WI : Chinese Governorates of Central Asia and Persia

So, since Crusader Kings 2 : Jade Dragon has been announced, I figured I'd start the threads that will be inspired by that.

One of the major features is the idea of a Chinese Governorate of the West. I wonder if starting with the Tang, whether or not a series of Expansionist Emperors could start setting up a Chinese Empire in the West, as title - in Central Asia, and potentially Persia. Effectively colonising it with Chinese Cities.

What would be the result? What would these look like?

I'd guess a potential PoD is victory against the Abbasids under the Tang dynasty. So lets roll with that.
 
How on earth do you project power from the heartland of China all the way to Persia?
Logistics. Where are you getting food for your marching soldiers? etc., etc. That's a LONG way and, in parts, very hostile terrain.
 
Ask the Mongols how they achieved it.
By being horse archers where the army and the society were the same thing. They travelled with their flocks and herds, and the grass of the steppes was the supply they needed.

Also, the 'government' was with the army/horde/people. A Chinese army can't operate that way.
 
The best bet is probably the Tang expedition to China in 679. In 661, the Tang government recognized Prince Peroz, the son of the last Sasanian shah, as governor of the "Persian Area Command" centered in Zaranj (now straddling the Afghan-Iranian border). In 662 the Tang invested him as "King of Persia" (Bosi Wang), so Peroz was technically Peroz III, the last non-Muslim Iranshah.

In 679 the Tang sent Pei Zingjian, former Protector General of the West and a man well-acquainted with Central Asia, to lead an army against the Umayyads to crown Peroz as the Chinese vassal king of Persia. He only went as far as Kyrgyzstan before returning, and Peroz eventually returned in abject defeat to China.
 
You can project power into Iran from China. However, it requires quite a destitute situation in Iran, Central Asia and Bactria. It is my opinion, that the Tang had begun moving west in attempts to curb the alarming expansion of the Umayyad realm.

Regardless, it is possible with a string of fairly sophisticated khanates or kingdoms on the Silk Road which cooperate with insert Chinese dynasty. Had the Abbasids not occurred, the Tang could have for a short time gained clients in Ferghana, Afghanistan, Zabul, etc....
 
Maybe a tributary state in Central Asia like Kara-Khitai? Chinese administration and slowly even Chinese culture, but not actually integrated into China proper.
 

ben0628

Banned
How on earth do you project power from the heartland of China all the way to Persia?
Logistics. Where are you getting food for your marching soldiers? etc., etc. That's a LONG way and, in parts, very hostile terrain.

If Alexander the Great did it from Macedonia, it make sense that the Chinese could do it. Just settle tens of thousands of soldiers there after conquest
 
If Alexander the Great did it from Macedonia, it make sense that the Chinese could do it. Just settle tens of thousands of soldiers there after conquest
Alexander did it marching over land that was fertile (mostly). His army could a) live off the land, b) requisition stuff from satrapies as they took each in turn.
Neither option is available coming from China, unless you are a nomad army (which the Chinese, obviously, aren't).

Also, Alexander attacked when Persia was relatively weak. With an army that was particularly suited to beating what the Persians had (the Macedonian phalanx was the best military unit around until the Romans figured out how to beat it). He was a military genius, who travelled with his armies.
Any hypothetical Chinese emperor who did that would be deposed while he was gone, and any general that was that successful wouldn't be trusted.

The situations simply aren't analogous.
 
The best bet is probably the Tang expedition to China in 679. In 661, the Tang government recognized Prince Peroz, the son of the last Sasanian shah, as governor of the "Persian Area Command" centered in Zaranj (now straddling the Afghan-Iranian border). In 662 the Tang invested him as "King of Persia" (Bosi Wang), so Peroz was technically Peroz III, the last non-Muslim Iranshah.

In 679 the Tang sent Pei Zingjian, former Protector General of the West and a man well-acquainted with Central Asia, to lead an army against the Umayyads to crown Peroz as the Chinese vassal king of Persia. He only went as far as Kyrgyzstan before returning, and Peroz eventually returned in abject defeat to China.

Was it even possible for Pei to succeed?
 
Alexander did it marching over land that was fertile (mostly). His army could a) live off the land, b) requisition stuff from satrapies as they took each in turn.
Neither option is available coming from China, unless you are a nomad army (which the Chinese, obviously, aren't).

Also, Alexander attacked when Persia was relatively weak. With an army that was particularly suited to beating what the Persians had (the Macedonian phalanx was the best military unit around until the Romans figured out how to beat it). He was a military genius, who travelled with his armies.
Any hypothetical Chinese emperor who did that would be deposed while he was gone, and any general that was that successful wouldn't be trusted.

The situations simply aren't analogous.

We don't have to wonder IF they can project power. Both Han and Tang dynasties sent armies into Central Asia, and they crossed a desert to get there, which Alexander never had to do. The Chinese had both camels and the horse collar so logistics is not insurmountable.

Tactically they had the crossbow by the Han dynasty and stirrups by Tang dynasty. They can hire local mercenaries and arm them with crossbows as force multiplier.
 
We don't have to wonder IF they can project power. Both Han and Tang dynasties sent armies into Central Asia, and they crossed a desert to get there, which Alexander never had to do. The Chinese had both camels and the horse collar so logistics is not insurmountable.

Tactically they had the crossbow by the Han dynasty and stirrups by Tang dynasty. They can hire local mercenaries and arm them with crossbows as force multiplier.

Exactly. There is a reason the Abbasid throne moved to check the Tang Dynasty in Central Asia. The ancients may not have had all our luxuries, but they were not moronic and China certainly had the power and skill to project into Central Asia and beyond. It was only after the Abbasids challenged the Tang Dynasty, that the Abbasid rule over Kwarezm, Ferghana, etc began. These would become major centers of the Islamic world. Formally, both were on the edges of political schemes by the Tang, Umayyad, Gokturks and earlier, the Sassanid and Hepthalite Empires.
 
Alexander did it marching over land that was fertile (mostly). His army could a) live off the land, b) requisition stuff from satrapies as they took each in turn...

But China had some other advantages which Alexander the Great didn't have:

a) the Chinese Empire(s) had the greatest resources to support the invasion and the conquest in the Central Asia and Iran. That's why the Chinese army doesn't have to live off the land - using their excellent logistics they are able to build the road(s) beforehand and a chain of fortresses. And that was sometimes in place and even more - the Great Wall covered part of the road:
7493-004-596B98E8.jpg
So before the invasion China needs to store the food supplies in those fortresses so the Grand Army of invasion might have less train of supplies with it. As it is seen from the map, the hardest part (through mountains) is already taken.
After that goes pretty fertile agricultural lands where in addition to the supplies from China it is possible to live off the land.

And Alexander the Great had the minimal pool of human resources, Macedonia was actually a little country with a small population scattered over the mountains mostly; the Greeks were rebellious, the locals even more so.
China probably had the biggest population on the planet.

b) The Chinese armies might count on the requisition stuff from the regions they're gonna to conquer each in turn, those were pretty rich lands.
But that's not the main incentive for the Chinese conquest; the idea of invasion is to cut off the middleman on the "Silk Road" - every 100 miles of the occupied Silk Road gives China 'a ton of gold per year' (figuratively speaking of course) - that is another advantage, which Alexander didn't have.

-------------------------------
But the point is China doesn't need this 'conquest of Central Asia and Persia'.
I mean controlling Silk Road is good, cut the middleman is fine.
But Silk Road is not necessity for China.
- If one day all the Silk Roads shut down what happens to China?
- Nothing. I mean, tons of silk stays in China, which is good. Well, China won't get some gold from West, but the point is the Chinese economy may function pretty well on paper and bronze/copper currency, no problem whatsoever. China has everything it needs.

The other problem with China expanding West is that this expansion dramatically extends the border with the Great Eurasian Steppe (from the North).
And every Chinese knows that it is the North where the greatest danger to China lies - the steppe nomadic tribes are waiting for their chance, when China is weakened, and the nomads unite and strike the deadly blow.

So the real longtime interests of China is to keep the Northern border as short as possible, which means no "Go West" strategy.
There are plenty of other ways to expand for China and the resources taken there might be used to strengthen the existing (preferably short) Northern border.
 
Last edited:
Top