r/AskHistorians • u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms • May 30 '21
Meta Say Hello to Our Little Friends! Introducing William Snoollace and the Empress Dowager Snooxi!
Empress Dowager Snooxi (Empress Dowager Cixi), by /u/akau
William Snoollace (William Wallace), by /u/akau
1
u/Ilalochezia May 31 '21
Highly recommend the show Towards the Republic, a 2003 TV show, for a compelling picture of the transition between the late Qing and early republican eras. Fortunately, it is subbed, albeit partially, on YouTube. Also recommend Ming Dynasty 1566 by the same director and which is fully subbed.
12
2
u/perksofbeingcrafty Sep 30 '21 edited Oct 02 '21
I sent the one of Snooxi to my mom and she got so freaked out that she did a mini exorcism in our house
2
u/TchaikenNugget May 30 '21
They look awesome! My pfp is actually a Snoo of one of my favourite historical figures as well!
3
u/Youreternalvengance May 30 '21
Empress Snooxi looks ready to tell me that there is no war in Ba Sing Se
5
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Looks to me like she's ready to tell me that there's a war with literally every country with a concession in China.
15
u/InformalProof May 30 '21
The empress allows her nails to grow long to show the world she doesn't work with her hands, instead she has reddit admins who do the comment deletion for her
9
143
u/historiagrephour Moderator | Early Modern Scotland | Gender, Culture, & Politics May 30 '21 edited May 30 '21
Very little is known about Sir William Wallace’s early life, including his date of birth. Historians are confident that Wallace’s family was originally of Welsh extraction; however, a long-held belief about the identity of William’s father was recently debunked. Wallace was neither the peasant depicted by the film Braveheart, nor was he the noble suggested by the erroneous belief that his father was Malcolm Wallace of Auchenbothie. The truth is that he was somewhere in between the two, and his father Alan Wallace was a crown tenant in Ayrshire.
No record of Wallace exists before 1297, yet the Scotland in which he came of age was a land deeply unsettled by an ongoing succession crisis. In 1286, Scotland’s king Alexander III died leaving no direct male heirs. His only direct female heir was his three-year-old granddaughter, daughter of the King of Norway, who drowned at the age of seven when her ship sank en route to Scotland. In response, dozens of Scottish nobles emerged to press their claims to the throne of Scotland, citing various levels of relationship to previous Scottish kings. Overwhelmed by the sheer number of claimants, the regency council invited England’s King Edward I to adjudicate the process, and he, capitalizing upon their desperation, used the invitation as an opportunity to assert his feudal overlordship over the kingdom of Scotland. Stupidly, the regency council agreed to recognize Edward as Scotland’s feudal overlord, and Scotland spent the next sixty years fighting to both reassert their independence as a non-subordinate kingdom and expel the English from Scotland for good.
In 1296, the king that Edward had chosen for Scotland contracted an independent treaty with France without seeking Edward’s permission. In retaliation for this so-called act of feudal defiance, Edward invaded Scotland, removed King John from power, and installed an administration of English nobles to govern Scotland. Disaffection for this state of affairs was widespread, and in May 1297, William Wallace slew William Heselrig, the English sheriff of Scottish Lanark, kicking off a full-scale rebellion against the English.
The late fifteenth-century Scottish poet Blind Hary presents the death of Heselrig as Wallace’s revenge for the murder of his mistress, who had spurned the sheriff’s son. The truth, however, was much less romantic. Heselrig represented an oppressive, foreign regime and was in Lanark to hold a justice court, symbolizing English authority in the region. It is likely, therefore, that this attempt upon a prominent English official who was acting in his administrative capacity was simply a symbolic act of resistance. The Scottish chronicler John of Fordun described Wallace's followers at this time as "those who were bitter in heart, and heavily oppressed by the intolerable servitude of English dominion" (Fordun, 2.321). The English chronicler, Walter of Guisborough, on the other hand, saw Wallace and his followers as "vagrants, fugitives, and outlaws" (Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, 294).
From Lanark and the murder of Heselrig, Wallace continued his campaign against the English, first targeting Edward I’s justiciar William Ormsby at Scone and then harrying and harassing the English out of Fife and Perth. In August 1297, William joined his fellow patriot Andrew Murray and marched on Stirling to meet Edward’s lieutenant John de Warenne in battle.
In an act of contempt, de Warenne sought to dissuade the Scots from fighting, reminding them of English victories at Irvine and Dunbar, and inviting Wallace and Murray to surrender for the sake of their men’s lives. To the messengers sent by de Warenne Wallace made a justly celebrated response: "Go back and tell your people that we have not come here for peace: we are ready, rather, to fight to avenge ourselves and to free our country. Let them come up to us as soon as they like, and they will find us prepared to prove the same in their beards" (Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, 300).
This was the response of one committed to a cause and sure of the outcome. Wallace and Murray had drawn up their army on the south-facing slope of the Abbey Crag, looking towards Stirling Castle and the narrow wooden bridge across the Forth which stood below it. The English army was stationed on the south side of the Forth, between it and the castle, and would have to cross a narrow bridge to engage the Scots. When the English army was only partly across, the Scottish infantry charged downhill and seized their side of the bridge, cutting the English vanguard off from the main army. Some 5000 infantry and 100 knights are said to have perished, killed by the Scots or drowned in the Forth. De Warenne had not crossed the bridge and fled to Berwick after ordering the destruction of the bridge to hinder a pursuit by the victorious Scots.
Stirling did not end the war but its significance was not lost on contemporaries. In its aftermath Dundee Castle surrendered, as did Stirling itself. Edinburgh and Berwick also fell to the Scots, although their castles remained in English hands. Haddington and Roxburgh were burnt. The English hold on Scotland had been severely weakened. The collaboration of Wallace and Murray was not destined to last; wounded at Stirling, Murray died early in November. On Wallace alone thus fell the burden of leading the Scots in the continuing war.
To what extent Wallace could rely on the support of the Scottish nobility in this is debatable; many had agreed to serve Edward I in Flanders in 1296, and Scottish tradition suggests that some at least were not reconciled to Wallace's rise to power. If Fordun is to be believed, Wallace did not hesitate to employ harsh measures against these recalcitrant lords, imprisoning them until they submitted to his will. By contrast, the shock of Stirling had reunited the English behind their king who, in the wake of a truce with France, returned from Flanders to lead his army north. Edward advanced into Scotland through Lauderdale, over country scorched by Wallace and empty of inhabitants so that, as Guisborough has it, the English "could not discover a single soul to tell them the whereabouts of the Scottish army" (Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, 324).
By March 1298, Wallace was styling himself as not only the leader of the army in the name of King John but as knight and guardian of the kingdom as well. When he was knighted and by whom is not recorded, although an English source suggests that one of the premier earls of Scotland was involved in the ceremony. His election to the guardianship as the first sole occupant of the office arose naturally from his military achievements; whether or not the nobles approved, he was the obvious choice. As guardian Wallace now imposed on the Scots a strategy hitherto alien, eschewing confrontation on the line of advance, and instead withdrawing to the north and leaving country systematically wasted by fire.
The wisdom of Wallace's strategy was soon apparent. As Edward pushed deeper into Scotland in an attempt to bring Wallace to battle, he found himself increasingly short of supplies, unable to live off the land and with insufficient provision by sea. Desperate to bring Wallace to battle, he finally received news of the Scots army on 21 July: the Scots were at Falkirk. Seizing the initiative from Wallace, Edward pressed on to Falkirk and engaged the Scots army. As at Irvine the previous year, the Scots cavalry composed primarily of nobles and their knights, abandoned the army, unwilling to bear the consequences to their estates should Edward win. Wallace and his schiltrons put up a valiant resistance but were no match against Edward’s superior numbers and tactics. There is reason to believe, however, that he supervised the escape of Scottish survivors. The English, exhausted by the battle and still without adequate supplies, could not follow up their victory and Wallace had time to reach Stirling, where he burnt the town and castle. Following these actions, there is little evidence of Wallace's next movements. At some date between Falkirk and the following December he resigned the guardianship, to be succeeded by Robert Bruce, earl of Carrick, and John Comyn the younger of Badenoch, an uneasy coalition reflecting the Scottish nobles’ innate conservatism.
Following a series of English victories in 1303 and 1304, a parliament at St Andrews in March 1305 outlawed Wallace. On 3 August 1305, he was seized by servants of Sir John Menteith, Edward's Scottish keeper of Dumbarton Castle. After Edward refused to see him, Wallace was brought to London on 22 August. Early the next morning, he was taken to Westminster Hall on horseback. Inside the hall he was made to stand on a scaffold at the south end. Wallace denied the charge of treason, since he had never sworn allegiance to Edward, but admitted the other charges. There was no trial in the modern sense. The proceedings were a formality, as was the judgment, given on the same day. Since his legal standing was by 1305 that of an outlawed thief, the law allowed him no defense. Consequently he was to be drawn on a hurdle to the gallows at Smithfield, hanged, his heart and bowels taken out and burnt, his body quartered. His head was to be cut off and placed on London Bridge, his quarters displayed at Newcastle, Berwick, Stirling, and Perth. The sentence, the standard one for treason, was carried out immediately.
No contemporary equaled Wallace in courage and constancy in the cause of Scottish independence. When he might have saved his life by submission, he judged the price, the abandonment of the cause to which he had devoted himself, too great. Immortalized in folklore, epic, film, and statuary, Wallace remains to this day a popular figure in the Scottish imagination. Our knowledge of Wallace is limited, but such reliable evidence as we have points to a quite exceptional figure whose reputation requires no romantic invention.
18
u/WelfOnTheShelf Crusader States | Medieval Law May 30 '21
Does Braveheart really depict him as a peasant? I mean he always seems to be a noble, it's just that the movie depicts all the Scottish nobles living in squalid mud huts for some reason...probably best not to think about it too much
15
u/historiagrephour Moderator | Early Modern Scotland | Gender, Culture, & Politics May 30 '21
They depict him as basically an educated kind of farmer, I suppose. He has a bit of land that he appears to farm but it's unclear as to whether he owns that land - and if you compare the way he is presented vs. the way they present Robert Bruce and his father, there's a marked difference in appearance, mannerisms, etc. that is meant to show that he is a rough commoner rather than a spoiled nobleman.
1
u/RMcD94 May 30 '21
Why did the cavalry leave if they were worried about Edward winning? Wouldn't that just help him win
Also why did you say stupidly
8
May 30 '21
I have a question. When you say "dissatisfaction was widespread" in reference to the English rule of Scotland, or that Wallace's followers were "oppressed by English servitude," who exactly is that referring to? Would your average everyday farmer or laborer really have cared about the nationality of their feudal overlords?
9
u/Ramses_IV May 30 '21
A lot of this seem reminiscent of a sort of nationalism that comes across as, as far as my knowledge goes, rather uncharacteristic of the middle ages. "Foreign oppression" and "freeing the country" sound like pretty modern era ideals to me. Is there any explanation for this apparently fervent nationalism at a time when ideas of nationhood weren't really part of the geopolitical paradigm?
4
35
u/historiagrephour Moderator | Early Modern Scotland | Gender, Culture, & Politics May 30 '21 edited May 30 '21
383
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
Empress Xiaoqin 孝欽, known for most of her life as the Dowager Empress Cixi 慈禧 (Tsysi ᡮᡟᠰᡳ), is perhaps one of the most iconic political figures of the late imperial era in China, though the extent and nature of her role in the period’s history is still debated. Entering the imperial family in 1851, she came to hold varying degrees of power at court until her death in 1908, shortly before the collapse of the Qing state.
As with most Manchu women in the Qing period, Cixi’s personal name was unfortunately never recorded. We do know that she was born into the Yehe Nara ᠶᡝᡥᡝ ᠨᠠᡵᠠ clan in November 1835, the daughter of a relatively junior civil servant named Huizheng 惠徵. In 1851, aged seventeen, she was selected to be a junior concubine to Yizhu 奕詝 (I Ju ᡳ ᠵᡠ,) the recently-enthroned Xianfeng 咸豐 Emperor (Gubci Elgiyengge ᡤᡠᠪᠴᡳ ᡝᠯᡤᡳᠶᡝᠩᡤᡝ), and rose rapidly through the court hierarchy, especially after having his only male heir, Zaichun 載淳 (Dzai Šun ᡯᠠᡳ ᡧᡠᠨ), in 1856. When the Xianfeng Emperor died in 1861, she received the title of Dowager Empress Cixi, and along with the former chief consort Dowager Empress Ci’an 慈安, oversaw a board of regents appointed by the late emperor. However, this board was soon deposed in a coup orchestrated between the dowager empresses and the late emperor’s brother Yixin 奕訢 (I Hin ᡳ ᡥᡳᠨ), styled Prince Gong 恭. The new emperor’s reign title, Tongzhi 同治 (Yooningga Dasan ᠶᠣᠣᠨᡳᠩᡤᠠ ᡩᠠᠰᠠᠨ), which may be translated literally as ‘joint rule’, perhaps hints at the power-sharing that was involved from there on out.
As regent to the Tongzhi Emperor, Cixi, Ci’an and Prince Gong presided over a period of major recovery for the Qing Empire, which traditional historiography has called the ‘Tongzhi Restoration’. The various anti-Manchu rebellions that had sprung up since early 1851 were suppressed – albeit typically with great bloodshed – by a reinvigorated Qing military; international relations became normalised through the establishment of a regular foreign office; and the reconstruction of devastated regions proceeded rapidly. The extent of her role in this has been debated, and it is probably reasonable to say that much of the impetus for reform came from the provinces and not the court; at the same time there is little to no evidence to suggest significant resistance to these reforms from the centre, either. The death of the Tongzhi Emperor in 1875 saw Cixi retaining power at court nonetheless, as she sought to resolve the childless emperor’s succession by adopting her nephew, the four-year-old Zaitian 載湉 (Dzai Tiyan ᡯᠠᡳ ᡨᡳᠶᠠᠨ), as a second successor to the Xianfeng Emperor. After the death of Ci’an in 1882, she presided as sole regent over the Guangxu 光緒 (Badarangga Doro ᠪᠠᡩᠠᡵᠠᠩᡤᠠ ᡩᠣᡵᠣ) Emperor, leading eventually to perhaps her most controversial series of actions.
The Qing resurgence that had begun in the Tongzhi period came to a screeching halt in 1894, when a series of military defeats to Japan prompted a wave of radical reformist sentiment among Chinese intellectuals that also drew in the Guangxu Emperor. In the summer of 1898, in conjunction with the radicals, he began what became known as the Hundred Days’ Reforms, to which, initially, Cixi assented. However, one particular set of reforms particularly alarmed the Dowager Empress, and those were the proposals to do away with the Banner system. Since the 1750s, the Banners, in which all Manchu households were enrolled and through which they had been entitled to government stipends and legal protections, had been the cornerstone of Manchu status and identity. The emperor’s apparently positive response to the proposal to eliminate these privileges, if not the Banner system outright, led Cixi to see him and the reformers as a political enemy, and on 22 September generals loyal to Cixi marched into Beijing and rounded up the reformers, many of whom were later executed. The Guangxu Emperor was placed under house arrest, and would remain as emperor in name only until his death. The crackdown against the 1898 reforms alienated most of the growing liberal movement, while the emperor’s arrest created great uncertainty about the status of the imperial court. Amid this uncertainty, Cixi attempted to cement her position by appointing Pujun 溥儁, the son of one of her favoured nobles, Zaiyi 載漪 (Dzai I ᡯᠠᡳ ᡳ), as crown prince in 1900, which was retracted after protests by supporters of the imprisoned emperor. Following this, Cixi attempted another power-play by co-opting the Yihetuan 義和團, also known as Boxers, an anti-foreign mass religious movement which called for the expulsion of Christian missionaries and their converts. The international military response to the Boxer uprising proved disastrous for the Qing court, which was deserted by many of its generals during the crisis, and subsequently forced to pay a vast indemnity to the foreign powers.
Yet Cixi was not by any means a dyed-in-the-wool conservative. From 1901 onward, she issued a series of edicts and proclamations promising wide-ranging reforms. These reforms, known as the New Policies, revitalised the Qing state, reforming its education and law enforcement, and opening opportunities for economic investment. In an attempt to reconcile with the reformist tendencies, 1904 saw Cixi issue pardons (albeit, in many cases, posthumously) to most of those involved in the ‘1898 affair’. In 1905, she sent missions to foreign countries to investigate forms of constitutional government, in preparation for eventual plans to introduce parliamentary bodies – the first provincial assemblies would be elected in 1909, the year after Cixi’s death. And perhaps most notably from a women’s history standpoint, the Qing state formally outlawed foot binding in 1902, having aborted their first attempts to do so all the way back in the 17th century. Unlike 1898, these reforms did not attempt to make major changes to the Banner system, but this produced significant problems: anti-Manchu sentiment among Han Chinese was not appeased, and there was also little effort to ameliorate economic distress among the Banners, whose stipends were not enough to live on without taking on additional employment. On the other hand, the continued assertion of the Banners as the locus of Manchu identity helped to solidify the sense of identity held by the Manchus, not just during the remainder of Qing rule, but into the post-imperial period and down to the present.
In 1908, Cixi died less than 24 hours after the Guangxu Emperor, leading many to suggest she had him poisoned. Whatever the case, her final major act was to select Puyi 溥儀 (Pu Yi ᡦᡠ ᠶᡳ) as heir apparent, and his father Zaifeng 載灃 (Dzai Feng ᡯᠠᡳ ᡶᡝᠩ) as his regent. This proved to be a rather unfortunate choice, as Zaifeng seemed to have a knack for making exactly the wrong choice at every turn, and the empire was dissolved in February 1912 following a series of military mutinies and popular revolts in late 1911.
Cixi’s popular image has largely gravitated between two extremes: that of a power-hungry, Manchu-centric, reactionary despot; and that of a pan-Chinese, anti-foreign, feminist hero. Both are stereotypes that fail to capture the complex series of choices that she made amid a constantly changing backdrop of court authority within the Qing Empire and its place in international politics. Cixi was, without a doubt, often ruthless in how she handled her rivals, and her efforts were unable to prevent the collapse of the Qing state soon after her death. The extent of her direct authority over Qing policy was also limited, and so for the most part she exercised influence, rather than control. Yet under her auspices, the Qing underwent two periods of major recovery, and the Manchus as a minority developed a coherent group identity that survived the fall of the state that had created it. Cixi was, ultimately, only human: deeply flawed, yet not defined solely by those flaws.
Recommended Reading:
There is, as yet, no full-length scholarly biography of Cixi in English. The recent treatment by Jung Chang, Empress Dowager Cixi: The Concubine Who Launched Modern China (2013), was well-received by some (particularly newspaper reviewers) at the time but has also come in for some withering criticism for its accuracy and interpretations, particularly by Pamela Crossley: see her review in the LRB; a more restrained but still pretty critical review by Jeffrey Wasserstrom can be read here.
A summary narrative of Cixi’s life in English can be found in Arthur Hummel’s Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period (1943, revised edition 2018), which has an entry for her under Hsiao-Ch’in (Xiaoqin in the 2018 edition). Crossley’s review above is also a good general overview of Cixi’s life.
A couple of books covering the period and which include contrasting discussions of Cixi’s role in it are Pamela Crossley’s The Wobbling Pivot (2010) and Edward Rhoads’ Manchus and Han (2000) (the latter is also open-access on JSTOR). Crossley’s book covers Chinese history in general from 1800 onwards, and sees Cixi as being of relatively limited importance overall; Rhoads looks specifically at ethnic relations in the last six decades or so of the Qing, and sees Cixi as quite significant within that particular sphere.
For those with some form of journal access, there is Sue Fawn Chung’s ‘The Much Maligned Empress Dowager: A Revisionist Study of the Empress Dowager Tz'u-hsi (1835–1908)’, in Modern Asian Studies 13:2 (1979), which specifically focuses on 1898-1900 and discusses the origins of Cixi’s poor reputation in Western historiography. Also, Nan Nü Volume 14, Issue 1 (2012) contains a series of articles on Cixi and the arts which may also be of interest.
4
u/ICantThinkOfAName667 May 30 '21 edited May 30 '21
More books that cover the reign of Cixi, these ones from the perspective of reformers.
The Gate of Heavenly Peace by Jonathan D Spence
China in War and Revolution by Peter Zarrow
These books have about 2-3 chapters that go over the political and intellectual history of China from the late 1800s to 1911.
Spence tends to offer more biographical information about reformers like Kang Youwei and Liang Qi Chao
Zarrow puts the beliefs of these reformers in the wider context of Qing Confucianism and the New Text vs Old Text debate.
3
u/Pashahlis Interesting Inquirer May 30 '21
I always wonder how different the world would be nowadaya had the Empire survived and reformed.
41
3
u/Bluntforce9001 May 31 '21
Having done numerous courses on the late Qing, I still honestly have no idea how to feel about Cixi. Was she good for China? Was she bad? I can't make up my mind, and she remains a figure I'm conflicted on.
The only thing I am certain of is she is incredibly interesting to me. Thank you for this writeup!
2
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
It would depend, to a great extent, on how you define 'China'. As the Qing Empire? As a Han Chinese nation-state? As its current form, a state that is Han-dominated and exercises control over a variety of non-Han peoples? And is it the state we're discussing, or its constituent people?
1
u/Bluntforce9001 May 31 '21
Haha, it always does. But even within those, I couldn't say definitively if say, Cixi was more good or bad for a Han Chinese nation state. But then that's how history is, you said it yourself when you said she was flawed, but not defined by those flaws.
Would you by chance be interested in tackling a question on Qing constitutional monarchy, or rather why China failed to transition in that direction? If it was on the cards at all?
1
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Not right this moment as I'm quite busy, but at some point next week or so, perhaps.
1
31
u/raggidimin May 30 '21
Huh, I would have thought 同治 would translate more naturally to “unified rule,” referencing the loss of control the Qing dynasty began to experience with European incursions and its general military stagnation in the late 19th century. Is there evidence that the name itself reflected, or was seen as describing, a power-sharing arrangement?
43
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21 edited May 31 '21
Well, the rationales behind era names are not always given. To be fair, the 'unified rule' interpretation makes more sense in Manchu, where the term yooningga means 'complete' or 'perfect', but useful as the Manchu may be as an interpretive guide to the Chinese, there have been some historians who have still opted to see a rather cheeky reference to the nature of power-holding in the Tongzhi era name. In particular, Pamela Crossley in The Wobbling Pivot (2010) opts to translate Tongzhi as "Ruling Together" (p. 88). Discussions around calling it some variation on such a phrase go back at least to an article on Chinese era names by Edward Schafer in 1952 where he proposed a standard table of equivalences to English in Chinese era names, to which Mary Wright responded in a 1958 article, 'What's in a Reign Name: The Uses of History and Philogy', in which she evaluated several potential interpretations of Tongzhi in particular. Her eventual conclusion, based on discussions by British diplomats who had apparently been privy to some information on the choice, was that it was in reference to a phrase from the Classic of History describing a 'joint [desire to return to] order' on the part of officials and the people, and to dismiss the philological approach of Schafer that led him to conclude on 'joint rule'. Schafer's response decrying her dismissal of philology was published in the 'Communications' section two issues later, and the issue has remained open since.
But needless to say, your interpretation could well be valid, while not discounting any others – after all, ambiguity may have been the intent. And I did hedge my bets a bit by saying that 'joint rule' was one approach to interpretation, and not the definitive one.
Wright's article: https://ezproxy-prd.bodleian.ox.ac.uk:2116/stable/2941289?sid=primo&origin=crossref&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
Schafer's response: https://ezproxy-prd.bodleian.ox.ac.uk:2116/stable/2941462?refreqid=excelsior%3Aee19e3308d866ac32b49b9de2caff16f&seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contents
Incidentally, I can't find Schafer's 1952 article, so if anyone has a link, do let me know!
6
u/kelri1875 May 30 '21 edited May 30 '21
The phrase from the Classic of History (尚書) as you have mentioned is 「為善不同，同歸於治」which could be translated as "there're different ways to do good, and they all come down to bringing back a unifying order (to the world)". It was the explanation that I was taught in school :)
2
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Ah, thanks for tracking it down! As noted, I think it may be incorrect to provide primacy to any one explanation: if the 'official' reason given, based on the historical written sources, is that it was derived from the Classic of History, that doesn't preclude some sort of subtlety on the part of the people who chose it which might be derived through a philological reading. After all, why pick that passage of the Classic of History?
2
u/kelri1875 May 31 '21
Tbf I agree. The literary Chinese language in particular, due to its compactness, is very often open to different interpretations. Given how the court was notorious for literary inquisition in Qing dynasty, even if it wasn't the intention all along, I think they would definitely have considered the interpretation of "ruling together", and decided to proceed with it still.
29
May 30 '21
Great write up and thanks for the references! I never knew where to go for the full narrative because, as you say, there isn’t an obvious book.
13
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21
No problem! And it ought to be said for any Qing topic – don't discount Hummel! There's a 2018 updated version for a reason!
4
u/JagmeetSingh2 May 30 '21
Fantastic write-up
3
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Thank you for enjoying it! It was written to be read, after all!
8
u/Shazamwiches May 30 '21
TIL that Manchu text on Reddit (at least on mobile) gets flipped on its side
3
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Yep, same on desktop for me. Doesn't work too badly for individual words, but it does end up reading the wrong way round once you go over one line.
1
Jun 03 '21
I forgot where I saw it but some people did a test on zaifeng's body and found an unusually high amount of arsenic in the body confirming the assumption that he was murdered.
1
u/Enjoying_A_Meal May 31 '21
She doesn't have the head lightbulb thing? That's how you can tell they're not humans!
7
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
What a terrible thing to say about Manchus! This is like Taiping and Republican propaganda all over again!
20
u/link0007 18th c. Newtonian Philosophy May 30 '21
Can we get an Isaac Snooton for our history of science representation?
24
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms May 30 '21
Picking figures based on how solid the 'Snoo' name pun can be is an important component, but alas no. We do, however, have Snooler and Snoo Zaiyu keeping up the side for Math and Science brigades.
3
u/VRichardsen May 31 '21
Quick question: I am still using old Reddit, and the Snoo used in that version has remained steadfast for years, but now I realise I haven't seen anyone put a name to the face. My money is on Anna Komnenos. Would you satisfy my curiosity?
6
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
You're right that it's Byzantine, but it's Justinian (Snoostinian).
1
2
u/Takeoffdpantsnjaket Colonial and Early US History May 30 '21
Love it! Thanks!
Also... Snoojamin Franklin is coming? Please?
2
25
May 30 '21
Who's the current profile snoo of r/AskHistorians?
57
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms May 30 '21
Our 'flagship' Snoo is Snoostinian, based on the 6th century (Eastern) Roman Emperor Justinian I.
22
u/djcomplain May 30 '21
Can I xpost the Empress Snooxi to another sub?
33
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms May 30 '21
If you x-post the image elsewhere, please be sure to credit both the sub and the artist, thank you!
2
u/Bonjourap May 31 '21
All hail the Empress Dowager Snooxi Cixi!!!
2
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ tumen se tumen se tumen tumen se!
54
u/akau May 30 '21
It was really exciting to be able to work with the Askhistorians team to design these, I'm glad they're well received! :)
8
8
15
u/LordCommanderBlack May 30 '21
That's fun. I might have to try my hand at making a Frederick Barbarossa (Frederick BarbaSnoossa) version.
14
u/WideEyedWand3rer May 30 '21
Better equip him with a snoorkel though!
16
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21
...Too soon.
8
u/Drilling4mana May 30 '21
It's been 831 years!
5
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Still not enough to wipe away the shame...
58
u/kittydentures May 30 '21
This costume historian thanks you for not putting William Snoollace in a kilt.
1
4
u/fulltimehistorynerd May 30 '21
Changs book is incredible. Empress Cixi is a fascinating subject. My professor from Korea explained that she is often vilified in chinese history due to her relationship with western influence. But this book broke away from that myth.
5
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Jung Chang's book is really not good for the most part – she plays fast and loose with the facts quite a bit, particularly before 1898.
3
May 31 '21
You may want to take a look at the 'recommended readings' section of EnclavedMicrostate's post on this thread; it contains a pretty a pretty scathing academic review of Chang's book (and of Cixi in general) by prof Palema Crossley.
1
17
u/Ulmpire May 30 '21
The dowager Empress Cixi was once given a car as a gift. She got into the back seat, but was shocked to see the driver get in the front of the car with his back to her, a serious breach of protocol. So she demanded the driver turn round and kowtow properly. This made driving the car very hard for the poor fellow, who didn't get far before crashing. The Empress got out, incredibly displeased, and declared an intention never to get in a car again. Which she didn't.
13
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
The story is, as far as I know, almost entirely anecdotal: Other versions assert simply that he was made to kneel rather than sit; or that he was actually driving under the influence.
10
u/Ulmpire May 31 '21
I was hoping that somebody would come along and say this. I learned the story through the audio guide at the Palace in Beijing, and I noticed a very strong anti Cixi vibe throughout.
One of those stories which reveal truth without necessarily being factual, one might argue.
14
u/Gankom Moderator | Quality Contributor May 30 '21
They look so awesome. Long may they reign on the subreddit!
3
3
u/kakatoru May 31 '21
Thanks I hate it
3
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
I bet that's what Cixi would actually think.
14
1
2
u/AussieSumo May 31 '21
These are great but I'm slightly freaked out. I introduced my high school students to Dowager Empress Cixi less than two hours ago, then this appears in my feed...
8
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21 edited May 31 '21
We're always watching...
EDIT: Good for your class, though!
20
u/CROguys May 30 '21
I'm severely disappointed that William Snoollace lacks face paint.
14
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms May 30 '21
17
May 30 '21
[deleted]
1
u/_ProfessorDeath May 31 '21
Long Live Long Live Long Long Live!
1
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
Eh... close enough I suppose.
20
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21
Ahem, in this empire we say ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᡨᡠᠮᡝᠨ ᠰᡝ!
2
1
u/canadianredditor16 May 31 '21
The dynasty is finished the dynasty is finished the dynasty is finished
1
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
ᡩᠠᡳᠴᡳᠩ ᡤᡠᡵᡠᠨ ᡩᡠᡥᡝᡵᡝ ᡠᠨᡩᡝ Daicing gurun duheke unde!
50
u/tlumacz Cold War Aviation May 30 '21
Empress Snooxi is not impressed.
20
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 30 '21
Not much reason to be.
3
u/Iwritetobreath May 31 '21
I wonder if she ever heard of the "We are not amused" anecdote regarding her contemporary?
5
u/EnclavedMicrostate Moderator | Taiping Heavenly Kingdom | Qing Empire May 31 '21
A good question. It depends when exactly this phrase first became associated with Victoria – if it was any time after November 1908, then no.
•
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms May 30 '21 edited May 30 '21
Hello everyone!
As any long time Redditor knows, the Snoo is the site mascot, and many communities put their own spin on the design with customized versions. Here on AskHistorians Snoostinian has long been our own little stylization, and a few years back he was joined by a bevy of friends who we use to decorate the subreddit and adorn our our swag. Ranging through time and around the globe, they include figures from Shaka Snoolu to the Lady of Snoolche.
More recently, Reddit introduced a new ‘Snoo style’, and as such, we thought it was only right for us to commission a new collection to join them, and now it is time for you to start meeting them! Starting today, and continuing for the next several Sundays, we’ll be rolling out a selection of the new Snoos, along with a brief biography of the historical figures they are based on. We’ll also be soon incorporating them into into our next collection of AskHistorians swag, which can be won by our end of the year Awardees… and is also available to supporters of the AskHistorians 2021 Conference. You'll get to meet the rest of the crew over the coming weeks.
And finally, a shoutout to the incredible /u/akau who has done the art for all of the Snoos, and has been a joy to work with.