Russian borders if the Jurchen never united

[Coqui]

Assuming there are no Manchu; Mongolia and the land that became Manchuria would not go on to be centralized under the Qing dynasty, as the Ming dynasty either falls in civil war or manages to recover and limp on. Is Russia likely to expand into those lands in the 17th and 18th centuries? In our timeline, they didn't really go that far south into Central Asia until later, but there was definite Russian interest in the Amur river basin that was countered by the Qing; is Mongolia likely to be more left alone?

What about demographics? Would Russians, Cossacks, or Polish exiles come to make up more of the population than Jurchens/Mongolians? Are breakoff states like the state of Jaxa in our timeline, likely to form? What about later when, in our timeline, Han migration lead to them becoming the majority in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia; would this migration still happen, or would Europeans be more likely to fill that niche? If it did happen, would that affect Russian control of the region, or upset order in any breakaway states that might have formed?

 

[Madhukar_Shah]

The dzungar khanate is likely to put up more spirited resistance than the Qing, given that Central Asia and Mongolia are their only real interests.

 

[Coqui]

The dzungar khanate is likely to put up more spirited resistance than the Qing, given that Central Asia and Mongolia are their only real interests.

I was wondering about them, actually; if they were likely to make their empire from Outer Mongolia to Tibet into a stable polity, or if the Russians would do what the Qing did in our timeline. I take it you very much think the former? What would this polity be called? Just Mongolia? Dzungaria?

 

[Rickdukulous Rex]

Amur area probably solidly European

 

[Coqui]

Amur area probably solidly European

Do you see the later Han immigration to Manchuria in our timeline not happening as much in this alternate timeline? I suppose it being another country is an added difficulty, but the Qing tried to stop Han migration there and were unable to.

 

[Madhukar_Shah]

I was wondering about them, actually; if they were likely to make their empire from Outer Mongolia to Tibet into a stable polity, or if the Russians would do what the Qing did in our timeline. I take it you very much think the former? What would this polity be called? Just Mongolia? Dzungaria?

It’s difficult to say much without knowing exactly what’s going on with china and the khalkha mongols- in 1640, the dzunghar/oirat and the khalkha agreed to a pretty much federal constitution with the Mongol oirat codes of the forty and the four, and given that the Kalmyks were able to colonise and settle the Volga, it’s plausible that if china was clearly strong enough that expansion in that direction is impossible, the forty and the four sweep through the Kazakh khanate as well so that pretty much everywhere from modern Kalmykia to Manchuria is ruled by Tibetan buddhists by the 1650s.

The displaced Kazakhs could wreak havoc in a Russia fresh from the time of troubles or swing through and destabilise Bukhara, khiva or even the Safavids. Many might find employment in Aurangzebs Deccan campaigns or join the nogais in fleeing to the Crimean khanate and bolstering its position on the western steppe, having consequences on the ottoman campaigns of 1683. All these things could combine to dissuade Russia from ever really trying to Russify that territory until the great divergence has truly set in around the 1830s

Alternatively, the dzungars only manage to subjugate the khalkha by 1700, and when they turn westwards to link up with the Kalmyks they meet a Russia that’s very able to pay them off and play them off against each other, leading to Russian domination of the whole thing pretty quickly.

The situation is especially interesting as without the Qing, or another Tibetan Buddhist dynasty in china that’s interested in control of the Tibetan Buddhist mongols by controlling the Dalai Lama, the Dalai Lama is much more able to maintain his pope like position as the spiritual centre of all mongols, with claims to be able to depose and confirm khans. That theocratic angle could lead to Tibetan Buddhism becoming established as state religion everywhere north of the Safavid and Mughal realms, right before those two powers are about to experience a period of massive turmoil.

It would probably be stretching the parallel to imagine a world where Tibetan Buddhist mongols replace the forces of Nader shah/ahmed shah abdali in the mid to late 18th century, sweeping down into india to establish crusader states around the buddhist pilgrimage site of bodh gaya.

 

[Coqui]

It’s difficult to say much without knowing exactly what’s going on with china and the khalkha mongols- in 1640, the dzunghar/oirat and the khalkha agreed to a pretty much federal constitution with the Mongol oirat codes of the forty and the four, and given that the Kalmyks were able to colonise and settle the Volga, it’s plausible that if china was clearly strong enough that expansion in that direction is impossible, the forty and the four sweep through the Kazakh khanate as well so that pretty much everywhere from modern Kalmykia to Manchuria is ruled by Tibetan buddhists by the 1650s.

The displaced Kazakhs could wreak havoc in a Russia fresh from the time of troubles or swing through and destabilise Bukhara, khiva or even the Safavids. Many might find employment in Aurangzebs Deccan campaigns or join the nogais in fleeing to the Crimean khanate and bolstering its position on the western steppe, having consequences on the ottoman campaigns of 1683. All these things could combine to dissuade Russia from ever really trying to Russify that territory until the great divergence has truly set in around the 1830s

Alternatively, the dzungars only manage to subjugate the khalkha by 1700, and when they turn westwards to link up with the Kalmyks they meet a Russia that’s very able to pay them off and play them off against each other, leading to Russian domination of the whole thing pretty quickly.

The situation is especially interesting as without the Qing, or another Tibetan Buddhist dynasty in china that’s interested in control of the Tibetan Buddhist mongols by controlling the Dalai Lama, the Dalai Lama is much more able to maintain his pope like position as the spiritual centre of all mongols, with claims to be able to depose and confirm khans. That theocratic angle could lead to Tibetan Buddhism becoming established as state religion everywhere north of the Safavid and Mughal realms, right before those two powers are about to experience a period of massive turmoil.

It would probably be stretching the parallel to imagine a world where Tibetan Buddhist mongols replace the forces of Nader shah/ahmed shah abdali in the mid to late 18th century, sweeping down into india to establish crusader states around the buddhist pilgrimage site of bodh gaya.

I really like these two scenarios. I'm wondering how long Dzungar dominance could last, though; would the Tarim Basin's Uyghur population continue to rise and possibly go on to resist Dzungar rule?

I wonder what Siberia would even look like in the first scenario. With a khanate threatening them at the Volga, is it likely that Russia would abandon Siberia and the far east, so it's mostly ruled by indigenous polities?

In the latter scenario, where they can't completely derail Russian Siberia, would they resist Russia by the Amur as much as the Qing did, or would they stick to their core in outer Mongolia?

 

[Madhukar_Shah]

I really like these two scenarios. I'm wondering how long Dzungar dominance could last, though; would the Tarim Basin's Uyghur population continue to rise and possibly go on to resist Dzungar rule?

I wonder what Siberia would even look like in the first scenario. With a khanate threatening them at the Volga, is it likely that Russia would abandon Siberia and the far east, so it's mostly ruled by indigenous polities?

In the latter scenario, where they can't completely derail Russian Siberia, would they resist Russia by the Amur as much as the Qing did, or would they stick to their core in outer Mongolia?

In the latter scenario I don’t think they’d resist the Russians by the Amur that much no, unless it infringes on grazing land the Mongols need to expand into.

I don’t think the Tarim basin would be a problem, Muslims there were largely urban and non militarised- resistance is most likely passive.

I think Russia and the Cossacks wouldn’t be threatened by the dzungars as long as there are Muslims on the scene- any group that can prevent Muslim raids would be welcome.

For the Cossacks as well I wouldn’t be surprised if they find themselves making stronger alliances with the Mongols than the Russian state- confederation might be difficult as long as the Cossacks stick with orthodox Christianity, but they might be inspired by Mongol kurultais and law codes in their own forms of government.

After a few generations of stable anti Islamic alliances, I could potentially imagine splinter groups of the cossack Hetmanate styling themselves as a khanate if that isn’t exclusively associated with Islam now, drawing on steppe traditions of legitimacy, adopting Buddhism, Mongol law codes and Genghisid descent to win allies amongst the group that now seems to dominate the steppe and isn’t Muslim. Most Cossacks probably stay Christian but might accept a Buddhist ruler if he swears to abide by the rulings of sich rada and marriage alliances may blur religious boundaries. Just to illustrate why that would be an enticing idea- the Mongol- oirat code of 1640 included among its first governing principles that every constituent state of the confederation had fundamental rights that could not be altered without their consent. By confederating with the mongols you don’t lose your own group identity, you just get the protection of the larger group. It is strikingly modern in world history as a constitutional document of a federation of states underpinned by shared commitment to the Gelugpa school of Tibetan Buddhism, Westphalian sovereignty and genghisid descent.

The Cossacks were primarily concerned with their own independence, and otl they were guaranteed to lose it, it was just a choice of do we lose it to the Catholic poles or the orthodox Russians- while the Cossacks and Russia are a pretty natural alliance, they might use the Mongol counterweight to resist Russian domination into the 18th century.

 

[alexmilman]

I don’t think the Tarim basin would be a problem, Muslims there were largely urban and non militarised- resistance is most likely passive.

I think Russia and the Cossacks wouldn’t be threatened by the dzungars as long as there are Muslims on the scene- any group that can prevent Muslim raids would be welcome.

For the Cossacks as well I wouldn’t be surprised if they find themselves making stronger alliances with the Mongols than the Russian state- confederation might be difficult as long as the Cossacks stick with orthodox Christianity, but they might be inspired by Mongol kurultais and law codes in their own forms of government.

I could potentially imagine the cossack Hetmanate styling itself as a khanate if that isn’t exclusively associated with Islam now, drawing on steppe traditions of legitimacy, adopting Mongol law codes and Genghisid descent to win allies amongst the group that now seems to dominate the steppe and isn’t Muslim. Most Cossacks probably stay Christian but marriage alliances might emerge. At the absolute most, after a few generations of stable anti Islamic alliance, the Cossacks accept a Mongol as ruler on the condition that he become orthodox and uphold the decisions of the sich rada, thus becoming a new Mongol tumen to join the forty and the four.

I’m afraid that you are somewhat confused about the demographics and terminology.

Unlike the Kazakhs (the nomads part of whom, IIRC, were the vassals of Dzungaria), the Cossacks relevant to the subject were the ethnic Russian military settlers, not a separate ethnic or political group. Neither did/would they form a Hetmanate: unlike the Ukrainian Cossacks, which were a different entity historically, geographically, etc., they never were an independent (or semi-independent) entity and were fully dependent upon the central government for the supplies. Their leadership was appointed by the local Russian administration. Unlike the Kazakhs, they were not the nomads, which means that any talk about the Mongolian code inapplicable (it was strictly for the nomads). They came into the area as a vanguard of the Russian colonization and were garrisoning the fortified border line(s) plus doing some “conquistadoring” further to the east, eventually coming into a military confrontation with the Manchu which was ended by the Nerchinsk Treaty.

The Kazakhs, OTOH, were the nomads, did form their own state, or rather three states and most of what you wrote did apply to them. Except, of course, for the “Hetmanate”. Most of them had been Muslims starting from at least XV century.

The Cossacks were primarily concerned with their own independence, and otl they were guaranteed to lose it, it was just a choice of do we lose it to the Catholic poles

You are definitely confusing the Ukrainian Cossacks with those operating east of the Ural. Think about the geography: where was the PLC and where is the CA.

or the orthodox Russians- while the Cossacks and Russia are a pretty natural alliance, they might use the Mongol counterweight to resist Russian domination into the 18th century.

See above about the confused terminology.

 

[The Gunslinger]

Do you see the later Han immigration to Manchuria in our timeline not happening as much in this alternate timeline? I suppose it being another country is an added difficulty, but the Qing tried to stop Han migration there and were unable to.

They were able to, just unwilling to after the Treaty of Aigun and the Russians started encroaching on the Chinese frontier. It was felt that a stronger Chinese presence would help prevent Russian domination.

 

[Coqui]

Unlike the Kazakhs (the nomads part of whom, IIRC, were the vassals of Dzungaria), the Cossacks relevant to the subject were the ethnic Russian military settlers, not a separate ethnic or political group.

While I can see why you'd doubt the Ural Cossacks breaking off (I think some of them did though, with a Polish exile in the short lived state called Jaxa by the Amur), I was under the impression that Madhukar_Shah was suggesting that the Dzungars would displace the Kazakhs, which would cause the Kazakhs to encroach into Russia, possibly destabilizing it, rather than meaning to say the Cossacks would attack Russia

 

[Coqui]

They were able to, just unwilling to after the Treaty of Aigun and the Russians started encroaching on the Chinese frontier. It was felt that a stronger Chinese presence would help prevent Russian domination.

Interesting. What kind of people do you see moving there? Cossacks? Regular Russians? Old Believers? Polish exiles? Do you see the Amur Russians staying loyal to Russia?

 

[alexmilman]

While I can see why you'd doubt the Ural Cossacks breaking off (I think some of them did though, with a Polish exile in the short lived state called Jaxa by the Amur),

Polish exile probably implies the late XVIII (there was a famous Polish adventurer, forgot the name, who made a noticeable splash around the world) but the numbers were minuscule and I’m not sure if these people were the Cossacks or the escaped prisoners.

I was under the impression that Madhukar_Shah was suggesting that the Dzungars would displace the Kazakhs, which would cause the Kazakhs to encroach into Russia, possibly destabilizing it, rather than meaning to say the Cossacks would attack Russia

Confusion between the “Cossacks” and “Kazakhs” is quite usual and the same applies to the Ukrainian Cossacks vs. the Russian Cossacks so I also assumed that intention was to talk about the Kazakhs.

In OTL in the 1st half of the XVIII Russians in Siberia were all types of the encounters with the Dzungars so nothing fantastic there and the same applies to the Kazakhs who were at war with the Dzungars in 1720s. However, Kazakhs’ “encroachment” into Russia was, IMO, unlikely because the Dzungars were looking for the tribute, not a territory. As for the Dzungars themselves, by the time Qing destroyed them, the Dzungar state fall apart due to the internal dynastic conflicts so in an absence on the Manchu this state could exist for a longer time but the problems would remain. Then, the Dzungars did not have the numbers and technology to kick the Russians out of the Eastern Siberia even in 1720s when their presence in the area was quite weak. The chance to do this in the 2nd half of the XVIII would be even smaller due to the Russian increased presence, fortified lines, better tactics and weapons.

 

[alexmilman]

Interesting. What kind of people do you see moving there?

The people whom the Russian government permitted to move there. 😉

Cossacks?

Of course, they were guarding the border. Some of them had been ‘guarding’ it even before there was a border: Trans-Baikal Cossacks included Buryat and Tungus units.

Regular Russians?

If I guessed correctly what do you mean by the “regular”, yes. Some state peasants had been moved by Muraviev down the river.

Old Believers?

In post-Aigun time this was not a big issue: they already controlled most of the manufacturing in Moscow and not only. But perhaps they as well.

Polish exiles?

If permitted.

Do you see the Amur Russians staying loyal to Russia?

They would not have an alternative: even in the early XX century the region was not self-sufficient economically. Besides, the settlers were not moving into the administrative vacuum: the first wave was organized by the Governor General of the Eastern Siberia, Muraviev, and the administrative apparatus and the troops were there before too many settlers appeared. On the coast the first settlements were the naval outposts.

 

[Coqui]

the Dzungars did not have the numbers and technology to kick the Russians out of the Eastern Siberia even in 1720s when their presence in the area was quite weak. The chance to do this in the 2nd half of the XVIII would be even smaller due to the Russian increased presence, fortified lines, better tactics and weapons.

I guess the question is what you think the fate of Dzungaria, Mongolia, the Tarim Basin and Tibet would be. Do you see Russia conquering a lot more of Asia, or do you see them focusing more on the Northeast? Would they have a greater interest in Korea?

 

[alexmilman]

I guess the question is what you think the fate of Dzungaria, Mongolia, the Tarim Basin and Tibet would be. Do you see Russia conquering a lot more of Asia, or do you see them focusing more on the Northeast? Would they have a greater interest in Korea?

Northeast (all the way to Kamchatka) presented practically no opposition and there were no technical means allowing to “concentrate” on it much more than in OTL prior to the XX century. OTOH, a greater involvement in the CA is rather easy to imagine especially taking into an account that contacts with the Dzungars already happened in the early XVIII century and an absence of the Chinese factors will make both them and the Mongols an obvious targets. The details would depend upon the circumstances.