scholar
Banned
Not sure If I'm actually responding to your points, but then again I'm not really sure you understand mine as at the moment this debate seems scattered over many different points.
By the way, Manchuria was a consolidated state with its own written language before going into China. Chinese cultural diffusion also occurred in areas that were consolidated states, Korea was at its most dominated by Chinese culture long after it was consolidated.
Making this influence stronger doesn't end with the result being weaker.
So why would they do it? Because they already have done it. There's more incentive to do it now as the influence was stronger going in and was actually partially restored again with this state once again strengthening economic and cultural exchanges between the empire.
Only one comes to mind as I had believed that the two river boundaries which largely form the modern border had been around the limit of direct Korean control since Unified Silla. Which was wrong. There are probably others though.Anyway, in line with the above, I had to thoroughly explain numerous times why almost all of your main assumptions about Korea were wrong. Yes, we certainly agreed on various overarching concepts, but this was only after I pointed out the specifics which needed to be corrected, so your viewpoints technically shifted over time.
The assimilation I am referring to is the consistent and reliable kind that occurs within a Chinese Dynasty with people that are directly linked to it, politically, socially, and economically. For instance no state has every conquered a large portion of the contemporary era of China without presenting itself as China somewhere along the way. All Northern Dynasties did this, there are no exceptions to my knowledge. This Russo-Mongol state taking over northern China would do the same, or its fragment inside of China would do it after it was falling apart because of the Yuan Dynasty. The sinification process occurred to just about every group that established itself in the state.Comparing China to other entities doesn't really make sense. China was able to grow the way it did mostly because its expansion was relatively gradual, and cultural diffusion generally occurred in areas that were neither consolidated nor had writing systems.
By the way, Manchuria was a consolidated state with its own written language before going into China. Chinese cultural diffusion also occurred in areas that were consolidated states, Korea was at its most dominated by Chinese culture long after it was consolidated.
And yet this will be smaller, at least, by half. There will be no holdings in Southern China, where resistance was most stiff. Levant, most of India, Southeast Asia, and other problematic areas are not part of the borders of this state. The frontiers are not as far away and not as problematic to deal with if one uses OTL as a measuring stick. With this in mind would it still fall apart in the same time table?In addition, the Mongols, which technically achieved your general objective, if only for a short while, were ultimately unable to expand further due to stiff resistance in remote regions, which also held true for other large OTL entities as well. It was bogged down in Korea, Southeast Asia, India, and the Levant due to small entities in each respective region, and it never advanced further into Europe because of succession issues, not to mention that pushing much further would have been a stretch due to the hostile terrain involved. As a result, even if the hypothetical empire is somehow held together for a while, continuous defeats in far-flung regions will give each region an incentive to break away, along with the fact that the decentralization of power across such a vast expanse of territory will almost certainly lead to fragmentation within several decades or so.
Because their authority officially is derived from them? I'm really not sure what you are trying to suggest here. That any state with some level of decentralized governance is doomed because once that occurs there is no social, cultural, political, or economic reason that they might possibly want to remain part of the state so long as one of them decides that they don't care about the ruler anymore? Or that none of the nobility in those regions have any of those motivations or that other sub-governmental factions would wish to gain power by giving lip and deriving the ability to wage war without any worry of being attacked by other sub-states against a rebelling one without them too being branded a traitor and attacked? Or that no relative of said sub-ruler may see the opportunity to gain that rank and title by staying loyal if only as a front to take power?Why would they serve as a check? They have nothing making them give two shits for the khagan.
The Ilkhanate has its name because it was an independent, but subordinate, khanate within the Mongol Empire, recognizing the Emperor of the Yuan Dynasty as its leader. This was lip service that was entirely unnecessary, yet it still occurred decades after Kublai was dead. It was lip service and they would have far more incentive to just go their own way and ignore it than any sub-governmental leader.And the original Mongol Empire started falling into pieces before Kublai's stopped breathing. Even if any given part - the Ilkhanate, say - lasted longer, the idea of a united Mongol Empire didn't.
What makes you say that? The Crimean Tartars and most of Central Asia continued to claim that they were Mongols and their leaders received legitimacy through Genghis Khan and the Mongol Hordes up until Russia conquered them, and this continued after that as well. It was more than one part of their culture and heritage, to many of the fragment states it was their culture and heritage and most of the Khans would kill someone who told them otherwise.And independent from such a state for much longer. Mongol influences are going to be at best one part of their culture and heritage, even assuming they're all influenced the same way or to the same extent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_KhanateAll Khans were from the Giray clan which traced its origins to Genghis Khan and asserted its right to rule on this basis. According to the tradition of the steppes, the ruler was legitimate only if he was of Genghisid royal descent (i.e. "ak süyek"). Even the Muscovite Tsar claimed Genghisid descent.
Making this influence stronger doesn't end with the result being weaker.
That's why there is an acting bridge between the two cultures, Mongol culture and that the influence from that helps bridge the two together. I understand that this is very different from the normal Chinese assimilation process of external territories, that is also why I wanted to make this state into a Northern Dynasty, especially as it attempts to supplant the *Yuan.I think democracy101 addressed this in regards to Chinese assimilation of the areas it assimilated - or at least that should indicate how different this is, more along the lines of Germany assimilating Poland (as an example of two distinct cultures with different histories, ambitions, etc.) taken up to eleven.
Only if that English King is Harold Harefoot and there is an opportunity to do so. A number of individuals attempted to restore the Mongol Empire or believed that they were the Mongol Empire in its most legitimate form. Even the Qing Dynasty claimed to be the rightful rulers of the Mongol Empire and all of the Qing Emperors were descended from Genghis Khan matrilineally. They actively pursued this objective with its campaigns in Xinjiang and Mongolia. Those that didn't need to justify themselves felt the need to present themselves as it anyways, such as with the OTL Russian Empire.Not only will it fragment, there is very little if anything making the different subregions - any of them, really - think in terms of "restoring the empire" over building their own polities developing in ways like and unlike the OTL polities of those regions. This would be like an English king trying to resurrect Canute's "empire" in that regard, but more so.
So why would they do it? Because they already have done it. There's more incentive to do it now as the influence was stronger going in and was actually partially restored again with this state once again strengthening economic and cultural exchanges between the empire.