At the end of 1950s, there was a great discussion in academic circles about the vindication of the historical figure Cao Cao. Under the special historical conditions at that time, Guo Moruo published the article "Reversing the Case", while Tan Qixiang bluntly expressed his views on Lao Guo, leaving a meaningful history for historians in New China. Recently, "Long Water-A Prequel to Tan Qixiang" published by East China Normal University Press recorded this history objectively and clearly, and we are here to extract it for readers.

How to evaluate Cao Cao's historical merits and demerits

1In March, 1959, Tan Qixiang and Zhu Yongjia went to Beijing to participate in the discussion on the outline of China's general history. 19 returned to school in June, and held a meeting between teachers and students of various departments in the trade union to convey the spirit of the Beijing meeting. The Beijing Conference made a big fuss, proposing to rely on experts to compile a new general history of China, so as to make teachers and students clear-headed. In order to reduce the negative influence of criticizing bourgeois academic thoughts, the Party Committee encouraged Tan Qixiang to take the lead in making academic reports. Just now Guo Moruo and Jian Bozan proposed to convict Cao Cao, and Guo Moruo also proposed to convict Yin and other historical figures. Tan Qixiang read his article and felt that many arguments were untenable. On the afternoon of March 26th, he gave an academic report on Cao Cao's evaluation to the teachers and students of history department in the trade union, which caused great repercussions. That night, Chen Wangdao held a forum in his apartment to discuss how the Department of History and Chinese Studies could carry out academic discussions. After the meeting, Wen Wei Po reporter Lu Hao sent a report on his academic report. Tan Qixiang revised it to 12 and published it in the newspaper on the 28th. Lu Hao also asked him to organize the contents of the report into articles, and Tan Qixiang started writing on the evening of 27th. Before 25th, he received a phone call from Beijing. Before the National Atlas was held, the editorial board had something to discuss and asked him to arrive early. He has reserved a ticket. In order to finish writing this article before going out, we can only return the tickets we have already bought and buy another one. From 28th to 30th, he was extremely busy and nervous, because after Wen Wei Po's report was published, all parties called one after another, and Guangming Daily and Fudan Daily all requested to publish this article. He writes at three or four o'clock in the evening every day, and finally finishes it on the morning of the 30th 10. Lu Hao, who was waiting at his house, immediately took it away. Guangming Daily and Fudan Daily failed to grab it, and the article about Cao Cao was published in Wen Wei Po the next day.

At that time, everyone knew that Guo Moruo's conviction article was well-founded, so Tan Qixiang's discussion was particularly eye-catching. Teachers and students of the history department further discussed and the atmosphere was lively. There has also been a contention of different opinions in academic circles, breaking the long silence.

(1) In this paper, Tan Qixiang first pointed out that there is no question of reversing Cao Cao's conviction. It is said that a person's beliefs are reversed, whether positive or negative, and the new evaluation is completely opposite or basically opposite to the old evaluation. But from ancient times to the present, many people say that Cao Cao is not good, but many people say that he is good, and some people think that he is good in some aspects, and at the same time think that he is not good in some aspects. He listed that in the history textbooks published in recent decades, the evaluation of Cao Cao was generally not particularly bad; Although Fan Wenlan's "A Brief History of China" and Lv Zhenyu's "A Brief History of China" scolded him, they were only one of the warlords in the late Han Dynasty, and their evaluation of him was far above that of Liu Bei and Sun Quan. Before and after liberation, articles or pamphlets about Cao Cao gave him more positive comments than negative ones. Since people's comments on Cao Cao in the past were not all negative, but also positive, how can we say that Cao Cao has been rehabilitated and overturned today? The ancients' evaluation of Cao Cao was both detrimental and detrimental. Even Sima Guang's comments in Zi Tong Zhi Jian almost accepted the words of Wang Shen, the courtier of Cao Wei. As for novels and operas, it is said that Cao Cao is not good, not good. That is a question of whether historical novels and historical dramas conform to historical facts, nor is it a question of reversing the verdict.

(2) Both Guo Moruo and Jian Bozan believe that all the bad things of Cao Cao come from the ruling class. The reason why the ruling class speaks ill of him is the orthodox historical view of the feudal era, and the common people also say that Cao Cao is not good, which is influenced by the ruling class. "The ruling class deliberately cultivated it."

Tan Qixiang listed various evaluations of Cao Cao from the Jin Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty, and pointed out that the feudal ruling class treated Cao Cao on the basis of orthodoxy and did not always regard him as a usurper? Even in the era of partial security, the person who stole the Sect did not regard him as a bad person. Since the Northern Song Dynasty, novels and operas have regarded Cao Cao as a negative teacher, which is obviously not cultivated by the ruling class, as Guo Moruo said, because Sima Guang has a good evaluation of Cao Cao, but according to Zhi Lin of Su Shi at the same time, the speaker (folk storyteller) at that time has said that Cao Cao has become a negative figure.

Tan Qixiang specifically discussed Cao Cao's historical contribution, which was summarized as four great achievements:

1. ended the scuffle between Hao warlords in the late Han Dynasty and unified the North.

2. Conquered Wuwan and Xianbei, and ensured the peace of the border.

3. It hit the aristocratic families, restrained the merger to a certain extent, and clarified the official management.

4. Production has been restored and developed to a certain extent.

At the same time, it points out the four deadly sins of Cao Cao:

1. Strike peasant rebels.

2. Most of the battles fought by Cao Cao in his life were internal wars between ruling groups. In order to end the melee and seek reunification, these wars are inevitable, but he killed too many people in the course of the war, which is also a great sin.

3. Reclaiming land is really beneficial to the people to destroy the powerful, but the so-called reclamation system is actually a system that forces the military and civilians to exploit the land at a high level by military means. Moreover, no matter the tenant farmers (army) or the tenant farmers (people), because their labor production is directly under the jurisdiction of the agricultural officials established by the government, their status has declined and they have embarked on the road of serfdom.

In terms of moral quality, his cruelty is unforgivable.

He bluntly put forward: "The evaluation of historical figures should be right or wrong and as appropriate as possible. If they are evil, they should hope to send them to hell. If they love them, they will be afraid of not being praised. " In Lao Guo's works, Cao Cao seems to have no problem, even if there is, it's no big deal. I think Lao Guo's view is debatable in many places. "

(2) Guo Moruo said: "Although Cao Cao started from attacking the Yellow Scarf, we can say that he inherited the Yellow Scarf Movement and organized it." "Although Cao Cao played the yellow scarf, he did not violate the purpose of the yellow scarf."

Tan Qixiang pointed out: "The Yellow Scarf Uprising has basically disintegrated the Eastern Han regime. Why did Cao Cao come out to overthrow it? The basic demand of farmers is land, which is an insignificant tax. However, Cao Cao's measure was to arrange farmers on state-owned land, carry out serf-like production under the direct control of agricultural officials, and extract high land rent of five ten thousandths or six tenths. How can it be said that it has not violated the purpose of the Yellow Scarf Uprising? There were many peasant uprisings in the late Jian 'an period, which showed that under Cao Cao's rule, the life of peasants was not necessarily much better than that since Huanling in the Eastern Han Dynasty. After Cao Cao defeated the Qingzhou Yellow Scarf Army, he was incorporated into the Qingzhou Army. From then on, Qingzhou soldiers no longer fought for the interests of the peasant class, but served the interests of Cao Cao's ruling group. How can you say that Cao Cao inherited the Yellow Scarf Movement? "

(3) Guo Moruo said that due to Cao Cao's measures such as weeding and reclaiming farmland, "the peasants' desire for land in northern China for thousands of years was basically lifted" and "the situation of people being enslaved was reversed".

Tan Qixiang asked: "Is it that making people serfs on the land means adjusting their desire for land and reversing the situation of slavery?" Besides, it was not limited to Cao Shi at that time, and Jiangdong was also introduced to Sun Shi, and the scale was not small. This shows that this is not a special advantage of the Cao Shi regime.

(4) Guo Moruo thinks that the record of Cao Cao's murder in history is not completely credible. For example, there are three different records about his attack on Tao Qian. He believes that the biography of Cao Zang was written by Wu people, and it is obviously hostile propaganda to say that Cao Cao killed tens of thousands of people. The Biography of Tao Qian in the Later Han Dynasty exaggerates the number of killings to hundreds of thousands, which is a typical musical pen. Only the record of Biography of Wei Zhi and Tao Qian is credible, which contains "tens of thousands of people died" and "they may have been killed here, drowned in the defeat or trampled by themselves, not all of them were killed by Cao Cao".

Tan Qixiang pointed out that there are many records about Cao Cao's murder in historical materials, and even the Biography of Wei Zhi said that he was "killed by Tai Chen"; Even if the Book of Wu is not credible because of Wu people, is the Biography of Wei Zhi not credible? Wei Zhi, too. Why is it that only Tao Qian's biography is credible, but Benji is not?

(5) Guo Moruo believes that Cao Cao's killing of Kong Rong's second son is not credible, because Guo's Shi Yu has no clear text, while Wei Chunqiu and The Biography of Kong Rong in the Later Han Dynasty are just affirmations, and that Pei Songzhi, the annotator of the Three Kingdoms, once criticized Sun.

Tan Qixiang pointed out that this was Lao Guo's negligence and misunderstood Pei Songzhi's original intention. Pei's original intention was not to object to Kong Rong's second son being killed at the same time, but he thought it was unnatural to say that Kong Rong's second son "couldn't sit up when he was arrested". At the same time, Cao Cao often killed three families (parents, brothers and wives), not just the Kong Rong family. There are three records about Cao Cao's killing of the Lv Boshe family, and Tan Qixiang thinks that the most appropriate way is to be suspicious.

(6) Guo Moruo also said that Cao Cao wanted to move the residents of Huainan counties at the junction of Sun and Wu to the mainland in the eighteenth year of Jian 'an, which caused "more than ten people in Jianghuai were all scared away" and fled to Sun Wu, saying that this was originally out of Cao Cao's kindness, but he was in a hurry and screwed up things. According to Yuan Huan's biography, he believes that Huainan people were forced to open up wasteland. Later, since it was no longer forced, "it can be seen that many of the hundreds of thousands of people in Dongdujiang came back later."

Tan Qixiang pointed out that this is probably another misunderstanding caused by Lao Guo's negligence in not reading Yuan Huanchuan, because Cao Cao gave up forced reclamation in Jian 'an in 1934, and Huainan people lagged far behind in moving eastward. What does it have to do with reclamation? In this case, hundreds of thousands of families who were scared away may not come back in the future. It can be seen from this incident that Cao Wei's rule may not be much better than that of Sun Wu, otherwise Huainan people would not be willing to defect because they were unwilling to move inward.

(7) Guo Moruo even doubted the records of Battle of Red Cliffs. He quoted the saying in Cao Cao and Sun Quan's books that "if there is a disease, it will burn the boat and never stop" and thought, "Which side is a historical fact?" It's hard for us to judge. "

After listing all kinds of records, Tan Qixiang pointed out that Battle of Red Cliffs's "Zhou Yuchuan of the Three Kingdoms" is the most detailed and consistent with other records, which is beyond doubt. "Please imagine: Cao Cao went down the river with hundreds of thousands of troops and was arrogant. He wants to decide Jiangdong in one fell swoop and unify the world. If he is not defeated, how can he' cross the rubicon'? "

(8) Guo Moruo said that Cao Cao "hit 50,000, and 50,000 people obeyed him" and "he hit the yellow turban insurrectionary, and the yellow turban insurrectionary farmers supported him". These two things are the most amazing. The so-called 50,000 people obey him, referring to the three counties after Cao 50,000 in Wei Zhi 50,000 Biography. "Knowing that his home is China, handsome people multiply and conquer with his princes, so 50,000 counties are famous for riding in the world."

Tan Qixiang said that there have always been many conquered "aliens" as soldiers. In the Middle Ages, frontier tribes were often ruled by predatory wars. Who is recruited, who does he serve and who does he fight for? Why is it amazing? Zhang Chunhe Yuan Shao can use fifty thousand armed forces, but why not Cao Cao?

(9) Guo Moruo said that after Cao Cao destroyed 50,000 counties, he moved back to more than 100,000 Han people who had fallen to 50,000. They are sincerely grateful to Cao Cao and regard him as a reborn parent.

Tan Qixiang thinks this may not be the case, because at that time, not all the Han people in the frontier tribes were taken captive, and some of them "returned from exile" because they could not bear the ravages of the warlord separatist war. Unless the Central Plains is really peaceful, they may be reluctant to come back.

(10) Guo Moruo said that Cao Cao's ethnic policy "basically adopted the method of ethnic harmony", and the implementation of this policy was meritorious.

Tan Qixiang said that may not be true. He thinks that Cao Cao moved the frontier tribes to the inland. "It is not good for the mainland, the frontier, the Han nationality and the ethnic minorities. Its only advantage is that it increases the exploitation targets and soldiers of the rulers. " "To say the least, in the era of Cao Cao, Wuwan suffered from the frontier fortress and moved to the mainland, which is still beneficial to Anbian. However, if he later made a western expedition to Zhang Lushi, he moved to the Douren in Hanzhong. In vain, I have left my hometown and lost my foothold. "

(1 1) Guo Moruo also said that "another reason why Cao Cao was distorted like Qin Shihuang was that the regime did not last long."

Tan Qixiang thinks this statement is problematic. "The situation in the Jin and Wei Dynasties is different from that in the Han and Qin Dynasties, but slightly the same as that in the Sui (North) Zhou Dynasty and the Zhao, Song and Zhou Dynasties. Just as people in the Sui Dynasty did not have to speak ill of Yu Wentai (the founding emperor of the Northern Zhou Dynasty) and Chai Rong (the founding emperor of the Later Zhou Dynasty), people in the Western Jin Dynasty did not have to speak ill of Cao Cao. In fact, people in the Western Jin Dynasty did not deliberately vilify Cao Cao and protect Liu Bei. "

(12) Tan Qixiang's conclusion is: "In short, Cao Cao is a historical figure, with both advantages and disadvantages. Looking at the problem in an all-round way, the overall evaluation should be that the merits outweigh the demerits. But we can't, and we don't need to, confess his guilt just because he has rendered meritorious service. Many people didn't say that he was guilty and meritorious before, so the case basically didn't have to be turned over. If we must turn over the crime he committed, saying that it didn't happen, or that it happened, but it didn't offend, I am afraid it can't be turned over, because that is a historical fact. "

Debate on Cai Wenji's Eighteen Beats of Hu Jia

When Guo Moruo reversed his conviction for Cao Cao, he also published Eighteen Beats of Hu Jia in Cai Wenji, and later published Talk Again, Three Talks and Four Talks based on other people's opinions. In Cai Wenji, he also included his play Cai Wenji and related articles. One of the purposes of Guo Moruo's study of Cai Wenji is to further affirm Cao Cao through her.

Tan Qixiang also continued to study the relevant papers, and on July 3, he wrote the article "Life and Works" to discuss with Guo Moruo and others. Sister Liu, Kaiyang Liu, Li Dingwen, Wang Dajin, etc. At first, those who participated in the contention were all from the perspective of literary history, and Tan Qixiang "proved the historical facts at that time, the author's life experience and the things described in his works, thus putting forward my immature views on all the problems contained in this whole problem, that is, the authenticity of the author's life and each work"; Unique in the discussion.

(1) Fan Wenlan, Guo Moruo, Liu Dajie, etc. From the Song Dynasty to the present, Su Shi expressed doubts about the two chapters of mourning poems recorded in Dong Sichuan, and thought that they were not written by Cai Wenji. In addition to discussing from the style and style, there are three main points:

1. According to the Biography of Dong Sizhi's Wife in the Later Han Dynasty, Wen Xi's victory was "not left by the southern Xiongnu", which should not be said to be the work of Dong Zhuo's followers.

2. Wenxi's father, Cai Yong, is highly valued by Dong Zhuo and occupies a high position in the central government controlled by Dong Zhuo. He was killed by Wang Yun only after the death of Dong Zhuo. Wenxi must have been exiled after Cai Yong's death. In the poem, Dong Zhuo said that he was driven into Hu.

3. In the chapter of Sao Ti, there is a sentence that "Qiang people have gone through hardships and dangers", which is inconsistent with the fact that Yue people were plundered by the southern Xiongnu. There is also a saying that "the desert is covered with dust, the vegetation is covered with soldiers, and the spring scenery is not glorious", which is inconsistent with the geographical environment of Pingyang area (now southern Shanxi) where the southern Xiongnu was located at that time.

However, Tan Qixiang believes that these three items are not valid. Because:

1. Dong Zhuo's department is full of Qiang people and conference semifinals. In Sorrow and indignation, it is said that "outstanding people come from the east" and "all soldiers follow". Aren't these Hu Bing "Hu Qi"?

2. Since the fifth year of Zhong Ping (188), the southern Xiongnu has been divided into two parts, one part moved to Hedong, and the other part remained in Hetao area of Inner Mongolia. If "Southern Xiongnu" refers to the part left there, the geographical environment is exactly the same as described.

3. Dong Zhuo's discipline is poor. At that time, Cai Wenji was exiled to Kanto, Cai Yong was in Chang 'an, and Cai Yong was killed after three months in exile, so there was no way to get news, let alone rescue him. Hu Qiang in Dong Zhuo's army is from Guanzhong. It is not surprising that Cai Wenji was driven into the customs by the west after he was captured. He has been going to the land of Qiang people since he entered the customs. Therefore, we can be sure that the second chapter of Sorrow and Indignation is really Cai Wenji's work. On this basis, Tan Qixiang further confirmed that Cai Wenji was captured by Dong Zhuo and other officials in Chenliulai County, his native place, in the spring of the third year of Chuping (192). In addition, there was no case of being captured by the right king of the southern Xiongnu in Xingping. After Cai Wenji was exiled, he immediately went north to the Qiang people's area, that is, the northern Shaanxi Plateau, which was no longer included in the territory since the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty. Guo Moruo expressed doubts about Qiang people, fearing that he didn't understand the regional distribution of all ethnic groups at that time. There are many deep valleys and high banks in the northern Shaanxi Plateau, which is just in line with the scenery described in the poem, such as "the road is dangerous and blocked, but I still worry about darkness" and "the mountain is dangerous and blocked, and the road is long". Further north from here is the beautiful millet where Nanting is located, which is today's Zhungeer Banner area in Inner Mongolia. From Chenliulai County to Meiji, the Han Dynasty was about 3,000 miles. The poem "You have a journey of three thousand miles" (referring to the way home, the same route as when you went) is completely documentary. Wenxi returned to Han in the eighth year of Jian 'an (2003). She was 16 years old when she first married Wei Zhongdao, 19 years old when Chu Ping was captured for three years, and 30 years old when she returned to Han.

(2) Finally, Tan Qixiang pointed out that the content described in Eighteen Beats of Hu Jia was totally out of line with the reality in the late Eastern Han Dynasty. On the contrary, Cai Wenji's personal experience in the second chapter of Sorrow and Indignation is completely unknown. It can be seen that this author is not only unclear about the relationship between Hu and South Korea when Moon Hee had no Hu, but also unclear about the circumstances under which she had no Hu. Could it be Cai Wenji himself? As for the "dragon water" mentioned in the sentence, it is far from Nanting. Cai Wenji, who has personal experience, won't use nouns indiscriminately. As for this, he disagreed with Guo Moruo. He thinks that Eighteen Beats of Hu Jia is a beautiful poem, which can deeply understand Cai Wenji's mood, but it was written by an author who has been to Cai Wenji for a long time and doesn't understand Cai Wenji's background and experience.

This paper was published in the 9th issue of Academic Monthly of 1959, but another article was first published in Wen Wei Po of July 10.

(1) In this article entitled "Reading Zhu Guo's Cai Wenji", Tan Qixiang pointed out Guo Moruo's mistakes in his plays "Cai Wenji" and "Eighteen Paintings and Postscripts of Hu Family": Cai Wenji was only one of many concubines captured by the "Left Department" and could not be the left princess. Cao Cao sent a small official, Zhou Jin, to redeem Cai Wenji, who was unknown in history, not a "general". Cai Wenji gave birth to two sons in the call, and Zheng Zhenduo used the word "child", so the script arranged a son and a daughter. In fact, the Biography of Cai Yan has explained that it is "two people". The scene outside Chang 'an is arranged in the script, which is a misunderstanding of Hu Jia's original intention. Even according to Hu Jia, it does not refer to the real Chang 'an, but refers to the capital of the Central Plains dynasty. In fact, you don't have to go through Chang 'an to return to the Central Plains from Meijia. The end of the script will be arranged in Ye, because the author mistook the date for thirteen years of Jian 'an and eight years of Jian 'an, Ye was still occupied by Yuan Shao and Cao Cao was still in Xu.

(2) Tan Qixiang pointed out that the most problematic part of the script is to arrange Hu Chuquan Khan and travel to Wang Xian to Nanting's hometown. In fact, I once set out from Hedong to participate in the war of returning the East to the Son of Heaven, and finally gave it to Xu, and then returned to China. This so-called "country", that is, its original starting point Hedong, can't be Nanting. After Luo Fu's death, Hu Chuquan succeeded to the throne as Khan. Bao, the son of Li, is the father of Liu Yuan. I have lived in Hedong from Luo Fu to Liu Yuan.

According to the biography of Xiongnu in the Book of Jin, Guo Moruo indicated in the script that the Xiongnu in Central and South China was under Khan Hu Chuchun: "This man entered the Han Dynasty in the 21st year of Jian 'an, and was retained by Cao Cao in Cao Zhen. He sent the Xiongnu to the right and was divided into five parts, each of which made him handsome and handsome, and the Han people were chosen as Sima Du. Therefore, in Cao Cao's hands, the southern Xiongnu is equal to naturalization. The northern Xiongnu had already moved westward, and the old land was occupied by Xianbei people. "

However, he didn't even notice that it was clearly described in Xiongnu Biography that the five captains divided their troops in the five counties of Kujiao, Qi, Puzi, Xinxing and Daling in the territory at that time, all east of the Yellow River, but there were Xiongnu tribes beyond the Great Wall, which joined at the beginning of the Western Jin Dynasty. On the basis of such misunderstanding, Guo Moruo said that "the Xiongnu, who suffered great disasters in northern China since Yin, has almost become a county in his (Cao Cao's) hands". In fact, the Southern Xiongnu, which was "equal to naturalization", was limited to five families living in counties east of the Yellow River and south of Fuling in Sene at that time. The Xiongnu problem was not completely solved by Cao Cao.

Guo Moruo generally refutes different opinions in his articles, but he has remained silent and did not respond to Tan Qixiang's three papers.