The Qing Dynasty scholar Wei Xi once said: "Discussing people after the fact and discussing people outside the bureau is a serious disease of scholars." Scholars must do a good job in research, and since it is research, they must maintain an objective and rigorous style, especially for some historical figures, they cannot easily deny it, nor can they discuss people after the fact and outsiders.
Just like understanding an essay, it must be placed in the era in which the author lived at that time, and understand the author's creative intentions, so that it is possible to truly understand a prose. If you evaluate the ancient text with the current vision, it will be off topic and out of bounds. The same is true of historical figures, which should be viewed in light of the background of the times and the characteristics of the situation at that time, and cannot be simply evaluated from a modern perspective beyond history and situation.
Sima Qian wrote the "Records of History", which has many mythological descriptions, including Jian Di who ate the eggs of Xuan Bird and became pregnant, Jiang Yuan, who stepped on the footprints of giants and became pregnant, and Liu Bang's mother who washed clothes by the river and mated with dragons. If that were to go against the spirit of historiography, it would become something that was not objective or just, it would simply become a myth and legend, and where there would be the rigorous spirit of historiography. Such historical works are still ranked first in the twenty-four histories, which can be regarded as relatively powerful historical works. In fact, it is not right to only look at the historical figures in the "History" from the current perspective, but to get rid of those feudal superstitious things and restore the real historical figures. Or put it in the context of the time to understand. The lack of historical materials led sima qian to write only according to folklore. Most of the pages of the Chronicle of History have strong historical value, not just a fictional event or two. That is to say, most of the historical events recorded in the "Chronicle of History" are still reliable, and as for some mythological descriptions, they can only be regarded as literary descriptions. The history books of the previous generation either had dry narratives or made into false story books, without the objectivity and vividness of the "History", nor the rich three-dimensional and mutual verification of the characters in the "History". If you put the "Shi Ji" in the historical situation of the Han Dynasty at that time, and understand it in the personal experience of Sima Qian's writing of the "Shi Ji", you can read the "Shi Ji" without speculating randomly.
When people only saw the great achievements of Qin Shi Huang, they ignored his destruction of cultural diversity; when they saw emperor Wudi of the Han Dynasty sending people to attack the Xiongnu several times, they ignored the fact that domestic finances were short; when people saw the great talent of Zhao Kuangyin, the grandfather of the Song Dynasty, they ignored the whistle-blowing style he advocated, which was a great blow to the courtiers at that time; when they saw the budding rise of capitalism in the Ming Dynasty, they ignored the rule that "pieces of plates are not allowed to enter the sea", resulting in almost zero overseas trade.
Hindsight is a bit of an afterthought, while outsiders are a bit of a fish. Tan Sitong wrote in prison: "I smiled at the sky with a horizontal knife and went to keep the liver and gallbladder for two Kunlun. "After that, heroism is righteousness, and you must become the first person to sacrifice for the change of law." He obviously had the opportunity to escape, but he just didn't run away and had to sacrifice for the change of law. Now people think he is stupid, there is a chance to live and not run, look at Kang Liang, don't they all run? The old saying goes: "Stay in the green mountains, not afraid of no firewood." "It is important to save your life, and you can make a comeback in the future, even if you can't make a comeback, you can still read and lecture and travel the world." Why do we have to sacrifice for the change? People did not put Tan Sitong in the situation at that time, but simply made a conclusion from the current point of view. Although Tan Si and them only practiced the Penghu Reform Law for more than a hundred days and did not achieve much success, it was of great significance to a group of intellectuals who proposed to change the law and try to become stronger. They were never valued by the imperial court, and they were not easily valued by changing the law, and the emperor followed the implementation of the new law———— and those political ideals of repairing Qi Zhiping could soon be realized. However, due to the intervention of Empress Dowager Cixi, the change soon failed. It is reasonable to say that if you fail, you can come again, and you don't have to drill the horns. However, Tan Sitong recognized the truth of changing the law, and also saw the reality that old China was poor and weak at that time, and wanted to kill thieves, but he was powerless to return to heaven. He hated those who only talked about changing the law but did not practice it, and he also hated a group of timid people who did not sacrifice for the change of the law. In his view, what the old China lacked at that time was not to change the law, but to make sacrifices for the change of law. When everyone is willing to make sacrifices for the change of the law, the change of the law will not be reduced to a formality, and the future changes will have great success. Therefore, after hating the corruption and incompetence of the Qing government, hating those timid people, and hating those figures who were only lip service, Tan Sitong was generous and righteous, and was willing to be the first person to sacrifice for changing the law.
Although time cannot be turned back, history cannot be repeated, but the evaluation of historical figures must be carried out in the case of fully grasping the data, but also to put the historical figures into the historical situation at that time to understand, put into the events at that time to understand, even so, there are still many historical figures are a mystery, the lack of historical materials, the opinions are divergent, there is no consensus, if you wantonly speculate about the psychology of historical figures, only seek sensationalism, and even just to earn the click rate, it is even more difficult. Of course, there are also people who take out what has become a conclusive conclusion and write it again in their own words to win attention, but in fact, they are already picking up people's teeth and wisdom, and there is no creation. There are also people who are just loyal to the mainstream ideology at that time, but disregard the facts, put Liu Bang on the anti-feudal hat, and label Wu Zetian as feminist, if you look at it, Ruan Yuan, Ji Kang and others should be regarded as behaviorist artists.
From this point of view, how childish and ridiculous it is to see the ancients from the current point of view. In order to win attention, many university professors often pretend to be amazing, appearing to be erudite and free to come and go, but they are not objective and faithful to history. Because most of them talk about people after the fact, outsiders.