Talk:Yuan dynasty

Han chinese were conquered and enslaved

The article ignores the reality of han chinese enslavement of men and women, including Han chinese women into concubinage and enslavement, in general.

Sources already cited talk about this enslavement but the article conspicuously and suspiciously eliminates these facts. It appears to be a chinese ultranationalistic and revisionist editing tactic. Please be sure to balance this article better with the unfortunate reality of widespread chinese slavery among its conquered state.

Wyatt, D. J. (2021). "Chapter 4 Slavery and the Mongol Empire". In Slavery and Bonded Labor in Asia, 1250–1900. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004469655_006 https://brill.com/display/book/9789004469655/BP000015.xml AstanHun (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

A modern telling of the slave class of Han chinese "Nan ren" females is the book "She Who Became the Sun" By Shelley Parker-Chan. In a book review "War soon infiltrates her life at the monastery, brought on by General Ouyang, a foil to Zhu throughout the story. Ouyang is a southern Chinese Nanren — the lowest class in the Yuan Dynasty — who was formerly enslaved by the Mongol Empire and has now ascended its ranks." — Preceding unsigned comment added by AstanHun (talk • contribs) 16:06, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Please stop with the inflammatory and incendiary language you are engaging in, the title for your topic is incredibly provocative and is not helping anyone.

While slavery in the Mongol Empire was widespread (and perhaps this article should include more specifics on the social and caste structure of China under Mongol domination by focusing more on the 3rd and 4th classes, the Northern and Southern Han), it is not helpful and can potentially offend others to make claims that the Han Chinese were enslaved. The social class system of the Mongol Empire was complex, and while the Mongols were clearly the ruling elite that doesn't mean the entirety of the Chinese people were enslaved. If you plan to make edits, please make them piecemeal, well sourced and do not just delete huge chunks of the article. Again, do not engage in incendiary language or accuse the article page of being ultranationalistic. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 16:20, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

A bunch of this guy's edits are also completely redundant. For example he constantly whines about how it's not stated that the Chinese were enslaved or at the bottom of the social hierarchy, putting in trivia knowledge about "Nanren" here which is only meant to emphasize that the Chinese were especially enslaved, even though the fact that Southern Chinese (aka Nanren) are at the bottom of the Yuan social hierarchy, is already in the article. Meanwhile, any mention or reference to Koreans being under another group in the hierarchy, not even the lowest, just lower than someone else, is deleted ex. I honestly can't seen this as anything other than some sort of nationalistic whinging. Qiushufang (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@AstanHun stop going on other editor talk pages and engaging in personal attacks. Additionally, please stop with the blatant POV push, it is a very well-stated fact that because the Koreans captiulated last they were ranked below certain other groups that captiulated earlier and this is a relatively uncontroversial fact (versus say what role Korea played in the Mongol Empire).

I saw Qiushufang already issued a warning on your talk page, if you continue this aggressive behavior you will likely end up being blocked from Wikipedia. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@AstanHun regardless of whether your sources are valid or not, you are clearly not addressing the inflammatory nature of the content that you are trying to push onto the page as well as the genuine concerns raised by two editors about what you are trying to add onto the page. This makes me rather distrustful of the edits you are trying to make, while you are citing sources that do appear to be academic you do not really have any internet links for 4/5 sources. While internet links aren't necessary for adding a citation, the rather inflammatory opening edits you made onto the page makes me a bit suspicious of the authencity of the sources you are trying to add.

Also please try to actually address our concerns rather than trying to brute force your edits onto the page. While I see you have stopped personal attacks in your most recent edits, still adding the very incendiary comment that the Han Chinese were quote "conquered and enslaved" really does sound like a very serious POV push. I am open to deeper analysis and inclusions on the caste system of the Mongol Empire and the nature of slavery and how groups like the Han Chinese were treated but your edits really seem very seriously related to a POV push, its just a blanket statement on an entire group of people. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

@Qiushufang and @Sunnyediting99 Enslavement of han chinese and human trafficking is the actual history. Don't hide history to suit your nationalistic narrative. Your tone is the same as the CCP chinese communist revisionist history of Asian peoples (Japanese, Koreans, Phillipines, Mongolians, Manchurians, Tibetans, Vietnamese, etc). The ultranationalistic tone of many Chinese articles like this glorify the human trafficking history and reality now happening in China. Do not edit out valid, cited points of view and engage in an edit war. Stop chinese nationalistic edit trolling! AstanHun (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

First off I am not even Chinese which shouldn't matter to begin with what ethnicity or nationality I am, it's infuriating the disrespectful behavior you are engaging through your comments and rhetoric towards me and other editors. I want you to look through the entire talk discussion page where I said a single mention of modern day China/Peoples' Republic of China or its current ruling government and find a single positive, negative or neutral statement I made on it. You are blatantly engaging in an edit war now against other editors, you have been warned not only by editors here but by other editors on your talk page and some of your latest comments were outright deleted for personal attacks against other editors. You are ignoring the points being raised (asking you to provide online links for your citations, asking you to not engage in inflammatory language) and you are engaging in whataboutism by diverting to other topics such as modern day human trafficking (which is terrible yes but its completely unrelated to this topic). Yes, some articles on Wikipedia have bias due to POV push from editors and I have seen this first hand on topics that show bias that for example are edited to push a pro-China agenda or a pro-US agenda, etc etc. But what you are doing is immensely disrespectful behavior and ignoring the multiple warnings other editors have given you to not engage in personal attacks, and you are also doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 22:09, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I am highlighting the nature of the editing done by the editors, since it aligns with a revisionist tone. For instance, chinese revionist narratives have become ingrained unwittingly, and that is what I am highlighting. Here is an example https://thediplomat.com/2022/12/how-china-reinvented-an-ancient-kingdom-to-advance-its-claims-in-the-himalayas/ AstanHun (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

I have made edits that are now less stark to the reality of the chinese populace in Yuan china. I would ask the editors take out the emphasis on non-chinese people in the article, particularly claims to their alleged inferority or servitude, since this article is about a CHINESE DYNASTY and not about a neighboring Asian people. It should focus on the interaction of Mongol rulers with their Chinese subjects. To this end, I have made some fresh edits with notes in the edit summary to highlight some of these issues. Why focus so much on other nations in this han chinese biased, nationalistic way?AstanHun (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

We are going in circles around here, and this is not productive for anyone and I am sure editors on here are not interested in getting into an edit war. Please continue address the allegations being raised in the ANI discussion which you have responded to and I recommend you stop making more edits until you reach consensus/the ANI is concluded. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

This page is about the Yuan Dynasty, and they ruled over many people who were not Han Chinese, despite being a Chinese political institution, thus it is still relevant to the article their treatment of non-Han ethnic groups. Agwic (talk) 20:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

References

Primorsky Krai

The maps depict the dynasty as reaching into the primorsky krai which it never did. The map should be rectified. 109.37.134.2 (talk) 21:08, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

The Yuan clearly did reach what is now modern day primorsky krai, this is a medieval empire that does not fit in clearly defined modern day borders. Sunnyediting99 (talk) 00:24, 25 June 2025 (UTC)