aolung 奧龍
__________

敬亭獨坐

眾鳥高飛盡 Voegel in der Hoehe flogen fort;

孤雲去獨閒 Still die Wolke war dahingetrieben.

相看兩不厭 Sahn uns unersaettlich an, wir beide:

唯有敬亭山 Nur der Ging-ting-Berg war dageblieben.

(Li T'ai-Po 李白 - tr. Prof. G. Debon)

德國慕尼黑

Dr. Chao was trying to point out the futility of adopting romanization as the system of writing for Chinese.

It is utterly impossible to read the passage when it is written as:

shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi shi

The movement of adopting pinyin in the '50s was the second wave of this terrible idea. The first time was at the beginning of the 20-th century.

Dear Alfred

I am somewhat confused about the " lion eating poets" part of your post. Please elaborate more.

Also, I wonder whether you know about the most famous court case in the Qing Dynasty. This afternoon (Saturday) after work, I went over to a book-shop in the Little Shanghai of Sydney, a suburb called Ashfield. Lo and behold, I found the set of VCDs on the real story of a scholar Yang Naiwu 楊乃武 and a house-wife called Xiao Baicai 小白菜.

The story had me interested for sometime because of the triumph of good over evil, and justice over corruption. It is a rare instance of fairness and justice by the infamous and incompetent anti-Reform Dowager Empress, Cixi, who re-opened the trial out of personal interest. I have just finished the whole eight hours TV series at a stretch, sacrificing my dinner and my sleep. It is such an excellent series, so well filmed and acted that I must recommend it to all who love history and law.

The story began around 1870 in Zhejiang, near Hangzhou. Yang Naiwu, who had affection for the impoverished Xiao Baicai, was falsely accused of the murder of her husband by poisoning. In fact the villain was the son of the town magistrate, Liu. The younger Liu plotted with the town druggist to put poison in the husband's medication and blamed Yang for his death. Liu had earlier blackmailed the vulnerable woman into a sexual liaison, thus condemning her to a no-win situation. She had a poor and sick husband and was courted by two rich men, one a rascal (Liu) and the other a gentleman (Yang).

Yang consistently denied the crime despite horrendous torture to force him to admit. Following Yang's death sentence, his sister took up his case and went on appealing all the way to Beijing (Peking) to no avail, because the judges at every level were either corrupt or part of the "big boys network". Needless to say, the Yang family became poverised by the legal process.

Following the intervention of an honest court official, who brought the seriousness of the case to the Dowager Empress Cixi, a retrial was ordered with the pronouncement of death for both Yang and Xiao Baicai. This was a ruse by the presiding judge in order that the two condemned would meet for their last meal. The whole truth was then told to Yang by Xiao Baicai prior to their "execution", and was heard by the judges of the court of appeal, who were hidden in a separate room. The happy ending saw the innocent Yang released, Xiao Baicai entering a Buddhist convent and the corrupt judges executed.

I wonder what became of Yang Naiwu finally. He apparently wrote essays of high standing and passed his provincial exam before being imprisoned on his wedding day. BTW Xiao Baicai means "Little White Cabbage" but in Cantonese it is the well-known Chinese vegetable called "Bak Choy".

Tin-Kay

www.fa-kuan.muc.de/AUSAMP.RXML

(or click the blue bar "Poetry Audio Samples" on the front page)

Alas, these difficulties now not seldom appear due to Ming's (necessary) restricted access measures ;(

aolung. 奧龍

德國慕尼黑

Yet, ;-) I must admit that Chinese folks also are pretty strange to me: they are great poets and big eaters at the same time. Sometimes their poets are also eating lions - and even stone lions too! - as I've learned from an ancient text I snatched from Ming's site. Would you please have a look at my tongue twisters' page and maybe kindly see after any mistakes in my translation? Is there anybody who wants to do the sound sample for me - or will it be up to me to flavour Mandarin with a Bavarian accent!? ;-)

aolung. 奧龍

德國慕尼黑

You need to acquire a little bit of basic knowledge about the Chinese language. May I suggest that browse www.chinapage.org/learnchinese.html and go on from there.

I am glad we have provided some alternative points for you to consider on your question. Let me elaborate a bit more on the subject of Chinese philosophy and American understanding of Chinese.

Much of the misunderstanding of China seems to stem from the view that China is an anti-religious or a non-religious country. And a non-religious (particularly non-Christian) country to the western eye is one that can be unruly, unethical and ruthless (although Pope John Paul has admitted that the Christian church has also done a lot of injustice in the name of God during the past several hundred years).

China in reality is multireligious, or non-adhering to any religion as the national standard but inclusive of all. There is a total and true separation of church from state. No church should become dominant in the governing of the state. The rights of the "non-religious" is the same as the "religious". The basic matrix of the Chinese society is Confucianism, Buddhism and Daoism, which are more philosphies than religions. Relative truth rather than absolute truth is recognized by these philosophies as exemplified by many of the quotations we learn by heart since childhood: "Daily renewal", "The law of the universe is continued self discipline and self strengthening", "Without knowing about the universe, how can one talk about gods and ghosts?", "Benevolence is unconquerable". Frugality and altruism are honored as virtues. As you might have seen Chinese students in US are usually the more diligent and law abiding ones. You are seeing these philosphies at work. It is passed down through the family network throughout the history of at least 3500 years. China has gone through many social experiments in the last 50 years. In the end, the traditional Chinese value system continues to prevail among the people, and the government has recognized it. While you are interested in Sino-American relationship, you should give a bit more time to study these philosophies. At least know what they are and how they affect the way of thinking among Chinese.

Americans are also changing their views towards Chinese, thanks to the increasing international dialog and the availability of the internet. When you are doing research, also watch for the dates of your references. There was a period of extreme Sino-phobia in US from the 1950s up to 1970. Since the visit of Nixon to China, there have been a lot more interactions and understandings.

Dear Elvis

I hope Prof. Ming Pei will allow me the courtesy of a reply to your post. I feel that many people in the West believe their Press and governments without question, while people in China and Russia view their Press and governments with cynicism and doubt. For us in the West, it can be a painful disillusion to realize that many Western reports are not only untrue and biased, but also mischievious in nature. This deception creates a bad feeling towards a people which is trying to break out of its poverty cycle and join the world community in interaction and co-prosperity.

Ostracizing China will not serve US interest except for the weapon industry. The PNTR is certainly a good American gesture to reassure China for the past mutual distrust. "It is twice blessed, it blesseth him that gives and him that takes." The Chinese people have always look to the US as a land of opportunity and freedom, and many would like to experience the American way of life without any hesitation. Yet, the Chinese are also apprehensive of American intentions when it comes to military designs affecting their national interest. China is now having very cooperative and moderate leaders, many having children trained in the West. It is an opportune time for the US and China to develop long term plans in trade, cultural exchanges, educational liaisons and people to people dialogue via the Internet and travel.

There are two issues which you raised without any justification. Firstly, you claimed that China stole American nuclear secrets. To date, the scientist, Dr. Wen Ho Lee, has not been charged for giving secrets to China. There has been no proof, and Dr. Lee is a hounded scape-goat for no other reason than some adminsitrative bungling. The man is now imprisoned awaiting trial for work-related procedural technicalities. BTW, Dr. Lee was born in Taiwan and not China. Secondly, you believed the discredited Gordon Liddy huffing and puffing about the modern Yellow Peril of China. Some Americans may be gullible, but many will realize that this Chinese hegemony is an unrealistic cry of the weapon industry. It is a fact that China is militarily too weak to interfere with non-Chinese affairs, especially when they are already confronted with the threatening night-mare of an American NMD and TMD at their door-steps.

To see the real China, I will advise you to go to China and see for yourself how people live. Go to Shanghai's Lu Xun Park at Hongkou, and on a week-end you will see thousands of people of all ages involved in group Taichi, Western and traditional (fan, sword, ribbon) dancing, opera singing and acting, games, tea drinking, kite flying and fishing. This can truly be really amazing because all the activities are spontaneous and free of charge.

The Western image of the evil and tyrannical Communist government seems a fantasy of the Press. In fact, the system is more capitalist than many Western countries, whilst the government, though still autocratic, is not the same as the communist government of yesteryears. If you are in China, you will realize that you are free to travel everywhere outside military installations. This is unlike Saudi Arabia, where travel is restricted for foreigners. I have been to China eight times, and on each occassion I can see the people achieving more rights and material comfort, including travel to Western countries and surfing the Internet, which cannot be totally censored. Times have changed, and so must we view China differently than before.

There has always been a Sino-American fraternity, and I hope this bondage can be further enhanced for the mutual respect, understanding and prosperity of both great nations.

Tin-Kay

Let's look ahead 20 years. You mention Britain, etc. Geopolitically, there was reason why Britain wanted to expand and get rich at the expense of others.

If you were the leader of America, do you want to take over Carribean countries? That would be foolish. Why would China want to conquer Viet Nam, Phillipines, etc. Or Korea? Or India? There is no point.

China and America should be geopolitical allies, precisely because both countries have no desire (or reasons) to expand their territories. U.S. needs a strong China to stabilize Asia. Japn can't be trusted for this role, and Phillipines, etc are not capable for the role.

And China needs a strong America to stablize the world.

I urge you to really think hard and carefully, but to ignore these ignorant people on the TV.

There are three kind of countries in the world: (1) small countries, (2) countries that are expansionistic, and (3) countries who prosper if the world is at peace.

Make a list, Aaron.

Your post a very interesting question, using history to project on the future. In this case, I think America should consider Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, and Britain as the biggest potential hegemony. How do you think US should deal with these countries? Or, may be the biggest enemy should be Mongolia?

Second, before looking into the future, let me ask you another question: Do you think there is hegemony now? Which country has the most military force outside of its own sovereignty?

Your post reminds me of a lot of things. Nature actually cause a lot of damage to our culture over the history. The Yellow River has changed its course so many times, each immersed thousands of people and sometimes causing famine to millions. Yangzi is a bit tamer, but is getting worse in recent years. Anhui, a great province with many literati, suffers the most from floods of Huai River. Just last year, Hefei was flooded. Mao Zedong had a slogan in 1950s:"We must tame the Huai River." To date, it is still causing problems. So, one may also have to consider the consequences of not taking action too.

It is seldom brought to our attention in any news, but the biggest problem mankind faces is water - drinking water and other utility water. Just think if the Russian nuclear submarine explodes in Berent Sea. Are we going to eat any marine products for the next million years?

Laozi understood the power of water right from his time. And many of us have not learned much yet. The Mississipi now floods every year, and more serious each time. The lifelihood of the biggest city in US, Los Angeles, is hanging on the Hoover Dam. Battles between states on water has been going on quietly all the time. While we have the convenience of turning on and off the tap, millions of people in the world have to walk miles to bring back a gallon.

Dear Stephen

Your last post
"We Taiwanese do call the first Ming Emperor as 洪武君 (Hong-Bu Kun), the HongBu Emperor. So we do call the emperor using his "Year/Reign name."
is similar to what Alfred and I were trying to say.

You call Zhu Yuanzhang, the first Ming Emperor, as the Hongwu (HongBu) Emperor and not Emperor Hongwu. The issue was not whether the reign e.g. Hongwu 洪武 can be used to identify the emperor, but rather that the emperor would be more appropriately called the Hongwu Emperor rather than Emperor Hongwu.

Similarly, it is more correct to call "The Qianlong Emperor" rather than Emperor Qianlong.

I fear our readers are having an overdose of Emperor calling. Ha! Ha! Long live the Emperors of Ten Thousand Years! Yet some lived only a few months or years on the throne.

Tin-Kay

There are many unbelievable architectural feats in history, in China and elsewhere. We realize how important the dam is for navigation and flood control. The purpose of many others is still a mystery. The most puzzling and detrimental are the statutes on Easter Island.

Error in posting while half asleep (2.45 am, Sydney time).

Please ignore Hong Men Hui 洪門會. It should be just Hong Men 洪門. Hong Men itself already denotes a Hong league.

Tin-Kay

Dear Stephen

Thanks for the correction. You are right to say that the character 洪 in the name Hong Men Hui 洪門會 was derived from the reign period 年號, Hongwu 洪武, of Zhu Yangzhang, founder of the Ming Dynasty. Both Cihai 辭海 and Hanyu Dacidian 漢語大詞典 confirm the origin from Hongwu. The play on the loss of center 中 and earth 土 from the character Han 漢 must have been a story from the Hong Men Hui members, to add flavour to the name. Surprisingly, Ciyuan 辭源 had no entry for Hong Men Hui.

Tin-Kay

Dear Ming

The Zhongguo Dabaike Quanshu (China Grand Encyclopedia 中國大百科全書), Volume on Chinese Geography (Zhongguo Dili 中國地理) mentioned that the Grand Canal (Jing-Hang Yunhe 京杭運河 or 大運河) had three phases of construction. The first was by King Fuchai 夫差 of Wu Kingdom in 486 BC during the Spring and Autumn Period. The second phase started in AD 605, during the Da Ye 大業 reign of Sui Yangdi (Yang Guang). The third phase was by the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties.

I have checked a number of history books and most give the credit to Sui Yangdi (Yang Guang), the second son of Sui Wendi (Yang Jian), for amassing the massive work force to develop the Grand Canal. However, one book did mention that when Sui Wendi founded Sui Dynasty and united the empire, he improved communication and repaired the canals.

From your post, it looks like Sui Wendi conceived and started the construction on the Grand Canal, while his second son, Sui Yangdi, secured the man-power and enforced the giant and expensive project for the Grand Canal. This was an unkind irony for Sui Wendi, who not only did not get the credit for the Grand Canal, but was killed in AD 604 by an assassin sent by his own son, Sui Yangdi, who usurped the throne. Sui Yangdi was himself overthrown after having overtaxed his subjects and overspent his budget with the Grand Canal, his grandiose boat trips and the expensive war with Korea.

Tin-Kay

As pointed out by all of you, 廟 號 is not unique and we will not know which emperor unless we add the dynasty upfront. Therefore 漢 文 帝 is different from 隋 文 帝 .

年 號 on the other hand, is unique. There can only be one 乾 隆 and for that matter, many writers just use this term to name "the" emperor.

Tin-Kay's point is well taken though and I am sure 柏 陽 will totally agree with him. If you read 柏 陽's 資 治 通 鑑 , you will find out how he named the emperors.

Dear Joseph

The Hong Men (Hung Men or Hung League) was definitely associated with the Taiping Revolution, as mentioned by Siu-Leung. It was not only a secret society, but a nationalist pro-Ming, anti-Manchu movement which ultimately failed after the Taiping Revolution, when it continued to simmer as a low profile revolutionary, then a pro-Republican underground group. It was active from 1786-9 and 1849-50.

Further to what Siu-Leung has elaborated, the Hong Men started after the fall of the Ming forces in Taiwan in the 1674. Some Ming loyalists retreated to a Shaolin Monastery in Fujian Province and five remaining progenitors formed the secret society, pledging "As ageless as the heaven and as lasting as the earth, we shall revenge, even if it takes ten thousand years". This Triad society then develop a Freemason-like structure with Grand and Minor Lodges and various branches through-out the coastal parts of South China, even spreading its tentacles to overseas Chinese communities.

As Yoon-Ngan has pointed out, the word Hong (Hung) 洪 was derived from the word Han 漢 for the Chinese race. The water radical (three left dots) of the character 漢 was untouched, and the right radical was removed of 中 (center) and 土 (earth). The resultant character 洪 is considered so sacred by the society members that they use a numerical code to indicate the character. The left water radical of 洪has three dots (3), the middle of the right radical has a central horizontal line 一 (1), the top part has a horizontal line with two vertical cutting the horizontal line signifying twenty (20) and the lower part of the right radical is the character eight 八 (8). Hence, a member will just use the number 3-8-21. Red was the colour of the Hong Men.

The Hong Men was made up of three main divisions, viz. the Heaven and Earth Society (Tian Di Hui 天地會), the Three Dots Society (San Tian Hui 三點會) and the Three Harmonies Society (San He Hui 三和會). The most famous of the three is the Heaven and Earth Society, Tian Di Hui, which you spelt as Thian Ti Hwui. The name, Heaven and Earth Society (Tian Di Hui), was derived from the saying "Heaven should be worshipped as the Father, and Earth as the Mother" 拜天為父﹐拜地為母. In addition to Schelegel. I suggest you read more books, especially Immanuel Hsu's "The Rise of Modern China" and Martin Booth's "The Dragon Syndicates".

There were two other anti-Qing (Manchu) secret societies, the Brotherhood Society (Ge Lao Hui 哥老會) and the famous White Lotus Sect (Bai Lian Jiao 白蓮教). The White Lotus Sect, of Buddhist-Daoist philosophy, was formed against the Mongols during the Yuan Dynasty. They were joined in 1351 by the Red Turbans, helping Zhu Yangzhang to defeat the Mongols. Zhu Yangzhang later dissociated from them when he proclaimed himself the Emperor of the Ming Dynasty.

Tin-Kay

Dear Yoon-Ngan

As you are aware, the dumplings called "wonton" 雲吞 by the Cantonese means swallowing clouds. I wonder whether it was named because it looked like white clouds in the bowl, especially when steaming hot. Some people like to write it as 餛飩, using the food radical 食. Maybe well read Cantonese like Julian and Rudy (as well as Siu-Leung) can help explain.

A very interesting book in English on Chinese cuisine, unfortunately out of print, is called "Swallowing Clouds" in honour of wonton. The author, A. Zee, also mentioned that a Song Dynasty chronicler put forward a view that wanton was named after a person called Wonton.

The book is now very rare, unless Zee starts a reprint or new edition. One can get the book from a large library. Recently an American lady and an Australian lady emailed me, asking where they can buy the book. Sometimes, second hand book-shops are helpful. Amazon lists it at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/104-9236725-4722326

Tin-Kay

If you read Chinese, there is a site about Vancouver's Hong Men organization:
http://www.coolcanada.com/doc10/doc10_h09c.html
The revolutionaries in Guangdong developed a style of martial art called Hong Jia Quan (Hong's boxing style) with similar objective to unite the Han people and beat up the Manchurians in Guangzhou. It has become one of the most popular style of martial art in the south. Coincidentally, one of the famous martial artist was also called Hong Xi Guan (Hong Hey Goon in Cantonese).

The word may be found in English dictionaries. Until 1960's the word was practically synonymous with Chinese food. It was widely used in newspapers, novels, theaters and American literary scenes. One of the important early 20-th century American painter, Edward Hopper, who painted many contemporary American citi scapes, painted several paintings called "Chop Suey". Prints of these paintings are still available for purchase on the Internet. Several paintings show the word "Chop Suey" displayed as signs on the building.
See for example, http://www.artprints4you.com/hopper/hop1504.htm

I have heard directly from a number of people that Chop Suey was the main entry during 1910's. I was told that the dish originated in the 19-century during visits to the U.S. by Li Hong-Chang, the Ambassador plenipotentiary from China. although I have heard this story some 50 years ago, I have no proof of its validity.

As late as 1950's, I can testify that Choy Suey was the main, and often the only dish found on the menus of Chinese restaurants. (Great hardships to Chinese students attending colleges in the U.S.).

After WWII, new chefs from China broaden the menu, so by late 1990's Chop Suey has practically disappeared from the menus of 'real' Chinese restaurants in the U.S.

Nevertheless, Chop Suey remains a popular dish in the U.S. It is still in the cookbooks as well as on the Internet. See for example, http://bora.dacom.co.kr/~ksmoon/Recipes/Chop_Suey.html

Chop Suey is an American or Chinese-American dish. It is not Chinese, although it is always considered by Americans to be a Chinese dish. The Chinese term of this dish is [雜碎].

BTW, proclaiming a motto (in order to ask for fortune) for certain occasions (e.g. accession to the throne) was practiced since 114 B.C. inb China. Only since Ming dynasty (1368 A.D.) the Nien-hao was identical with the period of reign.

aolung. 奧龍

Dear Chen

I am confused by your comments, possibly because you have not understood my message. If you read my last post carefully you will note that I have not gone into Western royal dating. I only commented that a) European Royal houses do not have a name for the reigning period and that b) calling Queen Elizabeth ll is similar to Elizabeth ll Regina, since Elizabeth is the name of the person whichever way you call her, unlike Qianlong, which is the reign, and not the person. At no time did I mention any date for Western rulers.

Since you have brought up Western usage, I am sure Ming will be kind enough to allow me go into depth to reply about European usage on two issues, the European dating and the European Monarch's name. I was brought up with Western history and literature, hence I hope my Western education will come in useful here.

On the first issue (Western dating), you posted "For example the date given for the queen of England will be Queen Elizabeth II (1953-present) and not (1926-present)." From this, I gather that you mean the years in brackets for European rulers are indicating the reign rather than the life span of the ruler. In fact, the reverse is correct. If we do not stipulate "Reign of Queen Elizabeth ll", but "Elizabeth ll", then, Elizabeth ll (1926-present) is correct. When a bracket with years follows the name of a European monarch e.g. Henry Vlll (1491-1547), Louis XlV (1638-1715), Frederick ll, the Great (1712-1786), the years indicate the life span of the rulers, not the reigning period. Please check any biographical book like The Cambridge Biographical Encyclopedia.

On the second issue (European monarch's name), you commented "He should also realise that the name of the King or Queen is the name chosen for the reign and need not be his or her own name." I am sure everyone in this discussion is aware of the common fact that the European Monarch (like the Pope) may choose a name different from his own name. The contending issue is not whether the European monarch has a different name, but that the European monarch does not have a name for his/her reign, just a new name for his royal person. If you can understand that Qianlong is not the monarch's name but the reign, and that Elizabeth ll is not the monarch's reign, but her reigning name, then I would not have posted in vain.

If we go into any Western reference book on historical figures, we will find the following: Kangxi((1654-1722) and Qianlong (1711-1799) listed as Emperors of China. Whilst we may accept this Western mistake of reign for ruler, in academic discussion, we must attain clarity and correct usage. I certainly acquiesce to Ming's view that this mis-calling of Chinese Emperors will be used in CTB because of common usage, as long as we are all aware of the difference between the reign and the ruler.

Tin-Kay

Dear Chen

I am confused by your comments, possibly because you have not understood my message. If you read my last post carefully you will note that I have not gone into Western royal dating. I only commented that a) European Royal houses do not have a name for the reigning period and that b) calling Queen Elizabeth ll is similar to Elizabeth ll Regina, since Elizabeth is the name of the person whichever way you call her, unlike Qianlong, which is the reign, and not the person. At no time did not mention any dates for Western rulers.

On the second issue (European monarch's name), you commented "He should also realise that the name of the King or Queen is the name chosen for the reign and need not be his or her own name." I am sure everyone in this discussion is aware of the common fact that the European Monarch (like the Pope) may choose a name different from his own name. The contending issue is not whether the European monarch has a different name, but that the European monarch does not have a name for his/her reign, just a new name for his royal person. If you can understand that Qianlong is not the monarch's name but the reign, and that Elizabeth ll is not the monarch's reign, but her reigning name, then I would not have posted in vain.

If we go into any Western reference book on historical figures, we will find the following: Kangxi((1654-1722) and Qianlong (1711-1799) listed as Emperors of China. Whilst we may accept this Western mistake of reign for ruler, in academic discussion, we must attain clarity and correct usage. I certainly acquiesce to Ming's view that this mis-calling of Chinese Emperors will be used in CTB because of common usage, as long as we are all aware of the difference between the reign and the ruler.

Tin-Kay

Dear Ming

In regards to your last post, I beg to differ for two reasons.

Firstly, by using the words, Emperor Qianlong, a non-Chinese would immediately and erroneously think that the Emperor was actually called Qianlong, which was his reigning period and not his name. The Chinese imperial system (imitated by the Japanese) was unlike the European Royal houses, being unique in having a name for the reigning period in addition to the name of the ruler (Emperor). Unlike non-Chinese, when the Chinese called the Emperor as Qianlong Emperor, they understand that Qianlong is the reign and not the person. If we write in English, "Emperor Qianlong", we create a confusion among the English readers that his name was indeed Qianlong. However, if we write "The Qianlong Emperor", there is no ambiguity that the Emperor is the ruler during the Qianlong reign.

Secondly, the dates pertaining to the Qianlong Emperor denotes the beginning year and ending year of the Qianlong reign (AD 1736-1795), not the actual birth and death of the Emperor himself (AD 1711-1799). Hence many readers of Chinese history are caught unaware, thinking that the period of the reign is the life span of the Emperor. If they understand that Qianlong is not the person but the reign, then this misunderstanding of the dates will not occur.

As you have said, this is certainly not simple. It is easy to say Queen Elizabeth ll or Elizabeth ll Regina, because Elizabeth is the name of the person whichever way you put it. But when it comes to the Qianlong reign, calling the Emperor correctly as "The Qianlong Emperor" has a totally different meaning than calling "Emperor Qianlong".

Tin-Kay

Dear Tin-Kay and friends:

In this seemingly simple situation, the rules are not really very straight forward. Rule 1: Before the Qing Dynastry, the common practice is to use the "Emperor's name" Rule 2: In Qing Dynastry, the common practice is to use the "Reign name." Thus, take the case of the correct usage is say Emperor Qianlong . It is not customary to use the emperor's name.

In Chinese literature, Chinese novels, Chinese paintings and even movies and TV shows, people say "Emperor Qianlong".

Take a look at this painting of Emperor Qianlong at the Hong Kong Museum of Art website. It would be presumptuous for us to say that the musuem's curator is wrong. He is right.

Why? There is no real logocal explanation. Language, grammar, and usage are not always logical. I can offer my explanations, but explanations by you or by me do not matter.

By common usage, people say Emperor Qianlong, and in CTB I shall follow this usage.

As a secondary matter, do we say "Emperor Qianlong" or should be say "Qianlong Emperor"? Here we must follow the common usage of the English language. It is King George V, Queen Elizebeth, Emperor Bonnaparte etc. So I say "Emperor Qianlong".

Dear Ming

Thanks for pointing out about 開皇 Kai Huang as the reign of Yang Jian (Wendi), first emperor of the Sui Dynasty. The Grand Canal was not ordered by him, but rather by his son, Yang Guang 楊廣 (Yang Di 煬帝), the second emperor of the Sui Dynasty in AD 605. Yang Guang had the Grand Canal constructed at great human cost, much like the Great Wall of Qin Shi Huangdi, and he was subsequently overthrown for the cruel despot that he was.

My post about using the Emperor's name correctly is how we should now use the name in reference to the emperor's reign. This is especially so in the case of Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong. Too often we call Qianlong as the emperor when he should be called (posthumously of course) as the Qianlong Emperor and not the Emperor Qianlong.

Tin-Kay

An emperor,at birth, has a birth name.
Upon attaining the throne, he takes a name for himself and another name as the name of the reign [ 年 號 ].
The name of the first emperor of the Sui Dynasty is Wendi [ 文帝 ] (Tin-kay take note }. The name of the reign is Kaihuang [ 開皇 ]

The great acomplishment of Emperor Wendi is the construction of the Grand Canal, an engineering feat greater than that of the Great Wall. Its importance is too often not appreciated.

Thanks to Tin-Kay for laying stress on that, since most Westerners, and maybe Western teachers too, do not realize this fact, so there can arise misunderstanding. But those *dynastic titles* (as I also referred to) are also regarded/called the *emperor's posthumous name*. (This is still the fact in our modern times with the *name* of the Japanese emperors!)
As Tin-Kay kindly pointed to, and pretty useful to know, the two dates attached to this title are the beginning and ending of the *reign* and *not* the emperor's personal dates of birth and death respectively, as it could easily be misunderstood.

aolung. 奧龍
德國慕尼黑

The name Wendi refers to the reign of the emperor, and not the emperor himself. With due respect to the august body of scholars here, I feel compelled to point out that the correct way to refer to the emperor by reign would be the Wendi Emperor, not Emperor Wendi. As Yoon-Ngan has pointed out, there are so many Chinese dynasties with reigns using the title Wendi 文帝. Hence the founder emperor using the title should be called the Sui Wendi Emperor 隋文帝. His real name was Yang Jian, so his full name would be the Sui Wendi Emperor, Yang Jian 隋文帝楊堅.

When we are discussing about each Wendi, we are discussing about each imperial period. Hence, when we give the historical period of each Wendi, the years indicate the reign, and not be the birth to death of the emperor. Yoon-Ngan has given almost a full list of all the Wendi Emperors, missing out only the Liang Dynasty, the Jian Wendi Emperor called Xiao Gang (born AD 501 died AD 550). He rebelled against his father, but was eliminated by his cruel ally, Hou Jing. Both Xiao Gang of the Liang Dynasty and Sima Yu of the Eastern Jin Dynasty called their reigns Jian Wendi 簡文帝, rather than just Wendi 文帝.

The most common mistake in Western history books is in regards to Kangxi, Yongzhen and Qianlong, which are all reigns of the famous Manchu rulers. The emperors have been mistakenly called Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong. The right way to call them is the Kangxi Emperor (meaning the emperor of the Kangxi reign), the Yongzheng Emperor (meaning the emperor of the Yongzhen reign) and the Qianlong Emperor (meaning the emperor of the Qianlong reign).

Tin-Kay

aolung. 奧龍

Reading Lauren's posting carefully, I beleive it is a multiple-choice Question.

For those familiar with the currently popular "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" on the U.S. TV, the questions is:
What is the name of the Chinese Dynasty founded by Emperor Wendi? Was it (a) Han, (b) Tang, (c) Ming, or (d) Sui ?

The correct answer, first given by Alfred, is (d) Sui.

It is also my "final answer." None of the other dynasties was founded by an emperor named Wendi.

aolung. 奧龍

Is your teacher a very knowledgeable person about China, or where did he/she get this question to torture the students?

Lauren, this seems to be kind of tricky question since there are several emperors with this dynastic title through thousand years of Chinese history (yet not all having founded a dynasty), e.g. there's the founder of the Wei dynasty in The Three Kingdoms, 220 A.D., and Wen-ti 文帝, the first emperor of the Western Wei in 535 A.D. and that of Sui in 589 A.D.. Yet, I didn't find any referring to later dynasties such as T'ang, Sung etc. in my charts. Maybe it's the Sui (隋紀) mentioned above.

aolung. 奧龍

Are you beginning to learn Chinese or Japanese? If you are studying Chinese, then it is wrong to use the term "kanji" which is Japanese written language; it is based on Chinese but adapted for the Japanese language.

See the two Chinese words forming this term at http://www.chinapage.org/quote/quote.html

The project received a great deal of publicity in the U.S. among Roosevelt New Deal, Hollyword movies, and finally U.S. Marines by the effort of a Col. Evans Carlson.

The project was short-lived due to the invasion of the Japanese army. The term "Gung Ho" is practically unknown among the Chinese.

Gung Ho, for all intensive purposes, is an American term (though the word originates from Chinese) which means to "Work Together."

The word is in the English dictionaries, but not in the Chinese dictionaries.

Any suggestion that eugenics would make China a world power is utterly off the wall.

This space should not be used for discussions of this kind of topics.

Webmaster

The character you asked about is Zhong Kui, a legendary judge who snatches and devours little devils. He is a dark-faced hirsute fellow wearing a red courtier gown and holding a sword. A famous painting was about the wedding procession of his younger sister with all the little devils. The story is also popular in Japan. And I believe I saw him portrayed in a Japanese painting displayed in Metropolitan Museum (NYCity). A few artists are very fond of painting Zhong Kui.

The following is from another site:
In Chinese myth, he is the god of literature and examinations, the protector against evil spirits and demons. He belongs to the Gui Xian (a classification of demons) because he committed suicide when he failed to reach the first place in the exams. His attribute is a sword with which he wards off poisonous animals such as snakes and scorpions.

Orchid is one of the most popular subjects for Chinese painting. You will find literally thousands of artists. So is lotus. One of the more recent ones famous for lotus is Zhang DaQian (Chang Dai Chien) whose collection was exhibited recently in San Francisco, California and in France. He lived in CA for some time. You can find books about him in amazon.com

The full text of this famous poem can be found at this site.

http://www.sljhs.ylc.edu.tw/yea/peacoko/