"Introducing Wolf into the House: A New Exploration of Historical Affairs in the Late Qing Dynasty" by Lei Jiasheng, published by Zhongxi Book Company in October 2019, 330 pages, 55.00 yuan
"Introducing Wolf into the House: A New Exploration of Historical Affairs in the Late Qing Dynasty" written by himself (hereinafter referred to as " This book is believed that during the Reform Movement of 1888, Kang Youwei was influenced by British pastor Timothy Richard and former Japanese Prime Minister Ito Hirobumi , and asked Emperor Guangxu to promote "borrow talents" (reusing Ito Ito) The plan of "United Nations" (China, the United States, Britain and Japan, handing over military, diplomatic and financial power), Empress Dowager Cixi discovered it and immediately launched a coup, preventing these plans and saving the country's crisis. This conclusion completely overturns our traditional understanding of the Reform Movement of 1898. Therefore, whether the conclusion of this book is valid should also be criticized by the academic community. Professor Zhang Ronghua's "Comment on "New Exploration of Historical Affairs in the Late Qing Dynasty" - "Inducing Wolves into the House" or a new classical interpretation? 》, that is, it raises a lot of questions about the views of this book. Is the views of this book reasonable? Is Professor Zhang’s criticism valid? It should be judged by the academic community and the readers themselves. This article only responds to Zhang Wen’s questions.
1. Zhang Wen pointed out: " Korean 's national demise history and Sino-Japanese War as the background of the reform movement have been common discussions in today's research. The late Qing patriots were also alert and condemned by Japan's annexation of North Korea; in 'Wuxu A new exploration of historical events. The retelling of the last half century of North Korea under the name is not only meaningless, but also a misunderstanding of the text." "The opinions on the change of Jiashen and the coup of , , have many similarities, and must be implemented in the main text. It is the basic norm of academic works, but it is not mentioned in the next two chapters, and it is not a historical fact proof of just a few words. "
The author believes that from the perspective of academic papers, the description of the history of the fall of North Korea and the Sino-Japanese War of 1894 is indeed redundant. , but judging from a historical work that faces ordinary readers, these narratives are still necessary. Although there are many studies on the history of the fall of Korea and the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 today, ordinary readers still have limited understanding of the modern history of North Korea/South Korea. In particular, this book compares the previous events launched by Japan in North Korea since the Jiashen Incident in North Korea with the Wuxu Coup, so it is necessary to explain the relevant events clearly so that readers can see it at a glance.
As for the similarities between the Jiashen Incident and the Wuxu Coup, the fourth chapter of this book contains "The Conspiracy of the Jiashen Incident, the Yiwei Incident and Kang Youwei and Tan Sitong" (pages 245-246). This book also mentions Wuxu. After the coup, Gao Xie, the director of the Ministry of War, once reported: "In the past, Korea was killed by Japanese people and forced to the king, which was a clear proof." The censor Huang Guiyu also reported: "This kind of plan is inappropriate, and he will follow the wisdom of Kaihua Party and chaos in Goryeo." ( Pages 220-221) All compare the Jiashen Incident with the Wuxu Coup, and it is by no means unexplained. Chapter 4, Section 3, Section 1 of this book, "Korea's Hebang Experience" (pages 233-239), also uses Kang Youwei's plan to "borrow talents" and "hebang" with the first South Korean-Japanese Agreement in South Korea's history and Hirofumi Ito. He served as the chief magistrate of North Korea and compared the second South Korea-Japan agreement and explained its similarities.
2. Professor Zhang pointed out: "In Chapter 4, there is an author who thinks on behalf of Yuan Shikai and : "As long as Yuan Shikai thinks a little, you can understand that these reform officials are the Kaihua Party of China, and Tan Sitong and are China Jin Yujun and and Park Yonghyo. If..., Empress Dowager Cixi will become Queen Min. '(page 198) This is obviously no longer a story. "The passage quoted by Professor Zhang is analyzing Yuan Shikai's Ronglu’s motivation for rumouring. Regarding the motivation of historical figures to make a certain event, it is difficult to provide historical materials as evidence. Even if there are memoirs and other words, it may be a word of self-protection by the parties involved and should not be believed in them all. Therefore, analyzing the motivations of historical figures to make a certain event often depends on inference. However, inference is not an imagination out of thin air and allowed to be fabricated by the writer, but should make reasonable inferences based on the experience of the parties involved. Chapter 2 of this book details the process of the Jiashen change and describes Yuan Shikai's experience in the Jiashen change. Part of the reason is to analyze what Yuan Shikai would think at this time. If historical research cannot have any "inference", many history will not be discussed, and appropriate and rigorous inferences seem necessary.
3. Regarding the third chapter of this book, Professor Zhang pointed out: "The author said that he tried to use the research results of the predecessors to present the process of the reform of 1898. In writing a new book, there is no reason to misappropriate existing achievements in the whole section,' The word "' is not easy to use."
Chapter 3 of the book talks about the reform of 1898. He once added a short cut of the long form of "The History of the Reform of 1898" and placed it in the main text (pages 145-153) , I have not studied much about the various political, military, educational and economic reform measures of the 1898 Reform Movement, and it is not the focus of this book. However, in order to seek the completeness of the book, I cannot completely ignore it, so I can only " Try to use the research results of predecessors.”
Professor Zhang also criticized the book "Empress Dowager Cixi and Emperor Guangxu have two different personalities and have produced two different ways of making decisions" and is also a bad sentence. He believes that the "Wuxu Coup can be said to be caused by these two different things. The conflict of power caused by personality" (page 135) is particularly unreasonable. "Is the coup caused by personality incompatibility or the result of power conflict? The two theories cannot coexist."
The Empress Dowager Cixi described in this book is indeed "decisive and able to make a decision" (but it does not say that Cixi "distinguish right from wrong"); the Emperor Guangxu described in this book is indeed "reckless and impulsive, emotional", and the two have different personalities. Cixi had a huge influence in the court, while Guangxu was the actual ruler. When there were major problems in Guangxu's promotion of reform, did Cixi willingly retreat and let Guangxu do it, or should she intervene immediately when she found the problem (with power with Guangxu. Conflict), of course, is related to Cixi's character, and will also lead to different political consequences.
Empress Dowager Cixi
4. Regarding the incident of Weng Tonghe being deposed, Professor Zhang pointed out: "The Long Biography of Liang Qichao" is accompanied by Weng to a friend's letter to you, "My brother's actions are Kang and Liang, and he cannot tell others about everything." Although the authenticity of this letter is still doubtful, there are still traces of Weng's recommendation. Li Shengduo From one of the advocates of the Congress to relying on the rear party, becoming the confidant of Ronglu is a consensus in academic research. The author conjectures Li The clan was not Ronglu's personal, but only to prove that the removal of Weng was not due to Cixi's intention, and completely ignored Kang Liang. Ye Changchi, Jin Liang and other insiders bluntly stated that Cixi, Ronglu and Gangyi had squeezed away Weng Tonghe. "
According to Kang Youwei's records in "Customized Chronicle", after Guangxu issued an update of the country's edict, Kang Youwei "sented the book for the censor Li Shengduo, traveled and made the rewards and punishments, and identified the old and new records, Li Shangzhi" (page 143) , and soon Weng Tonghe was dismissed for Li Shengduo's memorial. Unless Kang Youwei’s records are unreliable, how can we explain the relationship between Li Shengduo and Kang Youwei, “Rong Lu’s personal”? As for Ye Changchi, Jin Liang and others in the Beijing officialdom at that time, their records of Weng Tonghe being dismissed should still be rumoral evidence, and their historical value should not be more important and credible than the records of Kang Youwei, the person involved.
5. Regarding Liang Qichao Two other articles on the basis of Cixi's obstruction of reforms: "Officers above the second rank went to the Empress Dowager to thank him" and "the confidant Ronglu served as the governor of Zhili". This book believes that "it may not be due to Cixi's intentions, but it may also be Guangxu's pleasing. Cixi's actions" (page 165), Professor Zhang "won't wonder why the author loves favoring the Queen Mother so much."
This book does doubt whether the two materials can be used as the basis for Cixi to obstruct the reform. After Guangxu ordered "officials above the second rank and above to go to the Empress Dowager to thank him", were there any senior officials above the second rank and above who were appointed by Guangxu but were voted back by Cixi? Did Cixi use this power to interfere in politics? Before Ronglu was the Governor of Zhili, he served as the Minister of Military Affairs. If Cixi wanted to interfere in the reform, what would be better if Ronglu was the Minister of Military Affairs or the Governor of Zhili? This is all debatable.
6. Professor Zhang pointed out: "The author's term "hebang comes from Japan" (page 170)" does not have this term in China, and this term is reported from Japan' (page 211) is not accurate. The source is in "Shangshu Yao Dian" "Sharmony of All Nations" and "Records of the Grand Historian: The Annals of the Five Emperors" "Harmony of All Nations". "
In fact, words such as "Constitution", "Cultural", "Politics", and "History" can be used in ancient Chinese books. Find the origin, but the modern meaning comes from Japanese vocabulary translation.The one who gives "Hong Kong" the meaning of "national merger" is indeed modern Japan. Professor Zhang pointed out that this book is based on Kang Youwei's "My History" ("Customized Chronicle") and "I made an appointment with Japan's Yano Fumio to the National Assembly," and the Russians knew about it, but Yano did not dare" (page 177 of this book ), critics: "What is the basis for determining this unity of the country, talking about the merger of China and Japan? Why is it not about the alliance?"
Appendix 3 of this book has pointed out: "What exactly is the meeting of the two countries' unity of the country to discuss? Are you arguing The merger of the country? Or did Kang Youwei misuse the word "Hobon"? It is not obvious in the above quotation. However, in addition to Kang Youwei, the promoters of the Hebon Conference, there is also Japanese ambassador to China, Fumio Yano, who should know The meaning of Hebang is the merger of the country. Unless Yano deliberately deceives Kang Youwei, Kang Youwei will not be unaware of the true meaning of Hebang. In addition, Kang Youwei's student Liang Qichao reprinted and published the "Dadong Hebang Theory" in China and renamed it "Dada" "New Meaning of the East Hebang", so Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao will not completely misunderstand the meaning of the East Hebang. Therefore, it is difficult to believe that Kang Youwei does not understand the meaning of the East Hebang." (pages 314-315)
"New Meaning of the East Hebang" 》
Professor Zhang also pointed out: "If Kang Yi was to merge, wouldn't it be the Japanese's idea? As a politician, Yano would not dare to do so?" Kang Youwei himself said: "And the Russians knew about it, Yano did not dare to do so. . "Professor Zhang seemed to miss the phrase "and the Russians knew it" when citing it, so he had this question. Appendix III of this book also mentions: "Yano Jun is worried about Russia's opposition, so he dared not implement it." (Page 313). After all, Russia was a world power. At that time, it occupied Lushun, , Dalian , and Japan did not dare to act rashly.
As for Professor Zhang, "Kang has condemned Japan's annexation of North Korea in the name of a united state. He wrote a note in the 1898-1899 that 'disclosure of Japan's conspiracy, referring to North Korea's accumulating troubles'. After the coup, he reiterated the lessons of Japan's merger of North Korea: 'When the summer of Yiwei, Huanghuang praised his independence and thought he had escaped from China's yoke. It was less than ten years ago, and he was in Japan, so he regretted the trick he accidentally listened to. '" The previous paragraph was the words Kang Youwei condemned Japan after the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Chapter 2, Section 3 of this book has pointed out that Kang Youwei was lobbying by the Japanese after Yiwei and began to turn from hatred to pro-Japanese (pages 87-98). The latter paragraph was when Japan controlled North Korea after the 20th century. Liang Qichao also wrote "A Brief History of the Demise of North Korea" and scolded Japan for invading North Korea. Why did Kang and Liang help Japan promote the "Hong Kong-League" in the year of Wuxu? When Japan criticized Japan when North Korea promoted the "Hong Kong-League"? The author can only say that politicians’ remarks are different, isn’t it rare?
7. Professor Zhang criticized the author for "not crawling the documentary archives of Japanese parties such as Ito and Yano." In "Ito Hiromoto Relations Document", Ito Hiromoto and Yano Fumio had close contacts with letters, but there was no letter information during the period from the beginning of the Wuxu Reform Movement in June 1898 to the Wuxu Coup. Just imagine Hirofumi Ito was about to set out for traveling in China. Wouldn't there be any letters to Yano, an old friend who was the minister in China? The author has entrusted a Japanese friend to check the relevant information of the Japanese National Official Document Library, but has no gains; Mao Haijian Professor Mao Haijian 's Observation and Reaction of the Japanese Government on the Reform of 1898 (accompanied in "A Study on the Historical Events of the Reform of 1898") also said that the Japanese Embassy's Various new policies during the Reform Movement of 1898 were reported in detail to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but the Japanese government responded indifferently and had no specific instructions. In addition, in order to write the process of Japan's annexation of North Korea, the author also consulted the National Official Document Library's "The Merger of South Korea and the Books of the NKU" and thoughts after reading it: "South Korea voluntarily merged with Japan."If you speak completely according to the "organized" archival historical materials without any analysis, can Professor Zhang accept such results? Professor Zhang believes: "The author severely denounces Ito, Yano and others to start annexation in one fell swoop in the year of Wuxu. The Hebang Plan, this judgment is extraordinary, but it fails to provide any documentary evidence. It is just an explanation. We cannot think that the Hebang Plan did not exist at that time because there is no Hebang content in the Japanese archives.' We cannot be sure of Japan. The role played in the Hebang Project, however, does not mean that the Hebang conspiracy does not exist. (Page 260). In the same paragraph, the author once claimed that 'the test of facts depends on evidence, but the evidence should only be asked if there is any. Ask more and less' (page 259), therefore, this book is considered to be "contradictory". Both passages of
are based on the conclusions of this book. "Testing facts depends on evidence, but the evidence should only be asked if there is any, and no "Asking more and less" refers to Kang Youwei's plan of the United Nations. There are evidences such as "Customized Chronicle", Yang Shenxiu's Memorial, and Song Bolu's Memorial and Memorial, which is enough to prove the matter; such court secrets cannot be listed like social history research. There are dozens or hundreds of evidence as evidence. "We cannot believe that there was no plan for Hebang at that time just because there is no content in Japanese archives." This means that although Japan's information is limited, it is not enough to fully prove it. The Japanese government participated in the "Hongbang" plan, but Kang Youwei accepted the suggestion of Timothy Li and asked Yang Shenxiu and Song Bolu to propose the "Hongbang" plan to Guangxu, which was completely certain that it existed.
Professor Zhang also pointed out that "Taiwan Daily News" The content of "The Book of the Qing Dynasty" recorded in "My History" is consistent with the record of "I see Hirobu Ito but does not invite rescue, but asks him to say the Empress Dowager". The author failed to find the expected content from it, and was disappointed and was in trouble. Questioning: "The content of "Youqing Jiyu" is questionable. "Is Kang Youwei meeting Hirobuki Ito? Is that the only thing about the conversation? ” (Page 208) The author did raise doubts about the content of "Youqing Jiyu". At that time, the reform officials kept writing letters to advocate the reuse of Hirobuki Ito. Did Kang Youwei talk to Ito without talking about these matters at all? This should be a reasonable doubt.
8. Regarding the memorials of Yang Shenxiu and Song Bolu, Professor Zhang pointed out: "Both letters are drafted by Kang Youwei. Yang "The current situation is difficult and dangerous to fight for the tiles to save the tiles and cracks" limits the meaning of the tyrant to Hong Ruchong, who quotes the tyrants and the country. ', Timothy Lee's "unites Britain, the United States, Japan, and Hirofumi Ito's "connects to Wuhua" are equivalent to a coalition, so he says, "Don't think that the name of a unity is not beautiful." The author determined that it was not an alliance, and that the unity advocated by Yang Shenxiu was actually a merger with the three countries of Britain, the United States and Japan’ (page 212). Have you forgotten that you have said that Hebang is a neutral noun and a combination of combination? ”
In fact, this book believes that "heiba" is a relatively neutral noun (page 176), which means that compared with "merger" and "annexation", "heiba" can include voluntary merger between two countries, so it is a relatively middle The term "union" means national merger, and is by no means "union". This book has mentioned Hong Ruchong's memorial to advocate "connection with the country", and it is not surprising that China and Japan "merge into one country." ", Hong Ruchong also quoted examples from Sweden Norwegian Federation, Austro-Hungarian Empire , Italy, and Germany, and talked about the merger of states (pages 180-181). In the memorial of Yang Shenxiu, Timothy Li said that "unified Britain, the United States, Japanese scholar Miyako Furuki has pointed out that Yang Shenxiu will use "union", "union" and "union" indiscriminately. This book also points out that based solely on Yang Shenxiu's memorials, it is impossible to It is difficult to tell whether Yang Shenxiu misused the word "heiba" and whether Li Timothy's "heiba" strategy was a military alliance or a national merger (page 317).
9. Regarding Song Bolu's memorial, Professor Zhang pointed out : "Song's "Please Quickly Censor the State of the Receipt of the Important Ministers", and explained that the day before, Timothy Lee presented a division map to Kang Youwei, and said that he planned to unite China, Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom to become a united state, but wrote a memorial The concerns are shown in the excerpt of "connecting with the country to safeguard the country".At the same time, the "News" column of the "Guowen News" reported that Timothy Li went to Beijing to submit the "dividing up China map" to the General Administration, advocating that "for the sake of the present, we must make a certain federal agreement with the United Kingdom, the United States and Japan." "Professor Zhang criticized the explanation of Song Bolu's memorials in this book: "It is not only determined that Song Bolu supports Li Timothy's proposal to unite the country, but also extends it to "It can be seen that the so-called unite the country by the reform officials at that time was indeed not just a diplomatic alliance, but a diplomatic alliance. The merger of state power' (pages 214-215). Can you equate between linkage, federation and merger in this way? "
The reason why this book determines that the so-called "union" in the Song Bolu memorial is a merger that surrenders national power is because the Song Bolu memorial says: "There is the arrival of Qu (Timothy Li), and plans to unite China, Japan, the United States and Britain is a united country, with a total of hundreds of people who understand the current affairs and understand the affairs of various countries, and specialize in the military, political, tax and rules of the four countries and all diplomatic affairs. ” (Page 214) The four countries must elect one hundred people to be in charge of the military, government, taxation, and all diplomatic affairs of the four countries. This means that the state handed over all military, financial and diplomatic powers and elected them to the four countries. 100 people came to take charge. This is already more "advanced" than the current European Union and is about to move towards national mergers. Therefore, the content of Song Bolu's memorial fully confirms that "unification" is not an alliance or cooperation, but a handover of national power. Merger. Professor Zhang emphasized "Get evidence! "This passage from Song Bolu's memorial is the best evidence. This plan of unity was completely impossible at that time. However, as a missionary and senior intellectual, Li Timothy, proposed that this was completely impossible to implement. , so this book believes that this is a diplomatic scam. Professor Kong Xiangji also said in his book "Research on the Reform Memorial of Kang Youwei": "The initiator of the Hebang Plan was not someone else, but Li Timothy. ...Exposing the diorama of Timothy Li, it turned out to be a naked conspiracy to annex China. Kang Youwei invited such an ambitious missionary as his consultant at the critical moment of the reform cause. This move is really It is unwise, stupid and dangerous. "(Page 253 of this book) Kang Youwei accepted the suggestion of Timothy Li and sent Yang Shenxiu and Song Bolu to Guangxu to request a "bundance of the country". Shouldn't he be criticized? He must wait until the power of the country is plundered and the country is no longer in order to wake up and happen. Is there anything wrong?
10. Professor Zhang pointed out: "After the coup, the Qing court announced the crimes of Kangliang and the six gentlemen, but there was no word about the so-called unity of the country. The author was to stitch this secret. At the end of this chapter, why Cixi avoided talking about this matter. The real reason for launching a coup is very secretive, mainly because of concern that the reformists' forces among the people will be difficult to completely eradicate them for a while. This is an unreasonable guess. If there is really a "shocking international conspiracy" that the reformists brought wolves into the house, it will be listed as the top crime and will be punished by the world in order to eliminate the social influence of the reformists. How can it be hidden? ”
In this book, this book has clearly stated: “After the coup, why did Empress Dowager Cixi not announce the conspiracy between Britain and Japan and condemn the treason of the reform officials? The author believes that this may be to maintain diplomatic relations with Britain and Japan on the one hand. Cixi knew that China had no strength to be enemies with Britain and Japan at that time. The military activities between Britain and Japan were always concerned by the Qing Dynasty. ...The rumors of the war between Britain, Japan and Russia going to the east were not fully clarified until the 11th. Empress Dowager Cixi rashly announced the conspiracy between Britain and Japan during the coup, and opposed it with Britain and Japan, which shows that China is on Russia's side in the war between Britain and Japan, and this statement is obviously for China. No benefit. "(pages 221-223) As for "the power of the reformists among the people is difficult to completely eradicate for a while" (page 223), it is only a secondary factor.
Professor Zhang also pointed out: "In the author's writing, Cixi seems to have become a principled person. Marxist-Leninist old lady.However, isn’t it the one who threatens to “measure China’s material resources and win the country with the favor”? "
The book has mentioned: This book does not intend to portray Empress Dowager Cixi as a "great man" and "national hero". Empress Dowager Cixi also has many things worthy of criticism during the past forty years in power, but in the single incident of the Wuxu Coup In the previous article, Empress Dowager Cixi blocked the "borrowing talents" and "union of the country" plan, and made the Qing Dynasty "turning the tide" and saved China from the disaster of annexation and merger. It should still give a positive evaluation (page 258). This book also pointed out that After the coup, Cixi did not dare to reuse those who advocated reform and reuse a large number of conservative officials, causing disaster for the Eight-Nation Alliance in the future (pages 242-243). After the Eight-Nation Alliance, Cixi said, "measure China's material resources and make the country's favor." Could it be that Did she say this happily? This should be a helpless word after the defeat. Taking a step back, even if we evaluate Cixi as a "bad person", is she just doing bad things for the rest of her life? She wouldn't do it right occasionally. One thing? Research history should not first label the research subject as "good people" and "bad people", but should try to conduct research objectively.
or above is the author's response to Professor Zhang Ronghua. Thank you very much for your turmoil during the epidemic In the middle, I patiently finished reading this book and put forward very valuable opinions. In particular, the interpretation of "classical new interpretation" displayed by Professor Zhang in the second half of the book review also deeply admired the author, and I also learned it from it. Many people, and I feel that it is not easy to understand the mentality of political figures and to interpret the whole story of political events in detail, and the treacherous and charm of history are also here. As a Chinese, I also hope that China will have more positive examples and less "induce wolves into the house" But after reading historical materials, the author's understanding is so true, so he should be loyal to what he sees and write his own views in full. Since this book has been published, whether the content and views are correct, scholars, experts and general readers are welcome to criticize and correct them. Finally, thank you again for your corrections from Professor Zhang, who has conducted in-depth research on modern Chinese history, and for the real-name publication of "Shanghai Book Review".
on Taipei
on April 13, 2020
