| Change log entry 64582 | |
|---|---|
| Processed by: | ycandau (2017-11-08 23:32:16 UTC) |
| Comment: |
<< review queue entry 61204 - submitted by 'richwarm' >> According to the Wp article, the dates of these "events" were 213 and 210, not 212. If burning the books was *one* of his "crimes", then wouldn't burning books AND burying scholars be *two* "crimes". Is "crime" the right word for it when an emperor destroys books? Maybe "atrocity" is more appropriate for these acts. "The scholar Michel Nylan observes that despite its mythic significance, the Burning of the Books legend does not bear close scrutiny. Nylan suggests that the reason Han dynasty scholars charged the Qin with destroying the Confucian Five Classics was partly to "slander" the state they defeated ... Sima Qian’s account of the execution of the scholars has similar difficulties. ..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_books_and_burying_of_scholars#Skepticism "During the interregnum when China came under the rule of the Qin dynasty (221–206 bc), a massive burning of books took place in which most copies of the Confucian classics were destroyed." https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mao-Chang#ref846671 |
| Diff: |
- 焚書 焚书 [fen2 shu1] /to burn the books (one of the crimes of the first Emperor in 212 BC)/ - 焚書坑儒 焚书坑儒 [fen2 shu1 keng1 ru2] /to burn the books and bury alive the Confucian scholars (one of the crimes of the first Emperor in 212 BC)/ + 焚書坑儒 焚书坑儒 [fen2 shu1 keng1 ru2] /to burn the Confucian classics and bury alive the Confucian scholars (acts supposedly committed by the first emperor 秦始皇[Qin2 Shi3 huang2])/ |