The Fall of Beijing and the Birth of the Southern Ming

In April 1644, news of the fall of Beijing to Li Zicheng’s rebel forces and the suicide of the Chongzhen Emperor sent shockwaves through the Ming loyalists gathered in Nanjing. With the imperial capital lost and the emperor’s sons missing, the Ming court faced an urgent succession crisis. The surviving descendants of the Wanli Emperor included the Prince of Fu (Zhu Yousong), Prince of Hui, Prince of Rui, and Prince of Gui—but only the Prince of Fu and his distant relative, the Prince of Lu, were within reach of Nanjing.

A fierce debate erupted among officials. Some argued for the Prince of Fu due to his direct lineage, while others, wary of past succession disputes involving his father, pushed for the Prince of Lu under the guise of “choosing virtue over bloodline.” Sensing opportunity, Ma Shiying, the governor of Fengyang, rallied military leaders like Huang Degong and Gao Jie to support the Prince of Fu. By early May, Zhu Yousong was installed as regent, and on May 15, he ascended the throne as the Hongguang Emperor, marking the birth of the Southern Ming.

A Fragile Regime Amidst Chaos

The Hongguang regime emerged in a fractured landscape: the Qing had seized Beijing, Li Zicheng’s rebels held western territories, and the Southern Ming controlled the wealthy but politically divided Jiangnan region. Despite boasting nearly a million troops—including the formidable warlord Zuo Liangyu’s 200,000-strong army—the regime was rotten at its core.

Emperor Hongguang, more interested in pleasure than governance, famously hung a palace couplet: “Nothing compares to a cup in hand; how often does one see the moon overhead?” His court, led by the corrupt Ma Shiying and the notorious eunuch ally Ruan Dacheng, became a den of bribery and infighting. Officials mocked the regime in satirical songs:

> “Bows and arrows can’t match bribes; talent is worthless next to silver.
> The Ministries of War and Personnel hang out their shingles—selling offices to the highest bidder.”

The Ill-Fated “Borrow Barbarians to Quell Rebels” Policy

Convinced the Qing were focused on crushing Li Zicheng’s rebels, the Hongguang court pursued a disastrous strategy: ally with the Manchus to eliminate peasant uprisings, then negotiate a divided China. In July 1644, they sent an embassy to Beijing with lavish gifts—100,000 taels of silver, 1,000 taels of gold, and silks—hoping to buy Qing support.

The Qing, however, saw through the ruse. Regent Dorgon dismissed Southern Ming legitimacy, declaring: “How can there be two suns in the sky?” By October, the embassy was humiliated, and envoy Chen Hongfan defected, offering to betray his colleagues. The mission collapsed, exposing the regime’s naivety.

Military Disintegration and Betrayal

As Qing forces advanced in 1645, the Southern Ming’s warlords turned on each other. Zuo Liangyu’s son marched on Nanjing under the pretext of “purifying the court,” while Ma Shiying diverted troops to fight this internal threat instead of defending against the Qing. When the Manchus besieged Yangzhou, defender Shi Kefa was abandoned and executed after a brutal massacre.

By May 1645, Qing troops crossed the Yangtze unopposed. Officials panicked: “Better to submit than resist!” Hongguang fled but was captured, while Ma Shiying escaped with the empress dowager. Nanjing surrendered without a fight, and the Prince of Lu’s brief “reign” in Hangzhou ended in swift capitulation.

Legacy: The Rise of Anti-Qing Resistance

The Hongguang regime’s collapse shattered illusions of coexistence with the Qing. Its failures—corruption, factionalism, and misjudging the Manchu threat—pushed surviving Ming loyalists toward genuine resistance. As Qing policies grew harsher, ethnic Han resentment ignited widespread uprisings, merging with surviving rebel forces to fuel a decades-long anti-Qing struggle.

The lesson was clear: a regime built on opportunism and internal decay could never withstand an existential crisis. The Southern Ming’s tragic first chapter became a cautionary tale for later resistance movements, underscoring the fatal cost of division in the face of conquest.