Thoughts on a Europe-less world

A while back, I read a very interesting review of The Years of Rice and Salt, the novel where the Black Death obliterates the population of Europe from Ireland to the Urals. While I did enjoy the book, I did think some of the techological advancement and course of world history to be a little too close to OTL for comfort, almost as if world history was a giant game of Civilization. The author of this review seemed to think so too, and he a few points on a likelier course of world history in such a TL.

John J. Reilly said:
Consider a few of the notable figures in this alternative history: a Chinese Columbus, an Uzbek Newton, an Indian Florence Nightingale. They not only perform roughly the same historical functions as their real-world counterparts; except for the Columbus figure, they each do so at roughly the same time as each of their real-world counterparts. It is hard to see why this should be. The West did not decisively influence the internal affairs of the two greatest non-Western imperia, China and the Ottoman Empire, until well into the 19th century. There is no particular reason why sailors from Ming China could not have discovered America. For all we know, maybe a few did. Even if that discovery had become well-known, however, it would have made little difference. For internal reasons of cultural evolution, China was no longer looking for adventures. Similarly, there is no reason why the physics of Galileo and Newton could not have been discovered in Central Asia in the 17th century, if all that was necessary was cultural cross-fertilization and a frustrated interest in alchemy.

There are in fact good reasons for making India the site of an alternative industrial revolution. Its patchwork of states, so reminiscent of Baroque Europe, might well have offered both the intellectual sophistication and the political license to develop a machine economy. The problem is that no such thing seems to have been happening when the English acquired control over most of the subcontinent in the 18th century. There was considerable Indian industry, of course, but it was not progressive in the way that European industry was in the same period. It was not just a question of technique; industrial development requires financial sophistication and acceptable political risk quite as much as it requires engineering. India was kept from developing by the government of the Idiot Sultan, and he was wholly indigenous.

[...]

Nonetheless, the incontestable fact is that, whatever malign influence you might want to ascribe to European imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, the other great civilizations during early modern times were simply not efflorescent in the way the West was. Without too much speculation, we can make a good estimate of the course of the world’s major civilizations in the absence of the West.

China was winding down from its Song climax; the Ming and Qing Dynasties would have followed much the same course with or without Western influence. The result would have been another minor dark age in the 20th century, as after the Latter Han in antiquity. Similarly, the Ottoman Empire, the greatest of Islamic states, was losing control of North Africa and the hinterland of the Middle East before the Europeans ever became a factor. The empire would probably have unraveled in pretty much the way it did in our timeline, perhaps with the exception that the caliphate might have survived as a venerable anachronism. As for India, it is a commonplace that the English stepped into a vacuum left by the decline of the Mughal Empire. Doubtless other forces would have stepped in if the English had not been available, but there is no particular reason to suppose that the new situation would have been discontinuous with earlier Indian history.

There would still have been dynamic societies in the world, of course. Japan’s social evolution has its own internal logic; Western contact in the mid-19th century was an opportunity that Japanese elites chose to exploit. During the same period, Burma was literate, mechanically ingenious, and of an imperial turn of mind; only annexation by the British Empire prevented what might have been a new Buddhist civilization from forming. Anything at all might have happened in the Americas, but for the time being, it would have been of only local significance. The “classical” generation of American civilizations would still have been in the future.

On the whole, Earth by the middle of the 20th century might have seemed like a planet with a great future behind it. However, there have been general breakdowns of civilization before, notably at the end of the Bronze Age. Even in the barbarous early Iron Age that followed, however, techniques and ideas spread from land to land. Similarly, in the third millennium, it would have been just a matter of time before one or more societies wove the new ideas into a civilization with universal potential.

It's a rather interesting idea, and one I think is a bit closer to how things would actually play out. Thoughts?
 
I heard a lot about TYORAS, but I haven't read it yet. Mostly people I heard about did praise it, but very few were critical about it, and the analogy with a game of Civilization sorta brings things to the point.

Like somebody put it, the trouble about removing Europe from the timeline is that all the features of our modern life (industrialization, computers, internet, etc.) would never have arisen. This is because without the European Enlightment, the scientific method would have never arisen.

Of course, if they can supply an alternative where this could arise, then things work out good. If not, then you can basically bash apart such a scenario very easily.

As I understand it, you need a combination of the following ingredients:
- the interest of the old Greeks into math and logics
- the burst of free thinking and creativity during the Renaissance
- the Medieval emphasis on trade and handicraft
- the Judeo-Christian emphasis on determining beyond all doubt what theory is "right"

Combine them, and the scientific theory will arise, and all the "miraculous" things of modern technology that came from it.

Now, the question is, did Robinson think about that when he wrote his series?
 
For a well known author to write a book where European colonialism doesn't happen, and the world develops more slowly as a result is unfortunately just as unrealistic.

It is not socially acceptable to express the opinion that Europe and colonialism may have contributed to development.

That leaves the options of letting the world develop

a) About the same

or b) More quickly

In the books defense, we can also note that it was written around the concept that people are souls which keep getting reborn. So one of the reasons the development followed a similar pattern to OTL would be that the same people were (re)born as in OTL, just in different places.

Personally I think that if the Rice and Salt plague had happened, the world would be about like OTL 17th century in tech and politics today. Some nations would have risen, some fallen. Europe would have been repopulated in 2 generations, and be a patchwork of muslim nations.

There would be guns, cannons and ships. Humans being humans, the nations that had them would have subjugated the ones that didn't. Reaching out would have become profitable, and nations that did so would have gained power, eclipsing the stay-at-homes.

The Americas would have had its plagues, and the nations would have fallent to old world ones, but natives would have much more power and numbers. Perhaps independence in remote areas. All due to slower growth of the technological edge, giving more time to adapt.
 
Colonialism? Where did you get the point about colonialism from (did I overlook something earlier)?

IMHO, colonialism did have little to no effect on the whole issue. The only obvious effect was the (temporary) increase of wealth for the colonial powers. But, if you take Spain and Portugal - which did possess huge colonial empires in Central and South America - they definitely didn't become centers of scientific advancement from it.

But yeah, Umbral, I agree with the approximately 17th century tech today in a TYORAS scenario and the general outline you gave there.
 
Sorry for being unclear there. The point I was trying to make was : Colonialism, and european powers dominating non-european ones, is a negatively charged concept, socially.

It was still the driving force behind the wests affecting other nations and regions.

It is not socially acceptable to write a book that implies that the non-western nations and areas would be worse off now, without that period of interference from europe. And certainly not that they would be less advanced.
 

Hendryk

Banned
Sorry for being unclear there. The point I was trying to make was : Colonialism, and european powers dominating non-european ones, is a negatively charged concept, socially.

It was still the driving force behind the wests affecting other nations and regions.

It is not socially acceptable to write a book that implies that the non-western nations and areas would be worse off now, without that period of interference from europe. And certainly not that they would be less advanced.
Well, because of my personal bias I cut Robinson some slack about both his TL mirroring OTL's technological evolution rather too closely, and the concept of the characters' souls being reborn over and over again (when you think about it, it adds up to a "great man" theory of history, as KSR's characters account for much of mankind's scientific and political progress down the centuries).

This being said, I disagree with your interpretation of colonialism. You'll notice that the one non-Western country that industrialized successfully before the mid-20th century (at which point the name of the game wasn't colonization but rather decolonization) happens to be the very one that wasn't colonized--I mean Japan.
 
It is not socially acceptable to write a book that implies that the non-western nations and areas would be worse off now, without that period of interference from europe. And certainly not that they would be less advanced.

Well, without a doubt, if you think about the realms of the Aztecs, Inca or Maya, they would have fared way better without European interference. It would have been interesting to see how they would have developed. However, I don't agree that it's "socially non-acceptable" to say that they would have been less advanced. It's just a mere fact that they would be.

While the Maya for example were pretty sophisticated in regards for mathematics and astronomy (such as mathematics with zero, or their calendars), they did for example have little or no idea about metallurgy (and hence they didn't have any swords, shields, etc.). In that respect, they were (at the time of the contact with Europeans), significantly lacking behind much of the rest of the world. It's VERY unlikely, the Aztecs or the Inca would have developed industry and computers all on their own in a time frame of 500 years... (which is what you imply with saying "it's socially non-acceptible to say that they were less advanced").

I have no doubt that without European interference, the American civilizations would have definitely advanced, but they would have done so in their own pace (which is very slow by the standards of the rest of the world).

You have to consider the following: As the industrial revolution occured in Europe, one has to ask why this is the case. Also, one has to determin then what was so special about Europe (there has to be something special. And I think what is so special about Europe is the development of the scientific method, as this did drive the advancement of science - and it is a self-amplicating effect.

I still insist that colonialism has nothing to do with it. Perhaps, you are talking about what i would call more appropriately "cultural imperialism", ie, pressing one's culture/religion/lifestyle etc. (perhaps broadly this all can be included under "memetics") upon others, which is distinct from colonialism.

Now, to get back to the core question of TYORAS. IMHO, if there would have been a way how the scientific method could have arisen outside of a European context, then I have no doubt that something like the industrial revolution would have occured in such a timeline. However, it's a bit unlikely it might have occured in the same time frame. I wouldn't rule it out completely though, since there existed some pretty decent thinkers in the Islamic world, and they were after all perhaps not that far away from developing a scientific method (I'm uncertain here however in what way the Mongol invasion did ruin things there, I wished I knew more on this topic). Therefore, the "Uzbek Newton" from TYORAS perhaps isn't that far off.

However, it's very unlikely that the world would have developed in a faster pace without the influence of Europe.
 
Last edited:
I still insist that colonialism has nothing to do with it. Perhaps, you are talking about what i would call more appropriately "cultural imperialism", ie, pressing one's culture/religion/lifestyle etc. (perhaps broadly this all can be included under "memetics") upon others, which is distinct from colonialism.
Cultural imperialism, that's the phrase I wanted! Thanks.

Also, there was some metallury starting in Mesoamerica around the time of European contact. The Tarascans, IIRC, who lived on the west coast of Mexico, had actually started working in bronze by the time Cortez showed up. I tend to equate the Mesoamerican and Peruvian civilizations with the Sumerians and Old Kingdom Egyptians, so they still had a long way to go. Of course, having a smaller starting population and not that meny domesticable animals would probably make things even slower.

Hendryk, even in Japan's case, the industrialization and Westernization that occured during the 1850-1950 period was in many ways a reaction to the technical achievements of Europe and their effect on East Asia. The Japanese had the ability to industrialize, but they needed that impetus from Europe to actually do it.
 

Hendryk

Banned
Hendryk, even in Japan's case, the industrialization and Westernization that occured during the 1850-1950 period was in many ways a reaction to the technical achievements of Europe and their effect on East Asia. The Japanese had the ability to industrialize, but they needed that impetus from Europe to actually do it.
Point taken. Anyway, as I wrote above, I don't dispute that KSR stretched plausibility when he had his Europe-less world develop at roughly the same pace as OTL. But I was just stating that Japan provides a counter-example to those who think that a country needs to be vassalized by a Western power in one way or other in order to industrialize. Japan, which wasn't anyone's colony, became an industrial powerhouse in a few short decades, while Africa, which was Europe's colonial backyard, is now the world's economic basket case.
 
I have not advanced any arguments or opinions on colonialism.

But on the public perception of it, and regrettably, what a well-known person may say in the public sphere. Irrespective of what the actual period was like.
 
I have not advanced any arguments or opinions on colonialism.

But on the public perception of it, and regrettably, what a well-known person may say in the public sphere. Irrespective of what the actual period was like.

I still don't understand what's your point with bringing up colonialism here... :confused:
 
It would be less people to invent and create with no europe. Ergo the world would fall behind in develpment.
 
It would be less people to invent and create with no europe. Ergo the world would fall behind in develpment.

Ehm, no. There would still be people in Europe, they just wouldn't be 'Europeans', as we understand them. They'd probably be Asian and North African colonists.
 
It would be less people to invent and create with no europe. Ergo the world would fall behind in develpment.

Is it necessary to assume that Europe/European culture is the only one that can (and would) produce this development though? I mean, are non-Western cultures intrinsically incapable of this inventivenss or scientific mindset?
 
As I understand it, you need a combination of the following ingredients:
- the interest of the old Greeks into math and logics
- the burst of free thinking and creativity during the Renaissance
- the Medieval emphasis on trade and handicraft
- the Judeo-Christian emphasis on determining beyond all doubt what theory is "right"

Combine them, and the scientific theory will arise, and all the "miraculous" things of modern technology that came from it.

Now, the question is, did Robinson think about that when he wrote his series?

In fact, you could argue that something like Hindu culture, they were into philosophy, maths and logic like the Greeks.
Also, why would the Judeo-Christian be the most rational one? Hindu (and some other Eastern) worldviews actually equally, if not more compatible with scientific views since they believe in an impersonal God, for example, having the idea that the universe is billions of years old or that we evolved from lower animals would not strike controversy for them the way they did with the Church.
 
there's an interesting question... if Europe was so massively depopulated as in the book, who would be the best people on it's borders to colonize it? Middle easterners? Nomads from Asia? North Africans? Who would be able to best occupy and adapt to the place and settle it first?
 
there's an interesting question... if Europe was so massively depopulated as in the book, who would be the best people on it's borders to colonize it? Middle easterners? Nomads from Asia? North Africans? Who would be able to best occupy and adapt to the place and settle it first?

My guess is that different parts of Europe would tend to be colonized by whoever is closest - the Iberian peninsula and Italy from North Africa, the Balkans by Middle Easterners, parts of eastern and northern Europe by people from the steppes. The northwestern part of Europe - northern France, Britain, Ireland, the "Low Countries", most of Germany, Scandinavia - would be the furthest away from surviving population centers so it's harder to predict who would settle there. Those lands might become a major bone of contention between different groups migrating in from different directions.
 

Kaptin Kurk

Banned
Question: In the abscence of European competitors, would the Ottoman Empire have stagnated as readily? Moreover, in a 'European Population Dissappear's scenario, might not depopulated Europe itself serve as the frontier / New World that might give the ancient (Middle Eastern) world a chance for a boost?

I still imagine technology / civilization would be behind the 17th 18th Century levels, but I think it's unlikely we'd be much behing 1900 level tech / socials by now...can't say for sure, but the Ottoman empire wasn't standing still now, was it?
 
I think its silly to say that the world would cease to advance scientifically, or in any other way, without Europe. It would have taken longer perhaps, but it strikes me as very Euro-Centric to assume that most of the rest of world is incapable of gaining what?, 15th or 16th century Tech.?

IMO, If Europe wasn't around to abort many cultures progression, surely some of these peoples would eventually discover most, if not all, of these alledgedly European patented inventions.

I know this sounds snotty, but people are people, no smarter or dumber than any other. Europe was blessed with a situation that encouraged learning and invention to a certain point. If a somewhat similar situation was reproduced in a place with access to the materials neccessary to make these advances, its just a matter of time until they'll figure stuff out.
 
I still imagine technology / civilization would be behind the 17th 18th Century levels, but I think it's unlikely we'd be much behing 1900 level tech / socials by now...can't say for sure, but the Ottoman empire wasn't standing still now, was it?

Technologically? Pretty much. Unlike a Certain Published Author, I am not of the "scientific revolution incredibly unlikely" [1] school, but the Ottoman empire was hardly a fount of technical innovation or a school of great Islamic natural philosophers.

However, it is true that with the population of Europe abducted by evil giant space cucumbers in the 1340's (which I find likelier than a germ that knows geography), we don't get anything like OTL's Ottoman empire: it's expansion into the Balkans will be slowed by the fact that there is no indigenous agricultural population to tax or provide services or Jannisaries, no fiefs to hand out to the Ghazis. The Balkans were a major center of revenues, supplies, even manpower for the early Ottomans: by necessity the Ottoman empire will be far more Asia-centered, and may never devlop anything like the slave-based administration and military system of OTL. The entire character of the state will be different, and therefore predictions on it's durability or internal development based on OTL's empire are unlikely to be accurate.

That being said, the Ottoman empire was one of the longest lasting large states in all of Islamic history: the odds are good that an alt-Ottoman empire doesn't do as well. Sans the resources of the Balkans (and the military hardware know-how imported by European renegades), it might lose the military contest with Safavid Persia, if they are not butterflied away: or it might expend eastward _before_ the Safavids emerge and capture the Iranian plateau, leading to an eventual loss of Egypt and north Africa as their interests shift to India and central Asia: or, sans a Balkan redout, might simply be wiped out by Tamerlane.

Really, in a world where such books as Ringo's "Watch on the Rhine" get respectable shelf space at Barnes & Noble, it's absurd to imagine that "political correctness" makes AH with a backward non-European world unpublishable. (I'm a bit of a lefty myself, and I'd have no problem in a novel in which the industrial revolution doesn't occur in India until, say, 2900 AD). Indeed, it could allow the author to create a novel setting, in which iron-age successor states to OTL's Mesoamerican and Andean civilizations battle conquistadors from a long-Islamicized Europe, the Second Burmese Empire's iron grip on SE Asia is beginning to decline, a scientific revolution already _almost_ arose and failed to take off in one of the states of fragmented China in the 2400's (see ancient Greece), but left some interesting literature that was brough to India in the 2700's by returning Hindu missionaries, and the holy warriors of the syncreatic faith which arose in central Africa in the 2600's are threatening to crush the Muslim Swahili empires of East Africa...

And speaking of Islamic Europe, that would be a quite different setting than any OTL. After all, we don't have any large Muslim societies, as far as I know, which arose from settlement on unpopulated land, equivalent to the British "settler societies" of N. America and Australia [2]: generally they arose either from conquest or conversion of already settled and long-established societies. Could we see the scientific revolution arise in the Islamic "new world" of Europe?

best,
Bruce

[1] Merely unlikely
[2] I know, N. America and Australia had their own populations. But Americans and Australians worked darn hard to replicate the condition of an empty land.
 
Top