In the year 1663, the city of Hangzhou in Zhejiang province witnessed one of the most brutal massacres of early Qing China. The victims were primarily members of two prominent families from Huzhou—the Zhuangs and the Zhus. Hundreds of adult men were executed by beheading, their blood flowing through the streets. The women and children who survived faced a grim fate: exile to the frontiers for hard labor or enslavement to the Manchu elite. Even more gruesome was the exhumation and dismemberment of a deceased individual, whose remains were hacked to pieces in a final act of desecration.

This tragedy, known historically as the Ming History Case, stands as a stark reminder of the dangers of intellectual pursuit under authoritarian rule. It exemplifies how personal ambition, scholarly passion, and political paranoia could converge with devastating consequences during China’s tumultuous transition from Ming to Qing rule.

The Ambitious Scholar: Zhuang Tinglong

Zhuang Tinglong was a wealthy landowner from Huzhou during the early reign of the Kangxi Emperor. Unlike many of his contemporaries who pursued pleasure or political influence, Zhuang harbored a deep passion for history and literature. He dreamed of leaving his mark on the world through intellectual achievement rather than material accumulation.

Tragically, Zhuang’s academic ambitions were thwarted by failing eyesight during his studies at the Imperial Academy in Beijing. Forced to abandon his formal education, he returned to his hometown in Zhejiang, blind but undeterred. Inspired by the legendary blind historian Zuo Qiuming, who compiled the famous Guoyu historical text, Zhuang remained determined to achieve scholarly immortality through his own contributions to historical literature.

The Fateful Manuscript

As fate would have it, Zhuang’s neighbor, Zhu Guozhen, found himself in financial distress and decided to sell his grandfather’s unpublished manuscript—a draft history of the Ming dynasty. This grandfather had served as a Grand Secretary in the Ming court, giving him unprecedented access to historical records and court affairs.

Recognizing the manuscript’s tremendous value, Zhuang purchased the copyright for one thousand taels of silver. The work represented a comprehensive account of Ming history, though it notably lacked coverage of the Chongzhen Emperor’s reign—the final period before the dynasty’s collapse. To complete and refine this work, Zhuang assembled a team of renowned scholars from the Jiangnan region, known for its concentration of intellectual talent.

Compiling the Controversial Text

Under Zhuang’s direction, the team worked tirelessly to edit, expand, and polish the historical manuscript. They added the missing Chongzhen period and refined the narrative throughout. Upon completion, Zhuang appended the title with the words “Jilue” and claimed authorship, declaring exclusive copyright over the work.

Tragically, Zhuang did not live to see his magnum opus published. His blindess had progressed, and he passed away before the printing process concluded. His father, determined to fulfill his son’s posthumous wish for recognition, invested substantial resources into publishing the work. He commissioned prestigious scholars to write prefaces and exaggerated the endorsement of famous historians to boost the book’s credibility and sales.

Zhuang’s father-in-law, Zhu Youming, also contributed significant financial and organizational support to the publication effort. Their collective investment reflected not only familial devotion but also recognition of the work’s potential cultural significance.

The Political Climate of Early Qing Rule

To understand the severity of the government’s response to the Ming History publication, we must examine the political context of early Qing rule. The Manchu conquest of China in 1644 established a foreign dynasty ruling over a predominantly Han Chinese population. The Qing authorities maintained constant vigilance against any expressions of Ming loyalty or anti-Manchu sentiment.

The Kangxi Emperor, though young during these events, ruled through regents who exercised extreme caution in suppressing potential dissent. Historical writing posed particular concerns because it could challenge the legitimacy of Qing rule by favorably portraying the previous dynasty. The government established rigorous censorship mechanisms and punished any works deemed seditious or disrespectful toward the ruling house.

This environment created what historians would later term “literary inquisition” or文字狱 (wénzì yù)—the persecution of individuals for their written works. The Ming History Case became the first major example of this phenomenon in the Qing period, setting a dangerous precedent for subsequent crackdowns on intellectual expression.

The Catalyst of Catastrophe: Wu Zhirong

As copies of “Ming History Jilue” began appearing in bookstores across the country, they caught the attention of Wu Zhirong, a disgraced former county magistrate. Wu had been dismissed from office for corruption and had returned to Zhejiang unemployed and seeking opportunity.

While browsing a bookstore, Wu discovered Zhuang’s publication and immediately recognized its potential for exploitation. Upon examining the content, he identified passages that could be interpreted as sympathetic to the Ming cause or critical of Qing rule. Seeing an opportunity for personal gain and political rehabilitation, Wu devised an extortion scheme.

Wu approached Zhuang’s father, brandishing the book and accusing the family of promoting anti-Qing sentiment and Ming restorationism. He demanded one thousand taels of silver in exchange for his silence. When the elder Zhuang refused, denouncing Wu as a known scoundrel and emphasizing that the publication had been properly registered with authorities, Wu took his scheme to Zhuang’s father-in-law, Zhu Youming. Both families rejected his blackmail attempts and expelled him from their homes.

The Fatal Accusation

Enraged by his rejection and humiliation, Wu traveled to Beijing to present his accusations directly to Qing authorities. He portrayed himself as a loyal subject uncovering seditious activities, presenting the book as evidence of widespread anti-Qing sentiment among Jiangnan intellectuals.

The Manchu rulers, already suspicious of Han Chinese scholars’ loyalties, took these accusations extremely seriously. They ordered an immediate investigation, establishing a special commission to examine the publication and identify all those involved in its production.

The investigation quickly expanded beyond the original accusations. Examiners scrutinized every passage for potential subtext, interpreting neutral historical descriptions as coded criticism of Qing rule. Standard historical terminology referring to Ming institutions was reinterpreted as deliberate defiance of current authority.

The Brutal Aftermath

The government’s response was swift and merciless. Authorities arrested not only the Zhuang and Zhu families but everyone associated with the publication—editors, printers, booksellers, and even those who had merely purchased copies. The resulting trials were characterized by their lack of due process and extreme severity.

Hundreds of men from the two families were executed by decapitation. Their properties were confiscated, and their families were destroyed through exile or enslavement. The persecution extended even to the dead: Zhuang Tinglong’s corpse was exhumed and mutilated in a symbolic destruction of his legacy.

The case created a climate of fear among intellectuals throughout China. Scholars began self-censoring their work, avoiding historical topics altogether, or deliberately praising Qing rule to avoid suspicion. The Jiangnan region, traditionally China’s cultural heartland, saw a dramatic decline in intellectual production as writers feared attracting similar accusations.

The Legacy of Literary Persecution

The Ming History Case established a pattern of literary persecution that would continue throughout the Qing dynasty. Subsequent emperors would invoke this precedent when suppressing works they deemed threatening, creating what historians term the “literary inquisition” phenomenon.

This case demonstrated how easily historical scholarship could be weaponized for political purposes. It also revealed the vulnerability of intellectuals to false accusations from malicious individuals seeking personal gain. The phenomenon of “following the model” emerged, with people using similar accusations to settle personal scores or seize property from their enemies.

The case had a chilling effect on historical writing about the Ming-Qing transition. Scholars avoided sensitive topics, leading to gaps in the historical record that modern historians still struggle to fill. The self-censorship that resulted from this and subsequent cases distorted Chinese intellectual development for generations.

Cultural Impact and Historical Significance

The Ming History Case represents more than just a historical tragedy; it illustrates the complex relationship between power, knowledge, and memory in imperial China. The Qing authorities understood that controlling historical narrative was essential to maintaining political control. By punishing those who presented alternative historical accounts, they reinforced their version of events as the only acceptable truth.

This case also reveals the precarious position of Chinese intellectuals during periods of political transition. The Jiangnan literati, who had enjoyed relative autonomy under the Ming, found themselves constrained by the more authoritarian Qing approach to intellectual life. Their attempts to preserve cultural continuity through historical writing brought them into direct conflict with the new regime’s political needs.

Furthermore, the case demonstrates how personal ambition—both Zhuang’s scholarly aspirations and Wu’s political ambitions—could have devastating consequences when intersecting with state power. The tragedy emerged from the collision of individual dreams with imperial paranoia, exacerbated by the opportunism of those willing to exploit the system for personal gain.

Reflections on Historical Memory

The Ming History Case continues to resonate because it raises enduring questions about who controls historical narrative and how societies remember their past. The Qing attempt to suppress Ming history ultimately failed—the very notoriety of the case ensured that the incident would be remembered, even as specific details of the suppressed historical text were lost.

Modern historians view the case as a classic example of how authoritarian regimes attempt to weaponize history while demonstrating the ultimate impossibility of completely controlling historical memory. The persistence of the story itself, passed down through generations, represents a form of resistance against historical erasure.

The case also serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of instrumentalizing history for political purposes. It reminds us that historical scholarship, when subjected to political pressures, can become a matter of life and death—a reality that remains relevant in many parts of the world today.

Conclusion: The Enduring Relevance of a Historical Tragedy

The Ming History Case of 1663 stands as a watershed moment in Chinese intellectual history. It marked the beginning of systematic literary persecution under Qing rule and demonstrated the vulnerability of scholars to state power. The tragedy of the Zhuang and Zhu families illustrates the human cost of political paranoia and the dangers of historical writing under authoritarian conditions.

This case continues to offer lessons about the importance of intellectual freedom and the protection of scholarly work from political interference. It reminds us that the control of historical narrative often serves as a tool for maintaining power, and that those who challenge official histories may face severe consequences.

Though centuries have passed, the Ming History Case remains relevant as societies continue to grapple with questions about who controls historical narrative and how we remember the past. The blood spilled in Hangzhou serves as a permanent reminder of the high stakes of historical scholarship and the enduring struggle for truth in the face of power.