REVOLUTION OF 1911

INTRODUCTION:

The Revolution of 1911 holds a significant place in the history of China, for it was during this revolution that Manchu dynasty was overthrown. For the first time, a republic was established in the country. The debates surrounding the revolution of 1911 are hinged upon four key issues: (a) the nature of the movement- was it anti Manchus or anti imperialists? (b) who were the most important participants? (c) can the movement be regarded as a prelude to the May 4th movement? And lastly

(d) was the revolution a success or a failure?

If one has to assess the HISTORIOGRAPHY of this event, broadly speaking, there are three main schools which have put forward their respective theories with regard to the 1911 revolution. The first school is the Orthodox school, which views the revolution as a prologue to the future Chinese revolutions of the 20th century. The second school, the Neo-Orthodox school consists of the communist historians or Marxists, who view the 1911 revolution as a bourgeois revolution. They held that it was a phase in the series of revolutions that were to follow. And the third group of scholars is that of Western scholars. In their opinion, this revolution was neither a prelude nor a phase. Rather, it was an inevitable event which led to the collapse of the Manchu dynasty.

POLITICAL BACKGROUND TO THE REVOLUTION:

The end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century had witnessed the growth of Chinese nationalism.

According to Mary C. Wright, the emergent Chinese nationalism had two dimensions- anti- Manchuism and anti-Imperialism. Anti-Manchu sentiments had existed ever since the inception of the dynasty. Manchus were looked upon as foreigners by the Han race and their attempts to strengthen their position by ruling autocratically had made them extremely unpopular. It soon became clear that the Manchus were not ready to surrender any of their claims to rule over China.

According to I.Y. Hsu, anti-Machu sentiments had been evident in case of the various popular uprisings that had taken place throughout its history. The most prominent of these were the Taiping rebellion, the various movements launched by secret societies and the Boxer rebellion. All these movements wanted an overthrow of the Manchu rule and its replacement by a more favourable system of governance. Such sentiments percolated down to the 20th century too. Wolfgang Franke mentions that the period from the end of 1908 to early 1910 appeared to be peaceful, but this was only on the surface. The revolutionaries had been secretly working intensively in order to prepare for a revolution.

Our analysis of the political background to the revolution of 1911 may begin with the ‘Boxer Protocol’ (1901) that the Manchus had signed with the foreign powers. This was an unequal treaty that demanded disarmament, taking down of forts, opening of ports, a huge indemnity of 450 million taels of silver, execution of members of the imperial household along with the extermination of the boxers. China’s sovereignty was being challenged openly now. Wu Yu-Chang aptly states that as a consequence of these humiliating demands, China was being driven ‘deeper and deeper into the abyss of a semi-colony’. Scholar…………has used the phrase ‘cutting of the Chinese melon’ in order to describe how foreign powers had carved their own spheres of influence on the Chinese mainland.

Owing to these developments discussed above, anti Manchu and anti imperialist sentiments continued to grow. It was this rising tide of nationalism that compelled the government to introduce a series of reforms in 1898. Chesneaux states that it was these very reforms which sounded the death knell for the Manchus, for they gave rise to new revolutionary currents and succeeded in intensifying the nationalist sentiments. Having said that, let us see how this argument holds true.

The key areas in which reforms were initiated included- education, the army and administration and institutional organisation. The old system of competitive examination was abolished. It is important to note that the new education system was promoting a political consciousness among the students that would later threaten the existing political system. Educational institutions had also become centers of political activity and were used as staging grounds for launching all kinds of demonstrations and protests against the Manchu government led by the students. A ‘New Army’ was created that was trained to handle new equipment. The traditional system of recruiting soldiers was also abolished and the Banner system that had provided the military support base to the Manchus was also abolished.

The Manchu regime also agreed to the grant constitutional reforms. Elected Assemblies were created at a national and provincial level. As far as the Manchus were concerned these changes were not meant to reduce the power or authority of the Manchus in anyway. These reforms were aimed at promoting greater centralization of the power and influence of the Manchus. This in turn was perceived as a direct threat to the autonomy that the provincial governors enjoyed. Thus the Manchus began to be resented by their once loyal allies.

One particular reform of 1911 was the plan of nationalization of the railways by the Manchu government. This announcement became the immediate cause for the outbreak of the revolution of 1911. In the spring of 1911, the imperial government had decided to nationalize the remainder of the railway system of China, including the part that was still in course of construction, which was in private hands. The money required for this was to be raised by means of a loan from the Big Four powers (England, France, Germany and USA). This nationalization was met with opposition especially in the provinces like Hunan and Hupei. The reason for this opposition was that the central government was taking charge of the construction of the Hankow-Canton and the Hankow- Chungking-Chentgu lines, which had been started by private companies who had taken loans from the provinces concerned.

The gentry saw this step as a move by the by the central government to be able to concentrate more power in its hands so as to be able to extend greater privileges to the foreign powers in return for the loans taken on 4 may, 1911. The bourgeoisie also saw this as yet another attempt by the Manchus to give more privileges to the foreign powers and thus, another means through which the national sentiments of the Chinese had been betrayed. This had led to popular outcry culminating in the outbreak of revolution on 10 October 1911 in Wuchang, thereby often called the Wuchang uprising. From Wuchang, the revolution spread to other provinces, resulting in Manchu abdication on 12 February 1912 and the establishment of a republic with Sun-Yat-Sen as its first provisional president.

PARTICIPANTS OF THE REVOLUTION OF 1911:

One of the academic debates which centre round the revolution of 1911 is about the role of the various groups and classes which took part in the revolution. At the same time, scholars have tried to find out which group played the most prominent role. The new groups that had emerged during this period were the students and intellectuals; women; new military men; overseas Chinese and the

working class. But at the same time the older social groups like the gentry, the bourgeoisie and the masses also played an important role in the Revolution of 1911.

· ROLE OF GENTRY AND BOURGEOISIE:

M.C. Bergere has argued that the rise of a new social group in China- the commercial bourgeoisie was an important phenomenon. The bourgeoisie that had come up mainly in the port towns of China like Canton, Shanghai etc were the worst affected by the foreign intrusion into China. Their own interests were often in conflict with that of the foreign interests. The petty bourgeoisie was also becoming disenchanted with the Manchu rule as the influx of foreign goods had a disastrous affect on the indigenous industries. Moreover, the inability of the Chinese government to impose tariffs on the imported goods had led to their free and cheap circulation within the Chinese markets. Owing to these reasons, nationalist sentiments among the bourgeoisie were demonstrated strongly throughout this period in the form of strikes and boycott of foreign goods. Their anti-imperialist sentiments were quickly turned into active hostility against the Manchu state for its failure to protect the Chinese and their business interests. There was a formation of an alliance between the gentry and the bourgeoisie. Wolfgang Franke points out that earlier the gentry had been a unified force which supported the ruling dynasty. But now, discontent with the Manchus, they allied with the bourgeoisie. Thus, it can be seen that by the 20th century the increasing foreign encroachment and the inability of the Manchus to tackle this foreign threat had given rise to a great deal of opposition and resentment within China.

While analyzing the political role of the Chinese bourgeoisie, Bergere argues that the entire bourgeoisie class was nationalistic in its opposition to special privileges given to foreign powers and in its demand for a strong central government capable of providing conditions for the growth of a national market. Thus, the “bourgeoisie ideology” was coloured by nationalism and constitutionalism and they came to play an important role in the boycott of foreign goods, the agitation for parliamentary governments and played a key role in mobilizing a new kind of public opinion. It is for this reason that some scholars like Edward Rhoads have described the Revolution to be a bourgeoisie revolution. He has argued that the bourgeoisie was quite independent and extraordinarily active in the nationalist agitations.

However, Bergere argues that when the revolution came, the bourgeoisie proved too weak to be able to play a leading role. Thus, the 1911 revolution cannot be characterized as a bourgeoisie revolution as is done by some scholars. This according to her was due to the fact that the Bourgeoisie had not yet developed a distinct class identity. Even Esherick has argued that most of the Bourgeoisie demonstrations had taken place under gentry leadership and even their Self-Government society was actually headed by a member of the gentry. Thus, he believed that the distinction between the gentry and bourgeoisie was not yet definite enough for the latter to play the leading role.

In contrast to the views held by Bergere, scholars like Ichiko Chuzo, David Buck and Robert Kapp held that the gentry was motivated only by the desire of self-preservation and not by any higher ideal of improving China. They argue that their role should not be overemphasized, a point which even Joseph Esherick makes.

· STUDENTS AND INTELLECTUALS:

This was also the period which saw the growth of intellectual ideas. According to I.Y. Hsu, modern and western ideas like human rights, democracy, equality, independence, freedom etc were gaining currency in China. Nationalism, democracy and republicanism had become the motivating forces for revolutionary change in China.

Wolfgang Franke states that the most important element in the revolutionary movement was the young intellectuals and students. They helped prepare the ground for the revolution. According to Franz Micheal, it was the students, who had studied in Japan, USA and Europe that the first modern Chinese intellectuals had emerged. This group realized the weakness of the Manchu Government and the danger facing the country and the only way out according to them was revolution.

· PEASANTRY:

Western historians, particularly in the early works on 1911 revolution have tended to undermine the role played by the peasantry class. The traditional view dismissed the role played by the peasant class on grounds of it being a passive, conservative and traditional class that was disinterested in revolution, as it was tied to the land. This view doesn’t’ hold good any longer. The fact was that the peasantry was deeply stirred by increasing foreign intrusion and also by increasing missionary activity. In fact the biggest peasant movements in China took place when foreign impact was the strongest. In 1909 alone for instance there were 113 well-documented outbursts of rebellion and in 1910 the number rose to 285. According to John Lust, who has provided the strongest argument for the significance of “movements from below”, during this period it was this constant agitation that had completely undermined the authority and confidence of the existing establishment.

Though the causes for the uprisings were essentially traditional in character i.e. floods, famine, agrarian discontent, unemployment, what was unique about these uprisings was that they were specifically political in character. Their main purpose was to overthrow the Manchu government and the imperial system. However, Escherick has argued that while scholars, who have worked on the role of the peasantry have been able to challenge the elitist interpretation of the revolution they have gone overboard in describing the direct role that the peasantry may have played.

REASONS FOR EMERGENCE OF SUN-YAT SEN AS THE LEADER OF THE REVOLUTION:

A very important development that was taking place in the period prior to the revolution of 1911 was the rise of one particular figure on the political scene – Dr. Sun Yat Sen. Many scholars regard him as the father of the Chinese Republic. K.T.S. Sarao has argued that he was not only the promoter but also the inspirer of the revolution. A number of historians belonging to the orthodox school highlight the heroic role played by Sun-Yat; they believe that Sun had ushered in the era of Republicanism into China.

In order to account for the reasons for the rise Sun Yat Sen, one may briefly discuss his early career. In 1905, Sun Yat left Europe for Japan. Under his leadership, more than 70 representatives of the China Revival Society, the Restoration Society and the Daily Knowledge society gathered in Tokyo for the founding of a new organization called the China Revolutionary League. The political programme of the new organization, as proposed by Sun Yat Sen had four points: repulsion of the Manchus, restoration of China, establishment of a Republic and equal land ownership.

He made some very significant contributions to the revolution. Recognising the existence of social forces capable of bringing about a revolution, he called for the unification of all revolutionary organizations under one head. He therefore formed the Chinese United League of Tung-Meng Hui in 1905. The Tung-Meng Hui because of its multi-provincial and multiclass character provided a unified central organization that resembled a modern political party, which served as a rallying point for all revolutionary and progressive forces in the country. Thus, according to some scholars he deserves credit for bringing into the mainstream the revolutionary movement. He succeeded in bringing secret societies to the forefront. He also played an important role in garnering the support

of the overseas Chinese for the cause of the revolution. Ever since he went to Hawaii in 1895 he continued to woo the overseas Chinese in Hongkong, Japan, USA, Britain etc.

Sun Yat’s ideas had considerable influence on the development of the revolutionary movement. He formulated the three people’s principles: People’s National Consciousness or Nationalism; People’s Rights or Democracy and People’s livelihood or Socialism.

However, in recent years a number of questions or doubts have been raised regarding the role played by Sun in the Revolution of 1911 and to his commitment to the ideas of Republicanism. For instance, Esherick has argued that the leadership to his party was in the hands of Yang Qu-Yun, who was more insistent on the principles of republicanism than Sun. Moreover, he also argues that Tung-Meng Hui was not as effective or unified as it was made out to be. This viewpoint has been supported by K.S.Liew, who argued that it was more a ‘federal union of the provinces’ rather than a ‘unitary organization composed of individuals’.

Harold Schiffrin throws light on some weaknesses of Sun Yat Sen. He says that Sun Yat was remarkably vague and self-contradictory. Mary Wright goes to the extent to say that Sun Yat was not the leader needed! He had little idea of what a transfer of power would mean. And he was equally vague on the subject of China’s relation to the West.

WAS THE MOVEMENT A SUCCESS OR FAILURE ? FAILURE:

• Wu Yu-Chang has brought to our attention one particular shortcoming seen in the Revolution of 1911. He argues that the anti-manchu propaganda did not fully succeed in raising the national consciousness of the people to the desired The important reasons for the failure of revolution of 1911 were the lack of preparation and errors in leadership with regard to the fundamental problems of revolutionary theory, revolutionary organization, the revolutionary armed forces and the revolutionary provisional government. In similar vein, Mary Wright holds that the most immediate and obvious cause of the failure of the revolution was the limited vision of the revolutionary leaders and their ability to effectively organize. And this problem of organization was not seen in the top leadership but also in the localities.
• However, as Wright brings to our notice, we must not forget that the reason why no adequate leadership could emerge was because of lack of Moreover the body of revolutionary tradition and doctrine was also thin. There was no time because it was felt that prolonged disorder would invite foreign intervention and partition of the country. Thus, the leadership was handed over to Yan Shih Kai. Yuan Shikai’s formal assumption of the office of Presidency in Beijing signalled the failure of the revolution.
• Wolfgang Franke argues that even though Sun Yat Sen and his followers succeeded in giving a severe blow to the tottering Confucian state, they did not really provide any conclusive programme so as to replace the old order. Herein lies the reason for the failure of the
• Communist historians have attributed the failure of the revolution of 1911 to the weak nature of the bourgeoisie. Ch’en Tu Hsiu states that the bourgeoisie was highly divided, lacked a class consciousness and therefore not successful as a united

SUCCESS:

• Wolfgang Franke points out that earlier the gentry had been a unified force which supported the ruling dynasty. But now, discontent with the Manchus, they allied with the And unlike earlier times, now the gentry was no longer unified. This was therefore another factor that contributed to the success of the revolution.
• Although the revolution of 1911 failed to wipe out feudalism completely, it did succeed in giving it a fatal It overthrew the Machu dynasty and herein lies the greatest significance of this revolution.
• Mary Wright states that in a way, the revolution of 1911 had laid a base for the second phase of the Chinese Revolution (1919-27) which began with the May Fourth She asserts that not only the roots of the post-1919 phases but of the post-1949 phases of the Chinese Revolution also lie the first decade of the 20th century.
• One of the impacts of the revolution was that it allowed the centrifugal forces to New centres of power began to form in the provinces. The revolution led to a lot of internal conflicts. This was one of the main reasons why Sun Yat resigned the Presidency. He realized he would not be able to hold the country together.

CONCLUSION:

In short, from different perspectives, we may get different impressions of the 1911 revolution. In its broadest sense, we may say that the revolution started as a movement sponsored by small groups of intellectuals, but finally developed into a large scale political and social process. Zhang Kaiyun aptly summarises the nature of the movement when he says that the revolution of 1911 was a three pronged attack against imperialism, feudalism and an autocratic monarchy.

LINK (and comparison ) BETWEEN THE MAY FOURTH AND THE 1911 REVOLUTION:

To commence with,

Hu Sheng reiterated the point made by Mao Zedong. Sheng argues that before 1919, the Chinese did not make a firm stand against the imperialists and even sought ‘help’ form them. But the May Fourth movement witnessed an uncompromising stance against imperialism and feudalism.

Woflgang Franke states that the situation in 1919 was both politically as well as economically different from that in 1911. The War had led to the Europeans being pre-occupied with affairs back home and this gave the Chinese economy the much needed breathing space. China now developed its industrial sector. Industrial cities like Shanghai, Tientsin and Hankow attracted large number of peasants; and this led to the emergence of a new class of workers. These workers had become free from the traditional family ties and were open to new ideas, Marxism being one of them.

The political programme of the new organization-China Revolutionary League, as proposed by Sun Yat Sen had four points: repulsion of the Manchus, restoration of China, establishment of a Republic and equal land ownership. It did not say anything about the overthrow of the imperialists. In fact, the league even dreamed of winning the support of the imperialists by adhering to the Unequal Treaties and promising to pay the indemnities as stipulated. However, if we compare this with the situation during the May fourth movement, we notice that unlike the revolutionary period of 1911, the anti-imperialist stance was very strong. thus, the strong anti-imperialist sentiments which were somewhat missing in 1911 were brought to the forefront in 1919.

May Fourth movement as a precursor of the Chinese Communist Revolution:

The May Fourth movement had led to several important developments. One such development was the growth of the working class, which emerged as an important group that could combat the imperial forces. More importantly, socialist ideas began to take roots in China as a result of this

movement. The Marxist-Leninist ideas penetrated into China. It is in this context that the May Fourth movement has been rightly called the precursor to the Chinese Communist Revolution. The New Culture movement too witnessed the spread of Marxism. The May Fourth movement laid down a sound foundation base for the Chinese Communist Party to emerge. The progressive minded intellectuals were the first ones to accept the Marxist-Leninist ideology. Thus, May Fourth paved the way for the founding of the CCP.