Qi Shan, who had to bear the responsibility for the defeat in the Opium War, was only a "criminal minister" in the eyes of the Daoguang Emperor, but when he arrived at the scholar," he soon disguised himself, and titles such as "traitorous minister" and "adulterous minister" replaced "criminal minister".
Qi Shan (left) and Lin Zexu (right) in the old movie "Lin Zexu"
In 1842, Wei Yuan, a famous thinker of the Qing Dynasty, wrote "The Journey of the Daoguang Yang Ship", which recounted the history of the Opium War, praised the anti-British aggression struggle of the Chinese, and violently attacked the capitulators who compromised with the British. In this short article, there are dozens of words such as "adulterous", "adulterous", "adulterous", "adulterous", etc., of which "adulterous" refers to Qishan. Obviously, Wei Yuan called Qi Shan a "traitorous appearance", expressing his dislike for Qi Shan and painfully accusing Chen QiShan of misleading the country and harming the people. It can also be seen from this that Wei Yuan believes that the defeat of the Qing Dynasty in the Opium War was the result of the traitorous state of the "traitorous subjects", and Qi Shan, as a "traitorous minister", was naturally guilty of the crime.
Historical Examination of the Opium War - Wei Yuan's "Records of the Conquest of the Daoguang Yang Ship"
In 1843, the Daoguang Emperor tried to revive the power of QiShan, Yijing and other powerful ministers who had been dismissed in the Opium War, but they were strongly opposed by Chen Qingyong, the inspector of Jiangnan Province, who played Chen "Starting to use Qishan, Yijing, Wenwei, etc. as punishment rewards, unable to repay the people", and vigorously impeached Qishan and others. He said: "The rebellion dares to run rampant, and the coastal soldiers dare to escape." This situation is all due to the fact that Qi Shan first showed weakness when he rebelled against the enemy and entered the Kou, lazily the heart of our army, and helped him to poison the flame. Chen Qingyong played a loose recital, the government and the public recited, and the Daoguang Emperor also had to issue an edict to blame himself, and once again dismissed Qi Shan and others from their posts. Since then, Chen Qingyong has "shook the world with a straight voice". While Chen Qingyong won the reputation of "zhichen", he beat QiShan into a situation of no return, and his image of a "traitorous minister" was deeply rooted in the hearts of the scholars.
The scholars described Qi Shan as a "traitor" for the following reasons:
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="7" > the arrogance of not accepting defeat and not admitting defeat</h1>
Although the Opium War ended in a fiasco, the scholars at that time could not easily accept the reality that the great powers of the Tang Dynasty had been defeated so miserably by a large country on the island of Suier, and after nearly a hundred years of isolation, the entire country and society of the Qing Dynasty were derailed from the Western capitalist world, they did not understand the Western capitalist world, nor did they really realize the gap between Britain and the Qing Dynasty. There was no deep thinking about the real reasons for the fiasco of the Qing Dynasty. In the eyes of these traditional scholars, the best way to deal with the untamed "barbarians" is to show the majesty of the Heavenly Dynasty and suppress it in one fell swoop, but this war ended in the compensation of the Qing Dynasty' land-cutting, and for such a result, they failed to look at the problem from the perspective of China's current situation and the general trend of the world, nor could they see the problem of the traditional Heavenly Dynasty system. For the fact that it has become a failure, they still maintain a lofty mentality and an arrogant psychology of not accepting defeat and not admitting defeat.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="15" > influenced by Confucian moral evaluation</h1>
The theory of loyalty and treachery in classical Chinese political science influenced the scholars' evaluation of the characters, and they generally believed that Qi Shan, who blindly advocated compromise and surrender in the Opium War, was a great "traitor" without compromise. In addition, the antithesis of the "traitorous ministers" is the "loyal subjects", that is, all officials who oppose foreign aggression and resolutely resist, such as Lin Zexu, Guan Tianpei, and others, are the "loyal subjects" who are loyal to the country, and the scholars and doctors believe that they represent the integrity of the Chinese nation, the indomitable backbone of the Chinese nation, and they are not afraid of personal safety and interests in the face of crisis, and they are bent on serving the country and the people. The direct conclusion of such antagonism is that the key to the Victory of the Qing Dynasty in the war lies in the loyalty of the loyalists, as long as Lin Zexu and others are reused, Qi Shan and his compromised party members are deposed, and the loyal subjects will be successful and the traitors will not be born. Such a conclusion reflects the lesson learned by the traditional scholars in this defeated war is not to reform the backward Qing Dynasty, but to strengthen the internal discipline of the imperial court and strengthen the sage classics. Such a wrong understanding made it impossible for the scholars to find the real reason for the failure of the Opium War, and from the Confucian moral evaluation, Qi Shan was nailed to the pillar of shame of the "traitorous courtiers", making Qi Shan responsible for the failure of the Opium War, and preserving the Taoist consciousness in the hearts of the scholars.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="16" > looking for a scapegoat for the Daoguang Emperor</h1>
Even if the scholars and masters have no way to blame the traditional old system, then according to common sense, the person responsible for the defeat should be the Daoguang Emperor, because the greater the power, the greater the responsibility, but in the traditional bureaucratic autocratic imperial system, the autocratic emperor is always the supreme in the interior, the emperors will not make mistakes and any of their decisions are correct, if things do not achieve the satisfactory results, then it must be that the ministers who are doing things are incompetent and not loyal, which is also in traditional Chinese historiography." Traitor Mode". The scholars' criticism of politics can only reach the level of ministers at most, so that Tianzi is spared the responsibility of direct failure, and at most it is a poor use of people. In such an environment, "capitulation factions" like Qi Shan naturally needed to be responsible for the defeat, which not only maintained the image of the Daoguang Emperor as a "saint", but also preserved the "etiquette" of Confucianism. Therefore, the image of Qishan's "traitorous courtier" has not only become a "scapegoat" for The old Chinese system, but also a "scapegoat" for the Daoguang Emperor of "Shengming".
In general, history itself is about objectivity, both past and present, but it is difficult to avoid the subjective feelings and wishes of these scholars in the historical works of these scholars. Among them, some people, stimulated by the real society, have a contemptuous attitude toward the aggression of the Western powers and the compromise and capitulation factions; some people have raised the principles of "goodness" and "evil" of traditional Confucian doctrines, attacked all the deeds of the capitulation faction represented by Qi Shan, and vigorously admired Lin Zexu and other main war factions. But in fact, whether it is the first or the second, historiography has inadvertently or intentionally become a tool of propaganda, telling the world in passionate words that compromise and surrender are the most shameful, and eventually only lead to the demise of the country, just as the defeat of the Opium War was qishan that opened the gap for the already shaky ruling regime of the Qing Dynasty, causing Western invaders to trample on this ancient and traditional country. It can also be seen here that the initial traitorous criticism of QiShan, in order to warn the world, after its development, began to transform into a kind of historical propaganda, which was used to encourage the people to devote themselves to the cause of resisting the aggression of the Western powers and saving the nation-state without hesitation.
Since then, Qi Shan has been nailed to the historical shame column of "traitors".
Note: This article is the original content of the public account, and it is forbidden to reprint it at will without the authorization of the account