Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests 128  China Review International: Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011 20.  Liezi, 1 “Tian rui.” This is the only wu neng fragment in the whole book. See also A. C.  Graham,e B  Th ook of Lieh-tzu, p. 20. 21.  Lunyu, 14.28. See also D. C. Lau,e A  Th nalects (London: Penguin Books, 1988), p. 128. 22.  In those days the book cost 0.34 yuan. Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era  Popular Protests Ho-fung Hung. Protest with Chinese Characteristics: Demonstrations, Riots and Petitions in the Mid-Qing Dynasty. New York: Columbia University  Press, 2011. 288 pp. Hardcover $50.00. isbn 978-0-231-15202-0. This title already has won the Social Science History Association’s President’s  Award for 2010.e  Th  award is given to a first published work, and this book dis- plays careful social science research and broad interpretative scope. Ho-fung Hung  has extracted from the Qing dynasty’s Veritable Records (Qing shilu) more than  950 cases of popular protests against the Qing government in the hundred years  from 1740 to 1839. He has supplemented this material with work in the First  Historical Archives in Beijing and the Palace Museum in Taiwan as well as careful  reading of secondary materials. e Th  century under investigation covers most of the Qianlong emperor’s reign  (1736–1796) and the reigns of his successors: his son, the Jiaqing emperor (1796– 1820), and grandson, the Daoguang emperor (1821–1851).en  Th  Ho-fung Hung  breaks down his data into three shorter time periods of twenty years each and  draws conclusions about the different patterns of protest he finds. He uses estab- lished categories from other social science scholars of protest, particularly Charles  Tilly, to classify this data. To supplement his statistical analysis, Hung adds  detailed descriptions of several incidents from each subperiod. Hung finds shifting patterns of protest in three twenty-year subperiods and  devotes more than half of this work to discussing these differences.e  Th  first  subperiod, from 1740 to 1759, comes during the early years of the Qianlong emper - or’s long reign. It was marked by general prosperity and aggressive state expansion,  including the pacification of the far western regions of Mongolia and the establish- © 2012 by University ment of Xinjiang (new territory). Hung is not concerned with this expansion, but  of Hawai‘i Press rather deals with protests within the Chinese heartland of the Qing empire. He  characterizes the protests from this period as “filial-loyal demonstrations” (p. 68),  Features  129 in which Chinese protesters accepted the Qing mandate to rule and sought to  bring about changes by impressing the emperor with their loyalty and filial devo- tion. Many protests from this era took a peaceful form and showed respect toward  officials as parental figures. Demonstrations included kneeling in worshipful  postures before magistrates. e Th  second subperiod runs from 1776 to 1795, during the last decades of the  Qianlong emperor’s reign, when his Manchu protégé, Heshen, dominated the  government. In these years, the elderly emperor exercised lax control and tolerated  corruption at all levels of government, led by Heshen’s own avaricious behavior.  Hung finds that under these conditions, protestors became defiant toward both the  emperor and his officials. No longer respectful, the protesters took forceful action,  including open rebellion.e  Th  White Lotus Rebellion (1796–1805) was the culmina- tion of this period. He labels this as a time when “riots [turned] into rebellion”   (p. 102). e Th  final subperiod, from 1820 to 1839, comes in a time known as the Dao- guang Depression, marked by financial and monetary instability of the Qing  empire, resulting from declining tax revenues, silver outflow to purchase opium  imports, and the breakdown of the Grand Canal grain shipments.es  Th e made up  the most obvious examples of failing state policies. Hung sees this period as an era  of “resistance and petitions” (p. 135) during which the Qing empire’s Chinese  subjects resumed a filial and loyal manner toward the emperor, but vented their  antagonism on local officials. Tax riots and open rebellion declined because of  general awareness of the declining capacities of the Qing administration. Protes- tors resumed their appeals to the emperor’s mercy and sought his Confucian  responsibilityt   o  his  subjects.  Nevertheless,  popular  resistance  to  state  policies  grew  as economic and social conditions worsened. Hung’s statistical data reveal continuing forms of protests across the century,  and he draws his general characterizations for each twenty-year subperiod from  increased percentages of certain kinds of protest within each. When Hung’s con- clusion about the century from 1740 to 1839 is compared with those of his John  Hopkins colleague William T. Rowe’s in China’s Last Empire: The Great Qing  (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), they agree in a general outline.  Yet Hung lays even greater emphasis on the high levels of prosperity, commercial- ization, and social complexity in eighteenth-century China, as well as seeing an  early onset of weakness during the Qianlong reign, which is tied to the emperor’s  personal conduct toward his two empresses as well as his unquestioning devotion  to his grandfather’s policies. In Hung’s view, these caused the Qianlong emperor to  ignore dealing with the changing circumstances of the empire. His grandfather, the  Kangxi emperor (r. 1661–1722), had adopted policies of fixed taxation at low rates  and Confucian concern for the livelihood of his subjects. Hung finds Qianlong  followed closely and seemingly unquestioningly many of his grandfather’s policies.  130  China Review International: Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011 Hung also finds a greater revival of the leadership under the Jiaqing emperor than  does Rowe. In general, Hung oer ff s sharper characterizations of the reigns of these  three Qing emperors than Rowe. Other historians disagree with Hung’s characterization of the last decades of  Qianlong’s rule. Wensheng Wang in “Prosperity and Its Discontents: Contextual- izing Social Protest in the late Qianlong Reign” (Frontiers in Chinese History 6,  no. 1 [2011], pp. 347–369) states that a crisis was inevitable because of the rising  Chinese population. Wang rejects the notion that Qianlong blindly followed  Kangxi’s policies. Rather, he argues it was Qianlong’s efforts to expand government  control over popular religious sects that triggered social protests, such as the  White Lotus Rebellion (1796–1805). In the final chapter, Hung uses his conclusions about the changing patterns of  popular protest in the mid-Qing dynasty to challenge the assumption of conver - gence that underlies so much of modernization theory. This is one of the oldest  and reoccurring debates in social science history. As his title “Protest with Chinese  Characteristics” suggests, Hung rejects the premise that the history of the non- Western world will conform to the general patterns observed in European and  North American history in the post-1800 modern era. Hung argues that popular  protest in China differs significantly from Europe from the eighteenth century to  the present. He finds that scholars of early modern and modern Europe generally  have argued that popular protests have a single pattern, moving from traditional to  modern forms. In traditional protests, the participants seek to preserve some  established practices from which they have benefitted, such as access to grazing or  woodlands or assistance in food shortages. Modern protests advance new claims to  natural or human rights that exceed, by far, their traditional privileges. In tradi- tional protests, local authorities were the main targets, while in modern protests,  the entire governmental structure finds itself under challenge. Ho-fung Hung rejects theories of convergence as Eurocentric and finds that in  China protests follow a cyclical pattern first described by the distinguished social  scientist G. William Skinner. Skinner argued that Chinese communities experi- enced a cycle in which they were open to the official system during periods of  prosperity, but returned to a closed or isolated attitude during times of dynastic  decline and disorder.u  Th s, the changing character of protest in Hung’s three  subperiods reflects the peasantry’s “strategic choice of action in the context of the  changing capacities of the state” (p. 171). Hung writes that, as the Qing state  became less able govern with benevolence and increased its exaction, “the state  became part of the problem [and] to fend off predatory local government agents,  local communities invoked their communal solidarity in the form of tax riots,  attacks on officials and the like” (p. 172). Hung asserts that Chinese intellectual and political life in the mid-Qing  era existed without any real concern for the issues of “natural rights” of individu- Features  131 als or the general populace. Until these concepts were introduced into Chinese  life in the late nineteenth century, protests in China retained their distinctly  different character. He concludes, “non-Western protests follow their own  rhythms of change and are delimited by their own traditions of claims and reper http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png China Review International University of Hawai'I Press

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests

Buck, David D., --
China Review International , Volume 18 (2) – Sep 19, 2012
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/finding-distinctive-chinese-characteristics-in-qing-era-popular-cNHPi2KGyq

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-9367

Abstract

128  China Review International: Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011 20.  Liezi, 1 “Tian rui.” This is the only wu neng fragment in the whole book. See also A. C.  Graham,e B  Th ook of Lieh-tzu, p. 20. 21.  Lunyu, 14.28. See also D. C. Lau,e A  Th nalects (London: Penguin Books, 1988), p. 128. 22.  In those days the book cost 0.34 yuan. Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era  Popular Protests Ho-fung Hung. Protest with Chinese Characteristics: Demonstrations, Riots and Petitions in the Mid-Qing Dynasty. New York: Columbia University  Press, 2011. 288 pp. Hardcover $50.00. isbn 978-0-231-15202-0. This title already has won the Social Science History Association’s President’s  Award for 2010.e  Th  award is given to a first published work, and this book dis- plays careful social science research and broad interpretative scope. Ho-fung Hung  has extracted from the Qing dynasty’s Veritable Records (Qing shilu) more than  950 cases of popular protests against the Qing government in the hundred years  from 1740 to 1839. He has supplemented this material with work in the First  Historical Archives in Beijing and the Palace Museum in Taiwan as well as careful  reading of secondary materials. e Th  century under investigation covers most of the Qianlong emperor’s reign  (1736–1796) and the reigns of his successors: his son, the Jiaqing emperor (1796– 1820), and grandson, the Daoguang emperor (1821–1851).en  Th  Ho-fung Hung  breaks down his data into three shorter time periods of twenty years each and  draws conclusions about the different patterns of protest he finds. He uses estab- lished categories from other social science scholars of protest, particularly Charles  Tilly, to classify this data. To supplement his statistical analysis, Hung adds  detailed descriptions of several incidents from each subperiod. Hung finds shifting patterns of protest in three twenty-year subperiods and  devotes more than half of this work to discussing these differences.e  Th  first  subperiod, from 1740 to 1759, comes during the early years of the Qianlong emper - or’s long reign. It was marked by general prosperity and aggressive state expansion,  including the pacification of the far western regions of Mongolia and the establish- © 2012 by University ment of Xinjiang (new territory). Hung is not concerned with this expansion, but  of Hawai‘i Press rather deals with protests within the Chinese heartland of the Qing empire. He  characterizes the protests from this period as “filial-loyal demonstrations” (p. 68),  Features  129 in which Chinese protesters accepted the Qing mandate to rule and sought to  bring about changes by impressing the emperor with their loyalty and filial devo- tion. Many protests from this era took a peaceful form and showed respect toward  officials as parental figures. Demonstrations included kneeling in worshipful  postures before magistrates. e Th  second subperiod runs from 1776 to 1795, during the last decades of the  Qianlong emperor’s reign, when his Manchu protégé, Heshen, dominated the  government. In these years, the elderly emperor exercised lax control and tolerated  corruption at all levels of government, led by Heshen’s own avaricious behavior.  Hung finds that under these conditions, protestors became defiant toward both the  emperor and his officials. No longer respectful, the protesters took forceful action,  including open rebellion.e  Th  White Lotus Rebellion (1796–1805) was the culmina- tion of this period. He labels this as a time when “riots [turned] into rebellion”   (p. 102). e Th  final subperiod, from 1820 to 1839, comes in a time known as the Dao- guang Depression, marked by financial and monetary instability of the Qing  empire, resulting from declining tax revenues, silver outflow to purchase opium  imports, and the breakdown of the Grand Canal grain shipments.es  Th e made up  the most obvious examples of failing state policies. Hung sees this period as an era  of “resistance and petitions” (p. 135) during which the Qing empire’s Chinese  subjects resumed a filial and loyal manner toward the emperor, but vented their  antagonism on local officials. Tax riots and open rebellion declined because of  general awareness of the declining capacities of the Qing administration. Protes- tors resumed their appeals to the emperor’s mercy and sought his Confucian  responsibilityt   o  his  subjects.  Nevertheless,  popular  resistance  to  state  policies  grew  as economic and social conditions worsened. Hung’s statistical data reveal continuing forms of protests across the century,  and he draws his general characterizations for each twenty-year subperiod from  increased percentages of certain kinds of protest within each. When Hung’s con- clusion about the century from 1740 to 1839 is compared with those of his John  Hopkins colleague William T. Rowe’s in China’s Last Empire: The Great Qing  (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), they agree in a general outline.  Yet Hung lays even greater emphasis on the high levels of prosperity, commercial- ization, and social complexity in eighteenth-century China, as well as seeing an  early onset of weakness during the Qianlong reign, which is tied to the emperor’s  personal conduct toward his two empresses as well as his unquestioning devotion  to his grandfather’s policies. In Hung’s view, these caused the Qianlong emperor to  ignore dealing with the changing circumstances of the empire. His grandfather, the  Kangxi emperor (r. 1661–1722), had adopted policies of fixed taxation at low rates  and Confucian concern for the livelihood of his subjects. Hung finds Qianlong  followed closely and seemingly unquestioningly many of his grandfather’s policies.  130  China Review International: Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011 Hung also finds a greater revival of the leadership under the Jiaqing emperor than  does Rowe. In general, Hung oer ff s sharper characterizations of the reigns of these  three Qing emperors than Rowe. Other historians disagree with Hung’s characterization of the last decades of  Qianlong’s rule. Wensheng Wang in “Prosperity and Its Discontents: Contextual- izing Social Protest in the late Qianlong Reign” (Frontiers in Chinese History 6,  no. 1 [2011], pp. 347–369) states that a crisis was inevitable because of the rising  Chinese population. Wang rejects the notion that Qianlong blindly followed  Kangxi’s policies. Rather, he argues it was Qianlong’s efforts to expand government  control over popular religious sects that triggered social protests, such as the  White Lotus Rebellion (1796–1805). In the final chapter, Hung uses his conclusions about the changing patterns of  popular protest in the mid-Qing dynasty to challenge the assumption of conver - gence that underlies so much of modernization theory. This is one of the oldest  and reoccurring debates in social science history. As his title “Protest with Chinese  Characteristics” suggests, Hung rejects the premise that the history of the non- Western world will conform to the general patterns observed in European and  North American history in the post-1800 modern era. Hung argues that popular  protest in China differs significantly from Europe from the eighteenth century to  the present. He finds that scholars of early modern and modern Europe generally  have argued that popular protests have a single pattern, moving from traditional to  modern forms. In traditional protests, the participants seek to preserve some  established practices from which they have benefitted, such as access to grazing or  woodlands or assistance in food shortages. Modern protests advance new claims to  natural or human rights that exceed, by far, their traditional privileges. In tradi- tional protests, local authorities were the main targets, while in modern protests,  the entire governmental structure finds itself under challenge. Ho-fung Hung rejects theories of convergence as Eurocentric and finds that in  China protests follow a cyclical pattern first described by the distinguished social  scientist G. William Skinner. Skinner argued that Chinese communities experi- enced a cycle in which they were open to the official system during periods of  prosperity, but returned to a closed or isolated attitude during times of dynastic  decline and disorder.u  Th s, the changing character of protest in Hung’s three  subperiods reflects the peasantry’s “strategic choice of action in the context of the  changing capacities of the state” (p. 171). Hung writes that, as the Qing state  became less able govern with benevolence and increased its exaction, “the state  became part of the problem [and] to fend off predatory local government agents,  local communities invoked their communal solidarity in the form of tax riots,  attacks on officials and the like” (p. 172). Hung asserts that Chinese intellectual and political life in the mid-Qing  era existed without any real concern for the issues of “natural rights” of individu- Features  131 als or the general populace. Until these concepts were introduced into Chinese  life in the late nineteenth century, protests in China retained their distinctly  different character. He concludes, “non-Western protests follow their own  rhythms of change and are delimited by their own traditions of claims and reper

Journal

China Review International – University of Hawai'I Press

Published: Sep 19, 2012

There are no references for this article.