That’s false. The internal turmoils largely happened during HER tenure. There were no serious turmoils during the reign of both of her husbands. The rebellions were specifically aimed at HER illegal seizure of power and usurpation of the throne. Much of the court factionalism arose out of those who decided to toe her line and those who opposed it. In her later years, she deliberately provoked more chaos by suggesting that her nephews succeed her over the sons by her husband due to her desire to be remembered as a founder emperor of a dynasty instead of just another usurper. Regarding her economic ‘improvements’, her reign saw the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing system due to corruption by aristocrats and officials promoted by her that has underpinned Tang economic and military success.
While it is true that Wu Zetian's rule was marked by significant challenges, the idea that her husbands' reigns were devoid of turmoil overlooks historical complexities. Both Emperor Taizong and Emperor Gaozong, Wu Zetian's husbands, faced internal conflicts and political struggles during their reigns, although these challenges may have been less pronounced compared to Wu Zetian's time in power.
Emperor Taizong's reign, characterized by military expansion and administrative reforms, also experienced conflicts and factionalism within the court. While his reign is often lauded for its successes, it's important to acknowledge that governance complexities and disputes did exist. Similarly, during Emperor Gaozong's reign, the rivalry between powerful officials and the influence of various factions played a large role in dynastic and court instability much of which came to effect in the years directly prior to Wu's rise in power.
Furthermore, attributing all rebellions and factionalism during Wu Zetian's rule solely to her rise to power oversimplifies the historical context. While her controversial ascension did contribute to discontent among some segments of society, other factors like regional instability, economic challenges, and competition for power were also significant drivers of unrest. It's crucial to recognize that political complexities in historical contexts are rarely the result of a single individual's actions, but rather a combination of factors.
The argument that Wu Zetian deliberately provoked chaos in her later years to secure her legacy as a founder emperor also requires scrutiny. While her intentions may have been driven by a desire for a particular legacy, her actions must be understood within the broader framework of maintaining her authority and navigating the intricate power dynamics of the time. Such actions may have been influenced by the complex web of political considerations rather than a simple desire for historical recognition.
Lastly, the notion that her reign led to the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing systems due to corruption promoted by her overlooks the multifaceted causes behind policy changes. While Wu Zetian's administration did face corruption issues, attributing the demise of these systems solely to her actions discounts other economic, social, and political factors that could have contributed to their decline.