The Chinese Americas - Is it possible?

you're right :D

Helmsman, correct to Indonesia-to-Cambodia-to-Siam-to-Bangladesh-to

If you're already in Indonesia, wouldn't it be easier to go directly through the Malakka straight instead of going back north to Cambodia, then Siam, and then back south to Malakka/Indonesia?

Nevertheless, I repeatedly read that the Chinese were "less expansionist". Why is that? Han Chinese gradually colonized the South. Whereas already the first Emperor held Southern Chinese territories, it required centuries for the Han to colonize them. As far as I know, this gigantic movement of peoples wasn't finished under the Song, neither under the Yuan. Peripheric provinces such like Guangxi or Yunnan would probably come even later. And then colonialization of Manchuria started.

So actually, the Chinese were very expansionistic. It's only that natural borders (desert, mountains, sea) limited expansion of their state. At the same time, state frontiers were generally wider than cultural/population frontiers, which made inner colonialization possible. For centuries, any population surplus found its space in the South - or died in droughts, floods or invasions. The Europeans on the other side required space for their population surplus. That's the main reason for European settlement.

Considering trade colonies of the Europeans, I think we actually saw the beginnings of such under Cheng He and the Chinese tributaries. If the Chinese had stayed and fortified, we'd probably had seen similar colonies in the reest of Asia like the Europeans established later. Outright conquest of American civilization is probably more a European thing. Christian missionary being an important part as well as autonomous leaders such as Cortez and Pizarro - not a specialty of the rather bureaucratic Chinese.
 
you're right :D

Helmsman, correct to Indonesia-to-Cambodia-to-Siam-to-Bangladesh-to India proper.
Aye Aye Sir.

Or, more probably:
Yes, Venerable Ship-Captain

Why would he go towards China and then around the Malay peninsula again?

Actually, it would be Cambodia - Siam - Indonesia - Bangladesh - India proper :p
 
Considering trade colonies of the Europeans, I think we actually saw the beginnings of such under Cheng He and the Chinese tributaries. If the Chinese had stayed and fortified, we'd probably had seen similar colonies in the reest of Asia like the Europeans established later. Outright conquest of American civilization is probably more a European thing. Christian missionary being an important part as well as autonomous leaders such as Cortez and Pizarro - not a specialty of the rather bureaucratic Chinese.

I agree the Chinese wouldn't bother themselves with missionary activity. It's generally only monotheists who actually care what other people believe, and Taoism and Confucianism aren't really concerned with saving heathen souls. You may get some Buddhist missionary activity and some conversions, but nothing like on the scale of the Catholics.

I'm not sure the Chinese wouldn't conquer, though. I mean, at first they would only be there for trade. And I don't think meeting the Aztecs or the Inca would suddenly inspire them to send in the soldiers and make all that gold their own. But as their trading colonies grow and improving navigational technology makes trans-Pacific travel easier, they'll want to tighten their control of the resources and put more effort into protecting their investment. I'm not saying they'll sweep across the countryside grabbing all that they see, like the Spanish. But they will expand, and they will consolidate. And if any of the local tribes (read: barbarians) are giving them too much trouble, they'll do what they have to in order to nullify them. There may be walls involved where this is practical. But there will be some conquest as well.
 
I'm not sure the Chinese wouldn't conquer, though. I mean, at first they would only be there for trade. And I don't think meeting the Aztecs or the Inca would suddenly inspire them to send in the soldiers and make all that gold their own. But as their trading colonies grow and improving navigational technology makes trans-Pacific travel easier, they'll want to tighten their control of the resources and put more effort into protecting their investment. I'm not saying they'll sweep across the countryside grabbing all that they see, like the Spanish. But they will expand, and they will consolidate. And if any of the local tribes (read: barbarians) are giving them too much trouble, they'll do what they have to in order to nullify them. There may be walls involved where this is practical. But there will be some conquest as well.

OK, I have to agree that they'll use their military. But I'd still say that this would happen more in an "intervention"-style. The Chinese would establish vassal states which had to accept suzerainty of the Chinese Emperor. People who would not accept that would be punished, which may involve military action including occupation. The main difference to the Europeans hence most likely lies in the aftermath of such an intervention. Spanish conquest meant that the conquered lands were under Spanish administration. Chinese conquest will likely see a new vassal state reinvested. So in lands conquered by Europeans a governor or vice-king would reside, whereas in lands conquered by the Chinese a native ruler would reside and pay tribute to the Emperor.

Problem here is, of course, that we only have a very short timespan when Zheng He interfered with South Asian affairs and in general Chinese interference with Inner-Asian and East Asian neighbours to extrapolate. The fundamentally different situation of "barbaric" tribes in America under Chinese rule will probably require new forms of administration.
 
Top