23 replies to this topic

[snowybeagle]

After reading some transcripts from the Lecture Room Series (百家讲坛), I wonder now if the Rebellion of the Seven States (七国之乱) was inevitable or was it really provoked by the Emperor's attempt to cut them down to size.

The speaker Yi Zhongtian (易中天) claimed there was no real evidence of Liu Pi (刘濞) or other Imperial princes were actually planning to revolt. He also cited that the execution of Chao Chuo (晁错) led to some princes from deciding not to join the revolt.

易中天<汉代风云人物>讲稿（一）-晁错(上)
易中天<汉代风云人物>讲稿（二）-晁错(下)

On the other hand, the abolition of autonomous fiefs was seen as necessary in history as part of unification and development of China, and thus revoking the priviliges and downsizing the territories of the Imperial princes was considered as just, even though in modern terms, it is akin to state stealing personal properties.

What do you guys think? This was to happen again during the Ming Dynasty, the difference being Prince Zhu Di of Yan (燕王朱棣) succeeded in replacing Emperor Jianwen (建文).

Edited by snowybeagle, 10 December 2007 - 11:58 PM.

[light]

I think it is more meaningful to discuss why the rebellion of the 7 states failed instead

[snowybeagle]

I think it is more meaningful to discuss why the rebellion of the 7 states failed instead

I would say that understanding how something began provides more meaningful understanding of how it developed further down the road and eventually ended, but feel free to start a separate thread on it if you want.

Edited by snowybeagle, 11 December 2007 - 11:40 AM.

[DaMo]

Ah, incidentally I just started watching Han Wu Da Di recently, and it goes pretty deep into the reign of Han JingDi (for a series about Han WuDi).

Is a fief really a private property, though? Perhaps the vassal diminishing was intended to reinforce the imperial stance that dukes are more like stewards to the emperor than sovereign kings. The emperor giveth, the emperor taketh away?

[Prince of the South]

Would you say Zhu Di's successful rebellion/usurpation against Jian Wen Emperor was inevitable or was provoked?

[snowybeagle]

Would you say Zhu Di's successful rebellion/usurpation against Jian Wen Emperor was inevitable or was provoked?

We should start a separate thread in Ming Dynasty folder for that question.
There're parallels, but also a great deal of differences between them.

[snowybeagle]

Is a fief really a private property, though? Perhaps the vassal diminishing was intended to reinforce the imperial stance that dukes are more like stewards to the emperor than sovereign kings. The emperor giveth, the emperor taketh away?

In feudal Europe, fief was technically not private property (though in practice, it was a matter of who was more powerful).

But in feudal China, the "fief" was traditionally private property, at least as far as the concept of feudalism re-introduced during the early Han Dynasty was concerned.

It was only later to justify Imperial annexation that the scholars came up with reasoning such as "All lands under the sky belong to the Son of Heaven.", which though was not new then, was never meant in that light.

The Son of Heaven was a notion carried over from Zhou Dynasty, and the Zhou king was merely overlord to a host of independent states, many of these states were of different tribal groups from the Zhou and merely pledged their support, but never forswore their independence.

[Fireice]

I saw a thread in Han Dynasty about the rebellion of the 7 states. But I started another thread because I can't reply in that thread and also I wanted to discuss about different aspects of the rebellion.

1. Why the xiongnus did not want to join the 7 states in the rebellion? What could the 7 states do or offer to the xiongnus to get their support to help them in the rebellion? If the xiongnus had joined the 7 states, what do you think will have happen?

2. If the rebellion of the 7 states succeeded, what do you think will happen to the Han Dynasty?

3. During Jing reign, Han dynasty was already rich and prosperous although it was not as rich and prosperous as under Han Wudi. Zhou Yafu was also a capable general and the supression of the 7 states rebellion was very much his effort. If after the 7 states rebellion had been supressed, Jing send Zhou YAfu to attack the xiongnus, do you think he will be able to defeat the xiongnus?

[snowybeagle]

1. Why the xiongnus did not want to join the 7 states in the rebellion? What could the 7 states do or offer to the xiongnus to get their support to help them in the rebellion? If the xiongnus had joined the 7 states, what do you think will have happen?

We can only make guesses here.

Either the XiongNu were having internal problems, or they preferred to wait and see how things develop in the Central Plains.

A major rebellion which failed could weaken the central authorities, providing even better opportunities for the XiongNu if they conserved their strength. The states which rebelled were primarily in the south, so it makes sense to see if there was any withdrawal of military garrisons in the north. If the XiongNu had attacked at the same time, the northern military would have definitely have stayed and resisted.

Alternatively, the XiongNu might have wanted to wait and see if the central authorities would make them a better or more legitimate offer.

2. If the rebellion of the 7 states succeeded, what do you think will happen to the Han Dynasty?

Most commentators thought it would go the way of Zhou Dynasty, or feudalism in Europe.

3. During Jing reign, Han dynasty was already rich and prosperous although it was not as rich and prosperous as under Han Wudi. Zhou Yafu was also a capable general and the supression of the 7 states rebellion was very much his effort. If after the 7 states rebellion had been supressed, Jing send Zhou YAfu to attack the xiongnus, do you think he will be able to defeat the xiongnus?

Not very likely. Even when the Han was stronger during Emperor Wu, it took them a lot of effort to defeat the XiongNu.

Warfare against the XiongNu in the steppes was very different from the Central Plains. The Han still did not have enough horses at that stage.

[kingswonder]

1 LiuBi, the king of Wu, the leader of "rebelled kings", was already 62-year old at that time.
if he intended to rebel and want to be the emperor, why not rebel when he was young and strong and
at his convenience?
2 The strength of the seven states were much meagerer than the central government of the emperor.
Please see a map and judge by yourself. Except Wu and Chu, all other states hardly acted effectively.
even some king was easily imprisoned by local officials befroe he can do something.
3 The emperor's mother,Empress Dou warned the emperor that his policy will provoke resistance and revolt from the princes. That's also the reason why all other ministers opposed ChaoCuo's proposal.
But the emperor was overconfident and proceeded his whim recklessly. thus unleashed the consequent rebellion .
4 Zhu Di's rebellion was neither a deliberate conspire, it's also a struggle for survival. Please consult
their detailed original history.
5 Both of them are revolt against central monarchy absolutism by outlying princes.
Their difference is , one failed, one triumphed.
6 The conclusion of their crime of treason and rebellion's inevitability was drawn
under a circumstance of absolute monarchy autocracy and for the political need of unification
,consolidation and dictator's authoritarianism, but not a history science and original truth.

Edited by kingswonder, 17 December 2007 - 02:56 AM.

[snowybeagle]

1 LiuBi, the king of Chu, the leader of "rebelled kings", was already 62-year old at that time.
if he intended to rebel and want to be the emperor, why not rebel when he was young and strong and
at his convenience?

The Prince of Chu was Liu Wu (楚王刘戊), and there was no record of his age.

It was Prince Liu Pi of Wu (吴王刘濞) who was 62 years old.
He was merely 21 years old when enfeoffed to principality of Wu. Liu Bang assigned him there because it was former stronghold of Xiang Yu, whose populace he feared would pose trouble. Liu Pi was chosen by Liu Bang as the former proved himself in battle against Ying Bu's rebellion. Nonetheless, he was young and it would take him quite a while to consolidate his hold over the region.

Don't forget that during the regency of Empress Lu, he didn't try to seize power, indicating either his wings were not fully fledged or he was biding his time for a more opportunine time. At this time, many of Liu Bang's old veterans such as Fan Kuai and Zhou Bo were still around (and were instrumental in re-establishing the Liu linage on the throne).

Thus, circumstances might not have been more favourable when Liu Pi was younger.

2 The strength of the seven states were much meagerer than the central government of the emperor.
Please see a map and judge by yourself.

Maps don't show the full picture. Principality of Wu alone was able to raise 200,000 trooops.
Together with the forces of other princes, they could reckon against the Imperial troops whose primary forces were divided between the Northern Army (to guard against the XiongNu) and the Central Army.

If the seven states posed little threat, the emperor would have no cause to worry, nor would he even contemplate killing Chao Cuo as an appeasement offer.

4 Zhu Di's rebellion was neither a deliberate conspire, it's also a struggle for survival. Please consult their detailed original history.

I would like to invite you to comment on the relevant threat in Ming Dynasty folder.
http://www.chinahist...showtopic=20160

Edited by snowybeagle, 18 December 2007 - 10:49 AM.

[kingswonder]

Sorry, a typing mistake, corrected already.

[kingswonder]

Thanks for your correction, or my mistyping will make a joke further.

濞 in standard Chinese PinYin should be spelled as Bi, not Pi,
though I don't know how it pronounced in Singapore Chinese.
晁错 in standard Chinese should be Chao Cuo, not Chuo, also.
for your reference.

If LiuBi's troops or forces was a severe threat to the emperor,
why LiuBang enfeoffed him, and why Emperor Jing's father Emperor
Wen didn't curtail it?

And do you think the princes after the defeat of the Seven States was
weakened and became no threatening to central government?
But why Emperor Wu divided them more fragmentally?

Whether there's a threat or not depend on the judgement of the emperor.
That's also why TaiZu of Ming(明太祖) annihilated his ministers and generals,
but LiuBang(Han)(刘邦) and LiShiMin(Tang) (李世民)didn't , for they didn't consider their
subordinations as threats.

Edited by kingswonder, 17 December 2007 - 03:38 AM.

[snowybeagle]

If LiuBi's troops or forces was a severe threat to the emperor,
why LiuBang enfeoffed him, and why Emperor Jing's father Emperor Wen didn't curtail it?

Liu Bang enfeoffed Liu Bi more than half a century before. The geopolitical dynamics were very different back then.

When Emperor Wen came to the throne, there was a lot of stabilisation to take care of, including filling up the imperial coffers.

And do you think the princes after the defeat of the Seven States was weakened and became no threatening to central government?
But why Emperor Wu divided them more fragmentally?

How weak the enfeoffed princes were after the Rebellion of Seven States was crushed is a matter of conjecture.
But apparently, Emperor Wu was not satisfied and wanted to weaken them further in order to boost his own power and authority.

Further weakening these princes will enable emperor to ensure he can extract more taxes from these princes, not necessarily because they were significant threat.

Edited by snowybeagle, 17 December 2007 - 04:54 AM.

[kingswonder]

Further weakening these princes will enable emperor to ensure he can extract more taxes from these princes, not necessarily because they were significant threat.

So why not Emperor Jing also wanted to levy more taxes from those princes and
the threat is only a pretension?
So YiZhongTian's comparision is very apt, Emperor Jing wanted to grab more
lands and wealth from other princes' hereditary holdings.