This week is the last in our Sima Qian series, but it is also definitely the best. We look at how Sima Qian lost his testicles while sticking to his principles. We consider the conflict between him and Emperor Wu that percipitated his castration. I also make a big announcement.  Here is the Transcript:   My name is Lee Moore, and this is the Chinese literature podcast. We are coming to the end of our Summa Chen series. Last week, we looked at Summa Chen's discussion of the capitalists, Summa Chen's defense of free market principles. This week, we are looking at one of the most famous Summa Chen works. And strangely, it might not even have been by Sima Qian himself.   This week we are talking about the famous Bao Ren An Shu, the letter replying to Ren An, the letter to Ren An as it's sometimes translated. First we're going to discuss the controversy surrounding the letter and the context in which it was produced, and then we're going to dive into the letter itself.   So what's the controversy? There's actually a debate as to whether or not Sima Qian wrote the letter. The letter to Renan, despite the fact that This is the work that Sima Qian is most known for. It doesn't appear in the shi ji, the records of the historian. The records of the historian is Sima Qian's main work.   Why doesn't the letter of Ren'an appear in that work? We don't really know. Instead, it appears in the Han shu, the history of the Han, the book of the Han. The Han shu, is a work that appears almost two centuries after Sima Qian's death. Now, the letter to Renan appears in that work and it purports to be by Sima Qian.   Did Sima Qian actually write this letter? It's hard to say. There's a book written by Li Weiyi, Michael Nylan, Han Venice, and Stephen Durant. They're all stunningly good. Scholars, professor Durant's a friend of the podcast has appeared on the podcast way back in April 17. They argue that this letter might actually be written by someone else, but they think it's pretty much true to Sima Qian.   I don't understand what that means if The letter is written by someone else, but true to him, I don't, I don't know. That's a circle that I can't square, but that's fine. I just wanted to talk a little bit about that controversy. Is this letter by Sima Qian? We don't know. Does it matter? Probably not, because for two millennia, it's Chinese readers have been reading this letter and whether or not it was truly written by the real historical Sima Qian, it has become associated with the character of Sima Qian in the minds of so many Chinese readers.   Okay. Enough on the controversy. Let's dive in to the circumstances surrounding this letter. Renan was supposedly a friend of Sima Qian. Renan is involved in a rebellion in 91 BC called the Liuzhou Rebellion. Renan is facing execution because he supposedly did not. display sufficient loyalty to the emperor during this rebellion.   Ren An writes a letter to Sima Qian explaining what happened. Ren An doesn't think his execution is justifiable. Sima Qian replies to Ren An's letter. Sima Qian essentially tells Ren An to suck it up, deal with it. And then he, it is this long disquisition. By so much in explaining what happened to so much in himself and how he dealt with the prospect of almost being executed by the emperor and how in the end so much in lost his testicles though not his life.   Let's jump back in time a bit. So much in served Emperor Wu of the Han dynasty, Han Mu Di. Emperor Wu is very controversial. He institutes this new economic policy, something that we talked about in the last podcast. Emperor Wu also breaks with other traditions. So for about quite the past century, the Han dynasty largely kept the northern barbarians, that is the Xiongnu, in check.   And they had done this with a pretty simple diplomatic formula. They paid them and they married the, uh, Han Dynasty princesses off to the Xiongnu as a way to make sure the Xiongnu had skin in the gam