Introduction: The Crucial Year of 1898 in Late Qing China

The year 1898 stands as a pivotal moment in the history of late Qing China. It was a year marked by ambitious reform attempts aimed at modernizing the empire in the face of internal decay and external pressures. Central to these efforts were key figures such as Prince Gong , Emperor Guangxu, and the imperial tutor Weng Tonghe. Their actions and interactions reveal the complexities and contradictions of reform in a deeply conservative society resistant to change.

On May 29, 1898, Prince Gong, an influential reform advocate and executor, passed away at the age of 65. His death preceded the official launch of the Hundred Days’ Reform by only a few weeks. This article examines the political dynamics surrounding Prince Gong’s death, Emperor Guangxu’s reform ambitions, and the role of Weng Tonghe, whose influence was both instrumental and controversial. We will explore the historical context, key events, and lasting impacts of the 1898 reform movement, shedding light on the intricate power struggles and ideological battles that shaped its fate.

Prince Gong: The Reform Advocate’s Final Days and Legacy

Prince Gong, also known as Yixin, was one of the most important figures in late Qing reform efforts. Having served as a regent and a high-ranking statesman, he was instrumental in initiating and supporting various modernization projects during the late 19th century. His death on May 29, 1898, marked the end of an era of cautious reformist leadership.

According to tradition, Prince Gong left behind two cryptic last words: a warning to Empress Dowager Cixi to be wary of Weng Tonghe, whom he described as power-hungry and untrustworthy, and advice to Emperor Guangxu to be cautious about reform advocates from Guangdong, cautioning against reckless trust of “petty people.” While these utterances have been often cited, modern scholarship suggests they may have been later fabrications or exaggerations. More importantly, subsequent events reveal that it was Emperor Guangxu himself, not Empress Dowager Cixi, who decided to expel Weng Tonghe from the core of power shortly after Prince Gong’s death.

Prince Gong’s passing removed a moderating and experienced figure in the court at a time when the Qing dynasty was at a crossroads. His absence arguably made it easier for younger reformers and conservative hardliners alike to maneuver for influence over the young emperor and the direction of the state.

Emperor Guangxu’s Reform Aspirations and the “Edict on National Reform”

Emperor Guangxu, ascending the throne as a child, grew increasingly aware by the late 19th century of the urgent need for reform. Since at least 1889, he had engaged with reformist writings such as Feng Guifen’s “Protests from the Jianbi Studio,” which advocated institutional modernization and adoption of Western knowledge. Influential Western-style publications from missionary-led organizations like the Guangxuehui further shaped his thinking.

On June 11, 1898, under Emperor Guangxu’s name, the Qing court issued the “Edict on National Reform,” often seen as the official starting point of the Hundred Days’ Reform. This edict aimed to set a clear national policy—or “national essence”—for modernization and reform, mandating both the imperial court and provincial governments to adhere to this new direction.

The edict was composed of three parts: the reasoning behind the reform, the content of the new national policy, and reforms to the capital’s educational institutions such as the Imperial University . The most critical segment was the articulation of the “new national essence,” which emphasized grounding reforms in traditional Confucian ethics while pragmatically adopting Western practical knowledge and skills.

This foundational principle was encapsulated in a key passage that stressed:

“To root reforms in the principles of the sages and righteous learning, while broadly embracing Western studies focused on current affairs, thoroughly investigating and practically applying them to remedy outdated and fallacious practices. The aim is to transform what is useless into what is useful, to cultivate talents capable of navigating economic and political changes.”

This philosophy echoed the long-standing slogan of “Chinese learning as substance, Western learning for application,” which sought to balance respect for Chinese tradition with pragmatic modernization.

Weng Tonghe’s Role: Imperial Tutor and Reform Interpreter

Weng Tonghe, the imperial tutor and advisor to Emperor Guangxu, played a pivotal role in shaping the content and tone of the “Edict on National Reform.” However, the official edict did not fully reflect the emperor’s original intentions.

According to Weng’s personal diary entries from June 11, 1898, the drafting of the edict was the result of complex negotiations. Emperor Guangxu, influenced by reformist officials Yang Shenxiu and Xu Zhijing—both associated with reformist thinker Kang Youwei—had insisted on a clear proclamation to “focus exclusively on Western learning” and required that imperial scholars be permitted to study Western subjects.

Weng Tonghe, though supportive of reform, disagreed with the emperor’s narrow emphasis on Western learning alone. He argued that while Western methods were indispensable, the Confucian moral framework could not be abandoned. His suggested revision reintroduced the importance of “the sages’ righteousness and learning,” ensuring the edict maintained a Confucian foundation alongside the adoption of Western techniques.

This subtle but significant modification meant that the edict, as finally published, expressed Weng’s interpretation of reform rather than the emperor’s more radical vision. Weng’s influence thus placed traditional learning on equal footing with Western knowledge, tempering the reform agenda.

The Downfall of Weng Tonghe and Power Struggles at Court

Ironically, Weng Tonghe’s role as mediator between tradition and reform did not secure his position for long. Just four days after the edict’s issuance, an imperial decree—issued in Emperor Guangxu’s name—removed Weng Tonghe from his post. The official charges accused Weng of arrogance, misuse of power, and an inability to manage critical state affairs.

This swift dismissal has been interpreted by historians as part of the emperor’s effort to assert authority over reform and remove perceived obstacles. It also underscores the intense factionalism within the Qing court, where reformers, conservatives, and imperial advisors vied for influence.

Weng’s ousting cleared the way for Kang Youwei’s direct audience with Emperor Guangxu, effectively launching the more radical phase of the Hundred Days’ Reform. However, this phase would soon encounter fierce opposition from Empress Dowager Cixi and conservative officials, culminating in the reform’s abrupt end later that year.

The Broader Historical Context: Reform and Reaction in Late Qing China

The 1898 reform movement did not arise in isolation. It was part of a broader pattern of late Qing attempts to modernize in response to military defeats, territorial losses, and internal rebellions. The humiliations of the Opium Wars, the Sino-French War, and especially the First Sino-Japanese War exposed Qing weaknesses and galvanized calls for change.

Reform-minded officials and intellectuals debated how to strengthen China: Should they preserve Confucian traditions as fundamental pillars or embrace Western science, technology, and political systems more fully? Should reform be gradual or radical? These questions fueled intense court debates and public discussions.

Prince Gong had long advocated cautious reforms, including the Self-Strengthening Movement, which sought to blend Western technology with traditional governance. Emperor Guangxu’s generation was more inclined toward systemic change but faced entrenched conservative opposition, particularly from Empress Dowager Cixi, who wielded formidable influence behind the throne.

In this context, the 1898 edict symbolized both hope and the limits of reform. It attempted to balance innovation with tradition, but the lack of unified vision and political will doomed the reform effort.

Cultural Impacts and Legacy of the 1898 Reform Efforts

Although the Hundred Days’ Reform was short-lived—lasting only from June to September 1898—it had profound cultural and political repercussions. It inspired a new generation of intellectuals and reformers who would later drive the revolutionary movements of the early 20th century.

The reform’s emphasis on education reform, including the promotion of Western sciences and the transformation of traditional academies, planted seeds for China’s modernization. The movement also exposed the deep fissures within Qing society and government, highlighting the challenges of reforming a sprawling empire rooted in centuries of tradition.

The downfall of Weng Tonghe and the subsequent political upheaval illustrated the perilous position of reformers and the risks of court factionalism. The interplay between Emperor Guangxu’s ambitions, Weng’s cautious mediation, and the conservative backlash led by Empress Dowager Cixi underscored the complexities of power in late Qing China.

Conclusion: Understanding the 1898 Reform Movement’s Complexities

The events surrounding the 1898 reform movement reveal a nuanced picture of late Qing China’s struggle between tradition and modernization. Prince Gong’s death removed a key reformist figure, allowing Emperor Guangxu and reformists like Kang Youwei to push for rapid change. Yet, the reform edict’s content reflects the intricate negotiations between the emperor’s vision and Weng Tonghe’s conservative counsel.

Weng’s subsequent dismissal by the emperor symbolizes the fraught nature of reform efforts, where ideological differences and political rivalries intertwined. The reform movement’s failure foreshadowed the Qing dynasty’s eventual collapse but also set the stage for China’s 20th-century transformations.

By analyzing the personalities, political dynamics, and ideological debates of 1898, we gain deeper insight into the challenges of reforming a traditional imperial system under external and internal pressures. The legacy of this brief but significant period continues to inform our understanding of China’s modern history and the enduring tension between innovation and tradition.