The Rise of China’s First Female Ruler

Empress Lü (241–180 BCE) stands as one of the most consequential yet controversial figures in Chinese imperial history. As the first woman to exercise sovereign authority through “ruling from behind the curtain” (临朝称制), she governed the Han Empire for fifteen years—eight officially as regent and seven through covert control. Her tenure followed the death of Emperor Gaozu (Liu Bang), founder of the Han Dynasty, whose final days saw remarkable political theater when the gravely ill emperor dictated his succession plan to his formidable wife.

This deathbed conversation reveals much about early Han power dynamics. When Lü inquired about posthumous ministerial appointments, Gaozu recommended a sequence of chancellors: Xiao He, followed by Cao Can, Wang Ling (assisted by Chen Ping), and finally Zhou Bo. His pragmatic choices reflected deep understanding of each official’s strengths—Xiao’s administrative brilliance, Cao’s reliability, Wang’s integrity tempered by Chen’s cunning, and Zhou’s military steadfastness. The exchange demonstrates Lü’s immediate priority: maintaining stability during the vulnerable transition period.

The Dual Nature of Lü’s Governance

### Political Stabilization Through Continuity

Initially, Lü adhered strictly to Gaozu’s ministerial blueprint. The seamless transitions from Xiao He to Cao Can (d. 193 BCE) and then Wang Ling maintained governmental continuity. Only after Emperor Hui’s death in 188 BCE did Lü alter this arrangement, replacing Wang Ling with her confidant Shen Yiji when Wang opposed her nepotistic enfeoffment of Lü clan members. This shift marked a turning point—from stabilizing the Liu regime to consolidating personal power.

### Groundbreaking Legal Reforms

Beyond palace intrigues, Lü implemented transformative policies:

1. Abolition of Collective Punishment
The brutal “Extermination of Three Clans” (夷三族), inherited from Qin legalism, mandated the execution of a criminal’s entire kinship network through six torturous steps: facial tattooing, nose amputation, limb removal, clubbing, decapitation, and dismemberment. Lü abolished this in 187 BCE, though the practice regrettably resurfaced later, culminating in the infamous Ming Dynasty “Ten Clan Extermination” of Fang Xiaoru.

2. Repeal of the “Sedition Law”
The vague “Prohibition of Demagoguery” (妖言令) had criminalized any speech deemed unfavorable to authorities. Its abolition signaled a move toward greater intellectual freedom.

3. Economic Liberalization
Unlike Gaozu’s restrictive policies toward merchants (forbidding silk garments and imposing heavy taxes), Lü relaxed commercial regulations, stimulating post-war recovery.

The Dark Side of Power

Lü’s reign was equally marked by ruthlessness:

– Elimination of Rivals: The grotesque murder of Consort Qi—mutilated into a “human swine” (人彘) after her son threatened Hui’s succession—horrified even Lü’s own son.
– Purge of Liu Princes: Three Zhao kings perished under suspicious circumstances as Lü installed her relatives.
– Violation of the White Horse Oath: Her enfeoffment of Lü clan members directly contravened Gaozu’s blood pact that “non-Liu family members shall not be made kings.”

Historical Memory and Paradox

Sima Qian’s evaluation captures this duality: “During Hui and Lü’s reigns, the people rested from war’s hardships… punishments were rare, and the people prospered.” Yet popular memory overwhelmingly emphasizes her cruelties. Three factors explain this discrepancy:

1. Gender Bias
The “hen crowing at dawn” (牝鸡司晨) metaphor framed female rule as unnatural. Lü’s political maneuvers—common among male rulers—were magnified as transgressive.

2. Moral Outrage
Her betrayal of benefactors like Han Xin (whose military genius saved both Lü and the Han) violated Confucian reciprocity norms. The embellished “Three No-See” execution myth reflects enduring public revulsion.

3. Legitimacy Challenges
The Lü clan’s rise through Liu bloodshed made their power appear illegitimate despite Lü’s lack of dynastic ambition.

Strategic Miscalculations

Lü’s final years revealed critical errors:

– Overestimating Control: Believing her nephews Lü Lu and Lü Chan could maintain power after her death, she failed to recognize their incompetence. Lü Lu’s naive surrender of military authority triggered the clan’s downfall.
– Misreading Political Winds: Where earlier actions like eliminating Han Xin aligned with broader elite consensus, her later pro-Lü policies alienated both bureaucrats and regional kings.

Conclusion: A Proto-Emperor’s Legacy

Empress Lü’s significance transcends simplistic villain/hero binaries. She demonstrated that a woman could govern a vast empire effectively—maintaining stability, reforming harsh laws, and fostering economic growth. Yet her methods established troubling precedents about palace violence and nepotism that would echo through Chinese history. The paradox of her legacy—administrative achievements overshadowed by personal cruelty—speaks to enduring tensions between effective governance and moral leadership in political memory.

Her story remains essential for understanding how power operates beyond formal titles, and how historical figures are judged differently by chroniclers versus the popular imagination. In many ways, Lü Zhi was the first to prove that in imperial China, a woman could rule like an emperor—for better and worse.