A Study Of Conflicts Between Emperor And Officials In The Ming Dynasty

Centered with the political critics of officials that are often suppressed by the monarch, conflicts between the monarch and officials are common in Chinese ancient times. It became severer while entering the imperial times, with grouped officials struggling against the regality.Conflicts between the monarch and officials in Ming dynasty could be divided into three distinguished periods. The first is from reign of Emperor Hongwu to Tianshun, in which, the conflicts were not drastic though strong exhortations were made to the emperors by Qian Tang, Li Shimian and etc. The second stage is from the reign of Emperor Chenghua to Wanli, in which period, officials either rejected emperors’orders or resigned. Memorials to the throne often occurred. For example, Hairui pledged his life to make exhortation to the throne; Luo Yuren criticized Emperor Wanli sharply for his lusts for alcohol, beauties,money and irritability. Accordingly, flogging at court, though originated from the former dynasty, is frequented in this period and deserves more attention. The reigns of Emperor Taichang, Tianqi and Chongzhen are the third period. In the wake of officials’exhortation against the employment of eunuch Wei Zhongxian, the tone of conflicts still continued, and weakened later until the collapse of Ming dynasty. Characteristics of the conflicts in Ming dynasty are as follows: first, the frequency of conflicts is in accordance with the political experience of Ming court; second, the severity of conflicts, the frequency of memorials to the throne and flogging at court are the prominent features of Ming period.While clarifying the historical facts of conflicts between emperors and officials in Ming court and interpreting the political and cultural implication, this article also responds to the following questions: what is the root cause for the conflicts? In what sense conflicts between emperors and officials constitute the source for the profound consideration of the despotism theory? Why the conflicts in Ming period are comparatively more prominent in the political history of imperialism? What are the fundamental spirits of political culture in Ming dynasty?First, the root cause for the conflicts in Ming period is the divergence between emperors’political ideas and officials’. Officials’political appeals concerned more about civilians’livelihood and folk custom, instead of limiting to the high-level circle, reflecting their care of civil society. In contrast, though with the claim of worshiping the heaven and protecting civilians, emperors’political practices always follow the logic of“emperor is the highest, emperor represents the court”, revealing the orientation of privatizing the world. The intrinsic feature of privatizing the world is emperor-oriented. Both people-centered and monarch-centered conceptions are highly rooted in historical China, not exclusively endowed for certain social ranks, though the former is more distinct in the political practice of struggling officials while the latter can be seen in emperors’.Second, the logic of despotism theory, which is taken as the spirit of political culture of imperial China by many scholars, points toward the conclusion of the over-centralization of monarchical power, the obedience of ministers and their nature as political tools. It should make clear that, other than a denial of the value judgment of despotism itself, this article simply discusses this theory and verify whether it reflects Chinese imperial politics truthfully. In a common sense, it is not acknowledged by modern scholars when the state power goes toward individualized despotism. Meanwhile, this article doesn’t consider all officials’struggles are transcendentally reasonable, which needs detailed analysis on the factual level.From the perspective of the relation between the emperor and officials, the theory of despotism is discussed. It can be revealed that, officials in Ming period hold strong political principles. It is evidenced in two points. The first is, officials who made stands against emperors always incited“Common Customs”(Li,礼), which is interlinked with“Reason”(Li,理) in Chinese society. Scholar-bureaucrats reasoned with emperors on the basis of“common customs”, sticking to the political value that“Reason is above Emperor”. The concept of“Reason is above Emperor”is supported by concepts of“All under heaven is equal”,“Sticking to ancestors’precepts”and“Morality of emperor”, of which the position is parallel to the generally acknowledged truths in traditional political culture. In officials’opinion, the ideal manner of officials is to combine obedience and correction of emperors’errors together, instead of only obedience only. Second, officials’political role reflects their self-consciousness of active involvement in political practice. Officials’political pursuits in Ming court are varied according to their offices. However, from the perspective of the deployment of public power in court, they all oppose the extremity of autocratic monarchy, and assert the separated power and the shared governance of the monarch and officials. Officials didn’t claim for“puppet emperors”, or the decentralized authority system pursued by early modern revolutionary parties, but rather the legitimacy of their political power and expectation of the effectiveness. In general, officials in Ming court show their obedience to the emperors while reserve their own principles in great degree.After confirming the strong political principles of Ming officials, it can be reflected that, a tension exists between the two parties, emperors and officials, and goes beyond the control of emperors’wills. There are always critics from ministers when the regality goes toward absolute. Certain mutual restriction is placed on the relationship between the emperor and ministers. However, restriction on the regality by officials, which can be taken as a political mode of self-examination, is lack of systematic guarantee. Besides, the effect is limited. In this way, it is evident that, the regality might be exaggerated from a short-run perspective. Chinese imperial politics as a whole is complicated, and further study is expected.Third, the prominent phenomena of conflicts in imperial times are closely related to the structure of the state central power in Ming period and the political atmosphere of encouraging exhortation. The fundamental spirits of political culture in Ming period can also be concluded from this third answer:To begin with, the intensification of conflicts between emperors and officials is greatly related to the abolishment of the office of prime minister. In one way, there is no buffer between the emperor’s powers and officials’. Exhortations of the official group turned toward emperor’s virtues and political measures and etc. after the reign of Emperor Hongwu, since the office of prime minster was absent. In another way, though the Imperial Grand Secretary was positioned in center of power system, it only played the role of“consultancy”, though the authority of Imperial Grand Secretary was proposed several times to be improved in the conflicts. Since middle Ming, especially after Emperor Wanli punished Zhang Juzheng severely, the power of Imperial Grand Secretary relied heavily on emperors’favor. When the Imperial Grand Secretary won the favor of the emperor in a“private”way with the sacrifice of“public discussion”, all officials in middle and low levels criticized their flatteries, fighting against the sacrifice of officials’political principles for the purpose of supporting emperor’s arbitrary politics. In general, officials in different imperial ministries try to enlarge their political power by going against the extremity of the regality. For this reason, the prominence of the conflicts between emperors and officials is a reflection of the disorder of rights and responsibilities in central administrative system.Also, official’s praises for exhorters, appeals for reinstating officials who were dismissed for exhortation and the recognition of the legitimacy of the exhortation, these entire express officials’positive attitude toward the conflicts centered with their exhortations. Their positive remarks on the conflicts, not only reflect the fundamental spirits of political culture, that is, the encouragement of political critics, but also create an atmosphere of inducing exhortations, in which officials are indulged. Encouraged by exhortations to the throne in former reigns , which contributes to the active state of Ming officials’exhortation in latter times, officials praise mutually for their resistance against the emperor, and take exhortation to the throne as the key approach to achieve their own political values.Thus, the fundamental spirits of Ming political culture is the encouragement of political critics, of which is composed three points: first, views to encourage critics is popular, showing the free political environment for public opinions; second, from long-run perspective, the power of political public opinions is dominated by officials; third, views that encourage political critics take virtue as the yardstick.The article further concludes that, the imperial politics of china is a unique political mode established by the interactive influence of the politics of emperors’and officials’. In addition, imperial politics is not equal to emperors’politics. Scholar-bureaucrats’ politics doesn’t own absolute legitimacy. It has idealized political vision, which is embodied prominently in certain periods while implicit in other periods. Scholar-bureaucrats’ politics has three positive effects, that is, the pursuit of the civilian-oriented political aim, the encouragement of interaction among different political subjects and the emphasis on the cultivation and self-discipline of political virtue.