The Sacred Foundations of China’s First Imperial Era

The Qin and Han dynasties marked China’s “First Imperial Era,” where the concept of Tianming (Mandate of Heaven) reigned supreme. This divine legitimacy evolved into three pillars of governance: Virtue (德), Loyalty (忠), and Filial Piety (孝).

– Virtue served as the overarching principle, embodying harmony with cosmic order and ritual propriety.
– Loyalty bound officials to the emperor, ensuring centralized control over a vast territory.
– Filial Piety stabilized grassroots society by embedding hierarchy within families, reducing the state’s need for direct intervention.

This triad minimized internal strife—until the Sima family’s usurpation of the Wei throne shattered the illusion of sacred rulership.

The Sima Betrayal: When Heaven’s Mandate Lost Its Aura

The Jin Dynasty’s founder, Sima Yan, inherited a throne secured through his family’s ruthless machinations. His uncle, Sima Zhao, had openly assassinated the Wei emperor Cao Mao in 260 CE, exposing Tianming as a contest of brute force rather than divine will.

This watershed moment emboldened later usurpers:
– Non-Han rulers like the “Five Barbarians” (五胡) declared themselves emperors, unthinkable in earlier centuries.
– Eastern Jin (317–420) emperors became puppets of powerful clans like the Wang and Huan, who treated them as figureheads.
– By the time Liu Yu founded the Liu Song Dynasty (420–479), regicide had become routine—he executed six monarchs with theatrical brutality.

The collapse of Virtue and Loyalty left only Filial Piety as a fraying social glue.

Liu Yu’s Axe and the Descent into Chaos

Liu Yu, a former sandal-maker turned warlord, epitomized the new era’s ruthlessness. His rise marked a shift from symbolic authority to raw military power:
– Public Executions: His victims included the Jin emperors Sima Dezong (strangled) and Sima Dewen (smothered).
– Legacy of Violence: The Liu Song court became a revolving door of coups, with each generation more paranoid than the last.
– Cultural Decay: Unlike the Han’s emphasis on Confucian ideals, Liu Song rulers relied on terror, inflaming regional rebellions.

Historian Sima Guang later lamented this period as one where “the noble became base.”

The Paradox of the Yuanjia Golden Age

Amid the chaos, Emperor Liu Yilong’s Yuanjia Reign (424–453) briefly restored stability through:
– Agricultural Reforms: Tax relief, land reclamation, and state-funded crop loans revived the economy.
– Cultural Flourishing: Masterpieces like Shishuo Xinyu (A New Account of Tales of the World) and Fan Ye’s Book of Later Han were produced.
– Military Restraint: After disastrous northern campaigns, Liu Yilong prioritized domestic recovery.

Yet this “golden age” was built on shaky foundations. The Liu family’s penchant for fratricide—Liu Yilong executed his brother Liu Yikang over succession fears—doomed long-term stability.

Why the First Four Histories Stand Above the Rest

The Twenty-Four Histories canon includes two tiers: the revered First Four (Records of the Grand Historian, Book of Han, Book of Later Han, Records of the Three Kingdoms) and the often-overlooked later works. Three factors explain their supremacy:

### 1. The Lost Nobility of Early Imperial China
The pre-Jin era featured figures who embodied ideals:
– Xiang Yu’s tragic defiance at Gaixia (“Heaven forsakes me, not war!”).
– Liu Bang’s pragmatism, balancing meritocracy and kinship oaths.
– Zhuge Liang’s unwavering loyalty to Shu Han despite impossible odds.

Post-Jin histories, by contrast, chronicle “aristocrats without aristocracy”—elites clinging to titles while engaging in sordid power struggles.

### 2. The Craft of Solo Historians vs. Committee Compilations
– Sima Qian’s Records of the Grand Historian took 18 years, blending rigorous research with vivid storytelling. His “Collected Biographies” (liezhuan) format became a model.
– Ban Gu’s Book of Han refined this approach, while Chen Shou’s Three Kingdoms balanced multiple warring states’ perspectives.
– Later dynastic histories, like the Book of Song (compiled in 488), were rushed bureaucratic projects. The Yuan Dynasty’s Histories of Liao, Jin, and Song were completed in under three years combined.

### 3. The Power of Subjective Truth
Critics accuse Sima Qian of “bias” for dramatizing events like the Hongmen Banquet or elevating rebels like Xiang Yu. Yet his emotional engagement—seen in commentaries like “The Grand Historian remarks…”—created enduring archetypes:
– The flawed hero (Xiang Yu).
– The cunning strategist (Zhang Liang).
– The bureaucratic martyr (Li Si).

As Lu Xun noted, these narratives “ignite the reader’s soul” far better than dry chronicles.

The Modern Resonance: History as Mirror and Compass

Today, the First Four Histories endure because they:
– Humanize Power: Even emperors face moral scrutiny—a stark contrast to later hagiographies.
– Celebrate Agency: Figures like Zhuge Liang prove individual virtue can shape eras.
– Warn Against Cycles: The Sima and Liu family downfalls illustrate how legitimacy, once lost, is irrecoverable.

In an age of information overload, their lessons cut through noise: governance requires more than force, and culture outlasts politics. As Sima Qian showed, the best histories don’t just record—they reckon.