We often see vastly different or even completely opposite interpretations of the same events in Chinese history on the internet, which can be confusing and even make one feel a sense of helplessness, as if their worldview and values are being completely overturned.
Before delving into this issue, it’s necessary to first explain a few commonly used terms.
Historical Perspectives
Academically, different historical perspectives are categorized based on how people view and understand history. Common perspectives include:
Materialist Historical Perspective: This is the core of Marxist historical thought, which posits that the mode of material production is the foundation of social development, and that social existence determines social consciousness. It emphasizes the decisive role of the economic base on the superstructure (politics, law, culture, etc.) and believes that history is driven by the contradictions between productive forces and production relations.
Idealist Historical Perspective: This perspective holds that the development of history is primarily determined by human thought, ideas, and spiritual forces. It emphasizes the dominant role of spirit, consciousness, and ideas in historical development, viewing history as the realization of ideas.
Social Historical Perspective: This perspective focuses on the lives of ordinary people and changes in social structures, believing that history is created by the masses. It emphasizes the role of social structures, culture, daily life, and social movements in historical development, paying attention to the history of marginalized groups.
Civilizational Historical Perspective: This perspective sees history as a process of interaction, conflict, and fusion between different civilizations. It focuses on the rise and fall of civilizations, cultural dissemination, and exchange, viewing the conflict and cooperation of civilizations as key drivers of historical development.
Postmodern Historical Perspective: This perspective questions the objectivity and authority of traditional historical narratives, viewing history as pluralistic and relative. It emphasizes the subjectivity and diversity of historical narratives, opposes singular historical interpretations, and focuses on the study of marginalized groups and non-mainstream histories.
There are also other perspectives like the Heroic Historical Perspective, Progressive Historical Perspective, Cyclical Historical Perspective, and Ecological Historical Perspective, but in serious historical research in China today, the above five are the main ones.
However, things are completely different online. Especially in discussions about Chinese history, the humiliating history post-1840 has led to the emergence of three very active historical perspectives on the internet.
A. Han-Centric Historical Perspective
The Han-Centric Historical Perspective emphasizes the superiority and historical continuity of the Chinese nation, particularly the Han ethnicity. This perspective often carries a nationalist tone, highlighting the glorious achievements of ancient Chinese civilization and the central role of the Han ethnicity in history. It often comes with a strong sense of ethnic pride and cultural superiority, opposing the influence of foreign cultures and non-Han rule on China.
Ethnic Superiority: Emphasizes the central role of the Han ethnicity in Chinese history and its major contributions to Chinese civilization, believing that Han culture, technology, and institutions are superior.
Cultural Continuity: Stresses the historical continuity and cultural inheritance of Chinese civilization, viewing Chinese history as a continuous process with Han culture as its main thread.
Opposition to Foreign Influence: Criticizes foreign cultures and non-Han rule, advocating for the preservation and revival of traditional Chinese culture and opposing the erosion of Chinese culture by foreign influences.
Historical Heroism: Reveres great historical figures and events, especially those who defended and promoted Han culture.
Ethnic Pride: Highlights the glorious achievements of ancient Chinese civilization, fostering a sense of ethnic pride and patriotism.
Classic Quotes
- After Yashan, there is no China; after the fall of the Ming, there is no Huaxia.
- Expel the barbarians, restore China.
- Barbarians are not of our kind; their hearts are surely different.
- China is the China of the world.
- The Han ethnicity is the foundation of China.
B. Ruling Historical Perspective
The Ruling Historical Perspective is a historical view that considers any regime that successfully rules China and maintains national unity and stability as “one of us,” i.e., legitimate. This perspective has had some influence in Chinese history, especially in the face of foreign invasions and rule. Its characteristics include:
Realism and Pragmatism: Emphasizes the effectiveness of political power and governance rather than ethnic or cultural purity. As long as a regime can effectively govern China, maintain social stability, and promote economic development, it is considered legitimate.
Inclusivity and Pluralism: This perspective is highly inclusive, accepting rulers from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. For example, the Yuan and Qing dynasties, established by the Mongols and Manchus respectively, are seen as part of Chinese history because they effectively ruled China.
Emphasis on National Unity and Stability: Highly values national unity and stability as key criteria for a regime’s legitimacy. Regardless of the ruler’s ethnic background, as long as they can maintain national unity and social stability, they are considered legitimate.
Historical Continuity: Stresses the continuity of history, viewing Chinese history as an ongoing process. Different dynasties and rulers are seen as part of this process, even if their ethnic backgrounds differ.
Acceptance of Foreign Rule: Within this framework, foreign rulers who can effectively govern China and to some extent accept and integrate into Chinese culture are considered legitimate. For example, the Mongol rulers of the Yuan dynasty and the Manchu rulers of the Qing dynasty accepted Chinese culture and had a profound impact on China’s politics, economy, and culture.
Classic Quotes
- No dynasty in Chinese history was entirely established by the Han, yet every dynasty is considered part of Chinese history.
- The characteristic of Chinese history is unity; whether Han or foreign, as long as one can unify China and maintain order, they are accepted as legitimate.
- The governance of China, despite changes in foreign rule, has never abandoned its fundamental principles.
- There is no single way to govern; what benefits the state does not necessarily follow ancient methods.
- The world belongs to all under heaven, not to one person.
- China belongs to the Chinese, not just the Han.
- Five Races Under One Union.
As seen above, some quotes come from the same person. For example, “Expel the barbarians” and “Five Races Under One Union” were both slogans of Sun Yat-sen during the Xinhai Revolution, but the revolution’s progression led to flexible changes, resulting in starkly different views.
C. Class Historical Perspective
The Class Historical Perspective, sometimes referred to as the Class Struggle Historical Perspective, is a branch of the Materialist Historical Perspective.
The core of this perspective is “class struggle as the guiding principle,” believing that historical development is driven by struggles between different classes. Each social formation has its specific class structure, and class struggle is the primary force driving social progress.
This perspective emphasizes that the masses are the main agents of history, and historical progress is achieved through their struggles and resistance. Peasant uprisings, workers’ movements, etc., are seen as important forces for historical progress. Those who oppress the people and oppose peasant uprisings are the targets of struggle.
The Class Historical Perspective is critical of slave societies, feudal societies, and capitalist societies, viewing them as products of oppression and exploitation. It believes that only through revolution and struggle can society progress and achieve liberation.
Summary of the Three Online Historical Perspectives
Looking at current online discussions about Chinese history, they are largely dominated by the above three groups. They can be summarized as follows:
Han-Centric Historical Perspective: The narrative focuses on the Han ethnicity, viewing surrounding groups as barbarians. It treats the Five Barbarians, the Mongol Yuan, and the Manchu Qing as foreign enemies. It often claims that “after Yashan, there is no China” and “after the Southern Ming, there is no Huaxia.” It vehemently opposes the Yuan and Qing dynasties, equating events like the Mongol rule, the Yangjia Rebellion, and the Shaanxi-Gansu Muslim Rebellion with the Nanjing Massacre. While dreaming of foreign nations paying tribute, it views them as foreign trash.
Ruling Historical Perspective: The narrative focuses on royal legitimacy, believing that whoever holds power is great, and whoever wins is supported. It doesn’t matter which ethnicity you are or what atrocities you committed; as long as you end up in power, you must be glorified. The idea of “the winner takes all” is deeply ingrained, and everything else is irrelevant. For these people, it’s fortunate that Japan didn’t win, or who knows what might have happened.
Class Historical Perspective: The narrative focuses on class struggle, fighting against heaven and earth, viewing everything before the May Fourth Movement as dark. When discussing the Great Wall, it’s about the mountains of corpses and seas of blood of the oppressed masses; when discussing Records of the Grand Historian, it’s about eunuchs being forced by class oppression to beautify the rulers; when discussing the Xiongnu, it’s about material conditions forcing them south for food; when discussing Korea and Mongolia, it’s about national awakening and liberation. The only heroes are figures like Chen Sheng, Wu Guang, Huang Chao, and Hong Xiuquan, and the most common debate is whether Li Xiucheng was truly loyal.
Example: Evaluating Zuo Zongtang
Zuo Zongtang (1812-1885) was an important politician and military leader in late Qing China, making significant contributions to suppressing the Taiping Rebellion and reclaiming Xinjiang. However, depending on the historical perspective, completely different conclusions can be drawn.
Loyal Patriot (Ruling Historical Perspective) - Late Qing
He Xiling: Zuo Zongtang, from a young age, showed remarkable independence and a solid grasp of learning. His conduct and speech were always proper, and he never strayed from the rules. I have always admired him.
Zhang Liangji: Everything relies on Zuo Zongtang’s arrangements. He is a talent of the nation, capable of defeating bandits and rebels, excelling in both offense and defense. He promotes the worthy and motivates soldiers, bringing vitality to the devastated Hunan and Hubei regions. What can I do? It’s all thanks to Zuo Zongtang.
Guo Songtao: Zuo Zongtang’s talent is immense, and there’s nothing he can’t accomplish. His character is upright, and everyone respects him.
Pan Zuyin: The nation cannot do without Hunan for a single day, and Hunan cannot do without Zuo Zongtang for a single day.
Zeng Guofan: In terms of military strategy, I am no match for Zuo Zongtang; in terms of loyalty to the nation, Zuo Zongtang is unparalleled. The nation is fortunate to have Zuo Zongtang.
Peng Yulin: Loyal to the nation and patriotic, he remained steadfast from beginning to end.
Traitor and Slave (Han-Centric Historical Perspective) - Around the Xinhai Revolution
Sun Yat-sen: Because of traitors who acted as accomplices to the enemy, oppressing their own people while currying favor with foreigners. First, there were Wu Sangui and Hong Chengchou as pioneers, followed by Zeng Guofan and Zuo Zongtang as enforcers. Now, there are so-called reformers and constitutionalists who fan the flames, exclusively honoring the Manchus while suppressing the Han, deceiving the public for personal gain.
Zhang Taiyan: I observe the righteous uprising of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, and those who opposed it, like Zeng and Li, were merely sycophants. Zuo Zongtang, who loved fame and war, was merely a tool, regardless of right or wrong. Such people are not worth discussing.
Zou Rong: Zeng, Zuo, and Li are representatives of Chinese slaves.
Zhu Qi: Zeng, Hu, Zuo, and Li, as members of our own ethnicity, acted against their own people, allowing the barbarians to survive and remain for so long. This is the fault of the unfilial descendants, not the longevity of the barbarians.
Gong Chuntai: Zeng Guofan, Hu Linyi, and others, lacking in righteousness and ignorant of ethnic boundaries, recognized thieves as fathers and barbarians as rulers, slaughtering their own people.
Zhang Shizhao: Zeng, Zuo, Hu, and Peng, with their slave-like efforts, nearly destroyed the qualifications of our nation.
Tao Chengzhang: Zeng Guofan, Zuo Zongtang, and Li Hongzhang, these scoundrels and traitors, trained Han soldiers to help the Manchus kill our people.
National Hero (Materialist Historical Perspective) - From the Anti-Japanese War to the Early PRC
Miao Fenglin: After Emperor Taizong of Tang, the person who contributed the most to the nation’s territory is undoubtedly Zuo Zongtang, and this is no exaggeration.
Wang Zhen: In the historical context of imperialist attempts to carve up China, Zuo Zongtang resolutely led his troops westward, reclaiming Xinjiang, which aligned with the long-term interests of the Chinese nation. His patriotic spirit is worthy of our emulation. Zuo Zongtang’s western expedition was meritorious; otherwise, the vast territory of northwest China would be hard to imagine. Zuo led his troops out of the pass, eliminating Yaqub Beg and Bai Yanhu, reclaiming lost territory, and received support from the various ethnic groups in Xinjiang. This was a resistance against foreign aggression and is commendable.
Mao Zedong: Without Zuo Zongtang, the situation in Xinjiang would be hard to say. The last piece of hard bone in the late Qing, he carried his coffin into battle to reclaim Xinjiang. A great general and national hero! This was also the only victory in late Qing’s foreign wars.
Warlord and Traitor (Class Historical Perspective) - 1960s-1970s
Guo Moruo: Zuo Zongtang was an extremely reactionary butcher in the late Qing, brutally suppressing the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom and the Nian Rebellion, displaying unparalleled cruelty and reactionary tendencies.
Fan Wenlan: Zuo Zongtang colluded with foreign forces, enthusiastically defending French invaders, making him a traitor of the late Qing.
Lü Zhenyu: As an important official of the Qing dynasty, Zuo Zongtang’s suppression of peasant uprisings fully demonstrated his extremely reactionary nature.
Wu Han: In suppressing peasant uprisings and handling the Xinjiang issue, Zuo Zongtang displayed the cruelty and reactionary nature of feudal rulers, colluding with foreign forces to maintain feudal rule.
National Hero, Pioneer of Modernization, Patriotic General - Post-Reform and Opening-Up
People’s Daily: Zuo Zongtang is the backbone of the Chinese nation. His name should be engraved on the monument of the Chinese people’s resistance against aggression and defense of the motherland.
Hunan Institute of Culture and History: Zuo Zongtang had both merits and faults, but his merits far outweigh his faults. He was a figure who made significant contributions to the modern Chinese national liberation movement and overall aligned with the historical trend of modernization. From the perspective of the development of the principal contradictions in modern Chinese society and the tasks of national liberation and economic modernization, Zuo Zongtang’s role and status in modern Chinese history should be highly affirmed.
People’s Political Consultative Conference News: Zuo Zongtang was an outstanding politician, military strategist, and thinker in modern China, a representative figure of the Self-Strengthening Movement, a pioneer of China’s modernization, and a practitioner of Hunan culture, an important component of China’s excellent traditional culture.
Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences: How to treat and evaluate historical figures is a major issue in historical research, especially for a figure like Zuo Zongtang, who had multifaceted impacts in a complex historical context.
We must adhere to the correct stance and direction. That is, we must stand on the side of the Chinese people and the Chinese nation, and on the side of historical progress; we should not stand on the side of the exploiting class, individual interest groups, or purely personal interests. Specifically, we must analyze whether historical figures benefited or hindered the interests of the people, whether they contributed to or obstructed the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, and whether they promoted or hindered the progress of modern China.
We must adhere to the correct historical perspective. That is, we must use the Marxist materialist historical perspective to view historical figures. We must analyze whether historical figures promoted or hindered the development of productive forces, whether they maintained or overthrew腐朽落后的社会制度，是推动人民群众的革命还是镇压了人民的革命。
**必须坚持正确的方法论。**要坚持唯物辩证法矛盾分析、阶级分析、经济分析的方法；要根据事实本身一分为二地看待、分析历史人物，既不能全盘肯定也不能全盘否定；把历史人物放在特定历史背景中来分析，不能超越历史来苛求历史人物，也不能拔高历史人物，不能把历史人物抽象化、绝对化、神圣化。
**要有时代高度和现实关注。**要站在当今时代的高度来分析特定历史人物，评价历史人物不是为了历史，也不是为了个人，而是要服务于现实，从历史人物身上发掘那些对现代社会发展有益的元素，避免历史人物身上的不利因素在当代重演。
中国社会科学院近代史研究所：左宗棠是中国近代史上产生过很大影响的人物，为国家统一做出了巨大贡献。对于左宗棠的历史评价要突出强调几个方面：
他在中国近代化进程中的历史贡献，特别是他在洋务运动中对历史变局的认识，在开办船政局、船政学堂，办理近代海军、近代教育、近代军事工业和民用工业的贡献。
他在打击外敌入侵、收复新疆，提议设立新疆省、台湾省等方面，捍卫中华民族利益和尊严、捍卫国家领土完整和主权完整上的贡献。
他在地方治理特别是在治理陕甘和新疆中的贡献，他在改善生产条件、发展民生方面、社会治理方面的举措，有利于生产发展和人民生活。
他在国家安全方面，提出的海防和塞防并重的战略，是符合长远发展的综合性的国家安全对策。
他身上体现的爱国主义精神、民族自立自强精神追求，他在面临外敌入侵的情况下，能够站在民族的立场上，强调民族自强，致力于通过发展自己的力量来抵抗外敌，在学习西方的目的上是追求自身力量壮大。
—» 6. It is particularly noteworthy that the historical evaluation of Zuo Zongtang should not overly emphasize his so-called status as a “minister of revival,” as this reflects his inability to transcend historical limitations. These limitations are not personal to him, for after all, he was a man of his time. There is no need to deliberately avoid historical facts to glorify Zuo Zongtang, nor is it necessary to use personal morality to defend or conceal his actions. Respecting history is the best way to understand historical figures.