{"id":268,"date":"2019-10-31T05:35:19","date_gmt":"2019-10-31T05:35:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/?p=268"},"modified":"2019-11-18T20:28:22","modified_gmt":"2019-11-18T20:28:22","slug":"the-conservative-character-of-the-taiping-rebellion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/2019\/10\/the-conservative-character-of-the-taiping-rebellion\/","title":{"rendered":"The Conservative Character of the Taiping Rebellion"},"content":{"rendered":"

A surface level study of the ideology of the Taiping Rebellion may lead one to view the movement as distinctly unique and unprecedented in Chinese history. Though Christianity, a religion obviously not indigenous to China, had made itself known to China for centuries prior to the rebellion, it certainly never inspired social movements anywhere near the scale of the Taiping. A first impression of the Taiping rebellion as revolutionary and progressive may be reinforced by historiographical schools of thought that see the Taiping\u2019s as peasant rebels and revolutionary ancestors of the Communists.[1]<\/a> Whilst land redistribution was a theme in the rhetoric of the Taiping\u2019s it was never realized in practice. Additionally, whilst foot-binding was abolished in areas controlled by the Taiping rebels, the practice was far less common in Guangdong and Guangxi province where the revolt effectively was born, therefore, for the leaders of the rebellion abolition of foot-binding was a less revolutionary step than it would have been in other parts of China.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

The political and theological orientation of the Taiping\u2019s was conservative in nature, rhetoric and ideology concerned a return to a time when China was favoured by God (Tianzhu<\/em>). The connection between God and the Chinese people was severed at the time of Qin Shi Huang\u2019s wars of unification when Qin adopted the title of (Di),<\/em> usurping a title that can only legitimately be held by God, and began worshipping Daoist false Gods.[3]<\/a> Since then, China had become increasingly morally corrupt not least due to the idolatry associated with foreign Buddhism. It is of course, a classic conservative rhetorical move to harken back to a Golden Age when people had pure morals and society existed in perfect order. The widespread iconoclastic attacks on Buddhist and Daoist idols bare superficial resemblance in imagery to the iconoclastic attacks perpetrated by the Communist Party against antiquated superstition. However, the purpose of the iconoclastic attacks conducted by the Taiping\u2019s was not to destroy old ways to make way for a new, progressive society, but to reverse the spiritual decline that China had suffered due to the worship of false Gods.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

Perhaps the most striking example of the Taiping\u2019s conservatism was their distinctly patriarchal view of the role of women in society. In Poems of the Heavenly Father<\/em>, Hong Xiuquan, leader of the Taiping rebellion, outlines his misogynistic feminine ideal. The poems lay out ten offences which are punishable by beating, clearly establishing a link with the Decalogue so that women serving Hong in the palace would associate the ten offences with the will of heaven. The ten offences are:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n
      \n
    1. \n
        \n
      1. \n
          \n
        1. \n
            \n
          1. Disrespectfulness<\/li>\n
          2. Refusing to obey instructions<\/li>\n
          3. Raising the eyes<\/li>\n
          4. Disrespectfulness in asking for instructions<\/li>\n
          5. Rashness<\/li>\n
          6. Speaking to loudly<\/li>\n
          7. Refusing to respond<\/li>\n
          8. Cheerlessness<\/li>\n
          9. Casting the eyes to the left or right<\/li>\n
          10. Unmannerly speech[5]<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

             <\/p>\n

            In the palace of Heavenly Capital (Tianjing) <\/em>feminine virtue was an instrument of patriarchal domination. Hong\u2019s patriarchal doctrines where not always Biblically inspired, but in the case of the \u2018three obedience\u2019s\u2019 inspired by the Chinese classics. The three obedience\u2019s instructed women to obey their fathers, then their husbands, then (as widows) their sons.[6]<\/a> In his monograph on Taiping ideology, Carl S Kilcourse argues that the patriarchal nature of the Taiping movement was the clearest example of Hong\u2019s attachment to classical Confucian morality, even though the movement\u2019s outward rhetoric disavowed Confucianism.[7]<\/a> Poems of the Heavenly Father<\/em> demonstrate Hong\u2019s reluctance to move away, even nominally, from the oppressive patriarchal role of women that was the norm in China, and is perhaps the most illustrative feature of the Taiping movement\u2019s conservative character.<\/p>\n

            [1]<\/a> Kilcourse, Carl S. Taiping Theology<\/strong><\/em>: The Localization of Christianity in China, 1843\u201364. Springer, 2016. p.157<\/p>\n

            [2]<\/a> Ibid. p.158<\/p>\n

            [3]<\/a> Ibid. p.51<\/p>\n

            [4]<\/a> Ibid. p.54<\/p>\n

            [5]<\/a> Ibid. p.161-162<\/p>\n

            [6]<\/a> Ibid. p.164<\/p>\n

            [7]<\/a> Ibid. p.165<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

            A surface level study of the ideology of the Taiping Rebellion may lead one to view the movement as distinctly unique and unprecedented in Chinese history. Though Christianity, a religion obviously not indigenous to China, had made itself known to China for centuries prior to the rebellion, it certainly never inspired social movements anywhere near … Continue reading “The Conservative Character of the Taiping Rebellion”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[6,20,43,5],"class_list":["post-268","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-christianity","tag-conservatism","tag-patriarchy","tag-taiping"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=268"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":270,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268\/revisions\/270"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/world\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}