Why didn't late Qing produce any good generals?

Late Qing Dynasty had plenty of good generals, they were not the problem. The problem was the government.

The Northern Fleet（北洋水师）was the most powerful naval force in the Far East, but Cixi diverted funds from the fleet to build her own palace, resulting in a severe shortage of ammunition for the fleet. Many of the cannon shells were filled with dirt instead of gun powder in an attempt to fool the officials in charge.

That is just one of the common story that people heard over and over again, but it still does not explain if China had good general or not, I know they lost almost all the major battles again the Western powers on land, I mean why can't they develop good generals like those ones in the early 20th century.

Zuo zhong tang was pretty descent. His black banner troops managed to defeat the French during the Sino-French War in Vietnam. Too bad the Qing government was so cowardly that it remained a strategic defeat for China.

Originally Posted by stardave

That is just one of the common story that people heard over and over again, but it still does not explain if China had good general or not, I know they lost almost all the major battles again the Western powers on land, I mean why can't they develop good generals like those ones in the early 20th century.

The best general in history can't do anything if he doesn't get the logistic support from his government. Do you think the Western Powers defeated China with guns and warships? No, they defeated China with manufacturies and, in the beginning, opium. Where Britain once ran such a trade deficit with China that they decided to resort to opium to redress the balance, by the time of Cixi, China was importing cloths from the West!

The late Qing Dynasty was bankrupt from the collapse of local manufacturing industries. They were propping themselves up with loans from foreign banks, and the Imperial Court spent most of those loans on their luxuries instead of guns and bullets for their soldiers. They also had very little popular support, with the largest peasant rebellion, Taiping, crushed just a few decades ago. Troop morale was extremely low.

Riddled by all these troubles, no amount of great generals would have been able to make a difference!

Originally Posted by stardave

I am always amazed at the amount and the quality of the Generals and offers that China was able to produce during world war 2 and the civil war. They were really talented individual, they can use actual military tactic and maneuvers to win the battle, even then they were severely lacking firepower when compare to the enemies (Korean war).

However during the last few decades of late Qing periods, why was there not any good generals being produced from China? I would think if there were people such Lin Biao during the Opium war, he would have defeated the Europeans powers, he would have lost a lot of people, but he would win the battle in the end.

I agree with the comments left by previous posters. The problem is not the generals, but the govn't. No matter how talented you are, if your superior commander always wants to surrender, how can you ever fight? One good example would be Lin Zexu in the 1st Opium War. He led the Qing forces and successfully defeated the British on the battlefield. Yet, the British managed to bribed the high-ranking officials in the Qing govn't who convinced the emperor to not only banish Lin, but completely destroyed ALL the coastal defense network along the east and south coast of China. Without any meaningful defense, the British simply walked into China.

Lin Biao could do it because his superior commander, Mao, was willing to fight to the end. If Lin Biao lived in the era of the Opium War, he would have gotten the same treatment as Lin Zexu if not worse.

I believe, in China, there has never been lacking of generals who are not only talented, but willing to fight to the end no matter when. China is a huge nation. With the huge population base, you are bound to find talented people any time in history. The key issue is the govn't that leads the people. When you have a hard-core and tough leader, the generals thrive. That's why you always find these famous generals under tough emperors. With weak leadership, these talented generals can't find a suitable environment. They either could not even get a job in the military, or die young while trying to win a battle without support, or killed/banished by their emperor while trying desperately to protect the nation alone. Yue Fei of the Song dynasty would be another good example.

About late Qing dynasty, how about Zeng Guofan, Zuo Zongtang, and their mortal enemy, Shi Dakai? All these were highly talented generals.

---------- Post added at 12:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 PM ----------

Originally Posted by stardave

That is just one of the common story that people heard over and over again, but it still does not explain if China had good general or not, I know they lost almost all the major battles again the Western powers on land, I mean why can't they develop good generals like those ones in the early 20th century.

Late Qing was still different from the early 20th century. Although the Qing dynasty was very corrupted, they were still a unified nation under an highly authoritarian govn't. One person, be it a general or a soldier, could not do much. Since there was no alternative in a still tightly controlled govn't, these potential generals either joined the military and be seriously handicapped by the govn't, or go back home and spend their life as a civilian. Zeng Guofan experienced this in his lifetime. In his early years, he was middle range official in the Qing govn't. He made a comment about how the emperor should focus more on the govn't issues and stay away from all his wives. For that, he was banished. If it weren't because of the Taiping rebellion, he would have spent all his time at home.

The early 1900's was a completely different time. It was chaotic, to say the least. There was an old Chinese saying: "heroes come at chaotic times." There was no unified govn't. There were dozens and dozens of warlords. Assuming you are a general, you could leave your current commander and join someone else if you don't like the commander you have now. Even if you can't seem to find anyone you like, you can start your own force and become a warlord yourself. Because there was no unified govn't, there were many many political/military voids in the country where you can fill if you want to and if you are smart enough. So chaotic times provide many alternatives for anyone who is smart and ambitious. It becomes the fertile soil for talented people. You can look at these famous generals in the early 1900's, most of them have changed sides. They would have been banished/marginalized if there was no alternative. Yet, there was one, one that happened to give them what they needed to thrive. In fact, most of the famous CCP generals were either with Nationalist or warlords themselves in their early days.

Another factor. In the Qing dynasty, the leadership was not personally threatened by the Westerners although the country was becoming a colony. In fact, many high-ranking officials got super wealthy during this time because of all the bribery from the Western powers. While not threatened, the military personnel became less important to them. Sometimes, these officials and even the emperor felt that the military was actually hampering in their ability to gather more wealth. So the military was marginalized even the nation was being invaded and turned into a colony. Things became vastly different in the early 20th century. It was a period of warlords. These leaders came to power because of their military. They knew that military was key to their success. Not only that, they also know that they could lose everything including their lives the moment they ignore their military. With so much emphasis put on military, the generals were given all the resources to pursue what they loved to do, fight battles.

Same thing with the KMT. The KMT 29th Army scored major victories against the Japanese while armed with mainly broadswords. That is about as bad-ass as you can get. However, they were still defeated in the end because Chiang never gave them the support needed to actually win.

The Taiping Rebellion created a military force that was feared by the Jurchen and the industrial powers alike. What do you expect from a country that has a tiny ethnic minority clinging unto power and upon distinction? Despite the integration of the traditional Chinese civil servants, the military elite power had to be ethnically limited (not exclusive to Jurchen, but in checks and balances, similar to modern Lybia, Syria and Iraq before the turmoils.
It needed a civil war first to get rid of Jurchen "nobility and occupation" before Hans of talent could showcase achievement. If you are a tiny ethnic group ruling over a larger population, the last thing you want is a leader and saviour from the ranks of the "inferior". For the political system's stability it's better to lose the conflict than topple the state for one victory in battle. From this point of view the gouvernment of China was very well managed to cling to power and having no capable general in position was quite often a necessity for this achievement as well as using public outrage at the other occupiers who were dissimilar to the Han for inner unity (no matter what the battlefield outcome).
To smother the waves I'll likely create, European military reports indicate that Chinese hired as soldiers showed themselves highly capable, but deserted because the Chinese resistance found out their family connections. A conquest was impossible for this reason.

Originally Posted by Kurt

The Taiping Rebellion created a military force that was feared by the Jurchen and the industrial powers alike. What do you expect from a country that has a tiny ethnic minority clinging unto power and upon distinction? Despite the integration of the traditional Chinese civil servants, the military elite power had to be ethnically limited (not exclusive to Jurchen, but in checks and balances, similar to modern Lybia, Syria and Iraq before the turmoils.
It needed a civil war first to get rid of Jurchen "nobility and occupation" before Hans of talent could showcase achievement. If you are a tiny ethnic group ruling over a larger population, the last thing you want is a leader and saviour from the ranks of the "inferior". For the political system's stability it's better to lose the conflict than topple the state for one victory in battle. From this point of view the gouvernment of China was very well managed to cling to power and having no capable general in position was quite often a necessity for this achievement as well as using public outrage at the other occupiers who were dissimilar to the Han for inner unity (no matter what the battlefield outcome).
To smother the waves I'll likely create, European military reports indicate that Chinese hired as soldiers showed themselves highly capable, but deserted because the Chinese resistance found out their family connections. A conquest was impossible for this reason.

Taiping Rebellion was the turning point where ethnic Han began to take center stage in Qing govn't. Before that, most important positions in Qing govn't were always held by Manchurians. The emperor had no choice but to turn to the Hans when he found out that his own people were next to useless on the battlefield against Taiping. When Zeng Guofan successfully defeated Taiping, he and his fellow generals took many important posts in the govn't. However, it was too late for the Qing dynasty. The corruption and Taiping Rebellion took its toll.

Alright thanks for the reply, I guess the Qing government was just too corrupted to the core, that no matter what talented General they have, it will be never given the support that he needed to win the battle. So I guess that make sense that Qing lost control so quickly.

So one must ask the question, why didn't the general never receive the support he needed form the central government, even if it was the right thing to do. I think it is because of conflict of interests, when the top leadership is in bed with the foreign class... and in the case of America, our top leadership is in bed with Wall street. (off topic I know)

Originally Posted by stardave

So one must ask the question, why didn't the general never receive the support he needed form the central government, even if it was the right thing to do. I think it is because of conflict of interests, when the top leadership is in bed with the foreign class... and in the case of America, our top leadership is in bed with Wall street. (off topic I know)

Interesting question. It depends on what you believe.

First the legend. When Qing dynasty was 1st established, the founder, Nurhachi unified Manchuria by destroying all fellow tribes. One of the tribes he destroyed was headed by one of his childhood friends. At the time when he sacked the capital city, his childhood friend refused to surrender and burned himself along with his entire immediate family. He hated Nurhachi so much that he swore that even if there was a single woman left in his tribe, she would seek to destroy what Nurhachi created. Then fast-forward 250 years to the late Qing. The young emperor, Xianfeng, fell in love with this beautiful girl in his palace and wanted to name her one of his wives. His officials opposed his decision adamantly because she was a descendant of Nurhachi's childhood friend, which we discussed above. As the legend says, she might have the potential to destroy the great Qing dynasty. The emperor laughed at the notion that a little girl might have the power to destroy a dynasty. So she became one of his wives. She then grew and grew into the infamous Empress Cixi. She was a highly intelligent person as she managed to destroy everyone in her way to power. Yet, it seemed that, once she came to power, every decision she made was harmful to the dynasty. So the legend says her intention was to destroy the Qing dynasty to begin with since Nurhachi, the founder of the Qing dynasty, destroyed her ancestors.

What might have actually happened. The Qing leadership became so corrupted, their personal greed outweighed anything related to the nation. This, in fact, has happened many many times in history. Corrupted officials might take the bribes from the Westerners and did their bidding. The leader who was so removed from the his/her people and the reality made delusional decisions. This also happened many many times in history. Look how Rome fell and what the Louis XVI was doing in his time on the throne. It's not difficult to imagine that these rulers were simply too incapable of ruling a nation.

Originally Posted by vesicles

Interesting question. It depends on what you believe.

First the legend. When Qing dynasty was 1st established, the founder, Nurhachi unified Manchuria by destroying all fellow tribes. One of the tribes he destroyed was headed by one of his childhood friends. At the time when he sacked the capital city, his childhood friend refused to surrender and burned himself along with his entire immediate family. He hated Nurhachi so much that he swore that even if there was a single woman left in his tribe, she would seek to destroy what Nurhachi created. Then fast-forward 250 years to the late Qing. The young emperor, Xianfeng, fell in love with this beautiful girl in his palace and wanted to name her one of his wives. His officials opposed his decision adamantly because she was a descendant of Nurhachi's childhood friend, which we discussed above. As the legend says, she might have the potential to destroy the great Qing dynasty. The emperor laughed at the notion that a little girl might have the power to destroy a dynasty. So she became one of his wives. She then grew and grew into the infamous Empress Cixi. She was a highly intelligent person as she managed to destroy everyone in her way to power. Yet, it seemed that, once she came to power, every decision she made was harmful to the dynasty. So the legend says her intention was to destroy the Qing dynasty to begin with since Nurhachi, the founder of the Qing dynasty, destroyed her ancestors.

What might have actually happened. The Qing leadership became so corrupted, their personal greed outweighed anything related to the nation. This, in fact, has happened many many times in history. Corrupted officials might take the bribes from the Westerners and did their bidding. The leader who was so removed from the his/her people and the reality made delusional decisions. This also happened many many times in history. Look how Rome fell and what the Louis XVI was doing in his time on the throne. It's not difficult to imagine that these rulers were simply too incapable of ruling a nation.

Well, the legend certainly fits the template of other legends in Chinese history: when a dynasty/kingdom falls, find a woman to blame.

Yes, Cixi was a conservative who clung to her power at the expense of the rest of the country, but her two predecessors would not have done things any different.

The deep corruption of late-Qing started with Qian Long and He Shen. He Shen was a favorite minister of Qian Long, and he was so corrupt, and so adept at corruption, that he amassed a fortune worth more than 15 years of the entire tax revenue of the empire! Even though He Shen was executed in the end, the culture of corruption he created remained, directly influencing events of 100 years later.

It's really a very interesting piece of Chinese history. Of course, I'm no real historian, so my information may well be mixed with legends.

Originally Posted by solarz

Well, the legend certainly fits the template of other legends in Chinese history: when a dynasty/kingdom falls, find a woman to blame.

Yes, Cixi was a conservative who clung to her power at the expense of the rest of the country, but her two predecessors would not have done things any different.

The deep corruption of late-Qing started with Qian Long and He Shen. He Shen was a favorite minister of Qian Long, and he was so corrupt, and so adept at corruption, that he amassed a fortune worth more than 15 years of the entire tax revenue of the empire! Even though He Shen was executed in the end, the culture of corruption he created remained, directly influencing events of 100 years later.

It's really a very interesting piece of Chinese history. Of course, I'm no real historian, so my information may well be mixed with legends.

Yep. I am always fascinated with the legends. And it is true that Chinese like to blame women for the fall of anything. Thus the phrase "she has the look that would sack a city and destroy a kingdom."

Virtually all dynasties end because of corruption. Qin had Zhao Gao, Han had the ten Changshi, Song had Zhang bangchang and Qin Hui and Ming had Wei Zhongxian. Like the famous saying, all empire falls from within.

Interesting, but I don't think Cixi was "in" on it from the beginning, she was probably just doing what she needed to do to maintain her personal power, if that means at the expense of the nation then so be it. It was kinda like when Mao launched the cultural revolution to get back in power, even though he probably know that will only benefit himself, but not much for the nation.

Originally Posted by vesicles

Yep. I am always fascinated with the legends. And it is true that Chinese like to blame women for the fall of anything. Thus the phrase "she has the look that would sack a city and destroy a kingdom."

Virtually all dynasties end because of corruption. Qin had Zhao Gao, Han had the ten Changshi, Song had Zhang bangchang and Qin Hui and Ming had Wei Zhongxian. Like the famous saying, all empire falls from within.

Not just women. Any individuals who lack the male part gets blamed. Eunuchs get the blame almost 100% of the time when a dynasty falls.