Germany, China, and the Way to the Boxer Uprising

Ge many, China, and he Way o he Boxe Up ising1 Jan Koč a The aim o his a icle is o explain he in luence o Ge man policy in Beijing and in he p o ince o Shandong on he o igins o “ he Boxe Up ising”.2 Ge man policy o‑ wa ds China in la e 1890’s was ma ked by unconcealed a ogance, and Ge man in e ‑ e ence in Shandong, al hough caused by un es in he p o ince, only wo sened he si ua ion. The ci cums ances o he seizu e o he Jiaozhou Bay in 1897 and o subse‑ quen u ning o Shandong in o Ge man sphe e o in luence in 1898 a e o he mos pa excluded om he scope o his a icle, o hey will be ea ed sepa a ely a an‑ o he occasion. Since 1644, China was uled by he Qing dynas y which was o Manchu o igin, hus alien o China. The golden e a o he Qings ended a he end o he XVIII cen‑ u y. Fo he la ge pa o he XIX cen u y, China su e ed om ho ible up isings as well om o eign in e en ion which so a culmina ed in 1860, when B i ish and F ench oops conque ed Beijing. Since 1861, Chinese policy was domina ed by Em‑ p ess Dowage 3 Cixi (1835–1908), who assumed egency o he mino son, and his scena io was epea ed se e al imes o he es o he li e. In 1875, ano he child became Chinese empe o — Cixi’s nephew and adop ed son who eigned unde he name Guangxu (li ed 1871–1908). Up o 1894, i seemed ha China had ecupe a ed om he u moil o mid ‑nine een h cen u y. Bu he Sino ‑Japanese Wa had e ealed Chinese weakness: indulgence and g eed o he cou ; co up ion o Chinese o icials; poo igh ing abili ies o Chinese a my and na y. Fo eign powe s couldn’ ail o ex‑ ploi such a si ua ion. 1 This s udy is one o he ou comes o he g an The Poli ical and Economic In e es s o G ea B i ain and Ge many in China, 1894–1914, awa ded by he G an Agency o he Czech Repub- lic (GA13–12431S). 2 This e y e m is mos inaccu a e. I s pa icipan s didn’ call hemsel es “Boxe s”, no did hey ebel agains he Qing dynas y — in 1900, hey we e decla ed pa o Chinese a my. Roo s o he mo emen and i s e y o iginal name a e a ma e o con o e sy and will be eminded la e . 3 Cixi was nei he an Emp ess no a dowage , e en hough she is gene ally known unde his i le. She was a concubine o Empe o Xian eng ( uled 1850–1861) and mo he o his only son and successo , Empe o Tongzhi ( uled 1861–1875). 42 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 Un il 1897, he Ge mans didn’ ake pa on o eign agg essions agains China. On Sep embe 2, 1861, P ussia and China concluded a ea y a Tianjin, hus inaugu a ed mode n diploma ic ela ions. One somewha dis u bing e en ook place in 1864, du ‑ ing he wa be ween Aus ia, P ussia, and Denma k. P ussian wa essel cap u ed Danish ship in Chinese e i o ial wa e s, and Vice oy Li Hongzhang (1823–1901), ha ‑ ing ecen ly o de ed a ansla ion o ea ise abou in e na ional law, induced he P ussians o elease he essel.4 On July 21, 1870, nume ous o eigne s and Ch is ians including F ench consul in Tianjin we e slaugh e ed du ing an i ‑missiona y io s.5 Since he ep esen a i e o he No h ‑Ge man Con ede acy was he hen dean o he diploma ic co ps, his du y was o coo dina e o eign esponse on such an e en . The Ge mans indi ec ly sa ed China om ano he F ench agg ession by being a acked by F ance hemsel es du ing he P usso ‑F ench Wa . Bu he ebo n Ge man Empi e was a g ea powe , and g ea powe s needed a place in he sun. O cou se Ge man ac i i ies didn’ ha e only de imen al e ec on China. Many Ge mans we e employed in Chinese Impe ial Ma i ime Cus oms Se ice, which was a majo sou ce o income o Chinese budge .6 Ge man mili a y ad iso s assis ed mode niza ion o Chinese a my, and Chinese a med o ces we e s ongly dependen on wa ma e iel o Ge man o igin.7 Fo i ica ions o Po A hu we e designed by Ge man enginee s. Bo h ba leships owned by he Chinese p io o he Sino ‑Japanese Wa , Dingyuan and Zhenyuan, we e buil by he Vulcan na al ya ds in S e in, o ‑ de ed in 1881 and a i ing a e he Sino ‑F ench Wa .8 In 1887, he Ge mans (Telge and Company) buil a eleg aph line ac oss Taiwan.9 Since 1885, Ge man ins uc‑ o s we e aining Chinese mili a y pe sonnel in many pa s o China.10 I is mos 4 J. K. FAIRBANK — LIU, Kwang -ching (Eds.), The Camb idge His o y o China: La e Ch’ing, 1800–1911, Vol. 11, Pa 2, Camb idge 2008, p. 196. 5 H. B. MORSE, The In e na ional Rela ions o he Chinese Empi e: The Pe iod o Submission, 1861– 1893, Vol. 2, London, Bombay, Calcu a 1918, pp. 239–261. 6 In 1893, he income o ma i ime cus oms o alled 21,989,000 aels, i.e. one ou h o o- al income (and expendi u e, o a his ime China had a balanced budge o 88,979,000 aels) o Chinese cen al go e nmen . FAIRBANK — LIU, Table 21 on p. 63. Tael is a adi- ional Chinese sil e cu ency. I s alue was cons an ly d opping. In 1875, 1 B i ish pound was wo h o 3 aels; in 1901, o 6.67 aels; and in 1903, 7.5 aels. In 1901, 1 sil e ael was equal o 3.055 Ma ks. H. B. MORSE, The In e na ional Rela ions o he Chinese Empi e: The Pe‑ iod o Subjec ion, 1894–1911, Vol. 3, London, Bombay, Calcu a 1918, pp. 367–368. 7 I is in e es ing ha while Ge man mili a y ins uc o s we e aining Chinese oops, Ge - many didn’ wish o assis imp o ing o Chinese unde s anding o diplomacy. In 1896, China announced he in en ion o build a diploma ic school in Beijing, and asked o B i - ish ad iso . Ge man Fo eign O ice (Auswä iges Am ) ecommended cau ion, and Ge man Minis e o China on Heyking disclaimed a no ion o B i ish -Ge man school o Chinese diploma s. Finally, he plan came o nough . N. PETERSSON, Impe ialismus und Mode ni‑ sie ung. Siam, China und die eu opäischen Mäch e 1895–1914, München 2000, p. 53. 8 FAIRBANK — LIU, p. 248. 9 Ibidem, pp. 261–262. 10 D. R. REYNOLDS (Ed.), China, 1895–1912: S a e ‑Sponso ed Re o ms and China’s La e Qing Re olu ion: Selec ed Essays om Zhongguo Jindai Shi (Mode n Chinese His o y, 1840–1919), New Yo k 1995, pp. 69–70; FAIRBANK — LIU, pp. 267–268. A his ime, he e was no uni o mi- JAN KOč AR 43 in e es ing ha du ing he decisi e na al ba le o he Sino ‑Japanese wa , a Yalu (Sep embe 17, 1894), ci cums ances o ced a Ge man a my o ice (!), who was p es‑ en on boa d o Chinese lagship, o assume command o Chinese squad on.11 And on Ap il 23, 1895, a e he wa , only he T iple In e en ion o Russia, Ge many, and F ance sa ed China om u he losses o e i o y. The in e en ion was sugges ed by Russia, and main Ge man aim was o p e en bila e al deepening o Russo ‑F ench coope a ion. Bu Ge man no e o Japan was by a he mos sha p.12 The wa s a ed a new e a o in e na ional i al y in he Fa Eas , and his i al y was shown also on inancial ma ke . The mos impo an o Ge man inancial ins i u‑ ions in China was he Deu sch ‑Asia ische Bank (DAB), es ablished in 1889 by a con‑ so ium led by Deu sche Bank.13 Whe eas a Russo ‑F ench conso ium a Russo ‑F ench conso ium len 400 million ancs (15.82 million pounds) o China on July 6, 1895,14 Deu sch ‑Asia ische Bank coope a ed wi h B i ish ‑owned Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Co po a ion (HSBC). On Ma ch 23, 1896, HSBC and DAB len 16 million pounds o China, and on Feb ua y, 1898, his loan was ollowed by ano he one o he same amoun .15 On June 3, 1896, China concluded a de ensi e alliance wi h Russia agains Japan and he Russians we e g an ed he igh o build he e minal pa o he T ans‑ sibe ian Rail oad h ough Manchu ian e i o y.16 I became clea ha his Russian design was endange ing Chinese so e eign y, and Russo ‑Chinese ela ions s a ed y in Chinese land o ces. Se e al ice oys and go e no s we e aining mode nized uni s on hei own; a ious uni s we e equipped by weapons o di e en o igin and calib e; and mode n mili a y educa ion was in oduced only h ough p i a e e o o ice oys. Bo h Li Hongzhang and his colleague Zhang Zhidong, Vice oy o Guangdong and Guangxi, used se ices o Ge man ins uc o s ex ensi ely. 11 FAIRBANK — LIU, p. 106. P e iously, bo h Admi al Ding Ruchang and his B i ish na al ad- iso ha e been wounded. This s o y pe haps ela es o Ge man ad iso on Hanneken, who was a ha ime assis an di ec o o he No he n Coas al Na y. REYNOLDS, p. 69. 12 As a possible explana ion o he pe cei ed di e ence be ween he Ge man no e and he o he ones, inaccu a e ansc ip ion o he o iginal ex in o Japanese was sugges ed. A. M. POOLEY (Ed.), The Sec e Memoi s o Coun Tadasu Hayashi, Basings oke 2002, pp. 82–84; M. KAJIMA, The Eme gence o Japan as a Wo ld Powe , 1895–1925, Ve mon , Tokyo 1968, p. 16. Ne e heless, Ge man Minis e o Japan, on Gu schmid, was well awa e o he di e ence, as shown in his epo o Be lin om Ap il 23, 1895. Whe eas he Russian no e poin ed ou ha he “ esis ance” again h ee g ea powe s was impossible, he Ge man no e clea - ly used he e m “ igh ”. Die G osse Poli ik de eu opäischen Kabine e, 1871–1914 ( u he only GP), J. LEPSIUS — A. MENDELSOHN -BARTHOLDY — F. THIMME (H sg.), Bd. IX, Be - lin 1923, N . 2252, pp. 275–278. A dis inguished schola Ian Nish is o he opinion ha he sha pness o he no e was a esul o empo al s a e o mind o Ge man Empe o Wilhelm II. I. H. NISH, Japan’s Fo eign Policy, 1869–1942: Kasumigaseki o Miyakezaka, London, Hen- ley, Bos on 1977, p. 40. 13 h p://www.bankgeschich e.de/de/docs/Ch onik_D_Bank.pd , p. 34, [2014–09–07]. 14 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 53. 15 P. KŘIVSKÝ — A. SKŘIVAN, S ole í odchází: S ě la a s íny „belle époque“, 2nd Ed., P aha 2004, pp. 270, 283; MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 53–54, 116–117. 16 KAJIMA, pp. 49–53. The au ho , howe e , s a es e oneously ha he ea y was signed on May 22, 1896. 44 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 o de e io a e. La e , Ge man Minis e o China Edmund on Heyking (1850–1915) p i a ely old o his Aus o ‑Hunga ian colleague Mo iz on Czikann ha he go he imp ession ha Chinese o icials we e wea y om ies o Russia.17 Did his hin he possibili y o close Ge man ‑Chinese coope a ion? Subsequen seizu e o Jiaozhou by Ge man o ces hwa ed any chance on such a de elopmen , had i exis ed a all. Ge man policy in China was ine i ably in luenced by Ge man opinion on China and he Chinese. Be ween 1896 and 1899, Ge many was ep esen ed in China by Edmund on Heyking, who a i ed o China oge he wi h his wi e Elisabe h, a amous w i e . He opinion o he Chinese was mos unpleasan : “Wha e e he Chinese may ha e been in he pas , oday hey a e no hing bu di y ba ba ians who need a Eu opean mas e and no a Eu‑ opean ambassado — he soone he be e !”, she w o e in he dia ies in 1897.18 Ge man Minis e o Japan, on Gu schmid, was allegedly e en s aigh e when he explained o his Chinese colleague in Japan: “You O ien als a e jus plain beas s.“19 A splendid example o an opposi e iew was Paul Geo g on Möllendo , an employee o he Impe ial Ma i‑ ime Cus oms Se ice. O iginally sen by enligh ened Vice oy Li Hongzhang o Ko ea in o de o p omo e Chinese in luence, he sided wi h he Ko eans, espec ed Ko ean cus oms, and ied o s eng hen in e na ional posi ion o Ko ea.20 Ne e heless, Ge ‑ man policy in China, as well as policy o o he na ions, was based on sense o whi e supe io i y.21 This iew was based on acial, cul u al, as well as eligious di e ences. Bu China was no conside ed only backwa d and unenligh ened, bu also po en‑ ially dange ous. This sen imen wasn’ new. P io o 1894, China seemed o be a ela‑ i ely s ong coun y.22 He a med o ces we e in he p ocess o g adual mode niza‑ ion and he na y was conside ed he s onges in he Fa Eas . Chinese au ho i ies planned building a ailway h ough Manchu ia and e en demanded e ocession o he Possie a Bay, su ende ed o Russia in 1860. The Russians we e so ale ed by g ow‑ ing Chinese asse i eness ha hey inally s a ed building he T anssibe ian Railway in 1891.23 Wi hin a ew yea s, e e y hing had changed.24 The de ea o 1894–1895 led o he s uggle o concessions and sphe es o in luence. Ne e heless, he e y de ea 17 Haus -, Ho - und S aa sa chi , Wien ( u he only HHS A), Poli isches A chi ( u he only PA) XXIX, China, Ka on ( u he only K .) 6, Be ich e 1898, N . 2. Czikann an Gołu chow- ski, Peking, Janua y 7, 1898. 18 G. STEINMETZ, The De il’s Handw i ing: P ecoloniali y and he Ge man Colonial S a e in Qin‑ gdao, Samoa, and Sou hwes A ica, Chicago, London 2007, p. 361. 19 Quo ed in: D. SCOTT, China and he In e na ional Sys em, 1840–1949: Powe , P esence, and Pe ‑ cep ions in he Cen u y o Humilia ion, Albany 2008, pp. 129–130. 20 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 10–13. 21 Fo a ious aspec s o Sinophilia and Sinophobia, see STEINMETZ, pp. 361–421. 22 Al eady in 1883, Edmund Fi zmau ice, a membe o B i ish Pa liamen , s a ed: “The Chi‑ nese Empi e in he las ew yea s had shown an ex ao dina y ecupe a i e powe (…) occupied a posi ion in Asia almos equal o he mos palm days o i s his o y.” Quo ed in: SCOTT, p. 82. 23 W. L. LANGER, The Diplomacy o Impe ialism, 1890–1902, New Yo k 1951, pp. 171–172; A. MALOZEMOFF, Russian Fa Eas e n Policy, 1881–1904: Wi h Special Emphasis on he Causes o he Russo ‑Japanese Wa , Be keley, Los Angeles 1958, pp. 26–27, 38–40. 24 “The wa showed he wo ld o he i s ime how as onishingly he G ea Qing Empi e — which had been agg essi ely lexing i s muscles a ound i s pe iphe ies o se e al decades — eally was.” W. T. ROWE, China’s Las Empi e: The G ea Qing, Camb idge, London 2009, p. 230. JAN KOč AR 45 o China by mode nized Japan was a p oo o inhe en capabili y o Asian na ions. The Manchus pe haps we e unable o mode nize China on hei own — in ac , hey we e equen ly conside ed in e io e en o he Chinese –, bu many Wes e n ob‑ se e s ha e jus lea ned o ea Japanese designs. Du ing he Sino ‑Japanese Wa , he Japanese ha e o cibly ini ia ed e o ms in Ko ea, and a e he wa hey s a ed assis ing Chinese e o ms as well. The p ospec o mode nized China unde Japanese u elage was ho ible. And Japan he sel , which s a ed o cou China a e he wa , had clea ly p o en bo h he willingness and po en ial o achie e such a change. Ge man Empe o was among he i s o acknowledge his ac . Al eady in 1895, he o de ed a amous pain e He mann Knack uss o d aw a pic u e called “The Yellow Pe il”, o “Peoples o Eu ope, P o ec You Mos Sac ed Possessions” (“Völke Eu opas, wah eu e heiligs en Gü e ”). The pic u e, based on a ske ch by Wilhelm II himsel , depic ed a med emale pe soni ica ions o Eu opean g ea powe s, led by A changel Michael, uni ed unde a c oss and wa ching a Eu opean ci y h ea ened by da k cloud wi h a d agon and Buddha in i s middle. The pic u e had o exp ess Empe o ’s wish o uni e Eu opean coun ies bo h agains he Yellow Pe il and agains “ana chism, epub‑ licanism, and nihilism”. Wilhelm II’s special en oy, Helmu h on Mol ke he Younge , p esen ed he pic u e o Russian Cza , who was much pleased.25 Ge man Empe o conside ed Russia a bulwa k agains Asian Paganism and cul u al h ea , i.e. agains he Yellow Pe il.26 Such Ge man a i ude owa ds Asian coun ies couldn’ ail o ha e consequences bo h in Beijing and Shandong. The i s g ea powe ewa ded o he T iple In e en ion was F ance. Al eady in 1895 he F ench annexed la ge e i o y a Sino ‑Lao ian bo de .27 The B i ish ollowed F ench lead and in Feb ua y, 1897, compelled China o ag ee wi h a “ ec i ica ion” o Sino ‑Bu mese bo de .28 Bu hese a eas, al hough la ge, we e oo emo e and insig‑ ni ican , and hei loss didn’ cause much disa ec ion in Beijing. Russian schemes in Manchu ia wen hand in hand wi h F ench desi e o build a ailway om F ench In‑ dochina o Chinese p o ince o Guangxi. Ye he beginning o a new phase o humili‑ a ion o China is a ibu ed o Ge many. On 1 No embe 1897, wo Ge man Ca holic missiona ies belonging o he Socie y o he Di ine Wo d we e mu de ed in he Juye coun y in Shandong,29 ei he by casual bandi s o , mo e p obably, by he Big Kni e So‑ cie y (Dadaohui).30 In e alia ion, on No embe 14, Ge man o ces unde command o 25 LANGER, p. 448; PURCELL, p. 90; STEINMETZ, pp. 426–427. The pic u e is a ailable a h p://de.wikipedia.o g/wiki/Da ei:Voelke _Eu opas.jpg, [2014–09–07]. The lady hugging Ge mania isn’ Aus ia -Hunga y, he ally, bu Russia. 26 Ne e heless, many obse e s dismissed he e y idea o he “Yellow Pe il”, whe eas o h- e s ea ed ha he main h ea is ep esen ed by he possibili y o conques and mode n- iza ion o China by Russia he sel . SCOTT, pp. 136–138. 27 J. CHESNEAUX — M. BASTID — M. -C. BERGÈRE, China om he Opium Wa s o he 1911 Re ‑ olu ion, New Yo k 1976, p. 294. 28 LANGER, p. 395. 29 Fo mo e in o ma ion abou his Juye Inciden , see J. W. ESHERICK, The O igins o he Box‑ e Up ising, Be keley, Los Angeles, London 1987, pp. 123–127. 30 This name is usually ansla ed as “Big Swo d Socie y”. Ye he cha ac e “dāo” 刀 means ei he a “kni e” o a “sho swo d”. Since i doesn’ make sense o speak abou a big sho swo d, I p e e he less common ansla ion. 46 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 Admi al Diede ichs occupied he Jiaozhou Bay on eas e n coas o Shandong.31 Finally, on 6 Ma ch 1898 Chinese Impe ial cou leased he a ea o Jiaozhou o Ge many o 99 yea s, he en i e p o ince was decla ed Ge man sphe e o in luence, and Ge many was gi en he igh o cons uc wo ailways om Jiaozhou o he p o ince capi al o Jinan. On 27 Ap il 1898, Ge many o icially decla ed Jiaozhou he colony (Schu zgebie ). E en so, Chinese p o incial o icials cons an ly discussed he p ecise legal s a us o he leased e i o y, which encompassed 553 km². Qingdao, so a a small coas al illage, became cen e o he new colony and was ans o med in o a la ge ci y wi h dis inc‑ i ely Ge man cha ac e . A ound he leased a ea p ope was c ea ed a 50 km ‑wide zone in which Ge man oops we e allowed o ope a e a will — hey didn’ espec i s bounda ies, anyway.32 Jiaozhou was p o ec ed by newly o med Thi d Na al Ba ‑ alion (III Seeba aillon) o ma ine in an y. The colonial adminis a ion was subjec o Ge man na y. The i s go e no was appoin ed Cap ain33 Ku Rosendahl. In 1899, he was succeeded by Cap ain Paul Jaeschke, who died on 27 Janua y 1901, while in o ice. The only o he o eign encla e in Shandong was he na al base in Weihaiwei, which was in Feb ua y 1895 occupied by Japanese oops. The B i ish wished o e‑ place Japan in possession o Weihaiwei, should he Liaodong Peninsula all in o Rus‑ sian hands, and on 20 Ma ch 1898, a e Russian seizu e o Po A hu , he B i ish s a ed nego ia ions wi h Japan o ha end. The Japanese app o ed he B i ish mo e, o hey we e eage o coope a e wi h he Uni ed Kingdom.34 On 25 Ma ch 1898 B i ish cabine inally ag eed upon he seizu e o Weihaiwei, and he Chinese consen ed on 2 Ap il.35 Nego ia ions wi h he Ge mans led o a decla a ion o 20 Ap il 1898, whe eby 31 Ge man in e es on he Jiaozhou Bay was ela i ely old. The P ussian expedi ion o 1860– 1861 no iced i s ad an ageous posi ion o he i s ime. On Ma ch 11, 1895, Ge man Auswä ‑ iges Am sugges ed o Ge man na y ha Ge many could in e ene on China’s behal du ing peace nego ia ions in exchange o a sui able na al base. Ge man Minis e o China Gus a Adol Schenck zu Schweinsbe g had ecommended Jiaozhou again. GP, Bd. XVI, Be lin 1924, N . 1628, pp. 5–7. In 1896, Admi al Ti pi z, who was a ha ime commande o Ge man na al o ces in he Fa Eas , also sugges ed seizu e o Jiaozhou. Howe e , Russian wa essels ha e al eady spen he e he win e o 1895–1896, which acco dingly o cus oms o he age ga e p io i y claim on he bay o Russia. In sp ing, 1897, he Ge mans in o med Russia, Aus ia- -Hunga y and I aly abou hei in en ion o acqui e a na al base in China, and sen a powe - ul squad on led by Admi al Diede ichs o he Fa Eas . In Augus , Ge man Empe o isi ed his Russian cousin, ob ained his app o al wi h Ge man seizu e o Jiaozhou, and p omised him o suppo simila Russian ac ion elsewhe e. Bo h Wilhelm II and bishop Anze we e decided o u ilize he mu de and seize Jiaozhou. LANGER, pp. 451–452; ESHERICK, p. 130. 32 G. STEINMETZ, Qingdao as a Colony: F om Apa heid o Ci iliza ional Exchange. Pape p e- pa ed o he Johns Hopkins Wo kshops in Compa a i e His o y o Science and Technol- ogy, “Science, Technology and Mode ni y: Colonial Ci ies in Asia, 1890–1940,” Bal imo e, Janua y 16 h–17 h, 2009, p. 15. A ailable a : h p://www -pe sonal.umich.edu/~geos ein/ docs/Qingdaocolony.pd ; [2014–09–07]. 33 All go e no s o Jiaozhou held he ank “Kapi än zu See”, which is equi alen o “Cap ain a Sea”. 34 KAJIMA, pp. 100–101. 35 T. G. OTTE, The China Ques ion: G ea Powe Ri al y and B i ish Isola ion, 1894–1905, Ox o d 2007, pp. 122–127. JAN KOč AR 47 he B i ish pledged hemsel es no o connec Weihaiwei wi h Shandong in e io by a ailway and o es ain om “inju ing o con es ing he in e es s o Ge many in he P o ince o Shan ung, o o c ea ing di icul ies o he in ha p o ince”.36 Du ing p i a e mee ings be ween B i ish s a esman Joseph Chambe lain and Ge man Ambassado o he Uni ed Kingdom Ha z eld , Chambe lain e en sugges ed join Ge man ‑B i ish p o ec o a e o e China in o de o p e en Russian enc oachmen .37 The Japanese s ill held Weihaiwei un il he wa indemni y was paid by he Chinese, i.e. un il 9 May 1898. On 24 May, he B i ish eplaced Japanese occupan s in o de o coun e balance Russian occupa ion o he Liaodong Peninsula.38 Ge man seizu e o Jiaozhou di e ed om p e ious agg andizemen o F ench Laos and B i ish Bu ma in se e al aspec s. Fi s ly, i wasn’ achie ed by nego ia ions, bu by di ec ac ion o Ge man a med o ces. Secondly, Jiaozhou wasn’ an insigni ican a ea on he end o he Chinese wo ld. E en hough he se lemen o Qingdao was inhab‑ i ed only by ew ishe men a ha ime, i lay in one o co e p o inces o China p ope . Thi dly, despi e ea lie pe manen “ ec i ica ions o bo de s” and eques s o ailway concessions, he seizu e o Jiaozhou was he ac which ini ia ed he ue sc amble o concessions and sphe es o in luence. Wha else could en age he Chinese mo e? Ne ‑ e heless, Chinese o eign ela ions in 1890’s we e as u bulen as Chinese domes ic policy. These ela ions we e unde going a cons an change, which mean , gene ally speaking, only de e io a ing. B i ish p es ige in China was se iously weakened when he B i ish e used o suppo China du ing he Sino ‑Japanese wa . As a esul , embi ‑ e ed Chinese u ned o Russia. Bu , as a esul o ac ional s uggle a he cou , he Russians we e inc easing hei demands. Thei ships spen he win e o 1897–1898 in Po A hu , and in Ma ch 1898, Russia seized bo h Po A hu and Dalny a he Lia‑ odong Peninsula. On he o he hand, Japanese go e nmen s a ed cou ing Chinese cou and he ela ionship be ween wo Asian empi es g ea ly imp o ed. The e o e he possibili y o imp o emen o ela ions be ween Ge many and China was no a p io i p ecluded e en a e he seizu e o Jiaozhou. Howe e , Ge man policy o‑ wa ds China was qui e di e en , exploi ing he weakness o he Middle Kingdom. O he powe s ollowed Ge man example. The Russians no only seized he Lia‑ odong Peninsula, bu also ex ended hei in luence h oughou Manchu ia, Mongo‑ lia, and Chinese Tu kes an. The F ench ese ed o hemsel es a ea o p o inces bo de ing o Indochina39 and es ablished a na al base a Guangzhouwan in wes e n Guangdong. The B i ish leased addi ional e i o y in he neighbou hood o Hong Kong and exac ed on China a pledge o non ‑aliena ion o all p o inces in he Yangzi (Chang Jiang) basin — no o he powe was allowed o ob ain any special igh s he e o any pa o he p o inces. The Japanese eques ed and ob ained simila assu ances in espec o Fujian. Va ious o eign na ions we e g an ed many economic igh s h oughou China, especially ailway and mining concessions. 36 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 119; OTTE, p. 130. 37 OTTE, pp. 147–148. 38 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 118. 39 I.e. Yunnan, Guangxi, and wes e n pa o Guangdong — he B i ish p e en ed any ex en- sion o such a p i ileged F ench posi ion o he icini y o Hong Kong. Eas e n Guangdong ell unde B i ish in luence. 48 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 Fo he ime being, China was sa ed om g ea e losses only by he eno mous di‑ mensions and by mu ual i al y o he g ea powe s. The p og essi e pa o Chinese socie y despe a ely el he necessi y o mode nize China. The mos in luen ial ad o‑ ca e o e o ms was a young Can onese schola Kang Youwei (1858–1927), who gained Guangxu’s us . Since 11 June 1898, many e o m edic s we e issued. Fo eign diplo‑ ma s including Ge man Minis e didn’ belie e in success o he e o ms.40 Since he pace o e o ms was e e inc easing, many digni a ies s a ed eeling h ea ened. Fi‑ nally, he e o m e o was hinde ed especially by conse a ism and lack o coope a‑ ion, i no di ec opposi ion, o mos o icials and e en he Emp ess Dowage Cixi he sel . In Sep embe , he i be ween e o me s and conse a i es was oo deep, and bo h sides we e plo ing agains each o he .41 The e o me s ied o pe suade Yuan Shikai (1859–1916) a b illian commande o Han Chinese o igin, o suppo hei cause; ye Yuan be ayed hei plans o his supe io Ronglu.42 On 21 Sep embe 1898, he Emp ess Dowage execu ed a success ul coup d’é a , imp isoned Guangxu and execu ed many e o me s (Kang Youwei himsel managed o escape).43 “I is by such me hods as we e now o be adop ed ha gene al elec ions a e held in Asia ic coun ies.”44 The con lic had a subs an ial “ acial” dimension. The e o me s we e Han Chi‑ nese, especially Sou he ne s — in China, he e exis ed a signi ican mis us be ween people om he Sou h and he No h, and his con ibu ed o cold ecep ion o e o ms by many Han o icials bo n in he No h. The ic o ious eac iona y clique, since he Sep embe coup con olling he Beijing cou , was o med by Manchu a is oc a s, in‑ cluding close ela i es o he Emp ess Dowage . Among he mos p ominen Manchu eac iona ies was Zaiyi, P ince Duan (1856–1922), who wished he appoin men o his own son Pujun (1886–1929) hei appa en . Tha would acili a e Guangxu’s elimina‑ ion. Ye immense p essu e p e en ed such a mo e. Immedia ely a e he coup d’é a , digni a ies and gen y h oughou all China decla ed sympa hy owa ds he Empe o . E en mo e signi ican ly, diploma s o all coun ies wi h he excep ion o Russia we e conce ned by Empe o ’s “poo heal h” and explained ha hey we e acc edi ed by he Empe o ’s pe son. As a esul , a F ench physician was allowed o isi he Empe o , and diagnosed kidney disease and o e all weakening o o ganism.45 Fo he ime be‑ 40 PETERSSON, p. 70. 41 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 141. 42 The ole o Yuan Shikai is analyzed by Je ome Ch’en and H. B. Mo se. J. CH’EN, Yuan Shih‑ ‑k’ai, 1859–1916: B u us Assumes he Pu ple, S an o d 1961, pp. 55–62; MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 141–144. Ronglu (1836–1903) was Manchu a is oc a who was on bes e ms wi h he Emp ess Dowage Cixi. Du ing his li e he held op - anking mili a y and go - e nmen al pos s, and he was he ma e nal g and a he o he pas Manchu Empe o Puyi. 43 Minis e Heyking e used o join a plea o his B i ish colleague MacDonald o sa e li e o a p ominen e o me and diploma Zhang Yinhuan, who had been sen enced o dea h. PE- TERSSON, p. 72. Finally, Zhang was pa doned and sen in o exile in Chinese Tu kes an, only o die a he e y end o he “Boxe Up ising”. A. W. HUMMEL (Ed.), Eminen Chinese o he Ch’ing Pe iod (1644–1912): (A–O), Vol. 1, Washing on 1943, p. 63. 44 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 144. 45 HHS A, PA XXIX, China, K . 5, Be ich e 1898, N . 22. Czikann an Gołuchowski, Peking, Oc- obe 24, 1898; XIANG, Lanxin, The O igins o he Boxe Wa : A Mul ina ional S udy, London, New Yo k 2003, p. 23. JAN KOč AR 49 ing, Guangxu’s li e was sa ed by p essu e o o eigne s and go e no s. Ne e heless, he un o una e Empe o emained o he es o his li e46 absolu ely powe less, bul‑ lied and supe ised by he Emp ess Dowage Cixi. The conce n o o eign powe s including Ge many o Guangxu’s li e was deeply de es ed by Manchu a is oc acy a he cou . Immedia ely a e he coup, un uly elemen s s a ed a acking Ch is ians and o eigne s in he a ea o Beijing. Fo eign diploma s decided o summon signi ican numbe o oops o Beijing as lega ion gua ds. The posi ion o he ic o ious cou ac ion was a om secu e. The cou ea ed bo h o eign in e en ion and insu ‑ gency led by pa isans o he Hund ed Days o Re o m. On 5 and 8 No embe 1898, wo edic s ha e encou aged loyal Qing subjec s o o m mili ia.47 Mo eo e , he cou summoned ein o cemen s o he icini y o Beijing, some 30,000 men al oge he . Abou hal o hese oops we e Muslims om he p o ince o Gansu, nicknamed “Gansu B a es”. They we e unde command o Gene al Dong Fuxiang (1839–1908). Thei backg ound didn’ p e en hem om u hlessly c ushing he e ol o Gansu Muslims o 1895–1896. Un o una ely, bo h Dong and his oops ha ed he o eigne s, and hese soldie s, being unpaid o a long ime, s a ed plunde ing he Beijing me ‑ opoli an a ea and h ea ening he Ch is ians and o eigne s on hei own.48 As a e‑ sul , o eign diploma s in Beijing wice sen a collec i e no e o he Zongli Yamen,49 demanding wi hd awal o Dong’s oops. Chinese diploma s, pe haps ea ing ha sh Ge man ac ion, asked Heyking no o do any hing which could be conside ed as an undue p essu e on he Emp ess Dowage .50 Finally, Dong’s oops we e wi hd awn.51 In ea ly 1899, he g ea powe s ecalled hei lega ion gua ds om Beijing. The Ge mans and I alians ha e delayed he wi hd awal o hei oops, whose p esence cons i u ed a so o p essu e on Chinese go e nmen .52 Whe eas he Ge mans de‑ si ed concessions in Shandong, he I alians wished o acqui e a na al base on Chinese coas . On 10 Ma ch 1899, I alian Minis e o China Di Ma ino p esen ed an ul ima‑ 46 The Guangxu Empe o died a he same ime as he Emp ess Dowage Cixi, in No em- be 1908. Chinese cou publicly decla ed ha he had died on 14 No embe 1908, he day be o e Cixi’s dea h. Howe e , he p ecise da e and cause o his dea h will be o e e un- known. MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 441–442; CH’EN, p. 98. 47 Poli isches A chi des Auswä igen Am es, Be lin ( u he only PA AA), R 18244. N . 1248, Ke ele an Auswä iges Am , Peking, Decembe 16, 1899; C. T. TAN, The Boxe Ca as ophe, New Yo k 1955, p. 41. Such a mo e had been al eady sugges ed by he e o me s. ESHER- ICK, p. 173. 48 HHS A, PA XXIX, China, K . 5, Be ich e 1898, N . 23c. Czikann an Gołuchowski, Peking, Oc obe 31, 1898. 49 Zongli Yamen (“O ice o Gene al Managemen ”) was c ea ed in 1861 in o de o manage dealings wi h o eigne s. Fo he mos pa o i s exis ence i was p esided o e by P ince Gong, chie collabo a o o he Emp ess Dowage Cixi. A e he “Boxe Up ising”, i was eplaced by a no mal minis y o o eign a ai s (Waiwubu). 50 HHS A, PA XXIX, China, K . 5, Be ich e 1898, N . 24b. Czikann an Gołuchowski, Peking, No embe 13, 1898. 51 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 151–153. 52 HHS A, PA XXIX, China, K . 6, Be ich e 1899, N . 3. Czikann an Gołuchowski, Peking, Ap il 4, 1899. 56 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 The e o o Anze and his colleagues bo e i s ui . In 1882 he e we e ela i ely ew Ch is ians in his hea e o ope a ions.88 A e he “Boxe Up ising”, no less han 47,221 Ca holics and 85 Ca holic missiona ies li ed in Shandong, oge he wi h 14,776 P o es an s and 180 P o es an missiona ies.89 This di e ence in e ec i eness o p osely izing was pa ially due o he ac ha he Ca holics we e less in e es ed in mo al p o ile o hei “sheep” and sligh ly mo e willing o suppo hem agains Chinese o icials han he P o es an s. Some P o es an missiona ies we e occasion‑ ally pu ging hei lock om unlaw ul elemen s; ye P o es an a ogan sense o supe io i y o e Chinese “supe s i ions” was no way lesse han he Ca holic one. The e y same o eigne s who conside ed hei sac ed du y o ge China id o bad habi s o he people had ce ain bad habi s on hei own. One o hese bad habi s was he eage ness o pu p essu e on he Impe ial cou in o de o punish o icials unde whose ju isdic ion a acks on o eign subjec s ook place. A e wo Ge man mission‑ a ies we e mu de ed on 1 No embe 1897, he Ge mans demanded punishmen o Li Bingheng, who was a ha ime go e no o Shandong and was al eady p omised he ice oyal y o Sichuan. The cou o iginally hesi a ed,90 bu on 15 Janua y 1898 inally succumbed o Ge man p essu e. No only didn’ Li Bingheng become ice oy o Si‑ chuan, bu he was o bidden o be employed in any o icial pos again.91 In 1900 his injus ice was washed o by i e s o blood, o Li Bingheng gained Impe ial a ou again, suppo ed he an i ‑ o eign iolence, and ook his e enge on Ch is ians, o ‑ eigne s, and mode a e digni a ies a he cou . Li Bingheng was succeeded by Zhang Rumei. A ogan Ge man beha iou had consequences in he sphe e on which he Ge ‑ mans we e so p oud. P io o he seizu e o Jiaozhou, he posi ion o Ge man mili a y ad iso s in Chinese land o ces was supe io o posi ion o any o he ad iso s. In la e 1890’s, his Ge man posi ion was ques ioned, and inally los , due bo h o disappoin ‑ men by Ge man agg essi e beha iou a e 1897 and o ise o compe i ion among o eigne s. Bo h Russia and Japan spa ed no e o o eplace Ge man ad iso s. This was e iden in case o he Gua d A my, deployed no a om Beijing, led by Ron‑ glu, and di ided in o i e di isions o “a mies”. “Tenacious A my” o Gene al Nie Shicheng was o iginally led by Ge man ad ise s; ye Russian mission led by L . Col. Wo ono managed o ous hem all.92 B illian mili a y leade Yuan Shikai, who had o shape China’s des iny in he decades o come, had expe ience wi h he Ge mans as well. Since 1895 he led he “Newly C ea ed A my”, o “Gua d o he Righ ”, which was composed la gely om ec ui s om Shandong. No only did Yuan accep Ge ‑ man mili a y ad iso s, he e en o de ed his subo dina es o eci e he In oduc o y 88 Joseph Eshe ick s a es ha in Shandong al eady li ed 4,000 Ch is ians in 1839, whe eas Va ican online sou ce claims ha no mo e han 158 Ca holics li ed he e in 1881, al hough i doesn’ s a e unequi ocally whe he o no he numbe ela es o Shandong o sou he n Shandong. ESHERICK, p. 77; h p://www. a ican. a/news_se ices/li u gy/sain s/ns_li _ doc_20031005_ einademe z_en.h ml, [2014–09–07]. 89 ESHERICK, p. 79. 90 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 107. 91 STEINMETZ, Qingdao, p. 3. 92 REYNOLDS, p. 72. JAN KOč AR 57 Manual o Ge man A my D ills “un il hey g adually unde s ood i ”.93 Ye in 1899 some 40 Japanese ins uc o s a i ed o China, only o be ollowed by many o he s.94 In he ol‑ lowing yea s Yuan s a ed elying on Japanese help, and as a esul , he had 175 Japan ad iso s in 1908. A ha ime, Japanese mili a y ad iso s ha e eplaced mos o o he o eigne s wi h he excep ion o a hand ul o Ge mans. I is an i ony ha Meiji Japan he sel had mode nized he a my unde Ge man u elage.95 A so o a icious ci cle was ope a ing in Shandong. Financial p oblems o ced he au ho i ies o dismiss la ge pa o mili a y o ces in he p o ince. P io o he Sino ‑Japanese Wa , he e we e almos 50,000 oops on he pay oll in Shandong, bu hese numbe s ha e d opped o 30,000 in 1897 and o some 21,000 only in 1898. Fea om u he Ge man designs, and undoub edly also om subsequen age o he Impe ial cou , o ced he au ho i ies o deploy he emaining oops in eas e n Shan‑ dong and a he coas , whe eas he in e io o Shandong was le wi h insu icien o ce.96 Dismissed oops (had hey exis ed a all, o Chinese commande s we e o ‑ en epo ing highe numbe s o oops unde hei command, and hen embezzled hei sala y) became unemployed, hus emp ed o eso o bandi y. E en i he ban‑ di s hadn’ a acked he o eigne s hemsel es, he need o igh he bandi s was he eason why many Chinese joined he “Boxe s”. In o he wo ds, s a egic decisions caused by o eign agg ession led o such un es ha he o eigne s gained a p e ex o ano he agg ession. In Chinese socie y, he e was an ancien adi ion o o ming a ious sec e soci‑ e ies and sec s. Some o hem we e well known — and ea ed — o cen u ies, while o he s we e ela i ely new. In 1890’s he Big Kni e Socie y was o med in wes e n Shandong, s a ed igh ing bandi y, and coope a ed wi h local o icials. In June 1896 when he socie y u ned agains Ch is ians, loo ing hei possessions bu no killing a single one o hem. In July, he Big Kni e Socie y was u hlessly supp essed by Yux‑ ian, a Manchu who was a ha ime p e ec o Caozhou.97 Soon he ea e , a dange ous mass mo emen eme ged in Shandong. In he Wes i is known as he “Boxe s”. Since i was a sec e socie y, li le is known abou i s in en‑ ions, his o y, o e en o iginal name. Acco dingly o an o icial named Lao Naixian, he sec was a b anch o he Eigh T ig am Socie y, which had unsuccess ully a ‑ emp ed o o e h ow he dynas y in 1813 and hen wen in o hiding. An al e na i e heo y by schola Geo ge N. S eige s a es ha he mo emen was had o igina ed as a mili ia ounded in acco dance wi h dec ees om No embe 1898. The a i ude o he “Boxe s” owa d he Manchu dynas y was mos unce ain. I is mos p obable ha among hem we e bo h loyal and disloyal elemen s, and ha mos o newly ‑admi ed membe s in la e phases o he mo emen we en’ in o med abou sedi ious designs, had such designs exis ed. Anyway, he ba le ‑c y o he “Boxe s” was “Suppo he Qing, ex e mina e he o eigne ” (Fu Qing mie yang). O icial a i ude owa ds he mo e‑ men was indecisi e. The mo emen o iginally called i sel Yihequan, o “Righ eous 93 Ibidem, p. 70. 94 PURCELL, p. 100. 95 REYNOLDS, pp. 74–77. 96 ESHERICK, pp. 170–173. 97 Ibidem, pp. 115–122, 191–192. 58 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 and Ha monious Fis s”, hence he nickname “Boxe s”. Some imes in 1898 o in 1899 he name had changed o Yihe uan, o “Righ eous and Ha monious Mili ia”. In 1899, he o eigne s o he i s ime no ed he exis ence o he an i ‑ o eign mo emen in Shandong, e en hough hey we en’ ce ain abou i s name. The oo s o he mo emen we e discussed in an a icle in “Shen Pao”, Chinese newspape s p in ed in Shanghai.98 Acco dingly o he a icle, a sec was ounded by Zhu Hong‑ deng, a bandi chie who epea edly changed bo h i s name and e i o y o ope a‑ ions. O iginally his socie y was supposed o be called “Red Lan e n”,99 “A mo o he Golden Bell”,100 “I on ‑clo h Shi ” and “G ea Wa e Sec ”.101 A e a clash wi h go e nmen al oops, Zhu was supposed o ha e enamed his socie y o Yihequan and, ul ima ely, o Yihe uan. On 15 Ma ch 1899 he cou ga e up o a long ‑ e m goal o he Ca holic Chu ch and ecognized equali y o Ca holic cle gy wi h Chinese digni a ies o equi alen ank.102 Thus, Anze was conside ed equal in digni y o go e no s and ice oys o he same coun y whose so e eign y and digni y he was cons an ly igno ing. I is in e es ing ha Anglican bishops e used he same posi ion.103 Ye he o eigne s in Shandong we e occupied by o he ma e s. In la e 1898 he magis a e o Yizhou decla ed ha he would no mo e send oops in o de o p o ec missiona ies wi hou di ec o de s om he go e no .104 In No embe 1898 a Ca holic p ies Geo g S enz om SVD has empo a ily a es ed o kidnapped in a po own o Rizhao in sou heas Shandong. I is mos p obable ha his inciden wasn’ connec ed wi h he Yihe uan mo emen . Bishop Anze a i s con ended himsel wi h a huge indemni y, bu Heyking e used. Ge man go e no o Jiaozhou Jaeschke sen in es iga o s, who we e h ea ened by he Chinese as well. Wi h app o al om Be lin, wo puni i e expedi ions ook place; wo illages in he Yizhou p e ec u e we e bu n and many Chinese killed. A e some pe‑ iod o occupa ion o Rizhou by Ge man oops, hei commande in i ed local gen y o a mee ing, cap u ed i e o hem and ook hem as hos ages o Qingdao.105 Ano he puni i e expedi ion was connec ed wi h iola ing o Ge man ailway p ope y. E en hough he SEG hasn’ been ounded ye , Ge man enginee s and wo ke s al eady s a ed su eying he p oposed ou e and e en p epa ing e ain o he ailway ack. When Chinese illage s s a ed emo ing su ey ma ke s, Ge man ma ine s 98 Quo ed in Be line Neues e Nach ich en. Die “Boxe ” in Schan ung, Be line Neues e Nach‑ ich en, Ap il 6, 1900. 99 “Ro he Lampenschi m” in Ge man o iginal. Al hough he wo d “Lampenschi m” means “lampshade”, i is mos p obable ha he au ho had con used he “Boxe ” socie y i sel wi h i s emale b anch called “Red Lan e ns”. 100 “Schleie de goldenen Glocke” in he o iginal a icle. A spi i ual echnique called “A mo o he Golden Bell” was exe cised in Shandong in 1890’s. ESHERICK, pp. 104–106. 101 In he o iginal a icle, i is ansc ibed “Ta auhui”. I seems ha he co esponden had mis ansla ed he name o he Big Kni e Socie y. 102 PURCELL, p. 77. 103 Ibidem, no e 4 on p. 302. 104 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 173. 105 Ibidem, pp. 174–175; ESHERICK, pp. 187–190; STEINMETZ, Qingdao, p. 15. Whe eas Mo se claims ha Rizhao was occupied o six weeks, S einme z s a es ha he hos ages we e d agged away a e i e days o Ge man occupa ion. JAN KOč AR 59 s ole hei ca le and killed wo Chinese in he p ocess.106 Such b u al measu es we e pe haps adop ed pa ially om ea ha he Ge mans would o he wise lose ace, e en in he eyes o o he o eigne s. Mo e o una e Chinese we e “only” ined — he o ‑ eigne s we e ex o ing huge sums indeed, bo h om he people and om he go e n‑ men . In he pe iod o 1897–1899, he missiona ies accep ed 104,000 aels al oge he .107 Zhang Rumei was so occupied by o eign h ea ha he absolu ely neglec ed he ca e o dikes a he Yellow Ri e . In summe 1898, se e e loods ollowed, and as a con‑ sequence, Zhang Rumei was dismissed in sp ing 1899.108 On 11 Ap il 1899, his succes‑ so Yuxian assumed his o ice. He was a Manchu conse a i e who was a ou ably disposed o he Yihe uan mo emen . Al hough his o iginal a i ude owa d he “Box‑ e s” is dispu ed,109 he had inally shown himsel o be g ea suppo e . Yuxian was o he opinion ha among he “Boxe s” we e bo h loyal and disloyal elemen s, and he in‑ ended o use he loyal ones as mili ia. He had shown a high sel ‑es eem when he ied o nego ia e indemni y o des oyed p ope y and Chinese killed by he Ge mans, and e en asked Zongli Yamen o ask Ge man go e nmen o eplace o icials espon‑ sible o puni i e expedi ions.110 This e o was unsuccess ul, bu Ge man campaign om sp ing 1899 was ollowed and coun e weigh ed by empo al ans e o la ge de achmen s o he Gua d A my om Zhili o Shandong. O cou se he Ge mans we en’ in imida ed. Ins ead, hey s a ed ano he pun‑ ishmen ope a ion. Be ween June 23 and July 10, 1899, o ces o Cap ain Mau e we e sen o punish he ci y Gaomi o a acks agains Ge man ailway wo ke s. Soon he ea e , be ween July 22 and Augus 11, 1899, Shandong’s coun yside became a ‑ ge o ano he expedi ion by Lieu enan on Re be g and his ca al y de achmen . The expenses o Re be g’s expedi ion amoun ed o 1,782.02 ma ks, he expedi ion o Goumi cos 7,126.57 ma ks. Fo una ely, hese expenses we e pa ially paid by a con‑ ibu ion o ced upon local o icials, which o alled 2,402.05 ma ks.111 Bu such mea‑ su es couldn’ supp ess he en i e p o ince. Al eady on July 26, 1899, Ke ele bo h in o med and wa ned Go e no Jaeschke by a 32 ‑pages long message. He was o he opinion ha e en hough he go e no o Shandong had o iginally suppo ed xeno‑ phobic sec s (Big Kni e Socie y and “Red Fis ”, i.e. he “Boxe s”), hey go en i ely ou o his in luence and ha e me ged wi h s a e ‑suppo ed and s a e ‑a med mili ia.112 In la e Augus , dis u bances in Shandong o ced Minis e Ke ele o wa n he Zongli Yamen ha “i hey canno con ol hei people and p e en hei in e e ence wi h he ailway cons uc ion, Ge many will ake he ma e in hand he sel ”.113 One week la e , he Ge mans disco e ed a g oup o Chinese who planned o a ack he ailway. Many plo e s we e a es ed and weapons in hei possession con isca ed.114 106 ESHERICK, p. 184; STEINMETZ, Qingdao, p. 15. 107 CHESNEAUX — BASTID — BERGÈRE, p. 329. 108 ESHERICK, pp. 177–180. 109 Ibidem, pp. 190–192, 198–202. 110 Ibidem, p 193. 111 PA AA, R 18244 N . 254. J. Jaeschke, Tsing au, Feb ua y 2, 1900. 2 Beilagen. 112 PA AA, R 18244, N . 1248. Ke ele an Auswä iges Am , Peking, Decembe 16, 1899. 113 Peking & Tien sin Times, Augus 26, 1899. 114 Peking & Tien sin Times, Sep embe 2, 1899. 60 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 In la e 1898, he “Boxe s” om no h ‑wes e n Shandong o he i s ime openly displayed hei exe cise. They we e publicly p ac icing ma ial a s, belie ing ha hey we e secu ing in ulne abili y by magical means. The ea e hey ha assed Chi‑ nese Ch is ians. In Oc obe 1899, la ge “Boxe ” dis u bances in no hwes Shandong o ced local au ho i ies o use open o ce. Go e no Yuxian dismissed he digni a ‑ ies esponsible o supp ession o he Yihe uan mo emen , e en hough he used he subs an ia ed p e ex ha hei oops ha e go ou o con ol and endange ed peace ul inhabi an s.115 While he Yihe uan mo emen lou ished in Shandong, i.e. on sou h ‑eas e n bo de o Zhili, ano he iolen esis ance agains o eigne s was aking place in Russian ‑occupied Manchu ia, o he no h ‑eas o Zhili. Manchu ian bandi s — khunkhuzy (Honghuzi — li . “Redbea ds” in Chinese) — we e elen lessly a acking Russian a ge s bo h be o e and a e he “Boxe Up ising”. Ye hei beha ‑ iou was oo c iminal in i s na u e, and hey had no dis inc ideology on hei own, so hei in luence on e en s ou side Manchu ia was negligible. A he end o 1899, he si ua ion in Shandong was u bulen , and he in e io o he p o ince didn’ esemble sphe e o Ge man in luence. In No embe , he “Boxe s” s a ed a acking o eign a ge s and Ch is ian a ge s on a la ge scale and a some places engaged in bloody clashes wi h well ‑a med con e s. Employees o SEG we e a acked, and he ailway cons uc ion was empo a ily hal ed. On Decembe 1, 1899, Anze epo ed o Ke ele ha Ge man missiona y a ea was a peace.116 Ye Ke ele ’s epo o Decembe 16, 1899 ei e a ed minis e ’s ea om Chinese sec s which ha e me ged wi h mili ia.117 A ha ime, Shandong had inally ecei ed a go e no able o cope wi h he si ua ion. On Decembe 6, 1899, Yuxian was ecalled o Beijing “on consul a ions” and eplaced by Yuan Shikai. Yuxian was indeed g an ed an audience a he cou and he spoke in a ou o u iliza ion o he Yihe uan mo emen agains he o eigne s. This was in absolu e acco dance wi h adi ional Chinese policy — coun less no able mili a y leade s we e o igi‑ nally bandi s, pi a es, insu gen s o ascals o all kinds, un il hey we e pa doned by he au ho i ies. In Ma ch, 1900, Yuxian was appoin ed go e no o Shanxi, and he became no o ious o massac es which ook place in ha p o ince du ing he “Boxe Up ising”. In con a y, Yuan Shikai clea ly saw he h ea posed by he Boxe s” and was ully de e mined no o ge in o ouble. Yuan also knew ha his powe was based solely on he “Newly C ea ed A my”, which ollowed him o Shandong. “The i s hing Yuan did was o es he Boxe s in ulne abili y.” In a memo ial o he h one o Janua y 13, 1900, Yuan poin ed ou ha se e al hund eds o “Boxe s” we e unable o conque a single o i ied chu ch. “How can hey wipe ou he o eigne s,” he asked?118 I is a ma ‑ e o pa adox ha he si ua ion in Shandong didn’ imp o e, and he i s mu de o a s ange , B i ish missiona y B ooks, ook place on Decembe 31, 1899, i.e. only a e 115 ESHERICK, pp. 246–257; MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, p. 177. 116 PA AA, R 18243. Teleg amm N . 140. Ke ele an Auswä iges Am , Peking, Decembe 7, 1899. 117 PA AA, R 18244. N . 1248. Ke ele an Auswä iges Am , Peking, Decembe 16, 1899. 118 CH’EN, p. 66. JAN KOč AR 61 Yuan had assumed his du y in Shandong.119 Assaul s by Chinese mobs on cons uc ion wo ke s caused he cons uc ion o he Shandong ailway o be in e up ed anew be‑ ween Decembe , 1899, and Feb ua y, 1900.120 Ye he ocus o he Yihe uan mo emen mo ed o he me opoli an p o ince o Zhili. A he same ime, on Janua y 24, 1900, P ince Duan’s son Pujun was appoin ed hei appa en a las . I was a clea p oo o powe o he Manchu eac iona y clique; bu , a he same ime, coun less ea i ma‑ ions o loyal y owa ds Guangxu a i ed om he p o inces and e en om ab oad.121 Fo eign diploma s ailed o cong a ula e P ince Duan, hus e en mo e annoyed him. Wi h Chinese xenophobes aging in he me opoli an a ea and Manchu xe‑ nophobes a powe a he cou , he s age o he “Boxe up ising” was p epa ed. Ge many had con ibu ed much o such a de elopmen . A ogan beha iou o he o icials and missiona ies and b u ali y o Ge man oops o ended and h ea ened Chinese digni a ies and people alike. Chinese o icials ha e encoun e ed unjus and biased demands o he o eigne s and hey had he choice be ween humilia ion and immedia e h ea o dismissal by hei own cou , which i sel was bullied by o ‑ eign powe s. Chinese eligion wasn’ espec ed. Chinese popula ion was o ced o pay high indemni ies; illages we e bu n and people killed. E en hough Chinese oops we e o en beha ing in equally o e en much mo e b u al manne owa ds hei coun y ‑ ellows, hey we e a e all na i e o he coun y, whe eas he Ge mans we e simply o eigne s, unwelcome, despised, and conside ed “ba ba ian”. To sum up, he encoun e be ween wo ancien ci iliza ions, he Wes e n and he Chinese one, ook a o m o a dea hma ch. Many o eigne s app ecia ed ha . Al eady in 1857, Gideon Nye, Ame ican ice ‑consul in Can on, w o e ha “ he las a med s uggle be‑ ween Paganism and Ch is iani y” was aking place in China.122 Many Chinese, o hei pa , go he imp ession ha he o eigne s we e no hing bu de ils, o ganizing and a ming Chinese c iminals and aiming a des oying he e y co e o Chinese ci iliza‑ ion. Since Chinese ci iliza ion was conside ed he only genuine ci iliza ion, such des uc ion would be an analogy o he end o he wo ld. China was ipe o he inal ba le be ween ligh and da kness; ye no ‑one ep esen ed he ligh . ABSTRACT P io o 1897, Sino ‑Ge man ela ions we e gene ally peace ul and in some espec s bene icia y. Ye since he seizu e o Jiaozhou, Ge many was ollowing a policy o ha shness and used any oppo u‑ ni y o exe p essu e on China. This was due o widesp ead eeling o acial, cul u al, and eligious supe io i y. E en hough Ge many wasn’ he i s g ea powe o gain Chinese e i o y a e he Sino ‑Japanese Wa , Ge man seizu e o Jiaozhou s a ed he Sc amble o Concessions. Ch is ian missiona ies didn’ espec Chinese belie s, and hey we e in mos cases suppo ing hei con e s 119 B ooks wasn’ killed immedia ely a e his cap u e. Al hough he was wounded, he unsuc- cess ully a emp ed o escape. En aged, he bandi s beheaded him. MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 178–179; PURCELL, pp. 290–291. 120 PA AA, R 18244. Wi hou numbe , Schan ung Eisenbahn Gesellscha , Be lin an Schan ung Eisenbahn Gesellscha , Tsching au, Be lin, Feb ua y 7, 1900; WENDELS, p. 46. 121 MORSE, In e na ional Rela ions, Vol. 3, pp. 183–185; HHS A, PA XXIX, China, K . 6, Be ich- e 1900, N . 3. Czikann an Gołuchowski, Peking, Feb ua y 19, 1900. 122 Quo ed in: SCOTT, p. 36. In he o iginal ex , he ph ase has been emphasised. 62 PRAGUE PAPERS ON THE HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1/2014 agains Chinese jus ice a all cos s. The missiona ies hemsel es we e suppo ed by Ge many. Ge ‑ man mili a y had unde aken many puni i e expedi ions agains inhabi an s o Shandong, hus adicalized he people. A he same ime, he “Boxe ” mo emen had eme ged in Shandong Due o inapp op ia e esponse o he au ho i ies, he mo emen gained signi icance, and a he e e o he yea 1900 i was eady o cause ha oc in he me opoli an p o ince o Zhili. A he cou in Beijing, he mos in luen ial g oup was ep esen ed by an i ‑ o eign a is oc a s. KEYWORDS Ge many; China; Qing Dynas y; T iple In e en ion; Yellow Pe il; Jiaozhou; Qingdao; Boxe s; Yihe ‑ uan; Impe ialism; Missiona ies Jan Koč a | Mili a y His o y Ins i u e in P ague, U Pamá níku 2, 130 05 P aha 3 jankoc a @seznam.cz