What effect would a surviving Spanish Empire have on trade in China, and East Asia in general?

[Sardar]

I know that trade between Southern China and the Americas was a pretty big deal for a long time, but what effect (if any) would there be if that trade continued well into the 19th century?

Or conversely what effect did the fall of the Spanish Empire have on trade in East Asia? Was the inflow of silver still a big deal at the turn of the 19th century?

 

[Sardar]

I know the Philippines were kept by Spain until 1898, but were American (not USA) goods still flowing into Manila and vice-versa? How big was Spanish trade by the late 18th century in East Asia anyway?

 

[Camelopardalim]

I was thinking about this topic recently and found this paper, which says that the end of Spanish control of American silver led to the reliably standard Spanish silver coinage being replaced by many lower-quality silver coins, which reduced its usefulness for China, which led to the trade imbalances motivating the opium trade. American traders, especially after the Napoleonic Wars started, sold European goods to Spanish America in exchange for silver coins which were then traded for Chinese goods. China then sold silver ingots to western traders such as the BEIC. Spanish silver coins continued to be used in trade with China in the decades after the Spanish colonies became independent, but supplies slowly dried up and inferior non-standard coinage spread. By the 1830s, Chinese traders began to refuse to accept new American silver coins due to their unreliability, which caused a currency crisis and a credit shortage, leading to unrest and conflict. The US apparently had a similar dependence on Spanish silver coins, but they had the state capacity to reform their currency market to avoid crisis.
So if Spain kept their colonies, you might end up delaying the mid-19th century crises Qing China faced (rebellions, Opium Wars, etc). I don't know if they could be delayed indefinitely, but if the Qing used the time to reform their currency system I imagine they would have an easier 19th century than OTL. I also wonder if there could be some impact on the US economy if Spanish silver coins continue to dominate rather than local currency.

 

[prani]

also wonder if there could be some impact on the US economy if Spanish silver coins continue to dominate rather than local currency

Might this delay the adoption of gold standard in the late 19th century, generally speaking

 

[Metempsychosis]

I know the Philippines were kept by Spain until 1898, but were American (not USA) goods still flowing into Manila and vice-versa? How big was Spanish trade by the late 18th century in East Asia anyway?

Officially, free trade came in 1834, some years after the end of the Galleon Trade in 1815. America and Britain were big partners in Manila commerce between then and 1898, likely contributing to the rise of cash crops. The Suez Canal also made the Philippines a big export market, creating a wealthy bourgeoisie that ended up pushing for independence because it had become a big contributor to the Spanish economy.

Here's a paper on 19th century Philippine trade: https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/9abueg-012517.pdf

 

[Sardar]

I was thinking about this topic recently and found this paper, which says that the end of Spanish control of American silver led to the reliably standard Spanish silver coinage being replaced by many lower-quality silver coins, which reduced its usefulness for China, which led to the trade imbalances motivating the opium trade. American traders, especially after the Napoleonic Wars started, sold European goods to Spanish America in exchange for silver coins which were then traded for Chinese goods. China then sold silver ingots to western traders such as the BEIC. Spanish silver coins continued to be used in trade with China in the decades after the Spanish colonies became independent, but supplies slowly dried up and inferior non-standard coinage spread. By the 1830s, Chinese traders began to refuse to accept new American silver coins due to their unreliability, which caused a currency crisis and a credit shortage, leading to unrest and conflict. The US apparently had a similar dependence on Spanish silver coins, but they had the state capacity to reform their currency market to avoid crisis.
So if Spain kept their colonies, you might end up delaying the mid-19th century crises Qing China faced (rebellions, Opium Wars, etc). I don't know if they could be delayed indefinitely, but if the Qing used the time to reform their currency system I imagine they would have an easier 19th century than OTL. I also wonder if there could be some impact on the US economy if Spanish silver coins continue to dominate rather than local currency.

Very interesting. Thanks for finding that paper, btw. I think Southern China, should Spanish silver keep coming in, might not bear so much resentment against the Qing as in OTL. Were there efforts in the late Qing to reform the currency?

As for the US, certainly it might be much harder to move away from Spanish silver and transition to the US dollar. I'm not sure what the consequences of this would be, but certainly it might be harder for the US to dominate the currency market further down the line in the 20th century.

Might this delay the adoption of gold standard in the late 19th century, generally speaking

I might think so, seeing as the Spanish Peso would be still be a dominant international currency.

Officially, free trade came in 1834, some years after the end of the Galleon Trade in 1815. America and Britain were big partners in Manila commerce between then and 1898, likely contributing to the rise of cash crops. The Suez Canal also made the Philippines a big export market, creating a wealthy bourgeoisie that ended up pushing for independence because it had become a big contributor to the Spanish economy.

Here's a paper on 19th century Philippine trade: https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/9abueg-012517.pdf

So one might think that a surviving Spanish Empire would only increase the prosperity of Manila, should free trade also come in the early 19th century? I wonder if the Spanish might also seek concessions directly on the Chinese mainland, as well.

 

[Metempsychosis]

So one might think that a surviving Spanish Empire would only increase the prosperity of Manila, should free trade also come in the early 19th century? I wonder if the Spanish might also seek concessions directly on the Chinese mainland, as well.

I think it'd be a bit of a mixed bag. On one hand, a surviving Spanish Empire could mean continued neglect under the frailocracy. On the other, it would have access to a bigger market.

 

[Sardar]

I think it'd be a bit of a mixed bag. On one hand, a surviving Spanish Empire could mean continued neglect under the frailocracy. On the other, it would have access to a bigger market.

I imagine the Philippines might receive a tad bit more Spanish settlement, no?

 

[Taunay]

I imagine the Philippines might receive a tad bit more Spanish settlement, no?

Bad climate for Europeans

 

[Fulano]

Bad climate for Europeans

Still way better than Africa.

 

[Taunay]

Still way better than Africa.

And? It was still bad for Europeans, Subsaharan Africa being bad doesn't mean that the Philippines aren't too

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

Still way better than Africa

If Spanish Settlers could deal with Latin America they could Survive the Philippines. The problem with Africa was all the viruses Europeans had no immunity too.

 

[Gloss]

Bad climate for Europeans

Europeans settled plenty of tropical regions, for example Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Central America and so on. The barrier here is sheer distance and larger native population.

 

[Taunay]

Europeans settled plenty of tropical regions, for example Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Central America and so on. The barrier here is sheer distance and larger native population.

Brazil's European population is mostly on the South and Southeastern regions. Colombia's white population is at most one-third, and the majority are Mestizo.
As you said, the larger Native population means that IF there was European settlement, it would at most result in a new Mestizo ethnic group

 

[Gloss]

Brazil's European population is mostly on the South and Southeastern regions. Colombia's white population is at most one-third, and the majority are Mestizo.
As you said, the larger Native population means that IF there was European settlement, it would at most result in a new Mestizo ethnic group

The lowest European ancestry in any place in Brazil is like 40%:

https://www.scielo.br/j/gmb/a/fk6kLTxZknvrJjmC9hdcZBC/?format=pdf&lang=en

Mestizo community exist because the gender-biased migration in Iberian colonies and because of long term cohabitation of different groups in the same places without strong barriers to intermarriage(for example religion), that has little to do with tropical climate.

 

[Taunay]

The lowest European ancestry in any place in Brazil is like 40%:

https://www.scielo.br/j/gmb/a/fk6kLTxZknvrJjmC9hdcZBC/?format=pdf&lang=en

Mestizo community exist because the gender-biased migration in Iberian colonies and because of long term cohabitation of different groups in the same places without strong barriers to intermarriage(for example religion), that has little to do with tropical climate.

European is way too much of a stretch, most people have European ancestry, yet their phenotype doesn't really look like that. Unless you only look at politicians or major businessmen, the North and Northeast are not European at all lol.

Also, why wouldn't the settlement of the Philippines be gender-biased?

 

[Gloss]

European is way too much of a stretch, most people have European ancestry, yet their phenotype doesn't really look like that. Unless you only look at politicians or major businessmen, the North and Northeast are not European at all lol.

Also, why wouldn't the settlement of the Philippines be gender-biased?

Regardless of what you consider those individuals, those people have on average 40% European ancestry in the places with least European ancestry(outside of unconctacted tribes...). Ultimately the point is that many Europeans came and lived in the region, if your argument is those people HAD to mix with locals or Africans because of the tropical climate itself you should make an argument as to why because I don't see how that is possibly the case.

I'm not sure why you moved the goalpost to argue about the existence of mestizos, the original claim was more Spanish settlement which doesn't preclude intermixing or say anything about the nature of this community in the long term.

 

[Taunay]

I'm not sure why you moved the goalpost to argue about the existence of mestizos, the original claim was more Spanish settlement which doesn't preclude intermixing or say anything about the nature of this community in the long term.

I didn't move the goalpost, Spanish settlement leads to an understanding of an ethnically Hispanic presence in the Philippines, just like "British settlement of Kenya" or "Portuguese settlement of Angola".

 

[Gloss]

I didn't move the goalpost, Spanish settlement leads to an understanding of an ethnically Hispanic presence in the Philippines, just like "British settlement of Kenya" or "Portuguese settlement of Angola".

Ethnically Hispanic? Hispanic populations ARE mixed though.

 

[Taunay]

Ethnically Hispanic? Hispanic populations ARE mixed though.

By Hispanic I mean Spanish, like the ethnic group in Europe, not the Hispanic-American populations that are themselves mixed