Battle of Zhenhai - The Chinese Version

The Chinese Version

As far as the French were concerned, they had bottled up seven Chinese warships in Zhenhai Bay, where they remained immobilised for the rest of the war. Although Courbet had not gone in after them, locating and trapping the Chinese warships ranked as a strategic success comparable to the destruction of Yuyuan and Chengqing a fortnight earlier. But that was not how the Chinese saw things. Courbet’s decision not to force the defences of Zhenhai Bay allowed the Chinese to claim the brief engagement on 1 March as a striking defensive victory. The half-hour exchange of shots between Nielly and the Chinese shore batteries became a six-hour battle in which Courbet’s ships were roughly handled and the French commander was seriously wounded, and the brief engagement on 1 March was stretched into a three-day battle from 1 to 3 March, in which the French repeatedly attacked and were repulsed.

The Chinese version crystallised shortly after the war, with the erection of a commemorative tablet near the site of the engagement in 1889 by the Chinese general Ouyang Lijian (歐陽利見), who had been charged with the defence of Ningbo and Zhenhai. According to Ouyang's account, the defence of the town was in the hands of the Chinese military mandarins Xue Fucheng (薛福成), Liu Bingzhang (劉秉璋) and himself. The hero of the battle was the artillery officer Wu Jie (吳杰), who directed the fire of a battery of cannon. Wu Jie defied direct orders not to fire on the French, and precipitated the battle by ordering his men to open fire. The Chinese cannon inflicted terrible damage on the French ships, hitting both Bayard and Nielly, and a shot aimed in person by Wu Jie severely wounded the ‘terrible Guba’ (as the Chinese called Courbet). After the battle was over, Wu Jie expected to be commended for his prowess. Instead, he was punished for disobedience.

Read more about this topic:  Battle Of Zhenhai

Famous quotes containing the word version:

    Truth cannot be defined or tested by agreement with ‘the world’; for not only do truths differ for different worlds but the nature of agreement between a world apart from it is notoriously nebulous. Rather—speaking loosely and without trying to answer either Pilate’s question or Tarski’s—a version is to be taken to be true when it offends no unyielding beliefs and none of its own precepts.
    Nelson Goodman (b. 1906)