I have to agree that it had absolutely nothing to do with 'culture' as I understand what that term describes. It was the Enlightenment--a new way of thinking that recognized the Individual and the Rights of the Individual, including the most important Right of ownership of self and products of self. The group never advances humanity--only the Individual acting in his own best self-interest accomplishes that and if that Individual has no ownership, there is no advantage to himself in making the advancement.

Actual factual date from the WP is truly surprising. One might also consider that an atmosphere of individual freedom was growing along with the industrial revolution, thereby, enabling the concept of property rights and consequently patents.

The Amercias and Africa were not unified, yet it was not Native American or African ships that showed up all over the world and exerted their region's influence. I wonder if it was some combination of the stuff Jered Diamond identified in Guns, Germs, and Steel that worked together with the lack of one dominate gov't in Europe.

The OP says patents are a big part of it. Did patents exist at the time when the Middle Ages ended and people began to reject Classical knowledge? When I read about the notion of studying nature to improve life, I think of William Harvey discovering the circulation of the blood. I think of that as setting people on a path of viewing nature as something that can be understood by breaking it down in to parts, which led to machines, which led to industry. I wonder if this led to patents, patents led to this, or if other factors led to both.