Russia topples Qing in the 1790s/1800s

Except that, by the time 25 years have rolled out, the momentum will have been lost, a new Han dynasty might have already been installed in China and the Chinese might not want to rebel all over again to enthrone a new ruler.

...Honestly, if your response to every well-evidenced counter-argument in this thread is to not take any of them into account and continue insisting that the scenario fabricated in your mind, particularly the battle plan that'd require literally everything to go right, is plausible, then i'm sorry, but maybe the whole premise (conquering China, enthroning a Romanov as emperor, and then leaving) was ill-conceived from the start.

Obviously this scenario relies on the civil war NOT being resolved but only getting worse.

I've addressed every argument and changed the proposed TL greatly to adjust. It's not meant to be remotely plausible just not ASB, yes everything will have to go right, but so long as it's theoretically possible then that's my aim.
 
The logistics question is the most difficult. In the 1790s:

1) Can the Russians march 30,000-50,000 men in several waves to Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
2) Can the Russians rapidly develop basic weapons manufacturing in Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
3) Can Russia resupply 30,000-50,000 men in ammunition, gunpowder, clothes and food that far east? (helped by local production later on after 1799 when Russian settlers start pouring into Manchuria)

If yes, then I think this scenario is theoretically possible. If no then it isn't.
 
Last edited:
Assuming Qing China falls early in disarray because of the Ming loyalist in the mid 17th century, do you think the Russians could push into Manchuria during the decades in which they had the OTL border conflicts with the Qing?

I’m not a specialist on China history and can’t comment on this aspect but I don’t think that commitment of 50 - 100K Russian troops on Far East was realistic at that time or that the whole idea of conquering China would be anywhere on a list of the Russian priorities in the lat XVIII - early XIX.
 
I’m not a specialist on China history and can’t comment on this aspect but I don’t think that commitment of 50 - 100K Russian troops on Far East was realistic at that time or that the whole idea of conquering China would be anywhere on a list of the Russian priorities in the lat XVIII - early XIX.

30K to 50K. The romantic idea to conquer China will turn into merely an attempt to revise the Treaty of Nerchinsk of 1689. When military successes occur the goal becomes to annex parts of Manchuria. Then China just collapses thanks to Heshen and Qianlong not retiring early because he wants to defeat the Russians first and the need for his "strong military leadership." This leads Heshen to imprison the new emperor (Jiaqing) and later to murder him in a bid to retain control. This or course leads all the provincial governors to revolt against Heshen.

Right now only the logistics question needs answering I think.


In the 1790s:

1) Can the Russians march 30,000-50,000 men in several waves to Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
2) Can the Russians rapidly develop basic weapons manufacturing in Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
3) Can Russia resupply 30,000-50,000 men in ammunition, gunpowder, clothes and food that far east? (helped by local production later on after 1799 when Russian settlers start pouring into Manchuria)

If yes, then I think this scenario is theoretically possible. If no then it isn't.
 
Yeah this relies on the romantic imagination to spur the initial decision, since the odds of success are extremely low, particularly since no one knows how vulnerable the Qing really are in the 1790s in particular. This will start off as a romantic idea to conquer China but turn into an attempt to overturn the Treaty of Nerchinsk, and when military success is achieved against Qing armies, the project is continued with the aim of acquiring parts of Manchuria.

The reason why the Treaty of Nerchinsk was not overturned earlier is that it simply did not make a practical sense for Russia before it got a meaningful population in the region. Treaty of Kiakhta (1727) established trade relations Russia was looking for and In 1858 Russia annexed the land North of Amur and in 1860 took the coast down to Vladivostok. By 1858 - 60 there were already Russian settlements established in a violation of Nerchinsk Treaty.

But in 1790’s the area was pretty much void of the Russians and Catherine had problems even with finding enough settlers for Novorossia.

As for the romantic ideas, Catherine had quite a few of them but conquest of China was not a part of the Russian ...er... historic folklore.
 
As for the romantic ideas, Catherine had quite a few of them but conquest of China was not a part of the Russian ...er... historic folklore.

Yeah this will require an early POD where either or both Catherine and her future lover are influenced early on by the romantic idea to one day conquer China (like the Mongols of yore). Obviously this will be a very hard undertaking but by establishing Russia in the east and Manchuria, it's a precursor to eventual conquest. So in 1792 Catherine actually funds a large eastern expedition with the aim of overturning the Treat of Nerchinsk. Then Paul I is influenced as well by his mother and continues to fund the project, ect.

But in 1790’s the area was pretty much void of the Russians and Catherine had problems even with finding enough settlers for Novorossia.

I think existing Russian settlers in Siberia would be happy to swap their lands for Manchuria, much better farmland and climate.
 
Right now only the logistics question needs answering I think.


In the 1790s:

1) Can the Russians march 30,000-50,000 men in several waves to Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
2) Can the Russians rapidly develop basic weapons manufacturing in Nerchinsk and Irkutsk?
3) Can Russia resupply 30,000-50,000 men in ammunition, gunpowder, clothes and food that far east? (helped by local production later on after 1799 when Russian settlers start pouring into Manchuria)

If yes, then I think this scenario is theoretically possible. If no then it isn't.

Not that I’m such a great authority but my 2c worth are:
#1 No because there was a good chance that, while waiting for the 2nd wave, troops of the 1st one are going to starve to death. This was different by the late XIX but you are asking about the late XVIII.
#2 No because this would require too many things including search for the necessary ores, transporting specialists (of which there was no surplus) and workers (serfs) to work in the mines, building the ironworks, etc.; even before that would have to transport there serfs in the tens of thousands (where from?) to develop a regional agriculture capable of supporting the industry.
#3 Realistically, no. Ditto for the pouring settlers: where are they going to come from and why (see #2)


However, I still like an idea of Grand Duke Constantine dressed in Chinese robes and tightly fitting breeches observing a parade ground drill of his similarly dressed pet Chinese Guards :)
 
Not that I’m such a great authority but my 2c worth are:
#1 No because there was a good chance that, while waiting for the 2nd wave, troops of the 1st one are going to starve to death. This was different by the late XIX but you are asking about the late XVIII.
#2 No because this would require too many things including search for the necessary ores, transporting specialists (of which there was no surplus) and workers (serfs) to work in the mines, building the ironworks, etc.; even before that would have to transport there serfs in the tens of thousands (where from?) to develop a regional agriculture capable of supporting the industry.
#3 Realistically, no. Ditto for the pouring settlers: where are they going to come from and why (see #2)

1. Well the soldiers are going to carry plenty of food with them at first. And a steady supply line for food in the Siberian route will be ongoing presumably. But if not, what's the maximum number of men that can travel all at once and be sustained? 5K? (If not the POD needs to be pushed back for the Russians to develop Irkutsk and Nerchinsk more before the 1790s to make it plausible. Maybe the Tsars since Peter the Great have a long term ambition/romantic idea to conquer China?)
2. OK what's realistically the furthest east the Russians could establish weapons manufacturing relatively quickly? Tobolsk? (again will need an earlier POD to establish weapons manufacturing further east. Is Tobolsk plausible assuming nobody wants to move to Irkutsk presumably?) Also there were apparently rich mines near Nerchinsk.
3. From Siberia because Manchuria is much better farm soil and climate.
 
Last edited:
Uh, wasn't the White Lotus Rebellion a pretty big deal?
And yet the problem with that comparison is that it’s really hard to root out a guerilla based secret society that’s ethnically the exact same as those who aren’t your enemies, and are in fact just pious and respectable people who because they’re Buddhist could be connected with the rebellion accidentally. In this case you simply forbid anyone from contact with the Russians and if they do they have no excuse and are treated as rebels. It’s much easier. Not that I think there would be any people who would contact the Russians as no one would want yet another wave of non Han rulers, worse ones that had no real understanding of Confucian ideas, couldn’t speak Chinese, had no reverence for their ancestors and would dismiss the rituals they believe their state rested upon as pagan.

Also, conquest of Beijing by no means means the fall of the dynasty. When the western coalition captured Beijing at the height of the boxer war, after the weakness of the Chinese state had been exposed to all and sundry, the ravages of taiping, opium, etc etc, the imperial court just moved to Chang an and none of the Chinese officials the western powers wanted to enthrone as a new dynasty/ emperor in the case of the Aisin Gioro ones, were willing.

In short this entire scenario puts Genghis Khan to shame in terms of megalomania and ambition and surpasses him too in unreasonability, as it is pretty much the definition of textbook ASB.
 
And yet the problem with that comparison is that it’s really hard to root out a guerilla based secret society that’s ethnically the exact same as those who aren’t your enemies, and are in fact just pious and respectable people who because they’re Buddhist could be connected with the rebellion accidentally. In this case you simply forbid anyone from contact with the Russians and if they do they have no excuse and are treated as rebels. It’s much easier. Not that I think there would be any people who would contact the Russians as no one would want yet another wave of non Han rulers, worse ones that had no real understanding of Confucian ideas, couldn’t speak Chinese, had no reverence for their ancestors and would dismiss the rituals they believe their state rested upon as pagan.
Not what I was arguing (I too think Russia can't invade China), I was merely disputing the notion that the Qing were stable in the 1790s.
 
Not what I was arguing (I too think Russia can't invade China), I was merely disputing the notion that the Qing were stable in the 1790s.
Indeed, the 1790s were a turning point in Chinese history that started the trend of massive rebellions that would eventually take them down. But, at the same time, it still took another century of multiple military humiliations and even larger scale rebellions (the Taiping Civil War being far larger in scale than the White Lotus Rebellion and causing far more damage) to finally break their back, so it's not like they were teetering on the brink of collapse in the 1790s. Empires tend to decline over a period before breaking apart spectacularly, after all.
 
Top