Changes

*Horse armor was largely absent prior to the Edo period. It was only around 1600 that samurai began to armor their horses; and before long, it became largely decorative, rather than intended to be militarily effective. [https://www.flickr.com/photos/toranosuke/16315719675/in/photostream/]

*Horse armor was largely absent prior to the Edo period. It was only around 1600 that samurai began to armor their horses; and before long, it became largely decorative, rather than intended to be militarily effective. [https://www.flickr.com/photos/toranosuke/16315719675/in/photostream/]

*[[Taiping War]] - There is little evidence that China before the Taiping War was beset by deep or intractable racial animosities. Chinese and Manchus certainly did have resentment towards one another, but ethnic conflict was not the primary cause of unrest, and racial invectives were typically appended to more direct grievances, rather than being the grievance at the center. Even the Taipings did not unequivocally hypothesize irremediable hostilities between Chinese and Manchus based on static racial qualities. But, something did change with the Taipings, who used religion, ideology, and propaganda to promote the idea, to a greater extent than ever before, that “the Chinese people” were enslaved or oppressed by “the Manchus,” a barbarian “slave” race. The Taiping experience seems to have sharpened people’s consciousness of belonging to a “people” – no longer defined above all by their identity as bannermen, they were now Manchus, Mongols, Xibe, or Han, with ethnic histories, and futures. They were still generally quite loyal to the Qing, however, after the Boxer Uprising, these ethnic groups began to become more nationalistic, seeking independent states: once the Han overthrew the Qing and reclaimed China, they hoped to have an independent Manchuria, Mongolia, Tibet, and/or East Turkestan again. - Crossley, Translucent Mirror, 342-343. (Needs to be reworded before posting!)

*[[Taiping War]] - There is little evidence that China before the Taiping War was beset by deep or intractable racial animosities. Chinese and Manchus certainly did have resentment towards one another, but ethnic conflict was not the primary cause of unrest, and racial invectives were typically appended to more direct grievances, rather than being the grievance at the center. Even the Taipings did not unequivocally hypothesize irremediable hostilities between Chinese and Manchus based on static racial qualities. But, something did change with the Taipings, who used religion, ideology, and propaganda to promote the idea, to a greater extent than ever before, that “the Chinese people” were enslaved or oppressed by “the Manchus,” a barbarian “slave” race. The Taiping experience seems to have sharpened people’s consciousness of belonging to a “people” – no longer defined above all by their identity as bannermen, they were now Manchus, Mongols, Xibe, or Han, with ethnic histories, and futures. They were still generally quite loyal to the Qing, however, after the Boxer Uprising, these ethnic groups began to become more nationalistic, seeking independent states: once the Han overthrew the Qing and reclaimed China, they hoped to have an independent Manchuria, Mongolia, Tibet, and/or East Turkestan again. - Crossley, Translucent Mirror, 342-343. (Needs to be reworded before posting!)