Originally Posted by Chas'88

POC, I do wonder if 1815 is a little too neat and even. ...

Yeah, I know. I was just throwing some stuff out there to try to get some sort of proximity.
(and I believe you already know I usually start with 0s and 5s! )

Originally Posted by Chas

So I lean 1T for 1808, with likely the 1802/1803 switch over being the likely point for both England and France.

OK. So, are you saying you believe France lost it's 'hegemon'-status around that time?
That's kinda what I'm wondering i/r/t 'Continental Europe' and thus possibly the loss of
France as a 'gravitational center' that maybe other individual countries begin to 'orbit'
around, so to speak. I'm pretty much open-minded on the whole thing, really.


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Chas'88

The move to the USA was the 1920s, 1927 to be exact.

~Chas'88

Interesting. So, what makes you think 1927, Chas?
(It wouldn't be related to repayment of WWI German War Reparations
via JPM Jr. and The Dawes/Young Plan(s), would it? )

Originally Posted by Chas'88

So I lean 1T for 1808, with likely the 1802/1803 switch over being the likely point for both England and France.

Another great whopper of a Chas post!

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

But I was wondering if you've ever read Capitals of Capital?
(I haven't yet, but it's on 'the list').

No. But from the blurb it appears they are channeling Braudel and his concept of successive "world cities".

Anyway, the move of the 'financial center' from Amsterdam, to London,to New York, to ... eek!() is something I'm very interested in. In fact,
one of the most important by-products of William III of Orange(and Mary) being chosen as the successor(s) to the English Crown might just be that
move from Amsterdam to London(or at least helped contribute to it).

I agree. The establishment of Britain as the new hegemon (after the Netherlands) was based on what I call, "the introduction of Dutch finance" to British governance. As Cicero noted, money is the sinews of war, or as the Spanish capitains used to say victory goes to he who has the last escudo. With prudent use of a central bank, established in 1694, little Britain could outspend much bigger France, when necessary despite its smaller economic base. Earlier in the century, the Dutch had been able to hold their own against larger countries by enjoying lower interest rates in the financing of their wars.

But that said, I haven't identified the actual moments that these changes occurred. For instance, I've heard that the move to the US actually was
sometime around the second half of the 1800s during the move westward via investments in railroads and such. Any thoughts?

New York displaced the City of London after 1914, as a consequence of British liquidation for WW I. Amsterdam was displaced by the City of London in 18th century, I am not sure exactly when.

Originally Posted by Mikebert

S&H always called the War of the Spanish Succession (Queen Anne's War) a 4T war for America, even though that war began in 1701 and the 4T ended in 1704. .

Ah, now see this alone explains it. I forgot that the Glorious Revolution 4T actually ended in 1704 not 1700 (I was going by the Generational boundaries not the turning boundaries, the turning boundaries are always a few years after the generational boundaries). So this does indeed put the War of Spanish Succession, or at least the beginning of the War within a 4T. And it being widely considered global or "total war" means it fits in well with S&H's theory.

Originally Posted by Gianthogweed

Ah, now see this alone explains it. I forgot that the Glorious Revolution 4T actually ended in 1704 not 1700 (I was going by the Generational boundaries not the turning boundaries, the turning boundaries are always a few years after the generational boundaries). So this does indeed put the War of Spanish Succession, or at least the beginning of the War within a 4T. And it being widely considered global or "total war" means it fits in well with S&H's theory.

Yes, having looked into the situation a little more thoroughly, the Total War aspect (for Britain) of the Spanish War of Succession ended being a Total War for Britain after the Battle of Blenheim, which British history treats as a battle which changed everything. I believe for S&H everything before Blenheim was Crisis, while everything after Blenheim was 1T.

Marlborough returned to England on 14 December (O.S) to the acclamation of Queen Anne and the country. In the first days of January the 110 cavalry standards and the 128 infantry colours that were taken during the battle were borne in procession to Westminster Hall.^[95] In February 1705, Queen Anne, who had made Marlborough a Duke in 1702, granted him the Park of Woodstock and promised a sum of £240,000 to build a suitable house as a gift from a grateful crown in recognition of his victory – a victory which British historian Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy considered one of the pivotal battles in history, writing – "Had it not been for Blenheim, all Europe might at this day suffer under the effect of French conquests resembling those of Alexander in extent and those of the Romans in durability.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Yes, having looked into the situation a little more thoroughly, the Total War aspect (for Britain) of the Spanish War of Succession ended being a Total War for Britain after the Battle of Blenheim, which British history treats as a battle which changed everything. I believe for S&H everything before Blenheim was Crisis, while everything after Blenheim was 1T.

But S&H's saeculum is supposedly about America. The dates they give for the Glorious Revolution in America are 1675-1704. A good candidate for a prominent figure is the Nomad Benjamin church (1639-1711) . He was the first American Ranger and played an important role in King Phillip's War 1675-76. It was a member of his company who shot and killed Metacomet (King Phillip) in August 1676, ending the war. He led four expeditions to Acadia (Nova Scotia and about 2/3's of Maine) during King William's War (1688-1697). He also led one more expedition into Acadia in 1704 during Queen Anne's War. I suspect this guy serves as a "GC anchor" like George Washington and the 4T spans his "active years" from 1675 through 1704.

I was wrong about Queen Anne's War being a 4T war. S&H call it a 1T war on p 118 in T4T.

I have always thought of hegemonic wars as being cusp wars, that is either 4T or 1T wars depending on what happened domestically during the war. Hence for me the Nine Years War (1688-1697) was always more 4Tish, since it began at the time of the Glorious Revolution and saw the formation of of the new post revolutionary order, for which I see the establishment of new economic institutions (National Debt in ca. 1692, central bank in 1694 and stock market in 1698) that presaged Britain's rise as a capitalist powerhouse . The war of the Spanish Succession I see as 1T since it occurred after the institutional changes and demonstrated their utility by the emergence of Great Britain as unified nation and the next hegemonic power. WW II is a lot like the WoSS and would be a 1T war, except, the domestic policies implemented by the largely Nomad-led OPA and NWLB created for the war were the solution to the 4T crisis (the Depression). So WW II is a 4T war like the Nine Years War.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Yes, having looked into the situation a little more thoroughly, the Total War aspect (for Britain) of the Spanish War of Succession ended being a Total War for Britain after the Battle of Blenheim, which British history treats as a battle which changed everything. I believe for S&H everything before Blenheim was Crisis, while everything after Blenheim was 1T...

-There's no reason a major war (or any war) couldn't straddle two different turnings.

Originally Posted by Mikebert

But S&H's saeculum is supposedly about America.

The early Saeculum's concern England and America because America is still a colony under England.

Here's something that I wrote over ten years ago, with some editing
and additional material:

The War of the Spanish Succession, 1701-1714

The previous crisis war was the English Civil War (for England),
climaxing in 1649 with the beheading of the King, and the Thirty Years
War (for Europe). (I've never really researched the climax of the 30
years war, and it may be different for different countries, some time
between 1634 and 1640.)

The Glorious Revolution was an Awakening era climax for England, and
part of a concurrent generational crisis war for Ireland.

** 23-Jun-11 News -- Sectarian violence in Northern Ireland grows again
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/...b.htm#e110623b

For England and Western Europe, The 4T Crisis Era began in the 1690s,
and the first major Regeneracy event occurred in 1700, in the events
that followed the death of the King of Spain. This war merged the
timelines of the major West European countries, and put them onto the
same timeline.

The war was triggered by the death of the King of Spain in 1700.
Since he was childless, the person who would inherit Spain was not
known until his will became known at his death. Today, it would be
considered a peculiar thing to have one person inherit an entire
country from another person, but that in fact is what happened in
those days.

Even more bizarre by today's standards is this: Because of numerous
marriage alliances, the country might have gone to either French or
German royalty, or split between them. It would not be known until
the will was read. In addition, since France and Germany were
long-term enemies, the will could have an enormous effect on the
balance of power in Europe. How's that for a situation?

Well, when the will was read, it turns out that Spain was bequeathed
to the grandson of the King of France, who then became King of Spain,
and so Spain became allied with France, where previously it had been
allied with Germany. It was previously Spain's alliance with Germany
that triggered France's entry into the Thirty Years' War, and prompted
the final settlement with the Peace at Westphalia.

Bequeathing Spain to French royalty completely unraveled the
Westphalia Treaty, and the War of the Spanish Succession began.

The 1704 Battle of Blenheim was a significant battle, though not the
climactic battle of the war. Indeed, it might well be the referred to
as a major Regeneracy event. Up until that point, England was losing
the war badly, and Scotland was considering allying with France, which
put England's entire empire in grave danger. But the Battle of
Blenheim was an enormous victory for the English, saving the English
empire, forcing France to retreat, and convincing Scotland to join
with England in 1707.

The 1709 Battle of Malplaquet was the climax of the war, and the
bloodiest battle in Western Europe for the eighteenth century. France
and England lost 25,000 and 20,000 men respectively. The war was
technically a victory for England, but there were tremendous losses on
both sides, thus preventing an English invasion of France.

http://battlefieldanomalies.com/the-...of-malplaquet/

The final resolution occurred in 1714 with the Treaty at Utrecht,
which the statesmen of the time signed because they wanted to avoid
for as long as possible another violent conflict such as the one that
had just ended. The next West European crisis war was the
French Revolution.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Here's something that I wrote over ten years ago, with some editing
and additional material:

...

The Glorious Revolution was an Awakening era climax for England, and
part of a concurrent generational crisis war for Ireland.

This is ridiculous. Your desire to tie a war to every 4T climax is showing through. I won't speak to Europe, but from a British POV it misses the boat.

I am confident in one thing about cultural achievements in a Turning--is that you can usually tell from what kind of turning they're from. The 1660s closest comparison is the 1920s in terms of social behavior and entertainment. The Lost Generation and the Cavalier would have gotten on famously. The best literary depiction of the Cavalier generation would be Moll Flanders (whose philosophy of the world "we make our own fortune" is most assuredly Nomad).

The 1690s saw a social movement akin to how entertainment in the 1930s or today in the 2010s towards moving away from "anything goes" attitude towards more "sentimental" entertainment. This is a movement you always see in a 4T as it gets closer to a 1T.

The 1660s as part of a 1T (unless you're suggesting that the 1T ended in 1660) supposedly with Restoration Comedies (essentially about two rakes who go around tricking or getting as much sex as they can) as its type of entertainment? Hardly! The Country Wife of 1675 is typical of late 3T and early 4T extremely crass entertainment meant to titillate and focus around anti-heroes. The early 1930s Pre-Code era of Hollywood (which was the heyday of Mae West & explored newly divorced women, people having easy sexual relations, and put anti-heroes squarely as the protagonist) has a lot of rhymes with Restoration Comedy for this reason. And up until now we've had a similar period in our own entertainment in the late 2000s & early 2010s that has started to be challenged by the Left-leaning Millennials (like Odin), in their attempt to make the world more PC and Safe-Space friendly.

This is one area where I am rather confident that S&H got it right, as the rise of Sentimentalism circa 1700 shows with the shift being rather blatant with a play such as The Way of the World--which to put it into today's terms is about two aging near-middle aged hipsters agreeing to at long last end their youthful lifestyles and "get married" but to do so "in their own way" and not according to how anyone else defines marriage, and agreeing rationally and drawing up a "contract" of sorts defining how their new marriage of sorts will work for them and their habits. You could translate the comedy to today's Millennial generation and not have to change an awful lot, keeping in mind we're talking about Millennial Hipsters being the equivalent.

~Chas'88

This is silly. You've gone to a lot of trouble to force all sorts of
things into the boundaries defined by your own favorite pet theories.
The explosion of Romantic Comedies in the 1950s and 1960s, following
the WW II crisis war, is very similar to the explosion of Restoration
Comedies in the 1660s, following the English crisis civil war. Both
"explosions" were reactions to the somber austerity that followed the
climaxes of the respective crisis wars, and both were early first
manifestations of the kinds of generational conflicts that occur in
the imminently approaching Awakening eras.

Examples: Marilyn Monroe movies: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, The Seven
Year Itch, Some Like It Hot.