22 replies to this topic

[Wan Ren aka Danny]

The QIng dynasty took over China just when the world was about to enter to the 19th century of industrialization and modernization. It was during the time of the Qing the Chinese gain the characteristics or the image of having pigtails, shaven forehead and clothings that are associated with the Manchus.

What if, the Yuan or Mongols were defeated by the Manchus and the Qing dynasty had come to power before the Ming? What if the Ming were to have defeated the Manchu and established the Ming dynasty during what is suppossed to be the actual Qing dynasty period?

Could the Ming have done a better job of keeping up with the Europeans in terms of industrialization, exploration, modernization and most of all securing China as a super power.

[Yang Zongbao]

How are we to have this scenario? No one really knows. There weren't Manchus at the time of the Yuan dynasty; just Jurchens. Likely the dynasty would just be named "Later Jin" like the early Qing dynasty was, and the name "Qing" would never come to pass.

Undoubtedly the policies of this dynasty would be different, calibrated for a different situation and subsequently, the "Ming" (which might also have a different name, since they would have a different founder) would also have different policies to react to the different dynasty before it. No one knows how this would turn out, since the scenario is just impossible and because we cannot expect the policies of these dynasties to remain constant (except in reverse order) with other changes, since they inevitably react both to the past and the factors around them.

So the short answer...who knows? The "Ming" in this scenario could conceivably take a similar course as the Qing, they could be better, they could be worse. It all depends on events, which we can not ascertain.

[Wan Ren aka Danny]

Let us assume that the Manchus or Jurchens were already existing and were able to defeat the Mongols and took over China and the QIng dynsaty was established after the Yuan and there after the Ming took China back from the Qing.

One point that I like to look at is the difference between the Ming and the Manchus. Historically, the Qing are more isolatinist? while the Ming were expanding through exploration beyond China. Science, technology, commerce, foreign policies, and culture took a big step forward within China and outside of China.

Because of this China under the Ming would have been able to keep up with modernization? and with a link with Eurpoe, China would probably took advantage of what they can learn from Europe and benefitted just like what Japan did during that time. ADopting and applying reverse technology by blending both east and west to produce a more stable China.

Edited by Wan Ren aka Danny, 16 June 2008 - 03:03 PM.

[mariusj]

Let us assume that the Manchus or Jurchens were already existing and were able to defeat the Mongols and took over China and the QIng dynsaty was established after the Yuan and there after the Ming took China back from the Qing.

One point that I like to look at is the difference between the Ming and the Manchus. Historically, the Qing are more isolatinist? while the Ming were expanding through exploration beyond China. Science, technology, commerce, foreign policies, and culture took a big step forward within China and outside of China.

Because of this China under the Ming would have been able to keep up with modernization? and with a link with Eurpoe, China would probably took advantage of what they can learn from Europe and benefitted just like what Japan did during that time. ADopting and applying reverse technology by blending both east and west to produce a more stable China.

No. Ming was as isolationist as Qing/Tokugawa Shogunate, people won't have image of pig tails but they will surely associate something else with its people. People keep on saying that Ming would be the beginning of capitalistic movements in China, which I think is false. Capitalistic depends on one thing, the security of ownership; how do you have that when the Emperor owns everything? The transfer of debt from government to merchant wasn't unheard of and I would almost say its quite a common practice for Government to do that when its in a pinch.

Japan was forced to open up, so really you can't say Japan this and that, unless Ming also was forced to open up, but if Ming was, then there are no real discussion here.

I just don't think Ming would treat any 'foreign barbarian' any better then it has to for weapons [like Qing] and gave people any more freedom then it absolutely must [like Qing] thus I see little difference b/w these two.

[Mei Houwang]

We would have to assume the Qing took the name from somewhere else instead of it being water to the Ming's fire. But if it was the Jurchens who rebelled and took over all of China, and then the Han who rebelled and took over the Jurchens, it would be hard to say. There's a million different possibilities, probably stemming from the infinite interpretations of the set background. First off, would famous Ming people such as Yongle still exist? However, I must say that the word "Ming" might be named in order to counter the "Qing", which is exactly the opposite of what happened in real history.

[LongMa]

The QIng dynasty took over China just when the world was about to enter to the 19th century of industrialization and modernization. It was during the time of the Qing the Chinese gain the characteristics or the image of having pigtails, shaven forehead and clothings that are associated with the Manchus.

What if, the Yuan or Mongols were defeated by the Manchus and the Qing dynasty had come to power before the Ming? What if the Ming were to have defeated the Manchu and established the Ming dynasty during what is suppossed to be the actual Qing dynasty period?

Could the Ming have done a better job of keeping up with the Europeans in terms of industrialization, exploration, modernization and most of all securing China as a super power.

Well the Qing were quite conservative, some thing as to justify their reign as non-han by saying they were defenders of traditional Chinese culture. The Ming were quite conservative too, but they did sponsor sea voyages all the way to the Middle East and Africa by Zheng He. Problem is they closed up shop.

Still nothing major was happening at this time, Europeans had barely made any inroads in Asia...just the Portuguese going around...raiding weak states.

There was no major industrialization until the middle 1700's, one can argue the foundation for this started in the 16 and 17th century though. THere is much debate...real productive superiority did not occur over Asia (China and India) until the early 19th century, that is when Western Europe skyrocked past the competition.

The most significant thing to happen around the time of the Ming was that Europeans had started to colonize the Americas, which was a source of gold, silver, and also a place they could grow a lot of tropic fruits (as well as new fruits and vegetables) without having to take the longer trip to East Asia to trade. So Europeans started to become the primary exporters, where before they were primarily importers dependent on the good graces of Muslim middle men or the costly and time consuming voyage around Africa...

Even when Portuguese and later Spanish got to Asia by ship (by going around Africa) trade did not increase dramatically because it was just so costly...it took time for technology to allow for larger ships, better weapons to fight pirates, the ability to secure seaways, etc.

So it is definately the fault of the Qing for not keeping up with the curve, but the Ming (at least the later Ming were not either).

The Ming were constantly under attack from the North and I think they focused too much on land supremacy. china was always more of a land empire than a sea one...and the Ming held this tradition. They were used to foreigners coming to them more than the other way around. This hurt their sea faring technology and I also think that through trade they could have kept up better with modern weaponry.

The Japanese definately did, although fairly closed, they did trade with the Portuguese and later the Dutch. The first Shogun united Japan, not by the sword but by the musket/handgun and only banned their use after he won control.


I would also say that Japan and China are not analogous. China was a multiethnic empire, Japan was not for the most part. Japan is also small in land area and highly centralized (even today). It is much easier to reform a country like this compared to one like China. I think even if China had started reforms at the same time as Japan in the 1850's they would not have been able to do so as fast and efficiently as the Japanese. Japan's situation was much more like pre-enlightenment Western Europe, than like China, in the way the society was organized. It is not shocking to me that they were better able to adapt in a similar way to Europeans.

I also think the Japanese had a different attitude. They were used to getting high end philosophy and technology from both China and Korea for centuries and adapting it to their culture fairly quickly. Despite the Japanese looking down on the "Southern Barbarian: "nanban") they never appeared so arrogant as not to want to learn from them.

China did assimilate various military techniques, fashions, and technologies from foreigners but I don't think it was at nearly the same rate historically as China was the source of innovation and I believe Chinese were some what chauvinist about "needing to learn something from a barbarian".

Edited by LongMa, 16 June 2008 - 07:23 PM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

Its likely that the situation would be worse, since Xinjiang, Mongolia, and Manchuria would be taken by the Russians and Tibet would be taken by Britain as the Ming controlled none of these areas and would probably be powerless to stop the foreign encroachment.

[Sinoid]

I like to think if Qing had come first, Ming Dynasty probably won't have happened at all. What might had happened instead of the subsequent Ming is that parts of today's Southern China may have brokened off to be another country.

As for its impact on a global scale, I think it would be likely that what would be today's China countries may be in a better economic and social standing. I think the Zheng He voyages which would now have taken place during the Qing may have gotten a little bit further so that China was able to establish a good size colony in the Americas. I do see this was a key to Western Europe skyrocketing to its established levels in 18th-19th century. But just imagine China had a chance to do this in the 16th century.

The Qing had less to worry about further invasion from the North. One of the reasons why the exploration voyages were cut short was because of an obsession with wall building.

Edited by Sinoid, 17 June 2008 - 08:42 AM.

[Yang Zongbao]

We would have to assume the Qing took the name from somewhere else instead of it being water to the Ming's fire. But if it was the Jurchens who rebelled and took over all of China, and then the Han who rebelled and took over the Jurchens, it would be hard to say. There's a million different possibilities, probably stemming from the infinite interpretations of the set background. First off, would famous Ming people such as Yongle still exist? However, I must say that the word "Ming" might be named in order to counter the "Qing", which is exactly the opposite of what happened in real history.

Precisely. We can't just arbitrarily say that the order will invert. The new "Ming" will just react to the "Qing" policies. There's no telling how they would do so. They could be more or less isolationist than Qing, more or less militant. The different ethnicity would not cause grand policy to be supremely different.

[Wan Ren aka Danny]

I guess it won't make much difference as to who ever came first whether it be the Qing or MIng because both dynasties collaps due to internal corruption and self indulgence their failure & refsuing to adopt and put the welfare of the empire and the people first instead both dynasties put their own emperors selfish welfare first

Very interesting thoughts I guess base on all of those observation can we say that present day China be it the PRC of ROC have learn the mistakes of the past? and what is happening is what China should have been doing during the 18th century.

I would think that China have learn and it is very evident with the way China have been conducting itself in economy, local government, giving emphasis the importance of life, foreign policies, being active participant as part of UN peace keeping force, allowing foreign aid groups to enter China and aid in helping relief efforts in disaster hit zones, exploration that included space technology plus using modern media to project China's openess to the outside world. The big difference between China and Japan of toady is that China did not gave up it's sovereignty and was able to negotiate successfully with its neighbors in a fairly manner such as with Russia and India.

It is as if history is repeating itself but this time in a more positive manner, China is becoming the center and probably that is what the policy planners are trying to accomplishe make China give the words "Chung Kuo" it's true meaning.

[poseph]

I would have though China would have been able to deal with the West more effectively.

If the Hongwu emperors, along with Yongle and Xuande were the emperors of China in the late 1600s to early 1700s, they would have had a much more aggressive policy towards the West and probably there would have been more trade and more power projection missions.

[shawn]

Well, no one would know the answer...seriously...

[Wan Ren aka Danny]

Come to think of it all of the Chinese dynasties share similar disasters the Song, Jin, Yuan, Ming or Qing all these dynasties started out very strong & prosperous with their main focus were on the welfare of the empire and the people. Their downfalls were all about becoming very corrupt and self serving moving away from the empire and the people.

The only difference if the Ming was in power instead of the Qing would be Chinese will be seen as Chinese without the pigtails or shaven forehead.

Edited by Wan Ren aka Danny, 19 June 2008 - 12:50 PM.

[MrKuang]

If the Ming Dynasty came after the Qing, would the Manchu's ban on footbinding have been more effective? Or would it reappear again when the Ming took over?

[Yang Zongbao]

Come to think of it all of the Chinese dynasties share similar disasters the Song, Jin, Yuan, Ming or Qing all these dynasties started out very strong & prosperous with their main focus were on the welfare of the empire and the people. Their downfalls were all about becoming very corrupt and self serving moving away from the empire and the people.

The only difference if the Ming was in power instead of the Qing would be Chinese will be seen as Chinese without the pigtails or shaven forehead.

The Western Jin was actually doomed by political infighting among the imperial princes, and the Eastern Jin was taken by coup, I believe. But yes, corruption and exploitation of the people by the officials was a common pattern for dynastic decay.