WI: Asian imperialism over Europe-descended New World

In OTL Atlantic, French, Dutch and English could have stayed in Europe and let Spanish and Portuguese keep their monopoly of long distance trade, either sailing to Lisbon, Seville or Bilbao to buy goods from Portuguese and Spaniards or staying at home and letting Portuguese and Spanish ships sail to Rouen, Antwerpen and London. They did not - they did sail to Americas and Indies even though this meant fighting Spaniards and Portuguese rather than cooperating with them.

Why?
Because during at least the early part of that period they were already fighting against the Spaniards (and, while the Iberian crowns were united, against the Portuguese as well) for other reasons anyway...
 
In OTL Atlantic, French, Dutch and English could have stayed in Europe and let Spanish and Portuguese keep their monopoly of long distance trade, either sailing to Lisbon, Seville or Bilbao to buy goods from Portuguese and Spaniards or staying at home and letting Portuguese and Spanish ships sail to Rouen, Antwerpen and London. They did not - they did sail to Americas and Indies even though this meant fighting Spaniards and Portuguese rather than cooperating with them.

Why?
Because the pay off was worth it. In one Swift move they not only increased their own wealth by ensuring that everybody traveled to their ports and bought from them, they also ensured that their enemies lost wealth and military strenght.
And you might mean Amsterdam instead of Antwerpen.
 
The commodity issue is problematic. The problem is that most new world commodities (chillies, tomatoes, tobacco) grew very well indeed in parts of the world within the Asian trade network. Once someone brings them to Asia (which happened very swiftly) they will be adopted just as iotl where a minor agricultural crisis was spurred in china by the enthusiastic adoption of tobacco depleting previously rich agricultural land.

The reason for the scarcity of spice was that in most cases these couldn't be grown effectively in Europe. The same isn't true of New World crops and Asia as OTL shows.

Sorry to keep on throwing out obstacles but i think its important that we find the incentive. We need something concrete to get Asians across the Pacific.

The European adventurer scenario would still need to be underpinned by a concrete economic reason- they didn't go on adventures just for the fun of it.

While this is true, it bears mentioning that the lack of European plantations in Asia will make a big difference, both to the prices of some commodities seeked by Euros as well as the Asian native economies. No destruction of spice orchards in Maluku, for one thing. No coffee plantations as well as potatoes in West Java as well. This general situation will obstruct introduction of New world commodities into Asia to an extent. There are lots of ways this can play out.

Why Pacific ? Why can't Indians simply follow Europeans back to the Atlantic ? It's closer, and much easier too.

European adventures won't simply come and advice the Badshah or Maharaja to send a fleet to Europe and Americas. They will leave impact upon India gradually. They will become the first stone for crossfertilization between India and Europe. They will influence India intellectually, socially and culturally. Overtime, they can also develop this connection into two-ways relationship, where their influence will also stimulate Indian interest for going to western hemisphere as well. Why not ? Even without monopoly in Indian Ocean Europe isn't going to stay 15th century forever. They will grow into a level of sophistication that will attract Indian attention as well, with New World plunders. Especially after some european adventurers have brought few useful European innovations to India. Indians will also do the same to Europe, for sure.

Let's say some of these Indian adventurers get dragged quite deep into European and New World affairs, while still maintaining connection to the homeland. He'll might be the beginning of something big, depending on the issues of the time and opportunities present.

Under these conditions, I think one way would be to adjust Indian preference through European influence to a degree. For instance, I think it's not too farfetched to make Indians developing a taste for coffee grown in Brazil or Carribean instead of Africa or Middle East with PoD as early as 1500. That can be a good start to drag Indians westward. If that's not enough, then various Indian figures in the west, as an advisor or general of a European kingdom, or as pirates or notorious millionaires in the New World, should be able to do something or another to bring concrete Indian political and economic presence in western hemisphere. Let's figure this out together.
 
Last edited:
Because the pay off was worth it. In one Swift move they not only increased their own wealth by ensuring that everybody traveled to their ports and bought from them, they also ensured that their enemies lost wealth and military strenght.
But it wasn´t one swift move, nor did it ensure everybody travelled to their ports.
Portugal held monopoly to India trade. While Dutch did massacre English of Amboyna and get a monopoly for Japan, they did not completely shut down English East India Company from sailing to Indian Ocean and trading with India proper.
Regarding Caribbean, note that the French, Dutch and English, and the smaller players like Denmark, Sweden and Courland, did not in 17th century take and hold populous Spanish settlements. Spain had conquered Mexico and Peru, but OTL nobody else did. 17th century English were settling small islands and coastal spots which the Spaniards had visited but never cared about (like Bermudas and Jamestown ), or depopulated to concentrate Indian slaves to their bases, and left deserted (like Bahamas). Jamaica which English did conquer did have a Spanish town, but it was fairly small, and populated mainly by Negro slaves, and in 1655 the few Spaniards owning these fled rather than stay under English government.
Morgan conquered Panama - but then evacuated with his loot rather than stay and hold the city.
And you might mean Amsterdam instead of Antwerpen.
Until the Dutch rebellion, Antwerpen was the main urban centre, and Amsterdam a small town.
 
In OTL Atlantic, French, Dutch and English could have stayed in Europe and let Spanish and Portuguese keep their monopoly of long distance trade, either sailing to Lisbon, Seville or Bilbao to buy goods from Portuguese and Spaniards or staying at home and letting Portuguese and Spanish ships sail to Rouen, Antwerpen and London. They did not - they did sail to Americas and Indies even though this meant fighting Spaniards and Portuguese rather than cooperating with them.

Why?

Because that's a totally different situation. If they didn't compete, they'd have to pay jacked up prices.

In Asia, the Asians are the ones selling commodities. Either way the gold will come to them because they hold the commodities.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Don't forget that in roughly the same period

Because that's a totally different situation. If they didn't compete, they'd have to pay jacked up prices.

In Asia, the Asians are the ones selling commodities. Either way the gold will come to them because they hold the commodities.


Don't forget that in roughly the same period some Europeans were carving up the map in the Caribbean and points west looking for physical gold and silver, and then cash crops, others were carving up the map to the northwest on the short route looking for finned silver...

And still others were sailing across the south Atlantic using the favorable winds there, for economic imperatives of their own.

I think the odds are still very high, but I'd guess they are actually more in favor of an "African" (including Islamic North Africa) competitor to Europe in the Western Hemisphere than an Asia (east or south); not only is there little economic incentive for Asians to sail east, the (multiple) sea routes are significantly easier across the Atlantic then they are across the Pacific.

It's also worth considering that once the Isthmus of Panama is crossed and something resembling a settlement and boatyard can be built (by whoever makes the crossing) travel time to the west coast of the Americas by Europeans is reduced significantly from the route around the Horn.

Now, given the as yet undefined point of departure, anything is (remotely) possible, but still....geography (hydrography) is the foundation, and the geography favors Europe (and/or Africa) taking control of the Western Hemisphere much more so than it favors Asia.

Asian cultures taking control of Australia seems somewhat more likely, but even that is something of stretch, given everything going on in eastern or south Asia in the past 1,000 years, and simple economics.

Best,
 
Because that's a totally different situation. If they didn't compete, they'd have to pay jacked up prices.

In Asia, the Asians are the ones selling commodities. Either way the gold will come to them because they hold the commodities.

And if the Portuguese keep their monopoly then the Asians are getting the depressed prices Portuguese will pay. They could get better prices by sailing their ships past Africa and Portugal to the ports of England and Netherlands.

So what if it is the Asians and not Dutch who break the Portuguese monopoly at the end of 16th century?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
So are we back to a "Ming maritime focus that lasts" POD?

And if the Portuguese keep their monopoly then the Asians are getting the depressed prices Portuguese will pay. They could get better prices by sailing their ships past Africa and Portugal to the ports of England and Netherlands.

So what if it is the Asians and not Dutch who break the Portuguese monopoly at the end of 16th century?

So are we back to a "Ming maritime focus that lasts" POD?

Best,
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Okay, at least that's a little more firm...

Or starts. A new broom late 16th-early 17th century... like Oda, Toyotomi, Tokugawa, Yui, Shun, Koxinga or Qing who for some reason decides to build a navy and start projecting power.

But I presume the obvious issues/problems/challenges to such an Asian power's policy are pretty obvious.

Best,
 
And if the Portuguese keep their monopoly then the Asians are getting the depressed prices Portuguese will pay. They could get better prices by sailing their ships past Africa and Portugal to the ports of England and Netherlands.

So what if it is the Asians and not Dutch who break the Portuguese monopoly at the end of 16th century?

You're not factoring in the costs and risks of the voyage to Europe. These were expensive and dangerous voyages- it was worth it for the Europeans because without it they'd have to pay ridiculously marked up prices for Asian commodities. For Asian traders, on the other hand, the choice is between gold and no risk and *possibly* more gold with much greater risk, danger and expense.

The fact that we didn't see Asian expeditions to Europe, despite Asians having the shipbuilding technology to do so, argues that there were strong economic incentives against such ventures.

And cultural arguments- Asian conservatism etc - don't work. Across the span of two millenia of trade a significant number of people would have tried it if it was worth it. The very fact that it didn't happen argues against it.

This may seem like I'm undermining the entire concept of AH but even In AH there is almost always an economic explanation for human behaviour and in many cases there's wiggle room to go one way or the other. I don't think the Asian trade has that much economic wiggle room.
 
Top