China continues to explore the planet?

While not Zheng He, I have heard claim of generally some chinese did make it to the West Coast-but in the form of shipswrecks.
 
It's also becoming accepted that the Polynesians came to the Americas before Columbus... apparently, they brought chickens with them and took sweet potatoes away... IIRC, sometime this year, it was announced that someone had found that chickens were here before the Spanish came...
 
Leaving 1421 aside, and getting back to the basic gist of this thread, why want China geared towards great voyages of discovery? They had no real need tradewise as the Europeans did, but is it out of the realms of possibility that they start to set up trading posts in East Africa or the Indian Ocean islands? How about Australia or Polynesia and an eventual arrival in America by the late 1500's?
 

Philip

Donor
is it out of the realms of possibility that they start to set up trading posts in East Africa or the Indian Ocean islands?

Certainly possible, but I am not sure it is likely. They would have to out compete the Arabs, Tamils, and others for control of the Indian Ocean. Then they need to defend against incursion by the Portuguese and other Europeans. The Chinese seemed more content to set at the end of the trade routes and profit from that. They had enough problems controlling their frontiers to worry about starting a maritime empire.
 
The Ming maritime system suffered from the lack of a good business plan. It was a government run prestige program that ran way over budget. It was only one of several such costly programs initiated by Emperor Yongle, others including the Ming imperial tombs, restoring the Grand Canal, construction of new Great Wall, and multiple offensive campaigns into Mongolia.

After a major flood, the economy could no longer support these programs and the first to get cut was the treasure fleet. The fact that the private sector did not pursue the Indian Ocean trade shows there just wasn't the commercial interest or necessary private capital to make it happen. Had there been more trade, the Ming government would have the incentive to keep the fleet in order to protect its tax base.

Fundamentally China was an agrarian economy and not a commerce economy like European powers. Portugal for example was so dependent on maritime commerce that it could no more ban maritime trade than the Chinese emperor ban agriculture. War and natural disaster accelerates maritime programs in Europe but dooms them in China.

So in the end it comes down to a sound economic reason for China to remain a maritime power, other than because it could. China unlike Europe was able to source everything it needs domestically. Its economic project in the Indian Ocean seemed aimed at creating a viable market for Chinese exports which proved insufficiently profitable.
 
It's also becoming accepted that the Polynesians came to the Americas before Columbus... apparently, they brought chickens with them and took sweet potatoes away... IIRC, sometime this year, it was announced that someone had found that chickens were here before the Spanish came...
I remember seeing somewhere that the feral Araucana chickens in South America were more closely related to Asian chickens than to European chickens.
 
After a major flood, the economy could no longer support these programs and the first to get cut was the treasure fleet. The fact that the private sector did not pursue the Indian Ocean trade shows there just wasn't the commercial interest or necessary private capital to make it happen. Had there been more trade, the Ming government would have the incentive to keep the fleet in order to protect its tax base.

The government actively curtailed overseas trade, and unless you think all governments act perfectly rational, there are plenty of reasons for this.

Certainly, given the bom in overases trade of the 16th century, and the Song Dynasty....
 
I think China could've become a great colonial power... If it accepted a divided China. If Southern Song survived the Mongol onslaught and if China remained divided between nonHan north and Han south, I think it's reasonable to assume that the Southern Song would look to the seas to sustain its empire. Before SS fell, it was already heavily dependent on overseas trade for its governmental tax receipt and for its burgeoning urban class. A hostile Mongol north (not unreasonable) that controlled the Silk Road would most definitely prompt the Chinese to seek and control sea-borne routes to India and beyond-- just as the Mamluke control of Egypt was an impetus in the Portugese and Spanish exploration for alternatives to Arab middlemen. The problem with the other Chinese dynasties was that there were no compelling economic or political reasons to create and sustain an overseas empire; with half of China and its overland trade routes under enemy control, the Chinese would finally have one. Hell, even before the Mongols came, there were signs that the Southern Song was on the cusp of exploding commercially overseas. The Mongols would've been the shove that finally pushed them over the edge.
 
The problem remains that China is simply too easy to unify. I think, given Chinese history (repeated political unification, from North to South), a divided China, unless it is imposed externally, is not likely. But I agree that a division would be the best way for Chinese proto-Capitalism to take off. I seem to recall, though, that the best takeoff for that might have been earlier (12th century?--my China background is especially weak).

A world history favorite of mine, The Human Web suggests that market capitalism worked well in China then in say Europe thanks to the unified state and the nature of its internal market. But my favorite bit from that book is that the Northern European moldboard plow team created social conditions that were uniquely favorable towards the development of "civil society" (including the non-familial business arrangement). Thinking about it just now that might explain Jews and other "commercial minorities" (i.e. the Chinese is parts of Southeast Asia, Indians in Africa and other British colonies)--same sort of civil society incentive.
 
How far Zheng Ho reached is a matter of speculation. The Ming dynasty collapsed in on itself ending the voyages. Zheng Hos ships may have reached the West Coast of America, there is no proof they didn't, they probably didn't round the Cape of Good Hope and come across Europeans or there would have been some record but in theory they could have reached the West Coast of South America

Let us assume that exploration continued in which case they probably would have reached the Americas and West Africa and eventually come into conflict with the Portugeuse first then the Spanish. How manouverrable would junks be against smaller Carracks and caravels and even galleons? Maybe Britain would become allied with the Chinese against the Spaniards? I think it would have lead to wars but China would not have been subject to the invasions of the nineteenth century that she wass through going in on herself but not to the extent that Japan did enabling her to avoid colonisationdid.Trade wasn't cut off in China
 
The problem remains that China is simply too easy to unify. I think, given Chinese history (repeated political unification, from North to South), a divided China, unless it is imposed externally, is not likely. But I agree that a division would be the best way for Chinese proto-Capitalism to take off. I seem to recall, though, that the best takeoff for that might have been earlier (12th century?--my China background is especially weak).

Yes, but if the previous poster's idea happened (Southern Song / northern Mongols), then, if the Song take northern China in 100-200 years, they've still gotten addicted to the maritime tax revenue, and will continue with their empire. Chinese Formosa early? Chinese Philippines?
 

Hendryk

Banned
Mmh, since this question is generating sustained interest, I suppose I could do worse than mention that old TL of mine, The Chinese Discover America in 1435, which is based on the idea of Zheng He making one more journey, this time to the East.

Plenty in there to poke holes into, but as Sinowank I guess it's pretty enjoyable ;)
 
No, I've read 2nd hand sources which accept them.

But I am shocked, shocked to find you don't believe this without any rationale and despite the consensus of historians.

Who said I don't?
I asked a simple question, you jumped to the defensive for no apparent reason.

As to what you're implying there...pots shouldn't call kettles black.
 
Top