AHC: Asian Industrial Revolution

scholar

Banned
My points still technically apply, given that I used "multiple" in both posts, and although "two" can theoretically fall into this category, "fragmented" generally implies more than just a few entities. On the other hand, "divided" can be used to describe more than one entity, so this concept would encompass all scenarios in which China would not be united.
I tried to address this by referencing a stronger Mongol reaction to the chaos in the Ming State, multiple successor states springing up in the north that would take decades to several generations to completely subdue, the Qing and Korea having a brief but inconclusive and costly war, and the revival and increase of Wakou raids. I took this to mean the need for more than two state involved to have wars with, rather than more than two Chinese Dynasties. This was the root of some misunderstanding.

Even in this case, the Song never made a significant attempt to attack north in order to reconquer North China after the Jin moved in, in part because doing so for more than a few decades would severely exhaust resources, and the vested interest was essentially in the form of trade, which continued to flow significantly in both directions. The attacks by the Mongols also involved the Song being on the defensive, and the latter eventually collapsed due to numerous internal issues, which were similar to the Ming's weaknesses.
Well, to be fair, the Song were quite enthusiastic in attempt to recapture the Jin Dynasty. Ultimately what left them open to the Mongols was the Song antagonizing them three times, even though both the first and second left open the real possibility of a lasting peace.

I'll apologize for the bluntness, then. I just didn't want to get into an entangled discussion that falls far outside of the boundaries of the OP.
Fair enough, I will respect that.
 
Could other Asian states industrialize as well like Vietnam or some other Indochina state? What about Brunei and the Philippines?

I'm curious if is that even possible?
 
Would it have been possible for Korea to industrialize? The country is small enough to have a high-density population, has some natural resources unlike Japan, and if you combine this with a China that fails to get too much influence over the northeast, the conditions could be ripe for intensive British-style development.
seems quite a good idea, along with Siam. What would the POD be?
Would a different White Lotus Rebellion help? a weakened Qing, perhaps, can spur Korea into industrialization?
 
What about India?

The Indian subcontinent as a whole is energy poor in terms of what you need to kickstart the virtuous cycle of power and production that leads to an actual industrial revolution. India by the 18th C had significant and sophisticated cottage industries but given the distribution of resources across India there just wasn't much easily accessible, high-quality coal that could fuel a move towards mechanisation.

one of the things that drove industrialism was not just the availability of resources, but the location of them... Europe (and England in particular) had several areas where iron, coal, and water power were all right there together, and this seemed to really spur industrial progress. Did China have anything like that?

Quoted for truth- to everyone else suggesting various countries, you need to look for accessible coal.
 
The Indian subcontinent as a whole is energy poor in terms of what you need to kickstart the virtuous cycle of power and production that leads to an actual industrial revolution. India by the 18th C had significant and sophisticated cottage industries but given the distribution of resources across India there just wasn't much easily accessible, high-quality coal that could fuel a move towards mechanisation.



Quoted for truth- to everyone else suggesting various countries, you need to look for accessible coal.
What if one Indian power controls most (if not all) of the coal producing regions (which I understand is Orissa)?
 
Outside of steam engine and coal, one of the most important thing for Industrialization is "merchantilist economy".
Mercantilism favored the more and even more production. This is ideal incentive for industrialization.

I don't know which Asian country is more ideologically-culturally being merchantilist.
 
As far as I know, the Straits of Malacca were as mercantile as Asia could get. The problem is that the polities there were too busy fighting each other too much to care.
 
Outside of steam engine and coal, one of the most important thing for Industrialization is "merchantilist economy".
Mercantilism favored the more and even more production. This is ideal incentive for industrialization.
I don't know which Asian country is more ideologically-culturally being merchantilist.
Would one of the Asian nations acquiring "The Wealth of Nations"(the book itself) help? Books, we can probably arrange one of the traders or priests bring them around and accidentally land on one of the country's shores, resulting in the country's government having possession of the books.
 
Last edited:
Would one of the Asian nations acquiring "The Wealth of Nations"(the book itself) help? Books, we can probably arrange one of the traders or priests bring them around and accidentally land on one of the country's shores, resulting in the country's government having possession of the books.

Actually "Wealth of Nation" doesn't support mercantilism.
Better to obtain Mercantilist Economic books of 1600 - 1750 period.
 
What if one Indian power controls most (if not all) of the coal producing regions (which I understand is Orissa)?

Not much practical difference. It's poor quality brown coal which isn't easily accessible without an already existing industrial base.

Britain's advantage was relatively easily accessible, high quality coal to fuel the engines to pump out deeper mines for more coal and so forth.
 
Would one of the Asian nations acquiring "The Wealth of Nations"(the book itself) help? Books, we can probably arrange one of the traders or priests bring them around and accidentally land on one of the country's shores, resulting in the country's government having possession of the books.

And then what happens? Economies are dependent on preexisting factors that can't necessarily be implemented from above.
 
Would one of the Asian nations acquiring "The Wealth of Nations"(the book itself) help? Books, we can probably arrange one of the traders or priests bring them around and accidentally land on one of the country's shores, resulting in the country's government having possession of the books.

Not really. The book was essentially a commentary on social conditions at the time, and did not actually cover how policies could be implemented on a systematic level. For example, the "invisible hand" described how if individuals were free to make economic decisions, they would eventually balance out as a whole because it was in everyone's interest to maximize profit. In addition, Adam Smith also contradicted himself at some levels, as he stated that although the division of labor maximized efficiency, he also suggested that a "mental mutilation" of the workers would eventually occur over time, as their knowledge becomes extremely limited after countless repetitions in the long run.
 

katchen

Banned
We all seem to be racking our brains looking for existing factors in Asian nations that will make industrialization possible. What we keep coming up against is that industrialization was always possible in Asia but until the mid 19th Century, was not perceived by Asian elites (or to be fair, by Central and Eastern European elites in places like Russia and Austria) as necessary--or anything more than a threat to existing social relations that was to be resisted at all costs. What is needed to kick-start industrialization in Asia earlier is literally an earlier kick---in the butt of Japan!
Industrialization need not start in the 18th Century to be effective. Even for a nation like Japan. The Japanese may not have much coal, but they do have high mountains and plenty of water. And waterwheels turned cranks and drive shafts before steam engines did. And in the EARLY 19th Century, waterwheels still are in use.
So let's assume a POD somewhere in the 1800s to 1820s. The British East India Company or perhaps Thomas Raffles sends a flotilla to Japan to negotiate the surrender of some strategic islands that can be used for the China trade (either Sakashima Gunto --the Southern Ryukyu Islands; having the advantage of nearness to Taiwan and the Chinese coast, Okinawa having the advantage of the yearly tribute expedition to China or Tsu-Shima, which is centrally located for both China, Japan and Korea.
This shows conclusively to much of the Japanese elite that Japan's seclusion policy is not effective and that Japan must emulate the West. The result is that the Bafuku is overthrown by 1830 in the reign of the Emperor Ninko (1817-1846).
Forty years makes a big difference in the 19th Century!
In the 1830s, Russia has not claimed any of China, much less Sakhalin or the Kuril Islands. Japan is free to claim both. None of the European nations are anywhere close to taking over the Pacific Islands. (The British and Dutch only made a paper claim to New Guinea, the world's second largest island in 1828). Japan can expand into many if not most Pacific Islands (much as Russia expanded across Siberia in the early 17th Century) as soon as it can build a navy to take them and find them extremely low on any European nation's national list of priorities. And in the 1830s, those ships can still be made of wood (which Japan has aplenty) and powered by wind.
And unlike Japan, many of those islands ARE rich in natural resources. Consider:
Sakhalin. Rich in coal reserves
New Guinea: rich in gold, copper (in conjunction with gold), nickel, rich agricultural land for sugar cane (domesticated originally in New Guinea), rice and tea. Can comfortably support over 80 million people.
Solomon Islands (lead, zinc, nickel, gold, bauxite)
New Hebrides (Vaunuatu) gold, silver, manganese
New Caledonia Nickel
Fiji gold, phosphate, bauxite, lead, zinc, iron, titanium
And if the Japanese can wrest the Amur River and it's basin (or at least that part of the Amur Basin north of the Lesser Khingnan Mountains) from China --which is doable in the 1840s and 50s with steamboats mounted with guns --well, from Wikipedia, here are the mineral resources of what is IOTL, Amur Oblast (the Middle Amur Basin from Khabarovsk to the Stanovoi Range):
ranes nest here, as well as a host of other rare birds. Natural resources

Amur Oblast has considerable reserves of many types of mineral resources; proven reserves are estimated to be worth US$400 billion. Among the most important are gold (the largest reserves in Russia), silver, titanium, molybdenum, tungsten, copper, tin, etc. Black coal and lignite reserves are estimated to be 70 billion tons. Probable iron deposits are estimated to be 3.8 billion tons. The Garin deposit is fully explored and known to contain 389 million tons of iron ore. Estimated reserves of the deposit are 1,293 million tons. The deposit's ore contains a low concentration of detrimental impurities; the ore contains 69.9% iron. Amur Oblast is also a promising source of titanium, with the Bolshoy Seyim deposit being the most important.[11]


This concentration of resources is well worth remembering, not only for this TL but for many others involving alternatives to Japan taking over Manchuria. If Japan can start expanding from the 1830s (and is likely to experience far less pushback from European nations if it does beginning in the 1830s, Japan's industrialization is likely to be far more successful than IOTL and Japan is likely to gain far more acceptance as a world power by the turn of the 20th Century.


Of those islands,
 
quick thought before anything else.
so I think we've covered importance of coal, population density, prerequisite "agricultural revolution" and merchant-oriented economy.
what about education? I don't think we actually covered the importance of education, but I do believe that factor needs some emphasis...
 

katchen

Banned
I seem to recall that Japan had a relatively high level of education for both Asia and Europe at the time (mid to late 19th Century). Enough to appreciate the value of education and enough to begin development.
 

scholar

Banned
I seem to recall that Japan had a relatively high level of education for both Asia and Europe at the time (mid to late 19th Century). Enough to appreciate the value of education and enough to begin development.
Japan and Korea have been putting an emphasis upon education since the 1000s AD, and China almost two thousand years before them.

It wasn't education, it was the type of education.
 
Japan and Korea have been putting an emphasis upon education since the 1000s AD, and China almost two thousand years before them.

It wasn't education, it was the type of education.
quite true. what matters is whether the education system was centralised or done by the scholars themselves, without the help from government. standardised education maybe is quite important?
 
quite true. what matters is whether the education system was centralised or done by the scholars themselves, without the help from government. standardised education maybe is quite important?
>
>
>
Having no centralised system didn't seem to bother the Greeks/Romans/Persians. Up through the 19th century a lot of technical learning was master/apprentice, learn by doing.
 
We all seem to be racking our brains looking for existing factors in Asian nations that will make industrialization possible. What we keep coming up against is that industrialization was always possible in Asia but until the mid 19th Century, was not perceived by Asian elites (or to be fair, by Central and Eastern European elites in places like Russia and Austria) as necessary--or anything more than a threat to existing social relations that was to be resisted at all costs. What is needed to kick-start industrialization in Asia earlier is literally an earlier kick---in the butt of Japan!
Industrialization need not start in the 18th Century to be effective. Even for a nation like Japan. The Japanese may not have much coal, but they do have high mountains and plenty of water. And waterwheels turned cranks and drive shafts before steam engines did. And in the EARLY 19th Century, waterwheels still are in use.
So let's assume a POD somewhere in the 1800s to 1820s. The British East India Company or perhaps Thomas Raffles sends a flotilla to Japan to negotiate the surrender of some strategic islands that can be used for the China trade (either Sakashima Gunto --the Southern Ryukyu Islands; having the advantage of nearness to Taiwan and the Chinese coast, Okinawa having the advantage of the yearly tribute expedition to China or Tsu-Shima, which is centrally located for both China, Japan and Korea.
This shows conclusively to much of the Japanese elite that Japan's seclusion policy is not effective and that Japan must emulate the West. The result is that the Bafuku is overthrown by 1830 in the reign of the Emperor Ninko (1817-1846).
Forty years makes a big difference in the 19th Century!
In the 1830s, Russia has not claimed any of China, much less Sakhalin or the Kuril Islands. Japan is free to claim both. None of the European nations are anywhere close to taking over the Pacific Islands. (The British and Dutch only made a paper claim to New Guinea, the world's second largest island in 1828). Japan can expand into many if not most Pacific Islands (much as Russia expanded across Siberia in the early 17th Century) as soon as it can build a navy to take them and find them extremely low on any European nation's national list of priorities. And in the 1830s, those ships can still be made of wood (which Japan has aplenty) and powered by wind.
And unlike Japan, many of those islands ARE rich in natural resources. Consider:
Sakhalin. Rich in coal reserves
New Guinea: rich in gold, copper (in conjunction with gold), nickel, rich agricultural land for sugar cane (domesticated originally in New Guinea), rice and tea. Can comfortably support over 80 million people.
Solomon Islands (lead, zinc, nickel, gold, bauxite)
New Hebrides (Vaunuatu) gold, silver, manganese
New Caledonia Nickel
Fiji gold, phosphate, bauxite, lead, zinc, iron, titanium
And if the Japanese can wrest the Amur River and it's basin (or at least that part of the Amur Basin north of the Lesser Khingnan Mountains) from China --which is doable in the 1840s and 50s with steamboats mounted with guns --well, from Wikipedia, here are the mineral resources of what is IOTL, Amur Oblast (the Middle Amur Basin from Khabarovsk to the Stanovoi Range):
ranes nest here, as well as a host of other rare birds. Natural resources

Amur Oblast has considerable reserves of many types of mineral resources; proven reserves are estimated to be worth US$400 billion. Among the most important are gold (the largest reserves in Russia), silver, titanium, molybdenum, tungsten, copper, tin, etc. Black coal and lignite reserves are estimated to be 70 billion tons. Probable iron deposits are estimated to be 3.8 billion tons. The Garin deposit is fully explored and known to contain 389 million tons of iron ore. Estimated reserves of the deposit are 1,293 million tons. The deposit's ore contains a low concentration of detrimental impurities; the ore contains 69.9% iron. Amur Oblast is also a promising source of titanium, with the Bolshoy Seyim deposit being the most important.[11]


This concentration of resources is well worth remembering, not only for this TL but for many others involving alternatives to Japan taking over Manchuria. If Japan can start expanding from the 1830s (and is likely to experience far less pushback from European nations if it does beginning in the 1830s, Japan's industrialization is likely to be far more successful than IOTL and Japan is likely to gain far more acceptance as a world power by the turn of the 20th Century.


Of those islands,

Japan's in a fairly unique position insofar as relatively accessible resource rich areas go, though, because it was on the outer edge of the civilised.world with relatively untouched.unsettled territory nearby. What about Siam or Mysore or Travancore or the Sikh Empire? They, like most of the Asian states aren't going to have the advantages Japan did.
 
Top