Dubious Facts: The Evidence of Early Chinese Historiography

CHAPTER SEVEN Commitment to the Facts

99 CHAPTER SEVEN Commitment to the Facts THE CON V ICTION OF THE EMPEROR : FOUR W ISE MEN CON V INCE LIU BA NG As mentioned earlier, because the executive’s response recorded in the Intrigues is usually laconic, it is almost impossible to be sure of the influence of the epistemic aspects of the addresses presented to him. In other words, it is not clear that his beliefs about the truth of the matter were, or could have been, altered. By contrast, the Han histories have examples of more extensive executive responses. One thus has the opportunity to verify that, at least in some cases, the persuasions and rhetoricized addresses presented to the executive were meant to achieve conviction, that is, the firm establishment of an affirmative belief or disposition (as opposed to the audience’s mere entertainment of the proposal or being cursorily swayed). Furthermore, one can be almost certain that conviction was at times achieved. One particularly notable instance is found in the biography of a highly influential senior advisor to Liu Bang, Zhang Liang. The relevant anecdote reveals the High Emperor, Liu Bang, being forced to arbitrate between conflicting pressures and his primary inclinations and purposes being overcome by more compelling concerns because of the advice offered by a minister. Around the time of the Han general Ying Bu’s 英布 revolt in 196 BCE, Sima Qian reports that the High Emperor decided to get rid of the heir apparent, Liu Ying 劉盈, and replace him with Liu Ruyi 劉如意, his son by the Qi 戚 consort. Before embarking on the campaign to put down the rebellion, the emperor is reported to have fallen ill.1 He thus made plans to send Liu Ying to lead the attack against Ying Bu, hoping, we can presume, that Liu Ying would be killed in the fighting. A group of four elderly advisors, who had been recommended to Empress Lü by 100 Dubious Facts Zhang Liang, advise Lü Ze 呂澤, the empress’s eldest brother, to suggest to the empress that she find an opportunity to tearfully plead with the emperor not to send out the heir. Though the emperor may be unwell, they argue, he should be told that he would be better off taking command himself. If he sends out the heir, the generals will not support him, and once Ying Bu becomes aware of this, he will take advantage of their dissent and move his troops westward to attack. Were the emperor himself to command the troops, the generals would not dare not to follow orders. “To put the heir apparent in command of a group of men such as this,” they assert, “is like sending a lamb to lead a pack of wolves. None of them will be willing to do his best for such a leader, and the failure of the expedition will be assured.”2 Lü Ze takes their advice and speaks to the empress, who pleads with the emperor exactly as the four advisors had suggested. The emperor’s quoted response, which follows immediately in the text, and the record of his succeeding actions demonstrate that the reader is meant to believe that he paid attention to, and was in some way convinced by, the empress’s attempt: “The emperor said, ‘I have thought it over. My incompetent son is not fit to be sent out, so I, your lord, will go myself.’ Thereupon the emperor put himself in command and went eastward with his troops” 上曰： 「吾惟之， 豎子固不足遣， 乃公自行耳.」 於是上自將而東.3 The emperor’s denigrating reference to his son reveals his irritation at having his plot defused but he seems to understand and agree with the four advisors’ estimations of the consequences. They very shrewdly raise epistemic doubts regarding whether Liu Ying was up to the job and force Liu Bang to weigh whether it was more important to successfully put down Ying Bu’s rebellion or to do away with Liu Ying. The aim of these advisors was not merely to manipulate the executive, but to convince him, by employing propositions that carry epistemic weight, that their presentation of the matter and their recommendations for how to proceed were correct. We can see that their arguments did not rest on the raising of interpersonal doubts, or irrelevant slanderous remarks, but on very relevant epistemic doubts. Their ability to convince the emperor was not simply through eloquent artifice or unfounded assertions but by arguments and claims of significant consequence.4 EPISTEMIC QUA LIT Y A ND...