Dai Jinhua, a well-known professor of Chinese at Peking University, pointed out in a conversation that "history is not true, history is not truth, history is never an objective account, what is history? History is a list of victors." As soon as this point of view was revealed, it immediately set off a heated discussion on the Internet.
Loading...
Some agree with her that this explains why the same historical event may be recorded differently in different historical books from different periods. Others, on the other hand, argue that historians should do everything they can to restore the truth of history. Dai Jinhua's evaluation points out an important problem in historical research—the subjectivity of historical writing.
Taking Li Shimin's revision of history in the early years of the Tang Dynasty as an example, it can be seen that history is indeed the product of the victors who modified the results for themselves. After Li Shimin seized power, he set out to revise the history of the early Tang Dynasty and create an image of a generation of Ming monarchs. In the name of work, he sent his cronies to secretly read the history books to learn about the record of the Xuanwumen Incident.
Seeing that the record was unacceptable, he personally participated in the revision, emphasizing the need to maintain his authoritative image. After that, the historian could only revise it according to his request, attributing the credit to him, and attributing the guilt to Li Jiancheng and others. This is the traditional sense of "the victor writes history". Li Shimin understands that using history to beautify himself and belittle others is one of the effective means of consolidating his rule.
Not only that, Li Shimin also made a conclusion about the monarch of the previous dynasty. He slandered Emperor Yang Guang of Sui, accusing him of being unscrupulous and killing his brother. In fact, Yang Guang governed the country well, but he was warlike and lost the country. Li Shimin exonerated himself and used history to stigmatize the former monarch in order to consolidate his ruling image.
This just supports Dai Jinhua's thesis that history is a "list of victors" that can be embellished. The famous historian Ge Jianxiong revealed Li Shimin's subjective revision of history through a large number of newly unearthed Tang Dynasty cultural relics. He stressed that the records of the Tang Dynasty history exaggerated the merits of Li Shimin, while ignoring the contributions of other heroes such as Wei Chi Jingde and others, and derogatory to the image of Li Jiancheng and others.
This does not correspond to reality. It can be seen that the historical text needs to be constantly revised in order to restore the truth. Dai Jinhua's view is not unreasonable, history lacks third-party verification data, and it is easy to be influenced by the subjective factors of the winner. In the case of Li Shimin, for example, he revised history to glorify himself and stigmatize others in order to consolidate his dominance.
But we should not completely dismiss the dominant historical narrative. As the actual victor at that time, Li Shimin's version of historical materials was limited by the times after all, and it was inevitable that there would be subjective elements. But it may also reflect part of the truth, at least revealing the successful side of Li Shimin's governance from the perspective of managing the country. History is multifaceted and chaotic, and there is no such thing as right or wrong.
As new artifacts and materials continue to be unearthed and discovered, so do historical research methods. Some of the new ideas can be revised and questioned, helping us to understand more comprehensively and objectively what was really going on at the time. Just like the work done by Professor Ge Jianxiong, through a large number of first-hand documents, we have a new understanding of history.
We should look at history with an open and balanced attitude. Neither blindly accept nor completely deny. Only through multiple evidences can we gradually restore the whole picture and truth of history. At the same time, it is also necessary to adopt a cautious and rational attitude and avoid arbitrarily judging the ancients. Only in this way can the study of history be refined and provide us with more accurate historical insights.