IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jechis/v72y2012i03p601-633_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Was It Europeans Who Conquered the World?

Author

Listed:
  • HOFFMAN, PHILIP T.

Abstract

By the 1700s Europeans dominated the gunpowder technology, which was surprising, because it had originated in China and been used with expertise throughout Eurasia. To account for their dominance, historians have invoked competition, but it cannot explain why they pushed this technology further than anyone else. The answer lies with a simple tournament model of military competition that allows for learning by doing. Political incentives and military conditions then explain why the rest of Eurasia fell behind Europeans in developing the gunpowder technology. The consequences were huge, from colonialism to the slave trade and even the Industrial Revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoffman, Philip T., 2012. "Why Was It Europeans Who Conquered the World?," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 601-633, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:72:y:2012:i:03:p:601-633_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022050712000319/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lagerlöf, Nils-Petter, 2014. "Population, technology and fragmentation: The European miracle revisited," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 87-105.
    2. Ko, Chiu Yu & Koyama, Mark & Sng, Tuan-Hwee, 2014. "Unified China; Divided Europe," MPRA Paper 60418, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Thomas Keywood & Jörg Baten, 2021. "Elite violence and elite numeracy in Europe from 500 to 1900 CE: roots of the divergence," Cliometrica, Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History, Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), vol. 15(2), pages 319-389, May.
    4. Mark Dincecco & Mauricio Prado, 2012. "Warfare, fiscal capacity, and performance," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 171-203, September.
    5. Nicola Gennaioli & Hans-Joachim Voth, 2015. "State Capacity and Military Conflict," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(4), pages 1409-1448.
    6. Chiu Yu Ko & Mark Koyama & Tuan†Hwee Sng, 2018. "Unified China And Divided Europe," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(1), pages 285-327, February.
    7. Corchón, Luis C. & Yıldızparlak, Anıl, 2013. "Give peace a chance: The effect of ownership and asymmetric information on peace," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 116-126.
    8. Mark Dincecco & James Fenske & Massimiliano Gaetano Onorato, 2019. "Is Africa Different? Historical Conflict and State Development," Economic History of Developing Regions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 209-250, May.
    9. Seth G. Benzell & Kevin Cooke, 2021. "A Network of Thrones: Kinship and Conflict in Europe, 1495–1918," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 102-133, July.
    10. Yuchtman, Noam, 2017. "Teaching to the tests: An economic analysis of traditional and modern education in late imperial and republican China," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 70-90.
    11. Dincecco, Mark & Katz, Gabriel, 2012. "State Capacity and Long-Run Performance," MPRA Paper 38299, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Noort, S., 2018. "The Importance of E ective States: State Capacity and Economic Development," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1821, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:72:y:2012:i:03:p:601-633_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jeh .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.