A Severe Drought Was The Primary Cause

Of The Boxer Uprising. Discuss. Essay, Research Paper

The decade before the end of the nineteen-century has been described by many historians as a period of great discontent for Chinese population as a result of frequent natural disasters, such as river floods and droughts. Historically, these events had severe repercussions on both economy and social life of the entire country, as they created a state of imbalance between man and nature at all levels. At the lowest levels, creating instability among the masses and leading them to rebel, and at the highest levels, threatening seriously the existence of the dynasty in power.

Taking this into consideration, it seems appropriate to attribute the rebellion of the Boxers as the consequence of natural disasters. However, studies on the origins of this secret society and the events prior to its uprising in the summer of 1900, led me to consider the floods that struck on China just before the end of the century, in conjunction with other events of the period, as an important cause of the Boxer uprising. Given that there also are clear divergences in scholars opinions on the Boxers, in this essay I will attempt to discuss the relevance of droughts in causing the uprising as well as other decisive events.

Generally, uprising and mass rebellions have been identified, in Chinese history, with natural disasters, which were considered as a heavenly sign to preannounce the fall of a dynasty and the rise to power of a new one. This was not precisely the outcome of the Boxer uprising, but China, eventually, did experience a change of guards to leave space to a new ruling class. According to Wakerman (1975), the rural class must be taken into consideration as origin of those movements, because this represented the rebellious and most unstable class. When nature was merciful peasants were dedicated to their job and loyal to the state; in times of famine instead, they were the first victims of poverty and death, therefore they raged against the state to demand more capable rulers. In this view, the initial motive of Boxers anti-Manchu activity, often underestimated by book writers, can be justified. Although many have emphasised that an anti-foreign spirit drove this secret society, it is also true that originally they opposed the Manchus, on the one hand because not considered Han Chinese and on the other because of the concessions allowed to foreign powers during the last fifty years. There were incidents testifying that the sentiment against the state, mostly as a result of famine, remained alive until the very end of the century. In July 1899, as an example of direct challenge against Qing military, Yue Jintang, a lieutenant-colonel in Shan County, was ambushed and killed by bandits .

Another connection between the rebellious movements and the peasantry can be found in the articulation of agriculture and land tenure. Many movements, even if not as widely known as the Boxer movement, originated in northern China. That region is relatively arid compared to the south, therefore much more exposed to droughts. Cultivation here, already lower in output than southern China, could be severely damaged, sometimes by very dry seasons, sometimes by the outbreak of water from rivers banks. For centuries, state officials have been engaged in the maintenance of river works and supervision of water levels, this is why their performance has also been determinant in preserving the power of ruling class. Shandong is the province were the Boxer movement originated and was more active. There, like in other provinces, the Yellow River flooded repeatedly throughout Chinese history and in several occasions starving peasants could only choose between migration, usually toward the south, and banditry. In this respect, dynastic power could be in serious danger if unable to guarantee a safe environment for those who worked the land. After all, most of the economic activity in China has concerned agriculture for thousands of years.

Assuming that the Boxer uprising was caused by the natural disasters of end of century, it is opportune to identify where the government failed in containing the floods of the Yellow River. Shandong was a province that had had little difficulty in meeting its obligations toward the state and the surplus in production had generated means for supporting public work projects. After the Sino-Japanese War in 1894-95 the government military expenditure created a huge budget imbalance, because of its obligations as a defeated country, and the heavy burden, mostly higher taxation, to meet further expenses was left on the rural population. This incumbency was made even harder to comply by the decline in price of silver throughout the 1890s, which also devalued the salary of officials, who then more easily fell into corruption. This kind of behaviour was a clear example of non-respect towards Confucian values. The maintenance of river works could not be underestimated by the officials, indirectly appointed by the emperor, but whenever they showed more concern for their own interests, public works maintenance became poorer, to the extent of driving the peasants to rebel. For example, Esherick compares the success of careful officials in avoiding major floods, like Li Pingheng, with the very bad performance of corrupted ones, like Zhang Rumei . The government found itself in the crucial position to decide whether costs cou