Likeliest Asian countries (besides Japan) to begin industrializing in the 19th century?

CaliGuy

Banned
I previously asked about Africa in regards to this. However, I would now like to shift the focus on Asia (in a broad sense; including the Middle East); thus, here goes:

Which Asian countries (again, including the Middle East) other than Japan were the most likely to begin industrializing in the 19th century had things gone a little differently for them?

As for me, I suspect that Korea could be a candidate for this; indeed, had King/Emperor Gojong managed to begin his reforms and industrialization earlier and had the Russo-Japanese War been completely avoided afterwards (for instance, by having Russian Tsar Nicholas II die of typhoid fever in 1900 like he almost did in our TL), then Korea might have been able to begin industrializing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?
 

Thothian

Banned
Persia, after the second Russo-Persian war, as the British give it support as a proxy against Russia in the "Great Game"

India, as a "second Britain" ; again as Britain putting a wall south of Russia to halt their expansion
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Persia, after the second Russo-Persian war, as the British give it support as a proxy against Russia in the "Great Game"

India, as a "second Britain" ; again as Britain putting a wall south of Russia to halt their expansion
Giving support to a country and having this country industrialize are two different things, though.
 

Thothian

Banned
What I'm saying is that the UK might deliberately back the industrialization of South Asia as a counter to Russian expansionism, but it's an outside chance I think.
 
What I'm saying is that the UK might deliberately back the industrialization of South Asia as a counter to Russian expansionism, but it's an outside chance I think.
A better chance would be if British colonialism is limited and most of the subcontinent remains under effective local rule. The OP never stated that the PoD has to be after the British conquest, after all...
 

Zachariah

Banned
Think this fits in quite well with my post in the 'Likeliest African countries to begin industrializing in the 19th century?' thread, answering the follow-on question of "...in the entire world, which non-White countries other than Japan (and excluding the Americas, of course) had high or relatively high literacy levels in the 19th century and earlier?". I'd go with the Sikh Empire as my first choice (excluding the princely state of Hyderabad, which actually did successfully industrialize in the late 19th century IOTL- so of, after having been bankrupted by the British garrison's levy charges in the early 19th century. Avert this early bankruptcy, and Hyderabad could well have industrialized a lot more far earlier). The main argument for this:

You should find this article about the levels of literacy in the Sikh Empire very interesting. http://dailysikhupdates.com/scholar-1881-punjab-educated-place-world-sikh-empire/. One of the central tenets of the Sikh faith was universal literacy, with the Gurmukhi script created and standardized by the second Sikh Guru Angad Dev Ji for this specific purpose, and Maharajah Ranjit Singh's Sikh Empire was the first in the world to introduce compulsory state-funded universal education for both males and females, resulting in what the East India Company themselves admitted was most likely the highest literacy rate in the world, potentially rivaling that of even the contemporary Netherlands (90%) at the time of annexation- so high that the British implemented a book-burning program to curb it and reduce literacy rates for fear of rebellion. Before its annexation, and the anti-literacy program in 1857, the Sikh Empire had an estimated 330,000 students in higher education, equivalent to 2.75% of its entire population of roughly 12M; for comparison, the USA only managed to reach and surpass this level of college enrollment in the mid 1950's. It's one of the mods which I added to my own version of Victoria II to make it more historically accurate- and let me tell you, it makes a huge difference when you're playing as the Sikh Empire. Great Power status guaranteed...
 
Last edited:
Cochin China.

Massive natural resources, good money supply, lots of cultural mixing, liberal French administration, lots and lots of opportunities for some faction or group to start something weird but profitable.
 
China already started limited reforms to industrialise in order to build up its military strength as early as the 1860s, but generally failed.

If they had greater political will to pursue wider reforms (like reforming other areas like government, finance, etc to support industrialisation as Japan did, instead of just trying to build factories and shipyards to copy modern weapons), then they might have succeeded.
 
The elephant that is China most assuredly could've done it were the Qing not literally afraid of gunpowder.
The Qing disapproved of archery entirely falling out of use because it was important in Manchu culture, not because they were scared of it. They used firearms extensively both before and after the Opium Wars and were quick to (and actually fairly successful at) adopting Western weaponry.
 
Cochin China.

Massive natural resources, good money supply, lots of cultural mixing, liberal French administration, lots and lots of opportunities for some faction or group to start something weird but profitable.
That is a good point but not entirely accurate.

Saigon WAS a big town and fairly affluent in the XVIIIth century but by the French conquest, it doesn't seem to be that impressive anymore. I don't have exact numbers but it's not noted as a major population center by the French. I might be wrong.

Saigon was also quite separated from its traditional trade networks as it had been conquered from Cambodia. I doubt it was yet fully integrated with Vietnam's economy (which was oriented mostly toward the Hanoi delta) and Cambodia was really a dying beast.
The region was also fairly unstable by the time of the French conquest, due partly to resistance to the invader and anti-Christian persecutions.

However what I am telling you above might just be some reflection of Colonialist propaganda. It looks good if the Emperor before you is shown as very cruel and some kind of Asian Nero, hell-bent on killing Christians (Looking at you Tu Duc and Minh Mang).
Obviously that might be overplaying the Christian community and forgetting the actual disrupting role of Christians. It's a bit hard to blame the Vietnamese state for wanting to avoid having Christians when the reason they got invaded was for protection of the Christians...

Anyway, back to the topic.

With the Northern part of Vietnam, North of Hué, you have a very decent chance. By 1800-ish, the N'Guyen dynasty has re-affirmed control over the whole country and trade networks can start again. Hanoi is a stupidly rich and populated region. It was one of Asia's biggest city at the time, thanks to a very fertile delta.

You also had a clear bourgeoisie, a solid and educated administration, some artisans, high quality metalwork (and cannon foundries) AND decent trade integration through their ports.
On top of that, the founder of the dynasty, Gia Long, is perfectly aware of what a European army and a burgeoning industrial revolution can do, thanks to his association with the bishop Pigneau de Béhaine.
It also has a decent army and is not that easy to conquer. The French conquest wasn't exactly a walk in the park. The terrain is just awful for Europeans, and historically, the Viets use it a lot.

Now, the problem of Vietnam is clearly ideological. Vietnam historically is looking up to China senpai and won't do anything the Senpai doesn't do first. The N'Guyen dynasty is especially guilty of this.
So until they see some industrialisation in China (with the conflict against Confucean doctrine it includes) they most probably won't move.

Of course, there are ways to change that. Including a deeper conversion. Say if Gia Long is converted or allows wider proselytism in his kingdom. Or if Louis the XVI actually honours his promise of sending troups, you'd have an even further integrated Vietnam with great, relatively equal, ties with the West.
A retrained, re-equipped Vietnamese army is then used to pacify the country and, taking advantage of the massive troubles in China in that period, get some bits and pieces. Maybe even pushing to Canton? Who knows?
 

Deleted member 67076

The Ottomans, Iran, China are those Im sure of. Dunno, perhaps the Viets, Koreans, and Thai? Maybe a South Asian state if the British were to be kicked out?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Cochin China.

Massive natural resources, good money supply, lots of cultural mixing, liberal French administration, lots and lots of opportunities for some faction or group to start something weird but profitable.
Question--was Cochin China a part of Vietnam before the French conquered it, or what?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
That is a good point but not entirely accurate.

Saigon WAS a big town and fairly affluent in the XVIIIth century but by the French conquest, it doesn't seem to be that impressive anymore. I don't have exact numbers but it's not noted as a major population center by the French. I might be wrong.

Saigon was also quite separated from its traditional trade networks as it had been conquered from Cambodia. I doubt it was yet fully integrated with Vietnam's economy (which was oriented mostly toward the Hanoi delta) and Cambodia was really a dying beast.
The region was also fairly unstable by the time of the French conquest, due partly to resistance to the invader and anti-Christian persecutions.

However what I am telling you above might just be some reflection of Colonialist propaganda. It looks good if the Emperor before you is shown as very cruel and some kind of Asian Nero, hell-bent on killing Christians (Looking at you Tu Duc and Minh Mang).
Obviously that might be overplaying the Christian community and forgetting the actual disrupting role of Christians. It's a bit hard to blame the Vietnamese state for wanting to avoid having Christians when the reason they got invaded was for protection of the Christians...

Anyway, back to the topic.

With the Northern part of Vietnam, North of Hué, you have a very decent chance. By 1800-ish, the N'Guyen dynasty has re-affirmed control over the whole country and trade networks can start again. Hanoi is a stupidly rich and populated region. It was one of Asia's biggest city at the time, thanks to a very fertile delta.

You also had a clear bourgeoisie, a solid and educated administration, some artisans, high quality metalwork (and cannon foundries) AND decent trade integration through their ports.
On top of that, the founder of the dynasty, Gia Long, is perfectly aware of what a European army and a burgeoning industrial revolution can do, thanks to his association with the bishop Pigneau de Béhaine.
It also has a decent army and is not that easy to conquer. The French conquest wasn't exactly a walk in the park. The terrain is just awful for Europeans, and historically, the Viets use it a lot.

Now, the problem of Vietnam is clearly ideological. Vietnam historically is looking up to China senpai and won't do anything the Senpai doesn't do first. The N'Guyen dynasty is especially guilty of this.
So until they see some industrialisation in China (with the conflict against Confucean doctrine it includes) they most probably won't move.

Of course, there are ways to change that. Including a deeper conversion. Say if Gia Long is converted or allows wider proselytism in his kingdom. Or if Louis the XVI actually honours his promise of sending troups, you'd have an even further integrated Vietnam with great, relatively equal, ties with the West.
A retrained, re-equipped Vietnamese army is then used to pacify the country and, taking advantage of the massive troubles in China in that period, get some bits and pieces. Maybe even pushing to Canton? Who knows?
Question--why exactly were the Vietnamese such large fanboys of China during this time? After all, they not only followed China's lead but also forced their population to wear Chinese clothes, et cetera!
 

CaliGuy

Banned
China already started limited reforms to industrialise in order to build up its military strength as early as the 1860s, but generally failed.

If they had greater political will to pursue wider reforms (like reforming other areas like government, finance, etc to support industrialisation as Japan did, instead of just trying to build factories and shipyards to copy modern weapons), then they might have succeeded.
Question--was Shintoism more tolerant of industrialization than Confucianism was?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Question--was Cochin China a part of Vietnam before the French conquered it, or what?
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histoire_du_Viêt_Nam#/media/File:Nam_Tien.PNG
It was, but had not been for a very long time.
The Vietnamese are expert colonisers as you can see by the map ;)


Question--why exactly were the Vietnamese such large fanboys of China during this time? After all, they not only followed China's lead but also forced their population to wear Chinese clothes, et cetera!
Well, it's a lot like Belgium and France. Sure you might not like them but there's about 30 times as many of them as there is of you, hard not to get influenced...
Originally the Dai Viet were originating from Southern China and had been creeping south ever since. Give them a couple centuries, they'll probably settle Australia.

Another good parallel would be any state next to Rome. Even if they are barbarians or successor states, they would get their law books inspired from Rome.
The N'Guyen lawbooks were so close to the Chinese ones in that period that they're basically copy paste. French translators used the Viet version to translate the Chinese one because they're so alike.

It ebbs and flows, Lé Than Thong of the posterior Lé dynasty was taking more liberties with it. The thing is also that if you divert too much from China, China has a tendency to knock on your door.

Question--was Shintoism more tolerant of industrialization than Confucianism was?
It's more that Confucianism is all about tradition and stability. Not an expert on the matter though.
The elite was confucean (mandarin system, etc...) while the Vietnamese themselves also have a weird mix of animism, with the Emperor getting a mandate from Heaven, also that concept is not as strong as it is for the Chinese.

Of course! :) Indeed, the Vietnamese appear to have engaged in the Asian version of the Ostsiedlung up to the early 1800s!
A bit later than that actually
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian–Vietnamese_War
 
Since the Middle East is included... The Ottoman Empire of course! Maybe if the Sultan manages to purge the Yeniçeri already in 1807 things could take a turn for the better, but there are many ways to save the "sick man of Europe" Although obviously the challenges are very numerous and very big. Unfortunately I am not knowledgeable enough to expand on this, a pity there are notwo many Ottomanophiles here...

I would very eagerly read a Sikh Empire timeline: are there any in this board?
 
Question--was Shintoism more tolerant of industrialization than Confucianism was?
I want to say that the difference between China and Japan in terms of a propensity to industrialize had less to do with the state religion and more to do with scarcity of resources and Japan's heartfelt fear of Western destruction of their culture.
 
Top