Which expert "studied" the conclusion that China "grabbed Yuanmingyuan first"

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!

Attach the so-called original text of Professor Li.

The Truth of History-Who stole the Yuanmingyuan first?

□ Li Tiangang

140 years ago in the autumn, 1860, 10 months, the Yuanmingyuan disaster shocked the whole world, and the British and French allied forces were undoubtedly the culprit. But who robbed the Yuanmingyuan first? Wang? The cloud says he is from China! Manchu and the people of Beijing!

Wang Kaiyun's Yuanmingyuan poem (1832- 19 16) said, "Are the enemy soldiers there? In Yong Men, the shepherd boy has seen the Lushan fire. " Fortunately, this remark was accompanied by a self-explanatory note, the meaning of which was clear: "When foreigners came to Beijing, they all went to the Garden Palace, and when they saw the splendid furnishings, they all avoided it, fearing that they would claim for lost property."

The barbarians came out. The nobles and the poor advocated raping the people and pretending to be barbarians, so they were set on fire first, and the barbarians came back to plunder. "At that time, Wang just debuted and was very familiar with the capital etiquette in the shogunate. According to his testimony, when the British and French allied forces occupied Beijing, the first people who entered Yuanmingyuan to plunder were not foreigners, but indigenous people, who were poor Manchu people near Haidian.

This is a very important matter. Don't talk nonsense, have a basis. Therefore, the author of The Temple of Flowers (1890- 1937) wrote this riddle to meet Wang? After the cloud said that "this statement is generally true", Li Ciming's Diary of Yue Maotang was also cited as circumstantial evidence.

Li Ciming wrote on August 24th (Gregorian calendar 65438+1October 7th): "Wen Yiren only burned the official residence outside the garden", and there was no big robbery. The next day, the situation took a turn for the worse and a large-scale robbery broke out.

The diary says: thieves are everywhere in the western suburbs outside the city. The nobles, bureaucrats and rich people in the city began to be afraid and prepared to run away. What they are afraid of is not outsiders, but poor Manchu and poor Han people around Beijing. The mobs have sneaked into the city one by one, fiddling with the antique jade that they just grabbed from Yuanmingyuan, ready to follow the foreigners to grab it again.

The situation on August 27th was simply terrible. "After the barbarians plundered Yuanmingyuan, the traitors took advantage of it, robbed the remains and shipped them to the chariot. The top is precious and secret. " As you can see, after the British and French allied forces officially took the shot, mobs in Beijing began to rob on a larger scale. It is said that the river ditch is full of pots and pans, which can't be moved or left behind. In the following decades, Yuanmingyuan was restless. People in Beijing drag scooters to Haidian whenever there is unrest or officers and men usually neglect to take precautions. From nanmu and BRIC to stones and tiles, the emperor's things have all been moved home. Fortunately, you can still find porcelain and jade articles that can be put together in the ruins.

In the early Republic of China, Wang? The cloud once said to people: "After the Yuanmingyuan was destroyed, it was half buried, and the villagers stole in, stealing bricks and stones, and chopping wood, and no one asked." 1980 In the summer, I was a student of history department of Fudan University and went to Beijing for the first time. Near the front door, I saw the stone strips and boundary markers moved from Yuanmingyuan and built on the street. Seeing the way we southerners study textual research, old Beijing proudly said, "Yes! Yuanmingyuan's, the emperor's, "It's amazing.

Whoever grabs the Yuanmingyuan first is clear at a glance. According to the memoirs of British and French allied soldiers, they pursued Manchu soldiers and entered Yuanmingyuan on June 6, 10. On that day, in order to fight, several houses were burned outside the garden. Soldiers from the British and French countryside living in palaces are already talking about stealing treasures with their eyes wide open and their mouths watering. But it is said that the first day was fine. Only a few French soldiers took a few little things as souvenirs and didn't do them. They did so only after consulting with Allied Command for a few days. The next day, June 7th, 10, China people in Haidian did it. Dare not rob the palace occupied by foreign soldiers, but rob the unguarded houses of servants, butlers and eunuchs. In 2 16, the Qing dynasty entered the customs, and Beijing fell for the first time. Without officials, Beijing is out of control and in chaos. For Wang, who covets the emperor's life all day, it is undoubtedly a relief, and it is also a pleasure to visit the forbidden park on weekdays. So I started to rob, like a king? Cloud, recorded by Li Ciming.

Pastor Ghee, who was stationed in the army, said, "When we approached the Inner Palace again, we met a group of China people who were ganging up to rob their emperor's things. We checked their baskets and parcels, and only found China, carpets and rough cotton-padded clothes. They didn't go into the best palace, they were afraid of us. " So it seems to the outside world that China people burned the Yuanmingyuan first. Of course, the British and French allied forces are not good either. They have organized and disciplined the distribution, handling and auction of stolen goods in the park, but the outside world is unaware of it. The situation is this: the British and French allied forces are organized Jiang Yang thieves, and some people in Haidian are scattered unruly thieves.

To tell the truth, after reading this historical material many times, I still don't understand: are the people in the "first good area" and those under the "imperial city roots" still Manchu privileged elements who helped the emperor rule the people of the whole country? I hate foreigners the most at ordinary times, and I don't have conflicts with the emperor, so I don't show "loyalty to the monarch and patriotism."

Instead, he took advantage of the danger of the emperor's room and took advantage of it. Why? People in China like this. What's the matter? Traitor? I don't think so. Peasant uprising? Not really. Fool, thug, Beijing bastard?

However, they are so finely measured that both emperors and foreigners are beyond their capacity.

This story reminds people of another sentence: "take advantage of the fire to rob." There are so many such stories in China's history books that someone invented this punch line. At the end of Qin Dynasty, Xiang Yu set fire to Xianyang and Chu soldiers set fire to it, but there must be a large number of local civilians among the robbers. Otherwise, why is the fire "eternal in March"? Li Zicheng, the "King of Breakthrough" in the late Ming Dynasty, wanted to keep the discipline. It was also the local people in Beijing who robbed him first, and it was impossible to stop him. During the Revolution of 1911, similar incidents occurred in Beijing, Nanjing, Wuhan and other places, and some people tried to rob. However, because a group of businessmen, politicians and gentry came forward to defend and prohibit looting, it was the best time in the history of regime change, and the Forbidden City was preserved and a museum was built. However, such a story is not far away from us. In this century, every "fanning the flames" mass movement has actors who "fish in troubled waters". Anyone with discerning eyes can count it many times.

Du Mu's "Epang Palace Fu" explains why "fire robbery" keeps appearing in the history of China.

This phenomenon has been explained most vividly. He summed up the reason why Qin Shihuang's Epang Palace was burned and said, "Oh! One person's heart, the hearts of thousands of people in Qian Qian. Qin loves luxury and people are homesick. How can we use it like sand? Make the columns of negative buildings more than the farmers of nanmu; There are more rafters on board than women workers; Onion has more phosphorus than corn; The joints of ceramic tiles are uneven, more than the whole body silk; ..... make the whole world dare not speak and dare to be angry. The single husband's heart is getting more and more arrogant.

Shout, shout, Hanguguan. The Chu people are miserable and burnt. Although Du Mu is a poet, not a theorist, he tells a great truth: For a long time, I have been "alone", and the people inside and outside Miyagi and the emperor are rich and poor, and the difference is too great. Without the mediation of the middle class, the communication of social relations, and the vent of public criticism, people who despise the wild on weekdays certainly look up to Wei Que and dare to speak out, but once someone exposes himself, is honest and petty, and is wronged as a slave, civilians will "fish in troubled waters" and indulge in the emperor of Jindian Jiulong Bed.

Thinking of hometown stories told by friends in the north from the "fishing in the fire" in Yuanmingyuan. During War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression, the Japanese invaders swept through the anti-Japanese villages. Behind the Japanese army, follow the villagers in the neighboring village. After the Japanese "three lights" (burning and looting), they collected some junk and went home. Then I thought of Lu Xun's Mr Fujino, in which China people watched the Japanese kill China people. The attitude of Lu Xun and his contemporaries is to mourn his misfortune, anger his indisputable, and blame his ignorance. However, after so many ups and downs in the 20th century, we should now know that the habitual "taking advantage of the fire" is not a problem of cultural quality, nor is it a problem of national character defects. This is a system problem. If a society or a city always does not encourage its citizens to have independent property, career, beliefs and pursuits, which have nothing to do with themselves, they will always read, talk about and look at the emperor's life, treating it as pain and pleasure. Their personalities are bound to be boring, irresponsible, dispersed in a hubbub and become mobs. Wang? Yun, Li Ciming and Lu Xun saw this problem of China people, but they were unable to remedy it. I wonder if our generation can really understand more and stop being such a "fool".