> In fact, had the Ottomans just built proper toll roads, they may have held back the Reformation _and_ Renaissance for a 100 or so years.
Now sure I follow. The Reformation in my view was not an inevitable advancement but an unnecessary disastrous event (involving a good deal of looting by protestantizing princes lusting after Church property) that plunged Europe into disastrous religious wars. Why would toll roads have slowed the arrival of this revolt against the Church?
The Renaissance, pace the tidy myths we're taught in schools, was not some clean break from the Middle Ages or even a revolt, but a transition that was heavily indebted to the Middle Ages (actually, in terms of philosophy, it was kind of a mediocre period of history, save for perhaps some exceptions). Are you claiming that exploration was essential to the Renaissance? I'm not sure I buy that.
> I know in European and American histories the existence of the Ottoman Empire and it's impact is not considered when evaluating the external forces that were nudging societies one way or another,
I wouldn't generalize. Had the Ottomans conquered Vienna, it is argued that this breach through the Alps would have allowed the Ottomans to conquer the rest of Europe. Or at least tried to. That much is taught in some European countries.
If trade through Ottoman rules lands and seas had just been a matter of "pay the fee and get through", a lot of the pressures that defined the boundaries of European life would not have been there.
Now, the fact that the Ottoman Empire could not capitalize on its quick successes is a symptom of the limits of how far one can go with feudal+warlord structures. Do bear in mind that the "empire" was still a going concern for 400 years after that.
Had the Portuguese not had an incentive to circumnavigate Africa and had Columbus not had an incentive to try to get to India by traveling West, would the settlement of the Americas have happened at the pace it did?
Now sure I follow. The Reformation in my view was not an inevitable advancement but an unnecessary disastrous event (involving a good deal of looting by protestantizing princes lusting after Church property) that plunged Europe into disastrous religious wars. Why would toll roads have slowed the arrival of this revolt against the Church?
The Renaissance, pace the tidy myths we're taught in schools, was not some clean break from the Middle Ages or even a revolt, but a transition that was heavily indebted to the Middle Ages (actually, in terms of philosophy, it was kind of a mediocre period of history, save for perhaps some exceptions). Are you claiming that exploration was essential to the Renaissance? I'm not sure I buy that.
> I know in European and American histories the existence of the Ottoman Empire and it's impact is not considered when evaluating the external forces that were nudging societies one way or another,
I wouldn't generalize. Had the Ottomans conquered Vienna, it is argued that this breach through the Alps would have allowed the Ottomans to conquer the rest of Europe. Or at least tried to. That much is taught in some European countries.