Poll: Favorite major Chinese dynasty?

Favorite dynasty

  • Han dynasty

    Votes: 14 10.4%
  • Tang dynasty

    Votes: 53 39.6%
  • Song dynasty

    Votes: 34 25.4%
  • Ming dynasty

    Votes: 16 11.9%
  • Qing dynasty

    Votes: 17 12.7%

  • Total voters
    134
At the very least,Ming wasn't an apartheid state.Haijin wasn't as severe as the Qing.
Qing was not an apartheid state. Sure, the Manchus (and the Mongols to a lesser extent) were privileged, but as foreign commentators noted the Chinese civilization weathered the few decades of conquest just fine. Indeed it prospered.

Corruption rose to new heights during the Qing dynasty(must admit though that it was also pretty high during the Ming Dynasty,which led to the fall of Ming).
Corruption in the central government was hardly as bad as conditions under the persistent eunuch dictator phenomenon under the Ming.

There were literary inquisitions.
Which even the Song had.

It was a highly xenophobic regime,even more so than the Ming.
Ming began the Haijin, first of all, and contrary to what xenophobia would entail the Qing were the first dynasty since centuries that broke China's "natural borders" that the Ming believed in, such as annexing that "little ball of mud" called Taiwan. It's not as if the gates of China were wide open before the Qing. Not to mention that a lot of areas that flourished under the Qing, such as Sino-Islamic philosophy, wouldn't really square in with xenophobia.

Qianlong was completely overrated,and pretty much squandered the treasury on a series of unsuccessful wars as well as on personal luxury.Called himself the Old Man of Ten Completed Campaigns when in fact he only won two real wars while the rests were either minor rebellions or outright defeats.Rejected trade relations with Britain and thought very little of British goods.Tolerated excessive corruption.He was basically the beginning of the end.
10GCs were successes in all except Burma and Vietnam. Xinjiang #3 and Taiwan were not "minor rebellions." Jinchuan #2 was a real conquest, both political and cultural, in that the Gyalrongwa (the Jinchuan people to the Chinese) were effectively outside the purview of both the Chinese state and Tibetan Buddhism prior to the campaign. Nepal was important for the security of Tibet, which is crucial to control of Inner Asia. And so on. Yes, the Qianlong reign has been overrated, but it was similar to the Yongle reign in a lot of areas. In any case Aisin Gioro Hongli was a better ruler than all the Ming emperors except maybe two or three.

For your assessments of the Qing between 1799 and 1911, I would simply note that even if Qing China was bad for around a century, there were no good emperors after Ming Xuanzong, which makes two centuries of mediocre or worse rulers. Plus the Qing faced graver external pressures throughout the later 19th century than the Ming did for most of the time between the end of the Oirat problem and the rise of the Jurchen problem.
 
Qing was not an apartheid state. Sure, the Manchus (and the Mongols to a lesser extent) were privileged, but as foreign commentators noted the Chinese civilization weathered the few decades of conquest just fine. Indeed it prospered.
More than just privileged.The Qing intentionally tried to keep the Manchus and the Mongols segregated from the Han majority through policies such as bans on interracial marriage and locations where different races can live.The Manchus and the Mongols were also privileged being they receive government allowances(paid through taxing the Han majority) for literally doing nothing.The Manchus and Mongols pretty much had much sway over governmental offices.They also forced the Han to adopt their customs such as hairstyle and clothing.There were numerous large scale massacres of the Han majority during the conquests.What the Qing basically did was to basically endorse Confucian Scholarship and recruit members of the Han gentry as officials.Not so different from the British Raj,huh.

Corruption in the central government was hardly as bad as conditions under the persistent eunuch dictator phenomenon under the Ming.
May I remind you that there was literally more money in Heshen's private coffer than in the imperial treasury?The man's personal wealth worth 15 years of Qing's government revenue.
Which even the Song had.
Though the crack downs are not as severe as Qing's.

Ming began the Haijin, first of all, and contrary to what xenophobia would entail the Qing were the first dynasty since centuries that broke China's "natural borders" that the Ming believed in, such as annexing that "little ball of mud" called Taiwan. It's not as if the gates of China were wide open before the Qing. Not to mention that a lot of areas that flourished under the Qing, such as Sino-Islamic philosophy, wouldn't really square in with xenophobia.
The Qing had no choice but to annex Taiwan unless they were literally idiots.The Qing sure were xenophobic,much more so than the Ming ever was,and let's not even compare them with the days of Song,Tang and Han.Their reaction to foreigners like those from the west was completely f#$ked up.The Ming began the Haijin,but they actually removed it eventually.The Qing restarted it and never revoked it until held at gunpoint by western powers.


10GCs were successes in all except Burma and Vietnam. Xinjiang #3 and Taiwan were not "minor rebellions." Jinchuan #2 was a real conquest, both political and cultural, in that the Gyalrongwa (the Jinchuan people to the Chinese) were effectively outside the purview of both the Chinese state and Tibetan Buddhism prior to the campaign. Nepal was important for the security of Tibet, which is crucial to control of Inner Asia. And so on. Yes, the Qianlong reign has been overrated, but it was similar to the Yongle reign in a lot of areas. In any case Aisin Gioro Hongli was a better ruler than all the Ming emperors except maybe two or three.
Taiwan and Jinchuan were very much minor rebellions that were never really a significant threat.Arguably,they could have been prevented entirely if not due to Qing government policy.The real victories were the wars against the Dzungars and the Nepalese.The rests were basically defeats.

And please don't use the performance of the Ming dynasty to prove why Qing might be the best,because compared to Han,Tang and Song,Ming is absolutely appalling by comparison.
 
Last edited:
You cant really be serious. You wanna compare Kublai Khan with a prankster called Wang Mang?:D

Kublai Khan isn't the only Yuan emperor, is he?

But yeah, the Yuan seriously messed with the exam system and stuff. And the Mongols killed a bunch of Chinese (understatement) and created a stratified system. And they killed off much innovation.
 
Top