Talk:Emperor Taizong of Tang/Archives/2023/October

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 6 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dyy122dyy.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Date conversion accuracy??

The Xuanwu gate coup took place on the 4th day of the sixth month in 9th year of the Wude era 武德九年六月四日. The article converted the date to July 2. I don't doubt the year conversion because historians had mapped the Chinese eras to Western calendar quite accurately. I wonder what kind of conversion was used to come up with the lunar month and date to July 2. Both Chinese and Western calendars had been adjusted and corrected over the years. Most calendar conversion tools work well within the recent few centuries because no adjustment was introduced. How accurate is this converted date? Did it factor in the Calendar adjustments? Kowloonese 22:00, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Chinese date was converted into the Western calendar using the Chinese Calendar Converter software made available by the Computer Center of the Academia Sinica of Taiwan (中央研究院). The date given is in the Julian Calendar that was in use in Europe at the time. It is not in the proleptic Gregorian calendar. Hardouin 18:57, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

More about Dates! According to my reference, Taizong was named crown prince 3 days after the coup on July 7th in chinese calendar (not 2 days)... thoughts?

And day of death... may 26th, may 29th was announcement of death, june 1st-crown prince took throne..... buried aug 18th.... anyone care to convert those dates?

But,you know, this article is still good,though.User:WELL 13:54,6 Aug 2005(NC)

-the true na of the rebel is KURSHAD who want to killed emperor taizong In summer 639,here iswriteshis name is- Ashian Jiesheshuai (阿史那結社率), the younger brother of Ashina Shibobi.but he wasnt defeated quikly he an his 39 friends(40 turks)are killed hundreds guards of emperor.that was one of the most rebellion of the history.but in this page is not writing!!!(sorry for bad english)kamuran deliormanli]]88.255.183.34 (talk) 10:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Is Tang Taizong/Li Shimin Turk? Some historians told me this & recommended me to read Si Maqian's book called Shiji. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.172.49.18 (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

DNA test shows he is Chinese 63.157.97.218 (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, it took me all morning when I could have been working, but I've gone through the whole article and proofread all the obvious typos and clarified and condensed repetitions. Hopefully it should read better and people can use their time editing content instead of typos. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DChang • Sydney 1:52PM, 5 January 2007(UTC).

Taizong be concerned in a refutation.

Transferred over from User talk:Nlu.

(rv; there's absolutely no evidence that Goguryeo troops were in the outskirts of modern Beijing or that Tang forces were "totally defeated"; all evidence pointed to an orderly retreat with low losses)

a refutation: Do you Know 慌糧臺?

慌糧臺 was 臨愉關-北京 at regular intervals be situated. when Yeon's forces pursued Taizong is set up 慌糧臺. detailed contents→internet a search.

some grammar errors understanding request. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Korea history (talk • contribs) 11:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

And where is your source for this? Nothing in Zizhi Tongjian, Old Book of Tang, or New Book of Tang that I can see supports that either he got there or that your correspondence to modern local location is right. Wikipedia requires verifiable sources, and popular novels, if that's where you found your information, are not verifiable or reliable sources. --Nlu (talk) 16:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, this passage in New Book of Tang (vol. 220)[1], if correct (and there is no reason to doubt that it was correct given that Ouyang Xiu had no reason to manufacture it), pretty much disproves it:

詔集戰骸葬柳城，祭以太牢，帝臨哭，從臣皆流涕。 帝總飛騎入臨渝關，皇太子迎道左。

I'd translate this as: "The emperor issued an edict to collect the bodies of the dead soldiers at Liucheng [in modern Zhaoyang, Liaoning], and sacrificed an ox, a sheep, and a pig to them. He personally attended the mourning and cried, and his accompanying officials all wept. He then commanded the cavalry into Linyu Pass, and the Crown Prince met him there."

(Incidentally, all sources I can find indicate that Linyu Pass was where Shanhai pass is now -- nowhere near Beijing.)

If he were under attack, there was no way that he would have allowed the Crown Prince (the later Emperor Gaozong of Tang) to meet him at Linyu Pass. Further, if he were under attack, he wouldn't have taken the time to carry out a ceremonial mourning. --Nlu (talk) 16:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I am copying and pasting this discussion over to Talk:Emperor Taizong of Tang, where it belongs more. --Nlu (talk) 16:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

contention source:Sin Chaeho written 朝鮮上古史 題10篇 對唐戰役 That´s it.

北京 順義縣 高麗營 reliable evidence. other opinion don't respect an erroneous idea!. some grammar errors understanding request. --korea history (talk) 00:18 18 January 2007 (UTC).

Do you have either a link to the source or the source text itself? And remember that Beijing was not known as Beijing then. It was You Prefecture (幽州, later Fanyang Municipality (范陽府), although that would not be until way later), so unless there is a reference to You Prefecture, it would not be referring to Beijing but the Goguryeo northern capital (which, without further knowledge on the subject, I'd assume was Liaodong). --Nlu (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I can see now that you were referring to Joseon Sangosa, which wouldn't be online since it is still under copyright protection (published in 1933). Still, the particular passage in question can be quoted as fair use, so I'd encourage you to do that. But I'd argue that the (understandable) bias of the author makes it an unreliable source on this issue, in any case. It was published in an era where the Korean people were resisting Japanese assimilation and his publisher, the Chosun Ilbo, was a leading publisher in the cultural resistance movement. He (and the paper) had plenty of reason to exaggerate, much like the Chinese sources of the same era had reason to exaggerate and I therefore consider unreliable. (It should be noted further, when he published the book, Beijing incidentally was also not named Beijing -- it was then Beiping/Peiping.) Unless Sin himself cited ancient sources, I would be very skeptical of its claims with regard to Goguryeo's boundaries. --Nlu (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Japanese Occupation(1910~1945) written book completely exaggerate(or unreliable) egoism.

you friends korean exist? if any We asked friend to do us a translation. demand an explanation you. --korea history (talk) 09:25 18 January 2007 (UTC).

I await your friend's translation. Based on your edits, however, you are clearly capable of writing better English than this. Please make at least an effort -- or otherwise, I'll have to begin to assume that this isn't a lack of language ability, but feigning. --Nlu (talk) 09:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Tarim_Basin.2C_Tibet.2C_and_Western_Turks section needing expert ?

1. What is clearly the means of the template ? Where is the unclear statement ?
2. If it's the year of mariage, in my french book I found that Cheng princess was married in 641, establishing Tibetan vassality.

The article of the Tibetan Emperor indicate the same year : princess sent in 640, married in 641. Yug (talk) 15:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Map

I understood the objection to the map previously -- in that Goguryeo was not conquered. However, the alternative version of the map was even less accurate, in that Silla and Baekje were clearly at least nominally vassals. I believe that the map that covered the entire Korean and Manchurian regions is correct in the sense that while Taizong failed to conquer Goguryeo, Goguryeo nominally continued to be a vassal in that the states continued to exchange messengers, and Goguryeo, in those exchanges, acted as a vassal, notwithstanding the otherwise hostile relationship between the states. I think "at least nominal" made the map sufficiently NPOV. If you disagree, please discuss your reasons. --Nlu (talk) 17:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I found an other version in the Cambridge history of China. I will look for more information, but [from my memory], the war re

I the french article, I wrote :

French : "Inquiété par l'émergeance de la puissance Chinoise [...] En 642, un coup d'État reverse le roi favorable et place la faction hostile a la Chine à la tête du royaume, qui cesse d'apporter le Tribut annuel. En 645, Taizong, agacé par l'autonomie et l'arrogance de Goguryeo, lance une campagne militaire contre ce royaume"

English translation : "Fear by Chinese grow [...] In 642, a Coup d'État overthrow the Goguryean king, vassal of Taizong, and put into power the opponents to the Tang who stop to send tribute to Tang [Taizong]. In 645, Taizong, exceeded by Goguryeo autonomy and arrogance, lunch a military campaign against this kingdom."

I understand the "stop to send tribute" as "stop to be vasal". But, I don't remember where I have read this (Cambridge C. H. ? J. Gernet ?), so I will look in my sources to check accuracy. I think the misunderstanding may be that Goguryeo was vassal of the Tang from 619 to 642 [according what I wrote in the French article].

The map should be considered in the maximum of extension (641? 642 ?) or in Tang Taizong death (649).

If we show a map of 630, we should remove Tibet and the Western Turks.

If we consider 640 : that the same.

If we consider 641 : we should remove the Western Turks.

If we consider 642 : we should remove Goguryeo, and notice that the Tang Army are fighting against Western Turks.

If we consider 649 : we should remove Goguryeo.

I will check my source soon. Please search informations about the accuracy of that : Goguryeo = vassal from 619 + stop to be vassal in 642.

User:Yug 21:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

According to the Zizhi Tongjian, in 642, after Yeon Gaesomun killed the king of Goguryeo, there continued to be exchanges of emissaries, and nothing was mentioned about the cessation of tributes, and in 644, Yeon in fact offered a tribute of platinum to Taizong (although Taizong refused it on the basis that Yeon had murdered the king). Obviously, one can choose to disbelieve the Zizhi Tongjian, but for one to disbelieve it there should be good reason to do so. I don't think, in any case, though, that the payment of tributes is dispositive as to whether Goguryeo was nominally a vassal; any state that at least acknowledged Tang suzerainty should be considered at least a nominal vassal. --Nlu (talk) 08:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Somebody messed with the page.

"rapidly-deteriorating Sui regime. After this, his poop turned purple.Leading the troops with "

That is just disrespectful. In case nobody noticed while reading somebody added After this, his poop turned purple. I don't know if there were any other altercations, but I think this is crude and somebody will correct this and any other error.

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.212.159.84 (talk) 03:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

Reorganization

I am currently still working on several articles or soon-to-be articles on a number of high-level officials who predeceased Emperor Taizong, but soon thereafter (maybe in about a week), I am planning to start cleaning up, expand, and reorganize the article. Therefore, I would like input/suggestion on my thoughts on how to organize it:

1. I am planning to reorganize it chronologically, for the most part, and
2. I am planning to cut out several sections and let them branch out as separate articles. The ones that I am considering would include:
   1. 626: Incident at Xuanwu Gate (Chang'an)
   2. ~630: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Eastern Tujue (north: mongolia)
   3. ~635: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Tuyuhun (west: Qinghai, Gansu)
   4. ?: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Xueyantuo (north : mongolia)
   5. 638: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Tufan (far southwest: tibetan plateau)
   6. 645: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Goguryeo (north east: Korea and north-east mandchoury)
   7. 648: Emperor Taizong's campaign against Gaochang Emperor Taizong's campaign against Xiyu states (far west: Xinjiang)

These are my thoughts, which are not to be taken as the way that things need to be done. Comments are requested. --Nlu (talk) 21:48, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Support:

1. Yes to reorganize it chronologically. The section "political organization of Tang Taizong's China" may need to be on the end.
2. I think the current lenght of the Tang Taizong's article is fine, it can be a bit shorter, but should not be bigger.

So, I encourage to create separate articles. Sorry to don't have abilities to contribute at your level of quality. --Yug (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Professor Zhang Jianlin

I saw a documentary regarding Emperor Taizong and his final burial place. It was located in the Zhao Ling Mountain by Professor Zhang Jianlin (a scientist from the Shaanxi Archaeology Institute). The burial site was quite elaborate and probably worth discussing in the article. What do you think? - E! (talk) 01:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If your actually interested in watching the documentary, you can find it here. - E! (talk) 01:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Dates

I assume the dates in this article are AD or CE? Any objection to adding the CE references in relation to his dates of birth and death. With a civilization such as China, it isn't self-evident to many readers what the correct time period actually is.Corlyon (talk) 05:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Undid my own edit. Of course its CE, given that the year of birth precedes the year of death and the numbers are increasing!Corlyon (talk) 05:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

TaiZong Image?

Image:Qing1202.jpg
Found this unused image, the comment says its "Emperor TaiZong". Not sure if its the same guy as the one mentioned in this article, maybe someone familiar w/ this subject could take a look. -- $user log ^(Talk) @ 23:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

No, it is not. That is a Manchu emperor of the later Qing Dynasty, the last imperial dynasty of China that conquered much of China in 1644 and was not officially overthrown until 1912.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

"Taizong" is a kind of "given name", several emperor had this "given name". There is only one Taizong of Tang. Yug (talk) 20:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you for explaining that -- $user log ^(Talk) @ 03:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GateKeeperX (talk • contribs)

Familly tree available

Family tree of the Sui-Tang transition.

唐太宗李世民的三代祖辈

唐太宗李世民	父亲: 唐朝皇帝 唐高祖李渊	祖父: 北周唐国公（仁公） 追尊唐世祖 李昞	祖父之父: 西魏陇西郡公（襄公） 追尊唐太祖 李虎
			祖父之母: 追尊景烈皇后 梁氏
		祖母: 追尊元贞皇后 独孤氏	祖母之父: 北周大司马独孤信
			祖母之母: 独孤信之妻崔氏
	母亲: 追尊太穆皇后 竇氏	外祖父: 北周神武郡公（肃公） 窦毅	外祖父之父: 窦岳
			外祖父之母: 窦岳之妻，姓氏不详
		外祖母: 北周襄阳长公主 宇文氏	外祖母之父: 西魏安定郡公（文公） 追尊北周文帝 宇文泰
			外祖母之母: 北周叱奴太后

Shaolin monks

Is it true that Shaolin monks saved Taizong's life, and that he was indebted to the Shaolin monastery after that? Badagnani (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Too much military history!

There is far too much military history in this article. I've been meaning to add it to the "list of articles every Wikipedia" should have, but its focus as of now is far too narrow, even though it's long. Right now, it's just a breathless chronicle of military events and court bickering. What was Taizong's attitude toward Buddhism? What were his economic policies? Importantly, why were his military campaigns important? I understand that he involved China in Central Asia much more than previously. Explain why this is important.

And what is his legacy? --Aghniyya (talk) 23:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree this article is pretty turgid reading - there are already articles on Taizong's major military campaigns, so there's no need to have so much information here as well. Kisch (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Emperor Taizong of Tang

How did Taizong take control of present-day China and most of Middle Asia?

Would it be plagurism if you copy and pasted the information down and printed it all out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmichel111 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction tag (cause of death of Taizong)

Goguryeo article states,

Some Korean sources indicates that Taizong is believed to have died after the failed invasion, largely due to both physical and psychological damage that he gained during the campaign; he was shot in his eye during the battle of Ansi, and he got more and more mentally unstable as the Tang army repeated defeats citing two Korean sources. I don't know the other but Korean Broadcasting System is definitely not a reliable source.

This article states,

with some believing that his illness was caused by his taking pills given to him by alchemists.

So, there is an apparent contradiction. In my opinion, "shot in his eye" is something significant and if had occurred, would definitely appear in Chinese historical text. According to this article, Taizong lived for four years after the Goguryeo campaign, launching more campaigns against Xueyantuo and even against Goguryeo, which effectively neutralizes the statement, Taizong died after the failed invasion, largely due to both physical and psychological damage that he gained during the campaign. However, as this is not my area of expertise, and unwilling to spark edit war at Goguryeo article, I am bringing this here to resolve the issue. 203.81.67.183 (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

See my talk in 'Eye injury' below about this. Chrisliu (talk) 15:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Emperor Taizong receives Christian missionary to China and promotes the bible after reading it

http://christianyogamagazine.com/meditation/lost-jesus-sutras-reveal-ancient-chinese-christianity-2/ 76.10.131.41 (talk) 17:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Emperor Taizong of Tang/Archives/2023/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Account of his reign is rather incomplete: for example, despite his title of "General from Heaven", there's very little on his military achievements. No references, and some language-related problems. -- bcasterline • talk 14:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 14:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 14:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Li Shimin's insistence of fabricating historical records

"Diary of the founding of the Great Tang" should be added to the content. It was also mentioned in Cambridge history of China and several articles. Recent studies showed this book is a more reliable source regarding the founding of Tang.Elainr (talk) 16:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Eye injury

• Moving discussion from article. Jim1138 (talk) 08:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

According to the history record of China, there are no any record about Taizong had got a wound during the war. Even there are no any record in China history about Taizong has got any disability of his eye. Added by 223.197.187.158

• Agreed. The present mentioning of the eye injury of Taizong in the article is backed with no references or citations. My research (in Chinese only since I don't read Hangul) shows that this eye injury of Taizong had not been read either in ancient Chinese nor ancient Korean records until it was first mentioned in a poem written by a Korean poet in the 17th century. Later Korean writings (in classical Chinese) repeated this along with the defeat of Taizong at Anshi City. However, these writings also questioned the authenticity of the name of the commanding general of Anshi (梁万春 or 杨万春 who allegedly shot the arrow) since it was based on historical novels formed rather lately (in Chinese Ming Dynasty, ---probably 'The Popular Romance of Tang Dynasty' comppiled by a Chinese publisher Xiong Damu in 1593) but missed in historical records. See here: 1)金时让/涪溪记闻 (1612):安市城主，以蕞尔孤城，能抗王师。不特筹略不世。登城拜辞，词气从容，得礼之正，实闻道君子也。惜乎史失其名，至明时唐书衍义出表其名为梁万春。未知得之何书。安甫之功。辉映简策。苟非名不失传。通鉴纲目及东国史记。不应并遗。岂待数百年。始出于衍义耶。殆不可信也。 2）李圭景/五洲衍文长笺散稿 (mid 19th century)：有云句丽安市城主梁万春。见《唐书演义》。不足信。So unless provided with more evidences, I am going to rewrite this part. Chrisliu (talk) 17:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Agree! That nonsense should have been deleted a long time ago --Daduxing (talk) 05:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)