The death of Emperor Kangxi in 1722 and the subsequent ascension of his fourth son, Yinzhen (later Emperor Yongzheng), remains one of the most hotly debated mysteries in Qing dynasty history. For centuries, scholars and historians have argued whether Yongzheng orchestrated his father’s death to claim the imperial throne. This article examines the evidence, counterarguments, and lasting implications of this pivotal moment in Chinese history.

The Political Landscape of Late Kangxi’s Reign

By the early 18th century, Emperor Kangxi had ruled China for an unprecedented 61 years, creating both stability and tension within the imperial court. The aging emperor faced increasing challenges regarding succession among his many sons. What began as a routine matter of imperial protocol evolved into a complex power struggle known as the “Dispute of the Nine Princes.”

The Kangxi Emperor initially designated his second son, Yinreng, as crown prince in 1675. However, after two depositions (in 1708 and 1712) due to Yinreng’s erratic behavior and alleged treasonous plots, the throne remained vacant for the final decade of Kangxi’s life. This vacuum created intense competition among the princes, particularly the fourth prince Yinzhen (later Yongzheng), the eighth prince Yinsi, and the fourteenth prince Yinti.

Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding Kangxi’s Death

Historical records show that the 69-year-old Kangxi remained active until his sudden demise. In October 1722, he enthusiastically participated in a hunting expedition at Nanyuan. By November 7, he reportedly caught a minor cold, and just six days later on November 13, the emperor was dead. Several peculiar details have fueled suspicions:

1. Unusually Rapid Decline: For a generally healthy emperor to succumb to a “minor cold” within days seemed medically improbable to many contemporaries and later historians.

2. Yongzheng’s Restricted Access: From November 10-13, Yongzheng allegedly controlled access to the dying emperor, with palace records showing he was the only family member regularly entering Kangxi’s chambers.

3. The Ginseng Soup Theory: Anti-Yongzheng propagandist Zeng Jing later claimed the new emperor poisoned his father by serving ginseng soup—a beverage Kangxi historically disliked and avoided.

The Questionable Succession Process

The official succession account contains several anomalies that have raised eyebrows among historians:

– The crucial edict naming Yongzheng as successor was allegedly delivered when the heir himself was absent from the deathbed.

– Court official Longkodo alone announced the succession to Yongzheng after Kangxi’s death, without other princes or ministers present.

– The imperial will wasn’t publicly announced until three days after Kangxi’s death—unusual timing that suggested possible fabrication.

– For six days following Kangxi’s death, Yongzheng closed Beijing’s nine major gates and restricted princely access to the palace, creating an atmosphere resembling a coup.

Yongzheng’s Controversial Reign and Aftermath

The new emperor’s subsequent actions did little to quell suspicions:

1. Purge of Rivals: Yongzheng systematically eliminated potential challengers, imprisoning or executing several brothers including Yinsi and Yintang.

2. Elimination of Witnesses: Key supporters like military leader Nian Gengyao and official Longkodo—who allegedly helped Yongzheng secure power—were later executed on various charges.

3. Unusual Burial Choice: Breaking tradition, Yongzheng built his mausoleum in the Western Qing tombs rather than joining his father in the Eastern Qing tombs—interpreted by some as guilt over patricide.

Scholarly Perspectives Through the Centuries

The debate has divided historians:

– Pro-Murder Camp: Scholars like Meng Sen and Wang Zhonghan argue that Kangxi was murdered, citing Italian missionary Matteo Ripa’s account of the emperor’s agonized death cries.

– Skeptical View: Other historians note that Kangxi had praised Yongzheng’s administrative abilities before his death and suggest the rapid demise could stem from natural causes like stroke.

– Middle Ground: Some propose that while Yongzheng may not have directly poisoned his father, he likely accelerated Kangxi’s death through medical neglect or psychological stress.

Modern Reassessment and Ongoing Mystery

Contemporary historians continue reevaluating the evidence:

1. Medical Analysis: Modern physicians suggest Kangxi’s symptoms could indicate pneumonia or cardiovascular disease rather than poisoning.

2. Political Context: Yongzheng’s administrative reforms and meticulous governance suggest his capabilities as ruler, regardless of how he obtained power.

3. Historiographical Challenges: Much “evidence” comes from politically motivated sources—either Yongzheng’s defenders or his enemies.

The truth may remain elusive, but the controversy profoundly impacted Qing historiography and our understanding of imperial succession politics. The Yongzheng succession crisis reveals the complex interplay of filial piety, power, and historical narrative in China’s last dynasty—a legacy that continues to fascinate scholars and the public alike. As new archival materials emerge and analytical methods improve, this pivotal moment in Chinese history may yet yield more of its secrets.