The Boxer rebellion is that bonus mission you get at the end of the game where you get a unit from each faction you’ve been fighting in the campaign so far.
Aye. Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. Why Britain started the Opium War? ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@edenender Wrong. These HK youngsters have no idea how HK was under British rule. The Brits treated HKers like 3rd class citizens. All the wealth was stolen from HK and taken back to England. All the high colonial government officials, including the governors, all retired very rich men. The early governors even took part in opium smuggling. There were all sorts of draconian laws like Emergency Regulation 31, which allowed the governor to order anyone to be imprisoned without trial, for one year renewable. If the riots we're seeing today had happened under Britain, they would have been shut down immediately under the Public Order Ordinance, which allowed the Brits to ban demonstrations and arrest anyone before they even started the protest. The public did not get to vote for the governor, he was appointed by the UK prime minister. At least now, there is a limited election to elect the Chief Executive. Only in the last 20 years of rule did Britain give HK more freedom, and that's only because they knew they were leaving. -- Flux Mulder RUclips SUPPRESSED my HK video - How the 5 Eyes control what you see ruclips.net/video/_LPEif9xyiw/видео.html Source Hong Kong People better than Chinese? ruclips.net/video/NiqueUJkFJw/видео.html If the British imperialism can sell you drug (opium) and steal your land Hong Kong and hold you ransom what else can they not do but lie and be arrogant. HK citizens had no democracy during British rule. British believe in slavery so what’s new. Good for China to be strong and put the facts right. -Jo Cheah Why is BBC making fake news against China ruclips.net/video/tcKw5jiT6wg/видео.html
Actually, the trope of "pioneer blowing himself up to destroy fortifications" is somewhat older, there is a (likely apocryphal) Prussian pioneer called Carl Klinke doing so during the Danish-German war. Since "Klinke" is German for "door knob", insert a lame pun about him opening the door. (Fixed typo).
Yeah ... I'm familiar with the "hmmm ... what was _my_ source for that ... " which can lead to hours of digging around and trying to find old books ... The Ultimate example of that was that I read two books on Kennedy and PT-109 in 1965 when I was like 14 years old (one popular and one obscure) ... and ... had this understanding of what really happened - that I came to question ... and then ... decades of on and off periodic attempts to find that obscure book I'd checked out from the New Orleans Public Library Book Mobile ... which I never did ... but ... one day ... I thought - "I could google 'PT-109 After Action Reports'" and ... I finally found the information I'd been looking for and corrected some of the details of my understanding of the battle ... Of course ... the intervening creation of the Internet ... helped with that ... So ...persistence ... Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! .
'Acrobat Prostitute Leader of soldiers" Okay then, turn of the century China sounds pretty interesting also: An hour of ramblings what have we done to deserve this?
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I had re-listen to that since it comes off as "odd" but then again lots of things seem that way about this event. Ps Is it a failed video if Justin doesn't spend more than an hour on a China video?
I'm gonna fight 'em all, a seven nation army couldn't hold me back what about eight? ...shiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Aye. Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. Why Britain started the Opium War? ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@condorX2 "Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium." The problem with this traditional narrative is that the spark for the "First Opium War" was the Qing authorities blockading the British Quarters in Guangzhou/Canton, besieging all British nationals (whether or not they had signed the agreement not to trade Opium or not), forbade anybody to give them the necessities of life like food and water, and essentially expected them to starve to death. This was not only inhumane, it was outright counter-productive. Because not only are you throwing away any and all progress you've made towards getting foreign merchants to sign (and ABIDE) by the agreement to not trade Opium in exchange for protection and the ability to conduct trade under the Qing "Canton System", but it's also an incredibly obvious casus belli that all but demanded a British armed response. The Son of Heaven wouldn't have tolerated "his subjects" being treated like this, and indeed Nurhaci's Seven Grievances were integral parts of the Qing ideology justifying their rebellion against the Ming and ultimate conquest of the position of Huangdi. Yet Qing conduct in the Canton Blockade handily violated three of the seven. It also plays in to a longer history of Chinese Imperial attempts to blanketly repress entire ethnicities or groups regardless of guilt or innocence backfiring BADLY (see: An Lushan). This is a major reason why the British government went from being ambivalent about the Opium trade and even engaging in some half-hearted cooperation with the Qing to suppress it, to supporting it. Because they recognizes that UNLESS the Opium Trade was not legalized in China AND the British could somehow oversee the good behavior of all British subjects (really really unlikely), the Qing authorities could use it as a wedge to strip British nationals of all rights and protections. Really, the only way Qing diplomatic conduct looks GOOD in this is if you don't pay close attention to what it was. And it is a crystal clear example of This is also why opponents of the Opium Trade and even British imperial expansionism as a whole like ex-President John Quincy Adams tended to support the British stance in both "Opium Wars." Because they recognized what the implications for Qing demands were, and how they would endanger other foreign nationals. " As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire." To which the British could point to the extremely degrading demands made by the Qing court on foreign embassies like the Macartney Mission's staff, the violation of (what the British and other foreigners saw as) neutral rights, and above all *THE ATTEMPT TO MASSACRE BRITISH SUBJECTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR INNOCENCE OR GUILT* and the need to have an enclave where they could be safe from sudden attack like the Canton blockade. Moral of the story: don't try and humiliate people with greater capabilities to humiliate you. " For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. " So in other words, it was much like the "Western Regions" or Mongolia, but the governors were British rather than Han Chinese or Manchu/Jurchen. One doesn't have to like British imperialism in order to try and whitewash the atrocities and follies of the High Qing, which is exactly what the conventional narrative of "And everything changed when the British nation attacked"/Century of Humiliation try to do. It also is actively detrimental (as it was at the time) to trying to understand the situation and counter moves like this, because it meant thinking in often-racist cliches as an excuse to avoid understanding the "Red Haired Barbarians" and the grievances their government aired. That doesn't mean the British wouldn't behave badly (obviously they would and did), but the "Century of Humiliation" would've involved a lot less humiliation had the Qing repeatedly acted with less diplomatic tact than Ribbentrop and more brutality than most competing factions. (Which curiously enough had repeated almost exactly about 200 years earlier, with attempts to crush "Japanese Piracy" leading to things like repressive sea bans, ethnic cleansing, and the like that often drove the locals into the hands of collaborating with the pirates. Which helped lead to widespread local resentment of the "Central State"'s authority and probably no shortage of people who would later on collaborate with British traders up to and including opium traffickers. Funny how that works.)
It got touched on a bit with Justin talking about the last samurai, but a video like this covering the boshin war and maybe the satsuma rebellion or just the Meiji restoration generally would be pretty cool
Follow Justin on twitter twitter.com/CBI_PTO_History @CBI_PTO_History Follow Joe on twitter twitter.com/JoeFonsecaHist @JoeFonsecaHist Follow MHV on twitter twitter.com/MilHiVisualized @MilHiVisualized » TIME STAMPS « 00:53 - Why Uprising not Rebellion? 12:03 - Source Situation 13:03 - Myths & Tactics 18:01 - Prelude: Chinese vs. Chinese 24:44 - Military Forces: The Boxers 27:18 - Military Forces: The Chinese 31:57 - Military Forces: "Foreigners" (Europeans, Americans & Japanese) 58:58 - The First Expedition 1:07:33 - Taking the Fort 1:09:10 - The Second Expedition 1:37:48 - The Aftermath 1:38:59 - Treaty Signing
A small attempt to restore a dead mans honour. Eduard Thomann Edler von Montalmar (1853 - 1900) wasn't an admiral he was Fregattenkapitän (rank between commander and captain) and commanded SMS Zenta (small cruiser) on her way to Japan on a asian navytour as the uprising started. He sent 30 Marines to Peking and went there himself to see the situation with his own eyes as he was caught in the siege. His public shaming started when Times-correspondent Georg Ernest Morrison accused him of cowardice and inability. And so did the historians. Morrison spent a long time in lazarett during the siege (legwound) but continued delivering eye-whitness-reports to the readers (Sterling Seagrave, Dragon Lady - The life and the legend of the last empress of china, 1992). The command to retreat on the 22nd of June was given based on an agreement of all defenders of the eastern quarter (French, Germans, Italians, Japanese and Austro-Hungarians) to fall back to the british lines IF the americans are defeated at the western wall. They were afraid of being cut off. Unfortunately Thomann got on this day a (false) message claiming the americans are retreating. Based on this he gave the unfortunate order to retreat aswell. He died at an exposed position at the wall, two other officers (Darcy, Wintherhalder) with him, inspecting the possibility for making a sortie as he was hit by a grenade and killed on the spot.
Fascinating recounting of the whole conflict. My first unit in the army was the 2nd battalion of the 9th infantry that was mentioned, funny how different of a light they painted their own actions in the official unit history, Colonel Liscum especially so. 'Bravely marching 85 miles into combat, when the Colonel and his men reached the walled city and the colors bearer fell dead, he valiantly picked up the colors and was also shot, supposedly saying "keep up the fire" before dying.' or at least that's what the unit history says lol. To this day I think 4th battalion 9th infantry still does the 'Manchu Mile' which is a 25 mile ruck march in commemorance of these actions. Soldiers who complete this when the coveted Manchu belt buckle that can be worn with the uniform. I also got to see the Liscum Bowl which was with the unit in Korea at the time, still under armed guard. Crazy to think that Colonel Liscum had survived being seriously wounded in the civil war and also at the Battle of San Juan Hill, to finally be killed in China. Thanks for the in depth look at this whole conflict
@@seanp.anim15 After being impaled by a German with a pitchfork, shanked by a Russian's broken vodka bottle, bonked by a Japanese stick, and pummeled to smithereens by the United States Army, yeah, I think I am gonna need the opium.
would you like to make a video about the Chinese civil war，and what is your comment on the military leadership of chang kai shak？
4 года назад
There's already the Chinese History Podcast about the political side of that and the warlord era. It was so detailed that the relatives of warlord Ma Bufeng threatened to sue the host. ^_^
Didn't the Qing declare war on the Dutch, Belgians and Spanish even though they had no part in the taking of the forts? If so, was the taking of the forts really just a catalyst or also a pretext to do something (eliminate the legation district) that the Qing had wanted to do anyway?
Even Ottoman Empire sent a squadron of ships and soldiers. There were no hostilities between Qing and Ottomans but Chinese Muslims asked for representation and protection (IIRC) while Ottoman sultan at the time was a huge Islamist who was trying to flex his caliphate muscles. But, in a true sick man fashion, Ottoman forces arrived very late and returned empty handed. Edit: My point is no matter the official status of hostilities and such, imho whole boxer affair was an open buffet imperialism for every nation with some form of prestige.
The Empress got played and thought the foreign powers intended to fuck her over succession issues. Dutch Belgains and Spanish are on the supposly fuck her list. The attack on the battary only confirmed her deepest fear.
OK, I've GOTTA know - when these ad-hoc international conglomerate forces come together throughout history, are the non-English speaking nations(since we typically see the British or US at the center of these examples) also sending translators with their units; how the hell does this on-the-fly delegation & command structure get assembled? How does coordination even begin to work? Having had my hand in some logistics work, it's hard enough to get people that speak the same damn language(allegedly...) all on the same page - I can't even imagine trying to get something like this working in a meaningfully positive way
At this time they would be a bit more likely to use French than English honestly. Though there was more English speaking involvement and this was around the turn of French to English preeminence.
It was certainly difficult. Since the German von Waldersee was given overall command by the governments in charge of the allied army, and he was still on his way when the second expedition moved out, there was no one directly in charge of the mission. Each force was commanded by their own officers, and each of the contingent commanders met everyday to discuss the plan. This took place in a variety of languages. Many spoke German or French, but there were also interpreters, official and not, helping out. All that came together with a good bit of patience, cooperation, and the understanding that they needed to work together to have a fighting chance. Even still, it was messy. At Peitsang, for example, the Americans arrived too late to participate and there was a period there where British guns were firing into the backs of the advancing Japanese, who had moved too far north as they attacked through the 6ft. tall crops.
@@Joe-xc8ch Leave it to us Americans to arrive late to a fight haha. Do you know if any language was preferred? My field is linguistics and I spent a while helping a friend with his research on the ascendency of English as global lingua franca so any turn of the century grand alliance communication always interests me.
404Dannyboy It's likely that the officer corps was bilingual so i'm sure it wouldn't be too hard for this very reason, there also would have been regulars that could translate and it wouldn't have been too much of a hindrance.
Wasnt it that the dowager empress was more or less a puppet of the civilian government which itself was divided between the modernists and the manchu banner clans? And the boxers were a bunch of organized crime families, cults terrorist organizations and other assorted ruffians that gained popular support on a harsh anti western traditionalist platform, and then ingratiated themselves to the manchu? It definitely has elements of a civil war, ao I think rebellion is not an inaccurate term.
It all worked out great for Yuan Shikai at least, his unit was relatively small compared to other westernised contingents prior to the Boxer war. However, seeing how the rest of the westernised troops in northern China were destroyed or devastated, the Qing government had to rely on Yuan for their modernisation programme afterwards.
1:14:46 are the accounts claiming that the Japanese marine captain died helping the British marine captain climb credible in any way? It sounds amazing and I'd love to find more information about it.
@MildlyUpsetGerbil It's one of those things that was told differently every time it came up. Some accounts say the British flag is raised first, some say the Japanese flag is raised first. Captain Hattori certainly dies, unfortunately, but the surroundings events are so tied to evolving Anglo-Japanese friendship that its hard to know what really happened. It's probably legendary, if I had to come down on it professionally (though I like to think it was real :) ), but it remains significant because it means both the British and the Japanese felt the need to have this little diplomatic moment become a story, surrounded as they both were by imperial rivals and competitors. You'll see a lot of British and American commentators during the episode praising the Japanese and the way they worked together with the British, while putting down the Russians as upstarts or disheveled. Silbey has a narrative on the Dagu assault that mentions it and the competing flags come up in the official reports hiding away at the archives.
An "ad-hoc, slapped together" non-Army of foreigners with mismatched weapons quickly beat the well-trained Qing armies that greatly outnumbered them, and you say it wasn't a pushover. No, not a *pushover* but definitely a route.
I like to emphasize the importance of the Battle of Tianjin when I talk about this because, if the Japanese engineer hadn't made that sacrifice to blow open the gate, we would have been looking at a definitive allied defeat. It's hard to know what would have happened then. Repulsing a second allied attack after Seymour would have been quite the morale boost for the imperial soldiers, and the allies, who were already wary about advancing with 20k men after the success at Tianjin, would have been compelled to wait for a much larger force. The point is that the popular perception of the Boxers and Imperial troops during this war as fitting the Hollywood 'savage warrior' trope is unfair to the modern new army the Qing placed in the way of the foreign army. The 8 Nation army definitely won in the end, and there probably would have been a vicious punitive campaign if they hadn't, but it is worth giving the Qing soldiers their due. And, while the allied force was ad-hoc and slapped together, they were soldiers too.
Actually the only "well-trained" Qing units that fought there were three divisions (2 infantry and one cavalry), most of the men fighting were the Boxers, which were more a militia than a real army.
@@Joe-xc8ch Well, the Qing forces of the Wuwei Lujun were fairly good in both equipment and training. They were only around 50k soldiers (of which 30k acted in the campaign), though.
@@Joe-xc8ch Wikipedia is more accurate than you, I could probably do a 2 hour video addressing your inaccuracies. This is what happens when you view "history" through Anglo-centric lenses & fail to look at other primary sources. 1:11:16 you claim the "Taku/Dagu Forts are "Western Constructed", not even close, the forts have been in existence since the 1520s & were in fact a continually expanded upon series of earth works originally built to deal with Japanese sea raiders, the only "Western" feature of the (4) main forts was a central (half) Battery of three 35 ton 12" RML Armstrong Guns & 20+ smaller locally produced guns of varying calibers, if we include the 2 other northern forts, not attacked we have a total of over 136 guns facing the Alliance. 1:13:25 "some Chinese Gunboats".....no, there were 4 German built Destroyers all built at the Schichau-Werke shipyard in Elbing, these were yard numbers :- No. 608 Hai Jing (Sea Eagle) later commissioned as SMS Taku No. 609 Hai Nju later commissioned as FS Takou No. 610 Hai Hola (Sea Lotus) later commissioned as leitenant Burakov (named in honor of the Artillery Officer of Gunboat Korietz killed during the action) No. 611 Hai Lung later commissioned as HMS Taku All these Destroyers were laid down & completed in 1898 making them only 2 years old, each was armed with 6 x 3pdr (47mm) Hotchkiss Quick Fire guns & 2 x 14" Torpedoes, making them formidable opponents with the potential to sink the entire assembled fleet of the 8 Nation Alliance. Taken into service by each of the Navies, the "Destroyers" were mostly De-Rated to Torpedo Boats owing to the fact that by this time the smallest Torpedo Boats of the respective Navies were already some 50% larger in tonnage with heavier Deck Guns & larger improved Torpedo systems. I really don't know what you are doing with your silly little inaccurate anecdotal stories but history does not exist for your entertainment, history is made up of real people with real lives which were irrevocable changed, changes that have shaped & will continue to shape the world in unforeseen ways. Perhaps you should look for another line of work.
The problem for the Qing was that these trained armies were really not national armies. They were mainly raised by leaders authorized by the government. These groups weren't mutually supportive, lacked common doctrine between armies, and often did not have common arms. Although earlier, during the First Sino-Japanese War, there was a Northern fleet under one leader and a Southern fleet under another. The Southern fleet contributed nothing to the war. The leader of the ground forces in the North had the most effective army during the Taiping Rebellion, but since it was recruited on personal ties and there was no retirement policy many units now were old men, addicted to opium because of boredom and inactivity. The funds for these forces had been cut due to fears of him growing too strong. Many of the same type of problems continued into the Boxer Rebellion period. This decentralized issue continued beyond the Boxer Rebellion and was a factor in the expulsion of the Quin Dynasty in 1911 (best of my memory on the year, my best sources are stored at the moment).
The Chinese started modernising their armed forces in the 1860s during the Taiping uprising, as they started buying western weapons and equipment, as well as hiring western advisors. However, as you well point out, the Qing military structure was overly complicated and only some units were modernised by 1900. The Wuwei corps included 5 divisions (4 infantry and 1 cavalry, the cavalry being the Gansu braves), and was outfitted with the most modern equipment the Chinese had, including the Type 88 rifle, which was a Chinese licensed version of the Mauser 88. Of the 4 infantry divisions, 2 were 'veteran' made out of the rests of the Beiyang forces that fought in the first Sino-Japanese war, and the other two were raised after the war to make up for those losses.
Another big problem with the Qing in this war was that divided they fell. While in previous conflicts with the Western powers all the assorted regional grandees and central administration had more or less stepped behind the Huangdi's will to fight the conflict, the nature of the Boxer Rebellion and the Dowager Empress's policy towards internal fighting led to large swaths jumping ship from the start and refusing to abide by orders from the Court-Society alliance. In part because they understood how this would likely go and wanted no part of it.
Joe seems to take a lot of stuff in to consideration in this. Though I'm kind of baffled that he doesn't or didn't consider the national character of the British officers. When he talked about Admiral seamore. Brits where quite stoically everything is fine nothing is wrong.
You're right, I should have talked more about national characteristics and their perceptions during the war. The role of national characteristics is an important keystone of my thesis actually, though I deal more with what the British made of the other participants. British "Stiff upper lip" masculinity was certainly an important part of how officers tried to conduct themselves at the time, even becoming part of civilian life during the siege of the legation. Civilians took pride in walking without fear between buildings, regardless of the constant sniping, for example. Looking clean and put together was frowned upon, as it meant you weren't working hard enough, and, my favourite, one instance of British ladies stepping over each other to get a Marine captain to promise them that he'd shoot them first if the Boxers broke in. Seymour, though he attempted something quite brave, was in over his head and his inability to properly deal with the evolving situation shouldn't be overlooked and simply chalked up to stoicism. He was making mistakes. His own report comes across a little sheepish, really. A major factor of this war was international competition between the participants of the 8 Nation alliance. Reporters were keen for a story of an imperial rival bungling, and officers were constantly scrutinizing other contingents to learn what they could. It was a precarious situation certainly.
@@Joe-xc8ch I think you misunderstood me. I was not saying Seymour is not responsible for the situation he found himself in I was commenting on how you in the recording didn't seemed get why Seymour took the Qing cav following him so nonchalant. I think Seymour new he was in over his head but the social standard he had to act under didn't allow him to not be calm about it.
This is quite a sensitive topic in my country, and is often retold with nationalistic and patriotic undertone, and is most often used in some sort of propaganda whenever the government needs justification for boycotting a specific country's product in a politically motivated situation. This is particularly evident if you visit any of the famous tourist sites in Beijing.
It's a shame when *any* country uses historical events as a political excuse to do bad things. Never mind the fact that our children grow up innocent until they're told "country x is full of bad people"..then the cycle and sins of our forefathers start all over again.
@@brianreddeman951 Yes. Best to present the historical details as objective facts. This is, however, idealistic at best, so I'd settle for no historical colouring or gross alterations of the facts to serve a political agenda.
@@ErulianADRaghath I noticed that when I studied in China. The Chinese history that the state broadcasts seems to be the hundred years of national humiliation rather than the complex and very interesting history of China before that point. Honestly, I feel like China is better than its current government.
@@ErulianADRaghath I usually tried to get my news from foreign sources so I didn't watch that much Chinese news, but you are right that some channels weren't nearly as bad. Watched more historical dramas than I can count to practice the language though. 英雄曹操 became a favorite of mine for some reason.
Actually, China didn't have a modern army, but several Westernizing Armies. Following this conflict, which led to real strong attempt to standardize the Army, which actually helped with fall of the Manchu Dynasty.
Aye. Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. Why Britain started the Opium War? ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@condorX2 Not exactly right. The British and others started opium as a major trade item much earlier. The Chinese refused to buy European products, barbarians couldn't make anything that they needed. They believed that the only things worth anything were produced there. If you wanted to buy Chinese s I lk, tea, etc.; you needed to buy it. Opium already was in China as a luxury item imported in small quantities on camel back over the silk road. The British found that India produced huge quantities of opium and the British East India Company (called John Company) began to import it by the shipload. It moved from luxury item to a cheap escape from the despotic and corrupt governments; while at the same time providing the silver needed to buy Chinese goods. For decades this continued, until the government finally realized the problem; and tried to stop it. This led to conflict between John Company and independent traders which got the British government involved. Unless you dig into it you will miss some very interesting facts. John Company operated on a Royal Charter for which it paid the Crown (of course that also meant the King). It was a stock company owned by many of the nobles and wealthy, including the Royal family, who therefore personally profited from it as investors. Finally taxes on both the auction of the opium harvest and its subsequent sale enriched the government and the crown without mentioning the profit on tea and other trade goods brought into Britain and its colonies from China. It was until after the Indian Mutiny in 1857 that this changed because the Crown took direct control and didn't. Want a direct involvement in that trade. Cotton then became a major crop, re during t he need for US cotton which had an impact on the US Civil War (by the way, the French started buying cotton grown in East Africa around the same time, again reducing the need for US cotton). So, there is alot of threads that are usually ignored when you see this war discussed.
I know that I typed better than that; here are some corrections. North Africa and Egypt not East Africa. The comment about cotton being grown in India was about it replacing the need for Southern cotton removing any need for the government to tie itself to the slave owning Confederacy. Similar reasons applied to France. An interesting point is that the conditions for the poor who actually grew the cotton wasn't much better than that of slaves in the Confederacy; they just weren't out right slaves and part of a system even cheaper to run than slavery.
@@condorX2 Spamming meets Counter-Spam. "Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium." The problem with this traditional narrative is that the spark for the "First Opium War" was the Qing authorities blockading the British Quarters in Guangzhou/Canton, besieging all British nationals (whether or not they had signed the agreement not to trade Opium or not), forbade anybody to give them the necessities of life like food and water, and essentially expected them to starve to death. This was not only inhumane, it was outright counter-productive. Because not only are you throwing away any and all progress you've made towards getting foreign merchants to sign (and ABIDE) by the agreement to not trade Opium in exchange for protection and the ability to conduct trade under the Qing "Canton System", but it's also an incredibly obvious casus belli that all but demanded a British armed response. The Son of Heaven wouldn't have tolerated "his subjects" being treated like this, and indeed Nurhaci's Seven Grievances were integral parts of the Qing ideology justifying their rebellion against the Ming and ultimate conquest of the position of Huangdi. Yet Qing conduct in the Canton Blockade handily violated three of the seven. It also plays in to a longer history of Chinese Imperial attempts to blanketly repress entire ethnicities or groups regardless of guilt or innocence backfiring BADLY (see: An Lushan). This is a major reason why the British government went from being ambivalent about the Opium trade and even engaging in some half-hearted cooperation with the Qing to suppress it, to supporting it. Because they recognizes that UNLESS the Opium Trade was not legalized in China AND the British could somehow oversee the good behavior of all British subjects (really really unlikely), the Qing authorities could use it as a wedge to strip British nationals of all rights and protections. Really, the only way Qing diplomatic conduct looks GOOD in this is if you don't pay close attention to what it was. And it is a crystal clear example of Late Qing Hubris. This is also why opponents of the Opium Trade and even British imperial expansionism as a whole like ex-President John Quincy Adams tended to support the British stance in both "Opium Wars." Because they recognized what the implications for Qing demands were, and how they would endanger other foreign nationals. " As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire." To which the British could point to the extremely degrading demands made by the Qing court on foreign embassies like the Macartney Mission's staff, the violation of (what the British and other foreigners saw as) neutral rights, and above all THE ATTEMPT TO MASSACRE BRITISH SUBJECTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR INNOCENCE OR GUILT and the need to have an enclave where they could be safe from sudden attack like the Canton blockade. Moral of the story: don't try and humiliate people with greater capabilities to humiliate you. " For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. " So in other words, it was much like the "Western Regions" or Mongolia, but the governors were British rather than Han Chinese or Manchu/Jurchen. One doesn't have to like British imperialism in order to try and whitewash the atrocities and follies of the High Qing, which is exactly what the conventional narrative of "And everything changed when the British nation attacked"/Century of Humiliation try to do. It also is actively detrimental (as it was at the time) to trying to understand the situation and counter moves like this, because it meant thinking in often-racist cliches as an excuse to avoid understanding the "Red Haired Barbarians" and the grievances their government aired. That doesn't mean the British wouldn't behave badly (obviously they would and did), but the "Century of Humiliation" would've involved a lot less humiliation had the Qing repeatedly acted with less diplomatic tact than Ribbentrop and more brutality than most competing factions. (Which curiously enough had repeated almost exactly about 200 years earlier, with attempts to crush "Japanese Piracy" leading to things like repressive sea bans, ethnic cleansing, and the like that often drove the locals into the hands of collaborating with the pirates. Which helped lead to widespread local resentment of the "Central State"'s authority and probably no shortage of people who would later on collaborate with British traders up to and including opium traffickers. Funny how that works.)
No mention of Germany, Italy and austria hungary? or did i not hear it? where there mentions? I couldn't find any... If you did mention them then sorry.
After the operation ichiagio (IDK the spelling) video I'd really like one on the KMT alliance with the allies. They said several times that the allies forced them to undermine their own interests in favor of the allied interests and I'd really like a deeper dive on it. I got next to nothing on this theater of WW2 in school and would like to hear more.
Yeah, in China the misinformed notion is that Chiang did very little to fight the Japanese. As my grandfather fought in that army, I would love to see a more fair and balanced evaluation of the Nationalist and Communist sides.
@@mmingfeilam your actually out of date and wrong. Since about 2010 there’s been an awkward embrace of the KMT involvement in the war. There’s even a memorial/museum in my province filled with statues of KMT troops. Something unimaginable 20 years ago.
@@zeitgeistx5239 which province is that, in my home province of Guangdong, I don't see any museum dedicated to Nationalists. I think you just answered your own comment, "awkward embrace", the Communist side is only beginning to begrudgingly acknowledge KMT contributions to the War against Japan. My family and I regularly watch TV shows from China, the Nationalist characters are still portrayed as either ambivalent or outright traitorous. Even if they do good deeds, it's because they were forced to, mostly toward the end. So yes, I still think people's knowledge of the truth about Nationalist role in the war is limited (thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial-japan-the-kmt-did/).
Kind of off topic but whenever i hear about the boxer uprising i think of Bioshock Infinite and how they managed to use a mostly forgotten historical event to world build in the gane
Video series idea - the major conflicts that Russia has indirectly caused, in chronological order There really is just something uniquely 'against the grain' that Russia has always brought to world politics, some of my favorite history!
I wonder what the world would look like if the Eight Nations was formalized . . . would it be like a version of NATO but much much earlier? Would WWI or WWII even happen? Could the Eight Nations have brought eternal peace to Earth by being the guardians?
The big issue I see is that at the time there were so many crippling and intractable divides between the different nations and governments. So even if you could get a sort of united front or agreements going- like the British, Russians, French, and Italians increasingly did- there were issues like Alsace-Lorraine, "Unredeemed Italia"/the Habsburg borderlands, and of course the Balkans and Poland. As well as some pretty fundamental differences in ideology (for instance, the German government going haywire and viewing Herbert Dow's busting their major business syndicates by out-competing them as major attacks on the Empire itself). Much like the Concert of Europe earlier broke down, in large part due to British and later French disillusionment with it and some squabbling among its core members. It isn't IMPOSSIBLE but it'd require a deft hand.
Its 2020 and serious historical discussions are now communicated with hilarious Simpsons and LOTR references :D Same talk by 2030. Justin: "So what you're saying is that the Europeans should have been nerfed?"
Name me another country that has survived getting invaded by eight nations at the same time then yrs later became a super power. 😂 shit is an anime movie.
The first rank were the young boys, the second the new recruits and the thrid Big Brothers. Hows the first rank get shot and dies? Poor young boys bad at their bullet proof Kongfu, need more partice. Hows the second rank get shots when retreat and dies? Damn young men must be thinking of women last night, breaks the Kongfu. Stupid young man. And us Big Brothers, we are real bullet proof, we all come back alive.
@098765 Craper Maybe it's just a topical joke? Because China is fucking awful - Nazi levels of awful. I doubt op would have anything bad to say about Hong Kong or Taiwan, both of which are racially Chinese.
@098765 Craper That's not really racist, that's prejudice, but I get your point. Point is it's probably just a joke. If this video was about the Prussians, I wouldn't be surprised to see people taking the piss out of Germans and their seemingly insatiable desire to take over Europe - doesn't mean I think they're racially inclined to do so.
The Boxer rebellion is that bonus mission you get at the end of the game where you get a unit from each faction you’ve been fighting in the campaign so far.
Aye.
Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place.
Why Britain started the Opium War?
ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@condorX2 chinese troll.
@@edenender you can't fix stupid.
@@condorX2 brits were some colonisers without any mercy but in Hong Kong the local population was better then under chinese rule
@@edenender Wrong.
These HK youngsters have no idea how HK was under British rule.
The Brits treated HKers like 3rd class citizens. All the wealth was stolen from HK and taken back to England.
All the high colonial government officials, including the governors, all retired very rich men.
The early governors even took part in opium smuggling. There were all sorts of draconian laws like Emergency Regulation 31, which allowed the governor to order anyone to be imprisoned without trial, for one year renewable. If the riots we're seeing today had happened under Britain, they would have been shut down immediately under the Public Order Ordinance, which allowed the Brits to ban demonstrations and arrest anyone before they even started the protest.
The public did not get to vote for the governor, he was appointed by the UK prime minister. At least now, there is a limited election to elect the Chief Executive.
Only in the last 20 years of rule did Britain give HK more freedom, and that's only because they knew they were leaving. -- Flux Mulder
RUclips SUPPRESSED my HK video - How the 5 Eyes control what you see
ruclips.net/video/_LPEif9xyiw/видео.html
Source
Hong Kong People better than Chinese?
ruclips.net/video/NiqueUJkFJw/видео.html
If the British imperialism can sell you drug (opium) and steal your land Hong Kong and hold you ransom what else can they not do but lie and be arrogant. HK citizens had no democracy during British rule. British believe in slavery so what’s new. Good for China to be strong and put the facts right.
-Jo Cheah
Why is BBC making fake news against China
ruclips.net/video/tcKw5jiT6wg/видео.html
The exciting conclusion to my random LotR tangent: The "kamikaze orc" was not in the book, only the film. I went and checked after this, haha.
would you like to make a video about the Chinese civil war，and what is your comment on the military leadership of chang kai shak？
In the book the blasting fire was something of a mystery.
Actually, the trope of "pioneer blowing himself up to destroy fortifications" is somewhat older, there is a (likely apocryphal) Prussian pioneer called Carl Klinke doing so during the Danish-German war. Since "Klinke" is German for "door knob", insert a lame pun about him opening the door.
(Fixed typo).
Yeah ... I'm familiar with the "hmmm ... what was _my_ source for that ... " which can lead to hours of digging around and trying to find old books ...
The Ultimate example of that was that I read two books on Kennedy and PT-109 in 1965 when I was like 14 years old (one popular and one obscure) ... and ... had this understanding of what really happened - that I came to question ... and then ... decades of on and off periodic attempts to find that obscure book I'd checked out from the New Orleans Public Library Book Mobile ... which I never did ... but ... one day ... I thought - "I could google 'PT-109 After Action Reports'" and ... I finally found the information I'd been looking for and corrected some of the details of my understanding of the battle ... Of course ... the intervening creation of the Internet ... helped with that ...
So ...persistence ...
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
.
@@ctibortrottelreiner3457 Is that why Colonel Klink is named as such, because he was a bit of a Dum Kopf?
'Acrobat Prostitute Leader of soldiers" Okay then, turn of the century China sounds pretty interesting also:
An hour of ramblings what have we done to deserve this?
I read adobe prostitute leader and thought this was some auto-caption stuff and then I re-read and finally remember that passage :D
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I had re-listen to that since it comes off as "odd" but then again lots of things seem that way about this event. Ps Is it a failed video if Justin doesn't spend more than an hour on a China video?
I'm gonna fight 'em all, a seven nation army couldn't hold me back
what about eight?
...shiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Nice
*Fight 'em off
Love that you allowed Justin to make videos, he has great insight into the Pacific theater.
Aye.
Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place.
Why Britain started the Opium War?
ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@condorX2 "Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium."
The problem with this traditional narrative is that the spark for the "First Opium War" was the Qing authorities blockading the British Quarters in Guangzhou/Canton, besieging all British nationals (whether or not they had signed the agreement not to trade Opium or not), forbade anybody to give them the necessities of life like food and water, and essentially expected them to starve to death.
This was not only inhumane, it was outright counter-productive. Because not only are you throwing away any and all progress you've made towards getting foreign merchants to sign (and ABIDE) by the agreement to not trade Opium in exchange for protection and the ability to conduct trade under the Qing "Canton System", but it's also an incredibly obvious casus belli that all but demanded a British armed response.
The Son of Heaven wouldn't have tolerated "his subjects" being treated like this, and indeed Nurhaci's Seven Grievances were integral parts of the Qing ideology justifying their rebellion against the Ming and ultimate conquest of the position of Huangdi. Yet Qing conduct in the Canton Blockade handily violated three of the seven. It also plays in to a longer history of Chinese Imperial attempts to blanketly repress entire ethnicities or groups regardless of guilt or innocence backfiring BADLY (see: An Lushan).
This is a major reason why the British government went from being ambivalent about the Opium trade and even engaging in some half-hearted cooperation with the Qing to suppress it, to supporting it. Because they recognizes that UNLESS the Opium Trade was not legalized in China AND the British could somehow oversee the good behavior of all British subjects (really really unlikely), the Qing authorities could use it as a wedge to strip British nationals of all rights and protections.
Really, the only way Qing diplomatic conduct looks GOOD in this is if you don't pay close attention to what it was. And it is a crystal clear example of
This is also why opponents of the Opium Trade and even British imperial expansionism as a whole like ex-President John Quincy Adams tended to support the British stance in both "Opium Wars." Because they recognized what the implications for Qing demands were, and how they would endanger other foreign nationals.
" As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire."
To which the British could point to the extremely degrading demands made by the Qing court on foreign embassies like the Macartney Mission's staff, the violation of (what the British and other foreigners saw as) neutral rights, and above all *THE ATTEMPT TO MASSACRE BRITISH SUBJECTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR INNOCENCE OR GUILT* and the need to have an enclave where they could be safe from sudden attack like the Canton blockade.
Moral of the story: don't try and humiliate people with greater capabilities to humiliate you.
" For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. "
So in other words, it was much like the "Western Regions" or Mongolia, but the governors were British rather than Han Chinese or Manchu/Jurchen.
One doesn't have to like British imperialism in order to try and whitewash the atrocities and follies of the High Qing, which is exactly what the conventional narrative of "And everything changed when the British nation attacked"/Century of Humiliation try to do. It also is actively detrimental (as it was at the time) to trying to understand the situation and counter moves like this, because it meant thinking in often-racist cliches as an excuse to avoid understanding the "Red Haired Barbarians" and the grievances their government aired.
That doesn't mean the British wouldn't behave badly (obviously they would and did), but the "Century of Humiliation" would've involved a lot less humiliation had the Qing repeatedly acted with less diplomatic tact than Ribbentrop and more brutality than most competing factions.
(Which curiously enough had repeated almost exactly about 200 years earlier, with attempts to crush "Japanese Piracy" leading to things like repressive sea bans, ethnic cleansing, and the like that often drove the locals into the hands of collaborating with the pirates. Which helped lead to widespread local resentment of the "Central State"'s authority and probably no shortage of people who would later on collaborate with British traders up to and including opium traffickers. Funny how that works.)
It got touched on a bit with Justin talking about the last samurai, but a video like this covering the boshin war and maybe the satsuma rebellion or just the Meiji restoration generally would be pretty cool
Follow Justin on twitter twitter.com/CBI_PTO_History @CBI_PTO_History
Follow Joe on twitter twitter.com/JoeFonsecaHist @JoeFonsecaHist
Follow MHV on twitter twitter.com/MilHiVisualized @MilHiVisualized
» TIME STAMPS «
00:53 - Why Uprising not Rebellion?
12:03 - Source Situation
13:03 - Myths & Tactics
18:01 - Prelude: Chinese vs. Chinese
24:44 - Military Forces: The Boxers
27:18 - Military Forces: The Chinese
31:57 - Military Forces: "Foreigners" (Europeans, Americans & Japanese)
58:58 - The First Expedition
1:07:33 - Taking the Fort
1:09:10 - The Second Expedition
1:37:48 - The Aftermath
1:38:59 - Treaty Signing
Talking about the boxer uprising and not mentioning British bringing in drugs from India in the first five minutes..
A small attempt to restore a dead mans honour. Eduard Thomann Edler von Montalmar (1853 - 1900) wasn't an admiral he was Fregattenkapitän (rank between commander and captain) and commanded SMS Zenta (small cruiser) on her way to Japan on a asian navytour as the uprising started. He sent 30 Marines to Peking and went there himself to see the situation with his own eyes as he was caught in the siege. His public shaming started when Times-correspondent Georg Ernest Morrison accused him of cowardice and inability. And so did the historians.
Morrison spent a long time in lazarett during the siege (legwound) but continued delivering eye-whitness-reports to the readers (Sterling Seagrave, Dragon Lady - The life and the legend of the last empress of china, 1992).
The command to retreat on the 22nd of June was given based on an agreement of all defenders of the eastern quarter (French, Germans, Italians, Japanese and Austro-Hungarians) to fall back to the british lines IF the americans are defeated at the western wall. They were afraid of being cut off. Unfortunately Thomann got on this day a (false) message claiming the americans are retreating. Based on this he gave the unfortunate order to retreat aswell.
He died at an exposed position at the wall, two other officers (Darcy, Wintherhalder) with him, inspecting the possibility for making a sortie as he was hit by a grenade and killed on the spot.
Fascinating recounting of the whole conflict. My first unit in the army was the 2nd battalion of the 9th infantry that was mentioned, funny how different of a light they painted their own actions in the official unit history, Colonel Liscum especially so. 'Bravely marching 85 miles into combat, when the Colonel and his men reached the walled city and the colors bearer fell dead, he valiantly picked up the colors and was also shot, supposedly saying "keep up the fire" before dying.' or at least that's what the unit history says lol. To this day I think 4th battalion 9th infantry still does the 'Manchu Mile' which is a 25 mile ruck march in commemorance of these actions. Soldiers who complete this when the coveted Manchu belt buckle that can be worn with the uniform. I also got to see the Liscum Bowl which was with the unit in Korea at the time, still under armed guard.
Crazy to think that Colonel Liscum had survived being seriously wounded in the civil war and also at the Battle of San Juan Hill, to finally be killed in China. Thanks for the in depth look at this whole conflict
Another in a series of Boxer Shorts.
I'll let myself out through the White Lotus door.
That needed to be said. Thanks.
Why did the Eight-Power Allied Forces quickly enter Beijing? It was the Han Chinese who helped lead the way. Manchu in Qing Dynasty is not China
Everybody gangsta till Germans bring out the pitchforks
And Russians come at you with their broken vodka bottle.
And Japanese want to hit you with huge stick like some short of tsundere character
@@apalahartisebuahnama7684 And when America walks off to call the artillery strike.
@@nukclear2741 and when britain want to sell you opium
@@seanp.anim15 After being impaled by a German with a pitchfork, shanked by a Russian's broken vodka bottle, bonked by a Japanese stick, and pummeled to smithereens by the United States Army, yeah, I think I am gonna need the opium.
would you like to make a video about the Chinese civil war，and what is your comment on the military leadership of chang kai shak？
There's already the Chinese History Podcast about the political side of that and the warlord era. It was so detailed that the relatives of warlord Ma Bufeng threatened to sue the host. ^_^
Blah b would you like to produce the link？
@@aaronia291
recordedhistory.net/china-history/
chinahistorypodcast.libsyn.com/
Didn't the Qing declare war on the Dutch, Belgians and Spanish even though they had no part in the taking of the forts? If so, was the taking of the forts really just a catalyst or also a pretext to do something (eliminate the legation district) that the Qing had wanted to do anyway?
@ They recognized that Belgium is rightful dutch clay and therefor declared war on them as a part of their war against the Netherlands.
Even Ottoman Empire sent a squadron of ships and soldiers. There were no hostilities between Qing and Ottomans but Chinese Muslims asked for representation and protection (IIRC) while Ottoman sultan at the time was a huge Islamist who was trying to flex his caliphate muscles. But, in a true sick man fashion, Ottoman forces arrived very late and returned empty handed.
Edit: My point is no matter the official status of hostilities and such, imho whole boxer affair was an open buffet imperialism for every nation with some form of prestige.
The Empress got played and thought the foreign powers intended to fuck her over succession issues. Dutch Belgains and Spanish are on the supposly fuck her list. The attack on the battary only confirmed her deepest fear.
Getting slight justification to do what you wanted to do anyways, is a regularity.
OK, I've GOTTA know - when these ad-hoc international conglomerate forces come together throughout history, are the non-English speaking nations(since we typically see the British or US at the center of these examples) also sending translators with their units; how the hell does this on-the-fly delegation & command structure get assembled? How does coordination even begin to work?
Having had my hand in some logistics work, it's hard enough to get people that speak the same damn language(allegedly...) all on the same page - I can't even imagine trying to get something like this working in a meaningfully positive way
At this time they would be a bit more likely to use French than English honestly. Though there was more English speaking involvement and this was around the turn of French to English preeminence.
It was certainly difficult. Since the German von Waldersee was given overall command by the governments in charge of the allied army, and he was still on his way when the second expedition moved out, there was no one directly in charge of the mission. Each force was commanded by their own officers, and each of the contingent commanders met everyday to discuss the plan. This took place in a variety of languages. Many spoke German or French, but there were also interpreters, official and not, helping out. All that came together with a good bit of patience, cooperation, and the understanding that they needed to work together to have a fighting chance. Even still, it was messy. At Peitsang, for example, the Americans arrived too late to participate and there was a period there where British guns were firing into the backs of the advancing Japanese, who had moved too far north as they attacked through the 6ft. tall crops.
@@Joe-xc8ch Leave it to us Americans to arrive late to a fight haha. Do you know if any language was preferred? My field is linguistics and I spent a while helping a friend with his research on the ascendency of English as global lingua franca so any turn of the century grand alliance communication always interests me.
404Dannyboy It's likely that the officer corps was bilingual so i'm sure it wouldn't be too hard for this very reason, there also would have been regulars that could translate and it wouldn't have been too much of a hindrance.
At the time it was normal for the British to speak several languages.
The Boxers were originally against the Qing government until Cixi endorsed them: in this way it’s accurate to call their movement a “rebellion”.
Wasnt it that the dowager empress was more or less a puppet of the civilian government which itself was divided between the modernists and the manchu banner clans? And the boxers were a bunch of organized crime families, cults terrorist organizations and other assorted ruffians that gained popular support on a harsh anti western traditionalist platform, and then ingratiated themselves to the manchu?
It definitely has elements of a civil war, ao I think rebellion is not an inaccurate term.
More movies and books should be based off of the boxer rebellion.
Can you make a video about the portuguese colonial war?
It all worked out great for Yuan Shikai at least, his unit was relatively small compared to other westernised contingents prior to the Boxer war. However, seeing how the rest of the westernised troops in northern China were destroyed or devastated, the Qing government had to rely on Yuan for their modernisation programme afterwards.
1:14:46 are the accounts claiming that the Japanese marine captain died helping the British marine captain climb credible in any way? It sounds amazing and I'd love to find more information about it.
@MildlyUpsetGerbil It's one of those things that was told differently every time it came up. Some accounts say the British flag is raised first, some say the Japanese flag is raised first. Captain Hattori certainly dies, unfortunately, but the surroundings events are so tied to evolving Anglo-Japanese friendship that its hard to know what really happened. It's probably legendary, if I had to come down on it professionally (though I like to think it was real :) ), but it remains significant because it means both the British and the Japanese felt the need to have this little diplomatic moment become a story, surrounded as they both were by imperial rivals and competitors. You'll see a lot of British and American commentators during the episode praising the Japanese and the way they worked together with the British, while putting down the Russians as upstarts or disheveled. Silbey has a narrative on the Dagu assault that mentions it and the competing flags come up in the official reports hiding away at the archives.
@@Joe-xc8ch Absolutely fascinating!
@@Joe-xc8ch Thanks for the reply!
Why did the Eight-Power Allied Forces quickly enter Beijing? It was the Han Chinese who helped lead the way. Manchu in Qing Dynasty is not China
An "ad-hoc, slapped together" non-Army of foreigners with mismatched weapons quickly beat the well-trained Qing armies that greatly outnumbered them, and you say it wasn't a pushover. No, not a *pushover* but definitely a route.
I like to emphasize the importance of the Battle of Tianjin when I talk about this because, if the Japanese engineer hadn't made that sacrifice to blow open the gate, we would have been looking at a definitive allied defeat. It's hard to know what would have happened then. Repulsing a second allied attack after Seymour would have been quite the morale boost for the imperial soldiers, and the allies, who were already wary about advancing with 20k men after the success at Tianjin, would have been compelled to wait for a much larger force. The point is that the popular perception of the Boxers and Imperial troops during this war as fitting the Hollywood 'savage warrior' trope is unfair to the modern new army the Qing placed in the way of the foreign army. The 8 Nation army definitely won in the end, and there probably would have been a vicious punitive campaign if they hadn't, but it is worth giving the Qing soldiers their due. And, while the allied force was ad-hoc and slapped together, they were soldiers too.
Actually the only "well-trained" Qing units that fought there were three divisions (2 infantry and one cavalry), most of the men fighting were the Boxers, which were more a militia than a real army.
@@Joe-xc8ch Well, the Qing forces of the Wuwei Lujun were fairly good in both equipment and training. They were only around 50k soldiers (of which 30k acted in the campaign), though.
@@Joe-xc8ch Wikipedia is more accurate than you, I could probably do a 2 hour video addressing your inaccuracies.
This is what happens when you view "history" through Anglo-centric lenses & fail to look at other primary sources.
1:11:16 you claim the "Taku/Dagu Forts are "Western Constructed", not even close, the forts have been in existence since the 1520s & were in fact a continually expanded upon series of earth works originally built to deal with Japanese sea raiders, the only "Western" feature of the (4) main forts was a central (half) Battery of three 35 ton 12" RML Armstrong Guns & 20+ smaller locally produced guns of varying calibers, if we include the 2 other northern forts, not attacked we have a total of over 136 guns facing the Alliance.
1:13:25 "some Chinese Gunboats".....no, there were 4 German built Destroyers all built at the Schichau-Werke shipyard in Elbing, these were yard numbers :-
No. 608 Hai Jing (Sea Eagle) later commissioned as SMS Taku
No. 609 Hai Nju later commissioned as FS Takou
No. 610 Hai Hola (Sea Lotus) later commissioned as leitenant Burakov (named in honor of the Artillery Officer of Gunboat Korietz killed during the action)
No. 611 Hai Lung later commissioned as HMS Taku
All these Destroyers were laid down & completed in 1898 making them only 2 years old, each was armed with 6 x 3pdr (47mm) Hotchkiss Quick Fire guns & 2 x 14" Torpedoes, making them formidable opponents with the potential to sink the entire assembled fleet of the 8 Nation Alliance.
Taken into service by each of the Navies, the "Destroyers" were mostly De-Rated to Torpedo Boats owing to the fact that by this time the smallest Torpedo Boats of the respective Navies were already some 50% larger in tonnage with heavier Deck Guns & larger improved Torpedo systems.
I really don't know what you are doing with your silly little inaccurate anecdotal stories but history does not exist for your entertainment, history is made up of real people with real lives which were irrevocable changed, changes that have shaped & will continue to shape the world in unforeseen ways.
Perhaps you should look for another line of work.
The problem for the Qing was that these trained armies were really not national armies. They were mainly raised by leaders authorized by the government. These groups weren't mutually supportive, lacked common doctrine between armies, and often did not have common arms. Although earlier, during the First Sino-Japanese War, there was a Northern fleet under one leader and a Southern fleet under another. The Southern fleet contributed nothing to the war. The leader of the ground forces in the North had the most effective army during the Taiping Rebellion, but since it was recruited on personal ties and there was no retirement policy many units now were old men, addicted to opium because of boredom and inactivity. The funds for these forces had been cut due to fears of him growing too strong. Many of the same type of problems continued into the Boxer Rebellion period. This decentralized issue continued beyond the Boxer Rebellion and was a factor in the expulsion of the Quin Dynasty in 1911 (best of my memory on the year, my best sources are stored at the moment).
Loved it, I learned so much! Q&A would be great
Time for Justin to do this fulltime and start his own channel. I will be the first to donate to his Patreon account.
Manchu, sir! Keep up the fire!
This needs to be made into a movie better than 55 days in Peking. And the trailer and end credits needs to have the 7 nation army remix in it
The Chinese started modernising their armed forces in the 1860s during the Taiping uprising, as they started buying western weapons and equipment, as well as hiring western advisors. However, as you well point out, the Qing military structure was overly complicated and only some units were modernised by 1900. The Wuwei corps included 5 divisions (4 infantry and 1 cavalry, the cavalry being the Gansu braves), and was outfitted with the most modern equipment the Chinese had, including the Type 88 rifle, which was a Chinese licensed version of the Mauser 88. Of the 4 infantry divisions, 2 were 'veteran' made out of the rests of the Beiyang forces that fought in the first Sino-Japanese war, and the other two were raised after the war to make up for those losses.
Another big problem with the Qing in this war was that divided they fell. While in previous conflicts with the Western powers all the assorted regional grandees and central administration had more or less stepped behind the Huangdi's will to fight the conflict, the nature of the Boxer Rebellion and the Dowager Empress's policy towards internal fighting led to large swaths jumping ship from the start and refusing to abide by orders from the Court-Society alliance. In part because they understood how this would likely go and wanted no part of it.
More Justin!
Joe seems to take a lot of stuff in to consideration in this.
Though I'm kind of baffled that he doesn't or didn't consider the national character of the British officers. When he talked about Admiral seamore. Brits where quite stoically everything is fine nothing is wrong.
You're right, I should have talked more about national characteristics and their perceptions during the war. The role of national characteristics is an important keystone of my thesis actually, though I deal more with what the British made of the other participants. British "Stiff upper lip" masculinity was certainly an important part of how officers tried to conduct themselves at the time, even becoming part of civilian life during the siege of the legation. Civilians took pride in walking without fear between buildings, regardless of the constant sniping, for example. Looking clean and put together was frowned upon, as it meant you weren't working hard enough, and, my favourite, one instance of British ladies stepping over each other to get a Marine captain to promise them that he'd shoot them first if the Boxers broke in. Seymour, though he attempted something quite brave, was in over his head and his inability to properly deal with the evolving situation shouldn't be overlooked and simply chalked up to stoicism. He was making mistakes. His own report comes across a little sheepish, really. A major factor of this war was international competition between the participants of the 8 Nation alliance. Reporters were keen for a story of an imperial rival bungling, and officers were constantly scrutinizing other contingents to learn what they could. It was a precarious situation certainly.
@@Joe-xc8ch I think you misunderstood me. I was not saying Seymour is not responsible for the situation he found himself in I was commenting on how you in the recording didn't seemed get why Seymour took the Qing cav following him so nonchalant. I think Seymour new he was in over his head but the social standard he had to act under didn't allow him to not be calm about it.
This is quite a sensitive topic in my country, and is often retold with nationalistic and patriotic undertone, and is most often used in some sort of propaganda whenever the government needs justification for boycotting a specific country's product in a politically motivated situation. This is particularly evident if you visit any of the famous tourist sites in Beijing.
It's a shame when *any* country uses historical events as a political excuse to do bad things. Never mind the fact that our children grow up innocent until they're told "country x is full of bad people"..then the cycle and sins of our forefathers start all over again.
@@brianreddeman951 Yes. Best to present the historical details as objective facts. This is, however, idealistic at best, so I'd settle for no historical colouring or gross alterations of the facts to serve a political agenda.
@@ErulianADRaghath I noticed that when I studied in China. The Chinese history that the state broadcasts seems to be the hundred years of national humiliation rather than the complex and very interesting history of China before that point. Honestly, I feel like China is better than its current government.
@@404Dannyboy CCTV1 tends to do that, but the documentary channel CCTV9 is fairly good in that sense. It's still CCTV, but a lot less edgy.
@@ErulianADRaghath I usually tried to get my news from foreign sources so I didn't watch that much Chinese news, but you are right that some channels weren't nearly as bad. Watched more historical dramas than I can count to practice the language though. 英雄曹操 became a favorite of mine for some reason.
Actually, China didn't have a modern army, but several Westernizing Armies. Following this conflict, which led to real strong attempt to standardize the Army, which actually helped with fall of the Manchu Dynasty.
Aye.
Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium. As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire. For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place.
Why Britain started the Opium War?
ruclips.net/video/EYq7nfqVVe8/видео.html
@@condorX2 Not exactly right. The British and others started opium as a major trade item much earlier. The Chinese refused to buy European products, barbarians couldn't make anything that they needed. They believed that the only things worth anything were produced there. If you wanted to buy Chinese s I lk, tea, etc.; you needed to buy it. Opium already was in China as a luxury item imported in small quantities on camel back over the silk road. The British found that India produced huge quantities of opium and the British East India Company (called John Company) began to import it by the shipload. It moved from luxury item to a cheap escape from the despotic and corrupt governments; while at the same time providing the silver needed to buy Chinese goods. For decades this continued, until the government finally realized the problem; and tried to stop it. This led to conflict between John Company and independent traders which got the British government involved. Unless you dig into it you will miss some very interesting facts. John Company operated on a Royal Charter for which it paid the Crown (of course that also meant the King). It was a stock company owned by many of the nobles and wealthy, including the Royal family, who therefore personally profited from it as investors. Finally taxes on both the auction of the opium harvest and its subsequent sale enriched the government and the crown without mentioning the profit on tea and other trade goods brought into Britain and its colonies from China. It was until after the Indian Mutiny in 1857 that this changed because the Crown took direct control and didn't. Want a direct involvement in that trade. Cotton then became a major crop, re during t he need for US cotton which had an impact on the US Civil War (by the way, the French started buying cotton grown in East Africa around the same time, again reducing the need for US cotton). So, there is alot of threads that are usually ignored when you see this war discussed.
I know that I typed better than that; here are some corrections. North Africa and Egypt not East Africa. The comment about cotton being grown in India was about it replacing the need for Southern cotton removing any need for the government to tie itself to the slave owning Confederacy. Similar reasons applied to France. An interesting point is that the conditions for the poor who actually grew the cotton wasn't much better than that of slaves in the Confederacy; they just weren't out right slaves and part of a system even cheaper to run than slavery.
@@condorX2 Spamming meets Counter-Spam.
"Britain waged a brutal war on China in the 19th-century because Beijing refused to allow the British to flood the Chinese market with opium."
The problem with this traditional narrative is that the spark for the "First Opium War" was the Qing authorities blockading the British Quarters in Guangzhou/Canton, besieging all British nationals (whether or not they had signed the agreement not to trade Opium or not), forbade anybody to give them the necessities of life like food and water, and essentially expected them to starve to death.
This was not only inhumane, it was outright counter-productive. Because not only are you throwing away any and all progress you've made towards getting foreign merchants to sign (and ABIDE) by the agreement to not trade Opium in exchange for protection and the ability to conduct trade under the Qing "Canton System", but it's also an incredibly obvious casus belli that all but demanded a British armed response.
The Son of Heaven wouldn't have tolerated "his subjects" being treated like this, and indeed Nurhaci's Seven Grievances were integral parts of the Qing ideology justifying their rebellion against the Ming and ultimate conquest of the position of Huangdi. Yet Qing conduct in the Canton Blockade handily violated three of the seven. It also plays in to a longer history of Chinese Imperial attempts to blanketly repress entire ethnicities or groups regardless of guilt or innocence backfiring BADLY (see: An Lushan).
This is a major reason why the British government went from being ambivalent about the Opium trade and even engaging in some half-hearted cooperation with the Qing to suppress it, to supporting it. Because they recognizes that UNLESS the Opium Trade was not legalized in China AND the British could somehow oversee the good behavior of all British subjects (really really unlikely), the Qing authorities could use it as a wedge to strip British nationals of all rights and protections.
Really, the only way Qing diplomatic conduct looks GOOD in this is if you don't pay close attention to what it was. And it is a crystal clear example of Late Qing Hubris.
This is also why opponents of the Opium Trade and even British imperial expansionism as a whole like ex-President John Quincy Adams tended to support the British stance in both "Opium Wars." Because they recognized what the implications for Qing demands were, and how they would endanger other foreign nationals.
" As a result of that event, known as the Opium Wars, China was defeated and humiliated by the British and, among other degrading acts, forced to cede the historic Chinese region of Hong Kong to the British Empire."
To which the British could point to the extremely degrading demands made by the Qing court on foreign embassies like the Macartney Mission's staff, the violation of (what the British and other foreigners saw as) neutral rights, and above all THE ATTEMPT TO MASSACRE BRITISH SUBJECTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR INNOCENCE OR GUILT and the need to have an enclave where they could be safe from sudden attack like the Canton blockade.
Moral of the story: don't try and humiliate people with greater capabilities to humiliate you.
" For approximately 150 years, Hong Kong was a colony of a ruthless colonial power in which London implemented its dictatorial will in the Chinese region through a British colonial governor there who enjoyed a luxurious and conceited lifestyle on soil which was being exploited by London, even though it was not Britain’s to enjoy in the first place. "
So in other words, it was much like the "Western Regions" or Mongolia, but the governors were British rather than Han Chinese or Manchu/Jurchen.
One doesn't have to like British imperialism in order to try and whitewash the atrocities and follies of the High Qing, which is exactly what the conventional narrative of "And everything changed when the British nation attacked"/Century of Humiliation try to do. It also is actively detrimental (as it was at the time) to trying to understand the situation and counter moves like this, because it meant thinking in often-racist cliches as an excuse to avoid understanding the "Red Haired Barbarians" and the grievances their government aired.
That doesn't mean the British wouldn't behave badly (obviously they would and did), but the "Century of Humiliation" would've involved a lot less humiliation had the Qing repeatedly acted with less diplomatic tact than Ribbentrop and more brutality than most competing factions.
(Which curiously enough had repeated almost exactly about 200 years earlier, with attempts to crush "Japanese Piracy" leading to things like repressive sea bans, ethnic cleansing, and the like that often drove the locals into the hands of collaborating with the pirates. Which helped lead to widespread local resentment of the "Central State"'s authority and probably no shortage of people who would later on collaborate with British traders up to and including opium traffickers. Funny how that works.)
and then Charlton Heston totally saves the foreign legation
out of curiosity is this the sam cemore or saymore? who fucks up at jutland?
Superintendent Chalmerskov
For the life of me I can't find the gong gong rifles he talked about. Can I get a link or a correct spelling?
**ahem**
*pum pum pum pum pum pum, pum pum pum pum pum pum*
pum pum pum pum-pum, pum pum pum pum pum pum pum!
No mention of Germany, Italy and austria hungary?
or did i not hear it? where there mentions? I couldn't find any... If you did mention them then sorry.
1 hour and 50 mins of chinese history? This'll be good.
Would love it if Justin can make a deep video on the KMT's situation and Chiang's thinking during WW2 to educate the English speaking masses.
After the operation ichiagio (IDK the spelling) video I'd really like one on the KMT alliance with the allies. They said several times that the allies forced them to undermine their own interests in favor of the allied interests and I'd really like a deeper dive on it. I got next to nothing on this theater of WW2 in school and would like to hear more.
Yeah, in China the misinformed notion is that Chiang did very little to fight the Japanese. As my grandfather fought in that army, I would love to see a more fair and balanced evaluation of the Nationalist and Communist sides.
@@mmingfeilam your actually out of date and wrong. Since about 2010 there’s been an awkward embrace of the KMT involvement in the war. There’s even a memorial/museum in my province filled with statues of KMT troops. Something unimaginable 20 years ago.
@@zeitgeistx5239 which province is that, in my home province of Guangdong, I don't see any museum dedicated to Nationalists. I think you just answered your own comment, "awkward embrace", the Communist side is only beginning to begrudgingly acknowledge KMT contributions to the War against Japan. My family and I regularly watch TV shows from China, the Nationalist characters are still portrayed as either ambivalent or outright traitorous. Even if they do good deeds, it's because they were forced to, mostly toward the end. So yes, I still think people's knowledge of the truth about Nationalist role in the war is limited (thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial-japan-the-kmt-did/).
Kind of off topic but whenever i hear about the boxer uprising i think of Bioshock Infinite and how they managed to use a mostly forgotten historical event to world build in the gane
Tolkein was not even born at the time of the Boxer Rebellion.
Joe, why are countries like Sweden-Norway listed in the Boxer Protocol?
JUSTIN!
Evertime the host bursts out laughing, I wonder if he's listiening to a comedy album the rest of us are not aware of.
Would be fun to do it again
In your dream.
Bom bom bom bom bom bom, bom bom bom bom bom bom
the german guns？
@@aaronia291 the song: 55 days in peking
Igor The Best lol I thought that was the poem German guns by Baldric from Blackadder go forth
@@aaronia291 lol
"But they don't stop cause that's how the Japanese work"
and
"Except that the Japanese are there, and the Japanese are the Japanese"
Why did the Eight-Power Allied Forces quickly enter Beijing? It was the Han Chinese who helped lead the way. Manchu in Qing Dynasty is not China
Video series idea - the major conflicts that Russia has indirectly caused, in chronological order
There really is just something uniquely 'against the grain' that Russia has always brought to world politics, some of my favorite history!
@ ...and, what a series it would be!!! Just the political chess alone reads like a Tom Clancy novel!
Joe? Joe who?
Joe mama.
That time you legitimately steal 4 German built Chinese Torpedo Boats....
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Taku
Rekt by a bunch of colonial reserves
China:"Shit"
Yo that’s kind of sad for China. Like rip bro they got f’d up real bad.
I wonder what the world would look like if the Eight Nations was formalized . . . would it be like a version of NATO but much much earlier? Would WWI or WWII even happen? Could the Eight Nations have brought eternal peace to Earth by being the guardians?
Peace for them war and subjugation for others.
The big issue I see is that at the time there were so many crippling and intractable divides between the different nations and governments. So even if you could get a sort of united front or agreements going- like the British, Russians, French, and Italians increasingly did- there were issues like Alsace-Lorraine, "Unredeemed Italia"/the Habsburg borderlands, and of course the Balkans and Poland. As well as some pretty fundamental differences in ideology (for instance, the German government going haywire and viewing Herbert Dow's busting their major business syndicates by out-competing them as major attacks on the Empire itself).
Much like the Concert of Europe earlier broke down, in large part due to British and later French disillusionment with it and some squabbling among its core members.
It isn't IMPOSSIBLE but it'd require a deft hand.
Where are the country balls.
For a video that is not a comedy there was an awful lot of laughter. Quite strange. There was good information in there though.
Its 2020 and serious historical discussions are now communicated with hilarious Simpsons and LOTR references :D
Same talk by 2030. Justin: "So what you're saying is that the Europeans should have been nerfed?"
Name me another country that has survived getting invaded by eight nations at the same time then yrs later became a super power. 😂 shit is an anime movie.
Yes we get it. they were not primitive savages. You don't need to spend 30 min on this point. There is so much more to cover.
The Han should be grateful to the Eight-Nation Alliance. Without the Eight-Nation Alliance, the Han cannot escape the Manchu rule.
how pretentious
Hope this will reverse in 21st or 22nd century
How woud you feel that it was your countrys history?
China was a victim in many cases, abused by west and Japan.
Its not a lughing mater
If you are incapable of laughing at yoursepf, you deserve to be ridiculed.
No one is laughing at you. Entertaining things happen in even the worse situations. Its called nuance, learn it and life will be better
The first rank were the young boys, the second the new recruits and the thrid Big Brothers.
Hows the first rank get shot and dies?
Poor young boys bad at their bullet proof Kongfu, need more partice.
Hows the second rank get shots when retreat and dies?
Damn young men must be thinking of women last night, breaks the Kongfu. Stupid young man.
And us Big Brothers, we are real bullet proof, we all come back alive.
The chinese. Always up to no good.
098765 Craper Doesn’t matter, just joking.
@098765 Craper Maybe it's just a topical joke? Because China is fucking awful - Nazi levels of awful. I doubt op would have anything bad to say about Hong Kong or Taiwan, both of which are racially Chinese.
@098765 Craper That's not really racist, that's prejudice, but I get your point. Point is it's probably just a joke.
If this video was about the Prussians, I wouldn't be surprised to see people taking the piss out of Germans and their seemingly insatiable desire to take over Europe - doesn't mean I think they're racially inclined to do so.
@098765 Craper It's not racism if it's not based on race
@@aloadofbollocks988 nazi? Oh ...