What kind of historical materials are of high value?

Older.

————

The value of historical materials

Historical materials vary widely, and there are many kinds, and their values are different when they are used. In particular, historical materials with words vary greatly in value. According to the distance between the author and the time and place of the historical events he described, we can divide them into several categories:

First, the narrative of the parties and people at the time of the incident has the highest value and is the so-called first-hand material. Oracle bone inscriptions, for example, are the first-hand materials to study the history of the Yin Dynasty, because they are the records of the divination of the Yin King, the records of the people and the parties at that time, which are less different from the facts and therefore have the highest value. At present, we mainly study the history of Shang Dynasty on the basis of Oracle Bone Inscriptions, not the historical records of Yin Benji. Because the latter is not the record of the person or the party at that time, the value of historical materials is much worse.

Apart from Zhou Shu and the Book of Songs, the first-hand material for studying the history of the Western Zhou Dynasty is bronze inscriptions. Bronze inscriptions existed in the Yin Dynasty, but generally the number of words is very small, only two or three crosses at most. In the Zhou Dynasty, especially after the middle of the week, there were 300 to 400 words in inscriptions, so some people said that an inscription was worth a history book. These inscriptions have been recorded since the Song Dynasty, and more and more. A large number of bronzes were unearthed in the late Qing Dynasty, some of which lived overseas. Most of the inscriptions are recorded in the book. After liberation, archaeologists excavated more bronzes by scientific methods, especially in Shaanxi and Henan ancient cultural centers, and made new discoveries. The inscriptions on these unearthed bronzes are extremely precious historical materials. Here are a few examples:

1976, a bronze ware "Li Chan" was unearthed in Lintong. The inscription says that King Wu attacked Zhou, not the year, but the date "Jiazi". Jiazi, the king of Wu is destroyed. It used to be said in history books, but is it reliable or not? It's hard to be sure. Now it has been confirmed by the inscription.

1965, a book He Zun was unearthed in Baoji, which recorded that Wu Wang moved to Luoyang in. This matter is not clearly recorded in the history books. Now with the inscription of He Zun, this matter is clear. King Wu died and told the Duke of Zhou to build Luoyi. Duke Zhou inherited Wu Yu's legacy to build Luoyi and moved the capital to Luoyang in Wang Wu. As for when to move back to Haojing? It is not clear at present, but the excavation of He Zun supplements the historical facts of moving to Romania.

1975, a cup and two cauldrons made by big noble named "Qiu Wei" were found in Fufeng County, and the inscription on it recorded his land transactions with other nobles. These are not found in ancient books, but we only know them from inscriptions.

1977, Zhongshan Wang Hu Ding was found in Lingshou County, Hebei Province, with a long inscription on it. Zhongshan was a small country during the Warring States Period. It was called Xianyu in the Spring and Autumn Period and belonged to Bai Di, a country in the north at that time. The history of Sun Yat-sen's kingdom is recorded in the long article of Hu Ding in King of Zhongshan (some people mispronounced it), in which it is said that when Yan was cut, Sun Yat-sen also took the opportunity to cut Yan and seized some land and property. See Mencius Warring States Policy for the story of Qi cutting Yan, but the story of Wang Zhongshan taking the opportunity to cut Yan is not recorded. The inscription also records the name of the "Xiangbang" (that is, the national phase) of Zhongshan King, and Sima is called in the Warring States Policy. He is the distant ancestor of Sima Qian. Sima Qian once said in the preface to Historical Records: Sima Jia defends the country, and someone is in Zhongshan, which means him. In the past, there were few records about Zhongshan, and the bronzes unearthed in Zhongshan made up for this deficiency. These bronzes are all mixed with gold and silver, which is very exquisite, indicating that Zhongshan at that time had fully accepted China culture. In terms of writing and grammar, it is basically the same as the bronze inscription of the Western Zhou Dynasty, with the Warring States style. However, some words are written in a special way, such as the word "heart" next to the word "Yan". It shows that before Qin Shihuang unified the written language, the differences among countries were not small. Some people used to think that all languages were basically the same before the Qin Dynasty. Judging from these inscriptions, this statement is wrong.

In ancient history, there is little first-hand information except underground excavation; In modern history, the situation is completely different. For example, the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom has compiled and published a lot of first-hand materials, which are still being explored. Although most of them were written by intellectuals of the landlord class, their expositions were of course from the standpoint of the reactionary class, but they always reflected the activities of the Taiping Army from different sides and to varying degrees. Another example is the Revolution of 1911, because it is relatively recent, so there are many first-hand materials preserved. Some old people who participated in the Revolution of 1911 are still alive, and their memoirs are all personal experiences, which are of course precious first-hand information.

The above examples illustrate the importance of first-hand materials. But it should also be noted that people's records at that time were not all reliable. For example, some personal notes of peasant uprisings in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties were written by people at that time, but many of them were obtained from rumors or copied from court books, which may not be reliable. So don't generalize, but analyze it book by book.

Second, what later generations wrote. The vast majority of ancient books belong to second-hand and third-hand materials, with a few exceptions. For example, Historical Records was written from the Yellow Emperor to the era of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty (The Biography of Emperor Wu, which we see now, was compiled by later generations with the Book of the Closed Meridian, and was originally called the Biography of Today, but it was lost because many places in the original book violated taboos). Historical records can be used as first-hand materials to record historical events since the early Han Dynasty. As for things before the Qin dynasty, it was much worse, because many of them were rumors, and it was hard to say whether they were reliable or not. As we all know, there was a "* * * peace period" between Li Wang and wangyi in the Western Zhou Dynasty, which lasted for 14 years. * * * and the first year, that is, 84 BC1,are the exact dates of China. What do you mean "* * * and"? Sima Qian explained that Duke Zhou and Zhao Gong were both people who managed state affairs. What is the basis of his saying this? We don't know. Ancient pre-Qin books, such as Zuo Zhuan and Lv Chunqiu, didn't say so. They only said that * * * Hebo (* * is the country name, * * is the bo name) replaced Zhou Wang in managing political affairs. This has formed two kinds of statements. On the whole, Sima Qian's speech is reasonable. Because Duke Zhou and Duke Zhao are ministers of Zhou, it is more reasonable for them to be regents. But reasoning is not evidence. What's going on? I don't know. Because such records are all hearsay, it is difficult to determine without more original materials.

Another example is the bamboo annals, which are the historical books of Wei in the Warring States period, so it is extremely reliable to record the historical events in the Warring States period. Although the original book has been lost, it has been widely quoted in later books, such as Notes on Water Classics and Historical Records. Why did Sima Zhen, a litterateur in the Tang Dynasty, quote the bamboo annals when he wrote Historical Records? Because there are many inconsistencies between it and historical records. Now let's compare these two books. It is more correct to record the Warring States Period in Chronicle of Bamboo Books, because it is a history book of Wei and a record of people at that time. There are many mistakes in Historical Records Chronology of Six Kingdoms. Now we can know these mistakes and correct them, which is based on bamboo chronology. However, it is not necessarily reliable to record events before the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, such as those in Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties. Therefore, the same book, different parts, as historical materials, have different values. Generally speaking, the past is more reliable, and the previous generation is not necessarily reliable. The older things are, the less reliable they are.

During the Warring States period, a hundred schools of thought contended, and various scholars described their ideal politics from different angles, citing legends and stories as the basis of their ideals. This situation is almost common among the pre-Qin philosophers, but it is more or less common. The Historical Records of the Five Emperors pointed out: "hundred schools of thought said the Yellow Emperor, but his words were indecent." It can be seen that the images and thoughts of the same person in ancient times, imposed and attached to him by later generations, are different, often exaggerated or distorted, and it is difficult to win the trust of others.

As I said before, most of the things written by future generations can only be read as second-hand or third-hand materials, but there are a few exceptions. What is the exception? Some things, although recorded by later generations, are not too far apart; Second, there is no earlier record; Third, there is nothing suspicious about its content. We might as well regard this kind of thing as first-hand material. For example, The Analects of Confucius was recorded by Confucius' disciples, so besides Confucius' words, there were also disciples' words. Although these words were not written by Confucius or his disciples who personally taught them, we can't be more reliable than it. Therefore, when we talk about Confucius' behavior and thought, we have to regard it as first-hand material. Whether other materials about Confucius are credible should be measured by The Analects, and those that conform to The Analects are probably credible. Inconsistency is not credible. For example, The Book of Rites, compiled by Han Confucianism, tells a lot of Confucius' words, some of which are credible, and most of them are not Confucius' words.

There is a situation in this kind of historical materials that deserves our attention. Many ancient books, especially pre-Qin philosophers, pay attention to discussing problems from the perspective of ideological history. Their tracing back to ancient history often reflects the historical view of thinkers. What should we think of the ancient historical system in which they expressed this idea? For example, does Han Fei's view of history reflect the view of evolution or degradation? From the ancient ignorance and its development, he combed the procedures of human development, such as the Chao family and the Sui family, but he also said: "In ancient times, we fought for morality, in the middle ages, we fought for wisdom, and now we fight for strength." How will this be explained? Another example is the expression of "great harmony" and "well-off" in the Book of Rites. Some people think it is Confucius' ideal country or historical view, but such an important thought should not be found in the Analects of Confucius, which is inconsistent with Confucius' thought. It is also used by some scholars as historical materials to illustrate ancient history. I think whether these practices are correct or not is debatable. The view of history of ancient thinkers and the correctness of the ancient historical system they used to explain these views are two different things. We can learn from their historical ideas that have a positive effect on the history we know, but we can't be limited to their conclusions based on speculation thousands of years ago, especially in the use of materials. From a scientific point of view, we should use well-founded and credible materials to demonstrate the development history of human society, instead of using historical legends or even ancient historical systems fabricated by some people to establish our own views.

Third, the ancient history told by later generations. This kind of thing has little historical value. In the last years of the Three Kingdoms, there was Qiao Zhou's Textual Research on Ancient History, and in the Western Jin Dynasty, there was Huangfu Mi's Century of Emperors. These two books are lost, but they were quoted by people in the Tang Dynasty when commenting on Historical Records. Sima Qian wrote Historical Records, starting with Biography of Five Emperors, which means that before the Five Emperors, it was all a myth and incredible. However, Sima Zhen wrote a biography of Huang San, which is really ignorant. In the Song Dynasty, there were more similar things, such as Shao Yong's Book of Imperial Classics, Su Zhe's Ancient History, Hu Hong's Uncle, Robbie's History of Tao, and many others were useless. In the early Qing Dynasty, Ma Su wrote The History of Deduction, which collected almost all the myths and legends, and whether it is credible or not, more wins less. These books are all about the ancient history of the pre-Qin period, which is far from the author's time. What are their contents based on? Mainly based on things passed down from generation to generation, nothing is really reliable. Therefore, the historical materials of such books are of little value.

There is a similar situation: since the Han Dynasty, many people used to copy books, a little from the east and a little from the west, and pieced them together into books. For example, The History of Han Shi Zhuan explains The Book of Songs. How to explain it? Tell a story first and then quote a poem. This is called telling poetry with facts. This method has been widely used in Xunzi, and Han Ying also used this method, and many places directly copied Xunzi. Some of the Book of Rites written by the Han people also copied Xunzi in large chunks. Liu Xiang's Shuo Yuan and Xin Xu all tell stories, and these stories are copied, and many of them are copied from Lu's Spring and Autumn Annals. Therefore, although Liu Xiang is a famous scholar, what he wrote may not be of much value.

At the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty, Wang Chong wrote Lun Heng, which is very famous. He attaches great importance to the "reality" of notes and opposes the "emptiness" of notes. Is everything in Lun Heng reliable? Not exactly. There is an article about Rui in Lun Heng, which says that Confucius called his disciples to give lectures and there was a situation of "three surpluses and three shortages". The Gang of Four seized on this passage when criticizing Confucius, saying that Shao Zhengmao was also giving lectures in Shandong at that time, and all Confucius students were attracted by Shao Zhengmao. This was repeated three times, so it was called "three profits and three losses", and only Yan Hui didn't go. The Gang of Four used this to belittle Confucius, which is actually groundless. Some people say that this passage is a copy of Confucius' family language and is not credible. The family precepts of the Han dynasty have been lost, and even if there were, there would be no such words to belittle Confucius. Because Family Language is highly praised by Confucius. As for this edition of Family Talk, it was forged by Wang Su, a Wei and Jin man. How could Wang Chong copy Wang Chong's book? Besides, this "family expression" does not include this matter. Judging from the facts, it is said that there are 72 Confucius' disciples, and there are so many records in the history books. After the death of Confucius, Zigong stayed at the tomb for three years, which is recorded in the history books. Conversely, if Shao Zhengmao talks about learning, what is he talking about? What are the important propositions? Who is his disciple? There is no record. So this incident, just like two children trying to deny that Confucius is a saint by deciding whether the morning is closer to the afternoon, is a story fabricated by the opposition of Confucianism in order to deny Confucius' theory, which cannot be regarded as a history of faith. The book Lun Heng is famous for its anti-counterfeiting and materialism, but it tells such an absurd story, so we should not be superstitious about the ancients. The experience drawn from this is that works based on ideological and political opinions should be distinguished from historical monographs and other records. Their attitudes to discussing history are quite different. The former treats history with a metaphysical subjective attitude. In order to achieve their goals, they often distort the historical truth to convince others and establish their own theories. The latter respects historical facts and aims at historical truth. So when there is a contradiction between the two books in describing the same historical event, it is clear at a glance where we will go. Moreover, in the works of later generations, tracing ancient history from the perspective of ideological history may have many merits, but from the perspective of historical data value, it is not the same thing.

/f？ kz=9 1045742