This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, History of Tibet, due to size or style considerations. |
This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Tibet, due to size or style considerations. |
Nothing in the article suggests that Tibet is a theocracy. I have removed the theocracy tag. 76.114.104.242 ( talk) 05:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
this artikel is trying to mislead the reader. in fact, there were never a tibet country in history after 13 Centry. Yuan Dynasty turned the mongol Tibet offically a part of China. in the time of 1912-1951 there was no Peoples Republic of China PRC. China had at that time " Public of China" ROC. also the official name of Taiwan Today. in the Constitution of Taiwan you can still find that Tibet is a part of PRC. in the civil war had tibet never successfully indepented. at last , Jiangkaisheng went to Taiwan, and the new PRC was found. naturlly tibet was still a part of china . Dalailama as the slavemaster, after the defeat of a rebel support bei CIA and England, under the help of CIA, escaped to India. what must be pointed out is, his follower were not normal Tibet people, most of them are nobles also slave owners. who brutally ruled tibet under the old Slavesystem. naturally these people never want to share with the 98% normal tibet people ...you can find some document about the law at that time, which england robbed from there at england invated tibet in 18 centry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nocnn ( talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to rename the article simply Tibet (1912-1950) and include the "former country" infobox, in order to have some succession with the Qing China and PRC regimes. Jean-Jacques Georges ( talk) 18:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
It appears that Tibet's status is up for debate. There are sources on the 13th Dalai Lama's page that contradict Nocnn's commits on this talk page. As such I have removed the Area of China status from the infobox. Furthermore, something about his comment seems fishy to me. Does anyone know if Nocnn has any connections to China or is pro-PRC? I suspect that Nocnn may have let his or her political views or personal feelings on the matter of Tibet influence his edits and comments on this matter. It is essential that this article show no bias toward either side of the debate over Tibet. Anasaitis ( talk) 23:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Update: it appears that there is currently no user named Nocnn on Wikipedia. The entire page on this user, including the talk page, has been deleted. There is nothing there. Very Strange. Stranger still, the above comment is the only contribution this user ever made to Wikipedia. I think we need to keep a closer eye on this article. Anasaitis ( talk) 23:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The Kashag got an important role, but what role does the Dalai Lama played, in the periods when the Lama was unable to rule or they were waiting to find the next rencarnation who governed?-- Tercerista ( talk) 19:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the by Wibach that was defended Auszie:
Please use edit summaries to explain the reasoning behind your edits, especially when you are reverting somebody. Quigley ( talk) 15:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Added some information on slavery and serfdom in Tibet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabbish ( talk • contribs) 18:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Edit by IP 190.55.70.74 | Parenti |
---|---|
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. These estates were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas.
Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that “a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches.” Much of the wealth was accumulated “through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending.” Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries rested in the hands of small numbers of high-ranking lamas. Most ordinary monks lived modestly and had no direct access to great wealth. The Dalai Lama himself “lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace.” |
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. These estates were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas.
Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that "a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches." Much of the wealth was accumulated "through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending." Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries rested in the hands of small numbers of high-ranking lamas. Most ordinary monks lived modestly and had no direct access to great wealth. The Dalai Lama himself "lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace." |
Secular leaders also did well.
A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, a member of the Dalai Lama’s lay Cabinet, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. |
Along with the upper clergy, secular leaders did well.
A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. He also was a member of the Dalai Lama's lay Cabinet. |
Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some Western admirers as “a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma.”
In fact. it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served mainly as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order, protect their property, and hunt down runaway serfs. |
Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some Western admirers as “a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma.”
In fact. it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served mainly as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order, protect their property, and hunt down runaway serfs. |
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their peasant families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks.
Once there, they were bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine.
In old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the “middle-class” families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. There also were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery. |
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks.
Once there, they became bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common practice for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated childhood rape not long after he was taken into the monastery at age nine. The monastic estates also conscripted peasant children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers. In Old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the "middle-class" families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. A small minority were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery. |
The majority of the rural population were serfs. Treated little better than slaves, the serfs went without schooling or medical care,They were under a lifetime bond to work the lord's land--or the monastery’s land--without pay, to repair the lord's houses, transport his crops, and collect his firewood. They were also expected to provide carrying animals and transportation on demand.
Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners lease them out to work in a distant location. As in a free labor system and unlike slavery, the overlords had no responsibility for the serf’s maintenance and no direct interest in his or her survival as an expensive piece of property. The serfs had to support themselves. Yet as in a slave system, they were bound to their masters, guaranteeing a fixed and permanent workforce that could neither organize nor strike nor freely depart as might laborers in a market context. The overlords had the best of both worlds. |
The majority of the rural population were serfs. Treated little better than slaves, the serfs went without schooling or medical care, They were under a lifetime bond to work the lord's land - or the monastery's land - without pay, to repair the lord's houses, transport his crops, and collect his firewood. They were also expected to provide carrying animals and transportation on demand.
Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners lease them out to work in a distant location. As in a free labor system and unlike slavery, the overlords had no responsibility for the serf's maintenance and no direct interest in his or her survival as an expensive piece of property. The serfs had to support themselves. Yet as in a slave system, they were bound to their masters, guaranteeing a fixed and permanent workforce that could neither organize nor strike nor freely depart as might laborers in a market context. The overlords had the best of both worlds... |
One 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf, reports: “Pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished”;
Landowners had legal authority to capture those who tried to flee. One 24-year old runaway welcomed the Chinese intervention as a “liberation.” He testified that under serfdom he was subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold.
|
if we are to believe one 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf: "All pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished."
They "were just slaves without rights." Serfs needed permission to go anywhere. Landowners had legal authority to capture and forcibly bring back those who tried to flee. A 24-year old runaway serf, interviewed by Anna Louise Strong, welcomed the Chinese intervention as a "liberation." During his time as a serf he claims he was not much different from a draft animal, subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold The third time I was already fifteen and they gave me fifty heavy lashes, with two men sitting on me, one on my head and one on my feet. Blood came then from my nose and mouth. The overseer said: "This is only blood from the nose; maybe you take heavier sticks and bring some blood from the brain." They beat then with heavier sticks and poured alcohol and water with caustic soda on the wounds to make more pain. I passed out for two hours |
The serfs
were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a tree in their yard and for keeping animals.
, for being sent to prison and upon being released.
and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being cast into slavery. |
The common people
were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child, and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a new tree in their yard, for keeping domestic or barnyard animals, for owning a flower pot, or putting a bell on an animal. There were taxes for religious festivals, for singing, dancing, drumming, and bell ringing. People were taxed for being sent to prison and upon being released. Those who could not find work were taxed for being unemployed, and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being placed into slavery |
Thank you for your persistence. You are correct, of course. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Young Tibetan boys were taken from peasant families were raised in monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they were bonded for life. citation needed Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine. [1] The monastic estates also conscripted children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers.
There is no page no., and the word 'rape' does not come up if you search this text. In Tibetan Buddhism, and monastic practice, any penetration of orifices, male or female is strictly forbidden, and the monastic practice was very much what it was in English colleges in Auden's day, intercrural intercourse, the passive partner being a 'guest' or drombo, and Tsering accepted this after being 'invited' to perform that function. Were anal sex (rape) involved and discovered, the consequence was, at least normatively, expulsion from the order. Specifically Tashi-tsering's memoir doesn't lend itself to the idea that the monastic system was into the sex-slave trade. He's quite open about all this, so a specific page ref is required before this can be restored. The relationship between monasteries and the peasantry is made out to be one of sexual predation. You need very good neutral sourcing for all this. Nishidani ( talk) 13:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
References
Should this also become part of the Artical, since this did take place before 1949. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.141.138.20 ( talk) 23:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
This article is very biased and misleading. There is very few historical evidence that proof Tibet is an independent country, in fact, most of map published between 1912 to 1951 marked Tibet as a part of China (such as the World map published by United Nation).Tibet is just one of the local governments that gains autonomous due to lack of effective central government during the age of Warlords, the Civil War, and the WWII. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.22.126 ( talk) 13:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
The article already covers it as an unrecognized, de facto autonomous state. You are suggesting a change that is already there. Dimadick ( talk) 10:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The Tibetan Communist Party was mostly formed by Tibetans from Kham and Amdo before merging with the Chinese Communist Party in 1949. It opposed the Kuomintang ( Tibet Improvement Party included) and opposed the Dalai Lama. It had little presence among U-Tsang Tibetans.
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/30128/5/Luo_Jia_E_200911_ME_thesis.pdf
A Tibetan Revolutionary: The Political Life and Times of Bapa Phüntso Wangye By Melvyn C. Goldstein, Dawei Sherap, William R. Siebenschuh
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA32#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA117#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA123#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA124#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA232#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA306#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA326#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rajmaan ( talk) 21:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
I've been told that this flag:
is actually the flag of the Tibetan Army, which was later adopted as the symbol of the Tibetan independence movement after Tibet fell to the communists, and wasn't actually the national flag of Tibet. If this really is the case, then the current state of the infobox is problematic. Is someone able to make some verifications regarding this? There also seems to be this, but it probably doesn't apply to this article, since it was used before 1912. -- benlisquare T• C• E 20:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
First time I found this flag in an 1926 flagbook, as the "national flag", western (german) one of course. So, the flag was widely used, by the military, and most likely not in the sense of the "national flag". But it was a symbol of the tibetan state then. Maybe adding some footnote? The emblem is anachronistic, really! That time, the Kashag government used seals like [1]-- Antemister ( talk) 20:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Was there an "official" name of that country, used on overnemnt documents?-- Antemister ( talk) 20:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Tibet (1912–51). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
A few days ago, an IP inserted "unrecognized independent" into the lead sentence and then another editor added it to the Short description. These assertions are untenable. Britain clearly recognized the de facto independence. That is why the Simla Conference was called and Britain insisted on a tripartite Convention (with three equal parties signing it).
The British representative retorted with the argument that... until Tibet signed it, her status was that of 'an independent nation recognising no allegiance' to China. [1]
Eventually, Tibet signed the Convention but China did not. And, until China had signed, no benefits from the Convention were to accrue to China. That meant that Tibet's de facto independence continued in British eyes until the 1950 annexation.
Indeed, Britain operationalised the McMahon Line agreement in the 1930's without any Chinese agreement, armed Tibet to fight against China, and stationed a British envoy in Lhasa. All these things mean Britain's recognition of the de facto independence.
When Britain says that they had "recognized" the suzerainty of China that only means that they recognized China's right to such suzerainty. But that right would come into being only if China had the signed the Simla Convention, which it never did.
As for de jure suzerainty that the Republic of China supposedly had, there is no such thing. De jure means "by law". Which law are we talking about here? Which reliable source authenticates such a thing? This is complete WP:OR. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 08:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
References
There are three further problems here:
1. The pro-Chinese editors want to add " unrecognized independent" as if it is some special form of independence. There is no such thing. [1]
2. The absence of recognition applies only to foreign states. But there are plenty of non-state bodies and scholars that recognize it. [2]
3. From Wikipedia's point of view, states and governments are not reliable sources. That is especially the case here, because scholars point out:
Political realism and economic self-interest, in short, motivate states' formal recognition practices toward China's assertion of sovereignty over Tibet. [3]
When states act in self-interest or in the interest of geopolitics, they are even less of reliable sources. Frankly, what they say makes absolutely no difference to Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
References
I've co-authored article of the enthronement ceremony of the 14th Dalai Lama on Chinese Wikipedia, and read all the cited sources, but none referenced the cited AP or UPI news. Who were the reporters present at the ceremony? None of the several eye-witness accounts of the ceremony mentioned the presence of Western reporters. Did the news come from press release of Chinese mission in Lhasa? That was the most likely explanation, as there were no Western reporters in Lhasa at the time AFAIK. In other words, the news look more like Chinese propaganda through western news. Happyseeu ( talk) 04:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The article currently uses Chinese time zones without citing any sources. Is there any evidence that Tibet uses Chinese time zones? The 14th Dalai Lama used the clock and watch gifted by the British Mission, so what time did it keep (most likely already set when he received it)? When Radio Lhasa only broadcast at certain times, what time zone did it use? These would at least indicate what time zone Lhasa adhered to at one time, instead of mere speculation. — Happyseeu ( talk) 15:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Someone wrote "Left hand drive until 1946" w/o citing any source. Given few cars existed before 1951 in Tibet, it's dubious that even driving customs had developed, let alone rules regulating which side to drive on. A reliable source is needed to say anything definitive here. Happyseeu ( talk) 17:05, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
This article appears to be the subject of vandalism: Some dates are nonsensical; ie. referring to Qing Dynasty interests in Tibet in the 1980s and 1990s and changing descriptions of the pre-Chinese Tibetan state from the past tense to the present tense 172.103.208.205 ( talk) 01:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Plenty of sources witness that Tibet asked ROC central government for permission to inaugurate the Dalai Lama, which was in fact the ROC preferred candidate seen as "pro China" at the time. See contemporary newspaper sources cited. 142.189.132.149 ( talk) 15:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
"The 13th Dalai Lama had reformed the pre-existing serf system in the first decade of the 20th century, and by 1950, slavery itself had probably ceased to exist in central Tibet, though perhaps persisted in certain border areas. Slavery did exist, for example, in places like the Chumbi Valley, though British observers like Charles Bell called it 'mild', and beggars (ragyabas) were endemic. The pre-Chinese social system, however, was rather complex."
Emphasis mine.
Seriously, what the shit? This would be grossly inappropriate in any article dealing with the topic of slavery, but the fact that the citation that leads to a book that is not linked electronically is especially wild. Even more than that, a cursory Google search came up with no electronically available copy of the cited book "The History of Tibet Vol. 1 by Alex McKay", AND all the physical copies I'm seeing are $1,000-$1200. IF a line like that is going to be included people need to be able to click through and see it in context.
This portion of the article seriously needs to be edited. Twitchyy ( talk) 04:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, History of Tibet, due to size or style considerations. |
This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Tibet, due to size or style considerations. |
Nothing in the article suggests that Tibet is a theocracy. I have removed the theocracy tag. 76.114.104.242 ( talk) 05:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
this artikel is trying to mislead the reader. in fact, there were never a tibet country in history after 13 Centry. Yuan Dynasty turned the mongol Tibet offically a part of China. in the time of 1912-1951 there was no Peoples Republic of China PRC. China had at that time " Public of China" ROC. also the official name of Taiwan Today. in the Constitution of Taiwan you can still find that Tibet is a part of PRC. in the civil war had tibet never successfully indepented. at last , Jiangkaisheng went to Taiwan, and the new PRC was found. naturlly tibet was still a part of china . Dalailama as the slavemaster, after the defeat of a rebel support bei CIA and England, under the help of CIA, escaped to India. what must be pointed out is, his follower were not normal Tibet people, most of them are nobles also slave owners. who brutally ruled tibet under the old Slavesystem. naturally these people never want to share with the 98% normal tibet people ...you can find some document about the law at that time, which england robbed from there at england invated tibet in 18 centry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nocnn ( talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to rename the article simply Tibet (1912-1950) and include the "former country" infobox, in order to have some succession with the Qing China and PRC regimes. Jean-Jacques Georges ( talk) 18:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
It appears that Tibet's status is up for debate. There are sources on the 13th Dalai Lama's page that contradict Nocnn's commits on this talk page. As such I have removed the Area of China status from the infobox. Furthermore, something about his comment seems fishy to me. Does anyone know if Nocnn has any connections to China or is pro-PRC? I suspect that Nocnn may have let his or her political views or personal feelings on the matter of Tibet influence his edits and comments on this matter. It is essential that this article show no bias toward either side of the debate over Tibet. Anasaitis ( talk) 23:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Update: it appears that there is currently no user named Nocnn on Wikipedia. The entire page on this user, including the talk page, has been deleted. There is nothing there. Very Strange. Stranger still, the above comment is the only contribution this user ever made to Wikipedia. I think we need to keep a closer eye on this article. Anasaitis ( talk) 23:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The Kashag got an important role, but what role does the Dalai Lama played, in the periods when the Lama was unable to rule or they were waiting to find the next rencarnation who governed?-- Tercerista ( talk) 19:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the by Wibach that was defended Auszie:
Please use edit summaries to explain the reasoning behind your edits, especially when you are reverting somebody. Quigley ( talk) 15:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Added some information on slavery and serfdom in Tibet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabbish ( talk • contribs) 18:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Edit by IP 190.55.70.74 | Parenti |
---|---|
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. These estates were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas.
Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that “a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches.” Much of the wealth was accumulated “through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending.” Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries rested in the hands of small numbers of high-ranking lamas. Most ordinary monks lived modestly and had no direct access to great wealth. The Dalai Lama himself “lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace.” |
Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. These estates were owned by two social groups: the rich secular landlords and the rich theocratic lamas.
Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that "a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches." Much of the wealth was accumulated "through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending." Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries rested in the hands of small numbers of high-ranking lamas. Most ordinary monks lived modestly and had no direct access to great wealth. The Dalai Lama himself "lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace." |
Secular leaders also did well.
A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, a member of the Dalai Lama’s lay Cabinet, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. |
Along with the upper clergy, secular leaders did well.
A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. He also was a member of the Dalai Lama's lay Cabinet. |
Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some Western admirers as “a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma.”
In fact. it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served mainly as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order, protect their property, and hunt down runaway serfs. |
Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some Western admirers as “a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma.”
In fact. it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served mainly as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order, protect their property, and hunt down runaway serfs. |
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their peasant families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks.
Once there, they were bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine.
In old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the “middle-class” families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. There also were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery. |
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks.
Once there, they became bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common practice for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated childhood rape not long after he was taken into the monastery at age nine. The monastic estates also conscripted peasant children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers. In Old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the "middle-class" families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. A small minority were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery. |
The majority of the rural population were serfs. Treated little better than slaves, the serfs went without schooling or medical care,They were under a lifetime bond to work the lord's land--or the monastery’s land--without pay, to repair the lord's houses, transport his crops, and collect his firewood. They were also expected to provide carrying animals and transportation on demand.
Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners lease them out to work in a distant location. As in a free labor system and unlike slavery, the overlords had no responsibility for the serf’s maintenance and no direct interest in his or her survival as an expensive piece of property. The serfs had to support themselves. Yet as in a slave system, they were bound to their masters, guaranteeing a fixed and permanent workforce that could neither organize nor strike nor freely depart as might laborers in a market context. The overlords had the best of both worlds. |
The majority of the rural population were serfs. Treated little better than slaves, the serfs went without schooling or medical care, They were under a lifetime bond to work the lord's land - or the monastery's land - without pay, to repair the lord's houses, transport his crops, and collect his firewood. They were also expected to provide carrying animals and transportation on demand.
Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners lease them out to work in a distant location. As in a free labor system and unlike slavery, the overlords had no responsibility for the serf's maintenance and no direct interest in his or her survival as an expensive piece of property. The serfs had to support themselves. Yet as in a slave system, they were bound to their masters, guaranteeing a fixed and permanent workforce that could neither organize nor strike nor freely depart as might laborers in a market context. The overlords had the best of both worlds... |
One 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf, reports: “Pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished”;
Landowners had legal authority to capture those who tried to flee. One 24-year old runaway welcomed the Chinese intervention as a “liberation.” He testified that under serfdom he was subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold.
|
if we are to believe one 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf: "All pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished."
They "were just slaves without rights." Serfs needed permission to go anywhere. Landowners had legal authority to capture and forcibly bring back those who tried to flee. A 24-year old runaway serf, interviewed by Anna Louise Strong, welcomed the Chinese intervention as a "liberation." During his time as a serf he claims he was not much different from a draft animal, subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold The third time I was already fifteen and they gave me fifty heavy lashes, with two men sitting on me, one on my head and one on my feet. Blood came then from my nose and mouth. The overseer said: "This is only blood from the nose; maybe you take heavier sticks and bring some blood from the brain." They beat then with heavier sticks and poured alcohol and water with caustic soda on the wounds to make more pain. I passed out for two hours |
The serfs
were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a tree in their yard and for keeping animals.
, for being sent to prison and upon being released.
and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being cast into slavery. |
The common people
were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child, and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a new tree in their yard, for keeping domestic or barnyard animals, for owning a flower pot, or putting a bell on an animal. There were taxes for religious festivals, for singing, dancing, drumming, and bell ringing. People were taxed for being sent to prison and upon being released. Those who could not find work were taxed for being unemployed, and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being placed into slavery |
Thank you for your persistence. You are correct, of course. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Young Tibetan boys were taken from peasant families were raised in monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they were bonded for life. citation needed Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine. [1] The monastic estates also conscripted children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers.
There is no page no., and the word 'rape' does not come up if you search this text. In Tibetan Buddhism, and monastic practice, any penetration of orifices, male or female is strictly forbidden, and the monastic practice was very much what it was in English colleges in Auden's day, intercrural intercourse, the passive partner being a 'guest' or drombo, and Tsering accepted this after being 'invited' to perform that function. Were anal sex (rape) involved and discovered, the consequence was, at least normatively, expulsion from the order. Specifically Tashi-tsering's memoir doesn't lend itself to the idea that the monastic system was into the sex-slave trade. He's quite open about all this, so a specific page ref is required before this can be restored. The relationship between monasteries and the peasantry is made out to be one of sexual predation. You need very good neutral sourcing for all this. Nishidani ( talk) 13:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
References
Should this also become part of the Artical, since this did take place before 1949. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.141.138.20 ( talk) 23:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
This article is very biased and misleading. There is very few historical evidence that proof Tibet is an independent country, in fact, most of map published between 1912 to 1951 marked Tibet as a part of China (such as the World map published by United Nation).Tibet is just one of the local governments that gains autonomous due to lack of effective central government during the age of Warlords, the Civil War, and the WWII. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.22.126 ( talk) 13:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
The article already covers it as an unrecognized, de facto autonomous state. You are suggesting a change that is already there. Dimadick ( talk) 10:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The Tibetan Communist Party was mostly formed by Tibetans from Kham and Amdo before merging with the Chinese Communist Party in 1949. It opposed the Kuomintang ( Tibet Improvement Party included) and opposed the Dalai Lama. It had little presence among U-Tsang Tibetans.
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/30128/5/Luo_Jia_E_200911_ME_thesis.pdf
A Tibetan Revolutionary: The Political Life and Times of Bapa Phüntso Wangye By Melvyn C. Goldstein, Dawei Sherap, William R. Siebenschuh
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA32#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA117#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA123#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA124#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA232#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA306#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=6n4hxVqqwz8C&pg=PA326#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rajmaan ( talk) 21:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
I've been told that this flag:
is actually the flag of the Tibetan Army, which was later adopted as the symbol of the Tibetan independence movement after Tibet fell to the communists, and wasn't actually the national flag of Tibet. If this really is the case, then the current state of the infobox is problematic. Is someone able to make some verifications regarding this? There also seems to be this, but it probably doesn't apply to this article, since it was used before 1912. -- benlisquare T• C• E 20:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
First time I found this flag in an 1926 flagbook, as the "national flag", western (german) one of course. So, the flag was widely used, by the military, and most likely not in the sense of the "national flag". But it was a symbol of the tibetan state then. Maybe adding some footnote? The emblem is anachronistic, really! That time, the Kashag government used seals like [1]-- Antemister ( talk) 20:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Was there an "official" name of that country, used on overnemnt documents?-- Antemister ( talk) 20:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Tibet (1912–51). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
A few days ago, an IP inserted "unrecognized independent" into the lead sentence and then another editor added it to the Short description. These assertions are untenable. Britain clearly recognized the de facto independence. That is why the Simla Conference was called and Britain insisted on a tripartite Convention (with three equal parties signing it).
The British representative retorted with the argument that... until Tibet signed it, her status was that of 'an independent nation recognising no allegiance' to China. [1]
Eventually, Tibet signed the Convention but China did not. And, until China had signed, no benefits from the Convention were to accrue to China. That meant that Tibet's de facto independence continued in British eyes until the 1950 annexation.
Indeed, Britain operationalised the McMahon Line agreement in the 1930's without any Chinese agreement, armed Tibet to fight against China, and stationed a British envoy in Lhasa. All these things mean Britain's recognition of the de facto independence.
When Britain says that they had "recognized" the suzerainty of China that only means that they recognized China's right to such suzerainty. But that right would come into being only if China had the signed the Simla Convention, which it never did.
As for de jure suzerainty that the Republic of China supposedly had, there is no such thing. De jure means "by law". Which law are we talking about here? Which reliable source authenticates such a thing? This is complete WP:OR. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 08:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
References
There are three further problems here:
1. The pro-Chinese editors want to add " unrecognized independent" as if it is some special form of independence. There is no such thing. [1]
2. The absence of recognition applies only to foreign states. But there are plenty of non-state bodies and scholars that recognize it. [2]
3. From Wikipedia's point of view, states and governments are not reliable sources. That is especially the case here, because scholars point out:
Political realism and economic self-interest, in short, motivate states' formal recognition practices toward China's assertion of sovereignty over Tibet. [3]
When states act in self-interest or in the interest of geopolitics, they are even less of reliable sources. Frankly, what they say makes absolutely no difference to Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
References
I've co-authored article of the enthronement ceremony of the 14th Dalai Lama on Chinese Wikipedia, and read all the cited sources, but none referenced the cited AP or UPI news. Who were the reporters present at the ceremony? None of the several eye-witness accounts of the ceremony mentioned the presence of Western reporters. Did the news come from press release of Chinese mission in Lhasa? That was the most likely explanation, as there were no Western reporters in Lhasa at the time AFAIK. In other words, the news look more like Chinese propaganda through western news. Happyseeu ( talk) 04:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The article currently uses Chinese time zones without citing any sources. Is there any evidence that Tibet uses Chinese time zones? The 14th Dalai Lama used the clock and watch gifted by the British Mission, so what time did it keep (most likely already set when he received it)? When Radio Lhasa only broadcast at certain times, what time zone did it use? These would at least indicate what time zone Lhasa adhered to at one time, instead of mere speculation. — Happyseeu ( talk) 15:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Someone wrote "Left hand drive until 1946" w/o citing any source. Given few cars existed before 1951 in Tibet, it's dubious that even driving customs had developed, let alone rules regulating which side to drive on. A reliable source is needed to say anything definitive here. Happyseeu ( talk) 17:05, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
This article appears to be the subject of vandalism: Some dates are nonsensical; ie. referring to Qing Dynasty interests in Tibet in the 1980s and 1990s and changing descriptions of the pre-Chinese Tibetan state from the past tense to the present tense 172.103.208.205 ( talk) 01:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Plenty of sources witness that Tibet asked ROC central government for permission to inaugurate the Dalai Lama, which was in fact the ROC preferred candidate seen as "pro China" at the time. See contemporary newspaper sources cited. 142.189.132.149 ( talk) 15:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
"The 13th Dalai Lama had reformed the pre-existing serf system in the first decade of the 20th century, and by 1950, slavery itself had probably ceased to exist in central Tibet, though perhaps persisted in certain border areas. Slavery did exist, for example, in places like the Chumbi Valley, though British observers like Charles Bell called it 'mild', and beggars (ragyabas) were endemic. The pre-Chinese social system, however, was rather complex."
Emphasis mine.
Seriously, what the shit? This would be grossly inappropriate in any article dealing with the topic of slavery, but the fact that the citation that leads to a book that is not linked electronically is especially wild. Even more than that, a cursory Google search came up with no electronically available copy of the cited book "The History of Tibet Vol. 1 by Alex McKay", AND all the physical copies I'm seeing are $1,000-$1200. IF a line like that is going to be included people need to be able to click through and see it in context.
This portion of the article seriously needs to be edited. Twitchyy ( talk) 04:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)