APPLY FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY!
Or, know someone who would be a perfect fit? Let them know!
Share / Like / Tag a friend in a post or comment!
To complete application process efficiently and successfully, you must read the Application Instructions carefully before/during application process.
Throughout the last  decades of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century,  scarcely a year passed without violent protest or armed rebellion. In  this period of crisis the first major break with the past was brought on  in the middle of the 19th century by the Taiping Rebellion. The Taiping  Rebellion was in many respects the hinge between China’s pre-modern and  modern histories. The impact that this movement had on China, not only  highlighted the breakdown of the traditional order but is also,  considered by many scholars, to have been more disastrous then the two  Opium Wars. 
This was a vast uprising  which although was a new beginning in Chinese history, it arose in a  setting that still contained the familiar elements characteristic of  periods of ‘dynastic decline’ and rebellious uprisings in the past. This  included grave corruption in government, heavy taxation of the farmers,  high rent, desertion of the land by the peasantry, the increase in  population, increasing insecurity, rise in the number of bandits, local  self-defence units and increasing importance of secret societies. These  were the conditions that existed even during the first half of the 19th  century in China under the Manchu dynasty that created the environment  conducive for a major uprising to take place. However, different  scholars have given different reasons for the origins of the rebellion.
The earliest theory was  propounded by Franz Micheals, who used the ‘Dynastic Decline’ theory to  explain the rise of the Taiping movement.  He argued that the Taiping  movement should be seen as part of the dynastic decline. In China, where  the ‘Mandate of Heaven’ provided the legitimacy for each and every  ruling dynasty, the rise and fall of each dynasty followed a cyclical  pattern. The Chinese society witnessed a period of major decline, which  saw the fall of a dynasty; it was followed by an interim period, wherein  the various contenders for power competed with one another and  ultimately a new dynasty emerged. This dynasty then underwent its own  period of crisis, which ultimately led to its decline. According to him,  this cycle was an unalterable process and irrespective of whatever one  may do the dynasty was going to fall.
Micheals argues that by  the 19th century Chinese society came to be characterised by grave  corruption in government, heavy taxation of the farmers, high rent,  desertion of the land by the peasantry, the increase in population,  increasing insecurity, rise in the number of bandits, local self-defence  units and increasing importance of secret societies. According to him,  all these were features of a dynasty in decline and therefore created  the conditions that were conducive for a rebellion.
However, this theory has  been criticised by a number of scholars in recent years. It has been  argued that this cyclical process, as described by Micheals, was in fact  a historical coincidence and not an unalterable process. This theory  fails to describe the reasons as to why the dynasty would fall. All the  characteristics mentioned above by Micheals to describe a declining  dynasty were seen as features of an inevitable process and not as causes  for the decline. In fact, it was the same features that were mentioned  as causes by other scholars for the Taiping rebellion. Finally, the  ‘Dynastic Decline Theory’ has come to be looked upon as a western  prejudice against Eastern civilisations. They wished to cement their  notion of the east as comprising of essentially backward, decadent and  stagnant societies that kept undergoing perpetual periods of crisis.  Thus, in light of such arguements it is essential to look at some of the  other factors that could have brought about the Taiping Rebellion.
A number of scholars have  argued that the conditions in 19th century China provided favourable  elements and a suitable setting for a rebellion to take place. Prominent  among these scholars was Sayun Thang, who argued that the features of  the dynastic decline prevailed in China and were the causes of the  rebellion. Even Franz Micheals had admitted that the situation in China  during this period was such that if a leader was to come about and  exploit such a situation then he would surely be able to launch an  organised rebellion against the Manchus.
Barrington Moore Jr. In  his “Social Origins of Dictatorship” argued that the peasantry in China  occupied a pitiful position in the feudal structure. Their lives  revolved around the three Nos: No religion, No Family and No property.  While, the last was due to the feudal structure prevailing in China, the  first two were an outcome of the peasants poor condition. He had no  time or inclination to indulge in religious activities nor did he have  the means to support a family. Such a situation was worsened by  conditions created by the Manchu government like over taxation.
Over taxation, according  to Micheals, was an outcome of the limitations of the existing system.  As the officials and Gentry were within a system that could not expand,  they were forced to improve their position at the expense of others and  through the process of over taxation. While, the limitations of the  system as portrayed by Micheals can be questioned, there is no doubt  that over taxation had become a menace in the Chinese countryside. This  phenomenon forced many small peasants into debt as they borrowed money  to be able to pay the tax on time and eventually caused them to lose  their land. Moreover, the imbalance in the copper-silver exchange rate  on account of the Opium War had further worsened the plight of the  peasants as the value of copper-the most basic medium of exchange- fell.  This seems to have further increased the tax burden on the peasantry.  Moreover, the property bought by the officials and the gentry did not  carry the same tax burden as that of the common farming population. This  further increased the tax burden on the peasants in order to make up  for the loss of revenue from this official land.
Apart from the over  taxation, high rents were another characteristic feature of the rural  countryside. The non-payment of taxes led to a large number of peasants  losing their land, which was then bought by officials and the gentry.  These displaced farmers were reemployed as tenant farmers but were  bogged down by high rents that further drove them into debt.
Another important feature  in the countryside that further worsened the condition of the peasants  was a rapid increase in population. This population growth increased the  pressure on the already limited agricultural resources. The population  had grown three-fold from the 18th to the 19th century, while, at the  same time the square mileage of cultivated land and the quantity of  agricultural production did not increase in the same proportion.  As a  result, the per capita availability of land had decreased. The  continuous shrinkage of individual landholdings could mean only  increasing hardship for the peasant. When the yield of this small  acreage could no longer sustain his life, he sold the land and became  the tenant of the landlord. This along with the high rents and over  taxation led to the concentration of land in the hands of the rich,  which not only included the landlords, but merchants, usurers and  pawnshop dealers. For eg, in Hunan province the landlords occupied  50-60% of the land, while, more than 60% of the population were mere  tenants, who hardly had any land of their own. A similar situation  prevailed in Kwangtung province as well.
This miserable condition  that existed in the countryside led to a large-scale desertion by the  peasants. Some migrated to the cities in search of alternative jobs but  in the absence of the development of an alternative sector in China most  people were unable to find jobs. This proved to be a major source of  unrest and a large number of people took to banditry causing a great  deal of damage and law and order problem in the rural countryside.
Thus, there was a general  insecurity in the countryside and no adequate measures were taken by  the officials to offer protection. In a situation like this the people  of the towns and villages began to establish their own defence units.  Although, this was against the policy of the dynastic government in the  time of crisis when its own forces had failed the government had to  allow the arming of such local forces to maintain law and order. They  soon came to acquire a dominant place in local politics and they began  to take up the fight for local issues in which their community was  involved. Thus, there were frequent clashes between the various  communities in the countryside as issues between villages over water  rights, property, women, ethnic and religious controversies began to be  settled through arms. Moreover, they began to levy duties on trade and  commerce passing through their locality in order to fund their units and  purchase weapons. The government officials in order to avoid a  confrontation with these units ignored such activities. Finally, it  became extremely difficult to draw the line between these recognised  units and the bandit organisations as even the former resorted to the  use of force at the drop off a hat in order to safeguard their  interests. The government officials in all these cases preferred to  maintain a position of neutrality as long as the warfare did not lead to  large-scale problems. Thus, naturally there was a decline in official  authority and it was the local leadership, which began to gain  prominence.
The decline of imperial  authority especially in the countryside also saw the rise of a number of  secret societies, which led many of the uprisings that had occurred in  the 19th century in China. The secret societies had a well defined  political and military structure and on account of the secrecy of their  memberships they were the ideal vehicle for conspiracy and political  uprisings against the government. They formed underground political  organisations, rival and potentially hostile to the existing state  organisation. They became the centers of unrest and provided the  framework necessary to unite all the local armed groups under one  leadership.  Immediately preceding the Taiping upsure, during the 1840s,  there were a number of uprisings led by peasants or displaced  handicraft workers, etc. These struggles were waged against the payment  of levies, high taxation and rents, and corrupt officials, etc.
The leadership was  provided by the ranks of secret societies like the Tien Ti Hui etc. Some  of the major struggles of the 1840s were the uprising on the  Hunan-Kwangsi border in 1847 under the leadership of Lei Tsal-hao of  Tien Ti Hui; the insurrections under the leadership of Chang  Chia-hsiang, Chen Ya-Kuai and Li Yuan-fa between 1840-50 in the regions  of Kwangtung-Kwangsi borders and Hunan, etc. Thus, these secret  societies and local armed units and their insurrections against the  Manchu government provided a model after which a rebellious organisation  like that of the Taipings could be patterned. These groups had already  helped in weakening imperial authority in the countryside and giving  voice to the existing dissatisfaction but they also assisted the  Taipings in one other way. They had realised that the lack of an  ideology had prevented these organisations from becoming mass movements  and this was something that the Taipings were able to rectify.
The decade of the 1840s  also witnessed a large number of natural calamities. Among the major  ones were the severe drought in Hunan in 1847, the flooding of the  Yangtze river over the four provinces of Hupei, Anhwei, Kiangsu, and  Chekiang and famine in Kwangsi in 1849 and the flooding of the Yellow  river in 1852. Millions of people were dislocated from their homes,  thousands were killed and lots of property and assets were destroyed.  The government relief in a situation like this was at the most  perfunctory, with much of the funds being embezzled at the same time.  According to Hsu, this had given rise to a great deal of disappointment  among the masses, who began to believe that the government was no longer  interested or capable of looking after their needs.
The rising tide of  resentment against the government officials was also closely linked to  the increasing phenomenon of political corruption. Sung Thang believes  that, while economic factors may have been responsible, in case of China  all rebellions and revolutions in the past were caused due to political  corruption. It was political corruption, which according to him, led to  economic misery, military weakness and cultural stagnancy- all the  factors discussed above. It was the offshoot implications of political  corruption, which in turn led to the rise of various organisations and  intellectual currents that went on to oppose the Manchu government. He  goes on to say that the government officials were characterised by  superficiality, temporisation and irresponsibility. As was seen in the  case of breakdown of law and order in the countryside or during the time  of natural disasters, little or no attention was paid to the people’s  welfare. Official irresponsibility was also evident from the fact that  these offices could be sold easily. Since such offices had to be bought  for 3,000 taels (a large amount), the new official tried to regain this  sum by extorting the sum from the taxpayers in the form of over taxation  or diverting the funds away from their intended use viz. to meet the  public demand. As the Manchu authority was based on such officials, this  increasing corruption highlights the breakdown of the political order.
The Opium War and the  encroachment by foreigners into Chinese society was believed to be an  essential factor that brought about rebellions during this period. IY  Hsu has argued that taking advantage of the fact that no provision was  made in the Treaty of Nanking against the import of Opium, the foreign  traders intensified their activities in this illicit and lucrative  trade. The Chinese government was in no position to stop this trade  because of which it practically became unrestrained and the volume of  import rose from 33,000 chests in 1842 to 46,000 chests in 1848 and to  above 52,000 chests by the 1850s. This trade led to a huge outflow of  silver (almost 20-30M taels of silver every year), which further  worsened the already grave economic situation in China and the  copper-silver exchange rate. There was an almost 100% rise in the  exchange rate, which virtually reduced a man’s income by half as it was  the copper coin that was the basic medium of exchange in the market.
Karl Marx also attributed  the Taiping movement to the impact of the Opium War. In his article  “Revolution in China and Europe” (1853) he argued that the war had  shattered the invincible aura that had surrounded the Manchu dynasty. In  his words “The English Cannon destroyed the myth of the invincibility  of the Chinese.” The Manchus were completely exposed in the eyes of the  people and this encouraged even the common peasant to rise up in  rebellion against the imperial forces. Hsu has added to this viewpoint  by saying that the Opium War had coincided with a general decline in the  military prowess of the Manchus. The bannermen and the Green Standard  Army, who had contributed to the founding o the dynasty had begun to  show major weaknesses. This was reflected in their inability to suppress  a number of popular rebellions due to which the crown had to depend on  the local militia. The Opium War was the final straw, which not only  exposed the military weakness of the Manchus but also made the people  lose all respect and fear for the bannermen and the Green Standard Army.
Marx also described the  economic effects of the war to be a factor behind the popular outburst.  The war and the consequent treaty had led to the general influx of  foreign goods in the Treaty port areas. Local household and traditional  industries were completely ruined and the self-sufficient economy also  suffered dislocation. He goes on to say that the people, who were  adversely affected, became a potential source of trouble.
The Beijing Press  published a monograph titled “The Taiping Revolution” that claimed that  the movement was marked by the intensification of China’s internal  contradictions caused by the Opium Wars. The Opium War had led to the  increasing exploitation of the peasants, who already held a fractured  position in the Chinese feudal society. As the War indemnity was huge it  posed a severe financial constraint on the Manchu rulers. In order to  pay the war damages they were forced to squeeze the peasants in order to  extract more resources from them. This task was usually entrusted to  the landlords, who already were known for their exploitative behaviour  towards the peasants. Thus, it can be seen that the need for additional  resources on account of the Opium War had led to a worsening of  relations between the peasants and the landlords.
Fredrick Wakeman in his  work “strangers at the Gate” argues that the Opium war signified the  merger of two processes- internal contradictions and the external  pressure. While, he is not sure whether to call the Taiping rebellion a  traditional movement sparked off by internal developments or part of the  global process of human evolution. He, however, concluded by saying  that the Taiping movement was conditioned by the larger western impact  on China.
By the 19th century  conditions existed in China, which according to Donald S. Zagoria were  essential pre-requisites for a rebellion or revolution to take place.  This included a large-class of landless peasants, heavy pressure on  land, existence of rural intelligentsia and movements against the  existing system to demand better status and condition of living and a  loss of respect for the ruling elite. Zagoria believes that all these  conditions prevailed in China.
In the early 19th century  all the conditions which made the life of the common people  increasingly hard and insecure were prevalent in South China. In  addition, the dislocation caused by the foreign presence and the Opium  wars, the tensions generated by the presence of diverse ethnic  communities in this region, and a pattern of chronic lawlessness and  anarchic violence, all combined to make the situation in South China and  specifically in the provinces of Kwangsi and Kwangtung particularly  explosive.  In these special local expressions of the overall problems  can be found the immediate causes for the Taiping Rebellion.
For the Manchu rulers,  South China had always been the most difficult region to control. After  their conquest of China in the mid-17th century, it had been the last  region to be fully subjugated. Even after the last major centres of  resistance to Manchu rule had been snuffed out, the area continued be  difficult to control. Partly, this was so because of its sheer distance  from the seat of administration at Peking. This was particularly true of  these hilly, semi-barren or border areas, such as in Kwangsi, which had  been colonized only in the 18th century.
In fact the increasing  pressure of population on the land had forced people to migrate from the  more fertile lowland areas. In general, the presence of the police and  administration was much less in such areas than in the earlier settled  and more densely populated areas. These newly settled areas, because of  migration from different areas, had a more mixed population. This had  also generated considerable social friction. The hard conditions of  frontier life contributed to a tendency for the different communities to  group together in mutually warring, heavily armed groups. This  contributed to the growth of secret societies like the Triads (Tien Ti  Hui) which flourished under such conditions.
In Kwangtung and Kwangsi  provinces, a major source of social tension was the centuries long  conflict between the people known as the Hakka and the original settlers  (known as penti). The Hakka were that group of people who had migrated  into this region from the North during the 12th and 13th centuries. In  spite of their many centuries of residence in the south, they continued  to retain many of their distinctive characteristics, and customs as well  as their own dialect. Conflicts between them and the other local people  were numerous and often violent. A sense of alienation from their  surroundings characterized this community from which emerged the founder  of the Taiping Movement, Hung Hsiuchuan. The initial social base of the  Taipings was from among the Hakkas.
The presence of the  Western traders also contributed to the spreading of a climate of  lawlessness along the South China coast and its hinterland, particularly  from the early 19th century when opium became a major item of trade.  The illicit opium trade generated a complex underground smuggling and  distribution network involving thousands of local people. The Opium War  itself was particularly disruptive.
Following the war and the  Treaty of Nanking, much of the foreign trade which was formerly centred  in this country shifted north to Shanghai. Thousands of coolies,  boatmen and others in the Canton area, who were employed because of  trade, were suddenly without jobs. As a source of livelihood, they now  turned to banditry. Pirates driven inland by the British navy’s piracy  suppression campaigns also contributed to the floating population of  adventurers and desperadoes ready for any kind of action.
It is not without  significance that, apart from the Hakka people, the initial adherents of  the Taiping Movement came more from the strata of displaced peddlers,  boatmen, coolies and others rather than from the ranks of the peasantry.  The treaty of Nanking had adversely affected the native handicraft  industry. For example foreign textiles now captured the market and the  role of native cotton goods declined. Same was the case with  handicrafts. A large number of handicraft workers were unemployed.
The Ch’ing government, in  order to pay the war indemnity imposed many levies leading to an  increased burden on the peasantry and soaring prices. For example by  1846 the price of salt had gone up by more than 100 per cent in certain  areas. The landlord class continued to exploit the peasant. Most of the  land was concentrated in hands of big landlords. The sufferings of the  common people and the anti-ruling class sentiments were best reflected  in the proclamation of the Tien Ti Hui (Triads) when this secret society  rose in revolt.
 How to Stop Missing Deadlines?  Follow our Facebook Page and  Twitter
!-Jobs, internships, scholarships, Conferences, Trainings are published every day! 
        
        
                    
                    