why is eastern europe so far behind western europe when it comes to historical achievements
Who is defined as a notable person?
>>18499341we just wanna live in our villages and be comfy, is that a crime?
Because they aren't descended from Germanic tribes, who settled and then took over Roman provinces after they conquered the Roman Empire. Everything good we have stems from Barbarian Freedom being intermixed with Civilization. Capitalism would have never developed like it did, if it wasn't for the Germanic's almost autistic preference for property rights, inheritance and honor. Because Capitalism is nothing more than property rights mixed with civilization, logistics and technology. After all you have to trust that almost an entire continent of people accepts that a piece of paper actually gives you property over something and you need the kind of population, which isn't servile and would just let a tyrannical Eastern despot rob them after a particularly bad war. That is why Capitalism would have never developed in the Byzantine Empire.I hope that answers ... literally everything!
Late arrival of feudalism in it's most brutal form.
>>18499341combination of literacy and wealth. in 1800s only educated rich people did science.Most of eastern europe were countries with foreign overlords. basically colonies to the western noble families, where the local population were just serfs / slaves, so the only people who could become "notable" were from that small elite.For example, in estonia, i bet these "notable" people were exclusively baltic germans.
>>18499341tl;dr is that eastern European aristocrats made their money by selling raw resources (grain and lumber) to western cities. Western aristocrats (and burghers) made their money by manufacturing shit and investing in joint stock companies. The latter is far more likely to produce innovation than the former.
>>18499341because it had to waste its resources on defense as it was under constant thread of invasion from northern and western asia
>>18499341Fake meme table
>>18499566cute post
>>18499341Eastern Europe had a very low population for most of that time so not really fair to use 1850. But desu it isn't Eastern Europe, even Southern Europe has been largely irrelevant for the last 1000 years, just like China or India. As noted above, we live in a Germanic world.
>>18500429>even Southern Europe has been largely irrelevant for the last 1000 yearsHow are Spain, Italy and Portugal irrelevant for the past 1000 years lmfao. The age of exploration, the discovery of america, the renaissance aren't big deals I guess
>>18499341Western Europe had the industrial revolution while Eastern Europe had the second serfdom, and didn't really start to pull out of that backwardness until the Soviet era.
>>18501463My nigger this chart is from 1000 to 1850, industrialization isn't the main problem here and the ussr didn't even exist in that time period
>>18501778I don't think it really fell behind until like 14-1500ishso the disparity before then might just be a result of "notability" meaning "notability according to English-speakers", England being on Europe's western edge and all
