Talk:Taiping Rebellion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
華
 This article is maintained by the Chinese history workgroup.
More information about this article...


This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

'Climax': "Control of the river meant that the Taipings could easily supply their capital at Nanjing (which they renamed Tianjing)." The part in brackets is redundant - the renaming of Nanjing was mentioned earlier in the article.

Why are the titles of the later Taiping leaders translated as "prince" rather then "king"? They use the same character 王 (Wang). None of the literature I have read supports this difference and translates both cases as "king". Zotlan 10:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

This article has nothing to do with Catholics in China as the Taiping were Protestants. I'm removing the link.--Gary123 04:06, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

At least 30 million people are believed to have died.

The article only accounts for 130,000 of these deaths. What happened to the other 29,870,000 people who (presumably) died in the violence?

And in what way may this rebellion, or the deaths connected to it, be considered genocide?

Jonathan D. Spence in God's Chinese Son mentions that he specifically targeted some groups for destruction. Interestingly Catholics were an example as his, somewhat inconsistent, Christian influences were strongly Old Testament and intent on smashing "idols." He learned Christianity from a Southern Baptist minister named Issachar J. Roberts. One of his first acts of controversy was to destroy Confucian tablets he deemed idolatrous. He also had racial overtones deeming the Manchu people to be "devils." The death toll in the rebellion is a tad confusing because the majority, possibly vast majority, of the deaths were caused by the resultant famines and plagues caused by mismanagement rather than by active purgings or battles. However he did practice summary executions for many infractions of his religious movement/law.--T. Anthony 12:52, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Why was this removed?

Hong Xiu­quan had been a minor bureaucrat, but he came under the influence of Christian missionaries and then after falling into a trance he emerged believing that he was the younger son of God, thus brother of Jesus Christ, on earth to found a new kingdom. He preached a mix of Christianity, Confucianism and communal utopianism. He did little for some years, until after study under Issachar Roberts he began a new iconoclastic sect called the God Worshippers.

I find it interesting. -- Error

It's not removed, it's just relocated to where it's more relevant: the biography of Hong Xiuquan, where it is an integral description of his early life. --Menchi 04:13 24 May 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] YES

That point is valid!


[edit] Hey

what about Zuo Zongtang?

Was it a Rebellion or a Revolution? The Chinese Government refer to it as a Revolution.

[edit] Death toll

The article now reads about the death toll: (as many as 40 or 50 million according to some sources). What are those sources? Shanes 09:08, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hey guys, I've made a page on Hong Rengan. I will try to expand all the pages on the Taiping rebellion over the next few months. 24.124.61.165 04:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

That would be great, this article begs for improvement. I suggest you create a username. Colipon+(T) 22:24, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The last figure listed from some travel website is "as many as 200 million lives lost...", this seems like a typo. 200 million is unbelievably high, isn't that close to half the population of China at that time?--70.189.32.215 22:59, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

According to Columbia University China had over 400 million people by 1851. Most things I've read confirm that more or less. I believe they had in least 200 million when the US became a nation. Still the idea half the population died in the Taiping Rebellion would be an absurd exaggeration. Generally the figures are between 20 and 50 million. Is the 200 million figure still up?--T. Anthony 12:27, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Taiping Social Organization Information

The article mentions that the Taipings promoted monogamy. While this is true, it is lacking key information. Perhaps there should be a theology section. The Taiping administration forbade any of their core members that led the million army that took Nanking from marrying. They attempted to seperate families entirely, and they would shuffle soldiers from one army to the next to keep people from garnering any loyalty to individuals. The promise was given that the people would be able to marry and restore the utmost theme of the Taiping rebellion, the heavenly family, once the Heavenly Kingdom was fully established on earth. It was not until the last two years, when defeat had become apparent to the sane leaders, that they allowed any Taiping members to marry.


[edit] European involvement

Could someone add more information about European and American involvement in the rebellion? Perhaps they played only a minor role, but I think it would be good to have a section on their motivations and actions during it. I really don't know enough about the subject to even attempt this. TastyCakes 07:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I think I'm mixing this up with the Boxer Rebellions to some extent. Don't know if European involvement is noteworthy here... TastyCakes 07:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • According to Chinese source [1]: In 1853, ambassadors of UK, the US, and France visited Nanjing, the capital of Taiping. In the later period, June 2, 1860, a group of westerners were orginized by an American named Warl (sorry, not sure how to spell) in Shanghai, called "rifle team". They cooperated with Qing government to fight Taiping. On Jan 1, 1862, a king of Taiping refused some requirement of right by a British warship captain named Robin. On Feb 21, 1862, an Anglo-French joint army attached Taiping army in Shanghai. Sept 21, 1862, Taiping army killed Warl during a battle. May 10, 1863, the Anglo-French joint army bombarded Ningbo city, and caused Taiping army retreated.--Mongol 06:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poor quality entry

Could someone with relevant information about this conflict please rewrite and reorganise it - it looks more like an essay by a 9th grader school student than an encyclopedia entry

[edit] Hakka

The Hakka article describes them as a subgroup of Han Chinese. So wouldn't the Hakka members of the Taiping Army be Han Chinese? DHN 17:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I find that section of the article weird as well. Great emphasize is placed on "Hakka", which seems to suggest "Hakka" and "Han" are different. =/ Hanfresco 04:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

This is my first Wiki edit. Wouldn’t have bothered, ‘cause the article as a whole needs a lot of professional attention – but this point is so wrong I had to fix it. The paragraph I edited dealt with the fact that the Taipings came mainly from two minority populations - Hakka & Zhuang – fine – that’s a valid point worth mentioning. But it went to develop its ideas based on the assumption that the Hakka are a non-Hàn ethnic minority group. Wow!. No. No. No. The Hakka are most certainly Hàn Chinese. And that is something a Wikipedia entry should NOT get wrong (and not just because who gets classsified as belonging to which minority [or majority] ethic group in China according to what criteria is an issue that everyone there takes very very seriously). Yeah, someone observant had made a quick fix to one line, but the rest of the paragraph was still factually way way out there. So I’ve replaced the parts that were wrong with real facts (as required by the context) that ARE correct. It’s still not pretty – not sure why the spacing in the 2nd para is messed up. And I didn’t touch the idea that Shí Dákāi’ was a rare asset for the Taiping owing in part to his being bilingually proficient in Zhuàng & Hakka – researching that one is beyond my scope (though I have seen sources stating MOST of the MILLIONS of Zhuàng living in China back then - and now - were equally fluent in Zhuàng and their local Hàn dialect, often several Hàn dialects – just as the Hàn in regions of South China where multiple dialects overlap were then (and are now) ShootingStarTP 19:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Climax

"At its height, the Heavenly Kingdom encompassed much of south and central China, including Nanjing, with the northwards extent reaching Tianjing."

In this article it's stated that Tianjing was a name given to Nanjing itself; perhaps it would be more appropiate to express this as "At its height, the Heavenly Kingdom encompassed much of south and central China, including Nanjing at its most northern point". Or here Tianjing is Tianjin misspelled?

It is indeed a misspelling. Corrected it and added some more information.Zotlan 11:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poor Quality Entry addendum

There are problems with the writing style of this article. For instance, in the section "Beginning", I don't understand this phrase: "..economic him quite a rare asset to the Taipings."

That was vandalism. If you find something like that again, see earlier versions of the article for the original text. Wikipeditor 00:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
For that matter, feel free to fix an article if you see vandalism. That is, after all, one of the big features of Wikipedia. --KNHaw 05:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, if anything is changed, make sure the original information is valid. I wish the people without usernames would join before writing anything history-related.

[edit] Yang Xiuqing

All historians unanimously agree that Yang was the leader with the most power in the Taiping rebellion, so i feel it is important to include him in the introduction.

It is commonplace for people to think that Hong was the most powerful and influential leader. Franz Michael in his work "the taiping rebellion" questions Hong's involvement stating it was even less then we originally think.

However the importance of Hong is definitely worth putting him in the introduction, however same goes with Yang.

[edit] Additional Biblical books

Where can I found the additional Biblical books he added to the Bible in addition to the Old and New Testaments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.224.54.249 (talk) 07:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/a/i/Talk%7ETaiping_Rebellion_7d49.html"