East Asia: Boxer Rebellion

Print Page | Close Window

Boxer Rebellion

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: East Asia
Forum Discription: The Far East: China, Korea, Japan and other nearby civilizations
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30346
Printed Date: 28-Apr-2024 at 18:52
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Boxer Rebellion

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Subject: Boxer Rebellion
Date Posted: 04-Oct-2011 at 19:32

For those interested in basic research and analysis..see: http://www.russojapanesewar.com/boxers.html - http://www.russojapanesewar.com/boxers.html

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Replies:

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 05-Oct-2011 at 20:56

Were the rebels really crazy enough to attack armed troops with their bare hands? Even a kung-fu master wouldn't be much of a match for a bolt-action rifle

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 06-Oct-2011 at 00:19

Well that is the allegation. As to their sanity in doing so? One can alone wonder.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman

Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Posted By: Logicv
Date Posted: 30-Dec-2011 at 20:27

Originally posted by Nick1986

Were the rebels really crazy enough to attack armed troops with their bare hands? Even a kung-fu master wouldn't be much of a match for a bolt-action rifle

In order to motivate the people to take up arms against the Europeans, the boxers spread propaganda depicting them as being immune to western weapons. They would use muskets to shoot one another, but of course, the shots fired were blank. The intent was not to cause people to face muskets bare handed, it was just a way of getting enough members to make the movement grow. But, it backfired.

People believed it, perhaps because they were so desperate to bring back the days of Chinese glory, and because they were so fed up the Manchu dominance.

-------------
If it is not logical don't waste time thinking about it.

Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 30-Dec-2011 at 22:13

I know only the main actions of the Boxers and only have one book dedicated to them:

http://www.amazon.com/Boxer-Rebellion-Dramatic-Chinas-Foreigners/dp/0425180840 - http://www.amazon.com/Boxer-Rebellion-Dramatic-Chinas-Foreigners/dp/0425180840

I took a course in the Chinese Revolution two years ago and would have to dig out my

papers to refresh my memory. The book though is good.

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 31-Dec-2011 at 00:59

An interesting summary, CV. In some ways, the Boxer phenomenon was not much different from the Taliban in Afghanistan. Seeking to preserve or restore a way of life that was threatened by modernization. In the Boxer's case, the European (and Japanese) nations whom they saw as imposing unwanted changes on China. Korea had a similar phenomenon in the same time period, the Donghak (Eastern Learning) movement (also romanized Tonghak), which sought to expel foreigners from Korea, and whose uprising triggered Japanese intervention in Korea, and indirectly the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95. The Japanese, likewise, saw uprisings a decade or two earlier in their own country that sought to avoid modernization.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 31-Dec-2011 at 19:49

From what i heard, the rebels left their guns at home and charged the enemy with edged weapon. Their fanatical hatred of Christianity and foreign influences is very similar to the Taliban and Samurai Lirelou mentioned above

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: Vladd
Date Posted: 01-Jan-2012 at 06:59

I am a wargamer and this period has always interested me. Can anyone suggest a good guide to the forces involved in the siege of Peking.

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 01-Jan-2012 at 13:29

Bear in mind two points on the Chinese of the period. First, Christianity was identified by many of the educated as related to modernization. Ergo, a threat to traditionalists but of interest to the modernists. Second, it was also identified in the Chinese mind with the Taiping Rebellion, and thus a potential threat to the Qing dynasty itself. With the establishment of the Republic of China, that dichotomy did not disappear. Despite the presence of Christians among many prominent Nationalists, Chinese nationalism took a decidedly anti-Christian turn in the 1920s and 30s, a time when the great majority of Chinese were illiterate, and relied upon oral communications for their news and view of national events.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 02-Jan-2012 at 22:06

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2MeUoD9G9xAC&lpg=PA121&dq=boxer%20rebellion&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false - Boxer Uprising: A Background Study

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: heyamigos
Date Posted: 02-Sep-2012 at 06:34

Most Chinese have not forgotten this episode in their history and view current encirclement policies from other nations as a continuation of this colonialism attitude. The rebellion was triggered when the German ambassador killed a civilian Chinese boy and the Manchu prince retaliated by beheading the German. Main factors were the continuing opium trade, unequal treaty where cities were carved into semi-colonies (foreigners were immune to crime in those areas), the utter decay of society. Chinese (Han and Manchu) joined up to attack the foreigners and they retaliated by using the armies of 8 nations. Countless and priceless artifacts were stolen from the Chinese imperial palace. The French and British actually burned down the summer palace.

Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 04-Sep-2012 at 21:58

Like all colonials throughout history, the Western nations failed to truly understand how little their gunboat diplomacy was appreciated by the Chinese, and how many angry Chinese the Empress could muster. When faced with a limited number of troops operating on foreign soil a long way from supply and reinforcements, human wave attacks can be remarkably effective.

The siege of Peking is one of those military masterpieces that must be read to believe, full of heroism and sacrifice, but with an inevitability that could no longer be ignored.

-------------
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Posted By: heyamigos
Date Posted: 15-Sep-2012 at 06:18

Chinese can easily understand the Arab mind. Basically both have been humilitaed and bullied by Western nations in the past. They despise what Western nations dictate and tell them to do in modern times. Both cultures deep down really want to coexist peacefully with the West. The arrogance and self interests needs to stop.

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 27-Oct-2012 at 07:06

The consent and support from the Manchiu rulers can't be ignored in the development of Boxer Rebellion. Generally speaking, Mauchiu rulers were not favorable of Han military organizations, but Boxers were an exception. Boxers put up a slogan of "Help Qing dynasty and Wipe out foreigners", which appealed to the Emperess much. So the government approved of the existence and development of Boxers, which is very unusual in Chinese history. Usually common people don't help rulers in China.
Many years ago I saw a Chinese movie titled "An amazing whip". This is the only movie I know which described the "Boxer Rebellion". The hero was an unknown kungfu master, whose only weapon was his long pigtail which he used like a whip (In Qing Dynasty all men grew long pigtails.) With this amazing weapon he defeated many opponents like western and Japanese warriors. But when he joined Boxers, he found his skill was totally useless since he had to be confronted with guns and canons. At last, amongst countless corpses of his comrades, he cut his pigtail and decided to the enrolled in an ammunition factory to manufacture modern weapons.
By the way, I don't think "Boxer Rebellion" is an appropriate expression to define this event since Boxers didn't rebel the rulers then. Maybe "Boxer Movement" or "Boxer Campaign" is a better term.

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 27-Oct-2012 at 13:26

A good point on the Boxer 'Rebellion'. Perhaps Boxer Uprising would be closer to what it was. I believe I saw the same (Hong Kong) movie, though I didn't know the title. I thought the westerners were somewhat clownishly depicted, but then historical accuracy wasn't the movie's purpose so much to entertain a Chinese audience.

A point on the pigtails. They were mandatory under the Qing dynasty, and for a man not to wear one was considered treason. (I assume bald men were excepted)

I read an opinion piece one time that pointed out that training in the martial arts to confront a foreign devil was approved of, while any martial training that might have given the skills to confront the Qing dynasty was prohibited. Yet the organization inherent in organizing against the foreigners was, per se, acquiring skills that could be used in an anti-Qing revolt.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: BoPoMoFo
Date Posted: 27-Oct-2012 at 23:24

We need to know it was a time in China where superstition was still taken as facts and most Chinese really had no knowledge about Europeans other than they looked scary and they were taking over. There were rampant rumors such as missionaries abducting Chinese children and using their organs to make medicine. And of course, belieiving Boxers' kung fu can stop bullet was one of them and was taken as facts. As this particular kung fu was mixed with religious practices, and that the practicing Boxers were actually possessed by certain Chinese dieties, no one was going to test them.

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 28-Oct-2012 at 05:18

Today I read a report about Boxer Rebellion by an American journalist (National Geographic Magazine July 1900).

I guess what puzzled Westerners most about Boxer Rebellion is how they could be so courageous, or ignorant, when confronted with guns and canons? Didn't they know bullets could kill people? Did they really think they were bulletproof?

One category of martial arts Chinese practice is called "hard kongfu". Like one lies on a spiked board and under a hard slabstone and another one hammers the stone into half with much force but the one lying remains uninjured. Or two people stand face-to-face with a spear with two pointed ends propped against their throats then they exert force to bend the spear. Chinese folk knowledge says these people are arms-proof.

But in fact these skills are not so difficult or dangerous as common people imagine. One needs much "gut" and caution to practice it, but that's all.

I guess many Boxers mastered this skill after practicing a lot then they thought they were strong enough to fend off bullets. Moreover, Boxer Rebellion leaders said there were many taboos before fighting against armed foreigners. According to the report, once 12 boxers were killed by foreigners and their bulletproof skill seemed useless.
But after the investigation, they were found out to violate the taboo rules the evening before. So the event simply enhanced the superstition of other followers.

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 05-Nov-2012 at 07:48

Today I read a statement: "The Boxer Rebellion had much to do with the failure of the 1898 reform".
Well I seriously doubt this statement. I think these two events had nothing at all to do with.

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 06-Nov-2012 at 07:14

A bullet has higher velocity than a spear or nail and will expand on contact. Perhaps there's another explanation: the Chinese rebels were "bulletproof" because they tied cloth strips around their major arteries before battle to avoid bleeding to death

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 06-Nov-2012 at 08:56

Originally posted by Nick1986

Actually bullets that expand on contact are illegal undercurrent laws of war, and to my knowledge were not in common use during the period of the Boxer rebellion. In addition, they were hardly necessary. The rifles of many contingents of the allied force in China were newer, high velocity, smokeless powder rounds firing at up or over 2,000 feet per second. High velocity gunshot wounds include what is called "kinetic vacuity". As the bullet passes through a body, the vacuum it produces creates a shock wave that damages tissue not in the immediate passage channel of the round. If not debrided (cut away), tissue within the shock wave area begins to rot, inducing gangrene. So, the European forces in China didn't need expanding bullets. The high velocity of their rifles sufficed.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2012 at 02:52

Originally posted by longbaby

Today I read a statement: "The Boxer Rebellion had much to do with the failure of the 1898 reform".
Well I seriously doubt this statement. I think these two events had nothing at all to do with.

Generally speaking, the 1898 reforomists, mostly the gentry people and headed by Kang You-wei and Liang Qi-chao, were the elites of China then. Those boxers were mostly low-class peasants in Northern China. They didn't understand what the 1898 reform was about. They rose up simply because of their hatred of Westerners.

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2012 at 08:40

Longbaby, in re your: "They rose up simply because of their hatred of Westerners."

So, the Boxers were simply a Chinese version of the Klu Klux Klan? Or of Russian mobs bent on a pogrom in the Jewish ghettos?

Or could it have been that frustration directed at Westerners was a safe outlet for the anger they felt for being under foreign (i.s., non-Han, i.e., Manchu) domination. Perhaps akin to today's Chinese mobs attacking Japanese targets?

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2012 at 08:47

Originally posted by lirelou

Originally posted by Nick1986

Weren't dum-dum bullets only illegal when used against European armies? The British used them in colonial wars as they were more effective in bringing down charging tribesemen

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: longbaby
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2012 at 22:00

Originally posted by lirelou

Longbaby, in re your: "They rose up simply because of their hatred of Westerners."

So, the Boxers were simply a Chinese version of the Klu Klux Klan? Or of Russian mobs bent on a pogrom in the Jewish ghettos?

Or could it have been that frustration directed at Westerners was a safe outlet for the anger they felt for being under foreign (i.s., non-Han, i.e., Manchu) domination. Perhaps akin to today's Chinese mobs attacking Japanese targets?

Seems I should consider this issue more closely. Yes, those mobs attacking Japanese targets these days simply want to let out their anger. But I am not as sure of Boxers over 100 years ago. Their deep mentality is beyond me. I think I need to study it more.

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2012 at 22:44

Nick, the revolution in high powered rifles took place in the 1880s and 1890s, and were first noted in the Boer War, 1899-1902, which started before but was contemporary with the Boxer Rebellion. The U.S. Army volunteer and state units called up for the Spanish-American War were still carrying the trap-door loading 1866 Springfield in 45-70 caliber, which was big enough to down any tribesman. But the regular units sent to China were armed with the Krag-Jorgensen, a 30-40 round that may well have incited some troops to crease their bullets dum-dum style. But these would have been the exception. Army regulations frowned upon damaging ammunition. The Mausers, Enfields, and Moisin-Nagants, however, were powered at least the equivalent of the 30-06 caliber that the U.S. Army adopted with the Model 1903 Springfield, and I suspect the Japanese arms were as well.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 09-Nov-2012 at 20:59

Heyamigos, in regards to your post, to wit: "Chinese can easily understand the Arab mind. Basically both have been humilitaed and bullied by Western nations in the past. They despise what Western nations dictate and tell them to do in modern times. Both cultures deep down really want to coexist peacefully with the West. The arrogance and self interests needs to stop."

There is this from a USMC history of the Marine Amphibious Corps that landed in North China to disarm and repatriate the Japanese. Note that this action was conducted over much the same territory that the Boxer Rebellion had been fought on. Perhaps what the "Chinese mind" can understand best is what its government tells it to understand.

"Long before daybreak on 30 September the convoy anchored in the bay off the mouth of Hai River. With dawn, as if out of nowhere, appeared a swarm of sampans manned by enthusiastic Chinese crews who sculled their small craft close to the transports to exchange mutually unintelligible badinage with the troops lining the rails and to trade cheap trinkets. The aura of good-natured welcome continued as the Assistant Division Commander of the 1st Division, Brigadier General Louis R. Jones, and his staff boarded a patrol craft to lead a procession of LCTs carrying men of the 7th Marines over Taku bar and into the narrow channel that led upriver to the Tangku docks. It was the start of a daylong victory parade. "Until long after dark groups of Chinese lined the river banks, gathered...outside their...houses to cheer each boatload of Marines."<2>

At 1030, General Jones set foot on the docks and met with Chinese port officials to complete arrangements initiated by General Worton's advance party for the reception, transportation, and billeting of the Marines. The 3d Battalion, 7th Marines, entrained for Tientsin, while 2/7 bivouacked in the warehouse area beside the docks. Elements of the IIIAC Shore Brigade, built around the 7th Service Regiment, also disembarked on the 30th to start unloading cargo. On every hand, the "Chinese military and civilian authorities were cooperative in the extreme,"<3> and no trouble of any kind was experienced with the Japanese garrison.

The tumultuous welcome that greeted 3/7 when it arrived in Tientsin was repeated and reinforced the following day as the 1st Marines and Division Headquarters Battalion reached the city by rail and road. The streets were packed with Chinese of all classes and European expatriates. Trucks and marching troops literally had to force their way through the happy, flag-waving throngs to reach their assigned billets in the former International Concessions. To many of the men, it seemed that their welcome must have out shone and out shouted "any welcome given to troops any time, any place, and anywhere during the war."<4>"

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 10-Nov-2012 at 11:57

Originally posted by lirelou

Nick, the revolution in high powered rifles took place in the 1880s and 1890s, and were first noted in the Boer War, 1899-1902, which started before but was contemporary with the Boxer Rebellion. The U.S. Army volunteer and state units called up for the Spanish-American War were still carrying the trap-door loading 1866 Springfield in 45-70 caliber, which was big enough to down any tribesman. But the regular units sent to China were armed with the Krag-Jorgensen, a 30-40 round that may well have incited some troops to crease their bullets dum-dum style. But these would have been the exception. Army regulations frowned upon damaging ammunition. The Mausers, Enfields, and Moisin-Nagants, however, were powered at least the equivalent of the 30-06 caliber that the U.S. Army adopted with the Model 1903 Springfield, and I suspect the Japanese arms were as well.

I thought the Americans used expanding bullets in the Philippines. One officer argued that "savages" with fatal wounds didn't go down like white men, but kept going until they had beheaded their enemy

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 11-Nov-2012 at 10:58

Nick, the "U.S. volunteer" units that saw service in the Philippines during the Spanish-American war carried the latest version of the 45-70 trap door Springfield rifle , a single shot weapon that fired a 500 grain bullet. When the insurrection fried up, those Civil War technology weapons were replaced by the 30-40 caliber Krag-Jorgensen, a more modern repeating rifle with the trademark box magazine riding up next to the bolt, in many but not all volunteer units.

The Regular Army units all carried the Krag-Jorgensen. U.S. recruited and equipped Philippino units could carry either rifle, depending upon the sponsoring U.S. units priority in the chain of supply.It fired a 220 grain bullet. Earlier attempts to increase the weight of the bullet had produced problems.

That 500 grain 45-70 round needed no 'dum-dum' treatment. It could have taken down a Moro "juramentado" at 600 yards had the terrain in the Philippines afforded such shots.

Over the course of the insurrection, many U.S. Volunteer units traded in their trap=door Springfields for the far more modern Krags. The Krag was considered by the troops of the period to be under-powered for war. (So was the .223 cal/ 5.56 mm M-16 round at first) The Krag was also sold on the Stateside civilian market as a sporting weapon, and well regarded as such. This means that differing weight and expanding bullet cartridges were easily available Stateside and that individual alteration of bullets in the field was possible. I don't know that any expanding rounds were actually "issued", because I can't find any evidence that such were ever manufactured in the U.S. for military use. Understand that modifying a 30-40 Krag round would have severely effected its accuracy at any but the closest ranges. The most likely 'dum-dum' treatments in the Philippines would have been .38 caliber pistol cartridges.

Also, note in the link that the laws on war on 'dum-dum' type bullets has exceptions.

http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule77

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 12-Nov-2012 at 08:36

http://www.russojapanesewar.com/boxers.html%20 - http://www.russojapanesewar.com/boxers.html

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!

Posted By: heyamigos
Date Posted: 13-Nov-2012 at 05:45

For the Chinese, this wasn't funny at all. It marked a turning point in their history. It was the appex of how they realized they were weak and getting 'bullied' by the West. Many Chinese today strive to modernize their nation because remembrance of these 'humiliations of the past' has not escaped the collective mind. That is why I think Americans and West in general should try to tame China and bring it 'into the fold.' Trying to isolate, alienate or contain them during their time of growth/modernization only lends credence to the long held belief that Westerners do not want to see a modernized China and will do everything to try to prevent that (even if it means going to war and bomb China to submission). On the other hand, if the Chinese progresses to a level on par that of Westerners, it is beneficial that we tame them now and show we welcome them into the larger international family of peace and prosperity. Their people (not their govt.) will see this and hope to emulate other aspects of the West besides material wealth (ie individual and societal rights, democracy, etc.)

Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 14-Nov-2012 at 14:30

Heyamigos, in re: "Their people (not their govt.) will see this and hope to emulate other aspects of the West besides material wealth (ie individual and societal rights, democracy, etc.)"

A question: If the Chinese control the information that their population receives, as in well proven by their control of the internet and jailing of dissidents to include web bloggers, how will the people of China ever get to see any evidence that they are 'being welcomed into the larger international family of peace and prosperity'?

Where is the evidence, beyond the radio rantings of extreme right commentators, that America and the West in general are trying to isolate, alienate, and contain...China?

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì

Posted By: heyamigos
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2012 at 03:22

^Mainlanders were even allowed to travel to Taiwan to witness their last presidential elections. Many Chinese have seen the world outside of their own.

A prerequisite during the US presidential elections was a question on 'getting tough with China'. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that China (and by implication all Chinese) are now the pariah and boogeyman of the world thanks to Western media

Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2012 at 10:41

It would be smarter if the Americans formed a partnership with the Chinese and pooled their resources to colonise the moon. What they're doing risks bringing about another Cold War

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!