Worst Chinese dynasty?

[Ian_Lee]

Some more good points about Yuan:

(1) Though Yuan Dynasty was undeniably oppressive, culturally China was still thriving. Yuan Drama occupied a very important position in Chinese Literature. Compared with Qing Dynasty when every Chinese scholar was forced to dwell their whole life in those strictly formatted essay which catered exclusively to civil service examination, Chinese Literature during Yuan was more vivid. And I would assume that theaters were allowed during Yuan which opened to massive audience.

If Chinese Shakespeare could survive during Yuan period, then it showed at least the Yuan Emperors had some degrees of tolerance.

(2) The provincial administrative apparatus that was established by Yuan Empire had been inherited by Ming, Qing, ROC and PRC.

Regarding slaughter of civilian population, the two early Ming Emperors also excelled in committing such atrocities.

Some more bad points about Ming:

(1) Late Ming was the worst and darkest period in Chinese History. And never had it happened in Chinese history that two large groups of armed peasants who numbered up to hundreds of thousands people openly revolted almost simultaneously. And never had it happened in Chinese history that a dynasty was toppled by these armed rebel peasants whom forced the Emperor to hang himself.

(2) In many records it showed that the people in late Ming were so desperate that they traded their sons/daughters to cannabalize. And Ming fell much faster than any dynasty under nomadic invasion. Why? I guess it is because not too many Ming retainers wished to keep the regime alive because they had suffered enough. In other words, anyone was better than the Mings -- even the Manchus who forced them to keep the pigtails.

[wushijiao]

(1) Late Ming was the worst and darkest period in Chinese History. And never had it happened in Chinese history that two large groups of armed peasants who numbered up to hundreds of thousands people openly revolted almost simultaneously. And never had it happened in Chinese history that a dynasty was toppled by these armed rebel peasants whom forced the Emperor to hang himself.

It's interesting. I'm reading a very good book about Korea http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0393316815/103-6842718-4699058?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance, and I always considered the Ming to be one of the worst dynasties. But the author of the book claims that the Ming was one of the best. I wonder if this is a widely held view from the Korean perspective.

[bhchao]

But the author of the book claims that the Ming was one of the best. I wonder if this is a widely held view from the Korean perspective

I believe that is Bruce Cumming's own viewpoint rather than the official Korean viewpoint of the Ming dynasty. He wrote: "If a country wanted to associate itself with something great, the Ming, China's greatest dynasty, was not a bad choice."

I would not be surprised however if Korean historians viewed Ming in a positive light. Relations between Korea and China were very friendly throughout Ming, much more so than previous Chinese dynasties (if you compare to what happened during Sui and Tang, and later when the Manchus invaded Korea).

After all Ming provided assistance to Yi Korea during Hideyoshi's two attempted invasions of the peninsula. This was one of the reasons accelerating Ming's decline.

[wushijiao]

I believe that is Bruce Cumming's own viewpoint rather than the official Korean viewpoint of the Ming dynasty. He wrote: "If a country wanted to associate itself with something great, the Ming, China's greatest dynasty, was not a bad choice."

Thanks for getting the quote, bhchao. My paraphrasing wasn't accurate.

It is interesting to view Chinese history from another country's point of view (in this case Korean).

I guess my question might be: if the Ming was so bad, why were so many Korean scholars (who Cummings names "Hongians") antagonistic to the Qing? Was that simply geopolitical (because the barbarians were right next to Korea)? Or did the Ming possess some positive Chinese cultural aspects that the Korean scholars knew would be destroyed in the "barbarian" usurpation?

(2) In many records it showed that the people in late Ming were so desperate that they traded their sons/daughters to cannabalize. And Ming fell much faster than any dynasty under nomadic invasion. Why? I guess it is because not too many Ming retainers wished to keep the regime alive because they had suffered enough.

Isn't it true that the Manchus were also better militarily (regarless of any other considerations)? Didn't the Manchus have European cannons?

[Ian_Lee]

Koreans were so nostalgic of Ming that after they were subdued by the Macnhus, they begged to retain the costume (which was influence by Ming costume) and not to shave their foreheads and kept pigtails as the Hans were obliged to.

The Manchus did not have cannons but the Ming Army was as Ming Court had Jesuit missionaries as counsels. Nuerhachi was killed by Ming's cannons.

[tommy79]

Some more good points about Yuan:

Regarding slaughter of civilian population, the two early Ming Emperors also excelled in committing such atrocities.

Some more bad points about Ming:

(1) Late Ming was the worst and darkest period in Chinese History. And never had it happened in Chinese history that two large groups of armed peasants who numbered up to hundreds of thousands people openly revolted almost simultaneously. And never had it happened in Chinese history that a dynasty was toppled by these armed rebel peasants whom forced the Emperor to hang himself.

Oh my God ! Do you even study history about Ming and Yuan dynasty ? Please go to read books on these dynasty written by famous historian like Huang Ray, Albert Chan and others. Late Ming is NOT the worst and darkest period in chinese history. Hong Wu and Yongle are cruel but they never massacare its people. They only eliminates those that brings threat to their throne like generals and scholars. Hong Wu hugely favor the poor like ordering his officials to buy back children that was sold by their parents. He also creates Yellow record and fish scale records to prevent the rich to evade taxes and protect injustice aginst the poor. He also make rules that the land occupied by the poor cannot be sold to the rich. He also punish his officials if they are corrupt or inefficent. During Yuan dynasty, northern china was totally devastated and many millions was killed and slaughter.

"Century of Humiliation" during QIng dynasty was the darkest period of chinese history as many historian agreed.

(2) In many records it showed that the people in late Ming were so desperate that they traded their sons/daughters to cannabalize. And Ming fell much faster than any dynasty under nomadic invasion. Why? I guess it is because not too many Ming retainers wished to keep the regime alive because they had suffered enough. In other words, anyone was better than the Mings -- even the Manchus who forced them to keep the pigtails.

Again, you must read all this stupid stuff on the internet, am I right ? The fall of Ming dynasty was not because of Manchu but by Rebellion. There are still people fighting to restore Ming dynasty throughout the Qing era up to the fall of QIng Empire. The QIng army also faces significant resistance from people in the southern pronvince. '

The QIng administration system derived much from the Ming dynasty with little modification.

I am jiangji from China history forum and ready to provide evidence on my point. If you want to challenge me on this point. Go there, I think many people there will also try to correct your view on Ming dynasty.

[Ian_Lee]

Tommy79:

Again, you must read all this stupid stuff on the internet, am I right ? The fall of Ming dynasty was not because of Manchu but by Rebellion.

Why did you selectively excerpt my post? I already elaborate your view in my first point:

(1) Late Ming was the worst and darkest period in Chinese History. And never had it happened in Chinese history that two large groups of armed peasants who numbered up to hundreds of thousands people openly revolted almost simultaneously. And never had it happened in Chinese history that a dynasty was toppled by these armed rebel peasants whom forced the Emperor to hang himself.

Hmmmmm..............

I am jiangji from China history forum and ready to provide evidence on my point. If you want to challenge me on this point. Go there, I think many people there will also try to correct your view on Ming dynasty.

Now you confess that you are just a salesman who tries to solicit customer here.

[tommy79]

Why did you selectively excerpt my post? I already elaborate your view in my first point:

Now you confess that you are just a salesman who tries to solicit customer here.

So, you are saying all the historian are wrong and you points are right. All of this information I tell you is from books written by many famous historian like Huang Ray (1587, A years of no significance), Albert Chan (The fall and glory of Ming dynasty), F.W mote (Imperial China 900-1800), S.H. Tsai (Yongle Emperor) and Kenneth swope.

Now I have many question here that hope you can answer

1. Can you tell me which historian tell you that Ming in the 1600s was the darkest period of chinese history? Unless you tell me that's your personal opinion

2. Where do you get the info that Hong Wu and Yongle actually slaughtering more people than the mongol? Strange that all historian estimated figure is different than yours. I only heard that the two MIng Emperor murder those that are threat to them.

3. So you are calling the dynasty the darkest period because mass rebellion bring down the Ming and forces his Emperor to commited suicide ? Do you heard about one of the bloodiest rebellion in chinese history, "Taiping rebellion" and a smaller one White lotus during the QIng dynasty. At least 20 millions were killed in the taiping rebellion. Both rebellion kills more people and brings many people to suffering than the late Ming in 1644 !

4. Do you know that the poor selling their own sons and daughters are even more serious than the late QIng dynasty ? Corruption are even worse in QIng dynasty than Ming. You know that, right? Please read the book "Imperial China" by FW Mote

5. In your 1st posts, you says that Ming Empires fall into the hands of the normadic invasions. But in you recent posts, you said that the Ming is toppled by the rebellion. Whch one is correct? Also

Where do you get the info that Ming Empire falls faster than any chinese dynasty in normadic invasion? Do you study chinese history ?

1449- The mongol under Wala make raid into china and even attempt to capture beijing but fails thanks to Yu Qian.

1550- Athan Khan attempt to capture Beijing

1590s - Japan invaders invade korea

1618-1662 - The Manchu took 44 years to bring down the entire Ming dynasty.

The Qing dynasty falls overnight without much fighting. Even if you does not include the sourthen Ming, it still took a long time to bring down Ming dynasty. The QIng dynasty falls after ruling 267 years while the Mongol only about 100 years. The Ming dynasty survive for 276 years longer than both Sui, Yuan, Qin, Qing, Jin and many others,

You accuse me of a salesmen but unable to back up your points with realiable sources. All of your points is based on your opinion. Until you back up your points with reliable sources, I will not debate with you.

[wushijiao]

Not that it is any of my business, but if one is going to debate using sources, then I think it would be fair to give reasonable paraphrases or direct quotes from history books or direct sources, not simply say that the one has read a book therefore one’s opinions are sourced.

Also, if one is going to judge which dynasties are better than others, I really don’t know if comparing random events in each dynasty is a good way to go about it. Rebellions, famines, revolts, and other horrific events happened in all dynasties. Granted, I agree that one can say that the violence of events like the Taiping rebellion are on such a scale that they should be significant factors in determining the value of a dynasty. However, it would make more sense to me to judge the relative value of a dynasty in terms of its bureaucratic efficiency, its statecraft, the life of people in that era, what if any lasting institutions, values, territory, literary works, cultural works, and architecture that it bequeath to modern China.

In other words, with what criteria should we judge the value of a dynasty? Also, if we agree that China was “weak” or “humiliated” in the late Qing, that is only in relation to the relative strengths or weaknesses of other countries at the time. Should this also be a criterion for consideration? Should we think less of the Han because it corresponded to the mighty Roman Empire? Likewise, when China was “strong”, should we take the feelings and suffering of the conquered and occupied into consideration? Should the success of a countries foreign policy be viewed simply from the point of view of expanding one’s national power? If this applies to China, does it thus apply to other nations, say, Japan or America?

[tommy79]

Not that it is any of my business, but if one is going to debate using sources, then I think it would be fair to give reasonable paraphrases or direct quotes from history books or direct sources, not simply say that the one has read a book therefore one’s opinions are sourced.

You are right. However, It is very long to quote from books and I tend to summarize things in few paragraph.

Also, if one is going to judge which dynasties are better than others, I really don’t know if comparing random events in each dynasty is a good way to go about it. Rebellions, famines, revolts, and other horrific events happened in all dynasties. Granted, I agree that one can say that the violence of events like the Taiping rebellion are on such a scale that they should be significant factors in determining the value of a dynasty. However, it would make more sense to me to judge the relative value of a dynasty in terms of its bureaucratic efficiency, its statecraft, the life of people in that era, what if any lasting institutions, values, territory, literary works, cultural works, and architecture that it bequeath to modern China.

I never value a dynasty based on rebellion. I was argue with Ian Lee that if he believe that1629-1644 Ming rebellion was the darkest period in chinese dynasty, he should look at Taiping rebellion which are several times worser.

In other words, with what criteria should we judge the value of a dynasty? Also, if we agree that China was “weak” or “humiliated” in the late Qing, that is only in relation to the relative strengths or weaknesses of other countries at the time. Should this also be a criterion for consideration? Should we think less of the Han because it corresponded to the mighty Roman Empire? Likewise, when China was “strong”, should we take the feelings and suffering of the conquered and occupied into consideration? Should the success of a countries foreign policy be viewed simply from the point of view of expanding one’s national power? If this applies to China, does it thus apply to other nations, say, Japan or America?

You are partly right on that there is a relation bewteen the strenghts of other countries. However, it will depend on the situation. I will compare two era which is Han-Roman, and Qing - Britain, France and Russia

1. Han dynasty which survive for 400 years remain the one of the strongest and technological advanced Empire. Why Han Empire progress very rapidly while QIng dynasty faces stagnation ? In term of military and technological superiority, Han will score higher than the Roman. The Han Emperors are more open-minded compare to Qing Emperors and encourage trade.

I. Under Han Wudi, Military went through several transformation and they defeat the much stronger enemy, Xiongnu.

II. Silk road was open for trade. Commercial relations between Han and other Empire improved significantly.

III. There are also many major reform and reorganization in the administration system making the government more centralize, effective and efficient.

2. Under Qing dynasty, it went through period of stagnation.

1. The administration system of Qing dynasty is derived much from Ming with little modification. Qing dynasty is the only dynasties that make the smallest change in the adminstration system. The system is becoming outdated and hugely ineffective and inefficent leading to all kinds of problem indirectly contribute of stagnation.

2. If Qing could have adopted "open door policy", it could been stronger and will have more technological progress. Japan has been much powerful nation under meiji modernization. It is true that Qianglong Conquer vast land in western China but it doesn't have bring any benefits and even drain the resources of the Empire. As a result, no money was left to modernize the army. The Opium Wars is a turning points for Qing dynasty as western power no longer see Qing army as invincible and later launch more attack and forces the QIng to make unequal treaty.

3. The Qing make little technological progess during its 267 years rules. Why there is a huge technological progress in Song dynasty when it faces a lot of much powerful enemy like the Mongol, Jin, Liao ?

[wushijiao]

If Qing could have adopted "open door policy", it could been stronger and will have more technological progress. Japan has been much powerful nation under meiji modernization.

I agree. But only a very strong emperor would have the power to modernize and institute an “Open Door” policy, similar to the Meji. In the Qing Dynasty, wouldn’t that only leave Kangxi and Qianlong? Accoring to 正说清朝十二帝 by 阎崇年, Kangxi was the emperor who was most interested in science. He loved scientific experiments. He was friendly towards foreigners. He loved learning about new gadgets and new technology. And yet, he failed to find a way to popularize scientific knowledge throughout the Qing. By the time of Qianlong, the need to learn about the West had grown much more important, and yet Qianlong showed contempt towards Lord Macartney. Worse, Qianlong failed to see that his empire was under long-term threat, nor did they show much curiosity towards the barbarian British. One can only imagine how history might have changed if there had been a Meiji-style restoration, or a 康有为-type official back in1793!

But one could go back further still. Didn’t 努尔哈赤 and 皇太极 use foreign weapons to help defeat the Ming? Then why didn’t they seek to learn how to produce and develop their own weaponry and improve on Western science?

I’m not an expert in Chinese history at all, but couldn’t one argue that the imperial system itself was simply incapable of coping with the dramatic shock of Western military methods, technology, and the social configurations that produced them? In fact, didn’t Ray Huang in 1587, A Year of No Significance argue that the imperial bureaucratic system was so cumbersome that the emperor had little real power? If so, and if the rise of the West had corresponded with the Ming, would the Ming court have been more successful than the Qing?

Don't get me wrong. I personally voted for the Qin as the worst dynasty.

[tommy79]

Actually, I do agree on some of your points.However, I think Sui is the worst dynasty and Qin is second on that. One of the two main contribution of Qin Empire is that it indirectly creates what "China" today and building the great wall.

The reason why Huang taiji adopted the western canon becuase the Ming was able defeat the Qing with it and even indirectly kills 努尔哈赤.

You doesn't have to be strong Emperor to institute an “Open Door” policy. The Late Ming under the lazy and weak Emperor lift the trade ban in 1567 and even the emperor sees the benefit of commence. Trade with Spain silver from America are very important for late Ming economy. Hong Wu, founder of Ming impose the trade ban but never properly enforce it and commence continue to boom up until to the end of 16th century. However, the fall of Ming dynasty was due to the fact most Ming Emperor live in great extent of luxury and the decline of agriculture lead people to great suffering.

[bhchao]

Kangxi was the emperor who was most interested in science. He loved scientific experiments. He was friendly towards foreigners. He loved learning about new gadgets and new technology. And yet, he failed to find a way to popularize scientific knowledge throughout the Qing.

There was a watershed event that may have inhibited the spread of scientific knowledge in China during Kangxi's reign. Kangxi allowed Jesuits to conduct their work in China provided that they respect the ancient Chinese tradition of ancestral rites. The Jesuits complied in the beginning. However the Pope later issued an edict saying that the Jesuit compliance with Kangxi's request violated religious precedent.

Both Kangxi and the Pope refused to budge on this matter. As a result of this dispute, Kangxi banned ongoing work by the Jesuits in China.

[bhchao]

2. Where do you get the info that Hong Wu and Yongle actually slaughtering more people than the mongol? Strange that all historian estimated figure is different than yours. I only heard that the two MIng Emperor murder those that are threat to them.

I also have been reading F.W. Mote's Imperial China (900-1800). Hong Wu and Yongle did not engage in mass murder or slaughter of civilians. You are right on that aspect. However they killed thousands of innocent people in the process of wiping out officials who did not support the government, or who openly criticized the emperor.

For example, Yongle tried to persuade Lian Zining and Fang Xiaoru to support his new government following the usurpation. Both refused and were executed. The court officials then went through the process of examining documents to see which candidates took the civil service exams when Fang administered them. In Chinese society, the examiner and the test taker bore a special relationship to each other like teacher-student or father-son. These candidates were located and wiped out, along with their family members.

Fang's family members were also exterminated to the tenth degree of relationship.

The Ming emperors also practiced thought control. During Ming there was a secret police called the Eastern/Western Depot who spied on anyone deemed subversive to the government. Anyone even remotely suspected of harboring disloyalty to the government were persecuted and tortured.

Ming was not the worst in treating officials. The practice of beating offending officials in the presence of the emperor was first started during Yuan, which Ming later emulated. In this regard, Yuan is worse than Ming since the former set a precedent for repressive governance for Ming and Qing.

Can you imagine such court practices occurring during the refined age of Song dynasty?

Ming did produce three of the four classic Chinese novels; 三國演義, 西遊記, and 水滸傳, also 金瓶梅. During mid-to-late Ming, there was a flourishing in literary publishing and a revival of intellectual thought (王陽明 and 王夫之 being two of the leading philosophers)

[Ian_Lee]

Tommy:

As you said, it took 40+ years for the Southern Ming to completely topple. But how many years did it take Eastern Jin to topple after the Western Jin fell into the hands of nomads? How many years did it take Southern Song to topple after Northern Song fell into the hands of the nomads?

All longer than Southern Ming.

Of course Taiping Rebellion took a heavier toll than the two rebellions in late Ming. Why? Very simple. From early Qing to mid-Qing, China had undergone about 150 years of extraordinary peaceful and stable period. Population grew at a much faster rate than many other dynasties. So even with a rebellion at a similar scale, the havoc that was wrought would be more devastating.

But during the Taiping Rebellion, another group of Han Chinese stood out to vehemently suppress the rebels. However, in late Ming when the two rebellions occurred, practically nobody was willing or able to suppress them.

Why? Most likely because everyone in late Ming, from officials to civilians, were really pissed off. But during the Taiping Rebellion, a lot of Han Chinese, even though they were under Manchu rule, still preferred the status quo.

Was Ming's fall due to the nomadic invasion or rural rebellion? Of course, both are important factors in addition to famine and misrule and clique friction.

No dynasty/regime ever fell under one single cause as you naively think.

What I wrote in this forum is of course my personal opinion. If every poster just listens to what the historians wrote, then why shouldn't we just provide the link instead of discussing?

Be an independent thinker and don't blindly follow what the authority says.

[tommy79]

However they killed thousands of innocent people in the process of wiping out officials who did not support the government, or who openly criticized the emperor.

Fang's family members were also exterminated to the tenth degree of relationship.

The Ming emperors also practiced thought control. During Ming there was a secret police called the Eastern/Western Depot who spied on anyone deemed subversive to the government. Anyone even remotely suspected of harboring disloyalty to the government were persecuted and tortured.

Ming was not the worst in treating officials. The practice of beating offending officials in the presence of the emperor was first started during Yuan, which Ming later emulated. In this regard, Yuan is worse than Ming since the former set a precedent for repressive governance for Ming and Qing.

Can you imagine such court practices occurring during the refined age of Song dynasty?

It is true that Hong Wu and Yongle excute many scholar and their families. However, their cruety also have positive effect of the Ming dynasty. Their cruety forces the offical to take them seriously and work hard so that they do not make any mistake and ensure the Emperor policy is being enforced effectively. Below are several of the benefits of Hong Wu policy. This policy was later ignored and lead to the fall Ming dynasty

1. Hong Wu favor the poor and ensure that nobility abuse and corruption is keep at minimal. Severe punishment for those that does not follow his policy properly. However after they dies, many soft-hearted Emperor come to power and many Hong Wu policy was either ignored or never enforced effectively by the Emperor. As a result, Corruption rises and Agriculture decline to critical level. During HongZhi reign, the cultivated land has drop by 50% compare to Hong Wu era. The decline of agriculture continue throughout the later Ming and finally mass starvation leading to rebellion everywhere bringing down the dynasty.

2. "In 1370, Hong Wu order that some land in Hunan and Anhui should be distributed to young farmers who had reached manhood. He announced that the title to the land would not be transferable to prevent nobility abuse. During the middle part of his reign an edict was published to the effect that those who brought fallow land under cultivation could keep it as their property without it ever being taxed." Albert Chan

3. "To prevent abuses from gentry and the wealthy, the Hong Wu Emperor instituted two very important systems: "Yellow Records" and "Fish Scale Records", both of which served to guarantee both the government's income from land taxes and the people's enjoyment of their property." Albert Chan

4. "In 1372, the Hong Wu emperor ordered general release of all innocent people who had been enslaved during the anxious days towards the end of the Mongol regime. Fourteen years later the same emperor ordered his officials to buy back children in Huinan province who had been sold as slaves by their parents because of famine in the locality." Albert Chan

5. "The Wei-so system was a great success in early Ming because of the tun-tien system. Hong Wu, well aware of the difficulties of supplying such a number of men, adopted this method of military organization in order to assure that the empire had a strong military force without burdening the people heavily for its support." Albert Chan

6. "Hongwu also noted the destructive role of court eunuchs under the previous dynaties and he drastically reducing their numbers, forbidding them to handle documents, insisting that they remained illiterate, and liquidating those who commented on state affairs.' Albert Chan

7. "The code of the Ming dynasty was a great improvement on that of the Tang dynasty in regards to the treatment of slaves." Albert Chan

8. He also order that his offical to buyback any children that was forces to sell by their parents. This program continue througout Ming period.

Hong Wu realized the cruety of the Ching-i-Wei and order the prison to be closed but it was reopen under Yongle reign. Court beating happen in Hong Wu reign but decline significantly after his dead. Court beating was actually useful to punish those that are corrupted.

[bhchao]

I like to point out that the Taiping Rebellion was an event instigated by a religious fanatic and his followers, rather than by the Qing government itself. It was an event that occurred as a result of Hong's vision after reading some Methodist pamphlets in Guangzhou.

To judge Qing in a bad light just because of a rebellion that a delusional Hong initiated is flawful.

If we were to really judge Qing on an event that it initiated itself, then why not choose the event when Oboi forced millions of coastal dwellers from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian to move 20 miles inland during the conflict with Koxinga? Millions were displaced from their villages and died from the resulting famine.

From an objective standpoint, Ming probably fared better than Qing in this regard.

[tommy79]

As you said, it took 40+ years for the Southern Ming to completely topple. But how many years did it take Eastern Jin to topple after the Western Jin fell into the hands of nomads? How many years did it take Southern Song to topple after Northern Song fell into the hands of the nomads?All longer than Southern Ming.

The Mongol conquer the Jin Empire in 1234 with Song help. During 1210s-1240s, Sourthern song was relatively peaceful as Mongol and Jin was busy fighting against each other. Only in 1240s, they began to attack Song dynasty and conquer most part of china by 1276. Only small resistence left and was defeated in 1279. That was about 36 years.

If you want to argue that Sourthern Song already faces threat from Jin Empire since its establishment. Then Ming survive much longer than northern Song and Sourthern song, the Ming was already faces the mongol threat in 1449 but remain untoppled until the internal rebellion that bring down the dynasty in 1644.Sourthern Ming survive until 1662.

Furthermore, Historian never consider Southern Ming as a dynasty because it was not a single entity. After the fall of Beijing in 1644, the sourthern Ming was divided on several factions fighting against each other instead of Qing army in the north. Many prefer to call it sourthern Ming resistence,

Of course Taiping Rebellion took a heavier toll than the two rebellions in late Ming. Why? Very simple. From early Qing to mid-Qing, China had undergone about 150 years of extraordinary peaceful and stable period. Population grew at a much faster rate than many other dynasties. So even with a rebellion at a similar scale, the havoc that was wrought would be more devastating.

Qing never have 150 peaceful years. During ShunZhi and Kang xi reign, Qing faces many critical problem like.

1. Anti-Qing movement from Southern china and Zheng Chenggong

2. Revolt of the Three Feudatories

3. Foreign invaders - Chakhar Mongols, Russia, Tibet

4. Famines also happen frequently in Guangzhou up until 1665.

5. Qing general , Oboi and his group making trouble

Only around 1696, a truely peaceful era began and continue until 1795. In 1796, large scale rebellion called "White lotus Rebellion" (1796-1804). Many rebellion contnue after that. Ming also undergone 100 years of peaceful period.

Hong Wu- 27 years

Yongle - 20 years

Xuande - 10 years

YingZong - 8 years

HongZhi - 18 years

jiajing - 5 years

Wan-li - 13 years

But during the Taiping Rebellion, another group of Han Chinese stood out to vehemently suppress the rebels. However, in late Ming when the two rebellions occurred, practically nobody was willing or able to suppress them.

You got it wrong. You have to remember that not all Han chinese support the rebel. Most of the rebellion happen in the northern china which is a poor region and greatly depend on Sourthern china for support.Sourthern China is still firmly in the hands of Ming after the fall of Beijing in 1644 evethough no longer a single entity. Li zicheng was unable to capture the sourthern china and finally get defeated by Manchu. When the Manchu tries to capture the sourthern region, they faces heavy resistance from the people.

Why? Most likely because everyone in late Ming, from officials to civilians, were really pissed off. But during the Taiping Rebellion, a lot of Han Chinese, even though they were under Manchu rule, still preferred the status quo. Was Ming's fall due to the nomadic invasion or rural rebellion? Of course, both are important factors in addition to famine and misrule and clique friction.

The Ming dynasty fall in 1644 when Li army capture Beijing. The Manchu uses the opportunity proclaiming that they came to avenge the murder of Ming Emperor by the rebel. They argue that this give them the mandate of heaven to rule and punish the rebel. This was a great success as Han official and people no longer feel guilty to serves the foreigners. If the Ming is so hated by the people, why the QIng even bother making such statement that they come to avenge the death of the Ming Emperor ?

No dynasty/regime ever fell under one single cause as you naively think.What I wrote in this forum is of course my personal opinion. If every poster just listens to what the historians wrote, then why shouldn't we just provide the link instead of discussing?

Be an independent thinker and don't blindly follow what the authority says.

I follow my logic and the historian always give a very details and convincing explanation. Sure, no dynasty fell under one causes. However, the rebellion plays a much larger role in bringing down the Ming dynasty by conquering Beijing in 1644. If the Rebel never took Beijing, the QIng will not be able to conquer China easily. The 100,000 Wu sangui elite army at Great wall are the Ming most powerful army. The fall of Beijing forces Wu sangui to make a deal with the Qing and finish both Ming and Rebel once for all.

[bhchao]

Qing never have 150 peaceful years. During ShunZhi and Kang xi reign, Qing faces many critical problem like.

1. Anti-Qing movement from Southern china and Zheng Chenggong

2. Revolt of the Three Feudatories

3. Foreign invaders - Chakhar Mongols, Russia, Tibet

4. Famines also happen frequently in Guangzhou up until 1665.

5. Qing general , Oboi and his group making trouble

Tommy79, I think you are viewing history through a Han (Ming) versus Manchu (Qing) perspective.

Kangxi defeated Zheng Chenggong's family, with Shi Lang personally leading the armada. And even after the victory, Kangxi was very adept in his public relations campaign towards people who originally were loyal to the Ming. Many Ming loyalists went from Tainan back to the mainland upon his invitation.

He also defeated the Revolt of the Three Feudatories, and expanded China's northeastern border up to the Amur River after defeating the Russians. He also incorporated Tibet into the Qing empire. The Tibetans were never a threat afterwards.

During Yongzheng's reign, China's surpluses grew amid prosperity.

[tommy79]

What's the point of quoting the complete post just before yours? Roddy.

Without any doubt, Kang Xi was the most capable Qing Emperor. I always consider Kang xi as one of the greatest Chinese Emperor. He inherited a totally unstable Empire from his father and turn it into a peaceful nation and as a great power. However, kang xi early reign faces many problems like revolts, foreign threats and others. So, I would not consider these early period as peaceful.