Pathway to Japanese Literature

I.

In the four-thousand-year annals of China, there was no Emperor Qin Shi Huang before Emperor Qin Shi Huang, and there has been none since.
The blind failed to discern and recklessly spread slander; credulous masses echoed their cries until they forced this peerless figure of antiquity to stand unjustly ranked with Jie and Zhou.
Is this not tragic?

This is a passage from my travelogue when I visited Emperor Qin Shi Huang's Mausoleum at Mount Li on October 10, Meiji 40 (1907). Today, five years later, that I again composed a biography of Emperor Qin Shi Huang to speak out on his behalf—this must be called no shallow karmic bond.

Emperor Qin Shi Huang's reputation has never been favorable. Regarding the inclusion of him among the ranks of the world's great figures, I believe there should be some opposition. The terms "Tyrant Qin" and "Lawless Qin," strategically employed during the early Han period, became what we might call preconceived notions, leaving ineradicable impressions in our minds to such an extent that merely hearing "Emperor Qin Shi Huang" immediately conjures associations of destruction and oppression. Indeed, Emperor Qin Shi Huang must have had numerous flaws and shortcomings. However, to completely obliterate his merits and strengths because of this is biased. It is excessive cruelty. [Long ago, Sima Qian himself took note of this point in his Records of the Six States,

Qin seized the realm through much violence.
However, the age saw transformative shifts.
The success was monumental.
The Records state:
"Why emulate later kings?
Because they are close to oneself and their customs and reforms resemble each other.
Their deliberations were humble and easily implemented.
Scholars are constrained by what they have heard.
They see that Qin's tenure on the imperial throne was brief.
They do not examine its full course.
Therefore, they bring it up only to mock.
They dare not speak of it.
This is no different from swallowing hearsay.
Alas!"

Sima Qian stated.
When examined with an open mind, Emperor Qin Shi Huang stood as a rare great statesman among all Chinese monarchs throughout history, and the institutions he established had exerted a lasting and widespread influence on later generations—this was an undeniable fact.
Moreover, his personality also had far more admirable aspects than was generally believed.
The validity of this criticism could only be judged based on Emperor Qin Shi Huang's lifework.
Facts were the final arbiter.

II.

Emperor Qin Shi Huang was the fifth-generation descendant of Duke Xiao and the son of King Zhuangxiang of Qin. At the age of thirteen, he succeeded his father to become the King of Qin.
For the first ten years of his reign, he entrusted governance to his ministers—particularly Chancellor Lü Buwei—and from the age of twenty-three took personal charge of all state affairs.
He unified the realm over the subsequent sixteen years.
Beginning with the conquest of Han in 230 BCE, he successively annexed the states of Zhao, Wei, Chu, and Yan in that order, and finally conquered Qi in 221 BCE to unify the realm.
Ever since Duke Xiao—Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s fifth-generation ancestor—appointed the renowned Shang Yang to establish grand policies for enriching the state and strengthening the military, the balance of power under heaven had already begun shifting toward Qin. That Emperor Qin Shi Huang achieved substantive unification within barely over a dozen years during his personal rule compels one to acknowledge his accomplishments as extraordinary.

The undertakings Emperor Qin Shi Huang implemented after unifying the realm were remarkably diverse, but ultimately could be categorized into domestic policy and foreign relations.
In domestic policy, the expansion of imperial authority; in foreign policy, the development of the Han people—these were the main focuses.
Therefore, the policies of his reign can also be interpreted as achieving “Revere the Sovereign and Expel the Barbarians.”

First, enumerating the principal elements of domestic policy yields the following.

[Exclusive Imperial Titulature] Emperor Qin Shi Huang adhered to Legalism.
From his conviction that the monarch's position must maintain a supreme and absolute distinction from commoners in every aspect, he established titles exclusively reserved for sovereign use in the year he unified the Six States.
To present a few concrete examples of these:

(i) Emperor: All monarchs before Emperor Qin Shi Huang were called kings.
The rulers of the Xia, Yin, and Zhou dynasties were all called kings.
When the Spring and Autumn Period arrived and the Zhou royal house declined, rulers of southern barbarian states like Chu, Wu, and Yue began usurping the title of king. Then as the Warring States Period commenced, even Chinese feudal lords followed this example—until finally, the rulers of Han, Wei, and Zhao from the Three Jin states, who had risen from vassal status to become feudal lords themselves—all styled themselves kings, causing the kingly title's prestige to plummet dramatically.
Therefore, the great feudal lords whose states prospered and armies grew powerful could no longer be satisfied with the kingly title, and some adopted other grand appellations instead.
The fact that King Zhaoxiang—Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s great-grandfather—once formed a pact with King Min of Qi to temporarily style themselves as the Western Emperor and Eastern Emperor side by side was also rooted in this rationale.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang, having subjugated the Six States and unified the realm, now deemed it improper to perpetuate either the kingly or imperial titles, and his resolve to adopt a new and loftier appellation must be deemed an inevitable demand.
Thus, he considered the opinions of his ministers and, deeming that his virtues encompassed those of the ancient Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, it was decided he would bear the title of Emperor.

(ii) *Chin*: In the pre-Qin era, *chin* was used as a first-person pronoun without distinction of status.
In Qu Yuan’s *Li Sao* from Chu, his father is referred to as *chin huangkao* (imperial father).
From Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s reign onward, *chin* became the emperor’s exclusive first-person pronoun.

(iii) Your Majesty: The practice of subjects addressing the Son of Heaven as "Your Majesty" dates from after Emperor Qin Shi Huang and cannot be found prior to the Qin dynasty.
The *Annals of Qin Shi Huang* in the *Shiji* is likely the textual source for these terms.

(iv) Imperial edict: An imperial edict signifies official proclamation.
Before Qin, this character was in common use by both upper and lower classes.
The *Zuo Zhuan* records that when General Luan Shu of Jin deferred to Xie, attributing their recent victory to Shi Xie’s well-devised military orders and the officers’ faithful adherence to them, it states: “These were Xie’s orders; the officers followed them.”
From Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s time onward, it was decreed that only the Son of Heaven’s commands would be termed "imperial edicts" (詔).

(v) Imperial Seal (璽): A seal made from jade was called an imperial seal (璽). Prior to Qin, these were used without distinction of status. The *Han Feizi* records that Gan Mao of Qin, who held the position of Grand Coachman and concurrently served as a Diplomat, "wore the Grand Coachman’s seal and conducted affairs." This Grand Coachman's seal referred to the official seal of that office. During Emperor Qin Shi Huang's reign, it was decreed that only the emperor's seal would use jade, which came to be called the imperial seal (璽).

These regulations were merely manifestations of one aspect of the doctrine of exalting the sovereign and suppressing subjects, which Emperor Qin Shi Huang revered as inviolable precepts.

Surveying Pre-Qin history reveals traces of imperial authority intensifying with each successive generation.
The Duke of Zhou Dan—compiler of the Rites of Zhou—stood as a central pillar in expanding monarchical power.
It was during the Zhou era that exhaustive regulations were established across all domains to enforce strict hierarchical distinctions: the Son of Heaven maintained seven ancestral temples compared to feudal lords' five, high officials' three, and scholar-officials' one; imperial halls measured nine shaku in height against feudal lords' seven, high officials' five, and scholar-officials' three; deaths were termed "demise" for the Son of Heaven, "passing" for feudal lords, "departure" for high officials, "unfulfilled duty" for scholar-officials, and simply "death" for commoners; pines marked imperial tombs while cypresses denoted feudal lords', goldenrain trees high officials', scholar trees scholar-officials', and willows commoners'.
Ultimately, Emperor Qin Shi Huang must be acknowledged as having perfected the doctrine of exalting the sovereign while suppressing subjects—a principle that had been progressively developing since antiquity.
That Han and later dynasties openly condemned Qin while covertly adopting its titulature serves as evidence that Emperor Qin Shi Huang's policies met the demands of their age.

III.

[Abolition of the Posthumous Naming System] The practice of posthumous names originated during the Zhou dynasty, with the *Lost Zhou Documents* containing a section titled "Explanation of Posthumous Names."
It is traditionally attributed to the Duke of Zhou Dan as having established it.
As stated in its *Explanation of Posthumous Names* section: “A posthumous name reflects one’s deeds […] Thus, grand deeds receive grand names, minor deeds minor names.” Accordingly, posthumous names were determined based on the lifetime conduct of those of status, embodying the intent to encourage virtue and condemn vice.
[As a prefatory note: Referring to a newly deceased ruler as *Daixing Huangdi* (Great Journey Emperor) or *Daixing Tianhuang* (Great Journey Celestial Sovereign) signifies that they were a person of high virtue during their lifetime and thus deserving of a grand posthumous name—an honorable appellation.]
To construe this as meaning “one who has embarked on an eternal journey” is incorrect.

Setting aside for now the origins of the posthumous naming system, it remained an undeniable fact that this system had been implemented during the Zhou dynasty.
According to contemporary regulations, when a high-ranking official died, it became customary for rulers to bestow posthumous names. Upon the Son of Heaven's demise, his council of ministers would convene to determine a posthumous name befitting his conduct and—adhering to the principle of neither flattering their sovereign nor deceiving Heaven—publicly announce it in the capital's southern suburbs under Shangdi's oversight (?).
While feudal lords across the states should have received their posthumous names from the Son of Heaven, as the Zhou royal house declined, each state's high officials began deliberating and determining these names themselves through procedures mirroring those used for the Son of Heaven.
Now when both Son of Heaven and feudal lords perished, ministers and sons found themselves compelled to critique their lord-fathers' lifetime conduct to determine fitting posthumous names.
This practice fundamentally undermined lord-fathers' dignity.
Consequently, Emperor Qin Shi Huang resolved to abolish the posthumous naming system thereafter.

Despite adopting many aspects of Qin’s institutions, the Han dynasty opposed Qin’s system regarding the posthumous naming system and revived it.
Although revived, the posthumous naming system after Han gradually became hollow and lost its original significance.
This was because subjects merely flattered their sovereign, presenting only flattering posthumous names, thereby completely losing the original intent of encouraging virtue and punishing vice.
For example, while the Posthumous Naming System defines “Benevolent” (Hui) as “loving the people and being generous,” we have cases like Emperor Hui of Western Jin.
While the Posthumous Naming System defines “Martial” (Huan) as “expanding territory and subduing the people,” we have cases like Emperor Huan of Eastern Han.
The derogatory posthumous names such as “Restless,” “Neglectful,” “Piercing,” and “Ugly” seen in the Posthumous Naming System ultimately had no instances of being used.
Cases like Emperor Yang of Sui receiving a derogatory posthumous name are rare exceptions; the Posthumous Naming System defines “Yang” both as “indulging in women and neglecting rites” and as “defying heaven and oppressing the people.”

Moreover, while single-character posthumous names had been standard during the Zhou period, as time passed their character count swelled in pursuit of grandeur—single-character titles became two-character ones by default, grew to six or seven characters commonly during the Tang dynasty, and further expanded to around twenty characters by the Ming and Qing dynasties.
As for Qing Taizu, he possessed a posthumous name approaching thirty characters: "Chengtian Guangyun Shengde Shengong Zhaoji Liji Renxiao Ruiwu Duanyi Qin'an Hongwen Dingye Gaohuangdi" (承天廣運聖徳神功肇紀立極仁孝睿武端毅欽安宏文定業高皇帝).
As posthumous names grew longer and became inconvenient to memorize and use, it became customary after the Tang dynasty to refer to emperors by their temple names, such as Gaozu or Taizong, rather than their posthumous names.
In any case, post-Han posthumous names lost their original meaning as “traces of deeds” and became nothing more than decorative praises bestowed after death.

IV.

[Administration of Prefectures and Counties] Prior to Qin, China was feudal, with numerous feudal lords each privately owning land and people.
It is recorded that at the beginning of the Xia dynasty, there were ten thousand feudal lords across the realm; during the Shang era, three thousand; and at the start of the Zhou dynasty, one thousand eight hundred.
Over a long span of years, as a result of wars and annexations, these feudal lords gradually diminished in number: during the Spring and Autumn period to 160-170 states, in the Warring States period to around ten states, until finally culminating in Qin’s unification.
The concept of “all under heaven as one family” first became a reality during Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s reign, something unprecedented before that time.

How to administer the unified realm became a major issue of the time.
While Chancellor Wang Wan and the majority of ministers advocated reviving the feudal system in emulation of Zhou precedent—proposing to enfeoff imperial clansmen as regional kings in distant territories to serve as bulwarks for the royal house—Emperor Qin Shi Huang heeded Li Si’s counsel, instead establishing direct imperial rule over the entire realm and instituting governance through prefectures and counties.
As clearly recorded in the *Zuo Zhuan* and *Shiji*, from the late Spring and Autumn period through the Warring States era, while the number of feudal lords decreased in inverse proportion to the increase in prefectures and counties, Emperor Qin Shi Huang ultimately transformed the entire realm into a system of prefectures and counties.
That is, he divided the realm into thirty-six prefectures and established in each a Governor, a Commander, and an Inspector.
Governors administered civil affairs, Commanders oversaw military matters, and Inspectors conducted supervision.
Beneath the prefectures, counties were further established, with Magistrates governing them.
Since all these officials of the prefectures and counties acted as representatives of the Son of Heaven in governing the people, with their appointments and dismissals being entirely at the Emperor’s command, imperial authority grew immensely powerful, and unified governance was thus fully realized.
The *Shiji* records the words of the ministers,

In ancient times, the Five Emperors held territories of a thousand *li* square.
Beyond these lay the Hou domains and Yi domains.
Some feudal lords paid homage; others did not.
The Son of Heaven could not control them.
Now Your Majesty [...] has pacified all under heaven.
The realm was divided into prefectures and counties.
Laws and decrees stemmed from a single authority.
Since antiquity.
Unprecedented.

This statement was by no means an exaggeration.

[Uniform Systems] During the Three Dynasties of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, feudal lords each implemented convenient policies in their respective states, resulting in the realm’s systems being fragmented and sorely lacking uniformity.
Even during the Zhou dynasty—when monarchical authority had expanded—states like Qi (descendant of Xia) and Song (descendant of Yin) persisted in inheriting their predecessors’ governance systems, while other feudal states did not fully adhere to the central government’s institutions.
*The Doctrine of the Mean* states, “All under heaven now share standardized axle widths and uniform script,” while *The Book of Songs* declares, “Under the vast heavens, there is no land that is not the king’s territory; to the shores of all lands, there are none who are not the king’s subjects.” Yet these were ultimately nothing more than expressions of hope or ideal.
Statements such as “To the shores of all lands, there are none who are not the king’s subjects” were ultimately nothing more than expressions of hope or ideal.
It was only after Emperor Qin Shi Huang that truly unified governance under heaven was achieved.

Upon annexing the six states, Emperor Qin Shi Huang rigorously enforced a policy of standardization across all domains—be it legal codes, weights and measures, length measurements, axle widths, calendrical systems, attire and headgear, or even script.
In the inscriptions he erected across the realm—some proclaiming “standardized instruments and uniform script,” others engraving “uniform measures for near and far”—it is only natural that he displayed an expression of utmost satisfaction regarding this achievement.
Particularly deserving of our attention were Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s fervent efforts in the reorganization of script.
He not only unified the script but also improved it.
He simplified the complex and inconvenient ancient scripts to create the so-called Qin seal script, then further streamlined them into clerical script.
It is not hard to imagine how greatly society benefited from this reorganization of the script.
Half of the purpose behind Emperor Qin Shi Huang erecting steles wherever he went may have been a strategic means to promote the unification of script.

[Imperial Tours] Emperor Qin Shi Huang began conducting frequent imperial tours across all directions starting from the year following the unification of all under heaven—that is, from his 27th regnal year onward.

27th Year: The western portion of present-day Shaanxi Province and the Gansu region.

28th Year: Present-day Henan, Shandong, Anhui, Hubei, and Hunan regions.

29th Year: Present-day Henan, Shandong, and Shanxi regions.

32nd Year: Present-day Zhili and Shanxi regions as well as northern Shaanxi.

37th Year: Present-day Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shandong regions.

While touring the four directions in this manner, he erected Qin’s commemorative steles wherever he went.
The renowned steles—such as those at Mount Yi, Langya Terrace, Zhifu, Mount Tai, and Mount Kuaiji—were all erected during this period, each inscribed with Qin’s merits in unifying the Four Seas.
Although Qin had annexed the six states, the surviving retainers and remnant people of those states would never submit to Qin overnight.
Thus arose the necessity to renew the realm’s perceptions.
The very purpose behind Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s frequent annual tours of the four directions must be deemed an exceedingly timely political strategy—one aimed at shattering the lingering vestiges of the Six States’ fragmentation and making this truth grasped by the myriad people of the realm: that he himself was by no means merely the ruler of Qin alone, but rather the sovereign lord of all within the Four Seas.
The Kangxi and Qianlong Emperors of the Qing dynasty frequently toured the realm with precisely the same intent; more recently, it may be surmised that Emperor Meiji’s imperial tours since the Restoration—to Tōkai, Ōu, and Hokuriku—were likewise rooted in identical reasoning.

V.

[Book Burning] Among Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s policies, those that drew the most censure from later generations were the so-called policies of Book Burning and Burying of Scholars.
Scholars of the world largely came to believe him, because of this, to be an enemy of humaneness and a foe to cultural education.
It was true that the Book Burning and Burying of Scholars may have been somewhat excessive.
However, there was some reason to this as well.
One could not simplistically condemn and dismiss Emperor Qin Shi Huang alone.

The Three Dynasties of Xia, Yin, and Zhou—unpraised by scholars—were themselves ages of autocratic rule. This was by no means an era of freedom as imagined by later generations. They imposed penalties for rumor-mongering, inciting unrest, and propagating heterodox teachings—mercilessly applying national law against all who employed grandiose deceptions or subversive rhetoric to mislead the populace. Yet when the Zhou court declined and the world descended from the Spring and Autumn period into the Warring States era—a time of martial and economic rivalry—the feudal lords competed to recruit talents from across the realm to strengthen their states. With these channels for talent recruitment now open, the affliction of wandering scholars holding unchecked debates began to ferment.

The rampancy of wandering scholars during the Warring States period was an exceedingly troublesome problem.
Even Confucius taught that “those not in office should not debate governance,” yet they all audaciously engaged in irresponsible and imprudent political discourse, harming public order and confusing the populace.
Did not even the gentle Confucius execute Shaozheng Mao, who gathered crowds and flaunted eccentricities?
For statesmen of the time, the unrestrained debates of wandering scholars were ultimately impossible to overlook in their raw form.
Conscientious politicians had already begun devoting themselves to suppressing this.
Some went even further to initiate their suppression, and there were even those who carried out the disposal of books—those that served as the source of such unrestrained debates by wandering scholars, meaning texts containing ideologies opposed to the politics of the time.
Qin served as one such example; from as early as Duke Xiao’s time, they prohibited political discourse among the populace, exiled violators beyond state borders, and even burned classical texts such as the *Book of Songs* and *Book of Documents* that were deemed harmful to public order.

Han Fei of Han, who emerged in the late Warring States period, argued in his work *Han Feizi* that laws and the officials who enforced them sufficed to govern a state.
Beyond this, he maintained there was no need for the Way of Former Kings or texts of sages.
Yet throughout the realm in his time, those styling themselves Confucians cited ancient sages' books to criticize contemporary governance and bewilder high and low alike—an utterly unacceptable situation.
He asserted that eliminating these Confucians must become the immediate priority.
Lü Buwei of Qin, Han Fei's contemporary, articulated largely identical views in his *The Annals of Lü Buwei*.

Emperor Qin Shi Huang had long admired Han Fei.
He had even declared, “Were We to meet this man and keep company with him, We would die without regret.”
Lü Buwei was a minister to whom the governance of the state was entrusted at the beginning of Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s reign, and he was even rumored to be the emperor’s biological father.
Given that both Han Fei and Lü Buwei advocated suppressing wandering scholars and eliminating ancient texts, it seems only natural that Emperor Qin Shi Huang had been preoccupied with managing these matters from the very beginning.
Under such circumstances, when his most trusted chancellor, Li Si, submitted a memorial proposing to ban ancient texts associated with heterodox doctrines—for the sake of ideological unification and the protection of imperial authority—Emperor Qin Shi Huang immediately accepted it, thereby leading to the promulgation of what came to be known as the Prohibition of Concealing Books and the Book Burning Edict.

Qin’s Book Burning was undeniably a great calamity for literary culture.
However, it seems that many people of the world tend to overestimate the scale of this literary calamity.
The *Old Book of Tang* and others indeed record that “the books of the Three Dynasties were nearly destroyed by Qin,” but this must be said to be an exaggerated statement that grossly misrepresents the facts.
The detailed account of Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s destruction of texts is recorded in the *Records of the Grand Historian*, but upon careful reading of this record, one cannot deny the following facts.

(i) While Qin burned the historical records of the Six States that contained many accounts unfavorable to itself, it did not burn Qin's own historical records.

(ii) Books related to medicine, divination, and agriculture were permitted for civilian use.

(iii) All books other than those mentioned above—particularly the *Book of Songs*, *Book of Documents*, and texts of the Hundred Schools of Thought—were completely prohibited from being kept by the populace. They were compelled to surrender these to government offices within thirty days after the edict’s promulgation, after which they were burned and destroyed.

(iv) Court-appointed erudites were permitted to keep any books without restriction.

Thus, while it is true that books held by the general populace were burned, given that this was an era when texts were laboriously written in intricate ancient script with lacquer on bamboo strips—and considering that books were exorbitantly priced and extremely cumbersome to transport—it goes without saying that commoners’ book collections were surprisingly meager. In the pre-Qin era, extensive collections were metaphorically called “five cartloads of books,” but even bamboo-strip texts filling five carts would amount to a truly meager quantity by modern printing standards. Therefore, scholars of that time generally memorized texts rather than storing them. Even after paper was invented in the Eastern Han Dynasty and copying became somewhat easier, the common people still continued rote memorization practices. Moreover, many works like the *Gongyang Zhuan* and *Guliang Zhuan* existed solely through oral transmission and had never been committed to bamboo slips, leading us to surmise that the burning of texts did not inflict damage as severe as later generations imagined. Furthermore, since the Qin court maintained seventy erudites whose collections would have been preserved intact, the scale of Qin’s book burning must be considered even more limited. Later, when Xiang Yu of Chu entered Guanzhong and reduced Xianyang’s palaces to ashes in a single blaze, countless government-stored texts were lost to the flames. Thus, responsibility for ancient texts’ disappearance should fall not on Emperor Qin Shi Huang but on Xiang Yu—who burned Xianyang—or rather on Liu Bang and Xiao He, who entered the passes before Xiang Yu yet failed to protect the government’s collections.

Though undertaken for ideological unification and protection of imperial authority—burning the realm's books was certainly not praiseworthy—most people knew only of the Book Burning incident without grasping the circumstances and realities of the time; thus I offered a partial defense on behalf of Emperor Qin Shi Huang.

VI

[Burying of Scholars] The following year after issuing the prohibition against concealing books, Emperor Qin Shi Huang had over 460 scholars buried alive in Xianyang.
This is what became known as the Burying of Scholars incident.
An examination of this event in the foundational historical text *Records of the Grand Historian* reveals that many later accounts contain no small measure of factual distortion.

From the Warring States period onward, practitioners of esoterica emerged who specialized in seeking the elixir of immortality, and the kings of Yan, Qi, Chu, and other states all placed trust in these practitioners.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang likewise followed the trends of the time by patronizing numerous practitioners of esoterica. Among these practitioners, two men—Hou Sheng and Lu Sheng—deceived the emperor, embezzling tens of thousands in gold under the pretext of seeking an elixir of immortality. Yet no such elixir could ever be found. Fearing that their fraud would soon be exposed and punished, they slandered the First Emperor relentlessly as a final act of spite before fleeing into hiding.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang, having been both deceived of gold and subjected to slander, grew enraged and ordered the interrogation of scholars in Xianyang who had associated daily with Hou and Lu while vilifying the imperial court and emperor.
However, these scholars—solely to save their own skins—vilely shifted blame onto others in a chain of mutual accusations (A blaming B, B blaming C), causing the scope of arrests to gradually expand until over 460 individuals were implicated, yet the true culprits could not be identified.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang also reached a dead end in handling the situation and decided to bury all suspects alive.
This is the true nature of the so-called Burying of Scholars incident.

Judging from the aforementioned facts, the majority of scholars buried alive were alchemists.
It appears that some Confucian scholars were mixed among them, but even these so-called Confucians were shameless individuals who calmly shifted blame onto others—men who bore the name of Confucian scholars but lacked their true substance.
Moreover, they were all criminal suspects accused of slander and spreading falsehoods.
This cannot be equated with the indiscriminate slaughter of innocent Confucian scholars carried out without reason.

The act of indiscriminately burying alive all criminal suspects cannot entirely escape criticism as somewhat reckless, but when considering the circumstances of the time, there were certain points in this that warranted some leniency.
The notion that "punishments should follow leniency and rewards follow generosity" represented the Confucian opinion, whereas Legalists upheld the opposite principle: punishments followed severity and rewards followed frugality.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang, who adhered to Legalist doctrine, strictly punished those suspected of crimes as a result of remaining faithful to his convictions.
He consistently adhered to this doctrine throughout.
It was not that he showed merciless cruelty only in the Burying of Scholars incident.

One day, Emperor Qin Shi Huang saw Chancellor Li Si’s procession while en route—its grandeur exceeding propriety—he, who placed the monarch’s position as supreme and absolute, grew deeply resentful. It was out of fear that this might become the seeds of usurpation. However, from the very next day, Li Si abruptly reduced the number of front cavalry and chariots in his procession. When Emperor Qin Shi Huang saw this, he became enraged, believing someone had informed Li Si of his discontent. He interrogated those around him but ultimately failed to identify the informant; consequently, he arrested all attendants present that day and sentenced them to death. Furthermore, after that, in the Dongjun region, there was a person who carved into a stone the seven characters: "The First Emperor dies and the land divides." Emperor Qin Shi Huang dispatched officials to search for the criminal, but failing to achieve their objective, he ultimately sentenced all nearby residents to death. When these incidents are compared with the Burying of Scholars incident, Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s doctrine can readily be comprehended.

If during the Burying of Scholars incident there had been even one man worthy of the name among those four hundred sixty scholars—someone who would voluntarily confess his crime and become a sacrifice for all—then assuredly such a calamitous event would never have occurred.
When considering this Burying of Scholars incident, rather than censuring Emperor Qin Shi Huang's tyranny, I believe we should instead lament the cowardice of those scholars.

I have introduced across the preceding chapters the key aspects of Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s domestic policies; according to this analysis, while his policies may have points deserving criticism, it remains an undeniable fact that they were largely appropriate to contemporary circumstances.
In addition, Emperor Qin Shi Huang confiscated weapons throughout the realm.
He dismantled regional city walls.
He also relocated 120,000 wealthy households from across the realm to the national capital Xianyang.
All of these must be deemed necessary policies to eradicate lingering vestiges of regional fragmentation, actualize unification, suppress local forces, and strengthen central authority.

VII

Turning our attention to Emperor Qin Shi Huang's foreign policies, he remained thoroughly uncompromising toward external matters. He carried out campaigns against foreign tribes to the north and south, demonstrating imperialist policies. In these foreign campaigns—as seen in Alexander the Great's Asian conquests and Taikō Toyotomi's Korean campaigns—there was undoubtedly an element of political strategy involved. Having subjugated the Six Kingdoms, he appears to have deemed it a sound strategy to direct the populace's attention outward through either campaigns against foreign tribes or foreign invasions, thereby securing domestic stability.

[Conquest of the Yue People] Emperor Qin Shi Huang first embarked on conquering the Yue people to the south.
The Yue people were an ethnic group that sprawled across what are now Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, and Guangxi provinces to the Annam region, divided into numerous tribes that earned them the collective name Baiyue.
From the late Spring and Autumn period onward, they gradually emerged as active players on China's historical stage.
Even renowned kings like Goujian of Yue—whose rulers claimed descent from the Xia dynasty and identified as Han—presided over populations that remained ethnically Yue.
Shortly after unifying the Six Kingdoms, Emperor Qin Shi Huang crossed the Yangtze and systematically conquered the Yue territories. He organized these lands into four commanderies—Minzhong (Fujian), Guilin (Guangxi), Nanhai (Guangdong), and Xiangjun (Annam)—incorporating them into imperial administration while resettling five hundred thousand Han Chinese colonists.
This marked the beginning of Han Chinese southern colonization that would develop across generations.
For two millennia thereafter—until France established its influence in Indochina—the southern maritime states maintained their acknowledgment of Chinese suzerainty, a tradition originating from these very conquests.

Particularly through Emperor Qin Shi Huang's southern campaigns, the gateway to maritime traffic was opened.
This occurred because Nanhai's Panyu and Xiangjun Commandery's Jiaozhi—these two cities that had ceaselessly thronged with foreign trade vessels over two millennia—came for the first time under Chinese control.
From this time onward, imports of exotic regional products like ivory, rhinoceros horns, hawksbill turtle shells, and pearls grew daily.
Thus began the prelude to East-West exchange here, as Chinese merchant vessels and Daqin's trading ships commenced their crossings between realms.

[Conquest of the Xiongnu] Emperor Qin Shi Huang further expelled the Xiongnu to the north.
According to Chinese history, the ancestors of the Xiongnu were called Chunwei and claimed to be descendants of King Jie of Xia.
Claims of being descendants of Xia are inherently unreliable, but it is likely that the name of their ancestor Chunwei became corrupted into the ethnic designation Xiongnu.
It was a common custom among the Northern Di to use their founding ancestor’s name directly as their ethnic designation.
The Xiongnu writing system first came into use during the Warring States period.
Prior to this period, they were variably referred to as Xianyun, Xianyun, Hunyu, Xuanyu, Xunyu, and so forth—never settling on a consistent designation.
However, all were merely phonetic transliterations of “Hunni,” differing only in the characters used.
That is, it refers to the Hun people who began appearing in Western history from around the 4th century CE.
This tribe had ceaselessly plundered the Han people since ancient times, causing them no small amount of distress.
The reason Gugong Danfu, the ancestor of Zhou, took refuge at Mount Qi was also due to the Xunyu.
The poets of late Western Zhou who lamented “No home, no family” did so because of the Xianyun.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang, after unifying all under heaven, had General Meng Tian lead an army of 300,000 troops to subjugate the Xiongnu and completely drove them north of the Yellow River.
He established thirty-four counties—some records say forty-four—on the land he had seized and repelled [the Xiongnu from], resettled tens of thousands of Han households there, built the so-called Great Wall, and strictly delimited the boundary between Hua-Xia and foreign tribes.

The construction of the Great Wall against Northern Di invasions was not necessarily initiated during Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s time.
According to the Book of Songs, from the late Western Zhou period onward, they built walls in Shuo Fang to defend against the Xianyun.
From the transition between the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods onward, the northern states of Qin, Wei, Zhao, Yan, and others successively built walls to defend against the Northern Di.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang constructed the Great Wall by partially utilizing these earlier walls.
That Great Wall originated near present-day Gongchang Prefecture in Gansu Province, circled beyond the Yellow River, traversed the northern borders of what are now Shanxi and Zhili Provinces, and reached the eastern part of Shengjing Province; thus, it naturally differs significantly from the wall that exists today.
The Great Wall as it exists today resulted from numerous expansions and renovations spanning dynasties from the Western Han, Later Wei, Northern Qi, Northern Zhou, Sui, and Ming periods following the Qin.

VIII

[Territorial Expansion] Through his expulsion of foreign ethnic groups to both the south and north and his reclamation of land, the Han people's territory during Emperor Qin Shi Huang's reign achieved unprecedented expansion.
Though Confucian scholars praise the Yao-Shun era and Three Dynasties as a golden age, the Han people's sphere of influence during those periods remained remarkably constrained.
Even during the Zhou era, what was called China—the Han people's heartland—was confined to areas along both banks of the Yellow River. In modern terms, this encompassed roughly all of present-day Henan Province and parts of Shaanxi, Shanxi, Zhili, Shandong, and Hubei provinces. Particularly notable were the numerous foreign ethnic groups interspersed among them—from the White Di and Red Di to the Quanrong, Xiaorong, and Lirong tribes. Border states like Qi, Qin, Chu, Wu, and Yue exhibited significant differences from the Han people in language and customs.
After Emperor Qin Shi Huang expelled surrounding foreign tribes, the Han sphere of influence expanded severalfold compared to early Zhou times. The territorial span of its forty commanderies—the original thirty-six augmented by four later additions—approximated what we now recognize as China proper.

Through Emperor Qin Shi Huang's power, an unprecedented great empire was constructed, and simultaneously, Qin's prestige spread far overseas.
From the Two Han dynasties through the Three Kingdoms period, whether among the Northern Di or in the Western Regions, the Chinese were consistently referred to as Qin people.
The same was true in the Nanhai region.
In geographical texts by Greeks around the 1st century CE, the nation at the world's Far East is recorded as "Sina," but this was likely a corruption transmitted by Western merchants who had traveled to the Far East after hearing China referred to as "Qin" in the Nanhai region at that time.
Regarding the origin of the national appellation "Sina," there are differing theories among scholars—some attempt to link it to the Dian Kingdom in Yunnan, while others explain it by tracing it back to Rinan Commandery in Annam—but none are worthy of acceptance.
Sina must invariably be explained in relation to Qin.

The names Sina or Sinisutan (meaning "country of the Qin people") were most widely used from India across Central Asia and West Asia to Europe.
The terms Shina or Zhina were phonetic transliterations of "Sina," while Cintan or Zhendan were phonetic transliterations of "Sinisutan."
Though the Han and Tang dynasties saw their country names occasionally used abroad as synonyms for China after projecting national prestige far and wide, they never achieved the global ubiquity of "Shina."
Despite Qin's brief reign over all under heaven, its national name became immortalized as China's appellation.

IX

When examining the above facts, Emperor Qin Shi Huang must indeed be acknowledged as one who asserted the spirit of the Shina nation. Among successive monarchs of Shina who made single-minded pursuit of peace and temporary appeasement their policy toward foreign enemies, he blazed like a singular comet. To say that Shina’s four-thousand-year diplomatic history—a chronicle of humiliating failures—barely preserved its honor through his efforts would hardly be an overstatement.

When surveying the diplomatic history of Shina after Qin, Emperor Gaozu of Han—wielding the lingering authority from his subjugation of rival warlords—led a grand army of 300,000 to personally campaign against the Xiongnu. Yet after a single defeat at Baideng, his resolve crumbled; he resorted to offering princesses of royal blood and dispatching silks and gold, single-mindedly currying their favor.
After Emperor Gaozu’s death, Han monarchs and ministers devoted themselves to perpetuating this policy, meekly enduring every insult from the Xiongnu.
During this period, even when heroic monarchs like Emperor Wu emerged to conduct campaigns against the Northern Di, the situation ultimately amounted to nine parts loss for every one part gain—their achievements scarcely repaying their endeavors.
Historians of Shina evaluated policies toward foreign ethnic groups across successive dynasties, rating Zhou as having adopted superior strategies, Qin as middle strategies, and Han as inferior strategies.
Whether Zhou truly obtained superior strategies remains questionable, but one cannot deny that Han’s policies toward foreign ethnic groups compared to Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s entailed greater costs with lesser achievements.

Since the post-Three Kingdoms and Western Jin eras marked a period of Five Barbarians’ dominance—an age when even unremarkable Han people lamented the sinking of the divine land and descendants of Hua-Xia donning barbarian garments—there is no need for elaborate exposition here.
Emperor Taizong of Tang was an illustrious ruler through the ages.
After unifying the realm, he had originally intended to implement a militaristic policy toward foreign ethnic groups; however, swayed by his ministers’ arguments about warfare’s calamitous dangers, he ultimately adopted a policy of appeasement through marital alliances.
Throughout the Tang dynasty, the practice of dispatching so-called heqin princesses to wed frontier monarchs at their request stemmed from this policy.
“A beauty descends from heaven.”
Princess Yongle—of whom poets wrote “Dragon Pass first welcomed spring”—and Princess Taihe (?), memorialized in verse as “All life’s raiment follows her,” both became sacrificial offerings of these heqin princesses under this policy.
However, insatiably greedy barbarians could not be restrained through marriage alliances alone.
Such became the pattern that no sooner had a princess been sent at dawn than demands for gold and silk followed by dusk.
The strategy of mitigating foreign tribes through matrimonial ties and tributes to avoid plundering remained paramount throughout Han and Tang—eras celebrated as peaks of Han people’s national prestige. Yet these efforts ultimately proved futile; neither urgent dispatches nor beacon fires showed any sustained decline.

The deeds of the Khitan, Western Xia, and Jurchen during the Song, or those of the Northern Barbarians and Southern Pirates during the Ming, require no elaboration here.
The Yuan and Qing dynasties—eras when the entire realm became subjects of foreign ethnic groups—are naturally beyond the scope of criticism.
If the accumulated weakness and humiliation of the past two millennia were indeed as described, then Emperor Qin Shi Huang—who during this very period subdued the Yue people in the south, expelled the Xiongnu in the north, and vigorously implemented colonization policies—must assuredly be deemed a great benefactor of the Chinese nation.
Particularly in today’s Republic of China, where the national revolution has succeeded, should not Emperor Qin Shi Huang be enshrined and worshiped as a great man for a hundred generations?

X

Having already described Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s domestic and foreign achievements, I would now like to offer a few words on his character.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang was a meticulous yet daring politician.
Furthermore, he was a statesman who humbly listened to others, consulted the masses, and made wise decisions.
The *Records of the Grand Historian* describes Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s approach to governance as personally adjudicating all matters of the realm—great and small—without delegating them to his ministers.
It records that unless he finished adjudicating the day’s scheduled matters, he would not rest even late into the night.
To criticize this on grounds of power-hoarding would be misguided.
Not delegating sovereignty constitutes Legalism’s cardinal principle; just as Zhuge Liang of Shu Han—who espoused xingming doctrine—personally adjudicated minor affairs, this should rather stand as proof of Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s diligence and meticulousness.

Emperor Qin Shi Huang was meticulous while also being bold.
He who had destroyed the Six States was fully aware of how he had become the object of resentment among their bereaved families and former retainers.
In front, Jing Ke’s dagger flashed; behind, Zhang Liang’s iron mace was hurled.
Had he been an ordinary monarch, he would surely have refrained from traveling due to caution; however, without any such concerns, he continued his imperial tours year after year.
In the Shina style, it would not be inappropriate to praise him as having been like a gallant struggle.

Contrary to common assumptions, Emperor Qin Shi Huang often accepted others' admonishments. To present a few examples, the first is the Lao Ai Incident. Lao Ai, relying on the Empress Dowager's favor, instigated a rebellion but failed; their faction members were all severely punished, and due to this connection, the Empress Dowager was relocated to Yong's detached palace. Regarding the treatment of his mother, when Mao Jiao of Qi risked death to remonstrate, Emperor Qin Shi Huang descended from the hall, personally helped Mao Jiao rise from his knees, listened to his admonition, brought his mother back to Xianyang, and restored her to her former privileged status.

The second was the Expulsion of Outsiders incident.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang, heeding his imperial clan ministers' counsel, resolved to expel all officials from other states serving in Qin on grounds of untrustworthiness.
At this juncture, Li Si of Chu submitted a memorial expounding how expulsion brought minimal benefit and maximal harm, declaring: "Mount Tai does not spurn soil,
Thus it achieves its majesty.
Rivers and seas do not shun tributaries,
Thus they attain their depths." Moved by these celebrated lines, the Emperor recalled Li Si—already journeying home—and rescinded the expulsion decree.

The third was the Chu conquest incident.
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang sought to subjugate Chu and asked his generals about required troop numbers, Li Xin claimed two hundred thousand would suffice while Wang Jian insisted six hundred thousand were necessary.
The emperor heeded Li Xin, granting him two hundred thousand troops for the campaign, but they suffered a crushing defeat.
Swallowing his humiliation, Emperor Qin Shi Huang deliberately visited Wang Jian—who had retired to his hometown mountains nursing discontent—repeatedly entreated him to lead the expedition, and ultimately succeeded in destroying Chu.

As these examples make abundantly clear, even if Emperor Qin Shi Huang did not possess magnanimity so profound as to accept remonstrance as effortlessly as flowing water, neither was he so narrow-minded as to gloss over his errors and persist in wrongdoing. The phrase "tyrannical and self-willed," invariably cited in evaluations of Emperor Qin Shi Huang, originated from Hou Sheng and Lu Sheng’s slanderous accusations against him. To dismiss his legacy based solely on this epithet is to place undue faith in a fragmentary critique—a judgment that must be deemed excessively harsh.

XI

That Emperor Qin Shi Huang was a man of resolute decisiveness requires no deliberate elaboration here.
After unifying the realm, though the majority of his ministers advocated reviving feudalism, he resolutely implemented governance through the Prefecture-County System.
Whether reorganizing scripts or disposing of classical texts, he executed these monumental challenges—ones no ordinary statesman could have accomplished overnight—without the slightest hesitation.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang became sovereign ruler of all under heaven in barely over a decade.
That he achieved relatively numerous significant undertakings within this brief span was wholly due to his decisiveness.

As is common among many great men, Emperor Qin Shi Huang too possessed a nature that delighted in extravagance.
As for structures like the Mausoleum at Mount Li, while Sima Qian’s records and Liu Xiang’s accounts undoubtedly contain numerous exaggerations, it remains an indisputable fact that its scale and construction—even amidst an era when lavish burials were commonplace—astounded people’s senses.
Having since suffered repeated destruction and excavation that have greatly marred its original form, the present-day mausoleum—now utterly ruined and devoid of its former appearance—still remains a distinct mound approximately 200 *ken* square and 18 *ken* in height, through which one can faintly discern traces of its past splendor.
Whether it be the capital at Xianyang, the Epang Palace, or the Great Wall, all his planned endeavors retain traces of their grand scale.
Perhaps within these [projects] lay a certain political strategy encapsulated in the couplet: “If one does not behold the grandeur of the imperial palace, how can one know the majesty of the Son of Heaven?”

There are those who criticize Emperor Qin Shi Huang for relying exclusively on criminal law while scorning benevolence and righteousness.
It cannot be denied that Emperor Qin Shi Huang bore traces of severity and scant mercy.
However, he was an adherent of Legalism.
In Legalism, benevolence and righteousness are proscribed.
When one considers this, it must be said that Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s dismissal of the Confucian-Mencian path of benevolence and righteousness arose from unavoidable necessity.
The period spanning from the Spring and Autumn to the Warring States eras was an age when rebellious ministers and traitorous sons proliferated, rendering monarchs’ positions perilously unstable.
Thus emerged the Legalist assertion that granting rulers maximal authority to suppress untrustworthy subjects—their doctrine holding human nature as inherently wicked—would ensure state security, an approach better suited to the era’s demands than Confucian-Mencian teachings.
Though all claimed Confucian orthodoxy, its doctrines grew increasingly concrete yet passive—Confucius’s benevolence becoming Mencius’s righteousness, then Xunzi’s ritual propriety—a transformation wholly shaped by contemporary external pressures.
Laozi declares in his *Daodejing*:

*When the Way is lost, virtue arises.*
*When virtue is lost, benevolence arises.*
*When benevolence is lost, righteousness arises.*
*When righteousness is lost, ritual arises.*

Laozi declared that through this sequence the world gradually descended into an age of moral decay; yet remarkably, this prophecy manifested as historical reality.
That is to say: Laozi himself expounded the Way and virtue; next came Confucius who taught the third element of benevolence; Mencius the fourth of righteousness; and Xunzi the fifth of ritual.
To advance one step further into concrete passivity, there remained no alternative but law.
This progression would ultimately explain Legalism's origins and—I maintain—clarify why Emperor Qin Shi Huang depended on legalist statecraft to govern the realm.

XII

The Chinese people are inherently bound by conservatism.
"Transmit but do not create."
"Believe in and love antiquity" or "Follow the old statutes"—they view all innovation as evil.
When a plan was made during the Western Jin era to construct a bridge over the Yellow River, many court officials opposed it on the grounds that even Yao and Shun had not implemented such a project.
Among such a people, it is inevitable that politics marked by an innovative character like Emperor Qin Shi Huang's would be repudiated as tyrannical governance that did not follow antiquity.

The Chinese people were also bound by pacifism.
They believed passive defense—epitomized by maxims like “The Son of Heaven secures his realm through the four barbarian tribes” and “True monarchs do not govern barbarians”—to be the supreme safety strategy.
Their ideal lay in Emperor Shun’s ancient feat of subduing the Sanmiao tribes through a thousand feathered displays rather than warfare.
Those who bowed their heads at the Dance of Seven Virtues and raised their faces at the Dance of Nine Merits were not limited to Wei Zheng alone.
For such a people, taking Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s expulsion of barbarians and territorial expansion as exhausting military means and defiling martial valor, it was hardly unreasonable that they did not approve.

The glory of Qin was but a fleeting moment.
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang fell ill and passed away during his southeastern tour in the thirty-seventh year of his reign, his youngest son Huhai, who succeeded him, was soon assassinated by the eunuch Zhao Gao, and his grandson Ziying surrendered to Liu Bang (Emperor Gaozu of Han) shortly thereafter, leading to the fall of Qin.
The hope of Emperor Qin Shi Huang—who had anticipated his dynasty enduring for ten thousand generations—was shattered when, within three years of his passing, the state collapsed in a truly tragic downfall; yet because of this, one cannot belittle Emperor Qin Shi Huang.
Even if the Napoleonic Empire collapsed after merely a decade, can one deny that Napoleon was a man of extraordinary prowess?
Even if the Toyotomi house fell in two generations, can we deny that the Taikō was a hero?
The true worth of a person lies not in years but in achievements.
Emperor Qin Shi Huang was fifty years old—hardly what one would call a long life.
His reign following the unification of the realm lasted a mere twelve years—indeed, it must be called short.
However, he accomplished great undertakings.
Even if the Mausoleum at Mount Li were to be demolished, even if the foundations of the Great Wall were to shift, Emperor Qin Shi Huang’s position in Chinese historical records would remain unshakable.

Emperor Qin Shi Huang Chronology

BCE Emperor Qin Shi Huang Events

Age Reign

259 BCE 1 year old Emperor Qin Shi Huang is born

247 BCE 13 years old Ascended the throne as Emperor Qin Shi Huang and entrusted state affairs to his ministers.

238 BCE 22 years old 9th year ※ (Character: 嫪 [Rou], formed by ‘woman’ radical + right component of 繆) ※ (Character: 毐 [Ai], formed by ‘士’ over ‘毋’) instigated a rebellion.

237 BCE 23 years old 10th year Dismissed Prime Minister Lü Buwei and assumed personal governance as Emperor Qin Shi Huang (Zheng); accepted Mao Jiao’s remonstration; issued the Edict of Expulsion; heeded Li Si’s counsel.

230 BCE 30 years old 17th year Conquered Han.

228 BCE | Age 32 | 19th year | Conquers Zhao

227 BCE | Age 33 | 20th year | Jing Ke attempts to assassinate Emperor Qin Shi Huang but fails

226 BCE | Age 34 | 21st year | Qin general Li Xin attacks Chu but fails

225 BCE | Age 35 | 22nd year | Conquered Wei

224 BCE | Age 36 | 23rd year | Emperor Qin Shi Huang accepted Wang Jian’s counsel and dispatched a 600,000-strong grand army to attack Chu.

223 BCE | Age 37 | 24th year | Conquered Chu

222 BCE | Age 38 | 25th year | Conquered Yan

221 BCE | Age 39 | 26th year | Conquered Qi to unify the realm; established the exclusive title of Emperor; abolished the posthumous naming system; initiated prefecture-county governance; confiscated all weapons under heaven; promulgated uniform regulations to standardize script across the realm; relocated wealthy families to the capital Xianyang.

220 BCE | Age 40 | 27th year | Conducted a tour of the northwestern regions

219 BCE | Age 41 | 28th year | Conducted an eastern tour; ascended Mount Tai to erect stones; engraved steles at Zouyi Mountain, Mount Tai, Langya Terrace; conducted a southern tour.

218 BCE | Age 42 | 29th year | Conducted an eastern tour; Zhang Liang attempted to assassinate Emperor Qin Shi Huang but failed; engraved the Zhifu Stele.

215 BCE | Age 45 | 32nd year | Conducted a northeastern tour and engraved [a stele] at Jieshi Gate; Qin general Meng Tian attacked the Xiongnu.

214 BCE | Age 46 | 33rd year | Subdued the Baiyue people; constructed the Great Wall.

213 BCE | Age 47 | 34th year | Issued the Book Burning Edict.

212 BCE | Age 48 | 35th year | Constructed Epang Palace; Emperor Qin Shi Huang investigated those who leaked confidential matters from his inner circle; buried scholars alive.

211 BCE | Age 49 | 36th year | The Dongjun stone inscription incident occurred.

210 BCE | Age 50 | 37th year | Conducted a southeastern tour; engraved the Kuaiji Stele; conducted an eastern tour; Emperor Qin Shi Huang passed away.

(Drafted on December 7, Taishō 1 [1912]) (Published in the January issue of Volume 3, *New Japan* magazine, Taishō 2 [1913])