Talk:Hongwu Emperor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Roadrunner:
I’ll acknowledge, this article needs a lot of work. I’ve already born the greatest share of the brunt though. But I know that you'll have fun contradicting me.
The date of 1830 is obviously incorrect (he reigned from 1368 to 1398). I have replaced it temporarily by a "xxxx". olivier 13:47 Jan 7, 2003 (UTC)
Ugh. Ugly title for this article. -- Zoe
I should get around to more biographical information. If I don't, other contributors should take on this task.
I also agree with Zoe. A better title will make this article on such a significant historical figure more likley to be found on a yahoo or a google search. Let's have Roadrunner decide the new name.
I recommend either Hongwu, Emperor Hongwu of China or Hongwu of China - Zoe
Given the long history of Imperial China and the possibility of the reigning names of emperors repeating themselves, I will raise the suggestion of incorporating the dynasty in the title--something like "Hongwu of Ming China". Also, I don't have all my sources here, but I seem to remember that Yongle was also Hongwu's son, albeit a younger son. Hongwu's elder son died young, so that he was succeeded by his grandson Zhu Yunwen. A civil war erupted, and Yongle was eventually victorious. Also there were important monetary reforms in Hongwu's time, which led to major inflation and a decentralized currency. Generally not a bad start on an article, but there seems to be too much information about Yongle and the early Ming (important subjects, to be sure, but they can go into their own articles), whereas more on Hongwu would be valuable. The opening remark reminds me of a professor of mine in Chinese history teaching that Mao's rise to power should be seen in the context of traditional changes of dynasty in China. I'll buy that, but I wonder if this is the place to bring that up. Danny
Hung-wu's one of the most significant figures in Chinese history, and indeed world history. Hung-wu or Hung-wu would suffice, just like Henry VIII can do instead of Henry VII of the Tudor Dynasty.
Actually, we use Henry VIII of England. Danny
Well, we could have Hongwu, Hung-wu, Hongwu Emperor of China. Just redirect all of them to the same article.
There are two problems. 1. Consistency: we want the articles for all emperors of China to be titled similarly. 2. China never developed a system of reginal numbers. Where there other Hongwu's? Where there other emperors who shares the same name? How are we distinguishing between them? Danny
I think that, given that many wiki users won't be familiar with Chinese history, and that there is a clearly defined empire with a name that was reigned over, the name of the empire should be stated, so readers can immediately answer the basic questions, who?' and where?. We have a absolute unintelligable nightmare with Japanese emperors, given that one person refuses to allow the use of the Japan word in their title. At this stage, if you don't already know Japanese emperors, finding them on wiki is now the equivalent of trying to find a needle in a haystack (though efforts are being made to undo with mess). So the name we use should have three things
- a recognisable name
- as much historical accuracy as possible (given that we are dealing with an english language version of wiki and so cannot - or should not - translate everything literally if the meaning cannot be grasped by english language readers)
- a recognisable location.
I certainly would have no problem with in China's case incorporating a dynastic name but only if necessary. STÓD/ÉÍRE 02:22 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
I'm not set on it. Just a suggestion. There are also issues of spelling in English (Pinyin vs. Wade-Giles) and the actual names themselves--reign names, personal names, etc. It can be a mess if we are not consistent. Danny
Hongwu Emperor is currently the most up-to-date spelling, I believe. Perhaps this will be a better title.
I think we should incorporate at least the word "China" in the title, and if the title comes in, it should come first. In cases of European monarchs, we do not include the title. Why would we include it here? Danny
If, as that god-awful battle over on the japanese emperors names pages suggested, eastern tradition places emperor after name, then we could do it, I suppose, rather than apply strict European naming standards to eastern monarchies. But I agree that China should stay; saying that there everyone can tell the difference between Japanese and Chinese, though regularly repeated on wiki, is simply wrong. Many people cannot tell. When you consider there may also be a list of Vietnamese emperors at some stage, it makes sense to clarify who came from where. Having turned [[{name} Emperor of Japan]] into [[{name} Emperor]], the last thing we need are more anonymous emperors appearing by the dozen on wiki. (Though I have that dreadful feeling that we will be swamped here like on the Japanese pages by 'purists' demanding we do just that, even if it produces unfindable pages!!!) Man the barracades to defend 'China'! (*big big smile*). Jeez, I never thought I'd hear myself say that!!! STÓD/ÉÍRE 03:36 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
Does anyone want to add content and perspective to the article? Keep in mind that the posting is entirely mine and Chinese history, at least prior to the First Opium War, is not my area of expertise.
I minored in East Asian history, but that was almost twenty years ago, and I haven't touched the stuff since. There was an important economic component to his rule--major inflation because of paper money being printed and distributed without backing, followed by a decentralized currency, which eventually led to economic destablization. You've got a much better grip on economic issues than me. Could you check on that? Danny
I've added more on economic policies with a particular bent on as to how they contributed to the aborted commercial revolution of the later Ming years.
Compliments to 172 for this well-thought article especially the concise commerce paragragh; however I'd like to point out certain things:
1) Quote: "Hongwu noted the destructive role of court eunuchs under the Sung". Hongwu did take certain measures against court eunuchs but Sung dynasty was not noted for plaguing of eunuchs.
2) "Although Hongwu’s rule saw the introduction of paper currency, capitalist development would be stifled from the beginning. Not understanding inflation, Hongwu gave out so much paper money as rewards that by 1425 the state was forced to reintroduce copper coins given that the currency was worth 1/70 of its original value."
May you comment on this? I always think Yuan rulers were responsible of devaluing the paper currency; however Hongwu and his Confuscian schloar gentry's lack of monetary knowledge led them to wrongly blaming the introduction of paper currency as one source of devaluing and thus introducing silver for monetary exchange.
3)In my humble opionion, Ming's government's plaguing of commerce have gradually changed Chinese commerce self-supporting and inward, as noticed in the rise of certain specialized merchant groups. For instance Shanxi merchants specialized in currency exchange and banking, Huizhou and Anhui merchants in salt and rice. These merchant groups complemented each other, thus limiting needs of commercial services outside the coutry.
point#3 could be inserted in the Ming Dynasty article. As always, I'm open to discussion. -- User:kt2
It's copper right after the abandonment of paper money. You don't see the rise of the silver money economy, I'm fairly certain, until the trade with the Portuguese. I'm fairly certain that the content regarding currency is fine.
I agree, though, point 3 belongs in the article. This is an important factor that I overlooked.
Thank you, kt2.
- but I am pretty sure that Ming dynasty did see the first use of silver money, probably not in Hongwu's time (which I am not sure). IMO, they traded with Portguese and later Dutch for silver during mid-Ming because slmost all silver mines in China have been used up.User:kt2
They abandoned paper money for copper in the late 15th century, before trade with the Portuguese.
[edit] Where is the info on what he did before becoming an emperor?
This article just skips to when he becomes an emperor without saying how he came about unifying the empire...no battles...no rivals, nothing? --80.227.100.62 11:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] copyedit "Hongwu"
In my copyedit I have normalized all occurrences of the emperor's name to "Hongwu", to conform to the article's current title. If this does not conform to Chinese practice someone please change it: but I'd suggest keeping it uniform, at least, as WadeGiles/pinyin and other spelling conflicts just confuse the text for non-Chinese readers.
--Kessler 00:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I made grammar and style changes to the 'Early Life' section of the article to eliminate some of the more glaringly awkward sentences. The second part of the article didn't seem to need much in the way of alteration, so I left it untouched.
Pajari 03:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
