Alternate colonizers of Siberia?

[scholar]

Originally Posted by democracy101

Yes, but that really doesn't mean anything. Joseon also sent criminals north, but the region was and still is thinly populated. Korea was able to retain the territory because its newly conquered regions were not as expansive, but retaining Siberia with convicts/Manchus/other ethnic groups would not really be a long-term solution unless more than 10 million or so were actively relocated, which would be extremely hard to do if the Russians begin to colonize and claim the area.

Because the Joseon had a much smaller population and its crimminals were less numerous.

Out of a population of 300 million, sending off maybe .3% of the native troublemakers (there was a larger population than that) up north for a decade and you have 10 million.

Originally Posted by democracy101

Your statement sounds awfully deterministic. With the exception of the Sima Jin, it took about 400 years for China to be reunified under the Sui, and China was divided for more than 50 years after the Tang collapsed. Granted, China was reunified even after long periods of division, but if North and South China had similar populations, which was not the case before 1000, then China could remain divided. For comparison, China was divided between the Jurchen Jin and the Southern Song for more than a century, and there is no reason to assume that a similar situation would not have existed for at least several centuries more if the Mongols had not invaded. Also, if China was divided between two states, the northern one would have been more concerned about repelling excursions from the south rather than sending colonists north.

Because it is awfully deterministic. The scholar-gentry demands it. The period of the Song is what I would consider a dynastic change period as a total of four Dynasties existed at the time. Xia, Liao, Jin, and Song. The Song was the only native Han state, but far from the only Sinicized Dynasty. Similar to the Five Dynasty, Ten Kingdoms period; and the Northern and Southern Dynastic Period which was the Jin state.

And depending on the ideas, the Zhou period was another exceptionally long period of dynastic division. Before the man claimed title of 'Emperor' was created after the Three Emperors, Five Sovereigns, period by the Qin, the Zhou had all the hallmarks of Chinese civilization (along with the previous ones) and the texts of the Zhou were incredibly influential in later generations such as the work of Confucius to the scholar-gentry which remained a near constant factor inside Chinese civilization until the late Qing era.

Originally Posted by democracy101

With all due respect to the mapmaker, that map is simply ridiculous. It makes almost as much sense as Goguryeo controlling northern Manchuria/Siberia, or Joseon claiming "Gando," which was supposedly a significant amount of southeastern Manchuria. I've seen other maps by Chinese mapmakers that have exaggerated Tang claims in Manchuria/Siberia as well, and this is no different. Tibet was under Ming influence, but the Ming most likely did not control it directly in political terms, and it's also telling that the map does not indicate exactly where Chinese control ends in the northeast, so for all we know, it might suggest that the empire extended to the Kamchatka Peninsula. Ming control probably did not expand far beyond what is now Primorsky Krai.

Oh, it was ridiculous, but it was interesting to see Chinese perceptions. The main focus of the map was not to highlight the absurdity of the Ming, but to capitalize upon the Yuan remnant in the Mongol region. As, at the time, it seemed to control significant portions of it.

However, I would not say that it matches some of the Korean absurdities. The Ming could have done that if it wanted to, and probable bankrupt itself in the process if done too quickly.

Originally Posted by democracy101

Okay, but again, finding a reason to actively expand into Siberia would be unlikely.

Oh, its surprisingly easy to do. The Nanbu, Akita, Date, and others of the north of Honshu that had ports tried to reach Hokkaido's trade and beat back the Matsumae's monopoly. At one time it was plausible for a division of Ezochi into different zones of Daimyo control. If, instead, it was changed to a less radical approach of allowing one of the Daimyo to pursue similar relationships elsewhere up north providing they cede some of their domain to the Shogunate. For this one of them would need to be convinced that taking them over would provide a profit. Possible unofficial trade with the Russians could easily pursuade a Daimyo to operate under this, provided an opportunity for it arises.

Originally Posted by democracy101

I already know what the Joseon viewpoints were, but if they found ways to expand north along the coastline due to trading and drought/famine-related reasons, then it would not necessarily exclude them from doing so. In fact, in 1433, Sejong conquered what was previously considered Jurchen territory for security reasons, which could be another reason. I'm not saying that it would be necessarily be hard to colonize Siberia if a state found a way to get there, but in the case of the Ming and Joseon, they would have to find a way to deal with the states in Manchuria/Central Asia first, and Japan would need to find a suitable reason to expand north. However, after expanding north, they would only be able to retain parts of Siberia for a few decades/centuries unless the government(s) actively pushed for settlers to head north.

My point is that compared to Jurchen, Mongol, Chinese, or Japanese expansionism into Siberia, Korea is far less likely to do so. The Ming/Chinese State is more capable of dealing with those buffer states than Korea ever could be, and during the Qing they more or less succeeded. Only by then the game was up.

[zraith]

Originally Posted by democracy101

Yes, but that really doesn't mean anything. Joseon also sent criminals north, but the region was and still is thinly populated. Korea was able to retain the territory because its newly conquered regions were not as expansive, but retaining Siberia with convicts/Manchus/other ethnic groups would not really be a long-term solution unless more than 10 million or so were actively relocated, which would be extremely hard to do if the Russians begin to colonize and claim the area.

10 million or so individuals is not something that should/would be considered a colony, but an actual functioning territory either independent or a vessel/dependency.

As for retaining Siberia, it all comes down to who is able to enforce their claim, not the number of people living in the area. Just like it was done in the Americas. Even if only a hundred people lived in a town, it didn't stop the colonizing nation from claiming an area of land completely out of proportion of the actual population of the area. It all came down to who was able to enforce their claim, which in this case East Asian nations will have an easier time. Any nation that goes eastward from Eastern Europe will be dependent on very long supply lines that East Asian nations will not face.

Russia's success in its colonization eastward and enforcement of its claims is due to the construction of the Siberian Route (aka Moscow Route; construction began in 1730 and didn't end until 19th century), its successor the Trans-Siberian Railroad and (most likely large) in part due to the lack of interest of East Asian states in the area. Even then Primorsky Krai wasn't acquired by Russia until very late 19th century.



On a different matter, how about having multiple nations colonizing Siberia?

[MarshalBraginsky]

On the other hand, can anyone tell me which Turco-Mongol entity had the best chance of stopping Muscovy or China from expanding up north? Given the fact that the Khanate of Sibir may not be a best choice (unless we go way back to a PoD where the Golden Horde never becomes Muslim or Christian), the Timurids may (or may not) work and the successors to the Golden Horde are less likely to expand, could a Central Asian based entity that could do the expanding instead?

[Asharella]

I just wondered something. Assuming that Russia doesn't colonize Siberia, that is assuming someone finds a reasonable POD where Russia just doesn't do it, what happens to Alaska? Does it end up part of Canada or still somehow part of the U.S.? Is it even possible that the northern Pacific Siberia could be colonized from Alaska by the British or Americans, instead of the opposite that happened in OTL?

[MarshalBraginsky]

Ideally, I'd like to envision an Alaska and Siberia controlled by Canada. Other than that, it is realistically impossible for either Canada or the US to get Siberia.

[democracy101]

Originally Posted by scholar

Because the Joseon had a much smaller population and its crimminals were less numerous.

Out of a population of 300 million, sending off maybe .3% of the native troublemakers (there was a larger population than that) up north for a decade and you have 10 million.

Not really. I'm assuming that most of the criminals would be male, a majority would not survive for more than a decade in the harsh climate, and that they would be sent gradually over time, as sending more than a few thousand at a time would increase the chances of revolts before they arrived, and would be burdensome in terms of transportation. As a result, at most, only about 1 million would probably exist in Siberia at a certain point in time, and the number would probably be similar even if the Manchus/other ethnic groups emigrated to the area.

Originally Posted by scholar

Because it is awfully deterministic. The scholar-gentry demands it. The period of the Song is what I would consider a dynastic change period as a total of four Dynasties existed at the time. Xia, Liao, Jin, and Song. The Song was the only native Han state, but far from the only Sinicized Dynasty. Similar to the Five Dynasty, Ten Kingdoms period; and the Northern and Southern Dynastic Period which was the Jin state.

And depending on the ideas, the Zhou period was another exceptionally long period of dynastic division. Before the man claimed title of 'Emperor' was created after the Three Emperors, Five Sovereigns, period by the Qin, the Zhou had all the hallmarks of Chinese civilization (along with the previous ones) and the texts of the Zhou were incredibly influential in later generations such as the work of Confucius to the scholar-gentry which remained a near constant factor inside Chinese civilization until the late Qing era.

I really don't think that becoming culturally assimilated necessarily indicates that they were a "Chinese" state, as you could potentially state that the Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese dynasties could have been considered as such if they had been politically absorbed into China around 1000-1700. I understand your point concerning the Zhou dynasty and before, but I don't think it's possible to argue that they were necessarily centralized, and probably governed through a system in which the various nobles were functionally independent within their regions. I also think that anything before the Shang dynasty should probably be considered as legendary.

Originally Posted by scholar

Oh, it was ridiculous, but it was interesting to see Chinese perceptions. The main focus of the map was not to highlight the absurdity of the Ming, but to capitalize upon the Yuan remnant in the Mongol region. As, at the time, it seemed to control significant portions of it.

However, I would not say that it matches some of the Korean absurdities. The Ming could have done that if it wanted to, and probable bankrupt itself in the process if done too quickly.

I see your point. However, unless the Ming were successful in conquering the states to the north, and have a reason to encourage mass settlement in desert/cold climates, which would be possible, but unlikely, then it would be hard to move a significant amount of settlers into the area.

Originally Posted by scholar

Oh, its surprisingly easy to do. The Nanbu, Akita, Date, and others of the north of Honshu that had ports tried to reach Hokkaido's trade and beat back the Matsumae's monopoly. At one time it was plausible for a division of Ezochi into different zones of Daimyo control. If, instead, it was changed to a less radical approach of allowing one of the Daimyo to pursue similar relationships elsewhere up north providing they cede some of their domain to the Shogunate. For this one of them would need to be convinced that taking them over would provide a profit. Possible unofficial trade with the Russians could easily pursuade a Daimyo to operate under this, provided an opportunity for it arises.

Okay, but I'm not sure if the Japanese would be willing to control more than several trade ports in Siberia, although it would be possible to take over Hokkaido and Sakhalin.

Originally Posted by scholar

My point is that compared to Jurchen, Mongol, Chinese, or Japanese expansionism into Siberia, Korea is far less likely to do so. The Ming/Chinese State is more capable of dealing with those buffer states than Korea ever could be, and during the Qing they more or less succeeded. Only by then the game was up.

IMHO, unless China abandoned its ethnocentric view, or it managed to completely conquer the states north of the Great Wall, it would be extremely difficult to send numerous settlers to Siberia. The Qing does not count, as it would be unwilling to encourage mass settlement to the area. The Ming would be capable of dealing with the buffer states, but it would also probably do so in alliance with Joseon, so the scenarios would not be mutually exclusive. The Jurchen and Mongol states could probably have established themselves in Siberia, but due to their small populations, I don't see how they would be able to resist the Russians effectively, as the -stans were eventually overrun, and Japan would probably not be willing to take a significant amount of Siberia.

Originally Posted by zraith

10 million or so individuals is not something that should/would be considered a colony, but an actual functioning territory either independent or a vessel/dependency.

As for retaining Siberia, it all comes down to who is able to enforce their claim, not the number of people living in the area. Just like it was done in the Americas. Even if only a hundred people lived in a town, it didn't stop the colonizing nation from claiming an area of land completely out of proportion of the actual population of the area. It all came down to who was able to enforce their claim, which in this case East Asian nations will have an easier time. Any nation that goes eastward from Eastern Europe will be dependent on very long supply lines that East Asian nations will not face.

Russia's success in its colonization eastward and enforcement of its claims is due to the construction of the Siberian Route (aka Moscow Route; construction began in 1730 and didn't end until 19th century), its successor the Trans-Siberian Railroad and (most likely large) in part due to the lack of interest of East Asian states in the area. Even then Primorsky Krai wasn't acquired by Russia until very late 19th century.

I see, but as I stated above, only about 1 million, at most, would probably exist in Siberia at a time if the Qing managed to project its influence into the area. The area that it would occupy would also probably be large enough for it to be sparsely populated, and the inhabitants would probably not have constant contact with each other.

Also, if Primorsky Krai and the adjacent areas came under Chinese control, then the region would probably be considered part of Manchuria, not Siberia.

Originally Posted by zraith

On a different matter, how about having multiple nations colonizing Siberia?

I already said that China, Japan, and/or Korea could have expanded into Siberia, which means that the scenarios are not mutually exclusive, and other states in Central and Northeast Asia probably could have done so as well, although the latter ones would not have an enough population base to resist the Russians.

[Asharella]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

Ideally, I'd like to envision an Alaska and Siberia controlled by Canada. Other than that, it is realistically impossible for either Canada or the US to get Siberia.

It also seems to me that it would be very unlikely for the U.S. to claim Alaska if it's never Russian territory sold to the U.S. and so it makes sense for it to end up part of Canada. Of course that's assuming that butterflies of Russia not colonizing Siberia don't somehow drastically alter U.S. and Canada history.

[MarshalBraginsky]

On the other hand, I was thinking if it was plausible for all of Siberia to be colonized by Nestorian Christian Turkic groups, both pre- and post-Mongol invasion? They could just stake a claim on a small portion of Siberia, and after the Mongol invasion, the Christian Turks could expand from there.