Talk:Hung Taiji
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
The same old question. Was Hong Taiji's personal name really Abahai? Nanshu 22:57, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)
As suggested by Mgmei, I read "The emperor 'Abahai': Analysis of a Historical Mistake," by Giovanni Stary (Central Asiatic Journal, 28, Nos. 3-4 (1984), pp. 296-9). Neither Manchu, Chinese nor Korean sources refer him as Abahai. So Giovanni Stary investigated when and why the Western mistake had happened. He found Russian documents call him Abachaj in the middle 19th century. He supposed that Abahai was the misinterpretation of "abkai sure," the first era name of Hong Taiji. He guessed that Abahai came from the Chinese syllabic pronunciation of abkai (abka "sky" + GEN.) but I think it's likely that they misread abkai in Manchu (as I often did). --Nanshu 01:40, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Wonderful. You're discrediting a learned source with your own hunch????
Contents |
[edit] romanisation
What is the Manchu romanisation of Hong Taiji (like Nurhaci)? — Instantnood 01:49, Jan 31 2005 (UTC)
i've never heard of him referred to as hong taiji before reading this article. i'd always thought he was huang taiji. is hong taiji the manchu pronunciation? if so is there a source for this opinion?--Sumple 04:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Sumple, you are right. Hong Taiji in Manchu, or Хунтайж in Mongolian is a title amongst the Sino-Manchu-Mongol aristocracy. It is a corruption of the chinese title Huangtaiji. 简明满汉词典 has a long list of emperors' titles at the end of the book. Funny enough, the Mongols refer Prince Harry as Британийн хунтайж Гарри, Hong Taiji Harry of Britain. The title can be translated into Englsih as "Crown Prince". --GoogleMonkey 20:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
so it is "Hong Taiji"? well all we need now is sb to (or to tell me how to) redirect Huang Taiji and Huangtaiji here. --1698 08:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Is it "Hong Taiji" or "Hung Taiji" in Manchu romanisation? I have found the latter form in Volume 9 of the Cambridge History of China and also in this web page with a course curriculum from the University of Berkeley, and in this review of a book on the Manchus. Unless somebody can point more authoritative references that use "Hong Taiji" (or explain the Manchu system of romanisation being used and the rationale for that), I would suggest moving the article to "Hung Taiji", and use that form of the name consistently throughout the text. By the way, the Cambridge History of China book also cites Giovanni Stary's article and accepts his research, lending even more credibility to the idea that Abahai is, indeed, a wrong name. --AngelRiesgo 11:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have decided to be bold, and have moved the title to "Hung Taiji", since this seems to be the usual Manchu romanisation in the specialised literature of recent years. I have also modified the text of the article to be consistent so that only the "Hung" form is used. Besides the sources I cited above, I have also checked book The Manchus by Pamela Crossley. In the glossary at the end of the book, both "Hong Taiji" and "Huang Taiji" are regarded as pinyin renderings of the various Chinese names, whereas "Hung Taiji" is consistently used as the Manchu name. --AngelRiesgo 09:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] wife
its weird theres just on wife at the bottom of the whole article. maybe, a list of consorts somewhere above the succession box? --1698 07:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Difficulty
These Chinese articles are almost uniformly unreadable. There are no sections. There is no introduction. There are many different names in different scripts, stated right at the start of the article that buries the reader under a load of minutae. This makes it completely inaccessible to almost 99% of the readers. I will make a few changes.--Filll 18:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please check
I have tried to make this a bit clearer and reorganize it. I hope I did not introduce any errors. Please check my edits.--Filll 18:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
