VictortheMonarch
Victor the Crusader
What if the Manchu Invasions failed, and the Ming survived what was their darkest hour?
What if the Manchu Invasions failed, and the Ming Dynasty prevailed?
- Thread starter VictortheMonarch
- Start date
TheRomanSlayer
Kayabangan, Dugo, at Dangal
The Shun Dynasty replaces the Ming, should the latter still end up collapsing. Much of the Ming's economic decline was attributed to constant campaigns in the north, as well as the Little Ice Age affecting the agriculture. However, there was also the Xi Dynasty, which arose from Zhang Xianzhong's conquest of Sichuan.
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
The Ming probably wouldn't have lasted much longer - by the time the Manchus and Shun Dynasty insurgents brought them down, they were thought to have lost the Mandate of Heaven due to being battered by famines (induced by the Little Ice Age), plagues, quakes, silver shortages and good old-fashioned rampant government corruption (the domination of eunuch Wei Zhongxian, for example) for decades before their final downfall.
However, assuming the Ming have it in them to limp along until let's say 1800...by the 17th century they were very much of a conservative, Confucian bent. The era of Zheng He's overseas adventures was long (as in two centuries long) over. A smaller, more compact and more homogeneous China with an isolationist outlook is IMO the most probable outcome here, probably leaving both the Manchus and the Dzungar Mongols to survive on their periphery. Trade with Europe had already been confined to Macao since 1557 and I can't imagine the fiercely Confucian later Ming will be any more chill toward a growth in Christianity than the Qing or Tokugawa were, even if the Chinese rites controversy goes the Jesuits' way, unless by some miracle they convert the Ming emperor at the time. Obviously, things like the queue hairstyle and cheongsam won't become mainstream in China with no Manchus to enforce their mandatory use and instead the hanfu's popularity will continue to endure.
However, assuming the Ming have it in them to limp along until let's say 1800...by the 17th century they were very much of a conservative, Confucian bent. The era of Zheng He's overseas adventures was long (as in two centuries long) over. A smaller, more compact and more homogeneous China with an isolationist outlook is IMO the most probable outcome here, probably leaving both the Manchus and the Dzungar Mongols to survive on their periphery. Trade with Europe had already been confined to Macao since 1557 and I can't imagine the fiercely Confucian later Ming will be any more chill toward a growth in Christianity than the Qing or Tokugawa were, even if the Chinese rites controversy goes the Jesuits' way, unless by some miracle they convert the Ming emperor at the time. Obviously, things like the queue hairstyle and cheongsam won't become mainstream in China with no Manchus to enforce their mandatory use and instead the hanfu's popularity will continue to endure.
TheRomanSlayer
Kayabangan, Dugo, at Dangal
The queue hairstyle would remain a primarily Manchu/Jurchen feature, while the Mongols would remain a primary threat to any Ming successor state.
As for the Jurchens themselves, they would still be a unified entity at this point, although I could see them aim their next conquest at Korea.
While there wouldn’t have been a Ten Great Campaigns in a Qing-less China, I could still see China expand a bit in the northwest, around the area of OTL Xinjiang. However, the expansion would be more for security reasons. At the same time, a Qing-less China would still have to contend with the Spaniards, Portuguese and Dutch traders.
As for the Jurchens themselves, they would still be a unified entity at this point, although I could see them aim their next conquest at Korea.
While there wouldn’t have been a Ten Great Campaigns in a Qing-less China, I could still see China expand a bit in the northwest, around the area of OTL Xinjiang. However, the expansion would be more for security reasons. At the same time, a Qing-less China would still have to contend with the Spaniards, Portuguese and Dutch traders.
raharris1973
Well-known member
Does a dynastic collapse circa 1800 set post-Ming China up to be perfectly carved up by the British East India Company right after it has finished with India?
VictortheMonarch
Victor the Crusader
Wasn't the last Ming Emperor a catholic? from my understanding Catholicism is quite popular in Asia, like with Catholicism being the largest religious group in Korea, or the 271,650,000 Christians in China.
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Quite possible IMO, although China does have the advantage of being more ethno-religiously & culturally homogeneous and having a long tradition of being a single unified state (just one which falls apart from time to time) unlike India. It might just be too big a prize for the British to swallow up so soon after India, as well.
The Yongli Emperor was also a desperate, half-starved exile whose 'reign' was spent in one long, losing war against the Qing, and who had just tried & failed to backstab his Burmese hosts right before they handed him over to said Qing for execution. I doubt a Ming Emperor whose dynasty is still actually standing would be nearly as desperate to get Western (or really anyone's) help as he was, and even if they were favorably inclined toward Catholicism, they'd have the challenge of their own dynasty's strongly entrenched Confucianism to overcome.
Buba
A total creep
If China stays reasonably unified and is reasonably well run, then the EIC on its own does not stand a chance.
IMO up to the 2nd Sikh War the EIC did not have troops to spare for foreign expeditions. And it's navy was not particularly potent. Too far away and too expensive.
Hence it'd have to be the Crown.
A very interesting premise
Maybe one of the Southern Ming's is competent and rises to kick stem the tide and kicks out the Northern Barbarians?
IMO up to the 2nd Sikh War the EIC did not have troops to spare for foreign expeditions. And it's navy was not particularly potent. Too far away and too expensive.
Hence it'd have to be the Crown.
A very interesting premise
Maybe one of the Southern Ming's is competent and rises to kick stem the tide and kicks out the Northern Barbarians?
Plus while both have seen domination by foreign dynasties China is more used to such groups settling in China and eventually 'converting' to Chinese customs and practices. That's unlikely with a European conqueror/ruler, whether an economic one like the EIC or a state. I can't see a lasting rule by a policy that is based thousands of miles away being accepted.
raharris1973
Well-known member
\
Just sayin' - the Ming lasting to 1800 (a 400 year + dynasty, not seen since the Han) would be a miracle, China would be in for a deep, long fall, and circa 1800 is when the west is decisively breaking ahead.
I know there's the butterfly effect, but as soon as Britain is done with its takeover of India and whatever this TL's analogue of the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars happens, it could be well positioned to grab China while its down. While Russia grabs Manchuria, Mongolia, Turkestan.
VictortheMonarch
Victor the Crusader
There is one problem with the 'UK Gobbles China' idea. the UK doesn't have the manpower to put down any chinese revolts. they had their hands tied with India and it's other colonies, add in wars it simply doesn't have the means to hold it. Plus the other great powers, while easily played against each other, would no doubt seek to end the UK for attempting such.
What about a multiple-way European partition of China, as with the Ottoman Empire after the end of WWI?
But what if they cooperate with the UK in this in exchange for a piece of the Chinese pie?
Buba
A total creep
Please let us be clear - are we talking about EIC the company or Britain the country? EIC was an extension of Britain, true, being backed by part of the British Army (for which AFAIK it paid), but nevertheless the two are distinct.
Still, direct rule over significant portions of China does not seem possible.
Still, direct rule over significant portions of China does not seem possible.
Last edited:
TheRomanSlayer
Kayabangan, Dugo, at Dangal
Assuming that the Ming, or the Shun, would have endured, I would have predicted that a gradual and slower expansion into the northwest would have resulted in a bit more stable empire, though it wouldn't be as big as the OTL Qing. However, I would also see the core Mongol heartland, the further parts of Dzungaria and even the lands that would become Manchuria become a part of the Russian sphere of influence, should the Ming not focus their attention there. If the Ming or Shun would want to at least gain access to the Sea of Japan, they could also come to an understanding with the Russians and possibly partition the Manchuria region, with the Ming or Shun getting the area of Jianzhou (where the Aisin Gioro clan came from) as well as parts of the lands ruled by the Haixi Jurchens. The Russians would probably get the lands inhabited by the Evenks and Yeren Jurchens, as well as the lands ruled by the Donghai Jurchens in what is essentially the coastal areas of the OTL Russian Far East.
I was talking about either/or here.
Buba
A total creep
@TheRomanSlayer - interesting point about Russian expansion.
The Tang did reach deep into Central Asia (eastern Kazachstan?) hence there is precedence for purely Chinese polities to expand there.
The Manchu - if they bounce off the Great Wall, or are contained to the north of the Huang He - are almost certain to be around and strong in the late 17th. This will either keep the Russians to the north of the Stanovy Mts. - as in OTL - or even out of Buryatria/Transbaikale. How long will the Manchu Khaganate exist? How long will be strong enough to keep the Foreign Devils out? Impossible to say ...
The Tang did reach deep into Central Asia (eastern Kazachstan?) hence there is precedence for purely Chinese polities to expand there.
The Manchu - if they bounce off the Great Wall, or are contained to the north of the Huang He - are almost certain to be around and strong in the late 17th. This will either keep the Russians to the north of the Stanovy Mts. - as in OTL - or even out of Buryatria/Transbaikale. How long will the Manchu Khaganate exist? How long will be strong enough to keep the Foreign Devils out? Impossible to say ...
Last edited:
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Assuming a Chinese collapse around 1800 and ceteris paribus elsewhere, impossible due to the European powers being embroiled in the Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars (or an equivalent thereof). The unity to organize a mutually agreeable partition of China, not to mention the resources to make it happen, won't be there. Attacking at the turn of the century also means the British & other Europeans won't have the technological edge (steamships, cannons which handily outranged the Chinese coastal artillery, percussion caps...) which they would a few decades later IIRC, so their victories are likely to be less overwhelming & one-sided than those of the First Opium War, as well.
Assuming no butterfly genocide so that Europe is sufficiently peaceful to attempt anything like this, well - at that point you might as well write your own timeline around this scenario, because 200 years is a lot of time for a lot of things to happen in the rest of the world.
VictortheMonarch
Victor the Crusader
That is something Likely. Though it could result in war because Russia would want a big gobble of Mongolia (inner and Outer) Manchuria, and likely parts of East Turkmenistan. I can see Turkmenistan getting released as it's own Sultanate, then likely conquered by the Russians later on...