生平

萬曆三十四年（1606年）九月十八日出生于陝西延安衛柳樹澗堡（今陝西省榆林市定邊縣郝灘鄉劉渠村），出身貧苦，初從軍籍，擔任過捕快、下級軍吏，後因犯法被判死刑，雖然被陳洪範請求特赦，但也被免職處分。

明思宗崇禎三年（1630年），張獻忠在米脂追隨府谷人王嘉胤起事，自號八大王，以驍勇多力著稱，又因體貌魁奇、面色微黃，得綽號「黃虎」。初屬王自用，後自成一軍，王死後改投高迎祥。高迎祥稱闖王，張獻忠、李自成號闖將。崇禎四年（1631年）六月，王嘉胤兵敗被殺，張獻忠受洪承疇招安，但隔年（1632年）又叛。

1635年張獻忠參與滎陽之會，議決進取，與高迎祥等共攻略東方，攻破鳳陽，焚明皇陵。不久張獻忠與李自成因故分裂，張獻忠率部攻長江流域，李自成攻黃河流域。崇禎十年（1637年）秋天，張獻忠從河南進入湖廣，向襄陽進攻。總兵秦翼明兵寡不敵，一路退敗，湖廣震動。明廷急調左良玉、馬爌、劉良佐等合兵阻截，張獻忠遭明軍總兵官左良玉部的擊敗，部隊嚴重受損，張獻忠本人也受傷。退守湖北房、竹一帶。

崇禎十一年（1638年），張獻忠又在湖北谷城受兵部尚書熊文燦招安，被授予副將一職。駐地王家河，易名太平鎮，以示休兵。崇禎十二年（1639年），楊嗣昌與五省軍務總理熊文燦密謀，「出師關洛，趨會鄖襄」，打算夾擊張獻忠，張獻忠「殺知縣阮之鈿，隳穀城」，重舉反明的大旗。轉戰四川境，巡撫邵捷春、參軍廖大亨、閣部楊嗣昌等部隊都拿他沒奈何，獻忠戲稱；「前有邵巡撫，常來團轉舞。後有廖參軍，不戰隨我行。好個楊閣部，離我三天路。」1641年破襄陽，殺襄王朱翊銘，「發銀五十萬以賑飢民」，監軍兵備副使張克儉、推官鄺曰廣、知縣李大覺、游擊黎安民等同死。祟禎十六年（1643年）據武昌，稱大西王，將楚定王朱華奎溺死。

崇禎十七年（1644年）春，大西軍「陷夔州，至萬縣，水漲，留屯三月，已，破涪州」六月，占領重慶，明瑞王朱常浩、四川巡撫陳士奇、重慶知府王行儉等被處死。八月（8月9日）攻破成都，巡撫龍文光、總兵劉佳胤、蜀王朱至澍及其嬪妃全部自殺身亡。張獻忠號稱60萬大軍，很快控制了四川大部分州縣。8月16日，張獻忠接受李自成封的秦王稱號，十一月庚寅（12月4日）登基成為大西皇帝，改元大順。以成都為西京。

順治三年（1646年）清兵南下，清軍到達川北之際，張獻忠成都出兵以對抗清軍時，將自己的妻妾幼子全部殺光，避免自己戰敗後其親屬被清軍俘獲。留守漢中的劉進忠投降清軍。十一月己巳（1647年1月2日）張獻忠於鳳凰山（西充縣與鹽亭縣交界處，西充縣城東南15公里的多扶場西）多寶寺前太陽河畔偵察時被清肅親王豪格的前鋒劉進忠部射殺身亡。張獻忠死後，他的四個義子李定國、孫可望、劉文秀、艾能奇率餘眾聯明抗清，轉戰貴州、雲南。梓潼居民之前被張獻忠以和文昌帝君同姓張的原因沒有被全面屠殺，裴、賈族人更為張立廟塑像拜祭，清朝時被朝廷搗毀，復建至今仍在。

濫殺及屠蜀

歷次屠殺記載

依據《明史紀事本末》記載，張獻忠曾有如下屠殺行為：

• 崇禎十四年四月，張獻忠、羅汝才合兵攻陷隨州，知州徐世淳敗死，全家被殺，官吏與百姓全部屠殺而不遺留，血流成溝渠。

• 崇禎十五年八月，張獻忠再度攻陷六安，將州民全數砍斷一臂，男左女右。

• 崇禎十五年十二月，張獻忠再度東進，攻下桐城後屠城。

• 崇禎十六年五月，張獻忠沿江而上，破漢陽後率軍渡河，兵臨武昌城下。楚王府新募兵為內應，開門迎接。楚王朱華奎被囚於籠中，沉江而死。屠殺士民數萬人，投尸江中。尚餘數萬人，驅趕出城，以鐵騎圍而逼入江中。剩餘民眾數百人，多砍斷手足，鑿毀目鼻，無一全角者。

• 崇禎十六年八月，獻忠在湘潭徵集船隻數千艘欲北渡，忽然起大風，吹翻船隻百餘艘，溺死數千人。因而再回岳州，盡殺所掠奪的婦女，投尸於江中。焚燒船隻，火勢延伸四十里，江水夜明如白晝。

• 崇禎十七年六月，張獻忠攻陷涪州、瀘州，蜀王朱至澍告急，請求救兵師于南都。左良玉兵屯德安。張獻忠順流而下攻陷佛圖關，遂圍重慶。官兵盡力守城，四日被攻陷，瑞王朱常浩全家受難，舊撫陳士奇也被殺。賊兵在重慶屠殺，抓取萬餘壯丁，割去耳鼻，砍斷一手，驅趕至各州縣，告之若兵至不降，以此為鑑。

• 崇禎十七年八月，張獻忠進陷成都，蜀王全家受難，巡撫龍文光暨道府各級官吏皆被殺。張獻忠要求全蜀紳士至成都，全部殺害。隨後公告科舉取士，遠近諸生爭相前往。張獻忠派兵包圍，擊殺數千人，蜀中文士皆亡。其後又大殺蜀中百姓。

屠蜀爭議

四川盛傳張獻忠屠城無數，尤其屠蜀，立下七殺碑，兩側碑文分別為：「天生萬物以養人，人無一物以報天」 ，中間有七字「殺殺殺殺殺殺殺」，不分男女老幼，逢人便是帶到此碑之下斬殺。目前發現的張獻忠屠蜀史料有：《張獻忠陷廬州紀》、《流賊張獻忠禍蜀記》、《孤兒籲天錄》、《大西通紀》、《破山集》、《蜀難敘略》、《歐陽氏遺書》、《張獻忠屠蜀記》、《客滇述》、《雅州受難記》、《漢嘉受害記》、《蜀記》、《紀事略》、《五馬先生紀年》、《蜀破鏡》、《荒書》、《聖教入川記》、《山城紀事》、《流離傳》、《劫後錄》、《綏寇紀略》、《續綏寇紀略》、《滇蜀紀聞》、《灩澦囊》、《老神仙傳》、《廣陽雜記》、《明季南略》、《井蛙雜記》、《罪惟錄》、《蜀龜鑑》、《蜀碧》、各地方志、四川民間家譜等450餘種。

魯迅在《晨涼漫筆》中說：「他（張獻忠）開初並不很殺人，他何嘗不想做皇帝，後來知道李自成進了北京，接著是清兵入關，自己只剩沒落這一條路，于是就開手殺，殺......他分明感到天下已沒有自己的東西，現在是在毀壞別人的東西了，這和有些末代的風雅皇帝，在死前燒掉了祖宗或自己所搜集的書籍古董寶貝之類的心情，完全一樣。他還有兵，而沒有古董之類，所以就殺，殺，殺人，殺......李自成已經入北京做皇帝了，做皇帝是要有百姓的，他要殺之他的百姓，使他無皇帝可做。」

南明和清朝人記載張獻忠戰死時川人已幾乎被其屠盡，但此後清軍仍然在四川和南明軍隊作戰多年，張獻忠于鹽亭縣鳳凰山被流矢射殺身亡。張獻忠死後，餘部繼續轉戰四川各地。直到順治十六年（1659年），清軍攻陷南明渝城（重慶）後，才算占領四川。胡昭曦認為這些自相矛盾的記載證明屠蜀的真正主謀是南明地主階級武裝對四川勞動人民的反攻倒算，而非在公元1647年已死的農民革命領袖張獻忠。

明史專家陳學霖教授批評相關學者基於政治需要及在階級鬥爭意識型態的影響下，美化張獻忠等人「農民起義」，但亦肯定相關史學家對糾正舊史記載的一些重疊錯誤，如釐清張獻忠殺人的數字，及四川多少人及哪一類人如何被殺等爭議性問題的貢獻。

相關文獻如《明季南略》和《客滇述》、明朝遺民顧山貞以及西方傳教士等人的記述皆指出張獻忠是屠川元兇：

• 計六奇《明季南略》記載：「獻忠遂屠重慶，砍手三十餘萬人，流血有聲。」

• 《客滇述》：「獻忠既陷成都，盡伐梨樹，做宮室馳道，練兵於此。賊兵之樵採者，盡入城中，拆毀房屋以為薪。又發兵四出，搜各州縣山野，不論男女老幼，逢人便殺；如是半載。八月，獻忠毀成都城，焚蜀王宮殿，並焚未盡之民房。凡石柱亭欄，皆毀之；大不能毀者，更聚薪燒裂之。成都有大城小城，本張儀所築，漢昭烈帝修之。以大石，貫以鐵絙，壯麗甲天下。宮殿之盛，亦不減京師。至是，盡為瓦礫矣。獻忠又令其大家遍收川兵殺之，及其妻子男異性，惟十時以下者僅留一、二。」

• 西方傳教士利類思和安文思被張獻忠封為「天學國師」，目擊張獻忠屠殺，1918年古洛東根據他們的原始記錄寫成的《聖教入川記》說：「殘殺之後，成都為之一空。除少數官員外，別無居民。荒涼慘象，不忍矚目。獻忠剿滅成都後，命令各鄉鎮村民移居成都。」

在張獻忠死後出現了清軍跟南明軍對峙的局面，清軍的勢力於川北保寧一帶，而南明軍隊占據著四川境內大部分州縣。根據《蜀龜鑑》的記載，經過張獻忠軍隊的屠殺，川南的人口損失約50％，而川北的人口幾乎損失殆盡。儘管川南和川北都遭到了張獻忠的軍隊的屠殺，可是到了張獻忠死後，南明與清朝對峙的時期，南明控制的川南，人口明顯多于清朝控制的川北。川北遭受的破壞，比川南嚴重得多，由於各軍事力量基本上都要經過川北入川，可見川北為主戰場。因此，綜上所述，清朝軍隊以十三年的時間才平定四川，並不是表示清軍一直在屠殺四川人。

此外，明末清初四川人口的銳減，是多股勢力混戰的最終惡果，張獻忠雖然不是主兇，但仍然是屠川元兇其中一原因

至於「不得已而動大兵剿之，民賊相混，玉石難分，或全城俱殲，或殺男留婦」，這份奏章的出處是順治六年刑科給事中陳調元揭，是某個官員給清廷的奏章，匯報說一些入川的清軍將領亂殺無辜的情況，而不是任何一種形式上的政府命令。網上流傳的內容被人篡改為清朝屠四川的政府公告「民賊相混、玉石難分。大兵所到之處，或屠全城，或屠男而留女。」

相關

對學術的態度及相關見解

對天文及地理有興趣的張獻忠因懷疑兩名傳教士藏有天文著作不肯獻出，不時大發雷霆之怒，欲置其於死地。實則司鐸所藏之書為艾馬祿爾（P. Emmanuelis）司鐸所著之超性學書，講明天主教誡律，與天文學無關。及二司鐸解釋全書「皆論管理人良心之事，教人知道當避罪惡，雖在罪惡危險之中，當獨向正道，方得永福」。獻忠聞之稱讚，因此息怒：

張獻忠在聽到司鐸天主教誡的解說之後，大為奇異，稱讚其法律如此精詳，管理人良心，誠為不二法門，認為歐洲各國風俗純美，實由此聖律而來。不過他續言：「然此等法律為川人無益，伊等固執於惡，不從此聖教聖令，寧願從我刀劍之下，不服聖律。故吾奉天地大主之命，殄滅此種僧黨及世上惡人。凡仇爾等者，吾亦仇之」云云，故意將司鐸的解說扭曲，作為殄滅僧黨及世間定性為「惡人」的藉口及理據。

毀滅文物古蹟

大西軍在成都「入城樵採，凡先聖賢祠廟，民居屋宇，悉毀為薪，於是自東漢以來古跡，明太祖所頒圖書彞器，至是皆盡」。明末的成都有寺廟94所，包括武侯祠在內，無一存者。川中各州縣的情況「園亭寺廟無不焚毀」。

千船沉銀

清順治三年，張獻忠在兵敗時率軍撤離成都，帶寶物載船沿岷江南下，行至彭山雙江河遭南明軍官楊展伏擊，所載之金銀珠寶亦隨船沉入江中。即歷史上傳說的江口沉銀。2010年，眉山市人民政府將彭山區江口鎮的江口沉銀遺址，列為眉山市級文物保護單位。直到2015年，專家找出當年的沉船遺址，並順利在2017年大規模封江開挖後，出土許多珍貴的文物，包含張獻忠分封嬪妃的金冊、銀冊，以及金銀幣、銀錠、金戒指等，還有鐵刀劍等兵器。

互聯網文化

由于張獻忠在歷史上留下的是一個濫殺無辜的血腥形象，在當下矛盾重重的中國社會，其名號也成為一個互聯網俚語，含義接近日語中的通り魔，意為出于報複社會等原因而大肆殺傷無辜民眾的殺人狂。最早可能是劉仲敬賦予「張獻忠」一詞此番含義。

注釋

Biography

Background

Zhang was born in liushujian (literally 'willow spring', modern Dingbian, Shaanxi province), into a poor family. He was described as tall in stature, had a yellow complexion and a "tiger chin" (虎頷), and hence was given the nickname "Yellow Tiger". He served in the Ming army, and while in the army he was sentenced to death for violations of military rules, but was reprieved after an intervention by a senior officer who was impressed by his appearance.

As rebel leader

Towards the end the Ming dynasty, drought, famines and epidemics broke out in various part of China. In the late 1620s, peasants revolted in Shaanxi, resisting attempts by the Ming government to collect grains and taxes. They coalesced into rebel armies called "roving bandits" (liúkòu 流寇) because of their highly mobile nature, and spread into other parts of China. Zhang escaped from the army, joined the rebel forces in Mizhi County in 1630, and established himself as a rebel leader, styling himself Bada Wang (八大王, Eighth Great King). His mobile forces would conduct raids along the western edge of Shaanxi, plundering swiftly and hiding out in the hills. Later he moved into other provinces, moving from place to place raiding towns and cities. He was defeated at various times by the Ming forces; Zhang would also surrender when it was expedient for him to do so, for example in 1631 and 1638, but would then later regroup and resume rebellion.

In 1635 he joined a larger confederation of bandits that included another rebel leader, Li Zicheng (Li would later capture Beijing and end the Ming rule there). They devastated Henan and pushed into Anhui. After they had burnt the Ming ancestral temple at Zhongdu (Fengyang) in Anhui and ravaged the area, the rebel armies broke up and Zhang headed to Hubei. In 1637, joined by other rebels and with an army now reaching a size of 300,000 men, he again pushed into Anhui, then to Jiangsu, and almost down to Nanjing. But he was defeated there and he retreated back to Hubei. In 1638, he surrendered to Ming supreme commander Xiong Wencan (熊文燦) and was allowed to serve as a regional Ming commander. However, he reneged on the agreement in 1639 and rebelled, and later defeated the Ming forces led by the Ming general Zuo Liangyu (左良玉). In 1640, he suffered defeats at the hand of Zuo and had to flee with few followers into the mountains of Eastern Sichuan. In 1641 he emerged from Sichuan and attacked Xiangyang, capturing and executing the imperial prince there.

In 1643, he took Macheng in Hubei, and his army swelled to some 57,000 after incorporating the city's rebels. He then captured the provincial capital of Wuchang, killed the imperial prince there, and proclaimed himself "Xi Wang" (King of the West). Wuchang however was soon recaptured by Ming forces, and for a while Zhang stayed at Changsha where he controlled much of Hunan and part of Jiangxi.

Conquest of Sichuan

In 1644, Zhang decided to abandon Hunan and led 100,000 of his troops towards Sichuan. His army converged on Chongqing from two directions and surrounded the city. After several days of fighting, his army managed to blast a hole through the city wall and captured the city on 25 July 1644. He was said to have cut off the hands of the city's defenders and massacred a large number of people.

The conquest of some other parts of Sichuan was made easier after he promised not to harm the local population if they seized their officials, took possession of the storehouse and surrendered without resistance. He took Chengdu in 9 September 1644, and met no real opposition in the rest of Sichuan afterwards. He then set up court in Chengdu, which he renamed Xijing (西京, Western Capital), and declared himself king of the Daxi Dynasty (大西王朝, Great Western Dynasty). In the 10th lunar month of 1644 he declared himself as Emperor with the reign title Dashun.

Rule in Sichuan

In Sichuan he attempted to set up a civil administration and initially gained considerable support. According to an account by Gabriel de Magalhães, a Portuguese Jesuit who was working in Sichuan with another Jesuit Lodovico Buglio (but both pressed to serve as astronomers to Zhang), "he began his rule with such liberality, justice and magnificence by which he captivated all hearts that many mandarins, famous both in civic as in military affairs whom fear was keeping concealed, left their hideouts and flew to his side."

However, resistance to his rule did not cease, and Chongqing was retaken by Ming loyalists in the spring of 1645. Zhang then embarked on a campaign of terror, which was well under way by the middle of 1645, to stamp out the remaining resistance in Sichuan. In November 1645, according to de Magalhães, Zhang, after hearing that "a huge and powerful army was coming against him", announced that "the people of his kingdom had a secret pact with the enemy and planned an uprising; because of this he was determined to kill any suspected resistors". The Jesuits, who now "understood the evil of this man", reported that while they managed to save a few of their Jesuit brothers who were taken, the rest were killed. Zhang's policy of terror increased in intensity, especially in 1646 after he had decided to abandon Sichuan. By then, Zhang's government had virtually disintegrated, all but three of his principal officials had either committed suicide or were executed.

Death

The Manchu Aisin Gioro founded the Qing Dynasty in 1636 and advanced through the Great Wall after the fall of the Ming Dynasty to rebels of Li Zicheng in 1644. In 1646 the Qing sent out a force under the leadership of Haoge intending to attack Zhang's domain in Sichuan. In October 1646, Zhang decided to abandon Sichuan, and headed towards his homeland in Shaanxi. However, the Qing army was also approaching from Shaanxi, and in January 1647, Zhang and the Qing forces met in Xichong where Zhang had set up camp, and he was killed in the confrontation. According to one account, he was betrayed by one of his officers, a native of Sichuan named Liu Chin-chung (Liu Jinzhong) who resented his policy of terror in Sichuan. Zhang was alerted to their presence and decided to confront them with only 8 to 10 men. Liu pointed Zhang out to the Qing when Zhang rushed out from his tent on learning of the betrayal, and he was then shot and killed by a skilled Manchu archer. The Draft History of Qing has an entirely different account of his death and claims he was killed by Oboi during a battle.

Devastation of Sichuan

The events surrounding Zhang's rule and afterwards devastated Sichuan, where he was said to have "engaged in one of the most hair-raising genocides in imperial history". Lurid stories of his killings and flayings were given in various accounts. According to Shu Bi (蜀碧), an 18th-century account of the massacre, after every slaughter, the heads were collected and placed in several big piles, while the hands were placed in other big piles, and the ears and noses in more piles, so that Zhang could keep count of his killings. In one incident, he is said to have organized an imperial examination ostensibly to recruit scholars for his administration, only to have all the candidates, which numbered many thousands, killed. In another, to give thanks for his recovery after an illness, he was said to have cut off the feet of many women. The severed feet were heaped in two piles with those of his favorite concubine, whose feet were unusually small, placed on top. These two piles of feet were then doused in oil and set alight to become what he called "heavenly candles".

He was reported to have ordered further massacres before he abandoned Chengdu in advance of the Qing armies. The massacres, a subsequent famine and epidemic, attacks by tigers, as well as people fleeing from the turmoil and the Qing armies, resulted in a large-scale depopulation of Sichuan. The worst affected areas are believed to be Chengdu and its surrounding counties, and places on the path of Zhang's retreat from Chengdu to Shaanxi.

Seven Kill Stele

A popular account of his life has it that he erected in Chengdu a stele, which came to be known as the Seven Kill Stele (七殺碑), with the following inscription:

There are, however, considerable doubts that this account is accurate. In 1934, a stele thought to be this very one was found by a missionary – its reverse side contains an added inscription by a Ming general commemorating Zhang's numerous victims whose bones he had collected and buried in 1646. While the first two lines of the poem on this stele are similar, the line with the seven kills is absent in this stele. Instead the actual line reads: "The spirits and gods are knowing, so reflect on this and examine yourselves" (鬼神明明，自思自量). Many therefore considered the story to be a distortion from the Qing era.

Deaths

The actual number of people killed by Zhang is not known and is disputed. Official Ming Dynasty history Ming Shi recorded a figure of 600 million deaths due to Zhang's activities, an obvious exaggeration, since the total population of China at that time was less than 150 million, perhaps much lower. According to an assessment by a modern historian, "the death toll is reputed to have been enormous, possibly one million out of a total provincial population of three million, before he was eventually killed by the Manchus." The combination of deaths from the massacres and other causes as well as flight of people from the province resulted in a sharp drop in the population of Sichuan. The population has been estimated to have dropped by as much as 75%, with fewer than a million people left in Sichuan, most of whom were clustered in the periphery areas. The last Ming census figure for Sichuan in 1578 (more than 60 years before Zhang entered Sichuan) gave a population of 3,102,073. However, by 1661, only 16,096 adult males were registered in Sichuan, and Chengdu was said to have become a virtual ghost town frequented by tigers. A later figure for Sichuan was from the 1720s, which is over 70 years after Zhang's death and long after the resettlement of Sichuan had begun, and it recorded 634,802 households (which one estimate calculated to be around 2.5 million individuals).

Many, while acknowledging the massacres committed, do not believe that Zhang was responsible for the greater part of the population collapse in Sichuan, and thought that the greatest loss happened after his death due to the continuing turmoil, famine and diseases. Some argued that while a great many died, Sichuan did not become virtually depopulated as recorded. Some modern Chinese historians considered him a proto-revolutionary, maintaining that accounts of the massacres were exaggerated, or were committed by others including the Qing armies, that his victims were Ming nobles, rich landlords, and other "counter-revolutionary" elements, and that his heinous reputation was the result of "Qing slanders" and "reactionary propaganda".

Aftermath

Before he had abandoned Sichuan, Zhang divided his forces into four divisions, each led by one of his four generals (Li Dingguo, Sun Kewang, Liu Wenxiu, Ai Nengqi). These remnants of his army, as well as Ming loyalists, held out in Sichuan, Yunnan, and Guizhou after Zhang's death, and most of Sichuan did not come under control of the Qing until a dozen years or so later, and fighting only finally ended in eastern Sichuan in 1664.

Resettlement of Sichuan

In order to fill up the depopulated regions of Sichuan, a massive resettlement program was initiated during the Qing Dynasty, starting around 1670 or 1671 and lasting more than two centuries. Millions of people from Hubei, Fujian, Jiangxi, Guangdong, Shaanxi and other provinces were resettled in Sichuan. Some of the early migrants were those who returned after fleeing Sichuan (including the ancestors of Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping), but some were also coerced. A large number of the migrants came from Huguang (now Hubei/Hunan), and the migration was therefore described by 19th century scholar Wei Yuan as "". By the 1720s, 70–80% of the population of Sichuan was reportedly non-native, and as much as 85% a century later.