Newsletter

In Shiji (史記), also known as the Records of the Grand Scribe, this is how Sima Qian (司馬遷) described the death of Qu Yuan (屈原), a patriotic poet from the state of Chu (楚) who lived during the Warring States period.

"He thereupon embraced a rock and drowned to death of his own accord."

The four Chinese characters translated as "embracing a rock and drowning of his own accord" are "Huaishi zichen" (懷石自沈) in the original verse. The phrase became the source of much controversy later on. Siam Qian and Qu Yuan lived nearly two centuries apart from one another (Qu Yuan was born around 343 B.C., while Sima Qian was born around 145 B.C.). It would have therefore been inevitable for the veracity of the historian Sima Quan's description authored long after Qu Yuan's death to be questioned. That Qu Yuan drowned in the Miluo River (汨羅江) seems to be true. That much is universally acknowledged, even in other remains or pictorial records which depict Qu Yuan jumping into the Miluo River from a rock or cliff. However, it was Sima Qian, the author of the most detailed remaining record of Qu Yuan's life, who pictured the poet's death in a most dramatic light.

In Search of "Truth" Disguised by "Fact"

Criticism of the above description by historians or scholars who came after Sima Quan are mostly based upon the following approach: "Did you actually witness the death of Qu Yuan?" It is both a criticism and retort borne out of absolute commonsense to question whether saying Qu Yuan embraced a rock and drowned to death of his own accord had purely been a product of Sima Quan's imagination or what evidence there had been to support that saying when a full account of how Qu Yuan died is nowhere to be found.

It is likely that Sima Quan must have also agonized over the same part. That Qu Yuan drowned in the Miluo River is a fact. However, Sima Quan's interest was in how Qu Yuan died. Qu Yuan was someone who made considerable efforts by all means to save his home state Chu from collapsing. He was disappointed and despaired by his inept king and the treacherous courtiers who blocked the king's eyes and ears, but he never spared his counsel until the end. Nevertheless, he was repaid by being dismissed from the royal court and sent away into exile. With nowhere to return to, Qu Yuan's choice was to commit ritual suicide. Suicide in this case was never meant to be a means of escape or self-abandonment. It was meant to be a form of powerful resistance. This spirit was something Sima Quan was not about to let go of. So, it then becomes obvious as to why Sima Quan had been curious of how Qu Yuan committed suicide.

Sima Quan must have painstakingly reflected along the border of fact and truth. He personally visited the grave and shrine of Qu Yuan as well as the Miluo River. He even questioned people from Qu Yuan's hometown. That was how Sima Quan was able to come up with his description of Qu Yuan's death through what he discovered about Qu Yuan's personality, disposition, the works left by Qu Yuan, and other relevant records. Rather than hiding behind feeble "objectivity," Sima Quan brushed past the "fact" that had no substance with a firm "mind of his own" to approach the accurate "truth." This is none other than a valuable legacy presented to historians of today who are preoccupied with covering up truths behind shields of feeble objectivity and futile facts.

The Account of Joseon in Shiji and Gojoseon

Shiji is an exemplar of oriental historical narrative. The annal-biography (jizhuanti 紀傳體) style created by Sima Qian greatly influenced not only China, but all oriental cultures based on Chinese characters. The jizhuanti style is a type of layout for historical narratives that emerged from China. It constitutes of annals and biographies, which is why the style was named by taking the "ji" from benji (本紀 basic annals) and "zhuan" from liezhuan (列傳 ranked biographies). The History of the Three Kingdoms (Samguk sagi 三國史記) and the History of the Goryeo Dynasty (Goryeosa 高麗史), both well-known Korean historical narratives, have both been written in this jizhuanti style. It is not an exaggeration to say that there is still no narrative style that outshines the jizhuanti style since Sima Qian created it more than two thousand years ago. That is why Shiji remains a model and exemplar of general history even today. The problem is that Sima Qian's spirit as a historian has regressed since his time, which inadvertently makes his true worth that much more monumental.

Shiji also shares a close connection with the history of Korea. That is because among its 130 chapters is the Account of Joseon (Chaoxian liezhuan 朝鮮列傳). So far, only the existence of the Account of Joseon has been acknowledged, while its value, importance, and veracity as a historical source has been neglected. Countless have deemed it as a false record steeped in Sinocentrism.

Shiji's Account of Joseon is a record that briefly chronicles the collapse of the ancient Korean kingdom Gojoseon. Embedded in the record are a multitude of sources of controversy over the ancient history of Korea, such as the issue involving the Four Commanderies of Han. It would therefore be imperative to first scrutinize the record's reliability and veracity ahead of all else.

The kingdom of Gojoseon met its downfall in 108 B.C.. Shiji records that Gojoseon's decline had been caused by internal conflicts. What needs to be taken into more serious consideration is the timing of when the downfall occurred. The year 108 B.C. was when Sima Qian was 38 years old, which means the Account of Joseon is a record of an event Sima Qian had actually witnessed at the time it took place. This fact makes the Account of Joseon a primary source as valuable as any epigraph.

The same year is also when Sima Qian assumed the position of Grand Historian (Taishi gong 太史公) from his father Sima Tan (司馬談), becoming responsible for keeping records of the Han dynasty. The Account of Joseon was authored by referring to records by Han dynasty scribes who served in the war to conquer Gojoseon. If the rest of the records in Shiji are considered reliable, there is no further need to discuss the Account of Joseon's reliability as a historical source. Also, taking into account Sima Qian's approach toward pursuing the truth makes it necessary to reconsider the Account of Joseon in Shiji. For Korean academia to ignore Shiji and Sima Qian would be an irresponsible move on their part at a time when China is strategically attempting to bring them to the foreground.