World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Battle of Dagu Forts (1900)

Article Id: WHEBN0007648435
Reproduction Date:

Title: Battle of Dagu Forts (1900)  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Boxer Rebellion, 1900 in China, Siege of the International Legations, Seymour Expedition, Boxer Protocol
Collection: 1900 in China, Battles of the Boxer Rebellion
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Battle of Dagu Forts (1900)

Battle of Dagu (Taku) Forts
Part of the Boxer Rebellion

A model of the Taku Forts.
Date June 16–17, 1900
Location Dagu Forts, China
Result Allied tactical victory
Commencement of the Siege of the International Legations
 United Kingdom
 German Empire
Imperial China
Commanders and leaders
Yakov Hildenbrandt
Christopher Cradock
900 Russians, British, Japanese, Germans, Austrians, and Italians approximately 2,000 soldiers and sailors
Casualties and losses
172 killed and wounded Unknown
The attack on Dagu by the Allies influenced Empress Dowager Cixi's decision to support the Boxers.

The Battle of Taku or Dagu Forts was a battle during the Boxer Rebellion between the Chinese military and allied Western and Japanese naval forces. The Allies captured the forts after a brief but bloody battle.


  • Background 1
  • The battle 2
  • Impact 3
  • Notes 4
  • References 5


In mid-June 1900, allied forces in northern China were vastly outnumbered. In Beijing there were 450 soldiers and marines from eight countries protecting the diplomatic legations. Somewhere between Tianjin and Beijing were the 2,000 men in the Seymour Expedition which was attempting to get to Beijing to reinforce the legation guards. In Tianjin were 2,400 Allied soldiers, mostly Russians. All of these forces were menaced by thousands of Boxers, members of an indigenous peasant movement that aimed to end foreign influence in China.[1] The Qing government of China was wavering between supporting the Boxers in their anti-foreign crusade or suppressing them because they represented a threat to the dynasty.[2]

A few miles offshore in the Yellow Sea were a large number of Western and Japanese warships. On June 15, Chinese forces deployed a weapon called "electric mines" in the Peiho River before the battle to prevent the Eight-Nation Alliance from sending ships to attack.[3] With their supply and communication lines to Tianjin threatened, the commanders of the ships met on June 16. Control of the Dagu forts at the mouth of the Hai River was the key to maintaining a foothold in northern China. Vice-Admiral Hildenbrandt, from the Imperial Russian Navy, through Lieutenant Bakhmetev, sent a message to the commander of the forts, who then sent a message by telegraph to the Governor of Zhili Province, stating that they proposed to “occupy provisionally, by consent or by force” the Dagu Forts and demanded that Chinese forces surrender the forts before 2 am on June 17. Of the Allied countries represented, only the United States Navy’s Rear Admiral Louis Kempff demurred, stating that he had no authority to undertake hostilities against China.[4] Kempff said that an attack was an "act of war", and therefore refused to participate.[5] However, Kempff agreed that an ageing American gunboat, the Monocacy, could be stationed near the forts as a place of refuge for civilians in the vicinity.[6]

It was an audacious demand by the foreign sailors. Only ten small ships, including the non-combatant Monocacy, could cross over the banks at the river’s mouth to enter the Hai River – two hundred yards wide—from where the four forts could be occupied or assaulted. Only 900 men could be assembled to undertake the operation. By contrast the Chinese soldiers and sailors in the forts and on several modern gunboats docked along the river consisted of about 2,000 men. The Chinese also began laying mines near the mouth of the river and installing torpedo tubes in the forts.[7] In the evening of June 16, the foreign warships began entering the river and taking up their stations from which the Dagu Forts could be occupied or assaulted.[8]

The battle

The Chinese did not wait for the expiration of the deadline but opened fire from the forts with every single gun at the Allied ships simultaneously at about 00:45 on June 17.[9] The Russian gunboat Korietz was heavily damaged in the opening salvo. The Monocacy, despite its distance from the battle and the assurances of its officers to the 37 women and children aboard that they were “in a position of absolute safety” took a Chinese shell in its bow which hurt nobody. The captain quickly moved the Monocacy to a safer position. Chinese gunnery from the forts aimed at the ships was accurate, also hitting HMS Whiting, SMS Iltis, and Lion and driving Giliak aground.[10] The Russians turned on the searchlight of Giliak, exposing them to Chinese guns. Giliak and another ship were severely damaged. 18 Russians died with 65 others receiving wounds.[11]

The most serious offensive threat to the Allied attack were four modern German-built destroyers laying alongside the dock at Dagu. These warships could have easily overpowered the Allied ships, but inexplicably they remained docked even after the Chinese opened fire. Two British destroyers, HMS Whiting and HMS Fame (the former commanded by Lieutenant Colin Mackenzie and the latter by Roger Keyes), each towing a whaleboat with 10 men aboard, darted alongside the Chinese ships and boarded them.[12] The Chinese only offered weak resistance before fleeing and leaving their ships in the hands of the British.[13]

The artillery duel continued inconclusively until nearly dawn when the Allies stripped their ships of crew and mounted a ground assault on the Northwest Fort. Two hundred Russians and Austrians led the way followed by 380 British and Italians with 300 Japanese bringing up the rear. In a bit of luck for the allies, the powder magazine exploded just as the ground assault began and in the confusion afterwards the Japanese had the honor of storming the fort.[14] The British and Italians then led the way on the assault of the North Fort which was soon captured.[15]

Two forts remained on the south side of the river. The Allies turned all their guns, and the guns in the two Chinese forts they had captured, on these two forts. They blew up another powder magazine in one, and shortly afterwards the Chinese soldiers abandoned the forts. The Allied ground force then crossed the river and captured the forts with almost no opposition. The battle of the Dagu Forts was over at 6:30 a.m. The Allies had suffered 172 casualties among the more than 900 soldiers and sailors engaged.[16] The number of Chinese casualties is unknown but the forts were described as flowing in "rivers of blood".[17] However, Robert B. Edgerton says that Chinese casualties were "probably not heavy".[18]


The attack by the allied navies on the Dagu Forts had a profound impact. The first reports of the battle arriving in Beijing from Governor Lu Yu in Tianjin emphasized the positive – and failed to mention to the Dowager Empress Cixi that the allies had captured the forts.[19]

The battle pushed the Qing government definitively to the side of the Boxers and the Chinese army was instructed to resist foreign military forces on Chinese soil. The next day, June 18, Admiral Seymour and his two thousand men were attacked by the Chinese army along the railroad running from Tianjin and Beijing and Seymour decided to abandon his objective of reaching Beijing and instead retreated to Tianjin. On June 19, an ultimatum was delivered to the diplomats in the Legation Quarter in Beijing informing them that they had 24 hours to depart the capital. When the foreigners refused to leave, fearing for their safety, the Siege of the Legations began on June 20. The Dagu forts remained in foreign hands for the remainder of the Boxer Rebellion.[20]

Allied officers praised the courage and skill the Chinese soldiers had demonstrated in defending the Dagu Forts.[21]


  1. ^ Thompson, Larry Clinton. William Scott Ament and the Boxer Rebellion: Heroism, Hubris, and the Ideal Missionary. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2009, p.68
  2. ^ Tan, Chester C. The Boxer Catastrophe. New York: Columbia U Press, 1955, p. 72
  3. ^ United States. Adjutant-General's Office. Military Information Division (1901). Publication, Issue 33 Document (United States. War Dept.). G.P.O. p. 533. Retrieved February 19, 2011. 
  4. ^ Fleming, Peter. The Siege of Peking. New York: Dorset Press, 1959, pp. 79-81
  5. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 73.  
  6. ^ Sharf, Frederic A. and Harrington, Peter. China 1900: The Eyewitnesses Speak. London: Greenhill Books, 2000, p.91
  7. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 73.  
  8. ^ Scharf and Harrington, p. 95; Fleming,p. 80-81
  9. ^ United States. Adjutant-General's Office. Military Information Division (1901). Publication, Issue 33 Document (United States. War Dept.). G.P.O. p. 533. Retrieved February 19, 2011. 
  10. ^ Landor, A. Henry Savage. China and the Allies. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1901, pp 118-119, 131
  11. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 74.  
  12. ^
  13. ^ Landor, 119; Thompson, 71
  14. ^ Sharf, 95-96
  15. ^ Landor, 126
  16. ^ Fleming, p. 83
  17. ^ Sharf and Harrington, 92
  18. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 74.  
  19. ^ Fleming, 83-84
  20. ^ Thompson, p. 73-74
  21. ^ Landor, p. 130


  • Harrington, Peter (2001). Peking 1900: The Boxer Rebellion. Oxford: Osprey.  
  • Leonhard, Robert R. "The China Relief Expedition Joint Coalition Warfare in China Summer 1900" (PDF). The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. Retrieved 8 August 2014. 
  • Xiang, Lanxin (2003). The Origins of the Boxer War: A Multinational Study. Psychology Press.  
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.