Dark Sand: My Players Are All Actors

If a key figure or a critical event were misjudged, no matter how hard they tried, players probably would never meet the requirements to complete the game.

On the internet, there is a group of people who sneer at the achievements of Emperor Taizong of Liang.

Among them, some deliberately try to be unique to stand out from others, while others believe that since Emperor Taizong of Liang altered historical records, all accounts about him are unreliable, especially those concerning the Xuanwu Gate Incident, which are even more unbelievable.

If the historical records were indeed entirely altered, then players would almost certainly fail to solve the puzzles and pass the "Xuanwu Gate Incident" section of the game.

As for how the claim that "Emperor Taizong of Liang altered history" originated?

This, too, is recorded in historical documents.

The Old Liang Book states that Emperor Taizong of Liang once wanted to see the chronicles by Chu Suiyang, curious about what this historian, who always followed behind him noting his every word and action, had specifically written. However, Chu Suiyang refused, stating that no emperor had ever seen his own chronicles before.

Then Emperor Taizong asked, "If there were things I did not do well, would you also record them?"

Chu Suiyang replied, "Of course, it is my duty to record whatever Your Majesty does."

Another scholarly officer then said, "Even if Chu Suiyang does not record it, the people of the world will."

And to this, Emperor Taizong conceded, thinking it reasonable.

However, Emperor Taizong clearly could not let go of this matter, and later he approached Zhu Zishe, wanting to see the chronicles but was again refused.

But years later, Emperor Taizong finally saw the historical records about himself.

Comprehensive Reflections to Aid in Governance records that Fang Xuanling presented the "Gaozu's Record" and "Taizong's Record" for Emperor Taizong's review. Upon seeing the entries for June 4th, the day of the Xuanwu Gate Incident, which were "euphemistically written," Emperor Taizong said to Fang Xuanling that historians need not mince words and requested them to "remove superfluous words and record the events truthfully."

Also, it is recorded in the Old Liang Book that after Xu Jingzong took over the national history, he "recorded events to flatter," and many examples were listed to prove he edited and distorted the historical records according to his likes and dislikes. Thus, the "Gaozu's Record" and "Taizong's Record" were indeed severely tampered with by Xu Jingzong.

Therefore, the claim that "Emperor Taizong of Liang altered history" naturally became entwined with the highly debated topic of the Xuanwu Gate Incident and spread down through the generations, becoming a hotly discussed issue online.

And at this time, Li Hongyun found himself engulfed in this confusion.

If the "Gaozu's Record" and "Taizong's Record" were unreliable, then the New and Old Liang Books, which were based on them, were naturally untrustworthy, and so too would be the Comprehensive Reflections to Aid in Governance, which was again based on the New and Old Liang Books...

Doesn't that mean there is no chance at all of recreating the actual truth?

After a moment of silence, Chu Ge said, "Let me correct a few of your views.

"Firstly, Emperor Taizong of Liang was not the first to look at the chronicles. The historical records say that he only inquired about Chu Suiyang's chronicles but did not state he actually saw them. What Fang Xuanling showed him were the actual records. The actual records and the chronicles are not the same thing.

"There have been many emperors who have seen the actual records, and emperors have consulted the chronicles before too, like during the Sixteen Kingdoms era when an emperor of Former Qin viewed and then burned the chronicles; had the historian not already been deceased, he likely would have been punished as well.

"Secondly, there is indeed the practice among historians of using veiled language and euphemisms out of respect for the sovereign. Not only in the Liang Dynasty but even in the more ancient states of Yan and Chu, many records exhibit this practice. For instance, towards the end of the Chu Dynasty, historical records show that within a year, three legitimate heirs successively died of illness and then a new emperor ascended to the throne... do you believe that?

"As for whether this was at the emperor's behest or the personal survival instinct of the historians, that's harder to say.

"As for Xu Jingzong, he indeed altered historical records, but that was during the reign of Emperor Gaozong of Liang, and many historians at the time disdained his actions, later reversing most of his changes. In fact, many of the records he tampered with were to slander Emperor Taizong and his court.

"Of course, this does not completely prove that Emperor Taizong did not alter history. According to historical records, Emperor Taizong indeed reviewed the 'Gaozu's Record' and 'Taizong's Record,' and he did indeed express the wish for his subjects to re-write them. However, to thus declare the existing historical records as untrustworthy is clearly too arbitrary.

"In fact, historians throughout the Liang Dynasty have always been particularly keen to find concrete evidence of Emperor Taizong altering history, searching tirelessly. And whenever related epitaphs surface, they become extremely excited.

"But to this day, after generations of research, with books almost worn through and tombs excavated one after the other, no truly convincing evidence has been found. The matter of whether Emperor Taizong altered history remains a conjecture.

"Moreover, even from the existing records, one can find evidence suggesting that 'the existing historical records are still credible.'"

Li Hongyun considered this for a moment: "But the absence of evidence doesn't mean it didn't exist, right?"

Chu Ge nodded: "Of course, but you should realize that altering history on a grand scale is essentially akin to completely eradicating people's memories at the time, and that's not something an emperor can achieve with just a decree.

"Besides the official histories, there were also numerous unofficial accounts and folk histories, as well as epitaphs for those who died, among various other records.

"Even if the emperor altered the official histories, it would be impossible to change all the privately recorded materials or epitaphs. Just like what the scholarly officer said, even if Chu Suiyang did not record it, the people of the world would."