text:
Yongzheng Emperor

The Yongzheng Emperor (13 December 1678 – 8 October 1735), also known by his temple name Emperor Shizong of Qing, personal name Yinzhen, was the fourth emperor of the Qing dynasty, and the third Qing emperor to rule over China proper.

The fourth son of the Kangxi Emperor, Yongzheng ascended the throne following prolonged disputes over succession. A hard-working ruler, he aimed to create a more effective government, cracked down on corruption and reformed the personnel and financial administration. His reign also saw the formation of the Grand Council, an institution that had a major impact on the future of the dynasty. Militarily, Yongzheng continued his father's efforts to consolidate Qing's position in Outer Mongolia and Tibet through force.

The Yongzheng Emperor died in 1735 at the age of 56 and was succeeded by his fourth son, who assumed the throne as the Qianlong Emperor. Although his reign was much shorter than that of both his father and his son, the Yongzheng era was a period of peace and prosperity.

Birth and early life
Yinzhen was the eleventh recorded son of the Kangxi Emperor, and the fourth prince to survive into adulthood. His mother, historically known as Empress Xiaogongren, was originally a court attendant from the Manchu Uya clan. Around the time when Yinzhen was born, his mother was of low status and did not have the right to raise her own children. For most of his childhood, Yinzhen was raised by Noble Consort Tong, the daughter of Tong Guowei, the Kangxi Emperor's maternal uncle and an eminent official in the early part of the Kangxi Emperor's reign. She died when Yinzhen was just 9 years old. After she gave birth to more children, Yinzhen's mother was promoted to a pin and then to a fei, and became known as defei or "Virtuous Consort". The Kangxi Emperor did not raise his children only inside the palace. He also exposed his sons (including Yinzhen) to the outside world and gave them a rigorous education. Yinzhen accompanied his father on several inspection trips around the Beijing area, as well as one further south. He became the honorary leader of the Plain Red Banner during the Battle of Jao Modo between the Qing Empire and the Mongol Dzungar Khanate led by Galdan Khan. Yinzhen was made a beile in 1689 along with several brothers and promoted to junwang (second-rank prince) in 1698.

In 1709, the Kangxi Emperor stripped his second son Yinreng of his position as crown prince. Yinreng had been the crown prince for his whole life; his removal left the position of heir open to competition among the Emperor's remaining sons (the Kangxi Emperor had 24 sons who reached adulthood). In the same year, the Kangxi Emperor promoted Yinzhen from junwang to qinwang (first-rank prince) under the title "Prince Yong of the First Rank" (Manchu: hošoi hūwaliyasun cin wang). Yinzhen maintained a low profile during the initial stages of the succession struggle. To appoint a new heir, the Kangxi Emperor decreed that officials in his imperial court would nominate a new crown prince. The Kangxi Emperor's eighth son, Yinsi, was the candidate preferred by the majority of the court as well as many of the Kangxi Emperor's other sons. The Kangxi Emperor, however, opted not to appoint Yinsi as his heir apparent largely due to apprehension that Yinsi's political clout at court was beginning to overshadow that of himself. Thereafter, Yinzhen sensed that his father was in favour of re-instating Yinreng as heir apparent, thus he supported Yinreng and earned the trust of his father.

Yongzheng's quote
Yinzhen (胤禛: 13 December 1678 – 8 October 1735) had the highest honor to orchestrate the imperial ceremonies and rituals during the reign of the Kangxi emperor, which illustrated that Yinzhen was well acquainted with the Confucianism traditions and customs. In the imperial court, Yinzhen was also deeply immersed in the state's affairs and heavily engaged in the political debates where he acquired diplomatic skills. As the Yongzheng Emperor (雍正: r. 1723–1735 CE) of Qing China, Yinzhen was indubitably a very diplomatically inclined ruler who created an institution of a "moral government" based on the Confucian principles. Yinzhen sought four distinctive qualities: loyalty—忠, fairness—公, sincerity—誠, and capability—能, from his subjects in order to run an effective court and to achieve stability. Li Wei (李衛 : February 2, 1687 – December 3, 1738) was a recruit among the Qing officials to possess the desired virtues, and was regarded highly by Yongzheng.

A notable quote from Yinzhen captured during his reign as the Yongzheng Emperor in the 1720s expresses his imperial will:

小事小料理,不可因小而忽之·,大事大振作,不可因難處而隱諱. 朕意若果能如此實心奉行,以忠正一一字感化,不數年,賊亦人也. 見文武大臣實心忠勇為國,屬員清正愛民,營伍整齊,士卒曉勇,而百姓不懷如是德,不畏如是威,仍去成群為匪者,朕想必無此理也.
 * — page 190, lines 7–10

"If it is a trivial matter, do not just simply neglect the issue because it seems insignificant. If it is a complex matter, do not just simply conceal away the issue because it could become a challenge. To have good governance and dissuade seditionists, is all in the ruler's wish. If civilians see a judicious court that is loyal and wholeheartedly for the country, and see that the court embraces its people; and civilians feel the virtue in their court marshalls, then the people would not perceive the court as a threat. Thus, there would be no reason to have seditionaries."

In short, after several years of political chaos, Yongzheng earnestly strived to restore a functional court with "good government", immediately after he ascended the throne in 1723 CE, to stabilize Qing into a unified and harmonious empire. In 1733 CE, Yongzheng successfully institutionalized the Grand Council, which allows Qing to relay communication effectively and efficiently from region to region, thereby enabling the implementation of his domestic reform policy.

With the establishment of his Grand Council, Yongzheng was not only able to discourage corruption, but he was in a position to launch several domestic reforms beneficial to the empire and its people. Canals and irrigation systems were reconstructed to support agriculture and maintain farmlands. During famines, he provided relief to the affected regions by distributing resources. In reparation to the people, who were the backbone of the country, he issued an imperial decree to emancipate slaves under his reign. One of the several tax reform policies Yongzheng introduced was to shift the head taxation to the property taxation on landowners, which greatly reduced the tax burden on civilians. Additionally, Yongzheng was indeed in full support with the construction of orphanages to shelter orphans, in building elementary schools to educate children, and poorhouses to house paupers. Perhaps the Yongzheng era (雍正: r. 1723–1735 CE) may have been overshadowed by his predecessor's accomplishments, the Kangxi Emperor, and his achievements may not have been as glorious as his successor, the Qianlong Emperor; however, the Yongzheng era did serve as a remediation to the people, and resentments began to gradually decrease. Hence the Yongzheng era was a peaceful and prosperous reign of Qing China.

Kangxi's choices of the crown princes
In 1712, the Kangxi Emperor deposed Yinreng again, and chose not to designate an heir apparent for the remaining years of his reign. This resulted in competition among his sons for the position of crown prince. Those considered 'frontrunners' were Yinzhi, Yinsi, and Yinti (the third, eighth and 14th princes, respectively). Of these, Yinsi received the most support from the Mandarins, but not from his father. Yinzhen had supported Yinreng as heir, and did not build a large political base for himself until the final years of the Kangxi Emperor's reign. Unlike Yinsi's high-profile cultivation of a partisan base of support, Yinzhen did so largely away from the limelight. When the Kangxi Emperor died in December 1722, the field of contenders shrank to three princes after Yinsi pledged his support to the 14th prince, Yinti.

At the time of the Kangxi Emperor's death, Yinti, who held the appointment of Border-Pacification General-in-Chief, was leading a military campaign in northwestern China. He was also awarded an apparently grandiose title of "Fuyuan General-in-chief Prince" (撫遠大将軍王) and his departure ceremony was solemnly held. Some other princes, such as Yinsi and his clique, interpreted that Yinti might be chosen as heir and, therefore, pledged their support to Yinti and encouraged him to make military achievements to prove his "worthiness".

However, Yi Zhongtian argued that such a "promotion" was Kangxi's way of protecting Yinzhen, Kangxi's secret chosen heir, by distracting the public's attention away from Yinzhen. The court officials, who believed that Yinti would be chosen as the heir, would also no longer pester Kangxi about the crown prince issue. Sending Yinti away to the northwestern border was also meant to separate him from Yinsi, his newly formed ally, and potential flatterers who wanted to curry favour with Yinti. Yinti would also be unable to use his commanded troops to make a coup d'état, since Nian Gengyao, Yinzhen's close aide, controlled the food supply and the return route of Yinti's troops. Promoting Yinti was also a way for Kangxi to control Yinzhen: if Kangxi's "investment" to Yinzhen turned out to be a failure, he still had Yinti as alternative choice. With Yinti as a potential competitor, Yinzhen would not fall into self-complacency and turn against Kangxi. Yinsi's clique, clinging to the hope of Yinti's future prospect, would also not do anything reckless. As a result, Yinti's "General-in-chief Prince" title appeared grandiose, but was actually hollow and dubious; it was neither "general" nor "prince" and could be interpreted in various ways, which could be used in favour of either Yinti or Yinzhen should the situation arise. Such dubious words with multiple interpretations was a traditional trick in Chinese politics.

There were signs showed that Yinzhen was actually Kangxi's secret choice. First, Kangxi occasionally mentioned that how Yinzhen was raised by Kangxi and how he expressed filial piety to Kangxi. Second, at Kangxi's 60th regnal year (1721) memorial event, Yinzhen was given the task of holding the ritual ceremonies for the royal family's ancestors in Three Great Mausoleums in Shenyang. Shortly after that, Yinzhen was also tasked to organize the Sacrifice to the Heaven (南郊禮), the most sacred ceremony in Confucian tradition, on the day of winter solstice. Moreover, Kangxi also highly favoured Yinzhen's son Hongli (future Qianlong Emperor) and that might also contribute to Kangxi's support for Yinzhen as his heir, similar to how Yongle Emperor chose his heir due to his favour to the crown prince's son.

Official court records state that on 20 December 1722 the ailing Kangxi Emperor called seven of his sons and the general commandant of the Beijing gendarmerie, Longkodo, to his bedside. Longkodo read the will and declared that Yinzhen would be the Kangxi Emperor's successor. Some evidence has suggested that Yinzhen contacted Longkodo months before the will was read in preparation for his succession through military means, although in their official capacities frequent encounters were expected.

Other scholars continue to believe that Yinzhen seized the throne illegally. Historian Qin Hui writes that it is largely recognized that Yongzheng forged the succession edicts together with Nian Gengyao. Qin Hui criticizes Feng Erkang, who also recognizes the forgery, for failing to explain why Yongzheng would have needed a forged edict if he had truly been the legal heir. Yongzheng also changed his story several times. When he punished Longkodo (who was supposed to be the only person who was informed of Kangxi's succession plan and informed Yongzheng and others about it after Kangxi's death), Yongzheng himself said that Longkodo was not present by the emperor's side on that day. According to historian Dai Yi, a report by Longkodo to Yongzheng also shows that the prince Yunli (who was cited by Yongzheng as one of the witnesses in his later version of the events; this prince did not participate in the fight for the throne but later became Yongzheng's ally during the latter's reign) was not present – when he was rushing to Kangxi's resident after being informed of his father's death, the prince met Longkodo who told him about Yongzheng's ascension and became so horrified that he returned to his house immediately, looking like a mad man. Dai Yi, Meng Shen, Wang Zhonghan and Yang Zhen are the notable historians who maintain that the fourteenth prince Yinzheng (later renamed Yunti) was Kangxi's intended heir. They point out that the conflict against the Zhungar was of such an existential importance to the Qing dynasty (which threatened to rip half of their territories apart together with the Mongol-Manchu alliance) that it is hard to imagine Kangxi would have sent anyone but his most trusted son to deal with the crisis. Due to this, the "Fuyuan General-in-chief" position (which was already bestowed on Kangxi on his trusted generals several times before and carried with it exceptional powers) was raised to an unprecedented level of power and prestige unseen since the beginning of the dynasty. The deposed crown prince, Yinreng, and Yinzhen fought for the position too, but failed to get it. Kangxi even made the apparently longterm investment by sending several young members of the imperial family (some already carried the "prince of the first rank" title) to the fourteenth prince so he could raise them as his apprentices. Yang Zhen opines that when Kangxi encouraged his son to engage with the local chiefs, the emperor did not think about their usefulness in the current campaign alone, as he told the prince that their dedication to the person of the prince "will be of use later", and that their service would be more valuable to that of the Han.

Yinzhen's tactics
Yinzhen's tactics during the struggle for crown prince's position were to do practically nothing and to stay out of the limelight. Instead, he focused on filial piety towards Kangxi and dutifully performed the given tasks as a subordinate of the Emperor. Compared to other siblings (Yinzhi, Yinsi, Yinti, Yinreng), Yinzhen had no clear advantage. Unlike Yinsi, Yinzhen had neither a close association nor a good relationship with the majority of court officers and magistrates, he was also shunned due to his cold appearance and the legalist-style harsh treatment for any kinds of moral sin and legal violation of the magistrates. Acknowledging that fact, Yinzhen intentionally showed no ambition to be the heir in order to not attract any unnecessary attention and animosity; he watched as other contenders fought each other to the death, a policy more beneficial for him. Yinzhen even pleaded many times for Kangxi's mercy and pardon for other princes, including the deposed Yinreng, which gained him the praise and favour from Kangxi.

As an experienced player in politics, Kangxi himself knew that Yinzhen's humbleness and filial piety was not really sincere and more of a cover to protect himself, nonetheless Kangxi still made lavish praise to Yinzhen and enjoyed the apparently good relationship with his son. In the situation when his offspring openly trampled on family relationships, Yinzhen's "false" filial piety and kindness was already a haven for Kangxi. Kangxi also hoped that Yinzhen, despite being pretentious, might not actually mistreat his deceased father and the deposed Yinreng in the future, which was proven to be relatively correct. As a result, Kangxi not only didn't expose Yinzhen, but also became the accomplice with Yinzhen's act.

Disputes over succession
Although Kangxi's meticulous plan enabled Yinzhen later to be crowned as emperor, it also created many disputes about Yinzhen's succession as there was no direct, intuitive way to prove Yinzhen's legitimacy. Kangxi's choice as Yinzhen was a shock to many other princes (even Yinzhen also pretended to be shocked), he was neither the eldest eliglible (Yinzhi) nor the most talented (Yinsi) according to the traditional criteria for the heir apparent. Kangxi also did not make any mention about his choice for the crown prince position, his will was only known via the deceased emperor's testament provided by Longkodo, and there was no decisive evidence proved that the testament was not fabricated. For the contemporary public, there was also no evidence to directly infer, or to explain why, Kangxi thought of Yinzhen as his choice. As a result, Yinzhen's succession faced fierce opposition from former contenders such as Yinti and Yinsi. Purging the dissidents and solidifying his own position occupied much of Yinzhen's initial reign as emperor.

There is a widely circulated legend, persisting even to the present day, that Yinzhen was crowned emperor after he modified Kangxi Emperor's final will that detailed who will succeed him. There are two versions of the legend, both of which involves the Chinese character "", and by extension, Yunti, Prince Xun. One version involves changing the "十" in the phrase "transfer the throne to the Fourteenth Prince" to "", which changed the phrase to "pass the throne on to the Fourth Prince" ). Another version states the character "十" was changed to "" , which means "sequence number" (四 = four, 第四 = the fourth / number four), thus changing the phrase to "transfer the throne to the Fourth Prince".

Researchers at Academia Sinica have disproved the theory, as official Qing documents, when mentioning sons of the Emperor, always list the son's title, as well as the son's rank amongst the emperor's sons and the son's name. In this case, the will mentions "Prince Yong, Emperor's Fourth Son, Yinzhen", as well as Kangxi Emperor's high regards for Yinzhen, and his belief that Yinzhen can succeed on the throne. In this case, changing the will becomes impossible without leaving obvious signs of alteration, since Yinti, if referenced in the will, would be shown as the Emperor's fourteenth son, which contains four Chinese characters instead of three for Yinzhen, as the Emperor's fourth son. It has also been noted that the Chinese character "" is a simplified character that is written as "" in traditional character, which was exclusively used back in the Qing era. In addition, the will is written in Traditional Chinese, Manchu, and Mongolian. The alteration theory is noted to be based solely on altering the will's Chinese version, as the will, as written in Manchu and Mongolian, is impossible to alter due to different language characteristics.

The problem with the will, or at least the Chinese version, as currently preserved, is that it was not Kangxi's creation. It was drafted three days after Kangxi's death by Longkodo under Yongzheng's instruction. Yongzheng's order is still preserved by Museum of the Institute of History & Philology, Academia Sinica There are debates about the authenticity of extant copies of the Manchu version, but not only the part that mentions the heir's name is destroyed, the important sentence that praises Yinzhen's virtues also does not appear at all.

Reign
After ascending the throne in December 1722, Yinzhen adopted the era name "Yongzheng" ( lit. "Harmonious Justice") in 1723 from his peerage title "yong" ( lit. "harmonious") and "zheng" ( lit. "just, correct, upright"). It has been suggested that the second character of his era name was an attempt to cover up his illegal claim to the throne by calling himself "justified". Immediately after succeeding to the throne, the Yongzheng Emperor chose his new governing council. It consisted of the eighth prince Yinsi, 13th prince Yinxiang, Zhang Tingyu, Ma Qi, and Longkodo. Yinsi was given the title "Prince Lian" while Yinxiang was given the title "Prince Yi", and these two held the highest positions in the land.

Continued battle against princes

The nature of his succession remained a subject of controversy and overshadowed the Yongzheng Emperor's reign. As many of his surviving brothers did not see his succession as legitimate, the Yongzheng Emperor became increasingly paranoid that they would plot to overthrow him. The earlier players in the battle for succession, Yinzhi, the eldest, and Yinreng, the former crown prince, continued to live under house arrest. Yinreng died two years after the Yongzheng Emperor's reign began.

The Yongzheng Emperor continued to perceive Yinsi and his party, consisting of the princes Yintang, Yin'e, Yinti, and their associates, as his greatest political challenge in the early years of his reign. To diffuse their political clout, the Yongzheng Emperor undertook a 'divide and conquer' strategy. Immediately after ascending the throne, the emperor bestowed on Yinsi the title "Prince Lian", nominally of the highest noble rank. Yinsi was also then appointed as the Minister of the Lifan Yuan (Feudatory Affairs Office) and the top-ranking member of the imperial council assisting the Yongzheng Emperor; some historians believe his position at the time was essentially that of a "Chancellor or Prime Minister". By ostensibly elevating Yinsi to a more prominent political role, the Yongzheng Emperor held Yinsi under close watch and kept him busy with affairs of state, reducing the chance of him conducting behind-the-scenes political maneuvers. Yinsi's allies received notably different treatment. Yintang was sent to Qinghai under the pretext of military service, but in reality was watched over by the Yongzheng Emperor's trusted protégé, Nian Gengyao. Yin'e, the tenth prince, was told to leave the capital to send off a departing Mongol prince, but since he refused to complete this trip as the emperor commanded, the Yongzheng Emperor stripped him of all his titles in May 1724 and sent him north to Shunyi to languish in solitude.

The 14th prince, Yinti, born to the same mother as the Yongzheng Emperor, was recalled to Beijing from his military post. The emperor selected Nian Gengyao to replace Yinti as the commander of the northwestern expeditionary force. Yinti, who expected to be placed on the throne himself, was reluctant to recognise the Yongzheng Emperor's succession as legitimate. Yinti was accused of violating imperial decorum at the funeral proceedings of the late emperor, and placed under house arrest by the Yongzheng Emperor at the imperial tombs in western Beijing. Historians believe that their mother, Empress Dowager Renshou, favoured Yinti partly because she raised him herself, while she did not raise the Yongzheng Emperor. Nonetheless, the increasingly sharp conflict between her two surviving sons caused their mother great sorrow. She died less than six months after the Kangxi Emperor.

By forcibly dispatching Yinsi's party to separate locations geographically, the Yongzheng Emperor made it extremely inconvenient for his rivals to link up and conspire against him. While some of Yinsi's subordinates were appointed to high office, others were demoted or banished, making it difficult for Yinsi's party to maintain the same set of partisan interests. The Yongzheng Emperor publicly reprimanded Yinsi in 1724 for mishandling an assignment, eventually removing him from office and then sending him into house arrest. Yinsi was forced to rename himself "Acina", a derogatory slur in the Manchu language. The emperor also confiscated the assets of Yintang and Yin'e.

Descendants of the Ming dynasty's imperial family
In 1725, the Yongzheng Emperor bestowed a hereditary marquis title on Zhu Ming in line with his father Kang Xi emperor wish of a Manchu—Han population integration, a descendant of the imperial family of the Ming dynasty. Zhu was also paid by the Qing government to perform rituals at the Ming tombs and induct the Chinese Plain White Banner into the Eight Banners. Later in 1750, during the reign of the Yongzheng Emperor's successor, the Qianlong Emperor, Zhu Ming was posthumously honoured as "Marquis of Extended Grace". The marquis title was passed on to Zhu's descendants for 12 generations until the end of the Qing dynasty in the early 20th century.

Nian Gengyao and Longkodo
Nian Gengyao was a supporter of the Yongzheng Emperor long before the latter ascended the throne. In 1722, when he was recalling his brother Yinti from the northwest border in Xinjiang, the Yongzheng Emperor appointed Nian as the commander of the Qing army in Xinjiang. The situation in Xinjiang at the time was volatile, and a strong general was needed in the area. After several military conquests, however, Nian's stature and power grew. Some said he began seeing himself as equal to the emperor. Seeing Nian as no longer within his control, the Yongzheng Emperor issued an imperial edict demoting Nian to the position of a general of the Hangzhou Command. As Nian continued to remain unrepentant, he was eventually given an ultimatum and forced to commit suicide by consuming poison in 1726.

Longkodo was the commander of the militias stationed at the capital at the time of the Yongzheng Emperor's succession. He fell into disgrace in 1728 and died while under house arrest.

After taking the throne, the Yongzheng Emperor suppressed writings he deemed unfavorable to his court, particularly those with an anti-Manchu bias. Foremost among these were those of Zeng Jing, an unsuccessful degree candidate heavily influenced by the 17th-century scholar Lü Liuliang. Zeng had been so affected by what he read that he attempted to incite the governor-general of Shaanxi-Sichuan, Yue Zhongqi (a descendant of anti-Jurchen General Yue Fei), to rebel against the Qing government. Yue Zhongqi promptly turned him in, and in 1730 news of the case reached the Yongzheng Emperor. Highly concerned with the implications of the case, the emperor had Zeng Jing brought to Beijing for trial. The emperor's verdict seemed to demonstrate a Confucian sovereign's benevolence: He ascribed Zeng's actions to the gullibility and naïveté of a youth taken in by Lü Liuliang's abusive and overdrawn rhetoric. In addition, the emperor suggested that Lü Liuliang's original attack on the Manchus was misplaced, since they had been transformed by their long-term exposure to the civilising force of Confucianism.

The Yongzheng Emperor is also known for establishing a strict autocratic-style rule during his reign. He detested corruption, and punished officials severely when they were found guilty of an offense. In 1729, he issued an edict prohibiting the smoking of madak, a blend of tobacco and opium. The Yongzheng Emperor's reign saw the Qing dynasty further establish itself as a powerful empire in Asia. He was instrumental in extending what became known as a "Kangqian Period of Harmony" (cf. Pax Romana). In response to the tragedy of the succession struggle during his father's reign, the Yongzheng Emperor created a sophisticated procedure for choosing a successor. He was known for his trust in Mandarin officials. Li Wei and Tian Wenjing governed China's southern areas with the assistance of Ortai.

Rationalization of personnel appointment system
In the early Qing period, the majority of middle-to-low government posts were subject to a mechanical appointment procedure managed by the Board of Personnel, which was a lottery rule. More specifically, candidates would first be classified into three categories, namely degree holders, office purchasers, and officials waiting for promotion, based on their sources of candidature. These candidates or so-called offices-in-waiting were then assigned to different posts by drawing lots on a monthly basis, known as month selection. This random appointment procedure stemmed from the late Ming dynasty. Sun Piyang, a minister of the Board of Personnel during the Wanli emperor's reign of Ming, was said to have invented the method of drawing lots with the intention of introducing fairness into personnel selection when the Ming court was mired in faction politics. It was apparent that this rule-based appointment procedure was conducive to curtailing patronage-network building and rent-seeking, although at the cost of flexibility.

Considering the limitation of monthly selection, the Yongzheng Emperor, inspired by a memorial of Jin Hong, the provincial administrative commissioner of Guangxi province, decided to launch a structural reform to the appointment system in 1731. In the new appointment system, local jurisdictions first were classified into two groups according to governance difficulties. More specifically, to prioritize local jurisdictions and allocate appointment power accordingly, the governability of each jurisdiction was decomposed into four elements, or four "characters": Chong, Fan, Pi, and Nan. "Chong" (thoroughfare) referred to places at busy highways and was designed to capture the characteristics of commercial potential or military significance. “Fan” (troublesome) stood for places with a great deal of onerous official business. “Pi” (wearisome) indicated areas having difficulty collecting taxes. “Nan” (difficult) referred to the places with crime-prone subjects and recurring violent engagement. Moreover, posts of jurisdictions containing all four elements would be ranked as very important positions and posts of places with three elements would be rated as important posts, whereas posts of places having less than two elements would be tagged as middle-level positions (two elements) or easy posts (one-zero element) respectively.

In this way, the post designation (Chong, Fan, Pi, and Nan) was linked to the importance rating system hand in hand. The appointment power then was allocated based on the importance rating system; posts marked as very important and important were subject to the discretionary appointment by the emperor or provincial leaders, whereas other less important posts still were assigned by drawing lots. As a result, the high-quality officials were matched to the important positions and in turn promoted local governance.

Yi Zhongtian commented that Yongzheng had a very flexible and pragmatic tastes of talent enrollment, based on the advice of Ortai: "Amongst affairs, there are both essential and trivial, easy and challenging. Amongst people, there are both soft and hard, long and short." The emperor, therefore, did not use dogmatic and abstract criteria of "talents" and "morality", instead he acknowledged that every person has both strengths and defects and the tasks given to him should be tailored to suit his specific traits. For example, Li Wei had a very rude personality, but he was brave and clever, Yongzheng assigned him tasks related to law enforcement, criminal punishment and rebel liquidation. Zhu Shih, a scholar with upright and good personality, was appointed as teacher for the future Qianlong Emperor. Tian Wenjing had many personality defects and was heavily criticized by contemporaries, but was favoured by Yongzheng due to his hard-work, devotion and loyalty. Chang Sanle, Wuqiao district chief, had upright and transparent moral conduct, but lacked fervor in work, hence he was re-assigned to an educational post and removed from administrative work. However, the most critical criterion for the government magistrate was "sincerity" towards the emperor. The magistrate's works, reports, criticisms, suggestion, even flattery and blandishment, should be performed with sincere devotion to and sympathy with the emperor's interests and stance. Suggestion and criticism with adequate "sincerity", even if they were flawed and incorrect, was usually praised by Yongzheng. On the other hand, suggestions which were considered to only serve the magistrate's selfish interests and fame, or to only curry favour from the emperor, even if the suggestions were accurate and reasonable, would be heavily criticized by Yongzheng and the magistrate could be punished severely. That was the reason behind Yongzheng's apparently "erratic" and "unpredictable" behaviors in punishing and rewarding his subordinates.

Corruption crackdown and financial reform
Emperor Kangxi's long reign left lasting achievements, but also many flaws and maladies, including budget deficit, inadequate tax revenues, and huge debts. Corruption was widespread, and magistrates and aristocrats frequently borrowed money from the national treasure without any sign of returning the money. Therefore, immediately after his enthronement, Yongzheng began a crackdown against corruption and financial issues. Utilizing his experience during the time as a prince, the emperor used an unconventional approach: first he anticipated the counter-measures that corrupt magistrates might employ to evade state punishment, and then devised the emperor's own counter-measures against the magistrates.

To counter the local magistrated well-built networks, Yongzheng organized a group of inspectors consisted of independent Imperial Commissioners and "clean" local chiefs, assisted with a group of regional officer-to-be. When a regional magistrate was found guilty, he would be replaced by a corresponding member amongst the inspector group who had no connection of interest with the local clique and therefore would naturally do his best to continue the purge. Furthermore, local people were forbidden to lend money to their magistrates, preventing them from temporarily transferring the borrowed money to the local treasure to mask the deficits. Yongzheng also created an independent Inquisition Association to examine all the spending and revenue documents to prevent local officers from bribing the Ministry of Revenue to fabricate financial reports. To prevent the magistrates from fabricating the corruption cases as merely "deificit spending", Yongzheng demanded that the case of deficit spending must be investigated first, and punishment, sanction and compensation should be performed first in the case of deficit spending. Equivocation between deficit spending and corruption was strictly prohibited.

To prevent the guilty magistrates from further exploiting the people to compensate for their deficit spending, Yongzheng immediately dismissed the magistrate before compensation began. Dismissed magistrates no longer had authority over the people and had no choice but to use their own properties to compensate. As the punished magistrate might use other connections as an alternative for their lost authority, paying compensation on behalf of them was also strictly prohibited. The properties of their families and relatives were also confisticated for the compensation payment if necessary. In the cases of magistrates committing suicide to avoid punishment, Yongzheng demanded that their family and descendants should shoulder the punishment and compensation for the deceased magistrate. The emperor himself admitted that he wanted to see the guilty magistrate's descendants "live in poverty and misery." Yongzheng's drastic punishment earned him the nickname "Emperor of confiscation".

Beside harsh punishment, Yongzheng also improved the state officer's income to remove their incentive for corruption. He created a "Fund for transparency nurturing" from government additional revenues, which was now regulated and controlled by the central government, to provide copious allowance for state magistrate, enabling their daily expenses to be covered without accepting bribes. Magistrates not eligible for the Fund's money also received other kinds of allowances, and officers on business trips were also provide an allowance to cover their essential expenses, which had to be reported to the government. The "transparency nurturing" allowances beside removing the corruption incentive, also helped to publicized the magistrate's incomes, enabled the state to monitor, evaluate and detect any potential signs of corruption. Furthermore, all kinds of gifts and "ritual fees" was now strictly prohibited.

The "secret report" system
To effectively grasp the situation of his subordinates, Yongzheng utilized the "secret report" system which originated from the Shunzhi Era, which also suited his own tastes of having personal connection separately with each subordinate. The emperor recruited secret informants from the trusted subordinates who had the privilege to privately report to the Emperor whatever they felt suspicious. The components of secret informants was quite varied, including even some low-ranked officers, and was widely distributed all over the empire. To encourage the sincerity and eagerness of informants, their identity and reports' content was kept strictly confidential; even informants did not know each other, and the procedures and writing style requirements were greatly simplified. Such "secret reporters" enabled the emperor to maintain an extensive information network without a specialized internal espionage bureau. The secret informants also had no privileges beside the secret reports and the reports had no legal authority, which prevented authority abuse from informants like the Ming internal espionage agents. Also, to avoid false accusation and incorrect reports from informants, Yongzheng collected information from various sources, and the accused person also had a chance to defend their actions and prove their innocence. Under a capable ruler, secret reports actually protected innocent magistrates from wrong accusations, as the reports provided alternative information sources beside the official charges.

Farming and land tax
During the massive population growth in the Qing dynasty and increasing demand from peasant and military populations for grain, the Yongzheng emperor launched a grain campaign in which he incentivized officials in local and provincial governments to compete in buying land meant specifically for farming. The Yongzheng emperor offered officials 5-10 year tax holidays in which they were free from paying taxes. This campaign led to more than one million new acres of farmable land. While these campaigns led to more food and land for the population to use for farming, it also led to officials lying about the amount of farmable land they were contributing in order to win the tax holidays. These tax holidays also pushed the burden of paying taxes elsewhere.

Local charity
Ethnicity in Qing China could vary depending on where one was from even locally in China. This ethnic separation along with the booming population led to reduced access to the Civil Service Examinations based on ethnicity and locality. The Yongzheng emperor, in an attempt to allow as many people to take the Civil Service Examination as possible, set up special exams for people in rural China. These special exams were called Miao exams and were located in Yunnan. In the 1730s, landholding shed people such as the Hakka were still not allowed to take the exams, Yongzheng made it legal for these people to take the exams in an attempt to dispel anger at being excluded from the exams.

A growing number of orphaned children or poor families came with the massive Qing population growth. The Yongzheng emperor sought to remedy this by mandating that orphanages (also called poor houses) be built in every county. These were funded not by local, provincial or high level government but privately funded and maintained. These orphanages existed less to help the local population out of poverty and more to model how wealthy officials should act towards the impoverished populations.

Gentry privileges
The Kangxi Emperor mandated that scholars that had passed the Civil Service Examination at any level were able to bypass punishments from the legal system depending on which level of the exams they had passed. Instead of legal repercussions for crimes, criminal officials were instead recommended to the county education commissioner for counseling. This led to corruption among officials who were no longer bound by law. In an attempt to stop this the Yongzheng emperor made it illegal to offer privileges to officials going through the legal system. This did not last long as the Qianlong Emperor reinstated legal privileges for officials that had passed the Civil Service Examination shortly after becoming emperor after Yongzheng.

Tax privileges
In the mid-1720s Qing empire, complex levels of tax hierarchies put in place by the Kangxi emperor existed to separate the population into different tax brackets. Households with government officials were in privileged tax brackets that brought with it tax exemptions for not only the immediate family in the household but also for extended family members. The Yongzheng emperor removed these privileged tax brackets as he saw the local gentry as competition to the throne. Just like the legal privileges that passing the Civil Service Examination offered, soon after the end of the Yongzheng emperor's reign, the Qianlong Emperor quickly reinstated the privileged tax brackets.

Religious policy
Growing distrust of Jesuit missionaries by the Kangxi emperor and later by Yongzheng in the early 1720s led to prohibition and action against the Christian presence in China. The Kangxi emperor had banned foreign missions (outside of Beijing and Guangzhou), and Yongzheng took this one step further by removing all foreign priests from China. All Christian churches were shut down and repurposed as local public offices.

Cohong
Chinese merchant houses belonging to Canton station were grouped together under a larger organization by Yongzheng called Cohong in 1725. This group was responsible for policing all trade within the Canton system.

Meltage fees and silver
As silver became more widely used as a currency in Qing China, the validity and purity of the currency being exchanged had to be verified. Silver taels were sent to official appraisers to do the job of verification. During the appraisal some silver was lost in the process, this lost silver had to be covered by the payer. This extra charge on the lost silver became known as a meltage fee. These meltage fees were a very important source of income for local governments. It became a practice to bribe appraisers to avoid meltage fees. Yongzheng attempted to ban all bribing to avoid these fees and also officially mandated meltage fees as a source of local income. These mandates helped silver become a major part of the Qing economy.

Expansion in the northwest

Like his father, the Yongzheng Emperor used military force in order to preserve the Qing Empire's position in Outer Mongolia. When Tibet was torn by civil war in 1727–1728, he intervened. After withdrawing, he left a Qing Resident (the amban) and a military garrison to safeguard the dynasty's interests.

On 1 November 1728, after the Qing reconquest of Lhasa in Tibet, several Tibetan rebels were sliced to death by Qing Manchu officers and officials. The Qing Manchu President of the Board of Civil Office, Jalangga, Mongol sub-chancellor Sen-ge and brigadier-general Manchu Mala ordered the Tibetan rebels Lum-pa-nas and Na-p'od-pa to be sliced to death. They ordered gZims-dpon C'os-ac'ad (Hsi-mu-pen ch'ui-cha-t'e), son of Lum-pa-nas and rNog Tarqan bsKal-bzajn-c'os-adar and dKon-mc'og-lha-sgrub (Kun-ch'u-k'o-la-ku-pu) and dGa'-ldan-p'un-ts'ogs (K'a-erh-tan-p'en-ch'u-k'o), sons of Na-p'od-pa to be beheaded. Byams-pa (Cha-mu-pa) and his brother Lhag-gsan (La-k'o-sang) and their brothers, younger and older, daughters, wives and mother were exiled after their father sByar-ra-nas was beheaded. The Manchus wrote that they "set an example" by forcing the Tibetans to publicly watch the executions of Tibetan rebels of slicing like Na-p'od-pa since they said it was the Tibetan's nature to be cruel. The exiled Tibetans were given as slaves to soldiers in Ching-chou (Jingzhou), K'ang-zhou (Kangzhou) and Chiang-ning (Jiangning) in the marshall-residences there. The Tibetan rNam-rgyal-grva-ts'an college administrator (gner-adsin) and sKyor'lun Lama were tied together with Lum-pa-nas and Na-p'od-pa on 4 scaffolds (k'rims-sin) to be sliced. The Manchus used musket matchlocks to fire 3 salvoes and then the Manchus strangled the 2 Lamas while slacing (Lingchi) Lum-pa-nas and Na-p'od-pa to death while they beheaded the 13 other rebels leaders. The Tibetan population was depressed by the scene and the writer of MBTJ continued to feel sad as he described it 5 years later. All relatives of the Tibetan rebels including little children were executed by the Qing Manchus except the exiled and deported family of sByar-ra-ba which was condemned to be slaves and most exiles sentenced to deportation died in the process of deportation. The public executions spectacle worked on the Tibetans since they were "cowed into submission" by the Qing. Even the Tibetan collaborator with the Qing, Polhané Sönam Topgyé (P'o-lha-nas) felt sad at his fellow Tibetans being executed in this manner and he prayed for them. All of this was included in a report sent to the Qing emperor at the time, the Yongzheng Emperor. Qing Han Chinese general Yue Zhongqi interviewed the Tibetan collaborator with the Qing, Polhané Sönam Topgyé (P'o-lha-nas) concerning his involvement in crushing the Tibetan rebels and sent a report to the Qing Yongzheng emperor on 17 August 1728.

For the Tibetan campaign, the Yongzheng Emperor sent an army of 230,000 led by Nian Gengyao against the Dzungars and their army of 80,000. Due to geography, the Qing army (although superior in numbers) was at first unable to engage their more mobile enemy. Eventually, they engaged the Dzungars and defeated them. This campaign cost the treasury at least eight million silver taels. Later in the Yongzheng Emperor's reign, he sent a small army of 10,000 to fight the Dzungars again. However, that army was annihilated and the Qing Empire faced the danger of losing control of Mongolia. A Khalkha ally of the Qing Empire would later defeat the Dzungars.

Following the reforms of 1729, the treasury's income increased from 32,622,421 taels in 1721 to about 60 million taels in 1730, surpassing the record set during the Kangxi Emperor's reign; but the pacification of the Qinghai area and the defence of border areas were heavy burdens on the treasury. Safeguarding the country's borders cost 100,000 taels per year. The total military budget came up to about 10 million taels a year. By the end of 1735, military spending had depleted half the treasury, leaving 33.95 million taels. It was because of the cost of war that the Yongzheng Emperor considered making peace with the Dzungars.

Identification of Qing with China
Since the Shunzhi Emperor's time, the Qing emperors had identified China and the Qing Empire as the same, and in treaties and diplomatic papers the Qing Empire called itself "China". During the Kangxi and Yongzheng emperors' reigns, "China" (Dulimbai Gurun in Manchu) was used as the name of the Qing Empire in official Manchu language documents, identifying the Qing Empire and China as the same entity, with "Dulimbai Gurun" appearing in 160 official diplomatic papers between the Qing Empire and the Russian Empire. The term "China" was redefined by the Qing emperors to be a multi-ethnic entity which included non-Han Chinese ethnic groups and their territories. China and Qing were noticeably and increasingly equated with each other during the Qianlong Emperor's reign, with the Qianlong Emperor and the Qing government writing poems and documents using both the Chinese name Zhongguo and the Manchu name Dulimbai Gurun. Compared to the reigns of previous Qing emperors such as the Yongzheng and Kangxi emperors, the use of China to refer to the Qing Empire appears most during the Qianlong Emperor's reign, according to scholars who examined documents on Sino-Russian relations.

The Yongzheng Emperor spoke out against the claim by anti-Qing rebels that the Qing were only rulers of Manchus and not China, saying "The seditious rebels claim that we are the rulers of Manchus and only later penetrated central China to become its rulers. Their prejudices concerning the division of their and our country have caused many vitriolic falsehoods. What these rebels have not understood is the fact that it is for the Manchus the same as the birthplace is for the people of the central plain. Shun belonged to the Eastern Yi, and King Wen to the Western Yi. Does this fact diminish their virtues?" (在逆賊等之意，徒謂本朝以滿洲之君入為中國之主，妄生此疆彼界之私，遂故為訕謗詆譏之說耳，不知本朝之為滿洲，猶中國之有籍貫，舜為東夷之人，文王為西夷之人，曾何損於聖德乎.

Religion

Commoners throughout Qing China were extremely diverse and multi-ethnic because not every region underwent sinification under the Manchu's suzerain. In accordance to the Book of Rites, Manchus of Qing chose to respect the local's cultural heritage and decided not to force their subjects to acculturate and sinicize. Manchus of Qing acknowledged that each region had the prerogative to preserve their identity, heritage, and cultural tradition and their religious faith. Hence, each region was allowed to keep their beliefs and way of worshipping the heavens. On the other hand, since the commoners preserved their ways, Qing, Yongzheng in particular, highly encouraged that Manchu elites should also preserve their ethnic identity and their distinctive ways of worshipping the heaven as well. The Yongzheng Emperor stated: "The Lord of Heaven is Heaven itself.... In the empire we have a temple for honouring Heaven and sacrificing to Him. We Manchus have Tiao Tchin. The first day of every year we burn incense and paper to honor Heaven. We Manchus have our own particular rites for honouring Heaven; the Mongols, Chinese, Russians, and Europeans also have their own particular rites for honouring Heaven. I have never said that he [Urcen, a son of Sunu] could not honour heaven but that everyone has his way of doing it. As a Manchu, Urcen should do it like us." Evidently, the Qing state practiced various religions, which was similar to the previous dynasty, the Ming. During the Ming, in the mid-1580s an Italian Jesuit, Matteo Ricci not only studied the Chinese language to understand the people and the Chinese culture, he also delved into the Confucian classics and adopted the scholar's official-literati robe during his stay near the Canton trading province. Introducing China to his religious faith was in Matteo Ricci's mission, and he successfully built a church in 1601 at Beijing, called Cathedral of Immaculate Conception. Johann Adam Schall von Bell, who was a German Jesuit, went to China in 1619, learned the Chinese language in 1623 in Macau, and was later appointed into the Imperial Astronomical Bureau in 1630 by the Ming, even after the fall of Ming to the rise of Qing, Schall's presence was welcomed by the Manchu of Qing and he was appointed as the head of the Imperial Astronomical Bureau. The accounts of Matteo establishing the institution of his Church during the Ming dynasty and Jesuits such as Schall who was able to acquire a bureaucratic position in the Qing's court make evident that China at one point did welcome things beyond its borders, such as religious faith that was brought by the missionaries. Even though the Catholic church condemned the practice of the Chinese rites in 1645 throughout China, Catholic missionaries continued their practice until the Rites Controversy was concluded in 1742 CE.

The Yongzheng Emperor was firmly against Christian converts among the Manchus. He warned them that the Manchus must follow only the Manchu way of worshipping Heaven since different peoples worshipped Heaven differently.

In 1724, the Yongzheng Emperor issued a decree proscribing Catholicism. This was followed by the persecution of Chinese Christians that steadily increased during the reign of the Yongzheng Emperor's son, the Qianlong Emperor.

Ancestral worship was understood as the Chinese customary tradition rather than as a religious ritual. However, since the Catholic Church condemned the Chinese rites and the decision by the "Church to ban the acceptance of the Chinese rites by the Jesuits" in Qing China, because the Church deemed the practice to be incompatible with the Catholic faith, led to the banishing of missionaries by the Qianlong Emperor in 1742 CE as a response to the Catholic Church's decision.

Jan Jakob Maria wrote "Nor did the Islamitic heretics escape the notice of this potentate. It has frequently been reported to me, he writes in a decree of the 7th of the fourth month (May 4) 1729 (Sh. h. 7), that these Mohammedans all follow one doctrine, that they use a peculiar language and dress, and constantly behave contrary to the laws, so that severe measures should be taken for their repression. But I desire that they shall be looked upon as my ordinary subjects, as “babes of the dynasty" (國家之赤子); for although they have their own mosques, and a peculiar language and religion handed down to them by their forefathers, they have the same manners and customs as the rest of the people; for their religion alone it would not do to prosecute them. There are, moreover, several state-servants among them, who are not without their good qualities. They muster strongest in Shensi, and there they are persecuted more than anywhere else, on account of their clubbing together to gamble, their secreting weapons, and for various other illegal acts. There they also unreservedly give expression to their wrath about the Imperial decrees forbidding the slaughter of horned cattle which are so indispensable to agriculture. They should therefore constantly be reminded to be kind and tolerant, not wantonly to oppress the weaker, nor by their greater intelligence to take in the ignorant, nor on the plea of their special religion to further their own interests, etc. Our will in this matter shall be proclaimed by the Viceroys and Governors throughout all the provinces."

Destruction of ethnic minority autonomy
The Yongzheng Emperor appointed the Manchu official Ortai who violently abolished hereditary ethnic minority states such as those belonging to ethnic minority Miao people across southwest China in Yunnan, Guizhou and Guangxi.

Death and succession
The Yongzheng Emperor ruled the Qing Empire for 13 years before dying suddenly in 1735 at the age of 56. Legend holds that he was assassinated by Lü Siniang, a daughter or granddaughter of Lü Liuliang, whose family was executed for literary crimes against the Qing government. Another theory was that Lü Siniang was the Yongzheng Emperor's lover, and the real mother of the Qianlong Emperor, but he refused to let her become the empress.

It is generally accepted that he died while reading court documents, and it is likely that his death was the result of elixir poisoning from an overdose of the elixir of immortality he was consuming in the belief that it would prolong his life. According to Zhang Tingyu, Yongzheng on his deathbed exhibited symptoms of poisoning, and in the wake of his death, his successor the Qianlong Emperor evicted all Taoist priests from the palace, possibly as punishment for this incident.

To prevent a succession crisis like he had faced, the Yongzheng Emperor was said to have ordered his third son Hongshi (an ally of Yinsi) to commit suicide. He also devised a system for his successors to choose their heirs in secret. He wrote his chosen successor's name on two scrolls, placed one scroll in a sealed box and had the box stored behind the stele in the Qianqing Palace. He kept the other copy with him or hid it. After his death, the officials would compare the scroll in the box with the copy he had kept. If they were deemed identical, the person whose name was on the paper would be the new emperor.

The Yongzheng Emperor was interred in the Western Qing tombs 120 km southwest of Beijing, in the Tai (泰) mausoleum complex (known in Manchu as the Elhe Munggan). His fourth son Hongli, then still known as "Prince Bao (of the First Rank)", succeeded him as the Qianlong Emperor. The Qianlong Emperor rehabilitated many figures who had been purged during his father's reign, including restoring honours to many of his uncles who were formerly his father's rivals in the succession struggle.

Family
Empress

 * Empress Xiaojingxian (孝敬憲皇后) of the Ula-Nara clan (烏拉那拉氏; 28 June 1681 – 29 October 1731), personal name Duoqimuli (多棋木理)
 * Honghui (弘暉), Prince Duan of the First Rank (端親王; 17 April 1697 – 7 July 1704), first son
 * Empress Xiaoshengxian (孝聖憲皇后) of the Niohuru clan (鈕祜祿氏; 12 January 1692 – 2 March 1777)
 * Hongli (弘曆), the Qianlong Emperor (乾隆帝; 25 September 1711 – 7 February 1799), fifth (fourth) son

Imperial Noble Consort

 * Imperial Noble Consort Dunsu (敦肅皇貴妃) of the Nian clan (年氏; ? – 23 December 1725)
 * Fourth daughter (15 April 1715 – June/July 1717)
 * Fuyi (福宜; 30 June 1720 – 9 February 1721), seventh son
 * Fuhui (福惠), Prince Huai of the First Rank (懷親王; 27 November 1721 – 11 October 1728), eighth son
 * Fupei (福沛; 12 June 1723 – ?), ninth son
 * Imperial Noble Consort Chunque (純愨皇貴妃) of the Geng clan (耿氏; December 1689/January 1690 – 27 January 1785)
 * Hongzhou (弘晝), Prince Hegong of the First Rank (和恭親王; 5 January 1712 – 2 September 1770), sixth (fifth) son

Consort

 * Consort Qi (齊妃) of the Li clan (李氏; 1676 – 31 May 1739)
 * Princess Huaike of the Second Rank (和碩懷恪公主; 15 August 1695 – April/May 1717), second daughter
 * Married Xingde (星德; ? – 1739) of the Manchu Nara clan in September/October 1712
 * Hongfen (弘昐; 19 July 1697 – 30 March 1699), second son
 * Hongyun (弘昀; 19 September 1700 – 10 December 1710), third (second) son
 * Hongshi (弘時; 18 March 1704 – 20 September 1727), fourth (third) son
 * Consort Ning (寧妃) of the Wu clan (武氏; ? – 25 June 1734), personal name Lingyuan (令媛)
 * Consort Qian (謙妃) of the Liugiya clan (劉佳氏; 1714 – 17 June 1767), personal name Xiangyu (香玉)
 * Hongyan (弘曕), Prince Guogong of the Second Rank (果恭郡王; 9 May 1733 – 27 April 1765), 10th (sixth) son

Concubine

 * Concubine Mao (懋嬪) of the Song clan (宋氏; 1677 – October/November 1730)
 * First daughter (10 April 1694 – April/May 1694)
 * Third daughter (8 January 1707 – January/February 1707)

Noble Lady

 * Noble Lady Guo (郭貴人)
 * Noble Lady Li (李贵人)
 * Noble Lady An (安贵人)
 * Noble Lady Hai (海贵人)
 * Noble Lady Zhang (张贵人)
 * Noble Lady Lao (老貴人)

First Class Attendant

 * First Class Attendant Na (那常在)
 * First Class Attendant Li (李常在)
 * First Class Attendant Ma (馬常在)
 * First Class Attendant Chun (春常在)
 * First Class Attendant Gao (高常在)
 * First Class Attendant Chang (常常在)
 * First Class Attendant Gu (顧常在)

Second Class Attendant

 * Second Class Attendant Su (蘇答應)
 * Second Class Attendant Yun (雲答應)

Lady

 * Lady of Qixiang Palace (啟祥宮姑娘)

Mistress

 * Mistress Yi (伊格格)
 * Mistress Zhang (張格格)
 * Mistress Su (蘇格格)

In fiction and popular culture

 * The Yongzheng Emperor appears in the flying guillotine-themed wuxia films and also in Qing gong qi shi lu (The Lady Assassin) produced by the Shaw Brothers Studio.
 * The Yongzheng Emperor is mentioned in the wuxia novel Ernü Yingxiong Zhuan (兒女英雄傳) by Wenkang (文康). It was adapted into the 1983 Hong Kong television series The Legend of the Unknowns (十三妹) and the 1986 Chinese film Lucky 13 (侠女十三妹).
 * A popular legend tells of the Yongzheng Emperor's death at the hands of a female assassin, Lü Siniang (呂四娘), a fictitious granddaughter (or daughter, in some accounts) of Lü Liuliang. She committed the murder to avenge her grandfather (or father), who was wrongly put to death by the emperor. The legend was adapted into many films and television series.
 * There are two legends about the origins of the Yongzheng Emperor's son and successor, Hongli (the Qianlong Emperor). The first, more widely circulated in southern China, says that Hongli is actually the son of Chen Shiguan (陳世倌), an official from Haining, Zhejiang. Shortly after he was born, Hongli switched places with one of the Yongzheng Emperor's daughters, was raised as the emperor's son, and eventually inherited the throne. The wuxia writer Louis Cha adapted this legend for his novel The Book and the Sword. The second legend about the Qianlong Emperor's origins, more popular in northern China, stated that during a trip to the Mulan Hunting Grounds (木蘭圍場) in Rehe Province, the Yongzheng Emperor had an illegitimate affair with a palace maid and they conceived a son, who became the Qianlong Emperor.
 * The Yongzheng Emperor is featured as an important character in Tong Hua's novel Bu Bu Jing Xin and he had a romantic relationship with the protagonist, Ma'ertai Ruoxi. He is referred to as the "Fourth Prince" in the novel. Taiwanese actor Nicky Wu portrayed the Fourth Prince in Scarlet Heart, a 2011 Chinese television series adapted from the novel.
 * The Yongzheng Emperor appears in the romance fantasy novel series Meng Hui Da Qing (梦回大清) by Yaoye (妖叶).

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Yongzheng Emperor


text:
Brain in a vat

In philosophy, the brain in a vat (BIV) is a scenario used in a variety of thought experiments intended to draw out certain features of human conceptions of knowledge, reality, truth, mind, consciousness, and meaning. Originated by Gilbert Harman, Hilary Putnam turned the scenario into a modernized version of René Descartes's evil demon thought experiment. Following many science fiction stories, the scenario involves a mad scientist that might remove a person's brain from the body, suspend it in a vat of life-sustaining liquid, and connect its neurons by wires to a supercomputer that would provide it with electrical impulses identical to those a brain normally receives. According to such stories, the computer would then be simulating reality (including appropriate responses to the brain's own output) and the "disembodied" brain would continue to have perfectly normal conscious experiences, such as those of a person with an embodied brain, without these being related to objects or events in the real world. According to Putnam, the thought of "being a brain-in-a-vat" (BIV) is either false or meaningless. Considered a cornerstone of Semantic externalism, the argument produced significant literature. The Matrix franchise and other fictional works (below) are considered inspired by Putnam's argument.

Intuitive version
Putnam's argument is based on the causal theory of reference, where a word describing a spatio-temporal object is meaningful if and only if it possesses an information-carrying causal relation to whatever it denotes. Next, an "envatted" brain is one whose entire world is composed of (say) electric manipulations performed by a computer simulation to which it is connected. With this much in place, consider the sentence "I am a brain in a vat" (BIV). In case you are not a brain in a vat, the sentence is false by definition. In case you are a brain in a vat, the terms "brain" and "vat" fail to denote actual brains and actual vats with whom you had an information-carrying causal interaction since, again by definition, the only interaction available is with the computer simulation, which is not information carrying. By the causal theory of reference, such references do not carry referential meaning. Thus, the sentence "I am a brain in a vat" is either false or meaningless.

Uses
The simplest use of brain-in-a-vat scenarios is as an argument for philosophical skepticism and solipsism. A simple version of this runs as follows: since the brain in a vat gives and receives exactly the same impulses as it would if it were in a skull, and since these are its only way of interacting with its environment, then it is not possible to tell, from the perspective of that brain, whether it is in a skull or a vat. Yet in the first case, most of the person's beliefs may be true (if they believe, say, that they are walking down the street, or eating ice-cream); in the latter case, their beliefs are false. Since the argument says if one cannot know whether one is a brain in a vat, then one cannot know whether most of one's beliefs might be completely false. Since, in principle, it is impossible to rule out oneself being a brain in a vat, there cannot be good grounds for believing any of the things one believes; a skeptical argument would contend that one certainly cannot know them, raising issues with the definition of knowledge. Other philosophers have drawn upon sensation and its relationship to meaning in order to question whether brains in vats are really deceived at all, thus raising wider questions concerning perception, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language.

The brain-in-a-vat is a contemporary version of the argument given in Hindu Maya illusion, Plato's Allegory of the Cave, Zhuangzi's "Zhuangzi dreamed he was a butterfly", and the evil demon in René Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy.

Recently, many contemporary philosophers believe that virtual reality will seriously affect human autonomy as a form of brain in a vat. But another view is that VR will not destroy our cognitive structure or take away our connection with reality. On the contrary, VR will allow us to have more new propositions, new insights and new perspectives to see the world.

Philosophical debates
While the disembodied brain (the brain in a vat) can be seen as a helpful thought experiment, there are several philosophical debates surrounding the plausibility of the thought experiment. If these debates conclude that the thought experiment is implausible, a possible consequence would be that we are no closer to knowledge, truth, consciousness, representation, etc. than we were prior to the experiment.

Argument from biology
One argument against the BIV thought experiment derives from the idea that the BIV is not – and cannot be – biologically similar to that of an embodied brain (that is, a brain found in a person). Since the BIV is disembodied, it follows that it does not have similar biology to that of an embodied brain. That is, the BIV lacks the connections from the body to the brain, which renders the BIV neither neuroanatomically nor neurophysiologically similar to that of an embodied brain. If this is the case, we cannot say that it is even possible for the BIV to have similar experiences to the embodied brain, since the brains are not equal. However, it could be counter-argued that the hypothetical machine could be made to also replicate those types of inputs.

Argument from externalism
A second argument deals directly with the stimuli coming into the brain. This is often referred to as the account from externalism or ultra-externalism. In the BIV, the brain receives stimuli from a machine. In an embodied brain, however, the brain receives the stimuli from the sensors found in the body (via touching, tasting, smelling, etc.) which receive their input from the external environment. This argument oftentimes leads to the conclusion that there is a difference between what the BIV is representing and what the embodied brain is representing. This debate has been hashed out, but remains unresolved, by several philosophers including Uriah Kriegel, Colin McGinn, and Robert D. Rupert, and has ramifications for philosophy of mind discussions on (but not limited to) representation, consciousness, content, cognition, and embodied cognition.

Argument from incoherence
A third argument against BIV comes from a direction of incoherence, which was presented by the philosopher Hilary Putnam. He attempts to demonstrate this through the usage of a transcendental argument, in which he tries to illustrate that the thought experiment's incoherence lies on the basis that it is self-refuting. To do this, Putnam first established a relationship that he refers to as a "causal connection" which is sometimes referred to as "a causal constraint". This relationship is further defined, through a theory of reference that suggested reference can not be assumed, and words are not automatically intrinsically connected with what it represents. This theory of reference would later become known as semantic externalism. This concept is further illustrated when Putnam establishes a scenario in which a monkey types out Hamlet by chance; however, this does not mean that the monkey is referring to the play, because the monkey has no knowledge of Hamlet and therefore can not refer back to it. He then offers the "Twin Earth" example to demonstrate that two identical individuals, one on the Earth and another on a "twin Earth", may possess the exact same mental state and thoughts, yet refer to two different things. For instance, when people think of cats, the referent of their thoughts would be the cats that are found on Earth. However, people's twins on twin Earth, though possessing the same thoughts, would instead be referring not to Earth's cats, but to twin Earth's cats. Bearing this in mind, he writes that a "pure" brain in a vat, i.e., one that has never existed outside of the simulation, could not even truthfully say that it was a brain in a vat. This is because the BIV, when it says "brain" and "vat", can only refer to objects within the simulation, not to things outside the simulation it does not have a relationship with. Putnam refers to this relationship as a "causal connection" which is sometimes referred to as "a causal constraint". Therefore, what it says is demonstrably false. Alternatively, if the speaker is not actually a BIV, then the statement is also false. He concludes, then, that the statement "I'm a BIV" is necessarily false and self-refuting. This argument has been explored at length in philosophical literature since its publication. A potential loophole in Putnam‘s reference theory is that a brain on Earth that is "kidnapped", placed into a vat, and subjected to a simulation could still refer to brains and vats which are real in the sense of Putnam, and thus correctly say it is a brain in a vat according to Putnamian reference theory. However, the notion that the "pure" BIV is incorrect and the reference theory underpinning it remains influential in the philosophy of mind, language and metaphysics. Anthony L. Brueckner has formulated an extension of Putnam‘s argument which rules out this loophole by employing a disquotational principle. It will be discussed in the following two sections.

Reconstructions of Putnam's argument
An issue that has arisen with Putnam's argument is that his premises only imply the metalinguistic statement that "my utterances of 'I am a BIV' are false". But a skeptic may demand the object-language statement 'I am a BIV' to be proven. In order to combat this issue, various philosophers have taken on the task of reconstructing Putnam's argument. Some philosophers like Anthony L. Brueckner and Crispin Wright have taken on approaches that utilize disquotational principles. While others like Ted A. Warfield have taken on approaches that focus on the concepts of self-knowledge and priori.

The Disjunctive Argument
One of the earliest but influential reconstructions of Putnam's transcendental argument was suggested by Anthony L. Brueckner. Brueckner's reconstruction is as follows: "(1) Either I am a BIV (speaking vat-English) or I am a non-BIV (speaking English). (2) If I am a BIV (speaking vat-English), then my utterances of 'I am a BIV' are true if I have sense impressions as of being a BIV. (3) If I am a BIV (speaking vat-English), then I do not have sense impressions as of being a BIV. (4) If I am a BIV (speaking vat-English), then my utterances of 'I am a BIV' are false. [(2), (3)] (5) If I am a non-BIV (speaking English), then my utterances of 'I am a BIV' are true if I am a BIV. (6) If I am a non-BIV (speaking English), then my utterances of 'I am a BIV' are false. [(5)] (7) My utterances of 'I am a BIV' are false. [(1), (4), (6)]" A key thing to note is that although these premises further define Putnam's argument, they do not so far prove 'I am not a BIV', because, although the premises imply the meta-linguistic statement that "my utterances 'I am a BIV' are false", they do not yet imply the object language statement that 'I am not a BIV'. In order to achieve the Putnamian conclusion, Brueckner thus further strengthens his argument by employing the disquotational principle of "My utterances of 'I am not a BIV' are true if I am not a BIV." This statement is justified since the metalanguage which contains the tokens for the disquotational principle also contains the object language tokens to which the utterances 'I am not a BIV' belong.

In fiction

 * Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Season 4
 * Alita: Battle Angel
 * Avatar
 * Bliss
 * "The Brain of Colonel Barham", a 1965 episode of the TV series The Outer Limits
 * The Brain of Morbius
 * Brain (novel)
 * Brainstorm
 * Caprica
 * Chappie
 * The City of Lost Children
 * Cold Lazarus
 * The Colossus of New York
 * Dark Star
 * Donovan's Brain
 * Existenz
 * Fallout series
 * Point Lookout, an expansion pack for Fallout 3
 * Old World Blues, an expansion pack for Fallout: New Vegas
 * Automatron, an expansion pack for Fallout 4
 * Futurama
 * Gangers in Doctor Who
 * Ghost in the Shell
 * Inception
 * Lobotomy Corporation
 * "Flashes Before Your Eyes", an episode of Lost
 * The Man with Two Brains
 * The Matrix film series
 * "Out of Time", an episode of Red Dwarf
 * Possible Worlds
 * Psycho-Pass
 * Repo Men
 * RoboCop
 * Saints Row IV
 * "Ship in a Bottle", an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation
 * Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
 * Soma
 * Source Code
 * "Spock's Brain", an episode of Star Trek: The Original Series
 * Steins;Gate 0
 * The Star Diaries
 * Strange Days
 * "The Inner Light", an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation
 * The Thirteenth Floor
 * Total Recall
 * Transcendence
 * Tron
 * Tron: Legacy
 * "The Vacation Goo", an episode of American Dad!
 * The Whisperer in Darkness
 * Upload (TV series)
 * Where am I?, written by Daniel Dennett
 * “William and Mary” by Roald Dahl
 * Adapted into the first episode of Way Out in 1961
 * Adapted again for Tales of the Unexpected in 1979
 * "White Christmas - Part II", an episode of Black Mirror
 * World on a Wire
 * World on a Wire

title: Brain in a vat


text:
Reign title

Reign title may refer to:

 * Chinese era name
 * Japanese era name
 * Korean era name
 * Vietnamese era name

title: Reign title


text:
Léognan

Léognan is a commune in the Gironde department, Nouvelle-Aquitaine, southwestern France.

Population
Its inhabitants are called Léognanais.

Wine
It is located in the Graves area of the Bordeaux county, known for its red wine (Pessac-Léognan appellation):
 * Château Haut-Bailly
 * Domaine de Chevalier
 * Château de Fieuzal
 * Château Olivier
 * Château Carbonnieux
 * Château Malartic Lagravière

The processing plant for Cacolac has been located here since 2000.

title: Léognan


text:
Hong Taiji

Hong Taiji (28 November 1592 – 21 September 1643), also rendered as Huang Taiji and sometimes referred to as Abahai in Western literature, also known by his temple name as the Emperor Taizong of Qing, was the second khan of the Later Jin dynasty and the founding emperor of the Qing dynasty. He was responsible for consolidating the empire that his father Nurhaci had founded and laid the groundwork for the conquest of the Ming dynasty, although he died before this was accomplished. He was also responsible for changing the name of the Jurchens to "Manchu" in 1635, and changing the name of his dynasty from "Great Jin" to "Great Qing" in 1636.

Names and titles
It is unclear whether "Hong Taiji" was a title or a personal name. Written Hong taiji in Manchu, it was borrowed from the Mongolian title Khong Tayiji. That Mongolian term was itself derived from the Chinese huang taizi 皇太子 ("crown prince", "imperial prince"), but in Mongolian it meant, among other things, something like "respected son". Alternatively, historian Pamela Crossley argues that "Hung Taiji" was a title "of Mongolian inspiration" derived from hung, a word that appeared in other Mongolian titles at the time. Early seventeenth-century Chinese and Korean sources rendered his name as "Hong Taiji". The modern Chinese rendering "Huang Taiji" (皇太極), which uses the character huang ("imperial"), misleadingly implies that Hong Taiji once held the title of "imperial prince" or heir apparent, even though his father and predecessor Nurhaci never designated a successor.

"Hong Taiji" was very rarely used in Manchu sources, because they observed a taboo on the personal names of emperors. In redacted documents, Hong Taiji was simply called the "Fourth Beile" or "fourth prince" (duici beile), indicating that he was the fourth ranked among the eight beile Nurhaci had designated from among his sons. However, an archival document rediscovered in 1996 and recounting events from 1621 calls him "Hong Taiji" in a discussion concerning the possible naming of Nurhaci's heir apparent, a title that the document refers to as taise. Tatiana Pang and Giovanni Stary, two specialists of early Manchu history, consider this document as "further evidence" that Hong Taiji was his real name, "not being at all connected with the Chinese title huang taizi". Historian Mark Elliott views this as persuasive evidence that Hong Taiji was not a title, but a personal name.

Western scholars used to refer to Hong Taiji as "Abahai", but this appellation is now considered mistaken. Hong Taiji was never mentioned under this name in Manchu and Chinese sources; it was a mistake first made by Russian clergyman G.V. Gorsky and later repeated by sinologists starting in the early twentieth century. Giovanni Stary states that this name may have originated by confusing "Abkai" with Abkai sure, which was Hong Taiji's era name in the Manchu language. Though "Abahai" is indeed "unattested in Manchu sources", it might also have derived from the Mongol word Abaġai, an honorary name given to the younger sons of hereditary monarchs. According to another view, Hong Taiji was mistakenly referred to as Abahai as a result of a confusion with the name of Nurhaci's main consort Lady Abahai.

Hong Taiji was the second Khan of the Later Jin and then Emperor of the Qing dynasty, after he changed its name. His title as Great Khan was Bogd Sécén Khaan (Manchu: Gosin Onco Hūwaliyasun Enduringge Han), and he was referred to as Bogda Khan by his Mongol subjects. His reign names, which were used in his lifetime to record dates, were Tiancong 天聰 ("heavenly wisdom"; Manchu: Abka-i sure) from 1627 to 1636, and Chongde 崇德 ("lofty virtue"; Manchu: Wesihun erdemungge, Mongolian: Degedü Erdemtü) from 1636 to 1643.

Hong Taiji's temple name, by which he was worshipped at the Imperial Ancestral Temple, was Taizong 太宗, the name that was conventionally given to the second emperor of a dynasty. His posthumous name, which was chosen to reflect his style of rule, was "Wen Huangdi" 文皇帝 (Manchu: šu hūwangdi), which means "the culturing emperor" or "the emperor of letters".

Consolidation of power

Hong Taiji was the eighth son of Nurhaci, whom he succeeded as the second ruler of the Later Jin dynasty in 1626. He might have had Mongolian ancestry as the son of Yehe-Nara Monggo Jerjer, and he might have been genetically related to the Mongolic Daur people as a member of the Aisin-Gioro clan.

Although it has always been regarded as gossip, he was said to have been involved in the suicide of Dorgon's mother, Lady Abahai, in order to block the succession of his younger brother. This is speculated because at the time of Nurhaci's death, there were four Lords/Beile with Hong Taiji holding the lowest rank, but also being the most fit one.

Originally, at the end of Nurhaci's reign, Hong Taiji controlled the two White Banners, but after Lady Abahai's death, he switched his two banners with Dorgon and Dodo's two Yellow banners. In the end, Hong Taiji had control over the highest class banners — the Plain and Bordered Yellow Banners — and the most influence. From there, he slowly got rid of his competitors' powers. Later, he would also receive the Plain Blue Banner from his fifth brother Manggūltai, which was the third strongest banner. Those three banners would officially become the Upper Three Banners during the early years of the Qing dynasty.

Ethnic policies
During his reign, Hong Taiji started recruitment of Han ethnicity officials. After a 1623 revolt, Nurhaci came to mistrust his Nikan (Manchu:, means "Han people") followers so Hong Taiji began their assimilation into the country and government.

A mass marriage of Han Chinese officers and officials to Manchu women numbering 1,000 couples was arranged by Prince Yoto and Hong Taiji in 1632 to promote harmony between the two ethnic groups.

It is the predecessor of Mongol Yamen ( 蒙古衙門, monggo jurgan) which was established for indirect government of Inner Mongolia after the Mongols were conquered by Hong Taiji. In 1638 it was renamed to Lifanyuan. Initially, the ministerial affairs were settled, while vice-ministers were set up as vice-ministers.

Expansion
He continued the expansion of the Later Jin dynasty in Manchuria, pushing deeper into the Mongolian Plateau and raiding the Joseon dynasty and the Ming dynasty. His personal military abilities were widely praised and he effectively developed the military-civil administration known as the Eight Banners or Banner system. This system was well-suited to accept the different peoples, primarily Han and Mongols, who joined the Later Jin state either following negotiated agreements or military defeat.

Although Hong Taiji patronized Tibetan Buddhism in public, in private he disdained the Buddhist belief of the Mongols and thought it was destructive of Mongol identity. He is quoted to have said that, "The Mongolian princes are abandoning the Mongolian language; their names are all in imitation of the lamas." The Manchus themselves such as Hong Taiji did not personally believe in Tibetan Buddhism and few wanted to convert. Hong Taiji described some Tibetan Buddhist lamas as "incorrigibles" and "liars", but still patronized Buddhism in order to harness the Tibetans' and Mongols' belief in the religion.

Hong Taiji started his conquest by subduing the potent Ming ally in Korea. February 1627 his forces crossed the Yalu River which had frozen. In 1628, he attempted to invade the Ming dynasty, but was defeated by Yuan Chonghuan and his use of artillery. During the next five years, Hong Taiji spent resources in training his artillery to offset the strength of the Ming artillery. Hong Taiji upgraded the weapons of the Empire. He realized the advantage of the Red Cannons and later also bought the Red Cannons into the army. Though the Ming dynasty still had more cannons, Hong Taiji now possessed the cannons of equal might and Asia's strongest cavalry. Also during this time, he sent several probing raids into northern China which were defeated. First attack went through the Jehol Pass, then in 1632 and 1634 he sent raids into Shanxi.

In 1636, Hong Taiji invaded Joseon Korea, as the latter did not accept that Hong Taiji had become emperor and refused to assist in operations against the Ming. With the Joseon dynasty surrendered in 1637, Hong Taiji succeeded in making them cut off relations with the Ming dynasty and force them to submit as tributary state of the Qing dynasty. Also during this period, Hong Taiji took over Inner Mongolia in three major wars, each of them victorious. From 1636 until 1644, he sent 4 major expeditions into the Amur region. In 1640 he completed the conquest of the Evenks, when he defeated and captured their leader Bombogor. By 1644, the entire region was under his control.

Huang Taji's plan at first was to make a deal with the Ming dynasty. If the Ming was willing to give support and money that would be beneficial to the Qing's economy, the Qing in exchange would not only be willing to not attack the borders, but also admit itself as a country one level lower than the Ming dynasty; however, since Ming court officials were reminded of the deal that preceded the Song dynasty's wars with the Jin Empire, the Ming refused the exchange. Huang Taiji rejected the comparison, saying that, "Neither is your Ming ruler a descendant of the Song nor are we heir to the Jin. That was another time." Hong Taiji had not wanted to conquer the Ming. The Ming's refusal ultimately led him to take the offensive. The people who first encouraged him to invade the Ming dynasty were his ethnic Han advisors Fan Wencheng, Ma Guozhu, and Ning Wanwo. Hong Taiji recognized that the Manchus needed Han defectors in order to assist in the conquest of the Ming, and thus explained to other Manchus why he also needed to be lenient to recent defectors like Ming general Hong Chengchou, who surrendered to the Qing in 1642.

Government
When Hong Taiji came into power, the military was composed of entirely Mongol and Manchu companies. By 1636, Hong Taiji created the first of many Chinese companies. Before the conquest of the Ming dynasty, the number of companies organized by him and his successor was 278 Manchus, 120 Mongols, and 165 Han. By the time of Hong Taiji's death there were more ethnic Han than Manchus and he had realized the need for there to be control exerted whilst getting approval from the Han majority. Not only did he incorporate the Han into the military, but also into the government. The Council of Deliberative Officials was formed as the highest level of policy-making and was composed entirely of Manchu. However, Hong Taiji adopted from the Ming such institutions as the Six Ministries, the Censorate and others. Each of these lower ministries was headed by a Manchu prince, but had four presidents: two were Manchu, one was Mongol, and one was Han. This basic framework remained, even though the details fluctuated over time, for some time.

Renaming the dynasty
In 1635, Hong Taiji changed the name of his people from Jurchen (Manchu: jušen) to Manchu, or  manju in the Manchu language. The original meaning of Manju is not known and so the reasons for its adoption remain opaque. There are many theories as to the reason for the choice of name but two of the most commonly cited are its sounding similar to the Manchu word for "brave" and a possible connection with the Bodhisattva Manjusri, the Bodhisattva of Wisdom, of whom Nurhaci claimed to be an incarnation.

The dynastic name Later Jin was a direct reference to the Jin dynasty founded by the Jurchen people, who ruled northern China from 1115 to 1234. As such, the name was likely to be viewed as closely tied to the Jurchens and would perhaps evoke hostility from ethnic Han who viewed the Song dynasty, rival state to the Jin, as the legitimate rulers of China at that time. Hong Taiji's ambition was to conquer China proper and overthrow the Ming dynasty, and to do that required not only a powerful military force but also an effective bureaucratic administration. For this, he used the obvious model, that of the Ming government, and recruited Ming officials to his cause. If the name of Later Jin would prove an impediment to his goal among the Han people, then it was not too much to change it. At the same time, Hong Taiji conquered the territory north of Shanhai pass by Ming Dynasty and Ligdan Khan in Inner Mongolia. He won one of the Yuan dynasty's imperial jade seal (Chinese: ) and a golden Buddha called "Mahakala". In April 1636, Mongol nobility of Inner Mongolia, Manchu nobility and the Han mandarin held the Kurultai in Shenyang, recommended khan of Later Jin to be the emperor of Great Qing empire. Russian archive contains translations of the 1636 year Hong Taiji decree with the provision that after the fall of the Qing dynasty Mongols will return to their previous laws, i.e. independence. Whatever the precise motivation, Hong Taiji proclaimed the establishment of the Qing dynasty and also changed his era name to Chóngdé in 1636. The reasons for the choice of Qing as the new name are likewise unclear, although it has been speculated that the sound – Jin and Qing are pronounced similarly in Manchu – or wuxing theory – traditional ideas held that fire, associated with the character for Ming, was overcome by water, associated with the character for Qing – may have influenced the choice. Another possible reason may be that Hong Taiji changed the name of the dynasty from (Later) Jin to Qing in 1636 because of internecine fraternal struggle and skirmish between brothers and half brothers for the throne.

According to Taoist philosophy, the name Jin has the meaning of metal and fire in its constituent, thereby igniting the tempers of the brothers of the Manchu Royal household into open conflicts and wars. Hong Taiji therefore adopted the new name of Great Qing (大清), the Chinese character of which has the water symbol [3 strokes] on its left hand side. The name, which means clear and transparent, with its water symbol was hoped to put out the feud among the brothers of the Manchu Royal household.

Hongtaiji claimed that the progenitor of his Aisin Gioro clan, Bukūri Yongšon (布庫里雍順), was conceived from a virgin birth. According to the legend, three heavenly maidens, namely Enggulen (恩古倫), Jenggulen (正古倫) and Fekulen (佛庫倫), were bathing at a lake called Bulhūri Omo near the Changbai Mountains. A magpie dropped a piece of red fruit near Fekulen, who ate it. She then became pregnant with Bukūri Yongšon. However, another older version of the story by the Hurha (Hurka) tribe member Muksike recorded in 1635 contradicts Hongtaiji's version on location, claiming that it was in Heilongjiang province close to the Amur river where Bulhuri lake was located where the "heavenly maidens" took their bath. This was recorded in the Jiu Manzhou Dang and his much shorter and simpler in addition to being older. This is believed to be the original version and Hongtaiji changed it to Changbai mountain. It shows that the Aisin Gioro clan originated in the Amur area and the Heje (Hezhen) and other Amur valley Jurchen tribes had an oral version of the same tale. It also fits with Jurchen history since some ancestors of the Manchus originated north before the 14th-15th centuries in the Amur and only later moved south.

The banners status
Before Hong Taiji was emperor, he controlled the two White banners. Upon Nurhaci's death, Hong Taiji immediately switched his two White Banners with Nurhaci's two Yellow Banners, which should have been passed on to Dorgon and his brothers. As emperor, he was the holder of three banners out of eight. He controlled the Upper Three Banners or the Elite banners which at the time were the Plain/Bordered Yellow Banners and Plain Blue Banner. Later the Plain Blue Banner was switched by Dorgon to the Plain White Banner as the third Elite Banner. At the end of his reign, Hong Taiji gave the two Yellow Banners to his eldest son Hooge. Daisan, who was the second son of Nurhaci, and his son controlled the two Red Banners. Dorgon and his two brothers controlled the two White Banners and Šurhaci's son Jirgalang controlled the remaining Bordered Blue Banner.

Death and succession
Hong Taiji died on 21 September 1643 just as the Qing was preparing to attack Shanhai Pass, the last Ming fortification guarding access to the north China plains. Because he died without having named an heir, the Qing state now faced a succession crisis. The Deliberative Council of Princes and Ministers debated on whether to grant the throne to Hong Taiji's half-brother Dorgon – a proven military leader –  or to Hong Taiji's eldest son Hooge. As a compromise, Hong Taiji's five-year-old ninth son Fulin was chosen, while Dorgon – alongside Nurhaci's nephew Jirgalang –  was given the title of "prince regent". Fulin was officially crowned emperor of the Qing dynasty on 8 October 1643 and it was decided that he would reign under the era name "Shunzhi." A few months later, Qing armies led by Dorgon seized Beijing, and the young Shunzhi Emperor became the first Qing emperor to rule from that new capital. That the Qing state succeeded not only in conquering China but also in establishing a capable administration was due in large measure to the foresight and policies of Hong Taiji. His body was buried in Zhaoling, located in northern Shenyang.

Legacy
As the emperor, he is commonly recognized as having abilities similar to the best emperors such as Yongle, Emperor Taizong of Tang due to his effective rule, use of talent, and warring skills. According to historian Jin Yong, Hong Taiji had the broad and wise views of Qin Shi Huang, Emperor Gaozu of Han, Emperor Guangwu of Han, Emperor Wen of Sui, Emperor Taizong of Tang, Emperor Taizu of Song, Kublai Khan, the Hongwu Emperor, and the Yongle Emperor. His political abilities were paralleled only by Genghis Khan, Emperor Taizong of Tang, and Emperor Guangwu of Han. In this sense, Hong Taiji is considered by some historians as the true first emperor for the Qing dynasty. Some historians suspect Hong Taiji was overall underrated and overlooked as a great emperor because he was a Manchu.

Family
Empress

 * Empress Xiaoduanwen (孝端文皇后) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏; 31 May 1599 – 28 May 1649), personal name Jerjer (哲哲)
 * Makata (馬喀塔), Princess Wenzhuang of the First Rank (固倫溫莊公主; 10 September 1625 – April/May 1663), second daughter
 * Married Ejei (額哲; ? – 1641) of the Chahar Borjigin clan on 16 February 1636
 * Married Abunai (阿布奈; 1635–1675) of the Chahar Borjigin clan in 1645 and had issue (two sons)
 * Princess Jingduan of the First Rank (固倫靖端公主; 2 August 1628 – June/July 1686), third daughter
 * Married Kitad (奇塔特; ? – 1653) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan in 1639
 * Princess Yong'an Duanzhen of the First Rank (固倫永安端貞公主; 7 October 1634 – February/March 1692), eighth daughter
 * Married Bayasihulang (巴雅斯護朗) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan in 1645
 * Empress Xiaozhuangwen (孝莊文皇后) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏; 28 March 1613 – 27 January 1688), personal name Bumbutai (布木布泰)
 * Yatu (雅圖), Princess Yongmu of the First Rank (固倫雍穆公主; 31 January 1629 – February/March 1678), fourth daughter
 * Married Birtakhar (弼爾塔哈爾; ? – 1667) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan in 1641
 * Atu (阿圖), Princess Shuhui of the First Rank (固倫淑慧公主; 2 March 1632 – 28 February 1700), fifth daughter
 * Married Suo'erha (索爾哈) of the Khalkha Borjigin clan in 1643
 * Married Sabdan (色布騰; ? – 1667) of the Barin Borjigin clan in 1648
 * Princess Shuzhe Duanxian of the First Rank (固倫淑哲端獻公主; 16 December 1633 – February/March 1648), seventh daughter
 * Married Lamasi (喇瑪思) of the Jarud Borjigin clan in 1645
 * Fulin (福臨), the Shunzhi Emperor (順治帝; 15 March 1638 – 5 February 1661), ninth son

 Primary Consort

 * Primary Consort Minhui (敏惠元妃) of the Khorchin Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏; 1609 – 22 October 1641), personal name Harjol (海蘭珠)
 * Eighth son (27 August 1637 – 13 March 1638)
 * Consort Yuan (元妃) of the Niohuru clan (鈕祜祿氏; 1593–1612)
 * Lobohoi (洛博會; 1611–1617), third son
 * Consort Ji (繼妃) of the Ula-Nara clan (烏拉那拉氏)
 * Hooge (豪格), Prince Suwu of the First Rank (肅武親王; 16 April 1609 – 4 May 1648), first son
 * Loge (洛格; 1611 – November/December 1621), second son
 * Princess Aohan of the First Rank (敖漢固倫公主; 3 April 1621 – February/March 1654), first daughter
 * Married Bandi (班第; ? – 1647) of the Mongol Aohan Borjigin clan on 25 May 1633

Secondary Consort

 * Noble Consort Yijing (懿靖貴妃) of the Abaga Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏; ? – 1674), personal name Namjung (娜木鐘)
 * Princess Duanshun of the First Rank (固倫端順公主; 30 April 1636 – July/August 1650), 11th daughter
 * Married Garma Sodnam (噶爾瑪索諾木; ? – 1663) of the Mongol Abaga Borjigin clan in December 1647/January 1648
 * Bomubogor (博穆博果爾), Prince Xiangzhao of the First Rank (襄昭親王; 20 January 1642 – 22 August 1656), 11th son
 * Consort Kanghuishu (康惠淑妃) of the Abaga Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏; 1606 – June/July 1667), personal name Batmadzoo (巴特瑪璪)
 * Secondary consort (側福晉) of the Yehe-Nara clan (葉赫那拉氏), personal name Wuyunzhu (烏雲珠)
 * Šose, Prince Chengzeyu of the First Rank (承澤裕親王 碩塞; 17 January 1629 – 12 January 1655), fifth son
 * Secondary consort (側福晉) of the Jarud Borjigin clan (博爾濟吉特氏)
 * Princess of the First Rank (固倫公主; 15 December 1633 – April/May 1649), sixth daughter
 * Married Kuazha (誇札; ? – 1649) of the Manchu Irgen-Gioro clan in December 1644 or January 1645
 * Ninth daughter (5 November 1635 – April/May 1652)
 * Married Hashang (哈尚; ? – 1651) of the Mongol Borjigin clan in October/November 1648

Concubine

 * Mistress (格格) of the Yanzha clan (顏扎氏)
 * Yebušu (葉布舒), Duke of the Second Rank (輔國公; 25 November 1627 – 23 October 1690), fourth son
 * Mistress (格格) of the Nara clan (那拉氏)
 * Lady of the Second Rank (縣君; 30 November 1635 – August/September 1661), 10th daughter
 * Married Huisai (輝塞; ? – 1651) of the Manchu Gūwalgiya clan in September/October 1651
 * Gose (高塞), Duke Quehou of the First Rank (愨厚鎮國公; 12 March 1637 – 5 September 1670), sixth son
 * 13th daughter (16 August 1638 – May/June 1657)
 * Married Laha (拉哈) of the Manchu Gūwalgiya clan in March/April 1652
 * Mistress (格格) of the Sayin Noyan clan (賽音諾顏氏)
 * Lady of the Third Rank (鄉君; 9 April 1637 – November/December 1678), 12th daughter
 * Married Bandi (班迪; ? – 1700) of the Mongol Borjigin clan in September/October 1651
 * Mistress (格格) of the Irgen-Gioro clan (伊爾根覺羅氏)
 * Cangšu (常舒), Duke of the Second Rank (輔國公; 13 May 1637 – 13 February 1700), seventh son
 * Mistress (格格) of the Keyikelei clan (克伊克勒氏)
 * Toose (韜塞), Duke of the Second Rank (輔國公; 12 March 1639 – 23 March 1695), tenth son
 * Mistress (格格) of the Cilei clan (奇壘氏; ? – 1645)
 * Princess Kechun of the Second Rank (和碩恪純公主; 7 January 1642 – December 1704 or January 1705), 14th daughter
 * Married Wu Yingxiong (吳應熊; 1634 – 18 May 1674) on 9 October 1653 and had issue (three sons, one daughter)

Popular culture

 * Portrayed by Kim Yoon-hyung in the 1981 KBS1 TV Series Daemyeong.
 * Portrayed by Tang Guoqiang in the 2003 TV series The Affaire in the Swing Age.
 * Portrayed by Liu Dekai in the 2003 TV series Xiaozhuang Mishi.
 * Portrayed by Nie Yuan in the 2015 TV series The Legend of Xiaozhuang.
 * Portrayed by Jiang Wen in the 2006 TV series Da Qing Fengyun.
 * Portrayed by Hawick Lau in the 2012 TV series In Love With Power.
 * Portrayed by Nam Kyung-eub in the 2013 JTBC TV series Blooded Palace: The War of Flowers.
 * Portrayed by Byun Joo-hyun in the 2014 tvN TV series The Three Musketeers.
 * Portrayed by Jung Sung-woon in the 2015 MBC TV series Hwajung.
 * Portrayed by Raymond Lam in the 2017 TV series Rule the World.
 * Portrayed by Kim Beob-rae in the 2017 film The Fortress.
 * Portrayed by Kim Jun-won in the 2023 MBC TV series My Dearest.

title: Hong Taiji