Private Historiography of the Late Ming

Chinese historiography up until the Qing dynasty was predominantly official historiography. But the zhengshi (official or standard histories), despite their meticulousness and rich details, can at best provide us with a one-sided picture. The sources employed were almost exclusively official ones, such as the qiji zhu (the diary of activity and repose), the SHIZHENG JI (the records of current government), the HUIYAO or HUIDIAN (the collected statutes), and the SHILU (the VERITABLE RECORDS). Moreover, historians working under the tutelage and supervision of the government were constantly subjected to political pressure and influence. The personality and individuality of the historians were often submerged in the collective effort of compiling the official histories under a commission (guan) or bureau (zhu). The intensification of despotism in the Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties meant increased political interference with historical compilation. The result was that individual judgment was more than ever discouraged. This is well demonstrated by the fact that the comment (lunzan) sections of the standard histories were reduced to mere eulogy. The judgment and criticism of the historians were hardly exercised and expressed

Archaeology · Art · Commission · Criticism · Eulogy · Government (linguistics · Guan · Historiography · Humanities · Literature · Mediocrity principle · Personality · Political science · Politics · Statute · Chinese history and philosophy · History · Law · Philosophy · Psychology

• The Writing and Rewriting of History

  Ellen Soulliere•Ming Studies•2016

  Add to list