WI Lord Napier was received?

FTWDK, in 1833 British Parliament ended the East India Company's monopoly on opium trade in China, and sent Lord William Napier as an envoy to Canton; the Qing were not informed of this change, and refused to see the envoy when he arrived. Five years later, the First Opium War broke out.

Now, what if a notification had been sent, and a Qing diplomatic official had met with Napier? Might this have delayed, or possibly even prevented, the Opium War?

And just to make it more interesting, what if the Jackson Administration had got wind of this, and decided to send an envoy (probably Edmund Roberts, who established relations with Siam) to protect American interests as well?

EDIT ADD: Somewhat like threads here and here
 
Last edited:
FTWDK? There's definitely a rash of new acronyms about that I don't know!

I don't know enough to make an informed guess, as what I would want to know in advance would be :-

1. Was NOBODY received between this refusal and the outbreak of the war?
2. Was the war in any way to do with a diplomatic breakdown or the lack of diplomats on the scene to smooth things over?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
FTWDK? There's definitely a rash of new acronyms about that I don't know!

For Those Who Don't Know...

I don't know enough to make an informed guess, as what I would want to know in advance would be :-

1. Was NOBODY received between this refusal and the outbreak of the war?
FWIU*, no. The refusal to engage the British diplomatically stemmed in large part from the Qing refusing to receive a foreign power as an "equal".

2. Was the war in any way to do with a diplomatic breakdown or the lack of diplomats on the scene to smooth things over?

Well, a big part of the breakout was the Qing sending Len Zexu to clamp down on the Opium trade, and things kind of spiraled out from there might of helped if the British Government had gotten notice, maybe an agreement might even have been worked out...

*sorry, "From What I Understand"
 
Last edited:
OK, here' what I'm thinking, wondering how plausible it rings:

In 1834, a diplomat of the Qing court receives Lord Napier during his diplomatic visit, and hears of Britain ending the monopoly on Opium sales in China; a tense exchange of words follows, but the Qing official promises to make sure the Emperor hears of Britains positions.

1836, a follow up diplomatic mission is sent; the Qing officials receive him as well, and inform the ambassador of China's new policies on opium sales, which includes tolerating its sale in certain port cities, with the proviso that large scale sellers whose product finds its way into the mainland will be targeted for "enforcement"; the British adjust their policies accordingly.

By 1840, modernizers in the Qing court hold a lot of sway, and are looking to start with the military; within a decade the Qing command a largely "western" style army...

1850, Prince Gong ("Devil Number Six") inherits the throne; one of his first acts is to commission an "expedition" to travel the world, looking to understand "modernity" (think Japan in 1873 OTL)...

That's what I've got so far, anyway...
 
Why should the Chinese tolerate and receive narcotics traffickers?

Well, considering what happened when the didn't... :rolleyes:

On why they would tolerate narcotics, it should be remembered that there was a real debate in the Qing court on how to deal with the country's drug problem, one option discussed was decriminalization. The approach I described allows the Qing regime to fight the scourge in the country at large, while giving British merchants an opening to sell the product.

Now, that's one way of doing it; if a diplomat receiving Napier can lead to an avoided the Opium War another way, I'm open to it.
 
Right, but at the time the Chinese had no way of knowing that the British had the capability of destroying their coastal cities at will until they accepted a drug that was devastating the Chinese family and economy.

Well, the PoD is four years before the Qing began the zero-tolerance policy that precipitated the war, so there's time.

How about then -- in 1834, a Qing official receives Lord Napier during his diplomatic visit, and hears of Britain ending the monopoly on Opium sales in China; a tense exchange of words follows. The official gives assurances that the Emperor will hear of the British positions; when the court discusses the matter, the message is understood the mean that the British are willing to go to war over their trade.

Thus, before the Qing make any final decision, they decide to have a report commissioned on British military power -- and the findings are not encouraging...
 
perhaps by the majority..

One of the reasons I have seen given for the start of the 1st opium war, was that 'opium' was the 'only' goods that china 'wanted' from the outside world, and given the inflow of silver into that country at the time, as it insisted in payment for its exports in that metal alone, that it was causing the British economy to start to suffer shortages with detrimental effects, hence by stopping the trade in opium, it also prevented some of the silver from making its way out of China once more.

As for 'narcotics' - opium etc has been around for millenia and while recognised as a debilitant did not carry the same stigma that we have grown up with.
 
Last edited:
I see; do you think this made the war inevitable, assuming the Qing wouldn't legalize opium so completely that Britain would see no real barriers in selling its product in the large volumes needed to offset their trade imbalance?
 
They had already adopted a zero-tolerance policy in the interior (Hubei iirc) and it was working. Applying it to the coastal areas is a logical next step. I don't honestly think the Chinese are going to consider the possibility that they can be defeated militarily by foreigners until it happens - it's literally inconcievable. Only the Mongols (and some would say the Qing themselves) have ever done it, and both of them promptly founded new dynasties and became Sinicized.

That said, it's always seemed strange to me that the British insisted that everything be done according to British rules and customs. They didn't get to see the Emperor face to face because they absolutely refused to kowtow; they participated in the traditional exchange of tribute only under duress; they addressed the Chinese as inferiors so consistently that it's difficult to consider it ignorance of the Mandarin language. Napier was among the worst, but it seems as if there wasn't a competent diplomat in the whole of Britain (some have argued the same of the American Revolution - seems to be a trend in British history of the period...).

I don't think proper communications can prevent the first opium war anyway. Many in Britain did not accept the idea that China had the right to restrict opium in any way - Free Trade (for other people at least) was very nearly a religious doctrine in Britain at the time, and anything that impinged on Free Trade was Morally Unacceptable. They certainly didn't equate selling opium in bulk as equivalent to chemical or biological warfare on a civilian population (as many would see it today) because addiction was a moral failure, not a treatable medical condition (in the eyes of everyone except Lin Zexu, whose treatment programs are strangely modern).

One possible compromise would be the idea that Europeans have the right to sell opium, but any Chinese person caught doing so will be beheaded. The British might regard this as an acceptable compromise, and not everyone at Court believes the problem is as serious as Magistrate Lin makes it out to be. It still shatters the cohong system, which will make an interesting reordering of the Chinese economy, but it probably keeps the drug-peddling gweilo in the coastal provinces and not spreading into the interior.
 
That said, it's always seemed strange to me that the British insisted that everything be done according to British rules and customs. They didn't get to see the Emperor face to face because they absolutely refused to kowtow; they participated in the traditional exchange of tribute only under duress; they addressed the Chinese as inferiors so consistently that it's difficult to consider it ignorance of the Mandarin language. Napier was among the worst, but it seems as if there wasn't a competent diplomat in the whole of Britain (some have argued the same of the American Revolution - seems to be a trend in British history of the period...).

Don't forget, Shawn, that when the British came to the Eternal Court, or whatever it was called, during the Napoleonic Wars, looking to strike a deal over something or other, the Chinese response was to ask the British delegates to agree that Britain would commence paying the tribute owed to the Emperor, and thus to continue paying it for ever. They were told in no uncertain terms that the Chinese still believed that the Emperor was pre-ordained to rule over the entire Earth, and that kind of left them with little room for manoeuvre. After that, if they ever agreed to kowtow it would - either literally, or more importantly metaphorically for their sense of pride and prestige, be an acknowledgment of the claim that the Chinese deserved to be their liege lords, and that was something the British were never going to accept.
 
I don't honestly think the Chinese are going to consider the possibility that they can be defeated militarily by foreigners until it happens - it's literally inconcievable. Only the Mongols (and some would say the Qing themselves) have ever done it...

OK, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this -- I mean seriously, nobody at the Qing court could even conceive of the possibility that a foreign power could defeat them in war?

It feels weird that the biggest wrench in my TL is one of those stranger than fictions...
 
OK, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this -- I mean seriously, nobody at the Qing court could even conceive of the possibility that a foreign power could defeat them in war?

It feels weird that the biggest wrench in my TL is one of those stranger than fictions...

It's true though. The main reason behind it wasn't an inability to recognise advanced technology, it was the fact that they knew their nation was huge, and they honestly believed that godly powers were watching over them to ensure they would always be supreme.
 
It's true though. The main reason behind it wasn't an inability to recognise advanced technology, it was the fact that they knew their nation was huge, and they honestly believed that godly powers were watching over them to ensure they would always be supreme.

So they honestly couldn't conceive of a foreign power's navy doing serious damage to their coastal cities, and possibly seizing them? I mean, it's not like they never paid tribute to foreign powers in their own history (the Song come to mind)...
 
Top