The Unfolding of a Political Masterstroke

In the turbulent autumn of 1861, as the Qing Dynasty navigated multiple crises following the Xianfeng Emperor’s death, an apparently routine memorial arrived at the imperial court that would trigger an extraordinary political confrontation. The document, jointly submitted by two high-ranking officials, contained what seemed like a simple gesture: a formal expression of respect and concern for the health of the Empress Dowagers. Yet this seemingly innocuous act would expose the fragile power dynamics within the regency government and reveal the sophisticated political maneuvering occurring behind the scenes during one of China’s most vulnerable periods.

The memorial’s authors were significant figures in their own right. Sheng Bao, the Imperial Commissioner overseeing bandit suppression in Henan and Anhui, joined with Tan Tingxiang, the Governor of Shandong who had previously served as Viceroy of Zhili before being dismissed for his inadequate defense against the Anglo-French forces during the recent conflict. Their collaboration on this document represented more than bureaucratic routine—it constituted a carefully calculated political probe that would force the regents to reveal their hand regarding the proper status and authority of the Empress Dowagers during the minority of the new emperor.

Historical Context: A Dynasty in Crisis

To understand the significance of this memorial, we must appreciate the precarious position of the Qing Dynasty in 1861. The empire faced existential threats on multiple fronts: the devastating Taiping Rebellion had entered its eleventh year, controlling significant territory in southern China and establishing a competing capital at Nanjing; foreign powers had recently humiliated Chinese forces during the Second Opium War, culminating in the occupation of Beijing and the burning of the Summer Palace; and internally, the court struggled with succession issues following the death of the Xianfeng Emperor, who had passed away at the Rehe Mountain Resort while fleeing the foreign invasion.

The political structure established after Xianfeng’s death placed power in the hands of eight regents led by Sushun, who served as advisors to the five-year-old Tongzhi Emperor. This arrangement deliberately marginalized the Empress Dowagers—Cixi and Ci’an—who were expected to play merely ceremonial roles in the upbringing of the young emperor. The regents viewed any enhancement of the dowagers’ status as a direct threat to their authority, creating a tense atmosphere where even symbolic gestures carried profound political implications.

Against this backdrop, the memorial from Sheng Bao and Tan Tingxiang arrived not as an isolated incident but as part of broader political currents. Powerful regional officials, including victorious military commanders like Zeng Guofan, were gaining influence even as the central government struggled to maintain control. The recent recapture of Anqing from Taiping forces—a significant military victory that would be reported to the court around the same time—demonstrated that real power was shifting toward provincial leaders who commanded loyal armies and controlled substantial territories.

The Memorial That Shook the Court

The memorial itself followed established format—a yellow-covered document expressing formal courtesies—but its content broke with tradition. While officials regularly submitted memorials wishing good health to the emperor, directing similar sentiments specifically toward the Empress Dowagers represented a significant departure from precedent. As one of the regents, Muyin, would note: “Throughout our dynasty, there have been precedents of officials sending memorials wishing good health to retired emperors, but never any regulation for sending them to Empress Dowagers.”

This innovation carried multiple layers of meaning. Superficially, it expressed respect for the mothers of the young emperor. More significantly, it implicitly recognized the dowagers as legitimate political figures worthy of direct address rather than merely as conduits for the emperor’s authority. Most dangerously from the regents’ perspective, it suggested that true respect and loyalty might be directed toward the dowagers rather than exclusively toward the child emperor whom the regents controlled.

The memorial’s timing further amplified its impact. With the court still in official mourning for the Xianfeng Emperor, any political maneuver carried additional weight. The use of yellow covers—standard for routine memorials but potentially questionable during mourning periods—provided the regents with a technicality they could use to challenge the document while avoiding the more substantive issue of the dowagers’ status.

The Regents’ Reaction: Panic and Overreaction

The regents’ response to the memorial revealed their political anxieties with remarkable clarity. Sushun, the dominant figure among the eight regents, immediately recognized the threat: “If this precedent is established, it will inevitably start a trend of speculation. Perhaps there will even be suggestions that the dowagers should rule behind a screen. By then, suppressing such ideas will require much more effort.”

Their discussion of how to handle the memorial exposed both their determination to maintain control and their political clumsiness. Duhun suggested not only rejecting the memorial but punishing its authors: “Of course we shouldn’t simply reject it. We can say it violates proper protocols and turn it over to the ministry for disciplinary action—that would make it easier to phrase appropriately.” When Muyin questioned whether punishing officials for expressing respect toward the dowagers might create public relations problems, Sushun dismissed these concerns with characteristic bluntness: “The more we fear trouble, the more trouble we’ll have.”

The regents’ proposed response—to reject the memorial and discipline its authors—demonstrated their failure to appreciate the changing political landscape. Rather than skillfully managing a delicate situation, they resorted to heavy-handed authoritarianism that would ultimately undermine their position. Their reaction betrayed their insecurity about the legitimacy of their rule and their fear that any acknowledgment of the dowagers’ status might open the door to broader challenges to their authority.

The Military Context: Victory Amid Political Struggle

Even as the regents debated how to handle the provocative memorial, another development was unfolding that would further complicate the political situation: news arrived of the recapture of Anqing from Taiping forces. This significant military victory, achieved on the first day of the eighth lunar month, represented a major turning point in the campaign against the rebellion that had threatened the dynasty’s survival for over a decade.

The manner in which this news reached the court proved almost as significant as the victory itself. Cao Yuying, a official who would later play a crucial role in the power struggle, presented the information informally since formal reports from the commanding general, Zeng Guofan, had not yet arrived. This casual delivery allowed the regents to celebrate the victory while avoiding immediate consideration of its political implications.

The Anqing victory highlighted the growing importance of regional forces, particularly the Xiang Army under Zeng Guofan, who operated with considerable autonomy from the central government. These military successes strengthened the position of officials outside the immediate court circle and created alternative power centers that would ultimately influence the resolution of the power struggle in Beijing.

Cultural and Social Implications

The controversy over the memorial reflected broader cultural and social tensions within late Qing society. The proper relationship between male officials and female regents challenged traditional Confucian norms that generally excluded women from formal political roles. The regents’ insistence on maintaining strict protocol regarding the dowagers’ status represented not just political self-preservation but also a defense of traditional gender roles against evolving political realities.

The incident also revealed changing attitudes toward authority within the bureaucratic class. Regional officials like Sheng Bao and Tan Tingxiang demonstrated increasing willingness to exercise independent political judgment rather than simply following court directives. Their testing of boundaries through the memorial signaled a shift in the relationship between central and regional power that would characterize Chinese politics for decades to come.

Socially, the exchange reflected the growing influence of Han Chinese officials in a Manchu-dominated court. Many of the officials testing the limits of court protocol, including the memorial’s authors and military leaders like Zeng Guofan, were Han Chinese whose power derived from their administrative and military effectiveness rather than from aristocratic lineage. Their increasing confidence in challenging court norms signaled a gradual rebalancing of ethnic power within the Qing system.

The Legacy of a Seemingly Minor Incident

The memorial controversy, though seemingly minor at the time, proved prescient regarding the power struggle that would soon unfold. Within months, the Empress Dowager Cixi would form an alliance with Prince Gong and other court figures to overthrow the eight regents in the Xinyou Coup. Sushun would be executed, and the other regents would be removed from power, replaced by a new regency structure that acknowledged the dowagers’ authority through the “regency behind the curtain” system that would characterize the rest of the Tongzhi reign.

The incident demonstrated the political acumen of officials who recognized the dowagers’ potential authority before the formal power structure acknowledged it. Sheng Bao’s clever probe revealed both the regents’ vulnerability and their political clumsiness in responding to challenges. His career would continue with various appointments, though he would eventually face execution in 1863 for corruption—a fate that awaited many Qing officials during this turbulent period.

The memorial controversy also established important precedents for political communication during times of transition. It demonstrated how seemingly routine documents could carry profound political meaning and how established protocols could be stretched to test power relationships. These lessons would not be lost on subsequent generations of officials navigating complex political environments.

Modern Relevance and Historical Reflection

The 1861 memorial incident offers valuable insights for understanding political dynamics in transitional periods more broadly. It demonstrates how symbolic actions can reveal power structures and test boundaries in ways that formal challenges cannot. The regents’ clumsy response illustrates the danger of overreacting to procedural innovations and the importance of distinguishing between genuine threats and mere political testing.

The episode also highlights the importance of regional power centers in national politics. The memorial authors’ confidence in testing court protocols reflected their secure regional power bases and the court’s dependence on regional officials for military success against the Taiping rebels. This tension between central and regional authority would continue to characterize Chinese politics long after the Qing Dynasty’s collapse.

From a gender perspective, the incident represents an early challenge to strictly patriarchal political structures. While the dowagers’ authority would remain somewhat circumscribed by traditional norms, their eventual emergence as powerful figures signaled the possibility of female leadership even within highly conservative political systems. The memorial controversy thus represents a small but significant moment in the long and complex history of women’s political participation in China.

Finally, the episode reminds us that political history often turns on seemingly minor incidents whose significance becomes clear only in retrospect. The memorial that so agitated the regents in 1861 might have been forgotten as a historical curiosity had it not revealed the underlying tensions that would soon erupt into open conflict. Its preservation in the historical record offers us a window into the complex political calculations and cultural assumptions that shaped one of the most critical transitions in late imperial Chinese history.

The subtle power play initiated by Sheng Bao and Tan Tingxiang ultimately proved more perceptive than even they might have anticipated. Their memorial not only tested the regents’ political skill but also revealed the shifting foundations of Qing power at a pivotal moment. In doing so, it provided a preview of the dramatic changes that would soon transform Chinese politics and set the stage for the complex era of reform and reaction that would characterize the late nineteenth century.