the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 16 Aug 2024
Reconstruction of ancient drought in Northwest China and societal responses: A case study of 1759
Abstract. According to the written records and scores of grain harvest in the official historical documents of the Qing Dynasty in China, the spatial-temporal distribution and the impact caused by the 1759 AD drought in Northwest China were reconstructed, and the response of Chinese society to the drought at that time was summarized. In the spring and summer of 1759, vast areas of northern China suffered from drought, of which that experienced in the northwest region was the most serious. Starting from 27 April 1759, droughts covered Zhili, Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Gansu provinces, and the droughts in Gansu and northern Shaanxi provinces lasted until 23 July 1759. This severe drought caused the worst crop failure in Northwest China during the period 1730–1900. By implementing a series of disaster relief measures, the Qing government managed to ease the adverse societal impact of the drought in the summer of 1760. Among the relief measures, tax reduction and exemption in disaster-stricken areas, grain storage in the northwest region, and bumper agricultural harvests in Henan, Shandong, Jiangsu, and Anhui provinces in 1759 were the main reasons for the rapid recovery from the drought impacts. With better climatic conditions in the 18th century, China had higher agricultural harvest levels in the 18th century than in the 19th century. Favorable financial conditions increased drought relief efforts, which was the background for the greater societal adaptability to the climate disaster of 1759.
- Preprint
(1686 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
CC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-111', Fang Xiuqi, 06 Sep 2024
-
AC3: 'Reply on CC1', Danyang Xiong, 06 Apr 2026
Dear community referee,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments and constructive suggestions. Having carefully reviewed your feedback, we have gained significant insights and benefited greatly. We believe that revising according to your suggestions will greatly enhance the quality of our study. It is an honor for us to receive your review and guidance. The following are detailed point-by-point modifications made, with all changes already incorporated into the original manuscript. Once again, thank you for your review and feedback!
-
AC3: 'Reply on CC1', Danyang Xiong, 06 Apr 2026
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-111', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Sep 2024
The paper is dealing with an important topic on disasters and social responses. According to the paper, it seems to emphasize social responses more. Therefore, I have some comments as below to improve the manuscript further.
First, the manuscript should include more records to show the responses by government. In particular, the effect of these measures should be supported by these records. So far, the effect of these measures are evaluated indirectly. If there are some records directly show the effectiveness of these measures, it will be more persuasive.
Second, the study may consider the demographic pressure and conditions. After the drought occurrence, how about the migration conducted by local communities? The migration out of town may reduce the vulnerable groups under disaster which lead to less loss.
Third, in addition to government measures, how about the measure at the civil level? I think it would be better to include some discussions on this point from a bottom-up mode.
The above comments are made to improve the manuscript. I look forward to the revised version.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-111-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Danyang Xiong, 06 Apr 2026
Dear anonymous referee,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments and constructive suggestions. Having carefully reviewed your feedback, we have gained significant insights and benefited greatly. We believe that revising according to your suggestions will greatly enhance the quality of our study.
For instance, following your advice, we consulted additional historical sources and found quantitative evidence for assessing the effectiveness of disaster relief measures. For example, in memorials to the throne, prefectural and county gazetteers, and other local documents from the Qing Dynasty, we discovered that in response to the 1759 disaster and to increase grain production, local communities expanded the area of reclaimed land, bringing some previously uncultivated wasteland into agricultural use. A memorial records that in the Hexi Corridor of Gansu Province, newly reclaimed land produced 82,346 dan of grain in 1760, enough to feed 41,173 adult males for one year. A local gazetteer records that on the Ningxia Plain, the Tanglai Canal and Hanyan Canal irrigation systems were dredged, expanding the irrigated area by 21,970 mu in 1760, which increased grain production by 26,364 dan, enough to feed 13,182 adult males for one year. Adding this evidence undoubtedly makes our study more complete and presents readers with more robust and scientifically grounded findings and conclusions.
Regarding the three valuable comments you raised below, we will add one paragraph in the manuscript to address each of them, in order to supplement the deficiencies of the original version. However, because the journal requires review by two external referees, and we have just received the comments from the second referee, a large number of figures and substantial portions of the text need to be redrawn and revised. Therefore, the full revision of the manuscript is still ongoing.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Danyang Xiong, 06 Apr 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-111', Anonymous Referee #2, 24 Feb 2026
General comments
This study uses official historical documents from the RQD and grain harvest score data to reconstruct the spatial-temporal distribution, social impacts, and governmental responses to the 1759 drought in Northwest China. This is a case study of significant academic value. It is a valuable case study with solid data and clear analysis. I recommend acceptance after MINOR REVISION.
Specific Comments
Title: The spatial scope is unclear. The title says "Northwest China," but the study covers Shanxi and Zhili (North China) while excluding Xinjiang (Northwest China). So the word "Northwest China" in title is inappropriate.
Section 2.1 Study Area: Considering that the follow analysis is basically based on agricultural harvest conditions and rainy season in North China, it would be helpful to add brief background on local farming systems and rainy season patterns. This helps readers understand how drought timing affected crops.
Section 3.2 (Drought Patterns)
Lines 209–214: The discussion of disaster severity within the region is necessary, but the current approach (e.g., criteria for drought level classification) lacks specific technical details. Please add more details.
Line 238: "This confirms the RQD's records..." Do the RQD also include materials from the Qing Dynasty's harvest recording system? Can we say that the harvest record “confirms” RQD records? Or “the harvest record is consistent with RQD records” is more appropriate?
Section 4 Discussion: In addition to the current discussion, could the analysis be expanded from the following perspectives?
- Analyzing the reliability of the current research methodology and data. The paper uses 8 NWAR sites and 26 adjacent sites, but Figure 2 shows uneven distribution of these sites. There are few sites in the western part of Gansu Province. Will this uneven distribution affect the reconstruction results? Additionally, the systematic bias of historical records can also be taken into consideration. As an official document, the RQD may have tendencies to "report good news but not bad news" or “conceal disaster conditions”. One suggestion is to add discussion on the limitations of historical materials and how to identify and handle possible missing records, or add a cross-validation with local documents (prefecture and county chronicles).
- Examining this event from a broader spatial perspective. For example, supplementing the discussion with possible climatic driving mechanisms of the 1759 drought would help place the case study within the framework of global climate change.
- Deepening the quantitative assessment of social response mechanisms. The paper currently lists detailed measures such as tax exemptions, grain transfers, and work-relief programs, but lacks quantitative analysis of the actual effectiveness of these measures. Therefore, when comparing response differences between cases, there is a lack of common quantifiable discourse for comparison.
Given the length limitations of the paper, selecting one of these points for discussion would be sufficient.
Technical Corrections
- The bold formatting in the caption of Figure 1 needs to be consistent.
- What does "Disaster relief" mean in the last row of Table 1? It does not seem to match the subsequent descriptions?
- What does "the province" refer to in Line 183?
- The use of "NAR" in Line 193 is inaccurate because the areas such as Yulin mentioned later do not fall within this region. Similarly, "NWAR" in Line 203 is also inappropriate, as Shanxi mentioned in the previous text does not belong to this region.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-111-RC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Danyang Xiong, 05 Apr 2026
Dear anonymous referee,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments and constructive suggestions. Having carefully reviewed your feedback, we have gained significant insights and benefited greatly. We believe that revising according to your suggestions will greatly enhance the quality of our study.
For example, after careful consideration, we have revised ambiguous directional terms, such as replacing "Northwest China (NWAR)" with "Shaanxi and Gansu Provinces in the Qing Dynasty (abbreviated as SG)" in the study area description. Corresponding revisions have also been made in the title, abstract, and throughout the manuscript. Furthermore, we have added content on the climatic and agricultural characteristics of Northwest China, clarified the different levels of drought severity across counties based on the varying intensity of government relief measures, and provided quantitative evidence of the success of response measures by showing that the grain harvest scores in 1760 and 1761 recovered to bumper levels.
It is an honor for us to receive your review and guidance. The following are detailed point-by-point modifications made, with all changes already incorporated into the original manuscript. Once again, thank you for your review and feedback!
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 955 | 217 | 79 | 1,251 | 79 | 111 |
- HTML: 955
- PDF: 217
- XML: 79
- Total: 1,251
- BibTeX: 79
- EndNote: 111
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
This study presents a comprehensive reconstruction of the 1759 drought and the societal responses in Northwest China. The historical records in the official historical documents of the Qing Dynasty are reliable. The three main conclusions on the in 1759 are reasonable. The results are valuable for coping with the climate extremes under global climate change in modern society.
The major comments are that the geographical regions should be distinguished more clearly and be used consistently in the whole paper.
First, “Northwest China” was used in title, but in fact, the paper divided the Northwest China into the eastern part(Northwest Agricultural Region of China (NWAR) ) for reconstruction and the other part in the discussion. Does the “Northwest China” refering to NWAR or the whole?
Second, “Northwest China” and the other part of “Northern Agricultural Region of ancient China (NAR)” should be clearly distinguished when use the records for drought reconstruction and make any statement on the analysis or the results. It is difficult for a reader to recognize a mentioned place whether belonged to Northwest China. For example, in the abstract, “droughts covered Zhili, Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Gansu provinces” and “bumper agricultural harvests in Henan, Shandong, Jiangsu, and Anhui provinces in 1759”. Some structure changes is necessary to make the “Northwest China” and the other part of “northern China” to be distinguished.
Third, do “Northwest China” in line 68 and in lines 70-71 refer to the same area? At present, Northwest China does not include Qinghai Province, but the “the area east to Qinghai Lake in Qinghai Province was belonged to the Gansu Province. It is better to define the Northwest China using to the provinces in 1820(Fig. 1), and to list the corresponding provinces at present.
Forth, The measures out of NWAR in “4.1” is suggested to be deleted. For example, the “Cao rice” for Zhili in lines 334-338.
Some other suggestions are as follows.