Discuss the main causes behind the emergence of Taiping and Boxer

Movement. And explain in WhatsApp ways do the ideologies and policies of

these movements throw light on their nature.

Background:
The 19th century was a turbulent period for China, marked by internal unrest
and increasing foreign intervention.The Opium Wars (1839-1842, 1856-1860)
were pivotal in shaping this era, as they exposed China’s vulnerability to
Western powers.The unfair terms of the Treaty of Nanjing (1842) left the
Chinese people feeling both frustrated and humiliated in their own land.This
humiliation by foreign powers, combined with the spread of addiction and the
loss of control over their own economy, left the Chinese people feeling deeply
resentful.
Introduction:
As the effects of the treaty festered, China faced overpopulation, famines,
and government corruption, further aggravating the population’s suffering.
Amid this growing turmoil, drastic action seemed necessary. The Taiping
(1850-1864) and the Boxer Movement (1899-1901) represent two distinct
attempts by the Chinese to address their nation’s struggles. Although
separated by over three decades, these movements took vastly different
approaches to the common goal of healing an ailing China.

Rise of the Taiping and Boxer Movements in 19th-Century China :

The Taiping Rebellion stands as one of the deadliest civil conflicts in world
history, seeking to overthrow the Qing dynasty and implement radical social
reforms inspired by a unique interpretation of Christianity.
Meanwhile, the Boxer Movement, though shorter in duration, was crucial for
its nationalist sentiment, as it sought to purge China of foreign influence and
protect traditional Chinese values.
Both movements were deeply rooted in the frustrations stemming from foreign
interference and internal decay, and they reflect distinct visions for China’s
future. To understand their impact, we must explore the causes, ideologies,
policies, and nature of these movements.
Foundation of Taiping Movement – Hong Xiuquan

No other event devastated China as much in the 19th century as the Taiping
rebellion (1850-64)It was sparked by the leadership of one man, Hong
Xiuquan from the south of China (Guangdong) Born in the peasant family
,Hong Xiuquan worked as a teacher while preparing for the civil service
examination. However, repeated failures in the exam left him frustrated and
disillusioned with the establishment. This failure, combined with his contact
with Christian missionaries, transformed his worldview. Hong began to
believe that he was the younger brother of Jesus Christ, sent to Earth to save
China. He vehemently attacked indigenous faiths, particularly Confucianism,
denouncing the teachings of Confucius (Kong Zi) as absurd.
After losing his teaching position, Hong, along with his friend Feng Yinxhan,
moved to Guangxi, where they founded the “Society of God Worshippers,”
attracting thousands of converts, mainly poor peasants and miners from the
Hakka community.
By July 1850, the society had grown powerful enough to pose a threat to the
Qing government. On January 11, 1851, Hong declared the establishment of
the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace (Taiping Tianguo), directly
challenging the Qing rulers in Beijing. And this laid the foundation of Taiping
Movement.
Causes behind the emergence of Taiping Movement:
1. Impact of the Opium Wars and Foreign Influence :The Opium Wars
left China humiliated and economically weakened. The Treaty of
Nanjing, which followed the first Opium War, imposed heavy reparations
on China, forced the opening of ports to Western trade, and ceded Hong
Kong to Britain. This external pressure aggravated internal issues, as
foreign influence grew, and resentment toward the Qing dynasty’s
inability to protect the nation intensified.
 2. Socio-Economic Hardships : By the mid-19th century, China was
grappling with severe economic difficulties. Overpopulation, poor
harvests, and famines left large portions of the population impoverished
and unable to meet their basic needs. The unequal distribution of land
and the exploitation of peasants by landlords exacerbated the situation.
These conditions created widespread dissatisfaction, especially among
the rural peasantry, who were the most affected by these hardships.
3. Government Corruption and Inefficiency: The Qing dynasty’s
bureaucratic system had become deeply corrupt. Officials were more
interested in personal gain than in addressing the needs of the people.
High taxes, mismanagement of resources, and lack of reforms to
address growing crises led to further alienation of the common people.
The weakening of central authority made the government unable to
effectively respond to economic issues or natural disasters, like floods
and famines.
4. Ethnic Tensions :The Qing dynasty was ruled by the Manchu ethnic
minority, while the majority of China’s population was Han Chinese. The
Manchus were seen as foreign rulers by many Han Chinese, leading to
ethnic tensions. The Taiping movement drew on these sentiments,
positioning itself as a force that would restore China to Han rule and
overthrow the “foreign” Qing dynasty.
5. Religious Influence of Hong Xiuquan: Hong Xiuquan, the leader of the
Taiping movement, was a failed civil servant who came into contact with
Christian teachings through missionaries. He claimed to have had a
vision that he was the younger brother of Jesus Christ, sent to establish
a “Heavenly Kingdom” on Earth. His teachings resonated with many
people, especially the poor, as they promised equality, justice, and
salvation. The religious aspect of the movement provided a sense of
purpose and direction, attracting a large following.
Ideologies of the Taiping Movement:
1.Christian Millenarianism: The Taiping movement was heavily influenced by
Hong Xiuquan’s interpretation of Christianity. The movement was
characterized by a belief in the imminent arrival of a new, divine kingdom on
Earth. This millenarian vision provided a spiritual foundation for their
revolutionary goals.

2.Anti-Confucianism:The Taiping vehemently opposed Confucianism,

which they viewed as a corrupting influence that had contributed to China’s
societal ills. In contrast, the Taiping sought to establish a more egalitarian
society.
3.Nationalism and Restoration: The Taiping sought to restore Chinese pride
and identity by overthrowing the Qing dynasty, which they viewed as a foreign
rule. Their movement was inherently nationalist, aiming to reclaim Chinese
sovereignty and establish a government that reflected the will of the people.
Policies of the Taiping Movement:
1.Land System: The Taiping implemented a land redistribution policy that
aimed to allocate land equally among all members of society. They believe in
the concept of ‘ Communal Ownership of Land’. Taiping system of land was
divided into 9 ways according to rice producing capability and divided equally
among the people.
2. Women’s Rights:The Taiping movement sought to improve the status of
women significantly. They abolished practices like foot-binding , polygamy
prostitution and promoted gender equality. They established Women Militia
.women were allowed to compete in Taiping Civil examination. In their system
women were occupied the positions similar to men.
3.Moral and Religious Reforms: The Taiping implemented strict moral codes
based on their interpretation of Christianity, which included prohibitions
against gambling, opium use, and promiscuity. They emphasized the
importance of leading a virtuous life as a foundation for their new society.
These ideologies and policies not only reflect the Taiping’s vision for a new
society but also illustrate their attempt to address the socio-economic issues
facing China at the time.
The Taiping Movement
Capturing of Nanjing ( 1853) : In the beginning of the rebellion, the Taipings
were successful in their endeavor and had even occupied Nanjing in the battle
of Yungan 1853 and renamed it as Tianjin ( Heavenly Capital) . And Hong
emerged as victorious.
The downfall of Taiping Movement
Qing Government Response and Reform: The Qing dynasty, although
initially weak and struggling, gradually reorganized its military response. The
government appointed capable military leaders, such as Zeng Guofan, who
utilized traditional Chinese military tactics combined with modern strategies.
They formed New Hunan Army which were well-disciplined and effectively
mobilized against the Taiping forces.
Foreign Support for the Qing:As the conflict escalated, foreign powers began
to support the Qing dynasty. Western nations, particularly Britain and France,
had vested interests in maintaining stability in China to protect their economic
interests. They provided military assistance, arms, and training to Qing forces,
further strengthening their position against the Taiping .
Internal Division and Leadership Issues:One of the major factors
contributing to the downfall of the Taiping movement was internal division
among its leadership. Although Hong Xiuquan, the movement’s founder, was
its spiritual leader, the day-to-day governance and military operations were
often handled by his subordinates. Over time, serious disagreements arose
among the top leaders of the movement, particularly over strategy,
governance, and personal ambition.
Fall of Nanjing : In July 1864, Nanjing was conquered by Zeng Guafan ,The fall
of the city marked a significant turning point in the rebellion. The Taiping
forces faced brutal reprisals from Qing troops, leading to widespread
slaughter and the destruction of the city. Estimates suggest that millions
perished during the rebellion, with the loss of life in Nanjing being particularly
devastating.
Death of Hong Xiuquan: After the fall of Nanjing, Hong Xiuquan, the leader of
the Taiping movement, was reportedly deeply distressed and isolated. He died
shortly after the city’s capture, likely from illness or suicide. His death
signaled the effective end of the Taiping leadership and further demoralized
the remaining supporters.
Nature of the Taiping Movement –“ WAS Taiping Movement a Rebellion or
Revolution “
Many terms have been used to describe the Taiping movement, ranging from
‘nothing less than a complete Revolution’, to ‘a typical traditional rebellion’.
These terms clearly indicate the great deal of controversy Surrounding the
nature of this movement. The two opposing schools of thought are those
represented by The Western scholars, and those represented by the
Chinese communist historians.
These two standpoints Differ not only in their interpretation of the movement
as a rebellion or revolution, but also of other Aspects of the nature of the
movement, such as whether or not it was a peasant movement and anti-
feudal, Anti-foreign and anti-imperialist or anti-imperialist and pro-foreign.
Its uniqueness compared to other rebellions, and its possible role as a
precursor to the Communist Revolution.
To tackle the question of whether the Taiping Movement was a rebellion or a
revolution, you’ll need to examine the interpretations of both Chinese
Communist historiography and Western historiography, focusing on how
various historians and thinkers have categorized the Taiping Movement.
1. Chinese Communist Historiography: Taiping as a Revolution
Chinese Communist historians have tended to see the Taiping Movement
as a proto-revolutionary event. They emphasize its anti-feudal, anti-Qing,
and populist nature, framing it as a precursor to the Chinese Communist
Revolution.
Mao Zedong’s Interpretation: Mao interpreted Chinese history through a
Marxist lens. He identified in Chinese history a series of ‘Great peasant
revolutionary wars’ from the uprisings on the eve of the Christan era down
to the Taiping Movement. He further argued that class struggle, uprisings,
and peasant wars were the real motive force behind the development of
Chinese society during the feudal era. According to Mao, Taiping was a
national movement; ‘Taiping launched a ‘war against the Qing regime, the
running dog of imperialism’.
Mao interpreted the Taiping Rebellion as a combination of class struggle
and nationalist resistance, framing it as a revolutionary movement that
challenged both feudal oppression and imperialist domination. This
perspective helped Mao build a historical narrative that connected the
Communist Revolution to a long tradition of peasant resistance in China.
Ssu-Yüan’s Interpretation : Ssu-Yüan, a Chinese historian, divided the
Taiping Movement into two distinct phases.
Phase 1 : Proletarian Revolutionary Movement
In the first phase of the Taiping Movement, Ssu-Yüan characterized it as a
proletarian revolutionary movement with the goal of overthrowing the Qing
regime , establish a new nationalist government that would replace the
Qing Dynasty. This government aimed to introduce radical changes in
economic, social, and cultural systems.
Phase 2 : Traditional Peasant Insurrection
In the second phase, however, the movement began to lose its
revolutionary character and resembled a more traditional Chinese peasant
insurrection. The initial revolutionary ideology of the Taiping, which
emphasized peasant welfare, egalitarianism, and social reform, became
diluted as the movement faced internal struggles, corruption, and
leadership failures. This degeneration weakened the movement’s capacity
to carry out its original peasant-oriented policies.
The movement’s actions in this phase mirrored earlier peasant rebellions
in Chinese history, where the emphasis shifted from systemic change to
more immediate military objectives and survival. It became more about
resistance and defiance against the Qing rather than creating a new social
order. This failure to sustain the revolutionary ideology transformed the
movement into something that aligned more with traditional peasant
uprisings, where the focus was on overthrowing rulers rather than
establishing a new system.
Ssu-Yüan essentially maintained a middle path in his interpretation of the
Taiping Movement.
Tan Chung’s Interpretation of the Taiping Movement: According to Tan
Chung, the Taiping Movement represented a form of “potential peasant
power” that was highly organized and well-structured within a hierarchical
system. His view emphasized the movement’s role as a force of opposition
against several key elements of traditional Chinese society and foreign
influence.
In Tan Chung’s view, the Taiping Movement was a well-structured and
ideologically-driven peasant movement that aimed to dismantle the
existing bureaucratic, feudal, and imperialist systems. By organizing a
broad base of peasant support, the movement was positioned as a
powerful force against the social and economic injustices of its time.
2. Western Historiography : Taiping as Rebellion
Vincent shih: In his work on Taiping ideology, Vincent Shih outlined
two key criteria that a movement must fulfill to be considered truly
revolutionary:
1. Use of Violence as a Means of Change: Shih argued that for a
movement to be revolutionary, it must actively use violence as a
tool to bring about societal transformation.
2. Desire to Change the Nature of Society: Shih emphasized that a
key aspect of any revolutionary movement is the genuine desire to
fundamentally alter the structure and nature of society.And one of
 the important change according to him was “Reshufflings of class
society”.
So he offers two reasons which rejected Taiping as a ‘ peasantry
Revolution or War ’ :

• The Taiping leaders did not identify with the peasantry

• The Taiping following did not reflect peasant ‘ Consciousness ’
• No land redistribution or empowerment of the peasantry
Franz Michael’s Interpretation: Franz Michael, in his book The
Taiping Rebellion, argues that the Taiping Movement, while it originated from
conditions of social unrest and economic hardship that affected the
peasantry, did not truly represent their interests. He posits that the
movement’s leadership, particularly Hong Xiuquan, was more focused on
religious and ideological reforms than on addressing the specific grievances
of the peasantry, such as land distribution or economic relief.
Barrington Moore’s interpretation : in his analysis of social revolutions,
argues that the Taiping Movement cannot be considered a true peasant
revolution because it failed to fundamentally alter the underlying
structure of Chinese society. Unlike other successful peasant revolts
that led to structural transformations—such as land redistribution or a
shift in class power—the Taiping Movement, according to Moore, did not
result in lasting social or economic change.
Ultimately, whether the Taiping was a rebellion or a revolution depends on
how one defines these terms. If viewed through a lens of class struggle and
anti-feudalism, it could be considered a proto-revolution. However, if we
focus on its religious nature and the movement’s failure to establish a
sustainable new order, it aligns more with the concept of a Rebellion.
Conclusion for the Taiping Movement:

• The Taiping Movement stands as one of the most significant peasant

revolts in Chinese history, as noted by Jean Chesneaux.
• Its efforts to implement radical social reforms, such as land
redistribution and equality, reflect its revolutionary potential,
although the movement ultimately failed due to internal conflicts,
leadership struggles, and external military suppression.
• While the Taiping Movement did not succeed in its goal to overthrow
the Qing Dynasty, it paved the way for future uprisings, notably
inspiring subsequent movements like the Boxer Rebellion.
• The Taiping Rebellion came to an end in 1864, after a prolonged and
violent struggle that left a profound impact on China.
• It marked a significant chapter in Chinese history, influencing
subsequent reform movements.
• As a result of brutal fighting and mass starvation,Over 20-30 million
Chinese people were killed
• The aftermath of the rebellion also led to a reassessment of the Qing
dynasty’s policies and the necessity for modernization and reform in
China.

Boxer Movement
Introduction: Thirty-four years after the failed Taiping Rebellion, as
foreign influence continued to spread throughout China, a surge of
discontent led to the emergence of the Boxer Rebellion or Yi Ho
Tuan movement( 1898-1901). So , who were the Boxers? The Boxers
were a Chinese secret organization known as the Society of
Righteous and Harmonious Fists( Yihequan) .The Boxers, originally
from Shandong province in China ,spearheaded an uprising in
northern China against the growing influence of Western and
Japanese powers. This group, referred to by Westerners as
“Boxers,” derived their name from the physical exercises and martial
arts they practiced.They also thought they could drive out foreigners
from China and that they were bulletproof.

Foundation of the Boxer uprising

The Boxer Movement was primarily led by the Society of the
Righteous and Harmonious Fists, ( 18 ) a secret society that
mobilized in response to growing resentment against missionaries
who preached Christianity, the real Aim was to fight imperialism. If
Western imperialist encroachment on China was not enough,
Japanese Imperialism too emerged as a new force to crush China
further.

The basic organizational unit of the Boxer Movement was known as a

Tan. Within this framework, the leaders held various ranks to
facilitate coordination and command during the uprising. Like (
Zongban, Tangling, Xunying). It is important to note that the
movement did not operate under a strict hierarchy led by a single
leader.This grassroots organization, fueled by a belief in their
invulnerability and supported by elements within the Qing court, led
to widespread uprisings against foreign nationals, Chinese
Christians, and those associated with foreign powers, ultimately
escalating into a violent rebellion that garnered international
attention.

Causes behind the emergence of the Boxer Rebellion

1. Influence of Sino – Japanese war (1894-1895): The Sino-
Japanese War (1894-1895) profoundly influenced the Boxer
Movement by highlighting the vulnerability of the Qing dynasty and
exacerbating anti-foreign sentiment among the Chinese
populace. The war, fought between China and Japan over control
of Korea, ended in a humiliating defeat for China, leading to the
Treaty of Shimonoseki. This treaty not only ceded Taiwan and the
Pescadores Islands to Japan but also recognized Korea’s
independence and imposed heavy indemnities on China.
2. Anti Christian sentiments : The advent of Christianity in China
was one of the main catalysts for the Boxer Rebellion. Christian
 missionaries had been working in China for many years, and by
the late 1800s, they were a considerably larger group. For many
Chinese people, particularly the Boxers, this represented a threat
to traditional Chinese beliefs and values.
3. Rise of Secret Societies: The Boxer Movement was rooted in a
long tradition of secret societies in China, which often emerged in
response to social and political unrest. These organizations
provided a sense of community and support for members while
promoting a shared ideology.
4. Socioeconomic Factors: Many Chinese faced poverty,
unemployment, and food shortages due to a combination of
natural disasters, mismanagement, and foreign exploitation of
resources.
.The 19th century also saw a significant population increase in
China, which further strained the country’s resources and
exacerbated economic hardships.
.Chinese farmers began cultivating cash crops like tobacco and
cotton in response to growing market demands. While this shift
increased their profits, it also made them more vulnerable to
market fluctuations controlled by landlords and merchants.
. At the same time, peasants faced heavy tax burdens from the
Qing government, adding to their economic struggles.

5. Natural Calamities: The natural disasters resulted in crop

failures, food shortages, and increased poverty. Many peasants
lost their livelihoods, which fueled frustration and desperation. In
provinces such as Shandong and Hebei, significant flooding and
drought conditions during the 1890s severely impacted
agricultural yields.
6. Political Support: Empress Dowager Cixi Initially ambivalent,
Empress Cixi later supported the Boxers as a means to regain
control over the Qing dynasty’s authority and push back against
 foreign powers. This backing lent legitimacy to the movement and
allowed it to gain traction among the populace.And we came
across a famous slogan: support the Qing, destroy the foreign.”
Boxer Movement

Winter of 1898: Boxer Rebellion Begins:

In the winter of 1898, the Boxers launched their movement to
oppose the growing influence of Christianity in China. They began
attacking churches, Christian missionaries, and Chinese converts
in Shandong province, marking the start of their violent uprising.
Yuan Shikai, a Qing military leader, initially managed to suppress
the Boxers, defeating many of their forces by the spring of 1900.
However, as Yuan’s military efforts intensified, the Boxers shifted
their focus and relocated their activities to the neighboring
province of Hebei, where the rebellion continued to grow.

Escalation of Violence in 1900:

Later , movement spread across North China they destroy
churches , railway station. Gradually, the army became massive
and then from North China they moved towards Beijing. In April
1900, Boxers laid siege to Beijing, targeting foreign legations
Quarters .

Foreign Intervention (June-August 1900):

In response to the escalating violence and the siege of foreign
legations in Beijing, an international coalition of eight nations (Japan,
the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Italy, and
Austria-Hungary) formed to intervene militarily.
The coalition launched a military campaign, known as the Eight-
Nation Alliance, aimed at protecting their nationals and restoring
order.
Fall of Beijing (August 1900):
The foreign troops captured Beijing on August 14, 1900, marking a
turning point in the Boxer Rebellion and ending the siege of the
foreign legations. An international relief force of 20,000 men, sent by
the Eight-Nation Alliance, broke into the city, rescuing foreign
communities and Chinese Christians who had been under siege for
months.
The conflict continued Into 1901, with foreign powers exerting more
control over Chinese territory. Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany sent
troops to China, while Russia claimed control over the surrounding
area of Manchuria.
The war ultimately concluded with the signing of the Boxer Protocol
Treaty on September 7, 1901. This treaty imposed heavy penalties
on China, including large indemnities, execution of Boxer leaders,
and foreign military occupation, marking the end of the rebellion and
further weakening the Qing dynasty.
The Boxer Protocol:
 Ideologies of Boxer Movement :
1. Anti-Foreign Sentiment: The Boxer Movement was deeply rooted
in hostility toward foreign powers, especially Western nations and
Japan. The Boxers believed that foreign imperialists were
exploiting China’s resources and undermining its sovereignty.
Their resistance was aimed at expelling these foreign influences
to restore China’s autonomy.
2. Anti-Christian Sentiment : The Boxers saw Christianity, brought
by foreign missionaries, as a direct threat to Confucian values and
traditional Chinese beliefs. They believed that Christianity was
eroding the social fabric of Chinese society and weakening its
cultural heritage. As a result, the Boxers targeted both foreign
missionaries and Chinese Christian converts in their attacks.
3. Belief in Supernatural Powers : The Boxers believed in the
spiritual power of traditional Chinese martial arts and rituals,
claiming that these practices could make them invulnerable to
bullets and other foreign weapons. This belief gave them
confidence in their fight against foreign forces, even though it
ultimately proved to be misguided.
Policies of the Boxer Movement:
1.Violent Opposition to Foreign Powers: The primary policy of the
Boxer Movement was to engage in violent actions against foreign nationals,
missionaries, and Chinese Christians.
2. Targeting Symbols of Foreign Influence: In their efforts to resist
foreign presence, the Boxers targeted key symbols of foreign influence, such
as railways, telegraph lines, and other infrastructure associated with foreign
powers.
3. Nationalism and Cultural Preservation: The Boxers were driven
by a sense of Chinese nationalism, seeing themselves as protectors of
Chinese culture and traditions. They sought to defend China from what they
viewed as cultural contamination by foreign powers.
Nature of the Boxer Movement: “Were the Boxers Yihe Quan (
Heretical sect) or Yihe Tuan ( Militia) “
To understand the nature of the Boxer Movement in relation to Manchu
dynasty. It is important to understand whether the Boxers were Militia or a
herectical sect . The origin of the controversy lies in the last celible of the
name Yehi Tuan . The Boxers had not claimed to be a Tuan which connotes
militia until the year of 1898. The change of the name had a political
significance between the Boxers and imperial authority.
Evolution of the Boxer Movement’s Ideology:
Initially, the Boxers sought to overthrow the Qing dynasty and restore the Ming,
as reflected in their slogan “Fan Qing Fu Ming” (Oppose the Qing and
Restore the Ming). However, with the increasing encroachment of foreign
imperialist.
They embraced new slogans such as “fan yang” (Oppose the Foreigners)
and “mie yong” (Exterminate the Foreigners). This shift marked a change in
their political stance and led them to accept the “militia status” granted by
the imperial authorities, adopting the slogan “bao Qing mie yong” (Uphold
the Qing and Exterminate the Foreigners).

Views of Different scholars:

Scholarly opinions on the Boxer Movement can be broadly categorized into
two perspectives: one view holds that the Qing dynasty supported the
movement, while the other asserts that it was an independent movement.

1. George Steiger: in his work “ China and the occident ”, Steiger argues
that the Boxers were not affiliated with any heretical sect but rather
were a militia force that was recruited at the express behest of the Qing
government. He posits that the Boxers functioned as a volunteer militia
 in response to the throne’s commands. However, this assertion is
questionable, as there is scant evidence linking the Boxers to the
Imperial court until mid-1899.
2. Chester Tan: In his work The Boxers’ Catastrophe, Tan rejects Steiger’s
militia theory but stops short of fully endorsing the opposing view that
the Boxers were aligned with a heretical sect. He suggests that while the
Boxers initially operated as a volunteer association, it is possible that
secret societies influenced their activities from behind the scenes.
3. Victor Purcell: in his work The Boxers Rebellion argues that the Boxer
Movement emerged organically and independently from the Qing
government, rather than being orchestrated or controlled by state
authorities. He contends that the Boxers were part of a broader landscape
of secret societies and heterodox religious groups that had historically
posed a threat to the Qing dynasty.
According to him, the Boxers’ motivations were deeply rooted in local
grievances, including anti-foreign and anti-Christian sentiments, rather
than being a top-down initiative supported by the Qing regime.
4.Fan Wenlan: suggests that the movement was not a monolithic entity but
rather a collection of different factions united by a common goal—resisting
foreign influence and aggression in China.

Fan highlights a significant aspect of the movement: the rampant disunity

among the Boxer ranks. He argues that this disunity is characteristic of secret
societies, which often operated with loose affiliations and varied agendas.
This lack of cohesion may have weakened the Boxers’ effectiveness and
contributed to their eventual defeat.

Religion played a crucial role in the lives of the Boxers, according to Fan. He
points out that each member was required to undergo a religious ordination
upon joining the organization, which not only legitimized their actions but also
instilled a sense of discipline and commitment.
5.Hen Sheng: Hu Sheng further supports the thesis that the Boxer Movement
had significant ties to traditional secret societies, particularly through the
celestial protection rituals invoked by the Boxers, which he likens to the
practices of the White Lotus sect.
Additionally, Hu Sheng notes that both the White Lotus and Boxer
organizations operated in a similar manner, characterized by disorganization
and a tendency to exist in small, scattered groups.
Hu Sheng’s perspective reinforces the idea that the Boxers functioned as a
secret society.
6.Tan Chung: Tan Chung argues that the Boxer Movement can be viewed as a
continuation of earlier anti-establishment movements, specifically the White
Lotus and Nian rebellions. He posits that the Boxers inherited the legacy of
these movements in their resistance against foreign domination and their
challenge to the Qing dynasty.
Concept of Xenophobia in the Boxer Movement :
Xenophobia, or the fear and distrust of foreigners, was a central theme in the
Boxer Movement.
Different scholars views :
1.victor Purcell: Victor Purcell contends that the Boxer Movement’s anti-
foreign and anti-imperialist stance inherently led to its anti-Christian
sentiment. He argues that the Chinese opposition to missionaries was not
based on religious beliefs, but rather on their status as foreigners who
embodied imperialism. The Boxers labeled foreigners as “primary devils” and
Chinese converts as “secondary devils,” viewing missionaries primarily as
agents of foreign dominance rather than as religious figures.

Purcell’s analysis reveals a complex layer of the Boxers’ motivations,

suggesting that their hostility towards missionaries was intertwined with their
broader resistance to foreign influence and an assertion of national
sovereignty. This highlights a crucial aspect of the Boxer Movement, where
religious affiliations became secondary to the pressing concerns of cultural
and political identity in the face of imperialist encroachment.
Purcell’s analysis suggests that the Boxers’ actions were driven by a desire to
resist and expel foreign influences that threatened traditional Chinese culture
and sovereignty, highlighting a xenophobic reaction against what they viewed
as external threats to their national identity.
2.Fair Bank: Fairbank argued that the Boxer Uprising was a direct response to
the profound crises affecting the lives of the Chinese people at the time. He
suggested that the movement emerged as a reaction to various socio-
economic challenges, such as poverty, unemployment, and foreign
exploitation, which had deepened during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Fairbank emphasized that the Uprising should not be seen as an isolated or
irrational outburst of xenophobia, but rather as a manifestation of widespread
discontent and frustration among the Chinese populace, particularly among
peasants.
3. Chesneaux :argued that the Boxer Uprising should not be regarded merely
as a xenophobic reaction against foreign influence. Instead, he emphasized
the peasant aspect of the movement, suggesting that it arose from deeper
socio-economic issues and grievances faced by the rural population.
Chesneaux highlighted that the Boxers were not just reacting to foreign
presence; they were also responding to the dire conditions of poverty,
oppression, and dislocation within their own communities.
Chesneaux aimed to provide a more nuanced understanding of the Boxer
Movement, framing it as a complex expression of resistance against various
forms of oppression rather than a simple anti-foreign outburst.

4.AH Smith : , in his work China in Convulsion, attributed the primary blame
for the Boxer Uprising to Christian missionaries, arguing that their perceived
arrogance and displays of superiority provoked widespread resentment
among the Chinese masses. According to Smith, the missionaries’ attempts
to impose foreign beliefs and values, coupled with their condescending
attitudes towards Chinese culture, alienated the local population and
exacerbated tensions.
5.Li Hung Chung: Li Hu Chang, in a memorial to the Emperor, characterized
the Boxers as embodying “strong nationalistic and patriotic sentiments.” This
highlights the Boxers’ desire to assert Chinese sovereignty and restore
national pride in the face of foreign domination. A prominent slogan
associated with the movement was “Overthrow the Qing, Restore the Ming,”
which reflects their deep-seated anti-Manchu feelings. This slogan indicates
that the Boxers sought not only to resist foreign influences but also to
challenge the ruling Qing dynasty, which they viewed as foreign oppressors
themselves.
6.P.A. Cohen: adopts a critical stance toward the Boxer Movement,
characterizing it as a reflection of China’s longstanding tradition of anti-foreign
sentiment. He emphasizes that the movement is part of a broader historical
pattern in which Chinese society has reacted to foreign encroachment and
influence with resistance and hostility. Cohen argues that this reaction stems
from a deep-seated nationalism rooted in China’s historical experiences of
foreign domination and cultural imperialism.
7.ES wehrled & PA Varg : According to Wehrled and Varg, the aggressive acts
of these Christian representatives, supported by their respective
governments, fueled the Boxer Movement’s anti-foreign sentiment. They
contend that the Boxers viewed missionaries as agents of foreign imperialism,
seeing their presence and activities as direct threats to traditional Chinese
society, culture, and sovereignty.
8.Fan Wenlan: Fan Wenlan critiques the actions of Christian missionaries
and foreign powers during the Boxer Movement, highlighting how their
activities contributed to social unrest in China. He argues that these
missionaries not only occupied land and properties but also infringed upon
government revenue by shifting the tax burden onto local populations.
Wenlan points out that missionaries used treaty privileges to protect their
converts from local legal repercussions,
Additionally, he notes that converts were encouraged to commit atrocities
against their fellow countrymen, leading to widespread resentment. Instances
of blackmail and coercion were reported, with missionaries attempting to
extract money and resources from the local populace.
This exploitation and the aggressive actions of missionaries contributed
significantly to the anti-foreign sentiment that fueled the Boxer Movement.
Conclusion:

The Boxer Movement, emerging from a complex interplay of anti-foreign

sentiment, social discontent, and nationalist fervor, marked a significant
chapter in China’s struggle against imperialism.
The Boxer Rebellion not only intensified Chinese nationalist sentiments but
also laid the groundwork for future movements advocating for reform and
resistance against foreign influence.
Ultimately contributing to the rise of revolutionary activities in the early 20 th
century, such as the 1911 Xinhai Revolution, which sought to establish a
republic free from imperialist control.
Thus, the legacy of the Boxer Movement can be seen as a catalyst for China’s
ongoing quest for self-determination and modernization in the face of external
pressures.
A brief Comparison:

• Both movements arose from socio-political turmoil but differed in

objectives, ideologies, and organization.
• Taiping sought radical social reform; Boxer focused on expelling foreign
influences.
• Both ultimately failed but significantly impacted Chinese nationalism
and reform, leading to the overthrow of the Qing dynasty and shaping
modernization efforts.
Self-Interpretation: Lessons from the Taiping and Boxer Movements
As a history student, the exploration of the Taiping and Boxer Movements
offers profound insights into the complexities of societal change and
resistance against external influences. Both movements emerged during
critical periods of upheaval in China, highlighting the deep-seated
grievances of the Chinese people against foreign domination and internal
decay.
The Taiping Rebellion exemplified the radical response to social injustice
and the desire for reform, fueled by a vision of a new social order that
sought to eradicate corruption and uplift the impoverished. In contrast, the
Boxer Movement reflected a more nationalist sentiment, emphasizing a
rejection of foreign powers and a restoration of Chinese cultural integrity,
albeit through violent means.
These movements illustrate the struggle between tradition and modernity,
and the ways in which cultural identity can be a source of both unity and
division. They remind us of the dangers of extremism and the need for
balanced approaches to reform. As history students, we learn that
understanding these historical contexts is vital to comprehending
contemporary issues of nationalism, identity, and the impact of foreign
influence in today’s world. The legacies of both movements resonate in
current debates about sovereignty, cultural preservation, and the role of
external powers in shaping national destinies.
In conclusion, the Taiping and Boxer Movements serve as a powerful
reminder of the complexities of social movements and the ongoing
struggle for self-determination. Through this analysis, we are encouraged
to reflect critically on the past and its relevance to present and future
challenges in the realm of history and beyond.