I wouldn’t describe myself as a history buff — but I am fascinated at how a plucky island of grey, green, and drizzle called England became the empire that dominated the globe for hundreds of years until the mid-20th century.
Why was it not Belgium, Japan or New Zealand? They've got similar land size and climate.
The answers are deeply nuanced, involve a myriad of factors, and include centuries worth of countless individual developments. That is why I will be utilizing a new historical technique called "selective revisionism" where I start with my own, completely subjective experience of the present and reverse engineer it to understand past.
This will allow for creative speculation while also enjoying the process. Let's enjoy the ride.
This is my hypothesis:
England became dominant in the 2nd millennium by developing naval military prowess, which segued well to global commerce via sea trading.
Pretty reasonable hypothesis, wouldn’t you agree? But what we really want to know is why this naval prowess was endowed to England and not one of their temperate maritime contemporaries. Was it early constitutional governance, sea-going military opportunities with France, strategic marriages, political reforms, and technological innovation?
Probably.
Yet I'd like to offer a more reductive reason:
It was the depressing, dark grey, moist, melancholy, mind-altering English winter weather.
Imagine a young man living in Blackpool during the 2nd millennium. All I know is that if I were him, I too would want to create a sea-worthy vessel capable of getting me closer to the equator.
Just look at what happened to 'Sir' Francis Drake. He spent decades of hardship sailing around the globe only to find the Caribbean full of warm, sandy beaches in a tropical climate full of people who season their food while he had grown up eating beans in the cold rain.