Earliest PoD where European Dominance is 50%+ Likely

Earliest PoD where European Dominance is 50%+ Likely

  • 5000BCE: Dawn of Human Civilization

    Votes: 8 7.4%

  • 323BCE: Death of Alexander the Great

    Votes: 4 3.7%

  • 337: Death of Constantine the Great

    Votes: 5 4.6%

  • 1294: Death of Kublai Khan

    Votes: 31 28.7%

  • 1492: Beginning of Colonization of the Americas

    Votes: 57 52.8%

  • 1757: Battle of Plessy

    Votes: 3 2.8%
  • Total voters
    108

polyharmonic

IOTL, the Western world (i.e. Europe and the New World conquered by Europeans) emerged as the most powerful and wealthy civilization of all time and completely eclipsed other powers in East Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East. But what is the earliest PoD where this occurrence was 50%+ likely?

(By 50%+ likely, I mean that in a million parallel universes running history from that PoD, 500,000+ of those universes results in European domination similar to OTL).

Here is the thinking behind each of the answers:
1. 5000 BCE: Dawn of History
While history can play out very differently with such an early PoD, Europe has an immense geographical advantage which existed since the dawn of history to make it dominant in future.

Europe's geography favored balkanization into smaller competing nation-states as its many natural barriers provide defensible borders. More importantly, Europe is full of peninsulas surrounded by water on three sides and thus naturally forming many seafaring nation-states. Compounded further, Europe is in the center of the land hemisphere and right next to the Americas with the trade winds blowing towards it. Combined, this leads to early naval exploration, conquest of the New World and domination of global maritime trade. Europe also has an abundance of coal and other industrial resources near good places for cities leading to early industrialization.

Geographical determinism alone meant Europe would dominate since the dawn of history with 50%+ likelihood.

(My opinion is that European dominance is at 60% from this PoD)
----------
2. 323 BCE: Death of Alexander the Great
If geographic determinism alone is not enough, how about 323 BCE? By this time Europe had given birth to civilization in ancient Greece centuries before. This date is the height of that ancient Greek civilization, widely considered as the cradle of Western civilization. With Europe now well civilized and with its geographical advantages combined, European dominance is now 50%+ likely.

(My opinion is that European dominance is at 70% from this PoD)
----------
3. 337: Death of Constantine the Great
If the above PoDs are considered too early, how about 337? A powerful Roman Empire had been built and existing for a few centuries and now combined with a unifying proselytizing religion in the Christian mode and the aforementioned geographical advantage, European domination is now 50%+ likely from this PoD on.

(My opinion is that European dominance is at 80% from this PoD)
----------
4. 1294: Death of Kublai Khan
With the Mongol threat receding and with the European Renaissance emerging, at last Europe has turned the corner and European/Western civilization is now likely to dominate at 50%+ probability.
(My opinion is that European dominance is at 90% from this PoD)
----------
5. 1492: Beginning of Colonization of the Americas
This is probably the latest PoD you could reasonable go. Once Europe starts exploring, conquering and subjugating the New World, its domination is assured.
(My opinion is that European dominance is at 95% from this PoD)
----------
6. 1757+: Battle of Plessy
Mughal Empire and Qing Empire are the only rivals to Europe left. Ottomans are already in decline and no longer a rival by this time. Once Britain begins its subjugating of Indian subcontinent in winning this decisive battle, European domination is greater than 50%. Pick this one if 1500 is still too early for you for some reason (can't think of any).

I have decided not to go later that 1757, because by 1757 its already a done deal. IOW European domination is at 100%. But if you think Qing dynasty or a rising Japan still has a chance to turn back European dominance even at this late date, pick this one anyway. That is why I labeled it 1757+.
----------

What are the opinions of readers?
(IMHO European dominance is already at 60% likelihood in 5000BCE so that is my answer.)

And what are your probabilities per each of the six PoDs regardless of when you think the earliest PoD is for likely European dominance?
 
Last edited:

leopard9

I think that things go past 50% once Europe really starts to colonize the Americas. The reasoning for why Europe's geographically advantaged feels like reasoning after the fact. If China hadn't turned inward or if the Indian subcontinent managed to industrialize, there would be reasonings for why their geography advantaged them.

The access to two continents worth of mineral and agricultural resources as well as the disproportionate benefits of the Columbian Exchange hitting Europe the hardest of the Old World continents is what really paved the way for European dominance.
 

Gloss

I'd say Kublai Khan, simply because the colonization of America by the Europeans was basically granted by then, thus it seems to me to postpone it to 1492 a bit weird, I'm not exactly sure what happened in those 2 centuries to wildly change the dynamic, heck one would argue that with the Ottomans European dominance was less granted then.

Although I'm using a more open definition of dominance, one in the sense where Europe is richer per capita than the rest of the world, without necessarily conquering other big civilizations or empires.
 
Last edited:

kholieken

Banned
1294 or earlier.

European sailing tech is already developed in 1400s so 1492 is just accepting result of that tech development.

I think at High Middle Ages European success is already mostly formed. elimination of tribal society, canon law, representative institution, assembly that order its member, accounting, glasses, Christian ethic, women rights, etc.
 

polyharmonic

It's true that 1294 and 1492 aren't very far apart. In retrospect, I should have removed one or the other.

I think really 5000 BCE, 323 BCE or 337 at the latest are the only choices. As others note, it is well past 50% probability by 1294.
 

Arkenfolm

Define "European". Because 1, 2, and 3 apply equally to North Africa, minus abundance of industrial fuel, but I've written about seafaring Mauretania and introduced mesquites/acacias which could work for charcoal (and in theory, even Islamic Morocco might become a seafaring empire).

But I'll rank the options:
1 - 25% chance - Geographical determinism definitely plays a part in what made Europe dominate the world, but it's so early that even a Native American cultural area (not just Mesoamerica/Andes, but even alt-Pacific Northwest, alt-Mississippians, etc.) has a chance at dominating the globe (let alone any cultural part of the Old World aside from Aboriginal Australia, but I wouldn't count out a strong LoRaG-style Australian civilisation at an early date like this, just not a world dominating one)
2 - 30% chance - Sure, Alexander and his successors spread Greek culture everywhere, but there's a lot of variables. East Asian (I'll lump together the Sinosphere) and Indian are still very viable choices for global domination, and of course the most likely scenario where no cultural region can dominate the world
3 - 35% chance - Still too many variables, and although Christianity is a useful unifying force for European civilisation, it is by no means limited to European civilisation (Egypt, Syria, ATL Nestorian Persia/whatever)
4 - 80% chance - This is where Europe will end up poised to dominate world trade and likely grab parts of the Americas--at this point, it's unlikely any East Asian or South Asian state will reap much of the riches of the New World
5 - 85% chance - Not so much for Columbus (I would've gone with the conquest of Aztecs which really launched the Spanish Empire, or maybe the conquest of the Inca which eliminated the last native American state which had a chance to be a powerful nation)
6 - 100% chance - The effects of British Bengal/British India on early industrialisation plus the beginning of the subjugation of India under Europeans is as good as any point to mark the point where it becomes impossible for Europeans not to dominate the world.

Kublai Khan's death is a convenient point, but there's probably a better POD/date in the 12th-14th centuries (related to the early Crusades/renaissance of the 12th century) where we'd pass the 50% mark.
 
Jasen777

Jasen777

Donor
European dominance is a 500 (less than that really) year blip, it is or soon will be Asia again.

That being said Death of Kublai Khan is the closest for me. Europe forming more modern style nation states needs to be a likely.
 

Gloss

Jasen777 said:
European dominance is a 500 (less than that really) year blip, it is or soon will be Asia again.

That being said Death of Kublai Khan is the closest for me. Europe forming more modern style nation states needs to be a likely.
Click to expand...
Why the heck would anyone compare Europe to Asia as a whole? It would make more sense to compare the Asian subcontinents instead with Europe to be at least on a similar scale.
 
Jasen777

Jasen777

Donor
Gloss said:
Why the heck would anyone compare Europe to Asia as a whole? It would make more sense to compare the Asian subcontinents instead with Europe to be at least on a similar scale.
Click to expand...

Good point, Europe really is just a subcontinent. But if it's the "Western World" then is "Eastern World" world comparable? In any case the West is no longer dominant, it was dominant for a relatively brief period historically speaking, East Asia is or will be the leading region soon (unless Europe gets to still be lumped with N. America), and historically East, South, or perhaps early on Middle East have been the most prosperous regions.
 
BBadolato

BBadolato

I would say Plessey, 1492 was not the end all be all of the European domination. Have a more stable Triple Alliance in Mesoamerica, avoid the Incan Civil War, have the North American natives win the Pequot War, and keep them with a source of gunpowder. European domination was more lucky breaks than an inevitability.
 

Arkenfolm

BBadolato said:
I would say Plessey, 1492 was not the end all be all of the European domination. Have a more stable Triple Alliance in Mesoamerica, avoid the Incan Civil War, have the North American natives win the Pequot War, and keep them with a source of gunpowder. European domination was more lucky breaks than an inevitability.
Click to expand...

Mesoamerica has too much good stuff to keep Europeans out of there forever, it's just the nature of colonisation will look very different. The Inca might be a bit more secure. But the thing is, to modernise your state (like buying gunpowder), you'll have a dependence on European imports. You also have ample amounts of gold and silver to pay for it. So at the end of the day, Europe will get their precious metals. Plus keeping Europeans away from the sugar islands in the Caribbean seems impossible after 1492. So there's still have that important source of wealth. There will be so many Europeans active in the Americas that much of the wealth there will still flow to Europe anyway.
 

Hvalrossen

Was there ever a point were European dominance were almost guaranteed? Is not history affected by the actions of individuals? Is it not to deterministic to think that x leads to y?
 
BBadolato

BBadolato

metalinvader665 said:
Mesoamerica has too much good stuff to keep Europeans out of there forever, it's just the nature of colonisation will look very different. The Inca might be a bit more secure. But the thing is, to modernise your state (like buying gunpowder), you'll have a dependence on European imports. You also have ample amounts of gold and silver to pay for it. So at the end of the day, Europe will get their precious metals. Plus keeping Europeans away from the sugar islands in the Caribbean seems impossible after 1492. So there's still have that important source of wealth. There will be so many Europeans active in the Americas that much of the wealth there will still flow to Europe anyway.
Click to expand...

Not if the natives structures can adapt, and it is not like the "Europeans" are just going to stop and do everything they can to get these resources save Portugal. France is making problems in Italy, and even if there is a surviving Trastmara monarchy in Spain they are threatened by France's incursions into Italy, England at this point is just recovering from the War of the Roses, Austria has far too much on its plate. The biggest sources of precious metals ending up in Spanish hands was an accident than an inevitability, it is not like Spain will send an army and navy to demand these resources a la gunboat diplomacy.

Gunpowder dependency was a problem even with the Pequot and their allies who had close to winning a war of what could be called mutual annihilation with the New England colonies. However, the only reason why the colonists won is that they needed people who knew the land, something that might not always be a given.
 

VenusUberAlles

I would say European dominance is basically assured by the 15th century, once the Renaissance kicks off. After the Renaissance, there isn't really any other nation on Earth that could match Europe's technology. Before that, some stuff with the Mongolians or the Black Plague could have delayed Europe's rise for a few centuries and allow other nations time to develop. But even then, I still think the chances of European dominance will never dip below 70% after the rise of the Roman Empire.
 

DominusNovus

Jasen777 said:
European dominance is a 500 (less than that really) year blip, it is or soon will be Asia again.

That being said Death of Kublai Khan is the closest for me. Europe forming more modern style nation states needs to be a likely.
Click to expand...

To some degree, I agree with this. European civilization is the most succesful in history to this point, but that was true of China at several points, and Islamic civilization, or Persian Civilization, or even Hellenistic civilization, at various points, depending on what metrics we use.

We also have to ask what makes a civilization what it is. Is the US European or something different? If it is, then we have a relatively expansive definition of European. Many of the more successful non-European countries owe much of their success to adapting various institutions of European origin (as Europeans adapted non-European ideas in prior centuries). Does that make them European to some degree?

Ultimately, I say that Europe was the region best positioned to capitalize on globalization, the very process by which the barriers distinguishing different civilizations are worn down. I wouldn’t dream of putting a percent on it, though.
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
Couldn't we assume that last ditch things might have stalled European dominance such as a suitably sized asteroid wiping out the continent in 1500(though having minimal damage elsewhere), a more virulent Black Plague, or some massive continental war in the 18th century with a plague mass famine and ottoman resurgence?

While these scenarios are implausible they aren't impossible-it's my opinion that if natural and human factors militate enough European dominance could be prevented as late as 1750 AD-however this would require what amounts to basically an apocalypse in Europe itself-with a population loss exceeding 65% at the bare minimum.

Anything less will be a speed bump.

And if one interprets European colonies in the new world and elsewhere as part of European civilization than not even an asteroid or super plague could stop it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top