Dutch article

Myth in the Shape of History: Elusive Triad Leaders
Barend Ter Haar
From the very first mention of the Triads in Chinese historical sources, which was
in the aftermath of the Lin Shuangwen ^!Ü rebellion of 1786-1787, on Taiwan,
Chinese authorities have been plagued by references to important Triad leaders whom
they were unable to track down. More curious still, even well-informed Triad members
were unable to give much pertinent Information äs to the precise whereabouts of
these absent leaders. Even those Triad teachers who were arrested in 1787 — which
according to the present state of Triad scholarship, was only a few decades after the
first Triad group had been founded — were remarkably uninformative about the
earliest Triad leaders and their teachings.
Although our understanding of the Triad phenomenon has increased considerably
since the mid-1970s, thanks to the increased availability of detailed sources, we
should not lose sight of the very severe limitations of these same sources. Even the
archival materials are never first-hand accounts by Triad members, but rather are
reports, in Classical Chinese (äs used in the memorials and other official documents)
and bureaucratic Mandarin (guanhua Hfifj), by non-participants, describing what they
themselves had seen or otherwise summarising Information obtained during extensive
interrogations. In the latter instance, the questioning of witnesses and suspects
always took place under psychic duress, and accompanying physical stress, caused
by the circumstances of arrest and imprisonment and different degrees of torture.
Furthermore, the people questioned usually spoke a different language to their interrogators
(even in northern China language differences are considerable) and almost
invariably came from a very different social and cultural backgrounds. This means
that our archival materials are rarely recorded in the languages which Triad members
actually spoke, the only exception being when literati or other higher-educated people
were interrogated.
Some Historiography
Between 1786 and 1787, a rebellion led by a certain Lin Shuangwen engulfed large
parts of Taiwan. Despite some initial successes, the rebellion was rapidly repressed
(Ownby 1996: 55-81; Cai 1987: 66-122; Qin 1998: 238-274). The authorities' subsequent
investigations into the origins of Lin's ideological and organisational background
extended to the Chinese mainland and lasted several years, before they were "successfully"
concluded — just how successful the Qing officials really were is an issue
that will be addressed below. What is certain is that from this moment onwards, the
Qing authorilies were aware of a network of secret societies, mainly along China's
southeastern coastline, but also spreading rapidly both inland and overseas, whose
members were bound by blood covenants, a symbolic System based on the number
three (which included recognition signals using three fingers), and the common family
name Hong ?ji. They originally called themselves the Heaven and Earth Gathering
19
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Identities, and Spheres oflmpact
(Tiandihui f^iiii^), which can also be translated äs Heaven and Earth Society, but are
better known today äs Triads.
The word 'Triad' is an early-nineteenth Century rendering of several Chinese
terms, which though based on a misunderstanding of their meaning, is actually quite
appropriate. These terms were true autonyms, having been chosen by the groups
themselves. They were Three Dot Gathering (Sandianhui Hjä zs), Three Unions Gathering
(Sanhehui H'n'z?) and Three River Society (Sanhehui ΞΐΜζ?)· All three names
referred to the three drops of water that make up the radical of the Chinese character
for the family name Hong fä. This family name was shared by all those who had
taken part in a Triad blood covenant ritual (Ter Haar 1998: 15-19). Western observers,
however, assumed that the reference was to the trinity of Heaven, Earth and Gathering
(tiandihui, with 'gathering' [hui] replacing the more common 'man' [ren A]), hence
their free rendering of these names äs Triads. Since then, the name has become a general
label for organised Chinese crime and has come to be identified, certainly in the
West, äs representing the epitome of a "typically Chinese" form of exclusionist, corporate
group. In the following paper, however, the term should be taken to refer to a
specific ritual and mythological tradition, rather than a type of social group.
In the course of the twentieth Century, several different opinions have been
expressed regarding the origins of the Triads. Until the 1970s, the dominant view was
based on Triad foundation accounts — usually mid-nineteenth Century versions. This
view (with Luo Xianglin §?!Μ^, Xiao Yishan f f— [JL| and Luo Ergang ^ ΜΗΊ äs three
of the most serious scholarly representatives), argued that the Triads originated from
the remnants of Ming loyalist fighters, acting against the Manchu-Qing rulers, who
had äs their central aim the restoration of the former Ming dynasty under the Zhu
imperial family.
On the basis of extensive studies of late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century
archival materials, Qing scholars in Taiwan (mainly Zhuang Jifa £Εΐ^ j£) and also
mainland China (such äs Cai Shaoqing H4?ÜP and Qin Baoqui [Chen Baoqi]|!J^lni)
have concluded that this earlier view can no longer be maintained. They trace the
origins of the Triads back to the activities of the monk, Wan Tixi, in the Zhangzhou
region of southern Fujian. A very specific location has even been identified äs the
actual place where the first Triad group was convened. This research has been introduced
in the West, and considerably refined, by Dian Murray and David Ownby.1
Even more recently, however, this archive-based paradigm has itself come under
attack by scholars who have unearthed local historical sources which in their
view prove that a specific Buddhist monastery in southern Fujian should be seen äs
the ultimate place of origin of the Triads. A link is also made with specific local Ming
loyalist traditions of southern Fujian. This view had already been proposed by Weng
Tongwen f|(Wj £ in the early 1980s, but Luo Zhao §?£?, Zeng Wuyue f 5ΐ& and He
Zhiqing üiplf have since provided an impressive amount of supporting evidence
from inscriptions, ritual manuals, manuscripts on local history, and so forth (Ter Haar
1998: 402-415).
1 For a survey of the historiography äs summarised, all too briefly, above, see Dian H. Murray,
in collaboration with Qin Baoqi (1994: 89-150) and Ownby (1996:7-11).
20
Myth in the shape of History: Eluswe Triad Leaders
In the course of our investigation, I will argue that despite some fundamental
differences, these approaches still share one important assumption, namely that at
least one of the existing sources documenting Triad origins — whether it be foundation
accounts, archival materials or local epigraphical and manuscript sources — contains
reliable historical information concerning Triad founders and the earliest Triad teachers.
However, I have proposed elsewhere that instead of seeing these leaders and teachers
äs "real" historical figures, we should see them rather äs mythical saviours from a
mid-Qing oral messianic tradition. Here I wish to extend this Interpretation to several
other elusive leaders of mid-nineteenth Century Triad uprisings and demonstrate that
certain figures who are commonly seen äs "real" should really be reinterpreted instead
äs mythical figures.
The Demonological Messianic Paradigm
Triad lore has been influenced in a number of ways by a pervasive, but little-studied,
demonological messianic paradigm. This paradigm was and is mainly transmitted in
oral form. It is characterised by the idea of apocalyptic disasters äs being caused by
demonic beings, which furthermore can only be combated by demonological means.
Central to these demonological countermeasures is the use of violence, which may
take the form of amulets, weapons or even actual armies. The latter are huge in size,
and comprise divine soldiers led by divine generals, who are liminal figures between
the world of the living and the realm of the dead. These divine armies are five in
number, one in the centre and one for each direction of the compass. Such armies may
be represented symbolically by flags and coloured pieces of cloth or paper, or may be
conceived in a very literal manner äs real-life armies. Since these generals and soldiers
are themselves of demonic origin, they have retained a propensity to violence, which
can be turned against other demonic beings by means of the performance of
appropriate sacrifices and rituals. The ultimate leadership of these divine armies and
their generals is provided by a prince (functioning äs a saviour or messiah), who is
descended from a past imperial family and is destined to rule again over the Allunder-
Heaven (tianxia ^T").
During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the demonic threat in this
messianic paradigm was repeatedly identified äs Manchu barbarians, äs well äs the
more usual cast of demonic beings traditionally responsible for causing plagues, war
and so forth. Other characteristic features of the paradigm during this period include:
the young age of the saviour, who is offen identified äs a Luminous King (rningwang
Β^ΞΕ); his family name Zhu ^ and his descent from the Ming B£| imperial family; the
assistance of one or more divine generals with the family name Li ^ (among others);
the symbolic significance of certain designated numbers, especially nine (jiu %) and
ten thousand (wem Jj); the sound 'hang' äs part of the names of the saviour and/or his
generals, or eise carrying füll meaning, äs in the forms 'red' (hang H) or 'flood-like'
(hang $t); references to fruit symbolising eternal youth, especially peaches (tao M),
and plums (U S); the idea of an ideal land in the west; the conquest of an imperial
capital (Nanjing or Beijing) äs a place of refuge from apocalyptic disasters; the use of
different forms of violence to deal with the demonic threat; and auspicious dates
containing the cyclical characters yin jlTand mao J/p. Whereas the more Buddhist-
21
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Jdentities, and Spheres oflmpact
prescribe forms of internalised devotion augmented by non-violent ritual acts, the
demonological messianic paradigm is purely ritualistic and extremely violent (Ter
Harr 1998: 224-262).
The paradigm was the messianic counterpart of the more general demonological
orientation of pre-modern Chinese religious culture, which defined a whole ränge of
threats to both individuals and collectivities in demonological terms. Intrusions and
disturbances, among them disease, were not caused by moral flaws (an important
alternative explanatory paradigm), but by the acts of demonic beings (gui j|,), including
bandits, rebels and barbarians, which had to be combated accordingly. This violent
and ongoing struggle took place on a symbolic or mythic plane, äs well äs in the
mundane world of everyday experiences (Feuchtwang 1992; Ter Haar 1996/7: 54-88).
A crucial point is the complete realism invested in the different elements of this
demonological messianic paradigm by their audiences. The princes who acted äs
saviours in this demonological messianic paradigm, together with their divine generals
and their armies, plus their advisors, were perceived äs real people in most respects,
and researchers have tended to adopt this traditional perspective, irrespective of the
sources they are investigating. Thus, in the same way that both the direct audiences of
these messianic teachings and the authorities combating them were constantly misled
by the authenticity of the different accounts of these figures, so too have modern
scholars been inclined to take them äs being more real than they ever were.
The predominantly oral transmission of the messianic demonological paradigm
makes it difficult to track down its impact in any precise way, but it certainly played
a role in a whole series of incidents and rebellions throughout the eighteenth, nineteenth
and twentieth centuries. Elsewhere I have argued that even the Heavenly Kingdom of
Great Peace was strongly influenced by this paradigm and äs recently äs 1980-1981,
ideas from the demonological messianic paradigm were taken up by a local teacher in
Hunan who had been inspired by one of the few texts in the paradigm, the Classic of
the Five Lords (wugongjing JL^££).2 Although this text has been banned since the time
of the northern Song right up to the present day, its influence continued to be
widespread and even extended into Vietnam during the late-nineteenth Century.
Elusive Triad Leaders
Early Triad lore was influenced by the demonological messianic paradigm in a very
fundamental way, especially in relation to the central position of the Luminous King,
who is identified äs both a young Zhu prince from the former imperial house of the
Ming dynasty, and also äs a saviour whose personal names include Zhu Jiutao ifUl
tt, Zhu Hongzhu /fcH1r, Li Kaihua ^3f?E, and other variants containing the hang
sound, which may simultaneously be incorporated into the personal names of the
divine generals who are said to assist him. Other crucial elements from the paradigm
include the centrality of auspicious numbers (especially ten thousand [wem.]); the hang
sound (äs occurring in the common family name Hong, and a variety of other contexts
2 For further references on this text, see Ter Haar (1998: 225-226). For evidence on its influence in
Vietnam, see Hue-Tan Ho Tai (1983).
22
Myth in the shape of History: Elusive Tnad Leaders
such äs 'flood-like' and 'red'); the Identification of a barbarian (Manchu) threat to the
Han-Chinese nation; the importance of eternal-youth symbolism; Sichuan (the land
in the West) äs a place of provenance for the saviour; the importance of a fixed date
(the jiayin Φ 1|Γ date); and possibly the prospect of a safe haven in the form of the City
of Willows. Conspicuously absent are apocalyptic disasters (except for the barbarian
invasions) and the notion of an immediate threat (Ter Haar 1998: 263-305).
Despite these striking similarities between Triad lore and the demonological
messianic paradigm, we only find clear evidence of an acutely messianic Interpretation
in a few early Triad incidents. Otherwise, the messianic message was rapidly routinized
and its politico-religious dimensions highlighted. The belief in the advent of a new
ruler, ordained by Heaven itself, provided the Triads with an independent source of
politico-religious legitimacy by establishing their own channel to Heaven. The
demonological dimension of the messianic paradigm was retained in the very explicit
definition of barbarians äs a major threat that needed to be driven away, not by normal
military means, but using the same exorcist methods that were employed against
demons (ghosts orgui). The so-called Tive Houses' that make up the Triads äs a whole,
were originally the divine armies of the five directions, which were now projected
onto the Chinese nation in a very concrete way, äs is customary in the demonological
messianic paradigm. The City of Willows also retained its original messianic
connotation of a city of last refuge, besides becoming an alternative conception of the
altar fable.
Once we recognise the importance of the demonological messianic paradigm
in the development of Triad lore, we can begin to look at a number of elusive Triad
leaders in a different way. Clearly, these were not strictly historical figures, but actors
in quite a different type of scenario. Even though this scenario had lost its messianic
significance (that is, its eschatological dimensions and the notion of salvation by a
saviour), it nevertheless preserved its politico-religious connotations, namely a belief
in the advent of a better ruler than the present one.
Take for example, the mysterious figure of Wan Tiqi 7TÜä2 (Wan Tixi Jj ÜH,
Wan Tuxi ^J j^lf), who is identified in later Triad lore äs Wan Yunlong 7TS jfe- He first
appears in the aftermath of the Lin Shuangwen uprising from 1786-1787. Qing officials
traced him back to a monk who had been active in the 1760s and 1770s in the Raozhou
area of northeastern Guangdong (a region where a local language close to the Minnan
language of southern Fujian is spoken). By 1787 he was already dead.
At present, most scholars, both in China and abroad, tend to accept this
identification äs historically correct. However, the evidence for this identification
largely stems from one official memorial, which was based on extensive interrogations
of crucial witnesses under torture and long after the death of the historical monk in
question (Ter Haar 1998: 20-21, 356). Furthermore, the purported pupils of this monk
seemed to have a very limited knowledge of Triad lore. They did not even possess (let
alone understand) those bits of Triad lore that were certainly known to the Qing
authorities by around 1787 — this was Information based on the confession of the
peddler Yan Yan and a written Triad covenant found in Taiwan (Ter Haar 1998: 9-21).
Nor were they aware of any other aspects of Triad lore which we now know were in
circulation at that time — this included material from another written Triad covenant
23
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Identities, and Spheres oflmpaci
and also the alleged aim of the Triads to be working towards the restoration of the
Ming Dynasty (Ter Haar 1998: 265). The fact that the people who "identified" Wan
Tixi äs a specific historical figure did so under torture and knew far too little about
Triad lore to be seen äs reliable witnesses, suggests that they simply superimposed
the mythological Wan figure — or rather, the little that the interrogating Qing
authorities "knew" about this figure — onto a real person whom they had indeed
known, but who was already dead by this time.
When we take the name(s) of the Wan figure, we find that the name Wan can be
traced to the demonological messianic paradigm, äs documented in several eighteenth
Century cases. The significance of the word Tixi, and its variants, Tixi and Tuxi —
evidently all three are derived from a single local name or term — has yet to be clarified,
but later sources refer to this figure äs Wan Yunlong or Wan Cloud Dragon, with
obvious auspicious connotations. However, in the course of the interrogations that
followed in the aftermath of the Lin Shuangwen uprising, the Wan figure was identified
by the Qing authorities with monk Hong. This identification is incorrect and all later
Triad lore clearly distinguishes between these two figures. Monk Hong was another
mythical figure, being the personification of the /zong-element in the messianic
demonological paradigm and no doubt inspired by the fact that the Ming founder,
Zhu Yuanzhang jfcjnlf", had been a monk himself (with the reign title Hongwu $£ϋζ)
(Ter Haar 1998: 269).
Wan Tixi (Yunlong) and Monk Hong, äs well äs the young Ming prince with
the family name Zhu (and varying personal names), continued to appear in the
confessions of Triad members, together with other figures from Triad lore. The Qing
authorities and Triad members alike tried to locate these persons, but always without
success.3 Just how real these figures were, becomes particularly clear during the Triad
uprisings of the early 1850s. Although the documentation of their religious and
ideological dimensions is rather limited in the otherwise abundant Qing official
archives, there can be little doubt about their overall Triad background and the role of
Triad lore here.4
3 The reference in Ter Haar (1998: 254-265) stems precisely from this discourse. The struggle by
the Triad adherents to give meaning to their political and narrative lore is also discussed in Ter
Haar (1998: 337-334,423-433).
4 Many of the official memorials mention that the rebels were organised in halls (tang) with
typical Triad names. The same sources recorded that booklets, seals, maps, amulets, flags and
the like were confiscated from the rebels. Luo Ergang (1981:356-359) discusses a group of Triad
objects undoubtedly going back to the mid-nineteenth Century. Sadly, his analysis does not
allow a more precise identification of their background. For the somewhat disputed Triad
background of the Li Yuanfa rebellion of 1849-1850, see the evidence in Qingdai dang'an shüiao
congkao (1979: 80-81 and passim); Song and Wang (1987: 449-451) discuss the Triad aspect of
this rebellion and similar Hunan rebellions. Guo (1987: 463-464) discusses some PRC
historiography. The capture of statues does not fit normal Triad paraphernalia. Cai Shaoqing
(1985: 350-362) argues that he belonged to the new religious group Green-blue Lotus Teachings
(qinglian jiao). Nonetheless, the titles Vanguard and Iron Board, äs well äs the presence of a flag
carrying the name Wan Yunlong suggest a Triad background.
24
Myth in the shape of History: Elusive Tnad Leaders
For the Triad participants in these rebellions, the principal actors mentioned in
Triad foundation narratives were certainly significant since they carried the names of
at least some of these figures on their flags. In a sense, their struggle with the Qing
authorities continued (rather than re-enacted) the struggle of the first Triad group of
128 "righteous heroes," under the leadership of Wan Yunlong, against Qing forces.
That particular struggle had ended in defeat and the disappearance of the young
Ming prince. Now, it was hoped that he would reappear. Although I do not wish to
claim that these uprisings were solely motivated by this kind of political Interpretation,
its influence should not be underestimated. The fact that the rebels did not co-operate
to attain their aims fits the localised nature of individual Triad networks, and also the
passive nature of their expectations. Like many other messianic groups, they expected
major events — in this case the reappearance of the young Ming prince from the Zhu
family — to take place of themselves. For their part, they had merely to create the
local groundwork, by defeating the Qing forces and avenging the death of Wan Yunlong
äs described in their foundation narrative. That other motivations, including the possibility
of avenging themselves against local power holders, also played an important
role in these Triad uprisings, is not in contradiction with the politico-religious
motivations.
The 1850s and 1860s were highly tense years for the Qing administration, who
were struggling to defeat the politico-religious movement known äs the Heavenly
Kingdom of Great Peace — the so-called Taiping Rebellion (1851-1864) — inspired
and (partly) led by Hong Xiuquan jätf!^. Besides this uprising, they also faced a
spate of quite separate acts of violence and even outright rebellion, spread across
southern China.5 Triad-inspired uprisings were extremely prominent among them,
and some lasted throughout the 1850s into the early 1860s. To us, these rebellions
show the continuing importance of political interpretations of Triad lore and the survival
of elements from the former demonological messianic paradigm.
Qing officials were particularly worried by the frequent references to a 'Great
Peace' (Taiping ^fc^) in these Triad rebellions, a theme which has also puzzled many
modern historians. The confusion, both then and now, derives from an insufficient
understanding of Triad lore, in which Great Peace is a rather common term, denoting
the perfect rule by a Zhu prince of the former Ming dynasty. Apart from being used
quite explicitly in this sense, the term is also symbolically employed in a variety of
contexts to denote one of the stations in the Triad Initiation journey, the geographical
location of the Shaolin ti?ffi Monastery (though only in early Triad lore), and the mountain
retreat of the monk, Wan Yunlong (in mature Triad lore) (Ter Haar 1998:126,281-
283, 302). Although it can be argued that the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace and
the Triads ultimately arose from the same demonological messianic tradition, they
developed in different ways and by the time that the first Triad societies appeared,
they were only connected superficially. Similarities between the two were not, äs far
5 Good surveys are Fang and Cui (1985: 363-385); Song and Wang (1987: 440-457); Guo (1987:
463-492). For a nationalist historian's point of view, see Xiao (1986:1-35). On Triad uprisings in
Guangdong, see Wakeman (1966) and Wakeman (1972) in Chesneaux (1972: 29-48).
25
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Identities, and Spheres oflmpact
as we know, the result of direct influences and the concurrence of the term 'Great
Peace/ should not be taken as evidence of the ideological subjugation of Triad groups
using this term to the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace movement.
In 1851, the prefect of Hengzhou in southern Hunan rounded up a Triad group
under a certain Zuo Jiafa TxM.'ßk, and seized typical Triad paraphernalia such as flags,
yellow cloth (with its imperial or Taoist ritual connotations), one or more wooden
seals, lay-out maps (zhentu |^|H, which may have been maps of the Triad altar in the
form of the City of Willows), "false" certificates and so forth. The authorities also
confiscated blood covenants of mutual Support in which three leading figures are
mentioned: Zhu Jiutao j^^Mf or the 'King of Great Peace, Li Dan ^^J- or the 'King
who Levels the Ground' (pingdi wang ^Ufe ΞΕ), and Zhang Tianzuo 31£l5f Ιέ, who has
the additional titles of 'Lord of the Red Pine Tree' and King of Xuguang. Li Dan also
goes by the alternative names of Ronghua/Yunhuai ^φ / zjfi> and is identified by
Zuo as the instigator of the intended uprising, under the ultimate leadership of Zhu
Jiutao (Taiping tianguo wenxian shiliao ji 1982: 312-323).
First of all, we should note that most of these names are meaningful. To begin
with, Zhu Jiutao ('nine waves') is homophonous with the name Zhu Jiutao ('nine
peaches') from the demonological messianic paradigm and early Triad lore. Li Dan,
on the other hand, means Li 'cinnabar' or '[immortality] pill', while his alternative
names, Li Ronghua/Yunhuai, are curiously reminiscent of the names of one of the
messianic saviours in the Ma Chaozhu incident of 1747, in Hubei province, who was
called Li Rongjue/Yongjue ^i^Sf / 7JCÜ. At the same time, Li Dan's designation as
King who Levels the Ground, also recalls similar titles of previous bandit chiefs and
rebels (Zheng 1983: 106). Zhang Tianzuo, on the other hand, means Zhang 'Heaven
assists/ while his nickname, Lord of the Red Pine Tree, refers to his profession as an
itinerant medicine seller. I am unable to make sense of his second nickname. None of
these three persons were ever arrested, but taken together their names can be read as
references to long life and good health, two typical concerns of the demonological
messianic paradigm and its Triad derivative.
Apart from these names, our sources also reveal some other interesting details.
For example, one confession explains that "The King of Great Peace would enter the
Yongan prefectural city in a coach." This underlines the belief in Zhu Jiutao, or the
King of Great Peace, as a saviour, albeit a political one. Zhu Jiutao was said to come
from Old Mount Wan, in Guangdong, which in early Triad lore was a place of renewal
and a base for action against Qing imperial rule. Old Mount Wan was also
written on one of the confiscated flags. Taken together, this evidence suggests that
these particular Triad adherents actually viewed their own struggle as a continuation
of the armed struggle of the very first Triad group, against Qing forces, as recounted
in their foundation account, and that this interpretations sustained their firm belief in
the advent of the Zhu figure.
Against the background of what we know of Triad lore from early nineteenthcentury
Guangxi, the references to the Old Mount Wan and Zhu Jiutao are especially
interesting, because they go back to the early days of Triad narrative lore. Elsewhere,
these names had long since disappeared, with Zhu Jiutao becoming Zhu Hongying
and Zhu Hongzhu. The Qing authorities never succeeded in Clearing up the precise
26
Myth in the shape of History: Elusive Triad Leaders
nature of these references, but they consistently interpreted them äs denoting real
people and real places, with modern historians following suite.
In 1852, another Triad rebellion broke out, this time in Nanning (Guangxi
province), supposedly led by Zhu Hongying ^$£ΐ£ and Hu Youlu iS^fü. The Triad
forces were made up from the combined membership of a number of different halls,
such äs the Stabilising Righteousness Hall (Anyi Tang ^cJ^CilD, the Public Righteousness
Hall (Gongyi Tang ^JüC^sC) and others (Taiping Tianguo geming shicji quanxi nongmin
qiyi ziliao 1978:403 and passim). This collective was active in the border region of Hunan
and Guangxi until 1855, when an attempt was made to join the Heavenly Kingdom
forces further north. They were successfully blocked by Qing forces, split into two
groups and were routed. Zhu Hongying was never captured and it was assumed that
he died in battle.6
However, Zhu Hongying (Zhu 'Martial Heroic') is one of the two names under
which the Ming saviour prince is worshipped in mature Triad lore, which should be
sufficient to raise some doubts about his true identity, especially äs different texts
refer to him by alternative names. These include Zhu Shenghong ^ISÄ (Zhu
'Flourishing Martiality'), Zhu Shenghong ^|cj!££[ (Zhu 'Victorious Redness') and Zhu
Hongying %&Μ. (Zhu 'Red Heroic'), in the same section of text, and elsewhere, Zhu
Shixiong /fctft^ (Zhu 'Hero of the World') of the Public Righteousness Hall (Taiping
Tianguo geming shicji quanxi nongmin qiyi ziliao 1978:403,404,405). Although it is possible
that these variants may reflect misunderstandings on the part of the recorders, they
are certainly meaningful in terms of Triad lore.
The participants in the rebellion of 1852 wore red turbans (scarves around their
heads), which was a common practice among bandits and rebels äs well äs ritual
specialists, signifying that they possessed a special life force (Ter Haar 1998:115-116).
One of their flags bore the legend 'Great Peace Heavenly Virtue' (Taiping tiande ^^p^t
ί§) (Taiping tianguo gening shicji quanxi nongmin qiyi ziliao 1968: 409), while other flags
carried the names of those participating in the uprising such äs 'Public Righteousness
Hall' and 'General Liu of the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace.' Finally, they had a
yellow flag bearing the name 'Zhu Hongying,' without further qualifications (Taiping
tianguo gening shiqi quanxi nongmin qiyi ziliao 1978:412-414). This last flag is especially
important, since we know that it is one of the flags traditionally used in Triad initiation
rituals. What is more, this flag, unlike the others bearing a personal name, simply
carries the füll name but no military title, which makes it unlikely that the flag was
intended for a real general in the rebel army. But even though 'Zhu Hongying' was
never caught, Qing sources always refer to him äs real person of flesh and blood.
During the Red Turban uprisings in Guangdong (which lasted into the 1860s),
a proclamation was posted bearing the name of a certain Wan Dahong 7Tλ JA (alterna-
6 A modern summary is given in Taiping tianguo geming shiqi quanxi nongmin qiyi zilaio
(1978: 401) plus a selection of source materials (pp. 401-448). Guo (1987: 465) discusses some
PRC historiography. Lu Baoqian (1975: 8, note 59) quotes a local gazetteer which Claims that
Zhu stayed in hiding among the Yao and was only arrested in 1874.
27
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Mentities, and Spheres oflmpact
tively cited äs Wan Suihong Jj ^i^)·7 As in the case of Zhu Hongying, this figure
again remains completely obscure in the historical record, in contrast to the real leaders
of the rebellion, such äs Chen Kai I^JF/ who are well documented (Wakeman 1998:
139-148). If, on the other hand, one turns to Triad lore, we find two figures with very
similar names. The family name, Wan, could have come from the above-mentioned
Wan Yunlong, while the two variants of his personal name, Dahong and Suihong,
could be derived from Hong Dasui ^^C^, who is alternatively known äs Fang Dahong
JT ifcSc . The latter was a general of one of the Five Houses in the very first Triad society
and is ultimately descended from the above-mentioned Monk Hong (Ter Haar 1998:
270). Clearly, the evidence suggests that Wan Dahong (Wan Suihong) was actually a
combination of these two mythical figures.
The following example is little known, and its precise affiliation is äs yet unclear
to me. Nonetheless, it shows the importance of narratives about the past to these
rebellious groups. In late 1850, a band of rebels, who were on their way to assist another
group of (Triad?) rebels, was defeated in Wengyuan county (Guangdong province).
One of the rebel leaders was identified äs someone called Zhu Honghao ^tt-§· ('Zhu
with the Red Signal' or the 'Red Signal of Zhu'). This name sounds suspiciously like a
Triad figure or may possibly refer to a red signal flag carrying the name Zhu. According
to the historical sources, Zhu Honghao was killed in the fighting but government
forces succeeded in capturing a rebel banner, which was called the 'Great Lord Flag'
(taigong qi ;fc^ffi)· Surviving rebels confessed that they worshipped the flag before
each act of plunder. They "prayed and announced [their plans] to it beforehand, and
when one had a request, it was immediately responsive." The rebels believed that the
flag had been handed down to them from a certain 'First Lad' Li Shao (Lishao Yilang
^έπ^ΒΡ)/ who had been a Taoist priest and was also well-versed in amulets and
spells. His flag had been transmitted over the generations and members of the society
worshipped the Li family äs their patriarch. At the time of their capture, they had
been led by Li Yuanbaoke/qiao (?) ^τπ£τΒ/ who had already been apprehended.
His name is certainly meaningful, since it can be translated äs 'Li Primal Treasure
Shell.'8 The meaning of the term 'shell' is unclear to me, but references to precious
objects are typical of the demonological messianic paradigm. Sadly for us, Qing officials
were not interested in obtaining further details, though they were certainly extremely
surprised about the continued cohesion of this particular group despite the death of
their purported leader.9 Of course, we may well wonder whether this leader was ever
alive in the first place!
7 This is quoted in Xiao Yishan (1936/1986: 6-7). Wan Dahong is also mentioned in an early list
of Heavenly Kingdom leaders, preserved in the manuscript collection of the British Museum
Or. 8207.
8 See Ter Haar (1998: 259, 310-312, 317) for more on treasures.
9 This document is found in "Daoguang dengdi huizhong fanqing douzheng shiliao," in Lishi
dang'an (1996 [2]: 37).
28
Myth in the shape of History: Elusive Triad Leaders
Concluding Remarks
When read against the background of the demonological messianic paradigm in its
Triad form, the references to Monks Wan and Hong, the Zhu Jiutao figure from Old
Mount Wan, Zhu Hongying, and other rebel leaders are quite clearly derived from a
coherent body of politico-religious narrative lore. This lore provided its adherents
with an independent path to Heaven äs the source of all politico-religious authority,
whether or not this involved an act of rebellion. What is also demonstrated by the
examples given above, is the fact that even though most of these rebellions were probably
not directly caused by political motives, they were certainly legitimated in this
way in the eyes of their participants.
Once a Triad foundation narrative was activated from the account of the very
first Triad group's pre-history and foundation, it became a script for political action
and its audience fully accepted its Contents äs authentic or real. This audience consisted
of both Triad adherents and their Qing opponents. Because the Qing officials
took these claims literally, their written records treated these protagonists äs real people,
thereby giving a kind of quasi-historical substance to these figures which has proven
exceedingly difficult for modern historians to unravel.
Ultimately, all the sources that are commonly used to study Triad history and
Triad lore — be they foundation narratives, archival materials or other forms of documentary
evidence — go back to infernal, religiously-inspired Triad accounts of their
past, present and future. As a result, the 'true' origins of the Triads will probably
remain forever hidden in the mists of time. This should not worry us too much, since
we can still make quite a number of concrete observations about the nature of the
Triads and their ritual and narrative lore, thanks to the ongoing research by Chinese,
Western and Japanese scholars.
References
Cai Shaoqing 1987 Zhongguo jingdai huidangshi yanjiu. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju,.
Chesneaux, J. (ed.) 1972 Populär Movements and Secret Sodeties in China, 1840-1950.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
-1985 "Taiping tianguo geming qiartxi Lei Zaihao he Li Yuanfa qiyi de jige wenti," in
Taiping tianguo xuekan (2 vols.). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
Fang Zhiguang and Cui Zhiqing 1985 "Guangxi tiandi hui qiyi yu taiping tianguo de
xingqi", Taiping tianguo xuekan, Vol. 2, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 363-385.
Feuchtwang, Stephen 1992 The Imperial Metaphor: Populär Religion in China. London:
Routledge.
Guo Yuming 1987 "Taiping tianguo shiqi huidang yundong yanjiu zongshu," Taiping
tianguo xuekan, Vol. 5, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 463-492.
29
Chinese Triads: Perspectives on Histories, Identities, and Splieres oflmpact
Hue-Tan Ho Tai 1983 Mülenarism and Peasant Politics in Vietnam. Harvard University Press.
Lu Baoqian 1975 Lun wancjing liangguang de tiandihui zhengquan. Taipei: Zhongyang
yanjiuyuan jindaishi yanjisuo.
Luo Ergang 1981 "Rucheng xian faxian de wan yunlong lingqi deng wenwu." Taiping
tainguo shi congkoa jiaji. Shanghai: Sanlian.
Murray, Dian H., in collaboration with Qin Baoqi 1994 The Origins ofthe Tiandihui: The
Chinese Triads in Legend and History. Stanford University Press.
Ownby, David 1996 Brotherhoods and Secret Societies in Early and Mid-Qing China.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Qin Baoqi 1998 Qing qianqi tiandihui yanjiu. Beijing: Zhingguo remin daxue.
Qingdai dang'an shiliao congkao (1979). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
Song Yaping and Wang Chengren 1987 "Shilun Taiping tianguo geming chuqi de hunan
huidang," in Taiping tianguo xuekan, Vol. 4, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
Taiping tianguo geming shiai quanxi nongmin qiyi züaio (1978). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
Taiping tianguo shiliao ji (1982). Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue.
Ter Harr, Barend J. 1996-1997 "China's Inner Demons: The Political Impact of the
Demonological Paradigm", China Information, Volume XI, no.s 2/3.
-1998 Ritual and Mythology ofthe Chinese Triads: Creating and Identity. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Wakeman, Frederick 1966 Strangers at the Gate: Social Disorder in South China 1849-
1861. Berkeley: University of California Press.
— 1972, "The secret Societies of Kwangtung, 1800-1856" in Chesneaux (ed.) Populär
Movements and Secret Societies in China, 1840-1950. Stanford: Stanford University Press,
29-48.
Xiao Yishan 1986 Qingdai tongshi. First edition 1936; new edition, Taipei: Shangwu
yinshuguan; re-reprint Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
Zheng Guangan 1983 "'Chuogeng lu' zhong defuji shi ji nongmin qiyi de zhang'ge,"
Zhongguo nongmin zhangzhengshi yanjiu, III, 106.
30
Myth in the shape of History: Elusive Triad Leaders
Zhongguodiyi dang'anguaneds. 1996 "Daoguang sanshinian qinzhenfu zhenya
guangdong dengdihuizhong fanqing douzhen shi liao", Lishi dang'an, 35-40.
31