Table 1: Average Aggregate

Annual Gentry Income in the

-officeholders were 1.6% of gentry and made about Late 19th Century (in Taels)
5,000 anually each (42)
-this included ‘extra’ income Gentry Services 74

-secretarial assistants were 16,200, about 1%, total Office 80.67

9,050,000 taels
-560 tael income on average for one of them Other 6
86
Secretarial 6.03
-gentry services (retainer and local projects) totalled
111,000,000 Teaching 41.05
-675000 received managerial
-300000 received retainer (total above
(207.75)
-total 975,000 or 2/3 of genry; 66% ‘Services’)
-ave 110 taels per annum
72 Landholding 146.67

teachers were 604,500 (40%) Mercantile Activities 75.73

-100 taels ave.
Total 430.15
-of 30,000-60,000 large gentry landholders (out of 1.5
million), ave income 5,000 (derived from Chang 1962, 197)
(200,000,000 of the 225,000,000 mou owned by
gentry)
Table 2: Average Gentry Income by Occupation in
-10,000 ‘mercantile’ gentry the Late 19th Century (in Taels)
as ‘dominant capital’
-113,600,000 taels total Occupation Numbe % of Total Ave.
-so 11,360 taels on ave r total Income Incom
0.67% of gentry e
Gentry 975,000 65 111,000,000 1101
Services
-what this implies for Landholding 30,000- 2-4 200,000,000 5,000
multiple ‘occupations’ (dominant) 60,000
Mercantile 10,000 0.67 113,600,000 11,360
(dominant)
Office 22,830 1.5 114,897,765 5,000
Secretarial 16,200 1.1 9,050,000 560
Teaching 604,500 40.3 60,450,000 100
(derived from Chang 1962, 42, 72-3, 85-7, 106-8, 146-7,
194-5)

1
Where Chang makes a similar calculation (1962, 197) he arrives at “about 120 taels”;
the reason for the difference between his and my own calculations is unclear.
Table 3: Individual Gentry Control Over
Societal Processes
External Internal
Breadth Greenfield Engrossment
Depth ‘External Depth’ Cost-cutting