According to historical records, King Mu reigned for 55 years, which was the year when he was in power. During the Warring States Period, Huang Xie and Chun said that King Mu had been in power for 20 years, which also confirmed Mr. Chen. According to bamboo records, Xia 47 1 year was added to the years of Iraq and Han Zhuo. The truth is that summer is 43 1 year. This can be seen from The Emperor's Century, Yi Wei and The Map. As for Shun's imprisonment of Yao and Shun's coercion of Yao, that is a rumor of the frustrated and the opposition. Since Xia Qi, they have been the heads of the family, with their sons challenging their father's position, and their grandchildren following in the footsteps of their grandfathers and cronyism, so they can't stand Yao Shun's abdication. Who wants their world to be touched by other surnames? Especially in the Han Dynasty, Liu was the world's surname, and there was no room for a physical surname!
There are two major problems in bamboo chronology: first, it is an isolated proof in many places! There is no other evidence to support this statement. Secondly, because of the fierce conflict with Confucianism, it caused great controversy in the Song Dynasty, which led to the destruction of the whole book. The existing books are basically rearranged by later generations, and mistakes and omissions are almost inevitable!
Archaeological discovery is the last word. A book can't explain the problem. Historical interpretation is correct if it is beneficial to the development of the country. The so-called history is just a little girl dressed for everyone to see. How real is it? The past is over, and the real situation at that time, especially the inside story and the real thoughts of the parties, cannot be restored at all. I think this is a kind of sadness that people who study history have to face!
Bamboo books are similar to today's self-media Hundreds of years later, a history lover found a completely opposite comment on a big event from the media and exclaimed: This is history! Too shallow and ridiculous!
History is like two sides of a person. The truth can't be presented, only questions. One advantage of doubt is that it makes people explore, understand, and ultimately lead people to the future. As a loser, Yi Yin couldn't master the right to speak, and his record spread. It is illogical for later historians who have nothing to do with him to overturn his conviction out of thin air. Confucianism and Tai Shigong have mastered the right to speak at the same time, and I am afraid it is impossible to become absolute monarchs immediately. On the contrary, the unearthed date of bamboo annals is very suspicious and has the motive of tampering with history.
Basically can't compare with this. One is mainly about history, and the other is mainly about recording the exchanges of documents. As far as the truth is concerned, the chronology of bamboo books is much more reliable, but unfortunately, there are too many versions of this book in this world, and it is basically unbelievable to spread it to today's campus. Only in other handed down documents, some of the contents recorded and quoted in the chronicle of bamboo books have been verified as completely true historical materials, but this book has completely disappeared and there is no real version.
Records of the Warring States Period in Historical Records are chaotic. In fact, Historical Records is a historical novel. As for the bamboo book, modern textual research has confirmed that it is a fake book, written by people in the Han Dynasty, and falsely claimed that it is a work of the Warring States. Strict historical research should be based on archaeological evidence, otherwise the holy scriptures, mountains and seas are historical books.
Historical Records is basically a historical novel, which contains a lot of author's conjectures. A lot of dialogues between characters and court plots are basically fabricated, even with personal feelings. Even the author has no unified caliber, but excerpts from previous documents, such as the life experience of the first emperor, and he himself has written two versions in different biographies. Therefore, in the eyes of historians, Historical Records is a collection of stories, and Lu Xun said that "Li Sao has no rhyme" is basically this attitude.
Sima Qian was born in a historian's family in the Qin Dynasty. Sima Qian was ordered by his father to write historical records. He must know some historical materials, collect a lot of folk historical materials and make an investigation. Sima Qian personally refuted the rumor. At the age of twelve, he studied history with his father, and first studied the Jianghuai area (Jiangshan and Hu Aishan in Wugang City, Henan Province). Because he insisted on writing real historical figures, he was imprisoned by Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty. It can be seen that the management of history is rigorous, and the value of historical records is beyond doubt. Secretary Zhu may have feelings for the history of that year, or he may edit it.
Children all know that isolated evidence doesn't hold water, so I wrote a secret history today. After a thousand years, I discovered that all I said about Zhuge Liang, Guan Yunchang, Yan Zhenqing, Wen Tianxiang and Yue Fei were false. Zhuge Liang almost usurped the power, and attempted to rebel and was strangled by Wei, Shu and Wu. Yan Zhenqing was not scared to death alive, and Wen Tianxiang was still killed. Yue Fei did collude with Jin people in order not to affect morale. The chronology of bamboo books is recorded by pre-Qin historians and should be more credible than historical books. The first is that it was written earlier, and the second is that the bones of pre-Qin historians are very hard. But no one can tell how different this book is from the original. However, its content feels more logical, a bit like a confidential document, rather than a historical document praising the world. It belongs to the kind of content that everyone knows but doesn't say.
By the historical records of the Hanwu period, Confucianism had an overwhelming political position and became an officially recognized "state religion", so the compilation of historical records could not be unaffected. One is authentic Han and the other is authentic Confucianism. Taking Han as authentic, Qin Gang is in Han, then Qin is unjust, and Qin Cheng is violent. Qin was unjust, and the feudal system of Zhou rites overthrown by Qin was relatively just and orthodox. Zhou feudalism was just and orthodox, and the business was cruel and ruthless. If Confucianism is orthodox, then a hundred schools of thought contend as heresy, Qin Shihuang, who burned books and buried Confucianism, was a cruel king, Duke Zhou, who followed the rites of Zhou, was a saint, and businessmen who believed in ghosts and gods were heresies. It is undeniable that Huang Lao's tactics were very popular in the early Han Dynasty. On the one hand, it played down the influence of Huang Lao in writing people in the early Han Dynasty, and on the other hand, it promoted Huang Lao not to be regarded as a heresy. Confucius once asked Laozi for a gift. There is no question about the status and authority of Historical Records, but it must be compared with other historical materials.
Historical records can confirm this. However, we can only see the results. To tell the truth, the process is mixed with many authors' personal opinions. For example, the siege of Baden, you may still say that you can find out the dialogue between Chen Ping and Liu Bang. But where did you get the conversation between Morton and E Shi? That's the conversation of the enemy's core personnel, how can it be known by a Han dynasty official! Can you say that this is the author's personal invention! A book that records history contains fabricated elements. How can it be called a history book? Throughout the ages, saints can't be good kings. This is the saying that great goodness is ruthless and small goodness often does evil. Heaven and earth are ruthless, and everything is a grass dog. What is a saint?
The sage is the best in the world, that is to say, no matter what class, at least 95% people think he is good, but the king can't. What the king wants is balance, which is the great interest of the country, so some people's interests will be damaged under the rules. Will these people still think the king is good? No
From the calligraphy of Confucius in the Spring and Autumn Period to the ousting of hundreds of schools by Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, Confucianism has been compiling history for almost all generations to spread its own culture and thoughts. Historical Records was also born under this background! Although Sima Qian personally made it, he still followed this tradition and was deeply influenced by Confucianism! Bamboo slips and blue-and-white bamboo slips were written earlier, but in the Warring States period, their thoughts were relatively free, and they were less influenced by Confucianism, which could truly reflect the real life and historical truth. I prefer the records of bamboo annals!
I think the chronology of bamboo books is more realistic. Later, in order to spread Confucianism, Confucius changed it into a world that conformed to his own thoughts. Anyway, everyone didn't know anything before, and the only one who knew it was Laozi, because Laozi was the curator of the National Library at that time. In the past, only emperors were qualified to understand history alone, so Confucius needed to ask Laozi for change. Later, it may be that Lao Tzu published something he made up after he left Tongguan in the west. Otherwise, I was beaten in the face or made an agreement with Lao Tzu. Later Confucianism came into being after wandering things. If you look up the books compiled by Confucius, you will probably have a clue.
There are also references to bamboo books in the notes of the three schools, but they do not hold opinions. I don't think there is anything wrong with respecting Confucianism. Some Confucian thoughts have the idea of heaven, which is worth studying by future generations. But the evil of human nature also exists objectively, and the ancient folk customs are simple. With the progress of material civilization and the development of ethics, people have become complicated! Good is good and evil! This is the choice of history! As for the credibility of bamboo slips or historical records, it is actually a false proposition. History is not true or false since ancient times, it all depends on how to interpret it! After all, nothing can be reproduced, and the truth behind history may be more exciting than the historical materials themselves.
First of all, the chronicles of bamboo books are buried historical materials; Historical Records was written by Sima Qian, deeply influenced by Confucianism, which should be added. Secondly, like people today, people today will not abdicate, nor will they abdicate in ancient times. Power has nothing to do with the times, and it is impossible to hand over power for no reason. Besides, talent is invisible. Those who can earn will gain power, and those who have power will know whether they are wise or not. Since we can learn from the past, we can also learn from the present. Finally, you can also use Occam's razor to compare history. The simpler, the more real.
Personally, I think it is true that Yao gave way to Shun. First of all, all the history books record that Emperor Yao was an old man when he abdicated. Now that it's going to die, Shun Di doesn't have to do it. Secondly, Shun Di did not claim to be the emperor, which is recorded in many history books. The title of "Shun Di" was added by later generations. Since you don't claim to be the emperor, what position can you usurp? This is the era of the world, which is completely different from Cao Cao's usurpation of the Han Dynasty.
In fact, Confucius worshipped the Duke of Zhou to the end, and even dreamed of seeing Duke of Zhou! Therefore, it is completely natural for him to change the ancient "Zhushu" system to seize power in order to support his Confucianism. The initial simple and rude slave private ownership has gradually evolved into a ritual system, which should be more in line with the historical development process. This historical development phenomenon of "selecting the rough and selecting the fine" is a universal historical law we know! Therefore, starting from this law, it should be similar to the ancient bamboo book and more real. The development of "martyrdom system" in ancient China can better prove the true history of kingship from "bamboo script" to Confucian auxiliary government model! For reference!
Since they are the same as most historical records, it can be said that both of them have high credibility. The reason why they describe different contents only shows that their values are different. It can be inferred that if there is no special historian to compile historical materials in later generations, what impression do we have today on the history between Cao Pi and the Southern and Northern Dynasties, the Southern Dynasties, the Song Dynasty, the Qi Dynasty, the Liang Dynasty, the Chen Dynasty, the Sui Dynasty and the Tang Dynasty? There are only two kinds. One is that Emperor Gaozu abdicated to the Wei Emperor as recorded in historical records, and the history of the Southern Dynasties and even the Sui and Tang Dynasties in the Northern and Southern Dynasties will be recorded in this way. Because there is no specific historical data, the world does not know the specific struggles of all parties, and can only speculate what happened at that time according to the national archives left behind, that is, the imperial edict of Zen.
The second narrative way is that Emperor Wei imprisoned Emperor Han Xian himself as emperor, which will also be recorded in the Southern Dynasties, Southern Dynasties, Sui and Tang Dynasties. As for who is more credible, it can be said that both can be trusted and not trusted, because it did happen at that time, and neither can be trusted because both statements only represent the author's personal values. As for what our future generations will say, that's a matter of opinion. This is just like the Tian Ping Tianguo Movement and the Boxer Movement in later generations. Some people say it's a mob movement, while others say it represents a progressive force. Which do you believe? As we all know, different conclusions can be drawn from different angles, and so can historical issues. Right or wrong, good or bad depends on the angle you look at it.
Personally, I think both Historical Records and Chronicles are correct. The description of good people and bad people in history is absolutely black and white, but it turns out that no one is perfect, and everyone has merits and demerits, but the proportion of merits and demerits is different. Many good people are good, and many bad people are evil. Or it can be said that it is true that Yao abdicated to Shun, but after abdication, Yao still has the right to interfere in politics, and then Shun isolated Yao by means. There is also the abdication of Shun to Yu, after which Shun became a politician, and Yu expelled Shun to unify power, and so on. From this interpretation, we can see that the records in Historical Records and General Records are true, but the author's thoughts are biased and exaggerated.