Jialin’s Blog

All in all, medieval East Asia was more accepting of gender diversity than it is now, even if it was not a democracy. For instance, when you look at the People’s Republic of China today, you can see that there has never been a female president before. This means that after 1949, there have never been any women appointed to serve in direct decision-making for China. There are crackdowns on feminist activism and movement in China and as well as discriminatory policies put in place that prevent women in China from having long political positions. For instance, female civil servants are required to retire 10 years before their male counterparts. This means that it is difficult for female politicians to have a career in politics after the age of 60. Similarly, there have not been any female successors to the throne in Japan since 1889 after Japan decided to follow a more Western approach (specifically the Prussian German constitutional monarchy) where women were not allowed to be in government positions. Lastly, South Korea is only marginally better by having one woman to be elected to the presidential position. All of this goes to show that it is a lot more difficult to secure positions of direct decision-making power in these East Asian countries compared to their medieval counterparts. 

Footnotes:

[1] Adam Taylor, “Analysis | Why Doesn’t Japan Allow Women to Be Emperor? Prussia and Concubines,”, paragraph 8

Bibliography:

Taylor, Adam. “Analysis | Why Doesn’t Japan Allow Women to Be Emperor? Prussia and Concubines.” The Washington Post. April 30, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/04/29/why-doesnt-japan-doesnt-allow-women-be-emperor-prussia-concubines/.

In Japan, the title “tennō” does not specifically refer to a specific gender (it is also important to know that the Chinese Huangdi is also gender-neutral, but we always translate it as “Emperor”). Rather it is gender-neutral and means “heavenly sovereign”. Thus female tennōs were not considered empresses but female emperors[1]. There were in total 8 female emperors who ruled in Japan’s history, including two of them who ruled twice under different names.  One notable Japanese female tenno would be Emperor Kōken (r. 749–758) who took the throne twice under different names. Similar to Emperor Wu Zetian of the Tang Dynasty (and later the Southern Zhou Dynasty as the sole ruler of the dynasty), historians demonize these women and label them not for what they have contributed to their respective countries but how their rise to power or current power was not legitimate. For example, Emperor Kōken was officially the first woman to receive the crown prince title and receive training to become the next in line ruler. What makes her rise to power interesting is that she didn’t begin her political career as anyone’s empress but was directly chosen to preserve the imperial line by her father. During her career as a female tennō, she could be described as a passionate ambassador of Buddhism. She sponsored many projects involving the production of Buddhist artwork and sutra copying, as well as recruiting famous practitioners of Buddhism to oversee temples. Not only was she a follower and proponent of Buddhism but she was also a very effective leader. She focused on achieving good relations with her neighbors by spearheading diplomatic missions to the Korean Peninsula as well as China [2]. What was most impressive about Kōken was the fact that she managed to oversee domestic and political affairs in Japan for over two decades; however, her achievements are overshadowed by her relationship with a priest called Dōkyō who was her close advisor in court and religious matters. 

Footnotes

[1] Paula R. Curtis, “Japan’s Once and Future Female Emperors”, paragraph 4

[2] Ibid., paragraph 9

Bibliography

Curtis, Paula R. “Japan’s Once and Future Female Emperors.” Nursing Clio. April 30, 2019. https://nursingclio.org/2019/04/30/japans-once-and-future-female-emperors/.

On the other hand, there were women rulers of East Asia who were more readily accepted than Tang China’s Wu Zetian. For example, Queen Seondeok of Silla from the Korean Peninsula was highly respected by her subjects for her domestic and foreign advances. In Silla, she helped establish aid for poor commoners in the countryside [1] as well as improving the arts and sciences. Buddhism became Silla’s official language and the queen herself oversaw most of the construction of the Buddhist temples. Not only did she invest in religion but she also invested in schools and directed the construction of the largest and oldest surviving observatory in East Asia called Cheomseongdae observatory [2]. In foreign matters, she was very intelligent in the way that she manipulated relations to make Silla more powerful than the rest of the Korean kingdoms located on the Korean Peninsula. She spearheaded a diplomatic mission to China to seek help to disarm other threatening neighbors such as Baekje. It was the correspondence that occurred between the Seondeok and Emperor Taizong of Tang that showed how public perception and societal standards made it clear as to why Emperor Wu Zetian had more difficulty than Queen Seondeok of Silla in terms of garnering more positive press. Taizong’s only condition to help (still a steep price and says a lot about Tang’s attitudes towards women rulers) out Seondeok was for Seondeok to step down from her position and allow one of Taizong’s relatives to assume power in Silla since Taizong felt that “Because your country has a woman as a ruler, neighboring states belittle it.”[3]  Tang China viewed women rulers as the downfall of a regime while Silla demonstrated the opposite by having another woman ruler succeed Seondeok shortly after she passed. 

Footnotes

[1] Mark Cartwright, “Queen Seondeok”, paragraph 3

[2] Ibid., paragraph 7

[3] Kim, Pu-sik, and Edward J. Shultz. The ‘Silla Annals’ of the ‘Samguk Sagi’, p.154

Bibliography

Cartwright, Mark. “Queen Seondeok.” World History Encyclopedia. December 14, 2021. https://www.worldhistory.org/Queen_Seondeok/.

Kim, Pu-sik, and Edward J. Shultz. The ‘Silla Annals’ of the ‘Samguk Sagi’. Academy of Korean Studies Press, 2013.

Wu Zetian is one of the most famous female figures in Chinese history. As the only female emperor in a sea of male emperors in Chinese dynastic history, not only is she an outlier in this male-dominated society but she is also considered as the number one “bad woman” in Chinese written history.[1] There have been numerous books, films, and television series published and written about her and she is constantly a hot topic for debate by historians. One of the interesting reasons as to why historians emphasized more of her private life rather than her public life of leading the Tang Dynasty and later founding the Zhou Dynasty is because she disrupted the yin and yang of Confucian society. Women are often associated with yin which represents anything that is associated with “black, dark, submissive, personal, soft, and gentle” and yin is used to complement yang which is associated with “white, bright, dominant, public, hard, and strong”. Yang is associated with men here.[2]  Due to Wu Zetian’s changing role in this traditional hierarchy Confucian model society from a concubine, nun, empress, empress dowager, and later to the emperor, this level of social mobility is one that was never seen before in this society. And due to historians and record keepers being primarily men, they produced biographies that highlighted their idea of what a woman’s role in a proper society should be like and that is how we have so much misogyny in the records about Wu Zetian. There has always been more emphasis on her private life and unprecedented rise to power rather than her accomplishments that highlighted her competency as a ruler. 

Moving along to how she was a competent ruler can be backed up by her determination in terms of promoting technology in society which caused a “massive transformation in society, economy, politics, and culture”.[3] Furthermore, there were Marxist historians who were the most vocal when it comes to promoting Wu Zetian’s positive contributions and achievements as a leader and changemaker of her time. To the Marxists, Wu Zetian was a heroine who advocated and addressed historical class struggles between common people and landlords and powerful aristocracy.[4]. Other historians also seek to reconstruct female authority through Wu Zetian’s legacy by “seeing her as being ahead of her time in attacking the privilege classes, elevating the position of women, and fostering the exam system, and the culture of her people.”[5]. 

Footnotes:

[1] Xianlin Song, “Re-gendering Chinese History: Zhao Mei’s Emperor Wu Zetian.”, p. 363.

[2] Ibid., p. 365

[3] Ibid., p. 366

[4] R. W. L.  Guisso, Wu Tse-Tʻien and the Politics of Legitimation in Tʻang China,  p. 6

[5] Ibid.

Bibliography

Guisso, R. W. L., and Wu Tse-T’ien. Wu Tse-T’ien and the Politics of Legitimation in T’ang China. Western Washington, 1978.

Song, Xianlin. “Re-gendering Chinese History: Zhao Mei’s Emperor Wu Zetian.” East Asia 27, no. 4 (2010): 361-79. doi:10.1007/s12140-010-9122-z.

The Tang Dynasty (618-907) could be described as the dynasty and time period that exerted the most amount of huaxia (what we often call the Chinese) cultural influence on its foreign relations with the rest of East Asia (the Korean Peninsula and Japan). An example of this powerful influence can be seen in how the word “Tang” was used as a name to refer to China even after the dynasty had ended.[1] In regards to China’s relationship with Korea during this time period, the Silla dynasty acknowledged the superiority of Chinese emperors in exchange for ruling majority of the Korean peninsula. Korea was considered one of the subordinate regions/areas besides Japan who was on the Chinese emperor’s side and made tributes frequently to Chinese emperors. It was also an unspoken custom for every Korean king “to apply to the Chinese court for confirmation of his legitimacy, in token of which he received a golden seal from the emperor”.[2] For the most part, the Chinese government did not directly influence affairs pertaining to Korea and how they ran their government. However, the Chinese’s influence did spread and permeate into Korean society culturally. Korean monks and scholars were often in Tang China and Silla frequently sent their most talented students to the Tang Dynasty capital Chang’an for academic studies and to participate in the Chinese state examinations. These examinations help officials appoint these scholars to civil service positions.[3]

The Chinese also had considerable influence in terms of passing on the practice of Buddhism and government system models to their East Asian neighbors. Korea and Japan would borrow some aspects of “Three Departments and Six Ministries” and change around the names of the layout to best suit their society. [4] Although Japan is a bit far away from China compared to its Korean neighbors, the Tang China influence still reached Japan. The Japanese were very intrigued by the Buddhist teachings and learning about the more complex Chinese governing styles. Considerable amounts of culture in the form of music, art, written language, and literature were exchanged during this time period which resulted in a common cultural foundation for East Asia today. [5]

Footnotes:

[1] Iryŏn. Samguk Yusa: Legends and History of the Three Kingdoms of Ancient Korea, p.12

[2] Ibid., p. 13

[3] Tineke, D’Haeseleer. “Chapter 7. Tang China”. In A Companion to the Global Early Middle Ages, p. 185.

[4] Ibid., p.185-186

[5] Ibid., p.186

Bibliography:

Hermans, Erik. A Companion to the Global Early Middle Ages. Applied Research Centre in the, 2020.

Iryæon. Samguk Yusa Legends and History of the Three Kingdoms of Ancient Korea. Yonsei University, 1972.

So far, I have gathered sources for my research project. I recently placed a hold for many of the print books I will be referring to in my project and had picked some of them up. I will be reading the books during Fall break and try to draw out some helpful information from the books that will aid in the completion of my project. Another book I placed hold for is an interlibrary loan, which may take some time to arrive. Classes and workload have been hectic recently for me, so I will try to better manage my time by creating a schedule for this class to be on track for the project. I do know that I would like to have the following outline for my research paper which would consist of an introduction that talks about the Tang Dynasty and the Korean kingdom of Silla (their relationship to each other), the similarities between them, the differences between them primarily when it comes to female rulers (Empress Wu and the queens of Silla), the public opinion of these female rulers, and maybe their differences in the ruling.  Quick question here: Dr. D recommended I look into the queens of Silla, female tenno of Japan, but these queens seem to be of Korean origin? And Silla is a Korean kingdom? So are the female tenno of Japan unrelated to the queens of Silla? Should I research the female tennos of Japan as well for my project?

Bibliography

金富軾, 1075-1151, Edward J Shultz, and Hugh H. W Kang. The Silla Annals of the Samguk Sagi. Gyeonggi-do Seongnam-si: Academy of Korean Studies Press, 2012.

Iryŏn. Samguk Yusa: Legends and History of the Three Kingdoms of Ancient Korea. Translated by Tae Hung Ha and Grafton K Mintz. Seoul: Yonsei University Press, 1972.

Hays-Gilpin, Kelley, and David S Whitley, eds. Reader in Gender Archaeology. Routledge Readers in Archaeology. London: Routledge, 1998.

Seth, Michael J. A Concise History of Korea: From Antiquity to the Present. Rowman Et Littlefield, 2020.

Guisso, R. W. L. Wu Tse-Tʻien and the Politics of Legitimation in Tʻang China. Occasional Papers – Program in East Asian Studies, Western Washington University, V. 11. Bellingham, Wash.: Western Washington, 1978.

Fitzgerald, C. P. The Empress Wu. 2d ed. London: Cresset P, 1968.
Song, Xianlin. “Re-gendering Chinese History: Zhao Mei’s Emperor Wu Zetian.” East Asia 27, no. 4 (2010): 361-79. doi:10.1007/s12140-010-9122-z.

1. How have you engaged with the course materials? What would you like to improve in your preparation and participation (which includes writing the posts, as well as the “regular” coming to class, participating in person? What are you doing well?

I have engaged with the course materials decently in terms of reading what is required. However, I feel like I have not really been doing deep readings or research into what I have learned from the slides or documents. I have used Hypothesis to briefly annotate or point out the key points of a text. Furthermore, I have used Hypothesis to highlight parts of readings that I found interesting or would like to mention in class. In terms of the posts, I have been using extensions or best-before dates sometimes in case I am feeling overwhelmed or stressed with other course obligations. When I do submit a blog post for this class, I do try to submit the best work that I can demonstrate as a student. I do attend all classes and lectures and seek to participate at least once or twice each class period. I think what I am doing well is absorbing the slide materials and readings. I think the visuals that Dr. D’Haeseleer provides on her google slides make lectures more interesting and engaging. Especially since I am a visual learner, I appreciate having visual components incorporated into slides and lectures. These images also make me want to do additional research on them outside of class. Lastly, I would like to add more sources to Zotero but at the moment I am having some difficulty with that since my laptop broke a few days ago so I would have to redownload it on my new laptop.

2. How would you evaluate your “thoughtful participation in the Learning Commons” so far? What have you done that fits with the syllabus description of that component, and how can you see yourself expanding that category and/or your participation?

I would say that my participation in the virtual Learning Commons so far has been satisfactory as I have provided thoughts and comments on my peers’ blog posts. I have read and engaged with my peers’ posts by looking back at readings with new insight after reading other classmates’ perspectives. In regards to the physical learning commons in class, I would say I have participated a couple of times. For example, I have provided my own insights about the readings and slides assigned, dropping questions in our google chat, and asking questions in class. I think in the future, I would like to participate more in a class by providing more of my own insight on readings. The reason why I would like to focus on this is that sometimes I may feel overwhelmed with coursework from other classes and meetings (clubs, programs, and/or meetings related to my double majors and study abroad) so I do not spend as much time as I would like on deeply analyzing and engaging with the readings assigned. 

The most significant idea that struck me from the Zhou readings is the concept of us vs. them. The idea of the Hua Xia people and barbarians was fascinating to me. In the Zhou Dynasty, there was this idea of a moral and cultural divide between the Zhou states and the barbarians/foreigners who were considered as less than human. The Zhou people often viewed these barbarians as “animals” or “subhuman.” These barbarians from outside Zhou territories were considered in such terminology because of how someone is classified as civilized in the Zhou worldview. Whether or not a territory contains civilized people is determined based on how close it is to the central royal domain. The farther away a territory is from the royal domain, the less civilized a territory and its people are. This reminded me of sinocentrism and how the mandate of heaven played a part in this idea of how Chinese emperors, through the mandate of heaven, were the only legitimized rulers. Thus, they are a symbol of civilization. Thus, in the Zhou worldview, regions farthest from the central royal domain would receive less civilizing influence, and therefore the people in these regions would be less than human.

In addition, besides determining how civilized a territory was based on its proximity to the central royal domain, there are terms such as “allied,” “assimilated,” “non assimilated,” and “hostile” to describe these foreigners. I wonder whether, once again, the farther a territory was from the central Zhou domain, the more “hostile” these foreigners are because they are less likely to be under the power and influence of the Zhou?

Lastly, I learned that historical recordings of these encounters with the Zhou people and foreign people reveal more about the political struggles and foreign policies at that moment in history than the apparent cultural differences between the Zhou people and foreign people.

As of right now, I still want to focus on comparing and contrasting Empress Wu and the queens of Silla. I liked Dr. D’Haeseleer’s suggestion of looking at how historians from earlier periods and modern periods’ views of female rulers changed over time. The article Dr. D recommended: Song, X. Re-gendering Chinese History: Zhao Mei’s Emperor Wu Zetian. East Asia 27, 361–379 (2010) was super interesting and fascinating to read. I think it is unfortunate yet interesting how Empress Wu is looked at as the ‘bad unwoman’ because she didn’t fit into gender-typical roles and her rise to power was also unconventional for the patriarchal and Confucian society at the time. The author of this article mentioned how Empress Wu as a historical character is often stigmatized by other historians and records. I am interested in looking more into this topic and how the queens of Silla were portrayed in record-keeping by historians in terms of being a woman and a ruler. I would like to focus on their ruling methods, too, and maybe the public opinion of them?

However, I am still confused about the national identity of Silla. I did read the literary works that the professor recommended, and I also tried to find some background information on Silla. Still, I kept seeing websites linking it to a Korean kingdom on the Korean peninsula? There were also instances when there were Korean and Japanese spellings of the queens’ names. I’m not sure whether Silla belongs to Japan or Korea. I would like to have more assistance in finding information on Silla and the different queens of Silla (their background information). Lastly, I am thinking about doing a traditional research paper on my project topic.