User:IronMike6/sandbox: Difference between revisions
References |
Typing mistakes |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{User sandbox}} |
{{User sandbox}} |
||
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> |
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> |
||
In 364 BC, Qin defeated the combined armies of Wei and Han, and [[King Xian of Zhou]], the nominal ruler of China, declared [[Duke Xian of Qin (424–362 BC)|Duke Xian]] the Hegemon (ba) of China (Sima Qian 4:160). His successor, [[Duke Xiao]], who ascended the throne in 361 BC, was also appointed hegemon (Sima Qian 7:203). The ''[[Guanzi (text)|Guanzi]]'' defines the status of hegemon as intermediate between king and emperor.<ref>Kuan Tzu, ''The Kuan Tzu Economic Dialogues in Ancient China''. (tr. Tan, Po-fu, New Heaven, 1954), p 60.</ref> A text from the late Warring States period describes hegemon as controlling military forces and commerce of the states under the hegemony and using court visits as a means of supervision.<ref>Rosen, Sydney (1978), "Changing |
In 364 BC, Qin defeated the combined armies of Wei and Han, and [[King Xian of Zhou]], the nominal ruler of China, declared [[Duke Xian of Qin (424–362 BC)|Duke Xian]] the Hegemon (ba) of China (Sima Qian 4:160). His successor, [[Duke Xiao]], who ascended the throne in 361 BC, was also appointed hegemon (Sima Qian 7:203). The ''[[Guanzi (text)|Guanzi]]'' defines the status of hegemon as intermediate between king and emperor.<ref>Kuan Tzu, ''The Kuan Tzu Economic Dialogues in Ancient China''. (tr. Tan, Po-fu, New Heaven, 1954), p 60.</ref> A text from the late Warring States period describes hegemon as controlling military forces and commerce of the states under the hegemony and using court visits as a means of supervision.<ref>Rosen, Sydney (1978), "Changing conceptions of the Hegemon in pre-Qin China," ''Ancient China: Studies in Civilization''. (ed. Roy, David). Hong Kong University Press, p 113.</ref> |
||
After Xiao, the status of hegemon was not officially granted to the kings of Qin, but de facto Qin remained hegemonic until its universal conquest in 221 BC. It seldom suffered defeats and repeatedly crashed other states in at least 15 major campaigns. ''Memorial on the Abolition of Feudal Lords'' by Qin official [[Li Si]], dated to 246 BC,<ref>Cotterel, Artur (1981). ''The First Emperor of China: The Greatest Archeological Find of Our Time''. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p 162.</ref> described: Through military victories, Qin has, "in the time of the last six kings," that is from Xiao in 361 BC to the First Emperor, brought the other states "into submission." Already by the 240s BC, other states "yielded obeiscence to Qin as if they were its commanderies and prefectures." <ref>Ostrovsky, Max (2007). ''The Hyperbola of the World Order'', (Lanham: University Press of America), p 256, https://archive.org/details/yarctgxhyperbola0000ostr/page/256/mode/2up?view=theater</ref> Sima Qian (6:282) confirmed and dated the beginning of the Qin hegemonic policy already from the reign of Xiao's predecessor, Xian (384-361 BC): Since his reign, Qin "gradually swallowed up the six states until, after 100 years or so," the First |
After Xiao, the status of hegemon was not officially granted to the kings of Qin, but de facto Qin remained hegemonic until its universal conquest in 221 BC. It seldom suffered defeats and repeatedly crashed other states in at least 15 major campaigns. ''Memorial on the Abolition of Feudal Lords'' by Qin official [[Li Si]], dated to 246 BC,<ref>Cotterel, Artur (1981). ''The First Emperor of China: The Greatest Archeological Find of Our Time''. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p 162.</ref> described: Through military victories, Qin has, "in the time of the last six kings," that is from Xiao in 361 BC to the First Emperor, brought the other states "into submission." Already by the 240s BC, other states "yielded obeiscence to Qin as if they were its commanderies and prefectures." <ref>Ostrovsky, Max (2007). ''The Hyperbola of the World Order'', (Lanham: University Press of America), p 256, https://archive.org/details/yarctgxhyperbola0000ostr/page/256/mode/2up?view=theater</ref> Sima Qian (6:282) confirmed and dated the beginning of the Qin hegemonic policy already from the reign of Xiao's predecessor, Xian (384-361 BC): Since his reign, Qin "gradually swallowed up the six states until, after 100 years or so," the First Emperor conquered them. "For more than one hundred years [before 221 BC], Qin commanded Eight lands and brought the lords of equal rank to its court." <ref>Ostrovsky, Max (2007). ''The Hyperbola of the World Order'', (Lanham: University Press of America), p 255-256, https://archive.org/details/yarctgxhyperbola0000ostr/page/240/mode/2up?view=theater</ref> |
||
By the late 4th century BC, other states in China became alarmed by the Qin power and began forming anti-hegemonic alliances, called [[School of Diplomacy|Perpendicular]] (Sima Qian 5:208; 6:279).<ref>''Cambridge History of Ancient China'' (1999), p 634-635.</ref><ref>Sage, Steven (1992). ''Ancient Sichuan and the Unification of China''. State University of New York, p 107.</ref> |
By the late 4th century BC, other states in China became alarmed by the Qin power and began forming anti-hegemonic alliances, called [[School of Diplomacy|Perpendicular]] (Sima Qian 5:208; 6:279).<ref>''Cambridge History of Ancient China'' (1999), p 634-635.</ref><ref>Sage, Steven (1992). ''Ancient Sichuan and the Unification of China''. State University of New York, p 107.</ref> |
||
Revision as of 19:19, 25 July 2024
In 364 BC, Qin defeated the combined armies of Wei and Han, and King Xian of Zhou, the nominal ruler of China, declared Duke Xian the Hegemon (ba) of China (Sima Qian 4:160). His successor, Duke Xiao, who ascended the throne in 361 BC, was also appointed hegemon (Sima Qian 7:203). The Guanzi defines the status of hegemon as intermediate between king and emperor.[1] A text from the late Warring States period describes hegemon as controlling military forces and commerce of the states under the hegemony and using court visits as a means of supervision.[2]
After Xiao, the status of hegemon was not officially granted to the kings of Qin, but de facto Qin remained hegemonic until its universal conquest in 221 BC. It seldom suffered defeats and repeatedly crashed other states in at least 15 major campaigns. Memorial on the Abolition of Feudal Lords by Qin official Li Si, dated to 246 BC,[3] described: Through military victories, Qin has, "in the time of the last six kings," that is from Xiao in 361 BC to the First Emperor, brought the other states "into submission." Already by the 240s BC, other states "yielded obeiscence to Qin as if they were its commanderies and prefectures." [4] Sima Qian (6:282) confirmed and dated the beginning of the Qin hegemonic policy already from the reign of Xiao's predecessor, Xian (384-361 BC): Since his reign, Qin "gradually swallowed up the six states until, after 100 years or so," the First Emperor conquered them. "For more than one hundred years [before 221 BC], Qin commanded Eight lands and brought the lords of equal rank to its court." [5]
By the late 4th century BC, other states in China became alarmed by the Qin power and began forming anti-hegemonic alliances, called Perpendicular (Sima Qian 5:208; 6:279).[6][7] This pattern continued during the last century of the Warring States.
- ^ Kuan Tzu, The Kuan Tzu Economic Dialogues in Ancient China. (tr. Tan, Po-fu, New Heaven, 1954), p 60.
- ^ Rosen, Sydney (1978), "Changing conceptions of the Hegemon in pre-Qin China," Ancient China: Studies in Civilization. (ed. Roy, David). Hong Kong University Press, p 113.
- ^ Cotterel, Artur (1981). The First Emperor of China: The Greatest Archeological Find of Our Time. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p 162.
- ^ Ostrovsky, Max (2007). The Hyperbola of the World Order, (Lanham: University Press of America), p 256, https://archive.org/details/yarctgxhyperbola0000ostr/page/256/mode/2up?view=theater
- ^ Ostrovsky, Max (2007). The Hyperbola of the World Order, (Lanham: University Press of America), p 255-256, https://archive.org/details/yarctgxhyperbola0000ostr/page/240/mode/2up?view=theater
- ^ Cambridge History of Ancient China (1999), p 634-635.
- ^ Sage, Steven (1992). Ancient Sichuan and the Unification of China. State University of New York, p 107.