Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T20:29:54.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Peiyang Army, Yüan Shih-k'ai and the Origins of Modern Chinese Warlordism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Stephen R. MacKinnon
Get access

Abstract

The Peiyang Army was the most significant military development in China between the Hsiang and Huai Armies which suppressed the Taiping and Nien rebellions in the 1860's and the army that Chiang Kai-shek raised and employed in the northern expedition of 1926–27. The Peiyang was the first Chinese army to be comparatively modern in training and discipline as well as in weaponry. Formed for the most part by Yuan Shih-k'ai while he was governor-general of Chihli province from 1901 to 1907, the Peiyang Army grew to six divisions of about 10,000 men each. Size alone gave the army a major role in politics during the last decade of the Ch'ing dynasty and the early years of the Republic.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 405 - 423
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

The author wishes to thank Arizona University's Grants Committee for financial ante.

1 See Yoshihiro, Hatano, “Hokuyd gambatsu no seiritsu katei [Development of the Peiyang Warlords],” Nagoya daigaktt bungakjtbu kenkyii ronshü [Collected studies from the faculty of letters of Nagoya University], 6(1953), 211–62;Google Scholar in English, sec also Powell, Ralph, The Rise of Chinese Military Power, 1895–1912 (Princeton, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Michael, Franz, “Regionalism in Nineteenth-Century China,” Introduction to Stanley Spector, Li Hung-chang and the Huai Army: A Study in Nineteenth-Century Regionalism (Seattle, 1964);Google Scholar pioneer works, by an eminent Chinese historian, are Erh-kang, Lo, “Ch’ing-chi ping-wei chiang yu ti ch'i-yüan [The origin of personal armies in the late Ch'ing period],” Chung-kuo she-hui ching-chi shih chi-k'an [Journal of Chinese social and economic history], vol. 5, no. 2 (June 1937),Google Scholar 235–50 and Hsiang-chün hsin-chih [A new treatise on the Hunan Army], (Shanghai,1938).Google Scholar

2 Erh-min, Wang, Huai-chtin chih [Treatise on the Huai Army], (Taipei, 1967).Google Scholar

3 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 16 August, 1904, from the Foreign Office archives of the Public Records Office, London (hereafter cited as FO), 17/1656, 633ff.; Intelligence Diary for the peritxi ending 8 November, 1904, FO 17/1657, 523ff.; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 28 March, 1905, FO 17/1688, 87–8 ft; Review of military affairs in China during the year 1904 by Lieutenant-Colonel C. M. Ducat, enclosure in Ernest Satow to Lansdownc. no. 15, 14 January, 1905. FO 405/154 (Confidential Prim), 90–92ff.

4 Yang-shou-yüan tsou-i chi-yao [Selected memorials of Yüan shih-k'ai], compiled by Shcn Tsu-hsicn (1937), chüan 26:1, 7a; Kuo T'ing-i, Chin-tai Chung-kuo shih-shih jih-chih [Chronology of modern Chinese history], (Taipei, 1963), p. 1195.

5 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 16 February, 1904, FO 17/1655, 25IT. and discussion in subsequent paragraphs.

6 Yang-s/tou-yiian tsott-i chi-yao, chüan 27:1–3, 6–8; 29:10–2; Tung-jang tsa-chih [Eastern Miscellany], vol. 1 (1904), no. 1, “ts'ai-cheng” [Financial administration], pp. 21–22 and no. 7, “ts'ai-cheng], p. 192; Lo Yü-tung, “Kuang-hsü ch'ao pu-chiu ts'ai-cheng chih fang-ts'e [Governmental policies for meeting financial crises during the Kuang-hsü period], Chung-l(tio chin-tai ching-chi shih-yen-chiu chi-k'an [Studies in modern economic history of China], vol. 1, no. 2, p. 249; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 2 February, 1904, FO 17/1654, 560ff.; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 8 November, 1904, FO 17/1657. 533–24ff.

7 Yang-shou-yüan tsou-i chi-yao, chüan 26:1–3, 8a, 9a.

8 Intelligence Diary for periods ending 2 February, 1904, FO 17/1654, 526 ff. and 16 February, 1904, FO/1655. 25ff.

9 Tung-fang tsa-chih, vol. I (1904), no. 5, “ts'ai-cheng,” p. 138 and no. 11, “ts'at-cheng,” pp. 284–86.

10 Ch'ing-shih [History of the Ch';ing dynasty], compiled by Chang Ch'i-yun, Hsiao I-shan, Hsiao et al. (Taipei, 1961), IV, 2830-32 and Ralph Powell, pp. 166–67, 205. On Ch'i-ang-keng, see Fei Hsing-chien, Chin-tai ming-jen hsiao-ch'uan [Short biographies of famous people in modern times] (Shanghai, 1920), pp.Google Scholar 236–37. T'ieh-liang was with the first group of students who were sent to Japan in 1900 for military -schooling. Late in 1902, at Yüan's suggestion, the Empress Dowager appointed T'ieh-liang, then only a taotai candidate, to co-direct with Yüan the training of 3,000 Man-chu recruits as the nucleus for a division of modern-trained Manchu troops. In 1903, T'ieh-liang became vice-president of the Board of Revenue, led a military delegation to observe war games in Japan, and upon returning late that year, worked with Yuan on the creation of the Army Reorganization Bureau, of which he and Yüan became directors. See Yang-shou yuan tsou-i chi-yao, chüan 21:40–5;Google ScholarPei-yang kunḡ-tu lei-tsuan [A classified collection of public documents of the Commissioner of Trade for the Northern Ports], compiled by Kan Hou-tz'u (1907), chüan 12:10–12; and Hsi-chang, Chen, Pei-yang ts'ang-sang shih-hua [Historical talk about the Peiyang convulsion], (Tainan, 1967), pp. 261–62.Google Scholar Hsü Shih-ch'ang and Yüan had been associated since childhood; on Hsü see the comprehensive biography “Hsü-Shih-ch'ang ping-ch'uan [Biography of Hsü-Shih-ch'ang] by Shen Yün-lung serialized in Ch'uan-cht wen-hsüeh [Biographical literature], beginning vol. 13, no. 1 (July 1968), p. 6-n. On Lu Ch'uan-lin see Ch'ing-shih, VI, 4909–10; Hsiao I-shan, Ch'ing-tai t'ung-shih [General history of the Ch'ing dynasty] (Taipei, 3951–53)IV 2378; and Liu Hou-sheng, Chang Chien ch'üan-chi [Biography of Chang Chien] (Shanghai, 1958), p. 130.

11 As recorded by Lieutenant-Colonel G. Pereira in a report on the Lu-chün, dated 14 January, 1906, FO 371/31, 386ff.

12Fu, Chou, Chou Ch'üeh-shen-kung ch'üan-chi [Complete works of Chou Fu] (1922), “tsou-kao [Memorials],” chüan 2:15–17 ami Intelligence Diary for the period ending 2 February, 1904, FO 17/1654, 563ff.Google Scholar

13 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 16 February, 1904, FO 17/1655, 2gff.

14K'uei-Iung, Ch'en, Yung-chi shang-shu tsou-i [Memorials of Board President Ch'en K'uei-lung”, chüan 4:1–2, 14–15.Google Scholar 18; Tung-fang tsa-chih, vol. 3 (1906), no. 4, “tsa-tsu \Miscellaneous],” p. 26; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 1 March, 1904, FO 17/1655, 87–88ff.; and The 29th Brigade of the Lu-chün at K'at-feng fu, report by G. Pereira, 29 August, 1906, enclosure no. 3 in John Jordan's no. 420 of 15 October, 1906, FO 371/41, 169–72ff.

15Fu, Chou. “tsou-kao,” chüan 3:29–32, 4:14–17; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 1 March, 1904, FO 17/1655, 75ff.; and Ralph Powell, pp. 231–32.Google Scholar

16Chih-tung, Chang, Chang Wen-hsiang-fytng ch'üan-chi [Collected works of Chang Chih-tung] (Peking, 1928), “tsou-kao,” chüan 38:16–23, 40: 14b; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 3 November, 1904, FO 17/1657, 414–17ff; report by CM. Ducat in Satow, no. 92, 14 March, 1905, FO 17/1671, III–15ff.; and Ralph Powell, pp. 147–220.Google Scholar

17 Ralph Powell, pp. 232–33.

18 Tung-fang tsa-chih, vol. 1 (1904), no. I, “ts'ai-cheng,” pp. 3–18; and Lo Yü-tung, pp. 215–52.

19Tuan-fang, , Tuan Chung-min l{itng tsou-kao [Drafts of Tuan-fang's Memorials] (1918),Google Scholarchüan 3:20; Feng-kang (editors pseud.), San-shui Uang Yen-sun hsien-sheng nien p'u [Chronological biography of Liang Shih-i] (1939), p. 44.Google Scholar

20Kuang-hsü ch'ao tung-hua hsü-lu [Continuation of the Tung-hua records, Kuang-hsü reign], compiled by Chu Shou-p'eng (Shanghai, 1909), chüan 184:30–4, 192:6–7; and Tang-fang tsa-chih, vol. 2 (1905), no. 10, “ts'ai-cheng,” pp. 240–43 and vol. 3 (1906), no. 2, “ts'ai-cheng,” pp. 22–25.Google Scholar

21Times(London), September 5, 1904, p. 6; also Review of Military Affairs in China during the year 1904 by CM. Ducat, enclosure in Satow no. 15, 14 January, 1905, FO 405/154 (Confidential Print), 92ff.Google Scholar

22 Memorials discussed in the following paragraph.

23 Wei also opposed Yuan and his allies at court in respect to the future of the Kiangnan arsenal, see Kennedy, Thomas, “The Kiangnan Arsenal, 1895-1911: The Decentralized Bureau-cracy Responds to Imperialism,” Ch'ing-shih wen-t'i, vol. II, no. i (October, 1969), 29–31.Google Scholar

24 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 10 May, 1904, FO 17/1655, 606ff.

25 Chang Chih-tung, “tsou-kao,” chüan 38:12b–16 and “ticn-kao [Telegrams],] chüan 65:140–15; report by CM. Ducat in Satow no. 92, 14 March, 1905, FO 17/1671, 111ff.

26 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 1 March, 1904, FO 17/1655, 75ff.

27Ta Ch'ing Te-tsung ching (Kuang-hsü) huang-ti shih-lu [Veritable records of the Ch'ing Kuang-hsü reign] (hereafter cited as Shih-lu) (Tokyo, 1937). chüan 533:19a.Google Scholar

28 Ch'en K'uei-lung, chüan 3:29–30, 6:1–2; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 13 September, 1904, FO 17/1657, I77ff.

20Adshead, S.A.M., “Viceregal Government in Szechwan in the Kuang-hsü period (1875–1909),” Papers on Far Eastern History, 4 (September, 1971), p. 48.Google Scholar

30Cameron, Merebeth, Reform and Revolution in China, 1898–1912 (Stanford, 1931), pp.Google Scholar 91–92; Chien-nung, Li, The Political History of China, 1840–1928, trans, by Tcng Ssu-yu and Jeremy Ingalls (Princeton, 1956), p.Google Scholar 93; for a lengthy discussion of Ch'u Hung-chi's attacks upon Yüan and Prince Ch'ing, see MacKinnon, Stephen R., “Yuan Shih-k'ai in Tientsin and Peking: The Sources and Structure of His Power, 1901-1908” (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Davis, 1971), pp. 106–119.Google Scholar

31 Ralph Powell, pp. 216–17, 251, 253.

32Timet (London), February 7, 1907, p. 7 and February 9, p. 7; North-China Herald, January 4, 1907, p. 30; Merebeth Cameron, p. 93.Google Scholar

33 Ralph Powell, p. 218; the 5th division of Lu-chün, report by G. Pcrcira, enclosure in J. Jordan's no. 407 of 12 September, 1908, FO 371/434, 209 ff.

34 Liu Hou-sheng, pp. 143, 150–53.

35 Shih-lu, chüan 572: 13a.

36 Shih-lu, chüan 572: 20a, 575: 8b–9a.

37 Shih-lu, chüan 573: 7b and Jerome Ch'en, “A Footnote on the Chinese Army in 1911–12,” ToungPao, XLVIII, no. 4–5 (1960), p. 428.

38 Shih-lu, chüan 571; 10.

39 Yang-shou-yüan tsou-i chi-yao, chüan 43:2b–4; The 5th division of Lu-chūn, report by C. Pereira, enclosure in J. Jordan's no. 407 of 12 September, 1908, FO 371/434. 206ff. The 2nd division of Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in J. Jordan's no. 506 of November 8, 1908, FO 371/435. 494ff.

40 T'ieh-liang had commanded the 1st Manchu division since 1903, so in real terms by the summer of 1907 he had gained effective control over only a division (one-half of the 5th and 6th divisions).

41 Handwritten comments on cover of J. Jordan's no. 332 of toth July, 1907, FO 371/231, 479–8off.

42Ch'cn, Jerome, Yüan Shih-k'ai (Stanford; 2nd edition, 1972), p. 60; Yang-shou-yüan tsou-i chi-yao, chüan 44: 6b–9.Google Scholar

43 Sec for example Hummel, Arthur W., ed., Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period, 1644–1912 (Washington, D. C, 1943–44). II, pp. 951–52.Google Scholar

44 Yin-ch'ang and Yüan Shih-k'ai had worked together since 1896; sec Ch'en Hsi-chang, p. 259.

45Shih-fu, Ch'ien, Ch'ing-li hsin-she chih-kuan nien-piao [Chronological tables of newly established official posts and incumbents during the late Ch'ing period] (Peking, 1961), p. 60.Google Scholar

46Feng-han, Liu, Hsin-chicn lu-chün [The Newly Created Army] (Taipei, 1967), pp. 123–24.Google Scholar

47Kung-chih, Wen, Tsui-chin san-shih-nien Chung-kuo chün-shih shih [History of Chinese military affairs for the past thirty years] (Shanghai, 1932), I, section II, p. 3 and Liu Feng-han, pp. 107, 109, 153, 336.Google Scholar

48 Liu Feng-han, pp. 115–16.

49Yü-hsiang, Feng, Wo-ti sheng-huo [My life] (Shanghai, 1947), pp. 82, 97–124 and Liu Feng-han, p. 124.Google Scholar

50 Ralph Powell, pp. 210–II; Shih-lu, chüan 588: 17b; Jerome Chen, “A Footnote on the Chinese Army in 1911-12,” pp. 433–34. Ch'en K'uci-lung’s collected memorials indicate that as governor of Kiangsu in 1906-07 he was not directly involved in the development of the 7th Lu-chiin division. Wang Shih-chen seemed to be in full control of the division, reporting directly to Peking—see in addition to the above: Shih-lu, chüan 581: 14a, 583:2a, 587: 18b, 596: 3.

51 Shih-lu, chüan 595: 9b. On the earlier rivalry between Yüan and Ma Yü-k'un, sec Stephen R. MacKinnon, pp. 15–18, 58–60; on Chiang Kuei-t'i, sec Liu Feng-han, p. 117.

52 See Wang Erh-min, Huai-chiin chih and Chart IV below.

53Chen, Jerome, “A Footnote on the Chinese Army in 1911–12,” pp. 426–34; jung-an ti-tzu chi [Biography of Yüan Shih-k'ai[,Google Scholar compiled by Shen Tsu-hsicn and Wu K'ai-sheng (1913), chüan 3: 16b, 18a; T'ing-hsieh, Wu, Ho-fei chih-cheng nien-p'u [Chronological biography of Provisional Chief Executive Tuan Ch'i jui[ (1938),Google Scholarchüan L: 7; Intelligence Diaries for the periods ending 16 February, i March, 29 March, 12 April, 1904, FO 17/1655, 23, 34. 73–4, 82–3, 92–3, 306, 311–14, 423–26ff. The 6th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in Carnegie's no. 332 of 6 August, 1906, FO 371/39, 468ff.; The 3rd Division of the Lu-chün, report by G, Pereira, enclosure no. 1 in Jordan's no. 420 of October 15, 1906, FO 371/41, 158ff.

54 Intelligence Diaries for periods ending 12 April and 13 September, 1904, in FO 17/1655, 423–24ff. and FO 17/1657. Biographical information from Liu Feng-han, pp. 103, 107, 109–10, 119–20, 122, 151, 153, 173, 175, 336; Jerome Ch'cn, “A Footnote on the Chinese Army in 1911-12,” pp. 428, 430; Troops in Manchuria, report no. 8 of 1909 by M. E. Willoughby, dated 10 November, 1909, FO 371/642, 511ff.

55 The 2nd Division of Lu Chün, report no. 88 by C. Pereira, dated 2 November, 1908, FO 371/435, 495–96ff. Biographical information from Liu Feng-han, pp. 120-23 and Ch'cn Hsi-chang, pp. 428–29.

56 Wen Kung-chih, I, section 1, pp. 42–43.

57 Wang Ehr-min, pp. 77, 108–10.

58 Tung-fang tsa-chih, vol. 3 (1906), no. 6, “chün-shih [Military affairs]," pp. 99–101.

59 Intelligence Diary for the period ending 16 August, 1904, FO 17[1656, 633ff.; The Lu-chün, report no. 4 by G. Pereira, dated 14 January, 1906, FO 371/31, 387ff.; The Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure no. 10 in Jordan's no. 420 of 15 October, 1906, FO 371/41, 205, 208ff.

60 The Lu-chün, report no. 4 by G. Pereira, dated 14th January, 1906, FO 371/31. 387ff.; The 6th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in Carnegie's no. 332 of 6th August, 1906, FO 371[39. 471ff.; The 3rd Division of the Lu-chiin, report by G. Pereira, enclosure no. 1 and the 5th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure no. 4 in Jordan's no. 420 of 15th October, 1908, FO 371/41. 158, 173*7; The 5th Division of the Lu-chün, report by C. Pereira, enclosure in Jordan's no. 407 of 12th September, 1908, FO 371/434. 206, 210ff.

61 Satow to Grey, no. 140, 29 March, 1906, FO 228/2482.

62 62 Feng Yü-hsiang, pp. 98–99, 108; The 6th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in Carnegie's no. 332 of 6th August, 1906, FO 371/39, 471ff. On discipline, see Ralph Powell, p. 227 and the 5th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure to Jordan's no. 407 of I2lh September, 1908, FO 371/434, 211ff.

63Yoshihiro, Hatano in “The New Armies,” Wright, Mary C., ed., China in Revolution: The First Phase, 1900–1913 (New Haven, 1968), pp. 365–82, has argued that the development of new armies during the last decade of the Ch'ing dynasty siphoned off potentially explosive peasant discontent and channeled it into the revolutionary nationalist movements of the upper classes. For the Peiyang Army there is little evidence that ordinary soldiers became politically conscious or identified themselves with the causes of their officers. They seemed more conscious of their bondage to an oppressive system which included their officers. When they could or dared, they deserted.Google Scholar

64 On Feng Kuo-chang, see Ch'en Hsi-chang, pp. 254–55; Liu Feng-han, pp. 114–15; and Howard L. Boorman, ed., Biographical Dictionary of Re-publican China (New York, 1967–1971), II, 24–28.Google Scholar On P'ei-fu, Wu, see Wu P'ei-fu hsien-sheng chi “(Materials) by and about Wu P'ei-fu” (Taipei, 1960), pp. 201-08, 306–09, and Howard Boorman, III, 444–450.Google Scholar

65Ta-Ch'ing Kuang-hsü hsin fa-ling [New laws and ordinances of the Kuang-hsü reign] (Shanghai, 1909), ts'e l4:1–5, 49b–50, 59; Yang-shou-yüan tsou-i chi-yao, chüan 22:2–4; Merebcth Cameron, p. 94; and Hatano Yoshihiro, “The New Armies,” pp. 273–75.Google Scholar

66 Historians have assumed that splits within the Peiyang officer corps already had developed during the Ch'ing period into cleavages—such as between Chihli and Anhui cliques—which after Yüan's death in 1916 defined much of 'warlord’ politics; see T'ao Chü-yin, Pei-yang chün-fa t'ung-chih shih-ch'i shih-hua [Popular history about the period when the northern warlords ruled] (Peking, 1957-58), I, 13, II, 80–81; Ch'en, Jerome, “Defining Chinese Warlords and Their Factions,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 31.3 (October 1967), pp. 581–84; and Hatano Yoshihiro, “HokuyS gambatsu no seiritsu katei,” p. 238. I have found no documentary support for such a hypothesis. Of course there were occasional disputes between officers, but there is no evidence of permanent cleavages developing which relate to post-Yuan Shih-k'ai warlord politics. For documentation of disputes between senior officers see for example Report on Chinese Army Manoeuvres by G. Pereira, FO 371/41. 543ff.Google Scholar

67 See biographies of Tuan Ch'i-jui in Wu T'ing-hsieh, chüan 1:1–7; of Feng Kuo-chang in Ch'en Hsi-chang, pp. 254-55 and Liu Feng-han, pp. 114-15; and of Wang Shih-chen in Ch'en Hsi-chang, p. 274 and Liu Feng-han, p. 117. The Empress Dowager, not Yuan, also rewarded senior Peiyang officers with traditional Green Standard and Banner forces’ ranks and titles as well as absentia appointments as commanders-in-chief and brigade commanders in provinces other than Chihli; see Ralph Powell, pp. 211–12.

68 After Yüan was forced to retire from public office in January, 1909, the loyalties of a number of senior Peiyang commanders to Yuan evidently wavered. Upon returning to power as premier in November, 1911, one of Yüan's first moves was the removal of Wang Ying-k'ai, Chao Kuo-hsien, Wu Feng-ling, and Ma Lung-piao—former associates whom Yuan no longer could trust with command of Peiyang units. Jerome Ch'en, Yüan Shih-k'ai, pp. 60–61.

69 Liu Feng-han, pp. 116–17; Ch'en Hsi-chang. pp. 220, 247; Johnston, Reginald F., Twilight in the Forbidden City (New York, 1934), pp. 131–60; and Ralph Powell, pp. 313–14. 327–28.Google Scholar

70 Wen Kung-chih, I, section I, p. 41.

71 The 6th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in Carnegie's no. 332 of 6 August, 1906, FO 371/39, 468ff.; The 3rd Division, 1 st Division, 29th Brigade, and 5th Division of the Lu-chün. reports by G. Pereira, enclosures no. 1–4 in Jordan's no. 420 of 15 October, 1906, FO 371/41, 160–61, 168, I79ff.; Military Schools in China, report by G. Pereira, enclosure in Jordan's no. 506 of 8 November, 1908, FO 371/435, 504/130.

72 Between 1903 and 1907 there were about 3,000 Chinese receiving some kind of military education in Japan—Sanetō Keish'ŭ, Chŭgokttpn Nippon ryŭgaku shi [A History of Chinese Students in Japan] (Tokyo, 1960), pp. 138, 528–32 and graph on p. 544. British military attachés who visited Peiyang divisions between 1904 and 1907 noticed varying but significant numbers of Japan-trained junior officers in each division—Intelligence Diary for the period ending 27 September, 1904, FO 17/1657 2356*.; Intelligence Diary for the period ending 22 November, 1904, FO 17/1686, 235ff.; The Lu-chiin, report by G. Pereira dated 14 January, 1906, FO 371/31, 388ff.; The 6th Division of the Lu-chiin, report by G. Pereira, enclosure, in Carnegie's no. 332 of 6th August, 1906, FO 371/39, 468ff.; The 5th Division of the Lu-chün, report by G. Pereira, enclosure to Jordan's no. 407 of 12th September, 1908, FO 371/434, 209ff.; The 2nd Division of Lu-chün, report no. 88 by G. Pereira, dated 2nd November, 1908, FO 371/435, 496ff. On Yuan's recruitment of graduates from southern military academics, sec Ralph Powell, p. 202.

73 See Tientsin Consul-General Hopkins' interview with Tientsin Customs Taotai Liang Tun-yen on December i8, 1905, in Hopkins to Satow, no. 62, 19 December, 1905, FO 228/1594; also T'ao Chü-yin, I, 13–14, 24.

74 Hatano Yoshihiro, “Hokuyō gambatsu no seiritsu katei,” pp. 245–53; T'ao Chü-yin, I, 24; Li Chien-nung, pp. 214–16.

75 Ch'en Hsi-chang, pp. 380–81, 378–79; Chu Yen-chia, “Wu Lu-chen yü Chung-kuo ko-ming” [Wu Lu-chen and the Chinese (1911–12) Revolution] in Wu Hsiang-hsiang ed., Chung-kuo hsien-tai shih tsung-k'an [Selected articles on the contemporary history of China] (Taipei, 1964), VI, 161–232; Feng Yu-hsiang, pp.Google Scholar 93–94; and names Sheridan, E., Chinese Warlord: The Career of Feng Yühsiang (Stanford, 1966), pp. 43–48.Google Scholar

76 On defining twentieth-century Chinese war-lordism, see Wilbur, C. Martin, “Military Separation and the Process of Reunification under the Nationalist Regime,” in Tsou, Ping-ti Ho and Tang, eds., China in Crisis (Chicago, 1968), I, Book 1, pp. 203-63, especially pp. 203–20 and Jerome Ch'en, “Defining Chinese Warlords and Their Factions.”Google Scholar