Revolts in China

So, while browsing Wikipedia, I came across an article on the Taiping Rebellion. A crazy christian cult, lead by a man who claimed to be the brother of Jesus Christ himself, led a revolt which would nearly control Southern China and claim around 25 million lives. It could be considered the largest war of the 1800's, even surpassing the Napoleonic wars. Britian and France eventually intervened to stop it. Other revolts happened around the same time, including the Nien Rebelion, Dungan Revolt, and Panthay Rebellion, which all occured from 1850 to 1870. So, what if these rebellions succeed? Could China Balkanize right then and there with the fall of the Qing Dynsaty almost fifty years before OTL?

Also, would the lack of intervention by the powers be enough to have the rebellion become a success? Because then in other timelines, such as Britannia's Fist or the Trent War, if Britian and France are preoccupied, then a side effect could be China collapsing.
 
Excellent point. If Britain and/or France are distracted, then the Tai Pings may succeed, which could improve the chances of some of the other rebellions.

That doesn't have to lead to complete fragmentation, or the fall of the Qing. With several moderate-sized Chinas, some might be able to play off the various foreign powers and maintain independance. Or they could become client states of different foreign powers. This will probably also influence Russian and Japanese expansionism.
 

Hendryk

Banned
So, while browsing Wikipedia, I came across an article on the Taiping Rebellion.
If you'll allow me a little off-topic comment, the way this sentence is phrased made me wonder how people here would react if I were to write something like:

So, while browsing Wikipedia, I came across an article on the American Civil War. Have you guys heard of it?
This isn't directed at you, but rather at the skewed historical perspective of even well-educated Westerners in general. The Taiping rebellion was one of the most important events of modern Chinese history, and you point out, with a body count of 25 million, it was the most violent war in the history of mankind up to that point, costlier in human lives than even WW1. Its casualties were 40 times those of the ACW, and in a long-term historical perspective, it may be regarded as the beta version of the Communist takeover of China less than a century later.

But it took place in China, so people chance upon it while browsing Wikipedia. It couldn't be nearly as important as, say, the Buchanan presidency, could it?
 
Also, would the lack of intervention by the powers be enough to have the rebellion become a success? Because then in other timelines, such as Britannia's Fist or the Trent War, if Britian and France are preoccupied, then a side effect could be China collapsing.

I don't think the rebellions can succeed, frankly. The Taipings came the closest, building a state that lasted for quite a few years. But its leader basically became a crazy SoB, living in a harem with hundreds of women as China burned around him. Moreover, their radical platform freaked everybody out, so they never managed to get the Chinese literati on their side.
 
This isn't directed at you, but rather at the skewed historical perspective of even well-educated Westerners in general. The Taiping rebellion was one of the most important events of modern Chinese history, and you point out, with a body count of 25 million, it was the most violent war in the history of mankind up to that point, costlier in human lives than even WW1. Its casualties were 40 times those of the ACW, and in a long-term historical perspective, it may be regarded as the beta version of the Communist takeover of China less than a century later.

But it took place in China, so people chance upon it while browsing Wikipedia. It couldn't be nearly as important as, say, the Buchanan presidency, could it?


I totally agree. My main history class at my high school is IB European History. No chinese there. I am an pretty good in American and modern European history, but I knew nothing before that, so I went to Wikipedia to check out the Romans and the Byzintines. Then I decided to check out the Chinese, and I discovered that it has the longest history in the world...


I don't think the rebellions can succeed, frankly. The Taipings came the closest, building a state that lasted for quite a few years. But its leader basically became a crazy SoB, living in a harem with hundreds of women as China burned around him. Moreover, their radical platform freaked everybody out, so they never managed to get the Chinese literati on their side.

Would there be an chance of a foriegn nation deciding that, for trade benefits, it was in their interests to back the rebellion and balkanize China? That my give the rebellions the extra help they need to survive.
 

wormyguy

Banned
with a body count of 25 million, it was the most violent war in the history of mankind up to that point, costlier in human lives than even WW1.
I had certainly heard of it before - whether it produced a higher body count than WWI is debatable. The fact is that both wars produced such high casualties that they exceeded the ability of contemporary recording techniques to calculate them. If you include related conflicts arising from the power vacuum after WWI (the Russian Civil War, ethnic conflict in the former Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires), it certainly had a higher body count.
 
... Could China Balkanize right then and there with the fall of the Qing Dynsaty almost fifty years before OTL?
Not likely. Although China has historically been divided from time to time, even for extended periods, that has not happened for a very long time. If fact the last time a period of prolonged division was in the 13th century during the Song dynasty where north China was ruled by the Jurchens. By the Taiping Rebellion China has existed as a unified state for a continuous six centuries only under different dynasties.

Basically a rebellion must completely replace the old dynasty and bring the whole country under its rule or it would be seen as illegitimate. It's a winner take all system. To accept anything else would be like expecting Victorians to revert to pre-Reformation world view.

With regards to casualties of the rebellion, I actually don't think it's as high as WWI. Much of the 30 million or so population loss came from disease and famine, but WWI casualty figures are calculated by tabulating actual combat losses. If we add the deaths from Spanish Influenza to WWI it would easily be over 100 million.
 
Last edited:

Typo

Banned
The Taiping was ultimately defeated by the Qing, it would have taken longer without the anglo-French mercanenaries, but they weren't -that- crucial.
 
The Taipings could have succeeded, even with the Europeans helping the Qing-- if they could have coordinated with the Muslim rebellions. In fact, the main reason for the Qing survival was not the European help, which was important, but the fragmented nature of the rebellions. With any degree of coordination between them, the overall rebellion would've been unstoppable and that puny Chinese Gordon's mercenaries swept aside like flies. However, their chance of success was greatly reduced when most of the capable Taiping leaders were killed or dead just when the rebellion needed them the most. Even if the Taipings succeeded, though, the chance of China balkanizing was miniscule. The more likely scenario would be for that Taiping nutjob to be receive the Mandate of Heaven and found his batshit crazy dynasty.
 
Early warlordism??

Actually, it was because of the Taiping Rebellion that eventually led to the warlordism that dominated China basically until the Communist Revolution.

The reason for it was that before, the Qing military organization had been basically unchanged since the Manchu takeover, which consisted of the banner system. Therefore, with the Taiping REbellion broke out the Qing Government was too disorganized and lacked the funding to create a cohesive national army to combat the Taiping. Therefore, the landlords of the scholar gentry class, unable to receive military protection from the Qing, and fearing that the peasants might revolt and then join the Taiping, they built their own military forces, buying arms from western merchants and then arming them.

It was these landlord armies that were largely responsible for destroying the Taiping. However, after the destruction of the Taiping, the warlords retained their regional armies, while the Qing were unable to create their own substantial military force and therefore until the end of the dynasty called upon these landlords to protect them. Of course, when the Qing collapsed these regional military forces controlled by the landlords did not simply dissappear, and therefore they became warlords.
 
The warlord era lasted around two decades, at no time did any warlord declare his realm independent. It was a purely transitory period.
 
The Taipings could have succeeded, even with the Europeans helping the Qing-- if they could have coordinated with the Muslim rebellions. In fact, the main reason for the Qing survival was not the European help, which was important, but the fragmented nature of the rebellions. With any degree of coordination between them, the overall rebellion would've been unstoppable and that puny Chinese Gordon's mercenaries swept aside like flies. However, their chance of success was greatly reduced when most of the capable Taiping leaders were killed or dead just when the rebellion needed them the most. Even if the Taipings succeeded, though, the chance of China balkanizing was miniscule. The more likely scenario would be for that Taiping nutjob to be receive the Mandate of Heaven and found his batshit crazy dynasty.

The Taiping Rebellion strikes me as a franchise organization. The MacDonalds of rebellions. Not only did they not coordinate with other rebellions, they had limited coordination among their own. Their fundamental weakness was that their founder was insane. As some point he just lost interest in the cause and let the franchise owners do their own things.
 
This isn't directed at you, but rather at the skewed historical perspective of even well-educated Westerners in general. The Taiping rebellion was one of the most important events of modern Chinese history, and you point out, with a body count of 25 million, it was the most violent war in the history of mankind up to that point, costlier in human lives than even WW1. Its casualties were 40 times those of the ACW, and in a long-term historical perspective, it may be regarded as the beta version of the Communist takeover of China less than a century later.

But it took place in China, so people chance upon it while browsing Wikipedia. It couldn't be nearly as important as, say, the Buchanan presidency, could it?

OTOH, for ninety somthing percents of Chinese, their understanding of American Civil War are "Lincon is a good guy", or even less.:(
 
Top