157 replies to this topic

[Zuo Zongtang]

1. Qin Shi Huang
2. Han Gao Zu
3. Han Wu Di
4. Sui Wen Di
5. Tang Tai Zong
6. Wu Ze Tian
7. Song Tai Zu (Zhao Kuang Yin)
8. Genghis Khan
9. Ming Tai Zu (Zhu Yuan Zhang)
10. Kang Xi

Ol' Genghis never made it to the position Emperor of China

[Yun]

No confucian here?

Where did Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Zhou Wen, Zhou Wu go?

I don't think they were officially 'emperors' (huangdi) - just sage-kings or kings.

Besides, we don't even know how historical Yao, Shun, and Yu were.

8. Ming taizong
9. Qing taizong

There were no Taizongs in the Ming and Qing dynasty.

Ol' Genghis never made it to the position Emperor of China

The problem is that because PRC orthodox historiography maintains that the Mongols have always been a Chinese ethnic group, any Mongol ruler is automatically a Chinese ruler, and not a foreign ruler. Furthermore, Chinggis Khan was retrospectively honoured as Yuan Taizu by Khubilai, so he did become an Emperor after he was dead for nearly 50 years.

3) Emperor Xiaowen Di of the Northern Wei Dynasty. I suppose he is often a little overlooked but he did order the assimilation of the nomadic people who occupied Northern China into Chinese culture. He also moved the capital of the Northern Wei Dynasty from what is now Datong to the more prosperous Luoyang. He faced a lot of opposition from his noblemen in the process but still prevailed in the end. Thus he was instrumental in easing the racial strife that plagued much of Northern China during that time & bringing about peace and assimilation to China. I don't think the Sui Dynasty would have been able to unify China had it not been for his work.

Xiaowen (Yuan Hong) actually made a huge mess through his impatience in trying to establish a capital in Luoyang and from there conquer the south, while also imposing radical reforms on the elite. After he died prematurely, no one was able to manage the processes of social change he had begun. Within 25 years of his death, the neglected and mismanaged northern border garrisons mutinied, and the various subject peoples of the Northern Wei empire (Chi'le, Di, Qiang, Xiongnu) also rebelled and tried to break away. The military then tried to seize control of the imperial court, and this led to the collapse of the empire.

The foundation for the Sui reunification was actually laid by the Northern Zhou (especially Yuwen Yong), not Xiaowen.

[MING-LOYALIST]

There were no Taizongs in the Ming and Qing dynasty.

my mistake I meant Ming taizu and Qing gaozong however I think Huang taiji was titled Qing taizong.

[Yun]

I think Huang taiji was titled Qing taizong.

Yes, I made a mistake there too. Hongtaiji changed the name of his state from Jin to Qing in 1636, and his posthumous title was Taizong. So there was a Qing Taizong after all, and Hongtaiji was therefore the first Qing emperor. See this thread: http://www.chinahist...showtopic=13580

[Rong Qin Wang]

Same here, I'm also shocked that Tang Taizong is not in the top 10. The only difference between me and Rong Qin Wang is that I would have put Tang Taizong as the Greatest due to the fact that he gave China the most powerful global position ever. I certainly don't believe that Wen/Jin Di of Han would be in the top 10. Yes, they were good emperors, but I don't think to the point of top 10. If based on ability and prosperity of the country, then I would never have included Qin Shi Huan for very obvious reasons.
Yongzheng maybe...
Qianlong not neccesary since he did plant the roots of the Qing destruction.
Han Gaozu, Ming Taizu each helped the economy but killed there most trusted advisors. They each weakened the army. Gaozu did so just by killing Han Xin. Taizu did so by killing several of his generals and by giving the power into scholars.

Zunjing de Whsie,

Well, I think the merits and mistakes of Tang Taizong deserve a thread of its own. Since we are on this topic right now, I might as well provide my evaluation of Tang Taizong.

First of all, Tang Taizong achieved great military victories as well as having big contributions in daily court affairs while still being Qin Wang.

Recently, there have been cases where people have suspected that official historical records were written in a rather favorable light for Tang Taizong under his insistence. However, this was unproven and it largely remained as only a speculation. Hence, I will just stick to the official history books.

Please note that I am far less critical of Tang Taizong’s fratricide. It was indicated that Li Jiancheng was extremely jealous of his younger brother’s talents and contributions to the founding of the new Empire. Even when Li Jiancheng was officially proclaimed as the Crown Prince, he still was not satisfied with his status as he always feared his younger brother’s growing power. Li Shimin, on the other hand, had always shown respect and compassion toward his older brother, and would back off from an argument most of the time. He clearly tried his best to be a good younger brother. Li Jiancheng’s incessant jealousy eventually led to the Xuan Wu gate incident, in which Tang Taizong was forced to kill two of his siblings. I really cannot see how we could have blamed Tang Taizong for this since he did not make the first move as this action was totally out of self-defense!

Tang Taizong was one of the greatest Chinese Emperors because he was willing to listen to the advice of righteous ministers and accept harsh criticisms. However, he owed a lot of the prosperity of Zhen Guan to his loyal ministers. Tang Taizong seemed to be a very fortunate Emperor in that fate had organized for some of the most loyal and best ministers to serve under him. Also, we must give some of the credit to his virtuous wife, Empress Zhangsun. Because some of Tang Taizong’s successes were based on the ability of his wife and other ministers, when Empress Zhangsun and a few other capable ministers have passed away, the Emperor slowly became more tyrannical. What I cannot forgive Tang Taizong was his failed invasion of Goguryo. Not only did he lose many competent troops, but also wasted a lot of valuable resources and placed heavy tax burdens on the civilians. This invasion was a major setback to his prosperous reign.

In conclusion, Tang Taizong was certainly one of the greatest Chinese Emperors, but definitely did not earn the title of being the greatest. However, if we were to compare eras instead of Emperors, then the prosperity of Zhen Guan would obviously rank first compare to all the other eras.

Well, this is purely my own opinion backed up by some facts; please feel free to express yours.

Xie Xie,

[Whsie]

yes, he owed a lot to his great ministers and such, but for them to be able to fully work without heavy restrains in a way is already a great task by Taizong. In history, we hear this emperor such and such and limits generals whatever. Taizong on the other hand is more open and lets the potential of his ministers and officials to be fully expanded. This would be what Icall use of talent which is actually rare in history because emperor's usually worry this and that.
While Taizong did become a bit more tryrannical in the end after Zhangsun Shi died, but I thought I read somewhere that Taizong realized his mistake and corrected it during the end of his reign. He also had Xu shi does last few years.
I do have to agree that Korea was the setback of his reign and imo, the only major one.
About the global position..., that is one of the reasons why I place Taizong so highly. He got the Tang empire around its max extent. Look at what happened during Wu Ze Tian's period after Taizong died. All the vassals broke off and rebelled- Tibet, West/East Turks, Khitans, Uyghurs. Silk Road closed off in early 700. During Taizong's reign, it was one of the few moments in history where the North actually was no longer in war with the Mainland. The barbarians even opened a road just to see their "Heavenly Khan".

While we're on this topic, who do you think is the greatest emperor?

Edited by Whsie, 30 November 2006 - 04:35 AM.

[lifezard]

i notice something, most of nominated emperors are named here in the x-zong x-zu, x-di format but not so for qing emperors, who are named by their regnal years... in spite of them having the x-zong forms too.

i understand that for qing and most of the ming emperors.. it is common to use their regnal year name, and hence most of us only know that name for that emperor. thus it is normal to use emperor qianlong or emperor wanli but less common to use emperor zhenguan or emperor yongjia etc

i m wonderin when such a difference crept into common folk and the rationale for it.. anyone can explain?

[galvatron prime]

MY top 10 emperor shall be

1 Emperor Li ShiMin
2 Genghis Khan
3 Emperor Kangxi
4 Emperor Kublai Khan
5 Emperor Yongli
6 Emperor YeluAbaoji
7 Hurachi
8 Emperor WangyanAguda
9 Emperor Yongzheng
10 Emperor Qianlong

Are ruler of Jin and Qidan consider Chinese Ruler as well ?.

Edited by galvatron, 30 November 2006 - 08:56 AM.

[ue扬]

在当代中国人心中，汉武帝当之无愧，是他打出了一个民族的千古雄风

[Whsie]

it is suprising that galvatron's list has no Han Dynasty emperors at all. I'm sure someone in that 400 year reign can be on the top 10 especially when it's the dynasty with the most good emperors. quantity over quality=longer rule.

I'm not sure of how Genghis Khan is. I'm not sure how he is politically. Anyone knows he is the Chinese God of War, but what bout economics or politics?

I defitnitely wouldn't consider Nurhaci a top 10. If Nurhaci is in top 10, then he should defitnitely be replaced by his 8th son-Huang Taji. While Huang Taji is not as good as his father is on the field, but Huang Taji is must stronger in politics and handling the country. It's about Huang Taji's time that the 8 Banner reached its peak military wise. It is also during his reign that the Manchu slowly start using Han officials. Huang Taji knows how to use talent and set off the discrimiination against Han people which was very evident during Nurhaci's reign. Practically, most historians say that if he had ruled China, then it would have been of great prosperity since he has the talents of the best emperors such as Li Shimin Tang Taizong or Liu Xiu Han Guang Wu Di.

[Dirt]

Kublai Khan was a terrible Emperor. His treatment of the Han majority is a major reason the Yuan Dynasty lasted less than 100 years.

Edit: I think Wang Mang get's a special mention for giving the Emperor's seat back to the Han.

Edited by Dirt, 01 December 2006 - 05:52 PM.

[Pax Americana]

Kublai Khan was a terrible Emperor. His treatment of the Han majority is a major reason the Yuan Dynasty lasted less than 100 years.

Edit: I think Wang Mang get's a special mention for giving the Emperor's seat back to the Han.

One can also make the case that Qin Shi Huang’s treatment of his subjects wasn’t much better. Along with Yuan, Qin and Sui were short lived dynasties as well. Maybe it has something do with the nature of all these "unifying dynasties" after long periods of turmoil. All of them were followed by long periods of so called Pax Sinica in Han, Tang and Ming. While I agree Kublai Khan is not up there with the likes of Tang Taizong or Kangxi, his accomplishments should put him in the top 10.

[Whsie]

I totally concur with Pax America. While Khublai Khan isn't up there with Kangxi, Yongle or Tang Taizong, overall speaking, Khublai Khan was a good emperor and probably has enough accomplishments to get him in the top 10 (though probably bottom part of top 10).
If we are to look at the Yuan Empire, then we would realize that the emperors of Yuan after Khublai were much worse. In addition, there was immediately corruption developing right after Khublai Khan died.
Economy for the Yuan Dynasty was at a peak during Khublai's period.
Grand Canal was worked on.
Public Building fixed.
Paper currency.
One of the bad things about his reign is the VERY unlucky expeditions on Japan which caused some economy problem and inflations.

[shawn]

Zunjing de Shawn Xian Sheng,

Hmm, you have created a pretty interesting list here considering that four out of the ten were Han Emperors. The Han Dynasty was definitely one of the golden ages in Chinese History. However, I am really shocked that you did not place Tang Taizong in your list of top 10 Emperors. I would personally never ever vote for Tang Taizong as the Greatest Chinese Emperor, but he still definitely deserved to be in the top 10. Were there some particular reasons why you did not put Tang Taizong in your list? This is rather odd since the Chinese consider Tang Taizong as one of the greatest Emperors.

Xie Xie,

If you have noticed, I also did not put in Song dynasty emperors. I just feel that although Tang dynasty emperors have done notable things, they are not in my list of greatest emperors. It's just like the rest of you guys here have your own set of criteria for greatest emperors. Some of you say Qin Shihuang is not great but he unified China,standardised the language so that everyone could understand each one, the set of volumes and weights so that trading would not be confused, the length of axles on carriages so that roads would not be uneven.

So if everyone else have their own set of criteria, I have my own set of criteria.

[shawn]

Same here, I'm also shocked that Tang Taizong is not in the top 10. The only difference between me and Rong Qin Wang is that I would have put Tang Taizong as the Greatest due to the fact that he gave China the most powerful global position ever. I certainly don't believe that Wen/Jin Di of Han would be in the top 10. Yes, they were good emperors, but I don't think to the point of top 10. If based on ability and prosperity of the country, then I would never have included Qin Shi Huan for very obvious reasons.
Yongzheng maybe...
Qianlong not neccesary since he did plant the roots of the Qing destruction.
Han Gaozu, Ming Taizu each helped the economy but killed there most trusted advisors. They each weakened the army. Gaozu did so just by killing Han Xin. Taizu did so by killing several of his generals and by giving the power into scholars.

Every founding emperor would want to consolidate their own power base. Thus they need to get rid of those who have the military power. Emperors would also want to have financial power in their hands too.