Alternate colonizers of Siberia?

[FDW]

Originally Posted by zraith

What about the continued existence of the Khanate of Sibir?

That's kind of unlikely, given that it fell down when the slightest pressure was applied to it.

[MarshalBraginsky]

That would require crippling Muscovy enough for the Khanates of Kazan, Astrakhan and Crimea to survive. Then, the Khanate of Kazan could conquer the Khanate of Sibir, if given the chance.

[scholar]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

So realistically, could we end up with a bigger Mongol state that includes Siberia through the Northern Yuan? Alternatively, would the Northern Yuan actually be absorbed by the Manchus?

You could easily have one or the other, but a stronger larger Yuan Dynasty that has the power projection to expand into Siberia and does so will most likely butterfly away the Manchus. Which is not necessarily a bad thing if we want the Yuan to colonize Siberia.

[zraith]

Originally Posted by FDW

That's kind of unlikely, given that it fell down when the slightest pressure was applied to it.

Haha, was farfetched even to me. Though I am curious what the time scale would have been if the incident that caused Russia to conquer it didn't occur. Several more years or decades before it falls?

[FDW]

Originally Posted by zraith

Haha, was farfetched even to me. Though I am curious what the time scale would have been if the incident that caused Russia to conquer it didn't occur. Several more years or decades before it falls?

Yeah, and is assimilated into one of the other nearby Khanates.

[MarshalBraginsky]

Originally Posted by scholar

You could easily have one or the other, but a stronger larger Yuan Dynasty that has the power projection to expand into Siberia and does so will most likely butterfly away the Manchus. Which is not necessarily a bad thing if we want the Yuan to colonize Siberia.

Though in this case the Yuan might be thoroughly Sinicized by this time.

[Mathalamus]

is it possible that if no one wanted Siberia, a completely independent state could emerge?

it would be easily taken, yes, but what if no one bothered with that state?

[FDW]

Originally Posted by Mathalamus

is it possible that if no one wanted Siberia, a completely independent state could emerge?

it would be easily taken, yes, but what if no one bothered with that state?

A State of sort did emerge (The Khanate of Sibir) but it couldn't do much before Russia glommed it.

[democracy101]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

Would China proper include what is now Manchuria? I'm not sure if the manchus would have been able to maintain their lands while Joseon farmers and artisans would have migrated up north. Could the Manchus have also adopted a few of the Joseon's institutions just to survive?

China proper including Manchuria would depend on the viewpoints at the time, and the Manchus could still have theoretically survived in northern Manchuria.

Originally Posted by scholar

Who said that?

Stiff resistance is subjective, there were a couple of rebellions some of which lasted for years, but resistance against the Qing was sporadic and a few decades after the conquest were comparatively weak and divided . . .

Also, its important to note that the Qing settled into the Zhongguo style of though in regards to the world. Everything not Chinese were Barbarians, its just that Mongolians and Manchurians were Chinese in their books. I mean, here's a letter that the Qing Emperor wrote to the King George III... This meant that subjugation was the primary goal, and when this collapsed in the wake of European expansion into the East it was something they could not really cope with. Not to mention the Qing government was going into rapid decline in the 19th century, it was not something that's indicative of the state as a whole, which reached its peak in the 17th and early 18th century.

I understand your points about Xinjiang, Tibet, Nepal, Burma, and Siam, although I should have said Vietnam instead of Siam. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Qing would have been more focused on subjugating states to the south instead of attempting to colonize the north. I also previously stated that the Qing mindset had essentially become Chinese by the mid-18th century, so I'm not sure why you're discussing Qianlong. The document indicates how the Manchus had adopted Chinese viewpoints, but does not illustrate why they were still unwilling to let the Chinese settle in Manchuria until the 19th century, which would have been crucial for Siberian settlement. As I stated before, the Manchus were constantly worried about a possible Chinese resurgence, and this fear would have to be removed for the Chinese to settle in Siberia.

Originally Posted by scholar

I was actually attempting to aim this towards the Chinese Qing Dynasty (I view the sinicized regime as Chinese culturally) going further north. However, if they did manage to survive those conflicts and flee further north then we have a Jurchen colonizer. Later on it is possible for the Chinese to subjugate said Jurchen state and bingo.

There are other ways to go about this. The Northern Yuan Dynasty [not OTL, but a separate one from a different hypothetical fall of the Yuan Dynasty] could maintain its control over itself, which included much of what's considered Southern Siberia, for several centuries against a Southern Chinese Dynasty, allowing for the Northern Yuan to properly sinicize and spread sedentary civilization north [not universal, but widespread enough to govern. Maybe 1/5 of the population]. Later on the Southern Chinese or the Northern Yuan could conquer the other and create another Chinese State which contains Siberia.

The Jurchens/Manchus heading north does not necessarily mean that they would head into Siberia. They could just flee to northern Manchuria, which the Chinese could then conquer, possibly in conjunction with Joseon. However, this does not have to include Chinese control over Siberia, as they would probably have other issues, internally and externally, to deal with. I agree that the Northern Yuan could have survived with a different POD, then come into conflict with a Chinese dynasty in the south, but because most of the butterflies would probably occur long after the POD, I think it would be hard to assume that one side would definitely conquer the other.

Originally Posted by scholar

Japan was Xenophobic because of fears, and said fears were not so much of the Europeans (though there was a legitimate scare from the Tokugawa with the Spanish), but rather how the various Daimyo of peacetime were gaining vast amounts of wealth, prestige, and amassing modern technologies. Not to mention becoming Christian. It was the fear of another war that led to said regression. The Xenophobia was a consequence of the radical persecution and essentially brainwashing that came about during the Edo Shogunate. Otherwise it was entirely possible that Western Japan, including Kyushu, would rebel with the backing of the Portuguese or the Spanish armed with European Naval Cannons and bringing with it the sword of Christiandom to tear down the Tokugawa and replace it with a Western Friendly Shogunate, one which would be entirely open to expansion and trade. The Tokugawa were terrified of Masamune Date forming an alliance with European Nations, especially after it sponsored the first Japanese expedition to circumnavigate the world and visit Spain and the Pope, though this fear wasn't as well founded as some of the others.

The conquest of the Ryukyu and the Ainu didn't take long once Japan decided to do it. In fact, the conquest of the Okinawa Island Chain was done by just a single Daimyo on the Southern edge of Kyushu, not the whole of Japan.

I see your points concerning an alternate Japanese regime. However, the Japanese probably decided to conquer the Ryukyu because the islands had become profitable through trade, while taking over Hokkaido would probably not have led to tangible benefits. Theoretically, the Japanese could expand into Sakhalin, and establish trading relationships with tribes in Siberia, as I stated before, but there would really be no impetus to colonize or actively expand into Siberia.

Originally Posted by scholar

I thought I basically just repeated myself, and since this is a new topic doing that isn't exactly a bad thing.

I would, however, strongly stress that Goryeo would most likely never actually do that. Not with pressure from the Jurchen, possible Liao remnants, or the Song. I believe back in the old topic I suggested a possible way to get around this would be have the Song collapse on itself. Once again, we aren't really disagreeing with each other. I'm just saying its really, really, not likely.

I'm glad we're still in general agreement.

As I stated before, Goryeo could theoretically expand into southern Manchuria with the right conditions, and/or Joseon, or a corresponding dynasty, could do the same as well from eastern Manchuria to the Sea of Okhotsk, after allying with the Ming against the Manchus and Russians. However, the possibility of all of the events neatly falling into place is highly unlikely. In other words, although it is technically possible for China, Japan, and/or Korea to expand into Siberia, it would require each to have a drastically different outlook and continuously succeed in their attempts to expand into the region.

[MarshalBraginsky]

After 1644, China proper included Manchuria, so before 1644, Manchuria wouldn't be included as part of China.

[scholar]

Originally Posted by democracy101

I understand your points about Xinjiang, Tibet, Nepal, Burma, and Siam, although I should have said Vietnam instead of Siam. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Qing would have been more focused on subjugating states to the south instead of attempting to colonize the north. I also previously stated that the Qing mindset had essentially become Chinese by the mid-18th century, so I'm not sure why you're discussing Qianlong. The document indicates how the Manchus had adopted Chinese viewpoints, but does not illustrate why they were still unwilling to let the Chinese settle in Manchuria until the 19th century, which would have been crucial for Siberian settlement. As I stated before, the Manchus were constantly worried about a possible Chinese resurgence, and this fear would have to be removed for the Chinese to settle in Siberia.

It didn't stop them from sending criminals out North and West as a form of banishment. Their desire to keep Manchuria filled with Manchurians (and, oddly, Mongolians and the Han Chinese bannermen) and keeping out native Chinese is not indicative of their unwillingness to allow Chinese colonization either as the end (Taiwan) or a means (Xinjiang). Should Siberia open up keeping them from settling traditional Manchu lands would not prohibit them from Siberia.

And even if it wasn't Han Chinese, Manchu Chinese would still count in the case of the Qing. Other examples have been given as well.

Originally Posted by democracy101

The Jurchens/Manchus heading north does not necessarily mean that they would head into Siberia. They could just flee to northern Manchuria, which the Chinese could then conquer, possibly in conjunction with Joseon. However, this does not have to include Chinese control over Siberia, as they would probably have other issues, internally and externally, to deal with. I agree that the Northern Yuan could have survived with a different POD, then come into conflict with a Chinese dynasty in the south, but because most of the butterflies would probably occur long after the POD, I think it would be hard to assume that one side would definitely conquer the other.

I thought we already established that Siberia and Manchuria are not clearly defined regions which actually overlap. The Jurchens moving north doesn't have to be Siberia, but after they move north enough they'll cease to be in terrain that involves uncertainty about whether or not its "Siberia Enough" to be considered Siberia. We're not shipping them East or West, but north.

Every. Single. Period. Of. Dynastic. Change. Ends. With. Unification. [Not meaning to sound abrasive but I really want to stress that.] It may take hundreds of years, but it happens. The only time where one side will not conquer the other is when the defeated ceases to be China or ceases to exist. In this case both the Northern Yuan and the Southern Chinese state would retain the notion of being of Tianxia, and the notion of Highlander politics in regards to having Emperors. There can be only one. So, they'll procede to bash each other's heads in to the point where one gives, or they'll still be bashing heads to the modern era.

However, it is not a necessity that one said conquer the other, that was simply for a unified Chinese Empire with the North as part of its own. The heavily sinicized Northern Yuan (centered around Kaifang, Beijing, Yu, Chang'an...) would count as Chinese colonization north all on its own.

Oh, and here's an interesting map of the Ming.

Originally Posted by democracy101

I see your points concerning an alternate Japanese regime. However, the Japanese probably decided to conquer the Ryukyu because the islands had become profitable through trade, while taking over Hokkaido would probably not have led to tangible benefits. Theoretically, the Japanese could expand into Sakhalin, and establish trading relationships with tribes in Siberia, as I stated before, but there would really be no impetus to colonize or actively expand into Siberia.

The Shimazu Daimyo basically acted of their own accord to strengthen their own trade and for bragging rights about conquering a foreign land (for which they were honored and respected, as far as I can tell).

The Matsumae March was a very profitable trading zone, as they had complete rights over trade with the Ainu. It wasn't exceptionally large, considering other areas, but it was enough to make them very happy and the Northern Honshu Daimyo very unhappy with the arrangement.

Originally Posted by democracy101

I'm glad we're still in general agreement.

As I stated before, Goryeo could theoretically expand into southern Manchuria with the right conditions, and/or Joseon, or a corresponding dynasty, could do the same as well from eastern Manchuria to the Sea of Okhotsk, after allying with the Ming against the Manchus and Russians. However, the possibility of all of the events neatly falling into place is highly unlikely. In other words, although it is technically possible for China, Japan, and/or Korea to expand into Siberia, it would require each to have a drastically different outlook and continuously succeed in their attempts to expand into the region.

The Joseon was subordinate to the Ming, and the Qing. They viewed themselves as Demi-Chinese, and mirrored many of the Chinese institutions as their predecessors had done such as Goryeo. They had similar concepts in regards to barbarian territory as the Chinese did. They were the civilized tributary state that China favored above all else, the Siberian wastes were Barbarian lands not worth touching. There were times in Korea's history when this was not the case, but not around the time of the Ming. Given their similar difficulties with wanting the North with China, it makes them less likely to wish for that.

The different outlook is manageable, as we've discussed, and having success up north isn't exactly going to be a challenge. Its lightly populated, some areas have some farmland, others some fur trades, and the rest being fishing or hunting subsistence communities. That's not something that would require effort to take, only enough bodies to get to move there (or like other policies: banish). Once they're there, which would only require a few centuries of rule and some minor motivation (like a semi-organized state up north worth trading with for some low level merchants like a northern Jurchen state) losing it would not be a worry.

[MarshalBraginsky]

Which nomadic group had the better demographical advantage though? The Mongols or the Manchus? Since having a larger amount of people would be necessary for the colonization of territories north of what they call Greater Manchuria.

[scholar]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

Which nomadic group had the better demographical advantage though? The Mongols or the Manchus? Since having a larger amount of people would be necessary for the colonization of territories north of what they call Greater Manchuria.

Depends on the era. Manchurians of Jianzhou had more men per kilometer than the Mongols at the time (and a ratio of 1:30 to native Chinese groups), but if you go back to the height of the Yuan Dynasty its a different story.

[MarshalBraginsky]

So in this case the Manchus might have more advantages than the Mongols in terms of long term settlement in any parts of the Siberian steppes. On the other hand, a surviving Khanate of Sibir (with a PoD going as far back as the 1480s) could have been possible, although I'm not sure if they would be doomed to be destroyed or not.

[scholar]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

So in this case the Manchus might have more advantages than the Mongols in terms of long term settlement in any parts of the Siberian steppes. On the other hand, a surviving Khanate of Sibir (with a PoD going as far back as the 1480s) could have been possible, although I'm not sure if they would be doomed to be destroyed or not.

Given that the Yuan Dynasty actually controlled much of Siberia (nominally at least) while the Khanate of Sibir laid barely beyond the Ural Mountain, the Khanate of Sibir is not a good option.

Add onto the fact that it was actually ethnically diverse (between Tartars, Turks, and Natives) and thinly populated it lacked strong cohesion and merely sustained itself by being out of reach from its main rivals. Its not something that can work in this situation.

[DrakeRlugia]

I can't see how, unless Muscovy is crippled, it wouldn't take an interest in it. After all, even before Siberia was conquered Russians were crossing the Urals looking for furs. Furs, especially sable, for instance, were a very important part of the Russian economy and part of the drive east. I also read in a book, I don't have the specific title or have it on me, but it dealt with Russian history, but stated that during the time of the troubles, the Urals and the parts of Siberia colonized at that time were important in helping the newly founded Romanov dynasty pushing out the foreigners.

[MarshalBraginsky]

If not the Khanate of Sibir and definitely not any Khanates within the Turco-Mongol confederations, then we're just down to the Manchus as the potential colonizers of Siberia.

[scholar]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

If not the Khanate of Sibir and definitely not any Khanates within the Turco-Mongol confederations, then we're just down to the Manchus as the potential colonizers of Siberia.

Why not the Turks and Mongols? Why not the Mongols themselves? The Jianzhou Jurchen before they went on to take China were the most powerful group, but why does that preclude others?

[MarshalBraginsky]

If we're talking about the Turks in this case, would it be the Central Asian Turks that may have a potential to colonize Siberia? The Mongols could also have a chance, but they may have several weaknesses. For the Turkic khanates, we could look at either the Kazakh Khanate, the Timurids (one of the Timurids could set up an empire in what is now OTL Kazakhstan), or the Khanate of Bukhara. For the Mongols themselves, I'm guessing that a remnant of the Northern Yuan could pull a Babur and launch a colonization drive in Siberia.

[democracy101]

Originally Posted by scholar

It didn't stop them from sending criminals out North and West as a form of banishment. Their desire to keep Manchuria filled with Manchurians (and, oddly, Mongolians and the Han Chinese bannermen) and keeping out native Chinese is not indicative of their unwillingness to allow Chinese colonization either as the end (Taiwan) or a means (Xinjiang). Should Siberia open up keeping them from settling traditional Manchu lands would not prohibit them from Siberia.

And even if it wasn't Han Chinese, Manchu Chinese would still count in the case of the Qing. Other examples have been given as well.

I thought we already established that Siberia and Manchuria are not clearly defined regions which actually overlap. The Jurchens moving north doesn't have to be Siberia, but after they move north enough they'll cease to be in terrain that involves uncertainty about whether or not its "Siberia Enough" to be considered Siberia. We're not shipping them East or West, but north.

Yes, but that really doesn't mean anything. Joseon also sent criminals north, but the region was and still is thinly populated. Korea was able to retain the territory because its newly conquered regions were not as expansive, but retaining Siberia with convicts/Manchus/other ethnic groups would not really be a long-term solution unless more than 10 million or so were actively relocated, which would be extremely hard to do if the Russians begin to colonize and claim the area.

Originally Posted by scholar

Every. Single. Period. Of. Dynastic. Change. Ends. With. Unification. [Not meaning to sound abrasive but I really want to stress that.] It may take hundreds of years, but it happens. The only time where one side will not conquer the other is when the defeated ceases to be China or ceases to exist. In this case both the Northern Yuan and the Southern Chinese state would retain the notion of being of Tianxia, and the notion of Highlander politics in regards to having Emperors. There can be only one. So, they'll procede to bash each other's heads in to the point where one gives, or they'll still be bashing heads to the modern era.

However, it is not a necessity that one said conquer the other, that was simply for a unified Chinese Empire with the North as part of its own. The heavily sinicized Northern Yuan (centered around Kaifang, Beijing, Yu, Chang'an...) would count as Chinese colonization north all on its own.

Your statement sounds awfully deterministic. With the exception of the Sima Jin, it took about 400 years for China to be reunified under the Sui, and China was divided for more than 50 years after the Tang collapsed. Granted, China was reunified even after long periods of division, but if North and South China had similar populations, which was not the case before 1000, then China could remain divided. For comparison, China was divided between the Jurchen Jin and the Southern Song for more than a century, and there is no reason to assume that a similar situation would not have existed for at least several centuries more if the Mongols had not invaded. Also, if China was divided between two states, the northern one would have been more concerned about repelling excursions from the south rather than sending colonists north.

Originally Posted by scholar

Oh, and here's an interesting map of the Ming.

With all due respect to the mapmaker, that map is simply ridiculous. It makes almost as much sense as Goguryeo controlling northern Manchuria/Siberia, or Joseon claiming "Gando," which was supposedly a significant amount of southeastern Manchuria. I've seen other maps by Chinese mapmakers that have exaggerated Tang claims in Manchuria/Siberia as well, and this is no different. Tibet was under Ming influence, but the Ming most likely did not control it directly in political terms, and it's also telling that the map does not indicate exactly where Chinese control ends in the northeast, so for all we know, it might suggest that the empire extended to the Kamchatka Peninsula. Ming control probably did not expand far beyond Liaodong.

Originally Posted by scholar

The Shimazu Daimyo basically acted of their own accord to strengthen their own trade and for bragging rights about conquering a foreign land (for which they were honored and respected, as far as I can tell).

The Matsumae March was a very profitable trading zone, as they had complete rights over trade with the Ainu. It wasn't exceptionally large, considering other areas, but it was enough to make them very happy and the Northern Honshu Daimyo very unhappy with the arrangement.

Okay, but again, finding a reason to actively expand into Siberia would be unlikely.

Originally Posted by scholar

The Joseon was subordinate to the Ming, and the Qing. They viewed themselves as Demi-Chinese, and mirrored many of the Chinese institutions as their predecessors had done such as Goryeo. They had similar concepts in regards to barbarian territory as the Chinese did. They were the civilized tributary state that China favored above all else, the Siberian wastes were Barbarian lands not worth touching. There were times in Korea's history when this was not the case, but not around the time of the Ming. Given their similar difficulties with wanting the North with China, it makes them less likely to wish for that.

The different outlook is manageable, as we've discussed, and having success up north isn't exactly going to be a challenge. Its lightly populated, some areas have some farmland, others some fur trades, and the rest being fishing or hunting subsistence communities. That's not something that would require effort to take, only enough bodies to get to move there (or like other policies: banish). Once they're there, which would only require a few centuries of rule and some minor motivation (like a semi-organized state up north worth trading with for some low level merchants like a northern Jurchen state) losing it would not be a worry.

I already know what the Joseon viewpoints were, but if they found ways to expand north along the coastline due to trading and drought/famine-related reasons, then it would not necessarily exclude them from doing so. In fact, in 1433, Sejong conquered what was previously considered Jurchen territory for security reasons, which could be another reason. I'm not saying that it would be necessarily be hard to colonize Siberia if a state found a way to get there, but in the case of the Ming and Joseon, they would have to find a way to deal with the states in Manchuria/Central Asia first, and Japan would need to find a suitable reason to expand north. However, after expanding north, they would only be able to retain parts of Siberia for a few decades/centuries unless the government(s) actively pushed for settlers to head north.