định believed that tự đức would eventually realise his error and reward the insurgents. historians feel that it is likely that gian and tự đức saw định's continued resistance as a misguided attempt to help the monarchy. in their written confrontation after the signing of the treaty, gian did not accuse định of being a rebel, but of excessive devotion to the emperor, which while admirable in principle, was hindering their current strategy. "monarchical loyalty is a noble quality", gian had told the recalcitrant guerrilla leader, but "[i]t must have a limit. one cannot exceed this limit and still be faithful and pious. too much is just as bad as not enough; when a snake begins to have legs, it is no longer a snake..." tự đức also appeared to view định's continued resistance as a misguided manifestation of loyalty. although the southern insurgents' disobedience provided the french with a pretext for further aggression, thereby hindering tự đức's plans for regaining the lost territory, the emperor never accused them of rebelling against royal authority. instead, he continued to refer to them as "righteous recruits" motivated by "indignation" at the actions of the westerners.