I know that this is a matter of definition, but there have been more than a few very destructive wars with a global reach. (or groups of connected wars, ie WWII = Hitler’s Wars + Pacific War, and I would add the Sino-Japanese War and possibly the Spanish Civil War, plus the Russo-Finnish War and… you get the idea)
Off the top of my head you have the French Revolutionary / Napoleonic Wars, the War of Spanish(?) Succession / Great Northern War, and the wars of Mongol expansion over most of Eurasia.
So how many ‘World Wars’ have there been? To qualify as a ‘World War’, I suppose that a conflict must have been:
world-wide (or at least covering much of the important bits)
destructive
involving most or all of the ‘Great Powers’ of the time
I was saw someone describe (possibly here on the SDMB somewhere) the Revolutionary War through the War of 1812 as, basically, one 40-some-odd year world war. I’m not enough of a history scholar to assert this as a fact and/or support it, I just thought it was an interesting point of view.
What counts as ‘world-wide’? Does combat have to take place in multiple countries, or can multiple countries send troops? By the latter definition, certainly the Korean War and the Vietnam War fit. Heck, just about any war where NATO was involved would count (numerous countries are, after all, getting involved in the fighting).
If one were to be very particular and require that the war took place on land and at sea, and on at least three continents, you’d still have to name almost every major European conflict from the Thirty Years War to the fall of Napoleon. Some which may qualify include:
Thirty Years War, 1618-1648 (or 1659, depending on how you look at it)
King Williams War, 1689-1697 and its sequel,
Queen Anne’s War, 1702-1713
The Other Thirty Years War, 1733-1763 (including The War of Polish Succession, The War of Austrian Succession (a.k.a. King George’s War in the U.S.), The Seven Years’ War (a.k.a. French and Indian in the U.S.), and what’s this? I think that’s Jenkins’ Ear)
The Paybacks Are A Bitch War 1775-1783 (a.k.a. the American Revolution)
And pretty much everything from 1789-1815
I probably left out some, too. Most of these wars can be classified as “world” wars (in my opinion) because any European war immediately embroiled North America, sometimes South America, definitely India (and therefore Asia) and occasionally the South Pacific. Not to mention North Africa, of which Gibraltar was a key point. But this definition is not perfect. By it, anyone from Alexander the Great to the Seljuks qualify simply by passing through Asia minor. But it’s a point to start from.
The French Revolution, Nepolianic Wars, War of 1812 and the Pennisular War (which kind of started out between Portugal and Spain and ended up between England and France) were all basically one big world war, at least until the British victoey in Egypt kept the French Navy from messing with the British oriental holdings
well, the first “real” ones were probably the French and Indian War/Seven Years War and the American War of Independence (what do they call it in the UK and France?).
The latter one involved most of the major powers (France, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK), got the attention of the other ones (the League of Armed Neutrality with Russia, Prussia, Denmark), and was fought on every continent but Australia (this was before Sydney was founded, and there wer no European settlements there).
The French and Indian/Seven Years War also was fought throughout North America/the Caribbean, Europe and India and involved the major powers (even more of them-- UK/proto-US, France, Spain, Prussia, Russia, Austria).
Some of the earlier wars were fought in Europe and the Caribbean/North America, as well. Dunno the extent of the Thirty Year’s War, but that might be a good one, too. Plus, of course, the ones you’d mentioned.
MauveDog, I would propose a separate term for the conflicts of the later half of the twentieth century. Perhaps “international wars?” Just a thought. Such conflicts certainly aren’t native to our own times, either. The subjugation of China late last century comes to mind, as does the abortive attempt to support the White Russians after WWI.
The War against the Muslims (1096-1699)
The War against the French (1337-1815)
The War against the People with Darker Skin (1418-1936)
The War against the Protestants (1517-1648)
The War against the Spanish (1568-1898)
The War against the Germans (1864-1945)
The War against the Communists (1917- )
It’s too soon to tell. Eventually, the group of wars we now refer to as WWI, WWII, and the Cold War (and its components such as Korea and Vietnam) may eventually be referred to as “The 75 years war”. This war, ranging from 1914 to 1989, was an ideological war between capitalism/democracy, fascism, and communism. Capitalism/democracy won. This is, of course, unless China and the U.S. get into some sort of conflict in the future; in that case the present day is merely a lull in an ongoing ideological war.
Short answer: it all depends on how you define “World War.”
Comments:
[li]Churchill’s History of the English Speaking Peoples includes a chapter entitled “The First World War” which covers the Seven Years’ War (AKA French and Indian War) – when you consider that this was fought on at least four continents, the point comes home.[/li]
Einstein was once asked what weapons would be used in the Third World War. “I don’t know,” he replied. “But I can tell you what will be used in the Fourth.” Asked what, he responded, “Sticks and stones.”
Lumping shorter wars together to form grander sounding conflicts is a game which professional historians play all the time. The various Franco-British wars between 1689 and 1815 have been dubbed the second Hundred Years War and the First and Second World Wars combined have been dubbed the second Thirty Years War. Usually such suggestions are no more than a shorthand way of suggesting broader interpretations and they rarely change conventional usage, even among academics.
The names given to particular wars do change if fundamental historiographical assumptions change. All the Wars of the … Succession were renamed once it became unfashionable to believe that only royal successions were at stake. Other forms of political correctness can also cause wars to be renamed. Where these considerations do not apply, the names used by professional historians and by everyone else tend to stick. We can argue endlessly about whether there were world wars before 1914 (and historians have done so), but the conventional usage is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.
Attila and his Huns vs Master-General Aetius and the might of Rome. Not an exceptionally long war, or even “world-wide” in geographical terms. There were however tribes from all over Europe and parts of Asia present at the battle, and the loss of life was considerable.
I wish I knew. Alas, I don’t recall where I saw this. I recall that it was a scattering of one or two contiguous days of peace, sprinkled across the milennia. They listed all the wars across the world throughout recorded history, I was astonished at the wide variety of wars that I’d never heard of.
APB, I understand what you’re saying. But it’s possible to go too far the other way. I think it’s legitimate to speak of the “Napoleonic War” rather than differentiate between the War of the Third Coalition, the War of the Fourth Coalition, the War of the Fifth Coalition, the War of the Sixth Coalition, and the War of the Seventh Coalition. All of these individual wars occurred within a single decade and had the common characteristic of being conflicts between England and its allies against France and its allies.
It occurs to me that all of the “world wars” that seem to be accepted as such have to include North America as well as Europe. Somehow that doesn’t seem right.
Perhaps we should have another classification: “Big-Ass Wars.” Might be worth keeping in mind if China, India and Pakistan decide to send up the balloon one day.