Talk:Queen Zhou the Elder

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 23:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Queen Zhou the Elder → Empress Zhou Ehuang – It basically boils down to whether the proper translation/characterization of the sui generis (never used before in Chinese history, only used once after her (by her sister/successor, who married her husband after her death) title of Guohou (國后), as the wife of the ruler of Southern Tang, Li Yu (Southern Tang), is "queen" or "empress." I believe it's "empress." Timmyshin (talk · contribs), who created the article, believes that it's "queen." I believe that both translations have potential merit (but still believe that "empress" is more proper, and would like further input. My discussion with Timmyshin, on his user talk page, is pasted below. Relisted. BDD (talk) 23:10, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Nlu (talk) 15:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

---

(As mentioned, below was my discussion with Timmyshin. I've slightly reformatted it for readability; Timmyshin (or anyone else), please feel free to further reformat for readability — an area that I'm not the best at.) --Nlu (talk) 15:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

It is my opinion that it should be translated as "empress." As you noted, it is frequently used in translated sources, but I think that even in Chinese sources she (and her sister) are treated as empresses, because Li Yu's title of guozhu (國主) was clearly considered greater than the guowang (國王; "king") title that Qian Chu had, even by Later Zhou and Song. (Note that Guo Rong did not accept Li Jing's brief self-use of the title Tang guowang (唐國王) and later referred to him as Jiangnan guozhu (江南國主), which eventually became a title that stuck.) Moreover, while he had to seek permission, Li Yu did get permission from Song to use imperial titles for his father Li Jing after Li Jing's death. Traditionally, both Chinese and otherwise, sources do also certainly treat Li Yu as an emperor. The wife of an emperor, then, should be treated as an empress. I'd like your further thoughts, though. --Nlu (talk) 16:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for writing me. I still disagree, however. My primary point of using terminologies like "king/queen" was to distinguish guozhu (國主) from huangdi (皇帝; "emperor") and demonstrate the clear hierarchical relationship like the terms intended to. I don't know what relationship guozhu (國主) and guowang (國王; "king") have, and I don't believe the "rank" between these 2 terms important. I also don't know what source you consulted that treated Li Yu as an emperor. Li Jing being permitted to have a temple name should have no bearing on Li Yu. Certainly he lived like an emperor and was an emperor for practical purposes, just like the Wuyue rulers or even Goryeo (which used Later Zhou era names) rulers. However, I don't believe it proper to translate guozhu (國主) as emperor, otherwise why was this term used in place of huangdi (皇帝; "emperor")? I consulted a few books in English and guozhu (國主) is translated either as "ruler" or "ruler of the kingdom". As far as his wife/wives (notice the terminology "Zhou Consort" (周后) rather than "Zhou Empress Consort" (周皇后)) being translated as "queen(s)" in English, I have a source here for your reference (I have never seen this book though): http://books.google.com/books?id=sF90iFCoAsYC&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=china%27s+southern+tang+dynasty&source=bl&ots=20_uvkpFXX&sig=3JuRoFRKu5tHl9r1hYiimq3PsBM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1_QUuGUIY6kqwGik4DQDg&ved=0CGIQ6AEwBg#v=snippet&q=queen%20zhou&f=false (Notice the same book used "empress" for Li Jing and Li Bian's wives: http://books.google.com/books?id=sF90iFCoAsYC&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=china%27s+southern+tang+dynasty&source=bl&ots=20_uvkpFXX&sig=3JuRoFRKu5tHl9r1hYiimq3PsBM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1_QUuGUIY6kqwGik4DQDg&ved=0CGIQ6AEwBg#v=snippet&q=empress&f=false ) Another English book (probably the only other one in English to write about the Zhou sisters) indeed has "empress" which is Lyric Poet of the Southern T'ang, but that book was mainly concerned with poetry. That book had the Zhou sisters as "Empress Chao-hui" and "Empress Hsiao-Chou" respectively (which makes little sense IMO). I'm still not sure what your main concern with the words "queen/empress" is, you must have your own reasons. Timmyshin (talk) 21:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point, but consider the following:

1. Traditionally, 主 is used for "false" emperors (under the traditional Chinese distinction of "true" (正統) and "false" (僭偽) emperors). Throughout the Zizhi Tongjian, for example, including during the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period, all "false" emperors were referred to as zhu (主; "lord"/"ruler") — even though, at the start of the Three Kingdoms Period, Sima Guang wrote a lengthy explanation on how his distinction was not intended to honor "true" emperors and degrade "false" emperors (whereas, if those non-"true" rulers only claimed the title of wang (王; "king"), he would refer to them as wang (王) and not zhu (主)). (See Zizhi Tongjian, vol. 69.) Instead, if you read the Zizhi Tongjian references to Li Yu's grandfather Li Bian and father Li Jing, they were referred to as "Tang zhu" (唐主) (consistent with, again, the traditional dichotomy between "true" and "false" emperors) rather than di (帝; "emperor") (which the Zizhi Tongjian used for the Five Dynasties' emperors) — even the Liao emperors (even though Song treated Liao as an equal diplomatically) were referred to as "Liao zhu" (遼主). zhu (主), in this context, was clearly distinct from wang (王). (Yet differently, he used 上 when referring to emperors of united China dynasties.)

   I understand your point about zhu (主), but I'm not confusing the word with wang (王). I think where we differ is I intend to emphasize the fact that Li Yu is not a huangdi (皇帝; "emperor"); whereas you are stressing that he is not a wang (王; "king"). I do understand the historiographer's bias against the so-called "10 kingdoms"; however, I don't think this is relevant in the case of Li Yu. I don't have a problem, for example, with Liu Chang or Meng Chang being considered huangdi (皇帝). I just simply believe the terminology in the translations should reflect the historical importance of the fact that Li Yu never declared himself huangdi (皇帝), and as such different from his daddy and grandpa. Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

2. guowang (國王; "king")s (including Li Yu's contemporary Qian Chu, as I pointed out) couldn't, and didn't, create other people various noble titles, while Li Yu continued to do so with tacit Song approval. While most of those titles went only as high as dukes (which could support an implicit reading of guozhu (國主) as translatable as "king"), Li Yu's uncles kept their 王 titles after Li Jing's submission to Later Zhou and Song, and Li Yu even created his deceased son Li Zhongxuan a wang (王; "prince"/"king") (specifically, the Prince of Qi, although he was only the Duke of Xuancheng while alive), which would be inconsistent of treating guozhu (國主) at merely the rank of a wang (王) or even a guowang (國王). (See the various biographies of Southern Tang imperial family members at [1] (vol. 19 of the Spring and Autumn Annals of Ten Kingdoms).)

   This is a very good point that I previously never considered. I will have to read more about other guowang (國王) to see whether there were exceptions. Still, basically you are only claiming Li Yu as being somewhere between an emperor and a king. Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

3. You are correct that guozhu (國主) cannot directly be translated properly as "emperor." That, however, is a matter of title, and not per se of substance; traditionally, tianwang (天王)-title holders (mostly from the Sixteen Kingdoms Era) were treated as emperors even though that title also cannot/should not directly be translated as "emperor." You're right that "ruler" is probably the right translation for the title, but that doesn't mean that Li Yu was not an emperor. Bo Yang's 中國帝王皇后親王公主世系錄, for example, noted that he was including guozhu (國主) as emperor. While Bo's two-level lumping (distinction between di (帝) and wang (王) only) may be too inflexible, it's not unsound, I don't think. Had Southern Tang survived one or more generations further, I think there would be little doubt that Song would have had to approve of Li Yu's being posthumously referred to as huangdi (皇帝) (at least internally in Southern Tang) posthumously.

   I don't think postulating what might have happened is a good approach in discussing what already transpired in history. Again, basically we are placing Li Yu as being somewhere between an emperor and a king. I will definitely bear that in mind if I edit Li Yu's page. Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

4. And by that same token, then, if you believe that because a direct translation is not "emperor" (which I agree with), then it should be noted that for either of the Zhous to be "Queen," she would have to be wanghou (王后; "queen consort") — not guohou (國后). guohou (國后) was a sui generis title that was never used before or after.

   Well, I really don't know how to respond to that. Again, I've pointed out English literature using either translation; the latest and more historical book (quite intentionally) chose "queen". Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

5. An emperor could still be the subject of another; Shi Jingtang was the subject of Liao, for example.

   I don't think this is relevant to this case at all, Shi Jingtang was unequivocally a huangdi (皇帝), a title that the Khitans were happy to honor. Li Yu was not. Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I do believe this is not a clean translation issue and that no translation is completely satisfactory, but it is more correct to treat Li Yu as an emperor (which seems to be a fairly uncontroversial treatment) and therefore, the Zhous as empresses. Your opinion may differ, and does differ. Perhaps, hopefully, someone else will jump in with his/her opinion? --Nlu (talk) 03:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Certainly, if you would like to pursue this please create a move discussion page so that we can copy and paste what we wrote here for others to judge. Timmyshin (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Comment as she was the female consort of the monarch of one of the "Ten Kingdoms", then I think she should use "Queen" , so if this is moved, it would become Queen Zhou Ehuang; but do we need to actually write "Queen" or "Empress"? Zhou Ehuang already redirects here. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 04:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
  • "Kingdoms" is a bit of a misnomer, however; several of the "kingdoms" actually should be "empires" as their rulers were clearly emperors. Indeed, that Zhou Ehuang's grandfather-in-law Li Bian and father-in-law Li Jing should be treated as emperors is not at all disputed. The tougher question is with her husband Li Yu, and therefore herself. --Nlu (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Why would it be empires? The Warring States were kingdoms, this wasn't as extensive as the largest ones from that period. Nor is it as large as the Three Kingdoms. Anyways, why bother having "Queen" or "Empress" at all? -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
      • "Empires", "Kingdoms", "Dynasties", "States", "Countries", "Nations", ... these are all synonyms and may be used interchangeably at times, depending on one's view points. What Nlu posted is correct; call it empire/kingdom or whatever but the fact remains that Li Yu's grandpa and father both declared themselves "emperors".

As far as your second point... Looks like nobody had addressed the issue yet. I believe Nlu prefers to name all historical figures by their personal names. However, the problem is that most females in East Asian history do not leave behind their given names, only their surnames (or maiden names... although not exactly the same thing). This is because traditional Confucians believed that female given names had no use outside their households, therefore we are left with these massive disambiugation lists: Category:Lists_of_empresses_sharing_a_surname. Now, a few consorts did leave their given names behind, and I think the formats that Nlu and others had (tried to) consistently use was "Empress SURNAME GIVENNAME" for these individuals and "Empress SURNAME (disambiguation word)" for those (the majority) without. The word "empress/queen" had to be added to the first group because if you have a queen called "Zhou Ehuang" and another (her sister) called "Queen Zhou the Younger" it's inconsistent and confusing, right?

Now my opinion agrees with Nlu in using personal names in titles and as much as possible — for male historical figures. For female figures I'm not convinced, because of the lack of importance of female given names in premodern times, which I explained. Take the current example, in Chinese language, the equivalent of "(Consort) Zhou the Elder" is far better known than "Zhou Ehuang" or "(Consort) Zhou Ehuang", and I'm certain WAS much better known in her times (some modern drama popularized "Ehuang"). In fact neither of the 2 books in English that mentioned her (China's Southern Tang Dynasty and Lyric Poets of the Southern T'ang) mentioned "Ehuang" at all. The first book called her "Zhou, Li Yu's consort" or "queen", and the second "Empress Chao-hui" (her posthumous name). Most of the other English books on Chinese history that I've browsed (such as Cambridge History of China) also didn't mention given names for consorts. Again I know where Nlu is coming from, but perhaps another discussion is needed to set up an English wiki guideline on how to name, or rather disambiguate female historical figures in East Asian history, as honestly it's a mess right now. (We have in titles given names, posthumous names, dynasty/kingdom names, husband's personal names, husband's temple names, husband's posthumous names... and if that's not confusing enough, many of the women had multiple posthumous names as history went along... but that's for another discussion.) Timmyshin (talk) 02:40, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• Further comment. It appeared that her tomb was referred to as a ling (陵), which would be appropriate for an empress, but not for a queen/princess. --Nlu (talk) 03:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
• Further comment. Also see how Song dealt with Western Xia rulers' titles — referring to them as 夏國主. (See the Book of Song, vol. 485.) --Nlu (talk) 14:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I think this passage just illustrates that the title guozhu 國主 is considered inferior in rank to an emperor, although not a direct subject.

To return to topic, prhaps we can take the middle ground and rename it Consort Zhou the Elder? Timmyshin (talk) 19:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.