1. The Second Opium War

2. Eight-Nation Alliance's war of aggression against China

Invaders burned Yuanmingyuan twice in history.

The Yuanmingyuan was burned down for the first time in the tenth year of Xianfeng in Qing Dynasty (1860), and the British and French allied forces invaded Beijing. The British and French allied forces burned and looted everywhere, savagely plundered and burned the world-famous Yuanmingyuan, and most of the temple buildings in the park were destroyed by fire. The British and French allied forces burned the Yuanmingyuan, aiming to raze it to the ground. However, due to the large area of Yuanmingyuan, scattered scenic spots and vast waters, some remote places and scenic spots in the water survived. According to the winter survey in the 12th year of Tongzhi (1873), there are still 13 buildings in the park. For example, Pengdao Yaotai and Cangzhou Wu in Yuanmingyuan, Dagongmen and Zhengjue Temple in Qichun Garden, etc.

The Yuanmingyuan was burned down for the second time in the 26th year of Guangxu reign of Qing Dynasty (1900). Eight-Nation Alliance invaded Beijing and set fire to Yuanmingyuan again, so that the only remaining 13 royal palace buildings here were looted and burned again.

In literary works, it seems that the sin of burning Yuanmingyuan is attributed to the incompetence of Empress Dowager Cixi. It sounds reasonable, but it's not exact. Countless facts in history show that a poor, backward and weak country and nation can only be oppressed, exploited, humiliated and plundered. The history of burning Yuanmingyuan once again proves that a poor, backward and weak country will be beaten.

Now, Yuanmingyuan has been turned into a ruins park, and protective maintenance is being carried out on the ruins, and the mountain water system, garden vegetation, bridges and culverts are restored, and some ancient buildings will also be rebuilt.

-

China people robbed the Yuanmingyuan first?

www.XINHUANET.com

Author: Chen Yunfa

In the modern history of China, the disaster that happened in Yuanmingyuan in June of 1860 was an eternal pain in the hearts of China people. At that time, the greatest ancient garden in the world, its cultural and historical value is by no means lower than the royal palace of the Forbidden City destroyed in the Second Opium War. The chief culprit of this disaster is the invasion of British and French allied forces. Up to now, many treasures they plundered from Yuanmingyuan are still displayed in the British Museum in London and the Louvre in Paris, which is evidence that they acted as robbers.

Regarding the responsibility of this disaster, history has long been clearly written with bloody facts, and honest historians in Britain and France do not deny this disgraceful history of their country. Unexpectedly, 145 years later, China's own "researcher" came out to vindicate the robbers of the British and French allied forces, claiming that it was not the British and French allied forces who robbed Yuanmingyuan first, but the people of China.

Believe it or not, there is a recent "paper" entitled "1860: Taking Yuanmingyuan as a Proof" (published by Li Tiangang in the 5th issue of Shanghai Culture magazine in 2005), which is an article about reversing the verdict of the British and French allied forces. At the beginning of this article, "People grabbed the Yuanmingyuan first" is the subtitle of the first part. A whole part of the pen and ink is used to "demonstrate" that after the British and French allied forces captured the Yuanmingyuan, it was the China who took the lead, which subsequently aroused the greed of allied soldiers and "drove away" the "fact" that the allied forces also robbed. What about the evidence? After quoting the so-called "foreign language records", the author said: "-According to the memoirs of British and French allied soldiers, they chased Manchu soldiers into Yuanmingyuan on June 6/kloc-0. The purpose was not robbery at first. In order to fight that day, several houses were burned outside the garden, but this was after the local people in Haidian burned and looted. " According to the author of the paper, before that, the "British and French soldiers living in the palace" had just "opened their eyes and drooled, and were already talking about stealing treasures". On the first day, it was said that "there was still military discipline, and the French soldiers took some small things, but they didn't officially start work."

At the same time, the author also quoted the record of Wang Renfu, an aide to the Qing court, saying that "when foreigners came to Beijing and saw the magnificent furnishings, they all avoided it, fearing that they would lose more." It was foreigners who came out. The nobles and the poor advocated raping the people and pretending to be foreigners, so they set fire first and the foreigners came back to plunder. According to this record, the author of the paper arbitrarily said: "Some children of the Eight Banners in the western suburbs took advantage of the war and braved the name of foreign troops to burn, kill and plunder nearby, and the British and French soldiers fell behind. "Here, in order to frame China robbery first, the author deliberately misinterpreted Wang Renfu's original text. It is clear that the original records only say that China people set fire in the name of posing as foreigners, which was not robbed by China people, but "plundered" by the allied forces after they came back. By the author's pen, China people's "arson" turned into robbery. It seems that this interpretation of ancient prose is not due to the lack of knowledge of ancient prose. I'm afraid it's at least preconceived! In addition, it is extremely inappropriate for the author to equate the "aristocrat" in Wang Renfu's original text with the children of the Eight Banners. The children of the Eight Banners were indeed nobles, but not all the nobles of the Qing Dynasty were children of the Eight Banners.

For the military discipline of the British and French allied forces, it is not the invaders' own memoirs that have the final say. China people's "learning from the scriptures" in Humen, Dinghai, Wusong, Yangcun and other war zones have historical records, so I won't say much here. What puzzles me is why the author of the article is superstitious about the evasions of the invaders and misinterprets the records of the ancients. Is it possible to use his article to wash away the heinous crime of plundering Yuanmingyuan for the invaders? Is this research just to prove that the "poor quality" of China people has existed since ancient times?

The tragedy of the Yuanmingyuan disaster is that the British and French invaders first came to the land of China and scattered the Qing army guarding Yuanmingyuan. They occupied the Yuanmingyuan. They robbed the Yuanmingyuan first. This is an ironclad fact. Are these intruders who want to make a fortune in China really satisfied with "getting something small" on the first day? They robbed the Chinese? China people "demonstrate" for them?

Ironically, when our experts "studied" China's conclusion that "people robbed the Yuanmingyuan first", in 2003, the French writer Bernard Blise wrote a book entitled "1860: The Disaster of Yuanmingyuan", which exposed the atrocities committed by the British and French invaders in burning and looting Yuanmingyuan, and "felt very sad and guilty" about the atrocities committed by the allied forces. I think the author of 1860: Based on Yuanmingyuan might as well read this foreigner's book (recently published by Zhejiang Ancient Books Publishing House) carefully and see how the French reflect on the sins of French soldiers. At the same time, I think we should remind some experts who are keen on writing overthrowing articles, not to sensationalize and make a blockbuster, but to show some economists' conscience!