AHC: Screw the Western civilization.

[Otto Kretschmer]

Your goal is to minimize the power and influence of Western civilization so that it never rises as the dominant power or simply never rises as a distinct civilization. How to achieve this?

I have a few things in mind:

Scenario I involves an Achaemenid conquest of Greece. The conquest takes place but after prolonged fighting so that Greece is devastated and never rises again against the Persian rule. The Achaemenid Empire survives for several centuries longer and Rome never rises as a major power.

Scenario II includes an even more successful initial Islamic expansion. The Muslims capture all of Anatolia early on which prompts the Slavs and the Notse to convert to Islam instead of Christianity. A more successful Viking Age leads to the Norse rule of the British idles and Ireland which over time convert to Islam too. This leaves the Western world limited to France, Italy and Germany which might be conquered on the future.

Scenario III includes a much more successful Catholic Church. Instead of being just one put of many social forces in Medieval Europe, it becomes THE dominant social force, like the Brahmins in India. When the printing press comes around, the church bans it. As a consequence the explosion of literary and scientific output that occured OTL never occurs. The Renaissance occurs on a smaller scale and the Scientific Rdvolution and the Enlightenment never do. The Industrial Rdvolution never happens either. The West remains just pne covilization out of many and the world of 2024 AD is at the technological level of early 1700s l in an optimistic scenario.

Any thoughts?

[stevep]

   Well that's going to be a grim world unless the sort of culture that developed in western Europe - i.e. a large number of small states competing for position and hence forced to consider the interests of their populations - develops elsewhere.  If not you still have widespread slavery, little/no rule of la with arbitrary and autocratic rule along with probably a strict religious elite dominating power and education in much of the world.  You will probably still have gradual technological development but its likely to be much slower and suffer frequent disruption and reversal.

  I'm not sure if the 1st option would work as while classic Greece was important in many cultural developments it wasn't alone.  Also there are already Greece settlements in the western Med, especially Italy and Sicily and their likely to see a lot of refugees fleeing to them.  Furthermore an empire as huge as the Achaemenid's is unlikely to last for more than a few centuries so something might develop in say Greece or parts of Anatolia after its collapse and/or you get vigorous competition in the warring states that emerge from the empire's collapse, 

  The other two options might be more likely although there is the question of assorted people giving up port and alcohol in the 2nd.  We pretty much had option 3 prior to the reformation, especially with the collapse of the Orthodox church's power with the Muslim/Mongol conquests of much of their lands.

  One other option might be that Justinian isn't so incompetent and trusts Belisarius and hence his reconquest of the western empire probably while not greatly increasing in territory other than possibly Iberia is a lot quicker and less destructive.  And/or Phocas's revolt doesn't occur/fails so you avoid the devastating war with the Sassanids - could well get some conflict but likely to be far shorter and less destructive so assuming Islam still occurs it makes little progress.  This leaves a situation similar to your option 3 although its Orthodox dominated with the Papacy never managing to claim superiority over other patriarchies.  Again your got a huge empire, as with the Achaemenid one but it has the Med was a unifying presence as its easier to keep most of the empire connected fairly easily and with Christianity a religious that's a lot more autocratic and hence, under imperial control as a strong unifying force.  The down sides with this is that monotheistic religions tend to be very fractious so you could see successful splinter movements and also that areas beyond the easy reach of the Med are likely to define themselves as separate from the empire as they seek to preserve their independence.  As such what's now northern France, Britain, Germany and the areas north of the Danube could stay largely outside imperial control.

[Otto Kretschmer]

I think in a world in which Islam doesn't exist India would be a good place to look at. It has Hinduism and Buddhism, two religions that heavily promote human rights, and is divided into many competing countries, just like Europe. Without the devastation caused by Muslim invasions it'd be a good place to undergo a scientific wnd technological revolution, provided to that they don't do something stupid like banning the printing press after it gets invented.

[stevep]

Jun 11, 2024 11:23:06 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

I think in a world in which Islam doesn't exist India would be a good place to look at. It has Hinduism and Buddhism, two religions that heavily promote human rights, and is divided into many competing countries, just like Europe. Without the devastation caused by Muslim invasions it'd be a good place to undergo a scientific wnd technological revolution, provided to that they don't do something stupid like banning the printing press after it gets invented.

  Its a possibility and some republics have been there at times while in the south there's a long history of mercantile trading activities.  However the country was vulnerable to invasion from other groups with steppe tribes coming in from the NW frontier long before the arrival of Islam. 

  Also both religions could have issues.  Buddhism tends to avoid the material world for a spiritual one, which is probably not that favourable to efforts for material improvement.  Hinduism has its caste system and belief in karma which also tends to deter people seeking to improve their material conditions.

  I'm not saying its impossible and possibly especially in the south it might be the best bet if Europe failed for some reason.  However it also has some climatic issues, if your ever read Guns, Gems and Steel or other books on the ecology of development.  Therefore its probably some way from a certainty, at least not without a markedly longer time period.

[raharris1973]

All interesting to explore:

Jun 11, 2024 8:04:19 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

Scenario I involves an Achaemenid conquest of Greece. The conquest takes place but after prolonged fighting so that Greece is devastated and never rises again against the Persian rule. The Achaemenid Empire survives for several centuries longer and Rome never rises as a major power.

This could be played as a "no western civilization" scenario. However, there are also ways this could just be played as a "different civilization" scenario.

The idea that you have in the second sentence that Greece is devastated and never rises again, is not impossible [even if unlikely], and if the Persian Achaemenid Empire survives for centuries longer, unbroken by Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, or steppe people, maybe Persia --the whole imperial space, not just what we know today as Iran, becomes a West Asian/East Mediterranean analog to "China" in the east, with an assimilating common culture, and an assumed unity, so that non-Persian traditions get marginalized and subsumed over time, and even when political change and fragmentation inevitably come, there is a habit and a norm pointing toward the restoration of the empire, and that empire, is Persia, and the restoration of the Shah under heaven.

....Just as realistic, and probably more, conquest of Greece (and Macedonia) is not destruction, and Greek western civilization, forms of local governance and philosophy exist in Greece, even under Persian political rule, and Greek writings survive in Greece, and in colonies in the western Med. It does not spread so fashionably eastward to West Asia as a culture of a conquered people. More Persian elements will be absorbed into Greek culture and Mediterranean-wide, because of that empire's longer life. I say this because the OTL Persian empire didn't wipe away prior distinct Mesopotamian, Levantine, Hebrew, Arabian, Anatolian, Bactrian, Thracian, and Egyptian cultures of conquered peoples. Some cultures, like the Hebrews used Persian rule to make a comeback, so it was healthier than, for example Babylonian/Chaldean rule for them, and Assyrian rule for many, many peoples.

West of the Persian Empire, the rises of Carthage and Rome may well be basically undisturbed. They both get more Persian culture because of Persian imperial prestige but they have their own culture and traditions.

Rome still has the characteristics leading to its rise, and is famed for its works of conquest, arms, governance, and civil engineering. It still absorbs and admires Greek culture from Magna Graecia colonies in southern Italy and Sicily, eventually Greece itself, and goes on eventually to smash Achaemenid control of the Eastern Mediterranean and Egypt, taking these lands for itself. It just also picks up more Persian elements.

Jun 11, 2024 8:04:19 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

Scenario II includes an even more successful initial Islamic expansion. The Muslims capture all of Anatolia early on which prompts the Slavs and the Notse to convert to Islam instead of Christianity. A more successful Viking Age leads to the Norse rule of the British idles and Ireland which over time convert to Islam too. This leaves the Western world limited to France, Italy and Germany which might be conquered on the future.

This leads to a different form of "western" civilization, still building on Ancient Greek, Roman, Old Testament building blocks, even in places, Scandinavia, Germany, Britain, old Germanic roots, just still more seamlessly connected to and less alienated from Arabo-Persian-Turkic-Islamic civilization we've arbitrarily started calling "eastern" that has many common roots.

This will keep east European river trade routes more consistently active. There are going to be *issues* as stevep suggested with bans on pork and alcohol. At the worst level they could impair the spread of Islam outside the ruling elite, governing over pagan or Christian peasantries.

It could leave France, Italy, and Germany, as Christian "sole survivors" as much more insular, unless conquered and brought into a common political sphere with neighboring Mediterranean, Baltic and North Sea realms. Sort of a northwestern, white version of Ethiopia or Georgia.

The development trajectories of this differently divided Europe could end up more stagnant than OTL or more productively dynamic than OTL.

Jun 11, 2024 8:04:19 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

Scenario III includes a much more successful Catholic Church. Instead of being just one put of many social forces in Medieval Europe, it becomes THE dominant social force, like the Brahmins in India. When the printing press comes around, the church bans it. As a consequence the explosion of literary and scientific output that occured OTL never occurs. The Renaissance occurs on a smaller scale and the Scientific Rdvolution and the Enlightenment never do. The Industrial Rdvolution never happens either. The West remains just pne covilization out of many and the world of 2024 AD is at the technological level of early 1700s l in an optimistic scenario.

This one is still decidedly "western civilization", just a much more stiff, stultified, stereotyped version. The idea of the printing press ban very much fits with the idea of "what if every insulting Protestant or secularist trope about the Catholic Church were true".

[raharris1973]

Jun 11, 2024 8:04:19 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

Scenario I involves an Achaemenid conquest of Greece. The conquest takes place but after prolonged fighting so that Greece is devastated and never rises again against the Persian rule. The Achaemenid Empire survives for several centuries longer and Rome never rises as a major power.

Here is an interesting speculation on a Persian conquered Greece, still leading to many convergent civilizational developments as I was suggesting with something kind of like the "irrepressible western civilization" emerging:

Galba Otho Vitelius said:
The above said, a Persian victory would produce all sorts of butterflies. Off the top of my head here are a few. The POD is that for whatever reason, the Persians are able to invade the Peloponnese and conquer Sparta. They had already overrun Athens, so the Athenians would evacuate to Sicily.

1. No Athens. Athens and Sparta were pretty much the two city states that opposed them, and Athens had already been burned to the ground. The Acropolis and Herodotus' histories would not be possible without the memory of the heroic struggle against Persia. Socrates gets killed in combat or is in exile in Italy, which has butterflies affecting western Philosophy, Plato probably lives in history though his philosophy will probably turn out to be about the same, but you don't have Socrates as a character in his dialogues.

2. Athens attracted alot of talented people from around Greece, who still would have lived ITTL but who would have gone elsewhere. Many of them would have wound up spending a good part of their lives in Persia itself, with Aristotle being very likely to wind up in this category.

3. No Sparta, though there will still be a legend of Sparta if they go down fighting, which is likely, and you still have Thermopylae.

4. Commercially the Punic cities become the top dog in the Med.

5. The Greeks assisted several Egyptian revolts, one of which got Egypt several last decades of independence. These are less successful.

6. Greek civilization would re-center on Sicily and Italy.

7. Since Alexander II of Macedon pretty much sided with Persia, or played both sides of the fence, you still get Alexander III, but if he takes over the Persian Empire, which is likely its part of an internal power struggle. Essentially the Persian empire gets a new, Macedonian dynasty. The fusion of Persian and Greek cultures that Alexander aimed for would have already happened. One likely way this happens is that Alexander restores an empire which is already collapsing internally.

8. Western civilization still develops from Greek roots, in Italy, though the Etruscan contribution will probably be more prominent and more remembered. However, it doesn't start with the heroic narrative of resistance to Persian invasion. Instead it starts with the loss of the original homelands, so you get more of an inferiority complex and depressed narrative. Keep in mind that Christianity survived the loss of all the places where Christianity developed to Islam, and India survived almost a thousand years of non-Hindu rule over most of the subcontinent, so you still will get Western civilization.

[stevep]

   We might be working somewhat at cross purposes here as it depends on what we're defining as western civilization.  For me with Otto Kretschmer, saying:

Your goal is to minimize the power and influence of Western civilization so that it never rises as the dominant power or simply never rises as a distinct civilization. How to achieve this?

  I was focusing on the 1st part of this and rather overlooked the 2nd so I was thinking about something to stop western civilization entering the modern period - in the longer meaning of the term from say ~1450-1500 onward - and hence becoming a major player is world affairs outside its core territories.  This would best be achieved by establishing a fairly consistent mega-state which would tend to oppose change and reform and hence overall new ideas.  This happened to a significant degree with China, although many technological developments occurred there many were largely suppressed. 

  raharris1973, has an idea for such a state based on the Achaemenid empire with a western extension into Greece and the Balkans but I have concerns about whether that has the necessary geographical position to have long term viability.  Its markedly more prone to nomadic attacks from assorted regions - including Arabic tribes around the fertile crescent and assorted groups by land and possibly sea from north of the Balkans and from the central and western Med.  I could be wrong but I suspect it would be too likely to fragment and be too large and discontinuous to be readily and regularly reformed.  I have suggested some sort of Roman empire surviving/reforming in a similarly way to China in the east simply because it has at a core the Med which with pre-industrial technology makes movement a lot easier, especially for bulk items.

  If you do include the kind of autocratic empire in Europe - either a surviving Rome of some form or a more powerful and all-absorbing Catholic controlled state - then it could well meet the 1st condition of never exerting great power outside its core - or developing the technology and culture to do so - but it would still be a distinct civilization.