Grand Scribe's Records, Volume IX : the Memoirs of Han China, Part II 9780253355904

Table of contents :
Cover
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction: Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien: A Preliminary Study of Styles and Sources in Their Early Chapters
On Using This Book
Weights and Measures (Lu Zongli)
List of Abbreviations
Memoir 45
Memoir 46
Memoir 47
Memoir 48
Memoir 49
Memoir 50
Memoir 51
Memoir 52
Frequently Mentioned Commentators
Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars 401(Ho Tz’u-chün and Sung Yün-pin)
Selected Recent Works on the Shih chi
Index

Citation preview

Ssu-ma Ch’ien

Ssu-ma Ch’ien (145–ca. 86 bc) served for several decades as an official at the court of the Han emperor Wu (r. 141–87 bc). From about 104 bc until his death, he was involved in the compilation of a mammoth historical project that resulted in this history, which came to be known as the Shih chi (The Grand Scribe’s Records).

Acknowledgments Introduction: Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien: A Preliminary Study of Styles and Sources in Their Early Chapters On Using This Book Weights and Measures List of Abbreviations

Memoir 45 Memoir 46 Memoir 47 Memoir 48 Memoir 49 Memoir 50 Memoir 51 Memoir 52 Frequently Mentioned Commentators Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars Selected Recent Works on the Shih chi Index

INDIANA

The Grand Scribe’s Records

C o n t e n ts

Volume IX: The memoirs of Han China, Part II

William H. Nienhauser, Jr., is the Halls-Bascom Professor of Classical Chinese Literature at the University of Wisconsin– Madison. He is author of The Indiana Companion to Traditional Chinese Literature (two volumes, IUP, 1985, 1998) and editor of the five previous volumes of The Grand Scribe’s Records.

University Press

Bloomington & Indianapolis iupress.indiana.edu 1-800-842-6796

Grand Scribe's Vol IX MECH.indd 1

INDIANA

Volume IX The Memoirs of Han China, Part II

Ssu-ma Ch’ien Edited by William H. Nienhauser, Jr. Translated by J. Michael Farmer, Enno Giele, Christiane Haupt, Li He, Elisabeth Hsu, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., Marc Nürnberger, and Ying Qin

Vo l u m e Ix The memoirs of Han China, Part II

Edited by William

H. Nienhauser, Jr.

Translated by J. Michael Farmer, Enno Giele, Christiane Haupt, Li He, Elisabeth Hsu, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., Marc Nürnberger, and Ying Qin

The eight chapters in this volume of The Grand Scribe’s Records comprise the second segment of Han-dynasty memoirs and deal primarily with men who lived and served under Emperor Wu (r. 141–87 bc). The lead chapter (105), however, presents a parallel biography of two great ancient physicians, Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung. Although Pien’s life is difficult to date, Ts’angkung provides a transition between the founding of the Han dynasty (depicted in chapters 89–104) and its heyday under Emperor Wu (chapters 106–112). The account of Liu P’i (chapter 106) is framed by the great rebellion he led in 154 bc. The remaining chapters trace the careers of court favorites (chapter 107), depict the tribulations of an ill-fated general (chapter 109), describe the Hans’ relations with their greatest enemy, the Hsiung-nu (chapter 110), and provide accounts of the two great generals who fought them (chapter 111). The final memoir (chapter 112) is framed around several memorials by the two strategists who attempted to lead Emperor Wu into negotiations with the Hsiung-nu, a policy that Ssu-ma Ch’ien himself supported.

9/17/10 11:39 AM

The Grand Scribe’s Records VOLUME IX The Memoirs of Han China, Part II

The Grand Scribe’s Records VOLUME IX The Memoirs of Han China, Part II by Ssu-ma Ch’ien William H. Nienhauser, Jr.

Editor J. Michael Farmer, Enno Giele, Christiane Haupt, Li He, Elisabeth Hsu, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., Marc Nürnberger, and Ying Qin Translators

INDIANA UNIVERSITY PRESS Bloomington & Indianapolis

Published under sponsorship with the Council for Cultural Affairs, R.O.C. This book is a publication of Indiana University Press 601 North Morton Street Bloomington, IN 47404-3797 USA www.iupress.indiana.edu Telephone orders Fax orders Orders by e-mail

800-842-6796 812-855-7931 [email protected]

© 2010 by William H. Nienhauser, Jr. All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. The Association of American University Presses’ Resolution on Permissions constitutes the only exception to this prohibition. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences―Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Manufactured in the United States of America Cataloging information is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN 978-0-253-35590-4 1 2 3 4 5 15 14 13 12 11 10

THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED TO

Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859)

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments Introduction: Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien: A Preliminary Study of Styles and Sources in Their Early Chapters On Using This Book Weights and Measures (Lu Zongli) List of Abbreviations

xi xlv xlix lv

Memoir 45 (Elisabeth Hsu and William H. Nienhauser, Jr., translators) Memoir 46 (Marc Nürnberger, translator) Memoir 47 (William H. Nienhauser, Jr., translator) Memoir 48 (Li He and Ying Qin, translators) Memoir 49 (Enno Giele, translator) Memoir 50 (Enno Giele, translator) Memoir 51 (J. Michael Farmer, translator) Memoir 52 (Christiane Haupt, translator)

1 89 135 173 201 237 311 363

Frequently Mentioned Commentators Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars (Ho Tz’u-chün and Sung Yün-pin) Selected Recent Works on the Shih chi Index

399 401

vii

ix

409 411

Acknowledgments Like most other volumes of this translation project, a substantial debt is owed to the Alexander-von-Humboldt Foundation for its continued support. Chapters 109, 110, and 112 were completed several years ago when our German Group was active in Munich supported in part by the Foundation. Chapter 106 and 107 were both partially completed with these funds. Moreover, the cooperation that the ‘German Shih chi Group’ fostered has continued in various other forms. This volume is therefore dedicated to the great explorer and scholar Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859). During the final several Humboldt sojourns our mentor in Germany was Hans van Ess. His role in helping to shape this volume and the preceding volume 8 has been vital. I should also like to thank the translators, who currently occupy posts from Arizona to Oxford and from Munich to Madison, for their skillful renditions and their practiced patience. Some of these manuscripts have waited nearly seven years to find their way into print. This volume is published under sponsorship with the Council for Cultural Affairs, R.O.C., which came to our aid at a crucial point in the translation and editing of these chapters. The Council’s funding also enabled us to employ the skills of an old friend and former key member of our Group, Scott W. Galer, who typeset everything between these covers and offered sagacious advice on preparing the final copy. The Fifth International Workshop on the Shih chi, in part funded by a generous gift from Lena Dunn-Lo (in memory of Irving Yu-cheng Lo), took place in Madison from 22 to 24 August 2008. The guest-scholars were J. Michael Farmer, Enno Giele, Bruce Knickerbocker, Zongli Lü, and Marc Nürnberger, who respectively took the lead in discussing the draft translations of chapters 106, 107, 108, and 111. As usual, the introductory pages were the last to be written. I am grateful to Barry Powell, who patiently lead me through Herodotus and offered numerous other sagacious suggestions on the comparison between the two great historians that opens the volume. Once again, Teresa Nealon kept our finances, travels, workshops and spirits on track. On the home front another room has been donated to the Shih chi efforts–thanks Judith! William H. Nienhauser, Jr. 24 October 2009 ix

Introduction Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien: A Preliminary Study of Styles and Sources in Their Early Chapters No picture, then, and no history, can present us with the whole truth: but those are the best picture and the best historians which exhibit parts of the truth as most nearly produce the effects of the whole. –Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859) It is funny, but it strikes me that a person without anecdotes that they nurse while they live, and that survive them, are more likely to be utterly lost not only to history but the family following them. Of course, this is the fate of most souls, reducing entire lives, no matter how vivid and wonderful, to those sad black names on withering family trees, with have a date dangling after and a question mark –Sebastian Barry, The Secret Scripture

I. Introduction The two great historians of East and West, Herodotus (Hēródotos, ca. 484-ca. 425 B.C.) and Ssu-ma Ch’ien (司馬遷, 145-ca. 86 B.C.), have been compared many times in the past. 1 There are of course obvious differences: Herodotus focuses his Histories to the conflicts between the Greeks and the Persians, whereas Ssu-ma’s Grand Scribe’s Records (Shih chi 史記) is an account of all known history up to his era. Moreover, their styles differ radically. Yet the similarities between them are striking. To begin with, their backgrounds are comparable. Herodotus hailed from Halicarnassus, on the coast of Asia Minor 1

See, for example, S. Y. Teng 鄧嗣禹, “Ssu-ma Ch’ien yü Hsi-lo-to-te chih pi-chiao 司馬遷 與西羅多德 (Herodotus) 之比較,” Chung-yang Yen-chiu-yüan, Li-shih Yü-yen-so chi-k’an 中央研 究院, 歷史語言所集刊, 28 (1956): 445-63, or Siep Stuurman, “Herodotus and Sima Qian: History and the Anthropological Turn in Ancient Greece and Han, China,” Journal of World History, 19.1 (2008): 1-40. My thanks to Ms. Xin Zou for help in assembling and in discussing texts cited herein and to Barry Powell for guiding me through Herodotus.

xi

xii

Introduction

near the frontier with the Persians; Ssu-ma Ch’ien was from Han-ch’eng 韓城, a provincial town near the border lands which the Hsiung-nu, the people just to the north of the Han-dynasty empire, often raided. Both men spent little time, however, in their hometowns, gathering much of their source material through conversations with people they met in their extensive travels. Each wrote only one major work and died shortly after completing it. Herodotus’ Historiē (Inquiries) and the Shih chi (Records of the [Grand] Scribe) were the first complete histories in their respective cultures. Moreover, unlike the local character of most early histories in Greece (cities) and China (states), Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien presented narrative accounts of their entire known world for the first time in their respective cultures. Herodotus wove disparate materials into a single focus—the causes and effects of the wars with the Persians. Ssu-ma Ch’ien took similarly diverse sources and shaped them into what some feel were reflections on the policies and politics of the single ruler under whom he spent most of his life, Han Wu-ti 漢武 帝 (r. 141-87 B.C.), focusing on those policies which dealt with the military methods the emperor employed against the Hsiung-nu. Each man had his work criticized by an important successor-historian shortly after death (Thucydides, ca. 460-ca. 395 B.C., and Pan Ku, 32-92). Both Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien were interested in the ethnography of neighboring peoples (especially Egypt and the Hsiung-nu). Both–from vastly different points of view–were interested in imperialism (as embodied in Darius and Xerxes of the Persians and Emperor Wu of the Han).2 Even the motivations for compiling their respective works have strong affinities. Herodotus tells in the first line of his text that he “presents his research so that human events do not fade with time. May the great and wonderful deeds—some brought forth by the Hellenes, others by the barbarians—not go unsung” (1.1). 3 Ssu-ma Ch’ien in his own postface admits that “if I should permit the labors of the meritorious ministers, the feudal families, and the worthy officials to fall into oblivion and not be transmitted . . . I could certainly be guilty of no greater sin” 滅功臣世家賢大夫之業不述，墮先人所言，罪莫大焉4 and 2

David Schaberg, “Travel, Geography, and the Imperial Imagination in Fifth-Century Athens and Han China, Comparative Literature 51.2 (Spring 1999), p. 154, notes that “Sima Qian’s Records of the Grand Scribe (Shiji 史記) [is] the imperial text par excellence.” 3 This and the following translations are based on Andrea L. Purvis (The Landmark Herodotus, The Histories, Robert B. Strassler, ed. [New York: Pantheon, 2007], pp. 8-9. 4 Burton Watson, Ssu-ma Ch’ien, Grand Historian of China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1958), p. 54, Shih chi 史記 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1959), 130.3299.

Introduction

xiii

in the first of his memoirs concludes that “when the gentlemen of the cliffs and caves choose and reject [official positions], it is with such careful timing; when their names are buried and unspoken, it is sorrowful, isn’t it? When men from village gates and lanes wish to polish their actions and establish their names, unless they attach themselves to a man of the highest rank, how can these [actions and names] reach later ages” 巖穴之士，趣舍有時若此，類名堙滅而 不稱，悲夫！閭巷之人，欲砥行立名者，非附青雲之士，惡能施于後世 哉？(GSR, 7:5-6; Shih chi, 61.2127). Finally, the historiographic talents of both of these writers have been questioned from earliest times. Indeed, having spent much of the last two decades in the company of Ssu-ma Ch’ien, the question remains whether Ch’ien can actually be considered historian in the modern sense of the word. A story-teller, a literary stylist, a courtier with strong allegiances to those imperials advisors who advocated restraint in fiscal and military matters, a man of great curiosity, a filial son, and a systematizer, but most of all a man with a sense of justice. And it is this sense which he applied to the traditions, many of them oral, of the Chinese past, seeking to preserve the “labors of the meritorious ministers, the feudal families, and the worthy officials.”5 Yet this discussion intends to focus not on similarities between these two men, but rather on the more practical matter of the construction of these two great histories, specifically on the use of anecdotes. My intent is to examine the rather considerable literature on Herodotus’ use of the oral-storytelling tradition and then to cast some comparative light on Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s employment of his often similar sources. Indeed, anecdotes play a major role in both texts.

II. Herodotus and the Gyges Tale The first character Herodotus moves onto his stage is Croesus, ruler of Lydia (r. 560-547/6 B.C.), noted only because he was “the first barbarian known to us who subjugated and demanded tribute from some Hellenes.” Subsequent to the few lines on Croesus, Herodotus takes us back to the Croesus’s ancestors, all descendants of Herakles, who ruled Lydia for 505 years. This he manages in a few sentences. Then he slows his narrative to entertain the reader with the strange story of succession in Sardis, the Lydian capital, during the last years of the eighth century B.C. 6 The king then was Kandaules who, as Herodotus tells us, 5

Shih chi (Peking: Chung-hua, 1959), 130.3299 (translation by Burton Watson, Ssu-ma Ch’ien, Grand Historian of China [New York: Columbia University Press, 1958], p. 54). 6 The Landmark Herodotus (Purvis’ translation): 1.8-12 (pp. 8-9).

xiv

Introduction

“fell in love with his own wife,” almost a joke in the context of ancient dynastic marriage. Herodotus continues the story: Kandaules, being in love, thought he had the most beautiful of all women. Therefore, he used to tell his favorite among his body guards, Gyges son of Daskylos, not only about serious matters, but [especially] about the beauty of his wife, and with extravagant praise. It was fated that things would turn out badly for Kandaules, and so this had not gone on long when he said to Gyges, When I tell you about my wife’s beauty (and it just happens that people believe their ears less than their eyes), I am asking you to do something to make sure you see her naked.” Gyges responded with a sharp cry and said, ‘My Lord, what are you saying? Insanity! You order me to see your wife naked? When a woman’s dress is removed, so is her dignity. People long ago recognized what principles are noble and good, and we should learn from them. Among them is this one: Look only at what belongs to you.’ I do believe that she is the most beautiful of all women, and I beg you not to ask for what is against all decency.” Gyges said such things to thwart the king’s desire, dreading the thought of how badly things could turn out for him because of this. Then Kandaules replied, “Don’t worry, Gyges, and don’t be afraid of me or my wife. I didn’t tell you this to test you, and no harm will come to you from her. I have a plan and will make sure she has no idea you’re watching her. I will position you in the bedroom behind the door.7 After I come in, my wife, too, will be there to go to bed. Next to the doorway is a chair. She will set each of her garments on it one by one as she takes them off, and you may watch unobserved. But when she walks from the chair to the bed and her back is turned, be careful she doesn’t see you and then you can go out through the door.” Since Gyges could not escape, he was won over. And when Kandaules thought it was bedtime, he led Gyges to the room, where before long the queen entered. While she came in and set down her garments, Gyges watched. And when she went toward the bed with her back turned, he slipped out from behind the door and went out. But the woman spied him as he left and, realizing that this was her husband’s doing, she neither cried out, even though she felt shamed, nor let on that she knew, since she intended to get even with Kandaules. For among the Lydians, as well as nearly all other barbarians, it is a great disgrace for even a male to be seen naked.

7

The door opened into the bedroom providing both fresh air and light and was left open all night (see Heinrich Stein’s (b. 1828) note, Herodotus Erklärt (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1901), v. 1, p. 14, n. 8.

Introduction

xv

Thus she revealed nothing and remained silent for the time being. But as soon as day dawned, she prepared her most faithful servants for what she intended and had Gyges summoned. He came at her request, assuming she knew nothing of what went on, just as he had always come to the queen whenever she had summoned him before. When he arrived, she said, ‘Now, Gyges, there are two roads before you, and I shall let you choose which you want to take. Either kill Kandaules and have me and the kingdom of the Lydians, or you yourself must die at once so that in the future you will never see things you should not see in your complete obedience to Kandaules. At any rate, either he should die, since he planned the deed, or you should, since you saw me naked, which violated all decency.” At first Gyges was dumbstruck by what he heard, Then he begged her not to force him to make such a choice. Nevertheless, he could not persuade her, and when he saw that he really was confronted with the necessity to kill his master or be killed by others, he decided that he would survive. He asked her, “Since you are compelling me to slay my master, please tell me how we’re going to assault him.” “The attack will be made from the very place he revealed me naked,” she replied, “and the assault will be made upon him in his sleep.” Together they worked out the plan, and when night fell–for Gyges was not getting out of this; there was no escape–either he or Kandaules had to die–Gyges followed the woman to the bedroom. She gave him a dagger and hid him behind the same door. Then, when Kandaules was sleeping, Gyges crept up, slew him, and obtained the woman and the kingdom. It is this Gyges (r. 716-678 B.C. [alternately ca. 680-ca. 650 B.C.]) that the poet Archilochus of Paros, who lived at the same time, mentioned in his verses [I.8-12].8

Two other sources provide information about this incident: Nicolaus of Damascus (ca. 64–after 4 B.C.) in his Historiai (based on the Lydiaca by Xanthus of Lydia, 9 apparently a contemporary of Herodotus)10 and Plato in his Republic. Nicolaus tells us that there was a conflict between three houses of 8

This anecdote, especially the method of killing Kandaules, is reminiscent of Feng Yan’s 馮 燕 murder of Zhang Ying 張嬰 in the Tang tale “Feng Yan zhuan” 馮燕傳 (cf. Wang Pijiang 汪辟 疆, Tang ren xiaoshuo 唐人小說 [Shanghai: Shanghai Guji, 1978], p. 165). 9 See the entry on Xanthus in Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth, eds., The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 1627. 10 The original text is collected in Felix Jacoby (1876-1959), Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1926), Part 2, Fragment 90, pp. 348 ff. and the second volume, Zeitgeschichte, Kommentar zu Nr. 64-105 (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1926), p. 246.

xvi

Introduction

Lydia: the Heraklides (to which Kandaules belonged), the Daskylians (Gyges’ line of descent), and the Tylonidans. The Daskylians and the Tylonidans were dire enemies. Daskylos (Gyges’ grandfather) was a figure at court, but was murdered by a son of the Lydian king (also a Heraklidian) without the king’s knowledge and his wife fled into the countryside. The king put a curse on the murderers, not knowing he was condemning his own son. Years later Gyges was recalled to court to serve a new king named Sadyattes. Gyges proved his loyalty to the king through a series of tests. However, when sent to fetch the king’s bride, he fell in love with her and tried to seduce her. When she revealed his behavior to the king on their wedding night, a female slave, who was in love with Gyges, informed him of the danger. After pondering whether to kill his master or to be killed himself (as in the Herodotus’ version) Gyges and his friends broke in and killed the king in his sleep. Traces of the factions that Xanthus depicted survive in Herodotus’ account (I.13): “For the Lydians thought what had happened to Kandaules was dreadful and were up in arms. However, the partisans of Gyges (Gygeō stasiōtai) and the rest of the Lydians came to an agreement . . . .” Other similarities between the Xanthian version and Herodotus’ account are the mention of Sadyattes and the indication that Kandaules was testing Gyges (Histories I.9.1: “Don’t worry, Gyges, and don’t be afraid of me or my wife; I didn’t tell you this to test you” [Purvis, p. 8]). However, in Herodotus (I.16) Sadyattes was Gyges’ grandson rather than his ancestor.11 In general, scholars have concluded that Xanthus’ version as reported four centuries later by Nicolaus of Damascus was unknown to Herodotus.12 Plato’s account of the Gyges (Republic, ii.359c ff.) is told to Sokrates by Glaucon in the course of an argument about the “just man.” Glaucon contends that even the just man would act in an unjust manner if he knew he could get away with it and uses Gyges as an example:

11 For a short discussion of the confusion of names in this passage in this passage and other parallels, see Stein, Herodotos Erklärt, v. 1, p. 10, n. 2, and the note by Daniela Fausti in Augusta di Filippo Càssola, transl., Erodot Storie, Volume Primo (Libri I-II) (Milan: BUR, 1997 [1984], p. 86, n. 21. Fausti notes that Kandaules may be a kingly epithet, similar to the Greek kunagches, “dog strangler.” Jacoby (Kommentar, p. 246) also comments on the strange way in which Sadyattes reappears in Herodotus as Gyges’ successor. 12 For example, Karl Reinhardt (1886-1958) in his “Herodots Persergeschichten,” in Vermächtnis der Antike, Gesammelte Essays zur Philosophie und Geschichtsschreibung, Carl Becker, ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1960), p. 139, rejects Xanthus as a source. Both he and Hans Peter Stahl (“Herodots Gyges-Tragödie,” pp. 386-7) provide summaries of the Xanthus version.

Introduction

xvii

If we grant to each, the just and the unjust, the license and power to do whatever he pleases, and then accompany them in imagination and see whither his desire will conduct each. We should then catch the just man in the very act of resorting to the same conduct as the unjust man because of the self-advantage which every creature by its nature pursues as a good, while by the convention of law it is forcibly diverted to paying honor to ‘equality.’ The license that I mean would be most nearly such as would result from supposing them [just men] to have the power which men say once came to the ancestor of Gyges the Lydian. 13 They relate that he was a shepherd in the service of the ruler at that time of Lydia, and that after a great deluge of rain and an earthquake the ground opened and a chasm appeared in the place where he was pasturing; and they say that he saw and wondered and went down into the chasm; and the story goes that he beheld other marvels there and a hollow bronze horse with little doors, and that he peeped in and saw a corpse within, as it seemed, of more than mortal stature, and that there was nothing else but a gold ring on its hand, which he took off and went forth. And when the shepherds held their customary assembly to make their monthly report to the king about the flocks, he also attended wearing the ring. So as he sat there it chanced that he turned the collet of the ring towards himself, towards the inner part of his hand, and when this took place they say that he became invisible to those who sat by him and they spoke of him as absent; and that he was amazed, and again fumbling with the ring turned the collet outwards and so became visible. On noting this he experimented with the ring to see if it possessed this virtue, and he found the result to be that when he turned the collet inwards he became invisible, and when outwards visible; and becoming aware of this, he immediatel y managed things so that he became one of the messengers who went up to the king, and on coming there he seduced the king’s wife and with her aid set upon the king and slew him and possessed his kingdom. 14

The differences between Herodotus’ account and this tale are striking. Gyges is no longer a courtier (as in Herodotus), but a mere shepherd. Perhaps this reflects the etymology of the name Gyges as “of the earth” or “earthling.”15 Moreover, he is equipped with a magic ring, acquired through mysterious means–a ring that he 13 There are two possible readings here: “the ancestor of Gyges” or “by Gyges the ancestor of Croesus the Lydian” (cf. Bernard Bosanquet, A Companion to Plato’s Republic for English Readers [London: Rivingtons, 1906], p. 74n.) 14 Paul Shorey, trans. Plato, in Twelve Volumes, V. The Republic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982 [Loeb Classical Library]), I:117-8. 15 Cf. Suzanne Bernard, “The Ring of Gyges,” Plato’s Dialogues, Republic (http://platodialogues.org/ tetra_4/republic/gyges.htm).

xviii

Introduction

quickly learns can make him invisible. Once he realizes this power, he immediately sets in motion a plan to seduce the king’s wife and slay the king, just as Gyges does in Herodotus’ account. For Herodotus the story is a folktale that we might call “the king who fell in love with his wife,” whereas for Plato the story is an opportunity to show how a just man will commit unjust deeds, if given the opportunity to go undetected. Hence he introduces the motif of the ring of invisibility. Herodotus’ version divides neatly into four scenes. Kandaules’ persuasion of Gyges is the first scene.16 In the second scene Gyges watches the queen disrobe from his hidden vantage.17 In the third scene, which takes place the following morning, the queen confronts Gyges offering him the choice between suicide and regicide. The actual murder occupies the fourth and final scene. Glaucon’s version in the Republic is merely a summarized account of Herodotus’ first scene, but as Glaucon tells the story it is Gyges himself who desires the queen. Once given the power to fulfill his immoral desires, Gyges acts. In the Republic Gyges is aggressive. In Herodotus, he is passive, manipulated by both Kandaules and his wife.18 Gyges of the Histories, although brought to life by Herodotus’ dramatic recreation, is no match for Kandaules’ queen, the dominant figure of the Herodotus’ story. Some scholars believe that Plato may have simply made up the account he has Glaucon relate. But more likely the two versions of the tale originated from oral traditions,19 possibly conflicting traditions passed on by those who originally opposed Gyges’ accession (descendants of Kandaules’ and his supporters) and by those who were attempting to mitigate Gyges’ usurpation while establishing a family genealogy of the Mermnadian kings (Gyges, who ruled from 716-678

16

Kandaules himself is a typical Herodotean tyrant, as John G. Gammie in his“Herodotus on Kings and Tyrants: Objective Historiography or Conventional Portraiture” (Journal of Near Eastern Studies 45 [1986]: 174) has pointed out, exhibiting (1) hybris (acting without accountability or outside customary restraints), (2) incongruous responses to servants, (3) a propensity to act contrary to traditional customs, and (4) violence [of a sort] toward women. 17 This is the scene which has attracted artists; see, for example, Jean-Léon Gérôme’s (18241904) King Candaules (1859). 18 The language used for Gyges’ submission to both his liege and the queen are similar: “since Gyges could not escape, he was won over [by Kandaules]”; “for Gyges was not getting out of this, there was no escape [from the queen].” 19 Rosalind Thomas has argued that “most knowledge about the family past was preserved orally in the classical period” (Oral Tradition and Written Record in Classical Athens [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989], p. 101)

Introduction

xix

B.C. and his successors down to Croesus [r. 561/560- 547/546 B.C.]). 20 In a family genealogy it would have been natural to subsume Gyges’ desire for power, to downplay his licentiousness, and to gloss over his usurpation of Lydia by attributing the outcome to Kandaules’ ill judgment and his queen’s temperament, as Herodotus has done. In later accounts the queen’s name was given as Nysia or Tudo (Nicolaus of Damascus, for example) and she had a “double-pupil” (dikoros) and also a “dragonstone” (drakontites, a counter-charm) that allowed her to see Gyges despite his magic ring.21 For Herodotus’ version the wife remains unnamed and unarmed with anything but her wit. Rather than her beauty, Herodotus emphasizes her resourcefulness and resolve when she discovers Gyges stealing away, but is able to subdue her emotions and carefully plan her revenge. He suggests as much by referring to her throughout the early part of the tale as “Kandaules’ wife” (I.8.2: “Since I don’t think you believe me, when I tell you about my wife’s beauty”) or simply as “the woman” (I.9.1: “Don’t be afraid of me or my wife”), using the Greek word gynê each time, but then referring to her as basileia or “queen” when Gyges first sees her (I.10.1: “He led Gyges to the room, where before long the queen entered”).22 As queen she is presented as a determined and effective ruler bent on revenge. Although the formal encounter between Gyges and the queen renews the dilemma that faced Gyges in his earlier conversation with Kandaules,23 the options the queen offers are more severe: kill or be killed. Herodotus even uses similar language to make clear the parallel between the two scenes. Kandaules tells Gyges that once in his bedroom he will be able to observe his wife “in silence” (hesuchiên . . . theasasthai, I.9.2), the same term used to depict the queen’s suppression of her emotions following her discovery that Gyges had spied on her (hesuchiên eiche “she remained silent” I.11.1). 20 Robert Fowler, “Herodotus and His Prose Predecessors,” Cambridge Companion, p. 33, argues that Plato’s paraphrase “seems to have been used to record oral traditions that existed prior to Herodotus.” 21 Kirby Flower Smith, “The Tale of Gyges and the King of Lydia,” American Journal of Philology 23.4 (1902): 367 and 370. 22 The whole idea of the king and queen sharing a room has disturbed some scholars, since in the Ionic world royal women would have had separate chambers. This arrangement would have been much more conducive to Plato’s version of the tale in which Gyges first seduces Kandaules’ wife, then later kills him. 23 On repetition in Herodotus’ version, see Timothy Long, “Towards a Method, Gyges and Candaules’ Wife,” in Repetition and Variation in the Short Stories of Herodotus (Frankfurt am Main: Anthenäum, 1987), pp. 9-38.

xx

Introduction

Although the reader is not told how the queen learned that her husband had betrayed her, a fragment of a “Gyges Tragedy,” of uncertain date,24 suggests one possibility.25 The queen speaks: I saw Gyges clearly, not by guess, I feared there was some plot for murder indoors— such as are the wages for tyrannies; but when I saw Candaules still awake, I knew what had been done and what man had done it.

Working with such fragments and accounts of Gyges, Kirby Flower Smith postulated that the original tale contained three basic sections: an account of Kandaules’ folly in persuading (or allowing) Gyges to view his wife, an erotic episode in which Gyges and the queen become lovers, and the depiction of the queen’s revenge.26 The erotic episode in this hypothetical back story may be discernible in Herodotus (I.11.1) description of Gyges’ reaction to the queen’s summons: “He came at her request, assuming she knew nothing of what went on, as he had always come to the queen whenever she had summoned him before.” Other evidence of the oral origins of the Gyges’ material Herodotus must have used include the parallel structure of Gyges’ two interviews and the frequent near repetition of phrases “now Kandaules fell in love with his wife and, being in love, thought he had the most beautiful of all women” (I.8.2) followed by Gyges’ assertion “I do believe that she is the most beautiful of all women” (I.9.3). 27 Yet the various literary motifs, figures of speech and especially the juxtaposition of synonyms reveal Herodotus’ hand in shaping the piece. The three major motifs in this tale exhibit methods of seeing (or looking), types of thinking, and trust. For example, the play on the opposition of forms of peithô, the belief that arises from within a person, versus nomos, the belief that is based 24 The dating and subsequent importance of the fragment, originally published by E. Lobel in 1950 (“A Greek Historical Drama,” Proceedings of the British Academy 35: 1-12), has been discussed by A. E. Raubitschek (1912-1999), “Gyges in Herodotus,” Classical Weekly 48.4 (Jan. 24, 1955): 48-50. See also Roger Travis, “The Spectation of Gyges in P. Oxy. 2382 and Herodotus Book, 1,” Classical Antiquity 19.2 (October 2000): 330-59. 25 A second possibility, although one rejected by Smith, is that the queen, with her double pupils, was able to see through the door behind which Gyges stood (Smith, “Tale,” p. 373). 26 Smith provides a lengthy reconstruction of the original tale which seems to include motifs from varied sources and dates (“Tale,” pp. 383-5). It seems more likely, however, that the original form of the tale is lost and that the variances in existing sources testify more to variation in locale and logopoioi. 27 See also Long, “Repetition.”

Introduction

xxi

on social codes or norms. 28 When Kandaules doubts that Gyges believes his claim about his wife’s beauty he uses a form of peithô (ou peithesthai, “do not believe,” I.8.2), Gyges contradicts his claim by citing an old saying (nomos), “look only at what belongs to you” (I.8.4). Similarly, Herodotus plays on the idea of subtle variations in verbs meaning “to see,” alternating oraô (“to see, perceive,” in I.9.1, 9.3, 10.3, 11.1, 11.2 and 11.4) with theaomai (“to inspect, review, contemplate,” in I.8.2, 9.2, 10.1, 11.3). In contrast to statements such as “it is a great disgrace for even a male to be seen naked” (oraô, I.9.3), the references to Gyges seeing Kandaules’ wife naked employ the stronger verb theaomai, causing one critic to suggest that the queen’s complaint “you saw me naked” has the connotation of “you peeped at me.”29 Gyges himself warns the king with the proverb “Look only at what belongs to you” (I.8.2). Moreover, although there is no magic ring in Herodotus’s story, Kandaules insists that Gyges do all in his power to remain invisible to the queen. Her instant perception of what has happened when she spies Gyges–visible to her–is in contrast to the lack of foresight Kandaules displays in assessing the overall situation and especially in the evaluation of his wife: “Don’t worry, Gyges, and don’t be afraid of my wife; I didn’t tell you this to test you and no harm will come to you from her” (emphasis mine, I.9.1.). Even the poem by Archilochus, referred to at the end of the story in Herodotus (I.12) returns to this “sight motif”: “I care not for the wealth of golden Gyges, nor ever have envied him; I am not jealous of the works of gods, and I have no desire for lofty tyranny; for such things are far beyond my sight.”30 All of this is in keeping with Herodotus own belief, put in the words of Kandaules, that “men’s ears are less trustworthy than their eyes” (I.8.2). 31 Trust, or perhaps faithfulness, can be viewed as the third motif. 28 On the role of nomos in this logos, and in Herodotus in general, see Michael Davis, “The Tragedy of Law: Gyges in Herodotus and Plato,” Review of Metaphysics 53.3 (March 2000): 63555, Rosalind Thomas, “The Intellectual Milieu of Herodotus,” Cambridge Companion, p. 69, respectively. Yet another similarity between Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien is their respective emphasis on social codes (li 禮) and one’s obligations to follow them (cf. Shih chi, 130.3298: ) 29 Long, “Repetition,” p. 31. 30 Cited from Marc Shell, “The Ring of Gyges,” Mississippi Review 17 (1989), p. 28. 31 Although examples abound, the following passage, in which Herodotus speculates that Egypt may originally have been a gulf that the Nile gradually filled with silt [Herodotus guesses it may have taken 10,000 years], illustrates his faith in “seeing is believing: “[And so I believe what I have been told about the land of Egypt, and I found myself convinced when I saw how the Delta of Egypt juts out from the adjacent lands, the seashells that appear on the mountains, and the salt coating its surfaces so that even the pyramids are damaged by its erosion” (emphasis mine, II.12, Purvis, p. 118).

xxii

Introduction

Kandaules trusts Gyges too much. He betrays his wife’s trust in him. In return she summons her faithful servants as she attempts persuade Gyges, to allow her to be unfaithful to her husband and he to his lord. Part of her persuasion is to claim that Gyges was “too obedient” to Kandaules. After he becomes king supporters faithful to Kandaules rose in arms, but they put their trust in the oracle at Delphi who declared that Gyges should be king (I.13). The idea of a revolt echoes a brief account in Plutarch’s (c. 46-120) Moralia of how Gyges’ attempt to overthrow Kandaules was supported militarily by Arselis of Caria.32 To sum up, in presenting this narrative Herodotus seems to have had four intentions. First, it is an analepsis designed to reveal how the line of Croesus, the Mermnadian dynasty, came to rule Lydia. Herodotus had begun his account (I.6) “Croesus was of Lydian ancestry, the son of Alyattes, and the ruler of the peoples this side of the River Halys.” In order to explain how “the rule passed from the Heraklids to the family of Croesus” (I.7), Herodotus inserts the Gyges’ account, very much as Homer provides background to his stories.33 Second, it concludes a series of narrative summaries that depict the abduction of wives and women, this by far the most detailed and absorbing account. Third it is a memorable story and must have engaged Herodotus’ readers,34 to propel them with some enthusiasm into the eight lengthy books of the Histories that follow. Whether Herodotus had heard or read other accounts of this tale, such as Plato’s, is unknown. 35 On occasion (for example, IV.81), Herodotus mentions hearing disparate accounts of events, but here he remains silent. Later in Book One, when Croesus captured by 32

Quaestiones Graecae, 301f-302a (cf. “The Greek Questions,” in Plutarch’s Moralia, Frank Cole Babbitt, trans. [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962 (1936)], p. 233: “Candaules deemed it [Heracles’ axe] of little worth and gave it to one of his Companions to carry. But when Gyges revolted and was at war with Candaules, Arselis came from Mylasa with an army as an ally for Gyges and slew both Candaules and his Companion and brought the axe to Caria together with the other spoils.” Gabriel Danzig (“Rhetoric and the Ring: Herodotus and Plato on the Story of Gyges as a Politically Expedient Tale,” Greece and Rome 55 [2008]: 182) feels that the “very fact that Gyges held a military position [spearman] itself looks like a telltale hint that the overthrow of Candaules was a military coup, as in Plutarch’s version.” 33 See the discussion in Irene J. F. de Jong, “Narrative Units and Units,” Brill’s Companion, pp. 253 and 254. 34 As Gabriel Danzig argues (“Rhetoric and the Ring,” p. 175) “Herodotus recognizes that describing a beautiful woman is an excellent way to begin a literary endeavor.” 35 The recent argument that Plato invented his version of the Gyges’ tale, put forth by Gabriel Danzig (op. cit.) and Andrew Laird (“Ringing the Changes on Gyges: Philosophy and the Formation of Fiction in Plato’s Republic,” Journal of Hellenic Studies 121 [2001]: 12-29), is unconvincing to the present author.

Introduction

xxiii

the Persians seeks to learn from the oracle at Delphi why he is so ill-fated, the Pythia recounts a similar if summarized version of that presented in Histories, I.8-12: “Fated destiny is impossible to avoid for even a god. Croesus had to atone for the wrong of his ancestor four generations ago. This ancestor was a bodyguard for his king, of the family line of the Heraklids. He was induced by a trick involving a woman to kill his master and usurp for himself a position that did not belong to him” (I.91, Purvis, p. 51). This version was probably that which the logioi loyal to the Mermnad line related, seating Gyges on the throne through Kandaules’ folly and the verdict of the oracle. Finally, on a larger scale, the Gyges story frames the entire Histories, with its tragic, parallel tale of Xerxes’ love for the wife of his brother, Masistes (Histories, IX.108-113), serving as a back frame. 36 Erwin Wolff has argued that Herodotus’ desire to parallel the opening of the Histories to the story of Masistes was the reason Herodotus selected this version of the Gyges tale.37

III. Ssu-ma Ch’ien and Shun From the ending of Herodotus’ Histories let us move to consider a series of passages near the beginning of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s Grand Scribe’s Records. Like Herodotus in the Histories, Ssu-ma Ch’ien opens with an account of the earliest rulers and their ancestors in his “Wu-ti pen-chi” 五帝本紀 (Annals of the Five Emperors). His rendition of the first three legendary emperors, Huang-ti 黃帝 36

One of the best presentations of these parallels is the chart by John G. Gammie (“Herodotus on Kings and Tyrants: Objective Historiography or Conventional Portraiture?” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 45 [1986], pp. 186-7) showing that while Kandaules is enamored (herasthê) of his wife (I.8.1), Xerxes is enamored (hera) of his sister-in-law (IX.108.1); that both women remain unnamed; that Kandaules voluntarily makes an offer to Gyges (I.8.2), and Xerxes voluntarily makes an offer to Artayntes whom he desires (IX.109); that events are bound to turn out as badly for Kandaules (chrên gar Kandaulêi genesthai kakôs, I.8.2) as they were for Artayntes and her household (tei de kakôs gar edee panoikiê genesthai, IX.109.2); that the offended wife of Kandaules gives choices that do not allow him to back down (I.11.2), and similarly the offended wife of Xerxes states a choice that because of the laws and customs of Persia leaves him little room to back down (IX.110.2-111); that the future monarch (Gyges) finds himself in the difficult position of being compelled to murder his master to whom he had heretofore been devoted (I.11-2-4), while the present monarch, Xerxes, is compelled under custom to surrender to his wife for death or mutilation the one to whom he had heretofore been devoted (IX.110-2-111); that the lineage of Gyges is decreed by an oracle to end in its fifth generation (I.13), and the lineage of Masistes, brother to the king, is terminated through the king’s orders (IX.113). 37 Wolff, “Das Weib des Masistes,” Hermes 92 (1964): 51-81. See also John Gould, Herodotus (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1989), p. 31.

xxiv

Introduction

(The Yellow Emperor), Chuan-hsü 顓 頊 , and Yao 堯 , is longer than that Herodotus provides for the Lydian kings, Kandaules’ ancestors.38 Moreover, Ssuma Ch’ien’s portrayals of these mythical rulers focuses on their public personas as the great civilizers, providing little detail about their own persons or personalities. The first departure from the mythical creativity of these early rulers can be found in a series of anecdotes concerning Shun 舜, the fourth of these emperors.39 These anecdotes are also preceded by a genealogical catalogue of Shun’s ancestors, just as Herodotus presented a list of the forefathers of Gyges. Shun is introduced under the reign of his predecessor, Emperor Yao, in a prolepses or ‘flash-forward’ of sorts. When Yao searched for good men, his Chiefs of the Four Sacred Mountains recommended Shun, because Shun, through filial devotion, had been able to keep harmony in his family, despite his, as the Chiefs mentioned, Shun’s “father’s obstinacy, his mother’s meanness, and his younger brother’s presumptuousness” 父頑，母嚚，弟傲 (Shih chi, 1.21). As a result, Yao decided to marry his two daughters to Shun. When Yao died, Shun tried to renounce the world by going into a self-imposed exile, but finally was pressured to take the throne. A biography of sorts, reiterating some of the above events in Shun’s life, follows (Shih chi, 1.31): As for Shun (literally “Mallow”) of [the state of] Yü, his given name was Ch’ung-hua (“Double Flowered,” i.e., “Double Pupils” or even “Double Acuity”). Ch’ung-hua’s father was called Ku-sou (“No-eyes, the Blind Man” or “Blind Musician”). Ku-sou’s father was called Ch’iao-niu (“Bridged Ox”). Ch’iao-niu’s father was called Kou-wang (“Bending to Gaze Afar”). Kouwang’s father was called Ching-k’ang (“Respecting Peace”). Ching-k’ang’s father was called Ch’iung-ch’an (“Exhausted Cicada”). Ch’iung-ch’an’s father was called the Chuan-hsü Emperor. The Chuan-hsü Emperor’s father was called Ch’ang-yi (“Glorious Ideas”). If one considers [the time] from him on down to Shun, there were seven generations. From Ch’iung-ch’an down to Shun they declined to become common people. 40 虞舜者，名曰重 38 Felix Jacoby’s discussion of the Lydian logos, Griechische Historiker (Stuttgart: Alfred Druckenmueller, 1956), pp. 419-23.\ 39 The best introduction to the Shun materials is that in Sarah Allan’s The Heir and the Sage (San Francisco: Chinese Materials Center, 1981), “Legend Set 1: Tang Yao to Yu Shun,” pp. 27-54. 40 This translation and those which follow are revised from those in Grand Scribe’s Records, Volume I: The Basic Annals of Pre-Han China, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., ed. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994). Other studies of the Shun include Eduard Erkes, “Zur Sage von Shun,” T’oung Pao 34 (1939): 295-333; Alfred Forke, “Yao, Shun and Yü,” Asia Major, 1 (1944): 9-55; Wolfgang Münke, “Shun,” Die klassische chinesische Mythologie (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett,

Introduction

xxv

華。重華父曰瞽叟，瞽叟父曰橋牛，橋牛父曰句望，句望父曰敬康， 敬康父曰窮蟬，窮蟬父曰帝顓頊，顓頊父曰昌意：以至舜七世矣。自 從窮蟬以至帝舜，皆微為庶人。

At this point Ssu-ma Ch’ien gives us a second, more detailed account of Shun’s relationships to his immediate family (Shih chi, 1.32): Shun’s father, Ku-sou, became blind 41 and Shun’s mother died. Ku-sou remarried and this wife gave birth to Hsiang (“Elephant”). Hsiang was presumptuous. Ku-sou loved the son of the latter wife and was often intent on killing Shun, [but] Shun was able to avoid him. When [Shun] made a small mistake, he would accept punishment. Shun obediently served his father, his step-mother, and his younger brother. Every day he was sincerel y attentive and never had a moment to relax. 舜父瞽叟盲，而舜母死，瞽叟 更娶妻而生象，象傲。瞽叟愛后妻子，常欲殺舜，舜避逃；及有小 過，則受罪。順事父及后母與弟，日以篤謹，匪有解。

Even though Ssu-ma Ch’ien is dealing with the obscure, earliest eras of Chinese history, his style itself adds to this obscurity. Here a series of characters are presented to the reader with no temporal context. Moreover, the text is filled with inconsistencies. If Shun “was able to avoid” his father, how is it that he “would accept punishment” when “he made a small mistake.” If Ku-sou was “always intent on killing Shun,” how was Shun able to be so attentive to his family members? 42 To add to the confusion, Ssu-ma Ch’ien next flashes back to 1976), pp. 288-301; Gerhard Schmitt, “Shun als Phönix–ein Schlüssel zu Chinas Vorgeschichte,” Altorientalische Forschungen, 1 (1974), p. 310; and Sarah Allan, Heir and the Sage (San Francisco: Chinese Materials Center, 1981). 41 According to the “Cheng-yi” (comment attributed to Kong An-kuo 孔安國) Ku-sou’s name can be analyzed as follows: ku 瞽 means “blind because of not having eyes,” Shun’s father had eyes but was metaphorically blind to the differences between good and evil and thus was called Ku 瞽叟; Sou 瞽叟, was his style name, meaning “no eyes.” Thus in this interpretation Gu Sou means “No-eyes, the Blind Man.” Therefore, it was possible for this metaphorically blind man to “go blind” in the passage just below (舜父瞽叟盲). See also the similar discussion of blindness in terms of understanding in “Hsiao-yao yu,” Chuang Tzu《莊子·逍遙遊》 Chuang Tzu chi-shih 莊子集釋, Kuo Ch’ing-fan 郭慶藩 (1844-1896), ed. (Peking: Chung-hua, 1989 [1961]), p. 30. Ku-sou’s name is, of course, a direct contrast to that of his son, Ch’ung-hua, Double Pupils. 42 For an interesting general discussion of evil fathers and good sons, see Mark Edward Lewis, “Flood Taming and Lineages,” The Flood Myths of Early China (Albany: SUNY Press, 2006), pp. 79-108. Lewis notes “the recurring pattern in early Chinese myths in which exemplary men have wicked fathers and themselves produce evil offspring. Throughout the tales of the sages preserved

xxvi

Introduction

introduce Shun, employing a formulaic depiction that he normally uses to begin the account of an individual: Shun was a native of Chi-chou (the Lands of Chi).43 Shun farmed at Mount Li, fished in the Lei Marsh, made pottery on the banks of the [Yellow] River, and created household wares at Shou-ch’iu (Longevity Hill). He pursued gain according to the season at Fu-hsia. 44 舜，冀州之人也。舜耕歷山，漁 雷澤，陶河濱，作什器於壽丘，就時於負夏。

These tasks are presented here as if they portray Shun’s livelihood, but in other accounts nearly contemporary to the Shih chi (that in the Hsin hsü 新序, for example 45), they record tasks that Emperor Yao set for Shun, after the Chiefs of the Sacred Mountains had recommended him. They were designed to test his capabilities. Here the accounts of these tasks appear with no chronological context. This passage is followed by an abrupt reiteration–the third such account– of Shun’s relationships to his father, mother and brother: Shun’s father, Ku-sou was obstinate, his mother mean, and his younger brother, Hsiang, presumptuous. They all had a desire to kill Shun. Shun was obedient and compliant and never strayed from the way of being a son, and he was fraternal to his younger brother and filial to his parents. When they wanted to kill him, they were not able to find him. But when they needed him, he was always around. 舜父瞽叟盲，而舜母死，瞽叟更娶妻而生 象，象傲。瞽叟愛后妻子，常欲殺舜，舜避逃；及有小過，則受罪。 順事父及后母與弟，日以篤謹，匪有解 . . . 舜父瞽叟頑，母嚚，弟象

from this period it is virtually a rule that wherever the transition between generations is noted in the text it is marked by an inversion of moral character or worth. A supremely worthy man or sage invariably has a bad father, if the father is mentioned, and the son of the sage is in turn a bad man” (p. 81). He also points out the several similarities between Ku-sou and Shun including their status as hereditary musicians (citing passages from the Kuo-yü 國語 and Lü-shih ch’un-ch’iu 呂氏春秋; p. 101). 43 Approximating the western and central part of modern Shansi (see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:11, n. 122). 44 Mount Li has been identified as modern Mount Lei-shou 雷首 near the confluence of the Fen 汾 and Yellow rivers in southwest Shansi (cf. Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:11, n. 123). Both Lei Marsh and Fu-hsia are located in the vicinity of Mount Li (ibid.). 45 Liu Hsiang 劉向 (57-6 B.C.), “Tsa-shih” 雜事, Hsin hsü 新序 (Hsin hsü chiao-shih 新序校 釋, Shih Kuang-ying 石光瑛 (1880-1943, chin-shih 1903), ed. [Peking: Chung-hua, 2001], 1.1-20). Shih Kuang-ying’s commentary includes many of the important early sources on Shun’s life.

Introduction

xxvii

傲，皆欲殺舜。舜順適不失子道，兄弟孝慈。欲殺，不可得；即求， 嘗在側。

Édouard Chavannes (1865-1918) at this point in his translation of the Shih chi notes that these word-for-word repetitions of the story about Shun’s family problems expose Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s compositional procedure, a procedure that involved stitching together diverse legends without establishing any chronological or narrative unity.46 Although Ssu-ma Ch’ien sometimes recorded various traditions of the same person in different chapters of the Shih chi (the accounts of Ch’ü Yüan 屈 原 in the “Chu shih-chia” 楚 世 家 Ch’ü’s own biography provide an obvious example), these two anecdotes are repeated precisely, so there seems to be no way to consider them “diverse legends” (légendes diverses).47 When the text continues, the situation is even more complex; the Shih chi repeats another motif from earlier in the “Wu-ti pen-chi” depicting how Shun was recommended to Emperor Yao (Shih chi, 1.33): Shun at the age of twenty was renowned for his filial devotion. When he was thirty the Emperor Yao asked “Who should be employed [in my government]? The [Chiefs] of the Four Sacred Mountains all recommended Shun of Yü: “He can be [employed].” At this point, Yao gave his two daughters 48 to Shun in marriage so as to observe his conduct within [his wives’ chambers] and send his nine sons to stay with Shun to thereby observe his conduct without. When Shun lived within the bend of the Kuei [River], his conduct within [his family] became even more careful. 舜年二 十以孝聞。三十而帝堯問可用者，四岳咸薦虞舜，曰可。於是堯乃以 二女妻舜以觀其內，使九男與處以觀其外。舜居媯汭，內行彌謹。

Earlier, Shun had been recommended to Yao as a “bachelor” (kuan 矜), here he is only noted to be twenty years old (the normal age of marriage in his era being

46

2.

47

Chavannes, Les mémoires historiques de Se-ma Ts’ien (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1895), 1:73, n.

The depiction of his father as obstinate, his step-mother as mean, and his half-brother as presumptuous is found in the “Yao tien” 堯 典 of the Shang shu 尚書 (Documents of High Antiquity; Shang shu chin-ku wen chu-shu 尚書今古文注疏, Sun Hsing-yen 孫星衍 [1753-1818], comm., 2v. (Peking: Chung-hua, 1986), 2:5581:30. 48 In later accounts known as O-huang 娥皇 and Nü-ying 女英.

xxviii

Introduction

thirty49). Here it is possible that Ssu-ma Ch’ien is stitching together similar texts without an attempt to provide chronological or narrative sequence. Yao’s two daughters, despite their noble status, dared not treat Shun’s parents and relatives too haughtily. And they both had the proper manner of a wife. Yao’s nine sons all became even more sincere. 堯二女不敢以貴驕事 舜親戚，甚有婦道。堯九男皆益篤。

In Nicolaus of Damascus’s version of the Gyges tale, Kandaules puts Gyges through a series of tests. The “Hsiao-hsü” 小序 (Small Preface) to the Shang shu 尚書 (Documents of High [Antiquity]) records that “When Shun of Yü was lowly and unknown, Yao heard of his comprehensive intelligence and, intending to make him succeed to the throne, successively tested him in various difficult situations” 虞舜側微，堯聞之聰明，將使嗣位，歷試諸難. 50 It seems likely, therefore, that Emperor Yao, in tendering his own children into Shun’s care, is testing to see if the positive influence Shun was able to work on farmers, fisherman and potters can be extended to his own children. The Shih chi narrative then meanders back to Shun’s ventures in farming and fishing (Shih chi, 1.33-34): When Shun was farming at Mount Li, the people of Mount Li all yielded in boundary disputes [to each other]. When he was fishing in Lei Marsh, the people on Lei Marsh all yielded [favorite fishing] locations [to each other]. When he was making pottery on the banks of the [Yellow] River, the vessels along the banks were all free of defects. After one year the place in which he stayed would become a hamlet. After two years it would become a town. After three years it would become a city. Yao then bestowed Shun with hempen clothes and a zither. And Yao built granaries for him and gave him cows and sheep. 舜耕歷山，歷山之人皆讓畔；漁雷澤，雷澤上人皆讓 居；陶河濱，河濱器皆不苦窳。一年而所居成聚，二年成邑，三年成 都。堯乃賜舜絺衣，與琴，為筑倉廩，予牛羊。

49

Cf. Ts’ui Shu’s 崔述 (740-816) comment cited in Takigawa Kametarô 瀧川龜太郎 (18651946), Shiki kaichû koshô fu kôhô 史記會注考證附校補 (Rpt. Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1986), 1:31 50 Shang shu chin-ku wen chu-shu 尚書今古文注疏, Sun Hsing-yen 孫星衍 (1753-1818), comm., 2v. (Peking: Chung-hua, 1986), 2:558.

Introduction

xxix

At this point it would seem Yao has tested Shun and should be ready to “employ” him in some position of importance. But not in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s account. Rather the reader is forced to read for a fourth time about Shun’s difficulties with his father and younger brother. But Ku-sou still harbored the desire to kill him. He caused Shun to climb up a granary to plaster it. Ku-sou then set its base on fire to burn down the granary. Shun then used two rain-hats to protect himself, jumped down, left the site, and was thus able to survive. Afterwards, Ku-sou also made Shun dig a well. While Shun was digging the well, he dug a passage for refuge which [led to] another exit. When Shun had gone down into the depths of the well, Ku-sou and Hsiang together threw down dirt to fill up the well. Shun got out through the passage [he had dug] and ran away. Ku-sou and Hsiang were happy, considering Shun to have already died. Hsiang said, “The one who made the original scheme was me, Hsiang!” Hsiang split the wealth with his parents. Thereupon he said, “Shun’s wives, Yao’s two daughters, and the zither, I’ll take. The cows, sheep and granaries, I shall give to my parents.” Hsiang then came to Shun’s residence to stay and to play on his zither. Shun came in to see him. Hsiang was astonished and displeased, [but] said: “I missed you and felt distressed!” Shun said, “Yes, it must be so that you are not a bad fellow!” Shun again served Ku-sou and loved his younger brother even more attentively. Thereupon Yao tested Shun’s ability in the Five Statutes and in all other offices, and things were all regulated. 51 瞽叟尚復欲殺之，使舜上涂廩，瞽叟從下縱火焚廩。舜乃以 兩笠自捍而下，去，得不死。後瞽叟又使舜穿井，舜穿井為匿空旁 出。舜既入深，瞽叟與象共下土實井，舜從匿空出，去。瞽叟、象 喜，以舜為已死。象曰：「本謀者象。」象與其父母分，於是曰： 「舜妻堯二女，與琴，象取之。牛羊倉廩予父母。」象乃止舜宮居， 鼓其琴。舜往見之。象鄂不 懌，曰：「我思舜 正郁陶！」舜曰： 「然，爾其庶矣！」舜復事瞽叟愛弟彌謹。於是堯乃試舜五典百官， 皆治。

This narrative brings to a close the background stories of how Shun impressed Yao and came to be selected to succeed him (what follows in the Shih chi are accounts of Shun’s official acts as a ruler). The primary emphases of the stories examined have been on Shun’s filial devotion to his father and younger brother, in addition to Shun’s role in reforming people, common and royal.

51

Shih chi, 1:32-33.

xxx

Introduction

Ssu-ma Ch’ien relates almost the entire series of tales in a summary fashion– in what Eric Auerbach might call the Biblical style: “the decisive points of the narrative alone are emphasized, what lies in between is nonexistent; time and place are undefined and call for interpretation; thoughts and feelings remain unexpressed, are only suggested by the silence and the fragmentary speeches, the whole . . . remains ‘fraught with background.’”52 The reader may have felt the need to skim through these repetitive narratives, at least until he suddenly comes upon this final scene in which we are allowed to listen in as the brothers, Shun and Hsiang, confront one another in Shun’s home, a scene that recalls the tension of Gyges stealing out of the royal bedroom. The reaction of the great Shih chi commentator Liang Yü-sheng 梁玉繩 (1745-1819) to this confrontation may be representative of many traditional readers: “When Hsiang was staying in [Shun’s] residence, playing the zither, how could the two wives have maintained their composure? Moreover, where was Shun returning from at this time when he met Hsiang?” (象居宮, 鼓琴, 二女何以自安? 且是時舜在何處而反往見象 耶?53). Liang was perhaps thinking of a variant version of this incident related by Wan Chang 萬章 (an adversarius not unlike Plato’s Glaucon) as recorded in the Meng Tzu (5a.1.2): Wan Chang said, “Shun’s parents sent him to repair the barn. Then they removed the ladder and the Blind Man set fire to the barn. Then they sent Shun to dredge the well, set out after him, and blocked up the well over him. Hsiang said, ‘The credit for plotting against the life of Shun goes to me. The cattle and sheep go to you, father and mother, and the granaries as well. But the spears go to me, and the lute and his ti bow as well. His two wives should also be made to look after me when I take to my bed.” Hsiang went into Shun’s house and there Shun was, seated on the bed playing the lute. 54 Hsiang ‘I was anxious and missing you.’ Shun said, ‘These subjects and people, you can help me in the task of ruling them.’ 55 I wonder if Shun was unaware of Hsiang’s intention to kill him.” 56 萬章曰：“父母使舜完廩，捐 階，瞽瞍焚廩﹔使浚井，出，從而掩之。象曰：『謨蓋都君，咸我 52

12.

53

Eric Auerbach (1892-1957), Mimesis (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003), pp. 11-

Shih chi zhi yi 史記志疑 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1982), 1:18. On Shun’s accomplishments in music, see Schmitt, “Shun als Phönix,” pp. 316ff. The blind, such as Shun’s father, were traditionally the best musicians in ancient China. 55 “So-yin” points out that this language was based on the Shang shu (cf. Yen Juo-ch’ü 閻若璩, Shang shu ku-wen shu-cheng 尚書古文疏證, 4.26b, SKCS, ed.). 56 Translation based on D. C. Lau, Mencius (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970), pp. 139-40. 54

Introduction

xxxi

續﹔牛羊父母，食廩父母，干戈朕，琴朕，弤朕﹔二嫂使治朕棲。』 象往入舜宮，舜在床琴，象曰：『郁陶，思君爾！』忸怩﹔舜曰： 『惟茲臣庶，汝其于予治。』不識舜不知象之將殺己與？”

Here we have details not found in any of the Shih chi accounts of Hsiang’s attempts to murder his brother. The dramatic effect of Hsiang declaring how he alone was responsible for the murder plot and how he would divide up Shun’s possessions, including his wives–only to find his elder brother still alive and waiting in his house–is not found in the Shih chi. Ssu-ma Ch’ien had certainly read the Meng Tzu. Why then did Ch’ien ignore this passage? It may be that he felt that Wan Chang, in doubting Shun’s perception, suggested an evaluation of Shun that did not fit Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s own assessment of Shun. In any case, Wan Chang’s objections to the accepted story suggest that there were other alternative traditions of the Shun story, traditions not recorded in the Shih chi. Wan Chang himself provides more evidence in his discussion with Mencius about Shun’s banishment of Hsiang (Meng Tzu, 5a.3.1-2): Wan Chang said, “Hsiang devoted himself every day to plotting against Shun’s life. Why did Shun only banish him when he became Emperor?” Mencius said, “He enfeoffed him. Some called this banishment.” Wan Chang said, “Shun banished Kung Kung to Yu-chou. He sent Huan-tou away to Mount Ch’ung. He killed [the ruler of] the San-miao at San-wei and put K’un to death on Mount Yü.57 When these four [i.e., the so-called “Four Evil Ones”] were punished, the whole world submitted [to Shun] . . . .”58 萬章問曰：“象日以殺舜為事，立為天子則放之，何也？”孟子曰： “封之也。或曰放焉。”萬章曰：“舜流共工于幽州，放驩兜于崇山，殺 三苗于三危，殛鯀于羽山：四罪而天下咸服，誅不仁也。

Two things are noteworthy here. First, Mencius acknowledges that there are traditions or interpretations that differ from his: “some called this banishment.” Second, Wan Chang points out the more violent means by which Shun secured peace in the world: banishments, punitive expeditions, and imprisonment. Shun by no means took the crown and then the world became ordered as some would claim the ideal ruler should.59 It is this more aggressive tradition–reminiscent of 57 Cf. the Shih chi (1:28). There “Four Evil Ones” were also the major candidates, other than Shun himself, to succeed to Yao’s throne (see the discussion in the text below). 58 Ibid., p. 140. 59 Cf. Confucius’ claim that Shun was one who “governed through inaction by doing nothing but reverently facing south” 無為而治 . . . 恭已正南面而已矣 (Lun yü, 15.4).

xxxii

Introduction

Plutarch’s claim that Gyges took power only through armed revolt–that is reflected in accounts of Shun in other early texts. One such account can be found in the Yüeh chüeh shu 越絕書 (History of Yüeh’s Destruction of [Wu], “Wu Neichuan” 吳內傳): Shun had a natural father and a stepmother. His mother repeatedly wanted to kill Shun. He departed to till Mount Li. Within three years he had a bumper crop. Away from home he nurtured himself, but his parents went hungry.” 舜有不孝之行。舜親父假母，母常殺舜。舜去，耕歷山。三年大熟， 身自外養，父母皆饑。60

This is a reinterpretation of Shun’s efforts at Mount Li. Although his achievements in the countryside impressed Yao, they left his parents without the support of their eldest son. The implied chronological sequence of family strife leading to Shun’s move to Mount Li, missing in the Shih chi narratives, is the standard in other Han dynasty and later texts. Moreover, the Yüeh chüeh shu version incriminates Shun’s step-mother, rather than the male members of his family (as in most other accounts). References to this tradition of Shun as a negative figure can also be found in Chuang Tzu: “Yao was a merciless father, Shun was an unfilial son.” 堯不慈，舜不孝 and “Yao killed his eldest son; Shun exiled his mother’s younger brother” 堯殺長子，舜流 母弟. 61 Chuang Tzu contains other critical interpretations of Shun’s achievements, such as the following passage from the “T’ien-yün” 天運 (The Turning of Heaven) chapter: Shun ruled the world by making the hearts of the people rivalrous. Therefore the wives of the people became pregnant and gave birth in the tenth month as in the past, but their children were not five months old before they were able to talk, and their baby laughter had hardly rung out before they had begun to distinguish one person from another. It was then that premature death first

60 Yüeh chüeh shu (3.34b, SKCS ed.; cf. also Keith Nathaniel Knapp, Selfless Offspring, Filial Children and Social Order in Medieval China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2005), p. 51. 61 Both passages in “Tao Chih” 盜 跖 (Robber Chih), Chuang Tzu chi-shih 莊 子 集 釋 , 4:9B.997 and 1005; the translation is that of Burton Watson, The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968), pp. 328 and 333.

Introduction

xxxiii

appeared. 舜之治天下， 使民心競， 民孕婦十月生子，子生五月而能 言，不至乎孩而始誰，則人始有夭矣.62

Although the general tone of this passage may represent merely a Taoist perspective on a Confucian paragon, the unique details of this depiction suggest they belong to a separate story-cycle. Liu Hsiang 劉向 (57-6 B.C.) in his Shuo yüan 說苑 also cites a different interpretation of Shun’s sojourn at Mount Li: Formerly, when Shun went to till the fields at Mount Li, he fled to the banks of the River; the way he was established as the Son of Heaven was by encountering Yao [there?]. 故舜耕歷山而逃於河畔，立為天子則其遇堯 也.63

This passage suggests Shun’s efforts at Mount Li, which in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s account lack any context, were part of a conscious effort on his part to attract Yao’s notice, rather than purely altruistic assistance for his fellow farmers as chronicled in the Shih chi account. This theme is also echoed in the “Jang wang” 讓王 (Giving Away a Throne) chapter of Chuang Tzu: Shun wanted to cede the empire to his friend, a man from the north named Wu-tse. Wu-tse said, “What a peculiar man this ruler of ours is! First he lived among the field and ditches, then he went wandering about the gate of Yao. Not content to let it rest at that, he now wants to take his disgraceful doings and dump them all over me. I would be ashamed even to see him!” Thereupon he threw himself into the deeps at Ch’ing-ling. 舜以天下讓其友 北人無擇，北人無擇曰：「異哉后之為人也，居於畎畝之中而遊堯之 門！不若是而已，又欲以其辱行漫我。吾羞見之。」因自投清泠之 淵.64

62 Chuang Tzu chi-shih, 2:5B.527-8; Kuo Ch’ing-fan 郭慶藩 (1844-1896) comments that in ancient times women gave birth after fourteen months and the children they bore did not speak until their second year (p. 528, n. 4). 63 “Tsa yen” 雜言, Shuo yüan chiao-cheng, 17.423. 64 Chuang Tzu chi-shih, 4:9B.984-5; translation Watson, Chuang Tzu, p. 320

xxxiv

Introduction

These alternative traditions65 were part of what Tung-fang Shuo 東方朔 (fl. 125 B.C.) referred to in his “Yüan shih” 怨世 (Vexation with the World): “Yao and Shun had their reputations besmirched by gossip”唐虞點灼而毀議.66 They must have been transmitted orally, as can be seen in the following exchange between Wan Chang and Mencius: 5a.1.2: Wan Chang said, “’When one is loved by one’s parents, though pleased, one must not forget oneself; when one is disliked by them, though distressed, one must not bear them any grudge.’ 67 Are you saying that Shun bore a grudge against his parents?” Mencius answered, “Ch’ang Hsi said to Kung-ming Kao, ‘That Shun toiled in the fields I now understand, but that he should have wept and wailed, calling upon merciful Heaven and calling upon father and mother, I have not understood.’ Kung-ming Kao said, ‘That is something beyond your comprehension.’ Now Kung-ming Kao did not think that a son could be so complacent as to say, all that is required of me is that I should do my best in tilling the fields and discharge the duties of a son, and if my parents do not love me, what is that to me?”68 萬章曰：“父母愛之， 喜而不忘﹔父母惡之，勞而不怨。然則舜怨乎？”曰：“長息問于公 明高曰：『舜往于田，則吾既得聞命矣。號泣于天于父母，則吾不知 也。』公明高曰：『是非爾所之也。』夫公明高以孝子之心為不若是 恝﹔我竭力耕田，共為子職而已矣﹔父母之不我愛，于我何哉！

This discussion has made evident the puzzlement that even early readers felt towards the Shun story-complex. The various stories were handed down, as most early literary works, orally, replete with the kind of explications that Kung-ming Kao and Mencius offer. Shun’s detractors, as seen above, were not convinced by the ju 儒 arguments. Even authors later associated with Confucians such as Han Fei 韓非 (ca. 280-233 B.C.) found fault with considering Shun a sage: “Shun coerced Yao [to yield the throne], Yü coerced Shun, T’ang exiled Chieh, and King Wu attached Chou; these four kings were subjects who killed their lords and yet the world praises 65 As D. C. Lau notes in his discussion of materials on Shun: “It is, perhaps not out of place to emphasize that the Confucianist version was only one version of ancient history and that there were other traditions. For instance, according to the Confucianist version, Yao abdicated in favour of Shun . . . but according to the Bamboo Annals, Shun imprisoned Yao” (Mencius, p. 224). 66 In David Hawkes’ rendition in Songs of the South (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1959), p. 126; original text in Ch’u-tz’u pu-chu 楚辭補注 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1983), p. 245. 67 Citing Lun yü, 4.18. 68 Translation by D. C. Lau, Mencius, p. 138.

Introduction

xxxv

them” 舜偪堯，禹偪舜，湯放桀，武王伐紂，此四王者，人臣弒其君者也， 而天下譽之. 69 These counter-traditions may have originally arisen from the political strife over a successor to Yao. As seen in a passage cited from Meng Tzu (5a.3.1-2), Shun banished or killed his competitors for the throne, Huan-tou, Kung Kung, and K’un, all of whom had been recommended to Yao as possible successors (Shih chi, 1:20), much as Gyges overcame the Heraklids and Tynoidans. Shun, like Gyges in the renditions of the tale recounted by Plato and Nicholaus of Damascus, was a commoner.70 The evolution of Shun’s saga in texts that were written during the several centuries following the composition of the Shih chi, however, follows closely those accounts given in the Shih chi, just as Herodotus’ Gyges’ tale dominates later retellings of his story. The best known narrative remains that Shun’s father and half-brother attempting to kill Shun.71 Liang Yü-sheng argues that these sort of tales must have been made up by persuaders during the Warring States era: “Whether the stories of burning the granary and covering up the well actually happened cannot be known. I suggest they are the fantastic creations of men of the Warring States” 焚廩, 揜井之事, 有無未可知, 疑戰國人妄造也.72 In the Sung dynasty and thereafter many books providing “selections” of the Shih chi, such as Lü Tsu-ch’ien’s 呂祖謙 (1137-1181) Shih chi hsiang-chieh 史記詳節 were published. In these texts the depiction of Shun’s escapes from the granary and the well are omitted.73 These chastened versions of Shun as sage emperor admitted no room for apostate accounts such as the Chuang Tzu, the Han Fei Tzu, and Wan Chang in the Meng Tzu offered. Thus we have no painting of Shun facing down his brother (with his wives in the background), unlike the popular motif of Gyges spying on Kandaules’ queen.74 69

Cf. the “Shuo yi” 說疑 section of Han Fei Tzu 韓非子 (17.15b, SKCS ed.). This tradition is also addressed in the “Nan-yi” 難一 section. 70 See also Meng Tzu, 7a.16: “When Shun lived in the depth of the mountains, he lived amongst trees and stones, and had as friends deer and pigs. The difference between him and the uncultivated man of the mountains was slight” (Lau, Mencius, p. 227). Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s claim that Shun was descended from Emperor Chuan-hsü (Shih chi, 1:31) but in the generations that followed the imperial ancestor became commoners seems improbable. 71 See the excellent discussion of the later versions of the Shun stories in Knapp, Selfless Offspring, pp. 49-53. 72 Shih chi chih yi, 1:18. 73 See Lü Tsu-ch’ien, “Yü Shun” 虞舜, in Shih chi hsiang-chieh 史記詳節 (Shanghai: Shanghai Ku-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 2007), pp. 10-13. 74 Cf., for example, William Etty’s (1787-1849) Candaules King of Lydia Shews His Wife to Gyges.

xxxvi

Introduction

IV. Towards a Conclusion Liang Yü-sheng’s argument that some of the Shih chi accounts were based on oral tales brings us back to the question of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s sources. As mentioned above, both Herodotus and Ssu-ma relied on what they heard during their extensive travels. 75 Herodotus’ model for the overall structure of his work is often said to have been Homer—i.e., oral verse. Herodotus has been criticized for loosely giving a version of events or motives as “what is said” by the Athenians, or the Corinthians, or the Egyptian priests, but this criticism implies that he is signaling the collective, social memory of the oral tradition he assumed his audience knew well. Similarly, Herodotus’ story of Gyges is no doubt close to the version told by the Mermandian line of logioi. Ssu-ma Ch’ien, however, relies on more disparate sources, piecing together varied strands of tradition, written (sometimes in texts, sometimes in documents) and oral (some local discovered through travels, some with a broader base). As in every chapter, Ssuma Ch’ien explains his motivations and sources for compiling the “Wudi benji” 五帝本紀 (The Basic Annals of the Five Emperors) in the appended compiler’s comment: I once traveled west to Mount K’ung-t’ung and passed the Chuo-lu [Mountains] in the north; to the east I drifted along the coast, and to the south I floated over the Huai River and the Chiang. Wherever I went, all of the village elders would point out to me sites of Huang-ti, Yao and Shun. The customary teachings [on Huang-ti, Yao, and Shun] were certainly very different from each other. In general, [those accounts of the elders] which were not far from the ancient-text versions [of the classics], seem to be closest [to the truth]. What I have read in the Ch’un ch’iu 春秋 (Spring and Autumn Annals) and the Kuo yü 國語 (Conversations from the States) sheds light on the ‘Virtues of the Five Emperors’ and the ‘Cognomens of the Successive Emperors’ and makes [their meaning] apparent. Though they did not investigate the problem deeply [enough], what they tried to show is not all without basis. The Book of Documents missed some things and has certain deficiencies. What is missing there, then, from time to time, can be seen in other stories. If one were not a person who is fond of pursuing and pondering deeply so as to conceive the ideas in his mind, one certainl y would have a hard time to tell it [i.e., this history] to those who only have a 75

Rosalind Thomas, “Introduction,” in The Histories, p. xxii).

Introduction

xxxvii

superficial view and are ill-informed. I edited and selected those accounts which were the most appropriate. For these reasons I composed this as the first chapter of the ‘basic annals.’” 余嘗西至空桐，北過涿鹿，東漸於 海，南浮江淮矣，至長老皆各往往稱黃帝、堯、舜之處，風教固殊 焉，總之不離古文者近是。予觀春秋、國語，其發明五帝德、帝系姓 章矣，顧弟弗深考，其所表見皆不虛. 書缺有閒矣，其軼乃時時見於他 說。非好學深思，心知其意，固難為淺見寡聞道也。余并論次，擇其 言尤雅者，故著為本紀書首.76

Ssu-ma Ch’ien points the reader to his sources, emphasizing the local differences in the “customary teachings” (or “teachings designed to transmit customs,” feng jiao 風教). Most of these teachings approximated what Ssu-ma Ch’ien found in the classics of his day, presumably in this case the Shang shu 尚書 (Book of Documents), from which some of the accounts of Shun’s public activities were taken. But Ssu-ma Ch’ien also notes that the Book of Documents “missed some things and has certain deficiencies. What is missing there, then, from time to time, can be seen in other stories.” What “stories” (shuo 說) is he referring to? Are these the tales that Liang Yü-sheng suspected were “fantastically created” (wang zao 妄造) by the persuaders of the Warring States era? The term shuo 說 (“stories” or possibly “explanations”) strongly suggests that they were oral renditions of the same nature as Mencius’ comments offered to Wan Chang. The most puzzling line in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s comments comes near the end: “I edited and selected those accounts which were the most appropriate.” The process of editing and selecting sources was one of the foundations upon which Ssu-ma Ch’ien built his style. Yet Ch’ien, in contrast to the dramatic reenactment of a single version of the Gyges’ story provided by Herodotus, offers a hodgepodge of tales about Shun with no apparent structure. Versions of Shun’s father trying to kill him occur three times in the texts (in the four accounts of Shun’s relationships to his family). Other events are also noted more than once. Thus it is difficult to find evidence of the careful editing Ssu-ma Ch’ien claims in his coda. This has led scholars, including Liang Yü-sheng, to assume that these annals are pitted with interpolations.77 Yet since the “Wu-ti pen-chi” is the first chapter of the Shih chi, it should have been one of the sections that was transmitted (orally and through manuscript copies) with the greatest accuracy. 76

Shih chi, 1.46 (translation revised slightly from Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:17). Shih chi chih yi 史記志疑 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1981), 1:17-18; see also Li Jen-chien 李人 鑑, T’ai-shih kung shu chiao tu chi 太史公書校讀記 (Lanchow: Kan-su Jen-min, 1998), 1:6. 77

xxxviii

Introduction

Perhaps the counter-tradition of Shun usurping the throne had a much wider reception in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s time than the versions of Gyges and the magic ring had in Herodotus’ age. The suspicions about Shun that led Han Fei Tzu to claim that “As soon as Shun became [Yao’s] follower, he gathered people about him and Yao no longer possessed the empire” 舜一從而咸包而堯無天下矣. 78 But while this hypothesis might explain a single reiteration of Shun’s relationship to his father, for example, it cannot account for the disturbing pair of identical repetitions of Shun’s filial behavior. One traditional scholar, Niu Yün-chen 牛運 震 (1706-1758) 79 has attempted to explain these passages. In his Shiji pingzhu 史 記平注 (cited in Yang, Li-tai, p. 323) Niu first notes that there is a duplication in the accounts of Shun’s problems with his parents and in the story of his farming at Mount Li. He then argues: “These [repeated references to Shun and Ku-sou as well as Mount Li] are all cases of the method of first being empty and later full, first giving an outline and later providing details. What’s excellent about other histories, lies in their excellence to be able to attain brevity. What’s excellent in the Grand Scribe’s Records, lies in its excellence to be able to use repetition. Other histories merely record events, but the Grand Scribe’s Records is able simultaneously to write of emotions. To combine emotion with events, [the Grand Scribe’s Record] therefore insatiably uses repetitive, interwoven, long narrations to their fullest; those who don’t understand, consider this redundancy, but it is not at all. The excellence of the whole Grand Scribe’s Records lies just in these [passages].” 此皆先虛後實, 先略後詳之法. 他史之妙, 妙在能簡. 史記 之妙, 妙在能復. 蓋他史只是書事, 而史記兼能寫情. 情與事並, 故極往復纏綿 長 言 不壓 之致 , 不知 者以 為冗 繁 , 則 非也 . 一 部 史記 佳處 正在 此 . This argument recalls Chavannes claim that in the Grand Scribe’s Records “diverse legends” are stitched together with no chronological or narrative unity (see text above). This phenomenon is one found in Biblical texts and criticism. The Flood narrative (“Genesis,” 6.5-8.6), for example, offers some interesting parallels80:

78

Cf. “Nan san” 難三, Han Fei Tzu, 16.5a (SKCS ed.) Niu was from Tzu-yang 滋陽 in Shantung. His agnomen was Chieh-p’ing 階平, but he was known as K’ung-shan Hsien-sheng 空山先生. He passed the chin-shih in 1733, published studies on the classics, history and literature (including studies of the Ch’un ch’iu, the K’ung-shan T’ang wen-chi 空山堂文集 , and the Shih lun 史論), and was noted for his upright behavior in governing (Ch’ing shih kao 清史列傳 [20v.; Peking: Chung-hua, 1987], 19:75.6196-7). 80 Coincidently, Mark Edward Lewis (Flood Myths, p. 181, n. 1) has shown that Shun is part of the ancient Chinese flood myth. 79

Introduction 5

xxxix

When Yahweh saw how great was man’s wickedness on the earth, and how every scheme that his mind devised was nothing but evil all the time, 6 Yahweh regretted that he had made man on earth, and there was sorrow in his heart. 7And Yahweh said, “I will blot out from the earth the men that I created, man and beast, the creeping things, and the birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I made them.”8 But Noah found favor with Yahweh. 9 This is the line of Noah.–Noah was a righteous man; he was without blame in that age; Noah walked with God.– 10Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japeth. 11 The earth was corrupt in the view of God, and it was full of lawlessness. 12 And God saw how corrupt the earth was, for all flesh had corrupted their ways on earth. 13 Then God said to Noah, “I have decided to put an end to all flesh, for the earth is filled with lawlessness because of them. So I am about to destroy both them and the earth. 14Make yourself an ark of gopher wood; make it an ark with compartments, and cover it inside and out with pitch. 15This is how you shall build it: the length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16Make a sky light for the ark, terminating it without a cubit of the top. Put the entrance in the side of the ark, which is to be made with lower, second, and third decks.” 17 “For my part, I am about to bring on the Flood–waters upon the earth– to eliminate everywhere all flesh in which there is the breadth of life: everything on earth shall perish. 18But with you I will establish my covenant, and you shall enter the ark–you, yours sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives. 19 And of all else that is alive, of all flesh, you shall take two of each into the ark to stay alive with you; they must be male and female. 20Of the birds of every kind, cattle of every kind, every kind of creeping thing–two of each shall come inside to you to stay alive. 21For your part, provide yourself with all the food that is to be eaten, and store it away to serve as provisions for you and for them.” 22 This Noah did. Just as God commanded him, so he did. [Chapter VII] 1 Then Yahweh said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and all your household, for you alone have I found to be truly righteous in this age. 2 Of every clean animal take seven pairs, a male and its mate; and of the animals that are unclean, one pair, a male and its mate; 3but seven pairs again of the birds of the sky, male and female, to preserve issue throughout the earth. 4For in seven day’s time I will cause it to rain upon the earth for forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the surface of the earth all existence that I created.” 5 Noah did just as Yahweh commanded him. 6Noah was in his six hundredth year when the Flood came–waters upon the earth. 7 Then Noah, together with his sons, his wife, and his son’s wives, went inside the ark because of the waters of the Flood. 8Of all the clean animals

xl

Introduction and the animals that are unclean, the birds of the sky and everything that creeps on earth, 9[two of each], 81 male and female, came inside the ark to Noah, as God had commanded Noah. 10 As soon as the seven days were over, the waters of the Flood were upon the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month–on that day– All the fountains of the great deep burst forth And the sluices in the sky broken open. 12 Heavy rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights. 13 On the aforesaid day, Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons has entered the ark–14they as well as every kind of beast, every kind of creature that creeps on earth, and every kind of bird, every winged thing. 15They came inside the ark to Noah, two each of all flesh in which there was the breath of life. 16Those that entered comprised male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded Noah. Then Yahweh shut him in. 17 The Flood came down upon the earth forty days. As the waters increased, they bore the ark aloft, so that it rose above the earth. 18The waters swelled and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark drifted on the surface of the water. 19 The waters continued to swell more and more, until all the highest mountains everywhere were submerged, 20the crest reaching fifteen cubits above the submerged mountains. 21 And all flesh that had stirred on earth perished–birds, cattle, beasts, and all the creatures that swarmed on earth–and all mankind. 21All in whose nostrils was the faintest breath of life, everything that had been on dry land, died out. 23All existence on early was blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark. 24 When the waters over the earth had maintained their crest one hundred and fifty days, [Chapter VIII] 1God remembered Noah and all the beasts and cattle that were with him in the ark, and God caused a wind to sweep across the earth. The waters began to subside. 2The fountains of the deep and the sluices in the sky were stopped up, and the heavy rain from the sky was held back. 3 Little by little the waters receded from the earth. By the end of one hundred and fifty days the waters had diminished so that 4in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the Ararat range. 5The waters went on diminishing until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the peaks of the mountains became visible. 81

E. A. Speiser notes that “two of each” seems to be a statement from the J text but varies from J’s figures elsewhere in the text. For that reason he believes that this is an interpolation by a later redactor who sought to bring the passage in line with the P tradition.

Introduction

xli

6

At the end of forty days Noah opened the hatch of the ark that he had made, 7and released a raven.–82

E. A. Speiser summarizes the conclusions of many scholars from various religious traditions on the problems of the above-cited passages: The received biblical account of the Flood is beyond reasonable doubt a composite narrative, reflecting more than one separate source. One of the sources goes back to P [the Priestly tradition], and it is easy enough to identify except for a clause or two. But the identity of the narrator or narrators other than P has caused considerable trouble and debate. Nevertheless, if one is prepared to overlook a few highly technical details . . . it should not be too hazardous to accept J [the Yahweh tradition] as the onl y other author involved. More serious for our immediate purposes is the fact that the respective versions of P and J have not been handed down in connected form . . . here the two strands have become intertwined, the end result being a skillful and intricate patchwork. Nevertheless . . . the underlying versions, though cut up and rearranged, were not altered in themselves. The upshot is that we are now faced not only with certain duplications (e.g., vi 13-22: vii 1-5), but also with obvious internal contradictions, particularly in regard to the numbers of the various animals taken into the ark (vi 19-20, vii 14-15: vii 2-3), and the timetable of the Flood (viii 3-5, 13-14 : vii 4, 10, 12, 17, viii 6, 10, 12).83

82 Translation is that of E. A. Speiser, The Anchor Bible, Genesis (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 47-49. 83 E. A. Speiser, ed., The Anchor Bible, Genesis (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1964), p. 54. It is of interest that Martin Luther (1483-1546, Lectures on Genesis, George V. Schick, translator, in Luther’s Works, volume 2 [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1960], p. 91) explains the repeated passages in the Flood narrative in a fashion similar to Niu Yün-chen’s exegesis of the Shun repetitions: “But it seems that by this constant repetition Moses wanted to give us some idea not only of his own exceedingly perplexed heart but also of the heart of Noah himself, who was filled with the Holy Spirit, war burning with love, and was almost overcome by his emotion over the coming disaster . . . . Therefore this is not a purposeless tautology or repetition. The Holy Spirit is not wordy without purpose, as the ignorant and sated spirits think who read the Bible through once or twice and quickly toss it aside as though they knew it well and there were nothing more in it for them to learn. By this procedure Moses wanted to thrust a goad, as it were, into the minds of his readers, to keep them from thinking that his message dealt with some unimportant matter.”

xlii

Introduction

W. Gunther Plaut’s reaction to this narrative is similar (The Torah, A Modern Commentary [New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1981], p. 62): The Flood story presents a particularly striking example of the confluence of two traditions in the Torah. Occasionally–as in the first two chapters of Genesis and in the relations of the lines of Cain and Seth–the variant sources are fairly apparent. At other times, as here, the two traditions are so closel y interwoven that at first glance they present a single strand.

Plaut then reconstructs both the J and the P texts (p. 63).

J

P

The Lord saw man’s wickedness and He regretted that He had made him. The Lord’s heart was saddened.

God saw how corrupt man was and He said to Noah, “I have decided to put an end to all flesh.”

Then He said to Noah, “Go into the ark for you alone have I found righteous . . . take with you seven pairs of clean and one pair of unclean animals, and seven pairs of birds. I will send forty days and nights of rain.

Make yourself an ark. Take with you two of everything that lives, male and female, of birds, cattle and creeping things.

After seven days the Flood came. Rain fell for forty days and nights. Noah sent out a dove, but the dove found no place to rest; he waited seven days, and the dove came back with an olive leaf. After another seven days the dove went out but did not return.

In the six-hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day the rain began. The waters swelled for one hundred and fifty days. At the end of that time the waters diminished. Noah sent out a raven. It went to and fro until the waters had dried up.

Noah left the ark. He built an altar and sacrificed of every clean animal and clean bird. The Lord in turn promised

In Noah’s six hundred and first year, on the twentyseventh day of the second month, he and his family left

Introduction never to bring another flood.

xliii the ark. God then made a covenant with Noah and set his rainbow in the sky as a sign that He would not bring another flood.

Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s account of Shun is not unlike the “certain duplications” Speiser points to in “Genesis.” In fact, if the four similar passages depicting Shun’s relationship with Ku-sou, his step-mother, and Hsiang, are parsed anew, placing them into larger narrative blocks, they can be read as parts of four distinct narratives: 1) Shih chi, 1:21: Yao’s discussion with the Chiefs of the Sacred Mountain concerning his successor in which Shun’s filiality and his parents are mentioned. A Yao source. 2) Shih chi, 1:31-32: A lineage narrative beginning with Shun’s ancestors and appending the tale about Ku-sou’s attempts to kill Shun. A Shun-lineage source. 3) Shih chi, 1:32: A standard Grand Scribe’s Records’ biographical opening, beginning “Shun was a native of Chi-chou,” and incorporating the tale of Kusou’s attempts to kill Shun word-for-word as it appears in narrative two. A Shunbiographical source. 4) Shih chi, 1:33: A longer narrative that focuses on Shun as an exemplar of filial love or obendience. Here the tale of Ku-sou and Hsiang’s attempts to kill Shun are provided in great detail. A source focusing on hsiao 孝 of filial love and obedience, possibly with other examples. Thus it is likely that the current “Wu-ti pen-chi” is a composite text pieced together from texts similar to those suggested above. Although the chapter has been placed first in the Shih chi, there is no reason to believe that Ssu-ma Ch’ien wrote it first. It may be a text that Ssu-ma Ch’ien–or his father, Ssu-ma T’an – drafted and then did not return to for final editing. In this limited reading of Herodotus and Ssu-ma Ch’ien it is difficult to draw too many conclusions. Yet it is evident that both historians accepted versions of these tales–Gyges and Shun, respectively–that fit the thinking of their own time and place. Herodotus accepted the tale of Gyges unwilling succession told by Lydian storytellers. In a manner and style that Eric Auerbach would call “Homeric,” Herodotus then shaped this version into an effective mini-drama which provided a historical context, stressed narrative cohesiveness, and brought the several main events–encounters with Kandaules and his queen–to center

xliv

Introduction

stage. Ssu-ma Ch’ien chose to weave together several narratives of Shun as a model subject and filial son, narratives that fit the interpretation of the ju 儒 (forerunners of Confucian scholars) who were strongly represented at court in the late second century B.C. In creating his composite text, Ssu-ma Ch’ien sacrificed the organization, dramatization, and characterization (seen in the accounts of Shun such as those in Meng Zi) for the larger goal of creating an image, albeit a somewhat jumbled image, of a sage emperor. Herodotus could, as scholars claim, be read aloud to the acclaim of audiences of his time. Ssu-ma Ch’ien needed to be studied. William H. Nienhauser, Jr. 6 November 2009, Madison

On Using This Book Most Texts are cited by chapter and page in a particular edition–Shih chi, 62.2185 indicates chüan 卷 62, page 2135 of the Chung-hua edition (see List of Abbreviations)–but references to the Lun yü 論語 (Analects of Confucius) and Meng Tzu 孟子 (Mencius) are according to chapter and verse (學而時習之 is thus Lun yü 1.1) and to Lao Tzu 老子 (Lao Tzu) by section. When comments in a modern critical edition are relevant, however, we cite it. All dynastic history references are to the modern punctuated editions from Chung-hua Shu-chü 中華書局. For many other citations we have referred to the Ssu-pu pei-yao 四部備要 or Ssu-pu ts’ung-kan 四部叢刊 Editions to allow the reader to more easily locate the passage. Other abbreviated titles can be found in the List of Abbreviations. For Official Titles we have for the most part employed the translations of Hans Bielenstein in his The Bureaucracy of Han China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), often making reference to Lu Zongli [Lü Zongli] 呂宗立, ed. Chung-kuo ku-tai chih-kuan ta tz’u-tien 中 國古 代職 官 大辭 典 (Chengchow: Ho-nan Jen-min Ch’u-pan-she, 1990), and on occasion also to Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1965), as well as to other texts and to the traditional commentators. Locations of Place Names are based on T’an Ch’i-hsiang 譚其驤, ed. Chung-kuo li-shih ti-t’u chi 中國歷史地圖集, Vol. II: Ch’in, Hsi Han, Tung Han shih-ch’i 秦，西漢 ， 東漢時期 (Shanghai: Ti-t’u Ch’u-pan-she, 1982). T’an’s identifications are not without problems, but they have been adopted by a number of large projects in China (such as the Chung-kuo ta pai-k’o ch’üan-shu 中國大百科全書) and provide the only practical means to attempt to identify the great number of place names in the Shih chi. On occasion we have added information from Ch’ien Mu’s 錢穆 Shih chi ti-ming k’ao 史記地名考 (Rpt. Taipei: San-min Shu-chü, 1984). Han 漢 is distinguished from Hann 韓 and Wei 魏 from Wey 衛 by means of romanization. We have found it difficult to decide when to translate a place name. Our basic principle has been to translate names which seem to still have meaning in the Records and to leave untranslated those which were understood by Ssu-ma Ch’ien primarily as toponyms. Where we were unsure, we gave a translation at the first occurrence only. Words like yi 邑, ch’eng 城 or chün 郡 (in two-syllable compounds) are treated as suffixes and usually transliterated rather than translated. For example, place names like An-yi 安邑, Tung-ch’eng 東城, and Nan-chün 南郡, in which yi, ch’eng and chün are similar to the “-ton” in Washington or “-ville” in Nashville, are transliterated as An-yi, Tung-ch’eng, and Nan-chün, rather than translated as An Town, East City or Southern Commandery. For modern cities and provinces we have used the postal-system xlv

xlvi

On Using This Book

romanization (Peking, Szechwan, etc.). Locations of these places are of course tentative. In the notes we have tried whenever possible to refer both to the distance from some well-known location as well as to a local identification. Weights and Measures are generally given in romanization only. More information is often provided in the notes and especially in the “Weights and Measures” section below. Although there has been a good deal of discussion on chiu 酒 (traditionally translated as “wine”) in recent years with suggestions that it would be better to translate it as “beer” or “ale,” according to H. T. (Hsing-tsung) Huang, Science and Civilization in China, Joseph Needham, ed. in chief. v. 6: Biology and Biological Technology. Part V: Fermentations and Food Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), there were two ways the ancient Chinese made wine (p. 162). One from the mould ferment ch’ü 麴, and the other, chiu 酒, from steamed millet or other grains and rice. Huang notes that this second process is “fairly similar” (p. 163) to the method of making Shao-hsing wine today. Thus, although chiu during Han times may be quite different from the wine we drink in the West today, we follow Huang (see his lengthy discussion of how to translate chiu on pp. 149-50 and his depiction of Han wines on 165-6) and translate chiu consistently as wine. Dates given according to the sexagenary cycle have been romanized: chia-tzu jih 甲 子日 becomes “the chia-tzu 甲子 day.” These dates whenever possible have been converted to the Western calendar using Hsü Hsi-ch’i 徐錫祺. Hsi Chou (Kung-ho) chih Hsi Han li-p’u 西周（共和）至西漢歷譜 (2v. Peking: Pei-ching K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu, 1997). We have used a slightly modified version of Wade-Giles’ Romanization: i is written throughout as yi to avoid the confusion between the English first-person pronoun and Chinese proper names. For Chinese passages over four characters in length, romanization is usually not provided. Our Base Edition has been that edited by Ku Chieh-kang 顧頡剛 (1893-1980) et al. and entitled Shih chi 史記. It was based on the Chin-ling Shu-chü 金陵書局 edition and published in ten volumes by Chung-hua Shu-chü in 1959. References to this edition are given by chapter and page (69.2250) in the notes and by page numbers in emboldened brackets in the translation itself [2250] (or as [*2250*] intertextually). In citing the standard three Commentaries–“Chi-chieh” 集解, “Cheng-yi” 正義¸ and “So-yin” 索隱, page numbers are given only if the reference is to a chapter other than that being translated. In other words, in the translation of 61.2124 no page number is provided for a citation from the “Cheng-yi” if that citation occurs on 61.2124 or 61.2125, since the reader should easily be able to locate it. If a “Cheng-yi” comment is provided from another section or chapter of the Shih chi, the reader is referred to the appropriate chapter/page. A brief introduction to these commentaries can be found in the Introduction to Volume 1. Also appended here is a list of Frequently Mentioned Commentators and two Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Commentators. Our Annotation has attempted to identify major textual problems, place names, book titles, rituals, unusual customs, individuals and groups of people. Chinese Characters are normally given only at their first occurrence.

On Using This Book

xlvii

The translation of each chapter is followed by a Translators’ Note and a short Bibliography. The former may provide a summary of analyses from traditional commentators, point out problems in the text, or discuss its relations to other chapters. The latter includes the major studies and translations. A General Bibliography of works was published in volume one of The Grand Scribe’s Records. A list of Selected Recent Studies of the Shih chi is appended.

Weights and Measures Throughout the text we have given words indicating weights and measures in their romanized form followed (at the first occurrence) by the Chinese character (e.g., jen 仞). This is in part because there are no standards for each era or each region dealt with in the “basic annals.” Yet most of the values given in the following charts were fairly stable from the Warring States era into the early Han in most states. Generally speaking, the basic unit of length, the ch’ih 尺, was the most stable. It varied from 23.1 cm in Warring States to about 23.2 cm in the Western Han. In terms of volume, one sheng 升 was roughly equal to 200 cc throughout the period. The greatest variance can be seen in weights, but even there we can assume that one chin 斤 remained equal to approximately 250 g through the era. Based on the usage in these Shih chi chapters included in volume 8 and the arguments presented by Sung Hsü-wu 宋敍五 in his Liang Han huo-pi shih kao 兩漢貨幣史稿 (Taipei: Wen-hai, 1978), we have revised our understanding of gold and copper coins in the Han dynasty beginning with this volume (8). Although 24 chu 銖 are equivalent to 1 liang 兩, 20 liang equal 1 yi 鎰, and 1 chin 斤 contains 16 liang, there is no set relationship between copper coins and gold until the Hsin 新 dynasty (Sung, pp. 139 and 145). The price of gold fluctuated under the Han, but it can be argued that under Emperor Wu 1 chin of gold varied from 1000-2500 copper coins (p. 142). The larger wu-chu 五銖 coins exchanged at about 2000 to the chin of gold and the pan-liang 半兩 coins at about 2500 to the chin (pp. 146-7). There are eight designations used for coins during the Former Han, but they actually designate only three basic types: (1) pa-chu ch’ien 八銖錢 (introduced in 186 B.C. and also called pan-liang ch’ien 半兩錢 or san-fen ch’ien 三分錢 after 136 B.C.), (2) san-chu ch’ien 三銖錢 (introduced in 140 B.C.) and (3) wu-chu ch’ien 五銖錢 (introduced in 118 B.C. and later known in slight variations as ch’ih-tse ch’ien 赤仄錢 and ch’ih-tse ch’ien 赤側錢). On other types of coin denominations (which are not referred to in the Shih chi), see Sung, pp. 112-3. Moreover, chin 金 is often used interchangeably with huang chin 黃金 (Sung, pp. 144-5) and refers to gold. Finally, the term pai chin 百金 (cf. Shih chi, 30.1417 and the comments in “So-yin” to that passage) refers to pai chin 百斤 (one hundred chin) of huang-chin 黃金 (gold). On the romanization of the measure word 石, we follow the general usage of shih instead of tan. Tan did at some time become the colloquial pronunciation for 石, but may not have started in the Han dynasty (cf. Michael Loewe, “The Measurement of Grain during the Han Period,” TP 49 (1961), p. 76. The following list is arranged by category (Length, Capacity, etc.) and under each category by the importance of the term. Variances are listed with the most ancient value first. A selected list of sources (along with a key to the abbreviated sources cited in the list) is appended.

xlix

l

Weights and Measures

Length Unit Name

Western Equivalent (Era)

Source (see appended Bibliography)

ch’ih 尺

23-23.7 cm (Western Han)

K’ao-ku hsüeh

ts’un 寸

1/10th ch’ih

pu 步

6 ch’ih = 138.6 cm (Ch’in-Han) 138 cm

Tz’u-hai “Han Weights and Measures”

jen 仞

7 ch’ih (Western Han)

Ku-tai wen-hua

hsün 尋

8 ch’ih

Ku-tai wen-hua

chang 丈

10 ch’ih

ch’ang 常

16 ch’ih

Ku-tai wen-hua

ch’un 純

4 tuan 端 (of cloth; = 2 chang)

“Chi-chieh” (Shih chi, 69.2250) 1 tuan

yin 引

10 chang

li 里

415 m 416 m = 300 pu or 180 chang)

she 舍

30 li

“Han Weights and Measures” Ku-tai wen-hua

Area mu 畝

240 pu2 (Warring States, Ch’in, Han, 457.056 m.2) 0.1139 English acre

li 里

often stands for x-li on a side i.e., x by x li)

Ku-tai wen-hua “Han Weights and Measures”

Weights and Measures

li

Capacity Unit Name

Western Equivalent (Era)

Source (see appended Bibliography)

sheng 升 yüeh 龠

from 194-216 cc (Ch’in) 1/2 ho = about 10 cc

ho 合

1/10 sheng = about 20 cc 19.968 cc.

tou 斗

10 sheng = 1900 cc (Ch’in dynasty)

Ch’en Meng-chia

hu 斛

10 tou = 19,968 cc.

“Han Weights and Measures”

fu 釜

20,460-20,580 cc

K’ao-ku hsüeh

“Han Weights and Measures”

K’ao-ku hsüeh, Ch’en Meng-chia

Weights chin 斤

244-268 g (Western Han) 245 g (Western Han)

Ch’en Meng-chia “Han Weights and Measures”

liang 兩

1/16 chin (ca. 15.625 g-15.36 g)

“Han Weights and Measures”

chu 銖

1/24 liang (ca. 0.651 g-0.64 g)

“Han Weights and Measures”

tzu 錙

6 chu, 1/4 liang = about 3.906 g

yi 溢

20 liang

See introduction to “Weights and Measures” above

chün 鈞

30 chin = (ca. 7,500 g-7,350 g)

“Han Weights and Measures”

tan 石

120 chin = (ca. 30 kg- 29.5 kg)

“Han Weights and Measures”

chin 金 =

yi (of copper or bronze, in preSee introduction to “Weights and Ch’in times) Measures” above 1 chin = 1 ts’un 3 of gold = 238-251 g (Ch’in-Han)

lii

Weights and Measures

Key to Abbreviated Sources Ch’en Meng-chia

Ch’en Meng-chia 陳夢家. “Chan-kuo tu-liang heng shih- lüeh shuo” 戰國度量衡史略說, K’ao-ku, 6.6(1964): 312-4.

“Han Weights”

“Han Weights and Measures,” in The Cambridge History of China, Volume 1, The Ch’in and Han Empires. Denis Twitchett and Michael Loewe, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986, p. xxxviii.

K’ao-ku hsüeh

Chung-kuo ta pai-k’o ch’üan shu, K’ao-ku hsüeh 中國大百科全書 , 考古學. Peking and Shanghai: Chung-kuo Ta Pai-k’o Ch’üan Shu Chu-pan-she, 1986.

Ku-tai wen-hua

Ku-tai wen-hua ch’ang-chih 古代文化常識. Yang Tien-k’uei ·楊 殿奎 et al., eds. Tsinan: Shan-tung Chiao-yü Ch’u-pan-she, 1984, pp. 271-92.

Shih chi tz’u-tien

Shih chi tz’u-tien 史記辭典. Ts’ang Hsiu-liang 倉修良, ed. Tsinan: Shan-tung Chiao-yü Ch’u-pan-she, 1984

Tz’u-hai

Tz’u-hai 辭海. 3v. Shanghai: Shang-hai Tz’u-shu, 1979.

Selected Bibliography Ch’ien Chien-fu 錢劍夫. Ch’in Han huo-pi shih kao 秦漢貨幣史稿. Wuhan: Hu-pei Jen-min, 1986. Ch’iu Kuang-min 丘光明 et al. Chung-kuo k’o-hsüeh chi-shu shih, Tu-liang-heng chüan 中國科學 技術史. Peking: K’o-hsüeh Chu-pan-she, 2001. Ho Ch’ang-ch’ün 賀昌群. “Sheng tou pien” 升斗辨, Li-shih yen-chiu, 1958.6: 79-86. Hulsewé, A. F. P. “Ch’in-Han Weights and Measures,” in Hulsewé, Remnants of Ch’in Law. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985, p. 19. ___. “Weights and Measures in Ch’in Law,” in State and Law in East Asian: Festschrift Karl Bünger. Dieter Eikemeier and Herbert Franke, ed. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1981, pp. 25-39. Kuo-chia Chi-liang Tsung-chü 國家計量總局. Chung-kuo ku-tai tu-liang-heng t’u-chi 中國古代度 量衡圖集. Peking: Wen-wu 文物, 1981.

Weights and Measures

liii

Loewe, Michael. “The Measurement of Grain during the Han Period,” TP, 49 (1961): 64-95. Sung Chieh 宋傑. Chung-kuo huo-pi fa-chan shih 中國貨幣發展史. Peking: Shou-tu Shih-fan Ta-hsüeh Ch’u-pan-she, 1999. Sung Hsü-wu 宋敍五 in his Liang Han huo-pi shih kao 兩漢貨幣史稿. Taipei: Wen-hai, 1978. Tseng Wu-hsiu 曾武秀. “Chung-kuo li-tai chih-tu kai-shu” 中國歷代尺度概述, Li-shih yen-chiu, March 1964, esp. pp. 164-6 and 182. Wang Chung-ch’üan 王忠全. “Ch’in-Han shih-tai chung, hu, tan hsin-k’ao” 秦漢時代鐘, 斛, 石新 考, Chung-kuo-shih yen-chiu, 1988.1, 11-23. Yang K’uan 楊寬. Chung-kuo li-tai ch’ih-tu k’ao 中國歷代尺度考. Shanghai: Shang-wu, 1955. Lu Zongli

Abbreviations I. Books Ancient China

—

Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, eds. The Cambridge History of Ancient China from the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Aoki, Shiki

—

Aoki Gorô 清木五郎. Shiki 史記. V. 11. Tokyo: Meiji Shoten, 2004. Shinaku Kanbun taikei 新釈漢 文大系, 91. Translations of chapters 101-110.

Bielenstein

—

Hans Bielenstein. The Bureaucracy of Han Times. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press, 1980.

Bodde, Festivals

—

Derk Bodde. Festivals in Classical China. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975.

Bridgman

—

R. F. Bridgman. “La médicine dans la Chine antique,” Mélanges Chinois et Bouddhique 10 (1955), 1-213.

Chang Lieh, Han shu

—

Chang Lieh 張烈, ed. Han shu chu yi 漢書注譯. 4v. Haikow: Han-nan Kuo-chi Hsin-wen Chu-pan Chung- hsin Ch’u-pan Fa-hsing 海南國際新聞出版 中心出 版, 1997.

Chang Wen-hu

—

Chang Wen-hu 張文虎 (1808-1885). Chiao-k’an Shih chi “Chi-chieh,” “So-yin,” “Cheng-yi,” cha-chi 校刊 史記集解索引正義札記. 2v. Rpt. Peking: Chung-hua, 1977.

Chavannes

—

Édouard Chavannes, trans. Les Mémoires historiques de Se-ma Ts’ien. 5v. Paris, 1895-1905; V. 6. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1969.

lv

lvi

Abbreviations

“Cheng-yi”

—

Chang Shou-chieh 張 守 節 (fl. 730). “Shih chi cheng-yi” 史記正義, as found in the Shih chi.

Ch’eng Shu-te

—

Ch’eng Shu-te 程樹德 (1877-1944). Lun-yü chi-shih 論語集釋. 4v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1990.

“Chi-chieh”

—

P’ei Yin 裴駰 “Shih chi chi-chieh” 史記集解, as found in the Shih chi.

Ch’ien Mu, Ti-ming k’ao

—

Ch’ien Mu 錢穆. Shih chi ti-ming k’ao 史記地名考. Rpt. Taipei: San-min Shu-chü, 1984.

Ch’in Han shih

—

Cheng T’ien-t’ing 鄭天挺 (1899-1981) et al., eds. Chung- kuo li-shih ta tz’u-tien, Ch’in Han shih 中國 歷 史大辭典秦漢史. Shanghai: Shang-hai Tz’u-shu, 1990.

Ching-yu

—

Shih chi in Pei Sung Ching-yu [Kuo-tzu] chien pen, Erh-shih-wu shih 北宋景祐〔國子〕監本, rpt of N. Sung Ching-yu [Era, 1034-1037] Academy [of the Sons of the State] Edition. Taiwan. Taipei: Erh-shih wu shih Pien- k’an Kuan 二十五 史編刊館, 1955.

De Crespigny, Dictionary

—

Rafe de Crespigny. A Biographical Dictionary of Later Han to the Three Kingdoms (23-220 AD). Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2007.

Dubs

—

Homer H. Dubs. The History of the Former Han Dynasty. Volume 1, Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1938.

Grand Scribe’s Records

—

Grand Scribe’s Records, Volumes 1, 2, 5.1, 7 and 8. William H. Nienhauser, Jr., ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994, 2002, and 2006.

Han Chao-ch’i

__

Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琦, ed. Shih chi chien-cheng 史 記 箋 證 . 9v. 2nd printing. Nanchang: Chiang-hsi Jen-min Ch’u- pan-she, 2005 [2004].

Han shu

—

Han shu 漢書. Edited by Chen Chih 陳直 et al. 12v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1962.

Abbreviations

lvii

Han shu pu-chu

—

Han shu pu-chu 漢 書 補 注 . Edited by Wang Hsien-ch’ien 王先謙 (1842-1918). 2v. Rpt. Taipei: Yi-wen Yin-shu- kuan, 1968 (1900).

Han Chao-ch’i

—

Ho Chien-chang

—

Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琪. Shih chi chien cheng 史記箋 正 . Rpt. Nanchang: Chiang-hsi Jen-min Ch’u-pan-she, 2005 [2004]. Ho Chien-chang 何建章. Chan-kuo Ts’e chu-shih 戰 國策注釋. 2v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1990.

Ho Tz’u-chün

—

Ho Tz’u-chün 賀次君. Shih chi shu-lu 史記書錄. Shanghai: Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan, 1958; rpt. Taipei: Ti-p’ing-hsien Ch’u-pan-she 地平線出版社, 1972.

Hsü Hsi-ch’i

—

Hsü Hsi-ch’i 徐 錫 祺 , Hsi-chou (Kung-ho) chih Hsi-han li-p’u 西周(共和)至西漢歷譜 2v. Peking: Pei-ching K’o-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 1997.

Hucker

—

Charles O. Hucker. A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985.

Hulsewé, Han Law

—

A. F. P. Hulsewé. Remnants of Han Law, Volume 1. Introductory Studies and An Annotated Translation of Chapters 22 and 22 of the History of the Former Han Dynasty. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1955.

Hummel

—

Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period (1644-1912). 2v. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1943, 1944.

Hübotter

—

F. Hübotter. “Zwei berühmte chinesische Ärzte des Altertums Chouen Yu-I und Hua T'ouo,” Mitteilungen der deutschen Gesellschaft für Naturund Völkerkunde Ostasiens 21A (1927), 3- 48.

Ikeda

—

Ikeda Shirôjirô 池田四郎次郎 and Ikeda Hideo 池 田英雄. Shiki kenkyû shomoku kaidai (kôhon) 史記 研 究 書 目 解 題 ( 稿 本 ). 2v. Tokyo: Meitoku Shuppansha, 1978.

lviii

Abbreviations

Ku and Hsü

—

Ku Chieh-kang 顧 頡 剛 (1893-1980) and Hsü Wen-shan 徐文珊 (1900-1998), editors. Shih chi pai wen chih pu 史記白文之部. 3v. Peiping: Kuo-li Pei-p’ing Yen-chiu Yüan, Shih-hsüeh Yen-chiu-hui 國力北平研究院，史學研究會, 1936.

Lau, Analects

—

D. C. Lau, trans. Confucius, The Analects. Harmonds- worth, England: Penguin, 1979.

Legge

—

Li Jen-chien

—

James Legge (1815-1897), trans. The Chinese Classics. 5v. 2nd rev. ed. Taipei: Southern Materials Center, 1985. Li Jen-chien 李人鑑. T’ai-shih kung shu chiao tu chi 太史公書校讀記. 2v. Lanchow: Kan-su Jen-min, 1998.

Liang Yü-sheng

—

Liang Yü-sheng 粱 玉 繩 (1745-1819). Shih chi chih-i 史記志疑. 3v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1981.

Loewe, Dictionary

—

Michael Loewe. A Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han, and Xin Periods (221 BC-AD 24). Leiden: Brill, 2000.

Loewe, Companion

—

Michael Loewe. The Men Who Governed Han China, Companion to A Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han and Xin Periods. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004.

Lu Zongli

—

Lu Zongli 呂宗力 [Lü Zongli], ed. Chung-kuo li-tai kuan-chih ta tz’u-tien 中 國 歷 代 官 制 大 辭 典 . Peking: Pei-ching Ch’u-pan-she, 1994.

Lun heng

—

Wang Ch’ung 王充 (27-ca. 97). Lun heng chu-shih 論衡注釋. Pei-ching Ta-hsüeh Li-shih hsi Lun heng Chu-shih Hsiao-tsu 北京大學歷史系論衡注釋小 組. 4v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1979.

Mizusawa

—

Mizusawa Toshitada 水澤利忠. Shiki kaichû koshô fu kôhô 史記會注考證附校補. Reprint-ed with Tokyo, 1934 ed. of Shiki kaichû koshô 史記會注考 證. 2v. Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1986.

Abbreviations

lix

Mizusawa, Shiki

—

Mizusawa Toshitada. Shiki 史記. V. 10 Tokyo: Meiji Shoten, 1996. Shinaku Kanbun taikei 新釈漢文大系, 91. Contains chapters 88-100.

Morohashi

—

Morohashi Tetsuji 諸橋轍次. Dai Kanwa jiten 大漢 和辭典. 13v. Tokyo: Taishûkan Shoten, 1955-1960.

Needham

—

Needham, Joseph et al. Science and Civilisation in China. V. 1-. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957-.

Ogawa, Retsuden

—

Ogawa Tamaki 小川環樹, Imataka Makoto 今鷹真, and Fukushima Yoshihiko 福島吉彦 , trans. Shiki retsuden 史 記 列 專 . 5v. 1975; 2nd ed., Tokyo: Iwanami, 1989.

Palace edition

—

Wu Ying-tien k’an-pen Shih chi 武英殿刊本史記. Rpt. Taipei: Wen-hsiang 文馨 Ch’u-pan-she, 1978.

“Pien-nien chi”

—

“Pien-nien chi” 編 年 記 , in Shui-hu-ti Ch’in mu chu-chien 睡 虎 地 秦 墓 竹 簡 (Peking: Wen-wu Ch’u-pan-she, 1978), pp. 1-13.

Pokora, “Traductions”

—

Timoteus Pokora. “Bibliographie des traductions du Che ki,” in E. Chavannes, tr. Les Mémoires historiques de Se- ma Ts’ien. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1969, 6:113-46.

Po-na

—

Po-na pen Erh-shih-ssu shih 百衲本二十四史. Rpt. Taipei: Shang-wu Yin-shu Kuan, 1968.

Shen Chung

—

Shen Chung 沈 重 et al., ed. Chung-kuo li-shih ti-ming tz’u-tien 中國歷史地名辭典. Nan-chang: Chiang-hsi Chiao-yü Ch’u-pan she, 1988.

Shih chi

—

Shih chi 史記. 10v. Peking: Chung-hua shu-chü, 1963.

Shih chi p’ing-lin

—

Shih chi p’ing-lin 史記評林. Ling Chih-lung ,凌稚 隆 (fl. 1576), comp. 5v. Rpt. Taipei: Ti-ch’iu 地球 Ch’u- pan-she, 1992.

lx

Abbreviations

Shih chi tz’u-tien

—

Ts’ang Hsiu-liang 倉修良, ed. Shih chi tz’u-tien 史 記辭典. Tsinan: Shan-tung Chiao-yü, 1991.

Shih chi yen-chiu

—

Shih chi yen-chiu chi-ch’eng 史記研究集成. Chang Ta-k’o 張大可, An P’ing-ch’iu 安平秋, and Yü Chang- hua 俞樟華, eds. 14v. Peking: Hua-wen Ch’u- pan-she, 2005.

Shih Chih-mien

—

Shih Chih-mien 施之勉. Shih chi hui-chu kao-cheng ting-pu 史記會注考證訂補. Taipei: Hua-kang 華岡, 1976.

Shih Ting, Han shu

—

Shih Ting 施丁. Han shu hsin chu 漢書新注. 4v. Sian: San Ch’in Chu-pan-she, 1994.

SKCS

—

Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu. 四庫全書.

“So-yin”

—

Ssu-ma Chen 司馬貞 (fl. 730). “Shih chi so-yin” 史 記索隱, as found in the Shih chi.

SKCS

—

Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu 四庫全書.

SPPY

—

Ssu-pu pei-yao 四部備要.

SPTK

—

Ssu-pu ts’ung-k’an 四部叢刊.

T’ai-p’ing yü-lan

—

T’ai-p’ing yü-lan 太平御覽. Wang Yün-wu 王雲五, ed. 7v. Rpt. Taipei: T’ai-wan Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan, 1968.

Takigawa

—

Takigawa Kametarô 瀧川龜太郎 (1865-1946). Shiki kaichû koshô fu kôhô 史記會注考證附校補. 2v. Rpt. [Tokyo, 1934]; collation notes by Mizusawa Toshitada 水澤利忠. Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1986.

T’an Ch’i-hsiang

—

T’an Ch’i-hsiang 譚其驤, ed. Chung-kuo li-shih ti-t’u chi 中國歷地圖集. 9v. Shanghai: Ti-t’u, 1982.

Tzu-chih t’ung-chien

—

Ssu-ma Kuang 司 馬 光 (1019-1086), compiler.

Abbreviations

lxi Tzu-chih t’ung-chien 資治通鑒. Peking: Chung-hua Shu-chü, 1963.

Wang Li-ch’i

—

Wang Li-ch’i 王利器 (1912-1998), ed. Shih chi chu-i 史記注譯. 4v. Sian: San Ch’in, 1988.

Wang Li-ch’i, Jen-piao

—

Wang Li-ch’i 王利器 and Wang Chen-min 王貞玟, editors. Han shu ku-chin jen-piao shu-cheng 漢書古 今人表疏證. Tsinan: Ch’i Lu shu-she, 1988.

Wang Nien-sun

—

Wang Nien-sun 王 念 孫 (1744-1832). “Shih chi tsa-chih 史記雜志,” in Volume 1 of Wang’s Tu-shu tsa-chih 讀書雜志. Rpt.; Taipei: Shih-chieh, 1963.

Wang Shu-min

—

Wang Shu-min 王叔岷. Shih chi chiao-cheng 史記 斠 證 . 10v. Taipei: Chung-yang Yen-chiu Yüan, Li-shih Yü-yen Yen-chiu So, 1982. Chung-yang Yen-chiu Yüan, Li-shih Yü-yen Yen-chiu So chuan-k’an 中央研究院歷史語言所研究專刊, No. 87.

Watson

—

Burton Watson, translator. Records of the Grand Historian of China, from the Shih chi of Ssu-ma Ch’ien. 2v. Revised edition. Hong Kong and New York: The Research Centre for Translation, The Chinese U. of Hong Kong and Columbia U. Press, 1993 [1961].

Watson, Qin

—

Burton Watson, trans. Records of the Grand Historian: Qin Dynasty. Volume 3. Revised edition. Hong Kong and New York: The Research Centre for Translation, The Chinese U. of Hong Kong and Columbia U. Press, 1993.

Watson, Ssu-ma Ch’ien

—

Burton Watson, translator. Ssu-ma Ch’ien, Grand Historian of China. New York: Columbia U. Press, 1958.

Wu and Lu

—

Wu Shu-p’ing 吳樹平 and Lu Zong-li 呂宗力 [Lü Zongli], eds. and trans., Ch’üan-chu ch’üan-yi Shih chi 全注全譯史記. 3v. Tientsin: T’ien-chin Ku-chi, 1995.

lxii

Abbreviations

Wu Chen-feng

—

Wu Chen-feng 吳鎮烽. Chin-wen jen-ming hui-pien 金文人名匯編. Peking: Chung-hua, 1987.

Yang, Li-tai

—

Yang Yen-ch’i 楊燕起 et al., eds. Li-tai ming-chia p’ing Shih chi 歷代名家評史記. Peking: Pei-ching Shih-fan Ta-hsüeh, 1986.

Yang, Lun-yü

—

Yang Po-chün 楊伯峻(1909-1992). Lun-yü yi-chu 論語譯注. Peking: Chung-hua, 1980.

Yang, Tso-chuan

—

Yang Po-chün 楊伯峻. Ch’un-ch’iu Tso-chuan chu 春秋左傳注. 4v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1982.

Yang Chia-lo

—

Yang Chia-lo 楊家駱, ed. Shih chi chin-shih 史記今 釋. Taipei: Cheng-chung Shu-chü, 1971.

Yang Yen-ch’i

—

Yang Yen-ch’i 楊燕起. Shih chi ch’üan-yi 史記全 譯. 9v. Kweiyang: Kuei-chou Jen-min, 2001.

Yangs

—

Yang Hsien-yi and Gladys Yang. Records of the Historian. Rpt. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press, 1985.

AM

—

Asia Major

BIHP

—

Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica, Taiwan)

BMFEA

—

Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities

BSOAS

—

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

CLEAR

—

Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews

EC

—

Early China

II. Journals

Abbreviations

lxiii

HJAS

—

Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies

JA

—

Journal asiatique

JAH

—

Journal of Asian History

JAOS

—

Journal of the American Oriental Society

JAS

—

Journal of Asian Studies

JCP

—

Journal of Chinese Philosophy

JEAA

—

Journal of East Asian Archaeology

MS

—

Monumenta Serica

OE

—

Oriens Extremus

TP

—

T’oung Pao

ZDMG

—

Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft

ArC

—

Archaic Chinese

ed.

—

editor

mss.

—

manuscript

n.

—

note

nn.

—

notes

no.

—

number

rev. ed.

—

revised edition

rpt.

—

reprint

III. Other

Deutschen

Morgenländischen

lxiv

Abbreviations

trans.

—

translator

transl.

—

translation

v.

—

volume

The Grand Scribe’s Records VOLUME IX The Memoirs of Han China, Part II

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 451 P'ien Ch’üeh translated by William H. Nienhauser, Jr.

[105.2785] “Pien Ch’üeh” 扁鵲2 was a native of Cheng 鄭 in Po-hai 勃海 Commandery.3 His cognomen was Ch’in 秦4 and his praenomen was Yüeh-jen 1

The translator is grateful to Elisabeth Hsu for her numerous suggestions and the numerous secondary studies she provided. Wang Shao 王劭 (550-610?) is cited in “So-yin” arguing that this chapter belongs near the end of the book adjacent to the chapters on the diviners (chapters 127 and 128) and has been placed between the memoirs on by some later editor erroneously. Chang Shou-chieh (“Cheng-yi”) follows this line of thought in his claim that although this collective memoir (lei chuan ) may show similaries to chapters 127 and 128, it was placed among the memoirs on early Han figures because Ch’un-yü Yi lived under Emperor Wen of the Han. Li Ching-hsing 李景星 (1876-1934, Shih chi p’ing-yi 史記評議, in Ssu shih p’ing-yi 四史評議, Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琦 and Yü Chang-hua 俞樟 華, eds. [Changsha: Yüeh-Lu 岳麓 Shu-she, 1986], p. 96) refutes both of these arguments in favor of the idea that as a joint biography of someone from antiquity with someone of (from Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s perspective) modern times–similar to chapter 84, “Ch’ü Yüan, Chia Yi lieh-chuan” 屈原， 賈宜列傳–this chapter is placed exactly right. His reasons for this evaluation, however, are not stated explicitly. It would seem that Li Ching-hsing is actually following Chang Shou-chieh in his argument that as a parallel biography, like that of Ch’ü Yüan and Chia Yi, this chapter is well placed between chapters 104 and 106 (the biographies of T’ien Shu 田叔 and Liu P’i 劉濞, respectively). However, both of the other similar parallel biographies (chapters 83 and 84) are arranged according to the chronology of the ancient biographee (Lu Chung Lien 魯仲連 and Ch’ü Yüan, respectively), not according to the dates of the modern counterpart (Tsou Yang 鄒陽 and Chia Yi, respectively) as would seem to be the case here. 2 Pien Ch’üeh is not a name, but what this physician was called in Chao (see text below and Wang Li-ch’i, 105.2213n., and Ts’ao Tung-yi 曹東義, “Pien Ch’üeh [Ch’in Yüeh-ren] li-chi k’ao 扁鵲（秦越人）里籍考,” Chung-hua yi-shih tsa-chih 中華醫史雜誌, 23.1 [1993]: 15-19). Morita Den’ichirō 森田伝一郎. Shiki Hen Shaku Sô-kô retsuden yakuchû 史記扁鵲倉公列傳訳注 (Tokyo: 雄山閣出版, 1986, p. 24) speculates that 扁鵲 (*b’iwän ts’iak in Chou Fa-kao’s reconstruction) was a play on 砭石 (*b’iwan diak), the stone needle or prick (a primitive kind of scalpel) used to

1

2

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

treat diseases (see text below) and furthermore that the magpie (ch’üeh 鵲) had a call that is very similar to ts’iak or diak (based on arguments he heard in the modern scholar Katô Jôken’s 加藤常 賢 lectures). Morita also has a lengthy note (pp. 1-2, n. 1) explaining that in Chinese myth Pien Ch’üeh was said to have lived during the time of the Huang Ti. Morita further argues (based on the preface to the Huang Ti pa-shih-yi nan 黃帝八十一難 cited in the “Cheng-yi”) that Pien Ch’üeh’s name was Ch’in Yüeh-jen (as here), that he lived sometime during the Chou dynasty, and that he became known in the state of Chao as Pien Ch’üeh because his healing powers were similar to those of the mythical figure of the same name. It is more likely that his praenomen was Shao-ch’i 少齊 as given in the Chou Li (cf. Wang Li-ch’i, Jen Piao, p. 425 and Aoki Gorō 青木五郎 (“Hen Shaku Sô-kô retsuden” 扁鵲倉公列傳 in Shiki 史記, v. 11 [Tokyo: Meiji Shoten, 2004], 105.1445n.). He is named Ch’in Shao-ch’i in two subsequent texts: Yün-chi ch’i-ch’ien 雲笈七籤 (56.9a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) and in the section on names in Fang Yi-chih’s 方以智 (d. 1671) T’ung ya 通雅 (21.8b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.). Ts’ao Tung-yi (ibid.) argues that Pien Ch’üeh was a title given him by the people of Chao based on the Chao bird-totem of their ancestral spirit corresponding to early depictions of Pien with a bird’s beak and lower body. See also the Translator’s Note on Pien Ch’üeh as a title. He was also known as the Lü Physician (Lü Yi 盧醫), since his home was in Lü 盧, a statelet absorbed by Ch’i. Lü is not on T’an Ch’i-hsiang’s maps nor in Ch’en P’an, but R. F. Bridgman (“La médicine dans la Chine antique, d’après les biographies de Pien-ts’io et de Chouen-yu Yi [Chapitre 105 des Mémoires historiques de Sseu-ma Ts’ien],” Mélanges chinois et bouddhique, 10 [1955]) and Aoki locate it south of the modern seat of Ch’ang-ch’ing 長清 County in Shantung. The “Cheng-yi” locates Lü at Lü County in what was known as Chi 濟 Prefecture under the T’ang about fifty miles southwest of modern Tsinan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:44). There are two works (no longer extant) attributed to Pien Ch’üeh: Pien Ch’üeh nei-ching 扁鵲 內經 (Inner Classic of Pien Ch’üeh) in 9 chüan and a Wai-ching 外經 (Outer Classic) in 12 chüan (Han shu, 30.1776). 3 Hsü Kuang 徐廣 (“Chi-chieh”) first noted that Cheng should be read Mo 鄚 and is a county. Wang Li-ch’i (105.2213n.) concurs and locates Mo County near modern Mo-chou Chen 鄚州鎮 in Jen-ch’iu 任丘 County in Hopei. Wang further observes that Po-hai was first made a commandery by Liu Pang under the Han and there was no such commandery in the pre-Ch’in state of Ch’i. Of course, there is also no such county at this time. There is the possibility that Pien Ch’üeh’s home place has been anachronistically identified (as we also see with Lao Tzu on Shih chi, 63.2139). On the other hand, among the numerous articles written by modern Chinese scholars on this question, Ts’ao Tung-yi 曹東義, in his “Pien Ch’üeh (Ch’in Yüeh-ren) li-chi k’ao 扁鵲（秦越人）里籍考” (Chung-hua yi-shih tsa-chih 中華醫史雜誌, 23.1 [1993]: 15-19), argues persuasively that Po stands for Po-hsieh 勃澥 here and indicates the regions around Ts’ang-chou 滄州 (just southeast of the modern city of Ts’ang-chou in Hopei near where the Yellow River then flowed into the sea; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:34). There is a cottage industry among Shantung scholars attempting to prove Pien was from Lu 魯, but there arguments are not convincing (see, for example, Wen Ju-chieh 溫如 杰 and Chang Hsin-mei 張新美, “Tui ‘Yen Chao ming-yi tsu Pien Ch’üeh te tsai chih-yi” 對‘燕趙 名醫祖扁鵲’的再質疑, Shan-tung Chong-yi Hsüeh-yüan hsüeh-pao 山東中醫學院學報 18.3 [1994]: 193-4).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

3

越人 (The Native of Yüeh?).5 In his youth he became the head of a hostel.6 When the hostel guest, Mister Ch’ang-sang 長桑 (Long-lived Mulberry?),7 stopped by, Pien Ch’üeh alone found him remarkable and often treated him with respect. Mister Ch’ang-sang also recognized that Pien Ch’üeh was not an ordinary man. Only after coming and going for more than ten years did he [Mister Ch’angtsang] summon Pien Ch’üeh to sit with him in private and secretly8 said to him: “I have a secret [medical] formula. I am growing old and would like to hand it on to you, Sir. You must not disclose it.” Pien Ch’üeh said, “I respectfully promise.” Then he took out some medicinal herbs from the inside of his jacket and gave them to P’ien Ch’üeh. “Drink these [herbs] with water from the surface of a Wang Li-ch’i cites a T’ai-p’ing yü-lan (721.5b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) citation of this passage which omits chün 郡 as part of his argument that chün is a scribal error and should be deleted. Bridgman (p. 51, n. 1) notes that during the T’ang dynasty scribes often wrote Mo 鄚 as Cheng 鄭. 4 The shih 氏 here is superfluous and indicates once again Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s apparent misunderstanding of the distinction that existed between nomen 氏 (shih) and cognomen (hsing 姓) in pre-Ch’in times. 5 Yüeh-jen 越人真人呂真人 may be a title similar to Chen-jen 真人 which was often applied to early medical practitioners (cf. the entry on Lü Chen-jen curing an eye disease in the Sungdynasty Yi-chia lei 醫家類, 3.6a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.; this term of address occurs a number of times in Yi-chia lei, although Yüeh-jen admittedly does not). 6 This line might also be read “he became an innkeeper for someone else.” The So-yin edition of the Shih chi reads simply 少時為舍長 (without jen 人; Takigawa, 105.3). 7 Master Ch’ang-sang 長桑公 is mentioned several times in various early texts: in the Chen kao 真誥 chüan 14, fol. 15b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) he is said to be Chuang Tzu’s master, in the Taoist collectanea Yün-chi ch’i-ch’ien he is depicted as a recluse who went about with his hair down singing cryptic songs (chüan 110, fol. 1b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.), and in the Shen-hsien chuan 神仙傳 is said to have been the master of Yü Tzu 玉子 (chüan 4, fol. 6a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.). On why he has the epithet “mulberry,” two explanations seem tenable. The first follows the association of the mulberry with the fecundity of the grove where only women worked (cf.the luxuriance of the mulberry in “Hsi sang” 隰桑, Mao #228 or “Sang jou” 桑柔, Mao #257, of the Shih ching). More likely is the second explanation that the mulberry itself is long-lived and thus symbolizes the “father” or “ancestor”–in this case of medicine–as in “Hsiao pien” 小弁, Mao #197). According to the modern scholar Ch’en Yung-liang 陳永良 (citing Li Ch’an 李梴 of the Ming in Ch’en’s “Shih chi, ‘Pien Ch’üeh chuan’ chu-pu” 史記扁鵲傳注補, Ch’eng-tu Chung-yi yao Tahsüeh hsüeh pao 成都中醫葯大學學報, 18.4 [December 1995], p. 46n.), she k’o 舍客 indicates a person who moves from one temporary residence to another. 8 Most modern commentators read chien 閒 as secretly (cf. Wang Li-ch’i, 110.2213n.); the “Cheng-yi” reads it as hsien 閑, suggesting a reading of “familarly” or “leisurely” which seems also possible.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

4

pond 9 and after thirty days you will be able to discern things [regarding illnesses]!” 10 Then he took all the documents of his secret formulae and gave them entirely to Pien Ch’üeh. Suddenly he disappeared–probably he was not a human being. After Pien Ch’üeh, as he had said, had drunk the herbs for thirty days, he could see a person on the other side of a low wall. Using this when examining patients, he could completely see the concretions and knots in the five viscera.11 When he practiced medicine [however] he did so solely under the name of diagnosing pulses.12 Solely by means of taking pulses he became famous. As a physician he was sometimes in Ch’i and sometimes in Chao. In Chao he was called Pien Ch’üeh.13 [2786] During the time of Duke Chao 昭 of Chin (r. 531-526),14 when the various grand masters [of the clans in Chin] were becoming powerful and the ducal clan was weakening, 15 Viscount Chien 簡 of Chao 16 became a Grand

9

The “So-yin” cites an “old theory” that shang ch’ih shui 上池水, literally “water on the top of a pond,” indicates water than has not yet reached the ground such as dew that collects on plants. The “Cheng-yi” (Takigawa, 105.3, not found in the Chung-hua edition) suggests it might refer to dew collected in special containers. But the literal meaning or water from the top of a pool or pond may also obtain here. Nakai Riken 中井履軒 (1732-1817; cited by Takigawa, 105.3) explains that such pure water would be used to take the herbs. 10 “So-yin” argues that wu 物 here refers to ghosts or immortals. Another possibility might be “material phenomena.” 11 I.e., heart, liver, spleen, lungs and kidneys. Ts’ui Shih 崔適 (1852-1924) points out that the “Cheng-yi” glosses both wu tsang 五藏 (five viscera) and liu fu 六府 (six bowels) suggesting that the original text read: 盡見五藏六府癥結 “he could completely see the concretions and knots in the five viscera and the six bowels” (Shih chi t’an-yüan 史記探源 [Peking: Pei-ching Ta-hsüeh Ch’u-pan-she], 1986 [original preface 1909], p. 205). Cf. also the translation and discussion in Elisabeth Hsu, The Transmission of Chinese Medicine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 85. 12 In other words, although he could see through people, he hid this power and pretended to be merely a pulse diagnostician. Another reading for this sentence would be “[but] he solely made his name through diagnosing pulses.” 13 See n. 2 above. 14 Morita (p. 30n.) suspects that this should be Duke Ting 定 who ruled from 476-475 B.C. (cf. Shih chi, 39.1685) since his dates correspond better to those of Viscount Chien (see also the following note). Although we have very little information on Duke Shao in the Shih chi (cf. 39.1684 and 14.651-4), the comments at the end of the accounts of his rein in the Shih chi (see the following note) suggest rather than Duke Chao is intended (if possibly anachronistic) here. 15 Shih chi, 39.1684 reads: “Duke Chao expired in his sixth year. The Six Excellencies [the heads of the Han 韓, Chao 趙, Wei 魏, Fan 范, Chung-hang 中行 and Chih 智 clans] were mighty and the ducal house was brought low” 昭公六年卒。六卿彊，公室卑. (cf. the similar passage on

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

5

Master and took sole control of the affairs of the state. Viscount Chien became ill17 and for five days he could not recognize anyone.18 The grand masters19 were all afraid. At this point, they summoned Pien Ch’üeh. Pien Ch’üeh entered, examined the illness, and came out. Tung An-yü 董安 于 20 questioned Pien Ch’üeh. Pien Ch’üeh said, “The blood vessels are [well] regulated,21 so what do you feel is strange [about this]? Long ago Duke Mu 穆 of Ch’in (r. 659-621 B.C.) was once like this for seven days and then he awoke.22 On the day he awoke, he informed the Noble Scion Chih 支 and Tzu-yü 子輿,23 saying: ‘I went to the residence of Ti 帝 (the High God); I was so pleased.24 The reason I stayed for a Shih chi, 14.654-5 and the very similar comments of Tzu-fu Hui’s 子服回 recorded in the Tso chuan (Yang, Tso, Chao 16, 526 B.C., p. 1382). 16 He was the son of Viscount Ch’eng 成 of Chao; his nomen was Chao and his praenomen was Yang 鞅 (after turning against Chin openly, he changed his praenomen to Chih-fu 志父; see Fang Hsüan-ch’en, pp. 571-2, #1965). For further details see Shih chi, 43.1786 and 15.687-8) Considered the founder of the state of Chao, he ruled the area that became Chao (originally a part of Chin) for the sixty-year period from 517-458 B.C. Given the length of his rule, it is unlikely he could have been more than a young boy during the reign of Duke Chao of Chin. 17 According to the “Cheng-yi” (Shih chi, 43.1787), this illness occurred in 501 B.C. (“Chengyi” claims that the chronological tables also record this, but they do not in the extant version included in the Chung-hua edition). 18 A parallel passage on Pien Ch’üeh’s treatment of Viscount Chien’s illness, virtually identical to the text here with one exception (see text and notes below), appears in the “Chao shih-chia” (Shih chi, 43.1786-7; see also Chavammes [5:25-31] translation. It is followed in the “Chao shihchia” by a complete interpretation of the dream which is not cited here. 19 This refers to those grand masters who were serving the Viscount (see Morita, p. 30n.). 20 One of the Viscount’s vassals. 21 Tung Pin 董份 (1510-1595, cited in Takigawa, 105.4) glosses chih 治 as “chih luan chih chih” 治亂之治 (to bring order to a chaotic situation) and our translation follows this reading. T’ang Yao 唐耀 (“Pien Ch’üeh, Ts’ang-kung lieh-chuan” 扁鵲,倉公列傳, in Yi ku wen 醫古文. Tuan Yi-shan 段逸山, ed. [Rpt. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng 人民衛生 Ch’u-pan-she, 1994 (1986)], p. 41, n. 14) also reads chih as an ting 安定. 22 See the brief account of this dream on Shih chi, 28.1360. 23 Both apparently were grand masters of Ch’in. Noble Scion Chih (Chih 枝 in the Tso chuan, agnomen Tzu-sang 子桑) was an advisor to Duke Mu (cf. Yang, Tso, Hsi 9 and 13, pp. 331 and 349; Fang Hsüan-ch’en, p. 184, #349). Aoki (p. 147n.) argues that Tzu-yü refers to the Tzu-ch’e 子車 Clan of Ch’in (see also Shih chi, 5.194, Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:102, and the commentary on Yang, Tso, Wen 6, pp. 546-7), but this still does not make clear who this particular member of the clan was. Chavannes (5.25) believes Tzu-yü was the father of the three Tzu-yü clansmen buried with Duke Mu, but it seems safest to note that Tzu-yü (or Tzu-ch’e) was a Ch’in clan and that, as Takigawa (105.4) notes, the exact person referred to here can not be determined. 24 Chavannes (5:25) translates: “et m’y suis fort plu.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

6

long time [*2787*] is just then there was that which could be learned. Ti told me, “The State of Chin is on the verge of great disorder. For five generations it will not be peaceful. Thereafter, it will become the Hegemon who will die before he becomes old. The son of the one who is Hegemon will cause25 the men and women of your state not to be separated [as they should be].” Noble Scion Chih wrote this down and stored it and the Ch’in [divinatory] bamboo-slips originated from this.26 The disorder of Duke Hsien 獻 ([of Chin], r. 676-651 B.C.),27 the hegemony of Duke Wen 文 (r. 636-628 B.C.), and Duke Hsiang’s 襄 (r. 627-621 B.C.) defeat of the Ch’in army at Yao 殽28 and indulging himself in debauchery upon returning home29: these are things you have heard about. Now the ailment of the His Lordship and Master is the same as that. Without going beyond three days he is certain to recover; when he [Viscount Chien] recovers, he will surely have something to say.” After two and one half days, Viscount Chien awoke, telling the various grand masters, “I went to the residence of Ti and was very pleased; with the hundred spirits I roamed through the molded heaven30; the Vast Music 31 was performed 25

Chavannes (5:25) has “commanderait.” Aoki (p. 148n.), following Takigawa, believes that these were bamboo-slips which first recorded Ch’in’s history. The parallel passage on Shih chi, 43.1787 reads ch’ien 謙 for ts’e 策 and makes clear that Chavannes’ rendering of “livres de divination” (5.26) should be preferred. 27 These troubles originated with the ambition of the beauty Chi from the Li 驪姬, who became Duke Hsien’s favorite and caused him to want to change the succession (cf. Shih chi, 39.1641ff.). 28 Yao (also written 崤 sometimes as Yao-sai 殽塞; on the pronunciation yao rather than hsiao, see Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 6:1494) was the name of a mountainous formation with two major peaks (East and West Yao) which ran for about forty miles from a few miles northwest of the county-seat of modern Lo-ning 洛 寧 County (i.e., stretching between fifteen and fifty miles southeast of modern San-men Hsia in Honan, its easternmost point about fifty miles due west of modern Loyang; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:23). Although Lo-yang could be reached without approaching the Yao peaks, armies had to pass through the valley between these peaks to move from the Lands within the Passes southeastward after they had negotiated the Han-ku 函谷 Pass). 29 See the accounts of this battle, which took place in 627 B.C., on Shih chi, 5.191-2 and 39.1670. Although there is no explicit record of Duke Hsiang’s debauchery in either of these accounts, on Shih chi, 39.1670 the Duke’s wife, a woman from Ch’i, tricks him into releasing three Ch’in generals he had captured in the battle at Yao, presumably using her feminine wiles to encourage the Duke. This, to some eyes, may imply immoral behavior. 30 Chün T’ien 鈞天, literally “moulded heaven,” refers in several texts to the central parts of Heaven (Lü shih ch’un-ch’iu 呂氏春秋, “Yu shih” 有始 [13.1b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.: 中央曰鈞 天; Huai-nan Tzu (“T’ien-wen hsün” 天文訓, 3.3a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) has the same line. Chavannes (5:26) points out that chün means the potter’s wheel, giving several examples in support 26

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

7

nine [or “many”] times to the Wan Dance.32 Unlike the music of the Three Eras, 33 its sounds stirred the heart. There was a black bear34 who wanted to grab me. Ti ordered me to shoot it. I hit the black bear and the black bear died. A brown bear35 came and I also shot at it, hit the brown bear, and the brown bear died.36 Ti was very happy and bestowed two bamboo boxes on me, each with a set of ornaments [to wear in sacrificial rites].37 I saw a boy at Ti’s side. Ti entrusted a of this translation, including Shih chi, 83.2477: 是以聖王制世御俗，獨化於陶鈞之上 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:291: “This is why when a sage king controls the world and masters conventions, he shapes them alone on his potter’s wheel . . . ”). 31 This music came to be known as chün T’ien kuang kuang yüeh 鈞天廣樂, “the vast (or “widespreading”) music of the sculpted heavens” (cf. Han-yü ta-tz’u-tien, 11.1221). Chavannes (5:27, n. 1) notes that the Kuang yüeh is frequently mentioned in the Mu T’ien-tzu chuan. 32 Exactly what this is supposed to mean remains murky (to this reader at least). Despite Arthur Waley’s claims that this is a sacrificial dance (see his “The Wan Dance,” Appendix II, in The Book of Songs [Rpt. New York: Grove, 1960 (1937)], p.p. 338-40, esp. 340, n. 1), it seems to have been used on both civil and martial occasions. Given that it is contrasted with the sober music of the Three Dynasties in the following line, it may suggest here the amorous character Waley also ascribes to it (p. 339). 33 Referring to the music of the classic reigns of the Hsia, Shang and Chou dynasties, this may also suggest that the music the Viscount heard was some kind of modern, licentious music. 34 The hsiung 熊 is the ancestor of the Asiatic black bear (also called the “moon bear”) which is the most common bear in China today. It is about 5 feet in length and weighs about 250 pounds, but by reputation is one of the fiercest types of bear. On the interpretation of animals that occur in dreams see Roel Sterckx, The Animal and the Daemon in Early China (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), pp. 214-6. 35 The p’i 羆 was a brown and white bear (ursus arctos, “So-yin,” Shih chi, 1.3) which was larger than the hsiung 熊 (“Cheng-yi,” Shih chi, 117.3034) and is probably an ancestor of the brown bear that still lives in China in small numbers (a relative of the American grizzly). Wu and Lu (105.2741n.) note that this bear could swim well. 36 These two bears symbolize the leaders of the Fan 范 and Chung-hang 中行 clans who were vanquished by Viscount Chien in 490 B.C. (cf. Shih chi, 39.1685 and Grand Scribe’s Records, 5.1:364-5) as will become clear below. 37 In the allegorical reading of this dream, the sets of ritual sacrificial ornaments represent pars pro toto the states of Tai 代 and that of Chih 智 (Chavannes, 5:28, n. 3, says that both were from the Tzu 子 clan) which Chao wiped out; the parallel version on Shih chi, 43.1788 add the relevant details: On another day, when Viscount Chien went out there was a man blocking the way. He was warned to clear the way, but did not leave. The attendants [of the Viscount] grew angry and were about to take their swords to him. [Then] the one blocking the way said, “I want to report [something] to His Lordship and Master.” The attendants made this known, Viscount Chien summoned him and said, “Hey, you are the Tzu Che 子晣 whom I saw [in my dream].” The one blocking the way said, “Have your attendants step aside, I would like to report [something]. Viscount Chien had his attendants step aside. The one blocking the way said, “When Your

8

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

dog of the Ti 翟 tribe38 to me, saying, ‘When the boy is full grown, bestow it [the dog] on him.’ 39 Ti told me, ‘The state of Chin will decline generation by generation; after seven generations it will perish. 40 Those of the Ying 嬴 cognomen41 will crush the men of Chou42 west of Fan-k’uei 范魁 (Fan Hillock),43 Lordship and Master became ill, your servant was at the side of Ti.” Viscount Chien said, “Right. That is so. Having coming to see me, what can I do [for you]?” The one blocking the way said, “Ti ordered Your Lordship and Master to shoot the black bear and the brown bear and they both died.” Viscount Chien said, “Yes, but what does this mean?” The one blocking the way said, “The state of Chin is on the verge of having a great calamity / disaster. Your Lordship and Master will be the beginning of it. Ti ordered Your Lordship and Master to extinguish the two excellencies [the lords of Tai 代 and Chih 智] and the black bear and the brown bear are their ancestors.” The Viscount of Chien said, “Ti bestowed two bamboo boxes on me each with a set of ritual ornaments. What did this mean?” The one blocking the way said, “Your Lordship and Master’s son will overcome two states among the Ti 翟 tribe [i.e., Tai and Chih], both with the cognomen Tzu 子.” Viscount Chien said, “I saw at boy at Ti’s side. Ti entrusted to me one of the dogs of the Ti and said, ‘When the boy is grown bestow it [the dog] on him.’ This boy, what does it mean to bestow the Dog of the Ti tribe on him?” The one blocking the way said, “The boy was Your Lordship and Master’s son. The Dog of the Ti tribe is the ancestor of Tai. Your Lordship and Master’s son will certainly possess [the state of] Tai. And when a successor of Your Lordship and Master changes the way of administration and adopts the clothing of the Hu, he will annex the two states among the Ti tribe.” [This referring to the accomplishments of King Wu-ling 武靈 of Chao (r. 325-299 B.C.), cf. Shih chi, 43.1806-11] Viscount Chien asked his cognomen and invited him to take an official position. The one blocking the way said, “Your subject is a man of the countryside. He is merely bringing to you Ti’s orders.” Then he disappeared. Viscount Chien wrote down [what he said] and stored it in the treasury. 38 The purebred dogs of the Ti tribe were well known and one was considered to be the ancestor of the small Spring and Autumn state of Tai (located in the northeast part of modern Wei 蔚 County in Hopei; cf. Wu and Lu, 105.2741n.). See also the preceding note. 39 On Shih chi, 43.1788 a man Viscount Chien meets on the road interprets his dream for him. The transfer of the dog (representing the state of Tai) is supposed to foretell Viscount Hsiang 襄 of Chao’s murder of the King of Tai and thereby wiping out his state in 457 B.C. (see Shih chi, 43.1793-4 and 15.693-4). 40 The “Cheng-yi” suggests that these seven generations were those of dukes Ting 定 (r. 511479 B.C.), Ch’u 出 (r. 474-457), Ai 哀 (r. 456-438), Yu 幽 (r. 437-420), Lieh 烈 (r. 419-393), Hsiao 孝 (r. 392-378), and Ching 靜 (r. 377-376). Chin was (in this interpretation) overthrown in 376 B.C. While there were dukes of Chin down to 376 B.C., they were virtually powerless after 453 B.C., which is terms of real politik might be seen as a more accurate date for the end of Chin. 41 This was the cognomen of the royal house of the states of Ch’in and Chao. Here it refers to Chao (cf. Wu and Lu, 105.2741n.). 42 Here again this is an indirect reference to the state of Wey 衛 which shared the same cognomen with Chou (Chi 姬) and was descended from the same mother as the Chou founder, King Wu.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

9

but still will not be able to possess it [Wey].’” 44 Tung An-yü accepted his explanation, 45 wrote it out, and stored it away. He formally reported Pien Ch’üeh’s explanation 46 to Viscount Chien and Viscount Chien bestowed forty thousand mu of fields on Pien Ch’üeh. [2788] After this, when Pien Ch’üeh stopped by Kuo 轜,47 the Heir of Kuo had [just] died.48 Pien Ch’üeh arrived beneath the palace gate of Kuo49 and asked the Household Headmaster,50 a person fond of [medical] formulae, “What illness did the Heir have? In the capital has the managing of the Jang 穰 exorcism taken 43

Fan-k’uei was located in modern Fan 范 County, about one hundred miles northeast of Kaifeng, in Honan (Aoki, p. 150n.). The battle that took place here in 372 B.C. allowed Chao (one of the three states that was created when Chin disintegrated) to take considerable territory from Wey (cf. Shih chi, 43.1787 and 15.717). 44 In the parallel account on Shih chi, 43.1787 there is one more sentence which Ti utters: “Now I have been contemplating Shun of Yü’s meritorious service and it occurs to me to take you as the grandson of one who married Meng Yao, a woman descended from him [i.e., Yü]” 今余思虞 舜之勳，適余將以其冑女孟姚配而七世之孫. According to the “So-yin,” Yao was her cognomen and Meng her agnomen and she was the daughter of Wu Kuang 吳廣 (on Wu Kuang see Wang Lich’i, Jen-piao, pp. 587-8). 45 Han-yü ta tz’u-tien (2:882) defines shou yen 受 言 as “a ruler receives words (of remonstrance).” 46 Presumably what Pien Ch’üeh had said about the Viscount’s illness being the same as that of Duke Mu of Ch’in and the fact that he would wake up in a few days as the Duke had. 47 There were three statelets named Kuo (East, West, and Southern Kuo, see Aoki, p. 152n.) located south and east of modern San-men Hsia in Honan–T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:23). T’ang Yao, op. cit., p. 41, n. 16) argues that this must be Eastern Kuo. But, as the “Chi-chieh” and “Cheng-yi” commentaries point out the chronology is off here, since Kuo had been wiped out by Chin in 665 B.C. over a century before Viscount Chien ruled Chao. “So-yin” speculates that these events could have taken place in Kuo 虢, a later reincarnation of the earlier Kuo 郭. As Liang Yü-sheng (33.1367) has shown, other later texts (Hou Han shu, etc.) refer this story to Kuo as well. But as Ts’ui Shih (pp. 205-6) points out, this is all allegory and the exact place or time is not important. The focus is on Pien Ch’üeh’s medical marvels. As verification of Ts’ui’s claims note that in the Shuo yüan 說苑 (18.470) these events take place in Chao 趙 and in Han Fei Tzu 韓非子 they are located in Ts’ai 蔡 (“Yü lao” 喻老, 7:2b-3b, SPPY). 48 In Han Shih wai-chuan 韓詩外傳 (10.6b-7b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) there is a parallel account which differs somewhat from the text here. For T’ai-tzu 太子, “Heir,” for example, Han Shih wai-chuan reads Shih-tzu 世子, “legitimate successor.” 49 Where petitions from those other than the court would normally be accepted, cf. Enno Giele, “The Duduan 獨斷 and Imperial Communication in Early China.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Free University Berlin, 2001, pp. 107ff. 50 Chung-shu tzu 中 庶子 (cf. the explanation of this position in the “So-yin,” Shih chi, 68.2227).

10

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

precedence over all the [other] matters?”51 The Household Headmaster said, “The Heir became ill, [his] blood and ch’i were irregular,52 in disorder not able to be discharged, and when they violently broke forth to the outside, then they caused injury to the center. When the essence and the spirit53 can not stop the noxious ch’i, the noxious ch’i accumulates and cannnot be discharged. For this reason the yang was slowed and the yin was intensified. For this reason, he suddenly 51 Bridgman (p. 19 and 56, n. 20) reads jang 禳 as a ritual connected with burial and translates this line quite differently as: “Dans ce pays la détermination du tombeau a le pas sure les autres affaires.” The term does not come up in Mu-chou Poo’s “Ideas concerning Death and Burial in PreHan and Han China” (AM, 3rd Series, 3.2 [1990]:25-62), although Poo’s conclusion (p. 33) that there was no “correct way” to conduct burials at this time may suggest why reference works on early ritual do not associate jang and burial—i.e., it may well have been a local custom. Wu and Lu (105.2742n.) understand it simply as a ceremony of exorcism. Perhaps this jang ceremony was similar to the ssu t’u 祀土 in which sacrifices were made to the Hou T’u 厚土 before burial (cf. Chung-kuo feng-su tz’u-tien 中國風俗辭典. Yeh Ta-ping 葉大兵 and Wu Ping-an 烏丙安, eds. [Shanghai: Shang-hai Tz’u-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1990], p. 263). The parallel text in Han Shih waichuan (10.6b) reads: 吾問聞國中卒有壤土之事。得無有急乎 “I have heard that in the capital city there is a hurry to have the ‘matter of excavated dirt’ [i.e., a burial]. Is there a rush?” This expression jang-t’u chih shih 壤土之事 (cf. also Lao Chuang tz’u-tien 老莊詞典, Wang Shih-shun 王世舜 and Han Mu-chün 韓慕君, eds. [Tsinan: Shan-tung Chiao-yü Ch’u-pan-she, 1993], p. 435 on the meaning of jang 壤 as “dirt which has been dug from a hole”) seems to be a euphemism for burial. The parallel lines in Shuo yüan (18.471), where the text otherwise has Pien Ch’üeh stopping off in Chao, are exactly the same. Another possibility is that the jang was simply an exorcism which followed the death of an important official of leader intended to dispel the evil that caused it. 52 On blood and ch’i 氣 (which we have elsewhere translated variously as “airs, ethers, emanations, energy, and (vital) force,” but given the complexity of the term in the medical context and the lack of a Western counterpart we here ‘render’ simply in the romanized ch’i) see Paul U. Unschuld’s “Blood and Qi,” in Huang Di nei jing su wen, Nature, Knowledge, Imagery in an Ancient Chinese Medical Texts [hereafter Su wen] (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), pp. 144-67. See also Unschuld’s discussion of the difficulty in translating the term ch’i (pp. 145-6). 53 See also Morita (p. 36, n. 42) who believes that “spirit” here refers to the yang ch’i 陽氣 a functional activity, whereas the yin ch’i 陰氣 relates to substance (cf. Xie Zhu-Fan 謝竹 藩, Classified Dictionary of Traditional Chinese Medicine (Revised Edition) [Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 2002], p. 52). Aoki (p. 152) argues that ching shen 精神 refers to the “correct ch’i” 正氣 as opposed to the hsieh ch’i 邪氣 (noxious ch’i). Elisabeth Rochat de la Vallee (“Obstacles to Translating Classical Chinese Medical Texts into Western Languages,” in Paul U. Unschuld, ed. Approaches to Traditional Chinese Medical Literature (Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989], p. 70) argues that ching shen 精神 represents “a comprehensive expression of human life . . . Jing, “essences,” represents any substance full of life, while shen, “spirits,” represents the heavenly inspiration in each person. The paired expression jing/shen represents the interpenetration of Heaven and Earth at its higher level: the extraction of and renewal of the substances which compose every thing . . . .”

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

11

dropped down and died.”54 Pien Ch’üeh said, “At what time did he die?” [The Household Headmaster] said, “From cockcrow until now.” [Pien Ch’üeh] said, “Has [the body] been encoffined?” [The Household Headmaster] said, “Not yet. His death cannot yet be half a day [ago].” “Please report [to Your Lord] that his servant is Ch’in Yüeh-jen [originally] from Po-hai in Ch’i. My family is located in Cheng 鄭55 and I have not yet been able gaze on the elegant face [of Your Lord] or stand before him in attendance. I have heard that the Heir has unfortunately died, but your servant is able to bring him to life.” [The Household Headmaster] said, “Venerable Sir, how could you boast about this? How can you say that the Heir can be brought back to life! I have heard that in highest antiquity among the physicians there was Yü Fu 俞跗.56 He treated illnesses 54

On chüeh 蹶 (literally, “to fall”) T’ang Yao (p. 41, n. 22) says this ancient malady involved a dizzy, confused state in which perception of others was lost prior to the afflicted’s collapse; the passage he cites from the Ch’üeh lun 厥論 parallels our text: 邪氣逆則陽氣亂，陽氣亂則不知人 也。 An extremely detailed discussion of this condition can be found in Unschuld, Su wen, pp. 222-7 and the lengthy discussion in Hsu, The Transmission of Chinese Medicine, Case 9. Unschuld (p. 223 and 224) translates the condition as “recession” and notes that chüeh, in keeping with the vessel theory, denotes “first, a movement of yin or yang qi out of a section where it should be present but ceases to be present; and second, a violent reaction resulting in a sudden fall and immediate death (with this ‘death’ being either unconsciousness or real death)’; further “jue came to be used to designate conditions thought to be caused by reverse moving qi.” Unschuld translates the line in our passage as “hence he suddenly fell and died” (p. 223). The point is that whereas the word means both the disease “recession” and “to fall,” Pien Ch’üeh can see this case in the larger sense of a disease whereas the Household Headmaster understands only that the Heir has falled and apparently “died.” 55 Cheng is thought to be a scribal error for Mo 鄚 as above on Shih chi, 105.2785 (cf. Wu and Lu, 105.2743n.). 56 The earliest mention of Yü Fu (also written 俞柎，踰跗，舁跗) is probably that in the Hokuan Tzu 鶡冠子 (16.1a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.; there is no discussion of the anecdote in which Yü Fu is mentioned, i.e, the narrative which parallels that of Pien Ch’üeh stopping in Kuo, in the major study of the Ho-kuan Tzu by Carine Defoort [The Pheasant Cap Master (He guan zi): A Rhetorical Reading [Albany: SUNY Press, 1997]). In Lo Mi’s 羅泌 (Sung dynasty) Lu shih 路史 (14.18.b, Hou-chi 後紀 5) he is mentioned with Lei Kung 雷公 and other advisors of Huang-ti 黃 帝. Perhaps an earlier tradition citing Pien Ch’üeh and Yü Fu as masters of vessel-tract cures (maiching liao 脈經療) is recorded in the “Hsüan-yüan pen-chi' 軒轅本紀 of Yün-chi ch’i-ch’ien (100.11b-12a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.). A work collecting the prescriptions (or formulae) of Yü Fu and Pien Ch’üeh is listed in the bibliographic treatise of the Han shu (30.1777) where he is also said to have been a man of “extreme antiquity” (t’ai ku 太古, 30.1780). Many other mentions of Yü Fu seem derivative of this biography. In the parallel version in Han Shih wai-chuan (10.6b) before Yü Fu is mentioned, the medical methods of the ancient physician Ti Fu 弟父 are given; in Shuo yüan (18.471) it was the practices

12

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

without using medicinal decoction or wines, stone needles, stretching and pulling,57 massaging and vibrating,58 or using drugs in compresses.59 As soon as [the patient] removed [his clothes],60 and he saw the [external] manifestation of the illness, in accordance with the acupoints of the five viscera,61 he scraped the skin62 and loosened the muscles [to remove the pathogenic],63 cleaned out the vessels and joined the muscles [along the meridians],64 put massaging pressure on the marrow and the brain, and taking hold of the space above the diaphragm and grasping with the whole hand the diaphragm,65 he rinsed out the digestive tract, cleansed the five viscera, refining the essences66 and changing the bodily form. Venerable Sir, if your formulae can be like this, then the Heir can be of the ancient physician Miao Fu 苗父 that are first discussed. This entire passage has been abridged from the version in our text. 57 In the Yin shu 引書 (Document on Pulling; on this text see Donald J. Harper, Early Chinese Medical Literature, The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts [London: Kegan Paul, 1998], pp. 84ff.) chuan 撟 and yin 引 are often paired, as in the following passage: “To pull the flesh of the back, bend forward at the knees, extend the back, entwine the hands, stretch and rotate towards the back.” 引腜者，屈前膝，信後，昔手，撟而後旋; Yin shu shih-wen chu-shih 引書釋文注釋, in Chang Chia-shan Han-mu chu-chien (Erh-ssu-ch’i hao mu) 張家山漢墓竹簡（二四七號墓）(Peking: Wen-wu Ch’u-pan-she, 2001), p. 287. 58 For wu 杌 “shaking” or “moving” the limbs see Chien-ming Chung-yi tz’u-tien 簡明中醫辭 典, Chung-yi Yen-chiu Yüan 中醫研究院 and Kuang-chou Chung-yi Hsüeh-yüan 廣州中醫學院, eds. (Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1979), p. 747. 59 Reading tu 毒 as a general term for drugs (cf. Aoki, p. 154n.). 60 On po 撥 as “to remove the clothes” see Aoki, p. 154n. and T’ang Yao, p. 41, n. 32. 61 See the discussion of shu 輸 below in the second part of this chapter (case 22). 62 This scraping caused local congestion (cf. Xie, Classified Dictionary, p. 216). For a more thorough discussion of p’i 皮, see case 17 in the second half of this chapter below. 63 Although the context seems to call for chieh (parallel to ko 割, “to pare”) to mean “dissect” or something similar, chieh chi 解肌 is a standard compound meaning “to dispel pathogenic factors from the superficial muscles” (Xie, Classified Dictionary, p. 216). Chi 肌 might also mean “fatty part of the skin.” 64 The reading here follows T’ang Yao’s translation (p. 44: lien chieh ching-chin 聯結經筋) and Xie Zhu-fan’s gloss for ching chin 經筋 (p. 445). 65 Huang 荒 is used for huang 肓 here (T’ang Yao, p. 44, n. 36). On the method of chua method (chua fa 抓法) cf. Xie, Classified Dictionary, p. 515. Wu and Lu (105.2743n.) argue that chua 爪 is an interpolation here (possibly a scribal error in which the bottom part of huang 荒 was copied as a separate character, cf. Aoki, p. 154n.) and prefer to read the line without it, paralleling the preceding line, as she huang mu 揲荒幕, “to take hold of the diaphragm and the area above it” [??]. The Shuo yüan (18.4781) parallel reads shu huang mo 束肓莫, “to bind (or restrain) the huang membrane [ii.e., diaphragm].” 66 Following T’ang Yao’s translation (p. 44).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

13

brought back to life. If they cannot be like this, though you desire to bring him back to life, you should not even announce this to a gurgling baby.” After [what seemed like] a whole day, Pien Ch’üeh looked up at Heaven, sighed, and said, “Master, as for what you take as your methods, they are like looking at Heaven through a tube or inspecting a pattern through a crack. I, Yüeh-jen, practice procedures [in which] I do not wait to palpate the pulse, to examine the visage, auscultate the [bodily] sounds, 67 or to investigate the form [i.e., bodily appearance],68 [before] explaining where the illness is located. When I perceive the yang [status] of the illness, [then] I can analyze and attain the yin.69 When I learn the yin, I can analyze and attain the yang. When the resonance of the illness appears on the greater surface [of the patient’s body], if I am not beyond onethousand li [distant], those [illnesses] I can determine are extremely numerous and they cannot be fully detailed! If you consider my explanation is not true, try going in and examining the Heir. You should be able to hear a ringing in his ears and a stirring [of breath] in his nose; if you follow his two thighs to reach his private parts, they should still be warm.” [2790] Only when the Household Headmaster had heard Pien Ch’üeh’s explanation–his eyes with spots before them, being unable to blink, his tongue rolled up and not able to unroll–did he take Pien Ch’üeh’s explanation in [to the palace] to report them to the Lord of Kuo. When the Lord of Kuo heard it he was astounded. He came out [of the palace] to meet Pien Ch’üeh at the central gatetower70 and said, “The day I [first] heard of your high righteousness was long 67 The voice reveals the condition not only of those parts of the body normally associated with it (nose, mouth, lungs, throat, etc.), but also the condition of many other internal organs through the tone, breathing, language used, coughing, etc.; cf. Chien-ming Chung-yi tz’u-tien, p. 438. But this sort of auscultation involves the general sounds the body omits, as can be seen in the final lines of this paragraph where Pien Ch’üeh suggests listening to the sounds in the Heir’s ears and nose. 68 Following T’ang Yao’s (p. 42, n. 43) gloss of shen 審 for hsieh 寫. 69 Yang Hsüan-ts’ao 楊玄操 (T’ang dynasty [we know nothing of Yang’s life, but he left a preface to the Nan ching 難經 [cf. Nan-ching pen-yi 難經本義, “Hui-k’ao” 彙考, 2a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.] and seems to have commented on the Huang-ti nei-ching 黃帝內經 [cf. Wang Ying-lin 王應麟 (1223-1206), Han Yi-wen-chih k’ao-cheng 漢藝文志考證, 10.9b, Ssu-k’u ch’üanshu ed.]; in Chuo-keng lu 輟耕錄, 24.21b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.], he appears in a list of doctors over the centuries under the T’ang dynasty group), as cited in the “Cheng-yi,” explains that if the disease is in the viscera, it will appear as yang on the back, whereas if the disease is an external one, it will enter into the yin and appear in the stomach. On the yin-yang correspondences in the context of disease, see Unschuld, Su wen, pp. 83-92, esp. p. 88 and case 22 in the second part of this chapter. 70 Chung ch’üeh 中闕 was the gate between the Ku Men 庫門 (Treasury Gate), which the feudal lords used, and the Lu-men 路門 (Road Gate) inside the palace; the Middle Gatetower was

14

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

ago. But I have not yet been able to pay my respects in person. Venerable Sir, you stopping by my little state and fortunately raising this matter, for me as the lonely minister of this remote state is fortunate in the extreme. With you, Venerable Sir, [here], [the Heir] will live. Without you, he would be abandoned to fill a ditch,71 forever dead and unable to return [to life].” His speech not yet finished, he then let his pent up feelings go in sobs, his soul and essence diffusing in all directions, tears flowing in long streams disconsolately catching in his eyelashes; he was so sorrowful he was unable to control himself, his face and bearing altered and changed.72 Pien Ch’üeh said, “An illness like the Heir’s is that which is called ‘Drop like a Corpse.’ When the yang enters into the yin, it churns the stomach, 73 entwining the central channels, linking vessels, and capillaries,’ 74 [then] separates and descends into the triple energizer 75 and the bladder. For this reason the yang vessels drop down and the yin vessels struggle to rise up; the ch’i intersections are blocked and do not connect. The yin ascends and the yang moves inwardly; in the lower part [of the body] [*2791*] and the internal part, [the yang] though roused will not rise. In the upper [body parts] the external [yang] is cut off and cannot been dispatched. Above there are links of that from which non-officials could submit reports or petitions (Wu and Lu, 105.2744n.). Pien Ch’üeh earlier (Shih chi, 105.2788) speaks to the Household Headmaster from “beneath the palace gate,” the place commoners probably came to submit petitions or convey a message to the court (see the excellent discussion of such submissions from non-courtiers during the Han dynasty in Enno Giele “The Duduan 獨斷 and Imperial Communication in Early China, Part I: The Central Decision-Making,” Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Free University, Berlin, 2001, pp. 78 and 107ff. Thus the Lord of Kuo is both showing the urgency of this situation as well as paying Pien Ch’üeh great honor by coming out to meet him. 71 A euphemism for death. Cf. Ch’u hsüeh chi 初學記 (14.27a, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.): 不得 埋曰棄，不得其尸曰捐 “not to be able to be buried is call ‘abandonment,’ not to be obtain the corpse is called ‘casting away.’” 72 Hsü Kuang (cited in the “Chi-chieh”) saw an edition which read more simply: “His speech not yet finished, he then wept streams of tears and sobbed, unable to control himself” 言未卒，因 涕泣交流，噓唏不能自止. 73 Cf. Unschuld, Su wen, p. 157: “The regular qi of a normal person is supplied by the stomach. / [The stomach (qi) is the regular qi of the normal person.] / When someone has no stomach qi, that is called ‘movement contrary [to a regular course].’ / A movement contrary [to a regular course results in] death.” 74 Here we follow the syntax in Aoki (p. 158) and Takigawa (105.13), which breaks the line after tung wei 動胃 rather than after ch’an yüan 纏緣 as in the Chung-hua edition. Ching 經 (channels) are the conduits through which the blood and ch’i circulate in the body. 75 San chiao 三焦 or “triple energizer” is a “collective term for the three portions of the body cavity [upper, middle, and lower] through which qi and fluids are transmitted” (Xie, Classified Dictionary, p. 19).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

15

exhausted yang cut off, below there is a knot of broken yin. With yin broken and yang exhausted the face loses color and the pulses are disordered. Therefore, the bodily form is as still as if it were dead. The Heir has not yet died. As this is a case of the yang entering the yin it interrupts viscera,76 [but] he continues to live. If it were a case of the yin entering the yang interrupting the viscera, he would have died. All of these several things occur suddenly when the five viscera become numb to their core. A good artisan selects this [relevant treatment],77 the clumsy one remains doubtful. [2792] Then Pien Ch’üeh had his disciple, Tzu Yang 子陽, sharpen needles and smooth stones in order to chose the five intersections78 of the external three yang [vessels]. After some time had passed, the Heir revived. Only then did he [Pien Ch’üeh] have Tzu Pao 子豹79 boil an iron [so the heat would penetrate] five inches with a dose of medicine eight times reduced80 to alternately use as a hot compress beneath his two ribcages. The Heir sat up, again regulated yin and yang, after only taking a decoction for twenty days he was as good as ever.’’ For this reason all the world thinks Pien Ch’üeh was able to bring a dead man alive. Pien Ch’üeh said, “Yüeh-jen [i.e., I] is not able to revive a dead man. In this case, he was supposed to keep on living on his own and I was able to allow him to get up.” [2793] When Pien Ch’üeh stopped by in Ch’i, Marquis Huan 桓 of Ch’i (r. 374-357 B.C.) made him a retainer.81 He went into court for an audience and said, “My Lord has a disease between the skin and the flesh; if it is not treated, it will go deeper.” Marquis Huan said, “I, the lonely one, have no disease.” When Pien Ch’üeh had left [the court], Marquis Huan said to his attendants, “When a 76

Reading chih lan 支蘭 as to “interrupt” or “stop off” (Aoki, p. 158). Alternately, “good craftsman could take away [the illness].” 78 On the wu hui 五會 see Aoki, p. 161n. and Xie, Classified Dictionary, p. 472, 481, and 473. 79 Presumably he was another disciple or assistant. 80 Wu and Lu (105.2746n.) cite texts to support the reading of chien 減 as a Ch’i dialect word for fen 分 and explain that the strength of the medicine had to be cut since the Heir was in such a weakened condition. 81 There is a parallel passage in Han Fei Tzu, “Yü lao” 喻老, (7:2b-3b, SPPY), but there the ruler is Marquis Huan 桓 of Ts’ai 蔡 (r. 714-695 B.C.). See also Unschuld’s comments (Su wen, p. 173) on this anecdote; Unschuld points out that in the Su wen a disease in the bones and their marrow “does not constitute the final sanctuary to be aimed at by an intruder to kill the host.” It is rather when the noxious ch’i reached the “ceasing yin vessel” beyond which there was no hope for the patient. 77

16

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

physician is fond of profit, he wants to use someone who is not diseased to earn merit.” Five days later, Pien Ch’üeh again had an audience and said, “My Lord has a disease in the blood vessels; if it is not treated, I fear it will become go deeper.” Marquis Huan said, “I, the lonely one, have no disease.” When Pien Ch’üeh had left, Marquis Huan was not pleased. Five days later, Pien Ch’üeh again had an audience and said, “My Lord has a disease in the digestive tract; if it is not treated, it will become go deeper.” Marquis Huan did not respond. When Pien Ch’üeh had left, Marquis Huan was not pleased. Five days later, Pien Ch’üeh again had an audience and, seeing Marquis Huan from afar, he withdrew [from court] and fled. Marquis Huan sent men to ask his reasons. Pien Ch’üeh said, “When the disease resides in between the skin and the flesh, decoctions and a hot iron [to prepare medicinal compresses] are that which can reach it. When it lies in the blood vessels, stone needles are that which can reach it. When it lies in the digestive tract, medicinal wines are that which can reach it. When it lies within the bone marrow, even those who are in charge of fate are helpless. Now it lays within the bone marrow; for this reason this humble subject did not request [to treat it].” Five days later, Marquis Huan’s body became ill and he sent men to summon Pien Ch’üeh. Pien Ch’üeh had already fled away. Marquis Huan then died. If a sage can draw knowledge from the slightest beginnings, we can allow a good physician would be able with early [symptoms] to follow the matter [of what disease is developing], and thus the disease can be ended, the body can be revived. That which brings ill to people, is that illnesses are numerous, but that which brings ill to physicians [*2794*], is that the ways to treat illnesses are few. Therefore, in illnesses, there are six [types of people] that are not treatable: arrogant and reckless people who cannot be reasoned with are the first that cannot be treated; those who do not consider their physical bodies important, but emphasize wealth are the second that cannot be treated; those who are not able to dress and eat appropriately are the third who cannot be treated. Those whose yin and yang join and whose visceral ch’i is unstable are the fourth who cannot be treated. Those whose bodily form is thin and weak and cannot take medicine are the fifth who cannot be treated. Those who believe in shamans but do not believe in physicians are the sixth who cannot be treated. If one has one of these [types], then they are extremely hard to treat.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

17

Pien Ch’üeh’s name was known throughout the world. When he passed through Han-tan 邯鏐,82 he heard that they esteemed women and then he became a physician for ‘below the belt.’83 When he stopped in Lo-yang 雒陽,84 he heard that the people of Chou85 admired the elderly and then he became a physician of obstructions in ears and eyes.86 When he came into Hsien-yang 咸陽,87 he heard that the people of Ch’in admired children, and he then became a children’s physician. He transformed himself according to local customs. Li Hsi 李醯,88 the Grand Prefect of Medicine 89 in Ch’in, knew himself that his techniques for healing were not as good as Pien Ch’üeh’s, [so] he sent someone to assassinate him.90 Up until the present, those in the world who expound on pulse [all] based themselves on Pien Ch’üeh.91

82

Although the chronology of this chapter presents a number of problems, it may well be that this visit to Han-tan occurred after 386 B.C. when Marquis Ching 敬 of Chao moved his capital from Chin-yang 晉 陽 in modern Shansi to Han-tan (located just southwest of the modern eponymous city in Hopei, T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 83 Tai-hsia yi 帶下醫 (an abbreviation for tai-hsia mo yi 帶下脈醫 according to Wang Li-ch’i, 105.2219n.) is the traditional euphemism for a gynecologist. 84 This graphic variant for Lo-yang was used during the Han dynasty; the city was called Lo-yi 洛邑 during the Warring States era (Wang Li-ch’i, 105.2219n.). 85 A metonymic reference to the citizens of Lo-yang which was the capital of the Eastern Chou dynasty. 86 Cf. Unschuld (Su wen, p. 218) and case 17 below. 87 The capital of Ch’in from about 350 B.C. on (Shih chi, 5.203). The expression lai ju 來入 “came into” places the narrator of this text in Hsien-yang. Thus the tale may have been recorded or narrated by someone in Ch’in, as Takigawa (105.19) suggests. 88 Otherwise unknown. 89 T’ai yi ling 太醫令; he was in charge of all medical activities in the state. This position was first created by Ch’in (Wang Li-ch’i, 105.2219n.) 90 Fearing, apparently, that Pien Ch’üeh was after his position. Wang Li-ch’i (105.2219n.) records the local legend surrounding Pien Ch’üeh’s assassination: both the Shan-hsi t’ung-chih 陝西 通志 and the Chien-t’ung hsien-chih 監潼 縣志 locate the remains of Pien Ch’üeh’s tomb thirty miles northeast of the countyseat of modern Chien-t’ung County (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15) between Mount Li 驪 and the Wei 渭 River. This was on the main road from Ch’in to the lands of the Central States and the story tells that Pien Ch’üeh was killed by Li Hsi’s assassin(s) at a place called Hsi-ho Kou 西河溝 (West-river Gulley) and later buried above it. If the story is true, Li Hsi had nothing to fear, since Pien Ch’üeh travelled west from Han-tan through Lo-yang to Hsien-yang, but then appeared to be on his way back out of the Pass heading for the states to the east. 91 Or: “All that is expounded on the pulse originated with Pien Ch’üeh.”

Translator’s Note (for Pien Ch’üeh 92) William H. Nienhauser, Jr. The major question this text seems most likely to provoke in the reader is that of chronology: how can Pien Ch’üeh have lived over the many centuries that divide the several anecdotes in this chapter. Takigawa (105.2) suggests that Pien Ch’üeh may not have been a historical figure and notes that his “biography” seems intended to provide the origins of the medical techniques of Ts’ang-kung 倉公, who is the main subject of this chapter—in a way similar to the several accounts of minor assassins setting up the main narrative on Ching K’o 荊軻 in “Tz’u-k’e lieh-chuan” 刺客列傳. Other commentators attempt ad infinitum to alter the name of this ruler or that state to make the chronology fit. These efforts seem destined to failure, however. The most compelling argument is that of the modern scholar Chang Tsung-tung 張宗棟 who postulates that Pien Ch’üeh may have originally been someone’s name, but came to be a respectful general title for physicians in ancient China.93 Thus the Pien Ch’üeh in each of the narratives of this chapter are the titles of different people, their real names largely unknown. The opening biographical passage may refer, however, to the Pien Ch’üeh (his title) who is also known as Ch’in Ho 秦和 or Yi Ho 醫和. He appears in a passage of the Sung dynasty Yi-chia lei 醫家類 (“Yi shuo” 醫說, 1.6b, Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu ed.) by Chang Kao 張杲 (fl. 1177) in a text that resembles those collected in this memoir:: 92 In lieu of a Translator’s Note for “Ts’ang-kung lieh-chuan” see Elisabeth Hsu’s forthcoming Telling Touch. 93 Chang Tsung-tung claims that Pieh Ch’üeh came to be a polite, respectful, general title for physicians and did not refer to a single person (see his “Yi-sheng ch’eng-wei k’ao” 醫生稱謂考, Chung-hua yi-shih tsa-chih 中華醫史雜誌, 20.3 [1990], p. 142).

19

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

20

This Doctor Ho (Yi Ho) was a native of the state of Ch’in during the Spring and Autumn time. His cognomen is not known. Whent he Marquis of Ch’in had an illness, he asked the Lord of Ch’in for a doctor from Ch’in. The Lord sent Doctor Ho to examine him. He said: “The disease cannot be treated. This [disease] is called ‘the diseased black-magic of approaching women’s rooms.’ It is not from a ghost or from eating. It is an infatuation of female allure. When a fine minister is about to die [of it], the Mandate of Heaven will not protect him.” Chao Meng 趙孟 said, “He is a fine doctor.” He (Chao Meng) was generous in the ritual treatment [he gave Doctor Ho] and [then] sent him home.

The remaining anecdotes in the first biography of this chapter 105 are all about other unnamed Pien Ch’üeh. They do not seem to be intended to be historically consistent or true, but rather are medical exemplary tales designed to instruct or enlighten. Ssu-ma Ch’ien (or the source he used) must have assembled all the Pien Ch’üeh tales (much as the narratives concerning exiles may have been affixed to Ch’ü Yüan, whom David Hawkes claims was a “target figure” for such material94) in one chapter. Ssu-ma Ch’ien must have realized himself the chronological anarchy of this biography. Thus he placed this chapter after that on T’ien Shu 田叔 and before the memoir on Liu P’i 劉濞. This dating was done according to the life of Ts’ang-kung, not Pien Ch’üeh, and thereby violates the principle that Ssu-ma Ch’ien set up in the two earlier parallel biographies of ancient and modern men, chapters 83 and 84 on Lu Chung Lien 魯仲連 and Tsou Yang 鄒陽, then Ch’ü Yüan 屈原 and Chia Yi 賈宜, respectively (these two chapters were placed according to Lu Chung Lien and Ch’ü Yüan’s lives). Finally, there are some interesting comments by Su Ch’e 蘇轍 (1039-1102) on Pien Ch’üeh’s biography (in Ku shih 古史 cited in Yang Yen-ch’i, Li-tai, p. 662). Su claims that the parallel passage concerning Viscount Ch’ien’s dream and Pien Ch’üeh explanation thereof has been removed from the account given in the “Chao shih-chia.” He supposes that this was done because the “hereditary houses” was a more sober genre and that such kuai 怪 narratives would naturally belong among the memoirs. But the text we have of the “Chao shih-chia” contains both the dream and Pien Ch’üeh’s explanation of it. Although this single passage, which may invite other interpretations than that given here, cannot prove that Su Ch’e’s Shih chi was a different text than the one we have today, it 94

See Hawkes’s review of Laurence A. Schneider’s A Madman of Ch’u: The Chinese Myth of Loyalty and Dissent in Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews (CLEAR) 4.2 (July 1982): 245.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

21

may serve to caution the modern reader that that textual lineage of the Shih chi remains murky and treacherous.

Bibliography (Pien Ch’üeh) I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:142-238. Bridgman, R. F. “La médicine dans la Chine antique, d’après les biographies de Pien-ts’io et de Chouen-yu Yi (Chapitre 105 des Mémoires historiques dde Sseu-ma Ts’ien),” Mélanges chinois et bouddhique, 10 (1955): 1-213. Morita Den’ichirō 森田伝一郎. Shiki Hen Shaku Sô-kô retsuden yakuchû 史記扁 鵲倉公列傳訳注. Tokyo: 雄山閣出版, 1986. Morita relies on a number of Edo-era translators, many of whom were Japanese physicians (see p. 13). Nguyên, Trân-huán. “Biographie de Pien Tsio,” Bulletin de la Société des Études Indochinoises, 32 (1957): 59-79. T’ang Yao 唐耀. “Pien Ch’üeh, Ts’ang-kung lieh-chuan” 扁鵲，倉公列傳, in Yi ku wen 醫古文. Tuan Yi-shan 段逸山, ed. Rpt. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng 人 民 衛 生 Ch’u-pan-she, 1994 (1986), pp. 38-47. Annotated, partial translation. II. Studies Harper, Donald J. “The Conception of Illness in Early Chinese Medicine, as Documented in Newly Discovered 3rd and 2nd Century Manuscripts (Part I),” Sudhoffs Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften, 74 (1990). Li Po-ts’ung 李伯聰. Pien Ch’üeh ho Pien Ch’üeh hsüeh-p’ai yen-chiu 扁鵲和 扁鵲學派研究. Sian: Shan-hsi K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1990. Loewe, Michael. “The Physician Chunyu Yi 淳 于 意 and His Historical Background,” in En suivant la Voie Royale. Jacques Gernet and Marc Kalinowski, eds. Paris: École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1997, pp. 297313. Lu Gwei-djen and Joseph Needham. “Records of Diseases in Ancient China,” in Diseases in Antiquity. D. Brothwell and A. T. Sandison, eds. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1967. Ma Su 馬驌 (1621-1673). “Pien Ch’üeh Wen-chih yi-shu” 扁鵲文摯醫術. In Yi shih 繹史. Tsinan: Ch’i Lu Shu-she, 2001, 4:113.2640-5. 23

24

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Needham, Joseph and Lu Gwei-djen. Science and Civilization in China. V. 6. Biology and Biological Technology. Part VI. Medicine. Nathan Sivin, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Brief comments on Pien Ch’üeh, pp. 45-6. T’ien Ching 田靜. “Ssu-ma Ch’ien pi-hsia te Pien Ch’üeh hsing-hsiang” 司馬遷 筆下的扁鵲形象, Ssu-ma Ch’ien yü Shih chi lun-chi 司馬遷與史記論集. Chang Hsin-k’o 張新科 et al., eds. V. 5. Sian: Shan-hsi Jen-min, 2002, pp. 237-48. Ts’ao Tung-yi 曹東義. “Pien Ch’üeh (Ch’in Yüeh jen) li-chi k’ao” 扁鵲 (秦越 人) 里籍考, Chung-hua yi-shih tsa-chih 中華醫史雜誌, 23.1 (1993): 15-19. Yamada Keiji 山田慶児. “Hen Shaku densetsu” 扁鵲傳説 (The Legend of Pien Ch’üeh), Tôhô gakuhô, 60 (1988): 73-158.

T’ai Ts’ang-kung 太倉公 (The Great Granarian) 95 translated by Elisabeth Hsu [105.2794] T’ai Ts’ang-kung 太倉公 (The Great Granarian) was the Chief of the Great Granary of Ch’i 齊.96 He was from Lin-tzu 臨淄.97 His cognomen was 95 [Translator’s note: The page numbers in the main text refer to the Shiji Zhonghua shuju edition, but the translation is based on and quotes commentators from the Shiki kaichû kôshô 史記 會注考證 (Examination of the collected commentaries to the records of the historian), 1932-1934. Commented by Takigawa Kametaro 瀧川龜太郎. Toyo Bunka Gakuin, Tokyo. Please note that an effort was made to translate all Chinese words; mai 脈 can be approximated in English as 'pulse' or 'vessel’, and sometimes it is difficult to know in which sense it was used; the translator had to make choices in English while the term in Chinese is vague. N.B.: The document comes in two parts: 1. introductory part, written in Wade Giles, rest all in pinyin.] [Editor’s note: Unlike all other chapters, Elisabeth Hsu has based her rendition on, and quotes commentators from the Shiki kaichū kōshō 史記會注考證, edited and commented by Takigawa Kametarō 瀧川龜太郎. Her version of this rendition, in Pinyin romanization with an apparatus similar to the text Dr. Hsu presented to this project, will appear in her forthcoming book Pulse Diagnosis in Early Chinese Medicine: The Telling Touch (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, forthcoming 2010 [hereafter Telling Touch]). The text here has been edited to bring it in line with the other chapters.] 96 T’ai Ts’ang-kung 太倉公 figures on Shih chi, 10.427-8 as T’ai Ts’ang-ling 太倉令 “The Prefect of the Great Granary” (Bielenstein), as Ch’un-yü Kung 淳于公 “the Chief [Master] Ch’unyü’ and as T’ai Ts’ang-kung 太倉公 “Chief of the Great Granary.” The praenomen Yi is not mentioned. In Lun heng 論衡 (“Hsieh-tuan” 謝短, Lun-heng chu-shih [4v. Peking: Chung-hua, 1979], 2:724), there is mention of a Ch’un-yü Te 淳于德, also rendered as 淳于 , whom Wang Shu-min (105.2901) identifies the same person as Ch’un-yü Yi. Michael Loewe, “The Physician Chunyu Yi and His Historical Background” ( in En suivant la voie royale, Jacques Gernet, Marc Kalinowski, and Jean-Pierre Dièny, eds. [Paris: École Française d’Extrême Orient, 1997], p. 31) argues that Yi changed his personal name from Yi to Te. He points out that on Shih chi, 105.2814, Yi himself mentions that he changed his personal name, in his response to interrogation question 3. 97 Lin-tzu was the capital of Ch’i 齊, situated at 36.8° N, 118.3° E, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:1920).

25

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

26

Ch’un-yü 淳于,98 his praenomen was Yi 意. When he was young, he was fond of medical formulae and techniques.99 In the eighth year of Empress Kao 高 (180 B.C.), he took another master, Yang Ch’ing 陽慶, a kung-sheng-dignitary100 of the ward Yüan 元 from the same commandery.101 Ch’ing was over seventy years old, and had no sons.102 He had Yi discard all his previous formulae. Instead, he took all his [own] secret formulae and handed them over to him [Yi]. He transmitted pulse books103 attributed to Huang Ti and Pien Ch’üeh,104 how to 98

Ch’un-yü 淳于 is a cognomen and a place name. Ch’un-yü is a variously mentioned family name, as in the case of Ch’un-yü Ch’ang 淳于長, a native of Wei 魏 commandery, see Han shu, 93.3730 and of a rather ruthless female doctor, Ch’un-yü Yan 淳于衍, see Han shu, 8.251, 68.2952, 97A.3966-8. Ch’un-yü was a city-state during the Chou period, according to Chang Shou-chieh. It is the name of a town in Ch’i in case 20. 99 Yi fang 醫方 “medical formulae” occurs over forty times in the Shih chi, and fang shu 方術 “esoteric techniques” is about double as frequent; i fang shu occurs only once and probably is a mistake (perhaps, copyists unfamiliar with the concept i fang, added shu, to compose the idiom “medical fang shu”). The translator follows Nathan Sivin (“Text and Experience in Classical Chinese Medicine,” in D. Bates, ed., Knowledge and the Scholarly Medical Traditions [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995], p. 179) in translating fang as “formulae,” although “techniques” is equally valid. For recent work on fang shu in antiquity, see D. Harper, Early Chinese Medical Literature: The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts. (London: Routledge, 1998) and, for medieval times, M. Kalinowski M., Divination et société dans la Chine médiévale: Étude des manuscripts de Dunhuang de la Bibliothèque nationale de France et de la British Library (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2003). 100 Kung-sheng 公乘 is a family name, according to Chang Chao. It is an order of honor comparable to Hsiang Ch’u's 項處 in case 25, according to Ssu-ma Chen. For the latter, see Michael Loewe, “Orders of Honour,” TP 48 (1960): 97-174). The Yi-shuo 醫說 (SKCS, 1.9b), (which contains also misinterpretations), refers here to a certain Yang Ch’ing and not to a kungch’eng-dignitary Yang Ch’ing. F. Hübotter (“Zwei berühmte chinesische Ärzte des Altertums Chouen Yu-I und Hua T’ouo,” Mitteilungen der deutschen Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens 21A [1927]: 4), R. F. Bridgman (“La médicine dans la Chine antique,” Mélanges Chinois et Bouddhique 10 [1955]: 24) and the translator follow Ssu-ma Chen; Nathan Sivin (“Text and Experience in Classical Chinese Medicine,” in D. Bates, ed., Knowledge and the Scholarly Medical Traditions [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995], p. 179) follows Chang Chao. 101 [Editor’s note: alternate reading “in Yüan hamlet.”] 102 This information contradicts that given in the last section of the chapter, where Yang Ch’ing 陽慶 is said to have sons and grandsons, as Liang Yü-sheng notes (33:1368). One of the sons is named Yin 殷 in Yi’s response to interrogation question 6. 103 Mai 脈 can be approximated in English as “pulse” or “vessel,” and sometimes it is difficult to know in which sense it was used. 104 Han shu, 30.1776 lists a “Pien Ch’üeh nei-wai ching” 扁鵲內外經 (Inner and Outer Canon of Pien Ch’üeh).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

27

examine illness by means of the five colors, how to recognise whether a person will die or live, how to judge over the doubtful and determine the curable.105 When it came to structured analytical discussions on drugs, he was highly refined.106 After receiving these teachings for three years, he [Yi] as a person107 treated illness and made decisions about death and life, which largely were proven true. In spite of this, he wandered around among the feudal lords, and did not treat his home as a home. Sometimes, he did not treat illness on behalf of other people, and among the families of the ill many bore grudge against him.108 In the [fourth] year of Emperor Wen 文 [176 B.C.],109 a person submitted a memorial to the Emperor that denounced Yi with the charge of corporeal punishment, and he was about to be transferred to the West and go to Ch’ang-an 長安.110 Yi had five daughters. Accordingly, they wept. Yi got angry and scolded them: “I have fathered children, but not fathered any sons. In times of crisis, no one can be made to serve me.” At this his youngest daughter T’i-ying 緹縈 felt distressed by her father's words. She thereupon followed her father to the West and submitted a document to the Emperor saying: “As to your maid’s father as an official, everyone in Ch’i praises him for being honest and fair. Now he is tried by law and faces corporeal punishment. Your maid feels palpable pain. As the dead cannot return to life, those who received corporeal punishment cannot

105

4).

The translator follows Bridgman (p. 24) and Sivin (p. 179), and diverges from Hübotter (p.

106

“Yao lun” 藥論 could also be translated as a book title and below as Book of the Discourse on Drugs 藥論書. See D. J. Keegan, “The ‘Huang-ti Nei-Ching’: The Structure of the Compilation; The Significance of the Structure” (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1988), Sivin, “Text and Experience,” and Harper, Mawangdui on textual transmission in the context of Han medicine. No certainty can be given for the veracity of any of the titles that Yi mentions. 107 Wei jen 為人 “as defining characteristic of his personhood,” see Lun yü 1.2. Compare with case 22; alternate translation, as below: “on behalf of other people, for the people.” 108 Takigawa punctuates the text so that che 者 should be read as yeh 也; che often stands for yeh in this text. 109 Bridgman (p. 64, n. 63) provides a plausible explanation for a scribal error, four (176 B.C.) being mistaken as thirteen (167 B.C.). Loewe (“The Physician,” p. 31), in recognition of textual parallels of Shih chi, 10.427 and Han shu, 23.1098, considers the incident to have taken place in 167 B.C., i.e., the thirteenth year of Emperor Wen. The translator, in full awareness that this date does not tally with the date given in other parts of the Shih chi, suggests to take the date of 176 nevertheless at face value, and explore the consequences this entails, in particular for medical reasoning, before dismissing it as mistaken. 110 Ch’ang-an was the capital of the empire, west of the kingdom Ch’i.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

28

reattach [a lost member] again.111 Even if they wish to mend their conduct and renew themselves, it is never possible to achieve it. Your maid wishes to offer herself and become a female slave in order to remit her father’s crime deserving corporeal punishment, and effect that he can change his conduct and renew himself.” When the document was given a hearing, the Emperor was saddened by its meaning. 112 The model of punishment by mutilation was rescinded in this year, indeed.113 [*2796*] Yi lived at home.114 An imperial edict summoned him and asked about that which made him treat illnesses. Those whose death and life [he had prognosticated] accurately, how many persons were they? The main names among them were who?115 The imperial edict inquired the former Chief of the Granary, your servant, Yi: “Among the formulae and skills you are good at and the kinds of illnesses 111

Hsü 續 “to continue.” The translation above is based on the parallel text passages of Shih chi, 10.427 and Han shu, 23.1098, where the word shu 屬, “to attach,” replaces hsü. 112 In the Lieh-nü chuan (SPPY, 6.13b-14b), T’i-ying's skills of argumentation are praised. But in the Kuei fan of the Ming dynasty, she is praised for the filial piety (hsiao 孝) rather than for argumentative skills (Raphals 1998: 133-136). 113 According to Shih chi, 10.427-8 and Han shu, 23.1097-8, Ts’ang-kung was exempted from punishment by mutilation in the thirteenth year of Emperor Wen (167 B.C.). See also Shih chi, 22.1127, which provides confirmation that punishment by mutilation was rescinded in the thirteenth year of Emperor Wen (not in the twelfth as Hsü Kuang suggests). According to Han shu 23.1098, three cases were exempted from mutilation. Chang Shou-chieh explains: “Tattooing the face and cutting off the nose makes two, [cutting off] the left and the right foot [he?] was one, altogether this makes three” 黥劓二 [刖]左右趾[合]一 凡三也. 114 Fan Hsin-chün 范行準 (“Erh-ch’ien yi-pai nien ch’ien te yi-yü” 二千一百年前的醫獄 [A Medical Lawsuit, Two Thousand One Hundred Years Ago], manuscript printed by Ch’üan-kuo Yihsüeh Chung-hsin T’u-shu Kuan, 1963) suggests that this sentence should be the last sentence of the previous paragraph. This would indicate that after the Ch’ang-an incident Yi lived at home, which can be a form of punishment. As said above, he had wandered around before that, and did not treat his home as a home. 115 Ch’en Tzu-lung postulates a causal relation between the incident in Ch’ang an and the Imperial edict. Because of this incident, “hence” (ku 故) the edict was issued for Yi personally. Sivin (“Text and Experience,” p. 178) sees no causal relation between the Ch’ang-an incident and the edict; Loewe (“The Physician,” p. 307), however, has not found any textual evidence of an imperial edict of the kind being sent out to Ch’i, an event well worth recording. However, Loewe too argues that Yi’s statement is not a defense against the criminal charges, not least because some dealings with personages Yi records, in his view, must have taken place at a later date than the Ch’ang-an incident; Christopher Cullen (“Yi’an [Case Statements]: The Origins of a Genre of Chinese Medical Literature,” in Innovation in Chinese Medicine, ed. Elisabeth Hsu, ed. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001], p. 304) connects the edict to various political upheavals in Ch’i. Sivin, Loewe and Cullen have a viewpoint that contrasts with Hübotter (p. 5), Bridgman (p. 25), and Hsu (Telling Touch).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

29

you can treat, are there any books about them, do you have them or not? In each case, where did you receive instruction [on them]. You received instruction [on them] for how many years? When you tried them, were there any that were verified? From which prefecture and which ward were the persons [treated]? What were the disorders? When the medical treatment and drugs were finished, the appearance of those disorders, what was it like, in all cases? Be comprehensive and detailed in your answers.” [Section 2] Your servant, Yi, replied saying: “From the time when I, Yi, was young, I was fond of medicine and drugs. The formulae of medicine and drugs, 116 however, when I tried them out, mostly were not verified [i.e. they were ineffective].117 When the eighth year of Empress Kao (180 B.C.) was reached, I succeeded in meeting my master, the kung-sheng-dignitary Yang Ch’ing from the ward Yüan in Lin-tzu.118 Ch’ing was over seventy years old, but I, Yi, had the privilege to meet and serve him. He spoke to me, Yi, saying: “Get rid of all your formula books. They are wrong. I, Ch’ing, have inherited and been transmitted from the ancient predecessors the pulse books attributed to Huang Ti and Pien Ch’üeh, [and know] how to examine illness by means of the five colors, how to recognise whether a person will die or live, how to judge over the doubtful, and how to determine the curable. When it comes to structured analytical arguments on drugs, the books are highly refined. My family is wealthy. I dearly love you. I 116

Yi yao fang 醫藥方 alternate translation: ‘formulae of medicinal drugs’ but formulae need not only refer to drug prescriptions but any therapeutic or life nurturing technique (Sivin, “Text and Experience,” p. 179). 117 This statement stands in blatant contradiction with the correspondent one in Yi’s reply to interrogation question 6, unless one adopts Hübotter’s (p. 27) interpretation there. 118 Chang Wen-hu points out that Yi himself says that after serving master Yang Ch’ing for three years he was 39 years old, which was in the third year of Emperor Wen (177); therefore Yi must have been 36 years old in 180. Hsü Kuang had earlier already noted this (although Chang Wen-hu says he saw editions where Hsü Kuang stated that Yi was then 26 years old). This means Yi was born, irrespective of the death date of his teacher Yang Ch’ing, in 216, according to Hsü Kuang, Chang Wen-hu, Bridgman (p. 66 n. 73) and Ho Ai-hua 何愛華 (“Chun-yü Yi sheng-tsu nien te t’an-t’ao” 淳于意生卒年的探討 [Discussion of Chunyu Yi’s Dates of Birth and Death), Zhongguo yishih zazhi 14.2 [1984], 80-81). This date of birth differs from that of 206 given by Loewe (“The Physician,” pp. 307-8), who follows Wilbur (1943: 289). Fan Hsingchun (“Yi-yü”) gives 205 as the birth date. Sivin (“Text and Experience,” p. 179) points out that 39 sui means he was 38 years old and gives as birth date 214. The translator takes account of Hsü Kuang and Sivin, and identifies Yi’s birth date as 215.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

30

wish to take my books of secret formulae in their entirety and teach them all to you.” Your servant, Yi, thereupon said: “I am very fortunate. This is more than what I, Yi, had dared to hope for.” Your servant, Yi, then refused the mat and venerated him repeatedly.119 I formally received his Mai shu: shang hsia ching 脈書上下經 (Pulse Book: Upper and Lower Canon [i.e., the first and second volume]),120 “Wu se chen” 五色診 (Diagnostics by Means of the Five Colors), “Ch’i k’e shu” 奇咳術（The Art Concerning the Regular and Irregular), 121 “K’uei tu yin yang wai pien” 揆度陰陽外變 (Gauging and Measuring the

119

Pi hsi 避 席 “to refuse the mat.” People used to sit on mats. When they wished to demonstrate respect to their host, they refused to sit on the mat. 120 Li Chien-min 李 建 民 (Chung-kuo yi-hsüeh shih 中國 醫 學 使 [Tokyo, 2003], p. 19) considers this one book in two volumes. Consider Su wen 79.250: “one reads out the first and second volume of a canon” 卻念上下經. A shang ching 上經 and a hsia ching 下經 are mentioned in various parts of the Nei ching, and clearly refer to a text in Su wen 34.100, 44.124, 46.130, 69.196. It is possible that references to the shang ching and hsia ching were shorthand for longer titles. 121 Ch’i k’e shu 奇咳術 or ch’i k’e 奇咳 (see question 7) literally means “unusual coughs.” According to Wang Shu-min (105.2902-3), k’e 咳 can be substituted by several other characters which all mean “extraordinary, irregular.” There is a parallel between the “Ping fa” 兵法 (Military Model) he mentions, which has “Wu yin ch’i k’ai” 五音奇侅 (Five Tones and the Extraordinary), and the “Mai fa” 脈法 (Model of the Pulse), which has “Wu se chen” 五色診, “Ch’i k’e shu” 奇咳 術 (Five Color Examinations and the Art of the Extraordinary). “Ch’i heng” 奇恆 (The Irregular and Regular), a title of a text in Su wen (46.128 and 130), according to Ando Koretora 安藤維寅. It is mentioned often in Su wen according to Ma Chi-hsing 馬 繼 興 (Chung-yi wen-hsien hsüeh 中 醫 文 獻 學 [Study of the Chinese Medical Literature] [Shanghai: Shang-hai K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1990], p. 63). In the translator’s view, it probably is a title also in Su wen 11.37: “Ch’i heng” chih fu, elsewhere translated e.g. as ‘paraorbs’ (P. Porkert, The Foundations of Chinese Medicine: Systems of Correspondence [Cambridge: MIT Press, 1974]), then means “The receptacles mentioned in the text ‘Ch’i heng.’” This is said in awareness that ch’i heng is not a book title, but a verb or attribute in Su wen 15.46, 37.37, 77.247, 80.253. The reason for finding “Ch’i ke” here instead of the “Ch’i heng” of the Su wen may parallel that of finding the term ch’ang shan 常山 in the Mawangdui “Ho yin yang,” strip 103-104, in place of the usual heng shan 恆山. There are scholars who argue that the scribe of that manuscript respected the taboo (hui 諱) character heng 恆 during the reign of Liu Heng 劉恆 (Emperor Wen 文帝, 179-157). If “Ch’i ke” in Shih chi Chapter 105 stands for “Ch’i heng,” the primary material for sections two, three and four dates to 179-157; it begs the question, however, why “Ch’i k’e” rather than “Ch’i ch’ang” is given in the Shih chi.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

31

External Anomolies of yin and yang),122 “Yao lun” 藥論（The Discourse on Drugs), “Shih shen” 石神（The Deities of the Stone),123 and “Chieh yin yang chin shu” 接陰陽禁書 (The Secret Book on Joining yin and yang).124 I received, read, understood and checked them, for about a year. 125 In the following year, when I tested them, there were effective ones.126 However, I still had not yet reached expertise. Essentially, 127 I served him [Ch’ing] for about three years, 122

“K’uei tu yin yang wai pien” 揆 度 陰 陽 外 變 “Gauging and Measuring the External Anomalies of Yin and Yang”). Taki Motokata 多紀元堅 (1795-1857, Hen Shaku Sô-kô den 扁鵲倉 公傳) points to Su wen 15.45, 46.130 and 77.248 where there are pairs of k’uei tu and ch’i heng. In Su wen 15.45 “K’uei tu” seems to be a title of a text: 揆度者 切度之也 “As to ‘Gauging and Measuring,’ it is about palpating [vessels] and measuring them out.” The same applies to Su wen 46.130: 揆度者 度病之淺深也 奇恆者 言奇病也 “As to ‘Gauging and Measuring,’ it measures out the depth of the disorders. As to “the Irregular and Regular,’ it is about the unusual illnesses.” In Su wen 77.248, the “Upper Canon” and “Lower Canon” (Shang ching Hsia ching 上 經 下 經 ), “Gauging and Measuring yin and yang” (k’uei tu yin yang 揆度陰陽), and “Assessing the Regular or Irregular of the Five Central Ones [i.e. the Five Viscera]” (ch’i heng wu chung 奇恆五中) are mentioned together. See also Su wen 19.60. 123 “Shih shen” 石神 is “Pien shi chih shen fa” 砭石之神法（The Divine Model for Stone Needling), according to Taki Motokata. On early lithic therapy, see V. Lo, “Lithic Therapy in Early Chinese Body Practices,” in P. A. Baker and G. Carr, eds., Practitioners, Practices and Patients: New Approaches to Medical Archaeology and Anthropology (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2002), pp. 195-220. 124 “Chieh yin yang chin shu” 接陰陽禁書 concerns the sexual arts, according to Takigawa (105.23). This interpretation parallels that of chieh 接 in cases 5, 6 and 10. Li Chien-min (Chungkuo yi-hsüeh shih, p. 21) renders chin 禁 as secret (mi-mi 秘密), rather than forbidden (Sivin, “Text and Experience,” p. 179). The Mawangtui medical manuscripts contain two texts on the sexual arts. For translations, see Donald Harper (Early Chinese Medical Literature: The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts. [London: Routledge, London, 1998]) and R. Pfister (“Sexuelle Körpertechniken im Heilkunde-Korpus von Mawangdui,” Dokorarbeit, Ostasiatisches Seminar der Universität Zürich, 2001). For translation of all above titles, compare and contrast with Sivin (op. cit.) and P. U. Unschuld (Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen: Nature, Knowledge, Imagery in an Ancient Chinese Medical Text [Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003], pp. 80 ff.). For more extended studies on them, see D. J. Keegan (“The ‘Huang-ti Nei-Ching’: The Structure of the Compilation; The Significance of the Structure,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1988, passim) and Ma Chi-hsing 馬繼興 (Chung-yi wen-hsien-hsüeh 中醫文獻學 [Study of the Chinese Medical Literature] [Shanghai: Shang-hai K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1990], pp. 60-109). 125 So 所 means hsü 許 “about,” according to Wang Nien-sun (cited by Takigawa, 105.23). 126 Yu yen 有驗 “to be tested and verified, i.e., effective.” Note that this phrase is repeated below. It appears redundant in this context. 127 Yao 要 “essentially,” is best understood as in the phrase of the Lü-shih ch’un-ch’iu, “Ch’a hsien pien: yao tsai te hsien 要在得賢 “its essential element consists in obtaining worthy men” (J.

32

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

then, probing [the formulae I had received], 128 I, on behalf of other people, delivered treatment, examined illnesses, and made prognoses determining whether they would live or die. There were successful experiences, refined and excellent ones. Now, Ch’ing has already been dead for about ten years. In the year of completing the three years [of study with him], your servant, Yi, was thirty-nine years old.”129 [Section 3] [Case 1] [2797] Ch’eng 成, an Attending Secretary of Ch’i 齊, himself said that he was ill; the head hurt. Your servant, Yi, examined his vessels and formally announced: “The illness of your Excellency is bad, I cannot speak about it.” Then I went outside and solely informed Ch’eng’s younger brother Ch’ang 昌 by saying:” This one is ailing from a ju-abscess. It will erupt internally in the region of the intestines and the stomach. After five days, it will become a yung-clog swelling. After eight days, he will vomit pus and die.”130 Ch’eng’s illness was contracted from wine131 and women.132 Ch’eng then died at the predicted time. Knobloch and J. Riegel, The Annals of Lü Buwei 閭氏春秋: A Complete Translation and Study [Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000], p. 112), according to to the traditional scholar Kaiho Gyoson 海保漁村 (1798-1866; Takigawa, 105.23). 128 Ch’ang 嘗 should be read as shih 試’ and yi 已 as yi 以, according to Kaiho Gyoson (Ibid.). He points to a parallel usage of ch’ang yi 嘗以 in Chuang-tzu, 4.141. 129 Sui 歲 “year,” but see Sivin’s comment in n. 118 above. Liang Yü-sheng (Takigawa, 105.24) points out that the imperial edict need not necessarily have been issued in the thirteenth year of Emperor Wen (167 B.C.), since Yi mentions the King of Tzu-ch’uan, the King of Hsi-liao, the King of Chi-nan, King Wen of Ch’i, and “the former Marquis of Yang-hsü’ who became King of Ch’i. Loewe (“The Physician”) argues that the answers to the edict must have been written after 164 B.C. because this was the year in which King Wen died, the kingdom of Ch’i was divided, and the former Marquis of Yang-hsü became King of Ch’i. Hsu (Telling Touch) differentiates between primary materials contained in this chapter and the edited chapter in the Shih chi. She agrees that the chapter was edited after 164. However, according to her research, the chapter may well be a compilation of different primary texts from different decades within the second century B.C., including texts from before 164 B.C. Therefore, the personages mentioned in one section of the text only cannot be used for dating the entire text. Considering that case records in the legal texts were written without identifying the individual (e.g. “Feng chen shih” 封診試 in Hulsewé, Han Law), it is possible that this also applied to some medical case histories that provided the primary source material, and that some of the named individuals represent an editorial emendation. 130 For chü 疽 “abscesses,” see Ma-wang-tui manuscripts (hereafter MWT, 1985, pp. 57-9), Ma Chi-hsing 馬繼興, ed., Mawangdui gu yishu kaoshih 馬王堆古醫書考釋 (Explanation of the

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

33

The means whereby I recognized Ch’eng’s illness were that when your servant, Yi, pressed on to his vessels, I got ch’i [coming] from the liver.133 The ch’i [coming] from the liver, despite being murky, was still. This is a disorder of the interior being closed off. 134 The “Mai fa” 脈法 (Model for the Study of Ancient Medical Documents from Mawangdui) (Changsha: Hu-nan K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-panshe, 1992, pp. 532-46), Donald Harper (Early Chinese Medical Literature, pp. 276-9). A chü yung is mentioned on strip 273. For yung 癰, “boils, ulcers,” see MWT (Ma-wang-tui vessel texts, Mawang-tui Han-mu po-shu cheng-li hsiao-tsu 馬王堆漢墓帛書整理小組, 1980-85, pp. 67-68), Ma (op. cit., pp. 591-600), Harper (op. cit., pp. 290-3). In canonical doctrine chü and yung are often contrasted with one another, and in Ling shu 81, entitled “Yung-chü” (Boils and Abscesses), chü and yung are attributed either yin or yang qualities. Such distinctions do not apply to Shih chi Chapter 105. Shuo wen 7B.30 interrelates chü-abscesses and yung-clogs: "A chü-abscess is an old (chronic) yung-boil" (chü chiu yung yeh 疽久癰也), an interrelation which applies in this memoir to case 22, but only arguably to case 1, and not to the MWT texts. Yung-ulcers are elsewhere also associated with swellings and pus. See yung-entry in Shuo wen 7B.30 and MWT (1985, p. 17). For extensive discussion of all the names of disorder and body parts mentioned in cases 1-10 of this memoir, see Hsu Telling Touch). 131 Chiu 酒 refers to an alcoholic beverage. It was not liquor, since the technology of distillation was not known in antiquity. It probably was gained through fermentation, like beer, for instance, millet beer. However, in English translation, drinking beer is associated with the working classes and not with the debauchery among the nobility to which Yi, and indirectly Ssu-ma Ch’ien, seems to refer. 132 Nei 內 stands for chieh nei 接內, lit. “to join with the interior” and means “to have sexual intercourse.” 133 For extensive discussion of the sense relations between mai and ch’i in this memoir, see Hsu, “Lexical Semantics and Chinese Medical Terms,” M. Phil. Dissertation in General Linguistics, University of Cambridge, 1986). For detailed discussion of all the words used for describing the tactile qualities of the mai in cases 1-10, see Hsu (Telling Touch). 134 Nei kuan chih ping 內關之病 “disorder of the interior being closed off” or “disorder of an internal closure” is not attested elsewhere in the medical literature. It occurs, with slight variation, three times in this memoir (in cases 1, 12 and 15). This condition typically is lethal, although the pulses felt on the body surface are still and smooth. The translator follows Wang Nien-sun who reads kuan 關 as a verb, and nei 內 as a noun referring to a body part, the “interior” (as in the expression chieh nei). Donald Harper, Early Chinese Medical Literature: The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts (London: Routledge, 1998, p. 396) mentions kuan as a body part in a self-cultivation text, “an internal barrier located near the navel.” Alternate readings take kuan as noun: “disorder of the inner lock” or, more likely, “disorder inside the [stock-]lock.” These translations link up with the metaphor invoked in expressions like “the outside lock and the inside trestle” (wai kuan nei ko 外關內格) and “the inside lock and the outside trestle” (nei kuan wai ko 內關外格) found in Mai ching 1.4 (Mai jing 脈經 [Canon of the Pulse], Wang Xi 王熙, author, Mai-ching chiao-chu 脈經 校注, Shen Yen-nan 沈炎南, ed. [Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1991], p. 7); Su wen 9.33, 17.51; Ling shu 9.294, 17.323; 48.397-8; Nan ching 3 (Unschuld, The Classic of Difficult Issues (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986, p. 91). Yamada Keiji (The Origins of

34

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Vessels/Pulses) says 135 : “In cases where the pulse, while being elongated, is strung, if it is not [the pulse] that alternates in accordance with the four seasons, the host of its illness resides in the liver.”136 If they [the pulses] blend, then the channels govern the illness. 137 If they alternate, then the linking vessels have excess. In cases where, [while] the channels govern the illness, they [the pulses] blend, one’s illness is contracted in the sinews and the marrow. In cases where, while taking turns in being severed, the pulses spout, one’s illness is contracted from wine and women.138 The means whereby I recognized that after five days he would have a yungclog swelling, and that after eight days he would vomit pus and die, were that at the time when I pressed on to his vessels, the minor yang, [at the place] where it begins, was alternating. In cases of an alternating [pulse], the channels are

Acupuncture, Maxibustion, and Decoction (Kyoto: Internation Research Center for Japanese Studies, 1998, pp. 32-3) points out that the conditions of nei kuan and wai ko, which both are lethal, are linked to vessel-pulse diagnostics relying on jen ying 人迎 and ts’un k’ou 寸口 palpation; Yi probably engaged in a precursory form of the latter. While it is possible that the geographical imagery of the region “inside the passes” (nei-kuan) around the capital Ch’ang-an may have been used for describing the internal body landscape –kuan and nei kuan were terms used in the geographical sense in Shih chi, 8.356–evidence still needs to be found that in the early second century B.C. a geographical idiom originating from the region of Ch’ang-an should have been predominant in medical discourse, and used by a doctor in the cultural metropole of Ch’i 齊. Chang Shou-chieh interprets nei kuan as a place on the wrist, near the nei kuan acupuncture locus, but this is probably an anachronistic reading. 135 For a parallel of the “Mai fa” 脈法 quote in the received literature, see Mai ching, 3.1. 136 Ping chu 病主 “the host of the illness,” see also cases 2, 5, and 10. Yi discusses ping chu in his response to interrogation question 1. The term chu may have meant “governor” or “host.” Unschuld (Medicine in China: A History of Ideas [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980) emphasizes administrative metaphors in Han medicine, but ping chu may also have had more religious connotations. Just as an ancestor tablet can be a host (chu 主) to an ancestor, a body part may have been a host to an illness. 137 Ching chu ping 經主病 “the channels govern the illness,” alternate translation: “the host of the channels is ill.” And below: lo mai chu ping 絡脈主病 “the linking vessels govern the illness,” alternate translation: “the host of the linking vessels is ill.” 138 The ideas expressed in these four sentences are not widely adhered to in the received literature. Nevertheless, there are some striking parallels (see Hsu, “The Telling Touch: Pulse Diagnostics in Early Chinese Medicine,” Habilitationschrift, Heidelberg University, 2001, case 1). If one assumes that ho 和 (gentle) is a synonym of ching 靜 (still) and tai 代 (alternating) of chuo 濁 (murky), then these sentences are a comment on the pulse qualities mentioned above.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

35

ailing. 139 If the disorder leaves, it overcomes the person, the person then leaves [i.e. dies].140 The linking vessels govern the illness. At that time, the minor yang, [at the place] where it begins, was closed by one fen [degree]. Hence, although the interior was hot, pus had not yet been emitted. If it [the closure] reaches five fen, then it gets to the boundary of the minor yang.141 If it [the predicted time] reaches the eighth day, then one spits pus and dies. Hence, when it [the closure] was above two fen, pus was emitted; when it reached the boundary, there was a yung-clog swelling; when there was complete discharge, he died. If the heat rises, then it heats up the yang brightness and spoils the flowing links. If the flowing links are stirred, then the nodes of the vessels burst open.142 If the nodes of the vessels burst open, then the spoilage disperses. Hence the links intermingled. If the hot ch’i by means of wandering upwards reaches the head, it stirs [it]. Hence the head hurt. [Case 2] [2798] Chu Ying, the youngest son143 of the King of Ch’i’s 144 middle son,145 fell ill. They summoned your servant, Yi. I examined him and pressed on to his 139 Ching ping 經病 alternate translation: “disorder of the channels” occurs precisely in the same sense in case 6, as a “disorder of a transition” to death; in case 2, the verb ching 經 is used in the sense of “being transitory.” 140 Ching ping ping ch’ü kuo jen jen tse ch’ü 經病病去過人人則去 makes no sense to the commentators. Osebe Yō (“Hen Shaku Sōkō den,” 1994, p. 78–see Bibliography following this translation) points to Su wen 20.64-6, where 病去過人 and 人則去 are explained. 141 Yi refers here to the prognosticatory “Fen chieh fa” 分界法（Model for Measuring the Boundary), mentioned by name in case 8 and referred to in case 6, but not attested elsewhere in the literature. It evaluates the severity of the patient’s condition in terms of degrees from one to five, one being the least affected and five being indicative of death. It predicts the time span before death. Minor yang (shao yang 少陽) and yang brightness (yang ming 陽明) probably refer to specific vessels (mai 脈), as described in the MWT vessel texts. 142 Liu lo 流絡 “flowing links” and mai chieh 脈結 “knots of vessels” are not attested in the received literature. They may be compound words referring to bodily structures; consider the notion of “floating links” (fu lo 浮絡) in Su wen 56.151, and mai chieh in case 10. The alternate translation of mai chieh as a noun-verb phrase is also possible: “the vessels got knotted up”; it is unlikely that it refers to one of the twenty-four qualities listed in Mai ching 1, a “pulse that is knotty.” 143 Chu ying erh hsiao tzu 諸嬰兒小子 “the youngest of Chu Ying,” “the youngest of all infants”; or: “the small prince Chu Ying,” according to Hübotter (p. 9). However, since Yi usually repeats the name of the patient and repeats here hsiao tzu, the latter is unlikely. 144 The King of Ch’i could have been Liu Hsiang 劉襄 (r. 188-179), Liu Tse 劉則 (r. 179-164), or [Liu] Chiang-lü [劉] 將盧, also known as Liu Chiang-lü 劉將閭 (r. 164 -153). If the source

36

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

vessels. I formally announced: “A disorder of ch’i that is blocked.146 The illness makes a person upset and oppressed. Food does not go down. [*2799*] At times, one vomits froth.” The illness is contracted from infantile irritability and [involves] frequently rejecting food and drink. Your servant, Yi, immediately made for him a hot liquid that causes ch’i to go downward and got him to drink it.147 On the first day, the ch’i went downward. On the second day, he was able to eat. On the third day, the illness was cured. The means whereby I recognized the youngest son’s illness were that when I examined his vessels, it was ch’i [coming] from the heart.148 It was murky and hurried, but [the condition] was transient.149 This is a disorder of yang in the links. 150 The “Mai fa” says: “In cases when the pulses come frequently and material was heterogeneous, as suggested by Hsu (Telling Touch, forthcoming), one cannot be certain that the King of Ch’i unambiguously identified in case 23 is the same person as mentioned in case 2. Cf. Han shu, 14.398-406, Dubs (p. 259), Bridgman (”La médicine,” pp. 110ff), and Loewe (“The Physician Chunyu Yi”). 145 Bridgman (op. cit., p. 28) renders him as the “second son,” as though he knew the King of Ch’i had three sons. 146 Ch’i ko ping 氣鬲病 ‘a disorder of ch’i that is being separated’; term not attested elsewhere in the literature. The diaphragm (ko 鬲 and 膈) separates (ko 鬲 and ko 隔) the body into an upper and a lower part; hence its name. The symptoms suggest that ch’i is trapped above the diaphragm, in the chest. 147 Hsia ch’i tang 下氣湯 “broth that causes ch’i to go downward,” Not attested elsewhere in the literature. 148 Cases 1 and 2, and parts of case 6, refer to kan 肝 ‘liver’ and hsin 心 ‘heart’ in a sense that is partly at odds with that of liver and heart within the framework of the five viscera. Perhaps, liver and heart were the two main viscera of a bipartite body, conceived of as being divided into an upper yang part and lower yin part, a yin yang 陰陽 conception of the body that may have predated that of the body in terms of the five agents (wu hsing 五行). For further discussion, see (Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 2). 149 It is uncertain whether Yi speaks of the quality of two or three vessels; in cases 1 and 2, he seems to speak of two but arguably gives two or three words for describing pulse qualities in cases 4, 7 and 19; refers to “three strokes” and “three yin” in cases 6 and 7. There are three yin and yang foot vessels in the MWT vessel texts and on the Mien-yang 綿陽 figurine; three yang but only two yin hand vessels in the MWT vessel texts; in Ling shu 10, there are twelve in total, three yin and yang vessels on hands and feet. In his response to interrogation question 1, Yi says the vessels san ho yü jen 參合於人 “threefold unite in man.” 150 Lo yang ping 絡陽病 “disorder of the links becoming yang” or “disorder of yang in the links” based on Hübotter (op. cit., p. 9). Not attested elsewhere in the literature. The term lo yang ping contrasts with that of nei kuan chih ping of case 1, nei refers to the inner parts of the body, lo to the links on the body surface; kuan refers to closing off, yang to heating up. The condition involves a doubling of yang (see below). Alternate translation: the “yang disorder of the links.” Or,

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

37

swiftly, and when they leave with difficulty and are not one, the host of the disorder resides in the heart.”151 In cases where the entire body is hot and the vessels are exuberant, it is a double yang.152 As for the double yang, it assaults [the host of] the heart.153 Hence he was upset and oppressed. If the food had not gone down, then the linking vessels would have had excess. If the linking vessels had had excess, then the blood would have risen to get out. If the blood had risen to get out, he would have died.154 This is what an aggrieved heart generates. The illness is contracted from being irritable. [Case 3] Hsün 循, the Prefect of the Gentlemen of the Palace of Ch’i, fell ill. All the many doctors considered it a numbness,155 which had entered the interior,156 and in consideration that constituents of compound words are sometimes inverted in this text: yang lo ping, “a disorder of the link to the yang part of the body, i.e., the heart.” 151 For a parallel, but modified, passage, see Su wen 19.59 and Mai ching 3.2 (Shen, p. 72). Bridgman (op. cit., p. 70 n. 89) refers to further parallels in the Mai ching. 152 Ch’ung yang 重陽 “double yang.” For parallels, see Ling shu 67.440. For ch’ung sun 重損 “double harm” and the severing of two vessels leading to death, see case 6. For ch’ung k’un 重困 “reduplicated hindrance,” see case 22. For the book title “Yin yang ch’ung” 陰陽重 (The Doubling of yin and yang), see response to interrogation question 8. For ping yin 并陰 “doubled yin,” see case 4. 153 Hsin chu 心主 “the host of the heart” can, of course, be interpreted as hsin Pao lo 心包絡 “pericard” (lit. link to the heart bag). However, Kaiho Gyoson notes that Hsü Kuang’s comment to this passage would suggest that the text he commented on mentioned only hsin, and not hsin chu. 154 This passage, which poses problems to the commentators, only makes sense if it is read as a counterfactual. Note that hsüeh 血 “blood” is said to rise, rather than ch’i 氣. Paul U. Unschuld (personal correspondence) suggests the idea that blood rises refers to an older understanding of bodily processes than the medical language, which alludes to the movements of ch’i (see also cases 1 and 6); scribes sometimes forget to update the text and that older ideas. 155 Chüeh 蹶 is variously mentioned in the manuscript and canonical literature, with different radicals. It is mentioned as illness diagnosed by all the many doctors in cases 3 and 23. For “numb” as a symptom, collocated with han 寒 “cold,” see case 25. There is reason for translating chüeh as “numbness” here, in that it refers to a state of being numb as a stone. See Shuo wen 9B.20a (Shuo wen chieh tzu chu 說文解字注 [Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1981]): “chüeh is an emitted/dug out [unrefined] stone” (chüeh fa shih yeh 厥發石也). Consider also Yang Liang's 楊倞 (9th c.) gloss “chüeh means stone” (chüeh shih yeh 厥石也) on Hsün Tzu, 27 (Hsün Tzu chien chu 荀子箋注, Chang Shih-t’ung 章詩同, ed. (Shanghai: Shang-hai Jen-min, 1974, p. 309). For the idea that stones were numb and insensitive, see P. Santangelo, “Emotions in Late Imperial China, Evolution and Continuity in Ming-Qing Perception of Passions,” in V. Alleton and A. Volkov, eds., Notions et Perceptions du Changement en Chine (Paris: College de France, Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises, 1974), p. 172) who explains that according to Mencius human beings can become as

38

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

needled him. Your servant, Yi, examined him and said: “It is a gushing 157 amassment.158 It makes a person unable to urinate and defecate.” Hsün said: “I have not been able to urinate and defecate for three days!” Your servant, Yi, had him drink the hot liquid [prepared by careful] regulation of fire.159 After drinking the first [dose], he was able to urinate. After drinking the second, he thoroughly relieved himself. After drinking the third, the illness was cured. The illness was contracted from an indulgence in women. The means whereby I recognized Hsün’s illness were that at the time when I pressed on to his vessels, at the right opening,160 ch’i was intense. The pulses did “insensitive as stone” if not constantly subject to self-development. See also G. Majno, The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1974, p. 245) rendering of the pulse quality shih 石 as being “dead as a rock.” Chüeh in this sense, as understood by the many doctors, is also given in pao chüeh 暴厥 and shih chüeh 尸厥 on Shih chi, 105.2788 and 105.2790. Yi has a more sophisticated understanding of chüeh. See cases 9, 11, and 16 for feng chüeh 風厥, je chüeh 熱厥 and chüeh shang 厥上; extensively discussed in Hsu (Telling Touch: case 9). 156 Chung 中 “the interior,” see also cases 3, 8, 9, 10 and 22. Yi variously refers to body parts identified through deixis: nei 內 “the interior” (e.g. case 1), shang 上 “the above, the upper parts” (cases 3 and 16), hsia 下 “the below, the lower parts” (case 3), etc. Alternate translation, common in the canonical medical literature: chung 中 “to strike the centre.” 157 Yung 涌 “gushing, welling,” variously recorded in the Su wen, as in yung shui 涌水 “welling water” in Su wen 37.108, or yung ch’üan 涌泉 “welling spring” in Su wen 17.50, which is also the name of an acupuncture locus, as e.g. in Su wen 6.25. 158 Shan 疝 “amassment” occurs in cases 3, 10 and 25, as yung shan 湧疝, ch’i shan 氣疝 and mu shan 牡疝; in all three cases it is contracted by sexual intercourse. The term shan is widely attested in the manuscript and canonical literature. The graph would suggest that it refers to a tumour or hernia. Consider also Shuo wen 7B, 29b: “An amassment is abdominal pain” (shan fu t’ung yeh 疝腹痛也). 159 Huo ch’i t’ang 火 齊 湯 “hot liquid [prepared by careful] regulation of fire”; i.e., by simmering over a small fire. Translation based on Yamada Keiji (The Origins of Acupuncture, Moxibustion, and Decoction (Kyoto: International Research Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto, 1998). Huo ch’i 火齊 is mentioned already in the Han Fei Tzu 韓非子, 7 (21) (Han Fei Tzu chishih, Ch’en Ch’i-yu 陳啟猷, ed. [Peking: Chung-hua, 1958], pp. 397 and 399), but substituted in the parallel passage of Shih chi 105.1 by the compound word chiu lao 酒醪, which probably refers to “mixed alcohols.” See Shih chi, 105.2788. For further discussion, see Yamada (op. cit., p. 112). In Shih chi 105.2, see cases 3, 5, 10 for huo chi tang, case 4 for yeh t’ang huo ch’i 液湯火齊, case 20 for huo ch’i mi chih 火齊米汁, and case 23 for huo ch’i chou 火齊粥. Case 22 mentions 陰陽水 火之齊 as a phrase used in a cosmological sense, rather than as a qualification of a hot liquid. 160 Yu k’ou 右口 the right opening refers to a “opening of the vessels” (mai k’ou 脈口) on the right, perhaps at the ankle, perhaps at the wrist. See case 4 for t’ai yin mai k’ou 太陰脈口, case 5 for t’ai yin chih k’ou 太陰之口, case 6 for tsu shao yang mai k’ou 足少陽脈口, and case 7 for you

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

39

not have ch’i [coming] from the five viscera. At the right opening, the pulses, while being large, were frequent. In cases of the frequent, the interior and lower parts, while hot, are gushing. The left is for [diagnosing] the lower parts, the right is for [diagnosing] the upper parts. There was in all cases no response from the five viscera. Hence I said a gushing amassment. The interior was hot, hence the urine was dark.161 [Case 4] [2800] Hsin 信, the Chief of the Palace Wardrobe of Ch’i,162 fell ill. I entered [his room] to examine his vessels and formally announced: “It is the ch’i of a heat disorder.163 In spite of this, you are sweating [as one does] from summer heat. The pulses are barely weakened. You will not die.” I said: “This illness is contracted when one formerly bathed in running water while it was very cold, and once it was over, got hot.” Hsin said: “Yes, so it is. Last winter season, I was sent as an envoy to the King of Ch’u 楚. When I got to the Yang-chou 陽周 River in Chü 莒 County,164 the planks of the bridge were partly damaged. I then seized the shaft of the carriage. I did not yet intend to cross. The horses became frightened and [I] promptly fell. I was immersed in water and almost died. Some officers then came to save me and pulled me out of the water. My clothes were completely soaked. For a short time my body was cold, and once it was over, it got hot like a fire. Up to today, I cannot stand the cold.” Your servant, Yi, mai k’ou 右脈口; see also case 18 for Tso k’ou 左口. These “openings” evidently refer to a specific place on the vessels. For mai k’ou in the received literature, see for instance Ling shu 49.400. Considering that in the MWT vessel texts mai are often said to “come out” (ch’u 出) near or on structures of the hands and feet, one can easily imagine that the places at the extremities where the mai exit were called “openings” (k’ou). Perhaps this concept developed later into that of ch’i k’ou 氣口 and the ts’un k’ou 寸口, as mentioned variously in the Nei ching, Nan ching and the Tunhuang manuscripts. See Hsu (“Telling Touch”: case 3). 161 Ni ch’ih 溺赤 means “the urine is deep colored,” i.e., dark yellow, which typically is indicative of heat inside the body. Hübotter (op. cit., p. 10) and Bridgman (op. cit., p. 72) considered ch’ih to mean red. The latter thought ni ch’ih indicated haematuria. This is mistaken. 162 Alternate translation: “Chang Hsin, the court warehouse official,” given by Yamada Keiji (op. cit., p. 117). 163 Je ping 熱病 “heat disorder.” Variously attested in canonical literature. For je ping in chapter headings, see Su wen 31, 33 and Ling shu 23. The term je ping ch’i 熱病氣 is an unusual constituent in Yi’s names of the disorders, see Hsu (2001b). The MWT Tsu-pi (hereafter MWT TP) vessel text (1985: 4) mentions je ch’u han 熱出汗 “heat expels sweat.” 164 Chü 莒 was in the kingdom of Ch’eng-yang 成陽. See Han shu, 28B.1635. It was located on 35.3° N and 118.5° E. (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19-20).

40

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

immediately made for him the fluid hot liquid [prepared by careful] regulation of fire, to drive away the heat. After drinking the first dose, the sweating came to an end. After drinking the second, the heat left. After drinking the third, the illness ceased. I then made him apply medicines.165 After about twenty days, his body was without illness. The means whereby I recognized Hsin’s illness were that at the time when I pressed on to his vessels, there was a paired yin. The “Mai fa” says: “In the case of a heat disorder, those whose yin and yang intermingles, die.” 166 When I pressed on them [the vessels], there was no intermingling, but a paired yin. In cases of the paired yin, the pulses are smooth and clear, and [the condition] curable. Although his heat had not yet gone completely, he was still going to live. Ch’i [coming] from the kidneys was sometimes for a moment murky. At the opening of the major yin vessel, however, it was thin. This is a case of water ch’i. The kidneys certainly167 govern water. Hence by means of this I recognized it [the illness]. If the disorder had neglected to be treated instantly, then it would have turned into chills and hot flushes.168

165 Fu yao 服藥 “to apply medicines” often refers to an external application in early medical texts, see annotations by Ma Jihsing 馬繼興, ed., Mawangdui gu yishu kaoshih 馬王堆古醫書考釋 (Explanation of the Ancient Medical Documents from Mawangdui) (Changsha: Hu-nan K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1992, pp. 432, 568). However, there are exceptions, see Donald Harper (“The ‘Wushier pingfang’: Translation and Prelegomena,” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1982, p. 407) and Ma (Ibid., p. 500), and cases 17, 20, 22, 23. The doctor's insistence on treating the patient with, in all likelihood, 'externally applied medicines' for another twenty days was certainly the appropriate thing to do in the case of an infection before the advent of antibiotics. European folk medicine, for instance, prescribed long-term hot fomentation (potato, onion, or cabbage fomentation). 166 The latter part of the quotation, namely that the intermingling of yin and yang leads to death (yin yang chiao ssu 陰陽交死), is widely known. See, for instance, Su wen 33.96. Yi’s “Mai fa” quotation and his concluding sentence in case 4. The condition of a “double yin” (ping yin 并陰), apparently, was curable. 167 Ku 固 “certainly,” e.g., in translation by Donald Harper (in E. Hsu, ed., Innovation in Chinese Medicine [hereafter Innovation; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001], p. 118). However, in case 21, the grammar would suggest that ku se 固色 probably means “solid, steady, healthy complexion.” See case 21 and the notes. Alternate translation: shen ku 腎固 “the kidneys are firm,” as kan kang 肝剛 “the liver is hard” in case 6. Health is indicated by the firmness of the viscera and the solidity of color. See Hsu (Telling Touch forthcoming). 168 Han je 寒 熱 “intermittent coldness and heat” certainly does not refer to malaria, as Bridgman (op. cit.,73). suggests, but probably to a state of utter exhaustion: “chills and hot flushes.” See also cases 6, 18, 19.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

41

[Case 5] [2801] The Queen Dowager of the King of Ch’i169 fell ill. They summoned your servant, Yi, to enter [the palace] and examine the vessels. I said: “A windinduced heat-due-to-overexertion is visiting the bladder.170 One has difficulties with defecating and urinating, and the urine is dark.” Your servant, Yi, had her drink the hot liquid [prepared by careful] regulation of fire. After drinking the first dose, she immediately could urinate and defecate. After drinking the second, the illness ceased. She urinated as before. The illness was contracted because while dripping with sweat, she went outside to dry up. In cases of drying up, having removed one’s clothes, the sweat dries in the sunlight.171 The means whereby I recognized the illness of the Queen Dowager of the King of Ch’i were that when your servant, Yi, examined her vessels, and when I pressed on to the opening of the major yin, it was damp while there was wind ch’i. The “Mai fa” says: “In cases where when as one sinks down [as one presses on to the vessels], it is very firm, and when as one floats [as one barely touches the surface of the vessels], it is very tight, the host of the illness resides in the

169

For identification of the King of Ch’i 齊, see cases 2 and 23. Feng tan k’e p’ao 風癉客脬 “wind-induced heat from overexertion lodged in the bladder” is not attested elsewhere in the medical literature. Wind (feng 風), widely attested in the received literature, occurs as a constituent of the name of the disorder in cases 5, 9, 20 and 24. It figures as a cause of the illness in cases 13, 15, and 24. The term tan 癉, also written as tan 憚, occurs already in the Shih ching (cf. “Ta tung” 大東, Mao #203, and “Ban” 板, Mao #254, respectively; SPPY 13.3b and 17.15b). It appears also among the names of disorders listed in MWT YY (1985, p. 12), and the Chang-chia-shan “Mai shu,” see Kao Ta-lun 高大倫, ed., Chang-chia-shan Han-chien Yinshu chiao-shih 張家山漢簡引書校釋 (Explanation of the “Document on Pulling” on Han Dynasty Bamboo Strips from Changjiashan) (Chengtu: Pa Shu Shu-she, 1995), pp. 28-9) . See also Shuo wen 7B.33b: “tan is a disorder of overexertion” (tan, lao ping yeh 癉 勞病也). In cases 5 and 6, tan clearly refers to heat, therefore a literal translation should render it as “heat due to overexertion.” In the later canonical literature, tan often has connotations of heat. See Su wen 17: "tan turns into a wasting away of the centre" (tan cheng wei hsiao chung 癉成為消中), which indicates a meaning of tan that parallels that of tan in case 6, and Wang Bing’s 王冰 (8th c.) comment: “tan indicates dampness and heat” (tan wei shih je yeh 癉謂溼熱也; Huang ti nei ching Su wen 黃帝內經 素問 [Yellow Emperor's Inner Canon, Basic Questions], 1982, p. 39), which applies to both cases 5 and 6. The two terms, p’ao 脬 and p’ang kuang 膀胱, both refer to the bladder in case 5. See Shuo wen 4B.22: “p’ao is the bladder” (p’ao p’ang kuang yeh 脬旁光也). Note here p’ang kuang 旁光 instead of p’ang kuang 膀胱. In the Nei ching, p’ao is hardly mentioned but p’ang kuang very frequently. For detailed discussion, see Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 5). 171 The translator follows Harper (personal correspondence). See also Hübotter (op. cit., p. 11). 170

42

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

kidneys.”172 When I pressed on to the vessel of the kidneys, it was the other way round. The pulse while large, was hurried. In cases where it is large, it is ch’i [coming] from the bladder. In cases where it is hurried, the interior has heat and the urine is dark. [Case 6] Ts’ao Shan-fu 曹山跗 of the ward Chang-wu173 章武 in Ch’i fell ill. Your servant, Yi, examined his vessels and said: “It is a lung consumption. 174 In addition there are chills and hot flushes.”175 Forthwith I informed the members of the household saying: “He will die. Incurable. In accordance with what he needs, provide maintenance. A doctor should not treat this one.”176 The “Model” says: “After three days, he will be in a state that matches madness.177 In a frenzy, he will rise to walk about, desiring to run. After five days, he will die.”178 He then died at the end of the predicted time period. Shan-fu’s illness was contracted from being in great anger, and in this condition indulging in women. 172 For parallels, with modifications, see Mai ching 1.13 (Shen, p. 25), and Mai ching 6.9 (Shen, p. 209). 173 Li 里 “ward.” The text would appear defective since li requires a further specification, like ward of a prefecture. Chang-wu 章武 is, in fact, the name of a county (hsien 縣) and a “marquisate” (hou 侯 ). It was a hou from 173-122 B.C.; as a hsien it was subordinated to Po-hai 勃 海 Commandery. In pre-Imperial times, Chang-wu hou was part of Chao kingdom, but it is uncertain whether it was part of the Han kingom Chao or Ch’i. See Han shu, 28A.1579 and 28B.1655. 174 Fei hsiao tan 肺消癉, lit. “heat-due-to-overexertion arising from a lung wasting.” The translation “lung consumption” is to be appreciated with caution; it need not necessarily refer to tuberculosis. It has affinities with the premodern European notion “consumption,” but is not identical. The compound word is not attested in the received literature, but see Su wen 37.108 for fei hsiao 肺消 (lung wasting) and, for instance, Ling shu 46.387, for hsiao tan 消癉 (consumption). Case 6 has been considered to provide the earliest testimony of diabetes, a retrospective biomedical diagnosis that is questioned by Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 6). 175 Han je 寒熱 definitely does not refer to intermittent fevers in this context. Ling shu 46.387 mentions increasingly progressive stages of an illness which involve a stage of hsiao tan that later transforms into a han je. The term han je in those contexts refers to a state of utter exhaustion. See also cases 4, 18, and 19. 176 Note that this is a case of palliative care. 177 Tang k’uang 當狂 alternate translation: “he will be manic.” Compare with the state that arises when the yang brightness vessel is affected in MWT YY (1985, p. 10) vessel text and Ling shu 10.301, which is not called k’uang. Rather than referring to madness itself, Yi seems to describe a state of delirium or mania, “matching madeness,” and comparable to that of a madman. 178 The Fa 法 (Model) is not the “Mai fa,” but probably the “Fen chieh fa” 分界法 (Model for Measuring the Boundery). See cases 1 and 8.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

43

The means whereby I recognized Shan-fu’s illness were that when your servant, Yi, pressed on to his vessels, ch’i [coming] from the lungs was hot. The “Mai fa” says: “When they [the pulses] are uneven and not drumming, the body form fades away.” 179 In this particular case, [the disorder in] the high one [among the five viscera] went to the distant one180; the number181 indicates that the channels are ailing. 182 Hence, at the time when I pressed on to them [the vessels], they [the pulses] were not only uneven, [*2802*] but also alternating. In cases where they are uneven, the blood does not reside in its proper place. In cases where they alternate, from time to time three strokes arrive together, at once hurried, at once large. In this particular case, two linking vessels were severed.183 Hence he would die, and was incurable. As for the reason why there were in addition chills and hot flushes, it means that this person had fainted.184 In cases of fainting, the body form has been fading away. In cases where the body form fades away, it is not fitting to apply cauterisation and needle therapy,185 and to make [the patient] drink potent drugs. 179

The phrase is not attested in the received literature, but the terms ping 平 and ku 鼓 are. A ping mai is a normal, even pulse that indicates health (Nei ching, Mai ching, Nan ching, passim). In the canonical literature, ku refers to a pounding indicative of death, e.g., in Su wen 7.27, but here it seems to be used in the sense of a regular beat that is healthy. The terms pu p’ing 不平 and pu ku 不鼓 both indicate an unhealthy condition in this context. The term hsing pi 形弊 probably refers to a gradual fading away; Yamada (op. cit., p. 43) speaks of “fatigue.” 180 Kao chih yüan 高之遠 “the high one went to the distant one,” not attested in the received literature. The term chih 之 means “to wander, to go” in this context. See Su wen 7.27, and Osobe Yō (op. cit., p. 82). The terms kao 高 and yüan 遠 probably refer to the position of viscera inside the body, namely the lungs (heart) on high and the liver far away. Compare with Wang Bing’s comment on Su wen 74 (Wang Bing 1982, p. 187): “The heart and the lungs are the proximate ones, the liver and the kidneys the distant ones” 心肺為近 腎肝為遠. 181 Shu 數 “number” has here qualitative and classificatory functions, rather than the quantative ones of numbers used in the context to counting and measuring. Yi’s medicine built on the art of number. See response to interrogation question 1 below. 182 Ching ping 經病 alternate translation: “disorder of the channels” or “disorder of transition” to death; see case 1. 183 Namely, those of lung and liver, according to Ando Koretora. 184 Shih to 尸奪 refers either to a rapid bodily collapse, i.e., “fainting,” or to a gradual fading away, as in “fatigue.” It is not to be confused with shih chüeh 尸蹶 “corpse numbness.” See Shih chi, 105.1.2790. 185 Kuan chiu pien shih is “moxibustion and acupuncture,” according to Yamada (op. cit., p. 43), “cauterisation and stone needling,” which is more general: moxibustion, which involves the use of mugwort, is a particular form of cauterisation; acupuncture, which in the translator’s understanding is practised within the theoretical framework of the medicine of systemic correspondences, is a particular form of needle therapy. Kuan chiu 關 灸 “cauterisation,” not

44

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

At the time when your servant, Yi, had not yet come to make an examination, the Prefect Grand Physician of Ch’i had already examined Shan-fu’s illness. While cauterising the opening of his foot’s minor yang vessel, he made him drink a bolus of Pinellia. The patient immediately discharged and got drained, the abdomen and the interior were depleted. Moreover, he [the Grand Physician] cauterised the minor yin vessel. This harmed the hardness of the liver, being ruptured deep inside. In this way, he [the Grand Physician] doubly diminished the ch’i of the patient. Hence there were additionally hot and cold flushes.186 As for the reason why, after three days, he [Shan-fu] would be in a state that matches madness, a link of the liver connected with a binding knot and severed the yang brightness beneath the nipples.187 Hence, when the link got severed, it opened up the yang brightness vessel. When the yang brightness vessel got damaged, then in a state that matches madness, he ran about. As for dying after five days, liver and heart were distant from each other by five degrees [fen].188 Hence I said: “After five days, it [the distance] is exhausted. Being exhausted, he will thereupon die.” [Case 7] P’an Man-ju 潘滿如, the Commandant of the Capital of Ch’i, fell ill with pain in the lesser abdomen.189 Your servant, Yi, examined his vessels and said: “It is a conglomeration disorder of remanent stools.”190 Your servant, Yi, then attested elsewhere in medical texts, but see Ling shu 7.289 for kuan tz’u 關刺, which in that context is used for treating the liver (kan 肝). 186 Note that this is a case of an iatrogenic disorder. 187 Kan yi lo-lien shu chieh chüeh ju hsia yang ming 肝一絡連屬結絕乳下陽明 translation unclear. Hübotter (op. cit., p. 12) interprets shu chieh as “colon vessel”: “One of the links of the liver in its connection with the colon vessel interrupted the stomach just beneath the breast” (transl. by translator). 188 Hsin 心 “heart; epigastrium, inclusive of lungs.” The heart is mentioned here in place of the lungs; the lungs are evidently considered an aspect of the heart. Yi refers here to the “Fen chieh fa” 分界法 (Model for Measuring the Boundary), which apparently grounded in an archaic body concept, i.e. one which divided the body into two parts, a lower yin and upper yang part, liver and heart. Alternatively, the term “heart” is the result of a scribal error as discussed in case 2. 189 Shao fu 少腹 “lesser abdomen” used interchangeably with hsiao fu 小腹 “small abdomen,” mentioned in case 10. 190 Yi chi chia 遺 積 瘕 lit. “conglomerations of remanent accumulations” or “remanent accumulations and conglomerations”; not attested in the received literature. The term chia 瘕 “conglomerations” is mentioned in MWT (1985, pp. 11-12), the Chang-chia-shan “Mai shu” (Kao Ta-lun, op. cit., p. 16), and in the canonical medical literature. It also occurs in the non-medical literature, e.g., Shan hai ching 山海經 (Classic of Mountains and Lakes), 1 (Shan hai ching chiao-

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

45

said to the Grand Coachman Jao 饒 and the Clerk of the Capital Yao 繇: “If the commandant does not any further restrain himself from indulging in women, then he will die in thirty days.” After twenty-odd days, he passed blood and died. The illness was contracted from wine and women. The means whereby I recognized P’an Man-ju’s illness were that when I pressed on to his vessels, they were deep, small, and soft, abruptly they were confused,191 this is ch’i [coming] from the spleen. At the right [*2803*] vessel’s opening, ch’i arrived tight and small, 192 it manifested as ch’i [coming] from conglomerations. They [the pulses] took turns mutually in multiplying each other, hence [I said] he would die after thirty days. In cases where the three yin are entirely united,193 it is according to the “Model”.194 In cases where they are not entirely united, the decision resides within the ‘intensive time span’.195 In chu 山海經校注, Yüan Ke 袁珂, ed. [Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1980], p. 2). In late Imperial China, it develops into a blood-based women’s disorder, but on Shih chi, 105.2, it is not a genderspecific condition. See also case 19, where chia refers to a bug infestation. The term chi 積 “accumulation” frequently occurs in the received medical literature. Its locus classicus is Ling shu 66.438-9. See, for instance, Xie (1954: 4145). For extended discussion, see Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 7). 191 Ch’ia ch’ia yeh 合合也 “confused.” This reading follows Taki Motohiro 多紀元簡 (Taki Mototaka’s son, 1755-1810). It has an onomatopoetic meaning aspect, as various other signs indicative of splenetic, i.e. digestive, disorders. Incidentally, in case 19, it is also an onomatopoetic pulse quality tsu tsu jan or ch’i ch’i jan 戚戚然 that is indicative of a conglomeration (ch’ia). For detailed discussion of why the phrase should read ch’ia ch’ia yeh rather than he, he yeh, see Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 7). 192 Chih 至 can mean “extremely” or “to arrive.” It could also mean chih 窒 “congested,” as chih 至 is to be read a text passage of the Han Fei Tzu 20 (55) (Ch’en, op. cit., p. 1142), according to Yü Hsing-wu 于省吾 (1897-1984, op. cit., pp. 310-1). Depending on its translation, this passage refers to either two or three pulse qualities; compare with comparable ambiguities in cases 2, 4 and 19. 193 Po 搏, the graph given in Takigawa (105.36), should be pronounced as tuan 摶, according to Ju Ch’un. The Chung-hua Shu-chü edition (Shih chi, 105.2803) renders the graph as 摶. The graph 摶, if read as tuan, means “to unite” or “to bundle,” and if read as chuan it means “to link up,” “to form a circle.” 194 The “Model” obviously concerns the prognostication of death. Unlike the “Fen chieh fa,” which calculates the time span before death in terms of five degrees, this “Model” does so in terms of three. Compare with MWT TP (1985: 5) and MWT (1985: 21) and Su wen 7.27. 195 Chi ch’i 急期 “intense time span,” perhaps a period of crisis, after which the outcome of the patient’s illness will be clear. Elsewhere in early Chinese medical writings one encounters reasoning for determining “critical days,” e.g., Harper, “Iatromancy” and Su wen 32.94. In how far this is comparable to the notion of crisis in the Hippocratic writings remains to be seen. The term chi 急 is used in a similar sense of referring to a critical situation in Shih chi, 100.2729. Chüeh 決

46

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

cases where they once strike and once are alternating, [death] is near. Hence when the three yin united, he passed blood and died as [said] above. [Case 8] Chao Chang 趙章, the Chancellor196 of the Marquis of Yang-hsü 陽虛,197 got ill. They summoned me, Yi. All the many doctors took it for coldness in the interior.198 Your servant, Yi, examined his vessels and said: “It is the wind of the void.199 In the case of the wind of the void, drink and food go down the throat, are immediately evacuated, and not retained.” The “Model” says: “Death occurs after five days.” However, after ten days he eventually died. The illness was contracted from an indulgence in wine. The means whereby I recognized Chao Chang’s illness were that when your servant, Yi, pressed on to his vessels, the pulses came slippery. This is ch’i [coming] from the wind of the interior. In cases where drink and food go down the throat, are immediately evacuated and not retained, according to the “Model”, death occurs after five days. All this concerns the above mentioned “Fen chieh fa” 分界法 (Model for Measuring the Boundary).200 [Chao Chang] eventually died after ten days. could also mean “to burst open.” The translator follows Mark Lewis (personal communication) in translating chüeh as “to make a decision.” 196 Yang-hsü 陽虛 is Yang-hsü 楊虛 in Han shu 38, according to Takigawa. Yang-hsü 楊虛 was part of the Ping-yüan Commandery 平原郡 (Han shu bu chu, 15.4b) at 36.6° N, 116.4° E (Tan Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19-20). Hsiang 相, here and in case 15 rendered as “chancellor,” is in the Han the regular term for officials of various types and duties, including the one who was responsible for managing the estates of a noble. Originally termed ling 令, their title was changed to hsiang. See Han shu, 19A.740. Before 145 B.C., ch’eng hsiang 丞相 rather than hsiang is the word for chancellor. See Bielenstein, p. 106. 197 The King of Ch’i, who previously was the Marquis of Yang-hsü, unambiguously can be identified as Liu Chiang-lü 劉將閭 in case 23, but not necessarily in cases 2 and 8. Hsü Kuang identifies the man in question only in case 23, Hsu (Telling Touch forthcoming) takes account of this and argues for the heterogeneity of the original source material. 198 Han chung 寒中 “coldness in the interior” parallels chüeh shang 蹶上, a “numbness in the upper parts” in case 16; alternate translation: “a coldness striking the centre”; see also case 3. 199 Tung feng 迵風 “wind of the void,” not attested in the received medical literature, although the symptoms for tung 洞 in Ling shu 4.277, are almost identical. Unlike tung 迵, the term tung 洞 is a frequently encountered term in canonical writings; probably they were alternately used graphs. See Shuo wen 11A (2).8b: “tung means to flow swiftly” (tung chi liu yeh 洞疾流也). 200 “Fen chieh fa” 分界法 (Model for Measuring the Boundary), see also cases 1 and 6, and perhaps case 20.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

47

As for the reason whereby he exceeded the predicted time: this person liked to eat gruel, hence the viscera of the interior were full.201 The viscera of the interior were full, hence he exceeded the predicted time. A word of the master says: “Those who accommodate with ease to cereals will live beyond the appointed time. Those who reject cereals will not reach it.”202 [Case 9] [2804] The King of Chi-pei 濟北 fell ill. 203 They summoned me, Yi. I examined his vessels and said:204 “A wind-induced numbness.205 The chest feels full.” Forthwith, I prepared a drugged wine. 206 After drinking three shih, the

201

Chung tsang 中藏 “the viscera of the interior,” “the central viscera,” or: “the central viscus,” which Osebe Yô (op. cit., p. 86) identifies as the spleen (p’i 脾). Not attested in the Nei ching. See also case 19. Compare with Chung fu 中府 “receptacles of the interior,” “central bowels” or “the central bowel” which occur in MWT (1985, p. 156) and Su wen 27.85. 202 Note that the word of the master provides a medical/dietetic rationale for explaining the inaccuracy of a prognostication based on divinatory methods. 203 The man in question could either be Liu Hsing-chü 劉興居, the fourth son of Liu Fei 劉肥 (King of Ch’i from 201-188 B.C.), who became King of Chi-pei from 178-176, or Liu Chih 劉志, the fifth son of the Liu Fei, who was made King of Chi-pei in 164, became King of Tzu-ch’uan 淄 川 in 153 (154?), and died in 129 (130?). See references cited in case 2. 204 It is strange that Yi does not kao 告 “formally proclaim” his findings to the King (Rudolf Wagner personal correspondence), while he does so to the wetnurse of “the former King of Chi-pei” in case 11. 205 Feng chüeh 風 蹶 “wind-induced numbness” is not mentioned in the early medical manuscript literature, but see Su wen 7.26, and 33.96, and Ling shu 46.388. Feng chüeh in Ling shu 46 has sweating as symptom, feng chüeh in Su wen 33 has sweating and feeling upset and full, both of which parallel case 9. Yi’s understanding of chüeh in this case partly parallels the Shih ming, 8.26 (SPTK 60b), the Shuo wen 7B.29b, and the Yu pien B.8a, all dating to the second century A.D., which consider chüeh a manifestation of “countervective ch’i” (ni ch’i 逆氣). Chüeh is therefore often translated as inversion or reversal (Hsu “Telling Touch”: case 9), but designated a state of numbness in early writings (e.g., Hsu, Telling Touch forthcoming). 206 Yao chiu 藥酒 “medicinal alcoholic drink.” Yamada (op. cit., pp. 104 and 121) suggests that it was used for inducing therapeutic sweating. This is questioned below.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

48

illness ceased. 207 He contracted it from sweating and lying prostrate on the ground.208 The means whereby I recognized the illness of the King of Chi-pei were that at the time when I, Yi, pressed on to his vessels, it was wind ch’i. The pulse [coming] from the heart was murky. According to the “Ping fa” 病法 (Model of Disorders), if one excessively makes one’s yang enter,209 then, while the yang ch’i is exhausted, the yin ch’i enters. If the yin ch’i enters and expands, then, while the cold ch’i ascends, the hot ch’i descends, hence the chest feels full. As for the sweating and lying prostrate on the ground, when I pressed on to his vessels, the ch’i was yin. In cases of yin ch’i, the illness must have entered the interior. When one expels it, it reaches the degree of roaring water.210 [Case 10] The accredited wife211 Ch’u Yü 出於212 of Pei-kung 北宮,213 the Officer of Works214 in Ch’i, fell ill. All the many doctors took it for a wind that had entered 207

One shih 石 equaled in Han times about 20 litres. Three shih, about sixty litres, is a considerable amount of beer; in some editions, shih is replaced by jih 日. However, there is a therapeutic reason why the King of Chi-pei should drink lots of beer/wine. Bridgman (op. cit., p. 81, n. 140) points to Shih chi, 66.3199: “Oh, how is it possible that you can drink one shih” 惡能飲一 石哉, which provides evidence that people did consume such large quantities of beer in antiquity. 208 No doubt, the King of Chi-pei indulged in sexual intercourse. For sweating (han 汗) as an euphemism of sexual intercourse in cases 5, 9, and 12, see Hsu, Innovation in Chinese Medicine. Excessive sweating during sexual intercourse was considered harmful, see MWT (1985, p. 164) and Pfister (1992: 89). 209 Kuo ju ch’i yang 過 入 其 陽 “if one excessively makes one’s yang enter.” Alternate translation: “excess entered his yang” is given by Hübotter (op. cit., p. 14) and Bridgman (op. cit., p. 34) but makes no sense. The translator suggests that yang 陽 designates here either the penis or the ejaculate, i.e., yang-fluids, although neither is attested as such in other Han texts. The term for penis typically is yin 陰 (e.g. Harper, Early Medical Literature, pp. 402 and 425), apart from idioms like the “red infant” or the “jade whip” (Ibid., pp. 389, 400, 401 and 411). The term ju can refer to the sexual transfer of a fluid, see MWT (1985, p. 146): … nai ju ch’i ching 乃入其精. Harper (Ibid., p. 389) translates: “When able to move her form and bring forth the five tones, then absorb her [the woman's] essence.” However, in light of the above phrase, it could also mean: “When he is able to move her form and bring forth the five tones, then he enters his essence (semen) [i.e., he ejaculates].” Ju yang would then refer to the entering of yang fluids. 210 Chan 瀺 refers to the sound of water, whether “roaring” or “tinkling,” in particular of waterfalls. See Shih chi, 117.3017. Yamada (op. cit., p. 104), in accorsdance with the commentators, considers the water that comes out to be sweat, but Hsu (Telling Touch forthcoming: case 9), based on a literal reading of the text, argues that he King of Chi-pei urinated like a waterfall and thereby got rid of chüeh (which had yin qualities).

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

49

the interior. [They assumed that] the host of the disorder resided in the lungs [liver].215 They needled her foot’s minor yang vessel. Your servant, Yi, examined her vessels and said: “She is troubled by an amassment of ch’i visiting the bladder. She has difficulties with urinating and defecating, and the urine is dark. When the disorder is exposed to cold ch’i, then there is remanent urine. It makes the person’s abdomen swollen.” Ch’u Yü’s illness was contracted by intending to urinate, but not having the chance to do so, and by indulging, in this condition, in sexual intercourse. The means whereby I recognized Ch’u Yü’s illness were that when I pressed on to her vessels, while being large, they were replete. They came with difficulty. This is the agitation of the dull yin. In cases where the pulses come with difficulty, it is ch’i [coming] from an amassment that is visiting the bladder. As for the abdomen, the reason why it became swollen, it is said that a link of the dull yin is knotted to the small abdomen. When the dull yin has excess, then the knot of the vessel got agitated.216 When it got agitated, then the abdomen became swollen. Your servant, Yi, then cauterised her foot’s ceasing yin vessel, the left and the right one, each at one place. 217 Instantly, while there was no remanent urine anymore, she urinated clear [urine]. The pain in the small 211

Ming fu 命婦 “accredited wife,” “consort.” This term poses problems to the commentators and Taki Motohiro provides extensive remarks on the ranks of the husband of a nei ming fu or wai ming fu. See also Bridgman (op. cit., p. 82, n. 142). A ssu k’ung belonged among the lower ranks and would have been allowed to have a slave, but not a ming fu, according to Chavannes, 2:519 and 523). Another edition renders fu as nu 奴 “slave,” according to Hsü Kuang. 212 Ch’u-yü 出於 is a personal name, according to Chang Shou-chieh. The translator follows Yamada (op. cit., p. 118) who renders her full name as Ch’u-yü. Ts’ui Shih interprets ch’u-yü to mean ping yü ch’u 病於出 “the illness is at the exit,” which points, in his understanding, to this person's disorder in the bladder. On Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s puns about the names of Yi’s clientele, see Hsu, Telling Touch, forthcoming. 213 Pei-kung 北宮 is a surname, according to Yamada (op. cit., p. 118). 214 Ssu-k’ung 司空. Bielenstein (p. 16) does not list this title for the Former Han; it probably refers to a low-ranking official. In the Later Han Ssu-k’ung is a degradation of the title of the Grand Minister of Works (Ta Ssu-k’ung). To resolve this problem, Ssu-k’ung would have to be a personal name: “Ssu-k’ung of the northern palace” (Pei-kung Ssu-k’ung). However, then one would have to identify the northern and southern palaces. 215 Fei 肺 “lungs” is given as kan 肝 “liver” in another edition, according to Hsü Kuang. Hsu (Telling Touch forthcoming) points to historical developments of medical reasoning, which make this more likely. 216 Mai chieh 脈結 “knot of the vessel” seems to designate the knot between the dull yin mai 蹶陰脈 and the small abdomen, as detailed in the previous sentence. See also case 1. 217 So 所 “place,” not further specified.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

50

abdomen stopped. Forthwith, I additionally prepared the hot liquid [prepared by careful] regulation of fire, and had her drink it. After three days, the ch’i of the amassment dissipated. She instantly recovered. [Case 11] [2805] The wetnurse218 of the former King of Chi-pei219 herself reported that her feet were hot and full. Your servant, Yi, formally announced: "It is an inversion of heat.”220 Then I needled the heart of her feet, each at three [different] places. I pressed them [until] no blood came out. 221 The illness immediately ceased. The illness was contracted from drinking alcohol and getting badly drunk.222 [Case 12] The King of Chi-pei 223 summoned your servant, Yi. I examined the vessels.224 Among all the women and servants, I got to the woman Shu 豎. Shu 218

Ah mu 阿母 is a ju mu 乳母 “wetnurse.” See also Shih chi, 30A.1049. Her status must have been one of respect, otherwise Yi would not need to kao 告 “formally announce.” 219 The former King of Chi-pei was probably Liu Hsing-ch’iu 劉邢丘. The kingdom of Chi-pei was founded in 178 B.C. and abolished in 176 when Liu Hsing-ch’iu revolted. It was not reinstalled until in 164. 220 Je chüeh 熱蹶 ”inversion of heat,” i.e., the feet are usually cold, hers are hot. Note parallel to Su wen, 45.126. Yi’s name of the disorder, its symptoms, and its treatment do not contradict Su wen 45, although the latter puts more emphasis on yin yang aspects of bodily processes. In Ling shu 9.296 and 21.335, je chüeh 熱厥 is also mentioned, but has entirely different connotations. Yi’s understanding of chüeh builds on ideas of an inversion of yin and yang, see also case 16. Case 9 is more complicated because chüeh is there closely related to a surplus of coldness, yin, as is typical of numbness. The many doctors, who do not have as sophisticated a vocabulary as Yi, probably use the term chüeh in the sense of “numbness,” see cases 3 and 23. 221 The treatment of je chüeh 熱蹶 accords with that of tsu je 足熱 “the feet feel hot” in the manuscript texts and canonical writings: in MWT TP (1985, p. 4), one treats tsu je not by needling but by cauterizing the minor yin vessel. In Ling shu 10.303, the foot minor yin, which passes through tsu hsin 足心 “heart of the foot,” has as condition of so ch’an 所產 “that which it produces”: “the foot soles, while hot, are painful’ 足下熱而痛. Su wen 24.78 recommends for this the following treatment: “if you needle the minor yin, you effect that ch’i and bad blood come out” 刺少陰出氣惡血. 222 Note parallel to alcohol consumption in Su wen, 45.126, as cause of this disorder. Bridgman (op. cit., p. 84, n. 151) diagnoses gout due to chronic alcohol abuse. 223 If the former King of Chi-pei in the previous case was Liu Hsing-ch’iu 劉邢丘, the King of Chi-pei in this case is likely to be Liu Chih 劉志. However, due to the heterogeneity of the source material (Hsu, Telling Touch forthcoming)—cases 1-10 form from the viewpoint of medical

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

51

did not have an [apparent] illness. Your servant, Yi, formally announced to the Chief of the Rear Palace225: “Shu has a damaged spleen.226 She is not allowed to exert herself. According to the ‘Model,’ in spring she will vomit blood and die.” Your servant, Yi, spoke to the King: “The concubine227 Shu, what kind of skills has she got?” The King said: “This one is fond of formulae, she has many performative skills and she does what [I] approve of. The massage techniques are new.228 Last year, I purchased her on the town's market of the common people. She was 470 wan,229 an equivalent of four persons.”230 The King said 231: “Is it possible that she does not have an illness?” Your servant, Yi, replied: “Shu’s illness is grave, she is [in a state recorded] in the ‘Ssu fa’ 死法 (Model of [Imminent] Death).”232 The King summoned [her] to inspect her. Her complexion had not changed.233 He believed that it was not so, and did not sell her to any noble's household. When spring came, she held the sword and accompanied the King when he went to the toilet. The King left. Shu remained behind. The King ordered someone to summon her. Just then, she fell flat by the toilet, vomited

rationale more of an entity than cases 11-25–there is no compelling reason that therefore the King of Chi-pei in case 9 must be Liu Chih. See notes to case 9. 224 This seems to have been a measure of preventive health care. 225 Yung hsiang 永巷, lit. “long alley in the palace.” See Shih chi, 79.1406. 226 Compare and contrast with shang p’i ch’i 傷脾氣 “damaged spleen ch’i” in case 15. 227 Ts’ai jen 才人, lit. “talented person,” on Shih chi, 118.3079, juxtaposed to mei-jen 美人, lit. “beautiful person.” 228 “She does what [I] approve of. The massage techniques are new” 為所是案法新. Takigawa considers this passage corrupt; Ssu-ma Chen’s gloss does not make much sense. “An fa” 案法 (Model for Massage Techniques) are also mentioned in Yi’s answer to interrogation question 7. Mark Lewis (op. cit.) suggests this slave was skilled in sexual techniques. The king obviously cannot speak straightforwardly of sexual activities, and therefore vaguely refers to them as so shih “that which is this.” 229 Wan 萬 “ten thousand” coins of cash were equivalent to a pound of gold, according to Chavannes (1967: 3:541). The price of 470 pounds of gold for this one slave is rather high. Bridgman (op. cit., p. 84 n. 155) points out that a horse was worth 100 pounds of gold. 230 Ts’ao ou 曹偶 means t’ung lei 同類 “of the same kind,” or, according to Ssu-ma Chen, teng pei 等輩 “the same kind.” Therefore, ts’ao ou is rendered here as “an equivalent of.” 231 This repetition is odd. The king was speaking anyway. 232 “Ssu fa” 死法 (Model for [Determining] Death). For a text of this genre, see MWT (1985, pp. 19-21). 233 Yi was summoned to examine the vessels (mai 脈 ) but his prognosis is based on an inspection of color/complexion (se 色 ). His case histories are evidence that the diagnostic examination of se and mai emerged in the same medical circles.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

52

blood and died.234 The illness was contracted from dripping with sweat. 235 In cases of dripping with sweat, according to the “Model,” the illness is grave in the interior. The body hair was fine [like head hair] and the complexion lustrous.236 The pulse was not weakened. This is a disorder of closing off the interior.237 [Case 13] [2806] The Palace Grandee of Ch’i fell ill with a decaying tooth.238 Your servant, Yi, cauterized his left [hand’s]239 yang brightness vessel.240 Forthwith I made a k’u-shen potion.241 Daily he rinsed his mouth with three sheng. After 234

Usually, the verification of Yi’s prognosis is brief and succinct. This detailed account reminds of the narrative motif in Tso chuan (Yang, Tso chuan, Cheng 10, pp. 849-50): the Duke of Chin himself dies on the toilet. The slave who has to carry him out of the toilet, dreamt that he would carry the Duke on his shoulders and hoist him to heaven. He is killed and buried with the Duke. 235 Liu han 流汗 “dripping with sweat.” Such sweating parallels cases 5 and 9, and suggests that Shu was good at the sexual arts. It also parallels case 15, where Yi is explicit, however, that the illness did not arise due to sexual intercourse. 236 Mao fa 毛髮 “the body hair is [like] head hair,” appears to be a diagnostic sign opposite to mao che 毛折 “the body hair is brittle/broken,” which is indicativeof death e.g., in Chen chiu chia yi ching (1996, p. 1453). The idiom mao fa occurs in Chen chiu chia yi ching (p. 1487), but has a different sense there. The translator considers fa “to be fine, to be like head hair” a predicate that modifies mao 毛 “body hair’; it probably refers to the length, sturdiness or glossiness of the body hair. See also case 19, “the body hair is beautiful [like] cicada antennas” 毛美奉[螓]髮. 237 Kuan nei chih ping 關內之病 “disorder of closing off the interior” is synonymous to nei kuan chih ping in cases 1 and 15. 238 Ch’u ch’ih 蛀齒 “foul tooth,” probably designates a condition of dental caries. 239 Ta 大 “large” is, according to Taki Motohiro, replaced by shou 手‚ “hand.” The above translation diverges from the text given in Takigawa (105.40) and Shih chi, 105.2806. 240 Ta [rather: shou] yang ming mai 大[手]陽明脈 “the large [rather: hand’s] yang brightness vessel” is in MWT YY (Ma 1992, p. 244) called ch’ih mai 齒脈 “the vessel of the teeth.” Chi tong 齒痛 “toothache” is a disorder of the vessel, both in the case of shih tung 是動 “this one is agitated” and its so ch’an 所產 “that which it produces.” In the MWT ZB (Ma 1992, p. 215), it is a disorder of the pi yang ming mai 臂陽明脈 “the arm's yang brightness vessel.” In MWT, the disorders of the vessels are always treated by cauterization, as does Yi. See also Ling shu 10.300, where toothache is a so ch’an disorder of the hand yang brightness vessel. The correlation of toothache with the hand's yang brightness vessel is consistent throughout all these texts. 241 K’u shen 苦參 is generally identified with sophora flavescens Ait. (Chung-hua yao-hai 中 華藥海, [hereafter CHYH], 1.326-30, Chung-yao ta tz’u-tien 中藥大辭典 [hereafter CYTTT], entry 2624), but can also be another name for lan hsi so chü 藍錫莎菊‚ which is generally identified with cicerbita cynea (CYTTT, entry 5106). For other synonyms, see Bridgman (op. cit., pp. 85-86, n. 158). According to CHYH (1.327), its flavour is bitter (k’u 苦), cold (han 寒), and it has a bit of

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

53

about five to six days, the illness ceased. The illness was contracted from wind and sleeping with an open mouth, from eating and not rinsing the mouth.242 [Case 14] A concubine243 of the King of Tzu-ch’uan244 was with child, but did not give birth. They came to summon your servant, Yi. Your servant, Yi, went [there].245 I made a drink with a pinch246 of lang-tang247 medicine; I had her drink it with alcohol. Immediately she gave birth. When your servant, Yi, examined her vessels again, they were hurried. In cases when they are hurried, there is a lingering illness. Thereupon, I made a drink with a dose248 of niter.249 I effected

toxicity (you hsiao du 有小毒). “It clears the heat and dries out the damp” (ch’ing je zao shi 清熱 燥濕. K’u shen t’ang 苦參湯 can be applied externally (CYTTT, entry 1284), “to wash the affected body parts” (hsi huan ch’u 洗患處, CHYH, 1.329, entries 9, 10, 11), although it is nowadays not used for treating caries. Its indications are, according to Western medicine, bacterial (hsi chün hsing 細菌性), parasitic (ch’ung hsing 蟲性), and inflammatory (yen 炎) conditions. 242 Note that two rather unrelated conditions are mentioned as cause of the disorder; one points to bad, perhaps demonic influences from the outside that entered through an open cavity, the mouth, the other is also today considered a cause of caries. 243 Mei jen 美人 “concubine” is frequent in the Shih chi (e.g., Shih chi, 118.3075). 244 The Kingdom of Tzu-ch’uan 菑川 was installed in 164 B.C. Liu Hsien 劉賢, the seventh son of Liu Fei 劉肥, was king until 154 B.C., when, in his revolt, he was killed by his elder brother Liu Chih 劉志, King of Chi-pei 濟北, who thereupon annexed Zichuan. 245 Note that they came (lai 來) and Yi went (wang 往). Tzu-ch’uan was considered a distant place. 246 Ts’o 撮 “a pinch” is, according to T’ao Yin-chü 陶隱居 (T’ao Hung-ching 陶弘景, 456536), equivalent to four tao kuei 刀圭 and equivalent to one millilitre (Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 1.100). 247 Lang tang 莨菪 is not mentioned in the standard dictionaries on Chinese drugs. Taki Motohiro points out that the Pen ts’ao kang mu (17.1140-4) mentions lang tang tzu 莨菪子 (seeds). CYTTT (entry 0649) mentions as synonym t’ian hsien tzu 天仙子 (seeds), CYTTT (entries 3717 and 3718) and CHYH (1.1429) mention lang tang yeh 莨菪葉 (leaves) and lang tang ken 莨菪根 (roots), all taken from Hyoscyamus nikor L. The flavour of the seeds is according to CYTTT bitter (k’u 苦), pungent (hsin 辛), and they have toxicity (yu tu 有毒). 248 Yi ch’i 一齊 “one dose.” In Cheng lei ben cao, 3.34b (SKCS, 740-98) rendered as yi ch’i 一 劑. 249 Hsiao shih 消石 “niter.” Its main chemical compound is KNO3. According to CYTTT (entry 3959), it is produced from Caryopteris nepetaefolia (Benth.) Maxim. Its flavour is, according to CHYH (1.572-4), sweet (kan 甘), salty (hsien 咸), cold (han 寒), and it has toxicity (yu tu).

54

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

that blood came out.250 The blood [drops] were like beans, in succession,251 five to six [came out].252 [Case 15] The slave of a Member of the Suite of the Chancellor of Ch’i accompanied [his master who went] to court and entered the palace. Your servant, Yi, saw him eating outside the gate of the inner quarters.253 When I looked at his complexion, I saw that he had the ch’i of an illness. Your servant, Yi, thereupon formally announced [this] to Eunuch P’ing 平. P’ing was fond of [the art of] the pulse.254 He had studied at the place255 of your servant, Yi. Your servant, Yi, thereupon showed him the illness of the slave of the Member of the Suite, and formally announced: “This is the ch’i of a damaged spleen. When spring will arrive, the diaphragm will be blocked,256 and not connect.257 He will not be able to eat and drink. According to the ‘Model,’ 258 when summer arrives, he will discharge blood and die.” The Eunuch P’ing thereupon went to formally announce to the Chancellor: “The slave of your Excellency's Member of the Suite has an illness. The illness is grave. The period until he dies is counted in days.” [His Excellency], the Chancellor,259 said: “Sir, how do you know that?” [P’ing] said: “At the time when your Excellency had the court session and had entered the palace, the slave of your Excellency’s Member of the Suite finished off a meal 250 Ch’u hsüeh 出血 lit. “I caused blood to go out.” On blood letting in ancient China, see D. C. Epler, 'Bloodletting in Early Chinese Medicine and its Relation to the Origin of Acupuncture.' Bulletin of the History of Medicine 54 (1980): 337-67. 251 Pi 比, lit. “in succession,” according to Oka Hakku 岡白駒 (1692-1767). 252 Mei 枚 is a measure word (Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 4:856). 253 Kuei men 閨門 “the gate of the inner quarters’ where the women lived. 254 Hao wei mai 好為脈 “was fond of [the art of] the pulse.” Compare with case 12, hao wei fang 好為方 “to be fond of formulae” or “to be good at doing tricks.” 255 So 所 “place”; alternate reading: he studied “under the guidance of' Yi.” 256 Ko 鬲 “to separate” (case 2) or “diaphragm” (case 25). The translation is based on a parallel text passage in Ling shu 19 (see following footnote). 257 Pu t’ung 不通 “there is no connection” [between the upper and the lower part of the body], very common concept in medicine. Consider Ling shu 19.331: “if food and drink do not descend, if the diaphragm is blocked and does not connect, the noxious is in the centre of the stomach” 飲食不 下鬲塞不通邪在胃脘. Compare with case 2. 258 “Fa” 法 “Model,” probably the “Ssu fa” 死法 (Model of [Imminent] Death), mentioned in case 12. 259 Hsiang 相 and not hsiang chün 相君 should be the appropriate reading, according to Kaiho Gyoson.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

55

outside the gate of the inner quarters. I, P’ing, and Master Ts’ang were standing [there]. Thereupon, he [Master Ts’ang] showed [it] to me, P’ing, and said: ‘If you are ill like this, you will die.’” The Chancellor, thereupon, after summoning the Member of the Suite and the slave, spoke to them saying: “Master, does the slave have an illness or not?” The Member of the Suite said: “The slave does not have an illness. His body is without pain.” As spring arrived, [the slave] indeed fell ill. As the fourth month arrived, he discharged blood and died. The means whereby I recognized the slave’s illness were that the ch’i of the spleen completely overrode the five viscera. 260 After damaging the parts,261 it intermingled [with them]. Hence there was the color of a damaged spleen. 262 When I looked at him, [his complexion] was mortally yellow. When I inspected him, [it] was the deathly green of a straw mat. 263 The many doctors did not recognise [this illness]. They took it for large worms.264 They do not recognise [i.e. have a concept of] a damaged spleen. As for the means whereby [one recognises that], as spring arrives, there is death [and illness],265 the ch’i of the stomach was yellow.266 In cases of a yellow [complexion], it is the ch’i of the earth.267 Earth does not overcome wood. 268 Hence as spring arrives, death occurs. 260 Yi probably speaks of processes observed on the face but could also be speaking about processes in the body. 261 Pu 部 probably refers to se pu 色部 “parts on the face for diagnosis based on the inspection of the complexion.” See also case 17. For parallels, see for instance Ling shu 49.399. 262 Se 色 “color, complexion.” In Shih chi 105, when Yi speaks of se, he always reasons in terms of the five agents and makes use of technical terms typically used in those contexts, e.g., ch’eng 乘 “to ride on” (in canonical medical texts: “to multiply”), and sheng 勝 “to overcome.” 263 For parallels, see Su wen, 10.34: “if [the complexion] is greenish like a strawmat, death occurs)” 青如草茲者死 and Mai ching 5.4 (Shen, p. 153). 264 Ch’ung 蟲 “bugs, insects, worms, parasites, etc.” See Harper (Early Medical Literature, p. 74). 265 Ssu ping 死病 “death and illness”; alternate reading: “deathly illness.” Taki Motokata 多紀 元堅 considers ssu to be mistaken, for the slave did not die in spring. The translator, for reasons of consistency with other cases, which are concerned with the prognostication of death, considers ping to be mistaken. In the translator’s understanding Yi outlines first two general principles, introduced by the phrase so yi 所以 “the means whereby.” In the third instance, he refers to this particular case with the introductory phrase ch’i so yi 其所以 “the means whereby his.” 266 Note the importance of the stomach here; by contrast, in canonical medical doctrine the spleen correlates with yellow, and the stomach is an outer aspect of the spleen, e.g., Su wen, 5.21. 267 This is in accordance with canonical doctrine; e.g., Su wen, 5.21. 268 T’u pu sheng mu 土不勝木 “earth does not overcome wood.” This sentence is odd, because, in canonical doctrine, one usually speaks about the cycle of overcoming in the affirmative: earth

56

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

As for the means whereby [one recognises that], as summer arrives, there is death, the “Mai fa” says: “If an illness is grave, but the pulses are placid and clear, one says: ‘the interior is closed off’.” [In the case of] a disorder of the interior being closed off,269 the person does not recognise that which is painful. The heart is [serene] while there is no suffering.270 If there is additionally an illness, one dies in mid-spring. If there is [additionally] a favorable and placid [condition],271 one reaches one [more] season. The means whereby [I recognized] that he [the slave] would die in the fourth month, were that when I examined this person, he was in a favorable and placid [condition]. In a favorable and placid [condition] the person is still fat. The illness of the slave was contracted because, dripping with sweat, he frequently went outside. After roasting by the fire, he, in this condition, went outside and exposed himself to big winds. [Case 16] [2807] The King of Tzu-ch’uan fell ill.272 He summoned your servant, Yi. I examined the vessels and said: “An inversion of the above.273 It makes one feel heavy.274 The head aches. The body is hot and makes the person feel upset and

overcomes water. Note, moreover, that Yi's reasoning is not quite in accordance with canonical doctrine according to which yellow and earth indicate that there is an injury of the stomach-spleen and that death or illness occurs in the late summer, not in spring. Possibly, Yi’s rationale is that earth overcomes water, and that therefore the illness does not break out in winter, but since earth does not overcome wood, death will occur in spring. However, such reasoning diverges from the reasoning found in other medical writings. 269 Nei kuan 內關 “the interior is closed off.” For parallels in signs and symptoms, interior bodily processes, and the cause of the illness, see case 12. For discussion of this term, see case 1 and notes. Note that nei kuan chih ping in case 1 has a different symptomatology, physiology, and aetiology. 270 Chi 急 is hui 慧 “to be bright, serene,” according to Ando Koretora. See Ling shu 4.277: “the heart is serene as if one were without an illness” 心慧然若無病 and hui jan 慧然 in Suwen 26.83. 271 Shun 順 “smooth, placid.” In case 4, shun is a pulse quality; in case 20, shun refers to the illness itself. 272 For identification of the King of Tzu-ch’uan, see case 14 and notes. 273 Shang 上 “above, upper parts” is in the third tone, according to Chang Shou-chieh; it is a noun rather than a verb. 274 Wei chung 為重 probably means shen chung 身重, “the body feels heavy/sluggish.” It is a very common symptom, e.g., Su wen 22.72-3, 32.95, 33.97, 60.160, 64.178, 65.181, 69.198, 71.214, 71.224, and Ling shu 23.340. For collocation of t’ou t’eng 頭痛 “headache” and shen chung, see Su

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

57

oppressed.” Your servant, Yi, forthwith took cold water and clasped it onto his head.275 I needled his foot’s yang brightness vessel,276 the left and the right one, each at three [different] places.277 The illness instantly ceased. The illness was contracted from washing one’s hair and, while it was not yet dry, going to sleep. I examined him as [said] above. The means whereby [I recognized] that it was an inversion was that the heat of the head reached [downwards] to the shoulders.278 [Case 17] [2808] At the home of Huang Ch’ang-ch’ing 黃長卿, the elder brother of the King of Ch’i's 279 Lady Huang 黃, 280 there was wine and they invited guests. They invited your servant, Yi. All guests were seated, and one had not yet served the meal, when your servant, Yi, having looked at and perceived the Queen’s younger brother Sung Chien 宋建, formally announced: “Your Excellency has an illness. For four to five days, your Excellency has had pain in the lower back281 and in the sides.282 You are not able to bend forward and backward. Moreover, you cannot urinate. If you do not treat it immediately, the illness will forthwith enter the urinary kidneys.283 As long as it has not yet settled in the five viscera, wen 60.160. Bridgman (op. cit., p. 89, n. 185) proposes to read wei 為 as chien 肩 “shoulders” since they are mentioned in the last sentence, but there is no need to suggest the text is corrupt. 275 Fu 拊 “to caress, to clasp.” This treatment is probably based on a yin yang maxim that the cold balances out the hot, and vice versa. 276 Compare with case 1: rising heat and head ache are correlated with the yang ming. Consider the damaged yang ming and a state that matches madness in case 6. 277 Note parallel to case 11, where the heat inversion was treated by needling the heart of the feet, on the left and right at three [different] places. 278 Chüeh “numbness” or “inversion” [of yin and yang], see also cases 3 and 23, 9 and 11. Perhaps, Yi considers it an inversion because heat, which usually rises, goes downwards here. Bridgman (op. cit., p. 89, n. 188) points to a parallel in Su wen that could not be located. 279 For possible identifications of the King of Ch’i, see cases 2 and 23. 280 Huang yi 黃姬 “the concubine Huang” (Hübotter op. cit., p. 18). Alternate translation: Huang Chi 黃姬 as cognomen and praenomen (Michael Loewe, personal communication), but Chi can also be a clan name. 281 Yao 要 is yao 腰 “waist, lower back,” according to Takigawa. 282 Hsieh 脅 “sides” should be replaced by chi 脊 'spine,” in order be consistent with Chien’s statement, according to Ando Koretora. 283 Ju shen 濡腎 “urinary kidneys” or “moist kidneys.” For translation as “urinary kidneys” consider niao p’ao 尿脬 “urinary bladder” in Yang Shang-shan's comment to T’ai su 3 (Huang-ti nei ching T’ai su 黃帝內經太素 [The Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, Grand Basis] Yang Shangshan [fl. 666-683], Toyo Igaku Kenkyujo, eds., facsimile of the 1168 A.D. edition kept at Ninnaji

58

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

treat it urgently. The illness is now lodged in the urine of the kidneys.284 This is a so-called obstruction of the kidneys.”285 Sung Chien said: “So it is. I certainly have pain in the lower back and the spine. Four to five days ago, it was raining. All the servants286 of the Huang family saw in my, Chien’s, home a square stone beneath the storehouse.287 They then played with it.288 I, Chien, wished to imitate them. I imitated them, but was not able to lift it. Instantly, I put it back down. In the evening, the lower back and the spine hurt. I could not urinate. Until now I have not recovered.” Chien's illness was contracted from being fond of lifting heavy [things]. The means whereby I recognized Chien’s illness were that when your servant, Yi, saw his color, the color of the major yang was dry.289 Above the part [Osaka: Toyo Igaku Zenpon Sosho, 1981], p. 143): “the bladder composes the urine, hence it is called pao-bladder, then urinary p’ao-bladder” 膀胱成尿, 故謂之胞, 既尿脬. For translation as “moist kidneys,” see Su wen, 70. For an extended discussion of the bladder, see Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 5). Alternate translation: ju 濡 “to soak” the kidneys. 284 Shen ju 腎濡 “urine of the kidneys” or the same as ju shen. In this text the constituents of compound words are frequently exchanged, e.g., kuan nei chih ping (case 12) and nei kuan chih ping (cases 1, 15). Chang Wen-hu proposes to read ju 濡 as shu 輸 “the transport locus.” For discussion of shu, see case 22. According to the third case in Pien Ch’üeh’s biography (see text above), the shu of a viscus is affected shortly before the illness reaches the viscus itself. 285 Shen pi 腎痹. For correlation of pi with dampness and water, see Shuo wen, 7B.31: “pi is a disorder of flooding” (pi shih ping yeh 痹濕病) and Su wen, 10.36. However, in general, the descriptions of shen pi in Suwen 10.36, 43.121, and 64.178 hardly have any affinity with this case. Pi occurs in MWT vessel texts as compound word: chi pi 疾痹, tsu hsiao chih pi 足小趾痹, [tsu chung chih] huai pi [足中趾]踝痹, hou pi 喉痹 in MWT (1985, pp. 5, 9, 9, 10). Interestingly, in the MWT vessel texts the foot is frequently affected by an obstruction; this contrasts with Su wen 10. Pi has, in general, very many different connotations, e.g., Suwen 43 on pi (for translation of that entire chapter, see Hsu, “Transmission of Knowledge,” 1992, appendix). It is often contrasted with feng 風, e.g. Su wen 18.54-5, Ling shu 6.284 and wei 痿 e.g. Su wen 44.124. 286 Ch’ing or ch’ien 倩 “son-in-law,” Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 1:1443. “Servants,” according to P’ei Yin who refers to Kuo P’u’s comment in the Fang yen 方言 (SPTK 3.1a). 287 Ching 京 “storehouse.” Unusual usage. For translation of the commentaries, see Bridgman (op. cit., p. 90 n. 194). 288 Chi 即 “instantly” is rendered ch’ü 取 “to take” in the T’ai-p’ing yü lan, 721, according to Wang Nien-sun. 289 T’ai yang 太陽, three possible translations. First: “major yang vessel” (Bridgman, op. cit., p. 90, n. 195). In both MWT vessel texts (1985, pp. 3 and 9) the foot's major yang vessel wedges the spine (hsia chi 挾脊). In Ling shu 10.302, the foot's major yang wedges the spine internally (nei hsia chi 內挾 脊 ). These findings correlate nicely with the spine mentioned in this case, but contradict the possible correlation between bladder and t’ai yin in cases 4 and 5. This is yet another example of slight differences in medical reasoning between cases 1-10 and 11-25 (Hsu, Telling

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

59

of the kidneys up to the boundary and [in the part] below the lower back, it was withered290 to [the degree of] about four fen. Hence I recognized that his [illness] had started four to five days ago.291 Your servant, Yi, immediately prepared a softening hot liquid292 and made him apply it.293 After about eighteen days, he recovered from the illness. [Case 18] Han Ju 韓女,294 an attendant295 of the King of Chi-pei 濟北,296 fell ill. The lower back and the back were painful,297 and intermittently felt hot and cold.298 Touch, forthcoming). Second: T’ai yang can also refer to the “major yang warp.” Note the correlation between shih pi 濕痹 “obstruction due to dampness” and t’ai yang warp in the Chin kuei yao lüeh 2, which also concerns dysuria (but otherwise the symptoms do not match). Third: T’ai yang is the “major yang area at the temples,” according to Taki Motohiro. Indeed, Yi talks of pu 部 “parts” as when he does when he inspects the complexion (e.g., case 15). 290 K’u 枯 “withered” indicates a worse condition than kan 乾 “dry,” according to Ando Koretora. 291 Ku yi 故以, in contrast to the last section of eight interrogation questions and answers. is not be read as compound word, according to Kaiho Gyoson. 292 Jou t’ang 柔湯 “softening hot liquid.” Not attested in the received literature. It is a supplementing medicine (pu yao 補藥), according to Ando Koretora. See case 22 for jou ch’i 柔齊 “soft recipe,” which has yin qualities that boost yin and enhance vitality. 293 Shih fu chih 使 服 之 “made him apply it.” Probably, Yi refers to the application of compresses (Bridgman, op. cit., p. 90, n. 198), as probably also in cases 4 and 23. Yi usually states if a drink (yin 飲) is the remedy, except in cases 20 and 22. However, according to Hübotter (op. cit., p. 18), fu refers to the ingestion of the hot liquid. See also discussion in case 4. 294 Han Ju 韓女, cognomen and praenomen, according to Loewe (personal correspondence). However, Ju is a cognomen rather than a praenomen, according to Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 4:255. Hübotter (op. cit., p. 18) and Bridgman (op. cit., p. 139) give “dame” (Han nü), but Loewe (personal correspondence) considers this grammatically unusual, if not incorrect. See also Loewe’s comment to case 17. In favor of Loewe, note that Yi tends to repeat the name of the person, not title and name, exceptions are in cases 2 and 20. On Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s puns about Yi’s clientele, see Hsu, Telling Touch,forthcoming): han 韓 and han 寒 have the same pronunciation. See also Wu Ju-lun’s 吳汝倫 comment on han 寒 and han 韓 in Wang Shu-min (105.2908). 295 Shih che 侍者 “attendants” is a descriptive term, not a title, rendered as “messengers” in Bielenstein (op. cit., pp. 110 and 190, n. 143). 296 For possible identifications of the King of Chi-pei, see cases 9 and 12. 297 For back pain and menses that do not come, see Su wen 7.26 on er yang chih ping 二陽之病 “the disorder of two yang.” The following sentence in Su wen 7 san yang wei ping 三陽為病 “the three yang, if they get ill,” is about chills and hot flushes. Possibly, sensations of chills and hot flushes were considered a degree worse than back pain. Back pain is often considered a symptom of depletion. Chills and hot flushes refer to a state of utter exhaustion, and are lethal.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

60

All the many doctors took it for chills and hot flushes. Your servant, Yi, examined the vessels and said: “The interior is cold, 299 the menses do not descend.”300 Forthwith, I fumigated [her] with medicines. Instantly, the menses descended. The illness ceased. The illness was contracted because she desired a man but could get one.301 The means whereby I recognized Han Ju's illness were that at the time when I examined her vessels, when I pressed on to them, it was the pulse of the kidneys. It was rough302 and discontinuous. As to the rough and discontinuous, its coming is difficult and hard. Hence I said: “The menses do not descend.” The pulse of the liver was strong, [*2809*] it came out at the left opening,303 hence I said: “She desires a man, and cannot get one.” [Case 19] Po Wu 薄吾, a woman of the ward Fan 氾 in Lin-tzu 臨菑,304 fell very ill. All the many doctors took it for an aggravated state of chills and hot flushes. [They thought] she was about to die, and did not treat her. Your servant, Yi, examined her vessels and said: “A conglomeration 305 of jao-worms. 306 ” When a 298

Han je 寒熱 “chills and hot flushes” are lethal in cases 4, 6, and 19, but as a symptom, meaning “feeling intermittently hot and cold,” han je can be cured by Yi in this case. Alternately, han je represents a scribal error here. 299 Nei han 內寒 “the interior is cold” or “internal coldness.” For a parallel between the rough pulse and blood that congeals, respectively, menses that do not descend, see Su wen, 62.171. 300 Yüeh shih pu hsia 月事不下 “the menses do not descend.” For 月事不以時下 “the menses do not descend at the right time,” see Ling shu 57.415. For yüeh shih pu lai 月事不來 “the menses do not come,” see Suwen 33.97, for 月事 衰少 不來 “the menses are weak and minor, and do not come,” see Su wen 40.114. Su wen 33 and 40 have little affinity with the condition described here, but Ling shu 57.415 gives a correlation with the cold. 301 “She desires a man but cannot get one” 欲男子而不可得, based on Hübotter (op. cit., p. 19), Bridgman (op. cit., p . 39), and Liao Yuqun (personal correspondence). Alternate translation: “she wishes [to have] a son, but cannot conceive one” (Michael Loewe personal correspondence). 302 Se 嗇 is se 濇 “rough, choppy,” according to Takigawa. For a parallel, with modifications, see Mai ching 1.1 (Shen, p. 2). 303 Tso k’ou 左口 “left opening.” Compare with yu k’ou 右口 in case 3 and notes. Yi does not stick to his usual protocol here by giving an explanation for the cause of the disorder. In Late Imperial China, the left and right pulse qualities are often indicative of gender-specific conditions, see Hsu “Towards a Science of Touch, Part I: Chinese Pulse Diagnostics in Early Modern Europe,” Anthropology and Medicine 7.2 and 7.3 (2000): 251-268 and 3-16. 304 Lin-tzu 臨菑 was the capital of Ch’i at 36.9 N, 118.3 E, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:19-20). 305 Jao chia 蟯瘕 “conglomeration of rao-worms.” Fan Hsing-chün 范行準 ( ed., Chung-kuo ping-shih hsin-yi 中國病史新義 [Novel Interpretations of the History of Diseases in China; Peking:

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

61

conglomeration of jao-worms becomes an illness,307 the abdomen is large, the upper skin308 is yellow and coarse,309 and stroking it is tender to touch [lit. feels like “tsu-tsu”]. 310 Your servant, Yi, made a drink with a pinch of daphne. 311 Chung-yi Ku-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 1989], p. 339) argues, convincingly, that this is a case of a hookworm infestation. For chia as bug infestation, see Kuo P’u’s gloss on Shan hai ching 1 (Yüan, Shan hai ching, p. 2): “chia is an illness due to bugs” (chia ch’ung ping yeh 瘕蟲病也). For ch’ung chia 蟲瘕 “conglomeration of bugs,” see Ling shu, 24.343. For chia-conglomerations due to an infestation of dragons, turtles, fish, snakes, etc., see Chu ping yüan hou lun 19.10-8 (Ting Kuang-ti 丁光迪, ed., Chu-ping yüan hou lun 諸病源候論校注 [Collated, Annotated Edition of Treatise on the Origins and Symptoms of Medical Disorders], by Chao Yuanfang 巢元方 [fl. 610; Peking: Jenmin Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1991], pp. 585-9 [hereafter as Ting, Chu-ping). For chia as a lump in abdomen, see case 7. For extensive discussion of chia, see Hsu, “Telling Touch”: case 7). 306 Jao 蟯 “jao-worms.” See commentary on this passage in Shuo wen, 13A.42b: “Short insects enter the abdomen” ([ju] fu chung tuan ch’ung [yeh] [入]腹中短蟲[也]). Jao occurs once in the MWT manuscripts (1985, p. 55; Ma Chi-hsing 馬繼興, ed. 1992. Ma-wang-tui ku yi-shu k’ao-shih 馬王堆古醫書考釋 [Explanation of the Ancient Medical Documents from Ma-wang-tui; Changsha: Hu-nan K’o-hsüeh Chis-hu Ch’u-pan-she, 1992, pp. 516-8), but not in the Nei ching. For jao ch’ung hou 蟯蟲候 “jao-bug syndrome,” see Chu ping yüan hou lun 18.5 (Ting, Chu-ping, p. 563). 307 This sentence suggests that worm infestations were generally not considered an illness, Yi needs to explain that worms are an illness. Indeed, it is a common phenomenon cross-culturally that people do not consider worms an illness (see Hsu, Telling Touch). 308 Fu 膚 “skin.” In the Nei ching, p’i 皮 “skin” and fu 膚 “skin” are hardly differentiated. Likewise, see Shuo wen, 4B.20b: fu p’i yeh 膚皮也 “fu is pi.” In MWT “Wushier bingfang” (pp. 61, 75) the difference is more clear cut: fu always refers to the human skin; pi (pp. 29, 35, 39, 65, and 70) generally to the skin of fruits, vegetables, roots, etc. The exceptions are the squamous epithelium of the scrotum (p. 52) and, on a badly damaged bamboo strip, t’u p’i 兔皮 “rabbit skin” (p. 43). For the sense in which fu seems to be used here, see commentary in Shuo wen, 4B.20b : “the fat in front of the abdomen is called fu” 腹前肥者曰膚. No explanation could be found for the idiom shang fu 上膚 “upper skin.” 309 Huang tsu 黃麤 “yellow and coarse.” The practice of investigating the skin quality as diagnostic method is already mentioned in MWT (1985, p. 21, Ma 1992: 304-5): lieh fu 裂膚 “a split skin” is a sign indicative of death. Su wen, 18.56 refers to the diagnostic examination of the skin of the chi-area (ch’ih fu chen 尺膚診), Su wen 17.53 mentions tsu ta 麤大 “coarse and big” as a diagnostic quality. 310 Ch’i ch’i or ts’u ts’u 戚戚, like ch’ia ch’ia 合合 in case 7, probably is an onomatopoetic diagnostic sign for a chia-conglomeration. It might mean “to be tender”: Wang Shu-min (105.2908) cites Meng tzu (Meng tzu chu shu 孟子注疏, in Shih-san ching chu shu 十三經注疏, 2:1B.2670: “You described it for me and your words struck a chord in me” 夫子言之 於我心有戚戚焉 and Chao Ch’i 趙岐 comments: “ts’u ts’u: in the heart there are movements” 戚戚然 心有動也 , i.e., one feels tenderness. 311 Yüan hua 芫華 “daphne,” generally identified as Daphne konkwa Sieb. et Zucc. (CYTTD, entry 2135). According to CYTTD and CHYH (2:836-7), its flavour is pungent and bitter (hsin ku

62

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Instantly, it expelled the worms that amounted to a sheng. The illness ceased. After thirty days, she was as before.312 Ailing from worms was contracted from dwelling in the cold and damp.313 Cold and damp ch’i clusters,314 condenses,315 and cannot escape. It transforms into worms. The means whereby your servant, Yi, recognized Po Wu’s illness were that when I pressed onto her vessels and stroked over her ch’i [area], her ch’i was ropy, prickly and coarse,316 while the body hair was beautiful,317 [like] cicada antennas.318 This is [typical of] the ch’i of bugs. The color [of the skin] was lustrous. The viscera in the interior319 did not have any noxious ch’i320 nor a grave illness. 辛苦), it is warming (wen 溫) and has toxicity (yu tu 有毒). See Pen ts’ao kang mu, 17.1213-1217: yüan hua . . . sha ch’ung yü 芫華 . . . 殺蟲魚 “daphne . . . kills bugs and fish” (see also Bridgman, op. cit., p. 91 n. 204). 312 Ping yi 病 已 “the illness ceased.” The statement that the “illness ceased” does not necessarily mean that the person was ju ku 如故 “as before.” Compare and contrast with case 5, and also case 4. Probably, Po Wu had become extremely thin due to the worm infestation. Therefore, it took her thirty days to recover and gain her normal weight. 313 Jao 蟯 is mistaken, according to Wang Nien-sun, but considering that Yi finds it necessary to explain that worms are an illness, he may have repeated jao. 314 Yüan 宛 “to cluster” has many connotations. It is synonymous with yü 鬱. Yü 鬱 can mean “exuberant, stinking, oppressed, accumulated.” Compare with yüan ch’i 宛氣 “clustered ch’i” in case 22. 315 Tu 篤 “to thicken, to inspissate.” Note parallel to line 2, tu han je 篤寒熱 “an aggravated state of chills and hot flushes.” 316 So 索 lit. “rope,” here: “rough, ropy.” Alternate translation: “exhausted” (chin 盡) or “dried out” (k’u tsao 枯燥), according to Fan Hsing-chün (op. cit., p. 344). Consider also ch’ih so 尺索 “the chord at the ch’ih-area,” mentioned by Ssu-ma Chen, which would have Yi refer to two pulse qualities only but is not attested elsewhere in the literature. The above translation builds on the logic of there being three pulse qualities, see case 2 and notes. 317 Mao mei 毛美 “the body hair is beautiful.” Consider also mao fa 毛髮 Chao”the body hair is fine/long/glossy,” in case 12. In both cases, se tse 色澤 “the complexion is lustrous.” 318 Feng [ch’in] fa 奉[螓]髮 “[like] cicada antennas.” Feng 奉 “to offer or receive respectfully with both hands, to esteem, to attend to.” Hsü Kuang mentions tsou 奏 and ch’in 秦 in other editions. Ssu-ma Chen goes further and proposes to read ch’in 秦 as ch’in 螓 “cicada.” Mark Lewis (personal correspondence) notes that cicada are bugs (ch’ung), and that this correlates with the name of the disorder. Consider the possibility that feng [ch’in] fa shih ch’ung ch’i yeh 奉[螓] 髮 是蟲氣也 “cicada antennas indicate the ch’i of bugs” represents a comment to an earlier text that later became part of the main text. 319 Chung tsang 中藏 “the viscera of the interior,” “central viscera.” See also case 8 and notes. 320 Hsieh ch’i 邪氣 “noxious ch’i.” Notably, cheng ch’i “orthopathic ch’i” does not occur in Yi’s case histories.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

63

[Case 20] The Major from Ch’un-yü321 in Ch’i fell ill. Your servant, Yi, pressed on to his vessels and formally announced: “If this will become an illness, it will be a wind of the void.322 The appearance of the wind of the void is that food and drink go down the throat and are immediately evacuated through the behind. The illness was contracted, after stuffing oneself, from running swiftly.” The Major from Ch’un-yü said: “I went to the King's family to eat horse liver.323 I really stuffed myself. When I saw wine being served, I immediately ran away and dashed swiftly [*2810*] home. 324 Instantly, I had dozens of attacks of discharging myself.” 325 Your servant, Yi, formally announced: “Prepare a rice porridge by careful regulation of fire [i.e., by simmering it over a small fire] and drink it. After seven to eight days, you will recover.” At the time, the physician Ch’in Hsin 秦信 326 was at the side. After your servant, Yi, had gone away, Hsin

321 Ch’un-yü 淳于 can be a cognomen or the name of a town, which is east of Lin-tzu at 36.5 N, 119.3 E, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:19-20). If Ch’un-yü were the major’s cognomen, the position of name and title would be grammatically incorrect (Loewe, personal correspondence). Note, moreover, that Yi usually repeats only the name of a person, and not title and name. If Yi would solely refer to Ch’un-yü in the following, one could assume him to refer to the cognomen Ch’un-yü. Since Yi repeatedly speaks of “Ch’un-yü sima,” the translator considers him to refer to the “Major from the town Ch’un-yü,” as does Bridgman (op. cit., p. 40). 322 The parallels with case 8 concern the name of the disorder and the signs and symptoms. In case 8 the cause of the disorder is wine; in case 20, when wine was served, the major dashed away quickly. Note that Yi qualifies the condition: it will become (tang 當) a “wind of the void,” i.e., it is not yet a full blown condition of diarrhoea; its outcome is favorable. 323 On the dangers of eating horse liver, see Shih chi, 28.1390: “Wen Cheng ate horse liver and died” 文成食馬肝[而]死耳, a passage found also on Shih chi, 12.462 and Han shu, 25A.1223. See also Han shu, 88.3612: “if one eats meat without eating horse liver, it is not because one does not recognise its taste” 食肉不[無]食馬肝 不[未]為不知味[也] and Wang Ch’ung’s 王充 Lun heng 論衡 (Disquisitions Weighed in the Balance; Lun-heng so-yin 論衡索引, Cheng Xiangqing, ed. [Peking: Chung-hua,1994], p. 1500): “when fire is pressed ch’i gets hot, when ch’i is hot poison gets exuberant, hence eating the liver of a race horse kills a person, if ch’i is pressed it becomes hot,” 火困而氣熱 氣熱而毒盛 故食走馬之肝殺人 氣困為熱. See also Ku wei shu 古微書 (Book of Ancient Subtleties; Ts’ung-shu chi-ch’eng ed., 34B.640): “to eat horse meat also kills a person” 食 馬肉亦殺人. 324 Ch’ü chi 驅疾 is chi ch’ü 疾驅 “to dash swiftly,” according to Chang Wen-hu. Once again, the word sequence is, according to the usual standards, grammatically incorrect. 325 Shu shih 數十, lit. “several times ten.” 326 Yi Ch’in Hsin 醫 秦信 “doctor Ch’in Hsin,” according to Yi shuo (SKCS, 1.10a) and Hübotter (op. cit., p. 20). For Bridgman's (op. cit., p. 40) translation “doctor Hsin from Ch’in,” the word sequence would have to be altered: Ch’in yi Hsin.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

64

spoke to the Chief Commandants of the Left and Right Pavilion saying:327 “What does Yi consider the illness of the Major from Ch’un-yü to be?” They said: “He considers it a wind of the void, [and believes that] it can be cured.” Hsin then laughed and said: “This is ignorance. The illness of the Major from Ch’un-yü [is such that], according to the ‘Model’, he will die after nine days.”328 Even so, after nine days he did not die. His family summoned your servant, Yi, again. Your servant, Yi, went to ask him.329 It was entirely as I, Yi, had diagnosed it. Your servant instantly prepared one dose of rice porridge prepared by careful regulation of fire and made him apply it.330 After seven to eight days, the illness ceased. The means whereby I recognized it were that at the time when I examined his vessels, when I pressed onto them, they were entirely according to the “Model”. His disorder was placid. Hence he did not die. [Case 21] P’o Shih 破石, a Gentleman of the Palace of Ch’i, was ill. Your servant, Yi, examined his vessels and formally announced: “The lungs are injured, incurable.

327

Tso-yu ko tu wei 左右閣都蔚 “Chief Commandants of the Left and Right Pavilion,” based on the interpretation of tu wei 都蔚 as “chief commandant” in the local administration of the Former Han (Bielenstein, p. 94); tso yu 左右 “left and right” as an idiom that modifies the noun ko 閣 “hall or pavilion,” see Hucker (p. 278, entry 3167); ko 閣 as ho 閤 “small gate” is given in the T’ai-p’ing yü-lan, 721, according to Chang Wen-hu. Ko means kung ko 宮閣 “hall of a palace,” and Chief Commandants are in charge of it, hence ko tu wei is a compound word, according to a commentary cited by Ssu-ma Chen (not discussed in Bielenstein). Alternate translation: "he spoke to his entourage and the Chief Commandant Ko,” based on the following: Ko 閣 is a cognomen, according to Ssu-ma Chen, zuo you “left and right” can be understood to modify the verb: Hsin spoke to the left and right. 328 In case 8, the “Model” predicted that death would occur after five days; the numerology of nine is unusual. 329 Wang 往 “to go to,” see also case 14. Evidently, Yi considers himself to make an itinerary to Ch’un-yü. 330 Fu 服 “to apply” usually means “to apply externally” in early medical texts, but here it definitely means “to ingest.” It is an irregularity that suggests, together with other evidence, that the entire episode relating to physician Ch’in Hsin is an interpolation: Yi says the patient is about to have a full-blown diarrhoea, namely the “wind of the void,” which in case 8 is lethal, and recommends treating it with a rice porridge, but due to the physician Ch’in Hsin’s intervention the patient does not treat the diarrhoea for nine days, and does not die. This is odd. Then, diarrhoea that lasted nine days is cured with one dose. This is also odd. Note that Yi’s first recommendation was unspecific on dosage.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

65

In ten days on ting-hai,331 he will pass blood and die.” Indeed, after eleven days, while passing blood, he died. P’o Shih’s illness was contracted from falling off a horse and landing supine on a rock.332 The means whereby I recognized P’o Shih’s illness were that, when I pressed on to his vessels, I got the yin ch’i of the lungs.333 Their coming was dispersed,334 they arrived by several routes, and were not [united as] one.335 Moreover, the color multiplied them [i.e., their diagnostic message].336 The means whereby I recognized that he fell from the horse were that when I pressed on to them [the vessels], I got the reversed yin pulse.337 If the reversed yin338 pulse339 enters the emptiness inside,340 it multiplies [the effects of] the pulse

331 Ting hai 丁亥 ting is the fourth of the ten celestial stems, hai is the twelfth of the twelve celestial branches. Ting is generally associated with the phase of fire in the iatromantic texts (Harper, “Iatromancy,” pp. 117-8). 332 The translation here follows Harper (Ibid., p. 118). 333 The lungs (fei 肺) are according to canonical doctrine associated with yin, however, in contrast to the correlations given in cases 4 and 5, with the tai yin 太陰, see Ling shu 10.299. In MWT, the lungs are not mentioned. In MWT TP (p. 6) the tai yin goes into the heart (chih hsin 之 心), in MWT YY (p. 12) it enters in midst the heart (ju hsin chung 入心中). The lungs and the heart are both located in the epigastrium and the area of the hsü li 虛裡 “the emptiness inside.” See case 21 and notes. 334 San 散 is defined in the following line by Yi himself. See also Mai ching 1.1 (Shen 1991, p. 3). 335 Compare with pulse qualities in case 2. 336 Cheng 乘, lit. “to ride on,” “to multiply” in canonical doctrine, here perhaps used in the sense: “to reinforce.” Ando Koretora remarks that the red color overrode the parts of the lung (on the face), a comment that would suggest that the heart, which correlates with the color red, was affected. See also case 15. 337 The means whereby Yi recognizes the illness causes are generally not given; exceptions are case 9 and this one. The commentators exclaim that Yi is going too far in claiming that he could recognise it by means of pulse diagnostics. The “reversed” pulse nicely parallels the reversed fall onto the back. 338 Fan 番 means fan 翻 “to turn over” means fan 反 “to reverse.” The term fan yin mai 番陰 脈 “reversed yin pulse” is not attested in the manuscript and received literature, but note parallel to fan yang mai 番陽脈 in case 25. Note also that a pu 部 “part” refers to fan 蕃 in Ling shu 49.399. 339 Mai 脈 in this context seems to designate a force or an impulsion that moves through different locations in the body. 340 Hsü li 虛裡, lit. “the emptiness inside' designates an area in the epigastrium. See Su wen 18.55. Note that the space underneath the ribs sounds hollow (as if it were empty) when one beats one’s chest.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

66

[coming] from the lungs. In cases where the pulses [coming] from the lungs are dispersed, the solid complexion alters,341 and multiplies them.342 The reason why he did not die within the predicted time is that a word of the master says: “The patient, if at ease with grains, will surpass the predicted time. If he rejects grains, then he will not reach the predicted time.” This person relished millet. Millet governs the lungs.343 Hence he surpassed the predicted time. The reason why he passed blood was that the “Chen Mai Fa” 診脈法 (Model for Examining the Vessels) says: “If, when one is ill, while one is resting, one is at ease in yin places, one will have a placid death. If, while one is resting, one is at ease in yang places, one will die adversely.” This person liked to be quiet on his own, he was not hurried.344 Moreover, he sat peacefully for long [periods of time]. By resting his head on his hands at a table, he slept.345 Hence the blood flowed out downwards. [Case 22] Sui 遂, the Attending Physician346 of the King of Ch’i, fell ill. He refined for himself the five minerals347 and applied them.348 Your servant, Yi, went there and 341

Ku se 固 色 ‚ lit. 'hard/steady complexion'. The translator reads ku se as “healthy complexion,” paralleling ku mai 固脈 “healthy vessels/pulses” in Ling shu 10.306. Alternate translation: ku 固 “certainly,” see Harper, “Iatromancy,” p. 118); but it is in a grammatically unusual position (Robert Chard, personal correspondence). See also discussion case 4 and notes. 342 Kaiho Gembi considers this line mistaken. Indeed, it appears redundant. Either of the two phrases could have been later interpolated, both, or neither, it is difficult to know. 343 The five grains were ching mi 粳米 “sticky rice,” ma 麻 “hemp,” ta tou 大豆 “big beans,” mai 麥 “wheat and barley,” and huang shu 黃黍 ‘yellow millet’ correlating with the five flavours, which were kan 甘 “sweet,” suan 酸 “sour,” hsien 鹹 “salty,” k’u 苦 “bitter,” and hsin 辛 “astringent” in Ling shu 56.413. This confirms the above correlation between millet and the lungs. Compare and contrast with those given in F. Bray (“Agriculture” in Needham, v. 6, Biology and Biological Technology, Part 2, 1994, p. 432). 344 Ching 靜 “quiet, peaceful, motionless” and tsao 躁 “hurried” stand in correlation to each other like yin and yang. See Su wen 5.18. This opposition parallels, yet slightly diverges from, that of ching and chuo 濁 “murky” in case 1. 345 Fu chi 伏几, lit. “to sleep head down, back upwards on a chi-support-furniture” (people sat on mats). Since the lungs were injured, one would expect that the patient spat blood or had it flow out of his mouth. 346 Shih yi 侍醫 “Attending Physician,” see Bielenstein (p. 51). For unknown reasons, Sui is identified as Wang Sui in the Yi shuo (SKCS 1.10b). 347 Wu shi 五石 'five stones, five minerals'. The Pao p’u tzu (Wang Chih-p’u 王致譜, “Hsiaok’o [t’ang-niao ping] shih shu yao” 消渴（糖尿病）史述要 [Outline of the History of ‘Wasting

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

67

passed by. Sui spoke to Yi saying: “I unworthy one have an illness. I would be very fortunate if you examined me, Sui.” [*2811*] Your servant, Yi, then examined him and formally announced: “Sir, you ail from heat in the interior. The ‘Discourse’ says: ‘If in the case of the interior being hot, one cannot urinate,349 one is not allowed to apply the five minerals.’ The basic character of minerals as drugs350 is that they are refined and violent. Since you, Sir, have applied them, you cannot urinate frequently. Instantly, you should cease to apply them. The color is [indicating] that you will develop a yung-boil.”351 Sui said: “Pien Ch’üeh 扁鵲 says: ‘Yin minerals are used for treating yin disorders, yang minerals are used for treating yang disorders.’ 352 With regard to Medicinal minerals,353 there is regularity in terms of yin and yang and fire and water. Hence, if the interior is hot, then one prepares a softening recipe of yin minerals to treat it. If the interior is cold, then one prepares a hardening recipe of yang minerals to treat it.” 354 Your servant, Yi, said: “What you are discussing, Sir, is far [off the Thirst’–Diabetes], Chung-hua yi-shih tsa-chih, 10.2 [1980]: 69), transl. by James Ware, Alchemy, Medicine, Religion in the China of A.D. 320: The Nei P’ien of Ko Hung [Pao-p’u tzu;Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1966], p. 82, identifies the five minerals as cinnabar, realgar, arsenolite, laminar malachite, and magnetite, as Taki Motohiro notes. It is not certain whether these specifications apply here. 348 Fu 服 “to apply externally” (case 17) or “to drink” (case 20), here probably “to eat,” as in case 23. A passage from the Chin shu (History of the Chin) in the T’ai-p’ing yü-lan mentions “formulae for the powder of the five minerals” (wu shih san fang 五石散方) and explains that the shih ta fu 士大夫 (literati and dignitaries) of the Chin dynasty all ate cakes of them (fu erh 服餌). 349 Chung je 中熱 “the centre is hot.” The idioms chung je and je chung both occur in the Nei ching, but no passage links this condition with dysuria. 350 Shih chih wei yao 石 之為 藥, lit. “the basic character of the minerals as medicines”; compare, for instance, with wei jen 為人 “the defining characteristics of a person” (Mark Lewis personal correspondence). 351 Yung 臃 “yung-boil,” see discussion case 1 and notes. 352 Taki Motokata cannot make sense of this and proposes to read: yin minerals are used for treating yang disorders, and vice versa. He is mistaken, if yin ping and yang ping designate the same conditions as described in Su wen 5.20: “if yin wins, then there is a yang disorder. If yang wins, then there is a yin disorder”; 陰勝則陽病陽勝則陰病. It is thus in accordance with canonical doctrine that yin minerals are used to soften the surplus of yang in a yin disorder. However, if interpreted in terms of Su wen 5, this sentence stands in contradiction with the one discussed below, see case 22 and notes. 353 Yao shih 藥石 “medicinal minerals” or “medicines and minerals.” Note inverted word order in shih yao “minerals and medicines” in Su wen 40.114, which are also said to be “violent” (han 悍). 354 This sentence and the above ones are consistent if we assume that heat in the interior is equivalent with yang that wins, and that this induces a yin disorder, i.e. a condition that is best

68

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

mark]. Although Pien Ch’üeh’s word is like this, you still have to examine [it] with care, establish the measures of length and weight, set up compass and square, calibrate the weight and the scale [of a balance],355 combine356 the models of pulse and color, of the outer and inner, of having excess or being insufficient, and of the placid [flows] and countervective [flows]. You [have to] consider whether the activity and tranquillity of a person corresponds to his breathing [rhythm]. Then only are you allowed to pass judgement. The ‘Discourse’ says: ‘When a yang affection 357 resides inside and a yin form resonates on the outside,358 do not add violent drugs and stone needles.’ If violent drugs enter the interior, then the noxious ch’i gathers. 359 The clustered ch’i goes deeper and deeper.360 The “Chen fa” 診法 (Model of [Diagnostic] Examinations) says: ‘If two yin resonate on the outside and one yang joins inside,361 you are not allowed to use a hardening drug.’362 If a hardening drug enters, then it agitates the yang. The yin disorder is increasingly weakened and the yang disorder becomes increasingly conspicuous. 363 The noxious ch’i flows about 364 and causes a treated with yin minerals, and vice versa. Note that yin and yang, often associated with coldness and heat, are here attributed qualities of the soft and the hard, as in the Yi ching. 355 A phrase that combines words also used in other contexts of medicine; e.g. compass, square, weight and scale are mentioned precisely in this order in Su wen 17.51. 356 Ho 合 “to combine, to unite.” Hsü Kuang mentions as alternate reading chan 占 “to practise divination.” 357 Chi 疾 “affection.” It is possible that in this context Yi uses the word chi, not ping, in the same sense as it has in the iatromantic Shui-hu-ti manuscripts where, according to Harper (“Iatromancy,” p. 112), “chi is the point of origin of a morbid condition.” Harper translates chi as illness and ping as ailment, just the opposite of the above translation of these terms. Yi’s differentiation seems to be based on spatial (and not so much temporal) considerations: chi refers to the latent affection inside the body and is contrasted with the illness (ping), which has outwardly manifest signs and symptoms. 358 A yang affection inside the body is contrasted with a yin form at its surface. This parallels the condition described by the “Chen fa” 診法 “Method of [Diagnostic] Examinations” below: “If two yin resonate on the outside and one yang connects to the inside.” 359 Pi 辟 means chü 聚 “to gather,” according to Ssu-ma Chen; it refers to pi in pi chi chih pi 襞積之襞 “pleats in a skirt,” according to Takigawa, who argues here in favor of Ssu-ma Chen and against Chang Shou-chieh. 360 Yüan ch’i 宛氣 “clustered, accumulated ch’i.” See also case 19. 361 Chieh nei 接內 “to join, to connect to the interior”; an idiom of sexual intercourse is used to describe yin yang processes in the body. 362 Kang yao 剛藥 “hardening drug,” clearly has yang qualities. 363 This sentence does not make sense, if we follow the above rationale that a surplus of yang causes a yin disorder; perhaps, excerpts of two different of lines of reasoning in terms of yin and yang have been collocated in this speech.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

69

doubled encumbrance 365 in the shu-areas. 366 Anger makes that it bursts and becomes a ju-abscess.”367 Yi formally announced to him that [this would happen] after one hundred and a few days. Indeed, it became a ju-abscess erupting above the breast and invading the collarbone.368 He died. This is the general outline of the argument. You must have a pattern.369 If a clumsy craftsman has one [point] that he does not master, the coherent patterning of yin and yang is lost. [Case 23] Formerly, at the time when the King of Ch’i was the Marquis of Yang-hsü 陽 370 虛, he seriously fell ill. All the many doctors considered it numbness. Your servant, Yi, examined the vessels and considered it an obstruction.371 The root resided on the right underneath the flanks [*2812*] bulging as a cup turned

364 Above, it is said that the noxious ch’i “assembles,” here, that it “flows about”: two different rationales for pointing out an increase of noxious ch’i. 365 Ch’ung k’un 重困 “reduplicated encumbrance” is a lei k’un 累困 “accumulated difficulty,” according to Taki Motohiro. On “doubling” as a pathological process, see case 2 and notes. 366 Shu 俞 shu-loci on the channels, according to Takigawa. In the MWT vessel texts, shu 俞 are not mentioned. Su wen 4.16, 38.110, and 43.122 reflect a close interrelation between the shu 俞 and the viscera (tsang 藏); shu are located near the body surface. This notion of shu seems to be implied in case 22. In the Ling shu, there are no shu 俞 but shu 輸 and shu 腧; shu 腧 refer to five specific loci, one of which is the transporting locus called shu 輸 (frequently also rendered as shu 腧) e.g., Ling shu 1.265 and 1.267-9 and Nan ching 68 (P. U. Unschuld, The Classic of Difficult Issues, with Commentaries by Chinese and Japanese Authors from the Third through to the Twentieth Century. [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986], p. 577). This biography certainly does not refer to as an elaborate system as given in the Ling shu. See also interregation question 7 and notes. 367 Chü 疽 “chü-abscess,” see also case 1 and notes. 368 Ch’üeh pen 缺盆 “area around the collar bone.” By translating ch’üeh pen as collarbone, the vital importance of this body part is not conveyed. It is in vicinity of the area of the neck (ching 頸), the breasts (ju 乳), the chest (hsiung 胸), the lungs (fei 肺) and the heart (hsin 心), according to Ling shu 10.300-4. For ch’üeh pen t’ung 缺盆痛 “pain in the collar bone area,” see MWT vessel texts (pp. 3 and 12). 369 Ching chi 經紀 “principles, standards.” See Kuan Tzu, Han shu, Hou Han shu, quoted in Han-yü ta tz’u-tien 9.863. 370 This person can be unambiguously identified as [Liu] Chiang-lü 將盧, according to Hsü Kuang. In 164, Ch’i was divided into six kingdoms. Liu Chiang-lü became king of a much diminished Ch’i, and the other territories were given to the surviving brothers of Liu Hsiang 劉襄. 371 Pi 庳 “obstruction,” see also case 17 and notes. For parallels to this case, see Su wen 19.61. See also Su wen 43, called “Pi lun” (Analysis of Obstructions).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

70

upside down.372 It made the person pant, burp,373 and unable to eat. Your servant, Yi, thereupon took gruel374 and had him drink [it].375 After six days, the ch’i descended. I then had him once again eat376 eggs as a drug.377 After about six days, the illness ceased. The illness was contracted from an indulgence in women. At the time when I examined him, I was not able to know an explanation in terms of the channels.378 I vaguely knew the place where the illness resided. [Case 24] Your servant, Yi, formerly examined Ch’eng K’ai-fang 成開方 from the ward Wu-tu 武都 in An-yang 安陽.379 K’ai-fang said of himself that he thought he was not ill. Your servant, Yi, told him that he was ill, suffering from talkative winds.380 In three years, he would not be able to use his four limbs himself. [The 372

Fu pei 覆杯 “an inverted cup.” This image is found throughout the medical literature, e.g., Ling shu 4.277 and 71.447. 373 Ni ch’i 逆氣 “counterflowing ch’i” is here interpreted as a symptom, “burping,” not as the “counterflowing ch’i” referred to in medical speculation of later medical texts. 374 Chou 粥 “gruel” generally refers to a millet gruel and vegetable stew. Compare and contrast with huo chi mi chih 火齊米汁 “rice porridge prepared by careful regulation of fire” in case 20. 375 Ch’ieh yin 且飲 “and had him drink it,” alternate translation: “and hot liquid.” Yin also means tang 湯 “hot liquid, potion,” according to Ando Koretora. 376 Fu 服 “to apply,” probably “to eat” in this case. See case 22 and notes. 377 Wan 丸 “eggs,” medicines made into “pellets”; 垸 in MWT WBF (pp. 26, 27 and 56) is according to Ma (op. cit., p. 326) to be read as 丸, MWT WBF (p. 71) has 丸. In the Nei ching, the one chapter that mentions wan 丸 as a therapeutic measure, Su wen 40.114, refers to it in the sense of eggs of sparrows. This is also the sense of wan in the Lü shih chun ch’iu 閭氏春秋, 14 (translation by John Knoblock and Jeff Riegel, Knoblock J. & Riegel, The Annals of Lü Buwei: A Complete Translation and Study [Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000], p. 310), hence its rendering here as “eggs.” The term yao 藥 “drugs” is confusing here. Yi had not done a diagnosis and therefore administered foodstuffs, a sort of gruel and eggs, rather than medicines. 378 Ching chieh 經解 perhaps “an explanation in terms of the channels,” the alternate reading: “an explanation in terms of [Confucian] canonical writings,” as in Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 9.866, does not apply here. 379 An-yang 安陽 is difficult to locate since it is a popular place name. The An-yang most likely to be meant here is few miles west of modern An-yang in Shansi, in what was then Han-tan 邯鄲 Commandery, at 36.1 N, 114.3 E (Tan Ch’i-hsiang, 1:9-10), west of Yang-hsü, possibly on the route to Ch’ang-an. 380 Ku ta feng 苦沓風 precise translation unclear; the translator considers ping 病 part of the previous phrase, ku a verb, and ta feng a compound word, and does not follow the punctuation in Takigawa (105.51). No doubt, it is a “wind disorder,” as Ssu-ma Chen remarks. Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 5.941 glosses ta as “talkative, repetitive, intermingling or united, sluggish, boiling,” etc. and has an

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

71

illness] made the person become mute.381 Once one gets mute, one thereupon dies. Now, I hear that his four limbs cannot be used. While he has lost his voice, he has not yet died. The illness was contracted by frequently drinking alcohol, and then by exposing himself to strong wind ch’i. The means whereby I recognized Ch’eng K’ai-fang's illness were that, when I examined him, his pulses were modelled on a word of the “Ch’i ko” 奇咳 (The Regular and Irregular):382 “When the viscera’s ch’i turn against each other, one dies.” 383 When I pressed on to them [the vessels], I got the kidneys turning against the lungs.384 The “Model” says: “In three years, one will die.” [Case 25] Hsiang Ch’u 項處, a kung-sheng dignitary385 of the ward Pan 阪 in An-ling 安陵, 386 fell ill. Your servant, Yi, examined the vessels and said: “A male

entry on ta feng, meaning “talkative wind” or “intermingling wind” or “sluggish wind.” Alternate translation: he was ailing from a ku ta feng, a “painful talkative wind” or an “exhaustive, sluggish wind,” a three-syllabic compound word, as rendered in the Yi shuo (SKCS, 3.46a). Ku can mean lao 勞 “exhaustion,” see Wang Nien-sun’s comment to the Kuang ya 4A.24 (Kuang ya shu-cheng 廣雅 疏証 [Broadening What Is Correct], Wang Niansun 王念孫, compiler [Peking: Chung-hua, 1983, p. 121): lao yü k’u t’ung yi 勞與苦同義 “exhausted and k’u have the same meaning.” 381 Yin 瘖 “loss of voice” (MWT YY, p. 12), yin is mentioned, as a so chan disorder of the foot’s minor yin vessel which relates to the kidneys (hsi yü shen 繫於腎). In the Nei ching, yin occurs in Su wen 23.75 and Ling shu 78.473; almost the same text passage), Su wen 40.115-116, 47.131, 48.134, 49.137, 52.142-143 and Ling shu 4.276, 42.380. Note parallel to Su wen 47. Yü Yün-hsiu 余 雲 岫 (Ku-tai chi-ping ming-hou shu-yi 古代 疾病 名 侯疏 義 [Explanation of the Nomenclature of Disease in Ancient Times; Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1953], p. 211) explains that yin is not muteness due to dean.ess. Rather, it refers to a terminal stage of a nervous disease. Hsü Kuang mentions as alternate reading chi 脊· which is chi 瘠 “thin and weak,” according to Chang Wen-hu. See also Yu (1953: 323, 350). In MWT (p. 21), ch’i 齊 is interpreted to mean chi 瘠. In the Nei ching, chi 瘠 is mentioned in Su wen 70.208. 382 Yen 言 “the word,” Li Li points to case 21 and proposes that the word for master (shih 師) has been lost here. Wang Shu-min (105.2910) considers Li Li mistaken. The translator follows Wang. 383 Hsiang fan 相反 “to mutually turn against each other” is a well-known process in medicine that leads to death. Hsü Kuang mentions as alternate reading hsiang chi 相及 “to reach each other.” 384 Shen fan fei 腎反肺 no parallels found in the received medical literature. 385 Kung sheng 公乘, an order of honor. 386 Bridgman (op. cit., p. 97, n. 238) identifies three possible places. In consideration of Yi’s answer to question 3, An-ling situated in the Northwest of Ch’ang-an is the most probable at 34.4 N, 108.8 E, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:15-6).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

72

amassment.”387 Male amassments reside beneath the diaphragm,388 but above join with the lungs. The illness was contracted from an indulgence in women. Your servant, Yi, told him to beware of engaging in activities with physical exertion. If he would engage in activities with physical exertion, he necessarily would spit blood and die. Ch’u later played the ballgame tsu chü 蹴踘.389 The lower back got numb and cold, he sweated profusely, and then spat blood. Your servant, Yi, examined him again and said: “Tomorrow evening at dusk you will die.” Thereupon, he died. The illness was contracted from an indulgence in women. The means whereby I recognized Hsiang [*2813*] Ch’u’s illness were that, when I pressed on to his vessels, I got the reversed yang. When the reversed yang entered the emptiness inside,390 Ch’u died on the following day.391 When it [the pulse] is once reversed and once links up,392 it is a male amassment. [Section 4: Interrogation] Your servant, Yi, said: there were many other instances when I examined the time limits [before death], discerned whether someone would live or die, and treated and cured disorders. As it was a long time ago, I have partially forgotten

387

Mu shan 牡疝 “male amassment.” Horikawa Sei 堀川濟 (fl. 1849) identifies it as an amassment in the heart since the heart is the male viscus (hsin wei mu tsang 心為牡藏). See striking parallels to Su wen 17.52. However, in Ling shu 44.384-5, all five viscera are male. Mu 牡 “male, father” and pin 牝 “female, mother” are sometimes used as classifiers, like yin and yang, e.g. MWT WBF (1985: 25) differentiates between mu chih 牡 “male haemorrhoides” and pin chih 牝 “female haemorrhoides” . 388 Ko 鬲 “diaphragm.” In case 2 it is rendered as “to separate, to block,” in case 15 ko can be either verb or noun. 389 Tsu chü 蹴踘 is tsu ta 蹴蹹, according to Hsü Kuang. Comparable to football, used as a military exercise, see for instance Wolfgram Eberhard (Local Culture of South and East China [Brill, Leiden: Brill, 1968 (1942)], p. 46). 390 Note parallel to fan yin 番陰 “reversed yin” in case 21. For the body part hsü li 虛裡, lit. “the emptiness inside,” see case 21 and notes. 391 Ch’u tan jih ssu 處旦日死. Taki Motokata considers these four characters mistaken. Indeed, this phrase is in an unusual position, and is redundant. 392 Yi fan yi lo 一反一絡 “it is once reversed and once links up” could designate motions which are later referred to as yi ni yi cong 一逆一從 “once counterflowing, once going with the flow.” Alternate reading: lo is in another edition chieh 結 “to be knotted,” according to Hsü Kuang, which is a pulse indicative of death.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

73

them. I cannot remember them in their entirety. I do not dare to use them for my response [to your queries].393 [Question 1] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: among the illnesses that you examined and treated, the names of the disorders were often the same, while upon examining them, they differed;394 some [people] died, others not.395 Why? The answer is: the reason why the names of the disorders are often similar in kind, one cannot know. Hence the ancient sages invented for [recognising] them “Mai fa” 脈法 (Model of the Pulse). By establishing measures of length and weight, setting up compass and square, calibrating the weight and the scale,396 applying the ink of the marking-cord, 397 regulating yin and yang, they drew distinctions between the vessels in man, 398 and named them each. They [the vessels] mutually resonate with heaven and earth, and threefold unite in man. Hence one distinguishes the hundred illnesses by means of differentiating between them [the vessels/pulses]. For those who master [the art of] number,399 it is possible to differentiate between them [the vessels/pulses, and accordingly the 393 Takigawa speaks of seven questions and answers in the following, but there are eight. See also Bridgman (op. cit., pp. 45-50). 394 Ping ming 病名 and chen 診, the “name of an illness” and the identification of an illness on grounds of a precise diagnostic “examination,” are here opposed to each other. As will become apparent below, chen consists in determining "the place where the host of the illness resides". 395 The translator questions the accuracy of the above two accusations, since Yi’s case histories show no inconsistencies in this respect. It is true that the “wind of the void” (tung feng) is mentioned twice, and Yi’s client dies in case 8 and is cured in case 20. A careful reading reveals that while the wind of the void is lethal in case 8, the condition in case 20 is not yet full-blown but “just about to become” (tang 當) a wind of the void; one would expect that therefore it can be cured. A chü-abscess is also mentioned twice, in cases 1 and 22; in both as lethal. Nei kuan chih ping (case 1, 15) and kuan nei chih ping (case 12) have only in cases 12 and 15 similar signs and symptoms, but all three cases end in death. 396 See case 22 and Suwen 17.51. 397 An sheng mo 案繩墨 “to apply the ink of the marking cord,” a common practice among builders and carpenters to draw out a straight line. Not given in case 22. 398 Pieh jen chih mai 別人之脈, lit. “they distinguished the different vessels within a single person.” 399 Shu 數, lit. “number” was applied in the Han and earlier to any discipline that involved mastery of regular patterns, including methods of prognostication and other arts, see Peng Yoke Ho, “Chinese Science: the Traditional Chinese View,” BSOAS 54.3 (1991), 506-59). Ssu-ma Chen explains shu by referring to shu shu chih jen 術數之人 “persons skilful in numbers”; Takigawa refers to fang shu 方數 “the arts of [applying] formulae.” Yi is below said to hao shu 好數 “to be fond of [the art of] numbers.” See also case 6 and notes.

74

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

disorders]. Those who do not master [the art of] number, consider them the same. In spite of this, there is more to the “Model of the Pulse” than can be verified. If one examines a sick person by means of the [above] measures to differentiate between them [the disorders], then one can distinguish between those with the same name and one can name the place where the host of the illness resides. Now, those whom your servant, Yi, examined, all have consultation records.400 The means whereby I differentiated them [the vessels/pulses, and accordingly the disorders] were that the formulae that I had received from the Master were just about reaching completion, when the Master died. Hence, I drew up a table recording what he examined, the prognostications of the time limits [before death] and the decisions he made of whether someone would live or die, I contemplated over those instances that were failures and those that were a success, and I combined [all this] with the “Model of the Pulse”. Hence, 401 by now I can recognise them [the disorders]. [Question 2] [2814] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: when you prognosticated the time periods of a disorder and discerned whether someone would live or die, some cases were not in accordance with the predicted time period.402 Why? The answer is: in each of these cases drink and food, joy and anger had not been regular, some should not have drunk drugs,403 some should not have applied

400 Chi 籍 regular term for a written record or a register, usually of official nature. The translation is diametrically opposed to Hübotter’s (op. cit., p. 24), but in accordance with Bridgman’s (op. cit., p. 45). 401 Yi ku 以故 “hence” instead of ku 故 “hence” is frequently used in the text of the questions and answers, as Ling Chih-lung remarks. Note also other differences in writing style e.g. long sentences, the frequent use of chi 及 “and.” And note incongruencies in contents, e.g. the accusation formulated in question 1 does not apply to the case histories, nor does the answer given to interrogation question 2; Yi’s experience with formulae in his youth, Yang Ch’ing’s number of offspring; Yang Ch’ing’s name is given as Yang Chung-ch’in, which may be an appellation, but it rather suddenly appears in the text; the King of Tzu-ch’uan rather than the King of Ch’i is mentioned in Yi’s response to question 6; the book titles show blatant variations, too many to be listed (but see Hsu, Telling Touch); the medical concepts are partly incongruous with those given in previous sections. For reasons of writing style, use of technical terms, and related contents but nevertheless contradictory statements, it is possible that this section represents a later addition to an already existent body of text (Hsu, Telling Touch). 402 Indeed, in cases 8 and 21 the patients in question lived beyond their predicted time limit before they died, because of their appropriate diet and conduct during the illness, but not for the reasons Yi gives in his response to this question.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

75

needles and cauterisation.404 Hence, they did not die within the predicted time period.405 [Question 3 ] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: now that Yi is able to recognise disorders, discern between life and death, and provide a structured analytical discourse on [how] drugs are applied to that which is appropriate, among all the nobles, kings and great ministers is there anyone, or not, who has formerly asked for Yi? And, at the time when King Wen 文 406 was ill, why has one not requested Yi to examine and treat him? The answer is: the King of Chao 趙, the King of Chiao-hsi 膠西, the King of Chi-nan 濟南 and the King of Wu 吳 all sent messengers to come and summon your servant, Yi.407 Your servant, Yi, did not dare to go [to them]. At the time when King Wen was ill, your servant, Yi's, family was poor. I wished to treat illness on behalf of other people, and honestly feared that an official would assign me a government post and detain me, your servant, Yi. Hence I shifted the number of my name to the left and right, did not cultivate a home for my livelihood, and went out to wander among the kingdoms. I sought out those who were expert in formulae and number, and served them for a long time. I met and served several masters, I have received all their essential things, I have exhaustively [studied] the meaning of their formula books, and I have interpreted and analysed them. I lived in the fiefdom of Yang-hsü 陽虛, and therefore served 403

Tang 當 “should.” Note that tang was not used in this sense in the previous sections of this biography. 404 Chen chiu 鍼 灸 alternate translation: “acupuncture and moxibustion.” Arguably, this biography is the earliest extant text testifying to the practice of acupuncture and moxibustion based on complex medical reasoning. 405 Chung ch’i 中期 “to hit the predicted time period,” see also chung ch’un 中春 “to strike the centre of spring” in case 15. 406 Hsü Kuang identifies King Wen 文 with King Wen of Ch’i who died in the fifteenth year of Emperor Wen (165 B.C.). However, according to Han shu, 14.398, he died with fourteen years of age in the sixteenth year of Emperor Wen (164 B.C.). (In the introduction, Hsü Kuang identified the year in which Yi was punished as the twelfth of Emperor Wen instead of the fourteenth; there is consistency to his mis-counting.) Was it possibly King Wen who had submitted the Memorial to the Emperor and denounced Yi? 407 The King of Chao was Liu Sui 劉遂, the King of Chiao-hsi between 164-153 B.C. was Liu Ang 劉卬, the King of Chi-nan between 164-153 was Liu Pi-kuang 劉辟光, the King of Wu was Liu P’i 劉濞. These four, together with three others, took part in a revolt in 154 that ended in their execution in 153.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

76

the Noble. When the Noble entered the [Imperial] court, I, your servant, Yi, followed him to Chang’an. Hence I was able to examine the illness of Hsiang Ch’u 項處 in Anling 安陵,408 and of others as well. [Question 4] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: does he know the details of the situation of the means whereby King Wen contracted an illness, i.e. symptoms of not being able to get up.409 Your servant, Yi, answered: I did not see King Wen when he was ill, but I heard that King Wen was ill with panting, head aches, and a vision that was unclear.410 Your servant, Yi, analysed it in his heart-mind. I considered him not to be ill. My opinion is that due to being fat, he accumulated his essences. The person's entire body could not stand being moved, and the bones and flesh did not mutually support each other. Hence he panted. A doctor should not treat this. The “Model of the Pulse” says: “At twenty years of age, the ch’i of the pulse should be hasty. At thirty, one should have a swift pace. At forty, one should sit down quietly. At fifty, one should lie down quietly. When sixty years [*2815*] are accomplished and above, the ch’i should be stored deeply.”411 King Wen had not yet reached twenty years. Just then is the appropriate time for the ch’i of the pulses to be hasty. However, he walked slowly.412 He did not resonate with the workings of heaven and the four seasons. Later, I heard that a doctor had cauterised him and thereby aggravated his condition. This is a mistake in the analysis of illness [i.e., in diagnosis]. Your servant, Yi, analysed it. My opinion was that while the spirit ch’i was contending [with the consequences of cauterisation], the noxious ch’i entered. Not even his youth could retrieve it [the 408

See case 25. Pu ch’i chih chuang 不起之狀, lit. “the appearance [the symptoms] of not getting up,” i.e. fatigue or lassitude. Note the same meaning of chuang, as an outward manifestation of ping, also in case 20, and the first section of the introductory part. 410 Mu pu ming 目不明 “the eyes are not bright,” “the vision is unclear.” An unclear vision can indicate dizziness (e.g., Su wen 64.179 and Ling shu 23.340) or senility (e.g. Ling shu 54.410). 411 Tung 董 means shen tsang 深藏 “to store it deeply,” according to Hsü Kuang. Tung means ku 固 “to be hard” and implies “to be in control of,” according to Taki Motohiro. Ando Koretora cites a parallel text in Ling shu 54.410, which ends at hundred years of age. Note that the ageappropriate movements in this enumeration apply to ch’i and the person in rather undifferentiated ways. 412 Hsü chih 徐 之 is hsü hsing 徐 行 “he went slowly,” i.e. his movements were slow, according to Katsuro Ison (1920:71) and also Takigawa. The term chih 之 “to go” is used in this sense also in case 6. 409

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

77

spirit ch’i]. Hence he died. As to the so-called ch’i, one should harmonise drink and food, and choose clear days for coach rides and walks to broaden the mind in order to adjust the tendons, bones, flesh,413 blood and vessels for bringing ch’i into flow. Hence the age of twenty is called “the disposition for change”. 414 According to the “Model,” one should not apply stone needles and cauterisation. Stone needles and cauterisation can bring about the expulsion of ch’i.415 [Question 5] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: whence has Master Ch’ing 慶 received them [his teachings] and was he known among the feudal lords of Ch’i, or not?416 The answer is: I do not know the teacher whence he received [them]. Ch’ing's family was wealthy. He was fond of doing medicine, but unwilling to treat illness on behalf of other people. It must be for this reason that he was not known among them. Ch’ing, moreover, formally announced to your servant, Yi: “Beware not to let my sons and grandsons know that you have studied my formulae.” [Question 6] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: why did Master Ch’ing, upon meeting me, Yi, come to favor me, and why did he wish to teach me, Yi, all his formulae? The answer is: your servant, Yi, had not heard that master Ch’ing’s doing of formulae was good. The means whereby I, Yi, got to know Ch’ing were–given that I, Yi, when I was young had been fond of all activities concerned with formulae–that when your servant, Yi, tried out his formulae, all of them were very effective, refined and excellent.417 Your servant, Yi, had heard that Kungsun Kuang 公孫光 of the ward T’ang 唐 in Tzu-ch’uan 菑川 was fond of doing

413 Jou 肉 was later inserted, according to Kaiho Gembi. Indeed, the term hsüeh jou 血肉 is more common than jou hsüeh. Note that in his comment Takigawa speaks of chin ku hsüeh mai 筋 骨血脈. 414 Mao 貿 is rendered as ho 賀 or chih 質 in other editions, according to Hsü Kuang. 415 Chu 逐 means pen chu 奔逐 “to drive out,” according to Kaiho Gembi. 416 Questions 5, 6 and 7 were translated by Nathan Sivin, “Text and Experience in Classical Chinese Medicine,” in D. Bates, ed., Knowledge and the Scholarly Medical Traditions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 180-2, and taken as basis for this translation. 417 This translation follows Hübotter (op. cit., p. 27) in order to avoid the contradiction with the parallel statement in the introduction.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

78

formulae transmitted from the ancients.418 Your servant, Yi, thereupon went to pay respects to him.419 I had the opportunity to meet and serve him. I received the formulae that transform yin and yang and orally transmitted “Models.” 420 Your servant, Yi, received them all and wrote them down.421 Your servant, Yi, wished to receive in their entirety all of his other refined formulae. Kung-sun Kuang said: “My formulae have come to an end; it is not that I begrudge you anything. My body is already weakened, there is nothing I could any longer devote my activities to. These are the wonderful formulae that I received when I was young. In their entirety, I have given them to you. Do not teach them to anyone else.” Your servant, Yi, said: “I have had the privilege to meet and serve you in your presence and in their entirety I have obtained all [your] secret formulae. I am very fortunate. I would rather die than dare to transmit them to anyone improperly.” For some time Kung-sun Kuang lived at leisure. When your servant, Yi, analysed the formulae in depth, I encountered a word that was the most refined in one hundred generations. Master Kuang was delighted and said: “You are certain to become the most skilled in the land. I have that which I am good at, but it is few and far between. A fellow422 lives in Lin-tzu. He is fond of doing formulae, I cannot compare with him. His formulae are most exceptional. They are not what ordinary people have heard about. When I was in my prime, I formerly wanted [*2816*] to receive his formulae. Yang Chung-ch’ien 楊中倩423 was unwilling and said: ‘You are not the right person.’ I must go with you to see him. He will recognise that you are fond of formulae. This person too has reached old age. His family is well-supplied and wealthy.” At the time, as we had not yet gone [there], just then the son of Ch’ing, the young man Yin 殷,424 came 418

Ku chuan fang 故傳方 “formulae transmitted from the ancients” should be read as chuan ku fang 傳故方 “[he was expert] in transmitting ancient formulae,” according to Wang Nien-sun. 419 The relation between Yi and Kung-sun Kuang is slightly altered in the Yi shuo (SKCS 1.10b). 420 Chuan yu fa 傳語法 are k’ou shou fa 口受法 “orally transmitted models,” according to Oka Hakku. 421 This sentence suggests that, indeed, the formulae (fang 方) and/or models (fa 法) were not written, but orally transmitted. 422 T’ung ch’an 同產 “half-brother who has the same mother as oneself” or, simply, “fellow.” 423 Yang Chung-ch’ien 楊中倩 is identified as Yang Ch’ing by Katsuro Ison (1920: 75). Indeed, yang 陽 can replace yang 楊, as in Yang-hsü 楊虛 (case 8); 倩 can be pronounced as ch’ing. Given that direct speech is recorded here, it is possible that Chung-ch’ing 中倩 was his appellation among fellows. See Loewe, “The Physician Ch’un-yü Yi. 424 Nan 男 is a term that defines a man’s state for purposes of taxation. It designates males aged 23 to 56 (or 60?) with neither appointment as an official nor conferment of an order of aristocratic

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

79

to present a horse. Since Master Kuang offered the horse to the king's place [of residence], 425 I, Yi, therefore was able to become friendly with Yin. Kuang moreover entrusted me, Yi, to Yin saying: “Yi is devoted to the art of number [i.e. the esoteric techniques]. You must treat him with care. This person is a sage master of techniques.”426 Then, he wrote a letter in order to entrust me, Yi, to Yang Ch’ing. Hence I got to know Ch’ing. Your servant, Yi, served Ch’ing with diligently. Hence he favored me, Yi. [Question 7] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: have there ever been officials or commoners who have served him and studied his, Yi's, formulae and have they have all obtained his, Yi's, formulae in their entirety or not? Which prefecture and ward were the persons from? The answer is: Sung Yi 宋邑 of Lin-tzu 臨菑. When Yi 邑 studied [with me], your servant, Yi, taught him “Wu Chen” 五診 (The Five Examinations).427 It took more than a year. The King of Chi-pei 濟北王 sent the Grand Physicians Kao Ch’i 高期 and Wang Yü 王禹 to study [with me]. Your servant, Yi, taught them “Ching mai kao hsia” 經 脈 高 下 (Channels and Vessels: Above and Below) 428 and “Ch’i lo chieh” 奇絡結 (Irregular Links and Knots). 429 On a rank (Loewe, Records of Han Administration, 2v. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967], 2:74). His name 殷 can be pronounced as Yin or Yang. 425 It is not said who the King was, but if the offering was made to the King of Tzu-ch’uan, which was a kingdom established in 164 B.C., this contradicts Yi’s statement in the introduction that he trained with Yang Ch’ing between 180-177 B.C. See also Bridgman (op. cit., p. 100 n. 261). 426 Sheng ju 聖 儒 “scholar” (Sivin, “Text and Experience,” p.181) or “sage master of techniques.” Kaiho Gembi, for elucidating sheng cites the Shuo wen 20A.17a: “to be sage is to be connected [i.e. open to the changes of the universe]” (sheng t’ung yeh 聖通也) and for explaining ju cites Yen Shih-ku’s gloss in Han shu, 57B.2592: “ju it is the name for shu shih [all those who master the techniques of the Dao, they all are considered ju]” 儒[柔也]術士之稱[也] [凡有道術皆 為儒]. 427 “Wu chen” 五診 possibly refers to the book title Wu se chen 五色診 (The Examinations by Means of the Five Complexions) mentioned in the introduction. It is unclear whether Yi refers here to titles of texts, orally transmitted models, or techniques. The Yi shuo (SKCS 1.10b) renders this text passage as “the art of the analysis of the five [ways of] examining the pulses” 五診脈論之術. 428 Ching mai 經脈 “channels and vessels” are frequently mentioned in the Nei ching, but do not occur as a compound word in the previous sections of this biography. 429 Lo chieh 絡 結 “links and knots” are mentioned once in Ling shu 38.373, variously mentioned on their own in the previous sections of this biography, but not once as a compound word.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

80

regular basis, I analysed the places the shu430 inhabited, and in accordance with whether the ch’i would rise or descend, exit or enter, be noxious, 431 [flow] countervectively or placidly, equipped with the appropriate stone needles,432 I determined the locations for stone needling and cauterising.433 It took more than a year. [*2817*] The King of Tzu-ch’uan, from time to time, sent the Chief [of the Stable and] the Great Granary,434 Feng Hsin 馮信, for rectifying the formulae.435 Your servant, Yi, taught him “An fa” 案 法 (The Model for [delivering] Massage), 436 “Ni shun lun” 逆 順 論 (The Structured Analysis of the Countervective and Placid), and the “Yao fa” 藥 法 (The Model for [administering] Drugs),437 “Ting wu wei chi ho chi t’ang fa” 定五 wei 及和齊湯 430

Shu so chü 俞所居 “the places where the shu reside.” Sivin (“Text and Experience,” p. 181) translates shu as “acupuncture loci.” See also discussion in case 22 and notes. 431 Hsieh 邪 should read as hsieh cheng 邪正 “the heteropathic and orthopathic,” according to Wang Nien-sun and Chang Wen-hu. See also Yi shuo (SKCS 1.11a). However, in this biography hsieh occurs several times, but not once cheng or chen. Hsieh ch’i 邪氣 is opposed to shen ch’i 神 氣 “spirit ch’i” in Yi’s response to interrogation question 4, not to cheng ch’i. The translator disagrees with the commentators. Along a similar line of reasoning, the notion chen feng 真風 “correct wind” was inserted into case 14 in the Cheng-lei pen-ts’ao 8.29a (WYG-SKCS 740-351): jih sou san sheng chu chü [chen feng] wu liu ri ping yi [er yu] (new additions are in the parentheses). This alters the meaning from: “Daily he rinsed his mouth with three sheng. After about five to six days, the illness ceased” to: “Daily he rinsed his mouth with three sheng and spit them out. I made that the true wind entered. After five to six days, he recovered.” Probably, the notion ch’u ju 出入 “approximately” was no more intelligible in the Sung and the notion of chen feng very common. 432 Chen shih 針石 “stone needles.” See also cases 6 and 22. 433 Pien chiu 砭灸 “stone needles and cauterization.” It is strange that two different words refer to stone needles in this context. The translator follows Takigawa’s (105.59) punctuation and differs from Sivin (“Text and Experience,” p. 182). 434 T’ai tsang ma chang 太倉馬長. The character ma must be mistaken, acccording to Taki Motohiro. The T’ai-p’ing yü-lan 722 and Yi shuo (SKCS 1.10b) say that Feng Hsin from Lin-tzu became Chief of the Great Granary of Ch’i. 435 Cheng fang 正方, “to rectify the formulae,” see Han-yü ta tz’u-tien 5.307; cheng is a verb here. 436 An fa 案法 is an fa 按法 “Model for [Delivering] Massage” in the Yi shuo (SKCS 1.11a), which supports its interpretation in case 12 (see that case and notes). The T’ai-p’ing yü-lan 722 has shen fa 審法 “Model of Diagnosis”; it is a ch’a fa 察法 “method of diagnosis,” according to Taki Mototane. Compare and contrast the above translation with Han-yü ta tz’u-tien (1:633) and Sivin (“Text and Experience,” p. 181). 437 “Yao fa” 藥法 (The Model on Drugs) not “Yao lun” 藥論 (The Discourse on Drugs), as in the introduction. Note mai shu 脈書 and yao lun 藥論 in the introduction, while Yi refers to various fa 法, mostly to mai fa 脈法, in the case histories, and here to yao fa 藥法.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

81

法 (Models for Determining the Five Flavours and Blending the Regulatory Hot Liquids). Tu Hsin 杜信, deputy of the household of the Marquis of Kaoyung 高 永,438 was fond of [the art of] the pulse and came to study. Your servant, Yi, taught him “Shang hsia ching mai” 上下經脈 (The Upper and Lower Channels and Vessels)439 and “Wu chen” 五診 (The Five Examinations). It took more than two years. T’ang An 唐安 of the ward Chao 召 in Lin-tzu came to study.440 Your servant, Yi, taught him “The Five Examinations”, “The Upper and Lower Channels and Vessels”, “The Regular and Irregular”,441 “Ssu shih ying yin yang ch’ung” 四時應陰陽重 (The Resonance of the Four Seasons and the Doubling442 of Yin and Yang). He has not yet completed [his studies], but has been appointed the Attending Physician of the King of Ch’i. [Question 8] Your servant, Yi, has been asked: is he able to examine illnesses and make decisions about death and life completely without mistakes? Your servant, Yi's, answer is: if I, Yi, treat a patient, I must necessarily first press on to his vessels, then [only] do I treat him. If they are badly countervective, it is incurable. If they are placid, then I treat him [the patient]. When the heart-mind is not attentive to the pulse,443 what I prognosticate of death and life and [what] I regard as curable, I time and again get wrong. Your servant, Yi, cannot be perfect. 438 Kao-yung 高永 is not mentioned in the slightly more elaborate account on Tu-hsin in the Yi shuo (SKCS 1.11b-12a). There is no fiefdom of Kao-yung in the histories, according to Liang Yüsheng. 439 Shang hsia ching mai 上下經脈 alternate translation: “the Channels and Vessels: first and second volume,” which is unlikely, however. Contrast with: Mai shu shang hsia ching “the Pulse Book,” first and second volume” in the introduction, which is grammatically plausible. Compare with: ch’i shang hsia ching sheng 其上下經盛 “his upper and lower channels are exuberant” in Su wen 16.49. Shang hsia ching must refer to the channels in this context, not to books. 440 The Yi shuo (SKCS 1.11b) contains considerable additional information. 441 “Ch’i k’o” 奇咳 (The Regular and Irregular), rendered as “Ch’i k’o shu” 奇咳術 (the Art concerning the Regular and Irregular) at the start of this memoir, is possibly ch’i heng 奇恆. 442 Ch’ung 重 “to double” should be read as tung 動 meaning pien tung 變動 “changes,” according to Kaiho Gembi. The Yi shuo (SKCS, 1.11b) simply omits ch’ung. It makes no sense to a modern reader, see Sivin (1995: 182 n. 20). However, ch’ung 重 is an integral concept to Yi’s medical rationale (Hsu, Telling Touch), see cases 2, 6, and 22. 443 Ching 精 can mean ming 明 “to understand.” See Pao Piao’s 鮑彪 comment to the Chan kuo ts’e (Shanghai: Shanghai Ku-chi, 1978, p. 898): ching yu ming 精猶明 “to be refined means to understand.” The above translation is based on Hübotter (op. cit., p. 29).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

82

His Honor the Grand Scribe says, “Whether a woman was beautiful or ugly, when she resides in the palace, she is envied. Whether a young man was worthy or worthless, when he enters the court he comes under suspicion.444 For this reason, Pien Ch’üeh because of his techniques met with calamity. Ts’ang-kung, by contrast, although he concealed his traces and himself went into hiding, was about to be punished by mutilation. T’i-ying forwarded a document [to the Emperor], and the father thereby obtained peace in later life. Hence Lao Tzu 老 子 says: “Beauty and goodness are the instruments for [attracting] calamities.” 445 Isn't he speaking about Pien Ch’üeh's and others’ calamity? As for Ts’ang-kung, one can say he came close to it. *

*

*

*

*

Those medical cases that Pien Ch’üeh discussed, were all revered by the formulaists; the methods he adhered to were meticulous and brilliant. Later generations passed them on, and were not able to change them. Yet Ts’ang-kung could be said to have approached him. [Thus] I wrote “The Memoir of Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Number 45.”446

444

This old saying appears in two other chapters of the Shih chi: (1) in a memorial by Tsou Yang 鄒陽 (Shih chi, 83.2473), and (2) in Ch’u Shao-sun’s 褚少孫 comments at the end of Chapter 49 (49.1984); in both other occurrences the men are also the objects of jealous hatred–chi 嫉–rather than suspicion, doubt or distrust as here–yi 疑). See also Durrant’s (The Cloudy Mirror, p. 120) comment. 445 Lao Tzu 31 (Lao Tzu chu-shih chi p’ing-chieh 老子注釋及評介, Ch’en Ku-ying 陳鼓應, ed. [Peking: Chung-hua, 1984], p. 191) reads: fu ping che, pu hsiang chih ch’i 夫兵者 不祥之器. The idiom fu ping che “weapons,” sometimes given as chia ping che 佳兵者 “excellent weapons,” is here replaced by mei hao che 美好者 “beauty and goodness.” Is this a scribal error or was a different Lao Tzu edition in circulation? Or, did Ssu-ma Ch’ien intentionally alter the wording in the Lao Tzu? 446 Such are the grounds Ssu-ma Ch’ien gives for composing this chapter in his postface (Shih chi, 130.3316).

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:142-238. Bridgman, R. F. “La médicine dans la Chine antique, d’après les biographies de Pien-ts’io et de Chouen-yu Yi (Chapitre 105 des Mémoires historiques de Sseu-ma Ts’ien),” Mélanges chinois et bouddhique, 10 (1955): 1-213. Hübotter, F. “Zwei berühmte chinesische Ärzte des Altertums Chouen Yu-I und Hua T’ouo.” Mitteilungen der deutschen Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens, 21A (1927): 3-48. II. Studies Ch’ao Yüan-fang 巢元方. Chu-ping yüan-hou lun 諸病源候論 (Treatise on the Origins and Symptoms of Medical Disorders). References to Ting Kuang-ti 丁光迪, annot. Chu-ping yüan-hou lun chiao-chu. Peking: Jen-min Weisheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1991. Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan Han-chien Cheng-li Hsiao-tsu 江陵張家山漢簡整 理小組. “Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan Han-chien [Mai-shu] shih-wen” 江陵 張家山漢簡〔脈書〕釋文 (Transcript of the [Document of the Mai] on Bamboo Strips from Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan). Wen-wu 7 (1989): 72-74. Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan Han-mu Chu-chien Cheng-li-tsu 江陵張家山漢墓 竹簡整理組. “Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan Han-chien kai-shu” 江陵張家山 漢簡概述 (A Survey of the Bamboo Strips from Chiang-ling Chang-chiashan). Wen-wu 1 (1985): 9-15. Chiang-su Hsin-i Hsüeh-yüan 江蘇新醫學院 eds. Chung-yao ta-tz’u-tien 中藥大 辭典 (Dictionary of Chinese Materia Medica). Shang-hai: Shang-hai k’ehsüeh chi-shu ch’u-pan-she, 1995. CHYH, see Chung-hua yao-hai 中華藥海. Cullen, C. “Yi-an 醫案 (Case Statements): the Origins of a Genre of Chinese Medical Literature,” in E. Hsü, ed. Innovation in Chinese Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, pp. 297-323. CYTTT, see Chung-yao ta-tz’u-tien 中藥大辭典.

83

84

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Epler, D. C. “Bloodletting in Early Chinese Medicine and its Relation to the Origin of Acupuncture,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 54.3(1980): 33767. Fan Hsing-chun 范行準, unpubl., Erh-ch’ien i-pai nien ch’ien te i-yü 二千一百 年前的醫獄 (A Medical Lawsuit, Two Thousand One Hundred Years Ago). Manuscript printed by Ch’üan-kuo Tsu-kuo Yi-hsüeh Chung-hsin T’u-shukuan, 1963. ___, ed. Chung-kuo ping-shih hsin-i 中國病史新義 (Novel Interpretations of the History of Diseases in China). Peking: Chung-yi Ku-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 1989. Harper, D. The “‘Wushier bingfang’: Translation and Prolegomena.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California-Berkeley, 1982. ___. Early Chinese Medical Literature: The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts. London: Kegan Paul International, 1998. ___. “Lithomancy, Diagnosis and Prognosis in Early Chinese Medicine.” in E. Hsu, ed. Innovation in Chinese Medicine, 2001, pp. 99-120. Ho Ai-hua 何愛華. “Ch’un-yü Yi sheng-tsu nien te t’an-t’ao” 淳于意生卒年的 探討 (Discussion of Ch’un-yü Yi’s Dates of Birth and Death). Chung-kuo yishih tsa-chih 中國醫師雜誌, 14.2 (1984): 80-81. Ho Chih-kuo and V. Lo. “The Channels: A Preliminary Examination of a Lacquered Figurine from the Western Han Period.” Early China 21 (1996): 81-123. Hsieh Kuan 謝 觀 . Chung-kuo yi-hsüeh ta-tz’u-tien 中 國 醫 學 大 辭 典 (Comprehensive Dictionary of China's Medicine). 4 Vols. Shanghai: Shangyeh Yin-shu-kuan, 1954. Hsü, Elisabeth. Lexical Semantics and Chinese Medical Terms. M.Phil. Dissertation in General Linguistics, University of Cambridge.1986. ___. “Transmission of Knowledge, Texts and Treatment in Chinese Medicine.” Ph.D. Thesis in Social Anthropology, University of Cambridge. 1992. ___. “Towards a Science of Touch, Part I: Chinese Pulse Diagnostics in Early Modern Europe.” Anthropology and Medicine 7.2 (2000): 251-268. ___. “Towards a Science of Touch, Part II: Representations of the Tactile Experience of the Seven Chinese Pulses indicating Danger of Death in Early Modern Europe.” Anthropology and Medicine 7.3 (2000): 3-16. ___. “The Telling Touch: Pulse Diagnostics in Early Chinese Medicine. With Translation and Interpretation of 10 Medical Case Histories of Shi ji 105.2 (ca. 90 BC).” Habilitationschrift im Fachbereich Sinologie, Fakultät für Orientalistik und Altertumswissenschaft, Universität Heidelberg. 2001.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

85

___, ed. Innovation in Chinese Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. ___. “Tactility and the Body in Early Chinese Medicine”. Science in Context 18.1 (2005): 7-84. ___. “Pulse Diagnostics in Chinese Medicine (2nd BCE- 10th CE).” in C. Despeux ed. Médicine, Religion et Société on Chine Médiévale (forthcoming). ___. The Telling Touch: Pulse Diagnostics in Early Chinese Medicine. With an anthropological interpretation of the first ten medical case histories and an annotated translation of Chunyu Yi’s entire Memoir in Shiji 105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (forthcoming). ___. “Ch’un-yü I.” In W.F. and H. Bynum, eds. Dictionary of Medical Biography. Slough: Greenwood Press (forthcoming). Huang-fu Mi 皇甫謐. Chen-chiu chia-i ching 鍼灸甲乙經 (A-B Canon of Aupuncture and Moxibustion). References to Chang Ts’an-chia and Hsü Kuo-ch’ien 張燦玾 徐國仟, annot. Chen-chiu chia-yi ching chiao-chu 鍼灸 甲乙經校註. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1996. Huang-ti nei-ching 黃帝內經 (Yellow Emperor's Inner Canon). Jen Ying-ch’iu 任 應 秋, ed. Huang-ti nei-ching chang-chü so-yin 黃 帝內 經章 句索 引. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1986. Jan Hsien-te 冉先德, ed. Chung-hua yao-hai 中華藥海 (Sea of China's Materia Medica). Harbin: Ha-erh-pin ch’u-pan-she, 1993. Kao Ta-lun 高大倫, ed. Chang-chia-shan Han-chien Mai-shu chiao-shih 張家山 漢簡脈書校釋 (Explanation of the “Document of the Mai” on Han Dynasty Bamboo Strips from Chang-chia-shan). Ch’engtu: Ch’eng-tu Ch’u-pan-she, 1992. ___, ed. Chang-chia-shan Han-chien yin-shu chiao-shih 張家山漢簡引書校釋 (Explanation of the “Document on Pulling” on Han Dynasty Bamboo Strips from Changjiashan). Ch’eng-tu: Pa-shu shu-she, 1995. Keegan, D. J. “The ‘Huang-ti Nei-Ching’: The Structure of the Compilation; The Significance of the Structure.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, 1988. Ku Yeh-wang 顧野王. Yü p’ien 玉篇 (Jade Tablets). Ch’en P’eng-nien 陳彭年, ed. Ta kuang yi hui yü p’ien 大廣益會玉篇. Facsimile of the 1702 print. Peking: Chung-hua Shu-chü, 1987. Kuriyama, S. “Interpreting the History of Bloodletting.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 50 (1995): 11-46. Lawrence, L. I. and D. Wujastyk, eds. Contagion: Perspectives from Pre-modern Societies. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2000.

86

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Li K’o-kuang 李克光 et al. Chin-kui yao-lüeh yi-shih 金匱要略譯釋, 1993. Li Shih-chen 李時珍. Pen ts’ao kang mu 本草綱目 (Classified Materia Medica). 4 vols. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1977-81. Lin P’ei-chen 林培真 “Ch’un-yü Yi sheng-tsu nien ho chih-jen k’ao-pien” 淳于 意生卒年和職任考辨 (Examination of Ch’un-yü Yi’s Dates of Birth and Death and His Status). Chong-kuo yi-shih tsa-chih 14.2 (1984): 78-79. Lo, V. “Tracking Pain. Jue and the Formation of a Theory of Circulating Qi through the Channels.” Suddhoffs Archiv, 83 (1999): 191-211. ___. “Crossing the Neiguan 內關 ‘Inner Pass’: A Nei/wai 內外 ‘Inner/Outer’ Distinction in Early Chinese Medicine.” East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine 17 (2000): 15-65. ___. “Lithic Therapy in Early Chinese Body Practices.” in P.A. Baker and G. Carr, eds. New Approaches to Medical Anthropology and Archaeology. Oxford: Oxbow, 2002, pp. 195-220. Loewe, M.A.N. “The Physician Chunyu Yi and his Historical Background.” In J. Gernet and M. Kalinowski eds. En suivant la Voie Royale. Mélanges en homage à Léon Vandermeersch. Paris: École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1997, pp. 297-313. Lu, G. D. and J. Needham. “Records of Disease in Ancient China.” In D. Brothwell and A.T. Sandison, eds. Diseases in Antiquity: A Survey of the Diseases, Injuries, and Surgery of Early Populations. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Pub Ltd., 1967, pp. 222-37. Ma Chi-hsing 馬繼興. Chung-i wen-hsien hsüeh 中醫文獻學 (Study of the Chinese Medical Literature). Shanghai: Shang-hai K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’upan-she, 1990. ___, ed. Ma-wang-tui ku yi-shu k’ao-shih 馬王堆古醫書考釋 (Explanation of the Ancient Medical Documents from Ma-wang-tui). Changsha: Hu-nan K’ohsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1992. Ma-wang-tui Han-mu Po-shu Cheng-li Hsiao-tsu 馬王堆漢墓帛書整理小組, eds. Ma-wang-tui Han-mu po-shu 馬王堆漢墓帛書 (The Silk Documents from a Han Tomb at Ma-wang-tui). V. 4. Peking: Wen-wu Ch’u-pan-she, 1985. MSSW, see Chiang-ling Chang-chia-shan Han-chien Cheng-li Hsiao-tsu 江陵張 家山漢簡整理小組. MWD, MWD WBF (Wu-shih-erh ping-fang), MWD YY (Yin-yang shih-i maichiu ching), MWD ZB (Tsu-pi shih-i mai-chiu ching), see Ma-wang-tui Hanmu Po-shu Cheng-li Hsiao-tsu 馬王堆漢墓帛書整理小組. Nei ching 內經, see Huang-ti nei-ching 黃帝內經.

Pien Ch’üeh and Ts’ang-kung, Memoir 45

87

Pfister, R. “Sexuelle Körpertechniken im Heilkunde-Korpus von Mawangdui.” Dokorarbeit, Ostasiatisches Seminar der Universität Zürich, 2001. Porkert, Manfred. The Theoretical Foundations of Chinese Medicine: Systems of Correspondence. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1974. Sivin, N. “Text and Experience in Classical Chinese Medicine.” In D. Bates ed. Knowledge and the Scholarly Medical Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 177-204. ___. “State, Cosmos, and Body in the Last Three Centuries B.C.” HJAS, 55 (1995): 5-37. ___. “The Myth of the Naturalists.” in N. Sivin. Medicine, Philosophy and Religion in Ancient China: Researches and Reflections. Aldershot: Variorum, 1995, pp. 1-33. T’ang Shen-wei 唐 慎 微 . Cheng lei pen ts’ao 證 類 本 草 (Materia Medica Corrected and Arranged in Classes). Annotations by Ts’ao Hsiao-chung 曹孝 忠. Ssu-k’u Yi-hsüeh Ts’ung-shu 四庫醫學叢書. Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 1991. Unschuld, P. U. Medicine in China: A History of Ideas. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. ___. The Classic of Difficult Issues: With Commentaries by Chinese and Japanese Authors from the Third through to the Twentieth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. ___. Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen: Nature, Knowledge, Imagery in an Ancient Chinese Medical Text. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Wang Chih-p’u 王致譜 “Hsiao-k’o (t’ang-niao-ping) shih shu-yao” 消渴（糖尿 病）史述要 (Outline of the History of ‘Wasting Thirst’ -Diabetes). Chunghua yi-shih tsa-chih 10.2 (1980): 73-82. Wang Hsi 王熙. Mai-ching 脈經 (Canon of the Pulse). Shen Yan-nan 沈炎南, annot. Mai-ching chiao-chu 脈經校註. Peking: Jen-min Wei-sheng Ch’upan-she, 1991. Wang Ping 王 冰 . ed. Huang-ti nei-ching Su-wen 黃 帝 內 經 素 問 (Yellow Emperor's Inner Canon, Basic Questions). Facsimile reproducing a Ming woodprint of the Song edition of 1067 by Ku Ts’ung-te 顧從德. Peking: Jenmin Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1982. Wang Shao-tseng 王 紹 增 . Yi-ku-wen pai-p’ien shih-yi 醫 古 文 百 篇 釋 譯 (Explanations to One Hundred Essays in Classical Chinese for Medics) Harbin: Hei-lung-chiang K’o-hsüeh Chi-shu Ch’u-pan-she, 1994. Ware, J. R. Alchemy, Medicine, Religion in the China of A.D. 320: The Nei P’ien of Ko Hung (Pao-p’u tzu). Cambridge: MIT Press, 1966.

88

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 105

Yamada Keiji. The Origins of Acupuncture, Moxibustion, and Decoction. Kyoto: International Research Center for Japanese Studies, 1998. Yang Shang-shan 楊上善, ed. Huang-ti Nei-ching T’ai-su 黃帝內經太素 (The Yellow Emperor's Inner Canon, Grand Basis). Toyo Igaku Kenkyujo, eds. Facsimile of the 1168 A.D. edition kept at Ninnaji. Osaka: Toyo Igaku Zenpon Sosho, 1981. Yü Hsing-wu 于省吾. Shuang chien ch’ih chu-tzu hsin-cheng 雙劍誃諸子新証 (New Notes to the Shuang-chien-ch’ih Scholars). 4v. Peking: Chung-hua Shu-chü, 1962. Yü Yün-hsiu 余雲岫. Ku-tai chi-ping ming-hou shu-yi 古代疾病名侯疏義 (Explanation of the Nomenclature of Disease in Ancient Times). Peking: Jenmin Wei-sheng Ch’u-pan-she, 1953.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46 translated by Marc Nürnberger [106.2621] [Liu] P’i [劉] 濞1 (215-154 B.C.), The King of Wu 呉, was the son of Liu Chung 劉仲,2 the elder brother of Kao-ti 高帝 (The Exalted Emperor, ca. 248-196, r. 206-196). 3 When Kao-ti had already stabilized the empire for seven years (200 B.C.),4 he enthroned Liu Chung as King of Tai 代.5 And when the Hsiung-nu 匈奴 attacked Tai 代 (199 B.C.), 6 Liu Chung was not able to resolutely defend it, abandoned the state, and fled7; traveling backroads,8 he fled to Lo-yang 雒陽,9 1

According to “So-yin,” his agnomen was P’eng 澎 (see Shih chi, 106.2621). For further biographical information on Liu P’i see also the Han Shu parallel (35.1903-18) and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 334-7. 2 Liu Hsi 劉喜 (d. 193 B.C), an elder brother of Kao-ti, is introduced by his agnomen Chung 仲, as Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) clarifies by presenting Hsi 喜 as his praenomen. Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh,” on Shih chi, 50.1988) also records Ch’ing wang 頃王 as his canonical name. See also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 370. 3 Kao-ti 高 帝 was the posthumous title of the first Emperor of the Han. For further biographical on Liu Pang 劉邦 see his basic annals, Shih chi, Chapter 8 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:1-104) and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 253-9. 4 The Han shu (35.1903) omits the time reference “had already stabilized the empire for seven years.” 5 Although this installment is also mentioned on Shih chi, 8.384-5 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:72) as taking place in 200 B.C., the tables on Shih chi, 18.946 and 22.1120, situate this event in the first month of the sixth year (201 B.C.). Liang Yü-sheng (33.1370 and 6.232) thus believes the seventh year to be a mistake which is supported by a different time line of events presented in Hann Hsin’s biography (Shih chi, 93.2633; Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:112). Wang Shu-min (106.2913) adds further references in favor of the earlier date. 6 According to Shih chi, 18.946, this happened in the eighth year of Kao-tsu’s reign, but the same table reports Liu Fei’s enthronement to have happened in the sixth year, i.e., one year earlier than the account in this chapter (cf. note above). Shih chi, 22.1121, also places the attack in the year 199 B.C.. 7 The Han shu (35.1903) omits wang 亡 “[and] fled.“

89

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

90

and voluntarily submitted himself to the Son of Heaven. For the reason that he was [his own] flesh and blood,10 the Son of Heaven could not bear to apply the law [to him], deposed him, and made him Marquis of Ho-yang 郃陽.11 In the autumn of the eleventh year of Kao-ti (196 B.C.), Ying Pu 英布,12 the King of Huai-nan 淮南, revolted; moving east, he annexed the territory of Ching 荊, and took control of the troops of the state; moving west, he crossed the Huai 淮 and struck at Ch’u 楚,13 so that Kao-ti personally led [his troops] to go [there] and execute him. The son of Liu Chung, [Liu] P’i, the Marquis of P’ei 沛,14 was twenty years old, and he had strengths of vitality; as a cavalry general he followed [Kao-ti] to defeat the army of [Ying] Pu west of Ch’i 蘄 [County],15 at 8

According to “So-yin,” the term chien hsing 閒行 means: 獨行從他道逃走 “fleeing by traveling alone and following a backroads.” 9 Lo-yang is a town located in modern Honan about fifteen miles east of modern Loyang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 10 This part of the sentence does not occur in the Han shu parallel (35.1903). 11 According to “So-yin,” Ho-yang 郃陽 is the name of a County in P’ing-yi 馮翊 located on the west bank of the River Ho 郃水. “Cheng-yi” is more specific and locates the old town of Hoyang thirty li south of Ho-hsi 河西 in T’ung-chou 同州 County (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:47, places the Ho-yang of the T’ang dynasty at about the same distance west of Ho-hsi). T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:15) locates Ho-yang about ninety miles northwest of modern Chang’an on the west bank of the Ho, about twenty miles south of the mouth of the Fen 汾. The Han shu (35.1903) adds at this point the following sentence: 子濞封為沛候 “His son, P’i, was enfeoffed as the Marquis of P’ei.” 12 Ying Pu was also called Ch’ing Pu 黥布 (Pu, the Tattooed) since he was subjected to tattooing. Once a convict-laborer at Mount Li, he rose from a band of robbers into the service of Hsiang Yü. Possessing considerable military ability, he became an untouchable powerful supporter of Hsiang Yü’s cause and his later defection to Liu Pang was a crucial blow to Hsiang Yü’s campaign. In the year 203 B.C. he was made King of Huainan and supported Liu Pang in becoming the new emperor. How long he had been harboring disloyal thoughts before he officially announced his rebellion in 196 B.C. is difficult to tell. And although he told Kao-ti in their final encounter, that he rebelled only to become Emperor himself, this might have been rather an angry retort than a final disclosure of his true intentions (Shih chi, 91.2606; Grand Scribes Records 8.60). See also his biography on Shih chi Chapter 91 (Grand Scribes Records, 8:45-67), and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 651-2). 13 The Han shu (35.1903) reduces the first part of this sentence to a mere: Ch’ing Pu fan 黥布 反 “Ch’ing Pu revolted.” 14 The Han shu (35.1903) omits the first part of the sentence, “The son of Liu Chung, [Liu] P’i, the Marquis of P’ei 沛,” in favor of a simple “[Liu] P’i . . .” 15 Chi County was located approximately fifteen miles south of modern of Su-chou 宿州 in Anhwei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19).

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

91

K’uai-chui 會甀,16 [and Ying] Pu fled.17 Liu Chia 劉賈,18 the King of Ching 荊, had been killed by [Ying] Pu; there were no descendants.19 The Sovereign was worried that in Wu 吳 and K’uai-chi 會稽20 [men] were fickle and ferocious,21 [but] there was no stalwart king to fill it [i.e., the position of the king],22 [and as] all [his own] sons were too young, he thus enthroned [Liu] P’i at P’ei 沛 23

16

Reading the sentence in accord with “So-yin” as “at K’uai-chui 會甀,” i.e., as a reference to the same toponym that is already mentioned on Shih chi, 8.389 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:81) and 91.2606—both times marked as the place of the battle that is recorded to have happened in the tenth month of the twelfth year (12 November-11 December 196 B.C) between Kao-ti and Ying Pu. According to the—in comparison with the other mentioned passages—inconsistent layout of the Chung-hua edition, the sentence would read: “and met [him] at Chui 甀.” T’an Ch’i-hsiang does not locate this place, while Ch’ien Mu (Ti-ming k’ao, pp. 526-7) supports our reading. The Han shu, 35.1903, omits the last part of this sentence: “west of Ch’i [County], at K’uaichui , [and Ying] Pu fled.” 17 Takigawa (101.3) reads “[Ying] Pu fled.” as a separate sentence. 18 Liu Chia 劉賈 was probably a member of the Liu Clan, but only Pan Ku refers to him as a cousin of Kao-ti (see especially Wang Hsien-ch’ien’s comment on Han shu pu-chu, 35.954a). He fought successfully as a general against Hsiang Yü. At Han Hsin’s demotion in 201 B.C., he was made King of Ching to rule over half of his former territory, Huai-tung 淮東 [East of the Huai], while Liu Chiao 劉交, a younger brother of Kao-ti, was made King of Ch’u to rule over the other half, Huai-hsi 淮西 [West of the Huai] (see Shih chi, 51.1994). See also his biography on Shih chi Chapter 51 and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 315-6. 19 According to the parallel account on Shih chi, 51.1994, Liu Chia fled to Fu-ling 富陵 (about twenty-five miles southwest of modern Ch’ing-chiang-shih 清江市 in Chekiang; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20) and was killed by the troops of Ying Pu. 20 Liang Yü-sheng (33.1370) and Wang Hsien-ch’ien (Han shu pu-chu, 35.4b) both argue for a separate existence of a Wu Commandery in early Han times on the base of two Shih chi passages (18.966 and especially 95.2671). They take “Wu and K’uai-chi” as an expression originating from the time when they were not yet united into one administrative unit. Thereby they refute Ku Yenwu’s argument (cited in Takigawa, 106.2) that the original text should have only read Wu K’uai 吳 會 and also Ch’i Shao-nan’s approach (cited in Han shu pu-chu, ibid.), who interprets Wu K’uai 吳 會 as “Wu’s [capital] K’uai.” 21 “Fickle and ferocious” (ch’ing han 輕悍) seems to be a prominent attribute of the people from the southern regions. Apart from a second crucial appearance in this chapter (Shih chi, 106.2823), the same characterization is found again in the words of the Grand Scribe who accredits them, on top of that, with a fondness of instigating rebellions (hao tso luan 好作亂; Shih chi, 118.3098). 22 According to “So-yin,” the graph 填 has to be understood as chen 鎮, “to secure.” 23 P’ei County is located five miles west of modern Huai-pei 淮北 on the north bank of the River Chü 雎水 in Anhwei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

92

[County] as King of Wu 吳,24 ruling as king over three commanderies25 and fiftythree walled cities. After [Liu P’i] had already been appointed and received the seal, Kao-ti summoned [Liu] P’i to read his face; [Kao-ti] told him: “Your countenance has the appearance of someone who will revolt.” Secretly he regretted [his decision], [but as] he already had appointed [Liu Pi], he took the opportunity to pat his back26 and informed him: “Fifty years after [the founding] of the Han 漢 there will be a rebellion in the southeast, could this really be you?27

24

According to Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”), this took place on the hsin-ch’ou 辛丑 day of the tenth month of the 12th year (30th November 196 B.C.). Wang Shu-min (106.2913) adds further parallels to support this accurate dating. 25 Liang Yü-sheng (33.1370-1) and Sung Chi 宋祁 (998-1061; cited in Takigawa, 106.3) name Tung-yang 東 陽 Commandery, Chang 鄣 Commandery, and Wu Commandery as the three commanderies in question. According to Takigawa (ibid.), Wu and K’uai-chi Commandery were referred to as one unit in this count, since the parallel accounts on Han Shu, 27B.1470 and 45.2169, speak of four commanderies. 26 Yen Shih-ku comments on the Han shu parallel (35.1904), that fu 拊 either means “to pat” or to “hit lightly.” 27 According to Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”), the given time span of fifty years roughly refers to the fifty-three years that lie between the first year of the Han (206 B.C.) and the third year of Ching-ti’s reign (154 B.C.), when the actual rebellion took place. Since this count is in accord with the text (“Fifty years after the Han”), there is no apparent reason to agree with Hung Liang-chi 洪亮吉 (cited in Takigawa, 106.4) who holds against Hsü Kuang that one should only consider the time from the enfeoffment of Liu P’i until the outbreak of the rebellion, i.e. forty-two years according to his calculation. Ju Ch’un (cited in “Chi-chieh”) and also So-yin suggest that Kao-ti’s admonishing address was based on his own reasonable fears that the notoriously disobedient region of Wu and Ch’u was still well prepared to start another rebellion anytime, while Ying Shao (cited in “Chi-chieh”) and Ni Ssu 倪思 (1174-1220; Shih chi p’ing-lin, 106.1b) both point out to reader that the knowledge about the imminent rebellion actually came from some diviners, and Kao-ti himself had just heard about this prophecy, and thus became suspicious. Ying Shao (ibid.) furthermore compares this incident to the time of Ch’in Shih-huang-ti (The First August Emperor of the Ch’in) when an “emanation of a Son of Heaven” (T’ien tzu ch’i 天子 氣) had appeared in the southeast, then announcing the future uprising of Kao-ti himself (see Shih chi, 8.348; Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:17-18). Probably in the year 210 B.C., Ch’in Shih-huang-ti went on his final eastern tour to repress this phenomenon, but with no avail since Kao-ti, the source of this emanation, successfully had gone into hiding. The T’ai-p’ing huan yü chi 太平寰宇記 (Yüeh Shih 樂史 [930-1007], T’ai-p’ing huan yü chi, 15.12b, SKCS) even tells of the construction of a “Tower to Repress the Emanation” (Yen ch’i t’ai 厭氣臺) dedicated to this endeavor. Despite the fact that the text makes an effort to explain Kao-ti’s identification of the presumptive future rebel as simply too late to revocate his installment, Ho Meng-ch’un 何孟春 (1474-1536; Shih chi p’ing-lin, 106.1b-2a) still speculates that Kao-ti simply could not think of any

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

93

Nevertheless those with the same cognomen in the empire are of one family, take care not to revolt!” [Liu] P’i struck his forehead on the ground: “I would not dare [to revolt].” [2822] It happened that during the time of Hsiao Hui 孝惠 (The Filial and Kind [Emperor], 210-188 B.C., r. 195-188) 28 and Kao Hou 高后 (Empress Kao, r. 188-180),29 when the empire was first stabilized, each of the feudal lords in the commanderies and the states was devoted to soothing and comforting his own people. Wu 吳 having copper mountains30 in the Yü-chang Commandery 豫章 郡 , 31 [Liu] P’i thus summoned the fugitives 32 of the empire to come and other way to control Liu P’i, but to actually put him in the ideal position to achieve the foreseen revolt and admonish him afterwards. 28 Liu Ying 劉盈, the only son of Kao-ti and his principal consort Empress Lü, became Heir in 205 and succeeded Kao-ti after his death as emperor. Since he never escaped the domination of his mother, there is no separate chapter in the Shih chi dedicated to his reign (see Shih chi Chapter 9 and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 397-9). 29 Lü Chih 呂雉 was also called after her surname Lü Hou 呂后 (Empress Lü). She was determined to take over power after the death of Kao-ti and the accession of her weak son Hsiao Hui-ti. She succeeded in systematically consolidating her position by establishing two more infant emperors (see Shih chi Chapter 9 [Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:105-144] and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 426-9). 30 According to “Cheng-yi,” T’ung-shan 銅山 [Copper Mountain] is located some twenty miles east of modern Nanking at Chü-jung 句容 County (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24). Shen Ch’in-han (cited in Takigawa, 106.4) refers to an entry in the T’ai-p’ing huan-yü-chi (123.4b, SKCS) that places this mountain some eigthy-five miles east of Chiang-tu 江都 (modern Yang-chou 揚州 in Kiangsu; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:54). Ch’ien Mu (Ti-ming k’ao, pp. 566-7) is listing several other possible identifications each claiming to point to the “Copper Mountain” in question (see also T’ai-ping huan-yü-chi, 91.13b, 94.15b, 94.18b, 105.5a, SKCS). But in accordance with the Chung-hua edition it seems doubtful, whether T’ung-shan 銅山 should be treated in this sentence as any specific toponym. 31 Since Yü-chang Commandery covered most of modern Kiangsi with its seat at modern Nanch’ang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24-25), but was not known to be part of the Wu territory or posses copper mountains, “So-yin” declares the first character yü 豫 to be superfluous and explains the remaining Chang-chün 章 郡 as the place that was later called Ku-chang 故 鄣 (forty miles northwest of modern Hangchow; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24). Mizusawa (106.2) only records variants for the “Chi-chieh” and “So-yin” comments that show that Ku-chang 故鄣 was written Ku-chang 故 章 in some editions. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1371), Takigawa (106.4) and Wang Shu-min (106.1913-4) all agree on this emendation suggesting that the following two occurrences of Yüchang 豫章 in this memoir and an earlier one on Shih chi, 95.2671, should be dealt with in the same way—remarkably none of those emendations are supported by variants in Mizusawa. 32 According to “So-yin” (Shih chi, 89.2571), the term wang ming 亡命 could be understood as “absconding from one’s local registration and flee,” taking ming 命 as ming 名 (registered name).

94

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

illegally33 coin money, and to boil the seawater to produce salt; for that reason there were no taxes and the expenditures of the state were abundant and plentiful.34 Ts’ui Hao (cited in “So-yin,” ibid.) suggests to read the term as wu ming 無名 (to delete one’s entry in the local registration) suggesting it was just a different way to express the idea of fleeing a place. Li Shan 李善 (d. 689) explains wang ming 亡命 as: 犯罪名已定而逃亡避之 “to flee and avoid the name one has already established as a criminal” (see Liu ch’en chu Wen hsüan 六臣注文選, 37.30b-31a, SPTK). “Desperados,” “disobedient people,” “absconders from the local registration,” or just “fugitives”—without neglecting its origin as a probably technical legal term, at least in this chapter the term wang ming appears to be applied with a negative connotation. See the exhaustive note on wang ming 亡命 by William H. Nienhauser, Jr. on Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:1, n. 5]). 33 The Chung-hua edition replaces the graph yi 益 (“to increase,” i.e. “. . . to come [in order to] increase the minting of money”) with tao 盜 (“illegally”) which is the phrasing of the Han shu (35.1904). Wang Nien-sun (cited in Takigawa, 106.5) argues also for this emendation referring to the “Cheng-yi” edition. Wang Shu-min has no entry concerning this problem, while Misusawa (106.2) lists four editions that read yi 益. The Tzu-chih t’ung-chien (14.465) records the passage in question as yi chu ch’ien 以鑄錢 “in order to mint money.” In regard to the fact that at least during the reign of Wen-ti the old Ch’in prohibition regarding the products of mountains and marches (shan tse chih chin 山澤 之禁 ) was not in place (cf. Shih chi 129.3261, for the entry of its abolishment in the year 158 B.C. see Shih chi, 10.432 [Grand Scribe’s Records, 2.179]) and people were obviously allowed to mint money (cf. Shih chi, 30.1419 and also Chia Yi’s 賈 誼 admonishment in the Han shu, 24B.1153), the suggested emendation seems to reflect an ex-post point of view probably influenced by the reign of Wu-ti or later, when the tax system had been already remodeled and the liberal monetary policy of the beginning of the dynasty had become a sacrilege equal to “theft.” The emended phrasing, tao chu ch’ien 盜鑄錢, would in a different context refer to the seemingly uncontrollable problem of illegal [counterfeit] money minting notorious especially at later times—but that would have had rather the opposite effect on Wu’s economy (see Shih chi, 30.1424, 30.1427, 30.1433 and 120. 3110). 34 According to Ju Ch’un (cited in “Chi-chieh”), there were no taxes (fu 賦) on the people due to the profits from the money-minting and the salt production. Irritatingly “Cheng-yi” challenges Ju Ch’un’s explanation, as if Ju Ch’un had claimed that the people keeping their profits from the illegally minted money for themselves(?) could somehow provide the state with abundant wealth, whilst there were no taxes (fu 賦). However, “Cheng-yi” hardly achieves more than to repeat the already given information: 以 山 海 之 利 不 賦 之 ， 故 言 無賦 也 “due to the profits from the mountains and the seas [the King] die not burden [the people] with taxes, therefore it is said: ‘there were no taxes.’” Apart from the odd fact, that only the “Cheng-yi” commentary produces the issue of the people “illegally” (tao 盜) minting money (see note above), both commentaries raise the question of the relation between money minting, the wealth of the Kingdom of Wu, and the taxation system in general. At early Han times there are basically three terms for taxes: tzu 租 and shui 稅 taxes, traditionally associated with land and the cultivation of it, collected to secure the food supply; and fu 賦 taxes, originally corvée labor taxes that should support the military. Although the terms tzu 租 and shui 稅 sometimes are used interchangingly, tzu 租 is foremost used for t’ien tzu 田租, a land

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

95

[2823] When, at the time of Hsiao Wen 孝文 (The Filial and Cultured [Emperor, Liu Heng 劉恆], r. 180-157),35 the Heir of Wu36 entered [the capital] and had an audience [with the Sovereign], he was allowed to wait on the Imperial

tax payable by produce or tax-in-lieu thereof. Lately unearthed documents have furthermore confirmed that there was also a kind of ch’ü 芻 (forage grass) and kao 稾 (straw) tax payable in kind or tax-in-lieu thereof (see Kao Min 高敏, “Lun Hsi-Han ch’ien-ch’i ch’ü, kao shui chih-tu te pien-hua fa-chan” 論西漢前期芻、稾稅制度的變化發展, Cheng-chou Ta-hsüeh hsüeh-pao 鄭州 大學學報 35.4 (2002), pp. 114-6). Shui 稅 are called a multitude of taxes on various properties or products (i.e., carts and boats, salt, produce from mountains and the waters, divers ores, etc.). Fu 賦 refers as a technical term to a group of taxes by capitation: foremost keng fu 更賦, a tax-in-lieu of corvée labor; but also various(?) poll taxes, probably based on different age groups calculated either per head or household attested by terms like suan fu 算賦, k’ou fu 口賦, hu fu 戶賦. Regarding the distribution of the collected taxes, each of the feudal lords would, just as the Son of Heaven, privately support themselves by 山 川 園 池 市 井 租 稅 之 入 “the income from taxes stemming from the mountains and the waters, parks and lakes, and the markets” of their enfeoffments, without sharing those profits with the Emperor (see Shih chi, 30.1418). Although this description of the tax system is questioned by recent archaeological records that indicate local authorities had to pass on a portion of their profits to officers of the central government in early Han times (see Kao Min 高敏, “Kuan-yü Han-tai yu ‘hu-fu’, ‘zhi-ch’ien,’ chi ke-chung k’uangch’an-shui te hsin cheng” 關於漢代有“戶賦”、“質錢”及各種礦產稅的新證, Shih-hsüeh yüehk’an 史學月刊 4 (2003), pp. 121-2), the flourishing of copper ore mining and the salt production could well explain that Wu became a wealthy state from taxing these businesses. Since the local money minting by the fiefdoms was probably not forbidden until 113 B.C (see Shih chi, 30.1434), neither mining, nor minting, nor local taxes involved therein seem to be in conflict with early Han law. Recently unearthed documents, however, underscore the need for further study and differentiation (see Huang Chin-yen 黃今言, Tsung Chang-chia-shan chu-chien k’an Han ch’u te fu-shui cheng-k’e chih-tu 從張家山竹簡看漢初的賦稅征課制度, Shih-hsüeh chi-k’an 史學集刊 2 (2007), pp. 3-10). The sentence yi ku wu fu 以故無賦 “for that reason there were no taxes,” will probably nonetheless remain ambiguous, since it seems not likely that the term fu 賦 was used in this sentence as a strict technical term referring only to a certain tax and even if so, certainly not to the above mentioned group of corvée labor and associated poll taxes in their entirety, because, when the statement that there were no taxes in Wu (wu fu 無賦; Shih chi, 106.2823) is repeated, it can be deduced from the following remark about the fairness of the compensation system that at least the corvée labor tax could not have been abolished in Wu. For a traditional overview of the Han tax system see also Yoshida Torao 吉田虎雄, Ryōkan sozei no kenkyū 兩漢租稅の硏究 [Tōkyō: Daian, 1966], and Nancy Lee Swann, Food and Money in Ancient China [New York: Octagon Books, 1974]. 35 See Shih chi Chapter 8 and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 306-11. 36 According to “So-yin,” the Heir’s praenomen was Hsien 賢, his agnomen Te-ming 德明.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

96

Heir, to drink and play [liu-] po [六]博37 [with him]. The masters and mentors38 of the Heir of Wu were all men of Ch’u,39 fickle and ferocious, further by nature 37

Liu-po 六博 (“Six rods”) is a board game that was feverishly played during the Han dynasty and probably much earlier. Once, immortals, emperors, and probably even commoners played it. Precious boards were placed in tombs and scenes of the games were frequently depicted in stone reliefs and ceramic models. In its heyday even the children in the streets of the capital knew the rules and manuals on the game and tactics by master players existed—but today neither these nor any other coherent description of the game has survived. Although there might have existed some variations of the gaming equipment at different times and places, a typical set of liu-po at Han times would probably have at least comprised the following items: the eponymous six rods, i.e. lengths of split bamboo, one side concave the other even, that were supposedly thrown at some point of the game in combination with or as alternative to one or two eighteen-sided dice; twelve gaming pieces, six black and six white cuboids; a wooden board with its typical TLV-shaped pathways on it; and thirty counting sticks, probably used as chips. How the gaming pieces were moved along the board is still not known, but liu-po seems to have combined elements of both race games and displacement games. Since the archeological finding of a special liu-po divination text in combination with a mirror and a board at Yin-wan 尹灣 in 1993 (see Lien-yün-kang shih po-wukuan 連雲港市博物館 (ed.), Yin-wan Han mu chien-tu 尹灣漢墓簡牘 [Peking: Chung-hua, 1997]) even more attention has been devoted to understand the divinatory cosmic and calendrical dimensions of the game and the interpretation of its intriguing design that is supposed to present the whole cosmos. Against this background a game of liu-po between the Heir Apparent and the Heir of Wu could on some level have had “cosmic” significance—a decisive battle between two imperial bloodlines that ended with the doom of Wu. For a well-balanced introduction see Colin Mackenzie, “Liubo: The Five-Hundred-Year Craze,“ Colin Mackenzie and Irving Finkel, eds., Asian Games. The Art of Contest [New York: Asia Society, 2004], pp. 113-25; for the relation to the TLF-mirrors see Lillian Lan-ying Tseng [ 曾 藍 瑩 ], “Representation and Appropiation: Rethinking the TLV Mirror in Han China,” Early China 29 (2004), pp. 163-215; for the daemonic dimensions see Röllicke, Hermann Josef: “Von ‘Winkelwegen’, ‘Eulen’ und ‘Fischziehen’- liubo: ein altchinesisches Brettspiel für Geister und Menschen,” Board Game Studies 2 (1999), pp. 24-41; for a classic (pre-Yin-wan) study see Fu Juyou 傅舉有, “Lun Ch’in Han Shih-ch’i te po-chü, po-hsi chien-chi po-chü wen-ching” 論秦漢時期的博局、博戲兼及博局紋鏡, K’ao-ku hsüeh-pao 考古 學報 1 (1986), pp. 21-42. [The translator of this memoir would like to use this opportunity to express his deep gratitude to all members of the Shih-chi Group, especially the Editor, Enno Giele, Lu Zongli and Liu Ying for their bibliographic assistance regarding this note on liu-po and their careful comments on the translation.] 38 The term shih fu 師傅 could either refer to instructors in general or be a collective name for Grand Masters (T’ai-shih 太師) and Grand Tutors (T’ai-fu 太傅). 39 Since the Masters and Tutors of the Heir Ch’ien would be expected to be men from Wu, Ch’ien Ta-hsin 錢大昕 (1728-1804; cited in Takigawa, 106.5) explains the reference to them as “men of Ch’u” by pointing out that the text uses an anachronistic term from the times of the warring states, when Wu and Yüeh were still part of the former Ch’u. Thus Wu and Ch’u are different names but they are in fact—at least in the mind of the Grand Scribe—one area of origin. Ch’ien Ta-hsin also points at the passage above where the text refers to the area of “Wu 吳 and

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

97

arrogant40; while playing [liu-]po, [the Heir of Wu] contended for the lines on the board,41 acting without respect, so that the Imperial Heir used the [liu-]po-board to throw at42 the Heir of Wu, and killed him. At this his coffin was sent back [to Wu] for burial. When it arrived in Wu 吳, the King of Wu was angry43 and said: “The Empire are those belonging to the same clan44; he died in Ch’ang-an 長安, he should be buried in Ch’ang-an, how could there be any need to have him brought here for burial?”45 He sent the coffin back to Ch’ang-an to be buried.46 From this [moment] on the King of Wu gradually neglected the proper rites of a vassal on the frontier, claimed to be ill, and did not pay his respects at the court [of the Emperor]. Throughout the capital it became known that it was because of his son that he claimed to be ill and did not pay his respects at the court,47 so upon an investigation it was found out that he was really not ill, and all the envoys from Wu were upon their arrival tied up at once, to be interrogated and tried [for complicity]. The King of Wu was afraid [of these developments], he plotted ever more excessively. And when he later sent somebody to pay his

K’uai-chi 會稽” (Shih chi 106.2821) and to Chu Mai-ch’en 朱買臣, who came from Wu, but was called a “scholar from Ch’u,” ch’u shih 楚士 (Shih chi, 122.3143). 40 Cf. also the address of Yüan Ang on Shih chi, 101.2738, (Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:330-1) where the revolting King of Huai-nan is described in the same terms. 41 The term cheng tao 爭道 recalls an earlier liu-po encounter between the Assassin-Retainer Ching K’o 荊軻 and Lu Kou-chien 魯句踐. In contrast to the Heir of Wu, Ching K’o did not engage in a fight, but silently fled the scene (see Shih chi, 86.2527 [Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:326], and n. 65 on Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:106). 42 Wang Shu-min (106.2914) elaborates on the gloss on the Han shu parallel and argues in reference to an identical explanation cited in “So-yin” (Shih chi, 57.2072) that t’i 提 should be understood as chih 擲, “to throw” (see Han shu, 35.1905). 43 According to “Cheng-yi,” yün 慍 means “resentment” (yüan 怨), while Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 35.1905) explains it as “anger” (nu 怒). 44 According to Takigawa (106.5), the King of Wu refers with this choice of words to the speech of the Emperor given before (“Nevertheless those with the same cognomen in the empire are of one family, take care not to revolt!”). The Han shu parallel reads: T’ien hsia yi tsung 天下一 宗 “The Empire is only one clan” (35.1904) and Yen Shi-ku (ibid.) comments that this was another way of saying that: 同姓共為一家 “those of the same cognomen are together one family.” 45 Reading the final wei 為 with Wang Shu-min (106.2914) as hu 乎. Han Shu (35.1904) omits this problematic final particle. 46 Following Takigawa’s syntax and reading chih 之 as chih 至 this sentence would read: “He sent the coffin back, [and when] it reached Chang’an, it was buried [there].” 47 The Han shu (35.1904) prefers to omit “that he claimed to be ill and did not pay his respects at the court” from this part of the sentence.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

98

respect at the autumn homage,48 the Sovereign again cross-examined the envoy from Wu, and the envoy replied: “The King is not really ill, but as the Han tied up and tried several parties of [his] envoys, he therefore subsequently claimed to be ill.49 Furthermore [it is said:] ‘To inspect closely the fish in the depths is not auspicious.’50 Now, first the King feigned to be ill, [but] when this was revealed, he was fiercely investigated and became more and more reticent, and when he feared that the Sovereign would execute him, [his] plans only then [resulted in] desperate measures. If only the Sovereign would abandon him and gave him a new start.” At this the Son of Heaven then pardoned the envoy from Wu, let him return, and bestowed upon the King of Wu an armrest and a cane, [the privileges of] being old, and not having to pay his respects at court. When Wu was granted absolution from its offenses, 51 the plotting became merely 52 more relaxed. However, since [Liu P’i] governed the state53 with [the profits from its] copper 48

According to “So-yin,” Ying Shao (cited in “Chi-chieh”) has no apparent basis for his claim that: 冬當斷獄，秋先請擇其輕重也．“In winter [the cases] should be judged, in autumn one should beforehand request to assess the gravity [of the transgression].” Ju Ch’un’s explanation that Liu P’i could not go himself (or as the Han Shu, 35.1905, has transmitted his comment “did not go himself“) and sent somebody to take his place is likewise—at least according to “So-yin—a mere conjecture, since all the text says is, that: 使人為此秋請之禮 “he made someone perform this ritual of an autumnal homage.” 49 The Han shu (35.1905) once again prefers not to mention the pretended illness oft he King of Wu and omits this whole sentence. 50 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”) offers the reader the meaning of this saying in form of a straight rule: the ruler should not look completely into the secret affairs of his subordinates. Fu Ch’ien merely repeats in his comments on Han shu (35.1905) that it was not auspicious, if the Son of Heaven did so. And only Wei Chao (cited in “So-yin”) names the possible harm that will result from any excessive scrutiny: 知臣下陰私，使憂患生變，為不祥。故當赦宥，使自新也。 “If [the ruler] knows the hidden and secret affairs of his servants and subordinates, and makes them worry that they will bring forth rebellion, this is not auspicious. Therefore he should pardon them and let them [have] a new start by themselves.” For further occurrences of this saying the “So-yin” commentary refers the reader to the Han Fei Tzu (7.11a, SPPY) and the Wen Tzu (no verbatim quote, presumably A.11a, SPPY: 夫水濁者，魚噞。政苛者，民亂.“Now, if the water is cloudy, the fish will [come to the surface and] breathe. If the policies are rigorous, the people will be in disorder.”), whereas Shen Ch’in-han (cited in Takigawa, 106.6) additionally points to the Lieh Tzu (see Ch’ung hsü chih te chen ching 沖虛至德真經, 8.29a, SPTK). 51 Wang Shu-min (106.2914) suggests with reference to the Han Shu parallel (35.1905) and Takigawa’s notes (106.6) to emend the graph tsui 罪 (“offenses”) from the sentence. Cf. also Mizusawa (106.3) for the editions in support of this argument. 52 Reading yi 亦 as pu kuo 不過. 53 The Grand Scribe’s words on Shih chi, 89.2586, (Grand Scribe’s Records, 8.25) suggest that the term ch’i chü kuo 其居國 could alternatively translated as “But in the state he [i.e. Liu P’i] resided in there were—due to [its] copper and salt—no taxes on the people.”

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

99

and salt, there were no taxes on the people.54 Whenever [conscripts] fulfilled corvée labor in place of others, they always were immediately given a regular compensation.55 According to the proper season of the year56 he presented his greetings to the luxuriant talents and distributed rewards in the living quarters. Whenever functionaries from other commanderies and states wished to come and arrest fugitives, he would dispute the common prohibitions [with them], and not

54 According to “So-yin,” there were no further corvée labor or taxes (yao fu 徭賦) imposed on the people of Wu due to the profits from the money minting and the salt production. 55 According to “Cheng-yi,” originally everybody in the empire, up to the son of the Chancellor, had to serve his three month corvée labor at the frontier when it was his turn. But those who preferred to pass on their turn could offer a fee to the office and find a replacement for themselves, which was called kuo keng 過更. Those among the people who volunteered to serve were called chien keng 踐更. According to “So-yin,” Liu P’i wanted to win the heart of the people and thus paid them a regular compensation for their temporary service. The term p’ing chia 平賈 might thus either denote a “wage [adjusted to the demand of a certain] point of time” (shih chia 時價), as Nakai Sekitoku (cited in Takigawa, 106.7) suggests, or it might point out that this was meant to “balance” the expenditures of the temporary service offered by the replacement (see Su Lin’s 蘇林 gloss on the term in Han shu, 29.1690)—probably something that would later be called a yung chih 庸直 (also: 傭值) like Yen Shih-ku adds (Han Shu, 35.1905). 56 “At certain times each year” might be another way to treat sui shih 歲 時 . The above translation emphasizes the idea that when making inquiries it is important to choose the proper time (cf. Han shu, 4.113). Having the advice of the envoy from Wu still in mind, this short sentence is part of a comparison of the two rulers, the Emperor and the King of Wu. In a certain way they are treated just as two kingdoms—which might explain why the text refers to them only as Han and Wu.

100

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

hand [the fugitives] over.57 More than forty years passed like this58 and therefore [Liu P’i] was able to command his people.59 [2824] When Ch’ao Ts’o was made Prefect of the Household of the Heir, he won favor with the Heir and enticingly60 spoke several times of Wu’s committed transgressions and that it was permissible to seize [some of its territory]. He several times submitted memorials advising Hsiao Wen-ti [to seize territory], [but] Wen-ti was tolerant and could not bear to punish [Wu], and, because of this Wu daily became more and more overbearing. When it came to Hsiao Ching-ti 孝景帝 (The Filial and Luminous Emperor, Liu Chi 劉啓], r. 157-141 B.C.) ascending the throne, [Ch’ao] Ts’o was made Grandee Secretary, and he advised the Sovereign: “In former times when Kao-ti had first stabilized the empire, his brothers were few, and all [his own] sons were young [*2825*], so he widely enfeoffed [those] of the same cognomen; therefore, he made a king61 the son of a concubine, King Tao-hui 悼惠 [Liu Fei 劉肥],62 becoming the king of more than seventy walled cities of Ch’i, his younger brother of a secondary wife, King

57 Takigawa (106.7) admits not to be able to decide whether this sentence should read in accordance with “Cheng-yi”: “he would accommodate them and under all circumstances forbid the extradition so that they were not handed over” or like Ju Ch’un suggests: “he would, relying on the common prohibitions, not hand them over.” But instead of pondering the options of substituting the decisive graph 訟 with either jung 容 (“accommodate”) or kung 公 (“common”), the translation tries to work with Hsü Kuang’s gloss (cited in “Chi-chieh,” 106.2824) who suggested to preserve the given sung 訟 (“to dispute“). The Han shu (35.1905) reads sung 頌 (“praise”) only to be glossed by Ju Ch’un (ibid.) as kung 公, and by Yen Shih-ku as jung 容. 58 According to “Cheng-yi,” Ssu-ma Ch’ien intentionally refers to all the events in the life of the King of Wu with the time span of forty years and not just the events during the reign of Wen-ti. Thus, when Pan Ku deducted ten years from this count on the Han shu parallel (35.1905), it seems that he did not understand the idea behind this number, as “Cheng-yi” boldly remarks. But since Liu P’i himself later refers to his more than thirty years of preparation (Shih chi, 106.2828), at least Liang Yü-sheng (33.127) suggests that one should adhere to Pan Ku’s decision–and rather even out the subtle difference between the Grand Scribe’s account and the rhetoric of the King of Wu. 59 This ability to make use of his people is repeated once more in the words of the Grand Scribe at the end of this memoir. 60 For another instance of the compound ts’ung-jung 從容 in the sense of “to entice“ see Shih chi, 118.3095 and 118.3096. 61 Li Li 李笠 (1894-1962; cited in Takigawa, 106.8) suggests that wang 王, “to make into kings,” should be deleted from this sentence like Pan Ku did on the Han shu parallel (35.1906). 62 Liu Fei 劉肥 was the eldest son of Kao-tsu born by a secondary concubine called Lady Ts’ao 曹 (Shih chi, 52.1999). For further biographical information see his biography in Shih chi Chapter 52 and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 295-6.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

101

Yüan 元 [Liu Chiao 劉交], 63 becoming king of more than forty walled cities of Ch’u,64 and the son of his elder brother, [Liu] P’i, becoming king of more than fifty walled cities of Wu 吳; he enfeoffed three of [his distant] relatives and [thus] split of half of the empire. Now the King of Wu, as there was formerly a rift concerning his Heir, falsely claimed that he was ill and did not pay his respects at court; according to the old laws he should have been executed, [but] as Wen-ti could not bear this, he took the opportunity to bestow upon him a resting table and a staff. 65 [Wen-ti’s] virtuous behavior being so generous, [the King of Wu] should have corrected his transgressions and started over fresh. Only then did he become more and more arrogant and complacent; he approached the mountains66 to mint money, boiled the seawater to produce salt, lured the fugitives of the empire, and plotted to instigate a rebellion. Now if one seizes it [his territory], he will likewise revolt; if one does not seize it, he will likewise revolt. If one seizes it [his territory], his revolt will be immediate, but the calamity will be small; if one does not seize it, the revolt will be late, [but] the calamity will be great.” In the winter of the third year [155 B.C.], when the King of Ch’u 楚 [Liu Wu 劉戊] paid his respects at court, Ch’ao Ts’o took advantage to report that the year before [Liu] Wu [劉]戊,67 the King of the Ch’u, while in mourning because of 63 Liu Chiao 劉交 was the talented younger son of Kao-tsu born by a secondary concubine (Shih chi, 50.1987). He was respected for his studies of the Book of Songs and referred to as an experienced counselor by his cousin, the later Wen-ti. See also his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 319. 64 Despite the fact that Pan Ku reports the same amount of cities on the Han Shu parallel (35.1906), Liang Yü-sheng (33.1371) and Wang Shu-min (106.2915) both prefer the count on Shih chi, 51.1994, where Liu Chiao was made King over only thirty-six walled cities. 65 The “resting table” (chi 几) is a low table to lean on when sitting on mats. These ritual gifts to Liu P’i were already once mentioned on Shih chi, 10.433 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:180) as an example of Wen-ti’s tolerant reign and were meant to indicate that the King of Wu due to his age did not have to come to court anymore. The King of Huainan, a later rebel, is also given a “resting table and a staff” for the same purpose (Shih chi, 118.3083). 66 While “So-yin” does not take a side, whether to treat the chi 即 in this sentence as part of a toponym, “Mount Chi,” or just as a verb, “to approach” (chiu 就), Takigawa (106.8-9) and Wang Shu-min (106.2915) both agree that the latter solution is correct. 67 Liu Wu 劉戊 was the grandson of Kao-tsu’s younger brother Liu Chiao 劉交, King Yüan of Ch’u. He acceded to the throne in 175 and later joined the rebellion of the King of Wu. See also his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 366-7. While the Shih chi, 50.1987, introduces his grandfather Liu Chiao 劉交 as the younger brother of the same mother, the Han shu, 36.1921, prefers to present him as a younger brother of a different mother.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

102

the [death of] Po T’ai-hou 薄 太 后 (Empress Dowager Po), 68 secretly had intercourse in the mourning house, 69 and requested to execute him. [The Emperor] by decree pardoned him, but punished him by seizing Tung-hai Commandery 東海郡.70 He then took advantage [of the situation] and seized Wu’s Yü-chang Commandery and K’uai-chi Commandery.71 When two years earlier the King of Chao 趙 [Liu Sui 劉遂]72 had committed an offense, [the Emperor] seized his Ho-chien Commandery 河閒郡.73 As [Liu] Ang [劉]卬, the King of Chiao-hsi 膠西,74 had committed villainy in selling off official titles, he seized six of his counties.

68

Po T’ai-hou was the mother of Liu Heng 劉恆, the future Wen-ti. She followed her son to Tai when he was king there and was given the title Tai T’ai-hou 代太后. She died in 155, after the death of Wen-ti. See her biography on Shih chi, 49.1970-2, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 14-15. 69 According to Fu Ch’ien (cited in “Chi-chieh”), he secretly had intercourse in the palace. But Yen Shih-ku (Han Shu, 35.1906) argues that the intercourse took place in the mourning chambers. 70 Tung-hai Commandery 東海郡 is located at the border of Kiangsu and Shantung spreading landwards from the sea at the height of modern Lien-yün-kang 連雲港 about one hundred miles deep and sixty miles high (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19-20). 71 K’uai-chi Commandery covered most of modern Kiangsu and part of Chekiang, basically spreading east of the Yangtze to the sea with its seat at modern Soochow (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:2425). The Han shu (35.1906) omits the whole sentence. 72 Liu Sui 劉遂 was Kao-tsu’s grandson, son of Liu Yu 劉友 (d. 181 B.C.), King Yu 幽 of Chao. For further information see his biography on Shih chi, 50.1989-9, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 363. 73 Ho-chien Commandery is located at the western border of Chao in modern Hopei spreading between the Ho and the Chang River 漳 towards the sea. Its seat was at Le-ch’eng 樂城 about one hundred miles east of modern Shih-chia-chuang 石家莊 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27). But as “So-yin” points out, on Han shu, 35.1906, it is said that the King of Chao actually loses Ch’ang-shan 常山 Commandery that is located in the west of Chao in modern Hopei spreading north and south of modern Shih-chia-chuang 石家莊 about seventy miles (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26). Liang Yü-sheng (1372) and Takigawa (106.9) both argue with reference to Han shu (ibid.) and Shih chi (20.1989) that this should have been Ch’ang-shan Commandery, since Ching-ti’s son Liu Te 劉德 was made King of Ho-chien in 155 B.C. (see Shih chi, 59.2093). Wang Shu-min (106.2916) supports their argument by adding that the Tzu-chih t’ung-chien (16.517) also reads Ch’ang-shan Commandery. 74 Liu Ang 劉卬 was Kao-tsu’s grandson, son of Liu Fei 劉肥, King Tao-hui 悼惠 of Ch’i 齊. He had been the Marquis of P’ing-ch’ang 平昌 until he was made King of Chiao-hsi in 164 B.C. See also his biography on Shih chi, 52.2011-2, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 244-5.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

103

The Han court officials were just at this time discussing seizing [territory] of Wu.75 The King of Wu, [Liu] P’i [劉]濞, feared that the seizing of territory would have no end, and he took advantage of this to start his plotting, as he wanted set events in motion. As he was thinking that there was no one among the feudal lords worthy to plan and plot with, he heard that the King of Chiao-hsi was brave, spirited, and fond of warfare, that the various [states] of Ch’i76 all dreaded him and were in awe of him; only at that point did he send the Palace Grandee Ying Kao 應高 to tempt77 the King of Chiao-hsi. [Ying Kao] had no official document, but orally reported to him78: “The King of Wu is worthless, he has worries [that some calamity will reach him] in a very short period of time,79 and does not dare not to presume upon your friendship, so he sent me to express his 75

Chao Yi 趙翼 (1727-1814; cited in Takigawa, 106.9) wonders how this sentence could fit into the line of events: First the reader learns that Wu loses the “Yü-chang Commandery and K’uaichi Commandery”, then the court is “just discussing a reduction of the territory of Wu”, and further down the rebellion starts, when the “letter declaring the cutting away of Wu’s K’uai-chi and Yüchang Commandery” arrives. One possibility to give meaning to this disruption in the storyline is to believe like Feng Pan 馮班 (1602-1670, cited in Takigawa, ibid.) that it was an incredible mistake to downsize all those kingdoms at the same time, while at that moment only Wu held a grudge against the center. If the court had understood to isolate Wu—instead of spreading discontent all over the empire, the whole rebellion could easily have been controlled before it even had spread. Without those recent associates Wu would probably never have revolted. Since Nakai Sekitoku (cited in Takigawa, ibid.) has no trouble with this last sentence (“The Han court officials were just discussing a reduction…”), one might get the idea that the hereby initiated flashback was probably intended to tell once more the events just before the outbreak of the rebellion—but from a Wu perspective. 76 As Wei Chao (cited in “Chi-chieh”) recalls, Wen-ti had divided up the former Kingdom of Ch’i among his six sons creating the following states: Ch’i, Chi-pei. Chi-nan, Tzu-ch’uan, Chiaohsi and Chiao-nan. The Han shu (35.1908.1) even reads chu hou 諸侯 (“the feudal lords) for chu Ch’i 諸齊 (“the various [states] of Ch’i”). 77 Takigawa (106.10) refers the reader to a Shuo-wen gloss that explains the graph t’iao 誂 as: hsiang hu yu 相呼誘 “to call for and tempt each other.” 78 The Han shu (35.1907) omits this whole sentence. 79 Takigawa (106.10) treats the term su hsi 宿夕 as interchangeable with su hsi 宿昔, “[worries] from former days” or “long-lasting [worries].” Han shu (35.1907) substitutes the term with su ye 夙 夜, “day and night.” Wang Li-ch’i (106.2252) understands the term in the sense of “[the very short time between] night and dusk,” i.e., “a very short period of time” (comparable to tan hsi 旦夕). This expression of desperation might recall a dialogue between the King of Chao 趙 and the erudite Cheng T’ung 鄭同 in the Chan-kuo ts’e that records the King’s persuasion to finally resort to warfare, when he was facing greedy states coveting his land (see Chan-kuo ts’e ch’iao chu 戰國策 校注, 6.48a; translation by James Irving Crump, Chan-Kuo ts’e [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970], p. 327).

104

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

highest regards for you.”80 The King [of Chiao-hsi] said: “How does he wish to instruct me?” [Ying] Kao said: “Now the Ruling Sovereign is driven by evil [persons], he is deceived by pernicious ministers, he loves petty advantages, he listens to the slanderous scoundrels, he alters the laws and ordinances without any authority, he invades and takes the territory of the feudal lords away, and as the requests to seek [more territory] become even more frequent, he executes and punishes the excellent and good, and daily he becomes more extreme [in his actions]. There is common saying, ‘By licking away the husk you can get the grain.’81 Wu and Chiao-hsi are famous among the feudal lords; once they are investigated, [the King of Wu] is afraid that they will not be able to enjoy peace and indulgence. [*2826*] As the King of Wu himself has within his body an internal disease, 82 he was not able to pay his respects at court in spring and autumn for more than twenty years83; often has he worried that if he would come under suspicion, he had no way to explain himself. Now he slouches his shoulders and minces his steps [afraid to make a wrong move], all the more frightened that he will not be absolved. [The King of Wu] has privately heard that you, Great King, happened to have been punished due to some affair concerning orders; in all known cases where feudal lords have been seized [some of their] territory, the offenses were not sufficient for this [action], and like this [the King of Wu] is afraid that he [will not get away with] just some seizing of [his] territory.” The King [of Chiao-hsi] said: “So, yes, there is [such a thing]. Sir, what are you going to do about this?” Kao [Ying] said: “Those with a common disdain help each other out, those with a common preference preserve it for each other, those with a common emotion fulfill [their intention] for each other, those with a common desire will race at it for each other, those with a

80 The term huan hsin 驩 心 seems to be the euphemistic expression for the intent of [preserving] friendly relations with one’s rivals, as can be learned from the letter of King Chao of Ch’in who lured the King of Ch’u into an ambush. Especially noteworthy is the repeated use of the term huan 驩 in the rhetoric of the King of Ch’in (see Shih chi, 40.1727-8; Grand Scribe’s Records, 5.1:430). Takigawa (106.10) understands the term as “having no other [agenda] in mind” (wu t’a hsin 無他心). 81 According to “So-yin,” this is a simile suggesting that just like after the husk is gone you will get to the grain, one will first cut away territory from a state to approach its complete annihilation. 82 According to Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 35.1908), such an “inner disease” would not show on the outside, which obviously made it hard to attest. 83 According to the entries in the tables the King of Wu had paid his respect at court in the years 190 B.C., 188 B.C. (Shih chi, 17.815), and 177 B.C. (Shih chi, 17.829).

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

105

common profit will die for each other.84 Now the King of Wu himself surmises that he shares with you, Great King, a common grief; he wishes to take advantage of the moment and adhere to reason, to abandon [his] life in order to remove the disturbing harm from the empire, would you reckon this is likewise permissible?”85 The King was stunned and said terrified:86 “How could We dare to act like this? Even if today the Ruling Sovereign is treating [Us] rashly, it is just necessarily so that [We] will meet death,87 [but] how could [We] not oblige him?” 88 [Ying] Kao said: “The Grandee Secretary Ch’ao Ts’o is blinding and confusing the Son of Heaven, he [Ch’ao Ts’o] is invading and taking away [the territory] of the feudal lords, he is shielding off the loyal and blocking the worthy; as the court is loathing and resenting him and the feudal lords all have the intention of turning away [from the Emperor] and revolting, the rebellious affairs amongst men have reached a climax. A comet has appeared and locusts have several times risen [in swarms]; this is a unique moment in ten thousand generations where the worries and toils will give rise to a sage.89 Thus the King 84

Takigawa (106.11) and Wang Shu-min (106.2917) both argue that the Han shu parallel that reads t’ung ch’ing hsiang ch’iu 同情相求 (“those with a common emotion aid each other”) is inferior to the Shih chi version of this saying, since ch’iu 求 unlike ch’eng 成 does not rhyme with ch’ing 情 and thus breaks the euphonic pattern found in the other four sentences. Since there are almost identical phrasings of the principles conveyed in these maxims in other transmitted texts (cf. Liu t’ao 六韜, 2.1b, SPTK, Huai-nan Tzu 淮南子 15.3b-4a, SPTK, and T’ung hsüan chen ching 通玄真經, 8.9, SPTK), Kao Ying seems to appeal to common military sense at this stage of the dialogue. 85 Although Wang Shu-min (106.2917) citing Wang Nien-sun argues to read yi yi 億亦 as yi yi 抑亦 (“but”), Takigawa still prefers to understand the graph yi 億 as tu 度 (“to figure”). 86 According to “So-yin,” the graph chü 瞿 is glossed in the Shuo-wen 說文 as yüan shih mao 遠視貌, “gazing into the distance.” The only Shuo-wen gloss the translator could locate in the transmitted text reads ying sun chi shih 鷹隼之視, “gazing like an eagle or falcon” (see Shuo-wen chieh-tzu 說文解字, 4A.7b, SPTK). Wang Shu-min (106.2917) takes chü 瞿 as a loan character for chü [䀠/夰] that is glossed chü mu ching 舉目驚 “to raise one’s eyes in surprise” (see Shuo-wen chieh-tzu 說文解字, 10B.4a, SPTK). 87 Compare the following thought from Shih chi, 75.2362 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:200): 生 者必有死，物之必至也；富貴多士，貧賤寡友，事之固然也. “That which lives is sure to meet death. This is a thing which is sure to arrive. The rich and the noble have many knights, the poor and base have few friends. This is a matter which is necessarily so.” 88 Takigawa (106.11) and Wang Shu-min (106.2918) both agree to understand the graph tai 戴 in the sense of the Han Shu (35.1907) that reads shih 事, “to serve.” instead of tai 戴. 89 According to “So-yin” this sentence refers to something called 殷憂以啓明聖 “deep griefs will give rise to bright sages” an almost verbatim quote from Liu Hun’s 劉琨 (270-317) Ch’üan chin piao 勸進表 (Memorial advising to advance; see Liu ch’en chu Wen-hsüan 六臣注文選,

106

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

of Wu intends, with regard to the capital, to take Ch’ao Ts’o [as the reason] to lead a punitive campaign, with regard to the provinces, to follow you, Great King, in a chariot of [your] entourage, and to sweep all over the empire, so that those we face will surrender and those we point at will submit, and nobody in the empire would dare to not obey. If you, Great King, sincerely favor this and would give just one word of consent, then the King of Wu would lead the King of Ch’u to overrun the Han-ku Pass 函谷關,90 guard the grain of the Ao 敖 Granary at Hsing-yang 滎陽, 91 and hold off the Han troops. He would build campsites and shelters and wait for you, Great King. In the case that you, Great King, would favor and overlook this [enterprise], then the empire could be annexed and split up between the two rulers, wouldn’t that be permissible?“ The King said: “Well put.” [Ying] Kao returned and reported to the King of Wu, [but] the King of Wu still was afraid that [the King of Chiao-hsi] would not join [his enterprise], and only then did he make himself his own envoy, go on a mission to Chiao-hsi, and, face to face, conclude it [i.e, their agreement]. [2827] One of the assembled vassals of Chiao-hsi heard about the King’s plotting, and admonished him saying: “To obey just one emperor is the greatest happiness. Now you, Great King, and Wu are facing west, and even if the affair would be successful, when the two rulers would separately strive [for the empire], then the distress would start piling up. The territory of the feudal lords is not even enough to constitute two tenths of the Han commanderies, hence to revolt and commit treason only to worry the Queen Dowager, 92 is not an excellent plan.”93 The King [of Chiao-hsi] did not listen to him. Subsequently, he 37.35a, SPTK) that according to the traditional Wen-hsüan commentators is best understood in the light of the wailing of an earlier worthy officer who was neglected by his ruler (see Mao #26 [Legge, 4:38]: 耿耿不寐如有隱憂 “Disturbed am I, and sleepless, as if suffering from a painful wound.”) and Lu Wen-shu’s 路温舒 (fl. 66 B.C.) thesis that times of calamities and disorder could pave the way for new rulers of wisdom (see Han shu, 51.2368). 90 The Han-ku Pass is located fifteen miles west of modern Loyang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 91 The Ao Granary was in Honan on the south bank of the Ho ten miles north of Hsing-yang 滎 陽 that is located fifteen miles northwest of modern Chengchow 鄭州 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2. 16). The Granary and Hsing-yang were of immense strategic importance for anyone who wished to control northern China. 92 According to Wen Ying 文穎 (cited in “Chi-chieh”), t’ai hou 太后 refers to the Queen Dowager of the King. 93 The Han shu (35.1908) remodels the whole speech: 諸侯地不能為漢十二，為叛逆以憂太 后，非計也．今承一帝，尚云不易，假令事成，兩主分爭，患乃益生．“The territory of the feudal lords is not even enough to constitute two tenths of Han, to revolt and commit treason only to worry the Queen dowager, is not a plan. Now, one obeys just one emperor, you often said this is

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

107

sent out envoys to conclude agreements with Ch’i, Tzu-ch’uan 菑川, Chiao-tung 膠東, Chi-nan 濟南, and Chi-bei 濟北,94 and they all consented, and he said: “King Ching 景 of Ch’eng-yang 城陽 [Liu Chang 劉章]95 had moral principles, when the Lüs 呂 were attacked, he did not participate, so when the affair is settled, we split up [his territory].”96 When the feudal lords had already just recently received the punishment of seizing [their territory], they were aroused to fear, and mostly harbored resentment against Ch’ao Ts’o. When then the letter [confirming] the cutting away of Wu’s K’uai-chi and Yü-chang commanderies arrived, the King of Wu was the first to raise [his] troops; on the ping-wu 丙午 day of the first month [28th February 154 B.C.], Chiao-hsi97 executed the Han officers of the rank of two thousand shih and lower; Chiao-tung, Tzu-ch’uan, Chi-nan, Ch’u and Chao did also the same, and subsequently mobilized their troops moving west. The King of Ch’i had regrets afterwards, drank poison to kill himself, and betrayed the agreement.98 The city walls of the King of Chi-pei [Liu Chih 劉志]99 being in not to be changed [according to the gloss on Tzu-chih t’ung-chien (16.519): to obey just one emperor, you often said is not easy], and even if the affair would be successful, when the two rulers would separately strive [for the empire], then [your] distress would grow increasingly.” 94 According to Wang Shu-min (106.2918), the Han shu (35.1908) erroneously omits Chi-bei from this list. 95 Liu Chang 劉章 (d. 176 B.C.) had been appointed King of Ch’eng-yang in reward for his merits in the fight against the Lü Clan, but was already dead by the time of the rebellion, when his son Liu Hsi 劉 喜 was King Kung 恭 of Ch’eng-yang as Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) truthfully remarks. The Han shu (35.1909) thus omits the whole speech, starting with “and he said: . . .” But Liu Ch’en-weng 劉辰翁 (1232-1297; cited in Shih chi p’ing-lin, 106.6a) argues convincingly that this address was meant to persuade those among the Kings hesitating to join the rebellion by pointing out the consequences of a refusal on their behalf. 96 The Han shu (35.1909) omits this direct speech completely and ends the sentence after “. . . and they all consented.” 97 The Han shu (35.1909) omits “on the ping-wu 丙午 day of the first month [28th February 154 B.C.] Chiao-hsi,” thus suggesting it was the King of Wu, who had the Han officers executed. 98 While Takigawa (106.13) argues in accord with the Han shu parallel (pei yüeh ch’eng shou 背約城守; 35.1909) says: pei yüeh ch’eng shou 背約城守) that the King of Ch’i at that time only betrayed the agreement, defended his city, and actually took his own life after the troops of Wu had already been defeated, Wang Shu-min (106.2919) points out that Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s line of events at least fits the memorial of Mei Sheng 枚乘 very well (see his Shang shu ch’ung chien Wu wang 上 書重諫呉王, Liu ch’en chu Wen-hsüan 六臣注文選, 39.24a, SPTK). Liang Yü-sheng’s (26.1156) argues along this line in favor of the Shih chi version, which consequently disavows the whole anecdote on Shih chi, 52.2006, where the reader learns that the King of Ch’i was already on the verge of collaborating with the besieging Kings—as originally agreed before the rebellion—but

108

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

decay and [repair] having not been completed, his Prefect of the Gentlemen-ofthe-Palace kidnapped and guarded his own King, so he could not sent out troops. Chiao-hsi acted as the chief leader and, together with Chiao-tung, Tzu-ch’uan, and Chi-nan, attacked and besieged Lin-tzu 臨菑.100 [Liu] Sui, the King of Chao, also revolted and secretly sent [envoys] to the Hsiung-nu so that they would join forces with him. When the Seven Kingdoms mobilized [their troops], the King of Wu employed all of his officers and men, he issued a command within his state that said: “We are sixty-two years of age, yet We will ourself lead [the troops] in person, [Our] youngest son is fourteen years of age, he will also be at the front of [Our] officers and men. All men of an age at most comparable to Us and at least equal to [Our] youngest son, should all be mobilized.” He mobilized more than twenty thousand men. To the south [the King of Wu] sent [envoys] to the Minyüeh 閩越 and the Tung-yüeh 東越, and the Tung-yüeh also mobilized troops to follow [him]. [2828] On the chia-tzu 甲子 day of the first month of the third year (154 B.C.) of Hsiao Ching-ti,101 [the King of Wu] first raised troops at Kuang-ling 廣

then decided otherwise on the news of the approaching Han troops. When after the battle he had to face the questions about his original intentions, the King of Ch’i preferred to take his own life. 99 Liu Chih 劉志 (d. 129 B.C.) was another son of Liu Fei 劉肥. He could avoid recriminations following the suppression of the rebellion due to his failure to send out troops with the other rebels in time. Afterwards he was merely transferred to the smaller Kingdom of Tzu-chuan (see also Shih chi, 52.2011, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 407-8). 100 The capital of Ch’i was located seventy-five miles west of modern Tsinan in Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). Nakai Sekitoku (cited in Takigawa, 106.14) rightfully wonders, whether Chi-nan did not join the siege of Lin-tzu, because according to the later account on Shih chi, 106.2835, there were only three kings involved. 101 According to Hsü Hsi-ch’i (2:1375), there was no day chia-tzu in the first month of the third year. Chang Wen-hu (cited in Wang Shu-min, 106.2919), aware of this problematic date, points to a solar eclipse that is dated, according to Han shu, 5.141, on the jen-tzu 壬子 day in the second month of the third year which would allow a chia-tzu day in the first month. Shih Chih-mien (cited in Wang Shu-min) holds against it, that the same solar eclipse is also dated on the jen-wu 壬午 day in the second month of the third year, in the “Wu hsing chih” 五行志 on Han shu, 7Cb.1501, thus ruling out again the possibility of a day chia-tzu in the first month. Wang Shu-min adds that Tzuchih t’ung-chien (16.526) is in accordance with the dating of the Wu hsing chih 五行志 and further presents a third dating of this eclipse on the hsin-ssu 辛巳 day in the second month of the third year on Han chi 漢紀 (Hsün Yüeh 荀悦 (148-209), Ch’ien Han chi 前漢紀, 9.5b, SPTK)—likewise not supporting a day chia-tzu in the first month.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

109

陵.102 He marched west and crossed the Huai 淮, and then joined with the troops of Ch’u. He sent out messengers to deliver a letter to the feudal lords that read: “Liu P’i, The King of Wu, respectfully inquires of the King of Chiao-hsi, the King of Chiao-tung, the King of Tzu-ch’uan, the King of Chi-nan, the King of Chao, the King of Ch’u, the King of Huai-nan 淮南, the King of Heng-shan 衡 山, the King of Lu-chiang 廬江, and the Sons of the former King of Ch’ang-sha 長沙: 103 Let Us have the benefit of [your] instructions! Because Han has a seditious minister [Ch’ao Ts’o], it has not achieved merit for the empire, [but] invaded and seized the territory of the feudal lords, sent functionaries to accuse and tie them up, to interrogate and process them, [while this minister] makes it his business to humiliate and insult them, he does not treat the flesh and blood of the Liu Clan with the proper respect for the lords [of men] that the feudal lords are, he cuts off the meritorious ministers of the late Emperor [from power], he introduces and employs evil and wicked men, he deceives and brings rebellion to the empire, and he wants to endanger the altars of soil and grain. Whether His Majesty [i.e., the Emperor] has been sick too many times, or his [original] intentions have been lost, 104 he cannot carefully investigate. [We] want to mobilize [Our] troops and execute him [Ch’ao Ts’o], so [We] will carefully listen to [your] instructions. Although [Our] humble state is slim, [its] territory covers 3,000 square li; although [Our] people are few, [Our] trained troops could Mizusawa (106.7) notes four editions that add ch’ien 前 ([of the] Former Reign) to the date. Han shu (35.1909) und Tzu-chih t’ung-chien (16.515) also add this detail. 102 Kuang-ling is located just on the north-west border of modern Yang-chou 揚州 in Kiangsu about forty-five miles eastnortheast of modern Nanking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24). As Hsü-kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) explains, Liu Chia 劉賈, King of Ching 荊 until his death in 196 B.C., had his capital once at Wu 吳 County that is located at modern Soochow in Chekiang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24), but the King of Wu moved it to Kuang-ling. He contradicts thereby the “Cheng-yi,” that places the capital of Ching at Chiang-tu 江都 (Shih chi, 11.440)—in its intention to correct the entry in the tables that states Wu 吳 County was made capital by Liu Chia in 205 B.C. (Shih chi, 17.805). 103 According to “Chi-chieh,” after the death of Wu Chu 吳著, King Ching 靖, the fourth generation descendant of Wu Jui 吳芮, the kingdom of Ch’ang-sha was abolished in 157, since he was considered to have no descendants, which, according to P’ei Yin 裴駰 (cited in “Chi-chieh”), did not please his actual two sons that he had with concubines and who became merely ranking marquises. 104 Takigawa (106.15) suggests to read chih yi 志失; “his mind was focused on indulgence,” taking shih 失 as interchangeable with yi 佚. He thereby indirectly prefers the Han shu (35.1910) parallel that reads chih yi 志 逸 , “his mind was focused on leisure,” while Wang Shu-min (106.2921), quite to the contrary, points out that yi 逸 should be read as shih 失, “to lose.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

110

amount to 500,000 [men]. We have at all times served Nan-yüeh 南越 for more than 30 years, their kings and lords will all not decline to share their soldiers to follow Us, so [We] could in addition get more than 300,000. Although We are worthless, I would hope to follow you kings in person. Taking advantage of the fact, that Yüeh is a direct neighbor to Ch’ang-sha, the sons of the King will stabilize the area north of Ch’ang-sha, and moving west hasten to Shu 蜀105 and Han-chung 漢中.106 We appeal to the Yüeh 越, the King of Ch’u, and the three Kings of Huai-nan, to join Us and turn east; to the kings of Ch’i to join the King of Chao 趙 and stabilize Ho-chien 河閒 and Ho-nei 河內,107 and either to enter the Lin-chin Pass 臨晉關,108 or to join Us and meet at Lo-yang; and since the King of Yen 燕109 and the King of Chao decidedly have agreements with the King of the Hu 胡, the King of Yen should move north and stabilize Tai and Yün-chung 雲中,110 take the lead of the Hu [troops], enter the Hsiao Pass 蕭 關,111 hasten to Ch’ang-an 長安, and straighten out the Son of Heaven to secure 105

Shu was a commandery located in modern Szechwan spreading northwest and southwest from its capital at Ch’eng-tu 成都 (modern Chengtu) (Tan Ch’i-hsiang, 2:29). 106 Han-Chung was a commandery located in the southern part of modern Shensi. The commandery was a band of land spreading along the upper reaches of the River Han east and west of its seat at Han-chung (modern Han-chung) about some 150 miles (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:11). 107 Ho-nei was a commandery located in the border area of modern Shensi and Honan on the north bank of the Ho that in Han times still took a higher course to the north. With its seat about sixty miles northeast of modern Loyang it is a strip of land spreading east and west of its center for about sixty miles (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 108 The Lin-chin Pass is located ten miles east of modern Ta-li in Shensi, west of where the Ho bends east again (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:15). According to “Cheng-yi,” this refers to the pass in T’ang times called P’u-chin Pass 蒲津關 that was located west of modern Yung-chi 永濟 on the eastern bank of the Ho bend (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:47). According to Ch’ien Mu (Ti-ming k’ao, 231), the Lin-chin Pass is located east of modern Chao-yi 朝邑 County—but approaching it from east of the Ho it was also called P’u-pan Ford 蒲坂津 (P’u-pan 蒲坂 is located ten miles west of modern Yung-chi) and from the Area within the Passes it was also named Hsia-yang Ford 夏陽津 (Hsiayang 夏陽 is located forty miles north of modern Yung-chi on the eastern bank of the Ho). Lin-chin Pass was one of the important checkpoints to enter the Area within the Passes. 109 The King of Yen, Liu Chia 劉嘉, who was not directly addressed at the beginning of the letter, did not join the rebellion as suggested at this point and died in 152 B.C. (cf. Shih chi, 17.8404). 110 Yün-chung Commandery is located west of Tai 代 centered around its seat at Yün-chung 20 miles northeast of modern Ho-lin-ko-erh 和林格爾 in modern Inner Mongolia where the Ho bends south and 180 miles northnortheast of modern T’aiyüan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). 111 The Hsiao Pass is located 10 miles southeast of modern Ku-yüan 固原 in Ninghsia and 180 miles northwest of Ch’ang-an (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24). According to “Cheng-yi,” the Hsiao Pass is

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

111

the ancestral temple of Kao[-ti]. [We] would hope that you, Kings, would make an effort in this [enterprise]. The son of King Yüan of Ch’u and the three kings of Huai-nan may not have bathed and washed themselves for more than ten years, [their] resentment has entered the marrow of [their] bones, and it surely has been a long time that they wish to once have an opportunity to vent it, [but since] We have not yet obtained the intentions of the Kings, [We] have not ventured to heed them. Now if you Kings could bear it to restore fallen [states] and continue severed [successions], aid the weak and attack the violent, in order to secure the Liu Clan, it would be in [keeping with] the hopes for the altars of soil and grain. Although [Our] humble state is poor, We have been cutting back on the use of food and clothing, accumulating money, researching weapons and armor, and gathering grain until late at night, only to continue on the next day, already for more than thirty years. Since all [was done] for this [one aim], [We] would hope that you Kings would make an effort to make use of it. Those who decapitate or arrest a Commander-in-Chief, will be awarded 5.000 chin of gold and a fief of 10.000 households; a ranking general, 3.000 chin and a fief of 5.000 households; an adjutant general, 2.000 chin and a fief of 2.000 households; an [officer of] 2.000 shih, 1.000 chin and a fief of 1.000 households; an [officer of] 1.000 shih, 500 chin and a fief of 500 households: all [of those] will be made ranking marquis. Those who make an army or a city surrender, if the soldiers count 10.000 men, or the town counts 10.000 households, [will be rewarded] like obtaining a Commander-in-Chief; if the men or the households count 5.000, [they will be rewarded] like obtaining a ranking general; if the men or the households count 3.000, [they will be rewarded] like obtaining an adjutant general; [*2829*] if the men or households count 1.000, [they will be rewarded] like obtaining an [officer of] 2.000 shih; in the case of lesser officials, all [of those] will receive titles and gold according to the rank [of the obtained]. Other enfeoffments and rewards will all be double the [honors] of the military law. Those who had formerly possessed titles or [fief] towns, [their status] will be even more increased without (further) cause. [We] would hope that you Kings would make this clear among [your] commanding officers and grand masters, [We] would not dare to deceive you. Our money is placed [all over] the empire, there is some at every place, and it is not necessary to take it from Wu, so even if the you Kings would spend it day and night, you still could not exhaust it. If there the Pass called Lung-shan 隴山 Pass in T’ang times, located at the border between Yüan-chou 原州 County (modern Ku-yüan) and P’ing-liang 平涼 County (modern P’ing-liang; T’an ch’i-hsiang, 5:41).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

112

is someone who should be rewarded, inform Us, and We will forward it to him. Respectfully [We] make this known to you.” [2830] Only when the letter [asking the] Seven Kingdoms to revolt was made known to the Son of Heaven and did the Son of Heaven dispatch Grand Commandant Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫, the Marquis of T’iao 條, to lead thirty-six generals and to move towards them and attack Wu and Ch’u; he dispatched Li Chi 酈寄, the Marquis of Ch’ü-chou 曲周,112 to attack Chao; the General Luan Pu 欒布113 to attack Ch’i; and the Commander-in-Chief Tou Ying 竇嬰114 to set up camp at Hsing-yang 滎陽, to command the troops of Ch’i and Chao. When the letter [asking] Wu and Ch’u to revolt was made known, but the troops had not been mobilized yet and Tou Ying had not set out yet, someone spoke about the former Chancellor of Wu, Yüan Ang 袁盎.115 [Yüan] Ang was at that time living at home, so [the Emperor] decreed to have him summoned to enter and appear in front of him.116 The Sovereign was just adjusting the troops

112

Li Chi 酈寄 once sold out his friend Lü Lu 呂祿 in the course of the elimination of the Lü Clan, a reputation that stuck to him (95.2662-3; Grand Scribe’s records, 8.179). Sent to attack Chao he besieged its capital Han-tan 邯 鄲, the refuge of the King of Chao, for seven months and proved unable to take it, if it had not been for Luan Pu’s help who just returned from his victory over Ch’i. (Shih chi, 50.1990). Finally he incurred Ching-ti’s anger, when he was hoping to marry the mother of his Empress Wang 王, and consequently lost his nobility (Shih chi, 95.2663; Grand Scribe’s records, 8.180). See Loewe, Dictionary, p. 223. 113 Luan Pu 欒布 was famous for his loyalty to his former patrons that both were considered rebels. He became chancellor of Yen and demonstrated his military talent in his fight against the Hsiung-nu and in his famous victory over the besieging Kings at the gates of Lin-tzu in Ch’i (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 429). 114 Tou Ying 竇嬰 was a cousin of Wen-ti’s Empress Tou and had been Chancellor of Wu during Wen-ti’s reign. He was one of the few officials to oppose Ch’ao Ts’os’ plans to reduce the powers of the kings and helped to arrange Yüan Ang’s decisive meeting with Ching-ti that led to the sacrifice of Ch’ao Ts’o. Nonetheless Hsü Fu-yüan 徐孚遠 (1599-1665; cited in Takigawa, 106.18) feels compelled to remark that he did not actively earn any military merits in the whole campaign apart from blocking the enemy’s way to the west. See also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 79-80. 115 After the revolt became apparent, Ch’ao Ts’o wanted to investigate again Yüan Ang, since he as the former Prime Minister of Wu should have had some knowledge of Liu P’i’s plotting a rebellion (Shih chi, 101.2742; Grand Scribes Records, 8.338). The Han shu (35.1912) remodels the following encounter between the Emperor and Yüan Ang and explicitly moves parts of it to the Memoir of Yüan Ang and Ch’ao Ts’o. 116 For a parallel account of this dramatic encounter between Ch’ao Ts’o and Yüan Ang before the Emperor see also Shih chi, 101.2742 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 8.338-9).

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

113

and calculating the provisions for the soldiers with Ch’ao Ts’o 鼂錯,117 when the Sovereign asked Yüan Ang: “My Lord, you were once Chancellor of Wu, do you know what kind of man the Wu minister T’ien Lu-po 田祿伯118 is? Now that Wu and Ch’u are revolting, how do you see it from your perspective?” [Yüan Ang] replied: “It is not worth worrying about, since now they are already defeated.” The Sovereign said: “The King of Wu approached the mountains to mint money, he boiled the seawater to produce salt, he lured the stalwarts of the empire, but as an old man with white hair he starts a rebellion. Since the situation is like this, if his plan was not hundred [percent] flawless, would he ever send out [his troops?] Why do you say that he cannot cause [us any worries]?” Yüan Ang replied: “If the King of Wu has profit from copper and salt, then he shall have it, but how could he ever find stalwarts and lure them! Even in the case that Wu really had found stalwarts, and they had, moreover, supported the King in doing the right things, then he would not have revolted at all. Those who were lured by Wu are all useless youths, they are fugitive money-minting traitors,119 and therefore they have mutually led each other to revolt.” Ch’ao Ts’o said: “Yüan Ang’s estimation of it [the revolt] is excellent.” The Sovereign asked: “How would [your] plan play out?” [Yüan] Ang replied: “I would hope to screen off the attendants.” The Sovereign barred the attendants, only [Ch’ao] Ts’o remained. [Yüan] Ang said: “What your subject is going to say, other ministers should not get to know.” Only then did [the Emperor] screen off [Ch’ao] Ts’o. [Ch’ao] Ts’o hastened to hide away in the eastern anteroom,120 the filled with a strong hatred. When the Sovereign finally asked [Yüan] Ang about it, [Yüan] Ang replied: “Wu and Ch’u have delivered a letter to each other that reads: ‘Although each of the royal brothers of Kao-ti possesses a share of the territory, now the seditious minister Ch’ao Ts’o is without any authority accusing the feudal lords of transgressions, to seize and take away this territory.’ 121 Therefore they take 117 See above Shih chi, 106.2824, for a similar flashback in this chapter that is used to provide an alternative perspective on previous events. 118 T’ien Lu-po 田祿伯 was the Commander-in-Chief at Wu at the time of the outbreak of the rebellion, but he was not trusted enough to pursue his own—probably superior—strategy. See also his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 509. 119 A slight change in punctuation would turn this sentence into: “Those who were lured by Wu are all useless youths, fugitives, moneyminters and wicked people, and therefore . . .” 120 According to Shen Ch’in-han (cited in Takigawa, 106.19), the term tung hsiang 東廂 should be understood in the light of a comment to the Yi li 儀禮 (10.8b, PPTS) as a smaller room set before the eastern side room (tung chia 東夾) of the main hall. It was a place for servants. 121 Yüan Ang must be either paraphrasing, or referring to a different version of the letter, since this is not a verbatim quote from the letter presented in this memoir.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

114

‘Revolt!’ as their slogan, move west in order to jointly execute Ch’ao Ts’o, restore their former territory and dismiss [their] troops.122 Right now I consider that if [you] only would decapitate Ch’ao Ts’o, sent out envoys to pardon the Seven Kingdoms including Wu and Ch’u, and restore the territory that has formerly been seized, then the troops [*2831*] could altogether be dismissed without staining [their] blades with blood.” At this the Sovereign was silent for a long while, [then] he said: “However, what choice do [We] really have,123 We don’t love any single man [so much as] to decline the empire [for his sake].”124 [Yüan] Ang said: “Since your Servant’s foolish plan does not go beyond this, I would hope Your Highness will take it under careful consideration.” Then [the Emperor] appointed [Yüan] Ang as Grand Master of Ceremonies,125 and the son of the younger brother of the King of Wu [Liu T’ung 劉通], the Marquis of Te 德,126 as Director of the Imperial Clan. [Yüan] Ang packed and prepared for his journey. More than ten days later,127 the Sovereign sent the Commandant of the Capital to summon Ch’ao Ts’o, being fooled [like this] he was transported and brought to the eastern market. Ch’ao Ts’o was cut in to at the waist at the eastern market, wearing [his] court robes. Then he dispatched [Yüan] Ang to make offerings at the ancestral temple and the Director of the Imperial Clan to

122

According to Wang Shu-min (106.2921), this sentence is corrupt and should read like the Han Shu parallels on 35.1912 and 49.2301: 以故反，名為西共誅錯，復故地而罷。“For this reason they take ‘Move west and execute [Ch’ao] Ts’o together, restore [our] former territory and dismiss [the] troops’ as their slogan.” 123 According to Wang Shu-min (106.2921), the initial ku 顧 should be read as tan 但 (“only” or “but”) and not as nien 念 (“to think about”) like Yen Shih-ku (cited in Han shu, 39.2301) suggests. 124 According to Oka Hakku 岡白駒 (1692-1767, cited in Takigawa, 106.20), the Emperor compared in this phrase one single person to the empire. 125 According to “Cheng-yi,” Yüan Ang was made Grand Master of Ceremonies in order to make him the spokesman of the will of the ancestral temple. 126 According to Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”), his name was Liu T’ung 劉通, son of Liu Kuang 劉 廣 . After the rebellion was put down, Ching-ti wanted to install Liu T’ung as the successor of the King of Wu but was dissuaded from doing so by the Empress Dowager Tou (Shih chi, 50.1988-9). See also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 365. 127 Takigawa (106.20) and Wang Shu-min (106.2921-2) both remind the reader that the account in this memoir does not tell the reaction of the Chancellor Chuang Ch’ing-ti 莊青翟 and others who requested to execute Ch’ao Ts’o for his unprincipled behavior and the outrageous idea to have the emperor himself lead the troops to war, while Ch’ao Ts’o would guard the capital as it is recorded on Han shu, 49.2303.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

115

assist his own relative,128 and sent [both of them] away to inform Wu, as [Yüan] Ang had planned it. When they arrived at Wu, the troops of Wu and Ch’u had already attacked the fortifications of Liang 梁. Since the Director of the Imperial Clan was a relative of [the King], he was first to enter and appear [in front of him], and instructed the King of Wu that he was sent to make him kneel and bow his head to receive the [imperial] edict. When the King of Wu heard that Yüan Ang had come, he also knew that he wished to advise him, so he laughed and responded: “We are already the Emperor of the East, 129 what would still be the point in kneeling down and bowing the head to anyone else?” He was not willing to receive [Yüan] Ang and detained him in his camp, since he wished to make him a commander by force. As [Yüan] Ang was not willing, he had men surround and guard him, [but] just when he was about to have him killed, [Yüan] Ang was able to get out of [his guard] at night and escaping on foot he left, fleeing to the Liang 梁, army and finally returning [to the capital] to report.130 The Marquis of T’iao [Chou Ya-fu] was about to take six relay carriages and meet the troops at Hsing-yang. When he reached Lo-yang, he met Chü Meng 劇 孟, 131 and said happily: “Seven Kingdoms have revolted and when my relay carriages arrived here, I did not hope myself, [that Lo-yang] would be [still] intact. Furthermore I supposed that the feudal lords had already won [you] over Chü Meng, but Chü Meng even now has made no move [to join them]. If I can rely on Hsing-yang, then on eastwards there will be nothing worth worrying about.”132 When he reached Huai-yang 淮陽,133 he asked Commandant Teng Tu-

128

According to “Cheng-yi,” the Director of the Imperial Clan should on the basis of the interests of all the royal relatives assist the Han and instruct the King of Wu. 129 On Shih chi, 44.1898-9, the events of the later winter months in 288 B.C. are described, when King Min 湣 of Ch’i 齊 made himself Emperor of the East, while King Chao 昭 of Ch’in 秦 took up the title of Emperor of the West. After two months both gave up those titles again and became kings once more—much to the disadvantage of Ch’i that listened in this critical situation to the powerful persuasion of Su Tai 蘇代 only to be destroyed later on by Ch’in in 221 B.C. 130 The details of his truly lucky escape are told on Shih chi, 101.2743 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 8.339-40). 131 Chü Meng 劇孟 was an esteemed man of independent power, as can be seen in Yüan Ang’s praise who thought the known gambler to be one of the few men who would risk their own safety in order to help out a friend in needs (Shih chi, 101.2744; Grand Scribe’s Records, 8. 341). See also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 202-3. 132 Like Yüan Ang just before in his encounter with the Emperor, Chou Ya-fu arrives at this conclusion before even meeting the enemy.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

116

wei 鄧都尉, 134 the former retainer of his father, the Marquis of Chiang 絳, 135 “How would [your strategy] play out?” The retainer said: “The troops of Wu have such a sharp edge, it would be difficult to run right against them. The troops of Ch’u are lightly [equipped], they cannot last long. If I had to make a plan for the General right now, it would be best to lead your troops northeast and build fortifications at Ch’ang-yi 昌邑,136 take Liang 梁 and give it up to Wu,137 so Wu will inevitably attack it with all its sharpness. The General should deepen the moats and raise the height of the earthworks, send light infantry to cut off [the access to] the confluence of the Huai 淮 and Ssu 泗 [rivers],138 [*2832*] to block Wu’s supply line. If Wu and Liang wear each other out and their rations are exhausted,139 with full might you can overcome those fatigued to the extreme and the defeat of Wu will be inevitable.”140 The Marquis of T’iao said: “Well put.” He followed this plan and consequently secured fortifications south of Ch’ang-yi, while light infantry cut off Wu’s supply line. 141 When the King of Wu first mobilized [his troops], Wu’s minister T’ien Lu-po was made Commander-inChief. T’ien Lu-po said: “The troops have gathered and move west, but if we have no other surprise route, it will be difficult to achieve [our] task. Your 133

Huai-yang is located on the south bank of the Huai ten miles southwest of modern Ch’ingchiang-shih 清 江 市 in Kiangsu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). Liang Yü-sheng (33.1372) wonders whether Huai-yang should not be replaced by Hsing-yang. 134 Otherwise unknown. 135 Chou Po 周勃, once a loyal follower of the Liu Pang during the establishment of the Han Empire, won most of his praise due to the role he played in the elimination of the Lü Clan. See also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 365. 136 Ch’ang–yi is located on the south bank of the Ssu 泗 River fifteen miles south of the Tayeh-tzeh 大野澤 in Shantung. 137 Wang Shu-min (106.2922) reminds the reader that the graph wei 委 is interchangeable with wei 餧 (“to feed to”) but prefers the above translation as ch’i 棄, “to abandon.” 138 The Ssu and the Huai join thirty miles southwest of modern Ch’ing-chiang-shih 清江市 in Kiangsu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 139 According to Wang Shu-min (106.2923), pi 彼 should be read shih 使, “if.” 140 The same confidence regarding a victory over Wu was expressed already on Shih chi, 67.2199 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:73). 141 According to Chao Yi (cited in Takigawa, 106.22), the account of how Chou Ya-fu suddenly is presented with this brilliant plan to sacrifice Liang to Wu—as if he had never thought of this before—has to be doubted in the light of the record on Shih chi, 57.2076, where the Emperor himself accepts Chou Ya-fu’s personal request to feed Liang to Wu in order to stop the rebel troops. Wang Shu-min (106.2923) disagrees on the basis of a commentary to the Ch’ang tuan ching 長短 經 (7.15a, SKCS) that suggests that Chou Ya-fu only made the request in question after he had heard Teng Tu-wei’s advice.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

117

servant would hope to obtain fifty thousand men, separately follow the Chiang and Huai [rivers] upstream, take Huai-nan and Ch’ang-sha, enter the Wu 武 Pass,142 and meet with you, Great King–this would be completely unexpected.” The Heir of the King of Wu admonished [the King]: “The King took ‘Revolt!’ as a slogan, so it would be difficult to entrust these troops to others; if you entrusted them to others, and they also would revolt against you, My King, what would you do? Furthermore, if [T’ien Lu-po] were to monopolize the troops and move on separately, how much further profit or damage this would bring to you cannot yet be known.143 So you will only harm yourself.” After this, the King of Wu did not give consent to T’ien Lu-po. One of the young generals of Wu, General Huan 桓,144 advised the King: “Wu has mostly foot soldiers and foot soldiers are advantageous on dangerous terrain; Han has mostly chariots and horsemen and chariots and horsemen are advantageous on level terrain. I would hope that you, Great King, would not subdue the cities that you pass, but straightforward abandon and leave them, rapidly moving west to rely on the Armory 武庫 at Lo-yang, eating the grain from the Ao Granary 敖倉,145 and issuing orders to the feudal lords from the redoubts of the mountains and rivers146; although you would not enter the Pass, you would certainly have already stabilized the world. If you, Great King, move slowly and stop to subdue the cities, the chariots and horsemen of the Han troops will arrive, they will hasten to enter the outskirts of Liang and Ch’u, and the affair will fail.” The King of Wu asked an his old commanders about this. The old commanders said: “Although this young blood’s plan to push forward the point of our sword is permissible, how could he understand the greater concerns [involved in this affair]!” After this, the King did not use General Huan’s plan.

142

The Wu Pass is located a few miles south of modern Shang-nan 商南 on the north bank of the Tan 丹 River just across the border in modern Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 143 According to Su Lin (cited in “Chi-chieh”), it would have been disastrous if T’ien Lu-po had led those troops, defeated the Han and then simply used the situation to his own personal advantage. The Han shu (35.1913) omits “cannot yet be known.” 144 Otherwise unknown. 145 On the strategic importance of Lo-yang cf. also Shih chi, 60.2115. 146 Cf. the use of this expression on Shih chi, 8.382 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:70; especially note 475).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

118

[2833] The King of Wu commanded his troops with unity [of mind] and unity [of force]147; before he had crossed the Huai, his guests and retainers were all able to be made generals, colonels, captains, or majors, only Chou Ch’iu 周 丘148 was unable to be employed. Chou Ch’iu was a native of Hsia-p’ei 下邳. 149 He came as a fugitive to Wu, sold wine, and had no standards of conduct, so King of Wu [Liu] P’i neglected him and did not appoint him. Chou Ch’iu presented his visiting card, advised the King and said: “As your servant has no abilities, he was not able to await committing an offence among the ranks. Your servant would not dare to request [some men] that he could command, but he would hope to get only one of the Han caduceus from Your Majesty, he would certainly repay Your Majesty.” The King thereupon gave it to him. When Chou Ch’iu got the caduceus, he galloped by night into Hsia-p’ei. Hsia-p’ei had heard at that point that Wu was in revolt, so all [the people of Hsia-p’ei] were defending from their city walls. When he arrived at the guest house, he summoned the prefect. When the prefect entered the door, he ordered his followers to cut the prefect in half because of [some] offense. In the end he summoned the influential local officers, who were on good terms with his brothers, and reported to them: “Wu’s rebel troops will soon arrive. When they arrive, they will put Hsia-p’ei to the sword in no more time that it takes to eat a meal. But if we now capitulate in advance, our families and homes are sure to be safe, and those [of us] who are able will be enfeoffed as marquises.” They went out and informed others, so all of Hsia-p’ei capitulated. Chou Ch’iu got in just one night 30,000 men. He sent a man to report to the King of Wu and then led his troops north to overrun cities and towns. When he reached Ch’eng-yang 城陽,150 his troops being more than 100,000 men, he defeated the army of the Commandant of the Capital at Ch’eng-yang. When he heard that the King of Wu 147

Reading the term chuan ping 專并 as an abbreviation of the longer expression 專心并力壹 意, “with unity of mind, unity of strength, and unity of will,” as found in Su Ch’in’s 蘇秦 speech: 大王誠能聽臣，六國從親，專心并力壹意，則必無彊秦之患。 “If you can heed your servant, Great King, with the six states as allies, with unity of mind, unity of strength, and unity of will, no disaster can come from mighty Ch’in” (Shih chi, 69.2256; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:105). 148 Otherwise unknown. 149 Hsia-p’ei is located on the north bank of the Ssu River ten miles west of the Luo-ma-hu 駱 馬湖 in Kiangsu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 150 According to “Cheng-yi,” the Kingdom of Ch’eng-yang had been a part of the Kingdom of Chi 齊, before it became an independent Kingdom under Wen-ti in 178 B.C.. With Ying-hsien 莒 縣 as its capital the Kingdom centered around modern Yi-nan 沂南 in Shantung (see T’an Ch’ihsiang, II:20).

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

119

had been defeated and fled, he figured himself that [now] there was nobody with whom he could accomplish the task, and immediately led his troops to return to Hsia-p’ei. He had not arrived yet, when an ulcer broke out on his back and he died.151 In the second month, the troops of the King of Wu had already been crushed, they were defeated or on the run; at this point the Son of Heaven issued a decree and an edict to the Generals: “In general it is known that the doer of good is rewarded by heaven with good fortune, the doer of evil is rewarded by heaven with misfortune. Kao Huang-ti 高皇帝 (The August Emperor Kao) personally marked the merits and virtue [of his subjects], he established and invested the feudal lords, when King Yu 幽 [Liu Yu 劉友] and King Tao-hui 悼惠 [Liu Fei 劉 肥] were cut off without descendants,152 Hsiao Wen Huang-ti 孝文皇帝 (The Filial and Cultured August Emperor) took pity on them and granted more favor [to their sons], he made the son of the King Yu [Liu] Sui [劉]遂 and the son of King Tao-hui [Liu] Ang [劉]卬 King, ordered them to make offerings at the ancestral temple of the former Kings and act as Han’s frontier state; [Wen-ti’s] virtue matched heaven and earth,153 his brightness was like sun and moon. The King of Wu [Liu] P’i turned his back on his kindness and betrayed his righteousness, he lured and received the fugitives and offenders of the empire, he brought chaos to the currency of the empire,154 he claimed to be ill and did not pay his respects at the court [of the Emperor] for more than twenty years, and even when the government officials requested several times that [Liu] P’i should be punished, Hsiao Wen Huang-ti tolerated him, as he wished that he [i.e. Liu P’i] would change his conduct and do good. Now he has just joined with [Liu] Wu, King of Ch’u, [Liu] Sui, King of Chao, [Liu] Ang, King of Chiao-hsi, [Liu]

151

As Takigawa (101.24) observes, he obviously shares the fate of Fan Ts’eng 范增 (see Shih chi, 7.325; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:200). 152 Liu Yu 劉友, a son of Kao-tsu, reigned King Yu 幽 of Chao for fourteen years until he died under house arrest during the reign of the Empress Lü in 181 B.C. for having neglected his Queen a member of the Lü Clan (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 400). Liu Fei 劉肥, the only son of Kao-tsu older than the later Hui-ti, was established King Tao-hui 悼惠 of Ch’i in 201 B.C. and survived even the attack on is life by the Empress Lü in this position until his death in 188 (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 295-6). 153 The sign of a true emperor as the reader can learn from “Cheng-yi” (Shih chi, 1.1). 154 According to Ju Ch’un (cited in “Chi-chieh”), he used his private money to bring disorder to the currency of the empire.

120

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

Pi-kuang [ 劉] 辟光, King of Chi-nan, 155 [Liu] Hsien [ 劉] 賢, King of Tzuch’uan,156 [Liu] Hsiung-ch’ü [劉]雄渠, King of Liao-tung 膠東,157 to form an alliance to revolt, he became treasonous and unprincipled, he raised his troops to endanger the ancestral temples, he assassinated great ministers and Han envoys, he oppressed and coerced myriad people, he killed the innocent ending lives prematurely, he burned and destroyed the homes of the people, he dug up [*2834*] their grave mounds, acting extremely brutal and tyrannical. Now [Liu] Ang [劉]卬 and the others act even more treasonous and unprincipled, they burn the ancestral temples, 158 they raid Imperial objects,159 We are extremely grieved by them. We have put on white garments and avoided the main hall, but you, Generals, should urge [your] men in high positions to strike at the revolting cagelings. When striking at the revolting cagelings, you enter deep [into enemy territory] and kill many to achieve merit, [in doubt] whether to cut off heads, or taking prisoners, all those above three hundred shih you kill, there shall be nobody set free. Those who venture to discuss the edict and not obey the edict shall all be cut in two at the waist.” Earlier, when the King of Wu crossed the Huai, when he joined the King of Ch’u [Liu] Sui, moved west and defeated Chi-pi 棘 壁, 160 when he availed himself of his victory and moved forward, [the troops] were abundantly sharp. 155 Liu Pi-kuang 劉辟光 was Kao-tsu’s grandson, son of Liu Fei, King Tao-hui of Ch’i. In 164 B.C. he received his appointment as King of Chi-nan. See Liu Pi-kuang’s biography on Shih chi, 52.2010, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 260. 156 Liu Hsien 劉賢 was Kao-tsu’s grandson, son of Liu Fei, King Tao-hui of Ch’i. In 164 B.C. he received his appointment just like his brothers. See his biography on Shih chi, 52.2011, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 371. 157 Liu Hsiung-ch’ü 劉雄渠 was yet another son of Liu Fei, King Tao-hui of Ch’i, receiving his appointment likewise in 164. B.C.. See his biography on Shih chi, 52.2011, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 388. 158 According to Shen Ch’in-han (cited in Takigawa, 106.26), this refers to the ancestral temples of Kao-ti in the kingdoms and commanderies. 159 According to Yen Shih-ku (cited in “Chih-chieh”), these “Imperial objects” refer to ritual vessels in the ancestral temples. 160 According to T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:19), Chi-pi is located thirty miles west of modern Huaipei-shih 淮北市 in Anhwei. According to “Cheng-yi,” however, this place is located in Sung-chou 宋州 fifteen miles southwest of Ning-ling 寧陵 County, thus about more than sixty miles further to the northwest than T’an Ch’i-hsiang’s identification. With reference to “So-yin” (Shih-chi 58.2083) that explicitly identifies Ta-chi 大棘 as the recorded Chi-pi in Liang, Ch’ien Mu (Ti-ming k’ao, 534) locates the place in question northwest of modern K’uang-ch’eng 柘城 County (thirty miles south of modern Shang-ch’iu-shih 商丘市) in Honan.

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

121

The King Hsiao 孝 of Liang 梁 [Liu Wu 劉武]161 was in fear, dispatched six generals to strike at Wu, and again [Wu] defeated two of the Liang Generals, and officers and men all hastened back to Liang. Several times Liang sent envoys to report to the Marquis of T’iao and requested aid, but the Marquis of T’iao did not grant it. Once again [Liang] sent envoys to denounce the Marquis of T’iao at the Sovereign, the Sovereign sent a man to inform the Marquis of T’iao to aid Liang, but yet again he protected [his own] convenience and flexibility and did not set out. Liang sent Han An-kuo 韓安國 and Chang Yü 張羽, the younger brother of the Chancellor of Ch’u that had died in a military affair, as Generals, and only then did they manage to severely defeat the troops of Wu. 162 The troops of Wu wanted to move west, but the cities of Liang were defended resolutely, and since they did not dare to move west, they then hastened to the troops of the Marquis of T’iao and met them at Hsia-yi 下邑.163 They wanted to battle, but the Marquis of T’iao [stayed within his] fortifications and was not willing to battle. The provisions of Wu were exhausted, the men were starving, and after challenging him several times to battle, they finally one night rushed at the fortifications of the Marquis of T’iao, alarming the southeast [corner]. The Marquis ordered to prepare the northwest [corner] and as expected [they] were entering from the northwest. Wu was crushed, officers and men mostly died of starvation, and only then did they desert and scatter. At this the King of Wu then joined several thousand of the stalwart fellows under his banner to flee at night and leave, they

161

Liu Wu 劉武 was the brother of Ching-ti and needed the protection of their mother Empress Dowager Tou more than one time to avoid the consequences for his overbearing deeds during his life. He was first appointed King of Tai, then King of Huai-yang and finally became King of Liang in 168 B.C.. After his loyal and successful contribution to the suppression of the rebellion he aspired even to become Heir Apparent. But due to the intervention of Yüan Ang the choice fell on Liu Ch’e 劉徹 the later Wu-ti, while Yüan Ang fell victim to the revenge of the frustrated Liu Wu. See also his biography on Shih chi, 57.2081-6, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 366-9. 162 Han An-kuo (d.127 B.C.) served the King of Liang in the years 168-143 B.C. as palace grandee and it was his merit that Wu did not pass beyond Liang on its campaign west (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 142-4). Chang Yü was the younger brother of Chang Shang 張尚 who, as Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chichieh”) recalls, had to die for remonstrating against the King of Chu’s partaking in the rebellion (see also Shih chi, 50.1988, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 689 and 698). 163 Hsia-yi is located in modern Tang-shan 碭山 County in Honan, about forty miles east of modern Shang-ch’iu-shih 商丘市. According to Hsü-kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”), it belonged to Liang.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

122

crossed the Chiang, fled to Tan-t’u 丹徒,164 and took refuge at the Tung-Yüeh.165 The troops of the Tung-Yüeh approximately counted more than ten thousand men, thus they sent men to retake and gather the fleeing soldiers. The Han sent a man to entice the Tung-Yüeh by [offering] rewards, the Tung-Yüeh then tricked the King of Wu; when the King of Wu left [his refuge] to reward the troops, [the Tung-Yüeh] immediately sent a men to stab the King of Wu to death,166 they put his head into a box, 167 and sent it by fast carriage [to the Han] to make it known [to them]. The Sons of the King of Wu [Liu] Tzu-hua [劉]子華 and [Liu] Tzuchü [ 劉] 子駒 escaped and fled to the Min-Yüeh. As the King of Wu had abandoned his troops to flee, the troops consequently fell apart, and everywhere small numbers surrendered to the Grand Commandant or the troops of Liang. When the troops of the King of Ch’u [Liu] Wu [ 劉] 戊 were defeated, he committed suicide. [2835] When the three kings168 besieged Lin-tzu in Ch’i, for three months they were not able to make it submit. When the Han troops arrived, the King of Chiao-hsi, Chiao-tung and Tzu-chuan each withdrew his troops and returned home. The King of Chiao-hsi then bared his breast and feet, took place on a straw mat,169 drank water, and apologized to the Empress Dowager. The Heir of the King [Liu] Te [劉]德 said: “The Han troops have come from far away, your servant has observed that they are already worn out, they can be taken by surprise, so I would hope to retake the remnants of the Great King’s troops and attack them, if we attack them and do not triumph over them, then it would not yet be too late to flee into the sea.” The King said: “Our officers and soldiers are 164

Tan-t’u is located on the south bank of the estuary of the Chiang a few miles east of modern Chen-chiang-shih 鎮江市 in Soochow (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24). 165 Tan-t’u is located on the south bank of the Yangtze about ten miles east of modern Chenchiang-shih 鎮江市 in Kiangsu. 166 According to Meng K’ang (cited in Chi-chieh), the graph ts’ung 鏦 should be understood as a halberd (chi 戟) and not a simple spear. According to “So-yin,” ts’ung 鏦 means “to stab somebody to death” with a pole-axe (ke 戈 ). Wang Shu-min (106.2925) points the reader’s attention to a passage in the Yüeh chüeh shu 越絶書 (2.12b, SKCS) where the murder of Liu P’i is recorded as the Yi-wu Chiang-chün 夷烏將軍, a younger brother of the King of Yüeh. 167 The only fact “Chi-chieh,” “So-yin,” and “Cheng-yi” do agree upon is that the place where the King of Wu was buried is called Hsiang-t’ang 相唐 located somewhere in the vicinity of Tant’u. 168 According to Liang Yü-sheng (33.1373), the text lacks one King originally mentioned to be involved in this campaign: the King of Chi-nan (see Shih chi, 106.2827). Wang Shu-min (106.2926) agrees with him on the basis of Shih chi, 52.2006, where all four kings are at least punished. 169 A gesture to ask for punishment (Shih chi, 79.2417; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:245.).

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

123

all already crushed, they cannot be employed.” [The King] did not listen. The Han General Marquise of Kung-kao 弓高, [Han] T’ui-tang [韓]穨當,170 sent a letter to the King that read: “I have received an edict to punish those who have been unrighteous, but those who surrender will be pardoned for their crimes, and restored to their former status; what will the position of the King be—I will wait [for an answer] to accordingly do [my] work.” The King stripped to the waist knocked his head on the ground before the fortifications of the Han troops, and asked for an audience saying: “Your Servant, [Liu] Ang did not cautiously adhere to the received laws, he has frightened and scared the people, just to burden the General to make a journey of great distance and arrive at his poor state, so he venture to ask for the punishment of being minced into meat sauce.” The Marquis of Kung-kao was holding a bronze drum when he received him, and said: “Since the King has burdened himself with an act of war, I would hope to hear about the situation in which the King mobilized his troops.” The King struck his head to the ground, crawled forward on his knees, and replied: “These days, Ch’ao Ts’o [*2836*] was the Minster of the Son of Heaven that was in charge of affairs, he changed and altered the laws and ordinances of Kao Huang-ti, he invaded and seized the territory of the feudal lords, I, Ang, and the others thought that he was not righteous, we were afraid that he would bring ruinous disorder to the empire, so the Seven Kingdoms mobilized [their] troops, and they furthermore took ‘Execute [Ch’ao] Ts’o’ [as their slogan]. Now that we heard that [Ch’ao] Ts’o was already executed, I, Ang, and the others will respectfully dismiss [our] troops and return home.” The General said: “If the King thought that [Ch’ao] Ts’o was not worthy, why did you not make this known [to the Emperor]? Even when there was no edict or tiger-[shaped] tally, you arbitrarily mobilized your troops and attacked a righteous state. 171 If I take this [into consideration] and look at it, I get the idea that you were not wishing to execute [Ch’ao] Ts’o.” Only then did he produce an edict and read it to the King. When he read it till the end, he said: “The King shall plan for himself, [what to do next].” The King said: “For someone like me, Ang, even after death there will be unredeemable offenses left.” Consequently he committed suicide. The [Queen] Dowager and the Heir Apparent all died. The Kings of Chiao-tung, Tzu-ch’uan,

170

[Han] T’ui-tang was a son of Hann Hsin 韓信, King of Hann 韓, born after his defection to the Hsiung-nu. He himself surrendered to the Han in 166 B.C. and served with distinction in the suppression of the rebellion in 154 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 146). 171 For the importance of tallies see also Shih chi, 10.42 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:166, especially note 152).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

124

and Chi-nan all died,172 the states were abolished and [the territory] taken in by the Han. General Li 酈 besieged Chao for ten months and then subdued it,173 the King of Chao committed suicide. The King of Chi-pei, because he had been forced [into the revolt], managed not to be punished, but was moved to be King over Tzu-chuan. Earlier, the King of Wu was the head of the revolt; he united and led the troops of Ch’u, making Ch’i and Chao join. In the first month he raised his troops, in the third month they all were defeated,174 only Chao was subdued later on. [The Emperor] again made the younger son of King Yüan [of Ch’u, Liu Chiao], [Liu] Li [劉]禮, the Marquis of P’ing-lu 平陸,175 King of Ch’u, and continued the line of King Yüan. [He] moved [Liu] Fei [劉]非, the King of Junan 汝南, and made him King of Chiang-tu 江都.176 His Honor the Grand Scribe says: “That the King of Wu was made king was due to the fact that his father was reduced [to the rank of a marquis].177 He was able to lighten taxes and collections, and to command his people, because he monopolized the profits from the mountains and the sea. The bud of treason and rebellion bloomed since his Son[‘s death]. A contest of skills started the rebellion,178 in the end he forgot his origin.179 He allied himself with the Yüeh 172

According to Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”), one version reads: tzu sha 自殺 “[he] committed suicide.” 173 According to the account on Shih chi, 50.1990, this happened not without the decisive help of Luan Pu. Takigawa (106.29) and Shih Chih-mien (cited in Wang Shu-min, 101.2927) both suggest to replace the given date with “seven months,” Liang Yü-sheng (33.1373) and Wang Shu-min (101.2927) prefer an even shorter time span of “three months.” 174 The Han shu (35.1918) stops the account at this point of the story—omitting the fact, that Chao was sudued much later, and not mentioning the Emperors later enfeoffments. 175 Liu Li 劉禮 (d. 150 B.C.) was the son of Liu Chiao, King of Ch’u and was nominated Marquis of P’ing-lu in 156 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 328). 176 Liu Fei 劉非 (d. 127 B.C.) was a son of Ching-ti, elder brother of the later Wu-ti. After the successful repression of the rebellion he was made King of Chiang-tu that replaced the former Kingdom of Wu with its capital fixed at Kuang-ling. See also his biography on Shih chi, 59.2096, and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 296. 177 As “Chi-chieh” and “So-yin” both point out to the reader this refers to his reduction from King of Tai to Marquis of Ho-yang. Hence the Grand Scribe section starts off just like the memoir: with a reminder of the fate of Liu P’i’s father. The Han shu (35.1918) omits this sentence. 178 According to “So-yin,” the term cheng chi 爭技 refers to the fight about a game of liu-po with the Heir Apparent at the capital which is supported by the variant given for some editions by

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

125

and plotted against [his own] house, in the end he perished because of the Southern Barbarians.180 Ch’ao Ts’o made far-sighted plans for the state, but ill fortune, in return, closed in on him.181 Yüan Ang was a powerful adviser, at first he was favored, later humiliated. Therefore in ancient times the territory of the feudal lords did not exceed one hundred li,182 the mountains and the sea were not used for enfeoffments.183 ‘One should not ally oneself with the barbarians, as one will estrange one’s own clan,’ shouldn’t that be said about Wu? ‘One should not become the head of power, or in return one will suffer harm,’184 wouldn’t that apply to [Yüan] Ang and [Ch’ao] Ts’o?”

*

*

*

*

*

Just because [Liu] Chung was reduced [to the rank of a marquis], his [son Liu] P’i was made King of Wu, it happened to be the time when Han was first stabilized [and he was enthroned] in order to fill and pacify the region between the Chiang 江 and the Huai 淮. [Thus] I composed the “Memoir of King of Wu, Liu P’i, Number 46.185

Mizusawa (101.14): po 博 instead of chi 技. Nakai Sekitoku (cited in Takigawa, 106.30) believes chi 技 is a mistake for chih 枝, “twig.” Thus the first sentence would refer to the threat of a reduction of Wu’s territory as a marginal “matter of twigs and leaves” (chih ye chih shih 枝葉之事) that ultimately led to the loss of the stem and the second sentence would appear as the perfect echo to this idea. 179 “In the end he forgot its beginning” or “finally he destroyed his basis (i.e., everything essential to him)” would be two further approaches to deal with this sentence. 180 The Han shu (35.1918) also omits the last two sentences. 181 A bitter reference to Lun yü 15.11: 子曰: 人無遠慮，必有近憂．“The Master said: ‘If a man has no far-sighted plans, he will inevitably have nearby troubles.’” 182 Referring to the ideal sizes of enfeoffments (cf. Li chi chu-shu 禮記注疏, 11.2a, SPPY). 183 Shao Bao 邵寶 (1460-1527; cited in Takigawa, 106.1373) argues historically that Ssu-ma ch’ien’s reprimand referring to the Li chi 禮記 (Li chi chu-shu 禮記注疏, 11.5a, SPPY) could be doubted, since not all those states that were enfeoffed with a terrain of mountains or bordering to the sea failed their rulers. 184 According to Shih chi, 92.2624, one would suffer the same fate, if one does not take what heaven has given, or does not take actions when the right moment has arrived. According to Yen Shi-ku (cited in Takigawa), these words originate from the Yi chou shu 逸周書. 185 This is Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s account of why he wrote this chapter from his Postface (see Shih chi, 130.3316): 維仲之省，厥濞王吳，遭漢初定，以填撫江淮之閒。作吳王濞列傳第四十六。

Translator’s Note According to T’ang Shun-chih 唐順之 (1507-1560), 186 the Memoir of Liu P’i, King of Wu, basically narrates just one thing, but unfortunately he did not share with the reader what he considered that to be. A first approach to interpreting his comment would be to point out that Ssuma Ch’ien strikingly did not grant the King of Wu a place in the section of the hereditary houses (shih chia 世家) but chose to present Liu P’i’s biography amongst all the other memoirs (lieh chuan 列傳). The oddness of this decision is best shown by the fact that later scholars relocated his biography to where they felt it belonged. Pan Ku, for example, appended the core biography of Liu P’i to what basically used to be the Ching Yen shih chia 荆燕世家 (Hereditary House of Ching and Yen) in the Shih chi. Liu P’i could indeed have been the successor of Liu Chia 劉賈, King of Ching 荆, a fate that Ssu-ma Ch’ien considered would have been his187 had he not forfeited his legacy. In contrast Ssu-ma Chen, 188 indicating his different point of view, preferred treating Liu P’i together with Liu Chiao, King Yüan of Ch’u, in one chapter: On the one hand, this arrangement would reunite two of the kings who Kao-tsu in his need for trustworthy men had installed over vast territories at a time when his own offspring was still too young; on the other hand, this would also juxtapose the fates of the hereditary lines of the second eldest brother with the youngest brother of Kao-tsu. Ssu-ma Ch’ien was certainly well aware of these two important aspects and still did not include Liu P’i into the Ch’u wang Yüan shih chia 楚王元世家 (Hereditary House of King Yüan of Ch’u)—a chapter that, despite its title, comprises in large part the account of two Kings of the Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms (Liu Jung, King of Ch’u, and Liu Sui, King of Chao) and begins with an ominous look back 186

Cited in Shih chi p’ing-lin, 106.1a, supra. Ssu-ma Ch’ien stops the hereditary line of the King of Ching abruptly at the point, when Liu P’i is made King of Wu (see Shih chi, 51.1994), thus indicating that the account of his deeds could also have been told in this chapter. 188 Cited in Takigawa, 106.1. 187

127

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

128

at the youth of the four brothers of Kao-tsu that shows the first emperor of the Han in all his resentfulness. Since even a disloyal king that had no successors could be integrated into a hereditary house, why did Ssu-ma Ch’ien still decide to separate Liu P’i so markedly from all the other rebelling Kings? In search for an answer to that question Ch’en Jen-hsi 陳 仁 錫 (1581-1636) 189 refers to the reasons Ssu-ma Ch’ien himself gave for composing this memoir: Liu P’i was originally enthroned “in order to fill and pacify the region between the Chiang 江 and the Huai 淮.”190 By failing his royal task and instigating a rebellion instead he was no longer worthy to be included in the hereditary houses. The same reasoning seems to apply for the case of the Huai-nan Heng-shan lieh chuan 淮 南 衡 山 列 傳 (Memoir of Huai-nan and Heng-shan), a chapter that tells of rebellious Kings, who were, according to Ssu-ma Ch’ien, also once expected to “fill the region south of the Chiang and the Huai 淮”191 and today can be found exactly twelve chapters behind the memoir of the King of Wu. Furthermore, Liu P’i is once referred to as the “head of the revolt” (fan shou 反首) at the short summary of the rebellion at the end of his memoir. Whether this was merely the expected “official diction” or Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s own choice of words, Liu P’i accordingly had to be treated in a different manner. Taking into account the length and density of the Memoir of Liu P’i, King of Wu, it comes as no surprise that many traditional commentators went beyond the question, why it was placed in this portion of the Shih chi, and kept their observations focused on the structure of the narrative itself. Li Ching-hsing 李景 星 (1876-1934) basically divides the chapter into two parts (i.e., events before and after the beginning of the rebellion) taking the little sentence at the end of Liu P’i’s letter announcing the rebellion:192 “Respectfully [We] make this known to you” (ching yi wen 敬以聞)193 as the key. In his admiration for the stylistic perfection of the memoir, he relies on terms Wu Chien-ssu 吳見思 (fl. 16801690) had already used when he concisely named the main sections of the text: 194 First the reader learns about the “countenance” (hsiang 相) of someone who will revolt and the “prophesy” (ch‘en 讖) that someone will revolt, when Kao-tsu has 189

Cited in Takigawa, 106.2. Shih chi, 130.3316. 191 Shih chi, 130.3317. 192 Cited in Han Chao-ch’i 漢兆琦, Shih chi chien cheng 史記笺證 (Nan-ch’ang Shih: Chianghsi jen-min ch’u-pan-she, 2004), v. 8, p. 5348. 193 See Shih chi, 106.2829. 194 Cited in Han Chao-ch’i 漢兆琦, Shih chi chien cheng 史記笺證, v. 8, p. 5348. 190

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

129

the face of Liu P’i read. Copper and salt is presented as the “means” (tzu 資) that will enable the King of Wu to revolt. The mention of the violent death of the Heir of Wu provides the “grounds” (yin 因) for a revolt. An anonymous envoy from Wu exposes the situation and Ch’ao Ts’o with his politics finally expedites the plotting. The oral report to the King of Chiao-hsi, the accord with the six kingdoms, and the deployment of the letter announcing the revolt all arouse the reader’s expectation that events are coming to a head. Then, however, events take a different turn: Yüan Ang appears (in front of the Emperor and has Ch’ao Ts’o executed), Teng Tu-wei appears (as the veteran adviser of Chou Ya-fu), T’ien Lu-po appears (as the Commander-in-Chief whose argument for a surprise strategy remains unheard), the young General Huan appears (with the brilliant idea to of trying to capture Lo-yang quickly with a maximum of force, an idea which is nonetheless rejected), and finally Chou Ch’iu appears (as an mistakenly despised leader that almost singlehandedly demonstrates his true valor). Before the reader gets an opportunity to fathom the repercussions of these individual scenes, the rebellion has already failed. The chapter leaps to the declaration of the victorious Son of Heaven and then comes back to the defeat of the rebels: First the doom of Wu and Ch’u in the attack of Liang, then the failure of the Kings of the North in the siege of Lin-tzu.195 Tseng Kuo-fan 曾囯藩 (1811-1872) also shares the same admiration for the composition of the memoir when he praises the chapter as an excellent example of the skillful combination of detailed and brief style (hsiang lüeh chih fa 詳略之法). 196 He brings to the reader’s attention the great detail in the depiction of the reasons for the revolt, of the reaching of an agreement to revolt, of the great momentum displayed in Liu P’i’s letter, of the plans to suppress the uprising, of the strategies to crush Wu and even of the failure of the experts that could not get the ear of the King of Wu. These six points are all quite elaborate, whilst we learn of the defeat and flight of the King of Wu only en passant, without ever knowing the details. So if the whole memoir was just about the depiction of the Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms, it would be quite an elegant composition, comparable to the sublimity of the account of Hsiang Yu, if we accept Arai Hanpei’s 有井範平 (1830-1889) remarkable judgment.197 195 A last section, not mentioned in this description of Wu Chien-ssu, is reserved for a very short resume and the continuation of the line of the King of Ch’u, respectively the demotion of Liu Fei. 196 Cited in Takigawa, 106.2. 197 Cited in Han Chao-ch’i 漢兆琦, Shih chi chien cheng 史記笺證, v. 8, p. 5348.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 106

130

The meticulous way the Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms is represented in the Memoir of Liu P’i, King of Wu, inevitably raises the question of the reasons for and the background of the revolt. The Grand Scribe’s words at the end of the chapter remind the reader of some of the arguments given in the account: Liu P’i’s abundant wealth and power due the riches of his mountains and the sea, parts of his state that he better had not been enfeoffed with in the first place; the death of his own son at the hand of the Heir; his alliance with the Yueh, which alienated him from his own relatives; and lastly the implications of the actions of Yüan Ang and Ch’ao Ts’o. Though rather selectively chosen, all later positions regarding the Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms could be traced back to these key issues: Was it a general structural problem of Han rule, i.e., any powerful King would inevitably rebel at some point regardless of the initial (or even blood) relation of the feoffee to his lord, that caused the revolt? Was it a single incident, i.e., the unfortunate death of his son and the unworthy circumstance of his burial—in combination with the means and a pretext—that gave rise to Liu P’i’s plotting? Or was it all Ch’ao Ts’o’s fault whose aggressive policies forced the Seven Kingdoms into Rebellion? Especially Ch’ao Ts’o’s role polarizes the traditional commentators: For Wu Ju-lun 吳汝綸 (1840-1903)198 the chapter is all about the arrogance of the King of Wu and his plotting of the rebellion, it is a case of a failed enfeoffment. Chao Heng 趙恒 (fl. 1538) basically agrees with his point of view and stresses that Liu P’i had been “ripening evil thoughts” (jen e 稔惡) for a long time. Ch’ao emerges in their comments as a tragic character that lost his own life over his concern to govern the empire. Despite his pity for him Ch’en Fu-liang 陳傅良 (11371203)199 also challenges Ch’ao Ts’o’s rationale that the King of Wu would revolt no matter whether the Emperor would seize his territory or not. He rather argues that only the radical and hasty reduction of the kingdom’s territory produced the rebellion. Ch’ao Ts’o’s lack of patience made him the laughingstock of the empire. Ch’en Fu-liang’s comment culminates in the rhetorical question: Doesn’t the saying 貪走者蹶，貪食者噎 “Those who are greedy to flee will stumble, those who are greedy to eat will choke” apply to Ch’ao Ts’o?! Wang Fu-chih 王 夫 之 (1619-1692) ventures in his analysis of the rebellion even one step further:200 The ardent arguments of Chia Yi and Ch’ao Ts’o both were blind to the prudence of Wen-ti who surely could have avoided the revolt by his 198

Cited in Han Chao-ch’i 漢兆琦, Shih chi chien cheng 史記笺證, v. 8, p. 5346. Cited Shih chi p’ing-lin, 106.4a-b. 200 Cited in Han Chao-ch’i 漢兆琦, Shih chi chien cheng 史記笺證, v. 8, p. 5347. 199

Liu P’i, King of Wu, Memoir 46

131

seemingly so lenient and benevolent policy. Without doubt did Wen-ti see the danger that Wu presented to the court and he could have punished Liu P’i for his transgressions, and still he rather chose not to, since obviously time would surely have solved all their worries. Liu P’i was after all already an old man, when Wen-ti passed away, and without his lead the Kings of former Ch’i would have been far too hesitant to raise a rebellion on their own. Although the whole chapter is apparently about Liu P’i, the King of Wu, and his plotting the rebellion, Wang Fu-chih, with his remark about the Kings of former Ch’i, touches upon an important issue that may be only indirectly present in the final remarks of Ssu-ma Ch’ien: When he blames Yüan Ang and Ch’ao Ts’o for becoming the “head of power” does he simultaneously also blame Liu P’i for becoming the “head of the revolt”? In this case the son of the elder brother of Kao-tsu would have died in a war fought for the children of Liu Fei the eldest brother of Wen-ti and their claim for the Empire.201

201

Nunome Chōfū 布目潮渢, for example, speaks explicitly of the background struggle of two factions: one supporting Wen-ti and one in favor of the claim of the King of Ch’i (see “Go So shichigoku no ran no haikei” 呉楚七国の乱の背景, (Nunome Chōfū Chūgokushi ronshū 布目潮渢 中国史論集, Tōkyō: Kyūko Shoin, 2003) especially, pp. 6-8.

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:239-88. Watson, Han, pp. 465-86. Viatkin, 8:274-89, notes 429-33. II. Studies Akikawa Mitsuhiko 秋川光彦, “Zen Kan buntei no tai sho kō ō saku—Go So shichigoku no ran no ichi haikei to shite” 前漢文帝の対諸侯王策—呉楚七 国の乱の一背景として, Taishodaigaku Daigakuin kenkyuronshu 大正大学 大学院研究論集 25 (2001.3), pp. 119-32. Chang Fu-yün 張福運, “Hsi Han Wu Ch’u ch’i kuo chih luan yüan yin pien che” 西漢吳楚七國之亂原因辨析, Jen wen tsa chih 人文杂志 5 (2003), pp. 1215. Emmerich, Reinhold, “Die Rebellion der Sieben Könige, 154 v.Chr.,” in Reinhard Emmerich and Hans Stumpfeldt, eds., Und folge nun dem, was mein Herz begehrt: Festschrift für Ulrich Unger zum 70. Geburtstag (Hamburg: Hamburger Sinologische Gesellschaft, 2002), pp. 397–497. Ho Wei-yi 何為義, “Yeh p’ing Wu Ch’u ch’i kuo chih luan,” 也評吳楚七國之 亂, Liao-ning da-hsüeh hsüeh-pao 遼寧大學學報 2 (1997), pp. 99-102. Inaba Ichirō 稻葉一朗, “Go So shichigoku no ran ni tsuite” 呉楚七国の乱につ いて, Ritsumeikan bungaku 立命館文学 5 (6.1967), pp. 10-41. Nunome Chōfū 布目潮渢, “Go So shichigoku no ran no haikei” 呉楚七国の乱 の背景, Nunome Chōfū Chūgokushi ronshū 布目潮渢中国史論集, Tōkyō: Kyūko Shoin, 2003, pp. 4-16.

133

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47 translated by William H. Nienhauser, Jr. Tou Ying [107.2839] Tou Ying 竇嬰,1 the Marquis of Wei-chi 魏其,2 was the son of an elder cousin of Hsiao Wen Hou 孝文后 (Empress Hsiao Wen, i.e., Tou Yi-fang 竇猗房3). His forefathers had for generations been men of Kuan-chin 觀津.4 1

See also the entry on Tou in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 79-80 and his biography in the Han shu (52.2375-92). His agnomen was Wang-sun 王孫 (Han shu, 52.2375). As has been seen in other chapters (cf. “Fan, Li, T’eng, Kuan lieh-chuan” 樊, 酈, 滕, 灌列傳, Shih chi, 95.2651 ff., for example), the Shih chi often introduces a person with their title; Pan Ku regularly omits this reference in his opening lines. 2 Wei-chi was a county seat located on the east bank of the Yi 沂 River in the extreme southwestern part of Lang-ya 郎邪 Commandery (modern Shantung about 130 miles southwest of Tsingtao and equidistant in a south-southeasterly direction from Tsinan, T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19; Han shu, 28A.1586). It had originally been given as a fief to Chou Ting 周定 (d. 183 B.C.) in 201 B.C., but had been taken from the Chou family when Chou Chien 周閒 (d. 154 B.C.), Chou Ting’s son, was implicated in the Rebellion of the Seven States (Shih chi, 18.916). Tou Ying received the fief of 3,350 households for his defense of Hsing-yang 滎 陽 during the rebellion (Shih chi, 19.1012); according to Shih chi Chapter 19, this was the fifth largest fief awarded under Emperor Ching (of a total of three enfeoffments). It would seem to reflect the favor that Tou Ying had won at court (there is no way to compare his reward to that of the other major defender of dynastic interests against the Seven States, since Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫 had inherited the fief of his father, Chou Po 周勃, at Chiang 絳 [Shih chi, 57.2073]). Still, it was a relatively isolated county and could not have been considered an overly generous reward for Tou Ying’s loyalty. 3 Empress Dowager Tou 竇皇后 (her praenomen is provided by P’ei Yin citing Huang-fu Mi 皇甫謐 (215-282) in the “Chi-chieh,” Shih chi, 49.1973) was an important political force especially from the time of the death of Wen-ti in 157 B.C. until her death in 135. The two guiding motives for her actions were her firm belief in the teachings of Huang-ti and Lao Tzu and her strong love for her younger son, Liu Wu 劉武, King of Liang (r. 168 B.C. until his death in 144 B.C.). Mizusawa (47.1) notes that both the Kaedeyama 楓山 and Sanjô 三條 editions read “Huanghou 孝文皇后” for “Hsiao Wen hou 孝文后” here, in concert with the Han shu (52.2375).

135

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

136

During the time of Hsiao Wen[-ti] 孝文帝 (The Cultured and Filial Emperor, 203-157 B.C., r. 180-157 B.C.), [Tou] Ying became Chancellor of Wu 吳,5 but resigned because of illness.6 Shortly after Hsiao Ching[-ti] (r. 156-141 B.C.) was enthroned, he became Supervisor of the [Empress’] Household.7 King Hsiao 孝 of Liang (i.e., Liu Wu 劉武, r. 168-144 B.C.), a younger brother of Hsiao Ching[-ti], was beloved by their mother, Grand Dowager Tou 竇 (i.e., Hsiao Wen Hou). Once when King Hsiao of Liang came to court, [the Emperor] took advantage8 to fete him as a brother [rather than a subject]. At that time the Sovereign had not yet established the Heir; when he was feeling his wine, he casually said, “After I have lived my thousand autumns, [the throne] should be transmitted to the King of Liang.” 9 The Empress Dowager was

4

A tiny county seat in what was the statelet of Hsin-tu 信都 a little over one hundred miles northeast of modern Han-tan 邯鄲 and thirty miles northwest of Te-chou 德州 in Hopei (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:26). In Empress Tou’s biography it was noted that she came from a good family of Chao (Shih chi, 49.1972); there, however, Kuan-chin was a part of Ch’ing-ho 清河 Commandery which is located just to the south of Hsin-tu. This is either an error or an indication that Ch’ing-ho was at one time a larger entity. See also the “Suo-yin” note (Shih chi, 80.2429). According to T’an Ch’ihsiang (1:38), Kuan-chin existed already in the Warring States Era and was located in the marches between Chung-shan and Ch’i (in the delta of the Yellow River, which at that time had three mouths), but traditional commentators, probably basing themselves on the latest borders of Chao prior to its fall to the Ch’in (cf. T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:35), argue that Kuan-chin nevertheless belonged to Chao. 5 The chancellors of the various states in the early Han were appointed and dismissed by order of the Emperor. 6 Serving Liu P’i 劉濞, the King of Wu from 195-154 B.C.; Liu P’i was a nephew of Liu Pang (his father, Liu Hsi 劉喜 or Liu Chung 劉仲 was Liu Pang’s elder brother) and the chief instigator of the Rebellion of the Seven States which broke out in 154 B.C. (see his biography on Shih chi, 106.2821-37). 7 Chan-shih 詹事. Tou Ying served in Empress Tou’s household. 8 Another reading of yin 因 here might be “accordingly.” 9 The Han shu (52.2375) parallel reads: “After I have lived my thousand autumns and ten thousand years” 千秋萬歲後 and subsequently simply wang 王 (i.e., “should be transmitted to Your Majesty”), for the Shih chi’s “Liang wang” 梁王. This echoes the depiction of this meeting given in the “Liang Hsiao Wang shih-chia” 梁孝王世家 (Shih chi, 58.2082): “In the twenty-fifth year (154 B.C.), [the King of Liang] again came in to attend court. At this time, the Heir had not yet been set up. The Sovereign feasted and drank together with the King of Liang. He casually spoke up and said, ‘After We have lived a thousand autumns and ten thousand years We shall transmit [the throne] to Your Majesty”; 二十五年，復入朝。是時上未置太子也。上與梁王燕 飲，嘗從容言曰：「千秋萬歲后傳於王。」 Since the expression ch’ien ch’iu occurs only in

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

137

delighted. Tou Ying took a scyphus10 of wine and offered the Sovereign a toast, 11 saying, “This empire is the empire of Kao-tsu and is passed from father to son— this is the compact of the Han. My Sovereign, how would you be able to pass [the throne] to the King of Liang on your own authority?!” 12 The Empress Dowager from this time on detested [Tou] Ying. Ying furthermore scorned his official position, and he took advantage of this to resign because of illness.13 The Empress Dowager had him removed from the [palace] gate register14 so that he was unable to attend court.15 [2840] In the third year of Hsiao Ching (154 B.C.), Wu and Ch’u rebelled.16 Only when the Sovereign had examined [members of] the royal house17 and the Tous, no one being as worthy as Tou Ying, did he summon Ying.18 When [Tou] this text in the Shih chi, although the expression ch’ien ch’iu wan sui 千秋萬歲 occurs a number of times, it is possible that the Han shu reading of the text here is closer to the original Shih chi. 10 Chih 卮, “sychphus,”was a two-handled goblet with a capacity of four sheng. The Han shu parallel reads 巵, a more “normalized” version of the graph. 11 Chang Lieh (52.2475n.) notes that yin chih 引巵 is a compound meaning “to toast someone with a scyphus of wine; yin here suggests that Tou Ying took the wine from someone else. 12 It is not clear what agreement or compact (yüeh 約) Tou Ying is referring to here. Wang Ling 王陵 cites the covenant that Kao-tsu concluded with his vassals that no one but a member of the Liu family should be made a king (cf. Shih chi, 9.400), but a similar arrangement that the imperial succession should be from father to son does not seem to exist in extant texts. On another unrecorded compact that Kao-tsu seems to have made see Ying Shao’s 應 劭 comments on Han shu, 17.635 (n. 5). 13 This resignation recalls Tou Ying’s departure from the chancellorship of Wu, suggesting that the earlier illness was also a pretext. 14 The men-chi 門籍 or “gate register” was a wooden tablet about two feet long which was hung at the palace gate. The names, age, and description of all who were permitted into the palace were listed on it and this information was used by the guards to check those who wanted to gain admission. 15 Chao ch’ing 朝請 originally referred to the spring (chao) and autumn (ch’ing) attendance of the various lords at court, but here seems simply to refer attending court in general. 16 Actually, seven states rebelled led by the King of Wu, Liu P’i, and the King of Ch’u, Liu Wu 劉戊 (r. 175-154 B.C.), the other states were Chiao-hsi 膠西, Chiao-tung 膠東, Tzu-ch’uan 菑川, Chi-nan 濟南, and Chao 趙. 17 Although tsung shih 宗室, translated here as “royal house,” can refer either to the clans of the Emperor or the Empress, as Wang Hsien-ch’ien (following Yen Shih-ku’s original note) argues (Han shu pu chu, 107.1b), the reference here is to Emperor Ching. 18 The Han shu parallel (52.2840) omits the awkward repetition of Ying 嬰 and reads: “[The Sovereign] summoned him to come in for an audience, but he resolutely yielded and declined, claiming that because of illness he was not qualified to undertake an assignment”; 召入見, 固讓謝, 稱病不足任. However, the Han shu syntax seems flawed, since the subject of the entire sentence

138

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

Ying went in for an audience, he resolutely refused [a position], declining because his illness made him unfit to undertake an assignment.19 The Empress Dowager was moreover20 ashamed. At this, the Sovereign said, “With the empire just now in a crisis, how could you decline, Wang-sun 王孫?”21 Only then22 did he [the Sovereign] appoint him General-in-Chief and bestow one thousand chin of gold on him. Ying then spoke [to the Emperor] of Yüan Ang 袁盎,23 Luan Pu 欒布,24 and those famous commanders and worthy gentlemen who were staying at home [i.e., rather than at court] and recommended them. As for the gold which (as punctuated by the Chung-hua editors) should be Shang 上, the Sovereign, yet the subject of “yield and decline” must be Tou Ying. It would seem that in an attempt to improve the style of the passage, Pan Ku nodded. The first part of this paragraph and that of the following were the basis for the comments on why this chapter was written in “Tai-shih-kung tzu-hsü” 太史公自序 (cf. Shih chi, 130.3316, and our rendering at the end of this translation). 19 Mizusawa (47.1-2) points out that the Kaedeyama edition, the Sanjô edition, and one other early Shih chi text all read ch’eng ping 稱病 “to claim illness,” as does the Han shu parallel (53.2376). 20 Reading yi 亦 as “moreover.” Another possible reading would be 亦 = 以: “was because of this embarrassed.” 21 Li Jen-chien 李人鍳 (T’ai-shih-kung shu chiao-tu chi 太史公書校讀記 [2v.; Lanchow: Kan-su Jen-min, 1998], 2:1416) points out that wang sun 王孫 is an honorific term (like kung tzu 公子) used to refer to the royal scions of the states that Ch’in conquered in the late third century B.C. When wang sun appears in the response the washer-woman has to Han Hsin 韓信 in the opening lines of his biography (Shih chi, 92.2609), 張 晏 (fl. 250) apparently interpreted it incorrectly as Han Hsin’s agnomen. But Chang Yen is cited only in the “So-yin” (92.2610)—not as would be more usual in the “Chi-chieh.” Ssu-ma Chen 司馬貞 corrects Chang Yen by citing Liu Te 劉德 and Su Lin 蘇林 who argue wang sun is merely the honorific, “noble grandscions” in this passage. Li Jen-chien then speculates that the Emperor in referring to Tou Ying as wang sun is also using an honorific, not Tou Ying’s agnomen, and that Pan Ku’s notation of Tou’s agnomen in the opening line of the Han shu biography was simply derived (erroneously) from this reference. 22 Nai 乃 appears several times in this passage (also in the following sentence). It seems to emphasize Tou Ying’s reluctance to take a low-ranking position (by repeatedly resigning or declining them) until he is offered something he likes. Another reading of nai here might be simply “then.” 23 This presumably refers to Tou Ying arranging for Yüan Ang to have a private audience with the Emperor which allowed Yüan to malign his enemy, Ch’ao Ts’o 鼂錯. Ch’ao was executed and Yüan and Tou Ying (who was made General-in-Chief) both basked for a time in imperial favor (cf. Yüan’s biography, Shih chi, 101.2742). 24 Although Luan Pu (d. 145; cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 429) played an important role in subduing the revolt of the Seven Kings in 154 B.C., there is no record in his biography (Shih chi Chapter 100) of Tou Ying recommending him.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

139

[the Sovereign] bestowed on him, he arrayed it in the galleries and gatehouse [of his residence]; when his military officers stopped by, it would allow them to immediately take of it for expeditures [or “for their use”], [so that] none of the gold entered his own household.25 When Tou Ying garrisoned Hsing-yang 滎 陽,26 he kept the troops of Ch’i and Chao in check.27 When the troops of the Seven Kingdoms had already been completely defeated, [the Emperor] enfeoffed him as Marquis of Wei-chi. The various gentlemen who wandered about [seeking a position], guests, and retainers competed to give their allegiance to the Marquis of Wei-chi. During the time of Hsiao Ching[-ti] 孝景帝 (r. 156-141 B.C.), 28 whenever a major issue was being deliberated at court, none of the ranking marquises would dare to treat the Marquis of T’iao 條 (i.e., Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫, d. 143 B.C.) 29 and the Marquis of Wei-chi as though they were of equal rank. In the fourth year of Hsiao Ching[-ti] (153 B.C.), [the Emperor] installed Heir Li 栗30 and had the Marquis of Wei-chi become Tutor to the Heir. 31 In the seventh year of Hsiao Ching[-ti] (150 B.C.), when Heir Li was removed, Wei-chi remonstrated several times but was not able to obtain [his goal].32 Wei-chi resigned because of illness and was living in retirement in Lan25

This is in concert with the depiction of Tou Ying in the “Wai-ch’i shih-chia” 外戚世家 as “commited to knight-errantry and pleased with himself” (jen hsia tzu hsi 任俠自喜, Shih chi, 49.1974). The Emperor’s evaluation of Tou Ying in the text below also finds him “pleased with himself.” 26 In another account, Luan Pu is specifically given credit for defeating the forces of three kingdoms attacking Ch’i and for defeating Chao (cf. Shih chi, 52.2006–no mention is made of this in Luan’s biography in Chapter 100). But since Luan seems to have been given command at Tou Ying’s recommendation, perhaps he can also be credited for controlling Ch’i and Chao. 27 See the similar passage on Shih chi, 106.2830. 28 Li Jen-chien (op. cit., p. 1416) points out that the Han shu parallel account (52.2376) omits the three characters “Hsiao Ching shih” 孝景時 presumably because this paragraph begins with “in the third year of Hsiao Ching” and the following paragraph “in the fourth year.” Li argues that Ssuma Ch’ien’s intent here was to suggest the importance of Tou Ying and Chou Ya-fu throughout Emperor Ching’s reign and thus Pan Ku’s emendation distorts the original meaning. 29 Zhou Yafu was also instrumental in suppressing the rebellion in 154 B.C., serving as Grand Commandant with over thirty subordinate generals (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 735-6 and his biography on Shih chi, 57.2073-9. 30 I.e., Liu Jung 劉榮. He was Emperor Ching’s eldest son by Beauty Li 栗姬. Later, he was forced to commit suicide and became known by his mother’s cognomen, Li (see Han shu, 53.2412 and Shih chi, 49.1976). 31 T’ai-tzu fu 太子傅. 32 The Han shu parallel reads pa 拔 (to seize) for the Shih chi’s te 得 (to obtain).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

140

t’ien beneath the Southern Mountains for several months33; various of his guests, retainers, and rhetoricians tried to persuade him, but none were able to cause him to come [back to court]. Only then did Kao Sui 高遂, a native of Liang, advise him saying, “The one who can bring the General34 wealth and honor is none but the Sovereign; the one who can offer the General close family ties is none but the Empress Dowager. Now the General has been Tutor to the Heir and when the Heir was removed, you were unable to [successfully] remonstrate.35 When you remonstrated but were not able to [prevent his removal], you were further unable to risk you life for him. Withdrawing yourself you declined [a position] due to illness, surrounded36 yourself with women [as beautiful as those] from Chao, lived in idleness at home, and did not attend court. Arranging these two things together [a claim of illness and surrounding yourself with women],37 you are clearly making public the Sovereign’s error. If you further incur the wrath38 of the two palaces [i.e., the Emperor and the Empress Dowager39], General, then your wife and children and will have no posterity. 40 The Marquis of Wei-chi considered this to be correct, and only then did he finally get up [from his ‘sickbed’] and, as in the past, attend court. 33

Reminiscent of Li Kuang’s 李廣 similar retirement for a time to Lan-t’ien (cf. Shih chi, 109.2871). 34 Both Tou Ying and later T’ien Fen are generally addressed by subordinates using their military title, “General” (Chiang-chün 將軍). 35 Li Jen-chien (op. cit., p. 1416) argues that since Kao Sui is reiterating the text and events from the previous lines, the four characters erh pu neng cheng 而不能争, which do not appear in the Han shu parallel, are likely an dittographic interpolation. Our translation seems the Shih chi version as a more powerful use of rhetoric. 36 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 52.2377) glosses yung 擁 as pao 抱, “to embrace.” 37 Takigawa (107.5), citing Nakai Sekitoku 中井積德, offers another interpretation of for hsiang t’i erh lun 相提而論: “to take his retainers by the hand and discuss matters.” The Han shu parallel reads ti chia tui 袛加懟, “if you cause the resentment [of the two palaces] to be increased.” 38 Shi 螫 is a verb used to depict the sting or bite of a poisonous insect, thus a free translation here might read “to incur the venom of the two palaces.” The Han shu parallel (52.2376) reads shi 奭 (alternately read ho), which also means “to enrage.” Wang Shu-min (107.2930) argues that both readings are loan characters for ho 赫. The question of how these variants evolved remains to be sorted. 39 The Emperor lived in the Wei-yang Palace 未央 to the west of Ch’ang-an, the Empress Dowager in the Ch’ang-le 長樂 Palace in the east (cf. Chang Yen’s explanation in “Chi-chieh”). The “Cheng-yi” glosses the two palaces as that of the Heir Li and Emperor Ching, but it seems that incurring the disempowered Heir Li’s anger would not run any risk to Tou Ying or his family. 40 I.e., your clan will be put to death.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

141

[2841] When the Marquis of T’ao 桃 41 was dismissed from the chancellorship, Empress Dowager Tou several times spoke [to the Emperor] about the Marquis of Wei-chi. Emperor Hsiao Ching said, “Could Your Majesty really consider that I begrudge him by not appointing Wei-chi chancellor? Weichi is simply frivolous, full of himself42 and often fickle.43 It would be difficult to consider him for the especially heavy burdens of the chancellor.” In the end he did not employ him, but employed Wei Wan 衛綰, the Marquis of Chien-ling 建 陵 as Chancellor.44

T’ien Fen T’ien Fen 田蚡,45 the Marquis of Wu-an 武安,46 and the younger brother of [Emperor] Hsiao Ching’s empress by the same mother,47 was born in Ch’ang-ling

41

I.e., Liu She 劉舍 who inherited this noble title from his father, Liu Hsiang 劉襄. T’ao was a Han county located northwest of modern Heng-shui 衡水 County in Hopei about seventy miles east-southeast of Shih-chia-chuang (Chang Lieh, Han shu, 52.2476n. [not in T’an Ch’i-hsiang]). 42 Chan chan 沾沾 may also be read as “complacent.” 43 Chang Yen glosses yi 易 here as “rash” (ch’ing yi 輕易; cf. “Chi-chieh”). 44 Wei Wan was from Tai 代. He won merit in putting down the Rebellion of the Seven States and was made Marquis of Chien-ling in 151 B.C. (cf. Wu and Lu, 107.2801n. and Wei’s biography, Shih chi, 103.2768-70). Wei Wan had been Grandee Secretary and thus in line for the chancellorship to which he was appointed in 143 B.C. Li Chien-jen, pp. 1416-7, points out that according to the “Pai-kuan kung-ch’ing piao” 百官公 卿表 in the Han shu (19B.766), Wei Wan became chancellor in the eighth month 143 B.C., but Heir Li had been deposed in early 150 B.C. (cf. Shih chi, 11.443 and 22.1131 for details). Thus the deposing of Heir Li and the advice Kao Sui gave Tou Ying took place seven years apart. Chien-ling is northwest of modern Shu-yang 沭陽 County in Kiangsu (Wu and Lu, ibid.). 45 T’ien Fen was the half-brother of Empress Wang (Wang Chih 王娡 [d. 126], referred to below as Empress Dowager Wang). Their mother, Tsang Erh 臧兒, had married into the T’ien family of Ch’ang-ling after the early death of her first husband, Wang Chung 王仲, who was also the Empress’s father. Fen’s father was a member of the Ch’ang-ling T’ien clan. A younger brother, T’ien Sheng 田勝, was also born in Ch’ang-ling. More details on Empress Wang’s children can be found in her biography (Shih chi, 49.1975-8). A parallel biography of T’ien Fen can be found on Han shu, 52.2377-94 (see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 505-6). 46 Wu-an is near modern Wu-an County (Hopei) twenty miles west-northwest of Han-tan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26). 47 I.e., Empress Wang (d. 126); see note 45 above.

142

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

長陵.48 After [the Marquis of] Wei-chi had already become General-in-Chief and had just reached the height [of his power], Fen was one of the various [palace] gentlemen,49 and was not exalted; he often came to wait on [the Marquis of] Weichi when he was drinking wine, kneeling and then rising [to pour wine] as if he were one of Wei-chi’s descendants.50 When Hsiao Ching was in his later years, Fen, increasingly exalted and favored, became Grand Palace Grandee.51 Fen was a skilled speaker in debate, having studied [*2842*] the Pan yü 槃盂 (Vessel [Inscriptions]) 52 and the writings of various masters, 53 and Empress Dowager Wang considered him a worthy man. Hsiao Ching passed away and on that very day the heir was enthroned, [but the Empress Dowager] caused her orders to be considered decrees and man of those which kept order and insured peace were plans or stratagems made by T’ien Fen’s retainers. Fen’s younger brother, T’ien Sheng 田勝,54 was also a younger [half-] brothers of the Empress Dowager; in the third year of the later reign of Hsiao Ching (141 B.C.), Fen was enfeoffed as Marquis of Wu-an and Sheng was Marquis of Chou-yang 周陽.55

48 Ch’ang-ling was the mausoleum town for Emperor Kao-tsu located about fifteen miles north-northeast of the capital, Ch’ang-an (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). 49 For chu lang 諸郎 the Han shu parallel (52.2377) reads chu ts’ao lang 曹郎 (of the various bureaus of gentlemen), referring to such positions as yi lang 議郎, chung lang 中郎, shih lang 侍郎, or lang chung 郎中. 50 Tzu hsing 子姓 is glossed by a number of modern scholars as tzu sun 子孫, descendants. Mizusawa (107.4) notes that a number (he cites eleven) of editions, including several Sung-dynasty texts, have tzu chih 子姪 (sons and nephews—i.e., descendants) for tzu hsing. 51 The Han shu (52.2377) parallel reads Chung Tai-fu 中大夫, Palace Grandee. 52 Tradition has it that these inscriptions–twenty-nine of them all inscribed on various bronze vessels–had been composed by the Huang-ti’s scribe, K’ung Chia 孔甲 (cf. “Chi-chieh”). 53 Reading chu shu 諸書 as chu tzu wen shu 諸子文書 as Ying Shao suggests (cf. “Chi-chieh”). 54 See also the notice in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 511. 55 Chou-yang was located near Wen-hsi 聞喜 County in modern Shansi about twenty-five miles southwest of Hou-ma City 侯馬市 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). This took place in the third month of 141 B.C., after Emperor Ching’s death, and was presumably ordered by the Empress Dowager Wang (cf. also the passage on Shih chi, 11.448). The Han shu parallel (52.2378) is quite different here: “When Hsiao Ching passed away and Wu-ti first ascended the throne, Fen because of his [Emperor Ching’s] uncle was enfeoffed as Marquis of Wuan and his younger brother Sheng as Marquis of Chou-yang” 孝景崩, 武帝初即位, 蚡以舅封為武 安侯, 弟為周陽侯. Thus the Han shu attributes Fen’s advancement to Tou Ying, Emperor Ching’s uncle (cf. Shih Ting’s 施丁 note, Han shu, 52.1675).

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

143

When the Marquis of Wu-an newly wanted to be in charge of affairs and become Chancellor,56 he humbled himself before his guests and retainers and recommended famous gentlemen who were staying at home, causing them to become esteemed, 57 intending to thereby overturn58 the various commanders and ministers of Wei-chi. In the first year of the chien-yüan 建 元 reign (140 B.C.), 59 when the Chancellor [Wei] Wan [衛]綰 retired because of illness, the sovereign caused the positioning of the chancellor and the grand commandant to be discussed [at

56

Li Jen-chien 李人鍳 (Chiao-tu chi, pp. 1417-8) points out that the Han shu (52.2378) omission of yü 欲 (in yü yung shih 欲用事, “to intend to take charge of affairs”) is logical, since the text has just told us that T’ien Fen was enfeoffed and that most of the plans utilized by Empress Dowager Wang came from his retainers. The sentence which follows in the Han shu reads: 上所填 撫, 多蚡賓客計策. Although Li Jen-chien does not comment, this seems to be a restructuring of the awkward sentence just above which reads: “Hsiao Ching passed away and on that very day the heir was enthroned, [but the Empress Dowager] caused her orders to be considered decrees and man of those which kept order and insured peace were plans or stratagems made by T’ien Fen’s retainers” 孝景 崩，即日太子立，稱制，所鎮撫多有田蚡賓客計筴. This syntactic normalization in the Han shu suggests that the less crafted account in the Shih chi was the earlier text. There is a major difference between the Shih chi and Han shu here, in that Pan Ku stresses that after Emperor Ching passed away Emperor Wu, with the help of T’ien and his retainers, took immediate charge; the Shih chi argues that it was Empress Dowager Wang who, again aided by T’ien and his men, gained control of things. 57 This passage echoes the description of how Tou Ying came to power (Shih chi, 107.2840.3): “Ying then spoke [to the Emperor] of Yüan Ang, Luan Pu, and those famous commanders and worthy gentlemen who were staying home [i.e., rather than at court] and recommended them.” 嬰 乃言袁盎、欒布諸名將賢士在家者進之. The Han shu parallel (52.2378) reads “T’ien Fen having newly taken power [by being enfeoffed], he humbled himself to his guests and retainers, etc.,” omitting both the first yü 欲 (wanted) and the reference to the chancellorship. Chin Chuo 晉灼 comments that these guests and retainers were “those who were stagnating in the village lanes and had not yet served in official positions” 滯在里巷未仕者 (ibid.). 58 Li Jen-chien, Chiao-tu chi, p. 1418, notes the parallels between T’ien Fen seeking to “overturn” Tou Ying’s retainers and the Noble Scion of Wei “overturning” (the same verb, ch’ing 傾, is used in both texts) the allegiance of many of the Lord of P’ing-yüan’s retainers (cf. Shih chi, 77.2382; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:220). Indeed, there are a number of parallels between the relationships of T’ien Fen and Tou Ying and the Lord of P’ing-yüan and the Noble Scion of Wei (see the Translator’s Note). 59 The Han shu parallel reads simply “when [hui 會] the Chancellor Wei Wan retired because of illness,” with no mention of the exact year.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

144

court]. Chi Fu 籍 福 60 advised the Marquis of Wu-an: “Wei-chi has been esteemed [by the emperor] for a long time now, and those chevaliers61 of the empire have gone over to him. Now, my General,62 you have just risen to power and cannot measure up to Wei-chi. If the sovereign takes you, General, as chancellor, you must yield to Wei-chi. Should Wei-chi become chancellor, you are certain to become the grand commandant. The grand commandant and the chancellor are respected equally. Furthermore you will have gained the reputation of yielding to the worthier.” Only then did the Marquis of Wu-an speak to the Grand Dowager about this in secret, [asking her] to give a hint to the sovereign. From this, then, [the sovereign] took the Marquis of Wei-chi as chancellor and the Marquis of Wu-an as grand commandant. When Chi Fu [went to] congratulate the Marquis of Wei-chi, he took the opportunity to caution him: “It is Your Lordship disposition to delight in the good and hate the evil. Just now good men have recommended Your Lordship and for this reason you have reached the office of chancellor. Yet even though Your Lordship loathes evil, evil men abound. They indeed can even malign you. If you are able to tolerate both [good and evil men], then you will enjoy imperial favor for a long time; if you are not able to, you will presently be dismissed through this malice.” Wei-chi did not heed him. [2843] [The marquises of] Wei-chi and Wu-an, both fond of the methods of the Confucian-scholars, boosted Chao Wan 趙綰63 to become Grandee Secretary and Wang Tsang 王臧64 to become Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace. 65 60

Apparently one of T’ien Fen’s retainers (see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 181-2). Chevalier–an attempt to render shih 士 here–was a man of the lowest rank of French nobility and shared many of the goals and duties of the shih in Han China. 62 As noted above, both Tou Ying and T’ien Fen are often referred to as “General.” Since Tou Ying was made Ta chiang-chün 大將軍, General-in-Chief, during the rebellion in 154 B.C., this fits his position. But as there is no record of T’ien Fen being appointed general and at this point he had not yet been made Grand Commandant (T’ai-wei 太尉), the reason for this form of address is unclear. 63 A native of Tai 代, Chao Wan and Wang Tsang both studied the Shi 詩 (Odes) with Shen P’ei 申培. After antagonizing the Empress Dowager Tou with their proposals, she found some error (kuo 過) that both men had made and had them questioned by legal officials. While in confinement, both committed suicide (cf. Shih chi, 121.3221-2 and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 711-2). 64 Wang Tsang served as tutor to Emperor Wu when the latter was still heir, but retired from that post. When Emperor Wu ascended the throne, he was made a palace guard. See Shih chi, 121.3121-2, and the preceding note. 65 This was also one of the Nine Ministrial Positions (Chiu ch’ing 九卿) responsible for patrolling and protecting the palace. Thus Tou Ying and T’ien Fen held the highest political and 61

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

145

They welcomed Master Shen 申 of Lu66 [to court], intending to establish a Mingt’ang 明堂 (Bright Hall), 67 ordered the ranking marquises to go to their states, abolished the custom barriers, 68 and according to the ritual [of the Confucianscholars] established codes of dress and ceremony, to thereby bring about an era of great peace. They reported and censured69 those of the various branches of the Tou’s and the royal clan who had violated standards of conduct and expunged their names from the clan registers. At this time, various members who had married the royal family were ranking marquises, and since the ranking marquises had mostly been espoused to imperial princesses, none of them wanted to go to their states; for this reason their maligning [of Tou and T’ien] reached the Empress Dowager Tou day after day. The Empress Dowager was fond of the teachings of Huang-Lao, while Wei-chi, Wu-an, Chao Wan, Wang Tsang, and their group exerted themselves to advance the methods of the Confucian-scholars and to disparage the teachings of the Taoists; in this way the Empress Dowager Tou was increasingly displeased with Wei-chi and his group.70 When the second year of chien-yüan (139 B.C.) began, the Grandee Secretary Chao Wan requested [to the Emperor] that he not71 have to present his affairs [first] to the Eastern Palace [i.e., to the Empress Dowager]. The Empress military positions, respectively, and Chao Wan was essentially the vice-chancellor, and Wang Tsang in control of the palace. 66 Shen P’ei 申培 (ca. 220-ca. 138 B.C.) was a well known Ju 儒 scholar of early Han (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 469-70). A biographical sketch can be found in the “Ju-lin lieh-chuan” 儒林 列傳, Shih chi, 121.3120-1. He was summoned to court to assist in the ritual revolution that Chao Wan and Wang Tsang were supposed to effect. 67 Although much ink has been spilt in traditional texts and by modern scholars on the Mingt’ang, this building was intended to be built outside the capital to receive annual visits of the “feudal lords,” i.e., the ranking marquises who were now required to go to their fiefs and the other fief holders. 68 According to the Han law (the “Chin kuan ling” 津關令), all travel and transport of goods was permitted only with a governmental pass (chuan 傳) and regulated through custom houses (kuan ch’ia 關卡). Emperor Wen had done away with all such restrictions on travel in 168 B.C., but reinstituted them after the Revolt of the Seven Kings in 153 B.C. (cf. the long note by Wu and Lu, 107.2802). 69 The Han shu parallel (52.2379) reads chü-shih 舉適 “reported and remonstrated” for chüche 舉讁. 70 The Han shu parallel (52.2379) omits “with Wei-chi and the others” 魏其等 here. 71 The Han shu parallel (52.2379) reads wu 毋 for wu 無 in the line 無奏事東宮. Several lines above, however, the Han shu parallel reads wu 無 for the Shih chi’s wu 毋 for in the phrase 毋節行 者, making it difficult to see where there is a normalization of graphs in this passage.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

146

Dowager Tou was enraged72 and thus dismissed and expelled Chao Wan, Wang Tsang,73 and others, [then] removed the Chancellor and Grand Commandant and took the Marquis of Po-chih 柏至侯, Hsü Ch’ang 許昌,74 as the Chancellor, and the Marquis of Wu-ch’iang 武彊侯, Chuang Ch’ing-ti 莊青翟,75 as the Grandee Secretary. Wei-chi and Wu-an from this time on stayed in their homes as marquises.76 The Marquis of Wu-an, although he did not hold an official position, because of [his mother] Empress Dowager Wang, held the personal favor [of the Emperor] and of the repeated times he offered an opinion on matters most were effective, so that the officers and scholars who hastened after power or profit all left Wu-chi and went over to Wu-an. Wu-an daily grew more unrestrained / overbearing. In the sixth year of chien-yüan (135 B.C.), Empress Dowager Tou passed away; the Chancellor, [Hsü] Ch’ang, and the Grandee Secretary, [Chuang] Ch’ing-ti, were tried for not managing the funeral affairs properly and were dismissed. [The Sovereign] took [T’ien] Fen, the Marquis of Wu-an, as Chancellor and Han An-kuo 韓安國, the Grand Minister of Agriculture, 77 as Grandee Secretary. The gentlemen of the empire who were serving in the feudal states or the commanderies78 all the more attached themselves to Wu-an.

72

The Han shu parallel adds the following statement by the Empress Dowager: “This is going to be nothing but another Hsin-yüan P’ing” 此欲復為新垣平. Hsin-yüan P’ing gained an audience with Emperor Wen by virtue of having observed an emanation of a deity northeast of the capital. He recommended in 165 B.C. that the Emperor build a temple to the Five Emperors and promised that it would result in various auspicious events. In 163 the entire affair was revealed to have been a sham (see Shih chi, 10.430 and 28.1382. 73 They were imprisoned and then committed suicide. 74 He served until he was replaced six years later by T’ien Fen (see the text of this chapter below and the short biographical sketch provided by Loewe, Dictionary, p. 617. 75 Chuang was dismissed in 135 B.C. as a result of charges that he failed to observe mourning rites for Empress Dowager Tou. His career was revived when he was made Senior Tutor to the Heir and subsequently (118 B.C.) Chancellor. After a struggle with Chang T’ang 張湯, both men eventually were led to commit suicide in 115 B.C. (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 745-6). 76 In other words they held not official position nor did they attend court. 77 Chou Shou-nan 周壽南 (fl. 1408; cited in the Han shu pu-chu, 52.5a) observes that the corrected title of this position at the time was still Ta nung ling 大 農 令 (Grand Prefect of Agriculture). On Han An-kuo see his biography in Shih chi Chapter 108. 78 Cf. Yen Shih-ku’s comments cited on Han shu pu-chu, 52.5a.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

147

[2844] This [Marquis of] Wu-an, although he was ugly in countenance,79 had since birth been highly esteemed. Furthermore, when he took into consideration that the noble kings were mostly old, that the sovereign had just ascended the throne and had many years still to live, and that he, Fen, because he was as close [to the sovereign] as lungs are to the bowels had become Chancellor in the Capital, [he concluded] that if he did not ruthlessly strengthen himself by using ritual means to cause them [the noble kings and others in power] to bow to him, the empire would not treat [the sovereign] with respect. At this time, whenever the Chancellor would enter the palace to report an affair, he would sit and talk to the sovereign until the sun shifted [its position–i.e., a long time], and the sovereign heeded all on which he had offered his opinion. When he recommended someone, sometimes they would rise from living at home to the rank of two-thousand shih, shifting the power of the ruler [to himself]. Only then did the Sovereign say to him: “Are you, sir, finished yet in your appointing of officers? I should also like to appoint some officers.” Once when [Fen] requested some lands of the Complete Workman [Office]80 to increase his own residence, the Sovereign angrily replied: “Why don’t you just take the imperial arsenal [as well]?!” Only after this did he [Fen] become more withdrawn. Once when he had summoned his guests to drink, he seated his elder [half-]brother, the Marquis of Ko 蓋, 81 facing the south, 82 while he sat facing east, considering this to be 79

Wei Chao (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses ch’in 侵 as “short,” but also “ugly” and “extremely inflexible.” K’ung Wen-hsiang 孔文祥 (“So-yin”) also reads it as “ugly.” This seems to be the sense that Hsiao Yi 蕭繹 (508-554) understands the term (cf. his lines cited in Yi-wen lei-chü 藝文 類聚 [Shanghai: Shang-hai Ku-chi, 1985, 69.1216]: “T’ien Fen was ugly in countenance, but ended up adorned in beauty” 田蚡貌侵, 終於麗飾). Reading ch’in as both “short” and “unimposing” as Watson (2:94) and Wu and Lu (107.2813) do seems unsupported. As does Watson’s “conducted himself with a very lordly air” for kuei 貴. 80 K’ao-kung [Shih] 考工[室]. This office was responsible for making various objects for the palace (and later for the military; cf. Bielenstein, pp. 51-52). 81 This was Wang Hsin 王信 (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 558) whose mother, Tsang Erh 臧兒, was the same as T’ien Fen, but whose father was Tsang Erh’s first husband, Wang Chung 王仲 (see also n. 45 above). He was said to have been fond of drink. On the pronunciation of 蓋 as Ke, see Wu and Lu, 107.2803n. 82 The Han shu parallel (52.2380) reads pei 北 “north” for the Shih chi’s nan 南 “south.” But the seat facing east was the position of greatest respect in the Han. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1374) cites Liu Chen-weng 劉辰翁 (1231-1297) that the Han shu revised the text to avoid a taboo (pi hsien 避 嫌). The most extensive traditional argument preferring the Shih chi reading (because of similar accounts in other texts that juxtapose nan and tung seats) is that of Shen Ch’in-han 沈欽韓 (17751832) cited by Wang Hsien-ch’ien in Han shu pu-chu (107.5b). Nonetheless, Li Jen-chien (pp.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

148

respect for the Chancellor of the Han, [a position] which could not be bent to the respect for an elder brother. Wu-an from this time increasingly haughty, putting together a residence that was number one among the various mansions. His fields and gardens were on the most fertile lands, 83 and those who he sent to the commandaries and counties to buy or barter for utensils and implements were lined up on the roads.84 In his front hall he displayed bells and drums and set up crimson flags on curved staffs. In the rooms at the rear the women and maids could be numbered in the hundreds. The other lords who offered up gold, jade, dogs, horse, and other playthings, were too numerous to be counted. [2845] Wei-chi having lost Empress Dowager Tou, was more estranged [from the emperor] and not employed; without a powerbase, his various retainers were gradually drawn from him and [even] treated him with contempt and arrogance. Only with General Kuan 灌 [i.e., Kuan Fu] had he not lost his former relationship.85 Wei-chi spent his days in silence, having not attained his goals,86 and thus treated General Kuan with [especial] generosity.

Kuan Fu General Kuan Fu 灌夫,87 was a native of Ying-yin 潁陰.88 Fu’s father Chang Meng 張孟89 had once been a member of the suite for [Kuan] Ying [灌]嬰, 90 1418-9), citing the seating arrangements at the Hung-men banquet, notes that under the Han the host sat facing east, the honored seat was facing south, and the guest would face north. Thus in the context of the line, it would make no sense if Wang Hsin were seated facing south, since this was the most exalted seat. Only if he were denied this seat and forced to sit like a guest in the northfacing seat would the sentence be logical. Thus Li argues the Han shu reading must be the correct one. 83 An alternative reading might be “the fields and gardens [in his residence] were most fertile.” 84 Watson (2:94) has a different reading: “The merchants with their wares from the distant provinces stood in lines before his door.” 85 Li Jen-chien (p. 1419) argues that the Chung-hua parsing 唯灌將軍獨不失故。魏其日默默 不得志，而獨厚遇灌將軍 should be revised to read 唯灌將軍獨不失。故魏其日默默不得志， 而獨厚遇灌將軍, pointing to a similar passage in the “Chao shih-chia” 趙世家 (Shih chi, 43.1975), as evidence that there should be a li 禮 following the shih 失. 86 Mizusawa (107.7) notes that several editions read pu te yi 不得意, consistent with the current Han shu text. 87 His agnomen was Chung-ju 仲孺 and he died (see text below) in 131 B.C. (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 134-5). As Loewe points out, Ssu-ma Ch’ien mentions Kuan Fu as one of those who suffered humiliation before rising to become powerful, then was unable to hold on to power and met with an untimely death.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

149

Marquis of Ying-yin. He gained favor and accordingly [the Marquis] promoted him until he reached a post of two thousand shih. For this reason, he appropriated the Kuan Clan’s cognomen and became Kuan Meng 灌孟. During the time that Wu and Ch’u were rebelling, when Kuan Ho 灌何 (d. 147 B.C.),91 the [then] Marquis of Yingyin, was made a general and was put under the command of the Grand Commandant [Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫92], he requested that Kuang Meng be made a colonel. [Kuan] Fu took one thousand men and joined them together with his father. As Kuan Meng was too old, the Marquis of Ying-yin had to force his request [to appoint Meng], and Meng was depressed that he had not attained his goal and for this reason in battle he would always fall on [the enemy’s] strongpoint so that in the end he died in the middle of the Wu army. According to military law,93 when a father and son joined the army together, if one of them died, the other was able to return home with the coffin. Kuan Fu was not willing to follow his father’s coffin home and passionately declaimed: “I would rather take the head of the King of Wu or one of his generals to gain revenge for my father.” At [*2846*] this, Kuan Fu donned his armor and took up his halberd and mustered several dozen of the stalwart warriors in the camp with whom he was close to and were willing to follow him. Once they had emerged from the [Han] fortifications, none dared to advance. With only two [of these] men and a dozen mounted [family] slaves they galloped into the Wu camp, making it all the way to the flag of the Wu commander—those which they killed or injured in the tens of men. Unable to advance [further], they raced back again, returning at a gallop into the Han fortifications; all of his slaves had been lost and only one rider returned with him. [Kuan] Fu had been seriously wounded in more than ten places, but they happened to have some exceptionally precious medicine and for 88

Near modern Hsü-ch’ang 許昌 City in Honan (Wu and Lu, 107.2804n.). Unknown aside from his mention in this biography (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 686). 90 One of the hardscrabble commanders (see his biography in Shih chi Chapter 95 and Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:187-95; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 92-93). 91 Kuan Ying’s son who succeeded him as Marquis in 175 B.C. This campaign took place in 154 B.C. The Han shu parallel (52.2382) erroneously reads Kuan Ying for Kuan Ho here. 92 See his biography on Shih chi, 57.2073ff. 93 The Han shu parallel (52.2382) reads “law of the Han” (Han fa 漢法) for “military law” (chün fa 軍法). Sung Ch’i 宋祁 (cited in Han shu pu-chu, 6b) notes that an early edition of the Han shu also read chün fa. Wang Hsien-ch’ien argues that the Han shu was revised to read Han fa, an expression he points out was common in the Pans’ history. However, chün fa seems to be equally at home in the current Han shu text. 89

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

150

this reason was able to avoid death. When Fu’s wounds had healed a bit, he even made another a request to the General: “I [now] know more about the ins and outs of the Wu fortifications, and request to be allowed to go again.” The General considered him stalwart and dutiful, but was afraid of losing Fu and thus explained this to the Grand Commandant. Only then did the Grand Commandant firmly put a stop to this. 94 When Wu had been defeated, Kuan Fu for these [actions] became known throughout the empire. The Marquis of Ying-yin spoke of him to the Sovereign and the Sovereign took [Kuan] Fu as Commander of the Gentlemen of the Household.95 After a few months,96 he was tried before the law and dismissed. Later when he was living at home in Ch’ang-an, among the various gentlemen in the capital there was not a one who did not praise him.97 During the time of [Emperor] Hsiao Ching98 he reached the post of Chancellor of Tai.99 When Hsiao Ching passed away and the present Emperor has just taken the throne, considering that Huai-yang 淮陽 100 was a crossroads of the empire and a place where strong troops had been positioned, therefore moved [Kuan] Fu to become the Governor of Huai-yang. In the first year of chien-yüan (140 B.C.), he entered [the capital] as Grand Coachman. In the second year (139 B.C.), when [Kuan] Fu was drinking with Tou Fu 竇 甫, the Commandant of the Guards of the Ch’ang-le 長樂 [Palace], they were unable to decide on the proper ritual and when [Kuan] Fu became drunk, he struck [Tou] Fu with his fist. [Tou] Fu was the younger brother of the Empress 94

Alternatively: “firmly stop him [from returning].” Chung-lang chiang 中郎將. The position does not appear in Bielenstein, but Lu Zongli (p. 145) notes that it was a high-ranking position (two-thousand shih) in the palace guard. The Han shu parallel (52.2383) reads Lang-chung chiang 郎中將, There were a number of “Generals of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace” including the three major “generals” in charge of cavalry, equipage, and doors (cf. Bielenstein, 25ff.) which were all one-thousand-shih rank. Wang Hsien-ch’ien (Han shu pu-chu, 7a) believes the Han shu inversion was a copyist error, noting that there are several other mentions of Chung-lang chiang in the Shih chi. 96 The Han shu parallel reads shu sui 數歲 here. 97 The Han shu reads pu 不 for fu 弗 in the Shih chi. 98 The Han shu parallel (52.2383) replaces “during the time of Hsiao Ching he reached the post of Chancellor of Tai” 孝景時，至代相 with “through this [praise] he resumed [official life] as Chancellor of Tai” 由是復為代相. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1374) notes that Kuan Fu’s career began under Emperor Ching and that the Han shu reading is therefore corrective. 99 Serving Emperor Wen’s grandson, Liu Teng 劉登, who ruled Tai from 161 B.C. until his death in 133. 100 Near modern Huai-yang County in Honan (Wu and Lu, 107.2804n.). 95

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

151

Dowager Dou. The Sovereign, fearing that the Empress Dowager would have [Kuan] Fu executed, moved him to be Chancellor of Yen. After several years, he was tried before the law and dismissed from his position, living [again] at home in Ch’ang-an. [2847] Kuan Fu as a man was unyielding and upright, prone to loose his temper when drinking, and not fond of those who flatter you to your face. When with members of the nobility who held power or those who were above him [socially], he did not intend to be more polite, but would be certain to insult them. As for those petty nobles who were below him, the poorer and more humble they were, the more he increased his respect, treating them as equals. When with a crowd or a large group, he recommended and favored those who were younger than he. Because of this the petty-nobility admired him much. [Kuan] Fu was not happy with refined learning, but loved playing the role of a knight-errant101 and was completely true to his word. Those with whom he had friendly relations were all men of influential families or gang leaders. His household accumulated several tens of thousands [in copper cash], and those retainers they fed daily were several dozen to a hundred. Through making dikes and ponds for his fields and gardens, his clansmen, retainers and guests became powerful, acting without restraint through all of Ying-ch’uan 潁 川 [Commandery].102 Only then did the local children make of song of this which went:

101

The Han shu parallel reverses the verbs (hsi 喜 and hao 好) in these two clauses, reading “Fu did not love refined learning, but was fond of playing the role of a knight errant.” 102 Ying-ch’uan was a commandery centered around modern Hsü-ch’ang 許 昌 in Honan, beginning a few miles south of modern Chengchow (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:7). This sentence has been variously understood and interpretatively translated. Watson (2:97) has “He owned a number of lakes and farm lands in Yingchuan Province from which his relatives and the retainers of the family derived great profit, and this permitted the Guan family to run the affairs of the province in any way they pleased.” Wu and Lu (107.2814) offer: 為了壟斷水利田園, 灌夫 家族及賓客爭取奪利, 在潁川一帶衡行霸道; “In order to monopolize the water power, fields and gardens, Kuan Fu’s clansmen and retainers struggled for power and profit, running roughshod throughout Ying-ch’uan.” Chang Lieh (52.2495) has: 他在田地園林裡修築池塘, 他的宗族,賓客 擴張權勢, 壟斷利益,在潁川郡衡行霸道; “By constructing diked ponds in his farmlands and orchards, his clansmen and retainers expanded their power, monopolized profit, and ran roughshod over Ying-ch’uan Commandery.” Wang Li-ch’i (107.2285) offers a fourth understanding: 為了在 田地園林裏修築池塘, 他的宗族,賓客擴張權勢, 壟斷利益,在潁川郡衡行霸道; “In order to build dikes and ponds in his fields and gardens, his clansmen and retainers struggled for power, monopolized profit, and ran roughshod over Ying-ch’uan commandery.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

152 When the Ying River runs clear at its best, The Kuan clan’s sure to be at rest. When the Ying River turns polluted, The Kuan clan must have been executed. 103

When Kuan Fu was living at home [in Ch’ang-an], although he was wealthy, he had lost his power base, and the high officials and courtiers among his guests and retainers were diminishing. As when the Marquis of Wei-chi lost his powerbase and had wanted to rely on Kuan Fu to take the measure of and trim away those who because of their [political] lives had [first] held him in esteem and later abandoned him, Kuan Fu also relied on Wei-chi and to associate with those ranked marquises and members of the royal family to raise the level of his fame. The two men aided and respected each other and their friendship was like that of father and son. They found great pleasure together, without tiring of one another, only regretting that they came to know each other so late. [2848] When Kuan Fu was in mourning, 104 he stopped by to see the Chancellor [i.e., T’ien Fen]. The Chancellor in passing said, “I wanted to go with you, Chung-ju 仲孺, 105 to stop by to see the Marquis of Wei-chi, but it so happens you are in mourning.” Kuan Fu replied, “If you, General, are thus willing to graciously favor the Marquis of Wei-chi with a visit, how could I dare to use my mourning to decline]! May I ask that I speak to the Marquis of Wei-chi about setting things up106 so that you might honor him with a visit tomorrow morning?” Wu-an gave his word. Kuan Fu told the Marquis of Wei-chi all that the Marquis of Wu-an had said about him. The Marquis of Wei-chi and his wife bought extra beef and wine and swept and cleaned into the night, [then] got up early to set up the curtains and utensils by dawn. When daylight came, [Tou Ying] ordered his retainers to await [outside] on [T’ien Fen’s] arrival. But noon came and the Chancellor had not come. Wei-chi said to Kuan Fu: “The Chancellor couldn’t have forgotten, could he?” Kuan Fu was not happy, [but] said: “Though in mourning I invited him. I had better go [to get him].”107 Only 103

With thanks to Burton Watson for the final two rhymes (cf. Watson, 2:97). He was in mourning for his elder sister (Wu and Lu, 107.2806n.). 105 Kuan Fu’s agnomen. 106 Literally setting up curtains (chang 帳) for privacy within a larger hall and setting out utensils (chü 具) for drinking and eating. 107 A text that Hsü Kuang saw (“Chi-chieh”) read pu yi wang 不宜往 “I should not go [to get him.” The Han shu version (52.2385) reads simply pu yi 不宜 and (following Yen Shih-ku’s interpretation) should read “I invited him while in mourning. He should not [have forgotten].” 104

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

153

then did he get into his carriage and personally go to meet the Chancellor. The Chancellor on the previous day had only jokingly promised Kuan Fu and had not the slightest intention to go. When [Kuan] Fu reached his gate, the Chancellor was still in bed. At this, Fu went in to see him and said, “You, General, yesterday favored me with a promise to visit [the Marquis of] Wei-chi and Wei-chi and his wife arranged all the utensils. From morning until now they have not even dared to eat anything.” Wu-an was startled108 and apologized, “I was drunk yesterday and forgot all about my conversation with you.” Only then did he get into his carriage and go, yet driving slowly, so Kuan Fu got more and more angry. When [the party had started and] they were all feeling the wine, Fu stood up to dance and then designated the Chancellor [to follow]. 109 The Chancellor would not stand up and Fu from his seat began to offer offensive remarks. Only then did Wei-chi take Kuan Fu by the arm and lead him away, apologizing to the Chancellor. The Chancellor in the end drank until evening and left extremely delighted. [2849] [Later]110 the Chancellor once sent Chi Fu to ask Wei-chi for some fields south of the city wall. Wei-chi resenting this strongly said, “Though I am only an old fellow who has been cast aside, and though the General is of the highest rank, how can he use his power to seize [my land]?” He would not agree to it. When Kuan Fu heard of it, he was angry and cursed Chi Fu. Chi Fu loathed the idea that there would be bad blood between the two men [Tou Ying and T’ien Fen] and himself made up a good apology for the Chancellor: “Wei-chi is old and about to die. It should be easy for you to endure [until then]. Just wait a bit.” Before long, when Wu-an heard that Wei-chi and Kuan Fu had truly gotten angry and not given him the fields, he also became angry and said, “Wei-chi’s son once killed someone and I saved him. In dealing with Wei-chu there is nothing I didn’t permit him. How can he hold fields of a few ch’ing so dear? Moreover, what does this have to do with Kuan Fu? I do not dare to again seek the fields!” From this time on Wu-an harbored resentment for Kuan Fu and Wei-chi. 108

The Han shu parallel reads wu 悟 “realize what he had done” for e 鄂 “startled.” Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) observes that the same variant appeared in one of the early Shih chi manuscripts he was consulting. 109 It was a custom for those drinking together to dance one after another. Each dancer would designate a successor as Yen Shih-ku notes (cited in “So-yin”). T’ien Fen’s refusal to dance was a breach of this etiquette. 110 The Han shu parallel (52.2386) inserts a transitional hou 後 (later) here and our translation incorporates this editorial device. This is another example of how the Han shu provides temporal links between sections that are not bound together well in the Shih chi.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

154

In the spring of the fourth year of yüan-kuang (131 B.C.),111 the Chancellor reported [to the Emperor] that Kuan Fu’s family in Ying-ch’uan was acting without restraint and the people were suffering from it. He requested to start an investigation of them. The Sovereign said, “This is matter for the Chancellor [to determine]. Why do you make a request of me?” At the same time Kuan Fu got ahold of some [information about] a secret affair of the Chancellor to make a immoral profit by accepting gold from the King of Huai-nan and speaking to him [of how to make himself successor to Emperor Wu].112 Their guest and retainers acted as go-betweens and they finally stopped [the attacks and let each other alone. In the summer, when the Chancellor took the daughter of the King of Yen as his wife, there was an edict from the Empress Dowager summoning the ranking marquises and royal family members to go and congratulate him. The Marquis of Wei-chi stopped by to see Kuan Fu, intending to go together with him, but Fu declined, saying: “I have several times because of drinking [too much] wine acted improperly and offended the Chancellor and moreover there is bad blood between the Chancellor and me these days.” Wei-chi replied, “That matter has already been settled.” He urged him to go together with him. When they were all feeling the wine, Wu-an stood up to make a toast and the seated guests all moved from their mats and touched their foreheads to the ground. After a while when the Marquis of Wei-chi made a toast, only his old friends moved off their mats, the remaining half just rose up off their heels to a kneeling position on their mats.”113 Kuan Fu was not pleased. He stood up and went around toasting [each guest]; when he got to Wu-an,114 Wu-an rose up off his heels on his mat and said, “There is no need to drink a full cup.” [Kuan] Fu was angered by this and accordingly with a wry smile said, “General, you are a man of the nobility, I 111

Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) says this is an error for the third year (130 B.C.), as the text below shows. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1374) argues that it should be the second year (131 B.C.). 112 In 139 B.C. when Liu An came to court to attend on the youthful new emperor, T’ien Fen went out to meet him at Pa-shang 霸上 and there suggested to him that since there had been no heir appointed, Liu An himself would be an excellent candidate for the position (Shih chi, 118.3082). 113 At Han banquets guests knelt on mats, their buttocks resting on their heels, with low tables before them. To express respect, they were expected to rise up, move off their mats, and touch their foreheads to the ground (cf. Wu and Lu, 107.2807n.). 114 Watson’s rendition (2:100) of “Guan Fu, highly displeased at the way things were going, got up with a container of wine and went over to pour a drink for Tian Fen” is off the mark. Hsing chiu 行酒 means to go from guest to guest usually drinking a full cup of wine, as is still the custom at modern Chinese banquets.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

155

entreat you [to finish] it!”115 At that time 116 Wu-an was not willing [to empty his cup]. When [Kuan Fu’s] toasts in turn reached the Marquis of Lin-ju 臨汝,117 the Marquis of Lin-ju was just whispering something into Ch’eng Pu-shih’s 程不識 118 ear and furthermore did not move off of his mat. [Kuan] Fu with nowhere to vent his anger then cursed the Marquis of Lin-ju: “Your whole life you have maligned Ch’eng Pu-shih that he isn’t worth a single coin, [yet] today when one of your elders119 offers you a toast, you then are giggling in his ear like a little child.” Wu-an called Kuan Fu over and said, “Ch’eng and Li [Kuang] 李[廣] are the Commandants of the Guards at the Eastern and Western palaces.120 By now insulting General Ch’eng in public, do you not leave General Li [Kuang] little room [to share the insult]?”121 Kuan Fu replied, “Were they to cut off my head or sink [a blade] into my chest, what would I know of a Ch’eng or a Li?” Only then did those seated guests stand up and, on the pretense of going to the privy, gradually depart. When the Marquis of Wei-chi was departing, he signaled Kuan Fu to leave. Wu-an then grew angry and said, [*2850*] “This is my fault for allowing Kuan Fu to be so arrogant.” Only then did he order horsemen to detain Kuan Fu. Kuan Fu wanted to leave but was not able to. Chi Fu stood up to 115

The Han shu parallel (52.2386) reads pi 畢, i.e., “Finish it!” Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) notes that one of the Shih chi manuscripts he had also read pi. 116 Shih 時 is puzzling here. Neither the Han shu nor various Shih chi editions offer a variant reading, however. 117 I.e., Kuan Hsien 灌賢, the grandson of Kuan Ying 灌嬰. After the Kuans had lost the fief at Ying-yin 潁陰 in 134 B.C., Emperor Wu had enfeoffed Kuan Hsien with Lin-ju the following year (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 135-6). Lin-ju is near the eponymous county in modern Honan (Wu and Lu, 107.2807n.) 118 Ch’eng Pu-shih was the Commandant of the Guards at the Ch’ang-le 長樂 Palace. He had served with Li Kuang 李廣 (biography in Shih chi Chapter 109) and was the perfect foil for Li– Ch’eng preferring discipline and drill to Li Kuang’s relaxed approach to his men (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 45). 119 Kuan Hsien was the grandson of Kuan Ying; Kuan Fu’s father had served Kuan Ying. Thus Kuan Fu felt he was a generation senior to Kuan Hsien (cf. Wu and Lu, 107.2807n.). 120 The Western Palace was the Wei-yang 未央 Palace where the Emperor resided (see also n. 503 on Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:74); the Eastern, Ch’ang-le 長樂, was the home of the Empress Dowager (cf. n. 499, Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:73-74). The two palaces were separated by the imperial armory, the west wall of Ch’ang-le a little over a quarter of a mile from the east wall of Wei-yang (see Ho Ch’ing-ku 何清谷, ed., San-fu huang-t’u chiao-shih 三輔黃圖校釋 [Peking: Chung-hua, 2005], figure 7, p. 432). 121 Since Li Kuang and Ch’eng Pu-shih had just returned from a not entirely successful campaign against the Hsiung-nu, criticizing Ch’eng was tantamount to reminding people of Li’s recent errors (see the translation of Li Kuang’s biography below.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

156

apologize for him, pressing down on Kuan Fu’s neck to cause him to apologize [by prostrating himself]. [Kuan] Fu became all the more angry and was not willing to apologize. 122 Only then did Wu-an signal to his horsemen to bind [Kuan] Fu and place him in [the waiting room of] the postal station, [while] summoning the Chief Scribe123 and saying: “Today to summon [members of] the imperial clan] there was an imperial edict.124 Charge Kuan Fu with [the crime of] disrespect for cursing the seated guests.” 125 In the end, [the Chief Scribe] investigated his [the Kuan Clan’s] former affairs and sent legal officers separated into parties to pursue and apprehend all those branches of the Kuan Clan, all of whom were sentenced [to be executed and] to have their corpses exposed in the marketplace. The Marquis of Wei-chi was greatly shamed and provided the resources for his guests and retainers to entreat [for Kuan Fu’s release], but they were not able gain his release. Because Wu-an’s legal officers all acted as his ears and eyes and the various members of the Kuan Clan all were able to escape into hiding, [Kuan] Fu was bound [as a prisoner], and was in the end not able to present a report [to the Emperor] of Wu-an’s secret affairs. [*2851*] Wei-chi did all that he could to save Kuan Fu. His wife cautioned Wei-chi, saying, “General Kuan has offended the Chancellor and gone against the family of the Empress Dowager; how could you ever save him?” The Marquis of Wei-chi replied, “This marquisate, I won it on my own and own my own I shall renounce it with nothing to regret. Ultimately, I cannot allow Kuan Chung-ju to die alone while I alone live.” Then he hid from his family, secretly going out to submit a letter [to the Emperor]. He was immediately summoned to enter [the palace] and in detail he explained the events of how Kuan Fu had drunk too much and did not deserve to be executed. The Sovereign agreed with 122

The Han shu parallel (52.2387) reads shun 順 “to go along with” for hsieh 謝 “to apologize.” Bielenstein gives “Chief Clerk” for Chang-shih 長史. As Wu and Lu note (107.2807) the Chancellor, Grandee Secretary and General-in-Chief all had their own chief scribes in charge of documents, legal and otherwise. 124 Presumably from the Empress Dowager Wang. 125 The syntax seems slippery here in the original The Chung-hua editors limit T’ien Fen’s words to 「今日召宗室，有詔。」, but this leaves the following text ajar. Watson (2:101) translates without any direct quotation as “After this he sent for his chief secretary and, explaining that he had invited the members of the imperial family to his house in accordance with an edict from the empress dowager, instructed him to draw up charges against Guan Fu for insulting the guests and failing to show the proper respect . . . .” This, however, ignores the yüeh 曰 in chao Chang-shih yüeh 召 長史曰 . Our solution has been rather to extend the Marquis of Wu-an’s enjoinder to include 劾灌夫罵坐不敬，系居室. 123

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

157

him and conferred a meal [in the palace] on Wei-chi, saying: “Present this argument in the court of the Eastern Palace.” Wei-chi went to the Eastern Palace and praised to the limit Kuan Fu’s strengths, explaining that only when he had caused offense having drunk too much did the Chancellor slander him and find him guilty of another offense. Wuan [who was present] also maligned to the limit Kuan Fu’s overbearing behavior,126 accusing him of being treasonous and unprincipled. Wei-chi judging that there was nothing else to do [to defend Kuan against these charges], took advantage [of the audience] to speak of the Chancellor’s shortcomings. Wu-an replied, “The empire has fortunately been peaceful and happy with no trouble and I have been able to become a confidante [of the emperor]. What I am fond of are music, dogs and horses, and lands and houses. What I love are the sort of entertainers and skilled craftsmen. I am not like Wei-chi and Kuan Fu, who day and night summon those stalwart warriors and influential men to discuss and debate [politics], who set their hearts on defaming and their minds on speaking ill, who either look up to the heavens [for omens of political change] or down to the earth in which they map out their plans, who watch in sidelong glances the relationships between the two palaces, and who consider a crisis in the empire to be a blessing, wanting in it to find great merit. Your subject does not know to what all Wei-chi and his party might do.” At this the Sovereign asked the court ministers 127 : “Of these two men, which is right?” Han An-kuo, the Grandee Secretary, said: “Wei-chi has explained how Kuan Fu’s father’s dieing in service [of the dynasty], while he [Kuan Fu] himself shouldered a halberd and galloped into the unprobed Wu army, his body being wounded dozens of times, his fame the crowning of the three armies. He is the most stalwart warrior in the empire and is without any great transgression. Arguing over a cup of wine is not enough to drag in other errors and thereby sentence him to execution. Wei-chi’s explanation in this is correct. The Chancellor has also explained how Kuan Fu’s associated with villainous rascals, so that his family has massaged millions and has acted without restraint in Ying-ch’uan, riding roughshod over the royal house 126

The expression heng tzu 橫恣 (unrestrained behavior) recalls the descriptions above of the branches of the Kuan Clan “acting without restraint” 橫 in their home area of Ying-ch’uan 潁川 (cf. Shih chi, 107.2847 and 2848). 127 Thus it seems Wu-ti accompanied Tou Ying to the Eastern Palace and that a number of ministers were also in attendance. Another possible understanding of this passage might be “the Sovereign called his ministers to court to question them,” as Watson’s version (2:102) suggests: “The emperor then assembled the ministers of his court and asked them which of the two contestants, Dou Ying or Tian Fen, they believe was in the right.”

158

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

and oppressing its flesh and blood. ‘When the branches grow larger than the trunk, when the shins grow larger than the thighs, if they don’t break then they will certainly split apart.’ The Chancellor explanation in this is correct. Only our Enlightened Ruler can decide in this [case].” Chi An 汲 黯 , 128 Palace Commandant over the Nobility, considered Wei-chi to be correct. Cheng Tangshih 鄭當時,129 Scribe of the Capital, 130 considered Wei-chi to be correct, but later did not dare to stand by his response. All the rest did not dare to respond. The Sovereign became angry with the Scribe of the Capital and said, “You, sir, ordinarily you frequently speak of the strengths and weaknesses of Wei-chi and Wu-an, [but] today in this court discussion you cringe down like a colt [for the first time] in the carriage shafts. I should cut off the heads of all those of your sort.” He immediately dismissed [court], stood up, and entered [the inner palace] to wait on the Empress Dowager as she ate. The Empress Dowager, having already sent men to make inquiries and report to the Empress Dowager in detail, 131 the Empress Dowager was angry, refused to eat, and said: “Even now when I am still alive people all trample on my younger brother [T’ien Fen]. After I have had my hundred years of life, they will all make him into minced fish and meat.132 And the Emperor, how could he be made of stone?!133 This is only while 128 The point here is that Chi An was noted for his forthright criticism. In Chi An’s biography (Shih chi, 120.3106) he is said to have “been fond of directly admonishing, often offending the ruler to his face. He always admired the character of Fu Po and Yüan Ang [noted for their criticism] and was on good terms with Kuan Fu, Cheng Tang-shi and the Director of the Imperial Clan, Liu Ch’i. Indeed because he often directly admonished [his superiors], he was not able to occupy the same official position for long” 好直諫，數犯主之顏色，常慕傅柏、袁盎之為人也。善灌夫、 鄭 當時 及宗正 劉棄 。亦 以數直 諫， 不得久 居位 . He was obviously a man Ssu-ma Ch’ien admired (cf. also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 179-80). 129 Cheng Tang-shih (ca. 175-ca. 115 B.C.), unlike Chi An, was cautious and “at court catered to others and accepted their ideas, not venturing to draw on his own opinion for or against” 在朝， 常趨和承意，不敢甚引當否 (Shih chi, 120.3113). See also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 721-2. 130 Nei shih 內史, Bielenstein’s “Clerk of the Capital.” 131 Even though this court session took place in the Empress Dowager’s Eastern (Ch’ang-le) Palace, she did not attend the court session since she should not have direct contact (even eye contact) with males courtiers or servants. 132 The expression yü-jou 魚肉 is used several times in the Shih chi. Fan K’uai 樊噲, before advising Liu Pang to flee from Hsiang Yü during the Hung-men banquet, says, “Right now the others are the cleaver and chopping block, while we are the fish and meat” 如今人方為刀俎，我 為魚肉，何辭為 (Shih chi, 7.314); after plotting to frame the Heir (Shen-sheng 申生), the Beauty from the Li 驪姬 begs Duke Hsien 獻 of Chin not to “let us, mother and son, in vain be made into chopped fish or meat by the Heir 毋徒使母子為太子所魚肉也 (Shih chi, 39.1645); finally, Cheng

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

159

you are alive–this echoing what the other says,134 if you are to have had your hundred years of life, how could this bunch ever be relied upon?” The Sovereign apologized, saying, “As both of them are relatives by marriage of the imperial house, therefore I caused this to be debated at court. Otherwise, this matter is one that a single prison officer could settle.” At this time Shih Chien 石建, 135 the Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace, separately explained the cases of the two men. [2853] Wu-an having already been dismissed from court went out to the Chih-chü Men 止車門 (Gate Where the Carriages Must Stop). He called the Grandee Secretary Han to ride with him and said to him angrily: “You, Ch’angju, and I are joined together against an aging, bald, old man. Why did you turn your head in two directions like a rat [looking out of its hole]?” After some time Secretary Han said to the Chancellor: “Why, Milord, are you displeased with yourself? If Wei-chi maligns you, Milord should remove your official cap, untie your seals of office and hand them back [to the Sovereign] saying, ‘Your subject

Hsiu 鄭袖 tries to warn King Huai 懷 of Ch’u that Chang Yi’s 張義 advice is part of a ruse he contrived with the state of Ch’in, then asks that the king give permission for “my son and my mother to move south of the Chiang so that they will not be made into chopped fish by Ch’in” 子母 俱遷江南，毋為秦所魚肉也 (Shih chi, 70.2289). 133 I.e., how could you not have your own opinion? Another interpretation would be that you are not a man of stone and must yourself die someday. 134 Many modern commentators (and our translation) follow Yen Shih-ku’s reading of lu lu 錄 錄 as “following the crowd” (hsün chung 循眾; Han shu, 52.2391n.). But it seems equally likely that the expression echoes Mao Sui’s 毛遂 taunt of the other nineteen retainers who accompanied the Lord of Ping-yüan 平原君 to meet with the King of Ch’u; when none of these others could offer no useful advice to the Lord, Mao Sui, after handling the situation himself, said to them: “You gentlemen are but men of no abilities, those who can be said to accomplish things through the offices of others” 公等錄錄，所謂因人成事者也. Thus lu lu might be freely translated by the modern colloquial expression “lulus”: “these mediocre men, if you were to die, how could this bunch be relied upon.” 135 Shih Chien was the eldest son of Chancellor Shih Fen 石奮 and one of four successful siblings (see his biography in Shih chi Chapter 103). He had been appointed by the Empress Dowager in 139 B.C. in her efforts to reduce the Confucian-scholar influence at court. According to his that account, his temperament was ideally suited to providing this post-court report: “When [Shih] Chien was Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace, if there was a matter on which he felt he could give an opinion, when the others had retired, he gave his opinion with no restraint, extremely sharply. When it came to court audiences, it was as if he were unable to give an opinion. For this reason the Sovereign grew close to him, honored him, and treated him with courtesy”; 建為郎中令， 事有可言，屏人恣言，極切；至廷見，如不能言者。是以上乃親尊禮之 (Shih chi, 103.2765).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

160

as someone who because of marital ties has been able to gain your favor136 can [only] await committing an offense, basically not right for this office. Wei-chi’s arguments were all correct.’ In this way, the Sovereign will certainly think highly of your ability to yield and will not dismiss you. Wei-chi will certainly be ashamed of himself, shut his gates, bite his tongue, and take his own life. If another person maligns you, Milord, and Milord also maligns them, it is comparable to the wrangling of two petty merchants or women. How is it that you cannot see the larger picture?” Wu-an apologized for his fault, saying, “When we were arguing and it became heated, I did not think of this.” After this, when the Sovereign had the Secretary based on the recorded documents investigate what Wei-chi had said of Kuan Fu, [he found] they did not stand up at all and constituted libel.137 He [Tou Ying] was impeached and bound over to the [Prefect] Director of Works in the Central District. 138 During the time of [Emperor] Hsiao Ching, Wei-chi had once received a testamentary edict [from the Emperor] stating: “If you find anything that is disadvantageous, you may by the most convenient means express yourself to the Sovereign.” When he was bound over, and when Kuan Fu’s offense had reached the level of his clan being exterminated, and the situation daily grew more dire, none of the various high officials ventured to again explain [Tou Ying’s arguments] clearly to the Sovereign. Only then did Wei-chi send his nephew to submit a letter explaining them and wishing to again be called for an audience. The letter was presented to the Sovereign, but when [the documents in] the [Imperial] Secretariat139 were investigated, there were no [such] testamentary edicts. The only copy of the edict had been kept in Wei-chi’s household, with the seal of the Assistant of the Household. It was only then that Wei-chi was investigated for forging an edict [of the Late Emperor],140 his offense found to merit execution and exposing of his corpse in the marketplace. 136

Here echoing in part T’ien Fen’s own words when he and Tou Ying had presented their cases at the Emperor Dowager’s palace (cf. Shih chi, 107.2851 and the translation above). 137 Ch’i-man 欺謾 was a formal Han legal term (see Wu and Lu, 107.2809n. and Han shu, 8.273). 138 Tu-ssu-k’ung [ling] 都司空[令], He was in charge of transgressions by member of the royal clan by marriage and subordinate to the Tsung-cheng 宗正 or Director of the Imperial Clan (cf. Bielenstein, pp. 41-43). 139 As the “Cheng-yi” notes, ta-hsing 大行 refers to the passing away of a ruler. 140 Chiao chao 矯詔 is also the formal name of a crime under the Han legal system (Wu and Lu, 107.2809n.). The Han shu parallel (52.2392) reads: “[and found that] forging an edict of the Former Emperor was injurious” 矯先帝詔害. As Chang Lieh (52.2484n.) points out, there were

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

161

In the tenth month of the fifth year (130 B.C.), 141 Kuan Fu and his entire family were sentenced [to death]. When Wei-chi after some time heard this, hearing this he thus was filled with resentment, suffered a stroke,142 and stopped eating, intending to die. When someone heard that the Sovereign did not intend to kill Wei-chi, Wei-chi again started eating, curing his illness; it had been discussed [at court] and determined that he should not die. Only then were there rumors of [Tou Ying] speaking ill [of the Emperor] heard by the Sovereign, and for this reason on the last day of the twelfth month143 he was sentenced to be executed and his corpse exposed in the marketplace of Wei-ch’eng 渭城.144 [*2854*] That spring, the Marquis of Wu-an fell ill and could only cry out admitting and apologizing for his offenses.145 When sent shamans who could perceive evil spirits were sent to look at him, they saw Wei-chi and Kuan Fu

three levels of forgery according to Han law, “greatly injurious” (ta hai 大害), “injurious” (hai 害), and “not injurious” (pu hai 不害). 141 Liang Yü-sheng (33.1374-5) argues this should be the tenth month of the third year (132 B.C.). 142 Watson (2:104-5) understands this quite differently: “He was deeply embittered and, being afflicted with a swelling his joints, refused to eat anything in hopes that he would soon die.” The Han shu (52.2392) offers a much different scenario: “When [Tou] Ying after some time heard this, there was an official inquiry; when he heard this, he pretended to have had a stroke, and did not eat, intending to die” 嬰良久乃聞有劾，聞即陽病痱，不食欲死. 143 Hsü Kuang says simply (“Chi-chieh”) “I suspect this was not the twelfth month” 疑非十二 月也. Since executions were rare in the spring (the Han calendar began with the tenth month), this season (in which amnesties were common) remains suspect. Watson’s (2:105, n. 7) explanation in support of the twelfth month (“Since spring is the time when life returns to the earth, it was considered unlucky to perform executions in the spring . . . Tian Fen therefore had to work quickly to spread his rumors in order to dispose of his enemy before the end of the twelfth month”) ignores the fact that the Han year began in the tenth month. 144 The Han designation for the Ch’in former capital, Hsien-yang, just a few miles northwest of Ch’ang-an. 145 As is so often the case, the Han shu parallel (52.2393), in describing descendants of the biographee, differs greatly from the Shih chi text. Here the Han shu reads: “In the spring, [T’ien] Fen became ill, his whole body was in pain, as if there were someone beating him, and he cried out [in pain] and admitted his guilt. The Sovereign sent a shaman to see if there was an evil spirit and, having observed him, said: ‘The Marquis of Wei-chi and Kuan Fu are keeping watch over him, beating him with the intend of killing him” 春，蚡疾，一身盡痛, 若有擊者, 謼服謝罪. 上使巫視 鬼者瞻之曰。「魏其侯與灌夫共守，笞欲殺之」. An alternate reading for hu fu hsieh tsui 謼服 謝罪 would be “and he loudly cried out admitting his guilt” (cf. Chang Lieh, 52.2485n.). Watson (2:105) reads: “He spent all his time crying out ‘I was at fault.’”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

162

together standing watch over him, intending to kill him. Finally, he died of this. His son T’ien 恬146 succeeded him. In the third year of yüan-shuo (126 B.C.), the Marquis of Wu-an [i.e., T’ien T’ien] was tried for wearing a short coat and entering court, [thus] being disrespectful.147 [2855] When [later148] the plot to rebel by [Liu] An [劉]安, the King of Huaian 淮安, was detected, and brought to trial. 149 When the King first came to court,150 the Marquis of Wu-an had been the Grand Commandant; at the time he had gone to Pa-shang 霸上 to welcome the King and declared to the King: “The Sovereign has yet to have an Heir, as the Great King is worthy and a grandson of Kao-tsu, were the palace chariot to set off late [i.e., a euphemism for the Emperor passing away], who but you, Great King, would be enthroned?!” The King of Huai-nan was greatly pleased and generously gave him gold and goods. The Sovereign since the time that [the Marquis of] Wei-chi [dominated the court] did not consider Wu-an to be upright, and had only acted on account of the Empress Dowager [to favor him]. When he heard of the matter of the King of Huai-nan’s gold, the Sovereign said, “If the Marquis of Wu-an were alive, I would have him and his clan executed.” [*2856*] His Honor the Grand Scribe says: “[the Marquises of Wei-chi and Wu-an both gained importance between they were married to members of the imperial family; Kuan Fu used a single instance of a determined strategy to gain an illustrious name. Wei-chi’s promotion came as a result of [his suppression of]

146

This passage, Shih chi, 19.1024 and the Han shu parallels are the only references to T’ien T’ien. On Shih chi, 19.1024 he is called T’ien Wu 田悟. 147 The Han shu parallel reads “during the yüan-shuo era he committed an offense and was dismissed” 元朔中有罪免. Chan yü 襜褕 means, according to the Shuo wen 說文 (cited in “Chengyi”), a short (i.e., informal) coat or robe. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1375) argues that the formulaic phrase kuo ch’u 國除 “and his state was eliminated” has been omitted here. 148 The Han shu parallel (52.2393) adds hou 後 here. 149 The rebellion came to light in 122 B.C. (cf. Shih chi, 22.1138), but was tried after Liu An committed suicide that same year. 150 The Han shu reads “at the time when [Liu] An first entered court” 始安入朝時 ; this was 139 B.C. See the parallel, but not completely identical, account of T’ien Fen’s welcoming Liu An in Liu’s biography on Shih chi, 118.3082.

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

163

Wu and Ch’u; Wu-an’s exalted status lay in fortunate timing. 151 Yet Wei-chi really did not understand how to change with the times and Kuan Fu, though he had no special arts,152 would not yield to others. The two men’s attempts to aid one other only resulted in their disaster. Wu-an relied on his exalted status and loved power, but through his reproach over a cup of wine he made false charges against these two worthy men. Alas and alack! When one transfers his anger to another person, his own life certainly cannot be prolonged. Those who the common people cannot bear, will in the end suffer from a vile reputation.153 Alas and alack! This is from where misfortune rises!154 *

*

*

*

*

When Wu and Ch’u made rebellion, among those members of the royal clan only [Tou] Ying was worthy and fond of members of the petit-nobility, and such men were drawn to him; he led his troops to resist [the lords from] east of the Mount at Hsing-yang. [Thus] I composed the “Memoir of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Number Forty-seven.”155

151

I.e., he utilized the transition period when Emperor Wu was just enthroned and Empress Dowager Tou, his elder sister, held power. 152 The modern pai-hua translators read wu shu 無術 as “having no learning” (cf. Watson, 2:106), similar to the depiction of Shen-t’u Chia 申徒嘉 on Shih chi, 96-2585-6 (jan wu shu hsüeh 然無術學). Our understanding of that expression is, however, “but he had no arts or learning.” Thus the translation here remains “he had no special arts.” 153 Watson (2:106) reads: “Those who fail to win the commendation of the mass of lesser men will end by suffering their slanders. Alas, alas! No misfortune ever comes without due cause!” 154 Pan Ku’s commentary, although apparently based on the Shih chi, differs considerably from that given here (see Translator’s Note). 155 These are the Grand Scribe’s reasons for compiling this chapter given in his postface (Shih chi, 130.3316: 吳楚為亂，宗屬唯嬰賢而喜士，士鄉之，率師抗山東滎陽。作魏其武安列傳第 四十七).

Translator’s Note This chapter has been widely read and widely discussed. It traces not only the careers of the two chancellors, Tou Ying and T’ien Fen, both mentioned in the title, but also limns the life of Kuan Fu, Tou Ying’s most loyal supporter. Some scholars have attempted to address the question of why the chapter title included only two of the men whose lives appear herein. Others have focused on discussing the theme or themes of the chapter. Still others are interested in the style and structure of this long narrative. The Ch’ing poet and Han-lin academician, Wang Shih-han 汪師韓 (b. 1707, chin-shih 1732), points to the drinking of wine as the key to viewing (yen 眼) these biographies. He points out that when Emperor Ching at a feast casually mentioned that the King of Liang might be the one to succeed him, Tou Ying hurriedly seized a cup of wine and rushed forward to offer a toast to his ruler, reminding him that the Han tradition required succession from father to son, not brother to brother. Tou thereby revealed himself to be a “worthy subject” in part by venturing to brook his relative and patron, the Empress Dowager Tou, who doted on the King (Shih chi, 107.2841). Moreover, T’ien Fen also revealed his character by personally serving Tou Ying wine in an apparent attempt to curry favor (107.2841), and, later, when T’ien himself was in power, by seating himself above his elder brother at a drinking party (107.2844). Finally, the culture of wine is the background for Kuan Fu’s anger over T’ien Fen’s refusal to respond to his toast by drinking his entire cup of wine, as custom demanded. This refusal led to the final confrontation between Tou and T’ien and the ruin of all three men (107.2849). While Wang Shih-han’s point is well taken, and wine does seem to be a leitmotif on which the overall narrative may be structured, most commentators point to the emphasis on pin-k’o 賓客 as more central to the theme of the chapter.156 Pin-k’o were “guest-retainers” who were supported, often lavishly, by

156

Wu Chien-ssu 吳見思 (fl. 1680-1690), for example, says that the concept of pin-k’o was the “directing principle of the composition” (tso chu 作主) of this chapter (cited from Yang, Li-tai, p. 665).

165

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

166

powerful lords in return for their complete loyalty. 157 These relationships recall the Warring States era and more particularly Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s accounts of the Four Lords of Meng-ch’ang 孟嘗, P’ing-yüan 平原, Hsin-ling 信陵, and Ch’unshen 春申 (chapters 75-78) where the relationship might better be described as and enduring loyalty, perhaps even “fealty,” to their lord.158 The importance of guest-retainers to politics is emphasized throughout the Shih chi, beginning in high antiquity and continuing through the Han.159 But the term pin-k’o appears most often in the chapters on the Four Lords of the Late Warring States and in depictions of politicians under Emperor Wu of the Han, i.e., Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s contemporaries. Pin-k’o is almost a synonym compound, with pin suggesting perhaps noble guests and k’o (in this context) referring to any outsider, including lower ranking “guests.” Thus Cheng Tang-shih 鄭當時 upon becoming Grand Scribe (Shih chi, 120.3112) admonished his gate-keeper: “If a guest (k’o) arrives, whether he is in a high position or low, do not detain him at the gate.”「客至，無貴賤無留門者。」 As can be seen in the biography of the Lord of Meng-ch’ang, guest-retainers may have varied ‘talents’ and are not just warriors. Yet they are usually men without a fixed place. The translation “knights-errant” (roving knights) has been used to render hsia 俠, men who made up some of the pin-k’o, but does not fit the group of pin-k’o as a whole. Similarly, the word “vassal,” which implied a 157

There is some resemblance between pin-k’o and the Greek concept of xenia (guestfriendship); xenia normally involved a relationship between aristocrats or prominent men of different cities, required reciprocal hospitality and assistance, and would often be extended over several generations (cf. The Landmark Herodotus, the Histories, Andrea L. Purvia, translation, Robert B. Strassler, ed. [New York: Pantheon Books, 2007], p. 379, note 5.30.2a). See also Maria Khayutina, “Host-guest Opposition as a Model of Geo-political Relations in Pre-Imperial China,” Oriens Extremus, 43 (2002): 77-100. 158 Stephen W. Durrant, in his The Cloudy Mirror, Tension and Conflict in the Writings of Sima Qian (Albany: SUNY, 1995), has an excellent discussion (pp. 116-20) of how the power of some of these early lords was “based entirely upon his appreciation and use of talented retainers.” Durrant further argues that “this issue is central to Sima Qian’s writings about himself; for he was, in his own view, an unappreciated victim of his own appreciation for Li Ling’s stellar military service” (p. 117) and believes that the question of pin-k’o is a major sub-theme of the Shih chi. 159 To cite but three examples, “Shun was made to receive guests at the four gates” 賓於四門 (Shih chi, 1:21); the First Emperor of Ch’in “summoned and caused to come guest-retainers and wandering persuaders, intending with them to unite all under heaven” 招致賓客游士，欲以并天 下 (6.223). Even Kao-tsu’s followers were referred to as guest-retainers early in his career 始高祖 微時，嘗辟事，時時與賓客過巨嫂食。嫂厭叔，叔與客來，嫂詳為羹盡，櫟釜，賓客以故去 (Shih chi, 50.1987).

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

167

free man who held a fief from a lord, is not apt. The pin-k’o made up the “homage” or body of persons owning allegiance and attending a lord (from homme, “to become someone’s man”). As is clear from this chapter, allegiance is paid only during the lord’s period of ascendance. Thus, for clarity’s sake (and to maintain a sinological tradition) pin-k’o are referred to in this volume as “guestretainers.” For the most part Ssu-ma Ch’ien admires this relationship. As he explained in the biography of Shen Tao (Shih chi, 74.2347), “Shen Tao observed the guestretainers of the feudal lords through the world and argued that Ch’i would be able to cause the worthy knights of the world to come to it” 覽天下諸侯賓客，言齊 能 致 天 下 賢 士 也 . In other words, Ch’i had the potential through its attractiveness to these guest-retainers to become hegemon. As mentioned above, pin-k’o have been suggested as an important subtheme in this chapter by traditional scholars; Ling Yüeh-yan 凌約言 (chin-shih 1540) 160 pointed out: Wei-chi and Kuan Fu both assembled guest-retainers to establish their own factions and Wu-an broke ethical standards to deal with the affairs of the empire. The three men sought to overthrow each other merely by means of guestretainers, but in the end could not rely on their retainers. 魏其灌夫皆聚賓客以 樹黨, 武安亦折節天下事, 三人徒以賓客相傾, 而卒無賴於賓客.

Although Confucius argued that “he who administers a government through virtue is like the North Star: he resides in his place and all the stars turn respectfully towards him” 為政以德, 譬如北辰, 居其所而眾星共之,161 Ssu-ma Ch’ien recognized that the mere summoning of retainers did not in itself mean the one who summoned them was a man of virtue. Thus in the biography of Liu An 劉安 the Grand Scribe points out that after T’ien Fen encouraged him, Liu “secretly established relationships with guest-retainers and soothed and comforted the common people, on account of the affair of rebellion”; 陰結賓 客，拊循百姓，為畔逆事 (Shih chi, 118.3082). Liu was incited to thoughts of rebellion by T’ien Fen who suggested that he might become Heir and whom was rewarded with gold and gifts by Liu. These events mark a sharp contrast to Tou

160

Ling was the grandfather of the famous literatus Ling Meng-ch’u 凌濛初 (1580-1644). His comments are cited from Yang, Li-tai, p. 665. 161 Lun yü, 2.1; translation revised from Legge, 1:145.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107

168

Ying who earlier thwarted the King of Liang’s aspirations to become the Heir and who rejected or shared his gifts. Although it may be difficult to identify a consistent attitude towards pin-k’o in the Shih chi, Ssu-ma Ch’ien may have come close to giving his own view in his “citation” of Wei Ch’ing’s 衛青 response (recorded in the Grand Scribe’s comments following Wei’s biography, Shih chi, 111.2946) as reported to Ch’ien by Wei’s lieutenant Su Chien’s 蘇建. Su told Ssu-ma Ch’ien that because none of the worthy men of the empire praised General Wei, he suggested to Wei that he should strive to model himself on the famous generals of antiquity who summoned and selected “worthy men” 賢者. Wei then is said to have replied: Though [the marquises of] Wei-chi and Wu-an treated guest-retainers with generosity, the Son of Heaven often gnashed his teeth. This personally depending on gentlemen of the petit-nobility, summoning the worthy and expelling those who were worthless, is the prerogative of the ruler. Subjects should merely obey the law and comply with the duties of their position. What do they have to do with the summoning of gentlemen?! 自魏其武安之厚賓客, 天子常切齒. 彼親附士大夫, 招賢絀不肖者，人主之柄也。人臣奉法遵職而 已，何與招士！

It is equally possible that Ssu-ma Ch’ien felt that such an attitude was merely the only way to exist under his ruler, Emperor Wu. The Grand Scribe seems to have admired others who sought out and doted on guest-retainers. His apparent admiration for Cheng Tang-shih (Shih chi, 120.3112), who opened his gates to all (see above) and then entertained his guests until dawn, only “fearing that he could not spend time with each of them” (k’ung pu pien 恐不遍), is perhaps the most outstanding example. Cheng was of the same mind as Tou Ying in his dispute with T’ien Fen (Shih chi, 107.2851) and in many respects he seems to have been a man who like Tou, who did his best to maintain both his ethics and his life. Indeed, Ch’üan Tsu-wang 全祖望 (1705-1755) argues that Tou was one of only four chancellors in the first century of Han rule who governed by “high standards” (ta chieh 大節).162 Although this is reading a great deal between the lines of this chapter, Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s seems to have seen Tou Ying as basically a 162

Ch’üan places Tou Ying in the company of Wang Ling 王陵, Shen-t’u Chia 申徒嘉, and Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫 (cf. Yang, Li-tai, p. 668).

The Marquis of Wei-chi and Wu-an, Memoir 47

169

worthy man 163 who dared to remonstrate with his ruler, was generous with subordinates (witness his sharing the gold he received with his subordinates (Shih chi, 107.2840), and tried to support and recommend worthy men.164 Although his downfall came at the hands of T’ien Fen, who was selfish and corrupt in contrast to Tou, it was his guest-retainer relationships that became the flaw T’ien could exploit. When all Tou’s supporters abandoned him,165 only Kuan Fu remained. Tou’s loyalty to Kuan, a man who failed to realize the consequences of his rash actions, led all three men to ruin. In addition to Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s assessment of these three men presented in the context of the pin-k’o culture, chapter 107 also exhibits considerable skill in narrative techniques. It has already been noted how the motif of wine flows through the narrative. Wu Chien-ssu 吳建思 (fl. 1680-1690) points out that the dialogues and speeches in these scenes of drinking are realistic depictions of drunken, contemptuous, and angry speech.166 Chung Hsing 鍾惺 (1574-1624) lauds the final paragraph of T’ien Fen’s biography (Shih chi, 107.2845), which depicts the increasing interdependency between Tou and Kuan, as both a transition to Kuan’s biography and a key to understanding why Tou and Kuan were fated to fall to T’ien.167 Finally, Ssu-ma Ch’ien exhibits great skill in characterization in this chapter. While he never castigates T’ien Fen, he allows T’ien himself to point out his own foibles; T”ien, at the height of the dispute between the two chancellors, puts his case to Emperor Wu as follows (Shih chi, 107.2851): The empire has fortunately been peaceful and happy with no trouble and I have been able to become the confidante [of the emperor.] What I am fond of are 163

Li Wan-fang 李晚芳 (d. 1767) argues that Tou Ying’s nobility was that of a worthy (hsien 賢) man, whereas T’ien Fen’s nobility (kuei 貴), was a result of his familial relationship (cited from Yang, Li-tai, p. 667). 164 T’ang Hsieh 湯諧 (chin-shih 1724), however, offers a different view, claims that “Tou Ying came to power because of his relationship to the Empress Dowager Tou, that T’ien Fen by presuming upon deceit was recklessly oppressive, and Kuan Fu because of a willful anger acted with abandon. Within one memoir to depict the [differing] motivations of three men in such detail, what a wonderful skill!”; 魏其榮勢以親交, 武安挾詐以肆橫, 灌夫負氣以任性, 傳內三人都寫得 鬚眉欲動, 妙矣! (cf. Yang, Li-tai, p. 667). 165 In this regard Tou Ying resembles Chi An 汲黯 and Cheng Tang-shih about whom the Grand Scribe concludes “when they held power had guest-reainters manifold, when the lost it then had none” 有勢則賓客十倍，無勢則否 (Shih chi, 120.3113). 166 Cf. Yang, Li-tai, p. 666. 167 Chung’s comments as cited by Li Wan-fang (Yang, Li-tai, p. 666).

170

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 107 music, dogs and horses, and lands and houses. What I love are the sort of entertainers and skilled craftsmen. I am not like Wei-chi and Kuan Fu, who day and night summon those stalwart warriors and influential men to discuss and debate [politics], who set their hearts on defaming and their minds on speaking ill, who either look up to the heavens [for omens of political change] or down to the earth in which they map out their plans, who watch in sidelong glances the relationships between the two palaces, and who consider a crisis in the empire to be a blessing, wanting in it to find great merit.

Dogs and horses are distractions to which most chancellors would not admit; lands, houses and skilled craftsman reveal T’ien’s love of material things; and music and entertainers suggest perhaps his licentiousness. Narrative such as those found in this chapter would certainly have provoked the anger of Emperor Wu. Ssu-ma Ch’ien was able to express such ideas on contemporary politics‒ideas he would never have dared to present orally at court‒in such “biographies.” These ideas in turn sparked controversies among traditional commentators that will continue to spark reactions among readers of the Shih chi well into the future.

Bibliography Translations Aoki, Shiki , 11:289-337. Viatkin, 8:290-303, notes 433-5. Watson, Han, 2:89-106. Studies Cheng Ch’üan-chung 鄭 權 中 . “‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ hsüanchiang” 《魏其武安侯列傳》選講, in Shih chi hsüan-chiang 史記選講. Peking: Chung-kuo Ch’ing-nien Ch’u-pan-she, 1959. Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琦. “‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ shang-hsi” 《魏其 武安侯列傳》賞析, in Shih chi p’ing-yi shang-hsi 史記評議賞析. Huhotet: Nei Meng-ku Jen-min, 1985. Huang Chi-keng 黃季耕. “‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ p’ing-hsi” 《魏其 武安侯列傳》評析, in An-hui Chiao-yü Hsüeh-yüan hsüeh-pao 1988.3. K’o Yung-hsüeh 可永雪. “‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ san-t’i” 《魏其武 安侯列傳》三題, in Yü-yen wen-hsüeh, 1980.3. Li Huang 栗凰. “T’an Shih chi ‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ te jen-wu ho chieh-kou” 談《史記·魏其武安侯列傳》的人物和結枸, in Ch’ing-hai Shih-yüan hsüeh-pao, 1984.3. Shih Chih-mien 施之勉. “Yi li wei fu-chih–Shih chi hui-chu k’ao-cheng cha-chi” 以禮為服制史記會注考證札記, Ta-lu tsa-chih, 31.4 (August 1965). Yin Meng-lun 殷孟倫. T’ung-kuo ‘Wei Ch’i, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan’ lai k’an Ssu-ma Ch’ien Shih chi te yü-yan yi-shu” 通過《魏其武安侯列傳》來看司 馬遷《史記》的語言藝術, Wen-shih-che 1956.6.

171

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48 translated by Li He and Ying Qin1 [108.2857] Han An-kuo 韓安國,2 the Grandee Secretary, was a native of Ch’eng-an 成安 3 in Liang 梁. 4 Later he moved to Sui-yang 睢陽.5 He once 1

[Editor’s note: This chapter was originally translated by Ms. Jianqing Zhu in 2003. Ms. Zhu attended only a few meetings of our translation group in Germany and thus was unable to revise her draft or provide annotation in concert with the other chapters. Thus in 2008 the current translators undertook a new rendition and provided virtually all the footnotes in the present version. The translators and the editor would like to formally acknowledge Ms. Zhu’s preliminary work on the chapter.] 2 See also the entry on Han An-Kuo in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 142-4, and his biography in Han shu, 52. 2375-92. According to the Han shu (Han shu, 52.2394) his agnomen was Ch’ang-ju 長孺. Ssu-ma Ch’ien normally was consistent in referring to a person by either the praenomen or the agnomen in both the title and using that same name in the first line of the chapter. This chapter, however, is an exception in that the title uses the agnomen while the first line uses the praenomen, without even mentioning the agnomen again until the historian’s comments at the end of the chapter. Chen Chih 陳直 (Shih chi hsin-cheng 史記新證 [Tientsin: T’ien-chin Jen-min, 1979], p. 167) believes that the use of title, praenomen or agnomen carries Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s intentions of praise or criticism, with agnomen normally used to show respect to the person in question. However, he also suspects the reason for using the agnomen Ch’ang-ju in the title here was to respectfully avoid the name An-kuo, as it was also the name of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s teacher, K’ung An-kuo 孔安國. 3 Ch’eng-an 成安 was on the border between Ch’en-liu 陳留 Commandery and the state of Liang, about forty miles northwest of modern Shang-ch’iu 商丘 in Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). It was established during Western Han as a county within Ch’en-liu (Shih Wei-le 史為樂 et al., ed. Chung-kuo li-shi ti-ming ta tz’u-tien 中國歷史地名大辭典 [Peking: Chung-kuo She-hui K’o-hsüeh Ch’u-pan-she, 2005.] 1:610.), not to be confused with the Ch’eng-an 成安 County in Ying-ch’uan 潁川 Commandery that was about sixty-five miles southwest of modern Kaifeng in Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19) where Ch’en Yü 陳餘 was the Ch’eng-an Chün 成安君 (Lord of Ch’eng-an; Shih chi, 7.317; 92.2615-25). However, both in the current chapter of the Shih chi and the corresponding chapter in Han shu (52.2394), Ch’eng-an was considered as a county in Liang. This is probably because Ch’en-liu was initially a part of Liang before it was established as a

173

174

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

received [the teachings of] Han Tzu 韓子6 and the miscellaneous Masters at the establishment of Master T’ien 田生7 of Tsou 騶. 8 [He] served King Hsiao 孝 of Liang (i.e., Liu Wu 劉武, r. 168–144 B.C.) 9 as a Palace Grandee. When Wu 吳 and Ch’u 楚 rebelled (154 B.C.), 10 King Hsiao appointed [Han] An-kuo and Chang Yü 張羽11 as generals, to resist the troops of Wu on the eastern boundary. Chang Yü fought with might, [Han] An-kuo with prudence. Therefore the [troops of] Wu could not pass Liang. With Wu and Ch’u already defeated, the names of [Han] An-kuo and Chang Yü were distinguished because of this. commandery, and the Shih chi referred to Ch’eng-an by giving the original state it belonged to (cf. Liang Yü-sheng, 33.1375-6). Ch’eng 成 was used interchangeably with Ch’eng 城 (ibid.). It is also not to be confused with Ch’eng-an where the general of Yen 燕, Kung-sun Ts’ao 公孫操, was Ch’eng-an Chün 成安君 (Lord of Ch’eng-an) (Shih chi, 43.1821). 4 Ssu-ma Ch’ien held a very positive opinion of Liang, as he noted in his comments at the end of the current chapter: “People these days say that Liang is rich in venerable men, which is not false!” (Shih chi, 108.2865). By devoting an entire chapter to Han An-kuo, Ssu-ma Ch’ien seems to indicate that he held Han in high regard. 5 Sui-yang 睢陽 was the residence of the King Hsiao of Liang and the capital of Liang (Shih chi, 58.2082). It was about fifty miles southeast from modern Kaifeng, in the southern suburbs of modern Shang-ch’iu 商丘 in Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). The “Chi-chieh” notes it was the capital of Song 宋 during Western Chou and Spring and Autumn (Shih chi, 38.1621). 6 Han Fei Tzu 韓非子. Cf. his biography in Shih chi Chapter 63. 7 See also Han shu, 52.2394 and the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 511. Otherwise unknown. The two other T’ien Sheng mentioned on Shih chi, 51.1995 and 121.3118 are not to be confused with this Master T’ien. 8 Tsou 騶 is written as 鄒 in Han shu, 52.2394. The county of Tsou was about ten miles southeast of modern Tsou-ch’eng 鄒城 county in Shantung. It was established during Ch’in as a county in the Hsüeh 薛 Commandery, named after Mount Tsou 鄒. Its name was changed from Tsou 鄒 to Tsou 騶 in Western Han when it was territory of Lu 魯 (Ti-ming ta tz’u-tien, 1:1296). However, the “So-yin” argues that “the county of Tsou 騶 was originally the state of Chu, Duke Mu of Lu changed [the name] to Tsou 鄒”; 騶縣本邾國，魯穆公改作“鄒” (Shih chi, 28.1367). Meng K’o 孟軻 was born in Tsou (Shih chi, 74.2343). 9 See the biography of King Hsiao of Liang (Shih chi, Chapter 58), as well as his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 367-9. 10 Known as the Rebellion of the Seven States 七國之亂 or the Rebellion of the Seven Kings 七王之亂. The seven states include Wu, Ch’u, Chao 趙 and four states in the region of Ch’i, thus Chiao-hsi 膠西, Chi-nan 濟南, Tzu-ch’uan 淄川 and Chiao-tung 膠東. For further descriptions of this revolt cf. Shih chi, 58.2082 and 11.440. 11 See Shih chi, 58.2082 and Han shu, 47.2208, as well as his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 698.

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

175

King Hsiao of Liang was the younger brother12 of Ching-ti 景帝 (Emperor Ching, i.e., Liu Ch’i 劉啟, 188-141 B.C., r. 157-141 B.C.) by the same mother. The Empress Dowager Tou 竇太后 (Empress Hsiao Wen 孝文后, i.e., Tou Yifang 竇猗房) loved him and allowed him to request [to the Emperor] to be able to appoint his own chancellors and Officials Ranking Two Thousand Shih.13 In coming and going, touring and sporting, he overstepped his privileges by imitating the Son of Heaven.14 The Son of Heaven heard [*2858*] of this, and his heart did not approve it. The Empress Dowager, having learned that the Emperor did not approve, thus became angry with the envoys from Liang, did not give them audience, investigated and reprimanded the King’s conduct.15 When Han An-kuo was made the envoy from Liang, he sought an audience with the Grand Senior Princess.16 Weeping, he said: “Why, if the King of Liang is filial as a son and loyal as a subject, hasn’t the Empress Dowager ever scrutinized these qualities? Now in the past days when the seven states of Wu, Ch’u, Ch’i 齊 and

12

King Hsiao of Liang, Liu Wu, and his elder brother, the Emperor Ching, named Liu Ch’i, were the only two of King Wen’s sons to be born to his Empress Tou. Cf. Shih chi, 58.2081, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 367. 13 In early Han, officials ranking below two thousand shih could be appointed by kings of local states, however, the rights of appointing Officials Ranking Two Thousand Shih 二千石 were reserved by the Han Emperor (Takigawa, 108.2). Here, Officials Ranking Two Thousand Shih is used as a collective term including Official Ranking Exactly Two Thousand Shih 真 二千 石 (Bielenstein, 208) and those ranking above two thousand shih. Cf. Shih chi, 103.2764 for similar usage. 14 The King of Liang was fond of displaying imperial flags on his chariots, and usurping imperial priviledges such as having pedestrians cleared from his path when he moved about (see notes below). 15 Watson interpreted an-tse 案責 here as the Empress Dowager presenting the envoys of Liang “with a list of the King’s misdemeanours” (Watson, 108). Also see “Ch’in Shih-huang penchi” 秦始皇本紀 (The First Emperor of Ch’in, Basic Annals 6): “He gave Feng Ch’ü-chi, Li Ssu, and Feng Chieh to the judicial officers to investigate and reprimand their other faults” (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:160), 下去疾, 斯, 劫吏, 案責他罪. (Shih chi, 6.271-2). 16 The “Chi-chieh” has her as the elder sister of Emperor Ching, while the “Cheng-yi” claims she was the younger sister of the Emperor. The “So-yin” commentary has her as Princess Kuan-t’ao 館陶公主 (Shih chi, 108.2858). Han An-kuo visited the Grand Senior Princess twice–once when he was a Palace Grandee, to explain the King of Liang’s overstepping his privileges; the other time when he was Clerk of the Capital, to resolve the matter of the assassination of Yüan Ang 袁盎, the former Chancellor of Wu (cf. Shih chi, 58.2085). These two incidents occurred during different times, yet have been conflated by some historians into one incident (cf. Liang Yü-sheng, 33.1376).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

176

Chao 趙 rebelled, east from the Pass,17 all [states] formed an alliance, and headed westward [to the capital], only Liang as the closest relation, was put into dire straits. While The King of Liang was thinking of the Empress Dowager and the Emperor in the capital, the feudal lords were causing disturbances and disorder. With [even] one sentence18 [mentioning the situation], streams of tears flowed down [his cheeks].19 On his knees, he sent off his subjects, the six of us,20 to lead the troops and to attack and hold off Wu and Ch’u. Because of this, Wu and Ch’u did not dare to advance their troops westwards, and in the end were defeated and caused to flee. [All] this was due to the effort of the King of Liang. Now the Empress Dowager reprimands and reproaches the King of Liang over minor details and rigid rites. The father of the King of Liang was an emperor, and so is his older brother. All he has seen is the grandiosity. Thus on his way out [his attendants] shout “Make Way!” and on his returning [they] shout “Stop and Pay Respect!” 21 The flags on [his] chariots were gifts bestowed by the Emperor.22 Thus with these [gifts] he seeks to show off in [his] humble county. [He] gallops about in [his] state, in order to flaunt [his glory before] the various feudal lords and to let the whole empire know that he is beloved by the Empress Dowager and 17

Another understanding, according to the “Cheng-yi,” is that kuan 關, the pass, stands for kuan-chung 關中, the Lands within the Pass (Shih chi, 108.2858). 18 Other readings of yi-yen 一 言 can be one word, one sentence, and one speech. The translation here takes the meaning of one sentence, as in “Chin shih-chia” 晉 世 家 (Chin, Hereditary House 9): “Ch’u would stabilize three states with one sentence, whereas you would exterminate three states with one sentence” (Grand Scribe’s Records, 5.1:339), 楚一言定三國, 子 一言而亡之 (Shih chi, 39.1665). 19 Ch’i shu hang hsia 泣數行下 is often used to show strong emotion, for example, “tears streamed down King Hsiang’s cheeks and his attendants all wept; no one could lift up his head” (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1.205), 項王泣數行下, 左右皆泣，莫能仰視 (Shih chi, 7.333), and “Kao-tsu then got up to dance, his emotions ran high until they overcame him and streams of tears flowed down his face” (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2.83), 高祖乃起舞，慷慨傷懷，泣數行下 (Shih chi, 8.389). In the current chapter, this phrase is used once to illustrate Han An-kuo’s emotional speeches (108.2859) and twice to show the King of Liang’s emotions (108. 2858, 2860). 20 According to Takigawa (108.3; citing Wang Hsien-ch’ien), the six subjects sent to this task was Han An-kuo, Zhang Yü, Fu Po 傅伯, Ting K’uan 丁寛, and two other unknown officials. 21 The Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 (581-645) (Han shu, 52.2395) commentary has that pi 蹕 was to signal pedestrians to stop and clear the road, while ching 警 was used to call the attention of people to be take care and be respectful. These practices were supposed to be reserved for the Emperor. 22 See Shih chi, 58.2083, where only the “flags of the Son of Heaven” 天 子旌 旗 were mentioned as gifts from the Emperor. A different interpretation that both the King of Liang’s chariots and flags were gifts from the Emperor is possible based on the chieh 皆 in the sentence.

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

177

the Emperor. Now when the envoys from Liang came to the court, [the Empress Dowager] immediately investigated and reprimanded the King’s conduct. The King of Liang is afraid, day and night he weeps and longs, not knowing what to do. The King of Liang is filial as a son and loyal as a subject, but why doesn’t the Empress Dowager doesn’t care for him?” The Grand Senior Princess gave a thorough report to the Empress Dowager. The Empress Dowager was happy and said: “For him I will speak of this to the Emperor.” When she spoke of this, the heart of the Emperor was relieved. He then took off his hat [to pay respect] and apologized to the Empress Dowager: “[We] brothers were not able to enlighten each other,23 but have caused worries for the Empress Dowager.” Then he gave audience to all of the envoys from Liang and generously bestowed [gifts] upon them. After this the King of Liang was increasingly dearer (to the court) and favored more. The Empress Dowager and the Senior Princess in addition bestowed upon [Han] An-kuo gifts that could be valued above one thousand pieces of gold. [His] name was distinguished because of this, and his ties to the Han court were established. [2859] Later [Han] An-kuo was tried under the law and punished for an offense; T’ien Chia 田甲, 24 a legal official in charge of the prison of Meng 蒙, 25 humiliated [Han] An-kuo. [Han] An-kuo said: “Will not the ashes of a dead fire recommence to burn?” T’ien Chia answered: “Should they burn, I shall piss on them.” Not long after, the post of the Clerk of the Capital of Liang fell vacant. The Han court sent an envoy to appoint [Han] An-kuo as the [new] Clerk of the 23

Hsiang-chiao 相 教, Watson has “my brother and I had some difference of opinion.” However, in the first chapter of “Shang-t’ung” 尚同 in Mo Tzu 墨子 it states: “The people of the world, all [try to] harm each other with water, fire and poison. As a result, they have spare strength, but are not able to serve each other with it. They squander their spare wealth, and don’t share it with each other. They obscure the good way, and don’t enlighten each other with it. The disorder of the world is like that of [the world] of fowls and beasts” 天下之百姓, 皆以水火, 毒藥相虧害. 至 有餘力, 不能以相勞. 腐餘財, 不以相分. 隱匿良道, 不以相教. 天下之亂, 若禽獸然 (Mo Tzu, 3.20, SPTK). Thus hsiang-chiao refers to pointing someone to the good way of doing things, teaching each other, enlightening each other. Here the Emperor uses it to say that the matter was not able to be solved between brothers, thus worrying the Empress Dowager. Another reading could be that hsiang-chiao 相教 is used in place of hsiang-chiao 相交, meaning “to get along.” 24 See the parallel passage on Han Shu, 52.2395 and his entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 508. Otherwise unknown. Both Yang Shen 楊慎 (1488-1559) and Ku Yen-wu 顧炎武 (1613-1682) hold that Chia 甲 is used here because the person’s name was unknown (Takigawa, 108.4). 25 Meng was a county in Liang, about five miles north from Sui-yang, in the northern suburbs of modern Shang-ch’iu in Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). Chuang Tzu 莊子 was a native of Meng County in Liang (cf. Shih chi, 63.2143).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

178

Capital of Liang, raised him from among convicts,26 and designated him to a post of Official Ranking Two Thousand Shih. T’ien Chia ran and fled the state. [Han] An-kuo said: “If you, [T’ien] Chia, do not resume your post, I’ll wipe out your entire clan.” Only then did [T’ien] Chia strip down to the waist27 and apologize. [Han] An-kuo laughed and said: “Now you may piss! Are people like you28 worthy enough to be punished at all?” Eventually [Han An-kuo] treated him well. As to the vacancy of the Clerk of the Capital in Liang, King Hsiao had newly acquired Kung-sun Kuei 公孫詭,29 a native of Ch’i. [King Hsiao] liked him and intended to ask [the Emperor] to appoint him as the Clerk of the Capital. The Empress Dowager Tou heard about it, hence she decreed upon the King to appoint [Han] An-kuo as the Clerk of the Capital. Kung-sun Kuei and Yang Sheng 羊勝 30 persuaded King Hsiao about the affair to request to be the Heir of the Emperor, and to expand the territory [of Liang]. Fearing31 that the officials of Han court would not agree, they then secretly sent men to assassinate the Han counsellors that were in charge of 26

T’u 徒, convicts or convict-laborers (cf. Shih chi, 8.347, and Grand Scribe’s Records, 2.14). Stripping down to the waist was the traditional way of showing remorse, admitting defeat and asking for forgiveness and mercy. The surrendering party would often strip down to the waist and bring a lamb to offer, as in “Sung Wei Tzu shih-chia” 宋微子世家 (Shih chi, 38.1610), or carry a whip on the shoulder or back 肉袒負荊 to indicate the willingness to be punished, as in “Lien P’o, Lin Hsiang-ju lieh-chuan” 廉頗藺相如列傳 (Shih chi, 81.2443). 28 Kung 公 is a term of respect, used ironically by Han An-kuo, now a high official again, to T’ien Chia. 29 Kung-sun Kuei is known as a man full intrigues and false plans; cf. Shih chi, 58.2083, also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 636. 30 Yang Sheng and Kung-sun Kuei were both from Ch’i and were associated with a number of literary men and persuaders. The King of Liang gathered these men to his court and favored them with wealth and official titles. Cf. Shih chi, 58.2083, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 636. 31 K’ung 恐 “fearing” may be a scribal error for yüan 怨 “harbouring resentment for.” The parallel passage in Han shu (52.2396) also has k’ung 恐. However, the King of Liang harbouring resentment for the officials of Han, and for Yüan Ang in particular, for not supporting his request to be made Heir, is also recorded in “Yüan Ang, Ch’ao Ts’o lieh-chuan” 袁盎鼂錯列傳 (Shih chi, 101.2744) and “Liang Hsiao Wang shih-chia” (Shih chi, 58.2085), where in both accounts yüan 怨 is used instead of k’ung 恐. Liu Feng-shih 劉奉世 (1041-1113) regarded the discrepancy as a mistake in the current chapter (Takigawa, 108.5; Wang Hsien-ch’ien, 108.1127a). The use of k’ung 恐 makes it seem that the assassination was staged to prevent the Han officials from objecting the King of Liang’s proposal to become Heir; however, in fact the assassination was carried out after the Han officials objected the proposal, thus a result of the resentment on the King of Liang’s side. See the notes above. 27

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

179

affairs.32 They had murdered Yüan Ang 袁盎,33 the former Chancellor of Wu, by the time (150 B.C.) Emperor Ching had finally learned of the plans of [Kungsun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng. Only then did he send envoys to capture [Kungsun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng, determined to succeed. Ten groups of Han envoys34 came to Liang, and everyone from the Chancellor on down were all subjected to an extensive search [for Kung-sun and Yang] throughout the whole state, [yet] for over a month did not capture [them]. [Han] An-kuo, the Clerk of the Capital, learnt that [Kung-sun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng were hiding in King Hsiao’s residence. [Han] An-kuo went in to see the King and in tears said: “The ruler dishonoured, the minister dies.35 You, Great King, do not have good ministers, therefore things one after the other have come to this. Now [Kung-sun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng cannot be captured, I beg to be dismissed and granted my death.”36 The King asked: “Why should it come to this?” [Han] An-kuo, with streams of tears flowing down [his cheeks], [*2860*] said: “May the Great King consider for yourself your relationship with the Emperor; could it be closer than the

32

In 150 B.C. Liu Wu sojourned at the Han court where he was welcomed heartily and treated with great honor. A month after his arrival, Liu Jung, the Heir, was demoted to become King of Lin-chiang, whereupon Empress Dowager Tou expressed the hope that her son, Liu Wu, would be appointed Heir to Emperor Ching. However, officials like Yüan Ang intervened and prevented the nomination. Disappointed, Liu Wu returned to Liang and conspired with Kung-sun Kuei and Yang Sheng to assassinate Yüan Ang and other Han officials. Cf. Shih chi, 58. 2084-5. 33 Han shu (52.2396) reads 爰 盎 instead of 袁 盎 . Yüan Ang, a native of Ch’u, was a Chancellor of Ch’u before being transferred to become Chancellor of Wu (ruled by Liu P’i 劉濞, r. 195-154 B.C.). He was charged with taking bribes and removed from his office to become a commoner. In this chapter he is referred to as the former Chancellor of Wu, whom Emperor Ching frequently summoned for advice. He was mainly known for his part in the execution of Ch’ao Ts’o 鼂錯, and his protests against the aspirations of the King of Liang to become Emperor Ching’s heir. This eventually led to his assassination by conspirators from Liang. See his biography in Shih chi Chapter 101, the translation in Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:323-43, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 6613. 34 Presumably one group after another. 35 This is a quote from Kuo yü 國語 with slight variation. The Kuo yü has chün 君 “lord” instead of chu 主 “ruler” in Fan Li’s 范蠡 farewell conversation with the King of Yüeh 越王, “Your minister heard about this: for those who are ministers, the lord worried, the minister works; the lord dishonored, the minister dies.” 臣聞之，為人臣者，君憂臣勞，君辱臣死 (Kuo yü [Shanghai: Shanghai Ku-chi Ch’u-pan-she, 1998], 21.658). 36 To be granted to commit suicide, as opposed to being executed, was considered a favor granted by the emperor.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

180

relationship between the Grand Supreme Emperor37 and Emperor Kao[-tsu] (i.e., Liu Pang 劉邦, 247-195 B.C., r. 202–195 B.C.), or than the relationship between the Emperor and the King of Lin-chiang 臨江 (i.e., Liu Jung 劉榮, d. 148 B.C.)?” 38 King Hsiao answered: “There is no comparing them.” [Han] An-kuo said: “Now the Grand Supreme Emperor, as well as the King of Lin-chiang, enjoyed the closeness between father and son, yet Emperor Kao[-tsu] still said: ‘The one who carried a three-ch’ih sword to take the world was me.’39 Therefore the Grand Supreme Emperor never was given control over [imperial] affairs, [instead he] resided in Yüeh-yang 櫟陽.40 The King of Lin-chiang, the eldest son of the Emperor by the Empress, and the Heir, was deposed and made King of Lin-chiang because of one slip of the tongue. 41 Charged with the offence of [illegally extending] the walls of his palace, he ended up committing suicide at

37

T’ai-shang-huang 太上皇, is the respectful title Liu Pang, Emperor Kao-tsu bestowed upon his own father. According to later commentators, his name was either Liu Chih-chia 劉執嘉 or Liu T’uan 劉煓 (d. 197 B.C.; cf. Shih chi, 7.322; 8.341-2 n. 4). 38 Lin-chiang was situated on the banks of Yangtze River, near modern Chung-hsien 忠縣 in Szechwan, about two hundred miles east from modern Ch’engtu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:30). The “Cheng-yi” notes that though Liu Hung was made the King of Lin-chiang, his capital was at Chiang-ling 江陵 which was very close to modern Chiang-ling in Hupei (Shih chi, 11.443-4). Liu Jung was the eldest son of Emperor Ching and his consort Li Yi 栗姬. He was made Heir in 153 only to be demoted in 150 B.C. to be King of Lin-chiang. On his suicide in 148 B.C., Liu Ch’e 劉 徹, the ninth son of Emperor Ching by his Empress Wang 王 (i.e., Wang Chih 王娡, d. 126), was made Heir in his place. He later became Emperor Wu 武帝 (r. 141-87 B.C.). Cf. Shih chi, 49.1976; Han shu, 53.2412; and Liu Jung’s entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 352. 39 The full quote appears in “Kao-tsu pen-chi” 高祖本紀, where, several months before his death, Liu Pang refused to be treated even when he was told that his illness was treatable, instead, he said contemptuously to the physician, “With the status of a commoner I carried a three-ch’ih sword to take the world, was this not the will of Heaven? Fate lies within Heaven–even P’ien Ch’üeh could not help!” (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:86) 吾以布衣提三尺劍取天下, 此非天命乎? 命乃在天, 雖扁鵲何益! (Shih chi, 8.391). Han An-kuo here excerpts Liu Pang’s remarks, taking them out of context and using them for a completely different purpose. 40 Yüeh-yang was about forty miles northeast of modern Sian 西安 in Shensi (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:15). 41 According to Ju-ch’un 如淳 (“Chi-chieh”), the deposition of Liu Jung was caused by the insolent remarks of his mother, consort Li Yi (Shih chi, 108.2860). However, according to chapter 49 of the Shih chi, it was the jealousy-fueled intrigues between the Senior Princess and Li Yi, as well as the power struggles between Li Yi and Empress Wang, that led to his removal (Shih chi, 49.1976-7).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

181

the office of the Commandant of the Capital.42 Why? To govern the empire, one may never allow personal feelings to interfere with public duty. The saying has it: ‘Although one has his own father, how can one know that he would not turn out to be a tiger? Though one has his own brother, how can one know that he would not turn out to be a wolf?’ Now though the Great King is ranked among the feudal lords. He delights 43 in the baseless talk of evil ministers, violating the prohibition of the Sovereign and bending the proclaimed laws. For the sake of the Empress Dowager, the Son of Heaven couldn’t bear to bring charges against my King. The Empress Dowager sheds tears day and night, hoping that the Great King will correct himself, yet the Great King still will not come to his senses. Suppose that one day the Empress Dowager should ride away to her final rest in her imperial chariots, 44 whom will the Great King still cling to?” Before he finished his words, King Hsiao had streams of tears flowing down [his cheeks]. Apologizing to [Han] An-kuo, he said: “Now I will offer [Kung-sun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng [to the Emperor].” [Thereupon Kung-sun] Kuei and [Yang] Sheng committed suicide. The envoys of Han returned and reported [to the Emperor] that the affairs of Liang were all settled, due to the efforts of [Han] An-kuo. Thereafter Emperor Ching and the Empress Dowager appreciated [Han] An-kuo even more. When King Hsiao expired (144 B.C.) and King Kung 共 (i.e., Liu Mai 劉买, r. 144-136 B.C.)45 ascended the throne, [Han] An-kuo was tried under the law and lost his post.46 He [then] resided at home.

42

In 148 B.C. Liu Jung was summoned to Ch’ang-an and charged with breaking down the walls of a shrine in order to expand his own palace. He was questioned by Chih Tu 郅都, the Commandant of the Capital and one of the ‘harsh officials’ of the Han. Liu Jung committed suicide in Chih Tu’s office (see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 352). 43 Han shu (52.2397) has hsü 訹 which, according to Yen Shih-ku, means “to be lured by,” instead of yüeh 悦 “to delight in.” Also according to Sung Ch’i 宋祁 (998-1062) a variation of hsü 訹 in early Han shu editions is ch’u 怵 “to fear” (Wang Hsien-ch’ien, 108.1127b), which Chang Wen-hu identified as an error (5.644). 44 The chariot was often used to be a respectful byname for the person in it, for example, paochia 保駕 “to protect the chariot” means to escort the Emperor. Also as euphemisms for passing away, the ancient Chinese language used images of the person riding away on a crane or cloud, for example, chia-ho kuei hsi 駕鶴歸西 “riding on a crane to the west.” Here the Empress Dowager in her imperial chariots is also a respectful, euphemistic image employed to refer to her death. 45 Liu Mai was the eldest son of Liu Wu, and King of Liang after him (cf. Shih chi, 58.2086; Han shu, 47.2212; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 331). 46 Details of offense unknown (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 143).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

182

During the chien-yüan 建元 (140–135 B.C.)47 reign, T’ien Fen 田蚡, 48 the Marquis of Wu-an 武安, 49 was the Grand Commandant of the Han; he was favored, honored, and was in charge of affairs. [Han] An-kuo presented [T’ien] Fen valuables 50 worth five hundred chin of gold. [T’ien] Fen spoke to the Empress Dowager 51 about [Han] An-kuo. The Son of Heaven, too, had long heard about his worthiness and immediately summoned [Han An-kuo to the court] and appointed him as the Chief Commandant of Pei-ti 北地, 52 [then later (138 B.C.)] promoted him to be Grand Minister of Agriculture. When Min-yüeh 閩越 and Tung-yüeh 東越 attacked each other (135 B.C.), 53 [Han] An-kuo and

47

The chien-yüan reign period started when Liu Ch’e, Emperor Wu, took the throne. It was also the very first reign name in the history of China. 48 T’ien Fen was the half brother of the Empress Wang of Emperor Ching. See the apparatus in the translation of the previous chapter and Shih chi, 107.2841, as well as Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 505-6. 49 Wu-an was located near modern Wu-an county in Hopeh, about twenty miles northwest of modern Han-tan 邯鄲, and about ninety-five miles south of modern Shih-chia-chuang 石家庄 in Hopeh (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26). 50 Han shu (52.2398) has five hundred chin of gold instead of valuables worth five hundred chin of gold. 51 Wang Chih 王娡, Emperor Ching’s Empress Wang, the mother of Emperor Wu. She became the Empress Dowager when Emperor Wu took the throne in 140 B.C. (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 525). 52 Pei-ti was established as a commandery during the Ch’in with its seat at Yi-ch’ü 義渠, and was located about twenty miles southwest of modern Ch’ing-yang 慶 陽 in Kansu. The commandery covered the western part of modern Shensi and the northeastern portion of modern Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 53 There is obviously a mistake here, as well as in the parallel Han shu chapter (Han shu, 52.2398). According to Wei Chao 韋昭 in the “Chi-chieh” commentary, Min-yüeh was just another name for Tung-yüeh (Shih chi, 114.2979), while in the sixth year of chien-yüan (135 B.C.), it was Nan-yüeh 南越 that Min-yüeh attacked (Shih chi, 114.2981). The mistake in the current chapter was perhaps because of the complicated history of Tung-yüeh. As an ancient tribe of Yüeh, Tungyüeh occupied parts of the modern Fukien, Chekiang, and Kiangsi. During Ch’in, its land was established as Min-chung 閩中 commandery. During early Han, it was established as Min-yüeh state, which later split into Min-yüeh and Tung-ou 東甌. Nan-yüeh, another Yüeh tribe, occupied the land south of Wu-ling 五岭. Ch’in established three commandaries over its land. In early Han, the state of Nan-yüeh covered modern Kwangtung, Kwangsi, and parts of Vietnam (Shih chi, 114.2979; Shih chi tz’u-tien, p.259, 340, 666; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:4). However, another reading dates the war before 135 B.C. because the line appears in the text before “In the sixth year of chienyüan (135 B.C.),” thus this war should be between Min-yüeh and Tung-ou in the third year of

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

183

Wang Hui 王恢 (d. 133 B.C.),54 the Grand Usher, were made generals.55 Before they reached Yüeh, [Min-] yüeh had killed its King and surrendered, 56 [whereupon] the Han troops were also dismissed. In the sixth year of chien-yüan (135 B.C.), the Marquis of Wu-an was made Chancellor, and [Han] An-kuo Grandee Secretary. [2861] When the Hsiung-nu came [to the Han court] to request a marital alliance, the Son of Heaven handed this proposal down [to his ministers] for deliberation. Wang Hui, the Grand Usher, was a native of Yen 燕. Having served many times as a frontier officer, he was well acquainted with the affairs of the Hu 胡. 57 He deliberated: “If the Han and the Hsiung-nu form a marital alliance, usually they would immediately turn their backs on the agreement again before a few years passed. Better not to consent [to their proposal], but raise troops and attack them!” [Han] An-kuo said: “Going a thousand li into battle, the troops will not gain any advantage. Now the Hsiung-nu, relying on their abundance of warriors and horses,58 harboring the hearts of fowls and beasts, move about and rise up like flocks of birds, it is hard to be capture and control them. Gaining their land is not sufficient to consider extending [our territory], and possessing their multitudes59 is not sufficient to consider strengthening [the empire].60 Since high Chien-yüan. This reading also holds the current chapter made a mistake here (Liang Yü-sheng, 33.1376-7). 54 Wang Hui was appointed Grand Usher in 136 B.C. For his biographical details, see the later events in the current chapter and Shih chi, 114.2981 and 116.2993 (see also Han shu, 52.2398, 95.3839, and 95.3860, as well as Loewe, Dictionary, p. 526). 55 The Han court sent troops at the request of Nan-yüeh which respected the agreement with the Han court not to engage in wars with other states (cf. Shih chi, 114.2981). 56 King Ying 郢 of Min-yüeh was killed by his brother Yü-shan 餘 善 who was then established as the new King of Tung-yüeh by the Han court (cf. Shih chi, 114.2981). 57 Hu in the Shih chi was used generically to refer to the various northern non-Chinese peoples, including the Hsiung-nu. For example, Ssu-ma Ch’ien begins to explain his motives for compiling the “Chien-yüan yi lai hou che nien-piao” 建元以來侯者年表 with the lines “they suppressed the mighty Hu in the north, punished the violent Yüeh in the south” 北討強胡, 南誅勁越 (Shih chi, 130.3304). 58 Watson reads tsu 足 as the hooves of horses, and jung-ma 戎馬 as army horses, thus jungma chih tsu 戎馬之足 as “the feet of swift war horses” (p. 112). 59 Watson reads chung 眾 as the “hosts of warriors” of Hsiung-nu (Watson, p.112). 60 Shih chi has a quote of Chu-fu Yen 主父偃 quoting Li Ssu’s 李斯 opposition to going into war against the Hsiung-nu, “Now the Hsiung-nu have no habitat of walled cities and ramparts, nor

184

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

antiquity they have never belonged to what we deemed mankind.61 If the Han [troops] go several thousand of li to contend for advantage then our men and horses will be exhausted. The caitiffs, with the fullness of their strength, will take advantage of our weariness. Moreover,62 at the extremity of the range of a strong crossbow, the arrow cannot [even] pierce the light silk of Lu 魯;63 at the end of a gust of wind, its strength cannot even cause a goose feather to float. Not that they are not powerful in the beginning, but their strength has declined at the end. It is not expedient to attack them, [thus] it would be better to form the marital alliance.” The majority of the ministers participating in the discussion supported [Han] An-kuo[’s opinion]; at this, the Sovereign granted the marital alliance [with the Hsiung-nu].

garrisons for accumulated belongings, they move about and rise up like flocks of birds, it is hard to capture and control them.....Gaining their land is not sufficient to be called a profit, encountering their people you can not put them to work and maintain them [like that]” 夫匈奴無城郭之居, 委積 之守, 遷徙鳥舉, 難得而制也....得其地不足以為利也, 遇其民不可役而守也 (Shih chi, 112.2954). The reason that both Li Ssu and Han An-kuo, living in different historical periods, used the same expressions when commenting on the Hsiung-nu can be attributed to Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s tendency to employ formulaic language as a standard description of the Hsiung-nu. 61 According to Chin Cho 晉灼 in the “So-yin” commentary, jen 人 refers to the Han people (Shih chi, 108.2861), another translation can be “our people.” The parallel account in Han shu only has fu shu 弗屬 instead of pu shu wei jen 不屬為人, thus does not specify to what the Hsiung-nu had never belonged, only its note by Yen Shih-ku pointed out that it was chung-kuo 中國, the central states, that the Hsiung-nu had never belonged to (Han shu, 52.2398), which can be interpreted as that the Hsiung-nu had never become subjects of the Han court. Shih chi also has it that the Hsiung-nu was “treated as animals like fowls and beasts, never belonged to what was deemed mankind” 禽 獸 畜 之 , 不 屬 為 人 ever since the very beginning dynasties (Shih chi, 112.2955). 62 From this point on Han An-kuo used two analogies - an arrow at the end of its range and a gust of wind at the end of its strength–to argue his support for a marital alliance. This does not appear in the Han shu paralell of the discussion on marital alliance with Hsiung-nu. However in the Han shu, Han An-kuo‘s analogies appear in a long argument between him and Wang Hui, a year after the marital alliance was made, on the plan proposed by Wang Hui and Nieh Weng-yi 聶翁壹 to lure Hsiung-nu with profits so that they could be vanquished upon crossing over the border and entering Ma-yi 馬邑 (Han shu, 52.2402). This long argument (Han shu, 52.2398-403), showing Han An-kuo’s consistent opposition to engaging in war with the Hsiung-nu thousands of li away, does not appear in the Shih chi, the text of which goes from the proposal directly to the Emperor approving the proposal and sending Nieh Yi secretly on the mission (Shih chi, 108.2861). 63 Kao 縞 is a kind of thin white silk. According to Hsü Shen 許慎 (58-147), the silk made in Lu is especially thin (Shih chi, 108.2861).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

185

In the following year, namely the first year of yüan-kuang 元光 (134 B.C.),64 Nieh Weng-yi 聶翁壹,65 an influential man66 from Ma-yi 馬邑67 in Yen-men 雁 門68 went through the Grand Usher Wang Hui to speak to the Sovereign: “The Hsiung-nu have just concluded a marital alliance, trusting 69 the frontier 64

The Han shu parallel (52.2398) does not offer a specific year, but the “Wu-ti chi” 武帝紀 (6.162) refers to the second year of yüan-kuang (133 B.C.). Wang Hsien-ch’ien (following Yen Shih-ku’s original note) argues (Han shu pu chu, 52.2a) that Shih chi was in error, but the T’ungchien k’ao-yi 通鑑考異 cited by Takigawa (108.1146) points out that it was the first year of yüankuang that Nieh Weng-yi made the suggestion, and his proposal was not adopted until the second year. 65 The “So-yin” (108.2861) regards “Weng-yi” as the man’s first name. The Han shu parallel (52.2398) reads Nieh Yi for Nieh Weng-yi, but in the “Hsiung-nu chuan” 匈奴傳 (Han shu, 64a.3765) it still reads Nieh Weng-yi, where Yen Shih-ku notes that yi was the first name, and weng is an expression of calling the elderly. Mizusawa (48.9) notes that Wang Ming-sheng 王鳴盛 (1722-1797) also points out that only the character yi is the given name, and the character weng suggests certain respect to the elderly so that it can be omitted (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 443). Moreover, Chen Chih 陳直 (Shih chi hsin-cheng, p.167) notes that the use of given name yi is in accordance with the depiction in “Hsü-chuan” 敘傳 (Han shu, 70a.4197-8): “In the end of [the reign of] the Shih-huang, Pan Yi escaped to Lou-fan. During the time of Hsiao Hui[-ti] and Kao Hou, [Ban Yi] was dominant in the border with his wealth. Having been over one hundred years old, he died a natural death, and therefore the north is rich of people who take Yi as their given names. 始皇之末，班壹避地於樓煩，當孝惠高后時，以財雄邊，年百馀歲，以壽終，故北 方多以壹為字者.” 66 Chang Yen 張晏 (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses hao 豪 as shuai 帥, “leader.” 67 Ma-yi was a county seat located in the southwestern part of Yen-men Commandery, about twelve miles east of modern Shuo-chou 朔州 in Shangsi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 68 A commandery lying to the north of modern Ho-ch’ü 河曲, Wu-chai 五寨 and Ning-wu 甯 武 in Shangsi, on the south of modern Huang-ch’i 黄旗 and Tai 岱 lakes in Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 69 Ch’in-hsin 親信 seems to be a compound verb. It also occurs elsewhere in the Shih chi with the central meaning of “trust.” For example, in the “Tz’u-k’o lieh-chuan” 刺客列傳 (Shih chi, 86.2528), the whole sentence that contains ch’in-hsin is rendered as “[he] puts his trust in a miserable recluse” 親信窮僻之人 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:324.); and in the “Huai-yin Hou lieh-chuan” 淮陰侯列傳 (Shih chi, 92.2622), the sentence is rendered as “when a man trusts me deeply” 夫 人 深 親 信 我 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:88). The former is Nieh Cheng’s 聶 政 comment on Yen Chung-tzu 嚴仲子, and the latter is Han Hsin’s 韓信 comment on Liu Pang 劉邦, which indicate a kind of trust from superiors to subordinates. However, the trust in this chapter was built upon the marital alliance, which combined the Hsiung-nu and the Han together, thus the whole sentence is better to be rendered as “trusting the frontier inhabitants like a family” instead of merely “trusting the frontier inhabitant.” Another reading of ch’in-hsin here might be “to get close to and to trust” as Wu and Lu (108.2828) reads.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

186

inhabitants like a family, [thus they] can be lured by profits.”70 The [Sovereign] secretly sent Nieh Weng-yi as envoy, who fled to the Hsiung-nu and said to the Shan-yü: “I am able to cut off the heads of Ma-yi’s Prefect, Assistant71 and their officials, and to surrender with the walled city. All the wealth and goods can be completely obtained.” The Shan-yü was fond of and trusted him, taking this [plan] as correct and granting Nieh Weng-yi his permission. Nieh Weng-yi then returned. As a trick, he cut off the heads of condemned prisoners, and hung their heads up from the wall of Ma-yi to show to the messenger of Shan-yü as a token of faith. He said: “The senior officials 72 of Ma-yi are already dead, and you should hurry to come.” At this, the Shan-yü, leading over 100,000 horsemen through the fortifications, entered at the fortification of Wu-chou 武州.73 [2862] At that time, 74 the Han laid an ambush of over 300,000 military chariots, cavalry and Skilled Soldiers75 in a valley near Ma-yi. Li Kuang 李廣,76 the Commandant of the Guards, was appointed General of Resolute Cavalry, the 70

The Han shu (52.2398-2403) recorded a long argument between Wang Hui and Han An-kuo prior to Nieh Weng-yi being sent to the Hsiung-nu, indicating clearly that Han An-kuo was against the plot proposed by Wang and Nieh. 71 The role of assistant was normally that of an administrative assistant or aide to the head of an agency, but his function may at times be better suggested by renderings such as Vice Prefect. 72 Lu Zongli (p. 172) points out that chang-li 長吏 is a general designation that could be applied to officials such as county magistrate (hsien-ling 縣令) with a rank at or above 600 shih, which is verified by the edict in the “Hsiao-ching pen-chih” 孝景本紀 (Han shu 5.149). However, the “Hsiao-ching pen-chih” conflicts itself, since it also claims assistant county magistrate (hsiench’eng 縣丞) with a rank less than 600 shih as chang-li (Han shu 5.151). Furthermore, according to the “Pai-kuan kung-ch’ing piao” 百官公卿表 (Han shu, 19A.742), county magistrates with a rank from 600 shih to 1000 shih, and assistant county magistrates and county commanders (hsien-wei 縣 尉), holding ranks from 200 shih to 400 shih, could all be called chang-li. Therefore, the definition of chang-li is not consistent across chapters of the Han shu. 73 A county seat located in the center of Yen-men Commandery, south of modern Tso-yün 左 雲 in Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 74 Based on the “Wu-ti chi” (Han shu, 6.162), it was in the sixth lunar month of the second year of yüan-kuang (133 B.C.). 75 Skilled Soldiers (Ts’ai-kuan 材官) was one category of Han dynasty militiamen serving on active training duty in their home places, specifying ordinary infantrymen in contrast to cavalrymen and naval forces (cf. Hucker, p.515). 76 Li Kuang was one of the leaders who played a main role in the campaigns fought against the Hsiung-nu (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 220-1, his biography on Shih chi, 109.2867-78 and Han shu, 54.2439-70).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

187

Grand Coachman Kung-sun Ho 公 孫 賀 77 as General of the Light Chariots (Ch’ing-ch’e chiang-chün 輕車將軍78) , the Grand Usher Wang Hui as General of Military Garrison (Chiang-t’un chiang-chün 將屯將軍79), the Grand Palace Grandee Li Hsi 李息80 as General of Skilled Soldiers, and the Grand Secretary Han An-kuo as the Commissioner over the Army General, all the commanders being subordinate to the Commissioner over the Army. It was agreed that when the Shan-yü entered Ma-yi, the Han troops would be loosed upon him. Wang Hui, Li Hsi and Li Kuang81 would separately be in charge of attacking the heavy and light supply carts from Tai 代82.83 And then the Shan-yü crossed through the Great Wall of Han at the fortification of Wu-chou. More than 100 li away from Ma-yi, plundering and pillaging as he marched, he saw only livestock grazing on the fields, but not a single person. The Shan-yü found this strange. By attacking the beacon tower he captured the Commandant Aide84 of Wu-chou. He wanted to

77

Kung-sun Ho served most of his life in the armed forces, taking part in a number of military expeditions (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 124-5). A biographical sketch can be found on Shih chi, 111.2941-2 and in the translation of that chapter in this volume. 78 Ch’ing-ch’e chiang-chün, was a title of nobility established by Han Wu-ti. Kung-sun Ho seems to be the first one entitled (cf. Lu Zongli, p. 597, and Hucker, p. 173). 79 Li Ch’i 李奇 notes (cited in “Cheng-yi”) that Chiang-t’un chiang-chün was responsible for supervising and commanding garrisons. 80 Li Hsi served as General in the several campaigns against the Hsiung-nu, and then was appointed as Grand Usher (cf. Loewe, Dictionary, p. 231). A biographical sketch can also be found on Shih chi, 111.2942 and in the translation of that chapter in this volume. 81 Li Kuang was not included in Wang Hui’s group in the Han shu parallel (52.2404). 82 Tai was a commandery located to the west of modern Huai-an 懷安 and Wei-hsien 蔚縣 in Hopei, to the east of modern Yang-kao 陽高 and Hun-yüan 渾源 in Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). It bordered Yen-men 雁門 Commandery in the west. 83 Tai was a commandery located to the west of modern Huai-an 懷安 and Wei-hsien 蔚 縣 in Hopei, to the east of modern Yang-kao 陽高 and Hun-yüan 渾源 in Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). It bordered Yen-men 雁門 Commandery in the west. The Shih ming 釋名 (citied in “Cheng-yi”) glosses tzu 輜 as ts’e 廁, “to place items randomly.” However, without mention of such meaning, the Han-yü ta tz’u-tien 漢語大詞典 (9:1208) has tzu as “covered wagon.” Here, the translation of tzu-chung 輜重 is adopted from the Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:108. 84 Wei-shih 尉史 does not appear in Bielenstein, but Lu Zongli (p. 764) notes that it was a lowranking position subordinate to a commandant, in charge of inspecting government affairs.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

188

probe the Commandant Aide.85 The Commandant Aide said: “Several hundred thousand soldiers of the Han are laid in ambush below Ma-yi.” Turning his head to [his officials of] the left and right, the Shan-yü said: “[We] have nearly been sold out by the Han!” Only then did he lead his troops to return. When they had gone beyond the fortification, he said: “That I got the Commandant Aide was due to Heaven.” He ordered the Commandant Aide “Heavenly King.” A report was related to the fortification that the Shan-yü had already withdrawn and left. The Han troops pursued him as far as to the fortification. When they reckoned that they would not catch up with him, they gave up. Having heard that the Shan-yü had not engaged with the Han, with 30,000 soldiers Wang Hui and the other [commanders of his group] reckoned that going to attack the heavy and light supply carts would certainly result in a fight with the finest troops of the Shanyü, and that the Han troops would certainly be defeated. Then they dismissed the troops as they saw fit. All remained without merit. The Son of Heaven was furious that Wang Hui had not set out and attacked the Shan-yü’s heavy and light carts, but had led the troops to withdraw without authorization. [Wang] Hui said: “In the beginning we agreed that as soon as the caitiffs entered the walled city of Ma-yi, the troops would engage with the Shanyü, and [*2863*] your servant would attack his heavy and light carts, so we could obtain victory. Now the Shan-yü heard [about the plot] and without reaching [Ma-yi] he went back. Your servant considered his host of 30,000 men could not match [the Shan-yü] and would only gain shame. Your servant indeed knew that he would be beheaded upon his return, but he was able to keep 30,000 soldiers of your majesty intact.” After this, [Wang] Hui was handed over to the Commandant of Justice. The Commandant of Justice convicted [Wang] Hui of avoiding and circumventing [the enemy],86 and he was sentenced to be beheaded. 85

Kuo Sung-t’ao 郭嵩燾 (1818-1891) (Shih chi cha-chi 史記札記; Taipei: Shih-chieh Shuchü, 1960], p. 364) parses this line by pausing between what he sees as two independent verbs, tz’u 刺 “to stab” and wen 問 “to interrogate.” The Chung-hua edition reads tz’u-wen as a compound, with no comma to separate them. Kuo points out that a parallel passage in the “Hsiung-nu liehchuan” 匈 奴 列 傳 (Shih chi, 110.2905) reads: “The Shan-yü captured [the Assistant of the Commandant] and wanted to kill him, whereupon the Assistant of the Commandant told the Shanyü where the Han army was staying”; 單于得, 欲殺之, 尉史乃告單于漢兵所居. Kuo believes that tz’u here corresponds to the sha 殺 “to kill” in the account of the “Hsiung-nu lieh-chuan”, and that tz’u-wen should therefore be regarded as two independent verbs, “to stab” and “to interrogate.” Han Chao-ch’i (108.5409) supports this view with a similar demonstration, using the same quotation from the “Hsiung-nu lieh-chuan.” 86 Tou jao 逗橈, was a formal, Han military term (cf. “So-yin”).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

189

[Wang] Hui secretly sent 1,000 chin of gold to Chancellor [T’ien] Fen.87 [T’ien] Fen did not dare to speak of [this] to the Sovereign, but spoke to the Empress Dowager: “Wang Hui first created the Ma-yi affair, now it having not been successful, to execute [Wang] Hui is to take revenge for the Hsiung-nu.”88 When the Sovereign had an audience with the Empress Dowager, 89 the Empress Dowager reported the words of Chancellor to the Sovereign. The Sovereign said: “The one who first created the Ma-yi affair was [Wang] Hui, for this reason we mobilized several hundred thousand soldiers of the empire, followed his words, and did this. Moreover, even though the Shan-yü could not be caught, if [Wang] Hui’s troops had attacked his heavy and light supply carts, there would still have been considerable gains to console hearts of officialdom. Now if we do not execute [Wang] Hui, there will be no means with which to apologize to the empire.” Only when [Wang] Hui heard this, did he commit suicide. [Han] An-kuo behaved as a man full of bold strategies, his intelligence was enough to obtain harmony90 in those times, and [what he had done] proceeded from loyalty and sincerity. 91 He was greedy for and addicted to wealth. Those 87

Here echoing the depiction of T’ien Fen’s greed seen above in this chapter (108.2860), where T’ien Fen was bribed by Han An-kuo to speak to the Empress Dowager on Han’s behalf. See also “Wei-chi, Wu-an Hou lieh-chuan” 魏其武安侯列傳 (Shih chi, 107.2849), where T’ien Fen accepted gold from the King of Huai-nan 淮南 in return for a recommendation. 88 This echoes the description of Tzu Yü’s 子玉 death. Because as the commander of the Ch’u 楚 armies he lost the Battle of Ch’eng p’u 城濮 against Chin 晉, Tzu Yü was then executed by King Ch’eng 成 of Ch’u, which greatly pleased their adversary, Duke Wen 文 of Chin (cf. Shih chi, 39.1668). 89 Since Emperor Hsiao Wen-ti 孝文帝 (The Cultured and Filial Emperor, 203-157 B.C., r. 180-157 B.C.) moved into it, the Wei-yang 未央 Palace to the west of Ch’ang-an became the residence of successive emperors (cf. Shih chi, 10.417). According to the “Kuan-chung chi” 關中 記 (cited in “Chi-chieh”, 99.2726), the the Empress Dowager often dwelled in the Ch’ang-le 長樂 Palace. 90 The Han shu parallel (52.2405) reads ch’ü-she 取舍 for ch’ü-ho 取合. Yen Shih-ku glosses she as chih 止, “to cease,” thus ch’ü-she means “to accept or reject.” However, Li Jen-chien 李人鍳 (2:1429) argues that the two characters she and ho are both copyist errors. According to him, the correct character should be jung 容, since ch’ü-jong 取容 appears in other chapters of Shih chi (cf. “Chang Shih-chih, Feng T’ang lieh-chuan” 張释之, 馮唐列傳, Shih chi, 102.2757, and “Chi, Cheng lieh-chuan” 汲, 鄭列傳, Shih chi, 120.3108, for example.) 91 The “So-yin” (108.2864) glosses chu 出 as ch’ü 去, “to abandon,” which means that Han An-kuo changed his character leading to his greed for wealth. However, as Wu and Lu (108.2824n.) suggest, the “So-yin” seems to be wrong, because Ssu-ma Ch’ien praises Han An-kuo’s

190

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

whom he recommended and promoted were all honest men, those who were more virtuous than himself. In Liang he promoted Hu Sui 壺遂, Tsang Ku 臧固, Chih T’uo 郅他,92 all of whom were renowned men in the empire. Because of this, gentlemen also praised and admired him, and the Son of Heaven regarded him as “an implement for governing a state.” 93 When [Han] An-kuo had been Grandee Secretary for more than four years, Chancellor T’ien Fen died. [Han] An-kuo took care of the chancellor’s duties. [Once] when he was respectfully leading the Emperor’s carriage, he fell off his carriage94 and became lame. The Son of Heaven caused the appointment of the chancellor to be deliberated, and wanted to employ [Han] An-kuo. He sent an envoy to take a look at him, but his lameness had worsened. Only then did the emperor replace [him] with Hsüeh Tse righteousness in his remarks at the end of the text (108.2865). [Editor’s note: the term with which Han’s death is depicted, tsu 卒 “to expire,” also suggests the respect Ssu-ma Ch’ien had for him.] 92 See also the entry on Hu, Tsang and Chih in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 161, 668, and 725-6. As seen in the following text, Hu Sui worked on the calendar with Ssu-ma Chien. He was also mentioned in the postface (Shih chi, 130.3297-3300), where records a conversation between him and Ssu-ma Chien, in which the latter stated his motives for composing the Shih chi. Tsang Ku and Chih T’uo are otherwise unknown. The Han shu parallel (52.2405) reads chih t’uo 至它 for Chih T’uo 郅他. Yen Shih-ku glosses it as “as for others [recommended by Han An-kuo].” The “So-yin” suggests two possibilities: one is to regard Chih T’uo as a person’s name, and the other is to follow the version of the Han shu parallel, but gloss it as “to get to other places.” Wang Shu-min (108.2947) disapproves of the latter and argues that the “So-yin” had been misled by Yen Shih-ku. Loewe holds a similar argument that the word refers to a person’s name and is given incorrectly in the Han shu. 93 Wang Nien-sun (cited by Wang Shu-min, 10:2947) argues that the correct text should be “for this reason gentlemen praised and admired him, and the Son of Heaven also regarded him as ‘an implement for governing a state’”士以此稱慕之, 唯天子亦以為國器, in which the character yi 亦 is moved from the former half of the sentence to the latter, since the same sentence pattern also occurs in “Chi, Cheng lieh-chuan” 汲鄭列傳 (Shih chi, 120.3108). It reads: [Kung-sun] Hung and [Chang] T’ang resented [Chi] An deeply in their hearts, and the Son of Heaven was also displeased. 弘,湯深心疾黯,唯天子亦不說也. Wang Shu-min (10:2947) supports Wang Nien-sun’s argument with another example from “Fan Sui, Ts’ai Tse lieh-chuan” 范睢, 蔡澤列傳 (Shih chi, 79.2413): My master is well acquainted with him, and I can also pay my respects to him. 主人翁習知之,唯睢 亦得謁. Here the word kuo-ch’i 國器 echoes the description of the attendants of Ch’ung-erh 重耳 in “Chin shih-chia” 晋世家 (Shih chi, 39.1659), where King Ch’eng of Ch’u made a remark that “those who follow him [i.e., Ch’ung-erh] are all ‘implements for governing a state’” 從者皆國器 (cf. Grand Scribe’s Records, 5.1:329). 94 The officials in charge of leading the way would take a seperate carriage and precede the emperor’s to fulfill their duties (cf. “So-yin,” 10.417).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

191

薛澤, 95 the Marquis of P’ing-chi 平棘, 96 as Chancellor. Several months after [Han] An-kuo had been removed from office for sickness, he recovered from his lameness. The emperor re-assigned him as Commandant of the Capital. Over a year later, he was transferred to be Commandant of the Guards. [2864] Wei Ch’ing 衛青,97 the General of Chariots and Cavalry, attacked the Hsiung-nu. He set out from Shang-ku 上谷98 and broke the Hu’s Lung-ch’eng 蘢 城 (City of the Dragon).99 General Li Kuang was caught by the Hsiung-nu, but they lost him again 100; Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖101 lost his foot-soldiers in great numbers. Both were sentenced to death. They redeemed themselves and became commoners.

95

See also the entry on Hsüeh in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 629. As the descendant of the Marquis of Kuang-p’ing 廣平 (cf. Shih chi, 18.885-6), Hsüeh Tse inherited the rank, which was also the main reason that he was appointed as Chancellor. Ssu-ma Ch’ien regards him prudent but talentless, only a backup candidate for Chancellor (cf. Shih chi, 96.2685). 96 A county seat located in the southeastern part of Ch’ang-shan 常山 Commandery, thirty miles southeast of modern Shih-chia-chuang 石家莊 in Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26). 97 Wei Ch’ing (style Chung-ch’ing 仲卿), was the younger brother of Wei Tzu-fu 衛子夫, who became Empress Wei (cf. Shih chi, 19.1978) of Emperor Wu 武 of Han (156-87 B.C., r. 141-87 B.C., cf. Shih chi, 12.451). He was one of Han’s foremost generals, taking several offensives to counter the Hsiung-nu threat of invasion. See also the entry on Wei in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 573 and his biography on Shih chi, 111. 2921-47, and Han shu, 55. 2471-94. 98 Shang-ku was a commandery located to the northwest of modern Peking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27); cf. “Hsiung-nu lieh-chuan” 匈奴列傳 (Shih chi, 110.2886), which records that the five commanderies of Shang-ku 上谷, Yü-yang 漁陽, Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平, Liao-hsi 遼西, and Liaotung 遼東 (the former four commanderies are mentioned in the text) were established in order to resist the barbarians’ aggression by Yen 燕 during the Warring States. 99 The Han shu parallel (52.2406) reads Lung-ch’eng 龍城 for Lung-ch’eng 蘢城. Wu and Lu (108.2825n.) note that Lung-ch’eng, namely Lung-t’ing 龍庭, was the place where the Hsiung-nu offered sacrifices to their ancestors, Heaven, Earth, the spirits and gods (cf. “Hsiung-nu lieh-chuan” 匈奴列傳, Shih chi, 110.2892). The literal meaning of Lung-ch’eng is the City of Dragon. Ts’ui Hao 崔浩 (cited by “So-yin,” 110.2892) argues that the sacrificial place was so named by the Hsiung-nu because they worshiped the dragon god. Lung-ch’eng is located in modern Mongolia, west of the Orkhon River, around Khoshoo-Tsaydam Lake (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). 100 For details see “Li Chiang-chün lieh-chuan” 李將軍列傳, Shih chi, 109.2870-1. 101 See also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 123-4, and the biographical sketch on the Shih chi, 111.2942-3, where the same defeat is also recorded.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

192

The next year (128 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu entered the border in great numbers, and killed the Grand Administrator of Liao-hsi 遼西.102 By the time they entered Yen-men, those they had killed and overrun [i.e., captured] numbered several thousands. Wei Ch’ing, the General of Chariots and Cavalry attacked them, and drove them out of Yen-men. [Han] An-kuo, the Commandant of the Guards, was appointed as General of the Skilled Soldiers,103 and garrisoned [his troops] at Yüyang 漁陽.104 [Han] An-kuo captured a caitiff alive and he said that the Hsiungnu had gone far away. Immediately [Han] submitted a memorial, saying that it was just the time to work in the fields and requesting to temporarily dismiss the army garrison. More than one month after the army garrison had been dismissed, the Hsiung-nu entered Shang-ku and Yü-yang105 in great numbers. [Han] Ankuo’s fortification had only seven hundred odd men left. They set out to fight against [the Hsiung-nu], did not succeed and returned to enter into their fortification. The Hsiung-nu caitiffs captured more than one thousand people as well as livestock, and then left. When the Son of Heaven heard this, he was furious and sent an envoy to reproach and blame [Han] An-kuo. He transferred [Han] An-kuo further eastwards to garrison Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平.106 At that time the Hsiung-nu captives said that they ought to enter into the eastern regions.

102

A commandery lying to the west of the lower reaches of Ta-ling 大凌 River in Liao-ning, the east of modern T’ang-shan 唐山 in Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27). 103 Liang Yü-sheng (33.1377) argues that based on the “Han hsing yi-lai chiang-hsiang mingch’en ni’en-p’iao” 漢興以來將相名臣年表 (Shih chi, 22.1136), Han An-kuo should be General of the Military Garrison rather than General of the Skilled Soldiers at that time. 104 Yü-yang was a commandery located south of the upper reaches of Luan 灤 River, east of modern Huai-jou 懷柔 and T’ung-shan 通 縣 near Peking. Its seat was Yü-yang County, the namesake of the commandery, about sixty miles northeast modern Peking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27). Yü-yang Commandery was also where Ch’en Sheng 陳勝 and Wu Kuang 吳廣 failed to arrive in time, triggering the rebellion against the Ch’in government in Ta-tse 大 澤 Village (modern Anhwei); cf. “Ch’en She shih-chia” 陳涉世家, Shih chi, 48.1949. 105 Wang Hsien-ch’ien (citied by Takigawa, 108.14) points out that based on “Wu-ti chi” (Han shu, 6.169) and “Hsiung-nu chuan” (Han shu, 64a.3766), the Hsiung-nu invaded Liao-hsi, Yü-yang and Yen-men, but not Shang-ku. Wang Shu-min (10:2948) agrees with him. 106 A commandery located to east of modern Ch’eng-te 承德 in Hopei and Chi-shan 薊縣 in Tientsin, south of the upper reaches of Ta-ling River, and west of the Liu-ku 六股 River in Liaoning. Its seat was P’ing-kang 平剛, about 140 miles north of modern Ch’in-huang-tao 秦皇島 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27).

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

193

[Han] An-kuo first was Grandee Secretary and Commissioner over the Army. 107 Later he was gradually driven out and estranged, and was demoted; while the newly favored and stalwart generals such as Wei Ch’ing, had merit and were increasingly honored.108 [Han] An-kuo [*2865*] having been completely estranged, remained silent; when he commanded a garrison, he was furthermore tricked by the Hsiung-nu and suffered many losses, being deeply ashamed of himself. Fortunately he was able to be dismissed to return to the capital, and he was then transferred even further eastwards to garrison [troops]. He was emotionally frustrated and unhappy. After a few months, he became sick, vomited blood, and died. [Han] An-kuo expired in the second year of yüan-shuo (127 B.C.). His Honor the Grand Scribe says: “As I together with Hu Sui drew up the harmonic calendar,109 I observed Han Ch’ang-ju’s righteousness, and Hu Sui’s deep loyalty and underlying sincerity. People these days say that Liang is rich in venerable men, which is not false! Hu Sui’s official position reached Supervisor of the Household. Just when the Son of Heaven was relying on him and wanted to make him Chancellor of the Han, [Hu] Sui happened to expire. Otherwise, Hu Sui’s innate honesty and fine conduct, this was a gentleman who would bend his body into a bow [at the proper time].” 110

107

As recorded in the previous text, Han An-kuo was appointed as Grandee Secretary in the sixth year of chien-yüan (135 B.C.). One year later, namely the first year of yüan-kuang (134 B.C.), he became Commissioner over the Army. 108 Ssu-ma Ch’ien employs Wei Ch’ing’s promotion as a foil to Han An-kuo’s demotion, but in Wei Ch’ing’s biography, he sets Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病 as a foil to Wei Ch’ing to illustrate the latter’s falling into disfavor (Shih chi,111. 2931, 2938), making the depiction here quite ironic. 109 On lü-li 律曆 see also Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:205, n. 4. 110 Chü-kung 鞠躬 originally means “to make [oneself] into a bow,” mainly suggesting a discreet and scrupulous manner. For example, in the “Hsiang-tang” 鄉黨 chapter of the Lun-yü 論 語, it reads: “On going through the outer gates to his lord’s court, Confucius seemed to bend his body into a bow, as though the entrance was too small to admit him” 入公門, 鞠躬如也, 如不容 and “When he held the jade tablet, he seemed to bend his body into a bow, as though its weight was too much for him” 執圭, 鞠躬如也, 如不勝 (Translation is Lau, Analects, pp.101-2, with some revisions). A similar instance also can be found in “P’in-li” 聘禮 of the Yi-li 儀禮, which writes: “Holding the jade tablet, Confucius entered the gate. He seemed to bend his body into a bow, as though he was afraid of dropping it” 執圭, 入門, 鞠躬焉, 如恐失之. In “Feng Feng-shih chuan” 馮

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

194

*

*

*

*

*

[Han An-kuo’s] intelligence was enough to adapt himself to changes of recent times; [his] lenience was enough to be used to win over others.111 [Thus] I composed the “Memoir of Han Ch’ang-ju, Number Forty-eight.”112

奉世傳 (Han shu, 79.3308), Yen Shih-ku glosses chü-kung as “in a prudent and respectful manner” 謹敬貌. 111 This comment responds to the depiction in the main text that Han An-kuo’s intelligence was enough to obtain harmony in those times, and that he was praised and admired by gentlemen. 112 These are the Grand Scribe’s reasons for compiling this chapter given in his postface (Shih chi, 130.3316: 智足以應近世之變，寬足用得人。作《韓長孺列傳》第四十八).

Translator’s Note Although less well-known than many others in the Shih chi, the ending of this chapter has draw critical attention in the past. In his comments it appears at first glance that Ssu-ma Ch’ien veers off the subject of Han An-kuo to remark upon Hu Sui instead Why Ssu-ma Ch’ien did has led to diverse explanations. The Ch’ing scholar, Niu Yün-cheng 牛 運震 (1706-1758) considers this ending as potted biography dedicated to Hu Sui.113 As this chapter records, Ssuma Chien once drew up the harmonic calendar with Hu Sui, and in the postface he even states his motives for composing the Shih chi to Hu Sui (Shih chi, 130.3297-3300), which further suggest his intimacy with Hu Sui. Tseng Kuo-fan 曾國藩 (1811-1872), the Ch’ing statesman and scholar, argues: “Hu Sui and T’ien Jen were both close friends with Tzu-ch’ang, thus he [i.e., Ssu-ma Chien] often depicted officials of Liang and Chao with intense feelings” 壺遂與田任， 皆與子長深交，故敘梁趙諸臣多深切 (cited by Takigawa, 108.15). But the historian’s comments are not the place for such comments. Moreover, we have no record of a biography of Hu Sui (although there is a life of T’ien Jen 田仁114). Thus Niu Yün-cheng’s assumption seems doubtful. Another explanation has found favor with most commentators. They incline to regard Hu Sui as a foil to Han An-kuo.115 there are other two similar cases in historian’s comments in the Shih chi. In his remarks at the end of “T’ien Tan lieh-chuan” 田單列傳 (Shih chi, 82.2453), Ssu-ma Chien first approves of T’ientan’s amazing strategies during wars, but later brings two seemingly irrelevant figures into his comments: the daughter of T’ai-shih Chiao 太史嬓 and Wang Shu 王蠋. Ssu-ma Chien’s intention there seems to be focused on the concept ch’i 奇 (remarkable, strange), which is the dominant theme in that chapter. Both T’ai-shih Chiao and Wang Shu performed amazing deeds similar to those of 113

Cited by Yang, Li-tai, p. 672. Ssu-ma Chien composed a biography for T’ien Jen (see “T’ien, Shu lieh-chuan” 田叔列傳 (Shih chi, 104.2779). 115 Li Ching-hsing 李景星, for example, says that Hu Sui serves as a contrast to exhibit Han An-kuo’s character (Ssu shih p’ing-yi 四史評議, [Ch’ang-sha: Yüeh-lu Shu-she, 1986], p. 99). 114

195

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

196

T’ien Tan. As a result, the materials concerning the new figures supplement the main text and enhance the theme of ch’i. The other example in the biography of Chi An 汲黯 and Cheng Tang-shih 鄭當時 (Shih chi, 120.3105) might be even clearer. At the conclusion of the chapter, Ssu-ma Chien digresses from the two biographees to talk about Master Chai 翟 , who gained an insight into the fickleness of human nature. Afterwards, he directly equates the ups and downs of Master Chai’s life with those of Chi and Cheng by remarking “Chi and Zheng can be said [to be also like this], how sad!” 汲，鄭亦雲，悲夫！ (Shih chi, 120.3114) These examples show Ssu-ma Chien likes to bring people in similar situations into comparison. Ch’eng Jen-hsi 陳仁錫 (1581-1636) referred this writing technique to “to manifest the host through the contrast with the guest” (chieh k’o hsing chu 借客形主).116 Another Ming scholar, Ling Chih-lung 凌稚 隆117 points out: This remark should have expressed regrets for that Ch’ang-ju did not gain the Chancellor’s position, but instead, it sympathizes with the one who Ch’ang-ju recommended and also did not gain the position of Chancellor [i.e., Hu Sui]. There is a indeed a deeper meaning in the way he states this. 此論本惜長孺之 不得相，却以長孺之所舉，而亦不得相以為惜，有味哉其言之也.

According to Ling, Ssu-ma Ch’ien does not bemoan Han An-kuo’s fate directly, his sympathy for Hu Sui, however, bears the same effect, since the two suffered from similar misfortunes. This second explanation makes perfect sense, but nevertheless ignores other possibilities. Besides expressing his sympathy, does Ssu-ma Ch’ien hint at something else? The text right before the “His Honor the Grand Scribe says” is worthy of attention: “Later he [i.e., Han An-kuo] was gradually driven out, estranged, and was demoted; while the newly favored and stalwart generals such as Wei Ch’ing, had merit and were increasingly considered honored.” 后稍斥疏, 下遷；而新幸壯將軍衛青等有功，益貴. (Shih chi, 108.2864) Ssu-ma Ch’ien employs Wei Ch’ing’s promotion as a foil to Han An-kuo’s demotion, but in Wei Ch’ing’s own biography, he also says: “the General of Agile Cavalry, day by day, became closer [to the emperor] and more honored, matching the General-in116

Cited from Yang, Li-tai, p. 2453. Ling was the grandfather of the famous literatus Ling Meng-ch’u 凌濛初 (1580-1644). His comments are cited from Yang, Li-tai, p. 2453. 117

Han Ch’ang-ju, Memoir 48

197

Chief” 驃騎日以親貴，比大將軍 and “[Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief daily diminished while the General of Agile Cavalry daily increased in status.” 大將軍青日退，而驃騎日益貴.118 Now, by using almost the same language, Ssu-ma Ch’ien makes Huo Ch’ü-ping’s 霍 去 病 success as a foil for Wei Ch’ing’s falling into disfavor. Combing these two chapters, the depiction of Wei Ch’ing’s ascending career in Han An-kuo’s biography becomes quite ironic. Likewise, could Hu Sui’s involvement in the ending also expect an ironic effect to certain extent? The fact Han and Hu both missed their fortunes is indeed an irony played by fate! Moreover, Han and Hu were both the natives of Liang, which Ssu-ma Ch’ien believed was “rich in venerable men” 多長者 (Shih chi, 108.2865). Their virtues are highly praised in this ending. They both coincidently met with disaster while at the peak of their official careers. Hu Sui happened to pass away when the emperor was planning to appoint him Chancellor; Han An-kuo was crippled just as the emperor wanted to have him become Chancellor. Beyond this common ground, Hu Sui was recommended by Han An-kuo, which links them further. Thus it is not surprising that when Ssu-ma Ch’ien remarks on Han An-kuo’s life he thinks also of Hu Sui. Furthermore, Ssu-ma Ch’ien might associate Hu Sui with himself. Nakai Sekitoku 中井積德 (cited by Takigawa, 108.15) has a unique insight into this ending. He argues that Ssu-ma Ch’ien reveals his feeling that Hu Sui was destined to miss the position of Chancellor in the sentence “Sui happened to expire” 會遂卒 (Shih chi, 108.2865). Had Hu Sui lived, he would have become Chancellor and thus Ssu-ma Ch’ien might have the chance to change his own life with Hu’s help. Hu’s death terminating Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s hope is an invisible bond linking them. Accordingly, Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s grief for Han An-kuo and Hu Sui actually mirrors his lamenting for his own destiny. 119 Nakai Sekitoku’s argument can be supported by the fact that fatalism does exists somewhere in the Shih chi.120 In “Wai-ch’i shih-chia” 外戚世家 (Shih chi 49.1970), for example, 118

Shih chi, 111.2931 and 2938. The Han shu parallel can be used for reference. Despite of a few changes in wording, Pan Ku also ascribes Han An-kuo’s misery to fate (Han shu 52.2407). 120 It is still a controversial issue whether Ssu-ma Ch’ien believes in fatalism. The Shih chi presents an ambiguious attitude towards fatalism. In “Hsiang Yü pen-chi” 項羽本紀 (Shih chi, 7.295), for example, Ssu-ma Ch’ien criticizes Hsiang Yü for attributing his failure to Heaven, saying: “[Hsiang Yü] yet even then he did not come to his senses and blame himseld. What error! To excuse himself by claiming ‘Heaven destroyed me, it was not any fault of mine in using troops’. 119

198

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 108

Ssu-ma Ch’ien writes: “[husband and wife] are already delighted and mated [with each other], [but] some couples are incapable of producing offspring; among those who are capable of producing offspring, some cannot make a [good] ending. Wasn’t it due to fate?” 既驩合矣，或不能成子姓；能成子姓矣，或不 能要其終：豈非命也哉？Another example is in “Chang Ch’eng-hsiang liehchuan” 張丞相列傳 (Shih chi 96.2688), he writes: “Father and son [i.e., Wei Hsien 韋賢 and Wei Hsüan-ch’eng 韋玄成] were both Chancellors, who were praised by the world. Wasn’t it fated!” 父子俱为丞相，世间美之，岂不命哉. Thus it is possible that Ssu-ma Ch’ien expresses his helplessness about his own inevitable destiny by means of mourning for Hu Sui. Failing to understand Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s intention, Pan Ku tries to reconcentrate on Han An-kuo in his remarks at the end of his biography of Han An-kuo (Han shu 52.2406), bu removing the brief account of Hu Sui from Ssuma Ch’ien’s original conclusion. Whatever one concludes about this ending, it would seem that it reflects some original design of the compiler, a design that is still open to speculation and comment.

How absurd!” 尚不覺寤而不自 責，過矣 。乃引「天 亡我，非用 兵之罪也」 ，豈不謬 哉. (Rendition is from Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:208.) It shows Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s viewpoint that people fall victim to their behavior rather than to their fate.

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:338-64. Viatkin, 8:304-11, notes 435-7. Watson, Han, 2:107-16.

II. Studies Chang Ta-k’o 張大可. Shih chi lun tsan chi-shih 史記論贊輯釋. Sian: Shensi jen-min Ch’u-pan-she, 1986. Markley, Jonathan. “What Huo Qubing Did: The Problem of the Feng Shan 封禪 Sacrifice,” Silk Road Studies, XII (2008): 247-58.

199

General Li, Memoir 49 translated by Enno Giele [109.2867] General Li Kuang 李 廣 was a native of Ch’eng-chi 成 紀 [County] in Lung-hsi 隴西 [Commandery].1 [One of] his ancestors was called Li Hsin 李信.2 In Ch’in times, he had been a commander and was the one who had pursued and caught Tan 丹, the Heir of Yen 燕.3 Formerly from Huai-li, 4 he moved to Ch’eng-chi. 5 Kuang’s family had from generation to generation 1

Ch’eng-chi 成紀 is located about fifty miles due north of modern T’ien-shui 天水 in Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34). In Ch’in and early Han times, it still belonged to Lung-hsi Commandery as the text specifies (cf. T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:5), but after the establishment of T’ien-shui Commandery in the year 114 B.C. (see Han shu, 28B.1611), Ch’eng-chi came to be situated well within the boundaries of that Commandery. Ch’eng-chi lay at a distance of about two hundred miles from the Ch’in and Han capitals of Hsien-yang and Ch’ang-an respectively. In 165 B.C. an auspicious omen appeared here (Shih chi, 10.430; Han shu, 4.127). 2 For Li Hsin 李信, see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 232, under Li Xin (1). For his role in hunting down the Heir of Yen, see Shih chi, 86.2536. 3 In the most famous plot of Ch’in times, Tan 丹, the Heir of Yen, had sent an assassin to have the King of Ch’in, soon to become First Emperor, murdered, but the assassin had been forced to flee when the attempt failed. For a brief but critical account of the incident with further references, see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 201 under “Jing Ke.” 4 Huai-li 槐里 is located twelve miles west of the Ch’in capital of Hsien-yang or about twenty miles due west of modern Sian in Kansu. It lay just halfway between the Wei 渭 River in the South and the Ling-chih 靈軹 Canal in the north (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). This belonged to the capital district of the Western Sustainer (Yu-fu-feng 右扶風). Liang Yü-sheng (33.1378) has pointed out that the genealogy of Li Kuang’s clan as preserved in the Chin shu 晉書 (87.2257) notes that one of Kuang’s ancestors found himself a home in Ti-tao 狄道 (March of the Ti-Barbarians) which lay at the northwesternmost tip of the border fortifications built by King Chao of Ch’in in Lung-hsi Commandery, roughly one hundred miles west of Ch’eng-chi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:5). However, there is no imminent reason to suggest that the Chin shu record has priority over those in the Shih chi and Han shu. 5 This sentence is not found in the corresponding text on Han shu, 54.2439.

201

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

202

received [special instruction in] archery6. In the fourteenth year of Hsiao Wen-ti 孝文帝 (The Filial and Cultured Emperor) (166 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu with a great force7 entered through the Hsiao 蕭 Pass, 8 whereupon Kuang as a scion of a 6

She 射 could be both shooting with a normal (or a composite) bow or with a cross-bow. The usual weapon of Han troops was a cross-bow. But in view of the fact that Li Kuang later on in the text is said to have snatched and used a bow from a Hsiung-nu boy, it seems likely that he was apt in using any kind of bow. As Loewe, Dictionary, p. 220, has pointed out, the Han shu catalogue of books in the imperial library contains a reference to a Shooting Method of General Li (Li chiangchün she-fa 李將軍射法) in three fascicles (Han shu, 30.1761) which is not, however, found in the subsequent bibliographical catalogues. 7 According to the Han shu, 94A.3761, as many as 140,000 Hsiung-nu riders participated in this raid. 8 Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 (581-645) in his commentary to the parallel text in the Han shu claims that this lay north of or in the northern part of Shang 上 Commandery. This would have been some three-four hundred miles away from the capital of Ch’ang-an. However, the Hsiao Checkpoint in the historical record was situated at a distance of only 188 miles from Ch’ang-an in northwesterly direction, between Kao-ping 高平, the seat of the Government of An-ting 安定 Commandery, and Ch’ao-na 朝那, being close to, or perhaps even part of, the Ch’in border fortifications system (the “Great Wall”). Nowadays, this is in the southern part of the Autonomous Region of the Hui of Ningxia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34). In early Han times, it presumably belonged to Lung-hsi Commandery, the home commandery of Li Kuang (see “Map 4. The Han Empire 163 B.C.” in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 810). This makes it a more likely place for a young local recruit to defend. Note that what is called “pass” here–following sinological tradition–was not inevitably a mountain pass. Rather, these “passes” or kuan 關 were checkpoints built along major routes of communication and at administrative borders. They could also be built on flat terrain as is exemplified by the Yü-men-kuan 玉門關, the Yang-kuan 陽關, and the Chin-kuan 金關 that feature in traditional and manuscript sources and are preserved to some extent in the gravel desert of northern Kansu (for a brief general overview, see Xu Pingfang: “The Archaeology of the Great Wall of the Qin and Han Dynasties,” Journal of East Asian Archaeology 3:1-2.2001:259-81, pp. 262 and 276; for Yü-men-kuan and Yang-kuan, see Yüe Pang-hu 岳邦湖, Shu-lo-ho liu-yü Han-tai ch’ang-ch’eng k’ao-ch’a pao-kao 疏勒河流域漢代長城考察報告, Peking: Wen-wu, 2001:80-1; for Chin-kuan, see Bo Sommarström, Archaeological Researches in the Edsen-gol Region, Inner Mongolia, Part II, Stockholm: Statens Etnofrafiska Museum, 1958, p. 305-14). The function of these checkpoints was to control the transiting traffic and to try to prevent the exit of fugitives and the export of prohibited goods; cf. Hucker’s translation as “custom-houses” or “barriers.” The Hsiao Pass was one of at least four or five major checkpoints controlling the movements of people and goods to and from the capital of Ch’ang-an. The other checkpoints were named Hanku 函谷 in the East, Yao 嶢 and Wu 武 in the South (actually southeast of the capital, for these three checkpoints, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:6), and San 散 in the West (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:58). These five checkpoints are mentioned in the commentaries to the Shih chi (7.315, n.1, “Chi-chieh,” 22.202, “So-yin”). San checkpoint seems to have been a Later Han institution. However, new manuscript finds from the early Former Han period indicate that there were at least two other

General Li, Memoir 49

203

“respectable family” 9 joined the army to attack the Hu 胡 (Tartars). 10 Employing 11 his riding and archery skills, he took the heads of many of the checkpoints at the periphery of what was called the “Area within the Passes” (Kuan-chung 關中). These were named Lin-chin 臨晉 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15) and Chia-hsi 夾谿, situated at the Lo 洛 River a few miles before it unites with the Wei 渭 and some thirty miles east of that place, near ancient Ho-pei 河北 County (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16), respectively; see Chang-chia-shan Han-mu chu-chien. 247-hao mu 張家山漢墓竹簡〔二四七號墓〕 (Peking: Wen-wu, 2001), p. 206, strip 492 and p. 210, strip 523; see also Wang Tzu-chin 王子今 and Liu Hua-chu 劉華祝, “Shuo Changchia-shan Han-chien Erh-nien lü-ling Chin-kuan-ling suo chien wu-kuan” 說張家山漢簡二年律令 津關令所見五關, Chung-kuo li-shih wen-wu 中國歷史文物 2003,1, pp. 44-52. 9 There is no agreement among commentators about the specific meaning of the term liangchia-tzu 良家子. In the “So-yin” Ju Ch’un 如淳 (fl. A.D. 189-265) is cited with the words: “Not (from a family of) physicians, mediums, merchants/peddlers, traders, or artisans” (非醫、巫、商 賈、百工也). In a similar vein, Chou Shou-ch’ang 周壽昌 argued that liang-chia-tzu excluded the seven kinds of people banished by the Ch’in to do frontier service (ch’i-che 七謫; on this term see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:145, n. 216; and Hori Toshikazu 堀敏一, “Kandai no shichikataku to sono kigen” 漢代の七科謫とその起原, Sundai shigaku 駿台史學, 57 [1982]: 1-27; Ochi Shigeaki 越智重明, “Shichikataku wo megutte” 七科謫をめぐって, [Kyūshū daigaku] Tōyōshi ronshū 〔九州大學〕東洋史論集, 11 [1983]: 1-26). Against this, Hsu Fu-yüan 徐孚遠 (17th c.) held that the term meant volunteers, who were fit enough to gain themselves a reputation through meritorious military service, as against the usual recruits who just rendered their corvée duties. Furthermore, a slightly ambiguous statement on Han shu, 28B.1644, could either mean that liangchia-tzu “became officials because of their talents and (physical) force” or “because of their (financial) assets and power” (以材力為官). For these references, see Wang Shu-min, 9.2949. Ch’en Chih 陳直 (Shih chi hsin cheng 史記新証 [T’ien-chin: T’ien-chin jen-min, 1979], p. 168) draws attention to liang-chia-tzu, who are described in wooden strips sources as transmitting messages or doing earthwork. 10 Here, as in many other cases, the term Hu is clearly used for a group of the Hsiung-nu, and a few ancient commentators, among them the “Agriculturalist Cheng,” i.e., Cheng Chung 鄭眾 (d. c. AD 83) have indeed simply glossed Hu as “the present Hsiung-nu” (see the commentary to the introduction of the Chou-li, “K’ao-kung-chi,” Sun Yi-jang 孫詒讓, Chou-li cheng-yi 周禮正義, Peking: Chung-hua, 1987:3111). However, the term is also found used as a summary description of northern or northwestern peoples in general, sometimes, but not always, in a context that points to horse-riding peoples (see Shih chi, 110.2885). It also appears in compound names, though here it is not entirely clear whether this is a case for the general or the specific meaning of Hu. This is because the explanation of Tung-hu (“Eastern Hu”) is linked specifically to the Hsiung-nu (see Shih chi, 110.2884). Since hu also means “dewlap (of animals)”–“(human) whiskers” seems to be a post-Han gloss–or “foolish” (for hu 糊), that is to say, since it has rather negative connotations, one could translate Hu as something like “Northern Barbarians,” if there would not be words, like Peiyi 北夷, in the sources (see Shih chi, 110.2890) that fit this translation even better. Although this cannot be positively proven, I suspect that de Groot (Chinesische Urkunden zur Geschichte Asiens 1: Die Hunnen der vorchristlichen Zeit, Berlin, Leipzig: de Gruyter, 1921:23) was right, when he

204

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

caitiffs and was made an Gentleman-of-the-Household12 of the Han [court]. The cousin of Kuang, Li Ts’ai 李蔡,13 was also made a Gentleman-of-the-Household. Both were [concurrently] Cavalrymen in Regular Attendance,14 with a nominal salary of 800 shih. Once, 15 [when Kuang] accompanied [the Emperor] on [a hunting] tour, there were animals which rushed through entrapments and broke down barriers, and he pursued and fought these ferocious beasts.16 Wen-ti said: “What a pity! You, Sir, did not meet an opportune time! If you had lived in the

mused that Hu is a transcription for a foreign word. “Tartars” as well originated as a medieval transcription of a foreign word, at first designating a particular tribe in Eastern Mongolia, but later came to be used for Mongols in general and eventually for a mixed community of Mongolian and Turkish speaking people along the Volga and in Western Siberia (Tartary). For medieval Europeans, at least, the term came very close to meaning just “(animal-like) barbarians.” 11 Yung 用 could also be taken in the sense of “relying on,” or even “because of” (his skills). Wang Shu-min (9.2949) has already pointed out that a similar usage can be found in the text below; see n. 83 and the respective main text. 12 Chung-lang 中郎, this was the highest-ranking of three different categories of imperial bodyguard-advisors, with a nominal monthly income of 600 shih of grain. The other two categories were named shih-lang 侍郎 and lang-chung 郎中 and ranked 400 and 300 shih respectively. In general, one of these “gentleman”-positoins was a typical first step on the upper career ladder for young officials and could entail further appointment to the position of Grand Administrator or similar posts. Cf. Hucker, nn. 1580 and esp. 3563, who claims that all Gentlemen-of-the-Household (or Inner Gentlemen, according to his translation), while being used in different functions, had regular access to the court audiences. 13 On this man, see Shih chi 109.2873 translated below. 14 Wu-ch’i-ch’ang-shih 武騎 常侍 or, as the Han shu, 54.2439, has it, ch’i ch’ang-shih; probably a honorific title (chia-kuan 加官) or a functional description given to specially favored advisors and companions of the emperor, denoting certain privileges like perhaps the right to be mounted when accompanying the emperor on outings or, alternatively, the right to ride even when not accompanying the emperor (Hucker, no. 4834). Perhaps identical with ch’ang-shih-chi 常侍騎 but not to be confused with regular ch’ang-shih, which were eunuch posts (Hucker, nn. 262 and 264). As the Shih chi (but not the Han shu parallel) indicates, at least in this instance the honor came along with a raise of salary, for the regular income of Gentlemen-of-the-Household was 600 shih. 15 The Han shu (54.2439) parallel has “Several times, he accompanied [the Emperor] to shoot and hunt” 數從射獵. 16 Watson, Han, 2:141, translates, “he charged up to the animal pits, broke through the palisades, and struck down the most ferocious beasts.” Grammatically speaking this is possible. However, since pits and palisades are made for the animals, I find it hard to believe that Kuang as a hunter should have been the one who broke through them. Taking chi 及 as “pursue” allows for the necessary change of subject.

General Li, Memoir 49

205

times of Kao-ti, how could even a marquisate of ten thousand households be enough to speak of?”17 [Later,] when Hsiao Ching-ti (The Filial Luminous Emperor) had just been enthroned (156 B.C.), Kuang was made Chief Commandant 18 of Lung-hsi [Commandery] and [concurrently] moved to become Leader of the Gentlemen of Cavalry.19

17

Within the logical development of this narrative, this imperial praise certainly serves to bolster the image of Li Kuang’s physical martial prowess. On another level, however, it is quite possible to read into it an ironic notion. After all, the emperor’s word, while praising Li Kuang, make also clear that his abilities are not something that is much needed in his time. This could be an early sign of a general disrespect or contempt on the part of the government toward Li Kuang. In any case, the remark betrays a slightly smug pride about the civilized conditions of the advanced imperial culture during Wen-ti’s time that looks back on the beginnings under the first emperor of the Han, when ruffians were swept to the highest positions of state, but with a good dose of contempt. This does of course not mean that the proverbial wisdom that empires are not established by courteous diplomacy was lost entirely on Wen-ti and his entourage, only that those times were considered to be over once and for all. Therefore, it is much less clear, if one should go so far as to translate the remark into a general critique of Kao-ti by Ssu-ma Ch’ien. This is also not plausible because the Han shu preserves the same episode. 18 A tu-wei 都尉 was in charge of the militia and police forces of a commandery or–especially in frontier regions–of a smaller area of responsibility, a division (pu 部). There, he was responsible for the training of forces and the upkeep of the respective installations. He also led his troops in battle, if that was not done by the the Grand Administrator himself, as the highest military authority in a commandery. The relative position of a chief commandant is also brought out by the fact that he ranked one step below a Grand Administrator, being entitled to a nominal salary of Equivalent to Two Thousand Shih. Like the Grand Administrator, he had an office and a staff of his own. The mentioning of a tu-wei here may actually be anachronistic, as before 148 B.C. this official was regularly called chün-wei 郡尉. See Bielenstein, p. 94. The Han shu, 54.2439, does not mention that Kuang held this position. 19 A ch’i-lang-chiang 騎郎將 is found only three more times in the first four dynastic histories and only in connection with the early days of the dynasty (see Shih chi, 18.883; Han shu, 16.534 and 563, according to the Twenty-five Dynastic Histories Database of the Academia Sinica, Taipei). As both the “Chi-chieh” and the “So-yin” find it necessary to cite earlier commentators’ voices on this, it may be safe to surmise that the term came out of fashion rather early. Both the commentaries and the literal meaning of the term seem to imply that Kuang was now leading the group of Cavalrymen in Regular Attendance (ch’i-ch’ang-shih) that until then he had been only member of. If this is true and ch’i-lang-chiang as well was only a honorific title, his must have been a “leadership” in name only or one confined to rare occasions like those hunting expeditions mentioned before. This is because Kuang’s regular office of Chief Commandant still would have required him to be in Lung-hsi. Alternatively, ch’i-lang-chiang, too, was a regular office that Kuang did not hold concurrently, but only after having been Chief Commandant of Lung-hsi. This is implied by Watson’s (Han, 2:141) translation.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

206

At the time when Wu 吳 and Ch’u 楚 fielded armies (154 B.C.),20 Kuang was made Chief Commandant of Resolute Cavalry 21 and followed the Grand Commandant [Chou] Ya-fu 周亞夫 in attacking [*2868*] the armies of Wu and Ch’u. He took an [enemy] flag and made his merit and name well-known at the foot of [the walls of] Ch’ang-yi 昌邑.22 Because [it was] the King of Liang 梁 [who] conferred upon Kuang the seal of a general, upon return no rewards were meted out.23 When he was moved to become Grand Administrator of Shang-ku

20

Chün 軍, taken here as a verb. The phrase refers to the famous Rebellion of the Seven States (Ch’i-kuo chih luan 七國之亂) which was at once the most important and the last major armed collision of the conflicting interests of the central power of the imperial court on the one hand and the feudal states, that longed for their pre-imperial privileges, on the other. Wu 吳 and Ch’u 楚 were the strongest states that participated in the rebellion and they, especially Wu, were the main plotters. After months of large-scale fighting and besieging, the rebels were defeated by several imperial armies under the general command of Chou Ya-fu (see below). For more details, see Shih chi, 106; Han shu, 35; and Reinhard Emmerich, “Die Rebellion der Sieben Könige, 154 v.Chr.,”in R. Emmerich and H. Stumpfeldt, eds., Und folge nun dem, was mein Herz begehrt. Festschrift für Ulrich Unger zum 70. Geburtstag (Hamburger Sinologische Schriften 8; Hamburg: Hamburger Sinologische Gesellschaft e.V., 2002), pp. 397-497. 21 Hsiao-chi tu-wei 驍騎都尉; this title occurs only once in the Shih chi and only two more times in the Han shu (16.620, 69.2976), excluding the parallel biography of Li Kuang. It was obviously a subordinate to the General of Resolute Cavalry (hsiao-chi chiang-chün), a military duty assignment during the first phase of the Han period. But next to nothing else is known about these cavalry troops, that in the Later Han period came to designate the imperial guard (Hucker, no. 2378). 22 Ch’ang-yi was a town in the state of Liang 梁. Later, under Wu-ti, it became the seat of the provincial government of Shan-yang 山陽 Commandery (Han shu, 28A.1570). It was located in the southeastern part of modern Shandong Province, some thirty miles southwest of Chi-ning 濟寧; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19. 23 The King of Liang was Liu Wu 劉武, the younger brother of Ching-ti. Liu Wu, who ruled the state of Liang from 168 until his death in 144 B.C., played a major role in putting down the rebellion of the Seven Kings. His originally very close relationship with his elder brother, the emperor, became increasingly strained when Liu Wu after the rebellion was put down developed a representational lifestyle that even seemed to eclipse that of the emperor. Although, unlike other imperial relatives, Liu Wu never went as far as to openly turn against his brother, a series of severe rebuttals from the central court was needed in order to rein in his ambitions—as well as a good measure of diplomacy on the part of Liu Wu and his envoys in order to dissuade the emperor from taking even more drastic steps. Li Kuang’s appointment as General obviously occurred just at a time when the central government had already waxed suspicious of or become annoyed by the flamboyant and high-handed actions of the vassal king Liu Wu. For this context, see R. Emmerich, “Rebellion der Sieben Könige,” pp. 468-72, and M. Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 367-9.

General Li, Memoir 49

207

上谷,24 the Hsiung-nu daily met him in battle. The Director of Dependent States 25 Kung-sun Hun-yeh 公孫昆邪26 addressed27 the Sovereign and said with tears in his eyes: “Li Kuang has an ether of talent, in the [whole] world there is no one like him. If, being confident of his abilities, he repeatedly battles with the caitiffs on equal terms,28 I am afraid that we are going to loose him.” At this, [Li Kuang]

24

Shang-ku had been established as a commandery at the northern border since Ch’in times. Its governmental seat lay about forty-four miles northwest of modern Peking’s city center. See Han shu, 28B.1623; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27. 25 Tien-shu-kuo 典屬國, “an autonomous member of the central government [...], responsible for relations with non-Chinese peoples who accepted Chinese overlordship” (Hucker, no. 6646). His nominal salary is given as two thousand shih, although this may reflect a later boost of authority after dependent states were actually established in 121 B.C. (cf. Bielenstein, p. 84). One wonders how the duties of the Director of Dependent States were separated from the similar ones of the Director of Guests (tien-k’o 典客, later changed to Prefect Grand Usher, ta-hsing ling 大行令, later still to Grand Herald, ta-hung-lu 大鴻臚) and when the position was abolished in 28 B.C. its duties were indeed taken over by the Grand Herald. Anyway, it seems that in this case the duties of the Director of Dependent States did not matter much with respect to the incumbent’s plea in favour of Li Kuang; see next footnote. 26 Or Kung-sun Hun-hsieh. Both “Chi-chieh” as well as “So-yin”–either directly or through citing references–assure us that 昆 is read hun. This is backed by the fact that in the Han shu this name is also given as 渾邪 (see Han shu, 17.637 and 30.1734 as against 54.2439). It is not known, what motivated Kung-sun Hun-yeh to speak for Li Kuang’s withdrawal from the field. Under Wenti and later Kung-sun Hun-yeh was Grand Administrator of Lung-hsi, before he became Director of Dependent States under Ching-ti. It is not impossible that he felt generally responsible for a talented son of his commandery, or even knew Li Kuang personally and was on good terms with him. A special tinge is added by the possibility that Kung-sun Hun-yeh himself had a Hsiung-nu mother (Loewe, Dictionary, p. 128). Maybe, he was particularly intent at showing his allegiance to the house of the Han by advocating a strong military policy against the Hsiung-nu, of which Li Kuang was a leading proponent. Or he wanted, on the contrary, to prevent the able general Li to hurt the people who were his mother’s kin. In the latter case, this episode would acquire an ironic touch, of course. 27 Possibly, with wei 為 for wei 謂 (Kao Heng 高亨, Ku-tzu t’ung-chia hui-tien 古字通假會典, Peking: Ch’i Lu shu-she, 1989:663). Yen Shih-ku refering to the Han shu, 54.2439, that also reads wei shang li yue 為上泣曰, explains “[Kung-sun Hun-ye] wept while facing (or: answering) the Sovereign” 對上而泣也. Although this description of the situation can hardly be contested, the expression remains strange. 28 Ti-chan 敵戰 is understood as adverb-verb construction meaning “fighting as with an (equal) enemy.” The Han shu, 54.2439, has chüeh 确, “compete for victory or defeat,” instead. For ti-chan, see Han shu, 66.2881n4, and San kuo chih, 35.936n.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

208

was moved and made Grand Administrator of Shang 上 Commandery.29 Later, 30 Kuang would rotate to become Grand Administrator of [other] frontier commanderies, [before] being moved [again] to Shang Commandery. [In this way, he] was once Grand Administrator in Lung-hsi,31 Pei-ti 北地,32 Yen-men 鴈

29

Shang Commandery had been established already in Ch’in times (Han shu, 28B.1617)after the Ch’in forces had occupied the central part of the Ordos region. The seat of the Grand Administrator was located at Fu-shih 膚施, more than thirty miles west of the Ho and about ninety miles north of modern Yen-an 延安 in Shensi. From the capital of Ch’ang-an the distance was about 270 miles, to Li Kuang’s home town only a little farer; see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17 and 34. 30 This paragraph, from “Later . . .” to “. . . vigorous fighting,” is not in the parallel biography on Han shu 54.2439. Instead, the Han shu has the core passage (後徙為隴西、北地、雁門、雲中 太守, “Later, he was moved to become Grand Administrator in Lung-hsi, Pei-ti, Yen-men, and Yün-chung”) on p. 2440, after the episode, which follows below, of Li Kuang catching Hsiung-nu sharp shooters and bluffing a superior enemy force. As a string of events and from the perspective of narrative logic, this makes much more sense. After all, why should it be stressed that Li Kuang “became Grand Administrator of frontier commanderies,” when as Grand Administrator of Shang Commandery he already was at the frontier? This clearly warrants the use of a word like “other” (t’a 它) which usually is not elliptical. Similarly, the Shih chi makes it appear that Li Kuang was transferred to Shang Commandery twice, without providing a word like “again” or “return” or the like that one would normally expect in such circumstances. The translation above makes these hypothetical additions, but it is much more likely that those scholars who have argued for the Shih chi to be corrupt at this point and rather follow the Han shu (Chang Wen-hu, p. 646; Watson, Han, 2:142-3) or transfer the string “hsi Shang-chün” 徙上郡 before the following “Hsiung-nu ta ju Shang-chün” 匈奴大 入上郡, giving, “When he had been moved to Shang Commandery, the Hsiung-nu with a great force entered into Shang Commandery” (Liang Yü-sheng 33.1378) are correct (cf. also Li Jen-chien, pp. 1430-1). However, the text of the Han shu is also not unproblematic. Here, the list of commanderies in which Li Kuang served as Grand Administrator does not contain Tai Commandery. This is problematic because Han shu, 54.2446, also states that “Kuang served in seven commanderies as Grand Administrator” 廣歷七郡太守, although the text gives away the names of only six commanderies, while in the Shih chi all seven are duly recorded, i.e., Shang Commandery, Lung-hsi, Pei-ti, Yen-men, Tai Commandery, Yün-chung, and Yu-peip’ing (see below). 31 Li Kuang’s position as Grand Administrator of Lung-hsi is confirmed later on in the text; see Shih chi, 109.2874; Han shu, 54.2446. 32 Pei-ti Commandery was also already established by the Ch’in dynasty, just west of Shang Commandery. The seat of government lay in Ma-ling 馬領, 140 miles northwest of the capital of Ch’ang-an (or modern Sian) and at about the same distance, but in northeastern direction, from Li Kuang’s home town, Ch’eng-chi (see Han shu, 28B.1616; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17 and 34).

General Li, Memoir 49

209

門 , 33 Tai 代 Commandery, 34 and Yün-chung 雲 中 . 35 Everywhere he made himself a name through vigorous fighting. When the Hsiung-nu with a great force entered Shang Commandery,36 the Son of Heaven 37 had a palace eunuch 38 follow Kuang to train and become acquainted with weapons and attack the Hsiung-nu. The palace eunuch led several tens of horsemen in full gallop,39 when they saw three Hsiung-nu and

33

Yen-men Commandery, originally established by the Ch’in dynasty (Han shu, 28B.1621), then incorporated into Han time kingdoms, only to be reestablished in 144 or 143 B.C. (Loewe, Dictionary, p. 801), lay west of Tai Commandery. The map in T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:18) make both appear to reach far north into Hsiung-nu territory, but the seat of government in Shan-wu 善無 was actually located much more to the south than, e.g., that of Yün-chung Commandery. It lay about fifty miles west of modern Ta-t’ung 大同 in Shansi. 34 A Tai Commandery, established by the Ch’in dynasty east of Yen-men, had been transformed, together with adjacent territories, into a major kingdom under the early Han. When it was reestablished as a commandery in or shortly after 114 B.C., it was split in two and only the northeastern part was named Tai Commandery. The seat of government was probably situated in Sang-kan 桑乾 (pronunciation according to a gloss of Meng K’ang) because this heads the list of counties on Han shu, 28B.1622. T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:18) however marks Tai 代 County, the old capital of the vassal kingdom, as seat of the commandery government. The latter is located about ninety miles west of modern Peking’s city center; Sang-kan some twenty-two miles north of it. 35 Yün-chung was one of the northernmost commanderies. Already in the Ch’in period it had been established northeast of the Ordos region. After having been part of a kingdom for some time, it was reestablished as a commandery in 196 B.C. The seat of government was located at Yünchung County, twenty-five miles southwest of modern Hue Hot (Han shu, 28B.1620; T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:18). 36 Considering a matching record in the annals section, Shih chi 11.446, this probably occurred in the eigth month of 144 B.C. 37 That is, Ching-ti. 38 Chung kuei-jen 中貴人, literally, “someone esteemed within [the palace].” The “So-yin” cites Tung-ba’s 董巴 (ca. 220) Treatise on Chariots and Garments (Yü-fu-chih 輿服志) indicating that this may have been an Assistant of the Yellow Gates, huang-men-ch’eng 黃門丞, i.e., a eunuch official who enjoyed particularly close personal relations with the emperor and who was sent around the empire to gather information for his sovereign. The term is not to be confused with the title of “honourable lady,” kuei-jen 貴人 (see Hucker, no. 3371), nor with chung-jen 中人, for which see n. 131 below. 39 Tsung 縱; the Han shu, 54.2440, has ts’ung 從, “to follow,” instead. Yen Shih-ku (ibid.) obviously accepts this as correct, because he paraphrases the sentence using tzu-sui 自隨, “to surround oneself with . . . ,” “to take along,” but he also cites and rejects Chang Yen’s 張晏 opinion that tsung is correct and means “to let loose and roam for hunting 放（從）〔縱〕遊獵.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

210

gave them battle. The three shot backwards,40 wounded the palace eunuch and killed nearly all of his horsemen. The palace eunuch fled to [Li] Kuang. Kuang said: “Those [men] must have been sharp shooters.” 41 Then he let a hundred horsemen follow him42 and went racing after the three men. The three men had lost their horses and had travelled on foot for several tens of li.43 Kuang ordered 40

Huan-she 還射; the Han shu (54.2440) parallel does not have this expression, but just writes she, “they shot.” Watson (Han, 2:142) translates verbosely, “The three Hsiung-nu, however, began circling [huan] the party and shooting as they went . . . .” However, it seems highly questionable how three men could “circling” around a force of several dozens horsemen. The translation above assumes with the “Cheng-yi” that huan here means the same as chuan 轉, “to turn around,” and that this refers to the turning of the upper body while riding and shooting backwards at the pursuing enemy. This “backward shooting” is often said to have been a skill for which the northern neighbors of the Chinese were famous. It has been depicted on numerous Han relief stones, although most scenes are clearly hunting and not battle scenes; see Käte Finsterbusch: Verzeichnis und Motivindex der Han-Darstellungen (4 vols., Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1966, 1971, 2000, 2004), index under “Reiter, mit dem Bogen nach rückwärts schießend.” Moreover, in many of these reliefs the shooting rider may not actually be a northern horseman. More often than not, he rather seems to be Chinese. In one rare battle scene from Hsin-yeh 新 野 , Honan (Finsterbusch, Motivindex, vols. 3 and 4, no. E873), this is very clear as the rider is using a crossbow in this way and his opponents wear pointed hats, a characteristic of central Asian people (see Hsing I-t’ien 邢 義田: “Ku-tai Chung-kuo chi Ou-ya wen-hsien, t’u-hsiang yü k’ao-ku tzu-liao chung ti ‘Hu-jen’ wai-mao” 古代中國及歐亞文獻、圖像與考古資料中的「胡人」外貌, Kuo-li T’ai-wan ta-hsüeh mei-shu-shih yen-chiu chi-k’an 國立台灣大學美術史研究集刊, 9 (2000): 15-99). In another battle scene from T’eng-hsien 滕縣, Shantung (Finsterbusch, Motivindex, vols. 3 and 4, no. O449), however, it is the backward shooting rider, who wears this kind of cap. Probably, both the northern peoples and the Chinese used the backward shooting once the Chinese had acquired this skill from their foes. 41 She-tiao-che 射雕者, literally, “eagle-shooters,” probably some kind of Hsiung-nu military position or function. This better explains why Li Kuang makes this remark at all. The explanatory sense is lost, if one understands with Watson (Han, 2:142), “They must be out hunting eagles!” Various ancient commentators explain tiao as either osprey or vulture(-like). As to why these Hsiung-nu marksmen went by this name, there are two explanations. Wen Ying 文穎 (fl. 196-200), quoted in the “Chi-chieh,” indicates that since eagles were hard to shoot down, “eagle-shooters” had to be particularly skillfull bowmen. Yen Shih-ku in his commentary on the same passage in the Han shu, 54.2440, on the other hand states that the feathers of the eagles, or tiao, could be attached to arrows; thus the name would be derived from the equipment they used. 42 Or “follow him in full gallop,” if ts’ung 從 is taken as tsung 縱; see note 39 above. The preceding sui 遂 is lacking in the Han shu version. 43 The Chung-hua editors make a full stop here, although it is also possible to follow De Groot (Die Hunnen, p. 94) and connect the latter half of this sentence with the next: „The three men had lost their horses and had travelled on foot. After they had travelled for several tens of li, Kuang ordered his horsemen to spread out ....”

General Li, Memoir 49

211

his horsemen to spread out on the left and right flanks while Kuang himself shot at those three men, killing two of the men and obtaining one alive. As expected, they were Hsiung-nu sharp shooters. When [Kuang and his men] had already tied him [the captive]44 up and had mounted their horses,45 they saw in the distance that there were several thousand Hsiung-nu horsemen. [They in turn] saw Kuang [and his party] and supposed they were decoy horsemen. All were alarmed and moved uphill to [line up in battle] formation. Kuang’s hundred horsemen were all terrified and wanted to hastily turn around and flee. Kuang said: “We are several dozen li away from the main army. Now, if we flee like this as [only] onehundred horsemen, the Hsiung-nu will pursue and shoot us entirely at once. If [however] we stay, the Hsiung-nu will certainly regard us as a decoy of the main army. 46 They will surely not dare to attack us.” Kuang ordered all horsemen: “Advance!” They advanced up to about two li from the Hsiung-nu formation,47 where they stopped and [Kuang] ordered: “Everyone dismount and unsaddle!” His horsemen said: “The caitiffs are numerous and close by. If there is an emergency, [*2869*] what do we do?” Kuang said: “These caitiffs wait for us to flee. Now, let us all unsaddle to show that we won’t flee. By this means we will confirm their suspicion [that we are a decoy].”48 At this, the Hu cavalry finally did not dare to attack.49 [Among the Hsiung-nu] there was a commander on a white horse50 who emerged to surveil his troops. Li Kuang mounted his horse and together with more than ten horsemen rushed after, shot, and killed the Hu commander on the white horse. Then he returned to among his horsemen,

44

Or “them,” i.e., the surviving captive and the corpses of his comrades or parts thereof, as it was customary for Chinese troops to take the heads or ears of enemies slain in battle with them as evidence of their individual “kill rate.” 45 The Han shu, 54.2440, reads shang shan 上山, “had ascended a mountain or hill,” for shang ma 上馬. 46 This follows the emendation by the Chung-hua editors who followed either Wang Nien-sun (Tu-shu tsa-chih 讀書雜志)–or the Han shu (54.2440) which also has this–in reading 大軍之誘 for 大軍誘之, “. . . [suppose that we are] the main army luring them.” Cf. Li Jen-chien, pp. 1431-2. 47 Wei tao Hsiung-nu chen erh-li suo 未到匈奴陳二里所, literally, „... they had not yet reached the Hsiung-nu formation [but for] about two li,“ with suo 所 meaning “about.” Cf. a similiar expression below on Shih chi 109.2877: wei tao Chü-yen pai yü li 未到居延百餘里. 48 Chien ch’i yi 堅其意, literally, “confirm their opinion (or: intention).” 49 The Han shu, 54.2440, does not have this sentence. 50 This follows the “Cheng-yi.” Alternatively, this could be a “White-horse-commander,” i.e., a specific Hsiung-nu official who does not necessarily have to sit on a white horse.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

212

unsaddled, and ordered all warriors to release the horses and lie down.51 At this time it was just getting dark. The Hu troops after all found it [i.e., the situation] strange and did not dare to attack. Moreover, at midnight, the Hu troops, thinking that the Han had an army lying hidden nearby wanting to capture them [the Hsiung-nu] by night, all withdrew and went away. At dawn, Li Kuang returned to his main army. The main army had not known where he had gone, so it had not followed him.52 After some time, when Hsiao Ching[-ti] had passed away and Wu-ti (the Martial Emperor) was enthroned [9 March 141 B.C.], the ministers in attendance considered Kuang a famous commander, and, upon this, Kuang, as Grand Administrator of Shang Commandery, was made Commandant of the Guard at the Wei-yang 未央 (Eternal) Palace and Ch’eng Pu-shih 程不識 was also made Commandant of the Guard at the Ch’ang-lo 長樂 (Prolonged Joy) Palace. Ch’eng Pu-shih together with Li Kuang were formerly stationed as frontier Grand Administrators or Generals. When they had gone out53 to attack the Hu, then [Li] Kuang would travel without having his divisions and squads line up in formations.54 When he reached [a place with] good water and grass to station [his troops] and stopped for a rest,55 every man could do as he pleased. [At night, his men] did not beat on their mess kits 56 as a means of self-protection. The 51

In the Han shu, 54.2440, only Li Kuang “released his horse and lay down,” nothing is said of his ordering his men to do the same. 52 This last sentence, written from the perspective of the army headquarters, lacks on Han shu, 54.2440; instead the text there enumerates Kuang’s consecutive positions as frontier Grand Administrator; see the discussion in note 30 above. 53 Ch’u 出, literally “to go out,” “to exit.” Note that this certainly means not just to set out from home or the army headquarters, but more specifically to exit the country, to cross the border into enemy territory. This is implied by the formula “ch’u plus name of border commandery” that is found later on in the text. This gives more weight to the following statement describing the lack of discipline among Li Kuang’s troops not only on some unspecified march, but on a march through enemy territory! 54 Pu-wu hang-chen 部伍行陳; literally, “rows and formations of divisions and squads.” The Han shu, 54.2441, has ch’ü 曲, “battalions,” for wu. Compare also the similar expression in connection with Ch’eng Pu-shih below. Is hang-chen a short form of hang-wu ying-chen 行伍營陳? 55 T’un 屯, “to station,” “set up camp,” she 舍, “to rest,” “stay overnight,” and chih 止, “to stop,” seem too many verbs of basically the same meaning in a row and are possibly an indication that the text is defective at this point (see Li Jen-chien, pp. 1432-3). The Han shu, 54.2441, just has tun-she 頓舍, “to stop for a rest.” 56 Tiao-tou 刀斗 or, in other editions, tiao-tou 刁斗 (the pronunciation tiao 貂 for 刀 or 刁 is also provided by the “So-yin”). According to several commentators, this was a kind of saucepan,

General Li, Memoir 49

213

headquarters was sparing with paperwork.57 However, he still would sent out wide-ranging [*2870*] scouts and never met with calamity. Ch’eng Pu-shih [on the other hand] kept the divisions and battalions, marching squads58 and camp59 formations in good order and had the mess kits beaten. The military functionaries administered the troops’ files until dawn.60 The troops were not allowed to rest. However, [Ch’eng Pu-shih], too, never met with calamity. [Ch’eng] Pu-shih said: “The troops of Li Kuang have it extremely easy, but if the caitiffs swiftly assail them, they have nothing with which to stop them. And as to his officers and soldiers, they are definitely61 idle and happy. They all are happy to die for him. Although my troops have it vexatious, the caitiffs will definitely not be able to assail us.” At that time both Li Kuang and Ch’eng Pu-shih were famous as similar to an implement called chiao 鐎. Of the latter excavated specimen exist than are identified as such by the inscriptions they carry. They had a round body like a little basin (hsüan 鋗 or yao 銚) for heating liquids on a stove, but in addition also had a handle, which neither hsüan nor yao had, and they stood on three feet. Essentially, tiao-tou seems to have been a primitive form of a chiaotou without feet and without a rim; see Hayashi Minao 林巳奈夫, ed., Kandai no bunbutsu 漢代の 文物 (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 1976), pp. 230-1 and pls. 5-84 to 5-90; Sun Chi 孫機, Hantai wu-chih wen-hua tsu-liao t’u-shuo 漢代物質文化資料圖說 (Peking: Wen-wu, 1991), p. 325, pls.83-1 to 83-5. It was used for cooking in daytime and as a kind of gong for the patrolling vigil at night. Hsün Yüeh 荀悅 (148-209) glosses this as a “little bell” (hsiao ling 小鈴), but this is surely mistaken. The statement implies that Li Kuang did not bother to have his men keep vigil at night, at least not in a manner that was prescribed by the military handbooks of his day. 57 Wen-shu chi-shih 文書籍事, literally, “written documents and listed matters.” Wen-shu in most cases meant official letters, while chi, “lists,” and pu 簿, “files” (for which see below in connection with Ch’eng Pu-shih), were generic designations for archival material. Of the two, chi was predominantly used for any kind of ming-chi 名籍, i.e., personnel, muster or pay rolls that listed individuals’ names (see the various title strips among the wooden strips manuscripts from Chü-yen and Tun-huang). But in this context, chi and pu are obviously used interchangeably. Also, the whole expression wen-shu chi-shih clearly encompasses the entire range of clerical duties within the military administration. This is expressed by “paperwork,” although the contemporary stationery probably mostly consisted of wooden strips and boards rather than the kind of protopaper that was also found at Han border fortification sites in the northwest, but in insignificant quantities and not neccessarily as writing paper. 58 Hang-wu 行伍, literally, “lines and groups of five” or “lined-up squads.” 59 Ying 營 has also been understood as “brigade,” but here the import seems to be one of juxtaposing the organization of the army on the march (hang-wu) and when encamped (ying-chen). This is also clearly expressed by the translation of Ogawa Tamaki 小川環樹 et al., Shiki retsuden 史記列傳 (Tokyo: Chikuma shobo, 1969), p. 335. 60 Chih ming 明, or “in an utterly clear [manner].” 61 Yi 亦.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

214

commanders in border commanderies of the Han, but the Hsiung-nu dreaded a raid by Li Kuang [more] and most of the soldiers were definitely happier to follow Li Kuang, but suffered under Ch’eng Pu-shih. During the time of Hsiao Ching[-ti], Ch’eng Pu-shih was made Grand Palace Grandee on account of several upright admonitions. He was a man of integrity and scrupulous with regard to the codified law. Later, the Han [regime] enticed the Shan-yü62 with the walled city of Ma-yi (Ma Town) [133 B.C.], having a large army lie in ambush in a valley adjacent to Ma-yi. 63 [Li] Kuang was General of Resolute Cavalry under the command of the General and Commissioner over the Army [Han An-kuo]. At this, the Shan-yü discovered it and departed; the Han armies were all without merit. Four years later (129 B.C.), [Li] Kuang as Commandant of the Guards was made General and went out64 through Yen-men [Commandery] to attack the Hsiung-nu. The Hsiung-nu troops were [too] numerous; they thoroughly defeated Kuang’s troops and captured him alive. The Shan-yü had formerly heard that Kuang was worthy and had given the order: “If you capture Li Kuang, you must bring him [to me] alive!” When the Hu horsemen had captured Kuang, who was then wounded and ailing, they put him between two horses, tied [them] together [*2871*] and had Kuang lie down on [the ties]. When they had traveled for more than ten li, Kuang pretended to be dead. Stealing a glance, he perceived that there was a Hu boy next to him riding on a fine horse. He suddenly leaped up and mounted the Hu boy’s horse, then knocking the boy off,65 took his bow and whipped the horse galloping south for several tens of li, regained his remaining troops and could then withdraw behind the border fortifications. Several hundred horsemen from among the Hsiung-nu who had captured [him] had pursued him. While going forward Kuang had taken the Hu boy’s bow, shot and killed pursuing horsemen. For this reason he was able to escape. At this, he reached the Han [court], the Han [court] sent Kuang to the [judicial] officers. The officers considered Kuang guilty on account of his loosing [so] many [troops] and 62

On this Hsiung-nu title, see n. 132 to chapter 110 on the Hsiung-nu below. Ma-yi was located hundred miles due north of modern T’ai-yüan, Shansi. Formerly, it had been the capital of the kingdom of Tai 代, see Shih chi 110.2894. For the incident referred to here, see Shih chi 108.2861-2 and 110.2905. 64 That is, they crossed the border and entered into Hsiung-nu territory; cf. n. 53 above. 65 The commentary by Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) gives a variant according to which Li Kuang “embraced” (pao 抱) the boy, i.e., took him with him, when he fled. Takigawa (109.8) has tried to reconcile the two versions by taking pao as p’ao 拋, “to throw away.” 63

General Li, Memoir 49

215

because he allowed himself to be captured by the caitiffs alive, and [for this] he was to be beheaded, [but he] paid ransom and was made a commoner. A short while later, 66 [Li Kuang went to] live at home for several years. Kuang’s family together with the grandson of the former Marquis of Ying-yin 穎 陰67 went living in seclusion in the wilds of the mountains south of Lan-t’ien 藍 田68 to hunt.69 Once he went out at night followed by just one horseman and the follower 70 drank in the fields. When they returned and reached the precinct 66

It seems possible that this ch’ing chih 頃之, “a short while later,” is spurious, or that it belongs to the preceding sentence: “. . . was made a commoner for a short time.” Note that the parallel text of the Han-shu does not have ch’ing chih. 67 According to the commentaries, this was Ch’iang 強 (or 彊) the grandson of Kuan Ying 灌 嬰. 68 Located about twenty miles southeast of modern Sian, Shensi. T’an Ch’i-hsiang (2:15) also records a Mount Lan-t’ien c. twelve miles east of Lan-t’ien. The area was also renowned for producing precious stones; see Han shu, 28A.1543. 69 This sentence is probably defective. Ping-yeh 屏 野 , “to retreat into the wilds,” and especially the hunting activities are more probably those of Li Kuang himself, not his family. Therefore, chia 家 might be superfluous as Li Jen-chien (p. 1433) has claimed. On the other hand, chia could also mean “home” as in the preceding sentence, and others (Watson, Han, 2:121; Ogawa, p. 336) have taken this sentence to be concerned with the location of Li Kuang’s home. Watson translated: “His home was in Lantian, among the Southern Mountains, adjoining the estate of Guan Qiang, . . . .” (Watson, ibid., my italics). Whether or not Watson emended . . . ping-ye, chü . . . 屏野， 居 to p’ing-chü 屏居 and perhaps understood this as “adjoining the estate of s.o.”–it means “to live in seclusion”–yeh is actually lacking not only in the Han shu, 54.2443, but also in a comparable sentence in the biography of Tou Ying 竇嬰, the Marquis of Wei Ch’i 魏其, on Shih chi 107.2840. Because Tou Ying, after pleading ill, also retreated to live in the same area, both Wang Li-ch’i (109.2302) as well as Wu Shu-p’ing and Lü Tsung-li (109.2835) have claimed in their translations that the area was a popular retreat for high-ranking officials in the Han period. From this sentence onward, there is a parallel text including the entire episode of Li Kuang and the Commandant of Pa-ling in the Feng-su-t’ung 風俗通, chapter 7 (“Ch’iung-t’ung” 窮通; see A Concordance to the Fengsu tongyi. The ICS Ancient Chinese Texts Concordance Series. Philosophical works, No. 23 (Hong Kong: The Commercial Press, 1996), pp. 54-5, with notes on editions and emendations on pp. 63-4). The text, though obviously much corrupted, clearly follows the Han shu version. It also includes verbatim most of the Han shu’s elaboration at the episode’s end (see note 76 below). However, instead of mentioning the grandson of the former Marquis of Ying-yin, it begins with, “When Li Kuang left [the position of] the Grand Administrator of Yünchung, he went to live in seclusion (p’ing-chü) in the mountains south of Lan-t’ien . . . ,” and so on. 70 Ts’ung-jen 從人; the Feng-su-t’ung (ibid.) lacks this subject, and just writes yin t’ien chien 飲田間, “. . . [and they] drank in the fields.” As drinking was and is predominantly a social activity and no other reason for the outing is provided, this version is indeed more logical. The Shih chi (and Han shu) version, if correctly understood and if not corrupted, would have Li Kuang remain

216

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

station of Pa-ling 霸陵,71 the Commandant of Pa-ling was drunk and hollered to stop [Li] Kuang. Kuang’s horseman said: “This is former General Li!” The commandant said: “Even a present general is not allowed to travel at night, let alone a former one!” He stopped Kuang and had him stay overnight at the precinct station. Not long thereafter, the Hsiung-nu made an incursion killing the Grand Administrator of Liao-hsi 遼西72 and defeating General Han [An-kuo] 韓 [安國].73 Thereafter,74 General Han was transferred to Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平.75 At this [time], the Son of Heaven summoned [Li] Kuang and appointed him Grand Administrator of Yu-pei-p’ing. Kuang immediately requested that the Commandant of Pa-ling accompany him. When he arrived at the army [headquarters, Li Kuang] beheaded him.76

sober, and could be seen as an attempt to avoid the rather negative image of Li Kuang as becoming engaged in an argument between drunkards. It is also interesting to note, however, that this whole episode is one of the very few in this biography that shows a negative side of Li Kuang, namely that he was unforgiving. 71 Pa-ling or Pa Mausoleum was the final resting place for the fifth Han Emperor, Wen-ti, who died in 157 B.C., and his Empress Tou 竇 who died in 135 B.C. The mausoleum henceforth provided the name for a prefecture that was formerly called Chih-yang 芷 陽 ; see Han shu, 28A.1544. It was located a little over ten miles northeast from the city center of modern Sian (see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). On the history and archaeology of the mausoleum, see Liu Ch’ing-chu 劉 慶柱 and Li Yü-fang 李毓芳. Hsi Han shih-yi ling 西漢十一陵 (Sian: Shensi jen-ming, 1987), pp. 34-46, and n. 247 on Grand Scribe’s Records, 10.433. 72 Liao-hsi Commandery was located at the northern rim of the Po-hai Sea, its seat of government was about ten miles south of modern Chao-yang, Liao-ning; see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27. 73 For the biography of Han An-kuo, see Shih chi 108.2857-65 and the translation above. 74 Some editions do not have this word, others put it behind the subject “General Han,” see Li Jen-chien, p. 1433. 75 Yu-pei-p’ing was the neighboring commandery west of Liao-hsi. Its seat of government was located about ninety miles west of modern Chao-yang, Liao-ning see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27. As Takigawa (109.9) noted, two editions of the Shih chi as well as the Han shu close this sentence with ssu 死, “. . . and died there.” This provides a better reason for Li Kuang being appointed there, too. The Feng-su-t’ung makes no mention of Han An-kuo, but summarizes the events by stating, “The Hsiung-nu made an incursion into Liao-hsi, inflicting much harm at the border,” (Hsiung-nu ju Liao-hsi, ta wei pien hai 匈奴入遼西，大為邊害). This is the single instance, where the text diverges considerably from that of the Han shu. 76 This episode is elaborated further in the Han shu, which says that Li Kuang reported the certainly illegal murder of the commandant himself to the emperor and was forgiven.

General Li, Memoir 49

217

Kuang [now] resided in Yu-pei-p’ing. The Hsiung-nu heard of him and named him “the Flying General of the Han.” They avoided him for several years and did not dare to enter Yu-pei-p’ing. [Once] when Kuang went out hunting, he spotted a rock amidst the grasses. He thought it was a tiger and shot at it. [The arrow] hit the rock [so hard that] the arrowhead disappeared. [Only upon closely] observing it, [Kuang realized] it was a rock. Accordingly, he shot at it again repeatedly.77 [But] in the end, he was unable to penetrate [*2872*] the rock again. In whatever commandery [Li] Kuang lived, if he heard that there was a tiger, he tried78 to shoot it himself. And when he was residing in Yu-pei-p’ing and shooting at a tiger, the tiger leaped up and wounded Kuang. [But] eventually Kuang shot and killed it, too. Kuang had integrity. 79 When he obtained rewards and grants, he would at once divide them up among his subordinates and share drinks and food with his officers. When Kuang’s life ended, he had been [in positions] ranking two thousand shih for more than forty years, [yet] his family did not have [any] assets left. He would never speak about his family’s possessions. Kuang was a tall man with the [long] arms of an ape. His shooting skills were likewise a natural disposition; although among his sons, grandsons, and other people studied [him], there was none who was able to match Kuang. Kuang spoke slowly and made few words. When he was together with others, he would draw [lines] on the ground, make [his companions attain] army formations and shoot at the spaces in between in order to make [the losers] drink.80 [They] took shooting exclusively as 77

Presumably, so as to repeat the astonishing feat of penetrating a rock with a crossbow shot. The incident again seems to serve to demonstrate Li Kuang’s simple-minded stubborness. 78 Ch’ang 嘗. Alternatively, taking this as a loan for ch’ang 常, “. . . he always shot it himself.” 79 The following account of Kuang’s selfless attitude and his shooting habits is found on Han shu, 54.2446-7, in a different place, inserted after Kuang’s conversation with the diviner Wang Shuo, see below. Also, in the Han shu the whole paragraph is headed by the statement that “Kuang served in seven Commanderies as Grand Administrator, all in all (spending) more than forty years (in these positions).” See the list of his positions on Shih chi, 109.2868 translated above. 80 According to the commentary, she k’uo-hsia yi yin 射闊狹以飲 was a drinking game that required the losers to drink. It is not clear whether the formations consisted only of lines or pictures drawn on the ground at which the contestants had to take aim across varying distances. This ballistically difficult exercise is what Wang Li-ch’i (109.2303, 2309) and Wu Shu-p’ing and Lü Tsung-li (109.2835) propose. A somewhat different setup is implied by Watson’s (2.122) paraphrase, “he would draw diagrams on the ground to explain his military tactics or set up targets of various widths and shoot at them with his friends, the loser being forced to drink.” (Similarly, Ogawa, p. 336) In the translation above, it is on the contrary Kuang’s drinking buddies themselves who had to line up according to position markers drawn on the ground and whom the increasingly drunken marksmen had to avoid hitting. This would surely provide for more thrill and seems to be

218

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

a sport, finally dying. 81 As regards Kuang’s commanding troops, in situations where there were shortages, if they saw water, Kuang would not approach it until all the officers and soldiers had finished drinking; he would never eat until all the officers and soldiers had finished eating. He was uncomplicated and easygoing and the officers for this reason loved to serve [under him]. As for his shooting, when he saw the enemy charging82 and if he was not within some dozens of paces or if he estimated that he would not hit [the target], he did not let go. When he let go, [the target] responded instantly to the chord and fell. Because of83 this, [Kuang] was several times hard pressed and humiliated when leading troops. When shooting wild beasts he was reportedly also wounded because of this. After a while, 84 Shih Chien 石建 passed away 85 ; at this, the Sovereign summoned Kuang to replace Chien as Prefect of the Palace Attendants. In the sixth year of yüan-shuo (123 B.C.), Kuang again became General of the Rear. He followed the army of the General-in-chief and went out through Ting-hsiang [Commandery] to attack the Hsiung-nu. Most of the commanders met the quota of heads and caitiffs [taken]. On account of these merits they were made marquises while Kuang’s army did not gain merits. Two years later (121 B.C.),86 Kuang as Prefect of the Palace Attendants led four thousand horsemen and went out through Yu-pei-p’ing. Chang Ch’ien 張騫, the Marquis of Po-wang 博望,87 leading ten thousand horsemen joined Kuang [at more in line with the general characterization of Kuang as daring and rough. Depending on how one imagines the rules of this game the understanding of the next sentence could vary to a considerable degree. Here, it is taken as criticism against Kuang and his party for toying around even with such a serious matter as shooting on human targets. See next note. 81 Ching ssu 竟死, the Han shu (54.2447) parallel does not have this. The subject of the sentence could also be Li Kuang himself and the sentence could also be understood as simply stating that Kuang delighted in this kind of pastime right until his death. This, however, would seem to be a rather lame and unmotivated statement. 82 The Han shu (54.2447) does not have chi 急, literally “anxious; to hurry.” 83 For this meaning of yung 用, see n. 11 above. 84 That is, since Kuang became Grand Administrator of Yu-pei-p’ing. Here, the chronological narration, that broke off after the incident with the tiger that wounded Kuang, is continued. The Han shu (54.2446-7) has the same description of Kuang’s bodily features, his leadership and shooting technique later on in the text. Therefore, it does not need the phrase chü ch’ing chih 居頃 之, “after a while,” at this point. 85 This must have happened in 123 B.C., see Shih chi 103.2766; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 478. 86 Three years later, i.e. 120 B.C., according to the Han shu, 54.2445. 87 Located fifteen miles northeast of modern Nan-yang 南陽 city in Honan.

General Li, Memoir 49

219

first but later] took a different route. When they had traveled about several hundred li the Hsiung-nu Wise King of the Left 88 leading forty thousand horsemen besieged Kuang. [*2873*] The officers in Kuang’s army were all frightened. Kuang then send his son Kan to go and race them [the Hsiung-nu]. Kan, only89 accompanied by several tens of horsemen, sped off, went directly through the [phalanx of] Hu horsemen, passed around their left and right [flanks] and returned, reporting to Kuang: “The Hu caitiffs are easy to deal with!”90 Then the officers calmed down. Kuang [had his troops] take a circular battle formation facing outward. When the Hu fiercely attacked them, the arrows fell like rain. Of the Han troops more than one half died and the Han arrows were about to be used up. Kuang thereupon ordered the officers to load [their weapons] but not to shoot and all by himself with a great yellow crossbow he shot their [the Hsiung-nu’s] assistant commander and killed several others. The Hu caitiffs increasingly began to disperse. Just as the sun set, none of the functionaries and officers had the complexion of a human being. But Kuang’s mind and spirit were as always and he increasingly brought order to his troops. In the army from this time on [everyone] bowed to his courage. The next day, vigorous fighting broke out again, but when the army of the Po-wang Hou [i.e., Chang Ch’ien] also arrived [on the scene], the Hsiung-nu army dispersed and left. The Han army was disbanded and could not pursue them. At that time, Kuang’s army had been almost annihilated, it was disbanded and returned home. According to Han law, the Po-wang Hou’s dawdling behind and missing a rendezvous should have 88

Tso-hsien-wang 左賢王. The hierarchy of the Hsiung-nu nobility is sketched on Shih chi, 110.2890, and Han shu, 94A.3751. According to this explanation the Wise King of the Left, i.e., the East, was the title regularly given to the Shan-yü’s Heir. For variants of the title, see ibid. and Han shu, 94B.3827. For a short English summary of the Hsiung-nu nobles’ hierarchy, see Kurakichi Shiratori, “On the Territory of the Hsiung-nu Prince Hsiu-t’u Wang and His Metal Statues for Heaven-worship,” in Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko (The Oriental Library) 5.1930:4-5; and Nicola Di Cosmo, Ancient China and Its Enemies. The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 176-8 with further bibliographic references. 89 Tu 獨, taken here not in its usual sense of “alone,” since “Kan alone with several tens of horsemen” would sound contradictory in English. The import of the Chinese sentence, however, seems to be that Kan, although accompanied by an escort, was “on his own” as a leading officer. The graphs tu yü 獨與 are lacking on Han shu 54.2445. 90 Yü 與 in the sense of “to deal with” is seen several times in similar contexts, as, e.g., on Shih chi, 7.325; 34.1560; 92.2621. The latter is glossed in Han-yü ta-tz’u-tien 漢語大辭典 (2:159) as tui-fu 對付.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

220

warranted the death [penalty], [but] he paid redemption and was made a commoner. For Kuang’s military merit, as always, 91 there were no rewards. Earlier, Kuang’s maternal cousin Li Ts’ai 李蔡 had together with Kuang served Wen-ti. 92 By the time of Ching-ti (r. 156-141 B.C.), Ts’ai had accumulated [enough] merit and service 93 to have reached [a position with a nominal income of] two thousand shih. By the time of Wu-ti (140-87 B.C.), [Ts’ai] had reached [the position of] Prime Minister of Tai 代.94 In the fifth year of yüan-shuo (124 B.C.), he had become General of Light Chariots, following the General-in-chief in an attack on the [Hsiung-nu] Wise King of the Right. [Ts’ai] having gained merit of a middle degree,95 had been enfeoffed as Marquis of Lo-an 樂安.96 During the second year of yüan-shou (121 B.C.), [Ts’ai] replaced Kung-sun Hung as Chancellor.97 Ts’ai was a man of the second worst category.98 His fame 91

Kung tzu ju 功自如, for which the Han shu (54.2445) has tzu tang 自當 (without kung!). The T’ang commentator Yen Shih-ku explained this to the effect that Kuang’s merits and failures equaled each other. Most modern scholars beginning with Wang Nien-sun 王念孫 (1744-1832) as quoted by Wang Shu-min (9.2956) agree and argue that the Shih chi, too, should read tzu tang 自當. No one has commented upon the fact that the Han shu also lacks the kung. Since neither the Shih chi nor the Han shu spells out the two elements (merits and failures) that could have “equaled each other,” a literal translation would have to read, “Kuang’s military merits equaled each other” (Shih chi) or “Kuang’s troops equaled each other” (Han shu). Both is nonsensical, of course. For kung, see also the next note below. 92 The Han shu, 54.2446, specifies, “. . . together became gentlemen (lang 郎) serving Wen-ti.” 93 Kung lao 功勞, two criteria that were decisive for the promotion of officials, the first often representing individual feats of excellence, the second simply the duration of service, although some feats, like proficiency in archery could also translate into an improved lao count. See Michael Loewe, Records of Han Administration (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), vol. 2:169; see also n. 95 below. The Han shu (54.2446) parallel writes only kung. 94 The Han shu, 54.2446, lacks this information. Much later, in 114 B.C., the Kingdom of Tai was made a commandery in which Li Kuang came to serve as Grand Administrator. 95 The “So-yin” reads chung 中 in the fourth tone, i.e., in the verbal sense. On the other hand, the sentence is reminiscent of the terms shang kung 上功, “merit of highest degree,” chung kung 中 功, “merit of middle degree,” and hsia kung 下功, “merit of lowest degree,” seen in the wood strips from Edsen-gol; see Loewe, Records, vol. 2, p. 176. 96 Located about twenty-five miles north of modern Tzu-po 淄博 city, Shantung (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:20). 97 Kung-sun Hung was one of the few Chancellors who died in office; see Shih chi 22.1138. 98 This categorization refers to one of the nine grades of human characters that are preserved in Han shu 20, “Ku-chin jen-piao” 古今人表 (Table of Persons of Antiquity and the Present).

General Li, Memoir 49

221

and reputation ranked by far lower than Kuang’s, yet Kuang did not obtain a noble title and a fief. While Kuang’s position did not surpass [that of one of] the Nine Ministers, Ts’ai became a Ranking Marquis and reached the rank of [one of] the Three Excellencies. [Even] among Kuang’s army officials as well as his officers and men there were some who received ennoblement as Marquis. Once, when Kuang was chatting with the Observer of Air Currents, Wang Shuo 王朔, he said: “Since the Han [began to] attack the Hsiung-nu [*2874*], I have never once not been in the midst of it.99 Yet among those [ranking as] Colonels of the divisions and below, whose talents and abilities do not [even] reach the average man,100 but who received a noble title on account of merit gained while attacking the Hsiung-nu, there are several dozen people. I was not behind others, but I have not a tiny bit of merit to obtain nobility and a fief manor. Why is that? Could it really be that my visage is not fit for a marquis? Or is it that my fate is really fixed?”101 [Wang] Shuo said: “Think back, General: Is there something that you once regretted [doing]?” Kuang said: “When I once was Grand Administrator of Lung-hsi and the Tibetans rebelled, I lured them into surrender. Those who had surrendered were more than eight hundred men. I deceived them and had them killed the same day. So far, what I deeply regret is only this.” Shuo said: “There is no greater misdeed than killing those who already surrendered. This is the reason why you have not obtained a marquisate.” Two years later (119 B.C.),102 the General-in-chief and the General of Agile Cavalry103 set out with a great force to attack the Hsiung-nu. Kuang personally asked several times to go along. The Son of Heaven thought Kuang too old and did not give his consent. After a good while, he did give his consent, making him [Kuang] General of the Van. That year was the fourth year of yüan-shou (119 B.C.).104 99

“It” either refers to the military campaigns against the Hsiung-nu or, by extension, to the instances of mass promotions on account of military merits gained during those campaigns. 100 Again, this probably refers to a formal category or group of categories of human character, see note 98 above. In the “Ku-chin jen-piao” there are three different categories of “middle” or “average” characters. The Han shu, 54.2446, merely writes chung 中, “the average,” which Yen Shih-ku explains as “mean and ordinary,” chung-yung 中庸. 101 The last sentence lacks on Han shu 54.2446. 102 Here, the Han shu (54.2447) is more specific and writes, “In the fourth year of yüan-shou.” 103 At the time, these were the General-in-chief Wei Ch’ing 衛青 at the top of the military establishment, and the General of Agile Cavalry, Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病; see Han shu 19B.774-5 and their joined biography in Shih chi Chapter 111. 104 This last sentence is lacking on Han shu 54.2447.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

222

Kuang was already in the following of the General-in-chief [Wei] Ch’ing 衛 青 campaigning against the Hsiung-nu and they had already gone out through the barrier,105 when [Wei] Ch’ing captured a caitiff and learned of the Shan-yü’s whereabouts. Thereupon, [Wei Ch’ing] himself chased him with his elite troops, while ordering Kuang to unite with the army of the General of the Right106 and to set off on an eastern route. The eastern route was somewhat circuitous and long, and for a large army travelling on it water and pasture were insufficient; the topography there did not [allow for] travelling in army units.107 Kuang requested personally: “My position was that of the General of the Van. Now, the Generalin-chief has108 just moved and ordered me to set off on the eastern route. But I have fought with the Hsiung-nu since I tied up my hair,109 and only now have I first been able to come face to face with the Shan-yü. I wish to be at the front and [be the] first to die for [catching]110 the Shan-yü.” The General-in-chief [Wei] Ch’ing also secretly received a warning from the Sovereign [in which the latter] considered Li Kuang to be [too] old and have [too] often been unlucky.111 [The Emperor] ordered [Wei Ch’ing] not to let [Li Kuang] face the Shan-yü. 105

On Han shu, 54.2447, this sentence takes a different subject and simply begins with, “When the General-in-chief went out through the barrier, he . . . .” 106 According to a commentary by Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”), this was Chao Yi-chi 趙食其; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 715. 107 T’un 屯 means either an army camp or an army unit such as would be encamped together. Considering the context, the understanding must have been that of a rather large unit, like a company (Hucker’s translation), rather not like a platoon (Bielenstein’s translation). 108 The text at this point is not really conclusive as to who Li Kuang is actually addressing. Ta chiang-chün 大 將 軍 could also be a form of direct address: “Now, General(-in-chief), you have . . . .” However, it is assumed that Li Kuang is shown here pledging for his cause directly to the Emperor because the text below not only describes Wei Ch’ing “also” communicating with— that is, receiving instructions from—the Emperor, but also a later argument between Li Kuang and Wei Ch’ing that would not have been probable had the two men exchanged arguments before. Li Kuang protesting against an order of his direct superior first not directly with him but with the Emperor emphasizes the mutual distrust that obviously characterized the relationship of the two men. 109 Chieh fa 結髮; a common reference to a rite de passage, namely that of boys entering adulthood, also called “capping” (kuan 冠), probably conducted around the age of twenty (Ch’ü, T’ung-tsu, Han Social Structure [Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1972], p. 449, n. 246. 110 Ssu 死 with a direct object means “to die for (someone or a cause),” as in the Tso chuan story of Shih-mi Ming 提彌明 who died for his master; cf. Yang, Tso, Hsüan 2, p. 660. In this case, the cause that Li Kuang was willing to die for would have been either the capture or the killing of the Shan-yü. 111 In the Han shu (54.2448), the advanced age of Li Kuang is not mentioned as a problem.

General Li, Memoir 49

223

[Otherwise, he] feared that they would not attain what they wanted. At that time, Kung-sun Ao 公 孫 敖 had newly lost [his] nobility and was following the General-in-chief as General of the Center. The General-in-chief, too, wanted to let [Kung-sun] Ao take part in jointly facing the Shan-yü. For this reason he [Wei Ch’ing] moved [Li] Kuang, the General of the Van.112 In time, Kuang learned [*2875*] of this113 and firmly and personally explained himself to the General-inchief.114 The General-in-chief did not listen and ordered the chief clerk to seal a document and together with Kuang to go to the Headquarters, saying:115 “Quickly go to your position as [ordered in] the document!” Kuang broke [camp] and went off without paying his respects to the General-in-chief. Boiling with rage, he headed for his position, led his troops to join forces with the General of the Right, [Chao] Yi-chi, and set off on the eastern route. The armies lost their guides or116 missed the route and fell behind the General-in-chief. The General112

Since Li Kuang continues to be called “General of the Van” in the text below, he does not seem to have been “removed” from this position nominally, as Watson (Han, 2:125) has it. Factually, however, it is clear that he was no longer to be in the vanguard of the campaign against the Shan-yü. 113 “This” certainly means the motives of Wei Ch’ing as regards Kung-sun Ao, since the news of his, Li Kuang’s, being moved away from the vanguard had already reached him before and he had already complained about this in front of the emperor, if the narrative here is in chronological order. 114 The Han shu (54.2448) does not have tzu 自, “personally,” and yü ta-chiang-chün 於大將 軍, “to the General-in-chief.” 115 This translation follows Yen Shih-ku who holds that chih 之 is a verb here and mu-fu 莫府 means Wei Ch’ing’s field headquarters (hsing-chün fu 行軍府). Wu and Lu (109.2845) have also followed this. Most other translators have adhered to another understanding that could be rendered: “The General-in-chief did not listen and ordered the chief clerk to [write and] seal a letter and deliver it to Kuang’s Headquarters [the letter] saying: . . . ,” with the following sentence being the contents or part of the contents of the letter. In the version adopted above, the contents of the letter or document (shu 書) are considered unknown, but certainly specified Li Kuang’s marching orders for the upcoming campaign. Note that Kuang chih mu-fu 廣 之 幕 府 , “Kuang went to the headquarters,” occurs again later on in the text, when Kuang is ordered to provide an explanation for his having lost his way. 116 Huo 或 has been taken by most translators as huo 惑 (as on Han shu, 54.2448, where this character is the first of the sentence, “the armies lost their guides” missing altogether). In this case, the Shih chi translation would read, “The armies lost their guides and, being disoriented, missed the route ....” Although it would seem attractive to take huo-shih 惑失 as a compound verb, “to miss,” and translate, “the armies lost their guides and [therefore] missed the route” (as the “So-yin” implies), such a compound is hard to find in contemporary sources (an exception being Sung shih 宋史 149.3491, which is too late to be of value). Rather, the usual combination that is frequently

224

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

in-chief met in battle with the Shan-yü. When the Shan-yü took flight, he [the General-in-chief] returned having been unable to get hold of him. He moved south and crossed the desert and happened upon the General of the Van and the General of the Right. Kuang had already seen the General-in-chief, turned and went back to his army. The General-in-chief sent a senior clerk to take dried rations and unstrained wine and give them to Kuang, taking the opportunity to ask Kuang and [Chao] Yi-chi how they lost their way. [This was because Wei] Ch’ing wanted to submit a letter and report to the Son of Heaven about the armies’ deviations.117 When Kuang did not answer, the General-in-chief sent a senior clerk who urged Kuang emphatically to go to the headquarters and provide a response for the record. Kuang said: “My lieutenants are not guilty. I alone lost the way. I am now going to submit a record myself.” [2876] When he arrived at the headquarters, Kuang said to his subordinates: “Since I tied up my hair I have fought with the Hsiung-nu in over seventy battles and skirmishes. Now, I have been fortunate enough to follow the General-inchief setting out to cross weapons with the Shan-yü, but the General-in-chief not only moved my position so as to travel a long way around, but I also went astray and lost my way. How could this not be [the workings of] heaven? I am now over sixty years old—in the end I cannot stand up to those petty clerks118 any more.” With this, he took his knife and cut his throat. The leading officers119 in Kuang’s army all wept in unison.120 When the people heard of this, whether they had known him or not and regardless of [their] age, they all shed tears for him. As to

found is mi-huo shih tao 迷惑失道, “being deluded and lost the way,” (as on Han shu 7.227) or ... shih yi 失意, “... and lost their senses,” (as in the Lieh-nü-chuan 列女傳, cited on Shih chi 36.1579n1). What is more, when Li Kuang is asked how he “lost his way” further below in the text the expression used invariably is shih tao and not huo-shih tao. 117 This sentence is marked with yue 曰 as direct speech on Han shu, 54.2448. 118 Tao-pi chih li 刀筆之吏, literally “clerks of the knives and brushes” or “clerks with scraper and brush.” Since brushes and little knives were the usual tools to write and erase writing, these clerks must be seen as the ancient equivalent to the modern pencil pushers, nitpicking functionaries whose name might even had a menacing touch to it, because on behalf of their files and recording duties they almost naturally gained inquisitorial power. This is also evidenced by the fact that in a number of contexts, as for example in hsia li 下吏 in the same paragraph below, li effectively takes on the meaning of “judicial official.” 119 Shih ta-fu 士大夫, usually a term that implies a certain moral and intellectual standing, but here probably those who because of their rank were in a position to witness or be the first to hear about the incident. 120 This sentence is lacking on Han shu 54.2449.

General Li, Memoir 49

225

the General of the Right, he alone was handed over to the judicial officials and warranted the death penalty, but paid redemption and was made a commoner. Kuang’s three sons were named Tang-hu 當戶,121 Chiao 椒, and Kan 敢. They became gentlemen.122 When the Son of Heaven and Han Yen 韓嫣 sported together and Yen became slightly unrestrained, Tang-hu struck him and Yen fled. At this the Son of Heaven considered him [Tang-hu] brave.123 Tang-hu died early and Chiao was appointed Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery. Both died before Kuang. Tang-hu left a posthumous son named Ling 陵.124 By the time Kuang died in the army, Kan was following the General of Agile Cavalry. In the year following Kuang’s death (118 B.C.), Li Ts’ai as Chancellor was tried for encroaching upon unoccupied land in the park of Hsiao Ching[-ti’s mausoleum],125 for which he was warranted being handed over to the judicial officials to be dealt with. Ts’ai, too, killed himself and would not face the prison officials. His fief was abolished.126 Li Kan followed the General of Agile Cavalry as Colonel attacking the Hu Wise King to the Left. 127 He battled vigorously, snatched the Wise King to the Left’s drums and flags, and the heads that he took were many. He was granted the rank of nobility of Marquis within the Passes128 121

Note that this is the Chinese transcription of a Hsiung-nu noble title; see Shih chi, 110.2890, and note 156 in the translation below. Does this mean that his mother was a Hsiung-nu or that he had other affiliations with the Hsiung-nu nation? This would perhaps shed a different light on the later actions of his son, Ling, for which see below. 122 Láng 郎; this was a “generic term for court attendants from various sources . . . all regular participants in court audiences and used as door guards, ushers, etc., but principally constituted a pool of qualified men available for appointments when vacancies occurred or special needs arose. Differentiated into 3 salary ranks” (Hucker, Dictionary, no. 3563). 123 Yung 勇, the Han shu, 54.2449, writes neng 能, “able.” 124 This sentence is found in the parallel version of the Han shu not in the paragraph about Li Tang-hu, but only later on, in the paragraph about Li Kan’s children, before the text launches into the description of Li Ling’s life and actions (Han shu, 54.2450). 125 The “Cheng-yi” informs us that Li Ts’ai was granted a plot of twenty mu 畝 (more than nine thousand m2 or 2.278 English acres) to erect his own tomb near Ching-ti’s mausoleum complex, called Yang-ling 陽陵. He actually appropriated three ch’ing 頃 (more than 137.000 m2 or 34.17 acres) and sold it for over 400.000 cash. For his own last resting place, it is said, he illegally took one mu (c. 457 m2 or 0.1139 acres) of unoccupied land (juan-ti 壖地) near the funeral alley (shen-tao 神道) leading up to the imperial mausoleum. 126 This information and Li Ts’ai’s unwillingness to face the prison officials are not seen on Han shu, 54.2449. 127 I.e., the Hsiung-nu’s Crown Prince; see n. 88 above. 128 This was the second-highest of twenty ranks of nobility.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

226

with a fief manor of two hundred households, and he replaced [his father] Kuang as Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-palace. After a short time, resenting that the General-in-chief [Wei] Ch’ing hated his [Li Kan’s] father, he assaulted and wounded the General-in-chief. The General-in-chief concealed and did not speak about it. Not long thereafter, Kan went from the upper129 Yung 雍 to the [Park of the] Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 Palace (Palace of Sweet Springs) to hunt. The General of Agile Cavalry, [Huo] Ch’ü-ping and [Wei] Ch’ing were related to each other.130 [He] shot and killed Kan. Ch’ü-ping were just at that time held in high esteem and favor [by the emperor]. The Sovereign did not speak of it [what really happened], saying that a deer had run into and killed him [Kan]. More than a year later (117 B.C.), [Huo] Ch’ü-ping died. As to Kan[‘s family], he had a daughter who was a harem member131 of the Heir. She was favored with love [by the Heir]. Kan’s son Yü 禹 had the favor of the Heir, but he was fond of profit.132 The Li clan was in serious decline.133

129

This translation follows the commentary that explains shang by saying that Yung was situated in an upper or elevated position. However, the commentary could also be interpreted as commenting upon the fact that Kan “went up to” (shang) Yung, but then the preceding ts’ung 從 would have to be interpreted as a verb (“to follow someone”) and would lack an object (e.g. following the General-in-chief or the Emperor). If shang is interpreted as the object (“(he) followed the Sovereign”) the sentence would lack a verb before Yung. It would not seem improbable that the text is actually defective at this point, originally reading 上 ＝ (shang + reduplication mark, i.e. shang shang). If so, the translation would read: “... Kan followed the Sovereign going up to Yung (and on to) the palace . . . .” This speaks in favor of the fact that the Emperor was presumably the only one who was allowed to hunt (with entourage, of course) at the imperial summer retreat. Also, in a standard dictionary the earliest gloss of ts’ung in the sense of “from” is from the Han shu, i.e. two centuries later than the Shih chi. Finally, the emperor seems to have been an eye-witness to the murder that is described below. 130 Huo Ch’ü-ping was Wei Ch’ing’s nephew, i.e., he was the son of Wei Ch’ing’s elder full sister. Shao-erh 少兒. This and the general usage of yu ch’in 有親 is explained by Wu and Lu, p. 2840, n. 14. Interestingly, the Han shu (54.2450) parallel cites as Huo Ch’ü-ping’s motive not his relationship with Wei Ch’ing, but the fact that he resented Li Kan’s wounding Wei Ch’ing. 131 Chung-jen 中人, literally, “someone from inside” or “someone from the palace.” 132 After this, the Han shu (54.2450) starts to diverge from the Shih chi giving more information about Kan before entering into Li Ling’s biography, which is also much more elaborate than that in the Shih chi. 133 Ling ch’ih shuai wei 陵遲衰微; an expression that as such as well as in each of its constituents signifies degeneration, also seen on Shih chi, 30.1442.

General Li, Memoir 49

227

[2877] When Li Ling 李陵 had already reached manhood,134 he was chosen to become Inspector of the Chien-chang 建章 Palace (Palace of Established Brilliance) supervising the horsemen. He was good at shooting135 and loved his officers and soldiers. The Son of Heaven, considering that the Li clan had held military commands for generations, let [Ling] command eight hundred horsemen. Once he deeply entered into Hsiung-nu [territory] for more than two thousand li. When he passed Chü-yen 居延,136 he observed the topography. There was no caitiff that he saw, so he returned. He was appointed Chief Commandant of Cavalry, leading five thousand men of Ch’u 楚 from Tan-yang 丹陽.137 He taught [them] shooting at Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉 and Chang-yeh 張掖 in order to station them to guard against the Hu. Several years [passed].138 in the autumn of the second year of T’ien-han 天漢 (99 B.C.), the Erh-shih 貳師 (Sutrishna)139 General Li Kuang-li 李廣利 led thirty thousand horsemen in an attack on the Hsiung-nu Wise King of the Right at the Mounts Ch’i-lien 祁連 and T’ien 天 (Altai). 140 Whereupon, he let [Li] Ling command his five thousand crossbow soldiers and infantry and went out through Chü-yen, heading north for about thousand li.141 With this, they wanted to split the Hsiung-nu troops and not let them concentrate on going after the Erh-shih 134

The Han shu, 54.2450, instead gives Li Ling’s agnomen, Shao-ch’ing 少卿. The Han shu, 54.2450, adds ch’i 騎, “... from horseback,” but does not have chien chu-ch’i 監諸騎, “supervising the horsemen,” which immediately precedes the description of Li Ling’s skills in the Shih chi–a textual corruption? 136 Located about two hundred miles north of modern Chang-yeh city, Kansu (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:34). 137 Located about seventy-five miles south of modern Nanking; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:24. 138 The Han shu, 54.2451, inserts two more lines of information about the first campaign against Ta-yüan 大宛 (Ferghana), in which Li Ling already participated under the command of Li Kuang-li. The following campaign against the Hsiung-nu King is then told in much more detail in the Han shu, 54.2452-5. 139 This was reported to be the place where the people of Ferghana raised their famous horses, that were the objective of Li Kuang-li’s campaign. The place name hence was used for the official title of the military leader of that campaign; see Michael Loewe, Dictionary, p. 221. For earlier identifications of Erh-shih with Teratépé or Osh, see Erwin von Zach, “Einige Verbesserung zu de Groot, Die Hunnen der vorchristlichen Zeit,” AM 1 (1924), p. 128-9. 140 The Han shu, 54.2451, has but T’ien-shan 天山, the Altai mountain range. It also states that the campaign set off from Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉. 141 According to the Han shu, 54.2451, they travelled for thirty days. 135

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

228

[General]. After Ling had arrived at the destination, he turned back.142 But the Shan-yü besieged and attacked Ling’s army with eighty thousand troops. 143 Ling’s army [consisted of] five thousand men; the troops’ arrows144 were already used up. The death toll among the men surpassed one half, while those of the Hsiung-nu who were killed or wounded were also more than ten thousand. Now withdrawing, now battling, they struggled continuously for eight days. When on the way back they were still more than hundred li away from Chü-yen, the Hsiung-nu blocked them at a narrow place and cut off the way. Ling’s food supplies were exhausted and relief troops did not [*2878*] arrive. The caitiffs attacked fiercely and called on Ling to surrender. Ling said [to himself], “I could never face His Majesty to report back.” Consequently, he surrendered to the Hsiung-nu. His troops completely vanished; the survivors who fled in all directions and were able to return to the Han were four hundred some men. When the Shan-yü had captured Ling—having heard since long about his family’s reputation and also [because] he had fought manly—he gave Ling his daughter as a wife and held him in esteem. When the Han heard of this, they wiped out Ling’s mother, wife and children. From this time on, the name of the Li clan was ruined and those men from Lung-hsi [Commandery] who had lived under its protection all were ashamed about it. His Honor the Grand Scribe says: The tradition says: 145 “If someone is upright, he will carry on without an order. If someone is not upright, even if ordered, he will not follow.” 146 Is this what describes General Li? 147 I view

142

The Han shu, 54.2451, specifies, “... arrived at Mount Chün-chi 浚稽.” This place is located slightly more than five hundred miles northwest of modern Yin-ch’uan city, Ning-hsia Autonomous Region; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39. 143 The Han shu, 54.2452, speaks of thirty thousand Hsiung-nu troops who surrounded Ling’s army. 144 Shih 矢, probably mostly crossbow bolts than long arrows, because crossbows were the regular equipment of Han infantry. 145 Chuan yüeh 傳曰; whereas in later times and today chuan usually means the commentaries to the Ch’un-ch’iu 春秋, especially the Tso-chuan 左傳, here and in other early sources the term is used in reference to any philosophical text or saying outside the Five Canonical Scriptures, wuching 五經 (Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琦, Shih chi p’ing-chu pen 史記評注本 [Ch’ang-sha, 2004], p. 1479). 146 This sentence is found in Lun-yü 13.6.

General Li, Memoir 49

229

General Li as having been simpleminded as a rustic, his mouth not being able to formulate statements. [But] when it came to the day of his death, everyone in the empire, whether he had known him or not, felt utter grief. Was that [because] his sincerity and the honesty of his heart were more trustworthy than [those of] the leading men?148 A proverb goes: “Peaches and plums do not speak, [but] beneath them a path comes about.” This saying, though insignificant [in its literal sense], can be used to illustrate a larger point.149 *

*

*

*

*

[130.3316] If one is courageous in coming face to face with the enemy, humanely takes care of officers and men, not troubling [them] by proclaiming [too many] orders, the crowd of the armed forces will turn towards him. Thus I made the “Memoir on General Li, Number Forty-nine.”

147

This does not necessarily have to be a question, but the possibly negative implication of the preceding citation as well as the following judgment emphasizing the subjective opinion of Ssuma Ch’ien would seem to favor this solution. 148 Here, probably denoting the politically active and influential class of officials; cf. n. 119 above. 149 As Yen Shih-ku in the commentary to the largely identical text on Han shu 54.2469 explains, this metaphor means that if one develops sincerity and trustworthiness, others will spontaneously gather around oneself, just like the people gather around trees that have developed beautiful blossoms and tasty peaches and plums. In both cases it is not necessary to call somebody to come. The saying as such is not used any more, but it may be compared to the saying t’ao li man men 桃李滿門, “peaches and plums all around the house,” meaning that someone has a large following. Here, the “peaches and plums” are usually taken as metaphor for the disciples (Miao T’ien-hua 繆天華, gen. ed., Tseng-bien ch’eng-yü tien 增編成語典 [Taipei: Fu-hsing shu-jü, 1989], p.676), but it seems not impossible to interprete this differently in light of this Shih chi reference that indicates that there is a direct relationship between a virtuous conduct and a large following.

Translator’s Note This “Memoir on General Li” heads the triplet of chapters that in their entirety convey information on the Hsiung-nu. However, it is not the actual turning point at which the Shih chi narrative enters into the theme of foreign relations, especially those with the Hsiung-nu. This role is rather played by the latter half of the preceding biography of Han An-kuo 韓安國, starting on Shih chi 108.2861. Nevertheless, at first glance the sequence of the three core chapters, Shih chi 109 to 111 (those on Li Kuang; the Hsiung-nu; and the Generals Wei Ch’ing 衛青 and Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病), in which the theme of the Hsiung-nu pervades, as well as the internal structure of the “Memoir on General Li,” all seem significant in light of the fact that Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s personal fate was intricately connected with the Li family and their adventures and dealings with the Hsiung-nu. After all, Li Ling, the defense of whose actions had cost Ssu-ma Ch’ien his manhood, was Li Kuang’s grandson. A brief, sympathetic account of his story–as well as that of Li Kuang’s sons, in particular Li Kan, who continued his father’s opposition to Wei Ch’ing and was ambushed and slain by Huo Ch’ü-ping–is appended150 to this Memoir on “General Li,” as he is adoringly referred to. But it would be wrong to suspect that Li Ling is the actual hero of this chapter or to interpret the chapter itself as a self-righteous attempt of Ssu-ma Ch’ien to redeem himself in history. This is because this same account of Li Ling’s campaigns and surrender to the Hsiung-nu is found in the Han shu, also appended to a biography of Li Kuang.151 What is more, the Han shu account is even more elaborate and sympathetic to Li Ling. Here, we are told in detail how Li Ling asked the Emperor for an army of his own in order to support the Erh-shih General’s campaign against the Hsiung-nu. Since the older General Lu Po-te resented having to accompany the young commander Li Ling on this campaign, he petitioned to postpone the campaign. The Emperor, mistakenly thinking that Li Ling was behind this because he might have had second thoughts, was enraged and ordered Li Ling to immediately and 150 151

On Shih chi 109.2876-78. On Han shu 54.2450-9.

231

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 109

232

directly attack the Shan-yü’s position, dictating him to another marching route that did not match with that proposed by Li Ling earlier. Li Ling complied, but on this new route met with the disaster that is also roughly sketched in the Shih chi. The Han shu has an elaborate account on the prolonged battle that ensued between Li Ling’s five thousand and the Shan-yü’s eighty thousand fighters. Time and again, Li Ling is shown as ably and successfully fighting back the Hsiung-nu and inflicting great casualties, so much so, that the Shan-yü even came to suspect a trap and was on the verge of retreating. Only when a traitor from among the Han informed the Shan-yü about the real situation, did he renew his attacks encircling Li Ling and his troops in a valley with the Hsiung-nu on the slopes all around them. When in this desperate situation his men pressed Li Ling to surrender, he still tried to fight his way through and gave up only after his last remaining colonel had fallen. Even in captivity, he kept a certain distance to the Hsiung-nu, at least as compared to other Han defectors. Yet, the Han court not only severely punished Ssu-ma Ch’ien who was the only one daring to come out in defense of Li Ling when all the other courtiers, sensing the Emperor’s initial rage, were quick to condemn Li Ling. Later, the emperor–after having regretted his hot-headed first decision–again acted on mere rumors that later turned out to be false, and had Li Ling’s whole family exterminated. This eventually led to Li Ling’s refusal to come back, despite several overtures and a clear indication that deep inside he longed to go back to the land of his ancestors. Ssu-ma Ch’ien himself could not have written up a better apology for Li Ling (actually, his moving court speech on behalf of Li Ling is also given in the Han shu) and at the same time showing Emperor Wu’s decisions in a worse light than in this account. But this was Pan Ku’s book, or, at least, it is universally recognised as the product of an author whose loyalty to the imperial house and whose critical attitude against Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s historical evaluations are taken for granted. If this is so, then there is certainly no basis for claiming that the “Memoir on General Li” in the Shih chi is a subversive piece of prose in order to redeem Ssu-ma Ch’ien. The Han shu account goes to much greater lengths to accomplish this.152 That does not mean that the chapter cannot be interpreted as 152

As regards the relationship between these two sources, see the translator’s note on the “Memoir on the Hsiung-nu.” The same arguments in favor of the Shih chi being the earlier, if less elegant, version of the text, apply here. Suffice it to give here one example: It is hard to conceive that someone would have changed such a straightforward and simple phrase as “Kuang and his maternal cousin Li Ts’ai” 廣與從弟李蔡 on Han shu 54.2446 into such a long-winded and ugly form as “Kuang’s maternal cousin Li Ts’ai together with Kuang” 廣之從弟李蔡與廣 as on Shih chi 109.2873. Rather, the former cannot but be a later smoothening of the latter.

General Li, Memoir 49

233

veiled criticism against Emperor Wu. The point is that, contrary to what one could expect, Li Ling, who played such a big role in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s own life, is not needed as a vehicle to convey such a criticism. The life and fate of Li Kuang– which, by the way, shows not a few parallels to the life and fate of his grandson– fully suffices to function as such a vehicle. Now, having established that the “Memoir on General Li” is indeed about Li Kuang in the first place–and not about his descendants, who play but a secondary role–there still remains the question of what motivated it. Here, it might be instructive to compare the brief explanations to the chapters 107 through 109 that are given in the Grand Scribe’s epilogue.153 What emerges here as a motivating topic is “leadership qualities.” All four persons whose lives are presented here—Tou Ying 竇嬰, T’ien Fen 田蚡, Han An-kuo, and Li Kuang—could, albeit with very different methods or for different reasons, make the “men” (shih 士) or “the crowd of the armed forces” (shih-t’u 師徒) “turn towards them” (hsiang chih 鄉之) or “attract others” (te jen 得人) to their cause. The armed conflict with the Hsiung-nu or the rebels from Wu and Ch’u, who play a role in chapter 107, are just the backdrop in front of which these leadership qualities are played out. Chapters 110 and 111 on the Hsiung-nu and on Wei Ch’ing and Huo Ch’ü-ping on the other hand are explicitly written to inform about the history of the Hsiung-nu themselves and the Han’s dealings with them. It is this blending together textual elements on different levels of content and significance to form an intricately interconnected running narrative that accounts for the literary quality of the Shih chi. Here, in this string of chapters, it is seen at its best.

153

Shih chi 130.3316.

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:365-403. De Groot, J.J.M. Die Hunnen der vorchristlichen Zeit. Chinesische Urkunden zur Geschichte Asiens 1. Berlin, Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, 1921, pp. 93-5, 105, 130-1, 141-3; this work translates into German only those parts of the biography of Li Kuang that directly concern the Hsiung-nu. See also the review by von Zach in AM 1 (1924), pp. 125-33. Ogawa Tamaki 小川環樹 et al. Shiki retsuden 4 史記列傳. Tokyo: Iwanami bunko, 1975, pp. 7-24. Viatkin, 8:311-22, notes 437-40. Watson, Han, 2:117-28. II. Studies Chang Ta-k’o 張大可. Shih chi hsüan-chu chiang 史記選注講. 2 vols. Chi-nan: Shantung Chiao-yü, 1989, pp. 806-28. Ch’en Chih 陳直. Shih chi hsin-cheng 史記新證. Tientsin: Tientsin Jen-min, 1979, pp. 167-8 Han Chao-ch’i 韓兆琦. Shih chi hsüan-chu chi-shuo 史記選注集說. Nanch’ang: Chiang-hsi Jen-min, 1982, pp. 389-403. ___. Shih chi p’ing-chu pen 史記評注本. 2 vols. Ch’ang-sha: Yue Lu, 2004, pp. 1470-9.

235

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 501 translated by Enno Giele [110.2879] As for the Hsiung-nu,2 their progenitor3 was a descendant of the lineage of the rulers of Hsia 夏, called Ch’un-wei 淳維.4 During the times of 1

The “Cheng-yi” remarks that according to some editions, this memoir is the fifty-second, following those of General Wei Ch’ing, Kung-sun Hung, and Chu-fu Yen and preceding those on the other “barbarian” peoples, beginning with the Memoir on the Southern Yüeh (no. 53). 2 For a recent overview of the century-old discussion about the ethnic identity of the Hsiungnu–especially as regards a possible connection between the Hsiung-nu and the Huns who appeared some two hundred years later in the European theatre–see Nicola Di Cosmo, Ancient China and Its Enemies. The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 163-6; and J. Otto Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), pp. 367-75, who draws predominantly on palaeoanthropological evidence. See also n. 4. 3 Hsien-tsu 先祖, the parallel text on Han shu, 94A.3743, has only hsien, “ancestor.” 4 Though it might be possible to translate this as something like “genuine connection,” it is probably just a transliteration of a foreign name. The “So-yin” cites several sources in support of the idea that this Ch’un-wei might have been identical with Hsün-yü 獯粥 (also written 獯鬻), the son of Chieh 桀, the last king of the Hsia 夏 Dynasty. According to the K’uo-ti-p’u 括地譜 of Yüeh (or Lo) Ch’an 樂產 (8th c. or earlier), Hsün-yü had fled north after his father had been defeated and killed. He married his father’s wives and moved around with his livestock. In China, he or his tribe–the commentary here does not seem to distinguish between the individual and his followers or offspring–was called Hsiung-nu. This identification of Hsün-yü with Hsiung-nu is also reported by Ying Shao 應劭 in his Feng-su-t’ung 風俗通. Fu Ch’ien 服虔 (fl. 125-95 B.C.) and Chin Cho 晉灼, on the other hand, claim that the Hsiung-nu of Ch’in 秦 times were identical with the Hsien-yün 獫 狁 of Chou 周 times and with the Hun-yü 葷粥 of the times of Emperor Yao 堯. This is in fact similar to the following statement in this memoir. Since Yao was believed to have reigned before the Hsia Dynasty came to power, both statements actually contradict the notion, that the Hsiung-nu originated from a descendant of the Hsia after their downfall, while Wei Chao’s 韋昭 (d. A.D. 273) remark that Hun-yü was but a variant of what the Chinese of Han 漢 times called Hsiung-nu, is neutral in this respect. Perhaps, one should understand the first sentence here in political rather than in ethnographic terms. That is, the people that since most ancient times existed and went by names like Hun-yü at some point in time came to be ruled by a descendant of the Hsia who installed some kind of system that the later Hsiung-nu recognized as foundational. It is also quite possible, of

237

238

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

T’ang 唐 and Yü 虞5 and before, there were the Mountain Jung 戎, the Hsien-yün 獫狁, and the Hun-yü 葷粥 6 living in the unruly regions of the North 7 and circling about by following the livestock’s pasturing.8 Their livestock which are more numerous are horses, cattle, and sheep.9 As for the unusual livestock, there are camels, donkeys, mules, hinnies,10 wild horses,11 and wild asses.12 They move course, that this first sentence is but a rather unveiled attempt at securely positioning the foreign Hsiung-nu within the Chinese historical world-view, and at the same time providing a good reason for their being subordinate to the ruling house of Han in the same way that the descendants of the Shang 商 dynasty were thought to be subordinate to the Chou and their political heirs, the Han. The semantics of the various names for the Hsiung-nu and the implications of their graphical realizations have been variously discussed by a great number of scholars since early times. For a brief, cautious account, see Edwin G. Pulleyblank, “The Chinese and Their Neighbors in Prehistoric and Early Historic Times,” in David N. Keightley, ed., The Origins of Chinese Civilization (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1983), pp. 449-52. 5 That is, the mythical ruler Yao 堯 and his successor, Shun 舜. 6 Han shu, 94A.3743, has Hsün-yü 薰粥. For a similar name, see n. 188 below. 7 Pei Man 北蠻, this has been taken by others as Man, i.e., as an ethnonym. Wang Shu-min (110.2959) explains that Man, besides its particular sense of “barbarians of the South,” meant “barbarians” in general. Han shu, 94A.3743, has pei-pien 北 邊 , “northern border,” instead. However, the term pien as used in this chapter denotes the border regions under Chinese control. While in Pan Ku’s time a major group of the Hsiung-nu did indeed live inside the territory controlled by the Chinese, the reality was different in Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s time. Actually, the term man was not only used as an ethnonym, but in early geographical models also appears as a name for a “wilderness” that is wild not so much for its natural terrain but for the unruliness of its inhabitants. According to the Five Domain model (see n. 45 below), the Man, though here used as an ethnonym again, were relegated together with the Yi 夷 into a domain that was only sought after by the Chinese as annual tribute bringers, but could not really be controlled. 8 Sui ch’u-mu erh chuan-yi 隨畜牧而轉移. Han shu, 94A.3743, has ts’ao 草 as an additional graph, giving “they followed the grass letting their livestock pasture.” This is a recurrent stereotypical image of the northern people; see next line and p. 2900. It is interesting to note the use of the term chuan 轉, which indicates a circular movement, because like farmers rotating their crops or fields to allow the soil to recover, the seasonal movements of semi-nomadic herdsmen are not random but follow fixed patterns that bring them back to the same pastures and locations over and over again. This is different from the use of ch’ien-hsi 遷徙 in the line where the focus is on the fact that the Hsiung-nu’s frequent breaking camp and migrating makes it difficult for the Chinese to get hold of them. 9 The Chinese yang 羊 does not distinguish between sheep and goats. But the habitat in the north and north of China as well as the ecological characteristics of sheep and goats make sheep the more natural translation. 10 Chüeh-t’i or k’uai-t’i 駃騠; modern dictionaries gloss this term as hinny, i.e. the offspring of a male horse (stallion) and a female donkey (jennet). Egami Namio, “The K’uai-t’i 駃騠, the T’aoyü 騊駼, and the Tan-hsi 驒騱, the Strange Domestic Animals of the Hsiung-nu 匈奴,” Memoirs of

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

239

the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, 13 (1951): 87-123, has argued (pp. 90-103) vigorously against the identification of the k’uai-t’i as hinny. His main arguments are that hinnies are comparatively small, whereas Hsu Kuang 徐廣 has explained k’uai-t’i as “fine horse of the Northern Barbarians” (Pei-ti chün-ma 北狄駿馬). According to Egami this could only have been a horse that was larger and faster than the usual short and sturdy horses the Mongolians and earlier steppe people are known to have put to everyday use. Also, the word chüeh or k’uai itself is glossed as chi 疾, “fast,” or as pen 奔, “to run” (Kuang-ya 廣雅 as cited in the Shuo-wen t’ung-hsün tingsheng, p. 670). In a fragment attributed to the Shih-tzu 尸子 (a work of disputed provenance, but perhaps compiled mainly during the Han period) six chüeh-t’i 駃題 figure as draught animals (The ICS Ancient Chinese Texts Concordance Series, Philosophical works No. 39 [Hong Kong: Shangwu, 2000], p. 27, fragment 2.157). Some post-Han sources, as for instance Meng K’ang 孟康 (fl. A.D. 220-254), claim that it could “overtake” (ch’ao 超) his mother seven days after birth (Shuowen t’ung-hsün ting-sheng, p. 670). All this leaves us with the image of a rather large, fast and strong animal. This is emphasized all the more, when Egami (ibid., 90) interprets the last statement as meaning that the young chüeh-t’i could “jump over [ch’ao 超] its mother.” Therefore, he finally arrives at the conclusion that the chüeh-t’i was what he terms the “Aryan horse,” i.e., an equestrian species that originated somewhere near the Caspian Sea and was also called “blood-sweating horse,” han-hsüeh-ma 汗血馬 by the Chinese; see n. 140 below. This conclusion, however, not only misinterprets the word ch’ao, it also intentionally disregards the Shuo-wen definition of chüeh-t’i that reads literally, “the offspring of a (female) mule and a horse father” or perhaps “a ‘mulish’ offspring fathered by a horse” (馬父驘子). Because mules are said to be sterile, the first translation has been discredited as biologically impossible. The second translation seems self-contradicting, because mules, by definition, are produced by a jackass (male donkey) and a horse mare. However, if we take lo 驘 not as “mule” but more generally as “cross between horse and donkey,” the Shuowen definition of chüeh-t’i can be readily explained in two different ways: 1) “a horse-donkey offspring with a horse as father,” which is, of course, nothing else but a hinny. While a hinny may not be as big as a horse, it is clearly bigger than its donkey mother, which it may have overtaken in terms of height or speed after seven days. This actually fits well with another explanation given in the Fa-meng-chi 發蒙記 (“So-yin”) according to which a chüeh-t’i when born had to be cut out of its mother’s womb. The phenomenon of a fetus sired by a big horse and outgrowing a small jennet’s womb resulting in the latter’s death is recognized also today (Helene von Gugelberg and Cordula Bähler, Alles über Maultiere [Cham: Müller Rüschlikon, 1994], pp. 88-9, quoted from http://www.payer.de/entwicklung/entw084.htm#4.1., as of 16.03.2004). Finally, a hinny is definitely a good and strong draught animal. Another vague possibility to understand the Shuo-wen definition is 2) “the offspring of a (female) hinny or a molly (i.e., mare mule) and a horse stallion.” Though extremely rare, there are documented cases of female hinnies or mollies becoming pregnant and carrying offspring (http://www.fact-index.com/h/hi/hinny.html, as of 16.03.2004). This notion clearly inspires a commentary to the Shuo-wen definition that reads, “all mules (or horse-donkey offspring in general) do not (usually) give birth. If they (nevertheless) do, (the product) is certainly of fine quality” (凡驘不【牛產】，【牛產】則必駿). Seemingly, the only obstacle to these two interpretations is that neither hinnies nor possible offspring of hinnies or mules are very fast and thus do not seem to match the implications of the expression k’uai-t’i 駃騠. However, this name is obviously a loan, probably from the Hsiung-nu language. Therefore, what

240

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

around in search of water and grass. They do not have inner and outer city walls or permanent residences13 and do not engage in tilling fields. Nevertheless, each matters etymologically and semantically is the original meaning of the word in this language, not the meaning of the Chinese characters that have been arbitrarily chosen to transliterate it. 11 T’ao-t’u 騊駼. Egami (ibid., 103-11) identifies this animal with the Przewalski horse. The problem with this is that the commentaries say that this “wild horse” (野馬) or “horse-like” (似馬, 如馬) animal was ch’ing 青, i.e., “black” (or green or blue). Despite Egami’s claims to the contrary, the Przewalski horse has a very light brown or yellowish color, only the mane, tail, and pasterns are dark brown or black (see picture in Das neue Fischer-Lexikon in Farbe [Frankfurt: Fischer, 1975], p. 4849). Another wild horse, the Tarpan, that is said to have been “domesticated by Scythian nomads in about 3000 B.C.” seems to have a slightly darker, “smoky gray” coat, though the extant Tarpans are recreations with a genetic mix that also includes genes of the Przewalski horse (http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/tarpan; as of 17.03.2004). The rendering of t’ao-t’u as “wild horse” is therefore tentative. Note that Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju’s 司馬相如 (Rhapsody of Sir Vacuous) has t’ao-t’u as well as two other, possibly Hsiung-nu, names for what seems to be equestrian animals. Knechtges, Wen Xuan 2:62-3, ll.113-6, has rendered these as “tarpans,” “wild asses,” and “wild mules” respectively. 12 Tien-hsi 驒騱. Egami (ibid., 111-23) argues for this to be a kind of wild ass. This seems in line with a description in the commentary according to which this animal looked like a chü-hsü 駏 驉, which Egami shows to have been a light-footed creature resembling a mule with long ears. However, an anonymous explanation (“So-yin”) has the tien-hsi have a skin that is dark or “black with white scales and a pattern like a reptile (青驪白鱗，文如鼉魚). Wild asses (equus hemionus) have a “greyish or brownish coat with a pale muzzle, belly and flanks. ... Their legs are often lightly striped like a zebra and they have long ears” (http://www.yptenc.org.uk/docs/ factsheets/animal_facts/asiatic_wild_ass.html, as of 17.03.2004). When they loose their thick, often dirty winter coat, it may remotely resemble an alligator’s skin–though this description remains enigmatic. As far as geographical distribution is concerned, there are three types that could match, if at all, the tien-hsi of the Shih chi: The Mongolian wild ass (Dziggetai, mong. for “ear”) and the Turkmenian wild ass (Kulan)–both of which resemble the Persian wild ass (Onager), that is better known in the West–as well as the Tibetan wild ass (Kiang), that is larger and slightly more reddish in color. For a most detailed and comprehensive study of the wild asses, see Gertrud and Helmut Denzau, Wildesel (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 1999). 13 Ch’eng-kuo 城郭, “inner and outer city walls,” may be taken in the sense of “fortified settlements.” This was another criterion that was regularly adduced to distinguish the settled Chinese from their semi-nomadic neighbors. However, modern ethnographic research indicates that it would be wrong to imagine “(semi-)nomadic” people like the Hsiung-nu as being constantly on the march. Rather, they have fixed pasture grounds where they move to according to the season. So they do not have a single permanent residence, but several. As much is also indicated later on in the text (Shih chi, 110.2892), when a “Water-weed City,” Lung-ch’eng 蘢城, is mentioned as being one of two sacred places of the Hsiung-nu, where they regularly came together; see n. 174. SophiaKarin Psarras, “Han and Xiongnu. A Reexamination of Cultural and Political Relations (I),” Monumenta Serica 51 (2003): 125, has rightly pointed out that such places in particular were “likely to have been permanent.” Some of these might even be fortified. See also n. 166 below.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

241

[group or leader]14 has land allotted [to him for use]. They do not have written documents [but] make agreements and bonds by means of the spoken words. The children are able to ride on sheep and to draw the bow to shoot birds and rodents. When they grow a little older, they shoot foxes and hares to use as food.15 As men their strength is sufficient to draw the bow fully,16 and all become armored horsemen. It is their custom that, when they have ample [resources],17 they make a living by following the livestock and hunt with their bows18 wild birds and beasts. When in crisis, the men practice battling and attacking in order to make raids and campaigns. This is their natural disposition. Their long-range weapons are bows and arrows, their short-range weapons are the dagger and a short, allmetal pike. 19 If they are at the advantage, they advance, if they are at a disadvantage,20 they retreat, not being ashamed of taking to their heels. Wherever there is some easy gain, they do not know propriety nor righteousness.21 From 14

The source does not specify whether ko 各, “each,” refers to an individual or some kind of subgroup of the Hsiung-nu, but the same phrase occurs again on Shih chi, 110.2891 (see n. 167 below), and there it refers to the highest officials or tribal leaders and the highest ruler of the Hsiung-nu. Here, the focus of the statement is not so much on who uses the land, but on the fact that despite their free-roaming life-style the Hsiung-nu also, like the Chinese, had a concept of land ownership (or at least of rights of land usage) and borders. 15 Yung wei shih 用為食; the Han shu, 94A.3743, has jou shih 肉食, “[as] flesh-food,” instead. 16 Wan-kung 貫弓, “to fully draw a bow.” The Han-shu, 94A.3743, writes wan-kung 彎弓. 17 K’uan 寬 could point to an economically or a politically favourite situation, or to both. See the example in the last column on Shih chi, 110.2887 and 2900. 18 Han shu, 94A.3743, has t’ien lieh 田獵, “farming and hunting,” instead of yin she lieh 因射 獵. 19 Ch’an or yen 鋋, according to various ancient commentaries, a short lance with an iron shaft. See also Sun Chi 孫機 : Han-tai wu-chih wen-hua tzu-liao t’u-shuo 漢代物質文化資料圖說 (Peking: Wen-wu, 1991), p. 126. 20 Ch’en Chih 陳直, Shih chi hsin cheng 史記新證 (Tientsin: Tientsin Jen-min, 1979), p. 169, has drawn attention to the fragment of an inscribed wooden strip that was found in the 1930s in the sands around Lop Nor (modern Sinkiang). It reads, ... jen, li tseh chin, pu li ... 人，利則進，不利 (see Huang Lieh 黃烈, ed., Huang Wen-pi li-shih k’ao-ku lun-chi 黃文弼歷史考古論集 [Peking: Wen-wu, 1989], p.396, strip no. 65, my punctuation). Except for the first graph, which might belong to another sentence, this is the same wording as in this memoir and probably refers to the Hsiung-nu or other northern neighbors of the Han Chinese. Other strips that were found on the same occasion bear dates ranging from 49 to 8 B.C.; see Huang, ibid., p. 396. 21 This is, of course, a trait that in the eyes of Confucians was the epitome of a state of thieves. A well-known example of this is painted right at the beginning of the Mencius, where li 利, “profit,” and yi 義, “righteousness,” are the opposites: 苟為後義而先利，不奪不饜, “If righteousness be put last and profit be put first, they will not be satisfied without snatching all” (Mencius 1A.1; Legge, 2:126).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

242

their overlord on down, everybody eats the meat of the livestock,22 wears their skins and hides and drapes themselves with their felt and fur. The hardy adults eat what is rich and tasty, the elderly eat23 the leftovers. They value the hardy and fit and despise the old and weak. If a father dies, [the sons] marry their stepmothers; if a brother dies, [the other siblings] all take his wives 24 and marry them. In their customs, they have a praenomen without regard for taboos, but no cognomen or agnomen.25 [2881] When the Way of the Hsia 夏 declined (late seventeenth c. B.C.?)26 and His Honour Liu 劉 lost the millet office, he changed among the Western Jung 戎27 and built a settlement at Pin 豳.28 22

Many ancient texts say that it was very uncommon to have meat to eat. Only the noble and rich, as well as, sometimes, the old were allowed to enrich their diet with meat. 23 Han shu, 94A.3743, has yin shih 飲食, “eat and drink.” 24 This describes the practice of levirate or cross-cousin marriage, not uncommon in premodern societies (see the Bible, Genesis 38, or the Book of Moses, 5.25), but unfathomable to Confucian-minded Chinese. To make the case even more disgusting for the ancient Chinese reader, one could also translate, “. . . all (together) take his wife and marry her.” But the usual family structures in patriarchal societies worldwide seem to favor polygamy over polyandry, because the latter does not allow the fathers to claim the offspring with sufficient degree of certainty. For an apology of these Hsiung-nu customs, see Shih chi, 110.2900, below. 25 Han shu, 94A.3743, lacks the word hsing 姓, “cognomen” at this point, probably because elsewhere (p. 3751) it states that the Hsiung-nu leader had the cognomen Luan-ti 攣鞮 (This is pointed out by the “Chi-chieh”). See n. 132 below. 26 The seventeenth c. B.C. is usually given by modern scholars as the time when the Shang 商 people replaced the Hsia, a power that has not yet been unanimously identified archaeologically. In addition to the uncertainty of this dating, there is also the problem whether this sentence was intended to signify the actual downfall of the Hsia. This is because the same expression is used below in connection with the Chou Dynasty long before they waned or even moved to Lo-yang. On the other hand, adding up all descriptions at the beginning of this chapter of how much time had elapsed since such-and-such an event and calculating backwards from the relatively secure date of King P’ing’s move to Lo-yang (771 B.C.), one does indeed arrive at a date of about 1620 or 1610 B.C. for the incident mentioned above even though not all individual dates accord with the conclusions of modern research; see n. 34 below. 27 Jung 戎, according to Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 419-20, was “the general name for non-Chinese Tibeto-Burmans, including the Ch’iang [羌] and Ti [氐] of Chou times.” As others before him, he also pointed out the “rather close ties between the royal house of Chou and the Jung people.” However, the usage of Jung in this chapter of the Shih chi seems to allow for a broader usage that encompasses also people living much further north, even northeast, of the Chinese central plains rather than west of it. Therefore, the approach taken by Nicola Di Cosmo, “The Northern Frontier in Pre-imperial China,” Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, ed., The Cambridge History of Ancient China. From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 885-966, who draws attention to the literal meaning of the

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

243

More than three hundred years thereafter (late fourteenth c. B.C.?),29 the Jung and the Ti 狄30 attacked the Great King Tan-fu 亶父 (Father Tan).31 Tan-fu fled into exile at the foot of Mount Ch’i 岐32 and the people of Pin all followed Tanfu and built a settlement there, creating Chou 周.33 More than hundred years thereafter,34 Ch’ang 昌 of Chou, the Lord of the West (before 1073 B.C.), 35 led an expedition against the Ch’üan-yi 畎 夷 lineage. 36 term jung–being “martial,” “military,” “war,” etc.– and who views “Jung” as “a blanket word that included many alien peoples around and within the territory occupied by the Zhou [i.e., Chou], without a specific ethnic connotation” (ibid., p. 921), seems better suited to explain the situation found in the sources. For the deeds of His Honour Liu see next note. 28 For a detailed account of these personage and circumstances, see Shih chi, 4.112 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:55-6; de Groot, Hunnen, pp. 4-5). Kung Liu 公劉, “His Honour Liu,” is presented there as the great-grandson of the Hou Chi 后稷, the “Lord of the Agriculture,” a mythical cultural hero. According to that account, it was not Kung Liu himself who lost office under the Hsia and subsequently went abroad, but already his grandfather Pu Ch’ü 不窋. Likewise, it was not him, who set himself up at Pin, but his son Ch’ing-chieh 慶節. The memorable merit of Kung Liu himself was that, although he was among barbarians, he succeeded to change back his and his family’s ways to those of his superior ancestors. See Shih chi, 107.3064. The town of Pin 豳, also written 邠, has been located about seventy miles northwest of modern Sian, near Pin 彬 County in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17). 29 Historically speaking, this should be the twelfth c. For the method of calculating backwards from the dates mentioned later in the text, see n. 26 above. 30 Used here not as specific ethnonyms, but in the general sense of “Northern Barbarians.” The real ethnic affiliation of these Ti 狄 (also written 翟) remains enigmatic, despite the great role they played in early East Asian history; see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 446-8. 31 This individual, a descendant of Kung Liu in the ninth generation, is called Ku-Kung 古公, “The Ancient Honorable,” Tan-fu in Shih chi, 4.113-4 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:56-7; de Groot, Hunnen, pp. 5-6), where the details of the following brief account are also found. It is interesting to note that according to the detailed account, not only Jung and Ti, but also Hsün-yü 薰 育 participated in the attack, clearly another variant name for Hsiung-nu. 32 Located about fifteen miles northeast of modern Ch’i-shan in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:13). 33 The “So-yin” states that this refers to the state of Chou, not to the royal dynasty that later ruled it. See Shih chi, 4.113-4; also Mencius 1B.14 (Legge, 2:174-6). 34 This would have been around 1200 B.C., if we were to follow the chronology of the Shih chi as calculated backwards from the date 771 B.C., the move of the Chou capital to Lo-yang. Modern research relegates the reign periods of Kings Wen and Wu of Chou to a somewhat later time; see next note and n. 37 below. 35 Posthumously called King Wen 文, the founding figure of the royal Chou dynasty though not its first king. “Lord of the West” was the feudal title Ch’ang had obtained under the Shang 商.

244

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

More than ten years later, King Wu 武 (r. c. 1073-1068 B.C.) 37 led an expedition against Chou 紂,38 set up a base at the town of Lo 雒,39 and resided again at Feng 酆 40 and Hao 鄗.41 He banished the Jung and Yi 夷42 to the north of the Ching 涇43 and the Lo 洛.44 According to the seasons, they brought in tribute, [and] it was named the “wild domain.”45

His cognomen was Chi 姬. See Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:57-9, esp. n. 45, for the dating which is tentative. 36 The “So-yin” cites several explanations of the name Ch’üan-yi, according to which this may have been another name for what the Ch’un-ch’iu 春秋 calls Ch’üan Jung 犬戎, “Dog Jung.” This appelation is also used on Shih chi, 4.118 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:58), where this campaign of King Wen is related. In any case, it is interesting to note the addition shih 氏, “lineage,” that is also accorded to groups of people that play a role in the cultural formation of the Chinese. On Han shu, 94A.3743, shih 氏 is lacking. 37 King Wen’s successor, named Chi Fa 姬發; see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:59-64, esp. n. 45, for the dating which is tentative. 38 The last ruler of the Shang dynasty who was defeated by King Wu of Chou 周 around 1045 B.C. 39 Modern Loyang 洛陽 in Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). 40 Formerly, King Wen’s capital, located c. eleven miles west of modern Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). Note that there was at least one other city called Feng during Western Chou times (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). 41 King Wu’s capital after the conquest of the Shang, located c. nine miles west of modern Sian in Shensi, also written 鎬 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). The Chung-hua editors read Feng Hao without an enumeration comma in between, emphasizing the notion of a twin city. 42 Or perhaps the Jung-yi in the general sense of “the barbarians.” Cf. the term Jung-ti 戎狄 used below. 43 The Ching River is a norther tributary of the Wei 渭 River with which it meets about nineteen miles northeast of modern Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). 44 The Lo River is also a northern tributary of the Wei River; the confluence lies about sixty miles further to the east than that of the Ching River, shortly before the Wei flows into the Ho (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). 45 Huang-fu 荒服; this was the outermost zone in the Five Domains Model (wu-fu-chih 五服 制) that divided the world into five concentric domains or zones, the tien-fu 甸服 or “royal domain,” the hou-fu 侯服 or “lords’ domain,” the sui-fu 綏服 or “pacified domain,” the yao-fu 要服 or “invited domain,” and the huang-fu. Later, Han scholars also devised a model that divided the earth into nine domains (chiu-fu 九服). For these cosmological theories, see Yü Ying-shih, “Han Foreign Relations,” in Cambridge History of China. Volume I: The Ch’in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.A.D.220 D. Twitchett and M. Loewe eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 379-81. Yü translates yao-fu as “controlled domain,” but that is neither literally nor factually preferable.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

245

More than two hundred years thereafter, the Way of the Chou 周 declined and when King Mu 穆 ([of Chou], r. c. 985-931 B.C.) 46 led an expedition against the Ch’üan Jung 犬戎 (Dog Jung),47 he obtained four white wolves and four white deer with which he returned.48 From this time onward, people living in the wild domain did not pay homage [any more]. At this, the Chou subsequently created the regulations of the Fu Hsing 甫 刑 ([The Marquis of] Fu’s Punishments).49 More than two hundred years after King Mu, there was bad blood between King Yu 幽 of Chou (r. 781-771 B.C.)50 and the Marquis of Shen 申, because of the [King’s] favorite concubine, the Lady Ssu 姒 of Pao 褒.51 The Marquis of 46

The fifth king of the royal Chou dynasty, named Chi Man 姬 滿 ; see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:66. 47 Han shu, 94A.3744, writes 畎戎, see n. 36. For fantastic notions of these “Dog Jung” developed later, see Victor Mair, “Canine Conundrums: Eurasian Dog Ancestor Myths in Historical and Ethnic Perspective,” Sino-Platonic Papers, 87 (1998), esp. pp. 10-14. 48 The critique against this campaign is laid out on Shih chi, 4.135-6; see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:67-8, for the meaning of the white wolves and deer, animals holy to the Jung people, see ibid. n. 156. The Shan-hai-ching, 2 (The Chinese University, Institute of Chinese Studies, ed., Shan-hai-ching chu-tzu so-yin [Hong Kong: Shang-wu, 1994], p. 12) mentions a place in the utmost north were there are many white wolves, white tigers, white pheasants, and white kingfishers. 49 Also known as the (The Marquis of) Lü’s 呂 Punishments, under which title it has become part of the Shu-ching 書經 (Book of Documents); see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:69. This name is also used on Han shu, 94A.3744, where the text then continues with a short passage that mentions how the situation of the house of Chou deteriorated under King Mu’s grandson, King Yi 懿 (r. c. 915-891 B.C.) and recovered somewhat under King Hsüan 宣 (r. 827-782 B.C.); for these, see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:70, 72. Structurally and rhetorically, this passage differs from the immediate context in that it contains several quotes from the “Hsiao-ya” 小雅 section of the Book of Odes, Shih ching 詩經, all of which allude to the Hsien-yün 獫狁 or the northern frontier in general. The last two of these quotes are found on Shih chi, 110.2882, at the end of the paragraph, being assigned to the time of King Hsiang 襄 of Chou. 50 See Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:72. 51 The Marquis of Shen was the father of King Yu’s official Queen, who was demoted because of the Lady of Pao. For this incident and its consequences, see Shih chi, 4.147-9; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:73-4. Interestingly, the people of Shen seem to have been close to the Jung people. Yang Yen-ch’i 楊燕起, Shih chi ch’üen-yi 史記全譯, vol. 8 (Kweiyang: Kuei-chou Jen-min, 2001), p. 3809, n. 7, mentions the variant appellation Shen Jung 申戎. This expression can be seen in the Chu-shu chi-nien 竹書紀年 (Chu-shu chi-nien chi-cheng, p. 58) and the Hou Han shu 後漢書, 87.2872. The city of Pao 褒 was located c. ten miles west of modern Han-chung in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

246

Shen became angry and together with the Ch’üan Jung he attacked and killed King Yu of Chou at the foot of Mount Li 驪. 52 Subsequently, they took Chiaohuo 焦穫53 of Chou 周 and resided between the Ching 涇 and the Wei 渭, 54 invading and tyrannizing the Central States.55 Duke Hsiang 襄 of Ch’in 秦 (r. 777-766 B.C.) 56 rescued Chou. At this, King P’ing 平 of Chou (r. 771-720 B.C.) 57 left Feng and Hao and moved eastwards to the town of Lo 雒. All the while, Duke Hsiang of Ch’in led an expedition against the Jung reaching [Mount] Ch’i 岐 and was for the first time ranked as a feudal lord.58 Sixty-five years after this (705 B.C.), the Mountain Jung59 trespassing Yen 燕 made an expedition against Ch’i 齊 and Duke Hsi 釐 of Ch’i (r. 730-698 B.C.) 60 gave them battle at the suburbs of Ch’i. 52

Located twenty-one miles east of modern Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). Han shu, 94A.3745, writes 麗. 53 Name of a swamp, located c. thirty-six miles northwest of modern Sian on the Ching River (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). This geographical designation is also seen in the Ode Liu-yüeh 六月 of the “Hsiao-ya” 小雅 section of the Book of Odes, that is cited later on in the text. Here, Legge’s (4:283) translation makes two place names of it: “Badly reckoned the Hsien-yün, when they confidently occupied Chiao and Huo, and overran Hao and Fang, as far north as to the north of the Ching” (玁狁匪茹，整居焦穫，侵鎬及方，至于涇陽). Erwin von Zach, “Einige Verbesserung zu de Groot, Die Hunnen der vorchristlichen Zeit,” AM 1 (1924), p. 125, gives the alternative name Huo-k’ou 瓠口 (seen on T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:6) or Huo-chung 瓠中, that probably applied after a canal had been dug between the Ching 涇 and the Lo 洛 Rivers that drained the swamp. Han shu, 94A.3745, has 地，鹵獲 instead of 焦穫, giving, “... took Chou’s territory and took captives, and settled between ....” 54 Main river at the southern shores of which lies the capital area of the Chou and subsequent dynasties as well as modern Sian, meets with the Ho where this turns eastward again after flowing around the Ordos region (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17, 19). 55 Ch’in-pao Chung-kuo 侵 暴 中 國 . This, with some variation, is a recurrent topos and possibly the short form of ch’in-tao pao-nüeh Chung-kuo 侵盜暴虐中國 (Shih chi, 110.2882). 56 See Shih chi, 5.179. 57 The first king of the so-called Eastern Chou era; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:74. 58 The “Chi-chieh” states that he received as fief the old capital area of Feng and Hao. With this, Ch’in was for the first time accepted as an equal among the other powerful Chinese states. This event, described first on Shih chi, 5.179 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:90-1), is one of the frequently recurring chronological “signposts” of the Shih chi, see Shih chi, 28.1358, 32.1482, 33.1528, 34.1551, 35.1571, 36.1576, 38.1622, 39.1638, 40.1694. 59 According to Fu Ch’ien (“Cheng-yi”), the Mountain Jung were identical with the later Hsien-pi (or -pei) 鮮卑, on which see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 452-4. 60 The “So-yin” says that his canonical name was pronounced Hsi (instead of Li) and that his praenomen was Chu-erh 諸兒. However, this seems to be mistaken as according to the Tso-chuan

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

247

Forty-four years thereafter (661 B.C.), 61 the Mountain Jung made an expedition against Yen. Yen informed Ch’i of its crisis and Duke Huan 桓 of Ch’i (r. 685-643 B.C.)62 went north leading an expedition against the Mountain Jung. The Mountain Jung fled. More than twenty years thereafter (640-39 or 636 B.C.),63 the Jung-ti 狄64 came to the town at the Lo 洛65 in an expedition against King Hsiang 襄 of Chou (r. 651-620 B.C.). 66 King Hsiang fled to the town of Fan 氾 in Cheng 鄭. 67 Earlier, King Hsiang of Chou had wanted to lead an expedition against Cheng. Therefore, he had taken a daughter of the Jung-ti 戎狄 as Queen and with the troops of the Jung-ti made an expedition against Cheng. After a short while, he demoted the Ti 狄 Queen.68 The Ti Queen resented this, and when the stepmother of King Hsiang, called [King] Hui’s 惠 Queen,69 had a son, Tzu Tai 子帶, she70 Chu-erh was the praenomen of King Hsi’s son and successor, which is duly pointed out by Takigawa (110.6); see also Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:9, n. 7. 61 This must have been the event that is mentioned on Shih chi, 34.1552, under the 27th year of Duke Chuang, which corresponds to the year 664 B.C. However, as Takigawa (34.7) pointed out, the Tso-chuan has this happen in the thirtieth year of Duke Chuang, i.e., in 661 B.C. From here onwards, there is a considerable number of datable accounts in the Shih chi and other sources that record deep inroads of Ti people into southern, i.e., “Chinese,” territory. These accounts are translated and commented upon in de Groot, Hunnen, pp. 10-4. 62 Duke Huan became hegemon in 672 B.C; Shih chi, 4.151; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:75. 63 The first date (640 or 639 B.C.) is implied by simple calculation with a certain amount of doubt, because of the word yü 餘, “more than.” Note, however, that this date is also demanded by the next date (635 B.C.) given in the text below; see n. 78. The second possible dating (636 B.C.) is based on Shih chi, 4.153; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:76. The same story as related in the Tso-chuan also supports this latter dating. 64 This is taken as one people because subsequently it is said to have given a queen–one queen–to the Chou King. From here on until the end of the paragraph, the Han shu, 94A.3746, consistently writes ti 翟 instead of ti 狄. 65 Or the town Lo, which was in any case the new seat of Chou government, located at modern Loyang. The Han shu, 94A.3746, unambiguously writes 雒. 66 Named Chi Cheng 姬鄭; see Shih chi, 4.152; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:76. 67 Located about twenty-five miles south of modern Cheng-chou 鄭州 in Honan (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 1:23, 24). 68 The attack against Cheng happened in 637 B.C., the demotion of the queen in 636 or 634 B.C., see Shih chi, 4.153; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:76 and n. 222. 69 See Shih chi, 4.152, Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:76. Note that the translation takes Hui 惠 to be a reference to her spouse, whose posthumous name was Hui, although it might also be possible to see Hui as the posthumous name of the Queen herself. However, if that be the case, the parallel Ti of Ti hou 狄 后 should be understood likewise as posthumous name. Since the standard translation formula for posthumous names adopted throughout is “title + posthumous name” (as

248

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

wanted to enthrone him. At this, [King] Hui’s Queen, the Ti Queen, and Tzu Tai became [*2882*] agents from within and opened [the gate] for the Jung-ti.71 The Jung-ti, for this reason, were able to enter [the city] and defeated and drove away King Hsiang of Chou; then enthroned Tzu Tai as Son of Heaven.72 At this, some of the Jung-ti settled in Lu-hun 陸渾,73 in the east reaching [the state of] Wei 衛, invading, plundering, tyrannizing, and oppressing the Central States. 74 The Central States suffered under it. Thus, the poets sang of it: “The Jung-ti will be smitten!”75 and “Routing the Hsien-yün, did we, all the way to T’ai-yüan!”76 King Hui, for instance) this would give “Queen Ti.” This is unacceptable because we recognize Ti to be a generic or ethnographic designation, which, according to English grammar has to precede the title. Grammatically correct would be to treat posthumous names like generic names and either translate them directly or leave them untranslated in transcription before the title, i.e., as “Benevolent King/Queen” or “Hui King/Queen.” A third possibility would be to handle them like European royal epithets and convert them into an apposition but this would require the addition of the individual’s personal name, like “King (his name), the Benevolent.” 70 Meaning either the Ti Queen or the Benevolent Queen or both; the subject of this sentence is not clear. 71 According to Yang Yen-ch’i, 110.3810, n. 12, King Hui’s Queen had already died, so she could not have been involved in treacherous acts. 72 Han shu, 94A.3746, has wang 王, “king,” instead of t’ien-tzu 天子. 73 Or the “town of Lu” (Lu yi 陸邑) according to Hsü Kuang 徐廣 (“Chi-chieh”). According to Tu Yü 杜預 (“So-yin”), those settled at Lu-hun, i.e., between the two states of Ch’in 秦 and Chin 晉, were the “Jung with the cognomen Yün 允” (or the Yün-hsing 允姓 Jung). T’an Ch’i-hsiang (1:22) situates these Jung on the southern banks of the Wei River, west of modern Sian in Shensi. Later, they were moved by those two states to Yi-ch’uan 伊川, i.e., probably between the Lo and the Yi 伊 Rivers (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:23). 74 See n. 55 above. The Han shu, 94A.3746, just writes ch’in-tao yu shen 侵盜尤甚, “the invasion and plundering was especially extreme,” before it continues with, “Only after King Hsiang ....” The lines from the Shih ching that the Shih chi quotes next are found in the Han shu two pages earlier in a slightly different and more elaborate context. 75 Jung Ti shih ying 戎狄是應; a line from the “Pi-kung” 閟宮 Ode of the Laude (“Sung” 頌) section of the Book of Odes (Legge, 4:626), which has ying 膺 instead of ying 應. The original context describes the impressive army and equipment of the Duke of Lu 魯. Shih 是 acts to emphasize the verb and has been glossed as ju t’zu 如此, “thus,” “in this manner” (Ku-tai Han-yü hsü-tz’u tz’u-tien 古代漢語虛詞詞典 [Shanghai: Shang-wu, 2001], p. 514.3). The tense of the phrase is not clear, it could also be past tense, “the Jung-ti have thus been smitten!” But it is interesting to note that the three passages cited here, seem to form a logical sequence, relating first the assembling of troops, then the joy of accomplished victory and finally the triumphant return and provisions made for future defense.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

249

and “There go the chariots in countless numbers! ... to fortify that northern region.”77 Only after King Hsiang 襄 of Chou had already resided outside [his capital] for four years (635 B.C.),78 did he send an envoy and informed Chin 晉 of its crisis. Duke Wen 文 of Chin (r. 636-628 B.C.) 79 had just been invested and wanted to attain to the enterprise of the hegemon. Thus, he raised an army to lead an expedition against and drive away the Jung-ti 戎翟.80 He executed Tzu-tai and welcomed and reinstated King Hsiang of Chou to settle in the town of Lo 雒. [2883] All the while, Ch’in 秦 and Chin 晉 became strong states. Duke Wen of Chin pushed back the Jung-ti 戎翟 to settle in Ho-hsi 河西 (West of the River)81 between the Yin 圁82 and the Lo 洛. They were called the Red Ti and 76

Po-fa Hsien-yün, chih yü T’ai-yüan 薄伐獫狁，至於太原. This is a line from the ode “Liuyüe” 六月 of the “Hsiao-ya” 小雅 section of the Book of Odes (Legge, 4:283), which is said to celebrate a successful campaign against the Hsien-yün conducted by Chi-fu 吉甫. The initial particle po intensifies the following verb (Ku-tai Han-yü hsü-tz’u tz’u-tien, p. 35, chu-tz’u 助詞). The same ode contains wordings and place names (for which see n. 53) that situates it within the context of the transition from the Western to the Eastern Chou period. On the battles between the Western Chou and the Hsien-yün, that also figures in bronze inscriptions, see the recent work by Feng Li, “The Decline and Fall of the Western Zhou Dynasty: A Historical, Archaeological, and Geographical Study of China from the Tenth to the Eighth Centuries B.C.” (Unpublished Ph.D. Diss., The University of Chicago, June 2000), pp. 178-238; and P’eng Yü-shang 彭裕商: “Chou fa Hsien-yün chi hsiang-kuan wen-t’i” 周伐獫狁及相關問題, Li-shih yen-chiu 2004,3: 3-16. The T’ai-yüan mentioned here, should be the area located about 130 miles northwest of modern Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:17), not to be confused with the T’ai-yüan Commandery of later times, for which see n. 196 below. 77 Ch’u yü p’ang p’ang, ch’eng pi shuo-fang 出輿彭彭，城彼朔方. The whole passage from the Ode “Ch’u chü” 出車 of the “Hsiao-ya” 小雅 section of the Book of Odes contains a Chou king’s charge to his general and runs like this (translation of Legge, 4:263): “How numerous were his chariots! How splendid his dragon, his tortoise and serpent flags! The son of Heaven had charged us to build a wall in that northern region” (出車彭彭，旂旐中央；天子命我，城彼朔方). 78 This date is given on Shih chi, 4.154; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:76. 79 Named Ch’ung-erh 重耳. 80 From here on, the Shih chi, too, like the Han shu, writes 戎翟 instead of 戎狄. This shows the different graphical realizations of Jung-ti to be essentially the same. Yang Yen-ch’i (110.3810, n. 17), however, glosses these Jung-ti 戎翟 as specifically those tribes that settled north of Ch’in 秦 and Chin 晉. 81 This is not known as a geographical unit and as such rather imprecise. At least in later times, the term Ho-hsi was used for the area west of the Ordos, in modern Shensi and Kansu. Here, it obviously refers to an area just west of the eastern arm of the Ho, i.e., an area within the Ordos

250

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

White Ti. 83 When Duke Mu 穆 of Ch’in (r. 659-21 B.C.) obtained [the help of] Yu Yü 由余,84 eight85 states of the Western Jung submitted to Ch’in. Therefore, from Lung 隴 westwards, there were the [following] Jung [people]: the Mien-chu 緜諸,86 the Hun Jung 緄戎,87 the Ti 翟, and the Yüan ;88 north of the Mounts Ch’i 岐 and Liang 梁 and the [rivers] Ching 涇 and Ch’i 漆, there were the

region. The Han shu, 94A.3746, has Hsi-ho 西河 instead, which was the name of a commandery, founded in 125 B.C., through which the eastern arm of the Ho ran. However, the specified area between the two rivers actually lay in what later became Shang 上 Commandery (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:37), the seat of government of which in Ch’in times lay ninety-nine miles north of modern Yenan in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:6). 82 The “So-yin” gives the two variants Yin 嚚 and Yüan 圜 (as on Han shu, 94A.3746), but discounts them. 83 Ch’ih-ti 赤翟 and Pai-ti 白翟. The Tso-chuan, the Kuo-yü, and other sources write 赤狄 and 白狄. The K’uo-ti-chih 括地志 (“Cheng-yi”) even shows a mixture of these usages when it states that Lu-chou 潞州 was originally the land of the 赤狄 whereas Yen- 延, Yin- 銀, and Sui-chou 綏 州 were former 白翟 territory. For a monograph on the subject, see Jaroslav Průšek, Chinese Statelets and the Northern Barbarians in the Period 1400-300 B.C. (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1971). 84 This was a man of Chinese descent, who had grown up among the northern people, but who eventually was won over to the cause of the Ch’in, bringing with him valuable information about and–presumably–personal relationships with the non-Chinese neighbors that worked in favor of Ch’in’s position. See Shih chi, 5.192-4 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:100-1). 85 Wang Shu-min (110.2962) notes that according to Shih chi, 5.194, and a host of other sources, not eight, but twelve states were gained with the help of Yu Yü. It is noteworthy that subsequently exactly twelve states or non-Chinese people are mentioned. Their number is reduced to eight, if one excludes those that were situated north of Chin 晉 and Yen 燕, Ch’in’s two rival states in the east, i.e., in a territory that Ch’in hardly controlled at that time. 86 The K’uo-ti-chih 括地志 (“Cheng-yi”) states that the walled city of the Mien-chu was located about twenty miles north of Ch’in-ling 秦嶺 County in Ch’in-chou 秦州, while under the Han 漢 the Mien-chu March (tao 道) belonged to T’ien-shui 天水 Commandery. 87 The “Cheng-yi” cites Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 (A.D. 581-645) with the statement that these were the K’un-yi 混夷 and Wei Chao 韋昭 (d. A.D. 273) with the remark that these were the Dog Jung mentioned in the Ch’un-ch’iu. Also, according to the K’uo-ti-chih (“Cheng-yi”), the fortified Yüan March was originally situated about ten miles south of Hsiang-wu 襄武 County of Wei-chou 渭州, in Han times belonging to T’ien-shui Commandery. Han shu, 94A.3747, writes Ch’üan Jung 畎戎 instead of Hun Jung. 88 Also written 獂 (Yang Yen-ch’i, 110.3812, n. 2). Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) pronounces them wan 丸, the K’uo-ti-chih (“So-yin”) pronounces them Huan 桓.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

251

[following] Jung: the Yi-ch’ü 義渠,89 the Ta-li 大荔,90 the Wu-chih 烏氏,91 and the Hsü-yen 朐衍.92 And north of Chin 晉 there were the [following] Jung: Lin Hu 林胡 (Forrest Hu)93 and the Lou-fan 樓煩.94 North of Yen 燕, there were the Tung Hu 東胡 (Eastern Hu)95 and the Shan Jung 山戎 (Mountain Jung). Each [division of these people] lived scattered in valleys and gorges and had their own chieftain. Those who frequently gathered were more than a hundred Jung, but none of them could unify all of them. [2885] More than hundred years after this, Duke Tao 悼 of Chin 晉 (r. 572558 B.C.) sent Wei Chiang 魏絳 to make peace with the Jung-ti 戎翟, and the Jung-ti paid their respect at the court of Chin. 89

Wei Chao 韋昭 (“So-yin”) states that originally the Yi-ch’ü were part of the Western Jung and were governed by a king until they were defeated by the Ch’in (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:106, year 441 B.C.). Since then, their territory belonged to Pei-ti 北地 Commandery. 90 The “So-yin” states that according to the Basic Annals of the Ch’in the royal capital of the Ta-li was taken by Dukes Li 厲 and Kung 共 of the Ch’in, whereupon the latter changed their name to Lin-chin 臨晉 (“Overlooking Chin”); see Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:106, 113, n. 278. The K’uoti-chih (“Cheng-yi”) adds that the former territory of Ta-li was situated in the Lin-chin Commandery of Han times, later being part of Feng-yi 馮翊 and Ch’ao-yi 朝邑 Commanderies of T’ung-chou 同州, their royal city being very close to the commandery seat of Ch’ao-yi. 91 According to Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”), the Wu-chih were situated in An-ting 安定 County. The reading of 氏 as chih follows the “Cheng-yi.” 92 According to the K’uo-ti-chih (“So-yin”), the Hsü-yen were situated in Yen-chou 鹽州, identical with the Pei-ti 北地 Commandery of Ch’in times. 93 The commentaries give Ju Ch’un’s 如淳 (fl. A.D. 189-265) opinion that these were the Tanlin 儋林 (or 澹林) who later on would be annihilated by (the Chao general) Li Mu 李牧 (see n. 120 below). During Ch’un-ch’iu times they are said to have lived in the Pei-ti area. 94 The Han shu, 28B.1621, lists a Lou-fan County (hsien 縣) and a Lou-fan District (hsiang 鄉), both belonging to Yen-men 鴈門 Commandery. Concerning the former, the commentary cites Ying Shao 應劭 with the information that this was “formerly Lou-fan-hu 樓煩胡 territory.” 95 The “So-yin” cites Fu Ch’ien: “The Tung Hu were the ancestors of the Wu-wan 烏丸. Later, they became the Hsien-pi. They are east of the Hsiung-nu, thus they are called the Tung Hu.” To this, the commentary adds a quote from the Hsü Han shu 續漢書: “At the beginning of the Han period, the Hsiung-nu (leader) Mao-tun annihilated their state, their remaining kind held the Wuhuan 烏桓 Mountains and took their appelation therefrom. In their customs, they go around in search for water and grass and do not have fixed places to settle. They use the praenomen or agnomen of their father as cognomen. Both, father and son, man and women, all shave their heads for the sake of simplicity.” The ethnic groups mentioned here, would all become very important in the wake of the eventual demise of Hsiung-nu power some centuries later. For a brief, but valuable overview, see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 452-4, sub-chapter “The Proto-Mongols: Eastern Hu– Hsien-pei 鮮卑 (*Särbi) and Wu-huan 烏桓 (Avar).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

252

After more than a hundred years, Chao Hsiang-tzu 趙襄子 ([of Chao], r. 475425 B.C.)96 crossed Mount Kou-chu 句注,97 broke and annexed Tai 代 in order to overlook the Barbaric Mo 貉.98 Afterwards, after he together with [the clans of] Han 韓 and Wei 魏 had annihilated Chih-po 智伯,99 divided Chin’s 晉 territory, and took possession of [part of] it, then Chao 趙 held the north of Tai and Kouchu, while Wei held Ho-hsi 河西 and Shang 上 Commandery,100 thereby sharing a border with the Jung. Afterwards, the Jung of Yi-ch’ü 義渠 built inner and outer city walls to defend themselves. Then, Ch’in 秦 nibbled away gradually [at their territory], until King Hui 惠 ([of Ch’in] r. 337-311 B.C.) 101 finally seized twenty-five cities of the Yi-ch’ü. When King Hui attacked Wei 魏 , Wei presented all of Hsi-ho 西河 and Shang Commandery to Ch’in. In the time of King Chao 昭 of Ch’in (r. 306-251 B.C.), the King of the Yich’ü Jung had an illicit affair with the Queen Dowager Hsüan 宣102 and they had two sons. The Queen Dowager Hsüan deceived and killed the King of the Yich’ü Jung at Kan-ch’üan 甘泉103 and finally raised troops to lead an expedition and destroy the Yi-ch’ü. At this, Ch’in held Lung-hsi 隴西, Pei-ti 北地,104 and 96

Originally, a noble of Chin 晉, this man eventually became the founding figure for the state of Chao. 97 According to the “Chi-chieh,” this mountain or mountain range was situated in Yen-men 鴈 門; see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:38 and n. 195 below. 98 Or “Hu 胡 and Mo,” but this Hu is probably not an ethnonym; see the discussion of Hu in the translation of Shih chi 109, n. 10, above. The Mo are identified as Wei 濊 in the “So-yin.” Both Mo and Wei–whether they are one or two different ethnic groups–were, since Han times, related to southern Manchuria and Korean territories; see Pulleyblank “Neighbors,” pp. 442-6. 99 That is, Chih Hsiang-tzu 智襄子 or Hsün Yao 荀瑤, the last noble of Chin. 100 Again, the Han shu, 94A.3747, has Hsi-ho 西河 as it also appears at the end of this paragraph. For both place names, see n. 81 above. 101 Also named King Hui-wen 惠文. 102 King Chao’s mother, a native of Ch’u. 103 Also name of a mountain, located about fifty-five miles northwest of modern Sian in Shensi, T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:44. 104 These two Commanderies were located about 45 miles south of modern Lanchow in Kansu and about 120 miles northwest of modern Sian in Shensi respectively, see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:4344 and 1:5-6. Comparing both maps, it can be observed that the Ch’in established the seat of Pei-ti Commandery exactly at the place that was formerly known as Yi-ch’ü. Note also that on these maps at least part of both commanderies lay outside the fortifications built by the Ch’in, which may either reflect the fact that the maps combine aspects of a longer period of time or the fact that, like in Han times, outposts were deliberately established outside the fortifications in order to create an incentive for expansion.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

253

Shang Commandery and built a long wall in order to ward off the Hu 胡.105 As to King Wu-ling 武靈 of Chao 趙 (r. 325-299), he for his part106 changed the custom to wear Hu dress, and practised shooting from horseback, and went north defeating the Lin Hu and the Lou-fan. He built the long wall,107 making a barrier from Tai 代 along the foot of Mount Yin 陰 to Kao-ch’üeh 高闕 , 108 and established Yün-chung 雲中,109 Yen-men 鴈門,110 and Tai 代 Commandery. 111 Afterwards, Yen 燕 had the worthy commander Ch’in K’ai 秦開, who became a hostage among the Hu 胡. The Hu trusted him very much. He returned [*2886*] and led a surprise attack, defeated and put to flight the Tung Hu, who retreated more than a thousand li. The Ch’in Wu-yang 秦舞陽, who together with Ching K’o 荊軻 [tried to] assassinate the King of Ch’in, was K’ai’s grandson. Yen 燕 also built a long wall, running from Tsao-yang 造陽 to Hsiang-p’ing 襄平, 112 and established Shang-ku 上谷,113 Yü-yang 漁陽,114 Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平,115 Liao-hsi 105

As in the combination with Mo 貉, a single “Hu” 胡 seems to be a generic designation of non-Chinese people, living in the northern steppe belt. Possibly, the term here is related to horseriding people, since the wall-building at this time was one of several measures against this new type of cavalry attacks. Other measures are mentioned in the next sentence. 106 Yi 亦, literally, “also.” Since nobody else is mentioned who changed to Hu dress, this is taken in the sense of “the King of Chao also reacted to the menace from the north in that he changed the dress,” and so on. Alternatively, the change of dress etc. is an insertion and the sentence translates, “As to King Wu-ling of Chao, while changing the custom and wearing Hu dress, practising shooting from horseback, and going north to defeat the Lin Hu and the Lou-fan, he also built the long wall, ....” 107 Chu ch’ang-ch’eng 築長城; Han shu, 94A.3747, does not have these three graphs. 108 For archaeological remains of this and other walls, see Xu Pingfang [Hsü P’ing-fang] 徐蘋 芳, “The Archaeology of the Great Wall of the Qin and Han Dynasties,” Journal of East Asian Archaeology 3 (2001, 1-2): 259-81. 109 Located twenty-five miles southwest of modern Huhehot in Inner Mongolia, T’an Ch’ihsiang, 1:37 and 2:9. 110 Located fifty miles west of modern Ta-t’ung 大同 in Shansi, T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:38 and 2:9. 111 Located seventy-five miles east of modern Ta-t’ung in Shansi, T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:38 and 2:9. 112 Tsao-yang was located about 150 miles north of modern Peking. Hsiang-p’ing was located tabout 40 miles south of modern Shenyang in Liao-ning; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:41-2. See also n. 123 below. 113 In Ch’in times, the seat of administration of Shang-ku Commandery was located forty miles northwest of modern Peking; compare T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:41 and 2:9. 114 Located thirty miles northeast of modern Peking; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:41. See also n. 123 below.

254

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

遼西,116 and Liao-tung 遼東117 Commanderies in order to ward off the Hu. All the while, the warring states in caps and girdles118 were seven, and [of these] three states119 bordered on the Hsiung-nu. Afterwards, at the time of the Chao Commander Li Mu 李牧 (fl. 244-229), 120 the Hsiung-nu did not dare to enter the Chao borderlands. Later, Ch’in wiped out the Six States and the First Emperor sent Meng T’ien 蒙恬121 to command a host of hundred thousand122 and go north to attack the Hu and recover the entire Honan 河南 territory. He took advantage of the Ho 河 to make a barrier,123 building forty-four124 prefectural city walls overlooking the Ho and moving exiled people as garrison troops125 to fill them. Then, he had the Straight Road,126 connect from 115 In Ch’in times, the seat of administration of Yu-pei-p’ing Commandery was located about fifty miles east of modern Peking; compare T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:41 and 2:9-10. 116 Along the northern coast of the Po-hai Sea. The seat of administration of Liao-hsi Commandery was probably located at Yang-le 陽樂, 130 miles west of modern Shenyang in Liaoning; compare T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:41 and 2:10. 117 Liao-tung Commandery probably took Hsiang-p’ing as its seat of administration, see n. 112 above; compare T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 1:42 and 2:10. 118 Kuan-tai chan-kuo 冠帶戰國. This expression refers to two typical features of the Chinese dress and the cultural identity they provided. There lies a certain irony, if not sloppiness, in the fact that Chao is counted here as a state “in caps and girdles,” the same Chao that a few lines before was singled out as having changed its custom to wearing barbarian dress. However, the change of dress was obviously induced by considerations of military practicability and involved cavalry troops wearing trousers in the first place. It is probable that not every part of the garment culture instantly changed. 119 Namely, Yen 燕, Chao 趙, and Ch’in 秦. 120 On this individual and his peculiar tactics against the Hsiung-nu, see Shih chi, 21.2449; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:271-2. The dates given for him reflect the year when he was first made general and the year when he was killed. It is possible, though, that his great victory over an army of hundred thousand Hsiung-nu, that had the latter refrain from further attacks, happened shortly before 244. 121 On this famous general, see Shih chi, 88.2565 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:361). 122 Han shu, 94A.3748, writes “several hundred thousand.” 123 According to the T’ai-k’ang ti-chi 太康地記 (“So-yin”), “The nine hundred li of Ch’in borderline from north of Wu-yüan 五原 (onwards) was called Tsao-yang 造陽; running eastwards it ended in the Li-pen 利賁 Mountains, west of Han-yang 漢陽,” which must be a mistake for “Yüyang 漁陽.” See T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:9. 124 Note that on Shih chi, 6.253, the number thirty-four is given in the same context. The editors have indicated that they think this is a mistake. If so, this mistake was made even before T’ang times, because the “So-yin” (Shih chi, 6.254, n. 12) also cites this text with the number thirty-four. 125 Che shu 適戍. Shu 戍 were garrison troops. For the term che 適 (or 謫), comprising not only criminals, but also merchants, men living with the families of their wives–and thus evading

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

255

Chiu-yüan 九原127 to Yün-yang 雲陽. By staying close to cliffs, by taking gorges and valleys as moats, and by putting in order what could be refurbished,128 he started in Lin-t’ao 臨洮 and went to Liao-tung over more than ten thousand li.129 Moreover, he crossed the Ho and occupied Mount Yang 陽 and the central part of Pei-chia 北假.130

taxes–and other badly reputed elements of society, see T’ung-tsu Ch’ü, Han Social Structure (Seattle and London: Univ. of Washington Press, 1972), pp. 328-9, n. 21. See also Shih chi, 6.253 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:145, n. 216); Hori Toshikazu 堀敏一, “Kandai no shichikataku to sono kigen” 漢代の七科謫とその起原, Sundai shigaku 駿台史學, 57 (1982): 1-27; Ochi Shigeaki 越 智重明, “Shichikataku wo megutte” 七科謫をめぐって, (Kyūshū daigaku) Tōyōshi ronshū （九 州大學）東洋史論集, 11 (1983): 1-26. 126 An imperial highway that ran for about five hundred miles from the capital Hsien-yang 咸 陽 straight north; see Shih chi, 6.256 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:148, n. 241). The archaeological remains of this highway are documented in Kansu wen-wu-chü 甘肅文物局, Ch’in Chih-tao k’aoch’a 秦直道考察 (Lanchow: Lan-chou University Press, 1996). 127 Name of a Commandery located ten miles west of modern Pao-t’ou in Inner Mongolia; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17. 128 This surely describes the construction of border fortifications (the “Great Wall”), though similar wording (ch’ien shan yin ku 塹山堙谷, “cutting through mountains and filling up valleys”) is used on Shih chi, 6.256 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:148), exclusively for the construction of the Straight Road, the subject of the preceding sentence. The phrase ... k’o shan che chih chih …可繕 者治之 in particular shows that already this wall relied as much as possible on the work of precursors, as it obviously refers to extant walls and watch-towers that had fallen into disrepair and that were now reused by the Ch’in. As much is indicated by the Han shu (94A.3748) parallel, that has ... k’o shan che shan che …可繕者繕之, “repairing what could be repaired,” instead. This removes the ambiguity of the chih 治 that is taken by Yang Yen-ch’i (110.3816)–and similarly by Watson (Han, 2:160), though his is more a paraphrase than a translation–in its other standard meaning “to build.” Only de Groot, Hunnen, p. 39, mistakenly relates ... k’o shan che chih chih to the construction of the Straight Road. The stance of the Chung-hua editors of the Shih chi is not clear. Unlike Takigawa (110.14)–and also unlike Wang Hsien-ch’ien, Han shu pu-chu (Taipei: Hsin-wen-feng, 1988; 110.5a), and the Chung-hua editors for the Han shu–they do not put a comma before k’o shan che 可繕者. This, at least, leaves open the formal possibility to read, “those among the moats, gorges, and valleys that could be filled up ....” Thanks are due to Tomiya Itaru 冨 谷至 for providing the correct interpretation of this sentence. 129 That is, more than 2,500 miles. This enterprise is also mentioned on Shih chi, 88.2570; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:366. 130 This is also described on Shih chi, 6.253 (Grand Scribe’s Records 1:146).

256

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

[2887] All the while, the Tung Hu were mighty and the Yüeh-chih 月氏131 were at their peak. The Shan-yü 單于132 of the Hsiung-nu was named T’ou-man 頭曼. T’ou-man could not overcome the Ch’in and moved northwards. After more than ten years (207 B.C.), Meng T’ien died,133 the feudal lords turned against Ch’in, the Central States were thrown into confusion, and all those, whom Ch’in had moved as exiles to be stationed at the border, again left [for their homes]. At this, the Hsiung-nu gained more leeway. Once again, they gradually crossed the Ho southwards to share with [*2888*] the Central States the old barrier. The Shan-yü had an Heir named Mao-tun 冒頓.134 Later, there was a beloved Yen-chih 閼氏,135 who gave birth to a younger son, and the Shan-yü wanted to 131 On this people, probably speakers of a Tocharian language, see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 456-9. See also n. 353 below. 132 Also transcribed Ch’an-yü and translated as “Khan.” The Han shu, 94A.3751, gives the following explanation of this title: “The Shan-yü’s cognomen is Luan-ti 攣鞮. His state calls him Ch’eng-li ku-t’u shan-yü 撐犁孤塗單于. The Hsiung-nu call heaven (or: the sky) ch’eng-li, and they call a son ku-t’u. Shan-yü is a description of something vast. (The title Shan-yü) expresses that he is shan-yü [vast] like heaven (or: the sky).” The “So-yin,” after quoting these lines, adds a report from the Hsüan-yen ch’un-ch’iu 玄晏春秋: “Shih An read the Han shu and did not understand this word [i.e., Shan-yü]. There was a Hu 胡 slave next to him who said to him: ‘This is what the Hu call Son of Heaven.’ [...]” A brief overview over different theories about the origin of the title Shan-yü is provided in Sophia Karin Psarras, “Han and Xiongnu,” pp. 127-8. For a comprehensive discussion, see Uchida Gimpu 內田吟風, Kita Ajia shi kenkyu. Kyodo hen 北アジア史研究－匈奴 篇 (2nd. ed., Kyoto: Dohosha, 1988), pp. 83-105. 133 For the circumstances of the death of this most famous Ch’in general, see Shih chi, 88.2569-70; Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:365-6. 134 Depending on which commentary one trusts, there are altogether four different pronunciations to the characters writing this name: Mao-tun, Mo-tun, Mo-tu, Mo-t’u. This, in turn, has been claimed to be related to either Turkic-Uighur “baghatur,” “brave warrior” (Friedrich Hirth’s opinion) or Mongolian “bogdo,” “holy man” (Shiratori Kurakichi’s 白鳥庫吉 opinion); see Ts’en Chung-mien 岑仲勉,“Mao-tun chih yü-yüan chi ch’i yin-tu” 冒頓之語源及其音讀, Hsi-pei t’ung-hsün 西北通訊, 3:1 (1948), rpt. in Lin Kan 林幹, ed., Hsiung-nu shih lun-wen hsüan-chi (1919-1979) 匈奴史論文選集 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1983), pp. 217-21. Von Zach, “Verbesserung zu de Groot,” p. 133, notes that Manchu transcriptions always read mete, not motun. 135 This was the title of a Shan-yü’s wife or consort. The “So-yin” cites the letter of a King of Yen 燕 who gives the following explanation: “At the foot of the mountains, there is the safflower plant [for this, see Bernard E. Read, Chinese Medical Plants from the Pen Ts’ao Kang Mu 本草綱 目, A.D. 1596. 3rd Edition of a Botanical, Chemical and Pharmacological Reference List (Taipei: SMC, 1982, no. 21; reprint from the Peking National History Bulletin, 1936)] [...]. The people from the Northern Regions search after its flower to dye (things) orange. They gather the fresh ones

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

257

depose Mao-tun and install the younger son, so he sent Mao-tun as a hostage to the Yüeh-chih 月氏. After Mao-tun had become hostage of the Yüeh-chih, T’ouman fiercely attacked the Yüeh-chih. The Yüeh-chih wanted to kill Mao-tun; Mao-tun stole [one of] their fine horses, mounted it and fled home. T’ou-man regarded him as stalwart and ordered him to lead ten thousand horsemen. Maotun then created and made howling arrows.136 He thoroughly drilled his mounted among the upper blossoms to make rouge [Yen-chih 【火因】（煙＝胭）肢]. The women use this for make-up. [...] That the Hsiung-nu name their wives Yen-chih 閼支, expresses that they are lovely as rouge. [...].” Modern scholars have reconstructed the ancient pronunciation of 閼氏 as something like hati, hatin, hatsi, or atsi, and have pointed out that the Mongols call their wives hatun, the Tungusic people asi or aši (Edouard Chavannes and Shiratori Kurakichi as cited by Hsü Fu 徐復: “Yen-chih tu-yin k’ao” 閼氏讀音考, Tung-fang tsa-chih 東方雜誌, 41:5 [1945], rpt. in Lin Kan, ed., Hsiung-nu shih lun-wen hsüen-chi (1919-1979), 1983, pp. 222-6). Others have tried to connect the word yen-chih to the Sogdian Word for “woman,” inč (Elling O. Eide in a letter of January 15th, 2003 citing F.W.K. Müller, “Uigurische Glossen,” Ostasiatischen Zeitschrift 8 (1920), p. 314). 136 Ming-ti 鳴鏑. Arrows with holes in the head, or in a tubular application right beneath the head, that produced all kinds of howling, whistling, whirring, buzzing, or humming sounds when discharged where a widespread multi-purpose tool used for hunting and in warfare by the Inner Asian peoples. Ceremonial uses are also recorded as, for instance, in the Secret History of the Mongols, §116 (see Igor de Rachewiltz, The Secret History of the Mongols. A Mongolian Epic Chronicle of the Thirteenth Century [Brill: Leiden, 2004], p. 44, and notes with further references on p. 437). Most elaborately, the forms and functions of these arrows are dealt with in K. U[ray]Köhalmi, “Über die pfeifenden Pfeile der innerasiatischen Reiternomaden,” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 3.1953: 45-71. However, the author mainly probes into the related terminology and examples from much later times although she briefly mentions this passage in the Shih chi as the earliest occurrence. Benjamin Wallacker, “Notes on the History of the Whistling Arrow,” Oriens, 11 (1958): 181-2, on the other hand has drawn attention to the fact that a kind of “whistling arrow” (hao-shih 嚆矢) is already mentioned once in Chuang-tzu 莊子 11, “Tsai you” 在 宥 , i.e. in a source that is thought to predate Mao-tun considerably. He also cites occurrences of the terms ming-ti and hsiang-shih 響矢, literally “sounding arrow,” in the earliest Japanese sources (from the fifth through seventh centuries) and refers to Japanese specimen found by archaeologists that were “‘made of deerhorn’ with three holes.” None of the terms given for Inner Asian specimen of howling arrows, however, resembles the word ming-ti even slightly, so that it remains doubtful whether this alleged invention or creation of Mao-tun and the much later examples were really of the same kind. The only early archaeological objects from the east Eurasian steppe that have been identified as ming-ti 鳴嘀 (sic!) are two little tubular pieces made of bone with three holes found c. thirtyeight miles west of modern Hailar in the utmost northeast of Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:2). The brief description and singular line-drawing of one of them, however, does not allow to see any kind of pointed arrow head attached to the tube (Nei-meng-ku tzu-chih-ch’ü wen-wu kung-tsotui 內蒙古自治區文物工作隊, “Nei-meng-ku Ch’en-ba-erh-hu-ch’i Wan-kung ku-mu ch’ing-li chien-pao” 內蒙古陳巴爾虎旗完工古墓清理簡報, K’ao-ku, 1965,6: 278-9, ill. 7.11; I thank

258

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

archers,137 giving out the order: “Those who do not exactly shoot at where the howling arrow is shot, will be beheaded.” When they went hunting birds and beasts, there were those who did not shoot at where the howling arrow was shot and he beheaded them immediately. After a short while, when Mao-tun himself shot at his 138 fine horse with a howling arrow, there were those among the attendants who did not dare to shoot and Mao-tun immediately beheaded those who had not shot at the fine horse. After a short time had passed, when he himself shot again with a howling arrow at his beloved wife, there were some among the attendants who were quite afraid and did not dare to shoot and Maotun again beheaded them. After a short time had passed, when Mao-tun went out hunting and with a howling arrow shot at the Shan-yü’s fine horse, the attendants all shot at it. At this, Mao-tun knew that his attendants could all be made use of. He followed his father, the Shan-yü T’ou-man, on a hunt and when he shot at T’ou-man with a howling arrow, all his attendants, following the howling arrow, also shot and killed the Shan-yü T’ou-man. Subsequently, [Mao-tun] executed

Nicola Di Cosmo for this reference). What is more, the site is not even roughly dated and is situated in an area that seems to have been dominated by the Hsien-pei rather than the Hsiung-nu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:2, 39, 67). Although actual bronze arrow heads with holes have also been found, most of these do not fit the time and region of Mao-tun. Six specimen from the ninth or eighth century B.C. were unearthed from a site in Liao-ning (Liao-ning-sheng Chao-wu-ta-meng wen-wu kung-tso-tui 遼寧省昭烏達盟文物工作, “Ning-ch’eng-hsien Nan-shan-ken ti shih-kuo mu” 寧城 縣南山根的石槨墓, K’ao-ku hsüeh-pao, 1973,2: 32, pl. 6.11). Another type–with smaller holes– was even found in Fukien. This has been identified as chia-lu 鉀鑪, according to a description in Fang-yen 方言 (Sun Chi 孫 機 , Han-tai wu-chih wen-hua tzu-liao t’u-shuo, p. 138; see also Hayashi Minao 林巳奈夫, ed., Kandai no bunbutsu 漢代の文物 [Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 1976], pl. 10-67). Only five arrow (or crossbow bolt?) heads with holes from a late Warring States period site were found on Hsiung-nu territory. These were probably mounted on a wooden shaft (Yi-k’o-chao-meng wen-wu kung-tso-tui 伊克昭盟文物工作隧 et al., “Hsi-kou-p’an Hsiung-nu mu” 西溝畔匈奴墓, Wen-wu, 1980.7: 4, 9.27). 137 It is not entirely clear whether the drill consists in what follows, namely, Mao-tun directing the aim of his archers with his howling arrows, or whether this practice happened during a regular riding and shooting drill. Nicola di Cosmo (communication on September 18th, 2004) has drawn attention to the epical topic of the formation of a bodyguard unit–later called ordo, related to the word “horde”–as a kernel of the future state, that seems to belong to the common stock of lore in several Asian, especially Central Asian, societies. On this, see also Christopher I. Beckwith, “Aspects of the Early History of the Central Asian Guard Corps in Islam,” Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi, 4.1984: 29-43 (I thank the author for this reference). Therefore, the following story does not appear to be merely motivated by the attempt to give this narrative an additional chill, but does probably draw on some previously existing tale, be that oral or written, fictitious or true. 138 Han shu, 94A.3749, does not have ch’i 其, “his.”

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

259

all: his stepmothers and younger brothers as well as those among the great ministers who did not listen and follow. Mao-tun installed himself as Shan-yü. [2889] Mao-tun had already been installed,139 when at that time the Tung Hu were mighty and at their peak. When they heard that Mao-tun had killed his father and installed himself, they sent an envoy telling Mao-tun that they wanted to obtain the Thousand-li Horse140 that T’ou-man once had.141 Mao-tun asked the assembled ministers and the assembled ministers all said, “The Thousand-li Horse is the a treasured horse of the Hsiung-nu, do not give it away!” Mao-tun said, “How come rather than cherish one’s neighboring state you would cherish a single horse?” Consequently, he gave them the Thousand-li Horse. After a short time had passed, the Tung Hu thought that Mao-tun was in awe of them. Thus, they sent an envoy telling Mao-tun that they wanted to obtain one of the Shanyü’s Yen-chih 閼氏. Mao-tun again asked his attendants. The attendants were all angry and said: “It is only because the Tung Hu are devoid of moral principles, that they request a Yen-chih! We ask to attack them.” Mao-tun said: “How come rather than cherish one’s neighboring state you would cherish a single woman?” Consequently, he took his beloved Yen-chih and gave her to the Tung Hu. The King of the Tung Hu grew ever more arrogant and went west to invade [Hsiungnu territory]. Between [him] and the Hsiung-nu, there was in the middle 142 abandoned land, where nobody had settled, of more than thousand li [on a side]. Each stayed on his side and built earthenworks.143 The Tung Hu sent an envoy

139 Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) claims that Mao-tun became Shan-yü in the first year of the Second Emperor of Ch’in, i.e., 209 B.C. 140 Ch’ien-li-ma 千里馬; on this famous type of horse, that allegedly could cover thousand li– c. 257 miles–in one day and was also called “heavenly horse,” t’ien-ma 天馬, or “blood-sweating horse,” han-hsüeh-ma 汗血馬, see Shih chi, 24.1179, n. 5, 43.1780, n. 6, and 123.3170. 141 Han shu, 94A.3750, has hao 號 instead of yu 有, and indicates by yüeh 曰 that the following is direct speech: “[We] want to obtain the horse that was called Thousand-li Horse during T’ou-man’s time.” 142 Yü Hsiung-nu chien, chung 與匈奴閒，中…, literally, “[In] the in-between area (= chien) with the Hsiung-nu, in the middle ....” The Han shu, 94A.3750, has chung-chien 中閒…, “in the central in-between-area ...,” i.e., “in the midst,” instead.

143

Ou-t’o 甌脫; this term is explained by the traditional commentators either as “earthen room” (t’u-shih 土室) or “earth pit” (t’u-hsüeh 土穴) or as a “place of the border guard” (chieh shang t’un-shou ch’u 界上屯守處). This seems to be the most reasonable interpretation; see Uchida, Kyodo, pp. 59-60. Another explanation as a place name is not convincing, while the basis for Yang Yen-ch’i’s 楊燕起 (Shih chi ch’üan-yi

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

260

telling Mao-tun: “The abandoned territory outside the trenches at the border between the Hsiung-nu’s place and us is not something the Hsiung-nu are able to reach. We want to possess it.” Mao-tun asked the assembled ministers. Some among the assembled ministers said: “That abandoned territory–giving it away is as permissable, as not giving it away may also be permissable.” At this, Mao-tun became furious and said: “Territory is the root of the state, how can you give it away?!” All those who said, “give it away,” were beheaded.144 Mao-tun mounted his horse and ordered that, if there was somebody in the state who would remain behind, he should be beheaded. Subsequently, he moved eastward to launch a surprise attack on the Tung Hu. The Tung Hu had at first taken Mao-tun lightly and had not made preparations. When Mao-tun with his troops arrived, he attacked, crushed, and wiped out the King of the Tung Hu and captured his people and livestock.145 Having [*2890*] returned, he went west to attack and put to flight the Yüeh-chih 月氏, and south to annex the Lou-fan 樓煩 and the Honan 河南 King of the Pai-yang 白羊.146 He entirely recovered what Ch’in 秦 had sent Meng T’ien 蒙恬 to seize of the Hsiung-nu’s territory. With the Han 漢, he joined the old border south of the Ho 河 up to Ch’ao-na 朝𨚗𨚗147 and Fu-shih 膚 施. Then, he invaded Yen 燕 and Tai 代. At this time, the Han 漢 troops and Hsiang Yü 項 羽 were holding each other off and the Central States were exhausted from [the use of] weapons. For this reason, Mao-tun was able to become strong on his own, with more than 300,000 bow-drawing knights. From Ch’un-wei 淳維 up to T’ou-man 頭曼,148 for more than thousand years, [the Hsiung-nu]–looming large at times, at others less so–had been split up and

史 記 全 譯 (Kweiyang: Kuei-chou jen-min, 2001; 110.3818) gloss of ou-t’o as “wilderness without vegetation” is not clear. 144

The Chung-hua editors do not mark it as such, but this sentence–as an order: “Decapitate all...”–could be part of the preceding direct speech, too. 145 This happened around 206 B.C., see Wu and Lu, 110.2856n. Also, Mao-tun’s campaigns are related to on Hou Han-shu, 23.815 and 816, n. 11. 146 At this point, several editions have the sentence, “He invaded Yen 燕 and Tai 代,” that is repeated below. Wang Nien-sun had suggested that this is superfluous; see the discussion on this problem in Wang Shu-min, 110.2965. The Chung-hua editors have followed this opinion. The Han shu parallel also does not have that sentence. 147 The Han shu, 94A.3750, writes 那. 148 This and the following paragraphs about the Hsiung-nu’s institutions seem to have been inserted into the chronological narration somewhat erratically. Perhaps, this is not the original arrangement of the text.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

261

scattered. That was already a long time ago, and their hereditary accounts 149 could not be obtained and put into order any more. However, when it came to Mao-tun, the Hsiung-nu became exceedingly strong and great, subduing all the Northern Barbarians150 and to the south becoming an antagonist on a par with the Central States. 151 Only then could their hereditary accounts and offices and titles of the state 152 and its officials be obtained and recorded.153 They establish Worthy Kings to the Left and Right (Tso-hsien-wang 左賢王 and Yu-hsien-wang 右賢王), Lu-li 谷蠡 Kings154 to the Left and Right, Generalsin-chief 155 of the Left and Right, Grand Chief Commandants of the Left and Right, Grand Tang-hu 當 戶 156 to the Left and Right, and Ku-tu 骨 都 157 Marquises to the Left and Right. The Hsiung-nu call a worthy a T’u-ch’i 屠耆.158 149 Shih chuan 世傳, presumably historiographical records of some sort that had been handed down from generation to generation. Watson (Han, 2:163) translates the term as “account of the lineage of the Hsiung-nu rulers.” 150 Pei-yi 北夷 used here as a general term, not as ethnonym. 151 Chung-kuo 中國, the Han shu, 94A.3751, has chu-Hsia 諸夏, “the successors of the Hsia,” instead. On the various shades of this term see Takatsu Junya 高津純也, “Sen Shin jidai no ‘sho Ka’ to ‘Iteki’” 先秦時代の「諸夏」と「夷狄」, Nihon Shin Kan shi gakkai kaihō 日本秦漢史學會＝ 報, 1 (2000): 76-110. 152 Kuo 國. The Han shu, 94A.3751, has (hsin) [hsing] （信）〔姓〕, i.e., “cognomens,” instead. 153 The Han shu, 94A.3751, at this juncture offers an explanation of the title of Shan-yü; see n. 132. In the Han shu, therefore, the subject of the following sentence would be “he,” that is, the Shan-yü. 154 The reading of this title follows Fu Ch’ien’s opinion as given in the “Chi-chieh” and the “So-yin.” 155 Ta-chiang 大將; for practical reasons, this is assumed to be an abbreviation for ta-chiangchün 大 將軍 , lest the literal translation “Grand Commander” is confused with the following “Grand Chief Commandants,” ta-tu-wei 大 都 尉 . There may also be textual reasons for this conjecture; see n. 169 below, where this kind of abbreviation may have been used again for the same two offices without the ta. 156 Tang-hu is probably a phonetic transcription of a Hsiung-nu word, not a translation of its meaning. Examples (Shih chi, 110.2901-2; Han shu, 54.2453) show that these officials or nobles were used as military advisors and messengers, but there is no guarantee that this was their primary function. The text here seems to indicate that Tang-hu occupied a rather low–or even the lowest– position within the highest ranks of Hsiung-nu nobility. See also n. 170 below. 157 “Chi-chieh” and “So-yin” explain this as high-ranking vassals of a “different cognomen” (yi-hsing ta-ch’en 異姓大臣), i.e., presumably of families other than the ruling house of the Shanyü. 158 Or Chu-ch’i 諸耆, according to one variant version cited by Hsü Kuang (“Chi chieh”).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

262

Therefore, they usually take the Heir as T’u-ch’i King to the Left. Naturally, 159 [since] those from the Worthy Kings to the Left and Right down to the Tang-hu, the great ones have ten thousand160 horsemen [and] the lesser ones have several thousand, all twenty-four chieftains hold the title “[Leader of] Ten Thousand Horsemen.” All great vassals have hereditary positions. The Hu-yen 呼 衍 Lineage, 161 the Lan 蘭 Lineage, and afterwards there was the Hsü-pu 須卜 Lineage–[*2891*] these three cognomina are their nobility. All Kings and Leaders of the Left direction settle in the Eastern region.162 Those who directly [face] Shang-ku and beyond, adjoin eastwards to the Wei-mo 穢貉163 and Ch’aohsien 朝鮮.164 The Kings and Leaders of the Right direction settle in the Western region. Those who directly [face] Shang Commandery and further west, adjoin to the Yüeh-chih 月氏, the Ti 氐 and the Ch’iang 羌.165 As for the Shan-yü, his

159

Tzu-ju 自如; the Han shu (94A.3751) parallel has just ju 如 instead. The translation is tentative. It takes the initial word (ju or tzu-ju) as being related to the title that concludes the sentence, though it is not entirely clear whether it is used to remedy the illogic claim that even those leaders who do not command ten thousand men are called by that title. 160 Han shu, 94A.3751, has “more than ten thousand.” 161 Of the Hu-yen Lineage, Yen Shih-ku (“Cheng-yi”), says that this was identical with the Hsien-pei 鮮卑 cognomen Hu-yen 呼延 of his own times. This could indicate some kind of genetic or at least cultural relationship between the Hsiung-nu and their successors from the northeast. Both, the Hu-yen and the Hsü-pu Lineages mentioned below, were favorite consort families of the Shanyü, according to a Hou Han shu 後漢書 as quoted in all three major Shih chi commentaries. The respective information is found on Fan Yeh’s Hou Han shu, 89.2944-5. The Hsü-pu in particular are said to have been in charge of trials, i.e., they may have had a hereditary claim on the positions of judges or their equivalent in Hsiung-nu society. 162 This reveals that the Hsiung-nu had the same directional sense as the Chinese, namely that their ruler was imagined as “looking south,” or that their maps, if they had those, would have pointed south. Alternatively, this information actually reflects the contemporary Chinese practice and was just wrongly ascribed to the Hsiung-nu by the Chinese chroniclers. 163 Or the Wei and the Mo. Elsewhere, these are also written 濊 or 獩 and 貊 respectively. On the curiosity of these variants, previous references (especially to the Mo), the regional affiliation– since Han times–of both to Southern Manchuria, and on Fu-yü 夫餘, Kao-kou-li 高句麗, and other successor states of the Wei-mo, see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 442-6. 164 A state or a group of states on the Korean Peninsula. 165 On the Ti and Ch’iang, both probably Tibeto-Burman speakers, see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 418-9, and n. 27 above. According to the Shuo-wen chieh-tzu 說文解字 (“Soyin”), the Ch’iang were shepherders. For a comprehensive study, see Wang Ming-k’e [王明珂], “The Ch’iang of Ancient China through the Han Dynasty: Ecological Frontiers and Ethnic Boundaries” (Unpublished Ph.D. Diss., Harvard Univ., 1992).

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

263

court166 directly [faces] Tai and Yün-chung: Each [group or leader] has territory allotted and moves about in search of water and grass.167 As to the Worthy Kings to the Left and Right and the Lu-li Kings to the Left and Right, these have the greatest (domains).168 The Ku-tu Marquises to the Left and Right assist in the government. Each of these twenty-four chieftains also establishes on his own account Chiefs Over a Thousand, Chiefs Over a Hundred, and Chiefs Over Ten [Men], Supporting Minor Kings, Chancellors, Chief Commandants of Fiefs, 169 Tang-hu,170 Chü-ch’ü 且渠,171 and the like.172 166

T’ing 庭. For the Chinese, this inevitably conjured up the picture of a palace. Therefore, the “So-yin” feels compelled to explain that this Hsiung-nu t’ing was but the place were the government of the Hsiung-nu resided, or, in the words of Yüeh Ch’an 樂產 quoted subsequently, “The Shan-yü had no inner and outer city walls, ..., the place in front of the yurts was like a court, therefore it is called t’ing.” However, archaeological excavations found walled city or palace sites even on former Hsiung-nu territory; see Chou Lien-k’uan 周連寬, “Su-lien nan Hsi-po-li-ya so fahsien ti Chung-kuo shih kung-tien yi-chih” 蘇聯南西伯利亞所發現的中國式宮殿遺址, in Lin Kan 林幹, ed., Hsiung-nu shih lun-wen hsüan-chi, pp. 430-45; and Uchida, Kyodo, pp. 54-6; also Huang Wen-pi 黃文弼, “Ch’ien Han Hsiung-nu Shan-yü chien t’ing k’ao” 前漢匈奴單于建庭考, in ibid., pp. 88-91, for philological evidence. Therefore, the traditional opinion that the Hsiung-nu had no cities is not wholly reliable, and it is possible that the Shih chi uses t’ing just at face value. But probably, the government of a semi-nomadic people like the Hsiung-nu did not always reside in their palaces, but, depending on the season, also in tent cities. See n. 13 above. 167 Almost the same two phrases, albeit in reverse order, occur at the beginning of this chapter, on Shih chi, 110.2879; see n. 14 above. 168 The word kuo 國 is put in parentheses in the Chinese original, indicating that it is thought to be spurious. As Liang Yü-sheng (33.1385) indicates, this idea goes back to the Sung scholar Liu Pan 劉攽 (1023-89). 169 Hsiang, feng tu-wei 相、封都尉; this could also be translated as “Chancellors, enfeoffed Chief Commandants,” but this makes no sense in an enumeration of what are clearly military offices. For the same reason, the best solution to deal with the graph feng in this context seems to be Hsü Kuang’s (“Chi-chieh”) remark that one version had chiang 將, “Commanders,” or, perhaps, “Generals” (as an abbreviation for chiang-chün 將軍; see n. 155 above) instead of feng. This would give the string hsiang, jiang(-chün), tu-wei, “Kings, Chancellors, Generals, Chief Commandants,” which would have been the most reasonable for the ancient Chinese reader because it reflects Chinese institutions. The punctuation here follows the seventh print of the Chung-hua shu-chü edition of the Shih chi (1975). Another understanding had been demonstrated in the first print (1959), that takes hsiang-feng 相封, “Chancellors of Fiefs,” as one title. For this reading, Ch’en Chih, Shih chi hsincheng, p. 170, has offered the best solution arguing that this feng stands for pang 邦 because hsiang-pang 相邦, “Chancellor of the Domain,” had been the usual word for the prime minister before pang came to be tabood as the name of Liu Pang 劉邦, the first emperor of the Han, and the Chinese started to use hsiang-kuo 相國, “Chancellor of State,” instead. Here, Ch’en argued, not kuo

264

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

[2892] In the first month of the year, all chieftains have a small meeting at the court of the Shan-yü to perform sacrifices.173 In the fifth month, they have a great meeting at Lung-ch’eng 蘢 城 174 to make offerings to their ancestors, heaven and earth, and the ghosts and spirits. In autumn, when the horses are wellfed, they hold a great meeting at Tai-lin 蹛林,175 to examine and check men and livestock accounts. It is their law that anyone who draws the blade [so much as] a

but the phonetically and graphically much more similar feng was used instead. See also Wu and Lu (110.2858) for a seal that reads “Hsiung-nu hsiang-pang.” The Han shu, 94A.3751, parallel leaves out the feng (or pang or kuo) altogether, although it has a “Hsiung-nu hsiang-kuo” elsewhere; see Ch’en Chih, Han shu hsin-cheng, p. 445. 170 The first print (1959) [Editor’s note: on the first printing of the Shih chi by Chung-hua see the biography of Sung Yün-pin 宋雲彬 in the back matter] mistakenly punctuated tu, wei tang-hu 都、尉當戶. The correct reading is demonstrated on Han shu, 96A.3875 and 96B.3928, where tuwei occurs separately of tang-hu and chü-ch’ü. On the title Tang-hu, see also n. 156 above. 171 The responsibilities of this official are not well known. Various occurrences on Han shu, 94A.3762, 3787, 3789, 3791; 94B.3796, 3822, 3828, 3829; and Hou Han shu, 89.2944, 2950, 2952, 2955, 2962, and 2963 indicate that, like other Hsiung-nu titles, this position was divided into a left and right one. It could also be headed by the term ta 大, “grand.” One historical version of the Shih chi seems to have written chü-chü 且居 instead (see Hou Han shu, 89.2972, editorial comments to line 2944). Yen Shih-ku has drawn attention to the fact that by his time, i.e., in the early T’ang period, Chü-ch’ü had become a cognomen. Cf. also Shih chi, 110.2902 (n. 271 below), where Tanghu Chü-chü may be either one title or two titles held by one incumbent. 172 For an attempt to further explain the institutions of the Hsiung-nu, see Hsieh Chien 謝劍, “Hsiung-nu cheng-chih chih-tu de yen-chiu” 匈奴政治制度的研究, BIHP, 41:2 (1969): 231-72. 173 On the matter of the religious beliefs of the Hsiung-nu, see Hsieh Chien 謝劍, “Hsiung-nu tsung-chiao hsin-yang chi ch’i liu-pien” 匈奴宗教信仰及其流變, BIHP, 42 (1971): 571-613, and Psarras, “Han and Xiongnu,” pp. 129-32, and Di Cosmo, Ancient China and its Enemies, pp. 27980. 174 “Water-weed City.” The Han shu, 94B.3752 and 3766, writes Lung-cheng 龍城, “Dragon City,” and Ts’ui Hao 崔浩 (“So-yin”), explains, “The Hu of the Western Region all serve the dragon spirit. Therefore, they name the place of their big meeting Dragon City.” The commentary also quotes the Hou Han shu with the words, “It is the Hsiung-nu’s custom that they perform a dragon sacrifice thrice a year to make offerings to the spirit of Heaven.” 175 Most commentators from the Latter Han period and later who are quoted in the “Chi-chieh” and the “So-yin” agree that this is the name of a place where the Hsiung-nu met in the eighth month to make offerings. However, Yen Shih-ku (“Cheng-yi”) says, “Tai means to make offerings by surrounding the woods. It was a custom of the Hsien-pei, handed down from olden times, that, when at the autumn offerings there were no more woods and trees left, they would honour willow twigs that were put up vertically, and the assembled cavalrymen would chase around them three times before they stopped. This was a law that had been bequeathed to them.”

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

265

chih dies;176 those who are tried for robbery have their houses confiscated; those whose crimes are petty have their bones crushed;177 those [with] great [crimes] die. As to trials, the longest ones do not surpass ten days and the prisoners of [any] one state are but a few people. And when the Shan-yü in the morning leaves the camp, he prays to the incipient birth of the sun, in the evening, he prays to the moon. When they sit down, their men of honor sit on the left and face north. As for the days, they regard the wu 戊 and the chi 己 days as superior.178 When they accompany their dead,179 there are inner and outer coffins,

176

general.

This may refer to the situation of the above-mentioned meetings or to times of peace in

177 The commentaries seem to reflect surprising uncertainty already in ancient times about what this ya 軋 meant. Both the Han shu yin-yi 漢書音義 (“Chi-chieh”) and Fu Ch’ien (“So-yin”) claim that it meant “to cut the [culprit’s] face with a knife.” But the “So-yin” also cites Teng Chan 鄧展 with the opinion that it meant li 歷 (usually “to pass,” but here probably a loan) as well as the San Ts’ang 三蒼 (a Han source compiled during the Chin 晉 period) with “ya means nien 輾,” which in turn is further explained by the Shuo wen gloss “nien means li 轢, to crush (by means of a wheel).” Yen Shih-ku (“Cheng-yi”) is most elaborate: “Ya means crushing the joints by means of a wheel (nien-li), just like now [the punishment of] breaking someone’s ankles (ya huai 厭踝).” Most bewildering, however, is Ju Ch’un’s (“So-yin”) comment chua, ch’ih yeh 撾，抶也. With this punctuation of the Chung-hua editors, this has to be translated, “chua (to pound) means ‘to whip,’” but it could also be an explanation of ya–then without the comma–namely, “(it) means to pound and whip.” If the Chung-hua editors’ punctuation is correct and Ju Ch’un actually explains a graph that is not in the main text as we have it, this could mean that the main text was longer or different originally or that there were several versions of it, and this in turn would, of course, explain the existence of so many diverse commentaries. But there are even more uncertainties about these explanations or our interpretations, like: why should a wheel have figured so prominently in the law of a people that did not actually use chariots very much? 178 Among the so-called “heavenly stems” (kan-chih 干 支 ), the ten symbols that in combination with the twelve so-called “earthly Branches” (ti-chih 地支) form the sexagenary circle that is used in calendrics, wu and chi are fifth and sixth symbols respectively. As such, their combination represents the center as well as the entity “earth.” 179 For a brief account of what archaeology has to say on Hsiung-nu burial customs and how these compare with the following description, see Di Cosmo, Ancient China and its Enemies, pp. 273-4. Although burial customs are the single aspect of Hsiung-nu culture that should be relatively easy to compare independently of textual sources–because almost all archaeological sites in China, Mongolia, and Russia interpreted as belonging to the Hsiung-nu are tombs–the overall picture archaeology yields is still not too congruent with the information given here, or is ambiguous at best. The reason for this may also lie in an all too imperfect practice of archaeological reporting. For a detailed criticism of archaeological practice and those Hsiung-nu sites that are reported upon so far, see Psarras, “Han and Xiongnu,” pp. 79-101.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

266

gold and silver, clothing and furs,180 but there is no building of tumuli or planting of trees, 181 and [there are no] mourning clothes; those among the close and favorite subjects and concubines who follow the dead [into the grave] do at most reach several thousand [or] hundreds182 of persons. When they [are about to] undertake something, they watch the stars and the moon:183 If the moon is at its fullest and strongest, then they launch attacks and battle, if the moon is waning, then they draw back their troops. When they attack in battle, cutting off heads as trophies184 is rewarded by one goblet185 of wine, and the booty that they make is given to them on that account. When they capture human beings, these become slaves. Therefore, in battle, each and everyone spontaneously tries to make a gain. They are good at tempting [their] troops, so that they [boldly] charge the enemy.186 Therefore, when they see an enemy, they go after a gain, just like a 180

Yi-ch’iu 衣裘, Han shu, 94A.3752, has yi-ch’ang 衣裳, “shirts and skirts,” instead. Both have to be understood as funeral gifts. Grammatically speaking, yi could also be a verb: “They wear furs,” but this may contradict the following statement that there is no special mourning garment. 181 The construction of earthen mounds (tumuli) above a grave and the planting of trees on top and around the mound was a Chinese custom accorded to persons of the rank of a shih 士 and above. Note however, that the “Chi-chieh” cites Chang Hua 張華 with the remark that the Hsiungnu’s funerary mounds were called tou-lo 逗落, thus contradicting the Shih chi’s claim that they do not have mounds. 182 Shu ch’ien pai-jen 數千百人; this is clearly a corruption. Han shu, 94A.3752, reads shu shih pai-jen 數十百人, which is also unusual. Yen Shih-ku explains this as “several tens or hundred(s) of persons.” 183 The stars do not figure in the Han shu, 94A.3752, parallel, that reads, “When they undertake something, the often follow the moon: It it is ...,” etc. 184 Several major dictionaries (with the notable exception of the Tz’u-yüan and the Ku-tai Han-yü tz’u-tien) gloss shou-lu 首虜 as “heads of the enemy and captives of war” or the like. In most contexts, however, it is not at all clear whether living captives were actually taken and counted as merit in the same way as severed enemy heads did. Some of the headcounts in this chapter end in jen 人, “people,” but often chi 級, the unit for “trophy,” is used instead. Also, this instance seems to indicate that shou-lu actually meant only–or at least predominantly–severed heads, not living captives. At least as far as the Hsiung-nu are concerned, the vocabulary used for raids, that obviously functioned as a means of gaining foreign slaves, is lüeh 略, “to abduct.” For the Chinese side, though they may have practiced the same methods, or at least were sure to have had the same needs for slave labour, this terminology is not used. 185 Chih 巵; actually more of a pyxis, a round box complete with lid and small handles, if the examples from the Han tomb no. 168 at Feng-huang-shan 鳳凰山 shown in Han-yü ta-tz’u-tien, vol. 1, p. 918, are correct. Unlike a pyxis, however, the chih was used as a container for alcoholic beverages. 186 Most translators agree that this means something like, “They are good at luring [enemy] troops in order to trap the enemy.” This seems to be vindicated by the fact that, later on, this tactic

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

267

gathering of birds. When they are pressed or defeated, then [their might] crumbles and [they] disperse like clouds. Who in battle helps to carry away a dead [comrade], obtains all of the dead’s household possessions. [2893] Later,187 [Mao-tun] went northward to subdue the states of the Hun-yü 渾庾,188 the Ch’ü-yi 屈射,189 the Ting-ling 丁零, the Li-k’un 鬲昆, and the Hsinli 薪 黎 . 190 At this, the nobles and the great ministers of the Hsiung-nu all submitted and regarded Mao-tun Shan-yü as worthy. [2894] At this time, the Han 漢 had just stabilized the Central States 191 and had moved Hsin 信, the King of Han 韓, to Tai 代 with Ma-yi 馬邑 (Ma Town)192 as his capital.193 The Hsiung-nu launched a great attack on Ma-yi and besieged it. Hsin, the King of Han,194 surrendered to the Hsiung-nu. The Hsiungnu captured Hsin, took advantage of this leading the troops southwards to cross [Mount] Kou-chu 句注,195 and while attacking T’ai-yüan 太原 [Commandery], arrived beneath [the city walls of] Chin-yang 晉陽.196 Emperor Kao 高 himself commanded troops and went to attack them. He met with a winterly freeze, rain, and snow and those among the soldiers who lost fingers [due to the cold] were two or three out of ten. At this, Mao-tun feigned197 defeat and fled, luring the Han troops [to follow them]. The Han troops pursued and attacked Mao-tun. Mao-tun is indeed described as used by the Hsiung-nu–though not only by them. Also, the Han shu, 94A.3752, writes pao-ti 包敵 instead, literally, “to wrap up the enemy,” that is again, to trap him. The problem is that such a translation does not fit into the above context which is all about explaining why the Hsiung-nu battle like berserks. 187 Here, the chronological narration from p. 2890 is obviously continued; see n. 148 above. 188 Han shu, 94A.3753, has Hun-yü 渾窳. 189 This reading of 射 as well as the alternative, shih, is given in the “So-yin.” 190 Han shu, 94A.3753, has Hsin-li 新 . 191 Han shu, 94A.3753, reads Han ch’u ting 漢初定, “the Han [themselves] had just been stabilized.” 192 Ma-yi was located hundred miles due north of modern T’ai-yüan in Shansi; T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:18. For the later, famous incident at this place, see Shih chi, 108.2861-2, 109.2870, and 110.2905. 193 Probably, this meant that he became Kong of Tai. For this Han Hsin (or Han-wang Hsin, as he is called to distinguish him from Han Hsin, the Marquis of Huai-yin, see Shih chi, 93.2631, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 146-7. 194 Han shu, 94A.3753 et passim, reads Han Hsin 韓信 throughout. 195 Located about ninety miles north of modern T’ai-yüan in Shansi; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18. 196 The administrative seat of T’ai-yüan Commandery, located about ten miles south of modern T’ai-yüan in Shansi; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18. 197 Yang 詳; Han shu, 94A.3753 et passim, consistently writes yang 陽 instead.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

268

concealed his elite troops showing [only] his meagre and weak [ones]. At this, all of the Han troops, mostly infantry troops, 320,000 [men], went north to pursue them [i.e., the Hsiung-nu]. Emperor Kao first arrived at P’ing-ch’eng 平城.198 The infantry troops had not yet completely arrived, when Mao-tun let loose 400,000199 elite cavalry troops and besieged Emperor Kao at Pai-teng 白登.200 For seven days, the Han troops within and without [the siege] could not relief each other or provide food. As for the Hsiung-nu cavalry, its western side was all white horses, the eastern side was all black horses with white faces, 201 the northern side was all black horses, the southern side was all light brown horses.202 Emperor Kao thereupon sent an envoy secretly presenting generous presents to the Yen-chih [i.e., the Hsiung-nu queen]. The Yen-chih thereupon told Mao-tun: “Two rulers do not trap each other. [Even] if you capture Han territory today, you, Shan-yü, finally won’t ever be able to live there. Moreover, the Han 漢 King also has spirits [on his side]. [If only] you [would] consider this.” Maotun had made appointments with Wang Huang 王 黃 and Chao Li 趙 利 , commanders under Hsin 信, the King of Han 韓, but Huang’s and Li’s troops had not come, [so] he suspected that they had plotted together with the Han 漢. He also took in the words of the Yen-chih and thereupon loosened the siege in one corner. At this, Emperor Kao ordered the officers all to hold back fire, load bolts and, facing outwardly, directly exit through the loosened corner. Finally, they met the great [bulk of the] army, and Mao-tun consequently withdrew [his] troops and left. The Han, too, withdrew [their] troops and dismissed [them], sending Liu Ching 劉敬 to conclude a marital alliance.

198

According to Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) this was in Yen-men 鴈門 Commandery. Han shu, 94A.3753, says “more than 300,000.” 200 The “Cheng-yi” says that the Pai-teng Terrace (t’ai 臺) on top of Mount Pai-teng was situated 30 li east of Ting-hsiang 定襄 District in So-chou 朔州. Though the place name Tinghsiang seems to have moved from about twenty miles south of Huhetot (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18, 5:17) to about fifty miles north of T’ai-yüan in Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:46) with So-chou being mapped right between these two locations (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 5:46), Pai-teng is consistently a little over five miles northeast of modern Ta-t’ung in Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17, 5:17, 46). 201 Mang 駹 is glossed as “not pure” by Cheng Hsüan 鄭玄 (“Cheng-yi”), as “face and neck being white” by the Shuo-wen 說文 (“Cheng-yi”) and as a black horse with a white face by the Erh-ya 爾雅 (“Cheng-yi”). 202 Hsing-ma 騂馬; the Shih-chuan 詩傳, or Commentary to the Shih-ching, as cited by the “So-yin,” glosses hsing as “reddish yellow” (ch’ih-huang 赤黃). 199

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

269

[2895] Thereafter, Hsin 信 , the King of Han 韓 , became a Hsiung-nu commander and Chao Li 趙利 and Wang Huang 王黃 and their men several times betrayed 203 the alliance and invaded and raided Tai and Yün-chung.204 Not a long while thereafter, Ch’en Hsi 陳豨 rebelled and on top of that plotted together with Hsin, the King of Han, to attack Tai. The Han 漢 sent Fan K’uai 樊 噲 to go and attack them and again rout the prefectures of Tai, Yen-men and Yün-chung [but] not to go beyond the barrier. At that time, [some of] the Hsiungnu, because the Han commanders led a host [of troops], surrendered. Therefore, Mao-tun frequently went back and forth, invading and raiding the territory of Tai. At this, the Han 205 suffered from it. Emperor Kao thus sent Liu Ching 劉敬 to offer a princess of the imperial house206 as the Shan-yü’s Yen-chih [i.e., queen] and to annually offer the Hsiung-nu waddings, silk fabric, wine, grain, and [other] foodstuff, each in fixed quantities, and to conclude a marital alliance as brothers; only then did Mao-tun stop [the raiding] for a while. Later, Lu Wan 盧 綰, the King of Yen 燕, rebelled,207 led his party of several thousand208 men to surrender to the Hsiung-nu, and [subsequently] went back and forth to trouble [the area] east of Shang-ku. When Emperor Kao had passed away, 209 during the time of the Filial [Emperor] Hui 惠 and Empress Dowager Lü 呂, the Han had just been stabilized, therefore, the Hsiung-nu became arrogant by this. 210 Mao-tun then drew up a 203

Pei 倍 for pei 背. Han shu, 94A.3754 et passim, consistently uses the latter. According to Han shu, 94A.3754, Yen-men 鴈門 Commandery was also invaded. 205 Han shu, 94A.3754, personalizes this by writing Kao-tsu 高祖, “Emperor Kao,” instead. 206 Tsung-shih nü kung-chu 宗室女公主. The Shih chi, but for one instance (see n. 357), uses kung-chu 公主, “princess,” while Han shu, 94A.3754 et passim, regularly uses weng-chu 翁主 instead. The difference is explained by Ju Ch’un and Yen Shih-ku on Han shu, 1B.78, n.3, to the effect that kung-chu meant sisters (or daughters) of the emperor, while weng-chu were daughters of the feudal lords–from the middle of the Former Han period, these, too, belonged to the imperial clan, of course. The Shih chi’s choice of words here may indicate that this difference during the early Han period was not yet firmly established. 207 Han shu, 94A.3754, says they “rebelled again” (fu fan 復反). 208 Han shu, 94A.3754, has ch’ieh wan 且萬, “almost ten thousand.” 209 Kao-tsu peng 高祖崩; Han shu, 94A.3754, instead concludes the aforegoing paragraph with the words chung Kao-tsu shih 終高祖世, “[thus] ended the era of Kao-tsu.” 210 Han shu, 94A.3754, just says, “During the time of the Filial [Emperor] Hui and Empress Kao, Mao-tun became increasingly arrogant,” exhibiting not only the typical knack for brevity but also for personalizing the action, i.e., writing Mao-tun instead of the Hsiung-nu. Although in this instance, the latter could also be just another way to achieve brevity, for in this way “Mao-tun” can 204

270

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

letter and sent it to Empress Kao,211 using contumacious words.212 When Empress Kao wanted to attack him, the various commanders said: “Even though Emperor Kao was worthy and valorous, yet he still was trapped at P’ing-ch’eng.” Only at this, Empress Kao stopped and again concluded a marital alliance with the Hsiung-nu. Up to [the time] when the Filial [Emperor] Wen 文 had just been enthroned [i.e, 179 B.C.], [the Han] again adopted the procedure of the marital alliance. In his third year (177 B.C.), fifth month,213 the Hsiung-nu Worthy King to the Right entered to settle on the territory of Ho-nan and invade and raid the barbarians who guarded the barrier in Shang Commandery, killing and abducting the people. At this, the Filial Emperor Wen instructed214 the Chancellor Kuan Ying 灌嬰 to send out 85,000 chariots and horsemen,215 take them to Kao-nu 高 奴,216 and attack the Worthy King to the Right. The Worthy King to the Right fled beyond the barrier. Emperor Wen favored T’ai-yüan 太原 with a visit. At that time, the King of Chi-pei 濟北 rebelled and Emperor Wen returned and dismissed the chancellor’s troops who had attacked the Hu 胡. [2896] The next year (176 B.C.), the Shan-yü presented the Han with a letter, that read: “The great Shan-yü of the Hsiung-nu, who has been enthroned by Heaven, respectfully inquires about the Emperor’s well-being. When the be used as subject for the next sentence, there are many other instances where the personalization is less ambiguous; for instance, Shih chi, 110.2904, 2911, etc., or n. 234 below. 211 Kao-hou 高后. Unlike the appellations of other empresses that combine their family’s name with hou, Kao-hou rather means “Kao’s Empress,” i.e., it refers to the wife of the deceased emperor Kao, who was nobody else than the empress dowager from the Lü family. The translation tries to reflect the fact that there is no formal difference to other empresses’ names. 212 Han shu, 94A.3754-55, quotes part of the Shan-yü’s letter to the empress. In it, the Hsiungnu ruler in polite, yet unveiled, manner suggests that the empress marry him. Han shu, 94A.3755, also gives details about the ensuing discussion at court about how to react to the Shan-yü’s insult. Fan K’uai 樊噲 features here as the warmonger as that he is portrayed in the closing words by Ssuma Ch’ien to this chapter (in which he otherwise does not play too outstanding a role). This time, however, his suggestion is forcefully–and successfully–argued against by Chi Pu 季布. 213 Han shu, 94A.3756, just says “in summer.” 214 Han shu, 94A.3756, structures this paragraph somewhat differently, casting the edict in direct speech that also includes information about the Hsiung-nu attack and the addressee of the edict that the Shih chi gives at the beginning of the paragraph. Besides, the edict is made up of a few emotional accusations against the attack. Factual information is roughly the same as in the Shih chi, except what is indicated in the note below. 215 Han shu, 94A.3756, writes “eighty thousand chariots and horsemen [under the command] of the border functionaries.” 216 Located at modern Yen-an in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17).

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

271

Emperor of former times spoke about the matter of marital alliance, [he] abided by the intent of the letter [of the agreement] and [we] met in joy. [Now,] the Han border functionaries have invaded [the territory of] and insulted the Worthy King to the Right. The Worthy King to the Right, without asking for permission,217 listened to the plan of the Hou-yi-lu 後義盧 Marquis Nan-chih 難氏218 and others to distance themselves from219 the Han officials, to break the agreement of the two rulers and separate from the brotherly kin. The Emperor’s reprimanding letters repeatedly arrived, and I have send out envoys so as to report back in writing, [but they] did not come [back], nor did [any] Han envoys arrive.220 If the Han because of this do not make an alliance, the neighboring countries will not support [the Han]. Now, because petty functionaries221 spoiled the agreement, [I] have punished the Worthy King to the Right and send him westward to request [the territory of] the Yüeh-chih 月氏 and to attack them. Thanks to heavenly fortune, the quality of functionaries and soldiers, and the great strength of the horses, we used barbarians to wipe out the Yüeh-chih222 and to completely cut down and kill them or make them surrender. We stabilized Lou-lan 樓蘭, the Wu-sun 烏孫, the Hu-chieh 呼揭,223 and twenty-six states next to them. All these were made the Hsiung-nu’s. All bow-drawing peoples are united in one house. With the northern lands already stabilized, I wish to put the arms to rest, to 217 Pu-ch’ing 不請; for this term, see Shih chi, 43.1783, 1791; 48.1959; and the explanation by Yen Shih-ku on Han shu, 27A.1334, n. 1. 218 This reading is implied by the punctuation of the Chung-hua editors of the Shih chi. The Han shu editors on the other hand read the string of graphs as one name, i.e., Hou-yi-lu-hou-nanchih, which is the most probable choice to my mind, see Han shu, 94A.3756. Watson (Han, 2:140) interprets it as three names: Hou-yi, Lu-hou, and Nan-chih. According to the “So-yin,” this represents the name(s) of a (or several) Hsiung-nu general(s). The last graph is said to have been read like chih 支, which is also what the Han shu, 94A.3756, writes. 219 Chü 距; Han shu, 94A.3756, writes hen 恨, “to hate.” 220 This situation is explained as such by Yen Shih-ku on Han shu, 94A.3757. 221 This places the ultimate responsibility for the violation of the agreement on the shoulders of the Han, of course. 222 The wording is surprising as it comes from the mouth of a Hsiung-nu. After all, “to subdue the barbarians with the help of [other] barbarians” (yi Yi chih Yi 以夷制夷) characterized a Chinese policy applied against the Hsiung-nu; see Hsing Yi-t’ien (I-tien) 邢義田, “Han-tai te yi Yi chih Yi lun” 漢代的以夷制夷論, Shih-yüan 史原 5 (1974): 9-54. Interesting also, that the Han shu, 94A.3757, rather has the Shan-yü say “... ma-li ch’iang, yi mieh Yi Yüeh-chih” …馬力強，以滅夷 月氏, “... the strength of [our] horses was sufficient so as to wipe out the Barbarian Yüeh-chih.” 223 The “So-yin” and the “Cheng-yi” give an alternative fan-ch’ieh pronounciation that would result in modern ch’ieh.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

272

disband officers and men, nourish the horses, put an end to former affairs, and renew the old agreement in order to give peace to the border people and in order to echo the primeval antiquity, letting the young have the opportunity to reach adulthood and the old to settle down where they live for generation after generation tranquilly and happily. I do not yet receive [word of] the Emperor’s inclinations, therefore I send the Palace Attendant Hsi-yü-ch’ien 係雩淺 224 to offer the letter and ask for an audience and to present one camel, two cavalry horses and two quadriga teams. If, then, the Emperor does not wish the Hsiungnu to approach the barrier, then he should also instruct the functionaries and common people to settle farer away [from the border]. When the envoy arrives, immediately dispatch him.”225 During the sixth month, [the envoy] with [this letter] came to the territory of Hsin-wang 薪望.226 When the letter had arrived, the Han discussed what was more expedient: to attack or to conclude a marital alliance. The excellencies and the ministers all said: “The Shan-yü has just defeated the Yüeh-chih and has the momentum of victory. He cannot be attacked. Moreover, if we obtain Hsiung-nu territory, it is marshy and salty, not something that can be settled on. A marital alliance is most expedient.” The Han consented to it.227 [2897] In the former sixth year (174 B.C.) of the Filial Emperor Wen, the Han presented the Hsiung-nu with a letter, that read: “The Emperor respectfully inquires about the Hsiung-nu’s Great Shan-yü’s well-being. [You] sent the Palace Attendant Hsi-yü-ch’ien to present Us with a letter that said: ‘The Worthy King to the Right, without asking for an audience, listened to the plan of the Hou-yi-lu Marquis Nan-chih and others to break the agreement of the two rulers and separate from the brotherly kin. If the Han because of this does not make an alliance, the neighboring countries will not support [the Han]. Now, because 224

Han shu, 94A.3757, writes Hsi-hu-ch’ien 係虖淺. Probably, this means, “When my envoys (or: envoy) arrive(s), please send them back with your answer immediately.” But grammatically speaking, it could also mean, “When (or: If) the envoys with your answer arrive here, I will immediately respond.” 226 Han shu, 94A.3757, writes Hsin-wang 新望. According to Fu Ch’ien (“So-yin”), this was a place at the border that seems to have been a regular stop-over place for Hsiung-nu envoys. 227 This could mean two things: Firstly, the Han ruler adopted the policy proposal of his administration. Such a record of consent is a ubiquitous phenomenon at the end of policy proposals recorded in the historiographic sources. It is strange, however, that only the ruler and not the administration should be named “the Han.” Usually, such a dichotomy is not seen. Secondly, the Han government–ruler together with his administration–accepted the Hsiung-nu’s offer. Probably, this is the more viable explanation, although the place at the end of the policy proposal of the Han ministers is unusual. 225

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

273

petty functionaries spoiled the agreement, [I] have punished the Worthy King to the Right and send him westward to attack the Yüeh-chih, completely stabilizing them.228 I wish to put the arms to rest, to disband officers and men, nourish the horses, put an end to former affairs, and renew the old agreement in order to give peace to the border people and let the young have the opportunity to reach adulthood and the old to settle down where they live for generation after generation tranquilly and happily.’ We definitely praise this. This is the intention229 of the astute rulers of antiquity. The Han and the Hsiung-nu agreed to become brothers, therefore [We] have treated the Shan-yü very lavishly. Those disavowing the agreement and separating from the brotherly kin have often been among the Hsiung-nu. But the affair of the Worthy King to the Right already happened before the amnesty, 230 the Shan-yü shall not condemn [him too] profoundly. If the Shan-yü abides by the intent of the letter, he shall clearly instruct his various functionaries and let them not fail the agreement and be trustworthy and respectful, complying to the Shan-yü’s letter. The envoy said that the Shan-yü, in personally leading the campaigns against231 [other] states, had merit, and that he [the Shan-yü] is quite wary of military affairs. An embroidered robe with a thin openwork inner garment of silk, an embroidered, thin jacket with long sleeves, and a brocade thin gown, one each, one comb, one belt decorated with gold, one golden rhino comb, ten bolts of embroideries, thirty232 bolts of brocade, red thick silk and green thin silk, forty bolts each: [these are taken by] the Palace Grandee Yi 意 and the Director of the Internuncios Chien 肩 to present to the Shan-yü. [2898] After a short time, Mao-tun died and his son Chi-yü 稽粥233 was enthroned, who was called Lao-shang 老上 Shan-yü. When the Lao-shang Chiyü Shan-yü had been just enthroned, the Filial Emperor Wen again dispatched a 228

Up to this point, the Han shu, 94A.3758, does not quote the letter from the Shan-yü, presumably, because it has already been quoted at length above. The Han shu also does not quote part of the last sentence in this letter. Note that the following sentence repeats verbatim the letter from the Shan-yü. 229 Yi 意; Han shu, 94A.3758 et passim, regularly writes chih 志 instead. This could be an indication that the version of the Shih chi has been tampered with after the reign of the Latter Han Emperor Huan, whose personal name, Liu Chih 劉 志 , henceforth became a tabooed graph, frequently replaced by yi. Note, however, that there are two chih in the main text of Shih chi, 110.2896 and 2903. 230 That is, it is subject to the imperially proclaimed amnesty and therefore forgiven. 231 Fa 伐; Han shu, 94A.3758, writes ping 并, “annexing,” instead. 232 Han shu, 94A.3758, says “twenty.” 233 The reading Chi-yü follows the “So-yin.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

274

princess of the imperial house to become the Shan-yü’s Yen-chih 閼氏 and he send the eunuch Chung-hang Yüeh 中行說, a person from Yen 燕, to tutor the princess. Yüeh did not want to travel, [but] the Han forced him to do so. Yüeh said: “If I am to travel, it will be to the dismay of the Han.” After Chung-hang Yüeh had arrived, he took the opportunity to surrender to the Shan-yü and the Shan-yü became very close to him and favoured him. [2899] Initially, the Hsiung-nu234 had been fond of the silk fabrics, waddings, and foodstuff of the Han. Chung-hang Yüeh said: “The multitude of the Hsiungnu is not up to [even] one Commandery of the Han, yet the reason that you are strong is that you clothe and feed yourself differently. Do not look up to the Han! Now, the Shan-yü changes the custom and is fond of things from the Han. For [just] two out of ten Han things, the Hsiung-nu all readily go over to the Han. If you obtain wadded silk [garments] from the Han, use it to gallop through the thorny bush, [so that] the clothes and trousers will all be torn and worn out, in order to show that these are no match for the perfect235 qualities of felt and fur. If you obtain foodstuff from the Han, throw it all away, in order to show that these are no match for the appropiateness and taste of milk and cheese.”236 At this, Yüeh taught the attendants of the Shan-yü to make written lists and records in order to calculate and examine237 their people’s troops, livestock, and things. As regards the letter that the Han presented the Hsiung-nu with, the wooden strips were a ch’ih and one ts’un [long] and it stated, “the Emperor respectfully inquires about the Hsiung-nu’s Great Shan-yü’s well-being,” [continuing with] the things that were presented as well as speeches as usual.238 Chung-hang Yüeh had the Shan-yü present the Han with a letter on [one] ch’ih and two ts’un [long] wooden strips, and as regards the stamp and sealing, he had [the Shan-yü] widen, enlarge, and lengthen all these, and made his statement haughty, reading: “The Hsiung-nu’s Great Shan-yü, who was born by heaven and earth and set up by the

234

Han shu, 94A.3759, again personalizes by writing “Shan-yü” instead. Wan 完; Han shu, 94A.3759, has chien 堅, “hard,” instead. 236 The exact identity of the food item called tung-lao 湩酪 is unclear. Later references noted in the standard dictionaries indicate that it gave off a strong odor (at least for the Chinese taste). Except for cheese, another possibility would perhaps be koumiss, also spelled kymys or the like, which is a fermented beverage made from the milk of mares. 237 K’o 課; Han shu, 94A.3759, has shih 識, “to mark,” instead. 238 Yün-yün 云云, “and so forth.” Below, the same expression is used, but with a preceding yi 亦, “also,” therefore, I translate, “as usual.” 235

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

275

sun and the moon, respectfully inquires about the Han Emperor’s well-being,” [continuing with] the reason for presenting things and speeches, also as usual.239 Someone of the Han envoys said: “It is the custom of the Hsiung-nu to depreciate the aged.” Chung-hang Yüeh pressed the Han envoy, saying: “As for the Han custom, is it not so that when those who follow the army and be stationed as guards are about to set out, their aged240 relatives in turn241 on their own accord abstain from242 the pleasant, rich, nutritious, and tasty243 in order to send it to feed those who travel to their guard posts?” The Han envoy said: “Indeed.” Chung-hang Yüeh said: “The Hsiung-nu clearly take battling and attacking as their occupation. Their aged and weak cannot fight, therefore they take their nutritious and tasty to feed those who are stalwart and healthy, for in such a way [their action] naturally works as a defense and safeguard. Like this, both fathers and sons obtain a lasting mutual protection. How can you say that the Hsiung-nu view the aged lightly?” [*2900*] The Han envoy said: “A Hsiungnu father and [his] sons even sleep together in the same yurt.244 If the father dies, [the sons] marry their step-mothers; if a brother dies, [the other brothers] take all of his wives and marry them. There are no adornments like cap and girdle nor [any] social norms for gates and court.”245 Chung-hang Yüeh said: “It is the custom of the Hsiung-nu that [their] people feed on the flesh of [their] livestock, drink their fluids, and put on their hides; [whereas] the livestock feeds on grass and drinks water and circles about following the season. Therefore, when they are in crisis,246 the men practice shooting from horseback, when they have ample 239 See preceding note. Note also that the Han shu, 94A.3760, parallel writes so-yi ch’ien 所以 遺, “the reason for presenting,” instead of so-ch’ien 所遺, “that which was presented,” in both instances. 240 Han shu, 94A.3760, does not have “aged.” 241 Yu 有 for yu 又; Han shu, 94A.3760, does not have this. 242 T’o 脫; Han shu, 94A.3760, has to 奪, “to take away,” instead. 243 Wen-hou 溫厚 and fei-mei 肥美 also occur as compound expressions, meaning “rich” and “plump” things, people, or circumstances in general. Here, it obviously means the food which is given to the outgoing soldiers. 244 The Han-shu yin-yi 漢書音義 (“Chi-chieh”) glosses the term ch’iung-lu 穹盧 as a “felt tent.” Nothing is said of its size or form. The translation uses “yurt” because this is one of the most common tents of the steppe and it thus seems a probable choice, but there is no guarantee that a ch’iong-lu actually was a yurt. 245 Presumably, this means not only that they do not know how to behave at the gates or in the court of a host, but also that their dwellings do not have any separation into gate and court in the first place. This seems to be indicated by the following counter-argument. 246 This is a recurring theme in connection with the Hsiung-nu; see, for instance, Shih chi, 110.2879 above.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

276

[resources], the men enjoy having nothing to do. Their agreements and bonds being light they travel easily. [The relationship between] lord and vassal is uncomplicated and easy-going,247 [so] the government of one state consists as if of [just] one body.248 That when fathers or sons or brothers die, [the remaining male relatives] take their wives and marry them, is because they hate the loss of their blood line.249 Therefore, even though the Hsiung-nu confuse the order,250 eventually they are sure to install offspring251 of [their own] clan. Now, although [the people of] the Central States pretend not to take the wives of their fathers and elder brothers: If the relatives become ever more alienated, then they kill each other and they even go so far as to change their cognomen. All follow this type. Moreover, that [their] social norms and moral principles go bust, is because those above and those below exchange hatred,252 and [given] the extremes of [their] houses and buildings,253 [their] vital strength inevitably succumbs. After all, [the Han] exert [their] strength tilling the fields and cultivating mulberry trees in order to seek after clothing and food, [they] build inner and outer city walls in order to prepare ourselves, therefore, when the people are in crisis, then they do not practice their battling skills, when they are at ease, then they are worn out by doing their work. Oh dear, [You] from the earthen houses! 254 But, no more words. If [you] garrulously whisper around255 and don caps, what good does that do, after all?” 247

instead. 248

Chien-yi 簡易; Han shu, 94A.3760, has chien, k’o chiu 簡，可久, “simple and durable,”

Shen 身; Han shu, 94A.3760, has t’i 體, “limbs (being the agents of the body).” Chung hsing 種姓, literally perhaps, “(already) sowed (members of the same) cognomen.” 250 Luan 辭; this could refer either to the practice of levirate (see n. 24 above)–which seems more likely–or to the constant skirmishes among the Hsiung-nu. 251 Chung 種, “seedlings.” 252 Or, alternatively: “The backside of [those] social norms and moral principles is that those above and those below [just] exchange hatred.” Both refers to the Chinese, of course. 253 This could refer either to luxurious and expensive palaces and ritual buildings, that the Chinese peasants had to build and/or finance through statute labor and taxes, or to the people’s own dwellings that, though more humble, still were harder to build and more complicated–also reflecting the complicated social rules of the Chinese–than the tents of the Hsiung-nu. 254 This refers to the northern Chinese custom of using stamped loess to build houses. 255 Teng Chan 鄧展 (“So-yin”) explains ch’an 佔 as “whisper into another one’s ear” (nieh er yü 囁 耳 語 ). Hsiao-yen 小 顏 (“So-yin”), however, states that ch’an-ch’an describes the “appearance of the clothes” (yi-shang mao 衣裳貌). For 喋, he gives a pronunciation that would result in modern ch’e. This is exactly the pronunciation of 呫 and 詀, both of which mean “to whisper” or “garrulous” and which are also known as adverbs in the forms ch’an-ch’an 呫呫 and chan-chan 詀詀 respectively. In other words, 喋喋 and 佔佔 did probably mean the same. 249

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

277

[2901] From this time onwards, whenever a Han envoy wanted to argue, Chung-hang Yüeh invariably said: “Han envoy, don’t you speak too much! But as to the wadded silk and grain food256 that the Han pay to the Hsiung-nu, let their amount be accurate and let it not fail to be good and beautiful. That is all. Why speak about it? Moreover, if what is provided is complete and good, then this is it. If it is not complete and of inferior quality, then watch out for the ripe grain in autumn, [the Hsiung-nu] with [their] cavalry will just gallop and trample down [the fruit of] your sowing and harvesting.” Day and night [Chung-hang Yüeh] taught the Shan-yü to watch out for profitable and unprofitable conditions.257 In the fourteenth year of the Filial Han Emperor Wen (166 B.C.), 140,000 horsemen of the Hsiung-nu Shan-yü entered Ch’ao-na 朝𨚗𨚗and the Hsiao 蕭 Pass,258 killing [Sun] Ang 〔孫〕卬,259 the Capital Commandant of Pei-ti, and capturing commoners and livestock in very great numbers. Then, they reached P’eng-yang 彭陽.260 They had surprise troops261 enter and burn down Hui-chung 回中 Palace 262 and their scout cavalry reached Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 of Yung 雍.263 At this, Emperor Wen made Chou She 周舍, the Commandant of the Capital, and Chang Wu 張武, the Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace, generals, mobilized thousand chariots and hundred thousand cavalry and stationed them next to Ch’ang-an 長安 to prepare against the Hu 胡 marauders. And he appointed Lu 256

Mi-nieh 米糱, here probably in a general sense. Otherwise, mi means “grain” and nieh means “grain that has sprouted” or “yeast.” 257 Li-hai ch’u 利害處. 258 See n. 8 of the translation of Shih chi, 109, above. 259 Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh,” “So-yin”) reports this man’s cognomen and that he had a son, named Tan 單, who was made Marquis of P’ing (written 鉼 or 瓶). 260 Belonging to An-ting 安定 Commandery. Located 125 miles northwest of Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17, 34). 261 Ch’i-ping 奇兵; Han shu, 94A.3761, writes ch’i-ping 騎兵, “cavalry troops.” 262 According to Fu Ch’ien (“So-yin”), this was located in Pei-ti Commandery. The palace seems to have originated in Ch’in 秦 times. Later, it was rebuilt by the Han Emperor Wu, who also, in 107 B.C., built a road to that place. 263 Located about fifty-five miles northwest of Sian. Here, the Ch’in and Han emperor’s had their summer retreat and, according to the K’uo-ti-chih (“Cheng-yi”), this was where they sacrificed to Heaven. On the archaeological remains of the Kan-ch’üan Palace, see Yao Sheng-min 姚生民, Kan-ch’üan-kung chih 甘泉宮志 (Sian: San Ch’in, 2003). Interestingly, Yong is obviously understood as one of the Nine Regions allegedly established by the mythical Yü 禹 of Hsia. It is not identical with Yong prefecture that lay roughly ninety miles west of modern Sian in Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

278

Ch’ing 盧卿,264 the Marquis of Ch’ang 昌, as General of Shang Commandery; Wei Su 魏遫, the Marquis of Ning 甯, as General of Pei-ti; Chou Tsao 周 , the Marquis of Lung-lü 隆慮, as General of Lung-hsi; Chang Hsiang-ju 張相如, the Marquis of Tung-yang 東陽, as General-in-Chief; Tung Ho 董赤,265 the Marquis of Ch’eng 成, as General of the Van and mobilized chariots and cavalry on a big scale to go and attack the Hu. 266 The Shan-yü remained inside the barrier for more than a month and then left. The Han, in pursuit, went out through the barrier and forthwith returned, without having been able to kill someone. The Hsiung-nu grew ever more arrogant, each year making entries at the frontier, killing and abducting people and livestock 267 in very great numbers, most severely in Yün-chung and Liao-tung and more than ten thousand people after reaching Tai Commandery. 268 The Han was dismayed about this and sent an envoy to present the Hsiung-nu with a letter. The Shan-yü, too, had a Tang-hu269 convey his excuses and again brought up the matter of marital alliance. [2902] In the latter second year of the Filial Emperor Wen (162 B.C.), [he] send an envoy to present the Hsiung-nu with a letter that read:270 “The Emperor respectfully inquires about the Hsiung-nu’s Great Shan-yü’s well-being. [You] sent Diao-ch’ü-nan 雕渠難, the Tang-hu and Chü-chü 且居,271 and Han Liao 韓 遼, the Gentleman-of-the-Palace, to present Us with two horses. [They] have already arrived and been respectfully received. [According to] the late emperors decree: North of the Long Walls are the States of those who draw the bow and receive orders from the Shan-yü; inside the Long Walls are the houses of those with caps and girdles, We still control those. [We] have the myriad people till 264

In the chronological tables (“Nien-biao”), this individual’s cognomen is written Lu 玈. The pronunciation of the praenomen follows the “Cheng-yi,” that states that 亦 is pronounced like 赫. 266 The “Chi-chieh” cites Hsü Kuang with the claim that Luan Pu 欒布, the Clerk of the Capital, was also made general. 267 Han shu, 94A.3762, lacks “livestock.” 268 Han shu, 94A.3762, just writes, “most severely in Yün-chung and Liao-tung [with] more than ten thousand people in each commandery.” 269 For this title, see n. 156 above. 270 On Shih chi, 10.431, and Han shu, 4.129, the following letter and its results are mentioned in an edict that–in the Han shu version–is dated after the sixth month. Given the time that it took the envoys to travel, this communication between Emperor and Shan-yü must have taken place early in the year 162 B.C. De Groot, Hunnen, translates this letter on pp. 86-7. 271 The Chung-hua editors do not separate Tang-hu and Chü-chü, perhaps because there is only one incumbent. Luan Yen 欒彥 (“So-yin”) emphasizes that those are still two different titles. See also n. 171 above. Han shu, 94A.3762, writes chü-ch’ü 且渠. 265

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

279

[the fields] and weave and shoot to hunt for clothing and food, have fathers and sons not be separated, subject and ruler being at ease with each other, and all together not be brutal and treacherous. Now, We have heard that when unsettled and evil people covet and enjoy to run after their profit, they turn their backs to righteousness and break agreements, are forgetful of the myriad people’s lives, and separate both rulers’ [mutual] affection, and such cases lie already before [our eyes]. The [Book of] Documents say[s]: ‘After the two states concluded a marital alliance, both rulers felt affection and joy, put arms to rest, disbanded the men, and nourished the horses,272 and generation after generation prospered and was happy, having the beginnings [i.e., new governments] alternate peacefully.’ We definitely praise this. Astute people daily renew [themselves], revise the alternation of beginnings, let the aged be able to repose, the young be able to grow up, [so that] each preserve his head and neck and live out his natural life span. If We and the Shan-yü together follow this path, act in accordance with Heaven and mind the people, [*2903*] pass this on from generation to generation, and extend it unlimitedly, there will be nothing in the world that is not completely convenient.273 The Han and the Hsiung-nu are neighboring states on a par, the Hsiung-nu being situated in the northern territories, where it is cold and the chilly air descends early. Therefore, We have instructed the functionaries to present the Shan-yü with glutinous grains, metal, silk yarn and waddings, and other things, each year in fixed quantities. Now, the world is at peace everywhere, the myriad people are prosperous, We and the Shan-yü are their father and mother. We recall former affairs, petty things and trifle causes,274 and conspiring subjects whose plans failed–all these were not enough to separate the affection between brothers. We have heard that Heaven does not cover [only] one part [of the world] and Earth does not support [only] one side [of it]. Let Us and the Shan-yü discard the former trifle causes and together tread on the Great Path, let us drop and obliterate the previous evil in order to map out the far-away [future] and let the people of [our] two states be like the children of one house. Among the masses and myriads of people, below including the fishes and turtles, above including the birds in the sky, [and among] those that walk on tiptoe, breathe through a beak or those types that move by wriggling, there is none that does not head for security and advantage or does not [try to] avoid danger and 272

This stereotype expression is also seen on Shih chi, 110.2896 above. Pien 便; Han shu, 94A.3762, writes chia 嘉, “felicitous,” instead. 274 Causes for dissent, that is. On Shih chi, 10.431, and Han shu, 4.129, the term hsi guo 細過, “trifling faults,” is used in the same context. 273

280

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

peril. Therefore, not to stop those who come is the Heavenly Way. 275 Let us together leave behind us the previous matters: We will forsake the people who have fled or were abducted, the Shan-yü should not talk about Chang-ni’s 章尼 party. 276 We have heard the divine kings of antiquity, when concluding agreements, made clear distinctions and did not eat their words.277 Do you, Shanyü, pay attention! The world is at peace everywhere and after the marital alliance [is concluded], the Han will not be the first to transgress it. May you, Shan-yü, think about it!” The Shan-yü had already concluded the marital alliance, when, at this, an imperial decree instructed the Grandee Secretary as follows:278 “The Great Shanyü of the Hsiung-nu has presented Us with a letter, saying that a marital alliance has already been arranged. The fugitives are not [numerous] enough to increase [our] troops or enlarge [our] territories. The Hsiung-nu will not come in through the barriers, the Han will not go out through the barriers. Whoever violates the present agreement shall be killed. With this, it is possible to have close relations for a long time [to come] without resentment later on, it will be expedient for both parties. We have already consented to it. [*2904*] Announce [this] widely throughout the empire and let [the people] clearly understand it!” Four years later (158 B.C.),279 the Lao-shang Chi-yü Shan-yü died and his son, Chün-ch’en 軍臣, was enthroned as Shan-yü. After he had been enthroned,

275 This sentence obviously has to be understood in the light of the following suggestion, i.e., not to demand back each other’s fugitives any more. For a slightly different understanding, see n. 276 below. 276 The “So-yin” (and after it the Shih chi tz’u-tien, p. 487) explains this sentence to the effect that the Han returned all those criminals who had fled from the Hsiung-nu to the Han, including a certain Chang-ni and his party, who must have been a high-ranking Hsiung-nu of some value to the Han, and whom the Shan-yü should not accuse after his return. Actually, the text should be interpreted rather differently, namely to the effect that Chang-ni was to be kept with the Han and that the Shan-yü should not bring up the matter again, much like Emperor Wen would not talk about all those Chinese who had made over to–and would continue to stay on–the other side. 277 That is, they did not retract promises once given. 278 De Groot, Hunnen, translates this on p. 88 and draws attention to the fact that this alliance obviously was so important that a long address by the Emperor explaining its advantages is the only entry for the year 162 B.C. in the Annals part of the Shih chi, 10.431 (Grand Scribe’s Records 2.177). This is translated by De Groot, Hunnen, on p. 88-9. 279 Hou ssu sui 後四歲. This may be an error for hou ssu nien 後四年, “in the latter fourth year [of the Filial Emperor Wen] (160 B.C.).” Moreover, the information may be wrong altogether, for Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) claims that the new Shan-yü was enthroned in the latter third year, i.e. in 161 B.C. See also nn. 280 and 281 below.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

281

the Filial Emperor Wen again concluded a marital alliance with the Hsiung-nu. Then, Chung-hang Yüeh served him again.280 When the Chün-ch’en Shan-yü had been enthroned for four years (154 B.C.), 281 the Hsiung-nu again broke the marital alliance and in large numbers entered Shang Commandery and Yün-chung, each with thirty thousand horsemen. They left [only] after those whom they had killed or abducted were a great many. At this, the Han sent three generals to be stationed in and set up camps at Pei-ti, in Tai 代 at Kou-chu 句注, and in Chao 趙 at Fei-hu-k’ou 飛狐 口 [“Mouth of the Flying Fox(es)”],282 and along the border also had each [town] resolutely brace itself in order to prepare for the raids of the Hu 胡. In addition, [the Han] placed three generals and stationed them at Hsi-liu 細柳,283 west of

280 After all what Chung-hang Yüeh had done, “him” can here refer only to the Shan-yü and fu 復, “again,” is better translated loosely as “also.” The Han shu, 94A.3764, much more logically, reverses the order of the last two sentences, i.e., the new Shan-yü is enthroned, Chung-hang Yüeh serves under him again (or also), and Emperor Wen again concludes a marital alliance. 281 Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) notes that here the dates and the content of the following paragraph do not match with the information given elsewhere. As has been stated above, in the second year of his latter reign period, i.e., in 162 B.C., Emperor Wen sent the Lao-shang Shan-yü the letter that is quoted at length on Shih chi, 110.2902. As is well documented in several sources, the emperor himself died only five years later, in 157 B.C. However, the preceding paragraph’s “four years later” (hou ssu sui)–which Hsü Kuang quotes differently as “in the latter fourth year” (hou ssu nien), i.e, 160 B.C.–and this paragaph’s “when the Chün-ch’en Shan-yü had been enthroned for four years,” add up to eight years already, not to mention the following information that has the emperor’s eventual death happen more than another year later. All this would, of course, postpone the imperial demise to the impossible date 152 B.C. Hsü Kuang adds that the invasion of the Hsiung-nu into Shang Commandery and Yün-chung, that is also recorded in this paragraph actually happened in Emperor Wen’s latter sixth year, i.e., 158 B.C. Thus, it seems possible that not only the beginning of the previous paragraph should read “in the latter fourth year (160 B.C.),” but that also the beginning of the previous paragraph is spurious and should either read “When the Chün-ch’en Shan-yü had been enthroned for two years (158 B.C.),” or be connected with another event altogether. The Han shu, 94A.3764, avoids these difficulties by writing, “When the Chünch’en Shan-yü had been enthroned for more than a year.” 282 Alternatively, the sentence could be translated, “At this, the Han sent three generals to set up army camps at Pei-ti, [while the Kingdom of] Tai set up camp at Kou-chu, and Chao set up camp at Fei-hu-k’ou, and along the border each [unit] also resolutely braced itself to be ready for the raid of the Hu.” This would make five armies instead of three. However, since the Han obviously also form the subject of the next sentence, the solution in the main text seems better. Feihu-k’ou was located ninety-four miles west-southwest of modern Peking; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18. 283 Located several miles west of modern Hsienyang in Shensi; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15, inset map.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

282

Ch’ang-an 長安, at Chi-men 棘門,284 north of the Wei 渭 [River], and at Pashang 霸上 (Pa Heights),285 in order to prepare against the Hu marauders. When the Hu horsemen entered the border at Kou-chu in Tai, the beacon fires communicated [this] to Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 and Ch’ang-an. After several months, when the Han troops arrived at the border, the Hsiung-nu in turn had left and kept far from the barrier, and the Han troops for their part were disbanded. More than a year later (157 B.C.), the Filial Emperor Wen passed away, the Filial Emperor Ching 景 was enthroned and Sui 遂, the King of Chao 趙, thus covertly sent someone to the Hsiung-nu. When [the Kings of] Wu 吳 and Chu 楚 rebelled, they wanted to plot together with Chao and enter the [Han] border. When the Han besieged and broke Chao, the Hsiung-nu also stopped. From this onwards, the Filial Emperor Ching again made a marital alliance with the Hsiung-nu, [re-]opened markets at the [border] passes, 286 provided for the Hsiung-nu with presents, and sent them a princess like in [the times of] the former agreement. Throughout the times of the Filial [Emperor] Ching, [the Hsiung-nu] in small [parties] occasionally287 entered and plundered the border [areas], [but] there were no raids on a large scale. When the present emperor acceeded to the throne (141 B.C.), he made manifest the agreement of the marital alliance, treating [the Hsiung-nu] lavishly, opened markets at the [border] passes, and providing plentifully for them. The Hsiung-nu, from the Shan-yü on downwards, all became friendly towards the Han, coming and going beneath the Long Walls. [2905] The Han sent Nieh Weng-yi 聶翁壹,288 an ordinary man289 from Mayi 馬邑 to illegally export contraband goods and make deals with the Hsiung-nu,

284

Probably located about five miles north of modern Sian in Shensi; Shih Nien-hai 史念海, gen. ed., Sian li-shih ti-t’u-chi 西安歷史地圖集 (Sian: Sian ti-t’u ch’u-pan-she, 1996), p. 53. 285 Located ten miles east of modern Sian in Shensi; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15, inset map. This location shows that “north of the Wei [River]” in the main text only related to Chi-men, not to Pashang. 286 Kuan-shih 關市, i.e., trade posts at the transit checkpoints between two states, that in times of crisis, prevented the export of certain trade goods like metal or horses. Besides, these border trade posts were certainly an important venure for peaceful Chinese-Hsiung-nu meetings on grassroot level. The text literally says that they were “made passable” (t’ung 通), they certainly had existed before. Therefore the translation reads “[re-]opened.” 287 Shih 時; the Han shu, 94A.3765, writes shih-shih 時時, “frequently,” instead. 288 The “So-yin” draws attention to the fact that this individual is called just Nieh Yi in the biography of Wei Ch’ing 衛青 and cites a Mr. Ku 顧 with the statement that weng 翁, “old man,” is

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

283

posturing as if he wanted to sell the walled city of Ma-yi to the Hsiung-nu in order to lure the Shan-yü. The Shan-yü trusted him and, craving for the wealth of Ma-yi, thereupon with hundred thousand horsemen entered the barrier at Wuchou 武州.290 The Han lay in ambush with more than 300.000 troops next to Mayi. As Commissioner Over the Army, Han An-kuo 韓 安 國 , the Grandee Secretary, was responsible for four generals in order to ambush the Shan-yü. After the Shan-yü had entered the Han barrier, and had not yet reached Ma-yi but for over a hundred li, he saw livestock scattered over the fields, but no one to herd it. He found it strange and thereupon attacked a police station. At that time, the Commandant’s Clerk of Yen-men went on patrol, saw the marauders, and took refuge in this police station. He knew that Han troops had made plans, and when the Shan-yü captured and wanted to kill him, the Commandant’s Clerk thereupon told the Shan-yü where the Han troops stayed.291 The Shan-yü was greatly surprised and said: “Just as I suspected!” Thereupon, he withdrew his troops and went back. When he left [Chinese territory], he said: “That I captured the Commandant’s Clerk was [a sign from] Heaven. Heaven had him speak like this.” 292 He regarded the Commandant’s Clerk as “Heavenly King.” The Han troops had agreed to [wait until] the Shan-yü entered Ma-yi and then let loose. [But] the Shan-yü did not arrive, therefore the Han troops achieved nothing. A division of the Han General Wang Hui 王恢 went out through293 Tai 代 to attack the Hu’s 胡 supply [base]. When they heard that the Shan-yü returned and that [his] troops were numerous, they did not dare to set out. The Han, because Hui had originally developed the plan to use the troops, but then did not advance, beheaded 294 Hui. 295 From this onwards, the Hsiung-nu broke off the marital alliance and launced attacks against the barrier, wherever it was in their way. Everywhere, they entered and plundered in the Han border [region] in countless added only to reflect Nieh Yi’s advanced age. Thus, the name could be translated as “the old Nieh Yi.” 289 Hsia-jen 下人; the Han shu, 94A.3765, has only jen 人, “a man of ....” 290 Su Lin 蘇林 (“So-yin”) writes that this belonged to Yen-men 鴈門 Commandery. 291 This passage is structured somewhat differently on Han shu, 94A.3765. 292 Han shu, 94A.3765, does not have the last sentence. 293 Ch’u 出; see n. 53 to the translation of Shih chi, 109.2869 above. 294 Chan 斬; Han shu, 94A.3765, just says chu 誅, “executed.” 295 The Biography of Han Ch’ang-ju 韓長孺 (Shih chi, 108.2863) has him commit suicide. For Wang Hui in or shortly before 135 B.C. arguing for a military strike against the Hsiung-nu, instead of renewing the marital alliance as Han Ch’ang-ju (i.e, Han An-kuo) and others suggested, see Shih chi, 108.2861, Han shu, 52.2398-400, and Tzu-chih t’ung-chien, 17.576.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

284

numbers. But the Hsiung-nu were avaricious and esteemed and enjoyed the markets at the [border] passes and lusted after the wealth of the Han. The Han also esteemed the markets at the passes and did not discontinue it in order to hit them [i.e., the Hsiung-nu].296 [2906] In the autumn of the fifth year after the army [laid in ambush at] at Ma-yi (130 B.C.), the Han sent four generals, each with ten thousand horsemen to attack the Hu on the markets at the [border] passes. General Wei Ch’ing 衛青 went out through Shang-ku, went up to Lung-ch’eng 蘢城,297 and obtained seven hundred heads as trophies from the Hu. Kung-sun Ho 公孫賀 went out through Yün-chung and achieved nothing. Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖 went out through Tai Commandery and was defeated by the Hu loosing more than seven thousand men. Li Kuang 李廣 went out through Yen-men, was defeated by the Hu, and the Hsiung-nu [even] caught Kuang alive, [though] Kuang afterwards could escape and return.298 The Han incarcerated [Kung-sun] Ao and [Li] Kuang, [but both] Ao and Kuang paid ransom and became commoners.299 That winter, the Hsiung-nu several times300 entered and plundered the border [region], in Yü-yang especially awfully. The Han sent General Han An-kuo 韓安 國 to set up camp at Yü-yang and prepare against the Hu. The next year (129 B.C.), in autumn, twenty thousand horsemen of the Hsiung-nu entered Han [territory], killed the Grand Administrator of Liao-hsi, and abducted more than two thousand people. The Hu furthermore entered and defeated the army of the Grand Administrator of Yü-yang who lost more than thousand men. They besieged the Han General [Han] An-kuo and An-kuo’s at that time more than thousand horsemen were also almost exhausted, just when relief [troops] from Yen 燕 arrived and the Hsiung-nu thereupon left. The Hsiung-nu furthermore entered Yen-men, killing or abducting more than thousand people. At this, the Han sent the Generals Wei Ch’ing 衛青 leading thirty thousand horsemen and go out through Yen-men, and Li Hsi 李息 and go out through Tai Commandery, to attack the Hu. They obtained several thousand heads as trophies. 296

The Han wanted to make the Hsiung-nu dependent and thereby weaken them. See n. 174 above. 298 For this adventure, see the biography of Li Kuang, Shih chi, 109.2870-1. 299 Shu-jen 庶人; that is, their status was that of a kind of private citizens without official rank. 300 Shu ju 數入, Han shu, 94A.3766, has shu-ch’ien jen 數千人, “[with] several thousand men,” instead. 297

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

285

The next year (128 B.C.), Wei Ch’ing again went out through Yün-chung and going westwards reached Lung-hsi, attacking the Hu-affiliated King of Loufan 樓煩 and Pai-yang 白羊 south of the Ho,301, obtaining several thousand Hu heads as trophies and more than one million cattle and sheep.302 At this, the Han finally took the territory south of the Ho, 303 built Shuo-fang 朔 方 [Commandery],304 and once more repaired the barrier that had been made by Meng T’ien 蒙恬 in the former times of Ch’in 秦, taking advantage of the Ho as a [natural] barrier. The Han also abandoned the Tsao-yang 造陽 territory within the isolated305 prefectures of Shang-ku and gave it to the Hu. That year was the Han’s second year of yuan-shuo 元朔 (127 B.C.). [2907] In the following winter (126 B.C.), the Chün-ch’en Shan-yü of the Hsiung-nu died. The younger brother of the Chün-ch’en Shan-yü, the Lu-li 谷蠡 King to the Left Yi-chih-hsie 伊稚斜,306 enthroned himself as Shan-yü, launched an attack against and defeated Chün-ch’en Shan-yü’s Heir Yü-tan 於單. Yü-tan fled and surrendered to the Han. The Han enfeoffed Yü-tan as Marquis of She-an 涉安.307 Several months later, he died. After Yi-chih-hsieh Shan-yü had been enthroned, in that summer (126 B.C.), several tens of thousands of Hsiung-nu horsemen entered and killed Kung Yu 恭 友 , 308 the Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery, and abducted several thousand people. That autumn, the Hsiung-nu again entered Yen-men and killed or abducted more than thousand people.

301

That is, in the Ordos Region. Han shu, 94A.3766, just writes “sheep.” 303 That is, the Ordos region. 304 Located eighty-two miles west of modern Huhetot in Inner Mongolia; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 302

2:17.

305 Pi 辟 as a loan for p’i 僻, “outlying.” Taking pi 辟 as pi 壁, the sentence could also mean, “... abandoned ten barricades, prefectures, [and] the Tsao-yang territory ....” However, 辟 for p’i 僻 is the more common loan (Kao Heng 高亨, Ku-tzu t’ung-chia hui-tian [Chi-nan: Ch’i Lu, 1989], pp. 482-4) and both Han shu, 94A.3767, as well as the Yen-t’ieh-lun, chapter 16, “Ti kuang” 地廣 (Yen-t’ieh-lun chiao-chu [Peking: Chung-hua, 1992], p. 209), have tou p’i 斗 僻 , “isolated,” “outlying,” in the same context. 306 The “So-yin” writes the name of this Shan-yü with the graphs 伊 斜 and identifies 斜 as an original Hsiung-nu word. 307 Han shu, 94A.3767, writes Chih-an (or: Te-an) 陟安. 308 Han shu, 94A.3767, writes Kung Yu 共友.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

286

The next year (125 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu once again entered Tai Commandery, Ting-hsiang 定襄, and Shang Commandery, 309 each with thirty thousand horsemen killing or abducting several thousand people. The Hsiung-nu Worthy King to the Right, because he resented the Han having seized from him the territory south of the Ho and building Shuo-fang, several times conducted raids, plundered the border [region], and eventually entered [the territory] south of the Ho and invaded and threw into confusion Shuo-fang, killing or abducting functionaries and common people in very large numbers. The next year (124 B.C.), in spring, the Han made Wei Ch’ing 衛青 Generalin-chief, leading six generals and more than hundred thousand men, and setting out from Shuo-fang and Kao-ch’üeh 高闕310 to attack the Hu. The Worthy King to the Right thought that the Han troops could not possibly reach [him], [so] he drank wine until he was drunk. The Han troops, [after] passing the barrier [and traveling] for six or seven hundred li, at night besieged the Worthy King to the Right. The Worthy King to the Right was shocked and ran away in order to escape alive. All his elite horsemen from everywhere followed suit and left. The Han obtained fifteen thousand men and women from the populace of the Worthy King to the Right and more than ten secondary and lesser rulers. That autumn, ten thousand Hsiung-nu horsemen entered and killed Chu Ying 朱英,311 the Chief Commandant of Tai Commandery, abducting more than thousand people. The next year (123 B.C.), in spring, the Han again dispatched General-inchief Wei Ch’ing to lead six generals and more than hundred thousand cavalry troops, and thereupon, for a second time, he went out through Ting-hsiang [and traveled] for several hundred li to attack the Hsiung-nu. The head trophies that he obtained in the course of this [campaign] totalled more than nineteen thousand, but the Han also lost312 two generals and three thousand horsemen of the fighting force. [Su] Chien 〔蘇〕建,313 the General of the Right, could escape alive, but when the General of the Van’s [*2908*] troops [i.e., those of] Chao Hsin 趙信,

309

At that time all located at the northern border, though set apart by the commanderies Yenmen and Yün-chung. See Loewe, Dictionary, map 5. T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17-8, represents a later administrational division, in which Shang Commandery was not directly constituting a border commandery any more. 310 Located about 205 miles north of Yin-chuan in Ning-hsia; see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17. 311 Han shu, 94A.3767, writes Chu Yang 朱央. 312 Considering the following specifications, this did not mean that they died, but that they could not been used again after having lost their battles dishonestly. 313 The “Cheng-yi” remarks that this was Su Chien, the father of Su Wu 蘇武.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

287

Marquis of Hsi 翕,314 were not successful, he surrendered to the Hsiung-nu. As regards Chao Hsin, formerly a lesser ruler of the Hu, he had surrendered to the Han, and Han had enfeoffed him as Marquis of Hsi.315 As General of the Van he combined his forces with those of the General of the Right and travelled separately. 316 Alone, he happened upon the Shan-yü’s troops, therefore they [i.e., he and his troops] were completely taken over.317 After the Shan-yü had obtained the Marquis of Hsi, he made him ruler secondary only to himself, gave him his [own] elder sister as a wife, and had him partake in the planning against the Han. [Chao] Hsin taught the Shan-yü to move further north and cross the desert in order to lure and exhaust the Han troops, challenge them to the extreme and then take them in, without [ever] coming close to the barrier. The Shan-yü followed his plan. The next year (122 B.C.), a Hu cavalry [force] of ten thousand 318 men entered Shang-ku and killed several hundred people. The next year (121 B.C.), in spring, the Han sent [Huo] Ch’ü-ping 〔霍〕去 病,319 the General of Agile 320 Cavalry leading ten thousand horsemen to went out through Lung-hsi and pass Mount Yen-chih 焉 支 321 [traveling] more than thousand li to attack the Hsiung-nu. They obtained more than eighteen thousand322 heads as trophies and by defeating [him] obtained the bronze statues for the worship of Heaven from the Hsiu-t’u 休屠 King.323 That summer, the 314 According to the “So-yin” on Shih chi, 19.1021, this was located at Nei-huang 內黃, i.e., twenty-two miles east of modern Anyang in Honan; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26. 315 In 131 B.C.; see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 713. 316 Which means that the army of the two generals proceeded along a route different from that of the main bulk of the Han forces under Wei Ch’ing, as the “Chi-cheng” explains. 317 Mo 沒; this could also mean “to vanish” or to be “wiped out,” as Watson (Han, 2:180, 191) writes. However, mo also meant “to take over (as captive or prisoner),” “to confiscate.” This is clearly the case on Shih chi, 110.2915, where even Watson (Han, 2:189) translates “surrendered.” Cf. also Shih chi, 110.2918 below. 318 Han shu, 94A.3768, writes “several tens of thousands of horsemen.” 319 For his biography, see Shih chi, 111.2928 below, and Han shu, 55.2478. 320 P’iao 驃, Han shu, 94A.3768 et passim, consistently writes p’iao 票 instead. 321 Located sixty miles southeast of modern Chang-yeh in Kansu; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34. Han shu, 94A.3768, writes Yen-ch’i 焉耆. The K’uo-ti-chi (“Cheng-yi”) gives as alternative appellation for this mountain range the name Shan-tan-shan 刪丹山. The area seems to have been a source for certain minerals for the Hsiung-nu. See also n. 326 below. 322 Han shu, 94A.3768, reads “eight thousand.” 323 All three basic commentaries cite sources–namely the Han shu yin-yi 漢書音義 and the K’uo-ti-chih 括地志–with the opinion that these statues formerly had been placed at a Hsiung-nu

288

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

General of Agile Cavalry again, together with several tens of thousands of horsemen of the Marquis of Joint Cavalry,324 went out through Lung-hsi and Peiti and [traveled] two thousand li to attack the Hsiung-nu. He passed Chü-yen 居 延 , 325 launched an attack against Mount Ch’i-lien 祁 連 , 326 obtaining head trophies of more than thirty thousand men and more than seventy327 secondary and lesser rulers and those below. At that time, the Hsiung-nu also came and entered Tai Commandery and Yen-men, killing or abducting several hundred people. The Han sent the Farsighted Marquis328 as well as General Li Kuang 李 廣 to go out through Yu-pei-p’ing and attack the Hsiung-nu’s Worthy King of the Left. The Worthy King of the Left besieged General Li, whose forces of about 329 four thousand men were almost exhausted, 330 and the [number of] caitiffs that were killed also exceeded this amount. When relief by the army of sanctuary at the foot of Mount Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 in Yün-yang 雲陽 prefecture and had been relocated to the territory of the Hsiu-t’u King only after the Ch’in 秦 had conquered that area. Only the “So-yin” disagrees and claims that it was just the other way round, i.e., the statues came to Kanch’üan after having been snatched from the Hsiu-t’u King. In a baffling aside, Ts’ui Hao 崔浩 (“So-yin”) as well as the “Chi-chieh” state that these statues of the Hsiung-nu “Heavenly Lord” (t’ien-chu 天 主 ) were nothing else than representations of the Buddha. On this subject, see Kurakichi Shiratori, “On the Territory of the Hsiung-nu Prince Hsiu-t’u Wang and His Metal Statues for Heaven-worship,” in Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko (The Oriental Library) 5 (1930): 1-77, who rejects the possibility of large, metal Buddhistic images at that time. 324 Ho-chi hou 合騎侯; this was Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖, see Shih chi, 111.2942. 325 Located about two hundred miles north of modern Chang-yeh in Kansu; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34. 326 A mountain range located south of the Kansu Corridor, about fifty miles south of modern Chang-ye; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:33. The “So-yin” gives as alternative appellations for this mountain range the names T’ien-shan 天山 (“Heavenly Mountains”) and Pai-shan 白山 (“White Mountains”). This was the second major mountain range that the Hsiung-nu lost to the Han. The Hsi-ho chiu-shih 西河舊事 (“So-yin”) relates a song that deplored these losses: “The bereavement of our Ch’i-lien Mountains causes our various animals to not breed and rest [any more]; the loss of our Yen-chih Mountains causes our women to have no make-up [any more].” 327 Han shu, 94A.3768, has only “more than ten.” The great similarity of ch’i 七, “seven,” and shih 十, “ten,” in the ancient script has probably contributed to this slip of the clerks. 328 Po-wang hou 博望侯; this was Chang Ch’ien 張騫. A detailed account of the battle is found on Shih chi, 109.2872-3. 329 Tsu k’o 卒可; the Han shu, 94A.3769, writes Kuang jun 廣軍, “Kuang’s army (of four thousand men)” instead. 330 Ch’ieh chin 且盡; Han shu, 94A.3769, sounds only a little less dramatic with ssu-che kuopan 死者過半, “[of those four thousand] those dead accounted for more than a half.”

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

289

the Farsighted Marquis arrived, General Li was able to escape alive. The Han [*2909*] had lost several thousand men. 331 The Marquis of Hsi, because he missed the appointment with the General of Agile Cavalry, was implicated together with the Farsighted Marquis and both were warranted to receive the death penalty, [but] paid ransom and were made commoners. That autumn, the Shan-yü was angry about [the fact that] the Hun-yeh 渾 邪332 King and the Hsiu-t’u 休屠 King, settling in the west, had suffered from the Han the killing or capturing of several tens of thousands of men, [so] he wanted to summon and execute them. The Hun-yeh King and the Hsiu-t’u King were afraid and conspired to surrender to the Han. The Han sent the General of Agile Cavalry to go and receive them. The Hun-yeh King killed the Hsiu-t’u King and combined and lead his troops to surrender to the Han. All in all, this were more than forty thousand men, [but they were] proclaimed to be hundred thousand. At this, when the Han had already obtained the Hun-yeh King, and thereupon in Lung-hsi, Pei-ti, and Ho-hsi the raids of the Hu become ever more seldom, [the Han] moved paupers from East of the Pass and had them stay [in the area] south of the Ho and in Hsin-Ch’in-chung 新秦中333 [both of] which had been seized from the Hsiung-nu, in order to fill it. And the [number of] garrison troops from Pei-ti to the west was reduced by one half. The next year334 (120 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu entered Yu-pei-p’ing and Tinghsiang each [time] with several tens of thousands of horsemen, killing or abducting more than thousand [*2910*] people before they left. The next year (119 B.C.), in spring, the Han made plans and said: “[Chao] Hsin, the Marquis of Hsi, made a plan for the Shan-yü to stay north of the desert, assuming that the Han troops cannot reach [them].” Thereupon, for grain[carrying] horses, [the Han] mobilized hundred thousand horsemen [with] accompanying private pack horses totalling 140.000 animals. As for the weight of the grain rations, there was nothing comparable to it. They ordered [Wei] 331

Again, the Han shu, 94A.3769, eschews concrete numbers, saying that the Han “almost lost their [entire] army” (chin wang ch’i chün 盡亡其軍). 332 Han shu, 94A.3769, writes K’un-yeh 昆邪 throughout. 333 Literally, “New Ch’in Territory.” According to Fu Ch’ien (“Cheng-yi”), this was a six or seven hundred li wide land in Pei-ti Commandery between Ch’ang-an and Shuo-fang, 175 miles northeast of modern Yin-ch’uan in Ning-hsia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). Grammatically, it is also possible to translate this sentence as “... had them stay [in the area] south of the Ho that had been seized from the Hsiung-nu and in Hsin-Ch’in-chung 新秦中 ....” But ultimately, the New Ch’in Territory was also land that had been wrought from the Hsiung-nu, just a little earlier. 334 Han shu, 94A.3769, writes “the next spring.”

290

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

Ch’ing 〔衛〕青, the General-in-chief, and [Huo] Ch’ü-ping 〔霍〕去病, the General of Agile Cavalry, to divide [their] army between them, with the Generalin-chief going out through Ting-hsiang and the General of Agile Cavalry going out through Tai 代, and both agreeing to cross the desert and attack the Hsiungnu. When the Shan-yü heard of this, he moved his supply [base] farer away and with his elite troops waited north of the desert. He met with the Han General-inchief in battle for a whole day. When dusk set in and a strong wind arose, the Han troops let loose their left and right wings and besieged the Shan-yü. The Shan-yü himself estimated that in battle he would not be able to be as [good as] the Han troops. Consequently, the Shan-yü alone with [only] some hundred stalwart horsemen broke through the Han’s siege, ran away in northwesterly [direction]. The Han troops, pursuing him at night, could not catch him. On their march they cut down and caught nineteen thousand Hsiung-nu heads as trophies. Northwards they reached Chao Hsin’s 趙信 Rampart335 at Mount Tien-yen 闐顏 and then went back. When the Shan-yü ran away, his troops everywhere engaged the Han troops in skirmishes before following the Shan-yü. For a long time, the Shan-yü could not get hold of his masses. His Lu-li King to the Right assumed that the Shan-yü was dead, and thereupon enthroned himself as Shan-yü. The real Shan-yü again got hold of his masses, and the Lu-li King to the Right therefore did away with his Shan-yü title and again became the Lu-li King to the Right. [2911] When the Han General of Agile Cavalry had gone out through Tai 代 [and traveled] more than two thousand li, he met in battle with the Worthy King to the Left and the Han troops obtained Hu heads as trophies, totalling more than seventy thousand, [whereas] the commandants of the Worthy King to the Left all ran away. The [General of] Agile Cavalry made an offering to heaven at Mount Lang-chü-hsü 狼居胥, an offering to earth at Ku-yen 姑衍, overlooked the Hanhai 翰海 (Vast Sea),336 and then returned. After that, the Hsiung-nu went far away and south of the desert there was no more royal court. The Han crossed the Ho and everywhere from Shuo-fang 朔方

335 Ju Ch’un (“Chi-chieh”) says that after Chao Hsin had surrendered to the Hsiung-nu, they had built a city and placed him there. 336 Ju Ch’un (“Chi-chieh”) explains the Han-hai as the name of a sea in the north (or, possibly, the “North Sea”), while the “Cheng-yi” notes that it was a breeding place for birds. Both size and distance from the former area of Tai make Lake Baikal the most probable candidate to be the ancient Han-hai.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

291

westwards up to Ling-chü 令居 337 they interconnected [irrigation] canals and established agricultural offices, 338 [manned by] fifty or sixty thousand functionaries and soldiers, gradually nibbling away at [their enemy’s land]. The territory was adjacent to and north of the Hsiung-nu[‘s old homeland]. Earlier, when the two Han generals had set out with large [forces] and besieged the Shan-yü, those whom they killed or took captive were eighty or ninety thousand, but the casualties among the Han officers and soldiers were also several tens of thousands and of the Han horses more than hundred thousand died. Though the Hsiung-nu were hurt and went far away, but the Han also had but few horses and no means to go [there] again. The Hsiung-nu used Chao Hsin’s plan and dispatched an envoy to the Han asking in amiable words for a marital alliance. When the Son of Heaven handed down the matter for discussion, some argued for a marital alliance, some argued for finally subdueing them [i.e., the Hsiung-nu]. Jen Shang 任敞, the Chief Clerk of the Chancellor, said: “The Hsiung-nu have just been defeated and are in straigthened circumstances. It would be opportune to make [them] become subjects beyond the barrier, asking for audience at the border.” The Han sent Jen Shang to the Shan-yü. When the Shan-yü heard Shang’s plan, he was furious, held him back and did not dispatch him [on the return trip]. Before this, the Han had also [held back] some envoy of the Hsiung-nu who had surrendered and the Shan-yü now held back the Han envoy as a corresponding measure. The Han had just again assembled officers and horses, when it happened that [Huo] Ch’ü-ping, the General of Agile Cavalry, died. At this, the Han for a long time did not go north to attack the Hu. [2912] Several years [later], Yi-chih-hsieh 伊稚斜 Shan-yü died after having been on the throne for thirteen years, and his son Wu-wei 烏維 was enthroned as Shan-yü. That year was the Han’s third year of yüan-ting 元鼎 (114 B.C.). When Wu-wei Shan-yü was enthroned, the Han Son of Heaven for the first time set out to make a tour of inspection through the commanderies and prefectures.

337

A place belonging to Chin-ch’eng 金城 or Chang-yeh 張掖 Commandery. Located sixtythree miles northwest of modern Lan-chou in Kansu; see T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34. 338 T’ien-kuan 田官 . Here, the Chung-hua edition is clearly mistaken, putting a comma between t’ien, “field,” and kuan, “office.” Both chih t’ien 置田, “establish fields,” and kuan li zu 官 吏卒, “officers, functionaries and soldiers,” would be awkward expressions. See Kuan Tung-kui 管 東貴, “Han-tai te t’un-t’ien yü k’ai-pien” 漢代的屯田與開邊, BIHP, 45:1 (1973): 94, and Liu Kuang-hua 劉光華, Han-tai Hsi-pei t’un-t’ien yen-chiu 漢代西北屯田研究 (Lanchow: Lan-chou Ta-hsüeh Ch’u-pan-she, 1988), p. 69.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

292

Thereafter, the Han side turned south to punish the two Yüeh 越339 and did not attack the Hsiung-nu, while the Hsiung-nu for their part did not make inroads into the border [regions of the Han]. When (in 112 B.C.) Wu-wei Shan-yü had been enthroned for three years, the Han had already wiped out Nan-yüeh 南越 and dispatched [Kung-sun] Ho 〔公 孫〕賀, the former Grand Coachman, who led fifteen thousand horsemen and went out through Chiu-yüan 九原 [traveling] for more than two thousand li, reaching Fu-chü-ching 浮苴井 (Well of the Floating Rushes), before he returned without seeing a single Hsiung-nu. The Han furthermore dispatched Chao P’o-nu 趙破奴, the former Marquis Who Follows the Agile [Cavalry],340 who led more than ten thousand horsemen and went out through Ling-chü 令居 [traveling] for several thousand li, reaching the Hsiung-ho 匈河 River, before he returned, also without seeing a single Hsiung-nu.341 At this time, the Son of Heaven made a tour of inspection through the border [regions] reaching Shuo-fang 朔方, where he drilled 180.000 horsemen in order to display military prowess, and sending Kuo Chi 郭吉 to sound a knell342 for the Shan-yü. After Kuo Chi had arrived at the Shan-yü[‘s court], the Shan-yü’s Master of Guests asked about his mission and Kuo Chi, his manners humble, his words amiable, said: “When I see the Shan-yü, I will tell him directly.” When the Shan-yü saw [Kuo] Chi, Chi said: “The head of the King of Nan-yüeh is already dangling from the Han [capital’s] north gate tower. Now, if you, Shan-yü, are at once 343 able to come forward and met the Han in battle, the Son of Heaven himself will lead troops to await [you] at the border; if you, Shan-yü, are not at once able, then turn southwards and become a vassal of the Han. Why do you merely run far away, hiding like a fugitive north of the desert, in this cold and paltry place without water and grass? That is useless!”344 His speech ended and the Shan-yü was furious. He immediately had the Master of Guests decapitated as the one having presented [Kuo Chi], and retained Kuo Chi, not letting him return,

339

This refers to the two non-Chinese states Tung-yüeh 東越 and Nan-yüeh 南越. Ts’ung-p’iao-hou 從驃侯. 341 Han shu, 94A.3771, combines these records of failure for both campaigns into one sentence and shortens this passage in general. 342 Feng 風 used here as a loan for feng 諷. 343 Chi 即, possibly expressing haste or pressuring. Alternatively, it just means “if.” 344 Wu wei yeh 毋為也; Han shu, 94A.3772, lacks the last sentence but for a wei 為, that now acts as an interrogative particle at the end of the previous sentence. 340

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

293

[instead] moving him to the shores of the Pei-hai 北海 (North Sea).345 But the Shan-yü after all did not dare to make raids into the Han border [regions], [instead he] paused and nourished [himself] and let the men and horses rest, practised shooting by hunting, and several times sent an envoy to the Han asking for a marital alliance in nice speech and sweet words. [2913] The Han sent Wang Wu 王烏 and his party to the Hsiung-nu to spy them out. According to Hsiung-nu law, if a Han envoy did not let go of his caduceus and tatooed his face with ink,346 he was not allowed to enter a yurt.347 Wang Wu, as a man from Pei-ti, was familiar with the Hu customs, let go of his caduceus, tatooed his face and was allowed to enter the yurts. The Shan-yü loved him, made a show of allowing [him entry] using plenty sweet words, and dispatched his Heir to enter the Han [capital] as hostage in order to ask for marital alliance. 348 The Han sent Yang Hsin 楊信 to the Hsiung-nu. At this time, the Han in the East routed the Wei-mo 穢貉 349 and Ch’ao-hsien 朝鮮 and converted [their territories] into commanderies,350 and in the West established Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉 Commandery351 in order to cut off the route of communications between the Hu 胡 and the Ch’iang 羌.352 The Han also communicated with the Yüeh-chih 月 氏353 and Ta-hsia 大夏354 in the West and also married the King of the Wu-sun 345

The “Cheng-yi” explains this as Shang-hai 上海, “Upper Sea,” and adds that this was also the place to which Su Wu 蘇武 would be moved (later on). Again, the place may denote Lake Baikal; see n. 336 above. 346 Tatooing was a customary means of the Inner Asian people to ornament their body as is seen on a man’s body found at Pazyryk, Siberia, and a female mummy from Zaghunluq in the Taklimakan desert (see J.P. Mallory and Victor H. Mair, The Tarim Mummies. Ancient China and the Mystery of the Earliest Peoples from the West [London: Thames & Hudson, 2000], p. 204 and color pls. 7 and 8). This was in stark contrast to the Han, for whom tatooing, especially of the face, marked convicted criminals. 347 See n. 244 above. 348 On Han shu, 94A.3772, the request of the Shan-yü is set in direct speech. 349 Han shu, 94A.3772, writes 滅貉; see n. 163 above. 350 As the “Cheng-yi” remarks, these were Hsüan-t’u 玄菟 and Lo-lang 樂浪 Commanderies. 351 Located about ten miles southeast of modern Chia-yü-kuan in Kansu; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:33. 352 That is, between the Hsiung-nu and the Tibetans, the two foremost powers to the north and to the west of the Chinese; see n. 165 above. 353 The Yüeh-chih, probably Tocharian speakers (see Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 456-9), were the arch-enemies of the Hsiung-nu ever since Mao-tun Shan-yü had driven them out of their former homelands around Tun-huang 敦煌 and the Ch’i-lian 祁連 Mountains and Lao-shang Shanyü had killed their king and made his head into a drinking vessel. One part of the Yüeh-chih had

294

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

烏 孫 355 to a [Chinese] princess in order to separate the states in the West supporting the Hsiung-nu [from the Hsiung-nu]. In the North, they also augmented and widened the farmlands up to Hsien-lei 胘靁 356 [which they took] as barrier, and the Hsiung-nu after all did not dare to speak about this. That year, [Chao] Hsin, the Marquis of Hsi, died and those in charge of affairs at the Han [court] assumed that the Hsiung-nu were already weak and could be made to follow [the Han] as vassals. Yang Hsin was a man who was steadfast, straightforward, and unrelenting and as a rule did not esteem vassals. The Shanyü had no affection [for him]. When the Shan-yü wanted to summon him to enter [for an audience], he was not willing to let go his caduceus. The Shan-yü therefore sat outside the yurt to see Yang Hsin. After Yang Hsin had been received by the Shan-yü, he told [him]: “If you want a marital alliance, your Heir, Shan-yü, will [have to] become a hostage to the Han.” The Shan-yü said: “That is not [like] the former agreement. According to the former agreement, the Han regularly dispatch a princess357 give silk fabrics, waddings, and foodstuff in fixed quantities and with this [conclude] the marital alliance, while the Hsiung-nu, for their part, do not disturb the border [regions]. Now, you358 want to revert to the olden days by having my Heir become a hostage–no chance!” It is a Hsiung-nu habit that, when they receive a Han envoy and he is not a palace eunuch,359 but a

thereupon moved to the west of Ferghana and built a state that was later to flourish as the Kushan empire under King Kanishka. The other part, known as the “Lesser Yüeh-chih,” remained west of the Tarim Basin. This was presumably the group that the Chinese communicated with. See also Chen Chien-wen [Ch’en Chien-wen 陳健文], “Further Studies on the Racial, Cultural, and Ethnic Affinities of the Yuezhi 月氏,” in The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern Central Asia, Victor Mair, ed. (Philadelphia: The Institute for the Study of Man, 1998), pp. 767-84, with a good overview of current theories. 354 The Parthian empire under the Arsacid dynasty (247 B.C.-A.D.224). 355 A people in the Ili region between Lake Balkhash and T’ien-shan, probably Indo-European speakers (according to Pulleyblank, “Neighbors,” pp. 458); see Y.A. Zadneprovskiy, “The Nomads of Northern Central Asia after the Invasion of Alexander,” in History of civilizations of Central Asia. Volume II: The development of sedentary and nomadic civilizations: 700 B.C. to A.D. 250, János Harmatta, ed. [Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1999], pp. 458-62. 356 According to the Han shu yin-yi 漢書音義 (“Chi-chieh”), this was a place north of the settlement area of the Wu-sun. 357 This is the only instance, where the Shih chi writes weng-chu 翁主, “princess (i.e., daughter of a feudal lord).” See n. 206 above. 358 Nai 乃. This seems to be a less respectful form of address. 359 Chung kuei-jen 中貴人; for this term, see n. 38 to the translation of Shih chi, 109.2868 above.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

295

Confucian scholar,360 they assume that he wants to argue and break his argument; when he is a youth, they assume he wants to [make his words] sting and break his airs. Each time a Han envoy enters [the court of] the Hsiung-nu, the Hsiung-nu immediately respond by recompensation. If the Han hold back an envoy of the Hsiung-nu, the Hsiung-nu also hold back a Han envoy. One has to obtain one’s due, before one is willing to stop. [2914] After Yang Hsin 楊信 had returned, the Han sent Wang Wu 王烏. Then the Shan-yü again was toadying with sweet words, and wanted to obtain more of the Han’s wealth. Cheatingly, he told Wang Wu: “I want to enter the Han [court] and see the Son of Heaven, to make an agreement with him face to face that we become brothers.” Wang Wu returned to report [this] to the Han. The Han built a mansion for the Shan-yü at Ch’ang-an 長安. The Hsiung-nu said: “If we do not obtain as envoy someone the Han esteem,361 we will not talk to you sincerely.” The Hsiung-nu sent their esteemed person to the Han, he got ill, the Han gave him medicine and wanted to cure him, [but] unfortunately he died. Then, the Han sent Lu Ch’ung-kuo 路充國, who was girded with the seal and sash of an Official Ranking Two Thousand Shih, on a mission, and thereby to escort his [i.e., the Hsiung-nu’s esteemed person’s] funeral procession and a give [him] a generous burial362 worth several thousand cash, saying: “This is someone the Han esteem.” 363 The Shan-yü assumed that the Han killed his esteemed envoy and thereupon held back Lu Ch’ung-kuo not letting him return. All that was said was that the Shan-yü had just toadied Wang Wu for nothing, and in particular had had no intention to enter the Han [court] or dispatch his Heir to come as hostage. At this, the Hsiung-nu several times sent guerilla troops to invade and violate the Han borders. The Han thereupon appointed Kuo Ch’ang 郭昌 as Hu-Routing General and stationed the Marquis of Cho-yeh 浞野 364 east of Shuo-fang to prepare against the Hu. Lu Ch’ung-kuo was retained by the Hsiung-nu for three years, when the Shan-yü died.365

360

The “Chi-chieh” explains hsien 先, “former,” as hsien-sheng 先生, “mister,” and notes that the Han shu, 94A.3773, has ju-sheng 儒生, “Confucian scholar.” 361 Kuei-jen 貴人; here and in the following, it does not seem imperative that the esteemed persons were eunuchs; cf. n. 359 above. 362 Tsang 葬; Han shu, 94A.3774, just writes pi 幣, “a present.” 363 Han shu, 94A.3774, lacks this sentence. 364 Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) says that this was Chao P’o-nu 趙破奴. 365 Han shu, 94A.3774, lacks this sentence.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

296

Wu-wei 烏維 Shan-yü died having been on the throne for ten years, and his son Wu-shih-lu 烏師廬366 was enthroned as Shan-yü. He was of young age, [so] he was called the Boy Shan-yü. That year was the sixth year of yüan-feng 元封 (105 B.C.). From now on, the Shan-yü increasingly turned towards the northwest, [his] troops to the left directly faced Yün-chung, those to the right directly faced Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉 and Tun-huang 郭煌 Commanderies.367 [2915] When the Boy Shan-yü was enthroned, the Han sent two envoys, one to console368 the Shan-yü, one to console the Worthy King to the Right, wishing to pinch his state [from the Hsiung-nu]. When the envoys entered the Hsiungnu[‘s court], the Hsiung-nu went with everything to the Shan-yü. The Shan-yü was angry and retained all the Han envoys. All in all, the Han envoys remained with the Hsiung-nu more than ten years. But when Hsiung-nu envoys came, the Han also immediately held them back correspondingly. That year, the Han sent [Li] Kuang-li 〔 李 〕廣 利, the Erh-shih 貳師 (Sutrishna) 369 General, westwards on a campaign against Ta-yüan 大 宛 [Ferghana], and ordered [Kung-sun] Ao 〔 公 孫 〕 敖 , the Yin-yü 因 杅 370 General, to built the Shou-hsiang 受降 (Receiving the Surrendering) Rampart.371 That winter, the Hsiung-nu [suffered] heavy rain and snow, a lot of livestock died of starvation or cold. The Boy Shan-yü was young and was fond of killing and campaigning. Many people of [his] state felt insecure. The Grand Commandant of the Left wanted to kill the Shan-yü and sent someone to secretly inform the Han, saying: “I want to kill the Shan-yü and surrender to the Han, [but] the Han 366

Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) reports that one source writes the new Shan-yü’s name as Chanshih-lu 詹師廬. It is quite possibe that he is refering to Han shu, 94A.3774, which does just that. Alternatively, the Han shu version reflects one of at least two different redactions of an earlier Shih chi text. 367 At this point the “Cheng-yi” cites the K’uo-ti-chih explaining two place names–T’ieh-lekuo 鐵 勒國 and Lo-sheng-chou 樂勝 州–that do not feature in the received text, perhaps an indication that the text is defective. Tun-huang Commandery was located at modern Tun-huang in Kansu; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:33. 368 Tiao 弔, “to console,” namely because of the death of his father and in the next instance, probably, because the Worthy King, although he was next in rank to the Shan-yü, had not been called upon to follow as leader, but instead had to watch a young child taking his place. 369 A place name; see n. 139 to the translation of Shih chi, 109.2877 above. 370 The meaning of this title–perhaps a transliteration–is not very clear, see also Shih chi, 111.2942, and Han shu, 6.200. 371 This rampart was built outside the fortifications for reasons that are explained immediately below. It was located c. seventy-five miles northwest of modern Pao-t’ou in Inner Mongolia; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

297

are far away. If troops come to meet me,372 I will mobilize [forces] immediately.” Earlier, the Han had heard these words and therefore they built the Shou-hsiang Rampart, [but] they still considered [the Hsiung-nu too] far away. The next year (104 B.C.), in spring, the Han sent [Chao] P’o-nu 〔趙〕破奴, the Marquis of Cho-yeh 浞野, to lead more than twenty thousand horsemen and go out through Shuo-fang [traveling] northwestwards for more than two thousand li, making an appointment to reach Mount Chün-chi 浚稽,373 before turning back. After the Marquis of Cho-yeh had reached the [place of the] appointment and had turned back, the Grand Commandant to the Left wanted to mobilize [forces], but was discovered. The Shan-yü had him executed and mobilized the troops to the Left to attack [the Marquis of] Cho-yeh. The Marquis of Cho-yeh on his march caught head trophies obtaining several thousand. On his march back, when he had not yet reached the Shou-hsiang Rampart but for four hundred li, Hsiung-nu troops–eighty thousand horsemen–besieged him. The Marquis of Cho-yeh at night personally set out to look for water, [but] the Hsiung-nu intercepted him. Since they obtained the Marquis of Cho-yeh alive, they took advantage of this and impetuously attacked his army. Within the army,374 Kuo Tsung 郭縱 was Commissioner and Wei Wang 維王 was Gang [Leader].375 They consulted with each other, saying: “When all colonels fear to be executed, because they lost the general, nobody will urge the others to return.” Consequently, the army was taken over by the Hsiung-nu. The Hsiung-nu’s Boy Shan-yü exulted and then dispatched surprise troops to launch an attack against the Shou-hsiang Rampart. They could not subdue it, thereupon they made marauding incursions into the border [region] and then left.

372

Chi ping lai ying 即兵來迎; Han shu, 94A.3775, has, “If the Han have troops come near, ...” (Han chi lai ping chin 漢即來兵近). Obviously, ying 迎 and chin 近 have been confused for their graphical similarity. 373 Ying Shao 應劭 (“So-yin”) states that these lay north of Wu-wei 武威 Commandery. See Uchida, Kyodo, pp. 107-11, for a detailed discussion of its location, which was near the court of the Shan-yü. 374 Chün-chung 軍中, Han shu, 94A.3775, writes chün-li 軍吏, “army officers,” and continues, much like the Shih chi above, with “feared that one would execute them, because they lost [their] leader, [so] nobody urged the others to return.” 375 Ch’ü 渠 probably stands for ch’ü-shuai 渠 帥 (sometimes also written 渠 率 ), as the “Cheng-yi” observes. This term often occurs in connection with gangs of outlaws or pirates (see Han shu, 46.3225; Chü-yan Han-chien shih-wen ho-chiao 居延漢簡釋文合校, strips 33.8 and 503.17+503.8), but here seems to be a military title.

298

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

The next year (103 B.C.), the Shan-yü wanted personally to launch an attack against the Shou-hsiang Rampart, [but] he had not yet reached it, when he became ill and died. [2916] The Boy Shan-yü died after he had been on the throne for three years. His son was young of age, the Hsiung-nu thereupon enthroned the younger brother of his father Wu-wei Shan-yü, Kou-li-hu 呴犁湖,376 the Worthy King to the Right, as Shan-yü. That year was the third year of t’ai-ch’u 太初 (102 B.C.). When Kou-li-hu Shan-yü was enthroned, the Han sent Hsü Tzu-wei 徐自為, the [Superintendent of the] Imperial Household,377 to go out through the Wuyüan 五原 barrier,378 [traveling] several hundred li or at the farest more than379 thousand li, and to build ramparts, strongholds, and lines of watchtower stations reaching up to Lu-ch’ü 廬朐.380 And they sent Han Yüeh 韓說, the Yu-chi 游擊 (Roving Task Force) General, and Wei K’ang 衛伉, the Marquis of Ch’ang-p’ing 長平,381 to set up camp at his side. They [also] sent Lu Po-te 路博德, the Chief Commandant of the Strong Crossbowmen, to build [fortifications] at the shores of the Chü-yen 居延 Swamp.382 That autumn, the Hsiung-nu in great numbers entered Ting-hsiang and Yünchung, 383 killing and abducting several thousand people, defeating several Officials Ranking Two Thousand Shih [i.e. Commandery Administrators], before they left. On their march, they destroyed the rampart, lines of watchtower stations, and strongholds that had been built by the [Superintendent of the] Imperial Household. [*2917*] They also sent the Worthy King to the Right to enter Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉 and Chang-yeh 張掖, abducting several thousand people. When they happened upon Jen Wen 任文, who attacked and rescued [their captives], they completely lost again what had been obtained and left. That 376 Both the “Chi-chieh” and the “So-yin” give an alternative reading that would result in modern Yü-li-hu or Hsü-li-hu. 377 Kuang-lu as an abbreviation for Kuang-lu-hsün 光祿勳. 378 The “Cheng-yi” remarks that this was the Yü-lin 榆林 barrier in Wu-yüan Commandery. 379 Han shu, 94A.3776, lacks the “more than.” 380 The commentaries explain this either as a Hsiung-nu place name or as the name of a mountain, or as both, i.e., the Hsiung-nu name for a mountain. Han shu, 94A.3776, writes 盧朐. 381 Located sixty-five miles south of modern Kaifeng in Honan; T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19. 382 The K’uo-ti-chih 括地志 (“Cheng-yi”) identifies these fortifications as the Che-lu 遮虜 (Intercepting the enemy) Rampart, the place where, later on, General Li Ling 李陵 and his men would head for in their rearguard action in the year 99 B.C. 383 Han shu, 94A.3776, lists Wu-yüan and Shuo-fang Commanderies as additional targets of the invasion.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

299

year,384 the Erh-shih General broke Ta-yüan, cutting off the head of its king and returned. The Hsiung-nu wanted to intercept him, but could not reach him. 385 That winter, they wanted to launch an attack against the Shou-hsiang Rampart, but as it happened, the Shan-yü became ill and died.386 Kou-li-hu Shan-yü died having been on the throne for one year. The Hsiungnu thereupon enthroned his younger brother Chü-ti-hou 且 鞮 侯 , the Chief Commandant to the Left, as Shan-yü. After the Han had punished Ta-yüan 大宛, their prestige made the foreign countries tremble. The Son of Heaven’s mind was bound on the wish to finally trap the Hu, thus an edict was handed down that read: “Emperor Kao 高 left Us with the grief about [the lost battle at] P’ing-ch’eng.387 At the time of Empress Kao, the Shan-yü’s letter was extremely perverse and rebellious. Long ago, when Duke Hsiang 襄 of Ch’i 齊 took revenge against a foe from nine generations [earlier], the Ch’un-ch’iu 春秋 regarded it highly.”388 That year was the fourth year of t’ai-ch’u 太初 (101 B.C.). After Chü-ti-hou Shan-yü had been enthroned,389 he returned all Han envoys who had not surrendered. Lu Ch’ung-kuo 路充國 and his party was allowed to return. When the Shan-yü had just been enthroned, he feared that the Han would launch a surprise attack against him,390 thus he told himself: “Me, the little one, how could I dare to hate391 the Han Son of Heaven? The Han Son of Heaven is my father-in-law!” The Han sent Su Wu 蘇武, the General of the Gentlemen-ofthe-Household, to generously present the Shan-yü with gifts and valuables. The

384

Shih sui 是歲; Han shu, 94A.3776, has wen 聞, “[the Hsiung-nu] heard [that],” instead. Han shu, 94A.3776, has “... but did not dare to.” 386 Han shu, 94A.3776, just writes, “That winter, he [the Shan-yü] became ill and died.” 387 See above, Shih chi, 110.2894. 388 The “Chi-chieh” cites from the Kung-yang chuan. 389 This, as well as the next two paragraphs at the end of this chapter–but excluding the final appraisal of the Grand Scribe–are indented in the Chung-hua edition. Liang Yü-sheng (33.1389) argues that this is a later, albeit Western Han, addition. This is especially interesting, because the events recounted here, are at the heart of the historian’s personal falling out of favour with the emperor, i.e., they tell the story of how first Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s good friend, Li Ling, surrendered to the Hsiung-nu and finally also his political opponent Li Kuang-li did the same, though he had accused Li Ling severely for this action. See also critical remarks against some parts of Liang’s statement in Wang Shu-min, 110.2986. 390 The beginning of this paragraph is structured somewhat differently on Han shu, 94A.3777, but the content remains the same. 391 Wang 望, alternatively, “how could I dare to face the Han Son of Heaven?” 385

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

300

Shan-yü grew ever more arrogant, his bearing becoming extremely haughty, this was not what the Han had hoped for. The next year (100 B.C.), [Chao] P’o-nu 〔趙〕破奴, the Marquis of Choyeh 浞野, could flee and return to the Han. The next year (99 B.C.), the Han sent [Li] Kuang-li 〔李〕廣利, the Erhshih General, with thirty thousand horsemen to go out through Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉. He attacked the Worthy King to the Right at T’ien-shan 天山, obtaining more than ten thousand Hu heads as trophies [*2918*] and then went back. The Hsiung-nu with a large force besieged the Erh-shih General and he almost could not escape. The casualties among the Han troops were six or seven out of ten. The Han again sent [Kung-sun] Ao, the Yin-yü General, to go out through Hsi-ho 西河 and to meet the Chief Commandant of the Strong Crossbowmen [Lu Po-te] at Mount Cho-yeh 涿涂.392 They achieved nothing. Once more, [the Han] sent Li Ling 李陵, the Chief Commandant of Cavalry, to lead five thousand men of infantry and cavalry.393 He went out through Chü-yen, going north for more than thousand li, met the Shan-yü and battled with him. Those that [Li] Ling killed or wounded were more than ten thousand men, when the troops’ food was used up. He wanted to withdraw and return. The Hsiung-nu besieged [Li] Ling, and [Li] Ling surrendered to the Hsiung-nu, his troops finally being taken over. Those who were able to return were four hundred men. The Shan-yü then esteemed [Li] Ling giving him his daughter as wife. Two years later [97 B.C.], the Erh-shih General [Li Kuang-li] was again sent to lead sixty thousand horsemen and hundred thousand394 infantry troops and go out through Shuo-fang. Lu Po-te, the Chief Commandant of the Strong Crossbowmen, led more than ten thousand men and met with the Erh-shih [General]. [Han] Yüeh 〔韓〕說, the Yu-chi General, led thirty thousand men of infantry and cavalry395 and went out through Wu-yüan. [Kung-sun] Ao, the Yinyü General, led ten thousand horsemen and thirty thousand infantry troops and went out through Yen-men. When the Hsiung-nu heard about this, they removed

392

Both Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) and the “So-yin” itself give the above pronunciation for 涂. Han shu, 94A.3777, is in accord with this by writing Cho-ye 涿邪. The “Cheng-yi” explains that this was a central mountain or mountain range of the Hsiung-nu. For several theories as to where it was situated and an evaluation of these, see Uchida, Kyodo, pp. 111-3. 393 Han shu, 94A.3777, instead of “and cavalry” (ch’i 騎) has just “troops” (ping 兵). 394 Han shu, 94A.3777, has “seventy thousand.” See n. 327 above. 395 Again, Han shu, 94A.3777, has just “infantry troops.”

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

301

all their baggage to far away in the north of the Ye-wu 余吾 River,396 and the Shan-yü with hundred thousand horsemen waited south of the River to take up the battle with the Erh-shih General. The Erh-shih General then withdrew and led [his troops] back, battling with the Shan-yü successively for more than ten days.397 When the Erh-shih [General] heard that his family on account of voodoo sorcery398 had [suffered the punishment of the whole] clan being wiped out, he took the opportunity and together with his troops surrendered to the Hsiung-nu, only one or two out of thousand men being able to come back home. [Han] Yüeh, the Yu-chi [General], achieved nothing. [Kung-sun] Ao, the Yin-yü [General], battled with the Worthy King to the Left, did not gain the upper hand and led his troops returning home. That year, 399 it was not allowed to talk about how much merit had been acquired by the Han troops’ setting out to attack the Hsiung-nu; merit was not to be mentioned [at all].400 There was an edict to arrest Sui Tan 隨但, the Prefect Grand Physician, for telling the Erh-shih General that his family, house, and clan had being wiped out, letting [Li] Kuang-li be able to surrender to the Hsiung-nu. 396

The above pronunciation for 余 is given by Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”) and in the “So-yin.” The latter also cites the Shan-hai-ching 山海經 to the effect that a tributary of the Ye-wu was the Hsien 鮮 River that, after originating in the Pei-Hsien 北鮮 Mountains, flowed in a northerly direction. 397 That is, the Chinese side withdrew immediately when they saw the Hsiung-nu awaiting them, but had to engage in rearguard action on their way back. 398 The Han shu lacks this episode (up to “[Han] Yüeh, the Yu-chi [General], ...”) at this point, because it is chronologically misplaced (see n. 399 below). On Li Kuang-li’s surrender and eventual death on the altar of the Hsiung-nu, see Han shu, 94A.3779-81. For details of this famous political scandal during the Former Han period, also known as the “witchcraft case” in English secondary literature, and Li Kuang-li’s involvement therein, see, Michael Loewe, Crisis and Conflict in Han China, 104 BC to AD 9 (London: Allen & Unwin, 1974), p. 45. 399 According to the dating at the beginning of this paragraph and according to Hsü Kuang (“Chi-chieh”), this was 97 B.C., but the “Cheng-yi” claims that it is well known that the Shih chi is mistaken at this point and that the events from Li Kuang-li hearing about his clan’s demise do not belong to 97 B.C. Indeed, according to the chronology in Shih chi, 22.1144, and Han shu, 61.2704, the battle south of the Ye-wu River was not Li Kuang-li’s last fight as Han general. Instead, in the year 90 B.C. there was another campaign against the Hsiung-nu which Li Kuang-li took part in and during which he heard that his family back home had been targeted by his political opponents. The Shih chi seems to have confused these two campaigns into one. From here on, the Han shu, 94A.3778-91, continues differently recounting the history of the Hsiung-nu up to the year 58 B.C. 400 There is a nice play on words in this sentence, because yü 御, “to reign,” “to rule,” or “to superintend,” had the same or a very similar pronunciation as yü 語, “to talk (about),” as is pointed out in the “Cheng-yi.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

302

[2919] His Honor the Grand Scribe says: When Mr. K’ung 孔 [Ch’iu 丘, i.e. Confucius] wrote the Ch’un-ch’iu 春秋 (The Springs and Autumns [of Lu]), he made manifest [the events of] the time between the [Dukes] Yin 隱 and Huan 桓, [but] when he reached the periods of the [Dukes] Ting 定 and Ai 哀, he [merely] made vague indications. When he made the texts that touched upon his own time and there was nothing to praise, it was [all] terms of taboo and avoidance.401 As regards what the current and ordinary [people] have to say about the Hsiung-nu, this suffers from their going after temporary influence and devoting themselves to flattering until their advice is accepted, in order to serve their biased interests– do not consult those [whose merits and virtue is not up to their position];402 the commanders and leaders,403 relying on the Central States being large and big, have an impetuous drive. The Ruler over mankind takes advantage of it to make policy decisions. Therefore, the established merit is not profound. Although Yao 堯 was worthy, the work and business that he undertook did not succeed, only when he obtained [the help of] Yü 禹 , were the Nine Provinces peaceful. Moreover, if one wishes to undertake the government of a sage, [the important point] lies solely in choosing and employing military and civil leaders! It lies solely in choosing and employing military and civil leaders! *

*

*

*

*

From the Three Dynasties onwards, the Hsiung-nu 404 forever became the Central States’ worry and [source of] harm; wishing to know about the times of 401

This seemingly unrelated preliminary remarks seem like a rather obvious hint for the reader to look for the nuances in the historian’s account of his own times. 402 As the “Chi-chieh” and the “So-yin” remark, pi-chi 彼己 is an allusion to the Shih-ching ode lamenting “favours shown to worthless officers” (Mao #151 [Legge, 4:221]). In the received edition of the Shih-ching, the term is written pi-chi 彼其, but 彼己 is seen, marked as a quotation from the Shih-ching, in the Tso-chuan (Yang, Tso, Hsi 24, p. 427). If the interpretation “those” (Legge, 5:193) is correct, pu 不 in this sentence makes only sense as a particle of prohibition. 403 The “So-yin” claims that this stands for people like Fan K’uai 樊噲, Wei Ch’ing 衛青, and Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病. 404 It is interesting to note that the name “Hsiung-nu” here is readily applied to the whole temporal continuum since the very remote historical antiquity, when “Hsiung-nu” did not yet occur in the sources extant from that period. This confirms what was implied at the beginning of this chapter, namely that for Han historians “Hsiung-nu,” besides being an ethnonym, was in a broader sense also synonymous with the mighty steppe people in general, be they called Hsien-yün, Hun-yü, Jung, Ti, or Hsiung-nu. This, by the way, is also hinted at by the fact that the Shih chi has no independent memoir on any of the other steppe people.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

303

strength and [the times of] weakness, when arrangements and preparations [for defense] or punitive expeditions and campaigns were made, 405 I made the “Memoir on the Hsiung-nu, Number Fifty.”

405 This translation (of the Grand Scribe’s reasons for compiling this chapter given in his postface, Shih chi, 130.3317) is partly motivated by an attempt to reflect the punctuation of the Chung-hua editors, who make a semi-colon after hai 害, “harm,” and–quite unusually if compared with the remarks for other chapters–a comma before tso 作, “[I] made.” The Chinese original provides no indication on who it is who “wants to know about the times of strongness and weakness.” Watson (Han, 2:155) inserts “the Han” as the subject.

Translator’s Note As in the Han shu, the chapter on the Hsiung-nu in the Shih chi is the first in the sequence of the Memoirs that is not devoted to individuals or groups of individuals but to foreign peoples. Given the importance of the Hsiung-nu as the arch-rivals of the Former Han dynasty and the only foreign power that was able to effectively endanger the Han’s very existence, this is not surprising. In fact, the theme of the Hsiung-nu and the Han empire’s relation with them transcends this chapter and spills over into the biographies of the generals Li Kuang, Wei Ch’ing and Huo Ch’ü-ping, that sandwich this Memoir on the Hsiung-nu as chapters 109 and 111, as well as into the latter half of the Memoir on Han Ch’ang-ju (An-kuo), i.e., chapter 108. Further information, especially as regards the international balance of power, may be found in chapter 123, the Memoir on Ta-yüan. The possible significance of the biography of general Li Kuang has been dealt with already in the translator’s note to the preceding chapter. However, while Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s praise for Li Kuang and his descendant Li Ling is expressed rather unvealed in the former’s biography, the historical account of events in the Memoir on the Hsiung-nu strikes one as being rather balanced. The actions and merits of both Li Kuang and Li Ling as well as Wei Ch’ing and Huo Ch’ü-ping are related very matter-of-factly. The author’s subjectivity shines through only in the heretic judgements and the sneering apology of the eunuch Chung-hang Yüeh after his defection to the Hsiung-nu (pp. 2898-2900) as well as in the final verdict of “His Honor the Grand Scribe” (p. 2919). Both paragraphs clearly mark Ssu-ma Ch’ien as being opposed to the policy of assembling large armies and attacking the Hsiung-nu, though it is less clear whether he saw the solution in the marital alliances (hoch’in), that single thread which runs through the entire history of the relations between the Han and the Hsiung-nu. Especially the dialogue between Chunghang Yüeh and the Han envoys amounts to one of the most scathing cultural critiques of the time. Before hailing Ssu-ma Ch’ien as prophetic pacifist and the three core chapters concerning the Hsiung-nu as a masterpiece of veiled criticism and most direct proof of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s personal plight however, one has to realize two facts: First, that the question of how to deal, not only politically but also intellectually, with the Hsiung-nu, whose all too obvious might thwarted the Chinese emperor’s theoretical claim on cosmological superiority, was 305

306

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

ubiquitously present in those days. Many intellectuals presented opinions and suggestions on the matter and a stance that may be described as “pacifist” or “non-aggressive” was by no means uncommon. Therefore, the breadth that is accorded to the Hsiung-nu and Hsiung-nu related policies and campaigns here– after all, this Memoir is one of the longest in the whole Shih chi–does not have to be, and probably was not, related to the author’s personal history. Second, and even more importantly, one must not forget that the story of Chung-hang Yüeh, as indeed the entire Memoir on the Hsiung-nu, is preserved almost verbatim also in the Han shu, whose author is not known to have been a political sympathizer of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s. As is well known, the obviously close relationship between the Shih chi and the Han shu chapters in a number of cases has led some scholars to hypothesize that the respective parts of the Shih chi after having been lost somehow, where later copied back into the work from the Han shu. After having compared all differences between the two texts in detail (though I have mentioned only those differences in the footnotes that have a bearing on the immediate contents), I cannot find many indications that would support such a hypothesis. On the contrary, the Han shu version seems to be trying to economize the language by scrapping particles, like erh 而¸ chih 之, ch’i 其, shih 是, yeh 也, etc. or other expressions like jen 人 (Shih chi, 110.2904), where they are not really necessary; by not repeating a subject in a sentence if it is also the subject of the preceding sentence (the Han shu even works towards unifying subjects, wherever possible, like using “the Shan-yü” as subject in two consecutive sentences instead of “the Hsiung-nu” in one and “the Shan-yü” in the next); by reducing the number of expressions with two, largely synonymous words, like writing tsao 造 for chien-tsao 建造 (Shih chi, 110.2905) or ju 入 for ch’in-ju 侵入 (Shih chi, 110.2912); by avoiding to state the obvious, like “Shanyü of the Hsiung-nu” (Shih chi, 110.2907, the Han shu writes “Shan-yü” instead); or just by generally shortening the text, like writing Wen-ti 文帝 for Hsiao-Wen huang-ti 孝文皇帝 (Shih chi, 110.2898). The Han shu also seems bend on making the text more logical, or so it would seem according to our modern understanding. So, the Han shu writes, e.g., that the Hsiung-nu “entered Tai Commandery, killing the Grand Administrator” (入代郡，殺太守), instead of “entered and killed the Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery” (入殺代郡太 守) (Shih chi, 110.2907). It also happens, however, that the Han shu seems to misunderstand and distort a passage that in the Shih chi appears to be perfectly logical or that, at times, it is slightly more wordy than the Shih chi, but these are the exceptions.

The Hsiung-nu, Memoir 50

307

Other differences, that consistently appear, may reflect the development of orthographic standards, differences in regional or individual orthographic preferences, or taboo usage. Prominently in this respect feature the graphs ch’iang 彊 (e.g., Shih chi, 110.2883), pei 倍 (e.g., Shih chi, 110.2895), and yang 詳 (e.g., Shih chi, 110.2905), for which the Han shu writes 強, 背, and 陽 respectively. Another example is the exchange of yi 意 for chih 志 in the Shih chi version (see note 229). In sum, the great majority of differences gives the impression that someone tried to improve or anyway streamline a text similar to that which we see in the Shih chi today and by doing so created the version of the Han shu or its proto-version. Note, however, that David B. Honey (“The Han-shu, Manuscript Evidence, and the Textual Critics of the Shih-chi,” CLEAR 21 [1999]) in his detailed analysis, arrives at a different conclusion. According to Honey the Han shu version of the Memoir on the Hsiung-nu–as far as it overlaps with the same account in the Shih chi–is the most faithful representation of the original text by Ssu-ma Ch’ien (p. 92). Honey’s main arguments are that 1) the Han shu version more often than not is the more concise one (which, according to the dogma of Western textual criticism would speak in favor of it being earlier); and 2) most manuscript fragments of the Shih chi in general are closer to the received Han shu version. While it is easy to agree with Honey that the Han shu version is the more logical, textually “better version” (p. 92), the interpretation as to what that means, i.e., the applicability of Western text critical maxims to early Chinese texts, has yet to be proven. Exactly because the Han shu version is the better text, it is hardly conceivable, that someone, for whatever reason, took the Han shu version and inserted all those flowery and in most cases unnecessary expressions that we see in the Shih chi today. What is more, exactly this style seems to pervade most of the Shih chi. Why should we then suppose that only in the case of the memoir on the Hsiung-nu the Han shu, displaying a different style, is representative of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s hand? If that were true, we had to doubt the primacy of the entire Shih chi! Honey’s second argument, that draws on manuscript evidence, is much stronger. But all existing manuscripts–none of them from the Memoir on the Hsiung-nu–are from a time long after both the Shih chi and the Han shu came into existence. It is thus not impossible that the those manuscripts while actually citing from a perhaps easier accessible and textually better preserved Han shu claimed to be citing the more prestigious Shih chi both of which were widely known to be almost identical anyway.

308

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

Whatever the truth behind the differences between these two sources, it is clear that the process of the Han shu copying and “economizing” of the original Shih chi version (or even that of a later embellishment of the Shih chi, if we were to follow Honey) was not straightforward. Both source texts were certainly transmitted independently and underwent some corruption and additional changes in the process. Otherwise it would be difficult to account for all the differences that the texts show today. Honey (p. 93) himself is eager to stress that, in the end, “each case has to be independently demonstrated,” with which he seems to mean “each parallel account” in the Shih chi and the Han shu. I would venture to go further and claim that even every textual variant has to be looked at individually, for there is no guarantee that the memoirs were transmitted en bloc. Rather, there are indications to the contrary (see note 389 above). For their always helpful and motivating opinions and suggestions I would like to thank all members of the Shih chi working group in Germany as well as the participants of the Early Chinese History Workshop IV, held on September 16th-18th, 2004 in Madison. Special thanks go to Bill Nienhauser, who, of all members of the group, contributed the most during the entire period of translation, and to Nicola Di Cosmo and Liu Qian [Liu Ch’ien], my discussants at the workshop, for all their much appreciated help. Gratitude is also due to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft that funded my travel to Madison.

Bibliography

I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 11:404-509 De Groot, J.J.M. Die Hunnen der vorchristlichen Zeit. Chinesische Urkunden zur Geschichte Asiens 1. Berlin, Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, 1921. See also the review by von Zach in AM 1 (1924), pp. 125-33 Ogawa Tamaki 小川環樹 et al. Shiki retsuden 4 史記列傳. Tokyo: Iwanami bunko, 1975, pp. 25-65. Viatkin, 8:323-54, notes 440-50. Watson, Han, 2:129-62.

II. Studies Ch’en Chih 陳直. Shih chi hsin-cheng 史記新證. Tientsin: Tientsin jen-min, 1979, pp. 169-71. Di Cosmo, Nicola. “The Northern Frontier in Pre-imperial China.” Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, ed. The Cambridge History of Ancient China. From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ___. Ancient China and Its Enemies. The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Honey, David B. “The Han-shu, Manuscript Evidence, and the Textual Critics of the Shih-chi: The Case of the ‘Hsiung-nu lieh-chuan.’” CLEAR 21 (1999), pp. 67-97. Hsieh Chien 謝劍. “Hsiung-nu cheng-chih chih-tu de yen-chiu” 匈奴政治制度 的研究. BIHP, 41:2 (1969), pp. 231-72. ___. “Hsiung-nu tsung-chiao hsin-yang chi ch’i liu-pien” 匈奴宗教信仰及其流 變. BIHP, 42 (1971), pp. 571-613. Lin Kan 林幹, ed. Hsiung-nu shih lun-wen hsüan-chi (1919-1979) 匈奴史論文 選集. Peking: Chung-hua, 1983.

309

310

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 110

___. Hsiung-nu li-shih nien-piao 匈奴歷史年表. Peking: Chung-hua, 1984. ___. Hsiung-nu shih-liao hui-pian 匈奴史料彙編. 2 vols. Peking: Chung-hua, 1988. Maenchen-Helfen, J. Otto. The World of the Huns. Studies in Their History and Culture. Ed. by Max Knight. Berkeley et al.: University of California Press, 1973. P’eng Yü-shang 彭裕商. “Chou fa Hsien-yün chi hsiang-kuan wen-t’i” 周伐獫狁 及相關問題. Li-shih yen-chiu 歷史研究 3 (2004), pp. 3-16. Průšek, Yaroslav. Chinese Statelets and the Northern Barbarians in the Period 1400-300 B.C. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1971. Psarras, Sophia-Karin. “Han and Xiongnu. A Reexamination of Cultural and Political Relations (I),” Monumenta Serica 51 (2003), pp. 55-236. ___. “Han and Xiongnu. A Reexamination of Cultural and Political Relations (II),” Monumenta Serica 52 (2004), pp. 37-93. Pulleyblank, Edwin G. “The Chinese and Their Neighbors in Prehistoric and Early Historic Times.” David N. Keightley, ed. The Origins of Chinese Civilization. Berkeley et al.: Univ. of California Press, 1983, pp. 411-66. Rudenko, S.I. Die Kultur der Hsiung-nu und die Hügelgräber von Noin Ula. Übers. aus d. Russ. von Helmut Pollems. Vorwort von Karl Jettmar. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag, 1969. Uchida Gimpu 內田吟風. Kita Ajia shi kenkyu. Kyodo hen 北アジア史研究－ 匈奴篇. Kyoto: Dohosha, 2nd ed., 1988. Xu Pingfang [Hsü P’ing-fang] 徐蘋芳. “The Archaeology of the Great Wall of the Qin and Han Dynasties.” Journal of East Asian Archaeology 3 (2001, 12), pp. 259-81. Yü, Ying-shih [余英時]. Trade and Expansion in Han China. A Study in the Structure of Sino-Barbarian Economic Relations. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967. ___. “Han Foreign Relations.” D. Twitchett and M. Loewe eds. Cambridge History of China. Volume I: The Ch’in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.-A.D.220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986, pp. 379-81. ___. “The Hsiung-nu.” Denis Sinor, ed. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, pp. 118-50.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51 translated by J. Michael Farmer 1 [111.2921] As for the General-in-Chief Wei Ch’ing 衛青,2 he was a native of P’ing-yang 平陽.3 His father Cheng Chi 鄭季4 was made an official and served5 in the household of the Marquis of P’ing-yang. 6 He had relations with a maidservant7 of the Marquis, Dame Wei 衛,8 who gave birth to Ch’ing. Ch’ing’s 1 [Editor’s note: Michael Lackner completed a draft of the biography of Wei Ch’ing with outline versions of about eighty footnotes. J. Michael Farmer re-translated the entire chapter, revised the earlier footnotes, and added additional annotations.] 2 See the lengthy entry on Wei Ch’ing in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 573-5, and the parallel biography in Han shu, 55.2471-8. 3 P’ing-yang prefecture was located about 140 miles northeast of modern Sian in Shensi province (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 4 “Cheng-yi” says, “His father Cheng Chi was a native of P’ing-yang [prefecture] in Ho-tung 河東 [commandery]. While serving as a prefectural officer he served in the household of the Marquis of P’ing-yang.” Loewe’s entry only claims that Cheng Chi was the father of Wei Ch’ing, however in Genealogical Table 3: Wudi’s Empress Wei, he graphically indicates that Cheng was the father of six of Dame Wei’s children (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 723 and 773). 5 The expression chi shih 給事 (served, or waited on) also occurs on Shih chi, 85.2511, where it describes how Lü Pu-wei arranged for the well-endowed Lao Ai to “wait on” or “service” the Queen Dowager of Ch’in leading to an affair and two children (including the First Emperor of Ch’in) born out of wedlock. 6 The Marquis of P’ing-yang was Ts’ao Shou 曹壽 (also rendered Ts’ao Shih 時), a descendent of Ts’ao Shen 曹參 (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 20-2). He married the Princess of Yang-hsin 陽信, the elder sister of Emperor Wu. Ts’ao Shou died in 130 (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 22). 7 Shih chi uses the term ch’ieh 妾 (traditionally interpreted as concubine) to describe the position of Dame Wei in the marquis’ household. Han shu (55.2471) uses the term t’ung 僮 (slave or maidservant). From both the context and the parallel account in Han shu, it seems clear that she was not a formal concubine of the marquis. Takigawa (111.2) notes that in both the Kaedeyama 楓 山 and Sanjô 三條本 editions the text reads hou chia ch’ieh 侯家妾, suggesting she was a slave or lower-ranking maid in the Marquis’ household, not his personal concubine.

311

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

312

elder brother from the same mother9 was Wei Ch’ang-tzu 衛長子,10 and his elder sister Wei Tzu-fu 衛子夫11came out of the household of the Princess of P’ingyang 12 and obtained the favor of the Son of Heaven. Therefore, [he] passed himself off as having the cognomen of Wei.13 His agnomen was Chung-ch’ing 仲 卿.14 [His elder brother] changed his agnomen to Ch’ang-chün 長君.15 Ch’ang-

8

Ao 媼 often signifies an elder woman and has been rendered as “Mother” in our translation of Shih chi, 8.341 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:1; see also n. 4, ibid, 2:2 and the glossary note in ibid., 2:269). Here it seems to be an unofficial title granted by the emperor, and thus is translated as “Dame.” “So-yin” argues that since the woman was a maidservant, the term ao could not have referred to her age. “So-yin” also quotes Yen Shih-ku’s commentary to the Han shu, which claims that ao was a later designation (see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 568). 9 This passage indicates the complex family relations of Wei Ch’ing, and has been the subject of much commentary. Clearly, the use of the term t’ung-mu hsiung 同母兄 indicates that more than one man impregnated Dame Wei. The precise number of partners and which of these men sired which of her children is nearly impossible to determine. Yen Shih-ku (Han shu 55.2471) argues that the cognomen Wei came from her husband’s family, indicating Yen’s belief that a Mr. Wei sired at least one of the Dame’s children. The only paternal relationship that can be confirmed from the textual evidence is that Cheng Chi sired Wei Ch’ing. Whether Cheng was the father of any of the other children of Dame Wei is unclear. 10 This name appears to be a reference to birth order: Ch’ang-tzu 長子 (“oldest son”). He appears to have been appointed as a Palace Attendant around the time of his sister’s pregnancy, and died before 128 (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 570). 11 Loewe identifies her as a daughter of Cheng Chi and Dame Wei, though neither Ssu-ma Ch’ien nor Pan Ku make such claims (Loewe, Dictionary, p. 581). 12 Ju Ch’ün 如淳 (cited in “So-yin”) explains that the Princess of P’ing-yang was originally designated as the Princess of P’ing-hsin 平信 (Loewe says “Yang-hsin”), but after marrying Ts’ao Shou, the Marquis of P’ing-yang, she was known as the Princess of P’ing-yang. The princess was an elder sister of Emperor Wu (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 450-1). 13 “Passed himself off” is our translation of the term mao 冒. Watson renders this line as “For this reason Wei Qing also adopted the family name” (Watson, Han, 2:163), but mao has the negative sense of “to pass the false as genuine.” Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2471) glosses this term in Han shu as 冒謂假稱 “to falsely claim.” 14 Wei Ch’ing’s agnomen also appears to be an indication of birth order, with the term chung 仲 indicating his position as a middle brother, as opposed to his elder brother’s designation as chang 長 or eldest brother. 15 The Shih chi account does not specify when Wei Ch’ang-tzu changed his agnomen to the more dignified Ch’ang-chün 長君 (Eldest Gentleman). The new name is consistent with his given name, and matches the dignified agnomen of his half-brother Wei Ch’ing (Chung-ch’ing 仲卿 or “Middle Minister”). It may be that both brothers adopted these more refined agnomens after the promotion of their sister to the imperial harem and their own subsequent rise in status.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

313

chün’s mother was called “Dame Wei.”16 The Dame’s eldest daughter was Wei Ju 衛孺,17 the next daughter was Shao-erh 小兒,18 and the next was this Tzu-fu. Later, Tzu-fu’s brothers Pu 步 and Kuang 廣 both passed themselves off as members of the Wei lineage. 19 [2922] [Wei] Ch’ing was made a servant in the Marquis’ household. When he was young he returned to his father, and his father sent him to herd sheep. The sons of [his father’s] first wife20 all raised him as a slave and did not count him as a brother. Once [Wei] Ch’ing accompanied [someone] and entered the convict barracks21 at Kan-ch’üan 甘泉,22 [where] there was a shackled inmate who read Ch’ing’s physiognomy and said: “You are a noble man, your position will reach that of an enfeoffed marquis.” Ch’ing laughed and said, “For a person born as a

16

Similarly, no time frame for this appellation is given in the text. It may be that the title ao (“Dame” or even “Lady”) was granted after the elevation of her daughter to the imperial harem. 17 Han shu, 55.2471 gives her name as Chün-ju 君嬬 (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 571). 18 The second daughter of Dame Wei, Shao-erh was the mother of Huo Ch’ü-ping (sired by Huo Chung-ju 霍仲孺) (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 576). 19 Han shu, 55.2471 treats Pu 步 and Kuang 廣 as a single name, Pu-kuang. Yen Shih-ku comments that both Ch’ing and Pu-kuang passed themselves off as having the cognomen of Wei. Loewe follows the Han shu reading (Loewe, Dictionary, p. 569). 20 Shih chi uses the term hsien-mu 先母 (“first wife”), while the parallel account in Han shu uses the term min-mu 民母 (“commoner wife”). Fu Ch’ien 服謙 (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses the term hsien-mu as ti-ch’i 嫡妻 or “legitimate wife,” and that this woman would have been regarded as [Wei] Ch’ing’s “legitimate mother.” Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2472) understands the term minmu to mean “Cheng Chi’s legitimate wife (cheng-ch’i 正妻) was a commoner.” In our group discussion of the term hsien-mu, it has been suggested that it might mean “late” or “deceased” mother, but I see no evidence that any of the traditional commentators understood the term as such. 21 “Cheng-yi” notes that the term chü-shih 居室, literally “residential chamber,” was originally used as a proper noun, but that Emperor Wu changed the name of this facility to pao-kuan 保官 or “protective office.” Chang Yen 張宴 (Han shu, 55.2472) says that this was the residence for convicts at Kan-ch’üan Palace. 22 Kan-ch’üan [Sweet Springs] Palace was originally constructed by the First Emperor of Ch’in in 220 B.C. (see Shih chi, 6.241). The Palace was later expanded by Emperor Wu (see Shih chi, 12.458). Located on Kan-ch’üan Mountain, some 185 miles north of Ch’ang-an, the site was used by Emperor Wu and later Han rulers to perform sacrifices (see Shih chi, 28.1394). Yang Hsiung composed a rhapsody describing the journey to Kan-ch’üan and sacrifices performed by Emperor Ch’eng 成 (r. 32-6 B.C.). The rhapsody is quoted in the Han shu biography of Yang Hsiung (Han shu, 87A.3522-34), and also contained in Wen hsüan, 7.321-36. For translations, see David R. Knechtges, The Han shu Biography of Yang Xiong (Tempe: Center for Asian Studies, Arizona State University, 1981), 25; Knechtges, trans. Wen xuan or Selections of Refined Literature, vol. 2 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 17-39.

314

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

slave, it is sufficient if he can achieve not being flogged and scolded. How could I achieve the service [requisite to become] an enfeoffed marquis?” When [Wei] Ch’ing reached manhood, he was made a horseman in the marquis’ household and accompanied the Princess of P’ing-yang. In the spring of the second year of chien-yüan (139 B.C.), Chi’ng’s elder sister Tzu-fu was able to enter the palace and was favored by the sovereign.23 The August Empress (neé Chen 陳),24 a daughter of the Grand Senior Princess of T’ang-i 堂邑,25 had no sons and was jealous. The Grand Senior Princess heard that Wei Tzu-fu had been favored and was pregnant, and became jealous of her [Tzu-fu], so she sent men to arrest [Wei] Ch’ing. Ch’ing, at that time, served at Chien-chang 建章 [The Palace of Established Brilliance]26 and his name was not yet known. The Grand Senior Princess arrested and detained Ch’ing, and wanted to kill him. His friend 23 Han shu (67A.3949-50; 55.2490) provides additional details on Wei Tzu-fu’s rise to imperial favor. Emperor Wu’s sister, the Princess of P’ing-yang, concerned over her brother’s lack of a male heir, gathered over ten young women from “good families” and offered them to the Emperor, who had stopped in P’ing-yang upon his return from Pa-shang. The ruler was not interested in any of these women, but became enamored of a servant, Wei Tzu-fu. The emperor rose to change his garments and had Miss Wei accompany him to the wardrobe carriage, where he had sexual relations with her. Seeing his satisfaction, the Princess offered Wei Tzu-fu to her brother, who in turn presented the Princess with one thousand chin of gold. Upon seeing her maidservant to the emperor’s carriage, the Princess of P’ing-yang admonished Wei Tzu-fu to take care of herself and not to forget the princess when she became honored. This promise was kept, for many years later, the Princess of P’ing-yang requested and was matched in marriage to Wei Tzu-fu’s half-brother, Wei Ch’ing. 24 Empress Ch’en 陳, the first empress of Emperor Wu, was the daughter of Ch’en Wu 陳午 and the Grand Senior Princess of T’ang’yi 堂邑, Tou Piao 竇嫖 (see below). Her great-grandfather, Chen Ying 陳嬰 was a former associate of Hsiang Yü, but later supported Liu Pang. As a result, upon the establishment of the Han, Chen Ying was enfeoffed as Marquis of T’ang-yi. When the future Emperor Wu was made heir apparent, Miss Ch’en was selected as his consort, and upon his accession to the throne, she was made August Empress. She was childless for over ten years, resorting to the use of love charms in an effort to conceive, and became enraged upon learning that Wei Tzu-fu had become pregnant. In the first year of yüan-kuang (134 B.C.), the emperor deposed her, and she and several kin were tried for sorcery. In the end, over three hundred persons were executed in this matter. The empress was imprisoned, where she died the following year (133 B.C.) (see Han shu, 97A.3948-9; Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 31-2). 25 Han shu, 55.2472 omits the characters 堂邑 T’ang-i, simply referencing the Grand Senior Princess. The Grand Senior Princess of T’ang-i, Piao 嫖 was the daughter of Empress Tou and Emperor Wen, and the elder sister of Emperor Ching, thus Emperor Wu’s aunt. Her daughter became the first empress of Emperor Wu (see Han shu, 97A.3942-8; Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 34-5). 26 Chin Cho 晉灼 (cited in “So-yin”) identifies the Chien-chang palace as being part of the Shang-lin 上林 hunting park.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

315

Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖,27 a Mounted Gentleman, and some stalwart fellows came and snatched him away, and thus he was able to not die. The sovereign heard of this, summoned and made [Wei] Ch’ing Inspector of the Palace of Established Brilliance and Palace Attendant. Even his half-brothers by the same mother28 were honored, and within several days they were given gifts of some thousand pieces of gold.29 [His sister] Ju was made the wife of Kung-sun Ho 公孫賀,30 the Grand Coachman. [His sister] Shao-erh had originally had relations with Ch’en Chang 陳掌;31 [and so] the sovereign summoned and honored Chang. Kung-sun Ao, because of this, increased in honor. Tzu-fu was made a [Palace] Lady. 32 [Wei] Ch’ing was made Grand Palace Grandee. [2923] In the fifth year of yüan-kuang 元光 (130),33 [Wei] Ch’ing was made General of Chariots and Cavalry and attacked the Hsiung-nu, setting out from

27

Kung-sun Ao was a senior officer on several campaigns against the Hsiung-nu. He was spared the death penalty three times. His investigation of Li Ling in 99 B.C. led to the execution of Li’s family. Defeated in battle in 97 B.C., he faked his own death and hid for several years to avoid punishment. After five or six years, he was discovered and arrested. His fate is uncertain, with some claiming that he was executed in 97 B.C., and others arguing that he and his wife were tried for sorcery and executed in 91 B.C. A brief biography of Kung-sun Ao is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2942-93, translated below; see also Han shu, 55.2491; Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 123-4). 28 Han shu, 55.2472 omits the word t’ung 同 , thus rendering the sentence as “Even his brothers....” 29 Han shu, 67A.3949 notes that Wei Ch’ing’s half-brother Wei Ch’ang-chün was also made a Palace Attendant. 30 Kung-sun Ho, agnomen Tzu-shu 子叔, was a descendant of Kung-sun Hun-yeh 公孫渾邪. He served the young Emperor Wu as a horseman, and was matched in marriage to Chün-ju, the younger sister of Wei Ch’ing. After serving under Wei Ch’ing’s command, he was accused of corruption and other crimes and died in prison in 91 B.C. A brief biography of Kung-sun Ho is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2941-2, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 124-5). 31 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) identifies Ch’en Chang as the great grandson of Ch’en P’ing. As the lover of Wei Shao-erh, he was favored at the court of Emperor Wu. After Wei Tzufu’s promotion to empress, Ch’en was matched in marriage to the empress’s sister, Shao-erh, though he was unsuccessful in his efforts to use his position to regain the noble favor his ancestors had received from the Han court. Liang Yü-sheng (34.1390) argues that because Wei Shao-er was eventually matched in marriage to Ch’en Chang, then the couple’s relationship should not have been presented as illegitimate by Ssu-ma Ch’ien (see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 43). 32 A generic term used to denote secondary wives of the emperor. 33 Shih chi, 22.1135 and Han shu, 55.2472 both date Wei’s appointment to the post of General of Chariots and Cavalry to the sixth year of yüan-kuang (129).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

316

Shang-ku 上谷. 34 Kung-sun Ho, the Grand Coachman, was made General of Light Chariots and set out from Yün-chung 雲中.35 Kung-sun Ao, the Grand Palace Grandee, was made General of the Cavalry and set out from Tai Commandery 代郡. 36 Li Kuang 李廣, 37 the Commandant of the Guards, was made General of the Resolute Cavalry and set out from Yen-men 雁門.38 Each army had ten-thousand horsemen. [Wei] Ch’ing reached Lung-cheng 蘢城39 and cut off the heads of several hundred caitiffs. [Kung-sun] Ao, the General of the Cavalry, lost seven thousand horsemen; Li Kuang, the Commandant of the Guards, was captured by caitiffs but managed to escape and return. Both were subject to execution but paid redemptions40 and were made commoners. [Kungsun] Ho, too, was without merit.41 In the spring of the first year of yüan-shuo 元朔 (128 B.C.), Lady Wei [Tzufu] gave birth to a son42 and was enthroned as August Empress. That autumn, 34

Shang-ku commandery was located about forty miles northwest of modern Peking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27). 35 Yün-chung commandery was located north of the Yellow River/Ordos loop, about thirty miles southwest of modern Hohhot, Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). 36 Tai commandery was located near modern Wei 蔚 county, Hopei, about ninety-five miles west of Peking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). 37 Regarded as a fearless and often reckless general, Li Kuang led numerous campaigns against the Hsiung-nu between 169 B.C. and 119 B.C. After being prohibited from participating in a campaign by Wei Ch’ing in 119, he disobeyed and joined his troops with those of Chao Yi-chi 趙 食其. Failing to make a rendezvous, he committed suicide (see Shih chi, 109; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 20-1). 38 Yen-men commandery was located about twenty miles west of modern Tso-yün, Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:18). 39 Lung-ch’eng was located about 190 miles southwest of modern Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:67). 40 Hulsewé notes that redemptions (shu 贖) were distinctly different from fines (fa 罸). Fines were regular punishments for specific crimes, while redemptions were “extraordinary permission to pay a fine as the punishment for an act which normally was punished differently” (Hulsewé, Han Law, 205). The payment of a redemption was typically accompanied by the loss of aristocratic rank. Hulsewé lists some twenty-one cases of redemptions during the Western Han, and another twentyeight for the Eastern Han period. See Hulsewé, Han Law, 205–224. 41 Han shu, 55.2472-3 notes that only Wei Ch’ing was given rank as Guan-nei Marquis. 42 Han shu, 67A.3949-50 notes that prior to the birth of this son, Liu Ch’ü 劉璩, Wei Tzu-fu also bore three daughters to the emperor. Liu Ch’ü was named as the heir apparent in 121 B.C. Later, as Wei Tzu-fu aged and her beauty faded, Emperor Wu favored several other palace women. In 90 B.C., Lady Wei Tzu-fu was accused of sorcery, and both August Empress Wei and the heir apparent feared for their positions. The August Empress had one enemy at court executed and sent

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

317

[Wei] Ch’ing, as General of Chariots and Cavalry, set out from Yen-men with thirty-thousand horsemen to attack the Hsuing-nu, 43 cutting off the heads of several thousand caitiffs.44 The next year (127 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu entered and killed the Grand Administrator of Liao-hsi 遼西45and captured over two thousand people from Yü-yang 漁陽,46 and defeated the troops of General Han 韓 [An-kuo 安國].47 The Han [court] ordered the general Li Hsi 李息 48 to attack them, setting out from Tai.49 [The court also] ordered [Wei] Ch’ing, the General of Chariots and Cavalry, to set out from Yün-chung and go west to Kao-ch’üeh 高闕.50 He

out troops against her rivals’ allies. The empress’s troops were defeated and Liu Ch’ü, the heir apparent, was killed. The August Empress then committed suicide. 43 Han shu, 67A.3949 following the mention of Wei Tzu-fu giving birth to Emperor Wu’s son, Liu Ch’ü, says the following: “Prior to this, Wei Ch’ang-chün died, and because of this, [Wei] Ch’ing was made a general, attacked the Hsiung-nu and obtained merit, and was enfeoffed as Marquis of Ch’ang-p’ing.” Though not explicit, the Han shu account seems to argue that the elder Wei Ch’ang-chün was appointed as a general prior to Wei Ch’ing’s appointment, and that Ch’ing may have succeeded to his half-brother’s position. Unfortunately, no clear indication of the timeframe for these appointments is given in the Han shu 67A account, and this information does not appear elsewhere in the primary narratives concerning Wei Ch’ing. 44 Han shu, 55.2473 indicates that at this time, Li Hsi joined this campaign, setting out from Tai Commandery. Shih chi dates Li Hsi’s participation to the following year. 45 Liao-hsi commandery was located south of modern Fu-hsin 阜新 city, Liao-ning (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:27). 46 Yü-yang commandery was located just south of Mi-yün 密雲, north of modern Peking (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27). 47 Han An-kuo, agnomen Ch’ang-ju 長孺, was trained in Legalist theory and was regarded as a masterful negotiator. He served in the court of Liu Wu 劉 武 , the King of Liang, and was instrumental in restoring Liu Wu’s favor at the imperial court. Han was a strong advocate of the appeasement policies toward the Hsiung-nu, and was praised for contributing to the peace of the empire (see his biography in Shih chi, 108; see also the lengthy entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 142-4). 48 Li Hsi began his career under Emperor Ching, and served as a general on campaigns against the Hsiung-nu in 128 B.C., 127 B.C., and 124 B.C. He was involved in the construction of fortifications north of the Yellow River, and received the envoys of the Hsiung-nu seeking surrender. A brief biographical sketch of Li Hsi is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2942, translated below; see also Han shu, 55.2491; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 231). 49 Han shu omits this account of Hsiung-nu incursions into Liao-hsi and Yü-yang, and their defeat of Han An-kuo. 50 Kao-ch’üeh was located on the north bank of the Yellow River, about forty miles south of modern K’ang-ch’in-hou-ch’i, Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). Wei Ch’ing’s march from Yün-chung to Kao-ch’üeh covered roughly two hundred miles. “So-yin” notes that Kao-ch’üeh was both the name of a fortification and a mountain.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

318

then overran the territories south of the Ho (Ho-nan 河南),51 arriving at Lung-hsi 隴西,52 where he captured several thousand caitiffs and several hundred thousand [head of] livestock,53 [causing] the Kings of Pai-yang 白羊 and Lou-fan 樓煩54 to flee. He then took the territories south of the Ho and made them into Shuo-fang 朔方 Commandery. 55 With 3800 households, [Wei] Ch’ing was enfeoffed as Marquis of Ch’ang-p’ing 長 平 . 56 [Wei] Ch’ing’s colonel Su Chien 蘇 建 57 obtained merit, and with 1100 households was enfeoffed as Marquis of P’ing-ling 平陵.58 [The Han court] sent [Su] Chien to build a walled-city at Shuo-fang. [Wei] Ch’ing’s colonel Chang Tz’u-kung 張 次 公 59 obtained merit and was enfeoffed as Marquis of An-t’ou 岸頭.60 The Son of Heaven said: “The Hsiung51

Here, the term “Ho-nan” refers to the area south of the Yellow River inside the Ordos loop. Lung-hsi commandery was located at modern Lin-t’ao 臨洮, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:34). 53 There is some discrepancy in the number of livestock captured by Wei Ch’ing’s troops. Shih chi claims “several hundred thousand” (shu-shih-wan 數十萬), while the Han shu account claims “over a million” (pai-yü-wan 百餘萬) (Han shu, 55.2473). 54 Cf. Shih chi, 110.2906. 55 Shuo-fang commandery was located in the northwest quarter of the Ordos loop. Its administrative seat was located near modern Wu-la-t’e-ch’ien-ch’i, Inner Mongolia (T’ang Ch’ihsiang, 2:17). 56 Ch’ang-ping prefecture was located about ninety miles southeast of modern Cheng-chou 鄭 州, Honan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 57 Su Chien served as a colonel and general under Wei Ch’ing on campaigns in 128 B.C. and 124 B.C. On this last expedition, Su lost his troops and returned to headquarters to face judgment. His punishment was commuted, and he was later appointed as a commandery administrator of Tai 代, where he died in office. A brief biographical sketch of Su Chien is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2943-4, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 492). 58 P’ing-ling prefecture was located about six miles west of modern Hsien-yang 咸陽, Shensi (T’ang Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). P’ing-ling later became the site of the tomb of Emperor Chao 昭 of Han (r. 87-74 B.C.). 59 Chang Tz’u-kung was reported to have been a violent bandit as a youth, but later was appointed as a Gentleman at court. He was enfeoffed for his merit on campaigns against the Hsiung-nu under Wei Ch’ing, though he later lost his marquisate for having illicit relations with a daughter of the King of Huai-nan, and for accepting bribes in 122 B.C. A brief biographical sketch of Chang Tz’u-kung is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2943, translated below; see also Han shu, 55.2491-2; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 678). 60 There is some dispute over the location and classification of An-t’ou. The “So-yin” quotes Chin Chuo who argues that An-t’ou was a commune (t’ing 亭) in P’i-shih 皮氏 prefecture, Ho-tung 河東 commandery (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). The “Cheng-yi” quotes Fu Ch’ien who claims that Ant’ou was a prefecture, but offers no specific location. Han shu, 17.643 notes that Chang was enfeoffed by the fifth month of the first year of yuan-shuo (128 B.C), and that five years later in the 52

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

319

nu act against the order of Heaven, disorder human relations, assault the aged and oppress the elderly, take theft and robbery as their vocation; their actions have deceived the various Man 蠻 and Yi 夷 [people], 61 [causing them to] plot [together] and lend their troops, and repeatedly [*2924*] violated our borders. Therefore, we have raised troops and dispatched generals for a punitive expedition against their crimes. Does not the Odes say, ‘We struck the Hsien-yün 玁狁 and drove them to T’ai-yüan 太原,’62 and ‘We sent out chariots in great numbers and walled that Shuo-fang.’63 Now the General of Chariots and Cavalry has crossed Hsi-ho 西河64 and reached Kao-ch’üeh, capturing 2300 caitiff heads and taking supply carts and livestock as booty. [After] having been enfeoffed as a ranked marquis, he then went west and stabilized the territories south of the Ho, traveling along65 the old fortifications at Yu-ch’i 榆谿,66 traversing Tzu-ling 梓 領,67 bridging the Northern Ho 北河,68 suppressing P’u-ni 蒲泥 and defeating Fu-li 符離,69 cutting down their crack soldiers and capturing their spies, for a

first year of yuan-shou (122 B.C.) he lost his marquisate for having illicit relations with the daughter of the King of Huai-nan. 61 The term Man 蠻 is generically used to refer to the non-sinicized tribes of the south, while the term Yi 夷 is used to refer to the non-sinicized tribes of the east. Both terms are pejorative in nature. 62 This passage is taken from “Liu yüeh” 六月 (Mao #177; Legge, 5:283; see also Bernard Karlgren, The Book of Odes [Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1950] p. 121). 63 In this quoted passage from “Ch’u chü” 出車 (Mao #168; Legge, 5:263), Emperor Wu conflates two separate lines from the third stanza of the Ode. The full stanza reads: “The King ordered Nan-chung to go and build a wall in Fang; the out-going chariots go pwang-pwang, the dragon banner and tortoise-and-snake banner are brilliant; the Son of Heaven ordered us to build a wall in that Shuo-fang; awe-inspiring is that Nan-chung, the Hien-yün are expelled.” Translation from Karlgren, The Book of Odes, 112. 64 “Cheng-yi” notes that the term Hsi-ho refers to a place in Yün-chung commandery. However, it seems more likely that the term references the territories west of the Yellow River, including the Ordos and Hsi-ho commandery on his way west to Kao-Ch’üeh 65 Ju Ch’ü (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses an 按 as hsing 行. “So-yin” also cites Ju Ch’ün, but adds an additional phrase, presenting Ju as glossing an 按 as either hsing 行 or hsun 尋. 66 “So-yin” identifies the old fortifications at Yü-ch’i as Yü-gu 榆谷. 67 The location of Tzu-ling is unknown. 68 “Cheng-yi” loosely identifies the location of this bridge as “in the borders of Ling-chou 靈 州.” Ling-chou prefecture was located in Pei-ti commandery, about eighteen miles south of modern Yin-chuan 銀川, Ning-hsia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 69 “Chi-chieh” and “So-yin” each cite Chin Cho, who identifies P’u-ni and Fu-li as titles of Hsiung-nu kings. “So-yin” also cites Ts’ui Hao 崔浩, who claims the terms reference the names of

320

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

total of 3710 heads.70 He interrogated [the prisoners] and captured a multitude,71 and drove off over a million horses, oxen, and sheep, returning with his army intact. Therefore, we increase [Wei] Ch’ing’s fief by three thousand households.” The next year (126 B.C.), the Hsuing-nu entered and killed the Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery, [Kung 共] Yu 友,72 and entered and captured over a thousand people at Yen-men. The next year (125 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu entered Tai, Ting-hsiang 定襄, and Shang 上 commanderies with great force, killing and capturing several thousand Han people. [2925] The next year, in the spring of the fifth year of yüan-shuo (124 B.C.), the Han [court] ordered [Wei] Ch’ing, the General of Chariots and Cavalry, to lead thirty thousand horsemen and set out from Kao-ch’üeh. Su Chien, the Commandant of the Guards, was made General of Patrol and Attack;73 Li Chü 李 沮,74 the Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital, was made General of Strong Bowmen; Kung-sun Ho, the Grand Coachman, was made General of the Cavalry; Li Ts’ai 李蔡, 75 the Chancellor of Tai, was made General of Light Chariots. They were all under the command of the General of Chariots and Cavalry, and together they set out from Shuo-fang. Li Hsi, the Grand Usher, and Chang Tz’u-kung, the Marquis of An-t’ou were made generals and set out from Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平.76 old Han fortifications. Takigawa (111.8) cites Wang Hsien-ch’ien’s view that Fu-li was the name of an old Han fortification and therefore P’u-ni was also a place name. 70 Han shu, 55.2473 puts this figure at 3017 heads. 71 The phrase “chih-hsün huo-ch’ou” comes from the Odes, “Ch’u chü” 出車 (Mao #168; Legge, 5:263). Karlgren’s translation of this line reads, “We have seized prisoners for the question and caught a crowd” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, p. 113). 72 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) notes that Yu 友 was the personal name of the official, and that his cognomen was actually Kung 共 (see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 121). 73 Bielenstein does not translate this title, but renders yu 游 as “patrol.” Hucker indicates that it is a T’ang period title and translates it as Mobile Corps Commander (Hucker, Dictionary, p. 584). 74 A brief biography of Li Chü is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2943, translated below; see also Han shu, 55.2491; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 236). 75 Li Ts’ai was a cousin of Li Kuang. After successful campaigns under Wei Ch’ing in 124 B.C., he was appointed Chancellor in 121 B.C., where he had an undistinguished tenure. After being charged with misappropriating and selling land designated for Emperor Ching’s tomb in 118 B.C., Li Ts’ai committed suicide. A brief biography of Li Ts’ai is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2943, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 217-8). 76 Yu-pei-p’ing Commandery encompassed parts of modern Hopei, Liao-ning, and Inner Mongolia, with its administrative seat located about eighteen miles north of modern P’ing-ch’uan 平泉, Hopei, near the border with Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:27).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

321

The all attacked the Hsiung-nu. The Worthy King to the Right of the Hsiung-nu opposed Wei Ch’ing and the other troops, but thinking that the Han troops would be unable to reach him, he got drunk. The Han troops arrived in the night and encircled the Worthy King to the Right. The Worthy King to the Right was startled and fled into the night; accompanied only by a single beloved concubine and several hundred stalwart horsemen, he slipped through the encirclement and headed north, and got away. 77 Kuo Ch’eng 郭成, 78 the Han colonel of Light Cavalry, and others pursued him for several hundred li, but did not catch up to [the king], [but he] captured over ten subordinate kings of the Worthy King to the Right, over fifteen thousand men and women, and millions79 of livestock, at this point, they led their troops and returned. [When they] reached the [Han] fortifications, the Son of Heaven sent an envoy bearing the seal of a General-inChief, right then appointing [Wei] Ch’ing, the General of Chariots and Cavalry, as General-in-Chief, and all of the commanders subordinated their troops to the General-in-Chief. Thus established in the title of General-in-Chief, he returned [to the capital]. The Son of Heaven said, “[Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief has personally led his warriors and the army has won a great victory, capturing over ten of the Hsiung-nu kings. We increase [Wei] Ch’ing’s fief by six thousand households.”80Then [Wei] Ch’ing’s son K’ang 伉81was enfeoffed as Marquis of Yi-ch’un 宜春;82 Ch’ing’s son Pu-i 不疑 as Marquis of Yin-an 陰安;83 and 77 This description of the Worthy King to the Right’s flight closely resembles Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s earlier account of Hsiang Yü, who, accompanied by his beloved Fine Lady Yü 虞 and eight hundred stalwart horsemen, broke through an encirclement by the Han troops and successfully escaped (see Shih chi, 7.333-4; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:205-6). 78 There is no additional information on Kuo Ch’eng (see the brief entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 138). 79 Shih chi says “ch’ien-pai-wan” 千百萬, translated here as “millions.” Han shu says “shihpai-wan” 十百萬 (a million), but the Shih chi figure seems to be hyperbolic. On this, Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2475-6) says “Several hundred thousand up to a million” (shu shih-wan chih pai-wan 數十萬至百萬). 80 Han shu, 55.2475 says that Wei’s fief was increased by 8700 households. 81 Wei K’ang was the eldest son of Wei Ch’ing. Enfeoffed as a child in 124, he lost his marquisate in 116 B.C. after being charged with forgery of an imperial edict. He succeeded to his father’s title in 106 B.C., and was sent to man a military garrison in 102 B.C., In 98 B.C., he again lost his marquisate for illegally entering the palace. He was executed in 91 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 571-2). 82 Yi-ch’un prefecture was located in Ju-nan 汝南 commandery, about sixty miles south of modern Lo-ho 漯河, Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 83 Yin-an prefecture was located in Ch’ing-ho 清河 commandery, about sixty miles east of modern An-yang 安陽, Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:26).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

322

Ch’ing’s son Teng 登 as Marquis of Fa-kan 發 干 . 84 [Wei] Ch’ing firmly declined, saying, “Your subject has been fortunate to await his punishment among the ranks, and relying upon your majesty’s divine spirit, the army has had a great victory. This is all on account of the various colonels’ merit in vigorous battle. [*2926*] You majesty has favored him already increasing your subject Ch’ing’s fief. Your subject Ch’ing’s sons are still in swaddling clothes and have no diligent labors [but] Your Majesty favors them by ceding territories to enfeoff them as three marquises; this was not what your subject had in mind while awaiting punishment among the ranks so as to encourage my troops to vigorously give battle. How could K’ang and the two others dare to accept fiefs?” The Son of Heaven replied, “We have not forgotten the merit of the various colonels, and even now we are planning this.” [The emperor] then issued an edict to the Grandee Secretary, saying, “Kung-sun Ao, the Commissioner of the Army and Chief Commandant, thrice accompanied the General-in-Chief to attack the Hsiung-nu, constantly protected the troops and assisted the colonels in capturing the kings; with fifteen hundred households We enfeoff [Kung-sun] Ao as Ho-ch’i Marquis 合騎侯 (Marquis of Combined Cavalry).85 Han Yüeh 韓說,86 the Chief Commandant, accompanied the General-in-Chief to set out from Yü-hun 寙渾,87 reached the court of the Hsiung-nu Worthy King to the Right, and under the [General-in-Chief’s] banner struck, fought, and captured the kings; with thirteen hundred households We enfeoff [Han] Yüeh as Marquis of Lung-o 龍額.88 Kungsun Ho, the General of the Cavalry, accompanied the General-in-Chief to capture 84

Fa-kan prefecture was located in Tung 東 commandery, about seventy-five miles west of modern Chi-nan 濟南, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 85 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1034) identifies the fief associated with this marquisate as being located at Kao-ch’eng 高城, about 300 miles south of modern Tientsin (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:47). 86 Han Yüeh was regarded as a loyal and favorite subject of Emperor Wu. Enfeoffed for his meritorious service in the campaigns against the Hsiung-nu in 124, he was stripped of his rank in 112 B.C. for irregularities in presentation of dues to the throne. He was enfeoffed again in 110 B.C., and campaigned against the Hsiung-nu in 102 B.C. and 97 B.C. Sent by Emperor Wu with Chiang Ch’ung 江充 to investigate allegations that the Heir Apparent (Liu Ch’ü) was practicing sorcery against the emperor, he was killed resisting arrest orders believed to have been forged by Liu Ch’ü. A brief biography of Han Yüeh is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2944, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 151). 87 Yü-hun was located on the western edge of Shuo-fang commandery, about thirty miles southwest of modern Hang-chin-hou-ch’i 杭錦后旗, Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). Han shu, 55.2475 renders the location as T’ien-hun 窴渾. 88 Lung-o prefecture was located in P’ing-yüan 平 原 commandery, about twenty miles northwest of modern Chi-nan 濟南, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

323

the kings; with thirteen hundred households We enfeoff [Kung-sun] Ho as Marquis of Nan-hao 南奅.89 Li Ts’ai 李蔡, the General of Light Chariots twice accompanied the General-in-Chief to capture the kings; with sixteen hundred households We enfeoff him as Marquis of Lo-an 樂安.90 The colonels Li Shuo 李 朔, 91 Chao Pu-yü 趙不虞, 92 and Kung-sun Jung-nu 公孫戎奴 93 each accompanied the General-in-Chief three times to capture kings; with thirteen hundred households We enfeoff [Li] Shuo as Marquis of She-chih 涉軹;94 with thirteen hundred households We enfeoff [Chao] Pu-yü as Marquis of Sui-ch’eng 隨成;95 with thirteen hundred households We enfeoff [Kung-sun] Jung-nu as Marquis of Ts’ung-p’ing 從平.96 The generals Li Chü, Li Hsi, and the colonel Tou Ju-yi 豆 如意 97 had merit; We bestow upon them the rank of Guan-nei Hou 關內侯 (Marquis Within the Pass) and each is granted a fief town of three hundred households.” That autumn, the Hsiung-nu entered Tai and killed Chu Ying 朱 英,98 the Chief Commandant. 89

The location Nan-hao (Wang Li-ch’i glosses hao 奅 as “chiao”) is unknown. Lo-an prefecture was located in Ch’ien-sheng 千 乘 commandery, about seventy miles northeast of modern Ch’i-nan 濟南, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 91 Li Shuo served as a colonel under Wei Ch’ing on three campaigns against the Hsiung-nu. He was enfeoffed in 124 B.C., but was charged with unspecified crimes and stripped of his marquisate in either 122 B.C. or 119 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 228). 92 Chao Pu-yü served as a colonel under Wei Ch’ing on three campaigns against the Hsiung-nu. He was enfeoffed in 124 B.C., but lost his marquisate for submitting a deceptive report in 121 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 70-1). 93 Kung-sun Jung-nu served as a colonel under Wei Ch’ing on three campaigns against the Hsiung-nu. He was enfeoffed in 124 B.C., but stripped of his marquisate in 121 B.C. for failing to report a military action he initiated (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 130). 94 Han shu, 55.2475 renders this as Chih-chih 陟軹, while Han shu, 17.645 indicates that Li Shuo was made Marquis of Chih 軹 and places Chih in Hsi-an 西 安 . Hsi-an was located approximately one hundred twenty miles northeast of modern Chi-nan 濟南, Shantung (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:20). 95 Wang Li-ch’i (111.2352, n. 37) claims that Sui-cheng was a title of enfeoffment and not a place name, but identifies the location of the fief as being in Chi’en-sheng 千乘 commandery, about sixty miles northeast of modern Chi-nan 濟南, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 96 Wang Li-ch’i (111.2352, n. 38) claims that Ts’ung-p’ing was a title of enfeoffment and not a place name, though he notes that others have identified it as a place near Lo-ch’ang 樂昌, about sixty miles east of modern An-yang, Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 97 Tou Ju-yi served as a colonel under Wei Ch’ing on the campaign against the Hsiung-nu in 124 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 77). 98 Han shu, 94A.3767 gives his name as Chu Yang 朱央 (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 743). 90

324

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

[2927] In the spring of the next year (123 B.C.), General-in-Chief [Wei] Ch’ing set out from Ting-hsiang, with the Ho-ch’i Marquis [Kung-sun] Ao as General of the Center, the Grand Coachman [Kung-sun] Ho as General of the Left, the Marquis of Hsi 翕, Chao Hsin 趙信, 99 as General of the Van, the Commandant of the Guards Su Chien as general of the right, the Prefect of the Gentlemen of the Palace Li Kuang as General of the Rear, and the Clerk of the Western Part of the Palace Li Chü as General of the Strong Bowmen. They were all under the command of the General-in-Chief. They cut off several thousand [Hsiung-nu] heads and returned. After more than a month, they all together again set out from Ting-hsiang to attack the Hsiung-nu, cutting off over ten thousand caitiff heads. [Su] Chien, the General of the Right and [Chao] Hsin, the General of the Van, having combined their armies of over three thousand horsemen, alone happened on the troops of the Shan-yü and fought with them for more than a day until the Han troops were nearly wiped out. The General of the Van [Chao Hsin] was originally a Hu but had surrendered [to the Han], and had been made Marquis of Hsi. When he saw things turn critical, the Hsiung-nu enticed him and he led his remaining horsemen, some eight hundred, and fled and surrendered to the Shan-yu. Su Chien, the General on the Right, completely lost his army and he alone was able to escape, voluntarily returning to the General-in-Chief. The General-in-Chief asked his Director100 Hung 閎, his Chief Clerk An 安, and his Gentleman Consultant Chou Pa 周霸,101 and others about his punishment: “What can be said regarding [Su] Chien?” [Chou] Pa replied, “Since the General-inChief set out [on campaign], he has not yet executed a subordinate general. Now [Su] Chien has abandoned his troops; you could execute him in order to illustrate 99 Chao Hsin was a high ranking Hsiung-nu who defected to the Han and was enfeoffed in 131 B.C. He campaigned successfully against the Hsiung-nu in 127 B.C., and served under Wei Ch’ing in 123 B.C., but was defeated and surrendered to the Hsiung-nu. He then constructed a defensive garrison which was named after him (Chao Hsin walled-city; Chao Hsin cheng 趙信城). His defection led to the Han decision to campaign in 119 B.C., when Wei Ch’ing captured Chao Hsin Walled-city and its supplies. Chao died around 108 B.C. A brief biographical sketch of Chao Hsin is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2944, translated below; see also Han shu, 55.2492; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 713). 100 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses the title cheng 正 (Director) as chün-cheng 軍正, or Director of the Army. Han shu, 55.2477 identifies the individual Hung as the Legal Director (tsui-cheng 罪正). Ju Chün (cited in Han shu, 55.2477) claims this refers to a senior military scribe. 101 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh” and “So-yin”) identifies Chou Pa as a classicist (ju-sheng 儒生). Chou served on Wei Ch’ing’s staff in 123 B.C., and was later consulted regarding Emperor Wu’s ascent of Mount T’ai in 110 B.C., but his advice was rejected and he was demoted (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 729).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

325

your authority, General.” Hung and An replied, “That’s not right! The Art of War says, ‘Though a smaller opponent may hold strong, the larger opponent will take them captive before long.’102 Now [Su] Chien, opposing with several thousand [troops] the Shan-yü’s several tens of thousand [troops] and vigorously battling for more than a day until his soldiers were wiped out, dared not be disloyal, and voluntarily returned. If you execute him even though he voluntarily returned, this would signal that in the future there would be no point in returning. He should not be executed.” The General-in-Chief said, “[I], Ch’ing have been favored to be able, because of my close relationship [with the empress], to await punishment among the ranks; I am not troubled by a lack of authority, but [Chou] Pa advises me to illustrate my authority. This would cause my intentions to be completely lost. [*2928*] Moreover, although my position allows me to execute a general, because of my respect for the favor [I have received], I do not dare to use my authority to execute him beyond the frontier, but shall return him to the Son of Heaven with the details and the Son of Heaven himself may decide this. Thereupon, [people] may see that a subject does not dare to presume authority. Would this not be proper?” The military officials all said, “Well put.” [Su] Ch’ien was in the end taken prisoner and transported to the [emperor’s] presence. [Wei Ch’ing] entered the fortifications and dismissed the troops. It was this year (123 B.C.) that the General-in-Chief’s nephew Huo Ch’üping 霍去病,103 at the age of eighteen, was favored and made a Palace Attendant of the Son of Heaven. He was skilled at riding and archery, and twice accompanied the General-in-Chief, receiving an [imperial] decree presenting him with stalwart warriors, and was made Agile and Quick (P’iao-yao 剽 姚 ) Colonel.104 With 800 swift 105 and courageous horsemen he broke straightaway 102

Sun-tzu ping-fa reads: 故小敵之堅大敵之擒也. See Sun-tzu shih-chia chu 孫子十家注 (Chu-tzu chi-ch’eng 諸子集成 edition), 1239. Ralph Sawyer translates this passage as “Thus a small enemy that acts inflexibly will become the captives of a large enemy.” Ralph Sawyer, trans. The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China (Boulder: Westview, 1993), 161. 103 Han shu, 55.2478 offers a traditional introduction to Huo Ch’ü-ping, noting that he was the son of Wei Ch’ing’s elder sister Shao-erh and Huo Chung-ju 霍仲孺, a minor official in P’ing-yang prefecture. The relationship between Huo Chung-ju and Wei Shao-erh was apparently informal. Later, Wei Shao-erh was married to Ch’en Chang (see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 174-5). 104 Han shu, 55.2478 reads piao-yao 票姚 and Yen Shih-ku offers a long note on the term, glossing it as “quick and agile” (勁疾) and noting that in Hsün Yüeh’s 荀悅 (148-209 A.D.) Hanchi 漢紀 the title P’iao-yao was written as 票鷂, meaning “agile.” Liang Yü-sheng (34.1392) notes that these two characters should be 驃鷂. The character p’iao 驃 remained a part of Huo Ch’üping’s title when he was promoted to be P’iao-chi Chiang-chün 驃騎將軍, General of Agile Calvary.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

326

from the main army for several hundred li seeking advantage, and killed and captured more caitiffs than would have been standard.106 Thereupon, the Son of Heaven said, “[Huo] Ch’ü-ping, the Agile and Quick Colonel, has beheaded 2028 caitiffs, including a Chancellor and a tang-hu 當戶,107 beheaded one of the Shanyü’s elder relatives Ch’an 產, the Marquis of Chi-jo 籍若,108 and captured alive [the Shan-yü’s] uncle Lo-ku-pi 羅姑比.109 He twice ranked as the best in the army. With 1600 households 110 We enfeoff [Huo] Ch’ü-ping as Marquis of Kuan-chün 冠軍 (Best-in-the-Army Marquis).111 Ho Hsien 郝賢, 112 the Grand Administrator of Shang-ku, four times accompanied the General-in-Chief, capturing and cutting off the heads of over 2000 caitiffs. 113 With 1100 households We enfeoff [Ho] Hsien as Chung-li Hou 眾利 (Marquis of Manifold Merit).114 105

Literally, ch’ing 輕, “light” or “lightly armored” and therefore swift. “So-yin” cites Yen Shih-ku who explains kuo-tang 過當 (“more than would have been expected”) to mean that the number of Hsuing-nu killed or captured by Huo Ch’ü-ping was in excess of the number of troops Huo himself commanded. 107 The title of tang-hu appears to refer to a class of low-ranking Hsiung-nu nobles (see Shih chi, 110.2890). 108 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2478) identifies the Marquis of Chi-jo as being of the same generation as the Shan-yü’s grandfather. 109 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2478) identifies Lo-ku-pi as a younger uncle of the Shan-yü. 110 Han shu, 55.2478 gives the number of households included in Huo Ch’ü-ping’s fief as 2500. 111 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1038) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Kuan-chün 冠軍 prefecture, Nan-yang 南陽 commandery, about fifty miles southwest of modern Nan-yang, Ho-nan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:22). The fact that Huo was “twice ranked as best in the army” only adds to the appropriateness of this marquisate being granted to him. 112 Ho Hsien served as Grand Administrator of Shang-ku, and participated in four campaigns under Wei Ch’ing. He was enfeoffed in 123 B.C., but stripped of his marquisate after being charged with falsifying documents related to property seized from conscripts in 121 B.C. (see Shih chi, 111.2829; Han shu, 55. 2478; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 156). 113 Han shu, 55.2478 claims that Ho Hsien captured and beheaded 1300 caitiffs. 114 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1038) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Ch’eng-yang 城陽 kingdom. The administrative seat of Ch’eng-yang was located at modern Chü-hsien 莒縣, Shan-tung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). Han shu, 55.2478 includes information on the enfeoffment of another individual not included in the Shih chi narrative: “Meng Yi 孟已, a horseman, achieved merit and was granted the noble rank of Marquis within the Pass, and a fief of two hundred households.” The rank of kuan-nei hou first appeared in the Ch’in as the second highest rank of the twenty orders of aristocratic ranks. Loewe demonstrates that the rank was not always accompanied by a fief located in the so-called “Land Within the Passes” (modern Shensi), but fiefs appear to have been given in locations throughout the Han empire. He also cites evidence that would support the 106

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

327

That year (123 B.C.), the armies of two generals were lost.115 [Chao Hsin] the Marquis of Hsi fled [to the Hsiung-nu], and the armies’ merit was not much, therefore the General-in-Chief’s fief was not increased. When the General of the Right [Su] Chien reached [the emperor], the Son of Heaven did not have him executed, but pardoned his offenses and [Su Chien] paid a redemption and was made a commoner. [2929] After the General-in-Chief had returned, he was granted a thousand chin of gold. At that time Lady Wang116 had just been favored by the sovereign, so Ning Ch’eng 甯乘 117advised the General-in-Chief: “[Though] the means by which you, General, obtained merit are not yet great, you [have a fief] of ten thousand households from which to feed yourself, and your three sons have all been made marquises. This is all because of the August Empress. Now Lady Wang has been favored but her clan has not yet acquired wealth and honor. I would that you, General, present the gold you have been granted as a birthday gift to Lady Wang’s parents.” Only then did the General-in-Chief take five hundred chin of gold [and presented them] as a birthday gift. The Son of Heaven heard of this and asked the General-in-Chief about it. The General-in-Chief reported the truth to him and the sovereign thus appointed Ning Ch’eng as Chief Commandant of Tung-hai 東海 Commandery.118

claim that an estate did not always accompany the title (Michael Loewe, “The Orders of Aristocratic Rank of Han China,” TP 48 (1960): 152-4; see also the note in A .F.P. Hulsewé, China in Central Asia: The Early Stage, 125 B.C.-A.D. 23: An Annotated Translation of Chapters 61 and 96 of The History of the Former Han Dynasty (Leiden: Brill, 1979), p. 160, n. 490). 115 Han shu, 55.2478 simply says 失兩將軍 (“two generals were lost”). 116 Lady Wang 王 was a secondary consort of Emperor Wu who gained the ruler’s favor over Empress Wei 衛. When she was ill, Emperor Wu offered to make her son, Liu Hung 劉閎, a king, but declined her request to make him King of Lo-yang, installing him instead in Ch’i 齊. She died prematurely (Shih chi, 60.2115). The Shih chi biography of Emperor Wu contains an account of a spirit medium duping the ruler by claiming the ability of communicate with the spirit of the deceased Lady Wang (Shih chi, 12.458; Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:227). Han shu (25.1219; 67A.3951-2) narrates this event as well, but claims that the medium was trying to contact the spirit of Lady Li 李, not Lady Wang (see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 522). 117 There is no biographical information on Ning Ch’eng, though the same anecdote is included in Shih chi Chapter126 (126.3208), where he is referred to by the appellative Master of Tung-kuo (Tung-kuo Hsien-sheng 東郭先生) (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 444). 118 Tung-hai commandery was located in southern Shantung and northern Kiangsu provinces, with its administrative seat near modern T’an-ch’eng 談成, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

328

Chang Ch’ien 張騫 119 accompanied the General-in-Chief, and because he had once been sent as an envoy to Ta-hsia 大夏120and been detained by the Hsiung-nu for a long period, he guided the army. He knew the places with good water and grass and the army was thereby able to avoid hunger and thirst. Because he had previously earned merit when he was sent to distant states, [Chang] Ch’ien was enfeoffed as Marquis of Po-wang 博望 (The Farsighted Marquis).121 When [Huo] Ch’ü-ping, the Marquis of Kuan-chün, had been a marquis for three years, in the spring of the second year of yüan-shou (121 B.C.), [Huo]

119

Chang Ch’ien is best known for his diplomatic mission to the Yüeh-chih (ca. 140-135 B.C.). Captured by the Hsuing-nu on the outbound leg of the journey, Chang was held in captivity for over ten years before escaping with his Hsiung-nu wife and child. After his escape, he continued westward, eventually establishing contact with Ta-yüan 大 宛 (Ferghana) and Ta-hsia 大 夏 (Bactria), the new home of the Yüeh-chih. The Yüeh-chih declined the Han invitation to ally against the Hsiung-nu, and Chang returned to Ch’ang-an in 126 B.C. His report to the throne was instrumental in establishing regular contacts between Han and these western states. Chang Ch’ien served as a colonel under Wei Ch’ing in 123 B.C., and was enfeoffed. After an unsuccessful campaign in 121 B.C., he lost his marquisate. Chang died in 113 B.C., and is widely regarded as the “Father of the Silk Roads” for his earlier diplomatic mission (see Han shu, 61.2687-89; Shih chi, 123.3157-60; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 687-9). 120 According to the Shih chi, Ta-hsia is located about twelve hundred miles southwest of Tayüan 大宛 and its customs are similar to these of Ta-yüan: They lived in walled cities, planted rice and wheat, and were good at raising horses and riding. They did not have a central government, but each small city had its own kings or magistrates. Their military force was weak, but it was an affluent kingdom with rich markets, trading in various objects. When the Great Yüeh-chih moved to the west, Ta-hsia was defeated and submitted to be subjects of Great Yüeh-chih (see Shih chi, 213.3146). A.F.P. Hulsewé quotes Gustav Haloun to point out that Ta-hsia “originally referred to a mythical or fabulous people, vaguely located in the North (but eventually shifted to the West and even to the South). It was Chang Ch’ien who identified the Bactrians with the Ta-hsia, the westernmost people he knew, but that he did not use the word ta and hsia to reproduce their actual name.” Haloun emphasizes that the pronunciation of this term is not necessarily approximate to the name of the actual country. Henri Maspero agrees with Haloun’s view. See Hulsewé, China in Central Asia, 145; G. Haloun, Seit wann kannten die Chinesen die Tocharer oder die Indogermanen überhaupt? (Leipzig: Asia Major Verlag, 1926), pp. 136, 201-202; Henri Maspero, “Review of G. Haloun, Seit wann kannten die Chinesen die Tocharer oder Indogermanen überbaupt?” JA (1927): 144-152. 121 “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Po-wang 博望 prefecture, Nan-yang 南陽 commandery, about twenty-five miles northeast of modern Nan-yang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:22).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

329

Ch’ü-ping, as Marquis of Kuan-chün, was made General of Agile Cavalry, 122 and leading ten thousand horsemen set out from Lung-hsi and obtained merit. The Son of Heaven said, “The General of Agile Cavalryhas led his warriors across Mount Wu-li 烏盭, 123 suppressed the Su-p’u 遫濮,124 forded the Hu-nu 狐奴 River, 125 and passed through five kingdoms.126 The supply carts of those who fearfully submitted he did not take, hoping to capture the son of the Shan-yü. He fought again and again for six days, passing over a thousand li beyond Mount Yen-chih 焉支,127 and in hand-to-hand combat he killed the Che-lan King 折蘭 王, beheaded the Lu-hu King 盧胡王, 128 [*2930*] and wiped out all of his armored troops, 129 he seized the son of the Hun-yeh King 渾 邪王 and his 122 “Cheng-yi” cites the Han shu and explains that the office of General of Agile Cavalry began with Huo Ch’ü-ping and was classified among the Three Ministers (San-ssu 三司 or san-kung 三 公): Commander-in-Chief (Ta-ssu-ma 大司馬), Grand Minister of Works (Ta-ssu-k’ung 大司空), and Grand Minister Over the Masses (Ta-ssu-t’u 大司徒). The rank and salary for the post was equal to the General-in-Chief. 123 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2479) notes that li 盭 was an archaic form of li 戾. Ting Ch’ien 丁謙 speculates that Mount Wu-li was located northeast of modern Lan-chou 蘭州 (see Wu and Lu, 111.2913, n. 3). 124 Ts’ui Hao 崔浩 (cited in “So-yin”) claims that Su-p’u was the name of a Hsiung-nu tribe, however Ssu-ma Chen reckons that the term referred to a state. 125 The location of the Hu-nu River is unknown. 126 Takigawa (111.17) cites Ting Ch’ien, who claims that the Five Kings were subordinates to the Hsiu-ch’u King, who was stationed at Liang-chou 涼 州 , with the five subordinate Kings stationed in the area north of P’ing-fan 平番. Following the surrender of the Hsiu-ch’u King, the region was organized into a dependent kingdom and Wu-wei Commandery 武威郡. 127 Mount Yen-chih is located about twenty-five miles northwest of modern Yung-ch’ang 永昌, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34). According to Takigawa (111.17), it was also known as Mount Shan-tan 刪丹 or Mount Ta-huang 大黃. 128 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses Che-lan and Lu-hu as names of states. Yen Shihku (cited in “Cheng-yi”) identifies Che-lan as a Hsiung-nu surname, and notes that this was the root of the contemporary (to Yen) Hsien-pi surname Lan 蘭. 129 Traditional commentators have struggled to make sense of this passage regarding ch’uanchia 全甲, glossing it as “all of his armored troops” or reading it as chin-chia 金甲 (metal armored). These readings are ultimately unsatisfactory, and fail to take into account the significant differences in the emperor’s narration of Huo Ch’ü-ping’s accomplishments as recorded in Han shu, 55.2479. The Han shu account reads: “The General of Agile Cavalry has led his warriors across Mount Wuli, suppressed the Su-p’u, forded the Hu-nu River, and passed through five kingdoms. The supply carts and those who fearfully submitted he did not take, hoping to capture the son of the Shan-yü. He fought again and again for six days, passing over a thousand li beyond Mount Yen-chih, and in hand-to-hand combat he bitterly fought beneath Kao-lan, killed the Che-lan King, beheaded the Luhu King, and those who were most vigorous and violent, they wiped out, and the armored troops

330

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

Chancellor and Chief Commandant, took the heads of over eight thousand caitiffs,130 and took the metal statues for sacrificing to Heaven at Hsiu-ch’u 休 屠.131 We increase [Huo] Ch’ü-ping’s fief by two thousand households.” That summer (121 B.C), when the General of Agile Cavalry and [Kung-sun] Ao, the Ho-ch’i Marquis, both set out from Pei-ti 北地,132they took different routes; Chang Ch’ien, the Marquis of Po-wang, and Li Kuang, the Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace, both set out from Yu-pei-p’ing, taking different routes; all to attack the Hsiung-nu. The Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace led four thousand horsemen and arrived first, [while] the Marquis of Po-wang led ten thousand horsemen and arrived later. The Hsiung-nu Worthy King to the Left led several tens of thousand horsemen and surrounded the Prefect of the Gentlementhey took as prisoners, he seized the son of the Hun-yeh King and his Chancellor and Chief Commandant, took the heads of over eight thousand caitiffs, and took the metal statues for sacrificing to Heaven at Hsiu-ch’u, their [i.e., Hsiung-nu] troops were reduced by seventy percent. We increase [Huo] Ch’ü-ping’s fief by two thousand households.” 票騎將軍率戎士隃烏盭，討遫 濮，涉狐奴，歷五王國，輜重人红攝讋者弗取，幾獲單于子．轉戰六日，過焉支山千有餘里， 合短兵，鏖皋蘭下，殺折蘭王，斬盧侯王，銳悍者誅，全甲獲醜，執渾邪王子及相國﹑都尉， 捷首虜八千九百六十級，收休屠祭天金人，師率減什七，益封去病二千二百戶． The Han shu narrative appears complete and more logical than the Shih chi account, especially in regard to the armored troops. It seems likely that the Han shu account was the original and miscopied into the Shih chi at some early date. 130 Han shu, 55.2480 reads 8960 heads. 131 Yan Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2480) glosses t’u 屠 as ch’u 儲. On this passage the standard commentaries have relatively little to say. Ju Ch’ün (cited in “Chi-chieh”) simply indicates that the statues were used to make sacrifice to Heaven. “So-yin” also cites Ju Ch’ün, as well as Chang Ying 張嬰, who says that these were images of the Buddha. More information is provided in the commentaries to the prior reference to the statues in Shih chi Chapter 110, where “Chi-chieh” (110.2902) cites Han shu yin-yi 漢書音義 which explains that the Hsiungnu originally worshipped Heaven at Mount Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 in Yün-yang 雲陽, but after that territory was taken by the Ch’in, the Hsiung-nu moved the sanctuary to Hsiu-ch’u. “So-yin” also cites the Han shu yin-yi, but following this citation, Ssu-ma Chen (Shih chi, 110.2902) objects, arguing that the statues originated at Hsiu-ch’u and were brought to Kan-ch’üan after their seizure by Han forces. See also Homer Dubs, “The ‘Golden Man’ of Former Han Times,” TP 33 (1937): 114, 191-192; Kurakichi Shiratori, “On the Territory of the Hsiung-nu Prince Hsiu-t‘u Wang and His Metal Statues for Heaven-worship,” in Memoirs of the Tōyō Bunko, no. 5 (1930): 25-77; and J.R. Ware, “Once More the Golden Man,” TP 34 (1938): 74-178. The use of the term chin 金 in the text results in some ambiguity, and it is uncertain whether the statues were constructed of gold or some other metal, or perhaps even gold-painted or gold-leaf. 132 Pei-ti commandery was located in modern Shensi and Ning-hsia provinces, with its administrative seat located about twenty-five miles northwest of modern Ch’ing-yang 慶陽, Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

331

of-the-Palace. The Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace fought with him for two days, those who died exceeded half, and those who he killed were more than would have been expected. When the Marquis of Po-wang arrived, the Hsiung-nu troops withdrew and left. The Marquis of Po-wang was tried for a delayed march and was sentenced to be beheaded [*2931*], but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. Meanwhile, the General of Agile Cavalry set out from Pei-ti and had already penetrated deep [into Hsuing-nu territory] when the Ho-ch’i Marquis became lost and they did not find each other. The General of Agile Cavalry crossed Chü-yen 居延133and reached Mount Ch’i-lien 祁連,134 where the caitiffs and heads he took were extremely numerous. The Son of Heaven said, “The General of Agile Cavalry crossed Chü-yen, 135 then passed through [the territory of] the Lesser Yüeh-chih136 and attacked at Mount Ch’i-lien,137 captured the Yu-t’u 酋涂 King138 and, because he caused to surrender as a group 2500 [men], beheaded 30,200 caitiffs, captured 5 kings, 5 king-mothers,139 a consort of the Shan-yü, 140 59 princes, a chancellor, generals, tang-hu, and chief commandants totaling 63 persons, [also] reducing [the Hsiung-nu] by approximately thirty percent, 141 We increase [Huo] Ch’ü-ping’s fief by 5000 133

This would appear to reference Chü-yen Marsh, located to the north of Chü-yen prefecture, Chang-yi 張掖 commandery in modern Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:33-4). 134 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2481) identifies Mount Ch’i-lien as T’ien-shan 天山, explaining that the Hsiung-nu called Heaven “Ch’i-lien.” Mount Ch’i-lien was located about thirty miles south of modern Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:33). 135 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses Ch’ü-yen as the name of a body of water, confirming the identification of Ch’ü-yen as a marsh and not a reference to the prefecture of the same name, above. 136 Hsi-yü chuan 西域傳 (cited in “So-yin”) notes that the Greater Yüeh-chih (Ta Yüeh-chih 大 月氏) originally lived between Tun-huang 敦煌 and Ch’i-lien, and that the rest of the group lived in the South Mountains (Nan-shan 南山), and were known as the Lesser Yüeh-chih (Hsiao Yüehchih 小月氏). 137 “So-yin” cites Yen Shih-ku’s opinion that Mount Ch’i-lien referenced the T’ien-shan 天山, but Ssu-ma Chen disagrees with this assessment, citing the Hsi-ho chiu-shih 西河舊事, which claims that Po-shan 白山 was also known as T’ien-shan. 138 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”) simply glosses the term Yu-t’u King as “a Hu king.” Han shu (55.2480) notes that the Shan-huan 單桓 King was also captured. 139 I.e., wang-mu 王母. 140 Yen-chih 閼氏, a standard reference to a wife or consort of the Shan-yü. 141 “So-yin” claims the Han shu renders this figure at seventy percent (shih-ch’i 什七), but the Chung-hua edition of Han shu (55.2482) reads “reduced by thirty percent” (chien shih-san 減什三), identical to the Shih chi.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

332

households. We grant the colonels who accompanied [the General of Agile Cavalry] to [the territory of] the Lesser Yüeh-chih the rank of Left Chief of Staff.142 [Chao] P’o-nu 趙破奴,143 the Ying-chi ssu-ma 鷹擊司馬 (Falcon Attack Major),144 twice accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry, beheaded the Su-p’u King, captured the Chi-chü 稽沮 King, with a thousand horsemen obtained a king,145 a king-mother, and 41 princes and [other] lesser leaders, captured 3,330 caitiffs, his vanguard capturing 1400 caitiffs. With 1500 households, We enfeoff [Chao] P’o-nu as Ts’ung-p’iao Marquis 從驃侯 (Marquis Who Accompanies the General of Agile Cavalry).146 The colonel Kao Pu-shih 高不識, the King of Kou 句147 accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry and captured the Hu-yü-t’u 呼于 142

This title is not included in Bielenstein. For the translation, see Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:89 n. 14. Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2481) notes that this was a rank of the tenth level. 143 A one-time defector to the Hsiung-nu, Chao P’o-nu returned to the Han and took part in the campaign of 121 B.C. under the command of Huo Ch’ü-ping. He was initially enfeoffed in 121 B.C., and his fief was increased in 119 B.C. However, he lost his marquisate in 112 B.C. In 108-9 B.C., he was sent to secure the western trade routes by extending the line of Han military garrisons west to Yü-men 玉門. He was sent to secure the eastern frontier in 103 B.C., and was captured by the Hsiung-nu, but escaped by 100 B.C. In 91 B.C., he was charged with sorcery and he and his family were executed. A brief biography of Chao P’o-nu is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2945-6, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 710). 144 This title appears only in connection with Chao P'o-nu, and neither Bielenstein nor Hucker offer any additional information. 145 There is some dispute regarding the reading of the phrase 千騎將得王, which only appears in this passage and its parallel on Han shu, 55.2481. "So-yin" notes that Han shu reads 右千騎將王, and that this phrase has been variously interpreted to mean troops under Chao P'o-nu's command or as the title of a Hsiung-nu king (Thousand Horsemen General King of the Right). There is no evidence to support the latter reading. Shih chi, 20.1040-1 reads 得兩王子騎將功侯 ("obtained merit and a marquisate [for] two princes, horsemen, and a general"). Liang Yü-sheng (34.1392) argues that the text on Shih chi, 111.2931 is in error and should follow the reading in Shih chi Chapter 20 and Han shu, 17.647. Regardless, the text on Shih chi, 111.2931 is unclear. 146 Chang Yen (cited in “Chi-chieh”), notes that Chao P’o-nu received this title because of merit earned while under the command of the General of Agile Cavalry. Shih chi Chapter 20 does not offer a location for the fief associated with this marquisate. 147 Ssu-ma Chen (in “So-yin”) argues that the phrase Kou Wang Kao Pu-shih 句王高不識 references two Hsiung-nu individuals. Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) claims that the term Kou Wang was a Hsiung-nu title. Since later in this paragraph only Kao Pu-shih is noted as having received a noble rank and fief, we opt to render the passage as “Kao Pu-shih, the King of Kou.” Han shu, 55.2481 reads Kao Pu-shih 高 不 識. Loewe identifies Kao Pu-shih as a Hsiung-nu defector to the Han who served under Huo Ch’ü-ping in the campaign of 121 B.C. Enfeoffed for his role in capturing a Hsiung-nu king in 121 B.C., he later lost his marquisate in 117 B.C. for falsifying the number of casualties he inflicted on the enemy (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 113).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

333

屠 King, 148 11 princes and lesser leaders, and captured 1,768 caitiffs. With 1100 households We enfeoff [Kao] Pu-shih as Yi-kuan Marquis 宜冠侯 (Marquis Worthy of His Command).149 The colonel P’u To 僕多150obtained merit. We enfeoff him as Marquis of Hui-ch’ü 煇 渠 .” 151 [Kung-sun] Ao, the Ho-ch’i Marquis, was tried for being late and not meeting up with the General of Agile Cavalry, and was subject to execution, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. The soldiers and horses led by the other experienced generals were indeed not equal to those of the General of Agile Cavalry; [the soldiers] led by the General of Agile Cavalry were hand-picked. Moreover, he dared to penetrate deep [into enemy territory], often with some stalwart horsemen going ahead of his main army, and his troops also had the favor of Heaven and were not trapped or cut off. However, the various experienced generals were often tried for delays and not meeting [their rendezvous]. Because of this, the General of Agile Cavalry, day by day became closer [to the emperor] and more honored, matching the General-in-Chief. [2933] That autumn (121 B.C.), the Shan-yü was angry at the Hun-yeh 渾耶 King152 who resided in the west; he had been defeated by the Han [army] several times and lost several tens of thousands of men; this was because of the army of the General of the Agile Cavalry. The Shan-yü was angry and wanted to summon and execute the Hun-yeh King. The Hun-yeh King and the Hsiu-ch’u King and others conspired and wanted to surrender to the Han, sending men to wait at the 148

Ssu-ma Chen (in “So-yin”) simply glosses the term Hu-yü-t’u 呼于屠 as a kingly title. K’ung Wen-hsiang (cited in “Cheng-yi”) claims that this title originates because Kao Pushih accompanied the Best-in-the-Army General [Huo Ch’ü-ping], and that “Worthy-of-HisCommand” is the same type of title as “Accompanies-the-General-of-Agile-Cavalry” (ts’ung-p’iao 從驃) [bestowed upon Chao P’o-nu]. “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Ch’ang 昌. Ch’ang was located near modern Tzu-po 淄博, Shantung (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:20). 150 P’u To was a Hsiung-nu defector to the Han who served under Huo Ch’ü-ping on the campaigns of 121 B.C. He was enfeoffed in 121 B.C. and died in either 113 B.C. “So-yin” cites the Han po-kuan piao 漢百官表 which renders his name as P’u P’eng 僕朋, and Ssu-ma Chen reckons that the character to 多 is erroneous (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 451). 151 “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Lu-yang 魯陽 prefecture. Liang Yu-sheng (34.1393) claims that Hui-ch’ü is a scribal error for Hui-liang 煇梁. Lu-yang prefecture was located about sixty miles northeast of modern Nan-yang 南陽, Hopei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:22). 152 Hulsewé notes that in Han shu the terms K’un-yeh 昆邪 and Hun-yeh 渾耶 are used seemingly interchangeably. Hulsewé, China in Central Asia, p. 75 n. 36. 149

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

334

border.153 At this time, Li Hsi, the Grand Usher, was building walls along the upper reaches of the Ho 河. When he received the envoy of the Hun-yeh King he immediately caused a messenger cart to gallop off to report what he heard. The Son of Heaven heard this.At this point, he feared that [the Hsiung-nu] were pretending to surrender and would attack the border.Only then did he order the General of Agile Cavalry to lead troops to go out to welcome them. The General of Agile Cavalry had already crossed the Ho and he and the host of the Hun-yeh King looked upon each other from afar. The subordinate generals of the Hun-yeh King saw the Han army, and there were a large number who did not want to surrender,154 so many of them fled. [The General of] Agile Cavalry thereupon galloped into [the Hsiung-nu] and could see the Hun-yeh King, killing eight thousand men who wanted to flee. He then sent the carriage of the Hun-yeh King to go ahead alone to the emperor’s presence, and led the entire multitude across the Ho. Those who surrendered numbered several tens of thousand; it was said to be a hundred thousand. After they had already reached Chang’an, those things the Son of Heaven gave them as rewards were worth millions.155The Hun-yeh King was enfeoffed with ten thousand households and he was made the Marquis of Lo-yin 漯陰. 156 His subordinate king Hu-tu-ni 呼毒尼 was enfeoffed as Marquis of Hsia-mo 下摩;157 Ying-pi 鷹庇 was made Marquis of Hui-ch’ü 煇 渠;158 Ch’in-li 禽棃159was made Marquis of Ho-ch’i 河綦;160 and the Grand tanghu T’ung-li 銅離161 was made Marquis of Ch’ang-lo 常樂.162 Thereupon, the Son 153

Ssu-ma Chen reckons this indicated the Hsiung-nu kings’ desire to surrender. Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2483) comments that the Hsiung-nu subordinate generals feared that they were being set up for an ambush. 155 Wu and Lu (111.2936) note that these rewards were in the form of gold and silk. 156 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1041) glosses lo 漯 as “ta.” “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in P’ing-yüan 平原 commandery, about twenty miles north of modern Chi-nan, Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 157 Hsia-mo 下摩 is rendered as Hsia-hui 下麾 earlier in tables of enfeoffments (Shih chi, 20.1041). There, “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Yi-chih 猗氏 prefecture. Yi-chih prefecture was located about 190 miles northeast of modern Sian, Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). 158 Ying-pi was a lesser Hsiung-nu king who defected to the Han after the campaigns of 121 B.C. He was enfeoffed in 120 B.C., and died in either 115 or 114 B.C. (see entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 656). Here, Ying-pi is given the same title that P’u To was given a year earlier. 159 Shih chi, 20.1043 gives his name as Wu-li 烏棃. 160 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1043) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Chi-nan 濟南 commandery, modern Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 161 Shih chi, 20.1043 gives his name as T’ung-li 桐離. 154

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

335

of Heaven praised the merit of the General of Agile Cavalry, saying: “[Huo] Ch’ü-ping, the General of Agile Cavalry, led troops to attack the Hsiung-nu king of the western regions, Hun-yeh. The king’s host his people all ran [to surrender] and [Huo’s] troops were fed from the [Hsiung-nu’s] military provisions; simultaneously, he led over ten thousand archers and executed the fierce and violent, took the heads of over eight thousand caitiffs, and caused the surrender of thirty-two kings of different states. His warriors did not desert and were not wounded and a multitude of a hundred thousand all came together and submitted, continuing to labor with him, and thus the fortifications along the Ho were almost free from troubles and fortunately have already achievedeternal peace and harmony. With seventeen hundred households, We increase the fief of the General of Agile Cavalry.” The number of soldiers garrisoned in Lung-hsi, Pei-ti, and Shang commanderies was reduced by half in order to lighten the forced service in the empire. [2934] Shortly thereafter, those who surrendered were divided and relocated to the five commanderies beyond the old fortifications,163 all south of the Ho, were permitted to follow their old customs, and [the territories were] made into dependent kingdoms. The next year (120 B.C.), the Hsiung-nu entered Yu-pei-p’ing and Tinghsiang, killing and capturing over a thousand people of the Han. The next year (119 B.C.), the Son of Heaven in discussing affairs with the various generals said, “Chao Hsin, the Marquis of Hsi, has plotted with the Shanyü and has always thought that the Han army would not be able to cross the desert and easily remain. Now, if we send troops in large numbers, their efforts will surely obtain our objective.” That year was the fourth year of yüan-shou (119 B.C.). In the spring of the fourth year of yüan-shou (119 B.C.), the sovereign ordered [Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief, and [Huo] Ch’ü-ping, the General of Agile Cavalry, each to lead fifty thousand horsemen, with several tens of thousand infantrymen, supply carriers, and their followers, but the soldiers who dared to vigorously fight and penetrate deep [into enemy territory] were all under the command of the General of Agile Cavalry. The General of Agile Cavalry was originally to set out from Ting-hsiang to face the Shan-yü. Acaptive caitiff said that the Shan-yü was in the east;only then were the orders changed and the 162

“So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1043) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Chi-nan 濟南 commandery, modern Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 163 “Cheng-yi” identifies these five commanderies as Lung-hsi, Pei-ti, Shang-chün, Shuo-fang, and Yün-chung, and notes that they were all outside the original fortifications.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

336

General of Agile Cavalry set out from Tai [*2935*]Commandery and the General-in-Chief was ordered to set out from Ting-hsiang. The Prefect of the Gentlemen-of-the-Palace was made the General of the Van and the Grand Coachman was made the General of the Left, the nobleman Chao Yi-chi 趙食 其164 was made the General of the Right, and [Ts’ao 曹] Hsiang 襄, the Marquis of P’ing-yang,165 was made General of the Rear, all under the command of the General-in-Chief. The troops immediately crossed the desert, the men and horses numbering fifty thousand in total, and together with the General of Agile Cavalry and others, they all attacked the Hsiung-nu Shan-yü. Chao Hsin came up with a plan for the Shan-yü: “The armies of Han have just crossed the desert and their men and horses are worn out; the Hsiung-nu can just sit and collect the caitiffs.” 166 Only then did the [Hsiung-nu] move all of their heavy and light supply carts to the far north and waited at the northern [edge] of the desert with their best troops. At that moment, the General-in-Chief, over a thousand li from the fortifications, saw the Shan-yü’s troops arrayed in waiting. At this, the General-in-Chief ordered the covered war chariots to form a circle around the encampment and sent out over five thousand horsemen to face the Hsiung-nu. The Hsiung-nu also sent out some ten thousand horsemen. Just as the sun was setting, a great wind arose and sand pummeled the faces [of the soldiers]; the two armies could not see each other. The Han then released more men to the left and right flanks to surround the Shan-yü. The Shan-yü saw that the Han army was numerous and that their soldiers and horses were at the height of their strength, and if they fought, the Hsiung-nu would be at a disadvantage, so in the twilight the Shan-yü mounted a six-mule carriage and with some several hundred stalwart horsemen broke straight through the Han encirclement and galloped away to the northwest. By this time it was already dark, but the Han and Hsiung-nu skirmished with each other, and the number of dead and wounded [on each side] 164

Chao Yi-chi led campaigns in 119 B.C. When his and Li Kuang’s forces became lost and were late for their appointed rendezvous, he was subject to execution but paid a fine and was demoted to commoner status. Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2485) glosses 食 as “Yi” and 其 as “chi.” A brief biography of Chao Yi-chi is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2944, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 715). 165 Ts’ao Hsiang was a descendant of Ts’ao Shen (see above), and the fifth Marquis of P’ingyang. A brief biography of Ts’ao Hsiang is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2944, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 23). 166 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2485) glosses it to mean that the Hsiung-nu could collect the men and supplies of the Han army with little effort, hence the use of the verb tso 坐 “to sit.” It is interesting that Ssu-ma Ch’ien records Chao Hsin using the pejorative term “caitiff” to reference Han troops.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

337

was about the same. The Colonel of the Enclosure of the Left of the Han army captured acaitiff who reported the Shan-yü had left before dark, so the Han army then sent light cavalry into the night to pursue him. The General-in-Chief’s army then followed behind. The Hsiung-nu troops also scattered and fled. Before dawn, [the Han army] had traveled over two hundred li, [and though] they did not obtain the Shan-yü, they captured or killed over ten thousand caitiffs, finally reaching Mount T’ien-yen 窴顏167 and Chao Hsin’s city walls, 168 [where they] obtained the Hsiung-nu’s stores of grain to feed the army. The army stayed for a day and then went back, burning the remaining grain in the walled-city upon their return. [2936] The General-in-Chief went to meet the Shan-yü [in battle], but the armies of [Li] Kuang, the General of the Van and [Chao] Yi-chi, the General of the Right took separate routes to the east, sometimes were lost, and were late to attack the Shan-yü. The General-in-Chief led a retreat, crossing to the south of the desert where he finally met up with the General of the Van and the General of the Right. The General-in-Chief wanted to send an envoy to return [to the court] and report, so he ordered the Chief Clerk to prepare the case against [Li] Kuang, the General of the Van. [Li] Kuang killed himself.169 When the General of the Right arrived [at the capital], he was taken into custody, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. The General-in-Chief entered the fortifications; in total [his army] had killed and captured nineteen thousand caitiffs. At that time the Hsiung-nu multitude had been separated from the Shan-yü for over ten days, and when the Lu-li King to the Right 右谷蠡王170 heard of this, he installed himself as Shan-yü. Only when the Shan-yü later reached his throng did the Lu-li King to the Right abandon the title of Shan-yü. The General of Agile Cavalry also led fifty thousand horsemen, and his carriages and supplies were equal to those of the General-in-Chief, but he had no subordinate generals. He selected Li Kan 李敢171 and others as Grand Colonels 167

Shih chi, 110.2910 renders the character t’ien 窴 as 闐. Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses 窴 as “t’ien” 田. Wu and Lu (111.2918, n. 25) locate Mount T’ien-yen south of the K’angyüan 杭爰 Mountains in modern Mongolia. 168 Ju Ch’ün (cited in “Chi-chieh,” Shih chi, 110.2910) notes that after Chao Hsin surrendered to the Hsiung-nu, they built a walled city and kept Chao there. Wu and Lu, 111.2918n., argue that this could be a fortifications Chao Hsin had built as part of his plan. 169 See the detailed account on Shih chi, 109.2874-6. 170 “So-yin” glosses ku 谷 as lu. On the royal titles of the Hsiung-nu, see Shih chi, 110.2890. 171 Li Kan was a son of Li Kuang. He accompanied his father on campaign in 121 B.C., and led a small reconnaissance mission after the main body of troops were surrounded. His optimistic

338

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

who acted as subordinate generals, and set out from Tai and Yu-pei-p’ing, [riding] over a thousand li directly at the left flank of the [Hsiung-nu] army. The merit obtained from killing and capturing [caitiffs] already surpassed that of the General-in-Chief. After the army returned, the Son of Heaven said, “[Huo] Ch’üping, the General of Agile Cavalry, led the troops and personally commanded the captured warriors of Hsün-yü 葷粥,172 combined their supplies, crossed the great desert, forded [the river] and seized Chang-ch’ü 章渠,173 executed Pi-chü-ch’i 比 車耆,174 attacked the great general of the left [flank], cutting his pennants and seizing his drums. Next he made many crossings and [reached] Mount Li-hou 離 侯,175 forded the Kung-lü 弓閭 River,176 seized three [kings] including the T’unt’ou 屯頭 King and the Han 韓 King, along with 83 generals, ministers, tang-hu, and chief commandants. He performed the feng sacrifice177 at Mount Lang-chühsü 狼居胥178 and the shan sacrifice179 at Mount Ku-yen 姑衍,180 and ascended report emboldened the troops and they were able to withstand the Hsiung-nu attack, which ended after Li Kuang killed a leading Hsiung-nu general with an arrow. After his father’s death, he served in the palace. Angry at what he felt was mistreatment of his father by Wei Ch’ing, Li Kan once attacked and wounded Wei. Fearing that Li Kan would attack Wei Ch’ing again, Huo Ch’ü-ping killed Li Kan. A brief account of his activities is appended to the biography of his father (see Shih chi, 109.2876; Loewe, Dictionary, p. 219). 172 Wang Li-ch’i (111.2358, n. 1) glosses Hsun-yu 葷粥 as an archaic name for the Hsiung-nu. 173 “So-yin” claims that Chang-ch’ü was the name of a close advisor to the Shan-yü. Wu and Lu (111.2920 n. 8) call Ssu-ma Chen’s claim groundless. 174 Chin Ch’o (cited in “Chi-chieh”) glosses the term Pi-chü-ch’i as the title of a Hsiung-nu king. Han shu, 55.2486 renders his name as Pei-chü-ch’i 北車耆. 175 Han shu renders this name as Nan-hou 難侯. Wu and Lu (111.2920) gloss this sentence as “he crossed over many rivers and reached Mount Li-hou.” 176 Han shu, 55.2486 renders the name as Kung-lü 弓盧. The Kung-lü River is located in Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). 177 The feng sacrifice was offered to Heaven, and was traditionally performed by the emperor on Mount Tai 泰山. For imperial performances of the rite during the early Han, see Shih chi, 10.436; 12.458 (Grand Scribe's Records, 2:184; 2:226). See also Chavannes, "Textes relatifs aux sacrifices fong et chan," in Édouard Chavannes, Le T'ai Chan, essai de monographie d'un culte chinois (Paris: Lerous, 1910), pp. 158-261, and Chavannes translation of "Feng-shan shu" 封禪書 from the Shih chi published in 1890 as Le Traité sur les Sacrifices Fong et Chan, Extrait du Journal of the Peking Oriental Society (Peking: Pei-T'ang, 1890). 178 Mount Lang-chü-hsu was located about sixty miles east of modern Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). In this case, the feng sacrifice was offered to Heaven, using the mountain as an altar. 179 The shan sacrifice was offered to Earth, and was traditionally performed by the emperor on Mount Liang-fu 梁父.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

339

[the mountains] overlooking the Han Sea 翰海.181 He captured 70,443 caitiffs, while the troops he led were only reduced by three-tenths.182 He took food from the caitiffs, marched great distances and his provisions never ran out. With 5800 households We increase the fief of the General of Agile Cavalry.” Lu Po-te 路博 德,183 the Grand Administrator of Yu-pei-p’ing, was under the command of the General of Agile Cavalry and [scheduled] to meet at Yü-ch’eng 與城;184 he did not miss his appointed time and accompanied [the General of Agile Cavalry] to Mount Tao-yü 檮余, beheading and capturing over 2700 caitiffs.185 With 1600 households [Lu] Po-te was enfeoffed as Marquis of Fu-li 符离.186 Hsing Shan 邢 山 , 187 the Chief Commandant of Pei-ti, accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry and captured kings. With 1200 households [Hsing] Shan was enfeoffed Marquis of Yi-yang 義陽.188 Those who had previously submitted, Fu-lu-chih 復 陸支,189 the Yin-ch’un 因淳 King and Yi-chi-chien 伊即靬,190 the Lou-chuan 樓 專 King, both accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry and obtained merit. 180

Mount Ku-yen was located just east of modern Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). In this case, the shan sacrifice was offered to Earth, using the mountain as an altar. 181 The term Han-hai 翰海 refers to Bei-hai 北海, Lake Baikal, Russia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). 182 Han shu, 55.2487 puts this figure at two-tenths. 183 Lu Po-te was enfeoffed for his merit in capturing a large number of caitiffs in 119 B.C. In 113 B.C., he was sent to put down unrest in the south. Later, he lost his marquisate for failing to report his son’s immorality. In 102 B.C., he was again sent north, and he campaigned under Li Ling in 98 B.C., and under Li Kuang-li in 97 B.C. A brief biography of Lu Po-te is appended to the end of this chapter (111.2945, translated below; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 413-4). 184 Han shu, 55.2487 renders this as Hsing-ch’eng 興城. 185 Han shu, 55.2487 puts this figure at 2800. 186 Han shu, 55.2487 renders Fu-li 符离 as 邳 離. Fu-li prefecture was located just east of modern Su-chou 宿州, Anhui (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). 187 Han shu, 55.2478 renders his name as Wei Shan 衛山. Liang Yü-sheng (34.1394) and Loewe concur, with Loewe listing him under “Wei Shan.” Wei Shan was enfeoffed for his merit in the campaigns of 119 B.C. He was charged with a crime in 93 B.C., and died while the case was in process (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 575). 188 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1045) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in P’ing-chih 平氏 prefecture. P’ing-chih prefecture was located about twenty-five miles southeast of modern Nan-yang 南陽, Hupei (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:22). 189 Fu-lu-chih, the Yin-ch’un King, was a Hsiung-nu defector to the Han. He campaigned under Huo Ch’ü-ping in 119 B.C. and was enfeoffed for his merit. He died in 114 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 111). 190 Yi-chi-chien, the Lou-chuan King, was a Hsiung-nu defector to the Han. He campaigned under Huo Ch’ü-ping and was enfeoffed in 119 B.C. He died in 105 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 647).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

340

With 1300 households Fu-lu-chih was enfeoffed as Chuang Marquis 壯 侯 (Stalwart Marquis);191 and with 1800 households Yin-chi-chien was enfeoffed as Chung-li Marquis 眾利侯 (Multitude of Advantage Marquis).192 [Chao] P’o-nu, the Ts’ung-p'iao Marquis and [Chao] An-chi 趙安稽,193 the Marquis of Ch’angwu 昌武,194 accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry and obtained merit. Their fiefs were each increased by 300 households. The Colonel [Li] Kan obtained pennants and drums, and was made Kuan-nei Marquis 關內侯 (Marquis Within the Pass) with a fief of 200 households. The Colonel [Hsü] Tzu-wei 徐自為 195 was awarded the rank of Left Chief of Staff.196 Many of [Huo Ch’ü-ping’s] military officers and soldiers were made officials and given rewards. But the General-in-Chief’s fief was not increased and none of his military officers and soldiers was enfeoffed as a marquis.197 [2938] When the two generals set out from the fortifications, the fortifications records [indicated] they had a total of 140,000 state-owned and private horses,198 but when they returned to the fortifications, there were not quite 191

“So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1044) notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Tung-p’ing 東平. The administrative seat of Tung-p’ing kuo 東平國 was located about fifty miles north of modern Chi-ning 濟 寧 , Shantung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19). Liang Yü-sheng (34.1394) claims that this should read Tu-hou 杜侯. 192 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1044) notes that the location of the fief associated with this marquisate was not recorded. 193 Chao An-chi was a Hsiung-nu king who defected to the Han and campaigned under Huo Ch’ü-ping. He was enfeoffed in 125 B.C., and his fief was increased in 119 B.C. He died in 115 B.C. (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 700). 194 “So-yin” (Shih chi, 20.1031) notes that the location of the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Wu-yang 武陽. Wu-yang prefecture was located near modern P’engshan 彭山, Szechuan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:29). 195 Hsü Tzu-wei was a colonel under Huo Ch’ü-ping on the campaigns of 119 B.C. In 117 B.C. he was appointed to serve in the palace. He successfully put down an uprising by the Ch’iang 羌 in 111 B.C., and was charged with constructing defensive posts in 102 B.C. There are no details regarding his death (see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 625). 196 The Han shu (55.2487) account of the promotion of Li Kan and Hsü Tzu-wei includes a third individual: the Grand Administrator of Yü-yang 漁陽, [no cognomen given] Chieh 解, who was given the rank of Kuan-nei Marquis and a fief of three hundred households. 197 Han shu, 55.2487 notes that the Grand Administrator of Hsi-ho 西河 Ch’ang Hui 常惠 and the Grand Administrator of Yün-chung 雲中 Sui Cheng 遂成 each received rewards and noble ranks. 198 Wu and Lu (111.2921 n. 1) note that Wei Ch’ing set out from Ting-hsiang with fifty thousand horsemen and Huo Ch’ü-ping set out from Tai with fifty thousand horsemen; thus they concludes that some forty thousand private horses must have been attached to the two generals’

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

341

thirty thousand horses. Thus, the position of Commander-in-Chief was added, and the General-in-Chief and General of Agile Cavalry were both made Commanders-in-Chief. An edict was issued which ordered that the rank and salary of the General of Agile Cavalry be equal to that of the General-in-Chief. From this time onward, [Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief daily diminished while the General of Agile Cavalry daily increased in status. Many of the old friends and retainers of the General-in-Chief left and served the General of Agile Cavalry and they always received official positions and ranks. Only Jen An 任 安199 refused [to leave]. [2939] The General of Agile Cavalry was a man of few words who did not leak [information]; he was lively and bold in his actions. The Son of Heaven once wanted to teach him the military strategies of Sun of Wu 孫吳,200 but [the General] replied, “One only needs to see201 what works; there is no need to study ancient military strategy!” The Son of Heaven had a house built for [the General of Agile Cavalry] and ordered him to see it. [The General of Agile Cavalry] replied, “The Hsiung-nu are not yet extinguished; what use is there for a house?” Because of this, the sovereign increased in his regard and fondness for him. Though he was young, he [served as] a Palace Attendant, he was honored but did not take regards for his soldiers. When he accompanied the army, the Son of Heaven sent the Inspector of the Grand Provisioner to carry several tens of carts [of provisions for him], but when they had returned, the supply carts discarded the remaining grain and meat even though there were still soldiers who were hungry. When they were outside the fortifications his soldiers lacked provisions and some of them could not stand up, but the General of Agile Cavalry still had a

troops, bringing the total to the figure cited here. These figures are confirmed by the parallel account on Shih chi, 110.2910. Wu and Lu also explain that these private horses were likely the property of troops belonging to private militia pressed into service on these campaigns. 199 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.1488) notes that Jen An, agnomen Shao-ch’ing 少卿, was a native of Jung-yang 榮陽 and later served as the Inspector of Yi-chou 益州 (modern Szechuan), and that this is the same Jen An to whom Ssu-ma Ch’ien wrote his famous epistle. Though he refused to support the Heir Apparent Liu Ch’ü, Emperor Wu still suspected him and had him executed in 91 B.C. There is no official biography of Jen An, but Ch’ü Shao-sun includes a brief biographical note (Shih chi, 104.2779 and Grand Scribe’s Records, 8:405-7; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 457). 200 This refers to the Spring and Autumn period strategist Sun Wu 孫武 of the state of Wu 吳. The Han shu bibliographic treatise (Han shu, 30.1756) lists the writings attributed to him as Wu Sun-tzu ping-fa 吳孫子兵法 in eighty-two sections 201 Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.24889) glosses ku 顧 as nien 念 or “remember.”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

342

pitch dug for football. 202 There were many matters like this. The General-inChief was kind, affable, and yielding. He obtained the favor of the sovereign through kindness and tenderness, yet no one in the empire praised him. Three years after his four-year campaign, in the sixth year of yüan-shou (117 B.C.), the General of Agile Cavalry died. The Son of Heaven lamented this and sent black-armored troops of the dependent kingdoms to array themselves from Ch’ang-an to Mao-ling 茂陵,203 and built a grave for him in the shape of Mount Ch’i-lien. 204 [The emperor] conferred a posthumous title upon him, combining his military achievements and expansion of territories, calling him the Chinghuan 景桓 Marquis.205 His son [Huo] Shan 嬗 succeeded him in the marquisate. [Huo] Shan was young; his agnomen was Tzu-hou 子侯, and the sovereign cherished him and hoped to make him a general when he reached adulthood.206 [Huo Shan] lived for six years, then died in the first year of yüan-feng. His posthumous title was Ai 哀 Marquis (Pitiful Marquis). He had no sons, and the [lineage] was cut off and the fief was eliminated.

202

Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) says 穿地為營域 “dug a place for an encampment.” “Soyin” also cites Hsü Kuang, but then Ssu-ma Chen refutes Hsu’s claim, citing Ts’u-chü shu 蹵鞠書, which includes a section on the dimensions of the football pitch. “So-yin” also notes that the game was primarily a military training exercise, and that the “ball” was made of leather and filled with fur. 203 Mao-ling is the burial site of Emperor Wu, located in Mao-ling 茂陵 prefecture, about forty miles northwest of modern Sian, Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). 204 Ts’ui Hao (cited in “So-yin”) notes that Huo Ch’ü-ping defeated the Hsiung-nu K’un-yeh King at Mount Ch’i-lien, and for that reason, Emperor Wu had Huo’s grave constructed in that manner. Yao Ch'a 姚察 (cited in “So-yin”) notes that Huo’s grave was northeast of Mao-ling, with Huo’s grave located to the east and Wei Ch’ing’s grave located to the west of the future resting place of the emperor. In this manner, Emperor Wu would be surrounded in death by his two most accomplished generals. Liang Yü-sheng (34.1395) questions why the Shih chi text fails to mention that Wei Ch’ing’s grave was shaped like Mount Lu 廬山. 205 Su Lin 蘇林 (cited in “Chi-chieh”) notes that ching 景 was a martial posthumous title, and that huan 桓 as a posthumous title indicated the expansion of territory. Chang Yen (also cited in “Chi-chieh”) quotes the Shih-fa 謚法 on Huo’s title: 布義行剛曰景，闢土服遠曰桓 (“To display righteousness and act with resolve is called ching 景. To open territory and cause the distant to submit is called huan 桓.”). “So-yin” claims that Ching and Huan were two separate posthumous designations, and attributes them to the fact that Huo Ch’ü-ping’s life was spent in military campaigns that helped to enlarge the territory on the frontier. 206 Huo Shan was made Chief Commandant of Imperial Equipages and accompanied [Emperor Wu] to perform the feng sacrifice at Mount T’ai, but died on this expedition in 110 B.C. (see Han shu, 55.2489; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 175).

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

343

[2940] After the death of the General of Agile Cavalry, the eldest son of the General-in-Chief, [Wei] K’ang, the Marquis of Yi-ch’ün, was tried before the law and lost his marquisate. Five years later (112 B.C.), [Wei] K’ang’s two younger brothers, [Wei] Pu-yi, the Marquis of Yin-an, and [Wei] Teng, the Marquis of Fa-kan were both tried [in the matter of] submitting gold for sacrificesand lost their marquisates.207 Two years after losing their marquisates (110 B.C), the kingdom of the Marquis of Kuan-chün was abolished. Four years later (106 B.C.), [Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief died.208 He was given the posthumous title of Lieh 烈 Marquis (Illustrious Marquis). His son K’ang succeeded him as the Marquis of Ch’ang-p’ing.209 Fourteen years after the General-in-Chief surrounded the Shan-yu he expired. In the end, the reasons [the Han] did not attack the Hsiung-nu were because the number of horses of Han was small, they had just begun in the south to punish the Two Yüeh 越, in the east to campaign against Ch’ao-hsien 朝鮮, and to attack the Ch’iang 羌 and the Southwestern Yi 夷; for that reason it was a long time that [the Han] did not campaign against the Hu 胡 [Hsiung-nu]. Because the General-in-Chief had been able to be matched in marriage to the Elder Princess of P’ing-yang,210 therefore [his son, Wei] K’ang, the Marquis of

207

Wu and Lu (111.2923n) note that the court required all marquises to present gold of a certain level of purity for sacrifices in the eighth month of each year. Failure to submit the requisite amount resulted in loss of rank. In 112 B.C., some 109 marquises lost their positions for failure to meet the court’s demands, including the two sons of Wei Ch’ing. On the reduction of rank in general, see Hulsewé, Han Law, 214–224; on the loss of marquisates for the presentation of underweight gold, see Hulsewé, Han Law, 218. 208 I.e., the fifth year of yüan-feng 元封. 209 This succession took place in 104 B.C. Shih chi, 20.1029. 210 The Han shu account (55.2490) narrates the circumstances of Wei Ch’ing’s later marriage to the princess: Previously, [Wei] Ch’ing had just been esteemed and honored, and Ts’ao Shou, the Marquis of P’ing-yang had a severe illness and died. The Senior Princess [i.e., Emperor Wu’s elder sister] asked, “Among the various marquises, who is worthy?” The attendants all said the General-inChief. The princess laughed and said, “This came through my house; he regularly accompanied me as a horseman. How is this?” The attendants answered, “Now his esteem and honor is matched by none.” At this the Senior Princess hinted at this to the August Empress [who had previously served in the Senior Princess’s household and was presented to the emperor by the princess (see above)], who spoke of the matter [to the emperor]. The ruler then issued an edict matching [Wei] Ch’ing in marriage to the Princess of P’ing-yang. He [Wei Ch’ing] was buried with the princess, and his grave resembled the clouds of Mount Lu 廬山.

344

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

Ch’ang-ping, succeeded him as marquis.211 Six years [later], [Wei K’ang] was tried before the law and lost the marquisate. [2941] The two Generals-in-Chief of the Left Flank and the names of their subordinate generals:212 [Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief, in all set out to attack the Hsiung-nu seven times, killing and capturing over 50,000 caitiffs. As soon as he fought the Shan-yü, he acquired territory South of the Ho, in the end organizing Shuo-fang Commandery. Twice his fief was increased, [reaching] a total of 11,800 households. 213 His three sons were enfeoffed as marquises; each marquis’fief containing thirteen hundred households. Put together they totaled 15,700 households. Nine of his colonels and subordinate generals, because they accompanied the General-in-Chief, were made marquises. 214 Fourteen of his

211 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1395) cites Hsü Fu-yüan’s 徐孚遠 Ts’e-yi 測議 which notes that by the time Wei Ch’ing was married to the Princess of P’ing-yang, his son Wei K’ang had already been enfeoffed, and that Wei Ch’ing was never appointed as Marquis of P’ing-yang, thus his son’s succession to this title was not a gift of the Princess. 212 This section containing a career summary of Wei Ch’ing, biographical notes on fourteen of his subordinate generals, a career summary of Huo Ch’ü-ping, and biographical notes of two of his subordinate generals abruptly breaks the narrative flow of this chapter, and as such, appears to be an interpolation. Takigawa (111.34–35) cites Liang Yü-sheng, who claims “This refers to the biographies of Wei Ch’ing and Kung-sun Ho, which are recorded in more detail; moreover the appended biographies were added later. For this reason there are events reccorded that occured after the t’ien-han period (100–96 B.C.).” Liang’s claim cited by Takigawa is not found in Liang Yü-sheng chapter 34. A comparison of this section with its parallel in Han shu chapter 55 shows close textual affinities between the two texts. Shih chi presents sixteen biographies; Han shu only presents nine, omitting seven figures who receive full biographical treatment in that text. Of the seven common figures, two are nearly verbatum, with four others containing only minor variations. In only one case do the accounts contain any significant differences, with the Han shu note on Chao Yi-ch’i containing details missing from the Shih chi account. This is a sharp difference from the other variants which tend to have the Shih chi presenting more detail and the Han shu simplifying the account. This general trend of Han shu simplifying the Shih chi account is discussed in the Translator’s Note to chapter 110, and the same general skepticism about granting some from of primacy to the Han shu expressed there is applicable here. Regardless the source of this section, the inclusion of these career resumés of Wei and Huo and biographical notes of their subordinate generals at this point in the narrative is curious and noteworthy. 213 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1395) claims that this total is incorrect, noting that Wei Ch’ing was initially enfeoffed with 3800 households, and subsequently increased by 3000 and then again by 6000 households, for a total of 12,800 households. 214 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1395-6) notes that this total is incorrect, listing eleven of Wei Ch’ing’s subordinate generals who were awarded fiefs: Su Chien, Chang Tse-kung, Kung-sun Ao, Kung-sun Ho, Han Yüeh, Li Ts’ai, Chao Pu-yü, Kung-sun Jung-nu, Li Shuo, Chang Ch’ien, and Ho Hsien.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

345

subordinate generals and colonels had already been made generals.215 The one who was made a subordinate generals was called Li Kuang, who himself has a biography.216 Those without biographies are: General Kung-sun Ho 公孫賀.217 [Kung-sun] Ho was a native of Yi-ch’ü 義 渠,218 and his ancestors were Hu people. [Kung-sun] Ho’s father Hun-hsieh 渾邪 was made Marquis of Ping-ch’ü 平曲219 in the time of Emperor Ching,220 but was tried before the law and lost his marquisate. As for [Kung-sun] Ho, when Emperor Wu was made heir apparent, [Ho] was a Member of the Suite [of the heir apparent]. Eight years after Emperor Wu was enthroned (133 B.C.), [Kungsun Ho], as Grand Coachman, was made the General of Light Carriages and stationed at Ma-yi 馬邑.221 Four years later (129 B.C) he set off from Yun-chung as General of Light Carriages. Five years later (124 B.C.), as General of Cavalry, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and obtained merit and was enfeoffed as the Marquis of Nan-hao. One year later (123 B.C), as General of the Left, he again accompanied the General-in-Chief and set out from Ting-hsiang, but obtained no merit. Four years later (119 B.C.),222 he was tried before the law, caused to submit gold for sacrifices, and lost his marquisate. Eight years later

215 Han shu, 55.2491 says that fifteen of Wei Ch’ing’s subordinates were made t’e-chiang 特將. Yen Shih-ku (Han shu, 55.2491) glosses the term t’e-chiang as individuals who “led separate campaigns by themselves.” 216 Shih chi, 109, above. Han shu, 55.2490 lists the names of seven of these subordinates who have biographies in Han shu: Li Kuang 李廣, Chang Ch’ien 張騫, Kung-sun Ho 公孫賀, Li Ts’ai 李蔡, Ts’ao Hsiang 曹襄, Han Yüeh 韓說 and Su Chien 蘇建. 217 A full biography of Kung-sun Ho is found on Han shu, 66.2877-87, and as a result, he is not treated in the parallel Han shu chapter 55 account. 218 Yi-ch’ü was located in Pei-ti 北地 commandery, about twenty-five miles northwest of modern Ning-hsien 寧縣, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). “Cheng-yi” notes that Yi-ch’ü was originally part of a Jung 戎 state. 219 “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Kao-ch’eng 高城. T’an Ch’i-hsiang sites P’ing-ch’ü about thirty miles southeast of modern Lien-yün Kang 連云港, Chekiang (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 220 According to Shih chi, 19.1015, this enfeoffment took place in 151 B.C., and he lost the marquisate in 146 B.C. 221 Ma-yi prefecture was located in Yen-men 雁門 Commandery, near modern Shuo-hsien 朔 縣, Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). 222 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1396) claims that this chronology is incorrect, noting that Kung-sun He was tried and lost his marquisate in the fifth year of yüan-feng (112 B.C.) (see Shih chi, 20.1032), and thus eleven years had passed since the campaign originating at Ting-hsiang in 123 B.C.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

346

(112 B.C.), as the Fu-tzu 浮沮 General, he set out from Wu-yüan 五原 223 [marching] over two thousand li, but obtained no merit. Eight years later (103 B.C.), from Grand Coachman, he was made Chancellor and enfeoffed as the Marquis of Ko-yi 葛繹.224 [Kung-sun] Ho seven225 times was made a general, setting out to attack the Hsiung-nu with no great [*2942*] merit, but was twice made a marquis and was made Chancellor. His son Ching-sheng 敬聲 was tried because he had illicit relations with the Yang-shih 陽石 Princess226 and had been found to have practiced sorcery. 227 His clan was exterminated, leaving no posterity. General Li Hsi 李息 was a native of Yü-chih 郁郅.228 He served Emperor Ching 景. In the eighth year after the accession of Emperor Wu (133 B.C.) he was made Ts’un-kuan 村官 General229 and was stationed at Ma-yi 馬邑. Six years later (127 B.C.),230 he was made general and he set off from Tai. Three years later (124 B.C.), he was made general and accompanied the General-inChief setting out from Shuo-fang,231 but neither [time] obtained merit. He was made general a total of three times and afterward was made Grand Usher.

223

The administrative seat of Wu-yüan commandery was located at modern Pao-t’ou 包頭, Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 224 Shih chi, 20.1032 records this subsequent enfeoffment, but offers no location of the associated fief. 225 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1396) notes that Kung-sun Ho was only made a general five times. 226 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) notes that Yang-shih was also known as Te-yi 德邑. Yang-shih prefecture was located in Tung-shih-kuo 東史國, about ten miles south of modern Yehhsien 掖縣, Shan-tung (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). 227 Kung-sun Ching-sheng was tried and lost his marquisate in 91 B.C. (see Shih chi 20.10323). 228 Yü-chih prefecture was located in Pei-ti commandery, at modern Ch’ing-yang 慶陽, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). 229 Wu and Lu (111.2925 n. 2) note that the ts’un-kuan general was one of several titles given to men drafted from the ranks of local elites to lead troops during times of conflict. 230 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1396) argues that Li set out on campaign from Tai in the first year of yüan-shuo (128 B.C.), five years after his appointment at Ts’un-kuan General. However, Shih chi, 111.2923 claims that this campaign took place in the second year of yüan-shuo (127 B.C.), the same date indicated in the present chronological narrative. 231 Earlier in this chapter (111.2925), Ssu-ma Ch’ien indicates that Li Hsi set out from Yu-peip’ing.

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

347

General Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖 was a native of Yi-ch’ü. He served Emperor Wu in the post of gentleman.232 In the twelfth year after Emperor Wu had been enthroned (129 B.C.), he was made General of the Cavalry, and set out from Tai, losing seven thousand men. He was sentenced to be executed, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. Five years later (124 B.C.), 233 as a colonel, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and obtained merit and was enfeoffed as the Ho-ch'i Marquis. One year later (123 B.C.),234 as General of the Center, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and again set out from Ting-hsiang, but obtained no merit.235 Two years later (121 B.C.), as general, he set out from Pei-ti but was late [meeting] the [General of the] Agile Cavalry. He was sentenced to be executed, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner.236 Two years later (119 B.C.), as a colonel, he accompanied the General-in-Chief but obtained no merit. Fourteen years later (104 B.C.), as Yin-yü 因杅 General he built Shou-hsiang-ch’eng 受降城 (Walled-city for Receiving Those Who Surrender).237 Seven years later (98 B.C.), he again as Yin-yü General set out to attack the Hsiung-nu. Arriving at Yü-wu 余吾 238 he lost many officers and soldiers. 239 He was handed over to the legal officials and sentenced to be executed, [but] he faked his own death and fled, living among the common people for five or six years. Later he was discovered and was again [*2943*] arrested. He was tried with his wife for practicing sorcery and his clan was exterminated. In total, he was made a general four times, setting out to attack the Hsiung-nu, and was made a marquis once. 232

Han shu, 55.2491 claims that Kung-sun Ao served Emperor Ching, not Emperor Wu, as a gentleman. Liang Yü-sheng (34.1397) believes that the Han shu account is correct, but offers no further evidence to support his view. 233 Shih chi, 111.2925. 234 Shih chi, 111.2927. 235 Shih chi, 20.1034 indicates that Kung-sun Ao’s fief was increased in the sixth year of yüanshuo (123 B.C.) As such, Liang Yü-sheng (34.1397) argues that the phrase “but obtained no merit” is in error and should be deleted. 236 Shih chi, 111.2930-2. 237 This fortification was located approximately seventy-five miles northwest of modern Paot’ou, Inner Mongolia (Tan Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). It was constructed in 104 B.C. as a location to accept the surrender of defecting Hsiung-nu (see Shih chi, 110.2915). Wu and Lu (111.2926, n. 9) notes that Hu San-hsing’s 胡三省 (1230–1302) commentary to the Tzu-chih t’ung-chien 資治通鑑 identifies Shou-chien-ch’eng as being located north of Chü-yen 居延. 238 “So-yin” identifies Yü-wu as the Yü-wu River, which flows west and south of Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). 239 For details on this campaign, see Shih chi, 110.2918.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

348

General Li Chü 李沮 was a native of Yun-chung. He served Emperor Ching. Seventeen years after the accession of Emperor Wu (124 B.C.), as the Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital, he was made General of Strong Bowmen. The next year (123 B.C.), he was again made General of Strong Bowmen.240 General Li Ts’ai 李 蔡 was a native of Ch’eng-chi 成 紀 . 241 He served Emperors Hsiao-wen 孝文, Ching, and Wu. As General of Light Carriages, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and obtained merit and was enfeoffed as the Marquis of Lo-an. He had already been made Chancellor when he was tried before the law and died.242 General Chang Tz’u-kung 張次公 was a native of Ho-chü 河車.243 As a colonel he accompanied General Wei Ch’ing and obtained merit and was enfeoffed as the Marquis of An-t’ou. 244 Afterwards, the Empress Dowager 245passed away and he was made general, commanding the northern army. One year later (126 B.C.), he was made general and accompanied the General-in-Chief. He was again made general but was tried before the law and lost his marquisate. 246 [Chang] Tz’u-kung’s father, [Chang] Lung 隆, was an archer on a light chariot. Because he was skilled at archery, Emperor Ching favored him and kept him close. General Su Chien 蘇建 was a native of Tu-ling 杜陵.247 As a colonel he accompanied General Wei Ch’ing and obtained merit and was made Marquis of P’ing-ling. 248 As a general, he built [the walled-city at] Shuo-fang. Four years 240

Han shu Chapter 55 does not include this biographical notice of Li Chü. Ch’eng-chi prefecture was located in T’ien-shui 天水 commandery, about fifty miles north of modern T’ien-shui, Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:34). 242 Han shu Chapter 55 does not include this biographical notice of Li Ts’ai. 243 The Shih chi text here reads Ho-chü 河車. Han shu renders it as Ho-tung 河東. The Shih chi rendering is in error. 244 There is some dispute over the location and classification of An-t’ou. The “So-yin” quotes Chin Chuo who argues that An-t’ou was a commune (t’ing 亭) in P’i-shih 皮氏 prefecture, Ho-tung 河東 commandery (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:16). The “Cheng-yi” quotes Fu Ch’ien who claims that Ant’ou was a prefecture, but offers no specific location. 245 This refers to Empress Dowager neé Wang. The date of her death is disputed, with the years 125 B.C. and 126 B.C. being the general time frame (see Wu and Lu, 111.2927 n. 3). 246 In 122 B.C., Chang was tried for having illicit relations with the daughter of the King of Huai-nan, Liu An 劉安. As a result, he was fined and his fief was abolished (see Shih chi, 20.1030). 247 Tu-ling prefecture was about twelve miles southeast of modern Sian, Shensi (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:15). 248 Su Chien was enfeoffed as Marquis of P’ing-ling in the second year of yüan-shuo (127 B.C.) (see Shih chi, 20.1030). 241

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

349

later (123 B.C.),249as General of Patrol and Attack, he accompanied the Generalin-Chief and set out from Shuo-fang.250 One year later (122 B.C.), as the General of the Right, he again accompanied the General-in-Chief and set out from Tinghsiang, let the Marquis of Hsi [Chao Hsin] escape and lost [*2944*] his army.251 He was sentenced to be executed but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. Afterwards, he was made Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery, [where] he died. His tomb is in Ta-yu District 大猶鄉.252 General Chao Hsin 趙信, as the Chancellor of the Hsiung-nu, surrendered [to the Han] and was made the Marquis of Hsi. Seventeen years after the accession of Emperor Wu (124 B.C.), 253 he was made General of the Van and battled against the Shan-yü. He was defeated and surrendered to the Hsiung-nu. General Chang Ch’ien 張騫, because he was an envoy to Ta-hsia, returned, and was made a colonel. Accompanying the General-in-Chief, he earned merit and was enfeoffed as the Marquis of Po-wang.254 Three years later (120 B.C.), he was made general and set out from Yu-pei-p’ing, but missed the rendezvous. He was sentenced to be executed, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. Later he was sent as an envoy to the Wu-sun 烏孫255 and was made a Grand Usher, and died. He was buried at Han-chung 漢中.256

249

B.C.).

Wu and Lu (111.2928) date this event to the spring of the fifth year of yüan-shuo (124

250 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1397) notes that Su campaigned from Shuo-fang in 124 B.C. (see Shih chi, 111.2925), and this should read “three years later.” 251 Again, the chronology in the text is slightly off. The campaign from Ting-hsiang originated in the spring of 123 B.C. (see Shih chi, 111.2927). 252 Wu and Lu (111.2928 n. 6) note that Ta-yu District was part of Yang-ling 陽陵, a common burial site for high officials of the Western Han, located about fifty miles north of modern Sian, Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). 253 Shih chi, 111.2927 dates this campaign to 123 B.C. and thus the Shih chi text here should read “eighteen years” rather than “seventeen years.” Han shu, 55.2492 also says “eighteen years after the accession of Emperor Wu.” 254 Shih chi, 20.1037-8 dates this enfeoffment to 123 B.C. 255 The Wu-sun were located in the Ili region between Lake Balkhash and T’ien-shan (see Shih chi, 110.2913). 256 Chang Ch’ien was a native of Han-chung, located between modern Szechuan and Shensi provinces. Its administrative seat was located near modern An-k’ang 安康, Shensi (T’an Ch’ihsiang, 2:30).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

350

General Chao Yi-chi 趙食其 was a native of Tui-yü 祋祤.257 Twenty-two years after the accession of Emperor Wu (119 B.C.), 258 as a [Palace Commandant] over the Nobility, he was made General of the Right and accompanied the General-in-Chief and set out from Ting-hsiang. He got confused. lost the way, and was sentenced to be executed, but paid a redemption and was made a commoner. General Ts’ao Hsiang 曹襄, as the Marquis of P’ing-yang, was made General of the Rear and accompanied the General-in-Chief setting out from Ting-hsiang. [Ts’ao] Hsiang was the grandson of Ts’ao Ts’en. General Han Yüeh 韓說 was a cadet grandson of the Marquis of Kung-kao 弓高.259 As a colonel, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and obtained merit and was made the Marquis of Lung-o. He was tried, caused to submit gold for sacrifices, and lost his marquisate. In the sixth year of yüan-ting (111 B.C.), as an expectant appointee, he was made General of Heng-hai 橫 海 , attacked the Eastern Yüeh, 260 obtained merit, and was made Marquis of An-tao 按道 . 261 Because in the third year of t’ai-ch’ü (102 B.C.), he was made General of Patrol and Attack, he was garrisoned at Wu-yüan outside the series of walls. As Superintendent of the Imperial Household, he dug for [evidence of] ku-sorcery 蠱262 in the heir apparent’s palace and was killed by the Prince of Wei 衛.263

257

Tui-yü prefecture was located in Tso-feng-yü 左馮翊 commandery, about seventy-five miles north of modern Sian, Shensi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:15). On the pronunciation of 祋, see Wu and Lu, 111.2929n. “So-yin” gives both Tui and Tuo. 258 Han shu, 55.2492 notes that in 123 B.C. as a commandant with rank, he accompanied the General-in-Chief and killed six hundred sixty caitiffs. It also notes that in 120 B.C., he was given the rank of Marquis Within the Pass, and a hundred catties of gold. 259 Han Yin-tang 韓頹當, the Marquis of Kung-kao, was the son of Han Wang-hsin 韓王信, an early supporter of the Han founder, Liu Pang and later defector to the Hsiung-nu (see Shih chi, 93.2635). 260 See Han shu, 6.189. 261 Shih chi, 20.1034 renders this as An-tao 案道. “So-yin” notes that the fief associated with this marquisate was located in Ch’i 齊. 262 Literally, ku was a poison concocted from the venom of insects and reptiles. The term also specifically refers to a demonic creature endowed with concentrated ku-poison, and more generally to witchcraft, erotic charms, and malignant disease. The practice of ku-sorcery was thought to have originated in the deep south, especially Nam-Viet. In this passage, Han Yüeh was likely digging for a ku-demon or other evidence of ku-related magic activities. For more on ku, see J. J. M. de Groot, The Religious System of China (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1892-1910; repr. Taipei: Southern Materials Center, 1989), 5: 826-869; Edward H. Schafer, The Vermillion Bird (Berkeley: University of

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

351

General Kuo Ch’ang 郭昌 was a native of Yün-chung. As a colonel, he accompanied the General-in-Chief. In the first year of yüan-feng (110 B.C.), as Grand Palace Grandee, he was made Pa-hu Chiang-chün 拔胡將軍 (General Who Seizes the Barbarians) and garrisoned at Shuo-fang. He returned and attacked K’un-ming 昆明, but obtained no merit and was deprived of his seal of office. General Hsün Chih 荀彘264 was a native of Kuang-wu 廣武265in T’ai-yüan 太 原 [Commandery]. Through his carriage driving he met [the emperor] and as Imperial Inspector Palace Attendant, was made a colonel, and several times accompanied the General-in-Chief. In the third year of yüan-feng (108 B.C.), he was made General of the [*2945*] Left and attacked Ch’ao-hsien but did not obtain merit. Because he captured the Lou-ch’üan 樓船 General,266 he was tried before the law and died. The General of Agile Cavalry [Huo] Ch’ü-ping set out to attack the Hsiungnu a total of six times, four times as a general,267 killing and capturing over a hundred thousand caitiffs.268 These included the Hun-yeh King and a multitude of several tens of thousands who surrendered, and the territories of Ho-hsi 河西 and Chiu-ch’uan 酒泉 were opened; the western regions had significantly fewer Hu encroachments. His fief was increased four times, [reaching] a total of 15,100 California Press, 1967), 102-103; and H. Y. Feng and J. Shryock, “The Black Magic in China Known as Ku,” JAOS 55 (1935): 1-30. 263 This episode is briefly narrated on Han shu, 63.2742-3. According to this account, Emperor Wu was ill at Kan-ch’üan Palace and Chiang Ch’ung 江充 and others, including Han Yüeh, were sent to the heir apparent’s palace to determine if the prince was engaging in sorcery against the ruler. As they dug, they found a wooden statue, presumably used to curse the emperor. The heir apparent claimed ignorance, but fearing the outcome, had the men killed. 264 Hsün Chih was regarded as a skilled horseman. He led campaigns against Ch’ao-hsien in 108 B.C., where he clashed with another Han general, Yang P’u, and was executed (see entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 630). 265 Kuang-wu prefecture was located in T’ai-yüan commandery, near modern Tai-hsien 代縣, Shansi (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). 266 Yang P’u 楊僕 led campaigns against Nan-yüeh in 112 B.C. and Ch’ao-hsien in 109 B.C. Unable to cooperate with Hsun Chih, Yang was arrested by Hsün and stripped of his marquisate. He died of an illness (see Shih chi, 114.2982-4; 115.2987-8; 122.3149; see also Loewe, Dictionary, p. 634). 267 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) notes that of the four times Huo Ch’ü-ping went on campaign as a “general,” two were actually in the capacity of Agile Colonel (P’iao-yao hsiao-wei 驃姚校尉). 268 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1398) offers a more precise figure of 109,631 caitiffs killed or captured, basing this on the various counts presented elsewhere in this chapter.

352

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

households.269 Among his colonels and officers those who obtained merit and were made marquises were six in all, and two were later made generals.270 General Lu Po-te 路博德 was a native of P’ing-chou 平州. 271 As Grand Administrator of Yu-pei-p’ing, he accompanied the General of Agile Cavalry and obtained merit, and was enfeoffed as the Marquis of Fu-li 符離. After the death of the General of Agile Cavalry, [Lu] Po-te, as Commandant of the Guards, was made Fu-po 伏波 General272 and attacked and defeated the Southern Yueh;273 his fief was increased. Afterwards, he was tried before the law and lost his marquisate. He was made Chief Commandant of Strong Bowmen and garrisoned at Chü-yen, where he expired. General Chao P’o-nu was originally a native of Chiu-yüan 九原.274 Once he fled to the Hsiung-nu, but after he returned to the Han he was made a Major [under] the General of Agile Cavalry. When he set out from Pei-ti (121 B.C.), he obtained merit and was enfeoffed as the Ts'ung-p'iao Marquis. He was tried, caused to submit gold for sacrifices, and lost his marquisate.275 One year later (111 B.C.), he was made Hsiung-ho 匈河 General and attacked the Hu, reaching the Hsiung-ho River276 but obtained no merit. Two years later (109 B.C.),277 he attacked and captured the Lou-lan King and was again enfeoffed as the Marquis of Cho-yeh 浞野. Six years later (103 B.C.), he was made Chün-chi 浚稽 General and led twenty thousand horsemen to attack the Hsiung-nu Worthy King to the Left. [*2946*] [Chao] P’o-nu battled the Worthy King to the Left and was 269 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1398) disputes this figure, noting that the total number of households granted to Huo in Shih chi Chapter 111 totals 16,100, while the cumulative total in the Han shu account is 17,600., Han shu also offers a figure of 17,700 (Han shu, 55.2492). 270 Liang Yü-sheng (34.1399) notes that seven of Huo’s subordinates were made marquises: Chao P’o-nu, Kao Pu-shih, Pu To, Lu Po-te, Wei Shan, Fu-lu-chih, and Yin Chi-huan. 271 Han shu, 55.2493 places P’ing-chou in Hsi-ho 西 河 commandery, in modern Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:18). T’an’s atlas does not include P’ing-chou. 272 Bielenstein has no additional information on this military title. It appears in Shih chi only in connection with the campaigns against Nan-yüeh (20.1051; 20.1053; 22.1140; 111.2945; 113.29758). 273 This campaign took place in 111 B.C. (see Shih chi, 113.2975-7). 274 Chiu-yüan prefecture was located in Wu-yüan 五原 commandery, at modern Pao-t’ou, Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17). Han shu, 55.2493 notes his native place as T’ai-yüan 太 原. 275 This trial and loss of rank occurred in 112 B.C. (see Shih chi, 20.1040). 276 The Hsiung-nu River was located about three hundred miles west of modern Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:39). 277 Han shu, 55.2493 says “one year later.”

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

353

surrounded by eighty thousand horsemen. [Chao] P’o-nu was captured alive by the caitiffs and in the end abandoned his troops. He lived with the Hsiung-nu for ten years and, again, with the Prince An-kuo 安國 fled and entered [the territory of] Han.278 Later he was tried for sorcery, and his clan was exterminated. From the rise of the Wei lineage, the General-in-Chief was first enfeoffed and his descendants included five marquises. Within twenty-four years the five marquisates were completely eliminated and the Wei lineage had none who was a marquis.279 His Honor the Grand Scribe says, “Su Chien told me, ‘I once criticized the General-in-Chief because though he was highly esteemed, he was not praised by the worthy gentlemen of the empire. I would that the general observe how the famous generals of antiquity summoned and selected worthy men and strive to [emulate] them.’ The General-in-Chief declined saying, ‘Since [the Marquis of] Wei-chi 魏 其 280 and [the Marquis of] Wu-an 武 安 treated their retainers generously, the Son of Heaven was often enraged [with them]. As for drawing gentlemen near, summoning those who are worthy, and driving out those who are not, this is the right of the ruler of men. A subject simply receives commands and attends to his duty. How could I be involved in summoning gentlemen?’” The General of Agile Cavalry also adopted this opinion. This was their way of serving as generals. *

*

*

*

*

278 Hsü Kuang (cited in “Chi-chieh”) notes that Chao was captured in 103 B.C. and returned to the Han in 100 B.C., a period of approximately four years. Liang Yü-sheng (34.1399) also notes this discrepancy. 279 This brief paragraph resumes the narrative interrupted by the biographies of subordinate generals on 111.2941. 280 The Marquis of Wei-chi was Tou Ying 竇嬰 and the Marquis of Wu-an, T’ien Fen 田蚡 (see Shih chi Chapter 107 and the translation in this volume; see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 79-80 and 505-6).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

354

They straightened the winding border fortifications, expanded the [Han] territory south of the Ho, defeated [the Hsiung-nu] at [Mount] Ch’i-lien, opened the way to the western states, and beat back the Northern Hu, [thus] I composed the “Memoir of General Wei and the [General of] Agile Cavalry, Number 51.”281

281

These are the Grand Scribe’s reasons for compiling this chapter given in his postface (Shih chi, 130.3317: 直曲塞，廣河南，破祁連，通西國，靡北胡。作衛將軍驃騎列傳第五十一).

Translator’s Note Chapter 111 narrates the lives of two of the Han’s most successful generals, Wei Ch’ing and his nephew Huo Ch'ü-ping, as well as sixteen of their subordinate generals. Situated at the end of a four-chapter sequence of memoirs that deal with Han military figures and history, Chapter 111 frequently presents details on events and personages treated elsewhere in the Shih chi, and as such, may seem somewhat redundant when read in sequence. However, in addition to its surface intention of presenting the lives of two Han generals and outlining the successes and shortcomings of their numerous campaigns against the Hsiung-nu, this chapter also addresses two important themes and concerns of Ssu-ma Ch’ien: the power and influence of palace women, and imperial favoritism. The chapter opens with a puzzling narrative of Wei Ch’ing’s family relationships. His mother, a maidservant of the Marquis of P’ing-yang 平陽, had relations with an official serving in the Marquis’ household, Cheng Chi 鄭季, and as a result gave birth to Ch’ing. Ssu-ma Ch’ien then notes that Ch’ing had an “elder brother from the same mother,” agnomen Ch’ang-tzu 長子, and an elder sister named Tzu-fu 子夫. A few lines later, three or four (depending on whether one reads the characters Pu 步 and Kuang 廣 as one or two names; Han shu 55.2471 treats it as one) additional siblings are introduced. Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s use of the phrase “from the same mother” seems to indicate that the six (or seven) siblings did not all share the same father. Complicating the genealogy even more is Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s statement that after Ch’ing’s elder sister Tzu-fu was promoted to the imperial harem, Ch’ing and several of his siblings “passed themselves off as having the cognomen of Wei 衛.” Furthermore, the mother is referenced in the text as Dame Wei (Wei Ao 衛媼). The Shih chi provides no solid indication as to the origin of this cognomen, though given that it was adopted by the siblings after the rise in status of one of their sisters, it may have been the cognomen of Tzu-fu’s father. Similarly, the designation of the mother as “Dame Wei” may have also post-dated her daughter’s promotion to the ranks of palace women. Commentators, both traditional and modern, have long labored to unravel this cryptic genealogy. Yen Shih-ku argued that the cognomen Wei had come from Dame Wei’s husband, indicating Yen’s belief that a Mr. Wei had sired at least one of Dame Wei’s children. Liang Yü-sheng considered that Dame

355

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

356

Wei’s four oldest children, Ch’ang-tzu, Wei Ju 衛孺, Shao-erh 少兒, and Tzu-fu, were all sired by Mr. Wei, and that only Ch’ing, Pu, and Kuang “passed themselves off as having the cognomen of Wei.” 282 Loewe offered a simple family tree for Dame Wei and her children. In his genealogical table “Wudi’s Empress Wei [Tzu-fu],” he presented Cheng Chi as the father of all (six) of Dame Wei’s children. 283 Furthermore, in his entry on Wei Tzu-fu, Loewe introduced the empress as “a daughter of Cheng Chi.”284 Similarly, in his entry on Wei Ch’ing, Loewe noted that Ch’ing’s father was Cheng Chi, and then listed other children “born to his parents.”285 This is a gross over-simplification of a complex family tree. The Shih chi does not offer a clear picture of the situation; only Wei Ch’ing’s father is explicitly named, and the use of the term “from the same mother” would seem to signal different fathers for at least some of the siblings. With the limited information available we are unlikely to ever solve the puzzle of the paternity of Dame Wei’s children, but rather should accept the complexity and mildly scandalous and mysterious nature of Wei Ch’ing’s family as presented by Ssu-ma Ch’ien. What is clear, however, is that Wei Ch’ing came from lower-class stock, and that his rise to prominence was directly linked to women. His mother’s position in the household of the Marquis of P’ing-yang led to his own appointment as a horseman in the service of the Princess of P’ing-yang, the elder sister of Emperor Wu. When Ch’ing’s sister Tzu-fu entered the palace as a gift from the princess in 139 B.C., Wei Ch’ing, apparently still in the service of the princess, became a victim of harem politics. Wei Tzu-fu was favored by the emperor and became pregnant, inciting the jealousy of the Empress Chen and her kin. The empress’s mother ordered the then-unknown Wei Ch’ing arrested, and planned to have him killed. A daring rescue by several friends brought Ch’ing to the emperor’s attention, who then appointed Ch’ing and his half-brothers to positions at court and arranged marriages for Ch’ing’s remaining sisters. Within a decade, Wei Ch’ing was made General of Chariots and Cavalry and led troops on campaigns against the Hsiung-nu. This account of Wei Ch’ing’s rise from obscurity as the bastard son of a maidservant to a commanding general in the Han army illustrates one of the two major themes of the chapter, the power of palace women. When

282

Liang Yü-sheng, 34.1390. Loewe, Dictionary, 773. 284 Loewe, Dictionary, 581. 285 Loewe, Dictionary, 573. 283

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

357

Emperor Wu promoted Wei Tzu-fu to empress, her entire family enjoyed the benefits. Among the beneficiaries of this imperial largess was Wei Ch’ing’s nephew, Huo Ch'ü-ping. Huo was the son of Dame Wei’s middle daughter, Shao-erh, and Huo Chung-ju 霍仲孺, a low-level official in P’ing-yang. This relationship appears to have been informal, since Ssu-ma Ch’ien relates earlier that Shao-erh was matched in marriage to Ch’en Chang 陳掌, a descendent of the early Han official Chen Ping 陳平. At the time of her marriage to Ch’en Chang (ca. 139 B.C.), Wei Shao-erh’s son Ch'ü-ping would have been approximately four to five sui. At the age of eighteen (123 B.C.), Huo Ch'ü-ping was appointed to a court position and sent out to accompany his uncle Wei Ch’ing on campaigns, enjoying imperial favor in the form of extra supplies and hand-selected crack troops. The arrival of Huo Ch'ü-ping in the chapter narrative introduces the other major theme of the chapter, imperial favoritism. In the six years between Wei Ch’ing’s appointment as a commanding general and the arrival of Huo Ch'ü-ping on the scene, Wei Ch’ing and his subordinate generals enjoyed a good measure of success on campaigns against the Hsiung-nu, and were generously rewarded by the court for their efforts. Wei Ch’ing, his infant sons, and many of his subordinates had received noble ranks, fiefs, and cash rewards for their merits in battle. The Shih chi account of these campaigns matter-of-factly narrates the dates, location, participants, and outcomes of military events between 129 B.C. and 123 B.C., and includes the purported proclamations of merit issued by Emperor Wu. For his efforts in the campaigns of 123 B.C. Huo Ch’ü-ping was ennobled and enfeoffed. Following the campaign of 121 B.C., Wei Ch’ing’s star began to fade as the emperor bestowed increasingly generous favor upon Huo Ch’ü-ping. Huo’s success in capturing several ranking Hsiung-nu leaders resulted in two increases of Huo’s fief. Ssu-ma Ch’ien subltly indicates that Huo’s successes were not entirely due to the general’s own abilities, noting that the troops and horses assigned to Huo Ch’ü-ping were superior to those given to the other more experienced generals, and that he had enjoyed some measure of luck (i.e., “the favor of Heaven”). “Because of this,” Ssu-ma Ch’ien writes, “the General of Agile Cavalry, day by day, became closer [to the emperor] and more honored, matching the General-in-Chief, Wei Ch’ing” (111.2932). By 119 B.C., though holding a lower ranking position than Wei Ch’ing, Huo Ch’ü-ping was in effect a co-commander-in-chief with his uncle. However, it is clear that the emperor favored the younger general. As both armies prepared to campaign against the Hsiung-nu in 119 B.C., an intelligence report noted that the Shan-yü was in the east. Upon hearing this, the court changed the military orders, commanding Huo

358

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 111

Ch’ü-ping, who was originally scheduled to march to the west, to march eastward, and ordering Wei Ch’ing, originally slated to march eastward, to campaign in the west. Moreover, Ssu-ma Ch’ien notes, “the soldiers who dared to vigorously fight and penetrate deep [into enemy territory] were all under the command of the General of Agile Cavalry” (111.2934). Due to weather and personnel problems, Wei Ch’ing was forced to retreat, while Huo Ch’ü-ping’s campaign was more successful. Huo’s fief was increased; Wei’s was not. At the conclusion of the campaign, the two generals were made equal in rank, though clearly the court favored Huo Ch’ü-ping. Ssu-ma Ch’ien notes that “from this time onward, [Wei] Ch’ing, the General-in-Chief daily diminished while the General of Agile Cavalry daily increased in status,” and that many of the old friends and retainers of Wei Ch’ing left him for positions with Huo Ch’ü-ping. While the chapter opens with the familiar theme of the influence of palace women on the Han court and the two major subjects of the chapter received their initial appointments on the basis of their female kinswomen’s status at court, Ssu-ma Ch’ien does not necessarily find fault with Wei Ch’ing or Huo Ch’ü-ping on these grounds. Nor, despite the presence of this theme, does the chapter function as a warning against female power and influence at court. Rather, the theme of imperial favoritism dominates the chapter. Wei Ch’ing initially enjoyed the favor of the court, and thus properly supplied, was successful. When Huo Ch’ü-ping began to receive preferential treatment, his accomplishments reflected his favor, and conversely, Wei Ch’ing’s successes and favor decreased. Ssu-ma Ch’ien narration of the decline of Wei Ch’ing is melancholic and changes the overall tone of the chapter from a celebratory narration of the military successes of the two greatest generals of the age, to a lament for a leader fallen from favor due to circumstances beyond his control. In the case of Wei Ch’ing, his decline is more tragic because it was directly caused by the fickle favoritism of Emperor Wu and the reallocation of critical resources (troops, supplies, horses, and intelligence) to Huo Ch’ü-ping. The melancholy tone of the chapter is intensified as Ssu-ma Ch’ien turns from the narrative account of the military campaigns of Wei Ch’ing and Huo Ch’ü-ping to the moral character of the two Han generals. Ssu-ma Ch’ien begins his assessment of Huo Ch’ü-ping by noting that Huo was not prone to divulge information, was lively and bold, pragmatic, and focused on his public duties rather than private matters. “Because of this,” Ssu-ma Ch’ien notes, “the sovereign increased in his regard and fondness for him” (111.2939). Following this recitation of the positive virtues of Huo, Ssu-ma Ch’ien then states that the General of Agile Cavalry “did not take regards for his soldiers,” offering several examples to support this claim, including the disposal of surplus food, and

General Wei and [General of] Agile Cavalry, Memoir 51

359

ordering soldiers to prepare a pitch for football, both when troops were starving and unable to stand. Ssu-ma Ch’ien notes, “There were many matters like this” (111.2939). In contrast, Ssu-ma Ch’ien characterizes Wei Ch’ing as “kind, affable, and yielding,” but notes that he was largely unregarded in the empire (111.2939). This characterization of Wei Ch’ing forms the heart of Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s chapter-ending appraisal. Here the historian recounts a conversation between himself and one of Wei Ch’ing’s subordinate generals, Su Chien, who at one point urged Wei to take a more active role in summoning and recommending worthies. According to this anecdote, Wei Ch’ing declined, yielding that right to the sovereign. This exchange between Ssu-ma Ch’ien and Su Chien has resonance with Ssu-ma’s famous letter to Jen An. The Grand Scribe’s appraisal then adds, “The General of Agile Cavlary also adopted this opinion. This was their way of serving as generals” (111.2939). Given the earlier characterizations of Huo Ch’ü-ping, readers may rightly question Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s sincerity in this final evaluation. In his presentation of the lives and affairs of the two generals, Ssu-ma Ch’ien expresses a subtle yet clear preference for Wei Ch’ing over Huo Ch’ü-ping. Although the raw statistical data shows Huo Ch’ü-ping to have been more successful in his campaigns against the Hsiung-nu than his uncle Wei Ch’ing, 286 Ssu-ma Ch’ien attributes Huo’s success to having received preferential treatment from the court, including increased supplies, hand-picked combat troops, and advantageous assignments. Moreover, Huo Ch’ü-ping’s disregard for the wellbeing of his troops also contributed to his military success, but stands as a mark against Huo’s moral character in the judgement of Ssu-ma Ch’ien. On the surface, Chapter 111 is a straightforward narration of the military activities of two succesful generals and their subordinates. However, a closer reading reveals Ssu-ma Ch’ien commenting on the matter of female power (not always a bad thing), criticizing imperial favoritism, and offering a sharp study in contrasting characters and a lament for a tragic figure. In short, it is a complex and engaging piece of historical narrative.

286

See the career resumés of Wei Ch’ing on 111.2941 and Huo Ch’ü-ping on 111.2945.

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 12:1-72. Watson, Han, 2:163-84. II. Studies Chang Ta-k’o 張大可. “Ssu-ma Ch’ien hsieh Han Wu-ti cheng-fa Hsiung-nu” 司 馬遷寫漢武帝征伐匈奴, in Shih-chi wen-hsüan yen-chiu 史記文獻研究. Peking: Min-tsu Ch’u-pan-she, 1999. Hulsewé, A.F.P. China in Central Asia: The Early Stage 125 B.C.–A.D. 23. An Annotated Translation of Chapters 61 and 96 of the History of the Former Han Dynasty. Leiden: Brill, 1979.

361

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52 translated by Christiane Haupt Marquis of P’ing-chin [112.2949] Chancellor Kung-sun Hung 公孫弘 (ca. 200-121 B.C.) 1 was a native of Hsüeh 薛 County in the Kingdom of Tzu-ch’uan 菑川 in Ch’i 齊. 2 His agnomen was Chi 季. When he was young, he was Judiciary Clerk of Hsüeh, committed an offence, and was removed. His family being poor and, he raised pigs on the seacoast.3 When he was more than forty years old, he began to study 1 A parallel biography can be found in Han shu 58.2613-33. See further the detailed entry on Kung-sun Hung in Michael Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 125-8. In Crisis and Conflict in Han China (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1975, p. 20), Loewe points out that Kung-sun Hung had been one of the most respected statesmen, but that he had been somewhat old fashioned in his views, not always in keeping with the vigorous ideas of the world in which he lived. 2 Commentators (Takigawa 112.2) note that Hsüeh county and Tzu-chuan were located in different directions. At the time, when Kung-sun Hung was growing up, Hsüeh County was part of the Han kingdom of Lu 魯, located over two hundred miles southwest of Tzu-ch’uan. Hsüeh county was located in Hsüeh Commandery in modern Shantung about fifty miles west of the modern city of Ts’ao-chiang; it was founded by the Ch’in in 223 B.C. who divided the preimperial kingdom of Ch’i into five commandaries (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:8). During the western Han dynasty Hsüeh County was included into the Kingdom of Lu 魯 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:19, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 801). Tzu-ch’uan was located in modern Shantung province, Wang Li-ch’i (112.2373) locates it between the modern cities of Tzu-po 淄博 and Wei Fang 濰坊 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:20). Originally within Ch’i, the area was broken into the three kingdoms Ch’i, Chi-pei and Chiao-tung set up by Hsiang Yü in 206 B.C. It was assigned to the Han kingdom of Ch’i in Kao-tsu’s settlement of 203 B.C. In 164 B.C. after a smaller Kingdom of Ch’i was reconstituted, Tzu-ch’uan was established as a separate kingdom, then changed to a commandery in 155 B.C. The kingdom was restored in 153 B.C. and survived until the end of the Han-dynasty, see Loewe, Dictionary, p. 787. 3 Neither Tzu-ch’uan nor Hsüeh County had a seacoast. It is possible that hai shang 海上 might be an expression for something like “land outside government control.”

363

364

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

the Ch’un-chiu 春 秋 [Spring- and Autumn Annals] and the miscellaneous explanations to it.4 In supporting his stepmother he was filial and reverent. In the first year of chien-yüan 建元 [140 B.C.] when the Son of Heaven had just ascended the throne, he summoned scholars who were worthy and excellent in textual learning [to serve in government].5 At this time [Kung-sun] Hung was [already] sixty years old, [but] he was called up [because] of his worthiness and excellence to become an erudite. [Later] he was sent as an envoy to the Hsiungnu, [but] when he returned and reported, [his ideas] did not fit with the opinion of the sovereign. The sovereign became angry and thought he was incompetent. [Thereupon] Hung retired because of illness and returned home. In the fifth year of yüan-kuang 元光 [134 B.C.] there was an edict recruiting [men of] textual learning. The Kingdom of Tzu-ch’uan recommended Kung-sun Hung once more to the sovereign. But Hung declined and apologized to the people of the kingdom: “Your servant has already once gone west in response to fulfill a command [but since the Emperor] thought that I was incompetent, I was dismissed and returned home. I would hope you might change your recommended selection.” [Nevertheless] the people of the Kingdom determinely recommended Hung. [So] [Kung-sun] Hung went to the [office of the] Grand Master of Ceremonies.6 Among the more than one hundred Confucian scholars [ju-shih 儒士] whom the Grand Master of Ceremonies had recruited to answer the examination questions, [Kung-sun] Hung occupied a low position. [But] when the examinations were presented to the throne, the Son of Heaven raised [Kung-sun] Hung’s answer to the first positin. 7 [The Emperor] summoned [Kung-sun] Hung to an audience. His appearance and style were quite elegant

4 Ho Cho 何 焯 , (cited on Takigawa 112.3) thinks this refers not to the miscellaneous explanations of one school, but to the miscellaneous philosophical traditions such as Confucianism, Mohism, and Legalism. 5 This edict is included on Han shu, 6.160-1. The most officials were brought into the bureaucracy by reommendation. From 196 B.C. on the government began to employ stereotyped formulas to designate these recommendations. Hsien-liang wen-hsueh 賢良文學–men of textual learning–was one of these designations (see “Civil Service Recruitment” in Bielenstein, pp.132-3). 6 This is the only account where it is reported that the candidates were examined by the Grand Master of Ceremonies (see Bielenstein, pp. 17 and 133-3). Dubs (3:259, n. 1), however, believes that a kind of written examination already started in 165 B.C. 7 In the parallel biography of Kung-sun Hung on Han shu, 58.2613-5 the Emperor’s question and Hung’s answer are recorded.

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

365

and he was appointed as an erudite.8 At this time the road to the Southwestern Yi 夷 was being built and a commandery was established.9 The people of Pa 巴 and Shu 屬 [*2950*] were suffering because of this.10 By edict [the Emperor] sent [Kung-sun] Hung to inspect them. When he returned and memorialized on the matter he denunciated in strong terms the fact that [the territory] of the Southwestern Yi was useless. The sovereign did not listen to him. [Kung-sun] Hung by nature 11 was shrewd 12 and [a man] of much observation.13 Often he declared that he thought it was a problem for a ruler of men not to be generous and for the subject of a man not to be parsimonious.

8 Han shu, 58.2617 notes that he had to await edicts at the Chin-ma Men 金馬門 (Gate of the Golden Horse). On Shih chi, 126.3205 it is explained that it was a gate where the eunuchs had to await orders and edicts. 9 Which commandery is meant here is not clear. According to Shih chi, 116.2994, at this time Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju was sent to Shu to bring ten counties under the control of the Chief Commandant of Shu. 10 The road to the Southwestern Yi 西南夷道 was a controversial project in the time of Emperor Wu. The plan was to build a road to the region of the Southwestern Yi, between the states Shu and Pa. The commandaries were obliged to send out men to guard the supply lines and transport provisions to the workmen. Twenty or thirty thousand men were put to work building the road. Many of them died because of the extreme conditions. In addition, the Yi frequently rebelled against the Han rule. For further details see Shih chi 116.2995. Accounts of the early history of the Chengtu Plain are found in Michael Nylan, “The Legacies of the Chengdu Plain,” in Robert Bagley, ed. Ancient Sichuan: Treasures from a Lost Civilization (Seattle: Seattle Art Museum, 2001). Steven Sage, Ancient Sichuan and the Unification of China (Albany: SUNY, 1992), 83–156. For a recent study on Pa-Ch’u relations and the gradual combination of these two early cultures, see Lin Yong-jen 林永仁 and Lai Ts’eng-lin 來層林, Pa-Ch’u wen-hua 巴楚文化 (Peking: Hua-wen Ch’upan-she, 1999). A general study of early relations between the Chengtu Plain and the Central Plains is Ku Chieh-kang’s 顧頡剛 Lun Pa-Shu yü chong-yuan te kuan-hsi 論巴蜀與中原的關系 [The Relationship Between Pa-Shu and the Central Plains] (Chengtu: Ssu-ch’uan Jen-min, 1981). Yves Hervouet provides a detailed account of these early Han expansion efforts in Un poète de cour sous les Han: Sseu-ma Siang-jou (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1964), pp. 69-134. For a summary of Szechwan history under the Western Han, see Sage, Ancient Sichuan, 157–92. 11 Wei-jen 為人, literally “to act as a man.” 12 Instead of hui-chi 恢奇, Han shu, 58.2619 reads t’an-hsiao 談笑 which means that he liked to talk cheerfully and humorously with others. Chi as a single character has the meaning of “empty” or “hollow” and therefore could understood as ironical. The Han shu version is more moderate. 13 For to-wen 多聞, literally “to hear a lot of things,” see Lun yü 論語 16/4 (Legge (1:311): “There are three friendships which are advantageous, and there are injurious. Friendship with the upright; friendship with the sincere; and friendship with the man of much observation (to wen)– these are advantageous.”

366

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

Hung wore plain cloth14 and in eating he did not have two servings of meat.15 [After] his stepmother died he wore mourning [clothes] for three years. 16 Whenever at court they had a meeting to discuss [a matter] he explained and expounded his principles [but] let the ruler of men decide by himself. He was not willing to oppose [the Emperor] face to face and he never disputed at court. At this, the Son of Heaven noticed that he was sincere in action and that in debates he was more than eloquent. He was well-versed in legal codes and ministerial affairs and furthermore he embellished them with the arts of the Confucian [learning].17 The sovereign was greatly pleased by this. Within two years18 he became Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital. When Hung memorialized on an affair, [but the Emperor] did not approve it, he never argued for it in court. Once he and the Chief Commandant over the Nobility, Chi An 汲黯,19 asked for a

14 Benjamin E. Wallacker, “Han Confucianism and Confucius in Han,” Ancient China: Studies in Early Civilisation, ed. David T. Roy and Tsuen-hsuin Tsien (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 1978, p. 222) suggestes that in his frugality Kung-sun Hung might have been influenced by Mohist ideas. 15 The phrase shih pu ch’ung jou 食不重肉 can alternatively be translated as “he did not attach importance to meat.” It appears three times in this biography. Twice to characterize Kung-sun Hung himself and once in Hung’s comment on Yen Ying, the famous Chancellor of Ch’i. The phrase has one more appearance in Shih chi in the biography of Yen Ying. See Shih chi, 62.2134 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:10). The “So-yin shu-tsan” 述贊 (Shih chi, 62.2137) and Wang Li-chi (62.1613) read 重 as ch’ung, “double.” 16 Such a long mourning period seems worth mention because it was not his real mother but his stepmother. 17 On such embellishment see Hans van Ess “Éducation classique, éducation lègiste sous les Han” Christine Nguyen Tri, Catherine Despeux Extrait du Éducation et instruction en Chine (Paris and Louvain : Éditions Peeters, 2004), pp. 34-36. 18 According to Han shu, (58.2618) he was promoted within a year and became Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital in the fifth year of yüan-kuang. There are several problems dating this event. Liang Yü-sheng 梁玉繩 (citied in Takigawa 112.4) suggests that Hung took part in the examination in the first year of yüan-kuang and became an erudite. Then he went home for the mourning period of three years and was back in the capital at the beginning of the fifth year of yüan-kuang. Being promoted within one year means that he had been Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital already in the fifth year of yüan-kuang (130 B.C.). 19 Chi An was appointed Clerk of the Western Part of the Capital in 124 B.C. At the time when Kung-sun Hung enjoyed the Emperor’s favor, and Emperor Wu himself was said to be turning towards the ideas of Confucian school [ju 儒], Chi An is said to have been a student of the teachings of Huang-ti 黃帝 and Lao-tzu 老子. It is possible that this factor augmented his antipathy to Kung-sun Hung. For further details on his life see Shih chi Chapter 120 and the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 179-80.

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

367

moment in private [with the Emperor].20 Chi An announced the matter first and [Kung-sun Hung] expanded on it after him. The Son of Heaven was always pleased with his [Hung’s] argumentation and listened to all his words. In this way [Hung’s] reputation enjoyed a daily increase. Once [Hung] and other honored ministers deliberated an agreement, but when they came in front of the sovereign he turned his back to their agreement in order to comply with the sovereign’s intention. Chi An at court rebuked [Kung-sun] Hung saying: “You, men of Ch’i are deceitful and not sincere in your feelings. At the beginning we established this deliberated [agreement], now you turn your back on everything. This is not loyal!” The sovereign asked [Kung-sun] Hung [about it]. Hung apologized, saying: “Those who know your servant, consider your servant faithful, those who do not know your servant consider your servant not faithful.” The sovereign agreed with Hung’s words. Everytime the [Emperor’s] attendants and favorite ministers slandered Hung, the sovereign treated him all the more generously. In the third year of yüan-shuo 元朔 (126 B.C.), [the Emperor] dismissed Chang Ou 張歐 and took [Kung-sun] Hung as Grandee Secretary.21 At this time communications were established with the Southwestern Yi 夷 , 22 the [commandary of] Ts’ang-hai 滄 海 23 was established in the east and the commandery Shuo-fang 朔方24 was built in the north. Hung remonstrated several 20

There is one discussion between Hung, Chi An and the Emperor concerning the Tian-ma ko 天馬歌 [Hymn of the Heavenly Horses] reported on Shih chi, 24.1178. 21 In Chang Ou’s short biography on Shih chi, 103.2773 it is said that Chang Ou asked for leave (ching mien 請免 ) because of ill health. But it is also said that he was an expert in dispositions and designations (hsing-ming 刑名). Possibly is, that Emperor Wu wanted to replace him with Kung-sun Hung to have an expert on Confucian learning in his cabinet. On Chang Ou see Han shu Chapter 46 as well as the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p. 687. 22 The same event (t’ong hsi-nan tao 通西南夷) appears already earlier in this chapter and is dated to the fifth year of yüan-kuang. Maybe the text is corrupt here, but none of the commentators marks this incident. The parallel biography on Han shu (58.2618) concurs and notes the establishment of communications with the Southwestern Yi dated in the fifth year of yüan-kuang. The establishment of Ts’ang-hai and Shuo-fang is dated after the three year mourning period. In Shih chih Chapter 116 the establishment of the communications with the Southwestern Yi is not specifically dated, but it seems that it was before the first year of yüan-shou. Thus the dating in this passage could well be wrong. 23 Ts’ang-hai was founded on the surrender of non-Chinese inhabitants of northern Korea in 128 B.C. and was abandoned in 126 B.C. (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:28; see also on Han shu, 6:169-710. 24 The territory of Shuo-fang was formerly part of the Ch’in commandery of Chiu-yüan 九原. The commandery was founded in 128 B.C. after the acquisition of new territory. At this time the Han gained control of the area south of the bend of the Yellow River and started to repair the old system of defences and strengthen the border fortifications along the Yellow River. The

368

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

times [because] he thought that the central states were being exhausted to support a territory which had no use [for the empire]. He hoped that this might be ended. Thereupon the Son of Heaven ordered Chu Mai-ch’en 朱買臣 25 and others to place [Kung-sun] Hung in diffulties [by stressing] the benefits of establishing Shuo-fang. They brought up ten questions [about the advantages of establishing Shuo-fang] and Hung could not succeed [in arguing even] one. 26 Hung then apologized, saying: “I am a rustic fellow from east of the Mount and did not know that this was so advantageous. I would hope you might stop [the projects] at the Southwestern Yi and Ts’ang-hai, and provide exclusive support for Shuofang.” Only then did the sovereign allowed this.27 [2951] Chi An said: “[Kung-sun] Hung holds one of the positions of the Three Excellencies 28 and his salary is extremely high, but he is always dressed in plain cloth. This is [nothing but] deception.” The sovereign asked [Kung-sun] Hung. Hung apologized, saying: “This is true. Among the Nine Ministers none knows your servant as well as [Chi] An. But on this day he has rebuked me at court. He really has hit my weakest point. Now wearing plain cloth as a member of the cabinet is really like adorning one’s deceptiveness in order to fish for reputations. However, your servant has heard, when Kuan Chung 管仲29 was the fortifications were specially built in attempt to drive the Hsung-nu out of the region south of the Yellow River (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:17; see also Shih chi 110.2906-7). 25 Chu Mai-ch’en 朱買臣 has no biography in the Shih chi, although some information is found on Shih chi, 122.3143. All we know about his life comes from his biography in Han shu Chapter 64: he rose from humble origins to a position of honor, but finally was demoted and executed. His principal interest laid in the expansion of Han influence in the southeast (see also Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 740-1). 26 Wei Chao 韋昭 cited in “So-yin” and in “Chi-chieh” says that Kung-sun Hung was not really convinced of the project but did not dare to oppose the Emperor. 27 On other passage (Shih chi, 116.2995) makes Kung-sun Hung’s position even clearer. Because Kung-sun Hung repeatedly emphasized the dangers involved in attempting to open up communications with the Southwestern Yi and urged the Emperor to abandon the project and concentrate his strength on combating the Hsiung-nu. But only when Kung-sun Hung became Grandee Secretary did the Emperor give up his ideas, focusing only on the two counties of Nan-yi 南夷 and Yeh-lang 夜郎, and leaving the commandery of Chien-wei 犍為 more or less to take care of itself. 28 The collective term of the Three Excellencies 三公 in early Han times was used for the three highest ranks in the empire bureaucracy: Chancellor, Grandee Secretary and Grand Commandant. The term Three Excellencies is not documented in texts before 126 B.C. (see Bielenstein, p. 7). 29 On Kuan Chung (ca. 720-645 B.C.) see his biography in Shih chi Chapter 62 (Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:9-14). It is said that he and his lord, Duke Huan 桓 (r. 685-643 B.C.) of Ch’I,

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

369

Prime Minister in Ch`i, he had [the privilege of] “three returns.” 30 In his extravagance he imitated his lord. 31 When Duke Huan through him became Hegemon,32 he too usurped the prerogatives of his lord above [him]. When Yen Ying 晏嬰 33 was the Prime Minister of Duke Ching 景 [of Ch’i] when eating he never had two servings of meat and his concubines never wore silk, but the state of Ch’i was well governed, too. This means that he tried to live like the common people below [him]. Now your servant has the rank of a Grandee Secretary and wears [only] plain cloth. From the cabinet on down to the Junior Scribes,34 I try to make no distinction. Really, it is as Chi An’s said. However, if not for Chi An’s loyalty, how could Your Majesty have heard these words?” The Son of Heaven took as a humble way of yielding [to Chi An] and treated [Hung] with all

jointly brought Ch’i to an unprecedented status of leadership in the entire Chou world. See also Sydney Rosen, “In Search of the Historical Kuan Chung,” JAS, 35.3 (1975), 431-40. 30 San-kuei 三歸 “three returns” has been variously interpreted. The “Cheng-yi” commentary on Shih chi 62.2134 says: “The ‘three returns’ are women of three cognomens. A woman refers to getting married as a ‘return’ [to her home].” Kuo Sung-t’ao refutes the “Cheng-yi” claim in his Shih chi cha-chi (5A:235-6), pointing out that this explanation is based on a commentary (by Ho Yen 何晏 [d.249]) to Lun yü, 3/22). Kuo goes on “According to the social code, when the feudal lords first took a wife, a country of the same cognomen used her nieces as servants [for the bride]. [But] in one marriage [to take] wives of three surnames, was unheard of according to the social code . . . .” For further details see Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:13; n. 37. 31 This is probably an allusion to the Lun yü (3/22; Legge, 1:162): “The Master said: ‘Small indeed was the capacity of Kuan Chung!’ Someone said, ‘Was Kuan Chung parsimonious?’ ‘Kuan,’ was the reply, ‘had the three returns, and his officers performed no double duties; how can he be considered parsimonious?’ ‘Then, did Kuan Chung know the rules of propriety?’ The Master said, ‘The princes of States have screens intercepting the view at their gates. Kuan had likewise a screen at his gate. The princes of States on any friendly meeting between two of them, had a cup-stands. Kuan had also such a stand. If Kuan knew the rules of propriety, who does not know them?’” There is also a relevant passage in the Li chi (12:19 a-b, SPPY): “Confucius said, ‘Kuan Chung engraved his sacrificial grain vessels and colored his hat strings red [usurping royal privilege]. He set out trees [to screen his gate] and used cup-stands. He had hills fashioned on his pillars and had duckweed painted on his roof beams. He was a virtuous official, but was not easy to be his superior.” 32 The seventh year of Duke Huan’s reign (679 B.C.) is generally accepted as the year he became Hegemon (Shih chi, 32.1487) 33 For the biography of Yen Ying see Shih chi, 62.2134-7 translated in Grand Scribe’s Records, 7:14-7. He was a native of Yi-wei 夷維 in Lai 萊 and served Duke Ling 靈 (r. 581-554 B.C.), Duke Chuang 莊 (r. 553-548 B.C.) and Duke Ching 景 (r. 547-490 B.C.) of Ch’i as Prime Minister. For further details see Alfred Forke “Yen Ying, Staatsmann und Philosoph, und das Yentse Tch’un-Ts’iu,” AM, Hirth Anniversary Volume (London: Probsthain and Co., 1924), pp. 101-44. 34 Hsiao shih 小吏.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

370

the more generously. Finally he made [Kung-sun] Hung Chancellor and enfeoffed him as Marquis of P’ing-chin 平津 [Peaceful Ford].35 Hung had a begrudging character. He appeared to be tolerant, but inside he was hiding intentions.36 To all those with whom [Kung-sun] Hung once had had a rift, he pretended to be friendly, [but] secretly he repaid all wrongs. 37 The killing of Chu-fu Yen 主父偃38 and the banishing of Tung Chung-shu 董仲舒39 to Chiao-hsi 膠西 were both due to Hung’s efforts. He just had one meat dish a meal and only unhusked millet. But when a guest or retainer of an old friend looked up to him for clothing and food, [Kung-sun] Hung offered his entire salary to provide it for him. So his family had nothing left over. The scholars also considered him worthy for this. [2952] When [the kings of] Huai-nan 淮 南 and Heng-shan 衡 山 were plotting revolt40 and the trail had intensified, [Kung-sun] Hung’s illness became more serious. [Hung] personally considered himself to have been enfeoffed and having reached the position of a Chancellor without having achieved merit. It would have been fitting for him to assist the enlightened ruler to pacify the state and make men [follow] the way of [loyal] servants and [obedient] sons. Now 35

No reference in T’an Ch’i-hsiang; according to Wang Li-ch’i (112.2375) the city of P’ingchin 平津邑 was located in modern Hupei south of Yen-shan County 鹽山. Hsü Kuang 徐廣 (“Chi-chieh”) argues that Kung became chancellor and was enfeoffed on the eleventh month in the fifth year of yüan-shuo (124 B.C.). 36 “So-yin” explains that wai k’uan nei shen 外寬內深 suggests that Kung-sun Hung thoughts were full of superstition and harm. The phrase is also used to depict Tu Chou 杜周 (Shih chi, 122.3153), who is classed with those officials known for their rigorous application of the law. He together with Kung-sun Hung was in charge of the prosecution of Chu-fu Yen and later involved in investigating the King of Huai-nan’s plans to revolt. Later he was removed from all his posts because of a quarrel a subordinate. Due for execution, he committed suicide. See his biography in Han shu Chapter 90 and the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, p.190. 37 Han shu (58.2621) has ch’ang 常 “often” instead of ch’ang 嘗 “once” and pao ch’i huo 報 其禍 “he repaid their misfortune” instead of pao ch’i kuo 報其過 “he repaid their wrongs.” 38 Chu-fen Yen’s biography follows in the second half of this chapter. 39 Tung Chung-shu had been appointed as erudite during the reign of Emperoro Ching (r. 157141 B.C.). But shortly after Emperor Wu’s accession he incurred Kung-sun Hung’s hatred, by viewing Kung-sun Hung as being given to flattery and too ready to support the contemporary policies of imperial expansion. In successfully recommending that Tung Chung-shu should be appointed Chancellor of Chiao-hsi, Kung-sun Hung was able to have him removed from a position at the court. On Tung Chung-shu see also Shih chi 121.3127 and 130.3297 as well as his biography in Han shu Chapter 56 the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 70-71. 40 For the revolt in 122 B.C. see the biographies of the Kings of Huai-nan and Heng-shan in Shih chi Chapter 118 and Han shu Chapter 44.

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

371

[some] feudal lords have schemes to rebel and disobey. All this [proved to him that] as Chancellor he had not fulfilled his duty [and] could not be praised. He feared that if he might die of his illness, he would not be able to fulfil his responsibilities. Then he submitted a memorial, which read: Your servant has heard that there are five universal ways in the world and three possibilities to put them into practice. 41 [The five] ways are called the [hierarchical] orders of Lord and servant, father and son, older and younger brother, husband and wife, and old and young. These five are the universal ways of the world. Wisdom, virtue, courage, these three are the universal benevolence of the world to put [the five ways] into practice. For this reason it is said: “Force in action is close to humanity; to be fond of inquiry is close to wisdom; and to know shame is close to courage.”42 If you know these three, than you know how to govern yourself, if you know how to govern yourself, then you know how to govern men. In the world there has never been anyone who was able to govern men without being able to govern himself. This has been the unchangeable way for one hundred generations. Now Your Majesty has personally practiced great filial piety, you have examined [methods of] the Three Kings, established the Way of the Chou, you unite the [abilities] of [King] Wen 文 and [King] Wu 武. 43 You encourage the worthies by granting salaries and give offices by measuring their capability. I, your servant Hung, have the dispositions of an exhausted old nag, [and] have not labored as a sweating horse. 44 Your Majesty with extreme kindness selected me, your servant Hung, from the rank and file, enfeoffed me as a full-ranking marquis, and gave me a position in the cabinet. [But] your servant Hung’s behaviour and abilities are not good enough to be praised, and he simply is suffering from the illness of carrying firewood. 45 I fear, 41

The “So-yin” notes this is a quotation of the Tzu-ssu Tzu 子思子 which today appears in the Li chi (16.8a, SPPY; the text there reads ta 達 for t’ung 通). 42 This is also an allusion to Li chi (16.8a, SPPY; Legge, Li Ki, 2:314): “The Master said: ‘To be fond of learning is near to wisdom; to practise with vigour is near to benevolence; to know to be ashamed is near to fortitude. He who knows these three things, knows how to cultivate his own character. Knowing how to cultivate his own character, he knows how to govern other men. Knowing how to govern other men, he knows how to govern the kingdom with its states and families.” 43 Chung-hua shu-chü edition takes the terms wen 文 and wu 武 as proper names. But the text could also be read: “You unite the [abilities] of civil and military enterprise.” 44 The phrase han ma chi lao 汗馬之勞 alludes to Han Fei Tzu (19.8b; SPPY) and suggests that someone has achievements in war. 45 Fu-hsin 負薪, “carrying firewood” also refers to the Li chi (1.20a, SPPY; Legge, Li Ki, 1:101) “When a ruler wishes an officer to take a place at an archery [meeting] and he is unable to take part, he [should] say: ‘I am suffering from carrying firewood.’”

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

372

that I am going to [die and] fill up the ditches and moats around the capital before the dogs and horses [soon]. In the end I will have nothing to repay your benevolence and to fulfil my duty. [Therefore] I would hope you might return the seals of the marquisate and I beg for leave because of old age to give way [to someone more] worthy.

The Son of Heaven replied: In ancient times those who had merit were rewarded and those who had virtue were praised. To preserve what had been achieved one esteemed cultivated measures, whereas [in cases of crises] one accord military measures a higher place if one ran into troubles. 46 There has never been anyone who changed this principle. We formerly were obliged by luck to take over the most honorable position [in the whole empire] fearing always that we would be unable to bring peace. This [to bring peace to the country] depends only on the question of whom we are governing the country with. This you, Sir, ought to know. Now a gentleman treats well the good and despises evil. If you, Sir, are careful in action, you will always be at my side. But now, Sir, you have unfortunately met with the illness [brought by] frost and dew. How would such an illness not become better? 47 [Now] you have submitted a memorial to return your marquisate and ask for leave. In this way you manifest my lack of virtue. Now have some leisure from [your] work, [and] reconsider your decision, please. Concentrate your attention and help yourself with medicines.

Accordingly [the Emperor] granted him sick leave, beef, wine and various silks.48 After several months he recovered from his illness and was able to look after the affairs [again]. [2953] In the second year of yüan-shou (121 B.C.) [Kung-sun] Hung fell ill [again]. He finally met his end as Chancellor. 49 His Son [Kung-sun] Tu 度 succeeded him as Marquis of P’ing-chin. For over ten years he acted as Governor of Shan-yang 山陽,50 but violated the law and lost his marquisate. 46

上.

47

This translation orientates on the “So-yin” which explains that yu 右 can also be read shang

Shuang-lu 霜露 is used when someone has a cough due to a cold, not a grave illness (cf. “So-yin”). 48 According Wang Li-ch’i (112.2377) tsa-po 雜帛 is a kind of silk. The Ch’ung-wen ta-tz’utian says, it is an extremely thin silk and usually just was used at the Emperor’s court. 49 Han-shu, 58.2623 remarks that Kung-sun Hung at that time was eighty years old. 50 Shan-yang 山陽 is located in modern Shantung about forty miles west of the modern city of Shang-yü 上虞 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:24).

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

373

Chu-fu Yen Chu-fu Yen 主父偃 51 was a native of Lin-tzu 臨菑52 in Ch’i. He studied the technique gaining advantages53 through making alliances and counter-alliances. 54 Only late [in life] did he study the Yi[-ching] 易[經] ([Book of] Changes), the Ch’un-chiu 春 秋 (Spring and Autumn Annals) and the sayings of the one hundred schools.55 He travelled to the scholars of Ch’i, [but] with none [of them] was he able to receive a generous reception. [Since] the Confucian scholars of Ch’i [all] pushed him around among each other,56 he was not tolerated in Ch’i. [But as] his family was poor and he [asked to] borrow money, but there was no place to get any. He went north and travelled in Yen 燕, Chao 趙 and Chungshan 中山,57 [but] did not encounter any generosity, and in trying to become a retainer he suffered great hardship. 51

Ch’u-fu Yen’s parallel biography can be found in Han shu Chapter 64 (see also the entry in Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 749-50). 52 Lin-tzu 臨菑 or 臨淄 is located in modern Shantung province, forty miles northwest of the modern city of Tzu-po 菑博. During the Warring States period it was the capital of the state of Ch’i (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:20). 53 Takigawa (112:11) points out that tuan-ch’ang 短長 could be another name of the Chankuo ts’e 戰國策. When the Han librarian Liu Hsiang 劉向 submitted the Chan-kuo t’se to the Emperor, he wrote in his “Preface” that “the old titles of the books [I used to compile the Chan-kuo ts’e] were called Kuo ts’e, Kuo shih and Tuan-ch’ang 短長” (SPPY, 1:1b). The translation could also read: “He studied the Chan-kuo tse and the method of alliances and counter-alliances.” 54 The phrase tsung-heng 縱橫 first appears in Shih chi, 69.2168 and is generally understood as “vertical and horizontal alliances.” Tsung 縱 refers to the confederacy of six states directed against the Ch’in from the north to the south; while heng 橫 was a federation of the states from east to west under the leadership of Ch’in. On Grand Scribe’s Records 7:120 there is a detailed discussion of this phrase, arguing that it should be rendered “alliances and counter-alliances.” On these alliances, see Mark Edward Lewis “Warring States: Political History” in The Cambridge History of Ancient China, 1:587-650. The “Yi-wen-chih” (Han shu, 30.1739) lists a work by Chu-fu Yen in 28 p’ien under the school of tsung-heng chia 縱橫家. The text is no longer extant. 55 The sentence can alternative translated as: “Only late in life did he study the sayings of the one hundred schools on the Yi-ching and the Ch’un-chiu.” 56 There are two other alternative translations: “[Since] the Confucian scholars of Ch’i rejected each other there was no place for him in Ch’i.” Another possibility is: “[Since] the Confucian scholars from Ch’i rejected him, he was not tolerated in Ch’i.” 57 In 195 B.C. Liu Pang reestablished the old kingdom of Yen (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:27-28). The Kingdom of Chao had already been reestablished in 206 B.C. (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:26). Chung-shan just become a kingdom in 154 B.C. (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:26).

374

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

During the first year of the yüan-kuang [reign period] of [Emperor] Hsiao Wu (134 B.C.), he thought that none of the feudal lords was worth travelling to. Only then did he head west, enter the Pass and have an audience with General Wei 衛 [Ch’ing 青].58 General Wei [Ch’ing] spoke to the sovereign several times [about him], but the sovereign did not summon him. [So when Ch’u-fu Yen’s] living expenses were used up he stayed in the capital for a long time. Many of the guests and retainers of the noblemen detested him. So he submitted a memorial to the Emperor at the palace gate. It was presented [to the Emperor] in the morning and in the evening he was summoned to enter [the palace]. He discussed nine items, [*2954*] of which eight dealt with laws and ordinances. One item remonstrated [against] attacking the Hsiung-nu. His text read: Your servant has heard that an enlightened ruler does not detest remonstrance in order to broaden his views and a loyal subject does not dare to avoid [capital] punishment because he wants to straightforwardly remonstrate. For this reason, [Your Majesty’s] affairs will not be misplanned and [Your Majesty’s] achievements will flow down for ten thousand generations. Now your servant does not dare to hide [his] loyalty and avoid death in order to present a foolish plan. I would hope Your Majesty might pardon my offense and briefly examine this [proposal]: In the Ssu-ma fa 司馬法 (Methods of the Marshal) it is said, ‘Although a state is large, if it is fond of warfare it will certainly perish. Although the empire is at peace, if it forgets about warfare it must be endangered.’ 59 The empire is already at peace and the Emperor has the “Ta-k’ai” 大凱 (Great Victory March) 60 performed, in the spring the sou 蒐 and in the fall the hsien 獮 hunts61 [were carried out], the feudal lords recall their troops in the spring and in the fall drill their armies. By this means they do not forget warfare. 62 Moreover, anger runs 58 Wei Ch’ing 衛青 has been acclaimed as the most successful general of the Western Han, see Shih chi Chapter 111 and the translation in this volume, as well as Han shu Chapter 55 and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 573. 59 From Ssu-ma Jang Chü’s 司馬穰苴 Ssu-ma fa (1:1a, SPTK; both SPTK and SPPY read an 安 for p’ing 平. 60 According to Ying Shao 應劭 (“Chi-chieh”) ta-k’ai 大凱 is the title of a piece of music performed when an army returned home victorious (“Ch’un kuan 春官,” Chou li 周禮, 6.108b, SPTK). 61 Wang Shu-min (112:3036) points out that the phrase “in the spring sou 蒐 and fall hsien 獮 hunts” is a citation from the Erh-ya (6.9b, SPPY: “The hunt in spring is called sou . . . , the hunt in autumn is called hsien.” 62 The Chung-hua shu-chü edition marks just the first line as a citation from the Ssu-ma fa. But almost the whole paragraph is from the Ssu-ma fa (1.1a-b, SPTK).

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

375

counter to virtue, weapons are the vessels of evil, strife is trivial conduct. The ancient lords of men, once they were angry, would inevitably have corpses laid out and blood flowing. 63 For this reason the sage kings considered acting [in anger] to be a serious matter. Of those who have devoted themselves to warfare for victory and exhausted [themselves] in martial endeavours, there is none who has not regretted it. Long ago the August Emperor of Ch’in, relying on the authority of his victories in warfare devoured the world, he nibbled away [all the lands] of the world until he had swallowed up the warring states, bringing unity to all within the seas, a merit equal to those of the Three Ages (of Hsia, Shang and Chou). [Yet] his devotion to victories did not cease and he desired to attack the Hsiung-nu. Li Ssu 李斯64 admonished him saying: ‘This is not permissible. The Hsiung-nu have no residences [surrounded by] inner and outer walls, no protection of accumulated [grains], move around as birds flit bout, and they would be difficult to obtain and to control. If we send lightly equipped troops deep into [their territory], their [lines of] provisions will certainly be used up. If they move with [wagons of] provisions following them, [the provisions] will be too heavy and not keep up with their task. 65 Even if we win their territory, it is not enough to be considered profitable; even if we encounter their people, we cannot have them serve us or govern them. In victory we would have to kill them, and this is not acting as the ‘father-and-mother of the people’ [as the Emperor should]. To make the central states wasted and exhausted and to make the Hsiung-nu content, this is not a good strategy.’ 66 The August Emperor of Ch’in did not listen to him and then sent Meng T’ien 蒙恬67 to command troops to attach the Hu 胡. He opened up one thousand li of [new] territory, taking the Ho 河 as the border [of the empire]. [But] the territory was originally swamps and salt flats and could not produce the five grains. Thereafter [the Emperor of Ch’in] sent out young men in the empire to guard the Pei Ho 北河 (The 63

The term fu shih 伏尸 is an allusion to the “Tse yang 則陽” chapter of Chuang Tzu (8.185b, SPTK: “At times they [the kingdoms Buffet and Maul] quarrel over territory and go to war, strewing the field with corpses by the ten thousands.” 64 Li Ssu 李斯 (d. 208 B.C.) was prime minister of Ch’in (see his biography Shih chi chapter 87; translated in Grand Scribe Records, 7:335-57, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 228-30). 65 Burton Watson reads shih 事 as “in time” and translates this passage “and if we try to send provisions after them, the baggage trains will never reach them in time.” 66 This admonition of Li Ssu does not appear elsewhere in Shih chi. 67 Meng T’ien’s (d. 210 B.C.) biography is in Shih chi Chapter 88 (Grand Scribe Records, 7:362-6). He was a famous General of the Ch’in who in 215 B.C. was ordered to proceed to the north with a force of three thousand men to deter the Hsiung-nu from attacking the border territories. In debates on the right policy to be adopted against the Hsiung-nu, his exploits were usually mentioned by way of warning against the over-extension of imperial strength in an attempt to take over lands that were in fact valueless.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

376

Northern Ho).68 The armies and hosts were exposed to the harsh elements for more than ten years and those who died were too numerous to count. In the end, he was not able to cross the Ho and move northward. Was this because the armies of men were insufficient or the weapons and armour not in readiness? [Rather] it was that circumstances made it impossible. He further had the empire rush fodder and cart grain, originating [from as far as] those regions on the sea [such as] Huang 黃 69 Ch’ui 肿70 and Lang-ya 琅邪. 71 [But] when they had been transported to the Pei Ho, of every thirty chung 錘 [only] one shih 石 arrived.72 Though men urgently ploughed the fields, there was not enough for the [troops’] provisions; though women spun and wove, there was not enough for their tents. The common people were wasted and exhausted, the orphans and widows, the old and weak, could not be fed, so that along the roads dead bodies were everywhere. The world began to turn against Ch’in. [2955] And when it comes to the August Emperor Kao stabilizing the world (206 B.C.), having overrun territory to the border regions, he heard that the Hsiung-nu had gathered outside of Tai-ku 代谷 (The Valley to Tai) and desired to strike them. The Palace Secretar 73 Ch’eng 成 74 put forward an admonition which read: ‘This is not permissible. The nature of the Hsiung-nu is to gather like beasts, they scatter like birds; to follow them is like boxing with a shadow. Even if with Your Majesty’s abundant virtue we attack the Hsiung-nu, your subject privately considers it dangerous.’ Emperor Kao did not listen to him and then moved north to the Tai-ku, where he indeed was besieged at P’ing-ch’eng 平城.75 Emperor Kao must have regretted this deeply and thus sent Liu Ching 劉 68

The Pei Ho at that time was a separate arm of the northern bench of the Yellow Riverr, now a part of Inner Mongolia (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:6). 69 The area is located in modern Honan, forty miles northwest from modern An-yang 安陽 (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:9). 70 This pronunciation is recommended by the “Chi-chieh.” Ch’ui is located in modern Shantung close to the city of Fu-shan 幅山. 71 The area is located in modern Shantung thirty miles south of the city of Chiao-nan 膠南 (Tan Ch’i-hsiang 2:8). 72 A chung was equal to six shih and four tou 斗 or about 219.2 decilitres [公升], while a shih contained ten tou or about 34.25 decilitres. In other words, less than one-fifth of what was sent actually arrived. 73 yü-shih 御史 74 The Imperial Secretary Ch’eng is otherwise unknown. 75 The “Basic Annals of Emperor Kao-tsu” reports, that in 200 B.C. the Hsiung-nu attacked the King of Hann Hsin 韓信 at Ma-yi 馬邑. Hsin joined with them in plotting a revolt in T’ai-yüan. His generals set up Chao Li 趙利, a descendent of the royal family of Chao as King of Chao in revolt against the Emperor. Kao-tsu in person led a force to attack them, but he encountered such severe cold, that two or three out of every ten of his soldiers lost their fingers from frostbite. At last

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

377

敬 76 to conclude a marital alliance [with the Hsiung-nu] 77 and thereafter the world could forget about the affairs of shield and pole-ax. For this reason the Ping fa 兵法 (Methods of War) reads: ‘To raise an army of 100,000 men, daily it costs a 1000 chin.’ 78 Ch’in was constantly assembling armies and putting soldiers into the field in the several hundred thousands. Although they had the merit of overturning armies, skilled commanders, and taking the Shan-yü prisoner, indeed they were merely sufficient to congeal the resentment and deep the enmity [of the Hsiung-nu], but not sufficient to reward the expenditures of the empire. Above the treasuries and arsenals were emptied, and below the common people were exhausted. To make one please with a foreign state, this is not a perfect affair. That the Hsiung-nu ‘would be difficult to take and to control’79 has not been like this for just a generation. To act like bandits and make forceful raids is that by which they making their living – their nature is originally like this. All the way back to Yu, Hsia, Yin and Chou [we] have never taxed or regulated them, [but] reared them as birds and beasts, not belonging to what we consider mankind. Now My Sovereign does not look back to observe the policy of Yü, Hsia, Yin and Chou, but looks down to follow the errors of recent generations. This is a source of great concern to your subject and that from which the common people suffer painfully. Moreover, warring for a long period gives birth to sedition; serving in misery gives rise to considerations for change [of governments]. Thus the people in the border regions, exhausted and wasted and sorrowing in misery, are inclined to part from [the Han], the commanders and officers suspicious of each other sell themselves to the foreigners. For these reasons ‘Commandant’ [Chao] T’o 佗80 and Chang Han 章

he reached P’ing-ch’eng, where the Hsiung-nu surrounded him. After seven days of siege they finally withdrew. See Shih chi, 8.384-5 and Grand Scribe’s Records, 2:74-75. 76 Liu Ching’s 劉 敬 family name was originally Lou 婁 . He suggested the adoption of peaceful negotiations rather than a continuation of military confrontations with the Hsiung-nu (see Shih chi Chapter 99, Han shu Chapter 43, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 412). 77 The term ho-ch’in 和親 means to make peace by marrying into the opposing state and was invented by Liu Ching. He advised Kao-tsu to win the Hsiung-nu’s friendship by presenting an imperial princess as a bride to their leader Mao-tun 冒頓. He hoped that by this it would be possible to win over the Hsiung-nu to a love of a Chinese way of life. Although Kao-tsu was willing to send his only daughter, Empress Lü prevented him from doing so. Liu Ching was then sent with a gifts and a different to negotiate a treaty (see Shih chi 99.2719). 78 No reference has been found for this citation. 79 He cites Li Ssu’s remarks made just above. 80 Chao T’o 趙佗 was Commandant of Nan-hai 南海 Commandery during the Ch’in reign. Then at the end of the dynasty he turned against the Ch’in to become an independent ruler in Nan Yüeh (seee Shih chi, 113.2967-70, Han shu Chapter 95, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 710).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

378

邯 were able to fulfill [*2956*] their selfish designs. 81 That which caused the Ch’in administration not to function [any longer] was that its authority was divided among these two men. This is the effect of the gains and loses [of this policy to attack the Hsiung-nu]. Therefore the Chou shu 周書 reads: ‘Safety or danger lies in the issuing of orders, preservation or destruction lies in that [advice] which [the advisor] is employed.’ I would hope Your Majesty might look at this in detail, to give it some thought, and to thoroughly consider it in this [matter of the Hsiung-nu].”

At this time Hsü Yüeh 徐樂, a man from Chao 趙, and Yen An 嚴安, a man from Ch’i,82 both submitted memorials discussing current affairs to the throne. Hsü Yüeh’s read: Your servant has heard that the dismay of the world lies in a collapse of a mountain and not in scattering of broken tiles. 83 In ancient or modern times, it has always been like this. What does collapse of a mountain mean? The last generation of Ch’in [rule] was [precisely] this. Ch’en She 陳涉 did not have the reverence of owning one thousand chariots–nor even one ch’ih of territory. He himself was not the descendent of a king, duke, great man, or famous clan, and he had no reputation in his hometown. He did not have the worthiness of Confucius, Mo-tzu, or Tseng Tzu, nor the wealth of T’ao Chu 陶朱 or Yi Tun 猗頓.84 Yet he arose from a poor lane, lifted up a thorn-branch halberd, 85 bared his breast, and gave a mighty cry–and the world followed his influence. What was the reason for this? [It happene d] because he used [the fact] that the people 81

Chang Han took an active part in the fighting between the fall of Ch’in and the foundation of the Han empire (see Shih chi, 6.270; as well as Chapter 118, as well as Loewe, Dictionary, p. 681). 82 According to the “So-yin” his original family name was Chuang 莊. After Emperor Ming-ti 明帝 the name Chuang became a taboo character, so it was changed to Yen 嚴. 83 In an addition of Shih chi Chapter 6 written by Pan Ku 班固 (32-92 A.D.) it is said “Ch’in had been weak and the world was collapsing like a mountain scattering like broken tiles” 秦之積衰， 天下土崩瓦解 (Grand Scribe’s Record, 1:175). 84 T’ao Chu was originally called Fan Li 范蟸 (from Ch’u); he aided the King of Yüeh to defeat Wu. Later he went to T’ao, changed his name, and made his fortune. Yi Tun studied with the T’ao-chu and became a wealthy merchant and the owner of livestock. The description of Ch’en She is paraphrased from the famous essay of Chia Yi 賈誼, “Kuo Ch’in lun 過秦論” (On the Faults of Ch’in), which is cited at the end of the basic annalos of Ch’in (see Shih chi, 6.276-84; Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:163-9). 85 The “Chi-chieh” recommends the pronunciation ch’in for 矜. According to the “So-yin” a ch’in is same as a chi-ping 戟柄, a halberd with a wooden handle.

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

379

were in dire straits, but the ruler did not console them; that the subordinates were resentful, but the sovereign did not know; and that the customs were already disordered, but the government was not restored. These three [reasons] were used by Ch’en She as capital [for his rebellion]. This is what “collapse of a mountain” means. And accordingly do I say that the dismay of the world lies in the collapse of a mountain. What does scattering of broken tiles mean? The armies of Wu, Ch’u, Ch’i, and Chao were [an example of precisely] this. Seven states plotted to make a great rebellion. 86 As for their title, they had called themselves Lord of [a state with] ten-thousand chariots, with hundreds of thousands of armored soldiers. Their majesty was sufficient to put the land between their borders; their wealth was sufficient to encourage the officers and the common people. But they were unable to snatch a foot or an inch [ch’ihts’un 尺寸] of territory to the west, and they themselves were caught on the central plains. 87 What was the reason for this? It was not that their power was less than [of an] ordinary man, or that their armies were weaker than [that of] Ch’en She. [But] at that time, the virtue of the late emperor had not yet declined, and the people that were at peace in their territories and delighted in their customs were legion. For this reason the feudal lords were without support from outside their borders. This is what “scattering of broken tiles” means. And for this reason do I say that the distress of the world does not lie in a scattering of broken tiles. Seen from this [perspective], when the world is truly in the circumstances proper to a collapse of a mountain, even a commoner or an impoverished officer could lead evil and imperil the world. This was Ch’en [*2957*] She. How much more would this be true for [one of] the [Lords of] Three Chin states, 88 should one still exist? Even if the world should not yet have great regulation, as long as we are truly able to avoid the circumstances of a collapse of a mountain, then even if there is [someone with a] strong state [and] a powerful army, he will become a prisoner before he can turn his heels. This was [the case of the lords of] Wu, Ch’u, Ch’i, and Chao. How much the less would the assembled ministers and ordinary people be able to create disorder? These two structures are the clear preconditions of stability and peril. They are 86

The seven kingdoms revolted in 154 B.C. in order to force the execution of Ch’ao Ts’o 晁 錯 (200-154 B.C.; biography in Shih chi Chapter 101). In the end, Emperor Ching had Ch’ao cut in half at the waist. 87 After the Seven Kingdoms had besieged Liang 梁, the Emperor Ching sent Tou Ying 竇嬰 and Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫 to lead troops to execute the revolting troops, but later in 154 B.C. he pardoned the troops that had fled as well as Yi 蓺, the son of King Yüan of Chu, and others who had participated in plotting rebellion (see Shih chi, 11.440; Han shu, 5.142-3 contains an edict which outlines this pardon). 88 During the early years of the Warring States Era (453-256 B.C.) the states of Han, Chao and Wei partitioned the lands formerly held by Ch’in.

380

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112 what the worthy ruler gives attention and profound consideration to. Recently, the five grains have not grown [in the territory] east of the Pass, the harvest has not yet been restored, and many of the people [live in] impoverishment and in dire straits. These [hardships] are increased by the matters at the border. Considering this through extending the calculations and following the principles, then [you will see that] there are already people who are not safe at their places. As they are not safe, they will easily move. Being easily moved is the circumstance of a collapse of a mountain. For this reason, the worthy Lord alone observes the origins of the myriad changes and is enlightened about the triggers of stability and peril; he fixes [the myriad changes] in the ancestral temple hall, and gets rid of concerns before they take shape. The essence lies in invariably causing that the world should not be in the circumstances of a collapse of a mountain, nothing more. Thus, even if there were strong states with powerful armies, Your Majesty could chase fleeing beasts, shoot flying birds, expand your pleasure parks, give full license to what you see, and enjoy to the utmost the pleasures of galloping–just as you like. The music of bronze, stone, silk, and bamboo will not be denied to your ears. Within the privacy of your curtains, you will never lack the laughter of dancers and dwarves before you, and the world will be without chronic worries. Why would your reputation necessarily be that of King T’ang [of Shang] and King Wu [of Chou]? Why would the convention necessarily be that of King Ch’eng and King K’ang [of Chou]? Nevertheless, I humbly think that since Your Majesty is a heavenly-created sage with a disposition to generosity and humaneness. Sincerely takes the world as your task, then the reputations of King T’ang and King Wu are not difficult to emulate, and the customs of King Ch’eng and King K’ang can be restored. After these two structures are established, then you will dwell in the reality of reverence and stability, and you will have an acclaimed reputation and widespread fame at your time. You will become close to [all within] the world, and subjugate the four barbarians, and your remnant benevolence and bequeathed virtue make several successive generations prosper. [And your successors] will face south in front of the silken screen, lifting their sleeves to greet kings and dukes–this will be what Your Majesty carries out. Your servant has heard that when someone who plans to be a [proper] king does not succeed, the worst is [still] sufficient for stability. 89 If stable, what should Your Majesty seek and not obtain? What would you do that would not succeed? Whom should you attack but not subdue?

89 Alternately: “Your servant has heard that when someone who plans to be a [proper] king does not succeed, his failure is sufficient to make stability [out of the experience].”

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

381

Yen An submitted a memorial which read:90 Your servant has heard that [when] the Chou possessed the world, their government lasted more then three hundred years. The reigns of King Ch’eng and King Kang [of Chou] were the most glorious. Corporal punishment was put aside for more than forty years and was not used anymore. 91 Then their decline [*2958*] also took more then three hundred years. For this reason the Five Hegemons arose one after another. 92 The Five Hegemons constantly assisted the Son of Heaven. They promoted what was profitable and abolished injury, they punished violence, prohibited evil and put in order [the land] within the seas, to honor the Son of Heaven. After the Five Hegemons passed away no worthy or sage succeeded them. The Son of Heaven was alone and weak, the orders he issued were not put into practice. The feudal lords were unrestrained in their actions. The strong oppressing the weak, the many violating the few. T’ien Ch’ang 田常 usurped the throne in Ch’i, 93 the Six Ministers divided Ch’in among themselves. 94 They all became warring states. This was the beginning of suffering for the common people. After this the powerful states were engaged in attacking [the weak], the weak states prepared protection, [some] formed alliances and counter-alliances. They galloped with their chariots rubbing hubcaps, and with armours and helmets that bore lice. The common people had no one whom they could complain to. When it came to the King of Ch’in, he nibbled away [all the lands] of the world until he had swallowed up the warring states. He called himself the August Emperor and became the ruler over [the entire land] within the seas. He ruined the cities of the feudal lords, melted their weapons to cast them into bell90 The memorial bears many similarities and in some cases exact replications of the language and tone of Chia Yi's “Kuo Ch'in lun” (On the Faults of the Ch'in) which is recorded at the end of Shih chi Chapter 6; translated in Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:163-9. 91 On this see Shih chi, 4:134. 92 Five Hegemons generally referring to Duke Huan 桓 of Ch’i (r. 685-643 B.C.), Duke Wen 文 of Chin (r. 636-628 B.C.), Duke Mu 穆 of Ch’in (r. 659-621 B.C.), King Chuang 莊 of Ch’u (r. 613-591 B.C.) and Duke Hsiang 襄 of Sung (r. 650-637 B.C.). On the variations in this grouping see Sydney Rosen, “Changing Conceptions.” 93 T’ien Ch’ang was a Grand Master of Ch’i. He killed Duke Chien of Ch’i (r. 484-481) and usurped power (see Shih chih, 46.1883-4). 94 The Six Ministers refers to the six noble clans (Fan 范, Chung-hang 中行, Chih 智, Han 韓, Wei 魏 and Chao 趙) of Chin during the Spring and Autumn period. By sharing power they weakened the House of Chin and led to the partition of Chin into Han, Chao and Wei in 453 B.C. See also “So-yin” (Shih chi, 39.1684, n. 1). The description of T’ien Ch’ang and the Six Ministers seems to be again a paraphrase of Ch’un-yü Yüeh’s speech to the First Emperor (see Shih chi, 6.254 and 87.2564).

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

382

racks to show that they were not used again. 95 At the very beginning the black haired people who were able to escape the [time] of the warring states thought themselves reborn when they met with the enlightened Son of Heaven. If the Ch’in had [just] eased their punishments and penalties, had lightened the taxes and collections, reduced the forced labor service, valued benevolence and righteousness, and thought low of profits at the same time. [If] they had excelled sincerity and generosity and despised craftiness and cunningness. 96 [If they had just] reformed the customs and changed the practices, reforming [everything] between the four seas, then they would have had peace for many generations. Ch’in did not follow this custom, but instead restored its old practices. They made those who were crafty and cunning powerful and privileged to step forward, and those who were sincere, generous, loyal and trustworthy retreat. The laws were stern and the government harsh, those who were flattering [the Emperor] were many. Daily he heard him being praised, [so] that his mind became broad and his heart disperse. He desired to extend his authority [to the lands] beyond the sea. Thus [he] send Meng T’ien to command troops in the north to attack the Hu 胡 to enlarge the territories and to extend the frontiers. He guarded the frontiers at P’ei Ho 北河 and sent fodder and grain to follow the troops. At the same time he sent the Commandant T’u Sui 屠睢97 to command officers in towered ships to attack the hundred [tribes of] Yüeh 越in the south. He also send Inspector Lü 監祿98 to chisel a channel to transport the grain. They entered [deep into the country of] Yüeh. The people of Yüeh run [away] and fled. [The army] wasted many days [until] their provisions were exhausted. [Then] the people of Yüeh attacked them. The soldiers of Ch’in were seriously defeated. Ch’in then sent ‘Commandant’ T’o 佗 99 to command a troop of footsoldiers to guard the Yüeh. At this time the calamity of Ch’in was that in the north they were troubled by the Hu and in the south they were stringed up by the Yüeh.100 [They let] the soldiers lodge on worthless ground. They could advance but were not able to retreat. [After the situation] had gone on like this for more than ten years. The men who wore [their] armours [and] the women who were [busy] transporting [provisions] suffered so much that they did not enjoy their lives [anymore]. Men hung themselves on trees next to the roads [so close] that 95

On this see Shih chi, 6.239 (translated in Grand Scribe’s Records, 1:137). The “So-yin” reads shang 尚 instead of shang 上 . 97 This is the only reference to T’u Sui in Shih chi. 98 Wei Chao 韋昭 cited in the “Chi-chieh” says that the name was just Lü. Chien is a title, the short form for Chien yü-shi 監御史, “Inspecting Secretary.” 99 I.e., Chao T’o, see note above. 100 Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 cited in Takigawa (112.22) says that in former times kua 挂 had the same meaning like hsüan 懸 , “to hang up, to suspend.” 96

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

383

the dying [could] face each other. When the August Emperor of Ch’in died [210 B.C.] the whole empire was in upheaval. Ch’en Sheng and Wu Kuang 吳廣101 rose in Ch’en, Wu Ch’en 吳臣102 and Chang Erh 張耳 103 in Chao, Hsiang Liang 項梁104 in Wu, T’ien Tan 田儋 105 in Ch’i, Ching Chü 景駒 106 in Ying, Chou Shih 周 市 107 in Wei and Han Kuang 韓 廣 108 in Yen. [From] the poorest mountain [villages] through the valleys stalwart knights sprang in action [in such numbers that] it is not possible to report all of them. There were none who were descendents of dukes or marquises, none an officer in a senior post. [*2959*] They did not own an inch of land [but] rose from lanes and alleys, lifted up the thorn-branch halberds and took action in reaction to the situation. Without a plan they all rose [at the same time]. Without an agreement they assembled all together. The territories they occupied grew and they made progress on the land until they became hegemon kings. [The circumstances of the] time taught them to act like this. Ch’in was as honored as to have the Son of Heaven, as rich as to possess the world. [But] the ruling generation was destroyed and the sacrifices [to the previous rulers] were cut off, had its reason in the calamity that they had exhausted their military means. The reason, [why] the Chou failed because of their weakness [and] the Ch’in because of their strength; was [that] both were not able to change their fate. Today [Your Majesty] desires to summon the southern Yi 南夷 109 [to court], to bring Yeh-lang 夜 郎 110 to audience, to subjugate [the tribes of]

101

On Wu Kuang’s part of the rebellion see Shih chi, 48.1949-57. On Wu Ch’en’s role in the rebellion see Shih chi, 89.2573 and Loewe, Dictionary. p. 584. 103 On Chang Erh see Shih chi Chapter 89, Han shu Chapter 32, as well as Loewe, Dictionary, p. 678. 104 Hsiang Hsiang joined Liu Bang in 204 B.C. (Shih chi, 7.338, Han shu, 16.614 and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 599). 105 T’ien Tan was of the old royal family of Ch’i and established himself as king in 209 B.C. See Shih chi Chapter 94, Han shu Chapter 33, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 504. 106 In the confused period which followed Ch’en She’s uprising Ching Chü was established as King of Chu (208 B.C.). See Shih chi, 7.299, Han shu chapter 1A and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 201. 107 Chou Shih was sent by Ch’en Sheng in 208 B.C. to take over lands of the former Kingdom of Wei. He refused to accept the nomination as king, but agreed to act as its chancellor. See Shih chi, 8.352, Han shu 1A and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 735. 108 In 209 B.C. Han Kuang declared himself King of Yen. See Shih chi, 7.316, Han shu, 1A and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 145. 109 The region of the Southern Yi is near modern Canton (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:12). After the Han had pacified the empire, Chao T’o gained control of the region of the Southern Yi, guarding the south as a vassal of the Han empire and sending tribute to court (see Shih chi, 113.2967-70). 110 Yeh-lang was located at the southwest border of the Han empire. It is located west of modern Kweichow. (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:32). Further information on Shih chi, 116.2994-7. 102

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

384

Ch’iang 羌 111 and Po 僰, 112 to overrun Hui-chou 濊州, 113 to build cities to invade deep into Hsiung-nu [territory] [and] to burn down their Lung-ch’eng 蘢 城 [and] your advisers praise that. This is only for the advantage of the people and subjects, but not a long-lasting strategy for the empire. Today there is not a [single] barking dog in the middle kingdoms to alarm. 114 But outside [the empire] we are tied up to keep places far away in order and ruin the state. This is not the way to treat the people as your children. To realize [your] endless desires pleases your mind and delights your thoughts, [but] it creates resentments in the Hsiung-nu. This is not how to pacify the borders. When calamities are [once] tied and cannot be loosened, when soldiers have already been put to rest and have to be mobilized again, then those who are near [suffer] grief and bitterness, those who are far away will be fearful and scared. This is not how to [get] support for a long time. Today the empire forges armour and polishes swords, fixes arrowheads and strings bows, transports [supplies] and carries provisions without any rest. This is why the empire is in complete distress. Moreover if there is warfare for a long time, rebellion arises, [and] if service becomes annoying, plans [of upheaval] are born. Today the territory of some of the outlying commandaries [*2960*] [extends to] several thousand li in size, each one has dozens of forts. Their territories are easy to control. 115 [Thus] they threaten the neighbouring feudal lords. This is not profitable for the royal house. Above observe by what the [rulers] of Ch’i and Chin perished: Their royal houses were too weak, whereas those of the six ministers were extremely prosperous. Below observe what wiped out the Ch’in: severe laws and an endless desire to become bigger. Today the influence of the commandaries has not reached the power of the six ministers, [but] their land has the size of several thousand li which is not only the disposition of someone [born in] a lane or an alley. Their amour and weapons are not just as much as thorn-branch halberds: If we would meet with a revolt, I could not name you the consequences. 111

The Ch’iang were a non-Chinese tribe who lived in the T’ao River valley, which flows trough the southern part of modern Kansu (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:29). 112 Po was located in modern Szechwan (T’an Ch’i-hsiang, 2:29). 113 Ju Shui cited in the “Chi-chieh” says they are the Eastern Yi. The “So-yin” says Hui-chou is an old name for the Kingdom of Hui-mo 濊貊. No reference found in T’an Ch’i-hsiang. 114 In Han shu, 64B.2813 ching 驚 is read ching 警. 115 Fu Ch’ien 服虔 cited in the “Chi-chieh” interprets this passage as: “the area controlled by the governors of the commandaries was sufficient to regulate the common people.” Su Lin 蘇林, also cited in the “Chi-chieh,” reads it as: “The topographical situation was good enough to control their people.” Watson (Han, 2:234) follows these interpretations: “situated in strategic areas and with tightly controlled people . . . .” Wang Li-ch’i (112.2384) offers “The topographical situation of the bigger commandaries and the bordered territory area was sufficient to control the common people inside the commandery.”

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

385

[After] these memorials had been presented to the Son of Heaven, the Son of Heaven summoned the three men to an audience, asking them: “Sirs, where have you been? Why have we met each other this late?” After this the sovereign appointed Chu-fu Yen, Hsü Yüeh and Yen An as Gentlemen-of-the-Palace. 116 [Chu-fu] Yen several times came to audiences [at court] handing in itemized memorials117 discussing [governmental] affairs. [The Emperor appointed him] by degree as an Internuncio [and later] promoted him as Palace Grandee. Within a single year [Chu-fu Yen] received four promotions. [2961] [Once] [Chu-fu] Yen advised the sovereign, saying: “In ancient times [the territory of] the feudal lords did not go beyond a hundred li. [Whether] they were strong or weak, they were easy to control. Now [some of the] feudal lords either have a line of several tens of walled cities or their territory has the size of thousand square li. If you go easy on them, then they will [become] proud and extravagant and will easily become licentious and disordered. If you pressure them, they will rely on their strength and form a counter-alliance in order to oppose the capital. Now if you cut back their territories in accordance with the law, then the sprouts for opposition will rise. In former days that was the case with Ch’ao Ts’o 鼂錯.118 Now [however] the feudal lords have [each] more then ten sons and younger brothers, but [just] the eldest legitimate son can succeed and be established in their place. The others despite being blood relatives do not get even a foot or an inch of territory as fiefs. This means the way of benevolence and filial piety will not be displayed. I would hope Your Majesty might order the feudal lords to obtain your extended grace to divide [their land] among their sons and younger brothers, [each enfeoffed] with territory as a marquis. All these people will be pleased by getting what they wished. By acting virtuously his Highness will in reality divide their states without ceding [land] and will

116

Takigawa (112:25) argues that the memorials were presented to the throne in the sixth year of yüan-kuang or the first year of yüan-shou. 117 Shang-shu 上疏 is a special kind of memorial that was submitted to the emperor divided into sections” (Han-yü ta tz’u-tien, 8:495). 118 Ch’ao Ts’uo died 154 B.C. at the hands of executioner. The Shih chi charges him with failure to meet the situation that had arisen with the Revolt of the Seven States, and observes that, while hoping to settle his private scores with Yuan Ang 爰盎, he forfeited his own life (see Shih chi Chapter 101 and the translation in Grand Scribe’s Records v. 8). Han shu reports about this matter in a different way. Pan Ku (Han shu Chapter 49) praises him for his clear-headed long-term planning, but notes that he was unable to discern the dangers of his own personal situation.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

386

gradually weaken them.” As a result of this, the sovereign followed his plans.119 [Chu-fu Yen] further advised the sovereign, saying: “Mou-ling 茂陵120 has just been erected. [All] the families who are outstanding and cruel in the empire, and the people who caused disorder should all be moved to Mou-ling. You will enrich that within the capital and break the wrong-doers outside the capital. This is what is called removing danger without execution.” The sovereign again followed his plans. When Empress Wei 衛 121 had been established [in honored position], he discovered the secret matters in the harem in the county of Liu Ting-kuo 劉定國, King of Yen,122 and [Chu-fu] Yen won merit in that. The great ministers all feared his mouth and sent bribes of a total of one thousand chin to win his favor. Others advised him saying: “You are too headstrong!” Chu-fu [Yen] said: “After I bound up my hair [and entered manhood] I wandered [from place to place] studying for more than forty years, but I could not find success. My parents did not treat me as their son, all of my younger brothers did not accept me, the guests and retainers [of the noblemen] made me leave, my days of distress indeed have lasted long. Moreover, if a real man while alive does not eat from five tripods, he may die by being boiled in five tripods.123 I am in the evening of life, therefore I act unconventionally and carry things out abruptly. 119

Hsü Kuang cited in the “Chi-chieh” believes that this must have happened in the second year of yüan-shuo. At that time Emperor Wu started to divide the fiefs between the sons and younger brothers of the feudal lords. 120

Han Mou-ling 漢茂陵 was the mausoleum of Emperor Wu. It was located in modern Shensi in the northeast of Hsing-p’ing 興平. In 139 B.C. two years after he succeeded to the throne Emperor Wu started with the construction work and in 87 B.C. he was buried there (see also Han-shu, 6.158 and 212). 121

Empress Wei (Wei Tzu-fu 衛子夫) was Emperor Wu’s second Empress. After Empress Ch’en 陳 failed to bear him a son, Wei Tzu-fu, the sister of General Wei Ching was presented to the Emperor. She was a singing girl who performed in the household of the Princess of P’ing-yang. She lived in the women’s quarters for some years, but finally became Empress in 128 B.C. after giving birth to Liu Chü 劉據, Emperor Wu’s only son (see Shih chi Chapter 49 and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 581). 122 Liu Ting-kuo succeeded as third King of Yen in 151 B.C. He was the subject of a scandal, accused of having sexual relations with the wives of his father and one of his brother’s, as well as with three of his own daughters. He was condemned to death and allowed to commit suicide in 127 B.C. The kingdom was abolished at this time. See also Shih chi Chapter 51, Han shu Chapter 14, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 293. 123 In ancient times nobles used five different tripods to present different meat (cf. Yi li yao yi 儀禮要義, 20.7b-8a. SKCS): “When the meat is ready, they set out five tripods, three to the west of

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

387

[Chu-fu] Yen rigorously spoke of how rich and fertile the territory of Shuofang was. Outwardly [towards the north] bounded by the Ho 河, Meng T’ien had walled it in order to drive out the Hsiung-nu. Inwardly it could save the provinces transporting garrison [supplies] by water, and expand the [territory] of the central states. This would be the basis for the destruction of the Hu 胡. The sovereign examined his proposal and handed it down to the excellencies and ministers to be discussed. All said that [Chu-fu Yen’s proposal] was not beneficial. Kung-sun Hung said: “In Ch’in times once sent out a host of 300,000 men to construct the Pei-ho [fortifications]. In the end they could not complete this and after a short while they abandoned [the territory].” [*2962*] Chu-fu Yen rigorously spoke of its benefits. The sovereign finally used Chu-fu [Yen’s] plan and established the commandery of Shuo-fang. In the second year of yüan-shuo (127 B.C.), Chu-fu [Yen] reported [to the throne] that the King of Ch’i124 was secretly inside [his residence] licentiously indulgent and behaving dissolutely.125 The sovereign appointed Chu-fu [Yen] as Chancellor of Ch’i. When he arrived in Ch’i he summoned all his brothers, guests and retainers [of those he tried to affix himself to] and distributed more then five hundred chin among them. Then he reprimanded them saying: “In the beginning when I was very poor you my brothers did not [give] me anything to wear or eat, and you retainers did not let me inside the gates [of your masters]. Now [since] I am Chancellor of Ch’i, all of you gentlemen come to greet me as faraway as thousand li. [Now] I want to break off with you, gentlemen. Never ever enter Yen’s gate again!” Then he sent a man to use the king’s incestuous affairs with his older sister to provoke the king [to stop]. The king considered that in the end he would not be able to escape punishment and feared that he would like the King of Yen be sentenced to death. At this he committed suicide.126 The authorities made this known [to the sovereign]. the caldron for boiling the mutton, and two to the east of the caldron for boiling the pork.” It is an interesting contrast to Kung-su Hung’s habit of only eating a single meat dish with each meal. 124 Liu Tz’u-ch’ang 劉次昌 succeeded as King Li 厲 of Ch’i in 131 B.C. On his life see Shih chi Chapter 52, Han shu Chapter 14, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 286-7. 125 When Liu Tz’u-ch’ang succeeded to the throne his mother wanted him to marry a girl from her clan, but an attempt to match him to her niece was unsuccessful. She then introduced her eldest daughter, Chi Weng-chu 紀翁主, the king’s elder sister, to the king and he began an incestuous relationship with her. See also the following note. 126 On Shih chi, 52.2006-8 this situation is reported differently: Empress Dowager Wang 王 planned to have her granddaughter, O 娥, married into a noble family. For this purpose she gladly accepted the suggestion of Hsü Chia 徐甲, a palace eunuch born in Ch’i, to persuade the King of Ch’i to make a request for O’s hand. So he was sent by the Empress to the Kingdom of Ch’i. Chu-

388

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

When Chu-fu [Yen] in the beginning was an ordinary fellow he once travelled to Yen and Chao. When he became ennobled, he revealed the affairs in Yen. The King of Chao127 feared that he would also create a dismay in his county and desired to send a memorial [to the Emperor] to tell him about his [Chu-fu Yen’s] secret affairs, but because [Chu-fu] Yen held an appointment in the palace, he did not dare to send it. When [Chu-fu Yen] had become Chancellor of Ch’i and gone out of the Pass, [the king] immediately sent someone to submit the memorial, accusing Chu-fu Yen of having received money from the feudal lords. For this reason so many sons and younger brothers of the feudal lords received fiefs.128 When the King of Ch’i committed suicide, the Emperor heard of it and was enraged. He considered that Chu-fu [Yen] pressured the King and ordered him to commit suicide. Then he called him [back to the capital] and turned him over to the functionaries to be tried. Chu-fu [Yen] admitted receiving gold from the feudal lords, but he denied [that he had] ordered the King to commit suicide. The sovereign desired not to execute him. At this time Kung-sun Hung was Grandee Secretary and he then reported: “The King of Ch’i has committed suicide and with no descendants his Kingdom should be abolished, made a commandery and entered under Han [control]. Chu-fu Yen is beginning and end of this evil. If Your Majesty does not execute Chu-fu Yen, there will be not way to apologize to the world [for this].”129 Only then did [the Emperor] finally wipe out Chu-fu Yen’s clan. When Chu-fu [Yen] had just become honored and favored, his guests and retainers were counted in the thousands. [But] when he and his clan were wiped out there was not a single person to collect [their corpses]. Only K’ung Chü 孔

fu Yen at the same time had plans to introduce his daughter to the King of Ch’i’s palace and tried to use Hsü Chia’s mission for this purpose. However, the king’s mother, Queen Dowager Chi, protested the interference in family matters. At this Chu-fu Yen was angry and made sure that Emperor Wu was aware of Liu Tz’u-ch’ang’s incestuous relationship. 127 Liu P’eng-tsu 劉彭祖 as a son of Emperor Ching was nominated King of Kuang-ch’uan in 155 B.C. and was transferred to be King of Chao after the suppression of the Revolt of the Seven Kings in 152 B.C. Sima Ch’ien describes him as a man given to flattery and assumption of mock modesty, behind which he would be all too ready to harm others by means of innuendo (see Shih chi chapters 52 and 59 and Han shu Chapter 53). 128 A more detailed parallel can be found on Shih chi, 52.2008. 129 On Shih chi 52.2008 Kung-sun Hung’s words are reported slightly different. There it is recorded that he said: “The King of Ch’i died because of his worries. The Kingdom should be entered under Han [rule]. If Yen is not executed, there will be no way to stop the hate in the world.”

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

389

車 130 of Hsiao 洨 131 collected the corpses and buried them. When the Son of Heaven later heard of this, he considered K’ung Ch’e to be an honorable man. [*2963*] His Honor the Grand Scribe says: Although Kung-sun Hung cultivated acting righteously, he also met with the right time. More than eighty years after the Han arose the sovereign had just begun to direct himself to textual learning. He summoned the worthy and excellent, to expand Confucian and Mohist studies and [Kung-sun] Hung was recommended first. When Chu-fu Yen was on the road [to power], all the ministers praised him, [but] when his name was ruined and he himself put to death, gentlemen competed with each other to speak of his wickedness. How sad!

*

*

*

*

*

The Great August Empress Dowager issues the following edict to the Grand Minister Over the Masses and the Grand Minister of Works:132 Now I have heard that the way to rule a state takes as its beginning making the people prosperous. The central point in making the people prosperous lies in restraint and frugality. In the Hsiao ching 孝經 (Classic of the Filial Piety) it is said: “To bring tranquility to those above and bring order to the people, there is nothing better than the ritual (li 禮); as for ritual it is better to [practice] with frugality than extravagance.” 133 Long ago when Kuan Chung was Chancellor for [Duke] Huan of Ch’i he caused him to become hegemon among the feudal lords,134 and to have the success of assembling them nine times 135 and rectifying world once.136 Nevertheless Confucius said that he did not understand ritual,137 130

A.2804. 131

K’ung Chü is mentioned just once in the Shih chi and in Han Shu parallel biography 64

Hsiao is a county in modern Anhui (T’an Ch’i-hsiang 2:19). Hsü Kuang 徐廣 cited in “Chi-chieh” dates this edict in the yüan-shih period of Emperor Ping (1 A.D.). 133 The first part of these lines is found in the Hsiao ching 孝經 (6.3a, SPPY), but there is no parallel for the second part. However, Lun yü 3.4 reads: “Ling Fang asked what was the first thing to be attended to in rituals. The Master said: ‘A great question indeed. In festive rituals it is better to [practice] with frugality than extravagance. In the ritual of mourning it is better that there be deep sorrow than a minute attention to observance.’” 134 Lun yü 14.17. 135 Lun yü 14.16. 136 Lun yü 14.17. 132

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

390

for the reason that in his extravagant and wasteful intentions he imitated the ruler. Yü of the Hsia had a humble palace and his clothing was shoddy. [But] later sages did not follow him. If we discuss it from this point of view, as for the splendours of governing and the excellence of virtue none is higher than frugality. If one transforms the people with them, one attains the correct order of the revered and the demeaned, the feelings between those of the same flesh and blood and the source of struggles and disputes cease. Is this not the basis for families having enough, every person being satisfied, so that punishments can be put aside? Should we not devote ourselves to this? Now as for the three excellencies, they are the guides of the hundred officials, the standards of the myriad people. It has never occurred that by planting a straighter standard one has obtained a crooked shadow. Did not Confucius say: “When you are a leader and are correct, who will dare not to be correct!138”; “Let him advance the good and teach the incompetent; then they will be exhorted [to be virtuous].”139 Since the Han arose, the stewards who act as the [ruler’s] limbs have personally practiced frugality and economy. They have regarded riches lightly and emphasized righteousness. There is no example which has made this perfectly clearer then the former Chancellor Kung-sun Hung, the Marquis of P’ing-hou. His position was that of a Chancellor, but he wore plain cloth. At each meal he only had unpolished rice and not more than one meat dish. Among the guests and retainers of old friends whom he was on good terms with he divided his salary to provide for them, so there was never any [money] left. Certainly, inwardly he was able to make himself be economical and outwardly he followed the standards. Only when Chi An criticized him, did he make this [frugal and good behaviour] known at court. This could be said to put something [good] into practice by knowing the standards. [*2964*] When he begged to retire because of illness, the August Emperor Hsiao Wu then ordered: “To reward those who have merit, to extol those who have virtue. [A gentleman] treats the good well and despises the evil. This you should understand. May you relax your concerns, take care of your spirit and help yourself with medicines.” [The Emperor] granted him sick leave, beef, wine and various silks. After [Kung-sun Hung] had stayed at home for several months he recovered from his illness and was able to look after his duties [again]. In the second year of yüan-shou he expired when he was still in the position of Chancellor. To understand that your subject cannot measure up to this gentleman, this proof. [Kung-sun] Hung’s son [Kung-sun] Tu succeeded to his in rank and became Grand Administrator of Shang-yang, [but] was tried before the law and lost his marquisate. Now to manifest virtue and display 137

The edict of the Empress Dowager is probably alluding to Lun yü 3/22. Lun yü 14.17. 139 Lun yü 2.20. 138

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

391

righteousness, this is that by which one takes leadership in establishing customs and enforcing reform. This is the rule of the sage kings and the Way that cannot be changed. Let us bestow upon the men who in the succession of the sons and grandsons of Kung-sun Hung would next have been [his successor] the rank a Marquis within the Passes, with the sustenance from [the taxes] of a city of three hundred households. Let him come to the [Perfect of the Majors in Charge of] Official Carriages 公車140 and present his name to the Master of Writing. We personally will observe in his appointment [ceremony].

Pan Ku praises [Kung-sun Hung] as follows141: Kung-sun Hung, Pu Shih 卜式 and Ni K’uan 兒寬 142 were like those with the wings of wild geese hemmed in by sparrows and swallows. They all came from their origins midst sheep [Ni K’uan] and swine. If they had not met with the right time, how could they have reached this [high] position? At this time it was more than sixty years since the Han arisen, all within the seas was peaceful, the treasuries were full. But the barbarians of the four quarters had not yet come to audience and the regulations and standards were incomplete. When the sovereign had just begun to desire to employ cultured and martial men, he sought them without attaining them. In the beginning, he welcomed Master Mei 枚 生 143 with rush-lined wheels and met Chu-fu [Yen] with a sighs [of 140

Kung-chü ssu-ma ling 公車司馬令. Cf. Han shu 58.2633-4. 142 Pan K’u in Han shu 58 classes the three as men with outstanding ability who were inhibited by the inferiors around them and who were fortunate enough to live in times that nonetheless allowed their attainment of high office. Pu Shih and Ni K’uan are treated together with Kung-sun Hung in one chapter with detailed biographies of all of them. This is different to the Shih chi where almost nothing is found about Pu Shih and Ni K’uan. Pu Shih was a farmer in Honan but made over his land and property to his younger brother. He became famous for his generosity. Therefore Emperor Wu appointed him as Gentlemen-of-the-Household; in 111 B.C. he was summoned to become Grandee Secretary, but soon found himself in disagreement with government policy and fell into disfavor. On his life see Han shu Chapter 58 and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 16. Ni K’uan was also poor and without resources and had to work as a hired laborer. Selected as one of the men sent from Ch’ien-ch’eng 千乘 County to attend academicians, he became a pupil of K’ung An-k’uo 孔 安國. Later his explanations of the Shang shu pleased Emperor Wu and he appointed him as Palace Grandee and then as Clerk of the Eastern Part of the Capital. On Han shu, 58.2633 it is said that Ni K’uan was together with Ssu-ma Ch’ien were responsible for establishing a new calendar, an endeavor which might have caused problems between the two. On Ni’s life see Han shu Chapter 58 and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 441-3. On the discussion about the calendar see Han shu, 21A.974 as well the remarks in Loewe’s entry on Ni K’uan. 143 According to the “So-yin” Master Mei is Mei Sheng) 枚乘 (see his biography in Han shu Chapter 51, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 435). 141

392

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112 admiration]. The assembled ministers looked up to him with admiration and extraordinary men emerged together with him. Pu Shih he employed from the harvesters and herders, [Sang] Hung-yang [桑] 弘羊 144 he selected from the merchant fellows, Wei Ch’ing he raised from slavery, [Chin] Mi-ti [金]日磾145 came from prisoners who had surrendered. These were the same fellows who in former times had built fortifications and fed oxen. Han’s way of obtaining men flourished in these [kinds of men]. The refined scholars were Kung-sun Hung, Tung Chung-shu and Ni K’uan; those with sincere behaviour were Shih Chien 石建146 [*2965*] and Shih Ch’ing 石慶, 147 those who were unaffectedly upright were Chi An and Pu Shih, those who promoted the worthy were Han An-kuo 韓 安國148 and Cheng Tang-shih 鄭當時,149 those who established ordinance were Chao Yü 趙禹150 and Chang T’ang 張湯151; those with literary talents were Ssuma Ch’ien 司馬遷 and [Ssu-ma] Hsiang-ju 司馬相如,152 those who had wit and humor were Tung-fang Shuo 東方朔153 and Mei Kao 枚皋, 154 those good at responding to questions were Yen Chu 嚴助155 and Chu Mai-ch’en, those who could calculate the calendar were T’ang Tu 唐都 156 and Lo-hsia Hung 落下

144 For Sang Hung-yang see Shih chi Chapter 30, Han shu Chapter 24B, and Loewe, Dictionary, p.464. 145 For Chin Mi-ti see Han shu Chapter 68, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 196. 146 On Shih Chien see Shih chi Chapter 103, Han shu chapter 46, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 478. 147 For Shih Ch’ing see Shih chi Chapter 103, Han shu Chapter 46, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 479. 148 On Han An-kuo see Shih chi Chapter 108, Han shu chapters 52 and 94A, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 144. 149 For Cheng Tang-shih see Shih chi Chapter 120, Han shu Chapter 50, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 722. 150 For Chao Yü see Shih chi Chapter 122; Han shu Chapter 90, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 716. 151 On Chang T’ang see Shih chi Chapter 122, Han shu Chapter 59, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 692. 152 For Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju see Shih chi Chapter 117, Han shu chapter 57A, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 464. 153 For Tung-fang Shuo see Shih chi Chapter 126, Han shu Chapter 65, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 73. 154 Son of Mei Sheng (see n. 143 above); see his biography in Han shu Chapter 51, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 435. 155 Yen Chu is better known as Chuang Chu 莊助: see Shih chi Chapter 30, Han shu Chapter 64A, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 748. 156 For T’ang Tu see Shih chi Chapter 26, Han shu Chapter 21A, and Loewe, Dictionary, p.502.

Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu [Yen], Memoir 52

393

閎,157 he who knew the tones and harmony was Li Yen-nien 李延年,158 he who could make military plans was Sang Hung-yang 桑弘羊, 159 those who received orders to be envoys were Chang Ch’ien 張騫 160 and Su Wu 蘇武,161 those who commanded armies were Wei Ch’ing and Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病, 162 those who received testaments [to support succeeding rulers] supporting the dynastical stability were Huo Kuang 霍光163 and Chin Mi-ti. The others are too numerous to be listed here. By this means [Han] has caused to rise the meritorious enterprise [of establishing the empire] and left [a system] as its testament that no one in the later generations would be able to reach. [Emperor] Hsiao Hsüan 孝 宣continued this unification, continued to build the vast enterprise [of ruling the empire], also had the Six Disciplines [Liu yi 六藝] deliberated and discussed. He summoned and selected numerous extraordinary men; Hsiao Wang-chih 蕭望 之,164 Liang-ch’iu Ho 梁丘賀, 165 Hsia-hou Sheng 夏候勝, 166 Wei Hsüan-ch’eng 韋 玄 成 , 167 Yen P’eng-tsu 嚴 彭 祖 168 and Yin Keng-shih 尹 更 始 169 were advanced because of their Confucian scholarly methods, Liu Hsiang 劉向 170 and Wang Pao 王裦171 by means of their literary talents. [Among] the generals were Chang An-shih 張安世,172 Chao Ch’ung-kuo 趙充國,173 Wei Hsiang 魏相,174

157

p.430.

158

p.233.

For Lou-hsia Hung see Shih chi Chapter 26, Han shu Chapter 21A, and Loewe, Dictionary, For Li Yen-nian see Shih chi Chapter 125, Han shu Chapter 93, and Loewe, Dictionary,

159 For Sang Hung-yang see Shih chi Chapter 30, Han shu Chapter 24B, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 462. 160 For Chang Ch’ien see Shih chi Chapter 111, Han shu Chapter 61, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 688. 161 For Su Wu see Shih chi Chapter 110, Han shu Chapter 54, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 493. 162 For Huo Ch’u-ping see Shih chi Chapter 111, Han shu Chapter 55, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 174. 163 For Huo Kuang see Han shu Chapter 68, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 170. 164 For Hsiao Wang-chi see Han shu Chapter 78, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 606. 165 For Liang-ch’iu Ho see Han shu Chapter 88, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 239. 166 For Hsia-hou Sheng see Han shu Chapter 75, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 594. 167 For Wei Hsüan-ch’eng see Han shu Chapter 73, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 579. 168 Also named Zhuang P’eng-tsu. See Han shu Chapter 88, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 745. 169 For Yin K’eng-shi see Han shu Chapter 88, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 647. 170 For Liu Hsiang see Han shu Chapter 36, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 372. 171 For Wang Pao see Han shu Chapter 64B, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 516. 172 For Ch’ang An-shi see Han shu Chapter 59, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 672. 173 For Chao Ch’ung-kuo see Han shu Chapter 69, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 703. 174 For Wei Hsiang see Han shu Chapter 74, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 578.

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

394

Ping Chi 邴吉, 175 Yü Ting-kuo 于定過, 176 Tu Yen-nien 杜延年; 177 [among] those who ruled the people were Huang Pa 黃霸, 178 Wang Ch’eng 王成, 179 K’ung Sui 龔雖, 180 Cheng Hung 鄭弘, 181 Shao Hsin-ch’en 劭信臣,182 Han Yenshou 韓延壽, 183 Yin Weng-kuei 尹翁歸, 184 and Chao Kuang-han 趙廣韓. 185 They all left evidence of merit which will be handed down to later generations. [Yet] these famous ministers are indeed second in order to those [of Emperor Wu].

*

*

*

*

*

While the high ministers and members of the imperial family were all outdoing each other in luxurious living, only [Kung-sun] Hung using his frugality in dress and food, set an example for the other officials. [Thus] I made the Memoirs of the Marquis of P’ing-chin and Chu-fu Yen, Number 52.186

175

For Ping Chi see Han shu Chapter 74, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 12. For Yü Ting-kuo see Han shu Chapter 71, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 659-60. 177 For Tu Yen-nien see Han shu Chapter 60, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 83-4. 178 For Huang Pa see Han shu Chapter 89, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 165-6. 179 For Wang Ch’eng see Han shu Chapter 89, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 519-9. 180 For K’ung Sui see Han shu Chapter 89, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 120-1. 181 For Cheng Hung see Han shu Chapter 66, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 722. 182 For Shao Hsin-ch’en see Han shu Chapter 89, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 467-8. 183 For Han Yen-shou see Han shu Chapter 76, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 150. 184 For Yin Weng-kuei see Han shu Chapter 76, and Loewe, Dictionary, pp. 649-50. 185 For Chao Kuang-han see Han shu Chapter 76, and Loewe, Dictionary, p. 706. 186 This is Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s account of why he wrote this chapter from his postface (Shih chi, 130.3317). 176

Translator’s Note A biographical note in Shih chi Chapter 121 shows how Kung-sun Hung instituted a new method of selecting imperial court officials. He gave a ju 儒 methodological lining to the selection process. His replacement of older officials with newly trained ju-followers was one of his most successful accomplishments as Chancellor. It is all the more surprising that nothing about this is mentioned in this biography. A number of features in the account in chapter 121 mark Kungsun Hung as a paragon of the virtues later associated with the Confucian tradition. He rose from humble circumstances to attain the highest office in the empire. He had been grounded in texts that were later to be adopted as canonical. On the basis of his statements on political issues and his relations with others (as Ssu-ma Ch’ien describes them), it is possible to consider him an opponent to the ideas of Huang-lao. This can not only be seen in the delay of his appointment until after the death of the Grand Empress Dowager, who was an admirer of Huang-lao ideas, but may also have been one of the reasons for his poor relationship with Chi An. Above all, Ssu-ma Ch’ien describes him as outward kindly but inwardly harsh man. This is more evident if one reads the parallel biography in the Han shu. For example on Shih chi, 112.2951 the text reads: “To all those with whom Hung once had had a rift, he pretended to be friendly [but] secretly he repaid all wrongs [they had done to him].” Han shu (58.2621) changes ch’ang 嘗 “once” into ch’ang 常 “often” and instead of pao ch’i kuo 報 其過, “he repaid their wrongs,” Pan K’u writes pao ch’i huo 報其禍, “he repaid their misfortune.” This sounds much more moderate than Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s version. It seems that Pan K’u tried to correct the negative view of the grand old Chancellor that the Shih chi account offers. This might have also been the view of subsequent editors of Shih chi who added the later mandate of the Empress Dowager and Pan Ku’s eulogy. From my point of view, the main topic of this chapter is the establishment of Confucian values, a subject which Ssu-ma Ch’ien was not really comfortable with. Another important topic of this chapter is how to deal with new commandaries in Hsiung-nu territory and with the commandery of Shuo-fang. This is why Ssu-ma Ch’ien has combined Kung-sun Hung’s’ biography with that of Chu-fu Yen. In his memorial Chu-fu Yen called to mind the difficulties, expenses, and failures of similar ventures during the time of Ch’in and Han Kao-

395

396

The Grand Scribe’s Records, 112

ti, when commandaries were established deep into Hsiung-nu territory. He encouraged the government to establish a line of defense in Shou-fang and his proposals were finally used by Emperor Wu in establishing a commandery there. At first, Kung-sun Hung argued against Chu-fu Yen’s proposal for the establishment of defences at Shuo-fang, but later he urged the concentration of imperial energies there, while refraining from continuing with an expansion in the South. However, it seems that Kung-sun Hung was an envious man who detested Yen just for his favor with the Emperor. It was due to Hung’s efforts that Chu-fu Yen never reached a high position in the central government and finally was condemned to death. The term wai k’uan nei shen 外 寬 內 深 (outward kindly but inwardly harsh) is used in Shih chi just two times: once for Kung-sun Hung and once more for Tu Chou 杜周 (Shih chi, 122.3153), who is classed with those officials known for their overly rigorous application of the law. It is interesting that both of these “inwardly harsh” men were in charge of the prosecution of Chu-fu Yen.

Bibliography I. Translations Aoki, Shiki, 12:73-146. Watson, Han, 2:187-206. Zufferey, Nicolas. “Gong-sun Hong,” To the Origins of Confucianism. The Ru in Pre-Qin Times and during the Early Han-dynasty. Bern: Peter Lang AG, European Academic Publisher, 2003, pp. 320-5. II. Studies Huang Ch’ing-hsuan 黃慶萱. “Kung-sun Hung wei hsüeh-kuan” k’ao-shih 公孫 弘為學官考釋, Ta-lu tsa-chih 32.5 (1965.5). Liu Kuang-yi 劉光義. “Han-cai hsiang feng-hou pu tzu Kung-sun Hung shi (Shih chi cha-chi) 漢宰相封侯不自公孫弘始 (史記札記), Ta-lu tsa-chih 26.4 (1963.2). Schaab-Hanke, Dorothee. “The Power of an Alleged Tradition: A Prophecy Flattering Han Emperor Wu and Its Relation to the Sima Clan,” BMFEA, 74 (2002): 251-300. Wallacker Benjamin E., “Han Confucianism and Confucius in China”. In David T. Roy and Tsuen-hsuin Tsien, eds., Ancient China: Studies in Early Civilization. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1978, pp. 215-28.

397

Frequently Mentioned Commentators Chang Shou-chieh 張守節 (fl. 725) Chang Yen 張晏 (fl. 250) Chao Yi 趙翼 (1727-1814) Cheng Hsüan 鄭玄 (127-200) Ch’i Shao-nan 齊召南 (1706-1768) Chia K’uei 賈逵 (30-101) Ch’iao Chou 譙周 (ca. 200-270) Ch’ien Ta-chao 錢大昭 (1744-1813) Ch’ien Ta-hsin 錢大昕 (1728-1804) Chin Cho 晉灼 (fl. 275) Ch’in Chia-mo 秦嘉謨 (fl. 1814) Chung Wen-cheng 鐘文烝 (1818-1877) Fang Pao 方苞 (1668-1749) Feng Pan 馮班 (1602-1670) Fu Ch’ien 服虔 (fl. 188) Ho Cho 何焯 (1661-1722) Ho Meng-ch’un 何孟春 (1474-1536) Hsü Fu-yüan 徐孚遠 (1599-1665) Hsü Kuang 徐廣 (352-425) Hu An-kuo 胡安國 (1074-1138) Hung Liang-chi 洪亮吉 (1746-1809) Ju Ch’un 如淳 (fl. 230) Kao Shih-ch’i 高士奇 (1645-1703) Kao Yu 高誘 (fl. 205-212) Ku Tung-kao 顧棟高 (1679-1759) Ku Yen-wu 顧炎武 (1613-1682) Kuei Yu-kuang 歸有光 (1506-1571) 399

400

Frequently Mentioned Commentators

K’ung An-kuo 孔安國 (ca. 156-ca. 74 B.C.) Lei Hsüeh-ch’i 雷學淇 (fl. 1814) Li Li 李笠 (1894-1962) Li Tz’u-ming 李慈銘 (1830-1894) Liang Yü-sheng 梁玉繩 (1745-1819) Ling Chih-lung 凌稚隆 (fl. 1576-1587) Liu Ch’en-weng 劉辰翁 (1232-1297) Liu Wen-ch’i 劉文淇 (1789-1854) Lo Pi 羅泌 (fl. 1165) Meng K’ang 孟康 (ca. 180-260) Nakai Sekitoku 中井積德 (1732-1817) Ni Ssu 倪思 (1174-1220) Oka Hakku 岡白駒 (1692-1767) P’ei Yin 裴駰 (fl. 438) Shen Chia-pen 沈家本 (1840-1913) Shen Ch’in-han 沈欽韓 (1775-1832) Ssu-ma Chen 司馬貞 (fl. 745) Su Lin 蘇林 Sun Yi-jang 孫詒讓 (1848-1908) Tsou Tan-sheng 鄒誕生 (fl. 479) Ts’ui Shih 崔適 (1852-1932) Ts’ui Shu 崔述 (1740-1816) Tu Yü 杜預 (222-284) Wang Chung 汪中 (1745-1794) Wang Hsien-ch’ien 王先謙 (1842-1918) Wang Nien-sun 王念孫 (1744-1832) Wang Su 王肅 (195-256) Wei Chao 韋昭 (204-273) Wu Chien-ssu 吳見思 (fl. 1680-90) Wu Ju-lun 吳汝綸 (1840-1903) Yao Tsu-en 姚祖恩 (fl. 1784) Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 (581-645) Ying Shao 應劭 (ca. 140-203/204) Yü Fan 虞翻 (164-233) Yü Yüeh 俞樾 (1821-1907)

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars William H. Nienhauser, Jr. Now with the rise of the Han the world has been united and enlightened rulers and worthy lords; as for the loyal ministers and gentlemen who died doing what was righteous, though I have become Grand Scribe, I have not made records of them; I am direly afraid that the historical writings throughout the world will be neglected—I hope that you will think on this. Ssu-ma T’an to his son Ssu-ma Ch’ien (Shih chi, 130.3295)

Ho Tz’u-chün 賀次君 (October 5, 1914-April 17, 1988) 1 is best known to students of the Shih chi for his study of sixty important early editions, Shih chi shu lu 史記書錄 (A Record of Texts of the Grand Scribe’s Records [Peking: Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan, 1958]). Although the work has not received the attention it deserves in the West, scholars in the Far East were alerted to its importance through a pirated version published in 1978 by Ting-wen Shu-chü 鼎 文書局 (in a volume titled Shih chi fu pien 史記附編) and a review by Kanda Kiichirō 神田喜一郎 which appeared in Chūgoku bungakuhō 中國文學報 10 (1963). Ho was born in Chin-t’ang 金堂 County, Szechwan, where his father, Ho Wei-k’uei 賀維夔, was magistrate. Both his father and his grandfather had been examination graduates under the Ch’ing. Ho’s mother was the daughter of Hu Yü-lan 胡雨嵐 (from Wu-hsing 吳興, Zhejiang), who was active in educational circles in Szechwan in the late Ch’ing. The youngest of four brothers, Ho was not 1

I am grateful to Professor Zhenjun Zhang 張振軍 (now at Saint Lawrence University and formerly an editor in Peking) who in June 2009 interviewed Ho Tz’u-chün’s daughter, Ho Te-wei 賀德瑋, and who helped organize other materials upon which this short life is based.

401

402

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

a diligent student during the years he was taught by his father at home. In 1925 he began his formal studies in 1925 at Cheng-tu Pao-meng Kung-hsüeh 成都寶 盟公學 (a middle school). In 1929, he tested into Chih-ch’eng High School 志誠 高中 (also in Chengtu). In 1930 Ho Tz’u-chün passed the examination and was accepted by Peking University, studying in the Department of Literature and History under the tutelage of Ku Chieh-kang 顧頡剛 (1893-1980) and Hsiung Shih-li 熊十力 (1885-1968). At the time, Ku was working with some of his students on the Shih chi and in the fall that year, he offered a class on ancient Chinese history in which he read the pen-chi 本紀 and shih-chia 世家. The class included Hsü Wen-shan 徐文珊 (1900-1998), Ch’i Ssu-ho 齊思和 (1907-1980), and T’an Ch’i-hsiang 譚其驤 (1911-1992). It is quite possible that Ho also took this class.2 In 1934, with the support of his advisors, Ho became a research assistant for Ch’ien Mu 錢 穆 (1895-1990), working especially on the lecture notes for Ch’ien’s classes “Chin san-pai nien hsüeh-shu shih” 近三百年學術史 (A History of the Scholarship in the Last Three Hundred Years) and “Chung-kuo shang-ku shih” 中國上古史 (Ancient Chinese History).3 The following year Ho, perhaps encouraged by his advisors again, published an article titled “Shuo ju chih-yi” 《 說 儒 》 質 疑 , 4 based on comments made by Ch’ien Mu in his classes, criticizing Hu Shih’s 胡適 (1891-1962) “Shuo ju” 說儒. Hu Shih was displeased with this attack and as a result Ho left Peking University late in 1935. Shortly thereafter, Lo Hsiang-lin 羅香林 (1906-1978), then professor and head of the library at Chung-shan University in Canton, invited Ho to teach at Chung-shan and to simultaneously become head of the Research Institute of the Chung-shan Library. When Chung-shan University moved inland in 1937, Ho resigned. Then, on the recommendation of Hsiung K’o-wu 熊克武 (1885-1970), Ho entered the employ of the Szechwan provincial government as a secretary, becoming chief editor of Hua-hsi jih-pao 華西日報 (Western China Daily). For 2 As a result, Hsü Wen-shan worked on collating and punctuating the Shih chi; after Ku edited their work, it appeared in 1936 as Shih chi pai-wen chih pu 史記, 白文之部 with Ku and Hsü listed as coeditors. See the present author’s “Historians of China,” CLEAR 17 (1995): 210-1. 3 See Ch’ien Mu’s “Pei-ching Ta-hsüeh tsa-yi” 北京大學雜憶, in Pa-shih yi shuang ch’in, shih you tsa-yi 八十憶雙親,師友雜憶 (Peking: San-lien, 1998). Lectures from the first course were eventually published as Chung-kuo Chin san-pai nien hsüeh-shu shih 中國近三百年學術史. 4 The article was published in, Yi shih pao 益世報, a journal run by the students of the History Department at PKU.

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

403

several years in the early 1940s he also took on duties as a translator for the Kuoli Pien-yi Kuan 國立編譯館. After the war–at the invitation of the mayor of Peking, Hsiung Pin 熊斌 (1894-1964) –Ho returned to Peking, serving as a legislator and the head of Pei-p’ing kuo-min hsin-pao 北平國民新報 (through 1948). Following a number of editorials critical of the local and national governments, the Kuo-min-tang pressured Ho into stepping down. He returned to Chengtu where he was made secretary of the Labor Union of Iron and Steel Machinery. In 1952 Ho Tz’u-chün returned to Beijing to participate in the compilation of a Chung-kuo shang-ku shih 中國上古史 (History of Ancient China) with his former advisor Ku Chieh-kang. For the next decade he worked as an editor for Chung-hua and Shang-wu. From the mid-1950s on Ho aided Ku in punctuating and editing a critical edition of the Shih chi which became the first of the punctuated twenty-four dynastic histories upon its publication by Chung-hua in 1959. Assigned to study all available traditional editions of the Shih chi, Ho’s research led to the publication of his Shih chi shu lu in 1958. In June of that same year, He married Feng Shu-ch’in 鳳淑琴, a nurse working in the T’ung-jen Hospital in Peking. Ku Chieh-kang was the chief witness at the wedding, held in the O-mei Restaurant. Their daughter, Ho Te-wei 賀德瑋, was born on February 5, 1961. At the beginning of Cultural Revolution (1966), like many of the editors at Chung-hua, Ho Tz’u-chün was deemed a “reactionary” and persecuted. His property was confiscated and he was sent back to his hometown, Chengtu. He worked there in a printing house, folding paper and making paper boxes. In 1979 Ho was rehabilitated and returned to Chung-hua as an editor. He began work on several major projects including the preparation of the modern editions of Liang Yü-sheng’s 梁玉繩 (1745-1819) Shih chi chih-yi 史記質疑 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1981) and Li Chi-fu’s 李吉甫 (758-814) Yüan-ho chünhsien t’u chih 元和郡縣圖志 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1983). Ho suffered a major stroke in June 1981 and afterwards his memory failed. After a prolonged struggle with repeated strokes resulting in paralysis through the mid-1980s, he passed away on April 17, 1988, ending a life that would have merited inclusion in the Shih chi itself, had Ho lived two millennia earlier.

404

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

Sung Yün-pin 宋雲彬 (16 August 1897-17 April 1979) 5 like Ho Tz’u-chün had a long career as an editor and was instrumental in preparing the final version of the Chung-hua Shu-chü Shih chi edition (1959). He also seems to have played a prominent, if largely unacknowledged, role in the preparations of several other volumes of Chung-hua’s Erh-shih-ssu shi 二 十 四史 (Twenty-four Dynastic Histories) series. Born near Hai-ning 海 寧 (Chekiang), Sung entered Hangchow Middle School beginning in 1912 and was soon caught up in the rapidly changing cultural world of the early Republican years. Within a few years he was editing and contributing to several newspapers in Hangchow. His involvement in journalism allowed him to meet literati such as Hsü Chih-mo 徐志摩, Mao Dun 茅 盾 , and Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941). In 1924 Sung joined the Communist Party. Three years later, while living in Shanghai, he began his editing career, working on selections from the Tzu-chih t’ung-chien 資治通鑑 for Shang-wu Yin-shu-kuan. He also worked as an editor and author for Kai-ming Shu-tien in the mid-1920s. In the spring of 1927 he moved to Wuhan where he edited Min-kuo jih-pao 民國日報 for a time before returning to Shanghai and–at Mao Dun’s invitation–joining in the founding of the Wen-yi-chieh Hsieh-hui 文 藝界協會 (Association for Literary Studies). During the 1930s he also edited a modern critical edition of the Hou Han shu 後漢書. From 1938-1946 he was in the Southwest, mainly in Kweilin, where he taught at Kweilin Teacher’s College. At this time he met Liu Ya-tzu 柳亞子 (1887-1958). After the war, he spent two years in Hong Kong, teaching at Ta-te 大德 College, then four years in Peking (June 1949-1953), before moving back to Hangchow (1953-1958). In Hangchow he was in charge of the Wen-shih Kuan 文史館, held various political positions, and published regularly. Implicated as a Rightist in 1957, an event which was to obscure much of his subsequent scholarship, by the late spring of 1958 Sung had found employ as an editor with Chung-hua Book Company in Peking. Although Sung edited or wrote over twenty books on subjects from Handynasty religion to modern Chinese history, it is his work collating and punctuating ancient texts, begun in the late 1920s in Shanghai, that is of

5 Thanks to Zou Xin 鄒昕 and Chang Ch’un-t’ing 張淳婷 for assistance in assembling the materials on Sung Yün-pin. Sung’s miscellaneous writings have been published as Sung Yün-pin tsa-wen chi 宋雲彬雜文集 (Peking: San-lien, 1985).

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

405

relevance to the Shih chi. From Sung’s diary6 it is clear that at least since mid1945 he began to annotate certain Shih chi chapters.7 Sung’s work on the Shih chi in Hangchow had developed into a project to produce a Shih chi chi chu 史記集 注, that involved sixteen scholars, each with a specific assignment, including Yeh Sheng-t’ao 葉聖陶 (1894-1988), Wang Po-hsiang 王伯祥 (1890-1975),8 Cheng Chen-to 鄭振鐸 (1898-1958), and Hsia Ch’eng-t’ao 夏承燾 (1900-1986). Sung’s portion seems to have been the pen-chi, and he worked on chapters seven and eight (the annals for Hsiang Yü and Kao-tsu) in March 1958, collating and translating the text. In connection with the Shih chi work for Chung-hua, he made a copy of Ch’ien Ta-hsin’s 錢大昕 (1728-1804) Shih chi k’ao-yi 史記考義 and spent late spring 1958 annotating “Kao-tsu pen-chi” and working on a pai-hua translation and annotation of chapter 79, “Fan Sui, Ts’ai Tse lieh-chuan” 范睢蔡 澤列傳. By early 1958 the editorial staff at Chung-hua had serious concerns about Ku Chieh-kang’s 顧 頡 剛 (1893-1980) editorial work on the Shih chi. 9 The completed work was to be presented on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic in October 1959, thus there was considerable pressure to finish the editing. Chung-hua was also looking for someone to run their Twenty-four Dynastic Histories project. The senior editors concluded that Sung Yün-pin was someone who could solve both of these problems for them. Thus it seems that both the final editing of the Shih chi, as well as the overall supervision of the entire project, were gradually assigned to Sung at this time. Since he had been condemned as a Rightist only a year earlier, his new roles were not publicized.10 That fall he began collating the Chin-ling Shu-chü 金陵書局 edition (which Ku Chieh-kang had taken as his base edition) with the Huang Shan-fu 黃善夫 (Po-na 百衲) and Palace (Tien-pen 殿本) editions. In late September 1958 Sung noted in his diary (p. 480) that the 6 Sung Yün-pin, Hung-ch’en leng-yen, yi-ke wen-hua ming-ren pi-hsia te Chung-kuo san-shih nien 紅塵冷眼, 一個文化名人筆下的中國三十年 (Taiyuan: Shan-hsi Jen-min, 2002). 7 In June of that year diary entries for the 28th and the 30th notes that he was annotating the “Tz’u-k’o lieh-chuan” 刺客列傳 (Hung-ch’en leng-yen, p. 104). 8 Ibid., pp. 454ff. Wang was the compiler of the very popular Shih chi hsüan 史記選 (Peking: Jen-min Wen-hsüeh, 1957). 9 Ku had been editing the Shih chi for Chung-hua for several years (see the present author’s “Historians of China,” CLEAR 17 [1995]: 207-16). 10 See Ch’ien Po-ch’eng 錢伯城, “Ts’ung Sung Yün-pin jih-chi k’an yi-ke kao-tseng ‘Yu-p’ai te ching-li” 從宋雲彬日記看一個高層“右派的經歷, Tung-fang wen-hua 東方文化, 2002.5.

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

406

punctuated version of the Shih chi that Ku Chieh-kang had produced differed considerably from Sung’s own version. Ku’s punctuation to a large extent followed the edition titled Shih chi, pai-wen chih pu 史記, 白文之部, that he and Hsü Wen-shan had prepared in the 1930s.11 This discrepancy led to a meeting of the Chung-hua editorial staff on September 30th, attended by the chief editor, Chin Ts’an-jan 金燦然 (1913-1972), 12 Ku Chieh-kang, Ch’i Ssu-ho 齊思和 (1907-1980), Nieh Ch’ung-ch’i 聶崇歧 (1903-1962), and others. As a result, Sung was asked to write down his objections to Ku’s edition. He did so in a seven-thousand-word paper titled “Kuan-yü piao-tien Shih chi chi ch’i San-chia chu te jo-kan wen-t’i” 關於標點史記及其三家注的若干問題 which he submitted to Chin Ts’an-jan two weeks later on October 16. It was clear that the remaining problems in the edition Ku Chieh-kang had prepared would require a long period of time to address properly. Given the time pressure, however, Sung was forced to do all of the final editing of the Shih chi text in a rush, completing a revised draft by April 1958, then writing the frontand back-matter in early May. Although Ku Chieh-kang had written some prefatory materials, it seems Sung did not use them.13 In late May, Sung revised the text again, working from suggestions byYeh Sheng-t’ao (see Sung’s diary, p. 502) and others. From July to September Sung proofread the Shih chi text, submitting a final copy in time for the book to be presented in October 1959. Thus the many problems in punctuation of the Chung-hua Shih chi that have been

11

See n. 2 above. Chin had entered Peking University in 1936, but then went to Yen-an in the 1938 where he joined the Communist Party. He held a number of political positions, many related to publishing, in the 1950s (he was the editor of the feuilleton for Jen-min jih-pao, for example). In 1958 when Chung-hua was entrusted with published newly edited versions of classical literature along with publications by modern scholars on these works, Chin became the General Editor and General Manager. Chin supervised the publication of a number of important works including the twentyfour dynastic histories and the Ch’üan T’ang shih 全唐詩. His relationship with Sung does not seem to have been cordial. 13 Ku had written a “Shih chi chiao-tien shuo-ming” 史記 校點說明 (Introduction to the Collated and Punctuated Grand Scribe’s Record) in 1956 and a “Shih chi chiao-cheng kung-tso t’ikang 史記校證工作題綱 (Outline of the Text-critical Work on the Grand Scribe’s Records) in early 1958. According to his daughter, Ku Hung 顧洪, however, some of Ku’s drafts were taken and kept by the Chung-hua and the the postface to the current Shih chi seems based on a draft by Ku (see Nienhauser, “Historians of China,” 212-5). This supposition seems to be contradicted by Sung Yün-pin’s diary, however. 12

Biographical Sketches of Shih chi Scholars

407

pointed out by numerous scholars over the years can, at least in part, be traced to the pressures of the final editing. Shortly after he finished his work on the Shih chi, Sung turned his attention to the Hou Han shu 後漢書. His editing of this history, published in 1965 by Chung-hua, was acknowledged clearly in the preface (p. 5). Even as he worked on this new task, Sung began to reconsider his editing of the Shih chi, compiling a list of typos and other errors in the recently published Shih chi text. In April 1961 this list was used to correct the text and issue a second printing of the Shih chi. A third printing came in March 1963, with further corrections. Sung’s pai-hua translation of “Hsiang Yü pen-chi” (Hsiang Yü 項羽 [Peking: Chung-hua]) also appeared in 1963. 14 He continued to edit the official histories, completing the Hou Han shu at the end of 1963, then turning to the Nan Ch’i shu (1964), the Ch’en shu (1965) and the Liang shu (1966). As was the case with the Shih chi, his work is not acknowledged in the prefaces to these four volumes. In 1964 Sung also read and commented on Yang Po-chün’s 楊伯峻 (1909-1992) draft of what would become his Ch’un ch’iu Tso chuan chu 春秋左傳注 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1982). For at least two semesters in 1961 and again in 1963 Sung offered classes on the Shih chi for Peking University. By June 1966, however, he became embroiled in the Cultural Revolution and his diary entries end. Little information about his activities for the next few years is available. Sung was assigned to work in the countryside in Hsien-ning 咸寧 (Hupei), but by 1970 had returned to Chung-hua and continued to edit the remaining volumes of Chung-hua’s Erh-shih-ssu shih 二 十 四 史 . His diary entries in mid-1966 seem to be the last original writing he did. Much as Sung’s pen was silenced then by the Red Guards, it is rumored that from his return to Peking from the countryside in 1970 until his death he did not utter a word in public.

14

He also published a translation of “Kao-ti pen-chi” from the Han shu under the title Liu Pang: hsüan tzu Han shu 劉邦 : 選自漢書 (Peking: Chung-hua, 1964).

Ch’ang 昌 (of Chou, the Lord of the West before 1073 B.C.), 243 Ch’ang-an 長安, 27, 97, 110, 277, 282, 295, 342 Ch’ang-ling 長陵, 141-142 Ch’ang-lo 長樂 (Prolonged Joy) Palace, 150, 212 Ch’ang-sang 長桑 (Long-lived Mulberry?), Mister, 3 Ch’ang-sha 長沙, 110 Ch’ang-yi 昌邑, 116, 205 Chao 趙, 107, 112, 124, 252, 281, 373, 378 Chao An-chi 趙安稽, 340 Chao Chang 趙章 (the Chancellor of the Marquis of Yang-hsü 陽虛), 46 ff. Chao Ch’ung-kuo 趙充國, 393 Chao Heng 趙恒 (fl. 1538), 130 Chao Hsiang-tzu 趙襄子 ([of Chao], r. 475-425 B.C.), 252 Chao Hsin 趙信, 286, 290, 291, 294, 324, 327, 336, 349 Chao Kuang-han 趙廣韓, 394 Chao Li 趙利, 268, 269 Chao Pu-yü 趙不虞, 323 Chao P’o-nu 趙破奴, 297, 300, 332, 340, 352, 353 Chao T’o 趙佗, 377, 382 Chao Yi-chi 趙食其, 223, 224, 336, 350 Chao Yü 趙禹, 392 Ch’ao-hsien 朝鮮, 262, 293, 343 Ch’ao-na 朝𨚗𨚗, 260, 277 Ch’ao Ts’o 鼂錯, (Grandee Secretary), 100, 105, 107, 109, 113, 114, 123, 125, 129, 130, 131, 385 Ch’ao Wan 趙綰, 144, 145, 146 Chavannes, Édouard (1865-1918), xxxviii

Index A Ai 哀 Marquis (Pitiful Marquis), 342 Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859), ix Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, ix “An fa” 案法 (The Model for [delivering] Massage), 80 An-ling 安陵, 71, 76 An-yang 安陽, 70 Ao Granary 敖倉, 106, 117 Arai Hanpei 有井範平 (1830-1889), 129 Armory 武庫, 117 B Barbaric Mo 貉, 252 C Chang An-shih 張安世, 393 Chang Ch’ien 張騫 (Marquis of Powang 博望侯), 218, 219, 328, 330, 349, 393 Chang-ch’ü 章渠, 338 Chang Erh 張耳, 383 Chang Han 章邯, 377-378 Chang Hsiang-ju 張相如, 278 Chang Kao 張杲 (fl. 1177), 19 Chang Meng 張孟, 148 Chang-ni 章尼, 280 Chang Ou 張歐, 367 Chang Tsung-tung 張宗棟 (modern scholar), 19 Chang Tz’u-kung 張次公, 318, 320, 348 Chang T’ang 張湯, 392 Chang-yeh 張掖, 227, 298 Chang Yü 張羽, 121, 174 409

410

Che-lan King 折蘭王, 329 “Chen fa” 診法 (Model of [Diagnostic] Examinations), 68 “Chen Mai Fa” 診脈法 (Model for Examining the Vessels), 66 Ch’en Chang 陳掌, 315, 357, 367 Ch’en Fu-liang 陳傅良 (1137-1203), 130 Ch’en Hsi 陳豨, 269 Ch’en Jen-hsi 陳仁錫 (1581-1636), 128, 196 Ch’en P’ing 陳平, 357 Ch’en She 陳涉, 378, 379 Ch’en Sheng 陳勝, 383 Cheng 鄭 (in Po-hai Commandery), 1, 11 n. 55 Cheng Chen-to 鄭振鐸 (1898-1958), 405 Cheng Chi 鄭季, 355 Cheng Hung 鄭弘, 394 Cheng Tang-shih 鄭當時, 158, 166, 168, 196, 392 Ch’eng 成 (Attending Secretary of Ch’i 齊), 32 ff. Ch’eng-an 成安, 173 Ch’eng-chi 成紀 (County), 201, 348 Ch’eng Jen-hsi 陳 仁 錫 (1581-1636), 196 Ch’eng K’ai-fang 成開方 (the ward Wu-tu 武都 in An-yang 安陽), 70 ff. Ch’eng Pu-shih 程不識, 155, 212-214 Ch’eng-yang 城陽, 107, 118 Chi An 汲黯, 158, 196, 366, 367, 368, 369, 390, 392 Chi-chü 稽沮 King, 332 Chi Fu 籍福, 144, 155 Chi-men 棘門, 282 Chi-nan 濟南, 107, 108 Chi-pei 濟北, 47, 50, 107

Index

Chi-pi 棘壁, 120 Chi-yü 稽粥 (Lao-shang 老上 Shan-yü), 273, 280 Ch’i 齊, 100, 103, 107, 112, 122, 124, 175, 246, 363, 378, 381 Ch’i 蘄 County, 90 ch’i 奇 (remarkable, strange), 195 Ch’i 漆 River, 250 “Ch’i ko” 奇咳 (The Regular and Irregular), 71, 81 “Ch’i k’e shu” 奇咳術 (The Art Concerning the Regular and Irregular), 30 “Ch’i lo chieh” 奇絡結 (Irregular Links and Knots), 79 Ch’i Ssu-ho 齊思和 (1907-1980), 402, 406 Chia Yi 賈宜 (200-168 B.C.), 20, 130 Chiang 絳, 116 Chiang 江, 125, 127 Ch’iang 羌, 262, 343, 383 Chiao-tung 膠東, 107, 108 Chiao-hsi 膠西, 106, 107, 108, 370 Chiao-huo 焦穫, 246 “Chieh yin yang chin shu” 接陰陽禁書 (The Secret Book on Joining yin and yang), 31 Chien-chang 建章 Palace (Palace of Established Brilliance), 227, 314 Ch’ien Mu 錢穆 (1895-1990), 402 Ch’ien Ta-hsin 錢大昕 (1728-1804), 405 Chih-chü Men 止車門, 159 Chih-po 智伯, 252 Chih T’uo 郅他, 190 Chin 晉 (state of), 6, 251, 252 Chin Mi-ti 金日磾, 392, 393 “Chin san-pai nien hsüeh-shu shih” 近 三百年學術史 (A History of the

Index

Scholarship in the Last Three Hundred Years), 402 Chin-t’ang 金堂 (a county in Szechwan), 401 Chin Ts’an-jan 金燦然 (1913-1972), 406 Chin-yang 晉陽, 267 Ch’in Ho 秦和 (see also “Pien Ch’üeh” 扁鵲), 19 Ch’in Hsin 秦信, 63 Ch’in K’ai 秦開, 253 Ch’in-li 禽棃, 334 Ch’in Wu-yang 秦舞陽, 253 Ching 荊 (a territory), 90 Ching Chü 景駒, 383 Ching-huan 景桓 Marquis, 342 Ching K’o 荊軻, 19, 253 “Ching mai kao hsia” 經脈高下 (Channels and Vessels: Above and Below), 79 Ching 涇 River, 244, 246, 250 Chiu-ch’üan 酒泉, 227, 293, 296, 298, 300, 351 Chiu-yüan 九原, 255, 291, 352 Chou 周, 243, 245 Chou 紂, 244 Chou Ch’iu 周丘, 118, 128 Chou Pa 周霸, 324 Chou She 周舍, 277 Chou Shih 周市, 383 Chou shu 周書, 378 Chou Tsao 周 , 278 Chou Ya-fu 周亞夫 (Grand Commandant), 112, 115, 129, 139, 149, 206 Chu-fu Yen 主父偃, 370, 373-97 Chu Mai-ch’en 朱買臣, 368, 392 Chu Ying 諸嬰, 35

411

Chu Ying 朱英 (the Chief Commandant of Tai Commandery), 286, 323 Ch’u 楚, 90, 96, 101, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 116, 117, 121, 124, 128, 162, 175, 176, 227 Ch’u Yü 出於 (the accredited wife of Pei-kung 北宮), 48 ff. Chü 莒 County, 39 Chü-ch’ü 且渠, 263 Chü Meng 劇孟, 115 Chü-ti-hou 且鞮侯, 299 Chü-yen 居延, 227, 228, 288, 298, 331 Ch’ü-chou 曲周, 112 Ch’ü-yi 屈射, 267 Ch’ü Yüan 屈原, 20 Chuan-hsü 顓頊, xxiv Ch’üan Jung 犬戎 (Dog Jung), 245, 246 Ch’üan Tsu-wang 全祖望 (1705-1755), 168 Ch’üan-yi 畎夷, 243 Chuang Ch’ing-ti 莊青翟, 146 Chuang Marquis 壯侯 (Stalwart Marquis), 340 Chuang Tzu 莊子, xxxii, xxxiii, xxxv Ch’un-ch’iu 春秋 (The Springs and Autumns [of Lu]), 302, 364, 373 Ch’un-shen 春申, 166 Ch’un-wei 淳維, 237, 260 Ch’un-yü Yi 淳於意, 26 ff. Ch’un-yü 淳于 (a town is on the east of Lin-tzu 臨菑 in Ch’i 齊), 60 Chung-hang Yüeh 中行說, (a person from Yen 燕), 274, 275, 306 Chung Hsing 鐘惺 (1574-1624), 169 “Chung-kuo shang-ku shih” 中國上古 史 (Ancient Chinese History), 402, 403 Chung-li Hou 眾利侯 (Multitude of Advantage Marquis), 326, 340

412

Chung-shan 中山, 373 Chün-ch’en 軍臣, 280 Clerk of the Capital Yao 繇, 45 Confucius (K’ung Ch’iu 孔丘), 167, 302, 378, 390 Croesus, ruler of Lydia (r. 560-547/6 B.C.), xiii, xix, xxii Cultural Revolution, 403

Index

D Daskylians, xv-xvi Daskylos, xv Di Cosmo, Nicola, 308 dogs and horses, 169-170 dreams, 4-9, 20 Duke Ai 哀 of Lu, 302 Duke Chao 昭 of Chin (r. 531-526), 4 Duke Ching 景 (of Ch’i 齊), 369 Duke Hsi 釐 ([of Ch’i 齊] r. 730-698 B.C.), 246 Duke Hsiang 襄 ([of Ch’i 齊], r. 627621 B.C.), 6, 246, 299 Duke Hsien 獻 ([of Chin 秦], r. 676-651 B.C.), 6 Duke Huan 桓 ([of Ch’i 齊] r. 685-643 B.C.), 247, 302, 369, 389 Duke Mu 穆 ([of Chin 秦], r. 659-621 B.C.), 5-6, 250 Duke Tao 悼 ([of Chin 晉], (r. 572-558 B.C.), 251 Duke Ting 定 of Lu, 302 Duke Wen 文 ([of Chin 秦] r. 636-628 B.C.), 6, 249 Duke Yin 隱 of Lu, 302 Dunn-Lo, Lena, ix

139, 141, 142, 160, 175, 205, 212, 220, 282, 348 Emperor of Ch’in, 375 Emperor Kao 高帝 (The Exalted Emperor, ca. 248-196, r. 206-196), 89 ff., 100, 111, 118, 205, 267-269, 376, 395 Emperor Hui 惠帝 (Hsiao Hui-ti 孝惠 帝 210-188 B.C., r. 195-188), 93, 269 Emperor Hsüan 宣帝 (Hsiao Hsüan-ti 孝宣帝), 393 Emperor Wen 文帝 (Hsiao Wen-ti 孝文 帝), 27, 95, 100, 101, 119, 131, 135, 202, 204, 220, 270, 272, 278, 282, 306, 348, 371 Emperor Wu 武帝 (the Martial Emperor), 168, 212, 220, 232, 233, 346, 347, 348, 356, 371, 394 Empress Dowager Lü 呂 (Lü-hou 呂后), 269 Empress Dowager Tou 竇 (Hsiao Wen Hou 孝文后), 135, 136, 144, 145, 146, 151, 154, 158, 165, 175, 177, 181, 189 Empress Dowager Po 薄 (Po T’ai-hou 薄太后), 102 Empress Kao 高 (Kao-hou 高后), 26, 29, 93, 270 Empress Wei 衛后, 386 Erh-shih 貳師 (Sutrishna), 227, 231, 296, 300, 301 Erh-shih-ssu shih 二十四史 (Twentyfour Dynastic Histories), 404, 406 Ess, Hans van, ix

E Eastern Palace, 157 Egypt, xii Emperor Ching 景帝 (Hsiao Ching-ti 孝 景帝 r. 157-141 B.C.), 100, 108, 137,

F Fan 氾 (the ward in Lin-tzu 臨菑), 60, 247 Fan K’uai 樊噲, 269 Fan-k’uei 范魁 (Fan Hillock), 8

Index

Farmer, J. Michael, ix Fei-hu-k’ou 飛狐口 [“Mouth of the Flying Fox(es)”], 281 “Fen chieh fa” 分界法 (Model for Measuring the Boundary), 46 Feng 酆, 244, 246 Feng Hsin 馮信, 80 Feng Shu-ch’in 鳳淑琴, 403 Fu-chü-ching 浮苴井 (Well of the Floating Rushes), 292 Fu Hsing 甫刑 ([The Marquis of] Fu’s Punishments), 245 Fu-li 符離, 319 Fu-lu-chih 復陸支, 339, 340 Fu-shih 膚施, 260 G Galer, Scott W., 9 General Kuan 灌 (Kuan Fu 灌夫 r. 148123 B.C.), 148 ff. Generals-in-chief of the Left, 261 Generals-in-chief of the Right, 261 “Genesis” (the Flood narrative), xxxviii-xliii Giele, Enno, ix Glaucon, xvi, xviii, xxx Grand Chief Commandants of the Left, 261 Grand Chief Commandants of the Right, 261 Grand Coachman Jao 饒, 45 Grand Dowager Tou 竇 (Hsiao Wen Hou 孝文后), 135, 136, 144, 145, 146, 151, 154, 158, 165, 175, 177 Grand Scribe, 82, 124, 130, 162, 166, 167, 168, 193, 196, 228, 233, 302, 305, 359, 389, 401 Grand Senior Princess, 314 Grand Tang-hu 當戶 to the Left, 261 Grand Tang-hu 當戶 to the Right, 261 Great Granary of Ch’i 齊, 25, 80

413

Greece, xi, xii Guan-nei Hou 關內侯 (Marquis Within the Pass), 323 Gyges, xiii-xxiii, xxxii, xxxv-xxxvii H Hai-ning 海寧, 404 Harlicarnassus, xi Han 漢, 92, 122 Han An-kuo 韓安國,121, 146, 157, 159, 173-99, 214, 216, 231, 233, 283, 284, 317, 353, 392 Han-ch’eng 韓城, xi Han-chung 漢中, 110, 349 Han Fei Tzu 韓非子 (ca. 280-233 B.C.), xxxiv, xxxv Han-hai 翰海 (Vast Sea), 290, 339 Han Ju 韓女 (an attendant of the King of Chi-pei 濟北), 59 Han 韓 King, 338 Han-ku Pass 函谷關, 106 Han Kuang 韓廣, 383 Han shu 漢書, language of compared to that of the Shih chi, 306-7 Han-tan 邯鏐, 17 Han T’ui-tang 韓穨當, 123 Han Tzu 韓子, 174 Han Wu-ti 漢武帝 (r. 141-87 B.C.), xii Han Yen 韓嫣, 225 Han Yen-shou 韓延壽, 394 Han Yüeh 韓說, 298, 300, 322, 350 Hao 鄗, 244, 246 Hawkes, David, 20 Heng-shan 衡山, 370 Heir of Wu 吳, 95-97 Heir of Yen 燕, 201 Heir Li 栗, 139 Herakles, xiii Heraklides, xv-xvi, xxii, xxxv Herodotus, xi-xliv

414

His Honour Liu 公劉, 242 Ho-ch’i Marquis 合騎侯 (Marquis of Combined Cavalry), 322, 330, 333 Ho-chien 河閒, 110 Ho-chien Commandery 河閒郡, 102 Ho-chü 河車, 348 Ho-hsi 河西 (West of the River), 249, 252, 351 Ho-nan 河南, 254, 260, 285, 318 Ho-nei 河內, 110 Ho Te-wei 賀德瑋, 403 Ho Tz’u-chün 賀次君, 401-3, 404 Ho Wei-k’uei 賀維夔, 401 Ho-yang 郃陽, 90 Hou-yi-lu 後義盧, 271 Hsi-ho 西河, 252, 299 Hsi-liu 細柳, 281 Hsi-yü-ch’ien 係雩淺, 272 hsia 俠 (knights-errant), 166 Hsia 夏, 237, 242 Hsia Ch’eng-t’ao 夏承燾 (1900-1986), 405 Hsia-hou Sheng 夏候勝, 393 Hsia-p’ei 下邳, 118 Hsia-yi 下邑, 121 Hsiao Wang-chih 蕭望 之, 393 Hsiang 象, xxv ff., xliii Hsiang-p’ing 襄平, 253 Hsiang Ch’u 項處 (a kung-sheng 公承 dignitary of the ward Pan 阪 in Anling 安陵), 71-72, 76 Hsiang Liang 項梁, 383 Hsiang Yu 項羽, 129, 260 Hsiao ching 孝經 (Classic of the Filial Piety), 389 Hsiao Pass 蕭關, 110, 202, 277 Hsien-lei 胘靁 , 294 Hsien-yang 咸陽, 17 Hsien-yün 獫狁, 238, 319

Index

Hsieh Tse 薛澤 (Marquis of P’ing-chi 平棘), 190-191 Hsüeh 薛 (a county in the Kingdom of Tzu-ch’uan 菑川 in Ch’i 齊), 363 Hsin hsü 新序, xxvi Hsin-li 薪黎, 267 Hsin-ling 信陵, 166 Hsin-wang 薪望, 272 Hsing Shan 邢山 (the Chief Commandant of Pei-ti), 339 Hsing-yang 滎陽, 106, 112, 137 Hsiu-t’u 休屠 King, 287, 289, 330 Hsiung Ho 匈河 (River), 292, 352 Hsiung K’o-wu 熊克武 (1885-1970), 402 Hsiung-nu 匈奴, xi, xii, 89, 108, 183 ff., 189, 191, 192, 202, 209, 211, 214, 216, 217, 221, 224, 227, 231, 233, 237-310, 315, 318, 321, 333ff., 347, 349, 352, 353, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 384 Hsiung Pin 熊斌 (1894-1964), 403 Hsiung Shih-li 熊十力 (1885-1968), 402 Hsü Ch’ang 許昌, 146 Hsü Chih-mo 徐志摩, 404 Hsü Tzu-wei 徐自為, 298, 340 Hsü Wen-shan 徐文珊 (1900-1998), 402 Hsü-yen 朐衍, 251 Hsü Yüeh 徐樂, 378, 385 Hsün 循 (the Prefect of the Gentlemen of the Palace of Ch’i 齊), 37-39 Hsün Chih 荀彘, 351 Hsün-yü 葷粥, 338 Hu 胡 (Tartars), 110, 203, 227, 253, 270, 277, 281, 283, 284, 287, 343, 352, 375, 382, 387 Hu-chieh 呼揭, 271 Hu-nu 狐奴 River, 329

Index

Hu Shih 胡適 (1891-1962), 402 Hu Sui 壺遂, 190, 193, 195ff., 198 Hu-tu-ni 呼毒尼, 334 Hu Yü-lan 胡雨嵐, 401 Hu-yü-t’u King 呼于屠王, 332-333 Huai 淮 River, 90, 109, 116, 117, 120, 127 Huai-an 淮安, 162 Huai-nan 淮南, 370 Huai-yang 淮陽, 115, 150 Huan 桓 (a General), 117 Huang Ch’ang-ch’ing 黃長卿 (the elder brother of the King of Ch’i's Lady Huang 黃), 57 Huang Ch’ui 黃肿, 376 Huang Pa 黃霸, 394 Huang Shan-fu 黃善夫, 405 Huang-ti 黄帝 (The Yellow Emperor), xxiii-xxiv, 26, 29 Hui-chou 濊州, 384 Hun Jung 緄戎, 250 Hun-yeh King 渾邪王, 289, 329, 333, 334 Hun-yü 葷粥, 238 Hun-yü 渾庾, 267 Huo Ch’ü-ping 霍去病, 197, 226, 231, 233, 287, 290, 305, 325, 328-44, 353-61, 393 Huo Chung-ju 霍仲孺, 357 Huo Kuang 霍光, 393 Huo Shan 霍嬗, 341 J Jang 穰 exorcism, 9 Jen An 任 安, 341, 359 Jen Shang 任敞, 291 Jen Wen 任文, 298 Jung-ti 戎狄, 247, 248, 249, 251

415

K Kan-ch’üan 甘泉 Palace (Palace of Sweet Springs), 226, 252, 277, 282, 312 Kandaules, xiii-xxiii, xxviii, xxxv Kao Ch’i 高期 (a Grand Physician), 79 Kao-ch’üeh 高闕, 253, 286, 317 Kao Huang-ti 高皇帝 (The August Emperor Kao; see also Emperor Kao and Kao-tsu), 89 ff., 100, 111, 118, 205, 267-269, 376, 381, 38 Kao-nu 高奴, 270 Kao Pu-shih 高不識, 332, 333 Kao Sui 高遂, 140 Kao-tsu 高祖 (Liu Pang 劉邦, 247-195 B.C., r. 202-195 B.C.; see also Emperor Kao and Kao Huang-ti), 162, 180 Kao-yung 高永, 81 King Ching 景王, 107 King Hsiao 孝 of Liang 梁, 121, 136, 174, 175, 178, 179 King Hui’s Queen 惠后, 247, 248 King Kung 共王, 181 King of Ch’ang-sha 長沙王, 109 King of Chao 趙王, 75, 102, 108, 109, 110, 119, 124, 127, 282 King of Ch’i 齊王, 35, 41, 57, 66, 69, 81, 107, 110, 253, 381, 387, 388 King of Ch’in 秦王, 253, 381 King of Chi-nan 濟南王, 75, 79, 109, 119, 124 King of Chi-pei 濟北王, 47, 50, 59, 107, 124, 270 King of Chiang-tu 江都, 124 King of Chiao-hsi 膠西王, 75, 102, 103, 104, 106, 109, 119, 122, 128 King of Chiao-tung 膠東王, 109, 119, 122, 123 King of Ching 荊王, 91, 127

416

King of Ch’u 楚王, 100, 106, 109, 110, 120, 127 King of Han 韓, 268, 269 King of Heng-shan 衡山王, 109 King of Huai-nan 淮南王, 90, 109, 110 King of Kou 句, 332 King of Liang 梁, 168, 177, 206 King of Lin-chiang 臨江王, 180 King of Lou-fan 樓煩王, 285 King of Lu-chiang 廬江王, 109 King of Ju-nan 汝南, 124 King of Tai 代王, 89 King of the Hu 胡王, 110 King of the Pai-yang 白羊王, 260, 285, 318 King of the Yi-ch’ü Jung 義渠戎王, 252 King Ch’eng 成王 (of Chou 周), 381 King T’ang 湯王 (of Shang 商), 380 King of Tzu-ch’uan 菑川王, 53, 56, 80, 109, 119, 122, 123, 124 King of Wu 吳王 (see also Liu P’i 劉 濞), 75, 89-133 King of the Wu-sun 烏孫, 294 King of Yen 燕王 (Lu Wan 盧綰), 110, 154, 269, 386 King Chao 昭 ([of Ch’in 秦], r. 306-251 B.C.), 252 King Hsiang 襄王 ([of Chou 周], r. 651-620 B.C.), 247, 248, 249 King P’ing 平王 ([of Chou 周], (r. 771720 B.C.) King Mu 穆王 ([of Chou 周], r. c. 985931 B.C.), 245 King Tao-hui 悼惠王, 100, 119 King Wen 文王, 75 King Wu 武王 ([of Chou 周] r. c. 10731068 B.C.), 244, 380 King Wu-ling 武靈 ([of Chao 趙], r. 325-299), 253

Index

King Yu 幽王, 119 King Yu 幽王 ([of Chou 周], r. 781-771 B.C.), 245, 246 King Yüan 元王, 100-101, 111, 124 127 Knickerbocker, Bruce, ix Kou-chu 句注, 281 Kou-li-hu 呴犁湖, 298, 299 Ku Chieh-kang 顧頡剛 (1893-1980), 402, 403, 405, 406 Ku-sou 瞽叟, xxv ff.., xxxviii, xliii Ku-tu 骨都 Marquises to the Left, 261, 263 Ku-tu 骨都 Marquises to the Right, 261, 263 Ku-yen 姑衍, 290 K’uai-chi 會稽 Commandery, 91, 102, 107 K’uai-chui 會甀, 91 Kuan-chin 觀津, 135 Kuan Chung 管仲, 368 Kuan Fu 灌夫, 148-63, 165-170 Kuan Ho 灌何 (d. 147 B.C.), 149 Kuan Meng 灌孟, 149 Kuan-nei Marquis 關內侯 (Marquis Within the Pass) , 340 Kuan Ying 灌嬰, 148, 270 Kuang-ling 廣陵, 108-109 Kuang-wu 廣武, 351 “K’uei tu yin yang wai pien” 揆度陰陽 外變 (Gauging and Measuring the External Anomolies of yin and yang), 30-31 K’un-ming 昆明, 351 Kung-lü 弓閭 River, 338 Kung-kao 弓高, 123 Kung-sun Ao 公孫敖, 191, 223, 284, 296, 300, 301, 315, 322, 330, 333, 347 Kung-sun Ching-sheng 公孫敬聲, 346

Index

Kung-sun Ho 公孫賀, 187, 284, 292, 315, 316, 322, 323, 345, 346 Kung-sun Hun-yeh 公孫昆邪, 207 Kung-sun Hung 公孫弘 (ca. 200-121 B.C.), 363-72, 395-9 Kung-sun Jung-nu 公孫戎奴, 323 Kung-sun Kuang 公孫光 (the ward T’ang 唐 in Tzu-ch’uan 菑川), 7778 Kung-sun Kuei 公孫詭, 178, 179, 181 Kung-sun Tu 公孫度, 372, 390 Kung Yu 恭友, (the Grand Administrator of Tai Commandery), 285 K’ung Chü 孔車, 388 K’ung Sui 龔雖, 394 Kuo 轜 (statelet), 9; Lord of, 9-15 Kuo Ch’ang 郭昌, 295, 351 Kuo Ch’eng 郭成, 321 Kuo Chi 郭吉, 292 Kuo Tsung 郭縱, 297 L Lady Wang 王夫人, 327 Lan-t’ien 藍田, 215 Lang-ya 琅邪, 376 Lao Tzu 老子, 82 Li 酈 (a general), 124 Li Chi 酈寄, 112 Li Chi-fu 李吉甫 (758-814), 403 Li Chü 李沮, 320, 324, 348 Li Chiao 李椒, 225 Li Ching-hsing 李景星 (1876-1934), 128 Li Hsi 李醯, 17, 320, 334 Li Hsi 李息, 187, 284, 317, 346 Li Hsin 李信, 201 Li Kan 李敢, 225, 226, 337

417

Li Kuang 李廣 (a General), 155, 186, 187, 201-35, 284, 288, 305, 316, 330 Li Kuang-li 李廣利, 227, 296, 300, 301 Li-k’un 鬲昆, 267 Li Ling 李陵, 225, 227, 228, 231, 232, 300, 305 Li Mu 李牧 (fl. 244-229), 254 Li Ssu 李斯, 375 Li Tang-hu 李當戶, 225 Li Ts’ai 李蔡, 204, 220, 225, 320, 323, 348 Li Yen-nien 李延年, 393 Li Yü 李禹, 226 Liang 梁, 115, 116, 117, 120, 173, 250 Liang-ch’iu Ho 梁丘賀, 393 Liang Yü-sheng 粱玉繩 (1745-1819), xxx, xxxv, xxxvi, 355, 403 Liao Hsi 遼西, 192, 216, 253-254, 317 Liao-tung 遼東, 254, 255, 278 Lieh 烈 Marquis (Illustrious Marquis), 343 Lin-chin Pass 臨晉關, 110 Lin Hu 林胡 (Forrest Hu), 251 Lin-t’ao 臨洮, 255 Lin-tzu 臨菑, 29, 60, 79, 81, 108, 122, 129, 373 Ling Chih-lung 凌稚隆, 196 Ling-chü 令居, 291, 292 Ling Yüeh-yan 凌約言 (chin-shih 1540), 167 Liu An 劉安 (King of Huai-an 淮安), 162, 167 Liu Ang 劉卬 (King of Chiao-hsi 膠西), 102, 119, 120, 123 Liu Chang 劉章 (King Ching 景), 107 Liu Chia 劉賈 (King of Ching 荊), 91, 127 Liu Chih 劉志 (King of Chi-pei), 107 Liu Ching 劉敬, 268, 269, 376-377

418

Liu Chiao 劉交 (King Yüan 元), 101, 124, 127 Liu Chung 劉仲 (Liu P’i’s father, the elder bother of Kao-ti 高帝), 89-90, 125 Liu Fei 劉肥 (King Tao-hui 悼惠), 100, 119, 131 Liu Fei 劉非, 124 Liu Heng 劉恆 (r. 180-157 B.C.), 95 Liu Hsiang 劉向 (57-6 B.C.), xxxiii, 393 Liu Hsien 劉賢, 120 Liu Hsiung-ch’ü 劉雄渠, 120 Liu Mai (King Kung 共王 r. 144-136 B.C.), 181 Liu Jung 劉榮 (King of Lin-chiang 臨 江王 d. 148 B.C.), 127, 180 Liu Li 劉禮, 124 Liu P’i 劉濞 (215-154 B.C.; see also King of Wu), 20, 89-133 Liu Pi-kuang 劉辟光, 119-120 Liu-po 六博 (“Six rods”), 96-97 Liu Sui 劉遂 (King of Chao 趙), 102, 108, 119, 120, 127 Liu Te 劉德, 122 Liu Ting-kuo 劉定國, 386 Liu T’ung 劉通 (a brother of King of Wu 吳), 114 Liu Tzu-chü 劉子駒, 122 Liu Tzu-hua 劉子華, 122 Liu Wu 劉戊 (King of Ch’u 楚), 101, 122 Liu Wu 劉武 (King Hsiao 孝 of Liang 梁 r. 168-144 B.C.), 121, 136 Liu Ya-tzu 柳亞子 (1887-1958), 404 Liu Yu 劉友 (King Yu 幽), 119 Lo, Irving Yu-cheng, ix Lo 洛 River, 244, 246, 249 Lo-hsia Hung 落下閎, 392-393

Index

Lo-yang 雒陽, 17, 89, 115, 117, 129 Lo-yi 雒邑, 244, 247, 249 Lou-chuan 樓專 King, 339 Lou-fan 樓煩, 251, 260, 285, 318 Lou-lan 樓蘭, 271 Lu Ch’ing 盧卿, 278 Lu-ch’ü 廬朐, 298 Lu Chung Lien 魯仲連, 20 Lu Ch’ung-kuo 路充國, 295, 299 Lu-hu King 盧胡王, 329 Lu-hun 陸渾, 248 Lu-li 谷蠡 Kings to the Left (Tso-lu-liwang 左谷蠡王), 261, 263, 285 Lu-li 谷蠡 Kings to the Right (Yu-lu-liwang 右谷蠡王), 261, 263, 290, 337 Lu Po-te 路博德 (the Chief Commandant of the Strong Crossbowmen), 231, 298, 300, 339, 352 Lu Wan 盧綰, 269 Lo Hsiang-lin 羅香林 (1906-1978), 402 Lo-ku-pi 羅姑比, 326 Luan Pu 欒布 (a General), 112, 138 Lung-ch’eng 籠城 (City of the Dragon), 191, 264, 284, 316, 384 Lung-hsi 隴西 (Commandery), 201, 205, 208, 228, 250, 252, 287, 335 Lü Tsu-ch’ien 呂祖謙 (1137-1181), xxxv Lü Zongli, ix Lydia, xiii, xv M Ma Hsü 馬續, xx Ma-yi 馬邑, 185, 186, 188, 189, 214, 267, 282, 283, 345, 346 “Mai fa” 脈法 (Model for the Study of Vessels/Pulses), 33-34, 40, 41, 43, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78

Index

Mai shu: shang hsia ching 脈書上下經 (Pulse Book: Upper and Lower Canon), 30 Mao Dun 茅盾, 404 Mao-ling 茂陵, 342, 385 Marquis Huan 桓 of Ch’i (r. 374-357 B.C.), 15-16 Marquis Nan-chih 難氏, 271, 272 Marquis of An-tao 按道, 350 Marquis of An-t’ou 岸頭, 318 Marquis of Ch’ang 昌, 278 Marquis of Ch’ang-lo 常樂, 334 Marquis of Ch’ang-p’ing 長平, 298, 318 Marquis of Ch’eng 成, 278 Marquis of Chi-jo 籍若, 326 Marquis of Cho-yeh 浞野, 295, 297, 300, 352 Marquis of Chou-yang 周陽, 142 Marquis of Fa-kan 發干, 322, 343 Marquis of Fu-li 符离, 339, 352 Marquis of Ho-ch’i 河綦, 334 Marquis of Hsi 翕, 287, 289, 324, 349 Marquis of Hsia-mo 下摩, 334 Marquis of Hui-ch’ü 煇渠, 333, 334 Marquis of Ko 蓋, 147 Marquis of Ko-yi 葛繹, 346 Marquis of Kuan-chün 冠軍 (Best-inthe-Army Marquis), 326 Marquis of Kung-kao 弓高, 350 Marquis of Lin-ju 臨汝, 155 Marquis of Lo-an 樂安, 220, 323, 348 Marquis of Lo-yin 漯陰, 334 Marquis of Lung-lü 隆慮, 278 Marquis of Lung-o 龍額, 322 Marquis of Manifold Merit (Chung-li Hou 眾利侯), 326 Marquis of Nan-hao 南奅, 323 Marquis of Ning 甯, 278

419

Marquis of P’ing-chi 平棘, 191 Marquis of P’ing-chin 平津, 363 ff. Marquis of Ping-ch’ü 平曲, 345 Marquis of P’ing-ling 平陵, 318 Marquis of P’ing-yang 平陽, 311, 336, 350, 355, 356 Marquis of Po-chih 柏至侯, 146 Marquis of Po-wang 博望, 218, 328, 330, 331, 349 Marquis of She-an 涉安, 285 Marquis of She-chih 涉軹, 323 Marquis of Shen 申侯, 245 Marquis of Sui-ch’eng 隨成, 323 Marquis of T’ao 桃, 141 Marquis of T’iao 條, 112, 115, 121, 139 Marquis of Tung-yang 東陽, 278 Marquis of Wei-chi 魏其 (see Tou Ying), 135, 353 Marquis of Wu-an 武安, 141, 143, 144, 146, 147, 162, 353 Marquis of Wu-ch’iang 武疆侯, 146 Marquis of Yi-ch’un 宜春, 321, 343 Marquis of Yi-yang 義陽, 339 Marquis of Yin-an 陰安, 321 Mao-tun 冒頓, 256 ff. Master Chai 翟生, 196 Master Mei 枚生, 391 Master Shen 申生 of Lu 魯, 145 Master T’ien 田生 of Tsou 騶, 174 medical formulae and techniques, 26 Mei Kao 枚皋, 392 Meng 蒙 (a county in Liang 梁), 177 Meng-ch’ang 孟嘗, 166 Mencius, xxxiv, xxxvii Meng T’ien 蒙恬, 254, 260, 285, 375 Meng Tzu 孟子, xxx-xxxi, xxxv Mien-chu 緜諸, 250 Min-yüeh 閩越, 108, 122, 182 Ming-t’ang 明堂 (Bright Hall), 145

420

Mo-tzu 墨子, 378 Mount Ch’i 岐山, 243, 246, 250 Mount Ch’i-lien 祁連山, 227, 288, 331, 342, 353 Mount Cho-yeh 涿涂, 300 Mount Chün-chi 浚稽, 297 Mount Kou-chu 句注山, 252, 267 Mount Ku-yen 姑衍, 338 Mount Lang-chü-hsü 狼居胥山, 290, 338 Mount Li 歷山, xxxii-xxxiii, xxxviii Mount Li 驪山, 246 Mount Li-hou 離侯, 338 Mount Tao-yü 檮余, 339 Mount T’ien 天山 (Altai), 227, 300 Mount Tien-yen 闐顏山, 290, 337 Mount Wu-li 烏盭山, 329 Mount Yang 陽山, 255 Mount Yen-chih 焉支山, 287, 329 Mount Yin 陰山, 253 Mountain Jung 戎山, 238, 247 N Nakai Sekitoku 中井積德 (1732-1817), 197 Nan-yüeh 南越, 110, 292 Nealon, Teresa, ix Ni K’uan 兒寬, 391 “Ni shun lun” 逆順論 (The Structured Analysis of the Countervective and Placid), 80 Nicolaus of Damascus (ca. 64–after 4 B.C.), xv-xvi, xxviii, xxxv Nieh Ch’ung-ch’i 聶崇歧 (1903-1962), 406 Nieh Weng-yi 聶翁壹, 185, 186, 282 Nienhauser, William H., Jr., 308 Ning Ch’eng 甯乘, 327 Niu Yün-chen 牛運震 (1706-1758), xxxviii, 195

Index

Noble Scion Chih 支 , 5-6 Northern Barbarians (Pei-yi 北夷), 261 Northern Ho 北河, 319 Nürnberger, Marc, ix Nysia, xix O oral story-telling tradition, xiii P Pa 巴, 365 Pa-hu Chiang-chün 拔胡將軍 (General Who Seizes the Barbarians), 351 Pa-ling 霸陵, 216 Pa-shang 霸上 (Pa Heights), 162, 282 Pai-teng 白登, 268 Palace Grandee of Ch’i 齊, 52 Pan 阪 (the ward in An-ling 安陵), 71 Pan Ku 班固 (32-92), xii, 197, 198, 232, 391, 395 Pan yü 槃盂 (Vessel [Inscriptions]), 142 P’an Man-ju 潘滿如 (the Commandant of the Capital of Ch’i 齊), 44 ff. Pei-chia 北假, 255 Pei-hai 北海 (North Sea), 293 Pei Ho 北河 (North Ho), 375, 376, 382 Pei-kung 北宮 (Officer of Works in Ch’i), 48 Pei-ti 北地, 182, 208, 252, 277, 281, 330, 335, 347 P’ei 沛 County, 90-92 Persians, xi Pi-chü-ch’i 比車耆, 338 P’iao-yao 剽姚, 325 Pien Ch’üeh 扁鵲, 1-23, 26, 29, 67, 82 Pin 豳, 242, 243 pin-k’o 賓客 (guest-retainers), 165 ff. Ping Chi 邴吉, 394 P’ing-ch’eng 平城, 268, 376

Index

P’ing-chou 平州, 352 “Ping fa” 病法 (Model of Disorders), 48 Ping fa 兵法 (Methods of War), 377 P’ing-lu 平陸, 124 P’ing-yang 平陽, 311 P’ing-yüan 平原, 166 Plato, xv-xvi, xviii, xxii, xxx Plutarch (c. 46-120), xxii, xxxii Po 僰, 384 Po-hai 勃海 Commandery, 1, 11 P’o Shih 破石 (a Gentleman of the Palace of Ch’i 齊), 64 ff. Po Wu 薄吾 (a woman of the ward Fan 氾 in Lin-tzu 臨菑), 60 ff. Powell, Barry, ix Prefect Grand Physician of Ch’i 齊, 44 Princess of P’ing-yang 平陽, 312, 314 Princess of T’ang-i 堂邑, 314 P’u-ni 蒲泥, 319 Pu Shih 卜式, 391 P’u To 僕多, 333 pulse books, 26 Q Queen Dowager Hsüan 宣, 252 R Rear Palace, 51 Rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms (see Rebellion of Wu and Ch’u), 127, 129, 130, 137, 379 Rebellion of Wu 吳 and Ch’u 楚, 137, 174ff., 206, 233, 282 Rebellion of Yen 燕, 269 S Sadyattes, xvi Sang Hung-yang 桑弘羊, 392, 393 Sardis, xiii

421

Shan Jung 山戎 (Mountain Jung), 251 Shan-yang 山陽, 372 Shan-yü 單于, 186, 187, 188, 214, 221, 223, 224, 228, 232, 256, 258, 259, 262, 270-274, 278-280, 283, 290297, 329, 331, 333, 335, 336, 337 Shao Hsin-ch’en 劭信臣, 394 “Shang hsia ching mai” 上下經脈 (The Upper and Lower Channels and Vessels), 81 Shang-ku 上谷, 191, 192, 206-207, 253, 316 Shang shu 尚書 (Book of Documents), xviii, xxxvii Shen Tao 慎到, 167 Shih chi 史記 (Grand Scribe’s Records), xi and passim; structure of, 20 Shih chi chi chu 史記集注, 405 Shih chi chih-yi 史記質疑, 403 Shih chi hsiang-chieh 史記詳節, xxxv Shih chi k’ao-yi 史記考義, 405 Shih chi shu lu 史記書錄 (A Record of Texts of the Grand Scribe’s Records), 401 Shih Chien 石建, 159, 218, 392 Shih Ch’ing 石慶, 392 “Shih shen” 石神 (The Deities of the Stone), 31 Shou-hsiang-ch’eng 受降城 (Walledcity for Receiving Those Who Surrender), 347 Shu 豎, 50-51 Shu 蜀, 110, 365 Shun 舜, xxiii-xxxv, xxxvii, xliii-xliv; story-complex of, xxxiv Shuo-fang 朔方, 285, 286, 290, 292, 295, 318, 320, 346, 348, 351, 367 Shuo yüan (alternately Shui yüan) 說苑, xxxiii Six Disciplines (Liu yi 六藝), 393

422

“Ssu fa” 死法 (Model of [Imminent] Death), 51 Ssu-ma Ch’ien 司馬遷 (145-ca. 86 B.C.), xi and passim Ssu 姒 of Pao 褒, 245 Ssu 泗 river, 116 Ssu-ma fa 司馬法 (Methods of the Marshal), 374 Ssu-ma Hsiang-ju 司馬相如, 392 “Ssu shih ying yin yang ch’ung” 四時 應陰陽重 (The Resonance of the Four Seasons and the Doubling of Yin and Yang), 81 Su Ch’e 蘇轍 (1039-1102), 20 Su Chien 蘇建, 168, 286, 318, 320, 324, 325, 327, 348 Su-p’u King 遫濮王, 329, 332 Su Wu 蘇武, 299, 393 Sui 遂 (the Attending Physician346 of the King of Ch’i), 66 ff. Sui Tan 隨但, 301 Sui-yang 睢陽, 173 Sun Ang 孫卬, 277 Sung Chien 宋建 (Queen’s younger brother), 57-59 Sung Yi 宋邑 (of Lin-tzu 臨菑), 79 Sung Yün-pin 宋雲彬, 403, 404-7 T Ta-li 大荔, 251 Ta-hsia 大夏, 293, 328 “Ta-k’ai” 大凱 (Great Victory March), 374 Ta-yu District 大猶鄉, 349 Tagore, Rabindranath (1861-1941), 404 Tai 代, 110, 187, 209, 220, 252, 253, 281, 283 Tai-ku 代谷 (The Valley to Tai), 376 Tai-lin 蹛林, 264 T’ai-shih Chiao 太史嬓, 195

Index

T’ai Ts’ang-kung 太倉公 (The Great Granarian), 25, 82 T’ai-yüan 太原, 248, 267, 270, 319, 351 Tan-fu 亶父 (Father Tan), 243 Tan-t’u 丹徒, 122 Tan-yang 丹陽, 227 T’an Ch’i-hsiang 譚其驤 (1911-1992), 402 tang-hu 當戶, 326, 331, 338 T’ang An 唐安 (the ward Chao 召 in Lin-tzu 臨菑), 81 T’ang Hsieh 湯諧 (chin-shih 1724), 169n. T’ang Shun-chih 唐順之 (1507-1560), 127 T’ang Tu 唐都, 392 T’ao Chu 陶朱, 378 Te 德, 114 Teng Tu-wei 鄧都尉, 115-116, 128 Three Ages (of Hsia, Shang and Chou), 375 Thucycdides, xii Ti 帝 (the High God), 5-8 Ti 狄, 243 Ti 氐, 262 Ti 翟 tribe, 8, 250 Ti Queen 狄后, 247, 248 T’i-ying 緹縈, 27 ff., 82 T’ien Ch’ang 田常, 381 T’ien Chia 田甲, 177, 178 T’ien Fen 田蚡 (Marquis of Wu-an 武 安), 141-163, 165-70, 182, 189, 233 T’ien Lu-po 田祿伯, 113, 116 ff., 129 T’ien Sheng (Marquis of Chou-yang 周 陽), 142 T’ien Shu 田叔, 20 T’ien Tan 田儋, 195, 196, 383 T’ien T’ien 田恬, 162

Index

Ting-hsiang 定襄, 286, 289, 320, 335, 350 Ting-ling 丁零, 267 “Ting wu wei chi ho chi t’ang fa” 定五 味及和齊湯法 (Models for Determining the Five Flavors and Blending the Regulatory Hot Liquids), 80-81 Tou Fu 竇甫, 150 Tou Yi-fang 竇猗房, 135 Tou Ying 竇嬰(The Marquis of Wei-chi 魏其), 112, 135-41, 160, 165-70, 233 T’ou-man 頭曼, 256, 258, 260 Tsang Ku 臧固, 190 Ts’ang-hai 滄海, 367, 368 Ts’ang Kung 倉公 (The Great Granarian), 19 Tsao-yang 造陽, 253, 285 Ts’ao Hsiang 曹襄, 336, 350 Ts’ao Shan-fu 曹山跗 (the ward Changwu 章武 in Ch’i 齊), 42 ff. Tseng Kuo-fan 曾囯藩 (1811-1872), 129, 195 Tsou Yang 鄒陽, 20 Ts’ung-p’iao Marquis 從驃侯 (Marquis Who Accompanies the General of Agile Cavalry), 332, 340, 352 Tu Chou 杜周, 396 Tu Hsin 杜信 (a deputy of the household of the Marquis of Kaoyung 高永), 81 Tu Yen-nien 杜延年, 394 T’u-ch’i 屠耆, 261 T’u Sui 屠睢, 382 Tudo, xix Tui-yü 祋祤, 350 Tun-huang 郭煌, 296 T’un-t’ou 屯頭 King, 338 Tung An-yü 董安于, 5, 9

423

Tung Chung-shu 董仲舒, 370 Tung-fang Shuo 東方朔 (fl. 125 B.C.), xxxiv, 392 Tung-hai Commandery 東海郡, 102, 327 Tung Ho 董赤, 278 Tung Hu 東胡 (Eastern Hu), 251, 259 Tung-yüeh 東越, 108, 122, 182, 350 T’ung-li 銅離, 334 Tzu-chih t’ung-chien 資治通鑑, 404 Tzu-ch’uan 菑川, 53, 56, 77, 107, 108, 363, 364 Tzu-ling 梓領, 319 Tzu Pao 子豹, 15 Tzu Tai 子帶, 247, 248 Tzu Yang 子陽, 15 Tzu-yü 子輿, 5 “Tz’u-k’e lieh-chuan” 刺客列傳, 19 V Viscount Chien 簡 of Chao, 4-9, 20 W Wan Chang 萬章, xxx-xxxi, xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvii Wang Ch’eng 王成, 394 Wang Fu-chih 王夫之 (1619-1692), 130, 131 Wang Huang 王黃, 268, 269 Wang Hui 王恢 (d. 133 B.C.), 183, 185, 187, 188, 189, 283 Wang Pao 王裦, 393 Wang Po-hsiang 王伯祥 (1890-1975), 405 Wang Shih-han 汪師韓, (b. 1707, chinshih 1732), 165 Wang Shu 王燭, 195 Wang Shuo 王朔, 221 Wang Tsang 王臧, 144, 145, 146 Wang Wu 王烏, 293, 295

424

Wang Yü 王禹 (a Grand Physician), 79 Wei Ao 衛媼, 355 Wei Pu-i 衛不疑, 321 Wei Ch’ang-tzu 衛長子, 312 Wei-ch’eng 渭城, 161 Wei-chi 魏其, 135, 152, 153, 156, 157, 160, 161, 162 Wei Chiang 魏絳, 251 Wei Ch’ing 衛青, 168, 191, 192, 196, 197, 221, 226, 231, 233, 284, 286, 289-90, 305, 311-28, 353-4, 355-61, 374, 392, 393 Wei Hsiang 魏相, 393 Wei Hsien 韋賢, 198 Wei Hsüan-ch’eng 韋玄成, 198, 393 Wei Ju 衛孺, 356 Wei K’ang 衛伉, 298, 321, 322, 342344 Wei-mo 穢貉, 262, 293 Wei 渭 River, 246, 282 Wei Shao-erh 衛少兒, 355-6 Wei Su 魏遫 (Marquis of Ning 甯), 278 Wei Teng 衛登, 322, 343 Wei Tzu-fu 衛子夫, 312, 315, 355, 356, 357 Wei Wan 魏綰 (Marquis of Chien-ling 建陵), 141, 143 Wei Wang 維王, 297 Wei-yang 未央 (Eternal) Palace, 212 Western Jung 西戎, 242, 243, 244, 250 Worthy King to the Left (Tso-hsienwang 左賢王), 261, 263, 288, 290, 301, 352 Worthy King to the Right (Yu-hsienwang 右賢王), 261, 263, 270, 286, 296, 298, 300, 321 Wu 吳, 91, 93, 97, 98, 100, 101, 102, 107, 113, 115, 116, 121, 128, 131, 162, 176

Index

“Wu Chen” 五診 (The Five Examinations), 79, 81 Wu Ch’en 吳臣, 383 Wu Chien-ssu 吳建思 (fl. 1680-1690), 128, 165n., 169 Wu-chih 烏氏, 251 Wu-chou 武州. , 187, 283 Wu-hsing 吳興, 401 Wu Ju-lun 吳汝綸 (1840-1903), 130 Wu Kuang 吳廣, 383 Wu 武 Pass, 117 “Wu se chen” 五色診 (Diagnostics by Means of the Five Colors), 30 Wu-shih-lu 烏師廬, 296 Wu-sun 烏孫, 271, 349 “Wu-ti pen-chi 武帝本纪 (Annals of the Five Emperors), xxiii ff., xxxvi Wu-tu 武都, 70 Wu-wei 烏維, 291, 296 Wu-yüan 五原, 346 X Xanthus of Lydia, xv

Y Yang Ch’ing 楊慶, 26, 29, 31, 32, 77, 79 Yang-chou 陽周 River, 39 Yang Chung-ch’ien 楊中倩, 78 Yang Hsin 楊信, 293, 294, 295 Yang-hsü 陽虛, 46, 69, 75 Yang Po-chün 楊伯峻 (1909-1992), 407 Yang Sheng 羊勝, 178, 179, 181 Yang-shih 陽石 Princess, 346 Yang Yin 楊殷 (a son of Yang Ch’ing 楊慶), 78 Yao 堯, xxiv, xxviii ff., 302 Yao 殽, 6

Index

“Yao fa” 藥法 (The Model for [administering] Drugs), 80 “Yao lun” 藥論 (The Discourse on Drugs), 31 Ye-wu 余吾 River, 301 Yeh-lang 夜郎, 383 Yeh Sheng-t’ao 葉聖陶 (1894-1988), 405, 406 Yen 燕, 183, 247, 251, 373 Yen An 嚴安, 378, 381, 385 Yen-chih 閼氏 (the Hsiung-nu queen), 256, 259, 274, 320 Yen Chu 嚴助, 392 Yen-men 鴈門, 185, 192, 208-209, 214, 253, 269, 283, 285, 316 Yen P’eng-tsu 嚴彭祖, 393 Yen Shih-ku 顏師古 (581-645), 355 Yen Ying 晏嬰, 369 Yi 夷, 244, 319, 343, 365, 367 Yi-chi-chien 伊即靬, 339, 340 Yi-chia lei 醫家類, 19 Yi-chih-hsie 伊稚斜, 285, 291 Yi-ching 易經 (Book of Changes), 373 Yi-ch’ü 義渠, 251, 252, 345, 347 Yi Ho 醫和 (see also “Pien Ch’üeh” 扁 鵲), 19 Yi-kuan Marquis 宜冠侯 (Marquis Worthy of His Command), 333 Yi Tun 猗頓, 378 Yin-ch’un 因淳 King, 339 Yin Keng-shih 尹更始, 393 Yin Weng-kuei 尹翁歸, 394 Ying-chi ssu-ma 鷹擊司馬 (Falcon Attack Major) , 332 Ying-ch’uan 潁川, 151 Ying Kao 應高 (Palace Grandee), 103, 104, 105, 106 Ying-pi 鷹庇, 334 Ying Pu 英布, 90-91

425

Ying-yin 潁陰, 148, 150, 215 Yu-ch’i 榆谿, 319 Yu-pei-p’ing 右北平, 192, 216, 217, 253, 288, 289, 320, 335, 338, 339, 349, 352 Yu-t’u 酋涂 King, 331 Yu Yü 由余, 250 Yü 禹, 302, 390 Yü-chang Commandery 豫章郡, 93, 102, 107 Yü-ch’eng 與城, 339 Yü-chih 郁郅, 346 Yü Fu 俞跗, ancient physician, 11 Yü-tan 於單, 285 Yü Ting-kuo 于定過, 394 Yü-wu 余吾, 347 Yü-yang 漁陽, 192, 253, 284, 317 Yüan 元 (ward), 26, 29 Yüan 獂, 250 Yüan Ang 袁盎, 112, 113, 114, 115, 125, 129, 130, 131, 138, 179 Yüeh 越, 110, 124, 292, 343, 382 Yüeh-chih 月氏, 256, 257, 260, 262, 271, 293, 331 Yüeh chüeh shu 越絕書 (History of Yüeh’s Destruction of [Wu]), xxxii Yüeh-yang 櫟陽, 180 Yün-chung 雲中, 110, 209, 253, 262, 269, 278, 316, 345 Yün-yang 雲陽, 255 Z Zou Xin, xi