rivercao Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:24 PM Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:24 PM Which do you like best? 1 Quote
rivercao Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:31 PM Author Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:31 PM Sorry,' Zu Yuan Zhang' should be 'Zhu Yuan Zhang'... Quote
rivercao Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:47 PM Author Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 02:47 PM Kang Xi. I agree, Kang Xi > Qian Long. Quote
eatfastnoodle Posted May 4, 2010 at 04:28 PM Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 04:28 PM Of course, Cao Cao, Cao Cao and Mao Zedong are the only two on the list who have ever written top of the notch poems. Comparing to Mao Zedong, Cao Cao's output was also much bigger and impact much deeper in literary history. Quote
Patriot Posted May 4, 2010 at 06:26 PM Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 06:26 PM Where's Kangxi, Yongle? Quote
Hofmann Posted May 4, 2010 at 08:32 PM Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 08:32 PM 哎呀... Don't tell me Renmingongheguo Zedong was an emperor. Quote
rivercao Posted May 4, 2010 at 10:58 PM Author Report Posted May 4, 2010 at 10:58 PM 哎呀...Don't tell me Renmingongheguo Zedong was an emperor. Wasn't he? One man is in charge of the whole country, no other parties as opposition parties, policies are decide by that man, thus the man is, in my eyes, an emperor. Quote
bhchao Posted May 5, 2010 at 12:58 AM Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 12:58 AM What about Song Taizu? He set the tone by encouraging intellectual dissent in his court. He forbade the execution of anyone who disagreed with the emperor. He decentralized the court by delegating authority to the prime minister. Song Taizu used the civil service exams to promote talent and skill, rather than birthright. His successors folllowed the same pattern. Scholar-officials of humble origins dominated the court. The Tang court in contrast was dominated by elite families, or the aristocracy. Quote
rivercao Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:19 AM Author Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:19 AM What about Song Taizu? He set the tone by encouraging intellectual dissent in his court. He forbade the execution of anyone who disagreed with the emperor. He decentralized the court by delegating authority to the prime minister. Song Taizu used the civil service exams to promote talent and skill, rather than birthright. His successors folllowed the same pattern. Scholar-officials of humble origins dominated the court. The Tang court in contrast was dominated by elite families, or the aristocracy. He was a good emporer, but unfortunantely his emporer life was too short. There is a suspection that he was killed by his brother Zhao Guangyi, and I believe this is ture. Anyway he was a legendary emporer, "陈桥兵变",“黄袍加身”,“杯酒释兵权”, these are all very marvellous stories. He also invented a Kongfu called "太祖长拳", he was an all-round emporer. I'm sorry my options did not cover him, and Kang Xi, and many other great emporers. Quote
Moving_away Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:33 AM Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:33 AM I join the Kanxi league Quote
Shi Tong Posted May 5, 2010 at 09:09 AM Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 09:09 AM You cant have one technically non emperor, IMO! Or maybe we should call him King of Wei?! Quote
rivercao Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:19 PM Author Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 01:19 PM You cant have one technically non emperor, IMO! Or maybe we should call him King of Wei?! In Chairman Mao's peoms, 4 or 5 historic portrait was mentioned: Qin Shi Huang Han Wu Di Tang Tai Zong Song Tai Zu (秦皇汉武,略输文采,唐宗宋祖,稍逊风骚) Cao Cao (魏武挥鞭) So I think Cao Cao is an eligible candidate on the list, as a King, he's already better than 95% emporers in terms of achievement. Quote
Shi Tong Posted May 5, 2010 at 02:46 PM Report Posted May 5, 2010 at 02:46 PM I think Cao Cao is an eligible candidate on the list, as a King, he's already better than 95% emporers in terms of achievement. I couldn't agree less.(sh) Lets just pretend I didn't say that. Quote
eatfastnoodle Posted May 6, 2010 at 02:33 AM Report Posted May 6, 2010 at 02:33 AM Caocao wasn't emperor or a king when he was alive. There was no "king" in its strict sense as we understood now in China after Qing Shihuang united China. Caocao turned the emperor into a puppet, he was the de facto ruler of half of China, his son kicked the emperor off his throne and assumed it himself, nonetheless, officially, Caocao was still a "chen", not a ruler of any kind, not a king, not an emperor. He's an emperor in all but name but he's not a king, because there was no such thing called "king" back then. (well, the literal translation of his title is king, but it has a totally different connotation.) Quote
doraemon Posted May 6, 2010 at 06:40 AM Report Posted May 6, 2010 at 06:40 AM I don't know much about the other emperors, but IMO Mao Zedong accomplished the most out of all those on the list (maybe except for Cao Cao, but he was in the past ). Mao Zedong was the one who made China the superpower it is today, so regardless of what other people always say about him, I still respect him a lot. Wasn't Qian Long the really arrogant one who made China fall behind the western powers by rejecting their technology? Quote
skylee Posted May 6, 2010 at 07:21 AM Report Posted May 6, 2010 at 07:21 AM Mao Zedong was the one who made China the superpower it is today, How about Deng Xiaoping? And is China a superpower? Everyone on the list was in the past. Quote
rivercao Posted May 6, 2010 at 07:26 AM Author Report Posted May 6, 2010 at 07:26 AM How about Deng Xiaoping? And is China a superpower? My answer are: 1. Deng Xiaoping is great but Mao is greater, he had accomplished the rebuilding of a new republic. 2. Not yet. Quote
Shi Tong Posted May 6, 2010 at 09:32 AM Report Posted May 6, 2010 at 09:32 AM But didn't: Mao's social-political programs, such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, are blamed for costing millions of lives, causing severe famine and damage to the culture, society and economy of China. Maybe he was a revolutionary who did eventually help, (in terms that some of his revolutionary ideas were good) but were there not a lot of things that Mao did which were the symptoms of a despotic ruler? Kangxi, on the other hand: Kangxi's reign brought about long-term stability and relative wealth after years of war and chaos. He initiated the period known as the "Prosperous Era of Kangxi and Qianlong" which lasted for generations after his own lifetime. On the subject of Cao Cao. Yes, he wasn't known as an actual King, more of a Prime Minister of the Han, but he was also named "King" by his son once he had taken the throne from the Han emperor, but doesn't that make him even less of a legitimate candidate for best emperor? He ruled over 1/2 of China, and after his fall, China was left in a terrible state for tens of years. (Wu Hu Period (304–439 CE)) Is this really a ruler you would call one of the greatest of all time? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.