Li Jiancheng's offering of Li Shimin poisoned liquor was nothing more than an expression that Li Jiancheng wanted to murder Li Shimin. The fact that Li Yuanji did not shoot Li Shimin with three arrows was nothing more than to express that Li Shimin was the chosen one.
How did the news of this matter reach The Historian's ears? Are Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji going to tell Shi Guan? It was not Li Shimin or his cronies who said it later, anyway, the dead people Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji had no chance to speak, and only the living had the opportunity to tell the so-called "facts".
As for the truth? Li Shimin bitten to death and drank poisonous wine, and when he vomited, he would be fine, and the melon-eating masses would believe it or not.
Many people say that Li Shimin tampered with the history books, beautified himself, and smeared his father and brother.
However, we still have to see a lot of black material about Li Shimin in the history books - killing his brothers, slaughtering nephews, and bullying his brothers and daughters-in-law. What about some? Some people say that Li Shimin tampered with a more serious evil act - forcing the father.
Since Li Shimin wants to tamper with the "Living Notes", why doesn't he do one thing at a time and wipe out all the black materials?
You must know that since we want to falsify history, according to the Spring and Autumn brushwork in history, it is not a problem to completely erase it.
For example, in the Xuanwumen Revolution, the cause of death of Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji can be said to be "died in the rebellion" or "unaccounted for". If Li Shimin wants to slaughter the descendants of Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji, he can quietly let them "die of illness" or "die of grief", or simply "do not know how to die" like Huo Huo. In the court conspiracy, it is also necessary to remind the historian in advance to prepare a pen and paper to record what happened next?
Besides, when Li Shimin forcibly married his sister-in-law, when Li Shimin wanted to steal incense and jade, would he still take a historian to take a pen and paper and follow his ass to observe the records?
How many conspiracies and tricks, conflicts and struggles, only recorded in the history books three or two sentences, behind it is likely to be the result of many years of planning by many people - must be leaked to the historians in advance to record? (Is the record of three or two sentences in the history books really the truth of the whole incident?) In fact, more details are based on hearsay and speculation)
Speaking of the Xuanwumen Incident, Li Shimin and his cronies were the authors of official documents, the parties and witnesses, and the information they provided was the history that people later saw.
In 626 AD, in 636 (ten years later), Chu Suiliang was appointed as Qi Julang. What did Chu Suiliang rely on to confirm the truth of the Xuanwumen Incident ten years ago? Nowadays, an old lady support incident can have many reversals! What the camera records is not necessarily the truth, let alone what others relay or hearsay.
On the whole, Li Shimin just wanted to be curious to see the "living note", and did not say that he wanted to modify it, Chu Suiliang also did 5 years as a julang, and also promoted to an official. Li Shimin allowed the black material to be passed on to the world, at least indicating that Li Shimin was a bright and upright lord, or that the emperors did not care about the comments of later generations. No matter how rich and noble you are in front of you, who cares about the turbid waves after death.
The so-called historians who "do not fear imperial power" and "write straight books" are all false, and they are all self-praise by the literati and corrupt Confucianism.