Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Comparing Tang Taizong with Han Wudi


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 allie

allie

    Grand Tutor (Taifu 太傅)

  • Entry Scholar (Xiucai)
  • 351 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    none

Posted 13 August 2011 - 09:10 AM

After Tang Taizong defeated the Tujue, he boasted that he was far greater than Han Wudi.

He say he could easily defeat Tujue without causing much damage to the Tang Empire whereas Han Wudi have to use all the money that he have which caused the country to become bankrupt and the Han Empire declined and yet he could not totally defeat the Xiongnus.

Anyone agree with his statement that Taizong was far geater and more capable than Han Wudi?

I think Taizong was just lucky. If Huo Qubing did not die at a young age, there is a high chance that he will be be able to lead the Han Empire to totally conquer the xiongnus whereas Taizong was lucky that his generals such as Li Jing lived to a old age and thus had time to help him to defeat the Tujue.

Taizong was just more lucky but he was in no way more capable than Han Wudi

#2 oldbreadstinks

oldbreadstinks

    General of the Guard (Hujun Zhongwei/Jinjun Tongshuai 护军中尉/禁军统帅)

  • Entry Scholar (Xiucai)
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sg
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 13 August 2011 - 03:23 PM

But Tang Taizong helped unified the empire and build it up to war with other nations.
Han Wudi inherited his position and bankrupt the nation through war.

they were born in totally different situations.

#3 SlickSlicer

SlickSlicer

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 13 August 2011 - 04:55 PM

Yeah, one key distinction between them is that Tang Taizong was actually a general (and military genius) in his own right.

I think that it's unfair to credit the Emperor specifically with success or failure in campaigns they did not lead, though.
My avatar is Xiaowendi of Northern Wei.

#4 allie

allie

    Grand Tutor (Taifu 太傅)

  • Entry Scholar (Xiucai)
  • 351 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    none

Posted 14 August 2011 - 01:24 AM

Yeah, one key distinction between them is that Tang Taizong was actually a general (and military genius) in his own right.

I think that it's unfair to credit the Emperor specifically with success or failure in campaigns they did not lead, though.


Although Taizong was a good general too, but he did not participate in any successful wars against the Tujue. It was his generals who lead the wars and defeated the Tujue.

Han Wudi and Taizong were all the Grand Commanders in the sense that they were the 1 masterminding the whole campaigns while their generals such as Wei Qing, Huo Qubing, Li Jing etc carry out their orders.

The only difference is that Taizong was lucky that his capable generals did not die at a early age which was why his military campaigns were successful while Han Wudi was unlucky that his capable general Huo Qubing died early and he had to use medicore generals like Li Guangli after that which leads to the failure of his wars against the xiongnus

Edited by allie, 14 August 2011 - 01:25 AM.


#5 SlickSlicer

SlickSlicer

    Commissioner (Shi Chijie 使持节)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 14 August 2011 - 02:43 PM

I kind of recall that in some cases the Han armies were sent out with too few troops to deal with the Xiongnu. After some victories against the Xiongnu, I think the Han started to underestimate them. The Xiongnu were able to successfully unite together and continue to raise large armies even after initial defeats.

I was aware that Taizong did not lead the campaigns that conquered the Eastern Turks. That's why I posted, "I think that it's unfair to credit the Emperor specifically with success or failure in campaigns they did not lead, though." In this case I was referring to some of the failures that happened under Emperor Wu's rule and successes that happened under Taizong. In neither case were the rulers directly responsible. It's commonplace to blame or heap praise upon the big cheese, but I don't think it's a very fair assessment.

This topic also recalls this thread.

As noted here, Li Guangli in some cases found initial success or at least was able to restrain the Xiongnu. Various unfortunate events undermined him though. In one case he became outnumbered by a much larger force. This demonstrates poor campaign planning on the part of the Han rather than poor battlefield strategy on the part of Li Guangli. He should have been reinforced with alacrity by his allies. In the other case it seems like his family was executed back in China, and this dispirited him. I noticed that the Burton Watson translation I was reading was confused on this subject though, and noted that the affair mentioned in Sima Qian's work was out of order (the witchcraft affair of Emperor Wu's son and initial heir). Nicola di Cosmo's book about Ancient China and its Enemies did note that Li Guangli's family was executed for one reason or another though, and this seems to have been the reason for his surrender the second time.

Edited by SlickSlicer, 14 August 2011 - 02:50 PM.

My avatar is Xiaowendi of Northern Wei.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users