國立臺灣大學政治科學論叢

Abstract / Chinese PDF Download

In the 23rd year of the Western Han Empire, i.e., 180 B. C., the clan ofEmpress Lü (呂后) was wiped out in a coup d’etat which followed her death. Forover two thousand years, it had been firmly believed that the clan was justlyexecuted, because, as the orthodox historical records stated, the Empress’ nephewsPrime Minister Lü Chan (呂產) and Supreme Commander Lü Lu (呂祿) intendedto usurp the throne. In recent years, a few scholars began to challenge this viewand pointed out that no solid evidence can be found in the existing records for theso-called “intended usurpation” by the clan of Lü. They asserted that the clanperished in a dirty coup staged by the elder statesmen and generals, who tried toregain the political power and privileges deprived by the Empress. Thus, thehistorical records are false stories made up by the victor.

Through systematic examination of the text of the most authentic historicalrecords, namely Shiji (史記) by Sima Qian (司馬遷), this research demonstratesthat both these two views are far from the truth. The truth is that during her reignof eight years the Empress had planted deep and profound political contradictionsbetween her clan and the royal clan of her husband the Founding Emperor LiuBang (劉邦). No sooner had she died than the conflict erupted, and an impending full-scale civil war threatened to ruin the Empire. Fortunately, the elder statesmenand generals intervened and cut the Gordian knot by staging a coup to annihilatethe Lü clan. In this coup plot the prime conspirator Chen Ping (陳平), namely theearnestly trusted Prime Minister of the Empress, betrayed the Empress andconducted many immoral and illegal acts. But his means were well justified by hisend, because he succeeded in preventing the collapse of the new-born Empire andsaved millions of people’s lives.

A much more meaningful finding is that in presenting this history Sima Qianemployed ingenious writing skills, perhaps new to the world. By blurringnarrations, concealing facts, making up stories and planting riddles, he constructeda history of two tales; one is exoteric and false, the other esoteric and true. Theformer was to legitimize the regime erected by the coup; the latter, to providegenuine teachings to posterity. By so doing, he had fulfilled his duty as arecording-officer of the Imperial House and kept faithful to his own conscience asan independent historian.

A text like this is hard to comprehend, of course. It is full of grammaticalerrors, missing links, awkward expressions, contradictory statements, superfluousrepetitions and ridiculous accounts. Therefore, later historians, such as Ban Gu (班固) and Sima Guang (司馬光) rewrote it into plainer versions. By so doing,however, they obliterated the hints and clues for searching out the truth andpresented only false stories. This suggests that Sima Qian’s writings of this coupcannot be literally translated into modern Chinese or any other languages withoutsevere distortions. To grasp the truth, one cannot but return to the original text. Todecode the enigmatic writings, logic is the key.