Chao Cuo晁错

Where the histories differ

The Records of the Grand Historian blames Chao Cuo for altering laws and causing chaos, and for harboring personal grudges that led to his own death, while the History of Han deeply sympathizes with his sharp dedication to the state and his solitary loyalty.

• histories differThe historical characterization of Chao Cuo's proposal to reduce the feudal domains triggering the Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms

  The Records of the Grand Historian, in the 'Biography of Yuan Ang and Chao Cuo,' accuses Chao Cuo of being overly hasty in legal reforms and seeking personal revenge, which led to his death: 'When Chao Cuo was the household manager, he repeatedly presented proposals but they were not adopted; later he seized power and made many changes. When the feudal lords rose in rebellion, he did not urgently rescue the crisis but sought to avenge personal grudges, and instead brought about his own ruin.' The History of Han, in the 'Biography of Yuan Ang and Chao Cuo,' expresses deep sympathy for his foresight and solitary loyalty: 'Chao Cuo was sharp in planning for the state's long-term interests, but did not foresee personal harm... Although Chao Cuo did not meet a good end, the world mourned his loyalty. Therefore, his words and deeds are recorded in the chapter.' The Records of the Grand Historian blames him for usurping power and disrupting norms, while the History of Han pities his wholehearted devotion to the state.