{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01798800799467022, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007994670219853431, 'mean_word_length': 4.522058823529412, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the Nature of Cao Cao’s Appointments of the Provincial Officials

Later Han 後漢 termination in the 220 AD was a result of multiple crises, one aspect of which had been the political bankruptcy of the emperor and his loyalists. A turbulent and war-torn period, which started from the rebellion of the Yellow Turbans in 184 AD, has been a topic of discussion for many years ever since the Jin 晉empire. Although in the last years approaches to studies of the Later Han differ, there are three key historiographical ideas: the final years of the Later Han are discussed as a part of the Later Han, as a part of the Three Kingdoms era 三國 or are included into both periods. This case study is an attempt to show the possibility of a different approach and treat the period of 184–220 AD as a transition between Han and Wei empires, according to information about the local administrative appointments which can be found in the first chapter of San-guo zhi 三國志, being a biography of the most important statesman of this period – Cao Cao 曹操.The accounts, which can be found in his biography, indicate that Cao Cao's appointments did not precisely follow the traditions of the Later Han administrative system, but neither were they in full agreement with the ideas, which were later implemented during the Wei-Jin Nan-beichao period. His conduct was much more pragmatic than that of other Later Han statesmen, but he never ventured as far as his successors did in granting too much power to the local gentry.