论文部分内容阅读
在当下通行的历史文本中,黄兴一直是功高盖世、道德完美的正面角色,被称之为“窃国大盗”的袁世凯,只能是祸国殃民的罪魁祸首。但是,即使是祸国殃民的罪魁祸首,所要承担的也是属于他自己的一份罪责,而不应该是别人转嫁给他的“莫须有”的罪责。从这个意义上说,“二次革命”后战败流亡的黄兴,针对袁世凯的“莫须有”的嫁祸之辞,无论如何是不应该被历史叙述所采信的。1913年7月28日,上海《民立报》刊登黄兴的《致起义各省电》,其中写道:“顷据河南确报:白狼军已将铁路电线拆毁,张镇芳已逃,讨袁军得手。”由此可知,在
In the historical texts prevailing nowadays, Huang Hsing has always been a positive actor with perfect moral character. Yuan Shikai, who is called the stealing country thief, can only be the chief culprit in disasters. However, even if it is the chief culprit in disrupting the country and disastrous people, it also belongs to himself as a culprit and should not be the “unspoken” guilt that others pass on to him. In this sense, Huang Xing, who was defeated and exiled after the Second Revolution, and Yuan Shikai’s “unwarranted” speech should not in any event be taken by the historical narrative. On July 28, 1913, Shanghai Minli Daily published Huang Xing’s “Statement of Power Generation to the Uprising,” in which he wrote: “It is reported in Henan Province that the White Wolf Army has demolished the railway wires, Zhang Zhenfang has fled, Yuan Jun succeeded. ”Thus, in