Question 1: Is the Romance of the Three Kingdoms real? It is close to the truth! After all, "Three Kingdoms" is recognized by historians of all ages as one of the Twenty-Four Histories!
Moreover, when Chen Shou first wrote the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms, he was an official in the Jin Dynasty, and he referred to the Wei Shu, Wu Shu and Shu Shu at that time, so his information at that time was very complete...
And in terms of political stance, first of all, he was a Shu official. Maybe he would resent Wei for destroying Shu, but later Wei's successor Jin supervised his writing, and as Jin usurped Wei's power, he would definitely try to ask him to favor it. The State of Wei, and the State of Wu were not related to him, so they were more able to treat him fairly. Without any reason to tamper with it, most of what he wrote at that time should be the real reality as he saw it...
As for Pei Songzhi's annotations, first of all, most of what he added was what he saw. The so-called unofficial history, and almost everything in the official history has been written by Chen Shou. Some of the unofficial histories are credible and may have been ignored by the rulers or could be covered up. However, a large part of the unofficial histories are based on folklore and legends. It is the artistic addition made by ordinary people to the image of the characters in their hearts...
Generally speaking, the parts written by Chen Shou are generally worthy of belief, but the possible omissions or parts cannot be ignored. It's full of writing, but it doesn't hurt either. The part written by Pei Songzhi is worthy of speculation, but you can’t believe it all. After all, it is still credible...
Question 2: Is the Romance of the Three Kingdoms true or the Romance of the Three Kingdoms? Haha, of course, the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms shall prevail. After all, it was written by people at that time
Even if Chen Shou may be slightly biased, the Romance of the Three Kingdoms is still imagined by later generations on the basis of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms. Isn’t the credibility even lower?
Of course, the rule of our country's historiography is that the history of the dynasty is not written by the dynasty. The history of the dynasty is commented by future generations. This is very grand, but I also agree with what you said. For example, the history of the Ming Dynasty was severely distorted by the Manchu and Qing Dynasties. It seems that the Ming Dynasty The emperors in the dynasty were all cowards, and corrupt officials were everywhere
Question 3: How true is the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms? Speaking of the Three Kingdoms period, the first thing people think of is the well-known "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", but now most people have realized that "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is an artistic literary work. The author's sentiment of "respecting Liu and demoting Cao" made it The work does not entirely follow historical facts. Most people respect "Three Kingdoms" written by Chen Shou as the official history, but can "Three Kingdoms" fully reflect this historical event? I think it is not complete. There is still a certain gap between "Three Kingdoms" and the real history.
First of all, let us start with Chen Shou, the author of "Three Kingdoms". Chen Shou (233-297), courtesy name Chengzuo, was born in Anhan County (now Shunqing District, Nanchong City). When Chen Shou was born, it was the time when the three kingdoms of Wei, Shu and Wu were in confrontation. When he was young, he studied under Qiao Zhou and served in Shu as Guange Lingshi. Later, his career was frustrated because he offended the authoritative eunuch Huang Hao at that time. After the fall of Shu, he became an official in Jin Dynasty and compiled "The Collection of Zhuge Liang", which was appreciated by Emperor Wu of Jin Dynasty. After more than ten years, he wrote "Records of the Three Kingdoms", which together with "Historical Records", "Hanshu" and "Houhanshu" are called the former. Four histories.
From Chen Shou's experience, we can see that the "Three Kingdoms" was compiled in Jin, and Jin came from Cao Wei's abdication, so Chen Shou's "Three Kingdoms" takes Cao Wei as the orthodox one. From the "Three Kingdoms", a chronicle was established for the Wei emperor and he was called the emperor. For the Shu emperor, Wu was only passed down together with his ministers, and was called the lord of Shu and the lord of Wu. When the monarchs of Wu and Shu came to the throne, they all recorded the reign of Ming Wei. "Three Kingdoms" has some irregularities in its description of the royal family of the Jin Dynasty. The actions of the Sima family during the Wei, Jin, and Zen dynasties are especially obviously whitewashed and defended in many ways. Therefore, we say that the compilation of "Three Kingdoms" was more or less affected by the politics of the time. This is understandable. History books themselves serve politics. However, because Chen Shou was born in Shu and once lived and served as an official in Shu, I think he still misses Shu. Therefore, he calls Shu Han Liu Bei and his son the first master and the latter master, which is different. Yu Sun Wu.
Judging from the materials that Chen Shou can refer to, before writing "Three Kingdoms", there have been some historical works about Wei and Wu, such as Wang Chen's "Wei Shu" and Wei Zhao's "Wu Shu" wait. The "Book of Wei" and "Book of Wu" in "Three Kingdoms" are mainly based on these historical books.
The Shu Han regime did not set up historians, and there was no dedicated person responsible for collecting materials and compiling the history of Shu. The materials for "Shu Shu" were collected and compiled by Chen Shou. Since the book was written in an era close to the Three Kingdoms, there are not many other people's results available. , there is no condition to obtain a large number of documents and archives, so the content recorded in "Three Kingdoms" always makes people feel that there is insufficient historical data. This can also be seen from the length of the Three Kingdoms: Wei Shu has thirty chapters, Wu Shu has twenty chapters, and Shu Shu has only fifteen chapters, and the content of Emperor Wei is far more detailed than that of Lord Shu. Due to the lack of historical materials in the Shu Han Dynasty, although Pei Songzhi later made annotations for "Three Kingdoms", he still felt that the content was not full enough.
As for the extent to which Chen Shou's "Three Kingdoms" respects historical facts, I don't think it is up to me to make a conclusion. Since it can be called "Historical Records", "Hanshu" and "Houhanshu" together The authenticity of the contents of the first four histories is quite credible.
Therefore, I believe that the historical facts recorded in "Three Kingdoms" should be credible, but its shortcomings are: first, it was affected by the politics of the time and was dominated by "respecting Wei". To some extent, it will cover up some history that is not conducive to Wei and Jin, that is, there is less negative material about Wei. Second, due to the lack of historical materials, the content of Shu is a bit thin. It is believed that many historical events of Shu have not been included. Of course, the content of Wu should also be the same. When we now look at the history of the turbulent era of the Three Kingdoms, it seems that we should look at it more comprehensively. "Respecting Wei" or "respecting Liu" are our personal family opinions.
As for Chen Shou's version of the Three Kingdoms, there are no Whether the historical facts of what he wrote exist? When Chen Shou wrote the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms, because he did not have as comprehensive and rich materials as full-time historians such as Sima Qian, he had a strict attitude towards the selection of materials. He would rather not mention anything than record anything that he was not sure of. But not mentioning it does not prove that there is no history.
Take the familiar "Tao Te Ching" which was called "The Tao Te Ching" in the Han Dynasty. Virtue comes first and Tao comes last, and many of its contents are no longer in the current "Tao Te Ching". Based on: Female corpse unearthed from Mawangdui tomb in Changsha. Zhoucang is in the Romance, but not in the Three Kingdoms, but the absence of records in the Three Kingdoms does not mean that this person did not exist in history
On class nature: "The Three Kingdoms" was an official calendar of the Jin Dynasty as a chronicle, and its credibility Highly suspected
Question 4: Do all the characters in the Three Kingdoms really exist? The characters of the Three Kingdoms all existed. It is just that more artistic processing was added to later works to make the written descriptions more vivid. Moreover, the book authors would also add their own unique emotions to the descriptions of the characters they like and the characters they dislike. There will be discrepancies
Question 5: After all, the authenticity of the Three Kingdoms has not been truly experienced. We have no way to determine whether a historical record is authentic. We can judge that this record is "relatively reliable" based on time evidence such as the year when the book was written. "Trust", Chen Shou, the author of the Three Kingdoms, was from the Western Jin Dynasty. His records of the Three Kingdoms era are objectively more credible, although because he was from the Western Jin Dynasty, under the political environment, his remarks would intentionally or unintentionally be biased towards safeguarding the Sima family and the Cao Wei. I don’t know why Zhang Fei’s appearance is not described in the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms. People also say that he was a Confucian general who was good at calligraphy and beauty paintings. However, only his calligraphy rubbings are not authentic.
Question 6: The Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms is authentic Is it official history? "Three Kingdoms" written by Chen Shou is basically the true history of the Three Kingdoms. Pei Songzhi's notes for "Three Kingdoms" are a supplement to "Three Kingdoms". Generally speaking, both can be regarded as historical facts.
Question 7: What is the main difference between the real history of the Three Kingdoms and the Romance of the Three Kingdoms? The former is official history and the latter is a novel. This is the biggest difference. "Three Kingdoms" is a chronicle and country history that records the three kingdoms of Wei, Shu and Wu. Among them, there are thirty volumes of "Book of Wei", fifteen volumes of "Book of Shu", twenty volumes of "Book of Wu", and sixty-five volumes of "Book of Wu". It records the sixty-year history from the first year of Emperor Huangchu of Wei Wen (220 years) to the first year of Taikang (280 years) of Emperor Wu of Jin Dynasty. The author is Chen Shou in the early Western Jin Dynasty. "Three Kingdoms" written by Chen Shou, like the first three histories, is also a private history. After his death, Shangshu Lang Fan wrote: "Chen Shou wrote "Three Kingdoms" with many words of exhortation, good friends and good deeds. Although the writing is not as beautiful as the same, the quality is straightforward. I would like to record it." It can be seen that after the "Three Kingdoms" was written, it was well received by people at that time. Chen Shou's narrative is brief, rarely repeated in the three books, and his records are detailed and detailed.
It is also very careful in the selection of materials, which has been valued by historians of all ages. Historical circles regard "Historical Records", "Hanshu", "Later Hanshu" and "Three Kingdoms" as the first four histories, which are regarded as masterpieces of biographical history. The Three Kingdoms is the basis of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms novel. "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is a long novel... ...because it is not official history at all - if it is the same as the official history, there will be no need to compile another "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" after the "Three Kingdoms" is written. "Three Kingdoms" was written by Chen Shou of the Jin Dynasty. It records the history of Wei, Shu and Wu during the Three Kingdoms period. It is realistic and is one of the Twenty-Four Histories. "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" was written by Luo Guanzhong of the Ming Dynasty. It is a literary work adapted on the basis of the history recorded in "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms". The content is not completely consistent with the historical facts. It is one of the four classic Chinese classics. In terms of historical value, the former is higher than the latter; in terms of literary value, the latter is higher than the former.
"Three Kingdoms" is the so-called official history, while "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is a novel, story, and literary work based on the history recorded in "Three Kingdoms". If you want to study history, of course you must read "Romance of the Three Kingdoms"; if you want to acquire some historical knowledge for fun, "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is enough. The biggest difference between romances and official history is that romances are not entirely true, romances are novels. Everyone says that "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is 70% historical fact and 30% fiction
There are three main differences:
First, the style is different. "Three Kingdoms" is a history book and a relatively objective narrative of the history of the Three Kingdoms. "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is a historical novel, an artificial interpretation of the history of the Three Kingdoms, with a large amount of fictional content added;
The second is that the books were written at different times. "Three Kingdoms" was written in the early years of the Western Jin Dynasty, very close to the Three Kingdoms, so the authenticity of this history book can be guaranteed. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms was written at the end of the Yuan Dynasty and the beginning of the Ming Dynasty, and incorporated a large number of folklore;
The third is that the succession relationship is different. Chen Shou's writing of "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" relied on historical materials he had collected over the years, while Luo Guanzhong's writing of "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" mainly relied on "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms". In other words, "Three Kingdoms" is the mother body of "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms".
In "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms", Zhou Yu, who was literary, military, broad-minded, and heroic, turned out to be a narrow-minded, jealous and "stingy" in "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms". In "Three Kingdoms", Zhou Yu was versatile since he was a child and was proficient in music when he was young. As long as there is an error in the music, he will definitely find it, and he will definitely point it out when he finds it. Therefore, there is a folk saying at that time: "If there is an error in the music, Zhou Lang will take care of it" (Zhou Lang will find it, and you can ask Zhou Lang to point it out). During the Battle of Chibi, Zhuge Liang sent an envoy to Soochow to persuade Sun Quan to unite with Wu to resist Cao Cao. This strategy played a key role. But the commander and planner of the entire campaign was actually Zhou Yu. Zhou Yu played an important role in persuading Sun Quan, and in "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" it was Zhuge Liang who provoked the Fa; the use of fire attack was proposed by Huang Gai, and was later changed to Zhuge Liang. These were all out of highlighting the main character Zhuge Liang. Creative needs. It highlights Luo Guanzhong's love for Zhuge Liang. Zhou Yu's character in the novel is mainly narrow-minded and especially jealous of Zhuge Liang. This is the creative need of the novel to make the personalities of different characters distinct. Zhou Yu in history was broad-minded and magnanimous. The veteran Cheng Pu was dissatisfied with Zhou Yu because of his young age, and insulted him many times in person, but Zhou Yu ignored him. Cheng Pu was finally impressed by Zhou Yu's talent and moral character, and was so moved that he said: "Being friends with Zhou Gongjin is like drinking wine." , unconsciously drunk" and became friends with him. The narrow-minded Zhou Yu described in "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is a supporting character image deliberately created by Luo Guanzhong to set off Zhuge Liang. It is an artistic treatment and should not be taken seriously. Of course, "Three Qi Zhou Yu" has no historical basis. Zhou Yu finally died of illness during the expedition. of. ...>>
Question 8: Are all the things recorded in Chen Shou's "Three Kingdoms" true? Regardless of official history or unofficial history, the authenticity of the things recorded in it is worthy of scrutiny.
Because, first, all official histories were compiled by later dynasties. In order to cater to the rulers at that time, it is impossible for the emperors of the previous dynasties to speak like Yao, Shun, and Yu. And even vilify them when necessary. Regarding some of the scandals that occurred during the rise of our dynasty, we should either beautify them or not talk about them at all. Second, the most important basis for compiling history is the actual records of previous generations. For example, the most important reference basis for "History of the Ming Dynasty" is the "Records of the Ming Dynasty".
But the actual records are not necessarily true, because starting from Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty, the emperor could watch his own daily life, and not all historians were not afraid of death. Third, an important principle in compiling history is to "keep taboos for the sake of the venerable." That is, you cannot talk about some of the emperor's scandals, or you cannot talk about them directly. For example, some things about Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty in "Historical Records" were only mentioned by Tai Shigong. , passed by in one stroke. Therefore, Chen Shou, the editor of the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms, compiled it during the Western Jin Dynasty. He had many taboos about the previous dynasties Cao Wei, and would more or less conceal or even tamper with it.
In addition, the author himself also has subjective tendencies. It is difficult to say that the information he collected and the words he wrote must be a complete picture of the entire character or event. He may overgeneralize or deliberately omit, discredit and exaggerate praise. It's possible for everyone. So it can't all be true.
In short, the things in the history books are true and false. Some things are either omitted or deliberately ignored, and some things are simply made up by myself when compiling history. Reading history books should be detailed and comprehensive, not only official histories, but also unofficial histories are not without merit. For example, in the case of Emperor Jianwen, the "History of the Ming Dynasty" definitely tells you that he was dead, but now more and more historians believe that he was not dead. This is just one of many historical mysteries. While reading history, it is also a useful supplement to read more works from the past and present.
Question 9: Is the Romance of the Three Kingdoms true or false? The main plot of "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is similar to that of "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms", but some stories are fictional, such as the three sworn brothers in Taoyuan, the killing of Hua Xiong by warming wine, and the The British fought Lu Bu, the serial plan, the straw boat borrowing arrows, borrowing the east wind, etc. The empty city plan can be seen in Pei Songzhi's notes in "Three Kingdoms". The authenticity is doubtful and is generally believed to be untrue. The major discrepancies between "The Romance of the Three Kingdoms" and "The Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms" are mostly found in the description of the early deeds of Liu, Guan, and Zhang, the miraculous aspects of Zhuge Liang, and the narratives about Zuo Ci, Yu Ji, etc. The rest of the story is basically the same as "Three Kingdoms".
Question 10: Are everything written in the Three Kingdoms true? There may also be Chen Shou's personal and environmental factors at the time. Chen Shou's father was originally a grain transport officer in the Shu Han Dynasty. Because he failed to raise grain in time, Kong Ming, who was halfway through the Northern Expedition, had to retreat and was almost killed by Kong Ming. Later, although he was not cut off, he was scolded and dismissed from his post. Chen Shou must have criticized Kong Ming. In addition, when the Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms was written, the Three Kingdoms had already returned to the Jin Dynasty, and Chen Shou was writing the history as a minister of the Jin Dynasty. Naturally, he wrote the Three Kingdoms with the Wei and Jin Dynasties as the orthodox ones.
Hope to adopt