Why did Cao Ei set up his own temple in the first year of Jingchu?The political concerns behind the preservation of legitimacy.
In the first year of Wei Jingchu (237), Cao Rong accidentally drew up the temple name of "Wei Liezu" for himself, which attracted the ridicule of later historians. However, this seemingly "indecent" act has its own profound historical background.
Cao Ei's political considerations and the risk of extinction.
When Cao Rong was alive, he was in trouble with the loss of his heirs. The hidden danger of having no children is manifested in the "Book of Wei", and all his biological sons died young, and only one daughter, Princess Qi, survived. In order to maintain his legitimacy, Cao Rong had to resort to special means.
The temple of the three ancestors, behind the eternal indestructible.
Cao Rong drafted the temple number of "Wei Liezu" and issued an edict, declaring that "the temple of the three ancestors will not be destroyed forever;."The other four temples were all destroyed." This regulation was in effect an adjustment of the temple system, ensuring that Cao Cao, Cao Pi, and their own gods were never removed from the altar, and that later monarchs could rotate among the limited number of temple seats.
The evolution of the temple system and the special status of the "three ancestors".
The Cao Wei temple system has gradually evolved since the Cao Cao era, and the seven-temple system was determined during the Cao Ei period. Among these seven temples, the "three ancestors", namely Taizu Cao Cao, Gaozu Cao Pi, and Liezu Cao Rong, were given special treatment and were not allowed to move. This reflects Cao Ei's political wisdom, especially when there is no successor.
Cao Ei's children's health problems and adopted sons' hidden secrets.
Cao Ei's desperation for his own son is reflected in the record of many early deaths. Even raising children is based on concerns about blood inheritance. Cao Rong's two adopted sons, Cao Fang and Cao Xun, kept their identities secret, and concealing the existence of their adopted son may be to maintain the legitimacy of their adoptive father.
Policy adjustments under the risk of extinction.
In the third year of Taihe (229), Cao Ei formulated a series of policies on the risk of possible extinction. These policies demanded that the successor "uphold justice" and refrain from "relapsing his personal relatives," and threatened to kill ministers who disagreed with the government. This series of policies shows that Cao Rong is extremely concerned about the issue of the heir.
Cao Ei's life was healthy and died unequally.
After Cao Rong changed the yuan in the first year of Jingchu, he only lived for more than two years, and died in Jiafu Hall in the first spring of the third year of Jingchu. This also makes people wonder if it was the worry of the heir that made Cao Rong exhausted, which ultimately affected his lifespan
Epilogue. Behind Cao Ei's act of drawing up the temple name for himself is the deep distress of the heir and the political maintenance of the orthodox status. This historical episode shows us the delicate relationship between the struggle for power and the inheritance of blood.
The Mystery of the Cao Rong Temple: The Game of Conspiracy and Absolute Heirs
Cao Rong was on the verge of extinction, and his move to establish the temple number of "Wei Liezu" in the first year of the early Jing Dynasty caused widespread controversy in history. Behind this incident is Cao Ei's anxiety about the inheritance of the bloodline and the skillful maintenance of the orthodox status. The article analyzes Cao Rong's political considerations, the adjustment of the temple system, and the health of his children, and presents readers with a historical drama full of power and family games.
First, Cao's political considerations are deep and complex. Faced with the early death of his own sons, he had to take steps to ensure his legitimacy. The formulation of the temple number of "Wei Liezu" and the stipulation of "the temple of the three ancestors will not be destroyed forever" reflect Cao Ei's rigorous thinking on inheriting the unification. This is not only an adjustment of the temple system, but also a constraint on the subsequent monarchs, aiming to maintain the status of their descendants.
Secondly, the evolution of the temple system is also a key element in this historical mystery. Cao Rong not only determined the status of the "three ancestors" that could not be transferred during his lifetime, but also stipulated that the successor monarch of later generations could remove the remaining four tablets in turn. This system was designed with both the issue of blood lineage and the longevity of the dynasty in mind, leaving a certain amount of flexibility for subsequent rulers.
On the issue of heirs, Cao Ei's worries cannot be ignored. The danger of having no children led him to take the action of passing on the children of the clan and concealing the existence of his adopted son in order to prevent the future ruler from disrespecting his adoptive father's legal system. This shows Cao's extreme concern for the inheritance of bloodline, and also reflects his anxiety about whether his descendants can maintain their legitimacy.
Finally, the relationship between Cao Ei's life and health and his untimely death has also become the focus of commentary. The article pointed out that Cao Rong had a short lifespan after the first year of the early Jing Dynasty, and it seems that he was affected by the worry of extinction. This makes the reader wonder if it was the worry of the heir that made Cao Rong exhausted and eventually affected his lifespan, or was it other factors that happened at the same time?
In summary, the mystery of the Cao Rong Temple involves multiple aspects such as conspiracy, inheritance, and health, showing the complex strategy adopted by a ruler when faced with the problem of blood inheritance. This historical story is thought-provoking and gives us a better understanding of the power structure of ancient dynasties and the psychological considerations of their rulers.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!