Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan: Commentary on the "Spring and Autumn Annals" 0295999152, 9780295999159

Citation preview

Andrew H. Plaks and Michael Nylan, Series Editors

Exemplary Figures / Fayan Yang Xiong, translated by Michael Nylan Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan Commentary on the “Spring and Autumn Annals” Translated by Stephen Durrant, Wai-yee Li, and David Schaberg

Zuo Tradition Zuozhuan 左傳 Commentary on the “Spring and Autumn Annals”

Translated and introduced by

Stephen Durrant Wai-yee Li David Schaberg University of Washington Press Seattle and London

Publication of this book was made possible in part by generous gifts from Joseph and Lauren Allen, Nancy Alvord, Michael Burnap and Irene Tanake, Ruth and Alvin Eller, Griffith Way, and other donors.

© 2016 by the University of Washington Press Printed and bound in the United States of America Design by Thomas Eykemans Composed in Minion, typeface designed by Robert Slimbach 19 18 17 16  5 4 3 2 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. University of Washington Press www.washington.edu/uwpress isbn 978-0-295-9991 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Durrant, Stephen W., 1944– translator. | Li, Wai-yee, translator. | Schaberg, David, 1964– translator. Title: Zuo tradition = Zuozhuan : commentary on the “Spring and autumn annals” / translated and introduced by Stephen Durrant, Wai-yee Li, David Schaberg. Other titles: Zuozhuan. English. | Commentary on the “Spring and autumn annals” Description: 1st edition. | Seattle : University of Washington Press, [2016] | Series: Classics of Chinese thought | Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Contents: Chronology of dynasties — Volume One — Lord Yin — Lord Huan — Lord Zhuang — Lord Min — Lord Xi — Lord Wen — Lord Xuan — Volume Two — Lord Cheng — Lord Xiang — Volume Three — Lord Zhao — Lord Ding — Lord Ai — Place name index — Personal name index. Identifiers: lccn 2016014414 | isbn 9780295999159 (hardcover : acid-free paper) Subjects: lcsh: Confucius. Chun qiu. | China—History—Zhou dynasty, 1122– 221 b.c.—Early works to 1800. | China—History—Zhou dynasty, 1122–221 b.c.— Historiography. | Shandong Sheng (China)—History—Early works to 1800. | Shandong Sheng (China)—Historiography. Classification: lcc pl2470.z6 z8713 2016 | ddc 895.18/107—dc23 lc record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016014414 The paper used in this publication is acid-free and meets the m ­ inimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984. ∞

To the memory of Livia Plaks and Anthony C. Yu

Contents Acknowledgments ix Abbreviations xi Chronology of Dynasties  xii Maps xiii Introduction xvii Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan VOLUME ONE

VOLUME THREE

Lord Yin  2

Lord Zhao  1296

Lord Huan  68

Lord Ding  1726

Lord Zhuang  136

Lord Ai  1826

Lord Min  226 Lord Xi  248 Lord Wen  456 Lord Xuan  578 VOLUME T WO

Lord Cheng  700 Lord Xiang  878

Bibliography 1995 Place Name Index  2017 Personal Name Index  2053

Acknowledgments Our work on this project has extended across more springs and autumns than we originally envisaged. Perhaps at the outset we underestimated the difficulty of this great text, or perhaps we overestimated our own abilities as translators—or, possibly, both. Still, if our time spent with Zuozhuan has brought frustrations, it has also brought joys. The most obvious joy has come from slowly working our way together through this rich literary masterpiece in a desperate but sincere effort to beat trans­ lation’s odds, to find les mots justes, to capture in English the austere, unmistakable style that we all admired in Zuozhuan prose. For what is translation but exceedingly slow, careful, interpretative reading, undertaken with and for other readers, born from the urge to share with others the pleasure one takes in a difficult, remote work of art? Chief among our frustrations was the realization that our English translation, no matter how much effort we have put into it, does not and could never reproduce the genius of the original. We can perhaps draw comfort from the realization that the higher the quality of a text, the more it defies perfect translation. Another joy of our work together and individually over the years has been the support and encouragement of so many colleagues, students, friends, and family. The three of us extend our heartfelt appreciation to those who have read our translation and have offered valuable suggestions. Michael Nylan, Andrew Plaks, and Yuri Pines all worked through the entire manuscript with great meticulousness and helped us improve our translation in numerous ways. Many others have helped us with particular problems in Zuozhuan or have read and responded to portions of our work. Among these scholars are Lothar von Falkenhausen, David Keightley, Göran Malmqvist, Christoph Harbsmeier, Reinhard Emmerich, Enno Giele, Li Long-shien, David Pankenier, and Chang Su-ching. Lorri Hagman, Jacqueline Volin, Pamela Bruton, and other members of the staff at the University of Washington Press encouraged us at every stage of this project and have been more patient with us

IX

than we have sometimes deserved. We are grateful for their help. Our project has benefited from the financial support of the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Fairbank Center and the Asia Center at Harvard University, and the Oregon Humanities Center and the Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures at the University of Oregon. Sabbatical leaves funded by Harvard University, the American Council of Learned Societies, the Radcliffe Institute of Advanced Study, the University of California at Los Angeles, and the American Academy at Berlin allowed us to devote time to the translation of Zuozhuan, even as other projects claimed our attention. During the last decade, each of the three of us has taught graduate seminars dealing with Zuozhuan. Our interaction with students in these seminars has convinced us once again of how much research and publication can benefit from engagement with good students in the classroom. We are deeply grateful to our students for their willingness both to encourage and to challenge us. We also express our gratitude to Bill Nelson at “Bill’s Imac” for his help with maps and to several students who provided valuable assistance with technical details: Sara Higgins, Shijia Nie, and Xingwei Fu at the University of Oregon, and Ted Mingtak Hui at Harvard University. The image for the cover is based on a rubbing from a stele (dated 241) with fragments of the text of the Spring and Autumn Annals carved in three script styles. We thank the Special Collections in Fine Arts Library, Harvard University, for permitting the use of this image. Numerous friends and members of our families have helped us in one way or another with this lengthy project. We cannot name them all but would like to thank Omer Bartov, Françoise Calin Durrant, and Daphne Pi-Wei Lei for their support and encouragement over the years. Finally, we take full responsibility for the mistakes and infelicities that remain in this book and can only hope that, despite such possible problems, our work will help Zuozhuan achieve its deserved place among the masterpieces that have come to us from the ancient world.

X

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations BMFEA EC Gongyang Guliang HJAS JAOS Karlgren Legge SBBY SKQS SSJZS Takezoe XBZZJC Yang ZZ

Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities Early China Chunqiu Gongyang zhuan zhushu 春秋公羊傳注疏 Chunqiu Guliang zhuan zhushu 春秋穀梁傳注疏 Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies Journal of the American Oriental Society Bernhard Karlgren, “Glosses on the Tso Chuan,” BMFEA 41 (1969): 1–158 James Legge, trans., The Ch’un Ts’ew with the Tso Chuen, vol. 5 of The Chinese Classics (1872; repr., Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1895) Sibu beiyao 四部備要 Yingyin Wenyuange Siku quanshu 影印文淵閣四庫全書 Chongkan Song ben Shisan jing zhushu fu jiaokan ji 重刊宋本十三經注疏附校勘記 Takezoe Kōkō 竹添光鴻, ed. and annotator, Saden ­Kaisen 左傳會箋 (1912; repr., Taipei: Fenghuang, 1961) Xinbian zhuzi jicheng 新編諸子集成 Yang Bojun 楊伯峻, ed. and annotator, Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu 春秋左傳注, rev. ed., 4 vols. (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990) Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhengyi 春秋左傳正義

XI

Chronology of Dynasties Xia ca. 21st–16th Bce Shang ca. 1600–1045 Bce Zhou 1045–256   Western Zhou 1045–771   Eastern Zhou 770–256    Spring and Autumn 770–476    Warring States 475–221 Qin 221–206 Han 202 Bce–220 CE   Former Han (also called Western Han) 202 Bce–9 CE   Xin (Wang Mang reign) 9–23   Gengshi Emperor 23–25   Later Han (also called Eastern Han) 25–220 Six Dynasties 220–589   Three Kingdoms 220–280   Jin 265–420   Northern and Southern Dynasties 420–589 Sui 581–618 Tang 618–907 The Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms 902–979 Song 960–1279   Northern Song 960–1127   Southern Song 1127–1279 Yuan 1279–1368 Ming 1368–1644 Qing 1644–1912

Adapted from Endymion Wilkinson, Chinese History: A Manual (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2000), 10–13.

XII

Wuzhong SHAN RONG 0

100

200

Wuzhong

300 km

YAN WHITE DI

N

Xianyu RED DI QI

JIN LU

WEI CAO

ZHOU

QUANRONG QIN

ZHENG

LI RONG

SONG CHEN

CAI WU CHU SHU BA

YUE

Map 1. Major domains and peoples during the Spring and Autumn Period

Map 2.

Yun

Gu

Teng

Xiao

LU

Qufu

An

Pengcheng

Xue

Lesser Zhu

Zhu

Yellow

Bi

Jiagu

Souman

er Riv

Important places on the North China Plain

SONG

Cao

Chengpu

Shangqiu

WEI

Xing

Map Area

Linzi Ji

Ju

QI v

Qi

0

50

100 km

Capital Small domain Site of famous battle mportant place

YELLOW SEA

N

Map 3.

50

100 km

N

Rong of Luhun

H qu Hequ

Mao Rong

Linghu

Han

Yao

Chengzhou

JIN

Bi

Huangchi

Yanling

Xinzheng

Jiantu

WEI

Ganhou

Handan

Map Area

Chaoge

ZHENG

Hulao

Wen

Rong of Yi and Luo Rivers

Quwo

Jiang

Xintian [Jiang]

Important places in the Upper Yellow River / Wei River Basin

Yong

QIN

0

Capital Small domain Site of famous battle mportant place Site of covenant Site of famous meeting

Qi

Capital Small domain Site of famous battle Important place Site of covenant Site of famous meeting

N Huangchi Map Area

Hong Xu ugeng Bugeng Cai 1 Ruo

Xu

Shaoling

Shen

Cai 2

ai 3 Cai Zhoulai

Huang

Deng

WU Wu

Sui Ruo Yun

CHU

Boju Chao

Zuili

Ying

Kuaiji YUE

0

Map 4.

100

200 km

Important places in the South

Introduction This is an introduction in three parts, arranged as a gradual entrée to Zuozhuan 左傳 (Zuo Tradition). The first section, designed for newcomers to Zuozhuan, is a general introduction to the work itself, to Chinese history from the late eighth to the early fifth century Bce, and to the principles of our translation. Nonspecialist readers may wish to proceed directly from this general introduction to the pleasures of the history itself. The remaining sections of the introduction are more technical and are addressed to scholars in Chinese studies, historians of the ancient world, and specialists in related fields. The second part examines the historical and intellectual context in which Zuozhuan originated and revisits the long scholarly debate over the text’s provenance. The third part details the critical place that Zuozhuan has occupied in the Chinese tra­ dition during the past two millennia. With these observations on textual and cultural history as a foundation, the reader will be well prepared to understand the singular importance that Zuozhuan continues to have as a monument of early Chinese historical writing. We offer our introduction, and our translation itself, as a dedicatory gate and stairway to this edifice, with the fond hope that readers will visit often and stay long. PART I: ON ZUOZHUAN, SPRING AND AUTUMN HISTORY, AND TRANSLATION CONVENTIONS THE NATURE AND IMPORTANCE OF ZUOZHUAN

Zuozhuan is the largest text to come to us from pre-imperial China (i.e., from before 221 bce). One might also argue that it is the most important text from that era. As such, Zuozhuan deserves a place alongside other great histories from the ancient world, like those of Herodotus, Thucydides, and the Deuteronomic historians, with which it is roughly contemporaneous. There are several reasons why Zuozhuan has not found

XVII

such a place. One of the chief of these is that it has been transmitted to us as a commentary to another text, the Annals (Chunqiu 春秋), and follows the year-by-year chronology of that text. Consequently, single story lines are often broken up and distributed in a strictly chronological fashion, with other story lines and unrelated events intervening, so that it requires an excellent memory, or at least patient cross-checking, to keep the various interweaving accounts straight. In addition, the voice of the Zuozhuan historian is largely masked, so that the personality of the narrator rarely shines through. Put somewhat differently, there is no “I” in the text, no identifiable historian at our side guiding us in the fashion of Herodotus or Thucydides, who name themselves in the very first sentence of their respective texts and repeatedly appear as guides or commentators throughout their narratives. When compared with the works of such early Greek historians, Zuozhuan can sound impersonal, but the absence of a self-conscious narrative voice also gives it a dramatic, authoritative tone. This stylistic feature, like the annalistic fragmentation of the narratives, poses unique challenges for the reader, but it also has its own appeal, as we hope this translation will demonstrate. We have already noted the fact that Zuozhuan narratives are distributed according to the year-by-year organization of the Annals, creating a pattern of interweaving story lines that can sometimes be difficult to follow. In addition, the language of the narrative sections of Zuozhuan is exceedingly terse and elliptical. One scholar has aptly described Zuozhuan narratives as “lapidary.” That is, episodes are carefully crafted and, in a manner of speaking, “hard.” Nouns and verbs predominate, characters act and are acted upon, with adjectival description rare and consequently taking on particular significance wherever it does occur. Very often sentences or events are simply juxtaposed without explicit connective tissue. In one brief narrative, for example, a ruler takes for himself a woman intended for his son because he “finds her beautiful” (mei zhi 美之). Unhappy consequences cascade from his decision, one of the first being that his wife “hangs herself” (Huan 16.2). The reader can easily understand why she has been driven to this extremity, but here, as so often elsewhere in Zuozhuan, no explanation and certainly no psychological penetration into her unhappy mental state are provided, just as we are not told in the biblical narrative of Abraham and Isaac, to refer to another early narrative tradition, what Abraham thinks as he raises his knife to sacrifice his son.1 In general, the Zuozhuan narrator is absent, allowing the action to speak for itself and deflecting his own judgments into the speeches and pronouncements of his characters, one of the most important of them being the moralizing “noble man” ( junzi 君子). When, for example, the ever-present Herodotus, Greek author of The Histories, says that the Athenian Solon “claimed to be traveling to see the world, but it was really to avoid the possibility of having to repeal any of the laws he had made” (1.13), he is giving more explanation of a XVIII

Introduction

character’s motives than one finds anywhere in Zuozhuan, at least in the narrative voice. But the narrative terseness of Zuozhuan stands in stark contrast to the speeches the text presents. An exceedingly brief narrative can quickly lead to a speech of considerable length and great rhetorical complexity. Extensive parallelism, citation of earlier sources such as the Odes (Shijing 詩經), numbered sets, and a whole host of technical rhetorical features are employed as speakers admonish and sometimes overwhelm their audience. One of the functions of Zuozhuan, as we explain below, was to model for aspiring officials the importance and power of speechmaking. One must remain attentive while reading Zuozhuan, not only because so much is left unexpressed and must be surmised but also because one of the messages of this text is that the world is full of signs that can be read: a commander “lifts his feet high,” and because of this a wise adviser knows that “his intentions are not firm” (Huan 13.1); a prince receives a ceremonial jade “indolently,” and a minister concludes that the prince “will have no progeny” (Xi 11.2); a ruler’s index finger moves involuntarily, and he knows that that day he will “taste something extraordinary” (Xuan 4.2). Just as meaning can be found in the smallest gestures and briefest comments, so hidden significance can be mined from the seemingly straightforward text of Zuozhuan and the Annals. But such reading of the world is not always easy. In one peculiar case, a lord dresses his heir apparent in a peculiar “half-body robe,” touching off a dispute among the officials as to what this means, although it quickly becomes clear that the costume is ominous (Min 2.7). Acts of oracle-bone or milfoil divination and dream interpretation reported in Zuozhuan are also often highly complicated and susceptible to a variety of readings, some of them far-fetched on the surface.2 Many of these signs, and so much else about Zuozhuan narrative and speechmaking, foreshadow the future. One does not continue reading this text to find out who will rise and who will fall, who will win and who will lose, for the careful reader knows in advance what outcomes will ensue. The battle narratives are the clearest example of this. Much space is given to the preparation for battle and the signs that foretell the outcome, with the actual action on the battlefield typically narrated briefly or ignored altogether. For example, Jiang Bingzhang 姜炳璋 (1709–86) noted that, in one case where the “ruler’s virtue” has been described, “It is precisely by reason of this quality that victory is determined even before the battle begins.”3 The world of Zuozhuan can be read because it is a world filled with the prescriptions of ritual propriety. One scholar of Zuozhuan narrative has said that the message of this text is that the good are usually rewarded and the bad punished.4 While this generalization applies in some cases, the moral world of Zuozhuan is by no means a simple and straightforward one. In fact, much of the text seems to be struggling in a fascinating Introduction XIX

way with the vast complexity of human situations and the need to see ritual propriety not as a clearly delineated list of rights and wrongs but as a guiding principle that must be adapted to particular situations with flexibility and intelligence. Mercy, for example, might often be a good thing, but the ritual obligations and the practical exigencies of war sometimes make acts of mercy not just foolhardy but morally wrong (Xi 22.8, Xuan 2.1). The text we today call Zuozhuan might have been derived from a text originally known as Zuo’s Annals (Zuoshi chunqiu 左氏春秋). The earliest reference to this title is found in Sima Qian’s 司馬遷 (145?–86?) Records of the Historian (Shiji 史記). According to that account, after Confucius (551–479) died, his disciples began to disagree about the oral interpretation of the Annals, which the Master had supposedly trans­ mitted to them. Consequently, “the Lu gentleman,” a certain Zuo Qiu­ ming 左丘明, was afraid that the true teachings would be lost. “Therefore, taking Confucius’ scribal records as his basis, he put in order all their words and completed Zuo’s Annals.”5 While few scholars today still believe that Zuo Qiuming was responsible for Zuozhuan, its title, at least as usually understood, commemorates his surname. In Ban Gu’s 班固 (32–92) History of the Han (Hanshu 漢書), which was written approximately 150 years after the Records of the Historian, Zuo’s Annals is regularly called Zuo’s Commentary or Zuo’s Tradition (Zuoshi zhuan 左氏傳).6 This new title may well have resulted from editorial work undertaken by Liu Xin 劉歆 (46 Bce–23 CE), who, along with his father, Liu Xiang 劉向 (79–8), had been employed by the Han Emperor Cheng (r. 33–7) to examine texts collected from across the empire and to collate them against material held in the imperial archives. Liu Xin seems to have spent considerable time on Zuo’s Annals, and he became an ardent supporter of this text, even pleading in a letter to court officials of Emperor Ai (r. 7–1) that the text be given official recognition, which means that it would have been taught in the Imperial Academy under the direction of officially appointed Academicians (boshi 博士). The title change from Zuo’s Annals to Zuo’s Commentary may signal changes Liu made in the nature and structure of the text in order to emphasize its exegetical relationship to the Annals, although it is unclear how extensive his editorial work might actually have been. The current name of the text, Zuozhuan, and the current structure of the text appear to derive from the hand of Du Yu 杜預 (222–284), who is credited with weaving the Annals and Zuozhuan into a single text, giving Zuozhuan an even more obvious commentarial structure and thereby enhancing its prestige.7 Du Yu also reedited and standardized the text, while providing it with his own commentary, which drew upon and ultimately replaced much of the commentarial tradition preceding him.8 (For more on these issues, see part II below.) For well over two millennia, the Annals has been listed among the XX

Introduction

Confucian “Five Classics,” a group of texts that became the foundation of virtually all official imperial Chinese education.9 One eminent scholar, Pi Xirui 皮錫瑞 (1850–1908), even suggested that among these classics the Annals and the Classic of Changes (Yijing 易經) were preeminent, constituting a kind of advanced study that could be fully understood only by the best students.10 This elevated status derives in part from a tradition ascribing the Annals in its present form to Confucius himself. Such a tradition is already found in Mencius (Mengzi 孟子), a text written perhaps two hundred years after Confucius’ death, where we read that when Confucius completed the Annals, it had such powerful influence that “treasonous ministers and maleficent sons were terrified.”11 Mencius goes on to claim that Confucius once said, “Those who understand me will do so only through the Annals.”12 At a slightly later time, perhaps inspired by this Mencius passage, many believed not only that the Annals came from the hand of Confucius but that the Master had used this text to convey “lofty principles in subtle words.”13 Anyone who turns to the Annals after encountering such views as those found in Mencius and in later Confucian writings will almost certainly be surprised, even disappointed. The Annals is a slender text composed of slightly fewer than seventeen thousand written Chinese characters. It appears, at least at first reading, to do little more than list in highly economical and straightforward language short notices of events that took place in the central domains between 722 and 479 Bce as seen from the small domain of Lu 魯, where it was compiled. It probably derives from official court records—and terse records at that. The name Chunqiu literally means “spring and autumn,” which is an abbreviation of the sequence of four seasons and refers to a type of record keeping in which events are registered not just under a year and a month but under a season as well. With relatively few exceptions, at least one event is registered for each season of each year for the 242 years included in the Annals. Other early Chinese domains might have maintained records similar to the Lu Annals. Passages in at least two early Chinese texts refer to other such court records, and an annalistic text for the domain of Weì 魏, known as Bamboo Annals (Zhushu jinian 竹書記年), was discovered around 280 CE.14 The extraordinary stylistic precision and consistency of the Annals support the sense that Lu scribes adhered to a system in recording events. For example, a Lu ruler is usually referred to as “the lord” (gong 公) but, on the occasion of his funeral, is called “our ruler” (wojun 我君), with his posthumous honorific. Rulers of Chu and Wu, who styled themselves “kings” (wang 王), are called in the text “leaders” (ren 人) or “masters” (zi 子), one of the lower noble ranks. The assassination of a ruler is described with the word shi 弒, which indicates the violation of hierarchy—except for Lu rulers, whose murder is cloaked behind the word “expire” (hong 薨). Murdered rulers of other states are sometimes Introduction XXI

simply reported to have “died” (zu 卒).15 Words associated with military conflicts, such as “battle” (zhan 戰), “defeat” (bai 敗), “overcome” (ke 克), “completely defeated” (baiji 敗績), “invade” (qin 侵), “surprise attack” (xi 襲), “attack” (fa 伐), “punish” (tao 討), “enter” (ru 入), “seize” (huo 獲), “lay siege to” (wei 圍), or “extinguish” (mie 滅), seem to have precise meanings and imply evaluation of the justice or appropriateness of military operations. When Lu is defeated in battle, the words “completely defeated” are not used (with one exception).16 As these examples and exceptions show, many “rules” can be deduced, although few are absolutely consistent. Spurred on by the purported link to Confucius and the notion that there was much more to the Annals than a first reading might disclose, early Chinese scholars produced a rich body of commentarial literature on this text. In fact, the Annals has come down to us not as an independent text but only attached in slightly variant form to each of three commentaries or “traditions” (zhuan 傳): Zuozhuan 左傳, Gongyang zhuan 公羊傳, and Guliang zhuan 穀梁傳. All three of these Annals commentaries have at times exercised a significant influence upon the Chinese tradition, but the longest and most complex of them, Zuozhuan, has eventually enjoyed the greatest prestige, although Gongyang reigned preeminent as official learning during the Han dynasty. Whereas the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries primarily dissect the “subtle words” of the Annals so as to lay bare the “great principles” it supposedly contains, Zuozhuan provides historical context for events that occurred during the Spring and Autumn period (770–476), some noted in the Annals and some not. Zuozhuan also includes exegetical passages, although a good portion of the Annals has no Zuozhuan exegesis, and sometimes there seem to be pointed contradictions between the two texts. The sense of system in the Annals is challenged by shifts in meanings in Zuozhuan. Zuozhuan also covers events until 468 Bce (Ai 27), thirteen years after the capture of the lin (Ai 14.1), sometimes referred to as a “unicorn,”17 and eleven years after the death of Confucius (Ai 16.3), events that respectively mark the end of the Annals in Gongyang (the lin) and in Guliang (the lin) and Zuozhuan (Confucius’ death). All these issues have raised doubts about the exact relationship between the Annals and Zuozhuan. All three exegetical traditions interpret stylistic conventions and even textual corruption of the Annals as markers of the sage’s intention, although Gongyang and Guliang do so much more insistently and consistently than Zuozhuan. In one case, a missing word is construed as a deliberate expression of doubt.18 Designating Chu and Wu rulers (who called themselves kings) as “masters” is thought to convey criticism of the overreaching ambitions of “barbarians” and to set normative standards for “rectifying names” (zhengming 正名), so that names correspond to roles and functions.19 The omission in the Annals of references XXII

Introduction

to burials of Chu and Wu rulers supposedly functions to avoid the use of the title of “king.”20 Concealing a Lu ruler’s murder, which might have simply “reflected the wording of official notifications to other states” (cong fu 從訃, cong gao 從告), especially if we consider the new ruler’s frequent role as perpetrator, is said in Gongyang and Guliang to reflect Confucius’ choice of “concealment in internal matters” (neihui 內諱). “To conceal the truth” (hui 諱) to honor or protect one’s domain or ruler21 in turn implies that “bare facts” should yield pride of place to normative human relations in historical records. Reverence for the Annals as the sage’s moral judgments was pervasive, but there have always been dissenters. The Tang scholar and thinker Liu Zhiji 劉知幾 (661–721), famous for his Comprehensive Study of Historical Writings (Shitong 史通), casts doubt on the sacrosanct text by examining its inconsistencies. The Song chief minister and scholar-poet Wang Anshi 王安石 (1021–86), with typical boldness, dismissed the Annals as “fragmentary and corrupt court reports” (duanlan chaobao 斷爛朝報).22 But criticism of this type reflects a distinctly minority view. It is perhaps no accident that Liu Zhiji, skeptical about the Annals, should also have been an ardent champion of Zuozhuan; the latter spoke to his interests in the methods of historical writing much more than the former. More generally, most recognize that the historical events marked by the Annals would be incomprehensible without Zuozhuan. To read the Annals in China was most often to read it alongside Zuozhuan, with the latter providing the narrative detail and rhetorical flesh the former lacked. Zuozhuan is more than ten times longer than the Annals, containing just fewer than 180,000 written Chinese characters. A rich combination of narratives and speeches, it has been read as a reliable history of the Spring and Autumn era, as a great model of prose style, and as a repository of Confucian values. If we must now question Zuozhuan’s reliability as a historical source, at least for the period of time it claims to describe, and exercise care in reducing the text to a simple set of values, Confucian or otherwise, we can hardly question the raw power of its prose and the rhetorical brilliance of its speeches. One major voice in Chinese literary thought, Liu Xie 劉勰 (ca. 465–ca. 522), regarded Zuozhuan prose as “the winged glory of the sages’ writings, the crowning achievement of records and texts.”23 And Liu Zhiji found the speeches in the text “flowing and beautiful yet never in excess.”24 Despite the importance of both the Annals and Zuozhuan within the Chinese tradition, these texts, as noted above, have never gained a significant readership outside East Asia beyond a small number of earlyChina specialists. Our hope is that the following translation will help change this situation. Translating these texts was a daunting task in part because of the many difficulties they present, some of which we will discuss below, and in part because there is already an excellent EnglishIntroduction XXIII

language translation of both the Annals and Zuozhuan, James Legge’s (1855–97) The Ch’un Ts’ew with the Tso Chuen. More than 140 years have now passed since James Legge published his complete translation of the Annals with an attached translation of almost the whole Zuozhuan.25 His work was the only largely complete Englishlanguage version until a reworking of Legge’s translation of Zuozhuan, without the accompanying Annals, was published in China several years ago.26 Legge’s work was a great sinological achievement and has become a standard source for students of early China, a measuring rod against which subsequent translations of these texts must be evaluated, including the present one. In view of Legge’s achievement, why, one might ask, is a new translation needed at all? In what follows we hope it will become clear how our own reading, understanding, and presentation of the Annals and Zuozhuan differ from Legge’s. But for now we would note three important reasons for this new translation. First, the last century or so has brought genuine advances in our understanding of the Annals and Zuozhuan, and some of these advances impinge directly upon questions of translation. Second, Legge’s Victorian prose, despite its stateliness, is not “the most stylistically expressive and elegant”27 and is, moreover, becoming more and more remote from the twenty-firstcentury reader. And third, the format and presentation of Legge’s text, despite several reprints, remain unattractive, awkward, and difficult to use, although recent online versions have to some extent remedied this situation.28 Still, we do not presume that our work replaces that of our predecessor. As we have said, his translation is the measuring rod, and readers can surely profit from consulting his version as well as our own. We should add a brief word here concerning the complete French translation of the Annals and Zuozhuan by the tireless Jesuit scholar Séraphin Couvreur (1835–1919), Tch’ouen ts’iou et Tso tchouan. The format of this three-volume work makes it much easier to use than Legge’s text. It is also more conservative than Legge’s, consistently following Du Yu’s commentary. Paul Demiéville (1894–1979) judges Couvreur with reference to Legge as follows: “He makes no attempt at original interpretation or personal evaluation, such as James Legge rather prematurely attempted in his English version.”29 While this is an accurate characterization of Couvreur, whether it is fair to Legge depends on how one evaluates the latter’s “original interpretations.” THE ANNALS, ZUOZHUAN, AND THE HISTORY OF THE SPRING AND AUTUMN PERIOD

The very term “Spring and Autumn period” (given above) points to the critical role the Annals and its commentaries have played in the construction of Chinese history. The period, which encompasses the years covered by the text, 722–479, is named for the text. The date 722 Bce XXIV

Introduction

marks the ascension of Lord Yin to the position of ruler in the relatively small eastern domain of Lu. The start of Lord Yin’s reign is noteworthy only because the Annals begins in that year. Nothing else of great import occurs. In the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries, the Annals ends with the capture of the lin in 481 Bce, the fourteenth year of the reign of Lord Ai of Lu. In Zuozhuan, the Annals ends two years later, in 479 Bce, the year of Confucius’ death: “In summer, in the fourth month, on the jichou day, Kong Qiu [Confucius] died” (Ai 16.3). Some historians have objected to demarcating a historical period with reference to the beginning and ending of a text, however much influence that text might have exerted, and suggest that periods should be defined by unquestionably important moments. One such moment is 770 Bce, when the Zhou court moved from its capital near modern-day Xi’an 西 安 to the new capital Chengzhou 成周 in the region of modern-day Luoyang 洛陽. Since Luoyang is well to the east of Xi’an, 770 Bce separates the eras of what came to be known as the Western Zhou and the Eastern Zhou. This date also marks a significant milestone in the gradual decline of Zhou power, a decline that had begun almost a century earlier and was to continue until the Zhou kings became little more than figureheads by the middle of the Spring and Autumn period. 476 Bce is sometimes chosen as the closing date of the Spring and Autumn period because it marks the end of the reign of King Jìng of Zhou 周敬王 (r. 519– 476), when the capital moved further east, forming a new Chengzhou (the old Chengzhou was renamed Wangcheng 王城), due to Wangzi Zhao’s 王子朝 rebellion (Zhao 22–Zhao 29). Another significant event that some historians identify as the close of this period is the virtual breakup in 453 Bce of the once-powerful domain of Jin 晉 into three smaller domains: Han 韓, Weì 魏, and Zhao 趙, domains that were “officially recognized by the Zhou king in 403 Bce.”30 Besides marking the demise of a domain that had played a major role throughout much of the Spring and Autumn period, this event marks the ascendancy of powerful ministerial lineages, which had seriously undermined even the illusion of an old Zhou ritual order and had also marked a trend toward the bureaucratization and professionalization of the domains.31 Thus, although the dates 770 and 476 or 453 Bce might be preferred as commemorating major historical events, 722 and 479 Bce remain significant dates in the traditional periodization of Chinese history by reason of the prestige of a single text, the Annals. We have referred above to Zuozhuan as a “history,” the quotation marks here reflecting our belief that it is a particularly problematic instance of this category. Still, no single text has had a greater influence upon the way Spring and Autumn history has been presented both in China and in the West. When the early historians Sima Tan 司馬談 (d. 110 Bce) and his son Sima Qian wrote the first comprehensive history of China, in a certain sense creating “China” in the process, they used some of the Introduction XXV

materials now found in our Zuozhuan as their single most important source for the Spring and Autumn period.32 This circumstance has not changed greatly over time. For example, in the article on Spring and Autumn history in the prestigious Cambridge History of Ancient China, we read: “Despite a lack of corroborating evidence from other sources, there is no reason to doubt the details of political and military activities given in Zuozhuan, or the roles played by prominent figures in it, such as Guan Zhong 管仲.”33 Such faith in the essential historical reliability of Zuozhuan has been labeled “the worst error in classical Sinology.”34 If we commit this “worst error,” writing history as it is reported in Zuozhuan, what is the result? On the most basic level, we then produce an account replete with conflict. In fact, 490 instances of warfare are recorded in Zuozhuan. For this reason, one Qing scholar argued that Zuozhuan is “the ancestor of books on military strategy” (bingfa zhi zu 兵法之祖).35 The abundant instances of conflict recorded in Zuozhuan take place both between domains and within domains. The four major Spring and Autumn domains of Qi, Jin, Qin, and Chu annihilated 128 of the 148 other domains mentioned in Zuozhuan. Many of these domains were small and fell with relatively little resistance, but warfare between the major powers could be brutal. “Five great battles” described in Zuozhuan are often cited as examples: Jin and its allies’ victory over Chu at Chengpu in 632 Bce (Xi 28); Jin’s defeat of Qin at the battle of Yao in 627 Bce (Xi 33); Chu’s victory over Jin at Bi in 598 Bce (Xuan 12); Jin, Lu, and Wei’s decisive defeat of Qi at the battle of An in 589 Bce (Cheng 2); and Chu’s disastrous loss to Jin in the battle of Yanling in 575 Bce (Cheng 16). Conflict between the major domains was constant, and small domains scrambled to survive the violence. Strife within a single domain, often within the same lineage or family, could also be relentless. The first major narrative of Zuozhuan describes the rebellion of a younger brother, supported by his mother, against his older brother, the rightful heir to the domain of Zheng (Yin 1.4).36 The text goes on to record a century of major succession crises in the larger domain of Jin, provoked in part by the establishment in 745 Bce of a subordinate lineage at Quwo that functioned very much like an independent power center (Huan 2.8, 3.1, 7.4, Zhuang 16.5).37 Fraternal conflict, ministerial rebellion, and intergenerational strife, often between father and son, continue on page after page throughout Zuozhuan. The old Zhou polity was founded on a kinship structure under which royal relatives were granted vassal domains. Meritorious officials and key allies who were granted domains often had marriage ties with the Zhou house. Within many of those subordinate domains, kinsmen also held the most important offices. This emphasis upon kinship and lineage continues throughout the Spring and Autumn period and is reflected in Zuozhuan.38 Thus, we can correctly say that Zuozhuan for the most part depicts aristocratic society as normative. This dominance of hered XXVI

Introduction

itary, lineage-based administrative power is eventually challenged by an emerging meritocracy and a weakening of “family sentiment,”39 which will come to characterize the Warring States period. Many of the Zuozhuan speeches can be regarded as high-minded but ultimately unsuccessful attempts to slow the decline of the Spring and Autumn kinship order. A number of institutions described on the pages of Zuozhuan aim to stem the violence and bring stability to the strife-ridden domains. In the beginning of the Spring and Autumn period, the Zhou court still exercised some moral suasion, a faint echo of an earlier time, part memory and part myth, when they had brought peace to the realm, but their power had become vastly diminished. In 707 Bce, Zhou prestige suffered a terrible blow. The domain of Zheng, which had been a close supporter of Zhou and had provided three Zhou chief ministers, launched an attack on its former ally. Zhu Dan 祝聃, a Zheng official, shot the king in the shoulder, and the latter was saved only when Zhu Dan’s ruler recommended forbearance: “A noble man does not wish always to assert superiority over others.”40 With Zhou leadership in shambles, meetings between domains became frequent. The Annals provides contemporary evidence of many of these meetings and notes the covenants that were so frequently and solemnly sworn between participants, but only Zuozhuan and the other two commentary traditions refer to a new order under which one lord was recognized as first among equals—an “overlord” or “hegemon” (ba 霸), as he is usually called. The first of these overlords was Lord Huan of Qi 齊桓公 (r. 685–643). In the fifteenth year of Lord Zhuang of Lu (679 Bce), the Annals records a meeting between the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Zheng at a place named Juan. Zuozhuan adds that “Qi was for the first time acting as overlord.”41 The famous Lord Wen of Jin 晉文公 (r. 636– 628) also became overlord, striving, at least in theory, to preserve the Zhou order, and other rulers attempted to ascend to the same status. But what slowly emerged was a sort of balance of power or what some have referred to as a multistate system.42 Indeed, Zuozhuan describes a world in which power gradually shifted from the “central domains,” such as Zheng, Song, and Wei, toward the periphery represented by four big powers: Jin in the north, Qi in the east, Chu in the south, and Qin in the west. As time passes, more and more of Zuozhuan’s attention focuses on these domains and then, in its final decades, on the two new players in the southeast, Wu and Yue. As we have noted above, auxiliary aristocratic lineages and ministerial lineages become gradually more important in Zuozhuan. For example, much space is given to members of the three lineages descending from subordinate sons of Lord Huan 桓 of Lu (r. 711–694). One of these, the Ji 季 or Jisun 季孫 lineage, came to dominate Lu politics and, with Introduction XXVII

the help of the other two lineages descended from Lord Huan, even expelled Lord Zhao 魯昭公 from the domain in 517 Bce. In describing this humiliating event, the Annals discreetly notes that “the lord retired to Qi,” 43 but Zuozhuan makes it quite clear that his departure was coerced (see Zhao 25.6). Jin was another domain dominated by powerful ministers (who, unlike their counterparts in Lu, were not related to the ruling house) and beset by lineage rivalries from circa 600 Bce onward; these led to the partition of Jin in 453 by three warring lineages: Han, Weì, and Zhao. Other examples could be given of the ascension of originally subordinate lineages. Eventually, almost all Spring and Autumn rulers were “overshadowed by high ministers” who began “to dominate state affairs.”44 The order Zuozhuan offers as the surest antidote to the growing chaos of the age is ritual propriety, or li 禮. In speech after speech, Zuozhuan rhetoricians warn of the deleterious results of departures from ritual propriety. In fact, the motor of historical change—invariably change for the worse—is deviation from ritual. All the violence and conflict on the pages of Zuozhuan, and perhaps even the transforming processes of history itself, would stop if only leaders would conform to the good order that is inscribed in the patterns of ritual propriety.45 Two external voices in particular are cited repeatedly in the text as judges of ritual behavior: “the noble man” and Confucius.46 The former authority, who remains anonymous and somewhat mysterious, is quoted in seventy-eight instances distributed relatively evenly throughout the text, while Confucius is quoted twenty-five times, mostly in the years of the Lu Lords who ruled in the latter part of the Spring and Autumn period. These are voices of stability that try to bring order to a political and social world portrayed as being in decline. If we reject an account of Spring and Autumn history that is largely based upon Zuozhuan, we are left with rather scanty material to reconstruct that history. Few would question the credibility of the Annals itself as an authentic record compiled by Lu domain scribes, but this text comprises records of only certain types of events and conveys information very selectively.47 The Annals does give evidence of a high level of interdomain diplomacy, along with frequent conflict, but as noted earlier it gives no support to the Zuozhuan notion that for the first century of the Spring and Autumn period a particular leader was recognized as overlord and that other rulers aspired to this status throughout the period. Moreover, there is no clear evidence in the Annals for the intermittent awareness in Zuozhuan of “a cultural divide between the ‘Huaxia’ 華夏 population and the totality of the ‘Rongdi’ 戎狄, which by the middle Spring and Autumn period had clearly gained a meaning similar to ‘barbarian’ as the word is used in English.”48 The few textual records that can be confidently dated to the Spring and Autumn period are overshadowed by the large and ever-growing XXVIII

Introduction

body of archaeological finds. Still, the archaeological evidence from early China remains fragmentary and strongly skewed toward the excavation of tombs rather than settlements, although there is some indication that this situation is now changing. It has been common for Chinese archaeologists to use the textual record as a filter through which to examine and categorize archaeological finds, and archaeological evidence does substantiate textual traditions in many instances.49 However, we must note that some of the material evidence does not support what we read in early texts. For example, early Confucian texts, Zuozhuan included, tend to idealize the early years of the Western Zhou and treat it as a radical break from the earlier Shang dynasty. The archaeological evidence indicates no wholesale cultural shift from the Shang to the Zhou, although the practice of massive human sacrifice does seem to have ceased under the Zhou. The Zhou people, insofar as they represent a new intrusion into the central China plains, for the most part seem to have continued Shang traditions. The idealization of the new Zhou ritual practice, which supposedly supplanted the older Shang order, might indeed reflect a ritual reform that actually took place in the Middle Western Zhou, sometime around 850 Bce, in an attempt to buttress Zhou ruling power when it had begun to decline.50 This “Middle Western Zhou Ritual Reform,” as it has come to be called, seems to have marked a shift from an early ritual world characterized by rich and sometimes frightening animal motifs on sacrificial bronze vessels and by abundant ritual drinking to a more orderly system of ritual that reinforced political and social hierarchy, a shift, so to speak, from a more Dionysian to a more Apollonian habit of social interaction. Bronze vessels securely dated to the postreform period are humbler and “suggest a desire to reform the spirit of ritual by reducing its complexity and linking it with everyday activities.”51 It could indeed be that the remembrance of a superstitious Shang order, which is reflected in Sima Qian’s Records of the Historian, is actually a faint remembrance of times before the Middle Western Zhou Ritual Reform.52 In many ways, then, this reform might have created a foundation for the Spring and Autumn “segmentary aristocracy,”53 as well as for the skepticism about the supernatural that characterizes portions of Zuozhuan.54 Archaeology also attests to a second significant shift, which has been labeled the “Middle Spring and Autumn Ritual Restructuring.” The assemblages found in tombs during this period, with the noteworthy exception of those deriving from the westernmost domain (Qin), show a growing split between a small elite and the more common people, the latter including the “lesser elite.” Gradually, Spring and Autumn society seems to have become dominated by a relatively small subset of ruling families eager to maintain distance between themselves and those they ruled, a trend that may indeed be reflected in the Zuozhuan emphasis upon lineages, which we have noted above. Introduction XXIX

The period of this ritual restructuring also saw an important religious transformation. Whereas early Zhou tombs emphasize continuity between this world and the next, with funerary ritual designed to mirror the “basic ritual dimension of the deceased’s social existence,”55 Spring and Autumn tomb architecture becomes more domestic, with tombs designed as homelike, self-sufficient enclosures intended to keep the dead content and contained. The emphasis is no longer upon “commonality” but upon “the discontinuity between the living and the dead.”56 One cannot help but recall in this regard the famous Confucian injunction to “respect the ghosts and spirits and keep them at a distance” or the Zheng minister Zichan’s 子產 statement, found in Zuozhuan, that “the Way of Heaven is far away, while the Way of men is near at hand.”57 It would be extreme to reject the historicity of Zuozhuan outright and to rely instead entirely upon archaeology, the Annals, and a few other texts or sections of texts for the reconstruction of Spring and Autumn history. Most recent studies of Zuozhuan agree that the text derives from various sources and is composed of strata that accumulated over time. As Yuri Pines observes, “Few would doubt that the Zuo is a compilation of earlier sources.”58 Enough of these sources, he believes, are sufficiently near in time to the events they describe that one can use Zuozhuan to reconstruct ideological change in the roughly two and a half centuries of Spring and Autumn history. But he also provides a list of thirteen Zuozhuan passages containing information unavailable at the close of the Spring and Autumn period.59 In addition, Pines notes other “spurious speeches and interpolations” that have also contaminated the text.60 For him, then, most of the strata of the text are from the period they describe, while a later stratum is clearly of Warring States origin. While holding that “early Chinese literary and scholarly practice, by its very nature, produced texts that must frustrate our attempts to fix their origins,”61 David Schaberg suggests that Zuozhuan draws both upon earlier textual sources and upon a rich tradition of orality.62 He describes a process whereby “anecdotes and speeches were transcribed from the oral tradition” beginning around 400 Bce, a process that then continued for some time.63 Thus, Zuozhuan might be a layered text, but the layers remain malleable and exceedingly difficult to define and date with any precision. This particular conception of the development of Zuozhuan will be explored in much greater detail in part II below. A. Taeko Brooks discerns some of the same change in Zuozhuan ideology noted by Pines. Focusing primarily upon the shifting conceptions of Heaven (tian 天) and ritual propriety, she identifies five layers in the text and, correlating these with ideology as reflected in other texts, dates the layers from 390 to 312 Bce. For her, then, Zuozhuan is a layered text that can be quite precisely dated and ascribed to the mid–Warring States period.64 In a study we shall turn to forthwith, Barry B. Blakeley notes that Brooks’ study “touches almost exclusively on the narratives (espe XXX

Introduction

cially the Discourses)” and is therefore “relevant only to that segment of the text.”65 Thus, Brooks’ theory of the layered nature of the text leaves the door open to the possibility that some nonnarrative layers of the text predate her 390 Bce date. Blakeley takes a formalistic approach to identifying a number of Zuozhuan sources. First of all, he notes a redaction of the Annals embedded in Zuozhuan that is not always the same as the various versions of the Annals that we possess today. In his conception, those sections of Zuozhuan that seem to be duplicates or near duplicates of Annals entries are a major part of this source. The implication is that the Zuozhuan we now find interwoven with the Annals was based upon explanations of a somewhat different transmission of the Annals. Second, Blakeley identifies other passages that resemble Annals entries but are “presumably derived from chronicles kept in states other than Lu.”66 Third, Zuozhuan contains commentary, such as the sayings of “the noble man” or of Confucius, and “value judgments concerning ritual or behavioral correctness” that might come from quite different hands and might even date from a time later than much of the rest of the text.67 Fourth, there is clearly material in Zuozhuan that dates to the Warring States period. If we take away the parts of Zuozhuan that come from these four sources, we are left with most of the narratives, which constitute the bulk of the text. Blakeley divides this material into two categories. The first of these categories includes what he describes as “simple, straightforward accounts of events that could reasonably represent contemporary records and may have been transmitted in written form.” These particular narratives have neither “didactic function nor entertainment value.”68 The second category includes longer, more elaborate narratives that might have been transmitted orally and are less reliable historically, although these too must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Consequently, Blakeley concludes that a generalized verdict about the date or reliability of a particular narrative is difficult: “Instead, every segment, even utterance, in the text must be judged independently.”69 Most scholars of early China would agree that it might be as dangerous to dismiss the historical reliability of all of Zuozhuan as it is to accept it all uncritically. As the extensive discussion in part II below indicates, we too believe that Zuozhuan is a text of great complexity deriving from a number of practices in early China: extensive record keeping; a strong tradition of teaching, which drew upon and further explicated written records; an emphasis upon effective rhetoric for political purposes, which led to the production and transmission of model speeches; and a scholarly practice of compiling, transmitting, and circulating texts. Whether future research can further unravel the sources and layers of Zuozhuan and the authenticity of each remains to be seen. But it is likely that Zuozhuan, carefully used, can contribute to our historical understanding of both the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States Introduction XXXI

period—that is, both the years it purports to chronicle and the era defining its textual formation. STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE TRANSL ATION

The base Chinese text we have reproduced is that of Ruan Yuan 阮元 (1764–1849), which he published in 1815 as part of his highly influential reprint of rare Song editions of the thirteen classics.70 We have regularly consulted and followed the modern punctuated and annotated edition of Yang Bojun 楊伯峻 (1902–92), who sometimes alters Ruan’s text.71 In those cases where we adopt a reading differing from Yang and Ruan that significantly affects our translation, we have so noted. While our text is not a full critical edition consistently listing such variants as those from Dunhuang and Japanese manuscripts, it is practical and serviceable for the task at hand. Our organization and numbering of the texts of the Annals and Zuozhuan follow Yang Bojun. Accordingly, all Annals entries for a given year appear before the Zuozhuan entries for the same year. In each case these entries are numbered successively. Thus, under “Lord Yin 3,” Annals entries are given as 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 and are followed by Zuozhuan entries 3.1 through 3.7.72 One of the interesting features of Zuozhuan, which indicates that it was originally not just a commentary, is that some Annals lines are not commented upon and, more significantly, some Zuozhuan entries have no Annals equivalent, as we have noted earlier. Where a particular Annals entry and a Zuozhuan entry have a close relationship, we indicate this by giving in parentheses the number of the corresponding entry. Thus, the first Annals entry of Lord Yin 3 is given as 3.1(2), which indicates that the corresponding Zuozhuan entry is Zuozhuan 3.2 below, which in turn will be fully numbered as 3.2(1), pointing to the corresponding Annals entry above. The lack of a number in parentheses for any given entry indicates that there is no counterpart in the other text. We must voice a word of caution: while the correspondence between the two texts is often clear, it occasionally becomes more questionable and requires subjective judgment. We have tried to be consistent, but the attentive reader may find passages where he or she disagrees with what we have marked or have failed to mark as a correspondence. For each of the twelve Lords of Lu, we have provided an introduction. The purpose of the introduction is to highlight and clarify some of the important events and themes appearing in that particular section of the text. To further help readers, we give brief introductions to many individual entries and, on occasion, even to portions of particular entries. As we have noted earlier, one of the difficulties in reading Zuozhuan is that story lines or strings of related events are often broken up by the interposition of other events. In introducing entries, we attempt to indicate XXXII

Introduction

previous entries and later entries belonging to the same sequence of events. We also try to identify recurrent themes or figures—for example, the wise barbarian, the humble adviser, communication through riddles, and so forth. This makes it possible to read our translation either successively or by jumping from place to place to follow a particular series of related entries. The latter way of reading, incidentally, was common in China, for several re-presentations of Zuozhuan from as early as the Song dynasty conveniently group related entries together.73 One of the biggest difficulties one encounters in reading Zuozhuan is that it is replete with personal names. One scholar has counted 2,767 persons who are named in the Annals and Zuozhuan. The largest number are people who come from the domain of Jin (411), followed by Lu (316), then Chu (279), Qi (273), Zhou (205), Zheng (203), Wei (197), and Song (191).74 Moreover, many persons in the Annals and Zuozhuan have two or more names, so that the reader is often left overwhelmed, if not completely bewildered. Naming conventions during the period of time reflected in these texts are extremely complex and often relate to clan and lineage organization and official ranks and positions. Basically, most elite members of society belong to a large descent group, or xing 姓 (sometimes called a “clan”), and a smaller unit known as a “lineage,” or shi 氏. Lineage names can be derived from birth sequence (e.g., the Meng 孟 or Zhongsun 仲孫, Ji 季 or Jisun 季孫, Shusun 叔孫, and Shuzhong 叔 仲 lineages in Lu); the name of the place where the lineage head was put in power (e.g., Fan 范, Zhao 趙, and Weì 魏 in Jin); the birth name of a lineage head (e.g., the descendants of Gongzi Dang 公子蕩, the son of Lord Huan of Song 宋桓公, became the Dang lineage 蕩氏); the courtesy name of a lineage head (e.g., Gongzi Yan 公子偃, the son of Lord Mu of Zheng 鄭穆公, had the courtesy name Ziyou 子游, and by his grandsons’ generation “You” had become the lineage name 游氏); the name of a noble’s natal domain after he flees to another domain (e.g., Gongzi Wan 公子完 flees from Chen to Qi [Zhuang 22.1a], and his descendants in Qi formed the Chen lineage 陳氏); or a rank in court or in the army (e.g., the Zhonghang 中行 lineage in Jin started with Xun Linfu 荀林父, who commanded the “central column,” or zhonghang 中行, in the Jin army [Xi 28.13]; the ancestor of the Ji 籍 lineage in Jin obtained that name because he was in charge of “texts and documents,” or dianji 典籍 [Zhao 15.7]). Typically, clan names appear in the names of elite females, whereas lineage names appear in the names of males. Shortly after birth, persons received a name, or ming 名. A passage in Zuozhuan (Huan 6.6) briefly describes the naming ceremony and includes the Lu minister Shen Xu’s 申繻 explanation of appropriate and inappropriate naming. Somewhat earlier in Zuozhuan (Huan 2.8), there is an example of the potentially disastrous consequences of inappropriate naming. According to early ritual texts, upon the capping ceremony Introduction XXXIII

for males at the age of twenty and the hair-pinning for females at the age of fifteen, the young person received a second name, or “courtesy name” (zi 字), sometimes called a “style name” or “cognomen” in Englishlanguage sources.75 As Wang Yinzhi 王引之 (1766–1834) convincingly showed, there is often semantic resonance between a person’s birth name and courtesy name.76 Birth sequence indicators are commonly attached to the courtesy name: meng 孟 or bo 伯 for the eldest, zhong 仲 for the middle, and shu 叔 or ji 季 for the youngest. In addition, such gender markers as zi 子 or fu 父 commonly appear in courtesy names. A rich variety of possible name forms can arise from these principles and from several others, such as the use of posthumous names, or shihao 諡號, which supposedly convey an evaluation of a person’s life or achievement. Thus, it is not unusual in Zuozhuan for a single person to be called by four or five names, and one of the major characters, the Jin minister Fan Hui 范會, is called by nine names. Almost all major persons have at least two names: the basic lineage name / birth name combination and a courtesy name. Designations such as Gongzi 公子 (the lord’s son), Gongsun 公孫 (the lord’s grandson), Wangzi 王子 (the king’s son), Wangsun 王孫 (the king’s grandson), or Wangshu 王叔 (the king’s uncle) are used with birth names. Different permutations of lineage name, the place(s) a lineage head is put in power, birth sequence, birth name, courtesy name, and office held yield variations for men’s name forms. For women the components of name forms include varying combinations of two or three of the following: her birth sequence, the name or clan name of her natal domain, the name of her natal lineage, the posthumous name of her husband, the name or clan name of her husband’s domain, and her own posthumous name. The conditions under which one name rather than another is used in Zuozhuan are not always clear. Whereas in the Annals birth names predominate, in Zuozhuan there is a marked preference for courtesy names. A few tendencies can be identified in the selection of one name over another. When a person first appears in the text, he is often identified by birth name. Characters also refer to themselves by birth name. Zuozhuan passages that draw on the Annals or imitate an annals style often follow the Annals convention of using the birth name. As much as possible, we have simplified names in our translation by calling each person by a single name. Some will object to such a practice, since it erases a critical feature of the original text, and some scholars believe that different names convey judgment or information regarding the provenance of the materials, but Chinese names are difficult enough for a nonspecialist to recognize and remember without the added complexity of having to deal with several names for virtually every major character in the text. We have, however, prepared a personal name index and use a system of superscript references to indicate which of the variants actually appears in the Chinese text. For example, in our translation XXXIV

Introduction

of Yin 8.9 the reader will encounter “Gongzi Huia.” By referring to the index under “Gongzi Hui,” the name we use throughout Zuozhuan for this figure, one sees that the superscript “a” corresponds to “Yufu.” This indicates that in the Chinese original of Yin 8.9 Yufu is actually the name being used in this particular instance. In deciding which name to use in our translation, we have sometimes chosen the name we thought an English reader might remember most easily, and we have sometimes decided to use the variant that actually appears in Zuozhuan most frequently or that most clearly indicates the relationship of a particular character to a lineage or clan. The first of these considerations means that birth names appear more often in our translation than in Zuozhuan itself. Sometimes, however, we have not been able to avoid using two dif­ ferent names for a single character. The most common examples of this type occur where one name appears in the Annals, but we have for one reason or another decided to use another name in Zuozhuan. Since we do not want to alter the formulaic language of the Annals, we have in such cases retained the Annals name in our translation of that text and have added the selected Zuozhuan variant immediately afterward in parentheses. In some cases, the change of status necessitates the use of different names: for example, Chong’er 重耳 becomes Lord Wen of Jin 晉文公 and Gongzi Wei 公子圍 is later King Ling of Chu 楚靈王. In the personal name index, we have provided information (when it is available) about dates, lineage affiliations, and kinship relations. In the case of place names that coincidentally share the same Mandarin romanization and that appear frequently and are of continuing significance in the narrative, we have used pinyin tone marks to remove ambiguities. For example, the large domain 齊 is romanized as “Qi,” whereas the small domain 杞 is romanized as “Qǐ,” and the settlement 戚, the power base of Wei ministers of the Sun line, is romanized as “Qī.” The domains Xu 徐 and Xŭ 許 and the domains Wei 衛 and Weì 魏 are likewise differentiated. For the two domains written with the same character, 燕, one in the north and one in the south, we have arbitrarily decided to write the northern domain name as Yan and the southern domain as Yān. All such romanizations can be found in the Place Name Index. The nature of the calendar followed in the Annals and Zuozhuan is complex and the subject of rich tradition of study, which we will not attempt to summarize here.77 Years, as noted above, are marked in the Annals and Zuozhuan by reference to the lords of the domain of Lu: “Lord Yin 1,” “Lord Yin 2,” . . . , “Lord Ai 27.” We have inserted a Western calendar equivalent after each of these years—for example, Lord Yin 1 (722 Bce)—although there is not a perfect correspondence between the beginning and ending of years in the ancient Chinese lunar calendar and modern Western calendars. As one would expect from an annals system that derives its name from the sequence of seasons, the four seasons are almost always noted, with at least one event typically registered for each Introduction XXXV

season. In the Zhou calendar, which was used in the domain of Lu, the designation chun, “spring,” roughly corresponds to our winter, and so forth. Days in traditional China were named by a sequence of characters recurring in a cycle of sixty combinations, the so-called sexagenary cycle.78 This cycle operates independently from the lunar months, so that it is impossible to tell from the date name in the sexagenary cycle alone how far into a particular month the event took place. Such correspondences, however, have been established, and Yang Bojun regularly provides in a note the numerical day of the month that corresponds to a date name.79 In our translation, we reproduce the cyclical date names and then, following Yang, give the sequence day of the month in parentheses. For example, note the following entry from Lord Xi 1 (659 Bce): “In the twelfth month, on the dingsi day (18), the funeral cortege of Lord Zhuang’s wife arrived from Qi.” Dingsi is the romanized equivalent of the two-character name of the day in the sexagenary cycle, while “(18),” which is added by reference to Yang’s gloss, indicates that in this case dingsi falls on the eighteenth day of the twelfth lunar month. How much and what type of footnoting to provide in a translation are always difficult decisions. Our goal has been to produce a reader-friendly translation. Thus, we have tried to make our notes useful and have not consistently supplied footnotes giving information that an early-China scholar could easily access from a Chinese-language commentary. In some instances, we also supply in footnotes alternative versions of particular events as they appear in Warring States texts such as Discourses of the States (Guoyu 國語), Master Han Fei (Han Feizi 韓非子), and Annals of Master Yan (Yanzi chunqiu 晏子春秋), or even the considerably later Records of the Historian. These notes are meant, not as a comprehensive guide for the sinologist reader, who can find such information elsewhere, but as an indication to the more general reader of the rich texture of early Chinese texts and the way in which particular accounts are circulated and modified. One problem with a face-to-face classical Chinese–English translation is that the Chinese text requires so much less space than the translation, leaving a large amount of empty space on the left side page. To compensate for this, we usually begin our footnotes on the left side and continue them, where necessary, on the right. Footnoting in this fashion will mean that the reader’s eyes must often sweep from the right page to the left page to find the relevant footnote, but it also means that the heft and price of the book the reader now holds have been somewhat reduced! Translation from early Chinese is a challenging task, especially in the case of a text as linguistically rich and textually complex as Zuozhuan. We have tried to be reasonably consistent in our translation of terminology without becoming too rigid. Both the demands of English style and the basically heterogeneous nature of Zuozhuan itself should allow for some variance. Certain translation choices, we know, will raise eye XXXVI

Introduction

brows, if not ire. For example, we have chosen to render guo 國 as “domain” rather than the usual “state.” We do this to remind the reader of two characteristics of the guo in Spring and Autumn China. First, a guo was a nexus of settlements extending out from a walled central city or capital, also called guo, toward a border area that was rarely as clearly delineated as the frontiers of a modern state.80 Second, power in the domain was usually a matter of lineage and sublineage relationships, with the lord (Latin dominus, a distant root of the word “domain”) at the center. Administrative structures were not elaborate, and official business was usually a “family affair.” High officers (dafu 大夫) and ministers (qing 卿), who come to overshadow many lords of the ruling houses, fill offices that often become hereditary; their source of power and revenue was settlements (yi 邑) under their administration and jurisdiction. Serving under them are officers (shi 士), usually unranked descendants of branch lineages serving in chariot units. Inhabitants of the capital (guoren 國人) sometimes seem to be able to act collectively and sway policy decisions.81 We also have not adhered to the traditional way of translating the five ranks of early China: gong 公, hou 侯, bo 伯, zi 子, and nan 男, usually “duke,” “marquis,” “earl,” “count,” and “baron,” respectively. These terms not only lead the reader into the feudal world of medieval Europe but also convey a sense of hierarchy and orderliness that was not always so clear in the world of early China. Although a Zuozhuan passage indicates that these terms for ranks were not an entirely meaningless jumble (Xi 4.4), they were not applied consistently in Zuozhuan, as Chen Pan 陳槃 has so persuasively demonstrated.82 Consequently, we have rendered the five ranks as “duke,” “prince,” “liege,” “master,” and “head.” The first of these terms, gong, not only is used to designate the rulers of such domains as Song and Guo but also is a more general honorific bestowed upon every ruler at the time of his death and used consistently thereafter, usually attached to the ruler’s posthumous name. Thus, our text is organized not around twelve Lu “dukes” but around twelve Lu “lords.” Each of these is identified in the text by his posthumous name (Yin, Huan, Zhuang, Min, etc.), with the honorific title gong that follows thus being understood as the general honorific “lord.” Things can become tricky when, for example, a particular Duke of Song (Song gong 宋公) becomes Lord Shang of Song (Song Shang gong 宋殤公) after he dies and is buried. Zuozhuan refers to both the “Duke of Song” (e.g., Yin 4.2, 4.3, 4.4) and “Lord Shang” (e.g., Yin 3.5, 4.3). We translate the term gong differently in the second case because every ruler becomes a “lord” when he dies and is given his posthumous name. For example, when Liege Fuchu of Cao (Cao bo Fuchu 曹伯負芻) dies, even though he was never a "duke" or a "lord" (gong) while alive, he is posthumously named Lord Cheng (Cheng gong 成公). Furthermore, gong is also often used on its own as a way of referring to a living ruler who is being spoken to or Introduction XXXVII

mentioned. In the Annals an unqualified gong always refers to the Lord of Lu. In these cases we have typically translated gong as “our lord” to remind the reader that the Annals is a Lu text and maintains that perspective throughout. But in the case of Zuozhuan, we translate an unqualified gong as “our lord” when it refers to the Lu ruler and simply as “the lord” when it refers to the ruler of some other domain. This feature of our translation, which is meant to assist the reader, does have the result of giving Zuozhuan a Lu point of view that is not so apparent in the original and may not accurately reflect the origin of the text.83 In addition, Zhou court ministers are also called gong. To differentiate them from rulers of domains, we have rendered their names without the genitive—Liu Kang gong 劉康公, for example, is translated as Liu Duke Kang (rather than Duke Kang of Liu). Many other translation choices, which we will not describe in further detail here, deviate from sinological convention, but we hope none of these are too jarring or, more seriously, too far removed from the meaning of the original. Without pretending that we have necessarily produced a translation superior to that of James Legge, we do think there is some merit in trying to defamiliarize the text somewhat for those readers already steeped in Legge’s version. One of the advantages to having so many different translations of Homer or of the Bible is that the person who does not read the original languages can move from translation to translation, gaining new insights and perspectives from each. We hope that the reader will find what we have produced here to be fresh and clear. And should our work encourage other translations of this rich and wonderful text, translations with styles and features that set them apart from ours, so much the better! PART II: THE EARLY HISTORY OF ZUOZHUAN

Present consensus holds that Zuozhuan was largely complete by the end of the fourth century Bce.84 Predictions voiced within the text do not anticipate events much later than those years. Intellectual positions adopted by historical characters in the work are for the most part consistent with trends of this and earlier eras. The text’s diction preserves certain archaic distinctions that were forgotten in later times. Manuscripts recovered from tombs dating to around 300 Bce show that educated elites of the middle Warring States period were committing philosophical arguments and historical anecdotes to writing, sometimes in texts thousands of characters long. Some large part of our Zuozhuan likely circulated in writing by that time. Still, if a nearly complete version of Zuozhuan was being read and transmitted by the end of the Warring States period, it received surprisingly little attention in the texts that survive from those years. True, XXXVIII

Introduction

Zuozhuan seems originally to have had no distinguishing title of its own, instead sharing the general title Chunqiu with a much larger corpus of materials, and an early version of our text may have had an early independent transmission among these materials.85 But despite all the Warring States texts that reproduce bits of narrative and reasoning now found in Zuozhuan, none refer to Zuozhuan as a source, and very few mention even the Annals. Entirely absent are unequivocal references to an annalistic history of the kind we possess today, with narratives for multiple domains and exegetical passages on the Annals arranged year by year for the whole span of the twelve Lu Lords from Yin to Ai. In short, while internal evidence suggests that much of the content of Zuozhuan was in writing by the end of the fourth century Bce, no pre-Han source demonstrates that the whole of that content had been organized into a coherent work, whether in annalistic form or in any other order. Reconstructing the early history of Zuozhuan thus becomes a matter of investigating the diverse forms in which its content may have been transmitted in the time before its compilation and its earliest attestations as a complete, annalistically arranged text. This question of form in turn raises questions about function. For any written primary sources upon which Zuozhuan was able to draw, what prompted the initial act of writing? What good were these textual materials, and where, and to whom? Where Zuozhuan incorporated materials that had been transmitted orally, what purpose had they served when spoken aloud, and, again, what spurred their transcription? How and why did historical information move from place to place over time and become widely shared knowledge? What justified the preservation of components of the protoZuozhuan before they were assembled around the common historiographical project of telling a believable truth about the past? Zuozhuan derives ultimately from at least five early Chinese social practices or functions in which commemoration and interpretation of the past were made to serve present needs. These were record keeping, teaching, speaking, compiling, and transmitting. While in history these practices overlapped and interlocked with one another, they may nonetheless be distinguished in analysis and do mark out different aspects of the completed Zuozhuan. RECORD KEEPING

Ruling institutions in the Yellow River valley had employed writing in the management of large-scale political networks perhaps even before the date (ca. 1200 Bce) of the earliest extant examples of Chinese writing, the oracle bones.86 As Robert Bagley has argued, citing comparative evidence from Mesopotamia, the courts that used and inscribed the oracle bones in divination ceremonies may already have been using more perishable materials for a range of administrative functions.87 Edward Introduction XXXIX

Shaughnessy and others have pointed out that, given the large numbers of Western Zhou bronze vessels that bear inscriptions, writing was by no means an unfamiliar tool at the beginning of the first millennium Bce.88 Martin Kern has shown that inscriptional evidence and received texts alike suggest large staffs of literate officials both on elite levels and in the ranks of functionaries.89 One may readily speculate about the types of texts early writers were producing, archiving, and transmitting. The scapulae and turtle plastrons upon which divination charges and prognostications were carved are sometimes thought to have been archived; bones were in any case retained for a period of days for verification, and the effort expended upon writing itself suggests that the information on the bones may have merited longer-term preservation.90 Bronze inscriptions preserved from the Western Zhou show that courts used bamboo texts in investiture ceremonies and afterward retained these texts as records. The existence of such texts as the Bamboo Annals, with its accurate records of very early astronomical occurrences, strongly suggests that early courts maintained succinct chronicles of important events.91 The discovery that Sima Qian’s list of Shang kings is corroborated by the oracle bones implies that Shang and Zhou courts maintained records of successions.92 Finally, references in Zuozhuan and elsewhere show that courts maintained “canons” (dian 典, dianji 典籍), which in some cases were written documents and in some cases clearly were protocols regarded as having the same constancy as written documents.93 By the first centuries of the Eastern Zhou, to judge from references in Zuozhuan and other early texts, courts were keeping records of covenants sworn (“covenant documents,” mengshu 盟書) in “covenant archives” (mengfu 盟府) or “archives of precedents” (gufu 故府) (e.g., Xi 5.8, 26.3, Xiang 11.5, Ding 1.1). These archives also apparently contained records of “merits” (xun 勳) and “rewards” (shang 賞), that is, records of recognition and prerogatives granted to certain historical individuals and to their descendants (see, e.g., Xi 26.3, Xiang 11.5, Zhao 4.8).94 Such celebrations of service could easily have formed the kernel of later historical accounts. The character and use of such archival materials may be judged by the words of the Lu nobleman Zhan Xi 展喜, who by citing them stops a Qi attack: Previously, the Zhou Duke and the Grand Lord were like arms and legs to the Zhou household, bracing and supporting King Cheng. King Cheng honored their exertions and bestowed upon them a covenant that said, “May your sons and grandsons in every generation do no harm to one another.” This covenant was stored away in the covenant archives, and the grand preceptor took responsibility for keeping it. (Xi 26.3)95

XL

Introduction

The passage is telling in several ways. In the covenant ceremony as we know it from archaeological evidence, writing played a key role as a tool for intensifying ritual speech. By committing to writing the oath that was sworn and then smearing that writing with the blood of a sacrificial victim and burying it with the victim, the parties to the oath codified its precise terms and laid them before the divine powers, who would enforce them.96 Reconstructions of the investiture ceremony show that records of merit and reward likewise had their origin in primary documents used in the ceremony itself.97 By keeping and citing copies of such documents, the parties turned what had initially been ritual uses of writing to commemorative or protohistoriographical ends. Compiled at the royal court or at the court of a single domain, the retained documents would have constituted a record of the many noble lines’ most memorable political ties and achievements; the scribes and other functionaries who mastered the texts would have known history as a series of services rendered and rewards bestowed. Versions of such records preserved in individual noble houses might naturally have attracted supplementary accounts, written or simply remembered and retold, of the specific historical circumstances under which the family won its greatest glories.98 These treasuries may have contained other sorts of records as well. Certain passages in Zuozhuan are so detailed in their narrative description and so clear about the dating of specific events that they seem most likely to have originated as contemporaneous accounts.99 Scribes in courts and noble houses may well have maintained records of important events. What proportion of Zuozhuan derives from such records is impossible to determine. Again, communications that originally had a written character, such as letters or official notifications, might well have found their way into archives and ultimately into Zuozhuan.100 As for the speeches that figure in so many Zuozhuan narratives, it is true that certain royal utterances had often been committed to writing, but evidence for widespread contemporaneous transcription of others’ speeches is lacking.101 Strong evidence shows that by the Warring States period, legal reports and records were being kept in courts, and one may surmise that this practice had its roots further back, during the Spring and Autumn period.102 Among the texts kept by the Lu court was the little chronicle that would ultimately come to be known as the Annals.103 Zuozhuan makes reference to similar brief court chronicles in Jin and Qi (Xuan 2.3, Xiang 25.2), and Mencius (4B.21) gives the names of chronicles for Jin and Chu. The Bamboo Annals, a text that shows some formal similarities to the Annals, has been mentioned above. The original purpose of the Annals is unknown. Recent scholarship has focused on two possibilities.104 First, the records may have been intended initially for presentation in the Ancestral Temple, with the ancestors themselves as readers. The highly formulaic nature of the writIntroduction XLI

ing would then reflect the strict expectations imposed by ritual and the religious occasion. Second, the records may have been intended for latter-day readers. Several Zuozhuan passages imply that historical actors were conscious that their deeds could be recorded for posterity. The references to the keeping of court chronicles in Jin and Qi, mentioned above, suggest that once an Annals-style notation of an event had been composed, the scribe (shi 史) who composed it would “show it at court” (yi shi yu chao 以示於朝), and that he might moreover accept considerable risk in order to capture the truth of the event (Xuan 2.3, Xiang 25.2). The two hypotheses are not irreconcilable. Between the imagined readerships of past ancestors and future descendants, contemporary readers paid careful attention to what was being recorded.105 Indeed, the mix of events recorded in the Annals—from ritual observances to celestial and natural aberrations, diplomatic engagements, and military expeditions—implies that the chronicle served as a kind of ledger, and that the items entered in it defined the overall status of the Lu court’s relations with its political and spiritual counterparts. Whether or not all the entries in the Annals were reported in the Ancestral Temple, this ledger and the state of affairs it defined would have both a sacral quality, as being of concern to the ruler’s ancestors, and a historical quality, as being of use to future policy makers and ritual practitioners. Any court official wishing to know the history of Lu’s ties with a particular state, the services rendered by a particular Lu noble line, or the incidence of eclipses and other possible portents would benefit from knowledge of the chronicle. Traditional scholarship held that our Annals came from the hand of Confucius, who had either edited an existing text or composed it anew, and that his intention had been to convey, through his choices of wording, subtle moral judgments of the people and events mentioned in the text.106 No similar notions of intent or subtle wording are linked with the other chronicles mentioned above or with the practice of chronicle keeping itself. Nonetheless, the possibility that chronicle entries were shown in court at the moment of recording and widely known thereafter does provide a general context for the belief that they convey “praise and blame” (baobian 褒貶).107 Strictly speaking, the story of Confucius’ involvement with the Annals has less to do with composition than with teaching and with the transmission of the text beyond the Lu court. TEACHING

Archives and other collections of written records are not sufficient unto themselves. If the media on which they are written are perishable, they cannot survive without periodic recopying, and even records on more durable materials threaten to become worthless if there is no one around who can read them correctly. Record keeping thus entails teaching, XLII

Introduction

which may extend from the narrow training in literacy required of scribes to the much broader cultural instruction required to reproduce the political system in which archives have value. Relatively little is known about education in Eastern Zhou China. Designated heirs were assigned tutors (fu 傅), whose precise teaching duties, however, are rarely mentioned.108 Their curriculum presumably included elements of the traditional “Six Arts”—ritual, music, archery, chariot driving, calligraphy, and calculation—as well as some training in prestigious songs and speeches from the past.109 If we focus only on the verbal elements of a noble education, it appears that knowledge of the Odes mattered above all, as such knowledge was indispensable in competent diplomacy and oratory.110 Speakers in Zuozhuan also sometimes cite other inherited materials, such as the Documents (Shu 書), the Changes (Yi 易), and various sayings, and these may well have been taught to young people, either through reading or through recitation and memorization. Given the uses to which historical knowledge was being put in speeches, it is likely that teaching about the past had a place in early curricula. One Warring States text twice mentions the Annals in connection with the work of tutors for young heirs apparent: once when the Annals is listed with other works as a key component of an heir’s education, and again when a man is chosen as tutor entirely on the basis of his mastery of the Annals.111 In evaluating such passages it is important to note that the title Annals likely refers not to the chronicle alone but to a larger body of teachings about the past, which may or may not have been organized around a reading of the chronicle.112 If it is indeed the case that the Annals and similar chronicles served as ledgers of political and supernatural engagements, then the training of new members of the ruling elite would require not a narrow knowledge of the chronicle alone but a thorough knowledge of the events behind it. If the Annals chronicle had a place in such training, it would have served as an aide-mémoire, its every entry linked to a larger narrative that could be conveyed in the course of teaching.113 Further, teachers involved in the education of promising young men would have made an obvious conduit for the transmission of the court chronicle in institutions not directly attached to court.114 The earliest account of the composition of what came to be known as Zuozhuan and its relation to the Annals concerns Confucius’ teaching of his disciples rather than the training of a prince. Moreover, as it comes from the Records of the Historian, completed around 90 Bce by Sima Qian, it is relatively late. It has much to tell us nonetheless: Confucius clearly understood the Royal Way and approached more than seventy rulers, but none of them could make use of him. So he went west and observed the Zhou house. He

Introduction XLIII

discoursed upon (lun 論) the scribal records and the old legends and then, adopting the perspective of Lu (xing yu Lu 興於魯), put in order its Annals, recording the events of Lord Yin and continuing as far as the capture of the lin under Lord Ai.115 He made concise its phrases and wording, eliminated all excess and repe­ tition, and in this way created a system of rules of signification (yifa 義法). The Royal Way was there complete and the affairs of men fully encompassed. The seventy disciples received the meanings of the tradition orally (koushou qi zhuanzhi 口受其傳指). Since there were patterned words that satirized and ridiculed, praised and obscured, and impugned, they could not make them plain by writing them out. The Lu gentleman Zuo Qiuming feared that the various disciples, differing in their biases, would be content with their own opinions and lose what was genuine. Therefore, taking Confucius’ scribal records as his basis, he put in order (lun) all their words and completed Zuo’s Annals (Zuoshi chunqiu).116

In this way, according to Sima Qian, the text that he knew as Zuo’s Annals originated as an accurate record of Confucius’ teachings on the Annals, transcribed by a single author in Lu within a few years of the teacher’s death.117 The account is likely a simplification of a process that stretched over a period of decades or centuries and involved not one author and teacher but many, and not seventy disciples but hundreds. In his compressed account of authorship, Sima Qian sets aside the history of court chronicles and establishes in its place a vision of sagely research, order, and comprehensiveness. The past that was most relevant in the life of courts and in the education of the elite was the history of the network of domains related through the Zhou royal house, but what made this history relevant was its impact on the particular court with which a student was associated. That Confucius is made to acquire his historical knowledge during his legendary trip to the Zhou domain justifies the claim that the Annals embodies the Royal Way, while the observation that he “adopted the perspective of Lu”—or, more literally, “took his start from Lu”—reflects the character of the actual text as a local chronicle. Confucius “discourses upon” (or “sorts out” or “evaluates”) not only written records but also “old legends” or “things heard from olden times.” The allusion to orally transmitted materials ensures that, despite its extreme concision, the Annals nonetheless encapsulates all the knowledge that Confucius found valuable during his researches. Finally, this claim that the Annals is all-encompassing, along with the belief that it is written according to rules for signification (yifa), guarantees the text’s interpretability and makes a place for the many teachers who would undertake to interpret it for their students. XLIV

Introduction

The passage’s account of the early transmission of the Annals reflects the anxieties that surrounded the teaching, the interpretation, and the preservation of historical knowledge. Even as Confucius is made the first and greatest writer of history, the peculiarities of his magnum opus are explained as effects of his original vocation as adviser and teacher of future advisers. Succinctness and narrowness of focus are reinterpreted as intentional restraint, the courtier’s avoidance of direct confrontation. But this exemplary style has its drawbacks. The text is dependent upon its teachers, and particularly upon teachers who, like Confucius, can maintain the true knowledge of the events behind the Annals’ brief notations. After Confucius is gone, his disciples are not up to the task of preserving this knowledge in a unified and coherent form, and their explanations of the cryptic text threaten to go awry. Here Zuo Qiu­ ming steps in, fixing the correct tradition in writing. Zuo Qiuming is otherwise known in early texts only from the Analects, where Confucius mentions him with admiration as an opponent of glibness and insincerity.118 By attributing Zuozhuan to a contemporary of Confucius and making it prior to all other exegetical traditions of the Annals and compilations of historical lore that would follow, the Records of the Historian account gives Zuozhuan a singular prestige. Any reader would have known, however, that in the centuries since Confucius’ death and the final entries in the Annals, no fewer than five distinct traditions of expertise in Annals interpretation had flourished and competed with each other. The protoZuozhuan was only one among them, and one that before Sima Qian’s time (and perhaps for at least another century after) was overshadowed by two others. The account’s allusion to the danger of interpretive divergence reflects a real profusion of exegetical approaches to the Annals during the Warring States and Han periods. Here it is useful to consider a second version of the composition story told in Ban Gu’s History of the Han, specifically from the bibliographical treatise incorporated into that work: Because Lu was the domain of the Zhou Duke, and its ritual and cultural patterns were complete in all their specifics, and its scribal officers kept to their rules, [Confucius] joined with Zuo Qiuming in viewing its scribal records. He based his work upon deeds and followed the way of men. By addressing moments of ascendancy, he caused achievements to be established;119 by seizing upon failures, he brought punishment to completion. He used days and months to determine the numbers of the calendar; he availed himself of the rulers’ court visits and of envoys’ diplomatic trips to demonstrate correct ritual and music. Since there were those whom it praised or obscured or critiqued or impugned, and these could not be made plain in writing, he passed it on

Introduction XLV

orally to his disciples. But as the disciples went away from him, they differed in what they said. Qiuming was afraid that each of the disciples would be content with his own opinion and lose what was genuine, so he put in order the original affairs and founded a tradition (zhuan 傳), making it clear that the Master did not explain the classic on the basis of empty words. The great men critiqued and impugned in the Annals were contemporary rulers and subjects, men who possessed authority and power, and the facts of their doings were all laid out in this transmission. The text was therefore hidden away and not made widely known; that is why it escaped the troubles of the times.120

In its differences from the Records of the Historian account, Ban Gu’s version suggests that the story of the composition of the Annals and proto-Zuozhuan remained fluid even as late as the first century CE. The detail of Confucius’ trip to Zhou disappears, while Zuo Qiuming becomes involved not only in the final write-up of the transmission but even in the initial research, here apparently conducted in the Lu scribal records. Both the Records of the Historian and the History of the Han reflect the elevated status that the Annals had achieved as the supposed distillation of Confucius’ historical judgment. Where the Records of the Historian sees the Annals as the embodiment of the Royal Way, the History of the Han sees it as establishing norms for justice, for the calendar, and for ritual and music. For both Han historians, the Annals is both complete in itself and dependent upon teachers who can draw out its lessons for every new generation of students. From this point on, the History of the Han and the Records of the Historian differ more strikingly. The History of the Han continues its account by following the main course of Annals scholarship during the Warring States and Han periods: In later eras the oral explanations circulated widely, so one had the transmissions of Gongyang, Guliang, Zou, and Jia. Among these four varieties of expertise (jia 家), Gongyang and Guliang were given a place among the officers for learning, while for Zou’s there are no teachers and for Jia’s there was never a written text.121

Of these four transmissions, only Gongyang and Guliang are extant.122 These contain relatively little supplementary narrative but focus on detailed explanations of word choice in the Annals and especially on the ways in which word choice might reveal Confucius’ own judgments of historical events. Because both Gongyang and Guliang take the form of an extended series of questions and answers about the Annals, these texts seem to re-create the scene of teaching, with a patient teacher train XLVI

Introduction

ing an attentive student in all the implied nuances of the sage’s style. Indeed, the end of the passage suggests that all four of these transmissions existed as teaching traditions and that Gongyang and Guliang succeeded because, as codifications of traditions, they were useful in the training of future teachers. During the Warring States period, the intense reading of the Annals made possible by the Gongyang and Guliang teaching traditions would have furthered an education in moral and historical judgment and, more generally, in the intellectual imitation of teachers and of the ultimate teacher-author, Confucius himself. Once it is assumed that the wording of the Annals represents Confucius’ own careful choices, the chronicle becomes a rich treasury of exemplary evaluations, a counterpart to the sparser judgments preserved in the Analects.123 And while the many sayings attributed to Confucius and the many anecdotes told about him would have been of general use in ethical training, the Annals teaching traditions came to have a much more specific and practical application. During the Han, scholars who were trained in the Gongyang tradition, among them Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (ca. 179–ca. 104 bce), treated it as a legal casebook, adopting the implied judgments of Confucius on historical events as precedents for contemporary rulings.124 This period saw the triumph of the teachers’ transformation of the Lu chronicle into the coded record of Confucius’ judgments. Never again in the history of classical scholarship in China would a work be accorded such a prescriptive power. SPEAKING

Both record keeping and the kind of Annals exegesis attributed to Confucius and his followers presume the existence of a larger sphere of activity in which knowledge of history could become valuable. This sphere was statecraft, and the means by which educated men (and, in rare cases, women) affected the course of events was persuasion, usually in speech. To be sure, training in effective speech encompassed much else, including some of the themes and arguments that would develop into China’s great philosophical traditions. But to consider for the present only what the proto-Zuozhuan had in common with most other Warring States texts, it was the techniques of successful speech that the work foregrounded and taught, not only a particular interest in such themes as ritual, virtue, and the proper ways of governance. Where the History of the Han traces the line of Annals teaching transmissions, including the two that were accorded official recognition, the parallel Records of the Historian passage—presumably a model for Ban Gu’s account—does not so much as mention these transmissions, even though Sima Qian would of course have known of the traditions of Annals exegesis. Instead, the Records of the Historian places Zuozhuan Introduction XLVII

in a very different context, one that implies a different sort of teaching and different applications of historical knowledge. If the teaching transmissions that led to the Gongyang and Guliang idealized a personal and juridical imitation of the sage, Zuozhuan in its alternative context exemplified a much broader range of skills and aspirations, most importantly the art of speaking. The Records of the Historian account of the composition of Zuo’s Annals, the first part of which was cited above, continues as follows: Duo Jiao 鐸椒 (fl. 339–329) served as tutor to King Wei of Chu 楚威王 [r. 339–329]. Because the king could not read the Annals in its entirety, Duo Jiao selected its examples of success and failure, forty passages in all, and made Duo’s Subtleties (Duo­shi wei 鐸氏微).125 In the time of King Xiaocheng of Zhao 趙孝成王 [r. 265–245], the king’s minister Yu Qing 虞卿 (fl. 265–245) selected from the Annals for times past, observed the state of affairs in more recent times, and then for his own part composed the eight chapters that make up Yu’s Annals (Yushi chunqiu 虞氏 春秋).126 Lü Buwei 呂不韋 (d. 235 BCE), minister to King Zhuang­ xiang of Qin 秦莊襄王 [r. 249–247], also contemplated distant antiquity and then cut and excerpted from the Annals and collected events from the era of the Six States [i.e., the Warring States period], forming them into the eight examinations, the six discourses, and the twelve almanacs that make up Lü’s Annals (Lüshi chunqiu 呂氏春秋).127 Coming down to the likes of Xun Qing 荀卿 (Xunzi, ca. 335– ca. 238), Mengzi, Gongsun Gu 公孫固, and Han Fei 韓非 (d. 233 BCE), each of them again and again selected from the writings related to the Annals in composing their works; examples are too numerous to record.128 Under the Han, Chancellor Zhang Cang 張蒼 (d. 152 BCE) made a digest of the Five Virtues in their calendrical order, and Senior Counselor Dong Zhongshu extended the significations of the Annals; both of them wrote quite a lot about it.129

Although the titles of several of the works mentioned here recall the old affiliation with the Annals, they seem to have little to do with direct exegesis of the chronicle. Since the Records of the Historian author believed that Duo’s Subtleties and Yu’s Annals were excerpted from Zuozhuan (the Annals in the cited passage above probably refers to Zuozhuan or proto-Zuozhuan materials), these likely shared that work’s preference for narrative and argument over direct exegesis. Where extant, the other works referred to in the passage—Lü’s Annals, Xunzi 荀子, Mencius, Han Feizi, and The Luxuriant Dew of the Annals (Chunqiu fanlu 春秋繁露)—all draw upon narratives of Spring and Autumn history to substantiate philosophical points. XLVIII

Introduction

Two of the examples given in the Records of the Historian are especially revealing. Han Feizi contains entire chapters of categorized illustrative anecdotes, including Zuozhuan-style historical narratives, and moreover includes chapters on oratorical technique that refer to the use of narratives in speeches.130 Yu’s Annals is no longer extant, but a surviving list of its chapters shows that it was organized topically around themes of statecraft and political strategy. Tellingly, one of its chapters was called “Probing and Touching” (Chuaimo 揣摩).131 The compound chuaimo is otherwise associated with the arts of the persuader, who “probes” the hidden feelings of his audience and then discovers ways to “touch” on these in the course of his speech, in this way achieving his oratorical aims.132 It is conceivable, then, that what justified the inclusion of Zuozhuan-style material in these two works was the utility of historical anecdotes in persuasion. A concern with effective speech and narrative evidence may likewise be traced in the other works. Xunzi includes passages on the art of persuasion and makes frequent use of historical illustrations.133 The enormous Lü’s Annals, which offers a comprehensive view of the workings of the natural and political worlds, frequently substantiates its positions with historical anecdotes; it also contains several chapters on the problems of speech.134 The common thread running through all the works, from Duo’s Subtleties to The Luxuriant Dew of the Annals, is a faith in the value of historical evidence in the demonstration of abstract principles of ethics and statecraft. Although this faith would become one of the underlying assumptions of philosophers, of essay writers, and, indeed, of all educated Chinese, all evidence suggests that it long predated the coming of widespread literacy and was in fact a commonplace of reasoning and argumentation from very early times.135 Recalling the habits of record keeping discussed above, it is clear from early accounts that, whatever the precise contents of court archives, it was considered possible for men of a certain status to know of and to cite the texts these archives held. Zhan Xi’s citation of King Cheng’s covenant is but one example of such behavior. Yet citations of this kind are quite rare in Zuozhuan and other early texts. Far more common are references to historical data that do not necessarily imply any recourse to writing. Speechmakers in Zuozhuan regularly make rhetorical use of historical anecdotes without mentioning reading or writing.136 The exemplary speeches and oratorical manuals of the Warring States period further imply that a skilled speaker would have at his disposal a ready supply of narrative illustrations for arguments of all kinds, and that these could be supplied from memory; in no case does a speaker read his speech aloud from a written script. Unless one assumes that contemporaneous written accounts were always kept and always trumped hearsay, and that speakers and thinkers learned all their history through reading alone—patent improbabilities, in any era—it is certain that some of the extant texts’ Introduction XLIX

narratives about Spring and Autumn period history circulated by word of mouth before they were written down.137 Viewed in this context, Zuozhuan takes on a new aspect. As a putative source for Duo’s Subtleties and the texts listed in the Records of the Historian, Zuozhuan comes to look like a master collection of historical accounts useful in the demonstration of principles and, besides, a collection of models of effective political persuasion. As such, it differs markedly from Gongyang and Guliang, with their focus on the exegetical interpretation of the chronicle and their quest for the judgments of the sage. But it does not truly depart from the kinds of teaching that might reasonably be ascribed to the historical Confucius, who was a teacher both of history and of political methods, especially rhetoric. Many of the sayings attributed to Confucius in the Analects are comments on historical events and individuals.138 In Zuozhuan he often figures as a student and critic of history, in numerous passages taking the role of the “noble man” and offering a summary moral interpretation.139 Confucius’ attention to the craft of speech is most evident in his observation that study of the Odes is pointless if the student cannot use the songs properly on diplomatic occasions.140 In this and other remarks it becomes clear that one key aim of Confucius’ lessons was to prepare his students to speak elegantly and powerfully in court contexts.141 Zuozhuan itself reflects this aim most clearly. After Zichan brilliantly counters a Jin rebuke for a Zheng attack on Chen, Confucius remarks, “As the Records has it: ‘Use words that are adequate to the intent; use ornamentation that is adequate to the words.’ Without words, who can know the intent? Words without ornamentation cannot go far. For Jin to become overlord, and Zheng to enter Chen, there would have been no merit had it not been for ornamented words and phrases. Words and phrases must be used with care!” (Xiang 25.10). Whether or not we accept at face value the claim about Zuozhuan’s origins in the Records of the Historian, the idea that the text relates to a program in oratorical training pursued by Confucius and his admirers is an attractive one. Zuozhuan itself and numerous other texts show that fine speaking was a highly prized skill. They show further that what defined fine speaking was skill in literary patterning and a complete command of historical precedents, tags of traditional language, and other sources of authority. Many of the characteristics of early texts, from their narrative form to their handling of direct discourse, are explained by early elites’ interest in persuasive speech and historical demonstration. Even the anecdote, the distinctive fundamental narrative unit adopted in Zuozhuan and virtually all other early texts that touch on history, may have evolved in the context of practical persuasion; anecdotes lend themselves to use as precedents or analogies for matters under deliberation and are therefore useful oratorical tools. Further, anecdotes in general tend to feature the quoted speech of ministers and L

Introduction

advisers. Zuozhuan is especially rich in examples of powerful speech of all kinds, from the cutting remark to full-length policy persuasions and archaic forms of address.142 Taken together, these speeches constitute a rhetoric of sorts, demonstrating by example all the techniques of citation, exemplification, and patterning that characterized fine speaking. Many of these speeches and the narratives in which they are embedded also reflect ideals of ritual behavior and statecraft taught by Confucius and his followers.143 As students learned the substance of history and resources for their own speeches, they would also have encountered memorable, imitable models of speech. The Warring States period saw the rise of influential “roving persuaders” (youshui zhi shi 遊說之士) such as Su Qin 蘇秦 (4th cent. BCE) and Zhang Yi 張儀 (4th cent. BCE), who by their speeches made themselves strategic helmsmen for the major states of their day. The art of oratory flourished in the era, attaining a new prestige and promising a route to fame and fortune for the talented and cunning. Such works as Han Feizi and Xunzi, with their advice on oratory, reflect this prestige, as does the later Strategies of the Warring States (Zhanguo ce 戰國策), with its hundreds of examples of strategic speech attributed to Warring States speakers. As James Crump has observed, the Strategies of the Warring States includes what appear to be practice speeches composed, perhaps by students, for set situations in the manner of Roman suasoriae; one may venture further that the entire compilation has the character of a rhetorical manual or tekhnē in one of the older senses of that word, that is, as a collection of examples for imitation.144 In a milieu that was producing such works as these, many Zuozhuan anecdotes would have been read not only—and perhaps not primarily—as records of historical fact but also as imitable examples of clever and virtuous eloquence. Whether arranged topically, as they seem to have been in the compilations mentioned in the Records of the Historian, or according to some other ordering principle, the Zuozhuan anecdotes would have been a treasure-house for the speaker-in-training. COMPILING AND TRANSMITTING

What would ultimately make Zuozhuan more influential than most of the other texts with contemporaneous formative stages was a convergence of the two teaching traditions discussed above: the Annals-exegetical tradition that led to the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries and the oratorical-training tradition that preserved examples of good speech. From the exegetical approach came a strictly chronological principle of order, since the line-by-line interpretation of the chronicle entailed a month-by-month, year-by-year review of the materials of history. From the anecdotal approach came fuller narratives, often going well beyond anything intimated in the chronicle itself, and a preoccupation with the Introduction LI

themes that would most often have been relevant when speakers used history: lessons of military and political strategy, the importance of tradition, the effectiveness of ritual, the dangers of unchecked power, and the value of wise counselors. By presenting the origins, consequences, and meanings of historical events in anecdotal installments fixed to a chronological frame, the compilers who gave Zuozhuan its annalistic form pointed the way beyond exegesis and instruction to the beginnings of the craft of history. It is impossible to trace with precision all the steps that led to the present annalistic presentation of Zuozhuan and the disposition of the Annals in segments introducing each year. Scattered references from the Warring States period and afterward offer only blurry snapshots of the text in the course of its development. The habits of record keeping, of education, and of argumentation discussed above doubtless remained relevant to uses of the text and continued to influence its development. As the unification of China under the Qin dynasty (221– 206) and the subsequent Han dynasty (202 Bce–220 CE) brought a new drive to establish authoritative texts and teachers under the sponsorship of the imperial court, compilation and transmission gradually became matters of official concern, government archives obtained copies of privately transmitted editions, and the form and value of Zuozhuan were debated at court. As Records of the Historian and History of the Han passages on the composition of Zuozhuan show, Han dynasty scholars believed that the content of Zuozhuan was in place shortly after the death of Confucius and was based on oral transmission of his teachings about the written Annals chronicle. More recent work has shown that at least some of the materials found in Zuozhuan can be no earlier than the late fourth century Bce. Given the sparsity of the evidence, we may choose to believe that a substantial core of Zuozhuan was in place early on, acquiring only minor additions before finally being stabilized as a complete text by the late fourth century Bce. The form of presentation would change in the hands of later transmitters, but the content would in large part trace back to the teachings of Confucius and his immediate disciples. This view, which tracks close to the understanding of the text shared by most Chinese scholars in the imperial era, accepts Zuozhuan as a commentary (zhuan) on the Annals.145 Yet Zuozhuan as we have it is less homogeneous than this model would predict it to be. A number of scholars have identified discrepancies in the text that argue against a single author or single standard of narrative approach.146 Further, the technological and logistic difficulties attending the production, preservation, and transmission of a text of this size before the era of imperial sponsorship would have made the complete Zuozhuan impractical to use and consequently obscure. It is likely, therefore, that what circulated was not the complete Zuozhuan but par LII

Introduction

tial versions of it. If the traditional view cited above is correct, then such partial versions were excerpts of the kind mentioned by Sima Qian. But if more common early Chinese trends in text production are any indication, these partial versions were not excerpts from an already-complete Zuozhuan but instead components that would ultimately be combined with other materials to form the complete Zuozhuan.147 Such partial versions would have included Duo’s Subtleties and Yu’s Annals, both known to Sima Qian. They may also have included writings resembling the socalled Jizhong 汲冢 finds, texts likely buried just after 300 Bce and recovered around 280 CE at what is now Jixian 汲縣, Henan; one of these was said to have included “excerpts” from Zuozhuan.148 Where the anecdotes recounted in these texts were not taken from other written sources, they must have been based on writers’ knowledge of the historical lore regularly used in speeches. Interest in such lore would have in turn driven the circulation of texts, the production of new ones, and aggregation into larger collections.149 Significantly, both Yu’s Annals and the Jizhong Zuozhuan text are said to have been arranged topically, as one would expect of texts designed for use by educators and would-be advisers.150 Sima Qian’s list of Warring States and Han texts related to the Annals shows that chronological ordering was by no means an inevitable or even a preferred way of arranging such material. It is possible, therefore, that during the earliest period of Zuozhuan’s development, as it was being pieced together from smaller collections of disparate kinds, the materials in the text were distributed according to topics.151 One can only speculate as to what the topics were, but topics known from smaller collections may offer some clues. Yu’s Annals gathered its anecdotes under the headings “Conduct and Propriety,” “Forms of Address and Titles,” “Probing and Touching,” and “Administration and Strategy.” The Jizhong texts included a collection of stories about divination.152 Another strong possibility is that Zuozhuan was in its earliest formative stage ordered on a geographical principle, with sections devoted to each of the major domains of the Spring and Autumn era, and perhaps with anecdotes presented in chronological order within each section. This is the order adopted by the Discourses of the States, Zuozhuan’s closest cousin among early Chinese works and a text long known to have a close connection with Zuozhuan.153 The initial compilation of Zuozhuan did not put a stop to other writers’ efforts to capture Spring and Autumn lore. Many writers told their own versions of anecdotes found in Zuozhuan, perhaps drawing directly on the lore used by orators; and writers like Han Fei made their own compilations of anecdotes that were not dominated by Zuozhuan materials. In its early development as an aggregate text, and a fortiori as a congeries of small anecdote collections, Zuozhuan would have had no special authority. Even as late as the early second century Bce, it was still possible for a writer to put together a little gathering of Spring and Introduction LIII

Autumn anecdotes, several of them not attested in Zuozhuan or differing markedly from Zuozhuan counterparts.154 A number of sources sketch the transmission of Zuozhuan from its putative early fifth-century origins down to the moment when the imperial Han court recognized its importance by appointing Academicians to teach it. According to Liu Xiang, Zuozhuan was handed down from Zuo Qiuming himself to Zeng Shen 曾申 (fl. 5th cent. Bce), son of Zeng Shen 曾參, a prominent follower of Confucius. From Zeng Shen it went to the famous general Wu Qi 吳起 (440–381) and thence to his son Wu Qi 吳期 (fl. 4th cent. Bce). The latter handed it on to Duo Jiao of Chu and Yu Qing, both mentioned above. Yu Qing passed it to the writer and thinker Xunzi, and the latter taught it to Zhang Cang, one of the most prominent officials and literati of the early Western Han.155 Ban Gu continued where Liu Xiang left off.156 With the rise of the Han, not only Zhang Cang but also the literary star Jia Yi 賈誼 (201–169), Governor of the Capital Zhang Chang 張敞 (fl. 61–55), and Grand Counselor of the Palace Liu Gongzi 劉公子 (early Han?) all cultivated a knowledge of Zuozhuan.157 Jia Yi composed a definitions-and-references commentary (xungu 訓故) on Zuozhuan and transmitted it to a Mr. Guan 貫公 of the Zhao region, who served as an Academician in the court of Prince Xian 獻 of Hejian 河間 (r. 155–129). Guan’s son Guan Changqing 貫長卿 passed the text on to Zhang Yu 張禹 (d. after 56 Bce). The latter impressed the value of Zuozhuan on the rising official Xiao Wangzhi 蕭望之 (ca. 107–47), who cited Zuozhuan in his official writings and later brought Zhang to the attention of Emperor Xuan 漢宣帝 (r. 74– 49 Bce). Zhang Yu died while awaiting his audience, but not before passing Zuozhuan on to Yin Gengshi 尹更始 (fl. 51 Bce), a scholar who also specialized in the Guliang commentary. Yin Gengshi passed it to his son Yin Xian 尹咸 (fl. 5 CE), to the future chancellor Zhai Fangjin 翟方進 (fl. 15–7 Bce), and to Hu Chang 胡常 (fl. 28–18). From Hu Chang it passed to Jia Hu 賈護 (dates unknown), then to Chen Qin 陳欽 (fl. 11–14 CE), and then to the regent and would-be usurper Wang Mang (46 Bce–23 CE). Meanwhile, Liu Xin had received Zuozhuan from both Yin Gengshi and Zhai Fangjin. Taken in isolation, the transmission record says nothing about the content or form of the work being transmitted. The operative word in the passage, to “hand over” (shou 授), with its counterpart to “receive” (shou 受), is quite vague, and while it is linked throughout the passage with the physical transmission of a written text, it appears also to imply face-toface teaching, as various links in the chain depend on acquaintance and familiarity between teacher and student. Jia Yi’s commentary might have accompanied any partial version of Zuozhuan in any order of presentation. Further, the sketch is tenuous and unconvincing, positing for most periods only a single line of transmission and only from the early Han on reflecting the wider recognition and importance that a collection of LIV

Introduction

this kind would have acquired. Nonetheless, the transmission record is valuable in that it identifies a number of men who saw value in the sorts of materials found in Zuozhuan and who, especially those of them who lived in the Han, rose high enough in officialdom to lend the text some of their own prestige. Two key moments in the transmission merit closer examination because of the possibility that they involved changes in the text. First, the appointment of Mr. Guan as Academician for Zuozhuan in the court of Liu De 劉德, Prince Xian of Hejian, marks the earliest official recognition of and sponsorship for the text. According to the History of the Han, Liu De so loved learning and antiquities that he devised a way of discovering texts among the populace: anyone who brought an excellent old text to him would receive a gift of money and a fair copy of the text. The prince would keep the original. Scholars and keepers of old texts flocked to him, and his library rivaled that of the imperial court. In contrast to Liu An 劉安, Prince of Huainan 淮南王 (179?–122), another collector of texts and scholars, Liu De gathered mostly pre-Qin editions, mainly of works associated with Confucius and his followers, written in archaic script (guwen 古文). Besides appointing Mr. Guan, Liu De also appointed one other Academician, for the Mao tradition in Odes scholarship.158 It may not be a coincidence that the Odes citations and explanations found in Zuozhuan are closest to the Mao tradition.159 If the Zuozhuan text he obtained echoed many Mao readings, as does ours, then the discovery may have spurred the prince’s interest in that Odes tradition. On the other hand, in a court setting where an influential patron presided over the copying of texts and carried on the Qin practice of employing professional classicists to manage the study of texts, editing work on Zuozhuan might have tended to create consistency with the Mao tradition. The possibility remains that the prince, his Academician, and his retinue changed Zuozhuan somehow in the course of transmitting it. A second, even more crucial stage in the transmission of Zuozhuan was the editing work done by Liu Xin in the course of his efforts to have an imperial court Academician appointed for the text. This effort came in the context of broader debates over the value of the Guliang commentary as a complement to the Gongyang commentary, which had long enjoyed court support.160 Zuozhuan’s pre-imperial pedigree and the attention devoted to Zuozhuan by highly placed Han figures like Zhang Cang, Jia Yi, Liu De, Xiao Wangzhi, and Zhai Fangjin had lent the text a great deal of credibility. Zhang Cang’s mastery of calendrical science may have helped arguments for treating Zuozhuan as a commentary on the Annals, since proponents of the other commentaries, Gongyang in particular, had bolstered their authority by building large historical schemes on the basis of Five Phases correlations.161 Sima Qian’s reliance on Zuozhuan would likewise have aided Zuozhuan proponents, at least to the extent that such reliance was a matter of public knowledge.162 That Introduction LV

several of the figures who transmitted Zuozhuan also transmitted already-recognized traditions would have served to elevate Zuozhuan.163 By the late first century Bce, many scholars surely would have shared Huan Tan’s 桓譚 (ca. 43 Bce–28 CE) view that the Guliang and the Gongyang commentaries were both deficient in their treatment of the historical material behind the Annals and that “Zuozhuan is to the classic as the surface of a robe is to its lining; their dependence upon each other makes them complete. If one had the classic without the commentary, even if a sage were made to close his doors and think on it for ten years, he would not be able to understand it.”164 With or without official recognition, the “tradition” (zhuan) linked to Zuo Qiuming was now being used and cited as a “commentary” (zhuan) by some of the most prominent officials in the empire. Liu Xin, son of the noted scholar, textual collator, and intellectual Liu Xiang, was learned enough as a young man to have been appointed to help his father in his collation work in the imperial archives during the reign of Emperor Cheng 漢成帝 (r. 33–7 Bce).165 After Liu Xiang’s death, Wang Mang appointed Liu Xin to a series of important offices and brought him into close contact with Emperor Ai 漢哀帝 (r. 7–1 Bce). During this time he compiled the Seven Summaries (Qilu 七錄), a catalog of archived texts that built on his father’s work and later became the basis of the “Treatise on Classics and Other Writings” (Yiwenzhi 藝文志) in Ban Gu’s History of the Han. Like Yin Gengshi and Zhai Fangjin, Liu Xin devoted years to the study of the Guliang commentary, receiving instruction in it from his father. Coming upon copies of Zuozhuan preserved in the archives, Liu Xin gradually became convinced of its superiority to other commentaries and sought out additional instruction in it: When Liu Xin was collating texts in the archives, he saw a Zuo’s Annals written in archaic script and greatly admired it. At the time the clerk to Chancellor Yin Xian, who had a mastery of Zuozhuan, was working with Liu Xin to collate the classic and the commentary. Liu Xin received a certain amount of training in it from Yin Xian and from Chancellor Zhai Fangjin, asking them substantial questions about its greater significance. Originally, because Zuozhuan abounded in graphs in archaic script and old expressions, scholars had transmitted no more than definitions and references.166 But when Liu Xin worked on Zuozhuan, he pulled out the text of the commentary to explain the classic, causing the two to illuminate each other, and with this the sig­ nificance and principle of each passage and sentence were made complete.167

Later readers have rightly attributed enormous significance to this passage. Qing dynasty scholars like Liu Fenglu 劉逢祿 (1776–1829), who LVI

Introduction

believed that Liu Xin forged some of the comments in Zuozhuan, and Kang Youwei 康有為 (1858–1927), who hoped to demonstrate that Liu Xin had foisted a forged or heavily contaminated Zuozhuan on contemporaries in order to support Wang Mang’s claims to legitimacy, saw in this passage, among others, an oblique reference to the act of forgery.168 To judge strictly on the basis of the text itself, without attributing any greater political aims to the editorial work, it seems unlikely that Liu Xin introduced radical changes in Zuozhuan. Versions of the text were after all already well known to a number of prominent court officials, and it would have been difficult for Liu Xin to introduce entirely new material even with the support of an archival text and the powerful regent Wang Mang.169 Liu Xin’s changes to the text were apparently changes in its form. Before his time, Zuozhuan was transmitted separately from the Annals. This separation seems to have been reflected in Liu Xin’s own catalog of the imperial archives, where he found the “old Annals classic in twelve bamboo bundles” (Chunqiu jing shi’er pian 春秋古經十二篇), a “classic on eleven silk rolls” (jing shiyi juan 經十一卷), comprising the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries, and—apart from these—a “Zuozhuan on thirty silk rolls “ (Zuoshi zhuan sanshi juan 左氏傳三十卷).”170 When Liu Xin “pulled out the text of the commentary to explain the classic,” he most likely reordered Zuozhuan as he knew it to make it resemble the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries, arranging its materials in chronological order to correspond year for year with the chronicle.171 He seems also to have added a complete text of the Annals at the beginning of Zuozhuan.172 The present year-by-year interspersing of the Annals with Zuozhuan was an innovation introduced by Du Yu.173 Once Liu Xin enjoyed the favor of Emperor Ai, he moved to have Academicians appointed in formal recognition of Zuozhuan and several other texts preserved in archaic-script editions. As it had become customary to decide such issues through formal court debate, the emperor summoned Academicians of the Five Classics to discuss the matter. Since some of the Academicians did not dare pose questions, presumably fearing Liu Xin’s influence with the emperor and with Wang Mang, Liu Xin made his case in a famous letter addressed to the Academicians of the Superintendent of Ceremonials.174 Liu Xin’s main point was that Zuozhuan, like other texts preserved in archaic script, was more ancient than and therefore more reliable than the commentaries passed down via oral transmission.175 Work in the imperial archives had turned up copies of Zuozhuan, all in archaic script, some of them more than twenty sections (tong 通) in length.176 This discovery had in turn prompted Emperor Cheng to intensify work in the archives and, further, to seek texts that had been kept hidden by the populace. Among these were various traditions deriving from princely courts, including Mr. Guan’s teachings on Zuozhuan. In view of the superiority of earlier sources, in Introduction LVII

view of the present emperor’s father’s support for recovery work, and in view of the proven relevance of Zuozhuan in explaining the Annals, it was to be regretted that shortsighted scholars clung to their own petty learning and rejected a text that could guide the state in its grander ritual decisions. Liu Xin certainly had his own aims in promoting Zuozhuan. He was known for citing the text in arguments on omen interpretation, a form of discourse that was immensely influential in his era.177 He was identified as one of the closest associates of Wang Mang, who exploited classical scholarship in his efforts to reform and ultimately to take over the imperial court.178 Finally, however, all the evidence against Liu Xin is circumstantial, and the arguments that carried the day in his own time have remained convincing for later readers, who, like Huan Tan and his contemporaries, have found it wearying, if not impossible, to read the Annals without Zuozhuan. After an initial imperial sponsorship of studies on Zuozhuan and other texts in 8 Bce, an Academician was appointed for the text during the reign of Emperor Ping (r. 1 Bce–5 CE).179 The fall of Wang Mang and the restoration of the Han ruling house did not discredit Zuozhuan, which was assigned four Academicians in 28 CE.180 The status of Zuozhuan was made secure by a series of commentaries by leading scholars. In 76 CE, Emperor Zhang (r. 75–88) summoned to the palace a descendant of Jia Yi, Jiu Kui 賈逵 (30–101), a prominent classical scholar who had composed an “explanations and definitions” (jiegu 解詁) for Zuozhuan and Discourses of the States in fifty-one sections. Jia Kui’s father, Jia Hui 賈徽, had studied Zuozhuan with Liu Xin and had himself produced a commentary in twenty-one pian, the Ordered Principles of Composition for Zuo’s Commentary (Zuoshi tiaoli 左氏條例). Impressed by Jia Kui’s learning, the emperor had him instruct twenty talented students of the Gongyang commentary in Zuozhuan and send each of them home with a copy of the classic and the commentary on bamboo and paper.181 In the next century, Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 (127–200) and Fu Qian 服虔 (ca. 125–ca. 195) both wrote commentaries on the text; famously, Zheng Xuan is said to have turned over the draft of his own to Fu Qian on discovering that the two of them had offered similar interpretations.182 Finally, in the third century, the Jin statesman, general, and scholar Du Yu wrote what has proven to be the single most influential commentary on Zuozhuan, the Collected Explanations of the Zuo Tradition on the “Annals” (Chunqiu Zuozhuan jijie 春秋左傳集解), a magisterial work in which Du drew heavily upon earlier commentaries, in effect subsuming and replacing them.183 Du’s Collected Explanations would serve as the basis for all subsequent commentaries on Zuozhuan, including the imperially sponsored Tang work overseen by Kong Yingda 孔穎 達 (574–648), the Correct Meanings of the Zuo Tradition on the “Annals” (Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhengyi 春秋左傳正義). Even with the production and transmission of full-length written LVIII

Introduction

commentaries like Du’s and Kong’s, Zuozhuan did not entirely leave behind the social contexts that had produced it. Teachers continued to teach it, students to learn it, and speakers and writers to cite it as a source of authority. It had developed in part around a habit of record keeping and around a core of written records, and with its success it came to be regarded as the reliable record of an entire era and as an example of form that would be imitated by later compilers of annalistic histories.184 As a purported transcription of the teachings of Zuo Qiuming, a contemporary of Confucius, it would be read for centuries as a guide to the correct interpretation of historical events and an indispensable supplement to other decodings of Confucius’ Annals messages. As a treasury of recounted speech and distinctive narrative prose, it would inspire essayists, historians, and philosophical writers throughout imperial Chinese history, not least in the heyday of the “Ancient-Style Prose” (guwen 古文) movement of the Tang and Song dynasties. Thus, the process of compilation and transmission that produced our Zuozhuan never really removed it from its early uses but instead for a long time maintained and upheld the practices that Zuozhuan reflected. PART III: ZUOZHUAN IN THE CHINESE TRADITION

It is hard to overstate the influence of Zuozhuan in the Chinese tradition. On the most obvious level, the Chinese language carries memories of the text in countless idioms and allusions. Suffice it here to give a few examples. To impose order but to end up undermining it is “to unsnarl silk threads but entangle them further” (zhisi yi fen 治絲益棼), a Lu minister’s figure for a Wei usurper’s doomed attempt to pacify the people through his revolt (Yin 4.3).185 “To try to chew one’s navel and not to reach it” (shiqi moji 噬臍莫及) is to be doomed to vain regret, just like the Deng ruler who trusts his nephew, King Wen of Chu 楚文王, and loses his domain to him (Zhuang 6.3).186 A person spurred to act with pent-up vigor “drums once to arouse the energy” (yi gu zuoqi 一鼓作氣), a phrase used by Cao Gui 曹劌 as he explains a Lu victory to Lord Zhuang of Lu 魯莊公 (Zhuang 10.1). Desperation produces the impetus for action, because “even a trapped beast goes on struggling” (kunshou you dou 困獸猶鬬): thus does Lord Wen of Jin explain his relief at the execution of a commander in the rival domain of Chu (Xuan 12.5).187 To be amenable to good advice is to “follow good as naturally as water flowing” (congshan ru liu 從善如流), which is how a “noble man” praises a Jin commander for heeding strategic counsel (Cheng 8.2). An incurable malady is one that “has entered the space between the diaphragm and the heart” (bing ru gaohuang 病入膏肓). That idiom is derived from a dream in which Lord Jing of Jin 晉景公 sees his own illness assume the form of two young boys who decide to hide in that recess,188 “where the Introduction LIX

illness can neither be overcome with heat treatment nor reached through acupuncture” (Cheng 10.4). “Holding a chess piece without deciding” (juqi bu ding 舉棋不定) is hesitating, possibly with disastrous consequences, as does Ning Xi 甯喜, “who is about to put a ruler in his place and cannot decide” (zhijun er fu ding 置君而弗定); a prescient minister notes that he thus treats “dealing with the ruler as a lesser game than chess” (shi jun buru yiqi 視君不如弈棋; Xiang 25.15). When the part upsets the whole, or the subsidiary the dominant, one says, “When a tail is large, it will not wag” (wei da bu diao 尾大不掉), a phrase from the Chu minister Shen Shushi’s 申叔時 remonstrance with his king about the dangers of appointing his younger brother to rule in a newly annexed border territory (Zhao 11.10). To be “ground sharp in preparation” (moli yi xu 摩厲以須) is to wait for the opportune moment to act efficaciously, as the Chu minister Ran Dan 然丹 did when he prepared to let the sharp blade of remonstrance fall on King Ling of Chu 楚靈王 (Zhao 12.11).189 Classical and modern writers tap the linguistic resources of Zuozhuan. To aspire to eloquence and erudition is to master an idiomatic and allusive universe of which Zuozhuan is an indispensable component. Beyond such verbal echoes, Zuozhuan is a key window to the world of thought in early China. It also shapes ideas about form, structure, meaning, and representation for the historiographical and literary tradition. ZUOZHUAN AND THE EXEGETICAL TRADITION

As we have shown in part II, the early history of Zuozhuan culminates in its recognition as an exegetical tradition of the Annals. Like the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries, Zuozhuan has its share of exegetical passages seeking to derive a normative moral-political system from the Annals. However, as mentioned above, the preponderance of narrative and rhetorical passages distinguishes it from the other two traditions. Du Yu seeks to heighten Zuozhuan’s credentials as an exegetical text by elaborating its “rules,” codified in the classificatory functions of the word fan 凡 (“in cases of”), said to summarize or explain how words are used in the Annals. He also considerably expands the definition of exegesis by showing how apparent noncorrespondence can be regarded as a way of supplementing the canonical text. He does so by emphasizing the dual identity of Zuo Qiuming as both the sage’s like-minded contemporary and a state scribe (guoshi 國史) who, “having personally surveyed the texts, had to record widely and speak comprehensively.”190 In this sense, the idea of “Zuo Qiuming” is used to unite historical narrative and exegetical purpose in the text. The sense of unity and system must contend, however, with internal differences, a function of divergent sources and formative contexts shaping the text over a long period of accretion. For an example we can turn to an entry from the first year of the Annals (722 Bce): “In summer, in the fifth month, the Liege of Zheng LX

Introduction

overcame Duan at Yan” 夏五月，鄭伯克段于鄢. This line invites scrutiny, in the Gongyang and Guliang traditions, over the choice of the word “overcame” (ke 克), the designation of the Liege of Zheng’s younger brother as “Duan” 段 (rather than as “Gongshu [the lord’s younger brother] Duan” 共叔段 or “Gongzi [the lord’s son] Duan” 公子段), and the significance of recording the place name Yan. As we shall see below, the Annals entry elicits different questions answered in the Zuozhuan account: How and why did that happen? What were the consequences and implications? What emerges is the implicit belief in narrative as a necessary vehicle of historical meanings enshrined in a higher canonical text.191 We are told in Zuozhuan that Wu Jiang 武姜, the mother of Lord Zhuang of Zheng 鄭莊公 and his younger brother Duan, favors the latter on account of Lord Zhuang’s breech birth. She repeatedly plots with Duan to usurp Lord Zhuang’s position. Against all counsel to forestall the rebellion before it is too late, Lord Zhuang refuses to act until Duan’s rebellion is full-fledged. Then he crushes it and drives Duan into exile. The consequent estrangement from his mother, whom he vows never to see again until they reach the Yellow Springs (the underworld), is healed only when an ingenious border officer, Ying Kaoshu 潁考叔, suggests that he dig a tunnel and meet his mother there. By substituting the literal for the metaphorical meanings of “Yellow Springs,” Ying Kaoshu brings about reconciliation without undoing Lord Zhuang’s vow. The account is framed by exegetical comments that, by elucidating meanings of words in the corresponding entry from the Annals, condemn both Duan and Lord Zhuang for the almost fratricidal conflict, and it concludes with the comments of “the noble man,” who lauds the power of filial piety to heal divisions (Yin 1.4). If the comments do not sufficiently “contain” the narrative, it may be because their focus on kinship relations, tested, distorted, and then partially restored, does not address the boundaries of political authority. On that issue the account is reticent and tempered enough to support a reading of tacit celebration of eradicating subversion in the interest of greater unity and centralization, despite centuries of commentaries bent on unmasking Lord Zhuang and condemning him for deliberately abetting Duan and maneuvering the latter into treason. Furthermore, the reconciliation of mother and son, either dismissed as a further indication of Lord Zhuang’s duplicity or accepted as evidence of his repentance in commentarial traditions, might also have been intended as a lesson in manipulating meanings to master moral rhetoric and achieve a convincing public display of virtue. Indeed, many episodes chronicling Lord Zhuang’s expanding power are punctuated by speeches couched in the rhetoric of ritual propriety (Yin 8.2, 11.3, Huan 1.1, 1.2), which may reflect contemporary diplomatic language or public proclamations and may also represent moral justifications stemming from pro-Zheng sympaIntroduction LXI

thies. Alternatively, following the cue of many commentaries, one can read apparent approbation as hidden irony, delivered in the same spirit as other isolated negative judgments. Either way, the modulation of perspectives is made possible by narrative elaboration and suggests different layers or source materials.192 The diversity of sources amalgamated into Zuozhuan is evident on various levels. Clusters of anecdotes that develop around a person, especially wise and capable ministers, might have circulated as “clan histories”193 or moral-political teachings associated with that character. Calendrical discrepancies in Zuozhuan indicate different geographical origins—the domains of Lu and Qi, for example, follow the Zhou calendar, whereas Jin uses the Xia calendar. (This also results in discrepancies between Zuozhuan and the Annals, which sometimes follow different calendars.) Sometimes distinctive conventions seem to pertain to materials from different domains—for example, only in Jin-related materials are all the commanders and aides listed whenever an army is mobilized, and accounts of power struggles in Song are unique in always mentioning the six ministers.194 Regional differences in the representation of ruler-subject relationships point to varying historical situations and ideologies. In Chu, for example, the ruler is twice compared to Heaven and his command is upheld as inviolable, and Chu rulers are sometimes praised for their altruism and self-knowledge despite their failures (Xuan 4.3, Ding 4.3, Xiang 13.4, Ai 6.4). A Chu minister who, in the heat of remonstrance, threatens the Chu king with a weapon, punishes himself by cutting off his own feet and commits suicide when the king dies (Zhuang 19.1). This may suggest that powerful Chu kings justified and were justified by political thought maximizing the ruler’s claims. By contrast, one is tempted to link the great power of noble lineages in Jin to some recurrent concerns in what might have been Jin sources—the fulsome praise of just rewards for ministers, the arguments justifying the expulsion of unworthy rulers, and the sympathetic treatment of ministers involved in regicide (Min 1.6, Xi 33.6, Xuan 15.6, Xiang 11.5, Zhao 28.3, Xiang 14.6, Zhao 32.4, Xuan 2.3, Cheng 17.10, 18.1). Views of the collateral branches of the ruling family also differ: in domains where the ascendant noble lineages bore clan names different from that of the ruling house, such as Jin and Qi, noble lineages related to the ruler by kinship are seen as sharing the same fate of decline as the ruling house (Zhao 3.3); they are thus no longer presented in adversarial situations, as in Lu and Song. In the last two thousand years, those who question whether Zuozhuan is an exegetical tradition of the Annals often claim that Zuozhuan is “about history, not exegesis.”195 This distinction implies that historical writings are bound to exceed or diverge from exegetical writings because the goal of the former is to illuminate what happened rather than what should have happened. This is a model of containment and transgres LXII

Introduction

sion; the “excesses” in Zuozhuan not contained by exegetical purpose are thought to be closer to the spirit of historical inquiry. More generally, historical inquiry seems to thrive when there is tension between normative systems and the forces that challenge them, between ideological purpose and skepticism. Perhaps it is no accident that the great Han historian Sima Qian, who draws upon Zuozhuan extensively for his Records of the Historian, should question whether “the Way of Heaven” (tiandao 天道) exists and invite accusations of heterodoxy by encompassing knights-errant, jesters, and moneymakers in his sympathy, even while affirming his affiliation with the Confucian tradition.196 Exegetical claims are inseparable from Confucian perspectives in commentary traditions. As noted above, some scholars now believe that exegetical comments belong to a later stratum of the text, but the idea that Zuozhuan conforms broadly to Confucian thought as it evolved through the Warring States era is still widely accepted. Yet there are indisputably divergent perspectives in the text. We have here an astounding mix of cynical practicality and idealistic moral rhetoric, views that look to the past and earlier texts for guidance versus voices that urge changes and laud expediency, arguments for and against greater power for the ruler or the noble lineages, positions for and against the right of the governed to criticize the policies of the leaders of domains, militaristic and strategic interests versus moralized and ritualized perspectives on warfare, reverence for “the Way of Heaven” and the realm of spirits versus defiance or exposure of their fickleness or unknowability, distrust of and hostility for barbarians as “bestial” or being “not of the same kith and kin” (fei wo zu lei 非我族類) (Min 1.2, Cheng 4.4, Xiang 4.7) versus praise of them as bona fide bearers of Chinese cultural values and masters of esoteric knowledge (Xi 29.4, Xiang 14.1, Zhao 17.3).197 Some of these views cannot be subsumed under the idea of a unified, coherent Confucian vision. Indeed, over the centuries, despite the prevailing affirmation of Zuozhuan as a canonical classic that embodies Confucian values, there have always been skeptics who questioned the Confucian credentials of the text, from Han scholars who championed the Gongyang and Guliang traditions (and felt that Zuozhuan challenged their exegetical prerogatives) to later Confucian thinkers who criticized Zuozhuan for its moments of ruthless pragmatism and views that deviate from various versions of orthodox moral and sociopolitical order. Instead of imagining a mastermind orchestrating divergent perspectives, we should perhaps see differences as a function of Zuozhuan’s complex textual history, in part a correlative of the different sources and formal constraints mentioned earlier, in part a reflection of the varying responses to political disorder in a vital formative period in the history of Chinese political thought. It is often said that Zuozhuan is didactic and moralistic. Being “didactic,” however, is not the same as being “univocal.” Different positions encoded in narratives and arguments suggest Introduction LXIII

competing lessons, possibly in contexts of political persuasion of those in power, both by laying down the broad principles of government and by making specific policy recommendations. In this sense, Zuozhuan is a platform for articulating the competing conceptions of political order that flourished during its long period of formation. Narrative units in Zuozhuan often involve instances of causal reasoning: how and why an event happened. This can be a discrete account or one spanning a number of years (interrupted by other narratives). Since the present format of the text, by virtue of being tailored to match the Annals, presents materials year by year, episodes that belong to different narrative sequences are juxtaposed. There are exceptions, of course, the most famous being the more or less self-contained narrative sequences describing Chong’er’s (eventually the Jin ruler Lord Wen) exile, wanderings, return to Jin, and his rise to become the most powerful overlord of his time (Xi 23.6, 24.1, 25.1–25.6, 27.4, 28.1–28.13). For the most part, however, the reader has to trace different sequences simultaneously. He is aided to a certain extent by retrospective and prospective comments, advice, explanations, or judgments built into or appended to the unfolding narrative. They are provided by a categorical “noble man,” by “Confucius” (who should be understood as a persona in the text rather than the actual historical personage), by prescient contemporary statesmen, and by two categories that often overlap: the scribe (shi 史) and the diviner (bu 卜). Such comments and judgments are dominated by the rhetoric of virtue and good order. These speakers employ moral words liberally—most notably “ritual propriety” (li 禮) and “virtue” (de 德) but also “duty” (yi 義), “humaneness” or “nobility of spirit” (ren 仁), “reverence” (jing 敬), “rectitude” (zheng 正), “loyalty” (zhong 忠), “good faith” (xin 信), and “disinterestedness” or “the quality of being yielding” (rang 讓). These speakers presume and foster continuity as they invoke past models, especially the creation of the early Zhou order, and encourage aspirations to become models for later generations. They employ enumeration, definitions, distinctions, and the logic of sequential progression to augment a sense of clarity and inevitability. This rhetoric is, however, imposed on accounts of violence, disorder, destruction, and iniquities. What, then, is the relationship between the two? Sometimes this rhetoric is shown to be effective in staving off ruin and restoring ritual, moral, and political order, even if only briefly in some cases. More often than not, the rhetoric of order has no effect on unfolding events but serves to define the moral parameters of the situation. Unheeded remonstrance and speeches framed as judgments or moral explanations fall into this category. In this sense, there is no necessary paradox between virtuous rhetoric and ethical-political failures—the former simply gives a negative judgment of the latter.

LXIV

Introduction

However, the rich circumstantial details that make Zuozhuan engrossing can also introduce tensions between message and context. A highsounding speech lauding ritual propriety may simply be justifying existing or emerging power relations (e.g., Xi 28.3). A supposedly selfevident truth such as the primacy of kin relations in political organization (e.g., Xi 22.6) may turn out to be only one polemical position among several when we recall that there are stories of justified fratricide in Zuozhuan. An argument urging a moral position may be couched as extravagant verbal performance, as in “indirect remonstrance,” a kind of instruction via seduction whereby the persuader abets the desires and encourages the excesses of the listener only to urge a message of restraint and order (e.g., Zhao 12.11).198 The common perception that Zuozhuan simply draws didactic lessons from historical events does not do justice to its complex moral universe. An apparently consistent position may conceal changing premises. Different perspectives can be associated with the same persona or characters. We try to be consistent in rendering the semantic universe of Zuozhuan, but the polysemy of “virtue words” may be construed from their functions in different arguments and contexts. The same ethical vocabulary—most notably appeals to ritual propriety—can support opposed positions. For example, when the Zheng minister Zichan breaks away from convention and casts penal codes on bronze vessels in 536 Bce, the Jin minister Shuxiang 叔向, who espouses a more traditionalist position, expresses his opposition in a letter to Zichan by invoking a vision of idealized antiquity wherein ritual norms are fulfilled through the imitation of virtue and submission to its affective power. Zichan in reply declares that his goal is to “save his generation” (jiu shi 救世) (Zhao 6.3). Elsewhere in Zuozhuan Zichan is praised for adherence to ritual propriety and for expanding its application (e.g., Zhao 12.3). The elevation of ritual propriety could thus serve both conservative and reformist arguments. On one level, such heterogeneity translates into a kind of impartiality. Compared with Gongyang and Guliang, Zuozhuan is more balanced in its judgments. For example, during the battle between Song and Chu fought at the Hong River in 638 Bce, Lord Xiang of Song 宋襄公 refuses to attack before the Chu army crosses the river and again before they form their ranks, thus missing the only two opportunities whereby Song may achieve victory. When Lord Xiang justifies his decision as adherence to ancient rites of battle, his supervisor of the military, Ziyu 子魚, gives an eloquent rebuttal, arguing that battles call for different ritual criteria and suggesting that Lord Xiang’s standards are outmoded and self-defeating (Xi 22.8). Gongyang praises Lord Xiang for his respect for ritual, comparing him to King Wen of Zhou, put forward as the epitome of the sage-ruler. Guliang blames him, claiming that his inde-

Introduction LXV

fensible words render him “less than human.” Zuozhuan is unique in granting both Lord Xiang and his critic Ziyu the chance to articulate their positions, although there is obviously greater sympathy for Ziyu. Differences that might have been a function of textual history or deliberate impartiality can thus allow us to appreciate a rich and complex picture not only of past events but also of the forces determining their representation. In the accounts of the rise of overlords such as Lord Huan of Qi and Lord Wen of Jin, for example, statesmen and advisers make speeches celebrating the merging of ritual propriety with power and profit. At the same time we have the narrative contexts of these speeches, as well as accounts of events (from elsewhere in Zuozhuan) that such speeches represent or interpret. We are thus provided with the means to reconstruct events as well as assess their interpretations. In this sense, contradictions sometimes illuminate processes of historical interpretation. The figure of Confucius is a case in point. Both Gong­yang and Guliang record the year of Confucius’ birth and, as we have seen, mythologize the relationship between the capture of the lin and the completion of the Annals. The corresponding passage in Zuozhuan is shorter but typically contains more circumstantial details. A Lu officer captures the lin but considers it inauspicious. Confucius identifies the animal and corrects the officer’s misjudgment, whereupon the officer takes it (Ai 14.1). There is no discussion of the lin as omen. The Annals embedded in Zuozhuan ends two years later, with the death of Confucius. This means that one strand or layer of the text is interested in asserting the link between Confucius and the Annals. Despite passages confirming this connection, however, the idea of Confucius pitting textual or moral order against decline and disorder is not consistently pursued in Zuozhuan. Some anecdotes about Confucius in Zuozhuan are already quasihagiographic: a Lu nobleman, ashamed of his own ritual incompetence, on his deathbed (518 Bce) enjoins his sons to serve Confucius as their teacher (Zhao 7.12). Since Confucius is only around thirty at that point, such prescient advice is based on foreknowledge of his rise. Confucius shows cleverness, tenacity, and rhetorical prowess when he officiates at a meeting between the Lu ruler and the Qi ruler at Jiagu, where Qi tries unsuccessfully to intimidate Lu (Ding 10.2). Like the unnamed “noble man,” Confucius comments on events in Zuozhuan; from the early sixth century Bce on, he is also an active participant in and an observer of events. He emerges as a symbol for a range of positions in the text. In some comments, Confucius eloquently propounds on the need to adhere to ritual propriety, as if normative standards are absolute and unalterable. In other cases, expediency matters more; sometimes he seems to be a practical moralist who urges efficacy as the criterion of good judgment. Cautious assessment of a situation determines his refusal to get involved in contemporary Wei politics or to give his opin LXVI

Introduction

ions directly to the leaders of the Ji lineage in Lu. Confucius criticizes Jin leaders for casting penal codes on bronze vessels. Publicized written codes, which imply administrative reforms and a more rigid justice, are also associated with Zichan, as noted earlier. Yet Confucius also repeatedly applauds and defends Zichan, including his view on the necessity for harsh punishment. He sometimes does so proleptically, as if anticipating charges that Zichan is “not humane” (bu ren 不仁) (Xiang 31.11). In the protracted power struggle between Lu rulers and leaders of the dominant Ji lineage, Confucius implicitly criticizes the latter but seems amenable to compromises. After all, when he and his disciples “served in Lu,” they were working for or with the ministerial lineages. As supervisor of corrections, Confucius has a ditch dug to connect the tomb of Lord Zhao, driven into exile by Ji leaders, to the other Lu rulers’ tombs, in implicit opposition to the Ji lineage (Ding 1.4). When Lord Zhao’s principal wife dies, Confucius takes part in the condolences and then visits Ji Kangzi 季康子: the Ji lineage head did not wear a mourning cowl, “so Confucius removed his hempen cap and sash and bowed” (Ai 12.2). Most commentators read this gesture as Confucius’ tacit protest, but it seems also plausible to interpret it as his concession. The different images of Confucius in Zuozhuan answer needs to present him as an agent in history and as its judge, as one determined by or rising above his historical situation, and as one using the past to advocate changes or to defend tradition. The image of Confucius that obtains in the traditions of scholarship on Zuozhuan, however, usually emphasizes the unity of action and judgment, which reflects a more general concern with distilling a coherent, consistent ethical system from the Annals and its commentaries. This is especially evident in the production of commentary traditions closely identified with imperial patronage, official learning (guanxue 官學), and the examination system. The Correct Meanings of the Zuo Tradition on the “Annals,” which adheres to and elaborates Du Yu’s commentary even while incorporating divergent readings,199 was part of the Correct Meanings of the Five Classics project that provided the ideological foundation for the newly unified Tang Empire. Sometimes the need to use the Annals to justify a political vision can lead to impatience with the wealth of historical details in Zuozhuan, as with Song scholars who favor emphasis on the Annals and a highly selective use of Zuozhuan to articulate their views on “honoring the king” (zunwang 尊王) and “repelling the barbarians” (rangyi 攘夷) in response to the threat of nomadic invasions.200 Thus, Sun Fu 孫復 (992–1057) opines that the Annals conveys “only blame and no praise” (you bian wu bao 有貶無褒) in his Elucidation of the Subtleties of Honoring the King in the “Annals” (Chunqiu zunwang fawei 春秋尊王發微), which criticizes all three commentary traditions.201 Hu Anguo’s 胡安國 (1074–1138) Commentary on the “Annals” (Chunqiu zhuan 春秋傳) emphasizes the Introduction LXVII

opposition of Chinese and barbarians and pointedly marginalizes Zuozhuan.202 Hu’s commentary emerged as de facto official learning with the stamp of imperial approval and became especially influential during the Ming dynasty (1368–1644) by virtue of its inclusion in the examination system. Although the Hu commentary was not officially abandoned and replaced by Zuozhuan in the examination until 1793, it was the object of stringent critiques starting in the early Qing (1644–1912). The reaction against the blatantly political uses of the Annals was evident when the Kangxi 康熙 emperor (r. 1662–1722) sponsored the Imperially Sanctioned “Annals” and Its Collected Commentary Traditions (Qin ding Chunqiu zhuanshuo huizuan 欽定春秋傳說彙纂, 1699). Of course, the Qing court’s rejection of Hu’s strident “antibarbarian” rhetoric in favor of a more general emphasis on ritual propriety and loyalty was itself a political gesture. Beyond ideological orientation, the emphasis on “concrete learning” (shixue 實學), “political engagement” (jingshi 經世), as well as philological and historical interests, motivated scholars to collect and evaluate Zuozhuan commentaries.203 The commentaries of Du Yu and Kong Yingda are incorporated in the authoritative version of Zuozhuan that Ruan Yuan and his colleagues produced by a careful comparison of textual variants in extant editions. However, powerful new currents in Qing scholarship criticized Du and Kong and focused on recovering Han exegetical comments, often cited without proper attribution in the commentaries by Du and Kong. Han learning (Hanxue 漢學) stipulates that “the meaning of the canonical classics is preserved in philological explanations” (jing zhi yi cun hu xun 經之義存乎訓).204 Philological and bibliographic scholarship branched off into Zuozhuan-based studies of rituals, geography, calendrical systems, and historical events of the Spring and Autumn period. Major works in this tradition include Hui Dong’s 惠棟 (1697–1758) Supplementary Annotations on Zuozhuan (Zuozhuan buzhu 左傳補注), Hong Liangji’s 洪亮吉 (1746–1809) Exegesis on Zuozhuan (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu 春秋左傳詁), Gu Donggao’s 顧棟高 (1697–1759) Major Categories of Significance during the Spring and Autumn Period (Chunqiu dashi biao 春秋大事表), the portions on Zuozhuan in Wang Yinzhi’s 王引之 (1766– 1834) Studies of the Classics (Jingyi shuwen 經義述聞), and the systematic and exhaustive collection of Han commentaries in Critical Evaluation of Ancient Zuozhuan Commentaries (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng 春秋左氏傳舊注疏證) by Liu Wenqi 劉文淇 (1789– 1854) and his descendants. The insights of Qing philological scholarship inform the most important modern Zuozhuan editions and studies: Bernhard Karlgren’s “Glosses on the Tso chuan,” Takezoe Kōkō’s 竹添 光鴻 (1842–1917) Collected Commentaries on Zuozhuan (Saden Kaisen 左傳會箋), Yang Bojun’s Annotated Zuozhuan (Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu 春秋左傳注), and Wu Jing’an’s 吳靜安 Sequel to the Critical Evaluation LXVIII

Introduction

of Ancient Zuozhuan Commentaries (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu 春秋左氏傳舊注疏證續). Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century philological Zuozhuan scholars rarely made grand claims about its overarching vision or categorical principles (yili 義理, yili 義例). It is only in response to attacks on Zuozhuan by Liu Fenglu and Kang Youwei, the Gongyang and New Text scholars mentioned above, that scholars like Liu Shipei 劉師培 (1884–1919) and Zhang Taiyan 章太炎 (1868–1936) elucidated the moral-political vision of Zuozhuan and argued for its authenticity through extensive comparative references to Warring States and Western Han texts, in effect treating the latter as sources for Zuozhuan exegesis.205 From the perspective of historical linguistics, Karlgren reached similar conclusions on the authenticity and dating of Zuozhuan.206 The theory that Zuozhuan was Liu Xin’s forgery did not stand up to scrutiny. The anxieties it addresses, however, are deep-rooted. As mentioned above, a long line of commentators suspected that Zuozhuan deviates from the sage’s teachings. The moments when it questions the ruler’s authority or lauds expediency have especially invited criticism. The motives for questioning Zuozhuan’s exegetical filiation to the Annals can be scholastic, political, or historical.207 It is ironic that arguments defending Zuozhuan’s authenticity also implicitly take it beyond the traditional understanding of exegesis by showing how embedded it is in various strands of Warring States thought.208 ZUOZHUAN AND CHINESE HISTORIOGRAPHY

The acceptance of Zuozhuan as an exegetical tradition of the Annals has important implications for the idea of history. That process started with the passage cited above from the Records of the Historian on Zuo Qiu­ ming’s role in amplifying and discussing the Annals. Sima Qian posits deliberation of differences, magnified by the fluidity of oral transmission, as integral to the compilation of Zuozhuan. Ideas about encompassing and adjudicating differences had profound implications for Sima Qian’s own writings. In the autobiographical final chapter of the Records of the Historian, Sima Qian articulates his own vision of historical writing through Confucius’ description of the Annals: “I wanted to convey this [i.e., my concerns] through abstract, conceptual language, but it would not be as profound, compelling, and clear as embodying and revealing them through past events and actions.”209 In fact, the “thickness” and complexity of events are displayed, not in the Annals or in the purely exegetical comments, but only in the more detailed accounts in Zuozhuan, and to a lesser extent in their narrative counterparts in the Gongyang and Guliang commentaries. To appreciate Zuozhuan’s foundational role for Chinese historiography, we may begin with some early attempts to think about what it Introduction LXIX

means to commemorate and understand the past. According to “Treatise on Arts and Writings” in the History of the Han, “For the kings in ancient times, each generation had its official scribes. . . . the scribe of the left recorded words, and the scribe of the right recorded events. The record of events became the Annals, and the record of words became the Documents.”210 The order of right and left is reversed and assimilated into a picture of ritual propriety in the Records of Ritual (Liji 禮記): “When he [the Son of Heaven] moves, the scribe of the left records it. When he speaks, the scribe of the right records it.”211 In Zuozhuan, scribes “in action” write down precise and concise statements, comparable to the entries found in the extant Annals, but there is no reference to scribes recording speeches. Instead, scribes join a host of other characters in making speeches. For Liu Zhiji, the fact that some long speeches invite comments by scribes and ministers from other states attests to their circulation as written texts.212 But the reports of speeches could also have circulated orally, and the custom of appending judgment to speeches and narratives is pervasive and possibly conventionalized. Without totally dismissing their actual recording, we can imagine conventions of presenting ideas as speech acts (such as proclamation, remonstrance, instruction, or interlocution), at varying temporal distances from the supposed moment of utterance, and the circulation of speeches in oral or written forms. Contexts of invention, reconstruction, or transmission must have shaped the numerous speeches in Zuozhuan. The interweaving of speeches and narrative leads Liu Zhiji to assert that Zuozhuan “does not follow ancient rules” on their separate recording. But Liu goes on to claim that this is a felicitous combination that engages the interest of the reader.213 Indeed, the convention of framing ideas as speech acts and distilling drama from them or using them to propel the narrative becomes standard practice in Chinese historical writings. This feature is so pervasive that the paradigm is no longer one of influence but of common ground. A brief foray into Sima Qian’s Records of the Historian illustrates this: not only are the sections devoted to those who swayed rulers with skillful persuasion (such as Confucius’ disciple Zigong 子貢,214 Zhang Yi, Su Qin, and Lu Zhonglian 魯仲連) predictably dominated by their speeches,215 but all the decisive moments in the rise of Han, as well as early Han power struggles and policy debates, are defined through speeches. The Han founder Liu Bang’s 劉邦 (r. 202–195) listing of Xiang Yu’s 項羽 (d. 202 BCE) crimes at Guangwu 廣武 shows how Liu’s camp masters the moral rhetoric that would eventually justify Han victory in the Chu-Han struggle.216 Liu Bang’s chief helper, Han Xin 韓信, (d. 196 BCE) refuses to heed his adviser Kuai Tong’s 蒯通 eloquent persuasion on the necessity of rebellion, thus exposing the spuriousness of later charges of treason against Han Xin as well as Liu Bang’s dependence upon him for his eventual LXX

Introduction

triumph.217 The power struggles between the Han minister Yuan Ang 袁盎 (d. 148 BCE) and Chao Cuo 晁錯 (d. 154 BCE), with their opposed visions of the power balance between the central government and princely domains, are understood through their speeches to Emperor Jing of Han 漢景帝 (r. 157–141).218 Sima Qian’s own dim view of the expansion of the Han Empire under Emperor Wu 漢武帝 (r. 141–87) may be apprehended through the recorded remonstrance by Gongsun Hong 公孫弘 (d. 121 BCE) and Zhufu Yan 主父偃 (d. 126 BCE) against attacking the Xiongnu 匈奴.219 When Liu Zhiji classifies historical writings in the seventh century, he identifies six schools, represented by the Annals (“school of recording events,” jishi jia 記事家), the Documents (“school of recording words,” jiyan jia 記言家), Zuozhuan (“annalistic school,” biannian jia 編年家), the Discourses of the States (“school of arrangement by states,” guobie jia 國別家), the Records of the Historian (“school of annals and biographies from antiquity to the present,” tonggu jizhuan jia 通古紀傳家), and the History of the Han (“school of single-dynasty annals and biographies,” duandai jizhuan jia 斷代紀傳家).220 As we have seen, his views on how Zuozhuan transgresses the boundaries established by the Annals and the Documents lead him to consider it superior to the latter two as historical writing.221 He regards the Discourses of the States as a kind of supplement to Zuozhuan222 and is critical of inconsistencies in the Records of the Historian. Despite his high regard for Zuozhuan, he acknowledges in the same chapter that it is the History of the Han that becomes the model for official historiography. At first glance it would seem that the annalistic format of Zuozhuan is less influential than the categories of historical knowledge established in the Records of the Historian and the History of the Han. In fact, annalistic history continues to hold sway in many ways. Even after the monumental Records of the Historian and History of the Han consolidate the form of biographies, treatises, and tables in universal and dynastic histories, annalistic history still lays claim to being a more concise and comprehensive way to organize knowledge about the past, so much so that Xun Yue 荀悅 (148–209) is said to have composed the Han Annals (Hanji 漢紀) in answer to the desire of Emperor Xian of Han 漢獻帝 (r. 189–220) to have the history of Western Han (202 Bce–25 CE) rewritten in the annalistic format because he found Ban Gu’s History of the Han too tedious and bewildering.223 Legitimate political authority in imperial China came with the prerogative of determining the calendar and the ways of counting years by reign titles. Annalistic history not only seemingly affirms the legitimacy of the political authority that determines the temporal framework but also conveys a kind of intrinsic dignity. “Basic Annals” 本紀, the sections that deal with rulers (usually emperors) in the Records of the Historian and in all subsequent dynastic histories, follow the annalistic format.224 Introduction LXXI

The ties of annals to legitimation through ways of reckoning historical periods, first articulated in the Han dynasty, are retrospectively projected onto the Annals, whose use of the Zhou calendar is said to indicate allegiance to the early Zhou political order.225 As mentioned above, accounts in Zuozhuan refer to different calendrical systems.226 Many imperial commentators, however, believed that exegetical purpose guided the presentation of such differences, with the goal of upholding the Zhou order. Annalistic histories are often concerned with questions of legitimate succession. Thus, Yuan Hong’s 袁宏 (328–76) Later Han Annals (Hou Hanji 後漢紀) adheres to strict definitions of Han legitimacy and severely criticizes Cao Cao 曹操 (155–220) and Cao Pi 曹丕 (187–226) as usurpers.227 In doing so Yuan Hong was also addressing a contemporary crisis: the military commander Huan Wen’s 桓溫 (312–73) overreaching ambition threatened the already-diminished Eastern Jin dynasty (317– 420). It is not surprising that the most famous annalistic history, Sima Guang’s 司馬光 (1019–86) Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government (Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑑), which picks up a few decades after Zuozhuan ends (403 Bce) and continues through the end of the Five Dynasties (959), and much more so Zhu Xi’s 朱熹 (1130–1200) interpretation and abbreviation of that work, Main Principles of “Comprehensive Mirror” (Tongjian gang­mu 通鑑綱目), are also key texts for debating notions of dynastic legitimacy (zhengtong 正統). In some cases, legitimacy as proclaimed through annalistic history was a gesture that compensated for political failure. In the wake of the Qing conquest, the Ming loyalist Zha Jizuo 查繼佐 (1601–76) compiled the history of the rump Ming court of Prince Lu (Zhu Yihai 朱以海 [1618–62]) and entitled it Lu Annals (Lu chunqiu 魯春秋). The biography as a category of historical knowledge is Sima Qian’s invention. However, the materials contributing to such biographies, from anecdotes to speeches, are ubiquitous in Zuozhuan. For example, Sima Qian’s biography of Wu Zixu 伍子胥 (d. 484 Bce), a key character in the conflicts between Wu and Chu and between Wu and Yue, is culled and reworked from Zuozhuan accounts. One branch of Zuozhuan scholarship is devoted to constructing biographies by reorganizing Zuozhuan materials.228 By the same token, other common categories in official historiography, such as chronological tables and treatises on subjects as diverse as ritual, geography, or arts and letters, can be drawn from Zuozhuan. One Song scholar, Cheng Gongshuo 程公說 (1171–1207), reorganized Zuozhuan materials and presented them as tables, genealogies, and treatises.229 As mentioned above, there are also rearrangements of the text by events and states that conform to other forms of historical writings in the tradition.230 Historical commentaries that acquire a life of their own through richness of details and viewpoints, such as Pei Songzhi’s 裴松之 (372–451) commentary on Chen Shou’s 陳壽 (233–97) History of LXXII

Introduction

the Three Kingdoms (Sanguo zhi 三國志), also show a special affinity with Zuozhuan, especially in its intermittent independence from the text for which it is supposed to function as commentary. The elucidative and interpretive concerns of framed comments in Zuozhuan continue as stated judgments in many forms of Chinese historical writings. Sima Qian juxtaposes event and judgment and modulates his perspectives through the complex, ironic balance between the narrative and the discursive components, between supposedly objective accounts and subjective illumination, in his chapters, which all conclude with the comments of the grand historian (taishi gong yue 太史公曰).231 It became conventional in official historiography to end with the judgment of the historian, who adopts the usual self-designation of an official as the emperor’s “subject” or “servant” (chen 臣). Beyond form and structure, Zuozhuan is a crucial text for defining ideas about history writing in the Chinese tradition. The word for “history” in modern and classical Chinese, shi 史, sometimes rendered as “historian,” “scribe,” or “astrologer” in early texts, does not appear in the Annals, although scholarly consensus maintains that persons holding the office of shi were responsible for recording those annalistic entries. It is in Zuozhuan that we see the shi in his multiple guises—as record keeper, astrologer, diviner, ritualist, adviser, envoy, textual specialist, and commentator. We have translated shi as “scribe,” but some stories surrounding that figure elaborate a kind of historical self-consciousness.232 One of the most memorable episodes on the making of historical records in Zuozhuan deals with scribes who brave death to record a regicide in Qi in 548 Bce. The Qi minister Cui Zhu 崔杼 assassinates Lord Zhuang of Qi 齊莊公 and installs Lord Jing 齊景公. He has already gained the acquiescence of other ministers when Qi scribes defy him: The grand scribe wrote, “Cui Zhu assassinated his ruler.” Cui Zhu put him to death. The scribe’s younger brothers succeeded him and wrote the same thing, and so two more persons were killed. Another younger brother again wrote it, whereupon Cui Zhu desisted. The scribe of the south, having heard that the grand scribes had all died, clutched the bamboo strips and set out. When he heard that the record had already been made, he turned back. (Xiang 25.2)

The line for which the Qi scribes sacrificed their lives is found in the Annals. But the story of their courage, as well as the dense web of intrigues and betrayals that incriminate almost all sides and justify selfpreservation at the cost of equivocation, thus showing how the scribes’ statement of fact is but one facet of a complex picture, belongs to Zuozhuan. Cui Zhu had installed Lord Zhuang earlier and then murdered him when the lord cuckolded him. Cui Zhu and his line in turn fall Introduction LXXIII

victim to his coconspirator Qing Feng 慶封, who is eventually driven into exile by self-styled defenders of the Qi ruling house. The wise Qi minister Yan Ying 晏嬰 mourns Lord Zhuang of Qi in a ritually proper fashion but refuses to die or go into exile for him, at the same time managing to avoid both complicity with and outright defiance of the usurpers’ new government.233 The Qi scribes become traditional tokens of the historian’s integrity. Their unflinching recording of facts comes to be honored as the ideal of honesty and forthrightness in historical writing (zhishu 直書, zhibi 直 筆). Further, the historian’s task is implied not only by the scribes’ defiant self-sacrifice but also by the way in which the framing narrative extends “truth telling” to the details and perspectives that condition judgment. The notion that the moral authority of historical judgment, built on impartiality, should rectify the injustices in the apparent triumphs of power is self-consciously embraced by Sima Qian and becomes a cultural ideal. The Song poet-statesman, loyalist, and martyr Wen Tianxiang 文天 祥 (1236–83) links the Qi scribes to the Jin scribe Dong Hu 董狐 in a parallel couplet, presenting them as representatives of the “righteous spirit” (zhengqi 正氣) between heaven and earth.234 Yet the truthfulness of Dong Hu’s record, when compared with that of the Qi scribes, is of a different kind. The Annals and Dong Hu in Zuozhuan name Zhao Dun 趙盾 as having assassinated his ruler, Lord Ling of Jin 晉靈公, although according to the Zuozhuan narrative, the actual act is committed by Zhao Chuan 趙穿. In Zuozhuan, Dong Hu explains his judgment thus to Zhao Dun: “You are the chief minister. Yet fleeing you did not cross the domain border; upon returning you did not chastise the culprit. If you are not responsible, who would be?” (Xuan 2.3). At the same time, the narrative enumerates Lord Ling’s misdeeds and thus implicitly mitigates blame even while asserting Zhao Dun’s responsibility. The lord’s gratuitous cruelty, rejection of remonstrance, and murderous intentions regarding Zhao Dun make him culpable. Zuozhuan stakes out a range of perspectives on the ruler-minister relationship and emphasizes reciprocity to the extent that expulsions and even assassinations of unworthy rulers are sometimes presented as justifiable (e.g., Xuan 4.2, Xiang 14.6, Zhao 32.4), although such a position is unthinkable for many imperial commentators.235 Gongyang and (more briefly) Guliang both tell this story, but the Zuozhuan account is unique in adding another level of self-conscious deliberation through Confucius’ comments:236 “Dong Hu was a worthy scribe of ancient times: he did not conceal anything in his rules of writing. Zhao Dun was a worthy high officer of ancient times: he bore a guilty verdict for the sake of those rules. What a pity! Had he crossed the domain border, he would have been absolved.” Can Confucius possibly mean that a technical detail of location would have absolved Zhao Dun LXXIV

Introduction

even if he were guilty? Or does he mean that had Zhao Dun crossed the border, it would have proved that he was actually not party to the regicide? One would assume the latter, considering Confucius’ sympathy for Zhao Dun: he wishes this “worthy high officer of ancient times” had not been responsible. Confucius balances empathy and judgment as he evaluates evidence and circumstantial contexts and ponders the margins of intention and execution. As is often the case, contexts and chronology introduce ambiguities and complexities in Zuozhuan. Gongyang and Guliang are silent on the earlier exploits of Zhao Dun. It is only in Zuozhuan that we learn of his role in the succession struggles in Jin. Thirteen years earlier, Zhao Dun opposed the accession of the future Lord Ling, then a mere infant or very young child, and he switched his allegiance from a rival noble son to Lord Ling only under duress. Dominant in Jin government for two decades (621–601), he is eulogized for his just policies at one point (Wen 6.1) but criticized for his harshness at another (Wen 7.5). Zuozhuan thus encompasses two perspectives on Zhao Dun: one indicts him, while the other retains sympathy for him. This apparent ambivalence may be traced to differences rooted in the political reality of the fifth or fourth century Bce, when voices could be found to speak for and against the Zhao house, and to divergent conceptions of the rulerminister relationship. The account of Lord Ling’s assassination seems designed to both elicit sympathy for Zhao Dun and indict him. Irrespective of the motives behind this doubleness, the account remains a remarkable moment of reflection on how historical knowledge and judgment may be established. Dong Hu’s record is upheld in the tradition as historical writing that “condemns the intention” (zhuxin 誅心), as distinct from that which “condemns the act” (zhuji 誅迹). The historian’s acumen (shishi 史識) goes beyond the surface to probe what is hidden by combining empathy and judgment, in the spirit of Confucius’ comments. Confucius’ commendation of both Dong Hu and Zhao Dun implies a measure of ambiguity regarding judgment of Zhao Dun. This goes against the grain of traditional scholarship on historiography, which has room only for stable irony, as evinced by discussions of the terms for indirectness: “concealment” (hui 諱) and “crooked brush” (qubi 曲筆). The Gongyang and Guliang traditions develop elaborate theories of “concealment”: the sage is said to conceal historical facts to honor or protect his kin (qinzhe 親者), worthy men (xianzhe 賢者), those to be respected (zunzhe 尊者), his own domain (nei 內), and the central domains (zhongguo 中國) (regarding their relationship with “barbarians”). Zuozhuan uses the term hui much more sparingly, primarily in relation to Lu rulers. The reasoning behind “concealment” implies that “bare facts” should yield pride of place to normative human relations in historical records. The word hui may also refer to the cautious silence or indirectness Introduction LXXV

employed to negotiate the dangers of political references, something imposed by external necessity rather than embraced as an ethical choice. Likewise, the term “crooked brush” can yield two different interpretations: it can be accepted as necessary expediency or even praiseworthy decorum, or it can be used disparagingly to mean distortions of truth (often to pander to the powers that be).237 By such logic, when faced with ambivalence or contradictions in Zuozhuan, later commentators are prone to read it as irony (from the standpoint of staunch orthodoxy), or they may question the Confucian credentials of the text. Such precision and complexity suggest that Zuozhuan fulfills ideals that it ascribes to the Annals: “Such is the way that the Annals articulates judgment—subtle yet pointed, clear yet indirect, restrained yet richly patterned, exhaustive yet not excessive, chastising evil and encouraging goodness. Who but the sage could have shaped it?” (Cheng 14.4).238 As we have seen, however, the text also encompasses internal differences that sometimes seem to problematize these formulations of perfect balance. ZUOZHUAN AND THE LITERARY TRADITION

It is customary to regard the historical value and the literary value of Zuozhuan as distinct categories, if not indeed incommensurate attributes. For example, defenders of “historical facts” are often suspicious of the ghosts, spirits, dreams, omens, prophecies, and secretive communications that periodically appear in the text,239 while literary historians happily appropriate them as clues to the origins of the Chinese fictional imagination. The pleasure in rhetoric so evident in Zuozhuan leads some traditional commentators to perceive a tension between “embellishment” (wen 文) and “substance” (zhi 質).240 The Tang poet and prose master Han Yu 韓愈 (768–824), for example, faults Zuozhuan for its “fanciful and exaggerated” ( fukua 浮誇) diction.241 We will never know for sure the balance between “how it really was” and the attitudes, rhetorical modes, and intellectual currents ascendant during the period of Zuozhuan’s formation,242 but we are on firmer ground with the latter. For example, statesmen might indeed have performed recitations from the Odes in diplomatic gatherings in the seventh and sixth centuries Bce,243 but what seems more certain is how the competence to articulate aspirations and negotiate differences through common allegiance to a shared textual tradition is enshrined as a cultural ideal by the time of Zuozhuan’s compilation.244 The same may be said of the ceremonious courtesy of officers on the battlefield in Zuozhuan, which might have been remembered as an ideal or exaggerated through the lens of nostalgia during the intensifying conflicts of the Warring States era. Our rationalist bias discounts the Jin ruler Lord Jing’s 晉景公 dream of a vengeful ghost that resulted in his grotesque death in 581 Bce (Cheng 10.4), but we can infer from it the role of powerful Jin ministerial LXXVI

Introduction

lineages in shaping some Zuozhuan narratives—the ghost in this story is the ancestor of the Zhao lineage that had been almost entirely eliminated two years earlier (583 Bce) (Cheng 8.6). The dream emerges as a crucible for considering the ruler-minister relationship, agency and fate, requital and causality. The idea that kernels of historical truths can or should be separated from the rich verbal fabric is misleading. What is more germane to the sense of history is the conscious formulation of patterns and principles to understand the past. What we now consider supernatural or supra­ rational occurrences, rhetorical constructions, or narrative devices represent such patterns and principles. In other words, literary constructions or formal choices are but modes of historical interpretation. Liu Zhiji understands this very well: he devotes various chapters of the Com­ prehensive Study of Historical Writings to narrative art and rhetorical strategies, constantly upholding Zuozhuan as the source of the finest examples. That said, Zuozhuan is also rightly recognized as a foundational text in the Chinese literary tradition irrespective of its importance for historical facts and historical thought. Many of the genres that Liu Xie discusses in his categorization and discussion of fine writings, Literary Mind and Carvings of Dragons (Wenxin diaolong 文心雕龍), such as remonstrance, exposition, biography, ordinance, persuasion, disputation, inscription, recitation, eulogy, prayer, or lamentation, are based on examples from Zuozhuan. It is especially influential as a model for classical prose, as evinced by numerous anthologies that use Zuozhuan excerpts to explain principles of literary composition.245 Movements of renewal in the history of Chinese prose invariably draw upon Zuozhuan. Among the Tang-Song prose masters, some show affinities with Zuozhuan even when they are critical (e.g., Han Yu, Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 [1007–72]), while others (like Su Shi 蘇軾 [1036–1101] and his brother Su Che 蘇轍 [1039–1112]) effusively embrace it.246 During the Ming dynasty, not only is Zuozhuan a key text for movements championing “revival of the ancients” (fugu 復古),247 but even those advocating Tang and Song models are themselves drawing from it via Tang-Song mediation.248 Even those sporting deliberate informality refer to Zuozhuan’s anecdotal flair. Masters of Tongcheng 桐城, the dominant school in Qing prose in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, uphold Zuozhuan as the repository for “principles and methods of writing” (wenzhang yifa 文章義法). The recognition of Zuozhuan as providing models for both examination essays (shiwen 時文) and classical prose (guwen 古文) resulted in the development of many Ming and Qing commentary editions that focus on literary composition and appreciation (pingdian 評點).249 The Kangxi emperor’s interest in Zuozhuan led to the inclusion of eightyone Zuozhuan excerpts in the Imperial Selection of Exemplary Sources for Classical Prose (Yu xuan guwen yuanjian 御選古文淵鑑), with comments Introduction LXXVII

by the Kangxi emperor and his ministers. Major literary commentaries on Zuozhuan include Jin Shengtan’s 金聖歎 (1608–61) Analysis of Zuozhuan (Zuozhuan shi 左傳釋) and the section on Zuozhuan in his Essential Readings for Talented Scholars (Tianxia caizi bidu shu 天下才子必 讀書), Wang Yuan’s 王源 (1648–1710) Commentary on Zuozhuan (Zuozhuan ping 左傳評), the Tongcheng master Fang Bao’s 方苞 (1668–1749) Key Principles and Methods of Writing in Zuozhuan (Zuozhuan yifa juyao 左傳義法舉要), Feng Lihua 馮李驊 (ca. late 17th–early 18th cent.) and Lu Hao’s 陸浩 (ca. late 17th–early 18th cent.) Embroidered Zuozhuan (Zuoxiu 左繡), and Lin Shu’s 林紓 (1852–1924) Essence of Zuozhuan (Zuozhuan jiehua 左傳擷華). Whereas “principles and methods of writing” merge effortlessly with staunch orthodoxy and the discussion of significatory principles (shufa 書法) in the Annals and Zuozhuan in Fang Bao’s work, other literary commentaries acknowledge the gap between literary merit and exegetical purpose.250 Jin Shengtan famously declares that he wrote his commentary on the play Western Chamber (Xixiang ji 西廂記) in order to provide guidelines for reading Zuozhuan.251 Jin’s analysis of Zuozhuan, Records of the Historian, Zhuangzi, Du Fu’s 杜甫 poetry, Western Chamber, and Water Margin (Shuihu zhuan 水滸傳) points to the common grounds of reading defined through a shared commentary culture in the late imperial period. Zuozhuan has also had a great influence on the form and method of fiction, if only because of the continuum between history and fiction in the tradition, as evinced by the use of the terms “unofficial history” (baishi 稗史) and “lesser history” (yeshi 野史)252 for what we would categorize as fiction. The apology for fiction is often based on the assertion that it is on a par with historical writings: “it really happened” and “it offers a lesson.” Even the most blatantly fantastic fiction may employ the rhetoric of authentication, replete with precise details of time and place and painstaking accounts of transmission. And even the most flagrantly provocative or subversive fiction may invoke the rhetoric of moral orthodoxy, albeit sometimes ironically. The presumed filiation to the rhetoric and concerns of official historiography is most evident in the genre of historical fiction, of which the preeminent example is Three Kingdoms (Sanguo zhi yanyi 三國志演義, first extant edition 1522).253 One of the best-known fictionalized histories is Feng Menglong’s 馮夢龍 (1574– 1646) New Records of the Various States (Xin lieguo zhi 新列國誌), derived in part from Yu Shaoyu’s 余紹虞 (16th cent.) account of the Shang and Zhou dynasties. Feng conceives of his project as the exegetical vernacularization of canonical historical writings, especially Zuozhuan and the Records of the Historian. New Records is best known in a slightly revised form, edited by Cai Yuanfang 蔡元放 (18th cent.) and renamed the Records of the Various States during the Eastern Zhou (Dong Zhou lieguo zhi 東周列國誌). On the formal level, classical tales254 share the juxtaposition of narra LXXVIII

Introduction

tive and judgment or commentary standard in historiography since Zuozhuan and the Records of the Historian. Later writers and anthologists of stories give new twists to this convention. For example, Feng Menglong, who compiled Categories and Classifications of Feelings (Qingshi leilue 情史類略), ends his entries with comments by “the Historian of Feelings” (Qingshi shi 情史氏). Pu Songling 蒲松齡 (1640–1715) appends comments, by turns earnest, ironic, digressive, and facetious, to his own stories, most of them fantastic, under the name “the Historian of the Strange” (Yishi shi 異史氏) in the Records of the Strange from the Liaozhai Studio (Liaozhai zhiyi 聊齋誌異). Exploiting this convention of concluding comments, a writer can veer between straightforward ruminations on the story and far-flung reflections on his own art or the meanings of fictional illusion. Vernacular fiction dispenses with the “noble man” or other traditionally authoritative commentators but often preserves the insertion of judgment, interpretation, and commentary with the voice of the narrator as storyteller. There are also subtler but no less pervasive connections. Zuozhuan is famous for the economy of its language, whereby high drama is concentrated in a few words. To name a few examples: the Song assassin, Chang Wan 長萬, captured in Chen, demonstrates his immense strength: “The Chen leaders sent a woman to ply him with wine, and they then wrapped him up in rhinoceros hide. By the time he arrived in Song, his hands and his feet were both poking out” (Zhuang 12.1). The achievement of Lord Huan of Qi as overlord is summarized through the fate of Xing and Wei: “For Xing to be relocated was like a return, and the domain of Wei forgot its loss” (Min 2.9). The Jin minister Fan Hui’s success in Jin is conveyed in one line: “As a result, the brigands in Jin fled to Qin” (Xuan 16.1). In the account of the battle of Bi between Jin and Chu, the Jin commander, anxious to gather the remnants of his defeated army, issues an order in panic: “Those who cross the river first will be rewarded!” Predictably, Jin soldiers fight to board the boats: “The fingers in the boats were so numerous that they could be scooped up” (Xuan 12.2).255 This one gruesome detail captures the disarray, demoralization, and barbarization of the retreating Jin troops. Soldiers already in the boats, fearing pursuit by the Chu army and also afraid that the boats would sink under excessive weight, try to fend off soldiers struggling to climb on board by cutting off their fingers. The Records of the Historian continues such stylistic economy. At one of the turning points in the Chu-Han struggle, the Han army was routed, and fallen Han soldiers clogged the Sui River: “the water of the Sui River, on account of that, no longer flowed.”256 The image makes the reversal of Han fortunes, facilitated by a sudden storm, all the more dramatic. Referring to the vicissitudes in the lives of the Han ministers Ji An 汲黯 and Zheng Dangshi 鄭當時, Sima Qian cites the emblematic fate of Lord Di: after he lost office, “bird traps could be set up outside his gates.”257 Introduction LXXIX

Precision and concision thus come to be enshrined as literary ideals, especially for classical prose and classical tales and narratives. With the aesthetics of symbolic condensation, a gesture or a line often bespeaks a person’s destiny or sums up a complex historical situation in Zuozhuan. The disintegration of the northern alliance in the last decades covered by Zuozhuan is heralded by a trivial but symbolic transgression when Jin presides over a meeting at Shaoling in 506 Bce. “The men of Jin asked to borrow feathers from Zheng, and the men of Zheng gave them some. The next day, someone attended the meeting with the feathers attached to his banner. With this, Jin lost the allegiance of the princes” (Ding 4.1).258 Yiwu 夷吾, posthumously honored as Lord Hui, is said to have been “slack and inattentive” (duo 惰) when he received the ceremonial jade signifying royal recognition of his position as Jin’s ruler (Xi 11.2). On the basis of Yiwu’s comportment at this ceremony, the court scribe and diviner Guo 內史過 predicts that his line will not last, and Yiwu’s reign is indeed a chronicle of failures. While this kind of detail and ritual judgment primarily concern a person’s place in a ritual system, there are also moments that capture the contours of personality. In one example, after the downfall of King Ling of Chu, we are given an anecdote that sums up his naive hubris and downfall. He divines by turtle shell, seeking an answer to the question of whether he would gain rulership of all-under-heaven. When the result is inauspicious, he throws down the turtle shell, curses Heaven and cries, “Such a petty thing and yet you do not give it to me! I will take it for myself!”259 This gesture of defiant ritual infraction is offered as historical explanation. In other instances, a single gesture embodies complex psychological maneuvers: when Chong’er, posthumously honored as Lord Wen, is returning to Jin to be restored as its ruler, his follower Hu Yan 狐偃 gives him a ceremonial jade disk and asks to leave his service, claiming that in their exile together he must have given cause for offense. Chong’er throws the jade into the river, thereby inviting the river god to bear witness to his sincere intention to be “of one heart” (tongxin 同心) with Hu Yan (Xi 24.1). Hu Yan’s proposal to sever ties is thus used to seal a pact. Sima Qian develops this focus on significant moments and uses them to create unity, resonance, and momentum in the Records of the Historian. As a child, the Han official Zhang Tang 張湯 (d. 116 BCE) meticulously tries and executes an offending rat.260 The combination of self-righteous cruelty and pleasure in violence that eventually makes him a “harsh official” (kuli 酷吏) are already evident in that scene. In another example, the youthful Li Si’s 李斯 (d. 208 BCE) moment of epiphany, when he witnesses the demeaning existence of mice in the latrine and the confident contentment of mice in the barn, leads him to conclude that circumstances override essence and spurs him to master “the art of serving rulers” (di wang zhi shu 帝王之術) to become the legalist minister of Qin.261 An act that cannot impinge upon the course of events may LXXX

Introduction

nevertheless convey the essence of character or situation. In one wellknown example, Xiang Yu, the defeated contender for empire, sings one last song for his favorite consort and stages a final performance of valor for the remnants of his troops, declaring as he falls: “This is how Heaven has destroyed me. It is not my faults in battle.”262 The mixture here of pathos and grandeur, blindness and insight, has great expressive and explanatory power, although Xiang Yu’s last act amounts to nothing more than a futile gesture. Suffice it to observe that while various religions, thought systems, and aesthetic contexts might have shaped the understanding of what constitutes significant moments in different periods, the logic of symbolic condensation often persists in various ways. Even some examples of late imperial vernacular fiction, often of formidable length, focus less on plot than on particular emblematic moments. For example, in Cao Xueqin’s 曹雪芹 (1715?–1764?) Story of the Stone (Honglou meng 紅樓夢), widely recognized as the masterpiece of Chinese fiction, the major characters are all associated with specific gestures and scenes. We remember the heroine Lin Daiyu burying fallen blossoms and the hero Jia Baoyu tearing fans to amuse his maidservant Qingwen. Often we confront this embedded proposition: namely, that given the gap between self and world, value and meaning may have to be privately willed. This idea, in turn bracketed by irony and nostalgia, of course implies versions of subjectivity and social reality that have no meaning or relevance for the world of Zuozhuan. What is noteworthy is how particular moments can in different ways become focal points of narrative, sometimes defying the logic of plot or teleology. Yet the very definition of narrative takes us beyond the moment. In Zuozhuan, duration and sequence are often tied to insistent causal reasoning. Narratives and speeches that are spread out over a number of years may be tied together by explanatory threads, giving credence to final judgments and justifying the successes or failures of characters or domains. The account of a major battle often consists of many discrete anecdotes, most of them not directly connected to each other but rather geared toward an explanation of the final outcome on both strategic and moral levels, although anecdotes that seem to serve no particular explanatory function may sometimes also be included because of their story interest or didactic intent. Later historical fiction such as the Three Kingdoms, also mixing scenes of combat and explanatory intent with didactic and entertaining elements in descriptions of battles and showing a fascination for cunning and stratagems, sometimes brings to mind Zuozhuan, which may be considered one of the sources for its imaginative universe. The chronological arrangement of Zuozhuan sometimes imposes distance between cause and consequence. The interweaving of different narrative strands also means that determining whether an episode Introduction LXXXI

belongs to a sequence of events depends on the identification or definition of the sequence. For example, the Jin defeat at the battle of Bi in 597 Bce (Xuan 12.2) can belong to narratives about Jin decline, the rise of Chu, the fate of ministerial lineages in Jin, or the ideal of the overlord, to name but a few possibilities. Once embedded in precise temporal contexts and chronological ordering, materials of diverse origins or rhetorical purposes contribute to new kinds of causal reasoning. For later writers and readers, the form of Zuozhuan encouraged habits of weaving and decoding plots that place special emphasis on the interplay of associations and discontinuities, clues and signs, temporal and spatial shifts. Some examples from the vocabulary of fiction commentary, such as “hidden brush” (yinbi 隱筆, fubi 伏筆), “cry and echo” (huying 呼應), “parallelism from a distance” (yaodui 遙對), “laying down the thread from a thousand miles away” (qianli fuxian 千里伏線), “horizontal clouds cutting off the peaks” (hengyun duanling 橫雲斷嶺), or “snake lines of ashes in the grass” (caohui shexian 草灰蛇線), are devoted to the delineation of such modes of writing and reading. Temporal sequence sometimes acquires a kind of spatial form in Zuozhuan, when patterns of balance, contrast, and repetition that obtain on the level of syntax in many speeches are translated into structural principles. Some of the longer narratives (or, rather, clusters of anecdotes) demonstrate these patterns. The account of the battle of Yanling (575 Bce) is a good example (Cheng 16.5). It begins with parallel predictions of the outcome from the ministers of Lu and Zheng, allies of, respectively, Jin and Chu, the main parties involved in the conflict. Those predictions in turn follow from the Jin and Chu ministers’ analyses of the weaknesses of their own domains, which would render Chu defeat inevitable and Jin victory hollow. In the middle of the battle, there is a dramatic moment of analogous mutual assessment. A distinct sense of shifting perspectives and cinematic spectacle unfolds as first Bo Zhouli 伯州 犁, exiled from Jin, interprets for King Gong of Chu 楚共王, from a high perch, the meaning of various movements of Jin troops, and then Fen Huang of Miao 苗賁皇, exiled from Chu, strategizes for Lord Li of Jin 晉 厲公. Toward the end, the image of the Jin ruler’s chariot mired in a bog is juxtaposed with that of the Chu king’s injury, as he is shot in the eye. This type of patterning proves influential for the narrative tradition. Late imperial vernacular novels, for example, are sometimes very long and have meandering plots, but there are often patterns and meanings that emerge from contrast and complementarity within each chapter, between chapters, and between narrative units that comprise clusters of chapters, as well as figural and structural repetitions.263 The shifting perspectives tailored to motives, calculations, and self-justifications on all sides in accounts of Zuozhuan battles signal a more general engagement and sympathy with more than one viewpoint. Sometimes different and potentially contradictory positions in one event (or series of events) LXXXII

Introduction

are all given their due. For example, both Wu Shang, who vindicates filial duty and embraces certain death, and his brother Wu Zixu, who chooses instead to pursue vengeance, are affirmed as moral exemplars (Zhao 20.3). A deeply flawed character like King Ling of Chu can still engage our sympathy in his moments of generosity and fairness or when he shows a glimmer of self-understanding (Zhao 7.2, 8.6, 12.11, 13.2). In the tradition of historiography, this comes to be understood as impartiality, the breadth of vision that would allow Sima Qian, for example, to give the perspectives of both sides in the Chu-Han struggle or to see the world through the eyes of both the First Emperor of Qin and his wouldbe assassins. In the literary tradition, such capacious imagination facilitates complexity and comprehensiveness. It also bears secret affinities with the irony and liminality that create such types as “demonic immortals” (yaoxian 妖仙, Journey to the West [Xiyou ji 西遊記]), “deviant heroes” ( jianxiong 奸雄, Three Kingdoms), and the sentient stone “unfit to repair heaven” (wucai butian 無才補天, Story of the Stone) in the fictional tradition.

NOTES 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

We have in mind Erich Auerbach’s analysis of this narrative in his Mimesis, 8–9. For a study of the many ways in which the narratives of Zuozhuan teach the reading of the world, see Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, esp. 172–248; Wai-yee Li, “Dreams of Interpretation.” Jiang Bingzhang, Du Zuo buyi, 314. J. C. Y. Wang, “Early Chinese Narrative,” 14. 故因孔子史記具論其語，成左氏春秋 (Shiji 14.510). For a fuller account of this passage, see XLIV–XLV. In the History of the Han the text under discussion here is labeled “Zuoshi zhuan” ­several dozen times and “Zuozhuan” only once, the latter instance being almost certainly an interpolation (27.1428). The fact that the title “Zuoshi chunqiu” does appear in the History of the Han four times indicates that the text underwent a name change during the period covered by Ban Gu’s history of the Western Han dynasty. As the discussion in part II indicates, the precise role of Du Yu in restructuring the text of Zuozhuan is not easily determined. There is some indication that restructuring was occurring even before Du Yu’s time. See Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 135–48. Vogelsang, “Prolegomena to Critical Zuozhuan Studies,” 944–45. For an excellent introduction to these texts, see Nylan, Five “Confucian” Classics. Pi Xirui, Jingxue lishi, 6b. 亂臣賊子懼 (Mencius 3B.6). 知我者其惟春秋 (ibid.). 微言大義 (Hanshu 30.1701). See Wai-yee Li, “Pre-Qin Annals.” For reference to other texts that seem to be in the Annals tradition, see Mozi 墨子 31, “Ming gui xia” 明鬼下, 8.200–226; and Mencius 4B.21. On the rather problematic Bamboo Annals, see Nivison, “Chu shu chi nian”; Shaughnessy, Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 185–256; and Nivison,

Introduction LXXXIII

Riddle of the Bamboo Annals. There have been recent discoveries of excavated texts similar to the Bamboo Annals emerging from archaeological digs and acquired by Qinghua University. 15 See Annals, Yin 11.4, Huan 18.2, and Min 2.3. The word “die” (zu 卒), instead of the customary hong, is used for Ziban, who ruled for two months in 662 Bce before being murdered (Annals, Zhuang 32.5). 16 The exception is Zhuang 9.5. 17 The lin is a strange and unclassifiable animal, often translated simplistically as “unicorn.” In the lexicographical work Erya, the lin is said to have “the body of an antelope, the tail of an ox, and one horn.” Gongyang exegesis turns the end date of the Annals into a paradoxical time of decline and progress, despair and joy. Confucius is said to have wept when he heard about the capture of the lin, seeing a parallel between his failure to implement his vision and the capture of this auspicious animal. The Gongyang tradition claims that the lin conferred the kingly mandate on Confucius to create a new moral-metaphysical system to “await later sages.” See also our notes on Ai 14.1; Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 411–21. 18 See the Guliang commentary on the words “summer fifth” in Huan 14.3 (Chunqiu Guliang zhuan, Huan 14, 4.8a). 19 Shiji 47.1943. 20 Gongyang, Xuan 18, 16.210. 21 References to such examples of “concealment” are much more common in Gongyang and Guliang than in Zuozhuan, see LXXV–LXXVI 22 Song shi 327.10550. Wang Anshi is said to have authored a commentary on Zuozhuan (Zuoshi jie 左氏解), but it is no longer extant. 23 聖文之羽翮，記籍之冠冕也 (Wenxin diaolong yizheng, 569 [“Shi zhuan” 史傳 16]). 24 言流靡而不淫 (Shitong tongshi, 2.1 [“Yan yu” 言語 6]), translated by Schaberg, Patterned Past, 21. 25 In a number of cases, Legge does not translate Zuozhuan passages that comment only briefly on an Annals entry. 26 Hu Zhihui, Zuo’s Commentary. One way in which this translation differs from our own is that it makes virtually no effort to guide or assist the reader with introductory materials or footnotes. 27 Girardot, Victorian Translation of China, 357. 28 See, e.g., http://tls.uni-hd.de/projectDescription/texts/texts_TLS.lasso#Z. 29 Demiéville, Choix d’études sinologiques, 464–65. 30 Lewis, “Warring States Political History,” 600. 31 On the growing sophistication of domain government during the Warring States period, see ibid., 603–16. 32 For a study of the ways in which Shiji adapts Zuozhuan, see Gu Lisan, Sima Qian chuanxie Shiji caiyong Zuozhuan de yanjiu. 33 Hsü, “The Spring and Autumn Period,” 547. 34 Bruce Brooks, http://www.umass.edu/wsp/resources/overview.html#sa. 35 Cited in Luo Junfeng’s discussion of Li Yuanchun’s Zuoshi bingfa in Qingdai Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue yanjiu, 337. There are at least ten works from imperial China that focus on military stratagems (binglue 兵略) and the art of war (bingfa 兵法) in Zuozhuan. See Yang Pingnan, Zuozhuan xu zhan zhi zijian jingshen, 3. 36 For a more detailed discussion of this episode, see LIX–LX. 37 See also Shiji 14.539. 38 See, for example, Mark Edward Lewis’s discussion of excavated Spring and Autumn covenant texts in “Ritual Origins of the Warring States,” esp. 75. 39 Hsü, “The Spring and Autumn Period,” 568. 40 君子不欲多上人 (Zuozhuan, Huan 5.3). 41 齊始霸也 (Zuozhuan, Zhuang 15.1).

LXXXIV

Introduction

See Walker, Multi-state System of Ancient China. 公孫于齊 (Annals, Zhao 25.5). Hsü, “The Spring and Autumn Period,” 571. On this topic, see Schaberg, Patterned Past, 74–75 et passim. The term junzi and its counterpart xiaoren 小人 (“petty man”) designate both social status and moral qualities in Zuozhuan. The “noble man” as commentator combines both, but the emphasis is on the moral significance of his comments. 47 Van Auken, “Could ‘Subtle Words’ Have Conveyed ‘Praise and Blame’?,” 47–112. 48 Li Feng sees this awareness as increasingly implacable; see his Landscape and Power in Early China, 286. Li Feng’s statement and evidence notwithstanding, the picture is a fairly complicated one. There are in Zuozhuan disparaging remarks about the Rongdi and references to the center-periphery model, but many accounts also support the picture of “proximity and mixture of Hua and Yi peoples” (huayi za chu 華夷雜處), and there are also passages praising “barbarians.” See LXIII. Cf. Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu siyi biao” 春秋四裔表, in Chunqiu dashi biao 2:2159– 99; Tong Shuye, Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 225–30; Tong Shuye, Tong Shuye lishi dili lunji, 169–77; Schaberg, Patterned Past, 130–35. 49 Yang Bojun often cites epigraphic evidence in his annotations (e.g., 1:90, 4:1695), as does Wu Jing’an in Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu (e.g., 8, 24, 214, 365, 1522–23). Among the most famous excavated vessels is “Zifan’s (Hu Yan) Bell” (Zifan bianzhong 子犯編鐘); its 132–word inscription details Zifan’s participation in the Chengpu campaign and the gifts he received from the Zhou king. The date of the gift recorded in the inscription is exactly the same as in the account in Zuozhuan, Xi 28.3h. The inscription refers to the “six armies from the west” (xi zhi liushi 西之六師), which have been identified as the six divisions of Jin troops. This substantiates the Zuozhuan claim that it was Jin rather than a broader coalition (as the Annals asserts) that defeated Chu. On Zifan’s Bell, see Zhang Guangyuan, “Chunqiu Jin Wen chengba Zifan hezhong chushi”; and Li Xueqin, “Bulun Zifan bianzhong.” 50 This has been suggested in von Falkenhausen, Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius, 51. Much of what follows draws from this study. 51 Ibid., 50. 52 Shiji 8.393. 53 Lewis, Sanctioned Violence, 28–36. 54 On Zuozhuan attitudes toward the supernatural, see the recent study by Li Long­ shien, “You ‘Zuozhuan’ de ‘Shenguai xushi’ lun qi renwen jingshen.” Cf. Schaberg, Patterned Past, 96–124; Tong Shuye, Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 193–95. 55 Von Falkenhausen, Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius, 299. 56 Ibid., 301. 57 敬鬼神而遠之 (Analects 6.22); 天道遠，人道邇 (Zuozhuan, Zhao 18.3). 58 Pines, Foundations of Confucian Thought, 16. 59 Ibid., 221–31. 60 Ibid., 233–46. 61 Schaberg, A Patterned Past, 315. 62 Ibid., 319. On sedimentation and heterogeneity in the formation of Zuozhuan, see also Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 33–58. 63 For a useful summary of Schaberg’s conception of how Zuozhuan took form, see his Patterned Past, 322–24. 64 A. T. Brooks, “Heaven, Li, and the Formation of the Zuozhuan.” 65 Blakeley, “‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited,”265, n151. By “discourses” Blakeley is referring to the speeches. It is here that most of the ideology of the text (e.g., notions of “Heaven”), which Brooks uses to assign layers to Zuozhuan, can be discerned. 42 43 44 45 46

Introduction LXXXV

66 67

68 69 70 71 72 73

74 75 76 77

78 79 80 81 82

83 84

LXXXVI

Ibid., 221. Ibid., 224. The view that the “noble man” comments were late additions was expressed already in the Song dynasty; see Zhuzi yulei, 83.2150. See also Liu Shipei, “Sima Qian Zuozhuan yi xuli,” 468–90; Durrant, “Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s Conception of Tso Chuan,” 300. Blakeley, “‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited,” 263. Ibid., 264. Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhengyi. On the significance of this edition, see Vogelsang, “Prolegomena to Critical Zuozhuan Studies,” 965–68. Yang Bojun, Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu. We have relied extensively on Yang Bojun’s notes throughout our translation. In the case of very long Zuozhuan entries, we have further marked sections alphabetically, e.g., “Zhao 1.1a,” “Zhao 1.1b,” etc. These subdivisions correspond for the most part to paragraph breaks in Yang’s text. See Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 37–38. The earliest extant Chinese historical work organized according to events (jishi benmo ti 紀事本末體) is Yuan Shu, Tongjian jishi benmo, a reworking of Sima Guang’s Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government (Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑑). Ye Qingchen’s 葉清塵 Chunqiu zuanlei 春秋纂類, organized according to the same principle and based on Zuozhuan, predates Yuan’s work by more than a century. Unfortunately, it is no longer extant (Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 244). Later examples abound. See, e.g., Qing dynasty compilations such as Gao Shiqi 高士奇 (1645–1704), Zuozhuan jishi benmo, and Ma Su 馬驌 (1620–73), Zuozhuan shi wei. Burton Watson has followed a similar procedure in parts of his popular, partial translation of Zuozhuan. See his Tso Chuan. Cheng Faren, Chunqiu renpu, 4. Fang Xuanchen ( “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu”) identifies 2,373 distinct individuals. See also Fang Zhaohui, Chunqiu Zuozhuan renwu pu, 1082–1112. Liji, “Qu li shang” 曲禮上, 17a; “Nei ze” 內則, 21b. Wang Yinzhi, Zhou Qin ming zi jiegu. See, e.g., Chen Houyao, Chunqiu changli; Gu Donggao, Chunqiu dashi biao, 1:494; Luo Shilin, Chunqiu Shuorun yitong; Cheng Rongjing, Chunqiu rinan zhipu; Wang Tao, Chunqiu lixue sanzhong. More recently, see Gassmann, Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen, with discussion and review by Manthe. For a clear explanation of the sexagenary cycle, see Wilkinson, Chinese History, 175–78. Yang (1:80) lists Chen Houyao, Chunqiu changli, in his bibliography and may also have drawn on Dong Zuobin, Zhongguo nianli zongpu, which has since been superseded by Xu Xiqi, Xinbian Zhongguo sanqian nian liri jiansuobiao. See Du Zhengsheng, Gudai shehui yu guojia, 449–78, 609–702. The identification of the guo with “capital” has led us to translate guoren 國人 as “inhabitants of the capital.” On the role of guoren, see Du Zhengsheng, Zhoudai chengbang; Du Zhengsheng, Gudai shehui yu guojia, 470–78. Chen Pan, Chunqiu dashi biao lieguo jue xing ji cunmie biao zhuan yi, l.5b–10a. Yang (294) also questions the rigidity of the “system” of ranks. Gu Donggao lists Chunqiu domains and the supposed rank of their rulers, as well as their capitals and dates, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 1:563–608. For a more recent study, see Li Feng, “Transmitting Antiquity.” There are several different opinions on the domain where Zuozhuan might have originated. See discussion in part II. For overviews of Chinese scholars’ arguments, see Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 386–88; Liu Liming, Chunqiu jingzhuan yanjiu,

Introduction

141–55; Wu Xifei, “Zuozhuan zhengyi zhushuo shuping”; Niu Hongen, “Lun Zuozhuan di chengshu niandai.” 85 See discussion below and Jin Dejian, Sima Qian suojian shu kao, 105–11. 86 For this date, see Boltz, “Language and Writing,” 108. For examples of earlier marks that may or may not be regarded as true writing, see Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 30–44. 87 Bagley, “Anyang Writing and the Origin of the Chinese Writing System.” Two fine recent dissertations have furthered and contested Bagley’s case, respectively: Haicheng Wang, “Writing and the State in Early China in Comparative Perspective”; and A. D. Smith, “Learning to Write in Early China.” 88 See Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 298–99. 89 See Kern, “Offices of Writing and Reading in the Zhouli”; and Kern, “Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China.” 90 On preservation of oracle bones, see Keightley, “The Shang,” 252. 91 On the Bamboo Annals, see references given in n. 14 above. 92 Keightley, Sources of Shang History, 95, 185–87. 93 For dian that are unequivocally written, see Zuozhuan, Xiang 11.5 (dian), Ding 4.1 (diance 典策), and Zhao 26.9 (dianji). For dian as constant practices possibly based on documents, see Xuan 12.2, Xuan 16.4, Cheng 2.9, Xiang 14.8, Zhao 15.7, and Ai 11.7. 94 See also Yi Zhou shu huijiao jizhu, 2:800. 95 Cf. Xi 5.8 and Ding 1.1. The Zhou Duke and the Grand Lord were the Western Zhou founders of Lu and Qi, respectively. 96 Weld, “Covenant Texts from Houma and Wenxian,” esp. 156; Lewis, Sanctioned Violence in Early China, 46–47. 97 Von Falkenhausen, “Issues in Western Zhou Studies,” 162–63. 98 Blakeley (“‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited,” 244–54) treats a body of material that might have originated in this way. 99 Pines, Foundations of Confucian Thought, 19. See also Blakeley, “‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited,” 238–43. 100 Zuozhuan, Wen 17.4, Cheng 7.5, Xiang 3.7, Xiang 24.2, Xiang 29.4, Zhao 5.1, and Zhao 6.3. It is possible that major proclamations like the ones recorded at Cheng 13.3 and Zhao 26.9 were conveyed to their audiences not only in speech but also in writing, though the text mentions only speech. 101 In our view, the evidence that Pines cites in Foundations of Confucian Thought, 255, n. 43, does not make the case for any regular recording of statesmen’s speeches. The Discourses of the States episode cited there may well refer to an exceptional act of recording, and the Zuozhuan passage (Xiang 27.4b) says nothing at all about the recording or reading of speeches. 102 Lewis, Writing and Authority in Early China, 28–29. 103 Zuozhuan, Zhao 2.1. That the passage specifies that this is the Annals of Lu supports the hypothesis that other states maintained similar chronicles. 104 For a fine summary of these positions, see Van Auken, “Formal Analysis of the Chuenchiou,” 38–46. 105 Besides the cases of Dong Hu and the scribes who recorded Cui Zhu’s crimes (Zuozhuan, Xuan 2.3, Xiang 25.2) discussed in part III, see the viewing of the Lu Annals at Zhao 2.1. 106 Early acceptance of this view can be found in Shiji 47.1943–44. 107 For the idea of the Annals as a text of coded praise and blame, see, e.g., Chunqiu fanlu yizheng, 463 (79 “Weide suo sheng” 威德所生). 108 See, e.g., Zuozhuan, Zhuang 19.2, Xi 4.6, and Xi 9.4. Variants of fu include taifu 太傅, taishi 太師, shaofu 少傅, and shaoshi 少師. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu lieguo guanzhi biao,” j. 10, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1058–63.

Introduction LXXXVII

109 The earliest listing of the Six Arts is found in Zhouli 4.1010. 110 Two episodes in Zuozhuan (Xiang 27.2, Xiang 28.9) imply that skill in Odes recitation was expected and incompetence despised. The Analects likewise attests to the importance of a mastery of Odes recitation; see Analects 13.5, 16.13, 17.9. 111 See Guoyu jijie, 485–86 (“Chu yu” 1.1), 415 (“Jin yu” 7.8). 112 See Jin Dejian, Sima Qian suojian shu kao, 105–15. 113 For the idea of the Annals as aide-mémoire, see Rosthorn, “Das Tsch’un-tsch’iu und seine Verfasser.” 114 On the formation of enduring groups of scholars and continuing traditions of scholarship outside court, see Lewis, Writing and Authority in Early China, 63–83. 115 This remark suggests that Sima Qian had not seen the additional years (Ai 15–16) that follow the capture of the lin in the Zuozhuan version of the Annals. 116 Shiji 14.509–10. For an extended discussion of this and related passages, see Durrant, “Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s Conception of Tso chuan.” 117 Predictably, a number of modern scholars also associate the text with a scholar from Lu, whether Zuo Qiuming or some unnamed other: see, e.g., Zhao Guang­ xian, “Zuozhuan bianzhuan kao (xia),” 45–58, esp. 51–52; Hu Nianyi, “Zuozhuan di zhenwei he xiezuo shidai wenti kaobian,” esp. 29; Huang Lili, “Shuo Zuozhuan.” According to Bruce Brooks (http://www.umass.edu/wsp/chronology/overview. html#ws), the text was begun in Lu and finished in Qi. Zhao Guangxian (“Zuozhuan bianzhuan kao [xia],” 48–51) reviews and refutes arguments that it was composed by Wu Qi 吳起 of Wei or Confucius’ disciple Zixia 子夏, who lived for a time in Wei; see also Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 52–58. Zhu Xi (Zhuzi yulei, 83.2147) speculated that the “Zuo” in the title may suggest that the author is a descendant of the Chu Scribe of the Left Yixiang 左史倚相, given that Chu is so well represented in Zuozhuan. Finally, Hirase Takao (Saden no shiryō hihanteki kenkyū, 22) argues on the basis of Zuozhuan’s calendrical systems that the text implicitly supports the legitimacy of the Warring States domain of Han as a royal successor to Zhou. 118 Analects 5.25. 119 Ban may be alluding here to Zuozhuan, Xiang 24.1. 120 Hanshu 30.1715. 121 Ibid. 122 A recent study on the Gongyang commentary is Gentz, Das Gongyang zhuan. 123 For historical judgments in the Analects, see n. 138. In fact, since the Analects may have been compiled as late as 150 Bce and did not until later receive the official recognition that Gongyang had, it is possible that during Warring States and early Han transmissions on the teachings of the Annals were more influential than the Analects as guides to Confucius’ thought. On the late formation of the Analects as a stable collection, see Makeham, “Formation of Lunyu as a Book,” 10–13. 124 Queen, From Chronicle to Canon, 127–81. For uses of the Annals in efforts to regulate Western Han administrative activity, see Shiji 30.1424; Hanshu 24B.1160. 125 Hanshu 30.1713 lists a work entitled Duo’s Subtleties in three pian. 126 The History of the Han mentions a Yu’s Annals in fifteen pian (30.1726), as well as a Transmission of Yu’s Subtleties (Yushi weizhuan 虞氏微傳) in two pian (30.1713). 127 For translations of these section titles, see Knoblock and Reigel, Annals of Lü Buwei. 128 The work attributed to Gongsun Gu is no longer extant. See Hanshu 30.1725, where a note states that the text in one pian and eighteen sections brought together accounts of ancient and recent successes and failures and was composed for King Min of Qi 齊閔王 (r. 323–284) when he had fallen from power. This Gongsun Gu

LXXXVIII

Introduction

is not to be confused with the seventh-century Gongsun Gu of Song mentioned in Zuozhuan. 129 Shiji 14.510. 130 See Han Feizi 3, “Nan yan” 難言, 48–59; 12, “Shui nan” 說 難, 221–37; and 31– 35, the “Chu shui” 儲說 chapters, 516–790. On how history and philosophy are entwined in early Chinese anecdotes, see Schaberg, “Chinese History and Philosophy.” 131 Shiji 76.2375. 132 See Shiji 69.2242, on Su Qin’s training, with parallel passage in Zhanguo ce, “Qin 1”, 3.85. The Guiguzi 鬼谷子, a text on persuasive strategy that may date from as early as the fourth century Bce, devotes separate chapters to “Probing” and to “Touching.” For discussion and translation, see Broschat, “Guiguzi.” The compound chuaimo has come to mean mental calculation and psychological manipulation in classical and modern Chinese. 133 See Xunzi 5, “Fei xiang” 非相, 73–89. 134 E.g., Lüshi chunqiu, “Shun shui” 順說, 15.905ff.; “Shen ying” 審應, 18.1141–66. 135 The “Daya” 大雅 odes of Shijing (Mao 235–65) depend especially heavily on lessons from the past; “King Wen” (Mao 235), the ode cited most frequently in Zuozhuan, is an idealized retelling of that king’s reign. For the model of the past in bronze inscriptions, see Shaughnessy, Sources of Western Zhou History. 136 One way to track uses of history in Zuozhuan is to watch how speakers use the adverb xi 昔, which normally introduces a historical precedent or analogy. See, e.g., Min 2.7, Xi 4.1, and Xi 6.4; altogether there are nearly eighty such instances. 137 For scholars who have held that the materials of Zuozhuan were in part transmitted orally, see Schaberg, Patterned Past, 320–22. 138 E.g., Analects 3.22, 5.15–19, 5.21, 5.23–25, 6.15, 7.31, 8.1, 8.18–19, and 8.21. 139 On the junzi (“noble man”) and Confucius as commentators on events in Zuozhuan, see Henry, “‘Junzi yue’ versus ‘Zhongni yue’ in Zuozhuan.” 140 Analects 13.5. 141 On the Odes and speech, see Analects 7.18, 16.13, and 17.9. On speech more generally, see Analects 5.8, 10.1, 11.3, and 13.3. 142 For a lengthy address in an elevated register, see Zhao 26.9. The challenges or ­invitations issued before battle are also typically couched in an elevated, archaic register: see Xi 28.3, Cheng 2.3, and Cheng 16.5. 143 See Schaberg, Patterned Past, esp. 125–60. 144 Crump, Intrigues, 101–9. On the tekhnē, see Cole, Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, 81–83. 145 See reflections on this question in Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 31–33. A sensitive recent consideration of Zuozhuan as a commentary on the Annals is Zhang Suqing, Xushi yu jieshi—Zuozhuan jingjie yanjiu. 146 See, e.g., Dan Zhu 啖助 (724–70), cited in Lu Chun, Chunqiu jizhuan zuanli, 380– 81; Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi 4.70; Blakeley, “On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited”; A. T. Brooks, “Heaven, Li, and the Formation of the Zuozhuan.” 147 On circulation of texts in relatively short forms, later combined into larger collections, see Li Ling, “Chutu faxian yu gushu niandai di zai renshi.” 148 For details on the finds, see Shaughnessy, Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 131–53. As Shaughnessy notes (133), various sources give 279, 280, and 281 as the year of the discovery. 149 A somewhat too ambitious reconstruction of the connections among oral tradition and texts like Duo’s and Yu’s, Discourses of the States, and Zuozhuan is to be found in Zhang Jun, “Guoyu chengbian xinzheng.”

Introduction LXXXIX

150 Shaughnessy (Rewriting Early Chinese Texts, 145) translates the description of these earlier texts given in Du Yu’s afterword to his Zuozhuan commentary; see especially the remarks on Shi Chun 師春, a collection of divination stories. 151 The fact that the Records of the Historian links Zuozhuan to topically arranged Annals texts, while the History of the Han links it to chronologically arranged Annals exegeses, might reflect a change in Zuozhuan’s arrangement between 100 Bce and the middle of the first century CE. 152 Hung, preface to Combined Concordances to Ch’un-ch’iu, Kung-yang, Ku-liang, and Tso-chuan, xxvi. 153 Tong Shuye, “Guoyu yu Zuozhuan wenti hou’an.” 154 See Pines, “History as a Guide to the Netherworld.” 155 Liu Xiang’s reconstruction of the transmission is cited by Kong Yingda in his annotation to the preface to the Annals; see ZZ 1.6. Liu Xiang gives slightly dif­ ferent titles to the works of Duo and Yu and gives their size as three pian and two pian, respectively (Hanshu 30.1713). In a fragment of Liu Xiang’s catalog preserved in another work, Liu mentions a Chaocuo 抄撮 by Duo in nine juan (Hanshu “Yiwenzhi” jiangshu, 61). By contrast, the Records of the Historian account puts Duo’s and Yu’s works at forty passages (zhang 章) and eight pian, respectively. It is apparent that different works circulated under a general association with Duo Jiao and Yu Qing. 156 The following paragraph is based on Hanshu 88.3620. 157 Since this purports to be a list of early Han figures, it is strange that the first-century Bce Governor of the Capital Zhang Chang is included. The list might begin with the early Han and stretch forward, but in that case it is strange that Zhang Chang is listed before Liu Gongzi, whom Loewe dates to the early Han. See Loewe, Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han and Xin Periods, 302, 677. Since Liu Gongzi is mentioned only here, one solution would be to treat the list as a chronological overview, with Liu Gongzi coming after Zhang Chang. 158 Hanshu 23.2410. 159 Zhang Suqing (Zuozhuan chengshi yanjiu, 15–21) acknowledges the similarities between Zuozhuan’s version of the Odes and the Mao tradition while emphasizing that they are by no means identical. 160 Gongyang had been taught at the highest levels since the middle second century Bce (see Hanshu 88.3617), while Guliang received official support only in the reign of Emperor Xuan (r. 74–48 Bce; Hanshu 88.3621). 161 For Zhang Cang’s expertise in calendrical science and correlative cosmology, see Hanshu 42.2098. 162 See Gu Lisan, Sima Qian zhuanxie Shiji caiyong Zuozhuan di yanjiu. That the Records of the Historian was not readily available to readers during the first century Bce is clear from Hanshu 62.2737. 163 Besides Prince Xian of Hejian, see also Hu Chang, who worked on Shangshu (Hanshu 88.3607), Yin Gengshi, who worked on Guliang and composed a “passage and line” (zhangju 章句) commentary (Hanshu 88.3618), and Zhai Fangjin, who specialized in calendrical science and Guliang (Hanshu 84.3421). Yin’s commentary, like Duo Jiao’s work (Shiji 14.510), appears to have focused on exemplary cases of success and failure; for the term bianli 變理 (“principles of transformation”), compare the use at Hanshu 100B.4267 and the meaning of bian at 64B.3830. 164 For this and related fragments from Huan Tan’s work, see Pokora, Hsin-lun, 94–95. 165 The following sketch is based on Hanshu 36.1967–72. 166 See Hanshu 88.3620, where Jia Yi is said to have composed just such a commentary for Zuozhuan. Xun 訓 refers to definitions of words; gu 故 we take to be elaborations of the circumstances and referents that determine the meaning of a particular statement.

XC

Introduction

167 Hanshu 36.1967. 168 Liu Fenglu, Zuoshi chunqiu kaozheng; and Kang Youwei, Xinxue weijing kao, 398. 169 For a classic rebuttal of charges against Liu Xin and his father, see Qian Mu, “Liu Xiang Xin fuzi nianpu.” 170 Hanshu 30.1712–13. 171 Further evidence of such rearrangement is Shi Dan’s 師丹 (d. 3 CE) charge that Xin had “altered and disordered old passages” (gailuan jiuzhang 改亂舊章); see Hanshu 36.1972. 172 Maspero, “La composition et la date du Tso-chuan,” 183. 173 Du Yu (ZZ 1.16) claims to have introduced this reordering of the text. See also Maspero, “La composition et la date du Tso-chuan,” 184. 174 See Hanshu 36.1968–72. The letter was later included in the Wenxuan of Xiao Tong under the title “A Letter Rebuking the Academicians of the Superintendent for Ceremonials” (Yi shu rang taichang boshi 移書讓太常博士); see Wenxuan 43:1952–57. 175 Here it is important to note that although Liu Xin does mention certain texts discovered secreted in a wall on the site of Confucius’ home, he never includes Zuozhuan among these, insisting more plausibly on the usual transmission through teachers and disciples. By the first century ce, however, Wang Chong could claim that Zuozhuan was among the texts in Confucius’ wall; see Lunheng 61, “Yi wen” 佚文, 20.860–61; 83, “An shu” 案書, 29.1161–62. Michael Nylan has called into question earlier claims concerning a deep divide between scholars who favored “Ancient Script” (guwen 古文) texts—that is, texts written in pre-Qin graphs, perhaps including texts like those purportedly recovered from Confucius’ wall—and those who swore by “New Texts” (jinwen 今文). See Nylan, “Chin wen / Ku wen Controversy in Han Times.” 176 The passage is obscure. Tong 通 is attested with the meaning “section” in Sanguo zhi; see Wang Li gu Hanyu zidian, 1435. 177 Hanshu 27, “Treatise on the Five Phases,” is full of Liu’s citations of Zuozhuan. 178 Hanshu 99.4045–46. 179 Hanshu 67.2927, 88.3621. 180 Hou Hanshu 36.1228–29. 181 Hou Hanshu 36.1234–39. 182 Shishuo xinyu jianshu, 105. Fu Qian’s commentary has not been transmitted in its entirety, but fragments are collected in Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu. On Eastern Han Zuozhuan scholarship more generally, see Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 110–29; Wai, “Merging Horizons.” 183 Blakeley, “Notes on the Reliability and Objectivity of the Tu Yü Commentary on the Tso Chuan.” 184 See discussion of Xun Yue, Yuan Shu, et al., LXIX–LXX, n. 73. 185 The text has a slightly different formulation: zhisi er fen zhi 治絲而棼之. Chinese idioms are often condensed into four characters, hence the paraphrase. 186 The Deng ruler’s other nephews urged him not to trust the Chu king: “If you fail to make plans early on, later you’ll have to chew your navel, attempting the impossible” 若不早圖，後君噬齊. 187 The Wu Prince Fugai 夫槩 uses the same expression while pursuing Chu forces during the battle of Boju 柏舉: he reasons that escaping Chu troops should be allowed to cross the river and attacked only when half of them have crossed, since trapping the whole army on the near side of the river would only make them fight more ferociously (Ding 4.3). 188 The text describes this as “the space between the heart and the diaphragm, and below the fat at the tip of the heart” (huang zhi shang, gao zhi xia 肓之上、膏之下). 189 For a much longer, but by no means exhaustive, list, see Zhang Gaoping, Zuozhuan zhi wenxue jiazhi, 25–30.

Introduction XCI

190 ZZ 1.11. 191 Xu Fuguan characterizes this process as “using historical accounts to transmit canonical meanings” (yi shi chuan jing 以史傳經); see his Liang Han sixiang shi, 3:270–75. 192 The foregoing paragraphs and several to follow have been published previously in slightly different form in Wai-yee Li, “Pre-Qin Annals.” 193 Dan Zhu, cited in Lu Chun, Chunqiu jizhuan zuanli, 381. 194 Ibid., 380–81. 195 See, e.g., Zhuzi yulei, 83.2152. 196 Shiji 61.2125. For accusations of heterodoxy, see Ban Gu’s charges in Hanshu 62.2737. Cf. Durrant, The Cloudy Mirror; Wai-yee Li, “The Idea of Authority”; Hardy, Worlds of Bronze and Bamboo. 197 The Gongyang and Guliang traditions are much more insistent about “honoring the king and repelling the barbarians” (zunwang rangyi 尊王攘夷), although that perspective is also articulated in Zuozhuan. 198 On psychological manipulation in remonstrance, see Schaberg, “Playing at Critique”; Wai-yee Li, “Riddles, Concealment, and Rhetoric in Early China.” 199 The principle that “the subcommentary should not refute the commentary” (shu bu bo zhu 疏不駁注) stipulates that Du Yu’s commentary should not be explicitly questioned. 200 On Song scholarship on the Annals and its commentaries, see Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 202–45; Li Jianjun, Songdai Chunqiu xue yu Song xing wenhua; Song Dingzong, Chunqiu Song xue fawei. 201 Cited in Shen Yucheng and Liu Ning, Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao, 204. 202 Ibid., 221–25. 203 On Qing scholarship on Zuozhuan, see Zhang Suqing, Qingdai Han xue yu Zuozhuan xue; Luo Junfeng, Qingdai Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue yanjiu; Zhang Gao­ ping, Chunqiu shufa yu Zuozhuan xue shi. 204 Hui Dong, cited in Zhang Suqing, Qingdai Han xue yu Zuozhuan xue, 76. 205 See Luo Junfeng, Qingdai Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue yanjiu, 250–327. 206 Karlgren, Authenticity and Nature of the Tso Chuan. 207 Gongyang and Guliang scholars primarily interested in elucidating the significatory principles supposedly embodied by the Annals, from He Xiu 何休 (129–82), Fan Ning (330–401), to Liu Fenglu and Pi Xiru, fault Zuozhuan for straying beyond exegesis of the Annals. Those using the Annals or the Gongyang tradition to enunciate a political vision, from Song scholars like Hu Anguo to the Qing reformer Kang Youwei, find the historical details in Zuozhuan inconvenient and irrelevant. From a less partisan perspective, those who recognize the historical veracity of Zuozhuan (e.g., Zhu Xi, Gu Yanwu) often implicitly question its exegetical filiation to the Annals. 208 Qian Mu, who definitively refuted the theory of Liu Xin’s forgery in his “Liu Xiang Xin fuzi nianpu,” 50 et passim, also quotes with approval Yao Nai’s 姚鼐 (1731–1815) theory that Wu Qi—and the military, pragmatic strain of thought with which he is associated—might have played a role in Zuozhuan’s transmission; see Qian Mu, Xian Qin zhuzi xinian, 192–95. 209 我欲載之空言，不如見之於行事之深切著明也 (Shiji 130.3297). 210 左史記言，右史記事。事爲春秋，言爲尚書 (Hanshu 30.1715). 211 動則左史書之，言則右史書之 (Liji 29.545). 212 Shitong tongshi, 3.80 (“Shen Zuo” 申左). 213 Shitong tongshi, 1.21–22 (“Zai yan” 載言 3). 214 There are many references to Zigong’s rhetorical brilliance in Zuozhuan (Ai 7.3, 11.3, 12.3, 12.4, 15.4, 16.3, 26.3, 27.2), but he emerges as a full-blown rhetorical hero whose speeches shape interstate relations in Shiji 67.

XCII

Introduction

215 Shiji 69, 70, 83. 216 Shiji 8.376–77. By contrast, the account of the confrontation at Guangwu in Shiji 7 exposes Liu Bang’s ruthlessness. 217 Shiji 92.2622–24. 218 Shiji 101, 106. 219 Shiji 112.2954–60. 220 Shitong tongshi, 1.1–15 (“Liu jia” 六家 1). 221 In treating the Annals and the Documents as historical writings, Liu Zhiji presages Zhang Xuecheng’s 章學誠 (1738–1801) famous dictum that “the six canonical classics are all histories” (liujing jieshi 六經皆史); see Wenshi tongyi jiaozhu, 1:1. Liu’s effacement of the boundary between canon and history, as well as his critique of the Annals and the Documents, provokes the indignation of Pu Qilong (ca. 1670– ca. 1762), who provides a learned commentary to the Comprehensive Study of Historical Writing; see Pu’s comments on the chapter “Huo jing” 惑經 in Shitong tongshi, 3.63–77. 222 Discourses of the States and Zuozhuan are traditionally designated as the “external commentary tradition” (waizhuan 外傳) and the “internal commentary tradition” (neizhuan 內傳), respectively, of the Annals. 223 Hou Hanshu 62.2062. 224 From the History of the Han on, the convention emerges that only rulers with rightful political authority should be mentioned in “Basic Annals”—hence the criticism of Sima Qian’s decision to include Xiang Yu, rival of the Han founder, and Empress Lü, traditionally regarded as a usurper, in “Basic Annals.” Obviously, Sima Qian, who established the category of “Basic Annals,” had a different conception of its definition. 225 This is especially emphasized in the Gongyang and Guliang traditions. 226 Calendrical studies constitute one tradition of scholarship on the Annals and Zuozhuan. See n. 77 above. 227 See Yuan Hong’s comments in Hou Hanji jiaozhu 30.862–63. Yuan also quotes in full Zhuge Liang’s 諸葛亮 memorial condemning Cao Cao (Hou Hanji jiaozhu 30.856–58) and criticizes Liu Xiu 劉秀, the first Eastern Han Emperor, for seizing power from a supposedly more legitimate Han ruler (Hou Hanji jiaozhu 3.63). 228 See, e.g., Wang Dang (fl. early 12th cent.), Chunqiu lieguo zhuchen zhuanshuo; Liu Jie (15th cent.), Chunqiu liezhuan; Shao Wenzhuang, Chunqiu zhu mingchen zhuan; Tang Shunzhi (1507–60), Zuoshi shimo. 229 See his Chunqiu fenji. Another notable example is Gu Donggao’s Chunqiu dashi biao, which reorganizes Zuozhuan materials into tables and treatises. 230 See n. 73 above. Notable examples include Ma Su, Zuozhuan shi wei; Gao Shiqi, Zuozhuan jishi benmo; Wu Kaisheng 吳闓生 (1877–1949), Zuozhuan wei. 231 In some cases, there are deliberate disjunctions between narrative and comment. For example, Sima Qian comments that Xiang Yu is wrong to blame Heaven (Shiji 7.338–39), but Sima also presents reversals of fortune beyond Xiang’s control in the narrative (7.322). Sima blames Han Xin for treason in the final comments (92.2360) but implicitly defends him in the narrative. The intensely personal and lyrical tone of some of Sima’s comments contrasts markedly with the practical and moral judgments of the “noble man” and “Confucius” in Zuozhuan. 232 While “scribe” cannot encompass the multiple roles of the shi 史, who is more likely to observe the stars, perform divination, or offer advice or remonstrance in Zuozhuan, we have chosen “scribe” because record keeping is one of the key functions of the shi. On the many roles of the shi in early China, see Chen Tongsheng, Zhongguo shiguan wenhua yu Shiji; Xu Fuguan, Liang Han sixiang shi, 3:224–46. 233 For this series of events, see entries between Xiang 25 (548 Bce) and Xiang 28

Introduction XCIII

(545 Bce). It is interesting that several times in Yanzi chunqiu Confucius appears to criticize Yan Ying for serving three lords, and in some passages Confucius and Yan Ying are presented as adversaries (Yanzi chunqiu jishi, 7.489, 8.491–92, 8.500–504). Obviously, Yan Ying’s arguments about expediency come to be seen as requiring defense or at least explanation in the face of a late Warring States understanding of Confucian principles. 234 Wen Tianxiang, “Song of the Righteous Breath” (Zhengqi ge 正氣歌): “In Qi, the grand scribes’ bamboo strips, / In Jin, Dong Hu’s brush” 在齊太史簡, 在晉董狐 筆. See Wen Tianxiang quanji, 15.601–2. Wen Tianxiang defended the crumbling Song dynasty against the invading Mongols, and his poem suggests that the example of these early historians, as well as his expectation of how he will be remembered in history, gave him moral courage. 235 On the Qi historians and Dong Hu, see Durrant, “The Task and Ritual of Historical Writing in Early China”; Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 322–26, 408–10. 236 Recall our earlier caution to read “Confucius” as a persona in the text rather than the historical Confucius. 237 Shitong tongshi, 2.32–37 (“Qubi” 曲筆 25). 238 Cf. Zhao 31.5. 239 The Guliang master Fan Ning 范寧 (339–401) opined: “The Zuo tradition is rich and elaborate. Its fault lies in its supernatural references,” or, literally, in its references to spirit mediums 左氏艷而富, 其失也巫 (Guliang, “Xu” 7). “Rich and elaborate” are usually terms of approbation, but Fan Ning implies a connection between elaboration and wayward imagination. 240 Jin Shengtan (1608–61) embraced this perceived imbalance as proof of Zuozhuan’s literary merits: “Every line and every word are superb literature, not factual events” 句句字字是妙文, 不是實事. See Jin Shengtan, Guanhua tang di liu caizi shu Xixiang ji, 5.92 (“Si jing” 寺警). Zeng Guofan 曾國藩 (1811–72) is somewhat more critical: “[Zuozhuan] is prone to draw upon the strange and wondrous. Its fine words and phrases are dazzling and it has left substance behind” 好稱引奇誕, 文辭爛然, 浮於質矣 (“Shengzhe huaxiang ji” 聖哲畫像記, in Zeng Guofan shiwen ji, 289). Elsewhere, however, Zeng is full of praise for Zuozhuan. 241 Han Yu: “The Annals is careful and sober; Zuozhuan is fanciful and exaggerated” 春秋嚴謹, 左氏浮誇; see Dongya tang Changli jizhu, 12.200 (“Jin xue jie” 進學解). Many commentators are quick to point out Han Yu’s own debt to Zuozhuan prose. See, for example, Fang Bao’s 方苞 (1668–1749) comments in his preface to Guwen yuexuan 古文約選. 242 Pines suggests in his Foundations of Confucian Thought that Zuozhuan can be read as intellectual history of the Spring and Autumn period. 243 Examples are found between 637 Bce (Xi 23.6) and 506 Bce (Ding 4.2) in Zuozhuan. For a convenient table listing all instances of recitation in Zuozhuan, see Zhang Suqing, Zuozhuan chengshi yanjiu, 261–88. 244 See Schaberg, Patterned Past, 234–43; Zhang Suqing, Zuozhuan chengshi yanjiu, 83–84; Wai-yee Li, “Poetry and Diplomacy in Zuozhuan.” 245 For some examples, see Zhen Dexiu, Wenzhang zhengzong; Lü Zuqian, Donglai boyi; Wu Chucai and Wu Diaohou, Guwen guanzhi; Fang Bao, Guwen yuexuan; Yao Nai, Gu wenci leizuan; and Wu Zengqi, Hanfenlou gu jin wen chao. 246 For Han Yu’s criticism, see n. 241 above. Taking up Han Yu’s mantle, Ouyang Xiu, Su Shi, and Su Che were all major Song literary figures who charted the development of classical prose. 247 Namely, the so-called Early Seven Masters and the Later Seven Masters. 248 Champions of the Tang-Song school (Tang Song pai 唐宋派) include Tang Shunzhi and Mao Kun 茅坤 (1512–1601). 249 See Luo Junfeng, Qing dai Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue yanjiu, 328–76; Zhang Gaoping,

XCIV

Introduction

250 251 252

253

254 255

256 257 258

259 260 261 262 263

Chunqiu shufa yu Zuozhuan xue shi, 253–88; Huang Zhaoji, Jian’ao yu yuanzhao; Cai Miaozhen, Zhuixun yu chuanshi. For a list of Zuozhuan pingdian editions, see Zhang Gaoping, Zuozhuan wenzhang yifa danwei, cited in Cai Miaozhen, Zhuixun yu chuanshi, 13. See, e.g., Zhu Shi, “Zuoxiu xu”: “Zuozhuan is about fine writing, it is not about transmitting the meaning of the Annals” 左氏文章也，非經傳也 (cited in Cai Miaozhen, Zhuixun yu chuanshi, 164). Jin Shengtan, Guanhua tang di liu caizi shu Xixiang ji, in Jin Shengtan quanji, 3:46–47. Bai 稗 refers to plants that look like wheat or millet but bear smaller, inedible grain. It suggests insignificance and false resemblance, as in Ding 10.2. The word ye 野 (“in the wilds”) denotes marginality. Both terms, baishi and yeshi, thus imply a negative judgment, but their distinction from historical writings is premised not on a truth-falsehood axis but rather on a gradation of significance. The title means, literally, “The Elaboration of the Meanings of Records of the Three Kingdoms.” The book draws upon Chen Shou’s Sanguo zhi and Pei Songzhi’s commentary on it (see LXX–LXXI above), as well as Fan Ye’s Hou Hanshu, Sima Guang’s Zizhi tongjian, and Zhu Xi’s Zizhi Tongjian gangmu. The fusion of the historiographical tradition with the mythologizing memory preserved in storytelling and drama prompted Zhang Xuecheng (Bingchen zhaji 丙辰劄記, 90) to pronounce it “seven parts historical fact, three parts fictional arrangement” 七分 實事，三分虛構. Written in classical Chinese, these tales are often shorter and more condensed than their vernacular counterparts. 先濟者有賞。。。舟中之指可掬也. This detail also appears in the Gongyang tradition, which, however, does not provide the circumstantial context of Jin retreat that allows it to serve as the climax to the episode. The battle of Bi is mentioned only in passing in Guliang. 睢水為之不流 (Shiji 7.321–22). 門外可設雀羅 (Shiji 122.3113–14). 晉人假羽旄於鄭，鄭人與之。明日，或旆以會。晉於是乎失諸侯. This echoes an earlier incident in 559 Bce: the Jin minister Fan Gai “borrowed feathers and oxtail hair from Qi and did not return them. From then on Qi began to shift their allegiance” 范宣子假羽毛於齊而弗歸，齊人始貳。 (Xiang 14.10). 是區區者而不余畀，余必自取之 (Zhao 13.2). Shiji 122.3137. Shiji 87.2539–40. 天亡我，非戰之罪也 (Shiji 7.334–35). See Plaks, Archetype and Allegory in “The Dream of the Red Chamber”; Plaks, ­Chinese Narrative; Plaks, Four Masterworks of the Ming Novel.

Introduction XCV

Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan Volume 1

隱公

Lord Yin (722–712 bce) Zuozhuan begins with a problematic succession, the first of many such episodes that point to the danger so often accompanying moments of political transition. Lord Yin, the first of the twelve Lu Lords, is the son of a secondary consort and rules for eleven years as a regent for his younger brother, the future Lord Huan. This situation must have created confusion, and in the end, the Lu minister Gongzi Hui decided that one of these two brothers had to be eliminated. Lord Yin refused to join a conspiracy against his younger sibling and was consequently killed. While several sections of Lord Yin are regularly anthologized (chief among these is the story of the conflict between Lord Zhuang of Zheng and his younger brother; see Yin 1.4), most of the accounts in these earliest years of Zuozhuan are relatively brief and do little more than comment upon or expand upon Annals entries. In so doing, some of the patterns of the Zuo commentary that persist throughout the text are established. Among these are simple statements of why a particular event took place (2.1, 2.6, 3.6, 5.6, 5.10, 7.4), explanations of the subtle praise and blame contained in ostensibly straightforward Annals lines (1.4, 3.2, 4.4), incorporation of Annals entries into much longer historical narratives (3.5, 4.5, 5.8), comments on the significance of what the Annals fails to record (1.1, 1.3, 1.6, 1.7, 7.1), judgments of ritual appropriateness (5.1, 8.5, 8.6), disquisitions on fine distinctions in wording (3.2, 9.1), and so forth. So while other sections of Zuozhuan might have greater literary merit, or are at least more expansive, careful reading of the Lord Yin section familiarizes the reader with many of the conventions that continue throughout the text. In general, the world of Zuozhuan broadens geographically as one reads on. Thus, the Lord Yin years are geographically constricted. The large outlying domains of Qin and Chu are not mentioned at all, and even the more centrally located domain of Jin plays a relatively minor

3

左傳



Preface

惠公元妃孟子。孟子卒，繼室以聲子，生隱公。宋武公生仲子。仲子生 而有文在其手，曰為魯夫人，故仲子歸于我。生桓公而惠公薨，是以隱 公立而奉之。

1

2

4

Meng Zi, Lord Hui’s first wife, was a daughter of the ruling clan of Song. Her name literally means “the eldest Zi,” Zi 子 being the name of the ruling clan. Zhong Zi, mentioned later in the story, was the second daughter of the Duke of Song. Sheng Zi was presumably a member of the Song ducal household who came to Lu as a member of Meng Zi’s entourage. Sheng Zi is an unusual name. Most consorts have names that include a birth sequence marker (e.g., Meng Zi), the name of their native domain or natal family, or their husband’s posthumous name (see introduction). Occasionally, a consort may have had a posthumous name of her own, and Sheng in the name Sheng Zi (which means something like “The Illustrious Zi”) might be such a case (see Yang, 1:2–3, 2:562). For other instances of lines on the palm of the hand announcing extraordinary destinies, see Min 2.4 and Zhao 1.12, 32.4b.

Zuo Tradition

role. Most of the following entries concern events in Lu, Qi, Song, Zheng, Wei, and a number of relatively small domains, all these located in the North China Plain largely between the Yellow and Huai Rivers. Among these domains, Zheng is particularly active, leading some Chinese scholars to refer to Lord Zhuang of Zheng (r. 743–701) as a “minor overlord,” a forerunner of such major overlords as Lord Huan of Qi (r. 685–643) and Lord Wen of Jin (r. 636–628). The shifting interdomain alliances of these years are not always easy to follow, in part because the narratives are so short, and we are sometimes left to guess why new alliances form or dissolve and why attacks are suddenly launched upon this or that domain.

LORD YIN ZUO

The following passage, which begins Zuozhuan, falls outside the regular annalistic structure of the text and therefore functions as something of a “preface.” Lord Hui had ruled the domain of Lu for more than four decades (768–722). The next two Lu rulers, lords Yin and Huan, were his sons. As this passage indicates, Lord Yin, the older of the two, was born of a lesser wife, while Lord Huan was the son of the Lady of Lu. Lord Hui’s first wife was Meng Zi. When Meng Zi had died, he raised to her place Sheng Zi, who bore Lord Yin.1 Lord Wu of Song fathered Zhong Zi. When Zhong Zi was born she had a design in the palm of her hand, which resembled written characters that said, “She will be the Lady of Lu.”2 That is why Zhong Zi came to us in marriage. Soon after she gave birth to Lord Huan, Lord Hui expired. Because of this, Lord Yin was established in power but served Lord Huan.3

3

Preface

Lord Yin supposedly was to act as regent until Lord Huan reached his majority. A quite different, somewhat more scandalous account appears in Shiji 33.1528–29: “Lord Hui’s main wife had no son, but the lord’s lowly concubine Sheng Zi gave birth to a son Xi [i.e., the future Lord Yin]. When Xi grew up, they found a wife for him in Song. The young woman of Song arrived and was lovely, so Lord Hui appropriated her and made her his own wife. She gave birth to a son Yun [the future Lord Huan]. He elevated the Song woman to be his main wife and took Yun as heir apparent. When Lord Hui died, because Yun was young, the Lu men were united in ordering Xi to act as regent. So we do not say ‘he acceded to his position.’” Similar stories of fathers appropriating brides intended for their sons are found at Huan 16.5 and Zhao 19.2.

Lord Yin

5

春秋 1.1(1) 元年，春，王正月。 1.2(2) 三月，公及邾儀父盟于蔑。 1.3(4) 夏，五月，鄭伯克段于鄢。 1.4(5) 秋，七月，天王使宰咺來歸惠公、仲子之賵。 1.5(8) 九月，及宋人盟于宿。 1.6(13) 冬，十有二月，祭伯來。 1.7(14) 公子益師卒。

左傳

1.1(1)

元年，春，王周正月，不書即位，攝也。

1.2(2) 三月，公及邾儀父盟于蔑，邾子克也。未王命，故不書爵。曰「儀父」，貴

之也。公攝位而欲求好於邾，故為蔑之盟。 1.3 夏，四月，費伯帥師城郎。不書，非公命也。

4

“Royal first month” refers to the calendar of the Zhou king, who in this case is King Ping 平王 (r. 770–720). Spring began with the first lunar month of the year, which in the Zhou calendar corresponds to the eleventh month of the current lunar calendar. Thus, as Yang (1:6) notes, “During the Yin and Zhou periods, spring corresponds to our winter.” Multiple year dates  (e.g., 722–711) are given without BCE, while single year dates will be marked BCE. 5 Zhu 邾 was a small domain of the Cao 曹 lineage originally located just southeast of present-day Qufu 曲阜 in Shandong. It later was relocated further to the south and was under the control of the domain of Lu (map 2). Mie 蔑 belonged to the domain of Lu and was located east of present-day Sishui County 泗水縣, Shandong. 6 Yan 鄢 was located north of present-day Yanling County 鄢陵縣, Henan. 7 In the Documents (Shu 書) the Zhou rulers are simply called “kings,” but in the Annals they are called “Heaven-appointed kings” (tian wang 天王). Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 4.76) claims that at a time when the rulers of Chu, Wu, Xu, and Yue

6

Zuo Tradition

LORD YIN 1 (722 BCE) ANNALS

The first year, spring, the royal first month.4

1.1(1)

In the third month, our lord and Zhu Yifu swore a covenant at Mie.5

1.2(2)

In summer, in the fifth month, the Liege of Zheng overcame Duan (Gongshu Duan) at Yan.6

1.3(4)

In autumn, in the seventh month, the Heaven-appointed king7 sent his steward Xuan to us to present the funeral equipment for Lord Hui and Zhong Zi.8

1.4(5)

In the ninth month, we swore a covenant with a Song leader at Su.9

1.5(8)

In winter, in the twelfth month, the Zhai Liege came.

1.6(13)

Gongzi Yishi died.

1.7(14)

ZUO

The following three short entries are the first of many passages in Zuozhuan that speculate as to why a particular event or a particular item of information is not recorded in the Annals. The first year, spring, the royal Zhou first month: the text does not record that he acceded to his position because he was acting as regent.

1.1(1)

In the third month, our lord and Zhu Yifu swore a covenant at Mie: Yifu was Ke, the Master of Zhu. But he did not yet have the king’s appointment. For this reason, it does not record his rank. That the text says “Yifu” is to honor him.10 Being in the position of regent, our lord wanted to seek good relations with Zhu. He therefore swore the covenant of Mie.

1.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, Qinfu of Bia led troops to fortify Lang.11 This is not recorded because it was not by our lord’s command.

1.3



called themselves “kings,” the sage wants to elevate Zhou kings by calling them “Heaven-appointed.” In Zuozhuan, the Zhou ruler is sometimes called “the Heavenappointed king,” sometimes “Son of Heaven” (tianzi 天子), and sometimes simply “the king.” 8 According to Yang (1:8), traditional funeral equipment ( feng 賵) included a chariot, horses, and silk. 9 Su 宿 was the name of a small domain slightly southeast of present-day Dongping County 東平縣, Shandong. 10 “Fu” 父, in the name Yifu, means literally “father” and was added to the names of males as both a gender indicator and an honorific. 11 Lang 郎 was located in the domain of Lu northeast of Yutai County 魚臺縣, Shandong.

Lord Yin

7

1.4a(3) 初，鄭武公娶于申，曰武姜，生莊公及共叔段。莊公寤生，驚姜氏，故名

曰寤生，遂惡之。愛共叔段，欲立之。亟請於武公，公弗許。及莊公即 位，為之請制。公曰：「制，巖邑也，虢叔死焉。佗邑唯命。」請京，使居 之，謂之京城大叔。 祭仲曰：「都，城過百雉，國之害也。先王之制：大都，不過參國之 一；中，五之一；小，九之一。今京不度，非制也，君將不堪。」公曰：「 姜 氏欲之，焉辟害？」 對曰：「姜氏何厭之有？不如早為之所，無使滋蔓！蔓，難圖也。蔓 草猶不可除，況君之寵弟乎？」公曰：「多行不義，必自斃，子姑待之。」

12 Shen 申 was a small domain of the Jiang 姜 lineage (the same lineage that ruled the larger domain of Qi) and was located near present-day Nanyang City 南陽市 in Henan. 13 Gong 共 is the name of the place to which Gongshu Duan will eventually flee. It was at this time a small domain, located near present-day Hui County 輝縣, Henan, and later became part of Wei (Min 2.5). “Shu” means “younger brother” and Duan is his given name. So he is literally “Duan the Younger Brother of Gong.” Later, he is referred to as “Senior Younger Brother” (taishu 大叔), that is, the oldest among Lord Zhuang’s younger brothers. 14 While most commentators interpret the passage in this way (see Karlgren, gl. 1), Du Yu reads it as “She woke up and Lord Zhuang was already born” (ZZ 2.35). Thus, Legge (5) translates: “Duke Zhuang was born as she was waking from sleep.” In the Shiji retelling of the story (42.1759), the birth of Lord Zhuang is simply described as “difficult.” Cf. Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:167–68.

8

Zuo Tradition

The next episode is a famous flashback narrative and describes events in the domain of Zheng during the reigns of Lord Wu (r. 770–744) and his son Lord Zhuang (r. 743–701) that led to the rebellion of Lord Zhuang’s younger brother Gongshu Duan. Earlier, Lord Wu of Zheng had taken a wife in Shen who was known as Wu Jiang.12 She bore Lord Zhuang and Gongshu Duan.13 Lord Zhuang was breech born, and Lady Jiang was shaken. For this reason, she named him Wusheng [Breech Born] and consequently hated him.14 She loved Gongshu Duan and wanted to establish him as heir. Time and again she asked this favor of Lord Wu, but the lord would not grant it. When Lord Zhuang acceded to his position, she requested the settlement of Zhi for Gongshu Duan. The lord said, “Zhi is a strategic place. Guo Shu died there.15 For any other place, you need only issue a command!” She requested Jing,16 and the lord sent Gongshu Duanb to live there, calling him “The Senior Younger Brother of the Walled City Jing.” Zhai Zhong said, “For the wall of an outlying city to exceed one hundred zhi is a danger for the capital.17 In the system of the former kings, large cities did not exceed one-third of the capital, middle-sized cities did not exceed one-fifth, and small cities, one-ninth. Now Jing, failing to conform to this standard, is not in accordance with the rules. You, my lord, will not be able to bear it.” The lord said, “Since Lady Jiang wanted this, how am I to avoid harm?” Zhai Zhong replied, “How will Lady Jiang ever be satisfied? It would be better to settle this matter right away. Do not encourage creeping vines to spread! Once they spread, they are difficult to control. If even creeping vines cannot be rooted out, then how much less the favored younger brother of a ruler?” The lord said, “If he repeatedly commits undutiful acts, he surely will bring himself down. For the time being, sir, just wait for this.”

1.4a(3)

Guo Shu appears in Guoyu, “Zheng yu,” 16.507. Guo 虢, in this name, refers to the small domain of Eastern Guo, Zhi 制 being a settlement originally belonging to this domain. Eastern Guo was supposedly attacked and destroyed by Lord Huan of Zheng, and it is to this event that the passage above presumably refers. 16 Jing 京 was located southeast of present-day Xingyang County 滎陽縣, Henan. 17 A zhi 雉 is a measure used for the height and length of a city wall. While some equate the length of a zhi with three zhang 丈 (one zhang = 231 cm), others argue that it is five zhang, or just over ten meters. If the latter is correct, then one hundred zhi would be 1.15 kilometers. Since the Chinese measure of distance li 里 is roughly one-third of a kilometer, Zhai Zhong’s statement accords well with Mencius’ indication that a city wall of three li constitutes a major city (Mencius 2B.1). For further information, see Takezoe, 1.21. 15

Lord Yin

9

1.4b 既而大叔命西鄙、北鄙貳於己。公子呂曰：「國不堪貳，君將若之何？欲

與大叔，臣請事之；若弗與，則請除之，無生民心。」公曰：「無庸，將自 及。」 大叔又收貳以為己邑，至于廩延。子封曰：「可矣。厚將得眾。」公 曰：「不義，不暱。厚將崩。」 大叔完聚，繕甲兵，具卒乘，將襲鄭，夫人將啟之。公聞其期，曰： 「可矣。」命子封帥車二百乘以伐京。京叛大叔段。段入于鄢。公伐諸 鄢。五月辛丑，大叔出奔共。 書曰：「鄭伯克段于鄢。」段不弟，故不言弟；如二君，故曰克；稱 鄭伯，譏失教也：謂之鄭志。不言出奔，難之也。

10

Zuo Tradition

Shortly thereafter, the Senior Younger Brother commanded the western and northern marches to switch their allegiance to him. Gongzi Lü said, “A domain cannot bear divided allegiance. What are you, my lord, going to do about this? If you want to give the domain to the Senior Younger Brother, then I beg to serve him. If you are not going to give it to him, then I beg to root him out so as not to arouse the people’s sentiments!” The lord said, “It is not necessary. He will come to an end by himself.”18 The Senior Younger Brother went on to gather the disloyal19 and make them into his own settlements, reaching as far as Linyan.20 Gongzi Lüa said, “Now we can act! If he gets any stronger, he will win the multitudes.” The lord said, “If he is not dutiful, the people will not be devoted to him. If he gets stronger, he will collapse.” The Senior Younger Brother reinforced walls, gathered provisions, repaired his armor and weapons, and prepared his infantry and chariots. He was going to make a surprise attack upon Zheng, and Lady Jiang was going to open the city gate for him. When the lord heard that a date had been set, he said, “Now we can act!” He commanded Gongzi Lüa to lead two hundred chariots to attack Jing. Jing turned against the Senior Younger Brother Duan, who entered Yan. The lord attacked him at Yan. In the fifth month, on the xinchou day (23), the Senior Younger Brother left Yan and fled to Gong. The text says, “The Liege of Zheng overcame Duanb at Yan.” Gongshu Duan did not behave like a younger brother, so it does not speak of a younger brother. They were like two rulers, so it says “overcame.” That it labels him “the Liege of Zheng” is to criticize his neglect of instruction:21 what happened is judged to have been Zheng’s intention.22 That the text does not say he left Yan and fled is to express disapproval of him.

18 19 20 21 22

1.4b

This idea of biding one’s time while an enemy multiplies his crimes appears elsewhere in Zuozhuan (see Xuan 15.2, Zhao 4.1, 11.2). This presumably refers to the leaders of local settlements who were asked to transfer allegiance from the legitimate ruler to the contender. The precise location of Linyan 廩延 is disputed, but Du Yu (ZZ 2.36) believes it was located north of present-day Yanjin County 延津縣, Henan. Zuozhuan attaches significance here to the fact that the Annals identifies Lord Zhuang by his title as a ruler rather than by his position as an older brother. That is, the Annals, subtly and properly read, implies that the Liege of Zheng, Lord Zhuang, intended all along to put his younger brother in a situation of conflict so that he could take military action against him. The reading of zhi 志 as “hidden intention” is echoed in Zhuang 7.1. But the word zhi can also mean “expressed intent,” as in Zhao 16.3. Cf. Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:172–73.

Lord Yin

11

1.4c 遂寘姜氏于城潁，而誓之曰：「不及黃泉，無相見也！」既而悔之。

潁考叔為潁谷封人，聞之，有獻於公。公賜之食。食舍肉。公問 之。對曰：「小人有母，皆嘗小人之食矣；未嘗君之羹，請以遺之。」公曰： 「爾有母遺，繄我獨無！」潁考叔曰：「敢問何謂也？」公語之故，且告之 悔。對曰：「君何患焉？若闕地及泉，隧而相見，其誰曰不然？」公從之。 公入而賦： 大隧之中， 其樂也融融。 姜出而賦： 大隧之外， 其樂也洩洩。 遂為母子如初。君子曰：「潁考叔，純孝也，愛其母，施及莊公。《詩》 曰： 孝子不匱， 永錫爾類。 其是之謂乎！」 23 Chengying 城潁 was located northwest of present-day Linying County 臨潁縣, Henan. “Yellow Springs” is a subterranean world where the spirits of the dead presumably go. 24 This passage is making use of the terminology and technology of tomb construction. Ramps into the tomb were open to the air in the case of Zhou kings but were covered tunnels in the case of the lords (see Yang’s commentary to Lord Xi 25.2, 1:432). 25 Both of these couplets rhyme in Old Chinese and follow the typical four-characterline pattern of the Odes. 26 This is the first of seventy-eight cases where a judgment by the “noble man” (junzi 君子) is quoted. On this feature, see the introduction and particularly Schaberg, “Platitude and Persona.” 27 Quoted from Maoshi 247, “Ji zui” 既醉, 17B.606. This is the first of many quotations of odes in Zuozhuan. The majority of such quotations are among the 305 canonical pieces included in the Odes. However, some quotations, in each case noted, are from pieces not included in the Odes. The latter are sometimes referred to as “lost odes” (yishi 逸詩) but might more properly be called “noncanonical odes” since they were not included in what was to become the canonical collection. On the use of quotations from the Odes in Zuozhuan, see, among other studies, Zhang Suqing, Zuozhuan chengshi yanjiu; Mao Zhenhua, Zuozhuan fushi yanjiu; Van Zoeren, Poetry and Personality; Wai-yee Li, “Poetry and Diplomacy in Zuozhuan”; and Schaberg, “Virtue and Talent.” 28 The “Mao Commentary” links three of the “Zheng Odes” to this story (Maoshi 76, “Qiang Zhongzi” 將仲子; 77, “Shu yu tian” 叔于田; and 78, “Taishu yu tian” 大叔于 田; see Maoshi zhengyi 4B.161–66). The “Mao Commentary” faults Lord Zhuang

12

Zuo Tradition

The rebellion having been successfully put down, attention now shifts to the rift between the lord and his mother. Here, as elsewhere in Zuozhuan (see, e.g., Huan 16.5 and Xi 4.6), we see just how far filial devotion extends. The wise officer Ying Kaoshu makes a proposal that enables the lord to keep his hasty oath while at the same time metaphorically restaging the birth scene in a way that, in this instance, brings harmony. Consequently, the lord placed Lady Jiang in Cheng­y ing and swore an oath: “Until we reach the Yellow Springs, we will not see each other!”23 Shortly thereafter he regretted this. Ying Kaoshu was the border officer in charge of Ying Valley. When he heard of these events, he offered gifts to the lord. The lord granted him a meal, but as Kaoshu ate, he put aside the meat. The lord asked about this, and Kaoshu responded, “Your humble servant has a mother. She has always partaken of my meals, but she has never tasted my lord’s stew. I request your permission to give some to her.” The lord said, “You have a mother to give things to. Alas, I alone have none!” Ying Kaoshu said, “Dare I ask what you mean?” The lord explained the circumstances to him and also admitted his regret. Kaoshu replied, “Why should you worry about this? If you dig into the earth as far as the springs and meet each other in the tunnel, who could say this goes against the vow?”24 The lord took his advice. On entering the tunnel, the lord recited,

1.4c

Within the great tunnel Our joy flows together.

On exiting the tunnel, Lady Jiang recited, Outside the great tunnel, Our joy spreads abroad.25

And consequently they were mother and son as at the beginning. The noble man said,26 “Ying Kaoshu was pure in his filial piety. He loved his mother and tendered his example to Lord Zhuang. As it says in the Odes, The filial son is unstinting, And forever blesses your kind.27

Surely this is what is meant!”28

for being indecisive: “He did not prevail over his mother and thereby harmed his younger brother. His younger brother neglected the proper way, and he did not control him. Zhai Zhong remonstrated but the lord did not listen to him. Failure to be ruthless in small matters leads to great disorder” (4B.161). The “Mao Commentary” also claims that Duan was well liked: “The younger brother was talented and fond of bravado. Though not dutiful, he gained [the support] of the multitudes” (4B.163). Maoshi 77, if read after the “Mao Commentary” as a description of Duan, turns the latter into a much-beloved people’s hero.

Lord Yin

13

1.5(4) 秋，七月，天王使宰咺來歸惠公、仲子之賵。緩，且子氏未薨，故名。

天子七月而葬，同軌畢至；諸侯五月，同盟至；大夫三月，同位至； 士踰月，外姻至。贈死不及尸，弔生不及哀，豫凶事，非禮也。 1.6 八月，紀人伐夷。夷不告，故不書。 1.7 有蜚。不為災，亦不書。 1.8(5) 惠公之季年，敗宋師于黃。公立而求成焉。九月，及宋人盟于宿，始通

也。

29 30

31

32

14

The implication is that this was an inappropriate action, and Steward Xuan’s name is thus provided as a form of blame. This is apparently a way of referring to the leaders of the central cultural region. The assumption, perhaps idealized, is that all the central domains used a common chariot axle length, thus facilitating travel from one domain to another. Legge (7) translates this as “all the princes with whom he had covenanted.” In calculating this “full month,” one does not count the month of death; the next month constitutes the “full month,” with the burial taking place in the following month. Yang (1:16) notes that this is equivalent to the “three months” specified in Liji 6.110. At least two of the three principles were violated in this case: the representative of the king, Steward Xuan, arrived after the body had been buried, and he “anticipated the unlucky event” by bringing funeral equipage for the Lady Zi, who had not yet died.

Zuo Tradition

The next episode returns us to the events in the domain of Lu subsequent to the death of Lord Hui (Yin “preface,” 1.9, 1.10). In autumn, in the seventh month, the Heaven-appointed king sent his steward Xuan to us to present the funeral equipment for Lord Hui and Zhong Zi. They were late in arriving, and Lady Zi also had not yet expired, and that is why the steward is named.29 The Son of Heaven is buried after seven months, leaders of the same axle standard attending;30 a prince after five months, those joined with him in covenants attending; a high officer after three months, those of the same rank attending; and a regular officer after a full month,31 his relatives by marriage attending. To fail to give gifts for the dead while the body is still lying in state, to fail to express condolences to the living while they are still in mourning, and to anticipate the unlucky event were not in accordance with ritual propriety.32

1.5(4)

The following two events presume knowledge of specific events in the earliest year of the Spring and Autumn period not recorded in the Annals. This of course raises the problematic question of other records or traditions to which the Zuozhuan compilers might have had access. In the eighth month, the men of Ji attacked the Yi.33 The Yi did not report the attack, and that is why it is not recorded.

1.6

There were locusts. It did not become a disaster, so it also is not recorded.

1.7

Despite the following covenant between Lu and Song, Lu’s relationship with its neighbor to the southwest will remain difficult, as they later refuse to rescue Song (Yin 5.8), break off the exchange of envoys (Yin 9.3), and defeat Song in several battles (Yin 10.3, Huan 13.1, etc.). In the last year of Lord Hui’s life, he defeated Song troops at Huang.34 When Lord Yin was established as ruler, he sought an accord with Song. In the ninth month, we swore a covenant with a Song leader at Su: this was the beginning of relations with them.

1.8(5)

33 Ji 紀 was the name of a small domain of the Jiang 姜 lineage. It was located just to the south of present-day Shouguang County 壽廣縣 (map 2). The Yi people are sometimes contrasted with the Hua 華, a term for the people of the central domains. The name “Yi” was at times used for widely distributed groups, with the particular group mentioned above dwelling in the Shandong area. Later, the Yi were routinely identified with the east. 34 Huang 黃 was located in the domain of Song just east of present-day Minquan County 民權縣, Henan.

Lord Yin

15

1.9 冬，十月庚申，改葬惠公。公弗臨，故不書。惠公之薨也，有宋師，大子

少，葬故有闕，是以改葬。 1.10 衛侯來會葬，不見公，亦不書。 1.11 鄭共叔之亂，公孫滑出奔衛。衛人為之伐鄭，取廩延。鄭人以王師、虢

師伐衛南鄙。請師於邾，邾子使私於公子豫。豫請往，公弗許，遂行， 及邾人、鄭人盟于翼。不書，非公命也。 1.12 新作南門，不書，亦非公命也。 1.13(6) 十二月，祭伯來，非王命也。 1.14(7) 眾父卒，公不與小斂，故不書日。

16

Zuo Tradition

The future Lord Huan, we learn below, had already been designated “heir apparent.” Lord Yin presumably does not attend the reburial of his father because of his somewhat ambiguous position as regent/usurper. In winter, in the tenth month, on the gengshen day (14), Lord Hui was reburied. Our lord did not attend, and that is why it is not recorded. When Lord Hui expired, there was conflict with Song troops, and the heir apparent was still young, so there were omissions in the burial protocol. It was for this reason he was reburied. The Prince of Wei came to participate in the burial ceremony, but he did not meet with our lord, so it also is not recorded.

1.9

1.10

Zuozhuan returns to the aftermath of Gongshu Duan’s rebellion in the domain of Zheng (Yin 1.4). During the rebellion of Gongshu Duana in Zheng, Gongsun Hua left Zheng and fled to Wei.35 For his sake the Wei leaders attacked Zheng and seized Linyan. The Zheng leaders took troops from the king and troops from the domain of Guo to attack Wei’s southern marches. Zheng requested troops from Zhu, and the Master of Zhu sent a private message to Gongzi Yu.36 Yu asked permission to go, but our lord would not allow it. Yu subsequently departed and swore a covenant with a Zhu leader and a Zheng leader at Yi.37 This is not recorded because it was not by our lord’s command.

1.11

The southern gate was built anew. This is not recorded because it also was not by our lord’s command.

1.12

In the twelfth month, the Zhai Liege came: this was contrary to the king’s command.

1.13(6)

Some commentators suggest that Lord Yin does not participate in the burial ritual of a minister, just as he did not participate in the reburial of his father (Yin 1.9), to exhibit humility over the fact that he is a regent rather than the legitimate successor (see Yang, 1:19). When Gongzi Yishia died, our lord did not participate in the dressing of the body, and that is why the text does not record the day.

1.14(7)

35

Gongsun Hua was the son of Gongshu Duan and, as his name indicates, the grandson of Lord Wu of Zheng. 36 Gongzi Yu was a high officer in the domain of Lu. Lu thus becomes involved in the event through the unauthorized participation of one of its high officials. Note, however, that Lu did have an alliance with Zhu (Yin 1.2). 37 Yi 翼 belonged to the domain of Zhu and was located southwest of present-day Huang County 黃縣, Shandong.

Lord Yin

17

春秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，公會戎于潛。 2.2(2) 夏，五月，莒人入向。 2.3(3) 無駭帥師入極。 2.4(4) 秋，八月庚辰，公及戎盟于唐。 2.5(5) 九月，紀裂繻來逆女。 2.6 冬，十月，伯姬歸于紀。 2.7(6) 紀子帛、莒子盟于密。 2.8 十有二月，乙卯，夫人子氏薨。 2.9(8) 鄭人伐衛。

左傳 2.1(1) 二年，春，公會戎于潛，修惠公之好也。戎請盟，公辭。 2.2(2) 莒子娶于向，向姜不安莒而歸。夏，莒人入向，以姜氏還。 2.3(3) 司空無駭入極，費庈父勝之。

38 Qian 潛 was located near present-day Jining City 濟寧市, Shandong. 39 Ju 莒 was a small domain of the Ji 己 lineage and was located near present-day Ju County 莒縣 in Shandong (map 2). Xiang 向 was located just to the south of Ju. 40 Jí 極 was a small domain subordinate to Lu and located south of Jinxiang County 金鄉縣 in Shandong. 41 The eighth month in this year did not contain a gengchen day. 42 Tang 棠 was located in the domain of Lu and is identified with present-day Yucheng Town 魚城鎮, north of Yutai County 魚臺縣, Shandong. 43 The bride in question is Bo Ji. The character ni 逆 appears periodically in the Annals and Zuozhuan in reference to a ceremony in which the ruler or his designated high officials go out to the border to meet and escort back a ruler’s future wife. Lord Wen 4.4 specifies that it is contrary to ritual for this to be done by those below the rank of “minister” (qing 卿). Since Zuozhuan does not criticize this particular instance as “contrary to ritual,” it must consider Ji Liexu to be a minister. 44 Bo Ji is the eldest daughter of the deceased Lord Hui of Lu. She is the same woman referred to in the Annals, Yin 2.5. 45 Du Yu (ZZ 2.41) argues that Ji Zibo and Ji Liexu are the same person, a position Yang (1:21) supports. Mi 密 was in the domain of Ju and located east of present-day Changyi County 昌邑縣, Shandong.

18

Zuo Tradition

LORD YIN 2 (721 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, our lord met with the Rong at Qian.38

2.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, a Ju leader entered Xiang.39

2.2(2)

Wuhai led out troops and entered Jí.

2.3(3)

40

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the gengchen day,41 our lord and the Rong swore a covenant at Tang.42

2.4(4)

In the ninth month, Ji Liexu came to meet and escort home a bride.43

2.5(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, Bo Ji went to marry in Ji.44

2.6

Zibo of Ji (Ji Liexu) and the Master of Ju swore a covenant at Mi.

45

In the twelfth month, on the yimao day (15), our lord’s wife, Lady Zi, expired. A Zheng leader attacked Wei.

2.7(6) 2.8

2.9(8)

ZUO

In the second year, in spring, our lord met with the Rong at Qian:46 this was to restore the good relations that prevailed in the time of Lord Hui. The Rong asked for a covenant, but our lord declined.

2.1(1)

The flight of a wife provokes military action that returns her to her husband, the Master of Ju. The Master of Ju took a wife in Xiang. Xiang Jiang, his wife, did not feel at home in Ju and returned home. In summer, a Ju leader entered Xiang and returned with the Lady Jiang.47

2.2(2)

The supervisor of works, Wuhai, entered Jí. Qinfu of Bia conquered it.48

2.3(3)

46

47 48

The Rong 戎 are a group of people usually identified as non-Sinitic—that is, as not belonging to the central “Chinese” culture. Like many such designations, however, the term is a vague one. As Tong Shuye says, “the peoples named ‘Rong’ in the Annals and Zuozhuan are quite numerous” (see discussion in Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 252–54). This particular group obviously lived close to the region of Lu. In Yin 9.5 below, we encounter a group named the “Northern Rong,” who presumably lived to the north of Jin and Qi. Other groups of Rong are met with here and there throughout the years that follow. From later Zuozhuan entries, it appears that Xiang was a part of the domain of Ju after this time, so it is possible that this action resulted in the wholesale assimilation of Xiang into Ju. This is somewhat obscure. The Lu official Wuhai’s entry into Jí seems to have provoked Qinfu of Bi, another Lu official, to undertake a military expedition against this city. This is the first instance of the use of the word “enter” (ru 入), which implies aggression and military intervention.

Lord Yin

19

2.4(4) 戎請盟。秋，盟于唐，復修戎好也。 2.5(5) 九月，紀裂繻來逆女，卿為君逆也。 2.6(7) 冬，紀子帛、莒子盟于密，魯故也。 2.7(9) 鄭人伐衛，討公孫滑之亂也。

春秋 3.1 三年，春，王二月己巳，日有食之。 3.2(1) 三月，庚戌，天王崩。 3.3(2) 夏，四月辛卯，君氏卒。 3.4(4) 秋，武氏子來求賻。 3.5(5) 八月庚辰，宋公和卒。 3.6(6) 冬，十有二月，齊侯、鄭伯盟于石門。 3.7 癸未，葬宋穆公。

20

Zuo Tradition

The Rong requested a covenant. In autumn, we swore a covenant at Tang: this was to restore good relations with the Rong.

2.4(4)

In the ninth month, Ji Liexu came to meet and escort home a bride: the minister greeted and escorted her on the ruler’s behalf.

2.5(5)

In winter, Ji Liexua and the Master of Ju swore a covenant at Mi: this was because of Lu.49

2.6(7)

The short note below returns us to the conflict between Zheng and Wei precipitated by the flight of Gongshu Duan’s son, Gongsun Hua, to the domain of Wei (Yin 1.11). A Zheng leader attacked Wei: this was to chastise Gongsun Hua for the unrest.

2.7(9)

LORD YIN 3 (720 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the jisi day (1), there was an eclipse of the sun.50 In the third month, on the gengxu day (12), the Heaven-appointed king succumbed. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinmao day (24), the ruler’s lady died. In autumn, a son of the Wu lineage came to seek burial gifts.51 In the eighth month, on the gengchen day (15), He, the Duke of Song, died.52 In winter, in the twelfth month, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Shimen.53 On the guiwei day (12), Lord Mu of Song was buried.

3.1

3.2(1)

3.3(2)

3.4(4) 3.5(5)

3.6(6)

3.7

49

This particular covenant was undertaken “because of Lu” in the sense that Ji wished to improve relations between Lu and Ju (Yang, 1:21). 50 A full eclipse of the sun did occur in this part of China on 22 February 720 Bce. This is the first of thirty-six eclipses recorded in the Annals. 51 The Wu lineage leader was a Zhou minister and was seeking burial gifts for the recently deceased King Ping of Zhou (r. 770–720). 52 Known posthumously as Lord Mu of Song (r. 728–720). 53 Shimen 石門 was located southwest of present-day Changqing County 長清縣, Shandong.

Lord Yin

21

左傳 3.1(2) 三年，春，王三月壬戌，平王崩。赴以庚戌，故書之。

－－聲子也。不赴於諸侯，不反哭于寢，不祔于姑，故不曰 「 薨」。不稱夫人，故不言葬，不書姓。為公故，曰「君氏」。

3.2(3) 夏，君氏卒

3.3 鄭武公、莊公為平王卿士。王貳于虢。鄭伯怨王。王曰：「無之。」故周、

鄭交質。王子狐為質於鄭，鄭公子忽為質於周。王崩，周人將畀虢公 政。四月，鄭祭足帥師取溫之麥。秋，又取成周之禾。周、鄭交惡。

54 55

56

57

22

For some unknown reason, the messengers gave the wrong date. The Zuozhuan compilers apparently had a different source for this date. The term junshi 君氏, “ruler’s wife,” does not appear elsewhere in Zuozhuan. The “stepmother” in question is Zhong Zi, the mother of Lord Huan and the wife of Lord Yin’s father, Lord Hui. Thus, Sheng Zi was not accorded the funeral ritual that was normal for the mother of the lord. The sections of Zuozhuan commenting on the phrasing of the Annals often make much of the precise word used for “to die.” We have so far seen three such words, which from the least to the most prestigious are zu 卒, hong 薨, and beng 崩, “to die,” “to expire,” and “to succumb.” Normally, the mother of a lord would “expire” (hong) and not “die” (zu). During the early Spring and Autumn period, the leaders of the territorial domains of Zheng and Guo typically acted simultaneously as high ministers in the Zhou court. The word used here, er 貳, which we have translated in this context as “to make a second commitment,” is usually used to describe disloyalty, as in the case of the rebellious Gongshu Duan above (Yin 1.4). That the word is used in this passage to describe the Zhou king may say something about how the Zuozhuan author/ compiler saw Zhou as an agent in history in contradistinction to Zhou as an ideal. Gu Yanwu faulted the treatment of Zhou here as if it were just another domain and claimed this reflected the Zuozhuan compiler’s “profound ignorance of the Annals’ principles” (Rizhi lu jishi, 4.91). Exchanging hostages is a method of assuring that neither will act against the other’s interests. However, the usefulness of this practice will be called into question in this passage.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The long reign of King Ping of Zhou (r. 770–720) comes to an end. In the third year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the renxu day (24), King Ping succumbed. In sending notice of death, they said it was the gengxu day,54 and that is why they recorded that date.

3.1(2)

Sheng Zi, the mother of Lord Yin, dies the year after Zhong Zi, the mother of the future Lord Huan, dies (Annals, Yin 2.8). In summer, the ruler’s lady died: this was Sheng Zi. Our lord did not send notice of death to the princes, he did not wail at the Ancestral Temple upon returning from her funeral, and he did not place her spirit tablet next to his stepmother’s. That is why it does not say “expired.” She was not called “the lord’s wife.” That is why it does not speak of her burial and does not record her clan name. But on account of the lord, she is called “the ruler’s lady.”55

3.2(3)

Zheng had enjoyed a privileged relationship with King Ping of Zhou, but with King Ping’s death (Yin 3.1), the domain of Guo threatens Zheng’s status. The noble man, in one of the longer quotations of this sort in Zuozhuan, argues that any exchange of hostages indicates that “good faith” is lacking. Lord Wu and Lord Zhuang of Zheng were ministers under King Ping. The king made a second commitment to the domain of Guo.56 The Liege of Zheng was vexed with the king, but the king said, “There is no such commitment.” Zhou and Zheng therefore exchanged hostages.57 Wangzi Hu became a hostage in Zheng, and Gongzi Hu of Zheng became a hostage in Zhou. After the king succumbed, the Zhou leaders were going to let Jifu, the Guo Dukea, have charge of the administration. In the fourth month, Zhai Zhonga of Zheng led troops and took the wheat of Wen. In autumn, they also took the grains of Chengzhou.58 Zhou and Zheng hated each other.

3.3

58 Wen 溫 and Chengzhou 成周 were both part of the Zhou domain. Zheng is lashing out against Zhou for the latter’s new association with Guo. Wen belonged to the royal Zhou domain and was located south of present-day Wen County 溫縣, Henan. Chengzhou was the capital of the Eastern Zhou and was located just east of presentday Loyang City 洛陽市, Henan (see map 3).

Lord Yin

23

君子曰：「信不由中，質無益也。明恕而行，要之以禮，雖無有質， 誰能間之？苟有明信，澗、溪、沼、沚之毛，蘋、蘩、薀、藻之菜，筐、筥、 錡、釜之器，潢、汙、行、潦之水，可薦於鬼神，可羞於王公，而況君子結 二國之信，行之以禮，又焉用質？風有〈采蘩〉、〈采蘋〉，雅有〈行葦〉、 〈泂酌〉，昭忠信也。」 3.4(4) 武氏子來求賻，王未葬也。 3.5(5) 宋穆公疾，召大司馬孔父而屬殤公焉，曰：「先君舍與夷而立寡人，寡人

弗敢忘。若以大夫之靈，得保首領以沒；先君若問與夷，其將何辭以 對？請子奉之，以主社稷。寡人雖死，亦無悔焉。」 對曰：「群臣願奉馮也。」公曰：「不可。先君以寡人為賢，使主社 稷。若棄德不讓，是廢先君之舉也，豈曰能賢？光昭先君之令德，可不 務乎？吾子其無廢先君之功！」使公子馮出居於鄭。八月，庚辰，宋穆公 卒，殤公即位。

Maoshi 13, “Cai fan” 采蘩, 1C.46–47; 15, “Cai pin” 采蘋, 1D.52; 246, “Xing wei” 行葦, 17B.600; and 251, “Dong zhuo” 洞酌, 17C.622, respectively. All these odes supposedly reflect the very virtues of loyalty and good faith that the noble man here commends. “Airs” ( feng 風) and “Elegantiae” (ya 雅) refer to sections in the Odes. 60 Kongfu is particularly significant because he is said to be the direct ancestor of Confucius; see Fu Qian’s commentary cited by Du Yu (Zhao 7.13; Yang, 4:1295). 61 The descendants of the former Shang dynasty had been settled in the domain of Song. We may see here a reflection of a Shang tradition in which younger brothers rather than sons sometimes succeeded to the rulership. 62 For other examples of this expression, see Xuan 13.4 and Zhao 25.8. 63 Gongzi Ping, Lord Mu’s son, later becomes Lord Zhuang of Song (Huan 2.1; Yang, 1:85). The posthumous name “Shang” 殤 is inauspicious and often given to those who die young. Lord Shang is murdered in Huan 2.1 below and is also criticized for a reign that saw eleven battles in ten years. This makes the noble man’s paean to Lord Xuan all the more ironic. Lord Xuan and Lord Mu are praised for yielding power (rang 讓) to a rightful heir and bypassing their own sons, but these acts of supposed disinterestedness only result in chaos in Song. 59

24

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “If good faith does not spring from within, then hostages are of no benefit. But if parties act with exemplary forbearance and restrain themselves with ritual propriety, then even without hostages, who could come between them? If only there is exemplary good faith, then even the vegetation along creeks, brooks, ponds, and pools, such plants as duckweed, white southernwood, and bunches of algae, such vessels as square bamboo baskets, round bamboo baskets, pots, and pans, and water from lakes and puddles in the road can be offered to ghosts and spirits and presented to kings and lords. How much less would one have need of hostages when noble men make a bond of good faith between their two domains and carry out this bond on the basis of ritual? In the ‘Airs’ of the Odes, there are ‘Gathering Artemisia’ and ‘Gathering Duckweed,’ and in the ‘Elegantiae,’ there are ‘Wayside Reeds’ and ‘At the Wayside Pool,’ to display loyalty and good faith.”59 A son of the Wu lineage came to seek burial gifts: the king had not yet been buried.

3.4(4)

Lord Xuan of Song (r. 747–729) had passed control of the domain not to his own son but to his younger brother, who became Lord Mu (r. 728–720). In the following passage, Lord Mu reciprocates by recommending Lord Xuan’s son Yuyi, who will be posthumously honored as Lord Shang, over his own son Ping as the next ruler. Lord Mu of Song fell ill. He summoned Kongfu,60 the grand supervisor of the military, and entrusted Lord Shang to him, saying, “The previous ruler set Yuyi aside and established me as ruler, the unworthy one. I dare not forget this.61 If, by means of the numinous power of the high officer, I manage to die with my head upon my shoulders,62 then should the former ruler ask about Yuyi, with what words of explanation could I answer? I request that you respectfully serve him as he rules over the altars of the domain. Then, even though I die, I would have no regret about this.” Kongfu responded, “Your subjects wish to serve Gongzi Ping.” The lord said, “This cannot be. The former ruler considered me, the unworthy one, worthy and made me rule over the altars of the domain. If I were to cast virtue aside and not yield to his son, it would render meaningless the choice of the former ruler. How could I be called a man of competence and worth? Can we not make a great effort to glorify the former ruler’s exemplary virtue? My good sir, let us not reject the merit of the former ruler!” They sent Gongzi Ping out of the domain to reside in Zheng. In the eighth month, on the gengchen day, Lord Mu of Song died, and Lord Shang acceded to his position.63

3.5(5)

Lord Yin

25

君子曰：「宋宣公可謂知人矣。立穆公，其子饗之，命以義夫！商 頌曰： 殷受命咸宜， 百祿是荷。 其是之謂乎！」 3.6(6) 冬，齊、鄭盟于石門，尋盧之盟也。庚戌，鄭伯之車僨于濟。 3.7 衛莊公娶于齊東宮得臣之妹，曰莊姜，美而無子，衛人所為賦〈碩人〉

也。又娶于陳，曰厲媯，生孝伯，早死。其娣戴媯，生桓公，莊姜以為 己子。 公子州吁，嬖人之子也。有寵而好兵，公弗禁。莊姜惡之。石碏諫 曰：「臣聞愛子，教之以義方，弗納於邪。驕、奢、淫、泆，所自邪也。四 者之來，寵祿過也。將立州吁，乃定之矣；若猶未也，階之為禍。夫寵而 不驕，驕而能降，降而不憾，憾而能眕者，鮮矣。且夫賤妨貴，少陵長， 遠間親，新間舊，小加大，淫破義，所謂六逆也；君義，臣行，父慈，子 孝，兄愛，弟敬，所謂六順也。去順效逆，所以速禍也。君人者，將禍是 務去，而速之，無乃不可乎？」

A passage found in Maoshi 303, “Xuan niao” 玄鳥, 20C.792. Much of this story is repeated in Shiji 38.1623. The noble man also enters that account to render a judgment, albeit in slightly different words. 66 There was no gengxu day in the twelfth month, which is the month in which the Annals says that Lu and Zheng entered into the Shimen covenant. 67 The reason for noting the Liege of Zheng’s accident is difficult to fathom. Du Yu adds that this happened “because he encountered a storm” (ZZ 3.52). 68 “Recited” in this case can also be rendered as “composed.” The “Mao Commentary” links two odes to this event. The first, Maoshi 56, “Kao pan” 考槃, 3B.128, is supposedly directed at Lord Zhuang of Wei, who “was not able to continue the calling of the former lords and caused a worthy to retire and live in poverty.” The second, Maoshi 57, “Shuo ren” 碩人, 3B.129 (translated here as “The Great Lady”), “expresses sympathy for Zhuang Jiang.” The commentator says, “Lord Zhuang was misled by a favored concubine and allowed her to become arrogant and to slander superiors. Zhuang Jiang was worthy . . . but in the end she did not have sons. The people of the domain sympathized with and grieved for her.” Lienü zhuan (1.11–12) tells a different story: Zhuang Jiang starts off as a frivolous woman interested only in adornment, but her Qi instructress brings her back to the right path by composing “The Great Lady.” 69 It was common for a younger sister, in this case Dai Gui, to be sent along with the main bride as a secondary wife. 70 Karlgren (gl. 8) takes this somewhat differently: “Those who, when indignant, can be calmly dignified are few.” 64 65

26

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “Lord Xuan of Song can be said to be a wise judge of others! He established Lord Mu as ruler, and his son enjoyed in turn the offerings for a ruler. His command was indeed based upon dutifulness, was it not? The ‘Shang Hymn’ says, When the Yin rulers passed on the Mandate, it was always proper, And all the blessings they then did bear.64

Surely this is what is meant!”65 In winter, Qi and Zheng swore a covenant at Shimen: this was to renew the covenant of Lú. On the gengxu day,66 the chariot of the Liege of Zheng tipped over into the Ji River.67

3.6(6)

Succession in the domain of Wei is now complicated by the ruler’s indulgence of the child of a favorite, and a loyal minister, Shi Que, remonstrates (Yin 4.1, 4.3, 4.5). Lord Zhuang of Wei took as wife the younger sister of Dechen, the heir apparent of the domain of Qi. Known as Zhuang Jiang, she was beautiful but had no sons. It was for her that the people of Wei recited the ode “The Great Lady.”68 The lord next took a wife in Chen known as Li Gui. She gave birth to Xiaobo, but he died young. Her younger sister, Dai Gui, gave birth to Lord Huan, whom Zhuang Jiang took as her own son.69 Zhouxua was the child of a favorite. He had the lord’s favor and was fond of weaponry, and the lord did not restrain him. Zhuang Jiang hated him. Shi Que remonstrated: “I have heard that if one loves a son, one teaches him the ways of duty and does not allow him to stray into deviant paths. Pride, wastefulness, lewdness, and dissipation are origins of deviance. These four come when favor and reward are excessive. If you are going to establish Zhouxu as heir, then settle it now! If you are not ready to do this, then you are building steps to disaster. Few indeed are those who are indulged but do not become prideful; are prideful but able to step down; are able to step down but not be indignant; are indignant but able to keep within boundaries!70 Moreover, for the lowly to hinder the honored, for the young to insult the old, for the distant to come between kin, for the new to come between those with old ties, for the small to lord it over the great, for the lewd to destroy the dutiful, these are called the six violations. For rulers to be dutiful, for subjects to fulfill their tasks, for fathers to be kind, for sons to be filial, for older brothers to show love, and for younger brothers to be respectful, these are called the six compliances. To reject the compliances and follow the violations is the way to hasten disaster. One who rules over men should devote himself to forestalling disaster; is it not then unacceptable that he should instead hasten it?”

3.7

Lord Yin

27



弗聽。其子厚與州吁游，禁之，不可。桓公立，乃老。

春秋 4.1 四年，春，王二月，莒人伐杞，取牟婁。 4.2(2) 戊申，衛州吁弒其君完。 4.3(2) 夏，公及宋公遇于清。 4.4(3) 宋公、陳侯、蔡人、衛人伐鄭。 4.5(4) 秋，翬帥師會宋公、陳侯、蔡人、衛人伐鄭。 4.6(5) 九月，衛人殺州吁于濮。 4.7(6) 冬，十有二月，衛人立晉。

左傳 4.1(2) 四年，春，衛州吁弒桓公而立。 4.2(3) 公與宋公為會，將尋宿之盟。未及期，衛人來告亂。夏，公及宋公遇

于清。

28

Zuo Tradition

The lord did not heed this. Shi Que’s son, Shi Houa, kept company with Zhouxu. Shi Que forbad this, but his son refused. When Lord Huan was established as ruler, Shi Que retired on account of age. LORD YIN 4 (719 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal second month, a Ju leader attacked Qǐ and took Moulou.71

4.1

On the wushen day,72 Zhouxu of Wei assassinated his ruler Wan.

4.2(2)

In summer, our lord met up with the Duke of Song at Qing.

4.3(2)

The Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, a Cai leader, and a Wei leader attacked Zheng.

4.4(3)

In autumn, Hui (Gongzi Hui) led out troops; met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, a Cai leader, and a Wei leader; and attacked Zheng.

4.5(4)

In the ninth month, Wei leaders put Zhouxu to death at Pu.74

4.6(5)

In winter, in the twelfth month, Wei leaders instated Jin.

4.7(6)

73

75

ZUO

The Wei ruler’s indulgence of Zhouxu, described in the previous Zuozhuan episode (Yin 3.7), leads to assassination and rebellion (Yin 4.3, 4.5). In the fourth year, in spring, Zhouxu of Wei assassinated Lord Huan and was established as ruler.

4.1(2)

Our lord arranged for a meeting with the Duke of Song and was going to renew the covenant of Su. But before the appointed meeting time, the men of Wei came to announce the unrest in Wei. In summer, our lord met up with the Duke of Song at Qing.

4.2(3)

71 Qǐ 杞 was a small domain of the Si 姒 line and was located, at this time, near presentday Anqiu County 安丘縣 (map 2). Moulou 牟婁 was located in the small domain of Ju in present-day Zhucheng County 諸城縣, Shandong. 72 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no wushen day in the second month of this year. 73 Du Yu (ZZ 3.55) notes that “meeting up” (yu 遇) involves less ritual formality than the more frequent “meeting” (hui 會). Qing 清 was in the domain of Wei south of present-day Dong’e County 東阿縣, Shandong. 74 Pu 濮 was located southeast of present-day Bo County 亳縣, Anhui. 75 Jin, known in history as Lord Xuan, ruled over Wei in the years 718–700.

Lord Yin

29

4.3(4) 宋殤公之即位也，公子馮出奔鄭。鄭人欲納之。及衛州吁立，將修先君

之怨於鄭，而求寵於諸侯，以和其民。使告於宋曰：「君若伐鄭，以除君 害，君為主，敝邑以賦與陳、蔡從，則衛國之願也。」 宋人許之。於是陳、蔡方睦於衛，故宋公、陳侯、蔡人、衛人伐鄭， 圍其東門，五日而還。 公問於眾仲曰：「衛州吁其成乎？」對曰：「臣聞以德和民，不聞以 亂。以亂，猶治絲而棼之也。夫州吁，阻兵而安忍。阻兵，無眾；安忍，無 親。眾叛、親離，難以濟矣。夫兵，猶火也；弗戢，將自焚也。夫州吁弒 其君，而虐用其民，於是乎不務令德，而欲以亂成，必不免矣。」 4.4(5) 秋，諸侯復伐鄭。宋公使來乞師，公辭之。羽父請以師會之，公弗許。固

請而行。故書曰「翬帥師」，疾之也。諸侯之師敗鄭徒兵，取其禾而還。

76 77 78

30

He is, of course, referring to Gongzi Ping of Song, who was a rival to Lord Shang and had fled to Zheng. Shiji 37.1592 adds to this account by saying that sometime earlier Zhouxu had “sought to become friends” with Gongshu Duan and that his attack on Zheng was undertaken on behalf of Duan. The point of mentioning the defeat of the infantry seems to be to indicate that this battle involved no loss of chariots and hence was not a serious blow to the domain of Zheng.

Zuo Tradition

Three strands of narrative converge as Zhouxu (Yin 3.7, 4.1) tries to take advantage of the displaced Gongzi Ping of Song (Yin 3.5) to repay Wei’s grudge against Zheng (Yin 1.11, 2.7). When Lord Shang of Song acceded to his position, Gongzi Ping left Song and fled to Zheng. The Zheng leaders wanted to install him in power in Song. When Zhouxu of Wei was established as ruler, he was going to foster the resentment the former Wei rulers had held against Zheng and seek favor among the princes as a way to pacify his own people. He sent someone to proclaim in Song as follows: “If you, my lord, were to attack Zheng, so as to remove the threat you face,76 then you will be the leader, and our humble settlement will contribute troops and join forces with Chen and Cai to follow you. This is what the domain of Wei wishes!” The Song leaders agreed to this. Precisely at this time, Chen and Cai were on friendly terms with Wei, and that is why the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, a Cai leader, and a Wei leader attacked Zheng. They laid siege to the eastern gate of the capital, but after five days they returned home.77 Our lord asked Zhong Zhong, “Do you suppose that Zhouxu of Wei will succeed?” He responded, “I have heard of pacifying the people through virtue, but I have not heard of doing so through disorder. To do so through disorder is like trying to unsnarl silk threads and entangling them further. Zhouxu depends upon weaponry and is comfortable with cruelty. If he depends upon weaponry, he will not have the support of the multitude. If he is comfortable with cruelty, he will not have close associates. When the people turn against him and his close associates are alienated, it will be difficult to succeed! Now, weapons are the same as fire. If one does not contain it, one will be consumed oneself. Zhouxu assassinated his ruler and has cruelly used his people. If at this crucial juncture, he does not strive for exemplary virtue but wishes to succeed through disorder, he surely will not escape calamity!”

4.3(4)

The Lu minister Gongzi Hui disobeys his ruler and leads troops against Zheng. His impetuosity will be seen again in a later episode (Yin 10.2). In autumn, the princes again attacked Zheng. The Duke of Song sent someone to us to plead for troops. Our lord courteously declined. Gongzi Huia asked to lead troops and meet up with Song, but our lord would not allow it. He was insistent in his request and then departed on his own. Thus, that the text says, “Hui led out troops,” is to criticize him. The troops of the princes defeated the infantry of Zheng,78 seized their grains, and returned home.

4.4(5)

Lord Yin

31

4.5(6) 州吁未能和其民，厚問定君於石子。石子曰：「王覲為可。」曰：「何以得

覲？」曰：「陳桓公方有寵於王。陳、衛方睦，若朝陳使請，必可得也。」 厚從州吁如陳。石碏使告于陳曰：「衛國褊小，老夫耄矣，無能為 也。此二人者，實弒寡君，敢即圖之。」陳人執之，而請蒞于衛。九月，衛 人使右宰醜蒞殺州吁于濮。石碏使其宰獳羊肩蒞殺石厚于陳。 君子曰：「石碏，純臣也。惡州吁而厚與焉。『大義滅親』，其是之 謂乎！」 4.6(7) 衛人逆公子晉于邢。冬，十二月，宣公即位。書曰「衛人立晉」，眾也。

春秋 5.1(1) 五年，春，公矢魚于棠。 5.2(3) 夏，四月，葬衛桓公。 5.3(6) 秋，衛師入郕。 5.4(7) 九月，考仲子之宮。初獻六羽。

79 80 81

32

Tong Shuye (Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 46) argues that Shi Que’s advice indicates that the Zhou king still possessed considerable moral authority over the lords. This becomes a common proverb. Both the Guliang, Yin 5 (2.21), and the Gongyang, Yin 5 (3.34), commentaries have guan 觀, “to inspect,” instead of shi 矢. Some have suggested that the latter be taken in the meaning of “arrow” and understood as she 射, “to shoot”: “the lord shot fish

Zuo Tradition

Zhouxu’s brief control of Wei comes to an end as Shi Que sets a trap that leads to the execution of both his ruler and his own son (Yin 3.7, 4.1, 4.3). The noble man here puts public dutifulness above personal kinship relations. Zhouxu was not yet able to unify his people. Hou asked his father, Shi Quea, about stabilizing the position of the ruler, and Shi Quea said, “An audience with the king would accomplish this.”79 Hou asked, “How does one gain an audience?” Shi Que said, “Lord Huan of Chen just now is in favor with the king, and Chen and Wei just now are at peace. If you visit the court of Chen and have them make the request, certainly an audience could be gained.” Hou went along with Zhouxu to Chen. Shi Que sent someone to declare to Chen as follows: “The domain of Wei is narrow and small, and I, the old man, am infirm. There really is nothing I can accomplish. It was none other than these two men who assassinated our ruler. I presume to use this opportunity to lay plans to ensnare them.” The Chen leaders arrested them and requested that Wei oversee the matter. In the ninth month, the Wei leaders sent Steward of the Right Chou to oversee the execution of Zhouxu in Pu. Shi Que sent his steward Nou Yangjian to oversee the execution of Shi Hou in Chen. The noble man said, “Shi Que was a subject of the purest sort. He hated Zhouxu and Shi Hou associated with him. ‘For the sake of great dutifulness, he exterminates his kin.’80 Surely this is what is meant!”

4.5(6)

The Wei leaders met Gongzi Jin in Xing. In winter, the twelfth month, Gongzi Jin (later Lord Xuan), acceded to his position. The text says, “Wei leaders instated Jin”: this was the multitude’s will.

4.6(7)

LORD YIN 5 (718 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, our lord arrayed the fishermen at Tang.81

5.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, Lord Huan of Wei was buried.

5.2(3)

In autumn, Wei troops entered Cheng.82

5.3(6)

In the ninth month, we dedicated a temple for Zhong Zi. For the first time, a six-row feather dance was offered.

5.4(7)

82

at Tang.” For the meaning “arrayed” in the sense of chen 陳, see Yang, 1:39. Tang 棠 was located in the domain of Lu and has been identified with present-day Yucheng Town 魚城鎮, north of Yutai County 魚臺縣, Shandong. Cheng was a small domain that belonged to the Ji 姬 lineage. It is of uncertain location, although southeast of present-day Pu County 濮縣, Shandong, is one possibility (Yang, 1:42–43).

Lord Yin

33

5.5(8) 邾人、鄭人伐宋。 5.6 螟。 5.7(9) 冬，十有二月辛巳，公子彄卒。 5.8(10) 宋人伐鄭，圍長葛。

左傳 5.1(1) 五年，春，公將如棠觀魚者。臧僖伯諫曰：「凡物不足以講大事，其材不

足以備器用，則君不舉焉。君，將納民於軌、物者也。故講事以度軌量 謂之軌，取材以章物采謂之物。不軌不物，謂之亂政。亂政亟行，所以 敗也。故春蒐、夏苗、秋獮、冬狩，皆於農隙以講事也。三年而治兵，入而 振旅。歸而飲至，以數軍實。昭文章，明貴賤，辨等列，順少長，習威儀 也。鳥獸之肉不登於俎，皮革、齒牙、骨角、毛羽不登於器，則公不射， 古之制也。若夫山林、川澤之實，器用之資，阜隸之事，官司之守，非君 所及也。」

83 Changge 長葛 was located in the domain of Zheng northeast of present-day Changge County 長葛縣, Henan. 84 Commentators explain “great affairs” (da shi 大事) as affairs concerning sacrifices and the military (see also Cheng 13.2). Legge (18) translates as follows: “All pursuit of creatures in which the great affairs of the state are not illustrated . . .” 85 Here we are given the names of the four seasonal hunts, which were obviously also regarded as military exercises. 86 See Huan 2.7 for the celebration at the Ancestral Temple on the return of an expedition. 87 According to one commentator, when the troops marched forth to battle, the younger soldiers were placed in the front ranks and the older were put at the back.

34

Zuo Tradition

A Zhu leader and a Zheng leader attacked Song.

5.5(8)

There was an infestation of caterpillars.

5.6

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the xinsi day (29), Gongzi Kou (Zang Xibo) died. A Song leader attacked Zheng and laid siege to Changge.83

5.7(9)

5.8(10)

ZUO

In the following passage, the Lu ruler plans a seemingly innocuous visit to “inspect the fisheries,” only to receive a stern lecture concerning the rather limited activities appropriate to a ruler. Such concern about how a ruler’s example can change mores is also encountered in Huan 2.2 and Zhuang 23.1, 24.1, and 24.2. In the fifth year, in spring, our lord was going to visit Tang to inspect the fisheries. Zang Xibo remonstrated: “In all cases when an object does not suffice for instruction in the great affairs,84 or a material in no way suffices for supplying vessels and instruments, the ruler takes no action with regard to it. A ruler is the one who guides the people into the right paths and the proper usage of objects. That is why offering instruction in the great affairs so as to fix the right paths and measures is called ‘establishing the path.’ And selecting materials so as to display the color of objects is called ‘establishing the proper use of objects.’ Failing to establish right paths and the proper usage of objects is called ‘disorderly government.’ Disorderly government repeatedly practiced is the reason a domain suffers defeat. That is why the spring sou hunt, the summer miao hunt, the autumn xian hunt, and the winter shou hunt all involve military instruction undertaken during breaks in the agricultural seasons.85 Every three years, we drill the soldiers, enter the capital, and marshal the troops. When the troops return from an expedition, there is drinking to celebrate their arrival, and the spoils are numbered.86 We display the patterned insignia, clarify the noble and the base, distinguish the levels and ranks, and put in harmony the young and the old:87 this is for the sake of exercising the authority of ceremonial decorum. If the flesh of a bird or a beast is not to be put upon the sacrificial stand, or the skins and hides, teeth and tusks, bone and horn, or hair and feathers are not to be put in a sacrificial vessel, then a lord does not engage in archery. This is the system of old. As for the products of the mountains, forests, rivers, and marshes, these are the materials for ordinary vessels and articles of use, the affairs of menial laborers, and the duties of petty officers; they are not the concern of a ruler.”

5.1(1)

Lord Yin

35

公曰：「吾將略地焉。」遂往，陳魚而觀之，僖伯稱疾不從。書曰 「公矢魚于棠」，非禮也，且言遠地也。 5.2 曲沃莊伯以鄭人、邢人伐翼，王使尹氏、武氏助之。翼侯奔隨。 5.3(2) 夏，葬衛桓公。衛亂，是以緩。 5.4 四月，鄭人侵衛牧，以報東門之役，衛人以燕師伐鄭，鄭祭足、原繁、洩

駕以三軍軍其前，使曼伯與子元潛軍軍其後。燕人畏鄭三軍，而不虞制 人。六月，鄭二公子以制人敗燕師于北制。 君子曰：「不備不虞，不可以師。」 5.5 曲沃叛王。秋，王命虢公伐曲沃，而立哀侯于翼。 5.6(3) 衛之亂也，郕人侵衛，故衛師入郕。

The phrase lue di 略地 is problematic (see Karlgren, gl. 13). We have followed the interpretation of Yang (1:44) and of Wang Li (Wang Li gu Hanyu zidian, 745, where he glosses this very example). 89 Since Zang Xibo died later in the same year, this may have been more than just a “diplomatic sickness.” 90 Quwo 曲沃 was a capital of the Jin domain and was located east of present-day Wenxi County 聞喜縣, Shanxi (see map 3). Yi 翼 was also in Jin and located southeast of present-day Yicheng County 翼城縣, Shanxi. 91 Sui 隨 was located in the domain of Jin southeast of present-day Jiexiu County 介 休縣, Shanxi. A rebellion had been raging in Jin for five generations, and Yang (1:44) thinks that this had prevented Jin emissaries from coming to Lu with reports that could then have been incorporated into the Annals. Rival branches of the Jin ruling house had their power bases in Quwo and Yi (Jiang). According to Huan 2.8 (Yang, 1:91–95) and Shiji 39.1638–39, Prince Zhao of Jin (r. 745–740) had granted the city Quwo to Chengshi, the younger brother of his predecessor Prince Wen (r. 780–746). Quwo became larger than the Jin capital, called Yi here (earlier known as Jiang, a name it would later resume). Chengshi eventually used Quwo as the base of an unsuccessful rebellion. Liege Zhuang, referred to above, was Chengshi’s son. He continued the rebellion, killing Prince Xiao of Jin (r. 739–724), the successor to Prince Zhao. However, the people of Jin drove Liege Zhuang back into Quwo. After Prince Hou’s successor Prince E (r. 723–718) died, Liege Zhuang attacked again, the attack referred to in the Zuozhuan entry above. 92 As noted in the Kong Yingda commentary (ZZ-Kong 3.61), this minor state of Yān, sometimes called Southern Yān, was located about ninety kilometers northeast of the capital of Zheng and is to be distinguished from the larger Yan, located near present-day Beijing, that played a role in Warring States affairs. 93 Identifying Manbo with Gongzi Hu (later Lord Zhao of Zheng) is controversial. Yang (1:45) prefers identifying him with Ziyi, who appears later in Zhuang 14.2. Gongzi Tu (called Ziyuan here) later becomes Lord Li of Zheng. Thus, the two “noble sons” who defeated the Yān army would be Gongzi Hu and Gongzi Tu, who later vie for the throne in Zheng. 88

36

Zuo Tradition

Our lord said, “I will inspect the borderlands.”88 Consequently, he went out, arrayed the fishermen, and inspected them. Zang Xibo claimed that he was sick and did not go along.89 The text says, “Our lord arrayed the fishermen at Tang”: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety, and it is saying, moreover, that Tang was a distant place. The affairs of the domain of Jin, where Quwo is located, first enter the narrative. Background can be found in Huan 2.8. Liege Zhuang of Quwo took the men of Zheng and the men of Xing to attack Yi.90 The king sent the Yin lineage head and the Wu lineage head to assist them. The Prince of Yi fled to Sui.91

5.2

In summer, Lord Huan of Wei was buried. Wei was in disorder, so the burial was delayed.

5.3(2)

Conflict between Zheng and Wei continues, this time initiated by Zheng to avenge the actions reported in Yin 4.3. In the fourth month, the men of Zheng invaded the pastures of Wei in order to avenge the campaign at the eastern gate. The Wei leaders took along Yān troops to attack Zheng.92 Zhai Zhonga, Yuan Fan, and Xie Jia of Zheng led three armies and stationed them in the vanguard. They sent Gongzi Hua and Gongzi Tua to hide an army and station it to the rear of enemy lines.93 The men of Yān feared the three Zheng armies but had not anticipated the men of Zhi.94 In the sixth month, the two noble sons of Zheng led the men of Zhi to defeat the Yān troops at Northern Zhi.95 The noble man said, “If you are not prepared for the unexpected, you cannot command troops.”

5.4

The trouble in Jin broadens to include the Zhou king (Yin 5.2). Quwo rebelled against the king. In autumn, the king commanded Jifu, the Guo Dukea, to attack Quwo and establish Prince Ai as ruler at Yi.96

5.5

While Wei was in disorder, the men of Cheng invaded Wei. That is why Wei troops entered Cheng.

5.6(3)

94 95 96

The ambushing troops led by Gongzi Hu and Gongzi Tu were obviously hidden near the city of Zhi behind the invading troops from Wei and Yan. Yang (1:45) identifies this place with Hulao and the “strategic place” mentioned in Yin 1.4 earlier (see map 3). Prince Ai governed Jin from 717 to 710 (see Shiji 39.1639, 14.551–57).

Lord Yin

37

5.7(4) 九月，考仲子之宮將萬焉。公問羽數於眾仲。對曰：「天子用八，諸侯用

六，大夫四，士二。夫舞，所以節八音而行八風，故自八以下。」 公從之。於是初獻六羽，始用六佾也。 5.8(5) 宋人取邾田。邾人告於鄭曰：「請君釋憾於宋，敝邑為道。」

鄭人以王師會之，伐宋，入其郛，以報東門之役。宋人使來告命。 公聞其入郛也，將救之，問於使者曰：「師何及？」對曰：「未及國。」公 怒，乃止。辭使者曰：「君命寡人同恤社稷之難，今問諸使者，曰：『師未 及國』，非寡人之所敢知也。」 5.9(7) 冬，十二月辛巳，臧僖伯卒。公曰：「叔父有憾於寡人，寡人弗敢忘。」葬

之加一等。 5.10(8) 宋人伐鄭，圍長葛，以報入郛之役也。

97

98

38

The eight sounds are those produced by instruments made, respectively, of metal, stone, silk thread, bamboo, gourds, earth, hide, and wood. The eight winds are named in Lüshi chunqiu 13.658. See also Xiang 29.13, Zhao 20.8, and Zhao 25.3. The “eight-row dance” (bayi 八佾) is also identified as ceremonial entertainment appropriate only for rulers in Analects 3.1. In the performance of this dance, eight dancers form one row, and the number of rows in a performance, as noted in Yin 5.7, was fixed according to the rank of the person being honored. Eight rows were specified for the Son of Heaven, but the domain of Lu, with leaders descending from the Zhou Duke, had also used eight rows until this occasion. Confucius complains in Analects 3.1 about the Ji lineage from Lu that still presumed, in the first part of the fifth century Bce, to use eight rows. The performers of this dance held poles to which pheasant feathers were affixed.

Zuo Tradition

On the death of Zhong Zi, mother of the subsequent Lord of Lu, see Annals, Yin 2.8. The entry below resembles several others in Zuozhuan that explain the origin of certain customs or institutions (see, e.g., Xi 33.3, Xuan 8.5, Cheng 2.4, Xiang 4.8, Xiang 6.1, Zhao 10.3, Ding 8.6). In the ninth month, we dedicated a temple for Zhong Zi, and the Wan dance was going to be performed there. Our lord asked Zhong Zhong about the number of feathered dancers to use. He responded, “The Son of Heaven employs eight rows, princes employ six, high officers four, and regular officers two. Dance is a means of regulating the eight sounds and making the eight winds circulate.97 That is why the number ranges from eight down.” Our lord followed this. Thereupon, for the first time, they offered six rows of feathered dancers. This was the beginning of using six rows.98

5.7(4)

Zheng, still smarting from Song’s invasion the previous year (Yin 4.3), finds an opportunity to attack Song. Lu refuses to intercede because the danger to Song is not yet deemed sufficiently serious. The men of Song occupied the fields of Zhu. A Zhu leader reported this to Zheng, saying, “We request that you, my lord, vent your resentment upon Song. And our humble settlement will lead the way.” With troops from the king, the men of Zheng joined with Zhu and attacked Song and entered their outer ramparts to avenge the campaign at the eastern gate. The Song leaders sent someone to us to convey his ruler’s command. When our lord heard that the forces had entered the outer ramparts of Song, he was prepared to rescue them. He asked the envoy, “How far have the troops advanced?” When the messenger responded, “They have not yet reached the capital,” our lord became angry and immediately stopped action. Dismissing the envoy, he said, “Your ruler commanded that I, the unworthy one, share his care for the troubles besetting his altars of the domain, but now when I ask the envoy about it, he says, ‘The troops have not yet reached the capital.’ This is not something I would presume to take notice of.”

5.8(5)

Lord Yin gives a posthumous reward to Zang Xibo, who had been frustrated with Lord Yin, presumably over earlier events (Yin 5.1). In winter, in the twelfth month, on the xinsi day (29), Zang Xibo died. Our lord said, “My uncle was resentful of me, the unworthy one. I would not presume to forget that.” In burying him, our lord added one rank.

5.9(7)

The cycle of revenge between Song and Zheng continues (Yin 5.8). The men of Song attacked Zheng and laid siege to Changge: this was to avenge the campaign in which Zheng had entered the outer ramparts.

5.10(8)

Lord Yin

39

春秋 6.1(1) 六年，春，鄭人來渝平。 6.2(3) 夏，五月辛酉，公會齊侯盟于艾。 6.3 秋，七月。 6.4(5) 冬，宋人取長葛。

左傳 6.1(1) 六年，春，鄭人來渝平，更成也。 6.2 翼九宗五正、頃父之子嘉父逆晉侯于隨，納諸鄂，晉人謂之鄂侯。 6.3(2) 夏，盟于艾，始平于齊也。 6.4 五月庚申，鄭伯侵陳，大獲。往歲，鄭伯請成于陳，陳侯不許。五父諫曰：

「親仁善鄰，國之寶也。君其許鄭！」陳侯曰：「宋、衛實難，鄭何能 為？ 」遂不許。

99 Ai 艾 was located in the domain of Qi southwest of present-day Xintai County 新 泰縣, Shandong. 100 Ding 4.1 (506 Bce) describes the original investiture of the rulers of Jin. To Tang Shu, the younger brother of King Wu and the first ruler of Jin, were given “nine ancestral lines of the Huai clan and five regulators for overseeing official duties” (Yang, 4:1539). By this time, several hundred years later, the title “nine ancestral clans and five regulators” seems to have become the name of an office in Jin (Yang, 1:49). The use of this title here indicates that Qingfu was of high status. Yi was likely the place where Qingfu and Jiafu resided.

40

Zuo Tradition

LORD YIN 6 (717 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, a Zheng leader came to sue for peace. In summer, in the fifth month, on the xinyou day (12), our lord met with the Prince of Qi and swore a covenant at Ai.99

6.1(1) 6.2(3)

Autumn, the seventh month.

6.3

In winter, a Song leader took Changge.

6.4(5)

ZUO

In spring, in the sixth year, a Zheng leader came to sue for peace: this was to reestablish accord.

6.1(1)

The following short entry deals with the aftermath of the rebellions in Jin (Yin 5.2, 5.5). Jiafu, the son of Qingfu of Yi, officer for the nine ancestral lines and five regulators,100 met the Prince of Jin at Sui and installed him in power at E.101 The men of Jin called him “Prince E.”

6.2

In summer, our lord swore a covenant at Ai: this was the beginning of peace with Qi.102

6.3(2)

Zheng retaliates against Chen, who had been a part of the earlier alliance against Zheng (Yin 4.3). Assuming a rather pro-Zheng perspective, the noble man here castigates as evil a Chen ruler who seems guilty of little more than strategic miscalculation. In the fifth month, on the gengshen day (11), the Liege of Zheng invaded Chen and took a large amount of spoils. In the previous year, the Liege of Zheng had requested peace with Chen, but the Prince of Chen had not agreed. Wufu had remonstrated: “To draw near the noble in spirit and to treat one’s neighbor well are the treasures of a domain. I hope that you, my lord, will agree to Zheng’s request.” The Prince of Chen said, “It is Song and Wei that are the threats. What can Zheng do?” So he did not agree.

6.4

101 E 鄂 was located in Jin south of present-day Xiangning County 鄉寧縣, Shanxi. 102 This presumably resolved conflict that had existed between Lu and Qi previous to the beginning of the Annals in 722 Bce.

Lord Yin

41

君子曰：「善不可失，惡不可長，其陳桓公之謂乎！長惡不悛，從 自及也。雖欲救之，其將能乎？商書曰：『惡之易也，如火之燎于原，不 可鄉邇，其猶可撲滅？』周任有言曰：『為國家者，見惡如農夫之務去草 焉，芟夷薀崇之，絕其本根，勿使能殖，則善者信矣。』」 6.5(4) 秋，宋人取長葛。 6.6 冬，京師來告饑，公為之請糴於宋、衛、齊、鄭，禮也。 6.7 鄭伯如周，始朝桓王也。王不禮焉。周桓公言於王曰：「我周之東遷，

晉、鄭焉依。善鄭以勸來者，猶懼不蔇，況不禮焉？鄭不來矣。」

103 Shangshu, “Pan Geng shang” 盤庚上, 9.129. This is the first of numerous quotations from the Documents (Shu 書) in Zuozhuan. The textual history of the Documents is complex and will not be given here in any detail. Suffice it to say that there were various versions of the Documents during the time Zuozhuan was compiled. After the Qin bibliocaust of 213 Bce, two main versions circulated, a Modern Script (jinwen 今文) version, so-named because it was written in the Qin reformed script, and an Ancient Script (guwen 古文) version, written in the pre-Qin script. The latter subsequently disappeared but was then “reconstituted” during the third and fourth centuries CE. In subsequent quotations from the Documents, we will indicate those cases where the quotation is now found in the Ancient Script version. However, the precise relationship between these versions and what existed during the latter Zhou period is unclear. See Nylan, The Five “Confucian” Classics, 127–35. 104 The Han scholar Ma Rong (79–166 ce) identifies Zhou Ren as “a skilled scribe of ancient times” (see Yang, 1:50).

42

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “Good relations are not to be neglected; enmity is not to be nurtured. Surely this could refer to Lord Huan of Chen! By nurturing enmity and not repenting, he went the way of bringing disaster upon himself. Although one might desire to save a person like this, would one be capable of it? As it says in the Shang Documents, ‘The spread of iniquity is like a fire blazing on the plains. One cannot even draw near to it, so how could one beat it out?’103 Zhou Ren104 has a saying, ‘Those who rule domains and patrimonies look upon iniquity in the same way a farmer exerts effort to remove weeds: he cuts them down and piles them up, eradicates them and does not allow them to grow. Only then can good be extended.’” The Zheng settlement of Changge falls to Song (Yin 5.10). In autumn, a Song leader took Changge.105

6.5(4)

In winter, a report of famine came from the capital. Our lord, because of this, made requests in Song, Wei, Qi, and Zheng for shipments of grain. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

6.6

Zheng’s troubled relations with the Zhou court continue (Yin 3.3) as the Zheng leader makes his initial visit to the new Zhou ruler, King Huan (r. 719–697). The Liege of Zheng went to Zhou. This was the first time he visited the court of King Huan. The king did not accord him the appropriate ritual propriety. The Zhou Duke Huan106 said to the king, “In our Zhou relocation to the east, it was upon Jin and Zheng that we relied. If we treat Zheng well, we encourage others to come to our court. Even at that, I am afraid they will not arrive. How much less so if we do not treat Zheng with ritual propriety so that even Zheng will come no more!”

6.7

105 The Annals says this took place in winter; Zuozhuan, in autumn. Yang (1:51) explains that the domain of Song perhaps employed the Shang calendar and the discrepancy arises from this. 106 It is somewhat confusing that the king and the Zhou Duke have the same posthumous name, Huan. The latter is identified later on as Heijian 黑肩 (Huan 18.3). He is from the royal family and held a high position at court.

Lord Yin

43

春秋 7.1 七年，春，王三月，叔姬歸于紀。 7.2(1) 滕侯卒。 7.3(2) 夏，城中丘。 7.4(3) 齊侯使其弟年來聘。 7.5(4) 秋，公伐邾。 7.6(5) 冬，天王使凡伯來聘。戎伐凡伯于楚丘以歸。

左傳 7.1(2) 七年，春，滕侯卒。不書名，未同盟也。凡諸侯同盟，於是稱名，故薨則

赴以名，告終、稱嗣也，以繼好息民，謂之禮經。 7.2(3) 夏，城中丘。書不時也。 7.3(4) 齊侯使夷仲年來聘，結艾之盟也。 7.4(5) 秋，宋及鄭平。七月庚申，盟于宿。公伐邾，為宋討也。 7.5(6) 初，戎朝于周，發幣于公卿，凡伯弗賓。冬，王使凡伯來聘。還，戎伐之

于楚丘以歸。

107 Du Yu and other commentators believe that Shu Ji is going as secondary consort, setting out this year only because she was too young to accompany Bo Ji in Yin 2.6 (ZZ 4.3b). 108 Teng 滕 was the name of a domain located to the southeast of Lu near present-day Teng County 滕縣 in Shandong (map 2). 109 Zhongqiu 中丘 was located in the domain of Lu northeast of present-day Linyi County 臨沂縣, Shandong. 110 “Official visits” (pin 聘) take place when a superior visits an inferior or peers visit each other, while a “court visit” (chao 朝) involves an inferior visiting a superior. Thus, the rulers of small domains make court visits, while great domains send high officers to pay official visits. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu binli biao” 春秋賓禮表, in Chunqiu dashi biao. 111 Fan 凡 was the name of a small domain that was located north of the Yellow River in Henan, and the Fan Liege served hereditarily as a high official in the Zhou court. Chuqiu 楚丘 was located between Song and Cao to the southwest of Chengwu County 成武縣, Shandong.

44

Zuo Tradition

LORD YIN 7 (716 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, in the royal third month, Shu Ji went to marry in Ji.107

7.1

The Prince of Teng died.108

7.2(1)

In summer, we fortified Zhongqiu.

109

7.3(2)

The Prince of Qi sent his younger brother, Nian (Yi Zhongnian), to us on an official visit.110

7.4(3)

In autumn, our lord attacked Zhu.

7.5(4)

In winter, the Heaven-appointed king sent the Fan Liege to us on an official visit. The Rong attacked the Fan Liege at Chuqiu and took him home with them.111

7.6(5)

ZUO

In the seventh year, in spring, the Prince of Teng died. It does not record his birth name because Teng had not yet joined in a covenant with Lu. In all cases when one of the princes has joined in a covenant with us, then he is referred to by name. Therefore, when one expired, the notice of death used birth names, announced the death, and proclaimed the successor in order to continue good relations and to calm the people. We consider this a regular principle of ritual propriety.

7.1(2)

In summer, we fortified Zhongqiu: this is recorded because it was not timely.

7.2(3)

The covenant of Ai between Qi and Lu is confirmed (Yin 6.3). The Prince of Qi sent Yi Zhongnian to us on an official visit: this was to make fast the covenant of Ai.

7.3(4)

A peace agreement brings a temporary end to the conflict between Song and Zheng (Yin 5.8, 5.10). Zhu had instigated one of the attacks on Song and is now punished by Lu. In autumn, Song and Zheng made peace. In the seventh month, on the gengshen day (17), they swore a covenant at Su. Our lord attacked Zhu: this was to chastise it on behalf of Song.

7.4(5)

Earlier, the Rong had visited the Zhou court and had distributed gifts to the princes and ministers. The Fan Liege did not treat them appropriately as guests. In winter, the king sent the Fan Liege to us on an official visit. As he was returning, the Rong attacked him at Chuqiu and took him home with them.

7.5(6)

Lord Yin

45

7.6 陳及鄭平。十二月，陳五父如鄭蒞盟。壬申，及鄭伯盟，歃如忘。洩伯曰：

「五父必不免，不賴盟矣。」 鄭良佐如陳蒞盟，辛巳，及陳侯盟，亦知陳之將亂也。 7.7 鄭公子忽在王所，故陳侯請妻之，鄭伯許之，乃成婚。

春秋 8.1(1) 八年，春，宋公、衛侯遇于垂。 8.2(2) 三月，鄭伯使宛來歸祊。庚寅，我入祊。 8.3 夏，六月己亥，蔡侯考父卒。 8.4 辛亥，宿男卒。 8.5(5) 秋，七月庚午，宋公、齊侯、衛侯盟于瓦屋。 8.6 八月，葬蔡宣公。 8.7(7) 九月辛卯，公及莒人盟于浮來。

8.8

螟。 112 Chui 垂 was located in the domain of Wei north of present-day Cao County 曹縣, Shandong. 113 According to Du Yu (ZZ 4.73), Wawu 瓦屋 was located in the royal domain of Zhou northwest of present-day Wen County 溫縣, Henan. 114 Fulai 浮來 was located in the small domain of Ju west of present-day Ju County 莒縣, Shandong.

46

Zuo Tradition

Chen and Zheng end the hostility of the past few years (Yin 4.3, 6.7), and Xie Jia makes an ominous prediction about Wufu, which will come to pass (Annals, Huan 6.4). Note that Wufu is presented as the voice of sagacity in an earlier entry (Yin 6.4). Judgment in Zuozhuan tends to pertain to specific situations, and inconsistency in the portrayal of a character often passes without comment. Chen and Zheng made peace. In the twelfth month, Wufu of Chen went to Zheng to oversee the covenant. On the renshen day (2), he swore a covenant with the Liege of Zheng. But as he smeared his lips with blood, he appeared inattentive. Xie Jiaa said, “Wufu surely will not escape disaster. He does not put his trust in the covenant.” Liang Zuo of Zheng went to Chen to oversee the covenant. On the xinsi day (11) of the month, as he swore the covenant with the Prince of Chen, he also perceived that Chen was about to fall into disorder.

7.6

Gongzi Hu, the Zheng hostage in Zhou, marries a daughter of Chen (Yin 3.3). His refusal to form a marriage alliance with Qi may explain his downfall (Huan 6.4). Gongzi Hu of Zheng resided at the king’s residence. That is why the Prince of Chen requested to give him his daughter as wife. The Liege of Zheng agreed to this, so they concluded the marriage ceremony.

7.7

LORD YIN 8 (715 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, the Duke of Song and the Prince of Wei met up at Chui.112

8.1(1)

In the third month, the Liege of Zheng sent Wan to come to present Beng. On the gengyin day (21), we entered Beng.

8.2(2)

In summer, in the sixth month, on the jihai day (21), Kaofu, the Prince of Cai, died. On the xinhai day (14), the Head of Su died. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the gengwu day (3), the Duke of Song, the Prince of Qi, and the Prince of Wei swore a covenant at Wawu.113 In the eighth month, Lord Xuan of Cai was buried. In the ninth month, on the xinmao day (25), our lord and a Ju leader swore a covenant at Fulai.114

8.3

8.4 8.5(5)

8.6 8.7(7)

There was an infestation of caterpillars.

8.8

Lord Yin

47

8.9(9) 冬，十有二月，無駭卒。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年，春，齊侯將平宋、衛，有會期。宋公以幣請於衛，請先相見。衛侯

許之，故遇于犬丘。 8.2(2) 鄭伯請釋泰山之祀而祀周公，以泰山之祊易許田。三月，鄭伯使宛來歸

祊，不祀泰山也。 8.3 夏，虢公忌父始作卿士于周。 8.4 四月甲辰，鄭公子忽如陳逆婦媯。辛亥，以媯氏歸。甲寅，入于鄭。陳鍼

子送女，先配而後祖。鍼子曰：「是不為夫婦，誣其祖矣。非禮也，何以 能育？」

115 The wording here is ambiguous and can be read “to make peace between Song and Wei.” However, the latter two domains had been allies against Zheng. Yin 8.4 makes it quite clear that the prince was attempting to make peace between Song and Wei on the one side and Zheng on the other (Yang, 1:57–58). 116 Yang (1:58) notes that Quanqiu 犬丘 is an alternate name for Chui 垂, the place name that appears in Annals 8.1. 117 Zheng had been founded in 806 Bce when the younger brother of the mother of King Xuan of Zhou (r. 827–782) was granted this region as his domain. This original ruler of Zheng is known to history as Lord Huan (r. 806–771). At the time he was granted Zheng, Huan was also given Beng, which was located in the region of Lu near Mount Tai, quite far removed from Zheng, as a place where he could stay when attending the king’s sacrifices at the sacred mountain. However, these sacrifices had not been offered for a long time, and Beng served no real purpose for the domain of Zheng. The lands of Xǔ, by contrast, were adjacent to Zheng but had been presented earlier to Lu as a place where leaders could stay on their journeys to the Zhou capital. Thus, the land swap described here would reunite each domain with a piece of land

48

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the twelfth month, Wuhai died.

8.9(9)

ZUO

The Prince of Qi reconciles Song and Wei with Zheng, ending a longstanding conflict (see, e.g., Yin 4.4). In the eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi, intended to bring peace to Song and Wei.115 A time had already been set for a meeting. The Duke of Song made a request to Wei with gifts, asking that they see each other beforehand. The Prince of Wei agreed to this, and that is why they met up at Quanqiu.116

8.1(1)

The land swap between Lu and Zheng described below takes place only after three years have passed (Huan 1.1 below). The Liege of Zheng asked to give up the sacrificial shrine at Mount Tai and offer sacrifices instead to the Zhou Duke and thereby exchange Beng near Mount Tai for the lands of Xǔ. In the third month, the Liege of Zheng sent Wan to come to present Beng: this was because they would no longer sacrifice at Mount Tai.117

8.2(2)

From the brief passage below it appears that Guo has indeed gained a privileged relationship with the Zhou court (Yin 3.3). In summer, Jifu, the Guo Duke, began to act as chief minister in Zhou.

8.3

Gongzi Hu of Zheng, who had been a hostage in Zhou, now returns to his home in Zheng with his new wife from Chen (Yin 3.3, 7.7). A Chen representative who goes along to escort the bride to Zheng disapproves of the couple’s conduct. The anecdote is used to explain Gongzi Hu’s failure to secure the succession. In the fourth month, on the jiachen day (6), Gongzi Hu of Zheng went to Chen to meet and escort home Gui as bride. On the xinhai day (13), he started homeward with the Lady Gui, and on the jiayin day (16), he entered Zheng. Qianzi of Chen was escorting the young woman. The couple first had sexual relations and only then sacrificed to the ancestors. Qianzi said, “In this they did not act as proper husband and wife but deceived their ancestors. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. How will they be able to produce children?”

8.4

much closer to its capital. The exchange is also mentioned twice in Shiji. In the first mention, Shiji says that “the noble man criticized it” (33.1529). No such criticism appears in Zuozhuan, but Gongyang says, “When a Son of Heaven is reigning, princes cannot exchange land with one another” (Huan 1, 4.46). In the second Shiji passage (42.1760), the swap is linked to Zheng’s anger at Zhou for a lack of ritual courtesy.

Lord Yin

49

8.5(5) 齊人卒平宋、衛于鄭。秋，會于溫，盟于瓦屋，以釋東門之役，禮也。 8.6 八月丙戌，鄭伯以齊人朝王，禮也。 8.7(7) 公及莒人盟于浮來，以成紀好也。 8.8 冬，齊侯使來告成三國。公使眾仲對曰：「君釋三國之圖，以鳩其民，君

之惠也。寡君聞命矣，敢不承受君之明德。」 8.9(9) 無駭卒，羽父請諡與族。公問族於眾仲。眾仲對曰：「天子建德，因生以

賜姓，胙之土而命之氏。諸侯以字為諡，因以為族。官有世功，則有官 族。邑亦如之。」公命以字為展氏。

118 The eighth month did not have a bingxu day. 119 For additional information on the topic of clan names, see the introduction.

50

Zuo Tradition

In the following two passages, the domain of Qi intercedes on Zheng’s behalf to dispel ill-will generated by Song and Wei’s earlier invasion (Yin 4.3) and to arrange a visit of Lord Zhuang, the Liege of Zheng, to the royal court. The Qi leaders finally made peace for Song and Wei with Zheng. In autumn, they met up at Wen and swore a covenant at Wawu so as to dispel the ill will from the campaign at the eastern gate. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. In the eighth month, on the bingxu day,118 by means of the intercession of the Qi leaders, the Liege of Zheng went to visit the court of the king. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

8.5(5)

8.6

Ju and Ji had earlier sworn a covenant, which was meant to put them both on good terms with Lu (Yin 2.7). The relationships are here further formalized. Our lord and a Ju leader swore a covenant at Fulai: this was to formalize good relations with Ji.

8.7(7)

The peace agreement between the three domains of Song, Wei, and Zheng, which the domain of Qi has brokered, is announced in Lu (Yin 8.5). Peace will be short-lived (Yin 9.3). In winter, the Prince of Qi sent someone to us to announce an accord among the three domains. Our lord sent Zhong Zhong to reply, “Your ruler has put an end to the plots of the three domains against one another and has made their people secure. This is the kindness of your ruler. The unworthy ruler has heard your command! Would he presume not to accept your ruler’s exemplary virtue?”

8.8

As before (Yin 5.7), Zhong Zhong gives the Lord of Lu critical counsel, this time on the issue of names. This is an important passage explaining the different roots of lineage names. Wuhai died. Gongzi Huia requested that he be given a posthumous name and a lineage name. Our lord asked Zhong Zhong about lineage names, and Zhong Zhong responded, “When the Son of Heaven establishes the virtuous, he goes by their place of birth in giving them a clan name. In granting them land, he bestows a lineage name upon them. A prince makes the virtuous man’s courtesy name a posthumous name for him, and it consequently becomes a lineage name. If in a certain office they have had merit over generations, then they have a lineage name derived from that office. In the case of hereditary settlements it is likewise.”119 Our lord, going by the courtesy name, named them the “Zhan” branch lineage.

8.9(9)

Lord Yin

51

春秋 9.1 九年，春，天王使南季來聘。 9.2(1) 三月癸酉，大雨，震電。庚辰，大雨雪。 9.3 挾卒。 9.4(2) 夏，城郎。 9.5 秋，七月。 9.6(5) 冬，公會齊侯于防。

左傳 9.1(2) 九年，春，王三月癸酉，大雨霖以震，書始也；辰，大雨雪，亦如之。書，

時失也。凡雨，自三日以往為霖，平地尺為大雪。 9.2(4) 夏，城郎。書，不時也。 9.3 宋公不王，鄭伯為王左卿士，以王命討之。伐宋。宋以入郛之役怨公，

不告命。公怒，絕宋使。 9.4 秋，鄭人以王命來告伐宋。 9.5(6) 冬，公會齊侯于防，謀伐宋也。

120 Xie must be the name of a Lu high officer. 121 A place by this name was fortified in the first year of Lord Yin (1.3). Yang (1:63) suspects that this reference may be to a second Lang 郎 closer to the center of Lu. 122 Fang 防 was located northeast of Fei County, 費縣, Shandong.

52

Zuo Tradition

LORD YIN 9 (714 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, the Heaven-appointed king sent Nan Ji to us on an official visit. In the third month, on the guiyou day (10), there was a great rainstorm with thunder and lightning. On the gengchen day (17), there was a great snowfall.

9.1

9.2(1)

Xie died.120

9.3

In summer, we fortified Lang.121

9.4(2)

Autumn, the seventh month.

9.5

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Fang.122

9.6(5)

ZUO

In the ninth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the guiyou day (10), there was a great rainstorm with thunder: the text records when the storm began. On the gengchen day (17), there was a great snowfall: it does the same in this case. These are recorded because they were out of season. In all cases when it rains for three days or more, it is called “a storm” (lin). When there is a foot of snow on the ground, it is called “a great snowfall” (daxue). In summer, we fortified Lang: this is recorded because it was not timely.123

9.1(2)

9.2(4)

The brief peace between Zheng and Song (Yin 8.5, 8.8) comes to an end, and Song reacts to the earlier refusal of Lu to provide help (Yin 5.5) despite the fact that Lu had later chastised Zhu on Song’s behalf (Yin 7.4). The Duke of Song did not go to the king’s court. The Liege of Zheng was the king’s minister of the left and by command of the king went to chastise him. They attacked Song. Because of the campaign in which Zheng had entered their ramparts, Song held a grudge against our lord and did not announce the commands to Lu. Our lord was angry and broke off exchange of envoys with Song.

9.3

In autumn, a Zheng leader came by command of the king to announce the attack upon Song.

9.4

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Fang: this was to plan an attack on Song.

9.5(6)

123 That is, it presumably was in conflict with the agricultural season and hence diverted farmers from their usual work in the fields.

Lord Yin

53

9.6 北戎侵鄭。鄭伯禦之，患戎師，曰：「彼徒我車，懼其侵軼我也。」

公子突曰：「使勇而無剛者，嘗寇而速去之。君為三覆以待之。戎 輕而不整，貪而無親；勝不相讓，敗不相救。先者見獲，必務進；進而遇 覆，必速奔。後者不救，則無繼矣。乃可以逞。」 從之。戎人之前遇覆者奔，祝聃逐之，衷戎師，前後擊之，盡殪。 戎師大奔。十一月，甲寅，鄭人大敗戎師。

春秋 10.1(1) 十年，春，王二月，公會齊侯、鄭伯于中丘。 10.2(2) 夏，翬帥師會齊人、鄭人伐宋。 10.3(3) 六月壬戌，公敗宋師于菅。辛未，取郜。辛巳，取防。

124 The fear seems to be that the chariots are not easily maneuverable and will get bogged down among the foot soldiers. Thus, the proposed strategy involves a quick probe and retreat designed to draw part of the Rong army in among the Zheng lines.

54

Zuo Tradition

The Rong have appeared before (Yin 7.5), but here for the first time they are characterized disapprovingly as a cultural “other.” Gongzi Tu is a younger son who will become a usurper and will drive out his older brother, the heir apparent Gongzhi Hu. Here he is implicitly commended for his valor and judgment. The Northern Rong invaded Zheng. The Liege of Zheng blocked their advance. Worried about the Rong troops, he said, “They are on foot, and we are in chariots. I am afraid they will engulf us from the rear.”124 Gongzi Tu said, “Send some soldiers who are brave but not inflexible to probe the enemy and then quickly disengage from them. You, my lord, put ambushes in three places to await them. The Rong are lax and disorganized; they are greedy and know nothing of kith and kin. In victory, they will not defer to one another; and in defeat, they will not save one another. When those in the front ranks see they are going to take captives, they will surely make an effort to advance. As they advance, they will run into our ambushes and then surely will hasten to flee. Those at the back will not rescue them, and there will be no one to continue the attack! And so it is we can resolve matters.” The Liege of Zheng followed this. When the front ranks of the Rong ran into the ambush, they fled. Zhu Dan chased them and split the Rong troops in half. The Zheng force attacked them from the front and from behind and annihilated them. The Rong troops were completely routed. In the eleventh month, on the jiayin day,125 the men of Zheng roundly defeated the Rong army.

9.6

LORD YIN 10 (713 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng at Zhongqiu.

10.1(1)

In summer, Hui (Gongzi Hui) led out troops, met with a Qi leader and a Zheng leader, and attacked Song.

10.2(2)

In the sixth month, on the renxu day (7), our lord defeated Song troops at Guan.126 On the xinwei day (16), we took Gao.127 On the xinsi day (26), we took Fang.

10.3(3)

125 There was no jiayin day in the eleventh month of this year. 126 The written character 菅 is normally pronounced jian, but Yang (1:67) notes that as a place name it should be guan. It was located in the domain of Song north of present-day Dan County 單縣, Shandong. 127 Gao 郜 was located southeast of present-day Chengwu County 成武縣, Shandong.

Lord Yin

55

10.4(4) 秋，宋人、衛人入鄭。宋人、蔡人、衛人伐戴。鄭伯伐取之。 10.5(6) 冬，十月壬午，齊人、鄭人入郕。

左傳 10.1(1) 十年，春，王正月，公會齊侯、鄭伯于中丘。癸丑，盟于鄧，為師期。 10.2(2) 夏，五月，羽父先會齊侯、鄭伯伐宋。 10.3(3) 六月戊申，公會齊侯、鄭伯于老桃。壬戌，公敗宋師于菅。庚午，鄭師入

郜；辛未，歸于我。庚辰，鄭師入防；辛巳，歸于我。 君子謂鄭莊公於是乎可謂正矣，以王命討不庭，不貪其土，以勞 王爵，正之體也。

128 Yang says that the character 戴 is here pronounced zai rather than dai. Both Guliang, Yin 10 (2.25), and Gongyang, Yin 10 (3.41), have the character 載, which is most likely correct. Takezoe (1.88) notes that these two characters are often used for one another in early texts. Zai is attested as a small domain of the Ji 姬 lineage on bone and bronze inscriptions from the Shang period. Presumably, the domain was reestablished during the Zhou (Yang, 1:67) and was located east of present-day Minquan County 民權縣, Henan. 129 The Annals mentions a meeting in the first month but does not mention a covenant. Zuozhuan places the meeting in the first month. However, the guichou day, given as the twenty-fifth day above, is in the second month rather than the first. At this time, they fixed a time for their troops to join in attacking Song. The place Deng 鄧 is of unknown location.

56

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, a Song leader and a Wei leader entered Zheng. A Song leader, a Cai leader, and a Wei leader attacked Zai.128 The Liege of Zheng attacked and took it. In winter, in the tenth month, on the renwu day (29), a Qi leader and a Zheng leader entered Cheng.

10.4(4)

10.5(6)

ZUO

The conflict broadens (Yin 9.3) as Lu, Qi, and Zheng join to attack Song. In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng at Zhongqiu. On the guichou day (21), they swore a covenant at Deng and fixed a time for the troops to march forth.129

10.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, Gongzi Huia met beforehand with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng and attacked Song.130

10.2(2)

Lord Zhuang of Zheng is commended for properly conducting military action against Song (Yin 9.3, 10.1). Is a Lu scribe praising him because of territorial gains for Lu? Later commentators often decry Lord Zhuang’s deviousness and defiance of the Zhou king, but Zuozhuan presents a complex and ambiguous character. Here he is explicitly praised for acting on the Zhou king’s behalf. In the sixth month, on the wushen day,131 our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng at Laotao.132 On the renxu day (7), our lord defeated the Song troops at Jian. On the gengwu day (15), Zheng troops entered Gao; and on the xinwei day (16), Gao was presented to us. On the gengchen day (25), Zheng troops entered Fang; and on the xinsi day (26), Fang was presented to us. The noble man said that Lord Zhuang of Zheng in this action could be called “correct.” On the king’s command he chastised one who did not come to court. He did not covet their lands but used them to reward the exertions of one with a royal rank.133 This is the embodiment of correctness.

10.3(3)

130 That is, Gongzi Hui went ahead of the Lord of Lu to join in the battle. 131 There was no wushen day in the sixth month. 132 Laotao 老桃 was located in the domain of Song northeast of present-day Jining County 濟寧縣, Shandong. 133 That is, the Lord of Lu.

Lord Yin

57

10.4(4) 蔡人、衛人、郕人不會王命。秋，七月，庚寅，鄭師入郊，猶在郊。宋人、衛

人入鄭，蔡人從之伐戴。八月壬戌，鄭伯圍戴。癸亥，克之，取三師焉。 宋、衛既入鄭，而以伐戴召蔡人，蔡人怒，故不和而敗。 10.5 九月戊寅，鄭伯入宋。 10.6(5) 冬，齊人、鄭人入郕，討違王命也。

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年，春，滕侯、薛侯來朝。 11.2(2) 夏，公會鄭伯于時來。 11.3(3) 秋，七月壬午，公及齊侯、鄭伯入許。 11.4(8) 冬，十有一月壬辰，公薨。

左傳 11.1(1) 十一年，春，滕侯、薛侯來朝，爭長。薛侯曰：「我先封。」滕侯曰：「我，

周之卜正也；薛，庶姓也，我不可以後之。」

134 Cai and Wei did not join in the attack on Song but allied themselves with Song instead. It appears that Song and Wei turned aside from their attack on Zheng and summoned Cai to join them in an attack on Zai. Zheng launched a counterattack and defeated all three of them. 135 There was no wuyin day in the ninth month of this year. 136 For the hierarchical implications of this sort of visit (chao 朝), see note on Annals, Yin 7.4.

58

Zuo Tradition

A Cai leader, a Wei leader, and a Cheng leader did not comply with the king’s command and join the attack. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the gengyin day (5), Zheng troops had entered the outskirts of the Zheng capital but were still in the outskirts when a Song leader, a Cai leader, and a Wei leader entered Zheng. A Cai leader accompanied them to attack Zai. In the eighth month, on the renxu day (8), the Liege of Zheng laid siege to Zai. On the guihai day (9), he defeated it and seized the troops of the three domains there. Song and Wei had already entered Zheng territory and, in order to attack Zai, had summoned a Cai leader. The Cai leader was angry, and that is the reason the troops were not in harmony and were defeated.134 In the ninth month, on the wuyin day,135 the Liege of Zheng entered Song. In winter, a Qi leader and a Zheng leader entered Cheng: this was to chastise them for violating the king’s command.

10.4(4)

10.5

10.6(5)

LORD YIN 11 (712 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, the Prince of Teng and the Prince of Xue came to court.136

11.1(1)

In summer, our lord met with the Liege of Zheng at Shilai (Lai).137

11.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renwu day (3), our lord joined with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng and entered Xǔ.138 In winter, in the eleventh month, on the renchen day (15), our lord expired.

11.3(3)

11.4(8)

ZUO

An argument over seniority is settled through appeals to the degree of filiation with the Zhou court. In the eleventh year, in spring, the Prince of Teng and the Prince of Xue came to court: they argued over seniority. The Prince of Xue said, “We were granted a domain first.” The Prince of Teng said, “We were the directors of divination under the Zhou. Xue is of a subordinate clan. We cannot be placed after them.”

11.1(1)

137 Shilai 時來 was in the domain of Zheng north of Zhengzhou City 鄭州市, Henan. 138 Xǔ 許 was a domain of the Jiang 姜 clan and was located east of present-day Xuchang 許昌 in Henan.

Lord Yin

59

公使羽父請於薛侯曰：「君與滕君辱在寡人，周諺有之曰：『山有 木，工則度之；賓有禮，主則擇之。』周之宗盟，異姓為後。寡人若朝于 薛，不敢與諸任齒。君若辱貺寡人，則願以滕君為請。」 薛侯許之，乃長滕侯。 11.2(2) 夏，公會鄭伯于郲，謀伐許也。鄭伯將伐許。五月，甲辰，授兵於大宮。

公孫閼與潁考叔爭車，潁考叔挾輈以走，子都拔棘以逐之。及大逵，弗 及，子都怒。 11.3a(3) 秋，七月，公會齊侯、鄭伯伐許。庚辰，傅于許。潁考叔取鄭伯之旗蝥弧

以先登，子都自下射之，顛。瑕叔盈又以蝥弧登，周麾而呼曰：「君登 矣！」鄭師畢登。壬午，遂入許。許莊公奔衛。 齊侯以許讓公。公曰：「君謂許不共，故從君討之。許既伏其罪 矣，雖君有命，寡人弗敢與聞。」乃與鄭人。

139 There are several different interpretations of the character 在 zai in this context. We have read the character in its usual meaning (see Karlgren, gl. 18). 140 We follow Yu Yue 俞樾 in taking 宗 zong here verbally and in the sense of 主 zhu, “to rule over, to manage” (see Takezoe, 1.92; and Karlgren, gl. 19). 141 The ruling house of Xue had the clan name Ren 任. The name of the ruling clans of both the Zhou domain and the domain of Teng was Ji (姬). When the Prince of Teng describes Xue as deriving from “a subordinate clan,” the phrase he uses (shu xing 庶姓) is mildly pejorative, implying that Xue stems from a secondary wife or concubine. When the Lord of Lu speaks, he uses the much more neutral and hence more politic phrase “different clans” (yi xing 異姓). 142 Pulling a chariot in this manner was, to be sure, a great feat of strength on the part of Kaoshu! 143 Maohu 蝥弧 is the name of the Zheng flag. We also know the name of the flag of the domain of Qi: Linggupi 靈姑銔 (Zhao 10.2). Kong Yingda says, “The meaning of these names cannot be known” (ZZ-Kong 4.79). However, Liu Wenqi glosses mao as mou 牟 in the sense of “great” or “big” and suggests that maohu means “great flag pole” (see Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 57). 144 Precisely what Xǔ did not do is somewhat problematic. We have followed Takezoe (1.94). Yang (1:74) has a different interpretation that would lead to a translation something like “Xǔ was not reverent.”

60

Zuo Tradition

Our lord sent Gongzi Huia to make a request of the Prince of Xue: “You, my lord, and the ruler of Teng have deigned to be here with me, the unworthy one.139 A Zhou proverb has it that ‘mountains have their trees, but it is the carpenter who measures their size. Guests have their rituals, but it is the host who chooses what is appropriate.’ In covenant meetings managed by the Zhou,140 those of different clans come last. If I were to visit the Xue court, I would not presume to be put alongside the various Ren domains.141 If you, my lord, would deign to grant me a kindness, then I would wish to make a request on behalf of the Teng ruler.” The Prince of Xue agreed to this, so they gave the Prince of Teng the superior position. What the small domain of Xǔ had done to provoke the anger of the domains of Qi, Zheng, and Lu is unclear, but in the following episodes, they launch an attack on Xǔ. Xǔ is eventually put under the control of Zheng, but Lord Zhuang of Zheng wisely decides to make the occupation temporary. Ying Kaoshu also reappears in the following episodes, a decade after he helped Lord Zhuang resolve conflict with his mother (Yin 1.4), and is killed in the assault on Xǔ (Yin 11.3). In summer, our lord met with the Liege of Zheng at Lai: this was to plan an attack on Xǔ. The Liege of Zheng was about to attack Xǔ. In the fifth month, on the jiachen day (24), they distributed the weapons in the Grand Ancestral Temple. Zidua contended with Ying Kaoshu over a chariot. Kaoshu clasped the shaft of the chariot under his arm and ran away.142 Zidu pulled out his lance and chased him but reached the great road without having caught him. Zidu was furious.

11.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng to attack Xǔ. On the gengchen day (1), they pressed hard upon Xǔ. Ying Kaoshu took the Maohu banner of the Liege of Zheng and was the first to ascend the wall. 143 Zidu shot him from below with an arrow, and he fell from the wall. Xia Shuying next took the Maohu banner and ascended. Waving the banner to all sides, he yelled out, “Our lord has ascended!” And the Zheng troops all climbed to the top. On the renwu day (3), they entered Xǔ, and Lord Zhuang of Xǔ fled to Wei. The Prince of Qi yielded control of Xǔ to our lord, and the latter said, “You, my lord, stated that Xǔ had not presented tribute,144 and that is why we followed you to chastise it. Xǔ already has submitted to punishment for its crimes. Even though you have issued a command, I, the unworthy one, would not presume to agree to what I have heard.” And so he gave Xǔ to the Zheng leaders.

11.3a(3)

Lord Yin

61

11.3b 鄭伯使許大夫百里奉許叔以居許東偏，曰：「天禍許國，鬼神實不逞于

許君，而假手于我寡人，寡人唯是一二父兄不能共億，其敢以許自為功 乎？寡人有弟，不能和協，而使餬其口於四方，其況能久有許乎？吾子 其奉許叔以撫柔此民也，吾將使獲也佐吾子。若寡人得沒于地，天其以 禮悔禍于許，無寧茲許公復奉其社稷，唯我鄭國之有請謁焉，如舊婚 媾，其能降以相從也。無滋他族實偪處此，以與我鄭國爭此土也。吾子 孫其覆亡之不暇，而況能禋祀許乎？寡人之使吾子處此，不唯許國之 為，亦聊以固吾圉也。」 及使公孫獲處許西偏，曰：「凡而器用財賄，無寘於許。我死，乃 亟去之！吾先君新邑於此，王室而既卑矣，周之子孫日失其序。夫許，大 岳之胤也。天而既厭周德矣，吾其能與許爭乎？」 君子謂鄭莊公「於是乎有禮。禮，經國家，定社稷，序民人，利後 嗣者也。許無刑而伐之，服而舍之，度德而處之，量力而行之，相時而 動，無累後人，可謂知禮矣。」

145 Xǔ Shu was the younger brother of the lord of Xǔ. 146 He is of course referring here to his conflict with his younger brother Duan (see Yin 1.4). 147 Gongsun Huo was a high officer of Zheng. 148 We have followed Takezoe’s reading of 聊 liao (1.96), which is also Karlgren’s understanding (gl. 22), although the latter mistakenly assigns such a reading to Du Yu. Yang (1:75) understands liao to mean “for the time being”—that is, “but it is also, for the time being, to stabilize our own borders.” 149 This is referring to the region of “New Zheng.” Zheng was founded during the Western Zhou period in the region of Shaanxi. However, after the Zhou moved to the east (771 Bce), Lord Huan of Zheng attacked Guo 虢 and Gui 檜 and established New Zheng in this area. 150 Commentators identify taiyue 大岳, “Grand Peaks”—and, by extension, “chiefs of the Grand Peaks”—with siyue 四嶽, “the Four Peaks,” which is used in reference to the “chiefs of the Four Peaks,” who were supposedly aides to Yao or Shun (see Shangshu, “Yao dian” 堯典, 2.26). In Guoyu, they are said to be descendants of Gonggong, and Wei Zhao claims that they helped the sage king Yu in controlling the floods (Guoyu, “Zhou yu 3,” 3.104, 105n13).

62

Zuo Tradition

The rather ambiguous portrayal of Lord Zhuang, the Liege of Zheng, continues (see Yin 1.4). Despite rhetorical flourishes and disclaimer of selfinterest, he is turning Xǔ into a de facto Zheng protectorate. In the following passage his action seems to merit the noble man’s approval. But in the very next episode (Yin 11.4), the noble man criticizes his neglect of good governance. The Liege of Zheng had Baili, a high officer of Xǔ, serve Xǔ Shu and reside in the eastern sector of Xǔ,145 saying, “Heaven brought calamity upon the domain of Xǔ. In truth it was the ghosts and spirits who were displeased with the Prince of Xǔ and who then borrowed my hands to punish him. When I, the unworthy one, have not been able to bring peace even to one or two of my elders, how should I dare claim Xǔ as my own merit? I have a younger brother and was not able to live in harmony with him but sent him to find nourishment abroad.146 Still less would I be able to hold on to Xǔ for a long time! I hope that you, my good sir, will support Xǔ Shu in pacifying and soothing these people. And I will send Gongsun Huo to assist you.147 If I manage to die a natural death, and Heaven, in accord with ritual propriety, repents of the calamity visited upon Xǔ, should I not prefer that the Lord of Xǔ be made again to serve his altars of the domain? Then if our domain of Zheng were to make a request of him, so that as of old we would be joined through marriage, he would condescend to go along with us. Let it not be that it is other lineages that press close and dwell here, thereby contending with our domain of Zheng for this land. My sons and grandsons would then have no time to save themselves from destruction, still less to be able to offer sacrifices to Xǔ. That I send you, my good sir, to dwell in this place is not just for the domain of Xǔ but also because I rely upon you, for the time being, to shore up our own borders.”148 He then sent Gongsun Huo to dwell in the western sector of Xǔ, saying, “Do not put any of your ritual vessels or valuables in Xǔ. When I die, quickly depart. Our former ruler established his new settlement here,149 but the royal house has already declined, and the sons and grandsons of Zhou day after day lose their order of ranks. This very Xǔ is the offspring of the Grand Peaks.150 Since Heaven has had its fill of Zhou’s virtue, should I then be able to contend with Xǔ?” The noble man said of Lord Zhuang of Zheng: “In this he showed ritual propriety. Ritual is that which regulates the domain and its patrimonies, stabilizes the altars of the domain, gives order to the people, and benefits inheritors. Xǔ was lawless, and Lord Zhuang attacked it. It submitted, and he departed. Taking measure of his virtue, he managed the situation. Taking stock of his strength, he went forward. Examining the times, he took action. And he did not burden those who followed. He can be said to have understood ritual.”

11.3b

Lord Yin

63

11.4 鄭伯使卒出豭，行出犬、雞，以詛射潁考叔者。君子謂鄭莊公「失政刑

矣。政以治民，刑以正邪。既無德政，又無威刑，是以及邪。邪而詛之， 將何益矣！」 11.5 王取鄔、劉、蒍、邘之田于鄭，而與鄭人蘇忿生之田：溫、原、絺、樊、隰

郕、欑茅、向、盟、州、陘、隤、懷。 君子是以知桓王之失鄭也：「恕而行之，德之則也，禮之經也。己 弗能有，而以與人，人之不至，不亦宜乎？」 11.6 鄭、息有違言。息侯伐鄭，鄭伯與戰于竟，息師大敗而還。

君子是以知息之將亡也：「不度德，不量力，不親親，不徵辭，不 察有罪。犯五不韙，而以伐人，其喪師也，不亦宜乎？」

151 Maoshi 199, “He ren si” 何人斯, 12C.425, makes reference to the use of “the three creatures” (san wu 三物) to bind someone with an oath. Zheng Xuan says that the three creatures are the boar, the dog, and the chicken (Maoshi-Zheng 2:427). Yang (1:76) suggests that these three creatures could also be used in sacrifices that were intended to bind another with a curse. 152 See also Tong Shuye, Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 41; Yu Yingshi, Zhongguo jinshi lunli yu shangren jingshen.

64

Zuo Tradition

Lord Zhuang pronounces a curse upon the killer of Ying Kaoshu (Yin 1.4, 11.3). The Liege of Zheng had each company of soldiers contribute a boar and each squadron contribute a dog or a chicken in order to pronounce a curse upon the man who shot Ying Kaoshu.151 The noble man said of Lord Zhuang of Zheng: “He had indeed neglected government and penal law. Government is the means to regulate the people. Penal law is the means to correct deviance. Since he had neither a virtuous government nor stern penal law, Zidu therefore came to deviance. What is the benefit of cursing someone after they have become deviant?”

11.4

The noble man here criticizes the Zhou king for giving away lands over which he exercised little control. Zheng itself will have trouble controlling these lands (see Huan 7.2). Zheng’s somewhat aggressive behavior throughout the early years of Zuozhuan has led some to suggest that Lord Zhuang was something of a “minor overlord” and that Zheng power might have been based upon economic power that derived from privileging the merchant class (on this see Xi 33.1, Cheng 3.10, Zhao 16.3).152 The king took the lands of Wu, Liu, Wei, and Yu in Zheng and presented the Zheng leaders with the lands of Su Fensheng,153 namely, Wen, Yuan, Chi, Fan, Xicheng, Cuanmao, Xiang, Meng, Zhou, Xing, Tui, and Huai. The noble man knew by this that King Huan had lost Zheng. “To act upon fellow feeling is the standard of virtue and the principle of ritual propriety. He himself was not able to control his land, so he gave it to others. Is it not after all proper that others did not come to his court?”

11.5

Zheng and Xi had a verbal disagreement. The Prince of Xi attacked Zheng, and the Liege of Zheng fought with them along the border. The Xi troops were roundly defeated and returned home. The noble man knew by this that Xi was about to perish:154 “They did not take measure of their virtue, they did not take stock of their strength, they did not treat their kin with proper affection, they did not seek to verify allegations, and they did not examine into whether there had been a crime. They committed these five wrongs and thereby attacked others. Is it not fitting that they lost an army?”

11.6

153 Su Fensheng was given the territory of Wen in the time of King Wu of Zhou and became supervisor of justice (Cheng 11.7). In Zhuang 19.2 we learn that Wen is still held by the Su lineage, so what is given away here must be only a part of the “fields of Su Fensheng.” 154 We know that Xi had indeed perished by 680 Bce (Zhuang 14.3).

Lord Yin

65

11.7 冬，十月，鄭伯以虢師伐宋。壬戌，大敗宋師，以報其入鄭也。宋不告命，

故不書。凡諸侯有命，告則書，不然則否。師出臧否，亦如之。雖及滅 國，滅不告敗，勝不告克，不書于策。 11.8(4) 羽父請殺桓公，將以求大宰。公曰：「為其少故也，吾將授之矣。使營菟

裘，吾將老焉。」羽父懼，反譖公于桓公而請弒之。 公之為公子也，與鄭人戰于狐壤，止焉。鄭人囚諸尹氏。賂尹氏， 而禱於其主鍾巫。遂與尹氏歸，而立其主。 十一月，公祭鍾巫，齊于社圃，館于寪氏。壬辰，羽父使賊弒公于 寪氏，立桓公，而討寪氏，有死者。 不書葬，不成喪也。

155 There was no office in Lu by the title “grand steward” (大宰 da zai). Yang (1:79) supplies evidence that this term was sometimes used for a high minister or for one who held a high government position. 156 Yang (1:79) believes that the text is incomplete at this point. We think the ellipsis is a logical one and have therefore added “I have ruled” to the literal “Because he was young: that is the reason.” 157 Tuqiu 菟裘, where the Lu ruler proposes to retire, was probably located southeast of present-day Tai’an County 泰安縣, Shandong. 158 The preface to Lord Yin’s assassination is described in Shiji 33.1529 with somewhat more dialogue: “Gongzi Hui slanderously said to Lord Yin, ‘The common people would like to change rulers. I hope you will be established in power. I request permission to kill Yun for you, lord, and then you can make me a minister.’ Lord Yin said, ‘This [i.e., Yun’s rule] was the previous ruler’s command. But because Yun was young, I consequently acted as regent. I just now am building up the area of Tuqiu and will retire there. I will present the government to Yun.’ Hui was afraid Yun would learn of this and would turn on him and execute him. So he slandered Lord Yin to Yun, saying, ‘Lord Yin wants to be instated and get rid of you. You should plan for this! I request permission to kill Lord Yin for you.’”

66

Zuo Tradition

The pattern of conflict between Song and Zheng continues as Zheng retaliates for Song’s action reported in Yin 10.4. In winter, in the tenth month, the Liege of Zheng attacked Song with Guo troops. On the renxu day (14), they roundly defeated the Song troops. This was in retaliation for Song’s incursion into Zheng. Song did not notify Lu of its orders, and that is why it is not recorded. In all cases when the princes issued an order, if we were notified, then it was recorded; otherwise, it was not. If it was not reported, then it was not recorded. When troops went out, whether to a good outcome or not, it was the same. Even in the case of the destruction of a domain, if the destroyed did not report the defeat and the victorious did not report the conquest, it is not recorded on the bamboo strips.

11.7

Zuozhuan here provides details on the death of Lord Yin of Lu. Gongzi Hui, eager to enhance his own power, wants the future Lord Huan out of the way, but Lord Yin’s loyalty to his younger half brother continues and leads to his tragic demise. Only his death is noted in Annals, Yin 11.4, but here we are informed that he was assassinated. Gongzi Huia requested that Lord Huan be put to death and aimed in this way to seek for himself the position of grand steward.155 Our lord said, “It was because of his youth that I have ruled.156 I am going to hand rule over to him! Let Tuqiu be built up and I will retire there.”157 Frightened, Gongzi Huia turned around and slandered Lord Yin to Lord Huan and requested that the former be assassinated.158 When our lord was still a young prince, he had done battle with the Zheng men at Hurang and had been detained there.159 The Zheng men had imprisoned him among the Yin lineage. He had bribed the Yin lineage head and offered a prayer to Zhongwu, the god of the Yin lineage. Subsequently, he had returned to Lu along with the Yin lineage head, and they had established an altar to Zhongwu in Lu. In the eleventh month, our lord was going to perform a sacrifice to Zhongwu. He had been fasting in the She Garden and was lodging with the Wei lineage head.160 On the renchen day (15), Gongzi Huia sent brigands to assassinate our lord in the Wei lineage head’s house. After establishing Lord Huan as ruler, they chastised the Wei lineage and some died. That the text does not record the burial is because they did not complete the proper mourning ritual.

11.8(4)

159 Hurang 狐壤 was located in the domain of Zheng north of present-day Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. 160 The Wei lineage head was apparently a Lu official.

Lord Yin

67

桓公

Lord Huan (711–694 bce) The reign of Lord Huan begins and ends with a murder. Lord Huan comes to power when his half brother Lord Yin, who is acting as regent, is killed by henchmen of the ambitious Gongzi Hui, himself a member of the Lu royal family (Yin 11.8). Curiously, neither the Annals nor Zuozhuan expresses any disapproval of this murder. Lord Huan is in turn brutally killed while visiting the domain of Qi, as a result of his wife’s (Wen Jiang) sexual liaison with the Prince of Qi, her own older brother (Huan 18.1). Such violence is not unusual in these pages: the ruler of Song is assassinated (2.1); the heir apparent of Chen is killed, sending the domain into disarray (5.1); the Zhou king is shot in the shoulder with an arrow (5.3); the Wei heir apparent is killed and his brother Lord Hui is forced to flee the domain; Lord Zhao of Zheng is killed (17.8); and the Zhou Duke plans to assassinate King Zhuang but is himself killed first (18.2). In short, the political world of the central domains seems anything but stable. Qin and Chu, two domains that are to play a major role in the remainder of Zuozhuan and subsequent history as well, are first mentioned in the Lord Huan years: Chu in 710 (2.2) and Qin in 708 (4.3). Chu immediately plays an aggressive role, attacking Sui in 706 (6.2, 8.2), defeating forces from Deng and You in 703 (9.2), crushing a Yun army in 701 (11.2), and overwhelming Jiao in 700 (12.3), only to suffer defeat itself in 699 at the hands of Rong and Luo forces (13.1). Nevertheless, the major focus in the years of Lord Huan remains largely upon Lu, Zheng, Song, Wei, Qi, and Zhou, with the political rivals Zheng and Song particularly active. The Lord Huan section of Zuozhuan continues very much in the style of Lord Yin. The typical entry is brief. In fact, several years pass with entries that either add little to their respective Annals entries or largely imitate the terse Annals format (see years 4, 7, 14). Still, several passages of Lord Huan are of considerable literary interest. Among these we

69

春秋 1.1(1) 元年，春，王正月，公即位。 1.2(1) 三月，公會鄭伯于垂，鄭伯以璧假許田。 1.3(2) 夏，四月丁未，公及鄭伯盟于越。 1.4(3) 秋，大水。 1.5 冬，十月。

70

Zuo Tradition

might mention the Sui minister Ji Liang’s virtuous efforts to hold Chu at bay, which include his famous rationalistic argument that “the people are the masters of the gods” (6.2); the attempts of both Dou Bobi and the Chu ruler’s perspicacious wife Deng Man to avert Chu’s humiliating defeat (13.1); Yong Jí’s choice to save her father’s life rather than that of her husband (15.2); Jizi’s intense filial piety and his brother’s equally intense fraternal devotion (16.5); and, of course, the violent murder of Lord Huan (18.2). Also in this section the formal remonstrance first appears in full form. Although Shi Que’s remonstrance in Yin 3.3 is tightly structured and the remonstrance against the trip to the fisheries in Yin 5.1 is ornate, the form as encountered in Huan 2.2 points toward the complexity that remonstrance will assume in subsequent sections of Zuozhuan. Zang Aibo, the Lu minister who delivers this particular remonstrance, wins the accolades of the Zhou court scribe, who states what will become a recurring message of Zuozhuan: “When his ruler erred, he was not remiss in remonstrating with him on the basis of virtue.”

LORD HUAN 1 (711 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position.

1.1(1)

In the third month, our lord met with the Liege of Zheng at Chui. The Liege of Zheng, giving a jade disk as a gift, borrowed the lands of Xǔ.

1.2(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingwei day (2), our lord and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Yue.1

1.3(2)

In autumn, there was a great flood.

1.4(3)

Winter, the tenth month.

1.5

1

The Yue 越 referred to here was located in the area of present-day Cao County 曹縣, Shandong.

Lord Huan

71

左傳

1.1(1, 2)

元年，春，公即位，修好于鄭。鄭人請復祀周公，卒易祊田。公許之。三 月，鄭伯以璧假許田，為周公祊故也。

1.2(3) 夏，四月丁未，公及鄭伯盟于越，結祊成也。盟曰：「渝盟，無享國！」 1.3(4) 秋，大水。凡平原出水為大水。 1.4 冬，鄭伯拜盟。 1.5 宋華父督見孔父之妻于路，目逆而送之，曰：「美而豔。」

春秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，王正月戊申，宋督弒其君與夷及其大夫孔父。 2.2 滕子來朝。 2.3(1) 三月，公會齊侯、陳侯、鄭伯于稷，以成宋亂。

2

3

72

That is, two items were involved, permission to offer sacrifices to the Zhou Duke and the land transfer. Thus, the gift of the jade disk was added to the land transfer to compensate Lu. Guliang, Huan 1 (3.28), suggests that the Annals uses the word “borrow” or “loan” (jia 假) to avoid the unpleasant reality that this was actually a land swap. There was no wushen day in the first month.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In Yin 8.2 the Liege of Zheng first requested an exchange of lands with Lu and asked permission to offer sacrifices to the Zhou Duke, the founding ancestor of the Lu domain. The exchange is finally completed, but only after the Liege of Zheng has added the additional gift of jade, thus giving two things for the two things he is gaining. The ritual excuse (sacrifices to the Zhou Duke, ancestor of Lu) masks the drive for territorial expansion and consolidation. In the first year, in spring, our lord acceded to his position. He fostered good relations with Zheng. The Zheng leaders asked permission to offer sacrifices again to the Zhou Duke and to complete the transfer of the lands of Beng. Our lord agreed to this. In the third month, the Liege of Zheng, giving a jade disk as a gift, borrowed the lands of Xǔ: this was because of the negotiations about the Zhou Duke and Beng.2 In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingwei day (2), our lord and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Yue: this was to formalize completion of the exchange of Beng. The covenant said, “May he who violates the covenant not have the benefit of his domain!”

1.1(1, 2)

1.2(3)

In autumn, there was a great flood. In all cases when water overflows the plains, it is considered “a great flood.”

1.3(4)

In winter, the Liege of Zheng came here to bow in thanks for the covenant.

l.4

The following event sets up a fatal enmity between Kongfu, said to be a direct ancestor of Confucius and supervisor of the military in Song (Yin 3.5), and Huafu Du. Huafu Du of Song met the wife of Kongfu on a road. He eyed her as she approached and as she departed. “Lovely and radiant,” he said.

1.5

LORD HUAN 2 (710 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the wushen day,3 Du (Huafu Du) of Song assassinated his ruler Yuyi and the high officer Kongfu.

2.1(1)

The Master of Teng came to visit our court.

2.2

In the third month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Chen, and the Liege of Zheng at Ji in order to settle the turmoil in Song.4

2.3(1)

4 Ji 稷 was located in the domain of Song in present-day Shangqiu County 商丘縣, Henan.

Lord Huan

73

2.4(2) 夏，四月，取郜大鼎于宋。戊申，納于太廟。 2.5(3) 秋，七月，杞侯來朝。 2.6(4) 蔡侯、鄭伯會于鄧。 2.7(5) 九月，入杞。 2.8(6) 公及戎盟于唐。 2.9(7) 冬，公至自唐。

左傳

2.1(1, 3)

二年，春，宋督攻孔氏，殺孔父而取其妻。公怒，督懼，遂弒殤公。君子 以督為有無君之心，而後動於惡，故先書弒其君。會于稷，以成宋亂，為 賂故，立華氏也。 宋殤公立，十年十一戰，民不堪命。孔父嘉為司馬，督為大宰，故 因民之不堪命，先宣言曰：「司馬則然。」已殺孔父而弒殤公，召莊公于 鄭而立之，以親鄭。以郜大鼎賂公，齊、陳、鄭皆有賂，故遂相宋公。

5 Gao 郜 was the name of a small domain located near present-day Chengwu County 成武縣 on the Shandong Peninsula that was originally granted to the son of King Wen. The domain of Song eventually destroyed Gao, and the cauldron referred to here was presumably moved to Song at that time. In Annals, Yin 10.3, Lu seized the territory of Gao from Song in battle, and that is perhaps why the cauldron is now presented. Several cauldrons from the state of Gao are extant (Yang, 1:84). 6 Deng 鄧 was a small domain eventually absorbed by Chu. It was located in Deng County 鄧縣, Henan. 7 What is at stake here is the order of the murders. Zuozhuan asserts that Kongfu was killed first and here tries to explain why the Annals puts the murder of the ruler Yuyi (Lord Shang) first. That is, he had given no place for a ruler in his heart and therefore killed Kongfu. Huafu Du had, in a sense, eliminated the ruler before he committed his first murder. The noble man also seems to be continuing his concern with morallegal issues and criminal responsibility taken up earlier in Yin 11.4.

74

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fourth month, we took the great cauldron of Gao from Song.5 On the wushen day (9), we installed it in the Grand Ancestral Temple.

2.4(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, the Prince of Qǐ came to visit our court.

2.5(3)

The Prince of Cai and the Liege of Zheng met in Deng.6

2.6(4)

In the ninth month, we entered Qǐ.

2.7(5)

Our lord and the Rong swore a covenant at Tang.

2.8(6)

In winter, our lord arrived from Tang.

2.9(7)

ZUO

The murder of Lord Shang of Song here results from Huafu Du’s lust for the wife of Kongfu (Huan 1.5). Gongzi Ping, the future Lord Zhuang of Song and the son of Lord Mu, who had been passed over for the rulership of Song earlier (Yin 3.5), is brought back from exile in Zheng (Yin 4.3), and generous gifts are distributed to the lords as a way of neutralizing opposition to the change of government in Song. In the second year, in spring, Huafu Dua of Song attacked the Kong house, killing Kongfu and seizing his wife. The lord was angry, and Huafu Dub was filled with fear. As a result he assassinated Lord Shang. The noble man considered that Du first had a heart in which there was no place for his ruler and only afterward was stirred to his evil act. That is why the text first records that he assassinated his ruler.7 There was a meeting at Ji in order to settle the turmoil in Song. But because presents were offered, the lords established the hereditary Hua lineage.8 After Lord Shang was established in power, there were eleven battles in ten years, and the people could not bear his commands. Kongfua had been supervisor of the military and Du had been grand steward. That is why Huafu Du, exploiting the fact that the people could not bear the commands, first proclaimed, “It’s all the fault of the supervisor of the military.” Then, after he had killed Kongfu and assassinated Lord Shang, he summoned Lord Zhuang from Zheng and established him in power, thereby endearing himself to the people of Zheng. He offered the great cauldron of Gao as a present to our lord. Qi, Chen, and Zheng all received presents as well, and that is why Huafu subsequently served as minister for the Duke of Song.

8

2.1(1, 3)

Du belonged to the Hua line, a name taken by this family much later than the date of this entry (Yang, 1:85). For participants in the meeting at Ji, see Annals, Yin 2.3.

Lord Huan

75

2.2(4) 夏，四月，取郜大鼎于宋。戊申，納于太廟，非禮也。臧哀伯諫曰： 君人者，將昭德塞違，以臨照百官，猶懼或失之，故昭令德

以示子孫。是以清廟茅屋，大路越席，大羹不致，粢食不 鑿，昭其儉也。袞、冕、黻、珽，帶、裳、幅、舄，衡、紞、紘、 綖，昭其度也。藻、率、鞞、琫，鞶、厲、游、纓，昭其數也。 火、龍、黼、黻，昭其文也。五色比象，昭其物也。鍚、鸞、 和、鈴，昭其聲也。三辰旂旗，昭其明也。夫德，儉而有度， 登降有數，文物以紀之，聲明以發之，以臨照百官。百官於 是乎戒懼而不敢易紀律。

76

Zuo Tradition

Song’s gift, the great cauldron of Gao (2.1), is installed in Lu, much to the consternation of the wise adviser Zang Aibo (son of Zang Xibo), whose remonstrance displays many of the rhetorical flourishes that will typify speeches throughout Zuozhuan. In summer, in the fourth month, we took the great cauldron of Gao from Song. On the wushen day (9), we installed it in the Grand Ancestral Temple. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Zang Aibo remonstrated:

2.2(4)

A true ruler of men will manifest virtue and block disobedience, in this way overseeing and shining a light upon his officials. Still, he fears that he might sometimes fail at this, and therefore he manifests exemplary virtue and displays it for his sons and grandsons. So it is that the Pellucid Temple has a thatched roof,9 the grand chariot has rush mats, the grand broth is unseasoned, and the grains are unrefined: these manifest his frugality. The robes, ceremonial cap, leathern apron, and jade tablet; the belt, skirt, gaiters, and wooden-soled footwear; the hat pin, ear-plug cords, hat string, and cap board: these manifest his adherence to proper standards. The jade-offering box, sash, sheath, and sheath decorations; the leathern belt, belt tassels, pennant streamers, and bridle: these manifest his distinctions of rank. The weaves of fire, of dragons, of black and white axes, and of blue and black undulations: these manifest his proper patterning. The five colors matched with the images: these manifest his proper use of things. The bells on the horses’ foreheads, on the chariot, on the carriage shaft, and on the flags: these manifest his proper use of sounds. The flags decorated with the three heavenly bodies: these manifest his proper resplendence. Now when virtue is frugal but has standards, maintains distinctions despite any amplifications or reductions, is marked by patterning and proper use, and is expressed in sounds and resplendence, it is used to oversee and shine down upon the many officials. The officials thereupon show caution and fear and dare not transgress the rules and statutes.

9

“Pellucid Temple” (“Qing miao” 清廟) is the title of Maoshi 266. The “Mao Commentary” explains that it is a temple where sacrifices are offered to King Wen. Commentators explain qing 清 in this context as either “lucid” or “tranquil” (Maoshi 19A.706).

Lord Huan

77

今滅德立違，而寘其賂器於太廟，以明示百官。百官象 之，其又何誅焉？國家之敗由官邪也，官之失德，寵賂章也。 郜鼎在廟，章孰甚焉？武王克商，遷九鼎于雒邑，義士猶或 非之，而況將昭違亂之賂器於太廟，其若之何？ 公不聽。 周內史聞之曰：「臧孫達其有後於魯乎！君違，不忘諫之以德。」 2.3(5) 秋，七月，杞侯來朝，不敬。杞侯歸，乃謀伐之。 2.4(6) 蔡侯、鄭伯會于鄧，始懼楚也。 2.5(7) 九月，入杞，討不敬也。 2.6(8) 公及戎盟于唐，修舊好也。

10

78

The Zangsun lineage, to which Zang Aibo belongs, does indeed continue to hold high office in Lu and prospers well into the Warring States period. Among its most famous sons is Zang Wenzhong, first mentioned in Zuozhuan in Zhuang 28.4. The lineage is attested in Zuozhuan as late as Ai 24.1 (471 Bce), 240 years from the time of this prophetic utterance, and later even Mencius has trouble with one of them (see

Zuo Tradition

In the present case, stifling virtue and setting up disobedience as an example, you place a vessel received as a bribe in the Grand Ancestral Temple and make a clear display of it to the many officials. When the officials imitate such conduct, how are you going to punish them for this? The defeat of a domain or patrimony starts from the deviations of officials. The officials’ neglect of virtue is demonstrated in their partiality for bribes. For the cauldron of Gao to be in the temple—what demonstration could be more extreme than this! Even when King Wu conquered Shang and moved the nine cauldrons to the settlement at Luo, there were nonetheless some men of lofty principles who criticized him. How much worse is it to place in the Grand Ancestral Temple a vessel won as a bribe for showing disobedience and disorder!

Our lord did not heed this. The court scribe of Zhou heard of this and said, “I expect that Zang Aiboa will have descendants in Lu! When his ruler erred, he was not remiss in remonstrating with him on the basis of virtue.”10 In autumn, in the seventh month, the Prince of Qǐ came to visit our court: he did not show respect. When the Prince of Qǐ returned home, we made plans to attack him.

2.3(5)

The following brief entry is the first reference in Zuozhuan to the southern domain of Chu, which will very soon become a major player in the political world. The Prince of Cai and the Liege of Zheng met in Deng: this was the beginning of fear for Chu.

2.4(6)

On Qǐ’s disrespect for Lu, see Huan 2.3. In the ninth month, we entered Qǐ: this was to chastise them for their disrespect.

2.5(7)

Lu’s earlier covenants with the Rong (Yin 2.1, 2.4) had apparently been disrupted by the events of Yin 7.5. Our lord and the Rong swore a covenant at Tang: this was to restore ageold amity.

2.6(8)

Mencius 1B.16). A brief note on the installation of the cauldron given as a present appears in Shiji 33.1530 with the additional statement that a noble man criticized this, which is taken as evidence that the quotations from the “noble man,” considered a late addition by some scholars, were already in Zuozhuan at least by the early Han when Shiji was compiled.

Lord Huan

79

2.7(9) 冬，公至自唐，告于廟也。凡公行，告于宗廟；反行，飲至、舍爵、策勳

焉，禮也。特相會，往來稱地，讓事也。自參以上，則往稱地，來稱會，成 事也。 2.8 初，晉穆侯之夫人姜氏以條之役生大子，命之曰仇。其弟以千畝之戰

生，命之曰成師。 師服曰：「異哉，君之名子也！夫名以制義，義以出禮，禮以體政， 政以正民，是以政成而民聽。易則生亂。嘉耦日妃，怨耦曰仇，古之命 也。今君命大子曰仇，弟曰成師，始兆亂矣。兄其替乎！」

11 12

80

In other words, when only two of the princes were holding a meeting, no leader was designated so that it was necessary that only the place of the meeting be recorded since each of the lords would of course yield priority to the other. According to the Bamboo Annals (Zhushu jinian), the armies of Jin were defeated in this battle by the Rong peoples of Tiao (see Jinben Zhushu jinian shuzheng, King Xuan 38.257). Presumably because of this defeat, the son was given this rather unpropitious name.

Zuo Tradition

Two important items of information appear in the following passage: first, certain events were reported in the Ancestral Temple, a practice also mentioned in Liji (18.360); second, official records were made of meritorious acts. In winter, our lord arrived from Tang: this was reported in the temple. In all cases when the lord goes on a journey, he makes a report in the Ancestral Temple. When he returns from his journey, drinking celebrates his arrival, goblets are set out, and merits are recorded on bamboo strips. This is in accordance with ritual propriety. When meeting alone with one other domain, whether our lord leaves the domain or someone else comes, the place is noted. This is a matter of yielding priority as host.11 When three or more parties attend, if our lord leaves the domain, the place is noted, but if others come here, then just the occurrence of the meeting is noted. This is a matter of fulfilling the duties of host.

2.7(9)

The following passage provides background to events that are noted in Yin 5.2. The domain of Jin faced the problem that the auxiliary line in control of the city of Quwo had become more powerful than the ruler in control of the capital, Yi. The balance of power between the trunk ( ben 本) and branch (zhi 枝) or branch tip (mo 末) of a lineage is a recurrent concern in the text. The calamity Preceptor Fu predicts here will be fulfilled in Huan 3.1. For other examples of anecdotes concerning naming, see Huan 6.5, Wen 11.5, Xuan 4.3, and Zhao 4.8. Earlier, because Lady Jiang, the wife of Prince Mu of Jin, had given birth to the heir apparent during the campaign against Tiao, they named the infant Chou [“Enemy”].12 His younger brother was born at the time of the battle of Qianmou, and they named him Chengshi [“Successful Troops”].13 Preceptor Fu14 said, “Strange indeed is the way my lord has named his sons! Now, with names, one regulates duties. With duties, one produces rituals. With rituals, one embodies government. With government, one corrects the people. Therefore, when the government is brought to completion, the people heed it, but when it is altered, disorder arises. A partner in amity is called a ‘mate,’ and a partner in resentment is called an ‘enemy.’ This is the ancient way of naming. Now, for you to name your eldest son Chou and his younger brother Chengshi is to give a first portent of turmoil! Surely the elder brother will be replaced.”

13 14

2.8

The campaign against Tao is dated to 805 Bce. The Jin victory at Qianmou is noted in Shiji 15.525 under the twenty-sixth year of King Xuan (802 Bce). A high officer in the state of Jin.

Lord Huan

81

惠之二十四年，晉始亂，故封桓叔于曲沃。靖侯之孫欒賓傅之。師 服曰：「吾聞國家之立也，本大而末小，是以能固。故天子建國，諸侯立 家，卿置側室，大夫有貳宗，士有隸子弟，庶人、工、商，各有分親，皆有 等衰。是以民服事其上，而下無覬覦。今晉，甸侯也，而建國，本既弱 矣，其能久乎？」 惠之三十年，晉潘父弒昭侯而納桓叔，不克。晉人立孝侯。惠之 四十五年，曲沃莊伯伐翼，弒孝侯。翼人立其弟鄂侯。鄂侯生哀侯。哀 侯侵陘庭之田。陘庭南鄙啟曲沃伐翼。

春秋 3.1(2) 三年，春，正月，公會齊侯于嬴。 3.2(3) 夏，齊侯、衛侯胥命于蒲。 3.3(4) 六月，公會杞侯于郕。

15 16

17

82

This predates the beginning of the Annals by twenty-three years. Since Prince Jing (d. 841 Bce) was the great-great-grandfather of Chengshi, Luan Bin would be a great uncle. Shiji 39.1638 explains as follows: “In his thirty-fifth year [746 Bce] Prince Wen, Chou, died. His son Bo, Prince Zhao, was established. In the first year of Prince Zhao, he granted a domain to Prince Wen’s younger brother Chengshi in Quwo. The city of Quwo was larger than Yi. Yi was the ruler’s capital city of Jin. Chengshi was given his domain at Quwo and was called Huan Shu. One of the grandsons of Prince Jing by a concubine, Luan Bin, served as minister to Huan Shu. Huan Shu was fifty-eight at that time and was fond of virtue. The people of the domain of Jin all were attached to him.” The terms ce shi 側室, “auxiliary households,” and er zong 貳宗, “collateral line leaders,” also appear in Xiang 14.6 and Wen 12.6. They seem to refer to the lineages of younger sons and sons of concubines (Yang, 1:94).

Zuo Tradition

In the twenty-fourth year of Lord Hui of Lu (745 BCE),15 Jin first fell into disorder, and that is why they put Chengshia in power in Quwo. The grandson of Prince Jing, Luan Bin, served him as tutor.16 Preceptor Fu said, “I have heard that when domains and patrimonies are established, the trunk is large and the branches are small and that is why they are sturdy. Thus, the Son of Heaven establishes domains; the princes establish patrimonies; the ministers set up auxiliary households; the high officers have their collateral line leaders;17 the officers have sons and younger brothers who are subordinate to them; and the landsmen, the artisans, and the merchants each make distinctions among relatives. All of these have gradations of status.18 Therefore, the people submit to and serve their superiors, and inferiors have no inappropriate aspirations. Now, Jin was once a princedom in the king’s lands and then was established as a domain. Now that the trunk already has grown weak, can Jin last long?” In the thirtieth year of Lord Hui (739 BCE), Panfu of Jin assassinated Prince Zhao and was going to install Chengshia in power, but he did not prevail. The Jin leaders established Prince Xiao as ruler. In the forty-fifth year of Lord Hui (724 BCE), Liege Zhuang of Quwo attacked Yi and assas­sinated Prince Xiao. The Yi leaders established his younger brother Prince E as ruler. Prince E fathered Prince Ai. Prince Ai invaded the fields of Xingting, and the people of the southern marches of Xingting opened the way for Quwo to attack Yi.19 LORD HUAN 3 (709 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the first month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Ying.20

3.1(2)

In summer, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei exchanged commands at Pu.21

3.2(3)

In the sixth month, our lord met with the Prince of Qǐ at Cheng.

3.3(4)

18

Takezoe (2.26) notes that these gradations of status extend from the Son of Heaven down to the common people, the latter including unranked members of the aristocratic lineages and capital dwellers but neither slaves nor the provincial population. 19 This retrospective narrative is unusual in that it is not linked to any event that took place in the second year of Lord Huan. One gains the impression from this and other passages that the compilers of Zuozhuan possessed fairly detailed records from the domain of Jin. It is possible that the entry was originally part of Huan 3.1, which con­ cerns an attack by Quwo. 20 Ying 嬴 was located in the domain of Qi northwest of present-day Laiwu County 萊 蕪縣, Shandong. 21 Xu ming 胥命 is used of an agreement where no formal covenant was sworn (Yang, 1:96). Pu 蒲 was located in Wei territory east of current Changyuan County 長垣縣, Henan.

Lord Huan

83

3.4 秋，七月壬辰朔，日有食之，既。 3.5(5) 公子翬如齊逆女。 3.6(6) 九月，齊侯送姜氏于讙。 3.7 公會齊侯于讙。 3.8(7) 夫人姜氏至自齊。 3.9(7) 冬，齊侯使其弟年來聘。 3.10 有年。

左傳 3.1 三年，春，曲沃武公伐翼，次于陘庭。韓萬御戎；梁弘為右。逐翼侯于汾

隰，驂絓而止，夜獲之，及欒共叔。 3.2(1) 會于嬴，成婚于齊也。 3.3(2) 夏，齊侯、衛侯胥命于蒲，不盟也。 3.4(3) 公會杞侯于郕，杞求成也。 3.5(5) 秋，公子翬如齊逆女，修先君之好，故曰「公子」。

84

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renchen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. It was a total eclipse.22 Gongzi Hui went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride.23 In the ninth month, the Prince of Qi escorted Lady Jiang to Huan.

3.4

3.5(5) 24

3.6(6)

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Huan.

3.7

Our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi.

3.8(7)

In winter, the Prince of Qi sent his younger brother, Nian (Yi Zhongnian), to us on an official visit.

3.9(7)

There was a bountiful harvest.

3.10

ZUO

The following episode continues the events of Huan 2.8. In the third year, in spring, Lord Wu of Quwo attacked Yi and camped at Xingting. Han Wan drove the war chariot and Liang Hong was the spearman on the right. As they pursued the Prince of Yi in the Fen Marsh, one of his trace horses became tangled in the undergrowth, and he was brought to a halt. In the night they captured him and Luan Gongshu.25

3.1

They met at Ying: this was to conclude the marriage in Qi.

3.2(1)

In summer, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei exchanged commands at Pu: it was not a case of swearing a covenant.

3.3(2)

Our lord met the Prince of Qǐ at Cheng: this was because Qǐ had sought an accord.

3.4(3)

In autumn, Gongzi Hui went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride. He fostered the amity that prevailed among the former rulers, and that is why he is referred to as “Gongzi,” a noble son.26

3.5(5)

22 23

Calculations indicate that this eclipse actually took place in the eighth month. Presumably this bride is the Lady Jiang mentioned below as the wife of Lord Huan of Lu. 24 Huan 讙 was a small domain north of present-day Ningyang County 寧陽縣, Shandong. 25 Luan Gongshu was the son of Luan Bin, who served Chengshi as tutor (Huan 2.8). Guoyu says that Lord Wu of Quwo attacked the main Jin city of Yi, killed the Prince of Yi, and halted Luan Gongshu. Lord Wu then offered Luan Gongshu power in Jin, but the latter refused and “fought to the death” (Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.251). 26 In earlier entries (e.g., Annals, Yin 4.5), Hui is referred to by name only, without “Gongzi.” Recall that Gongzi Hui is responsible for the murder of Lord Yin.

Lord Huan

85

3.6(6) 齊侯送姜氏于讙，非禮也。凡公女嫁于敵國：姊妹，則上卿送之，以禮於

先君；公子，則下卿送之。於大國，雖公子，亦上卿送之。於天子，則諸 卿皆行，公不自送。於小國，則上大夫送之。

3.7(8, 9)

冬，齊仲年來聘，致夫人也。

3.8 芮伯萬之母芮姜惡芮伯之多寵人也，故逐之，出居于魏。

春秋 4.1(1) 四年，春，正月，公狩于郎。 4.2(2) 夏，天王使宰渠伯糾來聘。

左傳 4.1(1) 四年，春，正月，公狩于郎。書時，禮也。 4.2(2) 夏，周宰渠伯糾來聘。父在，故名。

27 Rui 芮 was a small domain that was located within the royal domain, in present-day Shanxi. It was ruled by the Ji 姬 lineage, whose leaders once served the Zhou as ministers. 28 The commentaries express consternation that there are no entries under this year for autumn and winter. Normally the first month of a season is registered even if no noteworthy event took place at that time.

86

Zuo Tradition

The Qi ruler personally escorts his sister to Lu for her marriage to Lord Huan. We find out later about their incestuous relationship (see Huan 18.1). The Prince of Qi escorted Lady Jiang to Huan: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when the daughter of a lord is married into a coequal domain and is a sister of the reigning lord, then a high minister escorts her to show ritual courtesy to the former ruler. If she is the child of the ruling lord, then a lower-ranking minister escorts her. But if the marriage is to a greater domain, it is still a high minister who escorts her even if she is a child of the lord. If the marriage is to the Son of Heaven, then the ministers all go, but the lord himself does not escort her. If she marries into a smaller domain, then the senior high officers escort her.

3.6(6)

In winter, Nian, the younger brother of the Qi lord, came on an official visit: this was to bring our lord’s wife.

3.7(8, 9)

A ruler’s mother, outraged by her son’s profligacy, drives him into exile. A series of short episodes below will trace his activities in exile and his eventual return to Rui (Huan 4.4, 9.3, 10.3). Rui Jiang, the mother of Wan, the Liege of Rui, hated the fact that the Liege of Rui had so many favorites.27 That is why she drove him away, and he left the domain to reside in Weì.

3.8

LORD HUAN 4 (708 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the first month, our lord went on the winter hunt at Lang.

4.1(1)

In summer, the Heaven-appointed king sent his steward Qu Bojiu to us on an official visit.28

4.2(2)

ZUO

In the fourth year, in spring, in the first month, our lord went on the winter hunt at Lang. The season is recorded because it was timely and was in accordance with ritual propriety.29

4.1(1)

In summer, Qu Bojiu, the Zhou steward, came on an official visit. His father was still alive, and that is why he is named.30

4.2(2)

29 30

The first month of the Zhou calendar, which begins the spring, here corresponds to the twelfth month of the Xia calendar, which is a winter month. Hence, the traditional “winter hunt” is held in the spring (Yang, 1:101). Presumably, he would have been called simply the Master of Qu had his father been dead and had Bojiu assumed leadership of the clan.

Lord Huan

87

4.3 秋，秦師侵芮，敗焉，小之也。 4.4 冬，王師、秦師圍魏，執芮伯以歸。

春秋 5.1(1) 五年，春，正月甲戌、己丑，陳侯鮑卒。 5.2(2) 夏，齊侯、鄭伯如紀。 5.3(4) 天王使仍叔之子來聘。 5.4 葬陳桓公。 5.5 城祝丘。 5.6(3) 秋，蔡人、衛人、陳人從王伐鄭。 5.7(5) 大雩。 5.8 螽。 5.9(6) 冬，州公如曹。

31

32

88

The entry is curious for giving two dates, the first in the previous month (i.e., the final month of the previous year) and the second fifteen days later. The Zuozhuan entry below claims that Chen was in disorder, and two separate announcements of the death came to Lu, one on each of the dates noted above. Guliang, Huan 5 (3.32), says that the lord disappeared on the first date and that his body was recovered on the second, so it was impossible to know the precise time of death. Another possibility is that the first date is an interpolation. For another example of a date discrepancy, in that case between the Annals and Zuozhuan, see Yin 3.1. Yang Bojun believes that the son was representing his father, an official, who was too old to undertake the journey himself (cf. Annals, Yin 3.4). As Yang (1:24) notes, the Yin lineage head (Yinshi 尹氏), the Wu lineage head (武氏), Reng Shu 仍叔, Rong Shu 榮叔, and Jiafu 家父 were hereditary officers in the king’s court. The words shi 氏, shu 叔, and fu 父 here signify honored rank rather than any strictly defined kinship relation.

Zuo Tradition

The domain of Qin, which will later play an extremely powerful role in the early Chinese political world, makes its first appearance in Zuozhuan. In autumn, Qin troops invaded Rui and were defeated by them. This was because Qin had underestimated them.

4.3

Qin, defeated by Rui in the previous passage, captures the Rui exile (Huan 3.8). In winter, the king’s troops and Qin troops laid siege to Weì. They seized the Liege of Rui and brought him back with them.

4.4

LORD HUAN 5 (707 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, in the first month, on the jiaxu day (21) or the jichou day (6), Bao, the Prince of Chen, died.31

5.1(1)

In summer, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng went to Ji.

5.2(2)

The Heaven-appointed king sent the son of Reng Shu to us on a formal visit.32

5.3(4)

Lord Huan of Chen was buried.

5.4

We fortified Zhuqiu.33

5.5

In autumn, a Cai leader, a Wei leader, and a Chen leader followed the king and attacked Zheng.

5.6(3)

There was a great rain sacrifice.

5.7(5)

There were locusts.

5.8

In winter, the Lord of Zhōu [the Lord of Chunyu] went to Cao.34

5.9(6)

33 Zhuqiu 祝丘 was located in the domain of Lu in present-day Linyi County 臨沂縣, Shandong. 34 Zhōu 州 was a small domain located to the northeast of present-day Anqiu County 安丘縣, Shandong. The domain capital was Chunyu 淳于, a name by which the domain itself is sometimes known (see, e.g., Zuozhuan below). The domain of Cao 曹 was founded when King Wu, the founder of the Zhou dynasty, established a younger brother there. It was located near Dingtao County 定陶縣 in southern Shandong.

Lord Huan

89

左傳 5.1(1) 五年，春，正月甲戌、己丑，陳侯鮑卒。再赴也。於是陳亂，文公子佗殺

大子免而代之。公疾病而亂作，國人分散，故再赴。 5.2(2) 夏，齊侯、鄭伯朝于紀，欲以襲之。紀人知之。 5.3(6) 王奪鄭伯政，鄭伯不朝。秋，王以諸侯伐鄭，鄭伯禦之。王為中軍；虢公

林父將右軍，蔡人、衛人屬焉；周公黑肩將左軍，陳人屬焉。 鄭子元請為左拒，以當蔡人、衛人；為右拒，以當陳人，曰：「陳亂， 民莫有鬬心。若先犯之，必奔。王卒顧之，必亂。蔡、衛不枝，固將先 奔。既而萃於王卒，可以集事。」從之。

35 36

90

Since Lord Wen was the previous ruler of Chen, Tuo was the younger brother of the newly deceased Bao (Lord Huan of Chen). This is the first occurrence of the term guoren 國人, which we have here translated as “the inhabitants of the capital.” Tong Shuye explains (Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 132–46) that this has a narrower and a broader meaning during the Spring and Autumn period. That is, it can refer to the inhabitants of the capital, as here and in most cases elsewhere in Zuozhuan, or it can refer more broadly to the inhabitants of the entire domain. Tong suggests that these guoren, at least in the narrower sense of the word, might have been relatively small in number, and Zuozhuan indicates that they had significant political importance (see, e.g., Xiang 25.2 and 30.10, where they swear to uphold covenants).

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the fifth year, in spring, in the first month, on the jiaxu day (21) or the jichou day (6), Bao, the Prince of Chen, died. They had sent notice of his death twice. At that time, Chen was in disorder. Gongzi Tuo, the son of Lord Wen, killed the heir apparent Mian and replaced him.35 The lord was extremely ill, and when disorder arose, the inhabitants of the capital were divided and scattered,36 and that is the reason they sent notice of his death twice. In summer, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng visited the Ji court, intending by this means to make a surprise attack on Ji. The Ji leaders learned of this.

5.1(1)

5.2(2)

The next episode details further deterioration in the relationship between the domain of Zheng and the royal court of Zhou (see Yin 3.3 and 8.3). Gongzi Tu’s speech below is the first of many examples in Zuozhuan of military advice, which led to its reputation as, among other things, a handbook of military strategy. The king had stripped political authority from the Liege of Zheng, and the Liege of Zheng no longer visited his court. In autumn, the king led the princes to attack Zheng, and the Liege of Zheng led the opposition against them. The king took charge of the central army. Guo Zhonga, the Guo Duke, led the army of the right, and the men of Cai and Wei were under his command. Zhou Duke Huana, led the army of the left, and the men of Chen were under his command. Gongzi Tua of Zheng requested that they form a counterforce on the left to face the men of Cai and Wei and a counterforce on the right to face the men of Chen.37 He said, “Chen is in disorder and none of its people have the will to fight. If we engage them first, they will surely flee. When the king’s infantry looks back and sees this, they are sure to fall into disarray. Cai and Wei are unsupported and will assuredly flee beforehand. Afterward, we can concentrate our army upon the king’s infantry and bring the matter to completion.” They followed this plan.

37

5.3(6)

The character 拒 ju has been understood as describing a particular military formation: “the square formation.” Karlgren (gl. 29), we think, is correct in arguing that the character here probably means simply “to resist.”

Lord Huan

91

曼伯為右拒，祭仲足為左拒，原繁、高渠彌以中軍奉公，為魚麗之 陳。先偏後伍，伍承彌縫。戰于繻葛。命二拒曰：「旝動而鼓！」蔡、衛、 陳皆奔，王卒亂，鄭師合以攻之，王卒大敗。祝聃射王中肩，王亦能軍。 祝聃請從之。公曰：「君子不欲多上人，況敢陵天子乎？苟自救也，社稷 無隕，多矣。」夜，鄭伯使祭足勞王，且問左右。 5.4(3) 仍叔之子來聘，弱也。 5.5(7) 秋，大雩。書不時也。凡祀，啟蟄而郊，龍見而雩，始殺而嘗，閉蟄而烝。

過則書。 5.6(9) 冬，淳于公如曹。度其國危，遂不復。

This is a problematic interpretation. Du Yu quotes Sima fa as stating that a pian 偏 is a military unit of twenty-five chariots. Du Yu also believes that wu 伍 refers to a unit of five men that accompanied each chariot (ZZ 6.106). Yang (1:105) questions this interpretation and concludes, quite judiciously, that for the time being it is well to leave out what is doubtful. The interpretation above presumes a tight formation of twenty-five chariots with a larger reserve to fill in gaps as lead chariots fall by the wayside. Thus, yu li 魚麗 is understood as referring to a school of fish, where one fish takes up the position of the leader when a leader is removed. For a quite different interpretation, see Karlgren, gl. 30. Other examples concerning military formations can be found in Xuan 12.2 and Cheng 7.5. 39 This is the same place as Changge, named in Yin 5.10. 40 An abbreviated description of this conflict appears in Shiji 42.1760 with the added note that the attack on Zheng resulted from the fact that Lord Zhuang of Zheng “did not go to the Zhou court.” King Huan’s wound was not mortal, and he lived for another ten years. 41 That is, by indicating that this was “a son,” the Annals supposedly points to his extreme youth. 42 The explanation given here for the untimely offering of the rain sacrifice is curious. As Yang (1:107) notes, there are two occasions on which such a sacrifice is offered. The first is the regular time—that is, at the beginning of the summer, when there is fear that the rains will be insufficient to sustain the crops. The second occasion is when there is a drought, and several such instances are recorded in the Annals with no Zuozhuan notice that this was in any way inappropriate. The sacrifices referred 38

92

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Hua formed a counterforce on the right, and Zhai Zhongb formed an opposing force on the left. Yuan Fan and Gao Qumi led the army of the center to support the Lord of Zheng and formed a “fish school formation” with twenty-five chariots in front, each followed by five chariots to close up gaps.38 They fought at Xuge.39 A command was issued to the two counterforces: “When the signal banners move, beat the war drums!” Cai, Wei, and Chen all fled, and the king’s infantry was thrown into disorder. The Zheng troops closed ranks to strike at them, and the king’s infantry was roundly defeated. Zhu Dan shot the king in the shoulder with an arrow, but the king was still able to battle on. Zhu Dan asked permission to pursue him, but the Liege of Zheng said, “A noble man does not wish always to assert superiority over others. How much less would one dare to insult the Son of Heaven! So long as one is able to save oneself, and the altars of the domain do not fall, that would be more than enough.” During the night, the Liege of Zheng sent Zhai Zhonga to inquire after the health of the king and also to ask about the welfare of his supporters.40 The son of Reng Shu came on an official visit: the text is indicating that he was young.41

5.4(3)

The following passage describes a regular succession of sacrifices all linked to natural events. Only deviations from this ritual cycle, we read, are noted. In autumn, there was a great rain sacrifice. It is recorded because it was not timely. In the case of all such sacrifices, when the insects have emerged from hibernation, one offers the sacrifice in the outskirts; when the Dragon constellation has appeared, one offers the rain sacrifice; when the withering has first begun, one offers the autumn sacrifice; and when the insects have gone into hibernation, one offers the winter sacrifice. If the proper season for the sacrifices has passed, then it is recorded.42

5.5(7)

In winter, the Lord of Chunyu went to Cao.43 He calculated that his domain was in danger and consequently did not return.

5.6(9)



43

to above are part of a seasonal schedule. The “sacrifice in the outskirts,” so named because it was offered outside the capital, took place at the beginning of the year (also the beginning of spring according to the early Chinese reckoning of seasons) and was essentially a prayer for a successful agricultural season. The rain sacrifice took place sometime during the fourth lunar month of the Xia calendar when a constellation known as the Dragon first appeared. “When the withering has first begun” refers to that time when the vapors of autumn arise and plants begin to die. This is the time of autumn [chang or the tasting of the first fruits] sacrifice. The Lord of Chunyu is the leader of the small domain of Zhōu 州.

Lord Huan

93

春秋 6.1(1) 六年，春，正月，寔來。 6.2(3) 夏，四月，公會紀侯于成。 6.3(5) 秋，八月壬午，大閱。 6.4 蔡人殺陳佗。 6.5(6) 九月丁卯，子同生。 6.6(7) 冬，紀侯來朝。

左傳 6.1(1) 六年，春，自曹來朝。書曰「寔來」，不復其國也。 6.2a 楚武王侵隨，使薳章求成焉，軍於瑕以待之。隨人使少師董成。鬬伯比

言于楚子曰：「吾不得志於漢東也，我則使然。我張吾三軍，而被吾甲 兵，以武臨之，彼則懼而協以謀我，故難間也。漢東之國，隨為大。隨 張，必棄小國。小國離，楚之利也。少師侈，請羸師以張之。」熊率且比 曰：「季梁在，何益？」鬬伯比曰：「以為後圖，少師得其君。」王毀軍而 納少師。

44 This refers to the Lord of Zhōu mentioned in Annals, Huan 5.9. The ambiguity results from the fact that the original Annals entries came one after the other and were not broken up, as presented here and in most current Chinese editions, by the Zuo, Gongyang, or Guliang commentaries. 45 Cheng 成 is also sometimes written as 郕 and was located in the domain of Lu northeast of Ningyang County 寧陽縣, Shandong. 46 There is no reference to this event in Zuozhuan under this year, but the execution of Tuo, also known as Wufu, is mentioned in Zhuang 22.1. 47 Zitong will be the next lord of Lu and will be known posthumously as Lord Zhuang. Yang (1:109) notes that, of the twelve lords of Lu recorded in the Annals, only Lord Zhuang was the eldest son of the main wife. This is the one Lu heir apparent whose birth is recorded in the Annals, which suggests a post factum manipulation of this exceptional record, since no one at the time of his birth could have known that he would live to succeed.

94

Zuo Tradition

LORD HUAN 6 (706 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the first month, he did come.44

6.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, our lord met with the Prince of Ji in Cheng.45

6.2(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the renwu day (8), there was a grand review of troops. Cai leaders put Chen Tuo to death.46

6.3(5)

6.4

In the ninth month, on the dingmao day (24), Zitong was born.

6.5(6)

In winter, the Prince of Ji came to visit our court.

6.6(7)

47

ZUO

In the sixth year, in spring, he came to visit our court from Cao. That the text says that “he did come here” is because he had not returned to his domain.

6.1(1)

The southern domain of Chu has been mentioned earlier (Huan 2.4), but the following is the first time it plays a major role in Zuozhuan. King Wu of Chu invaded Sui and had Wei Zhang seek an accord with them. The king stationed his troops at Xia to await Wei Zhang’s return.48 The Sui leaders sent an adjutant to manage the peace negotiations. Dou Bobi spoke to the Master of Chu: “If we do not achieve our aims east of the Han River, then we have only ourselves to blame. Having swollen the ranks of our three armies and having put on our armor and weapons, we approach Sui in martial display. Our enemies are afraid and have united to plot against us. That is why it will be difficult to foment discord among them. Sui is the largest of the domains east of the Han River. If Sui becomes swollen with pride, it must disregard the interests of the smaller domains. For the small domains to break with Sui is to Chu’s advantage. The adjutant is haughty. Let us make our troops appear weak in order to cause him to become overconfident.” Xionglü Jubi said, “As long as Ji Liang is alive, what good will this do?” Dou Bobi said, “It will serve our later plans. The adjutant will have his ruler’s favor.” The king made his troops appear to be in disarray and welcomed the Sui adjutant.

6.2a

48 Sui 隨 was a small domain with the clan name Jiang 姜 and was located south of present-day Sui County 隨縣 in Hubei. Shiji 40.1695 claims that Chu was angry because Sui had rebelled against them.

Lord Huan

95

6.2b 少師歸，請追楚師。隨侯將許之。季梁止之，曰：「天方授楚，楚之羸，其

誘我也。君何急焉？臣聞小之能敵大也，小道大淫。所謂道，忠於民而信 於神也。上思利民，忠也；祝史正辭，信也。今民餒而君逞欲，祝史矯舉 以祭，臣不知其可也。」公曰：「吾牲牷肥腯，粢盛豐備，何則不信？」 對曰：「夫民，神之主也，是以聖王先成民而後致力於神。故奉牲 以告曰『博碩肥腯』，謂民力之普存也，謂其畜之碩大蕃滋也，謂其不 疾瘯蠡也，謂其備腯咸有也；奉盛以告曰：『絜粢豐盛』，謂其三時不害 而民和年豐也；奉酒醴以告曰『嘉栗旨酒』，謂其上下皆有嘉德而無 違心也。所謂馨香，無讒慝也。故務其三時，修其五教，親其九族，以致 其禋祀，於是乎民和而神降之福，故動則有成。今民各有心，而鬼神乏

49 50 51

96

On the interpretation of this problematic phrase, see Karlgren, gl. 32. In Wen 18.7, the five precepts are explained as the dutifulness of a father, the kindness of a mother, the amiability of an older brother, the respectfulness of a younger brother, and the filial piety of a son. The precise nature of these “nine degrees” is disputed. What is clear is that it refers to a very extended family. For details, see Yang, 1:112.

Zuo Tradition

This section, in which the Sui minister Ji Liang argues that service to the people should come before sacrifices to the gods, is one of a number of Zuozhuan passages that reflect a belief that proper sacrifices alone are not sufficient to gain the support of gods and spirits (Zhuang 10.1, Xi 5.8). This is one of many Zuozhuan references to how rulership is ultimately justified by the people’s well-being. See also Zhuang 32.3, Xi 19.3, Wen 13.3, and Cheng 15.1 (among many other passages). Note the resemblance of this passage to the famous proclamation in the Mencius that “the people are of supreme importance” (7B.14, Lau trans.). The adjutant returned to his ruler and asked permission to pursue the Chu troops. The Prince of Sui was about to allow this when Ji Liang stopped him, saying, “Heaven is just now bestowing favor upon Chu. Chu’s appearance of weakness means that they are enticing us. Why act so quickly, my lord? I have heard that when the small can match the large, it is because the small is in accord with the Way and the large is debauched. What is meant by being ‘in accord with the Way’ is being devoted to the people and being honest with the spirits. When superiors think of benefiting the people, that is being devoted. When the invocators and scribes are correct in what they say, that is being honest. Now, the people are starving while you, my lord, satisfy your desires. The invocators and scribes falsely praise you in offering sacrifices. I, your servant, do not know how this can be acceptable.” The lord said, “My sacrificial animals are unblemished and fat; and the vessels of millet are full and complete in number. How is this dishonest?” Ji Liang responded: “The people are the masters of the gods. Therefore, the sage-kings first achieved success with the people and only then expended effort on service to the gods. That is why, when presenting sacrificial animals, they announced, ‘Broad, large, sleek, and fat.’ This means the strength of the people is widely preserved; it means the domestic animals are large and breeding well; it means the animals do not suffer from skin afflictions;49 and it means they are fat and plentiful. When presenting sacrificial vessels, they announced, ‘Pure millet fills the vessels.’ This means there were no disasters during the three agricultural seasons, the people are at peace, and the harvest is abundant. When presenting sacrificial wine, they announced, ‘Fine and pure, an excellent wine.’ That means superiors and inferiors all possess fine virtue and have no thought of disobeying; and the fragrance of which they speak is the absence of slander and villainy. Thus, one exerted effort during the three seasons, cultivated the five precepts,50 and showed affection for all nine degrees of relatives51 so as to present untainted offerings. In such circumstances, the people were at peace and the gods sent down blessings upon them. That is why, when they acted, they had success. But today, each person has his own intentions, and the ghosts and spirits lack a master.

6.2b

Lord Huan

97

主；君雖獨豐，其何福之有？君姑修政，而親兄弟之國，庶免於難。」隨 侯懼而修政，楚不敢伐。 6.3(2) 夏，會于成，紀來諮謀齊難也。 6.4 北戎伐齊，齊使乞師于鄭。鄭大子忽帥師救齊。六月，大敗戎師，獲其

二帥大良、少良，甲首三百，以獻於齊。 於是諸侯之大夫戍齊，齊人饋之餼，使魯為其班。後鄭。鄭忽以 其有功也，怒，故有郎之師。 公之未婚於齊也，齊侯欲以文姜妻鄭大子忽。大子忽辭。人問其 故。大子曰：「人各有耦，齊大，非吾耦也。《詩》云：『自求多福。』在我 而已，大國何為？」 君子曰：「善自為謀。」 及其敗戎師也，齊侯又請妻之。固辭。人問其故。大子曰：「無事 於齊，吾猶不敢。今以君命奔齊之急，而受室以歸，是以師婚也。民其 謂我何？」遂辭諸鄭伯。 6.5(3) 秋，大閱，簡車馬也。

52 53 54 55

98

This is a “flash-forward” to Huan 10.5. The phrase “Qi is large and not a proper mate” 齊大非耦 becomes a set phrase meaning that it is unwise to take as partner someone of much greater power or higher status. A quotation from Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.537. The “Mao Commentary” explicitly attaches the Zheng heir apparent Hu to several Zheng odes (see introductory comments to Maoshi 83, “You nü tongche” 有女同車, 4C.170; 84, “Shan you fu su” 山有扶蘇, 4C.171; 85, “Tuo xi” 蘀兮, 4C.172; 86, “Jiao tong” 狡童, 4C.173). Regarding the first of these the “Mao Commentary” says: “The Zheng people censured Hu for not marrying the Qi woman. The heir apparent Hu once had acquired merit in Qi and the Prince of Qi asked to give him a wife. Though the Qi woman was worthy, he would not take her. In the end, he did not have the help of a great domain and so was driven into exile. That is why the people censured him.” In Huan 11.3, the Zheng minister Zhai Zhong also advises Hu to marry the Qi woman and adds further that Hu has “many favorites.” The “Mao Commentary” attributes a number of other misdeeds to Hu, among them “not being able to make plans in collaboration with worthy men,” an obvious allusion to his failure to accept Zhai Zhong’s advice (Maoshi 4C.172).

Zuo Tradition

Although it is true that you yourself, my lord, enjoy abundance, what blessings could there be? If you for now would cultivate good government and draw close to fraternal domains, you might just manage to avoid calamity.” The Prince of Sui was frightened and cultivated good government. Chu did not dare to launch an attack. In summer, there was a meeting in Cheng: the reason that Ji came was to consult and plan about the difficulties with Qi.

6.3(2)

The Northern Rong had previously attacked Zheng (Yin 9.6). Here they turn their attention toward Qi, as the latter gets help from Zheng. Gongzi Hu, the heir apparent of Zheng, refuses the offer of a Qi princess as reward for Zheng’s aid. While this is presented here as a wise decision, Zhai Zheng will later declare it a strategic mistake (Huan 11.3). Gongzi Hu was earlier criticized for flouting ritual propriety in his marriage to a daughter of Chen (Yin 8.3, 8.4). The Northern Rong attacked Qi. Qi sent someone to plead for troops from Zheng. Gongzi Hub, the Zheng heir apparent, led troops to rescue Qi. In the sixth month, they roundly defeated the Rong troops and captured their two leaders, Liang the Elder and Liang the Younger, and presented them to Qi along with the severed heads of three hundred armed men. At that time, the high officers of the princes were garrisoned in Qi. The Qi leaders sent provisions to them and had the domain of Lu determine the order of distribution. Lu put Zheng last. Because he considered that they had achieved merit, Gongzi Huc was angry. That is why there would be the campaign at Lang.52 When our lord had not yet taken Wen Jiang as a wife from Qi, the Prince of Qi had wanted to make her the wife of the Zheng heir apparent Gongzi Hub, but the heir apparent Hu declined. When someone asked why, the heir apparent said, “For each person there is a mate. Qi is a large domain, so she is not my proper mate.53 As it says in the Odes, ‘For themselves they sought many blessings.’54 This is a matter for myself alone. Why should a large domain be involved?” The noble man said, “He was skilled at planning for himself.” When Gongzi Hu had defeated the Rong troops, the Prince of Qi again asked to marry one of his daughters to Hu, but he steadfastly refused. When someone asked why, Gongzi Hub said, “Even when I had performed no service for Qi, I did not dare. Now, if after rushing on my lord’s command to aid Qi in its distress, I should receive a wife and return home, that would be using troops to arrange a marriage. What would the people then say of me?” Consequently, he declined, using his father, the Liege of Zheng, as pretext.55

6.4

In autumn, there was a grand review of troops: this was to examine the chariots and the horses.

6.5(3)

Lord Huan

99

6.6(5) 九月丁卯，子同生。以大子生之禮舉之，接以太牢，卜士負之，士妻食

之，公與文姜、宗婦命之。 公問名於申繻。對曰：「名有五：有信，有義，有象，有假，有類。以 名生為信，以德命為義，以類命為象，取於物為假，取於父為類。不以 國，不以官，不以山川，不以隱疾，不以畜牲，不以器幣。周人以諱事神， 名，終將諱之。故以國則廢名，以官則廢職，以山川則廢主，以畜牲則廢 祀，以器幣則廢禮。晉以僖侯廢司徒，宋以武公廢司空，先君獻、武廢 二山，是以大物不可以命。」公曰：「是其生也，與吾同物，命之曰同。」 6.7(6) 冬，紀侯來朝，請王命以求成于齊。公告不能。

56

Du Yu (ZZ 6.112) believes that Lord Huan, the father, received his wife, Zitong’s mother. On our interpretation, see Yang, 1:114. This ceremony, the tailao, consisted of the sacrifice of an ox, a sheep, and a pig. 57 This type of name is presumably a broad category. According to commentators, it includes people like Tang Shuyu [Tang Shu], who was born with a design resembling the character yu in the palm of his hand, and those who were named according to the day upon which they were born or according to the first sound they made after birth. The notion seems to be that this type of name is “ready made,” coming from some circumstance of the birth itself. 58 King Wen, for example, was named chang 昌, “glorious,” because he possessed this quality. 59 Confucius, for example, was named qiu 丘, “hill,” we are told, because his head resembled the shape of a hill. 60 Confucius named his son li 鯉, “carp,” a name borrowed from the name of a thing. 61 The name derives in some way from the father. 62 After the death of a ruler with the same name as that of a domain, that name would be respectfully concealed, and thus the name of the domain would have to be changed, which would create considerable inconvenience. 63 Prince Xi was given the name Situ 司徒, “supervisor of conscripts,” which then could not be used after his death, forcing a change in the name of this office. Lord Wu of Song was named Sikong 司空, “supervisor of works.”

100

Zuo Tradition

The next Lord of Lu, the future Lord Zhuang, is born. The issue of proper naming is taken up once again (see Huan 2.8). In this passage we are informed that the tradition of not speaking the personal name of a deceased ruler—that is, “respectful concealment”—means that one must exercise caution to avoid giving personal names that will eliminate essential words from common use. In the ninth month, on the dingmao day (24), Zitong was born. They celebrated the birth with the ritual appropriate to the birth of an heir apparent, and his father received him with the sacrifice of the three domestic animals.56 They divined to select an officer to carry him and the wife of an officer to nurse him. Our lord and Wen Jiang, along with the women of the clan, were going to name him. Our lord asked Shen Xu about names, and he responded, “Names are of five types: tokens of truth, meanings, resemblances, borrowings, and kinds. Being born with a name is a token of truth.57 Being named according to some personal virtue is a meaning.58 Being named according to some similarity is a resemblance.59 When a name is taken from a thing, it is a borrowing.60 And when a name is taken from the father, it is a kind.61 One does not use the name of a domain; one does not use the name of an office, of a mountain or a river, of a malady or illness, of domestic animals, or of utensils and precious ceremonial objects. The Zhou leaders used a system of respectful concealment in serving spirits, and when one passed away, his name was avoided as respectful concealment. Therefore, using a domain name would do away with that name.62 Using the name of an office would do away with that official duty. Using the name of a mountain or a river would do away with the spirit master of that place. Using the name of a domestic animal would do away with a sacrifice. Using the name of a ceremonial vessel or a ceremonial gift would do away with a ritual. Jin, because of Prince Xi, did away with the supervisor of conscripts, and Song, because of Lord Wu, did away with the office of supervisor of works.63 Our former rulers Xian and Wu did away with the names of two mountains.64 Therefore, great things cannot be used as names!” Our lord said, “This child’s day of birth is the same as mine, so I will name him Tong [‘Same’].”

6.6(5)

The small domain of Ji continues to try to ease its problems with Qi (Huan 6.3) but Lu refuses to intercede on their behalf. In winter, the Prince of Ji came to visit our court. He requested the king’s command to seek an accord with Qi, but our lord told him he was unable to do this. 64

6.7(6)

That is, the personal names of these rulers were the same as the names of mountains, and thus the names of the mountains had to be changed after their deaths.

Lord Huan

101

春秋 7.1 七年，春，二月己亥，焚咸丘。 7.2(1) 夏，穀伯綏來朝。鄧侯吾離來朝。

左傳 7.1(2) 七年，春，穀伯、鄧侯來朝。名，賤之也。 7.2 夏，盟、向求成于鄭，既而背之。 7.3 秋，鄭人、齊人、衛人伐盟、向。王遷盟、向之民于郟。 7.4 冬，曲沃伯誘晉小子侯殺之。

春秋 8.1 八年，春，正月己卯，烝。 8.2 天王使家父來聘。 8.3 夏，五月丁丑，烝。

65

In a fire-hunt, the fields and woods were burned in order to drive the game into the open. According to Liji (“Jiao te sheng” 郊特牲, 25.491), this type of hunt took place in the winter months. Xianqiu 咸丘 was in the domain of Lu south of present-day Juye County 巨野縣, Shandong. 66 Gu 穀 was the name of a small domain located northwest of present-day Gucheng County 穀城縣 in Hubei and should be distinguished from another Gu 穀 located in Shandong (see Annals, Zhuang 7.5). Deng 鄧, a small domain from which several bronze vessels have been preserved, was located near present-day Deng County 鄧縣 in Henan (map 4). 67 There is a discrepancy between the Annals and Zuozhuan as to the season in which this event took place. Du Yu dismisses the issue with the conjecture that the Liege of Gu and the Prince of Deng came in the spring but were honored officially only in the summer (ZZ 7.118). Zhao Yi notes that such discrepancies appear elsewhere between the two texts and suggests that the differences arise from discrepancies

102

Zuo Tradition

LORD HUAN 7 (705 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, in the second month, on the jihai day (28), there was a fire-hunt at Xianqiu.65 In summer, Sui, the Liege of Gu, came to visit our court. Wuli, the Prince of Deng, came to visit our court.66

7.1

7.2(1)

ZUO

In the seventh year, in spring, the Liege of Gu and the Prince of Deng came to visit our court. That they are named is to demean them.67

7.1(2)

Meng and Xiang were among the twelve places the royal Zhou court granted to Zheng earlier (Yin 11.5), but they apparently had not submitted, which brought on the conflict noted in this and the subsequent passage. In summer, Meng and Xiang sought an accord with Zheng. Afterward, they rebelled against Zheng.

7.2

In autumn, the men of Zheng, Qi, and Wei attacked Meng and Xiang. The king relocated the people of Meng and Xiang to Jia.68

7.3

In winter, the Liege of Quwo lured the young Prince of Jin to Quwo and killed him.

7.4

LORD HUAN 8 (704 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, in the first month, on the jimao day (14), we offered the winter sacrifice.69 The Heaven-appointed king sent Jiafu to us on an official visit. In summer, in the fifth month, on the dingchou day (13), we offered the winter sacrifice.

8.1

8.2 8.3

between the Zhou and Xia calendars (see his comments in Gaiyu congkao, 2.16–17). 68 Jia 郟 was located in the royal domain of Zhou near present-day Luoyang City 洛陽 市, Henan. 69 According to Huan 5.5, the zheng or winter sacrifice was offered at the time of the hibernation of insects and was noted in the Annals only when performed at an improper time. According to Zuozhuan, then, this passage and Annals, Huan 8.3, are recording untimely sacrifices. A more plausible explanation, we think, is that Zuozhuan is imposing a later, much more rigidly fixed ritual calendar upon an earlier age when it did not apply. The zheng sacrifice is offered in the winter (our fall). The character zheng 烝 also has the meaning “many” or “much” (zhong 眾) and is an expression of hope that the offerings presented from the harvest will be abundant (Takezoe, 2.39).

Lord Huan

103

8.4 秋，伐邾。 8.5 冬，十月，雨雪。 8.6(4) 祭公來，遂逆王后于紀。

左傳 8.1 八年，春，滅翼。 8.2 隨少師有寵。楚鬬伯比曰：「可矣。讎有釁，不可失也。」夏，楚子合諸侯

于沈鹿。黃、隨不會。使薳章讓黃。楚子伐隨。軍于漢、淮之間。季梁請 下之，「弗許而後戰，所以怒我而怠寇也。」少師謂隨侯曰：「必速戰。不 然，將失楚師。」隨侯禦之。 望楚師。季梁曰：「楚人上左，君必左，無與王遇。且攻其右。右無 良焉，必敗。偏敗，眾乃攜矣。」少師曰：「不當王，非敵也。」 弗從。戰于速杞。隨師敗績。隨侯逸。鬬丹獲其戎車與其戎右 少師。 秋，隨及楚平，楚子將不許。鬬伯比曰：「天去其疾矣，隨未可克 也。」乃盟而還。 8.3 冬，王命虢仲立晉哀侯之弟緡于晉。 8.4(6) 祭公來，遂逆王后于紀，禮也。

70 71

This is the equivalent of our September, unseasonably early for a snowstorm. King Huan had been the king of Zhou for sixteen years already. It is difficult to believe that he had no queen for such a long period of time. Presumably, then, this is the occasion of greeting a second wife (Yang, 1:120–21). 72 Yi 翼 was the capital of Jin and was located southeast of Yicheng County 翼城縣, Shanxi. This passage continues the narrative of Huan 7.4. That is, after the murder of the Prince of Jin, the Liege of Quwo went on to destroy Yi. 73 Huang 黃 was a small domain located near Huangchuan County 黃川縣 in Henan. The capital has been excavated, and a number of bronze vessels from the domain have been discovered (Yang, 1:121). 74 Du Yu takes this to mean “the Chu ruler must be on the left” (ZZ 7.119). Gu Yanwu argues (Rizhi lu jishi, 27.620) that Ji Liang is urging the Sui ruler to go to his left and thereby attack the right side of the Chu force. Both interpretations are plausible and amount to the same conclusion: “Do not engage the King of Chu.” While most other domains emphasize the right side over the left in battle, Chu seems to do the reverse. 75 Suqi 速杞 was located west of present-day Yingshan County 應山縣, Hubei. 76 The malady, Yang (1:123) thinks, is the adjutant who urged Sui to fight Chu and has now been captured.

104

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, we attacked Zhu.

8.4

In winter, in the tenth month, it snowed.

8.5

The Zhai Duke came to Lu. He then went to meet and escort home the queen from Ji.71

8.6(4)

70

ZUO

After killing the Jin heir (Huan 7.4), the Liege of Quwo completes his conquest of the Jin capital. In the eighth year, in spring, Yi was destroyed.72

8.1

Chu now launches the attack on Sui that it had previously postponed (Huan 6.2). The Sui adjutant enjoyed great favor. Dou Bobi of Chu said, “Now we can act! Our enemy has given us an opening. We cannot lose the opportunity.” In summer, the Master of Chu gathered the princes at Shenlu. The domains of Huang and Sui did not attend.73 Sending Wei Zhang to reprimand the Huang leaders, the Master of Chu attacked Sui, stationing his army between the Han and Huai Rivers. Ji Liang of Sui requested that they submit to Chu: “If they do not agree to this and afterward we join in battle, this will prove a means of whipping up our troops and making the Chu raiders lax.” But the adjutant said to the Prince of Sui, “We must join in battle quickly. If we do not, we will lose our chance to push back the Chu troops.” So the prince engaged the Chu troops in battle. Looking out over the Chu troops, Ji Liang said, “The Chu leaders are placing emphasis on the left wing. You, my lord, must be on our left.74 Do not engage the King of Chu. Moreover, if you attack their right wing, since the right has no skilled men there, they will surely be defeated. When one wing is defeated, the multitude will disperse.” But the adjutant said, “If you do not face their king, you are not coequal with him.” The prince did not follow Ji Liang’s advice. They joined in battle at Suqi,75 and the adjutant was completely defeated. The prince of Sui escaped. Dou Dan captured his war chariot along with the adjutant, who was the prince’s attendant of the right. In autumn, Sui and Chu made peace. The Master of Chu was not going to allow this, but Dou Bobi said, “Heaven has removed its malady,76 so Sui cannot yet be subdued.” They then swore a covenant and withdrew.

8.2

In winter, the king ordered Guo Zhong to establish Min, the younger brother of Prince Ai of Jin, as ruler in Jin.

8.3

The Zhai Duke came to Lu. He then went to meet and escort home the queen from Ji: this was in accordance with ritual propriety.

8.4(6)

Lord Huan

105

春秋 9.1(1) 九年，春，紀季姜歸于京師。 9.2 夏，四月。 9.3 秋，七月。 9.4(4) 冬，曹伯使其世子射姑來朝。

左傳 9.1(1) 九年，春，紀季姜歸于京師。凡諸侯之女行，唯王后書。 9.2 巴子使韓服告于楚，請與鄧為好。楚子使道朔將巴客以聘於鄧，鄧南

鄙鄾人攻而奪之幣，殺道朔及巴行人。楚子使薳章讓於鄧。鄧人弗受。 夏，楚使鬬廉帥師及巴師圍鄾。鄧養甥、聃甥帥師救鄾。三逐巴 師，不克。鬬廉衡陳其師於巴師之中，以戰，而北。鄧人逐之，背巴師； 而夾攻之。鄧師大敗。鄾人宵潰。 9.3 秋，虢仲、芮伯、梁伯、荀侯、賈伯伐曲沃。

77 78

106

Jing 京, originally the name of a city established by the predynastic Zhou ruler Duke Liu, came to be used more generally in later times of the Zhou capital. Shi 師 often appears in Zhou writings after the name of a city (Yang, 1:123–24). There is a problem with the location of the domain of Ba 巴, which has traditionally been identified with another Ba, well known in history and located in present-day Sichuan near Chongqing 重慶. The context here, however, indicates that Ba was located somewhere near Deng 鄧 on the northwest border of Chu. Yang (1:124) believes that Ba was located in Hubei during the Spring and Autumn period and was relocated to Sichuan during the Warring States period. You 鄾 was apparently a small domain near Xiangyang 襄陽 in present-day Hubei. It is mentioned again in Ai 18.2, by which time it had become a Chu city.

Zuo Tradition

LORD HUAN 9 (703 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, Ji Jiang of Ji went to marry in the Zhou capital.77

9.1(1)

Summer, the fourth month.

9.2

Autumn, the seventh month.

9.3

In winter, the Liege of Cao sent his heir apparent Yigu to us to visit our court.

9.4(4)

ZUO

In the ninth year, in spring, Ji Jiang of Ji went to marry in the Zhou capital. In all cases, when a daughter of a prince travels, it is recorded only when she is becoming a queen.

9.1(1)

Conflicts break out between Chu and Deng; Chu will conquer Deng fifteen years later (Zhuang 6.3). The Master of Ba sent Han Fu to report to Chu and to ask their help in establishing good relations with Deng.78 The Master of Chu had Dao Shuo lead the Ba emissary on an official visit to Deng. The men of You, in the southwestern marches of Deng, attacked them, stealing their gifts 79 and killing Dao Shuo and the Ba envoy. The Master of Chu sent Wei Zhang to reprimand Deng, but the Deng leader would not receive him. In summer, Chu sent Dou Lian to lead troops and join up with Ba troops to lay siege to You.80 Nephew Yang and Nephew Nan of Deng led troops to provide aid to You. Three times they charged after the Ba troops but could not prevail. Dou Lian then arrayed his forces right across the middle of the Ba troops to engage Deng in battle but suffered defeat. The men of Deng charged after them, leaving the Ba troops in their rear. And then Ba and Chu attacked in a pincer movement. The Deng troops were roundly defeated, and the men of You scattered in the night.

9.2

In autumn, Guo Zhong, the Liege of Rui, the Liege of Liang, the Prince of Xun, and the Liege of Jia attacked Quwo.

9.3

79

Presumably, the gifts stolen were those that the Ba emissary was carrying to offer to the domain of Deng in an effort to promote good relations. 80 You 鄾 was a small domain located northeast of Xiangyang County 襄陽縣, Hubei.

Lord Huan

107

9.4(4) 冬，曹大子來朝。賓之以上卿，禮也。享曹大子。初獻，樂奏而歎。施父

曰：「曹大子其有憂乎！非歎所也。」

春秋 10.l(1) 十年，春，王正月庚申，曹伯終生卒。 10.2 夏，五月，葬曹桓公。 10.3 秋，公會衛侯于桃丘，弗遇。 10.4(5) 冬，十有二月丙午，齊侯、衛侯、鄭伯來戰于郎。

左傳 10.1(1) 十年，春，曹桓公卒。 10.2 虢仲譖其大夫詹父於王。詹父有辭，以王師伐虢。夏，虢公出奔虞。 10.3 秋，秦人納芮伯萬于芮。

108

Zuo Tradition

The following is an example of a wise minister interpreting a small gesture or sign, a theme that recurs throughout Zuozhuan (see, e.g., Huan 13.1, Zhao 25.1). Grief unwarranted by occasion bodes misfortune (see, e.g., Zhao 21.5, 25.1, 28.4). In winter, the heir apparent of Cao came to visit our court. That we received him in the manner appropriate to a high minister was in accordance with ritual propriety. We offered him ceremonial toasts. During the first wine offering, as the music began, he sighed. Shifu said, “Surely the Cao heir apparent will have some reason for grief! This is not the proper occasion for a sigh.”

9.4(4)

LORD HUAN 10 (702 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the gengshen day (6), Zhongsheng, the Liege of Cao, died. In summer, in the fifth month, Lord Huan of Cao was buried.

10.1(1)

10.2

In autumn, our lord was to meet with the Prince of Wei at Taoqiu, but he did not meet up with him. 81

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the bingwu day (27), the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Zheng came and did battle at Lang.

10.3

10.4(5)

ZUO

The Cao heir’s sigh (Huan 9.4) is connected to his father’s death. In the tenth year, in spring, Lord Huan of Cao died.

10.1(1)

A crack opens in Guo’s privileged position at the Zhou court (Yin 8.3). Guo Zhong slandered his high officer Zhanfu to the king. Zhanfu was able to offer an explanation. He attacked Guo with royal troops. In summer, Guo Zhong, the Guo Duke, left the domain and fled to Yu.82

10.2

Qin had detained the Liege of Rui for the previous six years (Huan 4.4). In autumn, the Qin leaders installed Wan, the Liege of Rui, in power in Rui.

10.3

81 Taoqiu 桃丘 was located in the domain of Wei east of present-day Anping Township 安平鎮 in Dong’e County 東阿縣, Shandong. 82 Yu 虞 was a small domain located just north of present-day Pinglu County 平陸縣 in Shanxi

Lord Huan

109

10.4 初，虞叔有玉，虞公求旃。弗獻。既而悔之，曰：「周諺有之：『匹夫無罪，

懷璧其罪。』吾焉用此，其以賈害也？」乃獻之。又求其寶劍。叔曰：「是 無厭也。無厭，將及我。」遂伐虞公。故虞公出奔共池。 10.5(4) 冬，齊、衛、鄭來戰于郎，我有辭也。

初，北戎病齊，諸侯救之，鄭公子忽有功焉。齊人餼諸侯，使魯次 之。魯以周班後鄭。鄭人怒，請師於齊。齊人以衛師助之，故不稱侵伐。 先書齊、衛，王爵也。

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年，春，正月，齊人、衛人、鄭人盟于惡曹。 11.2 夏，五月癸未，鄭伯寤生卒。 11.3 秋，七月，葬鄭莊公。 11.4(3) 九月，宋人執鄭祭仲。突歸于鄭。鄭忽出奔衛。 11.5 柔會宋公、陳侯、蔡叔盟于折。

83 Yu Shu was the younger brother of the duke. 84 Gongchi 共池 was located in Pinglu County 平陸縣, Shanxi. 85 The implication is that Lu was indeed correct in the order it had established. Although Zheng was the leader of the three domains attacking Lu, the Annals puts Qi and Wei first, thus reaffirming the correct rank according to which the provisions were distributed.

110

Zuo Tradition

A ruler’s insatiable greed results in his exile. Earlier, Yu Shu83 had possessed a jade. The Duke of Yu asked him for it, but Yu would not offer it. Afterward, Yu Shu regretted this and said, “A Zhou proverb has it that ‘a common man may be without crime until cherishing a valuable jade becomes his crime.’ What use do I have of this that I should use it to buy harm for myself?” So he offered it. The duke also asked for his precious sword, and Shu said, “That one cannot be satisfied. And if he cannot be satisfied, harm will come to me.” Thereupon, he attacked the Duke of Yu, and that is why the Duke of Yu fled to Gongchi.84

10.4

The battle at Lang, predicted several years earlier (Huan 6.4), takes place when Zheng attacks Lu for the earlier slight. In winter, Qi, Wei, and Zheng came and did battle at Lang. But we had an explanation for our action. Earlier, the Northern Rong people had afflicted Qi. The princes rescued Qi, and Gongzi Hu of Zheng had acquired merit in the action. When the Qi leaders distributed provisions to the princes, they had Lu establish the priority among them. Lu used the ranking established by Zhou and put Zheng last. The Zheng leaders were furious and requested troops from Qi. Qi leaders, making use of Wei troops, assisted them. That is why it does not say they “invaded” or “attacked.” It records Qi and Wei first because they have ranks given by the king.85

10.5(4)

LORD HUAN 11 (701 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, in the first month, a Qi leader, a Wei leader, and a Zheng leader swore a covenant at Wucao.86 In summer, in the fifth month, on the guiwei day (7), Wusheng, the Liege of Zheng, died.

11.1(1)

11.2

In autumn, in the seventh month, Lord Zhuang of Zheng was buried.

11.3

In the ninth month, Song leaders arrested Zhai Zhong of Zheng. Tu (Gongzi Tu) went home to Zheng, and Hu of Zheng (Gongzi Hu) departed and fled to Wei.

11.4(3)

Rou met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, and Cai Shu and swore a covenant at Zhe.87

11.5

86 87

The precise location of Wucao 惡曹 is disputed. It is perhaps to be identified with Wucao 烏曹 southeast of present-day Yanjin County 延津縣, Henan (see Yang, 1:129). Rou was a high officer of the domain of Lu. The location of Zhe 折 is unknown.

Lord Huan

111

11.6 公會宋公于夫鐘。 11.7 冬，十有二月，公會宋公于闞。

左傳 11.1(1) 十一年，春，齊、衛、鄭、宋盟于惡曹。 11.2 楚屈瑕將盟貳、軫。鄖人軍於蒲騷，將與隨、絞、州、蓼伐楚師。莫敖患

之。鬬廉曰：「鄖人軍其郊，必不誡。且日虞四邑之至也。君次於郊郢，以 禦四邑，我以銳師宵加於鄖。鄖有虞心而恃其城，莫有鬬志。若敗鄖 師，四邑必離。」莫敖曰：「盍請濟師於王？」對曰：「師克在和，不在眾。 商、周之不敵，君之所聞也。成軍以出，又何濟焉？」莫敖曰：「卜之？」對 曰：「卜以決疑。不疑，何卜？」遂敗鄖師於蒲騷，卒盟而還。 11.3(4) 鄭昭公之敗北戎也，齊人將妻之。昭公辭。祭仲曰：「必取之。君多內

寵，子無大援，將不立。三公子皆君也。」弗從。夏，鄭莊公卒。

88

Both Fuzhong 夫鐘 and Kan 闞 were in Lu territory and very close to each other near modern Nanwang Lake 南旺湖, Shandong. 89 Note the addition of the domain of Song. It is also curious that Zuozhuan does not contain the word “leaders” (ren 人) here and thus is more compact than the Annals. 90 The first of these small domains, Er 貳, was located within the boundaries of present-day Yingshan County 應山縣 in Hubei, while Zhen 軫 was farther to the south, near present-day Yingcheng County 應城縣. Chu eventually eradicated both domains. 91 Yun 鄖 was a small domain possibly located near Anlu County 安陸縣 in Hubei. The four domains mentioned here were located in present-day Hubei and southern Henan. 92 We have chosen the French word maréchal to translate the Chu office mo’ao 莫敖 (elsewhere written moxiao 莫囂). The position seems to be equivalent to the supervisor of the military, sima 司馬, in other domains and probably sounded slightly foreign to the central domains. 93 See Karlgren, gl. 39. 94 The armies of Zhou defeated the Shang armies in the eleventh century Bce and thereafter founded the Zhou dynasty. 95 Dou Lian plainly would like to consign divination to the margins. In his opinion, it should be used only when human judgment cannot remove serious doubts. 96 Pusao 蒲騷 was a small domain northwest of Yingshan County 應山縣, Hubei. 97 Shiji 42.1761 claims the three sons referred to here are Hu 忽 (Lord Zhao), Tu 突 (Lord Li), and Wei 斖. Du Yu does not count the heir apparent Hu and includes another son, Ziyi 子儀 (ZZ 7.122). It is true that three sons of Lord Zhuang did indeed rule the state, including Ziyi.

112

Zuo Tradition

Our lord met with the Duke of Song at Fuzhong.

11.6

In winter, in the twelfth month, our lord met with the Duke of Song at Kan.88

11.7

ZUO

In the eleventh year, in spring, Qi, Wei, Zheng, and Song swore a covenant at Wucao.89

11.1(1)

Chu continues to gain power (Huan 8.2, 9.2), and the Chu adviser recommends an attack on Yun and rejects divination, which should be used, he says, only when there is no certainty about a course of action. Qu Xia of Chu was going to swear a covenant with the domains of Er and Zhen.90 The men of Yun were stationed at Pusao and were going to join with Sui, Jiao, Zhōu, and Liao to attack the Chu troops.91 The maréchal,92 Qu Xia, was worried about this. Dou Lian said, “The men of Yun are stationed in their own outlying districts and are certainly not on guard. Moreover, each day they anticipate the arrival of troops from the four settlements. You, my lord, should set up camp in the outlying districts of Ying in order to block the advance of the men of the four settlements. I will lead our crack troops and fall upon Yun during the night. The men of Yun are worried and are relying on their city wall.93 None of them has the will to fight. If we defeat the Yun troops, the four settlements will certainly stand aside.” Maréchal Qu Xia said, “Why not request reinforcements from the king?” He responded, “Military victory resides in coordination and not in numbers. You, my lord, have heard that Zhou could not match Shang in numbers.94 When we have formed our army and marched out, what need is there of reinforcements?” The maréchal said, “Let us divine about it.” He responded, “Divination is for resolving doubts. Why divine when there are no doubts?”95 They then defeated the Yun troops at Pusao, completed their covenant, and turned back.96

11.2

Lord Zhao of Zheng is the previous Gongzi Hu. He had helped Qi earlier (Huan 6.4) but refused a marriage alliance with Qi and now is forced to flee. Zhai Zhong’s political acumen, evident in the advice he offered Lord Zhuang of Zheng (Yin 1.3), prompted him to urge Gongzi Hu to seek allies to buttress his position (without avail). Here he switches sides and supports Gongzi Hu’s younger brother Gongzi Tu (Lord Li), driving Gongzi Hu into exile. When Lord Zhao of Zheng defeated the Northern Rong, the Qi leaders had wished to give him a wife, but Lord Zhao had declined. Zhai Zhong said, “You must accept her. Our lord has many concubines. If you, sir, do not have the help of a great domain, you will not be established as ruler. The three other noble sons could all become rulers.”97 But he did not heed this advice. In summer, Lord Zhuang of Zheng died.

11.3(4)

Lord Huan

113

初，祭封人仲足有寵於莊公，莊公使為卿。為公娶鄧曼，生昭公。 故祭仲立之。宋雍氏女於鄭莊公，曰雍姞，生厲公。雍氏宗，有寵於宋 莊公，故誘祭仲而執之，曰：「不立突，將死。」亦執厲公而求賂焉。祭 仲與宋人盟，以厲公歸而立之。秋，九月丁亥，昭公奔衛。己亥，厲公立。

春秋 12.1 十有二年，春，正月。 12.2(1) 夏，六月壬寅，公會杞侯、莒子盟于曲池。 12.3(2) 秋，七月丁亥，公會宋公、燕人盟于穀丘。 12.4 八月壬辰，陳侯躍卒。 12.5(2) 公會宋公于虛。 12.6(2) 冬，十有一月，公會宋公于龜。 12.7(2) 丙戌，公會鄭伯，盟于武父。 12.8 丙戌，衛侯晉卒。 12.9(2) 十有二月，及鄭師伐宋。丁未，戰于宋。

98

This Deng Man is not to be confused with a woman of the same name who appears in 13.1 below as the prescient wife of King Wu of Chu. 99 The same events are described very similarly in Shiji 42.1759–60. 100 Quchi 曲池 was in the domain of Lu northeast of present-day Ningyang County 寧陽縣, Shandong. 101 Guqiu 穀丘, or “Gu Mound,” was located in the domain of Song and is called “Goudou Knoll” 句瀆之丘 in the Zuozhuan passage below (Huan 12.2). It was located southeast of Shangqiu County 商丘縣, Shandong.

114

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, Zhai Zhongc, the man who had been given an allotment at Zhai, was in favor with Lord Zhuang, and Lord Zhuang had made him a minister. He had arranged for the lord to marry Deng Man,98 and she gave birth to Lord Zhao. That was why Zhai Zhong had established him as ruler. The Yong line of Song had given a daughter to Lord Zhuang of Zheng. She was named Yong Jí and gave birth to Tu, the future Lord Li. The Yong line was honored as a major lineage and was in favor with Lord Zhuang of Song. They therefore lured Zhai Zhong to Song and then, arresting him, said, “If you do not establish Tu as ruler, you will die.” They also seized Lord Li and sought ransom for him. Zhai Zhong swore a covenant with the Song leaders, took Lord Li back to Zheng, and established him as ruler. In autumn, the dinghai day (13), Lord Zhao fled to Wei, and on the jihai day (25), Lord Li was established as ruler.99 LORD HUAN 12 (700 BCE) ANNALS

The twelfth year, spring, the first month.

12.1

In summer, in the sixth month, on the renyin day (2), our lord met with the Prince of Qǐ and the Master of Ju and swore a covenant at Quchi.100 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the dinghai day (17), our lord met with the Duke of Song and a Yān leader and swore a covenant at Guqiu.101

12.2(1)

12.3(2)

In the eighth month, on the renchen day,102 Yue, the Prince of Chen, died.

12.4

Our lord met with the Duke of Song at Xu.

12.5(2)

103

In winter, in the eleventh month, our lord met with the Duke of Song at Gui.104 On the bingxu day (18), our lord met with the Liege of Zheng and swore a covenant at Wufu.105 On the bingxu day (18), Jin, the Prince of Wei, died. In the twelfth month, we joined with Zheng troops and attacked Song. On the dingwei day (10), we did battle in Song.

12.6(2)

12.7(2)

12.8 12.9(2)

102 There was no renchen day in the eighth month. 103 Xu 虛 was located in the domain of Song east of present-day Yanjin County 延津縣, Henan. 104 Gui 龜 was located in Song in present-day Sui County 睢縣, Henan. 105 Wufu 武父 was located in the domain of Zheng south of present-day Dongming County 東明縣, Henan.

Lord Huan

115

左傳 12.1(2) 十二年，夏，盟于曲池，平杞、莒也。 12.2 公欲平宋、鄭。秋，公及宋公盟于句瀆之丘。宋成未可知也，故又會于 (3, 5, 6, 7, 9) 虛；冬，又會于龜。宋公辭平，故與鄭伯盟于武父，遂帥師而伐宋，戰

焉，宋無信也。 君子曰：「苟信不繼，盟無益也。《詩》云： 君子屢盟， 亂是用長。 無信也。」 12.3 楚伐絞，軍其南門。莫敖屈瑕曰：「絞小而輕，輕則寡謀。請無扞采樵者

以誘之。」 從之，絞人獲三十人。明日，絞人爭出，驅楚役徒於山中。楚人坐 其北門，而覆諸山下。大敗之。為城下之盟而還。 12.4 伐絞之役，楚師分涉於彭。羅人欲伐之。使伯嘉諜之。三巡數之。

106 Yang (1:134) argues that goudou 句瀆 is a phonetic variant of gu 穀, the latter being an allegro form. 107 The lines are from Maoshi 198, “Qiao yan” 巧言, 12C.424. Cf. Xiang 29.17. 108 Wood gatherers accompanying troops were usually protected, but here they are not since their purpose was to lure the enemy. Swearing a covenant at the foot of the wall of the defeated city was apparently an insult to that domain, in this case Jiao, because the victor could dictate the terms (Yang, 1:135). For other examples of a covenant of this type, see Wen 15.7, Xuan 15.2, and Ai 8.2. 109 This entry seems to have been misplaced. It may originally have been attached to what follows in the spring of the thirteenth year, when Chu attacks Luo, presumably because of Luo’s aggressive intentions described here (Yang, 1:135). The Peng River 彭水 is called the Nanhe 南河 today. It flows out of the southwest of Fang County 房縣 in Hubei. Luo 羅 was a small domain of the Xiong 熊 clan name and of prob­ lematic location.

116

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the twelfth year, in summer, we swore a covenant at Quchi: this was to pacify Qǐ and Ju.

12.1(2)

Bad relations between Song and Zheng had persisted for some time (Yin 4.3, 9.3, 10.1). Lu here sides with Zheng, despite conflict with Zheng not long before (Huan 10.5). On the question of good faith, compare the judgment here with the noble man’s comments in Yin 3.3. The following Zuozhuan passage is somewhat unusual in stringing five Annals entries into a single short paragraph. Our lord wanted to make peace between Song and Zheng. In autumn, our lord swore a covenant with the Duke of Song at Goudou Knoll.106 It was impossible to tell yet whether Song would agree to peace, and that is why we met again at Xu, and then, in the winter, still once more at Gui. The Duke of Song declined the terms, and that is the reason we swore a covenant with the Liege of Zheng at Wufu and then led troops and attacked Song. We did battle there. That is because Song had not exer­ cised good faith. The noble man said, “So long as one gives his word but does not follow up on it, a covenant is of no benefit. As it says in the Odes,

12.2 (3, 5, 6, 7, 9)

Noble men repeatedly swear covenants, But disorder is thereby only prolonged.107

That is because of a lack of good faith.” Chu’s military successes continue (Huan 9.2, 11.2), on this occasion through trickery. Chu attacked Jiao and stationed troops at its southern gate. Maréchal Qu Xia said, “Jiao is small, and its people are frivolous. Since they are frivo­ lous, they are deficient in making plans. I request that we leave our wood gatherers unguarded so as to lure them out.” Chu followed this, and the men of Jiao captured thirty wood gath­ erers. The next day, the men of Jiao struggled with one another to come out first and drove the Chu conscripts into the mountains. The Chu leaders had placed men at the northern gate and fixed an ambush at the foot of the mountains. Chu roundly defeated them. After forcing Jiao to swear a cov­ enant at the foot of the city wall, the Chu troops returned home.108

12.3

On the occasion of the campaign against Jiao, the Chu troops had divided to cross over the Peng River. The Luo leaders had wanted to attack them and sent Bojia to spy on them. He counted the Chu troops three times.109

12.4

Lord Huan

117

春秋 13.1(2) 十有三年，春，二月，公會紀侯、鄭伯。己巳，及齊侯、宋公、衛侯、燕人

戰。齊師、宋師、衛師、燕師敗績。 13.2 三月，葬衛宣公。 13.3 夏，大水。 13.4 秋，七月。 13.5 冬，十月。

左傳 13.1 十三年，春，楚屈瑕伐羅，鬬伯比送之。還，謂其御曰：「莫敖必敗，舉

趾高，心不固矣。」遂見楚子，曰：「必濟師！」楚子辭焉。 入告夫人鄧曼。鄧曼曰：「大夫其非眾之謂，其謂君撫小民以信， 訓諸司以德，而威莫敖以刑也。莫敖狃於蒲騷之役，將自用也，必小 羅。君若不鎮撫，其不設備乎！夫固謂君訓眾而好鎮撫之，召諸司而勸 之以令德，見莫敖而告諸天之不假易也。不然，夫豈不知楚師之盡行 也？」楚子使賴人追之，不及。

110 See Huan 12.1. 111 That is, all the troops of Chu had already been sent to fight Luo, so Dou Bobi must have been speaking of something other than simply sending more troops. 112 Lai 賴 was a small domain located near modern Lishandian 厲山店, Sui County 隨縣, in Hubei.

118

Zuo Tradition

LORD HUAN 13 (699 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, in the second month, our lord met with the Prince of Ji and the Liege of Zheng. On the jisi day (3), they did battle with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, and a Yān leader. The Qi troops, Song troops, Wei troops, and Yān troops were completely defeated.

13.1(2)

In the third month, Lord Xuan of Wei was buried.

13.2

In summer, there was a great flood.

13.3

Autumn, the seventh month.

13.4

Winter, the tenth month.

13.5

ZUO

Chu finally suffers a reversal as the King of Chu rejects the wise counsel of Dou Bobi and then acts too slowly on the good advice of his wife Deng Man, who displays similar wisdom in another passage (Zhuang 13.1). Here the king pardons his commanders, unlike in later cases where they either are killed or commit suicide. Deng Man is included in the “Benevolent Sagacity” (Renzhi 仁智) section of Lienü zhuan (3.2). In the thirteenth year, in spring, Qu Xia, the Maréchal of Chu, set out to attack Luo. Dou Bobi saw him off. As Dou Bobi was returning, he told his chariot driver, “The maréchal is certain to be defeated. He lifts his feet high; his intentions are not firm.” Dou Bobi then met with the Master of Chu and said, “We must reinforce the troops.” But the Master of Chu refused to do this. The Master of Chu went in and reported this to his wife Deng Man, and Deng Man said, “The high officer was not speaking of numbers but was saying that you, my lord, should soothe the common people with good faith, instruct their overseers with virtue, and overawe the maréchal with punishments. The maréchal, emboldened by the Pusao campaign,110 will rely too much upon himself and is certain to underestimate Luo. If you, my lord, do not take control and offer assistance, he will not set up a proper defense! Now, assuredly Dou Bobi was saying that you should instruct the multitude and control and assist them properly, should summon the high officers and encourage them with your exemplary virtue, and should meet with the maréchal and tell him that Heaven will not treat him leniently. If Dou Bobi did not mean this, then how could he not have known that all the Chu troops were already on the march?”111 The Master of Chu sent some Lai men to chase after Qu Xia, but they did not arrive in time.112

13.1

Lord Huan

119

莫敖使徇于師曰：「諫者有刑！」及鄢，亂次以濟，遂無次。且不設 備。及羅，羅與盧戎兩軍之，大敗之。莫敖縊于荒谷。群帥囚於冶父以聽 刑。楚子曰：「孤之罪也。」皆免之。 13.2(1) 宋多責賂於鄭。鄭不堪命，故以紀、魯及齊與宋、衛、燕戰。不書所戰，

後也。 13.3 鄭人來請修好。

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年，春，正月，公會鄭伯于曹。 14.2 無冰。 14.3(2) 夏五，鄭伯使其弟語來盟。 14.4(3) 秋，八月壬申，御廩災。 14.5(3) 乙亥，嘗。 14.6 冬，十有二月丁巳，齊侯祿父卒。 14.7(4) 宋人以齊人、蔡人、衛人、陳人伐鄭。

113 Huang Valley 荒谷 was located in the domain of Chu just outside the capital north of present-day Jiangling County 江陵縣, Hubei. 114 Yefu 冶父 was also near the Chu capital and is identified with present-day Jiangling City 江陵市, Hubei. 115 Presumably, Song made these demands because Lord Li of Zheng had acquired his position through Song’s help.

120

Zuo Tradition

The maréchal had a crier declare to the troops, “Those who remonstrate will be punished.” When they reached the Yan River, they crossed with their ranks in disorder, and from then on they remained in disorder. Moreover, they did not set up a proper defense. When they reached Luo, the Luo fighters along with the Lu Rong engaged them in battle from both sides and roundly defeated them. The maréchal hanged himself in the Huang Valley.113 All the military leaders of Chu were imprisoned at Yefu to await punishment.114 The Master of Chu said, “It was all my fault,” and pardoned them all. The battle of Lu and Zheng against Song is mentioned earlier (Huan 12.2), and the Annals records that it ended in victory (13.1). Song frequently demanded that Zheng offer gifts.115 Zheng could not bear these demands, and that is the reason it joined Ji and Lu and did battle with Qi, Song, Wei, and Yān. The place of the battle is not recorded because we arrived late.

13.2(1)

A Zheng leader came to request that we foster good relations.

13.3

LORD HUAN 14 (698 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, in the first month, our lord met with the Liege of Zheng at Cao.

14.1(1)

There was no ice.116

14.2

In summer, in the fifth month, the Liege of Zheng sent his younger brother, Yu (Ziren), to us to swear a covenant.

14.3(2)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the renshen day (15), there was a disastrous fire in the granary of the Ancestral Temple.117 On the yihai day (18), we offered the autumn sacrifice. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the dingsi day (2), Lufu, the Prince of Qi, died. A Song leader, taking with him a Qi leader, a Cai leader, a Wei leader, and a Chen leader, attacked Zheng.

14.4(3)

14.5(3) 14.6

14.7(4)

116 A lack of ice is mentioned three times in the Annals (Huan 14.2, Cheng 1.3, and Xiang 28.1). Apparently, during the second lunar month of each year, ice was gathered and stored. Thus, a lack of ice in this month was considered noteworthy. On the importance of a domain’s handling of ice, see Zhao 4.2. 117 According to Du Yu (ZZ 7.125), the yulin 御廩 was a storehouse where the grains harvested by the lord himself and used for the ancestral sacrifices were kept. This was also referred to as the shencang 神倉, “storehouse for the spirits.”

Lord Huan

121

左傳 14.1(1) 十四年，春，會于曹。曹人致餼，禮也。 14.2(3) 夏，鄭子人來尋盟，且修曹之會。

14.3(4, 5)

秋，八月壬申，御廩災。乙亥嘗，書不害也。

14.4(7) 冬，宋人以諸侯伐鄭，報宋之戰也。焚渠門，入，及大逵。伐東郊，取牛

首。以大宮之椽歸為盧門之椽。

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年，春，二月，天王使家父來求車。 15.2 三月乙未，天王崩。 15.3 夏，四月己巳，葬齊僖公。 15.4(2) 五月，鄭伯突出奔蔡。 15.5(3) 鄭世子忽復歸于鄭。 15.6(4) 許叔入于許。 15.7(5) 公會齊侯于艾。 15.8 邾人、牟人、葛人來朝。

118 On this covenant, see Annals, Huan 12.7. Ziren was the courtesy name (zi) of Yu, the younger brother of the Liege of Zheng. 119 Niushou 牛首 (“Ox Head”) was in the domain of Zheng slightly northeast of ­present-day Tongxu County 通許縣, Henan. 120 The name of this Song gate is also attested in Lüshi chunqiu 8:1391. 121 This was King Huan of Zhou (r. 719–697), who had reigned for twenty-three years. 122 The term shizi 世子, “heir apparent,” is used even though his father had been dead for four years. This terminology indicates that he is the legitimate successor to his father, Lord Zhuang.

122

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the fourteenth year, in spring, we met at Cao. That the Cao leaders sent provisions was in accordance with ritual propriety.

14.1(1)

In summer, Ziren of Zheng came to renew a covenant and also to build on the meeting of Cao.118

14.2(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the renshen day (15), there was a disastrous fire in the granary of the Ancestral Temple. On the yihai day (18), we offered the autumn sacrifice. This was recorded because no harm was done.

14.3(4, 5)

Song strikes back at Zheng (Huan 12.2, 13.2). In winter, a Song leader, taking with him the princes, attacked Zheng; this was in retaliation for the battle of Song. They burned the Qu Gate, entered the city, and got as far as the main thoroughfare. Then they attacked the eastern outlying district and seized Niushou.119 They took the rafters of the grand temple back with them and made them into the rafters of the Lu Gate.120

14.4(7)

LORD HUAN 15 (697 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the second month, the Heavenappointed king sent Jiafu to us to seek chariots. In the third month, on the yiwei day (11), the Heaven-appointed king succumbed.121 In summer, in the fourth month, on the jisi day (15), Lord Xi of Qi was buried.

15.1(1)

15.2

15.3

In the fifth month, Tu, the Liege of Zheng, departed and fled to Cai.

15.4(2)

The Zheng heir apparent, Hu, went home again to Zheng.

15.5(3)

122

The younger brother of the Head of Xǔ entered Xǔ.123

15.6(4)

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Ai.

15.7(5)

A Zhu leader, a Mou leader, and a Ge leader came to visit our court.124

15.8

123 He had been given a settlement at the eastern marches of the domain of Xǔ 許 (Yin 11.2). 124 The small, ancient domain of Mou 牟 was located just east of present-day Laiwu County 萊蕪縣 in Shangdong. The location of the ancient domain of Ge 葛 is disputed. Some believe it was a small domain located near Mount Tai on the Shandong Peninsula, while others believe it was just north of Ningling County 寧陵縣 in Henan.

Lord Huan

123

15.9 秋，九月，鄭伯突入于櫟。 15.10(7) 冬，十有一月，公會宋公、衛侯、陳侯于袲，伐鄭。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年，春，天王使家父來求車，非禮也。諸侯不貢車服，天子不私

求財。 15.2(4) 祭仲專，鄭伯患之，使其婿雍糾殺之。將享諸郊。雍姬知之，謂其母曰：

「父與夫孰親？」其母曰：「人盡夫也，父一而已，胡可比也？」遂告祭仲 曰：「雍氏舍其室而將享子於郊，吾惑之，以告。」 祭仲殺雍糾，尸諸周氏之汪。公載以出，曰：「謀及婦人，宜其死 也。」夏，厲公出奔蔡。 15.3(5) 六月乙亥，昭公入。 15.4(6) 許叔入于許。 15.5(7) 公會齊侯于艾，謀定許也。 15.6 秋，鄭伯因櫟人殺檀伯，而遂居櫟。 15.7(10) 冬，會于袲，謀伐鄭，將納厲公也。弗克而還。

125 Li 櫟 was a major city in Zheng and was located near present-day Yu County 禹縣 in Henan. 126 Chi 袲 was located in the domain of Song near present-day Su County 宿縣, Henan. 127 Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:174) notes the parallel with Antigone’s “A husband lost might be replaced.”

124

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the ninth month, Tu, the Liege of Zheng, entered Li.125

15.9

In winter, in the eleventh month, our lord met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, and the Prince of Chen at Chi and attacked Zheng.126

15.10(7)

ZUO

In the fifteenth year, in spring, the Heaven-appointed king sent Jiafu to us to seek chariots: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. The princes do not offer chariots and official regalia, and the Son of Heaven does not privately ask for goods.

15.1(1)

The Liege of Zheng’s plot to eliminate Zhai Zhong is exposed after a daughter chooses to save her father rather than her husband. Lord Li, the Liege of Zheng, is forced to flee Zheng (Huan 11.3), and in the next section (15.3), Lord Zhao, the famous Hu, returns. Zhai Zhong was monopolizing power, and the Liege of Zheng worried about this. He sent Zhai Zhong’s son-in-law Yong Jiu to kill him. Yong was going to offer Zhai Zhong ceremonial toasts in the outlying district. Yong Ji, Yong Jiu’s wife, learned of the plot and said to her mother, “Whom should one hold dearer, a father or a husband?” Her mother said, “Any man can be a husband, but one has only a single father. How can they be compared?”127 And so she reported to Zhai Zhong, “Yong Jiu did not use his house and is instead going to offer you ceremonial toasts in the outlying district. I am mystified by this and so report.” Zhai Zhong killed Yong Jiu and exposed his corpse near the pond of the Zhou lineage. The Lord of Zheng loaded the corpse into his carriage and took it out with him as he left the domain, saying, “He let his wife in on his plans; it is fitting that he died!” In the summer, Lord Li departed and fled to Cai.

15.2(4)

In the sixth month, on the yihai day (22), Lord Zhao entered Zheng.

15.3(5)

The younger brother of the Head of Xǔ entered into Xǔ.

15.4(6)

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Ai: this was to plan to settle the disorder in Xǔ.

15.5(7)

In autumn, the Liege of Zheng, with the help of the Li men, killed the Tan Liege and thus took up residence in Li.128

15.6

In winter we met at Chi: this was to plan an attack on Zheng and to install Lord Li in power. But we were unable to accomplish this and returned to our domains.

15.7(10)

128 The Tan Liege was the head of the Tan lineage and a high officer in Zheng who controlled the capital city of Li.

Lord Huan

125

春秋 16.1(1) 十有六年，春，正月，公會宋公、蔡侯、衛侯于曹。 16.2(2) 夏，四月，公會宋公、衛侯、陳侯、蔡侯伐鄭。 16.3(3) 秋，七月，公至自伐鄭。 16.4(4) 冬，城向。 16.5(5) 十有一月，衛侯朔出奔齊。

左傳 16.1(1) 十六年，春，正月，會于曹，謀伐鄭也。 16.2(2) 夏，伐鄭。 16.3(3) 秋，七月，公至自伐鄭，以飲至之禮也。 16.4(4) 冬，城向，書時也。 16.5(5) 初，衛宣公烝於夷姜，生急子，屬諸右公子。為之娶於齊，而美，公取

之。生壽及朔。屬壽於左公子。夷姜縊。

129 On the small domain of Xiang, see Annals, Yin 2.2. 130 Yin zhi 飲至 apparently describes a ceremony performed upon returning to the domain. According to Yang (1:42–43), this consisted of a report in the Ancestral Temple and the offering of toasts to faithful followers (cf. Yin 5.1). 131 “To consort with” is our translation for the highly problematic term zheng 烝, usually “steam” or “to steam.” While the early commentators insist that this means to have an illegitimate sexual relationship “with a member of the older generation,” some have argued, Tong Shuye (Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 209–13) perhaps the most noteworthy among them, that the practice of zheng originally was not considered improper. Rather, Tong argues, sons of noble lineages had access to the concubines and wives of a deceased father other than their own mother. Confucian commentators who lived in an era when such a relationship could only be branded as “immoral” misunderstood this practice. Yi Jiang was a concubine of Lord Zhuang of Wei, Lord Xuan’s deceased father.

126

Zuo Tradition

LORD HUAN 16 (696 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the first month, our lord met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Cai, and the Prince of Wei at Cao.

16.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, our lord met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Prince of Chen, and the Prince of Cai and attacked Zheng.

16.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

16.3(3)

In winter, we fortified Xiang.129

16.4(4)

In the eleventh month, Shuo, the Prince of Wei, departed and fled to Qi.

16.5(5)

ZUO

The following three passages appear to be a continuation of the events of the previous year (15.10) and were perhaps motivated by a desire to return Lord Li to Zheng (15.2). In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the first month, we met at Cao: this was to plan an attack on Zheng.

16.1(1)

In summer, we attacked Zheng.

16.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng: this was to carry out the ritual of drinking to celebrate his arrival.130

16.3(3)

In winter, we fortified Xiang: this is recorded because it was timely.

16.4(4)

Lord Xuan, who had been established after Zhouxu was executed (Yin 4.5, 4.6), complicates the succession in Wei. The following entry is a splendid example of the impressive economy of Zuozhuan narrative. Earlier, Lord Xuan of Wei had consorted with Yi Jiang, who gave birth to Jizi.131 They entrusted him to the Noble Son of the Right.132 They selected a wife for him in Qi, and she was beautiful, so Lord Xuan took her for himself. She gave birth to Shou and Shuo, and Shou was entrusted to the Noble Son of the Left. Yi Jiang hanged herself.

16.5(5)

132 The terms “Noble Son of the Right” and “Noble Son of the Left” are presented here as if they were official titles. Little is known about these positions except that from the context here, and from Sima Qian’s interpretation (see n. 135 below), they would seem to be members of the ruler’s family who are to fulfill the responsibility of preceptors.

Lord Huan

127

宣姜與公子朔構急子。公使諸齊。使盜待諸莘，將殺之。壽子告 之，使行。不可，曰：「棄父之命，惡用子矣？有無父之國則可也。」及 行，飲以酒。壽子載其旌以先，盜殺之。急子至，曰：「我之求也，此何 罪？請殺我乎！」又殺之。二公子故怨惠公。 十一月，左公子洩、右公子職立公子黔牟。惠公奔齊。

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年，春，正月丙辰，公會齊侯、紀侯，盟于黃。 17.2(2) 二月丙午，公會邾儀父，盟于趡。 17.3(3) 夏，五月丙午，及齊師戰于奚。 17.4(4) 六月丁丑，蔡侯封人卒。 17.5(5) 秋，八月，蔡季自陳歸于蔡。 17.6 癸巳，葬蔡桓侯。

133 Shen 莘 was located along the border between the domains of Qi and Wei just north of present-day Shen County 莘縣, Shandong. 134 The two noble sons referred to here are, of course, the Noble Son of the Right and the Noble Son of the Left, who had acted as preceptors to Jizi and Shou, both now dead. Lord Hui was the posthumous honorific of Shuo after he became the ruler of Wei. The reign dates of the rulers in question are as follows: Lord Zhuang, 757–735; Lord Xuan, 718–700; Lord Hui (Shuo), 699–697; and Qianmou, 696–688. However, Lord Hui returns to Wei in 688 bce and continues to rule until 669 bce, so the reign of Qianmou is often treated as an interregnum. 135 Lord Hui had ruled only three years (699–697) before he was forced to flee. Shiji 37.1593 contains a somewhat expanded version of this story, providing several additional details. First of all, the word zheng, “to consort with,” is deleted, and we are told that Lord Huan “loved the main wife Yi Jiang,” masking somewhat the fact that this was his father’s concubine. Sima Qian states explicitly that the Noble Sons of the Left and Right were “commanded to tutor” Jizi and Shou. We are also told that “Lord Xuan, because he himself had appropriated the heir apparent’s wife, hated the heir apparent in his heart and wanted to get rid of him.” Furthermore, so that the brigands would recognize the heir apparent, he was “given a white pennant.” In

128

Zuo Tradition

Xuan Jiang, the woman from Qi, conspired with Shuo against Jizi. Lord Xuan sent Jizi to Qi and sent brigands to await him at Shen,133 where they were to kill him. Shoua told Jizi of the plot to induce him to set out for some other place, but Jizi was unwilling and said, “If he rejects his father’s command, of what use is a son! If only there were a domain with­ out fathers, then I could flee there.” When Jizi was about to depart, Shou plied him with wine. Shoua then carried his banner and went first. The brigands killed him. When Jizi arrived, he said, “I am the one you were after. What crime did he commit? Please kill me!” The bandits also killed him. The two noble sons consequently hated Lord Hui.134 In the eleventh month, Xie, the Noble Son of the Left, and Zhi, the Noble Son of the Right, established Gongzi Qianmou as ruler. Lord Hui fled to Qi.135 LORD HUAN 17 (695 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, in the first month, on the bingchen day (13), our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Ji and swore a covenant at Huang.136 In the second month, on the bingwu day,137 our lord met with Yifu of Zhu and swore a covenant at Cui. In summer, in the fifth month, on the bingwu day (5), we did battle with Qi troops at Xi. In the sixth month, on the dingchou day (6), Fengren, the Prince of Cai, died. In autumn, in the eighth month, the youngest brother of the Prince of Cai went home from Chen to Cai. On the guisi day (23), Prince Huan of Cai was buried.

17.1(1)

17.2(2)

17.3(3)

17.4(4)

17.5(5)

17.6

short, this becomes a very interesting example of a Shiji re-presentation of a Zuozhuan story. The “Mao Commentary” attaches Maoshi 58, “Meng” 氓, 3C.134, to Lord Xuan and reads it as a harsh critique of his misbehavior: “In the time of Lord Xuan, ritual and dutifulness had disappeared and lewd practices flourished. The distinctions between male and female were not maintained, and they consequently ran after and seduced one another.” Maoshi 44, “Er zi cheng zhou” 二子乘舟, 2C.106, is also associated with this event. People of Wei, who were saddened by “the two sons who contended to die for one another,” supposedly wrote this ode. Note, however, that in this ode Jizi and Shou journey by boat! 136 Huang 黃 is not the state mentioned earlier but a small territory between Qi and Lu. It was located northeast of present-day Zichuan District 淄川區, Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. 137 There was no bingwu day in the second month.

Lord Huan

129

17.7(6) 及宋人、衛人伐邾。 17.8(7) 冬，十月朔，日有食之。

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年，春，盟于黃，平齊、紀，且謀衛故也。 17.2(2) 及邾儀父盟于趡，尋蔑之盟也。 17.3(3) 夏，及齊師戰于奚，疆事也。於是齊人侵魯疆，疆吏來告。公曰：「疆埸

之事，慎守其一，而備其不虞。姑盡所備焉。事至而戰，又何謁焉？」 17.4(4) 蔡桓侯卒。蔡人召蔡季于陳。 17.5(5) 秋，蔡季自陳歸于蔡，蔡人嘉之也。 17.6(7) 伐邾，宋志也。 17.7(8) 冬，十月朔，日有食之。不書日，官失之也。天子有日官，諸侯有日御。日

官居卿以厎日，禮也。日御不失日，以授百官于朝。

130

Zuo Tradition

We joined with a Song leader and a Wei leader and attacked Zhu.

17.7(6)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.

17.8(7)

ZUO

In the seventeenth year, in spring, we swore a covenant at Huang: this was for the purpose of making peace between Qi and Ji and moreover of making plans to deal with Wei.

17.1(1)

We swore a covenant with Yifu of Zhu at Cui: this was to renew the covenant of Mie.

17.2(2)

In summer, we did battle with Qi troops at Xi: this was a border dispute. At that time, the men of Qi had encroached upon the Lu borders, and a border official had come to report this. Our lord said, “In the affairs of border regions, take care to maintain the integrity of the border and prepare for the unexpected. Meanwhile, complete all the preparations there, and when something happens, then fight. What is there to come calling about?”

17.3(3)

Lord Huan of Cai died. The Cai leaders summoned Cai Ji from the domain of Chen.

17.4(4)

In autumn, the youngest brother of the Prince of Cai went home from Chen to Cai: this was because Cai leaders considered him good.

17.5(5)

We attacked Zhu: this was the will of Song.138

17.6(7)

The following passage expresses concern over the omission from the calendar of the precise date of an eclipse. We see here evidence of the official importance attached to maintaining and disseminating an accurate calendar. In winter, in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. That the text does not record the day is because the official omitted it. The Son of Heaven has a manager of the calendar, and the princes have officers of the calendar. The manager of the calendar occupies the rank of minister and fixes the calendar. This is in accordance with ritual propriety. The officers of the calendar should not omit dates and should present them to all the officials at court.

17.7(8)

138 This presumably was belated revenge for the attack of Zhu and Zheng on Song in Yin 5.8. In following Song’s lead here, Lu is violating the oath of Cui mentioned in Annals, Huan 17.2. On zhi as manifest or hidden intention, see Yin 1.4b, n. 22.

Lord Huan

131

17.8 初，鄭伯將以高渠彌為卿，昭公惡之，固諫，不聽。昭公立，懼其殺己

也，辛卯，弒昭公而立公子亹。君子謂昭公知所惡矣。公子達曰：「高伯 其為戮乎！復惡已甚矣。」

春秋 18.1(1) 十有八年，春，王正月，公會齊侯于濼。公與夫人姜氏遂如齊。 18.2(1) 夏，四月丙子，公薨于齊。 18.3 丁酉，公之喪至自齊。 18.4 秋，七月。 18.5 冬，十有二月己丑，葬我君桓公。

左傳

18.1(1, 2)

十八年，春，公將有行，遂與姜氏如齊。申繻曰：「女有家，男有室，無相 瀆也。謂之有禮。易此必敗。」 公會齊侯于濼，遂及文姜如齊。齊侯通焉。公謫之。以告。

139 Shiji 42.1763 reports this event as follows: “From the time that Lord Zhao had been heir apparent, his father, Lord Zhuang, had wanted to make Gao Qumi minister. The heir apparent, Hu, hated Gao Qumi, but Lord Zhuang did not listen to him and in the end employed Gao Qumi as minister. When Lord Zhao acceded to his position, Gao was afraid that he would be killed. In winter, in the tenth month, on the xinmao day, Qumi and Lord Zhao went out to hunt. Qumi shot an arrow and killed Lord Zhao in the wilds. Zhai Zhong and Qumi did not dare bring back Lord Li, so instead, they instated Lord Zhao’s younger brother Ziwei (Gongzi Wei) as ruler. And that one is known as Ziwei. He has no posthumous name.” 140 Du Yu (ZZ 7.129) claims that Gongzi Da was an official in Lu, but he appears just this once in Zuozhuan, so it is difficult to know what evidence Du Yu has for this claim. 141 The month, not noted here, was the fifth.

132

Zuo Tradition

Lord Zhao, who had come to power in Zheng only two years earlier (Huan 15.2), is killed. Earlier, the Liege of Zheng was going to make Gao Qumi minister. Lord Zhao, then the reigning liege’s son, hated Gao and remonstrated stubbornly, but the Liege of Zheng would not listen. When Lord Zhao acceded to his position, Gao Qumi feared that Lord Zhao would have him put to death. On the xinmao day (22), he assassinated Lord Zhao and established Gongzi Wei as ruler.139 The noble man said of Lord Zhao that he had known whom he should hate! Gongzi Da said, “I expect that Gao Qumia will come to a violent end. He repays hate excessively.”140

17.8

LORD HUAN 18 (694 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Luo. Our lord and his wife, Lady Jiang, then went to Qi. In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingzi day (10), our lord expired in Qi.

18.1(1)

18.2(1)

On the dingyou day (1),141 our lord’s funeral cortege arrived from Qi.

18.3

Autumn, the seventh month.

18.4

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the jichou day (27), we buried our ruler Lord Huan.

18.5

ZUO

The sexual relationship between the Prince of Qi and his sister, the Lady Jiang, wife of Lord Huan of Lu (Huan 3.6), continues and leads to the death of the Lord of Lu (18.2). In the eighteenth year, in spring, our lord was about to leave the domain and then go to Qi with Lady Wen Jiang. Shen Xu said, “When a woman has her home through her husband, and a man has his household through his wife, and the two do not encroach upon each other, we call this having ritual propriety. One who makes changes in this is certain to fall.” Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Luo. They joined up with Wen Jiang and went to Qi. The Prince of Qi had a liaison with her.142 Our lord reproached her, and she reported this to the Prince of Qi.

18.1(1, 2)

142 It should be remembered that the Prince of Qi is the elder brother of Lady Jiang. Luo 濼, where the Lord of Lu, his wife, and her brother met, was a Qi settlement located near modern Jinan City 濟南市 in Shandong. They then proceeded together to the Qi capital.

Lord Huan

133

夏，四月丙子，享公。使公子彭生乘公，公薨于車。 魯人告于齊曰：「寡君畏君之威，不敢寧居，來修舊好。禮成而不 反，無所歸咎，惡於諸侯。請以彭生除之。」齊人殺彭生。 18.2 秋，齊侯師于首止，子亹會之，高渠彌相。七月戊戌，齊人殺子亹，而轘

高渠彌。祭仲逆鄭子于陳而立之。是行也，祭仲知之，故稱疾不往。人 曰：「祭仲以知免。」仲曰：「信也。」 18.3 周公欲弒莊王而立王子克。辛伯告王，遂與王殺周公黑肩。王子克奔

燕。 初，子儀有寵於桓王，桓王屬諸周公。辛伯諫曰：「並后、匹嫡、 兩政、耦國，亂之本也。」周公弗從，故及。

143 Zuozhuan is cryptic on the death of Lord Huan. Gongyang, Zhuang 1 (6.72), says more: “[Lord Huan’s] wife slandered her lord to the Prince of Qi as follows: ‘My lord said, “Tong is not my son. He is the son of the Prince of Qi.’” The Prince of Qi was angry. He drank with Lord Huan. Departing from the feast, he had Pengsheng escort Lord Huan. As Pengsheng was putting him in the carriage, he crushed his ribs and killed him.” Shiji 33.1530 is similar to Gongyang but even more explicit: “In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingzi day, Lord Xiang of Qi offered Lord Huan a feast. The lord became drunk, and Lord Xiang had Gongzi Pengsheng carry Lord Huan of Lu. Thereupon, Lord Xiang commanded Pengsheng to break his ribs, and the lord died in the carriage.” 144 In some versions of the text, this entry is broken up into three separate entries, making what we have here as 18.2 into 18.4. 145 Shouzhi 首止 was located in the domain of Wei southeast of present-day Sui County 睢縣, Henan. 146 It is not entirely clear from Zuozhuan why the Prince of Qi hated Gongzi Wei and his supporter Gao Qumi so intensely. Shiji 42.1763 provides the following explanation:

134

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingzi day (10), ceremonial toasts were offered to our lord. The Qi ruler had Gongzi Pengsheng help our lord into a carriage, and our lord expired in the carriage.143 The Lu leaders declared to Qi: “Our lord feared the authority of your ruler and dared not stay at home in peace. He came to Qi to restore an age-old amity. But when the ritual was completed, he did not return. We have no reason to lay the blame on you, but we have been insulted in the eyes of the princes. We request that you use Pengsheng to remove the insult.” The Qi leaders killed Pengsheng.144 Gongzi Wei, instated as ruler in Zheng at the end of the previous year (17.8), is killed in Qi along with his supporter Gao Qumi. In autumn, the Prince of Qi stationed troops at Shouzhi.145 Gongzi Weia met with him, and Gao Qumi acted as assistant. In the seventh month, on the wuxu day (3), the Qi leaders put Gongzi Weia to death and had Gao Qumi torn apart with chariots. Zhai Zhong went to meet Ziyi, another son of Lord Zhuang of Zheng, in Chen and established him as ruler. As Gongzi Wei and Gao Qumi were leaving the domain, Zhai Zhong learned of Qi’s plans. He therefore claimed he was sick and did not go. The people said, “Zhai Zhong knows how to avoid harm.” And Zhai Zhong said, “This is truly so.”146

18.2

King Zhuang of Zhou kills a minister plotting his younger brother’s usurpation of the throne. This is the first of a series of crises in Zhou in which Zhou kings are challenged by their younger brothers (e.g., Zhuang 19–21, Xi 24–25, Zhao 22–26). We have here another version of the argument against empowering the “branch” that threatens the “trunk.” The Zhou Duke wanted to assassinate King Zhuang and establish Wangzi Ke as ruler. Xin Bo reported this to the king and then, along with the king, killed the Zhou Duke Huana. Wangzi Ke fled to Yān. Earlier, Wangzi Kea had been in favor with King Huan, who entrusted him to the Zhou Duke. Xin Bo remonstrated: “A concubine put alongside the queen, a concubine’s son made the equal of the main wife’s son, a two-headed government, another city made equivalent in size to the capital: these are the roots of rebellion!” But the Zhou Duke did not heed this, and that is why disaster overtook him.

18.3

“Gongzi Wei, at the time before Lord Xiang of Qi had acceded to his position, once met and fought with him, so they had become enemies with one another. When he was going to meet with the princes, Zhai Zhong requested that Gongzi Wei not travel there.” Shiji further claims that Gongzi Wei rejected this advice on the grounds that he did not want to manifest weakness and thereby encourage the princes to install Lord Li, who had fled Zheng under duress earlier (Huan 15.2). We follow Du Yu in identifying Ziyi as the one Zhai Zhong met in Chen and established as ruler.

Lord Huan

135

莊公

Lord Zhuang (693–662 bce) Lord Zhuang came to power after his father, Lord Huan, had been murdered as a consequence of an adulterous relationship between Lord Zhuang’s mother, Wen Jiang, and her own brother, the Prince of Qi. Despite the cloud that must have hung over Lord Zhuang’s head because of this unhappy event, as well as his mother’s subsequent visits to see her brother-lover (4.1, 7.1, 7.5), Lord Zhuang had a long and reasonably successful thirty-two-year reign. He received good counsel from his advisers, particularly Cao Gui and Zang Wenzhong, and he won noteworthy military victories over Qi and Song, both in 684 Bce. He even gains the praise of “the noble man,” the unerring Zuozhuan voice of moral judgment, although he is also criticized on several occasions for violating ritual propriety. Despite his successes, Lord Zhuang died without a clear successor, and the result was additional violence and sexual intrigue (32.4, 32.5, and Min 2.3). Although the domain of Chu continued its expansion, attacking Shen and destroying Deng (6.3), the years of Lord Zhuang are most often remembered as the time when the first “overlord,” Lord Huan of Qi (r. 685–643), rose to power and the second overlord, Lord Wen of Jin (r. 636–628), was born under somewhat threatening circumstances (28.2). The account of Lord Huan’s appointment as overlord in Zuozhuan is quite brief and ambiguous (see 27.6 below and accompanying note), despite the emphasis this event has received from some later historians, an emphasis in turn derived from the image of Lord Huan in such Warring States texts as Mencius and Guanzi.1 Much more attention throughout these years is given to the rebellion of Wangzi Tui of Zhou, which sends his uncle King Hui (r. 676–652) into brief exile (19.2, 20.1, 21.1), and other revolts in Qi (8.3, 9.1, 9.5), Zheng (14.2), and Song (11.4, 12.1). Wangzi 1

See, e.g., Cho-yun Hsü, “Spring and Autumn Period,” 555.

137

春秋 1.1(1) 元年，春，王正月。 1.2(2) 三月，夫人孫于齊。 1.3 夏，單伯送王姬。 1.4(3) 秋，築王姬之館于外。 1.5 冬，十月乙亥，陳侯林卒。 1.6 王使榮叔來錫桓公命。 1.7 王姬歸于齊。 1.8 齊師遷紀郱、鄑、郚。

2 3

138

Yang (1:155) notes that sun 孫, which we have translated “to retire,” is a euphemistic expression for “to flee” (sun 遜), an explanation that follows both the Gongyang, Zhuang 1 (6.72), and the Guliang, Zhuang 1 (5.44), commentaries. Cf. Zhao 25.6f. The Shan Liege was a Zhou official. Shan was a small domain within the Zhou realm and was located just north of present-day Loyang. Several bronze vessels recovered from this region bear the name “Shan” (Yang, 1:155–56).

Zuo Tradition

Tui’s rebellion very much follows the pattern announced in the case of the earlier rebellion of Wangzi Ke (Huan 18.3). As in Lord Yin and Lord Huan, this section of Zuozhuan moves relatively quickly. Short entries predominate, with one year made up of a single short entry (2) and three years of only two short entries (5, 15, 17). A number of passages in Lord Zhuang are of particular interest. There are, for example, two famous stories of the supernatural, although each one can be and has been explained rationally. In the first, Lord Xiang of Qi is spooked by a boar that a member of his entourage identifies as Gongzi Pengsheng, whom Lord Xiang (8.3) had put to death after using him to kill Lord Huan, his sexual rival (Huan 18.1). In the second passage, two snakes fight “within the southern gate of Zheng,” an event that is taken as an omen and provokes a discussion as to how such omens can arise (14.2). In another well-known passage, the wise wife Deng Man, whom we met earlier (Huan 13.1), appears again and displays her usual prescience (4.1). Elsewhere, the Lu minister Cao Gui gives brilliant advice both before and during battle (10.1). Finally, the complex conjugal life of Lord Xian of Jin (r. 676–651), which will motivate many of the best narratives of Lords Min and Xi, is presented in captivating detail (28.1).

LORD ZHUANG 1 (693 BCE) ANNALS

The first year, spring, the royal first month. In the third month, Lord Huan’s wife retired to Qi.

1.1(1) 2

1.2(2)

In summer, the Shan Liege escorted Wang Ji, the king’s daughter, to Lu.3

1.3

In autumn, we built a lodge for Wang Ji outside the city.

1.4(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the yihai day (17), Lin, the Prince of Chen, died.

1.5

The king sent Rong Shu to us to bestow his command upon Lord Huan.4

1.6

Wang Ji went to marry in Qi.

1.7

The Qi troops relocated the Ji towns Ping, Zi, and Wu.

5

1.8

4

It is at this moment, then, that the former ruler of Lu is given his posthumous title “Huan.” Rong Shu is presumably a Zhou official. 5 Ji 紀 was a small domain located in the northern part of the Shandong Peninsula. The three towns mentioned above all were subordinate to this domain.

Lord Zhuang

139

左傳 1.1(1) 元年，春，不稱即位，文姜出故也。 1.2(2) 三月，夫人孫于齊，不稱姜氏，絕不為親，禮也。 1.3(4) 秋，築王姬之館于外。為外，禮也。

春秋 2.1 二年，春，王二月，葬陳莊公。 2.2 夏，公子慶父帥師伐於餘丘。 2.3 秋，七月，齊王姬卒。 2.4(1) 冬，十有二月，夫人姜氏會齊侯于禚。

2.5

乙酉，宋公馮卒。

左傳 2.1(4) 二年，冬，夫人姜氏會齊侯于禚。書姦也。

6

140

Gongyang, Zhuang 27 (8.104), and Shiji (33.1532) identify Gongzi Qingfu as a younger brother of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Since at this time Lord Zhuang was only fifteen years old, Qingfu, if properly identified, was probably too young to be anything more than a nominal leader of this military expedition. Gongyang, Zhuang 2 (6.74), and Guliang, Zhuang 2 (5.46), also identify Wuyuqiu as a small fief of the domain of Zhu, but the identification is far from certain.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The next two Zuozhuan passages continue with the aftermath of Huan 18.1 and 18.2. According to Sima Qian (Shiji 33.1530), Wen Jiang, aware of her role in causing her husband’s death, does not dare return to Lu and stays in Qi. In the first year, in spring: because Wen Jiang was abroad, the text does not proclaim that our lord acceded to his position.

1.1(1)

In the third month, Lord Huan’s wife retired to Qi: because she had been cut off and was not acknowledged as a parent, it does not proclaim her “Lady Jiang.” This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

1.2(2)

The daughter of King Zhuang of Zhou comes to Lu as a bride. In autumn, we built a lodge for Wang Ji outside the city. Because she was from outside the domain, this was in accordance with ritual propriety.

1.3(4)

LORD ZHUANG 2 (692 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal second month, Lord Zhuang of Chen was buried.

2.1

In summer, Gongzi Qingfu led out troops and attacked Wuyuqiu.6

2.2

In autumn, in the seventh month, Wang Ji of Qi,7 died.

2.3

In winter, in the twelfth month, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Zhuo.8

2.4(1)

On the yiyou day (4), Ping, the Duke of Song, died.

2.5

ZUO

Wen Jiang, “Lady Jiang,” had earlier visited the domain of Qi in the company of her husband, Lord Huan of Lu, and had a liaison with her own brother, the Prince of Qi (Huan 18.1). Lady Jiang, now widowed, meets again with the Prince of Qi. Several more such meetings will be noted in subsequent years (Annals, Zhuang 4.1, 7.1, 7.5). In the second year, in winter, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Zhuo. This records an act of adultery.

2.1(4)

7

This is a daughter of the Zhou king married to King Xiang of Qi and should not be confused with Wang Ji (which means simply “the king’s daughter, of the Ji clan”) mentioned in Zhuang 1.3. 8 Zhuo 禚 was located in the domain of Qi near present-day Changqing 長清, Shandong.

Lord Zhuang

141

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，王正月，溺會齊師伐衛。 3.2 夏，四月，葬宋莊公。 3.3(2) 五月，葬桓王。 3.4(3) 秋，紀季以酅入于齊。 3.5(4) 冬，公次于滑。

左傳 3.1(1) 三年，春，溺會齊師伐衛，疾之也。 3.2(3) 夏，五月，葬桓王，緩也。 3.3(4) 秋，紀季以酅入于齊，紀於是乎始判。 3.4(5) 冬，公次于滑，將會鄭伯，謀紀故也。鄭伯辭以難。凡師，一宿為舍，再

宿為信，過信為次。

春秋 4.1 四年，春，王二月，夫人姜氏享齊侯于祝丘。

9 Ni was a high officer in the domain of Lu. 10 Hua 滑 was located in the domain of Zheng to the northwest of modern Sui County 睢縣, Henan. 11 There are two ways of interpreting the last phrase above. It may refer to Ni’s motive in joining Qi to attack Wei: he was distressed by Wei or by the Qi attack on Wei. More likely, it explains why the Annals refers to Gongzi Ni by his given name alone: “It expresses distress over his action,” presumably because he, like Gongzi Hui before him (Yin 4.5), was acting without his ruler’s authorization. Guliang, Zhuang 3 (5.46), clearly takes the latter position: “Who was this Ni? He was Gongzi Ni. Why

142

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 3 (691 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, Ni met with Qi troops and attacked Wei.9

3.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, Lord Zhuang of Song was buried.

3.2

In the fifth month, King Huan was buried.

3.3(2)

In autumn, the youngest brother of the ruler of Ji, taking Xi with him, went over to Qi.

3.4(3)

In winter, our lord set up camp at Hua.10

3.5(4)

ZUO

In the third year, in spring, Ni met with Qi troops and attacked Wei: this expresses distress over his action.11

3.1(1)

On the death of King Huan, which had occurred seven years before, see Annals, Huan 15.2. In summer, in the fifth month, King Huan was buried: this was late.

3.2(3)

In autumn, the youngest brother of the ruler of Ji, taking Xi with him, went over to Qi. From this time, Ji began to be partitioned.12

3.3(4)

In winter, our lord set up camp at Hua: this was because he was going to meet the Liege of Zheng and make plans about Ji. The Liege of Zheng declined because of troubles in his own domain.13 In all cases when troops halt for one night, it is called “to bivouac”; for two nights, “to halt”; and for more than two nights, “to set up camp.”

3.4(5)

LORD ZHUANG 4 (690 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, offered ceremonial toasts to the Prince of Qi at Zhuqiu.14

4.1



does it not name him Gongzi? It is expressing abhorrence for the fact that he joined with an enemy and attacked a domain of the same clan name. That is the reason it blames him and calls him by his given name.” 12 That is, half of Ji remained autonomous and half fell under control of the Qi. 13 The Liege of Zheng refers to Ziyi, who was installed as ruler after the murder of Lord Zhao (Huan 17.8) and his successor Gongzi Wei (Huan 18.3). The exiled Lord Li of Zheng was in Li, ready to seize any opportunity to return to power in Zheng. For unrest in Zheng, see Huan 11.3, 15.3, 17.8, 18.3. 14 Zhuqiu 祝丘 was located in the domain of Lu just southeast of present-day Linyi County 臨沂縣, Shandong. This site, however, is far removed from Qi and seems an unlikely place for this meeting.

Lord Zhuang

143

4.2 三月，紀伯姬卒。 4.3 夏，齊侯、陳侯、鄭伯遇于垂。 4.4(2) 紀侯大去其國。 4.5 六月乙丑，齊侯葬紀伯姬。 4.6 秋，七月。 4.7 冬，公及齊人狩于禚。

左傳 4.1 四年，春，王三月，楚武王荊尸，授師孑焉，以伐隨。將齊，入告夫人鄧

曼曰：「余心蕩。」 鄧曼歎曰：「王祿盡矣。盈而蕩，天之道也。先君其知之矣，故臨 武事，將發大命，而蕩王心焉。若師徒無虧，王薨於行，國之福也。」 王遂行，卒於樠木之下。令尹鬬祁、莫敖屈重除道梁溠，營軍臨 隨，隨人懼，行成。莫敖以王命入盟隨侯，且請為會於漢汭而還。濟漢而 後發喪。

15 16

144

The marriage of this woman, the daughter of the former Lord Yin, is mentioned in Annals, Yin 2.6. The term jingshi 荊尸, which appears here, is obscure. In Du Yu’s interpretation (ZZ 8.140), Jing is an old name for Chu and shi can mean “to array.” The term would thus refer to a military formation characteristic of the domain of Chu. Yang (1:163) relates jingshi to xingyi 刑夷, the name for the Chu month corresponding to the Qin first month.

Zuo Tradition

In the third month, Bo Ji, the wife of the Ji ruler, died.15

4.2

In summer, the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Chen, and the Liege of Zheng met up at Chui.

4.3

The Prince of Ji quit his domain forever.

4.4(2)

In the sixth month, on the yichou day (23), the Prince of Qi buried Bo Ji, the wife of the Ji ruler.

4.5

Autumn, the seventh month.

4.6

In winter, our lord joined with a Qi leader and went on the winter hunt at Zhuo.

4.7

ZUO

Deng Man, the wife of the ruler of the domain of Chu, again displays her insight (Huan 13.1). Chu had previously considered attacking Sui but was dissuaded by its “good governance” (Huan 6.2). Two years later Chu did attack and, as in the following passage, swore a covenant with Sui and then withdrew (Huan 8.2). In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal third month, King Wu of Chu arrayed his troops in a Chu-style formation16 and issued spears to the troops so that they could attack Sui. When he was about to begin a ritual fast, he entered his home and said to his wife, Deng Man, “My heart is unsteady.” Deng Man sighed and said, “Your fortune, king, is at its end! That what is full should be unsteady is the Way of Heaven. Surely the royal ancestors know this. Thus, as you approach a military affair and are about to issue a great command, they make your heart unsteady about it. But so long as the troops do not suffer a defeat, even if you expire during the march, it will prove a blessing for the domain.” So the king set out, but he died at the foot of Mount Manmu.17 Chief Minister Dou Qi and Maréchal Qu Zhong cleared a road, built a bridge over the Zha River, and established a base for the army near Sui. The Sui leaders were afraid and went to seek an accord. Citing the king’s command, the maréchal entered Sui and swore a covenant with the Prince of Sui. He also asked that they meet at the bend of the Han River. The Chu armies then returned home. Only after they had crossed the Han did they proclaim the beginning of mourning for the king.

17

4.1

Du Yu (ZZ 8.140) follows Shuowen jiezi in suggesting that this is the name of a type of pine: “but he died under a pine tree.” Yang (1:235), however, gives evidence that Manmu 樠木 is actually the name of a mountain.

Lord Zhuang

145

4.2(4) 紀侯不能下齊，以與紀季。夏，紀侯大去其國，違齊難也。

春秋 5.1 五年，春，王正月。 5.2 夏，夫人姜氏如齊師。 5.3(1) 秋，郳犁來來朝。 5.4(2) 冬，公會齊人、宋人、陳人、蔡人伐衛。

左傳 5.1(3) 五年，秋，郳犁來來朝。名，未王命也。 5.2(4) 冬，伐衛，納惠公也。

春秋 6.1(1) 六年，春，王正月，王人子突救衛。 6.2(1) 夏，六月，衛侯朔入于衛。 6.3 秋，公至自伐衛。 6.4 螟。 6.5(2) 冬，齊人來歸衛俘。

18

146

Gongyang, Zhuang 4 (6.77), justifies Qi’s aggressions as “just vengeance” for events that occurred nine generations earlier when a Ji ruler insulted the Qi lord.

Zuo Tradition

In the previous year, Qi had gained control of half of the domain of Ji (Zhuang 3.3). Ji’s very existence now seems threatened, and the prince leaves the domain hoping to forestall disaster. Ji was situated to the southeast of Qu and could hardly escape annexation as Qi sought to expand its territories. The Prince of Ji failed to submit to Qi and so gave the domain of Ji to a younger brother. In summer, the Prince of Ji quit his domain forever: this was to avoid the calamity brought on by Qi.18

4.2(4)

LORD ZHUANG 5 (689 BCE) ANNALS

The fifth year, spring, the royal first month.

5.1

In summer, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, went to the Qi troops.

5.2

In autumn, Li Lai of Ni came to visit our court.

5.3(1)

19

In winter, our lord met with a Qi leader, a Song leader, a Chen leader, and a Cai leader and attacked the domain of Wei.

5.4(2)

ZUO

In the fifth year, in autumn, Li Lai of Ni came to visit our court. He is called by name because the king had not yet granted him a title.

5.1(3)

Lord Hui of Wei, who is now installed as ruler with the help of Lu and its allies, had been living in exile since Qianmou had been instated (Huan 16.5). In winter, we attacked the domain of Wei: this was to install Lord Hui in power.

5.2(4)

LORD ZHUANG 6 (688 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Zitu, a leader from the royal court, went to the aid of Wei.

6.1(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, Shuo, the Prince of Wei, entered Wei.

6.2(1)

In autumn, our lord arrived from the attack on Wei.

6.3

There was an infestation of caterpillars.

6.4

In winter, a Qi leader came to present captives from Wei.

6.5(2)

19 Ni 郳 was a small tributary sub-enfeoffment of Zhu and was located just east of present-day Teng County 滕縣, Shandong. It is also known as Xiao Zhu or Lesser Zhu 小邾. A second opinion places Ni in a slightly different location in Shandong (see Yang, 1:166).

Lord Zhuang

147

左傳

6.1(1, 2)

六年，春，王人救衛。夏，衛侯入，放公子黔牟于周，放甯跪于秦，殺左 公子洩、右公子職，乃即位。 君子以二公子之立黔牟為不度矣。夫能固位者，必度於本末，而 後立衷焉。不知其本，不謀；知本之不枝，弗強。《詩》云：「本枝百世。」

6.2(5) 冬，齊人來歸衛寶，文姜請之也。 6.3 楚文王伐申，過鄧。鄧祁侯曰：「吾甥也。」止而享之。騅甥、聃甥、養甥

請殺楚子。鄧侯弗許。三甥曰：「亡鄧國者，必此人也。若不早圖，後君 噬齊。其及圖之乎！圖之，此為時矣。」鄧侯曰：「人將不食吾餘。」對曰： 「若不從三臣，抑社稷實不血食，而君焉取餘？」弗從。還年，楚子伐 鄧。十六年，楚復伐鄧，滅之。

20 The royal court of Zhou is thus supporting Wei and apparently Qianmou against the allies’ attempt to reinstate Lord Hui (see Yang, 1:168), which contradicts a later claim in Shiji that the allies were acting on command from the Zhou king (37.1594). 21 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.534. The original ode glorifies the lasting lineage of Zhou rulers, but the noble man is just using the metaphor of “root and branch” to weigh the chance of success for political rivals. 22 Commentators insist this means that if the prince does not act now, he will be forced to attempt the impossible later on (Yang, 1:169; Takezoe, 3.14). The common idiom for losing the opportunity to act before it is too late, “trying to chew one’s navel and failing to reach it” (shiqi moji 噬臍莫及), derives from this passage. In a discussion of this phrase, Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:174) notes how a metaphor for spatial impossibility is used to show how time cannot be reversed. 23 That is, if he kills the King of Chu, his own people will reject him. The prince may be making a joke playing off the nephews’ previous comment about chewing his navel. The nephews’ response seems to construe the king’s words somewhat differently, implying that the domain will perish and there will be no offerings provided to him or any other former rulers of Deng.

148

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Lord Hui of Wei now returns to power and takes revenge against those who had driven him from the domain (Huan 16.5 and Zhuang 5.2). The noble man’s criticism of the two noble sons below is curious in view of the generally negative portrayal of the supposedly legitimate Lord Hui. In the sixth year, in spring, a leader from the royal court went to the aid of Wei. In summer, the Prince of Wei entered his domain. He banished Gongzi Qianmou to Zhou and Ning Gui to Qin, he killed Xie, the Noble Son of the Left, and Zhi, the Noble Son of the Right, and then acceded to his position.20 The noble man regarded it as a violation of due measure that the two noble sons established Qianmou as ruler. Whoever can stabilize a position of authority must properly measure both the roots and the tips of the branches. Only then will he establish the fitting one. If you do not know the man’s roots, you do not plan for him. If you know that his roots will not bear branches, you do not encourage him. As it says in the Odes, “The roots branch out for one hundred generations.”21

6.1(1, 2)

In winter, a Qi leader came to present treasures from Wei: it was Lady Wen Jiang who had requested this.

6.2(5)

From the following passage it becomes evident that King Wen, the ruler of Chu, is the son of the virtuous woman Deng Man (Huan 13.1 and Zhuang 4.1), sister of Prince Qi of Deng. Consequently, the Prince of Deng here takes steps based on a family relationship that will eventually lead to the destruction of his domain. When King Wen of Chu attacked Shen, he crossed the domain of Deng. Prince Qi of Deng said, “He is my nephew.” So they made him stay and offered him ceremonial toasts. The nephews Zhui, Nan, and Yang asked permission to kill the Master of Chu, but the Prince of Deng would not allow this. The three nephews said, “The one who will destroy the domain of Deng is certain to be this man. If you fail to make plans early on, later you’ll have to chew your navel, attempting the impossible.22 Please plan while something can still be done! If you would make plans for this, now is the time.” The Prince of Deng said, “If I were to act thus, people would not eat my leftovers.”23 They responded, “If you do not follow the advice of your three servants, then it is the altars of the domain themselves that will no longer be used for flesh sacrifices. Where would you, my lord, get any leftovers?” He did not follow this advice. In the year when they were returning home from their attack on Shen, the Master of Chu attacked Deng. In the sixteenth year, Chu again attacked Deng and destroyed it.

6.3

Lord Zhuang

149

春秋 7.1(1) 七年，春，夫人姜氏會齊侯于防。 7.2(2) 夏，四月辛卯，夜，恆星不見。夜中，星隕如雨。 7.3 秋，大水。 7.4(3) 無麥、苗。 7.5 冬，夫人姜氏會齊侯于穀。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年，春，文姜會齊侯于防，齊志也。 7.2(2) 夏，恆星不見，夜明也。星隕如雨，與雨偕也。 7.3(4) 秋，無麥、苗，不害嘉穀也。

春秋 8.1 八年，春，王正月，師次于郎，以俟陳人、蔡人。 8.2(1) 甲午，治兵。 8.3(2) 夏，師及齊師圍郕。郕降于齊師。 8.4(2) 秋，師還。 8.5 冬，十有一月癸未，齊無知弒其君諸兒。

24 This presumably refers to a shower of meteorites that was so bright that the stars could not be seen. In April 1803, to note a more recent example of this phenomenon, over three thousand small meteorites fell near L’Aigle, France. 25 Gu 穀 was in the domain of Qi and was located near Dong’e Township 東阿鎮, Shandong. 26 Zhi 志, “will,” in this context, as in Yin 1.4 earlier, seems to imply something like “secret intention” (cf. Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:172)—in this case the incestuous relationship between Wen Jiang and Lord Xiang of Qi. 27 Zuozhuan appears to read ru 如, “like,” as the conjunction er 而 and thus claims that the meteors were coming down together with the rain rather than “like the rain”

150

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 7 (687 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Fang. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinmao day (5), the usual stars could not be seen at nightfall. In the middle of the night, stars fell like rain.24

7.1(1)

7.2(2)

In autumn, there was a great flood.

7.3

There was a dearth of wheat and millet seedlings.

7.4(3)

In winter, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Gu.25

7.5

ZUO

In the seventh year, in spring, Wen Jiang met with the Prince of Qi at Fang: this was the will of Qi.26

7.1(1)

In summer, the usual stars could not be seen at nightfall: this was because the night was bright. Stars fell like rain: this was because they were mixed together with rain.27

7.2(2)

In autumn, there was a dearth of wheat and millet seedlings: there was no harm done to the prime cereals used for sacrifice.28

7.3(4)

LORD ZHUANG 8 (686 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our troops set up camp at Lang to await a Chen leader and a Cai leader.29 On the jiawu day (13), we drilled the soldiers.

8.1

8.2(1)

In summer, our troops joined with Qi troops and laid siege to Cheng. Cheng surrendered to the Qi troops.

8.3(2)

In autumn, our troops began their return journey.

8.4(2)

In winter, in the eleventh month, on the guiwei day (7), Wuzhi (Gongsun Wuzhi) of Qi assassinated his ruler Zhu’er.

8.5

(cf. Yang, 1:171). Both Gongyang, Zhuang 7 (6.81), and Guliang, Zhuang 7 (5.49), say that the meteors “were like rain.” 28 Yang (1:171) believes that a rainstorm destroyed the wheat, and the millet was destroyed while it was sprouting. But there was still enough time for a crop of millet to be produced for sacrifice. 29 Lu was presumably waiting for Chen and Cai to join the expedition against Cheng. Apparently, the troops of these two domains did not arrive.

Lord Zhuang

151

左傳 8.1(2) 八年，春，治兵于廟，禮也。

8.2(3, 4)

夏，師及齊師圍郕。郕降于齊師。仲慶父請伐齊師。公曰：「不可。我實 不德，齊師何罪？罪我之由。夏書曰：『臯陶邁種德，德，乃降。』姑務修 德，以待時乎！」秋，師還。君子是以善魯莊公。

8.3 齊侯使連稱、管至父戍葵丘，瓜時而往，曰：「及瓜而代。」期戍，公問不

至。請代，弗許。故謀作亂。 僖公之母弟曰夷仲年，生公孫無知，有寵於僖公，衣服禮秩如適。 襄公絀之。二人因之以作亂。

30

31

152

According to Shiji 33.1532, Gongzi Qingfu was the younger brother of Lord Zhuang. Takezoe (3.17) suggests that Gongzi Qingfu wanted to attack Qi because they alone had received Cheng’s surrender and therefore were not sharing the fruits of victory with their ally Lu. This quotation comes from a lost section of the Documents and has been incorporated into the Ancient Script “Da yu mo” 大禹謨. Karlgren (gl. 45) takes mai 邁 here to mean “to walk, to go” and notes that this meaning is “common” in the Documents. For a slightly different interpretation, see Yang, 1:173–74.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the eighth year, in spring, we drilled the soldiers at the Ancestral Temple: this is in accordance with ritual propriety.

8.1(2)

In the following passage Lu joins Qi in attacking Cheng, but the latter surrenders only to Qi, at which Gongzi Qingfu seems to take offense. The noble man praises Lord Zhuang’s refusal to follow his adviser’s recommendation and attack Qi, although Lord Zhuang’s forbearance might have resulted as much from an assessment of the two domains’ relative strength as from respect for the virtue of the Qi ruler, who had after all been responsible for the death of his father, Lord Huan. In summer, our troops joined with Qi troops and laid siege to Cheng. Cheng surrendered to the Qi troops. Gongzi Qingfua asked permission to attack the Qi troops.30 Our lord said, “That is not to be done. We are the ones who have not acted with virtue. What offense have the Qi troops committed? The offense comes from us! As it says in the Xia Documents, ‘Gaoyao assiduously sowed virtue. Because he was virtuous, others surrendered to him.’31 Let us strive to cultivate virtue for now and await the proper time!” In autumn, the troops returned home. Because of this, the noble man praised Lord Zhuang of Lu.

8.2(3, 4)

The fall of the Prince of Qi is narrated below. Although Zuozhuan does not say so explicitly, Gongzi Pengsheng presumably killed Lord Huan of Lu at the behest of Lord Xiang of Qi so that the latter could more freely pursue his relationship with his sister-lover. Gongzi Pengsheng was subsequently made a scapegoat for Lu’s anger and was executed (Huan 18.1–3). In the following passage, he gets revenge—either as a ghost or as an imagined product of Lord Xiang’s guilt. The Prince of Qi sent Lian Cheng and Guan Zhifu to garrison Kuiqiu.32 They left during the melon season, and the prince said, “When the melons are ripe again, I will send replacements for you.” But they were garrisoned for a full year and no messages from the lord came to them. They asked to be replaced, but he would not allow it. That was why they plotted to raise a rebellion. A younger full brother of Lord Xi33 named Yi Zhongnian had fathered Gongsun Wuzhi. The latter had won Lord Xi’s favor: his clothing, ritual, and rank were comparable to those of the heir apparent [later Lord Xiang]. Lord Xiang stripped him of his privileges, and, espousing Gongsun Wuzhi’s cause, the two men, Lian Cheng and Guan Zhifu, raised a rebellion.

8.3

32 Kuiqiu 葵丘 was located in the domain of Qi west of present-day Linzi 臨淄, Shandong. 33 This is the ruler of Qi (r. 730–698) and father of Lord Xiang.

Lord Zhuang

153

連稱有從妹在公宮，無寵，使間公。曰：「捷，吾以汝為夫人。」 冬，十二月，齊侯游于姑棼，遂田于貝丘。見大豕。從者曰：「公子 彭生也。」公怒，曰：「彭生敢見！」射之。豕人立而啼。公懼，隊于車。傷 足，喪屨。反，誅屨於徒人費。弗得，鞭之，見血。走出，遇賊于門。劫而 束之。費曰：「我奚御哉？」袒而示之背。信之。費請先入。伏公而出， 鬬，死于門中。石之紛如死于階下。遂入，殺孟陽于牀。曰：「非君也，不 類。」見公之足于戶下，遂弒之，而立無知。 初，襄公立，無常。鮑叔牙曰：「君使民慢，亂將作矣。」奉公子小 白出奔莒。亂作，管夷吾、召忽奉公子糾來奔。 8.4 初，公孫無知虐于雍廩。

34

According to Yang (1:175), Gongsun Wuzhi is the speaker here and is promising to make this woman his wife. Shiji 32.1484 has Lian Cheng as the speaker. 35 Gufen 姑棼 was located to the northeast and Beiqiu 貝丘 to the south of present-day Boxing County 博興縣, Shandong. 36 Yang (1:175) believes that tu 徒 is here a mistake for si 寺, hence “Eunuch Bi.” The Hanshu “Table of Historical Characters” does list a Eunuch Bi 寺人費 (20.907). 37 Nothing more is known of this stalwart defender of Lord Xiang. 38 Mengyang is another defender of the lord who presumably was masquerading as the lord. 39 This episode appears in Shiji 32.1484. The first section corresponds closely to Zuozhuan, but toward the middle new details appear. After Lord Xiang of Qi falls from his chariot and loses his shoe, we are told: “When they returned, he had Fu (Bi, anciently near homophones), the manager of shoes, whipped three hundred lashes. When Fu was coming out of the palace, the group of Wuzhi, Lian Cheng, and Guan Zhifu, who had heard that the lord was wounded, were just then leading their host to attack the palace. They ran into Fu, the manager of shoes, and Fu said, ‘You will not be able to enter a palace that is on alert. A palace on alert is not easily entered.’ Wuzhi did not believe him, but Fu showed them his wounds, and then they believed him. So they waited outside the palace and ordered Fu to go in first.”

154

Zuo Tradition

Lian Cheng had a cousin in the lord’s harem, but she had not enjoyed the lord’s favor. The conspirators enlisted her to spy on the lord, saying, “If we triumph, we will make you Gongsun Wuzhi’s wife.”34 In winter, in the twelfth month, the Prince of Qi traveled to Gufen and then hunted at Beiqiu.35 They saw a huge boar, and a member of his entourage said, “It is Gongzi Pengsheng.” Enraged, the lord said, “Pengsheng dares to show himself!” He shot it, and the boar stood up like a man and cried out. The lord was terrified and fell from his chariot, injuring his foot and losing a shoe. After the lord returned to the palace, he demanded the shoe from Eunuch Bi.36 When Bi could not find it, he whipped him, drawing blood. As Bi ran from the palace, he met the rebels at the gate. They seized and bound him. Bi said, “Why would I stop you?” When he pulled down his robe and showed them his back, they trusted him. He asked to enter the palace first. After hiding his lord, he came back out, and fought against the rebels, dying in the gateway. Shi Zhifenru died at the foot of the stairs.37 The rebels then entered and killed Mengyang in the lord’s bed.38 Someone said, “He is not the ruler; he does not resemble him.” Catching sight of the lord’s feet from beneath a door, they assassinated him and established Gongsun Wuzhia as ruler.39 The short flashback narrative below tells of the flight of two claimants for power in Qi, Gongzi Xiaobo (the future Lord Huan of Qi) and Gongzi Jiu (both younger brothers of Lord Xiang of Qi). The important relationship between Bao Shuya and Guan Zhong, who each supported a different claimant, will be developed further in Zhuang 9.6. Earlier, after Lord Xiang had been established as ruler, he had behaved without any regard for law and order. Bao Shuya said, “The ruler treats the people with contempt.40 A rebellion will break out!” He then gave his support to Gongzi Xiaobo, fleeing with him to Ju.41 When the rebellion did break out, Guan Zhonga and Shao Hu gave their support to Gongzi Jiu, fleeing to us in Lu. Earlier, Gongsun Wuzhi had been cruel to Yong Lin.42

8.4

40 This can also be read “The ruler causes the people to be disrespectful.” 41 Xiaobo is the future Lord Huan of Qi. 42 This passage seems to be misplaced, as Yang (1:177) has noticed. It motivates the events of the next year (Zhuang 9.1). However, passages beginning “sometime earlier” (chu 初) are usually placed after the event they motivate as background information.

Lord Zhuang

155

春秋 9.1(1) 九年，春，齊人殺無知。 9.2(2) 公及齊大夫盟于蔇。 9.3(3) 夏，公伐齊，納子糾。齊小白入于齊。 9.4 秋，七月丁酉，葬齊襄公。 9.5(4) 八月庚申，及齊師戰于乾時，我師敗績。 9.6(5) 九月，齊人取子糾殺之。 9.7 冬，浚洙。

左傳 9.1(1) 九年，春，雍廩殺無知。 9.2(2) 公及齊大夫盟于蔇，齊無君也。 9.3(3) 夏，公伐齊，納子糾。桓公自莒先入。 9.4(5) 秋，師及齊師戰于乾時，我師敗績。公喪戎路，傳乘而歸。秦子、梁子

以公旗辟于下道，是以皆止。

43 Ganshi 乾時 was located in the domain of Qi southwest of present-day Linzi 臨淄, Shandong. 44 Shiji 32.1485 takes Yong Lin as the name of a place and writes it with the character 林: “In the first year of Lord Huan, in spring, Wuzhi, the ruler of Qi, traveled to Yonglin. The men of Yonglin bore a grudge against Wuzhi. So when he traveled

156

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 9 (685 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, Qi leaders put Wuzhi (Gongsun Wuzhi) to death.

9.1(1)

Our lord swore a covenant with high officers of Qi at Ji.

9.2(2)

In summer, our lord attacked Qi to install Zijiu (Gongzi Jiu) in power. Xiaobo of Qi (Gongzi Xiaobo) entered Qi.

9.3(3)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the dingyou day (24), Lord Xiang of Qi was buried. In the eighth month, on the gengshen day (18), we did battle with Qi troops at Ganshi.43 Our troops were completely defeated.

9.4

9.5(4)

In the ninth month, Qi leaders seized Zijiu (Gongzi Jiu) and put him to death.

9.6(5)

In winter, we dredged the Zhu River.

9.7

ZUO

Gongzi Wuzhi is put to death for his cruelty (Zhuang 8.4). In the ninth year, in spring, Yong Lin put Wuzhia to death.44

9.1(1)

Our lord swore a covenant with high officers of Qi at Ji: this was because Qi had no ruler.

9.2(2)

In summer, our lord attacked Qi to install Zijiu (Gongzi Jiu) in power. Lord Huan had entered the domain of Qi from Ju beforehand.

9.3(3)

45

Qi here successfully resists Lu’s attempt to install Gongzi Jiu as the new Qi ruler. In autumn, our army did battle with Qi troops at Ganshi. Our troops were completely defeated. Our lord abandoned his war chariot and returned by relay chariots. Qinzi and Liangzi took our lord’s flag and escaped on a secondary road. As a result, they were both detained.46

9.4(5)



there, the men of Yonglin made a surprise attack and killed Wuzhi.” Du Yu (ZZ 8.144), however, insists that Yong Lin was a high officer of Qi. 45 These are presumably high officers who support Gongzi Jiu, who has fled to Lu. 46 Probably they were trying to distract attention from the Lord of Lu as he fled by another route.

Lord Zhuang

157

9.5(6) 鮑叔帥師來言曰：「子糾，親也，請君討之。管、召，讎也，請受而甘心

焉。」乃殺子糾于生竇。召忽死之。管仲請囚，鮑叔受之，及堂阜而稅 之。歸而以告曰：「管夷吾治於高傒，使相可也。」公從之。

春秋 10.1(1) 十年，春，王正月，公敗齊師于長勺。 10.2 二月，公侵宋。 10.3 三月，宋人遷宿。 10.4(2) 夏，六月，齊師、宋師次于郎。公敗宋師于乘丘。 10.5(3) 秋，九月，荊敗蔡師于莘，以蔡侯獻舞歸。 10.6(4) 冬，十月，齊師滅譚。譚子奔莒。

47 Tangfu 堂阜 belonged to the domain of Qi. 48 Gao Xi presumably belonged to the powerful Gao lineage in Qi, a lineage that had served as high ministers for generations. 49 This story of the relationship between Bao Shuya and Guan Zhong becomes famous in early China as an example of the virtue of recommending a worthy man for government service even though he might be a political opponent. Sima Qian (Shiji 62.2131), placing emphasis upon the earlier relationship of Bao Shuya and Guan Zhong, tells the story as follows: “When Guan Zhong was young, he often went out to sport about with Bao Shuya, who recognized Guan Zhong’s great worthiness. Guan Zhong was impoverished and frequently cheated Bao Shuya, but the latter continued to treat Guan Zhong well and did not speak of this to anyone. Later, Bao Shuya served Gongzi Xiaobo, while Guan Zhong served Gongzi Jiu. When Xiaobo came to power as Lord Huan, Gongzi Jiu died and Guan Zhong was imprisoned. But Bao Shuya immediately recommended Guan Zhong [to the new ruler]. Guan Zhong was employed and assumed administrative responsibilities in Qi.” On this theme, see Henry, “The Motif of Recognition in Early China.”

158

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Jiu had earlier fled to Lu with two loyal supporters, Shao Hu and Guan Zhong (Zhuang 8.3). Despite the fact that Guan Zhong had supported Gongzi Jiu’s struggle to become the new Qi ruler and had even made an attempt on Lord Huan’s life (see Xi 24.1), Bao Shuya acknowledges his capability and recommends him to be Lord Huan’s minister. Bao Shuyaa led troops here to Lu and explained, “Gongzi Jiua is our kinsman. We ask you to chastise him. Guan Zhong and Shao Hu are our enemies. We ask you to hand them over, and we will be satisfied.” So Gongzi Jiua was put to death at Shengdou, and Shao Hu chose to die with him. Guan Zhong asked to become a prisoner, and Bao Shuyaa accepted this, but when they reached Tangfu,47 Bao Shuya released him. Bao Shuya returned to the capital and reported, “Guan Zhong’sa talent for governing surpasses that of Gao Xi.48 It would be appropriate to make him minister.” The Lord of Qi heeded this advice.49

9.5(6)

LORD ZHUANG 10 (684 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord defeated Qi troops at Changshao.50

10.1(1)

In the second month, our lord invaded Song.

10.2

In the third month, Song leaders relocated Su.

10.3

In summer, in the sixth month, Qi troops and Song troops set up camp at Lang. Our lord defeated the Song troops at Chengqiu.51

10.4(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, Jing defeated Cai troops in Shen.52 They took Xianwu, Prince of Cai, home with them.

10.5(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, Qi troops extinguished Tan.53 The Master of Tan fled to Ju.

10.6(4)

50 Changshao 長勺 was in the domain of Lu just north of present-day Qufu 曲阜, Shandong. 51 Chengqiu 乘丘 was also located near the Lu capital of Qufu in Shandong. 52 “Jing” is an alternative name for “Chu” and probably derives from a place name. “Jing” is used throughout the Zhuang years in the Annals for “Chu,” whereas “Chu” is used regularly beginning with Lord Xi. Shen 莘 was in the domain of Cai near present-day Runan County 汝南縣, Henan. 53 Tan 譚 was a small domain located southeast of Jinan 濟南, Shandong.

Lord Zhuang

159

左傳 10.1(1) 十年，春，齊師伐我。公將戰。曹劌請見。其鄉人曰：「肉食者謀之，又何

間焉？」劌曰：「肉食者鄙，未能遠謀。」 乃入見，問何以戰。公曰：「衣食所安，弗敢專也，必以分人。」對 曰：「小惠未遍，民弗從也。」公曰：「犧牲玉帛，弗敢加也，必以信。」 對曰：「小信未孚，神弗福也。」公曰：「小大之獄，雖不能察，必以情。」 對曰：「忠之屬也，可以一戰。戰，則請從。」 公與之乘。戰于長勺。公將鼓之。劌曰：「未可。」齊人三鼓。劌曰： 「可矣！」齊師敗績。公將馳之。劌曰：「未可。」下，視其轍，登軾而望 之，曰：「可矣！」遂逐齊師。 既克，公問其故。對曰：「夫戰，勇氣也。一鼓作氣，再而衰，三而 竭。彼竭我盈，故克之。夫大國，難測也，懼有伏焉。吾視其轍亂，望其 旗靡，故逐之。」

54 55

160

“Those who eat meat” are the wellborn, perhaps the only persons with the means to eat meat on a regular basis. Cao Gui, as one who lives away from the center of power, is literally at the margins (bi 鄙). By giving the word a moral meaning as “base” (perhaps even “far-fetched” or “ignorant”), he reverses the balance of importance between himself and those “meat-eaters.”

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The conflict between Lu and Qi continues (Zhuang 9.4). The following exchanges between Cao Gui and Lord Zhuang of Lu reveal Cao Gui as an extraordinarily prescient military strategist. He is sometimes identified as Cao Mo (Shiji 86:2515–16), included in the “The Biographies of Assassins” as a brave man who threatens the Qi ruler in order to accomplish Lu’s political goals. In the tenth year, in spring, the Qi army attacked us. Our lord was going to fight. Cao Gui asked for an audience. One of his fellow villagers said, “When those who eat meat have planned this action, why should you interfere?”54 Cao Gui said, “Those who eat meat are base and unable to make long-range plans.”55 Cao Gui then went in to see our lord in audience and asked what he would use to fight. Our lord said, “Of the things I take comfort in wearing and eating, I do not venture to keep all for myself but am sure to share with others.” Gui responded, “Such small kindnesses do not yet reach all. The people will not follow you for this.” Our lord said, “In regard to sacrificial animals and ceremonial jades and silks, I do not venture to exaggerate and am sure to rely upon good faith.” Gui responded, “Such small good faith does not yet cover all. The spirits will not bless you for this.” Our lord said, “In both small and large legal cases, even when I am unable to investigate thoroughly, I am sure to rely on the actual circumstances.” Gui responded, “This counts as a kind of integrity—with it you may indeed engage in battle. If you do battle, then I request to follow you.” Our lord rode with Cao Gui in his chariot. The battle took place at Changshao. Our lord was about to sound the drums to attack, but Gui said, “That must not be done yet.” The Qi men beat the drums and advanced three times. Gui said, “Now it may be done!” And the Qi troops were completely defeated. Our lord was going to pursue them, but Gui said, “That must not be done yet.” He got down from the chariot and looked at the ruts. Then he stood on the crossbar of the chariot, looked into the distance, and said, “Now we can!” So they pursued the Qi troops. After they were victorious, our lord asked him the reasons for his actions. He responded, “In doing battle, it all comes down to the energy one gets from courage. Drumming once arouses energy; but at the second drumming, it declines; and at the third, it is spent. When our enemy’s energy was spent, ours was full; and that is the reason we conquered them. Now, a big domain is difficult to fathom. I was afraid there would be an ambush, but I saw that their ruts were in disarray and I observed that their flags were down. That is why we pursued them.”

10.1(1)

Lord Zhuang

161

10.2(4) 夏，六月，齊師、宋師次于郎。公子偃曰：「宋師不整，可敗也。宋敗，齊

必還。請擊之。」公弗許。自雩門竊出，蒙臯比而先犯之。公從之。大敗 宋師于乘丘。齊師乃還。 10.3(5) 蔡哀侯娶于陳，息侯亦娶焉。息媯將歸，過蔡。蔡侯曰：「吾姨也。」止

而見之，弗賓。息侯聞之，怒，使謂楚文王曰：「伐我，吾求救於蔡而伐 之。」楚子從之。秋，九月，楚敗蔡師于莘，以蔡侯獻舞歸。 10.4(6) 齊侯之出也，過譚，譚不禮焉。及其入也，諸侯皆賀，譚又不至。冬，齊

師滅譚，譚無禮也。譚子奔莒，同盟故也。

56 57

162

Gongzi Yan was a Lu officer. The Yu Gate was the westernmost of the three gates along the southern wall of the Lu capital. The term we have translated as “leopard-pelt envelopes” (gaobi 皋比) is problematic. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 8.147) compares this passage to Xi 28.3, where horses are covered with tiger pelts, and suggests that the same thing is happening here, an interpretation Yang (1:184) follows; he glosses gaobi as “tiger pelts.” Such an action would presumably give an appearance of fierceness and would frighten the

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the sixth month, Qi troops and Song troops set up camp at Lang. Gongzi Yan said,56 “The Song troops are not well organized. They can be defeated. When Song is defeated, Qi surely will return home. I request that we attack them.” But our lord would not allow it. Gongzi Yan snuck out from the Yu Gate with leopard-pelt envelopes covering their weapons and rushed upon Song ahead of the rest.57 Our lord then followed him, and they roundly defeated the Song troops at Shengqiu. The Qi troops then returned home.

10.2(4)

The following two passages, although not related to one another in terms of the persons or states involved, both deal with the same theme: the importance of treating guests properly. Prince Ai of Cai took a wife in Chen. The Prince of Xi also took a wife there. When Gui, the wife of the Prince of Xi, was going to be married, she passed through Cai. The Prince of Cai said, “She is my sister-in-law.” He detained her and met with her, but he did not treat her as a guest.58 When the Prince of Xi heard this, he was angry and sent someone to tell King Wen of Chu, “Attack us, and when we seek help from Cai, then attack them.” The Master of Chu acted accordingly. In autumn, in the ninth month, Chu defeated Cai troops at Shen. They took Xianwu, Prince of Cai, home with them.

10.3(5)

When the Prince of Qi had gone out from his domain, he passed through the domain of Tan. The Tan ruler did not treat him with ritual propriety. When he went back into his domain, the princes all congratulated him, but the Tan prince again did not come to do so. In winter, Qi troops extinguished Tan: this was because the Tan ruler had not shown ritual propriety.59 The Master of Tan fled to Ju: this was because the two domains had sworn a covenant.

10.4(6)



58

59

enemy. Karlgren, however, notes that gao itself means “to cover” or “to envelop.” He suggests that bi is here a loanword for pi 貔, “leopard,” and consequently translates as follows: “Putting on enveloping leopard skins, he first went to attack them.” Karlgren goes on to argue that the purpose of these pelt covers was to hide the weapons. The Lu Lord has already refused permission for the attack, so Gongzi Yan must sneak out from the city gate with weapons hidden (see Karlgren, gl. 52). A version of this story found in the Qinghua document Xinian 繫年 says that the Prince of Cai committed adultery with his sister-in-law. See Yuri Pines, “Zhou History and Historiography: Introducing the Bamboo Xinian,” T’oung Pao 100:4–5 (2014): 287–324. According to Guanzi 20.393, Qi attacked Tan but did not annex it, and the Qi ruler is consequently praised for his benevolence.

Lord Zhuang

163

春秋 11.1 十有一年，春，王正月。 11.2(1) 夏，五月戊寅，公敗宋師于鄑。 11.3(2) 秋，宋大水。 11.4(3) 冬，王姬歸于齊。

左傳 11.1(2) 十一年，夏，宋為乘丘之役故，侵我。公禦之。宋師未陳而薄之，敗諸

鄑。凡師，敵未陳曰敗某師，皆陳曰戰，大崩曰敗績。得俊曰克，覆而敗 之曰取某師，京師敗曰王師敗績于某。 11.2(3) 秋，宋大水。公使弔焉，曰：「天作淫雨，害於粢盛，若之何不弔？」對曰：

「孤實不敬，天降之災，又以為君憂，拜命之辱。」

60 Zi 鄑 was located in the small domain of Ji northwest of present-day Changyi County 昌邑縣, Shandong. 61 As Yang (1:186–87) demonstrates, the application of these terms is not as strict in the Annals as this idealized explanation suggests. 62 In the Shiji account of this acknowledgment of guilt, Duke Min of Song says, “I, the unworthy one, have not been able to serve the ghosts and spirits, and my government has not been properly cultivated, and that is why we have floods” (38.1624).

164

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 11 (683 BCE) ANNALS

The eleventh year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fifth month, on the wuyin day (17), our lord defeated Song troops at Zi.60

11.1 11.2(1)

In autumn, there was a great flood in Song.

11.3(2)

In winter, Wang Ji (Gong Ji), the daughter of the king, went to marry in Qi.

11.4(3)

ZUO

Song retaliates unsuccessfully for its defeat in the previous year at the hands of Lu (Zhuang 10.2). Here, as elsewhere, Zuozhuan makes much of the particular choice of words in the Annals. In the eleventh year, in summer, because of the campaign at Chengqiu, Song invaded us. Our lord engaged them. When the Song troops were not yet in proper formation, we pressed upon them and defeated them at Zi. In all cases concerning troops, if the enemy was not yet in proper formation, the text says that “such and such troops were defeated.” When all were in proper formation, the text says, “did battle.” When there was total collapse, the text says, “completely defeated.” When valorous men were captured, the text says, “overcame.” When the army was defeated by ambush, the text says, “They took such and such troops.” When the troops of the capital were defeated, the text says, “The king’s troops were completely defeated at such and such a place.”61

11.1(2)

The passage below contains a rare example of a wrong prediction. Song did not flourish, as Zang Wenzhong’s words suggest, but almost immediately experienced domestic turmoil (see Zhuang 12.1). In his speech, Zang draws upon the examples of Yu and Tang, successful founders of the Xia and Shang dynasties, respectively, and Jie and Zhòu, who were the bad rulers who brought these dynasties to an end. In autumn, there was a great flood in Song. Our lord sent someone to offer them condolences and said, “Heaven has produced torrential rains, and this has harmed your grain supplies. How could I fail to express condolences?” The Duke of Song responded, “It is I, the lone one, who did not show respect. Heaven has brought down this calamity upon me, and this has now in addition become a matter of concern to you. I bow to the condescension of your command.”62

11.2(3)

Lord Zhuang

165

臧文仲曰：「宋其興乎！禹、湯罪己，其興也悖焉；桀、紂罪人，其 亡也忽焉。且列國有凶，稱孤，禮也。言懼而名禮，其庶乎！」既而聞之 曰公子御說之辭也。臧孫達曰：「是宜為君，有恤民之心。」 11.3(4) 冬，齊侯來逆共姬。 11.4 乘丘之役，公以金僕姑射南宮長萬，公右歂孫生搏之。宋人請之。宋公

靳之，曰：「始吾敬子；今子，魯囚也，吾弗敬子矣。」病之。

春秋 12.1 十有二年，春，王三月，紀叔姬歸于酅。 12.2 夏，四月。 12.3(1) 秋，八月甲午，宋萬弒其君捷及其大夫仇牧。 12.4 冬，十月，宋萬出奔陳。

166

Zuo Tradition

Zang Wenzhong said, “Song surely will rise! Yu and Tang blamed themselves, and their rise was sudden. Jie and Zhòu blamed others, and their fall was abrupt. Moreover, when one of the domains suffers a disaster, for the ruler to call himself ‘the lone one’ is in accordance with ritual propriety. When his speech shows fear and his usage of names accords with ritual, he is close to success!” Later, when he heard it said that the words of the response had been Gongzi Yuyue’s, Zang Aiboa said, “That one ought to become a ruler. He has a heart filled with sympathy for the people.”63 In winter, the Prince of Qi came to meet and escort home Gong Ji.64

11.3(4)

At the campaign of Chengqiu,65 our lord shot Nangong Chang Wan with a metal pugu arrow. Our lord’s spearman on the right, Chuan Sun, captured him alive. The men of Song asked that he be returned. The Duke of Song shamed him, saying, “Originally I respected you, sir, but now you are a Lu prisoner, and I no longer respect you.” He hated this.

11.4

LORD ZHUANG 12 (682 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, in the royal third month, Shu Ji of Ji went to marry in Xi.66

12.1

Summer, the fourth month.

12.2

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the jiawu day (10), Song Wan (Nangong Chang Wan) assassinated his ruler Jie and the high officer Choumu. In winter, in the tenth month, Song Wan (Nangong Chang Wan) departed and fled to Chen.

63

64

65 66

12.3(1)

12.4

Gongzi Yuyue, son of Lord Zhuang of Song, later ruled as Lord Huan (r. 681–651). Yang (1:189) believes that by the time Zang Aibo heard this remark, Lord Huan was already ruler, and thus, his comment should be understood as “It is fitting that he became ruler.” Zang Aibo had censured Lord Huan of Lu twenty-nine years earlier (Huan 2.2). He was the grandfather of Zang Wenzhong and presumably was still alive to utter this prediction about Gongzi Yuyue. Zang Wenzhong, also known as Zangsun Chen, was active in Lu for many decades and came to be considered the wise statesman par excellence. It is unclear why the text here refers to Wang Ji as Gong Ji (i.e., “Revered” Ji; “Gong” is the posthumous honorific). Lu is acting on behalf of the Zhou king in presiding over this marriage. The Qi ruler has to personally meet the bride (qinying 親迎) because of her high position. While most sources seem to read this “Chengqiu,” the Manchu translators clearly read it as “Shengqiu” (“Seng gio”; see Tsch’un-ts’iu, 110). As background to this, see Zhuang 3.3.

Lord Zhuang

167

左傳 12.1(3) 十二年，秋，宋萬弒閔公于蒙澤。遇仇牧于門，批而殺之。遇大宰督于東

宮之西，又殺之。立子游。群公子奔蕭，公子御說奔亳。南宮牛、猛獲帥 師圍亳。 冬，十月，蕭叔大心及戴、武、宣、穆、莊之族，以曹師伐之。殺南 宮牛于師，殺子游于宋，立桓公。猛獲奔衛。南宮萬奔陳，以乘車輦其 母，一日而至。 宋人請猛獲于衛。衛人欲勿與。石祁子曰：「不可，天下之惡一也， 惡於宋而保於我，保之何補？得一夫而失一國，與惡而棄好，非謀 也。  」衛人歸之。亦請南宮萬于陳，以賂。陳人使婦人飲之酒，而以犀革 裹之。比及宋，手足皆見。宋人皆醢之。

Gongyang, Zhuang 12 (7.91), has a quite different and more detailed account of the conflict between Nangong Chang Wan and Lord Min and the death of the latter: “Wan was gambling with Lord Min with the women all alongside. Wan said, ‘How profound is the goodness of the Prince of Lu and his beauty! Of the princes under heaven, only the Prince of Lu deserves to be a ruler!’ Lord Min was trying to impress these women, and jealous about Wan’s claim, he looked back at him and said, ‘This one was a captive—and it is because you were a captive there [that you would say this]. How could the excellence of the Prince of Lu be so extreme?’ Wan was angry, grabbed hold of Lord Min, and snapped his neck. When Choumu heard that the ruler had been assassinated, he hurried there and ran into Wan in the gateway. Brandishing his sword, he berated Wan. Wan struck Choumu with his arm, smashing his skull and scattering his teeth in the doorway.” Sima Qian’s version of this event (Shiji 38.1624) is brief but obviously draws upon the colorful Gongyang account. Meng Marsh 蒙澤, where the assassination supposedly took place, was located in the domain of Song north of present-day Shangqiu County 商丘縣, Henan. 68 Xiao 蕭 was a domain that, like Song, belonged to the Zi 子 lineage. It was located near present-day Xiao County 蕭縣, Anhui. “The noble sons” are sons of former Song rulers. 69 Bo 亳 was located in the domain of Song north of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. 67

168

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The following narrative continues the events of Zhuang 11.4. Nangong Chang Wan (Song Wan) appears in this passage as one of the more impressive strongmen in Zuozhuan, despite the fact that he had shamefully been captured alive earlier (Zhuang 11.4). He first kills his ruler with a single blow, then flees by chariot from Song to Chen in a single day, a distance of roughly sixty miles, and finally almost fights his way out of a bag made of rhinoceros hide. In the twelfth year, in autumn, Nangong Chang Wanb assassinated Lord Min in Meng Marsh.67 He ran into Choumu at the gate and killed him with a blow of the fist. He met the grand steward Hua Du to the west of the Eastern Palace and also killed him. He then established Ziyou as ruler. The noble sons fled to Xiao.68 Gongzi Yuyue fled to Bo.69 Nangong Niu and Meng Huo led troops and laid siege to Bo.70 In winter, in the tenth month, the younger son Daxin from Xiao, along with the houses of Dai, Wu, Xuan, Mu, and Zhuang, led Cao troops and attacked the insurgents.71 They put Nangong Niu to death in the presence of the troops, put Ziyou to death in the Song capital, and established Lord Huan (Gongzi Yuyue) as ruler. Meng Huo fled to Wei, and Nangong Chang Wana fled to Chen. Driving a chariot and carrying along his mother, Nangong Chang Wan reached Chen in a single day. The Song leaders requested that Wei deliver Meng Huo, but the Wei leaders wanted to refuse. Shi Qizi72 said, “This cannot be done. What the world despises is one and the same everywhere. If the man is despised in Song but is protected by us, then what benefit does protecting him bring? By gaining one man, we lose one domain, and by associating with the despised, we abandon the esteemed—this is not a wise plan.” So the Wei leaders sent him back. Song, presenting gifts, also requested that Chen deliver Nangong Chang Wana. The Chen leaders sent a woman to ply him with wine, and they then wrapped him up in rhinoceros hide. By the time he arrived in Song, both his hands and his feet were poking out. The Song leaders minced and pickled him.73

12.1(3)

70 Du Yu (ZZ 9.154) says that Nangong Niu was Chang Wan’s son, but Sima Qian (38.1624) claims that he was Chang Wan’s younger brother. 71 Xiao Shu is literally “the younger brother from Xiao.” The settlement of Xiao became subordinate to Song after this attack. Dai, Wu, Xuan, Mu, and Zhuang are all old lineages in the domain of Song. 72 Shi Qizi was a minister in Wei and presumably of the same family as the earlier Shi Que. 73 To be “minced and pickled” was one of the most feared punishments in ancient China.

Lord Zhuang

169

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年，春，齊侯、宋人、陳人、蔡人、邾人會于北杏。 13.2 夏，六月，齊人滅遂。 13.3 秋，七月。 13.4(2) 冬，公會齊侯盟于柯。

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年，春，會于北杏，以平宋亂。遂人不至。夏，齊人滅遂而戍之。 13.2(4) 冬，盟于柯，始及齊平也。 13.3 宋人背北杏之會。

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年，春，齊人、陳人、曹人伐宋。 14.2(1) 夏，單伯會伐宋。 14.3(3) 秋，七月，荊入蔡。 14.4(4) 冬，單伯會齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯于鄄。

74 Beixing 北杏 was located in the domain of Qi near present-day Dong’e County 東 阿縣, Shandong. 75 Sui 遂 was a small domain of the Gui 媯 lineage and, therefore, supposedly descended from Shun. It was located to the northwest of present-day Ningyang County 寧陽縣, Shandong. This should not be confused with another small domain sharing the same romanization Sui, 隨, last mentioned in Huan 6.2. 76 Ke 柯 was located in the domain of Qi near present-day E’cheng 阿城, Shandong.

170

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 13 (681 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi, a Song leader, a Chen leader, a Cai leader, and a Zhu leader held a meeting at Beixing.74

13.1(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, Qi leaders extinguished Sui.75

13.2

Autumn, the seventh month.

13.3

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and swore a covenant at Ke.76

13.4(2)

ZUO

In the thirteenth year, in spring, a meeting was held at Beixing to settle the unrest in Song. Sui leaders did not attend. In summer, Qi leaders extinguished Sui and garrisoned it.

13.1(1)

In winter, we swore a covenant at Ke: this was the beginning of peace with Qi.77

13.2(4)

The Song leaders violated the covenant of the meeting at Beixing.

13.3

LORD ZHUANG 14 (680 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, a Qi leader, a Chen leader, and a Cao leader attacked Song.

14.1(1)

In summer, the Shan Liege met with them and attacked Song.78

14.2(1)

In autumn, in the seventh month, Jing entered Cai.

14.3(3)

In winter, the Shan Liege met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Zheng at Juan.79

14.4(4)

This meeting between the domains of Lu and Qi, passed over so briefly in Zuozhuan, becomes the occasion for a body of Warring States lore that pits the Lu adviser Cao Gui 曹劌, otherwise known as Cao Mo 曹沫, against the Prince of Qi and his minister Guan Zhong. Accounts of this encounter appear in such texts as Zhanguo ce, “Qi 6,” 13.456; Guanzi 18.341; and Lüshi chunqiu 19.1303. Gongyang, Zhuang 13 (7.92), contains an expansive version of the meeting at Ke, as does Shiji 32.1487. 78 The Shan Liege, a minister of the Zhou king, was mentioned previously at Annals, Zhuang 1.3. 79 Juan 鄄 was located in the domain of Wei northwest of present-day Juancheng County 鄄城縣, Shandong. 77

Lord Zhuang

171

左傳

14.1(1, 2)

十四年，春，諸侯伐宋。齊請師于周。夏，單伯會之。取成于宋而還。

14.2 鄭厲公自櫟侵鄭，及大陵，獲傅瑕。傅瑕曰：「苟舍我，吾請納君。」與

之盟而赦之。六月甲子，傅瑕殺鄭子及其二子，而納厲公。 初，內蛇與外蛇鬬於鄭南門中，內蛇死。六年而厲公入。公聞之， 問於申繻曰：「猶有妖乎？」對曰：「人之所忌，其氣燄以取之。妖由人興 也。人無釁焉，妖不自作。人棄常，則妖興，故有妖。」 厲公入，遂殺傅瑕。使謂原繁曰：「傅瑕貳，周有常刑，既伏其罪 矣。納我而無二心者，吾皆許之上大夫之事，吾願與伯父圖之。且寡人 出，伯父無裏言。入，又不念寡人，寡人憾焉。」

80 Daling 大陵 was located in the domain of Zheng north of present-day Linying County 臨潁縣, Henan. 81 Yang (1:196) notes here that the ruler in question is Ziyi (r. 694–680), who does not have a posthumous name and is therefore referred to as a “master” (zi 子) rather than by the usual Zheng rank “liege” (bo 伯). 82 This appears to be proposing a psychic theory of omens, which is driven by a demystifying impulse. There are a variety of explanations of this passage. Du Yu (ZZ 9.155) draws on the meanings of the word yan (“flare up”) in the Documents (“Luo gao” 洛 誥, 15.226) and compares flickering flames to the Zheng people’s inconstancy. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 9.155) specifies the connection to failed rulership: Ziyi’s fear and wavering attitude toward Lord Li. In another reading, the uncanny manifestation

172

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Lord Huan of Qi legitimizes his campaign by seeking assistance (and implicit approval) from the Zhou court. A Zhou minister, the Shan Liege, meets with the allies. In the fourteenth year, in spring, the princes attacked Song. Qi requested troops from Zhou. In summer, the Shan Liege met with them. They reached an accord with Song and returned home.

14.1(1, 2)

Lord Li had fled Zheng seventeen years before (Huan 15.2) and now returns to assume power in circumstances that raise questions about how loyalty is to be discharged in complex political situations. The fight between snakes is interpreted as an omen, but again the primacy of the people is asserted (Huan 6.2). Lord Li of Zheng set out from Li to invade Zheng. When he reached Daling,80 he captured Fu Xia. Fu Xia said, “If only you were to release me, then I would ask to install you in power in Zheng, my lord.” Lord Li swore a covenant with him and then freed him. In the sixth month, on the jiazi day (20), Fu Xia killed the Master of Zheng81 and his two sons and installed Lord Li in power. Earlier, a snake from inside the city and a snake from outside had fought within the southern gate of Zheng. The snake from inside the city died. Six years passed and Lord Li entered Zheng. When our lord heard about the snakes, he asked Shen Xu, “Could it be that bad omens exist?” Shen Xu responded, “When a man resents something, his life-force flares up and seizes upon it.82 Bad omens arise from people.83 When there are no rifts among people, such omens will not arise on their own. When people reject the constant principles, bad omens arise. And that is why there are bad omens.” When Lord Li entered the city, he immediately killed Fu Xia. He sent someone to tell Yuan Fan, “Fu Xia was double-dealing. The Zhou has its constant punishments, and Fu Xia has already paid for his crimes! All those who installed me in power and showed no duplicity, I would allow to undertake the duties of senior high officers of the highest rank, and I would hope, my elder uncle, to consult about these things with you. Also, when I, the unworthy one, was in exile, you, my uncle, brought me no news. And now that I have entered the domain, you still do not think of me. I am distressed by this.” 83

14.2

arises in response to rifts in the human realm (see Lin Yaosou’s comment in Zuozhuan Du Lin hezhu, j. 6). Alternatively, the fear and resentment among the people prompt them to retrospectively regard the fighting snakes as omens (Takezoe, 3.40). This emphasis upon the human origin of such strange phenomena is reiterated in Xi 16.1, Zhao 12.10, and elsewhere in Zuozhuan.

Lord Zhuang

173

對曰：「先君桓公命我先人典司宗祏。社稷有主，而外其心，其何 貳如之？苟主社稷，國內之民，其誰不為臣？臣無二心，天之制也。子儀 在位，十四年矣；而謀召君者，庸非二乎？莊公之子猶有八人，若皆以官 爵行賂勸貳而可以濟事，君其若之何？臣聞命矣。」乃縊而死。 14.3(3) 蔡哀侯為莘故，繩息媯以語楚子。楚子如息，以食入享，遂滅息。以息媯

歸，生堵敖及成王焉。未言。楚子問之。對曰：「吾一婦人，而事二夫，縱 弗能死，其又奚言？」 楚子以蔡侯滅息，遂伐蔡。秋，七月，楚入蔡。 君子曰：「商書所謂『惡之易也，如火之燎于原，不可鄉邇，其猶 可撲滅』者，其如蔡哀侯乎！」 14.4(4) 冬，會于鄄，宋服故也。

84 85

Yuan Fan seems to be referring to Lord Li’s previous flight from the domain. In the abbreviated version of this episode in Shiji 42.1763–64, Yuan Fan hangs himself first and Fu Xia is executed later. 86 On the topic of Xi Gui’s treatment in the later poetic tradition, see Wai-yee Li, Women and National Trauma in Late Imperial Chinese Literature, 28–32. 87 In a passage cited by Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:178), Zhang Shouchang suggests that “she had not yet spoken” 未言 refers to how Xi Gui had not said anything about the past, including how Xi was destroyed through Cai’s machinations. The Qing scholar Yu Zhengxie, according to Qian, reads this literally as a kind of “silent mourning” (xinsang 心喪).

174

Zuo Tradition

Yuan Fan responded, “The former ruler, Lord Huan, ordered my ancestors to manage the stone coffer in the Ancestral Temple. When the altars of the domain have a man in charge, for a subject to turn to others outside the domain,84 what double-dealing can be equal to this? So long as he takes charge of the altars of the domain, who of the people inside the domain would not become his subject? It is the rule of Heaven that subjects should not serve two masters. Ziyi had been in power for a period of fourteen years. How could those who plotted to summon you back not have been duplicitous? There are still eight sons of Lord Zhuang left. If all of them were to use their offices and ranks to present gifts and encourage double-dealing and were able to succeed thereby, what would happen to you? But I, your servant, have heard your command.” Then he hanged himself.85 Prince Ai of Cai had been held in Chu since the events of Zhuang 10.3. Here his praise of the woman Xi Gui leads to attacks both on Xi and on the lord’s home domain of Cai. Xi Gui, who submits to a new master but nevertheless registers her pain through silence, becomes a recurrent literary topic, notably in poems by Wang Wei and Du Mu.86 In Lienü zhuan (4.7), Xi Gui is placed in the section “Chaste Submissiveness” (Zhenshun 貞順); there she commits suicide to protest her loyalty to the Xi ruler. Because of what happened at Shen, Lord Ai of Cai praised Xi Gui while speaking to the Master of Chu. The Master of Chu went to Xi and, on the pretext of carrying in food supplies for a formal feast with entertainments, thus extinguished Xi. He took Xi Gui back home, and she eventually gave birth to Du Ao and the future King Cheng. But she had not yet spoken a word.87 The Master of Chu asked her about this, and she replied, “I, one woman, have served two husbands. Even though I have not been able to kill myself, why should you expect me to speak?” The Master of Chu, having destroyed Xi on account of the Prince of Cai, then attacked Cai. In autumn, in the seventh month, Chu entered Cai.88 The noble man said, “It says in the Shang Documents, ‘The spread of iniquity is like the blazing of fire on grassland; since one cannot even approach it, how can one still beat it out?’89 Surely this fits Prince Ai of Cai!”

14.3(3)

In winter, a meeting was held at Juan. This was because Song had submitted.

14.4(4)

88 89

An account in Lüshi chunqiu (14.791) claims that the King of Chu planned to annex both Xi and Cai from the beginning and used a banquet as a pretext to enter Xi together with the Prince of Cai. The same quotation appears in Yin 6.4.

Lord Zhuang

175

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年，春，齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯會于鄄。 15.2 夏，夫人姜氏如齊。 15.3(2) 秋，宋人、齊人、邾人伐郳。 15.4(2) 鄭人侵宋。 15.5 冬，十月。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年，春，復會焉，齊始霸也。

15.2(3, 4)

秋，諸侯為宋伐郳。鄭人間之而侵宋。

春秋 16.1 十有六年，春，王正月。 16.2(1) 夏，宋人、齊人、衛人伐鄭。 16.3(2) 秋，荊伐鄭。 16.4(4) 冬，十有二月，會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、滑伯、滕子，同

盟于幽。 16.5 邾子克卒。

90 The two sentences of this entry are usually listed as two separate entries. We have followed Yang (1:200) in putting them together. 91 Hua 滑 was a small domain of the Ji 姬 lineage and was located near present-day Yanshi County 偃師縣 in Henan. It will be destroyed by the domain of Qin in Lord Xi 33 and is to be distinguished from the settlement of Hua located in Zheng and mentioned in Annals, Zhuang 3.5. This entry does not specify that the Lu Lord

176

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 15 (679 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Zheng met at Juan.

15.1(1)

In summer, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, went to Qi.

15.2

In autumn, a Song leader, a Qi leader, and a Zhu leader attacked Ni.

15.3(2)

Zheng leaders invaded Song.

15.4(2)

Winter, the tenth month.

15.5

ZUO

A second meeting is held at Juan (Zhuang 14.4). Unlike the first meeting, no royal representative attends, perhaps because Qi is acting on behalf of the king. In the fifteenth year, in spring, they once again held a meeting there: Qi was for the first time acting as overlord.

15.1(1)

In autumn, the princes attacked Ni on behalf of Song. Zheng leaders took advantage of this and invaded Song.90

15.2(3, 4)

LORD ZHUANG 16 (678 BCE) ANNALS

The sixteenth year, spring, the royal first month.

16.1

In summer, a Song leader, a Qi leader, and a Wei leader attacked Zheng.

16.2(1)

In autumn, Jing attacked Zheng.

16.3(2)

In winter, in the twelfth month, we met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, the Liege of Hua, and the Master of Teng, and we swore a covenant together at You.91

16.4(4)

Ke, the Master of Zhu, died.

16.5



attended the meeting, instead leaving the subject of the verb hui 會 (“met with”) unclear. Yet in another similar example (Xi 29.3) the Lu ruler certainly did attend the meeting, and this may be an insignificant variation in the way of recording the event. You 幽, the location of this meeting, was in the domain of Song near presentday Lankao County 蘭考縣, Henan.

Lord Zhuang

177

左傳 16.1(2) 十六年，夏，諸侯伐鄭，宋故也。 16.2(3) 鄭伯自櫟入，緩告于楚。秋，楚伐鄭，及櫟，為不禮故也。 16.3 鄭伯治與於雍糾之亂者，九月，殺公子閼，刖強鉏。公父定叔出奔衛。

三年而復之，曰：「不可使共叔無後於鄭。」使以十月入，曰：「良月也，就 盈數焉。」 君子謂強鉏不能衛其足。 16.4(4) 冬，同盟于幽，鄭成也。 16.5 王使虢公命曲沃伯以一軍為晉侯。 16.6 初，晉武公伐夷，執夷詭諸。蒍國請而免之。既而弗報，故子國作亂，謂

晉人曰：「與我伐夷而取其地。」遂以晉師伐夷，殺夷詭諸。周公忌父出 奔虢。惠王立而復之。

92 The Zheng official Gongzi E (Zidu) is probably the same man as the Gongsun E mentioned in Yin 11.2 above. 93 Gongfu Dingshu, mentioned only here in Zuozhuan, is said to be the grandson of Gongshu Duan (see Yin 1.4) and the son of Gongsun Hua (Yin 1.11). 94 According to Takezoe (3.46), chu 鉏 is a farm tool whose handle is called its “foot.” Thus, in an ironic way, “Strong Foot,” a literal translation of the name “Qiangchu,” becomes “Weak Foot.” For another story of someone who could not “protect his feet,” see Cheng 17.6. 95 A single army is granted to a low-level ruler, which indicates the rather insignificant status of the Quwo lineage at this time (Yang, 1:203). 96 Here, Yi 夷 refers, not to the groups of people in the east known by this name, but to a settlement that was under the control of the Zhou (see Wen 6 below). Yi Guizhu was a Zhou official who presided over Yi and apparently had taken the name of the settlement as his family name. Wei Guo was also a Zhou official and will appear again in Zhuang 19.2. 97 Yang (1:204) says that this passage has nothing to do with the previous Zuozhuan entry, although in the earliest versions of the text it is affixed to Zhuang 16.5. The events described both reach back in time to Lord Wu of Jin, who presided over Jin from 716 to 710, and reach forward in time to the establishment of King Hui of Zhou in 676, the year after the entry above. But the passage does continue the story of the ascendancy of the Quwo line as Lord Wu consolidates control over Yi.

178

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Zheng had invaded Song in the previous year (Zhuang 15.2). The princes now retaliate. In the sixteenth year, in summer, the princes attacked Zheng: this was because of Song.

16.1(2)

The following passage refers back to the return of Lord Li, the Liege of Zheng, to Zheng from the settlement of Li (Zhuang 14.2). The Liege of Zheng had entered the domain of Zheng from Li, but he had delayed reporting this to Chu. In autumn, Chu attacked Zheng and advanced as far as Li: this was because Zheng had not acted in accord with ritual propriety.

16.2(3)

The following passage is a continuation of the aftermath of Yong Jiu’s rebellion in the domain of Zheng, with a somewhat curious comment from the noble man (Huan 15.2 and Zhuang 14.2). The Liege of Zheng dealt with those who had joined in Yong Jiu’s rebellion. In the ninth month, he put Gongzi E to death and cut off the feet of Qiangchu.92 Gongfu Dingshu fled to Wei. But after three years, the Liege of Zheng restored him, saying, “We cannot allow Gongshu Duana to be without posterity in Zheng.”93 He had Gongfu Dingshu enter the domain in the tenth month, saying, “It is an auspicious month. We take from it the fullness of its number.” The noble man said that Qiangchu was not able to protect his own feet.94

16.3

In winter, they came together and swore a covenant at You: this was to conclude peace with Zheng.

16.4(4)

The next entry picks up on an event that occurred thirty-five years earlier (Huan 7.4). A Jin leader sides with one Zhou court official against another. The Liege of Quwo, who now assumes power in Jin, will be known as Lord Wu. The king sent the Duke of Guo to command the Liege of Quwo to lead one army and become Prince of Jin.95

16.5

Earlier, Lord Wu of Jin had attacked Yi and had captured Yi Guizhu. Wei Guo begged to have the latter released.96 Afterward, Guizhu did not repay Wei Guo, so Wei Guoa raised a rebellion, saying to the leaders of Jin, “Join with us in attacking Yi and we will seize its lands.” Then he led Jin troops, attacked Yi, and killed Yi Guizhu. The Zhou Duke Jifu fled to Guo. When King Hui was established as ruler, he brought Jifu back.97

16.6

Lord Zhuang

179

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年，春，齊人執鄭詹。 17.2(2) 夏，齊人殲于遂。 17.3 秋，鄭詹自齊逃來。 17.4 冬，多麋。

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年，春，齊人執鄭詹，鄭不朝也。 17.2(2) 夏，遂因氏、頜氏、工婁氏、須遂氏饗齊戍，醉而殺之，齊人殲焉。

春秋 18.1 十有八年，春，王三月，日有食之。 18.2(3) 夏，公追戎于濟西。 18.3(4) 秋，有蜮。 18.4 冬，十月。

According to Shiji 42.1766, this Zheng Zhan (the Prince) of Zheng was the younger brother of Lord Wen of Zheng (672–628) and thus the son of Lord Li. 99 It seems clear in at least this case that “men of Qi” 齊人 is plural and refers to the leaders and soldiers stationed in Sui. According to Guliang, Zhuang 17 (5.53), “the men of Sui” are not mentioned as the perpetrators of the slaughter because “there is no (more) Sui.” “If there is no Sui, then why refer to Sui [as the site of the slaughter]? This is to preserve [the spirit of] Sui.” By this logic, there is implicit praise for the men of Sui for being able to avenge the loss of their domain four years earlier. The Guliang commentator also blames Qi for “taking the enemy lightly” 狎敵. Cf. Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 13.333. 100 Deer are often harmful to crops. 98

180

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 17 (677 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, a Qi leader arrested Zhan of Zheng (Shuzhan).98

17.1(1)

In summer, the Qi men were all slaughtered in Sui.99

17.2(2)

In autumn, Zhan of Zheng (Shuzhan) came to us in flight from Qi.

17.3

In winter, there were many deer.100

17.4

ZUO

In the seventeenth year, in spring, a Qi leader arrested Shuzhana: this was because Zheng had not visited the Qi court.

17.1(1)

Qi had extinguished Sui four years earlier (Zhuang 13.1). The men of Sui trick the Qi garrison into inebriation and slaughter them. In summer, the Yin lineage head, the Ge lineage head, the Gonglou lineage head, and the Xusui lineage head of Sui gave a feast for the Qi garrison. After the soldiers were drunk, they killed them, and the Qi men were all slaughtered.101

17.2(2)

LORD ZHUANG 18 (676 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal third month, there was an eclipse of the sun.102

18.1

In summer, our lord pursued the Rong to the west of the Ji River.103

18.2(3)

In autumn, there were leaf-eating insects.

18.3(4)

104

Winter, the tenth month.

18.4

101 Shen Yucheng, in his modern Chinese translation (51), reads this differently: after the Qi garrison was killed, “The Qi leaders (in vengeance) slaughtered all the Sui lineages.” The source of such a reading is unclear. 102 This eclipse can be dated to 15 April 686 Bce. 103 This river flows along the western boundary of Lu, so the Lord of Lu was essentially chasing them out of his territory. 104 These insects, yu 蜮, are difficult to identify with any certainty (Yang, 1:206). Cf. Xuan 15.9.

Lord Zhuang

181

左傳 18.1 十八年，春，虢公、晉侯朝王。王饗醴，命之宥。皆賜玉五瑴、馬三匹，非

禮也。王命諸侯，名位不同，禮亦異數，不以禮假人。 18.2 虢公、晉侯、鄭伯使原莊公逆王后于陳。陳媯歸于京師，實惠后。 18.3(2) 夏，公追戎于濟西。不言其來，諱之也。 18.4(3) 秋，有蜮，為災也。 18.5 初，楚武王克權，使鬬緡尹之，以叛，圍而殺之。遷權於那處，使閻敖

尹之。 及文王即位，與巴人伐申，而驚其師。巴人叛楚而伐那處，取之， 遂門于楚。閻敖游涌而逸。楚子殺之。其族為亂。冬，巴人因之以伐楚。

105 Du Yu (ZZ 9.158) understands you 宥 “to forgive” as you 侑 in the sense of “offer presents.” Thus, Couvreur (Tch’ouen ts’iou et Tso tchouan, 1:168) translates “leur offrit des presents.” Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 17.408) has a quite different interpretation, which we follow. The king, by special command, gets his guests to present toasts that ordinary ritual would not require. He does this to promote familiarity. 106 Duke Zhuang was a Zhou court official who presumably governed the small allotment of Yuan, which was part of the Zhou domain and was located northwest of present-day Jiyuan County 濟源縣 in Henan. 107 This is a curious act of concealment. The Rong had presumably come to attack Lu. Perhaps the Rong were a genuine threat to Lu at this time, but the annalists themselves did not want to acknowledge this. 108 Quan 權 was a domain located near present-day Dangyang County 當陽縣, Hubei. The attack on Quan is not mentioned elsewhere. King Wu ruled over Chu from 740 to 690.

182

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The following passage, like others in Zuozhuan (Cheng 2.2, Zhao 32.4), emphasizes the importance of adherence to proper ritual in presenting gifts and granting privileges. In the eighteenth year, in spring, the Duke of Guo and the Prince of Jin visited the court of the king. The king offered a feast and presented sweet wine. He then ordered them to offer toasts.105 He bestowed on each of them five pieces of jade and three horses: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. When the king issues orders to the princes, if their titles and ranks are not the same, ritual requires different numbers of gifts. He does not grant ritual privileges to those who do not deserve them.

18.1

The Duke of Guo, the Prince of Jin, and the Liege of Zheng sent the Yuan Duke Zhuang to meet the queen at Chen and escort her home.106 Chen Gui went to be married in the capital, and she became the one known as Queen Hui.

18.2

In summer, our lord pursued the Rong to the west of the Ji River. The text does not say the Rong came because it respectfully conceals this.107

18.3(2)

In autumn, there were leaf-eating insects: this became a calamity.

18.4(3)

The following passage gives both the background and the aftermath of Chu’s earlier attack on Shen (Zhuang 6.3). It also contains what is possibly the only reference to swimming in Zuozhuan. Earlier, when King Wu of Chu conquered Quan,108 he sent Dou Min to be its administrator. Dou Min used it as a base for rebellion. Chu laid siege to Quan and killed Dou Min. They resettled the people of Quan at Nachu109 and sent Yan Ao to be its administrator. When King Wen acceded to his position, he joined with the men of Ba to attack Shen. But he alarmed the Ba troops, and the men of Ba rebelled against Chu and attacked Nachu, seizing it and then storming the city gate of the Chu capital. Yan Ao swam across the Yong River and escaped, but the Master of Chu had him put to death. The members of his house raised a rebellion. In winter, the Ba leaders conspired with them to attack Chu.110

18.5

109 Ba was last mentioned in Huan 9.2. Nachu 那處 was located in Chu, southeast of present-day Jingmen County 荆門縣, Hubei. 110 This particular entry seems to have been broken off from the first entry of the following year (19.1) (Yang, 1:209). The fact that Chu had become a threat “to the small domains between the Jiang and Han” Rivers is noted in Shiji 40.1696. In addition, when it records under the eleventh year of King Wen of Chu (679 Bce) that Qi “first became overlord,” it further says that “Chu also first became great” (40.1696).

Lord Zhuang

183

春秋 19.1 十有九年，春，王正月。 19.2 夏，四月。 19.3 秋，公子結媵陳人之婦于鄄，遂及齊侯、宋公盟。 19.4 夫人姜氏如莒。 19.5 冬，齊人、宋人、陳人伐我西鄙。

左傳 19.1 十九年，春，楚子禦之，大敗於津。還，鬻拳弗納，遂伐黃。敗黃師于踖

陵。還，及湫，有疾。夏，六月庚申，卒。鬻拳葬諸夕室。亦自殺也，而葬 於絰皇。 初，鬻拳強諫楚子。楚子弗從。臨之以兵，懼而從之。鬻拳曰：「吾 懼君以兵，罪莫大焉。」遂自刖也。楚人以為大閽，謂之大伯。使其後 掌之。

111 Jie was high officer in Lu. Juan is a place belonging to Wei and is mentioned also in Annals, Zhuang 14.4. Lu was apparently offering a concubine to accompany a woman of Wei who was becoming the wife of Lord Xuan of Chen. 112 Another visit of the Lady Jiang to Ju is mentioned in the next year (Annals, Zhuang 20.1). The reason for these visits is not known. Du Yu (ZZ 9.160) says that the text is hinting here at an adulterous relationship, but both Yang (1:210) and Takezoe (3.52) recommend caution, especially since the Lady Jiang was well over fifty at the time. Nonetheless, these journeys outside the domain of Lu were assuredly contrary to proper ritual. 113 Jin 津 was located in the domain of Chu south of present-day Jiangling County 江陵 縣, Hubei. 114 As noted below, Yu Quan was a high officer in Chu and, being in charge of security at the main gate, was in a position to block the Master’s entry. Huang 黃 was a domain of the same clan name as the ruling family of Chu and was located west of present-day Huangchuan County 潢川縣, Henan. Jiling was a town in Huang. 115 Du Yu (ZZ 9.160) believes that xi shi 夕室 (“the Evening Chamber”) is a place name. Takezoe (3.53) and Yang (1:211) argue that it is the name of the location of the Chu tombs (see also Karlgren, gl. 60). 116 The site of Yu Quan’s burial indicates that he will continue to guard the gate for the Chu king in the underworld.

184

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 19 (675 BCE) ANNALS

The nineteenth year, spring, the royal first month.

19.1

Summer, the fourth month.

19.2

In autumn, Gongzi Jie escorted to Juan a secondary consort for a Chen leader’s bride. Jie then swore a covenant with the Prince of Qi and the Duke of Song.111

19.3

Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, went to Ju.112

19.4

In winter, a Qi leader, a Song leader, and a Chen leader attacked our western marches.

19.5

ZUO

The narrative of Zhuang 18.5 continues. The Chu minister Yu Quan appears here as a minister of seemingly immoderate behavior and yet is praised by the noble man for his devotion to his ruler. Yu Quan’s loyalty is expressed through forceful remonstrance and opposition. The Gongyang scholar He Xiu faults Zuozhuan for “opening the way to rebellion and assassination” by affirming the way Yu Quan threatens the Chu king. Yu Quan’s amputation of his own feet has curious echoes with Zhuang 16.3, but in the latter case a ruler punishes an official, and here a man mutilates himself—the circumstances are quite different. In the nineteenth year, in spring, the Master of Chu engaged the Ba forces and was roundly defeated at Jin.113 On his return homeward with his men, Yu Quan would not let the Master of Chu enter the city, so he attacked the domain of Huang and defeated the Huang troops at Ji ­ling.114 On his return home, when he had arrived at Jiao, the Master of Chu became ill. In summer, in the sixth month, on the gengshen day (15), he died. Yu Quan buried him at the Evening Chamber.115 For his part, he committed suicide and was buried in the courtyard of the mausoleum.116 Earlier, Yu Quan had forcefully remonstrated with the Master of Chu, but the latter had not heeded him. When Yu Quan threatened him with a weapon, the Master of Chu became frightened and followed his advice.117 Yu Quan said, “I have frightened my lord with a weapon. No crime is greater than this.” So he cut off his own feet. The Chu leaders appointed him as guardian of the city gate and called him “The Great Uncle.” They had his descendants retain this position.

19.1

117 Perhaps Chu ministers are known for belligerent remonstrances. Lüshi chunqiu 23.1545 and Shuoyuan 9.289 both tell a story of the Chu minister Bao Shen who whips King Wen of Chu for his misconduct (Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:179).

Lord Zhuang

185

君子曰：「鬻拳可謂愛君矣！諫以自納於刑，刑猶不忘納君於 善。」 19.2 初，王姚嬖于莊王，生子頹。子頹有寵，蒍國為之師。及惠王即位，取蒍

國之圃以為囿。邊伯之宮近於王宮，王取之。王奪子禽祝跪與詹父田， 而收膳夫之秩，故蒍國、邊伯、石速、詹父、子禽祝跪作亂，因蘇氏。秋， 五大夫奉子頹以伐王，不克，出奔溫。蘇子奉子頹以奔衛。衛師、燕師 伐周。冬，立子頹。

春秋 20.1 二十年，春，王二月，夫人姜氏如莒。 20.2 夏，齊大災。 20.3 秋，七月。 20.4 冬，齊人伐戎。

186

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “Yu Quan can be said to have been devoted to his ruler. Through remonstrance he brought himself to punishment. And even after his punishment, he did not neglect to bring his lord to goodness.” Trouble brews in Zhou as the brief reign of King Hui is threatened by the rebellion of his uncle Wangzi Tui. Earlier, the king’s concubine Yao had been favored by King Zhuang and had given birth to Wangzi Tuia. Wangzi Tuia enjoyed the favor of the king, and Wei Guo had been made his tutor. When King Hui acceded to his position, he seized Wei Guo’s garden and made it into a park.118 Since Bian Bo’s palace was close to the king’s palace, he seized it too. The king took territory from Ziqin Zhugui and Zhanfu and held back the salary of his cook, Shi Su. As a result, Wei Guo, Bian Bo, Shi Su, Zhanfu, and Ziqin Zhugui raised a rebellion, relying upon the support of the Su lineage. 119 In autumn, the five high officers supported Wangzi Tuia in attacking the king, but they were not victorious and fled to Wen. The Master of Su supported Wangzi Tuia and fled to Wei with him. Troops from Wei and Yān attacked Zhou.120 In winter, they established Wangzi Tuia as ruler.

19.2

LORD ZHUANG 20 (674 BCE) ANNALS

In the twentieth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, went to Ju.

20.1

In summer, there was a catastrophic fire in Qi.

20.2

Autumn, the seventh month.

20.3

In winter, a Qi leader attacked the Rong.

20.4

118 King Hui of Zhou is actually the grandson of King Zhuang (r. 696–682). Hui’s father, King Xi 僖 (r. 681–677), was Hui’s immediate predecessor. 119 Su Fensheng, mentioned in Yin 11.5, was presumably a member of this family. Wen 溫, where Wangzi Tui and the five high officers flee, is a settlement of the Su line (see Cheng 11). The Master of Su, who supports Wangzi Tui’s relocation to Wei, is most likely a member of this line. Du Yu (ZZ 9.160) believes that Ziqin Zhugui is not a single person but two, but as Yang (1:212) points out, it is clear that five and not six officers raised the rebellion. 120 While Shiji 4.151 claims that Wei and Southern Yan alone attacked, it elsewhere adds the domain of Song to the list of participants (34.1551). There is some dispute about whether “Yan” here refers to Northern Yan or Southern Yan (Yang, 1:213). Du Yu (ZZ 9.160) is probably correct in identifying it as the latter, an interpretation reflected in our translation. For more on this domain, see Yin 5.4.

Lord Zhuang

187

左傳 20.1 二十年，春，鄭伯和王室，不克。執燕仲父。

夏，鄭伯遂以王歸。王處于櫟。 秋，王及鄭伯入于鄔。遂入成周。取其寶器而還。 冬，王子頹享五大夫，樂及遍舞。鄭伯聞之，見虢叔曰：「寡人聞 之：『哀樂失時，殃咎必至。』今王子頹歌舞不倦，樂禍也。夫司寇行 戮，君為之不舉，而況敢樂禍乎？奸王之位，禍孰大焉？臨禍忘憂，憂 必及之。盍納王乎？」虢公曰：「寡人之願也。」

121 Yan Zhongfu was the ruler of the domain of Southern Yan. 122 Wangzi Tui was at this time residing in the royal capital of Zhou (Wangcheng 王城). Chengzhou 成周 was a major Zhou settlement just to the east of the royal capital (Yin 3.3). Wu 隖 was a settlement that had once belonged to Zheng and had been seized by the king earlier (Yin 11.5). Li 櫟, mentioned in Huan 15.9, was a large Zheng settlement that became the power base of Lord Li after he was exiled from the Zheng capital. Thus, King Hui and Lord Li of Zheng are manifesting their power along the Zheng/Zhou border and are even making forays into the Zhou heartland.

188

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The domain of Zheng, which for some time had enjoyed a particularly close relationship with the Zhou kings, first tries to negotiate a peaceful settlement to the conflict in Zhou and then throws its support behind King Hui (Zhuang 19.2). The Zheng ruler predicts the demise of the king’s rival, Wangzi Tui, because of the latter’s improper use of music and dance. In the twentieth year, in spring, the Liege of Zheng tried to bring harmony to the king’s household but did not succeed. He detained Yan Zhongfu.121 In summer, the Liege of Zheng brought the king to Zheng, and the king dwelled in Li. In autumn, the king joined with the Liege of Zheng and entered Wu. They then entered Chengzhou, seized the precious vessels, and returned to Wu.122 In the winter, Wangzi Tui offered ceremonial toasts to the five high officers. The musical part of the entertainment extended to a performance of all the dances.123 The Liege of Zheng heard about this and, meeting with Guoshu, the Duke of Guo, said, “I, the unworthy one, have heard it said, ‘When sorrow or joy fail of their proper time, disaster and misfortune must come.’ Now, Wangzi Tui’s appetite for songs and dances is never sated. This is finding joy in disaster. When the supervisor of corrections carries out executions, a ruler does not dine with full ceremony; how much less should he entertain himself with music in a time of disaster?124 What disaster is greater than violating the position of the king? If he forgets to be sorrowful as he draws close to disaster, sorrow is sure to overtake him. Why not install the king in power in the capital?” The Duke of Guo said, “This is what I, the unworthy one, desire.”125

20.1

123 Cf. Xiang 29.13. There are two interpretations of this line. The first is that this was a performance of all the great dances of the past—that is, the “music of the six ages.” The second is that all those present joined in the dancing. Yang (1:214–15) favors the former interpretation and believes this would include the traditional dances supposedly deriving from the times of the Yellow Emperor, Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, and the Zhou King Wu. Karlgren (gl. 62) has a similar explanation: “The music (reached to) included the whole series of (pantomimic) dances [of the earlier rulers].” The second interpretation is that the merriment reached such a point that the prince and his guests all joined in the dancing. Both interpretations convey the sense of hubris and excess. 124 Other examples of this notion that music must match ritual propriety appear in Cheng 12.4 and Zhao 1.12. 125 This speech appears in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.28, with a slightly more explicit statement of Wangzi Tui’s crime: “Now, what crime is greater than to expel a king and replace him in his position?”

Lord Zhuang

189

春秋 21.1 二十有一年，春，王正月。 21.2(1) 夏，五月辛酉，鄭伯突卒。 21.3 秋，七月戊戌，夫人姜氏薨。

21.4

冬，十有二月，葬鄭厲公。

左傳 21.1(2) 二十一年，春，胥命于弭。

夏，同伐王城。鄭伯將王自圉門入。虢叔自北門入。殺王子頹及五 大夫。 鄭伯享王于闕西辟，樂備。王與之武公之略，自虎牢以東。原伯 曰：「鄭伯效尤，其亦將有咎！」五月，鄭厲公卒。 王巡虢守，虢公為王宮于玤，王與之酒泉。鄭伯之享王也，王以后 之鞶鑑予之。虢公請器，王予之爵。鄭伯由是始惡於王。 冬，王歸自虢。

126 This year’s Zuozhuan entry begins with the Duke of Guo and the Liege of Zheng as understood subjects and therefore appears originally to have been attached to Zhuang 20.1 (Yang, 1:216). On the term xu ming 胥命, see Annals, Huan 3.2. Mi 弭 was located in the domain of Zheng near present-day Mi County 密縣, Henan. 127 This literally means “the City of the King” and is the old city of Luoyang, where the Zhou King Ping had located the capital in 770 Bce. See also Xi 15.8, n. 219. 128 For a succinct version of Wangzi Tui’s rebellion and King Hui’s subsequent reinstatement, see Shiji 4.151. 129 Lord Wu, who ruled over Zheng from 770 to 744, was presumably given this same land by King Ping. 130 Lord Li of Zheng, like Wangzi Tui before him, made the mistake of performing a complete set of music from earlier eras. This act, ritually improper in a time of political strife and unbefitting Lord Li’s station, forecasts Lord Li’s death, which occurs soon after. 131 Jiuquan 酒泉 was a settlement of the royal Zhou domain. Its precise location is unknown.

190

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 21 (673 BCE) ANNALS

The twenty-first year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fifth month, on the xinyou day (27), Tu, the Liege of Zheng, died. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuxu day (5), Lord Huan’s wife, Lady Jiang, expired. In winter, in the twelfth month, Lord Li of Zheng was buried.

21.1 21.2(1)

21.3

21.4

ZUO

The rebellion of Wangzi Tui and the five high officers is brought to an end (Zhuang 19.2, 20.1). However, the Liege of Zheng, Lord Li, who had joined King Hui to defeat Wangzi Tui, follows the latter’s bad example in performing traditional ritual music beyond his due (Zhuang 20.1) and dies soon thereafter. In the twenty-first year, in spring, they exchanged commands at Mi.126 In summer, they joined together to attack Wangcheng.127 The Liege of Zheng, bringing the king with him, entered the capital through the Yu Gate, while Guoshu, the Duke of Kuo, entered the capital from the northern gate. They killed Wangzi Tui and the five high officers.128 The Liege of Zheng offered ceremonial toasts for the king at the lookout tower on the west side of the palace gate, replete with the most august music. The king granted the Liege of Zheng the same boundaries as Lord Wu, extending from Hulao east.129 The Yuan Liege said, “The Liege of Zheng has emulated a wrongful act. I expect he also will come to disaster!”130 In the fifth month, Lord Li of Zheng died. The king went on an inspection tour of the holdings of the domain of Guo. The Duke of Guo built a palace for him at Bang, and the king granted him the settlement Jiuquan.131 When the Liege of Zheng offered the king ceremonial toasts, the king gave him a girdle with decorative mirrors that had once belonged to the queen. The Duke of Guo requested a vessel, and the king gave him a bronze beaker. The Liege of Zheng, from this time on, hated the king.132 In winter, the king returned home from Guo.133

21.1(2)

132 The gift of the girdle with decorative mirrors was less esteemed than the gift of the ritual beaker presented to the Duke of Guo. This Liege of Zheng is the son of Lord Li of Zheng, who died in the previous paragraph. 133 Note that in the three preceding years, Lord Zhuang 19–21, no entry in the Annals has a corresponding Zuozhuan entry, and none of the events discussed in Zuozhuan, albeit ostensibly significant, appears in the Annals. Also, in the following year, Lord Zhuang 22, only one of the six Annals entries has a Zuozhuan equivalent.

Lord Zhuang

191

春秋 22.1 二十有二年，春，王正月，肆大眚。 22.2 癸丑，葬我小君文姜。 22.3(1) 陳人殺其公子御寇。 22.4 夏，五月。 22.5 秋，七月丙申，及齊高傒盟于防。 22.6 冬，公如齊納幣。

左傳 22.1a(3) 二十二年，春，陳人殺其大子御寇。陳公子完與顓孫奔齊。顓孫自齊

來奔。 齊侯使敬仲為卿。辭曰：「羇旅之臣幸若獲宥，及於寬政，赦其不 閑於教訓，而免於罪戾，弛於負擔，君之惠也。所獲多矣，敢辱高位以 速官謗？請以死告。詩云： 翹翹車乘， 招我以弓。 豈不欲往？ 畏我友朋。」 使為工正。 飲桓公酒，樂。公曰：「以火繼之。」辭曰：「臣卜其晝，未卜其夜， 不敢。」

134 “The lady” (xiaojun 小君) is a formula attached to the name of the deceased wife of a Lu ruler upon completion of her burial. See Zuozhuan, Ding 15.8, Ai 12.2. 135 On Gao Xi, see Zhuang 9.5. The place name Fang 防 is mentioned in Annals, Yin 9.6. 136 Shiji 36.1578 provides the following details: “Lord Xuan of Chen later had a favorite wife who bore a son named Kuan. The lord wished to establish him and so killed his heir apparent Yukou. Yukou previously had been fond of Lord Li’s son Jingzhong. Jingzhong was afraid that the calamity would reach to him and so fled to Qi.” 137 This is the first example in Zuozhuan of an “uncollected ode” (yishi 逸詩), or an ode not found among the 305 pieces in the received Book of Odes. For another example, see Xuan 2.4.

192

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 22 (672 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-second year, in spring, in the royal first month, serious crimes were pardoned. On the guichou day (23), we buried the wife of our former ruler, Wen Jiang.134

22.1

22.2

Chen leaders put Gongzi Yukou to death.

22.3(1)

Summer, the fifth month.

22.4

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the bingshen day (9), we swore a covenant with Gao Xi of Qi at Fang.135 In winter, our lord went to Qi to present betrothal gifts.

22.5

22.6

ZUO

With rebellion in the domain of Chen, several Chen leaders flee to the domain of Qi. One of them, Gongzi Wan, is given a high position in Qi, and predictions are made that his descendants will one day become powerful in Qi, predictions that are to come true in 534 Bce (Zhao 8.6) and 478 Bce (Ai 17.4). In the twenty-second year, in spring, Chen leaders put the heir apparent Yukou to death. Jingzhonga of Chen fled with Zhuansun to Qi. Zhuansun came in flight from Qi.136 The Prince of Qi wanted to appoint Jingzhong as minister, but the latter declined, saying, “It will be due to my lord’s kindness if I, a humble sojourner, should be so fortunate as to receive forgiveness and if, under the sway of your generous government, I may be pardoned for not having been schooled in proper instructions, escaping punishment for my offenses and being relieved of my burdens. Since I have already received so much, how could I presume to disgrace a high position and hasten slander from other officers? Permit me to make this declaration, even on pain of death. As it says in the Odes,

22.1a(3)

From the lofty chariot He beckons to me with a bow. How could I not wish to go? But I fear my friends.”137

So he was made director of artisans. Jingzhong entertained Lord Huan with wine. As they were making merry, the lord said, “Let’s continue this by torchlight.” Jingzhong refused: “I have divined about this day, but I have not divined about the night. So I dare not.” Lord Zhuang

193

君子曰：「酒以成禮，不繼以淫，義也；以君成禮，弗納於淫，仁 也。」 初，懿氏卜妻敬仲。其妻占之，曰：「吉。是謂 鳳皇于飛， 和鳴鏘鏘。 有媯之後， 將育于姜。 五世其昌， 並于正卿。 八世之後， 莫之與京。」 22.1b 陳厲公，蔡出也，故蔡人殺五父而立之。生敬仲。

其少也，周史有以《周易》見陳侯者，陳侯使筮之，遇觀䷓之否 ䷋  ，曰：「是謂『觀國之光，利用賓于王。』此其代陳有國乎？不在此，其 在異國；非此其身，在其子孫。光，遠而自他有耀者也。坤，土也；巽，風 也；乾，天也。風為天於土上，山也。有山之材，而照之以天光，於是乎 居土上，故曰『觀國之光，利用賓于王』。庭實旅百，奉之以玉帛，天地

138 The Yi lineage head was a high officer of Chen. 139 Gui is the clan name of the ruling family of Chen, and Jiang is the clan name of the ruling house of Qi. 140 This event is mentioned in Annals, Huan 6.4, where Wufu is called Chen To. 141 “Viewing” (Guan 觀) is hexagram 20 in today’s version of Zhouyi 周易 (Zhou Changes) (3.59), and “Obstruction” (Pi 否) is hexagram 12 (2.43). The point here is that instability in the fourth line from the bottom in the first of these hexagrams (20) transforms the original broken line (yin line) into an unbroken line (yang line) and yields the second hexagram (12). This is the first instance of divination in Zuozhuan that draws from the Zhouyi. In this and other passages concerning Zhouyi we have insofar as possible used the translation and terminology of Lynn, Classic of Changes. For another useful translation, see Shaughnessy, I Ching. On the use of Zhouyi in Zuozhuan, see K. Smith, “Zhouyi Interpretations from Accounts in the Zuozhuan”; and Gao Heng, Zuozhuan Guoyu de Zhouyi shuo tongjie. 142 This is the line statement for the fourth line of hexagram 20 (slightly modified from Lynn, Classic of Changes, 263). 143 “Pure Yin” (Kun 坤) and “Compliance” (Sun 巽) are the lower and upper trigrams, respectively, of hexagram 20. “Pure Yang” (Qian 乾) is the new upper trigram in hexagram 12, “Obstruction,” created by the changing of line 4 from the bottom.

194

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “Using wine to complete a ritual but not continuing to the point of excess is an act of duty. Guiding a ruler to complete a ritual but not leading him into excess is nobility of spirit.” Earlier, the Yi lineage head had divined by turtle shell about marrying his daughter to Jingzhong.138 His own wife gave the interpretation: “Auspicious. Of this we say, As the male and female phoenix soar away, Their harmonious cries resound. The progeny of Gui Will be raised among the Jiang.139 In five generations they will flourish And stand alongside the chief ministers. After eight generations None will be as great as they.”

Lord Li of Chen was born of a woman from Cai. That is why the Cai leaders killed Wufu and established him as ruler.140 He then fathered Jingzhong. When Jingzhong was young, there was a Zhou scribe who obtained an audience with the Prince of Chen to show him the Zhou Changes. The Prince of Chen had him divine by milfoil about Jingzhong. The scribe encountered the hexagram “Viewing” ䷓ and the line whereby it becomes the hexagram “Obstruction” ䷋141 and declared, “It says, ‘Viewing extends to the glory of the domain, so he is honored as a guest of the king.’142 This boy, I predict, will replace the Chen leaders and possess the domain. And if it is not here, it will be in another domain. And if not he, then it will be his descendant. Glory is something far off and shines from another source. ‘Pure Yin’ is the earth, ‘Compliance’ is the wind, and ‘Pure Yang’ is heaven.143 When wind becomes heaven and it is above earth, it is mountain.144 Possessing the resources of a mountain, he is illuminated with the glory of heaven. In this way he looms above the earth. Therefore, it says, ‘Viewing extends to the glory of the domain, so he is honored as a guest of the king.’ In the king’s courtyard, gifts are displayed by the hundreds; and

22.1b

144 “Wind becomes heaven” when the “Compliance” trigram, associated with wind, becomes the “Pure Yang” trigram, associated with heaven, in the transformation of “Viewing” into “Obstruction.” “Mountain” is the image associated with the “Restraint” (Gen 艮) trigram, a trigram with a solid line at the top and two broken lines underneath, which is created in lines 2–4 of hexagram 12 after line 4 of hexagram 20 is transformed. It must be kept in mind that lines in a hexagram were traditionally numbered from the bottom to the top.

Lord Zhuang

195

之美具焉，故曰『利用賓于王』。猶有觀焉，故曰其在後乎！風行而著於 土，故曰其在異國乎！若在異國，必姜姓也。姜，大嶽之後也。山嶽則配 天。物莫能兩大。陳衰，此其昌乎！」 及陳之初亡也，陳桓子始大於齊；其後亡也，成子得政。

春秋 23.1 二十有三年，春，公至自齊。 23.2 祭叔來聘。 23.3(1) 夏，公如齊觀社。 23.4 公至自齊。 23.5 荊人來聘。 23.6 公及齊侯遇于穀。 23.7 蕭叔朝公。 23.8(3) 秋，丹桓宮楹。 23.9 冬，十有一月，曹伯射姑卒。 23.10 十有二月甲寅，公會齊侯盟于扈。

145 The image of the imperial gate and courtyard is associated with the “Restraint” trigram. The image of jade is associated with the “Pure Yang” trigram, and that of silk is associated with the “Pure Yin” trigram. 146 Yang (1:224) notes that one views something that another does. Consequently, the term “viewing” might imply that it will not be Jingzhong himself but a descendant who will accomplish the great task. 147 That is, the wind arises in one place but strikes in another. 148 Taiyue 大嶽, “Grand Peaks” (last mentioned in Yin 11.3b), is supposedly the same as siyue 四嶽, “Four Peaks,” and signifies a minister who helped the great Yu. Anne Birrell (Chinese Mythology, 300) explains “Four Peaks” as a “synonym for ruling nobility of the four quarters of the world in the archaic era.”

196

Zuo Tradition

they are presented as gifts with jades and silk.145 The lovely things of heaven and earth are all supplied there. Therefore, it says, ‘He is honored as the guest of the king.’ Still, there is ‘viewing’ here, and that is why I said that it might be with his descendants.146 The wind moves and strikes upon the earth, and that is why I said that it might be in another domain.147 If it is in another domain, it surely will be one of the Jiang clan name. The Jiang are the descendants of Grand Peaks.148 Mountain peaks are mates of Heaven. Among things, there cannot be two of equal greatness. As Chen declines, I expect this one will flourish.” When Chen was destroyed for the first time, Chen Wuyu began to be powerful in Qi. When Chen was destroyed later on, Chen Henga took control of the government.149 LORD ZHUANG 23 (671 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-third year, in spring, our lord arrived from Qi.

23.1

Zhai Shu came.150

23.2

In summer, our lord went to Qi to observe the ceremonies of the altar of the earth.

23.3(1)

Our lord arrived from Qi.

23.4

A Jing leader came on an official visit.

151

23.5

Our lord and the Prince of Qi met up in Gu.152 The younger brother from Xiao came to visit our lord’s court.

23.6 153

23.7

In autumn, the front pillars of Lord Huan’s temple were lacquered red.

23.8(3)

In winter, in the eleventh month, Yigu, the Liege of Cao, died.

23.9

In the twelfth month, on the jiayin day (5), our lord met with the Prince of Qi and swore a covenant at Hu.154

23.10

149 This is a flash-forward to events that took place five generations and eight generations, respectively, after Jingzhong, thereby fulfilling the prediction about his descendants. Briefly, in 534 Bce Chen Wuyu became the first descendant of the Chen lineage, sometimes called the Tian 田 lineage, to be appointed as a high minister. Three generations later, 478 Bce, the head of this lineage, Chen Heng, killed a puppet ruler and soon took control of Qi. 150 This was perhaps the younger brother of the Zhai Liege, coming in his stead; cf. Annals, Yin 1.6. 151 This is the first mention of diplomatic relations between Lu and Chu (Jing). 152 See Annals, Zhuang 7.5. 153 On the younger brother from Xiao, also known as Daxin, see Zhuang 12.1. 154 Hu 扈 was located in the domain of Qi in present-day Fan County 范縣, Shandong.

Lord Zhuang

197

左傳 23.1(3) 二十三年，夏，公如齊觀社，非禮也。曹劌諫曰：「不可。夫禮，所以整民

也。故會以訓上下之則，制財用之節；朝以正班爵之義，帥長幼之序；征 伐以討其不然。諸侯有王，王有巡守，以大習之。非是，君不舉矣。君舉 必書。書而不法，後嗣何觀？」 23.2 晉桓、莊之族偪，獻公患之。士蒍曰：「去富子，則群公子可謀也已。」公

曰：「爾試其事。」士蒍與群公子謀，譖富子而去之。 23.3(8) 秋，丹桓宮之楹。

155 “Expenditures” refer to the gifts that rulers and nobles present to one another. 156 Yang Shuda reads ran 然 as nan 戁 (see Yang, 1:226), which Shuowen jiezi glosses as “respectful” (10B.503). 157 Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.153, has a slightly longer variant of Cao Gui’s remonstrance. It also gives the result: “But the lord did not listen and then went to Qi.” This concern about how one’s actions will be recorded is also encountered in Wen 15.2 and Xiang 20.7. 158 Huan Shu and Liege Zhuang were the father and grandfather of Lord Wu of Quwo. On Liege Zhuang, see Yin 5.2.

198

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Cao Gui, encountered earlier as a skilled strategist (Zhuang 10.1), appears here as a ritual specialist who comments on the appropriate journeys for a ruler (cf. Yin 5.1, Zhuang 27.1). Cao Gui juxtaposes two kinds of “viewing”: instead of being fascinated by an unworthy spectacle (Qi ceremonies of the altar), the Lu ruler should be mindful of his role as exemplar to be observed by posterity. According to Mozi (30.207), Qi ceremonies of the altar of the earth, like Sanglin in Song or Yunmeng in Chu, involve mixed crowds of men and women. This particular journey of Lord Zhuang may have to do with arrangements for his ill-fated union with Ai Jiang (Zhuang 24.1, 24.2). In the twenty-third year, in summer, our lord went to Qi to observe the ceremonies of the altar of the earth: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Cao Gui remonstrated: “This may not be done. Ritual is the way to bring order to the people. Thus, meetings are used to teach the principles of hierarchy and to establish regulations for expenditures.155 Court audiences are used to set right the duties of rank and to establish precedent among elder and younger. Punitive expeditions are used to chastise those who are not respectful.156 In order to practice these things on a grand scale, the princes have visits to the king, and the king has inspection tours. Except in these cases, the ruler does not travel. And when the ruler does travel, it must be recorded. If that which is recorded does not accord with the rules, what will posterity have to observe?”157

23.1(3)

Descendants of houses in Jin’s secondary capital of Quwo threaten the stability of the domain of Jin. This marks the beginning of the decline of lineages related to the Jin ruling house. The houses of Huan and Zhuang of Jin were becoming threatening.158 Lord Xian was troubled by it. Shi Wei said, “If we get rid of Fuzi, then we can plot against the noble sons, the descendants of Huan and Zhuang!” The lord said, “Try doing this.” Shi Wei plotted with the descendants of the former lords. They slandered Fuzi and got rid of him.159

23.2

In autumn, the front pillars of Lord Huan’s temple were lacquered red.160

23.3(8)

159 The gongzi 公子 being described here are presumably the members of the Huan and Zhuang clans, and we have translated accordingly. Fuzi, about whom little else is known, seems to have been a part of this group, so that Shi Wei was essentially recommending a “divide and conquer” strategy. 160 According to Guliang, Zhuang 23 (6.59), red was not a ritually acceptable color for temple pillars. It may well be that Lord Zhuang is preparing for his marriage to Ai Jiang.

Lord Zhuang

199

春秋 24.1(1) 二十有四年，春，王三月，刻桓宮桷。 24.2 葬曹莊公。 24.3 夏，公如齊逆女。 24.4 秋，公至自齊。 24.5(2) 八月丁丑，夫人姜氏入。 24.6(2) 戊寅，大夫宗婦覿，用幣。 24.7 大水。 24.8 冬，戎侵曹。 24.9 曹羈出奔陳。 24.10 赤歸于曹。 24.11 郭公。

左傳 24.1(1) 二十四年，春，刻其桷，皆非禮也。御孫諫曰：「臣聞之：『儉，德之共

也；侈，惡之大也。』先君有共德，而君納諸大惡，無乃不可乎？」

200

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 24 (670 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, in the royal third month, the square pillars of Lord Huan’s temple were carved.

24.1(1)

Lord Zhuang of Cao was buried.

24.2

In summer, our lord went to Qi to meet and escort home his bride.

24.3

In autumn, our lord arrived from Qi.

24.4

In the eighth month, on the dingchou day (2), his wife, Lady Jiang, entered Lu. On the wuyin day (3), the wives of the high officers of the same lineage met with her and offered betrothal gifts. There was a great flood.

24.6(2)

24.7

In winter, the Rong invaded Cao. Ji of Cao departed and fled to Chen.

24.5(2)

24.8 161

24.9

Chi went home to Cao.162

24.10

The Duke of Guo . . .

24.11

163

ZUO

The decoration of Lord Huan’s temple continues (Zhuang 23.3), perhaps in preparation for his forthcoming marriage to Ai Jiang. In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, the square pillars were carved: in both cases, this was not in accordance with ritual propriety.164 Yusun remonstrated: “I have heard: ‘Frugality is the most revered of virtues; profligacy is the greatest of evils.’ Our former ruler had revered virtue, but you led him into this greatest of evils.165 How on earth could this not be totally wrong?”

24.1(1)

161 Ji was presumably the heir apparent in Cao. 162 Chi is most likely the name of Lord Xi of Cao, who came to power in this year (Yang, 1:228). 163 The remainder of this line has been lost. This Duke of Guo should not be confused with Guoshu, the Duke of Guo. 164 This obviously belongs to Zhuang 23.3 and has been artificially separated, as the character jie 皆, “all” (or, in this case, “both”), plainly indicates. 165 That is, the temple erected to him reflects profligacy and not frugality. There is not much evidence of Lord Huan’s frugality, but the rhetoric of remonstrance requires such a contrast. A much longer version of this speech appears in Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.155.

Lord Zhuang

201



24.2(5, 6)

秋，哀姜至，公使宗婦覿，用幣，非禮也。御孫曰：「男贄，大者玉帛，小 者禽鳥，以章物也。女贄，不過榛、栗、棗、修，以告虔也。今男女同贄， 是無別也。男女之別，國之大節也；而由夫人亂之，無乃不可乎？」

24.3 晉士蒍又與群公子謀，使殺游氏之二子。士蒍告晉侯曰：「可矣。不過二

年，君必無患。」

春秋 25.1(1) 二十有五年，春，陳侯使女叔來聘。 25.2 夏，五月癸丑，衛侯朔卒。 25.3(2) 六月辛末朔，日有食之，鼓、用牲于社。

166 On this interpretation of wu 物, see Karlgren, gl. 66. 167 This remonstrance has a Guoyu variant. The speaker is specified there as “ancestral attendant Xiafu Zhan”（宗人夏父展), and he begins his remonstrance in a quite different fashion: “Ancestral attendant Xiafu Zhan said, ‘This is not the old precedent.’ The lord said, ‘The ruler’s actions are the old precedents.’ Xiafu responded, ‘If a ruler acts and complies with the models, then it is made a precedent. If he acts contrary to the models, then there will be a record of his contrary conduct. I am in

202

Zuo Tradition

Several anecdotes, including the one below, point to the inauspiciousness of the union of Lord Zhuang and Ai Jiang (Zhuang 23.1, 23.3, 24.1). Ai Jiang is the daughter of Lord Huan’s murderer, Lord Xiang of Qi, and she will eventually have a liaison with her husband’s brother, which will wreak havoc with the Lu succession when Lord Zhuang dies (Min 2). In autumn, Ai Jiang arrived, and our lord had the wives of the same lineage meet with her and offer betrothal gifts: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Yusun said, “Among gifts presented by men, the great ones are jade and silk, and the small ones are animals and birds. With such gifts status is displayed.166 For gifts presented by women, we do not go beyond hazelnuts, chestnuts, dates, and dried meat. With such gifts reverence is proclaimed. Now, if men and women present the same gifts, there will be no distinction between them. The distinction between men and women is a great regulating principle of the domain. Is it not then improper to confound this principle on account of your wife?”167

24.2(5, 6)

Shi Wei continues to eliminate potential rebels in Jin (Zhuang 23.2). Shi Wei’s prediction below seems not to have been fulfilled: Lord Xian of Jin’s death is followed by succession struggles and Lord Hui’s disastrous reign. Shi Wei of Jin conspired again with the noble sons and caused them to kill the two sons of the You lineage.168 Shi Wei announced this to the Prince of Jin: “This will do. In no more than two years, you are sure to have no further troubles.”

24.3

LORD ZHUANG 25 (669 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, the Prince of Chen sent Ru Shu to us on an official visit.169 In summer, in the fifth month, on the guichou day (12), Shuo, the Prince of Wei, died. In the sixth month, on the xinwei day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Drums were beaten and an animal sacrifice was offered at the altar of earth.

25.1(1)

25.2

25.3(2)



a position of responsibility and fear that if you act contrary to the models, it will be recorded for later generations. That is why I do not dare not tell you this’” (Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.156). This statement may be a prediction of Ai Jiang’s future negative role. 168 As the offspring of Huan and Zhuang mentioned in Zhuang 23.2, these “two sons of the You branch lineage” are capable members of the Huan and Zhuang lineages who can put up resistance if Lord Xian acts against them. 169 Ru Shu was an official in the domain of Chen. Ru is the clan name and Shu is a birth sequence indicator. The fact that his personal name is not given figures prominently in the Zuozhuan interpretation below (Zhuang 25.1).

Lord Zhuang

203

25.4 伯姬歸于杞。 25.5(3) 秋，大水，鼓、用牲于社、于門。 25.6 冬，公子友如陳。

左傳 25.1(1) 二十五年，春，陳女叔來聘，始結陳好也。嘉之，故不名。 25.2(3) 夏，六月辛未，朔，日有食之，鼓、用牲于社，非常也。唯正月之朔，慝未

作，日有食之，於是乎用幣于社，伐鼓于朝。 25.3(5) 秋，大水，鼓、用牲于社、于門，亦非常也。凡天災，有幣，無牲。非日、月

之眚不鼓。 25.4 晉士蒍使群公子盡殺游氏之族，乃城聚而處之。 25.5 冬，晉侯圍聚，盡殺群公子。

170 Yang notes that this manner of referring to the visitor is unusual. Out of thirty instances in the Annals where a minister comes to Lu on an official visit, only in this one case is the name not provided (Yang, 1:231). Zuozhuan seems to be implying that this manner of setting the entry apart from others implies special commendation of Chen’s action. 171 See Yang, 1:232. 172 This is literally the “high yang month,” when the yin forces have not yet begun to rise. It was the sixth month on the Zhou calendar, followed by Lu, and the fourth month of the Xia calendar. 173 Ju 聚 was located in the domain of Jin southeast of present-day Jiang County 絳縣, Shanxi.

204

Zuo Tradition

Bo Ji went to marry in Qǐ.

25.4

In autumn, there was a great flood. Drums were beaten and animal sacrifices were offered at the altar of earth and at the city gate.

25.5(3)

In winter, Gongzi You went to Chen.

25.6

ZUO

Chen, which had joined in an attack on Lu several years earlier (Annals, Zhuang 19.5), now seeks good relations with Lu. In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, Ru Shu of Chen came to us on an official visit: this was when we began to establish good relations with Chen. The text commended this, and that is why it did not supply the younger brother’s birth name.170

25.1(1)

The following passage concerning the proper ritual associated with eclipses contains some of the same wording that Ji Pingzi uses in Zhao 17.2. Yang suggests (1:232) that the author(s) have excerpted Ji’s words and added them here. Others believe that the portion of this passage beginning with “It is only . . .” is an interpolation.171 In summer, in the sixth month, on the xinwei day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Drums were beaten and an animal sacrifice was offered at the altar of earth. This was not the standard practice. It is only when there is an eclipse of the sun on the first day of the first month,172 before the adverse forces have begun their rise, that sacrificial goods are offered at the altar of earth and drums are beaten in the court. In autumn, there was a great flood. Drums were beaten and animal sacrifices were offered at the altar of earth and at the city gate: this also was not the standard practice. In all cases when there is a natural disaster, there is an offering of jades and silk but no animal sacrifice. Unless there is a dimming of the sun or moon, drums are not beaten.

25.2(3)

25.3(5)

The following two entries continue to trace Shi Wei’s activities and Lord Xian’s plan in Jin (Zhuang 23.2, 24.3). This elimination of the lateral branches of the ruling house sets the stage for the rise of ministerial lineages in Jin. Shi Wei of Jin sent the noble sons to kill all the members of the house of the You lineage. Then he fortified Ju and settled them there.173

25.4

In winter, the Prince of Jin laid siege to Ju and killed all the noble sons.

25.5

Lord Zhuang

205

春秋 26.1 二十有六年，春，公伐戎。 26.2 夏，公至自伐戎。 26.3 曹殺其大夫。 26.4 秋，公會宋人、齊人伐徐。 26.5 冬，十有二月癸亥朔，日有食之。

左傳 26.1 二十六年，春，晉士蒍為大司空。 26.2 夏，士蒍城絳，以深其宮。 26.3 秋，虢人侵晉。冬，虢人又侵晉。

春秋 27.1(1) 二十有七年，春，公會杞伯姬于洮。 27.2(2) 夏，六月，公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、鄭伯同盟于幽。 27.3(3) 秋，公子友如陳，葬原仲。 27.4(4) 冬，杞伯姬來。

174 The lack of a marker of the plural in classical Chinese makes it impossible to know if one or more men were executed. 175 Xu was a small domain of the Ying 嬴 lineage located in present-day Anhui. 176 Yang (1:233) equates this to an eclipse that would have taken place on 10 November 668 Bce.

206

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHUANG 26 (668 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, our lord attacked the Rong.

26.1

In summer, our lord arrived from the attack on the Rong.

26.2

Cao put to death its high officer.

26.3

174

In autumn, our lord met with a Song leader and a Qi leader and attacked Xu.175 In winter, in the twelfth month, on the guihai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.176

26.4

26.5

ZUO

Shi Wei’s activities in the domain of Jin continue (Zhuang 24.3, 25.4). Note that there is no overlap between the entries in the Annals and Zuozhuan for this year. In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, Shi Wei of Jin became grand supervisor of works.

26.1

In summer, Shi Wei fortified Jiang and made the palace walls higher.

26.2

In autumn, the men of Guo invaded Jin. In winter, the men of Guo again invaded Jin.

26.3

LORD ZHUANG 27 (667 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, our lord met with Bo Ji of Qıˇ at Tao.177

27.1(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, and the Liege of Zheng, and they swore a covenant together at You.178

27.2(2)

In autumn, Gongzi You went to Chen for the burial of Yuan Zhong.179

27.3(3)

In winter, Bo Ji of Qıˇ came.

27.4(4)

177 This is the Lord of Lu’s eldest daughter, who had been married to the ruler of Qǐ earlier (Annals, Zhuang 25.4). Tao 洮 was located in Lu near present-day Sishui County 泗水縣, Shandong. 178 For an earlier oath sworn at You, see Annals, Zhuang 16.4. 179 Yuan Zhong was a high officer of Chen.

Lord Zhuang

207

27.5 莒慶來逆叔姬。 27.6 杞伯來朝。 27.7 公會齊侯于城濮。

左傳 27.1(1) 二十七年，春，公會杞伯姬于洮，非事也。天子非展義不巡守，諸侯非

民事不舉，卿非君命不越竟。 27.2(2) 夏，同盟于幽，陳、鄭服也。 27.3(3) 秋，公子友如陳葬原仲，非禮也。原仲，季友之舊也。 27.4(4) 冬，杞伯姬來，歸寧也。凡諸侯之女，歸寧曰來，出曰來歸，夫人歸寧曰

如某，出曰歸于某。 27.5 晉侯將伐虢。士蒍曰：「不可。虢公驕，若驟得勝於我，必棄其民。無眾

而後伐之，欲禦我，誰與？夫禮、樂、慈、愛，戰所畜也。夫民，讓事、樂 和、愛親、哀喪，而後可用也。虢弗畜也，亟戰，將饑。」

180 Chengpu 城濮 was located in the domain of Wei and is the same as present-day Linpu cheng 臨濮城 in Fan County 范縣, Shandong (map 2). This will be the site of a famous battle in Xi 28. 181 The implication may be that Gongzi You had not traveled by the command of the Lu ruler and was hence engaged in a personal matter. Apparently, this kind of activity was unacceptable (Zhuang 27.1). 182 The activities and advice of Shi Wei, scattered over the previous few years in Zuozhuan, are succinctly summarized in Shiji 39.1639 as follows: “In the eighth year of Lord Xian [669 Bce], Shi Wei persuaded the lord as follows: ‘The noble sons of Jin are numerous. If you do not execute them, rebellion is sure to arise.’ So, he had all the noble sons killed and then fortified Ju and made it his capital. They named this capital Jiang. And this was the beginning of taking Jiang as capital. In the ninth year, the noble sons who had already left the domain fled to Guo. Guo, because of this, again attacked Jin but did not vanquish them. In the tenth year, the lord of Jin wanted to attack Guo, but Shi Wei said, ‘We will wait until they are in disorder.’”

208

Zuo Tradition

Qing of Ju came to meet and escort home Shu Ji as bride.

27.5

The Liege of Qıˇ came to visit our court.

27.6

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Chengpu.180

27.7

ZUO

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, our lord met with Bo Ji of Qıˇ at Tao: this was not official business. Unless it is to display propriety, the Son of Heaven does not conduct a royal inspection tour. Unless it is the official business of the people, the princes do not travel. Unless it is by command of the ruler, ministers do not cross the border.

27.1(1)

That Qi was part of the covenant noted below is clear from Annals, Zhuang 27.2. Chen leaders had killed their heir apparent Yukou several years earlier (22.1), and Jingzhong had fled to Qi. It is possible that this had created friction between Qi and Chen that is resolved in the following covenant. In summer, we swore a covenant together at You: this was because Chen and Zheng had submitted.

27.2(2)

In autumn, Gongzi You went to Chen for the burial of Yuan Zhong: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Yuan Zhong was an old friend of Gongzi Youe.181

27.3(3)

The return of daughters of Lu rulers to Lu is described with different words in the Annals. The lexical rules are not as consistent as presented here. In winter, Bo Ji of Qǐ came: she was returning to visit her parents. In all cases when the daughter of a prince returns to visit her parents, she is said to “come.” When she has been divorced, she is said to “come back.” When a lord’s wife returns to visit her parents, she is said to “go to such and such a place.” When she has been divorced, she is said to “go back to such and such a place.”

27.4(4)

Guo had attacked Jin in the previous year (Zhuang 26.3), and now the Prince of Jin considers reprisals. The Prince of Jin was going to attack Guo. Shi Wei said, “That is not an option. The Duke of Guo is arrogant. If he were suddenly to gain a victory over us, he would surely ignore the needs of his own people. If we attack him after he has lost the support of the multitude, who would there be to join with him if he wishes to resist us? Now, ritual, music, compassion, and sparing use of force are what should be nourished for battle. Only after the people defer to one another in public affairs, find joy in musical harmony, act well on their kin’s behalf, and grieve for the

27.5

Lord Zhuang

209

27.6 王使召伯廖賜齊侯命，且請伐衛，以其立子頹也。

春秋 28.1(1) 二十有八年，春，王三月甲寅，齊人伐衛。衛人及齊人戰，衛人敗績。 28.2 夏，四月丁未，邾子瑣卒。 28.3(3) 秋，荊伐鄭，公會齊人、宋人救鄭。 28.4(5) 冬，築郿。 28.5(4) 大無麥、禾，臧孫辰告糴于齊。

左傳 28.1(1) 二十八年，春，齊侯伐衛，戰，敗衛師，數之以王命，取賂而還。

210

Zuo Tradition

dead can they be used in battle. If Guo does not nourish these things but frequently fights battles, it will become depleted.”182 The Zhou king seeks revenge for Wei’s earlier participation in an attack upon Zhou (Zhuang 19.2). The following royal “appointment” of Lord Huan, the Prince of Qi, has sometimes been understood as designating him as the first “overlord” (see Yang, 1:237). The king sent the Shao Liege Liao to bestow an appointment upon the Prince of Qi. Moreover, he requested that the Prince attack Wei because they had established Wangzi Tuia as ruler.

27.6

LORD ZHUANG 28 (666 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the jiayin day,183 A Qi leader attacked the domain of Wei. The men of Wei fought with the men of Qi, and the men of Wei were completely defeated. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingwei day (23), Suo, the Master of Zhu, died.

28.1(1)

28.2

In autumn, Jing attacked Zheng. Our lord joined leaders from Qi and Song to rescue Zheng.

28.3(3)

In winter, ramparts were built around Mei.184

28.4(5)

There was a great dearth of wheat and other grains. Zangsun Chen (Zang Wenzhong) reported to Qi and purchased grain there.

28.5(4)

ZUO

Qi acts upon the request of the king and attacks Wei (Zhuang 27.6). In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked the domain of Wei and fought a battle. After he defeated the Wei troops, he enumerated their offenses at the king’s command, took booty, and then returned home.

28.1(1)

183 There was no jiayin day in the third month of this year. 184 Mei 郿 was located in the domain of Lu south of present-day Shouchang County 壽長縣, Shandong.

Lord Zhuang

211

28.2 晉獻公娶于賈，無子。烝於齊姜，生秦穆夫人及大子申生。又娶二女於

戎，大戎狐姬生重耳，小戎子生夷吾。晉伐驪戎，驪戎男女以驪姬，歸， 生奚齊，其娣生卓子。驪姬嬖，欲立其子，賂外嬖梁五與東關嬖五，使 言於公曰：「曲沃，君之宗也；蒲與二屈，君之疆也；不可以無主。宗邑 無主，則民不威；疆埸無主，則啟戎心；戎之生心，民慢其政，國之患 也。若使大子主曲沃，而重耳、夷吾主蒲與屈，則可以威民而懼戎，且旌 君伐。」使俱曰：「狄之廣莫，於晉為都。晉之啟土，不亦宜乎？」晉侯 說之。夏，使大子居曲沃，重耳居蒲城，夷吾居屈。群公子皆鄙。唯二姬 之子在絳。二五卒與驪姬譖群公子而立奚齊，晉人謂之二五耦。 28.3(3) 楚令尹子元欲蠱文夫人，為館於其宮側，而振萬焉。夫人聞之，泣曰：

「 先君以是舞也習戎備也。今令尹不尋諸仇讎，而於未亡人之側，不亦 異乎！」御人以告子元。子元曰：「婦人不忘襲讎，我反忘之！」

185 Jia 賈 was a small domain with the Ji 姬 clan name (Huan 9.3). 186 Du Yu (ZZ 10.177) says that Qi Jiang was one of the concubines of Lord Xian’s deceased father, Lord Wu (d. 677). But Shiji 39.1641 says, “The mother of the heir apparent Shensheng was a daughter of Lord Huan of Qi, and she died early.” Thus, Shiji seems not to regard Qi Jiang as one of Lord Xian’s women, or at least leaves the whole issue vague. A comparison of Huan 16.5 and the Shiji version of the same story (see Shiji 37.1593) leads to the suspicion that the Han historian either misunderstands or purposely bowdlerizes stories involving relationships that Zuozhuan describes with the word zheng 烝 (on the problem of translating zheng, see also Huan 16.5; and Yang, 1:239). 187 The Greater Rong were of the Ji clan and were located in the west of present-day Shanxi. The Lesser Rong are more difficult to identify. Shiji 39.1641 says that these two women were sisters and identifies them as daughters of the Hu lineage among the Di, but Kong Yingda (ZZ 10.177) relies on evidence from Guoyu to argue that they were not related. 188 These places were located just east of the Yellow River in present-day Shanxi. 189 Close variants of these arguments made by Liangwu and the Favorite Wu from Dong­ guan (“the two-Wu clique”) to the Prince of Jin are found in Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.270. In the Guoyu version, however, Li Ji’s lover, named Entertainer Shi 優施, provides her with the plot to distance the Prince of Jin from his heir apparent, Shensheng. A series of remonstrances voiced by the scribe Su 史蘇 attempt to warn against Li Ji’s plot and place her in a lineage of earlier femmes fatales who have destroyed domains (Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.252–55, and “Jin yu 1,” 7.262–63). 190 Jiang 絳 was the Jin capital at this time. The two Ji women are, of course, Li Ji and her sister. 191 Wei Zhao says that Ziyuan, the chief minister, was the son of King Wu of Chu (r. 740–690) and therefore the younger brother of King Wen (Yang, 1:241). He may be casting a spell ( gu 蠱) here as a means of seducing Xi Gui, or gu may just mean “to confuse” or “to disturb a person’s mind.” Cf. Zhao 1.12f. 192 “Soon-to-perish widow” (wei wang ren 未亡人) is a way for a widow to refer to herself.

212

Zuo Tradition

We return here to Lord Xian of Jin, who was previously engaged in plots against the descendants of the auxiliary lines of Huan and Zhuang (Zhuang 23.2, 24.3, 25.4, 25.5). Here his complicated sexual life is described, and the famous story of his son Chong’er, the future overlord Lord Wen, begins. Lord Xian of Jin took a wife in Jia.185 She had no sons. He consorted with his father’s concubine Qi Jiang,186 and she bore the wife of Lord Mu of Qin and the heir apparent Shensheng. Lord Xian also took two women from the Rong. Hu Ji of the Greater Rong bore Chong’er, and Zi of the Lesser Rong bore Yiwu.187 When Jin attacked the Li Rong, the Head of the Li Rong presented his daughter Li Ji. After they returned to Jin, she bore Xiqi, and her younger sister bore Zhuozi. Li Ji enjoyed the lord’s favor and wanted to establish her son as heir. She bribed the lord’s male favorites Liang Wu and the Wu from Dongguan and had them say to the lord, “Quwo is the site of my lord’s Ancestral Temple. Pu and the two Qu are on my lord’s borders.188 These cannot be without masters. If the site of the Ancestral Temple is without a master, then the people will not stand in awe of your authority. If the border regions are without masters, then you will give the Rong ideas. If the Rong get ideas and the people disrespect their government, it will be trouble for the domain. If you send the heir apparent to rule over Quwo and Chong’er and Yiwu to rule over Pu and Qu, then you can make the people stand in awe of your authority, instill fear among the Rong, and also make your merit manifest.” Li Ji had them both say, “The vast lands of the Di could be Jin cities. Would it not be fitting for Jin to open new lands?”189 The Prince of Jin was pleased with this. In summer, he sent his heir apparent to dwell in Quwo, Chong’er to dwell in Pucheng, and Yiwu to dwell in Qu. All the noble sons were kept in lowly rank. Only the sons of the two Ji women remained in Jiang.190 The two Wu in the end joined with Li Ji to slander all the noble sons and establish Xiqi as heir. The Jin men called them “the two-Wu clique.”

28.2

King Wen of Chu (r. 689–677) had died several years earlier. His wife, now a widow, is Xi Gui, whose interesting history can be traced in Zhuang 10.3 and 14.3. While Xi Gui avows “inner distance” from the Chu king in the earlier anecdote, here she speaks as a wise woman concerned with the welfare of Chu. Ziyuan, the chief minister of Chu, wanted to seduce the wife of King Wen.191 He built a lodge near her palace and shook clappers there to the rhythm of the wan dance. When the king’s wife heard this, she wept and said, “When our former ruler used this dance, it was to practice our military preparedness. Now the chief minister does not employ this against enemies but near ‘the soon-to-perish widow.’192 Is this not an aberration?” An attendant reported this to Ziyuan, and Ziyuan said, “A woman has not forgotten the need to strike at our enemies, while I, in contrast, have forgotten it.”

28.3(3)

Lord Zhuang

213

秋，子元以車六百乘伐鄭，入于桔柣之門。子元、鬬御彊、鬬梧、 耿之不比為旆，鬬班、王孫游、王孫喜殿。眾車入自純門，及逵市。縣門 不發。楚言而出。子元曰：「鄭有人焉。」諸侯救鄭。楚師夜遁。鄭人將 奔桐丘，諜告曰：「楚幕有烏。」乃止。 28.4(5) 冬，饑，臧孫辰告糴于齊，禮也。 28.5(4) 築郿，非都也。凡邑，有宗廟先君之主曰都，無曰邑。邑曰築，都曰城。

春秋 29.1(1) 二十有九年，春，新延廄。 29.2(2) 夏，鄭人侵許。 29.3(3) 秋，有蜚。

29.4

冬，十有二月，紀叔姬卒。

29.5(4) 城諸及防。

193 This was presumably a gate at the outskirts of the city (Yang, 1:241). 194 The Chun Gate was in the outer wall of the capital city. 195 This is difficult to follow. The inner gate was presumably the Zheng capital’s last line of defense, but in this case it had been left conspicuously open. But who comes out speaking the Chu language? Du Yu (ZZ 10.177) argues that Zheng men came out through the open gate with a show of leisure and imitating the Chu language, which prompted Ziyuan’s comment on the capabilities of Zheng men. Yang (1:242) rejects this and believes it is the Chu men who rush back out, speaking to one another in their own dialect to make it clear that their plan had not succeeded. However, it seems to us that the only people for whom it would make sense to specify that they were speaking Chu dialect is the Zheng people, in a show of bravado or perhaps as an act of submission. Apparently, the Chu men had concluded that leaving the gate so conspicuously open might be a trap.

214

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, Ziyuan led six hundred chariots and attacked Zheng. They entered through the Xiedie Gate.193 Ziyuan, Dou Yuqiang, Dou Wu, and Geng Zhibubi were among the standard-bearers, while Dou Ban, Wangsun You, and Wangsun Xi brought up the rear. All the chariots entered through the Chun Gate194 and reached the market on the main road. But the portcullis of the inner gate had not been let down, and the Zheng men were coming out speaking the Chu language. Ziyuan said, “In Zheng there are indeed able men!”195 The princes came to rescue Zheng, but the Chu troops withdrew in the night. The men of Zheng were about to flee to Tongqiu, but a spy reported, saying, “There are crows among the Chu tents.”196 So they stayed. In winter, there was a famine. Zang Wenzhonga reported to Qi and purchased grains there: this was in accordance with ritual propriety.197

28.4(5)

Ramparts were built around Mei: this was because it was not a main city. In all cases concerning settlements, those that have an Ancestral Temple with tablets of the former rulers are called “a main city.” If they do not have these, they are called “settlements.” Of a settlement, one says “built ramparts.” Of a main city, one says “fortified.”198

28.5(4)

LORD ZHUANG 29 (665 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, the Yan Stable was rebuilt.

29.1(1)

In summer, a Zheng leader invaded Xǔ.

29.2(2)

In autumn, there were locusts.

29.3(3)

In winter, in the twelfth month, Shu Ji of Ji died.199

29.4

Zhu and Fang were fortified.

29.5(4)

200

196 The fact that the spy saw crows among the Chu tents indicates that the Chu troops had departed and that there was no longer any need to fear their attack. Crows are used to predict troop movement also in Xiang 18.3. 197 Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.157–58, contains a much longer version of this episode. In that version, Zang Wenzhong (Zangsun Chen) persuades the Lord of Lu to ask Qi for grain and volunteers himself for this mission. Zang’s followers question whether this is appropriate: “The ruler did not command you, our master, but you requested the mission. Surely this could be considered selecting [one’s own] official service.” Zang successfully defends himself against this criticism and completes his mission in Qi. 198 This is obviously not consistently applied. Many settlements without ancestral temples are said to have been “fortified.” 199 Shu Ji’s marriage is noted in Annals, Yin 7.1. 200 These are both settlements in the domain of Lu. Zhu 諸 was located southwest of present-day Zhucheng County 諸城縣, Shandong. On Fang, see Yin 9.5.

Lord Zhuang

215

左傳 29.1(1) 二十九年，春，新作延廄，書不時也。凡馬，日中而出，日中而入。 29.2(2) 夏，鄭人侵許。凡師，有鐘鼓曰伐，無曰侵，輕曰襲。 29.3(3) 秋，有蜚，為災也。凡物，不為災，不書。 29.4(5) 冬，十二月，城諸及防，書，時也。凡土功，龍見而畢務，戒事也；火見而

致用，水昏正而栽，日至而畢。 29.5 樊皮叛王。

春秋 30.1 三十年，春，王正月。 30.2 夏，次于成。 30.3 秋，七月，齊人降鄣。

201 A principle already noted in Yin 1.7. 202 The “Dragon” is the name for a collection of seven constellations located in the eastern region of the sky (see Needham, Science and Civilization in China, 3:235) and appears in the ninth month of the Xia calendar, which is the eleventh month of the Zhou calendar (Yang, 1:244). The Horn and the Neck (Virginis) of the Dragon

216

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The first four of the Zuozhuan entries for this year are simply comments on the supposed principles employed in the Annals. In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, the Yan Stable was rebuilt: this was recorded because it was not timely. In all cases concerning horses, they go out to pasture at the spring equinox and come back in at the autumn equinox.

29.1(1)

In summer, a Zheng leader invaded Xǔ. In all cases concerning military campaigns, when there are bells and drums, it is called “an attack.” When there are none, it is called “an invasion.” When it is a lightly armed attack, it is called “a surprise attack.”

29.2(2)

In autumn, there were locusts, and it became a disaster. In all cases concerning creatures, unless they become a disaster, it is not recorded.201

29.3(3)

The following passage illustrates the high degree to which agricultural activity was ideally coordinated with movements of the stars. In winter, in the twelfth month, Zhu and Fang were fortified: it is recorded because it was timely. In all cases concerning construction, when the Dragon constellation appears, agricultural work should be finished and preparations made for construction. By the time the Fire constellation appears, the tools should be brought to the place of use. By the time the Water Star constellation is aligned at dusk, the forms should be put in place, and by the solstice it should be finished.202

29.4(5)

Fan Pi rebelled against the king.203

29.5

LORD ZHUANG 30 (664 BCE) ANNALS

The thirtieth year, spring, the royal first month.

30.1

In summer, the army set up camp at Cheng.

30.2

In autumn, in the seventh month, a Qi leader brought about the surrender of Zhang.204

30.3



appear in the east in the ninth month of the Xia calendar. The “Fire Star” is Antares. This appears in the tenth month of the Xia calendar, just after the appearance of the Horn and Neck of the Dragon. The Water Stars are the Pegasi, which appear in the south in the tenth month of the Xia calendar. 203 Fan Pi was a Zhou official. 204 Zhang 鄣 belonged to Ji 紀. Although the latter was effectively destroyed twentyseven years earlier (Zhuang 3.3), Zhang had not fallen. Zhang was located in presentday Jiangsu.

Lord Zhuang

217

30.4 八月癸亥，葬紀叔姬。 30.5 九月庚午朔，日有食之，鼓、用牲于社。 30.6(3) 冬，公及齊侯遇于魯濟。 30.7 齊人伐山戎。

左傳 30.1 三十年，春，王命虢公討樊皮。夏，四月丙辰，虢公入樊，執樊仲皮，歸

于京師。 30.2 楚公子元歸自伐鄭，而處王宮。鬬射師諫，則執而梏之。秋，申公鬬班

殺子元。鬬穀於菟為令尹，自毀其家，以紓楚國之難。 30.3(6) 冬，遇于魯濟，謀山戎也。以其病燕故也。

春秋 31.1 三十有一年，春，築臺于郎。 31.2 夏，四月，薛伯卒。

205 This eclipse has been dated to 28 August 664 Bce. 206 This portion of the Ji 濟 River apparently constituted the border between the domains of Qi and Lu (Yang, 1:246). 207 The Mountain Rong lived near present-day Qian’an County 遷安縣 Hebei, probably farther to the southwest than shown in Tan Qixiang, Zhongguo lishi ditu ji (28:2.7). 208 One commentator identifies the Dou Sheshi mentioned here as Dou Lian, who appears in Huan 9.2, while others believe this is Dou Ban (see Yang, 1:246).

218

Zuo Tradition

In the eighth month, on the guihai day (23), Shu Ji of Ji was buried. In the ninth month, on the gengwu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.205 Drums were beaten and an animal sacrifice was offered at the altar of earth.

30.4 30.5

In winter, our lord and the Prince of Qi met up on the Lu stretch of the Ji River.206

30.6(3)

A Qi leader attacked the Mountain Rong.207

30.7

ZUO

Fan Pi’s rebellion against the King of Zhou (Zhuang 29.5) is quashed. In the thirtieth year, in spring, the king commanded the Duke of Guo to chastise Fan Pi. In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingchen day (14), the Duke of Guo entered Fan, seized Fan Pia, and brought him back to the capital.

30.1

Ziyuan returns from the failed attack on Zheng (Zhuang 28.3). His renewed attempt to seduce King Wen’s wife causes strife that ends with his murder. On his return from attacking Zheng, Ziyuana of Chu lodged in the royal palace. When Dou Sheshi208 remonstrated, Ziyuan had him seized and manacled. In autumn, Dou Ban, the Lord of Shen, killed Ziyuan.209 Dou Gouwutu became chief minister and depleted his own household wealth in order to relieve the difficulties of the domain of Chu.210

30.2

In winter, they met up on the Lu stretch of the Ji River: this was to make plans against the Mountain Rong. This was done because the latter had put the domain of Yan in distress.

30.3(6)

LORD ZHUANG 31 (663 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-first year, in spring, a terrace was built in Lang.211

31.1

In summer, in the fourth month, the Liege of Xue died.

31.2

209 Shen 申 was a district in the region of Chu. It is mentioned in Yin 1.4 and was located near present-day Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan. 210 Ziwen is the chief minister’s courtesy name. His birth name is the highly unusual Gouwutu (on its pronunciation, see Yang, 1:247). This name will later be explained as “suckled by a tiger” (Xuan 4.3). 211 Lang was fortified in 714 Bce (Annals, Yin 9.4).

Lord Zhuang

219

31.3 築臺于薛。 31.4(1) 六月，齊侯來獻戎捷。 31.5 秋，築臺于秦。 31.6 冬，不雨。

左傳 31.1(4) 三十一年，夏，六月，齊侯來獻戎捷，非禮也。凡諸侯有四夷之功，則獻

于王，王以警于夷；中國則否。諸侯不相遺俘。

春秋 32.1(1) 三十有二年，春，城小穀。 32.2(2) 夏，宋公，齊侯遇于梁丘。 32.3(4) 秋，七月癸巳，公子牙卒。 32.4(5) 八月癸亥，公薨于路寢。 32.5(5) 冬，十月己未，子般卒。 32.6 公子慶父如齊。 32.7 狄伐邢。

212 There was a domain at this time known as Xue 薛, but it seems highly unlikely, as Yang (1:248–49) notes, that Lu would build a terrace in another domain. 213 Qin 秦, in this case, refers to a place in Lu, located south of Fan County 范縣, Shandong, and not to the domain of the same name. 214 There is a dispute as to whether Xiaogu 小穀 was a Lu settlement or a Qi settlement. The evidence of Zhuang 32.1 would indicate that it was in Qi, which is also Yang’s conclusion (1:250). 215 Liangqiu 梁丘 was located in the domain of Song northeast of present-day Chengwu County 城武縣, Shandong.

220

Zuo Tradition

A terrace was built at Xue.212

31.3

In the sixth month, the Prince of Qi came to present spoils from the Rong.

31.4(1)

In autumn, a terrace was built in Qin.213

31.5

In winter, it did not rain.

31.6

ZUO

At the Lu court Qi presents spoils from victory over the Rong. This prompts an excursus on the appropriate ritual of “presenting spoils” (see also Cheng 2.9). In the thirty-first year, in summer, in the sixth month, the Prince of Qi came here to present spoils from the Rong: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when the princes achieve some merit against the Yi of the four directions, they present these spoils to the king, and the king thereby issues a warning to the Yi. This was not done in the central domains. The princes do not present captives to one another.

31.1(4)

LORD ZHUANG 32 (662 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-second year, in spring, we fortified Xiaogu.214

32.1(1)

In summer, the Duke of Song and the Prince of Qi met up at Liangqiu.215

32.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the guisi day (4), Gongzi Ya died.

32.3(4)

In the eighth month, on the guihai day (5), our lord expired in the Grand Chamber.216

32.4(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiwei day (2), Ziban died.

32.5(5)

Gongzi Qingfu went to Qi.

32.6

The Di attacked Xing.

32.7

217

216 The lu qin 路寢, “Grand Chamber,” was apparently a chamber where the ruler of Lu retired in times of serious illness. Liji 44.761 says that “Rulers and their wives died in the Grand Chamber.” Gongyang, Zhuang 32 (9.112), refers to this chamber as “the Proper Chamber” 正寢也. On the meaning of “grand” for lu 路, see Wang Li gu Hanyu zidian, 1360. 217 Xing 邢 was a domain of the Ji 姬 lineage and was located near present-day Xingtai City 邢台市, Hebei.

Lord Zhuang

221

左傳 32.1(1) 三十二年，春，城小穀，為管仲也。 32.2(2) 齊侯為楚伐鄭之故，請會于諸侯。宋公請先見于齊侯。夏，遇于梁丘。 32.3 秋，七月，有神降于莘。惠王問諸內史過曰：「是何故也？」對曰：「國之

將興，明神降之，監其德也；將亡，神又降之，觀其惡也。故有得神以興， 亦有以亡，虞、夏、商、周皆有之。」王曰：「若之何？」對曰：「以其物享 焉。其至之日，亦其物也。」 王從之。內史過往，聞虢請命，反曰：「虢必亡矣。虐而聽於神。」 神居莘六月。虢公使祝應、宗區、史嚚享焉。神賜之土田。史嚚曰： 「虢其亡乎！吾聞之：國將興，聽於民；將亡，聽於神。神，聰明正直而 壹者也，依人而行。虢多涼德，其何土之能得？」

218 According to Guanzi 18.343, the domain of Wu 吳 attacked Gu, but this is anachronistic, for the domain of Wu probably did not yet exist. Lord Huan of Qi consequently fortified Gu and it became a fief of Guan Zhong, the prominent prime minister of Qi (Yang, 1:251; see also Zhao 11.10). 219 Shen 莘, one of several places by this name in Zuozhuan, was located in the domain of Guo just west of present-day Sanmenxia City 三門峽市, Henan. 220 The term “court scribe” 內史 is used only of scribes serving in the Zhou domain. 221 There was a set order to sacrifices, but since this spirit had appeared unexpectedly, the traditional scheduled order could not be relied upon. Thus, one could determine the appropriate offerings only by reference to the day on which the spirit had arrived. 222 Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.29–33, contains a much longer variant of this episode. The court scribe Guo in that account gives more details concerning the relationship between the ruler’s virtue and the behavior of both people and spirits. For example, he argues: “When a domain is about to perish, its ruler is covetous, perverse, lascivious, negligent, filthy, and cruel. Since his government is rotten, the fragrances of the sacrifices do not ascend. Since his punishments are false and slanderous, those of the hundred clan names depart from him and become disloyal. The radiant spirits are not invigorated, and the people have distant thoughts. Both people and spirits have nothing to cling to. And that is why the spirits go to that domain, examine its evils, and bring disaster upon it.” The scribe Guo goes on in this account to give specific historical examples from the Three Dynasties of the appearance of spirits and also identifies the particular spirit that has appeared in Guo: Dan Zhu 丹朱, the unworthy son of the legendary Emperor Yao.

222

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the thirty-second year, in spring, we fortified Xiaogu: this was for Guan Zhong.218

32.1(1)

Qi reacts to Chu’s attack upon Zheng (Zhuang 28.3). Because Chu had attacked Zheng, the Prince of Qi requested a meeting with the princes. The Duke of Song requested that he first have an audience with the Prince of Qi. In summer, they met up at Liangqiu.

32.2(2)

In the following passage two scribes attach pragmatic moral and political significance to the appearance of a spirit, while the Duke of Guo is condemned for excessive credulity. This passage also predicts the destruction of the domain of Guo, which will result from the expansion of Jin power seven years hence (Xi 5.8). In autumn, in the seventh month, there was a spirit that descended at Shen.219 King Hui asked the court scribe Guo,220 “What is the reason for this?” He responded, “When a domain is about to prosper, radiant spirits descend there and inspect its virtue. When it is about to fall, spirits also descend there to observe its offenses. That is why there are cases in which a domain has received a spirit and prospered, and also cases in which it has fallen. Such things occurred during the Yu, Xia, Shang, and Zhou periods.” The king asked, “What should I do about it?” He replied, “Use the appropriate objects in making offerings to the spirit. These ought to be the objects corresponding to the day of its arrival.”221 The king followed this. The court scribe Guo traveled to Shen and heard that the Duke of Guo had asked for the spirit’s commands. He returned to the king and said, “Guo is certain to perish. Their ruler is cruel and heeds spirits.” The spirit dwelled in Shen for six months. The Duke of Guo had the invocator Ying, the ancestral attendant Qu, and the scribe Yin make offerings to it. The spirit granted lands to the domain of Guo. The scribe Yin said, “Surely Guo will perish! I have heard that when a domain is about to prosper, it heeds the people, but when it is about to perish, it heeds the spirits. Spirits are keen of ear and eye, upright, straightforward, and constant: they act according to the conduct of the supplicant. The domain of Guo in many cases has shown little enough virtue. What lands will it be able to obtain?”222

32.3

Lord Zhuang

223

32.4(3) 初，公築臺，臨黨氏，見孟任，從之。閟。而以夫人言，許之，割臂盟公。

生子般焉。 雩，講于梁氏，女公子觀之。圉人犖自牆外與之戲。子般怒，使鞭 之。公曰：「不如殺之，是不可鞭。犖有力焉，能投蓋于稷門。」 公疾，問後於叔牙。對曰：「慶父材。」問於季友。對曰：「臣以死 奉般。」公曰：「鄉者牙曰『慶父材』。」 成季使以君命命僖叔，侍于鍼巫氏，使鍼季酖之，曰：「飲此，則 有後於魯國；不然，死且無後。」飲之，歸，及逵泉而卒。立叔孫氏。 32.5(4) 八月癸亥，公薨于路寢。子般即位，次于黨氏。冬，十月己未，共仲使圉

人犖賊子般于黨氏。成季奔陳。立閔公。

223 A part of the covenant ritual of ancient China was smearing the lips with the blood of the sacrificial animal. Presumably, Meng Ren is manifesting her sincerity by smearing her lips with her own blood before swearing a covenant with Lord Zhuang. She is testing Lord Zhuang’s sincerity before giving herself to him. 224 Ziban, son of the Lu Lord, would be a brother or half brother of this lord’s daughter. 225 The precise meaning of this feat of strength is unclear. Gai 蓋 literally means “cover.” Some believe it refers to the covering of a chariot, while others believe that it is a section of the gate itself. We have followed Jiao Xun, who reads gai 蓋 as he 闔, “the leaf of a door” (Karlgren, gl. 73). 226 The conflict here seems to be different conceptions of the succession. Gongzi Qingfu is a younger brother of Lord Zhuang, and Ziban, of course, is his son. In the Gongyang version, Zhuang 32 (9.111), Gongzi Ya claims that succession in Lu should be “once by birth and once by coming to the position” 一生一及, a statement that is repeated in Shiji 33.1532 as “once by succession and once by coming to the position.” What this seems to mean is that there should be an alternation in the manner of succession. Thus, Lord Yin succeeded to his position by reason of being a son of the previous ruler, whereas Lord Huan came to the position by reason of being Lord Yin’s brother. Since Lord Zhuang was the son of Lord Huan, the next lord should be a brother of Lord Zhuang. However, Qian Hang (Zhoudai zongfa, 130–44) suggests that the evidence in Zuozhuan does not support this theory of “once by succession and once by coming to the position.” 227 At this point, Zuozhuan does not inform us of just who Lord Min was. However, in the second year of Lord Min below we are told that “Lord Min was the son of Shu Jiang, the younger sister of Ai Jiang” (Min 2.3). The same passage goes on to say that “Gongzi Qingfuc had sexual relations with Ai Jiang.” Shiji 33.1533, in a more detailed account of the tangle surrounding the succession of Lord Min, puts the relationship between Qingfu and Ai Jiang at the center of things. It says that Ai Jiang had no children: “At an earlier time, Qingfu had a secret sexual relationship with Ai Jiang, and he desired to establish Ai Jiang’s younger sister’s son Kai. When Lord Zhuang died, Gongzi You installed Ziban. In the tenth month, on the jiwei day, Qingfu had the stable master Luo kill Ziban in the Zhang family residence. Gongzi You fled to Chen, and Qingfu finally installed Lord Zhuang’s son Kai. The latter became Lord Min.” Gongyang also has a detailed version of several of the events surrounding the death of Lord Zhuang and the problem of the succession (Zhuang 32, 9.111–13). It is not clear whether Ziban or Kai, the later Lord Min, is the more legitimate heir, because neither is the child of the principal wife Ai Jiang.

224

Zuo Tradition

This passage reworks familiar themes of sexual impropriety, unruly servants, and troubled succession as Lord Zhuang sires an ill-fated son, Ziban, who will be murdered immediately after his father’s death. Gongzi You, Qingfu, and Gongzi Ya are all brothers of Lord Zhuang and sons of Lord Huan. They become the heads, respectively, of the powerful Ji (Jisun), Meng (Zhongsun), and Shusun lineages that will dominate the latter parts of Zuozhuan. Earlier, our lord had built a tower overlooking the residence of the Zhang line. He caught sight of Meng Ren and pursued her. But she shut herself inside. When he spoke of making her his wife, she agreed, cutting her arm and swearing a covenant with our lord.223 Ziban was born to them. On the occasion of a rain sacrifice, our lord was rehearsing the appropriate ritual at the residence of the Liang lineage. One of our lord’s daughters was watching him. Luo, the stable master, was on the other side of the wall and flirted with her. Ziban was angry and sent someone to whip him.224 Our lord said, “It would be better to kill him. He is not someone you can whip. Luo has great strength: he can tear down a leaf of the imposing Ji Gate.”225 Our lord fell ill and asked Gongzi Yaa about the succession. The latter replied, “Qingfu is talented.” He asked Gongzi Youe, who replied, “I will serve Ziban to my death.” Our lord said, “Some time ago, Gongzi Yac said, ‘Qingfu is talented.’”226 Gongzi Youb sent someone to command Gongzi Yab in the name of our lord to wait at the home of Qian Wu’s lineage. He then had Qian Wua offer poisoned wine to Gongzi Ya, saying, “Drink this and you will have posterity in the domain of Lu. If you do not do this, you will die and have no posterity.” He drank it and returned homeward. When he reached Kuiquan, he died. They established the Shusun hereditary lineage. On the eighth month, on the guihai day (5), our lord expired in the Grand Chamber. Ziban acceded to his position and temporarily dwelled in the residence of the Zhang lineage. In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiwei day (2), Gongzi Qingfuc sent Luo, the stable master, to murder Ziban in the residence of the Zhang lineage. Gongzi Youb fled to Chen. They established Lord Min as ruler.227

Lord Zhuang

32.4(3)

32.5(4)

225

閔公

Lord Min (661–660 bce) The tragic reign of Lord Min is the shortest of the twelve Lu Lords in the Annals. On his deathbed, Lord Zhuang had asked two of his brothers about the succession (Zhuang 32.4). Gongzi Ya had recommended the appointment of Gongzi Qingfu, his own full brother and Lord Zhuang’s half brother. This would have led to a succession from brother to brother as had occurred when Lord Huan had succeeded Lord Yin. Gongzi You, yet another brother of Lord Zhuang, recommended as heir apparent Lord Zhuang’s son Ziban. In the wake of these recommendations, Gongzi You poisoned Gongzi Ya, and Gongzi Qingfu had Ziban murdered. Gongzi You then fled the domain with another of Lord Zhuang’s sons, who was eventually brought back to Lu with Qi’s support and installed as Lord Min. Qingfu made short work of the hapless Lord Min but was then forced to flee the domain of Lu himself. With Qingfu now out of the picture, Gongzi Shen, another son of Lord Zhuang, was made ruler and ruled for thirty-three years as Lord Xi. We have summarized these events, all narrated in the last year of Lord Zhuang above and the two years of Lord Min below, because this period of chaos in Lu begins a slow decline in Lu’s power. Moreover, the “three lineages” that were to play such a critical role in the domain of Lu in subsequent years derive from three players in the events described here: the Zhongsun lineage derives from Gongzi Qingfu, the Shusun lineage from Gongzi Ya, and the Jisun lineage from Gongzi You. The domain of Qi begins to play a more significant role in these pages. Lord Huan of Qi is described here as “an overlord,” a formal acknowledgment of his status, and establishes closer relationships with the domain of Lu because it preserves “the Zhou ritual” (1.5). In addition, events in the emerging domain of Jin come to the forefront. The sad story of Shensheng, the Jin heir apparent, continues (1.6, 2.5, 2.7). The prognostications of his eventual downfall are piled one atop the other, laying the

227

春秋 1.1(1) 元年，春，王正月。 1.2(2) 齊人救邢。 1.3(3) 夏，六月辛酉，葬我君莊公。 1.4(4) 秋，八月，公及齊侯盟于落姑。季子來歸。 1.5(5) 冬，齊仲孫來。

左傳 1.1(1) 元年，春，不書即位，亂故也。 1.2(2) 狄人伐邢。管敬仲言於齊侯曰：「戎狄豺狼，不可厭也；諸夏親暱，不

可棄也。宴安酖毒，不可懷也。《詩》云： 豈不懷歸， 畏此簡書。

1 Luogu 落姑 was located in the domain of Qi in present-day Pingyin County 平陰 縣, Shandong. 2 Jian shu 簡書, “the writings on bamboo,” were official documents used for such purposes as issuing commands, laws, or covenants, calls to military duty, etc. Whether Guan Zhong actually had a specific bamboo document in hand or simply used this term to indicate seriousness of purpose is unknown. The quotation can be found in Maoshi 168, “Chu che” 出車, 9D.339. In the ode, “affairs of the king” (wangshi) override the speaker’s longing for home. Here Guan Zhong is using the quotation to urge exertion and rejection of the lure of “ease and repose.”

228

Zuo Tradition

groundwork for events that will occur in the Lord Xi years and will culminate with the rise of the second overlord, Lord Wen (Chong’er). Although the Lord Min section of Zuozhuan is only two years in length, it reflects a transition from the predominantly brief narratives that characterize the previous three lords to the much longer narratives that are more common in subsequent sections of the text. Among several interesting narratives in these few pages, the story of Lord Xian’s “gifts” to his son, Shensheng, before the latter departs for battle is particularly noteworthy (2.7). Shensheng’s advisers engage in a fascinating debate as to the proper interpretation of these mysterious gifts.

LORD MIN 1 (661 BCE) ANNALS

The first year, spring, the royal first month.

1.1(1)

A Qi leader went to the aid of Xing.

1.2(2)

In summer, in the sixth month, on the xinyou day (7), we buried our ruler Lord Zhuang.

1.3(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, our lord swore a covenant with the Prince of Qi at Luogu.1 Jizi (Gongzi You) came home.

1.4(4)

In winter, Zhongsun (Zhongsun Jiao) of Qi came.

1.5(5)

ZUO

In the first year, in spring, that the text does not record that he acceded to his position is because of the unrest.

1.1(1)

We have seen the Rong described pejoratively earlier (Yin 9.6). Here again, following an attack on one of the central domains, the Di are put alongside the Rong and described as “ jackals and wolves.” The Qi ruler’s defense of Xing and (later) Wei is cited as one of his major achievements as overlord. The men of Di attacked Xing. Guan Zhongb spoke to the Prince of Qi: “The Rong and the Di are jackals and wolves and cannot be satisfied. The central domains are close intimates and cannot be abandoned. Ease and repose are poisons and cannot be embraced. As it says in the Odes,

1.2(2)

How could we not long to go home? But we fear the writings on bamboo.2

Lord Min

229

簡書，同惡相恤之謂也。請救邢以從簡書。」齊人救邢。 1.3(3) 夏，六月，葬莊公。亂故，是以緩。 1.4(4) 秋，八月，公及齊侯盟于落姑，請復季友也。齊侯許之，使召諸陳，公次

于郎以待之。「季子來歸」，嘉之也。 1.5(5) 冬，齊仲孫湫來省難，書曰「仲孫」，亦嘉之也。仲孫歸，曰：「不去慶

父，魯難未已。」公曰：「若之何而去之？」對曰：「難不已，將自斃，君其 待之！」公曰：「魯可取乎？」對曰：「不可。猶秉周禮。周禮，所以本也。 臣聞之：『國將亡，本必先顛，而後枝葉從之。』魯不棄周禮，未可動 也。君其務寧魯難而親之。親有禮，因重固，間攜貳，覆昏亂，霸王之 器也。」

3 4

230

What this seems to mean is that an emergency such as this was brought to the attention of other domains by means of an official written notification. Such a notification imposed a responsibility on other domains to respond with appropriate assistance. Lord Zhuang had died in the eighth month of the previous year. Therefore, eleven months rather than the normal five months had passed between the time of Lord Zhuang’s death and his burial.

Zuo Tradition

The writings on bamboo are what speak of sharing in adverse circumstances and showing pity for one another. I request that we go to the aid of Xing in order to comply with these writings.”3 A Qi leader went to the aid of Xing. In summer, in the sixth month, we buried Lord Zhuang. It was by reason of the unrest that this was delayed.4

1.3(3)

Gongzi You had been a supporter of the succession of Ziban and fled from Lu to Chen when Gongzi Qingfu murdered Ziban (Zhuang 32.4, 32.5). In autumn, in the eighth month, our lord swore a covenant with the Prince of Qi at Luogu and requested that Gongzi Youe be returned. The Prince of Qi agreed to this and sent someone to summon him in Chen. Our lord set up camp at Lang to await him. The phrase “Jizi (Gongzi You) came home” expresses approval of this.5

1.4(4)

A Qi leader here identifies Gongzi Qingfu, murderer of Lord Zhuang’s son Ziban, as the source of Lu’s troubles. But he goes on to link Lu’s continued survival to the fact that it “upholds Zhou ritual.” The association of Lu and Zhou remains strong throughout the period covered by Zuozhuan. In Zhao 2.1, for example, the Jin minister Han Qi, on the basis of textual traditions in Lu, asserts, “The rituals of Zhou are all here in Lu.” In winter, Zhongsun Jiao of Qi came to look into the difficulties in Lu. That the text says only “Zhongsun” is likewise to express approval of him.6 When Zhongsun Jiaoa went back home, he said, “If they do not get rid of Gongzi Qingfub, the troubles of Lu will not end.” The lord of Qi said, “What can we do to get rid of him?” Zhongsun Jiao replied, “Since the troubles will not end, he will bring himself down. You, my lord, should wait for it!” The lord said, “Can Lu be taken?” He replied, “It cannot. It still upholds Zhou ritual. Zhou ritual constitutes its trunk. I have heard it said, ‘When a domain is about to perish, the trunk must fall first. Only then will the branches and leaves follow.’ If Lu does not abandon Zhou ritual, it cannot be shaken. You, my lord, should strive to settle the troubles of Lu and draw close to them. Draw close to those who have ritual, rely upon the solid and stable, stay away from the disaffected and duplicitous, and overturn the benighted and disorderly. These are the instruments of the overlord.”

5

6

1.5(5)

Gongyang, Min 1 (9.114), is more explicit, claiming that the very use of the name Jizi 季子 (Gongzi You), which includes the sequence indicator for the youngest son and the male honorific, is a sign of respect: “Why does it call him ‘Jizi’? It is because he was a worthy man. Why does it say, ‘He came back to Lu?’ It is because it rejoices in this.” That is, it does not give his personal name, which is Jiao.

Lord Min

231

1.6 晉侯作二軍，公將上軍，大子申生將下軍。趙夙御戎，畢萬為右，以滅

耿、滅霍、滅魏。還，為大子城曲沃，賜趙夙耿，賜畢萬魏，以為大夫。 士蒍曰：「大子不得立矣。分之都城，而位以卿，先為之極，又焉得 立？不如逃之，無使罪至。為吳大伯，不亦可乎？猶有令名，與其及也。 且諺曰：『心苟無瑕，何恤乎無家？』天若祚大子，其無晉乎！」 卜偃曰：「畢萬之後必大。萬，盈數也；魏，大名也。以是始賞，天 啟之矣。天子曰兆民，諸侯曰萬民。今名之大，以從盈數，其必有眾。」 初，畢萬筮仕於晉，遇屯䷂之比䷇。辛廖占之，曰：「吉。屯固、比入，吉 孰大焉？其必蕃昌。震為土，車從馬，足居之，兄長之，母覆之，眾歸之，六 體不易，合而能固，安而能殺，公侯之卦也。公侯之子孫，必復其始。」 7

8

9

10 11

12 13 14

15

232

The leaders of all three of these domains possessed the clan name Ji 姬. Several bronze vessels have been found from the domain of Huo 霍, which was located just northwest of Jin, near present-day Huo County 霍縣, Shanxi. Geng 耿 was located near present-day Hejin 河津 on the bank of the Yellow River in Shanxi. Weì 魏 was located near present-day Ruicheng 芮城. Wu Taibo 吳太伯 was the son of the Grand King of Zhou 周大王 and was also the elder brother of Wang Ji 王季. Wang Ji was worthy and was also the father of the sagacious Chang 昌, who would become King Wen 文王 of the Zhou dynasty. The Grand King wanted Wang Ji and Chang to be his successors, so Taibo, along with another brother, Zhongyong 仲雍, left the domain and went to live among the southern barbarians. He was honored there and was eventually given a fief of over one thousand households (Shiji 31.1445–46). Shi Wei is thus saying that such a life of exile might also be best for Shensheng. Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.271–74, contains a much longer speech in which Shi Wei explains to the Prince of Jin why it is inappropriate for Shensheng to lead the “second army.” The Prince of Jin responds there to Shi Wei’s speech by saying, “He is my son and I am able to control him. There is no reason to worry about a son!” This response prompts Shi Wei to announce, “The heir apparent will not be established as ruler!” Weì is, of course, the name of the fief that Bi Wan had been granted after Jin defeated it. We use the tone mark for Wei the region or domain (to distinguish it from Wei 衛) but not for the lineage. Some interpreters believe that this is not literally a name for the Son of Heaven but simply an abbreviation for something like “Of the Son of Heaven, we say, ‘[He possesses] the multitudinous people.’” But Yang (1:259) notes that in bronze inscriptions the Son of Heaven is sometimes addressed as “You, the multitudinous people.” Diviner Yan became an important personality in Warring States discourse; fragments of a text attributed to him, “Guo Yan lun shi” 郭偃論士, were discovered at Yinqueshan 銀雀山, Shandong, in 1972, and he is also cited in Shangjun shu 1.3. “Birth Throes” (Zhun 屯) is hexagram 3; “Closeness” (Bi 比) is hexagram 8. The transformation of the “Birth Throes” hexagram into the “Closeness” hexagram results from a change in the bottom line that transforms the lower three lines of the hexagram from the “Quake” (Zhen 震) trigram, which represents a chariot, to the “Pure Yin” (Kun 坤) trigram, which symbolizes the earth and also represents a horse. Bi Wan’s ancestor was Gao, the Lord of Bi 畢公高 and a son of King Wen. Eventually, the name of the family’s fief, Bi, became their clan name and they fell in status and became commoners. The prediction here is that Bi Wan’s descendants will return to the status once enjoyed by their ancestors. The words of the official diviner are fulfilled in 403 Bce when the domain of Jin splits into three smaller domains: Han 韓, Zhao 趙, and Weì 魏, the last being ruled by the descendants of Bi Wan.

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xian of Jin (r. 676–651) had a rather complex family life (Zhuang 28.2), which was to complicate his succession. Shensheng was the son of Lord Xian by Qi Jiang, one of his father’s concubines. In this passage, soon after the wise minister Shi Wei expresses doubts that Shensheng will be Lord Xian’s successor, attention turns to Bi Wan and a prediction of the future greatness of his posterity, which is the Wei lineage. This is one of the lineages that will partition Jin in the fifth century Bce. Indeed, the prediction below is sometimes taken as proof of a pro-Weì bias in certain parts of Zuozhuan. The Prince of Jin raised two armies. The prince commanded the upper army, and the heir apparent, Shensheng, commanded the lower army. Zhao Su drove the war chariot and Bi Wan was spearman on the right. With this army they extinguished Geng, extinguished Huo, and extinguished Wei.7 As they were returning home, the prince fortified Quwo for the heir apparent, and he bestowed Geng upon Zhao Su and Weì upon Bi Wan, making them high officers. Shi Wei said, “The heir apparent will not get to be established as ruler. A walled city has been apportioned to him, and he has been given the position of minister. If, at the outset, he is raised to such a lofty position, how will he succeed in being established? Better that he should flee these things, lest incriminations come to him. Would it not be proper that he becomes a Wu Taibo?8 He would still possess an excellent name, and this would be better than being overtaken by disaster. Moreover, there is a saying: ‘If only one’s heart has no flaws, why be concerned about not having a family?’ If Heaven is to bless the heir apparent, then I suspect he will not have Jin for his own!”9 Diviner Yan said, “The posterity of Bi Wan are sure to become great. Wan, or ‘ten thousand,’ is a full number. And Wei, or ‘Lofty,’ is a great name.10 With this as its first gift, Heaven has opened the way for him. For the Son of Heaven one speaks of ‘the multitudinous people,’11 while for the princes one speaks of ‘the myriad people.’ Now, with the greatness of his name, which is a full number, Bi Wan is sure to possess a great populace.”12 Earlier, Bi Wan had divined by milfoil about becoming an official in Jin. He encountered the line whereby the hexagram “Birth Throes” ䷂ becomes the hexagram “Closeness” ䷇.13 Xin Liao interpreted this as follows: “Good fortune. ‘Birth Throes’ is to be stable, while ‘Closeness’ is to enter. Of good fortune, what could surpass this? His line is sure to flourish and prosper. The ‘Quake’ trigram becomes earth; the chariot follows after the horse;14 his feet are planted there; an elder brother raises him; a mother shelters him; and the multitudes come under his sway. If the six lines do not change, he will unite the people but be capable of firmness, and he will bring peace but be capable of killing. This is the hexagram of a prince. The descendants of the prince are sure to return to their origin.”15

1.6

Lord Min

233

春秋 2.1 二年，春，王正月，齊人遷陽。 2.2(2) 夏，五月乙酉，吉禘于莊公。 2.3(3) 秋，八月辛丑，公薨。 2.4(3) 九月，夫人姜氏孫于邾。 2.5(3) 公子慶父出奔莒。 2.6 冬，齊高子來盟。 2.7(5) 十有二月，狄入衛。 2.8(6) 鄭棄其師。

左傳 2.1 二年，春，虢公敗犬戎于渭汭。舟之僑曰：「無德而祿，殃也。殃將至

矣。」遂奔晉。 2.2(2) 夏，吉禘于莊公，速也。

16 Yang 陽 is the name of a small domain of the Ji 姬 lineage. It was located near present-day Yishui County 沂水縣, Shandong. 17 The di sacrifice was performed when the ancestral tablet of the deceased ancestor was installed in the Ancestral Temple. This sacrifice was to be offered no fewer than twenty-five months after the death of the ancestor. Only twenty-two months had elapsed, which is why in the Zuozhuan comment of Min 2.2 it is described as “too soon.” For other instances of this sacrifice, see Xi 8.3, 33.11, Xiang 10.2, 16.5, Zhao

234

Zuo Tradition

LORD MIN 2 (660 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal first month, Qi leaders relocated Yang.16 In summer, in the fifth month, on the yiyou day (6), the providential di sacrifice was offered to Lord Zhuang.17 In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinchou day (24), our lord expired.

2.1

2.2(2)

2.3(3)

In the ninth month, Lord Min’s wife, Lady Jiang, retired to Zhu.

2.4(3)

Gongzi Qingfu departed and fled to Ju.

2.5(3)

In winter, Gaozi of Qi came and swore a covenant.

2.6

In the twelfth month, the Di entered Wei.

2.7(5)

Zheng abandoned its troops.

2.8(6)

ZUO

This continues the account of Zhuang 32.3. The promised blessing is apparently fulfilled, but the wise minister Zhou Zhiqiao reads it as a portent of disaster. In the second year, in spring, the Duke of Guo defeated the Quanrong18 at the bend of the Wei River (where the Wei River joins the Yellow River). Zhou Zhiqiao said, “To be without virtue yet to profit is a calamity. A calamity is sure to come.” And he fled to Jin. In summer, the providential di sacrifice was offered to Lord Zhuang: this was too soon.



18

2.1

2.2(2)

15.1, 25.5, Ding 8.9, and Ai 11.5. This sacrifice is called xia 祫 on one occasion in both Gongyang, Wen 2 (13.6a), and Guliang, Wen 2 (10.4b). For a discussion of these different names and the significance of the sacrifice, see Gu Donggao, Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1471–73. The Quanrong 犬戎 (also called Darong 大戎) are a non-Sinitic group often associated with the later Hu 胡 and Xiongnu 匈奴.

Lord Min

235



2.3(3, 4, 5)

初，公傅奪卜齮田，公不禁。秋，八月辛丑，共仲使卜齮賊公于武闈。成 季以僖公適邾。共仲奔莒，乃入，立之。以賂求共仲于莒，莒人歸之。及 密，使公子魚請。不許，哭而往。共仲曰：「奚斯之聲也。」乃縊。 閔公，哀姜之娣叔姜之子也，故齊人立之。共仲通於哀姜，哀姜欲 立之。閔公之死也，哀姜與知之，故孫于邾。齊人取而殺之于夷，以其尸 歸，僖公請而葬之。

2.4 成季之將生也，桓公使卜楚丘之父卜之，曰：「男也，其名曰友，在公之

右；間于兩社，為公室輔。季氏亡，則魯不昌。」又筮之，遇大有 ䷍之乾 ䷀.，曰：「同復于父，敬如君所。」及生，有文在其手曰「友」，遂以命之。

19

Yang 1.262 believes that Bu 卜 (“Diviner”) is here a lineage name and that Bu Yi (our “Diviner Yi”) was a Lu official. 20 Mi 密 was located in Lu north of present-day Fei County 費縣, Shandong. 21 Gongzi Yu, also known as Xisi 奚斯, appears in Maoshi 300, “Bi gong” 閟宮, 20B.776–81, an ode that “very much exaggerates the military and political importance of Lu” (Waley, Book of Songs, 317). The ode claims that Gongzi Yu made “the new Ancestral Temple” (xin miao 新廟). 22 This is wordplay. The word for “right,” you 右, was pronounced the same as the child’s name You 友, which means “companion” or “friend.” 23 There were two important altars in Lu, the Zhou Altar 周社 and the Bo Altar 亳社. Du Yu (ZZ 11.190) says: “Between the two altars is the court where the administration of government takes place.” 24 There are two interpretations of this statement. The first is that this prediction is speaking only of Gongzi You himself. The second and more plausible is that it refers to the descendants of Gongzi You. 25 “Great Holdings” (Dayou 大有) is hexagram 14; “Pure Yang” (Qian 乾) is hexagram 1. “Great Holdings” is made up of the trigram “Cohesion” (Li 離) above and the trigram “Pure Yang” (Qian 乾) below. “Cohesion” symbolizes the son, and “Pure Yang” symbolizes the father. Thus, when the upper trigram changes and becomes the “Pure Yang” trigram itself, it indicates that the son will assume the honor of the father.

236

Zuo Tradition

A wise minister from the domain of Qi has already identified Gongzi Qing­fu as the source of Lu’s troubles (Min 1.5). Here Qingfu instigates Lord Min’s murder, only to see his old rival Gongzi You (Zhuang 32.4, 32.5), with the support of Qi, gain the upper hand and install a new ruler, Lord Xi. Zuozhuan then reveals the tangled relationships between Ai Jiang, her sister Shu Jiang, Qingfu, and Lord Min. Ai Jiang’s troublesome nature has been signaled earlier (see Zhuang 24.2). Earlier, our lord’s tutor had appropriated Diviner Yi’s fields,19 and our lord had done nothing to stop him. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinchou day (24), Gongzi Qingfuc had Diviner Yi murder our lord at the palace gate. Gongzi Youb took the future Lord Xi and went to Zhu. But after Gongzi Qingfuc fled to Ju, they reentered the domain and established Lord Xi as ruler. With gifts they searched for Qingfuc in Ju, and the Ju leaders returned him. When he reached Mi,20 he sent Gongzi Yu to beg for forgiveness. When forgiveness was not granted, Yu returned to him crying aloud. Gongzi Qingfuc said, “That is the voice of Gongzi Yua,” then he hanged himself.21 Lord Min was the son of Ai Jiang’s younger sister, Shu Jiang. It was for this reason that the Qi leaders had established him as ruler. Qingfuc had had a liaison with Ai Jiang, and Ai Jiang had wanted to establish him as lord. Ai Jiang was complicit in the murder of Lord Min, and that is why she retired to Zhu. But the leaders of Qi captured her and put her to death at Yi, bringing her corpse back with them to Qi. Lord Xi requested her corpse and buried her.

2.3(3, 4, 5)

In a flashback narrative, we are given several signals of Gongzi You’s future significance and of the continuing prominence of his line in the domain of Lu. This is one of several passages in Zuozhuan where predictions are based on the lines of a newborn’s palm (the initial entry of Lord Yin, Zhao 1.12). The milfoil divination will be brought up again almost 150 years later when Ji Pingzi, a descendant of Gongzi You, drives Lord Zhao of Lu into exile (Zhao 25.2). When Gongzi Youb was about to be born, Lord Huan had the father of Diviner Chuqiu divine about him by turtle shell. The diviner said, “It will be a boy. His name will be ‘You,’ and he will stand to the right of the lord.22 He will dwell between the two domain altars and will be a support to the lord’s household.23 If the Ji line perishes, then Lu will not flourish.”24 He also divined about him by milfoil and obtained the line whereby the hexagram “Great Holdings” ䷍ becomes the hexagram “Pure Yang” ䷀. He said, “He will repeat the same honor as his father and will be revered as he is in the place of the ruler.”25 When he was born, there was a design resembling the written character “You” on the palm of his hand. So they took it as his name.

2.4

Lord Min

237

2.5a(7) 冬，十二月，狄人伐衛。衛懿公好鶴，鶴有乘軒者。將戰，國人受甲者皆

曰：「使鶴！鶴實有祿位，余焉能戰？」 公與石祁子玦，與甯莊子矢，使守，曰：「以此贊國，擇利而為 之。 」與夫人繡衣，曰：「聽於二子！」 渠孔御戎，子伯為右；黃夷前驅，孔嬰齊殿。及狄人戰于熒澤，衛 師敗績，遂滅衛。衛侯不去其旗，是以甚敗。狄人囚史華龍滑與禮孔， 以逐衛人。二人曰：「我，大史也，實掌其祭。不先，國不可得也。」乃 先之。至，則告守曰：「不可待也。」夜與國人出。狄入衛，遂從之，又敗 諸河。

238

Zuo Tradition

The Di people attack and virtually destroy Wei, which suffers for the incompetence and strange obsession of its ruler Lord Yi. But on the rapid resurgence of the domain of Wei, see Min 2.9 and 2.10. In winter, in the twelfth month, the men of Di attacked Wei. Lord Yi of Wei was fond of cranes, and there were cranes that rode in the dignitary’s carriage. When they were about to do battle, those from among the inhabitants of the capital who had been issued armor said, “Send the cranes! If it is the cranes who hold salary and rank, then how can the likes of us go to fight?”26 Lord Yi gave Shi Qizi a jade thumb-ring and gave Ning Zhuangzi an arrow and appointed them to defend the domain, saying, “With these uphold the domain. Choose what is beneficial to the domain and do it.” He gave his wife an embroidered robe, saying, “Pay heed to these two men.” Qu Kong drove the lord’s war chariot and Zibo was spearman on the right, Huang Yi drove on ahead, and Kong Yingqi protected the rear. They fought with the Di at Xing Marsh, and the Wei troops were completely defeated. Wei was then annihilated.27 The Prince of Wei would not remove his flag, and that is why they were badly defeated.28 The Di men took the scribes Hua Longhua and Li Kong as prisoners, bringing them along as they pursued the men of Wei. The two scribes said, “We are grand scribes, and we are the ones who manage the domain sacrifices. If we do not go on ahead, the capital cannot be taken.”29 So the Di sent them on ahead. When the scribes arrived, they told the defenders,30 “The Di cannot be resisted.” In the night they departed with the inhabitants of the capital. The Di entered Wei and then pursued them, defeating them once more at the Yellow River.

2.5a(7)

26 Wang Zhong 汪中, a Qing scholar, notes that giving the cranes a place inside the dignitary’s carriage was equivalent to granting them the rank and salary of the supervisor of the military (see Yang, 1:265). Lord Yi’s fondness for cranes is referred to frequently in Warring States and Han texts. For example, Lü shi chunqiu (11.588) says, “The Di attacked Wei. The people of Wei said, ‘Those to whom the ruler grants rank and emoluments are the cranes. Those to whom he grants honor and wealth are the eunuchs. Let the ruler order the eunuchs and cranes to fight. Why would we want to fight?’ Consequently, they dispersed and went away.” 27 As we shall see, this war was not, however, the end of the domain of Wei. The domain of Qi will soon preserve a remnant of Wei in the city of Cao 曹. 28 This example is brought up again in Cheng 16.5. 29 Obviously, the domain sacrifices are considered to be extremely important. The scribes seem to be implying, perhaps as a trick, that unless they are present in Wei to offer the appropriate sacrifices beforehand, the gods will not allow the domain to be taken. Takezoe (4.17) says that the Di fell for this because they were “afraid of spirits.” 30 “The defenders” in this case are presumably Shi Qizi and Ning Zhuangzi, who had been charged earlier “to defend the domain.”

Lord Min

239

2.5b 初，惠公之即位也少，齊人使昭伯烝於宣姜，不可，強之。生齊子、戴公、

文公、宋桓夫人、許穆夫人。文公為衛之多患也，先適齊。及敗，宋桓公逆 諸河，宵濟。衛之遺民男女七百有三十人，益之以共、滕之民為五千人。 立戴公以廬于曹。許穆夫人賦〈載馳〉。齊侯使公子無虧帥車三 百乘、甲士三千人以戍曹。歸公乘馬，祭服五稱，牛、羊、豕、雞、狗皆三 百與門材。歸夫人魚軒，重錦三十兩。 2.6 鄭人惡高克，使帥師次于河上，久而弗召，師潰而歸，高克奔陳。鄭人

為之賦〈清人〉。

31

Qizi is so named because she marries the Lord Huan of Qi 齊桓公 and is almost surely the Wei Ji the Elder 長衛姬 referred to in Xi 17.5. Lord Dai is instated and dies in the same year, 660, at which time Lord Wen becomes ruler of Wei (r. 659–635). The next two daughters of the union of Zhaobo and Xuan Jiang become wives, respectively, of Lord Huan of Song (r. 681–651) and Lord Mu of Xǔ (r. 697–656). 32 Gong 共 (Yin 1.4) and Teng 滕 are two Wei settlements, the latter of unknown location. At the time of Wei’s crushing defeat, their inhabitants presumably joined the refugees who had originally fled the capital. 33 Maoshi 54, “Zai chi” 載馳, 3B.124–25, is introduced by the Mao commentators as follows: “This ode was created by Lady Mu of Xǔ. She mourned that her ancestral domain had been overturned, and she felt distress that they had not been able to rescue it. Lord Yi of Wei had been destroyed by the Di men, and the men of the domain of Wei had been dispersed. . . . She thought of returning home to condole with her older brother, but duty would not allow this, and that is why she composed this ode.” The ode expresses frustration at the inability to help “great gentlemen” who are in difficulty. Galloping horses take the implied speaker (traditionally accepted as Lady Mu) in her carriage to offer condolence to the new Wei ruler (her brother). She wants to “seek redress at a great domain”—i.e., urge Qi to intervene on Wei’s behalf. Here fu is taken to mean “compose” rather than the usual “recite.” 34 Or, as some suggest, “sealskin” (the Chinese has simply “fish chariot”). 35 It is unclear whether Gao Ke is related to Gao Qumi, also a Zheng minister, mentioned in Huan 17.6. 36 Of Maoshi 79, “Qing ren” 清人, 4B.164, the Mao preface says, “‘Qing ren’ is criticizing Lord Wen. Gao Ke was fond of profit and did not look after his ruler. Lord Wen hated him and wanted to keep him at a distance but was unable. So he had Gao Ke lead soldiers and guard against the Di at the border. Gao arrayed his army and roamed the banks of the Yellow River. But a long time passed, and he was not recalled, so his men dispersed and returned home. Gao Ke fled to Chen. The noble son had previously hated Gao Ke and did not advance him, and Lord Wen did not demote him in the proper way. This is the root of endangering the domain and losing the army, and that is why this ode was created.” The ode in question is, however, quite ambiguous, and Waley (Book of Songs, 67) is probably correct to conclude that it cannot be safely connected “with any definite historical incident.”

240

Zuo Tradition

The following flashback narrative fills in details on the rather-tangled relationships in Wei. Xuan Jiang had been the wife of the former Wei ruler Lord Xuan (r. 719–700). She was the daughter of Lord Xi of Qi (r. 732–698) and had originally come to Wei to be the wife of the crown prince Jizi, but Lord Xuan found her beautiful and took her for himself (see Huan 16.5). Zhaobo is the younger brother of Jizi and therefore consorts here with a woman who had originally been intended for his older brother but was appropriated by his father. Zhaobo is also a half brother of Lord Hui, the miscreant Gongzi Shuo who conspired in the death of Jizi (Huan 16.5). The union of Zhaobo and Xuan Jiang, which the domain of Qi forces, perhaps as a means of increasing its influence in Wei, is a fruitful one, producing two subsequent lords of Wei and three daughters who were to marry powerful husbands. Earlier, Lord Hui had still been young at the time of his accession. The Qi leaders had urged Zhaobo to consort with Xuan Jiang, Lord Hui’s mother. He refused, but they forced him. She gave birth to Qizi, Lord Dai, Lord Wen, the wife of Lord Huan of Song, and the wife of Lord Mu of Xǔ.31 On account of Wei’s numerous troubles, Lord Wen had gone to Qi earlier. When Wei was defeated, Duke Huan of Song went to meet the Wei refugees at the Yellow River. They forded the river by night, the refugees numbering seven hundred and thirty men and women. Adding the people of Gong and Teng, they numbered five thousand.32 They established Lord Dai as ruler, and he lodged in Cao. Lady Mu of Xǔ composed the ode “I Gallop.”33 The Prince of Qi had Gongzi Wukui lead three hundred chariots and three thousand armored soldiers to garrison Cao. He presented Lord Dai with a team of horses, five outfits of sacrificial robes, and oxen, sheep, pigs, chickens, and dogs, each numbering three hundred, along with wood for building a gate. He sent to the lord’s wife a carriage decorated in sharkskin34 and heavy brocade in thirty rolls.

2.5b

Zheng was located just south of the Yellow River, with Wei to the north. The attack of the Di on Wei and the large number of refugees this action had created perhaps motivated the following defensive military maneuver in Zheng, as well as providing Zheng leaders with an excuse to get rid of an unpopular minister. The Zheng leaders hated Gao Ke. They had him lead troops and set up camp on the bank of the Yellow River. When a long time had passed and they had not summoned Gao Ke,35 the army dispersed and the soldiers returned to their homes. Gao Ke fled to Chen. The men of Zheng recited the ode “The Men of Qing” about him.36

2.6

Lord Min

241

2.7a 晉侯使大子申生伐東山皋落氏。里克諫曰：「大子奉冢祀、社稷之粢盛，

以朝夕視君膳者也，故曰冢子。君行則守，有守則從。從曰撫軍，守曰 監國，古之制也。夫帥師，專行謀，誓軍旅，君與國政之所圖也。非大子 之事也。師在制命而已，稟命則不威，專命則不孝，故君之嗣適不可以 帥師。君失其官，帥師不威，將焉用之？且臣聞皋落氏將戰。君其舍 之！ 」公曰：「寡人有子，未知其誰立焉！」不對而退。 見大子。大子曰：「吾其廢乎？」對曰：「告之以臨民，教之以軍 旅，不共是懼，何故廢乎？」子懼不孝，無懼弗得立。修己而不責人，則 免於難。」 2.7b 大子帥師，公衣之偏衣，佩之金玦。狐突御戎，先友為右。梁餘子養御

罕夷，先丹木為右。羊舌大夫為尉。

37 38 39

40 41

242

The Gaoluo were apparently a branch of the Red Di 赤狄 and were located in the area of present-day Yuanqu County 垣曲縣 just north of the Yellow River. When the troops are in the field, the general’s orders are final and take precedence even over those of the ruler of the domain (Yang, 1:268–69). It is ironic that Li Ke, who speaks with such moral authority here, is eventually embroiled in the succession crisis and comes to a violent end in the early Xi years. Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.279–81, has a variant of the discussions between Li Ke and the prince and then, subsequently, between Li Ke and the heir apparent. The emphasis in Guoyu is upon Li Ke’s skill in negotiating his own situation, caught between the prince and the heir apparent. This earns him the applause of the “noble man,” who says, “Li Ke was skilled at managing the relations between a father and a son.” The “half-body robe” (pianyi 偏衣) was of different colors on the left and right. One half of the robe was of the same color as the lord’s robe. That is, the ring was not closed but had a slight gap where the encircling metal did not meet. This object seems to have been a symbol of his military authority but not one usually granted in this situation (see below).

Zuo Tradition

In the following narrative, we return to Prince Xian of Jin and his heir, Shensheng, about whom doubts have already been expressed (Min 1.6). Questions are now raised concerning the appropriateness of the heir apparent leading an army, and ministers discuss the meaning of two objects the prince gives to his son as the latter goes off to battle. The Prince of Jin had the heir apparent, Shensheng, attack the Gaoluo of Dongshan.37 Li Ke remonstrated: “The heir apparent is the one who offers the grand ancestral sacrifices and the vessels of millet at the sacrifices to the altars of the domain, while morning and evening looking after the ruler’s food provisions. That is why he is called ‘the preeminent son.’ When the ruler travels, he defends the capital. When there is another to defend the capital, then the heir apparent accompanies the ruler. When he accompanies the ruler, it is called ‘soothing the armies.’ When he defends the capital, it is called ‘watching over the domain.’ Such are the regulations of old. As for leading troops, taking charge of strategy, or administering oaths to the army, the ruler and the ministers of the domain oversee such affairs. They are not the business of the heir apparent. The troops are in the keeping of the one who issues the orders.38 If the heir apparent requests orders from his father, then he will not be authoritative. But for him to issue orders on his own is to be unfilial. That is why the ruler’s successor may not lead troops. If the ruler loses control over his officials, and the commander of the troops has no authority, then how can one make use of them? Moreover, I have heard that the Gaoluo tribe is going to make war. You, my lord, should put your order aside.” The lord said, “I have sons but do not yet know which of them to establish as heir.” Li Ke did not reply but withdrew. When Li Ke had an audience with the heir apparent, the heir apparent asked, “Am I to be deposed?” Li Ke responded, “He has told you to supervise the people of Quwo, and he has instructed you to lead the army. Not fulfilling your duties is what you should worry about! Why would you be deposed? Moreover, a son should fear not being filial but should not fear that he will not be established as heir. If you cultivate yourself and do not blame others, you will avoid calamity.”39

2.7a

The heir apparent led the troops. The lord dressed him in the “half-body robe”40 and gave him a gapped metal ring to wear at his waist.41 Hu Tu drove the war chariot and Xian You was spearman on the right. Liang Yuzi Yang drove Han Yi, and Xian Danmu was spearman on the right. The high officer of Yangshe was commandant.42

2.7b

42 Shensheng apparently was leading the upper army (shangjun 上軍), and Han Yi, second in command to the heir apparent, was leading the lower army (xiajun 下軍). The position of “commandant” (wei 尉) was below that of the two armies’ leaders but was above all other military officers (see Yang, 1:270; and Xiang 19.1a).

Lord Min

243

先友曰：「衣身之偏，握兵之要，在此行也，子其勉之，偏躬無慝， 兵要遠災，親以無災，又何患焉？」 狐突歎曰：「時，事之徵也；衣，身之章也；佩，衷之旗也。故敬其 事，則命以始；服其身，則衣之純；用其衷，則佩之度。今命以時卒，閟其 事也；衣之尨服，遠其躬也；佩以金玦；棄其衷也。服以遠之，時以閟 之；尨涼，冬殺，金寒，玦離，胡可恃也？欲勉之，狄可盡乎？」 梁餘子養曰：「帥師者，受命於廟，受脤於社，有常服矣。不獲而 尨，命可知也。死而不孝，不如逃之。」 罕夷曰：「尨奇無常，金玦不復。雖復何為？君心矣。」 先丹木曰：「是服也，狂夫阻之。曰『盡敵而反』，敵可盡乎？雖盡 敵，猶可內讒，不如違之。」 狐突欲行。羊舌大夫曰：「不可。違命不孝，棄事不忠。雖知其寒， 惡不可取。子其死之！」

244

Zuo Tradition

Xian You said, “You are half-clothed in the lord’s robes. You hold in your hands the mastery over the soldiers. It is in this campaign, sir, that you must exert yourself! Clothing half of your body in the lord’s robes means there is no harmful intent; and mastery of the soldiers will keep you safely distant from disaster. With kindred feelings and no disaster, what more should there be to worry about?” Hu Tu sighed and said,43 “Timeliness is proof of attention to official affairs; clothes are emblems of the body’s status; and pendants worn at the waist are flags of innermost convictions. Therefore, when showing respect for official business, one should begin by issuing orders. When dressing the body, one should wear unmixed colors. When acting from innermost convictions, one’s pendants should conform to standards. But in this case, you have been issued orders at the end of the season, which is to lock you out of official business. You have been dressed in motley clothes, which is to keep you physically at a distance. And a gapped metal ring has been hung at your waist, which is a rejection of your innermost convictions. With clothing, the ruler keeps you at a distance, and with his timing, he locks you out of official business. The motley represents meagerness; the winter, killing; the metal, coldness; and the gapped ring, separation. How can you rely on these? Even if you wished to exert effort in this matter, could the Di be eradicated?” Liang Yuzi Yang said, “One who leads troops receives his orders in the Ancestral Temple and receives sacrificial meat at the altar of earth. For these things there is standard clothing. If he does not receive this but wears motley clothing, then the intent of the orders can be known. Rather than die and be considered unfilial, it would be better to flee the domain.” Han Yi said, “The motley is strange and has no tradition, and the gapped ring means you will not return.44 And even if you did return, what would you do? The ruler has something harmful in mind.” Xian Danmu said, “Even a madman would not wear this type of clothing! The lord said, ‘Eradicate the enemy and come back.’ But can the enemy be eradicated? And even if you did eradicate the enemy, you would still be slandered within the domain. It would be better to leave the domain.” Hu Tu wanted to leave the domain, but the high officer Yangshe said, “This is not permissible. To disobey orders is not filial; to abandon official business is not dutifulness. Although you know the situation is chilling, you cannot choose evil. You should die in this endeavor!”

43

It is sometimes not noted that Hu Tu is a non-Sinitic person of Rong descent. Some of his descendants, such as Hu Yan, become exceedingly important. 44 That this particular metal pendant indicates separation or severance comes from wordplay: jue 玦, the metal pendant in question, is pronounced exactly the same as the related character jue 決, “to sever, to cut off.”

Lord Min

245

2.7c 大子將戰，狐突諫曰：「不可。昔辛伯諗周桓公云：『內寵並后，外寵二

政，嬖子配嫡，大都耦國－－亂之本也。』周公弗從，故及於難。今亂本 成矣，立可必乎？孝而安民，子其圖之！與其危身以速罪也。」 2.8 成風聞成季之繇，乃事之，而屬僖公焉，故成季立之。 2.9 僖之元年，齊桓公遷邢于夷儀。二年，封衛于楚丘。邢遷如歸，衛國

忘亡。 2.10 衛文公大布之衣、大帛之冠，務材、訓農，通商、惠工，敬教、勸學，授

方、任能，元年，革車三十乘；季年，乃三百乘。

246

Zuo Tradition

As the heir apparent was about to go into battle, Hu Tu remonstrated, saying, “You should not. Formerly Xin Bo counseled the Zhou Duke Huan as follows: ‘The roots of disorder are putting bedroom favorites on par with the queen, allowing court favorites to form a shadow government, making the sons of concubines the equal of the sons of the wife, and permitting large cities to be a match for the capital.’45 But the Zhou Duke Huan did not heed him and therefore came to disaster. Now the roots of disorder are complete. Can you be certain of being established as heir? You, sir, should give thought to being filial and pacifying the people. That would be better than endangering yourself and hastening offense!”

2.7c

The following short passage appears almost as an afterthought to Min 2.3 and informs us of the role played by Cheng Feng, a concubine of Lord Zhuang and the mother of Lord Xi. Cheng Feng, hearing of the divination prognostication for Gongzi Youb, went to serve him and entrusted Lord Xi to him. That is the reason Gongzi Youb established Lord Xi as ruler.

2.8

The Qi leaders had previously rescued Xing from a Di attack (Min 1.2) and had also provided support to Wei after the Di had virtually annihilated them (Min 2.5). Acting very much as an overlord, Lord Huan of Qi now “reconstitutes” each of these domains. In the first year of Lord Xi, Lord Huan of Qi relocated the domain of Xing to Yiyi. In the second year, he granted Wei a domain at Chuqiu.46 For Xing to be relocated was like a return, and the domain of Wei forgot its loss.

2.9

The brief and formulaic summary of good government given below is similar to other examples in Xi 27.4c, Wen 6.1, Cheng 18.3, and Xiang 9.9. Lord Wen of Wei, dressed in coarse cloth and a plain silk cap, worked hard to develop resources, encouraged farmers, opened up channels for merchants, showed kindness to artisans, respected the teachings, promoted learning, distributed proper rules for governing, and employed the able. In the first year of his reign, he had thirty war chariots and, by the last year, three hundred.

2.10

45

Xin Bo’s counsel to the Zhou Duke can be found in Huan 18.4. Xin Bo’s words as presented here are more an adaptation than an exact quotation of the earlier passage. 46 Chuqiu 楚丘 was located in the domain of Wei just east of present-day Hua County 滑縣, Henan. The Di people had previously destroyed Wei, so this was a restoration. Note that this restoration actually takes place in the next year.

Lord Min

247

僖公

Lord Xi (659–627 bce) Lord Xi became the ruler of the domain of Lu after Lord Min, his predecessor and half brother, had been murdered. Despite this troubled beginning, Lord Xi ruled for thirty-three years, one year more than his father, Lord Zhuang, and he died a natural death, which three of his four immediate predecessors had not. Still, he is not a major player in the following pages. The rise of the overlordship first of Lord Huan of Qi (r. 685–643) and second of Lord Wen of Jin (r. 636–628), and the ongoing power struggles between the major domains of Qi, Jin, Chu, and Qin, all geographically on the periphery of the Hua-Xia region, now somewhat eclipse events in Lu and the smaller “central” domains of Song, Wei, and Zheng. The “thickening” of the text noted in Lord Min continues throughout the Lord Xi section. As we have noted above, Lord Xi’s reign is only one year longer than that of his father, but the events of his reign occupy more than twice as many pages in Zuozhuan. This results mostly, albeit not entirely, from the detailed coverage given to the events of a single domain: Jin. The complicated conjugal life of Lord Xian of Jin (r. 675–651) has been described earlier in the text (Zhuang 28.1). Palace intrigues and succession crises are the result. Lord Xian’s initial heir apparent, Shensheng, is falsely accused of planning to poison his father and is driven to suicide (4.6). When Lord Xian dies just four years later, two of his sons and potential heirs, Xiqi and Zhuozi, are murdered in quick succession (9.4), and another son, Yiwu, is brought back from exile and installed as ruler. Although Yiwu, known to history as Lord Hui, rules for fourteen years (r. 650–637), his reign is marked from the beginning by incompetence, ominous portents, and a general sense that he is not the proper ruler (9.6, 10.2, 10.3, etc.). Lord Hui’s sad fate culminates in the battle of the Plains of Han, sometimes called Zongqiu, where his troops are defeated, and Qin forces capture him (15.4). Taken back to Qin as a prisoner,

249

Lord Hui escapes death only through the clever intercession of a sister who happens to have been married to the Qin ruler earlier. The shadow over Lord Hui’s reign is cast in large measure by his half brother Chong’er, known later as Lord Wen of Jin, who is surely one of the most engaging characters in Zuozhuan. The tale of Chong’er’s exile among the Di people (656–644) and subsequent wanderings among the domains is highly entertaining (23.6) and is as close as we come in Zuozhuan to a story of a hero’s journey. Once Chong’er completes his travels and returns to Jin, where he is installed belatedly as ruler, he displays his “moral scrupulousness” in a series of situations (24.2, 28.3) and also repays the debts and grudges accumulated during his journey. If the low point in Lord Hui’s reign is his defeat by Qin in 645 bce, the culmination of Lord Wen’s reign is his victory over Chu at Chengpu in 635 bce. The narrative of the battle at Chengpu is typical of many of the other major battles of Zuozhuan, including the earlier battle on the Plains of Han. The focus of narrative attention is on the preparations for battle, in which everything points to the outcome, and then upon the aftermath of the battle. In fact, the later redactors of the text search for presages of an outcome they already know in ways that sometimes seem a bit farfetched: Qing Zheng’s warning to Lord Hui of Jin against going to war with nonnative horses constitutes one example (15.4); Hu Yan’s interpretation of the Lord of Jin’s “brain-sucking dream” another. Little is actually said in these “battle narratives” about the battle itself, something one scholar has called “the ellipsis of battle.”1 The Lord Xi section has many other narratives of great interest. Chu’s power continues to grow, but the King of Chu’s violation of ritual, as well as his misunderstanding of the nature of warfare (22.8), makes it clear to the princes that he will “not achieve his goal of becoming overlord” (22.9). The domain of Qin for the first time appears as a major player in the political world and is, in fact, directly responsible for the installation of both Lord Hui and his successor Lord Wen in Jin. One of the most dramatic narratives in the Lord Xi section concerns Mu Ji, the wife of the ruler of Qin, whose threat to burn herself and her children alive persuades her husband not to bring the Lord of Jin, Mu Ji’s brother, into the capital (15.4). In addition, here and there throughout these years, there are more indications of what might seem like a rationalist temperament: auspiciousness and inauspiciousness, we are told, come from human, rather than divine, agents (16.1), and burning shamans as a means to end drought is pronounced useless (21.2). Still, strange events continue to occur: the ghost of Shensheng appears to his former carriage driver, and it falls to the latter to dissuade his master from plans for revenge (10.3); and Lord Wen, the former Chong’er, continues to give 1

C. H. Wang, “Towards Defining a Chinese Heroism,” 25–35.

Lord Xi

251

春秋 1.1(1) 元年，春，王正月。 1.2(2) 齊師、宋師、曹師次于聶北，救邢。 1.3(3) 夏，六月，邢遷于夷儀。 1.4(3) 齊師、宋師、曹師城邢。 1.5 秋，七月戊辰，夫人姜氏薨于夷，齊人以歸。 1.6(4) 楚人伐鄭。 1.7(4) 八月，公會齊侯、宋公、鄭伯、曹伯、邾人于檉。 1.8(5) 九月，公敗邾師于偃。 1.9(6) 冬，十月壬午，公子友帥師敗莒師于酈，獲莒挐。 1.10(7) 十有二月丁巳，夫人氏之喪至自齊。

左傳 1.1(1) 元年，春，不稱即位，公出故也。公出復入，不書，諱之也。諱國惡，

禮也。

2 Niebei 聶北 was located in the domain of Qi near present-day Boping Township 博平鎮, Chiping County 茌平縣, Shandong. 3 See Min 2.9. 4 See Min 2.4. 5 This is the first time that the name “Chu” 楚 appears in the Annals. Previously it had been called “Jing” 荊 (see Zhuang 10.5 above and the discussion in Yang, 1:181–82).

252

Zuo Tradition

military advice even from his coffin, although the purport of his message requires a diviner’s intercession (32.3)!

LORD XI 1 (659 BCE) ANNALS

The first year, spring, the royal first month.

1.1(1)

Qi troops, Song troops, and Cao troops set up camp at Niebei and went to the aid of Xing.2

1.2(2)

In summer, in the sixth month, Xing relocated to Yiyi.3

1.3(3)

Qi troops, Song troops, and Cao troops fortified Xing.

1.4(3)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuchen day (26), Lord Zhuang’s wife, Lady Jiang, expired at Yi. A Qi leader brought her home.4

1.5

A Chu leader attacked Zheng.5

1.6(4)

In the eighth month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, and a Zhu leader at Cheng.6

1.7(4)

In the ninth month, our lord defeated Zhu troops at Yan.7

1.8(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the renwu day (12), Gongzi You led out troops and defeated Ju troops at Li. Ru of Ju was captured. In the twelfth month, on the dingsi day (18), the funeral cortege of Lord Zhuang’s wife arrived from Qi.

1.9(6)

1.10(7)

ZUO

Just after the murder of his father, Lord Zhuang, the future Lord Xi had fled from Lu to Zhu under the protection of the minister Ji You (Min 2.3). The first year, spring: the text does not say Lord Xi acceded to his position because he had left the domain. Our lord had left and then reentered. That this was not recorded was to conceal it. To conceal a domain’s wrongdoing is in accordance with ritual propriety.8

1.1(1)

6

There is some question as to whether this place was located in the domain of Song or the domain of Chen (Yang, 1:276–77). 7 Yan 偃 was located in the small domain of Zhu south of present-day Fei County 費縣, Shandong. 8 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 12.198) says that what is being concealed here is the disorder that dominated the domain, which led to the departure and eventual return of the Lu Lord: “To conceal such misfortunate affairs is the proper ritual,” Kong notes.

Lord Xi

253

1.2(2) 諸侯救邢。邢人潰，出奔師。師遂逐狄人，具邢器用而遷之，師無私焉。

1.3(3, 4)

夏，邢遷于夷儀，諸侯城之，救患也。凡侯伯，救患、分災、討罪，禮也。



1.4(6, 7)

秋，楚人伐鄭，鄭即齊故也。盟于犖，謀救鄭也。

1.5(8) 九月，公敗邾師于偃，虛丘之戍將歸者也。 1.6(9) 冬，莒人來求賂，公子友敗諸酈，獲莒子之弟挐：非卿也，嘉獲之也。公

賜季友汶陽之田及費。 1.7(10) 夫人氏之喪至自齊。君子以齊人之殺哀姜也為已甚矣，女子，從人

者也。

9 10 11 12 13

14

254

Presumably, they moved these precious objects before the people themselves were relocated (see Xi 1.3 below). That is, they took no booty for themselves, which was probably an unusual act of restraint. Du Yu (ZZ 12.198) explains that Luo is the same as the Cheng 檉 of Annals, Xi 1.7. It was located in the domain of Song northwest of Huaiyang County 淮陽縣, Henan. The implication is that the Annals would normally mention the captive’s name only if he is a minister. The precise amount of land being granted here is a problem. The passage seems to say that land was granted from north of the Wen River all the way up to Bi, which would be a considerable amount of territory. Bi 費 was located in Lu southwest of Yutai County, Shandong (see map 2). It became the power base of the Ji lineage. The Wen 汶 River was well to the northwest of Bi. The lands north of the Wen River were to become a major point of contention between the domains of Qi and Lu. This may be one of the earliest allusions to the principle of the “three followings,” according to which a woman follows her father before marriage, her husband during marriage, and her eldest son after the death of her husband. The passage may also allude to the events of Zhuang 24.2, in which Lord Zhuang, Ai Jiang’s husband, does not control the gifts his wife receives. Such an act perhaps makes him indirectly guilty for her subsequent behavior. Moreover, Yang (1:279) notes that since Ai Jiang was married in Lu, she should have been punished there and not in her natal domain of Qi.

Zuo Tradition

The small domain of Xing had been under attack by the Di. Qi’s rescue of Xing was reported two years earlier (Min 1.2), and its relocation the previous year (Min 2.9). The princes went to the aid of Xing. The men of Xing, having been routed, came out and fled toward the rescuing troops. The troops then chased the Di forces away. They collected the vessels and implements of the domain of Xing and relocated the people.9 The troops did not win any selfish advantage from this action.10

1.2(2)

In summer, Xing relocated to Yiyi and the princes fortified it: this was to rescue Xing from trouble. In all cases when the leaders of the princes rescue others from trouble, share the burden of their disasters, and chastise crime, it is in accordance with ritual propriety.

1.3(3, 4)

Here begins political strife between the upstart southern domain of Chu and the domain of Qi, which will continue throughout the first years of Lord Xi. Zheng is caught between Qi and Chu, just as it would have to contend with conflicting demands from Jin and Chu later. In autumn, a Chu leader attacked Zheng: this was because Zheng had gone over to Qi. They swore a covenant at Luo:11 this was to make plans to come to the aid of Zheng.

1.4(6, 7)

Zhu had been the destination of Lord Xi’s earlier flight, but it is unclear whether the threatening position of the Zhu troops had anything to do with that earlier event (see Min 2.3, Xi 1.1). In the ninth month, our lord defeated Zhu troops at Yan: these were troops garrisoned at Xuqiu that were about to return home.

1.5(8)

Lu leaders had previously sent gifts to secure the return of Gongzi Qingfu from Ju (Min 2.3). Either those gifts were never presented or Ju had grown greedy for more. In winter, Ju men came to seek gifts. Gongzi You defeated them at Li and captured Ru, the younger brother of the Master of Ju: Ru was not a minister, but the text is celebrating You’s capture of him.12 Our lord bestowed upon Ji You lands north of the Wen River as well as the settlement of Bi.13

1.6(9)

Ai Jiang, the former wife of Lord Zhuang and the stepmother of Lord Min and Lord Xi, had been killed in Qi in the previous year (Min 2.3). Her remains are now brought back to Lu. The funeral cortege of Lord Zhuang’s wife arrived from Qi. The noble man considered the Qi leaders’ execution of Ai Jiang extreme. Women are those who follow others.14

1.7(10)

Lord Xi

255

秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，王正月，城楚丘。 2.2 夏，五月辛巳，葬我小君哀姜。 2.3(2) 虞師、晉師滅下陽。 2.4(3) 秋，九月，齊侯、宋公、江人、黃人盟于貫。 2.5 冬，十月，不雨。 2.6(6) 楚人侵鄭。

左傳 2.1(1) 二年，春，諸侯城楚丘而封衛焉。不書所會，後也。 2.2(3) 晉荀息請以屈產之乘與垂棘之璧假道於虞以伐虢。公曰：「是吾寶也。  」

對曰：「若得道於虞，猶外府也。」公曰：「宮之奇存焉。」對曰：「宮之奇 之為人也，懦而不能強諫。且少長於君，君暱之；雖諫，將不聽。  」

256

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 2 (658 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the first royal month, we fortified Chuqiu. In summer, in the fifth month, on the xinsi day (14), we buried the wife of our former ruler, Ai Jiang.

2.1(1) 2.2

Yu troops and Jin troops extinguished Xiayang.15

2.3(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, a Jiang leader, and a Huang leader swore a covenant at Guan.16

2.4(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, it did not rain.

2.5

A Chu leader invaded Zheng.

2.6(6)

ZUO

Wei, destroyed earlier (Min 2.5), is here officially reestablished. In the second year, in spring, the princes fortified Chuqiu and put the domain of Wei in power there. That the text does not record the occasion of this meeting is because Lord Xi arrived late.

2.1(1)

This is the first of several episodes concerning Jin’s encroachments upon its smaller neighbors to the south. Here Jin takes advantage of the domain of Yu in order to attack Guo (Xi 2.4), last mentioned in connection with its ruler’s misconduct and unfounded faith in the favors of the spirits (Zhuang 32.3). Xun Xi’s prediction that the Yu minister Gong Zhiqi would not be able to dissuade his ruler from allowing Jin passage is proven correct both here and, with more disastrous results, later on (5.8). Xun Xi of Jin asked to use a team of horses raised in Qu and a jade from Chuiji to gain permission to pass through Yu in order to attack Guo.17 The lord said, “These are my treasures!” Xun Xi responded, “If we are allowed to pass through Yu, then Yu will be like an extension of our own storehouses outside the domain.” The lord said, “But Gong Zhiqi dwells there.” He responded, “As a person, Gong Zhiqi is weak and unable to remonstrate with any insistence. Moreover, he was raised since childhood alongside his ruler, and his ruler is on close terms with him. Even if he does remonstrate, he will not be heeded.”

2.2(3)

15 Xiayang 下陽 was located in the domain of Guo near present-day Xiayang 夏陽 in Pinglu County 平陸縣, Shanxi. 16 Guan 貫 was located in the domain of Song south of Cao County 曹縣, Shandong. 17 On the location of Yu, see Huan 10, n. 82. Guo 虢 was just south of Yu, so Jin would normally pass through the former on its way to attack the latter.

Lord Xi

257

乃使荀息假道於虞，曰：「冀為不道，入自顛軨，伐鄍三門。冀之既 病，則亦唯君故。今虢為不道，保於逆旅，以侵敝邑之南鄙。敢請假道， 以請罪于虢。」 虞公許之，且請先伐虢。宮之奇諫，不聽，遂起師。夏，晉里克、荀 息帥師會虞師，伐虢，滅下陽。先書虞，賄故也。 2.3(4) 秋，盟于貫，服江、黃也。 2.4 齊寺人貂始漏師于多魚。 2.5 虢公敗戎於桑田。晉卜偃曰：「虢必亡矣。亡下陽不懼，而又有功，是天

奪之鑒，而益其疾也。必易晉而不撫其民矣。不可以五稔。」 2.6(6) 冬，楚人伐鄭，鬬章囚鄭聃伯。

18 Ji 冀 is the name of a small domain that Jin eventually destroyed. Ji’s location is problematic, but it may have been near present-day Hejin County 河津縣 along the banks of the Yellow River. Ming 鄍 was probably in the domain of Yu northeast of present-day Pinglu County 平陸縣, Shanxi. 19 Xun Xi is reminding Yu that Jin had previously assisted Yu in defeating the Ji invaders. 20 See Karlgren, gl. 85. Presumably these lodges for travelers were located along the border and were being turned into potential bases for an attack upon Jin. 21 Jiang 江 was a small domain whose rulers were of the Ying clan name (the same as the larger domain of Qin) and was located southwest of present-day Xi County 息縣, Henan. On the domain of Huang, see Huan 8.2. The names of both domains are found in bronze inscriptions (see Yang, 1:283). 22 This is the first mention in Zuozhuan of this notorious figure, known in other early texts as young servant Diao 豎刁/豎貂. Takezoe (5.9–10) suggests that this somewhat

258

Zuo Tradition

So he sent Xun Xi to gain passage through Yu, saying, “The domain of Ji, acting in an unprincipled way, entered your domain from Dianling and attacked the three gates of Ming.18 That Ji is already distressed is solely because we acted on your behalf, my lord.19 Now Guo, acting in an unprincipled way, has made strongholds of the travelers’ lodges in order to invade our humble settlement’s southern marches.20 I presume to request permission to pass through your domain in order to make Guo acknowledge its crimes.” The Duke of Yu agreed and also asked permission to attack Guo first. Gong Zhiqi remonstrated, but paying no heed to this, the lord went ahead and mobilized the troops. In summer, Li Ke and Xun Xi of Jin led troops and met up with Yu troops. They attacked Guo and extinguished Xiayang. That Yu is recorded first is because of the bribes. In autumn, a covenant was sworn at Guan: this was to bring Jiang and Huang into submission.21

2.3(4)

Diao, the eunuch of Qi, first disclosed the planned military action at Duoyu.22

2.4

Guo continues to receive signs of the spirits’ favor (Zhuang 32.3) despite the loss of Xiayang (Xi 2.2). Predictions are made in Jin, no doubt very pleasing to the Jin ruler, that Guo will not last long (see Xi 5.8 for the fulfillment). The Lord of Guo defeated the Rong at Sangtian.23 Diviner Yan of Jin said, “Guo will surely perish. The loss of Xiayang did not badly frighten them, and they went on to further exploits. That means Heaven has snatched its mirror from them and increases their affliction.24 They are certain to underestimate Jin and fail to succor their own people. They will not last through five harvests of grain!”

2.5

Chu continues its assault on Zheng (Xi 1.4, 3.4). In winter, a Chu leader attacked Zheng. Dou Zhang took Nan Bo of Zheng prisoner.

2.6(6)



enigmatic statement should be joined with the previous entry. Thus, the eunuch Diao disclosed a military operation that was part of the covenant sworn at Guan. Duoyu 多魚 was located in the domain of Qu in present-day Yucheng County 虞城縣, Henan. 23 Sangtian 桑田 was located in the domain of Jin in present-day Lingbao County 靈 寶縣, Henan. 24 The mirror of history enables one to gain an understanding of present events by looking into the past. A pasage in Maoshi 255, “Dang” 蕩, 18A.644, is perhaps the source of this idea: “The mirror for Yin is not distant / It is in the era of the Xia Lords.” For another example of history as a mirror, see Xiang 4.7.

Lord Xi

259

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，王正月，不雨。 3.2(1) 夏，四月，不雨。 3.3 徐人取舒。 3.4(1) 六月，雨。 3.5(2) 秋，齊侯、宋公、江人、黃人會于陽穀。 3.6(3) 冬，公子友如齊蒞盟。 3.7 楚人伐鄭。

左傳

3.1(1, 2, 4)

三年，春，不雨；夏，六月，雨。自十月不雨至于五月，不曰旱，不為災也。

3.2(5) 秋，會于陽穀，謀伐楚也。 3.3 齊侯為陽穀之會來尋盟。冬，公子友如齊蒞盟。 3.4 楚人伐鄭，鄭伯欲成。孔叔不可，曰：「齊方勤我，棄德不祥。」

260

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 3 (657 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, it had not rained.

3.1(1)

In the summer, in the fourth month, it did not rain.

3.2(1)

A Xu leader took Shu.

3.3

25

In the sixth month, it rained.

3.4(1)

In autumn, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, a Jiang leader, and a Huang leader met at Yanggu.26

3.5(2)

In winter, Gongzi You went to Qi to oversee the swearing of a covenant.

3.6(3)

A Chu leader attacked Zheng.

3.7

ZUO

In the third year, in spring, it had not rained. In summer, in the sixth month, it rained. It did not rain from the tenth month until the fifth month, but the text does not call it “a drought” because it was not a disaster.

3.1(1, 2, 4)

A second meeting of those allied against Chu is held (Xi 2.3), but Chu continues its aggression against Zheng (Xi 3.4). In autumn, they met at Yanggu: this was to make plans to attack Chu.

3.2(5)

On account of the meeting at Yanggu, the Prince of Qi came to renew our covenant.27 In winter, Gongzi You went to Qi to oversee the swearing of a covenant.

3.3

Kong Shu, a Zheng minister, advises his ruler against making peace with Chu (Xi 1.4, 2.6), correctly predicting that Qi’s policies will work in Zheng’s favor (Xi 4.1). A Chu leader attacked Zheng. The Liege of Zheng wanted to sue for peace. Kong Shu did not approve and said, “Qi just now is working on our behalf. To reject their kindness would be unlucky.”

3.4

25

On Xu, see Zhuang 26.4. The domain of Shu 舒 was quite far to the southwest near present-day Lujiang County 廬江縣, Anhui. 26 Yanggu 陽穀 was located in the domain of Qi north of Yanggu County 陽谷縣, Shandong. 27 Lu had not attended the Yanggu meeting, but Qi apparently wanted to maintain good relations with them.

Lord Xi

261

3.5 齊侯與蔡姬乘舟于囿，蕩公。公懼，變色；禁之，不可。公怒，歸之，未

絕之也。蔡人嫁之。

春秋 4.1(1) 四年，春，王正月，公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯侵

蔡。蔡潰，遂伐楚，次于陘。 4.2(4) 夏，許男新臣卒。 4.3(1) 楚屈完來盟于師，盟于召陵。 4.4(2) 齊人執陳轅濤塗。 4.5(3) 秋，及江人、黃人伐陳。 4.6 八月，公至自伐楚。 4.7(4) 葬許穆公。 4.8(5) 冬，十有二月，公孫茲帥師會齊人、宋人、衛人、鄭人、許人、曹人侵陳。

262

Zuo Tradition

An apparently minor marital incident in Qi leads to a breach of ritual that will have serious consequences for the domain of Cai and will lead to the first major confrontation between Chu and a northern power (Xi 4.1). Some Warring States anecdotes (Han Feizi, Zhanguo ce) suggest that Cai’s misstep is just an excuse for Qi to launch its campaign against Chu. While the Prince of Qi and his wife Cai Ji were aboard a boat in the royal park, she rocked the boat. He blanched in fear and told her to stop, but she refused. The prince was angry and sent her back to Cai. But although he had not cut off relations with her, the leaders of Cai married her to another.

3.5

LORD XI 4 (656 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao and invaded Cai. Cai collapsed, and they then attacked Chu, setting up camp at Xing.28

4.1(1)

In summer, Xinchen, the Head of Xǔ, died.29

4.2(4)

Qu Wan of Chu came and swore a covenant among the troops. We swore the covenant at Shaoling.30

4.3(1)

A Qi leader arrested Yuan Taotu of Chen.

4.4(2)

In autumn, the Qi leader joined with a Jiang leader and a Huang leader and attacked Chen.31

4.5(3)

In the eighth month, our lord arrived from the attack on Chu.

4.6

Lord Mu of Xǔ was buried.

4.7(4)

In winter, in the twelfth month, Gongsun Zi (Shusun Daibo) led out troops, met with a Qi leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, a Zheng leader, a Xǔ leader, and a Cao leader and invaded Chen.

4.8(5)

28 Xing 陘 was located in the domain of Chu in the northern area of present-day Yingshan County 應山縣, Hubei. 29 From the previous and subsequent entries, one must conclude that the Head of Xǔ died in the military activities surrounding the princes’ invasion of Cai and Chu. 30 Shaoling 召陵 is a place of unknown location. 31 The entry begins with the conjunction ji, “along with,” and no subject is specified. Presumably, the subject is the same as that of the previous entry: “a Qi leader.”

Lord Xi

263

左傳

4.1(1, 3)

四年，春，齊侯以諸侯之師侵蔡。蔡潰，遂伐楚。楚子使與師言曰：「君 處北海，寡人處南海，唯是風馬牛不相及也，不虞君之涉吾地也，何 故？」管仲對曰：「昔召康公命我先君大公曰：『五侯九伯，女實征之，以 夾輔周室！』賜我先君履，東至于海，西至于河，南至于穆陵，北至于無 棣。爾貢苞茅不入，王祭不共，無以縮酒，寡人是徵。昭王南征而不復， 寡人是問。」對曰：「貢之不入，寡君之罪也，敢不共給？昭王之不復，君 其問諸水濱！」 師進，次于陘。夏，楚子使屈完如師。師退，次于召陵。

32 33 34 35

264

The ancient Chinese imagined the known world as being surrounded by seas on four sides. The Grand Lord was the founding ancestor of the domain of Qi. See Karlgren, gl. 86. Yang (1:290) identifies Muling 穆陵 with a place near present-day Guangshan 光山, Henan, which would have been close to the Chu border. The point here seems to be that the lands of Qi reach to those of Chu. Wudi 無棣 is a river that presumably formed the border with Yan to the north.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The following passage begins with a conclusion to the previous Zuozhuan entry, as Qi defeats Cai (Xi 3.5), and then goes on to describe a Qi-led attack upon Chu that was perhaps motivated by the latter’s constant pressure upon Zheng (Xi 3.4). After considerable posturing, Chu persuades Qi and its allies to swear a covenant. In the fourth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi invaded Cai with troops of the princes. Cai collapsed, and Qi then attacked Chu. The Master of Chu sent someone to speak with the allies’ troops: “Your ruler dwells near the northern sea, while I, the unworthy one, dwell near the southern sea.32 Even when our horses and cattle are in heat, they cannot come close to one another. So I did not expect that you would encroach upon our territory. Why have you done so?” Guan Zhong replied, “In the past the Shao Duke Kang commanded our former ruler the Grand Lord,33 saying, ‘As for the princes of the five ranks and the lieges of the nine regions, it is you who can launch a military expedition against them in order to assist and defend the house of Zhou.’ He then bestowed on our former lord an endowment of land34 that reached to the sea in the east, to the Yellow River in the west, to Muling in the south, and to Wudi in the north.35 But your offerings of bundled mao grass did not arrive. Thus, the king’s sacrifices were not supplied, and there was nothing to use for filtering wine.36 I, the unworthy one, am here to inquire about this. Moreover, King Zhao went south on a military expedition and did not return. I am here to ask about this.”37 The envoy replied, “It was our lord’s crime that tribute did not arrive. How would we presume not to supply it in the future? As for King Zhao’s not returning, you should ask about that on the banks of the river.”38 The troops advanced and set up camp at Xing. In summer, the Master of Chu had Qu Wan move toward the allies’ troops. The allies’ troops withdrew and set up camp at Shaoling.39

4.1(1, 3)

36 Bundled mao grass (Imperata cylindrica var. major) was used to filter wine. 37 The details surrounding the death of Zhao, the fourth Zhou king, remain problematic. He supposedly led a large army to the south and suffered a stunning military and political defeat. On this event, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power in Early China, 93–95, 327–29. 38 Du Yu (ZZ 12.202) claims that the Han River was not part of Chu’s territory at the time of King Zhao, and hence Chu bears no responsibility for his death. 39 Shiji is more explicit, saying in two places (32.1489 and 40.1697) that Qu Wan was sent with a Chu army and thereby forced the allied army to pull back.

Lord Xi

265

齊侯陳諸侯之師，與屈完乘而觀之。齊侯曰：「豈不穀是為？先君 之好是繼，與不穀同好如何？」對曰：「君惠徼福於敝邑之社稷，辱收寡 君，寡君之願也。」齊侯曰：「以此眾戰，誰能禦之？以此攻城，何城不 克？」對曰：「君若以德綏諸侯，誰敢不服？君若以力，楚國方城以為 城，漢水以為池，雖眾，無所用之。」屈完及諸侯盟。 4.2(3) 陳轅濤塗謂鄭申侯曰：「師出於陳、鄭之間，國必甚病。若出於東方，觀

兵於東夷，循海而歸，其可也。」申侯曰：「善。」 濤塗以告齊侯，許之。申侯見曰：「師老矣，若出於東方而遇敵， 懼不可用也。若出於陳、鄭之間，共其資糧屝屨，其可也。」齊侯說，與 之虎牢。執轅濤塗。 4.3(5) 秋，伐陳，討不忠也。

4.4(2, 7)

許穆公卒于師，葬之以侯，禮也。凡諸侯薨于朝、會，加一等；死王事， 加二等。於是有以袞斂。 40 The ruler of Qi and the Chu commander survey the allied armies together. This is presumably an attempt by the ruler of Qi to intimidate his Chu adversary. The aristocratic way of conducting war, as exhibited here, was sometimes like a highly ritualized game without great violence (see also Huan 5.3 above, where the Liege of Zheng inquires into the Chou king’s well-being after one of the Liege’s men, Zhu Dan, had shot him with an arrow). Zhu Xi (Zhuzi yulei, 83.2149) notes this as follows: “But at the time the campaigns of the lords were almost like playacting. There did not seem to be killing on a vast scale.” It is difficult to ascertain the historical authenticity of such civility on the battlefield. 41 The term “deficient one” 不穀 is usually the term of self-address used by Chu kings. Some commentators maintain that Zhou kings use this term to refer to themselves, and the Qi ruler is using it here because he is leading a coalition supposedly acting on behalf of the Zhou king (Yang, 1:292). 42 The mountain range Fangcheng 方城 is difficult to identify, although it does seem to have been in the domain of Chu. For possible locations, see Yang, 1:292. 43 Presumably this “distress” will result from trying to supply the large army. 44 Hulao 虎牢, mentioned here, is the same place called Zhi 制 in Yin 1.4 (Yang, 1:293) and is located near modern Sishui Community 汜水公社, Rongyang County 榮陽 縣, Henan. 45 Lord Huan, the Prince of Qi, is here intervening in the affairs of another state. This intervention might also constitute the westernmost military action of Lord Huan except for his abortive invasion of Jin. 46 He was a “head” (nan 男) by rank, as the corresponding Annals entry indicates. Mencius (5B.2) says, “The Son of Heaven was one rank, duke was one rank, prince was one rank, liege was one rank, and master and head were the same rank, so that altogether there were five ranks.” Accordingly, a promotion of two ranks would make a head a prince. However, as Yang (1:294) notes, “Judging from bronze inscriptions, the five ranks of lords had no basis in fact. Zuozhuan was written by various schools of Warring States Confucians and cannot be completely relied upon.” Li Feng (“Transmitting Antiquity,” 128–29) argues that a more coherent system of ranks was emerging during the Spring and Autumn period but that Mencius reflects a later idealized, regularized version of this system. Additional study of the ranks as used within Zuozhuan itself is needed.

266

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Qi arrayed the troops of the princes and went out in a chariot with Qu Wan to inspect them.40 The Prince of Qi said, “How could these all be for me, the deficient one?41 How would it be if we were to continue the good relations of our former lords and you were to share the same good relations with me?” Qu Wan replied, “That you should be so kind as to seek blessings from the altars of our humble settlement and should deign to receive our lord is our humble ruler’s wish.” The Prince of Qi said, “If with this multitude I should do battle, who could resist me? If with these I should assail city walls, what city would I fail to overcome?” He replied, “If you pacify the princes with virtue, who would dare not submit? But if you use force, then the domain of Chu will take Fangcheng as its city wall and the Han River as its moat. Even with multitudes, you will have no means to make use of them.”42 Qu Wan and the prince swore a covenant. Forces from Chen and Zheng had been part of Qi’s attack upon Chu (Annals, Xi 4.1). Ministers from these two domains now discuss the route the army should take in returning to Qi. Shen Hou, the minister of Zheng, tricks his Chen counterpart and wins a temporary advantage, only to suffer reversal later (Xi 4.3, 4.5, 5.5, 7.2). Yuan Taotu of Chen said to Shen Hou of Zheng, “If the troops depart by a road between Chen and Zheng, our domains will surely be put into deep distress.43 But if they go out by way of the eastern region, showing their military might to the eastern Yi, then following along the sea to return, that would surely be acceptable.” Shen Hou said, “Excellent.” Taotu reported this to the Prince of Qi, who agreed to the plan. Shen Hou then had an audience with the Prince of Qi and said, “The troops have been in the field for a long time. If they depart by way of the eastern region and encounter the enemy, I am afraid they will be useless. If they depart by a road between Chen and Zheng, their food provisions and footwear will be provided for. Surely that would work well.” The Prince of Qi was pleased and bestowed Hulao upon Shen Hou.44 He arrested Yuan Taotu.45

4.2(3)

In autumn, they attacked Chen: this was to chastise Chen for its disloyalty.

4.3(5)

Lord Mu of Xǔ died during the military action. That they buried him in the manner of a prince was in accordance with ritual propriety.46 In all cases when a prince expires at court or at an official meeting, one rank is added. If he dies while on the king’s business, two ranks are added. Thereupon, he was dressed for burial in embroidered royal robes.

4.4(2, 7)

Lord Xi

267

4.5(8) 冬，叔孫戴伯帥師會諸侯之師侵陳。陳成，歸轅濤塗。 4.6 初，晉獻公欲以驪姬為夫人，卜之，不吉；筮之，吉。公曰：「從筮。」卜人

曰：「筮短龜長，不如從長。且其繇曰： 專之渝， 攘公之羭。 一薰一蕕， 十年尚猶有臭。 必不可！」 弗聽，立之。生奚齊，其娣生卓子。 及將立奚齊，既與中大夫成謀，姬謂大子曰：「君夢齊姜，必速祭 之！」 大子祭于曲沃，歸胙于公。公田，姬寘諸宮六日。公至，毒而獻 之。公祭之地，地墳。與犬，犬斃。與小臣，小臣亦斃。姬泣曰：「賊由 大子。」大子奔新城。公殺其傅杜原款。 或謂大子：「子辭，君必辯焉。」大子曰：「君非姬氏，居不安、食不 飽。我辭，姬必有罪。君老矣，吾又不樂。」曰：「子其行乎！」大子曰：「君 實不察其罪，被此名也以出，人誰納我？」十二月戊申，縊于新城。

47 48 49 50 51 52 53

268

Shusun Daibo (Gongzi Zi) was the leader of the powerful Shusun lineage in the domain of Lu. Karlgren (gl. 87) says that Zhouli 17:264–65 has more officials to deal with turtle than with milfoil divination. It is, however, difficult to know the precise relationship between the various offices of divination elaborated there. See also Yang, 1:295. The diviner presumably takes “the lord’s ram” to refer to the heir apparent. The four lines of the prognostication rhyme (Yang, 1:296). This happened ten years ago (Zhuang 28.2). The midlevel officers alluded to here might be “the two-Wu clique” of Zhuang 28.2. Qi Jiang is Shensheng’s mother. “The New City” (Xincheng 新城) is an alternative name for Quwo.

Zuo Tradition

Conflict between the allied army and Chen is now resolved, and the Chen minister Yuan Taotu is repatriated (Xi 4.2, 4.3). In winter, Shusun Daibo led out troops and met with the troops of the princes to invade Chen.47 Chen sued for peace, and Qi returned Yuan Taotu.

4.5(8)

The unhappy story of Lord Xian’s heir apparent Shengsheng continues and culminates here with his death (see Zhuang 28.2 and Min 2.7). Earlier, Lord Xian of Jin had wanted to take Li Ji as his wife. He divined about this by turtle shell, and the result was inauspicious. He divined by milfoil, and the result was lucky. The lord said, “I will follow the milfoil.” The diviner said, “Milfoil divination falls short where the turtle shell excels. We should follow the one that excels.48 Moreover, the prognosis says,

4.6

Single devotion will bring a change: One will steal the lord’s ram. One plant fragrant, one foul, Ten years hence the stench will linger still.49

This will certainly not do!” The lord did not heed this, but established Li Ji as his wife. She bore Xiqi, and her younger sister bore Zhuozi.50 By the time Xiqi was about to be established as heir, Li Ji had already conspired with the high officers of the mid-rank,51 and she said to the heir apparent, “Our lord has dreamed of Qi Jiang.52 You must quickly offer a sacrifice to her.” The heir apparent offered a sacrifice at Quwo and sent the sacrificial meat and wine back to the lord. The lord was hunting, so Li Ji kept the offerings in the palace for six days. When the lord arrived, she put poison in it and presented it to him. The lord offered some of it to the ground and the earth boiled up. So he gave some of it to a dog, and the dog died. Then he gave some to a servant, and the servant also died. Weeping, Li Ji said, “This assault comes from the heir apparent!” The heir apparent fled to the New City,53 and the lord killed the heir apparent’s tutor, Du Yuankuan. Someone said to the heir apparent, “You should offer an explanation. Our lord will surely discern the truth.” The heir apparent said, “Without Li Ji, the ruler will find no peace in rest and no satisfaction in food. If I offer an explanation, Li Ji will certainly be found guilty. My lord is old, and I also will be unhappy if he is unhappy.” “Will you go away then?” he asked. The heir apparent replied, “It was my lord himself who did not properly examine this crime. If I should leave the domain bearing this ill repute, who will accept me?” In the twelfth month, on the wushen day (27), he hanged himself at the New City. Lord Xi

269



姬遂譖二公子曰：「皆知之。」重耳奔蒲，夷吾奔屈。

春秋 5.1(2) 五年，春，晉侯殺其世子申生。 5.2 杞伯姬來朝其子。 5.3(3) 夏，公孫茲如牟。 5.4(4) 公及齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯會王世子于首止。 5.5(6) 秋，八月，諸侯盟于首止。 5.6 鄭伯逃歸不盟。 5.7(7) 楚子滅弦，弦子奔黃。 5.8 九月戊申朔，日有食之。 5.9(8) 冬，晉人執虞公。

54

270

A much more detailed version of these events is found in Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.285–93. In that version, Li Ji first warns Lord Xian that the heir apparent has gained the support of the people and is therefore dangerous. The lord refuses to act because he cannot yet “impute any crime to him.” Li Ji then conspires with Entertainer Shi, who is able to neutralize Li Ke. After Shensheng is falsely accused of trying to poison his father, Shensheng’s preceptor, Du Yuankuan, is arrested. Before his execution, Du sends a stirring admonition to Shensheng, instructing him with words that apply to both Shensheng and himself: “Even if slander circulates and one is brought to death, that is alright, for one will still have an excellent reputation. Not to change one’s sentiments, even when facing death, is to be strong. To preserve one’s sentiments and please one’s father is to be filial. For one to give up life to fulfill proper intentions is to be good. To die and not forget one’s lord is to be respectful.” Before taking his own life, Shensheng, in the Guoyu version, also gives a filial speech in which he says that he does not want his father, Lord Xian, to feel additional resentment. Accounts of Shensheng’s death in such texts as Lüshi chunqiu 19.1256 and Lunheng 19.39 claim that Shensheng “fell on his sword,” perhaps a more manly way to die than hanging oneself.

Zuo Tradition

Li Ji slandered the two noble sons, saying, “They both knew it.” Chong’er fled to Pu, and Yiwu fled to Qu.54 LORD XI 5 (655 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin put to death his heir apparent Shensheng.55

5.1(2)

Bo Ji of Qǐ came to present her son at court.

5.2

In summer, Gongsun Zi (Shusun Daibo) went to Mou.

56

5.3(3)

Our lord joined with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao and met with the king’s heir apparent at Shouzhi.57

5.4(4)

In autumn, in the eighth month, the princes swore a covenant at Shouzhi.

5.5(6)

The Liege of Zheng fled homeward and did not join the covenant.

5.6

A Chu leader extinguished Xian. The Master of Xian escaped to Huang.

58

In the ninth month, on the wushen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. In winter, a Jin leader arrested the Duke of Yu.

55

56 57 58

5.7(7) 5.8

5.9(8)

This event is described in Xi 4.6 above. Gu Donggu explains (Chunqiu dashi biao, 48.2581) that Jin was using the Xia calendar; and their twelfth month, reflected in the entry above, corresponds to the second month of the Zhou calendar employed in Lu. Shensheng, as we have seen above, actually committed suicide rather than “being put to death,” but apparently the event was reported to Lu as an execution (see Xi 5.2 below). It could well be that since Shensheng committed suicide under suspicion of what would have been a capital offense, his action was tantamount to an execution. On the small domain of Mou, see Annals, Huan 15.8. This was Zheng, the heir of King Hui of Zhou (r. 676–651), later King Xiang of Zhou (r. 651–619) The minor domain of Xian 弦 was located northwest of present-day Gouchuan County 溝川縣, Henan.

Lord Xi

271

左傳 5.1 五年，春，王正月辛亥朔，日南至。公既視朔，遂登觀臺以望，而書，禮

也。凡分、至、啟、閉，必書雲物，為備故也。 5.2(1) 晉侯使以殺大子申生之故來告。

初，晉侯使士蒍為二公子築蒲與屈，不慎，寘薪焉。夷吾訴之。公 使讓之。士蒍稽首而對曰：「臣聞之：無喪而慼，憂必讎焉，無戎而城， 讎必保焉。寇讎之保，又何慎焉？守官廢命，不敬；固讎之保，不忠。失 忠與敬，何以事君？ 《詩》云：

懷德惟寧， 宗子惟城。 君其修德而固宗子，何城如之？三年將尋師焉，焉用慎？」 退而賦曰： 狐裘尨茸， 一國三公， 吾誰適從？

The first day of the first month in this year should have been a renzi day rather than a xinhai day. 60 The precise meaning of shi shuo 視朔, “to inspect the new moon,” is disputed. Du Yu (ZZ 12.205) equates shi shuo with gao shuo 告朔, an announcement of the new moon that was made in the Ancestral Temple. Yang (1:302) disagrees and argues, “After the announcement of the new moon, one still had to administer the governmental affairs of the month in the Ancestral Temple; and this we call shi shuo or, alternately, ting shuo 聽朔.” 61 Bi 閉, “closing,” here refers to the first day of autumn and winter, which is the time of the “closing down” of warmth and growth, just as qi 啟, “openings,” refers to the first day of spring and summer, when warmth and growth are “opening up.” 62 Future events could supposedly be discerned in the colors and shapes of the clouds. 63 The same character, chou 讎, is used here in two quite different meanings: “enemy” and “to find its correspondence,” “to respond,” “to come in response.” 64 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.635. 65 The ode recited here, which does not precisely follow any text in extant versions of the Odes, consists of three four-character, rhymed lines. A somewhat abbreviated version of this story appears in Shiji 39.1646. In that version, when the Prince of Jin becomes angry at Shi Wei because “he had not completed his work,” Shi Wei replies, “Since there are few bandits in border cities, what’s the use of walls?” But as a result of the prince’s pressure, he finally does complete the walls. 59

272

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the xinhai day, the first day of the month, the sun reached the southern solstice.59 After our lord attended to the month’s official business in the Ancestral Temple on the first day of the month,60 he ascended the observation tower so as to look off into the distance and make a record of what he saw. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases of equinoxes, solstices, the “openings” of spring and summer, and the “closings” of autumn and winter,61 one must make a record of the colors of the clouds. This is for the purpose of making preparations.62

5.1

The Jin minister Shi Wei appears to be neglecting his duty in failing to fortify in the best way possible the settlements of the two noble sons Yiwu and Chong’er (Xi 4.6), but he suspects discord will come and finds himself in an unhappy dilemma. The Prince of Jin had someone come and report the reason for putting to death the heir apparent Shensheng. Earlier, the Prince of Jin had sent Shi Wei to construct walls at Pu and Qu for the two noble sons. He did not take care in his task but had brushwood mixed into the earthen walls. Yiwu complained about this, and the lord sent someone to upbraid Shi Wei. Shi Wei bowed with his forehead touching the ground and replied, “I, your subject, have heard that if one grieves when there is no loss, sorrow must come in response. And if one fortifies a city when there is no military threat, an enemy must take refuge there.63 If it is to be a refuge for an enemy raider, why should I take care with this? To disregard an order when holding office is disrespectful. To strengthen the refuge of an enemy is disloyal. If I neglect loyalty and respect, how can I serve my lord? As it says in the Odes,

5.2(1)

Cherishing virtue is our only peace; Sons of our lineage our only wall.64

If you should cultivate virtue and strengthen the sons of your lineage, what city walls could match them? Within three years, you will make use of an army there. Why should I exercise care?” He then withdrew from the lord’s presence and chanted, The fox-fur cape is unkempt. One domain, three lords: Which one am I to follow?65

Lord Xi

273

及難，公使寺人披伐蒲。重耳曰：「君父之命不校。」乃徇曰：「校 者，吾讎也。」踰垣而走。披斬其袪。遂出奔翟。 5.3(3) 夏，公孫茲如牟，娶焉。 5.4(4) 會于首止，會王大子鄭，謀寧周也。 5.5 陳轅宣仲怨鄭申侯之反己於召陵，故勸之城其賜邑，曰：「美城之，大名

也，子孫不忘。吾助子請。」乃為之請於諸侯而城之，美。遂譖諸鄭伯， 曰：「美城其賜邑，將以叛也。」申侯由是得罪。 5.6(5) 秋，諸侯盟。王使周公召鄭伯，曰：「吾撫女以從楚，輔之以晉，可以少

安。」鄭伯喜於王命，而懼其不朝於齊也，故逃歸不盟。孔叔止之，曰： 「國君不可以輕，輕則失親；失親，患必至。病而乞盟，所喪多矣。君必 悔之。」弗聽，逃其師而歸。

66

274

He is encouraging rebellion against Qi. The domains of Chu and Jin had not joined the Shouzhi alliance and would therefore not join Qi and its allies in protecting the heir apparent Zheng. At least that is what the Zhou king would have the Liege of Zheng believe. The king wants to establish his favorite son, Wangzi Dai, as heir apparent, and resented the attempt of Qi and its allies to rally support for the heir apparent. At this point Zheng is torn between Chu and Qi, even as later in Zuozhuan it is in a comparable situation with Jin and Chu.

Zuo Tradition

When trouble did come, the lord sent Eunuch Pi to attack Pu. Chong’er said, “The command of my lord and father is not to be resisted.” Then he circulated a command: “Whoever resists is my enemy.” As he was climbing over a wall to run away, Pi cut off Chong’er’s sleeve. Chong’er then left the domain and fled to the Di. In summer, Shusun Daiboa went to Mou. He took a wife there.

5.3(3)

The following meeting with the heir apparent Zheng, the future King Xiang (r. 651–619), was provoked by the king’s intention to depose him in favor of his younger son, Wangzi Dai. A meeting was held at Shouzhi, where they met with Zheng, the heir apparent of the king: this was to discuss the pacification of Zhou.

5.4(4)

Yuan Taotu, who had earlier been betrayed by Shen Hou (Xi 4.2), uses some trickery of his own to gain revenge. This story of fortifying a city well resonates with the story above of Shi Wei fortifying a city badly (Xi 5.2)! Yuan Taotua of Chen resented Shen Hou for turning against him at Shaoling. He therefore encouraged Shen Hou to fortify a settlement he had been granted: “If you fortify it splendidly, you will gain a great reputation, and your sons and grandsons will not forget you. I will assist you by making the request.” So Yuan made a request on his behalf to the princes. Shen Hou fortified the settlement, and it was splendidly done. Yuan then slandered him to the Liege of Zheng: “Most splendidly did he fortify the settlement he was granted. He is going to use it as a base to rebel.” Shen Hou, on account of this, was found guilty.

5.5

King Hui (r. 676–652) tries to weaken the Shouzhi alliance, which he no doubt believed was interfering with his plans for the succession (Xi 5.4). This will have serious consequences for Zheng (Xi 6.2, 6.3). In autumn, the princes swore a covenant. The king sent the Zhou Duke to summon the Liege of Zheng: “I would reassure you in following Chu.66 And, being assisted in this by Jin, you could for a time be at ease.” Pleased with the king’s command and fearful because he had not visited the Qi court, the Liege of Zheng fled back to his domain and did not join the covenant. Kong Shu tried to stop him, saying, “The ruler of a domain cannot act frivolously. If he is frivolous, then he will lose his kith and kin. And if he loses his kith and kin, then trouble must come. If you plead for a covenant when you are in distress, your losses will be many! You, my lord, will surely regret this.” The Liege of Zheng did not heed this but deserted his army and returned home.

5.6(5)

Lord Xi

275

5.7(7) 楚鬬穀於菟滅弦，弦子奔黃。於是江、黃、道、柏方睦於齊，皆弦姻也。

弦子恃之而不事楚，又不設備，故亡。 5.8(9) 晉侯復假道於虞以伐虢。宮之奇諫曰：「虢，虞之表也；虢亡，虞必從

之。晉不可啟，寇不可翫。一之謂甚，其可再乎？諺所謂『輔車相依，唇 亡齒寒』者，其虞、虢之謂也。」公曰：「晉，吾宗也，豈害我哉？」對曰： 「大伯、虞仲，大王之昭也；大伯不從，是以不嗣。虢仲、虢叔，王季之 穆也；為文王卿士，勳在王室，藏於盟府。將虢是滅，何愛於虞？且虞能 親於桓、莊乎？其愛之也，桓、莊之族何罪？而以為戮，不唯偪乎？親 以寵偪，猶尚害之，況以國乎？」公曰：「吾享祀豐絜，神必據我。」對曰： 「臣聞之：鬼神非人實親，惟德是依。故《周書》曰：『皇天無親，惟德 是輔。』又曰：『黍稷非馨，明德惟馨。』又曰：『民不易物，惟德繄物。』

67 Dao 道 was the name of a small domain located north of present-day Queshan County 確山縣, Henan. Bo 柏 was the name of a domain southeast of Wuyang County 舞陽縣, Henan. 68 The first part of this phrase, fu che xiang yi 輔車相依, has been interpreted quite differently from the translation given here. Du Yu (ZZ 12.207) understands fu che as “jaw and cheekbone” and believes that both the first and second parts of the saying refer to the face. Previous translators have followed Du. Yang (1:307), we believe, provides compelling evidence from other early texts that fu is being used here to indicate a part of a chariot, specifically the sideboards that keep the chariot from overturning (see also Karlgren, gl. 91). 69 The tablet of the first ancestor was placed at the top in the Ancestral Temple. The tablets of the following generations were placed successively on the right and on the left. Thus, each odd-numbered generation stood on the left and was part of the so-called zhao 昭 line, while each even-numbered generation was on the right in the mu 穆 line. The first ancestor of the Zhou lineage was Lord Millet (Hou Ji), who would have occupied the top. The Grand King (Taiwang) was the twelfth generation from Lord Millet and would therefore have been on the right (mu line). The next ancestral tablets would then be the thirteenth generation and the next in the zhao order on the left. For Taibo, see Min, n. 8. Yuzhong was the younger brother of Taibo and, according to Cui Shu, the ancestor of the domain of Yu. 70 Taibo was the son of the Grand King and fled the kingdom rather than succeed his father (Yang, 1:308). 71 Guo Zhong and Guo Shu were sons of Wang Ji. The former was granted a domain later known as Guo; the latter was granted a domain in a place that by 541 Bce had become Zheng territory (see Zhao 1.1). 72 Wang Ji was the thirteenth descendant of Lord Millet (zhao line). Thus, his sons would be placed to the right (mu line). The “covenant archives,” as we have translated meng fu 盟府, was apparently a place to store the texts of covenants (see Xi 26.3 and Xiang 11.5). 73 By kinship and by merit, Guo has stronger claims to Jin’s protection than Yu does. Yuzhong, the ancestor of the Yu domain, was the younger brother of Taibo and the older brother of Wang Ji. He belonged to the thirteenth generation (zhao line). The ancestor of the Guo domain was Wang Ji’s son and belonged to the fourteenth generation (mu line). Shuyu (the ancestor of Jin), as King Wu’s son, belonged to the sixteenth generation (mu line). Jin and Guo thus both belonged to the mu line.

276

Zuo Tradition

Dou Gouwutu of Chu extinguished Xian. The Master of Xian escaped to Huang. At this time, Jiang, Huang, Dao, and Bo were closely allied with Qi, and all were related by marriage to Xian.67 The Master of Xian relied on them and did not serve Chu, but he also did not make defensive preparations, and that is why Xian perished.

5.7(7)

Once again Jin asks for passage through Yu (Xi 2.2). Gong Zhiqi, a Yu minister, attempts to dissuade his ruler from granting passage. Even though he is correct that Jin will subsequently attack Guo, he is unable to prevail, just as was predicted earlier (Xi 2.2). The Prince of Jin again gained permission to pass through Yu to attack Guo. Gong Zhiqi remonstrated: “Guo is a buffer for Yu. If Guo perishes, Yu will certainly follow it. Jin cannot be encouraged; aggressors cannot be trifled with. To do this once was too much: how could it be done a second time? The proverb says, ‘The chariot and its running boards depend upon each other; if the lips perish, the teeth grow cold.’68 Surely that applies to Yu and Guo!” The Yu Lord said, “Jin is of our line. How could they harm us?” He responded, “Taibo and Yuzhong are to the left of the Grand King in the Ancestral Temple.69 Taibo did not stay with his father the Grand King and so did not succeed him.70 Guo Zhong and Guo Shu are to the right of Wang Ji and were King Wen’s court ministers.71 Their merit was achieved in the king’s household and is preserved in the covenant archives.72 If Jin would destroy even Guo, what affection would it have for Yu?73 Moreover, can Yu be dearer to Jin than the Huan and Zhuang lineages?74 If Jin had affection for them, then for what crimes were the lines of Huan and Zhuang destroyed? Was it not only because they were threatening that they were exterminated?75 If they were relatives who seemed threatening because they received favor, and Jin still harmed them, how much more would this happen in the case of our domain?” The lord said, “My offerings and sacrifices are abundant and pure. The gods are certain to sustain me.”76 Gong Zhiqi responded, “I have heard that the ghosts and spirits do not show favoritism toward men, but it is the virtuous alone to whom they turn. Therefore, as it says in the Zhou Documents, ‘August Heaven has no favorites; only the virtuous does it assist.’ It also says, ‘The millet is not fragrant; bright virtue alone is fragrant.’ And it also says, ‘People do not change the offerings; virtue alone is the offering.’77

74 75 76 77

5.8(9)

Huan is Huan Shu 桓叔, who was granted the settlement of Quwo in the mid-eighth century (Huan 2.5). Zhuang is Liege Zhuang 莊伯, the son of Huan Shu. See Zhuang 23.2, 24.3, and 25.4. The same argument was put forth and refuted in Huan 6.2 (see also Zhuang 10.1). These quotations are now found in the Ancient Script chapters of the Documents as we have it now. The first can be found in Shangshu, “Cai Zhong zhi ming” 蔡仲之命, 17.254, and the second in Shangshu, “Jun chen” 君陳, 18.274.

Lord Xi

277

如是，則非德，民不和、神不享矣。神所馮依，將在德矣。若晉取虞，而 明德以薦馨香，神其吐之乎？」 弗聽，許晉使。宮之奇以其族行，曰：「虞不臘矣。在此行也，晉不 更舉矣。」 八月甲午，晉侯圍上陽。問於卜偃曰：「吾其濟乎？」對曰：「克之。  」 公曰：「何時？」對曰：「童謠云： 丙之晨， 龍尾伏辰； 均服振振， 取虢之旂。 鶉之賁賁， 天策焞焞， 火中成軍， 虢公其奔。 其九月、十月之交乎！丙子旦，日在尾，月在策，鶉火中，必是時也。」 冬，十二月丙子，朔，晉滅虢。虢公醜奔京師。師還，館于虞，遂襲 虞，滅之。執虞公及其大夫井伯，以媵秦穆姬，而修虞祀，且歸其職貢 於王。 故書曰：「晉人執虞公」，罪虞，且言易也。

Zhanguo ce, “Qin ce 1,” 3.123, provides a somewhat more colorful account of these events: “Lord Xian again wanted to attack Yu, but he was afraid that Gong Zhiqi was there. Xun Xi said, ‘In the Zhou Documents there is a saying, “Lovely boys can break an old man.’” So they presented Lord Xian with a lovely boy and instructed him to slander Gong Zhiqi. When Gong Zhiqi remonstrated, he was not heeded, so he left the domain.” 79 Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.297–98, contains a longer speech that Gong Zhiqi supposedly delivers to his sons prior to removing his family from the domain of Yu. Gong Zhiqi’s speech follows another speech (“Jin yu 2,” 8.295–96) for which there is no Zuozhuan equivalent, in which Zhou Zhiqiao of the domain of Guo tells his family that the fall of Guo is imminent. Like Gong Zhiqi, he leaves his domain with his family. For Zhou Zhiqiao’s prediction of doom for Guo, see Zhuang 32.3 and Min 2.1. 80 This date is given according to the Xia calendar, which was used in the domain of Jin. It corresponds to the seventeenth day of the tenth month of the Zhou calendar used in Lu. 81 One text has bingzi (see Yang, 1:310). 82 The Dragon’s Tail is the lunar mansion usually known as Wei 尾, “Tail.” The sun will rise in this mansion at the time of Jin’s attack and thus obscure these stars. 83 Quail Fire is one of the lunar mansions. 78

278

Zuo Tradition

So it is that in the absence of virtue, the people will not be in harmony and the spirits will not be pleased. What the spirits turn to will be found in virtue. If Jin seizes Yu and makes bright its virtues as it offers sacrifices, will the spirits spit them out?” The lord did not heed this but agreed to the proposal of the Jin envoy.78 Gong Zhiqi departed from the domain with his clan, saying, “Yu will not offer the winter sacrifice. The attack will come in this very campaign; Jin will not raise troops a second time.”79 In the eighth month, on the jiawu day, the Prince of Jin laid siege to Shangyang.80 He asked Diviner Yan, “Will we prevail?” The diviner responded, “You will overcome them.” The lord said, “When?” The diviner responded, “A children’s ditty says, At daybreak on a bing day,81 When the Dragon’s Tail hides in morning rays,82 In military garb bristling, We will seize Guo’s bell-adorned flags. When the Quail Fire burns brave,83 And Heaven’s Whip fades away,84 With Quail Fire in the south, we will muster the army,85 And the Duke of Guo will flee.

It will be at the shift from the ninth to the tenth month. On the dawn of the bingzi day, the sun will be in the Tail, the moon in the Whip, and the Quail Fire in the south. Surely it will be at that time.” In the winter, in the twelfth month, on the bingzi day (1), Jin destroyed Guo.86 Chou, the Duke of Guo, escaped to the Zhou capital. As the Jin troops were returning home, they lodged in Yu and thereupon made a surprise attack on Yu and extinguished it. They seized the Duke of Yu and his high officer Jing Bo. Jin made them escorts for the bride Mu Ji of Qin, then continued the sacrifices of Yu.87 In addition, they submitted Yu’s official tribute to the Zhou king. Therefore, the text says, “A Jin leader arrested the Duke of Yu”: this blames Yu and, moreover, speaks to the ease of the matter.

84

85 86 87

Heaven’s Whip is a star in the Wei mansion, which will be obscured by the sun at the time mentioned. Since the event takes place on the first day of the month (i.e., on the day of the new, or dark, moon), the moon will not be visible and will have no light to obscure anything. But precisely because it’s the day of the new moon, the moon is near the sun, and the light of the sun obscures the Whip. Yang (1:311) explains that zhong 中 in this context has the technical meaning of “south.” This is the date according to the Zhou calendar used in Lu. It corresponds to the first day of the tenth month in the Xia calendar employed in Jin. Mu Ji was the daughter of Lord Xian of Jin and was married to Lord Mu of Qin. This event is already referred to in Zhuang 28.2.

Lord Xi

279

春秋 6.1 六年，春，王正月。 6.2(2) 夏，公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、曹伯伐鄭，圍新城。 6.3(3) 秋，楚人圍許，諸侯遂救許。 6.4 冬，公至自伐鄭。

左傳 6.1 六年，春，晉侯使賈華伐屈。夷吾不能守，盟而行。將奔狄，郤芮曰：「後

出同走，罪也，不如之梁。梁近秦而幸焉。」乃之梁。 6.2(2) 夏，諸侯伐鄭，以其逃首止之盟故也。圍新密，鄭所以不時城也。 6.3(3) 秋，楚子圍許以救鄭，諸侯救許，乃還。

280

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 6 (654 BCE) ANNALS

The sixth year, spring, the royal first month.

6.1

In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Cao and attacked Zheng and laid siege to Xincheng.88

6.2(2)

In autumn, a Chu leader laid siege to Xǔ. The princes then went to the aid of Xǔ.

6.3(3)

In winter, our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

6.4

ZUO

Like Chong’er before, Yiwu is now dislodged from his settlement, perhaps because of Shi Wei’s weak fortifications (Xi 4.6, 5.2). In the sixth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Jia Hua to attack Qu.89 Yiwu was not able to defend Qu. He swore a covenant and departed.90 He was going to flee to the Di, but Xi Rui said, “To leave the domain after another and to run to the same place would make you seem guilty.91 It is better to go to Liang. Liang is close to Qin and enjoys its favor.” So Yiwu went to Liang.

6.1

Zheng, whose ruler was persuaded by the Zhou king to leave the Shouzhi meeting (Xi 5.6), now faces an attack and receives Chu assistance (Xi 6.3). In summer, the princes attacked Zheng: this was on the grounds that Zheng had fled from the covenant meeting at Shouzhi.92 They laid siege to Xinmi: this is the reason Zheng fortified it in an improper season.93

6.2(2)

On the enmity between Xǔ and Zheng, see Yin 11.2 and Zhuang 29.2. In autumn, the Master of Chu laid siege to Xǔ in order to come to the aid of Zheng. The princes went to the aid of Xǔ, so the Chu troops returned home.

6.3(3)

88

This Xincheng 新城 is located in Zheng southeast of Mi County 密縣, Henan, and should be distinguished from the place of the same name in Jin (see Xi 4.6 above), translated as “New City.” 89 According to Xi 10.2, Jia Hua was a military official. 90 Yang (1:313) believes that the covenant was sworn with the people of Qu and was a promise to return and help them. 91 Chong’er fled to the Di according to Xi 5.2. For Yiwu to do the same would suggest conspiracy. 92 See Annals, Xi 5.6, above. 93 Xinmi 新密 is another name for Xincheng, the city located in Zheng. Presumably, they were forced to fortify this city during the agricultural season.

Lord Xi

281

6.4 冬，蔡穆侯將許僖公以見楚子於武城。許男面縛，銜璧，大夫衰絰，士

輿櫬。楚子問諸逢伯。對曰：「昔武王克殷，微子啟如是。武王親釋其 縛，受其璧而祓之。焚其櫬，禮而命之，使復其所。」楚子從之。

春秋 7.1(1) 七年，春，齊人伐鄭。 7.2 夏，小邾子來朝。 7.3(2) 鄭殺其大夫申侯。 7.4(3) 秋，七月，公會齊侯、宋公、陳世子款、鄭世子華盟于甯母。 7.5 曹伯班卒。 7.6 公子友如齊。 7.7 冬，葬曹昭公。

282

Zuo Tradition

Cai had previously been defeated by a Qi-led army, which subsequently attacked Chu (Xi 4.1). Cai’s relationship with Chu (Zhuang 10.3, 14.3) enables them to intercede on Xǔ’s behalf (Xi 6.3). In winter, Prince Mu of Cai took Lord Xi of Xǔ to have an audience with the Master of Chu at Wucheng. The Head of Xǔ had his hands tied behind his back94 and held a jade disk in his mouth.95 His high officers were dressed in hempen mourning garments, and his officers carried a coffin on their shoulders. The Master of Chu asked Feng Bo about this, and he responded, “Formerly, when King Wu overcame Yin, Weizi Qi did this.96 King Wu personally untied his hands, accepted the jade disk, and performed an exorcism ritual for him. He burned his coffin, treated him in accordance with ritual propriety and issued commands to him, and then sent him back to his home.” The Master of Chu acted accordingly.

6.4

LORD XI 7 (653 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, a Qi leader attacked Zheng.

7.1(1)

In summer, the Master of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court.97

7.2

Zheng put to death its high officer Shen Hou.

7.3(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Chen heir apparent Kuan, and the Zheng heir apparent Hua (Zihua) at Ningmu and swore a covenant.98

7.4(3)

Ban, the Liege of Cao, died.

7.5

Gongzi You went to Qi.

7.6

In winter, Lord Zhao of Cao was buried.

7.7

94 95

The phrase here is problematic (see Karlgren, gl. 95). A piece of jade was placed in the mouth of the corpse as it was prepared for burial. In total surrender, Lord Xi presents himself as a “dead man walking.” 96 Weizi Qi was the older brother of the last Shang king, the tyrannical Zhòu. When King Wu conquered the Yin, Weizi Qi surrendered humbly to the conquerers. He was released and returned to his previous territory. An account of Weizi’s surrender appears in Shiji 38.1610. 97 A branch of the ruling family of Zhu had founded Lesser Zhu. The Master mentioned here is Li Lai of Ni, who appears in Annals, Zhuang 5.3. Lesser Zhu was located on the Shandong Peninsula. 98 Ningmu 甯母 belonged to the domain of Lu and was located within the boundaries of present-day Yutai County, Shandong.

Lord Xi

283

左傳 7.1(1) 七年，春，齊人伐鄭。孔叔言於鄭伯曰：「諺有之曰：『心則不競，何憚

於病？』既不能強，又不能弱，所以斃也。國危矣，請下齊以救國。」公 曰：「吾知其所由來矣，姑少待我。」對曰：「朝不及夕，何以待君？」 7.2(3) 夏，鄭殺申侯以說于齊，且用陳轅濤塗之譖也。初，申侯，申出也，有寵

於楚文王。文王將死，與之璧，使行，曰：「唯我知女。女專利而不厭， 予取予求，不女疵瑕也。後之人將求多於女，女必不免。我死，女必速 行，無適小國，將不女容焉。」 既葬，出奔鄭，又有寵於厲公。子文聞其死也，曰：「古人有言曰： 『知臣莫若君』，弗可改也已。」

284

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Kong Shu had earlier cautioned against Chu (Xi 3.4) and had attempted to dissuade Zheng from leaving the meeting at Shouzhi (Xi 5.6), an action that had put Zheng in Chu’s camp rather than in that of the Qi-led alliance (Xi 6.3). In the seventh year, in spring, a Qi leader attacked Zheng. Kong Shu said to the Liege of Zheng, “As a saying has it, ‘If the heart is not strong, what right does one have to fear affliction?’ Unable to be assertive like a strong domain and also unable to be submissive like a weak one is the reason a domain falls. The domain is in peril. I request that we surrender to Qi in order to save the domain.” The lord said, “I know why Qi has come. For the time being, just wait awhile for me to act.” Kong Shu responded, “We will not survive from morning until evening, so how can I wait for you, my lord?”

7.1(1)

Shen Hou, already in trouble in Zheng because of Yuan Taotu’s slander (Xi 4.2, 5.4), is executed. We learn here something of his background as a rather greedy official and of the perspicacity of his former ruler, King Wen of Chu. In summer, Zheng put to death Shen Hou in order to seek favor with Qi and also because he had slandered Yuan Taotu of Chen. Earlier, Shen Hou, who was born of a woman from Shen, had found favor with King Wen of Chu. When King Wen was about to die, he gave him a jade disk and urged him to leave the domain, saying, “I alone understand you. You monopolize all the benefits yet are never sated. From me you have taken, from me you have sought, yet I have not found fault with you.99 But my successor will seek much from you, and you most certainly will not escape trouble. When I die, you must quickly depart. And do not go to a small domain, for they will not tolerate you.” After King Wen was buried, Shen Hou left the domain and fled to Zheng, where he also found favor with Lord Li. When Dou Gouwutua heard about Shen Hou’s death, he said, “The ancients had a saying: ‘No one knows a subject like his lord.’ One cannot change this saying at all!”100

7.2(3)

This reading of the phrase yu qu yu qiu 予取予求 follows Du Yu (ZZ 13.215) and Yang (1:316). Karlgren (gl. 96) questions Du Yu’s reading and interprets the phrase to mean “I have chosen you. I have sought you.” 100 Both Yang (1:317) and Takezoe (5.40) understand the change as applied to the saying. However, the last phrase might apply to Shen Hou’s unchanging character: “He was the one who could not be changed.” There is a third possibility. The final phrase may refer to King Wen’s wise advice to Shen Hou. 99

Lord Xi

285

7.3(4) 秋，盟于甯母，謀鄭故也。管仲言於齊侯曰：「臣聞之：『招攜以禮，懷

遠以德。』德、禮不易，無人不懷。」齊侯修禮於諸侯，諸侯官受方物。 鄭伯使大子華聽命於會，言於齊侯曰：「洩氏、孔氏、子人氏三族 實違君命。君若去之以為成，我以鄭為內臣，君亦無所不利焉。」 齊侯將許之。管仲曰：「君以禮與信屬諸侯，而以姦終之，無乃不 可乎？子父不奸之謂禮，守命共時之謂信，違此二者，姦莫大焉。」 公曰：「諸侯有討於鄭，未捷；今苟有釁，從之，不亦可乎？」對曰： 「君若綏之以德，加之以訓，辭，而帥諸侯以討鄭。鄭將覆亡之不暇，豈 敢不懼？若摠其罪人以臨之，鄭有辭矣，何懼？且夫合諸侯以崇德也。 會而列姦，何以示後嗣？夫諸侯之會，其德、刑、禮、義，無國不記。記 姦之位，君盟替矣。作而不記，非盛德也。君其勿許！鄭必受盟。夫子華 既為大子，而求介於大國以弱其國，亦必不免。鄭有叔詹、堵叔、師叔三 良為政，未可間也。」齊侯辭焉。子華由是得罪於鄭。

101 Our reading of the passage is that the Qi leaders were generous to officials who visited from other domains. Du Yu (ZZ 13.215) believes that the officers of the princes received local products from their own domains that were then transmitted to the Zhou king. That is, the Prince of Qi is attempting to restore a tribute system that had fallen into disuse. However, in Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.300, Lord Huan of Qi is faulted for relying on gifts to secure the princes’ allegiance. For a discussion of the role played by gifts of this type in Zuozhuan, see Schaberg, Patterned Past, 207–21. 102 Yang (1:317) believes that Xie, Kong, and Ziren refer to particular individuals: Xie Jia, Kong Shu, and the younger brother of Lord Li of Zheng. 103 This is alluding to the fact that Zihua is betraying his own father by extending to Qi the offer of his vassalage. 104 Karlgren, gl. 97. 105 The “rift” to which the Prince of Qi alludes is that between the Liege of Zheng and his son Zihua. 106 This same argument was last advanced in Zhuang 23.1. 107 Yang (1:319) believes that Shi Shu is the style name of Kong Shu (Xi 3.4) and is also to be identified with Kong Shi above (Xi 7.3). Yang suggests that Du Shu may be the same person as Xiedu Yumi (Xi 20.2, 24.2a).

286

Zuo Tradition

The Qi minister Guan Zhong tries to encourage his ruler to use ritual propriety and virtue as a means of ending the conflict with Zheng (Xi 7.1), but the Zheng heir apparent Zihua betrays his domain by proposing another solution to the conflict. In the autumn, a covenant meeting was held at Ningmu: this was because they were making plans against Zheng. Guan Zhong said to the Prince of Qi, “I have heard: ‘Summon the disaffected with ritual propriety; cherish the distant with virtue.’ If our virtue and ritual propriety are steadfast, none will fail to cherish us.” The Prince of Qi cultivated ritual propriety in relationships with the princes, and the officers of the princes collected the products of every region for tribute.101 The Liege of Zheng sent the heir apparent Zihua to attend to the commands at the covenant meeting. Zihua said to the Prince of Qi, “It was the three houses, Xie, Kong, and Ziren, that violated your command.102 If you, my lord, remove them so as to cement a peace agreement, I would make Zheng your subject, and you would benefit from this in every way.” The Prince of Qi was going to agree to this, but Guan Zhong said, “Would it not be wrong for you, my lord, to have assembled the princes through ritual propriety and good faith and then to end the meeting with treachery? We call it ritual propriety when a father and son do not betray each other.103 We call it good faith when the commands are kept and when seasonal tributes are furnished.104 There is no greater treachery than violating these two principles.” The lord said, “The princes have set out to chastise Zheng, but they have not yet achieved victory. Now, if there is a rift, is it not right and proper for us to take advantage of it?”105 He responded, “If you, my lord, pacify them with virtue and impose upon them proper instructions and lead the princes to chastise Zheng after it attempts to offer a justification, then Zheng would not have time to prevent its destruction, and how could they presume not to be in fear? But if you come at them, leading their criminal, then Zheng would have their justification; why would they be afraid? Moreover, gathering the princes is for the sake of exalting the virtuous. If you meet and give place to the treacherous, then what kind of example are you displaying to your descendants? When the princes meet, there is no domain that fails to make a record of acts of virtue, justice, ritual propriety, and duty. If they record that the treacherous are put in positions of power, your covenant will be discarded. If one takes an initiative and it is not recorded, then it is not of the highest virtue.106 You, my lord, should not agree to Zihua’s proposal. Zheng surely will accept the covenant. Since Zihua is heir apparent but seeks the intercession of a great domain to weaken his own domain, he surely will not escape disaster. Zheng has three skilled men serving the government: Shuzhan, Du Shu, and Shi Shu.107 One cannot intervene yet.” The Prince of Qi declined Zihua’s offer, and Zihua was consequently found guilty in Zheng.

7.3(4)

Lord Xi

287

7.4 冬，鄭伯使請盟于齊。 7.5(8.4) 閏月，惠王崩。襄王惡大叔帶之難，懼不立，不發喪，而告難于齊。

春秋 8.1(1) 八年，春，王正月，公會王人、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、許男、曹伯、陳世子款，

盟于洮。鄭伯乞盟。 8.2(2) 夏，狄伐晉。 8.3(3) 秋，七月，禘于太廟，用致夫人。

8.4(4, 7.5)

冬，十有二月丁未，天王崩。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年，春，盟于洮，謀王室也。鄭伯乞盟，請服也。襄王定位而後發喪。

288

Zuo Tradition

In winter, the Liege of Zheng sent someone to request a covenant with Qi.

7.4

Wangzi Dai will cause trouble for the Zhou ruler (Xi 11.3). However, the position of King Xiang had been solidified at the Shouzhi meeting, which had been held under the direction of the domain of Qi (Xi 5.4). In the intercalary month, King Hui succumbed. King Xiang, tormented by the trouble brought about by Wangzi Daib, was afraid he would not be established as ruler. So he did not officially announce the death but did report to Qi on the trouble.

7.5(8.4)

LORD XI 8 (652 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, the royal first month, our lord met with a leader from the royal court, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Head of Xǔ, the Liege of Cao, and the Chen heir apparent Kuan and swore a covenant at Tao.108 The Liege of Zheng pleaded to join the covenant.

8.1(1)

In summer, the Di attacked Jin.

8.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, a di sacrifice was offered in the Grand Ancestral Temple and the tablet of Lord Zhuang’s wife was thereby installed. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the dingwei day (18), the Heaven appointed king succumbed.

8.3(3)

8.4(4, 7.5)

ZUO

Zheng continues to seek reconciliation with Qi and other members of the alliance (Xi 7.3, 7.4), and King Xiang of Zhou finally announces the death of his predecessor (Xi 7.5, 8.4). In the eighth year, in spring, a covenant was sworn at Tao: this was to make plans for the royal house.109 The Liege of Zheng sought to join the covenant and asked to submit to its terms. Only after King Xiang had stabilized his position did he officially announce the death.

8.1(1)

108 Tao 洮 was located in the domain of Cao northwest of Juancheng County 鄄城縣, Shandong. 109 This was to follow up on the death of Kung Hui mentioned in the previous Zuozhuan entry (7.5).

Lord Xi

289

8.2(2) 晉里克帥師，梁由靡御，虢射為右，以敗狄于采桑。梁由靡曰：「狄無

恥，從之，必大克。」里克曰：「懼之而已，無速眾狄。」虢射曰：「期年， 狄必至，示之弱矣。」 夏，狄伐晉，報采桑之役也。復期月。 8.3(3) 秋，禘，而致哀姜焉，非禮也。凡夫人，不薨于寢，不殯于廟，不赴于同，

不祔于姑，則弗致也。 8.4(4) 冬，王人來告喪，難故也，是以緩。 8.5 宋公疾，大子茲父固請曰：「目夷長且仁，君其立之！」公命子魚。子魚辭

曰：「能以國讓，仁孰大焉？臣不及也，且又不順。」遂走而退。

110 Caisang 采桑 was located in the domain of Jin west of present-day Xiangning County 鄉寧縣, Shanxi. 111 This “lying in state” really involved temporarily placing the coffin and body in a shallow pit (see Yang, 1:322). 112 For another instance of unusual ritual after the death of the mother of a lord, see Yin 3.2. 113 In Shiji (38.1625), this event is reported as follows: “In the spring of his thirtieth year, Duke Huan fell ill. Cifu, the heir apparent, yielded the succession to his elder half brother Muyi (Ziyu). Duke Huan considered the heir apparent’s intention to be duti­ ful but to the end would not listen to him. In spring of the thirty-first year, Duke Huan died. Cifu, the heir apparent, was established as ruler and became Duke Xiang. He made his elder half brother Muyi his minister.”

290

Zuo Tradition

In recent years, the Di had attacked Xing (Min 1.2, Xi 1.2). Here Jin fails to follow up on a victory over the Di and is consequently attacked. Li Ke of Jin led troops, with Liang Youmi as his chariot driver and Guo She as his spearman on the right, and defeated the Di at Caisang.110 Liang Youmi said, “The Di have no shame. If we pursue them, surely we will win a great victory.” Li Ke said, “We should merely intimidate them. Let us not provoke the many Di groups.” Guo She said, “Within a year, the Di surely will come back, for we have shown them that we are weak!” In summer, the Di attacked Jin: this was to avenge the Caisang campaign. This fulfilled the prediction of one year.

8.2(2)

Ai Jiang, the wife of the former Lu ruler Lord Zhuang, had a checkered past and had been put to death in the domain of Qi (Zhuang 24.2, Min 2.3, Xi 1.7). Here the installation of her ancestral tablet in the temple is condemned. In autumn, a di sacrifice was offered and Ai Jiang’s tablet was installed in the temple: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when a wife does not expire in her living chamber, or does not lie in state in the Ancestral Temple,111 or whose notification of death is not sent to allies, or is not enshrined alongside her mother-in-law, then one does not install her tablet.112

8.3(3)

The following passage explains why the Annals mentions King Hui’s death only this year, although he had died a year earlier. In winter, the king’s men came to announce the mourning period: it was because of the troubles that this was so slow.

8.4(4)

In the next episode a virtuous younger brother yields to his older half brother in a reversal of the common Zuozhuan theme of a worthy older being supplanted by an ambitious younger son. But the older half brother, Ziyu, is not the son of the duke’s principal wife and consequently realizes that for him to succeed “would not be the proper course of things.” Cifu, the heir apparent, will become Lord Xiang of Song. The Duke of Song fell ill. Cifu, the heir apparent, insisted, “Ziyub is older and is also noble in spirit. You, my lord, should establish him as heir.” So the duke appointed Ziyu. But Ziyu declined, saying, “What greater nobility could there be than the ability to yield the domain? I am not his equal, and also that would not be the proper course of things.” Then he ran away and withdrew.113

8.5

Lord Xi

291

春秋 9.1(1) 九年，春，三月丁丑，宋公御說卒。 9.2(2) 夏，公會宰周公、齊侯、宋子、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯于葵丘。 9.3 秋，七月乙酉，伯姬卒。 9.4(3) 九月戊辰，諸侯盟于葵丘。 9.5(4) 甲子，晉侯佹諸卒。 9.6(4) 冬，晉里克殺其君之子奚齊。

左傳 9.1(1) 九年，春，宋桓公卒。未葬而襄公會諸侯，故曰子。凡在喪，王曰小童，

公侯曰子。 9.2(2) 夏，會于葵丘，尋盟，且修好，禮也。王使宰孔賜齊侯胙，曰：「天子有事

于文、武，使孔賜伯舅胙。」齊侯將下拜。孔曰：「且有後命。天子使孔 曰：『以伯舅耋老，加勞，賜一級，無下拜！』」對曰：「天威不違顏咫尺， 小白余敢貪天子之命，無下拜？恐隕越于下，以遺天子羞。敢不下拜？」 下，拜，登，受。

114 This was the steward Kong who was also granted a fief in Zhou and was known as the Zhou Duke. 115 For clarification of this reading, see Xi 9.1. 116 Kuiqiu 葵丘 was located in the domain of Song east of present-day Lankao County 蘭考縣, Henan. 117 According to Takezoe (5.46), she was a younger sister of Lord Xi, and her death is recorded because she had already been promised in marriage to the ruler of another domain. 118 Jiazi 甲子 is the first day of the sixty-day cycle. It is curious that in this case no month is given. Perhaps this results from the fact that the Jin emissary who announced this death to Lu reported only the day and not the month. At any rate, the jiazi day noted here would have corresponded to the tenth day of the eleventh month of the Zhou calendar. 119 The actual practice seems to be that any year can have only one ruler. Thus, when a ruler dies, his successor is known as “the son” for the remainder of the year in which the ruler has died (Yang, 1:325). 120 The Chinese text literally says, “The Son of Heaven had official duties in regard to Wen and Wu.” As Cheng 13.2 makes clear, “The great affairs of the domain lie with sacrifice and warfare.” In this case shi 事 refers to sacrifices.

292

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 9 (651 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, in the third month, on the dingchou day (19), Yuyue, the Duke of Song, died. In summer, our lord met with the Zhou Duke, who was the king’s steward,114 the Prince of Qi, the son of Song,115 the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao at Kuiqiu.116 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the yiyou day (29), Bo Ji died.117 In the ninth month, on the wuchen day (13), the princes swore a covenant at Kuiqiu.

9.1(1)

9.2(2)

9.3 9.4(3)

On the jiazi day,118 Guizhu, the Prince of Jin, died.

9.5(4)

In winter, Li Ke of Jin put to death Xiqi, his ruler’s son.

9.6(4)

ZUO

In the ninth year, in spring, Lord Huan of Song died. When he had not yet been buried, Lord Xiang met with the princes, and that is why he is called “the son.” In all cases when it is within the mourning period, a king is called “the small child” and a duke or prince is called “the son.”119

9.1(1)

King Xiang of Zhou, who had been installed through Qi assistance (Xi 5.4, 7.5), bestows special honors on the Qi ruler. In summer, a meeting was held at Kuiqiu: this was to renew the covenant and also to foster good relations and was in accordance with ritual propriety. The king sent the steward Kong to bestow sacrificial meat on the Prince of Qi, saying, “The Son of Heaven is offering sacrifices to Kings Wen and Wu and has sent me to bestow the sacrificial meat on his elder maternal uncle.”120 The Prince of Qi was about to descend the steps and bow in obeisance, but Kong said, “There is still a second command. The Son of Heaven sent me to say, ‘Because my elder maternal uncle is aged and has increased his toil, I am bestowing on him an additional rank. He need not descend and bow.’” The prince responded, “When Heaven’s majesty is no more than a few inches from my face, how would I, Xiaobo, dare to accept the command of the Son of Heaven but not descend and bow in obeisance? I fear that I might in that case tumble down below and thereby bring shame to the Son of Heaven. Would I dare not but descend and kneel?” He came down, knelt in obeisance, then ascended and received the sacrificial meat.121

9.2(2)

121 The Kuiqiu meeting, described rather briefly here, takes on great importance in Mencius, where the supposed provisions of the covenant are spelled out (see Mencius 6B.7). Another more detailed account of this meeting is found in Guanzi 20.392.

Lord Xi

293

9.3(4) 秋，齊侯盟諸侯于葵丘，曰：「凡我同盟之人，既盟之後，言歸于好。」

宰孔先歸，遇晉侯，曰：「可無會也。齊侯不務德而勤遠略，故北 伐山戎，南伐楚，西為此會也。東略之不知，西則否矣。其在亂乎！君務 靖亂，無勤於行。」晉侯乃還。

9.4(5, 6)

九月，晉獻公卒。里克、丕鄭欲納文公，故以三公子之徒作亂。 初，獻公使荀息傅奚齊。公疾，召之曰：「以是藐諸孤，辱在大夫， 其若之何？」稽首而對曰：「臣竭其股肱之力，加之以忠貞。其濟，君之 靈也；不濟，則以死繼之。」公曰：「何謂忠貞？」對曰：「公家之利，知無 不為，忠也；送往事居，耦俱無猜，貞也。」 及里克將殺奚齊，先告荀息曰：「三怨將作，秦、晉輔之，子將何 如？」荀息曰：「將死之。」里克曰：「無益也。」荀叔曰：「吾與先君言矣， 不可以貳。能欲復言而愛身乎？雖無益也，將焉辟之？且人之欲善，誰 不如我？我欲無貳，而能謂人已乎？」

122 Du Yu understands this to refer to disorder in the Prince of Jin’s home domain (ZZ 13.327). An alternative reading, supported by Karlgren (gl. 104), is that it refers to future disorder in Qi. 123 The steward Kong is referring to the strife and disorder caused by Li Ji (Xi 4.6, 5.2), consort of Lord Xian of Jin. Lord Xian is more or less a proto-overlord who is engaged in a ruthless expansionism and centralization of power. Kong is thus implying that there is a parallel between Lord Huan and Lord Xian. Lord Xian dies shortly after his meeting with Kong (Xi 9.4). Duke Huan leads forces of the lords to settle disorder in Jin following Lord Xian’s death (Xi 9.5). 124 A more detailed version of the steward Kong’s speech is given in Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.301, where Kong emphasizes Lord Huan of Qi’s efforts to treat the other princes with generosity. Shiji (32.1490) claims that the Prince of Jin was late to the meeting because of illness, but Gongyang, Xi 9 (11.134), says he sensed danger resulting from the Lord of Qi’s arrogance. 125 The “three resentful groups” are presumably followers of Shensheng (who is already dead), Chong’er, and Yiwu. 126 Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 17.415) believes that er 貳 in this instance is a graphic error for te 忒, “to change” or “to deviate”: “I have given my word to our former ruler and cannot deviate from it.” 127 He is saying that he does not intend to keep Li Ke from supporting the rebellion.

294

Zuo Tradition

An emissary of the Zhou king raises questions about the Prince of Qi’s ambitions and warns the Prince of Jin about impending problems in Jin. In autumn, the Prince of Qi swore a covenant with the princes at Kuiqiu that said, “All who joined together with us to swear this covenant will, after the covenant is sworn, revert to good relations.” The steward Kong, who was returning early from the meeting, encountered the Prince of Jin and said, “There is no need to go to the meeting. The Prince of Qi does not strive for virtue but expends effort on distant expeditions. Thus, he attacked the Shan Rong in the north, he attacked Chu in the south, and he held this meeting in the west. I do not know about expeditions in the east, but the one in the west will fail. Everything turns on the matter of disorder!122 You, my lord, should strive to quell disorder at home123 rather than expending effort on travel.”124 The Prince of Jin then returned home.

9.3(4)

The prediction of the previous passage (Xi 9.3) comes true as the Jin ruler Lord Xian dies and leaves behind a tangled succession, which Zuozhuan has already foreshadowed (Min 2.7, Xi 4.6). In the ninth month, Lord Xian of Jin died. Li Ke and Pi Zheng wanted to install Lord Wen in power, and that is the reason they raised a rebellion along with the support of the followers of the three noble sons. Earlier, Lord Xian had Xun Xi tutor Xiqi. When the lord fell ill, he summoned him and said, “I entrust this small, weak orphan to your indulgent care, sir. What do you intend to do about this?” Xun Xi bowed with his forehead touching the ground and responded, “Your subject will exert himself to the utmost, adding to that loyalty and integrity. If I succeed, then it will be by my lord’s numinous influence. And if I do not succeed, then let death follow.” The lord said, “What do you mean by ‘loyalty’ and ‘integrity’?” He responded, “To know what is advantageous for the lord’s family and always act accordingly is loyalty. To send off the departed ruler and to serve the one who is present so that both will have no cause for suspicion is integrity.” When Li Ke was going to kill Xiqi, he first notified Xun Xi: “The three resentful groups are about to rise up, and Qin and Jin will side with them.125 What will you do about this? Xun Xi said, “I will die for him.” Li Ke said, “That will be of no benefit.” Xun Xia said, “I have given my word to our former ruler and I cannot be duplicitous.126 Could I wish to fulfill my words but cherish my own body? Even if it may do no good, how could I avoid such action? Moreover, what man, desiring to do the good, would not be like me? I do not wish to be duplicitous, but can I counsel others to desist?”127

9.4(5, 6)

Lord Xi

295

冬，十月，里克殺奚齊于次。書曰「殺其君之子」，未葬也。荀息將 死之，人曰：「不如立卓子而輔之。」荀息立公子卓以葬。 十一月，里克殺公子卓于朝。荀息死之。君子曰：「《詩》所謂： 白圭之玷， 尚可磨也； 斯言之玷， 不可為也。 荀息有焉。」 9.5 齊侯以諸侯之師伐晉，及高梁而還，討晉亂也。令不及魯，故不書。 9.6 晉郤芮使夷吾重賂秦以求入，曰：「人實有國，我何愛焉？入而能民，土

於何有？」從之。 齊隰朋帥師會秦師納晉惠公。秦伯謂郤芮曰：「公子誰恃？」對 曰：「臣聞：亡人無黨，有黨必有讎。夷吾弱不好弄，能鬬不過，長亦不 改，不識其他。」 公謂公孫枝曰：「夷吾其定乎？」對曰：「臣聞之：唯則定國。《詩》 曰： 不識不知， 順帝之則。 文王之謂也。又曰： 128 The “mourning hut” was a thatched hut wherein Xiqi was carrying out the obligatory period of mourning for his deceased father, Lord Xian. 129 Quoted from Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.646. Guoyu has versions of this episode and of much that follows concerning the struggle for the Jin succession that are often more detailed than the Zuozhuan accounts. In the present case, the flashback in which Xun Xi promises the ailing Lord Xian that he will support Xiqi with “loyalty and integrity” is put into indirect discourse as Xun Xi reports to Li Ke why he cannot join the rebellion. Li Ke also explains in Guoyu why Xun Xi’s death in support of Xiqi “will be of no benefit”: “If you died, and the young child is established, would it not be useful? But if you die, and the young child is cast aside, how will it be useful to die?” Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.303–4, also contains a conversation between Li Ke and Pi Zheng in which the former gains the support of the latter, but only after convincing him that the rebellion should not be joined for reasons of personal profit. The result of all of this is that “they killed Xiqi, Zhuozi, and Li Ji and requested the ruler [Yiwu] from Qin.” 130 Gaoliang 高梁 was just north of the Jin capital and northeast of present-day Linfen City 臨汾市, Shanxi. 131 This seems to imply that Yiwu has not done anything to accumulate enemies in his home domain. A parallel version in Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.313–14, is more explicit: “When Yiwu was young, he was not fond of playing games, he did not go beyond his proper place, and anger did not show in his appearance. Now that he has grown up,

296

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the tenth month, Li Ke put Xiqi to death in the mourning hut.128 That the text says, he “killed his ruler’s son” is because Lord Xian had not yet been buried. Xun Xi was going to die defending Xiqi when someone said, “Would it not be better to establish Zhuozi as ruler and assist him?” So Xun Xi established Zhuozia as ruler and completed the burial of Lord Xian. In the eleventh month, Li Ke killed Zhuozia in the court, and Xun Xi died defending him. The noble man said, “Xun Xi was an example of what it says in the Odes, A flaw in a tablet of white jade Still can be polished away. But a flaw in one’s words— Nothing can be done about that.”129

The Prince of Qi took troops of the princes to attack Jin. They advanced as far as Gaoliang and then turned back.130 This was to chastise Jin for disorder. The order did not reach Lu, and that is why it is not recorded.

9.5

One Jin successor, Zhuozi, has just been eliminated (Xi 9.4). Yiwu, with Qin support (Xi 6.1), is now presented as a potential successor, but there are hints here that his reign will not last long (Xi 10.2). Xi Rui of Jin urged Yiwu to bribe Qin generously to seek their support in entering Jin. He said, “When it is other men who have the domain in their possession, why should we begrudge bribes? If you enter the domain and are able to manage the people, what worries will you have about land?” Yiwu followed this advice. Xi Peng of Qi led troops to join with Qin troops to install Lord Hui of Jin, the former Yiwu, in power. The Liege of Qin said to Xi Rui, “Upon whom is the noble son Yiwu dependent?” He responded, “I have heard that a fugitive has no partisans. If he does have partisans, then he is sure to have enemies. When Yiwu was small, he was not fond of games. He could fight, but he did not take it too far. He has not changed even after he has grown up. But I don’t know anything more.”131 The Lord of Qin said to Gongsun Zhi, “Will Yiwu achieve stability?” He responded, “I have heard it said, ‘Standards alone pacify a domain.’ As it says in the Odes,

9.6

I do not understand, I do not know; I follow the standards of the god on high.132

This was speaking of King Wen. Elsewhere in the Odes it says,

he has not changed. That is why, even though he left as a fugitive, he has no enemies in his domain and the multitudes are at peace with him.” 132 See Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.573.

Lord Xi

297

不僭不賊， 鮮不為則。 無好無惡，不忌不克之謂也。今其言多忌克，難哉！」公曰：「忌則多怨， 又焉能克？是吾利也。」 9.7 宋襄公即位，以公子目夷為仁，使為左師以聽政，於是宋治。故魚氏世

為左師。

春秋 10.1 十年，春，王正月，公如齊。 10.2(1) 狄滅溫，溫子奔衛。 10.3 晉里克弒其君卓及其大夫荀息。 10.4 夏，齊侯、許男伐北戎。 10.5(2) 晉殺其大夫里克。 10.6 秋，七月。 10.7 冬，大雨雪。

左傳 10.1(2) 十年，春，狄滅溫，蘇子無信也。蘇子叛王即狄，又不能於狄，狄人伐之，

王不救，故滅。蘇子奔衛。

298

Zuo Tradition

Deceive not, offend not; Rarely will you fail to serve as a standard.133

This is speaking of not having strong likes or strong aversions, of not being suspicious and aggressive. Now, since his words are suspicious and aggressive, there will be calamity!” The lord said, “If he is suspicious, there will be much resentment. So how can he overcome? This is to our advantage.” The virtue of the noble son Ziyu is rewarded in Song, and his descendants, “men of the Yu lineage,” continue in influence for generations (Xi 8.5). When Lord Xiang of Song acceded to his position, he considered Ziyua noble in spirit and appointed him minister of the left to attend to administration. With that, Song was ruled well. That is why men of the Yu lineage served as ministers of the left generation after generation.

9.7

LORD XI 10 (650 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, the royal first month, our lord went to Qi.

10.1

The Di extinguished Wen, and the Master of Wen (the Master of Su) fled to Wei.134

10.2(1)

Li Ke of Jin assassinated his ruler Zhuo and the high officer Xun Xi.

10.3

In summer, the Prince of Qi and the Head of Xǔ attacked the Northern Rong.

10.4

Jin put to death its high officer Li Ke.

10.5(2)

Autumn, the seventh month.

10.6

In winter, there was a great snowfall.

10.7

ZUO

In the tenth year, in spring, the Di extinguished Wen: this was because the Master of Su had been without good faith.135 The Master of Su had rebelled against the king and gone over to the Di. But then, again, he was not able to get along with the Di, and the men of Di attacked him. The king did not come to his rescue, and that is why Wen was extinguished. The Master of Su fled to Wei.

10.1(2)

133 See Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.648. 134 On Wen, see Yin 3.3. 135 The Master of Su, the head of the Su lineage, was also known as the Master of Wen. His lineage is noted in Zhuang 19.2, n. 119.

Lord Xi

299

10.2(5) 夏，四月，周公忌父、王子黨會齊隰朋立晉侯。晉侯殺里克以說。將殺里

克，公使謂之曰：「微子，則不及此。雖然，子殺二君與一大夫，為子君 者，不亦難乎？」對曰：「不有廢也，君何以興？欲加之罪，其無辭乎？臣 聞命矣。」伏劍而死。 於是丕鄭聘于秦，且謝緩賂，故不及。 10.3 晉侯改葬共大子。秋，狐突適下國，遇大子。大子使登，僕，而告之曰：

「夷吾無禮，余得請於帝矣，將以晉畀秦，秦將祀余。」 對曰：「臣聞之：『神不歆非類，民不祀非族。』君祀無乃殄乎？且 民何罪？失刑、乏祀，君其圖之！」 君曰：「諾。吾將復請。七日，新城西偏將有巫者而見我焉。」許 之，遂不見。及期而往，告之曰：「帝許我罰有罪矣，敝於韓。」

136 Both the Zhou Duke and Prince Dang are agents of the king, and Xi Peng is a high official of the domain of Qi. Thus, Zhou and Qi have joined together to support Yiwu as successor in the domain of Jin. 137 That is, the Prince of Jin used the execution to demonstrate to the other lords that he was indeed serious about punishing evildoers (Karlgren, gl. 108; and Yang, 1:333). 138 Shensheng committed suicide under suspicion of treason and was presumably not properly buried. Yiwu disinterred and reburied Shensheng with proper ritual, perhaps in part to enhance his own legitimacy. According to an account in Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.316–17, Shensheng’s corpse, when disinterred, gave forth a formidable stench. The people of Jin thus sang a song: “Integrity is not repaid. Who is it, then, that creates this stench?” The song holds the dishonest Yiwu accountable for the foulness of Shensheng’s corpse and predicts the demise of Yiwu’s line and the ascendancy of Chong’er. 139 Shensheng had committed suicide six years earlier. The secondary capital referred to here is Quwo (also known as “the New City”) and was formerly under the governance of Shensheng. Quwo was the power base of the lateral branch that eliminated the “trunk” and became the ruling lineage in Jin. 140 Hu Tu had previously been Shensheng’s carriage driver. 141 Yang (1:334) believes that Lady Jia, whom Yiwu takes as wife, was actually the widow of Shensheng and that Shensheng is alluding to that relationship with his claim here that Yiwu is “without ritual propriety” (see also Yang’s commentary [1:356] on Xi 15.1). Another theory is that Lady Jia is Yiwu’s stepmother. 142 The same argument appears in Xi 31.5. 143 In punishing all of Jin because of the wrongdoing of Lord Hui, the ghost of Shen­ sheng shows less magnanimity than Lord Mu of Qin, who twice transports grain to Jin during times of famine (Xi 13.4 and 15.8). 144 It is the heir apparent Shensheng who is speaking, and the term “lord” 君 here is most odd. One theory is that the narrative simply picks up Hu Tu’s use of the term just above.

300

Zuo Tradition

Yiwu, who will be known as Lord Hui (r. 650–637), is now established as ruler in Jin (Xi 9.6). He immediately takes action against Li Ke, despite the fact that the latter’s rebellious action had made it possible for Yiwu to come to power in the first place (Xi 9.4), a theme encountered earlier in Zhuang 14.2. In summer, in the fourth month, the Zhou Duke Jifu and Wangzi Dang met with Xi Peng of Qi to establish Yiwu, the Prince of Jin, as ruler.136 The Prince of Jin put to death Li Ke in order to provide an explanation.137 When the prince was about to put to death Li Ke, he had someone say to him, “If it had not been for you, I would not have attained this position. Nevertheless, you killed two rulers and one high officer. Are not those who become your ruler only making trouble for themselves?” He responded, “How would you, my lord, have risen to power had others not been cast aside? But if you wish to put the guilt on me, how could you fail to make a case? I have heard your command!” He then fell upon his sword and died. At that time, Pi Zheng was making an official visit to Qin and was also apologizing for the delay in presenting gifts, and that is why the punishment did not involve him.

10.2(5)

A violation of ritual on the part of the Prince of Jin provokes the wrath of his half brother Shensheng’s ghost, who appears to the Jin minister Hu Tu (on Shensheng’s death, see Xi 4.6). The latter is able to assuage Shensheng’s anger so that the domain of Jin will be preserved, but Shensheng does gain the god’s promise that Yiwu will be destroyed at the Plains of Han, a promise that foreshadows Yiwu’s eventual defeat (Xi 15.4). The Prince of Jin reburied the heir apparent Shenshenga.138 In autumn, Hu Tu was on his way to the secondary capital when he happened upon the heir apparent.139 The heir apparent had him mount the carriage and serve as his driver140 and then told him, “Since Yiwu has no sense of propriety,141 the god on high has granted my request: he will give Jin to Qin, and Qin will offer sacrifices to me.” Hu Tu replied, “I have heard this: ‘Spirits do not relish sacrifices from those not of their kind; and the people do not offer sacrifices to those not of their house.’142 Would not your sacrifices then be discontinued? Moreover, of what crimes are the people guilty?143 To have erred in your punish­ ments and to have no more sacrifices: you, my lord, should consider this!” The lord said,144 “Quite right. I will make another request. Seven days hence, on the west side of the New City, there will be a shaman through whom I will reveal myself.” Hu Tu agreed to this and the heir apparent then disappeared. When the time came, Hu Tu went to the place, and the shaman announced to him, “The god on high has promised me that he will punish the wrongdoer, who will be defeated at Han.”

10.3

Lord Xi

301

丕鄭之如秦也，言於秦伯曰：「呂甥、郤稱、冀芮實為不從，若重 問以召之，臣出晉君，君納重耳，蔑不濟矣。」 冬，秦伯使泠至報、問，且召三子。郤芮曰：「幣重而言甘，誘我 也。」遂殺丕鄭、祁舉及七輿大夫：左行共華、右行賈華、叔堅、騅歂、 纍虎、特宮、山祁，皆里、丕之黨也。 丕豹奔秦，言於秦伯曰：「晉侯背大主而忌小怨，民弗與也。伐 之，必出。」公曰：「失眾，焉能殺？違禍，誰能出君？」

春秋 11.1 十有一年，春，晉殺其大夫丕鄭父。 11.2 夏，公及夫人姜氏會齊侯於陽穀。 11.3 秋，八月，大雩。 11.4(4) 冬，楚人伐黃。

145 That is, they will not honor their earlier promise to present bribes to Qin. 146 Pi Bao is the son of Pi Zheng. 147 That is, petty resentmentment against people such as Li Ke and Pi Zheng has made him vindictive. 148 A more detailed version appears in Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.320–22: “Pi Zheng went to Qin to apologize for the delay in presenting gifts. He said to Lord Mu, ‘You, my lord, should inquire about their well-being with abundant gifts and thereby summon Lü Sheng, Xi Cheng, and Xi Rui and then detain them. With an army provide support to Gongzi Chong’er, and my supporters will foment rebellion within the domain so the ruler of Jin will be certain to flee the domain.’ Lord Mu sent Ling Zhi to return the inquiries and also to summon the three high officers. Pi Zheng, along with the Qin guest [Ling Zhi], was about to carry out this matter, when Xi Rui said, ‘What Pi Zheng presented to Qin was meager, and Qin’s repayment has been abundant. What he has said of us in Qin surely was to entice us there. If we do not kill him, surely he will foment trouble.’ That is why they killed Pi Zheng and the seven high

302

Zuo Tradition

When Pi Zheng went to Qin, he said to the Liege of Qin, “Lü Sheng, Xi Cheng, and Xi Ruia are the ones who will not comply.145 If you present gifts and ask after their well-being in order to summon them, I, your subject, will expel the ruler of Jin, and you, my lord, may install Chong’er in power. All would be achieved!” In winter, the Liege of Qin sent Ling Zhi to reciprocate Pi Zheng’s visit, to make inquiries, and also to summon the three men. Xi Rui said, “His gifts are abundant and his words sweet. He is trying to entice us!” Upon which they killed Pi Zheng, Qi Ju, and the seven high officers of the chariots: the leader of the left file Gong Hua, the leader of the right file Jia Hua, Shu Jian, Zhui Chuan, Lei Hu, Te Gong, and Shan Qi. All were partisans of Li Kea and Pi Zhenga. Pi Bao fled to Qin146 and said to the Liege of Qin, “The Prince of Jin has turned his back on a great benefactor, and he is vindictive about small grudges.147 The people will not go along with him. If we attack him, they surely will expel him.”148 The lord said, “If he had lost the support of the multitudes, how could he have killed his great officers? Since opponents like you have fled the calamity, who is there to expel the ruler?” LORD XI 11 (649 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, Jin put to death its high officer Pi Zhengfu (Pi Zheng).149

11.1

In summer, our lord and his wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Yanggu.150

11.2

In autumn, in the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

11.3

In winter, a Chu leader attacked Huang.

11.4(4)



officers of the chariot: Gong Hua, Jia Hua, Shu Jiang, Zhui Chuan, Lei Hu, Te Gong, and Shan Qi—all partisans of Li and Pi. . . . The son of Pi Zheng was named Bao. He fled to Qin and said to Lord Mu, ‘The ruler of Jin has largely lost the support of the multitudes. He has turned his back on the gifts promised to you, has killed Li Ke, and is spiteful toward those who remained in the domain. The people are assuredly displeased. Now, he also has killed my father and the seven high officers of the chariot. These partisans of his have split the domain in two! If you, my lord, were to attack them, the ruler would surely leave the domain.’” 149 This is recorded in Zuozhuan under the previous year. As before, the difference reflects the fact that Zuozhuan follows the Jin use of the Xia calendar, whereas the Annals consistently utilizes the Zhou calendar of the domain of Lu. 150 The lord’s wife was Sheng Jiang, the daughter of Lord Huan of Qi (r. 685–643).

Lord Xi

303

左傳 11.1 十一年，春，晉侯使以丕鄭之亂來告。 11.2 天王使召武公、內史過賜晉侯命，受玉惰。過歸，告王曰：「晉侯其無後

乎！王賜之命，而惰於受瑞，先自棄也已，其何繼之有？禮，國之幹也； 敬，禮之輿也。不敬，則禮不行；禮不行，則上下昏，何以長世？」 11.3 夏，揚、拒、泉、臯、伊、雒之戎同伐京師，入王城，焚東門，王子帶召之

也。秦、晉伐戎以救周。秋，晉侯平戎于王。 11.4(4) 黃人不歸楚貢。冬，楚人伐黃。

春秋 12.1 十有二年，春，王三月庚午，日有食之。 12.2(2) 夏，楚人滅黃。 12.3 秋，七月。 12.4 冬，十有二月丁丑，陳侯杵臼卒。

151 There is some difference of opinion as to whether Yang 揚, Ju 拒, Quan 泉, and Gao 皋 are four places or two (i.e., Yangju and Quangao) (Yang, 1:339). These places were all near Luoyang.

304

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the eleventh year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent someone to us to announce the rebellion of Pi Zheng.

11.1

We are presented with yet one more indication that Yiwu, the Prince of Jin, is doomed (Xi 9.6, 10.3, 15.4). The Heaven-appointed king sent the Shao Duke Wu and the court scribe Guo to confer an appointment upon the Prince of Jin, who behaved slothfully as he received the ceremonial jade. When Guo returned, he reported to the king, “The Prince of Jin surely will have no progeny! You, my king, conferred an appointment upon him, but he was slothful as he received the jade tablet. Since he has already abandoned what he owes himself, what successor could he have? Ritual propriety is the pillar of the domain, and respect is the vehicle of ritual. If one does not show respect, then ritual will not advance. And if ritual does not advance, then the order of superior and inferior will be confused. How then will his line extend for generations?”

11.2

Wangzi Dai’s activities continue to threaten Zhou stability (Xi 7.5, 12.3). In summer, the Rong of Yang, Ju, Quan, Gao, and the regions of the Yi and Luo Rivers jointly attacked the Zhou capital.151 They entered Wang­ cheng and set fire to the eastern gate. It was Wangzi Dai who had summoned them. Qin and Jin attacked the Rong to come to Zhou’s rescue. In autumn, the Prince of Jin brokered a peace treaty between the Rong and the king.

11.3

The Huang leaders did not deliver tribute to Chu. In winter, a Chu leader attacked Huang.

11.4(4)

LORD XI 12 (648 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the gengwu day, there was an eclipse of the sun.152

12.1

In summer, a Chu leader extinguished Huang.

12.2(2)

Autumn, the seventh month.

12.3

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the dingchou day (11), Chujiu, the Prince of Chen, died.

12.4

152 The eclipse presumably occurred on the first day of the fourth month, which can be calculated to 6 April 648 Bce (Yang, 1:339–40).

Lord Xi

305

左傳 12.1 十二年，春，諸侯城衛楚丘之郛，懼狄難也。 12.2(2) 黃人恃諸侯之睦于齊也，不共楚職，曰：「自郢及我九百里，焉能害我？」

夏，楚滅黃。 12.3 王以戎難故，討王子帶。秋，王子帶奔齊。 12.4 冬，齊侯使管夷吾平戎于王，使隰朋平戎于晉。

王以上卿之禮饗管仲。管仲辭曰：「臣，賤有司也。有天子之二守 國、高在，若節春秋來承王命，何以禮焉？陪臣敢辭。」王曰：「舅氏！余 嘉乃勳！應乃懿德，謂督不忘。往踐乃職，無逆朕命！」管仲受下卿之禮 而還。 君子曰：「管氏之世祀也宜哉！讓不忘其上。《詩》曰： 愷悌君子， 神所勞矣。」

153 Ying 郢 was one of the capitals of Chu. It was located near present-day Jiangling County 江陵縣, Hubei (see map 4). 154 The Zhou rulers had appointed the Guo and Gao lineages as overseers of the regional states. As such, their position was immeasurably higher than local noble lineages such as the Guan lineage in Qi. On this system, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power, 113. 155 Since Guan Zhong is the Qi ruler’s subject, he is “the subject of the king’s subject” (peichen 陪臣).

306

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the twelfth month, in spring, the princes fortified the outer wall of Chuqiu in Wei. They were afraid of trouble with the Di.

12.1

The Huang leaders, counting on the fact that the princes were on friendly terms with Qi, did not present tribute to Chu, saying, “It is nine hundred li from Ying to our domain.153 How can they harm us? In summer, Chu extinguished Huang.

12.2(2)

Wangzi Dai now flees to Qi (Xi 7.5, 11.3, 13.1). On account of the conflict with the Rong, the king chastised Wangzi Dai. In autumn, Wangzi Dai fled to Qi.

12.3

Guan Zhong, the Prince of Qi’s wise minister, pacifies the Rong (Xi 11.3) and impresses the Zhou king with his deference. Compare this with similar protestations of being unworthy from Lord Huan, Guan Zhong’s master (Xi 9.2). In winter, the Prince of Qi sent Guan Zhonga to make peace between the Rong and the king and sent Xi Peng to make peace between the Rong and Jin. The king offered Guan Zhong ceremonial toasts with the ritual appropriate to a high minister. Guan Zhong declined, saying, “I am but a petty functionary. Guo and Gao, two prefects of the Son of Heaven, are still in place.154 If they mark the festivals of spring and autumn by coming to receive the king’s commands, with what ritual will you honor them? I, the subject of the king’s subject,155 presume to decline.” The king said, “My uncle!156 I commend thy merit, and I accept thy admirable virtue, which I deem steadfast and will not forget. Go forth and discharge thy duties and do not contravene my orders!” Guan Zhong accepted the ritual appropriate to a lesser minister and returned home. The noble man said, “Fitting indeed that the Guan lineage should continue its sacrifices over the generations!157 He acted with deference and did not forget his superiors. As it says in the Odes,

12.4

Joyous and pleased is the noble man, He whose exertions the spirits reward.”158

156 Guan Zhong has the same clan lineage as the Zhou king (see Guoyu, “Qi yu,” 6.223; and Yang, 1:342). Thus, the king addresses him as “uncle.” 157 Guan Zhong’s descendants, while not prominent in Zuozhuan, are mentioned in Cheng 11.3 and Ai 16.5. 158 Maoshi 239, “Han lu” 旱麓, 16C.560.

Lord Xi

307

春秋 13.1 十有三年，春，狄侵衛。 13.2 夏，四月，葬陳宣公。 13.3(2) 公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯于鹹。 13.4 秋，九月，大雩。 13.5 冬，公子友如齊。

左傳 13.1 十三年，春，齊侯使仲孫湫聘于周，且言王子帶。事畢，不與王言。歸，

復命曰：「未可。王怒未怠，其十年乎？不十年，王弗召也。」 13.2(3) 夏，會于鹹，淮夷病杞故，且謀王室也。 13.3 秋，為戎難故，諸侯戍周。齊仲孫湫致之。 13.4 冬，晉薦饑，使乞糴于秦。秦伯謂子桑：「與諸乎？」對曰：「重施而報，

君將何求？重施而不報，其民必攜；攜而討焉，無眾必敗。」

159 Xian 鹹 was located in the domain of Wei southeast of Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan. 160 There is some question as to whether Huai Yi 淮夷 refers to the name of a domain or to a group of Yi people who were scattered along the Huai River (Yang, 1:344). 161 The first act of generosity was returning Yiwu.

308

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 13 (647 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Di invaded Wei.

13.1

In summer, in the fourth month, Lord Xuan of Chen was buried.

13.2

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao at Xian.159

13.3(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

13.4

In winter, Gongzi You went to Qi.

13.5

ZUO

A Qi minister predicts that it will be ten years before Wangzi Dai is brought back to Zhou (Xi 12.3), a prediction that will indeed be fulfilled (Xi 22.6). In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi sent Zhongsun Jiao to make an official visit to Zhou and also to speak with them about Wangzi Dai. After the official business was finished, he did not speak with the king about Wangzi Dai but returned home and reported on his charge: “It cannot yet be done. The king’s anger has not yet slackened. That will surely take ten years! Short of ten years, the king will not call Wangzi Dai back.”

13.1

In summer, there was a meeting at Xian: this was because the Yi of the Huai region had made trouble for Qǐ, and this was also to make plans regarding the royal house.160

13.2(3)

Despite efforts to pacify the Rong (Xi 12.4), danger remains. In autumn, on account of the trouble with the Rong, the princes garrisoned Zhou. Zhongsun Jiao of Qi took troops there.

13.3

Qin responds generously to a request for grain from the neighboring domain of Jin, which is in the midst of famine. Gongsun Zhi suggests that failure on Jin’s part to repay Qin for its generosity will indeed alienate the multitudes of Jin from their ruler, an issue that had arisen previously (Xi 10.3). In winter, there was a famine in Jin for the second year in a row. They sent someone to plead for a supply of grain from Qin. The Liege of Qin asked Gongsun Zhia, “Should we give it to them?” He responded, “If you show generosity for a second time and they pay you back, what more can you ask?161 If you show generosity for a second time, and they do not repay you, their people will surely be disaffected. If they are disaffected and you go to chastise him, he, lacking the support of the multitudes, will surely be defeated.”

13.4

Lord Xi

309

謂百里：「與諸乎？」對曰：「天災流行，國家代有。救災恤鄰，道 也。行道有福。」 丕鄭之子豹在秦，請伐晉。秦伯曰：「其君是惡，其民何罪？」秦於 是乎輸粟于晉，自雍及絳相繼，命之曰「汎舟之役」。

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年，春，諸侯城緣陵。 14.2(2) 夏，六月，季姬及鄫子遇于防。使鄫子來朝。 14.3(3) 秋，八月辛卯，沙鹿崩。 14.4 狄侵鄭。 14.5 冬，蔡侯肸卒。

左傳 14.1(1) 十四年，春，諸侯城緣陵而遷杞焉，不書其人，有闕也。 14.2(2) 鄫季姬來寧，公怒，止之，以鄫子之不朝也。夏，遇于防，而使來朝。 14.3(3) 秋，八月辛卯，沙鹿崩。晉卜偃曰：「期年將有大咎，幾亡國。」

162 Shiji (39.1653) identifies this person as Baili Xi, the Qin ruler’s famous adviser. 163 Boats could travel from the Qin capital of Yong 雍 down the Wei River then up the Yellow and Fen Rivers to Jiang 絳, the capital of Jin. 164 Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.323, contains a variant of this story. There Pi Bao not only asks that they attack Jin but also advises against offering grain: “The ruler of Jin does not show you, my lord, the appropriate ritual propriety, and among the multitudes of Jin there are none who do not know this. Last year they had difficulty and now they once again experience famine. The ruler has lost his people and also has lost Heaven’s support. Their calamities are numerous indeed. I hope you will attack them and will not give them grain.” 165 Yuanling 緣陵 was in the domain of Qǐ, southeast of Changle County 長樂縣, Shandong. 166 Ji Ji was most likely the daughter of Lord Xi. Zeng 鄫 was a small domain located east of present-day Zaozhuang City 棗莊市, Shandong. 167 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no xinmao day in the eighth month. The xinmao day was actually in the fifth month.

310

Zuo Tradition

The Qin ruler asked Baili,162 “Should we give it to them?” And he responded, “Natural disasters circulate from place to place. Each domain and patrimony has them in turn. To come to the aid of those suffering disasters and to succor a neighbor is the proper way. If one practices the proper way, one will be blessed.” Bao, the son of Pi Zheng, was residing in Qin and requested that they attack Jin. The Liege of Qin said, “It is its ruler I hate. What crime is its people guilty of ?” Qin thereupon transported grain to Jin. From Yong to Jiang the boats followed one after the other.163 And they named this “the campaign of the flotilla.”164 LORD XI 14 (646 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, the princes fortified Yuanling.165

14.1(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, Ji Ji met up with the Master of Zeng at Fang. She sent the Master of Zeng to us to visit our court.166

14.2(2)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinmao day,167 Shalu Mountain collapsed.168

14.3(3)

The Di invaded Zheng.

14.4

In winter, Xi, the Prince of Cai, died.

14.5

ZUO

In the fourteenth year, in spring, the princes fortified Yuanling and resettled Qǐ there.169 That the text does not record the men involved in the move is because there was a blank in the record.

14.1(1)

When Ji Ji of Zeng came to Lu to visit her parents, our lord was angry and detained her because the Master of Zeng had not come to visit our court. In summer, she met him at Fang and sent him to us to visit our court.

14.2(2)

A natural disaster is taken here to portend Jin’s defeat at Han in the following year (Xi 15.4). In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinmao day, Shalu Mountain collapsed. Diviner Yan of Jin said, “Within a year, there will be a great catastrophe, and it will almost destroy the domain.”

14.3(3)

168 Shalu Mountain 沙鹿 was located in the domain of Jin east of Daming County 大 名縣, Hebei. Presumably, a large landslide is being reported here. 169 It will be recalled that the Yi of the Huai River region had previously threatened Qǐ (Xi 13.2).

Lord Xi

311

14.4 冬，秦饑，使乞糴于晉，晉人弗與。慶鄭曰：「背施，無親；幸災，不仁；

貪愛，不祥；怒鄰，不義。四德皆失，何以守國？」 虢射曰：「皮之不存，毛將安傅？」慶鄭曰：「棄信背鄰，患孰恤 之？無信，患作；失援，必斃。是則然矣。虢射曰：「無損於怨，而厚於 寇，不如勿與。」慶鄭曰：「背施幸災，民所棄也。近猶讎之，況怨敵 乎？  」弗聽。退曰：「君其悔是哉！」

春秋 15.1 十有五年，春，王正月，公如齊。 15.2(1) 楚人伐徐。 15.3(1) 三月，公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯盟于牡丘，遂次于

匡。公孫敖帥師及諸侯之大夫救徐。 15.4(2) 夏，五月，日有食之。

170 This can mean both Yiwu’s potential act of generosity and the Qin ruler’s former beneficence. 171 The “skin” here refers to the cities that Jin had promised but had not yet turned over to Qin, and the “hair” is presumably the request for grain. Guo She is arguing that if grain is sent to Qin, they will still want the “skin” to which it clings: that is, the promised cities. Alternatively, the logic may be that without the promised cities, Qin resentment would be so great that a grain supply would not ameliorate it, just as “hair” cannot be attached without “skin.” 172 The Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.324, version of this section begins by saying that “Qin experienced a famine, and the lord ordered the regions above the Yellow River to send them grain.” Guo She then dissuades him from this action, despite Qing Zheng’s efforts to the contrary.

312

Zuo Tradition

Qin’s earlier generosity in shipping grain to Jin is not reciprocated (Xi 13.4), and the Jin minister Qing Zheng adds yet one more ominous prediction about the future of the ruler of Jin (Xi 11.2). In winter, there was a famine in Qin. They sent someone to plead for a supply of grain in Jin, but the Jin leaders would not give it to them. Qing Zheng said, “He who turns away from an act of generosity170 will have no close associates. He who finds fortune in disasters is not noble in spirit. He who covets what is prized will suffer misfortune. He who angers his neighbor is not dutiful. If these four virtues are all neglected, then by what means will the domain be protected?” Guo She said, “What would the hair cling to if the skin did not exist?”171 Qing Zheng said, “If one casts aside good faith and turns one’s back upon a neighbor, in times of trouble who will succor him? If one lacks good faith, trouble will arise. If one loses supporters, one is sure to fall. This is just such a case!” Guo She said, “There will be no decrease in their feelings of resentment toward us, and we will be enriching a foe. It is best not to provide the grain.” Qing Zheng said, “He who turns away from generosity and finds fortune in disaster is one whom the people will cast aside. If even those near at hand would scorn him, how much more so would a resentful rival!” But the lord did not heed Qing Zheng, so he withdrew, saying, “The ruler will surely regret this!”172

14.4

LORD XI 15 (645 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord went to Qi.

15.1

A Chu leader attacked Xu.

15.2(1)

In the third month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao and swore a covenant at Muqiu.173 They then set up camp at Kuang.174 Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) led out troops, joined with high officers of the princes, and went to the aid of Xu.

15.3(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, there was an eclipse of the sun.

15.4(2)

173 Muqiu 牡丘 was located in the domain of Lu just northeast of present-day Liaocheng County 聊城縣, Shandong. 174 The location of Kuang 匡 is problematic. Yang (1:349) argues that it was located in Song west of present-day Sui County 睢縣, Henan.

Lord Xi

313

15.5(3) 秋，七月，齊師、曹師伐厲。 15.6 八月，螽。 15.7 九月，公至自會。 15.8 季姬歸于鄫。 15.9(5) 己卯晦，震夷伯之廟。 15.10(6) 冬，宋人伐曹。 15.11(7) 楚人敗徐于婁林。 15.12 十有一月壬戌，晉侯及秦伯戰于韓，獲晉侯。

左傳

15.1(2, 3)

十五年，春，楚人伐徐，徐即諸夏故也。三月，盟于牡丘，尋葵丘之盟， 且救徐也。孟穆伯帥師及諸侯之師救徐，諸侯次于匡以待之。

15.2(4) 夏，五月，日有食之。不書朔與日，官失之也。 15.3(5) 秋，伐厲，以救徐也。

175 Li 厲 is apparently a domain, but its location is problematic (Yang, 1:349–50). 176 According to Zuozhuan below, Yibo was an ancestor of the Zhan 展 line, but little more is known of him. Du Yu (ZZ 14.229) says that Yi is a posthumous name and Bo is his style name, while Kong Yingda notes instead that here, as often, the word marking birth order (hangci 行次) is attached after the posthumous name. 177 Loulin 婁林 was located in the small domain of Que northeast of present-day Si County 泗縣, Anhui.

314

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, Qi troops and Cao troops attacked Li.175

15.5(3)

In the eighth month, there were locusts.

15.6

In the ninth month, our lord arrived from the meeting.

15.7

Ji Ji went home to Zeng.

15.8

On the jimao day, the last day of the month, lightning struck the temple of Yibo.176

15.9(5)

In winter, a Song leader attacked Cao.

15.10(6)

A Chu leader defeated Xu at Loulin.177

15.11(7)

In the eleventh month, on the renxu day (14), the Prince of Jin and the Liege of Qin did battle at Han.178 The Prince of Jin was captured.

15.12

ZUO

Even though the domain of Xu had been a regular part of the activities and covenants of the princes (Xi 4.1, 8.1, 9.2, 13.3), Chu perhaps felt that Xu should be within their sphere of influence (Xi 6.4). In the fifteenth year, in spring, a Chu leader attacked Xu: this was because Xu had drawn close to all the central domains.179 In the third month, a covenant was sworn at Muqiu: this was to renew the covenant of Kuiqiu and was also to plan military aid for Xu. Meng Mubo led out troops, joined with the troops of the princes, and went to the aid of Xu. The princes set up camp at Kuang to await him.

15.1(2, 3)

In summer, in the fifth month, there was an eclipse of the sun. The text does not record the first day of the month or the exact date because the officials neglected this.180

15.2(4)

In autumn, Li was attacked: this was for the purpose of coming to the aid of Xu.

15.3(5)

178 There is disagreement about the precise location of this battle. Yang (1:350–51) rejects the old explanation that Han 韓 was west of the Yellow River near present-day Hancheng 韓城. Another, more plausible theory holds that the battle took place east of the river, near present-day Ruicheng County 芮城縣, Shanxi. 179 Xu, although a domain subordinate to Chu, had a marital alliance with Qi. 180 The only eclipse that took place in this month was below the horizon and could not have been seen in the central plain.

Lord Xi

315

15.4a 晉侯之入也，秦穆姬屬賈君焉，且曰：「盡納群公子。」晉侯烝於賈君，

又不納群公子，是以穆姬怨之。晉侯許賂中大夫，既而皆背之。賂秦伯 以河外列城五，東盡虢略，南及華山，內及解梁城，既而不與。晉饑，秦 輸之粟；秦饑，晉閉之糴，故秦伯伐晉。 卜徒父筮之，吉：「涉河，侯車敗。」詰之。對曰：「乃大吉也。三敗， 必獲晉君。其卦遇蠱䷑曰： 千乘三去， 三去之餘， 獲其雄狐。 夫狐蠱，必其君也。蠱之貞，風也；其悔，山也。歲云秋矣，我落其實，而 取其材，所以克也。實落材亡，不敗，何待？」

181 Lady Jia had been the childless wife of Lord Xian (Zhuang 28.2). Yang (1:351–52), following commentators such as Tang Gu, Hui Dong, and Hong Liangji, argues that the Lady Jia who is entrusted here to Yiwu, the Prince of Jin, was Shensheng’s widow and not Lord Xian’s former concubine, as Du Yu (ZZ 14.229) believed. 182 Five of Lord Xian’s nine sons remained alive, Chong’er chief among them. 183 On the problematic term zheng 烝, “consort with,” see Huan 16.5, n. 109. 184 Du Yu (ZZ 14.229) suggests that the phrase “high officers of the mid-rank” in this case refers specifically to Li Ke and Pi Zheng.

316

Zuo Tradition

The misdeeds of Yiwu, Lord Hui of Jin, finally provoke Lord Mu of Qin, assured by the words of a diviner, to attack Jin. The ensuing account of the Battle of the Plains of Han is the first major battle narrative in Zuozhuan. When the Prince of Jin, Yiwu, entered Jin, Mu Ji of Qin entrusted Lady Jia to him.181 She also said, “You should have all the noble sons brought back to Jin.”182 The Prince of Jin consorted with183 Lady Jia; and he did not bring back the noble sons. For this reason Mu Ji resented him. The Prince of Jin had agreed to provide gifts to the high officers of the mid-rank, but afterward he turned his back on every single one of them.184 As gifts to the Liege of Qin he had offered five settlements beyond the Yellow River, as far east as Guolue and as far south as Mount Hua and, on the near side of the river, as far as Jieliang.185 But afterward he did not hand them over. When there had been famine in Jin, Qin had transported grain to them, but when Qin had a famine, Jin had barred the supply of grain to Qin. That is why the Liege of Qin attacked Jin.186 Diviner Tufu divined with milfoil about this, and the result was auspicious: “Upon crossing the Yellow River, the chariot of the prince will break down.” The Liege of Qin questioned him about this, and the diviner responded, “This is greatly auspicious. After defeating them three times, you are sure to capture the Jin ruler. The hexagram encountered was ‘Pest’ ䷑,187 which says,

15.4a

A thousand chariots depart three times. Among those who are left after the three departures, One captures the male fox.

The fox is a ‘pest’ and surely signifies their ruler. The lower trigram of ‘Pest’ is ‘Wind’; the upper, ‘Mountain.’ The year being now in autumn, we will knock down their fruit and seize their timber.188 That is how we will prevail. If the fruit falls and the timber is lost, what would one expect but defeat?”

185 The area “beyond the Yellow River” was to the west and south, outside the region enclosed by the turn of the river from its course toward the south to a course toward the east. Guolue 虢略 was the name of a place very close to present-day Lingbao County 靈寶縣, Henan, and Mount Hua 華山 was slightly to the southwest. Jieliang 解梁 was northwest of Yongji County 永濟縣, Shanxi. 186 Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.325, also says that Qin attacked Jin. However, Shiji 5.188 says that Jin was on the brink of attacking Qin when the latter struck first. 187 Gu 蠱 is hexagram 18 in the current Changes and means “vermin” or “pest.” The wording quoted for this hexagram does not appear in the extant Changes. 188 That is, we will be like the wind blowing across the mountain.

Lord Xi

317

15.4b 三敗及韓。晉侯謂慶鄭曰：「寇深矣，若之何？」對曰：「君實深之，可若

何？」 公曰：「不孫！」卜右，慶鄭吉，弗使。步揚御戎，家僕徒為右。乘小 駟，鄭入也。慶鄭曰：「古者大事，必乘其產。生其水土，而知其人心；安 其教訓，而服習其道；唯所納之，無不如志。今乘異產，以從戎事，及懼 而變，將與人易。亂氣狡憤，陰血周作，張脈僨興，外強中乾。進退不 可，周旋不能，君必悔之。」弗聽。 15.4c 九月，晉侯逆秦師，使韓簡視師。復曰：「師少於我，鬬士倍我。」公曰：

「何故？」對曰：「出因其資，入用其寵，饑食其粟，三施而無報，是以來 也。今又擊之，我怠、秦奮，倍猶未也。」公曰：「一夫不可狃，況國乎？」

189 The word here translated as “life force” is the problematic Chinese word qi 氣, literally “breath” or “breath of life” that is believed to flow throughout a living body. 190 The Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.326, equivalent reads: “The lord said, ‘Nevertheless, if I do not attack, when I return home, I will surely bear contempt.’” This would indicate that what he fears is the contempt of the people of his own domain. Du Yu (ZZ 14.231) argues, however, that it is the contempt of Qin that he fears. Yang (1:356) follows the latter, noting that Zuozhuan and Guoyu need not always be understood to agree.

318

Zuo Tradition

The first part of the diviner’s prediction is fulfilled (Xi 15.3), and the Prince of Jin continues to make disastrous decisions, here choosing to use horses from a domain other than his own. Defeated three times, the Jin army came to Han. The Prince of Jin said to Qing Zheng, “The marauders are deep in our territory. What should we do about it?” He responded, “It is you, my lord, who have drawn them in so deep. So what can be done about it?” The lord said, “Such disrespect!” He then divined about who should be his spearman on the right, and although Qing Zheng was judged auspicious, the lord did not employ him. Bu Yang drove the war chariot and Jiapu Tu was the spearman on the right. They put in harness the “Little Team of Four” that the domain of Zheng had presented to Jin. Qing Zheng said, “For great affairs like the present one, the ancients were sure to put in harness those sired within the domain. Raised upon local waters and lands, the horses understood what their masters had in mind. Comfortable with their instructions and commands, they were familiar with the local roads. Whatsoever one might direct them to do, the steeds never failed to comply. But now you put in harness those sired in another domain and use them to engage in warfare. When afraid, they will become uncontrollable and will turn against their masters. With their life force confused, perverse, and irritated, their dark blood will surge throughout them.189 With swelling veins, bubbling and bursting, they will appear strong but be drained within. Unwilling to advance or to retreat, they will be unable to perform proper maneuvers. And you, my lord, will surely regret it.” But the lord did not heed this.

15.4b

The following passage describes typical formalities performed before a battle: first, assessments of relative military strength, which are based largely on moral considerations; and second, a ritualized and ostensibly deferential challenge to battle. In the ninth month, when the Prince of Jin went forth to face the Qin troops, he sent Han Jian to observe them. Han Jian reported, “Their troops are fewer than ours, but they have twice as many fighters as we do.” The lord said, “Why is this?” He responded, “When you were outside the domain, you relied on Qin’s aid; when you were inside, you made use of their favor. In times of famine, we ate their grain. Three times they acted generously, and we have in no case reciprocated. This is the reason they have come. Now, if we go on to strike at them, we will be lethargic and Qin will be motivated. Even to say ‘twice as many’ is to underestimate the difference.” The lord said, “One cannot insult a single fellow with impunity, how much less a whole domain?”190

15.4c

Lord Xi

319

遂使請戰，曰：「寡人不佞，能合其眾而不能離也。君若不還，無所 逃命。」 秦伯使公孫枝對曰：「君之未入，寡人懼之；入而未定列，猶吾憂 也。苟列定矣，敢不承命？」韓簡退曰：「吾幸而得囚。」

15.4d

壬戌，戰于韓原。晉戎馬還濘而止。公號慶鄭，慶鄭曰：「愎諫、違卜，固 敗是求，又何逃焉？」遂去之。 梁由靡御韓簡，虢射為右，輅秦伯，將止之。鄭以救公誤之，遂失 秦伯。 秦獲晉侯以歸。晉大夫反首拔舍從之。秦伯使辭焉，曰：「二三子 何其慼也！寡人之從君而西也，亦晉之妖夢是踐，豈敢以至？」晉大夫 三拜稽首曰：「君履后土而戴皇天，皇天后土實聞君之言，群臣敢在 下風。」

191 Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.327, is more explicit: “The lord called out to Qing Zheng, ‘Give me a ride!’” 192 It may be that this is not just a pretext and that Qing Zheng, despite his defiance, really did want to save Lord Hui. 193 This passage is problematic (Yang, 1:357). For an alternative explanation, see Karlgren, gl. 114.

320

Zuo Tradition

He forthwith sent someone to request engagement in battle, saying, “I, the unworthy one, am not eloquent. I am able to gather a host, but I cannot disperse them. If you, my lord, do not turn back, we will have no place to flee your command to battle.” The Liege of Qin had Gongsun Zhi respond, “When your ruler had not yet entered his domain, I, the unworthy one, feared for him. After he had entered but had not yet stabilized his ranks, he was still a source of worry for us. If now his ranks have indeed been stabilized, would I presume not to accept his command?” Han Jian withdrew and said, “It will be our good fortune if we manage to be taken prisoners!” The numerous predictions of a sorry fate for Lord Hui of Jin begin to come true as he is defeated, captured, and taken to Qin (Xi 9.6,10.3,11.2, etc.). Fortunately, a resourceful sister, Mu Ji (Xi 5.8), saves him from a still worse fate. On the renxu day (14), they fought a battle on the Plains of Han. The warhorses of Jin swerved aside and got bogged down in the mud. The lord called out to Qing Zheng,191 and Qing Zheng said, “You rejected the admonition and spurned the divination. Certainly it is defeat that you sought! So why do you flee from it?” Then Qing Zheng deserted him. Liang Youmi was driving for Han Jian, and Guo She was his spearman on the right. They skirmished with the Liege of Qin and were about to detain him. But Qing Zheng delayed them on the pretext of rescuing the Lord of Jin, so the Liege of Qin escaped.192 Qin captured the Prince of Jin and took him back with them. The high officers of Jin, leaving their hair disheveled and pulling up their tents, followed after them.193 The Liege of Qin sent someone to dismiss them, saying, “Why are you gentlemen so gloomy? That I, the unworthy one, am accompanying your ruler and going toward the west is only to fulfill the portentous dream.194 How would I dare to sacrifice him?”195 Bowing three times and kneeling with their foreheads touching the ground,196 the high officers of Jin said, “You take Sovereign Earth as shoes and August Heaven as cap. August Heaven and Sovereign Earth: these have heard your words! We, your subjects, presume to abide by our subordinate position.”197

15.4d

194 He is presumably referring to the mysterious encounter with Shensheng narrated in Xi 10.3. 195 See Karlgren, gl. 115. Yang (1:357) understands this as something like “be too drastic [in my actions].” 196 Bowing two times (zai bai 再拜) is the usual ritual. Three times was perhaps a particularly self-deprecating bow, indicating they were a “lost domain” (Yang, 1:358). 197 Abiding by their “subordinate position” means that the high officers hold the Qin ruler to his promise even as they speak as his humble subjects.

Lord Xi

321

穆姬聞晉侯將至，以大子罃、弘與女簡璧登臺而履薪焉。使以免 服衰絰逆，且告曰：「上天降災，使我兩君匪以玉帛相見，而以興戎。若 晉君朝以入，則婢子夕以死；夕以入，則朝以死。唯君裁之！」乃舍諸 靈臺。 15.4e 大夫請以入。公曰：「獲晉侯以厚歸也；既而喪歸，焉用之？大夫其何有

焉？且晉人慼憂以重我，天地以要我。不圖晉憂，重其怒也；我食吾言， 背天地也。重怒難任，背天不祥，必歸晉君。」 公子縶曰：「不如殺之，無聚慝焉。」子桑曰：「歸之而質其大子， 必得大成。晉未可滅，而殺其君，衹以成惡。且史佚有言曰：『無始禍， 無怙亂，無重怒。』重怒難任，陵人不祥。」乃許晉平。 15.4f 晉侯使郤乞告瑕呂飴甥，且召之。子金教之言曰：「朝國人而以君命賞。

且告之曰：『孤雖歸，辱社稷矣，其卜貳圉也。』」眾皆哭，晉於是乎作 爰田。

198 There are two interpretations of this passage: the first is that the emissary himself wears the mourning garments, and the second is that he carries them for the Qin ruler to put on. We have followed both Yang (1:358) and Takezoe (5.80) in adopting the latter interpretation. 199 By lodging the prince in the Spirit Terrace, he averts the crisis predicted by his wife’s words: the Spirit Terrace was located in the suburbs outside the Qin capital. Zuozhuan does not say explicitly what the ruler of Qin’s intentions might have been, but in the Shiji 5.189 version, his intentions are clear: “I am going to offer the ruler of Jin as a sacrifice to the god on high.” He ultimately relents not only because of Mu Ji’s intercession but also because “the Zhou Son of Heaven heard of his plans and said, ‘Jin is of our same clan name.’ Thus, he pleaded on behalf of the Jin ruler.” 200 This expression, shi yan 食言, “to eat one’s words,” appears in “Tang shi,” one of the Ancient Script chapters in the Documents (8.108), and elsewhere in Zuozhuan (Xi 28, Cheng 12, Cheng 16, Xiang 27, Ai 25.2). It means “to go back on one’s promise” (Yang, 1:359) and has become an idiomatic expression in later usage. 201 The different recommendations of Gongzi Zhi and Gongsun Zhi about what to do with the Prince of Jin appear at greater length in Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.328–29. Gongzi Zhi recommends that the prince be killed and immediately replaced with Chong’er. Gongsun Zhi prevails by arguing that supporting Chong’er would put the latter in the position of choosing between the wishes of the domain of Qin and kinship ties with his brother, the present Prince of Jin. 202 The term yuan tian 爰田 is highly problematic, but it is clear that this was some action meant to assuage the multitude’s sorrowful reaction to the abdication of their ruler. There are basically two interpretations: the first is that this has to do with some new system of field rotation, and the second is that it refers to opening new lands for agriculture. As Yang (1:362–63) argues, the second is more plausible.

322

Zuo Tradition

When Mu Ji heard that her half brother, the Prince of Jin, was about to arrive in Qin, she took the heir apparent, Ying, her second son, Hong, and her daughter, Jianbi, ascended a terrace, and stood atop a bundle of firewood there. She sent someone to meet the Liege of Qin with a mourning headband and hempen mourning garments198 and furthermore to announce to him: “Heaven above has brought down a disaster and has brought it about that my two lords have met one another, not with presents of jade and silk, but with weapons held aloft. If the ruler of Jin enters the capital in the morning, then I, your maidservant, and the children will die in the evening. And if he enters in the evening, then we will die in the morning. Only you, my lord, will decide this.” So he lodged the Prince of Jin in the Spirit Terrace.199 The high officers of Qin requested that the Prince of Jin be brought into the capital. The lord said, “We captured the Prince of Jin so we could return in abundance. But now if I return in mourning, of what use would it have been? What do you, my high officers, have to gain from this? Furthermore, the Jin leaders have burdened me with their gloom and grief and have used Heaven and Earth to bind me with an oath. If I do not take Jin’s grief into account, I will increase their anger. And if I eat my words,200 I will be betraying Heaven and Earth. Increased anger will be difficult to bear; betraying Heaven will bring misfortune. I must send the Prince of Jin home.” Gongzi Zhi said, “It would be better to kill him and not allow him to gather those of ill-will in his domain!” Gongsun Zhia said, “If you send him home but take his heir apparent hostage, you are certain to win very favorable terms. Since Jin cannot yet be destroyed, killing its ruler would only solidify the hatred of the people of Jin. Moreover, the scribe Yi has a saying: ‘Do not instigate calamity; do not take advantage of unrest; do not increase another’s anger.’ Increased anger will be difficult to bear, and abusing others will bring misfortune.”201 And so the ruler of Qin agreed to make peace with Jin.

15.4e

The Prince of Jin, disgraced by recent events, raises the possibility of abdicating, but his minister Lü Sheng launches a public relations campaign on his behalf. Still, the reorganization in land ownership and the greater military autonomy may have given the ministerial lineages additional power. The Prince of Jin sent Xi Qi to give a report to Lü Shengb and also to summon him to Qin. Lü Shenga instructed Xi Qi in what to say: “Hold a court audience with the inhabitants of the capital and distribute rewards in the name of the ruler. And then, in addition, make the following announcement to them: ‘Even if I, the orphan, should return home, I have disgraced the altars of the domain. You should divine about substituting the heir apparent Yu for me.’” The multitudes all wailed upon hearing this, and so Jin at this time opened up new lands.202

15.4f

Lord Xi

323

呂甥曰：「君亡之不恤，而群臣是憂，惠之至也，將若君何？」眾曰： 「何為而可？」對曰：「征繕以輔孺子。諸侯聞之，喪君有君，群臣輯睦， 甲兵益多。好我者勸，惡我者懼，庶有益乎！」眾說，晉於是乎作州兵。 15.4g 初，晉獻公筮嫁伯姬於秦，遇歸妹䷵之睽䷥。史蘇占之，曰：「不吉。其

繇曰： 士刲羊， 亦無衁也； 女承筐， 亦無貺也。 西鄰責言， 不可償也。 歸妹之睽， 猶無相也。 震之離，亦離之震。

203 This points toward the lord’s posthumous name, which will be Lord Hui, hui 惠 meaning “kindness.” 204 “The young child” refers to the heir apparent Yu, whom they intend to establish as ruler. Yu will reign briefly as Lord Huai of Jin. 205 The precise nature of this reform, zhou bing 州兵, “regionally based military,” is obscure, but it may have allowed the elite greater autonomy to organize regionspecific armies. For several ideas, see Yang, 1:363. Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1429) links this to the more elaborate command structure in the three armies of Jin. 206 The top, or sixth, line of hexagram 54, “Marrying Maid” (Guimei 歸妹), was unstable and thus moved from a solid to a broken line, which yields hexagram 38, “Contrariety” (Kui 睽). 207 These two lines are reversed in the line statement of the sixth line in the “Marrying Maid” hexagram. 324

Zuo Tradition

Lü Sheng said, “When our lord was abroad, he did not feel self-pity; it was for his many subjects that he worried. This is the height of kindness.203 What are we going to do about our lord?” The multitudes said, “What can be done?” Lü Sheng responded, “With requisitioning and refitting, we will assist the young child.204 The princes will hear that we have lost one ruler but have another ruler, that the many subjects are in harmony and peace, and that the shields and weapons grow more numerous. Those on good terms with us will be encouraged, and those who hate us will be afraid. Perhaps this will be beneficial!” The multitudes were pleased, and because of that, Jin initiated a regionally based military system.205 A previous instance of divination is cited here, but Han Jian argues that even heeding the divination would have done no good, for “contentions are born of men” (cf. Xi 16.1). Earlier, Lord Xian of Jin had divined with milfoil about marrying his daughter Mu Jia to the Qin ruler. He had obtained the hexagram “Marrying Maid” ䷵ and the line whereby it became the hexagram “Contrariety” ䷥.206 The scribe Su had given the prognostication for this as follows: “Inauspicious. The omen verse says,

15.4g

The fine man stabs the sheep, But it does not bleed. The woman holds the basket, But it contains no gift.207 The western neighbor’s reproach Cannot be redeemed.208 ‘Marrying Maid’ moves to ‘Contrariety’: It is the same as having no help from the union.209

‘Thunder’ becoming ‘Cohesion’ is also ‘Cohesion’ becoming ‘Thunder.’210

208 Jin did not reciprocate Qin favors—first, by withholding the territories promised to Qin in exchange for Qin support of Lord Hui’s return to Jin as ruler (Xi 9.6, 10.3) and, second, by refusing to supply Qin with grain during famine (Xi 14.4), even though Qin had earlier relieved famines in Jin (Xi 13.3). Qin reproaches are thus justified and the situation cannot be repaired. 209 Not only does the top line of the “Marrying Maid” hexagram bode ill, but the top line of the “Contrariety” hexagram is also inauspicious. Its omen verse begins thus: “Isolated through opposition” (kuigu). 210 “Thunder” (Zhen 震) is the upper trigram of “Marrying Maid.” “Cohesion” (Li 離) is the upper trigram of “Contrariety.”

Lord Xi

325

為雷為火， 為嬴敗姬。 車說其輹， 火焚其旗， 不利行師， 敗于宗丘。 歸妹睽孤， 寇張之弧。 姪其從姑， 六年其逋， 逃歸其國， 而棄其家， 明年其死於高梁之虛。」 及惠公在秦，曰：「先君若從史蘇之占，吾不及此夫！」韓簡侍， 曰：「龜，象也；筮，數也。物生而後有象，象而後有滋，滋而後有數。先 君之敗德，及可數乎？史蘇是占，勿從何益？《詩》曰： 下民之孽， 匪降自天。 僔沓背憎， 職競由人。」 15.5(9) 震夷伯之廟，罪之也，於是展氏有隱慝焉。 15.6(10) 冬，宋人伐曹，討舊怨也。 15.7(11) 楚敗徐于婁林，徐恃救也。

211 The trigram “Cohesion” is associated with fire. 212 Ying is the clan name of the ruling Qin family, and Ji is the clan name of the ruling Jin family. 213 One image associated with the trigram “Thunder” is “chariot.” The lower trigram of both hexagrams is “Joy” (Dui 兌), one associated meaning of which is “breaking.” “Fire,” to repeat, is an image associated with the “Cohesion” trigram. 214 Zongqiu 宗丘 is an alternative name for the Plains of Han (Yang, 1:364). 215 The lines “isolated through contrariety” and “the enemies draw their bows” are part of the Zhouyi omen verse for the last line of “Contrariety.” 216 Han Jian here deploys the so-called “thimble style” of rhetoric (dingzhen 頂針), known as “anadiplosis” in the Western tradition, in which the last term in one sentence becomes the first term in the next (for other examples, see Cheng 2.2 and Zhao 9.5).

326

Zuo Tradition

It is thunder, it is fire,211 It is Ying that defeats Ji.212 Since the chariot will lose its axle And fire will burn the banners,213 Military action will be unfavorable. We will be defeated at Zongqiu.214 ‘The Marrying Maid’ is ‘isolated through Contrariety’: ‘The bandits stretch their bows.’215 The nephew follows the aunt And flees after six years. He escapes and returns to his domain, Abandoning his family. The next year he dies in the ruins of Gaoliang.”

When Lord Hui was in Qin, he said, “Had the former ruler followed the scribe Su’s prognostication, I would not have come to this!” Han Jian was in attendance and said, “The turtle shell gives an image; milfoil stalks yield a number. Only after phenomena come into being are there images. Only after the images is there increase. Only after increase are there numbers.216 Could the former ruler’s lapses in virtue have been reckoned in number? What good would it have done had he heeded this prognostication of the scribe Su? As it says in the Odes, The ills of people down below, Do not descend from heaven. Facile agreement, then hatred behind turned backs: Such contentions are born of men!”217

Lightning struck the temple of Yibo: this was incriminating him, and at this time there were hidden violations in the Zhan lineage.218

15.5(9)

A thirty-five-year-old grudge is finally settled (see Annals, Zhuang 14.1). In winter, a Song leader attacked Cao: this was to chastise them for an age-old resentment.

15.6(10)

The outcome of Chu’s attack on Xu (Xi 15.1) is reported. Chu defeated Xu at Loulin: this was because Xu had depended upon being rescued.

15.7(11)

217 Maoshi 193, “Shi yue zhi jiao” 十月之交 , 12B.409. 218 This could mean either that the Zhan lineage had faults that no one but the god on high knew about or that their faults were so serious that they could not be mentioned in the text.

Lord Xi

327

15.8 十月，晉陰飴甥會秦伯，盟于王城。秦伯曰：「晉國和乎？」對曰：「不和。

小人恥失其君而悼喪其親，不憚征繕以立圉也，曰：『必報讎，寧事戎 狄。』君子愛其君而知其罪，不憚征繕以待秦命，曰：『必報德，有死無 二。』以此不和。」 秦伯曰：「國謂君何？」對曰：「小人慼，謂之不免；君子恕，以為必 歸。小人曰：『我毒秦，秦豈歸君？』君子曰：『我知罪矣，秦必歸君。貳 而執之，服而舍之，德莫厚焉，刑莫威焉。服者懷德，貳者畏刑，此一役 也，秦可以霸。納而不定，廢而不立，以德為怨，秦不其然。』」秦伯曰： 「是吾心也。」改館晉侯，饋七牢焉。 蛾析謂慶鄭曰：「盍行乎？」對曰：「陷君於敗，敗而不死，又使失 刑，非人臣也。臣而不臣，行將焉入？」 十一月，晉侯歸。丁丑，殺慶鄭而後入。 是歲，晉又饑，秦伯又餼之粟，曰：「吾怨其君，而矜其民。且吾聞 唐叔之封也，箕子曰：『其後必大。』晉其庸可冀乎？姑樹德焉，以待 能者。」 於是秦始征晉河東，置官司焉。

219 Wangcheng 王城 was located right at the south-to-east bend of the Yellow River. However, two places seem to have the name “Wangcheng” 王城. One was in Zhou and is first mentioned in Zhuang 21.1, and this one is in Qin (present-day Shaanxi). 220 The notion here is that since they themselves have been forgiving, they assume that Qin will be the same. 221 One “set” (lao 牢) included an ox, a sheep, and a pig. According to Zhouli 37.562, this is the number of sets appropriate to one of the princes. 222 Guoyu, “Jin yu 3,” 9.331–32, contains slightly more expansive versions of the speeches of both Lü Sheng and Qing Zheng. 223 Tang Shu was the son of King Wu and the younger brother of King Cheng. He was the first to be given land in Jin. Jizi was either an uncle or an older brother of the last Shang ruler, Zhòu, and is identified in Analects 18.1 as one of the three men of noble spirit during the Shang. 224 This indicates that Jin finally transferred the promised lands to Qin and the latter established its rule there.

328

Zuo Tradition

The Jin minister Lü Sheng uses clever argument to obtain the return of the Prince of Jin (Xi 15.4). Qin once again sends aid to Jin in a time of famine (Xi 13.4). In the tenth month, Lü Shengd of Jin met with the Liege of Qin and swore a covenant at Wangcheng.219 The Liege of Qin asked, “Is the domain of Jin in harmony?” He responded, “It is not in harmony. The lesser men are ashamed to have lost their ruler and mourn the death of their own kin. But they do not balk at raising levies and making repairs so as to establish Yu as ruler, and they say, ‘We must retaliate, even if it means serving the Rong and the Di.’ The noble men love their ruler but know he was at fault. They do not fear requisitioning and refitting to await the command of Qin, and they say, ‘We must repay their kindness. Even facing death, we would not be of two minds.’ For these reasons, we are not in harmony.” The Liege of Qin said, “What does the domain say about the ruler?” He responded, “The lesser men are grieving and say he will not be pardoned. The noble men are forgiving and think he will surely return.220 The lesser men say, ‘We have poisoned our relations with Qin. How could Qin return our lord?’ The noble men say, ‘We have acknowledged our crime. Qin surely will return our ruler. He shifted allegiances, and Qin seized him. He has submitted, and Qin will pardon him. No kindness is more generous than this. No punishment is more awe-inspiring than this. Those who submit cherish kindness, and those who shift allegiances dread punishment. Through this single military campaign, Qin could become overlord. To install someone in power without making his position secure, to cast him aside and not establish him as ruler, to turn kindness into enmity: surely Qin would not do such a thing!’” The Liege of Qin said, “Such were my thoughts.” He changed the lodgings of the Prince of Jin and provided him with seven sets of sacrificial animals.221 E Xi said to Qing Zheng, “Why don’t you depart?” Qing Zheng responded, “I ensnared my ruler in defeat. When he was defeated, I did not die. If I also cause him to miss the chance to punish me, I will not be a proper subject. If I am a subject but do not act as a subject, were I to depart, who would take me in?”222 In the eleventh month, the Prince of Jin returned. On the dingchou day (29), only after Qing Zheng had been put to death, did he enter the capital. In this year, there was once again a famine in Jin. The Liege of Qin again supplied them with grain, saying, “I resent Jin’s ruler, but I pity its people. Moreover, I have heard that when Tang Shu was granted a domain, Jizi said, ‘His descendants will surely become great.’223 I expect that Jin can still be hopeful. For the time being, I will sow favors there and await a capable ruler.” At that time, Qin for the first time collected levies in Jin territory east of the Yellow River and established officials to provide oversight there.224

15.8

Lord Xi

329

春秋 16.1(1) 十有六年，春，王正月戊申朔，隕石于宋五。是月，六鷁退飛，過宋都。 16.2 三月壬申，公子季友卒。 16.3 夏，四月丙申，鄫季姬卒。 16.4 秋，七月甲子，公孫茲卒。 16.5(6) 冬，十有二月，公會齊侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、邢侯、曹伯

于淮。

左傳 16.1(1) 十六年，春，隕石于宋五，隕星也。六鷁退飛，過宋都，風也。周內史叔

興聘于宋，宋襄公問焉，曰：「是何祥也？吉凶焉在？」對曰：「今茲魯多 大喪，明年齊有亂，君將得諸侯而不終。」退而告人曰：「君失問。是陰 陽之事，非吉凶所生也。吉凶由人。吾不敢逆君故也。」 16.2 夏，齊伐厲，不克，救徐而還。

225 Du Yu’s (ZZ 14.235) identification of Huai 淮 would place it near Xuyi County 盱眙, Jiangsu, but this is by no means certain. 226 Note that the comments here try to rationalize apparently anomalous events. 227 We follow the reading zai 在 for sheng 生 (Yang, 1:369).

330

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 16 (644 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the wushen day, the first day of the month, stones fell from the sky in Song, five in number. This same month, six fishhawks flew backward across the Song capital. In the third month, on the renshen day (26), Gongzi Ji You (Gongzi You) died. In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingshen day (20), Ji Ji of Zeng died. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jiazi day (19), Gongsun Zi (Shusun Daibo) died. In winter, in the twelfth month, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, the Prince of Xing, and the Liege of Cao at Huai.225

16.1(1)

16.2

16.3

16.4

16.5(6)

ZUO

A court scribe here denies the legitimacy of inquiring into the meaning of apparent omens registered in the Annals, but he also admits that he would not presume to contradict the Song ruler. His argument that “auspiciousness and inauspiciousness arise from humans” echoes a Lu minister’s earlier assertion that anomalies are responses to human actions (Zhuang 14.12). In the sixteenth year, in spring, stones fell from the sky in Song, five in number: they were meteorites. Six fishhawks flew backward across the Song capital: this was because of the wind.226 Shuxing, the court scribe of Zhou, made an official visit to Song, and Lord Xiang of Song asked him about these events: “What do these portend? Where will the auspicious and the inauspicious events occur?” He responded, “This year Lu will have many important funerals. Next year there will be rebellion in Qi. You, my lord, will win the support of the princes, but it will not persist to the end.” He withdrew from the audience and told other people, “The ruler asked about the wrong things. These are matters of yin and yang and not matters in which one can locate the auspicious or the inauspicious.227 Auspiciousness and inauspiciousness arise from humans. The reason I answered as I did is because I did not presume to contradict the ruler.”

16.1(1)

In summer, Qi attacked Li, but they did not prevail. They aided Xu and returned home.

16.2

Lord Xi

331

16.3 秋，狄侵晉，取狐、厨、受鐸、涉汾及昆都，因晉敗也。 16.4 王以戎難告于齊。齊徵諸侯而戍周。 16.5 冬，十一月乙卯，鄭殺子華。 16.6(5) 十二月，會于淮，謀鄫，且東略也。城鄫，役人病，有夜登丘而呼曰：「齊

有亂！」不果城而還。

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年，春，齊人、徐人伐英氏。 17.2(3) 夏，滅項。 17.3(4) 秋，夫人姜氏會齊侯于卞。

228 Du Yu (ZZ 14.236) identifies Hu Chu 狐厨 as a single place, but Yang (1:370) identifies them as separate places probably located near Xiangfen County 襄汾縣, Shanxi. Shouduo 受鐸 was apparently in the same region. 229 Zeng is being threatened by the Yi of the Huai region. 230 Yingshi 英氏 was a small domain of the Yan 偃 clan and was probably located between Huoshan County 霍山縣 and Jinzhai County 金寨縣, Anhui.

332

Zuo Tradition

The Di tribes capitalize on Qin’s defeat of Jin in the battle of Han, fought in the previous year (Xi 15.4). In autumn, the Di invaded Jin and seized the regions of Hu, Chu, and Shouduo.228 They crossed the Fen River and advanced as far as Kundu. In this they were taking advantage of Jin’s defeat.

16.3

Wangzi Dai had previously provoked the Rong to attack Zhou, an event the Zhou king had not forgotten (Xi 11.3). The king reported to Qi the trouble with the Rong. Qi summoned the princes and garrisoned Zhou.

16.4

The Zheng heir Zihua had previously betrayed his domain and is now punished (Xi 7.3). In winter, in the eleventh month, on the yimao day (12), Zheng put Zihua to death.

16.5

Steward Kong of Zhou warns about the Qi ruler’s overreaching ambitions (Xi 9.3); here Qi is leading the allies and planning an eastward expedition. Disorder in Qi spells the impending end of Qi influence. Lord Huan of Qi will die next year, and in a few years Lord Wen of Jin will emerge as the next overlord. In the twelfth month, there was a meeting at Huai: this was to plan about Zeng and also to launch an incursion into the east.229 While fortifying Zeng, the laborers became exhausted. One of them climbed a hill during the night and called out, “There is a rebellion in Qi!” They did not finish fortifying Zeng but returned home.

16.6(5)

LORD XI 17 (643 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, a Qi leader and a Xu leader attacked Yingshi.230

17.1(1)

In summer, Xiang was extinguished.231

17.2(3)

In autumn, our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, met with the Prince of Qi at Bian.232

17.3(4)

231 Xiang 項 was a small domain located near present-day Xiangcheng 項城, Henan. Both Gongyang, Xi 17 (11.140), and Guliang, Xi 17 (8.85), claim that Qi and not Lu annihilated the domain of Xiang. 232 Bian 卞 was located in the domain of Lu east of Sishui County 泗水縣, Shandong.

Lord Xi

333

17.4(4) 九月，公至自會。 17.5(5) 冬，十有二月乙亥，齊侯小白卒。

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年，春，齊人為徐伐英氏，以報婁林之役也。 17.2 夏，晉大子圉為質於秦，秦歸河東而妻之。

惠公之在梁也，梁伯妻之。梁嬴孕，過期。卜招父與其子卜之。其子 曰：「將生一男一女。」招曰：「然。男為人臣，女為人妾。」故名男曰圉， 女曰妾。及子圉西質，妾為宦女焉。 17.3(2) 師滅項。淮之會，公有諸侯之事，未歸，而取項。齊人以為討，而止公。

17.4(3, 4)

334

秋，聲姜以公故，會齊侯于卞。九月，公至。書曰「至自會」，猶有諸侯之 事焉，且諱之也。

Zuo Tradition

In the ninth month, our lord arrived from the meeting. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the yihai day (8), Xiaobo, the Prince of Qi, died.

17.4(4) 17.5(5)

ZUO

In the seventeenth year, in spring, a Qi leader, acting on behalf of Xu, attacked Yingshi: this was in retaliation for the campaign of Loulin.233

17.1(1)

The Jin heir apparent Yu and his sister Qie become hostages in Qin as a part of the settlement of the conflict at Han (Xi 15.4) and in fulfillment of a prediction made before their birth. In summer, the heir apparent Yu of Jin became a hostage in Qin. The Liege of Qin returned to Jin the region east of the Yellow River and married a daughter to Yu. When Lord Hui had dwelled in Liang, the Liege of Liang had given a daughter, Liang Ying, to him in marriage. She had become pregnant and went beyond her delivery date. Diviner Zhaofu, along with his son, divined about this with the turtle shell. His son said, “She will give birth to one boy and one girl.” Zhaofua said, “That is correct. The boy will become a servant and the girl will become a maidservant.” Therefore, they named the boy Yu, “Groom,” and they named the girl Qie, “Maidservant.” When Yu went west as a hostage, Qie became a maid there.

17.2

The Lu ruler Lord Xi takes advantage of his journey to the meeting of Huai (Xi 16.6) to launch an attack on Xiang, which incurs the anger of the domain of Qi. Sheng Jiang, who was originally from Qi and was the wife of Lord Xi, then intercedes on her husband’s behalf. The troops extinguished Xiang. At the meeting of Huai, our lord had official business with the princes and had not yet returned to Lu, when we seized Xiang. The Qi leaders chastised us on that account and detained our lord.

17.3(2)

In autumn, Sheng Jiang, because of the circumstance concerning her husband, our lord, met with the Prince of Qi at Bian. In the ninth month, our lord arrived. That the text says “He arrived from the meeting” is because he still had official business with the princes. The text is also concealing what had happened.

17.4(3, 4)

233 The campaign of Loulin was an attack by Chu upon Xu (see Xi 15.7). However, there is a problem with this entry. Shiji 40.1967 claims that Chu had destroyed Ying (Ying­ shi) two years earlier. So either Zuozhuan or Shiji is mistaken (Yang, 1:371).

Lord Xi

335

17.5(5) 齊侯之夫人三：王姬，徐嬴，蔡姬，皆無子。齊侯好內，多內寵，內嬖如

夫人者六人：長衛姬，生武孟；少衛姬，生惠公；鄭姬，生孝公；葛嬴，生 昭公；密姬，生懿公；宋華子，生公子雍。 公與管仲屬孝公於宋襄公，以為太子。雍巫有寵於衛共姬，因寺 人貂以薦羞於公，亦有寵，公許之立武孟。 管仲卒，五公子皆求立。冬，十月乙亥，齊桓公卒。易牙入，與寺人 貂因內寵以殺羣吏，而立公子無虧。孝公奔宋。 十二月乙亥，赴。辛巳夜，殯。

春秋 18.1(1) 十有八年，春，王正月，宋公、曹伯、衛人、邾人伐齊。 18.2 夏，師救齊。 18.3(3) 五月戊寅，宋師及齊師戰于甗。齊師敗績。 18.4 狄救齊。 18.5(3) 秋，八月丁亥，葬齊桓公。 18.6(4) 冬，邢人、狄人伐衛。

234 Stories of the evil Yiya and the eunuch Diao and of the good Qi minister Guan Zhong’s attempt to thwart their growing influence appear in other early Chinese texts. For a fairly extensive example, see Guanzi 32.567–68.

336

Zuo Tradition

Lord Huan of Qi’s “ fondness for women” leads to competition for the succession after the death of his wise minister Guan Zhong (Xi 7.3, 12.4) and open rebellion after his own death. The Prince of Qi had three wives, Gong Jia, Xu Ying, and Cai Ji, all with out sons. The Prince of Qi was fond of his harem and had many favorites. There were six harem favorites who were treated like wives. Wei Ji the Elder gave birth to Gongzi Wukuia, Wei Ji the Younger gave birth to Lord Hui, Zheng Ji gave birth to Lord Xiao, Ge Ying gave birth to Lord Zhao, Mi Ji gave birth to Lord Yi, and Hua Zi of Song gave birth to Gongzi Yong. The lord, in collaboration with Guan Zhong, entrusted Lord Xiao to Lord Xiang of Song and named him heir apparent. The head cook Yiyaa found favor with Wei Ji the Eldera and through the eunuch Diao presented delicacies to the lord, so Yiya also gained favor with the lord. The lord promised them he would establish Gongzi Wukuia as heir apparent.234 When Guan Zhong died, all five noble sons sought to be established as heir. In winter, in the tenth month, on the yihai day (7), Lord Huan of Qi died. Yiya entered the palace. Through the help of the harem favorites, he and the eunuch Diao killed many court officers and established Gongzi Wukui as ruler. Lord Xiao fled to Song. In the twelfth month, on the yihai day (8), notice of death was sent. On the xinsi day (14), Lord Huan was lying in state during the night.

17.5(5)

LORD XI 18 (642 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Duke of Song, the Liege of Cao, a Wei leader, and a Zhu leader attacked Qi.

18.1(1)

In summer, our troops went to the aid of Qi.

18.2

In the fifth month, on the wuyin day (14), Song troops and Qi troops did battle at Yan.235 The Qi troops were completely defeated. The Di went to the aid of Qi. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the dinghai day, was buried.

18.3(3)

18.4 236

Lord Huan of Qi

In winter, a Xing leader and a Di leader attacked Wei.

18.5(3)

18.6(4)

235 Yan 甗 was located in the domain of Qi near present-day Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. 236 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no dinghai day in the eighth month.

Lord Xi

337

左傳 18.1(1) 十八年，春，宋襄公以諸侯伐齊。三月，齊人殺無虧。 18.2 鄭伯始朝于楚。楚子賜之金，既而悔之，與之盟曰：「無以鑄兵！」故以

鑄三鍾。

18.3(3, 5)

齊人將立孝公，不勝四公子之徒，遂與宋人戰。夏，五月，宋敗齊師于 甗，立孝公而還。秋，八月，葬齊桓公。

18.4(6) 冬，邢人、狄人伐衛，圍菟圃。衛侯以國讓父兄子弟。及朝眾，曰：「苟能

治之，燬請從焉。」眾不可，而後師于訾婁。狄師還。 18.5 梁伯益其國而不能實也，命曰新里，秦取之。

237 Most Zuozhuan editions give this last line as a separate entry. Yang (1:378) notes that in principle a Zuozhuan entry should not simply repeat an Annals entry. He consequently makes this line a part of 18.3 and notes that there are several other examples where a single Zuozhuan entry contains quotations from two Annals entries. According to Yin 1.5, princes are buried five months after their deaths. This was a delayed burial that took place a full eight months after Lord Huan’s death. Shiji 32.1494 gives a vivid account of the maggots crawling out of his decaying corpse in the lord’s chamber. 238 Tupu 菟圃 was located in the domain of Wei in present-day Changyuan County 長 垣縣, Henan.

338

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The domain of Song, presumably in support of Lord Xiao, takes action against Gongzi Wukui, the usurper in Qi (Xi 17.5). In the eighteenth year, in spring, Lord Xiang of Song took the princes to attack Qi. In the third month, the Qi leaders put Gongzi Wukuib to death.

18.1(1)

The Liege of Zheng for the first time visited the court of Chu. The Master of Chu bestowed metal on him. Afterward he regretted this and swore a covenant with him, saying, “Let this not be used to cast weapons.” The Liege of Zheng therefore used it to cast three bells.

18.2

Duke Xiang of Song, a strong supporter of the noble sons of Qi (Xi 17.5, 18.1), here succeeds in establishing Lord Xiao as ruler, but only over strong opposition from the followers of the other noble sons. The Qi leaders were going to establish Lord Xiao as ruler but could not prevail over the followers of the four other noble sons, so they fought a battle with the men of Song. In summer, in the fifth month, Song defeated the Qi troops at Yan. They established Lord Xiao as ruler and turned back. In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Huan of Qi was buried.237

18.3(3, 5)

Lord Wen of Wei, whom we encountered before as a rather idealized ruler (Min 2.10), is here portrayed again as showing concern for his people. In winter, a Xing leader and a Di leader attacked Wei and laid siege to Tupu.238 The Prince of Wei yielded control of the domain to his uncles and cousins. When it came to the time for holding a court audience with the multitudes, he said, “Whoever can bring order to the domain, I, Hui, request to follow him.” Only after the multitudes refused this were the troops deployed at Zilou.239 The Di troops returned home.

18.4(6)

The Liege of Liang increased the size of his domain but was not able to populate these lands. This region was named “Xinli,” and Qin took possession of it.240

18.5

239 Zilou 訾婁 was located in the domain of Zheng southwest of present-day Hua County 滑縣, Henan. 240 After Qin took possession, Xinli, literally “New Hamlet,” was called “Xincheng” 新城 (New City), the same name by which Quwo in Jin was also sometimes known. Whenever Quwo in Jin is called Xincheng in the text, we have translated it as “New City” to distinguish it from the Qin city of Xincheng (Xinli), which was located near present-day Chengcheng 澄城, Shaanxi.

Lord Xi

339

春秋 19.1(2) 十有九年，春，王三月，宋人執滕子嬰齊。 19.2 夏，六月，宋公、曹人、邾人盟于曹南。 19.3(3) 鄫子會盟于邾。己酉，邾人執鄫子，用之。 19.4(5) 秋，宋人圍曹。 19.5(4) 衛人伐邢。 19.6(6) 冬，會陳人、蔡人、楚人、鄭人，盟于齊。 19.7(7) 梁亡。

左傳 19.1 十九年，春，遂城而居之。 19.2(1) 宋人執滕宣公。

340

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 19 (641 BCE) ANNALS

In the nineteenth year, in spring, in the royal third month, Song leaders arrested Yingqi, the Master of Teng.

19.1(2)

In summer, in the sixth month, the Duke of Song, a Cao leader, and a Zhu leader swore a covenant in the south of Cao.

19.2

The Master of Zeng met with them and swore a covenant at Zhu. On the jiyou day (21), Zhu leaders arrested the Master of Zeng and sacrificed him.241

19.3(3)

In autumn, a Song leader laid siege to Cao.

19.4(5)

A Wei leader attacked Xing.

19.5(4)

In winter, we met with a Chen leader, a Cai leader, a Chu leader, and a Zheng leader and swore a covenant in Qi.

19.6(6)

Liang fell.

19.7(7)

ZUO

The following passage, mistakenly detached from Xi 18.5, refers to Qin’s occupation of Xinli. In the nineteenth year, in spring, they fortified and occupied it.

19.1

Song leaders arrested Lord Xuan of Teng.

19.2(1)

242

241 It is interesting that both Gongyang, Xi 19 (11.147), and Guliang, Xi 19 (9.88), try to explain away the practice of human sacrifice here by suggesting that yong 用 in this context means “they struck him in the nose to anoint the altar with blood.” For the correct interpretation, see Yang, 1:380; and Karlgren, gl. 121. 242 This Zuozhuan entry does little more than delete the name of Lord Xuan given in the corresponding Annals entry. It would seem, therefore, to violate the principle set forth earlier (n. 237). However, Yang (1:381) notes that in this case the entry sets up Ziyu’s comment in the next Zuozhuan entry that “in a single meeting the Duke of Song does violence to the rulers of two domains,” the rulers of Teng and Zeng.

Lord Xi

341

19.3(3) 夏，宋公使邾文公用鄫子于次睢之社，欲以屬東夷。司馬子魚曰：「古者

六畜不相為用，小事不用大牲，而況敢用人乎？祭祀以為人也。民，神之 主也。用人，其誰饗之？齊桓公存三亡國以屬諸侯，義士猶曰薄德，今一 會而虐二國之君，又用諸淫昏之鬼，將以求霸，不亦難乎？得死為幸。」 19.4(5) 秋，衛人伐邢，以報菟圃之役。於是衛大旱，卜有事於山川，不吉。甯莊

子曰：「昔周饑，克殷而年豐。今邢方無道，諸侯無伯，天其或者欲使衛 討邢乎？」從之。師興而雨。

243 That is, each animal was used only in the sacrifices for which it was specified. An ox, for example, could not be used in a sacrifice that called for a sheep. Du Yu notes that an animal would not be used in sacrifices to a spirit connected to that animal, which implies a system of “totem and taboo” (ZZ 14.239). Yang (1:381–82) disagrees. 244 This argument last appeared in Huan 6.2. 245 A passage in Guoyu, “Qi yu,” 6.246, reads as follows: “Lord Huan worried about the princes of the realm. When the rebellion of the lord’s wife [Ai Jiang] and Qingfu took place in Lu, two rulers were assassinated and the domain had no successors. Lord Huan heard about this and sent Guozi to preserve it. When the Di attacked Xing, Lord Huan built up Yiyi and gave it to Xing as a settlement. When the Di attacked Wei, the leader of Wei left his domain and dwelled temporarily in Cao. Lord Huan fortified Chuqiu and gave it to them as a settlement. The princes of the realm

342

Zuo Tradition

Duke Xiang of Song shows his ambition to succeed Lord Huan of Qi as the next overlord. He takes Lord Huan’s heir, Duke Xiao, under his protection and tries to expand Song influence eastward through aggression against Teng and Zeng. His “use” of the Master of Zeng in a ritual of human sacrifice provokes the Song supervisor of the military Ziyu to argue against the practice of human sacrifice. It should be remembered that Ziyu is the Duke of Song’s half brother who earlier refused to be made ruler (Xi 8.5). In summer, the Duke of Song sent Lord Wen of Zhu to sacrifice the Master of Zeng at the altar of earth at Cisui: he wanted thereby to subordinate the Eastern Yi to Song. The supervisor of the military Ziyu said, “In ancient times, the six domestic animals were not substituted for one another in sacrifices.243 For a small affair, they did not sacrifice a big domestic animal. How much less would they dare to sacrifice a human being? Sacrifices are for the benefit of human beings. The people are the hosts of the gods.244 Which of the gods will relish it if you sacrifice a human being? Lord Huan of Qi preserved three falling domains and thereby brought about the submission of the princes,245 and men of lofty principles still say he was of scant virtue. Now, in a single meeting the Duke of Song does violence to the rulers of two domains, and he also sacrifices one of them to a lustful, stupid ghost. If he seeks by such means to become an overlord, will it not be difficult to succeed? He will be fortunate if he manages to die in peace.”

19.3(3)

Wei retaliates for an earlier attack by the small domain of Xing and seems to receive Heaven’s approval for its action, perhaps due to the virtue of its ruler (Xi 18.4). The Wei minister Ning Zhuangzi also shows how an apparently unfavorable omen—in this case a drought—can be read as an auspicious sign justifying military action. In autumn, a Wei leader attacked Xing in retaliation for the campaign of Tupu. At that time, there was a great drought in Wei. They divined by turtle shell about offering sacrifices to the mountains and rivers, but the outcome was inauspicious. Ning Zhuangzi said, “Formerly, when there was a famine in Zhou, they overcame Yin [Shang] and the harvest became abundant. Right now, Xing is without principles and the princes have no overlord. Could it perhaps be that Heaven wants to send Wei to chastise Xing?” They followed his advice. As soon as the troops were mobilized, it rained.



19.4(5)

proclaimed Lord Huan noble in spirit and therefore turned to him.” There are two different theories about the identification of the three states that Lord Huan preserved. One theory is that the states were Xing, Wei, and Qǐ, another is that they were Xing, Wei, and Lu. Yang (1:382) favors the latter, which the Guoyu passage seems to support.

Lord Xi

343

19.5(4) 宋人圍曹，討不服也。子魚言於宋公曰：「文王聞崇德亂而伐之，軍三旬

而不降。退修教而復伐之，因壘而降。《詩》曰： 刑于寡妻， 至于兄弟， 以御于家邦。 今君德無乃猶有所闕，而以伐人，若之何？盍姑內省德乎？無闕而後 動。」 19.6(6) 陳穆公請修好於諸侯，以無忘齊桓之德。冬，盟于齊，修桓公之好也。 19.7(7) 梁亡，不書其主，自取之也。初，梁伯好土功，亟城而弗處。民罷而弗

堪，則曰：「某寇將至。」乃溝公宮曰：「秦將襲我。」民懼而潰，秦遂取 梁。

246 King Wen’s attack on “Hu, the Prince of Chong,” is mentioned in a number of texts, including Maoshi 244, “Wen wang you sheng” 文王有聲, 16E.583, and Shuoyuan 說苑 15.513. 247 Chong 崇 was a small domain, later assimilated into Wei, located east of present-day Hu County 戶縣, Shaanxi. 248 That is, he did not go beyond the entrenchments he had built previously—it was his cultivation of the moral precepts and not any new military assault that brought about the surrender of Chong. Ziyu tries to remonstrate by using exemplary historical precedents, as does the Chu minister Feng Bo in an earlier passage (Xi 6.4). For a late and fairly expansive account of King Wen’s victory over Chong, see Shuoyuan 15.513. 249 The quotation is from Maoshi 240, “Si qi” 思齊, 16C.561.

344

Zuo Tradition

Duke Song of Xiang turns to Cao as his next victim. Several years earlier, Song had attacked Cao (Xi 15.6). Cao had since joined with them in an attack on Qi (Annals, Xi 18.1), but the Song ruler still seemed to resent Cao’s failure to submit and here takes an action the wise minister Ziyu opposes. A Song leader laid siege to Cao: this was to chastise them for not submitting. Ziyu said to the Duke of Song, “When King Wen heard that the virtue of Chong was in disarray,246 he attacked them. The military operations lasted thirty days, but Chong did not surrender.247 So King Wen withdrew to improve his instruction of the army and then attacked them again. He depended upon his former entrenchments, and they surrendered.248 As it says in the Odes,

19.5(4)

He was a model to his wife— It reached to his brothers, And he thereby governed family and domain.249

Now, could it be that my lord’s virtue still has deficiencies? Yet you would employ it to attack others. What will come of this? Why not, for the time being, scrutinize your own virtue and take action only when you are without deficiencies?” Lord Mu of Chen tries to restore the good relations that had supposedly existed during the overlordship of Lord Huan of Qi. This effort may have been directed against Song’s recent aggressions (Xi 18.3, 19.3, 19.5). Lord Mu of Chen asked the princes to foster good relations so as not to forget the virtue of Lord Huan of Qi. In winter, they swore a covenant in Qi: this was to foster the good relations that had prevailed in the time of Lord Huan.

19.6(6)

The domain of Liang is censured for land developments it could not properly populate (Xi 18.5). To justify his projects, the Liang ruler spreads rumors of a Qin threat, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Liang fell: that the text does not record the actor is because Liang brought it upon itself. Earlier, the Liege of Liang had been fond of building projects. He frequently fortified cities but did not populate them. When the people grew weary and could not bear it any longer, he would say, “Such and such an enemy is going to come.” And so, as they were digging a moat around the lord’s palace, he said, “Qin is going to make a surprise attack on us.” The people were afraid and scattered, and Qin consequently did seize Liang.

19.7(7)

Lord Xi

345

春秋 20.1(1) 二十年，春，新作南門。 20.2 夏，郜子來朝。 20.3 五月乙巳，西宮災。 20.4(2) 鄭人入滑。 20.5(3) 秋，齊人、狄人盟于邢。 20.6(4) 冬，楚人伐隨。

左傳 20.1(1) 二十年春，新作南門。書不時也。凡啟塞，從時。 20.2(4) 滑人叛鄭，而服於衛。夏，鄭公子士、洩堵寇帥師入滑。 20.3(5) 秋，齊、狄盟于邢，為邢謀衛難也。於是衛方病邢。 20.4(6) 隨以漢東諸侯叛楚。冬，楚國鬬穀於菟帥師伐隨，取成而還。君子曰：

「隨之見伐，不量力也。量力而動，其過鮮矣。善敗由己，而由人乎哉？ 《詩》曰： 豈不夙夜， 謂行多露。」

250 The quotation is from Maoshi 17, “Xing lu” 行露, 1D.55. The implication of the quotation seems to be that whatever one desires, one must proceed cautiously and “weigh one’s strength.”

346

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 20 (640 BCE) ANNALS

In the twentieth year, in spring, the southern gate was rebuilt.

20.1(1)

In summer, the Master of Gao came to visit our court.

20.2

In the fifth month, on the yisi day (23), there was a disastrous fire in the western palace.

20.3

A Zheng leader entered Hua.

20.4(2)

In autumn, a Qi leader and a Di leader swore a covenant at Xing.

20.5(3)

In winter, a Chu leader attacked Sui.

20.6(4)

ZUO

In the twentieth year, in spring, the southern gate was rebuilt. It is recorded because it was not timely. In all cases concerning openings or closings, one follows the proper season.

20.1(1)

The small domain of Hua (very close to Zheng) is caught between Zheng and Wei, just as Zheng itself is caught between Qi and Chu (and, later, Jin and Chu). The Hua leaders turned against Zheng and submitted to Wei. In summer, Gongzi Shi and Xiedu Yumia of Zheng led out troops and entered Hua.

20.2(4)

Conflict between Xing and Wei continues (Xi 18.4, 19.4). In autumn, Qi and the Di swore a covenant at Xing: this was to make plans on Xing’s behalf concerning the difficulties caused by Wei. It was right at that time that Wei distressed Xing.

20.3(5)

Sui was able to resist Chu encroachments earlier (Huan 6.2, 8.2), but here Sui oversteps its power and comes up against the growing power of Chu. Sui, in league with princes from east of the Han River, turned against Chu. In winter, Dou Gouwutu of Chu led troops to attack Sui. They secured an accord and returned home. The noble man said, “Sui was attacked because it did not weigh its own strength. If one weighs one’s strength and then acts, one’s errors will be few. Success and failure arise from oneself. Could they arise from others? As it says in the Odes,

20.4(6)

How could I not want to go morning and night? Yet what is to be done—for walking there is too much dew.”250

Lord Xi

347

20.5 宋襄公欲合諸侯。臧文仲聞之曰：「以欲從人，則可；以人從欲，鮮濟。」

春秋 21.1 二十有一年，春，狄侵衛。 21.2(1) 宋人、齊人、楚人盟于鹿上。 21.3(2) 夏，大旱。 21.4(3) 秋，宋公、楚子、陳侯、蔡侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯會于盂。執宋公以伐宋。 21.5 冬，公伐邾。 21.6 楚人使宜申來獻捷。 21.7(3) 十有二月癸丑，公會諸侯盟于薄，釋宋公。

左傳 21.1(2) 二十一年，春，宋人為鹿上之盟，以求諸侯於楚。楚人許之。公子目夷

曰：「小國爭盟，禍也。宋其亡乎！幸而後敗。」

251 Zichan says something very similar to this in Zhao 4.1, which indicates that it might have been a common saying. 252 Lushang 鹿上 was located in the domain of Song southwest of present-day Juye County 巨野縣, Shandong. 253 Yu 盂 was located in Song near present-day Sui County 睢縣, Henan.

348

Zuo Tradition

Song’s ambitions to follow Qi as the dominant power are here revealed by the wise Lu minister Zang Wenzhong. Duke Xiang of Song wanted to gather the princes. When Zang Wenzhong heard this, he said, “To bring one’s own wishes into compliance with those of others is acceptable; but those who make others comply with their wishes rarely succeed.”251

20.5

LORD XI 21 (639 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-first year, in spring, the Di invaded Wei.

21.1

A Song leader, a Qi leader, and a Chu leader swore a covenant at Lushang.252

21.2(1)

In summer, there was a great drought.

21.3(2)

In autumn, the Duke of Song, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Cai, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao met at Yu.253 They arrested the Duke of Song and took him with them as they attacked Song.

21.4(3)

In winter, our lord attacked Zhu.

21.5

Chu leaders sent Yishen (Zixi) to us to offer spoils of war.254

21.6

In the twelfth month, on the guichou (10) day, our lord met with the princes and swore a covenant at Bo.255 The Duke of Song was released.

21.7(3)

ZUO

The overlord of the princes, Lord Huan of Qi, had died four years earlier (Xi 17.5). Chu had grown in power, and its ruler now seems to have been in a position of preeminence among the princes. Here the ruler of Song, which was a small domain but of a venerable tradition as one of the central domains, seeks to challenge Chu in assuming the position of overlord (Xi 20.5). In the twenty-first year, in spring, a Song leader made the covenant of Lushang in order to seek leadership of the princes from Chu. A Chu leader consented to this. Ziyua said, “When a small domain competes to lead the covenant, there will be disaster. Surely Song will fall! We will be fortunate if we manage to delay our defeat.”

21.1(2)

254 Presumably these were spoils won from the attack on Song. 255 Bo 薄 was located in the domain of Song north of present-day Shangqiu City 商丘 市, Henan.

Lord Xi

349

21.2(3) 夏，大旱。公欲焚巫、尪。臧文仲曰：「非旱備也。修城郭、貶食、省用、

務穡、勸分，此其務也。巫、尪何為？天欲殺之，則如勿生；若能為旱，焚 之滋甚。」公從之。是歲也，饑而不害。

21.3(4, 7)

秋，諸侯會宋公于盂。子魚曰：「禍其在此乎！君欲已甚，其何以堪之？」 於是楚執宋公以伐宋。冬，會于薄以釋之。子魚曰：「禍猶未也，未足以 懲君。」

21.4 任、宿、須句、顓臾，風姓也，實司大暭與有濟之祀，以服事諸夏。邾

人滅須句。須句子來奔，因成風也。成風為之言於公曰：「崇明祀，保 小寡，周禮也；蠻夷猾夏，周禍也。若封須句，是崇皞、濟而修祀、紓 禍也。」

256 Whether wu wang 巫尪 refers to one type of person or two is a matter of dispute. The passages cited in Yang, 1:390, and Karlgren, gl. 123, make it quite clear, it seems to us, that two types of persons are intended. Yang refers to a “deformed person” of a particular type: the back is arched and the chest protrudes so that the person’s face looks “up toward heaven.” Du Yu (ZZ 14.241) explains: “A popular explanation is that Heaven pities those who have this malady and fears that rain will enter their nostrils. Therefore, on their account, there is drought. Consequently, the lord wants to burn them.” 257 Gongyang, Xi 21 (11.143), contains the following account of the arrest of the Duke of Song: “The Duke of Song and the Master of Chu made an appointment to attend the meeting with riding chariots. Ziyu remonstrated: ‘Chu is a barbarian domain. They are strong but lack dutifulness. I request that you go to the meeting with a war chariot.’ The Duke of Song said, ‘I cannot. I have agreed upon a meeting with riding chariots. I was the one who made the agreement. If I were to be the one who fails it, it would not do.’ In the end he did go to the meeting in a riding chariot, and Chu did in fact hide war chariots. They arrested the Duke of Song and thereupon attacked Song.”

350

Zuo Tradition

Once again a wise minister questions a “superstition” and recommends good government as a means of combating drought. In summer, there was a great drought. Our lord wanted to burn a shaman and a deformed person.256 Zang Wenzhong said, “This is no defense against droughts. Repair the inner and outer walls, diminish food consumption, restrict expenditures, emphasize farming, and encourage sharing: these are the proper tasks. What can shamans and deformed persons do? If Heaven wanted to kill them, then it ought not to have given birth to them. And if they are able to cause droughts, then burning them would only make matters worse.” Our lord followed this advice. This particular year was one of famine, but it did no damage.

21.2(3)

As Ziyu predicted (Xi 21.1), the ruler of Song begins to have difficulties as Chu turns against him. In autumn, the princes met with the Duke of Song at Yu. Ziyu said, “I expect calamity will come from this! The ruler’s desires are already extreme. How will he withstand this?” At that time, Chu arrested the Duke of Song and attacked Song. In winter, they met at Bo to release him. Ziyu said, “The calamity has not yet occurred. This has not yet been sufficient to punish the ruler.”257

21.3(4, 7)

Cheng Feng, the mother of the Lu ruler, argues that Lu should defend small domains related to her natal lineage against the encroachments of Zhu, another neighboring small domain with which Lu has deteriorating relations in the period covered by Zuozhuan.258 The domains of Ren, Su, Xuqu, and Zhuanyu belonged to the Feng clan.259 These were the domains that were in charge of the sacrifices to Taihao and the Ji River and submitted to and served the central domains. The men of Zhu destroyed Xuqu. The Master of Xuqu came in flight, relying upon the support of Cheng Feng.260 Cheng Feng spoke to our lord on his behalf, saying, “To honor the bright sacrifices and to protect the small and the few is the ritual principle of the Zhou. For the Man and the Yi to disturb the central domains is a calamity for Zhou. If we put Xuqu in power, we would in this way venerate Taihao and the spirits of the Ji River, and through cultivating the former sacrifices, we could avert calamity.”

21.4

258 See Gao Shiqi, Zuozhuan jishi benmo, 127–44. 259 Ren 任, Su 宿, Xuqu 須句, and Zhuanyu 顓臾 were all small domains located in the region of the larger domain of Lu in present-day Shandong. 260 Cheng Feng, a native of Xuqu, had been a concubine of Lord Zhuang and was the mother of the current Lord Xi.

Lord Xi

351

春秋 22.1(1) 二十有二年，春，公伐邾，取須句。 22.2(3) 夏，宋公、衛侯、許男、滕子伐鄭。 22.3(7) 秋，八月丁未，及邾人戰于升陘。 22.4(8) 冬，十有一月己巳朔，宋公及楚人戰于泓，宋師敗績。

左傳 22.1(1) 二十二年，春，伐邾，取須句，反其君焉，禮也。 22.2 三月，鄭伯如楚。 22.3(2) 夏，宋公伐鄭。子魚曰：「所謂禍在此矣。」 22.4 初，平王之東遷也，辛有適伊川，見被髮而祭於野者，曰：「不及百年，

此其戎乎！其禮先亡矣。」秋，秦、晉遷陸渾之戎于伊川。 22.5 晉大子圉為質於秦，將逃歸，謂嬴氏曰：「與子歸乎？」

261 Shengxing 升陘 was probably in the domain of Lu, but its exact location is unknown. 262 The Hong River 泓水 was located southwest of present-day Shangqiu 商丘 in Henan. 263 Yichuan 伊川 refers to areas in the royal Zhou domain along the banks of the Yi River 伊河 within the region still known as Yichuan County 伊川縣, Henan. 264 “Rong of Luhun” seems to be the name of a Rong tribe that had been living in Guazhou (Yang, 1:394). Note that the prophecy was that this removal of the Rong to Yichuan would happen within 100 years. According to the traditional chronology, the capital was moved in 770 Bce, which would mean that 133 years had passed since the Zhou capital had been moved to the east. However, the recently discovered Qinghua bamboo text Xinian 繫年 contains a passage indicating that the relocation of the capital to Chengzhou actually took place in 738 Bce, precisely 100 years before the events reported here (Yuri Pines, private communication).

352

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 22 (638 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-second year, in spring, our lord attacked Zhu and took Xuqu.

22.1(1)

In summer, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Head of Xǔ, and the Master of Teng attacked Zheng.

22.2(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the dingwei day (8), we did battle with a Zhu leader at Shengxing.261 In winter, in the eleventh month, on the jisi day, the first day of the month, the Duke of Song did battle with a Chu leader at the Hong River.262 The Song troops were completely defeated.

22.3(7)

22.4(8)

ZUO

In the twenty-second year, in spring, we attacked Zhu and took Xuqu: this was to restore their ruler to them and was in accordance with ritual propriety.

22.1(1)

In the third month, the Liege of Zheng went to Chu.

22.2

Ziyu’s prediction of calamity is fulfilled (Xi 21.3). In summer, the Duke of Song attacked Zheng. Ziyu said, “What I have called ‘calamity’ lies in this!”

22.3(2)

A Rong tribe is relocated, and an earlier prediction of this event is noted. Earlier, when King Ping had moved the capital to the east, Xin You had gone to Yichuan263 and, upon seeing someone with unbound hair offering a sacrifice in the countryside, had said, “Within one hundred years, this likely will be the Rong’s! Ritual propriety has been lost here already!” In autumn, Qin and Jin moved the Rong of Luhun to Yichuan.264

22.4

To secure his release from Qin, Lord Hui of Jin had sent his son, the heir apparent Yu, as a hostage (Xi 15.4, 17.2). Here Yu escapes and returns home, but his wife Huai Ying, the daughter of the ruler of Qin, refuses to accompany him. Huai Ying is included in the “Integrity and Dutifulness” (Jieyi 節義) section of Lienü zhuan (Xi 5.3). The Jin heir apparent Yu was a hostage in Qin. As he was about to flee and return home, he said to his wife, Huai Ying, “Will you return with me, your master?”265

22.5

265 This somewhat awkward translation attempts to deal with zi 子, which is normally a polite second-person pronoun: “you, sir.” We have translated as if the speaker refers to himself as his wife might.

Lord Xi

353

對曰：「子，晉大子，而辱於秦。子之欲歸，不亦宜乎？寡君之使婢 子侍執巾櫛，以固子也。從子而歸，棄君命也。不敢從，亦不敢言。」遂 逃歸。 22.6 富辰言於王曰：「請召大叔。《詩》曰：

協比其鄰， 婚姻孔云。 吾兄弟之不協，焉能怨諸侯之不睦？」王說。王子帶自齊復歸于京師， 王召之也。 22.7(3) 邾人以須句故出師。公卑邾，不設備而禦之。臧文仲曰：「國無小，不可

易也。無備，雖眾，不可恃也。《詩》曰： 戰戰兢兢， 如臨深淵， 如履薄冰。 又曰： 敬之敬之！ 天惟顯思， 命不易哉！

266 Maoshi 192, “Zheng yue” 正月, 12A.401. 267 Maoshi 195, “Xiao min” 小旻, 12B.414. 268 Maoshi 288, “Jing zhi” 敬之, 19C.740. The last line of the original was understood in the Mao commentarial tradition to mean “And its mandate does not change,” but Zang Wenzhong seems to understand yi 易 as “easy,” putting it in opposition to nan 難, “difficult.” The same lines are cited in Cheng 4.3.

354

Zuo Tradition

She responded, “You are the heir apparent of Jin and condescended to be in Qin. Is it not fitting that you should want to return home? But my unworthy ruler ordered me, your lowly maid, to wait upon you with kerchief and comb and thereby keep you here. If I go back with you, I am rejecting my ruler’s command. I do not dare to follow you, but I also will not dare to speak of your flight.” So he escaped and returned home. Wangzi Dai had assisted the Rong in an attack upon the king’s realm (Xi 11.3) and had consequently fled to Qi (Xi 12.3). The following passage fulfills Zhongsun Jiao’s prediction that “short of ten years, the king will not call Wangzi Dai back” (Xi 13.1). The Zhou minister Fu Chen convinces the king that reinstating Dai will foster amity between “brother domains.” Fu Chen said to the king, “I request that we call back the Great Younger Uncle, Wangzi Dai. As it says in the Odes,

22.6

He is in accord with his neighbors And with kith and kin he is in harmony.266

If we cannot be in accord with our brothers, how can we blame the princes for not having good relations?” The king was pleased. That Wangzi Dai returned from Qi to the Zhou capital was because the king had called him back. Zhu had destroyed Xuqu (Xi 21.4), but Lu then attacked Zhu and restored Xuqu (Xi 22.1), bringing on a Zhu reprisal for which Lu had prepared poorly. Because of the Xuqu affair, the Zhu leaders dispatched troops. Our lord looked upon Zhu with scorn and engaged them without taking defensive precautions. Zang Wenzhong said, “No matter how small a domain might be, it cannot be regarded lightly. Without proper precautions, even when one’s troops are numerous, they cannot be relied upon. As it says in the Odes,

22.7(3)

Tremble, be fearful! As if standing before a deep abyss, As if treading upon thin ice.267

Again, it says, Be reverent, be reverent. Heaven is clear to see. Its command is not easy to guard!268

Lord Xi

355

先王之明德，猶無不難也，無不懼也，況我小國乎！君其無謂邾小，蜂 蠆有毒，而況國乎！」弗聽。 八月丁未，公及邾師戰于升陘，我師敗績。邾人獲公冑，縣諸 魚門。 22.8(4) 楚人伐宋以救鄭。宋公將戰，大司馬固諫曰：「天之棄商久矣，君將興

之，弗可赦也已。」弗聽。 冬，十一月己巳朔，宋公及楚人戰于泓。宋人既成列，楚人未既 濟。司馬曰：「彼眾我寡，及其未既濟也，請擊之。」公曰：「不可。」既濟 而未成列，又以告。公曰：「未可。」既陳而後擊之，宋師敗績。公傷股。 門官殲焉。 國人皆咎公。公曰：「君子不重傷，不禽二毛。古之為軍也，不以阻 隘也。寡人雖亡國之餘，不鼓不成列。」

269 Presumably this was the name of one of the Zhu city gates. Notice, too, that the defeat recorded in Zuozhuan is concealed in the Annals entry, which records only that Lu fought a battle with Zhu. 270 Ziyu held the position of supervisor of the military (see Xi 19.3). Shiji 38.1626 attributes this speech to Ziyu. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 27.622) supports Sima Qian’s attribution and argues that gu 固 is an adverb meaning “insistently,” not a proper name. However, in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.348, a supervisor of the military named Gongsun Gu 公孫固 urges Duke Xiang of Song to show civility to Chong’er, suggesting that Gu is not to be confused with Ziyu. Shiji 38.1627 also mentions in another context the grand supervisor of the military Gongsun Gu, whom Zhang Shoujie, quoting Shiben 世本, identifies as the grandson of Duke Zhuang of Song (Shiji 38.1628). However, “insistently remonstrating” is mentioned elsewhere (Yang, 1:396) and sticking with Ziyu here gives the anecdotal series a nice economy.

356

Zuo Tradition

Even for the former kings, with their bright virtue, there was nothing they did not consider difficult, nothing they did not fear. How much more should our small domain be vigilant! Pray do not, my lord, say Zhu is small. If wasps and scorpions carry poison, how much more does a domain!” But our lord did not heed this advice. In the eighth month, on the dingwei day (8), our lord did battle with the Zhu troops at Shengxing, and our troops were completely defeated. The Zhu leaders captured our lord’s helmet and suspended it above the Fish Gate.269 The predicted punishment of Song continues (Xi 21.1, 21.3) as their ruler follows a notion of “ fair warfare” rather than the more ruthless but realistic advice of the supervisor of the military, his half brother Ziyu. Concern for the proper etiquette of battle recurs throughout Zuozhuan. See, for example, Xuan 2.1, Cheng 2.3, and Zhao 21.6. The men of Chu attacked Song in order to come to the aid of Zheng. The Duke of Song was about to engage in battle when the grand supervisor of the military insistently270 remonstrated: “It has been a long time since Heaven abandoned the Shang. If you, my lord, try to revive it, Heaven simply will not be able to forgive it.”271 But the duke did not heed this. In winter, in the eleventh month, on the jisi day, the first day of the month, the Duke of Song did battle with Chu leaders at the Hong River. The men of Song had already formed their ranks, but the men of Chu had not yet finished crossing the river. The supervisor of the military said, “They are numerous, and we are few. Let us attack them before they have completed the crossing.” The duke said, “That won’t do.” When the Chu army had completed the crossing but had not yet formed their ranks, the supervisor of the military again notified him. But the duke said, “That will not do.” Only after the Chu army was properly marshaled did he attack them. The Song troops were completely defeated. The duke was wounded in the hip and the palace guards were all slaughtered.272 The inhabitants of the capital all blamed the duke. The duke said, “The noble man does not inflict wounds twice, nor does he take as prisoners those with graying hair. When the ancients engaged in warfare, they did not take advantage of difficult terrain and narrow straits. Although I, the unworthy one, am but a remnant of a fallen domain,273 I do not bang the drum to urge an attack upon those who have not formed their ranks.”

22.8(4)

271 When the Zhou conquered the Shang, they settled descendants of the Shang leaders in Song as a means of keeping alive offerings to the Shang ancestors. 272 According to Shen Qinhan, palace guards (menguan 門官) were sons of officials and served as the duke’s personal guards (Yang, 1:397). 273 The “fallen domain” referred to here is that of the Shang.

Lord Xi

357

子魚曰：「君未知戰，勍敵之人，隘而不列，天贊我也；阻而鼓之， 不亦可乎？猶有懼焉。且今之勍者，皆吾敵也。雖及胡耇，獲則取之，何 有於二毛？明恥、教戰，求殺敵也。傷未及死，如何勿重？若愛重傷，則 如勿傷；愛其二毛，則如服焉。三軍以利用也，金鼓以聲氣也。利而用 之，阻隘可也；聲盛致志，鼓儳可也。」 22.9 丙子晨，鄭文夫人羋氏、姜氏勞楚子於柯澤。楚子使師縉示之俘馘。君

子曰：「非禮也。婦人送迎不出門，見兄弟不踰閾，戎事不邇女器。」 丁丑，楚子入享于鄭，九獻，庭實旅百，加籩豆六品。享畢，夜出， 文羋送于軍。取鄭二姬以歸。叔詹曰：「楚王其不沒乎！為禮卒於無別。 無別不可謂禮。將何以沒？」諸侯是以知其不遂霸也。

274 Karlgren (gl. 128) argues that li 利 here means “sharp weapons.” It seems to us, though, that Ziyu is speaking of the need to make use of advantages in military actions. The troops of a domain were typically organized into three units, or “three armies,” while the royal Zhou military was organized into “six armies” (on this, see Xiang 14.5). Later, the domain of Jin will add two additional armies to their military force. 275 Lady Mi was a woman from the ruling family of Chu, and Lady Jiang was from the ruling family of Qi. Ke Marsh 柯澤 was apparently in the domain of Zheng, but its exact location is unknown. 276 Karlgren (gl. 129) has a quite different understanding, taking qi 器 in the sense of “capacity”: “Military matters are not proximate to female capacities.” We take qi, “vessels,” as metonymy for the world of household things—the realm of women. 277 Shuzhan was a Zheng minister. 278 The Master of Chu, also known as King Cheng of Chu, will be defeated at Chengpu and will be assassinated by his son Shangchen eight years later (Wen 1.10).

358

Zuo Tradition

Ziyu said, “You, my lord, do not yet understand warfare. When powerful adversaries are trapped in difficult terrain and have not formed ranks, it means Heaven is assisting us. Is it not proper, while they are in narrow straits, to press an attack? Even then, one should still be fearful of them. Moreover, the powerful ones in this case are all our adversaries. Even though they have reached old age, if they can be captured, then we seize them. Why be concerned about graying hair? We make clear what is shameful and teach about warfare because we seek to kill enemies. If the wounded are not yet dead, why not wound them a second time? If you are concerned about inflicting wounds twice, then you might as well not inflict wounds at all. If you are concerned about graying hair, then you might as well surrender to them. The three armies function through what is advantageous;274 metal and drums arouse courage with their sounds. Making use of the advantageous, it is proper to attack the enemy in difficult terrain and narrow straits; boosting morale with booming sounds, it is acceptable to drum for battle when the enemy is in disarray. Zheng honors Chu for military assistance (Xi 22.8), but in the course of the ceremony both sides behave in ways that run contrary to ritual propriety. In the two passages below, the King of Chu is criticized for not maintaining the proper boundary between men and women. On the bingzi day (8), early in the morning, Lady Mi and Lady Jiang, the wives of Lord Wen of Zheng, went to honor the exertions of the Master of Chu at Ke Marsh.275 The Master of Chu had the music master Jin display to the two ladies the captives and the severed ears of the enemy dead. The noble man said, “This is not in accordance with ritual propriety. In sending off or in greeting guests, women do not go beyond the gate; in meeting with their brothers, they do not cross over the threshold; and military matters are not brought near a woman’s realm.”276 On the dingchou day (9), the Master of Chu entered Zheng to receive ceremonial toasts. There were nine wine offerings, and in the court goods were displayed by the hundreds. Supplemental delicacies in bamboo and wooden containers amounted to six types. When the ceremonial toasts were over, the guests came out by night, with Mi, the wife of Lord Wen of Zheng, escorting the Master of Chu back to his military camp. He took two women of the Zheng ruler’s family and returned home. Shuzhan277 said, “I expect the King of Chu will not die a natural death! In performing the ritual, he ends by making no distinctions between male and female. What lacks appropriate distinctions cannot be considered ritual propriety. How will he die a natural death?” The princes knew by this that the Master of Chu would not achieve his goal of becoming overlord.278

Lord Xi

22.9

359

春秋 23.1(1) 二十有三年，春，齊侯伐宋，圍緡。 23.2(2) 夏，五月庚寅，宋公茲父卒。 23.3(3) 秋，楚人伐陳。 23.4(5) 冬，十有一月，杞子卒。

左傳 23.1(1) 二十三年，春，齊侯伐宋，圍緡，以討其不與盟于齊也。 23.2(2) 夏，五月，宋襄公卒，傷於泓故也。 23.3(3) 秋，楚成得臣帥師伐陳，討其貳於宋也。遂取焦、夷，城頓而還。子文以

為之功，使為令尹。叔伯曰：「子若國何？」對曰：「吾以靖國也。夫有大 功而無貴仕，其人能靖者與有幾？」

279 Min 緡 was located in the domain of Song northeast of present-day Jinxiang County 金鄉縣, Shandong. 280 Takezoe (6.28) notes that Chen’s shift of allegiance to Song is not mentioned earlier. 281 Jiao 焦 and Yi 夷 were two Chen towns located near present-day Bo County 亳縣, Anhui. Dun 頓 was a small domain of the Ji 姬 clan name located west of Xiangcheng County 項城縣, Henan. Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao, 1:585) suggests that Chen

360

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 23 (637 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-third year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked Song and laid siege to Min.279 In summer, in the fifth month, on the gengyin day (25), Zifu, the Duke of Song, died.

23.1(1)

23.2(2)

In autumn, a Chu leader attacked Chen.

23.3(3)

In winter, in the eleventh month, the Master of Qǐ died.

23.4(5)

ZUO

In the twenty-third year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked Song and laid siege to Min: this was to chastise them for not participating in the covenant sworn in Qi.

23.1(1)

The unhappy decline of Duke Xiang of Song now comes to an end (Xi 22.8). In summer, in the fifth month, Lord Xiang of Song died: this was because he was wounded at Hong.

23.2(2)

Chu now attacks Chen in retaliation for the latter’s support of Song (Xi 21.4). In autumn, Cheng Dechen of Chu led out troops to attack Chen: this was to chastise them for shifting their allegiance to Song.280 They then seized the settlements of Jiao and Yi, fortified Dun, and returned home.281 Dou Gouwutua regarded this as Cheng Dechen’s achievement and had him appointed chief minister. Wei Lüchena asked, “What would you do about opinions in the domain?” He responded, “By this I intend to bring peace to the domain. Now, he has great achievement but does not have an honored office. Just how many men of his ilk are there who can remain peaceful?”282

23.3(3)



had exerted pressure on Dun and that Dun had consequently gone over to Chu (Yang, 1:402). It does seem from the context above that Chu is extending its influence to intimidate Chen. 282 For an entirely different interpretation of this problematic sentence, see Karlgren, gl. 131 (cf. Yang, 1:402).

Lord Xi

361

23.4 九月，晉惠公卒。懷公立，命無從亡人，期，期而不至，無赦。狐突之子

毛及偃從重耳在秦，弗召。冬，懷公執狐突，曰：「子來則免。」對曰： 「  子之能仕，父教之忠，古之制也。策名、委質，貳乃辟也。今臣之子，名 在重耳，有年數矣。若又召之，教之貳也。父教子貳，何以事君？刑之 不 濫，君之明也，臣之願也。淫刑以逞，誰則無罪？臣聞命矣。」乃殺 之。 卜偃稱疾不出，曰：「周書有之：『乃大明服。』己則不明，而殺人 以逞，不亦難乎？民不見德，而唯戮是聞，其何後之有？」 23.5(4) 十一月，杞成公卒。書曰「子」，杞夷也。不書名，未同盟也。凡諸侯同

盟，死則赴以名，禮也。赴以名，則亦書之，不然則否，辟不敏也。

283 The fugitives are Chong’er and his party. The character li 立, “established,” is absent from most editions and is restored by Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 17.414) from quotations found in early “encyclopedias” (leishu 類書）.

362

Zuo Tradition

The tumultuous fourteen-year reign of Yiwu, Lord Hui of Jin, comes to an end (Xi 10.2). His son, the heir apparent Yu (Lord Huai) (Xi 15.4f, 17.2, 22.5), whose reign begins inauspiciously, succeeds him. In the ninth month, Lord Hui of Jin died. Lord Huai was established as ruler. He commanded that no one should follow the fugitives.283 He fixed a deadline, and fugitives who did not arrive home by that deadline were not to be forgiven. Hu Maoa and Hu Yanb, the sons of Hu Tu, had followed Chong’er and were in Qin, but Hu Tu did not call them back. In winter, Lord Huai arrested Hu Tu and said, “If your sons come home, then you will be pardoned.” Hu Tu responded, “The rule of ancient times was that when sons are capable of serving in office, their father teaches them to be loyal. After one’s name is written on a bamboo slip284 and gifts are exchanged at the beginning of one’s service, it is a transgression to be duplicitous. Now, it has been years since my sons’ names were listed with Chong’er. If still I were to call them back, this would be teaching them to be duplicitous. When fathers teach sons duplicity, how can they serve a ruler? That punishments are not excessive is the result both of the ruler’s perspicacity and of the subjects’ wishes. But if you seek satisfaction through wanton punishment, then who will be found guiltless? I have heard your command!” And so Hu Tu was put to death. Diviner Yan, citing illness, did not leave his residence. He said, “In the Zhou Documents there is this: ‘And thereupon his greatly bright virtue brought others to submission.’285 If one lacks bright virtue but kills others to seek satisfaction, will there not then be difficulty? When people do not see virtue but hear only of slaughter, then what posterity will the ruler have?”

23.4

In the eleventh month, Lord Cheng of Qǐ died. The text says “Master” because Qǐ was a Yi domain.286 It does not record his name because he had not yet joined us in a covenant. In all cases when a prince has joined us in a covenant, on the occasion of his death it is in accordance with ritual propriety to send notice of his death using his name. If a notice of death is sent using his name, then we also record it. If it is otherwise, then we do not record it. This is to avoid carelessness.

23.5(4)

284 Presumably, when one enters service and pledges loyalty to another, one’s name is inscribed on bamboo as a record of this pledge. 285 The closest passage to this in the Documents is found in “Kang gao” 康誥, 14.202. 286 Perhaps we should say “Yi-ized”! Yang (1:404–5) explains that Qǐ was inhabited by descendants of the Xia people but had been influenced by the Yi people and followed Yi ritual.

Lord Xi

363

23.6a 晉公子重耳之及於難也，晉人伐諸蒲城。蒲城人欲戰，重耳不可，曰：

「 保君父之命而享其生祿，於是乎得人。有人而校，罪莫大焉。吾其奔 也。」遂奔狄。從者狐偃、趙衰、顛頡、魏武子、司空季子。 狄人伐廧咎如，獲其二女叔隗、季隗，納諸公子。公子取季隗， 生伯鯈、叔劉，以叔隗妻趙衰，生盾。將適齊，謂季隗曰：「待我二十五 年，不來而後嫁。」對曰：「我二十五年矣，又如是而嫁，則就木焉。請待 子。」處狄十二年而行。 23.6b 過衛，衛文公不禮焉。出於五鹿，乞食於野人，野人與之塊。公子怒，欲

鞭之。子犯曰：「天賜也。」稽首受而載之。

287 Shiji 39.1656 adds, “Chong’er, Lord Wen of Jin, was the son of Lord Xian of Jin. From youth he was fond of gentlemen and by the age of seventeen possessed five worthy gentlemen: his elder uncles Zhao Cui and Hu Yan, and Jia Tuo, Xian Zhen, and Wei Chou. . . . When he went over to the Di, he was accompanied by these five gentlemen and eighteen others who are unnamed.” The list of followers in Zuozhuan is slightly different. 288 This was a Red Di group probably located just west of present-day Anyang City 安 陽, Henan. For another possibility, see Yang, 1:405. 289 Literally, she says, “I will be drawing near wood” (see Karlgren, gl. 134). 290 An extensive account of Chong’er’s travels can also be found in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.337–68. We will note below only a few places in which the latter account supplements or differs significantly from Zuozhuan. In the case of this episode, for example, it is Hu Yan who persuades Chong’er finally to leave the Di and travel to Qi (“Jin yu 4,” 10.337).

364

Zuo Tradition

Zuozhuan now returns to the story of Chong’er, a son of Lord Xian of Jin, who had been attacked at the Pu fortress many years before (Xi 5.2) and whose wanderings, as the following account indicates, had been extensive. When Chong’er, the noble son of Jin, had been beset by difficulties, the men of Jin attacked him at the Pu fortress. The men of the Pu fortress wanted to fight, but Chong’er refused and said, “Keeping to the command of my ruler and father, I have enjoyed a living allowance from him and have by this means gained followers. There would be no greater crime, now that I have followers, than to resist my father. I should flee!” So he fled to the Di. Those who accompanied him were Hu Yan, Zhao Cui, Dian Xie, Wei Choua, and the supervisor of works Xu Chenb.287 The men of Di attacked the Qianggaoru tribe,288 capturing two daughters of the ruling family, Shu Wei and Ji Wei, whom they presented to the noble son Chong’er. The noble son married Ji Wei, and she bore Bochou and Shuliu. He gave Shu Wei as wife to Zhao Cuia, and she bore Dun. When Chong’er was about to go to Qi, he said to Ji Wei, “Wait twentyfive years for me, and remarry only if I have not come back by then.” She responded, “I am twenty-five years old. If as many years as that pass again and I remarry, I will have taken to the wood of my coffin.289 Let me wait for you.” Chong’er had resided among the Di for twelve years by the time he set out.290

23.6a

In the domain of Wei, Chong’er’s wise advisor Hu Yan turns what might have been an insult into an omen of future territorial gain (see Xi 28.1), and in the domain of Qi, a newly acquired wife, Lady Jiang, pushes Chong’er toward his destiny. What unites these two episodes is that in both cases those who serve Chong’er seem to have a clearer sense of his future greatness than he does himself. When he passed through Wei, Lord Wen of Wei did not treat him with ritual propriety. As he was departing from Wei at Wulu,291 he begged for food from a peasant, but the peasant gave him a clod of earth. The noble son Chong’er was angry and wanted to whip him, but Hu Yana said, “This is granted from Heaven.”292 Bowing with his forehead touching the ground, the noble son accepted the clod and loaded it on his wagon.

23.6b

291 Wulu 五鹿 was located in the domain of Wei south of present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan. 292 Chong’er will take Wulu five years later (Xi 28.1). Hu Yan’s speech in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.338–39, is much more extensive. He argues that the presentation of earth is a foreshadowing and that Wulu will belong to Chong’er within the completion of one cycle of the Year-Planet (Jupiter), a period of twelve years. Wulu exemplifies the manipulation of signs and the strategic calculations that are important for Chong’er’s rise (Wai-yee Li, The Readability fo the past, 254–75)

Lord Xi

365

及齊，齊桓公妻之，有馬二十乘。公子安之。從者以為不可。將 行，謀於桑下。蠶妾在其上，以告姜氏。姜氏殺之，而謂公子曰：「子有 四方之志，其聞之者，吾殺之矣。」公子曰：「無之。」姜曰：「行也！懷與 安，實敗名。」公子不可。姜與子犯謀，醉而遣之。醒，以戈逐子犯。 23.6c 及曹，曹共公聞其駢脅，欲觀其裸。浴，薄而觀之。僖負羈之妻曰：「吾

觀晉公子之從者，皆足以相國。若以相，夫子必反其國。反其國，必得志 於諸侯。得志於諸侯，而誅無禮，曹其首也。子盍蚤自貳焉！」乃饋盤 飧、寘璧焉。公子受飧反璧。 及宋，宋襄公贈之以馬二十乘。

293 The parallel of this passage in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.342, contains a long speech by Lady Jiang in which she tries to persuade her husband that the time is right for him to reject his life of ease in Qi, return to Jin, and take action: “Of the noble sons, only you remain. You will certainly rule in Jin.” Lady Jiang is included in the “Sagacious Understanding” section in Lienü zhuan (2.3). 294 Xi Fuji was a minister in the domain of Cao. 295 She is, of course, urging her husband to establish a connection with Chong’er even as her husband remains a minister to his own ruler, Lord Gong of Cao. Five years later Xi Fuji gets his reward (Xi 28.1), which unfortunately provokes jealousy among Chong’er’s followers. 296 In Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.347, Xi Fuji delivers a long speech to the Liege of Cao trying to persuade him to treat the traveling Chong’er with ritual propriety, for although Chong’er fled his country when he was only seventeen, “three men of ministerial talent followed him, and he can be considered worthy indeed.”

366

Zuo Tradition

When he arrived in Qi, Lord Huan of Qi gave him a daughter, Lady Jiang, as wife, and he possessed twenty four-horse teams. The noble son Chong’er was content there, and his followers considered this unacceptable. They were preparing to set out and made plans to this effect beneath a mulberry tree. A maidservant who took care of silkworms was up in the tree and reported what she had heard to Lady Jiang. Lady Jiang killed her and then said to the noble son, “You have ambitions that reach to the four quarters of the realm. As for the one who overheard this, I have put her to death.” The noble son said, “I do not have such ambitions.” Jiang said, “Go! Affection and contentment are the very things that destroy reputations!”293 The noble son was unwilling to go. Lady Jiang and Hu Yana conspired together, got him drunk, and sent him off. When the noble son sobered up, he chased after Hu Yana, brandishing a dagger-axe. Another wise woman, the wife of Xi Fuji, recognizes Chong’er’s greatness and rescues her husband from being implicated in the Lord of Cao’s curiosity about Chong’er’s peculiar body. Appropriate reward and punishment, respectively, for Xi Fuji and for the Lord of Cao will follow (Xi 28.3a). Chong’er arrived in Cao. Lord Gong of Cao had heard that Chong’er had fused ribs and wanted to see him naked. While the noble son was bathing, he watched him from behind a curtain. The wife of Xi Fuji294 said, “I have observed that the followers of the noble son of Jin are all worthy to act as counselors to the domain. If he uses them as counselors, that fine man is certain to return to his domain. And when he returns, he is certain to achieve his ambitions among the princes. After he has fulfilled his ambitions among the princes, he will punish those who have violated ritual propriety, and Cao will be at the top of this list! Why don’t you show your difference from the Cao ruler early on?”295 So Xi Fuji presented the noble son with a plate of cooked cereal and placed a circular jade pendant on the plate. The noble son accepted the cooked cereal but returned the jade pendant.296 When he arrived in Song, Lord Xiang of Song gave him as a gift twenty four-horse teams.297

23.6c

297 Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.348, provides a more detailed account of the visit to Song. In that account, Lord Xiang’s courtesy to Chong’er results from a speech of the supervisor of the military Gongsun Gu, who commends to him Chong’er’s virtuous cultivation of three men of talent: Hu Yan, “whom he serves as a father”; Zhao Cui, “whom he serves as a teacher”; and Jia Tuo, “whom he serves as an elder.”

Lord Xi

367

23.6d 及鄭，鄭文公亦不禮焉。叔詹諫曰：「臣聞天之所啟，人弗及也。晉公子

有三焉，天其或者將建諸，君其禮焉！男女同姓，其生不蕃。晉公子，姬 出也，而至于今，一也。離外之患，而天不靖晉國，殆將啟之，二也。有三 士，足以上人，而從之，三也。晉、鄭同儕，其過子弟固將禮焉，況天之 所啟乎！」弗聽。 23.6e 及楚，楚子饗之曰：「公子若反晉國，則何以報不穀？」對曰：「子、女、

玉、帛，則君有之；羽、毛、齒、革，則君地生焉。其波及晉國者，君之餘 也；其何以報君？」曰：「雖然，何以報我？」對曰：「若以君之靈，得反晉 國。晉、楚治兵，遇於中原，其辟君三舍。若不獲命，其左執鞭、弭，右屬 櫜、鞬，以與君周旋。」

368

Zuo Tradition

Another unwise ruler resists his minister’s insightful recognition of Chong’er’s greatness. The pattern continues: the wise know that Chong’er is a man of destiny, while those with lesser insight treat him shabbily. When he arrived in Zheng, Lord Wen of Zheng also did not treat him in accordance with ritual propriety. Shuzhan remonstrated: “I have heard that others cannot match up to the man for whom Heaven has opened a way. The noble son of Jin has three qualifications in this regard. I expect that Heaven is going to establish him, and you, my lord, should treat him with ritual propriety. When a man and a woman share the same clan name, their offspring will not flourish.298 The noble son of Jin descends on both sides from the Ji clan, but he has endured down to the present day. This is the first qualification. He has borne troubles while he lived abroad, but Heaven has not calmed the domain of Jin. So probably it is going to open a way for him. This is the second qualification. There are three officers, worthy to preside over others, who follow him. This is the third qualification. Jin and Zheng are of the same rank. You ought to treat with ritual propriety any son or younger brother of Jin who is passing through our domain. How much more so one for whom Heaven is opening a way!”299 The ruler did not heed his advice.

23.6d

In the domain of Chu, both the ruler and his minister Cheng Dechen recognize Chong’er’s greatness. The ruler wants to know how Chong’er will repay his support and can only extract a promise of a most surprising gift, a gift that will be given several years later (Xi 28.3e). Cheng Dechen, eager to protect Chu’s long-term interests, would prefer to see Chong’er eliminated. The noble son Chong’er arrived in Chu. As the Master of Chu was offering him ceremonial toasts, he said, “If you, the noble son, were to return to the domain of Jin, how would you repay me, the deficient one?” He replied, “As for young men, young women, jade, and silk, you, my lord, have them; as for feathers, fur, ivory, and hide, your land produces them. Any of this that flows into the domain of Jin is but your surplus. So how could I repay you?” “Even so, how would you repay me?” He replied, “If by your numinous power I manage to return to Jin, then when Jin and Chu drill the soldiers and engage one another on the central plain, we shall retreat from you for a distance of three days’ march.300 If we do not obtain your command to desist, then, seizing whip and bow in the left hand, and taking up quiver and bow case in the right, I shall perform maneuvers with you, my lord.”

23.6e

298 The taboo against marrying someone with the same clan name is also mentioned in Zhao 1.12. 299 For a longer and more elaborate version of Shuzhan’s remonstration, see Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.349–50. 300 An army supposedly covered thirty li per day, or about ten miles.

Lord Xi

369

子玉請殺之。楚子曰：「晉公子廣而儉，文而有禮。其從者肅而 寬，忠而能力。晉侯無親，外內惡之。吾聞姬姓唐叔之後，其後衰者也， 其將由晉公子乎！天將興之，誰能廢之？違天必有大咎。」乃送諸秦。 23.6f 秦伯納女五人，懷嬴與焉。奉匜沃盥，既而揮之。怒，曰：「秦、晉，匹

也，何以卑我？」公子懼，降服而囚。 他日，公享之。子犯曰：「吾不如衰之文也，請使衰從。」公子賦​ 〈河水〉。公賦〈六月〉。趙衰曰：「重耳拜賜！」公子降，拜，稽首，公降 一級而辭焉。衰曰：「君稱所以佐天子者命重耳，重耳敢不拜？」

301 This is a rare and almost unnoticed (except Pines, Foundations, appendix 2) instance of a wrong prediction in Zuozhuan: Jin (the descendants of Tang Shu) disappeared in 376 Bce, long before such states of the Ji clan as Lu, Wei, Zhou, and even Zheng. 302 In Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.354, Cheng Dechen makes a second request after the Master of Chu has rejected his advice to kill Chong’er: that they at least keep Hu Yan in Chu. But the ruler rejects this option as “not in accordance with ritual propriety.” 303 See Xi 22.5. Huai Ying is the wife of Chong’er’s nephew Yu, Lord Huai of Jin, who had stayed behind in her native Qin. 304 Since other instances of the phrase jiang fu 降服 in Zuozhuan mean “to remove the outer garment” (Wen 4.6, Cheng 5.4, Zhao 13.2), we have followed Du Yu’s reading of this phrase (ZZ 15.253). Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.356–58, turns the presentation to Chong’er of the wife of the current Jin ruler, Lord Huai, into a subject of some discussion. Xu Chen, the future supervisor of works, gives a long speech in which

370

Zuo Tradition

Cheng Dechena requested that they put him to death, but the Master of Chu said, “The noble son of Jin is ambitious but temperate, cultured, and possessed of ritual propriety. His followers are respectful and generous, loyal and capable of exertion. The Prince of Jin, Lord Hui, is without close associates and is hated both within his domain and without. I heard that among the Ji clan the posterity of Tang Shu will be the last to decline.301 I suspect this will be due to the noble son of Jin! If Heaven is going to make him flourish, who can cast him aside? Those who go contrary to Heaven are certain to incur great blame.”302 So they escorted him on his way to Qin. Although obviously Chong’er is a man of destiny, the rather ambiguous portrayal of him continues. Here he appears alternately disrespectful and frightened of a new wife, who is the daughter of a powerful ruler and potential ally. The Liege of Qin presented him with five of his daughters, and Huai Ying was among them.303 She held a basin for him to wash his hands. When he had finished, he shook off water on her. She was angry and said, “Qin and Jin are equals. How can you demean me?” The noble son was afraid. He dressed in plain white garments and acted like a prisoner in self-abnegation.304 On another day, the Lord of Qin offered him ceremonial toasts. Hu Yana said, “I am not as cultured as Zhao Cui. I request that you have Zhao Cui accompany you.” During the ceremonial toasts, the noble son recited “The Yellow River.” The lord recited “The Sixth Month.”305 Zhao Cui said, “Chong’er bows in gratitude for the bestowed gift.” The noble son descended and respectfully bowed, touching his forehead to the ground. The lord descended one step and declined the honor. Zhao Cui said, “You, my lord, have issued orders to Chong’er, claiming that he is one with the means to assist the Son of Heaven. Would Chong’er presume not to bow?”

23.6f



he argues that it is ritually appropriate for Chong’er to marry Huai Ying. Zhao Cui, however, argues that Chong’er should return the gift of Huai Ying and then marry her in a properly respectful manner. 305 According to Du Yu (ZZ 15.253), “The Yellow River” is a lost poem that, recited in this context, compared Jin to the Yellow River and Qin to the sea. The Wei Zhao annotation to the Guoyu parallel (“Jin yu 4,” 10.361, n. 10) points out that Maoshi 183, “Mian shui” 沔水, includes appropriate lines on the river and the sea and may indeed be the poem Chong’er recited. “The Yellow River” is mentioned in what has come to be titled “Kongzi shilun” 孔子詩論 in the Shanghai Museum Bamboo-Strip Manuscript. In any case, the recitation was meant to honor Chong’er’s hosts. One of the lines of Maoshi 177, “Liu yue” 六月 (10B.357), speaks of “assisting the Son of Heaven” and presumably implied that Chong’er would eventually become a powerful leader of the princes. Yang (1:410) notes that this is the first episode in Zuozhuan that describes the reciting of odes at a banquet.

Lord Xi

371

春秋 24.1 二十有四年，春，王正月。 24.2(2) 夏，狄伐鄭。 24.3 秋，七月。 24.4(2) 冬，天王出居于鄭。 24.5 晉侯夷吾卒。

左傳 24.1a 二十四年，春，王正月，秦伯納之。不書，不告入也。

及河，子犯以璧授公子，曰：「臣負羈絏從君巡於天下，臣之罪甚 多矣，臣猶知之，而況君乎？請由此亡。」公子曰：「所不與舅氏同心者， 有如白水！」投其璧于河。 濟河，圍令狐，入桑泉，取臼衰。二月甲午，晉師軍于廬柳。秦伯使 公子縶如晉師。師退，軍于郇。辛丑，狐偃及秦、晉之大夫盟于郇。壬 寅，公子入于晉師。丙午，入于曲沃。丁未，朝于武宮。戊申，使殺懷公于 高梁。不書，亦不告也。

306 As Yang (1:413) and Takezoe (6.41) both note, this sentence has the structure of an oath. They also believe that “bright waters” refers to the god of the Yellow River, which is also how the expression is treated in Shiji 39.1660. 307 Linghu 令狐 was located in the domain of Jin west of present-day Linyi County 臨 猗縣, Shanxi. Sangquan 桑泉 is very close by, as is Jiushuai 臼衰. 308 The six dates in this paragraph do not correspond to the second month and are therefore incorrect. Jin followed a different calendar from Lu, as has been noted earlier, and it is possible that mistakes were made in the transcription of the dates. However, as noted in the translation, the time elapsing between each of the dates, which we have added to our translation, is clear: the six dates are the thirty-first, thirty-eighth, thirty-ninth, forty-third, forty-fourth, and forty-fifth days of the sixty-day cycle. 309 Xun 郇 was located in the domain of Jin southwest of Linyi County 臨猗縣, Shanxi. 310 This temple honored Lord Wu, Chong’er’s grandfather, who had taken power in Quwo in 715 Bce and had ruled there until he consolidated Jin in 678 Bce. He died the following year. The temple in his honor was located in the Jin capital of Jiang 絳. Yang (1:413) says that Zuozhuan does not note Chong’er’s entry into Jiang because the text was written for people who knew that the Wu Temple was in Jiang. The

372

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 24 (636 BCE) ANNALS

The twenty-fourth year, spring, the royal first month.

24.1

In summer, the Di attacked Zheng.

24.2(2)

Autumn, the seventh month.

24.3

In winter, the Heaven-appointed king departed and resided in Zheng.

24.4(2)

Yiwu, the Prince of Jin, died.

24.5

ZUO

After his extensive wanderings, described in considerable detail in the previous year (Xi 23.6), Chong’er returns to Jin and becomes the Prince of Jin, to be known posthumously as Lord Wen. In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Liege of Qin installed Chong’er in power in Jin. It was not recorded because we were not notified about his entry. When they arrived at the Yellow River, Hu Yana handed a jade disk to the noble son and said, “While I have accompanied you, my lord, carrying bridle and reins in your travels about the realm, my offenses have been numerous indeed! If even I, your servant, know this, how much more must you! I request to depart for good from this place.” The noble son said, “If there is an occasion when I am not of one mind with you, my elder uncle, may these bright waters bear witness against me!”306 And he threw the disk into the Yellow River. They crossed the Yellow River and laid siege to Linghu, entering Sangquan and seizing Jiushuai.307 In the second month, on the jiawu day,308 Jin troops were stationed at Luliu. The Liege of Qin sent Gongzi Zhi to go to the Jin troops. The troops pulled back and were stationed at Xun.309 On the xinchou day, seven days later, Hu Yan swore a covenant with the high officers of Qin and Jin at Xun. On the next day, the renyin day, the noble son came into the midst of the Jin troops. Four days later, on the bingwu day, they entered into Quwo. On the next day, the dingwei day, the noble son paid homage at the Wu Temple.310 On the following day, the wushen day, he sent men to kill Lord Huai at Gaoliang. This is not recorded because we were also not notified.311

24.1a

Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.367, account is more explicit: “On the dingwei day he entered into Jiang and was instated in the Wu Temple.” 311 This incident was either not reported, as Zuozhuan says, or concealed. If concealed, this could be taken as indirectly questioning the moral uprightness of this action.

Lord Xi

373

24.1b 呂郤畏偪，將焚公宮而弒晉侯。寺人披請見。公使讓之，且辭焉，曰：「蒲

城之役，君命一宿，女即至。其後余從狄君以田渭濱，女為惠公來求 殺余，命女三宿，女中宿至。雖有君命，何其速也？夫袪猶在。女其 行乎！」 對曰：「臣謂君之入也，其知之矣。若猶未也，又將及難。君命無 二，古之制也。除君之惡，唯力是視。蒲人、狄人，余何有焉？今君即位， 其無蒲、狄乎！齊桓公置射鉤，而使管仲相。君若易之，何辱命焉？行者 甚眾，豈唯刑臣？」 公見之，以難告。三月，晉侯潛會秦伯于王城。己丑晦，公宮火。 瑕甥、郤芮不獲公，乃如河上，秦伯誘而殺之。 晉侯逆夫人嬴氏以歸。秦伯送衛於晉三千人，實紀綱之僕。

312 He is referring here to the event narrated in Xi 5.2. The implication is that when Lord Xian, Chong’er’s father, attacked him at the Pu fortress, he wanted to give his son ample time to clear out. But Eunuch Pi was overzealous and almost prevented Chong’er’s flight. 313 The event referred to here is not found in Zuozhuan, but it is alluded to in Han Feizi 38.846, where the claim is made that Pi’s second unsuccessful attempt on Chong’er’s life occurred at a place named Huidou 惠竇. 314 This is the sleeve that Eunuch Pi cut from Chong’er’s clothing as the latter was “climbing over a wall” (Xi 5.2). 315 For a simiar argument, see Zhuang 14.3. 316 Chong’er is being told that he should consider situations wherein his subjects might spare his enemies, which is what he seems to feel Pi should have done at the Pu fortress and by the Wei River, when Chong’er was with the Di ruler.

374

Zuo Tradition

Former supporters of Lord Hui and his son Yu, or Lord Huai (Xi 15.8), plan a rebellion, but Chong’er is saved through the intercession of a eunuch who had formerly made an attempt on his life (Xi 5.2). The parties of Lü Sheng and Xi Rui, fearing reprisal, were going to set fire to the lord’s palace and assassinate Chong’er, the newly installed Prince of Jin. Eunuch Pi requested an audience, but the lord sent someone to rebuke him and also to decline his request by saying, “During the campaign at the Pu fortress, our ruler commanded you to spend one night on the road, but you came immediately.312 After that, when I accompanied the ruler of the Di to hunt along the bank of the Wei River, you were sent by Lord Hui to come and kill me. He ordered you to spend no more than three nights on the road, but you arrived on the second.313 Even if you did have a command from the ruler, why did you make such haste? And that sleeve is still here.314 You should go!” He responded, “I had thought that when you entered the domain, you would understand things! But if you still do not, you will once again be beset by difficulties. For the ruler’s command to allow no duplicity has been the rule since ancient times.315 When eradicating those one’s ruler hates, one considers only how best to exert one’s full strength. What are the men of Pu and the men of the Di to me? Now that you have acceded to your position, could you not have your own Pu and Di?316 Lord Huan of Qi put aside the fact that he had been shot with an arrow in the belt buckle and nonetheless employed Guan Zhong as minister.317 Now, if you are going to change this, why condescend to issue an order for me to depart? Those who depart from you will be numerous. How could it be only this mutilated subject?” The lord did receive Pi, and the latter reported on the uprising. In the third month, the Prince of Jin, Chong’er, met secretly with the Liege of Qin in Wangcheng. On jichou day, the last day of the month, the lord’s palace was set on fire. Lü Shengc and Xi Rui did not capture the lord, so they then went to the bank of the Yellow River, where the Liege of Qin lured them into a trap and put them to death. The Prince of Jin went to welcome his wife, Huai Ying, and took her back with him. The Liege of Qin dispatched three thousand guards to Jin. These were men who could impose discipline and order.318

24.1b

317 Before acceding to power, Lord Huan was known as Prince Xiaobo. Guan Zhong was in the service of another prince, Gongzi Jiu, and tried to kill Xiaobo but his arrow hit the latter’s belt buckle. For accounts of this event, see Lüshi chunqiu 38.847; Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.368; and Shiji 32.1485–86. 318 Han Feizi 10.200 is explicit in explaining that these three thousand soldiers were “to support Chong’er and install him in Jin.”

Lord Xi

375

24.1c 初，晉侯之豎頭須，守藏者也。其出也，竊藏以逃，盡用以求納之。及入，

求見。公辭焉以沐。謂僕人曰：「沐則心覆，心覆則圖反，宜吾不得見 也。居者為社稷之守，行者為羈絏之僕，其亦可也，何必罪居者？國君 而讎匹夫，懼者甚眾矣。」僕人以告，公遽見之。 狄人歸季隗于晉，而請其二子。文公妻趙衰，生原同、屏括、樓 嬰。趙姬請逆盾與其母，子餘辭。姬曰：「得寵而忘舊，何以使人？必逆 之！」固請，許之。來，以盾為才，固請于公，以為嫡子，而使其三子下 之；以叔隗為內子，而己下之。

376

Zuo Tradition

The new Prince of Jin shows that he is open to counsel, and his daughter is revealed as a most generous wife. The following passage also deals with the question of the loyalty of those who remained in the state while the rightful ruler has been in exile (see also Zhuang 14.1, Xi 10.2). Earlier, Touxu, a young servant of the Prince of Jin, Chong’er, had served as guardian of the storehouse. While the prince was outside the domain, he had stolen from the storehouse and had run away. He had spent all the stolen resources in seeking to secure the prince’s return to Jin. When Chong’er entered the domain, Touxu sought an audience. The lord declined this on the pretext that he was washing his hair. Touxu said to a servant, “When one washes one’s hair, the heart is upside down. If the heart is upside down, one’s thoughts will be topsy-turvy. It is fitting that I have not obtained an audience. Those who remained in the domain were guardians of the altars of the domain, while those who traveled abroad were servants who held bridle and reins. Both alternatives were proper. Why must you blame those who remained in the domain? If the ruler of a domain is going to treat a common fellow like me as an enemy, those filled with dread will be many!” The servant reported this, and the lord made haste to grant Touxu an audience. The Di leaders sent Ji Wei to Jin but asked to keep her two sons.319 Lord Wen320 had given his daughter to Zhao Cui as wife, and she had given birth to Zhao Tongc, Zhao Kuoc, and Zhao Yingqic.321 Zhao Ji, Zhao Cui’sa new wife, requested permission that Zhao Dun and his mother, Shu Wei, be welcomed into the domain,322 but Zhao Cuia declined her request. Zhao Ji said, “If you gain a new favorite but forget the old, how will you employ others? They must be welcomed.” She was so firm in her request that he allowed it. After they had come, Zhao Ji considered Dun talented. She firmly requested of her lord that Dun be made legitimate heir and that her own three sons be made subordinate to him, and that Shu Wei be made Zhao Cui’s main wife and that she herself become subordinate to Shu Wei.

24.1c

319 On Ji Wei and her two sons, see Xi 23.6a. 320 In much of the remainder of the story of Chong’er, he will be called by his posthumous name, Lord Wen. 321 In this passage, the three “Zhaos” are actually referred to as Yuan Tong, Ping Kuo, and Lou Ying. Yuan, Ping, and Lou were apparently places over which they would be given control: thus, we could translate these names as Tong of Yuan, Kuo of Ping, and Ying of Lou. 322 When he had been living among the Di, Zhao Cui had married a Di woman, Shu Wei, who had given birth to a son named Dun (see Xi 23.6a).

Lord Xi

377

24.1d 晉侯賞從亡者，介之推不言祿，祿亦弗及。推曰：「獻公之子九人，唯君

在矣。惠、懷無親，外內棄之。天未絕晉，必將有主。主晉祀者，非君而 誰？天實置之，而二三子以為己力，不亦誣乎？竊人之財，猶謂之盜，況 貪天之功以為己力乎？下義其罪，上賞其姦；上下相蒙，難與處矣。」其 母曰：「盍亦求之？以死，誰懟？」對曰：「尤而效之，罪又甚焉。且出怨 言，不食其食。」其母曰：「亦使知之，若何？」對曰：「言，身之文也。身 將隱，焉用文之？是求顯也。」其母曰：「能如是乎？與女偕隱。」遂隱而 死。晉侯求之不獲。以緜上為之田，曰：「以志吾過，且旌善人。」

378

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin fails to reward a supporter, Jie Zhitui, who opts for a life of reclusion and is accompanied in that life by his mother. The Prince of Jin rewarded those who had followed him in flight. Jie Zhitui did not speak of remuneration, and indeed no remuneration came to him. Tui said, “The sons of Lord Xian were nine in number, and only our ruler is still alive. Lords Hui and Huai had no close associates, and they were rejected both inside and outside the domain. Heaven has not yet cut off the Jin house; it will certainly have a sovereign. And if the one who is to preside over Jin’s sacrifices is not our ruler, then who would it be? It is Heaven that has put him in place, but those few fellows take it as the result of their own efforts. Are they not deceitful? Even one who steals the property of others is called a thief; how much more so one who covets Heaven’s accomplishments and takes them as the result of his own efforts! When inferiors justify their offenses and superiors reward their presumption, then superiors and inferiors are misleading each other, and it is difficult to dwell together with them.” His mother said, “Why not also seek remuneration? If you die like this, whom should we blame?” He responded, “If I find fault in others but then imitate them, my offense would be more extreme than theirs. Moreover, having spoken resentful words, I cannot eat our lord’s food.” His mother said, “If you were at least to make our lord aware of this—how would that be?” He responded, “Words are an adornment of the body. If the body is going into hiding, what is the use of adorning it? That would be to seek fame.” His mother said, “Can you act in such a way? Then I will go into hiding along with you.” They hid themselves away and died. The Prince of Jin, Chong’er, sought after them, but he could not find them. He made Mianshang into their demesne323 and said, “With this I mark my error and honor a good man.”324

24.1d

323 That is, a region that would sustain sacrifices to Jie Zhitui and his mother. 324 The story of Jie Zhitui, sometimes called Tui the Master of Jie 介子推, becomes exceedingly popular. For variants, see, e.g., Lüshi chunqiu 12.627; Zhuangzi 29.998; Shiji 39.1662.

Lord Xi

379

24.2a 鄭之入滑也，滑人聽命。師還，又即衛。鄭公子士、洩堵俞彌帥師伐滑。

王使伯服、游孫伯如鄭請滑。鄭伯怨惠王之入而不與厲公爵也，又怨襄 王之與衛滑也。故不聽王命，而執二子。王怒，將以狄伐鄭。富辰諫曰： 「不可。臣聞之：大上以德撫民，其次親親，以相及也。昔周公弔二叔之 不咸，故封建親戚以蕃屏周。管、蔡、郕、霍、魯、衛、毛、聃、郜、雍、 曹、滕、畢、原、酆、郇，文之昭也。邘、晉、應、韓，武之穆也。凡、蔣、 邢、茅、胙、祭，周公之胤也。召穆公思周德之不類，故糾合宗族于成周 而作詩，曰： 常棣之華， 鄂不韡韡。 凡今之人， 莫如兄弟。 其四章曰： 兄弟鬩于牆， 外禦其侮。 如是，則兄弟雖有小忿，不廢懿親。」

325 On this event, see Zhuang 21.1, where the king gives a bronze beaker to the Duke of Guo but not to the Liege of Zheng, the father of the reigning liege, Lord Wen. Lord Li had played a crucial role in helping King Hui pacify the rebellion of his nephew Wangzi Tui (Zhuang 19.2, 20.1, 21.1). It is curious that Sima Qian understands jue 爵 in this context as juelu 爵祿, “rank and emolument” (Shiji 42.1765). 326 Our interpretation follows both Yang, 1:420; and Karlgren, gl. 143. The older reading of this passage takes tai shang 大上 to refer to high antiquity: “those of the most ancient times.” 327 The two were Guan Shu and Cai Shu, younger brothers of the Zhou founder, King Wu, who supposedly relied upon remnants of the old Shang peoples to launch a rebellion (the famous Guan-Cai rebellion).

380

Zuo Tradition

The privileged relationship between the Zhou rulers and the domain of Zheng had become badly frayed (Zhuang 21.1, Xi 20.2, etc.), but the wise minister Fu Chen still counsels the king not to use Di forces against “Zheng kinsmen.” Whereas Fu Chen’s earlier argument (Xi 22.6) on the importance of kinship leads to disastrous results (Wangzi Dai’s rebellion), here the same argument is endorsed as authoritative. When Zheng forces entered Hua, the Hua leaders heeded Zheng’s commands. But when the Zheng troops returned home, they again went over to Wei. Gongzi Shi and Xiedu Yumi of Zheng led out troops to attack Hua. The king had Bo Fu and Yousun Bo go to Zheng to request relief for Hua. The Liege of Zheng resented the fact that when King Hui had entered Zhou he had not given a bronze beaker to Lord Li.325 He also resented King Xiang for giving Hua to Wei. Therefore, he disobeyed the king’s command and arrested the two men. The king was angry and was going to use the Di to attack Zheng. Fu Chen remonstrated: “This will not do. I have heard that the supreme achievement is to pacify the people by means of virtue,326 while the second greatest achievement is to draw one’s kin close and extend that sentiment to others. Formerly, the Zhou Duke grieved that the two younger brothers were not in accord with him.327 That is why he distributed power and granted domains to kinsmen and relatives as a hedge and a screen for Zhou: the domains of Guan, Cai, Cheng, Huo, Lu, Wei, Mao, Dan, Gao, Yong, Cao, Teng, Bi, Yuan, Feng, and Xun for King Wen’s sons of the odd-numbered generations; the domains of Yu, Jin, Ying, and Han for King Wu’s sons of the even-numbered generations;328 and the domains of Fan, Jiang, Xing, Mao, Zuo, and Ji for the descendants of the Zhou Duke. The Shao Duke Mu worried that the virtue of Zhou had degenerated. Therefore, he gathered together the house at Chengzhou and composed an ode, which said,

24.2a

The blossoms of the wild-plum tree, In a sudden burst become brilliant. Of all the people of this day, None are as good as one’s brothers.329

The fourth stanza of this ode says, Brothers may have differences within the walls, But without they will defend against insult.

If it is thus, then even when brothers have petty grievances, they will not cast aside excellent kinsmen.”

328 On the zhao-mu lineage system, see Xi 5.8, n. 69 above. 329 Maoshi 164, “Chang di” 常棣, 9B.321. Also cited in Xiang 20.6, Zhao 1.4, 7.5.

Lord Xi

381

24.2b 「今天子不忍小忿以棄鄭親，其若之何？庸勳、親親、暱近、尊賢，德之

大者也。即聾、從昧、與頑、用嚚，姦之大者也。棄德崇姦，禍之大者 也。鄭有平、惠之勳，又有厲、宣之親，棄嬖寵而用三良，於諸姬為近， 四德具矣。耳不聽五聲之和為聾，目不別五色之章為昧，心不則德義之 經為頑，口不道忠信之言為嚚。狄皆則之，四姦具矣。 周之有懿德也，猶曰『莫如兄弟』，故封建之。其懷柔天下也，猶 懼有外侮；扞禦侮者，莫如親親，故以親屏周。召穆公亦云。今周德既 衰，於是乎又渝周、召，以從諸姦，無乃不可乎？民未忘禍，王又興之， 其若文、武何？」王弗聽，使頹叔、桃子出狄師。 24.2c(2,4) 夏，狄伐鄭，取櫟。王德狄人，將以其女為后。富辰諫曰：「不可。臣聞之

曰：『報者倦矣，施者未厭。』狄固貪惏，王又啟之。『女德無極，婦怨無 終』，狄必為患。」王又弗聽。

330 When King Ping of Zhou relocated the capital to the vicinity of Luoyang in 770 Bce, it was with the help of Jin and Zheng. And when King Hui fled Zhou, it was Guo and Zheng that reestablished him. 331 The first ancestor of Zheng, Lord Huan, named You 友, was the son of King Li of Zhou (878–828) and the younger brother of King Xuan (r. 827–782) by the same mother. 332 Du Yu suggests that “the three worthy men” were Shuzhan 叔詹, Du Shu 堵叔 (possibly the same person as Xiedu Yumi), and Shi Shu 師叔 (ZZ 15.257). 333 Presumably this is a reference to such precedents as Wangzi Dai summoning help from the Di armies (see Xi 11.3) and the rebellion of Wangzi Tui (Zhuang 19–21), another example of a disaffected younger brother of the king. 334 These are Zhou ministers. Takezoe (6.52) argues that Tuishu Taozi is a single person. Fang Xuanchen (“Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 626) believes that Tui Shu and Taozi were indeed two individuals. It is noteworthy that the two, if two, always appear together, and below, they speak in a single voice. 335 Li 櫟 was a large Zheng city located near present-day Yu County 禹縣, Henan. It was located about thirty kilometers southwest of the Zheng capital. 336 This may well have been a common saying of the time. Nü de 女德 would seem to mean “a woman’s virtues,” but commentators insist that here de means “intentions” or “desires.” Thus, the Manchu translation, which almost invariably follows the traditional reading, has “hehei gūnin mohon akū, “a woman’s intentions are without end” (Bauer, Tsch’un-ts’iu, 237).

382

Zuo Tradition

“Now, if you, the Son of Heaven, cannot bear a petty grievance and on these grounds reject your Zheng kinsmen, then what is going to become of you? To reward merit, to draw close to kinsmen, to trust close advisers, and to honor the worthy, these are great acts of virtue. To ally oneself with the deaf, to follow the blind, to associate with the wayward, and to employ the perfidious, these are great acts of iniquity. To reject virtue and esteem iniquity is the greatest of disasters. Zheng has the merit of having assisted Kings Ping and Hui.330 They also had a close relationship with Kings Li and Xuan.331 They rejected toadies and favorites and employed the three talented men.332 Among the various domains of the Ji clan, they have been the closest to Zhou. These four virtuous qualities are present in them! When the ear does not hear the harmony of the five sounds, it is deafness. When the eye does not distinguish the resplendence of the five colors, it is blindness. When the heart does not take as model the principles of virtue and duty, it is waywardness. When the mouth does not speak words of loyalty and good faith, it is perfidy. In all cases the Di take these as models. These four iniquities are all present in them! “Although the Zhou possessed excellent virtue, they still said, ‘None are as good as one’s brothers.’ Therefore, they established domains and put them in power there. Although they cherished and treated gently the entire realm, still they feared that there would be insult from without. For resisting insult, nothing is equal to drawing close to one’s kinsmen. That is why they used kinsmen as a protective screen for the Zhou domain. The Shao Duke Mu has also spoken thus. But today, Zhou’s virtue has already declined. At this particular time, could it be other than inadmissible to change from the way of the Zhou and Shao Dukes in order to join the ranks of the iniquitous ones? The people have not yet forgotten the disaster,333 and yet you, King, would provoke it once again. What does that mean for the tradition of Kings Wen and Wu?” The king did not heed this but sent Tui Shu and Taozi to dispatch the Di troops.334

24.2b

The Zhou king had rejected Fu Chen’s advice and used Di troops to attack Zheng. Fu Chen now warns him against further collaboration with the Di. His warning is justified, as Wangzi Dai, who had been brought back to Zhou just two years before (Xi 22.6), ingratiates himself with the king’s Di wife and then leads a Di army against the king, driving him into exile. In summer, the Di attacked Zheng and took Li.335 The king was grateful to the Di leaders and was going to take a daughter of the Di chief as queen. Fu Chen remonstrated: “You cannot do this. I have heard it said, ‘He who must repay is weary already, while he who gives gifts is expecting more.’ The Di are in any case greedy, and you, King, are moreover leading them on. ‘A woman’s nature knows no limits; a wife’s resentment knows no end.’336 The Di are sure to cause trouble.” Again, the king did not heed his words.

24.2c(2,4)

Lord Xi

383

初，甘昭公有寵於惠后，惠后將立之，未及而卒。昭公奔齊，王復 之，又通於隗氏。王替隗氏。頹叔、桃子曰：「我實使狄，狄其怨我。」遂 奉大叔以狄師攻王。王御士將禦之，王曰：「先后其謂我何？寧使諸侯 圖之。」王遂出，及坎欿，國人納之。 秋，頹叔、桃子奉大叔以狄師伐周，大敗周師，獲周公忌父、原 伯、毛伯、富辰。王出適鄭，處于氾。大叔以隗氏居于溫。 24.3 鄭子華之弟子臧出奔宋，好聚鷸冠。鄭伯聞而惡之，使盜誘之。八月，

盜殺之于陳、宋之間。君子曰：「服之不衷，身之災也。《詩》曰： 彼己之子， 不稱其服。 子臧之服，不稱也夫！《詩》曰：『自詒伊慼』，其子臧之謂矣。夏書曰： 『地平天成』，稱也。」

337 The queen referred to here is the main wife of King Hui of Zhou (r. 676–653) and Wangzi Dai’s mother. In Zuozhuan there are often disastrous consequences when a mother favors her younger sons (see Yin 1.4 as another example). 338 Kankan 坎欿 was located in the domain of Zhou southeast of modern Gong County 鞏縣, Henan. 339 Fan 氾 was located in the southwestern part of Zheng and acquired the name Xiangcheng 襄城, “Fortified City of Xiang,” precisely because King Xiang went to dwell there (652–619). It is located just to the south of present-day Xiangcheng County 襄城縣, Henan.

384

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, Wangzi Daid had gained favor with King Hui’s queen.337 The queen was going to establish him as ruler, but before she could accomplish this, she died. Wangzi Daie had fled to Qi. The king brought him back into the domain, but then he had a liaison with Lady Wei, the king’s Di consort. The king cast Lady Wei aside. Tui Shu and Taozi said, “We were the ones sent on a mission to the Di. The Di are sure to feel resentment against us.” They then gave Wangzi Daia the support of Di troops to attack the king. The king’s royal guard was going to resist the attack, but the king said, “What will the former queen say of me? I would rather have the princes decide what to do.” The king then left the domain, reaching Kankan.338 But the inhabitants of the capital brought him back. In autumn, Tui Shu and Taozi gave Wangzi Daib the support of Di troops to attack Zhou. They roundly defeated the Zhou troops and captured the Zhou Duke Jifu, the Yuan Liege, the Mao Liege, and Fu Chen. The king left the domain and went to Zheng, where he dwelled at Fan.339 Wangzi Daib took the Lady Wei and lived in Wen.340 Zizang, the brother of the Zheng traitor Zihua (Xi 7.3, 16.5), flees to Song and is detested back in his home domain of Zheng because of his excessive fondness for “kingfisher-feather caps”! Zizang, the younger brother of Zihua of Zheng, left his domain and fled to Song. He was fond of collecting kingfisher-feather caps. The Liege of Zheng heard about this and despised him.341 He sent bandits to lure him into a trap. In the eighth month, the bandits killed him in the region between Song and Chen. The noble man said, “When clothing is not appropriate, it brings disaster to the body. As it says in the Odes,

24.3

That man over there, He does not wear the proper clothes.342

Zizang was not wearing the proper clothes! As it says in the Odes, ‘I have brought this grief upon myself.’343 Surely this is speaking of Zizang. As it says in the Xia Documents, ‘Earth is at peace and heaven is complete.’344 This is to be proper!”

340 Wangzi Dai may have chosen to stay in Wen because he feared those who lived in the royal capital, since they supported King Xiang. 341 It is not entirely clear why collecting kingfisher feather caps should be so hateful. Yang (1:426) suggests that since Zizang had fled his domain, he should have felt regret and sorrow rather than showing such fondness for curiosities. 342 Maoshi 151, “Hou ren” 候人, 7C.270. 343 Maoshi 207, “Xiao ming” 小明, 13A.447. 344 This line is found in “Da Yu mo” 大禹謨, an Ancient Script chapter of the Documents (4.53). The same line is quoted in Wen 18.7b.

Lord Xi

385

24.4 宋及楚平，宋成公如楚。還，入於鄭。鄭伯將享之，問禮於皇武子。對曰：

「宋，先代之後也，於周為客，天子有事，膰焉；有喪，拜焉。豐厚可也。」 鄭伯從之，享宋公，有加，禮也。 24.5 冬，王使來告難，曰：「不穀不德，得罪于母弟之寵子帶，鄙在鄭地氾，

敢告叔父。」臧文仲對曰：「天子蒙塵于外，敢不奔問官守？」王使簡師 父告于晉，使左鄢父告于秦。天子無出，書曰「天王出居于鄭」，辟母弟 之難也。天子凶服、降名，禮也。 24.6 鄭伯與孔將鉏、石甲父、侯宣多省視官具于氾，而後聽其私政，禮也。 24.7 衛人將伐邢，禮至曰：「不得其守，國不可得也。我請昆弟仕焉。」乃往，

得仕。

345 The Chinese wording here is curious. Yang (1:427) emends the text as follows: 得罪 于母氏之寵子帶, “[I] have offended Dai, my mother’s favored son.” 346 The expression “covered with dust,” meng chen 蒙塵, becomes a conventional way of referring to a ruler in exile.

386

Zuo Tradition

The conflict between Chu and Song (Xi 22.8) comes to an end, and Zheng treats Song with the respect appropriate to the descendants of the Shang dynasty. Song made peace with Chu. Lord Cheng of Song went to Chu. Upon his return, he entered Zheng. The Liege of Zheng was going to offer him ceremonial toasts. He asked Huang Wuzi about the appropriate ritual. He responded, “Song rulers are the descendants of a former dynasty. In the Zhou court they are treated as guests. If the Son of Heaven has an official sacrifice, he delivers the sacrificial meat to them. If Song is in mourning, he bows to the Song representative and offers condolences. Generous bounty will be appropriate.” The Liege of Zheng followed this and, in providing ceremonial toasts to the Duke of Song, did even more than normal. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

24.4

The problem of the king being “outside his domain” is here discussed (Xi 24.3). In winter, the king sent someone to us to report the Zhou trouble as follows: “I, the deficient one, did not show him favor and have offended Wangzi Dai, the favored one among my younger full brothers.345 I am rusticating at Fan in the land of Zheng and venture to report to you, my uncle.” Zang Wenzhong responded, “The Son of Heaven is covered with dust outside his domain.346 Would we dare not hasten to inquire of his officials?” The king sent Jian Shifu to report to Jin, and he sent Zuo Yanfu to report to Qin. For the Son of Heaven, there is no “leaving the domain.”347 The text says, “The Heaven-appointed king left the domain and dwelt in Zheng.” This was because he was avoiding the trouble with his younger full brother. That the Son of Heaven wore mourning clothing and used a self-deprecating name was in accordance with ritual propriety.

24.5

Only after the Liege of Zheng went along with Kong Jiangchu, Shi Jiafu, and Hou Xuanduo to inspect the officials and the supplies at Fan did they attend to their own administrative duties. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

24.6

The men of Wei were going to attack Xing. Li Zhi said, “If we do not take its prefect, the domain cannot be taken. I request that we two brothers, elder and younger, serve in office there.” They then went to Xing and succeeded in obtaining official positions.

24.7

347 The text does not use such a phrase precisely because all domains have been established by the Son of Heaven and therefore belong to him. Thus, it is a logical impossibility for him to “leave the domain.”

Lord Xi

387

春秋 25.1(1) 二十有五年，春，王正月丙午，衛侯燬滅邢。 25.2 夏，四月癸酉，衛侯燬卒。 25.3 宋蕩伯姬來逆婦。 25.4 宋殺其大夫。 25.5(3) 秋，楚人圍陳，納頓子于頓。 25.6 葬衛文公。 25.7(5) 冬，十有二月癸亥，公會衛子、莒慶，盟于洮。

左傳 25.1(1) 二十五年，春，衛人伐邢，二禮從國子巡城，掖以赴外，殺之。正月丙午，

衛侯燬滅邢。同姓也，故名。禮至為銘曰：「余掖殺國子，莫余敢止。」 25.2 秦伯師于河上，將納王。狐偃言於晉侯曰：「求諸侯莫如勤王。諸侯信

之，且大義也。繼文之業，而信宣於諸侯，今為可矣。」

348 This was the eldest daughter of Lord Xi of Lu, who previously had married into the domain of Song and was presumably coming to Lu to escort back to Song a wife for her son. 349 It is unknown if one or more men were executed. 350 See Du Yu, ZZ 16.262. 351 Guliang, Xi 25 (9.91), states the reason more clearly: “Why is the birth name Hui given? Because the text does not consider it proper that he attacked someone of the same origins and extinguished a domain of the same clan name.” The degree to which this principle has been applied in Zuozhuan is problematic (Yang, 1:420). 352 Wen refers to Chou 仇, the earlier Prince Wen of Jin, who helped to stabilize the Zhou royal house when King Ping of Zhou moved the capital eastward to Luo (770 Bce), for which service Chou received special honor from the Zhou king; see Shangshu, “Wen hou zhi ming” 文侯之命, 20.309–11. A different version of Hu Yan’s speech is found in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.373, where, among other things, he warns that if Jin does not bring back the king, Qin will.

388

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 25 (635 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the bingwu day (20), Hui, the Prince of Wei, extinguished Xing. In summer, in the fourth month, on the guiyou day (19), Hui, the Prince of Wei, died.

25.1(1)

25.2

Bo Ji, now of the Dang lineage in Song, came to meet and escort home a wife.348

25.3

Song put to death its high officer.349

25.4

In autumn, a Chu leader laid siege to Chen and installed the Master of Dun in power in Dun.

25.5(3)

Lord Wen of Wei was buried.

25.6

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the guihai day (12), our lord met with the succeeding son of Wei and Qing of Ju and swore a covenant in Tao.

25.7(5)

ZUO

The following narrative continues Xi 24.7, as the two Li brothers neutralize Guozi, the minister of Xing, enabling Wei to destroy the domain of Xing. In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, the men of Wei attacked Xing. The two Li brothers accompanied Guozi in an inspection tour of the city wall. They seized him by the arms, rushed outside the walls, and killed him.350 In the first month, on the bingwu day (20), Hui, the Prince of Wei, extinguished Xing. The rulers of Wei and Xing share the same clan name and that is the reason he is identified by his birth name.351 Li Zhi made an inscription that said, “I seized and killed Guozi, and none dared to stop me.”

25.1(1)

The Prince of Jin declines Qin’s support and takes the lead in suppressing the rebellion of Wangzi Dai and bringing back the Zhou king (Xi 24.2c, 24.5). The Liege of Qin stationed his troops on the bank of the Yellow River and was going to install the king in power. Hu Yan said to the Prince of Jin, “For seeking the support of the princes no action is better than working on behalf of the Zhou king. The princes will consider this good faith, and it also will be an act of great dutifulness. No time would be more appropriate than the present moment for continuing Wen’s achievement and proclaiming your good faith among the princes.”352

25.2

Lord Xi

389

使卜偃卜之，曰：「吉。遇黃帝戰于阪泉之兆。」公曰：「吾不堪 也。」對曰：「周禮未改，今之王，古之帝也。」公曰：「筮之！」筮之，遇大 有䷍之睽䷥，曰：「吉。遇『公用享于天子』之卦。戰克而王饗，吉孰 大焉？且是卦也，天為澤以當日，天子降心以逆公，不亦可乎？大有去 睽而復，亦其所也。」 晉侯辭秦師而下。三月甲辰，次于陽樊，右師圍溫，左師逆王。夏 四月丁巳，王入于王城。取大叔于溫，殺之于隰城。 戊午，晉侯朝王。王饗醴，命之宥。請隧，弗許，曰：「王章也。未有 代德，而有二王，亦叔父之所惡也。」與之陽樊、溫、原、欑茅之田。晉於 是始啟南陽。 陽樊不服，圍之。倉葛呼曰：「德以柔中國，刑以威四夷，宜吾不 敢服也。此誰非王之親姻，其俘之也？」乃出其民。 353 Da Dai liji 62.236 says, “The Yellow Emperor fought with the Red Emperor (called the Flaming Emperor in Zhao 17.3 and Ai 9.6) in the fields of Banquan. After three battles, he was able to achieve what he wanted.” In a version of this struggle in Yi Zhou shu 56.165, the Yellow Emperor contends with the Red Emperor’s minister Chi You. 354 It may be that the Prince of Jin has misunderstood. He seems to take the divination as comparing him to the Yellow Emperor. However, the Yellow Emperor and the Red Emperor were supposedly brothers (see Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.256), so the divination might actually be pointing to the ongoing conflict between the Zhou king and his brother Wangzi Dai. So it is that the diviner equates the earlier institution of emperor with the current institution of king (see Xi 24.2, 24.5). 355 The transformation in hexagram 14, “Great Holdings” (Dayou 大有), that yields hexagram 38, “Contrariety” (Kui 睽), takes place when the third line of “Great Holdings” changes from solid to broken and “Pure Yang” (Qian 乾), the lower trigram of this hexagram, which symbolizes heaven, changes to the “Joy” (Dui 兌) trigram, which symbolizes marsh. The upper trigram of “Great Holdings,” which does not change, is “Cohesion” (Li 離) and symbolizes, among other things, the sun. 356 Just as “Great Holdings” has changed to “Contrariety” and can now change back to itself again, so can the exiled king now be put back in his right place, the domain of Zhou. 357 Thus, Qin did not participate in the campaign to reintroduce the king in his domain; contrast the claim found in Shiji 5.190. The latter may be based on Qin sources (see Pines, “Biases and Their Sources”). 358 It will be remembered that Wangzi Dai and his brother’s wife, the Lady Wei, reside in Wen (see 24.2c). 359 More specifically, he requested that after his death, his coffin be carried into the tomb by way of an entrance tunnel. This, apparently, was a right limited to the king, while princes were carried to their final resting place by way of an open ramp (Yang, 1:433). 360 See Karlgren, gl. 153. 361 Yangfan 陽樊 was located in the royal domain of Zhou southeast of present-day Jiyuan County 濟源縣, Henan. The settlement of Cuanmao 櫕茅 (see Yin 11.5) and the small domains of Wen 溫 (see Yin 3.3 and elsewhere) and Yuan 原 (see Yin 11.5 and elsewhere) have appeared earlier. 362 Nanyang 南陽 is the designation for an area that extended from the northern bank of the Yellow River in the south to Taihang 太行 in the north. This corresponds to the present-day Xinxiang 新鄉 region of Henan. 363 Cangge was a resident of Yangfan.

390

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin had Diviner Yan divine about this by turtle shell. The diviner said, “Auspicious. I encountered the crack signifying the Yellow Emperor engaged in battle at Banquan.”353 The lord said, “I am not worthy of the comparison.” The diviner replied, “There’s been no change in the rites of Zhou. It is the Zhou king of our present day who corresponds to the emperor of ancient times.”354 The lord said, “Divine about it by milfoil.” On divining about it by milfoil, he obtained the line whereby the hexagram “Great Holdings” ䷍ becomes the hexagram “Contrariety” ䷥ and said, “Auspicious. I obtained the line ‘The lord enjoys the ceremonial toasts offered by the Son of Heaven.’ What can be more auspicious than being victorious in battle and being offered ceremonial toasts by the king? Moreover, in the case of this hexagram, heaven changes to marsh and thereby faces the sun.355 Is it not acceptable that the Son of Heaven should humble his heart and receive my lord? That ‘Great Holdings,’ having departed and gone over to ‘Contrariety,’ should then return—this is indeed as it should be.”356 The Prince of Jin declined the support of the Qin troops and went down the river.357 In the third month, on the jiachen day (19), they set up camp at Yangfan. The troops of the right laid siege to Wen,358 and the troops of the left received the king. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (3), the king entered Wangcheng. They seized Wangzi Daia at Wen and put him to death at Xicheng. On the wuwu day (4), the Prince of Jin visited the court of the king. The king offered ceremonial toasts, presented sweet wine, and ordered them to offer toasts. The prince requested the privilege of a tomb tunnel.359 The king did not grant permission for this and said, “This is the distinctive mark of a king.360 To have two kings when there is as yet no virtue that takes Zhou’s place—that is something that you, my uncle, would detest!” The king gave him the lands of Yangfan, Wen, Yuan, and Cuanmao.361 It was at that time that Jin began to develop the region of Nanyang.362 Yangfan did not submit, and Jin laid siege to it. Cangge363 cried out, “With virtue one placates the central domains; with punishments one intimidates the four Yi peoples. Fitting it is that we dare not submit. In this place, who is not related to the king by blood or by marriage? Will you then make prisoners of us?”364 Jin thus let the people of Yangfan go.365 364 Our interpretation follows Yang, 1:434. For another interpretation, see Karlgren, gl. 154. 365 Cf. Cangge’s speech in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.375: “The people of Yang possess the hereditary statutes of Xia and Shang, the troops of Zhou, and the official legacy of Fan Zhong [i.e., Zhong Shanfu, minister of King Xuan of Zhou]. Those who do not possess the official legacy are all paternal and maternal uncles and nephews of the king. If you, my ruler, stabilize the royal house but use violence against the king’s kinsmen by marriage, what can the people turn to?” Lord Wen acknowledges that “these are the words of a noble man” and refrains from taking the Yangfan people as prisoners of war.

Lord Xi

391

25.3(5) 秋，秦、晉伐鄀。楚鬬克、屈禦寇以申、息之師戍商密。秦人過析，隈入

而係輿人，以圍商密，昏而傅焉。宵坎血加書，偽與子儀、子邊盟者。商 密人懼，曰：「秦取析矣！戍人反矣！」乃降秦師。秦師囚申公子儀、息公 子邊以歸。楚令尹子玉追秦師，弗及。遂圍陳，納頓子于頓。 25.4 冬，晉侯圍原，命三日之糧。原不降，命去之。諜出，曰：「原將降矣。」

軍史曰：「請待之。」公曰：「信，國之寶也，民之所庇也。得原失信，何以 庇之？所亡滋多。」退一舍而原降。遷原伯貫于冀。趙衰為原大夫，狐溱 為溫大夫。 25.5(7) 衛人平莒于我，十二月，盟于洮，修衛文公之好，且及莒平也。

366 Ruo was a small domain between Qin and Chu located to the southwest of Xichuan County in Henan. 367 Shangmi was the capital of Ruo. Shen and Xi were two small districts subordinate to Chu. Dou Ke and Qu Yukou were the Chu king’s deputies, holding the title of “lord” in Shen and Xi, respectively.

392

Zuo Tradition

Qin uses trickery to take the capital of the small domain of Ruo and to capture two Chu leaders. In autumn, Qin and Jin attacked Ruo.366 Dou Ke and Qu Yukou of Chu took the armies of Shen and Xi to garrison Shangmi.367 The men of Qin passed by Xi, entering Ruo by a curve in the river. They tied up their own rank and file and thereby laid siege to Shangmi.368 They pressed close to the walls under cover of dusk, then in the night dug a pit, smeared blood there, and added a document, feigning that they had sworn a covenant with Dou Kea and Qu Yukoua. The men of Shangmi were frightened and said, “Qin has taken Xi! The men of the garrison have turned against us!” So they surrendered to the Qin troops. The Qin troops took as prisoners Dou Kea, the Lord of Shen, and Qu Yukoua, the Lord of Xi, and returned home. Cheng Dechena, the chief minister of Chu, pursued the Qin troops but did not overtake them. So they laid siege to Chen and installed the Master of Dun in power in Dun.

25.3(5)

Through a display of good faith, Jin gains control of Yuan, one of the regions “bestowed” by the Zhou king. In the winter, the Prince of Jin laid siege to Yuan, ordering the troops to carry three days’ provision of grain. Yuan did not surrender, and he commanded that they depart. A spy came out of the city and said, “Yuan is about to surrender.” The military officers said, “Let’s wait for this.” The Prince of Jin said, “Good faith is the treasure of the domain; it is the refuge of the people. If we gain Yuan but lose good faith, how can we give the people refuge? What is lost will be even greater.” The Jin troops retreated one day’s march and Yuan surrendered. They resettled Guan, the Liege of Yuan, in Yi. Zhao Cui became the high officer for Yuan, and Hu Zhen became the high officer for Wen.369

25.4

The following event harkens back to conflict between Lu and Ju that had taken place many years earlier (Xi 1.6). The Wei leaders made peace between Zhu and us. In the twelfth month, we swore a covenant at Tao. This restored the good relations we had had with Lord Wen of Wei and also made peace with Ju.

25.5(7)

368 What is happening here, at least as Du Yu (ZZ 16.263) understands it, is this: the Qin army goes around Xi, a settlement in Ruo, by following a curve in the river, thereby avoiding the road by which Chu was garrisoning Shangmi, but they tie up some of their own men to give the impression that they already had conquered Xi and taken prisoners. Shangmi 商密 was located in the domain of Chu southwest of present-day Xichuan County 淅川縣, Henan. 369 Hu Zhen was the son of Hu Mao and the nephew of Hu Yan.

Lord Xi

393

25.6 晉侯問原守於寺人勃鞮，對曰：「昔趙衰以壺飧從徑，餒而弗食。」故使

處原。

春秋 26.1(1) 二十有六年，春，王正月，己未，公會莒子、衛甯速，盟于向。 26.2(2) 齊人侵我西鄙，公追齊師，至酅，弗及。 26.3(3) 夏，齊人伐我北鄙。 26.4(3) 衛人伐齊。 26.5(4) 公子遂如楚乞師。 26.6(5) 秋，楚人滅夔，以夔子歸。 26.7(6) 冬，楚人伐宋，圍緡。公以楚師伐齊，取穀。 26.8 公至自伐齊。

左傳 26.1(1) 二十六年，春，王正月，公會莒茲丕公、甯莊子，盟于向，尋洮之盟也。

370 See Karlgren, gl. 155; and Yang, 1:436. The same story is told in Han Feizi 33.684 but is attached to an unknown figure named Ji Zheng: “When Lord Wen of Jin was in flight, Ji Zheng came along after him with a pot of cooked grain. He became confused, lost his way, and was separated from his lord. He became hungry and wept along the path. Although he was so hungry he collapsed, he did not dare eat.” The story obviously circulated as an instance of exemplary loyalty.

394

Zuo Tradition

Zhao Cui here is assigned to his post in the settlement of Yuan, which had just surrendered to Jin (Xi 25.4). The eunuch Pi was previously rejected for his erstwhile persecution of Chong’er (Xi 5.2), but he then convinced Chong’er that he had been and would continue to be loyal to the reigning lord (Xi 24.1). He now seems to have gained sufficient trust to serve as an adviser. The Prince of Jin consulted Eunuch Pia about the choice for prefect of Yuan. He responded, “There was a time when Zhao Cui, coming along after you with a pot of cooked grain, took a side path, and hungry as he was, he did not touch the food.”370 And so the prince had Zhao Cui dwell in Yuan as prefect.

25.6

LORD XI 26 (634 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the jiwei day (9), our lord met with the Master of Ju and Ning Su (Ning Zhuangzi) of Wei and swore a covenant at Xiang.

26.1(1)

A Qi leader invaded our western marches. Our lord pursued the Qi troops and advanced as far as Xi but did not catch up with them.371

26.2(2)

In summer, a Qi leader attacked our northern marches.

26.3(3)

A Wei leader attacked Qi.

26.4(3)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Chu to plead for troops.

26.5(4)

In autumn, a Chu leader extinguished Kui.372 He took the Master of Kui home with him.

26.6(5)

In winter, a Chu leader attacked Song and laid siege to Min. Our lord, taking Chu troops with him, attacked Qi and took Gu.

26.7(6)

Our lord arrived from the attack on Qi.

26.8

ZUO

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord met with Lord Zi Pei of Ju and Ning Zhuangzi and swore a covenant at Xiang: this was to renew the covenant of Tao.

26.1(1)

371 Xi 酅 was located in the domain of Qi south of present-day Dong’e County 東阿縣, Shandong. 372 Kui 夔 was a small domain of the same clan name as Chu and was located near present-day Zigui 秭歸, Hubei.

Lord Xi

395

26.2(2) 齊師侵我西鄙，討是二盟也。

26.3(3, 4)

夏，齊孝公伐我北鄙，衛人伐齊，洮之盟故也。公使展喜犒師，使受命 于展禽。齊侯未入竟，展喜從之，曰：「寡君聞君親舉玉趾，將辱於敝 邑，使下臣犒執事。」齊侯曰：「魯人恐乎？」對曰：「小人恐矣，君子則 否。」齊侯曰：「室如縣罄，野無青草，何恃而不恐？」對曰：「恃先王之 命。昔周公、大公股肱周室，夾輔成王。成王勞之，而賜之盟，曰：『世世 子孫無相害也！』載在盟府，大師職之。桓公是以糾合諸侯，而謀其不 協，彌縫其闕，而匡救其災，昭舊職也。及君即位，諸侯之望曰：『其率 桓之功！』我敝邑用不敢保聚，曰：『豈其嗣世九年，而棄命廢職？其若 先君何？其必不然。』恃此以不恐。」齊侯乃還。

26.4(5) 東門襄仲、臧文仲如楚乞師。臧孫見子玉而道之伐齊、宋，以其不臣也。

373 See Du Yu, ZZ 16.264, an interpretation endorsed by Karlgren, gl. 156. 374 Zhan Qin is the father of Zhan Xi and is known elsewhere as Liuxia Hui 柳下惠. 375 On this metaphor, see Karlgren, gl. 158; and Yang, 1:439. Given the angled shape of the chime-stones, when hung they looked like peaked roofs with nothing at all beneath them. “A house as empty as suspended chime-stones” becomes a common idiom for destitution. 376 Zhan Xi is reminding the Qi ruler of the close ties between the respective ancestors of Qi and Lu and between them and the Zhou king. 377 Yang (1:440) reads taishi 太史, “grand scribe,” in this passage instead of taishi 太師, “grand preceptor.” However, Shi Kuang (music master Kuang), for example, is sometimes called a grand preceptor in Zuozhuan, and the preservation of historical items is just the sort of thing a grand preceptor might be expected to do as a matter of course.

396

Zuo Tradition

The Qi ruler continues to think of himself as overlord and here attacks Lu for entering into the unauthorized covenants of Tao (Xi 25.5) and Xiang (Xi 26.1). Qi troops invaded our western marches: this was to chastise us for the two covenants.

26.2(2)

Qi attacks Lu, but a resourceful Lu envoy, Zhan Xi, blunts the attack by arguing that the domains of Lu and Qi have a venerable, close relationship. His rhetorical ploys are reminiscent of the Jin minister Lü Sheng’s exchange with Lord Mu of Qin (Xi 15.8). In summer, Lord Xiao of Qi attacked our northern marches. A Wei leader attacked Qi: this was because of the covenant of Tao. Our lord sent Zhan Xi to honor the troop’s exertions with provisions,373 and he had Zhan Xi receive commands from Zhan Qin.374 The Prince of Qi had not yet entered Lu territory, and so Zhan Xi went to where he was and said, “Our unworthy ruler has heard that you, my lord, have lifted up your own precious foot and will condescend to enter our humble settlement. He has sent his inferior servant to honor your functionaries’ exertions.” The Prince of Qi said, “Are the men of Lu afraid?” He responded, “The lesser men are afraid, but the noble men are not.” The Prince of Qi said, “Your houses are as empty as suspended chime-stones,375 and your fields are bare of fresh grass. Upon what do you rely so as not to be afraid?” He responded, “We rely upon the commands of the former kings. Previously, the Zhou Duke and the Grand Lord were like arms and legs to the Zhou household, bracing and supporting King Cheng.376 King Cheng honored their exertions and bestowed upon them a covenant that said, ‘May your sons and grandsons in every generation do no harm to one another.’ This covenant was stored away in the covenant archives, and the grand preceptor took responsibility for keeping it.377 For thus it was that Lord Huan of Qi gathered together the princes and made plans for dealing with disharmony; he mended the places that were wanting and rescued others from calamity. This was making manifest the age-old duties. When you, my lord, acceded to your position, the princes looked upon this with hope and said, ‘Surely he will keep to the achievements of Lord Huan.’ Our humble settlement consequently did not dare assemble together and keep to our fortifications but said, ‘How could he, nine years after his succession, throw aside the commands and reject his duties? What would this mean for the former ruler? He certainly will not do this.’ Relying on this, they are not afraid.” The Prince of Qi then turned back.

26.3(3, 4)

Xiangzhongb and Zang Wenzhong went to Chu to plead for troops. In an audience with Cheng Dechena, Zang Wenzhongb spoke to him of attacking Qi and Song because they had not submitted to Chu.

26.4(5)

Lord Xi

397

26.5(6) 夔子不祀祝融與鬻熊，楚人讓之。對曰：「我先王熊摯有疾，鬼神弗赦，

而自竄于夔。吾是以失楚，又何祀焉？」秋，楚成得臣鬬宜申帥師滅夔， 以夔子歸。 26.6(7) 宋以其善於晉侯也，叛楚即晉。冬，楚令尹子玉、司馬子西帥師伐宋，

圍緡。公以楚師伐齊，取穀。凡師，能左右之曰以。寘桓公子雍於穀，易 牙奉之以為魯援。楚申公叔侯戍之。桓公之子七人，為七大夫於楚。

春秋 27.1(1) 二十有七年，春，杞子來朝。 27.2(2) 夏，六月庚寅，齊侯昭卒。 27.3 秋，八月乙未，葬齊孝公。

378 Zhurong and Yuxiong are legendary ancestors of the Chu royal line. 379 Yang (1:441) notes that zuan 竄, “to hide, to place,” seems to have been written over the top of an erased yu 寓, “to lodge,” on one of the Tang stele inscriptions, which is among the earliest extant versions of Zuozhuan. Thus, the text might be read simply as “lodged himself” in Kui. Xiongzhi is probably the same as Xiongzhi Hong 熊摯 紅, identified in Shiji as a descendant of the royal lineage who lived during the second half of the ninth century Bce. Shiji 40.1693 claims that he was assassinated and replaced by his younger brother. But Zhang Shoujie 張守節 quotes an early text by a certain Song Jun 宋均 that says, “Xiongzhi had a terrible affliction and did not manage to have descendants. He took up separate residence in Kui, which then became a dependency of Chu. A later king ordered that he be called ‘the Master of Kui’” (see Shiji 40.1693, n. 3). Behind this particular passage is a belief that illness

398

Zuo Tradition

The leader of a small domain subordinate to Chu attempts to explain his breach of ritual but fails to stave off destruction. The Master of Kui did not offer sacrifices to Zhurong and Yuxiong.378 A Chu leader reproached him. He responded, “Our former king Xiongzhi had an illness, but the ghosts and spirits did not pardon him, so he hid himself away in Kui.379 For this reason, we lost our ties with the domain of Chu. Why would we then offer sacrifices to them?” In autumn, Cheng Dechen and Dou Yishen of Chu led troops and extinguished Kui. They took the Master of Kui home with them.

26.5(6)

Song had earlier made peace with Chu (Xi 24.4), but here it turns against Chu and fosters ties to Jin (see Xi 23.6c), which provokes Chu to attack. Chu gains influence as Lu becomes its de facto ally and as disaffected Qi nobles (the Qi ruler’s half brothers) seek refuge in Chu. Because Song had been on good terms with the Prince of Jin, it turned against Chu and drew close to Jin. In winter, Cheng Dechena, the chief minister of Chu, and the supervisor of the military Dou Yishena led out troops to attack Song and laid siege to Min. Our lord, taking Chu troops with him, attacked Qi and seized Gu.380 In all cases concerning troops, when one is able to move them freely it is called “taking them along.”381 They put Yong, the son of Lord Huan, in Gu.382 Yiya supported him in order to provide aid for Lu. Shuhou, the Chu Lord of Shen, garrisoned Gu. Seven sons of Lord Huan became seven high officers in Chu.

26.6(7)

LORD XI 27 (633 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, the Master of Qǐ came to visit our court. In summer, in the sixth month, on the gengyin day (18), Zhao, the Prince of Qi, died. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the yiwei day (24), Lord Xiao of Qi was buried.

27.1(1)

27.2(2)

27.3



can result from some action that incurs the wrath of deities. Xiongzhi presumably had prayed for forgiveness, but since he had not gotten better, he assumed that the spirits had not forgiven him. 380 According to Ai 24.1, the Lu minister Zang Wenzhong plays a critical role in this campaign. 381 Lu is supposed to be deploying the Chu army with autonomy, yet Lu is obviously acting as a Chu agent, since a Chu deputy garrisons Gu. 382 Yong was one of the four sons of Lord Huan of Qi who had resisted Song’s support of his half brother Lord Xiao (see Xi 18.3). So, as Du Yu (ZZ 16.265) suggests, he was probably being placed in Gu, with Chu support, as a means of intimidating Qi.

Lord Xi

399

27.4(3) 乙巳，公子遂帥師入杞。 27.5(4) 冬，楚人、陳侯、蔡侯、鄭伯、許男圍宋。 27.6 十有二月甲戌，公會諸侯，盟于宋。

左傳 27.1(1) 二十七年，春，杞桓公來朝。用夷禮，故曰「子」。公卑杞，杞不共也。 27.2(2) 夏，齊孝公卒。有齊怨，不廢喪紀，禮也。 27.3(4) 秋，入杞，責無禮也。 27.4a(5) 楚子將圍宋，使子文治兵於睽，終朝而畢，不戮一人。子玉復治兵於蒍，

終日而畢，鞭七人，貫三人耳。國老皆賀子文。子文飲之酒。蒍賈尚幼， 後至不賀。子文問之。對曰：「不知所賀。子之傳政於子玉，曰：『以靖國 也。』靖諸內而敗諸外，所獲幾何？子玉之敗，子之舉也。舉以敗國，將 何賀焉？子玉剛而無禮，不可以治民，過三百乘，其不能以入矣。苟入 而賀，何後之有？」

383 This would have been the fourth day of the next month, the ninth month. 384 Commentators have nothing to say about the nature of Yi rituals. Qǐ is supposed to be ruled by descendants of the Xia dynasty. The designation of “Yi” is sometimes understood as vaguely “barbarian”; here it seems to indicate deviance from Zhou rituals. The ruler of Qǐ is regularly referred to in Zuozhuan as bo 伯 “liege,” so the implication here is that the Annals is criticizing his behavior by referring to him as a “master,” a lower rank. 385 For minor offenses, one’s ear was pierced with an arrow (Yang, 1:444). 386 Yang (1:445) suspects that “soldiers” 兵 is meant here rather than “people” 民. The two characters resemble one another sufficiently that a mistake could have been made in the course of transmission of the text. 387 Cheng Dechen will ultimately fail, as this prediction indicates, and will end his life in shame (Xi 28.4).

400

Zuo Tradition

On the yisi day (4), 383 Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) led out troops and entered Qǐ. In winter, a Chu leader, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Cai, the Liege of Zheng, and the Head of Xǔ laid siege to Song. In the twelfth month, on the jiaxu day (5), our lord met with the princes and swore a covenant in Song.

27.4(3)

27.5(4)

27.6

ZUO

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, Lord Huan of Qǐ came to visit our court. He used the ritual of the Yi and that is why he is called “Master.”384 Our lord belittled Qǐ because Qǐ did not show respect.

27.1(1)

In summer, Lord Xiao of Qi died. There was resentment against Qi, but we did not reject the mourning requirements. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

27.2(2)

Qǐ is punished for its earlier breach of ritual (Xi 27.1). In the autumn, we entered Qǐ: this was to rebuke them for not behaving in accordance with ritual propriety.

27.3(4)

As Chu prepares to attack Song (Xi 26.6) questions are raised about the wisdom of the Chu generals Dou Gouwutu and Cheng Dechen, foreshadowing Chu’s defeat at Chengpu (Xi 28.3). Dou Gouwutu shows exemplary temperance, but his misjudgment in appointing the much harsher Cheng Dechen begs questions. The Master of Chu was going to lay siege to Song. He sent Dou Gouwutua to drill the soldiers at Kui. Dou Gouwutu finished at the end of the morning and had not punished a single man. Cheng Dechena also drilled the soldiers at Wei. Cheng Dechen finished at the end of the day and had whipped seven men and pierced the ears of three others.385 The domain elders all congratulated Dou Gouwutua, and Dou Gouwutua entertained them with wine. Wei Jia, who was still young, arrived late and did not offer congratulations. When Dou Gouwutu asked about this, he responded, “I do not know why one should offer congratulations. You passed ruling authority on to Cheng Dechena, saying, ‘By this I intend to calm the domain.’ If you bring calm at home but defeat abroad, what have you gained? Cheng Dechen’sa defeat is caused by your recommendation. If you bring defeat to the domain by recommending him, what is there to congratulate you about? Cheng Dechena is harsh and without ritual propriety. He cannot drill the people.386 If the forces allotted him exceed three hundred chariots, he surely will not manage to bring them back intact. If I offer congratulations only after he comes back, what would be too late about that?”387

27.4a(5)

Lord Xi

401

27.4b 冬，楚子及諸侯圍宋。宋公孫固如晉告急。先軫曰：「報施救患，取威

定霸，於是乎在矣。」 狐偃曰：「楚始得曹，而新昏於衛，若伐曹、衛，楚必救之，則齊、 宋免矣。」於是乎蒐于被廬，作三軍，謀元帥。趙衰曰：「郤縠可。臣亟 聞其言矣，說禮、樂而敦《詩》、《書》。《詩》、《書》，義之府也；禮、 樂，德之則也；德、義，利之本也。《夏書》曰：『賦納以言，明試以功， 車服以庸。』君其試之！」乃使郤縠將中軍，郤溱佐之。使狐偃將上軍， 讓於狐毛而佐之。命趙衰為卿，讓於欒枝、先軫。使欒枝將下軍，先軫 佐之。荀林父御戎，魏犨為右。

402

Zuo Tradition

Song, under attack from Chu, appeals to Jin. Jin prepares for confrontation with Chu and deliberates its choice of commanders. Much of the action below is determined by how various domains had treated Chong’er, the Prince of Jin, during his wanderings. The rulers of Cao and Wei had been uncivil to him and his followers, while Qi and Song had supported him (Xi 23.6). In winter, the Master of Chu and the princes laid siege to Song. Gongsun Gu of Song went to Jin to report their crisis. Xian Zhen said, “In this case at hand, we may find a way to repay generosity, rescue those in distress, assume authority, and solidify the position of overlord.” Hu Yan said, “Chu has just gained the allegiance of Cao and is newly linked by marriage to Wei. If we attack Cao and Wei, Chu would surely come to their aid, and then Qi and Song would be spared.” At that time they mustered troops at Pilu,388 formed the three armies, and deliberated over the choice of a commander-in-chief.389 Zhao Cuia said, “Xi Hu is the right person. I have often heard his words. He takes pleasure in ritual propriety and music and is well versed in the Odes and the Documents. The Odes and the Documents are repositories of dutifulness; ritual and music provide the norms of virtue; and virtue and dutifulness are the foundations of profit. The Xia Documents says, ‘In their speech hear their claims and appoint them; by their deeds test them openly; with chariots and regalia reward them.’390 You, my lord, should test him.” So they appointed Xi Hu to command the central army with Xi Zhen to assist him.391 They appointed Hu Yan to command the upper army, but he yielded his position in favor of Hu Mao and assisted him.392 They ordered Zhao Cuia to act as minister, but he yielded to Luan Zhi and Xian Zhen. They appointed Luan Zhi to command the lower army and Xian Zhen to assist him.393 Xun Linfu drove the ruler’s war chariot and Wei Chou was spearman on the right.

27.4b

388 Pilu 被廬 is presumably a place within the domain of Jin, but its precise location is unknown. 389 Establishing a third army marks Jin’s emergence as a major power. 390 These words are found in Shangshu, “Yi Ji mo” 益稷謨, 5.70. 391 Zhao Cui’s wisdom in urging the appointment of Xi Hu might be questioned in view of the fact that the latter died just a few months after his appointment (see Xi 28.1). 392 Hu Mao is the older brother of Hu Yan. In the Guoyu equivalent (“Jin yu 4,” 10.383), Hu Yan declines the appointment with the following words: “Mao is wiser and worthier than I am; and he is also older. If Mao is not put in the position, I would not dare to heed the commands.” 393 In Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.382, Zhao Cui yields up his position with the following words: “Luan Zhi has integrity and caution, Xian Zhen has the capacity to make plans, and Xu Chen has learning. All of these can be assistants. I am not their equal.”

Lord Xi

403

27.4c 晉侯始入而教其民，二年，欲用之。子犯曰：「民未知義，未安其居。」於

出乎出定襄王，入務利民，民懷生矣。將用之。子犯曰：「民未知信，未 宣其用。」於是乎伐原以示之信。民易資者，不求豐焉，明徵其辭。公 曰：「可矣乎？」子犯曰：「民未知禮，未生其共。」於是乎大蒐以示之 禮，作執秩以正其官。民聽不惑，而後用之。出穀戍，釋宋圍，一戰而 霸，文之教也。

春秋 28.1(1) 二十有八年，春，晉侯侵曹，晉侯伐衛。 28.2(2) 公子買戍衛，不卒戍，刺之。 28.3(2) 楚人救衛。

394 Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.373, explains as follows: “To escape the difficulties brought about by Wangzi Dai, King Xiang dwelled in the Zheng territory of Fan. He had someone come to Jin and report on his difficulties. Hu Yan said, ‘The people feel affection for you, but they do not yet understand dutifulness. Why not install the king in his domain to show them an example of dutifulness?’” 395 Yang (1:447) says that this means that they established a single fair price on each commodity and did not bicker over prices. 396 Contrasting present decline and past glory, Confucius comments that Lord Wen “established the office of keeper of ranks” (zuo zhizhi zhi guan 作執秩之官) (Zhao 29.5). But Ying Shao’s comment (Hanshu 23.1084, n. 6) quoted in the gloss to the “Treatise on Laws and Punishment” 刑法志 of Hanshu suggests that zhizhi 執秩 may refer to legal codes (Yang, 1:447).

404

Zuo Tradition

The following passage assures us that although the Prince of Jin’s victory in battle might have gained him the role of overlord, such success had come only after the proper moral and ritual preparation. From the moment the Prince of Jin had entered the domain, he had instructed his people. After two years, he wanted to put them to use. Hu Yana said, “The people do not yet understand their duty, and they are not yet peacefully settled in their abodes.” So it was that he left Jin to stabilize the position of King Xiang,394 then came back to the domain and strove to benefit the people, and the people cherished their livelihood. He was about to put them to use as soldiers. Hu Yana said, “The people do not yet understand good faith, and they have not yet demonstrated that they can be put to use.” So it was that he attacked Yuan to show them an example of good faith. The people who traded goods did not seek undue profits from this and openly stood by their words.395 The lord said, “Can we act yet?” Hu Yana said, “The people do not yet know ritual propriety, and they have not developed respect.” So it was that he organized the great spring hunt to show them an example of ritual and established the keeper of ranks to put in order his officials.396 The people could then heed his commands and not be deluded, and it was only then that he put them to use. That they could drive the Chu army from the garrison of Gu, relieve the siege of Song, and in a single battle become overlord was due to Wen’s instructions.397

27.4c

LORD XI 28 (632 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin invaded Cao. The Prince of Jin attacked Wei.

28.1(1)

Gongzi Mai garrisoned Wei. But he did not finish the garrisoning, so our lord cut him down.398

28.2(2)

A Chu leader went to the aid of Wei.

28.3(2)

397 The single battle referred to here is the battle of Chengpu, which will take place in the next year. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 16.268) understands the last phrase to mean “This was due to instructions of culture and virtue.” But Yang (1:447) believes this is making specific reference to the instructions of Lord Wen, called in this passage (27.4c) “the Prince of Jin.” The posthumous name Wen, or “culture,” makes this a reference both specifically to Chong’er, the Prince of Jin and later Lord Wen, and also to the cultured behavior upon which his posthumous name was based. 398 “Cut him down” is our attempt to render ci 刺 and differentiate it from sha 殺, “to kill” or “to put to death.” Yang (1:448) notes that when a lord put a high officer to death, sha was generally used unless the event, as here, occurred in Lu, in which case ci was used.

Lord Xi

405

28.4(3) 三月丙午，晉侯入曹，執曹伯。畀宋人。 28.5(3) 夏，四月己巳，晉侯、齊師、宋師、秦師及楚人戰于城濮，楚師敗績。 28.6(4) 楚殺其大夫得臣。 28.7(3) 衛侯出奔楚。 28.8 五月癸丑，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、蔡侯、鄭伯、衛子、莒子，盟於踐土。 28.9 陳侯如會。 28.10 公朝于王所。 28.11(5) 六月，衛侯鄭自楚復歸于衛。衛元咺出奔晉。 28.12 陳侯款卒。 28.13 秋，杞伯姬來。 28.14 公子遂如齊。 28.15(7) 冬，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、蔡侯、鄭伯、陳子、莒子、邾子、秦人于溫。 28.16(9) 天王狩于河陽。 28.17(10) 壬申，公朝于王所。 28.18(8) 晉人執衛侯，歸之于京師。衛元咺自晉復歸于衛。 28.19(11) 諸侯遂圍許。 28.20(12) 曹伯襄復歸于曹，遂會諸侯圍許。

399 Normally, Wei would be represented in the covenant ceremony by the Prince of Wei, but since the latter is barred from joining the covenant (Zuozhuan, Xi 28.1), his younger brother Shuwu takes his place (see Ding 4.1f) and is referred to as the “Master” of Wei. 400 Jiantu 踐土 was located in the domain of Zheng southwest of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan. 401 Du Yu (ZZ 16.269) claims that when the king was not at his capital, his location is simply called “the place of the king” (wang suo 王所). However, Yang (1:449) produces evidence that sometimes this term is used when the king is at the capital. So no conclusion can be drawn about the king’s location from the term itself.

406

Zuo Tradition

In the third month, on the bingwu day (8), the Prince of Jin entered Cao, arrested the Liege of Cao, and handed him over to a Song leader. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jisi day (2), the Prince of Jin, Qi troops, Song troops, and Qin troops did battle with a Chu leader at Chengpu. The Chu troops were completely defeated.

28.4(3)

28.5(3)

Chu put to death its high officer Dechen.

28.6(4)

The Prince of Wei departed and fled to Chu.

28.7(3)

In the fifth month, on the guichou day (16), our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Cai, the Liege of Zheng, the Master of Wei,399 and the Master of Ju and swore a covenant at Jiantu.400

28.8

The Prince of Chen went to the meeting.

28.9

Our lord visited court at the place of the king.401

28.10

In the sixth month, Zheng, the Prince of Wei, went home again from Chu to Wei. Yuan Xuan of Wei departed and fled to Jin.

28.11(5)

Kuan, the Prince of Chen, died.

28.12

In autumn, Bo Ji of Qǐ came.

28.13

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi.

28.14

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Cai, the Liege of Zheng, the Master of Chen, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, and a Qin leader at Wen.

28.15(7)

The Heaven-appointed king went on the winter hunt at Heyang.403

28.16(9)

On the renshen day (7), our lord visited court at the place of the king.

28.17(10)

402

A Jin leader arrested the Prince of Wei and presented him at the Zhou capital. Yuan Xuan of Wei went home again from Jin to Wei.

28.18(8)

The princes then laid siege to Xǔ.

28.19(11)

Xiang, the Liege of Cao, went home again to Cao. He then met with the princes and laid siege to Xǔ.

28.20(12)

402 Bo Ji was the eldest daughter of the former Lord Zhuang of Lu. 403 Heyang 河陽 was located in the domain of Jin west of present-day Meng County 孟縣, Henan.

Lord Xi

407

左傳 28.1(1) 二十八年，春，晉侯將伐曹，假道于衛。衛人弗許。還自南河濟，侵曹、

伐衛。正月戊申，取五鹿。二月，晉郤縠卒。原軫將中軍，胥臣佐下軍，上 德也。晉侯、齊侯盟于斂盂。衛侯請盟，晉人弗許。衛侯欲與楚，國人不 欲，故出其君，以說于晉。衛侯出居于襄牛。

28.2(2, 3)

408

公子買戍衛，楚人救衛，不克。公懼於晉，殺子叢以說焉。謂楚人曰： 「不卒戍也。」

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

With an alliance formed between Jin and Qi, the domain of Wei finds itself isolated. Jin success in Wei and occupation of Wulu fulfill the prediction in Xi 23.6. In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin was going to attack Cao. He sought to pass through Wei. When the Wei leaders would not permit this, he turned back, crossing the Yellow River to the south, invaded Cao and attacked Wei. In the first month, on the wushen day (9), they occupied Wulu.404 In the second month, Xi Hu of Jin died. Xian Zhena commanded the central army and Xu Chen assisted with the lower army. This was to promote the virtuous. The Prince of Jin and the Prince of Qi swore a covenant at Lianyu.405 The Prince of Wei asked to join the covenant, but Jin leaders would not permit it. The Prince of Wei wanted to join up with Chu, but the inhabitants of the capital did not want this. They therefore expelled their ruler in order to please Jin. The Prince of Wei left the capital and dwelled in Xiangniu.406

28.1(1)

Lu here seems to be acting in collaboration with Chu to defend Wei against Jin. The action, however, fails and Lu is left both to attempt to appease Jin and to provide some explanation to Chu for executing Gongzi Mai, the Lu noble charged with defending Wei. Gongzi Mai garrisoned Wei. A Chu leader went to the aid of Wei, but they did not prevail. Our lord was afraid of Jin, so he put to death Gongzi Maia to gain favor with them. He said to the men of Chu, “He did not finish the garrisoning.”407

28.2(2, 3)

404 See the episode in Xi 23.6 in which a Wulu peasant gives the traveling Chong’er a clod of earth, which Chong’er’s adviser Hu Yan identifies as a gift from Heaven. 405 Lianyu 斂盂 was located in the domain of Wei southeast of present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan. 406 Xiangniu 襄牛 was located in the domain of Wei south of Fan County 范縣, Shandong. 407 See Takezoe 8.13. This curious Zuozhuan passage seems to imply that the Annals record was distorted to appease the men of Chu and hide the fact that the real motive for killing Mai was more than simply that he did not finish the garrisoning.

Lord Xi

409

28.3a(4) 晉侯圍曹，門焉，多死。曹人尸諸城上，晉侯患之。聽輿人之謀曰：「稱

舍於墓。」師遷焉。曹人兇懼，為其所得者，棺而出之。因其兇也而攻之。 三月丙午，入曹，數之以其不用僖負羈，而乘軒者三百人也，且曰獻狀。 令無入僖負羈之宮而免其族，報施也。 魏犨、顛頡怒，曰：「勞之不圖，報於何有？」爇僖負羈氏。魏犨傷 於胸。公欲殺之，而愛其材。使問，且視之。病，將殺之。魏犨束胸見使 者，曰：「以君之靈，不有寧也！」距躍三百，曲踊三百。乃舍之。殺顛頡 以徇于師，立舟之僑以為戎右。

408 Apparently, the fear that the Jin army would desecrate Cao ancestral graves was enough to make them treat the dead Jin soldiers with greater respect. 409 There is some disagreement on the meaning of this phrase. It seems mostly likely that the Prince of Jin is rebuking the ruler for peeking at his body earlier to see if he really had fused ribs. Yan Shigu 顏師古 has suggested that the Prince of Jin is saying, “I have come expressly to present to you the form of my fused ribs!” Thus, we might translate, “I present my form!” Yang rejects this interpretation as too jocular.

410

Zuo Tradition

The series of passages below describes events leading up to the battle of Chengpu, one of the major battles recounted in Zuozhuan. In the following passage, Chong’er, the Prince of Jin, attacks the domain of Cao, retaliating against a ruler (Lord Gong of Cao) who had treated him badly during the time of his wanderings and rewarding a minister (Xi Fuji) who had treated him well (Xi 23.6c). Rewarding Xi Fuji’s earlier generosity, however, leads to jealousies and new conflicts. The Prince of Jin laid siege to Cao. They stormed the city gate and many died. The men of Cao displayed the corpses of the Jin soldiers atop the city wall, and this troubled the Prince of Jin. He followed the plans of his rank and file and announced a bivouac among the Cao graves. So the army was moved there. The men of Cao, filled with panic and fear, took the bodies of the Jin soldiers they had acquired, placed them in coffins, and sent them out of the city.408 Taking advantage of Cao’s state of panic, Jin set upon them. In the third month, on the bingwu day (8), they entered Cao. The Prince of Jin reproved the Cao ruler for not having relied on Xi Fuji while as many as three hundred others rode in dignitary’s chariots. Moreover, he said, “You saw my exposed body!”409 He ordered that no one enter Xi Fuji’s residence, and he pardoned his entire house. This was to reward Xi Fuji’s generosity. Wei Chou and Dian Xie were angry and said, “He does not think of those who toiled for him. What reward is there to speak of?” They set fire to the residence of the Xi Fuji family. Wei Chou was wounded in the chest. The Prince of Jin wanted to kill him but cherished his talent. So he sent someone to ask about his condition and moreover to examine him. If he was seriously wounded, the Prince of Jin was going to put him to death. Wei Chou bound up his chest, received the messenger, and said, “Relying on my lord’s numinous power, how could I not have good health?” Then he jumped forward and back three hundred times and from side to side three hunded times.410 So they spared him but killed Dian Xie as an example to the army, and they established Zhou Zhiqiao as the spearman on the right in the Prince of Jin’s war chariot.411

28.3a(4)

Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.380, says: “Lord Wen punished them for looking at his form.” It may be, as Yang (1:453–54) seems to suggest, that the prince is here continuing his reproach, adding the crime of the ruler of Cao’s voyeurism to his other crimes. 410 “Three hundred” may just indicate “many.” Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen) reads bai 百 as mo 陌, “to stretch across”—thus, “three giant leaps forward and back, three giant leaps from side to side” (cited in Yang, 1:454). 411 Zhou Zhiqiao is a Guo minister who predicted Guo’s downfall and fled to Jin (Min 2.1). He will, however, come to an unhappy end (Xi 28.6).

Lord Xi

411

28.3b 宋人使門尹般如晉師告急。公曰：「宋人告急，舍之則絕，告楚不許。我

欲戰矣，齊、秦未可，若之何？」先軫曰：「使宋舍我而賂齊、秦，藉之告 楚。我執曹君，而分曹、衛之田以賜宋人。楚愛曹、衛，必不許也。喜賂、 怒頑，能無戰乎？」公說，執曹伯，分曹、衛之田以畀宋人。 28.3c 楚子入居于申，使申叔去穀，使子玉去宋，曰：「無從晉師！晉侯在外，十

九年矣，而果得晉國。險阻艱難，備嘗之矣；民之情偽，盡知之矣。天 假之年，而除其害，天之所置，其可廢乎？軍志曰：『允當則歸。』又曰： 『知難而退。』又曰：『有德不可敵。』此三志者，晉之謂矣。」 子玉使伯棼請戰，曰：「非敢必有功也，願以間執讒慝之口。」王 怒，少與之師，唯西廣、東宮與若敖之六卒實從之。

412 Chu will not want to see its allies in Cao and Wei deprived of this land. Thus, Chu will appear stubborn to Qi and Qin, who will be pressing them to withdraw from Song. 413 It will be recalled that Shuhou had previously garrisoned Gu (see Xi 26.6). 414 He is referring to Wei Jia’s criticisms voiced in the previous year (see Xi 27.4). 415 These Chu military terms are rather obscure. Xi guang 西廣, “western cohort,” refers to one of two armies. Dong gong 東宮, “Eastern Palace” presumably refers here to the guard defending the palace of the heir apparent. Ruo’ao 若敖 was a Chu ancestor. Yang (1:457) believes that the liu zu 六卒, “six units,” were established by Ruo’ao. A zu is a unit of 30 chariots. Thus, Cheng Dechen had 180 chariots under his command.

412

Zuo Tradition

Unlike the ruler of Cao, the ruler of Song had treated Chong’er, the later Prince of Jin, generously during his wanderings (Xi 23.6c). Since that time, Chu had laid siege to Song and Song had asked Jin to intercede (Xi 27.4b). In the following passage, Song asks again for help, and Xian Zhen concocts a Machiavellian scheme to gain the support of Qi and Qin in joining with Jin against Chu and to facilitate theoretical territorial gains for Song without actually providing assistance. The Song leaders sent Ban, the commandant of the city gate, to the Jin troops to report the crisis. The Prince of Jin said, “If the Song leaders report a crisis and we abandon them, then they will break off relations with us. But if we declare to Chu that they should lift the siege, they will not agree. And if we want to join the battle against Chu, Qi and Qin would object. So what should we do about it?” Xian Zhen said, “Have Song appear to give up on us and, by giving gifts to Qi and Qin, have them intercede in making the declaration to Chu. We will arrest the Cao ruler and divide off a portion of the land of Cao and Wei to present as a gift to the Song leaders. Chu is close to Cao and Wei and will certainly not allow this.412 Pleased with the gifts and angered by Chu’s stubbornness, can Qi and Qin fail to join the battle?” The Prince of Jin was pleased. He arrested the Liege of Cao, divided off a portion of the land of Cao and Wei, and gave it to the Song leaders.

28.3b

The Master of Chu entered and dwelled in Shen. He had Shouhou, Lord of Shen, depart from Gu,413 and he had Cheng Dechena depart from Song, saying, “Do not pursue the Jin troops. The Prince of Jin was abroad for nineteen years and finally obtained the domain of Jin. Hardship and trouble he has experienced in every kind; the people’s true state and deceits he knows to the last detail. Heaven has granted him a long life and has removed those who would harm him. How can those whom Heaven has set up be cast aside? In the military records it says, ‘When you reach the appropriate point, stop.’ And again they say, ‘When you know that the difficulties are insurmountable, withdraw.’ And still again they say, ‘Those of virtue cannot be rivaled.’ These three records are referring to Jin!” Cheng Dechena sent Dou Jiaod to request of the king that they engage in battle, saying, “It is not that I dare insist I will have success, but I would hope to gag the mouths of those who slander and speak evil.”414 The king was angry with this and gave him only a few troops. The western cohort, the Eastern Palace guard, and Ruo’ao’s six units were the only ones that accompanied him.415

28.3c

Lord Xi

413

28.3d 子玉使宛春告於晉師曰：「請復衛侯而封曹，臣亦釋宋之圍。」子犯曰：

「子玉無禮哉！君取一，臣取二，不可失矣。」先軫曰：「子與之！定人之 謂禮，楚一言而定三國，我一言而亡之。我則無禮，何以戰乎？不許楚 言，是棄宋也；救而棄之，謂諸侯何？楚有三施，我有三怨，怨讎已多， 將何以戰？不如私許復曹、衛以攜之，執宛春以怒楚，既戰而後圖之。」 公說。乃拘宛春於衛，且私許復曹、衛，曹、衛告絕於楚。 28.3e 子玉怒，從晉師。晉師退。軍吏曰：「以君辟臣，辱也；且楚師老矣，何故

退？」子犯曰：「師直為壯，曲為老，豈在久乎？微楚之惠不及此，退三 舍辟之，所以報也。背惠食言，以亢其讎，我曲楚直，其眾素飽，不可謂 老。我退而楚還，我將何求？若其不還，君退臣犯，曲在彼矣。」退三 舍。楚眾欲止，子玉不可。

416 What he apparently means here is that his lord, the Prince of Jin, would get the advantage of having the siege of Song lifted, but Cheng Dechen, representing Chu, would get two things: the restoration of Wei and the reinstatement of Cao. 417 That is, Chu will have benefited Cao, Wei, and Song, while Jin will have incurred their enmity. 418 The head of the Jin army is also its ruler, while the Chu commander is only a subject in Chu.

414

Zuo Tradition

Chu agrees to lift the siege of Song if Jin will make certain concessions, but Jin outmaneuvers them, largely as a result of Xian Zhen’s clever advice. Note how Xian Zhen subtly shifts from the rhetoric of ritual propriety to strategic calculations. The secret agreement to restore Cao and Wei means that the promised territorial gains for Song will not materialize. Cheng Dechena sent Yuan Chun to make an announcement to the Jin troops: “We request that you restore the Prince of Wei and grant Cao its domain. I, your subject, will then lift the siege of Song.” Hu Yana said, “Cheng Dechena is without ritual propriety! The ruler would take one, the minister two.416 There is no time to lose before battle.” Xian Zhen said, “You should go along with him! To bring stability to the people is called ritual propriety. With one word Chu would bring stability to three domains, while with one word we would destroy them. If we then are without ritual propriety, how could we do battle? Not to agree to Chu’s proposal would be to abandon Song; if we come to their aid and then abandon them, what can we say to the princes? Chu would have three beneficiaries; and we would have three enemies.417 With so many enemies how would we do battle? It would be better to agree privately to restore Cao and Wei so as to create dissension between them and Chu, arrest Yuan Chun to anger Chu, and make further plans only after we have joined in battle with them.” The lord was pleased. He thus apprehended Yuan Chun in Wei and, moreover, secretly promised to restore Cao and Wei. Cao and Wei announced that they were breaking off with Chu.

28.3d

Hu Yan, adviser to Lord Wen of Jin, recommends a strategy of forbearance, which fulfills an earlier promise that the wandering Chong’er had made to the Chu ruler (Xi 23.6). Cheng Dechena was angry and pursued the Jin troops, but the Jin troops withdrew. A military officer said, “For a ruler to avoid a minister is humiliating. Moreover, the Chu troops are already worn out. Why retreat?” Hu Yana said, “When troops have justice on their side, they are at the height of their power and morale; when they are in the wrong, they are worn out. How could it be a matter of being in the field a long time? Had it not been for Chu’s kindness, we would not be here. To retreat three days’ march to avoid the Chu troops is the way to repay Chu. If we turn our backs on their kindness and break our promise in order to defend their enemy Song, we will be in the wrong and Chu will have justice on its side. Their multitudes have always been well fed; it cannot be said that they are worn out. If we retreat and Chu turns back, what more can we ask for? If they do not turn back, then our ruler will have retreated while their subject will have pressed an attack,418 and the wrong will be on their side.” Jin retreated three days’ march. The Chu host wanted to stop, but Cheng Dechen refused.

28.3e

Lord Xi

415

28.3f 夏，四月戊辰，晉侯、宋公、齊國歸父、崔夭、秦小子憖次于城濮。楚師

背酅而舍，晉侯患之。聽輿人之誦曰：「原田每每，舍其舊而新是謀。」 公疑焉。子犯曰：「戰也！戰而捷，必得諸侯。若其不捷，表裏山河，必 無害也。」公曰：「若楚惠何？」欒貞子曰：「漢陽諸姬，楚實盡之。思小 惠而忘大恥，不如戰也。」 晉侯夢與楚子搏，楚子伏己而盬其腦，是以懼。子犯曰：「吉。我 得天，楚伏其罪，吾且柔之矣。」 28.3g(5) 子玉使鬬勃請戰，曰：「請與君之士戲，君馮軾而觀之，得臣與寓目焉。」

晉侯使欒枝對曰：「寡君聞命矣。楚君之惠，未之敢忘，是以在此。為大 夫退，其敢當君乎？既不獲命矣，敢煩大夫，謂二三子：『戒爾車乘，敬 爾君事，詰朝將見。』」 晉車七百乘，韅、靷、鞅、靽。晉侯登有莘之虛以觀師，曰：「少長 有禮，其可用也。」遂伐其木，以益其兵。

419 Chengpu was located in Wei; see Annals, Zhuang 27.7. 420 While the Prince of Jin was on his back, he was indeed looking up to heaven, while the Master of Chu, who was bending over him, was in the position of submitting to a punishment. 421 The meaning of this last clause, wu qie rou zhi yi 吾且柔之矣, is very much in doubt. Du Yu (ZZ 16.272) explains that brains were used as a softening agent, so that, following him, we would translate “Moreover, we are softening him up.” That is, by sucking the Jin ruler’s brains, the Chu king is becoming weaker. But we follow Yang (1:459) in taking rou here to mean “gently bring into submission,” as it is used in Xi 25.2. 422 The terms used here to describe the various attachments of the horses to the chariots are obscure (see Yang, 1:460–61; and Karlgren, gl. 172). Shen Yucheng (Zuozhuan yiwen, 116), for this reason, takes the safe solution of translating into modern Chinese simply as “The equipment was complete.” 423 Youshen 有莘, or simply Shen 莘, was a small domain near Chengpu 城濮 and near present-day Fan County 范縣, Shandong. 424 For a discussion of whether or not men are ready “to be used,” see Xi 27.4.

416

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin is filled with doubts and fears as he faces the Chu army, but Hu Yan’s positive and creative interpretation of what seems to be an ominous dream boosts the prince’s confidence. In summer, in the fourth month, on the wuchen day (1), the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, Guo Guifu and Cui Yao of Qi, and Yin, the young son of the ruler of Qin, set up camp at Chengpu.419 The Chu troops backed up into treacherous terrain and bivouacked. The Prince of Jin was worried about this. He heard his rank and file chanting, “The fallow fields are green with grass; let go the old and make for the new!” The lord was filled with doubts about this. Hu Yana said, “Let us fight! If we fight and are victorious, we are certain to obtain the allegiance of the princes. If we are not victorious, we have the mountains and the river as defenses inside and out for the domain, and there is sure to be no harm.” The lord said, “What about Chu’s kindness?” Luan Zhia said, “Of those domains of the Ji clan north of the Han River, Chu has extinguished every last one. You are remembering a small kindness and forgetting a great humiliation. It would be better to fight.” The Prince of Jin dreamed that he was wrestling with the Master of Chu. The Master of Chu was bending over him and was sucking out his brains, and because of this the prince was afraid. Hu Yana said, “Auspicious! We are able to obtain Heaven’s blessings and Chu is submitting to punishment for its crimes.420 What is more, we are softening them into submission.”421

28.3f

After ritual formalities, Jin and Chu join in battle, and Chu is quickly defeated. Cheng Dechena sent Dou Bo to request that the armies join in battle, saying, “I request that we sport with my lord’s officers. You, my lord, can lean on the crossbar of your chariot and watch it. And I, Dechen, will join you in beholding it.” The Prince of Jin sent Luan Zhi to reply, “Our unworthy ruler has heard your command. He does not yet dare forget the kindness of the ruler of Chu, and that is the reason he is in this place. We thought that you, as high officers, would not have dared to face down a ruler. Since we have not received word of your retreat, we venture to trouble you, high officer, to tell those fine men, ‘Take precautions with thy chariots of war; show respect for thy ruler’s affairs; for on the morrow we shall meet.’” The chariot units of Jin were seven hundred in number, with straps fastened firmly to the horses’ breasts, backs, and bellies.422 The Prince of Jin ascended to the ruins of Youshen so as to review his troops423 and said, “The young and the old have the proper ritual. They can be used.”424 Then he cut wood from the mound to make more weapons.

28.3g(5)

Lord Xi

417

己巳，晉師陳于莘北，胥臣以下軍之佐當陳、蔡。子玉以若敖之六 卒將中軍，曰：「今日必無晉矣。」子西將左，子上將右。胥臣蒙馬以虎 皮，先犯陳、蔡。陳、蔡奔，楚右師潰。狐毛設二旆而退之。欒枝使輿曳 柴而偽遁，楚師馳之，原軫、郤溱以中軍公族橫擊之。狐毛、狐偃以上軍 夾攻子西，楚左師潰。楚師敗績。子玉收其卒而止，故不敗。 28.3h 晉師三日館、穀，及癸酉而還。甲午，至于衡雍，作王宮于踐土。

鄉役之三月，鄭伯如楚致其師。為楚師既敗而懼，使子人九行成 于晉。晉欒枝入盟鄭伯。五月丙午，晉侯及鄭伯盟于衡雍。

418

Zuo Tradition

On the jisi day (2), the Jin troops formed ranks north of Youshen. Xu Chen, in his capacity as assistant to the commander of the lower army, faced the troops of Chen and Cai. Cheng Dechena, with the six units of the Ruo’ao troops, commanded the central army. He said, “Today, without fail, Jin ceases to exist!” Dou Yishena commanded the Chu left column and Dou Boa commanded the right. Xu Chen covered his horses with tiger pelts425 and moved forward to strike at Chen and Cai. The armies of Chen and Cai fled and the Chu troops of the right collapsed. Hu Mao of Jin set up two pennons and retreated.426 Luan Zhi had his chariots drag firewood to stir up dust and make it appear as if they were fleeing.427 The Chu troops pursued them, and Xian Zhena and Xi Zhen of Jin took the troops of the central army from the lateral branches of the ruling house and attacked the Chu army on the flank.428 Hu Mao and Hu Yan led the upper army and caught Dou Yishena in a pincer attack. Chu’s troops of the left collapsed and the Chu troops were completely defeated. Cheng Dechena had gathered his soldiers together and had stayed put, and that is why he was not defeated. Jin now enjoys the rewards of victory over Chu, which includes a ceremonial meeting with the Zhou king, who formally makes Chong’er, now the Prince of Jin and posthumously named Lord Wen, the leader of the princes. The Jin troops lodged for three days, eating the Chu grain supplies. On the guiyou day (6), they turned homeward. On the jiawu day (27), they reached Hengyong and constructed a temporary residence for the king at Jiantu.429 In the third month, before the military campaign, the Liege of Zheng had gone to Chu to offer his troops. Because the Chu troops had now been defeated, Zheng was fearful and sent Ziren Jiu on a mission to seek an accord with Jin. Luan Zhi of Jin entered the Zheng capital and swore a covenant with the Liege of Zheng. In the fifth month, on the bingwu day (9), the Prince of Jin and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Hengyong.

28.3h

425 The same tactic was utilized in Zhuang 10.2. 426 The term er pei 二旆 is problematic. We have followed Takezoe (7.22), who believes this was part of the Jin ruse to make Chu believe they were in flight. For a different interpretation, see Liu Shunian 劉書年 as quoted in Yang, 1:461. 427 The same trick appears in Xiang 18.3. 428 According to Yang (1:462), the central army was made up in part of lateral branches of the lord’s clan. 429 Hengyong 衡雍 was a place in the domain of Zheng located west of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan. Apparently, this was a provisional residence in which the king could receive the princes and conduct other rituals.

Lord Xi

419

丁未，獻楚俘于王：駟介百乘，徒兵千。鄭伯傅王，用平禮也。己 酉，王享醴，命晉侯宥。王命尹氏及王子虎、內史叔興父策命晉侯為侯 伯，賜之大輅之服、戎輅之服，彤弓一、彤矢百，玈弓矢千，秬鬯一卣， 虎賁三百人，曰：「王謂叔父：『敬服王命，以綏四國，糾逖王慝。』」晉 侯三辭，從命，曰：「重耳敢再拜稽首，奉揚天子之丕顯休命。」受策以 出。出入三覲。 28.3i(7) 衛侯聞楚師敗，懼，出奔楚，遂適陳，使元咺奉叔武以受盟。癸亥，王子

虎盟諸侯于王庭，要言曰：「皆獎王室，無相害也！有渝此盟，明神殛 之，俾隊其師，無克祚國，及而玄孫，無有老幼。」君子謂是盟也信，謂 晉於是役也，能以德攻。

430 Apparently, Jin was greeted with the same ritual on this occasion as had been used with Jin during the reign of King Ping (r. 770–720), when Lord Wu of Zheng held a privileged position as a Zhou minister. Perhaps Jin forgave Zheng in part because Jin needed Zheng to reenact “the rituals of King Ping” (see Yin 3.3). A bronze vessel, the “Zifan bianzhong” 子犯編鐘, carries an inscription that corroborates some of the material found in Zuozhuan. It testifies to Hu Yan’s support of Chong’er on his return to Jin, mentions his victory over Chu at the Pu fortress, and even carries a date, dingwei, which is the same as the date in Zuozhuan. On this vessel, see Li Xueqin, “Bulun Zifan bianzhong.” 431 We have used the plural here because several texts indicate that ten ebony bows were given to the Prince of Jin on this occasion. The number ten may have been deleted in some texts because the ratio between bows and arrows in such gifts, one hundred to one, was general knowledge. For another instance of the presentation of such gifts, see Wen 4.6. 432 These were apparently elite palace guards and were named “tiger runners” as a description of their ferocity (Yang, 1:465). 433 These are presumably the exact words of the command that had been written down and is being narrated to the Prince of Jin, the new overlord. The Chinese here is in a higher stylistic register, making use of a four-character rhythm and employing archaizing expressions.

420

Zuo Tradition

On the dingwei day (10), Jin presented the Chu prisoners and booty to the Zhou king: one hundred chariot units with teams of four horses covered with armor and one thousand infantrymen. The Liege of Zheng acted as aide to the king and used the ritual of King Ping.430 On the jiyou day (12), the king offered ceremonial toasts and presented sweet wine, commanding the Prince of Jin to offer toasts. The king commanded the Yin lineage head, Wangzi Hu, and the court scribe Shuxinga to draw up a document on bamboo strips commanding the Prince of Jin to act as overlord of the princes. The king bestowed on him a grand ceremonial chariot and a war chariot with the appropriate regalia, a red bow and one hundred red arrows, ebony bows431 and one thousand ebony arrows, a pot of black millet wine perfumed with herbs, and three hundred “tiger runner” guards,432 and said, “The king tells his paternal uncle, ‘Respectfully obey the king’s command and thereby pacify the domains in all directions. Discipline and banish all who would do ill to the king.’”433 The Prince of Jin declined the gifts three times and then complied with the king’s command, saying, “I, Chong’er, presume to bow twice, with my forehead touching the ground, to receive and proclaim the grandly illustrious command you have bestowed on me.” He accepted the written command and departed. From his arrival to his departure, he had three audiences with the king.434 The Prince of Wei flees his domain in fear, turning rule over to his younger brother, and the allied princes swear a covenant in the king’s court at Jiantu. The Covenant of Jiantu becomes the symbol of Lord Wen’s achievement as overlord. When the Prince of Wei heard that the Chu troops had been defeated, he was fearful and fled from his domain to Chu and then went on to Chen. He dispatched Yuan Xuan to support Shuwu, the prince’s younger brother, as ruler and thereby accept the Covenant of Jiantu. On the guihai day (26), Wangzi Hu swore a covenant with the princes in the king’s court. The words of the agreement were as follows: “All of us will promote the king’s household and will do no harm to one another. Whoever betrays this covenant, may the glorious spirits destroy him, bring about his army’s defeat, and bestow no blessings on his domain.435 May this curse reach to his posterity without regard for old or young.” The noble man said of this covenant that it showed good faith and said that Jin in this military campaign had been able to launch an offensive on the basis of virtue.

28.3i(7)

434 Yang (1:466) suggests that in the first audience, Lord Wen, the Prince of Jin, presented the spoils of victory and the Chu prisoners of war; in the second audience, the king feasted him; and in the third, Lord Wen received the written command and other royal gifts. 435 The lines also appear in a covenant in Cheng 12.2.

Lord Xi

421

28.4(6) 初，楚子玉自為瓊弁、玉纓，未之服也。先戰，夢河神謂己曰：「畀余！余

賜女孟諸之麋。」弗致也。大心與子西使榮黃諫，弗聽。榮季曰：「死而 利國，猶或為之，況瓊玉乎？是糞土也。而可以濟師，將何愛焉？」弗 聽。出，告二子曰：「非神敗令尹，令尹其不勤民，實自敗也。」 既敗，王使謂之曰：「大夫若入，其若申、息之老何？」子西、孫伯 曰：「得臣將死，二臣止之，曰：『君其將以為戮。』」及連穀而死。 晉侯聞之而後喜可知也，曰：「莫余毒也已。蒍呂臣實為令尹，奉 己而已，不在民矣。」 28.5(11) 或訴元咺於衛侯曰：「立叔武矣。」其子角從公，公使殺之。咺不廢命，

奉夷叔以入守。

436 Mengzhu 孟諸 Marsh was in the domain of Song, which Chu will later attack. 437 Cheng Daxin is Cheng Dechen’s son. Both the Dou and the Cheng lines are descendants of the Ruo’ao 若敖 lineage. 438 The implication is that since so many of the sons of the people of Shen and Xi had been killed in the battle of Chengpu, Cheng Dechen would be too ashamed to live on, just as Xiang Yu, in a later age, did not return east of the Yangzi River because he could not face the fathers and elder brothers of the soldiers he had led to battle (Shiji 7.336). 439 Apparently, Cheng Dechen is not to deprive his ruler of the prerogative of ordering him to die. 440 This seems to imply that Cheng Dechen committed suicide, which is what Du Yu (ZZ 16.275) says, but the Annals says that he “was put to death” (28.6). The confusion is perpetuated in Shiji, where it says in one place he was executed (40.1698) and in another that he committed suicide (39.1668). Perhaps, as Yang (1:468) maintains, he was ordered to commit suicide. It is indeed difficult to know whether such a death should be labeled an “execution” or a “suicide”! Liangu 連穀 was located in the domain of Chu near Fangcheng 方城 but has not been identified with any current place. 441 Although Cheng Dechen is presented in this story in a negative light, the Prince of Jin obviously holds him in high regard. Earlier, Wei Lüchen (Shu Bo) was commended for his good judgment (Xi 23.3c), but here he is criticized as self-serving.

422

Zuo Tradition

Again, a rational explanation for an event is put forward to counter a supernatural explanation. Cheng Dechen commits suicide under duress, much to the relief of the Prince of Jin, who had a good idea of just how capable his rival was. Earlier, Cheng Dechena of Chu had fashioned for his horses agateornamented caps and jade-ornamented martingales, but he had not used them. Before the battle, he dreamed that the god of the Yellow River said to him, “Give them to me! And I will bestow on you Mengzhu Marsh.”436 But Cheng Dechen did not give them up. Cheng Daxina and Dou Yishena sent Rong Huang to remonstrate with Cheng Dechen,437 but he would not listen to him. Rong Huanga said, “Some would brave even death if it brought benefit to the domain, to say nothing of agate and jade! These things are mere dirt and dung! If you can bring success to the troops, why begrudge them?” Cheng Dechen would not listen to him. Rong Huang came out and told Dou Yishen and Cheng Daxin: “It will not be the gods who defeat the chief minister. The chief minister does not toil for the people. That man defeats himself!” After the defeat, the king sent someone to say to him, “If you, the high officer, were to enter the domain, then how would you deal with the aged of Shen and Xi?”438 Dou Yishena and Cheng Daxinb said, “Cheng Dechenb was going to die by his own hand, but we two stopped him by saying, ‘Surely the ruler will take hold of you and execute you.’”439 When he reached Liangu, Cheng Dechen died.440 When the Prince of Jin heard about his death, he was clearly delighted, and he said, “Now there is none left to poison my existence! None other than Wei Lüchen will become chief minister. But he serves no one but himself and is not concerned with the people.”441

28.4(6)

The Prince of Wei had fled his domain and was dwelling in Chen. He had sent Yuan Xuan to establish his younger brother as temporary ruler in his absence (Xi 28.3i). But now he hears rumors that Yuan Xuan has actually made the temporary arrangement permanent and takes action that leads to the death of his younger brother. Despite the promise of leniency, the Wei ruler pursues vindictive measures against those suspected of disloyalty. Someone made accusations against Yuan Xuan to the Prince of Wei, saying, “He has established Shuwu as ruler!” Yuan Xuan’s son Jiao had followed the Prince of Wei into exile, and the prince had him put to death. But Yuan Xuan did not abandon his charge but supported Shuwub in entering and defending the domain.

28.5(11)

Lord Xi

423

六月，晉人復衛侯。甯武子與衛人盟于宛濮，曰：「天禍衛國，君臣 不協，以及此憂也。今天誘其衷，使皆降心以相從也。不有居者，誰守 社稷？不有行者，誰扞牧圉？不協之故，用昭乞盟于爾大神以誘天衷。 自今日以往，既盟之後，行者無保其力，居者無懼其罪。有渝此盟，以相 及也。明神先君，是糾是殛。」國人聞此盟也，而後不貳。 衛侯先期入，甯子先，長牂守門，以為使也，與之乘而入。公子歂 犬、華仲前驅，叔孫將沐，聞君至，喜，捉髮走出，前驅射而殺之。公知 其無罪也，枕之股而哭之。歂犬走出，公使殺之。元咺出奔晉。

424

Zuo Tradition

In the sixth month, the Jin leaders restored the Prince of Wei. Ning Wuzi swore a covenant with the Wei leaders at Yuanpu, which said, “Heaven brought disaster to the domain of Wei. The ruler and ministers could not work together, so they fell into this trouble. But now, Heaven’s sentiments have been swayed, and we have all been made to humble our hearts and so go along with one another. If there had not been men who remained in the domain, who would have guarded the altars of the domain?442 And if there had not been those who traveled abroad, who would have shielded the oxherds and grooms?443 Because we could not work together, we beg to clearly swear a covenant before you, great spirits, to sway Heaven’s sentiments. From this day on, after the covenant has been sworn, those who went abroad are not to stake claims on their effort; and those who have stayed in the domain are not to fear incrimination. If there is one who transgresses this covenant, may they come to harm. May the bright spirits and former rulers discipline and exterminate them.” Only after the inhabitants of the capital heard this covenant did they cease to have divided loyalties. The Prince of Wei entered his domain before the appointed time. Ning Wuzib had preceded him, and Chang Zang, the keeper of the gate, taking Ning Wuzi to be an envoy from the prince, entered the capital riding together with him in a chariot. Gongzi Chuanquan and Hua Zhong drove on ahead. Shuwua was about to wash his hair, but when he heard the ruler had arrived, he was overjoyed and ran out, grabbing his hair in his hands. Those who had driven on ahead of the prince shot and killed him. The lord knew that Shuwu, his younger brother, was not guilty. He pillowed his dead brother on his own thigh and wailed over him.444 Chuanquan fled from the capital, and the lord sent someone to put him to death. Yuan Xuan departed and fled to Jin.

442 For a similar argument, see Zhuang 14.3 and Xi 21. 443 Those who traveled abroad were really protecting the ruler, but here they are credited with protecting the lowliest servants; or perhaps these servants are treated as assets to be guarded. Alternatively, the “oxherds and grooms” can refer euphemistically to the exiled lord’s property being guarded by servants. (Yang, 1:469). 444 This is Takezoe’s (7.31) reading, which Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:220) follows. Yang (1:470) believes that the lord put his head on his dead brother’s thigh, a reading Yang offers in Xiang 25.2.

Lord Xi

425

28.6 城濮之戰，晉中軍風于澤，亡大旆之左旃。祁瞞奸命，司馬殺之，以徇于

諸侯，使茅茷代之。師還。壬午，濟河。舟之僑先歸，士會攝右。秋，七 月丙申，振旅，愷以入于晉，獻俘、授馘，飲至、大賞，徵會、討貳。殺舟 之僑以徇于國，民於是大服。 君子謂文公其能刑矣，三罪而民服。《詩》云： 惠此中國， 以綏四方。 不失賞、刑之謂也。 28.7(15) 冬，會于溫，討不服也。 28.8(18) 衛侯與元咺訟，甯武子為輔，鍼莊子為坐，士榮為大士。衛侯不勝。殺

士榮，刖鍼莊子，謂甯俞忠而免之。執衛侯，歸之于京師，寘諸深室。甯 子職納橐饘焉。元咺歸于衛，立公子瑕。

445 There is no bingshen day in the seventh month of this year. 446 See Karlgren, gl. 179. 447 The third “criminal,” besides Qi Man and Zhou zhi Qiao, was Dian Xie, who was punished earlier (Xi 28.3). 448 See Maoshi, “Min lao” 民勞, 17D.632. 449 Takezoe (7.34) suggests that this was to make sure that the Prince of Wei would not be poisoned.

426

Zuo Tradition

In the aftermath of the victory at Chengpu, Lord Wen of Jin not only distributes rewards but metes out punishments as well. Discipline is thus the implied explanation for Jin’s military success. At the battle of Chengpu, the central army of Jin encountered a storm while in the marshes and lost the grand vanguard’s red pennant of the left. Qi Man disobeyed orders, and the supervisor of the military had him put to death and circulated news of this so it could serve as an example to the princes. He appointed Mao Pei to replace him. Then the troops turned toward home. On the renwu day (16), they crossed the Yellow River. Zhou Zhiqiao had gone back to the domain beforehand, and Fan Huia acted provisionally as spearman on the right. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the bingshen day,445 they marshaled the troops into ranks and entered the capital singing songs of victory. They presented the prisoners and handed over the severed ears in the Ancestral Temple.446 They drank to celebrate their arrival, and rewards were distributed on a grand scale. They called a meeting of the princes and chastised the disloyal. They put Zhou Zhiqiao to death and circulated news of this as an example throughout the domain, and the people, as a result, were completely submissive. The noble man said of Lord Wen that he knew well how to punish. Three criminals were punished and the people became submissive.447 As it says in the Odes,

28.6

Show kindness to the central domains, And thereby pacify the four quarters.448

This refers to not neglecting rewards and punishments. In the winter, they met at Wen: this was to chastise those who would not submit.

28.7(15)

The Prince of Wei’s troubles continue (Xi 28.5) as he makes accusations against Yuan Xuan before a Jin tribunal and is then himself arrested by the leaders of Jin. The Prince of Wei and Yuan Xuan brought charges against one another. Ning Wuzi acted as the assistant to the prince, Qian Zhuangzi was the substitute for the prince before the tribunal, and Shi Rong was the representative of the Prince of Wei. The Prince of Wei did not prevail. Shi Rong was put to death, and Qian Zhuangzi’s feet were cut off, but Ning Wuzia was declared loyal and was pardoned. They arrested the Prince of Wei and presented him at the Zhou capital, where they confined him in a dark cell. Ning Wuzib was in charge of supplying him with food and provisions.449 Yuan Xuan went home to Wei, where he established Zishia as ruler.

28.8(18)

Lord Xi

427

28.9(16) 是會也，晉侯召王，以諸侯見，且使王狩。仲尼曰：「以臣召君，不可以

訓。故書曰『天王狩于河陽』，言非其地也，且明德也。」 28.10(17) 壬申，公朝于王所。 28.11(19) 丁丑，諸侯圍許。 28.12(20) 晉侯有疾，曹伯之豎侯獳貨筮史，使曰以曹為解：「齊桓公為會而封異

姓，今君為會而滅同姓。曹叔振鐸，文之昭也，先君唐叔，武之穆也。且 合諸侯而滅兄弟，非禮也；與衛偕命，而不與偕復，非信也；同罪異罰， 非刑也。禮以行義，信以守禮，刑以正邪。舍此三者，君將若之何？」公 說，復曹伯，遂會諸侯于許。

450 This Zuozhuan entry says nothing more than the corresponding Annals entry. Yang (1:473) also notes that in the Annals the lord’s visit comes before the notice of the arrest of the Prince of Wei, whereas it follows that event in Zuozhuan. He believes that the Prince of Wei was first arrested and that the meeting was then completed and the king returned to the capital. However, the author(s) of Zuozhuan may have placed the arrest of the Prince of Wei in Xi 28.8 simply to indicate the eventual outcome of the legal dispute reported there and might not have intended us to conclude that this event preceded in time the unrelated visit of the Lord of Lu to the Zhou court. We should note that in the Combined Concordances to Ch’un-ch’iu, Kung-yang, Ku-liang, and Tso-chuan (1:135), this Zuozhuan entry is attached to 28.9. 451 As in the preceding entry this entry adds nothing but a date to the Annals equivalent. But as Takezoe (7.36) notes, even this is curious because Zuozhuan gives the day but not the month. According to Yang (1:473) this is the tenth month. 452 These are the first two rulers of the domains of Cao and Jin, respectively. According to tradition, the first Cao ruler was the uncle of the first Jin ruler. For the zhao-mu system for registering ancestors in the ancestral temple, which may be implied here, see n. 69 above. 453 Recall that Jin had secretly promised to restore sovereignty to both Cao and Wei (Xi 28.3d).

428

Zuo Tradition

The following passage is an important one. Some scholars argue that the quotation from Confucius is simply “To have the status of a subject and to summon the ruler is not an instructive example.” This could make Confucius the subject of a verb “to write” (shu) and would imply that the writers or editors of Zuozhuan believed that Confucius wrote the Annals: “That is why he wrote, saying . . .” Even if we take the subject of “to write” as an unidentified scribe, Confucius would seem to be directly commenting on the entry, possibly as an editor. This passage also seems to criticize Lord Wen for summoning the ruler while praising the Annals for concealing this unpleasant fact. Such an act of concealment would focus attention on the assistance Lord Wen provides for the Zhou king, which is a “shining example of virtue.” At this meeting at Wen, the Prince of Jin summoned the king and presented the princes to him. Moreover, he had the king undertake the winter hunt. Confuciusc said, “To have the status of a subject and to summon the ruler is not an instructive example. That is why it is written ‘The Heaven-appointed king went on the winter hunt at Heyang’: it is saying that this is not the proper place, and it is also to make a shining example of virtue.”

28.9(16)

On the renshen day (7), our lord visited court at the place of the king.450

28.10(17)

On the dingchou day (12), the princes laid siege to Xǔ.

28.11(19)

451

The Prince of Jin’s harsh treatment of the domain of Cao brings on illness, at least according to a suborned diviner. But once again the Prince of Jin shows his ability to heed good advice, even though in this case it comes from a corrupt official. The Prince of Jin fell ill. Hou Nou, a young servant of the Liege of Cao, plied the milfoil diviner with goods and had him say that Cao was the explanation for the Prince of Jin’s illness: “When Lord Huan of Qi called a meeting of the princes, he granted domains to those of a different clan name. Now when you, my lord, called a meeting, you destroyed a domain whose rulers have the same clan name as your own. Zhenduo, a royal younger brother and founder of Cao, was a son of King Wen, and your former ruler Tang Shu was a son of King Wu.452 Moreover, you assembled the princes and extinguished a fraternal domain; this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Cao shared the same orders as Wei,453 but Cao did not share in the same fate of being restored; this runs contrary to the principles of good faith. The same crime had different penalties; this runs contrary to proper punishments. With ritual propriety we carry out duty, with good faith we preserve ritual propriety, and with proper punishment we correct depravity. Having let these three things go, what will you, my lord, do?” The Prince of Jin was pleased. He restored the Liege of Cao to power and then met with the princes at Xǔ.

28.12(20)

Lord Xi

429

28.13 晉侯作三行以禦狄。荀林父將中行，屠擊將右行，先蔑將左行。

春秋 29.1(1) 二十有九年，春，介葛盧來。 29.2 公至自圍許。 29.3(2) 夏，六月，會王人、晉人、宋人、齊人、陳人、蔡人、秦人，盟于翟泉。 29.4(3) 秋，大雨雹。 29.5(4) 冬，介葛盧來。

左傳 29.1(1) 二十九年，春，介葛盧來朝，舍于昌衍之上。公在會，饋之芻、米，禮也。 29.2(3) 夏，公會王子虎、晉狐偃、宋公孫固、齊國歸父、陳轅濤塗、秦小子憖，

盟于翟泉，尋踐土之盟，且謀伐鄭也。卿不書，罪之也。在禮，卿不會公 侯，會伯子男可也。 29.3(4) 秋，大雨雹，為災也。 29.4(5) 冬，介葛盧來，以未見公故，復來朝。禮之，加燕好。介葛盧聞牛鳴，曰：

「是生三犧，皆用之矣。其音云。」問之而信。

454 Jie is a non-Sinitic domain of disputed location. Yang (1:475) believes it was south of the domain of Lu and north of present-day Xiao County 蕭縣, Anhui. 455 Diquan 翟泉 was located within the boundaries of present-day Luoyang 洛陽 and was thus a part of the region of the Zhou capital. 456 Changyan 昌衍 Mountain is known today as Changping 昌平 Mountain and is located about fifty kilometers southeast of Qufu 曲阜, Shandong.

430

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin raised three military columns in order to engage the Di in battle. Xun Linfu commanded the central column, Tu Ji commanded the right column, and Xian Mie commanded the left column.

28.13

LORD XI 29 (631 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, Gelu of Jie came.454

29.1(1)

Our lord arrived from laying siege to Xǔ.

29.2

In summer, in the sixth month, we met with a leader from the royal court, a Jin leader, a Song leader, a Qi leader, a Chen leader, a Cai leader, and a Qin leader and swore a covenant at Diquan.455

29.3(2)

In autumn, there was a great hailstorm.

29.4(3)

In winter, Gelu of Jie came.

29.5(4)

ZUO

In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, Gelu of Jie came to visit our court. He lodged on the slopes of Changyan Mountain.456 Our lord was at a meeting of the princes but sent hay and milled grain to him. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

29.1(1)

In summer, our lord met with Wangzi Hu, Hu Yan of Jin, Gongsun Gu of Song, Guo Guifu of Qi, Yuan Taotu of Chen, and Yin, the young son of the Qin ruler, and swore a covenant at Diquan. They renewed the Covenant of Jiantu and in addition planned an attack on Zheng. That the names of the ministers are not recorded is to blame them. According to ritual propriety, ministers do not meet with dukes and princes, but to meet with lieges, masters, and heads is permissible.

29.2(3)

In autumn, there was a great hailstorm: it was a disaster.

29.3(4)

Gelu makes his second visit to Lu within the same year (Xi 29.1) and displays his perspicacity in a most peculiar fashion. In winter, Gelu of Jie came: because he had not yet met with our lord, he came to visit our court again. We treated him with ritual propriety and lavished additional banquets and presents on him. Gelu of Jie heard a cow bellow and said, “This cow has borne three calves and all have been sacrificed. That is how it sounds.” They inquired about this, and it was true.457

29.4(5)

457 For other examples of the “barbarian’s” mastery of ritual and esoteric knowledge, see Xiang 14.1b and Zhao 17.3.

Lord Xi

431

春秋 30.1 三十年，春，王正月。 30.2(1) 夏，狄侵齊。 30.3(2) 秋，衛殺其大夫元咺及公子瑕。衛侯鄭歸于衛。 30.4(3) 晉人、秦人圍鄭。 30.5 介人侵蕭。 30.6(4) 冬，天王使宰周公來聘。 30.7(5) 公子遂如京師，遂如晉。

左傳 30.1(2) 三十年，春，晉人侵鄭，以觀其可攻與否。狄間晉之有鄭虞也。夏，狄

侵齊。 30.2(3) 晉侯使醫衍酖衛侯。甯俞貨醫，使薄其酖，不死。公為之請，納玉於王

與晉侯，皆十，王許之。秋，乃釋衛侯。 衛侯使賂周歂、冶廑曰：「苟能納我，吾使爾為卿。」周、冶殺元咺 及子適、子儀。公入，祀先君，周、冶既服，將命，周歂先入，及門，遇疾 而死。冶廑辭卿。

458 Xiao is a small domain of the same clan name as Song (see Zhuang 12.1). 459 Shiji 37.1595 has a different version: “Thereafter, Zhou made requests to Lord Wen of Jin, and finally he was installed in Wei. He put Yuan Xuan to death, and Xia (Zishi), the ruler of Wei, left the domain and fled.”

432

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 30 (630 BCE) ANNALS

The thirtieth year, spring, the royal first month.

30.1

In summer, the Di invaded Qi.

30.2(1)

In autumn, Wei put to death its high officers Yuan Xuan and Gongzi Xia (Zishi). Zheng, the Prince of Wei, went home to Wei.

30.3(2)

A Jin leader and a Qin leader laid siege to Zheng.

30.4(3)

A Jie leader invaded Xiao.

30.5

In winter, the Heaven-appointed king sent his steward, the Zhou Duke, to us on an official visit.

30.6(4)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to the capital. He then went to Jin.

30.7(5)

458

ZUO

In the thirtieth year, in spring, the men of Jin invaded Zheng in order to see whether a full-scale attack was feasible. The Di took advantage of Jin’s preoccupation with Zheng. In summer, the Di invaded Qi.

30.1(2)

The Prince of Jin continues to express hostility toward the Prince of Wei, but the latter successfully returns to his domain and settles an old score with Yuan Xuan (Xi 28.5, 28.8). The Prince of Jin dispatched the physician Yan to poison the Prince of Wei. Ning Wuzia plied the physician with goods and had him dilute the poison, so the Prince of Wei did not die. Our lord interceded on his behalf, presenting jade ornaments to the king and to the Prince of Jin, ten pairs in each case. The king granted our lord’s requests. In fall, they released the Prince of Wei. The Prince of Wei sent someone to present gifts to Zhou Chuan and Ye Jin, saying, “If only you can estabish me in power in my domain, I will make you my ministers.” Zhou and Ye put to death Yuan Xuan and Zishi and Ziyi, Zishi’s younger brother.459 The Lord of Wei then entered the domain and offered sacrifices to the former rulers of Wei. Zhou and Ye were already in official robes and were going to receive their charge. Zhou Chuan was first to enter the temple, but when he reached the gate, he became ill and died. Ye Jin declined the position of minister.460

30.2(3)

460 Du Yu (ZZ 17.284) explains that Ye Jin was frightened by what had happened to Zhou Chuan and thereby declined office. The implication is that the Wei ruler executed his accomplice Zhou Chuan.

Lord Xi

433

30.3(4) 九月甲午，晉侯、秦伯圍鄭，以其無禮於晉，且貳於楚也。晉軍函陵，秦

軍氾南。佚之狐言於鄭伯曰：「國危矣，若使燭之武見秦君，師必退。」 公從之。辭曰：「臣之壯也，猶不如人；今老矣，無能為也已。」公曰：「吾 不能早用子，今急而求子，是寡人之過也。然鄭亡，子亦有不利焉。」 許之。 夜，縋而出。見秦伯曰：「秦、晉圍鄭，鄭既知亡矣。若亡鄭而有益 於君，敢以煩執事。越國以鄙遠，君知其難也，焉用亡鄭以陪鄰？鄰之 厚，君之薄也。若舍鄭以為東道主，行李之往來，共其乏困，君亦無所 害，且君嘗為晉君賜矣，許君焦、瑕，朝濟而夕設版焉，君之所知也。夫 晉，何厭之有？既東封鄭，又欲肆其西封。不闕秦，焉取之？闕秦以利 晉，唯君圖之。」 秦伯說，與鄭人盟，使杞子、逢孫、揚孫戍之，乃還。

461 Hanling 函陵 was located in the domain of Zheng north of present-day Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan, and the Fan 氾 River was nearby. 462 See Karlgren, gl. 181. 463 The domain of Jin was located between Qin and Zheng.

434

Zuo Tradition

The domain of Zheng’s bad treatment of Chong’er during his travels (Xi 23.6d) and its flirtation with Chu (Xi 28.3h), Jin’s enemy, brings trouble. Qin, however, intercedes on Zheng’s behalf, and the Prince of Jin withdraws from Zheng as a way of repaying the Liege of Qin’s earlier hospitality (Xi 23.6f). Zhu Zhiwu’s speech, one of the most celebrated in Zuozhuan, portrays Jin in much less flattering terms than do the rather pro-Jin accounts of most of the passages in this section. In the ninth month, on the jiawu day (10), the Prince of Jin and the Liege of Qin laid siege to Zheng: this was because Zheng had acted without appropriate ritual in regard to Jin and had additionally switched allegiance to Chu. Jin was encamped at Hanling, and Qin stationed its army south of the Fan River.461 Yi Zhihu, a Zheng minister, said to the Liege of Zheng, “The domain is in peril! If you send Zhu Zhiwu to have an audience with the ruler of Qin, their troops will surely withdraw.” The Liege of Zheng followed this advice, but Zhu Zhiwu declined the mission, saying, “Even when I was in the prime of life, I was not as good as others. Now I am old, there is simply nothing I am able to do!” The Liege of Zheng said, “That I was not able to employ you, sir, early on, and only now seek you out because of an emergency is indeed my error. Still, if Zheng perishes, you too will suffer from it.” So he agreed. During the night, Zhu Zhiwu left the city by letting himself over the wall by rope. He had an audience with the Liege of Qin and said, “Qin and Jin are laying siege to Zheng, and Zheng already knows it will perish. If there were some advantage for you to gain, my lord, by destroying Zheng, would I dare to trouble your functionaries?462 You know how difficult it is to cross over a domain and join distant lands to one’s frontiers.463 What is the use of destroying Zheng to enhance a neighbor? A neighbor’s strength is your weakness, my lord. But if you release Zheng and make them the hosts of your road to the east, then as your envoys come and go, Zheng would supply what they lacked, and you, my lord, would in no way suffer harm. Moreover, you once did a favor for the ruler of Jin, and he promised you Jiao and Xia. In the morning he crossed the Yellow River to return home and by evening he had begun laying down frames to build walls in those places. This is something you know. How will Jin ever be satisfied? After it has extended its boundaries to the east and annexed Zheng, it will want to give free rein to expansions of its western boundary. If it does not carve away Qin, where will it get land? Carving away at Qin to benefit Jin: this is something you should consider carefully.” The Liege of Qin was pleased. He swore a covenant with Zheng, dispatching Qizi, Fengsun, and Yangsun to garrison Zheng, and he then turned toward home.

Lord Xi

30.3(4)

435

子犯請擊之。公曰：「不可。微夫人之力不及此。因人之力而敝 之，不仁；失其所與，不知；以亂易整，不武。吾其還也。」亦去之。 初，鄭公子蘭出奔晉，從於晉侯伐鄭，請無與圍鄭。許之，使待命 于東。鄭石甲父、侯宣多逆以為大子，以求成于晉，晉人許之。 30.4(6) 冬，王使周公閱來聘，饗有昌歜、白黑、形鹽。辭曰：「國君，文足昭也，

武可畏也，則有備物之饗，以象其德；薦五味，羞嘉穀，鹽虎形，以獻其 功。吾何以堪之？」 30.5(7) 東門襄仲將聘于周，遂初聘于晉。

春秋 31.1(1) 三十有一年，春，取濟西田。 31.2(2) 公子遂如晉。 31.3(3) 夏，四月，四卜郊，不從，乃免牲。猶三望。 31.4 秋，七月。 31.5 冬，杞伯姬來求婦。 31.6(5) 狄圍衛。十有二月，衛遷于帝丘。

464 That is, he remained within Jin near the border with Zheng but did not enter his own domain in this military action. 465 Shiji 42.1766 claims that Lord Wen, the ruler of Zheng, had driven his sons from the domain, and Lan had settled in Jin, where he quickly gained favor with the Prince of Jin. The latter wanted to establish Lan as heir apparent and made plans with the Zheng high officer Shi Jiafu to accomplish this goal. On how Gongzi Lan, later Lord Mu of Zheng, comes to have the name Lan (meaning “orchid”), see Xuan 3.6. 466 There is some question about the nature of these dishes. Changchu 昌歜 is apparently also known as changben 昌本 and is made by pickling the roots of changpu

436

Zuo Tradition

Hu Yana requested permission to strike at the Qin forces, but the Prince of Jin said, “This cannot be done. Were it not for that man’s effort, I would not have reached this position. To rely upon another’s strength and then to injure him is not noble. To lose one with whom you have been allied is not wise. To replace good order with disorder is not martial. We should just return home.” He also left Zheng. Earlier, Gongzi Lan of Zheng had left his domain and fled to Jin. He had accompanied the Prince of Jin in attacking Zheng, but he requested not to join in the siege of Zheng. This was permitted, and he was dispatched to await orders in the east of Jin.464 Shi Jiafu and Hou Xuanduo of Zheng met and escorted him back as heir apparent. They thereupon sought a peace accord with Jin, and the Jin leaders agreed to this.465 In winter, the king sent Yue, the Zhou Duke, to us on an official visit. At the feast in his honor there was pickled sweet flag, “white-black,” and tiger-shaped salt.466 Yue declined this, saying, “As for the ruler of a domain, if cultivated enough to shine and if martial enough to inspire awe, then there will be a feast where all things are prepared in order to symbolize his virtue. One offers the five flavors, presents the best grains, and the salt is tiger shaped in order to display his achievements. How could I be worthy of this?”

30.4(6)

Xiangzhongb was going on an official visit to Zhou, but he then first made an official visit to Jin.

30.5(7)

LORD XI 31 (629 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-first year, in spring, we took lands west of the Ji River.467

31.1(1)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Jin.

31.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, we divined four times about the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we spared the sacrificial animals. Still we performed the sacrifices to the Three Prospects.

31.3(3)

Autumn, the seventh month.

31.4

In winter, Bo Ji of Qǐ came to seek a wife for her son.

31.5

The Di laid siege to Wei. In the twelfth month, Wei relocated to Diqiu.468

31.6(5)



菖蒲, or sweet flag. “White-black” was presumably glutinous cakes made of white rice and dark millet. Yue refers to these as “the five flavors” and “the best grains,” respectively. 467 This region was mentioned earlier in Annals, Zhuang 18.2, and belonged at this time to the domain of Cao. 468 Diqiu 帝丘, the new capital of the domain of Wei, was southwest of present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan, not far from the previous capital of Chuqiu 楚丘.

Lord Xi

437

左傳 31.1(1) 三十一年，春，取濟西田，分曹地也。使臧文仲往，宿於重館。重館人告

曰：「晉新得諸侯，必親其共。不速行，將無及也。」從之。分曹地，自洮 以南，東傅于濟，盡曹地也。 31.2(2) 襄仲如晉，拜曹田也。 31.3(3) 夏，四月，四卜郊，不從，乃免牲，非禮也。猶三望，亦非禮也。禮不卜常

祀，而卜其牲、日。牛卜日曰牲。牲成而卜郊，上怠慢也。望，郊之細也，不 郊，亦無望可也。 31.4 秋，晉蒐于清原，作五軍以禦狄。趙衰為卿。

469 The region gained by Lu at this time was in the area of Dongping 東平 and Juye 巨野, Shandong. Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.164, is a longer version of this episode and gives greater attention to the manager of the hostel, who receives a rank as a result of his good advice, enabling the domain of Lu to profit from Jin’s distribution of Cao’s land. 470 The prospect (wang 望) sacrifice is offered to the rivers and mountains of one’s domain. As Ai 6.4 says, one is forbidden “to perform sacrifice beyond one’s purview.” According to Gongyang, Xi 31 (12.157), the Three Prospects for the domain of Lu are “Mount Tai, the Yellow River (He 河), and the sea.” The Three Prospects (Sanwang 三望) are also mentioned in Xuan 3.1 and Cheng 7.4. 471 Qingyuan 清原 was located in the domain of Jin southeast of Jishan County 稷山 縣, Shanxi.

438

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Prince of Jin continues to strip land from Cao (Xi 28.3b) and present it to other domains, in this case Lu. The Lu minister Zang Wenzhong follows the advice of the manager of the hostel in Chong, one of the “wise commoners” in Zuozhuan. (see also Cheng 5.4, Xiang 4.4, 15.4, 30.3a) In the thirty-first year, in spring, we took lands west of the Ji River: this was land divided off from Cao. We dispatched Zang Wenzhong to go there, and he stayed the night at a hostel in Chong. The manager of the hostel in Chong reported, “Jin has newly acquired the support of the princes and surely will draw near to those who grant them respect. If you do not act quickly, you will miss the opportunity.” He followed this advice. When Cao was divided, he received as a portion land from the Tao River southward, extending as far east as the Ji River. All of this had been Cao land.469

31.1(1)

Xiangzhong went to Jin: this was to bow in thanks for the Cao lands.

31.2(2)

The following passage concerns ritual impropriety in carrying out sacrifices. For further concerns about this particular sacrifice, see Xuan 3.2 and Ding 15.2. In summer, in the fourth month, we divined four times about the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we spared the sacrificial animals: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Still we performed sacrifices to the Three Prospects:470 this too was not in accordance with ritual propriety. According to ritual, one does not divine about regular sacrifices but divines about the proper sacrificial animal and the date. Only after one has divined the day is a bull called “a sacrificial animal.” For the sacrifical animal to have been settled upon and only then to divine about the sacrifice in the outskirts shows laziness and disrespect on the part of those in authority. The prospect sacrifice is but a component of the sacrifice in the outskirts. If one does not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts, it is acceptable not to have a prospect sacrifice.

31.3(3)

The Jin military is here expanded to five armies. This must have put considerable economic pressure on Jin, which may explain why Jin later reduced the military back to three armies (Wen 6.1). In autumn, Jin mustered troops at Qingyuan.471 They raised five armies to defend against the Di. Zhao Cui became minister.

31.4

Lord Xi

439

31.5(6) 冬，狄圍衛，衛遷于帝丘，卜曰三百年。衛成公夢康叔曰：「相奪予享。」

公命祀相。甯武子不可，曰：「鬼神非其族類，不歆其祀。杞、鄫何事？ 相之不享於此久矣，非衛之罪也，不可以間成王、周公之命祀，請改 祀命。」 31.6 鄭洩駕惡公子瑕，鄭伯亦惡之，故公子瑕出奔楚。

春秋 32.1 三十有二年，春，王正月。 32.2 夏，四月己丑，鄭伯捷卒。 32.3(2) 衛人侵狄。秋，衛人及狄盟。 32.4(3) 冬，十有二月己卯，晉侯重耳卒。

左傳 32.1 三十二年，春，楚鬬章請平于晉，晉陽處父報之，晉、楚始通。 32.2(3) 夏，狄有亂，衛人侵狄，狄請平焉。秋，衛人及狄盟。

472 This is an interesting entry, since Wei lasted for more than four hundred years, at least if we accept the account in Shiji 37.1605. Three hundred years from the date of this entry would be 329 Bce. Some conclude, therefore, that Wei had been in existence for around three hundred years at the time this particular passage was written. There are other possible explanations. Tong Shuye (Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 261–63), for example, believes that this refers to the series of events that led Wei to become a subordinate of Qin by the time Prince Ping of Wei was established in 332 Bce (see Shiji 37.1603–4). If one accepts this theory, it would mean that at least this portion of Zuozhuan was added after the 329 Bce of the “three hundred years.” 473 Kang Shu is the original ancestor of the Wei ruler’s lineage.

440

Zuo Tradition

The Di force Wei to relocate and a problem arises concerning the disposition of sacrifices offered in their new capital. The critical question is whether sacrifices should be determined by locality or ancestry. In winter, the Di laid siege to Wei, and Wei relocated to Diqiu. The turtle-shell divination said, “Wei will last three hundred years.” 472 Lord Cheng of Wei dreamed that his ancestor Kang Shu473 said, “Xiang has taken away my offerings.”474 The lord commanded that they sacrifice to Xiang. Ning Wuzi would not allow this and said, “If ghosts and spirits are not of one’s kith and kin, they will not relish the fragrance of one’s sacrifices. What sacrifices have Qǐ and Zeng offered?475 If Xiang has not received sacrifices in this place for a long time, it is not Wei’s fault, and he cannot interfere in the sacrifices appointed by King Cheng and the Zhou Duke. I beg you to change the command to sacrifice to Xiang.”

31.5(6)

Xie Jia of Zheng hated Gongzi Xia. The Liege of Zheng also hated him, and that is why Gongzi Xia left the domain and fled to Chu.

31.6

LORD XI 32 (628 BCE) ANNALS

The thirty-second year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jichou day (15), Jie, the Liege of Zheng, died. A Wei leader invaded the Di. In autumn, the Wei leader swore a covenant with the Di. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the jimao day (9), Chong’er, the Prince of Jin, died.

32.1 32.2

32.3(2)

32.4(3)

ZUO

Jin and Chu reach an agreement in the aftermath of Chu’s defeat in the battle of Chengpu (Xi 28.3). In the thirty-second year, in spring, Dou Zhang of Chu sued for peace with Jin. Yang Chufu of Jin reciprocated, and this was the beginning of relations between Jin and Chu.

32.1

In summer, there was disorder among the Di. A Wei leader invaded the Di. The Di sued for peace with them. In autumn, the Wei leader and the Di swore a covenant.

32.2(3)

474 Xiang was the fifth ruler of the Xia dynasty and supposedly had lived in the region of Diqiu. Therefore, he is stealing the offerings made by Wei to Kang Shu in their new capital of Diqiu. 475 These are domains that were supposed to perform sacrifices to the Xia ancestors.

Lord Xi

441

32.3(4) 冬，晉文公卒。庚辰，將殯于曲沃。出絳，柩有聲如牛。卜偃使大夫拜，

曰：「君命大事：將有西師過軼我，擊之，必大捷焉。」 杞子自鄭使告于秦曰：「鄭人使我掌其北門之管，若潛師以來，國 可得也。」穆公訪諸蹇叔。蹇叔曰：「勞師以襲遠，非所聞也。師勞力 竭，遠主備之，無乃不可乎？師之所為，鄭必知之，勤而無所，必有悖 心。且行千里，其誰不知？」公辭焉。召孟明、西乞、白乙，使出師於東 門之外。蹇叔哭之曰：「孟子！吾見師之出而不見其入也！」公使謂之曰： 「爾何知！中壽，爾墓之木拱矣。」 蹇叔之子與師，哭而送之曰：「晉人禦師必於殽，殽有二陵焉。其 南陵，夏后臯之墓也；其北陵，文王之所辟風雨也。必死是間，余收爾 骨焉！」秦師遂東。

476 In Cheng 13.2 we read: “The great affairs (da shi 大事) of the domain lie with sacrifice and warfare.” The great affair commanded here is, of course, a military affair. 477 Qizi was a Qin military leader dispatched earlier to Zheng to establish a Qin garrison (see Xi 30.3).

442

Zuo Tradition

The nine-year rule and brief overlordship of Lord Wen of Jin, the onetime exile Chong’er, come to an end, but he continues to give military advice even from his coffin. Contrary to much earlier advice (Xi 30.3), and now also against the advice of Jian Shu, Qin decides to cross Jin and attack Zheng. In winter, Lord Wen of Jin died. On the gengchen day (10), they were about to convey his coffin to Quwo to await burial. As they were leaving Jiang, they heard a sound like that of an ox coming from within the coffin. Diviner Yan had the high officers bow down before the coffin, and he said, “Our lord commands a great affair:476 there will be troops from the west that will cross our domain, and if we strike at them, we are certain to gain a great victory over them!” From Zheng, Qizi sent someone to report to Qin as follows:477 “The Zheng leaders have appointed me to control the key of the northern gate. If you come with concealed troops, the domain can be won!” Lord Mu inquired about this of Jian Shu. Jian Shu said, “I have not heard of wearing out troops in order to make a surprise attack on a distant place. The troops will be worn out and their strength spent; besides, the ruler of the distant place would be prepared for them. Is this not the wrong thing to do? Whatever the troops do, Zheng will surely know about it. Having toiled without finding their proper place, the troops surely will have rebellious thoughts. Moreover, if you march one thousand li, who would fail to know?” But the lord spurned this advice. He summoned Mengming, Xiqi Shua, and Bai Yi and had them send out troops from the eastern gate. Jian Shu wailed and said, “Master Meng! I will see the troops depart, but I will not see them return.” The lord sent someone to tell him, “What do you know? If you had enjoyed an average lifespan, the trees on your tomb would be so big around that they would fill one’s embrace!”478 Jian Shu’s son was with the troops. Jian Shu wailed as he sent him off and said, “If the men of Jin engage our troops, it will certainly be in the Yao Hills.479 The Yao Hills have two ridges. On its southern ridge is the tomb of Lord Gao of the Xia dynasty. Its northern ridge is a place where King Wen sheltered himself from wind and rain. You will certainly die between these ridges, and I will gather up your bones there.” The Qin troops then headed east.

32.3(4)

478 There are several interpretations of the term zhongshou 中壽, “mid-range old age.” Yang (1:491) believes that it refers to a span of life between sixty and seventy (see also Karlgren, gl. 186). The implication is that he is very old and very muddled. It is tempting to translate “What do you know, you old bastard!” 479 The Yao 殽 Hills were located in the domain of Jin northwest of present-day Luoning County 洛寧縣, Henan.

Lord Xi

443

春秋 33.1(1) 三十有三年，春，王二月，秦人入滑。 33.2(2) 齊侯使國歸父來聘。 33.3(3) 夏，四月辛巳，晉人及姜戎敗秦師于殽。 33.4(3) 癸巳，葬晉文公。 33.5(4) 狄侵齊。 33.6(5) 公伐邾，取訾婁。 33.7(5) 秋，公子遂帥師伐邾。 33.8(6) 晉人敗狄于箕。 33.9(7) 冬，十月，公如齊。 33.10 十有二月，公至自齊。 33.11(7) 乙巳，公薨于小寢。 33.12 隕霜不殺草。李、梅實。 33.13(8) 晉人、陳人、鄭人伐許。

左傳 33.1(1) 三十三年，春，秦師過周北門，左右免冑而下，超乘者三百乘。王孫滿尚

幼，觀之，言於王曰：「秦師輕而無禮，必敗。輕則寡謀，無禮則脫。入險 而脫，又不能謀，能無敗乎？」

480 The Jiang Rong were a people of the clan name Jiang 姜 who lived on the southern border of Jin near the area of the Yao Hills. See Xiang 14.1. 481 Zilou 訾婁 was located in the domain of Zhu but the precise location has not been identified. 482 There are different opinions about the location of Ji 箕. Yang (1:493) believes that it was located near present-day Bo County 薄縣, Shanxi.

444

Zuo Tradition

LORD XI 33 (627 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-third year, in spring, in the royal second month, a Qin leader entered Hua.

33.1(1)

The Prince of Qi sent Guo Guifu to us on an official visit.

33.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinsi day (13), a Jin leader and the Jiang Rong defeated Qin troops at Yao.480

33.3(3)

On the guisi day (25), Lord Wen of Jin was buried.

33.4(3)

The Di invaded Qi.

33.5(4)

Our lord attacked Zhu and took Zilou.481

33.6(5)

In autumn, Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) led out troops and attacked Zhu.

33.7(5)

A Jin leader defeated the Di at Ji.482

33.8(6)

In winter, in the tenth month, our lord went to Qi.

33.9(7)

In the twelfth month, our lord arrived from Qi.

33.10

On the yisi day (11), our lord expired in the small chamber.

33.11(7)

A frost fell but did not kill the grass. The plum trees bore fruit.

33.12

A Jin leader, a Chen leader, and a Zheng leader attacked Xǔ.

33.13(8)

ZUO

Just as Jian Shu had warned (Xi 32.3), Qin’s military excursion toward Zheng is discovered. A Zheng merchant intervenes and apprises Zheng leaders of the impending incursion. The Qin military leaders, realizing the difficulty of their situation, lose heart, and the army returns home. In the thirty-third year, in spring, the Qin troops passed by the northern gate of Zhou. The chariot archer of the left and the spearman of the right removed their helmets and descended from their chariots. But those who then leapt back on their chariots amounted to three hundred chariot teams. Wangsun Man was still young, but as he watched this, he said to the king, “The Qin troops are frivolous and without ritual propriety. They will certainly be defeated. Being frivolous, they have made few plans. Lacking all sense of ritual propriety, they will be careless. Can they avoid defeat if they are careless as they enter a dangerous region and, in addition, are unable to make plans?”

33.1(1)

Lord Xi

445

及滑，鄭商人弦高將市於周，遇之，以乘韋先，牛十二犒師，曰： 「寡君聞吾子將步師出於敝邑，敢犒從者。不腆敝邑，為從者之淹，居 則具一日之積，行則備一夕之衛。」且使遽告于鄭。 鄭穆公使視客館，則束載、厲兵、秣馬矣。使皇武子辭焉，曰：「吾 子淹久於敝邑，唯是脯資、餼牽竭矣，為吾子之將行也，鄭之有原圃， 猶秦之有具囿也，吾子取其麋鹿，以閒敝邑，若何？」杞子奔齊，逢孫、 揚孫奔宋。 孟明曰：「鄭有備矣，不可冀也。攻之不克，圍之不繼，吾其還 也。」滅滑而還。 33.2(2) 齊國莊子來聘，自郊勞至于贈賄，禮成而加之以敏。臧文仲言於公

曰：「國子為政，齊猶有禮，君其朝焉！臣聞之：服於有禮，社稷之衛 也。」

446

Zuo Tradition

When the Qin troops reached Hua, the Zheng merchant Xian Gao, who was going to Zhou to sell goods, came upon them.483 He gave them four tanned oxhides as a preliminary gift and then twelve oxen to honor the troops’ exertions. He said, “My unworthy ruler has heard that you, sir, were going to march troops out to our humble settlement and ventures to honor the exertions of your retinue. Impoverished as our humble settlement is, we will, if you stay, provide one day’s supplies, and if you travel on, provide one night’s protection.” In addition, he sent someone to hurry and warn Zheng. Lord Mu of Zheng sent someone to spy on the lodge where the Qin leaders were staying. And indeed they had loaded up, had sharpened their weapons, and had fed their horses. So he dispatched Huang Wuzi to explain to them, “You, good sirs, have tarried for a long time in our humble settlement. I suppose your food supplies and livestock are exhausted! Since you are about to journey on, and since Zheng has the Yuan Garden just as Qin has the Ju Park, how would it be if you were to take its deer to give our humble settlement some respite?” Qizi fled to Qi, and Fengsun and Yangsun fled to Song.484 Mengming said, “Zheng has made preparations. We cannot hold out hope. If we attack them, we will not overcome them, and if we lay siege to them, we will not be able to persist. We ought to turn back.” So they extinguished Hua and turned back. Guo Guifua of Qi came to us on an official visit. From the reception in the outskirts, honoring his exertions, up to the presentation of gifts,485 the ritual was complete and was, in addition to this, carried out with great care. Zang Wenzhong said to our lord, “With Guo Guifub in charge of government, Qi has continued to have ritual propriety. You, my lord, should visit their court. I have heard that to submit to those who have ritual propriety is protection for the altars of the domain.”

33.2(2)

483 Zheng is the only domain whose merchants play a significant role in Zuozhuan stories (see Cheng 3.10 and Zhao 16.3). 484 The military leaders of the Qin army apparently are afraid that Jin and Zheng will be able to push back Qin’s military incursion, and consequently, these leaders flee to neutral states (Yang, 1:496). 485 Cf. Zhao 5.3.

Lord Xi

447



33.3a(3, 4)

晉原軫曰：「秦違蹇叔，而以貪勤民，天奉我也。奉不可失，敵不可縱。 縱敵，患生；違天，不祥。必伐秦師！」欒枝曰：「未報秦施，而伐其師， 其為死君乎？」先軫曰：「秦不哀吾喪，而伐吾同姓，秦則無禮，何施之 為？吾聞之：『一日縱敵，數世之患也。』謀及子孫，可謂死君乎？」遂發 命，遽興姜戎。子墨衰絰，梁弘御戎，萊駒為右。

33.3b 夏，四月辛巳，敗秦師于殽，獲百里孟明視、西乙術、白乙丙以歸。遂墨

以葬文公，晉於是始墨。 文嬴請三帥，曰：「彼實構吾二君，寡君若得而食之，不厭，君何辱 討焉？使歸就戮于秦，以逞寡君之志，若何？」公許之。

486 See Karlgren, gl. 189; and Yang, 1:497. The latter argues that wei 為 here is used in the sense of you 有: “How would that be to have our dead lord [in our hearts]?” The idea is that Lord Wen was the recipient of Qin’s support and that now Jin should treat Qin generously. 487 The domain of Hua, just destroyed by Qin, is of the same clan name as Jin. 488 This is referring to Lord Xiang, the new ruler of Jin. Since his father, Lord Wen, is not yet buried, he is referred to as “the son.” Mourning dress is white in color and military dress is black, so he is expressing his resolve to fight.

448

Zuo Tradition

Qin and Jin were allies in the battle of Chengpu. Their alliance was based in part on the good treatment that Chong’er, the future Lord Wen, had received in Qin, treatment that had included marriage to the daughter of Lord Mu of Qin. Yet Jin now sees an opportunity to strike at Qin by attacking the Qin army that was withdrawing from the abortive assault on Zheng (Xi 33.1). Xian Zhena of Jin said, “Qin has gone contrary to Jian Shu’s advice, and out of greed has made its people toil. Heaven is giving us its support. Such support cannot be neglected, and enemies cannot be let go. To let enemies go is to breed troubles, and to go against Heaven is inauspicious. We must attack the Qin troops!” Luan Zhi said, “If we have not yet repaid Qin’s generosity but attack their troops, what would that mean for our deceased ruler?”486 Xian Zhen said, “Qin does not show pity in our time of mourning and attacks a domain that shares our ruler’s clan name.487 Indeed, it is Qin that is without ritul propriety, so what act of generosity need we consider? I have heard, ‘To indulge an enemy for a day means troubles for several generations.’ With plans reaching to our descendants, we can make our case to the deceased ruler!” Consequently, he issued an order quickly to muster the Jiang Rong. The lord’s heir dyed his hempen mourning garments black.488 Liang Hong drove his war chariot, and Lai Ju was the spearman on the right.

33.3a(3, 4)

The Qin army is defeated precisely where Jian Shu had foretold it would be defeated (Xi 32.3). Wen Ying, a Qin wife of the now deceased Lord Wen, wins the release of the three captured Qin commanders. They are then forgiven by the Liege of Qin, who assumes complete responsibility for the defeat. Her intercession is reminiscent of Mu Ji’s rescue of her brother after the defeat of Jin at Han (Xi 15.4). In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinsi day (13), they defeated the Qin troops at Yao. They captured Mengmingc, Xiqi Shua and Bai Yia and took them back to Jin. Then in black garments they buried Lord Wen. Jin from this time on used black as the color of mourning garments.489 Wen Ying requested that the three commanders be repatriated: “Those very men slanderously provoked the rulers of our two domains. If my unworthy ruler were to get them and eat them alive, he would still not be satisfied.490 Why should you, my lord, condescend to chastise them? How would it be if you send them back to be executed in Qin in order to satisfy my unworthy ruler’s desires?” The lord agreed to this.

33.3b

489 This is one of a number of Zuozhuan entries that explain the beginning of a custom (see, for another example, Xuan 8.5). 490 She is referring to her father, the ruler of Qin. Shiji 5.192 is more explicit: “Lord Mu’s resentment for these three men has entered into the marrow of his bones.”

Lord Xi

449

先軫朝，問秦囚。公曰：「夫人請之，吾舍之矣。」先軫怒曰：「武 夫力而拘諸原，婦人暫而免諸國，墮軍實而長寇讎，亡無日矣！」不顧 而唾。 公使陽處父追之，及諸河，則在舟中矣。釋左驂，以公命贈孟明。 孟明稽首曰：「君之惠，不以纍臣釁鼓，使歸就戮于秦，寡君之以為戮， 死且不朽。若從君惠而免之，三年將拜君賜。」 秦伯素服郊次，鄉師而哭曰：「孤違蹇叔，以辱二三子，孤之罪 也。」不替孟明，曰：「孤之過也，大夫何罪？且吾不以一眚掩大德。」 33.4(5) 狄侵齊，因晉喪也。

33.5(6, 7)

公伐邾，取眥婁，以報升陘之役。邾人不設備。秋，襄仲復伐邾。

33.6a(8) 狄伐晉，及箕。八月戊子，晉侯敗狄于箕。郤缺獲白狄子。先軫曰：「匹

夫逞志於君，而無討，敢不自討乎？」免冑入狄師，死焉。狄人歸其元， 面如生。

491 As Yang (1:499) notes, it was considered exceedingly rude to expectorate in the presence of someone of higher status. 492 White garments indicate calamity or sorrow. The Liege of Qin is here openly mourning the calamitous defeat. 493 Again, Zuozhuan gives a specific date that is not found in the equivalent Annals entry. 494 This was one group of the non-Sinitic Di who lived in the region of present-day Yichuan and Yan’an in Shanxi. 495 He is referring to his rude act of spitting.

450

Zuo Tradition

When Xian Zhen attended court and asked about the Qin prisoners, the lord said, “My mother pled for them, so I have released them.” Xian Zhen was furious and said, “They were captured on the battlefield through the strength of warriors and were released in the capital through the wiles of a woman! You give up the fruits of battle and encourage marauding enemies. The day of our destruction draws near!” Then without turning aside he spat upon the ground.491 The lord sent Yang Chufu to chase after the three men who had been released, but when he overtook them at the Yellow River, they already were on a boat. He unharnessed the trace horse on the left and presented it to Mengming in the name of the lord. Mengming bowed with his head touching the ground and said, “It was your lord’s kindness that he did not use me, a servant bound in ropes, to anoint drums with blood and instead sends me back to be executed in Qin. If my unworthy ruler has me executed, I will not perish even if I die. But if, as a consequence of your lord’s kindness, I am pardoned, then in three years I will return and offer thanks for your lord’s bequest.” The Liege of Qin put on white mourning garments and set up camp in the outskirts.492 Facing the soldiers who had been released, he wailed and said, “I, the lone one, went against Jian Shu’s advice and thereby brought shame upon you, good sirs. This was my offense.” He did not dismiss Mengming but said, “This was my mistake. What offense is the high officer guilty of ? Moreover, I would not let one blunder obscure great virtue.” The Di invaded Qi: this was taking advantage of Jin’s period of mourning.

33.4(5)

Eleven years earlier, the domain of Zhu had inflicted a humiliating defeat upon Lu (Xi 22.7), and Lu now retaliates. Our lord attacked Zhu and took Zilou: this was in retaliation for the military campaign at Shengxing. The Zhu men had not taken defensive precautions. In autumn, Xiangzhong again attacked Zhu.

33.5(6, 7)

The Jin minister Xian Zhen punishes himself for his earlier display of disrespect (Xi 33.3b). The Di attacked Jin and reached as far as Ji. In the eighth month, on the wuzi day (26), the Prince of Jin defeated the Di at Ji.493 Xi Que captured the chief of the White Di.494 Xian Zhen said, “I, a common man, behaved willfully at the expense of my lord,495 and there was no chastisement. Would I dare to fail to chastise myself ?” Removing his helmet, he rushed into the midst of the Di troops and died there. The Di sent his head back, and his face looked the same as when he was alive.

33.6a(8)

Lord Xi

451

33.6b 初，臼季使，過冀，見冀缺耨，其妻饁之，敬，相待如賓。與之歸，言諸文

公曰：「敬，德之聚也。能敬必有德。德以治民，君請用之！臣聞之：出門 如賓，承事如祭，仁之則也。」公曰：「其父有罪，可乎？」對曰：「舜之罪 也殛鯀，其舉也興禹。管敬仲，桓之賊也，實相以濟。〈康誥〉曰：『父不 慈，子不祗，兄不友，弟不共，不相及也。』《詩》曰： 采葑采菲， 無以下體。 君取節焉可也。」 文公以為下軍大夫。反自箕，襄公以三命命先且居將中軍，以再命 命先茅之縣賞胥臣，曰：「舉郤缺，子之功也。」以一命命郤缺為卿，復 與之冀，亦未有軍行。

33.7(9, 11)

冬，公如齊朝，且弔有狄師也。反，薨于小寢，即安也。

33.8(13) 晉、陳、鄭伐許，討其貳于楚也。

496 It is possible that the sentence “I have heard that to behave . . . is the standard for nobility of spirit” is a gloss erroneously incorporated into the text. For details, see Zhang Handong, “Zuo zhuan ji qi xiang Chunqiu xue de yanbian.” 497 In Xi 24.1, Xi Rui had been involved in an attempt on the newly installed Lord Wen’s life. 498 The passage cited here does not appear in the extant “Kang Proclamation” (Kang gao 康誥). As noted earlier, several different editions of the Documents were circulating during pre-Han times (see Lord Yin, n. 103). 499 Quoted from Maoshi 35, “Gu feng” 谷風, 2B.89. One should not ignore turnips and radishes simply because they are “roots beneath,” just as one should not ignore men because they have a lowly status. 500 He is referring here to the highly polite and ritualized behavior demonstrated by Xi Que in his relationship with his wife. 501 These different commands are in descending order of honor and rank (see Yang, 1:502–3). Cf. Cheng 2.3h, Xiang 19.1a. 502 Du Yu (ZZ 17.291) says that Xian Juju is the son of Xian Zhen. 503 Normally the lord would have expired in the Grand Chamber (luqin 路寢). By saying that he had gone to the small chamber “to rest,” the text is probably indicating that his death was rather unexpected.

452

Zuo Tradition

Lord Wen had succeeded in large measure because he appreciated men of talent. Here we are told how Xi Que, a capable Jin leader who captured the chief of the White Di in the previous section, originally came into Lord Wen’s service. Earlier, Xu Chena had been sent on a mission and was passing through Ji. He saw Xi Queb hoeing, and his wife was carrying food to him. They were respectful, treating one another like guests. He took Xi Que back with him and spoke of him to Lord Wen: “Respect derives from an accumulation of virtues. To show respect one must first possess virtue. With virtue one regulates people. I am asking, my lord, that you employ him. I have heard that to behave like a guest outside one’s gate and to handle official business as if one were offering a sacrifice is the standard for nobility of spirit.”496 The lord said, “But his father was guilty of an offense. Can he be employed?”497 He responded, “When Shun was punishing the guilty, he executed Gun. But when he was promoting people, he raised up Yu. Guan Zhongb was the violent enemy of Lord Huan, but the lord made that very man his minister, and he was successful. The Kang Proclamation says, ‘A father may not be kind, a son may not be reverential, an older brother may not be amiable, and a younger brother may not be respectful, but this does not implicate others.’498 As it says in the Odes,

33.6b

In gathering turnips, in gathering radishes, Do not mind that they are merely roots beneath.499

My lord should just use him because of the good in him.”500 Lord Wen had made Xi Que a high officer in the lower army. When he returned from Ji, Lord Xiang used a threefold command501 to appoint Xian Juju502 as commander of the central army, and he used a twofold command to award Xian Mao’s district to Xu Chen, saying, “Recommending Xi Que was your accomplishment.” He used a single command to appoint Xi Que as minister and gave Ji back to him. But he did not lead any of the military columns. Shortly after returning from a visit to Qi, the fifth Lu Lord of the Annals and Zuozhuan passes away. In winter, our lord went to visit the court of Qi and moreover condoled with them about the incursion of the Di troops. Upon his return, he expired in the small chamber: this was because he had gone there to rest.503

33.7(9, 11)

Jin, Chen, and Zheng attacked Xǔ: this was to chastise them for shifting allegiance to Chu.

33.8(13)

Lord Xi

453

33.9 楚令尹子上侵陳、蔡。陳、蔡成，遂伐鄭，將納公子瑕。門于桔柣之門，

瑕覆于周氏之汪，外僕髡屯禽之以獻。文夫人斂而葬之鄶城之下。 33.10 晉陽處父侵蔡，楚子上救之，與晉師夾泜而軍。陽子患之，使謂子上曰：

「吾聞之：『文不犯順，武不違敵。』子若欲戰，則吾退舍，子濟而陳，遲 速唯命。不然，紓我。老師費財，亦無益也。」乃駕以待。子上欲涉，大孫 伯曰：「不可。晉人無信，半涉而薄我，悔敗何及？不如紓之。」乃退舍。 陽子宣言曰：「楚師遁矣。」遂歸。楚師亦歸。 大子商臣譖子上曰：「受晉賂而辟之，楚之恥也。罪莫大焉。」王 殺子上。 33.11 葬僖公，緩作主，非禮也。凡君薨，卒哭而祔，祔而作主，特祀於主，烝、

嘗、禘於廟。

504 This gate, mentioned earlier in Zhuang 28.3, is the gate into the outskirts of the Zheng capital. 505 Gongzi Xia either dies in an accident, and Kuntun “captured” a dead body, or Kuntun killed him (Couvreur, Tch’ouen ts’iou et Tso tchouan, 1:438), or he was killed after being presented to the ruler, Lord Mu of Zheng. 506 A passage in Xuan 3.6 indicates that the widow of Lord Wen of Zheng was the mother of Gongzi Xia, which would explain her actions here. Kuai 鄶, sometimes written 檜, was a small domain in the region of Zheng northwest of present-day Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 507 The Zhi 泜 River is now known as the Sha River 沙河. 508 The burial of Lord Xi is noted only in Annals, Wen 1.4. This discrepancy apparently results from differences in the respective calendars (see Yang, 1:505).

454

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Xia of Zheng, hated by his father, Lord Wen of Zheng, had previously fled to Chu (Xi 31.6). Here he participates in an attack on Zheng but falls victim to an accident. Dou Boa, the chief minister of Chu, invaded Chen and Cai. Chen and Cai came to an accord with Chu. Chu then invaded Zheng and was going to install Gongzi Xia in power there. As they were storming the Jiezhi Gate,504 Gongzi Xia’s chariot overturned in a pond of the Zhou family. Kuntun, a servant who was outside the city, captured him and presented him to his master.505 The widow of Lord Wen of Zheng, the previous ruler, prepared the body for burial and buried him at the foot of the wall of Kuai.506

33.9

Jin and Chu come close to another battle, but cooler heads prevail. The Chu heir apparent Shangchen, who will assassinate his father next year, here sows discord that leads to the death of the Chu commander. Yang Chufu of Jin invaded Cai. Dou Boa of Chu came to their aid, and the troops of Jin and Chu were stationed on opposite sides of the Zhi River.507 Yang Chufua worried about this and sent someone to tell Dou Boa, “I have heard: ‘In ritual matters one does not transgress against the compliant, and in military matters one does not avoid enemies.’ If you want to join in battle, then I will retreat one day’s march. You cross the river and array your troops in formations. Then whether you delay or make haste to fight is entirely up to you. If you do not do this, then show the same liberality to me. To wear out our troops by keeping them in the field for a long time and to waste resources does not profit anyone.” He then yoked his chariot and waited. Dou Boa wanted to cross, but Cheng Daxinc said, “This will not do. The Jin men are without good faith. If they should press down on us after we are halfway across the river, how would there be even time to regret our defeat? It would be better to treat them liberally.” And so they retreated one day’s march. Yang Chufua issued a proclamation that said, “The Chu troops have run away!” Then the Jin troops turned toward home, and the Chu troops also turned back. The heir apparent of Chu, Shangchen, slandered Dou Boa, saying, “He accepted gifts from Jin and avoided battle with them, much to the shame of Chu. There is no greater crime than this.” So the king killed Dou Boa.

33.10

We buried Lord Xi508 but were slow in making the spirit tablet: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when a ruler expires, after the wailing ends, he is to be enshrined in the Ancestral Temple. To enshrine him in the temple, one makes a spirit tablet and then exclusively offers sacrifices to the spirit tablet. But for the winter sacrifice, the autumn sacrifice, and the ancestral di sacrifice, he receives sacrifices along with the other deceased lords in the Ancestral Temple.

33.11

Lord Xi

455

文公

Lord Wen (626–609 bce) For once the succession in Lu seems to have been without incident. While the Annals notes that Lord Wen “acceded to his position,” Zuozhuan passes over the event in silence. Perhaps this very silence is significant, as Zuozhuan marks the beginning of the years of Lord Wen by turning attention not to the ruler himself but to one of the powerful families, the Meng line and its leader Meng Mubo (1.1). Indeed, Meng Mubo’s love for a woman originally intended for Xiangzhong (Gongzi Sui), one of the remaining sons of Lord Zhuang, and his flight from the domain of Lu to join her constitute one of the major subplots of these years (7.7, 8.5, 14.11, 15.4). The powerful Lu families eclipse Lord Wen throughout his reign, and at his death, Xiangzhong has the rightful heirs murdered and installs a lesser son, who will become Lord Xuan (18.5). Compared with other domains, however, Lu plays a minor role during these years. As this section begins, the major power is clearly the domain of Jin, now ruled by the capable and ambitious Lord Xiang (r. 627–621), and Jin’s major rival is Qin. In the last year of the previous section (Xi 33.1, 33.3), Jin had defeated the Qin army in the Yao Hills and had captured three Qin generals. The disgraced generals are returned to Qin, where they are forgiven (Xi 33.3b and Wen 1.9). One of them, Mengming, leads an attack on Jin in retaliation for the defeat in the Yao Hills, only to suffer another crushing defeat at Pengya (2.1). In the next year, Qin gains a small victory over Jin, capturing the Jin settlements of Wangguan and Jiao and building a tomb in the Yao Hills for Qin soldiers who fell four years earlier on that battlefield (3.4). But this victory is short-lived, as Jin counterattacks in the very next year (4.5). Each of these major powers soon faces a crisis. Lord Mu of Qin (r. 659–621) passes away and has “three good men of Qin” buried with him. For this ignoble act of human sacrifice, the moral voice of Zuozhuan condemns him and predicts that

457

because of this “Qin would not march east again” (6.3), a prediction that appears, on the surface at least, unaware that Qin would indeed march toward the east once again in 360 Bce. Meanwhile, the death of Lord Xiang of Jin in the same year touches off a succession crisis that involves the major Jin ministers and one very determined mother in a power struggle. The result is the installation of a young, weak leader known as Lord Ling (r. 620–607) (6.5, 6.6). While contention between Jin and Qin is not at an end (7.4, 12.6, 13.2), the southern domain of Chu continues to grow in power. As Tong Shuye says, “From the period beginning with Lord Ling of Jin (r. 620–607) through the reign of Lord Jing (r. 599–582), Jin’s power cannot compare to that of Chu.”1 Chu annihilates the domains of Jiang (4.6), Liu (5.3), Liao (5.4), and Yong (16.4). They attack Zheng (9.5), intimidate Chen (9.8), and behave rudely to Lu (9.9). Despite an internal rebellion that threatens Chu (14.10), it poses a constant threat to the central domains (16.4). Two of the most interesting passages in this section remind us of the power women sometimes exercise in the world of Zuozhuan. Mu Ying, the mother of the heir apparent in Jin, thwarts the powerful minister Zhao Dun’s plans to install another successor through dramatic action (7.4) that is reminiscent of another woman, Mu Ji of Qin (Xi 15.4b). Elsewhere, the widow of a former ruler in Song seeks a sexual liaison with Gongzi Bao, a younger member of the Song ducal family. Although her advances are rejected, she continues to support Gongzi Bao, whom she brings to power after having the reigning ruler, Duke Zhao, murdered (16.5). The Lord Wen section concludes by returning to Lu, where a new ruler, Lord Xuan, offers refuge to the heir apparent of Ju, who “had done many things . . . not in accord with ritual propriety.” In another indication of the power of the major lineages in Lu, Ji Wenzi, head of the Jisun family, expels the refugee from the domain without seeking his ruler’s approval. When Lord Xuan asks why he has done this, Ji Wenzi, through the scribe Ke, delivers a long remonstrance that shows, among other things, the power of an idealized past as a corrective to those actions deemed contrary to ritual (18.7).

1

Tong Shuye, Chunqiu shi, 189.

Lord Wen

459

春秋 1.1 元年，春，王正月，公即位。 1.2 二月癸亥，日有食之。 1.3(1) 天王使叔服來會葬。 1.4(3) 夏，四月丁巳，葬我君僖公。 1.5(4) 天王使毛伯來錫公命。 1.6(5) 晉侯伐衛。 1.7(4) 叔孫得臣如京師。 1.8(5) 衛人伐晉。 1.9(6) 秋，公孫敖會晉侯于戚。 1.10(7) 冬，十月丁未，楚世子商臣弒其君頵。 1.11(8) 公孫敖如齊。

左傳 1.1(3) 元年，春，王使內史叔服來會葬。公孫敖聞其能相人也，見其二子焉。

叔服曰：「穀也食子，難也收子。穀也豐下，必有後於魯國。」

2

This eclipse occurred on 26 January 625 Bce. Eclipse notations normally include the word shuo 朔, indicating that the eclipse took place on the day of the new moon, the first day of the month. That the word shuo is here omitted may indicate that the calendar was out of adjustment at the time of the notation, causing the eclipse to fall on the final day of the previous month. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 4.72–73) suggests that there has been a miscalculation of the intercalary month. For another example of this, see Xiang 27.10. 3 Qī 戚 was a settlement that was attached to Wei and was located on the banks of the Yellow River. According to Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:781), it was a place critical for transportation between the domains (Yang, 1:509). It belonged to the Sun lineage, members of which served as ministers in Wei.

460

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 1 (626 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position. In the second month, on the guihai day, there was an eclipse of the sun.2 The Heaven-appointed king sent Shufu to come to meet with us for the burial. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (26), we buried our ruler Lord Xi.

1.1

1.2 1.3(1)

1.4(3)

The Heaven-appointed king sent the Mao Liege to us to bestow his command upon our lord.

1.5(4)

The Prince of Jin attacked Wei.

1.6(5)

Shusun Dechen went to the Zhou capital.

1.7(4)

A Wei leader attacked Jin.

1.8(5)

In autumn, Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) met with the Prince of Jin in Qī.

3

In winter, in the tenth month, on the dingwei day (18), the Chu heir apparent Shangchen assassinated his ruler, Jun.4 Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) went to Qi.

1.9(6) 1.10(7)

1.11(8)

ZUO

A court scribe judges physiognomy in a way that subsequent events will verify (Wen 7.3, 15.4). In the first year, in spring, the king sent the court scribe Shufu to come to meet with us for the burial. Meng Muboa had heard that he was able to judge the physiognomy of others and presented his two sons to him. Shufu said, “Wenboa is the one who will feed you; Huishua, the one who will gather up your remains.5 Wenboa has a prominent lower jaw. He is certain to have descendants in the domain of Lu.”

4 5

1.1(3)

Jun is elsewhere known as Kun 髡, Yun 惲, or Xiong yun 熊惲. Shangchen is the future King Mu of Chu 楚穆王. Wenbo will predecease Meng Mubo (Wen 7.3), but his descendants, through his son Meng Xianzi, will carry on the family sacrifices.

Lord Wen

461

1.2 於是閏三月，非禮也。先王之正時也，履端於始，舉正於中，歸餘於終。

履端於始，序則不愆；舉正於中，民則不惑；歸餘於終，事則不悖。 1.3(4) 夏，四月丁巳，葬僖公。

1.4(5, 7)

王使毛伯衛來賜公命。叔孫得臣如周拜。



1.5(6, 8)

晉文公之季年，諸侯朝晉，衛成公不朝，使孔達侵鄭，伐緜、訾及匡。晉 襄公既祥，使告于諸侯而伐衛，及南陽。先且居曰：「效尤，禍也。請君 朝王，臣從師。」晉侯朝王于溫。先且居、胥臣伐衛。五月辛酉朔，晉師 圍戚。六月戊戌，取之，獲孫昭子。衛人使告于陳。陳共公曰：「更伐之， 我辭之。」衛孔達帥師伐晉。君子以為古。古者，越國而謀。

1.6(9) 秋，晉侯疆戚田，故公孫敖會之。

6

The interpretation of these descriptions of “correcting the calendar” is problematic. We have followed Yang (2:510–11) in regarding the three steps as, first, calculating the winter solstice; second, working out the beginning of each of the four seasons; and third, putting any intercalary month at the end of the year rather than, as here, somewhere in the middle of the year. 7 This entry simply repeats Annals 1.4 above. As Du Yu (ZZ 18.298) argues, the Zuozhuan entry under Xi 33.11 was probably originally here and has been displaced, with only the first line being retained in its original place. 8 The precise location of Mian 緜 is unknown, although it should be close to the other two places mentioned here. Zi should probably be identified with Zilou (see Xi 18.3 above), and Kuang 匡 was located in the domain of Zheng southwest of present-day Changyuan County 長垣縣, Henan. 9 On this region, see Xi 25.2 above. 10 Reading guo 過 for huo 禍. Wei did not come to court, and Xian seems to be implying that Jin has neglected to pay an appropriate visit to the Zhou court. 11 Sun Zhaozi was a member of the Sun lineage (see n. 2 above). 12 The reading of the noble man’s judgment is problematic. We have followed Yang (2:513) in reading gu 古 as gu 沽, “to be shoddy, to be careless.” The implication is that Wei should have handled the situation itself rather than allowing Chen to seize the initiative. Legge (230) reads the character as it stands and translates: “The superior man will say that this was the ancient method. The ancients passed from their own to take counsel with another domain.”

462

Zuo Tradition

At that time they inserted an intercalary third month: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. When the former kings corrected the calendar, they calculated the winter solstice as the beginning of the year, placed the solstices and equinoxes in the middle months of the seasons, and moved the remaining days to the end of the year.6 If one calculates the winter solstice as the beginning of the year, then the order of seasons will not be in error. If one establishes the correct dates for the seasons in the middle of the year, then the people will not be confused. And if one moves the leftover days to the end of the year, then official business will not be in disarray. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (26), we buried Lord Xi.7

1.2

1.3(4)

Lord Wen of Lu receives his official appointment and succeeds Lord Xi. The king sent the Mao Liege Wei to us to bestow his command upon our lord. Shusun Dechen went to Zhou to bow in gratitude for this.

1.4(5, 7)

Throughout the reign of Lord Wen of Jin, the relationship between the domain of Jin and the domain of Wei had been troubled (Xi 28.5, 28.8, 30.2). Here we are told of an attack on Wei in the last year of Lord Wen’s reign and of a Wei counterattack that proves to be disastrous. In the final years of Lord Wen of Jin, while most of the princes visited the court of Jin, Lord Cheng of Wei did not. He sent Kong Da to invade Zheng and to attack Mian and Zi, advancing as far as Kuang.8 When Lord Xiang of Jin had finished the sacrifice at the end of the year of mourning, he sent envoys to make an announcement to the princes and then attacked Wei, advancing as far as Nanyang.9 Xian Juju said, “To emulate a wrongful act is wrong.10 I request that you, my lord, visit the court of the king, and I will accompany the troops.” The Prince of Jin visited the court of the king at Wen, and Xian Juju and Xu Chen attacked Wei. In the fifth month, on the xinyou day, the first day of the month, the Jin army laid siege to Qī. In the sixth month, on the wuxu day (8), they occupied it and captured Sun Zhaozi.11 The Wei leaders sent someone to report this to Chen. Lord Gong of Chen said, “Launch a counterattack against them, and I will negotiate with them.” Kong Da of Wei led out troops to attack Jin. The noble man considered this careless. And what is meant by “careless” in this case is to go beyond the boundaries of the domain in planning policy.12

1.5(6, 8)

In autumn, the Prince of Jin redrew the borders of the Qī territory. For this reason, Meng Muboa met with him.

1.6(9)

Lord Wen

463

1.7(10) 初，楚子將以商臣為大子，訪諸令尹子上。子上曰：「君之齒未也，而又

多愛，黜乃亂也。楚國之舉，恆在少者。且是人也，蜂目而豺聲，忍人 也，不可立也。」弗聽。既，又欲立王子職，而黜大子商臣。商臣聞之而 未察，告其師潘崇曰：「若之何而察之？」潘崇曰：「享江羋而勿敬也。」 從之。江羋怒曰：「呼！役夫！宜君王之欲殺女而立職也。」告潘崇曰： 「信矣。」潘崇曰：「能事諸乎？」曰：「不能。」「能行乎？」曰：「不能。」 「能行大事乎？」曰：「能。」 冬，十月，以宮甲圍成王。王請食熊蹯而死。弗聽。丁未，王縊。諡 之曰「靈」，不瞑；曰「成」，乃瞑。 穆王立，以其為大子之室與潘崇，使為大師，且掌環列之尹。

13 14 15

464

This indicates that the prophecy here was from many years earlier. King Cheng had reigned for forty-six years and must be at least in his fifties by the year under which this entry appears. Zhao 13.2i says virtually the same thing about succession in Chu: “When there is turmoil in the Mi clan, it is inevitably the younger son who is established as ruler. This is a constant in Chu.” This flashback narrative explains Shangchen’s hate for Dou Bo, whom he slandered and killed in Xi 33.10.

Zuo Tradition

The Master of Chu, known posthumously as King Cheng (r. 671–626), mishandles the succession of his domain and is murdered by his son, who will reign as King Mu of Chu (r. 625–614). As in Wen 1.1 above, physiognomy plays an important role in the following passage. Earlier, the Master of Chu had been about to make Shangchen heir apparent. He had consulted with the chief minister Dou Boa about this, and Dou Boa had said, “You, my lord, are still young and have many loves.13 If you later demote him, there will be unrest. The choice as heir apparent in the domain of Chu has always fallen upon the youngest.14 What’s more, Shangchen has the eyes of a wasp and the voice of a jackal. He is a ruthless person and cannot be established as heir.”15 But the Master of Chu did not heed this. Having made Shangchen heir apparent, he then wanted to demote him and establish Wangzi Zhi in his place. Shangchen had heard about this but had not yet thoroughly investigated the matter. He reported this to his tutor Pan Chong and said, “How can I investigate this more thoroughly?” Pan Chong said, “Offer ceremonial toasts to Jiang Mi but do not show her proper respect.”16 This was done. Jiang Mi was furious and said, “Ah, you scoundrel! How fitting it is that our lord, the king, wants to kill you and establish Zhi in your place!” Shangchen then told Pan Chong, “It is true.” Pan Chong said, “Can you serve him?” “I cannot,” Shangchen replied. “Can you leave the domain?” “I cannot.” “Can you take in hand such a great matter as rebellion?” “I can,” he said. In winter, in the tenth month, he led the armed guards of the heir apparent’s palace and surrounded King Cheng. The king asked leave to eat bear paws before dying.17 But Shangchen would not agree to this. On the dingwei day (18), the king hanged himself. They gave him the honorific “Ling,” but his eyes would not close. So they named him “Cheng,” and his eyes closed.18 King Mu, formerly Shangchen, was established as ruler. He gave the household property he had held while heir apparent to Pan Chong.19 Pan Chong was appointed grand preceptor and also held the position of deputy of the palace sentinels.

16 17 18 19

1.7(10)

Jiang Mi was the younger sister of the king (see Yang, 2:514). He is presumably trying to gain time because bear paws take a long time to cook (cf. Xuan 2.3). Ling 靈 is a negative posthumous name, whereas cheng 成 is propitious. On ling as an inauspicious posthumous name, see the “Introduction” to Xuan, Xiang 2.2, and 13.4. On unclosed eyes as a sign of being aggrieved in death, see Xiang 19.1. On the use of shi 室 to mean “property,” see Cheng 7.5 and Yang, 2:515.

Lord Wen

465

1.8(11) 穆伯如齊，始聘焉，禮也。凡君即位，卿出并聘，踐修舊好，要結外援，

好事鄰國，以衛社稷。忠、信、卑讓之道也。忠，德之正也；信，德之固 也；卑讓，德之基也。 1.9 殽之役，晉人既歸秦帥，秦大夫及左右皆言於秦伯曰：「是敗也，孟明

之罪也，必殺之。」秦伯曰：「是孤之罪也。周芮良夫之詩曰： 大風有隧， 貪人敗類。 聽言則對， 誦言如醉。 匪用其良， 覆俾我悖。 是貪故也，孤之謂矣。孤實貪以禍夫子，夫子何罪？」復使為政。

466

Zuo Tradition

Lu again draws close to Qi, and the alliance will be sealed with a marriage (Wen 2.8, 4.2). Meng Mubob went to Qi: this was the first official visit there under Lord Wen and was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when a ruler accedes to his position, the ministers leave the domain and make official visits to all the lords; they continue and restore age-old good relations, solidify agreements for external aid, and amiably serve neighboring domains so as to protect the altars of the domain. This is the way of loyalty, good faith, and modest deference. Loyalty is the correct expression of virtue; good faith is the bastion of virtue; and modest deference is the foundation of virtue.

1.8(11)

After Jin defeated Qin in the battle of Yao, the military leaders of Qin were repatriated over the opposition of the Jin minister Xian Zhen. The Liege of Qin forgave them, assuming responsibility for the defeat himself. Thus, the following passage reiterates and expands upon what has been said earlier (Xi 33.3). After the campaign of Yao, when the Jin leader had already sent back the Qin commanders,20 the high officers of Qin and the ruler’s retinue all said to the Liege of Qin, “This defeat was the crime of Mengming. We must put him to death.” The Liege of Qin said, “This was my crime. As it says in an ode of Rui Liangfu21 of Zhou,

1.9

A great wind blows brisk,22 A greedy man thwarts the skilled. To words of hearsay he responds, But to recited words he is like one drunk. He does not employ the good, But on the contrary causes us to go astray.23

This is about greed, and it describes me, the lone one. I am the one who was greedy and thereupon brought calamity upon that fine man. What was he guilty of?” He again put Mengming in charge of government.

20 21 22 23

On the basis for reading shuai 帥 instead of shi 師, see Yang, 2:516. Rui Liangfu was supposedly a minister of the Zhou King Li (r. ca. 864–828). Yang (2:516) follows Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen 7.168–69) for this interpretation of sui 隧. One can also translate, after Karlgren, “The great wind has its path” (see Schuessler, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, 591). The quotation comes from Maoshi 257, “Sang rou” 桑柔, 18B.657. “Recited words,” to which the Liege of Qin implies that he has not been responsive, are the words of exalted texts that would have been a part of his ministers’ remonstrations.

Lord Wen

467

春秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，王二月甲子，晉侯及秦師戰于彭衙，秦師敗績。 2.2(2) 丁丑，作僖公主。 2.3(3) 三月乙巳，及晉處父盟。 2.4(4) 夏，六月，公孫敖會宋公、陳侯、鄭伯、晉士縠盟于垂隴。 2.5 自十有二月不雨，至于秋七月。 2.6(5) 八月丁卯，大事于大廟，躋僖公。 2.7(6) 冬，晉人、宋人、陳人、鄭人伐秦。 2.8(7) 公子遂如齊納幣。

左傳 2.1a(1) 二年，春，秦孟明視帥師伐晉，以報殽之役。二月，晉侯禦之，先且居將

中軍，趙衰佐之。王官無地御戎，狐鞫居為右。甲子，及秦師戰于彭衙， 秦師敗績。晉人謂秦「拜賜之師」。

24 Pengya 彭衙 was located in the domain of Qin northeast of present-day Baishui County 白水縣, Shaanxi. 25 Chuilong 垂隴 was located in the domain of Zheng northeast of present-day Xingyang County 滎陽縣, Henan. 26 They are mocking the comments that Mengming made as he was returning to Qin from Jin (Xi 33.3).

468

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 2 (625 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the jiazi day (7), the Prince of Jin did battle with Qin troops at Pengya.24 The Qin troops were completely defeated. On the dingchou day (20), we erected the spirit tablet for Lord Xi. In the third month, on the yisi day (19), we swore a covenant with Chufu (Yang Chufu) of Jin.

2.1(1)

2.2(2) 2.3(3)

In summer, in the sixth month, Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, and Shi Hu of Jin and swore a covenant at Chuilong.25

2.4(4)

From the twelfth month right up to autumn, the seventh month, it did not rain.

2.5

In the eighth month, on the dingmao day (13), a great affair was undertaken in the Grand Ancestral Temple. We elevated the tablet of Lord Xi above that of Lord Min.

2.6(5)

In winter, a Jin leader, a Song leader, a Chen leader, and a Zheng leader attacked Qin.

2.7(6)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi to present betrothal gifts.

2.8(7)

ZUO

Qin had forgiven Mengming for his defeat in the Yao Hills at the hands of Jin (Xi 33.3b, Wen 1.9), and here he leads another unsuccessful attack on Jin. Despite these defeats, he continues to be employed in Qin and proves to be a most effective leader. Meanwhile, a Jin spearman, Laiju, strives to find the right situation to vindicate himself after showing a lack of courage and wins the approbation of the “noble man.” In the second year, in spring, Mengmingb of Qin led out troops and attacked Jin in retaliation for the campaign of Yao. In the second month, the Prince of Jin engaged them in battle. Xian Juju commanded the central army of Jin, and Zhao Cui assisted him. Wangguan Wudi drove the prince’s war chariot, and Hu Juju was the spearman on the right. On the jiazi day (7), they fought with the Qin troops at Pengya. The Qin troops were completely defeated. The Jin leaders called Qin “the army that bowed in thanks for bestowed gifts.”26

2.1a(1)

Lord Wen

469

戰于殽也，晉梁弘御戎，萊駒為右。戰之明日，晉襄公縛秦囚，使 萊駒以戈斬之。囚呼，萊駒失戈，狼瞫取戈以斬囚，禽之以從公乘。遂 以為右。箕之役，先軫黜之，而立續簡伯。狼瞫怒。其友曰：「盍死之？」 瞫曰：「吾未獲死所。」其友曰：「吾與女為難。」瞫曰：「周志有之：『勇 則害上，不登於明堂。』死而不義，非勇也。共用之謂勇。吾以勇求右， 無勇而黜，亦其所也。謂上不我知，黜而宜，乃知我矣。子姑待之。」 及彭衙，既陳，以其屬馳秦師，死焉。晉師從之，大敗秦師。 2.1b 君子謂「狼瞫於是乎君子。《詩》曰：

君子如怒， 亂庶遄沮。 又曰： 王赫斯怒， 爰整其旅。 怒不作亂，而以從師，可謂君子矣。」 秦伯猶用孟明。孟明增修國政，重施於民。趙成子言於諸大夫曰： 「秦師又至，將必辟之。懼而增德，不可當也。《詩》曰： 毋念爾祖， 聿修厥德。

27 28

29

30 31 32 33

470

See Xi 33.6. Yang (2:520) treats what we have translated “Zhou records” (Zhou zhi 周志) as a title and equates it with Zhou Documents, arguing that the term “records” (zhi 志) is frequently used to describe what elsewhere are called “documents” (shu 書). To be sure, the passage cited above is found in the “Da kuang” 大匡 chapter of today’s Yi Zhou shu (38.101). The latter text is generally believed to contain material not incorporated into the canonical Documents. See Shaughnessy, “I Chou Shu 逸周書.” The Zhou king conducted the most solemn governmental ceremonies in the Hall of Brightness (Mingtang 明堂). These included court audiences, major sacrifices, banquets, handing out rewards, making critical appointments, and issuing instructions. On this interpretation, see Karlgren, gl. 197, who follows Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 18.302). Maoshi 198, “Chiao yan” 巧言, 12C.424. Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.571. Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.537.

Zuo Tradition

When they had fought at Yao, Liang Hong of Jin had driven the lord’s chariot, and Lai Ju had been the spearman on the right. On the day after the battle, Lord Xiang of Jin had bound a Qin prisoner and had ordered Lai Ju to cut him down with his dagger-axe. But the prisoner screamed out, and Lai Ju dropped his dagger-axe. So Lang Shen picked it up and cut down the prisoner. He then apprehended Lai Ju, went in pursuit of the lord’s chariot, and became the spearman on the right himself. During the campaign of Ji,27 Xian Zhen had dismissed him as spearman and had established Hu Jujua in the position, leaving Lang Shen infuriated. One of Lang Shen’s friends said, “Why not die to vindicate yourself?” Shen said, “I have not found the right cause to die for.” His friend said, “I will foment a rebellion on your behalf.” Shen said, “In the Zhou records, there is this:28 ‘A man of courage who harms his superior will not ascend into the Hall of Brightness.’29 To die for an undutiful cause is not courage. To offer oneself in loyal service, that is courage.30 It was because of my courage that I sought to be spearman. But being found to be without courage, I was demoted. That was appropriate. You say my superior did not know me well, but his demoting me was proper, so he did know me. For the time being you should simply wait.” When they reached Pengya, after the troops had formed ranks, Lang Shen led his subordinates and rushed at the Qin troops, dying in the assault. The Jin troops followed after him and roundly defeated the Qin troops. The noble man said, “In this action Lang Shen behaved as a noble man. As it says in the Odes,

2.1b

If the noble man shows anger, Rebellion surely will be quickly quelled.31

Again it says, The king blazed up in anger And then put his troops in order.32

He whose fury does not foment rebellion but is used to serve the troops can indeed be called a noble man.” The Liege of Qin still employed Mengming. Mengming considerably improved the government of the domain and was generous in his dealing with the people. Zhao Cuib said to the high officers, “If the Qin troops come again, we must surely avoid them. He who increases his virtue while being vigilantly fearful is invincible. As it says in the Odes, Earnestly remember your ancestors And ever polish your virtue.33

Lord Wen

471

孟明念之矣。念德不怠，其可敵乎？」 2.2(2) 丁丑，作僖公主。書不時也。 2.3(3) 晉人以公不朝來討，公如晉。夏，四月己巳，晉人使陽處父盟公以恥之。

書曰「及晉處父盟」，以厭之也。適晉不書，諱之也。 2.4(4) 公未至，六月，穆伯會諸侯及晉司空士縠盟于垂隴，晉討衛故也。書「士

縠」，堪其事也。陳侯為衛請成于晉，執孔達以說。 2.5(6) 秋，八月丁卯，大事於太廟，躋僖公，逆祀也。於是夏父弗忌為宗伯，尊

僖公，且明見曰：「吾見新鬼大，故鬼小。先大後小，順也。躋聖賢，明 也。明、順，禮也。」

34

35

36

472

The principle reflected in this comment is that Lu officials who attend alliance meetings are named in the Annals, whereas those from other states are simply designated “leaders” (ren 人). This is by no means applied consistently, although some changes in the procedure for naming of persons can be traced in the Annals (see Yang, 2:522). Lord Xi and Lord Min were brothers. There is some question as to which was the elder (see Yang, 2:523), but Lord Min ruled first and hence, according to what follows, should have been granted precedence in the sacrifices. According to the longer Guoyu version (“Lu yu 1,” 4.166), what was at stake here was the placement of the deceased rulers in the zhao (left) / mu (right) order of the Ancestral Temple. The “Mao Commentary” claims that the poem “Bi gong” 閟宮 (Maoshi 300, 20B.780) lauds the Lord Xi as a sage ruler who “renews the dwelling of the Zhou Duke.” The same poem is quoted below in what seems to be ironic condemnation of Lord Xi’s behavior.

Zuo Tradition

Mengming remembered them. He remembered virtue and was not remiss. Could he then be matched?” A spirit tablet should normally be established in the Ancestral Temple on the fourteenth day after burial. Lord Xi of Lu had passed away ten months earlier (Wen 1.3), and his spirit tablet is only now installed. On the dingchou day (20), we erected the spirit tablet for Lord Xi: it is recorded because it was not timely.

2.2(2)

In the following passage, the ruler of Lu is humbled by Jin by being put on a par with a Jin high officer in the covenant ceremony. Zuozhuan reveals the ruler’s humiliation, which had been concealed in the Annals. On account of our lord’s failure to visit their court, the men of Jin came to chastise us. So our lord went to Jin. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jisi day (13), the Jin leaders sent Yang Chufu to swear a covenant with our lord in order to shame him. The text says, “We swore a covenant with Chufu of Jin”: this is to express abhorrence of the event. That our lord’s trip to Jin was not recorded was to conceal it.

2.3(3)

At Chen’s suggestion, Kong Da of the domain of Wei had earlier led an attack on Jin (Wen 1.6). Chen now tries to broker a peace agreement and appease Jin by arresting Kong Da. Before our lord had arrived home, in the sixth month, Meng Mubob met with the princes as well as Shi Hu, the Jin supervisor of works, and swore a covenant at Chuilong: this was because Jin had chastised Wei. That the text has “Shi Hu” is because he fulfilled his duty.34 The Prince of Chen, on Wei’s behalf, sued for peace with Jin, arresting Kong Da in order to placate them.

2.4(4)

A Lu minister violates proper order by placing the tablet of the most recent ruler, Lord Xi, above that of his half brother and predecessor, Lord Min, and asserts that the order should be determined by worthiness. The minister may be proposing this to curry favor with the reigning Lu ruler, a son of Lord Xi. The noble man rebukes this deviation and claims that the sequence of reigns and not worthiness determines ritual positions. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the dingmao day (13), a great affair was undertaken in the Grand Ancestral Temple. We elevated the tablet of Lord Xi above that of Lord Min: this violated the order of sacrifices.35 At this time Xiafu Fuji was the master of ritual. He did reverence to Lord Xi, and then he declared what he had seen: “I saw that the new ghost is larger and the old ghost is smaller. To put the larger first and the smaller last is to follow the right order. To elevate sages and worthies is wise.36 To be wise and follow the right order is in accordance with ritual propriety.” Lord Wen

2.5(6)

473

君子以為失禮：「禮無不順。祀，國之大事也，而逆之，可謂禮乎？ 子雖齊聖，不先父食久矣。故禹不先鯀，湯不先契，文、武不先不窋。宋 祖帝乙，鄭祖厲王，猶上祖也。是以魯頌曰： 春秋匪解， 享祀不忒， 皇皇后帝， 皇祖后稷。 君子曰『禮』，謂其后稷親而先帝也。《詩》曰： 問我諸姑， 遂及伯姊。 君子曰：『禮』，謂其姊親而先姑也。」 仲尼曰：「臧文仲其不仁者三，不知者三。下展禽，廢六關，妾織 蒲，三不仁也。作虛器，縱逆祀，祀爰居，三不知也。」

37 38 39

40 41 42 43

44 45

474

Cheng 13.2 says that sacrifice and warfare constitute the great affairs of a domain. See Karlgren, gl. 199. Yu, the legendary founder of the Xia dynasty, was a culture hero, while his father, Gun, was Yao’s minister who failed in controlling floods. Tang was the founder of the Shang dynasty and a descendant of Xie, Shun’s minister. Kings Wen and Wu, founders of the Zhou dynasty, were superior to their ancestor Buku, who was supposedly the son of Lord Millet, the first ancestor of the Zhou people. The implication is that both Emperor Yi and King Li are honored as “first ancestors” despite serious moral deficiencies. While this is attested for King Li, it is unclear what Emperor Yi’s deficiencies might have been (see Yang, 2:524). Maoshi 300, “Bi gong” 閟宮, 20B.780. Lord Millet is the earliest ancestor of the Zhou ruling house. See Maoshi 245, “Sheng min” 生民, 17A.587. Maoshi 39, “Quan shui” 泉水, 2C.101. The ode is cited to show a precedent for passing over one’s closer kin, here “elder sisters,” to seek advice from more distant but more powerful relatives. Karlgren, gl. 201, following Hui Dong, Zuozhuan buzhu. According to Analects 15.14, “The Master said, ‘Has Zang Wenzhong not occupied a position he is not entitled to? He knew the excellence of Liu Xiahui [i.e., Zhan Qin] and yet would not yield to him his position’” (Lau, Analects, 154). See Karlgren, gl. 202. Du Yu (ZZ 18.303) says that these barriers (gates) were meant to control the movements of “vagabonds” (moyou 末遊). In so doing, his household competes inappropriately with the people for profit.

Zuo Tradition

The noble man considered this a deviation from ritual propriety: “In the performance of ritual there is nothing that does not follow the right order. Sacrifices are among the great affairs of a domain.37 Can it be called ritual propriety to violate the right sacrificial order? Even when a son is perceptive and sagacious,38 it is long-standing tradition that he does not precede his father in imbibing sacrifices. That is why Yu was not placed before Gun, Tang was not placed before Xie, and Kings Wen and Wu were not placed before Buku.39 The Song traces its ancestry to Emperor Yi and Zheng traces its ancestry to King Li, and they still esteem their first ancestor.40 That is the reason it says in a Lu hymn, Not taking our ease in spring and autumn, We offer sacrifices without error To the greatly august sovereign god on high, To the august ancestor Lord Millet.41

When the noble man calls this ‘proper ritual,’ he is saying that Lord Millet may be closer kin, but the god on high is placed before him. As it says in the Odes, I will make inquiries of my paternal aunts And then I will come to my elder sisters.42

When the noble man calls this ‘proper ritual,’ he is saying that older sisters may be closer kin, but paternal aunts are placed before them.” Confuciusc said, “In three acts Zang Wenzhong was ignoble in spirit and in three acts was unwise. He kept Zhan Qin in a lowly position,43 he abolished the six customs barriers,44 and his concubines wove rush mats for sale.45 These are three ignoble acts. He fashioned meaningless vessels,46 he allowed a violation of the sacrificial order, and he sacrificed to the seabird Yuanju.47 These are the three unwise acts.” 46

47

Commentators claim that this is a direct reference to the tradition that Zang Wenzhong kept a sacrificial turtle. According to Analects 5.18, “The Master said, ‘When housing his great tortoise, Zang Wenzhong had the capitals of the pillars carved in the shape of hills and the rafter posts painted in a duckweed design. What is one to think of his intelligence?’” (Lau, Analects, 78). These ritual vessels were meaningless (literally xu, “empty”) in that there was no proper correspondence between the office and the vessels (see Du Yu, ZZ 18.303). The implication is that Zang Wenzhong was guilty of overreaching. This curious event is described in Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.165–70, as follows: “A seabird called ‘Yuanju’ roosted on the outside of the east gate of Lu for three days. Zang Wen­ zhong caused the people of the capital to offer sacrifices to it. . . . Zhan Qin said, ‘Now a seabird has arrived. You yourself do not understand the meaning of this but perform offerings to it and make this a domain ceremony. It is difficult to consider this humane and intelligent.’” Liji (5.97) says, “If it is not the appropriate sacrifice but one offers such sacrifice, it is called ‘recklessly making an offering.’ If one makes an offering recklessly, there will be no blessing.”

Lord Wen

475

2.6(7) 冬，晉先且居、宋公子成、陳轅選、鄭公子歸生伐秦，取汪及彭衙而還，

以報彭衙之役。卿不書，為穆公故，尊秦也，謂之崇德。 2.7(8) 襄仲如齊納幣，禮也。凡君即位，好舅甥，修婚姻，娶元妃以奉粢盛，孝

也。孝，禮之始也。

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，王正月，叔孫得臣會晉人、宋人、陳人、衛人、鄭人伐沈。沈潰。 3.2(3) 夏，五月，王子虎卒。 3.3(4) 秦人伐晉。 3.4(6) 秋，楚人圍江。 3.5(5) 雨螽于宋。 3.6 冬，公如晉。十有二月己巳，公及晉侯盟。 3.7 晉陽處父帥師伐楚以救江。

左傳 3.1(1) 三年，春，莊叔會諸侯之師伐沈，以其服於楚也。沈潰。凡民逃其上曰

潰，在上曰逃。 3.2 衛侯如陳，拜晉成也。

476

Zuo Tradition

In winter, Xian Juju of Jin, Gongzi Cheng of Song, Yuan Xuan of Chen, and Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng attacked Qin. They gained control over Wang, advancing as far as Pengya, and then turned back.48 This was in retaliation for the campaign of Pengya. That the ministers’ names are not recorded was because of Lord Mu and was in honor of Qin. We refer to this as elevating the virtuous.

2.6(7)

Xiangzhong went to Qi to present betrothal gifts: this was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when a ruler accedes to his position, he maintains good relations with his maternal uncles, cultivates marital ties, and selects a primary consort in order to present vessels of millet at the sacrifices. This is filial piety, and filial piety is the beginning of ritual.

2.7(8)

LORD WEN 3 (624 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, Shusun Dechen met with a Jin leader, a Song leader, a Chen leader, a Wei leader, and a Zheng leader and attacked Shěn. Shěn collapsed.49

3.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, Wangzi Hu died.

3.2(3)

A Qin leader attacked Jin.

3.3(4)

In autumn, a Chu leader laid siege to Jiang.

3.4(6)

Locusts rained down upon Song.

3.5(5)

In winter, our lord went to Jin. In the twelfth month, on the jisi day (22), our lord swore a covenant with the Prince of Jin. Yang Chufu of Jin led out troops and attacked Chu in order to go to the aid of Jiang.

3.6

3.7

ZUO

In the third year, in spring, Shusun Dechena met with the troops of the princes and attacked Shěn: this was because Shěn had submitted to Chu. Shěn collapsed. In all cases when people flee their superiors, it is called “collapse.” If this occurs among superiors, it is called “flee.”

3.1(1)

The Prince of Wei went to Chen: this was to bow in thanks for the accord with Jin.

3.2

48 Wang 汪 was in the domain of Qin near Pengya 彭衙 and located in present-day Baishui County 白水縣, Shaanxi. 49 Shěn 沈 was a small domain. We know from a bronze vessel inscription that the founders of this domain were direct descendants of the Zhou Duke (see Yang, 2:527). It was located northwest of present-day Fuyang County 阜陽縣, Anhui.

Lord Wen

477

3.3(2) 夏，四月乙亥，王叔文公卒，來赴，弔如同盟，禮也。 3.4(3) 秦伯伐晉，濟河焚舟，取王官及郊，晉人不出。遂自茅津濟，封殽尸而

還。遂霸西戎，用孟明也。 君子是以知秦穆之為君也，舉人之周也，與人之壹也；孟明之臣 也，其不解也，能懼思也；子桑之忠也，其知人也，能舉善也。《詩》曰： 于以采蘩？ 于沼、于沚。 于以用之？ 公侯之事。 秦穆有焉。 夙夜匪解， 以事一人。 孟明有焉。 詒厥孫謀， 以燕翼子。 子桑有焉。 3.5(5) 秋，雨螽于宋，隊而死也。

50

Burning the boats is a sign of Qin’s resolve not to turn back. This is the same tactic that Xiang Yu employs in Shiji 7.307. 51 Wangguan 王官 was located just south of present-day Wenxi 聞喜, Shanxi. The precise location of Jiao is a problem. Some read this as the outskirts of the capital and end the sentence before ji 及: “They reached the outskirts.” Yang (2:529) finds troop movements in the vicinity of the capital unlikely and believes that Jiao was a place very close to Wangguan. 52 In this decision, they were following the advice of Zhao Cui, who said the year before that if Qin forces came again, Jin should avoid joining them in battle (Wen 2.1). 53 This event recalls Zhao Cui’s earlier judgment of Mengming (Wen 2.1.). 54 Gongsun Zhi had earlier encouraged Qin to be generous to Jin (Xi 13.3). Du Yu says that Gongsun Zhi was responsible for promoting Mengming (Yang, 2:530).

478

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fourth month, on the yihai day (24), Wangzi Hua died. They came with the notice of death, and we mourned in the manner of a covenant partner. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

3.3(2)

Qin finally gains a victory over Jin, as the latter, following Zhao Cui’s earlier advice (Wen 2.1b), does not engage them in battle. Qin’s success is attributed to the Liege of Qin’s kind treatment of Mengming (Xi 33.3b, Wen 1.9, 2.1). The Liege of Qin attacked Jin. They crossed the Yellow River and burned their boats.50 They occupied Wangguan and Jiao,51 and the men of Jin did not come out to fight.52 Qin then crossed the Yellow River at the Mao Ford, built an earth tumulus over the corpses from the Yao battle, and returned home. They thus gained dominance over the Western Rong because they made use of Mengming. By reason of this, the noble man knew that as a ruler Lord Mu of Qin was broad-minded in promoting men and was unswerving in entrusting responsibilities to them. Mengming’s virtue as a subject was such that he was not remiss, and he was able even in fear to think carefully about cultivating virtue.53 Gongsun Zhi’sa loyalty was such that he recognized the worth of others and was able to promote those who were good.54 As it says in the Odes,

3.4(3)

Where do we gather the wormwood? By the pond, on the islets. How do we use it? In the sacrifice for our lord.55

Lord Mu of Qin had something of this quality in him.56 Morning and night we are not remiss In order to serve the one man.57

Mengming had this quality. He handed down plans to his grandsons, In order to bring peace and protect his sons.58

Gongsun Zhia had this quality. In autumn, locusts rained down upon Song: that is, they fell to the ground and died.

55 56 57 58

3.5(5)

Maoshi 13, “Cai fan” 采蘩, 1C.47. Cf. Yin 3.3, Zhao 1.4. This apparently means that Lord Mu was able to gather and use capable men like Mengming. Maoshi 260, “Zheng min” 烝民 , 18C.675. Maoshi 244, “Wen wang you sheng” 文王有聲, 16E.584.

Lord Wen

479

3.6(4) 楚師圍江，晉先僕伐楚以救江。冬，晉以江故告於周，王叔桓公、晉陽

處父伐楚以救江，門于方城，遇息公子朱而還。 3.7 晉人懼其無禮於公也，請改盟。公如晉，及晉侯盟。晉侯饗公，賦〈菁菁

者莪〉。莊叔以公降、拜，曰：「小國受命於大國，敢不慎儀？君貺之以 大禮，何樂如之？抑小國之樂，大國之惠也。」晉侯降，辭。登，成拜。公 賦〈嘉樂〉。

春秋 4.1 四年，春，公至自晉。 4.2(4) 夏，逆婦姜于齊。 4.3 狄侵齊。 4.4(6) 秋，楚人滅江。 4.5(5) 晉侯伐秦。 4.6(7) 衛侯使甯俞來聘。 4.7(8) 冬，十有一月壬寅，夫人風氏薨。

59

Zizhu was a high official in Chu and, according to Du Yu (ZZ 18.18a), served as prefect over the region of Xi. This is presumably the domain of Xi that was extinguished by Chu in Zhuang 14.3 (680 Bce). 60 Maoshi 176, “Jing jing zhe e” 菁菁者莪, 10A.353, which contains the lines “I have seen my lord / He was pleased and courteous to boot” (Waley, Book of Songs, 149).

480

Zuo Tradition

Chu troops laid siege to Jiang. Xian Pu of Jin attacked Chu to come to Jiang’s aid. In winter, Jin reported the Jiang matter to Zhou. Wangshu Duke Huan and Yang Chufu of Jin attacked Chu to come to Jiang’s aid. They stormed the gate at Fangcheng, engaged the Xi Lord Zizhu, and then returned home.59

3.6(4)

Jin here tries to make amends for its rudeness toward Lu in the previous year (Wen 2.3). The Jin leaders were afraid they had not behaved with the proper ritual toward our lord and asked to change the covenant. Our lord went to Jin and swore a covenant with the Prince of Jin. When the Prince of Jin was entertaining our lord, the Prince recited “Luxuriant Is the Tarragon.”60 Shusun Dechena helped our lord descend the steps, where he bowed and said, “Our small domain has received the command from your great domain. Do we dare not take care in the details of the ceremony? You, my prince, have bestowed this great ritual entertainment upon us, and what happiness could equal this? Ah, the happiness of a small domain depends upon the kindness of a great domain.” The Prince of Jin descended the steps and declined the honor. They then both went back up the steps, bowed to one another, and our lord recited “Great Happiness.”61

3.7

LORD WEN 4 (623 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Jin.

4.1

In summer, someone went to meet and escort home our lord’s wife, Jiang, from Qi.

4.2(4)

The Di invaded Qi.

4.3

In autumn, a Chu leader extinguished Jiang.

4.4(6)

The Prince of Jin attacked Qin.

4.5(5)

The Prince of Wei sent Ning Yu (Ning Wuzi) to us on an official visit.

4.6(7)

In winter, in the eleventh month, on the renyin day (1), our former lord’s wife, Lady Feng, expired.

61

4.7(8)

Maoshi 249, “Jia le” 假樂, 17C.650. Odes has 假 for Zuozhuan’s 嘉. This poem contains the lines “All happiness to our lord! / May he show forth his inward power” (Waley, Book of Songs, 250). This ode is also mentioned or cited in Cheng 2.8b, Xiang 26.7b, Zhao 21.2, Ai 5.4.

Lord Wen

481

左傳 4.1 四年，春，晉人歸孔達于衛，以為衛之良也，故免之。 4.2 夏，衛侯如晉拜。 4.3 曹伯如晉會正。 4.4(2) 逆婦姜于齊，卿不行，非禮也。君子是以知出姜之不允於魯也，曰：「貴

聘而賤逆之，君而卑之，立而廢之，棄信而壞其主，在國必亂，在家必 亡。不允宜哉！《詩》曰： 畏天之威， 于時保之。 敬主之謂也。」 4.5(5) 秋，晉侯伐秦，圍邧、新城，以報王官之役。 4.6(4) 楚人滅江，秦伯為之降服，出次，不舉，過數。大夫諫。公曰：「同盟滅，

雖不能救，敢不矜乎？吾自懼也。」君子曰：「《詩》云：

62 63

Presumably, he did this to thank them for the return of Kong Da. Du Yu (ZZ 18.306) believes that the concern was specifically with governmental regulations concerning tribute offerings to the new overlord, Lord Xiang of Jin. There is a presumption here that Lord Xiang of Jin has succeeded Lord Wen as overlord. Takezoe (8.28) believes that this practice harkens back to Xi 7.3, where Lord Huan of Qi collects goods from the princes for transmittal to the Zhou court. He also believes that “attended the meeting at the year’s end” (會歲終) in Xiang 22.2 concerns the same practice. 64 Du Yu (ZZ 18.306) takes yun 允 here to mean “trust” or “good faith.” Zhang Binglin believes yun is a loan for sui 遂 and means “to end” or “to end well” (Yang, 2:533). 65 Yang (2:534) notes, “The ruler’s wife is the leader inside the ruler’s palace.” Karlgren (gl. 203) would translate slightly differently: “They discarded their trust in her and destroyed its fundament.” 66 Maoshi 272, “Wo jiang” 我將, 19B.718. 67 On several difficult points of interpretation in this entry, see Karlgren, gl. 203. 68 Yuan 邧 was located in the domain of Qin south of Chengcheng County 澄城縣, Shaanxi, and the Xincheng 新城 mentioned here was apparently close by.

482

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Wei minister Kong Da had led an attack on Jin (Wen 1.6) and had later been sent to Jin in an attempt to placate them (2.4). In the fourth year, in spring, the Jin leaders repatriated Kong Da to Wei. They considered him the most excellent of Wei. That is why they released him.

4.1

In summer, the Prince of Wei went to Jin to bow in thanks.62

4.2

The Liege of Cao went to Jin to attend the meeting about regulations.

63

4.3

The improper ritual attending the marriage of Lord Wen and Lady Jiang from Qi foreshadows her unhappy return to Qi, narrated in Wen 18.6. In fact, the name by which she is here called, “Chu Jiang,” literally means “the Departing Jiang,” and alludes to the fact that she will eventually leave Lu. She is also called Ai Jiang (the Mournful Jiang) in Wen 18.4. Someone went to meet and escort home our lord’s wife, Jiang, from Qi, but the ministers did not go: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. The noble man thus knew that Chu Jiang would not end well in Lu.64 He said, “To formalize an engagement with a woman by means of elevated ceremony but welcome her in a demeaning fashion is to recognize her as our lord’s wife and then humiliate her; it is to establish her and then reject her; it is to cast aside good faith and ruin its basis.65 In a domain this must bring rebellion; in a family this must bring destruction. For her not to end well would be fitting. As it says in the Odes,

4.4(2)

Fear the authority of Heaven And thereby preserve Heaven’s blessings.66

It is speaking of respecting the basis of trust.”67 Qin had previously occupied Wangguan in Jin territory, an action Jin had not contested (Wen 3.4). In autumn, the Prince of Jin attacked Qin and laid siege to Yuan and Xincheng:68 this was in retaliation for the campaign of Wangguan.

4.5(5)

The Chu army finishes its assault on Jiang (Wen 3.6). A Chu leader extinguished Jiang. On account of this, the Liege of Qin dressed in plain white garments, left his residence, and camped in a hut, and he banished music during ceremonial feasts, exceeding the ritual regulations. The high officers remonstrated, but the Liege of Qin said, “When an ally is extinguished, even though one may have been unable to come to its aid, would one presume not to mourn? I am vigilantly fearful for myself.” The noble man said, “As it says in the Odes,

4.6(4)

Lord Wen

483

惟彼二國， 其政不獲； 惟此四國， 爰究爰度。 其秦穆之謂矣。」 4.7(6) 衛甯武子來聘，公與之宴，為賦〈湛露〉及〈彤弓〉。不辭，又不答賦。使

行人私焉。對曰：「臣以為肄業及之也。昔諸侯朝正於王，王宴樂之，於 是乎賦〈湛露〉，則天子當陽，諸侯用命也。諸侯敵王所愾，而獻其功， 王於是乎賜之彤弓一、彤矢百、玈弓矢千，以覺報宴。今陪臣來繼舊 好，君辱貺之，其敢干大禮以自取戾？」 4.8(7) 冬，成風薨。

69 70 71

484

Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.567. Maoshi 174, “Zhan lu” 湛露, 10A.350; and Maoshi 175, “Tong gong” 彤弓, 10A.351. Ning Wuzi knows that the recitation of “Red Bow” is inappropriate and hence feigns stupidity. Analects 5.21 speaks of Ning Wuzi as follows: “The Master said, ‘Ning Wuzi was intelligent when the Way prevailed in the domain, but stupid when it did not. Others may equal his intelligence but they cannot equal his stupidity’” (Lau, Analects, 79). On this type of private exchange in the context of a formal mission, see Xuan 16.4, Cheng 2.9, 8.1, Xiang 26.7, and Zhao 3.3.

Zuo Tradition

It was those two domains Whose government did not succeed. It was the domains on all four sides Who then took stock, who then took measure.69

Surely this is speaking of Lord Mu of Qin.” The Wei minister Ning Wuzi displays his ritual knowledge when he refuses to respond to inappropriately grandiose odes recited by the Lu ruler. Curiously, when a Lu minister later recites one of these odes, “Red Bow,” in his meeting with a Jin minister, the noble man applauds him for “knowing ritual propriety” (Xiang 8.4). Ning Wuzi of Wei came to us on an official visit. Our lord had a banquet with him and recited for him “Soaking Dew” and “Red Bow.”70 Ning Wuzi did not decline these, nor did he recite an ode in reply. Our lord had an envoy privately inquire about this, and Ning Wuzi responded, “I thought you were practicing the recitation of odes and had come to these.71 Formerly, when the princes visited the court of the king at the new year, the king would offer them a banquet accompanied by music. It was on such occasions that they recited ‘Soaking Dew’: that is, the Son of Heaven would face the sun and the princes would receive their commands. The princes would take as enemy whomsoever the king raged against and also offered their achievements. And the king, on this occasion, would give them one red bow and one hundred red arrows, and ebony bows and one thousand ebony arrows,72 in order to make it clear that this was a reward banquet.73 Now, I, the subordinate subject, have come to continue our age-old good relations, and you, my lord, have con­ descended to bestow upon me a banquet. How would I dare violate a great ritual and implicate myself in an offense?”

4.7(6)

In winter, Cheng Feng expired.

4.8(7)

72

73

The same set of gifts is presented in Xi 28.3. Several editions have 玈弓十玈矢千 in this line, thus making it specific that “ten ebony bows” are involved. However, we follow Yang’s reading (2:536), which complies with the wording in Xi 28.3. Ning Wuzi implies that the ode “Red Bow” is appropriate only when gifts of such magnitude are bestowed by the king for the lord’s distinguished service. The line is highly problematic. We have followed Du Yu (ZZ 18.307) and Takezoe (8.31). Yang (2:536) follows Feng Dengfu 馮登府 in taking jue/jiao 覺 as a loan for jiao 校 in the sense of “to evaluate”: “He evaluated the accomplishments of the princes and repaid them with a banquet.”

Lord Wen

485

春秋 5.1(1) 五年，春，王正月，王使榮叔歸含，且賵。 5.2 三月辛亥，葬我小君成風。 5.3(1) 王使召伯來會葬。 5.4 夏，公孫敖如晉。 5.5(2) 秦人入鄀。 5.6(3) 秋，楚人滅六。 5.7 冬，十月甲申，許男業卒。

左傳

5.1(1, 3)

五年，春，王使榮叔來含且賵，召昭公來會葬，禮也。

5.2(5) 初，鄀叛楚即秦，又貳於楚。夏，秦人入鄀。 5.3(6) 六人叛楚即東夷。秋，楚成大心、仲歸帥師滅六。 5.4 冬，楚公子燮滅蓼。臧文仲聞六與蓼滅，曰：「臯陶、庭堅不祀忽諸。德

之不建，民之無援，哀哉！」

74

This is the piece of jade that was placed in the mouth of the deceased, in this case Cheng Feng. 75 Liu 六 was the name of a small domain north of present-day Liu’an County 六安縣, Anhui. 76 Liao 蓼 was a domain northeast of present-day Gushi County 固始縣, Henan.

486

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 5 (622) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the king sent Rong Shu to present the jade mouthpiece and also to deliver the funeral equipment.74 In the third month, on the xinhai day (12), we buried the wife of our former ruler, Cheng Feng.

5.1(1)

5.2

The king sent the Shao Liege (the Shao Duke Zhao) to us to join us for the burial.

5.3(1)

In summer, Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) went to Jin.

5.4

A Qin leader entered Ruo.

5.5(2)

In autumn, a Chu leader extinguished Liu.75

5.6(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiashen day (18), Ye, the Head of Xǔ, died.

5.7

ZUO

In the fifth year, in spring, the king sent Rong Shu to present the jade mouthpiece and also deliver the funeral equipment, and the Shao Duke Zhao came to attend the burial: this was in accordance with ritual propriety.

5.1(1, 3)

Earlier, Ruo had rebelled against Chu and gone over to Qin. They again shifted allegiance to Chu. In summer, a Qin leader entered Ruo.

5.2(5)

The following two entries point to the increased aggressiveness of the southern domain of Chu. The leaders of Liu rebelled against Chu and went over to the Eastern Yi. In autumn, Cheng Daxin and Zhong Gui of Chu led troops and extinguished Liu.

5.3(6)

In winter, Gongzi Xie of Chu extinguished Liao.76 When Zang Wenzhong heard that Liu and Liao had been extinguished, he said, “All of a sudden Gaoyao and Tingjian will no longer receive sacrifices.77 When virtue is not established and the people are without succor, it is pitiful indeed!”

5.4

77

Ban Gu seems to have believed that Gaoyao and Tingjian were a single person. However, Yang (2:540) presents evidence that they are different people and would seem from this passage to be the ancestors of the domains of Liu and Liao, respectively. Yang (2:540) reads 忽諸 as “all of a sudden,” whereas Karlgren (gl. 204) thinks this means 滅之乎 “they have destroyed them” (i.e., the sacrifices to Gaoyao). Note also the different readings of this entire sentence in Karlgren and Yang.

Lord Wen

487

5.5 晉陽處父聘于衛，反過甯，甯嬴從之，及溫而還，其妻問之，嬴曰：「以

剛。商書曰：『沈漸剛克，高明柔克。』夫子壹之，其不沒乎！天為剛德， 猶不干時，況在人乎？且華而不實，怨之所聚也。犯而聚怨，不可以定 身。余懼不獲其利而離其難，是以去之。」 晉趙成子、欒貞子、霍伯、臼季皆卒。

春秋 6.1 六年，春，葬許僖公。 6.2(2) 夏，季孫行父如陳。 6.3(4) 秋，季孫行父如晉。 6.4(5) 八月乙亥，晉侯驩卒。 6.5(7) 冬，十月，公子遂如晉。 6.6 葬晉襄公。 6.7(6) 晉殺其大夫陽處父。 6.8(8) 晉狐射姑出奔狄。 6.9(9) 閏月不告月，猶朝于廟。

488

Zuo Tradition

Yang Chufu, active in various Jin campaigns (Xi 32.1, 33.10), will die next year (Wen 6.6), and a prediction of his doom is made here on the basis of his character. Yang Chufu of Jin made an official visit to Wei. Upon returning, he passed through Ning, and Ning Ying accompanied him. When they reached Wen, Ning Ying turned back. His wife asked him about this, and Ning Ying said, “It was because he is too hard. As it says in the Shang Documents, ‘Let those who are slow and indulgent overcome their nature with hardness; let those who are grand and brash overcome their nature with softness.’78 Since that man has united a grand and brash nature with hardness,79 how could he die a natural death? Even when Heaven employs the power of hardness, it does not interfere with the seasons. How much more so among men! Moreover, one who is all show and no substance becomes the focus of resentment. If one is aggressive and the focus of resentment, one is unable to make oneself secure. I was afraid I would gain no benefit from him but would meet with disaster because of him, and so I left him.” Zhao Cuib, Luan Zhia, Xian Jujua, and Xu Chena of Jin all died.80

5.5

LORD WEN 6 (621 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, Lord Xi of Xǔ was buried.

6.1

In summer, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Chen.

6.2(2)

In autumn, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Jin.

6.3(4)

In the eighth month, on the yihai day (14), Huan, the Prince of Jin, died.

6.4(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Jin.

6.5(7)

Lord Xiang of Jin was buried.

6.6

Jin put to death its high officer Yang Chufu.

6.7(6)

Hu Yigu of Jin departed and fled to the Di.

6.8(8)

In the intercalary month, our lord did not announce the first day of the month, but he still held court in the Ancestral Temple.

6.9(9)

78 79 80

Shangshu, “Hong fan” 洪範, 12.174. For a somewhat different reading, see Karlgren, Book of Documents, 32. On this interpretation, see Yang, 2:541. Yang believes that this Zuozhuan section originally belonged in the next year. Shiji 14.601, however, follows Zuozhuan in listing the death of all four of these in the fifth year of Lord Wen. According to Yang (2:542), this proves that “from the Western Han on down, the arrangement of Zuozhuan has been as it is here.”

Lord Wen

489

左傳 6.1 六年，春，晉蒐于夷，舍二軍。使狐射姑將中軍，趙盾佐之。陽處父至自

溫，改蒐于董，易中軍。陽子，成季之屬也，故黨於趙氏，且謂趙盾能， 曰：「使能，國之利也。」是以上之。宣子於是乎始為國政，制事典，正法 罪，辟獄刑，董逋逃，由質要，治舊洿，本秩禮，續常職，出滯淹。既成， 以授太傅陽子與大師賈佗，使行諸晉國，以為常法。 6.2(2) 臧文仲以陳、衛之睦也，欲求好於陳。夏，季文子聘于陳，且娶焉。 6.3 秦伯任好卒，以子車氏之三子奄息、仲行、鍼虎為殉，皆秦之良也。國人

哀之，為之賦〈黃鳥〉。 君子曰：「秦穆之不為盟主也宜哉！死而棄民。先王違世，猶詒之 法，而況奪之善人乎？《詩》云：

81

Yi here is probably a place name rather than the name of the Yi people. This region, Yang (2:544) believes, is the same as the one mentioned in Zhuang 16.6. 82 Yang, 2:545. 83 See ZZ-Kong 19A.313. 84 Karlgren, gl. 206. 85 We follow Kong Yingda here (ZZ-Kong 19A.313). For another interpretation, see Karlgren, gl. 207, following Shen Qinhan: “managed (drained) the marshes.” 86 Shiji 5.194 says that 177 men followed Lord Mu of Qin to the grave and then mentions these three by name as “excellent subjects,” describing them as being of the Ziyu 子 輿 lineage. 87 Maoshi 131, “Huang niao” 黃鳥, 6D.243.

490

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The famous nobleman Zhao Dun takes charge of the government in Jin and institutes a series of reforms, one of which eliminates two of the five armies established earlier (Xi 31.4), thereby reverting to an older order (Xi 27.4). In the sixth year, in spring, Jin mustered the troops in Yi and demobilized two armies.81 Hu Yigu was appointed to command the central army, and Zhao Dun was to assist him. When Yang Chufu arrived from Wen, he shifted the muster to Dong and replaced the head of the central army. Yang Chufua had been a subordinate of Zhao Cuic, so he was a partisan of the Zhao lineage. Moreover, he also said that Zhao Dun was capable: “Employing the capable is to the advantage of the domain.” On this account, he promoted him. Zhao Dunb from this time on began to be in charge of the government of the domain. He established regulations for official affairs, set straight the application of the laws to crimes, put in order litigation proceedings,82 controlled fugitives,83 kept strictly to bonds and contracts,84 corrected old abuses,85 stabilized the ritual pertaining to ranks, renewed the customary official duties, and promoted those who had been blocked or obstructed. Having accomplished these things, he handed control to the grand tutor Yang Chufua and the grand preceptor Jia Tuo. They had all of these things carried out in the domain of Jin and made them enduring laws.

6.1

Because of the concord between Chen and Wei, Zang Wenzhong wished to seek better relations with Chen. In summer, Ji Wenzi made an official visit to Chen and in addition took a wife there.

6.2(2)

Lord Mu of Qin (Renhao, the Liege of Qin), who was previously presented as a good ruler, is here condemned for the human sacrifice that accompanied his burial. A conflict of values is seen in the following passage. The ruler of Qin follows the ancient custom, well attested in the Shang dynasty, for example, of burying certain followers with their deceased lord. The noble man’s condemnation of this practice echoes Confucian values articulated elsewhere (see Mencius 1A.4) and leads to an important prophecy about the future of Qin. Renhao, the Liege of Qin, died. They took Yanxi, Zhonghang, and Qianhu, three sons of the Ziche lineage, and buried them with him. All were good men of Qin.86 The inhabitants of the capital grieved over them and composed in their honor the ode “The Oriole.”87 The noble man said, “It is indeed fitting that Lord Mu of Qin did not become leader of the covenant. In death, he discarded his people. When the former kings departed from the world, they would leave behind proper norms. How could they ever take away the good men of the domain! As it says in the Odes,

6.3

Lord Wen

491

人之云亡， 邦國殄瘁。 無善人之謂。若之何奪之？古之王者知命之不長，是以並建聖哲，樹之 風聲，分之采物，著之話言，為之律度，陳之藝極，引之表儀，予之法 制，告之訓典，教之防利，委之常秩，道之禮則，使毋失其土宜，眾隸賴 之，而後即命。聖王同之。今縱無法以遺後嗣，而又收其良以死，難以在 上矣。」君子是以知秦之不復東征也。 6.4(3) 秋，季文子將聘於晉，使求遭喪之禮以行。其人曰：「將焉用之？」文子

曰：「備豫不虞，古之善教也。求而無之，實難。過求，何害？」 6.5(4) 八月乙亥，晉襄公卒。靈公少，晉人以難故，欲立長君。趙孟曰：「立公

子雍。好善而長，先君愛之，且近於秦。秦，舊好也。置善則固，事長則 順，立愛則孝，結舊則安。為難故，故欲立長君。有此四德者，難必抒 矣。」

88 Maoshi 264, “Zhan ang” 瞻卬, 18E.696. 89 For the interpretation of this difficult section of the text, see Karlgren, gls. 209–14. 90 Since Zuozhuan predictions generally hold true, and Qin did indeed march east again, this passage has been used to date Zuozhuan. For example, Yang (1:38) believes that this passage dates the authorship of Zuozhuan to before 360 Bce. Yuri Pines (Foundations of Confucian Thought, 224) adds: “Clearly, the author/narrator did not witness the ascendancy of Qin in the 360s.” 91 Du Yu (ZZ 19A.315) explains that Ji Wenzi had heard that “the Prince of Jin was ill.” But Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 19A.315) and others believe that the concern is probably more general. Whenever a ruler left the domain, he was expected to have prepared the appropriate ritual in case he encountered a funeral (Yang, 2:549–50). The term zao sang zhi li 遭喪之禮, “the ritual for encountering a time of bereavement,” also appears in Lord Ai 15.2. 92 The former ruler referred to here is Lord Wen. Gongzi Yong is Lord Wen’s son and the younger brother of the recently deceased Lord Xiang.

492

Zuo Tradition

When good men perish, The domain is exhausted and suffers.88

This is speaking of not having good men. So how can one take them away? The kings of ancient times knew that the span of life is not long. So it was that they established everywhere sages and men of wisdom, set them apart as renowned and respected, distributed to them the colored insignia of distinction, and recorded their words and speeches. They made for the people rules and standards, explained to them norms and correct amounts, guided them to markers and usages, gave to them laws and regulations, announced to them admonitions and canons, taught them to guard against undue profit, entrusted them with regular official duties, led them to the way of ritual and regulations, and ordered them not to neglect the benefits of the land.89 Only after the multitudes could rely upon these, did the kings meet the end of their appointed life spans. The sage-kings were in agreement on this. Now not only have they no laws to hand down to successors, but they also gather up the best men and bring them to death. How difficult it will be for them to remain in high position!” The noble man by means of this knew that Qin would not march east again.90 In autumn, Ji Wenzi was going to make an official visit to Jin. He had someone seek out the proper ritual for encountering a time of bereave­ ment and then set out.91 One of his followers said, “How will we make use of this?” Wenzi said, “To be prepared for the unexpected is a good lesson handed down from early times. Trouble arises when one seeks in haste and can find nothing! What is the harm in seeking out more than we need?”

6.4(3)

The reign of Lord Xiang of Jin comes to an end, and a complicated succession crisis ensues. Zhao Dun’s argument in favor of Gongzi Yong is very much based on a desire to stay on good terms with the growing power of Qin on the Jin border. A rival bidder for the throne, Gongzi Yue, is also born of a Qin mother, but he has been sidelined in Chen. In the eighth month, on the yihai day (14), Lord Xiang of Jin died. Lord Ling was young, and the leaders of Jin, because of the troubles facing Jin, wanted to establish an older son as ruler. Zhao Dunc said, “Let us establish Gongzi Yong as ruler. He is fond of good men and is older, and the former ruler cherished him.92 Moreover, he is close to Qin, and Qin is our old friend. If we establish the good, then we will be stable. If we serve the older, then we will follow the right order. If we set up the cherished one, then we will be filial. If we make connections with an old friend, then we will be secure. It is because of the troubles in our domain that we wish to establish an older ruler. Since he is one who possesses these four virtues, the troubles will surely ease.”

Lord Wen

6.5(4)

493

賈季曰：「不如立公子樂。辰嬴嬖於二君，立其子，民必安之。」 趙孟曰：「辰嬴賤，班在九人，其子何震之有？且為二君嬖，淫也。 為先君子，不能求大，而出在小國，辟也。母淫子辟，無威；陳小而遠， 無援，將何安焉？杜祁以君故，讓偪姞而上之；以狄故，讓季隗而己次 之，故班在四。先君是以愛其子，而仕諸秦，為亞卿焉。秦大而近，足以 為援；母義子愛，足以威民。立之，不亦可乎？」 使先蔑、士會如秦逆公子雍。賈季亦使召公子樂于陳，趙孟使殺 諸郫。 6.6(7) 賈季怨陽子之易其班也，而知其無援於晉也，九月，賈季使續鞫居殺陽

處父。書曰「晉殺其大夫」，侵官也。 6.7(5) 冬，十月，襄仲如晉葬襄公。 6.8(8) 十一月丙寅，晉殺續簡伯。賈季奔狄。宣子使臾駢送其帑。

93 94

This is apparently the younger brother of Gongzi Yong. Huai Ying was the wife of Lord Huai of Jin and subsequently became a wife of Lord Wen. These are the two rulers referred to above. 95 The criticism here seems to be that Gongzi Yue has no sense of power politics and perhaps lacks ambition. While Gongzi Yong has cultivated relationships with a great domain like Qin, Yue has been content with dwelling in the small and distant Chen. 96 This indicates that Gongzi Yue lived at this time in the domain of Chen. 97 Du Qi is the mother of Gongzi Yong, and Bi Jí is the mother of Lord Xiang. 98 On Ji Wei, see Xi 23.6 above. Lord Wen had married her when he lived among the Di people. 99 The first wife was Wen Ying, who presumably had no surviving son. The second was Bi Jí, the mother of Lord Xiang. The third was Ji Wei, and the fourth was Du Qi, the mother of Gongzi Yong. 100 Pi 郫 was located in the domain of Jin near present-day Shaoyuan Township 邵源 鎮 west of Jiyuan County 濟源縣, Henan. 101 Du Yu (ZZ 19A.315) explains that the ruler had already issued commands to Hu Yigu when Yang Chufu usurped his authority.

494

Zuo Tradition

Hu Yigua said, “It would be better to establish Gongzi Yue as ruler.93 Huai Yinga was the favorite of two rulers.94 If we set up her son, the people will surely make him secure.” Zhao Dunc said, “Huai Yinga is of low rank. She was the ninth woman in order. What sway could her son have? Moreover, to be the favorite of two rulers is to be lascivious. As the son of the former ruler, to be unable to seek out a great domain but to depart and dwell in a small domain is contemptible.95 As the contemptible son of a lascivious mother, he will have no authority. And since the domain of Chen is small and distant,96 he will receive no assistance from them. How will we find security in this? Du Qi, on account of the ruler, deferred to Bi Jí and honored her as superior.97 And on account of the Di, she deferred to Ji Wei, and she herself became secondary to her.98 So she became the fourth in order.99 Because of all this, the former ruler cherished their son and sent him as an official to Qin, where he became assistant minister. Qin, being large and close at hand, will suffice to provide him with assistance. Being the cherished son of a dutiful mother will suffice to give him authority over the people. Would it not be right to establish him as ruler?” They sent Xian Mie and Fan Huia to Qin to meet Gongzi Yong. Hu Yigua also sent someone to summon Gongzi Yue from Chen, and Zhao Dunc sent someone to kill him in Pi.100 Hu Yigu resents Yang Chufu for replacing him with Zhao Dun as commander of the central army, which in the Jin system also means being chief minister (Wen 6.1), and sends his kinsman to kill Yang Chufu, fulfilling Ning Ying’s earlier prophecy (Wen 5.5). Hu Yigua resented Yang Chufua for having replaced him in his position and also knew that Yang Chufua would receive no assistance in Jin. In the ninth month, Hu Yigua sent Hu Jujub to kill Yang Chufu. The text says, “Jin put to death its high officer,” because he had usurped the authority of allotting office.101

6.6(7)

In winter, in the tenth month, Xiangzhong went to Jin to participate in the funeral of Lord Xiang.

6.7(5)

Zhao Dun avenges the death of his ally Yang Chufu by putting Hu Juju to death and driving Hu Yigu into exile. Yu Pian, despite old grudges against Hu Yigu, escorts the latter to the border. In the eleventh month, on the bingyin day, Jin put to death Hu Jujua. Hu Yigua fled to the Di. Zhao Dunb sent Yu Pian to escort his wife and children out of the domain.

Lord Wen

6.8(8)

495

夷之蒐，賈季戮臾駢，臾駢之人欲盡殺賈氏以報焉。臾駢曰：「不 可。吾聞前志有之曰：『敵惠敵怨，不在後嗣，忠之道也。』夫子禮於賈 季，我以其寵報私怨，無乃不可乎？介人之寵，非勇也。損怨益仇，非知 也。以私害公，非忠也。釋此三者，何以事夫子？」盡具其帑與其器用財 賄，親帥扞之，送致諸竟。 6.9(9) 閏月不告朔，非禮也。閏以正時，時以作事，事以厚生，生民之道於是乎

在矣。不告閏朔，棄時政也，何以為民？

春秋 7.1(1) 七年，春，公伐邾。 7.2(2) 三月甲戌，取須句。 7.3 遂城郚。 7.4(3) 夏，四月，宋公王臣卒。 7.5(3) 宋人殺其大夫。 7.6(4) 戊子，晉人及秦人戰于令狐。晉先蔑奔秦。 7.7(5) 狄侵我西鄙。 7.8(6) 秋，八月，公會諸侯、晉大夫，盟于扈。 7.9(7) 冬，徐伐莒。

102 Some take this as a generic reference (Takezoe, 8.44) and others as the name of a specific work about which nothing more is known: Qianzhi 前志 (note that it is marked as a proper noun in Yang, 2:552). On the general problem of zhi 志, which we have translated as “records,” see note 28 above.

496

Zuo Tradition

During the muster at Yi, Hu Yigu punished Yu Pian, and the followers of Yu Pian wanted to kill off all the Jia lineage in revenge for this. Yu Pian said, “This is not right. I have heard that in earlier records102 there is the following: ‘When repaying a kindness or a grudge, one does not involve posterity. This is the way of honor.’ Our master, Zhao Dun, showed proper courtesy to Hu Yigua. Would it not be wrong for us to repay his favor with a private grudge? To take advantage of another’s favor is not courage. To eliminate a grudge but increase enemies is not wise. To harm the common good for the sake of private interest is not honorable. If we relinquish these three qualities, how can we serve our master?” Yu Pian completed the preparations for Hu Yigu’sa family along with his household goods and wealth, and he personally guided and protected them, escorting them all the way to the border. In the intercalary month, our lord did not announce the first day of the month: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. We use the intercalary month to correct the seasons. We use the seasons to perform activities. We use activities to enrich the people’s livelihood. The way of providing the people with livelihood lies precisely in this! Not to announce the first day of an intercalary month is to cast aside timely governance. How could one serve the people by doing this?

6.9(9)

LORD WEN 7 (620 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, our lord attacked Zhu.

7.1(1)

In the third month, on the jiaxu day (17), we took Xuqu.

7.2(2)

We then fortified Wu.

7.3

In summer, in the fourth month, Wangchen, the Duke of Song, died.

7.4(3)

Song leaders put to death their high officers.

7.5(3)

On the wuzi day (1), a Jin leader did battle with a Qin leader at Linghu. Xian Mie of Jin fled to Qin.

7.6(4)

The Di invaded our western marches.

7.7(5)

In autumn, in the eighth month, our lord met with the princes and a high officer of Jin and swore a covenant at Hu.103

7.8(6)

In winter, Xu attacked Ju.

7.9(7)

103 Hu 扈 was located in the domain of Zheng west of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan.

Lord Wen

497

7.10(7) 公孫敖如莒蒞盟。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年，春，公伐邾，間晉難也。 7.2(2) 三月甲戌，取須句，寘文公子焉，非禮也

7.3(4, 5)

夏，四月，宋成公卒。於是公子成為右師，公孫友為左師，樂豫為司馬， 鱗矔為司徒，公子蕩為司城，華御事為司寇。 昭公將去群公子，樂豫曰：「不可。公族，公室之枝葉也，若去之， 則本根無所庇蔭矣。葛藟猶能庇其本根，故君子以為比，況國君乎？此 諺所謂『庇焉而縱尋斧焉』者也。必不可。君其圖之！親之以德，皆股肱 也，誰敢攜貳？若之何去之？」不聽。 穆、襄之族率國人以攻公，殺公孫固、公孫鄭于公宮。六卿和公 室，樂豫舍司馬以讓公子卬。昭公即位而葬。書曰「宋人殺其大夫」，不 稱名，眾也，且言非其罪也。

104 It is interesting that Shiji says in one place (38.1627) simply that Duke Cheng died, which is in agreement with the Zuozhuan account above, and in another place (14.603) that Gongsun Gu murdered him. 105 These are the six highest ministerial positions in the domain of Song (cf. Wen 16.5 and Cheng 15.4). 106 Shiji says in one place (38.1628) that Lord Zhao was the son of Lord Cheng and in another (14.604) that he was the son of Lord Xiang. But in Wen 16.5, Lord Zhao refers to the wife of Lord Xiang as “grandmother” (祖母), indicating that he was the son of Lord Cheng. Shiji 38.1628 also says, “When Lord Cheng died, Lord Cheng’s younger brother, Yu, killed the heir apparent and the grand supervisor Gongsun Gu and set himself up as ruler. But the Song leaders joined together to put the ruler Yu to death and instated Lord Cheng’s young son Wujiu, and that one became Lord Zhao.” This does not appear in Zuozhuan. Moreover, Gongsun Gu dies in somewhat different circumstances in Zuozhuan (see 7.4a below). Lord Zhao did not want to eliminate all the noble sons, but obviously certain of the descendants of the former lords Mu (728–720) and Xiang (650–637) were under attack. 107 This is an allusion to Maoshi 71, “Ge lei” 葛藟, 4A.153, which begins: “Long drawnout are the ko [ge] creepers and the lei creepers, / On the banks of the River; / Far away indeed I am from my brothers, / I call a stranger ‘father’; / I call a stranger ‘father,’ / And yet he does not look at me” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, 48). 108 See Karlgren, gl. 220. That is, the ruler should seek shelter from his kinsmen and yet proposes here that they be eliminated. 109 Gongzi Ang is a younger brother of Lord Zhao. 110 Du Yu (ZZ 19A.317) explains: “It gives neither the names of those who did the killing nor those who died. Those who did the killing were numerous and that is why they cannot be known. Those who died were guilty of no offense, so they were not named.”

498

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) went to Ju to oversee the swearing of a covenant.

7.10(7)

ZUO

In the seventh year, in spring, our lord attacked Zhu: this was taking advantage of the difficulties in Jin.

7.1(1)

Lu had previously occupied Xuqu but had, on that occasion, returned their rightful ruler to them (Xi 22.1). On this occasion, however, the son of Lord Wen of Zhu, presumably a Lu puppet, was installed there. In the third month, on the jiaxu day, we took Xuqu and put Lord Wen’s son there: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety.

7.2(2)

Lord Zhao of Song tries to centralize power but meets with fierce opposition. After a bloody power struggle, he reaches a peace agreement with the lateral branches of the ducal family. In summer, in the fourth month, Lord Cheng of Song died.104 At this time Gongzi Cheng was minister of the right, Gong­sun You was minister of the left, Yue Yu was supervisor of the military, Lin Guan was supervisor of conscripts, Gongzi Dang was supervisor of fortifications, and Hua Yushi was supervisor of corrections.105 Lord Zhao was going to eliminate the noble sons,106 but Yue Yu said, “This should not be done. The ducal lineage makes up the branches and foliage of the ducal house. If you prune them, then the trunk and roots will have nothing to shelter and shade them. Even kudzu vines can shelter the trunk and roots, and that is why the noble man uses them as a metaphor.107 How much more so should the ruler of a domain? This is a case of, as the saying has it, ‘seeking shelter under a tree and then taking an axe to it.’108 This must not be done. I hope that you, my lord, will consider this. If you attract your kinsmen with virtue, they all will be like your own arms and legs, and who will dare be disaffected or disloyal? Why would you eliminate them?” But he did not heed this. The houses of Lord Mu and Lord Xiang led the inhabitants of the capital to attack the duke. They killed Gongsun Gu and Gongsun Zheng in the duke’s palace. The six ministers made peace with the ducal household. Yue Yu resigned as supervisor of the military, deferring to Gongzi Ang.109 The burial of Lord Cheng took place after Lord Zhao’s accession. The text says, “The men of Song killed their high officers”: it does not give their names because the killers were so numerous and it also indicates that the victims were not guilty of any crime.110

7.3(4, 5)

Lord Wen

499

7.4a(6) 秦康公送公子雍于晉，曰：「文公之入也無衛，故有呂、郤之難。」乃多

與之徒衛。 穆嬴日抱大子以啼于朝，曰：「先君何罪？其嗣亦何罪？舍適嗣不 立而外求君，將焉寘此？」 出朝，則抱以適趙氏，頓首於宣子曰：「先君奉此子也而屬諸子 曰：『此子也才，吾受子之賜；不才，吾唯子之怨。』今君雖終，言猶在 耳，而棄之，若何？」宣子與諸大夫皆患穆嬴，且畏偪，乃背先蔑而立靈 公，以禦秦師。 箕鄭居守。趙盾將中軍，先克佐之；荀林父佐上軍；先蔑將下軍， 先都佐之。步招御戎，戎津為右。及堇陰。宣子曰：「我若受秦，秦則賓 也；不受，寇也。既不受矣，而復緩師，秦將生心。先人有奪人之心，軍 之善謀也。逐寇如追逃，軍之善政也。」 訓卒，利兵，秣馬，蓐食，潛師夜起。戊子，敗秦師于令狐，至于 刳首。

111 The Qin ruler, Lord Kang (r. 620–610), is referring here to the strife that arose when his predecessor Lord Mu (r. 659–621) installed Chong’er in Jin; see Xi 24.1b. 112 Cf. Xi 24.1. 113 This view is represented as a saying or maxim of military strategy; see Xuan 12.2 and Zhao 21.6. For a quite different interpretation of these lines, see Karlgren, gl. 221. 114 The dictionary Fangyan glosses ru 蓐 as hou 厚, “abundant” (12.6a.79). Yang (2:560) notes, “Before a battle, they would surely order the soldiers to eat their fill.” Du Yu (ZZ 19A.318) takes the phrase quite literally as “to eat on the mattress,” meaning that they should eat a meal early in the morning while still resting. Karlgren (gl. 222) follows Du. Cf. Cheng 16.5.

500

Zuo Tradition

The dispute concerning who should succeed Lord Xiang of Jin now comes to a head. A plan to bring Gongzi Yong from Qin (Wen 6.5) is thwarted, as Mu Ying, Lord Xiang’s widow, secures the support of the Zhao family for her son, the young heir apparent who will be known to history as Lord Ling. Qin forces escorting Gongzi Yong engage in battle with Jin, ending with Jin victory at Linghu. Lord Kang of Qin escorted Gongzi Yong on his way to Jin, saying, “When Lord Wen entered Jin, he had no bodyguards, and that is why the rebellion of Lü Sheng and Xi Rui occurred.”111 So he gave him numerous foot soldiers to act as bodyguards. For days on end Mu Ying carried the heir apparent and cried out in the Jin court, “What was the crime of our former ruler? And what is the crime of his heir? If you reject the rightful heir and do not establish him as ruler, but instead seek a ruler abroad, then where will you place this one?” She left the court and carried him to the Zhao residence. Bowing before Zhao Dunb until her head knocked against the ground, she said, “When the former ruler held this son in his hands and entrusted him to you, he said, ‘If this son becomes capable, I will have received a gift bestowed by you; if he does not become capable, I will have resentment for none but you!’ Although the ruler has now gone, his words still sound in our ears. What would you be doing if you should then reject those words?” Zhao Dunb and the high officers all worried about Mu Ying and also feared reprisal.112 So they turned against Xian Mie and established Lord Ling as ruler, and with that went forth to engage the Qin troops. Ji Zhengfua remained to guard the capital. Zhao Dun commanded the central army, and Xian Ke assisted him. Xun Linfu was assistant commander for the upper army. Xian Mie led the lower army, and Xian Du assisted him. Bu Zhao drove the war chariot, and Rong Jin was the spearman on the right. When they reached Jinyin, Zhao Dunb said, “If we receive Gongzi Yong from Qin, then Qin will be our guests. If we do not accept him, they will be our enemies. If on top of not receiving him, we also delay our troops, Qin is going to get ideas. ‘To preempt the enemy is to rob him of his will’ is good military strategy. ‘To pursue the enemy as if one were chasing men in flight’ is good military leadership.”113 They instructed the soldiers, sharpened their weapons, fed the horses, and ate in abundance.114 Forming the ranks of the troops in secret, they set out at night. On the wuzi day (1), they defeated the Qin troops at Linghu and advanced as far as Kushou.

7.4a(6)

Lord Wen

501

7.4b 己丑，先蔑奔秦，士會從之。

先蔑之使也，荀林父止之，曰：「夫人、大子猶在，而外求君，此必 不行。子以疾辭，若何？不然，將及。攝卿以往，可也，何必子？同官為 寮，吾嘗同寮，敢不盡心乎？」弗聽。為賦〈板〉之三章，又弗聽。及亡，荀 伯盡送其帑及其器用財賄於秦，曰：「為同寮故也。」 士會在秦三年，不見士伯。其人曰：「能亡人於國，不能見於此， 焉用之？」士季曰：「吾與之同罪，非義之也，將何見焉？」及歸，遂不 見。 7.5(7) 狄侵我西鄙，公使告于晉。趙宣子使因賈季問酆舒，且讓之。酆舒問於

賈季曰：「趙衰、趙盾孰賢？」對曰：「趙衰，冬日之日也；趙盾，夏日之日 也。」

115 He was going to Qin with Fan Hui expressly to meet Gongzi Yong and accompany him back to Jin, where he was to be installed as ruler (Wen 6.5). 116 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.633. The third stanza says: “Though I have a different service, / I am a colleague of yours; / But when I go to you and deliberate, / You listen to me arrogantly” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, 212).

502

Zuo Tradition

With Zhao Dun switching his allegiance to Lord Ling, the Jin ministers appointed to escort Gongzi Yong back to Jin as prospective ruler feel imperiled and flee to Qin. On the jichou day (2), Xian Mie fled to Qin, and Fan Huia accompanied him. When Xian Mie was going to Qin as an envoy,115 Xun Linfu stopped him, saying, “To seek a ruler from abroad while the former ruler’s wife and heir apparent are still alive is a course of action that is bound to fail. How would it be if you were to decline on the pretext of illness? If you do not do this, disaster will overtake you. It would be appropriate to appoint an acting minister and have him go. Why must it be you? Those who occupy the same office are colleagues. Since we were once together as colleagues, I would not dare do otherwise than fully exert myself on your behalf.” Xian Mie did not heed this. Xun Linfu recited for him the third stanza of the ode “Ban,”116 but he also did not heed this. When Xian Mie went into exile, Xun Linfuc sent all of Xian Mie’s family and his implements and goods to Qin, saying, “This is because we were colleagues.” Fan Huia was in Qin for three years, but he did not meet with Xian Miea. His men said, “You could bring yourself to go into exile from the domain with this man, but you cannot bring yourself to meet him here.117 What is the point of this?” Fan Huib said, “I committed the same offense as he. I do not consider him dutiful, so why should I meet with him here?” Right up to the time of his return to Jin, Fan Hui never met with Xian Mie.118

7.4b

Zhao Dun now depends upon the Jin minister Hu Yigu, who had earlier gone into exile among the Di (Wen 6.7), to intercede with the Di on Jin’s behalf. Hu Yigu’s assessment of Zhao Dun implies a critical perspective. The Di invaded our western marches. Our lord sent someone to report this to Jin. Zhao Duna sent someone to go through Hu Yigua to make inquiries of Feng Shu and also to rebuke him.119 Feng Shu asked Hu Yigua, “Who is worthier, Zhao Cui or Zhao Dun?” He responded, “Zhao Cui is like the sun on a winter day, and Zhao Dun is like the sun on a summer day.”120

7.5(7)

117 We follow Du Yu’s interpretation (ZZ 19A.318). For a quite different reading, see Karlgren, gl. 223. 118 For Fan Hui’s return to Jin, see Wen 13.2. 119 Feng Shu was a minister of the Di and is being reproached here for invading Lu. 120 Du Yu (ZZ 19A.319) explains: “The sun on a winter day is lovable, while the sun on a summer day is frightening.”

Lord Wen

503

7.6(8) 秋，八月，齊侯、宋公、衛侯、陳侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯會晉趙盾，盟于扈，

晉侯立故也。公後至，故不書所會。凡會諸侯，不書所會，後也。後至， 不書其國，辟不敏也。

7.7(9, 10)

504

穆伯娶于莒，曰戴己，生文伯；其娣聲己生惠叔。戴己卒，又聘于莒，莒 人以聲己辭，則為襄仲聘焉。冬，徐伐莒，莒人來請盟，穆伯如莒蒞盟， 且為仲逆。及鄢陵，登城見之，美，自為娶之。仲請攻之，公將許之。叔 仲惠伯諫曰：「臣聞之：『兵作於內為亂，於外為寇；寇猶及人，亂自及 也。』今臣作亂而君不禁，以啟寇讎，若之何？」公止之。惠伯成之，使仲 舍之，公孫敖反之，復為兄弟如初。從之。

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the eighth month, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao met with Zhao Dun of Jin and swore a covenant at Hu: this was because the Prince of Jin had been established as ruler. Our lord arrived late, so it does not record who was present at the meeting. In all cases when we met with the lords but the text does not record who was present, it is because we arrived late.121 That the domains participating are not recorded if we arrived late is to avoid carelessness.

7.6(8)

Two powerful Lu ministers, the cousins Meng Mubo (Wen 1.1, 1.8, et passim) and Xiangzhong (Wen 2.7, 6.7), almost come to serious conflict over a woman, but the Lord of Lu intercedes. Meng Mubob took a wife in Ju. She was named Dai Ji, and she gave birth to Wenbo. Her younger sister, Sheng Ji, gave birth to Huishu.122 Dai Ji died, and Meng Mubo tried to formalize another engagement with a lady from Ju. The Ju leaders declined on account of the position of Sheng Ji,123 and Meng Mubo formalized the engagement on behalf of Xiangzhong. In winter, Xu attacked Ju, and the Ju leaders came to request a covenant. Meng Mubob went to Ju to oversee the covenant and also to meet and escort home the bride intended for Xiangzhong. When he arrived in Yanling and ascended the fortifications to meet her, he found her beautiful and took her for himself.124 Xiangzhong asked permission to attack him, and our lord was going to allow it. Shuzhong Huibo remonstrated: “I have heard, ‘When arms are taken up within a domain, it is unrest; when without, it is an incursion. While an incursion may yet affect other people, unrest affects only one’s own.’ Now, if a minister foments unrest, and you, my lord, do not prevent it and thereby stir up marauders to assault us, then what are you doing?” Our lord stopped Xiangzhong. Huibo then brought them to an accord, proposing that Xiangzhong let the woman go and that Meng Mubob return her to Ju, and the two of them again became like brothers, as in the beginning. They went along with this.

7.7(9, 10)

121 This rule does not apply in the case of the meeting at Shasui in Cheng 16.6. 122 Dai Ji and Sheng Ji are both posthumous names, which indicates that the wives of ministers also had such names (Yang, 2:562; see also Lord Yin, n. 1). 123 Since Sheng Ji ought to succeed to her sister’s position, seeking another wife was quite unnecessary. 124 Yanling 鄢陵 was the capital of the domain of Ju and was located in present-day Linquan County 臨汱縣, Shandong. This Yanling is different from the site of the famous battle in Cheng 16.5, which is the same as the Yan mentioned in Yin 1.4 (see Place Name Index).

Lord Wen

505

7.8 晉郤缺言於趙宣子曰：「日衛不睦，故取其地。今已睦矣，可以歸之。叛

而不討，何以示威？服而不柔，何以示懷？非威非懷，何以示德？無德， 何以主盟？子為正卿，以主諸侯，而不務德，將若之何？夏書曰：『戒之 用休，董之用威，勸之以九歌，勿使壞。』九功之德皆可歌也，謂之九 歌。六府、三事，謂之九功。水、火、金、木、土、穀，謂之六府；正德、利 用、厚生，謂之三事。義而行之，謂之德、禮。無禮不樂，所由叛也。若吾 子之德，莫可歌也，其誰來之？盍使睦者歌吾子乎？」宣子說之。

春秋 8.1 八年，春王正月。 8.2 夏，四月。 8.3(3) 秋，八月戊申，天王崩。

125 Jin at this time was still acting as overlord, and Zhao Dun, according to Shiji 14.604, monopolized government authority. 126 This passage from the Xia Documents is today found in the “Da Yu mo” 大禹謨 chapter of the Ancient Script Documents (3.53). 127 See Karlgren, gl. 224. 128 Both “Lisao” 離騷 and “Tianwen” 天問 refer to nine songs supposedly associated with Qi 啟, the son of the mythical sage-king Yu. Whether this is a reference to such

506

Zuo Tradition

Relations between Jin and Wei had been troubled (Wen 1.5), but in the wake of a new covenant between Wei and Jin (Wen 7.6), a Jin leader uses the metaphor of music to recommend a gentler policy toward Wei. Xi Que of Jin said to Zhao Duna, “There was a time when Wei was not on amicable terms with us, and that is why we occupied its territory. Now that we are on amicable terms, we can return it. If someone revolts and you do not chastise them, how do you display your majesty? But if they submit and you are not gentle, how do you display your concern about them? If you are neither majestic nor concerned, how do you display your virtue? And without virtue, how can you preside over a covenant? You are the chief minister and thereby preside over the princes.125 But if you do not strive for virtue, what good will it do? As it says in the Xia Documents,126 ‘Exhort them with acts of grace, manage them with majesty,127 encourage them with the nine songs,128 and do not allow them to fall into ruin.’ The virtues of the nine endeavors can all be sung about, and we call these ‘the nine songs.’ The six treasuries and the three official affairs are called the nine endeavors. Water, fire, metal, wood, earth, and grain are the six treasuries. Correcting virtue, using things advantageously, and enriching livelihood are the three official affairs. To practice them in accordance with one’s proper duty is called virtue and ritual propriety. Without ritual, one will not perform music,129 and that is the path to disaffection. If with virtue like yours there is nothing that can be sung of, then who will be drawn to come here? Why not bring it about so that those who have become concordant with you sing your praises?” Zhao Dunb was pleased with this.

7.8

LORD WEN 8 (619 BCE) ANNALS

The eighth year, spring, the royal first month.

8.1

Summer, the fourth month.

8.2

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the wushen day (28), the Heaven appointed king succumbed.

8.3(3)



a tradition or some other, it is clear from what follows that these songs are linked here with singing about “the virtues of the nine endeavors.” 129 Yang (2:564) notes the double entendre here. Without ritual propriety there will be no occasion to make music about the “nine endeavors.” But 樂 (yue/le) also means “joy.” That is, “Without ritual propriety, one will not feel joy, and that will be a cause for revolt.”

Lord Wen

507

8.4(4) 冬，十月壬午，公子遂會晉趙盾，盟于衡雍。 8.5(4) 乙酉，公子遂會雒戎，盟于暴。 8.6(5) 公孫敖如京師，不至而復。丙戌，奔莒。 8.7 螽。 8.8(6) 宋人殺其大夫司馬。宋司城來奔。

左傳 8.1 八年春，晉侯使解揚歸匡、戚之田于衛，且復致公婿池之封，自申至于

虎牢之竟。 8.2 夏，秦人伐晉，取武城，以報令狐之役。 8.3(3) 秋，襄王崩。

8.4(4, 5)

晉人以扈之盟來討。冬，襄仲會晉趙孟盟于衡雍，報扈之盟也。遂會伊 雒之戎。書曰「公子遂」，珍之也。

8.5(6) 穆伯如周弔喪，不至，以幣奔莒，從己氏焉。

130 Bao 暴 or Baosui 暴隧 belonged first to Zhou and then to Zheng. It was located west of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan. 131 While Kuang had been seized seven years earlier from Zheng (Wen 1.5), it was originally Wei land and was therefore returned to them. 132 This use of feng 封, “demarcated,” also appears in Cheng 14.3 (see also Yang, 2:566; Karlgren, gl. 225). The area described here was originally Zheng land, and there is some question among commentators whether these territories are being presented to Wei or to Zheng (Yang, 2:566). 133 That is, the covenant was to repair damage done when Lu was absent from the earlier covenant meeting.

508

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the tenth month, on the renwu day (3), Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) met with Zhao Dun of Jin and swore a covenant at Hengyong. On the yiyou day (6), Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) met with the Rong of Luo and swore a covenant at Bao.130

8.4(4)

8.5(4)

Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) was going to the Zhou capital. Before he arrived there, he turned back. On the bingxu day (7), he fled to Ju.

8.6(5)

There were locusts.

8.7

Song leaders put to death their high officer, the supervisor of the military. The Song supervisor of fortifications came to us in flight.

8.8(6)

ZUO

Jin had seized Kuang and Qī from Zheng and Wei, respectively, several years before (Wen 1.6). As a result of Xi Que’s advice above (Wen 7.8), these lands are now relinquished. In the eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Xie Yang to return the land of Kuang and Qī to Wei.131 He also presented the lands that were demarcated by Gongxu Chi and that extended from Shen to the borders of Hulao.132

8.1

Qin retaliates for a military setback experienced during the previous year (Wen 7.4). In summer, the men of Qin attacked Jin and occupied Wucheng in retaliation for the campaign of Linghu.

8.2

In autumn, King Xiang succumbed.

8.3(3)

The Lord of Lu’s late arrival at the covenant of Hu now has consequences (Wen 7.6), but the mistake is repaired. Jin leaders used the covenant at Hu as a pretext to come and chastise us. In winter, Xiangzhong met with Zhao Dunc of Jin and swore a covenant at Hengyong: this was to make up for the covenant at Hu.133 Then he met with the Rong of the Yi and Luo regions. That the text calls him “Gongzi Sui” (Xiangzhong) is to show esteem for him.

8.4(4, 5)

Meng Mubo, still infatuated with the Ju woman (with the clan name Ji) he took from Xiangzhong (Wen 7.7), now follows her to Ju. Meng Mubob went to Zhou to extend condolences at the funeral of the king. But before he arrived there, he fled to Ju with the funeral gifts. He was following Lady Ji there.

8.5(6)

Lord Wen

509

8.6(8) 宋襄夫人，襄王之姊也，昭公不禮焉。夫人因戴氏之族，以殺襄公之孫

孔叔、公孫鍾離及大司馬公子卬，皆昭公之黨也。司馬握節以死，故書 以官。司城蕩意諸來奔，效節於府人而出。公以其官逆之，皆復之。亦書 以官，皆貴之也。 8.7 夷之蒐，晉侯將登箕鄭父、先都，而使士縠、梁益耳將中軍。先克曰：

「狐、趙之勳，不可廢也。」從之。先克奪蒯得田于堇陰。故箕鄭父、先 都、士縠、梁益耳、蒯得作亂。

春秋 9.1(2) 九年，春，毛伯來求金。 9.2 夫人姜氏如齊。 9.3(3) 二月，叔孫得臣如京師。辛丑，葬襄王。 9.4(1) 晉人殺其大夫先都。

134 King Xiang had ruled Zhou from 651 to 619, and Lord Xiang had ruled Song from 681 to 651. Liji 8.148 claims that Lord Xiang buried his wife, so the woman referred to here may very well be a second wife (Yang, 2:567), a possibility that is strengthened by the fact that Lord Xiang, as the above dates indicate, belongs to an older generation than King Xiang. Since Lord Xiang is the grandfather of Lord Zhao (r. 619–611), the wife of Lord Xiang would have been the latter’s official (if not biological) grandmother and already quite aged.

510

Zuo Tradition

Conflict continues among the noble kinsmen of Song (Wen 7.3) as the wife of a former ruler (she is called Lady Wang Ji in Wen 16.5a) launches an attack upon some of Lord Zhao’s followers. The wife of Lord Xiang of Song was the elder sister of King Xiang.134 Lord Zhao of Song did not treat her with ritual propriety. Acting in collusion with a house of the Dai lineage, she brought about the murder of Lord Xiang’s grandson, Kongshu, Gongsun Zhongli, and the grand supervisor of the military, Gongzi Ang, all of whom belonged to Lord Zhao’s faction.135 The supervisor of the military died grasping his official tally, and that is why the text records his official position. The supervisor of fortifications, Dang Yizhu, came to us in flight. He had presented his official tally to the personnel of the treasury before leaving his domain. Our lord welcomed him in accord with his official position and restored him and all his followers to their original positions.136 When a person’s official title is recorded, it is to honor him.

8.6(8)

Xian Ke’s favoritism for descendants of the great Jin ministers Hu Yan and Zhao Cui, evident in his recommendations of them at Yi two years earlier, and his greed for land provoke a rebellion in Jin. At the winter muster of troops in Yi, the Prince of Jin was going to promote Ji Zhengfu and Xian Du and appoint Shi Hu and Liang Yi’er as commanders of the central army. Xian Ke said, “The achievements of Hu Yan and Zhao Cui cannot be disregarded.”137 So the prince followed this. Xian Ke seized the lands of Kuai De at Jinyin. This is why Ji Zhengfu, Xian Du, Shi Hu, Liang Yi’er, and Kuai De raised a rebellion.

8.7

LORD WEN 9 (618 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, the Mao Liege (Mao Liege Wei) came to seek bronze burial gifts.

9.1(2)

Our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, went to Qi.

9.2

In the second month, Shusun Dechen went to the Zhou capital. On the xinchou day (24), King Xiang was buried.

9.3(3)

Jin leaders put to death their high officer Xian Du.

9.4(1)

135 The Yue 樂, Hua 華, and Huang 皇 lines in Song were all descendants of Lord Dai, who had ruled Song in the last years of the ninth century Bce. 136 That more than one person is being “restored” is indicated by the adverb jie 皆, “in all cases.” Yang (2:568) argues that this refers to Dang Yizhu and his entourage, and we have accordingly added “his followers” in our translation. 137 Thus, the positions of leadership over the central army went to Hu Yigu and Zhao Dun, descendants of Lord Wen’s devoted followers Hu Yan and Zhao Cui.

Lord Wen

511



9.5

三月，夫人姜氏至自齊。

9.6(4) 晉人殺其大夫士縠及箕鄭父。 9.7(5) 楚人伐鄭。 9.8(6) 公子遂會晉人、宋人、衛人、許人，救鄭。 9.9 夏，狄侵齊。 9.10 秋，八月，曹伯襄卒。 9.11 九月癸酉，地震。 9.12(9) 冬，楚子使椒來聘。 9.13(10) 秦人來歸僖公、成風之禭。 9.14 葬曹共公。

左傳 9.1(4) 九年，春，王正月己酉，使賊殺先克。乙丑，晉人殺先都、梁益耳。 9.2(1) 毛伯衛來求金，非禮也。不書王命，未葬也。 9.3(3) 二月，莊叔如周葬襄王。 9.4(6) 三月甲戌，晉人殺箕鄭父、士縠、蒯得。

512

Zuo Tradition

In the third month, our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi.

9.5

Jin leaders put to death their high officers Shi Hu and Ji Zhengfu.

9.6(4)

A Chu leader attacked Zheng.

9.7(5)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) met with a Jin leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, and a Xǔ leader and went to the aid of Zheng.

9.8(6)

In summer, the Di invaded Qi.

9.9

In autumn, in the eighth month, Xiang, the Liege of Cao, died.

9.10

In the ninth month, on the guiyou day, there was an earthquake.

9.11

In winter, the Master of Chu sent Jiao to us on an official visit.

9.12(9)

A Qin leader came to present burial garments for Lord Xi and Cheng Feng.

9.13(10)

Lord Gong of Cao was buried.

9.14

ZUO

In a continuation of the Zuozhuan narrative above (Wen 8.7), the rebels kill the Jin minister Xian Ke. The leaders of the rebels are in turn put to death (Wen 9.1, 9.4). In the ninth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the jiyou day (2), they sent brigands to kill Xian Ke. On the yichou day (18), the Jin leaders put to death Xian Du and Liang Yi’er.

9.1(4)

A Zhou official seeks a contribution from Lu for the burial of King Xiang, perhaps because the Lu minister Meng Mubo had absconded with the original Lu gifts (Wen 8.5). The Mao Liege Wei came to seek bronze burial gifts: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. That it does not record that it was by command of the king is because the former king had not yet been buried.

9.2(1)

In the second month, Shusun Dechena went to Zhou for the burial of King Xiang.

9.3(3)

In the third month, on the jiaxu day (28), Jin leaders put to death Ji Zhengfu, Shi Hu, and Kuai De.

Lord Wen

9.4(6)

513

9.5(7) 范山言於楚子曰：「晉君少，不在諸侯，北方可圖也。」楚子師于狼淵以

伐鄭。囚公子堅、公子尨及樂耳。鄭及楚平。 9.6(8) 公子遂會晉趙盾、宋華耦、衛孔達、許大夫救鄭，不及楚師。卿不書，緩

也，以懲不恪。 9.7 夏，楚侵陳，克壺丘，以其服於晉也。 9.8 秋，楚公子朱自東夷伐陳，陳人敗之，獲公子茷。陳懼，乃及楚平。 9.9(12) 冬，楚子越椒來聘，執幣傲。叔仲惠伯曰：「是必滅若敖氏之宗。傲其先

君，神弗福也。」 9.10(13) 秦人來歸僖公、成風之禭，禮也。諸侯相弔賀也，雖不當事，苟有禮焉，

書也，以無忘舊好。

138 That is, unlike his predecessors Lord Wen and Lord Xiang, he has no ambition to become overlord. Recall that Lord Ling was a young child at this point. 139 Langyuan 狼淵 was located in the domain of Zheng west of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. 140 All these are high officers of the domain of Zheng. 141 Huqiu 壺丘 was located in the domain of Chen southeast of Xincai County 新蔡縣, Henan.

514

Zuo Tradition

The domain of Chu takes advantage of the deterioration of the alliance of princes to move against its northern neighbor, the domain of Zheng. Fan Shan said to the Master of Chu, “The Jin ruler is young and he is not concerned with the princes.138 We can strategize about the northern regions.” The Master of Chu stationed an army in Langyuan and attacked Zheng.139 He took as prisoners Gongzi Jian, Gongzi Mang, and Yue Er.140 Zheng and Chu made peace.

9.5(7)

Xiangzhong a met with Zhao Dun, Hua Ou of Song, Kong Da of Wei, and a high officer of Xǔ and went to the aid of Zheng. But they did not come in time to confront the Chu troops. The names of the ministers are not recorded because they were late, and by this means their lack of zeal is censured.

9.6(8)

In summer, Chu invaded Chen and subdued Huqiu:141 this was because it had submitted to Jin.

9.7

Chu continues its military actions against northern neighbors (Wen 9.5). In autumn, Zizhua of Chu attacked Chen from the region of the Eastern Yi. The men of Chen defeated him and captured Gongzi Pei. But Chen was afraid and consequently made peace with Chu.

9.8

A Chu minister’s haughty behavior during a diplomatic mission in Lu leads to dire predictions, which are fulfilled thirteen years later (Xuan 4.2). In winter, Dou Jiaoc of Chu came to us on an official visit. He was haughty as he held the gifts. Shuzhong Huibo said, “This one is certain to destroy the lineage of the Ruo’ao clan. If he is haughty to the former rulers, the spirits will not bless him.”142

9.9(12)

Although Lord Xi of Lu had been dead for ten years (Xi 33.11) and his mother Cheng Feng for six (Annals, Wen 4.8), the domain of Qin only now gets around to offering condolences. Somewhat surprisingly, this late offering is not condemned. A Qin leader came to present burial garments for Lord Xi and Cheng Feng: this was in accordance with ritual propriety. When the princes offered condolences or congratulations to one another, even if it was not at the proper time, as long as they showed the proper ritual in the action, a record was made so as not to let the age-old good relations be forgotten.

9.10(13)

142 Before departing from Chu, Dou Jiao would presumably have displayed the gifts at the Chu Ancestral Temple. His lack of care in handling those gifts was an act of disrespect for the former rulers enshrined in the temple.

Lord Wen

515

春秋 10.1 十年，春，王三月辛卯，臧孫辰卒。 10.2(2) 夏，秦伐晉。 10.3(3) 楚殺其大夫宜申。 10.4 自正月不雨，至于秋七月。 10.5(4) 及蘇子盟于女栗。 10.6 冬，狄侵宋。 10.7(5) 楚子、蔡侯次于厥貉。

左傳 10.1 十年，春，晉人伐秦，取少梁。 10.2(2) 夏，秦伯伐晉，取北徵。 10.3(3) 初，楚范巫矞似謂成王與子玉、子西曰：「三君皆將強死。」城濮之役，

王思之，故使止子玉曰：「毋死。」不及。止子西，子西縊而縣絕，王使適 至，遂止之，使為商公。 沿漢泝江，將入郢。王在渚宮，下，見之，懼而辭曰：「臣免於死，又 有讒言，謂臣將逃，臣歸死於司敗也。」王使為工尹，又與子家謀弒穆 王。穆王聞之，五月，殺鬬宜申及仲歸。

143 The location of Ruli 女栗 is unknown. This Zhou minister belonged to the Su line­ age but is not the same person as the Master of Su who lost his control over Wen and fled to Wei in Xi 19.2. 144 Juemo 厥貉 was located in the domain of Que in present-day Xiangcheng County 項城縣, Henan. 145 Shaoliang 少梁 was located in the domain of Qin south of present-day Hancheng County 韓城縣, Shaanxi. 146 Beizheng 北徵 was located in the domain of Jin near present-day Chengcheng County 澄城縣, Shaanxi. 147 On Cheng Dechen’s death after Chu’s defeat in the battle of Chengpu, see Xi 28.4. 148 Shang 商 is probably the same place as Shangmi (Xi 25.3) and was a settlement within the domain of Chu. 149 Ying was the Chu capital (see Xi 12.2 and map 4). 150 The office known in most domains as sikou 司寇, “supervisor of corrections,” is known as sibai 司敗 in the domains of Chu, Chen, and Tang.

516

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 10 (617 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the xinmao day (21), Zangsun Chen (Zang Wenzhong) died.

10.1

In summer, Qin attacked Jin.

10.2(2)

Chu put to death its high officer Yishen (Dou Yishen).

10.3(3)

From the first month right up to autumn, the seventh month, it did not rain.

10.4

We swore a covenant with the Master of Su at Ruli.143

10.5(4)

In winter, the Di invaded Song. The Master of Chu and the Prince of Cai set up camp at Juemo.

10.6 144

10.7(5)

ZUO

In the tenth year, in spring, the men of Jin attacked Qin and occupied Shaoliang.145

10.1

In summer, the Liege of Qin attacked Jin and occupied Beizheng.146

10.2(2)

Years earlier a shaman had predicted that three Chu leaders, King Cheng (Wen 1.7), Cheng Dechen (Xi 28.4), and Dou Yishen, would all die violently. The last of the three left alive now meets a violent end. Earlier, Yu Si, a shaman from the settlement of Fan in Chu, had said to King Cheng, Cheng Dechena, and Dou Yishena, “You three noble men will all die violently.” At the campaign of Chengpu, the king remembered this, and that is why he sent someone to stop Cheng Dechena, saying, “Do not die!”147 But he did not arrive in time. When he went to stop Dou Yishena, Dou Yishena was in the process of hanging himself, but the rope broke. Just then the messenger arrived and stopped him, and Dou Yishen was appointed Shang Lord.148 Dou Yishen traveled down the Han River and then up the Jiang and was about to enter Ying.149 The king was residing in Zhu Palace and came down from the palace to meet him. Dou Yishen was frightened and explained himself, saying, “I escaped death earlier, and now again there is slander averring that I am going to flee the domain. I am returning here to die under the hand of the supervisor of corrections.”150 The king appointed him deputy for artisans. Later, he joined in a plot with Zhong Guia to assassinate King Mu. King Mu learned of this, and in the fifth month, King Mu put to death Dou Yishen and Zhong Gui.

10.3(3)

Lord Wen

517

10.4(5) 秋，七月，及蘇子盟于女栗，頃王立故也。 10.5(7) 陳侯、鄭伯會楚子于息。冬，遂及蔡侯次于厥貉，將以伐宋。宋華御事

曰：「楚欲弱我也，先為之弱乎？何必使誘我？我實不能，民何罪？」 乃逆楚子，勞且聽命。遂道以田孟諸。宋公為右盂，鄭伯為左盂。 期思公復遂為右司馬，子朱及文之無畏為左司馬，命夙駕載燧。宋公違 命，無畏抶其僕以徇。或謂子舟曰：「國君不可戮也。」子舟曰：「當官而 行，何彊之有？《詩》曰： 剛亦不吐， 柔亦不茹。 毋縱詭隨， 以謹罔極。 是亦非辟彊也。敢愛死以亂官乎？」 10.6 厥貉之會，麇子逃歸。

151 We have followed Yang (2:577). For a somewhat different interpretation, see Karlgren, gl. 226. 152 Qisi 期思 was the name of a Chu dependency located northwest of present-day Gushi County 固始縣, Henan. The leaders of dependencies in Chu are routinely called by the title gong 公, “lord” (Yang, 2:577). 153 The Chu minister Zizhu had led an attack upon Chen in the previous year (Wen 9.8). Shen Zhou appears in Xuan 14.3, where his execution in Song provokes a Chu attack. Shen Zhou is also named Wen Zhiwuwei. He is probably a descendant of King Wen of Chu (r. 689–677) and has taken the king’s posthumous name as the name of his line. “Zhi” in this case probably means “of.” This name also appears as Wen Wuwei 文無畏 in Lüshi chunqiu 20.1391 and Huainanzi 9.303. 154 Maoshi 260, “Zheng min” 烝民, 18C.676. The two lines are in reverse order in current editions of the Odes and are so cited in Ding 4.3 below. 155 Maoshi 258, “Min lao” 民勞, 17D.632. 156 Jun 麇 was a small domain located near present-day Yun County 鄖縣 in Hubei.

518

Zuo Tradition

An emissary from the newly installed King Qing of Zhou (r. 618–613) comes to Lu. In autumn, in the seventh month, we swore a covenant with Master of Su at Ruli: this was because King Qing had been established as ruler.

10.4(5)

Chu continues its aggressiveness by threatening Song, and the latter takes action to appease them. A Chu commander humiliates the Song ruler and will pay for it with his life twenty-two years later (Xuan 14.3). The Prince of Chen and the Liege of Zheng met with the Master of Chu at Xi. In winter, along with the Prince of Cai, they then set up camp at Juemo. They were going to attack Song. Hua Yushi of Song said, “Chu wants to put us in a position of weakness. Should we do them the favor of making ourselves weak beforehand?151 Why must we let them provoke us? It is we who are incompetent. What crimes are our people guilty of ?” So they went out to meet the Master of Chu, honored the exertions of the troops, and paid heed to Chu’s commands. They then led the Master of Chu on a hunting expedition to Mengzhu Marsh. The Duke of Song led the right curved formation, and the Liege of Zheng led the left one. Fusui, the Lord of Qisi,152 was supervisor of the right army, and Zizhu and Shen Zhoub were supervisors of the left army.153 They issued a command that in the morning they should hitch up the chariots and load up the fire-making tools. The Duke of Song disobeyed the command. Shen Zhouc flogged the duke’s servant as an example to the troops. Someone said to Shen Zhoua, “The ruler of a domain cannot be disgraced.” Shen Zhoua said, “I acted in accord with my office. In what way was I being harsh? As it says in the Odes,

10.5(7)

Though it was hard, he did not spit it out; Though it was soft, he did not eat it.154

And Do not indulge the wily and obsequious And observe carefully those who go to excess.155

This too is about refusing to avoid harshness. Would I dare begrudge dying and disrupt my official duty?” On the occasion of the meeting at Juemo, the Master of Jun fled back to his domain.156

10.6

Lord Wen

519

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年，春，楚子伐麇。 11.2(2) 夏，叔彭生會晉郤缺于承匡。 11.3(3) 秋，曹伯來朝。 11.4(4) 公子遂如宋。 11.5 狄侵齊。 11.6(5) 冬，十月甲午，叔孫得臣敗狄于鹹。

左傳 11.1(1) 十一年，春，楚子伐麇。成大心敗麇師於防渚。潘崇復伐麇，至于鍚穴。 11.2(2) 夏，叔仲惠伯會晉郤缺于承匡，謀諸侯之從於楚者。 11.3(3) 秋，曹文公來朝，即位而來見也。 11.4(4) 襄仲聘于宋，且言司城蕩意諸而復之。因賀楚師之不害也。

157 The previous Zuozhuan entry (10.6) seems an attempt to provide a bridge between Annals 10.7 and this entry. 158 Chengkuang 承匡 was located in the domain of Song but little more is known of its precise location. 159 Xian 鹹 was located in the domain of Lu south of Juye County 巨野縣, Shandong. 160 Fangzhu 防渚 was located in the domain of Chu in present-day Fang County 房縣, Hubei.

520

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 11 (616 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh month, in spring, the Master of Chu attacked Jun.157

11.1(1)

In summer, Shu Pengsheng (Shuzhong Huibo) met with Xi Que of Jin at Chengkuang.158

11.2(2)

In autumn, the Liege of Cao came to visit our court.

11.3(3)

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Song.

11.4(4)

The Di invaded Qi.

11.5

In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiawu day (3), Shusun Dechen defeated the Di at Xian.159

11.6(5)

ZUO

In a continuation of the previous Zuozhuan entry (Wen 10.6), Chu attacks Jun. In the eleventh month, in spring, the Master of Chu attacked Jun. Cheng Daxin defeated the Jun troops at Fangzhu.160 Pan Chong again attacked Jun and advanced as far as Yangxue.161

11.1(1)

In summer, Shuzhong Huibo162 met with Xi Que of Jin at Chengkuang to make plans against those princes who were in league with Chu.

11.2(2)

In autumn, Lord Wen of Cao came to visit our court: upon acceding to his position, he came for an audience.

11.3(3)

A Lu official makes a visit to Song and returns a Song minister who had fled to Lu earlier (Wen 8.6). Xiangzhong made an official visit to Song. He also spoke of Dang Yizhu, the supervisor of fortifications, and had him repatriated. He took this opportunity to congratulate Song that the Chu troops had done no harm.

11.4(4)

161 Yangxue 鍚穴 was located in the domain of Wei east of present-day Baihe County 白河縣, Shaanxi. 162 In the parallel Annals passage above, this person is known as Shu Pengsheng. But as Yang (2:580) notes, the Annals reading follows a Tang stone edition of the text. All other editions have Shuzhong Pengsheng 叔仲彭生, which Yang rejects on the grounds that the Shuzhong line had not yet been established at the time reflected in the Annals.

Lord Wen

521

11.5(6) 鄋瞞侵齊，遂伐我。公卜使叔孫得臣追之，吉。侯叔夏御莊叔，緜房甥

為右，富父終甥駟乘。冬十月甲午，敗狄于鹹，獲長狄僑如。富父終甥摏 其喉以戈，殺之。埋其首於子駒之門。以命宣伯。 初，宋武公之世，鄋瞞伐宋。司徒皇父帥師禦之。耏班御皇父充 石，公子榖甥為右，司寇牛父駟乘，以敗狄于長丘，獲長狄緣斯。皇父 之二子死焉，宋公於是以門賞耏班，使食其征，謂之耏門。 晉之滅潞也，獲僑如之弟焚如。齊襄公之二年，鄋瞞伐齊。齊王子 成父獲其弟榮如。埋其首於周首之北門。衛人獲其季弟簡如。鄋瞞由 是遂亡。 11.6 郕大子朱儒自安於夫鍾，國人弗徇。

163 The Souman were a tribe of the Di people. Tan Qixiang (Zhongguo lishi ditu ji, 1:22–23) locates these people just to the northwest of the domain of Qi. 164 Normally, a chariot contained three men. When there is a fourth man, he is called sisheng 駟乘 and serves as assistant to the spearman on the right. 165 This is one of three major tribes of the Di. 166 Shusun Dechen named his son Qiaoru (posthumously named Xuanbo) to commemorate his victory over the leader of the Chang Di. This unusual name is also mentioned in Xiang 30.3. 167 Lord Wu ruled from 765 to 748, some twenty-six years before the beginning of the Annals. 168 Changqiu 長丘 was located in the domain of Song south of Fengqiu County 封丘縣, Henan. 169 There are three different interpretations of this sentence. Ma Rong 馬融 (ZZ-Ma 19B.329) believes that Huangfu had two sons in the army and that they were both killed. Du Yu and others (ZZ 19B.329) suggest that er zi 二子 refers to the “two noble sons,” or attendants, who were with Huangfu in the chariot: Gongzi Gusheng and Niufu. The third explanation follows the second with regard to er zi but understands the preceding zhi 之 in this context to be the equivalent of yu 與 (on such evidence see Wang Yinzhi, Jingzhuan shi ci, 10.6). According to this reading, Huangfu and the two attendants were killed. This would explain why, in the subsequent sentence, Er Ban is the only person rewarded. Yang (2:583) follows this latter reading, as do we.

522

Zuo Tradition

Lu achieves victory over the Souman, a Di tribe, and a Lu noble names his son after the captured Di leader Qiaoru. In separate campaigns, Qiaoru’s three younger brothers are killed in battles with Jin, Qi, and Wei. The line of Souman rulers is thus extinguished. The Souman invaded Qi and then attacked us.163 Our lord divined about sending Shusun Dechen to pursue them, and the divination was auspicious. Hou Shuxia drove the chariot for Shusun Dechena. Mian Fang­ sheng was the spearman on the right, and Fufu Zhongsheng was the fourth man in the chariot.164 In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiawu day (3), they defeated the Di at Xian and captured Qiaoru of the Chang Di.165 Fufu Zhongsheng crushed his throat with a dagger-axe and killed him. They buried his head at the Ziju Gate. Dechen named Shusun Qiaorua after him.166 Earlier, in the age of Lord Wu of Song, the Souman had attacked Song.167 Huangfu Chongshi, the supervisor of conscripts, had led out troops to engage them. Er Ban drove the chariot for Huangfu Chongshi. Gongzi Gusheng was the spearman on the right, and Niufu, the supervisor of corrections, was the fourth person in the chariot. They thereby defeated the Di at Changqiu and captured Yuansi of the Chang Di.168 Huangfu and his two attendants died in the battle.169 The Duke of Song thereupon rewarded Er Ban with a city gate and had him live on the taxes collected there. It was called the Er Gate. When Jin extinguished the Lù, Fenru, the younger brother of Qiaoru, was captured.170 In the second year of Lord Hui of Qi,171 the Souman attacked Qi. Wangzi Chengfu of Qi captured Rongru, the younger brother of Qiaoru. They buried his head at the northern gate of Zhoushou.172 The men of Wei captured Jianru, Qiaoru’s youngest brother. As a result of this, the Souman perished.

11.5(6)

Zhuru, the heir apparent of Cheng, settled at Fuzhong,173 but the inhabitants of the capital did not accept him.

11.6

170 The destruction of the Lù 潞 line, a Di domain (not to be confused with the domain of Lu), is reported in Xuan 15.3 (594 Bce). 171 The text of Zuozhuan has Lord Xiang of Qi rather than Lord Hui. However, the second year of Lord Xiang would be 696 Bce, fully 80 years before the death of his older brother here and 102 years before the death of another brother in Xuan 15 (594 Bce). Shiji 33.1535 says Rongru was killed in the second year of Lord Hui of Qi (607 Bce), which makes more sense. We follow Yang (2:584) in concluding that the text of Zuozhuan is in error and that Shiji preserves the correct date. 172 Zhoushou 周首 was located in the domain of Qi east of present-day Dong’e County 東阿縣, Shandong. 173 On the small domain of Cheng 郕, see Annals, Yin 5.3.

Lord Wen

523

春秋 12.1(1) 十有二年，春，王正月，郕伯來奔。 12.2(2) 杞伯來朝。 12.3(2) 二月庚子，子叔姬卒。 12.4(3) 夏，楚人圍巢。 12.5(4) 秋，滕子來朝。 12.6(5) 秦伯使術來聘。 12.7(6) 冬，十有二月戊午，晉人、秦人戰于河曲。 12.8(7) 季孫行父帥師城諸及鄆。

左傳 12.1(1) 十二年，春，郕伯卒，郕人立君。大子以夫鍾與郕邽來奔。公以諸侯逆

之，非禮也，故書曰「郕伯來奔」。不書地，尊諸侯也。

12.2(2, 3)

杞桓公來朝，始朝公也。且請絕叔姬而無絕婚，公許之。二月，叔姬卒。 不言「杞」，絕也。書「叔姬」，言非女也。

12.3(4) 楚令尹大孫伯卒，成嘉為令尹。群舒叛楚。夏，子孔執舒子平及宗子，

遂圍巢。

174 Chao 巢 is an exceedingly old domain mentioned already in the oracle bones (Yang, 2:585). It was located just northeast of present-day Chao County, 巢縣, Anhui. 175 Fuzhong is the name of the Cheng heir’s settlement (Wen 11.6), which he presumably turned over to Lu. It is located northeast of present-day Wenshang County 汶上縣, Shandong. Du Yu (ZZ 19B.330) believed that Chenggui 郕邽 was the name of a settlement. Yang (2:587) suspects that gui 邽 was originally written simply gui 圭, “jade scepter,” and was subsequently corrupted with the addition of the “settlement radical” (yi 邑) under the influence of Du Yu’s interpretation. Since Cheng is not mentioned after this time, we might presume that the scepter symbolized delivery of sovereignty to Lu, which at this point absorbed Cheng. 176 Since he has been honored as a prince, his misdeed of taking a settlement from his own domain and offering it to Lu as a de facto bribe is not mentioned in the Annals. 177 Cheng Daxin is the son of Cheng Decheng (Ziyu) and the older brother of Cheng Jia, who succeeds him. 178 This was a small group of domains, one of which was already mentioned in Annals, Xi. 3.3. They are spread out around the region of present-day Shucheng 舒城, Anhui. 179 Zong 宗 was a small domain located just to the east of the Shu domains.

524

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 12 (615 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Liege of Cheng came in flight.

12.1(1)

The Liege of Qǐ came to visit our court.

12.2(2)

In the second month, on the gengzi day (11), Zi Shu Ji died.

12.3(2)

In summer, a Chu leader laid siege to Chao.174

12.4(3)

In autumn, the Master of Teng came to visit our court.

12.5(4)

The Liege of Qin sent Shu (Xiqi Shu) to us on an official visit.

12.6(5)

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the wuwu day (4), a Jin leader and a Qin leader did battle at Hequ. Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) led out troops and fortified Zhu and Yun.

12.7(6)

12.8(7)

ZUO

The heir of Cheng, rejected by his own domain, comes to Lu to seek refuge, bringing along a settlement and a precious jade scepter. On the propriety of accepting such bribes, see also Huan 2.1. In the twelfth year, in spring, the Liege of Cheng died, and the Cheng leaders established a new ruler. The heir apparent came in flight with Fuzhong and the jade scepter of Cheng.175 Our lord greeted him as a prince, and this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. That is why the text says, “The Liege of Cheng came in flight.” That it does not record the gift of land is to show respect for the princes.176

12.1(1)

Lord Huan of Qǐ came to visit our court: this marks the first time he visited the court of our lord. He further asked permission to divorce Zi Shu Jia but not to break off the marital relationship of the two domains. Our lord granted this. In the second month, Zi Shu Jia died. It does not say “of Qǐ” because she had divorced. It has “Shu Ji” because she was not an unmarried woman.

12.2(2, 3)

In the following passage Chu represses a rebellion of the Shu domains. Such conflict between Chu and the Shu domains will continue (see Wen 14.10, Xuan 8.3, Cheng 17.11, Xiang 24.9, 25.8). Cheng Daxinc, the chief minister of Chu, died, and Cheng Jia became chief minister.177 The Shu domains rebelled against Chu.178 In the summer, Cheng Jiaa seized Ping, the Master of Shu, and the Master of Zong.179 Then they laid siege to Chao.

12.3(4)

Lord Wen

525

12.4(5) 秋，滕昭公來朝，亦始朝公也。 12.5(6) 秦伯使西乞術來聘，且言將伐晉。襄仲辭玉，曰：「君不忘先君之好，照

臨魯國，鎮撫其社稷，重之以大器，寡君敢辭玉。」對曰：「不腆敝器，不 足辭也。」主人三辭。賓答曰：「寡君願儌福于周公、魯公以事君，不腆 先君之敝器，使下臣致諸執事，以為瑞節，要結好命，所以藉寡君之 命，結二國之好，是以敢致之。」 襄仲曰：「不有君子，其能國乎？國無陋矣。」厚賄之。 12.6a(7) 秦為令狐之役故，冬，秦伯伐晉，取羈馬。晉人禦之。趙盾將中軍，荀林

父佐之。郤缺將上軍，臾駢佐之。欒盾將下軍，胥甲佐之。范無恤御戎， 以從秦師于河曲。臾駢曰：「秦不能久，請深壘固軍以待之。」從之。

526

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, Lord Zhao of Teng came to visit our court: this also marks the first time he visited the court of our lord.

12.4(5)

As it contemplates an attack on Jin, the domain of Qin tries to strengthen its relationship with Lu. The Liege of Qin sent Xiqi Shu to us on an official visit. He also said that they were going to attack Jin. Xiangzhong declined the gift of a jade, saying, “Your ruler does not forget the good relations of our former rulers but comes to oversee and shine down upon our domain of Lu, stabilizes its altars of the domain, and adds to this with a great ritual object. My unworthy ruler presumes to decline the jade.” He replied, “This paltry object of little value is not worthy to be declined.” The host, Xianzhong, declined three times, and the guest responded, “My unworthy ruler hopes to seek blessings from the Zhou Duke and the Lu Lord by serving your ruler.180 He has sent me, a humble servant, to present to your functionaries this paltry object, which belonged to our former rulers, as an auspicious pledge confirming our agreement to have good relations. I use this object in such a way to express the command of my unworthy ruler to join our two domains in good relations. That is why I presume to present it.” Xiangzhong said, “If one does not have noble men, how can one rule a domain? Your domain is not so backward!” He bestowed rich gifts upon the visitor.

12.5(6)

Jin had defeated Qin at the battle of Linghu (Wen 7.4a), perpetuating a pattern of conflict between these neighboring domains (Xi 28.6). Qin now seeks military advice from Fan Hui, a Jin exile (Wen 7.4b). As a consequence of the campaign of Linghu, in winter, the Liege of Qin attacked Jin and occupied Jima.181 The men of Jin engaged them in battle. Zhao Dun commanded the central army, and Xun Linfu assisted him. Xi Que commanded the upper army, and Yu Pian assisted him. Luan Dun commanded the lower army, and Xu Jia assisted him. With Fan Wuxu driving Zhao Dun’s war chariot, they went after the Qin troops at Hequ. Yu Pian said, “Qin cannot endure for long. Let us raise high our ramparts and strengthen our encampment to wait them out.” They went along with this.

12.6a(7)

180 The Lu Lord referred to here is Boqin 伯禽, the eldest son of the Zhou Duke Dan and the first ruler of the domain of Lu. 181 Jima 羈馬 was located in the domain of Jin south of present-day Yongji County 永濟縣, Shanxi.

Lord Wen

527

秦人欲戰。秦伯謂士會曰：「若何而戰？」對曰：「趙氏新出其屬曰 臾駢，必實為此謀，將以老我師也。趙有側室曰穿，晉君之婿也，有寵 而弱，不在軍事；好勇而狂，且惡臾駢之佐上軍也。若使輕者肆焉，其 可。」秦伯以璧祈戰于河。 12.6b 十二月戊午，秦軍掩晉上軍。趙穿追之不及。反，怒曰：「裹糧坐甲，固敵

是求。敵至不擊，將何俟焉？」軍吏曰：「將有待也。」穿曰：「我不知謀， 將獨出。」乃以其屬出。 宣子曰：「秦獲穿也，獲一卿矣。秦以勝歸，我何以報？」乃皆出 戰，交綏。 秦行人夜戒晉師曰：「兩君之士皆未憖也，明日請相見也。」臾駢 曰：「使者目動而言肆，懼我也，將遁矣。薄諸河，必敗之。」 胥甲、趙穿當軍門呼曰：「死傷未收而棄之，不惠也。不待期而薄 人於險，無勇也。」乃止。秦師夜遁。復侵晉，入瑕。 12.7(8) 城諸及鄆，書時也。

182 Lord Ling of Jin (r. 620–608) was still too young to have a son-in-law. Chuan is probably the son-in-law of the previous ruler, Lord Xiang (r. 627–621). 183 Karlgren, gl. 227. 184 Karlgren, gl. 228. 185 As Du Yu (ZZ 19B.331) notes, neither the Qin nor the Jin armies had the will to fight but pulled back soon after they had joined in combat. 186 Du Yu (ZZ 19B.331) takes yin 憖 to mean “deficient” (que 缺), which would lead to the translation “the soldiers of our two armies are not lacking,” meaning that no casualties have yet been suffered. Both Yang (2:592) and Karlgren (gl. 230) note that yin can mean “to be willing” or “to be satisfied.”

528

Zuo Tradition

The men of Qin wanted to fight. The Liege of Qin said to Fan Huia, “How should we proceed to do battle?” He responded, “The Zhao line has newly recommended one of its subordinates named Yu Pian. It is surely he who has made this plan, and they are going to use it to wear down our troops. Zhao has a cousin of a collateral branch named Chuan who is the son-in-law of the ruler.182 He has the ruler’s favor but is weak: he knows nothing about military affairs. Combative and reckless, he also hates the fact that Yu Pian is assistant commander of the upper army. If we send light troops to provoke him,183 that would work.” The Liege of Qin, with a jade disk as an offering, prayed to the Yellow River about the battle. Fan Hui’s plan to entice Zhao Chuan into a reckless action succeeds, but in the end both Qin and Jin back away from a major military conflict. In the twelfth month, on the wuwu day (4), the Qin army unleashed its force on the upper army of Jin. Zhao Chuan pursued them but did not overtake them. He returned and angrily said, “We have put our grain provisions in sacks and sit here in our armor.184 Surely it is the enemy that we are after! But when the enemy arrives, we don’t attack. What are we waiting for?” A military officer said, “We are going to wait.” Chuan said, “I am not aware of the plans. I am going out to attack alone.” He then took his cohort and went forth. Zhao Dunb said, “If Qin captures Chuan, they will have captured one of our ministers. If Qin returns home victorious, then what will I have to report?” So they all went out to fight. But just as the armies were joining in battle, they drew back.185 A Qin envoy came at night to alert the Jin troops, saying, “The soldiers of our two rulers are not yet satisfied.186 I request that tomorrow we meet one another again.” Yu Pian said, “The envoy’s eyes were shifty and his speech was slipshod. They are afraid of us and are going to flee. If we press upon them at the banks of the Yellow River, we are certain to defeat them.” Xu Jia and Zhao Chuan blocked the gate of the camp and cried out, “The dead and wounded have not yet been gathered up and yet we abandon them. This is not benevolent! We do not wait for an appointed time but press upon men who are in difficult straits. This is a failure of courage!” So they desisted. The Qin troops fled in the night. But they again invaded Jin and entered Xia.

12.6b

We fortified Zhu and Yun: it is recorded because it was timely.

12.7(8)

Lord Wen

529

春秋 13.1 十有三年，春，王正月。 13.2 夏，五月壬午，陳侯朔卒。 13.3(3) 邾子蘧蒢卒。 13.4 自正月不雨，至于秋七月。 13.5(4) 大室屋壞。 13.6(5) 冬，公如晉。衛侯會公于沓。 13.7 狄侵衛。 13.8(5) 十有二月己丑，公及晉侯盟。 13.9(5) 公還自晉，鄭伯會公于棐。

左傳 13.1 十三年，春，晉侯使詹嘉處瑕，以守桃林之塞。

13.2

晉人患秦之用士會也，夏，六卿相見於諸浮。趙宣子曰：「隨會在秦，賈 季在狄，難日至矣，若之何？」中行桓子曰：「請復賈季，能外事，且由舊 勳。」 郤成子曰：「賈季亂，且罪大，不如隨會。能賤而有恥，柔而不犯； 其知足使也。且無罪。」

187 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no renwu day in the fifth month. 188 This is presumably the grand hall in the Grand Ancestral Temple (Tai miao 大廟). 189 Ta 沓 was located in the domain of Wei. Little more is known about its precise location. 190 According to the Lu calendar, there was no jichou day in the twelfth month. 191 Fei 棐 was located in the domain of Zheng west of present-day Xinzheng County 新 鄭縣, Henan. Fei is probably the same as Feilin in Annals Xuan 1.10, Zuozhuan Xuan 1.8, 31.10. 192 Zhufu 諸浮 was apparently located in Jin but little more is known of this settlement. 193 Hu Yigu is the grandson of Hu Tu and the son of Hu Yan, both distinguished Jin ministers. 194 Karlgren, gl. 231.

530

Zuo Tradition

LORD WEN 13 (614 BCE) ANNALS

The thirteenth year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renwu day,187 Shuo, the Prince of Chen, died.

13.1 13.2

Quchu, the Master of Zhu, died.

13.3(3)

From the first month right up to autumn, the seventh month, it did not rain.

13.4

The roof of the grand hall collapsed.188

13.5(4)

In winter, our lord went to Jin. The Prince of Wei met with our lord at Ta.189

13.6(5)

The Di invaded Wei.

13.7

In the twelfth month, on the jichou day,190 our lord and the Prince of Jin swore a covenant. Our lord was making the return journey from Jin. The Liege of Zheng met with our lord at Fei.191

13.8(5)

13.9(5)

ZUO

Jin now strengthens a strategic post on its western border to guard against any eastward advance from Qin. In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Zhan Jia to dwell in Xia in order to defend the strategic border post of Taolin.

13.1

Concerned about Fan Hui’s continued presence in Qin (Wen 12.6a), Jin executes a complicated ruse to bring him back to Jin. The Jin leaders were worried that Qin would employ Fan Huia. In summer, the six ministers met with one another at Zhufu.192 Zhao Duna said, “With Fan Huih residing in Qin, and Hu Yigua residing among the Di, difficult days are close at hand! What are we to do?” Xun Linfua said, “I request that we bring back Hu Yigua. He is capable in external affairs, and he also comes from a family of long-standing merit.”193 Xi Quea said, “Hu Yigua fomented unrest, and his offense was great. He is not the equal of Fan Huih. Fan Hui is able to humble himself and has a sense of shame.194 He is conciliatory and not aggressive. His wisdom makes him worthy to serve, and he also is not guilty of any offense.”

13.2

Lord Wen

531

乃使魏壽餘偽以魏叛者，以誘士會。執其帑於晉，使夜逸。請自 歸于秦，秦伯許之。履士會之足於朝。秦伯師于河西，魏人在東，壽 餘曰：「請東人之能與夫二三有司言者，吾與之先。」使士會。士會辭 曰：「晉人，虎狼也。若背其言，臣死、妻子為戮，無益於君，不可悔也。」 秦伯曰：「若背其言，所不歸爾帑者，有如河！」 乃行。繞朝贈之以策，曰：「子無謂秦無人，吾謀適不用也。」既 濟，魏人譟而還。秦人歸其帑。其處者為劉氏。 13.3(3) 邾文公卜遷于繹。史曰：「利於民而不利於君。」邾子曰：「苟利於民，孤

之利也。天生民而樹之君，以利之也。民既利矣，孤必與焉。」左右曰： 「命可長也，君何弗為？」邾子曰：「命在養民。死之短長，時也。民苟利 矣，遷也，吉莫如之！」遂遷于繹。五月，邾文公卒。君子曰：「知命。」 13.4(5) 秋，七月，大室之屋壞，書不共也。

195 On Weì, see Min 1.6. This region, which was subordinate to Jin, had been granted to Bi Wan earlier, and Shouyu was his descendant and the leader of Weì. 196 That is, he fled from Jin to the domain of Qin. This is an attempt to make Shouyu appear to be an enemy of the domain of Jin. A version of this story appears in Chunqiu shiyu (Mawangdui MS): see Yang, 2:595. 197 Apparently, this was a covert signal that he had come as a Jin spy to bring Fan Hui back to Jin. 198 As Yang (2:596) notes, this is the essential part of the ruse. Jin is to the east of Qin, and hence Shouyu is asking for a man of Jin to go with him and negotiate with the Weì officials. He is, of course, hoping that Fan Hui will be appointed, but he does not mention his name directly because he does not want to arouse Qin suspicions. 199 Du Yu (ZZ 19B.332) believes that ce 策 here means “whip” and that the Qin minister Rao Zhao was presenting it as a pun on the word “plan,” also ce: “He was showing that he himself had plans to disclose the situation.” In other words, he was trying to let Fan Hui know that he was aware that a trick was afoot. Karlgren (gl. 232) calls this “tempting but perhaps somewhat too clever.” Another interpretation, favored by Karlgren and by Yang (2:596) as well, is that Zhao was presenting Fan Hui with a document (still another meaning of ce 策) that contained something that would let Fan Hui know that he, Zhao, “had seen through the ruse.” In Chunqiu shiyu and Han Feizi 12.223, Rao Zhao is executed because he is suspected of collusion with Jin. 200 Descendants of Fan Hui who remained in Qin took the clan name Liu. Kong Yingda (ZZ 19B.333) thought that this final sentence did not belong to the original Zuozhuan account but was added in the Han dynasty to provide an ancestry for the ruling Liu house: since Fan Hui is supposed to descend from the sage-king Yao, this would make Han rulers descendants of Yao. However, Yang (2:596) offers persuasive evidence that this was not a Han interpolation but part of the original Zuozhuan text.

532

Zuo Tradition

So, in order to entice Fan Huia to Jin, they had Weì Shouyu feign that he was using Weì as a base for rebellion.195 They arrested Shouyu’s wife and children in Jin and had him slip away during the night.196 Shouyu requested to turn himself and his land over to Qin, and the Liege of Qin agreed to this. Shouyu stepped on Fan Hui’sa foot in court as a signal.197 The Liege of Qin deployed troops to the west bank of the Yellow River and the men of Weì were on the east bank. Shouyu said, “I request an easterner who is able to speak with their several officials, and I will go on ahead with him.”198 They were about to send Fan Huia, but Fan Huia refused, saying, “The Jin leaders are wolves and tigers. If they go against their word, I will die and my wife and children will be executed here in Qin. This will be of no benefit to you, my lord, and it will be too late for regrets.” The Liege of Qin said, “If they go against their word, and I do not return your wife and children, may the Yellow River bear witness against me!” So Fan Hui departed. Rao Zhao gave him a whip as a present and said,199 “You should not say that Qin has no men! It is just that my plans have not been used.” After they crossed the Yellow River, the men of Weì made a clamor and then turned back. The Qin leaders returned Fan Hui’s family. Those who stayed behind in Qin became the Liu line.200 The ruler of a small domain, Zhu, places his people’s welfare above his own. The force of the anecdote depends on the different readings of the word ming as “life span,” “charge” (or “command”), and “destiny.” Lord Wen of Zhu divined about relocating the capital to Yi.201 The scribe said, “It will benefit the people but will not benefit the ruler.” The Master of Zhu said, “So long as it benefits the people, it is to my benefit. Heaven gave birth to the people and set up a ruler for them in order to benefit them. If the people were to benefit, I, the lone one, would certainly share in it.” His retainers said, “If your life can be prolonged, why not do it, my lord?” The Master of Zhu said, “My charge is to nourish the people. Whether death comes early or late, that is a matter of the proper season. So long as the people benefit, we will relocate the capital. There is no auspiciousness equal to this.” So they moved to Yi. In the fifth month, Lord Wen of Zhu died. The noble man said, “He understood his charge.”202

13.3(3)

In autumn, in the seventh month, the roof of the grand hall collapsed: it is recorded because they had not been respectful.203

13.4(5)

201 Yi 繹 was apparently located southeast of present-day Zou County 鄒縣, Shandong, where there is a mountain now called Mount Yi 嶧山. 202 On the multiple meanings of ming 命, translated here as “charge,” see Cheng 4.3, 13.3; and Schaberg, “Command and the Content of Tradition.” 203 The implication seems to be that the ministers had not performed their job of keeping the great hall in proper repair.

Lord Wen

533



13.5(6, 8, 9)

冬，公如晉朝，且尋盟。衛侯會公于沓，請平于晉。公還，鄭伯會公于 棐，亦請平于晉。公皆成之。 鄭伯與公宴于棐，子家賦〈鴻雁〉。季文子曰：「寡君未免於此。」 文子賦〈四月〉。子家賦〈載馳〉之四章。文子賦〈采薇〉之四章。鄭伯 拜。公答拜。

春秋 14.1 十有四年，春，王正月，公至自晉。 14.2(2) 邾人伐我南鄙，叔彭生帥師伐邾。 14.3(3) 夏，五月乙亥，齊侯潘卒。 14.4(5) 六月，公會宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯、晉趙盾。癸酉，同盟于

新城。 14.5(7) 秋，七月，有星孛入于北斗。

204 Maoshi 181, “Hong yan” 鴻鴈, 11A.373. Gongzi Guisheng is a Zheng minister. The first stanza of this ode uses the image of the wild goose to evoke those who are alone: “Alas for both these pitiable men / And for these solitary ones and widows” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, 125). The implication of the recitation is that Zheng is alone, and that Lu should pity them and help them reach peace with Jin. 205 That is, the Lu ruler is himself pitiable and helpless. 206 Maoshi 204, “Si yue” 四月, 13A.441. This ode expresses resentment over being on a journey and expresses a desire to return home. Ji Wenzi is here expressing the desire of the Lu Lord to return home rather than go to Jin and attempt to work out an agreement between Zheng and Jin. 207 Maoshi 54, “Zai chi” 載馳, 3B.124. Yang (2:599) discusses the problem of identifying precisely the “fourth stanza,” since the ode may be arranged somewhat differently now than it was in earlier times. But the critical lines in this recitation seem to have been “I would hasten for aid to some great domain, / But whom shall I rely on, to whom shall I go?” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, 36). Presumably, Gongzi Guisheng is saying that Jin is the “great domain” but that he needs Lu as a mediator.

534

Zuo Tradition

Wei and Zheng request Lu’s intercession to bring them peace with Jin. The ensuing conversation between the ministers of the Liege of Zheng and the Lord of Lu is a splendid example of the way the Odes was used in a sophisticated game of political exchange. In winter, our lord went to visit the Jin court and also to renew the covenant. The Prince of Wei met with our lord at Ta and requested that he bring them peace with Jin. As our lord was returning home, the Liege of Zheng met with him at Fei, and he also requested that he bring them peace with Jin. Our lord in both cases fulfilled their goals. The Liege of Zheng and our lord held a banquet at Fei. Gongzi Gui­ shenga recited “The Wild Goose.”204 Ji Wenzi said, “Our unworthy ruler has himself not escaped this.”205 Wenzi recited “The Fourth Month.”206 Gongzi Guishenga recited the fourth stanza of “Gallop.”207 Wenzi recited the fourth stanza of “Plucking Bracken.”208 The Liege of Zheng bowed, and our lord, in response, bowed.

13.5(6, 8, 9)

LORD WEN 14 (613 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord arrived from Jin.

14.1

A Zhu leader attacked our southern marches. Shu Pengsheng (Shuzhong Huibo) led out troops and attacked Zhu.

14.2(2)

In summer, in the fifth month, on the yihai day,209 Pan, the Prince of Qi, died.

14.3(3)

In the sixth month, our lord met with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, the Liege of Cao, and Zhao Dun of Jin. On the guiyou day (27), they swore a covenant together in Xincheng.

14.4(5)

In autumn, in the seventh month, there was a star that became indistinct and entered the Big Dipper.210

14.5(7)

208 Maoshi 167, “Cai wei” 采薇, 9C.331. The critical lines of this stanza are as follows: “What chariot is that? / It is the carriage of the lord; / The war chariots are yoked, / The four stallions are robust; / How dare we settle down and sit still!” (Karlgren, Book of Odes, 112). Thus, the Lord of Lu relents and agrees to undertake the mission to Jin. 209 According to the reconstructed Lu calendar as there was no yihai day in the fifth month. 210 From the perspective of early Chinese viewers, a comet was a star that had become indistinct (bo 孛) and started to move.

Lord Wen

535

14.6 公至自會。 14.7(8) 晉人納捷菑于邾，弗克納。 14.8(11) 九月甲申，公孫敖卒于齊。 14.9(6) 齊公子商人弒其君舍。 14.10(12) 宋子哀來奔。 14.11(14) 冬，單伯如齊。 14.12(14) 齊人執單伯。 14.13(14) 齊人執子叔姬。

左傳 14.1 十四年，春，頃王崩。周公閱與王孫蘇爭政，故不赴。凡崩、薨，不赴，

則不書。禍、福，不告，亦不書。懲不敬也。 14.2(2) 邾文公之卒也，公使弔焉，不敬。邾人來討，伐我南鄙，故惠伯伐邾。 14.3(3) 子叔姬妃齊昭公，生舍。叔姬無寵，舍無威。公子商人驟施於國，而多

聚士，盡其家，貸於公有司以繼之。夏五月，昭公卒，舍即位。

211 Shiji 32.1495 says, “Gongzi Shangren, the younger brother of Lord Zhao (r. 632–613), because of the death of Lord Huan (r. 685–643), had fought to be established as ruler but had not succeeded. He secretly made contacts with worthy gentlemen and comforted and cherished the common people, and the common people were pleased.”

536

Zuo Tradition

Our lord returned from the meeting.

14.6

A Jin leader tried to install Jiezi in power in Zhu, but he did not succeed in installing him.

14.7(8)

In the ninth month, on the jiashen day (10), Gongsun Ao (Meng Mubo) died in Qi.

14.8(11)

Gongzi Shangren of Qi assassinated his ruler, She.

14.9(6)

Zi’ai of Song came in flight.

14.10(12)

In winter, the Shan Liege went to Qi.

14.11(14)

Qi leaders arrested the Shan Liege.

14.12(14)

Qi leaders arrested Zi Shu Ji.

14.13(14)

ZUO

The Zhou ruler, King Qing, concludes his relatively short reign (618–613), and internal dissension supposedly explains why no notice of his death is found in the Annals. In the fourteenth year, in spring, King Qing succumbed. Zhou Duke Yue and Wangsun Su were competing for control of the administration, and that is why no notice of death was sent. In all cases when a ruler succumbs or expires and no notice of death is sent, then it is not recorded. When disasters or blessings are not announced, they also are not recorded. This is to censure disrespect.

14.1

Hostilities break out between the domains of Zhu and Lu over a breach of ritual. When Lord Wen of Zhu died, our lord sent someone to offer condolences there, but he was disrespectful. A Zhu leader came to chastise us and attacked our southern marches. That is why Shuzhong Huiboa attacked Zhu.

14.2(2)

Lord Huan’s “ fondness for his harem” continues to reverberate in Qi as Gongzi Shangren, a son of Lord Huan by Mi Ji (Xi 17.5), builds a base of opposition against Lord Zhao’s designated successor, She. Zi Shu Ji was the consort of Lord Zhao of Qi and gave birth to She. Zi Shu Jia did not garner favor, and She inspired no awe. Gongzi Shangren frequently dispensed gifts throughout the domain and gathered many worthy men around him. After he had exhausted his family wealth, he borrowed from the responsible officials of the lord’s court to continue his generosity.211 In summer, in the fifth month, Lord Zhao died, and She acceded to the position.

14.3(3)

Lord Wen

537

14.4 邾文公元妃齊姜，生定公；二妃晉姬，生捷菑。文公卒，邾人立定公。捷

菑奔晉。 14.5(4) 六月，同盟于新城，從於楚者服，且謀邾也。 14.6(9) 秋，七月乙卯，夜，齊商人殺舍而讓元。元曰：「爾求之久矣。我能事爾，

爾不可使多蓄憾，將免我乎？爾為之！」 14.7(5) 有星孛入于北斗。周內史叔服曰：「不出七年，宋、齊、晉之君皆將死

亂。」 14.8(7) 晉趙盾以諸侯之師八百乘納捷菑于邾。邾人辭曰：「齊出貜且長。」宣

子曰：「辭順，而弗從，不祥。」乃還。 14.9 周公將與王孫蘇訟于晉，王叛王孫蘇，而使尹氏與聃啟訟周公于晉。

趙宣子平王室而復之。

212 Du Yu (ZZ 19B.335) notes that the domains following Chu were Chen, Zheng, and Song. They have now submitted to Jin. 213 There is no yimao day in the seventh month of this year. 214 Gongzi Yuan was Gongzi Shangren’s older half brother and the son of Lord Huan and Wei Ji the Younger (see Xi 17.4 above). He will rule Qi as Lord Hui (r. 608–599). 215 Lord Zhao of Song will be assassinated in 611 Bce, Lord Yi of Qi in 609 Bce, and Lord Ling of Jin in 607. 216 Du Yu (ZZ 19B.335) identifies the Yin lineage head and Nan Qi as high officials in Zhou.

538

Zuo Tradition

The succession in Zhu goes to the rightful heir, as a rival supported by Jin, Jiezi, flees the domain. The primary wife of Lord Wen of Zhu, Qi Jiang, had given birth to Lord Ding. A secondary consort, Jin Ji, had given birth to Jiezi. When Lord Wen died, the Zhu leaders established Lord Ding as ruler, and Jiezi fled to Jin.

14.4

In the sixth month, we joined in swearing a covenant at Xincheng. This was because domains that had been following Chu now submitted to Jin, and we also made plans about Zhu.212

14.5(4)

In Qi, Gongzi Shangren kills She (the son of Shangren’s half brother Lord Zhao) and takes the reins of power himself after a token offer to yield in favor of his half brother Yuan (Xi 17.5, Wen 14.3). In autumn, in the seventh month, on the yimao day,213 at night, Gongzi Shangren of Qi killed She and yielded power to Gongzi Yuan.214 Yuan said, “You have sought power for a long time. I am capable of serving you. You are not one who can be made to harbor resentment—if you are, how can I be spared? You should become ruler!”

14.6(9)

An ominous prediction about the impending deaths of three rulers (Wen 16.5b, 18.2; Xuan 2.3). There was a star that became indistinct and entered the Big Dipper. Shufu, the court scribe of Zhou, said, “Within seven years, the rulers of Song, Qi, and Jin will all die in rebellions.”215

14.7(5)

Jin joins the hostilities against Zhu with the intention of installing Jiezi but turns back after becoming convinced that he is not the rightful heir (Wen 14.4, 14.5). Zhao Dun of Jin took the princes’ troops, in eight hundred chariots altogether, to install Jiezi in power in Zhu. The Zhu leaders refused, saying, “Jueju, the offspring of the Qi woman, is older.” Zhao Dunb said, “He made a reasonable case and not to go along with it would be inauspicious.” So they turned back.

14.8(7)

Two members of the Zhou royal establishment argue a legal dispute before the Jin leaders (see also Xiang 10.12). The Zhou Duke and Wangsun Su were about to bring charges against one another in Jin. The king went back on his promise to support Wangsun Su and had the Yin lineage head and Nan Qi support the Zhou Duke’s charges in Jin.216 Zhao Duna brought peace to the king’s household and restored the disputants to their positions.

14.9

Lord Wen

539

14.10 楚莊王立，子孔、潘崇將襲群舒，使公子燮與子儀守，而伐舒蓼。二子

作亂。 城郢，而使賊殺子孔，不克而還。八月，二子以楚子出。將如商密， 廬戢梨及叔麇誘之，遂殺鬬克及公子燮。 初，鬬克囚于秦，秦有殽之敗，而使歸求成。成而不得志，公子燮 求令尹而不得，故二子作亂。 14.11(8) 穆伯之從己氏也。魯人立文伯。穆伯生二子於莒，而求復。文伯以為請。

襄仲使無朝聽命。復而不出。三年而盡室以復適莒。文伯疾，而請曰： 「穀之子弱，請立難也。」許之。文伯卒，立惠叔。穆伯請重賂以求復。 惠叔以為請，許之。將來，九月，卒于齊。告喪，請葬，弗許。

217 There are three Shu domains (Shuliao 舒蓼, Shuyong 舒庸, and Shujiu 舒鳩); see Wen 12.3, Xuan 8.3, Cheng 17.11, Xiang 24.9, 25.8. 218 Shuliao 舒蓼 was a domain located northeast of present-day Gushi County 固始縣, Henan. 219 They are preparing for defense against Cheng Jia and Pan Chong. 220 Lu 廬 was a district of the domain of Chu located near present-day Nanzhang County 南漳縣, Hubei. Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.537, says, “Formerly, when King Zhuang was still young, Gongzi Yifu of Shen [Dou Ke] was preceptor, and Wangzi Xie was tutor. They had Pan Chong and Zikong [Cheng Jia] lead an army to attack Shu. Xie and Yifu, having attributed crimes to the two leaders, divided their household property. When the armies came back, they took the king and went to Lu, but Lu Jili killed the two men and returned the king.” Du Yu identifies Shu Jun as the aide of Jili. 221 See Xi 25.3. 222 The battle of Yao was fought between Jin and Qin (Xi 33.3). Chu’s role in the conflict is described in Cheng 13.3, where the Jin official Wei Xiang [Lü Xiang] claims that Qin “did not succeed in exerting their will at our expense” because of the death of

540

Zuo Tradition

The death of King Mu of Chu (King Zhuang’s father) is not recorded in the Annals, possibly because there was no notification from Chu. A rebellion against the new ruler of Chu, King Zhuang (r. 613–591), fails as the two instigators are lured into a trap. King Zhuang of Chu was established as ruler. Cheng Jiaa and Pan Chong were going to make a surprise attack on the Shu domains.217 They had Gongzi Xie and Dou Kea defend Chu, and they attacked Shuliao.218 The two men left behind raised a rebellion. They fortified Ying219 and dispatched assailants to kill Cheng Jiaa, but they did not succeed and came back. In the eighth month, the two men took the Master of Chu and left the capital. They were going to go to Shangmi, but Lu Jili and Shu Jun enticed them to their region. Dou Ke and Gongzi Xie were then put to death.220 Earlier, Dou Ke had been imprisoned in Qin,221 but when Qin suffered its defeat at Yao, he had been sent back to Chu to seek an accord. They reached an accord, but he did not get what he desired. Gongzi Xie had sought to be chief minister but did not obtain the position, and that is why the two men raised a rebellion.222

14.10

Meng Mubo had earlier left Lu to live in Ju with Lady Ji (Wen 8.5). After a short sojourn back in Lu, he dies in Qi, and a request for burial in Lu is denied. Meng Wenbo (Mubo’s son) requests to have his younger half brother Huishu established as heir, thus fulfilling a prophecy about the Meng line made in Wen 1.1. When Meng Mubob had followed after Lady Ji, the Lu leaders had set up Wenbo as his heir.223 Meng Mubob, who had fathered two sons in Ju, pled to return home. Wenbo made the request on his behalf. Xiangzhong brought it about that Meng Mubo would not visit court or receive any government orders. Meng Mubo returned but did not leave his residence. After three years, he went back to Ju with his entire household. Wenbo fell ill and requested, “My son is young. I request that we establish Huishua as heir.”224 This was granted. When Wenbo died, they established Huishu as heir. Meng Mubob asked that abundant gifts be distributed so as to seek permission to return again. Huishu made the request on his behalf, and it was granted. When he was about to come back, in the ninth month, he died in Qi. They announced his death in Lu and requested permission to bury him there, but it was not granted.

14.11(8)



King Cheng of Chu (r. 671–626). Yang (2:605) suggests that the Qin-Chu alliance during the battle of Yao against Jin did not bring the anticipated results for the intermediary Dou Ke because someone thwarted the negotiations. 223 Wenbo was the son of Meng Mubo, born to a wife named Dai Ji, who died shortly after his birth (Wen 7.7). 224 Huishu was a younger half brother of Wenbo.

Lord Wen

541

14.12(10) 宋高哀為蕭封人，以為卿，不義宋公而出，遂來奔。書曰「宋子哀來奔」，

貴之也。 14.13 齊人定懿公，使來告難，故書以「九月」。齊公子元不順懿公之為政也，

終不曰「公」，曰「夫己氏」。 14.14(11–13) 襄仲使告于王，請以王寵求昭姬于齊，曰：「殺其子，焉用其母？請受而

罪之。」冬，單伯如齊請子叔姬，齊人執之。又執子叔姬。

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年，春，季孫行父如晉。 15.2(2) 三月，宋司馬華孫來盟。 15.3 夏，曹伯來朝。 15.4(4) 齊人歸公孫敖之喪。 15.5(5) 六月辛丑朔，日有食之。鼓、用牲于社。 15.6(6) 單伯至自齊。 15.7(7) 晉郤缺帥師伐蔡。戊申，入蔡。 15.8(8) 秋，齊人侵我西鄙。 15.9(8) 季孫行父如晉。

225 No date is attached to the report of Qi’s troubles in Annals, Wen 14.9. Presumably, the “ninth month” in Annals, Wen 14.8, is taken to govern the following passage. 226 This eclipse took place on 21 April 612 Bce.

542

Zuo Tradition

The improper behavior of Lord Zhao of Song continues and costs him a worthy minister (Wen 7.3, 8.6). Zi’aia of Song, who had been border officer in Xiao, was made minister. Considering the Duke of Song undutiful, he left the domain and subsequently came in flight. The text says, “Zi’ai of Song came in flight,” to honor him.

14.12(10)

Gongzi Yuan’s previous act of “yielding” to Gongzi Shangren, Lord Yi of Qi, is revealed as quite insincere (Wen 14.6). The Qi leaders, having settled Lord Yi in his position, sent someone to us to announce the troubles in Qi. Thus, the text says “ninth month.”225 Gongzi Yuan of Qi did not agree that Lord Yi should lead the government and to the end of his days did not call him “lord” but “that man.”

14.13

Zi Shu Ji, who had been the wife of Duke Zhao of Qi and the mother of the ill-fated She, was apparently a woman of Lu (Wen 14.3). Here Lu tries unsuccessfully to secure her return. Xiangzhong sent someone to report to the king and request that they use the king’s good favor to seek Zi Shu Jib in Qi, saying, “You killed her son; what use do you have for his mother? I request we receive her and charge her with crimes.” In winter, the Shan Liege went to Qi and asked for Zi Shu Ji. The Qi leaders arrested him and also arrested Zi Shu Ji.

14.14(11–13)

LORD WEN 15 (612 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Jin.

15.1(1)

In the third month, Hua Sun (Hua Ou), the Song supervisor of the military, came and swore a covenant.

15.2(2)

In summer, the Liege of Cao came to visit our court.

15.3

A Qi leader sent back Gongsun Ao’s (Meng Mubo) funeral cortege.

15.4(4)

In the sixth month, on the xinchou day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Drums were beaten and an animal sacrifice was offered at the altar of earth.226 The Shan Liege arrived from Qi. Xi Que of Jin led out troops and attacked Cai. On the wushen day (8), they entered Cai.

15.5(5)

15.6(6) 15.7(7)

In autumn, a Qi leader invaded our western marches.

15.8(8)

Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Jin.

15.9(8)

Lord Wen

543

15.10(9) 冬，十有一月，諸侯盟于扈。 15.11(10) 十有二月，齊人來歸子叔姬。 15.12(11) 齊侯侵我西鄙，遂伐曹，入其郛。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年，春，季文子如晉，為單伯與子叔姬故也。 15.2(2) 三月，宋華耦來盟，其官皆從之。書曰「宋司馬華孫」，貴之也。公與之

宴。辭曰：「君之先臣督得罪於宋殤公，名在諸侯之策。臣承其祀，其敢 辱君？請承命於亞旅。」魯人以為敏。 15.3(3) 夏，曹伯來朝，禮也。諸侯五年再相朝，以修王命，古之制也。

544

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the eleventh month, the princes swore a covenant at Hu.227

15.10(9)

In the twelfth month, a Qi leader sent Zi Shu Ji back to Lu.

15.11(10)

The Prince of Qi invaded our western marches. He then attacked Cao, entering their outer city walls.

15.12(11)

ZUO

A Lu emissary goes to Jin to try to obtain their support in Lu’s dispute with Qi (Wen 14.14). In the fifteenth year, in spring, Ji Wenzia went to Jin: this was on account of the Shan Liege and Zi Shu Ji.

15.1(1)

A great-grandson of Hua Du of Song visits Lu and makes reference to his ancestor’s murderous deed, noting that it “is found in the records [literally, ‘on the bamboo strips’] of the princes” (Huan 2.1). On how ministers are mindful of the memory encoded in “the records of the princes,” see also Xiang 20.7. In the third month, Hua Ou of Song came and swore a covenant. His officials all accompanied him. The text says, “Hua Sun (Hua Ou), the Song supervisor of the military,” to honor him. Our lord offered him a banquet, but he declined, saying, “One of my lord’s former servants, Hua Du, committed a crime against Lord Shang of Song, and his name went down in infamy in the records of the princes. Since I continue his sacrifices, how would I dare to insult you, my lord?228 I request to receive my orders from the officer’s second in command.” The Lu leaders considered him scrupulous.229

15.2(2)

In summer, the Liege of Cao came to visit our court: this was in accordance with ritual propriety. The system of old stipulated that princes should exchange court visits with one another twice in five years in order to renew the king’s orders.230

15.3(3)

227 The princes held a meeting at Hu eight years earlier (Annals, Wen 7.8) and will meet there yet again in two years (17.4). 228 As Du Yu (ZZ 19B.337) explains, “Ou considers himself the descendant of a criminal. Therefore, he does not dare insult the ruler of Lu by sharing a banquet with him.” 229 Du Yu (ibid.) disagrees with the judgment of the Lu leaders and does not find anything “scrupulous” about exposing the crimes of an ancestor! 230 No evidence is found elsewhere for this custom. The Liege of Cao did visit five years earlier (Wen 11.3), and a “principle” may have been improvised accordingly.

Lord Wen

545

15.4(4) 齊人或為孟氏謀，曰：「魯，爾親也，飾棺寘諸堂阜，魯必取之。」從之。

卞人以告。惠叔猶毀以為請，立於朝以待命。許之。取而殯之。齊人送 之。書曰「齊人歸公孫敖之喪」，為孟氏，且國故也。葬視共仲。聲己不 視，帷堂而哭。襄仲欲勿哭。惠伯曰：「喪，親之終也。雖不能始，善終可 也。史佚有言曰：『兄弟致美。救乏、賀善、弔災、祭敬、喪哀，情雖不 同，毋絕其愛，親之道也。』子無失道，何怨於人？」襄仲說。帥兄弟以哭 之。 他年，其二子來，孟獻子愛之，聞於國。或譖之曰：「將殺子。」獻 子以告季文子。二子曰：「夫子以愛我聞，我以將殺子聞，不亦遠於禮 乎？遠禮不如死。」一人門于句鼆，一人門于戾丘，皆死。 15.5(5) 六月辛丑朔，日有食之。鼓、用牲于社，非禮也。日有食之，天子不舉，伐

鼓于社；諸侯用幣于社，伐鼓于朝，以昭事神、訓民、事君，示有等威， 古之道也。

231 See Karlgren, gl. 233. Meng Mubo, whose body is the object of concern here, is the son of Qingfu and the ancestor of the Meng line, which will be a major player in Lu politics for the next century. 232 Bian (see Annals, Xi 17.3) was a Lu settlement, and Tangfu (see Zhuang 9.5) was located just to the northwest, presumably in Qi territory but very close to Lu. 233 This is the request, previously denied, that Mubo’s body be brought back to Lu for burial (Wen 14.11). 234 He had so much resolve, perhaps, that he would not withdraw until his request had been granted (Yang, 2:610). 235 It will be remembered that Meng is a branch of the ruling lineage. 236 The similarly unhappy story of the death of his father, Gongzi Qingfu, is found in Min 2.3. 237 Sheng Ji was a secondary consort of Meng Mubo and the mother of Huishu. She had been deserted when her husband went in pursuit of Lady Ji to Ju (Wen 7.7, 8.5). During the period soon after death, the body was washed and shrouded (the so-called xiao lian 小斂) and then surrounded by a curtain (Yang, 2:610). 238 While the analepsis marker chu 初, “sometime earlier,” is common in Zuozhuan, ta nian 他年, “some years later,” as a marker of a prolepsis, appears only here and in Zhao 13.2. 239 Meng Xianzi was Huishu’s nephew and Wenbo’s son. He did not become important in Lu government until about twelve years later, when he is said to undertake a mission to Zhou (Annals, Xuan 9.3). 240 Meng Xianzi, who was still quite young at this point, is their nephew. They address him as “master” (fuzi) possibly because of Meng Xianzi’s position as minister and lineage head. 241 Precisely how they died is left to conjecture. Du Yu (ZZ 19B.339) suggests that they put themselves in a dangerous position defending gates during an attack by bandits. Yang (2:612) notes that this is a reasonable speculation. Obviously, Mubo’s sons felt they had come under suspicion and preferred death to a sullied reputation. 242 Karlgren, gl. 234.

546

Zuo Tradition

The body of Meng Mubo is returned to Lu (Wen 14.11), and even his old rival in love, Xiangzong, is induced to mourn for him (Wen 7.7). The prophecy about two of his sons (Wen 1.1) is fulfilled: Huishu gathers his remains, and Wenbo’s son Meng Xianzi continues the Meng line. Mubo’s two sons born of the Ju lady return to Lu and give their lives to uphold their notion of ritual. Some men of Qi strategized on behalf of the Meng lineage,231 saying, “Lu is the domain of your kin. Decorate the coffin and place it at Tangfu. Lu will surely take it.” They followed this. The Bian leaders reported this to Lu.232 Huishu, still exhausted from mourning, requested permission to bring the body back 233 and remained standing in the court to await our lord’s command.234 When he was given permission, he took the coffin and formally prepared the body for burial. A Qi leader escorted it back to Lu. That the text says, “A Qi leader sent back Gongsun Ao’s (Meng Mubo) funeral cortege,” was for the sake of the Meng line, and, what is more, it was for the sake of the domain.235 They buried him as they had Gongzi Qingfuc.236 Sheng Ji did not view the coffin but wailed in the hall from outside the curtain.237 Xiangzhong did not want to wail for him, but Shuzhong Huiboa said, “Mourning is the conclusion of kinship. Even though you were unable to begin well, it is proper to end in a good way. The scribe Yi said, ‘Brothers should give their very best. They provide aid in times of need, congratulate one another in good times, offer condolences in times of disaster, act respectfully in offering sacrifices, and express grief in mourning. Although the situations may vary, they do not cut off affection. This is the correct way of kin.’ You, sir, should not neglect this correct way. Why show resentment for another?” Xiangzhong was pleased. He led his brothers in wailing for Meng Mubo. Some years later,238 Mubo’s two sons came from Ju. Meng Xianzi was fond of them,239 and this became known throughout the domain. Someone slandered them to Meng Xianzi, saying, “They are going to kill you.” Meng Xianzi reported this to Ji Wenzi. The two sons said, “The master is reputed to be fond of us,240 while we are reputed to want to kill him. Is this not to be far from ritual propriety? It is better to die than to be far from ritual propriety.” One of them defended the gate at Jumeng and one defended the gate at Leiqiu. They both died.241 In the sixth month, on the xinchou day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Drums were beaten and an animal sacrifice was offered at the altar of earth. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. When there is an eclipse of the sun, the Son of Heaven does not dine with full ceremony, but he does beat the drums at the altar of earth. The princes present gifts of silk at the altar and beat the drums at court. All these are done to manifest the intent of serving the spirits, instructing the people, and serving the ruler and to show that there are degrees to dignity.242 This is the correct way of old.

Lord Wen

15.4(4)

15.5(5)

547

15.6(6) 齊人許單伯請而赦之，使來致命。書曰「單伯至自齊」，貴之也。 15.7(7) 新城之盟，蔡人不與。晉郤缺以上軍、下軍伐蔡，曰：「君弱，不可以怠。」

戊申，入蔡，以城下之盟而還。凡勝國，曰滅之；獲大城焉，曰入之。

15.8(8, 9)

秋，齊人侵我西鄙，故季文子告于晉。

15.9(10) 冬十一月，晉侯、宋公、衛侯、蔡侯、陳侯、鄭伯、許男、曹伯盟于扈，尋

新城之盟，且謀伐齊也。齊人賂晉侯，故不克而還。於是有齊難，是以 公不會。書曰「諸侯盟于扈」，無能為故也。凡諸侯會，公不與，不書，諱 君惡也。與而不書，後也。 15.10(11) 齊人來歸子叔姬，王故也。

243 On this form of covenant, see Huan 12.3, Xuan 15.2, and Ai 8.2. 244 That is, they were unable to do anything about Qi’s invasion of Lu. Presumably, the names of those swearing the covenant are not given in the Annals because their action was ineffectual. 245 Yang (2:614) notes the following: “Many meetings that the ruler of Lu did not attend are recorded. What all this says is probably that there are meetings of the princes that the Lord of Lu should attend and those he should not attend. If he should not attend and does not attend, they still make a record of the meeting. But if he should attend and does not, then they do not record it.” 246 This refers to the intercession of the Shan Liege, the Zhou king’s representative (Wen 14.11, 14.14, 15.6).

548

Zuo Tradition

Qi releases the Zhou emissary, the Shan Liege, who was pleading on Lu’s behalf (Wen 14.14, 15.1). The Qi leaders granted the Shan Liege’s request and pardoned him. They sent him to us to convey the orders. That the text says, “The Shan Liege arrived from Qi,” is to honor him.

15.6(6)

The domain of Cai pays a heavy price for not having joined in the covenant at Xincheng (Wen 14.5). The Cai leaders did not join in the Xincheng covenant. Xi Que of Jin led the upper army and the lower army to attack Cai, saying, “The ruler is young. We cannot be remiss.” On the wushen day (8), they entered Cai. They swore a covenant at the foot of the city wall and then returned home.243 In all cases when one overcomes the capital, we say, “They extinguished it.” In all cases when one captures a large walled city in that domain, we say, “They entered it.”

15.7(7)

In the next few episodes, simmering conflict with Qi, perhaps motivated in part by the ascension of Gongzi Shangren to power in Qi, now begins to boil over (Wen 14.14, 15.1). Lu seeks the assistance of the ruler of Jin, who still acts as overlord. In autumn, a Qi leader invaded our western marches, and that is why Ji Wenzi reported to Jin.

15.8(8, 9)

The Xincheng covenant is renewed at Hu, this time with Cai as a participant (Wen 14.5, 15.7), but Qi thwarts concerted military action through some generous diplomacy. In winter, in the eleventh month, the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, and the Liege of Cao swore a covenant at Hu: this was to renew the covenant of Xincheng and also to plan an attack on Qi. But the Qi leaders presented gifts to the Prince of Jin, so they returned home without conquering Qi. At that time, there was trouble with Qi, and that is the reason our lord did not attend. The text says, “The princes swore a covenant at Hu,” because they were not able to act.244 In all cases when the princes meet and our lord does not take part, it is not recorded to conceal the ruler’s wrongdoing.245 If he attends and it is not recorded, it is because he arrived late.

15.9(10)

Despite conflict, Zi Shu Ji is released and returned to Lu (Wen 14.14, 15.1, 15.6). A Qi leader sent Zi Shu Ji back to Lu: this was for the king’s sake.246

15.10(11)

Lord Wen

549

15.11(12) 齊侯侵我西鄙，謂諸侯不能也。遂伐曹，入其郛，討其來朝也。季文子

曰：「齊侯其不免乎？己則無禮，而討於有禮者，曰：『女何故行禮？』禮 以順天，天之道也。己則反天，而又以討人，難以免矣。《詩》曰： 胡不相畏？ 不畏于天。 君子之不虐幼賤，畏于天也。在周頌曰： 畏天之威， 于時保之。 不畏于天，將何能保？以亂取國，奉禮以守，猶懼不終；多行無禮，弗能 在矣。」

春秋 16.1(1) 十有六年，春，季孫行父會齊侯于陽穀，齊侯弗及盟。 16.2(2) 夏，五月，公四不視朔。

247 Maoshi 194, “Yu wu zheng” 雨無正, 12B.410. 248 Maoshi 272, “Wo jiang” 我將, 19B.717. This translation is somewhat different from Karlgren’s (Book of Odes, 241), where it seems humans are being called upon to protect Heaven (“Fear the majesty of Heaven / And thereby preserve it”). 249 This recalls the fact that the Qi ruler, Lord Yi (r. 612–609), came to power through an act of rebellion (Wen 14.6). 250 After Takezoe, 9.23. Yang (2:614) has a somewhat different interpretation.

550

Zuo Tradition

Qi invades Lu, and Ji Wenzi condemns Lord Yi of Qi by linking his aggression to his earlier usurpation. His prediction of Lord Yi’s violent end will be fulfilled three years later (Wen 18.2). The Prince of Qi invaded our western marches: this was because the princes had been unable to act. He then attacked Cao, entering their outer city walls. This was chastising them for coming to visit our court. Ji Wenzi said, “How will the Prince of Qi avoid a bad end? He himself is without ritual propriety, and he chastises those who do have ritual propriety. He says, ‘For what reason would you practice ritual?’ To comply with Heaven through ritual propriety is the correct Way of Heaven. If he himself goes contrary to Heaven and on that basis chastises others, it will be difficult to avoid a bad end. As it says in the Odes,

15.11(12)

Why do you not revere one another? You do not show reverence for Heaven.247

That a noble man does not mistreat the young and humble is because he would show reverence for Heaven. As it says in the ‘Zhou Hymns,’ Revere Heaven’s majesty, And make this your way of preservation.248

If he has no reverence for Heaven, in what way will he be able to preserve what he has? Having taken control of the domain through a rebellion,249 one fears he will not come to a good end even if he later upholds ritual propriety while defending his position. But if he carries out many acts that are not in accord with ritual propriety, he will not continue to live on.”250 LORD WEN 16 (611 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) met with the Prince of Qi at Yanggu. The Prince of Qi failed to swear the covenant.

16.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, our lord, for the fourth time, did not attend to the month’s official business in the Ancestral Temple on the first day of the month.251

16.2(2)

251 The term shi shuo 視朔 is the equivalent of ting shuo 聽朔 and refers to a ceremony held in the Ancestral Temple on the first day of each month. It took place after the sacrificial ceremony known as gao shuo 告朔. Kong Yingda says that the latter concerned “making announcements to the ancestors” and the former ceremony concerned “making decisions about the month’s administrative issues” (ZZ-Kong 20.346). Presumably, the lord’s illness had prevented him from participating in this ceremony in the second, third, fourth, and fifth lunar months. Cf. 272, n. 60.

Lord Wen

551

16.3(2) 六月戊辰，公子遂及齊侯盟于郪丘。 16.4(3) 秋，八月辛未，夫人姜氏薨。 16.5(3) 毀泉臺。 16.6(4) 楚人、秦人、巴人滅庸。 16.7(5) 冬，十有一月，宋人弒其君杵臼。

左傳 16.1(1) 十六年，春，王正月，及齊平。公有疾，使季文子會齊侯于陽穀。請盟，

齊侯不肯，曰：「請俟君間。」

16.2(2, 3)

夏，五月，公四不視朔，疾也。公使襄仲納賂于齊侯，故盟于郪丘。



16.3(3, 4)

有蛇自泉宮出，入于國，如先君之數。秋八月辛未，聲姜薨。毀泉臺。

16.4a(6) 楚大饑，戎伐其西南，至于阜山，師于大林。又伐其東南，至于陽丘，以

侵訾枝。

252 The precise location of Xiqiu 郪丘 is a topic of dispute (Yang, 2:615–16), but it was presumably in the domain of Qi near the capital city of Linzi 臨淄. 253 Yang (2:616) suggests that the Prince of Qi was unwilling to swear a covenant with a high official rather than with the Lu ruler himself. 254 According to Du Yu’s (ZZ 20.346) count, there had been seventeen Lu Lords since the time of Boqin, so presumably seventeen snakes appeared. The Quan Palace was located in Lang 郎, a suburb of the Lu capital of Qufu. 255 Fushan 阜山 was located in the domain of Chu south of present-day Fang County 房縣, Hubei. Dalin 大林, also in Chu, was located northwest of present-day Jingmen County 荆門縣, Hubei. 256 The precise location of the Chu settlement Yangqiu 陽丘 is unknown. Zizhi 訾枝 was located near present-day Zhijiang County 枝江縣, Hubei.

552

Zuo Tradition

In the sixth month, on the wuchen day (4), Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) swore a covenant at Xiqiu with the Prince of Qi.252 In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinwei day (8), the former lord’s wife Lady Jiang passed away.

16.3(2)

16.4(3)

The Quan Terrace was demolished.

16.5(3)

The men of Chu, Qin, and Ba extinguished Yong.

16.6(4)

In winter, in the eleventh month, the Song leaders assassinated their ruler Chujiu.

16.7(5)

ZUO

An attempt at forging a peace accord between Lu and Qi fails when the ruler of Qi refuses to swear a covenant with a Lu official who is acting in place of his ill lord (Wen 15.11, 16.2). In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, we made peace with Qi. Our lord was ill and sent Ji Wenzi to meet with the Prince of Qi at Yanggu. Our lord requested that they swear a covenant, but the Prince of Qi was unwilling and said, “Let us wait until your ruler has recovered.”253

16.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, our lord, for the fourth time, did not attend to the month’s official business in the Ancestral Temple on the first day of the month: this was because he was ill. Our lord sent Xiangzhong to present gifts to the Prince of Qi, and that is why they swore a covenant at Xiqiu.

16.2(2, 3)

An inauspicious appearance of snakes is linked to the death of Lord Wen’s mother, Sheng Jiang, and a tower is demolished to rid the source of the inauspiciousness. This passage is reminiscent of an earlier snake “miracle” (Zhuang 14.2). There were snakes that came out from the Quan Palace and entered into the capital. They were the same in number as the former princes.254 In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinwei day (8), Sheng Jiang expired. The Quan Terrace was demolished.

16.3(3, 4)

There is more instability in the domain of Chu (Wen 14.10) as they are attacked and threatened from several directions. Clever tactics on Chu’s part enable them to prevail. There was a great famine in Chu. The Rong attacked the southwest portion of the Chu domain, advancing as far as Fushan and stationing troops at Dalin.255 They also attacked Chu’s southeast, advancing as far as Yangqiu and then invading Zizhi.256

16.4a(6)

Lord Wen

553

庸人帥群蠻以叛楚，麇人率百濮聚於選，將伐楚。於是申、息之 北門不啟。楚人謀徙於阪高。蒍賈曰：「不可。我能往，寇亦能往，不如 伐庸。夫麇與百濮，謂我饑不能師，故伐我也。若我出師，必懼而歸。百 濮離居，將各走其邑，誰暇謀人？」乃出師。旬有五日，百濮乃罷。 16.4b 自廬以往，振廩同食。次于句澨。使廬戢梨侵庸，及庸方城。庸人逐之，

囚子揚窗。三宿而逸，曰：「庸師眾，群蠻聚焉，不如復大師，且起王卒， 合而後進。」 師叔曰：「不可。姑又與之遇以驕之。彼驕我怒，而後可克，先君 蚡冒所以服陘隰也。」又與之遇，七遇皆北，唯裨、鯈、魚人實逐之。 庸人曰：「楚不足與戰矣。」遂不設備。楚子乘馹，會師于臨品，分 為二隊，子越自石溪，子貝自仞以伐庸。秦人、巴人從楚師。群蠻從楚子 盟，遂滅庸。

257 Yong 庸 was a small domain located near present-day Zhushan County 竹山縣, Hubei. It was on the western border of Chu. In the Documents it says that when King Wu of Zhou attacked the last ruler of the Shang dynasty, he had under his command some troops from the domain of Yong (Shangshu, “Mu shi” 牧誓, 11.158). If this can be believed, the domain would indeed be a very old one. 258 Jun was very close to Yong (see Wen 10.6). The Hundred Pu were tribes scattered widely in the area around present-day Shishou 石首, Hubei. 259 These two places were near Chu’s northern border. The gates presumably were kept closed to protect against opportunistic attacks from the princes of the central domains who might take advantage of Chu’s troubles in the south. 260 While the precise location of Bangao 阪高 is a subject of dispute, it was probably near present-day Dangyang County 當陽縣, Hubei. Du Yu (ZZ 20.347) suggests that it was a place that could be easily defended. 261 For Lu, a district of Chu, see Wen 14.10. For translation, see Karlgren, gl. 235. 262 Goushi 句澨 originally belonged to the domain of Yong and was eventually absorbed by Chu. It was located in an area that is now covered by a reservoir but was once governed by present-day Jun County 均縣, Hubei. 263 Fangcheng 方城 belonged to the domain of Yong and was located east of present-day Zhushan County 竹山縣, Hubei. It should not be confused with the previously mentioned Fangcheng, which was a Chu stronghold (Xi 4.1). 264 Nothing more is known of this figure. Du Yu (ZZ 20.347) says that he was a subordinate of Jili.

554

Zuo Tradition

The Yong leaders led various Man tribes in rebellion against Chu.257 The Jun leaders led the Hundred Pu and gathered at Xuan in readiness to attack Chu.258 At that time, the northern gates of Shen and Xi were closed.259 The Chu leaders made plans to move to Bangao.260 Wei Jia said, “We should not. If we are able to go there, the enemy is also able to go there. It would be better to attack Yong. Now, the Jun and the Hundred Pu believe that we are famished and unable to field troops. That is why they are attacking us. If we deploy troops, certainly they will be afraid and will turn back. The Hundred Pu live separated from one another and will each flee to their own settlements. Who among them will have the leisure to make plans against others?” So they deployed troops, and after fifteen days the Hundred Pu stopped their attack. From Lu marching on toward Yong, the Chu army had thrown open the granaries and shared the food.261 They set up camp at Goushi.262 They had Lu Jili invade Yong, and they advanced as far as Fancheng in Yong.263 But the men of Yong chased after them and captured Ziyang Chuang.264 On the third night of his captivity, he escaped and reported, “The Yong troops are numerous and various Man tribes have gathered there. It would be better to return and conscript a large army, in addition to deploying even the king’s own troops, and advance again only after combining these forces.” Pan Wanga said, “We cannot do that. For the time being, we should engage them again to lull them into overconfidence. Only when they are lulled into overconfidence and our troops are driven by fury will we be victorious. This was the way that the former ruler Fenmao made Xingxi submit.”265 So they engaged them again and were routed in seven successive engagements. It was those forces from Bi, Chou, and Yu that drove Chu away.266 The Yong leaders said, “The Chu troops are not battle worthy!” So they did not take defensive precautions. The Master of Chu rode in swift relay chariots and met with the troops at Linpin.267 They divided into two detachments. Dou Jiaoa set out from Shixi, and Zibei set out from Ren to attack Yong.268 The men of Qin and Ba accompanied the Chu troops. The various Man submitted to the Master of Chu and swore a covenant. Chu then extinguished Yong.

16.4b

265 Little is known of the event mentioned here. Fenmao (also mentioned in Xuan 12.2e, Zhao 23.9) ruled over Chu from 757 to 741. 266 Du Yu (ZZ 20.347) suggests that these are the names of three settlements in the Yong region, but Yang (2:619) believes these are the names of three tribes. 267 Linpin 臨品 was located in the domain of Chu in present-day Jun County 均縣, Hubei. 268 Shixi 石溪 was located in the domain of Wei near present-day Jun County 均縣, Hubei, and Ren 仞 was nearby.

Lord Wen

555

16.5a 宋公子鮑禮於國人，宋饑，竭其粟而貸之。年自七十以上，無不饋詒也，

時加羞珍異。無日不數於六卿之門。國之材人，無不事也；親自桓以下， 無不恤也。 公子鮑美而豔，襄夫人欲通之，而不可，乃助之施。昭公無道，國 人奉公子鮑以因夫人。 於是華元為右師，公孫友為左師，華耦為司馬，鱗鱹為司徒，蕩 意諸為司城，公子朝為司寇。初，司城蕩卒，公孫壽辭司城，請使意諸 為之。既而告人曰：「君無道，吾官近，懼及焉。棄官，則族無所庇。子， 身之貳也，姑紓死焉。雖亡子，猶不亡族。」

556

Zuo Tradition

In Song, Gongzi Bao, the younger half brother of the reigning Lord Zhao, acts generously and wins the support of Lady Wang Ji, the widow of his grandfather Lord Xiang (r. 650–637), gradually building his own influence even as Duke Zhao continues his “unprincipled” behavior. The text is evasive about Duke Zhao’s crimes: on the one hand, accusations against him are stated baldly, but on the other hand, his conduct does not seem to merit such negative judgments. On the machinations of Lady Wang Ji, see also Wen 8.6. Gongzi Bao of Song exemplified ritual propriety in his dealings with the inhabitants of the capital. When there was a famine in Song, he exhausted his own grain supplies dispensing loans.269 All those from the age of seventy up were given food and drink and were additionally offered precious and unusual foods in the proper season. There was no day Bao did not frequent the gates of the six ministers. Of the talented men of the capital, there was none he did not solicit. Of the kinsmen descended from Lord Huan, there was none he did not care for.270 Gongzi Bao was lovely and radiant, and the lady of the former Lord Xiang wanted a liaison with him.271 But he refused. So she then assisted him in his acts of generosity. Duke Zhao was unprincipled, and the inhabitants of the capital supported Gongzi Bao in order to be on the side of the lady. At that time, Hua Yuan was minister of the right, and Gongsun You was minister of the left. Hua Ou was supervisor of the military, Lin Guan was supervisor of conscripts, Dang Yizhu was supervisor of fortifications, and Gongzi Zhao was supervisor of corrections. Earlier, when the supervisor of fortifications Gongzi Dang had died, Gongsun Shou had declined the position of supervisor of fortifications and asked that his son Dang Yizhu be appointed to serve in his stead.272 Afterward, he reported to others, saying, “The ruler is unprincipled. My office would bring me close to him, and I fear disaster will overtake me. But if I reject the office, then my clan will have no protection. My son is my stand-in. With this I will keep death at bay for the time being. Even if I lose a son, my line will not perish.”

16.5a

269 See Karlgren, gl. 237. 270 Lord Huan (r. 681–651) was Gongzi Bao’s great-grandfather. 271 The lady of the former Lord Xiang must have been over sixty by this time. Her husband had been dead for twenty-six years. She was also the younger sister of King Xiang of Zhou (r. 651–619), who had died eight years earlier. The same phrase, mei er yan 美而豔, “lovely and radiant,” is used to describe Kongfu’s wife in Huan 1.5. As Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:173–74) points out, words used more exclusively for female beauty in later writings are also applied to men in early texts. Gongzi Bao is officially her grandson, although there are probably no blood ties between them. 272 Gongsun Shou, as Gongzi Dang’s son, should have inherited the position, but he yields it to his own son Dang Yizhu.

Lord Wen

557

16.5b(7) 既，夫人將使公田孟諸而殺之。公知之，盡以寶行。蕩意諸曰：「盍適諸

侯？」公曰：「不能其大夫至于君祖母以及國人，諸侯誰納我？且既為人 君，而又為人臣，不如死。」盡以其寶賜左右而使行。 夫人使謂司城去公。對曰：「臣之而逃其難，若後君何？」 冬，十一月甲寅，宋昭公將田孟諸，未至，夫人王姬使帥甸攻而殺 之。蕩意諸死之。書曰「宋人弒其君杵臼」，君無道也。 文公即位，使母弟須為司城。華耦卒，而使蕩虺為司馬。

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年，春，晉人、衛人、陳人、鄭人伐宋。 17.2(2) 夏，四月癸亥，葬我小君聲姜。 17.3(3) 齊侯伐我西鄙。六月癸未，公及齊侯盟于穀。 17.4(4) 諸侯會于扈。 17.5 秋，公至自穀。 17.6(7) 冬，公子遂如齊。

558

Zuo Tradition

Lord Zhao, who has lost support in Song, refuses to leave the domain. Lady Wang Ji has him assassinated, and he is replaced by the popular Gongzi Bao, who becomes Lord Wen (r. 610–589). Dang Yizhu dies during the unrest, but the Dang line remains in power, as his father predicted. Afterward, the lady was going to urge the lord to go hunting at Mengzhu Marsh and then have him killed. The lord learned of this and set out with all the domain’s treasures. Dang Yizhu said, “Why not go over to one of the princes?” The lord said, “Since I failed to gain the confidence of the high officers and even of my grandmother and the inhabitants of the capital, who among the princes would accept me? Moreover, having been a ruler of men, I would rather die than go on to be another’s subject.” He gave all his treasures to his retinue and sent them on their way. The lady sent someone to tell the supervisor of fortifications to forsake the lord, but he responded, “If I served him as subject and then fled in his hour of difficulty, then how will his successor regard me?” In winter, in the eleventh month, on the jiayin day (22), Lord Zhao of Song was going hunting at Mengzhu Marsh. Before he arrived, the Lady Wang Ji sent the commander of the hinterland to attack and kill him.273 Dang Yizhu died with him. The text says, “Song leaders assassinated their ruler, Chujiu”: the ruler was unprincipled. Lord Wen acceded to his position and appointed his younger full brother Xu as supervisor of fortifications. When Hua Ou died, Dang Hui was appointed as supervisor of the military.274

16.5b(7)

LORD WEN 17 (610 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, a Jin leader, a Wei leader, a Chen leader, and a Zheng leader attacked Song. In summer, in the fourth month, on the guihai day (4), we buried the wife of our former ruler, Sheng Jiang.

17.1(1)

17.2(2)

The Prince of Qi attacked our western marches. In the sixth month, on the guiwei day (25), our lord and the Prince of Qi swore a covenant at Gu.

17.3(3)

The princes met at Hu.

17.4(4)

In autumn, our lord arrived from Gu.

17.5

In winter, Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi.

17.6(7)

273 Yang (2:622) identifies the title shuai dian 帥甸 with dian shi 甸師, which Hucker (Dictionary of Official Titles, 506) translates as “master of the hinterland.” 274 Dang Hui was Dang Yizhu’s younger brother.

Lord Wen

559

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年，春，晉荀林父、衛孔達、陳公孫寧、鄭石楚伐宋，討曰：「何故

弒君？」猶立文公而還。卿不書，失其所也。 17.2(2) 夏，四月癸亥，葬聲姜。有齊難，是以緩。 17.3(3) 齊侯伐我北鄙，襄仲請盟。六月，盟于穀。 17.4a(4) 晉侯蒐于黃父，遂復合諸侯于扈，平宋也。公不與會，齊難故也。書曰

「諸侯」，無功也。 於是晉侯不見鄭伯，以為貳於楚也。鄭子家使執訊而與之書，以 告趙宣子，曰：

560

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

A military action against Song for killing Duke Zhao ends up doing little more than installing his successor Duke Wen (Wen 16.5). In the seventeenth year, in spring, Xun Linfu of Jin, Kong Da of Wei, Gongsun Ning of Chen, and Shi Chu of Zheng attacked Song. They chastised Song, asking, “For what reason did you assassinate your ruler?” Still, they established Lord Wen as ruler and returned home. The ministers’ names are not recorded because they had neglected their proper place.

17.1(1)

Conflict between Lu and Qi breaks out again, but this time a covenant is successfully sworn (Wen 16.1). In summer, in the fourth month, on the guihai day (4), we buried Sheng Jiang. There was trouble with Qi, and that is the reason we were tardy. The Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches.275 Xiangzhong requested that we swear a covenant with Qi. In the sixth month, a covenant was sworn at Gu.

17.2(2)

17.3(3)

The Zheng minister Gongzi Guisheng sends a letter to the Jin minister Zhao Dun, the first of its kind recorded in Zuozhuan. Guisheng’s argument combines protestations of loyalty and deference with a forceful defense of Zheng’s rights, in a manner typical of many exchanges between Zheng and more powerful domains such as Jin and Chu (e.g., see the passages relating to Zichan in later sections of Zuozhuan). Guisheng claims that Zheng plays a crucial role in forging the allegiance of Chen and Cai to Jin and also avers that Zheng will be ready to fight back if Jin continues to exert pressure. The Prince of Jin mustered troops at Huangfu.276 Then he again gathered the princes at Hu. This was to settle matters in Song. That our lord did not attend the meeting was because of the trouble with Qi. That the text says, “the princes,” is because they did not accomplish anything. On that occasion, the Prince of Jin did not receive the Liege of Zheng because he considered Zheng disloyal to Jin in serving Chu. Gongzi Guishenga of Zheng sent a courier and gave him a letter to inform Zhao Duna as follows:

17.4a(4)

275 Annals, Wen 17.3, says “western marches” rather than “northern marches.” Du Yu (ZZ 20.349) believes that the former is an error. 276 Huangfu 黃父 was a mountain located in the domain of Jin near present-day Heirang 黑壤, in the Wuling Mountains 烏嶺 northeast of Yicheng County 翼城縣, Shanxi.

Lord Wen

561

寡君即位三年，召蔡侯而與之事君。九月，蔡侯入于敝邑以

行。敝邑以侯宣多之難，寡君是以不得與蔡侯偕。十一月， 克減侯宣多，而隨蔡侯以朝于執事。十二年六月，歸生佐寡 君之嫡夷，以請陳侯于楚，而朝諸君。十四年七月，寡君又 朝以蕆陳事。十五年五月，陳侯自敝邑往朝于君。往年正月， 燭之武往，朝夷也。八月，寡君又往朝。以陳、蔡之密邇於 楚，而不敢貳焉，則敝邑之故也。雖敝邑之事君，何以不免？ 在位之中，一朝于襄，而再見于君。夷與孤之二三臣相 及於絳。雖我小國，則蔑以過之矣。今大國曰：「爾未逞吾 志。」敝邑有亡，無以加焉。 17.4b

古人有言曰：「畏首畏尾，身其餘幾？」又曰：「鹿死不 擇音。」小國之事大國也：德，則其人也；不德，則其鹿 也，鋌而走險，急何能擇？命之罔極，亦知亡矣，將悉敝賦 以待於鯈。唯執事命之。 文公二年六月壬申，朝于齊。四年，二月壬戌，為齊侵 蔡，亦獲成於楚。居大國之間，而從於強令，豈其罪也？大 國若弗圖，無所逃命。

277 Lord Mu of Zheng, who ruled at the time, acceded to his position in Xi 33 (625 Bce), so the third year of his reign would have corresponded to Lord Wen 2 (623 Bce). 278 Hou Xuanduo was instrumental in establishing Lord Mu of Zheng as ruler (Xi 30.3). This presumably gives him sufficient power to threaten Lord Mu. 279 See Karlgren, gl. 238. 280 Yi will reign later as Lord Ling of Zheng, but only for a single year (605 Bce). 281 That is, he came to expedite the submission of Chen to the domain of Jin. However, this event is not mentioned under Lord Wen 13. 282 The Prince of Jin to whom this discourse is addressed is Lord Ling (r. 620–607), and he was preceded by Lord Xiang (r. 627–621). 283 Jiang was the capital of Jin. 284 A variant of the same saying appears in Huainanzi 17.574. 285 There are two quite different interpretations of this saying. Du Yu (ZZ 20.350) believed that yin 音, “sound,” was being used for yin 蔭, “shelter”: “When a deer is dying, it does not choose its shelter.” The other reading, which we have followed here and which has become the idiomatic meaning, is that of Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 20.250) and is also preferred by Yang (2:626). 286 Du Yu (ZZ 20.350) understands ting 鋌 to mean “running swiftly” or “in a panic.” For the meaning “straight” adopted above, see Karlgren, gl. 241. 287 There was no renxu day in the second month of this year.

562

Zuo Tradition

In the third year after our unworthy ruler acceded to his position,277 he summoned the Prince of Cai and joined with him in serving your ruler. In the ninth month, the Prince of Cai entered our humble settlement as he was traveling to Jin. But on account of our humble settlement’s trouble with Hou Xuanduo, the ruler therefore could not accompany the Prince of Cai.278 In the eleventh month, having victoriously cut down the power of Hou Xuan­ duo,279 we followed the Prince of Cai and came to visit the court of your functionaries. In the twelfth year, in the sixth month, I, Guisheng, assisted Yi, my humble ruler’s legitimate heir,280 in asking Chu to bring the Prince of Chen to your court. In the fourteenth year, in the seventh month, our ruler again came to your court to complete the affair with Chen.281 In the fifteenth year, in the fifth month, the Prince of Chen went from our humble settlement to visit your court. And last year, in the first month, Zhu Zhiwu left and brought Yi to your court. In the eighth month, our ruler again went to your court. That Chen and Cai have drawn close to Chu but have not dared to shift allegiance to them is be­ cause of our humble settlement. Only in this way has our humble settlement served you, so why is it we have not escaped trouble? While my lord has been in his position, he has gone once to the court of Lord Xiang and has twice met with you in audience.282 Yi and several of our lone ruler’s servants have been to Jiang one after the other.283 We are a small domain, and yet for all that nothing can exceed what we have done. Now the great domain says, “You have not yet satisfied our desires.” Even if our humble settlement is to be destroyed, there is nothing more we can add to what we have done. There was a saying among the ancients: “If one is afraid for his head and is afraid for his tail, how much of the body is left over?”284 There was also this: “When a deer is dying, it does not choose its cry.”285 If a small domain serves a large domain and is treated well, then it reacts like a human being. If it is not treated well, then it reacts like a deer running straight toward a precipice.286 How could it choose its cry in such desperation? Your commands are without limit; we know that we will perish. So we will raise all of our conscripts and await you at Chou. It is entirely up to your functionaries to issue the command. In the second year of our Lord Wen, in the sixth month, on the renshen day (20), we visited the court of Qi. In the fourth year, in the second month, on the renxu day,287 we invaded Cai on behalf of Qi and obtained an accord with Chu. Located between great domains and subject to coercive orders, how could it be we who are to blame? If your great domain does not take this into consideration, we will have nowhere to flee your command.

Lord Wen

17.4b

563

晉鞏朔行成於鄭，趙穿、公婿池為質焉。 17.5 秋，周甘歜敗戎于邥垂，乘其飲酒也。 17.6 冬，十月，鄭大子夷、石楚為質于晉。 17.7(6) 襄仲如齊，拜穀之盟。復曰：「臣聞齊人將食魯之麥。以臣觀之，將不

能。齊君之語偷。臧文仲有言曰：『民主偷，必死。』」

春秋 18.1(1) 十有八年，春，王二月丁丑，公薨于臺下。 18.2 秦伯罃卒。 18.3(2) 夏，五月戊戌，齊人弒其君商人。 18.4(3) 六月癸酉，葬我君文公。 18.5(4) 秋，公子遂、叔孫得臣如齊。 18.6(5) 冬，十月，子卒。 18.7(6) 夫人姜氏歸于齊。 18.8 季孫行父如齊。 18.9(7) 莒弒其君庶其。

564

Zuo Tradition

Shi Zhuangboa of Jin traveled to Zheng and reached an accord with them. Zhao Chuan and Gongxu Chi of Jin became hostages there. In autumn, Gan Chu of Zhou defeated the Rong at Shenchui.288 They took advantage of the fact that the Rong had been drinking wine.

17.5

In winter, in the tenth month, Yi, the heir apparent of Zheng, and Shi Chu became hostages in Jin.

17.6

A Lu official, visiting Qi to thank them for the covenant (Wen 17.3), makes an ominous prediction about the ruler of Qi that will come true the following year. Zang Wenzhong, who died seven years earlier, will continue to be quoted throughout Zuozhuan as the wise man of Lu. Xiangzhong went to Qi and bowed to thank them for the covenant of Gu. When he returned, he said, “I have heard that the men of Qi are going to eat the wheat of Lu. As I see it, they will not succeed. The words of the ruler of Qi are remiss. Zang Wenzhong used to say, ‘When a lord of men is remiss, he will surely die.’”

17.7(6)

LORD WEN 18 (609 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the dingchou day (23), our lord expired at the foot of the terrace.

18.1(1)

Ying, the Liege of Qin, died.

18.2

In summer, in the fifth month, on the wuxu day (15), Qi leaders assassinated their ruler Shangren.

18.3(2)

In the sixth month, on the guiyou day (21), we buried our ruler, Lord Wen.

18.4(3)

In autumn, Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) and Shusun Dechen went to Qi.

18.5(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, the sons died.

18.6(5)

289

The wife of Lord Wen, Lady Jiang, went home to Qi.

18.7(6)

Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Qi.

18.8

Ju assassinated its ruler, Shuqi.

18.9(7)

288 Shenchui 邥垂 was located in the royal domain of Zhou just south of present-day Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. 289 That is, the heir apparent of Lu, Gongzi E and his brother Shi, died.

Lord Wen

565

左傳 18.1(1) 十八年，春，齊侯戒師期，而有疾。醫曰：「不及秋，將死。」公聞之，卜，

曰：「尚無及期！」惠伯令龜。卜楚丘占之，曰：「齊侯不及期，非疾也； 君亦不聞。令龜有咎。」二月丁丑，公薨。 18.2(3) 齊懿公之為公子也，與邴歜之父爭田，弗勝。及即位，乃掘而刖之，而使

歜僕。納閻職之妻，而使職驂乘。 夏，五月，公游于申池。二人浴于池，歜以扑抶職。職怒。歜曰：「人 奪女妻而不怒，一抶女，庸何傷？」職曰：「與刖其父而弗能病者何 如？」乃謀弒懿公，納諸竹中。歸，舍爵而行。齊人立公子元。 18.3(4) 六月，葬文公。

290 The diviner is predicting that the Lord of Lu will predecease the Prince of Qi and that Huibo will also be overtaken by disaster. Both predictions come true this year. 291 The grammar of this quotation, with ru 女 in a possessive position and the binomial interrogative yonghe 庸何, is somewhat unusual and may be an attempt to reproduce a colloquial idiom. 292 Yang (2:630) believes that she jue 舍爵, “to put down goblets,” refers to a ceremony in the Ancestral Temple in which libations were offered to the deceased (cf. Huan 2.2). As Karlgren (gl. 243) argues, however, this hardly seems congruous with the secrecy of the assassins’ act. He suggests, instead, that they are drinking among themselves to celebrate the demise of an unpopular prince.

566

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

As the Prince of Qi plans yet another attack upon Lu (Wen 15.8, 15.11, 17.3), he falls ill, and ominous predictions are uttered concerning both the Qi and the Lu leaders. In the eighteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi announced a time for military action against Lu and then fell ill. The doctor said, “He will die before autumn.” When our lord heard this, he divined by turtle shell, saying, “Would that he die before the time appointed for military action!” Shuzhong Huiboa issued the charge to the turtle shell, and Diviner Chuqiu gave the prognostication: “The Prince of Qi will not get to the appointed time. But the cause will not be the illness, and our ruler also will not live to hear about it. He who issued the charge will have misfortune.” 290 In the second month, on the dingchou day (23), our lord expired.

18.1(1)

Lord Yi of Qi is assassinated, and Gongzi Yuan, who had “yielded” to him earlier (Wen 14.6, 14.13), succeeds him as Lord Hui (r. 608–599). When Lord Yi of Qi was still a noble son, he fought with the father of Bing Chu over land but did not prevail. When he acceded to his position, he dug up the corpse of the father of Bing Chu and cut off its feet. Yet he employed Bing Chu as his chariot driver. He took the wife of Yan Zhi for himself and yet employed Zhi as the third man in his chariot. In summer, in the fifth month, Lord Yi went on an excursion to Shen Pond. Bing Chu and Yan Zhi were bathing in the pond when Chu struck Zhi with his whip. Zhi became angry and Chu said, “A man steals your wife and you do not become angry. So what would it matter if I struck you?”291 Zhi said, “And how does that compare to someone whose father’s feet were cut off and yet could not express indignation?” So they conspired and assassinated Lord Yi and then hid his body in a bamboo grove. They returned to the city, put down their cups after drinking, and went away.292 The leaders of Qi established Gongzi Yuan as ruler.293

18.2(3)

The burial of the recently ill Lord Wen (Wen 16.1, 16.2) is here noted, fulfilling the prediction of 18.1. In the sixth month, we buried Lord Wen.294

18.3(4)

293 Gongzi Yuan is known to history as Lord Hui of Qi (r. 608–599). 294 This entry simply repeats the corresponding line from the Annals. Yang (2:631) suggests that it might originally have been joined to the Zuozhuan entry that follows.

Lord Wen

567

18.4(5) 秋，襄仲、莊叔如齊，惠公立故，且拜葬也。文公二妃敬嬴生宣公。敬嬴

嬖而私事襄仲。宣公長，而屬諸襄仲。襄仲欲立之，叔仲不可。仲見于齊 侯而請之。齊侯新立，而欲親魯，許之。 18.5(6) 冬，十月，仲殺惡及視，而立宣公。書曰「子卒」，諱之也。

仲以君命召惠伯，其宰公冉務人止之曰：「入必死。」叔仲曰：「死 君命可也。」公冉務人曰：「若君命，可死；非君命，何聽？」弗聽，乃入， 殺而埋之馬矢之中。公冉務人奉其帑以奔蔡，既而復叔仲氏。 18.6 夫人姜氏歸于齊，大歸也。將行，哭而過市，曰：「天乎！仲為不道，殺嫡

立庶。」市人皆哭。魯人謂之哀姜。

568

Zuo Tradition

Lord Wen of Lu’s first wife was Ai Jiang (also called Chu Jiang) from Qi, and his secondary consort was Jing Ying, who became the lord’s favorite. The former gave birth to E and Shi, who are killed (Wen 18.5), and Jing Ying is the mother of the successor, Lord Xuan. Jing Ying has private ties with Xiangzhong, who thus supports her son and ruthlessly eliminates Lord Wen’s legitimate heirs, the children of his principal wife Ai Jiang. In autumn, Xiangzhong and Shusun Dechena went to Qi: this was because Lord Hui was established as ruler; and moreover, it was to pay their respects at the burial. The secondary consort of Lord Wen, Jing Ying, had given birth to Lord Xuan. Jing Ying was the favorite and had private dealings with Xiangzhong. When Lord Xuan had grown up, she entrusted him to Xiangzhong. Xiangzhong wanted to establish him as ruler, but Shuzhong Huibob was unwilling. Xiangzhong had an audience with the Prince of Qi and requested help from him.295 The Prince of Qi was newly established as ruler and wanted to have close relations with Lu, so he agreed to it.

18.4(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, Xiangzhong killed E and Shi and established Lord Xuan as ruler. The texts says, “The sons died,” to conceal it. Xiangzhong used the ruler’s command to summon Shuzhong Huiboa, but the latter’s steward, Gongran Wuren, stopped him, saying, “If you enter the palace, you are sure to die.” Shuzhong Huibob said, “To die at the ruler’s command is proper.” Gongran Wuren said, “If it is the ruler’s command, it is acceptable, but if it is not the ruler’s command, why heed it?” But he did not follow this counsel and entered the palace. They killed him and buried him in horse dung. Gongran Wuren offered his service to Shuzhong Huibo’s wife and children and fled with them to Cai, so that later the Shuzhong lineage was restored.

18.5(6)

Ai Jiang now returns to Qi under unhappy circumstances that had been predicted at the time she married into Lu (Wen 4.4). The wife of Lord Wen, Lady Jiang, went home to Qi. This was the irrevocable return.296 As she was about to leave, she passed through the market wailing and cried, “Oh, Heaven! Xiangzhong violated the proper way. He killed the legitimate heir and established a secondary son.” The people in the market all cried, and the men of Lu called her “Ai Jiang.”297

18.6

295 Qi is persuaded to turn against its own (Ai Jiang) and to support a Lu consort from Qin (Jing Ying). 296 Her intention, then, was to never return to Lu. Recall that she was called “Chu Jiang” (the Departing Jiang) in Wen 4.4. 297 Ai Jiang means “the Mournful Jiang.”

Lord Wen

569

18.7a 莒紀公生大子僕，又生季佗，愛季佗而黜僕，且多行無禮於國。僕因

國人以弒紀公，以其寶玉來奔，納諸宣公。公命與之邑，曰：「今日必 授！」季文子使司寇出諸竟，曰：「今日必達！」公問其故。季文子使大史 克對曰： 先大夫臧文仲教行父事君之禮，行父奉以周旋，弗敢失隊，

曰：「見有禮於其君者，事之，如孝子之養父母也；見無禮於 其君者，誅之，如鷹鸇之逐鳥雀也。」先君周公制周禮曰： 「則以觀德，德以處事，事以度功，功以食民。」作誓命曰： 「毀則為賊，掩賊為藏。竊賄為盜，盜器為姦。主藏之名， 賴姦之用，為大凶德，有常無赦。在九刑不忘。」

298 The office of “grand scribe” 大史 appears only in the domains of Zhou, Lu, Jin, Zheng, Wei, and Qin. 299 See Karlgren, gl. 245. 300 The term translated here as “Zhou rituals” 周禮 is also the name of one of the classics: Rituals of Zhou (Zhouli). It is doubtful, however, that such a text existed when the passage above was composed. Moreover, the quotation cited above does not appear in the current Zhouli. 301 According to Du Yu (ZZ 20.352), this means, “By merits, one nourishes the people.” Takezoe (9.46) favors the passive reading given above and explains as follows: “After merits are achieved, one is granted a settlement and fields and is thereby nourished by the people.” Yang (2:634) favors this latter interpretation. 302 This text is no longer extant. 303 Karlgren, gl. 247. 304 This is probably the same code of punishments noted in Zhao 6.3. Yang (2:635) believes that the nine punishments included in this code are the usual five (death, castration, removal of the feet, removal of the nose, and a facial tattoo) plus banish-

570

Zuo Tradition

In the following the Lu minister Ji Wenzi explains through the scribe Ke why it is unwise for Lu to harbor Pu, the rightful Ju heir apparent, who had committed patricide and then fled to Lu with treasures from his home domain. Personal advantage is here pitted against ritual and moral propriety. On the impropriety of receiving bribes from fugitive noblemen, see also Huan 2.1. Lord Ji of Ju fathered the heir apparent Pu and also Jituo. He loved Jituo and demoted Pu as heir apparent. Moreover, Lord Ji did many things in the domain that were not in accord with ritual propriety. Pu colluded with inhabitants of the capital to assassinate Lord Ji and then fled to Lu, bringing with him treasures and jades, which he presented to Lord Xuan. Our lord commanded that he be given a settlement and said, “This very day it must be granted!” Ji Wenzi sent the supervisor of corrections to expel Pu from the borders of the domain and said, “This very day it must be accomplished!” When our lord asked why he had done this, Ji Wenzi had the grand scribe Ke298 respond as follows:

18.7a

Zang Wenzhong, the former high officer of Lu, taught me the rituals for serving a ruler. I respectfully upheld these to deal with all situations and do not dare to neglect or diminish them.299 He said, “When you meet someone who behaves with ritual propriety toward his ruler, then serve him in the same way a filial son provides for his parents. When you meet someone who does not behave with ritual propriety in regard to his ruler, then punish him in the same way a sparrow hawk pursues small birds.” Our former ruler, the Zhou Duke, created the Zhou rituals, which say,300 “By means of models, one observes virtue. By means of virtue, one manages official business. By means of official business, one measures merits. By means of merits, one is nourished by the people.”301 He created the Solemn Declaration,302 which says, “He who destroys models is a rebel. He who hides a rebel is a conspirer. He who plunders goods is a robber. He who robs ceremonial vessels is a usurper. To gain a reputation for conspiracy and to profit from usurpation is to show a character of great evil,303 and there is no forgiveness for such behavior by the constant rules of the domain. The punishments in the ‘Nine Punishments’ should not be forgotten.”304



ment, paying a ransom, whipping, and pummeling. He also believes that wang 忘, “to forget,” should be understood here as wang 妄, “to be excessive.” Following Yang, one would translate it as: “That there would be one among the nine punishments to be applied to such a case would not be excessive.” For the interpretation above, see Karlgren, gl. 248.

Lord Wen

571

行父還觀莒僕，莫可則也。孝、敬、忠、信為吉德， 盜、賊、藏、姦為凶德。夫莒僕，則其孝敬，則弒君父矣； 則其忠信，則竊寶玉矣。其人，則盜賊也；其器，則姦兆 也。保而利之，則主藏也。以訓則昏，民無則焉。不度於 善，而皆在於凶德，是以去之。

18.7b

昔高陽氏有才子八人：蒼舒、隤敳、檮戭、大臨、尨降、庭 堅、仲容、叔達，齊、聖、廣、淵、明、允、篤、誠，天下之民 謂之八愷。高辛氏有才子八 人：伯奮、仲堪、叔 獻、季 仲、伯虎、仲熊、叔豹、季貍，忠、肅、共、懿、宣、慈、惠、 和，天下之民謂之八元。此十六族也，世濟其美，不隕其 名。以至於堯，堯不能舉。舜臣堯，舉八愷，使主后土，以 揆百事，莫不時序，地平天成。舉八元，使布五教于四方，父 義、母慈、兄友、弟共、子孝，內平外成。

305 See Zhang Binglin 章炳麟 as quoted in Yang (2:635–36). For a somewhat different reading and a discussion of various interpretations of this phrase, see Karlgren, gl. 249. 306 Gaoyang, also known as Zhuanxu 顓頊, is the grandson of the Yellow Emperor (Huang Di) and one of the legendary five emperors of high antiquity. As Du Yu (ZZ 20.353) notes, zi 子 must here refer to posterity and not merely “sons.” Yang (2:636) notes various conjectures on these eight men but concludes that none are reliable. 307 Karlgren, gl. 250.

572

Zuo Tradition

When I carefully examined Pu of Ju, there was nothing in his behavior that could be taken as a model. Filial piety, respect, loyalty, and good faith are favorable character traits. Robbery, rebellion, conspiracy, and usurpation are evil character traits. Now, if one took as model Pu of Ju’s filial piety and respect, then one would assassinate ruler and father! If one took as model his loyalty and good faith, then one would steal treasures and jades! Such a man is a robber and a rebel, and his vessels are the stolen goods of a usurper.305 If you offer him shelter and profit from him, then you have taken up conspiracy. And if you provide instruction to the people in such a fashion, then there will be confusion, and the people will have no model. He does not take the good as his standard but in all these respects is numbered among those of evil character, and that is the reason to expel him. Formally, the Gaoyang lineage had eight talented descendants: Cangshu, Tui’ai, Taoyan, Chouyan, Dalin, Mangxiang, Tingjian, Zhong­rong, and Shuda.306 They were fair, wise, broad-minded, profound, clear-sighted, reliable, earnest, and sincere. The people of the realm called them “the Eight Joyous Ones.”307 The Gaoxin line had eight talented sons: Bofen, Zhongkan, Shuxian, Jizhong, Bohu, Zhongxiong, Shubao, and Jili.308 They were loyal, reverent, proper, praiseworthy, accommodating, kindly, merciful, and harmonious. The people of the realm called them “the Eight Exemplars.” These men’s sixteen houses, generation after generation, continued their praiseworthy behavior and never let their reputation falter. They continued down to the time of Emperor Yao, but Yao was unable to employ them. When Shun served Yao, he employed the Eight Joyous Ones, appointing them to manage the offices of lands and to regulate the many official tasks. There was nothing they did not arrange according to the proper time, and the earth was at peace and heaven in accord.309 He employed the Eight Exemplars and had them promulgate the five precepts to the four quarters. Fathers were dutiful, mothers kind, older brothers fraternal, younger brothers respectful, and children ­fi lial. In court there was peace, and beyond the court there was accord.310

18.7b

308 Gaoxin is also known as Emperor Ku 帝嚳. He was the great-grandson of the Yellow Emperor and was one of the legendary five rulers of high antiquity. Little is known of his sons. 309 This same phrase appears in Xi 24.3 (see n. 344), where it is attributed to the Xia Documents. 310 See Karlgren, gl. 251.

Lord Wen

573

18.7c

昔帝鴻氏有不才子，掩義隱賊，好行凶德；醜類惡物。頑 嚚不友，是與比周，天下之民謂之渾敦。少皞氏有不才 子，毀信廢忠，崇飾惡言；靖譖庸回，服讒蒐慝，以誣盛 德，天下之民謂之窮奇。顓頊氏有不才子，不可教訓，不 知話言；告之則頑，舍之則嚚，傲很明德，以亂天常，天下 之民謂之檮杌。此三族也，世濟其凶，增其惡名，以至于 堯，堯不能去。縉雲氏有不才子，貪于飲食，冒于貨賄，侵 欲崇侈，不可盈厭，聚斂積實，不知紀極，不分孤寡，不 恤窮匱，天下之民以比三凶，謂之饕餮。舜臣堯，賓于四 門，流四凶族，渾敦、窮奇、檮杌、饕餮，投諸四裔，以禦 螭魅。 是以堯崩而天下如一，同心戴舜，以為天子，以其舉十 六相、去四凶也。故虞書數舜之功，曰「慎徽五典，五典克 從」，無違教也。曰「納于百揆，百揆時序」，無廢事也。曰 「賓于四門，四門穆穆」，無凶人也。

311 There is some question as to the identity of Emperor Hong. Du Yu (ZZ 20.354) says that this is the Yellow Emperor, but the basis for this claim is not known. The phrase yan yi 掩義 could be read as “cover acts of dutifulness,” but both Yu Yue and Zhang Binglin believe it is closer in meaning to the phrase that follows. Yi 義, they suggest, is written for e 俄 and means something like “crookedness” or “perversity” (see Yang, 2:638; and Karlgren, gl. 252). 312 Karlgren, gl. 254. 313 Du Yu (20:354) suggests that the name memorializes the fact that he was “thorough [qiong] in his actions” and “fond of the curious [qi].” Qiongqi appears in several early texts as the name of a demon or a beast. See Yang, 2:639. Hundun, glossed as “blocked” (ZZ 20.354), may be related to Hundun or Chaos, god of the center in Zhuangzi (Zhuangzi jishi 7.309). Jia Kui glosses Taowu as “the form of being incomparably fierce and recalcitrant” (Yang 2:640). Jia Kui, Fu Qian, and Du Yu all claim that Taotie means greed and gluttony (Yang 2:640). Hundun, Taowu, and Taotie are also identified in some early texts as beasts, the last made most famous as the name of a motif, sometimes called the “monster motif,” found on early Chinese bronze vessels. That they appear not as mythological beasts but as “historical” persons is an example of classicist euhemerization, of which there are other examples in early China. 314 Tong Shuye (Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu, 12–13) notes that this is one of the earliest references, albeit somewhat oblique, to the Confucian tradition that the early legendary rulers Yao and Shun abdicated the throne to other worthies. For another early reference to abdication, see Mozi jiangu, 9.52. 315 The “Five Canons” are typically explained as the teachings of the five constant virtues: a father’s justice, a mother’s kindness, an older brother’s fraternal devotion, a younger brother’s respect, and a son’s filial piety. 316 Both of these quotations from the Yu Documents are found in Shangshu, “Shun dian” 舜典, 3.34.

574

Zuo Tradition

Formerly, Emperor Hong had a worthless son who concealed perversity and hid rebellion.311 He delighted in giving full rein to his evil character and can be classified among the abominable. He formed cliques with those who were wayward, perfidious, and unfraternal. The people of the realm called him “Hun­dun.” The Shaohao lineage had a worthless son who destroyed good faith and rejected loyalty. He augmented and adorned immoral speech.312 He acquiesced in slander and employed the unruly. He gave way to slander and hid wickedness and thereby vilified men of abundant virtue. The people of the realm called him “Qiongqi.” The Zhuanxu line had a worthless son who could not be instructed and did not discern good speech. If you taught him something, then he became obdurate. If you left him alone, then he was stupidly perverse. He scorned bright virtue and threw the constant principles of Heaven into confusion. The people of the realm called him “Taowu.” These three houses, generation after gen­ eration, continued their evil acts, increasing their reputations for immorality. This continued on down to the time of Yao, and Yao was not able to expel them. The Jinyun line had a worthless son who craved food and drink and was greedy for goods and wealth. He was self-indulgent and profligate and could be neither filled nor satisfied. He gathered levies and accumulated goods and knew no limits or boundaries. He did not share with orphans and widows, and he did not show pity for the destitute and exhausted. The people of the realm compared him to the three evil ones and called him “Taotie.” When Shun served Yao, he welcomed guests at the four gates and banished the clans of the four evil ones. Hundun, Qiongqi, Taowu, and Taotie were thrown out into the wilds along the four borders to confront the beasts and demons.313 That is why when Yao succumbed, the realm was united. With hearts united they supported Shun and made him Son of Heaven because he had promoted the sixteen ministers and had expelled the four evil ones.314 Thus, the Yu Documents enumerate the merits of Shun as follows: “He took care to honor the Five Canons, and the Five Canons could be followed.”315 In no case did he act contrary to the teachings. It says further, “He was appointed to the hundred affairs, and the hundred affairs were put in order according to the proper times.”316 This means there was no case where an official task was neglected. It says, “He received guests, and all at the four gates were very reverent.” This means there were no evil men.

Lord Wen

18.7c

575

舜有大功二十而為天子，今行父雖未獲一吉人，去 一凶矣。於舜之功，二十之一也，庶幾免於戾乎！ 18.8 宋武氏之族道昭公子，將奉司城須以作亂。十二月，宋公殺母弟須及昭

公子，使戴、莊、桓之族攻武氏於司馬子伯之館，遂出武、穆之族。使公 孫師為司城。公子朝卒，使樂呂為司寇，以靖國人。

576

Zuo Tradition

Shun had twenty great accomplishments and became Son of Heaven. Now, although I have not yet obtained a single fine man, I have driven away one evil one. This is one-twentieth of Shun’s accomplishments, and yet it may be enough to free me from blame!

Duke Wen of Song purges residual supporters of his predecessor and solidifies his power (Wen 17.5). The house of the Wu lineage of Song took the side of Lord Zhao’s son and was going to support Xu, the supervisor of fortifications, in fomenting unrest. In the twelfth month, the Duke of Song killed Xu, his younger full brother, and Lord Zhao’s son. He had the houses of Lords Dai, Zhuang, and Huan attack the Wu lineage at the lodge of the supervisor of the military Hua Oua. Then, he expelled the houses of Lords Wu and Mu and appointed Gongsun Shi as supervisor of fortifications. When Gongzi Zhao died, he appointed Yue Lü as supervisor of corrections in order to pacify the inhabitants of the capital.

18.8

Lord Wen

577

宣公

Lord Xuan (608–591 bce) Lord Xuan became the ruler of Lu through the support of two Lu noblemen: Xiangzhong (Gongzi Sui) and Ji Wenzi (Jisun Hangfu). Xiangzhong, in league with Lord Xuan’s mother, murdered Lord Wen’s legitimage heirs in 609 Bce (Wen 18.5). Xiangzhong remained influential in Lu politics until his death in 601 Bce (Xuan 8.2). However, his Dongmen lineage, headed by his son Gongsun Guifu, was expelled upon Lord Xuan’s death ten years later (591 Bce), because Gongsun Guifu had plotted with Lord Xuan to oust the three powerful Ji (Jisun), Meng (Zhongsun), and Shu (Shusun) lineages descended from Lord Huan (Xuan 18.5). The Ji lineage, with Ji Wenzi as head, came to dominate Lu politics. A similar shift in the balance of power between ruler and minister is evident in Jin, with the difference that the powerful lineages there were not lateral branches of the ruling family because of earlier purges (Zhuang 23.2, 25.4, 25.5, Xuan 2.4). Zhao Dun, who had facilitated the accession of Lord Ling of Jin (then a mere infant or very young child) in 620 Bce after initial vacillations (Wen 7.3, 7.4) and was both praised and criticized for his policies (Wen 6.1, 7.5), was probably responsible for Lord Ling’s assassination thirteen years later (607 Bce, Xuan 2.3). That story, couched in terms of Lord Ling’s misdemeanors, defiance of remonstrances, and murderous plots against Zhao Dun, raises questions about the justifications for assassinating a ruler, the adjudication of responsibility, and “truth” in historical records. In the aftermath of Lord Ling’s death, the Zhao lineage expanded its influence in Jin. The Xi lineage also gained sway in Jin (Xuan 8.4, 17.1, 17.2). The rising power of ministerial lineages may account for arguments in Jin-related materials on why defeated commanders should be spared (Xuan 12.5) and why just rewards for ministers are fundamental (Xuan 15.6). Two other rulers were killed by their ministers during Lord Xuan’s reign. Lord Ling of Zheng was murdered in the first year of his reign (605 Bce) on account of an ostensibly

579

minor offense against ministers who had been denied turtle stew (Xuan 4.2). Lord Ling of Chen was assassinated in 599 Bce by Xia Zhengshu, the son of Lord Ling’s paramour Xia Ji, who had liberally bestowed her favor on the ruler and ministers of Chen (Xuan 9.6, 10.4). As one may gather from these stories, “Ling” as posthumous honorific conveys a negative judgment (see also Wen 1.7, Xiang 2.2, Xiang 13.4). Violence in the other direction obtains in Chu, where King Zhuang eradicated almost the entire Dou (Ruo’ao) lineage following Dou Jiao’s abortive rebellion in 605 Bce (Xuan 4.3). A symbolically charged exchange between King Zhuang and a Zhou prince on the size and weight of Zhou cauldrons is supposed to show how the Chu king’s ambitions are curbed by the rhetoric of ritual propriety (Xuan 3.3). However, Chu continued to expand its territories and influence, annexing Shuliao (Xuan 8.3) and Xiao (Xuan 12.6) and attacking Chen (Xuan 1.8, 8.7, 11.5), Song (Xuan 1.8, 13.2, 14.2), and repeatedly Zheng (Xuan 3.4, 4.4, 5.5, 6.5, 9.7, 10.12, 11.1, 12.1). If the rhetoric of ritual propriety seems to have eluded King Zhuang in the cauldron episode, he demonstrates how expansion of power can be achieved through gestures of virtuous leniency in Chu’s aggression against Chen (Xuan 11.5), Zheng (12.1), and Song (15.2). Jin, unable to compete with Chu despite continued attempts to exact allegiance, sometimes through aggression, from smaller domains such as Song, Chen, and Zheng (Xuan 1.8, 1.10, 2.2, 3.2, 5.5, 6.1, 10.12, 11.1, 14.2), tried to frame its policies of appeasement as strategic timing and judicious self-preservation (Xuan 2.2, 15.2). Its weakening hold on the central domains is only partially compensated by victories over the Red Di tribes (Xuan 6.3, 11.4, 15.3, 16.1). Chu ascendancy and Jin decline during this period culminate in Chu victory in the battle of Bi in 597 Bce (Xuan 12.2). As with the battle of Chengpu thirty-five years earlier (Xi 28), the narrative is much more concerned with the deliberations before and during battle than with the military action itself. Whereas the Chengpu campaign is presented more from the perspective of victorious Jin, the battle of Bi, like the battle of Yanling in the next section, is more distinctly multifocal, possibly because the account is prepared from both Jin and Chu sources. In the account of the battle of Bi, there are voices against the conflict on both sides, but the dissension in Jin is presented as deeper and ultimately more destructive. The lack of an efficient center of authority finally leads to a debacle for Jin. Some battle anecdotes retain a ritualized grandeur, depicting spectacular displays of valor and examples of polite rhetorical exchanges. King Zhuang crowns his victory with a famous speech defining martial greatness and refusing an ostentatious celebration of Chu might. It harks back to his earlier restraint: he did not keep Chen as a dependency (Xuan 11.5) and refrained from destroying Zheng (Xuan 12.1). While the

Lord Xuan

581

春秋 1.1 元年，春王正月，公即位。 1.2(1) 公子遂如齊逆女。 1.3(2) 三月，遂以夫人婦姜至自齊。 1.4(3) 夏，季孫行父如齊。 1.5(4) 晉放其大夫胥甲父于衛。 1.6(5) 公會齊侯于平州。 1.7(6) 公子遂如齊。 1.8(7) 六月，齊人取濟西田。 1.9 秋，邾子來朝。 1.10(8) 楚子、鄭人侵陳，遂侵宋。晉趙盾帥師救陳。宋公、陳侯、衛侯、曹伯會

晉師于棐林，伐鄭。 1

2 3

582

The daughter of the Qi ruler was to marry Lord Xuan. For a minister to meet the bride is ritually proper (Wen 4.4), although some commentators have criticized Lord Xuan for excessive haste in proceeding with his marriage so soon after his father’s death. Gongzi Sui in the Annals is most often referred to as Xiangzhong and Dongmen Xiangzhong in Zuozhuan. Pingzhou was on the border of Qi and Lu west of present-day Laiwu County 萊蕪 縣, Shandong. In 632 Bce (Xi 28.3a), Jin annexed Cao. In 629 Bce, when Jin divided up Cao territories, the share Lu received included the fields on the west bank of the Ji River (Xi 31.1), and this land is here offered to Qi as a bribe.

Zuo Tradition

Jin-Chu conflict can be constructed as a narrative that spans many years, some of the most memorable stories during this reign are relatively selfcontained. Besides the aforementioned assassination of the rulers of Jin, Zheng, and Chen, noteworthy episodes include the sheep stew incident that led to a Song defeat and the Song commander Hua Yuan’s exchange with laborers and builders (Xuan 2.1), the mysterious ties between orchids and Lord Mu of Zheng (Xuan 3.6), Dou Gouwutu’s (Ziwen) miraculous infancy and its implications for the fate of the Dou lineage (Xuan 4.3), the death of the Chu envoy Shen Zhou owing to King Zhuang’s scheme to subjugate Song (Xuan 14.3), Xie Yang’s fulfillment of his charge of delivering a false promise to Song (Xuan 15.2), Hua Yuan’s desperate peace mission (Xuan 15.2), and a Jin commander’s enemy being defeated by “knotted grass” (Xuan 15.5).

LORD XUAN 1 (608 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position.

1.1

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride.1

1.2(1)

In the third month, Sui, bringing our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi.

1.3(2)

In summer, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Qi.

1.4(3)

Jin banished its high officer Xu Jiafu (Xu Jia) to Wei.

1.5(4)

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Pingzhou.

1.6(5)

2

Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi.

1.7(6)

In the sixth month, a Qi leader took lands to the west of the Ji River.

3

In autumn, the Master of Zhu came to visit our court.4

1.8(7) 1.9

The Master of Chu and a Zheng leader invaded Chen. They then invaded Song. Zhao Dun of Jin led out troops and went to the aid of Chen. The Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Cao met with Jin troops at Feilin and attacked Zheng.6 5

1.10(8)

4

The purpose was presumably to pay respects to the new Lu ruler. The last recorded visit from a Zhu ruler was in 697 Bce (Annals, Huan 15.8). 5 This is the first instance of designating the Chu ruler as “master” (zi 子) in accounts of Chu military expeditions. Traditional exegetes often understand this use of the word zi as a subtle critique of the Chu ruler, who referred to himself as “king” (wang 王). 6 Feilin 棐林 is probably the same place as Fei 棐 mentioned in Annals, Wen 13.9.

Lord Xuan

583

1.11(9) 冬，晉趙穿帥師侵崇。 1.12(10) 晉人、宋人伐鄭。

左傳 1.1(2) 元年，春，王正月，公子遂如齊逆女。尊君命也。 1.2(3) 三月，遂以夫人婦姜至自齊。尊夫人也。 1.3(4) 夏，季文子如齊，納賂以請會。 1.4(5) 晉人討不用命者，放胥甲父于衛。而立胥克。先辛奔齊。 1.5(6) 會于平州，以定公位。 1.6(7) 東門襄仲如齊拜成。 1.7(8) 六月，齊人取濟西之田，為立公故，以賂齊也。

7

8

584

Chong, a Qin ally, was probably a small domain close to Jin, although there is no agreement on its precise location. King Wen of Zhou subjugated Chong, a Shang subsidiary domain (Xi 19.3, Xiang 31.13; Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.567–71; Maoshi 244, “Wen wang you sheng” 文王有聲, 16E.583), which Jiang Yong identifies as a different place (Yang, 2:647). Zhao Chuan, the brother-in-law of Lord Ling of Jin, has been criticized for his military errors (Wen 12.6). This is an instance of inferring judgment from the manner of naming in the Annals: the use of “Gongzi” supposedly honors the ruler’s command.

Zuo Tradition

In winter, Zhao Chuan of Jin led out troops and invaded Chong.7

1.11(9)

A Jin leader and a Song leader attacked Zheng.

1.12(10)

ZUO

Xiangzhong (Gongzi Sui), having murdered the legitimate heirs of Lord Wen and established Lord Xuan as ruler with the Qi ruler’s tacit support (Wen 18.4–5), now proceeds to seal the Qi-Lu alliance with a marriage and a bribe (Xuan 1.1–3, 1.5–7). In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, Gongzi Sui (Xiang zhong) went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride: this designation honors the ruler’s command.8

1.1(2)

In the third month, Sui, bringing our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi: this designation honors the lady.9

1.2(3)

In summer, Ji Wenzi went to Qi, offered gifts, and requested a meeting.10

1.3(4)

We are informed about a belated punishment for Xu Jia’s role in Jin’s defeat in the campaign of Hequ (Wen 12.6). Zhao Chuan, also responsible for the debacle, is spared because his kinsman, Zhao Dun, holds the reins of power in Jin. Jin leaders chastised the insubordinate ones, banished Xu Jiaa to Wei, and established Xu Ke as his successor. Xian Xin fled to Qi.11

1.4(5)

Lord Xuan’s meeting with Lord Hui of Qi at Pingzhou implies tacit recognition from the latter and, by extension, the rulers of other domains. They met at Pingzhou to confirm our lord’s position.

1.5(6)

Xiangzhongb went to Qi, bowing to affirm the alliance.

1.6(7)

In the sixth month, a Qi leader took lands to the west of the Ji River. It was for the sake of establishing our lord as ruler that these had been given to Qi as gifts.

1.7(8)

9 10 11

Sui is designated without his title to show respect for Lady Jiang. The gifts include the lands to the west of the Ji River. As usurper, Lord Xuan was in danger of being excluded from the meetings of rulers. Xu Ke was Xu Jia’s son; and Xian Xin was Xu Jia’s henchman.

Lord Xuan

585

1.8(10) 宋人之弒昭公也，晉荀林父以諸侯之師伐宋，宋及晉平，宋文公受盟于

晉。又會諸侯于扈，將為魯討齊，皆取賂而還。鄭穆公曰：「晉不足與 也。」遂受盟于楚。陳共公之卒，楚人不禮焉。陳靈公受盟于晉。秋，楚 子侵陳，遂侵宋。晉趙盾帥師救陳、宋。會于棐林，以伐鄭也。楚蒍賈救 鄭，遇于北林，囚晉解揚。晉人乃還。 1.9(11) 晉欲求成於秦。趙穿曰：「我侵崇，秦急崇，必救之。吾以求成焉。」冬，

趙穿侵崇。秦弗與成。 1.10 晉人伐鄭，以報北林之役。於是晉侯侈，趙宣子為政，驟諫而不入，故不

競於楚。

春秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，王二月壬子，宋華元帥師及鄭公子歸生帥師，戰于大棘。宋

師敗績，獲宋華元。 2.2(2) 秦師伐晉。 2.3 夏，晉人、宋人、衛人、陳人侵鄭。

12 13

586

See Wen 16.5. For the fruitless covenant at Hu and Jin’s half-hearted intervention in Song, see Wen 15.9, 16.5, 17.1.

Zuo Tradition

The smaller domains Zheng, Song, and Chen are caught in the struggle between Jin and Chu. The following three passages show Jin losing ground to Chu in interdomain relations: having accepted bribes and reversed its declared goals regarding Song and Lu, Jin alienates Zheng and also fails to make peace with Qin. The extravagance of Lord Ling of Jin is blamed for these setbacks. When the men of Song had assassinated Lord Zhao,12 Xun Linfu of Jin had led the princes’ armies to attack Song. Song and Jin made peace, and Lord Wen of Song accepted a covenant with Jin. Jin also gathered the princes for a meeting at Hu and was about to chastise Qi on behalf of Lu.13 In both cases, Jin took bribes and turned back. Lord Mu of Zheng said, “Jin does not deserve our loyalty,” and thereupon accepted a covenant with Chu. When Lord Gong of Chen died, Chu leaders did not respond with ritual propriety. Lord Ling of Chen accepted a covenant with Jin. In autumn, the Master of Chu invaded Chen and then invaded Song. Zhao Dun of Jin led out troops and went to the aid of Chen and Song. The lords joined forces at Feilin in order to attack Zheng. Wei Jia of Chu came to Zheng’s aid. The armies met at Beilin,14 and Xie Yang of Jin was captured. The men of Jin thus turned back.

1.8(10)

Jin wished to seek an accord with Qin. Zhao Chuan said, “If we invade Chong, Qin, anxious about Chong, is sure to come to Chong’s aid. On that basis we can seek an accord.” In winter, Zhao Chuan invaded Chong. Qin refused to make peace with Jin.

1.9(11)

The men of Jin attacked Zheng in retaliation for the campaign of Beilin. At that time the Jin prince was extravagant. Zhao Duna was in charge of policies. He repeatedly remonstrated with the ruler but was not heeded. Consequently, Jin could not compete with Chu.

1.10

LORD XUAN 2 (607 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the renzi day, Hua Yuan of Song and Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng both led out troops and did battle at Daji.15 The Song troops were completely defeated, and Hua Yuan of Song was captured.

2.1(1)

Qin troops attacked Jin.

2.2(2)

In summer, a Jin leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, and a Chen leader invaded Zheng.

2.3

14 15

Beilin was a settlement of Zheng located just north of present-day Xinzheng 新鄭. This settlement was located in the domain of Song, south of present-day Sui County 睢縣, Henan. The unusual repetition of “led out troops” 帥師 for both the main party and the subsidiary force appears only here and in Ai 2.5.

Lord Xuan

587

2.4(3) 秋，九月乙丑，晉趙盾弒其君夷臯。 2.5 冬，十月乙亥，天王崩。

左傳 2.1a(1) 二年，春，鄭公子歸生受命于楚伐宋，宋華元、樂呂御之。二月壬子，戰

于大棘。宋師敗績。囚華元，獲樂呂，及甲車四百六十乘，俘二百五十 人，馘百人。狂狡輅鄭人，鄭人入于井。倒戟而出之，獲狂狡。君子曰： 「失禮違命，宜其為禽也。戎，昭果毅以聽之之謂禮。殺敵為果，致果 為毅。易之，戮也。」 將戰，華元殺羊食士，其御羊斟不與。及戰，曰：「疇昔之羊，子為 政；今日之事，我為政。」與入鄭師，故敗。君子謂「羊斟非人也，以其私 憾，敗國殄民，於是刑孰大焉？《詩》所謂『人之無良』者，其羊斟之謂 乎！殘民以逞。」

16

A person can be “captured” (huo 獲) alive or dead. Here the juxtaposition with Hua Yuan implies that Yue Lü had been killed. 17 Compare Da Dai Liji 69.340: “Do not abandon the injunctions of the armored state: manifest decisiveness and determination in obeying commands” 無廢甲胄之戒， 昭果毅以聽. The Qing philologist Hui Dong (Zuozhuan buzhu) reads jie 戒 as rong 戎 and claims that here Zuozhuan is quoting from a standard saying that explains “martiality” (rong) as the ability to “manifest decisiveness and determination in obeying commands” 昭果毅以聽 (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 616). Karlgren (gl. 257) prefers to read rong in this passage as jie: “The injunctions make it clear that to use decisiveness and determination in obeying commands is ritual propriety” 戒昭果毅以聽之之謂禮. 18 Cf. Huainanzi 10.335, “The soupy mutton stew (geng) was not ladled (zhen) and Song was imperiled” 羊羹不斟而宋國危 ; and Shiji 38.1629, “His chariot driver did not get to have the soupy mutton stew (yanggeng)” 其御羊羹不及. In Shiji 70.2297, the word zhen is glossed as geng. (In Shiji 42.1767, however, the driver’s name remains Yang Geng.) The close connection between these two graphs has led some scholars to speculate that “Yang Zhen” here is not a proper name but refers instead to the stew. It is also possible that Yang Zhen was denied the punning stew as a deliberate joke. A story in Zhanguo ce, “Zhongshan” 中山, 33.1183, seems to combine elements from this and other food anecdotes in Xuan 2.3b and Xuan 4.3. A Zhongshan minister, having been denied mutton stew by his ruler, instigates the Chu invasion of Zhongshan. Two officers, whose once-starving father was offered food by the Zhongshan ruler, come to the latter’s defense when he is fleeing. Cf. Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:201–2. 19 The analogous passage in Lüshi chunqiu 16.1044 has zhi 制 instead of zheng 政: “With yesterday’s mutton, you set the rules, but in today’s affairs, I set the rules.” Hong Liangji (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 395) believes that the change was meant to avoid the taboo of the name of the First Emperor of Qin. Hua Yuan is blamed for

588

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the ninth month, on the yichou day (26), Zhao Dun of Jin assassinated his ruler, Yigao. In winter, in the tenth month, on the yihai day (6), the Heavenappointed king succumbed.

2.4(3)

2.5

ZUO

A battle occurs between Song and Zheng, which are allied to Jin and Chu, respectively. Song is again associated with an impractical and ill-advised sense of honor in the conduct of war (see also Xi 22.8, Cheng 2.3d, Zhao 21.6b). The Song commander Hua Yuan is captured because he denied his chariot driver sheep stew. This is one of several “ food stories” in Zuozhuan. The bestowal or denial of food also determines the plot in Xuan 2.3b, 4.2, and Xiang 28.9. In the second year, in spring, Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng received a command from Chu to attack Song. Hua Yuan and Yue Lü of Song led the defense. In the second month, on the renzi day, they did battle at Daji. The Song army was completely defeated. The Zheng army took Hua Yuan prisoner, captured Yue Lü,16 along with four hundred and sixty chariots drawn by armored horses, took two hundred and fifty captives, and cut off the ears of a hundred slain soldiers. As Kuang Jiao of Song and a man of Zheng were locked in combat, the Zheng man fell into a well. When Kuang Jiao turned his halberd around and with the handle hauled him out, he seized Kuang Jiao. The noble man said, “He deviated from ritual propriety and disobeyed commands. It is fitting that he became a captive. In martial affairs, to manifest decisiveness and determination in obeying commands is ritual propriety.17 To kill the enemy is decisiveness; to sustain decisiveness is determination. To change this is to incur punishment and execution.” On the eve of battle, Hua Yuan had slaughtered a sheep to feed his men, but his chariot driver Yang Zhen had been denied his portion.18 When it was time for battle, Yang said, “With yesterday’s mutton, you were in charge, but in today’s affair, I am in charge.”19 He drove the chariot into the ranks of the Zheng army, hence Song’s defeat. The noble man said of Yang Zhen: “He was not human. Because of a private grudge, he brought about defeat for the domain and devastation for the people. At that moment, what punishment could be too great for him? Where the Odes speaks of ‘men of no goodness,’20 does it not refer to the likes of Yang Zhen! He inflicted harm on the people for his own satisfaction.” 20

2.1a(1)

failing to “discern minute beginnings” (chawei 察微) in Lüshi chunqiu, whereas Yang Zhen is condemned for his disloyalty in Zuozhuan. The version of the anecdote in Shuoyuan 5.21 is identical to the Zuozhuan version. Maoshi 233, “Jiaogong” 角弓, 15A.504.

Lord Xuan

589

2.1b 宋人以兵車百乘、文馬百駟以贖華元于鄭。半入，華元逃歸。立于門外，

告而入。見叔牂，曰：「子之馬然也？」對曰：「非馬也，其人也。」既合而 來奔。 宋城，華元為植，巡功。城者謳曰： 睅其目， 皤其腹， 棄甲而復。 于思于思， 棄甲復來。 使其驂乘謂之曰： 牛則有皮， 犀兕尚多， 棄甲則那？ 役人曰： 從其有皮， 丹漆若何？ 華元曰：「去之！夫其口眾我寡。」 2.2(2) 秦師伐晉，以報崇也，遂圍焦。夏，晉趙盾救焦，遂自陰地，及諸侯之師

侵鄭，以報大棘之役。 楚鬬椒救鄭，曰：「能欲諸侯，而惡其難乎？」遂次于鄭，以待晉 師。趙盾曰：「彼宗競于楚，殆將斃矣。姑益其疾。」乃去之。 21

Du Yu (ZZ 21.363) identifies Shuzang as Yang Zhen. For Jia Kui, he is “a Song official who guarded the gate.” According to Fu Qian, Yang Zhen asks the question and Hua Yuan gives the reply (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 618). 22 Hua Yuan, suspecting Yang Zhen’s treachery, ironically questions whether the horses are to be blamed. Yang Zhen admits that he himself brought about Song’s defeat. “The man” can also refer to Hua Yuan—i.e., Hua Yuan is ultimately responsible because of the mutton stew incident. 23 Du Yu (ZZ 21.363) reads yusai 于思 as “great beard,” a meaning that has entered the Chinese lexicon. Karlgren (gl. 262) opines that yu 于 and sai 思 are loans for yu 宇 and sai 偲, “big” and “strong.” 24 We follow the reading of na 那 as “abundant or plentiful” in Karlgren, gl. 263. Du Yu (ZZ 21.363) and others read na as he 何 (“so what”) or naihe 奈何 (“what can be done?”). 25 The small domain of Jiao 焦 has already been mentioned in Xi 30.3. 26 Yindi 陰地 was located northeast of present-day Lushi County 廬氏縣, Henan. 27 The fall of Dou Jiao’s lineage is recounted in Zuozhuan, Xuan 4.3. Zhao Dun claims to bring about Dou Jiao’s doom by encouraging his ambitions with a show of Jin weakness.

590

Zuo Tradition

Hua Yuan escapes from captivity and returns to Song. His exchange with builders and laborers features songs as the commoners’ vehicle for voicing criticism of those in power. For other examples, see Xiang 4.8, 17.6, 30.13. The leaders of Song offered a hundred war chariots and a hundred foursome teams of dappled horses to ransom Hua Yuan from Zheng. When only half of the ransom had entered Zheng, Hua Yuan escaped and returned. He stood outside the city gate, declared his identity, and entered. He saw Shuzang21 and said, “It was your horses that did this, was it not?” He replied, “It was not the horses but the man.”22 Having answered, he fled to Lu. The city walls of Song were being fortified. Hua Yuan was in charge and went on circuits of inspection to check progress. The builders sang,

2.1b

Bulging are his eyes, Protruding is his belly. He abandoned his armor and returned. Big and strong! Big and strong!23 Abandoning his armor he has come again.

Hua Yuan had his chariot attendants sing in reply, Oxen would have their hides, Wild bovines and rhinoceros are yet plentiful. So I abandoned armor: but what abundance still!24

The laborers sang, Even if the hides are there, What about red lacquer?

Hua Yuan said, “Let us go! For they are many and we are few.” Now we learn about the consequences of the conflicts at Chong (Xuan 1.9) and Daji (Xuan 2.1). Jin confronts Qin and, half-heartedly, Chu. Zhao Dun defends Jin weakness as strategic indulgence of the enemy. Qin troops attacked Jin in retaliation for the Chong campaign. It then laid siege to Jiao. In summer, Zhao Dun of Jin came to the aid of Jiao.25 Then he set out from Yindi and joined with the princes’ troops to invade Zheng in retaliation for the Daji campaign.26 Dou Jiao of Chu came to the aid of Zheng, saying, “How is it possible to desire the princes’ support and yet balk at the difficulties?” He then set up camp at Zheng to wait for the Jin army. Zhao Dun said, “That lineage is powerful in Chu, but it is about to meet its doom. Let us just allow its malady to deepen.”27 He thus withdrew.

2.2(2)

Lord Xuan

591

2.3a(4) 晉靈公不君：厚斂以彫牆；從臺上彈人，而觀其辟丸也；宰夫胹熊蹯不

熟，殺之，寘諸畚，使婦人載以過朝。趙盾、士季見其手，問其故，而患 之。將諫，士季曰：「諫而不入，則莫之繼也。會請先，不入，則子繼之。」 三進，及溜，而後視之，曰：「吾知所過矣，將改之。」稽首而對曰：「人誰 無過，過而能改，善莫大焉！《詩》曰： 靡不有初， 鮮克有終。 夫如是，則能補過者鮮矣。君能有終，則社稷之固也，豈惟群臣賴之。 又曰： 衮職有闕， 惟仲山甫補之。 能補過也。君能補過，衮不廢矣。」

That is, his conduct is such that he is unworthy of the title of ruler. Cf. Analects 12.11. Du Yu, following Jia Kui, reads diao as hua 畫 (“painted”) (ZZ 21.364; Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 620; Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 397). 30 The pellets are probably made of mud or clay. Gongyang, Xuan 6 (15.192), and Guliang, Xuan 2 (12.116), specify that Lord Ling is taking aim at officials, presumably to emphasize the heinousness of Lord Ling’s act. However, if the terrace is inside the palace, then it is not likely that officials would be present. 31 Bear paws, considered a great delicacy, take a long time to cook. That is why King Cheng of Chu, when surrounded by his enemies, asks to have a meal of bear paws before he dies (Wen 1.7). 32 According to Lüshi chunqiu 23.1599, Lord Ling intends in this way to intimidate his officials. The account in Shiji 39.1673 claims that the women are merely taking the corpse out to be discarded. The women’s passage through a space frequented by outsiders (the court or audience chamber) shows Lord Ling as either oblivious to his own transgression or deliberately defiant of his ministers’ disapproval. 33 Liu 溜 is read as liu 霤, meaning eaves (ZZ-Kong 21.364). Shen Qinhan identifies sanjin 三進 as three stages of advancement: the gate, the inner courtyard (ting 庭), and the steps to the audience chamber (tang 堂) (Yang, 2:656–57). Lord Ling pretends not to see Fan Hui until he reaches the eaves over the steps of the audience chamber, when under normal circumstances he would have looked at him much earlier. By acknowledging his errors, Lord Ling disarms further remonstrances. 34 Maoshi 255, “Dang” 蕩, 18A.641. 35 Maoshi 260, “Zhengmin” 蒸民, 18A.676. Zhong Shanfu was a minister who helped King Xuan revive the fortunes of Zhou. The vestment refers to embroidered robes of office for the king and the highest ministers. Here it is a synecdoche for the king: holes refer to royal errors that Zhong Shanfu repairs by remonstrating with the king. Fan Hui is using the vestment to refer to both the dignity of Lord Ling’s office and the stability of the Jin domain. 28 29

592

Zuo Tradition

Lord Ling of Jin, now in his teens, persists in his errant course and defies remonstrances. The story seems to have been told in such a way as to justify his later murder. The Jin minister Zhao Dun, who later faces allegations of playing a role in the assassination, is presented as the victim. Zuozhuan encompasses two perspectives on Zhao Dun: one indicts him, while the other retains sympathy for him. This apparent ambivalence may be traced to differences rooted in the political reality of the fifth or fourth century Bce (voices for or against the Zhao house) or divergent conceptions of the ruler-minister relationship. In an analogous example, Chen Qi is identified as the one who assassinates the Qi ruler Tu in the Annals, while Zuozhuan portrays his reluctant or even inadvertent acquiescence to the murder (Ai 6.6). Lord Ling of Jin was no ruler.28 He levied heavy taxes in order to lavishly decorate the walls of his palace with painted patterns.29 From atop his terrace he shot pellets at people, so that he could watch how they tried to escape from the pellets.30 When the cook did not thoroughly stew bear paws,31 Lord Ling had him killed and put in a reed basket, and he had women pass through court carrying the basket.32 When Zhao Dun and Fan Huib saw the dead man’s hand and asked what had happened, they were deeply dismayed. They were about to remonstrate, when Fan Huib said, “If our remonstrances are not heeded, then there is no one who can follow us. I beg leave to go first. If I am not heeded, then you can follow.” Over three stages he advanced, but only when he reached the eaves did the lord look at him. The lord said, “I know my errors. I will correct them.”33 Fan Hui bowed, touching the ground with his forehead, and replied, “Who among men is without errors? Having erred and being capable of correction—there is no good greater than that. As it says in the Odes,

2.3a(4)

There is none who does not have beginnings, Few are those who fulfill them as endings.34

For if it is so, then those who can make good their errors are few. If my lord can persist to the end, then the altars of the domain will have a solid foundation. Surely it is not only your subjects who rely on that! As it also says in the Odes, The ritual vestment had holes— It was Zhong Shanfu who mended it.35

This is about being able to make good one’s errors. If my lord can do so, then the ritual vestment will not fall into disuse.”

Lord Xuan

593

猶不改。宣子驟諫，公患之，使鉏麑賊之。晨往，寢門闢矣，盛服 將朝。尚早，坐而假寐。麑退，歎而言曰：「不忘恭敬，民之主也。賊民之 主，不忠；棄君之命，不信。有一於此，不如死也。」觸槐而死。 2.3b 秋，九月，晉侯飲趙盾酒，伏甲，將攻之。其右提彌明知之，趨登，曰：

「臣侍君宴，過三爵，非禮也。」遂扶以下。公嗾夫獒焉，明搏而殺之。 盾曰：「棄人用犬，雖猛何為！」鬬且出。提彌明死之。 初，宣子田於首山，舍于翳桑，見靈輒餓，問其病。曰：「不食三日 矣。」食之，舍其半。問之。曰：「宦三年矣，未知母之存否，今近焉，請 以遺之。」使盡之，而為之簞食與肉，寘諸橐以與之。既而與為公介，倒 戟以禦公徒而免之。問何故。對曰：「翳桑之餓人也。」問其名居，不告 而退，遂自亡也。

36

37 38 39

594

Fu Qian reads the graph fu 扶 (“to help someone by being leaned on”) as xian 跣 (“barefooted”) (Yang, 2:659). With xian as verb, the subject of the sentence would be Zhao Dun instead of Shi Miming: “He thereupon came down barefooted.” According to Yili 15.184 and Liji 35.632, guests take off their shoes before coming to the mat where the feast is spread. Cf. Ai 25.1, where, by keeping his socks on, Market Overseer Bi arouses the fury of the “Ousted Lord” of Wei. Erya (10.195) defines ao 獒 as a large hound of about four chi (roughly three feet), and Shuowen jiezi (10A.5b) identifies it as a hound trained to do its master’s bidding. Mount Shou 首山 should probably be identified with present-day Leishou Mountain 雷首山, Yongji County 永濟縣, Shanxi. Du Yu (ZZ 21.365) glosses yisang 翳桑 as “luxuriant mulberry,” following cues from Gongyang, Xuan 6 (15.193); Huainanzi 18.622; Lüshi chunqiu 15.893; and Shiji 39.1647; all of which mention the starving man “under the mulberry.” But since Zuozhuan indicates location with yu 于 (and not xia 下), we have followed Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 685) in reading Yisang as a place name of unknown location.

Zuo Tradition

Still the lord did not correct his errors. Zhao Duna remonstrated with him several times. The lord loathed this and sent Chu Mi to murder him. When Chu Mi went just before sunrise, the doors of the bedchamber were open. Zhao Dun was fully dressed in official robes and was about to go to court. It was still early, and he was sitting with closed eyes. Chu Mi withdrew and sighed, saying, “He who does not forget reverence is the master of the people. To murder the master of the people is not loyal; to discard the ruler’s command is faithless. To be guilty of either of these is worse than death.” He smashed his head against a locust tree and died. The Jin ruler’s attempts to kill Zhao Dun are repeatedly foiled, and a man who earlier received help from Zhao Dun now requite his beneficence by saving him. Zhao Dun flees Jin. In autumn, in the ninth month, the Prince of Jin entertained Zhao Dun with wine. The prince had hidden armored soldiers who were going to attack him. Zhao’s aide on the right, Shi Miming, learned of this, rushed forward, and ascended the steps, saying, “For a subject waiting on a ruler at a feast to drink more than three rounds is not in accordance with ritual propriety.” He then helped Zhao Dun step down.36 The lord whistled for his fierce hounds.37 Shi Miminga wrestled with them and killed them. Zhao Dund said, “He deserts men and uses hounds—fierce, to be sure, but to what avail?” All the while fighting and struggling, they came out. Shi Miming died defending Zhao Dun. Earlier, Zhao Dunb had hunted at Mount Shou.38 While lodging at Yisang then,39 he saw Ling Zhe, who was starving, and asked what ailed him. Ling Zhe said, “I have not eaten for three days.” Zhao Dun gave him food, but Ling Zhe set half of it aside. When asked about it, he said, “For three full years I have been in service. I do not yet know whether my mother is still alive. Now that I am close to home, I beg leave to send her this food.”40 Zhao Dun had him finish eating, then prepared for him a bamboo basket filled with food and meat, put it in a sack, and gave it to him. Later, he joined the ranks of the lord’s armored attendants. He turned his dagger-axe against the lord’s men to defend Zhao and thereby saved him. Zhao asked why he did that, and he replied, “I was the starving man at Yisang.” Zhao asked his name and where he lived, but he withdrew without telling him. Then Zhao himself fled.41

2.3b

40 This becomes a stock motif in Chinese literature. See also Ying Kaoshu in Yin 1.5. 41 Du Yu (ZZ 21.365) thinks the subject of the last line is Ling Zhe, although the words zi and wang 自亡, emphasizing choice and echoing the later use of wang 亡, suggest Zhao Dun (Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 686).

Lord Xuan

595

2.3c 乙丑，趙穿殺靈公於桃園。宣子未出山而復。大史書曰「趙盾弒其君」，

以示於朝。宣子曰：「不然。」對曰：「子為正卿，亡不越竟，反不討賊，非 子而誰？」宣子曰：「《詩》曰： 我之懷矣， 自詒伊慼。 其我之謂矣。」孔子曰：「董狐，古之良史也，書法不隱。趙宣子，古之良 大夫也，為法受惡。惜也，越竟乃免。」 宣子使趙穿逆公子黑臀于周而立之。壬申，朝于武宮。 2.4 初，麗姬之亂，詛無畜群公子，自是晉無公族。及成公即位，乃宦卿之適

而為之田，以為公族。又宦其餘子，亦為餘子；其庶子為公行。晉於是有 公族、餘子、公行。

42

Du Yu (ZZ 21.365) classifies this as an uncollected ode. However, very similar lines appear in Maoshi 33, “Xiongzhi” 雄雉, 2B.86, and Maoshi 207, “Xiaoming” 小明, 13A.447. 43 Can Confucius possibly mean that a technical detail of location would have absolved Zhao Dun even if he were guilty? Or does he mean that he wishes for exonerating evidence (i.e., had Zhao Dun crossed the border, it would have proved that he was not party to the assassination)? One would assume the latter, considering Confucius’ implied sympathy for Zhao Dun. The idea of possible justification for Zhao Dun was anathema for many traditional commentators. Zhu Xi (Zhuzi yulei, 83.2150–51) criticizes the comment as justifying compromises and equivocation. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 4.94), writing as a Ming loyalist after the Qing conquest, emphasizes loyalty as absolute: “There is no escape from the principle of duty tying ruler and subject together anywhere between heaven and earth. How can one escape from it by crossing the border?” Wang Fuzhi (Chunqiu jia shuo, 218) considers the defense of Zhao Dun “partisan words” (dangci 黨詞), evidence that the Zhao lineage played a role is shaping this narrative. Ma Su (Zuozhuan shi wei, 145) maintains that the comment praising Zhao Dun could not have come from Confucius. 44 Heitun became Lord Cheng of Jin. According to Shiji 39.1676, Heitun was Lord Wen’s younger son, and his mother was a Zhou lady. Cf. Guoyu, “Zhou yu 3,” 3.99: “Moreover, I have heard that when Lord Cheng was born, his mother dreamed that the gods drew with ink on his buttocks, saying, ‘He will rule Jin; and three generations later, rulership will be given to Huan’s [Lord Xiang of Jin] grandson [the prophecy pertains to Lord Dao of Jin].’ That was why he was called Heitun [which means, literally, ‘black buttocks’].” 45 The Martial Temple was the Ancestral Temple of Lord Wu (“martial”) of Quwo at Jiang. All Jin rulers offered sacrifices there upon accession to the throne. See Xi 24.1 (Yang, 1:413–14). 46 See Zhuang 28.2. Noble sons from the lateral branches of the Jin house were already targets even earlier (Zhuang 23.2, 24.3, 25.4, 25.5). That was why lineages related to the ruling house were weaker in Jin, in contradistinction to Lu, Wei, and Song. Many of Lord Wen’s sons were not in Jin: Gongzi Yong was in Qin, Gongzi Yue served in Chen, and Gongzi Heitun served in Zhou. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu Chu lingyin lun” 春秋楚令尹論, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1840.

596

Zuo Tradition

The assassination of Lord Ling of Jin is followed by an exchange on the issue of guilt. The Annals and Zuozhuan, as well as Gongyang and Guliang, name Zhao Dun as having assassinated his ruler, although according to the narrative in Zuozhuan and Guliang, the actual act was committed by Zhao Chuan. Dong Hu’s record is upheld in the tradition as historical writing that “targets the intention” (zhuxin 誅心). Zhao Dun’s culpability may indeed be inferred from the way he protects the assassin— by making Zhao Chuan instrumental in establishing the new Jin ruler, he protects him from future prosecution. Confucius’ comments add another level of self-conscious deliberation. On the yichou day (26), Zhao Chuan killed Lord Ling at Taoyuan. Zhao Dunb returned before leaving the mountains of Jin. The scribe wrote, “Zhao Dun assassinated his ruler,” and showed the record at court. Zhao Dunb said, “This was not so.” He replied, “You are the chief minister. Yet fleeing you did not cross the domain border; upon returning you did not chastise the culprit. If you are not responsible, who would be?” Zhao Dunb said, “Alas! As it says in the Odes,

2.3c

I so cherished him That I bring sorrow upon myself.42

That describes me indeed!” Confuciusb said, “Dong Hu was a worthy scribe of ancient times: he did not conceal anything in his rules of writing. Zhao Duna was a worthy high officer of ancient times: he bore a guilty verdict for the sake of those rules. What a pity! Had he crossed the domain border, he would have been absolved.”43 Zhao Dunb sent Zhao Chuan to welcome Gongzi Heitun at Zhou and established him as ruler.44 On the renshen day (third day of the tenth month), they offered sacrifices at the Martial Temple.45 Ministerial lineages in Jin, especially the Zhao lineage, continue to rise in importance. Zhao Dun, in his role as the son of a minister’s concubine, takes up a new military office. The lineage gains greater sway under the nominal leadership of Zhao Dun’s half brother Zhao Kuo. An apparently yielding gesture thus increases the power of Zhao Dun and his lineage. Earlier, with the havoc wrought by Li Ji, there was a punitive oath against maintaining the noble sons within the domain of Jin.46 From that time on, Jin did not have lateral branches of the ruling house in government. When Lord Cheng acceded to his position, he took the primary sons of ministers into service, giving them land and granting them the status of ruling lineages. He also took their remaining sons into service and appointed them as supernumeraries. Sons of ministers’ concubines were made members of the lord’s ranks. Jin thus had ruling lineages, supernumeraries, and lord’s ranks.

2.4

Lord Xuan

597

趙盾請以括為公族，曰：「君姬氏之愛子也。微君姬氏，則臣狄人 也。」公許之。冬，趙盾為旄車之族，使屏季以其故族為公族大夫。

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，王正月，郊牛之口傷，改卜牛。牛死，乃不郊。猶三望。 3.2 葬匡王。 3.3(3) 楚子伐陸渾之戎。 3.4(4) 夏，楚人侵鄭。 3.5 秋，赤狄侵齊。 3.6(5) 宋師圍曹。 3.7(6) 冬，十月丙戌，鄭伯蘭卒。 3.8 葬鄭穆公。

47

Lord Wen’s daughter, Lady Ji, married Zhao Cui and gave birth to Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo. Zhao Cui had married Shu Wei, a daughter of the Di tribe, when he followed Chong’er into exile (Xi 23.6). Lady Ji ensured Shu Wei’s return to Jin and made her son, Zhao Dun, Zhao Cui’s heir (Xi 24.1c). 48 Zhao Dun apparently orchestrates the creation of two parallel hierarchies: the military one (according to which the actual leader of Jin is the commander of the central army) and a less specific one defined by “ruling lineages.” 49 According to Du Yu (ZZ 21.366), after a bull was chosen through divination for sacrifice, there would be divination about the date, after which that bull became “the sacrificial bull” (sheng 牲). Here the designation of the animal as simply “bull” indicates that the date has not yet been set. Yang (2:667) opines that three or four months elapsed between the first divination and the sacrifice. Here the mouth injury means that the bull could not be used for sacrifice. Cf. Annals, Xi 31.3, Cheng 7.1, Ding 15.2, Ai 1.3.

598

Zuo Tradition

Zhao Dun requested to have Zhao Kuo made a member of the ruling lineage, saying, “He is the beloved son of the ruler’s daughter Lady Ji. If it were not for Lady Ji, your subject would have remained a man of Di.”47 The lord assented. In winter, Zhao Dun took charge of the lineage overseeing bannered chariots, and the lord appointed Zhao Kuoa, leading the Zhao lineage of old, as a high officer of ruling lineages.48 LORD XUAN 3 (606 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, the bull designated for the sacrifice in the outskirts was injured in the mouth. We divined about using another bull. That bull died, so we did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts.49 Still we performed the sacrifices to the Three Prospects.50

3.1(1)

King Kuang was buried.51

3.2

The Master of Chu attacked the Rong of Luhun.

52

3.3(3)

In summer, a Chu leader invaded Zheng.

3.4(4)

In autumn, the Red Di invaded Qi.

3.5

53

Song troops laid siege to Cao. In winter, in the tenth month, on the bingxu day (23), Lan, the Liege of Zheng, died. Lord Mu of Zheng was buried.

3.6(5) 3.7(6)

3.8

50 The term “Three Prospects (Sanwang 三望) is also mentioned in Annals, Xi 31.3, Cheng 7.4, and Zuozhuan, Xi 31.3. The prospect (wang 望) sacrifice was offered to mountains and rivers within the purview of the domain. In Ai 6.4c, King Zhao of Chu maintains that “one was not to perform sacrifice beyond one’s purview” (ji bu yue wang 祭不越望). 51 King Kuang had died in the tenth month of the previous year; the ritually prescribed interval of seven months between death and burial for Zhou kings (Yin 1.5) was not observed. Du Yu (ZZ 21.366) notes the haste. 52 Recall that Qin and Jin moved the Rong of Luhun to Yichuan thirty-two years earlier (Xi 22.4). 53 The White Di were first mentioned in Xi 33.6. The term “Red Di” appears for the first time here. Liang Qichao (“Chunqiu Yi Man Rong Di kao” 春秋夷蠻戎狄考) opines that terms like “White Di” and “Red Di” signal divisions that eventually weakened the Di.

Lord Xuan

599

左傳 3.1(1) 三年，春，不郊，而望，皆非禮也。望，郊之屬也。不郊，亦無望可也。 3.2 晉侯伐鄭，及郔。鄭及晉平，士會入盟。 3.3 楚子伐陸渾之戎，遂至於雒，觀兵于周疆。定王使王孫滿勞楚子。楚子

問鼎之大小、輕重焉。對曰：「在德不在鼎。昔夏之方有德也，遠方圖 物，貢金九牧，鑄鼎象物，百物而為之備，使民知神、姦。故民入川澤、 山林，不逢不若。螭魅罔兩，莫能逢之。用能協于上下，以承天休。桀

54 Yan 郔, in present-day Hua County 滑縣 in Henan, is identified as the same place as Linyan in Yin 1.11. 55 According to Huan 2.2, “Even when King Wu conquered Shang and moved the nine cauldrons to the settlement at Luo, there were nonetheless some men of lofty principles who criticized him.” Since the cauldrons are a symbol of legitimate sovereignty, moving them is not to be undertaken lightly. Du Yu (ZZ 21.367) interprets the Chu king’s question as a sign of his ambition to challenge Zhou’s claim to the Mandate of Heaven. The symbolism is also operative in the first entry in Zhanguo ce, “Dong Zhou 1,” 1.1, where Qin seeks the nine cauldrons. 56 In Mozi 46.389, we are told that the Xia King Qi cast the cauldrons, and the prophecy on their transference from Xia to Shang and from Shang to Zhou is adduced as proof of the existence of the spirits. The Shiji 40.1700 account of this episode refers to “Yu and Xia in their prime” 虞夏之盛, which suggests that the legendary sage-king Yu cast the cauldrons. 57 Our translation follows Du Yu’s reading (based on Fu Qian) (ZZ 21.367), as well as Ban Gu’s paraphrase of this account (Hanshu 25.1225). Cf. Karlgren, gl. 270: “men from afar depicted various creatures, and submitted metal to the superintendents of the nine domains.”

600

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Sacrificial impropriety occurs in Lu. On the treatment of the sacrificial bull, see also Xi 31.2 and Annals, Ding 15.2. In the third year, in spring, we did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts, yet we performed the sacrifices to the prospects. In both cases this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Sacrifices to the prospects were subordinate to the sacrifice in the outskirts. If we did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts, then it would be admissible not to perform the sacrifices to the prospects.

3.1(1)

Zheng is again caught in the rivalry between Chu and Jin. Because of the covenant sworn here, Chu will invade Zheng. The Prince of Jin attacked Zheng, advancing as far as Yan.54 Zheng and Jin made peace, and Fan Huia entered Zheng to swear a covenant.

3.2

The confrontation between Chu and the Rong highlights the nuances in the idea of the barbarian. Sometimes described as “the cultural other,” Chu here presents itself as the bulwark against barbarian invaders, the Rong of Luhun, who had been moved to the outskirts of Zhou through the maneuvers of Qin and Jin (Xi 22.4). King Zhuang of Chu attacks the Rong but, instead of defending Zhou, seems to question its prerogatives. However, the rhetoric of ritual propriety triumphs in the exchange between a Zhou prince and King Zhuang on the meanings of royal cauldrons. The Master of Chu attacked the Rong of Luhun, and consequently reached the Luo River. He drilled his troops at the border of Zhou. King Ding sent Wangsun Man to honor the exertions of the Master of Chu. The latter asked about the size and weight of the cauldrons.55 Wangsun Man replied, “Size and weight depend on virtue, not on the cauldrons. In the past, just when Xia possessed virtue,56 men from afar depicted various creatures, and the nine superintendents submitted metal,57 so that cauldrons were cast with images of various creatures. The hundred things were therewith completely set forth, and the people thus knew the spirits and the evil things.58 That was why when the people entered rivers, marshes, mountains, and forests, they would not meet what could harm them, and the sprites of the hills and waters could not get at them. Thus,

58

3.3

Lüshi chunqiu refers repeatedly (16.947, 17.1110, 18.1179, 20.1374) to these images, which seem to serve purposes of explanation, admonition, and exemplarity. These passages are important for our understanding of the function of bronze motifs. See K. C. Chang, Art, Myth, and Ritual; Rawson, Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes; So, Eastern Zhou Ritual Bronzes.

Lord Xuan

601

有昏德，鼎遷于商，載祀六百。商紂暴虐，鼎遷于周。德之休明，雖小， 重也。其姦回昏亂，雖大，輕也。天祚明德，有所厎止。成王定鼎于郟 鄏，卜世三十，卜年七百，天所命也。周德雖衰，天命未改。鼎之輕重，未 可問也。」 3.4(4) 夏，楚人侵鄭，鄭即晉故也。 3.5 宋文公即位三年，殺母弟須及昭公子，武氏之謀也。使戴、桓之族攻武

氏於司馬子伯之館，盡逐武、穆之族。武、穆之族以曹師伐宋。秋，宋師 圍曹，報武氏之亂也。

59

Jiaru, in present-day Henan, is identified as the City of the King (Wangcheng) (Takezoe, 10.20) and thus located in present-day Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. King Wu is said to have moved the cauldrons there, and King Cheng is said to have “put them in place” there. 60 The heavenly command (tianming 天命) here suggests something preordained, as distinct from its implication of moral imperative in some other passages (e.g., Wen 13.3, Xiang 29.17, Ding 4.3). Since most prophecies in Zuozhuan are accurate—that is, fashioned to fit events that had already transpired at the time of writing—this prediction has been used to date Zuozhuan well before Qin’s annihilation of Eastern Zhou in 256 Bce (Yang, 2:671–72). Takezoe (10.20) argues that the span of thirty kings and 700 years refers not to the length of the Zhou reign (which lasted 874 years, with thirty-six kings) but to the time between the cauldrons’ being “put in place” (dingding 定鼎) and

602

Zuo Tradition

they were able to harmonize with those above and below them and to receive Heaven’s blessings. The last Xia king, Jie, possessed dimmed virtue, and the cauldrons were moved to the house of Shang, there to remain for six hundred years. The last Shang king, Zhòu, was violent and tyrannical, and the cauldrons were moved to the house of Zhou. When virtue is bright and resplendent, the cauldrons, though small, are heavy. When virtue is distorted, dimmed, and confused, the cauldrons, though large, are light. Heaven blesses those of bright virtue, giving them the place for realizing and maintaining it. When King Cheng put the cauldrons in place at Jiaru,59 he divined about the number of generations and got thirty; he divined about the number of years and got seven hundred.60 This is what Heaven has commanded. Although Zhou virtue is in decline, the heavenly command has not yet changed. The question of whether the cauldrons are light or heavy may not be asked yet.” In summer, a Chu leader invaded Zheng: the latter had gone over to Jin.

3.4(4)

Internecine struggles pitting groups of descendants of various former dukes against one another in Song, last touched on in Wen 18.8, now involve Cao. Three years after the accession of Lord Wen of Song, he put to death his full brother Xu and the sons of Lord Zhao. This was because of the conspiracy of the Wu lineage head. He had the houses of Dai and Huan attack the Wu lineage at the abode of the supervisor of the military Hua Oua and drove out every last member of the houses of Wu and Mu. The latter relied on Cao troops to attack Song. In autumn,61 Song troops laid siege to Cao in retaliation for the turmoil brought about by the Wu lineage.



61

3.5

their sinking in the Si River in 327 Bce. Hong Ye (Chunqiu jingzhuan yinde, xc–xcii) avers that the story of the sinking of the cauldrons in the Si River is a Han invention, which may indicate that this prophecy or this passage belongs to a later layer of the text. Even if one disagrees with Hong Ye, whatever dating conclusion one draws should pertain to this passage rather than the whole text, once one accepts that Zuozhuan is a sedimented text formed over a long period of accretion. This is the fifth year of the Song Lord Wen’s reign, six years after his accession.

Lord Xuan

603



3.6a(7, 8)

冬，鄭穆公卒。 初，鄭文公有賤妾曰燕姞，夢天使與己蘭，曰：「余為伯鯈。余，而 祖也。以是為而子。以蘭有國香，人服媚之如是。」既而文公見之，與之 蘭而御之。辭曰：「妾不才，幸而有子。將不信，敢徵蘭乎？」公曰：「諾。」生 穆公，名之曰蘭。

3.6b 文公報鄭子之妃曰陳媯，生子華、子臧。子臧得罪而出。誘子華而殺之

南里，使盜殺子臧於陳、宋之間。又娶于江，生公子士。朝于楚，楚人酖 之，及葉而死。又娶于蘇，生子瑕、子俞彌。俞彌早卒。洩駕惡瑕，文公 亦惡之，故不立也。 公逐群公子，公子蘭奔晉，從晉文公伐鄭。石癸曰：「吾聞姬、姞 耦，其子孫必蕃。姞，吉人也，后稷之元妃也。今公子蘭，姞甥也，天或 啟之，必將為君，其後必蕃。先納之，可以亢寵。」與孔將鉏、侯宣多納 之，盟于大宮而立之，以與晉平。

On dreams in Zuozhuan, see Wai-yee Li, “Dreams of Interpretation.” Bochou is identified in Wang Fu, Qianfu lun, 9.409, as one of the Yellow Emperor’s descendants. According to Jia Kui, Bochou was the ancestor of the Southern Yan (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 402). Yan Jí means Jí from Yan, but since she is said to be a lowly concubine, she could not have been the daughter of the Southern Yan ruler. 64 The Zheng Master is identified as Ziyi, younger brother of Lord Zhao and Lord Wen’s paternal uncle. The impropriety of the relationship is indicated by the word bao 報, which according to Fu Qian (Maoshi-Fu 21B.86) refers to a liaison with a relative’s wife. We have chosen to translate the title of “Zheng zi” as “Zheng Master” (instead of the usual “Master of Zheng”) because Ziyi was not a ruler. 65 See Xi 24.3. 66 See Xi 16.5. Nanli 南里 is located south of Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 67 See Xi 24.3. 68 Chu annexed Jiang and might have feared enmity from Gongzi Shi. She was within Chu territories. 69 See Xi 31.6. 70 Qun gongzi 群公子can refer both to his own sons and also to all members of lines of former Zheng rulers. 71 This harks back to events twenty-four years earlier, when Jin decided to support Lan (Xi 30.3). The narratives in Xi 7.3 and 33.9 pertain to the fate of Lord Wen’s other sons. The account here in Xuan 3.6 refers to these earlier events but answers new questions as to how Lord Mu became ruler and why he died. 72 “Lord Millet” (Hou ji 后稷) was the earliest male ancestor of the Zhou ruling house. See Maoshi 245, “Sheng min” 生民, 17A.587. On sacrifices to Lord Millet, see Wen 2.5, Xiang 7.2, Zhao 9.3; Maoshi 275, “Siwen” 思文, 19B.721. 62 63

604

Zuo Tradition

We now learn of the death of Lord Mu of Zheng, followed by a retrospective account of his extraordinary destiny, as announced in a dream to his humble mother and confirmed by his mysterious ties to orchids. This is one of many prophetic dreams in Zuozhuan that feature ancestors (see also Xi 31.5, Cheng 2.3, Zhao 7.15, 17.4, Ai 7.5).62 In winter, Lord Mu of Zheng died. Earlier, Lord Wen of Zheng had a lowly concubine named Yan Jí. She dreamed that a heavenly messenger gave her an orchid with these words, “I am Bochou.63 I am your ancestor. Let this be your child. As the orchid is the most fragrant flower of the domain, people will take him to themselves and love him, just as they do this flower.” Not long after, Lord Wen saw her, gave her an orchid, and had her serve him. She stated her case: “I am without merit. If I will be so fortunate as to bear a child, others will not believe me. May I presume to use the orchid as proof?” The lord said, “Agreed.” She gave birth to Lord Mu and named him Lan, or “Orchid.”

3.6a(7, 8)

Lan, Lord Mu of Zheng, survived the turmoil that embroiled his brothers and half brothers and became the ruler of Zheng through Jin support. The seven Mu lineages (Liang, You, Guo, Han, Si, Yin, Feng) that descended from him dominate Zheng politics for the rest of the period covered by Zuozhuan. Cf. Xiang 26.7b. Lord Wen had a liaison with the Zheng Master’s wife Chen Gui, and she gave birth to Zihua and Zizang.64 Zizang was guilty of an offense and fled to Song.65 Lord Wen induced Zihua to go to Nanli and put him to death there,66 and he sent brigands to kill Zizang between Chen and Song.67 Lord Wen also married a woman of Jiang, who gave birth to Gongzi Shi. While he was visiting the court of Chu, the men of Chu poisoned him, and he died upon reaching She.68 Lord Wen also married a woman of Su, who gave birth to Gongzi Xiaa and Gongzi Yumi, and the latter died young. The Zheng minister Xie Jia detested Gongzi Xia, and so did Lord Wen. That was why he was not established as heir.69 The lord expelled the noble sons.70 Gongzi Lan fled to Jin and followed Lord Wen of Jin in his military expedition against Zheng.71 Shi Jiafua said, “I have heard that when the Ji and Jí lineages make a match, their descendants are sure to flourish. ‘Jí’ means an auspicious person; such was the name of the original consort of Lord Millet.72 Now Gongzi Lan is descended on his mother’s side from the Jí lineage. Perhaps Heaven has opened a way for him. He must become ruler, and his progeny are sure to flourish. If we are the first to receive him, we may in this way win greater favor.” Shi Jiafu, together with Kong Jiangchu and Hou Xuanduo, received him, swore a covenant with him at the Ancestral Temple, and installed him as ruler so as to achieve peace with Jin.

3.6b

Lord Xuan

605



穆公有疾，曰：「蘭死，吾其死乎！吾所以生也。」刈蘭而卒。

春秋 4.1(1) 四年，春，王正月，公及齊侯平莒及郯。莒人不肯。公伐莒，取向。 4.2 秦伯稻卒。 4.3(2) 夏，六月乙酉，鄭公子歸生弒其君夷。 4.4 赤狄侵齊。 4.5 秋，公如齊。 4.6 公至自齊。 4.7 冬，楚子伐鄭。

左傳 4.1(1) 四年，春，公及齊侯平莒及郯，莒人不肯。公伐莒，取向，非禮也。平國

以禮，不以亂。伐而不治，亂也。以亂平亂，何治之有？無治，何以行禮？

606

Zuo Tradition

Lord Mu fell ill. He said, “When the orchids die, I will likely die also! I was born because of them.” The orchids were cut and he died.73 LORD XUAN 4 (605 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord and the Prince of Qi tried to make peace between Ju and Tan. A Ju leader refused. Our lord attacked Ju and took Xiang.74

4.1(1)

Dao, the Liege of Qin, died.

4.2

In summer, in the sixth month, on the yiyou day (26), Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng assassinated his ruler, Yi.

4.3(2)

The Red Di invaded Qi.

4.4

In autumn, our lord went to Qi.

4.5

Our lord arrived from Qi.

4.6

In winter, the Master of Chu attacked Zheng.

4.7

ZUO

Lord Xuan of Lu is criticized for attacking Ju after failing to resolve the conflict between the small domains of Ju and Tan. In the fourth year, in spring, our lord and the Prince of Qi tried to make peace between Ju and Tan. A Ju leader refused. Our lord attacked Ju and took Xiang. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Domains make peace through ritual propriety, not through disorder. Attacking and then failing to establish good order—that is disorder. If one quells disorder with disorder, what good order will there be? Without good order, how can one realize ritual propriety?

73

74

4.1(1)

It is not clear whether Lord Mu or someone else cuts the orchids. Shen Qinhan suggests: “Lord Mu wished to test [what determines] life and death. Consequently he cut the orchids and indeed died” (cited in Yang, 2:675). Does Lord Mu cut the orchids to test his destiny or to symbolize his acceptance of death? Have the orchids gone through their cycle of flowering and bearing seeds and need to be cut? Does someone cut them inadvertently? Such details would provoke other questions: Should one accept life and death as natural cycles? What does it mean to test fate? What is contingency or necessity? The narrative, however, is content to present the mysterious convergence of the symbols heralding life and death. Ju had occupied the small domain of Xiang long before (see Annals, Yin 2.2).

Lord Xuan

607

4.2(3) 楚人獻黿於鄭靈公。公子宋與子家將見。子公之食指動，以示子家，曰：

「他日我如此，必嘗異味。」及入，宰夫將解黿，相視而笑。公問之，子家 以告。及食大夫黿，召子公而弗與也。子公怒，染指於鼎，嘗之而出。公 怒，欲殺子公。子公與子家謀先。子家曰：「畜老，猶憚殺之，而況君 乎？」反譖子家。子家懼而從之。夏，弒靈公。 書曰「鄭公子歸生弒其君夷」，權不足也。君子曰：「仁而不武， 無能達也。」凡弒君，稱君，君無道也；稱臣，臣之罪也。 鄭人立子良。辭曰：「以賢，則去疾不足；以順，則公子堅長。」乃 立襄公。

75

Liu Xiang (Shuoyuan 6.27) cites a comment attributed to Confucius’ disciple Zixia: “The Annals records rulers not acting like rulers, subject not like subjects, fathers not like fathers, sons not like sons—all these are not what happened over one day. There were gradual developments that led to these.” Similar reasoning is found in Han Feizi 34.717. The same argument on gradual and irreversible development is used to urge moral vigilance in Zhouyi 1.20. 76 The text has “the eating finger” (shizhi 食指), which is the name for the index finger in classical and modern Chinese. It is not clear whether the term predates Zuozhuan or whether later usage derives from this passage. The story here has given rise to common idioms such as “the eating finger moves” (shizhi dong 食指動, meaning “appetite is whetted”) and “to dip one’s finger” (ranzhi 染指, meaning “to interfere when one should not”). 77 Jieyuan 解黿 can also be read as “butcher the turtle.” 78 Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 688) suggests that the word geng 羹 (“stew”) should follow the word yuan 黿 (“turtle”). 79 The Jin minister Han Jue quotes a similar saying in Cheng 17.10. 80 This entry aims to explain why the Annals mentions only Gongzi Guisheng when the main instigator of the murder seems to be Gongzi Song. Du Yu (ZZ 21.368) glosses quan as “authority”: quan buzu 權不足 means “his authority was insufficient to quell disorder.” The emphasis on insufficient authority is curious, because elsewhere Gongzi Guisheng seems to play an important role in Zheng government: he sends a letter to Jin in 610 Bce (Wen 17.4) protesting Jin demands on Zheng and leads the Zheng army to victory in the Daji campaign against Song in 607 Bce (Xuan 2.1). We have chosen to gloss quan as “weighing the odds,” the ability to judge a situation and adapt to exigencies. As in Xuan 2.3, the Annals identifies the most powerful minister as the person responsible for assassinating the ruler, while Zuozhuan supplies an anecdote with circumstantial details involving other culprits that necessitates further exegetical commentary reconciling the two versions. 81 Reluctance to kill an animal is cited as evidence of compassion and potential desire to benefit the people in Mencius 1A.7. However, the definition of “benevolence” (ren) here is somewhat incongruous, based as it is on the comparison of the ruler to an aging animal that inspires enough pity to be spared slaughter. Alternatively, “benevolence” can refer to Lord Ling, who is faulted for failing to act decisively against his ministers, as in Han Feizi 39.878. Cf. Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 641. 82 By this logic both the assassins and the Zheng ruler are faulted in the Annals entry. Du Yu turns this into one of the “significatory principles” in the Annals (ZZ 3.55, 20.348, 21.369; ZZ-Kong 4.73, 59.1031). As with other categorical statements of this

608

Zuo Tradition

A turtle dish leads to the assassination of Lord Ling of Zheng. Han Feizi 39.878–79 and the Han collection Shuoyuan 6.27 use this story to illustrate the ruler’s need to be vigilant to stamp out incipient subversion.75 The Zuozhuan account, however, seems to blame Lord Ling. The assassin is not unequivocally condemned; he is just said to have failed to “weigh the odds.” It is ironic that despite the earlier prediction that Lord Mu’s progeny will flourish (Xuan 3.6b), his heir does not survive the first year of his reign. The attempt to wrest a “significatory principle” from Lord Ling’s murder also implicitly justifies the assassination of a ruler who “violated the way of rulership.” Similar arguments are found in Mencius 1B.1 and Xunzi 15.317, 18.388–89, although Lord Ling’s misdemeanor does not seem to be on the same par with those of the tyrants Jie and Zhòu. The leaders of Chu presented a large turtle to Lord Ling of Zheng. Gongzi Song and Gongzi Guishenga were about to have an audience with the lord. Gongzi Songa’s index finger moved involuntarily.76 He showed it to Gongzi Guishenga and said, “On other days when my finger did this, I always without fail got to taste something extraordinary.” As they entered, the cook was about to take the turtle apart.77 They looked at each other and smiled. The lord asked why, and Gongzi Guishenga told him. When the lord had the high officers partake of the turtle,78 he called Gongzi Songa forward but did not give him any. Furious, Gongzi Songa dipped his finger into the cauldron, tasted the turtle, and left. The lord was so enraged that he wanted to kill Gongzi Songa. Gongzi Songa plotted with Gongzi Guishenga to act first. Gongzi Guishenga said, “Even with an aging domestic animal, one is reluctant to kill it.79 How much more so then with the ruler?” Gongzi Song turned things around and slandered Gongzi Guishenga. Gongzi Guishenga became fearful and complied with him. In the summer, they assassinated Lord Ling. The text says, “Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng assassinated his ruler, Yi”: this is because he fell short in weighing the odds.80 The noble man said, “To be benevolent without martial valor is to achieve nothing.”81 In all cases when a ruler is assassinated, naming the ruler means that he violated the way of rulership; naming the subject means that the blame lies with him.82 The leaders of Zheng wanted to establish Gongzi Qujia as ruler.83 He declined: “If the criterion is merit, then mine does not suffice; if the criterion is natural order, then Gongzi Jian is the oldest.” They thus established Lord Xiang (Gongzi Jian) as ruler.

83

4.2(3)

kind, the application is not consistent—in some cases, murdered rulers not criticized as unworthy are named (e.g., Annals, Wen 1.10, 14.9, Ai 14.11). Gongzi Quji, called Ziliang in the text, is the ancestor of the Liang lineage in Zheng. We have chosen to call him by his birth name to avoid confusion with Ziliang of Chu.

Lord Xuan

609

襄公將去穆氏，而舍子良。子良不可，曰：「穆氏宜存，則固願也。 若將亡之，則亦皆亡，去疾何為？」乃舍之，皆為大夫。 4.3a 初，楚司馬子良生子越椒。子文曰：「必殺之！是子也，熊虎之狀而豺

狼之聲；弗殺，必滅若敖氏矣。諺曰：『狼子野心。』是乃狼也，其可畜 乎？」子良不可。子文以為大慼。及將死，聚其族，曰：「椒也知政，乃速 行矣，無及於難。」且泣曰：「鬼猶求食，若敖氏之鬼不其餒而！」 及令尹子文卒，鬬般為令尹，子越為司馬。蒍賈為工正，譖子揚而 殺之，子越為令尹，己為司馬。子越又惡之，乃以若敖氏之族，圄伯嬴 於轑陽而殺之，遂處烝野，將攻王。王以三王之子為質焉，弗受。師于 漳澨。秋七月戊戌，楚子與若敖氏戰于臯滸。伯棼射王，汏輈，及鼓跗， 著於丁寧。又射，汏輈，以貫笠轂。師懼，退。王使巡師曰：「吾先君文王 克息，獲三矢焉，伯棼竊其二，盡於是矣。」鼓而進之，遂滅若敖氏。

84

That is, Lord Xiang planned to drive out the other sons of Lord Mu (his own brothers and half brothers), sparing Gongzi Quji because he had insisted on yielding accession to Lord Xiang. 85 The seven lineages of Lord Mu (qi Mu 七穆) continued to dominate Zheng government till the end of the Spring and Autumn era. They are mentioned in Xiang 26.7. 86 Dou Gouwutu (Ziwen), Ziliang’s older brother, was chief minister in Chu from 664 (Zhuang 30.2) to 637 Bce (Xi 23.3). 87 Dou Jiao’s improper ritual bearing provokes dire predictions from the Lu high officer Shuzhong Huibo in Wen 9.9. This proverb is also cited in Zhao 28.2, when another newborn child is declared evil. In Wen 1.7, Dou Bo advises King Cheng of Chu not to establish Shangchen as heir because “he has the eyes of a wasp and the voice of a jackal,” which indicate a ruthless nature. Shangchen later assassinates King Cheng. 88 The elimination of the Ruo’ao lineage means that there will be no descendants left to offer sacrifices to its ancestors. 89 Several other chief ministers served after Dou Gouwutu yielded that position and before his son, Dou Ban, assumed it. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu Chu lingyin biao” 春秋楚令尹表, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1814–20. 90 Liaoyang 轑陽 was in the domain of Chu and was located northwest of present-day Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan. 91 That is, King Wen, King Cheng, and King Mu. 92 An alternative reading has King Zhuang stationing his troops by the Zhang River (Yang, 2:681). In the original and the Place Name Index, this place is called Zhangshi 漳澨, which means “alongside the Zhang River.” 93 King Zhuang narrowly escapes being hit, since the arrows miss by hitting a little too low and too high, respectively. Karlgren (gl. 276) points out the incongruity of a canopy (ligu 笠毂) on a battlefield and concludes that “these are so many guesses; nothing definite can be known about the ligu.” 94 King Wen was King Zhuang’s great-grandfather; for King Wen’s conquest of Xi, see Zhuang 14.3.

610

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xiang was about to drive out the lineages descended from Lord Mu, while sparing Gongzi Qujia.84 Gongzi Qujia would not permit this. He said, “If the Mu lineages should be preserved, then of course I wish to stay. But if they are to be banished, then all of them should be banished together. Why should I alone stay?” Lord Xiang thus spared them, and all of them became high officers.85 Dou Jiao’s rebellion leads to the near-complete extinction of the Ruo’ao line in Chu predicted thirteen years earlier (Wen 9.9). Retrospective accounts of his uncle Dou Gouwutu’s prescience, miraculous infancy, and able governance explain the continuation of the line against all odds. The trope of prophecy on the evil nature of a newborn child who will bring about future destruction also appears in Zhao 28.2. Earlier, the Chu supervisor of the military Ziliang had fathered Dou Jiaob. Dou Gouwutua86 said, “He must be put to death! He has the appearance of a bear or a tiger, and the voice of a jackal or a wolf. If he is not put to death, he will certainly destroy the Ruo’ao lineage. The proverb says, ‘The wolf cub is wild at heart.’87 This is a wolf—how can he be kept and raised?” Ziliang would not allow this, to the great grief of Dou Gouwutua. When Dou Gouwutu was about to die, he gathered his kinsmen and said, “If Dou Jiaod gains power in government, you should leave quickly, so as not to be overtaken by disaster.” He further wept, “If ghosts seek food, will the ghosts of the Ruo’ao lineage not suffer hunger?”88 Upon the death of Chief Minister Dou Gouwutua, Dou Ban became chief minister,89 and Dou Jiaoa the supervisor of the military. Wei Jia was the director of artisans. He slandered Dou Bana and brought about his death, so that Dou Jiaoa was made chief minister and he himself was made supervisor of the military. But then Dou Jiaoa came to hate Wei Jia; with the kinsmen of the Ruo’ao lineage, he imprisoned Wei Jiaa at Liao­ yang and put him to death.90 Thereafter positioned at Zhengye, he was about to attack the king. The king offered the sons of three former kings91 as hostages, but he refused and stationed his troops by the edge of the Zhang River.92 In autumn, on the wuxu day (9) of the seventh month, the Master of Chu and the Ruo’ao lineage fought on the banks of the Gao River. Dou Jiaod shot an arrow at the king, which by excessive force flew past the curved pole of his chariot, reached the stand of his war drum, and affixed itself to the metal bells under the drum. He shot again; the arrow flew past the curved pole of the king’s chariot and pierced the ribs of its canopy.93 The king’s troops retreated in fear. The king sent messengers who circulated among the troops with these words: “When our late ruler King Wen vanquished Xi,94 he obtained three arrows. Dou Jiaod stole two of them, and they have been used up here.” The troops advanced to the drumbeats of war, and thus extinguished the Ruo’ao lineage.

4.3a

Lord Xuan

611

4.3b 初，若敖氏娶於䢵，生鬬伯比。若敖卒，從其母畜於䢵，淫於䢵子之女，

生子文焉。䢵夫人使棄諸夢中。虎乳之。䢵子田，見之，懼而歸。夫人以 告，遂使收之。楚人謂乳穀，謂虎於菟，故命之曰鬬穀於菟。以其女妻 伯比。實為令尹子文。 其孫箴尹克黃使於齊，還及宋，聞亂。其人曰：「不可以入矣。」箴 尹曰：「棄君之命，獨誰受之？君，天也，天可逃乎？」遂歸，復命，而自 拘於司敗。王思子文之治楚國也，曰：「子文無後，何以勸善？」使復其 所，改命曰生。 4.4 冬，楚子伐鄭，鄭未服也。

春秋 5.1(1) 五年，春，公如齊。 5.2(2) 夏，公至自齊。 5.3(3) 秋，九月，齊高固來逆叔姬。

95 Yun was a small doman mentioned earlier in Huan 11.2. 96 That is, she told him about their daughter’s liaison and the birth of the “tiger-child.” 97 According to Du Yu (21.371), Kehuang was the son of Dou Ban. Kehuang’s readiness to brave death while submitting to duty may be compared to the Lu minister Shuzhong Huibo’s decision in Wen 18.5. 98 Another Chu minister uses these lines to argue that vengeance against one’s ruler is inadmissible. See Ding 4.3. 99 See Zhuang 30.2, Xi 7.2, 23.3, 27.4. Various early texts emphasize Dou Gouwutu’s perspicacity, self-denial, and loyal service to the state; see, e.g., Analects 5.19; Guoyu, “Chu yu 2,” 18.573; Zhanguo ce, “Chu 1,” 14.514. The Han historian Ban Gu traces his family’s ancestry to the Ruo’ao lineage, stating that his lineage took their name from Dou Ban. He notes also that ban means “tiger” in the Chu language (Hanshu 100A.4297).

612

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, the Ruo’ao lineage head had married a woman of Yun,95 who gave birth to Dou Bobi. After he died, Dou Bobi followed his mother and was raised at Yun. He had an affair with the daughter of the Master of Yun, and she gave birth to Dou Gouwutua. Lady Yun had him abandoned at Meng Marsh. A tigress suckled him. When the Master of Yun went hunting, he saw this and returned in fear. His wife told him what had happened,96 and he thus had the child brought back. The Chu people called suckling gou, and tigers, wutu. That was why the child was named Dou Gouwutu [Dou Suckled by the Tigress]. The Lord of Yun gave his daughter in marriage to Dou Bobi. That child, Dou Gouwutu, was none other than Chief Minister Ziwen. His grandson, the deputy for remonstrance Kehuang,97 was sent on a mission to Qi. On his way back, by the time he reached Song, he had heard of the rebellion. His men said, “You can no longer enter Chu.” The deputy for remonstrance said, “Who will accept the one who rejects the ruler’s command? The ruler is Heaven; can one escape from Heaven?”98 So he returned, reported on his mission, and had himself detained by the officers of the law. Reflecting on Dou Gouwutua’s able governance of Chu,99 the king said, “If Dou Gouwutua were to have no progeny, how could one encourage excellence?” He thus had Kehuang return to his position and changed his name to “Sheng.”100

4.3b

In winter, the Master of Chu attacked Zheng: this is because Zheng had not yet submitted.101

4.4

LORD XUAN 5 (604 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, our lord went to Qi.

5.1(1)

In summer, our lord arrived from Qi.

5.2(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, Gao Gu of Qi came to meet and escort home Shu Ji (Zi Shu Ji) as bride.102

5.3(3)

100 The word sheng 生, meaning “life” or “birth,” indicates that Kehuang represents the rebirth of an otherwise-extinguished lineage. On naming anecdotes, see Huan 2.8. 101 This suggests that Chu’s gift of a turtle earlier in the year was part of an effort to draw Zheng away from Jin and to encourage alliance with Chu. That tactic might have failed because of the coup in Zheng: Gongzi Guisheng, who assassinated Lord Ling of Zheng, had close ties with Jin. (Indeed, the turtle itself might have symbolized a pro-Chu stance that provoked the power struggle in Zheng.) Alternatively, Chu leaders may be taking advantage of the unrest in Zheng. 102 Zi Shu Ji is a younger daughter of Lord Xuan of Lu.

Lord Xuan

613

5.4 叔孫得臣卒。 5.5(4) 冬，齊高固及子叔姬來。 5.6(5) 楚人伐鄭。

左傳 5.1(1) 五年，春，公如齊。高固使齊侯止公，請叔姬焉。 5.2(2) 夏，公至自齊，書，過也。 5.3(3) 秋，九月，齊高固來逆女，自為也。故書曰「逆叔姬」，卿自逆也。 5.4(5) 冬，來，反馬也。 5.5(6) 楚子伐鄭。陳及楚平。晉荀林父救鄭，伐陳。

春秋 6.1(1) 六年，春，晉趙盾、衛孫免侵陳。 6.2 夏，四月。 6.3 秋，八月，螽。 6.4 冬，十月。

103 The form of the name, “Zi Shu Ji,” indicates that she is now a married woman; cf. Annals Wen 12.3. 104 Traditional commentators maintain that a Lu ruler’s detainment is one of the “concealed” (hui) items in the Annals because it means shame for the domain; cf. similar occurrences in Xi 17.3, Xuan 7.4, Zhao 16.1. 105 Lord Xuan’s fault lies in agreeing to give his daughter in marriage to her inferior, a minister from a neighboring domain. Such an “unequal marriage” implies Lu’s submission to Qi. On how a ruler’s mistakes and offenses have to be recorded in history, see Zhuang 23.1. 106 This is in contradistinction to ministers who meet the bride and escort her back on behalf of the ruler of a domain (e.g., Yin 2.5, Huan 3.5, Xuan 1.1, Cheng 14.2; Annals, Huan 3.5, Xuan 1.2, Cheng 14.3). In some cases, a ruler personally meets his bride

614

Zuo Tradition

Shusun Dechen died.

5.4

In winter, Gao Gu of Qi and Zi Shu Ji came.103

5.5(4)

A Chu leader attacked Zheng.

5.6(5)

ZUO

A Qi minister marries a daughter of Lord Xuan of Lu. Ritual impropriety is inferred. In the fifth year, in spring, our lord went to Qi. Gao Gu had the Qi ruler detain our lord and requested from him a marriage with Zi Shu Jia.104

5.1(1)

In summer, our lord arrived from Qi: this was written to fault our lord.105

5.2(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, Gao Gu of Qi came to meet and escort home his bride: he was doing it for himself. Therefore, the text says that he “came to meet and escort home Shu Ji”: the minister came on his own behalf to escort home the bride.106

5.3(3)

In winter, they came to return the horses.107

5.4(5)

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng. Chen made peace with Chu. Xun Linfu of Jin came to Zheng’s aid and attacked Chen.

5.5(6)

LORD XUAN 6 (603 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, Zhao Dun of Jin and Sun Mian of Wei invaded Chen.

6.1(1)

Summer, the fourth month.

6.2

In autumn, in the eighth month, there were locusts.

6.3

Winter, the tenth month.

6.4

(e.g., Annals, Zhuang 24.3)—the propriety of such rites is especially emphasized in the Gongyang tradition, although some commentators question its validity. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu ji bu qinying lun” 春秋譏不親迎論, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1649–52. 107 The rite of “returning horses” appears only here. According to Kong Yingda (ZZKong 22.376), those ranked above high officers marry their daughters off with their own carriages and horses. Three months after the marriage, the husband’s family returns the horses and keeps the carriage. The carriage is kept as a token of the wife’s humility: she may not presume that she will be able to stay forever, as the husband’s family may ask her to leave. The husband returns the horses to show his confidence that the wife will stay.

Lord Xuan

615

左傳 6.1(1) 六年，春，晉、衛侵陳，陳即楚故也。 6.2 夏，定王使子服求后于齊。 6.3 秋，赤狄伐晉，圍懷及邢丘。晉侯欲伐之。中行桓子曰：「使疾其民，以

盈其貫。將可殪也。《周書》曰：『殪戎殷』，此類之謂也。」 6.4 冬，召桓公逆王后于齊。 6.5 楚人伐鄭，取成而還。 6.6 鄭公子曼滿與王子伯廖語，欲為卿。伯廖告人曰：「無德而貪，其在《周

易》豐䷶之離䷝，弗過之矣。」間一歲，鄭人殺之。

春秋 7.1(1) 七年，春，衛侯使孫良夫來盟。

108 Huai 懷 was mentioned in Yin 11.5. Xingqiu 邢丘 was located northeast of presentday Wen County 溫縣, Henan. 109 The literal translation is “fill up his cord”—evil deeds are compared to cowries strung on a cord. “His evil deeds fill up his cord [or coin string]” (e guan man ying 惡貫滿盈), referring to a person’s inevitable downfall brought about by the accumulation of his crimes, becomes a common idiom. The same metaphor is used in Ai 26.2a. 110 The verb yi 殪, which comes to mean “kill” or “destroy,” usually refers to shooting with arrows elsewhere in Zuozhuan. See also Maoshi 180, “Ji ri” 吉日, 11C.310. 111 That is, Jin will deal with the Red Di in the same way that Zhou bided its time but finally destroyed Yin (Shang). The line is found in “Kang gao” 康誥 (Shangshu 14.201).

616

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the sixth year, in spring, Jin and Wei invaded Chen: this was because Chen had gone over to Chu.

6.1(1)

In summer, King Ding of Zhou sent Zifu to request a consort from Qi.

6.2

The Red Di attack Jin, but the Jin leader Xun Linfu decides to refrain from retaliation and wait for a better opportunity to strike back. Jin will defeat the Red Di and annihilate one of its branches, the Lù lineage, nine years later (Xuan 15.3). In autumn, the Red Di attacked Jin, laying siege to Huai and Xingqiu.108 The Prince of Jin wanted to attack them. Xun Linfua said, “Let the Di ruler inflict harm on his people, so that he fills up his measure of crime109—then wouldn’t he be cut down with one shot?110 When the Zhou Documents says, ‘Cut down with one shot the great Yin,’ it refers to this kind of situation.”111

6.3

In winter, the Shao Duke Huan went out to meet and escort home the royal bride at Qi.

6.4

The men of Chu attacked Zheng, secured an accord, and returned.

6.5

A Zhou prince predicts the downfall of an ambitious Zheng nobleman, proving his point by showing his rhetorical mastery of the Zhou Changes. Gongzi Manman of Zheng spoke with Wangzi Boliao; he wished to become a minister. Boliao told others, “To possess no virtue and yet to be covetous: this is what is found in Zhou Changes—the line whereby the hexagram “Abundance” ䷶ becomes the hexagram “Cohesion” ䷝.112 He will not live beyond the term mentioned there.” A year passed in the interval, and the leaders of Zheng put Manman to death.113

6.6

LORD XUAN 7 (602 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, the Prince of Wei sent Sun Liangfu to us to swear a covenant.

7.1(1)

112 If the broken sixth (topmost) line is changed into an unbroken line, then hexagram 55, “Abundance” ䷶ (Feng 豐), becomes hexagram 30, “Cohesion” ䷝ (Li 離). The prophecy thus pertains to the sixth line of “Abundance,” whose statement reads: “He expands his house and screens off his family. He peers through the gate and observes that there is no one. For three years he sees nothing. Inauspicious.” Wangzi Boliao predicts that the Zheng nobleman will last less than three years. 113 Counting the months before and after the full year, the interval amounts to almost three years.

Lord Xuan

617

7.2 夏，公會齊侯伐萊。 7.3 秋，公至自伐萊。 7.4 大旱。 7.5 冬，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯于黑壤。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年，春，衛孫桓子來盟，始通。且謀會晉也。 7.2(2) 夏，公會齊侯伐萊，不與謀也。凡師出，與謀曰「及」，不與謀曰「會」。 7.3 赤狄侵晉，取向陰之禾。 7.4(5) 鄭及晉平，公子宋之謀也，故相鄭伯以會。冬，盟于黑壤。王叔桓公臨

之，以謀不睦。 晉侯之立也，公不朝焉，又不使大夫聘，晉人止公于會。盟于黃 父，公不與盟。以賂免。故黑壤之盟不書，諱之也。

114 Since Lord Xuan’s accession, Lu has met with Qi but has not sent any mission to Jin. Wei, on the other hand, is closely allied with Jin. 115 As is often the case with Du Yu’s explanation (or invention) of the rules governing the uses of certain terms, there are many exceptions (see Takezoe, 10.34–35; Yang, 2:691–92). 116 The Jin ruler is presumably following Xun Linfu’s argument on biding his time. Xiangyin 向陰 is a place of unknown location. 117 Heirang 黑壤, identified as the same place as Huangfu 黃父 (Wen 17.4), was in present-day Shanxi. 118 Having murdered Lord Ling of Zheng (Xuan 4.2), Gongzi Song is eager to legitimize his position by gaining recognition from other heads of domains.

618

Zuo Tradition

In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and they attacked Lai.

7.2

In autumn, our lord arrived from the attack on Lai.

7.3

There was a great drought.

7.4

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, and the Liege of Cao at Heirang.

7.5

ZUO

Wei and Lu resume relations, and preparations are made for a meeting with Jin, later realized at Heirang (Xuan 7.4). In the seventh year, in spring, Sun Liangfua of Wei came to us to swear a covenant: this was the beginning of resumed relations between Lu and Wei. The parties also conferred about a meeting with Jin.114

7.1(1)

The following is a typical exegetical passage. In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and they attacked Lai: he was not party to the planning. In all cases when troops are sent out, the word ji [“along with”] is used when the domain was party to the planning, and the word hui [“met with”] is used when the domain was not.115

7.2(2)

The Red Di invaded Jin and took the grains at Xiangyin.116

7.3

Relations between Jin and Lu have been strained, and Jin leaders humiliate Lord Xuan at the meeting at Heirang.117 That Zheng and Jin made peace was because of Gongzi Song’s planning. That was why the latter assisted the Liege of Zheng at the meeting.118 In winter, a covenant was sworn at Heirang, where Wangshu Duke Huan oversaw the event in order to mediate conflicts.119 When the Prince of Jin was established as ruler,120 our lord had not visited his court, nor had he sent any high officer on an official visit. The leaders of Jin detained him at the meeting at Heirang.121 When a covenant was sworn at Huangfu, our lord did not participate. He escaped by offering bribes. That is why the covenant at Heirang was not mentioned in the text: this is to conceal our lord’s disgrace.122

7.4(5)

119 Royal representatives tend to resurface at Jin-led covenants when Jin leadership is questioned (Xuan 1.8, 1.9, 1.10). 120 See Xuan 2.3. 121 On a Lu ruler’s detainment in another domain, see note 104 above. 122 That is, the meeting, but not the covenant, is mentioned in the Annals. The Lu ruler is also not mentioned to avoid reference to his detainment.

Lord Xuan

619

春秋 8.1 八年，春，公至自會。 8.2 夏，六月，公子遂如齊，至黃乃復。 8.3(2) 辛巳，有事于大廟，仲遂卒于垂。壬午，猶繹。萬入，去籥。 8.4 戊子，夫人嬴氏薨。 8.5(1) 晉師、白狄伐秦。 8.6(3) 楚人滅舒蓼。 8.7 秋，七月甲子，日有食之，既。 8.8(5) 冬，十月己丑，葬我小君敬嬴。雨，不克葬。庚寅，日中而克葬。 8.9(6) 城平陽。 8.10(7) 楚師伐陳。

左傳 8.1(5) 八年，春，白狄及晉平。夏，會晉伐秦。晉人獲秦諜，殺諸絳市，六日

而蘇。

123 This Qi settlement on the way from the Lu capital to the Qi capital is also mentioned in Annals, Huan 17.1. 124 Hong Liangji (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 86) claims that Chui was in Qi. Takezoe (10.36) doubts that the news of Xiangzhong’s death could have reached the Lu capital in a day if Chui was in Qi. 125 Du Yu (ZZ 22.378) suggests that in keeping with procedure, the sacrificial offerings from the day before are displayed again. 126 For the wan dance, see Zuozhuan, Yin 5.7. Music is deemed inappropriate because of Xiangzhong’s death, but the wan dance continues as part of the sacrifice. In Liji 10.188, Confucius refers to this incident as a “violation of ritual propriety. With the death of a minister, the sacrifice should not have been continued.” 127 The White Di were first mentioned in Zuozhuan Xi 33.6.

620

Zuo Tradition

LORD XUAN 8 (601 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, our lord arrived from the meeting.

8.1

In summer, in the sixth month, Gongzi Sui (Xiangzhong) went to Qi. He advanced as far as Huang,123 then turned back.

8.2

On the xinsi day (16), there was a sacrifice at the Grand Ancestral Temple. Zhongsui (Xiangzhong) died at Chui.124 On the renwu day (17), the sacrifice was continued nonetheless.125 The wan dancers entered, but they dispensed with their flutes.126

8.3(2)

On the wuzi day (23), our former lord’s wife, Lady Ying, expired.

8.4

Jin troops and the White Di attacked Qin.

8.5(1)

127

A Chu leader extinguished Shuliao.128 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jiazi day, there was an eclipse of the sun. It was a total eclipse.129 In winter, in the tenth month, on the jichou day (26), we were to bury our former lord’s consort, Jing Ying.130 It rained, and we did not complete the burial. Only at midday on the gengyin day (27) did we complete the burial.

8.6(3) 8.7

8.8(5)

We fortified Pingyang.

8.9(6)

Chu troops attacked Chen.

8.10(7)

ZUO

The White Di and Jin attack Qin. A Qin spy who has been put to death has a curious resurrection. In the eighth year, in spring, the White Di made peace with Jin. In summer, they joined forces with Jin to attack Qin. The men of Jin captured a Qin spy and put him to death in the marketplace at Jiang. Six days later, he came back to life.

8.1(5)

128 Shuliao seems to belong to a group of small Shu domains; see Annals, Xi 3.3, Wen 14.10, nn. 217, 218. 129 According to Yang (2:695), the eclipse took place in the tenth month. The graphs for “seven” and “ten” are similar in ancient script, hence the confusion. 130 This is Lord Xuan’s birth mother, Lord Wen’s secondary consort. Recall that she schemed with Dongmen Xiangzhong to murder Lord Wen’s legitimate heirs in order to have her son installed as ruler.

Lord Xuan

621

8.2(3) 有事于大廟，襄仲卒而繹，非禮也。 8.3(6) 楚為眾舒叛，故伐舒蓼，滅之。楚子疆之。及滑汭，盟吳、越而還。 8.4 晉胥克有蠱疾，郤缺為政。秋，廢胥克，使趙朔佐下軍。 8.5(8) 冬，葬敬嬴，旱，無麻，始用葛茀。雨，不克葬，禮也。禮，卜葬，先遠日，

避不懷也。 8.6(9) 城平陽，書，時也。 8.7(10) 陳及晉平。楚師伐陳，取成而還。

131 This is the first time the domains of Wu and Yue are mentioned in Zuozhuan. 132 The word used here is gu 蠱. Shuowen jiezi (13B.1b–2a) explains this graph as “worms in the abdomen,” which Duan Yucai glosses as “poisoned through the ingestion of worms” (Lu Zongda, Shuowen jiezi tonglun, 188–89). Physician He links gu to delusion, obsession, and loss of mental faculty in Zhao 1.12. 133 The enmity between the Xi and Xu lineages is to flare up twenty-seven years later (Cheng 17.10). 134 The plant mentioned here is kudzu (Pueraria thunbergiana). The entry thus explains the origins of a custom. We may compare it with Xi 33.3, when Lord Xiang of Jin donned the black clothes of war during mourning for this father: “Jin from this time on used black as the color of mourning garments.”

622

Zuo Tradition

Dongmen Xiangzhong (Gongzi Sui), active in Lu politics and diplomacy for more than forty years, dies. There is no disparaging reference to his role in the murder of Lord Wen’s legitimate heirs. Instead, the Lu court is faulted for ritual impropriety in continuing with the sacrifice at the Grand Ancestral Temple right after Xiangzhong died. There was a sacrifice at the Grand Ancestral Temple. The sacrifice was continued even after Xiangzhong had died. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety.

8.2(3)

Chu expands its territories and extinguishes Shuliao, following earlier aggression (Wen 12.3, 14.10). Other Shu domains (Shuyong and Shujiu) will succumb later (Cheng 17.11, Xiang 24.9, 25.8). It was because all the Shu domains had rebelled against Chu that Chu attacked Shuliao and extinguished it. The Master of Chu marked the boundaries of his domain, going as far as the bend of the Hua River. He swore a covenant with Wu and Yue and then returned.131

8.3(6)

Xi Que of Jin dismisses Xu Ke, fomenting enmity between the Xi and Xu lineages (see Cheng 17.10). Xu Ke of Jin was ill with frenzied mania.132 Xi Que was in charge of policies. In autumn, Xi Que discharged Xu Ke and appointed Zhao Shuo assistant commander of the lower army.133

8.4

The funeral for Lord Xuan’s mother is delayed because of rain. For another example of such a delay, see Ding 15.7. In winter, we buried Jing Ying. Because of the drought there was no hemp. It was then that the fibers of creeping vines were first used to make ropes for drawing the coffin.134 It rained, and we did not complete the burial: this was in accordance with ritual propriety. By the rule of ritual propriety, when divining the date for burial, one begins with a distant day, so as to avoid the diminution of mournful longing.135

8.5(8)

Pingyang was fortified: this is written to show that this was timely.136

8.6(9)

Chen and Jin made peace. Chu troops attacked Chen, secured an accord, and returned.

8.7(10)

135 For the choice of a distant day for burial, see also Liji 3.59. This practice is cited as explanation for why it is ritually proper to delay the burial because of rain. The completion of interment would presumably lighten the burden of mourning, and bereaved, filial persons are thus prone to prolong the procedure. Guliang, Xuan 2 (22.379), argues that a funeral should not be delayed because of rain, but such an injunction seems to apply only to commoners (Liji 12.239). 136 Pinyang 平陽 was located northwest of Xintai County 新泰縣, Shandong.

Lord Xuan

623

春秋 9.1 九年，春王正月，公如齊。 9.2 公至自齊。 9.3(1) 夏，仲孫蔑如京師。 9.4 齊侯伐萊。 9.5(2) 秋，取根牟。 9.6(3) 八月，滕子卒。 9.7(4) 九月，晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯會于扈。 9.8(4) 晉荀林父帥師伐陳。 9.9(4) 辛酉，晉侯黑臀卒于扈。 9.10 冬，十月癸酉，衛侯鄭卒。 9.11(5) 宋人圍滕。 9.12(7) 楚子伐鄭。 9.13(8) 晉郤缺帥師救鄭。 9.14(6) 陳殺其大夫洩冶。

左傳 9.1(3) 九年，春，王使來徵聘。夏，孟獻子聘於周。王以為有禮，厚賄之。 9.2(5) 秋，取根牟，言易也。 9.3(6) 滕昭公卒。 9.4(7–9) 會于扈，討不睦也。陳侯不會。晉荀林父以諸侯之師伐陳。晉侯卒于扈，

乃還。 137 Genmou was the name of a small domain that was located east of Lu and south of Qi near present-day Yishui County 沂水縣, Shandong. 138 According to Yin 7.1 and Xi 23.5, a lord’s name is mentioned in official death notifications only if he is a partner in a covenant. One may infer that the Teng ruler was not a covenant partner and Teng sent no official notification of his death. 139 Hu was located in Zheng. See Wen 7.6; Annals, Wen 7.8. 140 On the explanation of the word qu 取 (take) as “easy conquest,” see also Cheng 6.3, Xiang 13.2, Zhao 4.5. 141 Domains allied with Chu are considered “disaffected” by Jin. The entry thus adopts Jin’s perspective.

624

Zuo Tradition

LORD XUAN 9 (600 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord went to Qi.

9.1

Our lord arrived from Qi.

9.2

In summer, Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) went to the Zhou capital.

9.3(1)

The Prince of Qi attacked Lai.

9.4

In autumn, we took Genmou.

9.5(2)

137

In the eighth month, the Master of Teng died.138

9.6(3)

In the ninth month, the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, and the Liege of Cao met at Hu.139

9.7(4)

Xun Linfu of Jin led out troops and attacked Chen.

9.8(4)

On the xinyou day, Heitun, the Prince of Jin, died at Hu.

9.9(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the guiyou day (15), Zheng, the Prince of Wei, died.

9.10

A Song leader laid siege to Teng.

9.11(5)

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng.

9.12(7)

Xi Que of Jin led out troops and went to the aid of Zheng.

9.13(8)

Chen put to death its high officer Xie Ye.

9.14(6)

ZUO

In the ninth year, in spring, the king sent someone to us to solicit an official visit. In summer, Meng Xianzi went on an official visit to Zhou. The king deemed him ritually proper and richly rewarded him.

9.1(3)

In autumn, we took Genmou: this indicates how easy it was.140

9.2(5)

Lord Zhao of Teng died.

9.3(6)

Jin’s attempt to assert its leadership at Hu was halted by the untimely death of Lord Cheng of Jin. The princes met at Hu: this was to chastise disaffected domains.141 The Prince of Chen did not come to the meeting. Xun Linfu of Jin used the troops of the princes to attack Chen. They returned when the Prince of Jin died at Hu.

9.4(7–9)

Lord Xuan

625

9.5(11) 冬，宋人圍滕，因其喪也。 9.6(14) 陳靈公與孔寧、儀行父通於夏姬，皆衷其衵服，以戲于朝。洩冶諫曰：

「公卿宣淫，民無效焉，且聞不令。君其納之！」公曰：「吾能改矣。」公 告二子。二子請殺之，公弗禁，遂殺洩冶。 孔子曰：「《詩》云： 民之多辟， 無自立辟。 其洩冶之謂乎！」 9.7(12) 楚子為厲之役故，伐鄭。 9.8(13) 晉郤缺救鄭。鄭伯敗楚師于柳棼。國人皆喜，唯子良憂曰：「是國之災

也，吾死無日矣。」

142 In thus taking advantage of the funeral of Lord Zhao of Teng, Song violates ritual propriety. 143 Zhu Xi (Zhuzi yulei, 83.2249–51), for example, faults Zuozhuan for advocating compromise, pragmatism, and expediency and for “denigrating martyrs of integrity” (bian sijie 貶死節). Wang Fuzhi (Chunqiu jia shuo, 227) believes that Xie Ye fulfilled his duty as subject by “dying for his remonstrance” (sijian 死諫). He also faults Zuozhuan for “using success and failure as a yardstick, thereby denigrating duty and integrity” (ju chengbai er bian jieyi 據成敗而貶節義). 144 The adulterous relation between Xia Ji and the Chen ruler and ministers is also mentioned in the prefaces to Maoshi 144, “Zhu 株林, and Maoshi 145, “Zepo” 澤陂 (7A.255–57). The analogous account in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.67, is more straightforwardly moralistic: it gives a lengthy judgment of how Chen has fallen from early Zhou standards, the adultery being one among many other signs of its doom. Lienü zhuan 7.155–56 combines several Zuozhuan stories about Xia Ji (Xuan 9.6, 10.4, Cheng 2.6, Zhao 28.2b), who is said to know the technique of rejuvenation (lao er fu zhuang 老而復壯). 145 Xie Ye gives a longer remonstrance on rulership by example in Shuoyuan 1.4. The same word, bi 辟, has opposite meanings in these two lines from Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.635. The same duality of bi obtains in Mao 255, “Dang” 蕩, 18A.641. The lines from “Ban” are quoted in Zhao 28.2, also in the context of ill-fated remonstrance against sexual license. Duobi 多辟 means “many deviations,” libi 立辟 means “to set up laws and rules against deviations.” Liu Wenqi (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 663) cites Gu Yanwu: “regarding those above, bi means deviations; regarding those below, bi means rules against deviations” 上辟爲邪，下辟爲法. Elaborating the implications of this story, Wang Su (Kongzi jiayu 19.48–49) has Confucius explain to Zigong the difference between Bi Gan and Xie Ye. Bi Gan, as kin to the last Shang king, Zhòu, had no choice but to martyr himself remonstrating with Zhòu; Xie Ye, as a mere high officer of Chen, had no such obligation and was presumptuous in pitting his puny strength against the wrongdoings of the whole

626

Zuo Tradition

In winter, a Song leader laid siege to Teng: this was to take advantage of its ruler’s death.142

9.5(11)

The ruler and ministers of Chen enjoy the favors of Xia Ji, with disastrous consequences. Confucius criticizes Xie Ye, the high officer put to death for his staunch remonstrance, as lacking sound judgment. Xie Ye is remembered either as a paragon of loyalty (e.g., Shuoyuan 1.4, Han shi waizhuan 7.299) or as a cautionary tale against rash interference (e.g., Shuoyuan 9.272, Han Feizi 44.918, Kongzi jiayu 5.19.48). Many commentators have been uncomfortable with Confucius’ putative advocacy of compromise and detachment.143 Lord Ling of Chen, Gongsun Ninga, and Yi Hangfu all had liaisons with Xia Ji.144 They each wore her intimate garments under their robes, bantering about them in court. Xie Ye remonstrated with the lord: “When lords and ministers demonstrate their licentiousness, the people have nothing to look to as example. Moreover, the reports that spread as a result will not be good. You, my lord, should put away those garments!” The lord said, “I will be able to change my ways.” He told the two noblemen about this, and when the two requested to have Xie Ye killed, he did not stop them. They thus put Xie Ye to death. Confuciusb said, “It says in the Odes,

9.6(14)

When the people have many deviations, Do not set up your own law against deviations!

Does this not describe Xie Ye?”145 A battle between Chu and the Jin-Zheng coalition takes place. The Master of Chu, on account of the Li campaign, attacked Zheng.146

9.7(12)

Xi Que of Jin went to the aid of Zheng. The Liege of Zheng defeated Chu troops at Liufen. The inhabitants of the capital were all glad, while Gongzi Qujia alone was worried: “This is a calamity for the domain. Our days are numbered.”

9.8(13)

court. In various early texts (Han shi waizhuan 7.299; Da Dai Liji 48.136; Shuoyuan 8.237; Jia Yi, Xin shu, 10.208) Xie Ye’s martyrdom is juxtaposed with the departure of another Chen minister, Deng Yuan, with tacit approval for the latter’s choice. Xie Ye’s remonstrance is implicitly praised as being fundamental for rulership in Shuoyuan 1.4. 146 Du Yu (ZZ 22.377) suspects that the “Li campaign” refers to Chu’s attack upon Zheng in Xuan 6.5 above. But, as Yang argues (2:689, 2:703), this is by no means certain.

Lord Xuan

627

春秋 10.1(1) 十年，春，公如齊。 10.2 公至自齊。 10.3(1) 齊人歸我濟西田。 10.4 夏，四月丙辰，日有食之。 10.5(2) 己巳，齊侯元卒。 10.6(2) 齊崔氏出奔衛。 10.7(3) 公如齊。 10.8 五月，公至自齊。 10.9(4) 癸巳，陳夏徵舒弒其君平國。 10.10(5) 六月，宋師伐滕。 10.11 公孫歸父如齊。葬齊惠公。 10.12(6) 晉人、宋人、衛人、曹人伐鄭。 10.13(7) 秋，天王使王季子來聘。 10.14(8) 公孫歸父帥師伐邾，取繹。 10.15 大水。 10.16(9) 季孫行父如齊。 10.17(10) 冬，公孫歸父如齊。 10.18 齊侯使國佐來聘。 10.19 饑。 10.20 楚子伐鄭。

628

Zuo Tradition

LORD XUAN 10 (599 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, our lord went to Qi.

10.1(1)

Our lord arrived from Qi.

10.2

A Qi leader returned to us the lands to the west of the Ji River.

147

In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingchen day (1), there was an eclipse of the sun.148

10.3(1) 10.4

On the jisi day (14), Yuan, the Prince of Qi, died.

10.5(2)

The Cui lineage head in Qi departed and fled to Wei.149

10.6(2)

Our lord went to Qi.

10.7(3)

In the fifth month, our lord arrived from Qi.

10.8

On the guisi day (8), Xia Zhengshu of Chen assassinated his ruler, Pingguo.

10.9(4)

In the sixth month, Song troops attacked Teng.

10.10(5)

Gongsun Guifu went to Qi. Lord Hui of Qi was buried.

10.11

A Jin leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, and a Cao leader attacked Zheng.

10.12(6)

In autumn, the Heaven-appointed king sent Wang Jizi official visit.

10.13(7)

150

to us on an

Gongsun Guifu led out troops, attacked Zhu, and took Yi.

10.14(8)

There was a great flood.

10.15

Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Qi.

10.16(9)

In winter, Gongsun Guifu went to Qi.

10.17(10)

The Prince of Qi sent Guo Zuo to us on an official visit.

10.18

There was a famine.

10.19

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng.

10.20

147 See Xuan 1.7. 148 This eclipse took place on 6 March 599 Bce. 149 Du Yu (ZZ 22.381), following Guliang, Xuan 10 (12.120), suggests that the term Cui shi 崔氏 here indicates that the entire lineage was leaving. However, there are also instances in the Annals of using the term to refer to the lineage head. 150 “Wang Jizi” is literally “the youngest royal son.” The commentaries differ as to whether he is the son of the present king (Ding) or the previous one (Kuang).

Lord Xuan

629

左傳

10.1(1, 3)

十年，春，公如齊。齊侯以我服故，歸濟西之田。

10.2(6) 夏，齊惠公卒。崔杼有寵於惠公，高、國畏其偪也，公卒而逐之，奔衛。

書曰「崔氏」，非其罪也；且告以族，不以名。凡諸侯之大夫違，告 於諸侯曰：「某氏之守臣某，失守宗廟，敢告。」所有玉帛之使者則告； 不然，則否。 10.3(7) 公如齊奔喪。 10.4(9) 陳靈公與孔寧、儀行父飲酒於夏氏。公謂行父曰：「徵舒似女。」對曰：

「亦似君。」徵舒病之。公出，自其廄射而殺之。二子奔楚。 10.5(10) 滕人恃晉而不事宋，六月，宋師伐滕。 10.6(12) 鄭及楚平，諸侯之師伐鄭，取成而還。 10.7(13) 秋，劉康公來報聘。

151 Cui Zhu will murder Lord Zhuang of Qi fifty-one years later (Xiang 25.2). At this point he might have been too young to formally assume positions of power, but being a favorite of Lord Hui was enough to incur the suspicions of the Gao and Guo lineages, first mentioned in 648 Bce (Xi 12.4). Here the persons involved are probably Gao Gu or Gao Xuanzi (see Xuan 14.4, 17.1; Annals, Xuan 15.7) and Guo Zuo (Cheng 2.3; Annals, Xuan 10.18). It is also possible that the Cui lineage head (Cui shi) is misidentified as Cui Zhu; see Hao Jing, Chunqiu fei Zuo, cited in Zhao Guangxian, “Zuozhuan bianzhuan kao,” 140. 152 Here the word used is wei 違, which can mean either “to flee” (ben 奔) or “to be banished” (fang 放). 153 Jade and silk mark formal visits. This means that only domains with which one has formal relationships would be notified. 154 This amounts to self-abnegation that violates ritual propriety. Even in the case of the Zhou king’s death, a lord would not personally attend the funeral but would send his minister instead. 155 Xia Zhengshu was the son of Xia Ji. Lord Ling and Yi Hangfu suggest that Zhengshu was fathered in adultery. 156 In Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.75–78, Liu Duke Kang (“the youngest royal son”) reports to King Ding of Zhou his judgment of Lu ministers after his mission to Lu.

630

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Lord Xuan of Lu, after four trips to Qi, secures the return of the lands to the west of the Ji River, given as a bribe in Xuan 1.7. In the tenth year, in spring, our lord went to Qi. The Prince of Qi, because of our submission, returned to us the lands to the west of the Ji River.

10.1(1, 3)

Cui Zhu, later to wreak great havoc in Qi (Xiang 25.2), is expelled from Qi. In summer, Lord Hui of Qi died. Cui Zhu had been favored by Lord Hui. The Gao and Guo lineages, fearful of Cui’s encroachments, expelled him when the lord died. He fled to Wei.151 The text says “the Cui lineage head”: this shows that he was not to blame. Moreover, the notification to Lu mentioned his line and not his name. In all cases when a high officer of a prince left the domain,152 the princes would be notified thus: “The so-and-so keeper and subject of the so-and-so lineage lost his stewardship of the Ancestral Temple. We presume to notify you.” Domains with which envoys bearing jade and silk had been exchanged would be notified; if that had not been the case, then there would be no notification.153

10.2(6)

Our lord went to Qi to attend the funeral.154

10.3(7)

Adulterous relations in the Chen court, told last year (Xuan 9.6), result in Lord Ling’s assassination. Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2” (2.72–75), has a much more detailed account of how Chen has fallen short of idealized Zhou standards. Lord Ling of Chen, Gongsun Ninga, and Yi Hangfu drank wine at the Xia residence. The lord said to Hangfu: “Zhengshu looks like you.” Hangfu replied, “He also looks like you.”155 Xia Zhengshu abhored this. As the lord was leaving, Zhengshu shot an arrow from the stable and killed him. The two noblemen fled to Chu.

10.4(9)

The leaders of Teng, relying on Jin, refused to serve Song. In the sixth month, Song troops attacked Teng.

10.5(10)

Zheng and Chu made peace. The troops of the princes attacked Zheng, secured an accord, and turned back.

10.6(12)

A Zhou prince comes to Lu to reciprocate Meng Xianzi’s earlier visit (Xuan 9.1). In autumn, the Liu Duke Kang came to reciprocate the official visit from Lu.156

10.7(13)

Lord Xuan

631

10.8(14) 師伐邾，取繹。 10.9(16) 季文子初聘于齊。 10.10(17) 冬，子家如齊，伐邾故也。 10.11(18) 國武子來報聘。 10.12(20) 楚子伐鄭。晉士會救鄭。逐楚師于潁北。諸侯之師戍鄭。 10.13 鄭子家卒。鄭人討幽公之亂，斲子家之棺，而逐其族。改葬幽公，諡之

曰「靈」。

春秋 11.1 十有一年，春，王正月。 11.2(1) 夏，楚子、陳侯、鄭伯盟于辰陵。 11.3 公孫歸父會齊人伐莒。 11.4(4) 秋，晉侯會狄于欑函。 11.5(5) 冬，十月，楚人殺陳夏徵舒。 11.6(5) 丁亥，楚子入陳。 11.7(5) 納公孫寧、儀行父于陳。

157 158 159 160

632

Yi is first mentioned in Wen 13.3. That is, this was his first visit since the accession of Lord Qing in Qi. Gongsun Guifu’s mission is presumably to secure Qi support for Lu’s aggression. Lord Ling’s son, Lord Cheng of Chen, was at this point in Jin and unlikely to be able to leave Jin to swear a covenant with Chu. Yang (2:710) suggests that “the Prince of Chen” refers to Xia Zhengshu. Sima Qian also mentions that Xia Zhengshu made himself ruler after assassinating Lord Ling (Shiji 36.1748). This would mean that King Zhuang’s avowed goal of punishing Xia Zhengshu for assassinating his ruler masked other concerns. After initially recognizing Xia Zhengshu, he likely attacked Chen because Xia turned against Chu or because opposition against Xia caused too much unrest in Chen. The place Chenling, where this covenant is sworn, is given as Yiling 夷陵 in Guliang, Xuan 2 (12.120). On the dispute regarding the location of this place, see Yang (2:710).

Zuo Tradition

Our troops attacked Zhu and took Yi.157 Ji Wenzi went on a first official visit to Qi.

10.8(14) 158

10.9(16)

In winter, Gongsun Guifua went to Qi because of the attack against Zhu.159

10.10(17)

Guo Zuob came to reciprocate our official visit.

10.11(18)

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng. Fan Huia of Jin went to the aid of Zheng and drove the Chu army out of the area north of the Ying River. The troops of the princes garrisoned Zheng.

10.12(20)

Gongzi Guisheng is posthumously punished for his role in the murder of Lord Ling of Zheng (Xuan 4.2). Gongzi Guishenga of Zheng died. The leaders of Zheng chastised the culprits for the turmoil in which Lord You was assassinated. They hacked open Gongzi Guisheng’s coffin and also drove out his lineage. They reburied Lord You and changed his posthumous honorific to “Ling.”

10.13

LORD XUAN 11 (598 BCE) ANNALS

The eleventh year, spring, the royal first month.

11.1

In summer, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Chen, and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Chenling.160

11.2(1)

Gongsun Guifu met with a Qi leader and attacked Ju.

11.3

In autumn, the Prince of Jin met with the Di at Cuanhan.

161

In winter, in the tenth month, Chu leaders put Xia Zhengshu of Chen to death.

11.4(4) 11.5(5)

On the dinghai day (11), the Master of Chu entered Chen.162

11.6(5)

He installed Gongsun Ning and Yi Hangfu in power in Chen.163

11.7(5)

161 The location of Cuanhan is not known. 162 The sequence of Xuan 11.5 and 11.6 seems to be reversed. Du Yu (ZZ 22.382) rationalized it as follows: “The Master of Chu first killed Zhengshu and then wanted to turn Chen into a Chu dependency. Later, because of Shen Shushi’s remonstrance, he returned dominion to Chen and laid no claim to the land. That was why ‘entered’ was recorded after ‘Xia Zhengshu was put to death.’” 163 Yang (2:710) notes that the word “install” (na 納) appears six times in the Annals. All other instances involve deposed or aspiring rulers. This is the only case where the word is used in connection with ministers.

Lord Xuan

633

左傳 11.1(2) 十一年，春，楚子伐鄭，及櫟。子良曰：「晉、楚不務德而兵爭，與其來者

可也。晉、楚無信，我焉得有信？」乃從楚。夏，楚盟于辰陵，陳、鄭服 也。 11.2 楚左尹子重侵宋，王待諸郔。 11.3 令尹蒍艾獵城沂，使封人慮事，以授司徒。量功命日，分財用，平板榦，

稱畚築，程土物，議遠邇，略基趾，具餱糧，度有司。事三旬而成，不愆 于素。 11.4(4) 晉郤成子求成于眾狄。眾狄疾赤狄之役，遂服于晉。秋，會于欑函，眾狄

服也。

164 Zichong, called Gongzi Yingqi in the Annals, was the younger brother of King Zhuang of Chu. He would become chief minister by 589 Bce (Annals, Cheng 2.9). 165 Yan 郔 seems to have belonged to Chu and was very close to the three domains of Chen, Song, and Zheng (Yang, 2:711). 166 Du Yu identifies Wei Ailie as Wei Ao or Sunshu Ao (ZZ 22.283); Kong Yingda cites (but ultimately rejects) Shiben, which claims that Sunshu Ao and Wei Ailie were brothers (ZZ-Kong 22.283). In various Warring States and Qin-Han texts (including Zhuangzi 21.726; Xunzi 13.290; Han Feizi 21.390; Huainanzi 9.273, 13.436, 18.590–91; Lüshi chunqiu 2.86; Shiji 119.3099–3100; and Han shi waizhuan 2.43, 10.432), Sunshu Ao is lauded as the loyal and upright minister instrumental in expanding Chu power to fulfill King Zhuang’s ambition. Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1821–22) suggests that he served as chief minister from 605 to 591 Bce. “Wei” is a major noble lineage in Chu. However, Shiji (119.3099), as well as several Warring States sources (Xunzi 5.74, Mozi xiangu 3.13, Lüshi chunqiu 24.1593), identifies Sunshu Ao as a commoner. Chen Qiyou opines that Wei Ailie, Wei Ao, and Sunshu Ao refer to three different persons (Lüshi chunqiu 2.92–93). 167 The term fengren 封人, translated here as “surveyor of boundaries,” is rendered as “border warden” when the person involved comes from the domain border, relatively far from the capital (e.g., Yin 1.4, Huan 11.3, Wen 14.12, Zhao 19.2, 21.6). The translation here refers to the definition of the office in Zhouli-Jia 9.139, 12.187—the fengren established the boundaries of the altars of the domain and also the measurement of the city walls. 168 Literally, “took counsel for the distance or proximity.” Du Yu’s gloss, “to even out the labor and the leisure” (ZZ 22.383), is ambiguous: this may refer to the distance laborers would have to travel to the work site or the balance between the weight carried and the distance traveled (Takezoe, 10.52). Lü Zuqian (Zuoshi zhuanshuo, j. 5) thinks this refers to consideration of the shortest distance to the water and soil needed for construction. Liu Wenqi (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 673) suggests that this refers to the width of the city wall.

634

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

After siding with Jin and turning against Chu (Xuan 7.4, 9.4, 9.8), Zheng now provisionally accepts Chu leadership. In the eleventh year, in spring, the Master of Chu attacked Zheng, advancing as far as Li. Gongzi Qujia said, “Jin and Chu do not apply themselves to virtue and are instead embroiled in warfare—we can simply side with whoever comes our way. When Jin and Chu are faithless, how can we act in good faith?” Zheng thus went over to Chu. In summer, Chu swore a covenant at Chenling: this was because Chen and Zheng submitted.

11.1(2)

The Chu deputy of the left, Zichong, invaded Song.164 The Chu king waited for him at Yan.165

11.2

The Chu chief minister, Sunshu Ao (Wei Ailie), fortifies the city Yi with exemplary efficiency.166 There is a similar passage in Zhao 32.3c describing the fortification of Chengzhou under the leadership of the Jin minister Shi Mimou. The chief minister Sunshu Aoa fortified Yi. He had the surveyor of boundaries167 carefully consider the plan, which was given to the director of artisans who then estimated the requisite labor and issued orders on the number of working days, distributed the materials and tools, adjusted the frames and pillars, apportioned the baskets for carrying soil according to the batons for its pounding, calculated the amount of soil and other materials, took counsel about the distances to be traveled,168 surveyed the borders of the foundation, provided for food for the laborers, and determined the relevant offices. The work was done in thirty days, without exceeding what had been originally planned.

11.3

Xi Que, last mentioned as being in charge of Jin policies in Xuan 8.4, cautions against arrogance and peremptoriness in dealing with the Di tribes. While the Red Di tribes attacked Jin (Xuan 6.3, 7.3), the White Di tribes have been an ally (Xuan 8.1). The submission of the White Di may be instrumental for Jin victory over the Red Di four years later (Xuan 15.3). Xi Quea of Jin sought an accord with the various Di tribes. The latter resented the services that the Red Di tribes demanded of them and thus submitted to Jin. In autumn, they met at Cuanhan: this was because the various Di tribes had submitted.

11.4(4)

Lord Xuan

635

是行也，諸大夫欲召狄。郤成子曰：「吾聞之：非德，莫如勤，非 勤，何以求人？能勤，有繼。其從之也。《詩》曰：『文王既勤止。』文王 猶勤，況寡德乎？」 11.5(5–7) 冬，楚子為陳夏氏亂故，伐陳。謂陳人：「無動！將討於少西氏。」遂入

陳，殺夏徵舒，轘諸栗門。因縣陳。陳侯在晉。 申叔時使於齊，反，復命而退。王使讓之，曰：「夏徵舒為不道，弒 其君，寡人以諸侯討而戮之，諸侯、縣公皆慶寡人，女獨不慶寡人，何 故？」 對曰：「猶可辭乎？」 王曰：「可哉！」 曰：「夏徵舒弒其君，其罪大矣；討而戮之，君之義也。抑人亦有 言曰：『牽牛以蹊人之田，而奪之牛。』牽牛以蹊者，信有罪矣；而奪之 牛，罰已重矣。諸侯之從也，曰討有罪也。今縣陳，貪其富也。以討召諸 侯，而以貪歸之，無乃不可乎？」 王曰：「善哉！吾未之聞也。反之，可乎？」 對曰：「吾儕小人所謂『取諸其懷而與之』也。」乃復封陳。鄉取一 人焉以歸，謂之夏州。故書曰「楚子入陳。納公孫寧、儀行父于陳」，書 有禮也。

169 Maoshi 295, “Zi” 賫, 19D.754. 170 Xi Que thus presses home the literal meaning of a conventional polite term, guaren (“one lacking virtue”), used by rulers to refer to themselves. His convincing argument is also a token of Jin weakness at this point. 171 Xia Zhengshu’s ancestor was Shaoxi (cognomen Zixia). 172 This was Lord Ling’s heir apparent Wu, later Lord Cheng of Chen. We are not told why he fled to Jin. In a speech justifying Zheng aggression against Chen, Zichan claims that Zheng facilitated his return and reinstatement in Chen (Xiang 25.10). 173 The region or district was designated Xia to commemorate Chu’s successful military expedition against Xia Zhengshu. 174 That Gongsun Ning and Yi Hangfu should be commended and rewarded for their crimes is jarring for many traditional commentators (e.g., see the comments of Dan Zhu, Lu Chun, Huang Zhongyan, and Hu Anguo in Chunqiu zhuanshuo huizuan 20.590; Ma Su, Zuozhuan shiwei, 150). Du Yu (ZZ 22.383) claims that they redeem themselves by avenging Lord Ling and obtaining Chu’s help to drive out Xia Zhengshu. Sensing the contemporary resonance of this issue (i.e., former Ming officials who supported Qing rule because Qing forces crushed the rebels and avenged the last Ming emperor), Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 4.85) condemns Du Yu’s reasoning as specious. King Zhuang’s action accords with the ideal of “restoring destroyed domains and continuing lineages that had been cut off” (Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.308; Gongyang, Xuan 17 [16.210], Zhao 20 [23.293], Zhao 31 [24.309]; Guliang, Zhuang 15 [5.51]; Guliang-Fan, Xi 1 [7.69], Xi 2 [7.70]; Liji, “Zhongyoung” 中庸, 52.889; Lunyu 20.1; Shiji 130.3297; and Shuoyuan 8.230 with slightly different wording) and is widely praised in later texts (e.g., Shiji 36.1580; Kongzi jiayu 2.10.21).

636

Zuo Tradition

Regarding this trip, the various high officers had wished to summon the Di tribes instead. Xi Quea said, “I have heard that failing virtue, nothing compares to diligence. But failing diligence, how can one seek submission from others? If we can be diligent, success will follow. Let our lord go to them. As it says in the Odes, ‘King Wen was diligent’:169 when even King Wen was diligent, how much more must those lacking in virtue be so?”170 Chu intervenes in the aftermath of Xia Zhengshu’s assassination of Lord Ling of Chen (Xuan 9.6, 10.4). A sagacious minister, Shen Shushi, convinces King Zhuang of Chu to return dominion to Chen. In Huainanzi 18.608–9, he is praised for “heightening the virtue of his lord.” In winter, the Master of Chu, on account of the havoc wrought by the Xia lineage head in Chen, attacked Chen. He said to the leaders of Chen, “Do not be alarmed! I am going to chastise the lineage of Shaoxi.”171 He thus entered Chen, put Xia Zhengshu to death, and had him quartered at Li Gate. With that he turned Chen into a Chu dependency. The future Prince of Chen was in Jin.172 Shen Shushi had been on a mission in Qi. Upon his return, he reported on the discharge of his mission and withdrew. The king sent someone to reprove him, saying, “Xia Zhengshu acted against the proper way and assassinated his ruler. I have led the troops of the princes to chastise and execute him. The princes and heads of our dependencies have all congratulated me. You alone have not congratulated me. Why?” He replied, “May I still state my case?” The king said, “You may indeed!” He said, “Xia Zhengshu assassinated his ruler; his crime was great indeed. To chastise and execute him was my lord’s justice. Yet there is also this saying: ‘He led his ox on a shortcut through the fields of another man, who seized his ox.’ Now he who led his ox on a shortcut through the fields of another man was indeed guilty; but to seize the ox—that punishment was too heavy. That the princes followed you was because you said you were chastising the guilty. Now to turn Chen into a dependency is to covet its riches. To summon the princes in the name of chastisement and then to let it end in covetousness—is this not unacceptable?” The king said, “Well said! I have not heard such arguments. Would it not be acceptable to return dominion to Chen?” Shen replied, “This is what we humble ones call ‘taking it from someone’s embrace and giving it back to him.’” The king thereupon restored dominion to Chen. From each village in Chen one person was taken back to Chu; the place where they were settled was called Xiazhou.173 Hence, the text says, the Master of Chu entered Chen. He installed Gongsun Ning and Yi Hangfu in power in Chen: this was to indicate he had ritual propriety.174

11.5(5–7)

Lord Xuan

637

11.6 厲之役，鄭伯逃歸，自是楚未得志焉。鄭既受盟于辰陵，又徼事于晉。

春秋 12.1 十有二年，春，葬陳靈公。 12.2(1) 楚子圍鄭。 12.3(2) 夏，六月乙卯，晉荀林父帥師及楚子戰于邲，晉師敗績。 12.4 秋，七月。 12.5(6) 冬，十有二月戊寅，楚子滅蕭。 12.6(7) 晉人、宋人、衛人、曹人同盟于清丘。 12.7(8) 宋師伐陳。衛人救陳。

左傳 12.1(2) 十二年，春，楚子圍鄭，旬有七日。鄭人卜行成，不吉；卜臨于大宮，且巷

出車，吉。國人大臨，守陴者皆哭。楚子退師。鄭人修城。進復圍之，三 月，克之。入自皇門，至于逵路。

175 The Li campaign does not appear in the Annals and Zuozhuan. Du Yu (ZZ 22.384) links it to Chu’s attack on Zheng five years earlier (Xuan 6.5), see n. 146. 176 Lord Ling was assassinated twenty-one months earlier (Xuan 9.6); his burial was delayed because of the disorder in Chen. 177 According to Zuozhuan, the Chu army entered (ru 入) the Zheng capital. Yang (2:717) suggests that the word wei 圍 (“laid siege to”) is used because the Chu army retreated after entering. Takezoe (11.1) claims that the protracted siege is emphasized because it accords with ritual order. 178 This is the first example of high officers meeting for a covenant in Zuozhuan. Qing­ qiu 清丘 was in Wei and was located southeast of Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan. 179 According to Du Yu (ZZ 23.388), bringing the chariots on the roads indicates total submission. The people of Zheng thereby acknowledge that they might soon be relocated and could no longer hope to settle in their own abodes. Jia Kui’s explanation is more convincing: the chariots signify the refusal to surrender and the readiness to fight (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 412).

638

Zuo Tradition

Zheng continues to vacillate between Chu and Jin. During the Li campaign, the Liege of Zheng escaped and returned.175 Since then Chu had not been able to fulfill its ambitions regarding Zheng. Having accepted a covenant with Chu at Chenling, Zheng again sought to serve Jin.

11.6

LORD XUAN 12 (597 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, Lord Ling of Chen was buried.176

12.1

The Master of Chu laid seige to Zheng.177

12.2(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, on the yimao day, Xun Linfu of Jin led out troops and did battle with the Master of Chu at Bi. The Jin troops were completely defeated. Autumn, the seventh month. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the wuyin day (8), the Master of Chu extinguished Xiao.

12.3(2)

12.4 12.5(6)

A Jin leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, and a Cao leader swore a covenant together at Qingqiu.178

12.6(7)

Song troops attacked Chen. A Wei leader went to the aid of Chen.

12.7(8)

ZUO

Gongzi Quji’s dire prediction in Xuan 9.8 comes true. Chu overcomes Zheng resistance and enters its capital. Lord Xiang’s eloquent plea convinces King Zhuang of Chu not to annex Zheng. In the twelfth year, in spring, the Master of Chu laid siege to Zheng. Seventeen days passed. The leaders of Zheng divined about seeking peace: the result was inauspicious. They divined about lamenting at the Grand Ancestral Temple and, further, bringing the chariots out on the roads:179 the result was auspicious. The inhabitants of the capital performed their lamentations with great grief, while those guarding the parapets all wailed.180 The Master of Chu withdrew his troops. The leaders of Zheng repaired the city wall. Advancing and again laying siege to the city, Chu troops overcame it after three months. The Chu ruler entered through the great city gate and reached the main thoroughfare.

12.1(2)

180 The guoren, persons of some consequence in the capital and its immediate environs, can lament with proper ritual (lin 臨) at the Grand Ancestral Temple. The guards can only wail (ku 哭) at the parapets. All show their determination to die rather than surrender.

Lord Xuan

639

鄭伯肉袒牽羊以逆，曰：「孤不天，不能事君，使君懷怒以及敝 邑，孤之罪也，敢不唯命是聽？其俘諸江南，以實海濱，亦唯命；其翦以 賜諸侯，使臣妾之，亦唯命。若惠顧前好，徼福於厲、宣、桓、武，不泯其 社稷，使改事君，夷於九縣，君之惠也，孤之願也，非所敢望也。敢布腹 心，君實圖之。」 左右曰：「不可許也，得國無赦。」 王曰：「其君能下人，必能信用其民矣，庸可幾乎？」退三十里而許 之平。潘尪入盟，子良出質。 12.2a(3) 夏，六月，晉師救鄭。荀林父將中軍，先縠佐之；士會將上軍，郤克佐之；

趙朔將下軍，欒書佐之。趙括、趙嬰齊為中軍大夫，鞏朔、韓穿為上軍 大夫，荀首、趙同為下軍大夫。韓厥為司馬。及河，聞鄭既及楚平，桓子 欲還，曰：「無及於鄭而勦民，焉用之？楚歸而動，不後。」

181 In the wake of King Wu’s conquest of Shang, Weizi Qi, the older half brother of the last Shang king, is said to have bared his flesh, bound himself, and led a goat by his left hand to meet the victor (Shiji 38.1610). 182 “South of the Yangzi River” and “shores of the sea” are not specific places and here synonymously refer to distant locations. Chu had moved other small domains it extinguished to locales in Chu; the Zheng ruler professes readiness to submit to the same fate as a gesture of self-abnegation. 183 These were Zheng ancestors. Lord Huan, the first Zheng ruler, was the son of King Li of Zhou, and he was granted a domain by King Xuan. Lord Wu was the son of Lord Huan. 184 “Nine” here merely means “various.” On how Chu turns conquered land into dependencies (xian), see Xuan 11.5, Ai 17.4. 185 We follow Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 23.389) in reading ji 幾 as ji 冀 (“hope”). Sima Qian (Shiji 40.1702) rewrites ji 幾 as jue 絕: “How can Zheng be cut off!” 186 Jin commanders and assistant commanders were last enumerated in the account of the battle at the bend of the Yellow River (Wen 12.6a). A comparison shows changes of persons and positions.

640

Zuo Tradition

Baring his flesh and leading a goat,181 the Liege of Zheng went forward to meet him and said, “I, the lone one, lack Heaven’s favor. That I failed to serve you, my lord, and caused you to descend in anger on our humble settlement is my own offense. How dare I not heed any command you may give? If I were to be taken as a captive to the south of the Yangzi River, there to populate the shores of the sea,182 let it be as you command. If our domain were to be cut up and our lands bestowed on other lords, and if our people were to be made slaves and serving women, let it be as you command. But if you were to kindly look back on our former good relations, seek blessings from King Li and King Xuan, Lord Huan and Lord Wu,183 and not obliterate the altars of our domain, letting us serve you in a new way, as if we were the equal of your nine dependencies184—it would be my lord’s beneficence, and my very wish, but it is not what I dare hope for. I have presumed to lay open my inmost heart, but it is up to you, my lord, to take your measures accordingly.” The king’s aides said, “We cannot allow this. When one has gained possession of a domain, there is no room for leniency.” The king said, “The ruler of Zheng was able to humble himself and must therefore be able to use his people with good faith. How can I hope to gain possession of his domain?”185 He retreated thirty li and agreed to peace with Zheng. Pan Wang entered the capital to swear a covenant, and Gongzi Qujia left for Chu as hostage. The armies of Jin and Chu clash in the battle of Bi. News of the peace agreement between Zheng and Chu prompts the Jin minister Fan Hui to praise the Chu ruler and urge Jin to withdraw. In summer, in the sixth month, Jin troops went to the aid of Zheng. Xun Linfu commanded the central army, and Xian Hu assisted him. Fan Huia commanded the upper army, and Xi Ke assisted him. Zhao Shuo commanded the lower army, and Luan Shu assisted him.186 Zhao Kuo and Zhao Yingqi were high officers of the central army. Shi Zhuangboa and Han Chuan were high officers of the upper army. Xun Shou and Zhao Tong were high officers of the lower army.187 Han Jue was the supervisor of the military. When Jin troops reached the Yellow River, they heard that Zheng had already made peace with Chu. Xun Linfub wished to turn back, saying, “What use would it be to make our people toil when relief is no longer relevant for Zheng? It will not be too late if we wait until Chu turns back and then move.”188

12.2a(3)

187 Fang Bao (Zuozhuan yifa juyao 1.25–26) notes that this is the only major battle in which high officers of the three Jin armies are named, presumably because of their role in the narrative (their disastrous decisions lead to Jin’s defeat). 188 Jin would then move to punish Zheng for its dealings with Chu.

Lord Xuan

641



隨武子曰：

善。會聞用師，觀釁而動。德、刑、政、事、典、禮，不易，不

可敵也，不為是征。楚君討鄭，怒其貳而哀其卑。叛而伐 之，服而舍之，德、刑成矣。伐叛，刑也；柔服，德也，二者 立矣。 昔歲入陳，今茲入鄭，民不罷勞，君無怨讟，政有經 矣。荊尸而舉，商農工賈，不敗其業，而卒乘輯睦，事不 奸矣。 蒍敖為宰，擇楚國之令典；軍行，右轅，左追蓐，前茅 慮無，中權，後勁。百官象物而動，軍政不戒而備，能用 典矣。 12.2b

其君之舉也，內姓選於親，外姓選於舊。舉不失德，賞不 失勞。老有加惠，旅有施舍。君子小人，物有服章。貴有常 尊，賤有等威，禮不逆矣。

189 Virtue (德 de) and punishment (刑 xing) are often mentioned together in Zuozhuan as complementary (noncoercive and forceful) means of facilitating order. For other examples, see Xi 7.3, 25.2, Cheng 16.7, 17.10, and Xiang 28.8. 190 For the term “Chu-style military formation” (jingshi 荊尸), see Zhuang 4.1, n. 16. 191 The text makes a distinction between shang 商 (“traders”) and gu 賈 (“merchants”). Zheng Xuan (Zhouli-Zheng 1.14, 2.29) defines the former as itinerant and the latter as staying in one place. 192 Both Du Yu and Kong Yingda (ZZ 23.390) claim that “left” and “right” refer to infantry units (comprising seventy-two soldiers during the Warring States and ten during the Spring and Autumn period) marching to the left and right of the chariots. 193 We follow Karlgren (gl. 294), who reads mao 茅 as a loan for mao 冒, “to look intently.” Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, cited in Yang, 2:723) reads mao 茅 as a loan for mao 旄, “oxtail” (maojing 旄旌 is a common expression referring to banners and standards decorated with oxtails): “the front troops use standards with oxtails to warn about the unexpected.” Du Yu (ZZ 23.390) suggests that the Chu army might have used rushes (mao) as a way to signal: “the front troops used rushes to warn about the unexpected.” On the importance of rushes in Chu rituals, see Liji 21.749, Guoyu, “Jin yu 2,” 8.466. 194 We follow Karlgren (gl. 296). It is also possible to follow Du Yu (ZZ 23.390) and read quan 權 as “deliberate over plans” or “adapt to exigencies.” 195 Guan 官 can indicate both civil and military officials. The context here, however, seems to refer to officers in the army. 196 Such insignia designate ranks and duties. Somewhat too literally, Kong Yingda (ZZKong 23.390) interprets wu 物 as things and objects on banners that the officers are supposed to imitate (xiang 象).

642

Zuo Tradition

Fan Huic said, Well said. I have heard that in using troops one looks for openings and moves accordingly. When a domain’s virtue, punishments, government, administrative affairs, statutes, and rituals are not deviant, it cannot be overcome; against such a domain we do not launch military expeditions. In chastising Zheng, the Chu ruler was angered by Zheng’s double-dealing and was moved to compassion by Zheng’s self-abnegation. Zheng rebelled, and Chu attacked it; it submitted, and Chu left it. Virtue and punishment are thereby realized. To attack the rebellious is just punishment; to deal gently with the submissive is virtue—these two are thus established.189 Last year Chu entered Chen, and this year Zheng, but the people have not become weary with toil, nor has the ruler been the target of rancor or grumbling. Government has thus followed its proper course. When the Chu-style military formation is prepared190 and the army is called up, traders, farmers, artisans, and merchants191 do not suffer in their occupation, while the infantry and chariot drivers are in harmonious cooperation. Administrative concerns thus do not come into conflict with one another. Sunshu Aob is chief minister and has decided on laws and statutes for Chu. When the army is marching, the troops on the right follow the shafts of the commander’s chariot; the troops on the left go in quest of rushes for the night’s rest;192 the vanguard fixes its gaze so as to be primed for the unexpected;193 the center has solid strength;194 the rear is forceful. The hundred officers195 act according to their insignia on banners and standards.196 Military regimen, without any special orders, is prepared for any contingency. The statutes are thus followed to good purpose. When the ruler of Chu raises men to office, among those of his own clan name he selects from close kin; and among those of other clan names he selects from old families holding hereditary offices. In raising men to office he does not overlook the virtuous; in giving rewards he does not overlook those who toiled. The aged are shown additional kindness; travelers are granted gifts. Noblemen and commoners have regalia with different patterns to distinguish them. The noble have consistent standards of dignity; the lowly have a sense of awe based on gradations. There is thus no violation of ritual propriety.

Lord Xuan

12.2b

643

德立，刑行，政成，事時，典從，禮順，若之何敵之？見 可而進，知難而退，軍之善政也。兼弱攻昧，武之善經也。子 姑整軍而經武乎！猶有弱而昧者，何必楚？ 仲虺有言曰：「取亂侮亡」，兼弱也。〈汋〉曰： 於鑠王師！ 遵養時晦。 耆昧也。〈武〉曰：

無競惟烈。 撫弱耆昧，以務烈所，可也。 12.2c 彘子曰：「不可。晉所以霸，師武、臣力也。今失諸侯，不可謂力；有敵而

不從，不可謂武。由我失霸，不如死。且成師以出，聞敵強而退，非夫 也。命為軍帥，而卒以非夫，唯群子能，我弗為也。」以中軍佐濟。

197 In Ding 1.1, a Xue official claims that Zhonghui was descended from the Xue ancestor and served as minister of the left to Tang, the first Shang king. Zhonghui’s words, with some variations, are also cited in Xiang 14.9 and 30.10. “Zhonghui’s Proclamation” (Zhonghui zhi gao 仲虺之誥, Shangshu 8.110–12), which contains this line, is one of the Ancient Script chapters in the Documents. 198 Zuozhuan has zhuo 汋 (the sound of water splashing), which appears as zhuo 酌 in the received text of Maoshi 293, “Zhuo” 酌, 19D.752. Both graphs may be linked to zhuo 灼 (“burning brightly”). Zhu Xi (Shi ji zhuan, 275) glosses zhuo as shao 勺, which usually means “ladle” but may be used in the hymn title as a musical term designating a type of beat and rhythm. 199 Maoshi 285, “Wu” 武, 19C.737. 200 The word “soothe” (fu 撫) here suggests a subtler expansion of power, closely connected to the earlier notion of “absorbing” (jian 兼) weaker domains.

644

Zuo Tradition

A domain with virtue established, just punishment carried out, good government realized, administrative affairs timely, statutes followed, and ritual propriety observed—how can it be challenged? Seeing what can be achieved and then advancing, and knowing what is difficult and then withdrawing, amount to good governance of the army. Annexing weak domains and attacking benighted ones constitute good management of military affairs. For now, sir, put the army in good order and properly manage military affairs! There are yet weak and benighted domains; why must you target Chu? Zhonghui had this saying: “Take the domain in turmoil; humiliate the failing one.”197 These words are about annexing weak domains. The Zhou hymn “Bright”198 says, Ah, how splendid the king’s army! It takes the lead to seize the dark one. This refers to confronting benighted domains. The Zhou hymn “Martial” says, Peerless is his accomplishment.199 To soothe the weak 200 and confront the benighted, so as to bring about great accomplishment, is the right course.

Jin commanders are divided: Xian Hu repudiates Fan Hui’s reasoning and takes his troops into battle, and Xun Linfu, despite his hesitations, is drawn into the conflict even as his younger brother, Xun Shou, predicts disaster.201 For his insubordination in this battle and subsequent betrayal of Jin, Xian Hu will be put to death the following year (Xuan 13.4). Xian Hua said, “This will not do. The reason Jin became overlord was because of the martial prowess of its troops and the unremitting effort of its subjects. Now to lose the allegiance of the princes cannot be called unremitting effort; to have an enemy and fail to pursue him cannot be called martial prowess. To lose our position as overlord through our own failings is worse than death. Moreover, to organize troops to set forth and then retreat on learning that the enemy is strong is not manly. To receive the charge to be commander of the army and then to end up being unmanly—it may be that the rest of you can do it, but I refuse to do it.” With the troops under his control as assistant commander of the central army, he crossed the Yellow River.

12.2c

201 From this point until the end of the period covered by Zuozhuan, the Xun lineage is divided into the Zhonghang and Zhi lineages. The lineage name “Zhonghang” is derived from Xun Linfu’s position as commander of the central column (zhonghang) in the Jin army (Xi 28.13). In 597 Bce these lineages are headed by Xun Linfu (Zhonghang Huanzi) and Xun Shou (Zhi Zhuangzi), respectively.

Lord Xuan

645

知莊子曰：「此師殆哉！《周易》有之：在師䷆之臨䷒，曰：『師出以 律，否臧，凶。』執事順成為臧，逆為否。眾散為弱，川壅為澤。有律以 如己也，故曰律。否臧，且律竭也。盈而以竭，夭且不整，所以凶也。不行 謂之臨，有帥而不從，臨孰甚焉？此之謂矣。果遇，必敗，彘子尸之，雖 免而歸，必有大咎。」 韓獻子謂桓子曰：「彘子以偏師陷，子罪大矣。子為元帥，師不用 命，誰之罪也？失屬、亡師，為罪已重，不如進也。事之不捷，惡有所分。 與其專罪，六人同之，不猶愈乎？」師遂濟。 12.2d 楚子北師次於郔。沈尹將中軍，子重將左，子反將右，將飲馬於河而

歸。聞晉師既濟，王欲還，嬖人伍參欲戰。令尹孫叔敖弗欲，曰：「昔歲 入陳，今茲入鄭，不無事矣。戰而不捷，參之肉其足食乎？」參曰：「若事 之捷，孫叔為無謀矣。不捷，參之肉將在晉軍，可得食乎？」

202 This is the line statement of the first (broken) line of hexagram 7, “Army” ䷆ (Shi 師). If this first line is unbroken, “Army” becomes hexagram 19, “Overseeing” ䷒ (Lin 臨). As in Xuan 6.6, this is a purely rhetorical use of the Zhou Changes. 203 After explaining the line statement, Xun Shou goes on to expound on the trigrams that make up the hexagrams “Army” and “Overseeing.” The hexagram “Army” is made up of the trigrams “Pure Yin” ☷ (Kun 坤) above and “Sinkhole” ☵ (Kan 坎) below, and the hexagram “Overseeing” is made up of the trigrams “Pure Yin” above and “Joy” ☱ (Dui 兌) below. For “Army” to become “Overseeing,” “Sinkhole” is transformed into “Joy.” The trigram “Sinkhole” is associated with a big group coming together; its change thus signifies dispersal. The trigram “Joy” is associated with a young maiden, hence the idea of weakness. “Sinkhole” and “Joy” are also linked to rivers and marshes, respectively. The single-line change may thus be read as rivers being stopped up, resulting in the creation of marshes. 204 The river is full, but water in the marshes dries up easily. Likewise, the army’s potential is full when it sets out, but it is “used up” when discipline comes to an end. 205 Again, we have the metaphor of water in the marshes—water is stopped up (yao 夭) and cannot pass into the right waterways. Takezoe (11.9) reads yao as “puny” or “weak,” linking it to the image of the “young maiden.” 206 Recall that the hexagram “Overseeing” includes the image of water that is not moving. 207 There is a similar exchange between Chong’er and Hu Yan in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.344–45.

646

Zuo Tradition

Xun Shoua said, “This army is in great danger! As the Zhou Changes has it, at the line whereby the hexagram ‘Army’ ䷆ becomes the hexagram ‘Overseeing’ ䷒ : ‘The army sets forth by discipline. If proper order is contravened, it is inauspicious.’202 To manage affairs and follow the course of fruition is ‘proper order.’ To go against that is ‘contravening.’ The multitude disperses and weakness is created; the rivers are stopped up and become a marsh.203 When there is discipline, the army acts like one’s own body. Thus, it speaks of ‘discipline.’ Contravene the proper order, and discipline comes to an end. What is full is being used up,204 what is blocked up cannot, furthermore, be put in order;205 that is why it is inauspicious. ‘Not proceeding’ is called ‘Overseeing.’206 We have a commander but he is not followed; what can be a more extreme fulfillment of ‘Overseeing’ than that? This is what is meant! If we indeed meet the enemy, we are certain to be defeated. As the one who brought this about, Xian Hua may escape death and come back, but even so he is certain to come to great harm.” Han Juea said to Xun Linfub: “If Xian Hua is lost with his section of the army, your offense is sure to be great. You are the commander in chief. Whose offense is it that the army does not execute your commands? To lose the allegiance of a subordinate domain and to let troops perish would already be a grave offense. You might as well advance. If we do not achieve victory in battle, the blame can be shared. Instead of having you bear the offense alone, would it not be better for six persons to share it?” The troops thus crossed the Yellow River. There is dissension in Chu between Wu Can, who supports war with Jin, and Sunshu Ao, who opposes it. Wu Can repeats the arguments of Jin officers against retreat during the Chengpu campaign (Xi 28.3), one of the many echoes of the earlier battle. The Master of Chu shifted his troops northward and set up camp at Yan. The deputy of Shen commanded the central army; Zichong, the left; and Zifan, the right. They intended to water the horses at the Yellow River and then turn back. When they heard that Jin troops had already crossed the river, the king wanted to return, but his favorite, Wu Can, wanted to engage in battle. The chief minister Sunshu Ao did not want to fight. He said, “Last year we entered Chen, and this year we entered Zheng: it is not as if we have not fought wars. If we fight and do not achieve victory, will eating the flesh of Wu Can suffice to appease our rancor?” Can said, “If we do win the war, then Sunshu Aoc will be the one who lacked foresight in his plans; if we do not win, then my flesh will be with the Jin army. How would it be available for eating?”207

12.2d

Lord Xuan

647

令尹南轅、反旆，伍參言於王曰：「晉之從政者新，未能行令。其 佐先縠剛愎不仁，未肯用命。其三帥者，專行不獲。聽而無上，眾誰適 從？此行也，晉師必敗。且君而逃臣，若社稷何？」王病之，告令尹改乘 轅而北之，次于管以待之。 12.2e 晉師在敖、鄗之間。鄭皇戌使如晉師，曰：「鄭之從楚，社稷之故也，未

有貳心。楚師驟勝而驕，其師老矣，而不設備。子擊之，鄭師為承，楚師 必敗。」彘子曰：「敗楚服鄭，於此在矣。必許之！」 欒武子曰： 楚自克庸以來，其君無日不討國人而訓之于民生之不易、禍

至之無日、戒懼之不可以怠；在軍，無日不討軍實而申儆之 于勝之不可保、紂之百克而卒無後，訓之以若敖、蚡冒篳路 藍縷以啟山林。箴之曰： 民生在勤， 勤則不匱。 不可謂驕。

208 The Jin army is coming from the north. Sunshu Ao refuses to fight and turns his chariot southward. 209 Xun Linfu’s predecessor, Xi Que, was negotiating with the Di tribes only a few months earlier (Xuan 11.4). 210 Du Yu (ZZ 23.393) identifies the three commanders as Xian Hu, Zhao Tong, and Zhao Kuo, who all defy Xun Linfu. If the troops heed them, they will be disobeying the commander in chief, Xun Linfu. The Ming commentator Lu Can has a different reading: since Xun Linfu cannot enforce his commands, it is as if the troops have no one above them even if they wish to heed orders. In another interpretation (Yang, 2:730), the commanders would act on their own but cannot; they would heed orders but have no superior. 211 A Jin officer objected to Jin’s retreat for the same reason during the battle of Chengpu (Xi 28.3e). 212 Cf. Yang, 2:730: “the king set up camp at Guan to await the chief minister.” 213 See Wen 16.4. 214 Song rulers are said to be descendants of Weizi Qi, half brother of Zhòu, the Shang king; Zhòu himself had no direct descendants. 215 The same phrase appears in Zhao 12.11 in Ran Dan’s account of early Chu history. Fenmao is also lauded as an exemplary Chu leader in Wen 16.4b.

648

Zuo Tradition

The chief minister turned the shaft of his chariot south and reversed the direction of his banner.208 Wu Can said to the king, “The person at the helm of government in Jin is new to his responsibilities.209 He cannot yet enforce his commands. His assistant, Xian Hu, is hard, ruthless, and lacks humaneness. He is not yet willing to follow orders. As for the three commanders, they all want to monopolize power but fail to do so. The troops would like to heed orders but lack a superior:210 whom can they follow as leader? On this expedition, the Jin army is sure to suffer defeat. Moreover, if you as ruler run away from mere subjects,211 how could it be justified to the altars of the domain?” Troubled by this, the king notified the chief minister to turn the shaft of his chariot and point it northward. The Chu army set up camp at Guan to wait for the Jin army.212 A Zheng minister’s proposal that Jin should strike Chu provokes further debates among Jin commanders. Luan Shu cites Hu Yan, yet another reminder of the Chengpu campaign. Luan Shu claims rightly that Zheng is hedging its bets. In Shiji 39.1677 and 42.1769, Zheng is said to attack Jin once Chu victory is imminent. Jin troops were between the Ao and Gao Mountains. Huang Xu of Zheng sent someone to the Jin army to say, “That Zheng followed Chu was for the sake of the altars of the domain. It has no intention of double-dealing. Chu troops have become arrogant with repeated victories. They are worn out and have not set up a proper defense. If you strike, Zheng troops will follow suit, and Chu troops are sure to be defeated.” Xian Hua said, “The defeat of Chu and the submission of Zheng lie in this move! We must agree to this.” Luan Shua said,

12.2e

Ever since the time Chu vanquished Yong,213 its ruler has not let a day pass without steeling the inhabitants of the capital and admonishing them on how the people’s weal is not easily achieved, how calamity can come any day, and how fearful vigilance cannot slacken. With the army, he has not let a day pass without steeling his troops and warning them how there is no safe refuge in victory, and how the last Shang king, Zhòu, had a hundred conquests and in the end left no descendants.214 He admonishes them on how the Chu ancestors Ruo’ao and Fen­ mao, riding in rugged wooden carts and clad in tattered hemp,215 opened up hills and forests for cultivation. He exhorts them thus: The people’s weal lies in diligence; With diligence there is no lack. Chu cannot be called arrogant.

Lord Xuan

649

先大夫子犯有言曰：「師直為壯，曲為老。」我則不德， 而徼怨于楚。我曲楚直，不可謂老。其君之戎分為二廣，廣 有一卒，卒偏之兩。右廣初駕，數及日中，左則受之，以至于 昏。內官序當其夜，以待不虞。不可謂無備。 子良，鄭之良也；師叔，楚之崇也。師叔入盟，子良在 楚，楚、鄭親矣。來勸我戰，我克則來，不克遂往，以我卜 也！鄭不可從。 趙括、趙同曰：「率師以來，唯敵是求。克敵、得屬，又何俟？必從彘 子！」知季曰：「原、屏，咎之徒也。」趙莊子曰：「欒伯善哉！實其言，必 長晉國。」 12.2f 楚少宰如晉師，曰：「寡君少遭閔凶，不能文。聞二先君之出入此行也，

將鄭是訓定，豈敢求罪于晉？二三子無淹久！」 隨季對曰：「昔平王命我先君文侯曰：『與鄭夾輔周室，毋廢王 命！』今鄭不率，寡君使群臣問諸鄭，豈敢辱候人？敢拜君命之辱。」

216 See Xi 28.3.e 217 Although the word wen 文 has a broad range of meanings, here it refers primarily to the rhetoric of diplomatic speeches. See also Xi 26.3f, when Zhao Cui is recommended to represent Jin in a diplomatic meeting because he is more “cultured” (wen). 218 Kings Cheng and Mu attacked Zheng (Zhuang 28.3, Wen 9.5). Disavowing any intention of offending Jin, the Chu envoy is in fact claiming that Jin has no right to interfere in Zheng. 219 For Zhou’s reliance on Zheng and Jin, see the Zhou Duke Huan’s speech in Yin 6.7. 220 The term here is houren, officers who wait for, meet, or send off envoys and dignitaries from other domains (Yang, 2:734–35). The office of houren is mentioned in Maoshi 151, “Houren” 侯人, 7C.269–71; Zhouli 6.93; Yili 13.151; Zuozhuan, Xiang 21.5. Fan Hui disclaims any intention of troubling any Chu attending officer (i.e., the Chu junior steward), but he is in fact arguing that Chu has no right to interfere with Jin plans in Zheng.

650

Zuo Tradition

Our former high officer Hu Yana once said, “When troops have justice on their side, they are at the height of their power and morale; when they are in the wrong, they are worn out.”216 Our side lacks virtue, and yet we invite Chu’s rancor. We are in the wrong, and Chu has justice on its side. They cannot be called worn out. Its ruler’s chariots are divided into two detachments. Each detachment has thirty chariots, which are divided into two units. The chariots in the right detachment are harnessed first and mark the passage of time till midday; then the left detachment takes over until evening. Officers of the palace assume duty in shifts during the night so as to be ready for any unexpected occurrence. Chu cannot be said to lack preparation. Gongzi Qujia is one of the finest men in Zheng; Pan Wanga, a highly respected person in Chu. Pan Wanga entered Zheng to swear a covenant, and Gongzi Qujia is in Chu as hostage; Chu and Zheng thus have close ties. Zheng came to encourage us to fight. If our side wins, it would come here to submit; if our side does not win, it will then go over to Chu. It is using us to divine which way it should go. Zheng’s counsel is not to be heeded.

Zhao Kuo and Zhao Tong said, “We have led the troops and came thus far only to seek the enemy. If we can vanquish the enemy and gain possession of a subordinate domain, then what are we waiting for? We must follow Xian Hua!” Xun Shoub said, “Zhao Tonga and Zhao Kuob are on the path to calamity!” Zhao Shuoa said, “Luan Shub was right! If we act upon his words, then Jin will last long.” The rituals of the battlefield are presented: leaders and envoys encode veiled threats in polite diplomatic language, heroes challenge the enemy with spectacular displays of valor, and an officer presents a stag to the enemy, substantiating the connection between hunting and warfare. The Chu junior steward went to the Jin army and said, “Our unworthy ruler met with calamity in his youth and is not capable of fine expression.217 He has heard that two of our former rulers had come and gone through this place, with the intention of admonishing and stabilizing Zheng. How would we dare to give offence to Jin?218 You, sirs, should not tarry here for long!” Fan Huid replied, “In the past, King Ping commanded our former lord, Prince Wen, with these words: ‘With Zheng, you should flank and assist the house of Zhou. Do not abandon the king’s command!’219 Now Zheng does not follow the king’s command, and our lord has sent his subjects to ask Zheng about it. How dare we trouble any attending officer?220 I presume to bow to the condescension of your lord’s command.”

12.2f

Lord Xuan

651

彘子以為諂，使趙括從而更之，曰：「行人失辭。寡君使群臣遷大 國之跡於鄭，曰：『無辟敵！』群臣無所逃命。」 楚子又使求成于晉，晉人許之，盟有日矣。楚許伯御樂伯，攝叔為 右，以致晉師。 許伯曰：「吾聞致師者，御靡旌、摩壘而還。」 樂伯曰：「吾聞致師者，左射以菆，代御執轡，御下，兩馬、掉鞅 而還。」 攝叔曰：「吾聞致師者，右入壘，折馘、執俘而還。」皆行其所聞 而復。 晉人逐之，左右角之。樂伯左射馬，而右射人，角不能進。矢一而 已。麋興於前，射麋，麗龜。晉鮑癸當其後，使攝叔奉麋獻焉，曰：「以 歲之非時，獻禽之未至，敢膳諸從者。」鮑癸止之，曰：「其左善射，其 右有辭，君子也。」既免。 12.2g 晉魏錡求公族未得，而怒，欲敗晉師。請致師，弗許。請使，許之。遂往，

請戰而還。楚潘黨逐之，及熒澤，見六麋，射一麋以顧獻，曰：「子有軍 事，獸人無乃不給於鮮？敢獻於從者。」叔黨命去之。

221 Xu Bo is at the center as chariot driver; Yue Bo is on the left with bow and arrow; She Shu is on the right with dagger-axe and shield. Du Yu (ZZ 23.394) glosses zhishi 致師 as “challenging the enemy with a single chariot” before the real battle. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 23.394) claims that this indicates a determination to fight. 222 The man on the right would have entered the enemy’s entrenchment; the other challengers are thus waiting outside. Aligning the horses and adjusting the martingales show their composure and presence of mind. 223 The explanation for this division of labor is not clear. It may just be a way of saying that he was furiously shooting men and horses on both sides. 224 For the status that accrues to being a member of a ruling lineage, see Xuan 2.4. Although Wei Yi is presented in general in a negative light in this account, he displays the courtesy of “presenting game” to his opponents, just like the Chu officers above.

652

Zuo Tradition

Xian Hua considered the reply too obsequious and sent Zhao Kuo to follow the Chu envoy and change the message: “Our envoy erred in his address. Our unworthy ruler has sent us, his many subjects, to remove the traces of your great domain from Zheng, saying, ‘Do not shun the enemy!’ His many subjects have nowhere to hide from this command.” The Chu ruler also sent someone to seek an accord with Jin. The leaders of Jin agreed to it, and a date was set for the covenant. On the Chu side, Xu Bo was Yue Bo’s chariot driver, with She Shu on the right, and they set forth to challenge Jin troops.221 Xu Bo said, “I have heard that in challenging the enemy, the chariot driver sets the banners streaming and touches the enemy’s ramparts, and then they return.” Yue Bo said, “I have heard that in challenging the enemy, the archer on the left shoots the best arrows and holds the reins for the chariot driver while the latter descends, aligns the horses, adjusts the martingales;222 and then they return.” She Shu said, “I have heard that in challenging the enemy, the man on the right penetrates the ramparts, kills an enemy and cuts off his left ear, and seizes a captive; and then they return.” They all put into practice what they had heard and came back. The men of Jin pursued them, closing on them from right and left. Yue Bo shot the horses on the left and the men on the right, and the pincer formations could not advance.223 Only one arrow remained. A stag leapt in front of them. He shot at the stag, hitting it in the back. Bao Gui of Jin was right behind them. Yue Bo had She Shu present the stag to Bao Gui as an offering: “Because the season is not timely, and the time for offering animals has not arrived, I venture to present this as a feast for your followers.” Bao Gui stopped his troops, saying, “The man on the left is good at archery; the man on the right has the right words. They are both noble men.” They thus escaped. Two disaffected Jin officers, Wei Yi and Zhao Zhan, undertake negotiations but instead provoke conflict. The Jin army is in disarray. Fan Hui and Zhao Yingqi forestall a total debacle, but a surprise attack from Chu inflicts heavy losses. Wei Yi of Jin sought to be appointed a high officer of the ruling lineages and failed.224 Enraged, he wished to bring about Jin’s defeat. He asked to challenge the enemy, but this was not allowed. He asked to be an envoy, and this was allowed. He thus went, asked Chu to engage in battle, and returned. Pan Dang of Chu pursued him. Upon reaching Xing Marsh, Wei Yi saw six stags. He shot one of them, looked back, and offered it to Pan Dang, saying: “As you are involved in military affairs, perhaps your hunters have not supplied enough fresh game? I venture to present this to your followers.” Pan Danga gave order to leave off pursuit.

12.2g

Lord Xuan

653

趙旃求卿未得，且怒於失楚之致師者，請挑戰，弗許。請召盟，許 之，與魏錡皆命而往。 郤獻子曰：「二憾往矣，弗備，必敗。」 彘子曰：「鄭人勸戰，弗敢從也；楚人求成，弗能好也。師無成命， 多備何為？」 士季曰：「備之善。若二子怒楚，楚人乘我，喪師無日矣，不如備 之。楚之無惡，除備而盟，何損於好？若以惡來，有備，不敗。且雖諸侯 相見，軍衛不徹，警也。」彘子不可。 士季使鞏朔、韓穿帥七覆于敖前，故上軍不敗。趙嬰齊使其徒先 具舟于河，故敗而先濟。 潘黨既逐魏錡，趙旃夜至於楚軍，席於軍門之外，使其徒入之。 楚子為乘廣三十乘，分為左右。右廣雞鳴而駕，日中而說；左則受之，日 入而說。許偃御右廣，養由基為右；彭名御左廣，屈蕩為右。乙卯，王乘 左廣以逐趙旃。趙旃棄車而走林，屈蕩搏之，得其甲裳。 晉人懼二子之怒楚師也，使軘車逆之。潘黨望其塵，使騁而告曰： 「晉師至矣！」楚人亦懼王之入晉軍也，遂出陳。孫叔曰：「進之！寧我 薄人，無人薄我。《詩》云：

225 The term tiaozhan 挑戰 here has been traditionally glossed as somewhat synonymous with zhishi (see n. 221). Whereas zhishi involves only one chariot and an individual feat of bravado, tiaozhan seems to entail a full-scale military operation and a serious provocation that would make battle inevitable. 226 Commentators focus on what this garment might have been made of (armor-grade leather) but say nothing about the significance of this detail. Perhaps for Qu Dang to rip off Zhao Zhan’s lower garment is to humiliate him and score a symbolic victory. 227 Fu Qian claims that these are chariots usually stationed at a military camp to guard it (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 420). 228 There is thus a sense of fortuitousness as fear and miscalculations drive both sides to battle. That the Chu army can assume battle formation immediately upon receiving Pan Dang’s word gives credence to Fan Hui’s earlier assessment of Chu: “[their] military regimen, without any special orders, is prepared for any contingency.” 229 This is the same grammar as Cao Cao’s famous declaration in chapter 4 of Three Kingdoms: “I would rather betray all-under-heaven than let anyone under heaven betray me.” Although Sunshu Ao opposed Wu Can’s call for battle with Jin, he now supports the war effort and argues for swift and resolute troop movements. The unity among Chu leaders stands in sharp contrast to the lack of common purpose and strategy among Jin commanders.

654

Zuo Tradition

Zhao Zhan sought to be appointed minister but failed. Moreover, he was angry at Jin’s failure to capture the Chu challengers. He asked to provoke battle,225 but this was not allowed. He asked to summon the parties for a covenant, and this was allowed. Both he and Wei Yi were charged with this task and set forth on their mission. Xi Kea said, “The two disgruntled ones have gone. If we do not make preparations, we will surely be defeated.” Xian Hua said, “The men of Zheng encouraged us to fight, and we do not dare to follow their counsel. The men of Chu sought a peace agreement, and we are not able to reach amity. The army has no definite commands. What is the use of all these preparations?” Fan Huib said, “It is better to be prepared. If those two arouse Chu to anger, and Chu forces pounce on us, then our troops will perish in no time. It is better to make preparations. If Chu has no ill intention, then we can dismantle the preparations and swear a covenant with them. How would that damage good relations? If Chu comes with ill intentions, then because of our preparations we will not be defeated. Moreover, even when the princes gather for a meeting, it is circumspect for the guard troops not to withdraw.” Xian Hua refused. Fan Huib sent Shi Zhuangboa and Han Chuan to set up ambushes in seven places in front of Mount Ao. That was why the upper army was not defeated. Zhao Yingqi had his men prepare boats at the Yellow River in advance. That was why, after suffering defeat, they were the first to cross the Yellow River. After Pan Dang had already driven Wei Yi away, Zhao Zhan reached the Chu army at night, spread his mat outside the gate of the camp, and sent his men to enter. The Chu ruler had detachments of thirty chariots each distributed to the left and right. The chariots of the right detachment were harnessed at cockcrow and unyoked at midday, while the chariots of the left then took over and were unyoked at sunset. Xu Yan drove the commanding chariot in the right detachment, and Yang Youji was the spearman on his right. Peng Ming drove the commanding chariot in the left detachment, and Qu Dang was the spearman on his right. On the yimao day, the king rode in the left detachment to drive Zhao Zhan away. Zhao Zhan abandoned his chariot and ran into the woods. Qu Dang, locked in single combat with Zhao Zhan, obtained his leather lower garment.226 The men of Jin, fearful that Wei Yi and Zhao Zhan would provoke the Chu army, had sent guard chariots227 to meet them. Pan Dang saw the dust raised by these chariots and sent word on the fastest steed: “The Jin army has arrived!” The men of Chu also feared that their king would plunge headlong into Jin ranks, and thus, they came out in battle formation.228 Sunshu Aoc said, “Advance! I would rather we close in on them than let them close in on us.229 As it says in the Odes,

Lord Xuan

655

元戎十乘， 以先啟行。 先人也。軍志曰：『先人有奪人之心』，薄之也。」遂疾進師，車馳、卒 奔，乘晉軍。桓子不知所為，鼓於軍中曰：「先濟者有賞！」中軍、下軍爭 舟，舟中之指可掬也。 12.2h 晉師右移，上軍未動。工尹齊將右拒卒以逐下軍。楚子使唐狡與蔡鳩居

告唐惠侯曰：「不穀不德而貪，以遇大敵，不穀之罪也。然楚不克，君之 羞也。敢藉君靈，以濟楚師。」使潘黨率游闕四十乘，從唐侯以為左拒， 以從上軍。 駒伯曰：「待諸乎？」隨季曰：「楚師方壯，若萃於我，吾師必盡， 不如收而去之。分謗、生民，不亦可乎？」殿其卒而退，不敗。 王見右廣，將從之乘。屈蕩戶之，曰：「君以此始，亦必以終。」自 是楚之乘廣先左。 晉人或以廣隊不能進，楚人惎之脫扃。少進，馬還，又惎之拔旆 投衡，乃出。顧曰：「吾不如大國之數奔也。」

230 Maoshi 177, “Liuyue” 六月, 10B.357–60. The war chariots are “prime” (yuan 元) because of their size, power, and positioning in the front. They might have been the vanguard launching surprise attacks. These lines are also cited in Zhao 13.6; Zhao Cui recites “Liuyue” in Xi 23.6. 231 This saying is also cited in Wen 7.4 and Zhao 21.6. 232 Zhao Yingqi, as officer of the central army, had prepared boats by the Yellow River in advance. The struggle here suggests that only the section of the central army under the command of Zhao Yingqi is able to board the boats, while the rest of the central army has to struggle for the boats allocated to the lower army. 233 Soldiers already in the boats, fearing pursuit by the Chu army and also afraid that the boats would sink if boarded by too many, try to ward off the soldiers struggling to climb on board by chopping off their fingers. The logic of this is spelled out more clearly in Shiji 39.1677. In Gongyang, Xuan 12 (16.204–5), Han shi waizhuan 6.257–58, and Xinxu 4.124, the spectacle of this carnage is said to move King Zhuang of Chu to withdraw his troops. 234 The Yellow River is to the right of the Jin army. Upon the collapse of the central and lower armies, the remnants cross the Yellow River. The upper army is able to hold its position because of the ambushes mentioned above. 235 On battle formations, see Huan 5.3, Cheng 7.5. 236 By withdrawing, the upper army is sharing the blame with the central and lower armies. To refrain from battle is to save the lives of the people.

656

Zuo Tradition

Prime war chariots, ten of them: Charge ahead and break through the enemy’s ranks.230

This means to anticipate the enemy. The Maxims for the Military says, ‘To preempt the enemy is to rob him of his will.’231 This means closing in on the enemy.” He thus swiftly advanced his troops. His chariots flew and his soldiers raced, attacking Jin troops by surprise. At a loss as to what to do, Xun Linfub ordered that drums be beaten in the army and cried, “Those who cross the river first will be rewarded!” The central army and lower army fought to board the boats.232 The fingers in the boats were so numerous that they could be scooped up.233 King Zhuang pursues the Jin army with the support of Tang, a small domain (in present-day Hubei) in the Chu sphere of influence. The upper army of Jin retreats. The narrative continues with anecdotes from the battlefield. The Jin army moved to the right. The upper army had not yet changed position.234 The Chu deputy for artisans, Qi, led the troops on the right front of the square battle formation235 to pursue the lower army of Jin. The Master of Chu sent Tang Jiao and Cai Jiuju to notify Prince Hui of Tang: “I, the unworthy one, for lack of virtue and excess of ambition, have encountered a formidable enemy—I am indeed to blame. But if Chu does not prevail, it will also bring shame on you, my lord. I venture to borrow your numinous power to bring about deliverance for the Chu army.” He sent Pan Dang, leading forty chariots from the reserve, to follow the Prince of Tang to form the left front of the square battle formation, which then pursued the upper army of Jin. Xi Yia said, “Should we confront them?” Fan Huid said, “The Chu army is right now at the height of its power and morale. If they concentrate their resources to turn on us, our army will be completely destroyed. It would be better for us to gather our troops and depart. Is it not acceptable to share the blame and let the people live?”236 He guarded the rear of the withdrawing troops, which suffered no loss. The Chu king, seeing the right detachment, intended to ride on its commanding chariot to pursue the enemy. Qu Dang stopped him, saying, “You began with the left detachment, my lord, and you must end with it.” It was from that point on that the left detachment took precedence in Chu. There was a man in the Jin army whose chariot sank in a pit and could not go on. A Chu man advised him to try removing the horizontal beam holding weapons. After advancing a little, his horses sank back. The Chu man then advised him to pull out the flags and pennants and to throw aside the wooden collars for the horses. With that the chariot came out, and the Jin man turned around and said, “We are not so experienced in fleeing as the soldiers of your great domain!”

12.2h

Lord Xuan

657

趙旃以其良馬二濟其兄與叔父，以他馬反。遇敵不能去，棄車而 走林。逢大夫與其二子乘，謂其二子無顧。顧曰：「趙傁在後。」怒之，使 下，指木曰：「尸女於是。」授趙旃綏，以免。明日，以表尸之，皆重獲在 木下。 楚熊負羈囚知罃，知莊子以其族反之，厨武子御，下軍之士多從 之。每射，抽矢，菆，納諸厨子之房。厨子怒曰：「非子之求，而蒲之愛， 董澤之蒲，可勝既乎？」知季曰：「不以人子，吾子其可得乎？吾不可 以苟射故也。」射連尹襄老，獲之，遂載其尸；射公子穀臣，囚之。以二 者還。 12.2i 及昏，楚師軍於邲。晉之餘師不能軍，宵濟，亦終夜有聲。

丙辰，楚重至於邲，遂次于衡雍。潘黨曰：「君盍築武軍而收晉尸 以為京觀？臣聞克敵必示子孫，以無忘武功。」 楚子曰：

237 This has been construed as evidence of the use of cavalry during the Spring and Autumn period. However, the horses here were probably used for drawing chariots. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 29.670–71) believes that there might have been isolated instances of men riding horses already in this period, but his evidence is not conclusive. On King Wuling of Zhao’s (r. 326–298) reforms instituting “barbarian clothing and mounted archery” (hufu qishe 胡服騎射), see Zhanguo ce, “Zhao ce 2,” 19.653–75. 238 The distinctions of rank decree that Feng should yield a place in his chariot to Zhao Zhan, a minister, even if it means giving up his sons’ lives. For a comparable incident, see Xiang 25.5, where a Chen officer, Jia Huo, dismounts with his wife and mother to give his chariot to the Chen ruler and his heir apparent. Whereas the Chen ruler demurs for a moment, Zhao Zhan here shows no such compunction. Feng’s prediction of doom for his sons echoes a similar lamentation by the Qin minister Jian Shu on the eve of the battle of Yao (Xi 32.2). 239 Karlgren (gl. 556) links lian 連 in lianyin 連尹 (which we translate as “court deputy”) to lian 輦, carriages for court officials pulled by men. Yang (2:743) cannot fully endorse this supposition. For the position of court deputy, see also Xiang 15.3. 240 Nine years later, Chu sends Zhi Ying back in return for Guchen and Xiang the Elder’s corpse (Cheng 3.4). On Xun Shou and the Zhi lineage, see n. 201. 241 Bi 邲 was located on the south bank of the Yellow River about forty kilometers northwest of Zhengzhou 鄭州, Henan. 242 The Annals has “in the sixth month, on the yimao day.” There is no yimao or bingchen day in the sixth month. Yimao precedes bingchen, and they correspond to the thirteenth and fourteenth day of the seventh month. 243 Hengyong was about twenty kilometers due east of Bi and is first mentioned in Xi 28.3.

658

Zuo Tradition

Zhao Zhan gave two of his good horses to his older brother and uncle to help them escape. He himself made his way back with other horses.237 Encountering the enemy and unable to escape, he abandoned the chariot and ran into the woods. The high officer Feng was riding with his two sons and told them not to look back. They looked back and said, “Old man Zhao is behind us.” In his anger with them he made them dismount. He pointed to a tree and said, “I will collect your corpses here.” He gave the reins to Zhao Zhan, who thereby escaped.238 The next day, he went to collect the corpses at the place he had signaled and found both his sons’ bodies lying atop each other under the tree. Xiong Fuji of Chu took Zhi Ying prisoner. Zhi Ying’s father, Xun Shoua, led his lineage troops to turn back and go after him. Wei Yia drove for him, and many officers from the lower army followed him. With every shot, Xun Shou pulled out an arrow, and whenever it seemed especially fine, he put it in Wei Yib’s quiver. Wei Yib cried in anger, “You do not seek to recover your son but instead begrudge these willowy arrow shafts. Can the willows of Dong Marsh be used up?” Xun Shoub said, “If not with another’s son, how can I get my own son back? That is why I cannot shoot arrows carelessly.” He shot and killed the Chu court deputy,239 Xiang the Elder, and loaded the corpse in his chariot; he also shot Gongzi Guchen and took him prisoner. Taking these two with him, he returned.240 King Zhuang refuses an ostentatious celebration of Chu might and victory in a famous speech defining martial greatness. Whereas the idealization of King Zhuang is often unequivocal in texts like Gongyang, Chunqiu fanlu, Xinxu, Shuoyuan, and Han shi waizhuan, it is combined with strategic calculations in Zuozhuan. As night fell, Chu troops were stationed at Bi.241 Remnants of Jin troops were unable to bivouac at all. They crossed the river in the dark and made noises all through the night. On the bingchen day, Chu’s wagons, heavy with supplies, arrived at Bi.242 Chu then set up camp at Hengyong.243 Pan Dang said, “My lord, why do you not build a military monument by collecting Jin corpses in a grand mound?244 I have heard that the conquest of our enemies must be displayed for our descendants, so that they will not forget our martial achievement.” The Master of Chu said,

12.2i

244 Yang Bojun (2:744) suggests that the military monument (wujun 武軍) was to be made up of a giant grave mound (jingguan 京觀) for Jin corpses, probably with some laudatory inscription on top or close by. Such grave mounds are mentioned in Xiang 23.2b and Hanshu 84.3439. This kind of grave mound for fallen enemy soldiers is also called jing 京; see Lüshi chunqiu 15.917; Huainanzi 6.213.

Lord Xuan

659

非爾所知也。夫文，止戈為武。武王克商，作頌曰： 載戢干戈， 載櫜弓矢。 我求懿德， 肆于時夏， 允王保之。 又作〈武〉，其卒章曰：

耆定爾功。 其三曰：

鋪時繹思， 我徂維求定。 其六曰：

綏萬邦， 屢豐年。 夫武，禁暴、戢兵、保大、定功、安民、和眾、豐財者也，故使

子孫無忘其章。

245 The word for “writing” or “graph” here is wen 文. In later (Qin-Han and after) usage, zi 字 was more commonly used to designate “graph.” Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 21.497) observes that up to the Spring and Autumn period, there is reference only to wen and not zi in discussion of words. Xu Shen in the preface to Shuowen jiezi makes a distinction between wen as more primary pictographs (yilei xiangxing 依類象形) and zi as compound graphs that include phonetic and semantic elements (xing sheng xiangyi 形聲相益). The graph wu 武 (“martial”) appears as in oracle bones and is supposed to represent a man walking (or marching) with a weapon. The “rationalization” of the word here shows how the idea of “the war to end wars” and “the violence to stop violence” had gained ground by the time of Zuozhuan’s compilation and is adopted in Shuowen jiezi (12B.6a). For other examples of this mode of etymological reasoning, see Xuan 15.3 and Zhao 1.12f. 246 Maoshi 273, “Shimai” 時邁, 19B.718–20. This hymn has also been attributed to the Zhou Duke (Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.1). Zheng Xuan reads the line si yu shi xia 肆于 時夏 as “To be displayed through this great music” (Maoshi-Zheng, 19B.720).

660

Zuo Tradition

This is not something you understand. In writing, “stop” and “dagger-axe” form “martial.”245 When King Wu had conquered Shang, he composed a hymn, which said, Store away then the shields and halberds, And return bows and arrows to their cases. I seek beautiful virtue, To be displayed in this great land. May the kings preserve it.246 He also composed the hymn “Martial,” whose last stanza says, And so brought about the great achievement.247 Its third stanza says, Spread King Wen’s mantle and extend it. That I set forth is solely to seek peace and stability.248 Its sixth stanza says, Bring peace to the myriad domains. Multiply the years of good harvest.249 Martial greatness, then, prohibits violence, stores away weapons, preserves what is great, confirms achievements, brings repose to the people, harmonizes the multitudes, and expands wealth: that was why King Wu did not let descendants forget his glory.

247 Maoshi 285, “Wu” 武, 19C.737–38. This is the last line in the received text, which has only one stanza. 248 These lines are not in “Wu” but in Maoshi 295, “Zi” 賫, 19D.754–55, with fu 敷 for pu 鋪, in the received text. 249 These lines are not in “Wu” but in Maoshi 294, “Huan” 桓, 19D.753–54, in the received text. The “Wu” known to the author of this passage thus comprises various odes in the received text of Maoshi.

Lord Xuan

661

今我使二國暴骨，暴矣；觀兵以威諸侯，兵不戢矣；暴 而不戢，安能保大？猶有晉在，焉得定功？所違民欲猶多， 民何安焉？無德而強爭諸侯，何以和眾？利人之幾，而安人 之亂，以為己榮，何以豐財？武有七德，我無一焉，何以示 子孫？其為先君宮，告成事而已，武非吾功也。古者明王伐 不敬，取其鯨鯢而封之，以為大戮，於是乎有京觀以懲淫 慝。今罪無所，而民皆盡忠以死君命，又可以為京觀乎？ 祀于河，作先君宮，告成事而還。 12.3 是役也，鄭石制實入楚師，將以分鄭，而立公子魚臣。辛未，鄭殺僕叔

及子服。君子曰：「史佚所謂『毋怙亂』者，謂是類也。《詩》曰： 亂離瘼矣， 爰其適歸。 歸於怙亂者也夫！」 12.4 鄭伯、許男如楚。

250 Zheng will be divided between Shi Zhi and Chu. 251 The same quotation appears in Xi 15.4. In Ai 17.5b, Zhao Yang quotes Shuxiang’s saying: “Those who take advantage of disorder to extinguish a domain have no descendants.” Fang Bao (Zuozhuan yifa juyao, 1.41) regards the phrase huluan 怙亂 (“take advantage of unrest”) as the central idea or key point (shuniu 樞紐) of the battle of Bi: Chu victory is premised on disorder and disunity among Jin leaders. 252 Maoshi 204, “Siyue” 四月, 13A.441–44. 253 The word gui 歸 (“return home”) in the quotation from Maoshi refers to people who have nowhere to go in the midst of disorder and destruction. The second gui is associated with the phrase guizu 歸罪 (“cast blame”).

662

Zuo Tradition

Now I have caused two domains to lay bare the bones of their men—that was violence! I reviewed my troops to intimidate the princes—that meant weapons were not stored away. When one is violent and does not store away weapons, how can one preserve greatness? As long as Jin still exists, how can I confirm my achievements? When I have gone against the people’s desires in many ways, how can the people find repose? Lacking virtue and striving by force for the princes’ allegiance, how can I create accord for the multitudes? If I profit from others’ perils, find repose in others’ disorder, and regard this as my own glory, how can I expand wealth? Martial greatness involves seven virtues, and I do not have even one of them. What can I display for my descendants? We should build a temple for our former kings, report the completion of our mission, and be done with it. Martial greatness is not what I have achieved. In ancient times, when enlightened kings attacked the disrespectful, they took the greatest culprits among them and had them killed and sealed off in a mound as the most extreme punishment. Thus it was that the grand mound was built to warn against excesses and iniquities. Now Jin was nowhere at fault, and the people of Jin all fulfilled their loyalty and died carrying out their lord’s command: how can the grand mound be built?

The Chu king offered sacrifices at the Yellow River, built a temple for the former kings, reported the completion of the mission, and returned to Chu. Zheng leaders punish those who collaborated with Chu. In this campaign, Shi Zhi of Zheng was the one who brought Chu troops into Zheng. He was going to divide up Zheng250 and establish Gongzi Yuchen as ruler. On the xinwei day (29) of the seventh month, Zheng put to death Gongzi Yuchena and Shi Zhia. The noble man said, “What the scribe Yi means by ‘Do not take advantage of unrest,’251 refers to this kind of person. As it says in the Odes,

12.3

Chaos and separation are distressing indeed! Whereto can we return home?252

The blame should be brought home253 to those who take advantage of unrest!” The Liege of Zheng and the Head of Xǔ went to Chu.

12.4

Lord Xuan

663

12.5 秋，晉師歸，桓子請死，晉侯欲許之。士貞子諫曰：「不可。城濮之役，晉

師三日穀，文公猶有憂色。左右曰：『有喜而憂，如有憂而喜乎？』公曰： 『得臣猶在，憂未歇也。困獸猶鬬，況國相乎？』及楚殺子玉，公喜而後 可知也。曰：『莫余毒也已。』是晉再克而楚再敗也。楚是以再世不競。 今天或者大警晉也，而又殺林父以重楚勝，其無乃久不競乎？林父之 事君也，進思盡忠，退思補過，社稷之衛也，若之何殺之？夫其敗也，如 日月之食焉，何損於明？」晉侯使復其位。 12.6(5) 冬，楚子伐蕭，宋華椒以蔡人救蕭。蕭人囚熊相宜僚及公子丙。王曰：

「勿殺，吾退。」蕭人殺之。王怒，遂圍蕭。蕭潰。 申公巫臣曰：「師人多寒。」王巡三軍，拊而勉之，三軍之士皆如 挾纊。遂傅於蕭。

254 The Jin army was eating grain left behind by the Chu troops, who had fled after their defeat; see Xi 28.3h. 255 To feel joy when one should have fear is obviously dangerous heedlessness. To be fearful when the occasion calls for joy would seem less pernicious, and the noble man is said to be “careworn his whole life” (zhongshen zhi you 終身之憂) in Mencius 4B.28 and Liji 6.112, in part because he “bears the burden of the whole world” (you yi tianxia 憂以天下) (Mencius 1B.4). The Song statesman and writer Fan Zhongyan (989–1052) famously declares that he aspires “to feel dread before all-under-heaven feel dread, and to feel joy only after all-under-heaven feel joy” (“Yueyang lou li” 岳 陽樓記). In Zuozhuan, however, incommensurability of occasion and emotion is always dangerous. Besides this passage, see also Zhuang 20.1, Zhao 1.1, Zhao 15.7, and Zhao 25.1. 256 The same idiom appears in Ding 4.3. See also Xunzi 31.671 and Huainanzi 11.371: “A desperate bird will peck, a desperate beast will leap, a desperate man will deceive.” In Sunzi, one “must not press a desperate enemy” (7.142), and “the spot of likely death” (sidi 死地) spurs the will to fight (8.156, 9.197–98). On Lord Wen’s reaction to Cheng Dechen’s death, see Xi 28.4. 257 These two lines also appear in Xiaojing 8.17.52. Jin 進 (“advancing”) and tui 退 (“withdrawing”) refer to the participation (or lack thereof) in politics and public affairs. Here the two words may be associated with “advancing with the army” and “withdrawing in defeat” (Karlgren, gl. 326). Later usages tend to link jintui 進退 to holding office (zaichao 在朝) and not holding office (zaiye 在野). 258 Since the fall of Xiao is mentioned again below, this sentence may be the result of textual corruption. Or it may, as Yang (2.749) argues, belong to a preliminary summary narration of the fall.

664

Zuo Tradition

The Jin minister Shi Wozhuo argues that Xun Linfu, a leader in the Jin army since 632 Bce (Xi 28.13), should not be put to death. (Unlike their Chu counterparts, Jin commanders are often absolved after defeat in a battle.) In autumn, the Jin army returned. Xun Linfub begged to be put to death. The Prince of Jin wanted to allow it. Shi Wozhuoa remonstrated with him: “This will not do. In the Chengpu campaign, even after the Jin army had been eating Chu grain for three days,254 Lord Wen still had a look of dread. His attendants asked him, ‘To feel dread when one should have joy—isn’t that the same as feeling joy when one should have dread?’255 The lord said, ‘Since Cheng Dechena is still there, my dread cannot yet abate. Even a beast will fight when pressed256—how much more the chief minister of a domain?’ Only when Chu put Cheng Dechena to death was the lord’s joy apparent. He said, ‘He can no longer poison my peace of mind.’ That was when Jin again prevailed and Chu was again defeated. That was why Chu was weak for two generations. Now perhaps Heaven is giving a great warning to Jin. If we then go on to kill Xun Linfud to double Chu’s victory, would it not make us weak for a long time? In his service to the ruler, Xun Linfud advances and dwells on how to fulfill his duty, withdraws and dwells on how to make up for his mistakes.257 He is one who guards the altars of the domain. How can he be put to death? In this case, his defeat is just like the eclipse of the sun or the moon, so how can it diminish his brightness?” The Prince of Jin allowed him to resume his position.

12.5

Chu attacked Xiao, and officers from Chu and Xiao communicate in riddles. For another example of encoded exchange, see Ai 13.4. In winter, the Master of Chu attacked Xiao. Hua Jiao of Song, using the men of Cai, went to the aid of Xiao. The leaders of Xiao took Xiong­ xiang Yiliao and Gongzi Bing prisoner. The king said, “Do not kill them. I will retreat.” The leaders of Xiao killed them. Enraged, the king laid siege to Xiao. Xiao then collapsed.258 Qu Wuchena, Lord of Shen, said, “Many among the troops are cold.” The king went on a circuit of inspection among the three armies, consoling and encouraging the soldiers. The officers of the three armies all felt as if they were clothed in garments padded with silk. They then pressed close to Xiao.

12.6(5)

Lord Xuan

665

還無社與司馬卯言，號申叔展。叔展曰：「有麥麴乎？」曰：「無。」 「有山鞠窮乎？」曰：「無。」「河魚腹疾奈何？」曰：「目於眢井而拯之。」 「若為茅絰，哭井則己。」明日，蕭潰。申叔視其井，則茅絰存焉，號而 出之。 12.7(6) 晉原縠、宋華椒、衛孔達、曹人同盟于清丘，曰：「恤病，討貳。」於是卿

不書，不實其言也。 12.8(7) 宋為盟故，伐陳。衛人救之，孔達曰：「先君有約言焉。若大國討，我則

死之。」

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年，春，齊師伐莒。 13.2(2) 夏，楚子伐宋。 13.3 秋，螽。 13.4(4) 冬，晉殺其大夫先縠。

259 According to Du Yu (ZZ 23.399), Xuan Wushe was an officer in Xiao. Mao and Shen Shuzhan were Chu officers. Xuan and Shen were presumably friends despite the hostilities between Xiao and Chu. 260 Xuan and Shen have to speak in riddles because Chu and Xiao are at war. The meanings of the wheat for brewing and the hill grass are not clear, and commentators offer many different interpretations. Du Yu (ZZ 23.399), following Jia Kui, suggested that since both items are supposed to ward off dampness, Shen may be hinting that Xuan should try to hide where it is damp—either lying low in the mud or in some pit. Xuan’s answers indicate that he did not get the point. “Cramps from river fish” refers to sickness caused by excessive dampness, and at this point Xuan understands and tells Shen where he will hide. 261 Yao Nai reads ji 己 as yi 已: “When I wail at the well, it [the hiding] will be over” (Yang, 2:750).

666

Zuo Tradition

Xuan Wushe asked the supervisor of the military, Mao, to call out for Shen Shuzhan.259 Shuzhan said, “Do you have fermented wheat for brewing?” Xuan Wushe replied, “No.” “Do you have medicinal hill grass?” “No.” “What is to be done when you get cramps from river fish?” “Look out for a dried-up well and save me there.”260 “If you make a hempen cord, I will know which well. The person wailing at the well will be me.”261 The next day, Xiao collapsed. Shen Shuzhan looked at the wells and saw a hempen cord by one of them. He wailed and brought Xuan Wushe out. Song, but not Wei, acts to fulfill the covenant of Qingqiu (Xuan 12.7, 12.8, 13.2). Xian Hub of Jin, Hua Jiao of Song, Kong Da of Wei, and a leader of Cao swore a covenant together at Qingqiu with these words: “Relieve distress; chastise double-dealing.” For this meeting, the names of the ministers were not written down because these words were not put into effect.

12.7(6)

Song attacked Chen because of the covenant. A leader of Wei went to the aid of Chen.262 Kong Da said, “The former lords had their agreement.263 If the great domain264 chastises us, I will willingly die for it.”265

12.8(7)

LORD XUAN 13 (596 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, Qi troops attacked Ju.

13.1(1)

In summer, the Master of Chu attacked Song.

13.2(2)

In autumn, there were locusts.

13.3

In winter, Jin put to death its high officer Xian Hu.

13.4(4)

262 Chen submitted to Chu. Song thus attacked Chen to “punish double-dealing.” Wei, instead of assisting Song, came to Chen’s rescue, thus breaking the Qingqiu covenant. 263 Lord Cheng of Wei and Lord Gong of Chen were allies; see Wen 1.5. 264 That is, Jin. 265 Kong Da played a role in the deterioration of Wei-Jin relations thirty years earlier (Wen 1.5). He will die to placate Jin (Xuan 13.5, 14.1).

Lord Xuan

667

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年，春，齊師伐莒，莒恃晉而不事齊故也。 13.2(2) 夏，楚子伐宋，以其救蕭也。君子曰：「清丘之盟，唯宋可以免焉。」 13.3 秋，赤狄伐晉，及清，先縠召之也。 13.4(4) 冬，晉人討邲之敗與清之師，歸罪於先縠而殺之，盡滅其族。君子曰：

「『惡之來也，己則取之』，其先縠之謂乎！」 13.5 清丘之盟，晉以衛之救陳也，討焉。使人弗去，曰：「罪無所歸，將加而

師。」孔達曰：「苟利社稷，請以我說，罪我之由。我則為政，而亢大國之 討，將以誰任？我則死之。」

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年，春，衛殺其大夫孔達。

266 See Xuan 12.6. 267 Jin did not come to Song’s rescue, thus betraying the promise to “relieve distress.”

668

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the thirteenth year, in spring, Qi troops attacked Ju: this was because Ju, presuming Jin’s support, had not been serving Qi.

13.1(1)

In summer, the Master of Chu attacked Song: this was because the latter had gone to the aid of Xiao.266 The noble man said, “With regard to the covenant of Qingqiu, Song alone may escape blame.”267

13.2(2)

In league with the disaffected Xian Hu, who was responsible for Jin’s defeat at Bi (Xuan 12.2), the Red Di resume aggression against Jin (see Xuan 6.3, 7.3). According to Shiji 39.1677, Xian Hu fled to the Di after the battle of Bi and plotted with the Di to attack Jin. In autumn, the Red Di attacked Jin and reached Qing:268 this was because Xian Hu had summoned them.269

13.3

In winter, the leaders of Jin chastised those responsible for the defeat at Bi and the military confrontation at Qing. They put the blame on Xian Hu, had him put to death, and completely extinguished his lineage. The noble man said, “‘Evil came to him because he himself brought it on.’ Would this not describe Xian Hu?”

13.4(4)

The Wei minister Kong Da dies defending long-standing Chen-Wei ties (Wen 1.5, Xuan 12.8). Jin, betraying the covenant of Qingqiu by failing to come to the aid of Song, nevertheless punishes Wei for violating the same covenant. Acting by the covenant of Qingqiu, Jin chastised Wei because it had gone to the aid of Chen. The Jin envoy refused to leave Wei, saying, “If the offense cannot be held to anyone’s account, we will unleash our troops upon you.” Kong Da said, “So long as the altars of the domain stand to gain by it, I request that I be used to placate them. I was the source of the offense. It was I who was in charge of policies. When it comes to being chastised by the great domain, who else should be made to bear the responsibility? It is I who should die for it.”

13.5

LORD XUAN 14 (595 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, Wei put to death its high officer Kong Da.

14.1(1)

268 Qing 清 is probably to be identified with the Qingyuan 清原 mentioned in Xi 31.4. 269 According to Du Yu (ZZ 24.404), Xian Hu had summoned the Di to prepare for an insurrection.

Lord Xuan

669

14.2 夏，五月壬申，曹伯壽卒。 14.3(2) 晉侯伐鄭。 14.4(3) 秋，九月，楚子圍宋。 14.5 葬曹文公。 14.6(4) 冬，公孫歸父會齊侯于穀。

左傳 14.1(1) 十四年，春，孔達縊而死，衛人以說于晉而免。遂告于諸侯曰：「寡君有

不令之臣達，構我敝邑于大國，既伏其罪矣。敢告。」衛人以為成勞，復 室其子，使復其位。 14.2(3) 夏，晉侯伐鄭，為邲故也。告於諸侯，蒐焉而還。中行桓子之謀也，曰：「示

之以整，使謀而來。」鄭人懼，使子張代子良于楚。鄭伯如楚，謀晉故 也。鄭以子良為有禮，故召之。

670

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fifth month, on the renshen day (11), Shou, the Liege of Cao, died.

14.2

The Prince of Jin attacked Zheng.

14.3(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, the Master of Chu laid siege to Song.

14.4(3)

Lord Wen of Cao was buried.

14.5

In winter, Gongsun Guifu met with the Prince of Qi at Gu.

14.6(4)

ZUO

The following entry is a continuation of Xuan 13.5. After putting Kong Da to death to appease Jin, the Wei leaders nonetheless preserve his line. In the fourteenth year, in spring, Kong Da hanged himself. The leaders of Wei used this to placate Jin and thus escaped further recriminations. They then notified the princes: “Our unworthy ruler had a disgraceful subject, Kong Daa, who entangled our humble settlement in a conflict with the great domain. He has already suffered for his offense. We presume to notify you.”270 Because they considered Kong Da indefatigable in his earlier exertions,271 the Wei leaders restored his son by marrying a daughter of the Wei house to him and had him assume his father’s position.

14.1(1)

Intimidated by Jin, Zheng leaders seek Chu’s support and bring Gongzi Quji—praised for yielding rulership to Lord Xiang (Xuan 4.2) and sent to Chu as hostage (Xuan 12.1)—back to Zheng. In summer, the Prince of Jin attacked Zheng: this was on account of Bi.272 He notified the princes, reviewed his fighting force at Zheng, then turned back. This was by the counsel of Xun Linfua, who said, “Show them our orderliness, then let them hold counsel and come to us.” Fearful, the leaders of Zheng sent Gongsun Heigonga to replace Gongzi Qujia in Chu. The Liege of Zheng went to Chu to take counsel about defense against Jin attacks. It was because Zheng regarded Gongzi Qujia as a man of ritual propriety that they summoned him back.

14.2(3)

270 For other examples of such interdomain notifications, see Xi 24.5. 271 According to the inscription on Kong Kui’s cauldron, Kong Da followed Lord Cheng of Wei in his exile to Chu (Liji-Kong 49.840); for those episodes in Lord Cheng’s rule, see Xi 28.3 and 28.8 (where Kong Da is not mentioned). For other examples of a nobleman accepting death to ensure his progeny’s position, see Shen Zhou below, Gongzi Ya in Zhuang 32.4, and Yue Qili in Ding 6.6. 272 Zheng switched allegiance to Chu following the Jin defeat at Bi.

Lord Xuan

671

14.3(4) 楚子使申舟聘于齊，曰：「無假道于宋。」亦使公子馮聘于晉，不假道于

鄭。申舟以孟諸之役惡宋，曰：「鄭昭、宋聾，晉使不害，我則必死。」王 曰：「殺女，我伐之。」見犀而行。及宋，宋人止之。華元曰：「過我而不 假道，鄙我也。鄙我，亡也。殺其使者，必伐我。伐我，亦亡也。亡一也。」 乃殺之。楚子聞之，投袂而起。屨及於窒皇，劍及於寢門之外，車及於 蒲胥之市。秋，九月，楚子圍宋。 14.4(6) 冬，公孫歸父會齊侯于穀，見晏桓子，與之言魯，樂。桓子告高宣子曰：

「子家其亡乎！懷於魯矣。懷必貪，貪必謀人。謀人，人亦謀己。一國謀 之，何以不亡？」

672

Zuo Tradition

King Zhuang provokes Song to kill a Chu envoy, Shen Zhou, so that Chu will have an excuse to invade Song. The Chu king’s outrage seems both spontaneous and calculated. The subjugation of Song is a crucial step in Chu’s project to expand its influence eastward. The Master of Chu sent Shen Zhou on a formal visit to Qi and said, “Do not seek right of way as you pass through Song.” He also sent Gongzi Ping on a formal visit to Jin and did not have him seek right of way from Zheng to pass through their domain.273 Shen Zhou, hated in Song because of the incident at Mengzhu,274 said, “Zheng is clear-eyed, Song deaf. The envoy going to Jin will come to no harm, but I am sure to die.” The king said, “If they kill you, I will attack them.” Shen Zhou had the king receive his son, Xi, before he left.275 When he reached Song, the leaders of Song detained him. Hua Yuan said, “To pass through our territory without seeking right of way is to treat us as the borderlands of Chu. To be treated as the borderlands is to perish. If we kill Chu’s envoy, it will certainly attack us. If they attack us, we will also perish. Either way we perish just the same.” He thereupon had Shen Zhou killed. When the Master of Chu heard the news, he shook his sleeves and rose. By the time his shoes were brought to him, he had reached the courtyard of his chamber. By the time he received his sword, he was outside the gates of his palace. By the time his chariot was ready, he had reached the Puxu market. In autumn, in the ninth month, the Master of Chu laid siege to Song.

14.3(4)

A Qi minister predicts exile for the Lu high officer Gongsun Guifu, son of Dongmen Xiangzhong. Guifu will be driven out of Lu four years hence (Xuan 18.5). In winter, Gongsun Guifu met with the Prince of Qi at Gu. He saw Yan Ruoa276 and spoke to him about Lu with pleasure. Yan Ruo told Gao Gua: “Gongsun Guifua will surely be banished! He is enamored of his privileges in Lu. Being thus enamored, he will certainly be covetous; being covetous, he will certainly scheme against others. If he schemes against others, others will also scheme against him. With the whole domain scheming against him, how can he not flee the domain?”

14.4(6)

273 The purpose of the mission to Jin was probably to delay its reaction to Chu’s aggression against Song. Zheng was at this time a Chu ally. 274 See Wen 10.5. 275 Shen Zhou wants to secure his son’s position and to make sure that the king keeps his promise. Shen Xi will remind King Zhuang of his broken promise when he retreats from Song the following year (Xuan 15.2). 276 Yan Ruo was the father of Yan Ying (Master Yan), a wise Qi minister who is featured prominently in the Xiang and Zhao reigns.

Lord Xuan

673

14.5 孟獻子言於公曰：「臣聞小國之免於大國也，聘而獻物，於是有庭實旅

百；朝而獻功，於是有容貌采章，嘉淑而有加貨，謀其不免也。誅而薦 賄，則無及也。今楚在宋，君其圖之！」公說。

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年，春，公孫歸父會楚子于宋。 15.2(2) 夏，五月，宋人及楚人平。 15.3(3) 六月癸卯，晉師滅赤狄潞氏，以潞子嬰兒歸。 15.4(5) 秦人伐晉。 15.5(4) 王札子殺召伯、毛伯。 15.6 秋，螽。 15.7 仲孫蔑會齊高固于無婁。 15.8(8) 初稅畝。 15.9(9) 冬，蝝生。 15.10 饑。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年，春，公孫歸父會楚子于宋。

277 For the expression ting shi lü bai 庭實旅百, see Zhuang 22.1. 278 Meng Xianzi seems to be referring to things such as silks, jewelry, feathers, fur, and leather that can be used for clothing or insignia on banners.

674

Zuo Tradition

A Lu minister, Meng Xianzi, urges Lord Xuan of Lu to offer gifts to Chu in order to improve relations. Chu’s expanding influence is evident. Meng Xianzi said to our lord, “I have heard this is how a small domain avoids offending a great domain: it brings various offerings on formal visits—that is why in the king’s courtyard, gifts are displayed by the hundreds; 277 it submits accounts of meritorious service while visiting court—that is why they bring objects that add glory to the person,278 plus fine things and additional presents. These are designed to allow small domains to avoid offense. If rich offerings are sent only upon recriminations, it will be too late. Now Chu is in Song. You, my lord, should plan what is to be done.” Our lord was pleased.

14.5

LORD XUAN 15 (594 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, Gongsun Guifu met with the Master of Chu at Song.

15.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, a Song leader and a Chu leader made peace.

15.2(2)

In the sixth month, on the guimao day (18), Jin troops extinguished the Lù lineage of the Red Di and took the Master of Lù, Ying’er, home with them.

15.3(3)

A Qin leader attacked Jin.

15.4(5)

Wang Zhazi (Wangzi Jie) put to death the Shao and Mao Lieges.

15.5(4)

In autumn, there were locusts.

15.6

Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with Gao Gu of Qi at Wulou.

15.7

A tithe was first levied on acreage.

15.8(8)

In winter, the larvae of locusts hatched.

15.9(9)

There was a famine.

15.10

ZUO

Lord Xuan of Lu follows Meng Xianzi’s advice (Xuan 14.5). Fearful that Chu aggression against Song may extend to Lu, Lu placates Chu in advance (for earlier examples, see Annals, Xi 21.7, 27.6). In the fifteenth year, in spring, Gongsun Guifu met with the Master of Chu at Song.

15.1(1)

Lord Xuan

675

15.2(2) 宋人使樂嬰齊告急于晉，晉侯欲救之。伯宗曰：「不可。古人有言曰：

『雖鞭之長，不及馬腹。』天方授楚，未可與爭。雖晉之強，能違天乎？ 諺曰：『高下在心。』川澤納汙，山藪藏疾，瑾瑜匿瑕，國君含垢，天之 道也。君其待之！」乃止。 使解揚如宋，使無降楚，曰：「晉師悉起，將至矣。」鄭人囚而獻諸 楚。楚子厚賂之，使反其言。不許。三而許之。登諸樓車，使呼宋而告 之。遂致其君命。楚子將殺之，使與之言曰：「爾既許不穀而反之，何 故？非我無信，女則棄之。速即爾刑！」

279 In Gongyang, Xuan 15 (16.206), Zifan and Hua Yuan both acknowledge their respective privations in an arranged meeting, and Zifan convinces the Chu king that he was right to divulge Chu difficulties and upholds the importance of good faith. The wording in the Annals is said to indicate approbation. In Shiji 38.1629, after Hua Yuan’s visit, Zifan reports Song’s desperation to the Chu king, who approves of Hua Yuan’s good faith and concedes that Chu also cannot afford to continue the siege much longer. Versions of this story in Lüshi chunqiu 20.1391 and Han shi waizhuan 2.37 emphasize the exemplary good faith of both Zifan and Hua Yuan. 280 That is, the mind decides how high and how low oneself and others stand. 281 Laozi 78: “He who takes on himself the shame of the domain is called the master of the altars of the domain.”

676

Zuo Tradition

A Chu siege of Song unfolds in a story of deceit and betrayals. A Jin minister, Bo Zong, eloquently urges nonintervention, which means Jin will abandon its ally. With great courage and rhetorical skill, Xie Yang fulfills his charge of delivering a false promise to Song by deceiving the Chu king. King Zhuang breaks his pledge to Shen Zhou (Xuan 14.3) after the Song high officer Hua Yuan’s desperate peace mission. It is ironic that dramatic reversals based on deception should culminate in the oath “we shall not deceive you, and you shall not defraud us.” Accounts of this episode in other early texts take away some of the drama and unpredictability and add a greater emphasis on good faith and moral exemplarity.279 The leaders of Song sent Yue Yingqi to notify Jin of its crisis. The Prince of Jin wished to go to the aid of Song. Bo Zong said, “This will not do. The ancients had this saying, ‘Even if a whip is long, it does not reach the horse’s belly.’ Heaven is just now giving power to Chu, and we cannot yet contend with it. Although Jin is strong, can it go against Heaven? As the proverb says, ‘High and low are all in the mind.’280 Rivers and marshes take in filth; mountains and swamps hide causes of maladies; fine jades conceal flaws; the ruler of a domain bears shame281—such is the Way of Heaven. You, my lord, should wait!” The Jin ruler thus desisted. Jin sent Xie Yang282 as envoy to Song to convince the latter not to surrender to Chu. He said, “Jin troops have already set out and are about to arrive.” The leaders of Zheng took him prisoner and offered him to Chu. The Master of Chu bribed him handsomely to retract his words.283 He refused. After three attempts to persuade him, he agreed. They mounted him on a towered chariot284 and had him call out to the Song forces and make his announcement; he then did as his lord had commanded.285 The Master of Chu was about to put him to death and sent someone to him with these words: “You had already made a promise to me, and yet you turned against it. What is the reason for this? It is not that I lacked good faith; you are the one who abandoned it. Make haste to meet your punishment.”

15.2(2)

282 Xie Yang is also mentioned in Wen 8.1 and Xuan 1.8. Sima Qian (Shiji 42.1769) is probably using another source when he describes Xie Yang as a “strongman” from Huo. Shuoyuan (12.388–89) presents him as an envoy of exemplary loyalty. The account in Zuozhuan makes it clear that in keeping good faith with his lord, Xie Yang is lying to the people of Song. 283 He is to proclaim that Song should surrender to Chu because Jin is not coming to its rescue. 284 Like the “nest chariot” (chaoche 巢車) mentioned in Cheng 16.5, this was probably a tall chariot that allowed a better view of the enemy’s troops. 285 That is, he agreed to the demands of his Chu captors but then persisted in announcing that Jin troops will arrive to relieve Song, although no such succor is actually coming.

Lord Xuan

677

對曰：「臣聞之：君能制命為義，臣能承命為信，信載義而行之為 利。謀不失利，以衛社稷，民之主也。義無二信，信無二命。君之賂臣， 不知命也。受命以出，有死無霣，又可賂乎？臣之許君，以成命也。死而 成命，臣之祿也。寡君有信臣，下臣獲考死，又何求？」楚子舍之以歸。 夏，五月，楚師將去宋，申犀稽首於王之馬前曰：「毋畏知死而不 敢廢王命，王棄言焉。」王不能答。申叔時僕，曰：「築室，反耕者，宋必 聽命。」從之。 宋人懼，使華元夜入楚師，登子反之牀，起之，曰：「寡君使元以 病告，曰：『敝邑易子而食，析骸以爨。雖然，城下之盟，有以國斃，不能 從也。去我三十里，唯命是聽。』」子反懼，與之盟，而告王。退三十里， 宋及楚平。華元為質。盟曰：「我無爾詐，爾無我虞。」 15.3(3) 潞子嬰兒之夫人，晉景公之姊也。酆舒為政而殺之，又傷潞子之目。晉侯

將伐之。諸大夫皆曰：「不可。酆舒有三儁才，不如待後之人。」

286 “Master of the people” (min zhi zhu 民之主) here refers to high officers and ministers. The same term is used to refer to Zhao Dun in Xuan 2.3 and to Han Hu of Zheng in Zhao 5.5. 287 Throughout his speech Xie Yang emphasizes his duty as a Jin subject, but in his selfaddress as “subject,” he may also be implying his lesser duty as the Chu ruler’s temporary subject or external object (waichen 外臣). 288 The siege of Song had by then lasted for nine months. The failure to vanquish Song was a major setback, and the Chu army did not venture northward after this battle. 289 See Xuan 14.3. On the contexts for ignoring the taboo of calling one’s father by name, see Cheng, n. 120. 290 The Chu army thereby demonstrates its intention to stay and prolong the siege indefinitely. 291 “A covenant made beneath the city wall,” also mentioned in Huan 12.3, Wen 15.7, and Ai 8.2, is a cause of great shame (ZZ-Kong 7.124), presumably because the terms would be dictated and humiliating. 292 Mao Qiling (Chunqiu Maoshi zhuan, j. 21) suggests that Zifan fears assassination and that this style of co-opting agreement presages Warring States practice. 293 The idiom er yu wo zha 爾虞我詐 (“you deceive me, and I defraud you”) is derived from this episode. 294 Such statements are usually followed by an explanation, but here further specification is strangely lacking.

678

Zuo Tradition

He replied, “I have heard that a ruler who can establish commands is dutiful, a subject who can receive commands has good faith, and when one makes good faith a vehicle for duty and puts it in motion, there is benefit. He who makes plans without losing the benefit and in this way defends the altars of the domain is the master of the people.286 Dutifulness does not allow two objects of good faith; good faith does not allow two commands. That you, my lord, bribed me, a subject, is because you do not understand the meaning of command. Having received the command to go on a mission, I would sooner die than let the command fail; how then can I be bribed? That I, a subject, made a promise to you, my lord, was in order to fulfill my command. To die fulfilling a command is my good fortune. Our unworthy ruler has a subject of good faith; I, a lowly subject, will get to die a worthy death. What more can we ask for?”287 The Master of Chu released him and let him return to Jin. In summer, in the fifth month, Chu troops were about to leave Song.288 Shen Xi knelt and knocked his forehead on the ground in front of the king’s horses and said, “Shen Zhoud knew how to die without daring to betray the king’s command,289 but the king has forsaken his word.” The king could not answer. Shen Shushi, driving for the king, said, “If we build abodes and send the plowmen home,290 Song will surely obey our command.” The king followed his counsel. The leaders of Song were fearful, and sent Hua Yuan to go into the midst of the Chu army at night. He climbed onto Zifan’s bed and roused him, saying, “Our unworthy ruler sent me to tell of our suffering in these words: ‘In our humble settlement people are exchanging their children and eating them, and they are splitting up human skeletons to kindle their fires. For all that, we cannot comply with a covenant made beneath the city wall, even if we are to perish with our domain.291 Retreat from us for a distance of thirty li, and then we will abide by none but your command.’” Fearful, Zifan made a covenant with him and told the king.292 After Chu retreated thirty li, Song and Chu made peace. Hua Yuan became a hostage in Chu. The covenant said, “We shall not deceive you, and you shall not defraud us.”293 Jin destroys the Lù lineage from the Red Di, fulfilling Xun Linfu’s earlier prediction (Xuan 6.3). The wife of Ying’er, the Master of Lù, was the elder sister of Lord Jing of Jin. Feng Shu, who was in charge of policies there, killed her and also wounded the Master of Lù in the eye. The Prince of Jin intended to attack Feng Shu. The various high officers all said, “This will not do. Feng Shu has three extraordinary talents.294 It is better to wait for those who will come after him.”

15.3(3)

Lord Xuan

679

伯宗曰：「必伐之。狄有五罪，儁才雖多，何補焉？不祀，一也。耆 酒，二也。棄仲章而奪黎氏地，三也。虐我伯姬，四也。傷其君目，五也。 怙其儁才而不以茂德，茲益罪也。後之人或者將敬奉德義以事神人，而 申固其命，若之何待之？不討有罪，曰『將待後』，後有辭而討焉，毋乃 不可乎？夫恃才與眾，亡之道也。商紂由之，故滅。天反時為災，地反物 為妖，民反德為亂，亂則妖災生。故文，反正為乏。盡在狄矣。」 晉侯從之。六月癸卯，晉荀林父敗赤狄于曲梁，辛亥，滅潞。酆舒 奔衛，衛人歸諸晉，晉人殺之。 15.4(5) 王孫蘇與召氏、毛氏爭政，使王子捷殺召戴公及毛伯衛，卒立召襄。 15.5(4) 秋，七月，秦桓公伐晉，次于輔氏。壬午，晉侯治兵于稷，以略狄土，立

黎侯而還。及雒，魏顆敗秦師于輔氏，獲杜回，秦之力人也。

295 Du Yu (ZZ 24.408) identified Zhongzhang as a wise man in the Lù lineage. He was dismissed or exiled for counseling against the seizure of Li territories. Li might have been the place mentioned in Shangshu 10.144. 296 In other words, deviations from correctness and propriety result in lack and deprivation. In seal script, the graph for “correct” (zheng 正) appears as , and that for “lack” (fa 乏) as . The two graphs seem to be mirror images, hence Bo Zong’s assertion. Xu Shen adopts the explanation for fa in Shuowen jiezi 2B.1a. 297 Bo Zong’s enumeration of Feng Shu’s offenses echoes Xun Linfu’s recommendation that Jin should strike the Red Di only when the latter “fills out the measure of its crime” (Xuan 6.3). 298 Quliang 曲梁 was located north of present-day Lucheng County 潞城縣, Shanxi. 299 Fushi 輔氏 was in present-day Shaanxi right at the big bend of the Yellow River. 300 Ji 稷 was located in Jin south of present-day Jishan County 稷山縣, Shanxi.

680

Zuo Tradition

Bo Zong said, “We must attack them. That Di has five offenses. Even if he has many extraordinary talents, how would it make up for his offenses? First, he does not offer sacrifices to his ancestors. Second, he is addicted to wine. Third, he rejected Zhongzhang and seized the lands that had belonged to the Li lineage.295 Fourth, he slaughtered Bo Ji, our late lord’s eldest daughter. Fifth, he wounded his ruler in the eye. His reliance on extraordinary talents rather than abundant virtue only adds to his offenses. Those who come after him may honor and uphold virtues and duties to serve spirits and men and thereby extend and consolidate the destiny of that domain. Why wait for them? Not to chastise the guilty, saying, ‘We will wait for those who come after him,’ and then to chastise those who come after him who may yet make a good case with reasonable words—is that not inadmissible? Now, to rely on talents and multitudes is the way to perish. King Zhòu of Shang followed this path and was therefore destroyed. When Heaven reverses the seasons, there are calamities; when earth reverses the nature of things, there are demons; when the people reverse their virtues, there is disorder. With disorder, demons and calamities arise. That is why in writing, the reverse of ‘correct’ is ‘lack.’296 All these failings are found in the Di.”297 The lord of Jin heeded him. In the sixth month, on the guimao day (18), Xun Linfu of Jin defeated the Red Di at Quliang and extinguished Lù.298 Feng Shu fled to Wei. The men of Wei turned him over to Jin, and the leaders of Jin put him to death. Power struggles erupt among the nobles of the Zhou court. Wangsun Su fought with the heads of the Shao and Mao lineages over control of policies. He sent Wangzi Jie to kill Shao Duke Dai and Mao Liege Wei. In the end Shao Duke Xiang was established as head of the Shao lineage.

15.4(5)

In the aftermath of Jin’s victory over the Red Di, Jin reinstated the Prince of Li, whose land had been seized by Feng Shu. Jin also defeats Qin, and the Jin commander’s earlier humane decision is held up as explanation for his victory. In autumn, in the seventh month, Lord Huan of Qin attacked Jin and set up camp at Fushi.299 On the renwu day (27), the Prince of Jin drilled his troops at Ji and thereby seized Di territories.300 He established the Prince of Li as ruler before he returned. When the Jin army reached Luo, Wei Ke defeated the Qin army at Fushi and captured Du Hui, a Qin strongman.

15.5(4)

Lord Xuan

681

初，魏武子有嬖妾，無子。武子疾，命顆曰：「必嫁是。」疾病，則 曰：「必以為殉！」及卒，顆嫁之，曰：「疾病則亂，吾從其治也。」及輔氏 之役，顆見老人結草以亢杜回。杜回躓而顛，故獲之。夜夢之曰：「余， 而所嫁婦人之父也。爾用先人之治命，余是以報。」 15.6 晉侯賞桓子狄臣千室，亦賞士伯以瓜衍之縣，曰：「吾獲狄土，子之功

也。微子，吾喪伯氏矣。」羊舌職說是賞也，曰：「周書所謂『庸庸祗祗』 者，謂此物也夫。士伯庸中行伯，君信之，亦庸士伯，此之謂明德矣。文 王所以造周，不是過也。故《詩》曰：『陳錫哉周』，能施也。率是道也， 其何不濟？」 15.7 晉侯使趙同獻狄俘于周，不敬。劉康公曰：「不及十年，原叔必有大咎。

天奪之魄矣。」 15.8(8) 初稅畝，非禮也。穀出不過藉，以豐財也。

301 Other examples of the living sacrificed as grave companions or attendants for the dead include Wen 6.3, Cheng 2.4, Cheng 10.4, Zhao 13.2, and Ding 3.1. 302 “To tie knots of grass” (jiecao 結草) becomes a common idiom for repaying a favor (even after death). 303 Yang (2:764) suggests that the gift included the land that the thousand households of slaves worked. Alternately, Di chen qian shi 狄臣千室 can mean “the thousand households that belonged to a Di official.” 304 Guayan 瓜衍 was located in Jin just north of present-day Xiaoyi County 孝義縣, Shanxi. 305 See Xuan 12.5. 306 See “Kang gao,” Shangshu 14.201. 307 Following Karlgren (gl. 341) and Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 695–96), we read “things” (wu 物) as “category” (lei 類). 308 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.534: “Again and again gifts were bestowed on Zhou.” We have 載 instead of 哉 in the received text of Maoshi. Here the line acquires a different meaning: it describes the beneficial effects of judicious gifts from the lord to his ministers. The line is quoted with similar import in Zhao 10.2 and Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.13. 309 The graph po 魄 is sometimes translated as “material soul,” as distinguished from the “spiritual soul” (hun 魂). See also Zhao 25.1: “The pure part of the heart is known as the soul. When their souls are lost to them, how can they last long?” 310 According to Du Yu (ZZ 24.410), the lord’s lands (gongtian 公田) represent onetenth of acreage under cultivation, but there is no evidence of this in Zuozhuan. Commentators differ on the exact nature of the changes in land tenure referred to here, but most agree that this implies an increase in taxation. Gu Donggao suggests that the increased revenue goes to the powerful lineages instead of the Lu ruler; see “Chunqiu tianfu junlü biao” 春秋田賦軍旅表, in Chunqiu dashi biao 2:1423–33. Cf. Cheng 1.2, Zhao 4.6, Ai 11.7.

682

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, Wei Ke’s father, Wei Choua, had a favored concubine who bore no son. When Wei Choub was ill, he commanded Ke: “You have to marry her off.” But when his illness became critical, he said, “You have to let her follow me in death!”301 Upon his death, Ke married her off, saying, “Critical illness leads to confusion of mind. I am following the charge given in his right mind.” When it came to the Fushi campaign, he saw an old man tying knots of grass to block Du Hui’s way. Du Hui stumbled and fell, and that was why Wei Ke captured him. At night he dreamed of the old man, who said, “I am the father of the woman you married off. You fulfilled the charge your late father made when he was in his right mind. With this I have repaid you.”302 The following entry is a paean to the policy of justly rewarding ministers, which is described as the foundation of the Zhou polity. Xun Linfu makes up for disgrace at Bi by victory over the Red Di, and his erstwhile defender Shi Wozhuo gets to share his good fortune. The Prince of Jin awarded Xun Linfub a thousand households of Di slaves.303 He also awarded Shi Wozhuob the dependency of Guayan,304 saying, “That I obtained Di territories was your accomplishment. If not for you, I would have lost Xun Linfue.”305 In explaining these awards Yangshe Zhi said, “As the Zhou Documents has it, ‘Employ the employable, honor the honorable.’306 Does this not refer to actions of this kind!307 Shi Wozhuob considered Xun Linfuf fit for service. The ruler trusted him and also considered Shi Wozhuob fit for service. This is what is meant by bright virtue. That with which King Wen established Zhou was nothing more than this. That is why it says in the Odes, ‘By bestowing gifts he founded the Zhou.’308 This is about the capacity to give. If one follows this way, how can there not be success?”

15.6

The prediction of doom for Zhao Tong, culpable in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2), will be fulfilled eleven years later (Cheng 8.6). The Prince of Jin sent Zhao Tong to present Di captives at the Zhou court, where he was disrespectful. Liu Duke Kang said, “In less than ten years, Zhao Tongb will certainly meet with great calamity. Heaven has snatched his spirit309 away from him.”

15.7

Changes are made in land tenure and taxation in Lu. A tithe was first levied on acreage: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety. The grains levied should not exceed what is produced on the lord’s lands.310 The tithe was a way to increase wealth.

15.8(8)

Lord Xuan

683

15.9(9) 冬，蝝生，饑。幸之也。

春秋 16.1(1) 十有六年，春，王正月，晉人滅赤狄甲氏及留吁。 16.2(2) 夏，成周宣榭火。 16.3(3) 秋，郯伯姬來歸。 16.4 冬，大有年。

左傳 16.1(1) 十六年，春，晉士會帥師滅赤狄甲氏及留吁、鐸辰。三月，獻狄俘。晉侯

請于王，戊申，以黻冕命士會將中軍，且為大傅。於是晉國之盜逃奔于 秦。羊舌職曰：「吾聞之， 禹稱善人， 不善人遠。 此之謂也夫。《詩》曰： 戰戰兢兢， 如臨深淵， 如履薄冰。

311 We follow Yang (2:766), who adopts Yu Chang’s reading of xing 幸, “fortunate, thankful,” as a mistake for nie 㚔, “warning.” Karlgren (gl. 343) reads sheng 生 as a mistake for wei 未: “In winter, there were larvae of locusts. That there was no famine yet is something to be thankful for.” It is also possible that the phrase “considered it fortunate” pertains only to “in winter, the larvae of locusts hatched” and not to the word “famine”: larvae hatching in winter had no chance to survive and cause harm. In Gongyang, Xi 3 (10.125), the larvae are said to be the calamity responding to the “new tithe levied on acreage,” and Lu leaders had no choice but to accept this “punishment.” 312 The xie 榭 is a court on a terrace used for archery practice or other military exercises. Gongyang, Xuan 16 (16.209), claims that the court is in the temple of King Xuan, hence the name. However, King Xuan’s temple should not be in the Zhou capital. For the Zhou capital Chengzhou, see Yin 3.3. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong, 24.410) cites Fu Qian, who glosses xuan 宣 as xuanyang weiwu 宣揚威武, “to manifest martial authority.”

684

Zuo Tradition

In winter, the larvae of locusts hatched. There was famine. This was a warning [against misgovernment].311

15.9(9)

LORD XUAN 16 (593 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, a Jin leader extinguished the Jia and Liuxu lineages of the Red Di tribes.

16.1(1)

In summer, there was a fire at the Xuan archery court at Chengzhou.312

16.2(2)

In autumn, Bo Ji of Tan came home.313

16.3(3)

In winter, there was a very bountiful harvest.

16.4

ZUO

The Jin minister Fan Hui, who gains high office because of his successful campaigns against the Red Di tribes, is praised for his exemplary governance. In the sixteenth year, in spring, Fan Huia of Jin led out troops and extinguished the Jia, Liuxu, and Duochen lineages of the Red Di tribes.314 In the third month, Jin presented Di captives at the Zhou court. The Prince of Jin submitted a request to the king, and on the wushen day (27), Fan Huia was given a ritual robe and cap315 and commissioned to command the central army and, moreover, to serve as grand guardian in charge of ritual and punishment. As a result, the brigands in Jin fled to Qin. Yangshe Zhi said, “I have heard it said,

16.1(1)

Yu raised good men to office, And evil men stayed far away.

Does it not refer to this! As it says in the Odes, Tremble, be fearful! As if standing before a deep abyss, As if treading upon thin ice.316

313 Bo Ji was the eldest daughter of a Lu ruler and was married to the Tan ruler. 314 According to Du Yu (ZZ 24.410), Duochen is not mentioned in the Annals because it is subordinate to Liuxu. 315 The ritual robe (fu 黼) is embroidered with the pattern of 亞 in blue and black; see Huan 2.2. The ritual robe and cap marked Fan Hui’s new position as minister. 316 Maoshi 195, “Xiao mian” 小旻, 12B.412–14. These lines are also quoted in Xi 22.7.

Lord Xuan

685

善人在上也。善人在上，則國無幸民。諺曰： 民之多幸， 國之不幸也。 是無善人之謂也。」 16.2(2) 夏，成周宣榭火，人火之也。凡火，人火曰火，天火曰災。 16.3(3) 秋，郯伯姬來歸，出也。 16.4 為毛、召之難故，王室復亂，王孫蘇奔晉。晉人復之。

冬，晉侯使士會平王室，定王享之。原襄公相禮。殽烝。武季私問 其故。王聞之，召武子曰：「季氏！而弗聞乎？王享有體薦，宴有折俎。公 當享，卿當宴。王室之禮也。」武子歸而講求典禮，以修晉國之法。

317 That is, they trust their good luck to break rules with impunity. 318 This is the only instance when huo 火, “fire,” is used in the Annals, whereas zai 災, “calamitous fire,” is common; see Huan 14.4, Xi 20.3, Cheng 3.4, Xiang 9.1, 30.3, 30.9, Zhao 9.3, Zhao 18.2, Ding 2.2, Ai 3.3, and 4.5. 319 Du Yu (ZZ 24.410–11) explains that Fan Hui is uncertain why sections of meat with bones (yaozheng 殽蒸) should be brought in instead of half of the animal ( fangzheng 房蒸 or tijian 體薦). For other examples of private exchange in the context of public mission, see Wen 4.7, n. 71.

686

Zuo Tradition

This is because good men are in high offices. When good men are in high offices, then there are none among the people who put their trust in good luck.317 The proverb says, When the majority trust in good luck, It is bad luck for the domain.

That refers to the absence of good men in high offices.” In summer, there was a fire at the Xuan archery court at Chengzhou. This was a fire caused by humans. In all cases concerning fires, a fire caused by humans is called “fire,” while a fire sent by Heaven is called “calamitous fire.”318

16.2(2)

In autumn, Bo Ji of Tan came home: she was sent back.

16.3(3)

The Zhou court combines political weakness with ritual knowledge. Sent as envoy to the Zhou court to arbitrate dissension, Fan Hui also learns rules of ritual propriety from the way meat is served at a feast. (On the killing of the Mao and Shao lineage heads, see Xuan 15.4.) As a result of the turmoil that ensued with the killing of the Mao and Shao lineage heads, the royal house was again in chaos. Wangsun Su fled to Jin. The leaders of Jin reinstated him. In winter, the Prince of Jin sent Fan Huia to pacify the royal house. King Ding offered ceremonial toasts for him, and Yuan Duke Xiang assisted him in the ceremony. Sections of meat with bones were brought in on stands. Fan Huie privately asked the reason for this.319 The king heard about this and summoned Fan Huif: “Fan Huig! Have you not heard of this? When the king offers ceremonial toasts, the carcasses are brought in as uncut halves; when he has a feast, the meat is cut up and brought in on stands. With the lords there should be ceremonial toasts; with ministers of the domains, feasts. Such are the rituals of the royal house.” Upon Fan Huif ’s return, he examined and sought out rules of ritual propriety in order to revise and augment the laws in Jin.320

16.4

320 In the much more detailed parallel passage in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.62–66, Fan Hui is simply on an official visit to Zhou. King Ding of Zhou explains the rituals of feasting as being particularly appropriate for the fraternal relations between Zhou and Jin, Fan Hui is said to have upheld “the rules of ritual propriety from the Three Dynasties” upon his return, and the reform of Jin law is linked specifically to the revival of “adherence to constant rules” (zhizhi 執秩) first mentioned in Xi 27.4 and remembered as exemplary in Zhao 29.5.

Lord Xuan

687

春秋 17.1 十有七年，春，王正月庚子，許男錫我卒。 17.2 丁未，蔡侯申卒。 17.3 夏，葬許昭公。 17.4 葬蔡文公。 17.5 六月癸卯，日有食之。 17.6(1) 己未，公會晉侯、衛侯、曹伯、邾子同盟于斷道。 17.7 秋，公至自會。 17.8(3) 冬，十有一月壬午，公弟叔肸卒。

左傳 17.1(6) 十七年，春，晉侯使郤克徵會于齊。齊頃公帷婦人使觀之。郤子登，婦

人笑於房。獻子怒，出而誓曰：「所不此報，無能涉河！」獻子先歸，使 欒京廬待命于齊，曰：「不得齊事，無復命矣。」 郤子至，請伐齊。晉侯弗許。請以其私屬，又弗許。

321 In the sixth month, there was no guimao day and also no solar eclipse. In the fifth month of the same year, on the yihai day, there was an annular solar eclipse. According to Wang Tao (Chunqiu lixue sanzhong), a solar eclipse was reported in Xuan 7, on the guimao day of the sixth month, and that record was misplaced here. 322 Fen Huang of Miao was the son of Dou Jiao of Chu. In 605 Bce Chu eliminated the Ruo’ao (Duo) lineage (Xuan 4.3), and Fen Huang fled to Jin, where he was given the district of Miao and played a crucial role in Jin’s victory in the battle of Yanling (Cheng 16.5, Xiang 26.10). 323 Jin wanted to ensure Qi’s presence at the meeting at Duandao. 324 The “womenfolk” (furen 婦人) here include Lord Qing’s mother, Xiao Tongshu Zi, whom Xi Ke demands as a hostage after Qi’s defeat at the battle of An (Cheng 2.3), as well as her attendants. On the components of her name, see n. 63 in Cheng.

688

Zuo Tradition

LORD XUAN 17 (592 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the gengzi day (24), Siwo, the Head of Xǔ, died.

17.1

On the dingwei day (2), Shen, the Prince of Cai, died.

17.2

In summer, Lord Zhao of Xǔ was buried.

17.3

Lord Wen of Cai was buried. In the sixth month, on the guimao day, there was an eclipse of the sun.

17.4 321

On the jiwei day (15), our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, and the Master of Zhu, and they swore a covenant together at Duandao. In autumn, our lord arrived from the meeting. In winter, in the eleventh month, on the renwu day (11), our lord’s younger brother Shuxi died.

17.5 17.6(1)

17.7 17.8(3)

ZUO

Jin’s attempt to hold sway over Qi is embroiled in Xi Ke’s quest to avenge a personal insult. Fen Huang of Miao counsels leniency when Jin detains Qi envoys.322 In the seventeenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Xi Ke to Qi to summon Qi leaders to a meeting.323 Lord Qing of Qi placed his womenfolk 324 behind curtains and let them observe Xi Ke. As Xi Keb ascended the steps, the womenfolk laughed in the side chamber.325 Enraged, Xi Kec came out from the meeting and vowed, “If I do not avenge this insult, may I fail to cross the Yellow River!” Returning first to Jin, Xi Kec had Luan Jinglu wait for further commands in Qi, saying, “If you cannot accomplish the task in Qi, do not return to report on discharge of your mission!” Xi Keb arrived in Jin and requested to attack Qi. The Prince of Jin refused. Xi Ke requested to use his private troops to attack Qi and again was refused.

17.1(6)

325 According to Gongyang, Cheng 2 (17.216), Xi Ke and the Lu envoy Zang Xuanbo came to Qi with blind and lame retainers, and Xiao Tongshu Zi sent similarly handicapped retainers to welcome them. Guliang, Cheng 1 (13.128–29), claims that the envoys themselves had physical limitations (Ji Wenzi was bald, Xi Ke was blind, Sun Liangfu of Wei was lame, and the Cao envoy was hunchbacked) mimicked by Qi hosting officials sent by Xiao Tongshu Zi. See also Shiji 39.1678–79.

Lord Xuan

689

齊侯使高固、晏弱、蔡朝、南郭偃會。及斂盂，高固逃歸。夏，會于 斷道，討貳也。盟于卷楚，辭齊人。晉人執晏弱于野王，執蔡朝于原，執 南郭偃于溫。苗賁皇使，見晏桓子。歸，言於晉侯曰：「夫晏子何罪？昔 者諸侯事吾先君，皆如不逮，舉言群臣不信，諸侯皆有貳志。齊君恐不 得禮，故不出，而使四子來。左右或沮之，曰：『君不出，必執吾使。』故 高子及斂盂而逃。夫三子者曰：『若絕君好，寧歸死焉。』為是犯難而 來。吾若善逆彼，以懷來者，吾又執之，以信齊沮，吾不既過矣乎？過而 不改，而又久之，以成其悔，何利之有焉？使反者得辭，而害來者，以懼 諸侯，將焉用之？」晉人緩之，逸。 秋，八月，晉師還。 17.2 范武子將老，召文子曰：「燮乎！吾聞之：喜怒以類者鮮，易者實多。

《詩》曰： 君子如怒， 亂庶遄沮。 君子如祉， 亂庶遄已。

326 He had presumably heard about Xi Ke’s resentment and feared his vengeance. 327 The domains deemed guilty of double-dealing are the ones that sided with Chu, including Song, Zheng, Chen, and Cai. 328 Juanchu was either another name for Duandao or a place near it. Duandao was in the domain of Jin, west of Jiyuan County 濟源縣, Henan. 329 Lianyu was a place in the domain of Wei and was first mentioned in Xi 28.1. 330 We follow Karlgren (gl. 246), who reads ruo 若 as “if.” Yu Yue (Zhuzi pingyi, cited in Yang, 2:773) reads ruo as buru 不如 (“would do better,” “ought to”): “We would do better to receive them kindly so as to encourage those to come.” 331 Gao Gu, who returned without permission, would be able to justify himself. 332 According to the logic of Fen Huang’s argument, all three men should be allowed to go, but only Yan Ruo escaped. 333 The phrase xinu yilei 喜怒以類 may be literally translated as “happy and angry according to [right] categories.”

690

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Qi sent Gao Gu, Yan Ruo, Cai Zhao, and Nanguo Yan to the meeting. When they reached Lianyu, Gao Gu escaped and returned to Qi.326 In summer, they met at Duandao, with the purpose of chastising double-dealing.327 They swore a covenant at Juanchu328 and declined the Qi leaders’ participation. The leaders of Jin seized Yan Ruo at Yewang, Cai Zhao at Yuan, and Nanguo Yan at Wen. While on an official mission, Fen Huang of Miao encountered Yan Ruoa. Upon his return, he said to the Prince of Jin, “Of what crime is Yan Ruob guilty? Formerly, when the princes served our former rulers, it was in all cases as if they could not be too eager. But now they all say that the various ministers of Jin lack good faith, and the princes all have the intention to shift allegiance. The Qi ruler was fearful that he would not be treated with ritual propriety, and that was why he did not set out from Qi but instead sent these four men here. His aides might have tried to stop him, saying, ‘If my lord does not set out, they will certainly seize our envoys.’ That was why Gao Gub fled once he had reached Lianyu.329 The other three men said, ‘If it is a matter of good relations being cut off between the two rulers, then we would prefer to give our lives for it.’ For that reason they have come here, braving calamity. If we receive them kindly, we will encourage those to come.330 Instead of that we take the further step of seizing them and thus give credence to those who tried to stop the Qi ruler from setting out. Would we then not have erred? To have erred and not to correct it, and furthermore to persist in error, so as to have full reason for regret later—what benefit would there be in that? To give the one who returned a justification,331 and to bring harm to those who came, so as to strike fear in the princes—what use would it be?” The men of Jin relaxed their supervision, and Yan Ruo got away.332 In autumn, in the eight month, the Jin army returned. Fan Hui counsels his son on the noble man’s just emotions and predicts disaster for Xi Ke. Fan Huii intended to retire on account of his old age. He summoned his son Fan Xiea and said, “Xie! I have heard that those who are joyous and angry for the right reasons are scarce;333 it is those of the opposite ilk who are numerous.334 As it says in the Odes,

17.2

If the noble man is angry, Disorder will likely soon abate. If the noble man is glad, Disorder will likely soon cease.335

334 The word yi 易 is read here as “change” or “turn over.” An alternative reading is “easy”: “many are those who are too easily roused to joy or anger.” 335 Maoshi 198, “Qiaoyan” 巧言, 12C.423–25.

Lord Xuan

691

君子之喜怒，以已亂也。弗已者，必益之。郤子其或者欲已亂於齊 乎？不然，余懼其益之也。余將老，使郤子逞其志，庶有豸乎！爾從二三 子唯敬。」乃請老。郤獻子為政。 17.3(8) 冬，公弟叔肸卒，公母弟也。凡大子之母弟，公在曰公子，不在曰弟。凡

稱弟，皆母弟也。

春秋 18.1(1) 十有八年，春，晉侯、衛世子臧伐齊。 18.2 公伐杞。 18.3 夏，四月。 18.4(3) 秋，七月，邾人戕鄫子于鄫。 18.5(4) 甲戌，楚子旅卒。 18.6(5) 公孫歸父如晉。 18.7(5) 冬，十月壬戌，公薨于路寢。 18.8(5) 歸父還自晉，至笙。遂奔齊。

336 Kong Yingda notes that Du Yu’s gloss of the graph zhi 豸 (what we translate as “decisive outcome”) as jie 解 comes from Fangyan 方言 (ZZ-Kong 24.412). Du Yu (ZZ 24.412) suggests that the word means “resolved”—that is, either Xi Ke’s discontent or the threat of disorder will be removed or resolved. Karlgren (gl. 349) argues that zhi should be understood in the sense of “decision” or “clarity.” 337 In a parallel passage in Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.400, Fan Hui explains why Xi Ke, not being able to vent his anger in Qi, will give it free rein in Jin. In both passages Fan Hui is implying that Xi Ke would wreak havoc in Jin, but curiously he also justifies handing government over to him.

692

Zuo Tradition

“The noble man’s joy and anger serve to end disorder. He who does not end it will certainly aggravate it. Perchance Xi Keb wishes to end disorder in Qi! If not, I fear he will aggravate it. I intend to retire on account of old age. This will allow Xi Ke to give full rein to his ambition, and there will likely be a decisive outcome.336 In following the various fine men in court, you should harbor nothing but respect.” He then requested to retire. Xi Kea came to be in charge of policies.337 In winter, our lord’s younger brother Shuxi died.338 He was our lord’s younger full brother. In all cases concerning the lord’s younger full brothers, they are called “noble sons” when the lord is alive, and “younger brothers” when he is dead.339 In all cases when someone is called “younger brother,” he is always a younger full brother.

17.3(8)

LORD XUAN 18 (591 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin and the Wei heir apparent Zang attacked Qi.

18.1(1)

Our lord attacked Qǐ.

18.2

Summer, the fourth month.

18.3

In autumn, in the seventh month, Zhu leaders slew the Master of Zeng in Zeng.

18.4(3)

On the jiaxu day (7), Lü, the Master of Chu, died.

18.5(4)

Gongsun Guifu went to Jin.

18.6(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the renxu day (26), our lord expired in the Grand Chamber. Guifu (Gongsun Guifu), making the return journey from Jin, advanced as far as Sheng. He then fled to Qi.

18.7(5)

18.8(5)

338 According to Guliang, Xuan 17 (12.123), Shuxi demonstrated his integrity by criticizing Lord Xuan for his role in the murder of Lord Wen’s legitimate heirs. Shuxi refused support from the lord and made his living by weaving sandals. Shuxi is the ancestor of the Shu (also called Zishu) lineage. His son Zishu Shengbo (Gongsun Yingqi) will be active in Lu politics. 339 This “rule” is not applied consistently in either the Annals or Zuozhuan. For example, the head of the Ji line, Jiyou (Cheng Ji), is Lord Huan’s son and Lord Zhuang’s younger full brother, and he is consistently called Gongzi You or Gongzi Jiyou, but never Gongdi (“younger brother”) You, even after Lord Huan’s death.

Lord Xuan

693

左傳 18.1(1) 十八年，春，晉侯、衛大子臧伐齊，至于陽穀。齊侯會晉侯盟于繒，以公

子彊為質于晉。晉師還。蔡朝、南郭偃逃歸。 18.2 夏，公使如楚乞師，欲以伐齊。 18.3(4) 秋，邾人戕鄫子于鄫。凡自內虐其君曰弒，自外曰戕。 18.4(5) 楚莊王卒，楚師不出。既而用晉師，楚於是乎有蜀之役。 18.5(6–8) 公孫歸父以襄仲之立公也，有寵，欲去三桓，以張公室。與公謀，而聘于

晉，欲以晉人去之。冬，公薨。季文子言於朝曰：「使我殺適立庶以失大 援者，仲也夫！」臧宣叔怒曰：「當其時不能治也，後之人何罪？子欲去 之，許請去之。」遂逐東門氏。

340 Yanggu was just to the east of the Ji River 濟水 along the northern border of Lu (see Annals, Xi 3.5). 341 With the Jin-Qi covenant, Lu felt its isolation and turned to Chu for assistance against Qi. 342 The word qiang 戕 appears only once in the Annals; in Zuozhuan it is used again in Xiang 31.9. 343 See Cheng 2.3. 344 See Cheng 2.8. 345 This is the first mention of the term “three Huan lineages” in Zuozhuan.

694

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Preliminary conflicts (Xuan 18.1, 18.2, 18.4) later culminate in the battle of An (Cheng 2.2, 2.3). In the eighteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin and the Wei heir apparent Zang attacked Qi, advancing as far as Yanggu.340 The Prince of Qi met with the Prince of Jin to swear a covenant at Zeng. They agreed to have Gongzi Qiang of Qi as hostage in Jin. Jin troops turned back. Cai Zhao and Nanguo Yan escaped and returned to Qi.

18.1(1)

In summer, our lord sent someone to Chu to plead for troops, hoping to use them to attack Qi.341

18.2

In autumn, Zhu leaders slew the Master of Zeng in Zeng. In all cases when a subject slaughters his own ruler, the word for it is “assassinate.” When someone from outside the domain kills the ruler, the word for it is “slay.”342

18.3(4)

King Zhuang of Chu died, and Chu troops requested by Lu did not come forth. In due time Lu availed itself of Jin troops.343 That was why Chu fought the Shu campaign.344

18.4(5)

Gongsun Guifu, son of Dongmen Xiangzhong, is exiled after his failed plot to remove the three Huan lineages: the Ji (Jisun), Meng (Zhongsun), and Shusun lineages, whose ancestors were sons of Lord Huan of Lu. The expulsion of the Dongmen lineage, which allows Ji Wenzi to emerge as the most powerful figure in Lu, is confirmed by Gongsun Guifu’s flight to Qi. Ji Wenzi tries to blame Xiangzhong for the crime in which he himself was complicit. Gongsun Guifu was favored because his father, Xiangzhong, had established our lord as ruler. He wished to remove the three Huan lineages345 so as to expand the power of our lord’s house. Guifu made a plan with our lord and went on an official visit to Jin, hoping to use Jin troops to remove the Huan lineages. In winter, our lord expired. Ji Wenzi declared at court, “Xiangzhong it was who made me kill the heirs born of the principal wife and establish the son of the secondary wife as heir, so that we lost our great helper!”346 Zang Xuanshu said angrily, “If at the time you could not adjudicate the crime of Xiangzhong, what crime is his progeny guilty of? If you wish to banish Guifu, I will request to drive him out.” They thus expelled the Dongmen lineage.

18.5(6–8)

346 For the role of Dongmen Xiangzhong and Ji Wenzi in Lord Xuan’s accession, see Wen 18.4, 18.5, 18.6, Xuan 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7. It is not clear who “the great helper” was—Ji Wenzi may be referring to Lu’s deteriorating relations with Qi or Chu, although it is not apparent how Xiangzhong would be responsible.

Lord Xuan

695

子家還，及笙，壇帷，復命於介。既復命，袒、括髮，即位哭，三踊 而出。遂奔齊。書曰「歸父還自晉」，善之也。

696

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Guifua was returning to Lu. When he reached Sheng, he built an altar of earth and surrounded it with curtains.347 He reported discharge of his mission to his chief aide.348 Having done so, he bared the left side of his body, tied his hair with hemp, took his appointed place,349 and wailed, stamping his feet three times before he came out. He then fled to Qi. The text says, “Guifu, making the return journey from Jin”: this is to show approval.

347 By the time he reached Sheng, he had heard of his lineage’s exile. He thus set up the site of mourning on the road. 348 According to Yili 23.277, an envoy whose ruler dies while he is on a mission should complete the mission and report the discharge of his mission at the coffin of the dead ruler. Here Guifu knew that he could not return to Lu, and so he made the report to his chief aide, who was to repeat the message at Lord Xuan’s coffin upon his return. 349 This might have been the direction facing Lu or a north-facing position.

Lord Xuan

697

Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan Volume 2

成公

Lord Cheng (590–573 bce) The period covered by Lord Cheng’s reign is framed by two extended battle narratives—the battle of An (Cheng 2, 589 Bce) and the battle of Yanling (Cheng 16, 575 Bce). In both cases, victory is presented as inconclusive and even dangerous, unlike the alignment of moral rhetoric, superior tactics, and eventual victory in the campaigns at Chengpu (Xi 28, 632 Bce) and Bi (Xuan 12, 597 Bce). In the aftermath of Chu victory at Bi, smaller domains such as Zheng, Song, Chen, and Cai became dependents of Chu. The campaign at An may be seen as Jin’s attempt to reassert its influence in the north, as it supports Lu and Wei, its allies from the Covenant of Duandao (Xuan 17, 592 Bce), against Qi. The Jin minister Xi Ke’s desire for vengeance against the Qi ruler’s mother, who laughed at his deformity during his official visit to Qi (Xuan 17.1), is presented as a key factor in the An campaign. Jin vindictiveness may explain why the most compelling rhetoric belongs to the defeated party—the speech of the Qi minister Guo Zuo (Bin Meiren) resisting Jin demands (Cheng 2.3). This is one of several famous pieces of diplomatic rhetoric in this section, which also includes Zhi Ying’s dignified refusal to yield to the Chu king’s demand for requittal (Cheng 3.4), Ji Wenzi’s speech on the duties of an overlord (Cheng 8.1), and Lü Xiang’s (Wei Xiang) speech or letter severing relations with Qin (Cheng 13.3). The fruits of victory at An for Jin and its allies are hollow. Lu regains the lands north of the Wen River from Qi (Cheng 2.3), but Jin forces Lu to return the territories six years later after improving its ties with Qi (Cheng 8.1). Jin’s position as covenant chief seems uncertain, despite its triumph at An and victory over Qin at Masui (Cheng 13.3). Chu confirms its ascendancy and gathers many domains, except Jin, for a covenant at Shu shortly after the An campaign (Cheng 2.8), and it continues its aggression against Wei (Cheng 2.8, 15.3), Zheng (Cheng 6.9, 7.4, 15.3), and Song (Cheng 18.2). Chu’s image remains ambivalent, however. On the one

701

hand, we have the Lu minister Ji Wenzi’s categorical rejection of Chu as not being “of the same kith and kin” as the central domains (Cheng 4.4). On the other hand, Zhong Yi, a Chu prisoner in Jin, impresses Jin leaders with his dignity and ritual propriety by strumming “southern tunes” and proudly proclaiming his hereditary vocation as a musician (Cheng 9.9), and he becomes an envoy seeking a Jin-Chu accord. Music serves an opposite function when the Chu minister Zifan (Gongzi Ce) uses it to intimidate the Jin minister Xi Zhi (Cheng 12.4), thus undermining the peace agreement between Jin and Chu (Cheng 12.2). That accord is brought about by the Song minister Hua Yuan (Cheng 11.8, 12.2), whose mediatory effort presages that of Xiang Xu, another Song minister seeking cessation of conflicts some thirty years later (Xiang 27.4, 546 Bce; Zhao 1.1, 541 Bce). Jin-Chu conflict culminates in the battle of Yanling. As in analogous accounts earlier, we have a cluster of anecdotes about omens, predictions, and explanations that assess and justify the outcome. A heightened awareness of perspectives and spectacle adds to narrative interest. Unlike previous battles, ritualized respect toward rulers of the enemy camp here feeds allegations of conspiracy and treason (Cheng 17.10). The battle of Yanling produces no real victor. Whereas Chu defeat is moralized, notably in Shen Shushi’s speech (Cheng 16.5), Jin victory is not presented as morally justified; instead, it is accompanied by the Jin minister Fan Hui’s repeated predictions of imminent disaster, soon fulfilled in the anni­ hilation of the Xi lineage (Cheng 17.10) and the Jin ruler’s assassination (Cheng 18.1). This bloody outcome in turn develops from the deepening rift between the Jin ruling house and its ministerial lineages, as well as from deadly rivalry among those lineages. Earlier we see the destruction of the Zhao lineage (Cheng 8.6), whose ancestor’s fearsome ghost exacts vengeance against Lord Jing of Jin in a memorable dream visitation (Cheng 10.4). The sagacious Jin minister Bo Zong is slandered and killed by leaders of the Xi lineage (Cheng 15.5), in their turn maligned by Luan Shu (Cheng 17.10). Possibly as a response to such violence, we have passages celebrating the virtues of yielding, civility, and cohesion among Jin leaders (Cheng 2.3, 2.7, 4.4, 6.11, 8.2). There are other kinds of intriguing mixtures: Xi Ke is alternatively humble (Cheng 2.7) and arrogant (Cheng 3.9), the Zhou king’s concern with the ritual propriety of Jin’s act of presenting the spoils of its victory over Qi shades into a petulant complaint about the inferior rank of the Jin envoy (Cheng 2.9), Zhao Yingqi of Jin combines licentiousness with keen insight (Cheng 5.1), Zishu Shengbo of Lu is both unscrupulous (Cheng 11.3) and loyal (Cheng 16.8, 16.11), and his life ends with an enigmatic dream (Cheng 17.8). We have accounts of internecine conflicts in many domains, although they are often less detailed than such narratives in Jin. In Song, complex negotiations between the Dai and Huan lines show how the sometimesLord Cheng

703

春秋 1.1 元年，春，王正月，公即位。 1.2 二月辛酉，葬我君宣公。 1.3 無冰。 1.4(2) 三月，作丘甲。 1.5(3) 夏，臧孫許及晉侯盟于赤棘。

1

2 3

704

In his classification of female characters in Zuozhuan, Gu Donggao lists twelve in the highest rank of “integrity” (jiexing 節行), eleven in the middle rank of “sound judgment” (mingzhe 明哲), and thirty-four in the lowest rank of “unscrupulous excesses” (zongzi budu 縱恣不度). See Gu’s “Chunqiu lienü biao” 春秋列女表, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 3:2628–30. The ritual of collecting and storing ice in the second month of the Zhou calendar (for use in the summer) is mentioned in Zhao 4.2 and Maoshi 154, “Qiyue” 七月, 8A.276–88. Here “no ice” means that the ritual cannot be performed. Commentators disagree on the size of the district (qiu 丘) and the number of armored soldiers (jia 甲). Suffice it to say that the two seem to have a proportional relationship. Fan Wenlan (cited in Yang, 2:784) suggests that this reform may be connected to

Zuo Tradition

conflicting interests of individuals, lineages, and the domain are debated (Cheng 15.4, 15.5). Chu interference determines the balance of power between Song lineages (Cheng 18.5), just as Jin arbitrates disputes between the Wei ruler and the Sun lineage of Wei (Cheng 7.6, 14.1, 14.5). In Lu, the young Lord Cheng is threatened by his mother, Mu Jiang, who demonstrates her cultural competence (Cheng 9.5) but also plots with her lover Shusun Qiaoru to expel the Ji and Meng lineages by seeking Jin assistance (Cheng 16.5, 16.6, 16.8, 16.11). In Qi, adulterous relations between Lord Qing’s mother, Sheng Meng Zi, and Qing Ke lead to violence against the Gao and Guo lineages (Cheng 17.6, 17.9, 18.2). In Chu, Qu Wuchen warns King Zhuang and Zifan against union with the femme fatale Xia Ji but acts against his own better judgment (Cheng 2.6). His marriage with Xia Ji and Zifan’s consequent enmity, in addition to the grudges of another Chu minister, Zichong, lead to the annihilation of his line in Chu (Cheng 7.5). As Jin envoy in Wu, Qu Wuchen contributes to the rise of Wu and uses Wu attacks against Chu to wreak vengeance on Zifan and Zichong (Cheng 7.5). In all these cases, women are seductive and dangerous. There are, however, counterexamples, including Bo Zong’s wife, who warns Bo Zong against excessive forthrightness (Cheng 15.5), and Ding Jiang of Wei, whose sagacity urges reconciliation and whose prescience predicts disaster (Cheng 14.1, 14.5).1

LORD CHENG 1 (590 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position. In the second month, on the xinyou day (27), we buried our ruler Lord Xuan.

1.1

1.2

There was no ice.2

1.3

In the third month, the system of having districts supply armored soldiers was instituted.3

1.4(2)

In summer, Zangsun Xu (Zang Xuanshu) and the Prince of Jin swore a covenant at Chiji.4

1.5(3)



the “tithe levied according to acreage” (shuimu 稅畝) mentioned in Xuan 15.8. The last Zuozhuan reference to Lu taxation is in Ai 12.1. Cf. the “levy according to district” 邱賦 in Zheng in Zhao 4.6. See Gu Donggao, Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1423–33. 4 Chiji 赤棘 is of unknown location.

Lord Cheng

705

1.6(1) 秋，王師敗績于茅戎。 1.7 冬，十月。

左傳 1.1(6) 元年，春，晉侯使瑕嘉平戎于王，單襄公如晉拜成。劉康公徼戎，將遂

伐之。叔服曰：「背盟而欺大國，此必敗。背盟，不祥；欺大國，不義； 神、人弗助，將何以勝？」不聽，遂伐茅戎。三月癸未，敗績于徐吾氏。 1.2(4) 為齊難故，作丘甲。 1.3(5) 聞齊將出楚師，夏，盟于赤棘。 1.4 秋，王人來告敗。 1.5 冬，臧宣叔令脩賦、繕完、具守備，曰：「齊、楚結好，我新與晉盟，晉、

楚爭盟，齊師必至。雖晉人伐齊，楚必救之，是齊、楚同我也。知難而有 備，乃可以逞。」

5 6

706

The word jiao 徼 here is read as jiao (僥, 儌), as in jiaoxing 僥倖, “to trust one’s luck.” The Rong have let down their guard because of the peace negotiations. Du Yu (ZZ 25.420) identifies Xuwushi as a subgroup of the Mao Rong (Rong tribe of the Mao), while Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 25.420) notes that Xuwushi was the place where the Mao Rong gathered their forces. We may surmise on the basis of Shufu’s prediction that Zhou was defeated by Jin forces assisting the Mao Rong. The dif­ ference between the Zhou and Xia calendars, followed by the Annals and this Zuozhuan entry respectively, explains the temporal discrepancy. Whereas Gongyang, Cheng 1 (7.214), implies and Guliang, Cheng 1 (13.128), explicitly asserts that the lack of reference to Jin is “respectful concealment” of the royal house’s plight, Zuozhuan, through Shufu, places the blame squarely on the Zhou house.

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, the king’s troops were completely defeated by the Rong tribe of Mao.

1.6(1)

Winter, the tenth month.

1.7

ZUO

Zhou defeated the Rong twenty years earlier (Wen 17.5) and hostilities persist. A Jin envoy brings about a peace agreement between Zhou and the Rong. Zhou attacks the Rong by surprise but is defeated, as Shufu (Wen 1.1), the prescient court scribe, predicts. In the first year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Zhan Jiaa to make peace with the Rong on behalf of the king. Shan Duke Xiang went to Jin to bow to affirm the alliance. Liu Duke Kang wanted to try his luck with the Rong 5 and thus planned to attack them. Shufu said, “To turn against a covenant and deceive a great domain like Jin will certainly end in defeat. To turn against a covenant is inauspicious; to deceive a great domain is undutiful; gods and men will not assist you; on what basis will you win?” Liu Duke Kang did not listen, and thereupon attacked the Rong tribe of Mao. In the third month, on the guiwei day (19), Zhou troops were completely defeated at Xuwushi.6

1.1(6)

New military preparations are undertaken as a consequence of Qi-Lu hostilities in the last two years (Xuan 17.1, 18.2). On account of the troubles with Qi, the system of having districts supply armored soldiers was instituted.

1.2(4)

With the news of an impending Qi-Chu incursion, Lu affirms its alliance with Jin. We heard that Qi was about to send forth Chu troops. In the summer, we swore a covenant at Chiji.

1.3(5)

In autumn, the king’s men came to announce Zhou’s defeat.

1.4

Zang Xuanshu of Lu prepares for war. In winter, Zang Xuanshu ordered that military levies be exacted, city walls be repaired, and preparations for defense be made. He said, “Qi and Chu have cemented their ties. We have just sworn a covenant with Jin. With Jin and Chu fighting to become leader of the covenant, Qi troops will certainly descend on us. Although Jin will attack Qi, Chu will certainly go to its aid. That means Qi and Chu will together side against us. It is only when one is aware of dangers and makes preparations for them that one will prevail.”

1.5

Lord Cheng

707

春秋 2.1(1) 二年，春，齊侯伐我北鄙。 2.2(2) 夏，四月丙戌，衛孫良夫帥師及齊師戰于新築，衛師敗績。 2.3(3) 六月癸酉，季孫行父、臧孫許、叔孫僑如、公孫嬰齊帥師會晉郤克、衛

孫良夫、曹公子首及齊侯戰于鞌，齊師敗績。 2.4(3) 秋，七月，齊侯使國佐如師。己酉，及國佐盟于袁婁。 2.5(4) 八月壬午，宋公鮑卒。 2.6(5) 庚寅，衛侯速卒。 2.7(4) 取汶陽田。 2.8(8) 冬，楚師、鄭師侵衛。 2.9(8) 十有一月，公會楚公子嬰齊于蜀。 2.10(8) 丙申，公及楚人、秦人、宋人、陳人、衛人、鄭人、齊人、曹人、邾人、薛人、鄫

人盟于蜀。

708

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 2 (589 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches. In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingxu day (29), Sun Liangfu of Wei led out troops and did battle with Qi troops at Xinzhu.7 The Wei troops were completely defeated. In the sixth month, on the guiyou day (27), Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi), Zangsun Xu (Zang Xuanshu), Shusun Qiaoru, and Gongsun Yingqi (Zishu Shengbo) led out troops, met with Xi Ke of Jin, Sun Liangfu of Wei, and Gongzi Shou of Cao, and did battle with the Prince of Qi at An. The Qi troops were completely defeated. In autumn, in the seventh month, the Prince of Qi sent Guo Zuo to the invading troops of the allies. On the jiyou day (23), they swore a covenant with Guo Zuo at Yuanlou.

2.1(1)

2.2(2)

2.3(3)

2.4(3)

In the eighth month, on the renwu day (27), Bao, the Duke of Song, died.

2.5(4)

On the gengyin day (9), Su, the Prince of Wei, died.8

2.6(5)

We took lands to the north of the Wen River.

2.7(4)

In winter, Chu troops and Zheng troops invaded Wei.

2.8(8)

In the eleventh month, our lord met with Gongzi Yingqi (Zichong) of Chu at Shu.

2.9(8)

9

On the bingshen day (12), our lord swore a covenant with a Chu leader, a Qin leader, a Song leader, a Chen leader, a Wei leader, a Zheng leader, a Qi leader, a Cao leader, a Zhu leader, a Xue leader, and a Zeng leader at Shu.

2.10(8)

7 Xinzhu 新築 was presumably in Wei or somewhere along the Qi-Wei border. 8 The gengyin day fell in the ninth month. 9 Jin made Qi return the fields to Lu.

Lord Cheng

709

左傳 2.1(1) 二年，春，齊侯伐我北鄙，圍龍。頃公之嬖人盧蒲就魁門焉。龍人囚之。

齊侯曰：「勿殺，吾與而盟，無入而封。」弗聽，殺而膊諸城上。齊侯親 鼓，士陵城。三日，取龍。遂南侵，及巢丘。 2.2(2) 衛侯使孫良夫、石稷、甯相、向禽將侵齊，與齊師遇。石子欲還。孫子曰：

「不可。以師伐人，遇其師而還，將謂君何？若知不能，則如無出。今既 遇矣，不如戰也。」 夏，有......。 石成子曰：「師敗矣，子不少須，眾懼盡。子喪師徒，何以復命？」 皆不對。又曰：「子，國卿也。隕子，辱矣。子以眾退，我此乃止。」且告 車來甚眾。齊師乃止，次于鞫居。新築人仲叔于奚救孫桓子，桓子是以 免。 既，衛人賞之以邑，辭，請曲縣、繁纓以朝。許之。

10

Lu borders Qi on the east. Qi attacks against Lu were usually from the west. Lu defenses on its western border were probably stronger than on its northern one, hence Qi’s circuitous route of attack. The Prince of Qi is also referred to as Lord Qing in this entry. 11 During the battle of Chengpu in 632 Bce, the men of Cao also displayed Jin corpses on the city wall (Xi 28.3). Here the word bo 膊 indicates that Lupu Jiukui had been undressed before being exposed on the wall. 12 Long 龍 was located in the domain of Lu southeast of present-day Tai’an County 泰安縣, Shandong. 13 Chaoqiu 巢丘 would probably not have been far from Long. 14 This is also a recurrent theme in Xunzi; see Xunzi 9.165, 10.200, 19.419, 22.511. 15 Sima Qian (Shiji 37.1596) believes that Wei was trying to come to the aid of Lu. Zuozhuan does not specify where Qi and Wei troops met. According to the Annals, Qi and Wei fought at Xinzhu. It seems likely that Qi and Wei troops met at the border between Qi and Wei, and then the Qi army pursued Wei forces to Xinzhu in Wei, where the battle took place. Alternatively, Xinzhu could be at the border of Qi and Wei. 16 Here the text breaks off. The missing text presumably describes the Xinzhu campaign that took place in the fourth month. 17 Shi Chengzi and Sun Liangfu reverse their positions as the battle wears on. 18 The Zhou king used four-sided frames for suspending musical instruments such as bells and chime-stones; this was called “palace-style suspension” (gongxuan 宮縣、 宮懸). The curved (three-sided) frames used by the princes were called quxuan 曲縣 or xuanxuan 軒縣. High officers were entitled to two-sided frames known as panxuan 判縣. The martingales of silken cords (fanying 繁纓) were a prerogative of the princes. In sum, Zhongshu Yuxi was requesting the ritual regalia and paraphernalia of the princes, which should be beyond his station as high officer.

710

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Qi invades Lu, and tensions mount because the Qi ruler’s male favorite is killed. In the second year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches and laid siege to Long.10 Lord Qing’s male favorite, Lupu Jiukui, stormed the city gate. The men of Long took him prisoner. The Prince of Qi said, “Do not put him to death. I will swear a covenant with you and will not enter your borders.” The men of Long did not heed him, put Lupu Jiukui to death, and exposed his naked corpse on the city wall.11 The Prince of Qi personally beat the war drum, and his officers scaled the city walls. In three days, the Qi army took Long.12 It then made a southward incursion and advanced as far as Chaoqiu.13

2.1(1)

The forces of Wei and Qi meet. Wei is defeated at the battle of Xinzhu. Zhongshu Yuxi saves the Wei commander Sun Liangfu and is, against ritual propriety, rewarded with dignities beyond his station. On the importance of ritual distinctions and the dangers of their misuse, see also Zhuang 18.1 and Zhao 6.7.14 The prince of Wei sent Sun Liangfu, Shi Chengzia, Ning Xiang, and Xiang Qinjiang to invade Qi, and they encountered Qi troops on the way.15 Shi Chengzib wanted to return to Wei. Sun Liangfub said, “This will not do. If we mobilize troops to attack another domain, and then turn back upon encountering its troops, what will we say to the ruler? Had we known that we could not fight, we would have done better not to have set forth at all. Now, since we have encountered them, it will be better to fight.” In summer, there was . . .16 Shi Chengzi said, “Our troops are losing. If you, sir, do not hold out and wait a while for reinforcements, I fear that our entire force will be destroyed. If you lose all your men, how are you going to report on the discharge of your mission?”17 None of the other commanders responded. Shi Chengzi continued, addressing Sun Liangfu, “You, sir, are a minister of the domain. If we lose you, it will be shameful indeed. You should retreat with the majority of the troops, while we remain here.” Meanwhile, he also announced to Wei troops that many chariots were coming as reinforcement. Qi troops then stopped and set up camp at Juju. Zhongshu Yuxi, a man of Xinzhu, had come to the aid of Sun Liangfua, who thereby escaped harm. Not long thereafter, the leaders of Wei rewarded Zhongshu Yuxi with settlements. He declined and requested instead curved frames for suspending musical instruments and the use of martingales of silken cords when he visited court.18 His requests were granted.

2.2(2)

Lord Cheng

711

仲尼聞之曰：「惜也，不如多與之邑。唯器與名，不可以假人，君 之所司也。名以出信，信以守器，器以藏禮，禮以行義，義以生利，利以 平民，政之大節也。若以假人，與人政也。政亡，則國家從之，弗可止也 已。」 2.3a 孫桓子還於新築，不入，遂如晉乞師。臧宣叔亦如晉乞師。皆主郤獻子。

晉侯許之七百乘。郤子曰：「此城濮之賦也。有先君之明與先大夫之肅， 故捷。克於先大夫，無能為役，請八百乘。」許之。郤克將中軍，士燮佐 上軍，欒書將下軍，韓厥為司馬，以救魯、衛。臧宣叔逆晉師，且道之。 季文子帥師會之。 及衛地，韓獻子將斬人，郤獻子馳，將救之。至，則既斬之矣。郤子 使速以徇，告其僕曰：「吾以分謗也。」

19

The argument about the inviolability of “ritual objects” and “names” is repeated in Zhao 32.4 when Scribe Mo discusses the exile of Lord Zhao of Lu. This may be linked to the idea of “rectification of names” (zhengming 正名) (Analects 13.3), as Sima Guang asserts in Zizhi tongjian 1.4, when he refers to this passage as Confucius’ programmatic affirmation of the political hierarchy of ruler and subject. 20 For other examples of such sequencing in the so-called thimble style (dingzhen 頂針) or anadiplosis in Western rhetoric, see Xi 15.4g, Zhao 9.5. 21 Xi Ke’s vow of vengeance against Lord Qing of Qi (Xuan 17.1) must have become public knowledge. 22 See Xi 28.3. 23 Ma Zonglian believed that xian dafu refers to Xi Ke’s ancestor Xi Hu, but the term probably includes all the Jin commanders responsible for victory at Chengpu (Yang, 2:789). The word su 肅 is usually associated with solemnity, caution, and discipline. Here we follow Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 696), who cites his father Wang Niansun’s gloss of su 肅 as minjie 敏捷, “quickness.” Wang also refers to the gloss of su as su 速 or ji 疾 (“quick,” “swift”) in Erya. 24 In other words, the troops under the assistant commander of the central army, the commander of the upper army, and the assistant commander of the lower army did not join the battle. That a partially mobilized Jin army should involve eight hundred chariots, compared with the seven hundred chariots that constituted the entire Jin army in the battle of Chengpu, demonstrates how the scale of warfare and the size of the Jin army had escalated.

712

Zuo Tradition

Confuciusc heard of this and said, “What a pity! It would have been better to give him many settlements. It is precisely ritual objects and names that cannot be granted to others, for these are the things by which a ruler governs.19 The right names are for bringing forth trust; trust is for guarding ritual objects; ritual objects are for embodying ritual propriety; ritual propriety is for carrying out justice; justice is for bringing benefit; benefit is for governing the people.20 These are the great principles of government. If these things are granted to others, it amounts to handing over government to others. Once the government is gone, then domain and patrimony follow, and the process cannot be stopped.” The commanders of Wei and Lu appeal to Xi Ke, chief commander of Jin, for assistance. Xi Ke, motivated by a personal grudge against Qi (see Xuan 17.1), requests a large force from the Jin ruler. He takes pains to foster unity among Jin commanders. Sun Liangfua returned to Xinzhu. Without entering the capital, he then went to Jin to plead for troops. Zang Xuanshu also went to Jin to plead for troops. Both looked to Xi Kea as one who could decide the situation.21 The Prince of Jin granted Xi Ke the use of seven hundred war chariots. Xi Keb said, “This was the size of our force at the Chengpu campaign.22 We then had the wisdom of our former ruler and the quick, judicious calculations of our former high officers23—hence our victory. I am not even fit to be a lackey of our former high officers. I request eight hundred chariots.” His request was granted. Xi Ke was commander of the central army, Fan Xieb was assistant commander of the upper army, Luan Shu was commander of the lower army.24 Han Jue was supervisor of the military. Thus did they go to the aid of Lu and Wei. Zang Xuanshu met the Jin troops and also guided them on their way. Ji Wenzi led out Lu troops and joined forces with them. When they reached Wei territories, Han Juea was about to execute someone. Xi Kea raced there with the intention of saving him. By the time he arrived, that person had been executed. Xi Ke immediately had his corpse circulated among the troops as a warning, saying to his attendant, “Thus have I shared the blame.”25

2.3a

25 In Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.402, the attendant questions Xi Ke’s about-face. The guilt or innocence of the executed person is not the issue. At first Xi Ke wants to have him spared, for fear that harsh military discipline would undermine morale. When he finds out that the person had been executed, he hastens to “share the blame” to preserve the unity among the commanders, perhaps in tacit recognition that division among the leaders had led to Jin defeat in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2). Xi Ke’s act is castigated as a perversion of justice that “heightens blame” 益謗 in Han Feizi 36.811–12. See also Zhuzi yulei, 83.2167. Han Jue’s and Xun Linfu’s pursuit of Chu in the name of unity of command might have led to Jin’s defeat in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2c), although Fan Hui’s decision to “share the blame” of retreat is also praised (Xuan 2.12h).

Lord Cheng

713

2.3b 師從齊師于莘。六月壬申，師至于靡笄之下。齊侯使請戰，曰：「子以君

師辱於敝邑，不腆敝賦，詰朝請見。」 對曰：「晉與魯、衛，兄弟也，來告曰：『大國朝夕釋憾於敝邑之 地。』寡君不忍，使群臣請於大國，無令輿師淹於君地。能進不能退，君 無所辱命。」 齊侯曰：「大夫之許，寡人之願也；若其不許，亦將見也。」齊高固 入晉師，桀石以投人，禽之而乘其車，繫桑本焉，以徇齊壘，曰：「欲勇 者賈余餘勇！」 2.3c(3) 癸酉，師陳于鞌。邴夏御齊侯，逢丑父為右。晉解張御郤克，鄭丘緩為

右。齊侯曰：「余姑翦滅此而朝食。」不介馬而馳之。

26 Mount Miji 靡笄 is identified with what is now called Qianfo Mountain 千佛山, near Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. Note that the battle of An is referred to as the battle of Miji 靡筓之役 in Guoyu, “Jin yu 5.” 27 The Jin commanders are referring to the Qi ruler’s request to commence battle on the morrow.

714

Zuo Tradition

Polite diplomatic rhetoric shows that war is inevitable. Gao Gu, one of the officials sent to join Jin and other domains in a meeting, escaped and returned to Qi because he feared Xi Ke’s vengeance (Xuan 17.1). He now demonstrates his valor. The allied troops caught up with Qi troops at Shen. In the sixth month, on the renshen day (16), the allied troops reached the foot of Mount Miji.26 The Prince of Qi sent someone to request engagement in battle, saying, “You deigned to bring your lord’s troops to our humble settlement. Insufficient as our modest forces are, we request to meet you tomorrow morning.” The Jin commanders responded, “Lu and Wei are the brothers of Jin. They came to notify us: ‘That great domain had been day and night relieving its rancor in the territories of our humble settlements.’ Our unworthy ruler could not bear their distress and sent a group of his subjects to plead with your great domain, charging that we should not let our chariots and troops remain long in your territory. We can only advance; we cannot retreat. The command from you, my lord, shall have no cause to be dishonored.”27 The Prince of Qi said, “What you, high officers, granted is my own wish. Even had you not given us permission, we would still meet you in battle.” Gao Gu of Qi entered the ranks of the Jin army, raised a stone and hurled it against a Jin man, took him captive, and then rode in his chariot, tying to it a mulberry trunk with its roots.28 He paraded around the Qi fortifications, saying, “Those who want valor can buy my surplus!”

2.3b

At the battle of An, Jin commanders and officers bear with injuries and persevere. On the guiyou day, the troops formed their lines at An.29 Bing Xia was the Qi Prince’s chariot driver. Feng Choufu was the spearman on the right. On the Jin side, Xie Zhang was Xi Ke’s chariot driver, and Zhengqiu Huan was the spearman on the right. The Prince of Qi said, “I might as well smite them and root them out before my morning meal!”30 Without putting armor on his horse, he charged toward the enemy.

2.3c(3)

28

Mulberry trees are hard to uproot. Gao Gu thereby demonstrates another feat of strength. The mulberry trunk also makes the captured chariot distinctly recognizable. 29 An 鞌 was located in the domain of Qi and is probably to be identified with Lixia 歷下, west of Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. 30 Du Yu (ZZ 25.423) reads jian 翦 as jin 盡 (completely), but elsewhere in Zuozhuan the word means “to cut off” or “to destroy.”

Lord Cheng

715

郤克傷於矢，流血及屨，未絕鼓音，曰：「余病矣！」張侯曰：「自 始合，而矢貫余手及肘，余折以御。左輪朱殷，豈敢言病？吾子忍之！」 緩曰：「自始合，苟有險，余必下推車，子豈識之？然子病矣！」張侯曰： 「師之耳目，在吾旗鼓，進退從之。此車一人殿之，可以集事。若之何其 以病敗君之大事也？擐甲執兵，固即死也，病未及死，吾子勉之！」左并 轡，右援枹而鼓。馬逸不能止，師從之。齊師敗績。逐之，三周華不注。 2.3d 韓厥夢子輿謂己曰：「旦辟左右！」故中御而從齊侯。邴夏曰：「射其御

者，君子也。」公曰：「謂之君子而射之，非禮也。」射其左，越于車下。射 其右，斃于車中。 綦毋張喪車，從韓厥曰：「請寓乘！」從左右，皆肘之，使立於後。

31 In Shiji 32.1497, Xi Ke is said to want to “return to Jin ranks.” 32 Alternatively, “an arrow went through my hand and reached my elbow.” 33 He did not have time to take them out properly, so he just broke them off, leaving the tips of the arrows in his flesh. 34 Zhengqiu Huan assumes rightly that Xi Ke did not notice because he had been seriously wounded and also because he was devoting whatever remained of his energy and concentration to beating the war drums. 35 By acknowledging Xi Ke’s wound, Zhengqiu Huan could have implied that a return to the Jin ranks might be admissible. This in turn provoked Xie Zhang’s rebuttal. 36 The analogy of the army with the human body means that banners and drums define direction, unity, and purpose for the army—banners are what the soldiers see and drumbeats are what they hear. Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.402: “The heart of the three armies is with this chariot. Their eyes and ears are with our banners and drums. If the chariot shows no retreating sign and the drum makes no retreating sound, our military endeavor will succeed.” Cf. Sunzi 7.141. 37 Du Yu (ZZ 25.423) reads dian 殿 as zhen 鎮 (“control” or “guard”). Du derived his gloss from Maoshi 15A.502 (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 439). Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1.204–5) suggests the phonological and semantic connections between dian 殿, tian 填 (“fill”), and zhen 鎮. 38 Xie Zhang was holding the reins in only one hand and thus could not control the horses properly. 39 The mountain called Huabuzhu 華不注 was located northeast of present-day Jinan. 40 For similar reasoning, see Xi 22.8, where Lord Xiang of Song refuses to attack Chu at the battle of Hong until the Chu army had crossed the river and arranged its troops; see also Zhao 26.4c, where Ran Shu does not lead troops against Chen Zi­qiang of Qi because Ran calls Chen a “noble man.” For the opposite argument, which maintains that warfare calls for a different kind of ritual propriety, see Xi 22.8 and Xuan 2.1a. In Zhao 21.6b, Hua Bao, having shot at and missed an enemy on the battlefield, agrees to give the latter his turn to shoot and is killed.

716

Zuo Tradition

Xi Ke was wounded by an arrow. The blood flowed all the way to his shoes, but he never faltered in his drumbeat. He said, “I have been wounded!”31 Xie Zhanga said, “From the moment the troops clashed, arrows pierced my arm and elbow.32 I broke them off so as to drive the chariot.33 The left wheel has turned dark red with blood. Did I dare to speak of my wounds? You, sir, should just bear it!” Zhengqiu Huana said, “From the moment the troops clashed, whenever there is difficult terrain, I have without fail dismounted to push the chariot. How would you even know about it?34 But you, sir, have indeed been wounded!”35 Xie Zhanga said, “The eyes and ears of the army are with our banners and drums, and we advance and retreat in step with them.36 We can complete our mission so long as there is one of us to control the chariot.37 How can you let your injury ruin our ruler’s great enterprise? To don armor and take up weapons is to be ready to meet death. You are wounded but not dying yet. You, sir, have to brace yourself!” Xie Zhang grasped all the reins together with his left hand while with his right he wielded the drumstick and beat the war drums. The horses raced forward and could not be stopped,38 and the army followed his chariot. The Qi troops were completely defeated. Jin forces pursued the Qi army, whose remnants thrice circled Mount Huabuzhu.39 A dream saves the Jin commander Han Jue; a snakebite might have caused Qi’s defeat. In the midst of such apparently random causality the etiquette of battle persists: the Qi ruler refuses to shoot Han Jue because he seems to be “a noble man”; Xi Ke pardons the Qi officer Feng Choufu because of his loyalty toward his ruler. Han Jue had dreamed of his father, Ziyu, telling him: “Tomorrow morning, avoid the right and the left!” That was why he stood in the center driving the chariot as he pursued the prince of Qi. Bing Xia said, “Shoot the chariot driver, to all appearances a noble man.” The Qi lord said, “To call him a noble man and yet shoot him would not be in accordance with ritual propriety.”40 He shot the archer on Han’s left, who fell from the chariot, and he also shot the spearman man on his right, who died in it. Qiwu Zhang lost his chariot and ran after Han Jue, saying, “Please let me ride in your chariot!” He followed Han Jue to his left and then his right; in both cases Han Jue elbowed him and made him stand behind

2.3d

Lord Cheng

717

韓厥俛，定其右。逢丑父與公易位。將及華泉，驂絓於木而止。丑父寢 於轏中，蛇出於其下，以肱擊之，傷而匿之，故不能推車而及。 韓厥執縶馬前，再拜稽首，奉觴加璧以進，曰：「寡君使群臣為 魯、衛請，曰：『無令輿師陷入君地。』下臣不幸，屬當戎行，無所逃隱。 且懼奔辟，而忝兩君。臣辱戎士，敢告不敏，攝官承乏。」丑父使公下，如 華泉取飲。 鄭周父御佐車，宛茷為右，載齊侯以免。韓厥獻丑父，郤獻子將 戮之，呼曰：「自今無有代其君任患者，有一於此，將為戮乎？」郤子曰： 「人不難以死免其君，我戮之，不祥，赦之，以勸事君者。」乃免之。 2.3e 齊侯免，求丑父三入，三出。每出，齊師以帥退。入于狄卒，狄卒皆抽戈

楯冒之。以入于衛師，衛師免之。遂自徐關入。

41

In the beginning, Lord Qing of Qi was in the center and Feng Choufu was his spearman on the right. Now Feng Choufu moves to the center and Lord Qing stands on his right. The ruler and the commander must have been wearing similar military garb; hence, changing places sufficed to confuse the enemy. 42 These were springs at the foot of Mount Huabuzhu. 43 The zhan 轏 (“army wagon”) has been glossed as “carriage for sleeping” (woche 臥車) and as “military carriage” (yiche 役車) (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 439). 44 Presumably he concealed the wound so as to retain his position as the Qi ruler’s spearman on the right. 45 According to the received text, this line should be translated differently: “Han Jue held the bridle in front of the horses.” But the word ma 馬 is probably included by mistake (Karlgren, gl. 362, following Duan Yucai). Du Yu (ZZ 25.424) claims that the horse trappings symbolize willingness to serve as attendant. 46 The horse trappings, the bowing, and the wine cup were all part of the standard etiquette for a commander addressing the ruler of the vanquished army. These details are repeated in Xiang 25.5, when Gongsun Shezhi of Zheng meets the defeated Chen ruler. 47 “The ranks of the army” (ronghang 戎行) may also be rendered as “military action” or “the battlefield.” 48 Despite the elaborately polite rhetoric, Han Jue is announcing his intention to make a prisoner of the man he believes to be Lord Qing of Qi. 49 To give Lord Qing a chance to escape, Feng Choufu orders him to fetch water. 50 In Gongyang, Cheng 2 (17.215), Xi Ke executed Feng Choufu. 51 Following Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 780. He enters to lead the Qi army in withdrawal but comes out again to look for Feng Choufu. Du Yu (ZZ 25.424) opines that Lord Qing enters and comes out of the Jin ranks three times trying to save Feng Choufu. Yang (2:795) asserts that Lord Qing deals with Jin in his first attempt and with the Di and Wei troops in his second and third attempts. 52 Di soldiers are found in the Jin army probably because Di men were awarded to Jin ministers as slaves or conscripts after Jin’s victory over the Red Di (Xuan 15.3). 53 Karlgren (gl. 366), following Shen Qinhan, reads mao 冒 as “charge.” Du Yu (ZZ 25.425) explains mao as “cover.” According to the latter reading, the Di soldiers pull out dagger-axes to allay Jin suspicions, but they actually try to protect the Qi ruler by covering him with shields. 54 Both Di and Wei are Jin allies, but Wei (or both Di and Wei, if we read mao as “cover”) is reluctant to harm Lord Qing, perhaps for fear of future Qi vengeance.

718

Zuo Tradition

himself. As Han Jue bent to adjust the corpse of his attendant on the right, Feng Choufu and the Qi lord changed places.41 When they were about to reach the Springs of Hua,42 the flanking horses got caught in the trees and stopped. Feng Choufu had been sleeping in an army wagon43 when a snake emerged from under it. He had hit it with his forearm, was bitten, and concealed his wound.44 That was why he could not push the chariot free and his pursuers caught up with it. Han Jue held the bridle and came forward,45 bowed twice with his forehead touching the ground, and respectfully presented a wine cup, adding a jade disk as offering.46 He said, “Our unworthy ruler sent a group of his subjects to plead with Qi on behalf of Lu and Wei, charging us not to let our troops penetrate deeply into your territory. Your humble servant unfortunately happens to be in the ranks of the army,47 with no place to turn for escape or hiding. Moreover, he fears that fleeing or avoiding battle will bring shame to both rulers. Unworthy to be a warrior, I venture to tell of my lack of abilities, as I provisionally take up duties to attend you and offer inadequate service.”48 Choufu had the lord dismount and fetch a drink from the Springs of Hua.49 Meanwhile, Zheng Zhoufu was driving one of the auxiliary chariots, with Yuan Pei as his spearman on the right. They took in the Prince of Qi, who thus escaped capture. Han Jue presented Choufu to Xi Ke. Xi Kea was about to put him to death, when Choufu cried out: “Henceforth there will be none who will take his ruler’s place to bear his woe! There is one right here. Is he to be put to death?” Xi Keb said, “It is inauspicious for us to put to death a man who does not balk at death if it will let his ruler escape. I will pardon him to encourage those who serve their lords.” He thus spared him.50 The Qi ruler tries to retrieve Feng Choufu, causing further confusion in the Qi army. A Qi woman is rewarded for upholding the primacy of the ruler and the father. For another example of a Qi woman who upholds public duty as paramount, see Xiang 23.7. Having evaded capture, the Prince of Qi searched for Choufu. Thrice he entered his army’s ranks and thrice he came out of them.51 Each time he came out, Qi troops withdrew with their commanders without following him. He entered the ranks of Di soldiers.52 The Di soldiers all pulled out dagger-axes and shields as they charged at him.53 He entered the ranks of Wei troops, which let him escape from harm.54 He then entered Qi from Xuguan.55

2.3e

55 Xuguan 徐關, which could be translated as the “Pass of Xu,” was a pass located just southwest of present-day Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong.

Lord Cheng

719

齊侯見保者，曰：「勉之！齊師敗矣！」辟女子。女子曰：「君免乎？」 曰：「免矣。」曰：「銳司徒免乎？」曰：「免矣。」曰：「苟君與吾父免矣， 可若何？」乃奔。齊侯以為有禮。既而問之，辟司徒之妻也。予之石窌。 晉師從齊師，入自丘輿。擊馬陘。 2.3f 齊侯使賓媚人賂以紀甗、玉磬與地。「不可，則聽客之所為。」

賓媚人致賂。晉人不可，曰：「必以蕭同叔子為質，而使齊之封內 盡東其畝。」 對曰： 蕭同叔子非他，寡君之母也。若以匹敵，則亦晉君之母也。

吾子布大命於諸侯，而曰必質其母以為信，其若王命何？且 是以不孝令也。《詩》曰： 孝子不匱， 永錫爾類。

Rui 銳 is a spearlike weapon. The rui situ 銳司徒 is the leader of those who wield such weapons, who probably form the front line of the army. Alternatively, ruishi 銳士 can mean “crack troops”; see Karlgren, gl. 367. 57 He thought this because she asked first about the ruler and only then about her father, and she did not ask about her husband, which may be considered a more private concern. 58 Takezoe (12.18–19) notes that this is the first instance of a woman being granted a settlement. 59 Maxing 馬陘 was located southwest of Yidu County 益都縣, Shandong. 60 This might have been acquired when Lord Xiang of Qi annexed Ji in 690 Bce (Zhuang 4.2). The yan 甗, a kind of ancient double boiler, was made of pottery or bronze. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 25.425) speculates that this yan is made of jade, which might have been a more appropriate gift. Karlgren (gl. 368) suggests that yan may simply be a mistake for xian 獻, a bronze vessel presented as an offering. 61 The Ji vessel and jade chiming stones are to be given to Xi Ke (or, according to the Bamboo Annals, cited by Du Yu, to the Jin ruler), while land is to be returned to Wei and Lu (ZZ 1063; Yang, 2:797). 62 That is, if Jin refuses, Qi would fight again. 63 Xiao Tongshu Zi was the mother of Lord Qing of Qi and a secondary consort of Lord Hui of Qi (Soushen ji 14.103). Her scornful laughter at Xi Ke’s deformity in 592 Bce (Xuan 17.1) in part explains Xi Ke’s readiness to attack Qi on behalf of Lu and Wei. She is called Xiao Tongzhi Zi 蕭同姪子 in Gongyang, Cheng 2 (17.216), and Guliang, Cheng 1–2 (13.129). Tong 同 is written as Tong 桐 in Shiji 32.1494, 39.1678. Du Yu (ZZ 25.425) glosses her name as “the daughter of Tongshu of Xiao.” Her name has also been interpreted as Xiaotong Shu Zi, “middle daughter of [the ruler of] Xiaotong,” Xiaotong here being understood as the name of a domain or as a combination of the names of two domains. Other commentators read “Zi” as the clan name of Song, to which Xiao was subsidiary, as indicated by the word shu (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 783). 56

720

Zuo Tradition

When the Prince of Qi saw the guards for the city walls and gates, he said, “Brace yourselves! The Qi army was defeated!” The vanguard urged a woman to get out of the way. The woman said, “Has the ruler escaped harm?” They replied, “He has.” “Has the leader of the spearmen escaped harm?”56 “He has.” She said, “If the ruler and my father have escaped harm, what more can I ask?” She then ran away. The Prince of Qi thought she acted in accordance with ritual propriety.57 Inquiring about her subsequently, he found out that she was the wife of the leader of fortifications, and he gave her the settlement of Shiliu.58 The Jin army pursued the Qi army, entered Qi by way of Qiuyu, and attacked Maxing.59 Jin leaders demand total subjugation from Qi: its field divisions are to run east and west, thus linking Qi to Jin, and the Qi ruler’s mother is to come to Jin as hostage, because Xi Ke wants revenge for her scornful laughter at his deformity three years ago (Xuan 17.1). The Qi envoy Guo Zuo rebuffs Jin demands by appealing, through citation of the Odes, to the early Zhou moral and political order. He also emphasizes Qi’s determination to resist Jin’s encroachments. The Prince of Qi sent Guo Zuoa to offer the bronze yan vessel from Ji,60 jade chiming stones, and land as gifts to the victors,61 with this instruction: “If they refuse, let them do what they would.”62 Guo Zuoa offered the gifts. The leaders of Jin refused: “Qi must give Xiao Tongshu Zi as hostage in Jin63 and make the divisions between fields within its borders all run east and west.”64 Guo Zuo replied,

2.3f

Xiao Tongshu Zi is none other than our unworthy ruler’s mother. If we were to name someone as her counterpart, then it would in fact be the mother of the Jin ruler. If, as you lay your great command upon the princes, sir, you must make hostages of their mothers to secure a pledge, how can you answer to the Zhou king’s charge? Moreover, this will amount to issuing commands that are unfilial. As it says in the Odes, The filial son is unstinting, And forever blesses your kind.65

64

65

Divisions between fields were made according to topography and patterns of irrigation. Jin was west of Qi, east–west divisions in Qi would mean irrigation canals and roads running in the same direction, which would facilitate Jin incursions into Qi. Shangjun shu 17.136, Lüshi chunqiu 8.441, and Han Feizi 34.250 all mention that after Lord Wen of Jin defeated Wei, Jin demanded that Wei make the divisions between fields run east to west. Maoshi 247, “Jizui” 既醉, 17B.606. These lines are also quoted in Yin 1.4.

Lord Cheng

721

若以不孝令於諸侯，其無乃非德類也乎？先王疆理天下，物

土之宜，而布其利。故《詩》曰： 我疆我理， 南東其畝。 今吾子疆理諸侯，而曰「盡東其畝」而已，唯吾子戎車是利，

無顧土宜，其無乃非先王之命也乎？反先王則不義，何以為 盟主？其晉實有闕。四王之王也，樹德而濟同欲焉；五伯之 霸也，勤而撫之，以役王命。今吾子求合諸侯，以逞無疆之 欲，《詩》曰： 布政優優， 百祿是遒。 子實不優，而棄百祿，諸侯何害焉？不然，寡君之命使臣，

則有辭矣。曰：「子以君師辱於敝邑，不腆敝賦，以犒從者。 畏君之震，師徒橈敗。吾子惠徼齊國之福，不泯其社稷，使 繼舊好，唯是先君之敝器、土地不敢愛。子又不許，請收合 餘燼，背城借一。敝邑之幸，亦云從也；況其不幸，敢不唯 命是聽？」 66 67

68

69 722

Maoshi 210, “Xin Nanshan” 信南山, 13B.460. Yang (2:798) identifies them as Shun, Yu, Tang, and Wu (or Wen). Shun was successor to the sage-king Yao; the remaining three founded the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties, respectively. The four eras are named together in Zhuang 32.3 and Cheng 13.3. Du Yu (ZZ 25.426) identifies the four kings as Yu of Xia, Tang of Shang, and Kings Wen and Wu of Zhou. Du Yu (ZZ 25.426) names Kunwu of Xia, Dapeng and Shiwei of Shang, Lord Huan of Qi, and Lord Wen of Jin as the “five overlords.” The list coincides with those of Fu Qian (as cited in Maoshi-Kong, “Preface,” 6), Ban Gu (Baihu tong shuzheng 1), and Ying Shao (Fengsu tongyi 1.2b–3b). “The five overlords of the Three Dynasties” are distinct from “the five overlords of the Spring and Autumn period,” of which there are various versions (Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 4.95–96). Lord Huan of Qi and Lord Wen of Jin figure in all versions. Xunzi 11.232–33 and Lüshi chunqiu 2.95–96 add King Zhuang of Chu, King Helu of Wu, and King Goujian of Yue, while Lu Deming’s Jingdian shiwen includes Lord Xiang of Song, Lord Mu of Qin, and King Zhuang of Chu, as does Zhao Qi in his annotations to Mencius (Mengzi-Zhao 12B.218); Yan Shigu in his annotations to Hanshu (Hanshu-Yan 13.364) lists Lord Mu of Qin, Lord Xiang of Song, and King Fucha of Wu. It is likely that Guo Zuo is referring to “the five overlords of the Three Dynasties.” It would be anachronistic, but not impossible, for Guo Zuo to refer to “the five overlords of the Spring and Autumn period.” (In other words, the mid–Warring States author of this passage could have been guilty of anachronism.) In Zuozhuan itself, the only figures consistently referred to as overlords are Lord Huan of Qi and Lord Wen of Jin. The term is used more sporadically in relation to Lord Mu of Qin’s expanding power over the Western Rong, Lord Xiang of Jin’s continuation of his father’s enterprise, and the resurgence of Jin power under Lord Dao. Often the term is used in policy debates or diplomatic negotiations to invoke varying visions of dominance or judicious authority. Cf. Li, Readability, 296–98. Maoshi 304, “Changfa” 長發, 20D.802.

Zuo Tradition

If you should command the princes to be unfilial, is that not a contravention of moral example? When the former kings drew up boundaries for the land under heaven and divided it into geographical regions, they assessed what the land was suitable for and laid it out in accordance with the benefits to be gotten from it. That is why it says in the Odes, We draw up boundaries, we divide, Making fields run south, run east.66 Now you, sir, are setting up boundaries and divisions for the princes but demand that “divisions between fields should all run east and west.” You are only considering the advantage for your war chariots, with no regard for what is suitable for the land. Is that not a violation of the former kings’ commands? To go against the former kings is undutiful. How then can you be the covenant chief? It is Jin that is at fault. The four kings67 became kings by establishing virtue and fulfilling desires shared by all. The five overlords68 became overlords by being diligent and attending to the needs of other princes, and in this way put themselves in the service of the king’s commands. Now you seek to gather the princes and unite them, only to give free rein to desires that go beyond all boundaries. As it says in the Odes, Gently and carefully he lays out his decrees. A hundred blessings he gathers around him.69 It is you, sir, who are not gentle and careful in this matter, and thus abandon the hundred blessings—how can that harm the other princes?70 In the event that our offer is refused, our unworthy ruler has already charged his envoy with the following message: “You, sir, deigned to bring your lord’s army to our humble settlement. Insufficient as our modest forces were, we strove to honor the exertions of your followers.71 Awed by your ruler’s mighty authority, our troops scattered and suffered defeat. If you will be kind enough to seek blessings for this domain of Qi, and not let the altars of its domain be obliterated, and if you instead allow our former good relations to be continued, then we do not dare begrudge the humble vessels and land of our former rulers. If you do not grant this, then we ask to collect the last remnants72 of our army and fight one more time with our backs to our city walls. Even if our humble settlement is lucky in battle, we shall still obey you. How much more so if we are not lucky? Would we dare to abide by anything but your commands?” 70 71

72

That is, Jin alone will suffer. Literally, “to offer provisions to your followers.” It is customary diplomatic rhetoric to refer to battle as “the offering of provisions” (e.g., Xi 26.2). Karlgren (gl. 372) suggests that Guo Zuo may be referring specifically to how the provisions left behind by the Qi army in its hasty retreat were taken over by the Jin army. What we translate as “last remnants” is literally “remnant embers” (yujin 餘燼), what remains after a devastating fire.

Lord Cheng

723

2.3g 魯、衛諫曰：「齊疾我矣。其死亡者，皆親暱也。子若不許，讎我必甚。

唯子，則又何求？子得其國寶，我亦得地，而紓於難，其榮多矣。齊、晉 亦唯天所授，豈必晉？」 晉人許之，對曰：「群臣帥賦輿，以為魯、衛請。若苟有以藉口，而 復於寡君，君之惠也。敢不唯命是聽？」

2.3h(4, 7)

禽鄭自師逆公。 秋，七月，晉師及齊國佐盟于爰婁。使齊人歸我汶陽之田。公會晉 師於上鄍。賜三帥先路三命之服。司馬、司空、輿帥、候正、亞旅皆受一 命之服。

2.4(5) 八月，宋文公卒，始厚葬，用蜃、炭，益車、馬，始用殉，重器備。槨有四

阿，棺有翰、檜。 君子謂華元、樂舉「於是乎不臣。臣，治煩去惑者也，是以伏死 而爭。今二子者，君生則縱其惑，死又益其侈，是棄君於惡也，何臣之 為？」

73

Lord Cheng of Lu was coming from Lu to meet the Jin army. Qin Zheng is a Lu high officer accompanying the Jin army. 74 The location of Yuanlou 爰婁 is unknown. 75 Shangming 上鄍 was located in present-day Yanggu County 陽穀縣, Shandong. 76 The three commanders are Xi Ke, Fan Xie, and Luan Shu. According to Shangshu 18.278 and Liji 25.480, ceremonial carriages have three gradations: great carriage, superior carriage, and inferior carriage. Zhouli 27.413 names five kinds of ceremonial carriages, made of jade, gold, ivory, leather, and wood, respectively. It is not clear how the two lists may be compared. The higher the number of commands, the more opulent the carriages and robes would be. 77 Du Yu (ZZ 25.427) glosses yushuai 輿帥 as “leader of war chariots.” Karlgren (gl. 376) suggests that, since all military units have chariots, the title should refer to more specific duties, such as overseeing the repair and management of chariots and other military supplies. 78 Both lime (obtained by burning clamshells) and charcoal function to absorb humidity. Use of charcoal seems to have been common practice among the rich (Lüshi chunqiu 10.525). However, according to Zhouli-Zheng 16.251, only Zhou kings were entitled to use the ashes of burnt clamshells. 79 Since the Song ruling line was descended from Shang, for which human sacrifices and interment of humans to “accompany the dead” were common, it is not clear why the text says here that interment of humans began only with Lord Wen. It is possible that the practice had been discontinued for some generations and only restarted with Lord Wen. See also Xi 19.3. 80 Both the style of the outer coffin and the ornamentations on the coffin were prerogatives of the Zhou king. Also, Lord Wen was buried in the second month of the next year, seven months after his death. According to burial rites of the time, a Zhou king should be buried after seven months, and a prince after five months. Karlgren (gl. 379) argues that the association of hankuai 翰檜 with decorations is tenuous, and he proposes that the term may simply mean “on the side was a supporting cypress trunk” (reading han as gan 榦). Archaeological evidence suggests the “upgrading” of sumptuary norms for the tombs of lords and nobles (von Falkenhausen, Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius, 139–49).

724

Zuo Tradition

Lu and Wei delegates convince Jin leaders to accept the terms of peace Guo Zuo proposed. Lu and Wei remonstrated with the Jin leaders: “Qi already resents us! The ones who died were all their ruler’s kin and favorites. If you do not agree to these terms, Qi’s enmity toward us will certainly be extreme! Even in your case, sirs, what more can you ask for? You will gain their treasures of the domain; we too will gain land and will have been relieved of our difficulties. The glory is great indeed! Qi and Jin are both endowed by Heaven. Why must it be Jin that prevails?” The Jin leaders granted the Qi request with this reply: “We, our lord’s subjects, led war chariots to plead on behalf of Lu and Wei. If we have the wherewithal for an answer to report back to our unworthy ruler, it is due to your ruler’s beneficence. Would we dare to abide by anything but your commands?”

2.3g

Lu gains lands, and Jin commanders gain honor. Qin Zheng came from the army to meet our lord.73 In autumn, in the seventh month, Jin troops and Guo Zuo of Qi swore a covenant at Yuanlou.74 Qi leaders were made to return to us the lands to the north of the Wen River. Our lord met with Jin troops at Shangming75 and bestowed on the three Jin commanders superior ceremonial carriages as well as regalia appropriate to dignitaries of three commands.76 The supervisor of the military, the overseer of works, the commander of military administration,77 the leader of scouts, and officers second in command all received the regalia appropriate to dignitaries of one command.

2.3h(4, 7)

Song ministers are blamed for the Song ruler’s extravagant funeral. This, along with the next entry, explains the origins of certain funeral practices. In the eighth month, Lord Wen of Song died. It was then that the extravagant burials began. The ashes of burnt clamshells and charcoal were used.78 The number of carriages and horses accompanying the dead were increased. For the first time humans were sacrificed to follow the deceased in death.79 The number of vessels and implements was multiplied. Four pillars supported the outer coffin, which had a roof in the palace style. The coffin was ornamented on three sides and on the top.80 The noble man said of Hua Yuan and Yue Ju that “in this they did not behave as subjects should. A subject is one who brings order to chaos and removes confusion. That is why he braves death to fight for the right path. Now as for these two men, when the ruler was alive they abetted his desires, and when he died, they added to his extravagance. This amounted to abandoning the ruler to iniquities. How was this the proper behavior for a subject?”

2.4(5)

Lord Cheng

725

2.5(6) 九月，衛穆公卒，晉三子自役弔焉，哭於大門之外。衛人逆之，婦人哭於

門內。送亦如之。遂常以葬。 2.6a 楚之討陳夏氏也，莊王欲納夏姬。申公巫臣曰：「不可。君召諸侯，以討

罪也；今納夏姬，貪其色也。貪色為淫，淫為大罰。周書曰：『明德慎罰』， 文王所以造周也。明德，務崇之之謂也；慎罰，務去之之謂也。若興諸 侯，以取大罰，非慎之也。君其圖之！」王乃止。 子反欲取之，巫臣曰：「是不祥人也。是夭子蠻，殺御叔，弒靈侯， 戮夏南，出孔、儀，喪陳國，何不祥如是？人生實難，其有不獲死乎？天 下多美婦人，何必是？」子反乃止。

81

82

83 84

726

According to Liji 41.727, officials on a mission to offer condolences for deaths in another domain should enter the hall. Here the three Jin commanders wailed outside the gate, perhaps because they were not official representatives sent by the Jin ruler. According to Liji 44.765, women should wail in the hall. Here they are mourning “inside the gate,” but the guests offering condolences are “wailing outside the main gate.” Ministers and, in some cases, rulers attending the funerals of Jin lords and Chu kings during the Xiang and Zhao reigns are often asked to do more than this. That is, officials from other domains offered condolences and were received outside the main gate. In the parallel but briefer account in the bamboo document Xinian, Zifan and Qu Wuchen openly fight for Xia Ji (Pines, “Zhou History and Historiography”). Xia Ji had a grown son in the accounts from more than ten years earlier. At this point she must be in her forties or fifties. That she should remain seductive well into middle age becomes part of the lore about Xia Ji, who is said to rejuvenate herself through mastery of the art of sexual intercourse (Lienü zhuan 7.155–56). In the late Ming erotic novel Unofficial History from the Forest (Zhulin yeshi 株林野史), Xia Ji learns such secrets from her first lover, the immortal who visits her in a dream; and the first mortal with whom she has sexual relations is Ziman, her paternal uncle’s son (who, according to the Chinese patrilineal system, counts as a brother).

Zuo Tradition

In the ninth month, Lord Mu of Wei died. The three commanders of Jin, on their way back from the campaign, went to offer condolences. They wailed outside the main gate of the capital.81 The men of Wei went out to meet them. The womenfolk wailed inside the gate.82 There was the same arrangement as they were sent off. This thus became the customary procedure for burial.83

2.5(6)

The femme fatale Xia Ji, who caused havoc in Chen (Xuan 9.6, 10.4, 11.5), now sows discord in Chu. A Chu minister, Qu Wuchen, offers advice that he himself cannot follow.84 Having chastised the Xia lineage of Chen, King Zhuang wished to take Xia Ji into his harem. Qu Wuchena, Lord of Shen, said, “This will not do. You, my lord, summoned the princes to chastise the guilty, but now you are taking her into your harem because you covet her beauty. To covet beauty is licentiousness, and licentiousness is a great transgression. The Zhou Documents says, ‘Illuminate virtue, be wary of transgression.’ On this basis King Wen created Zhou.85 To illuminate virtue is to strive to exalt it; to be wary of transgression is to strive to remove it. If you rouse the princes only to become guilty of great transgression, you are not being wary. My lord should consider this well!” The king thus desisted. Zifan wanted to take her for himself. Wuchen said, “This is an inauspicious person. This is the one who brought about Ziman’s early death, killed Yushu, murdered Lord Ling, executed Xia Zhengshua, exiled Kong and Yi, and destroyed Chen.86 How can anyone be so inauspicious? Life is difficult enough as it is. Would you want to suffer an unnatural death?87 There are many beautiful women under heaven. Why must you have that one?” Zifan thus desisted.

85 86

87

2.6a

Qu Wuchen is paraphrasing lines from “Kanggao” 康誥 in the Documents (Shangshu 14.201). Du Yu identifies Ziman as Xia Ji’s older brother. According to Zhao 28.2, Xia Ji’s older brother is Zimo, or Lord Ling of Zheng, who was murdered in the first year of his reign because of the turtle stew incident (Xuan 4.2). Ziman, identified as Xia Ji’s cousin in the late Ming novel mentioned in n. 84, may be another name for Lord Ling of Zheng; or he may be another older brother or Xia Ji’s first husband. Since she is said to have “killed three husbands” (Zhao 28.2), there should be another husband before Xia Zhengshu’s father and Xiang the Elder. Yushu is identified as Xia Ji’s second husband and Xia Zhengshu’s father. “Kong and Yi” are the Chen ministers Gongsun Ning and Yi Hangfu. Literally, “For any man, staying alive is difficult. Will you fail to find a natural death?” The implication is that life is hard to guard—the alternative reading is that life is precious, hard to come by—and Zifan’s proposed marriage will lead to his premature or violent death.

Lord Cheng

727

王以予連尹襄老。襄老死於邲，不獲其尸。其子黑要烝焉。巫臣使 道焉，曰：「歸，吾聘女。」又使自鄭召之，曰：「尸可得也，必來逆之。」 姬以告王。王問諸屈巫。對曰：「其信。知罃之父，成公之嬖也，而中行伯 之季弟也，新佐中軍，而善鄭皇戌，甚愛此子。其必因鄭而歸王子與襄 老之尸以求之。鄭人懼於邲之役，而欲求媚於晉，其必許之。」 2.6b 王遣夏姬歸。將行，謂送者曰：「不得尸，吾不反矣。」

巫臣聘諸鄭，鄭伯許之。及共王即位，將為陽橋之役，使屈巫聘于 齊，且告師期。巫臣盡室以行。申叔跪從其父，將適郢，遇之，曰：「異 哉！夫子有三軍之懼，而又有桑中之喜，宜將竊妻以逃者也。」及鄭，使 介反幣，而以夏姬行。將奔齊。齊師新敗，曰：「吾不處不勝之國。」遂 奔晉，而因郤至，以臣於晉。晉人使為邢大夫。 子反請以重幣錮之。王曰：「止！其自為謀也則過矣，其為吾先君 謀也則忠。忠，社稷之固也，所蓋多矣。且彼若能利國家，雖重幣，晉將 可乎？若無益於晉，晉將棄之，何勞錮焉？」

88

Xiang the Elder was shot by the Jin commander Xun Shou during the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2h). 89 Wuchen claims that Zhi Ying’s father, Xun Shou, is a favorite of Lord Cheng of Jin, father of the reigning Lord Jing. Xun Linfu’s recent victories over the Red Di (Xuan 15.6) confirm his position in Jin government. Such important connections mean that Xun Shou would be heeded. “The prince” refers to Gongzi Guchen, who was taken prisoner during the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2h). Recall that the Xun line branched out as the Zhi and Zhonghang lineages, headed first by Xun Linfu (Zhonghang Huanzi) and Xun Shou (Zhi Zhuangzi). 90 The prince refers to Gongzi Guchen, whom Xun Shou captured at Bi (Xuan 12.2). 91 She, of course, has no intention of bringing back Xiang the Elder’s body; she knows that she is not returning to Chu. 92 For the Yangqiao campaign, see Cheng 2.8 below. Yangqiao 陽橋 was located northwest of present-day Tai’an County 泰安縣, Shandong. 93 Wuchen should be anxious because of his diplomatic mission involving military affairs. “The delight of a mulberry patch tryst” refers to illicit union. See Maoshi 48, “Sang zhong” 桑中, 3A.113: sang zhong (in the mulberry patch) is where lovers have their rendezvous. 94 By this time Wuchen has completed his mission in Qi and is supposed to be on his way back to Chu. He sends his assistant to bring back the gifts and also to report to the Chu king the discharge of his mission. 95 Literally, “The way he planned for himself was indeed excessive, but the way he planned for our former rulers was loyal.” 96 Since King Gong was only ten or eleven at this point, it is unlikely that he could have made such an elaborate statement. The balance between loyalty and self-interest (or self-preservation) is a persistent concern in Zuozhuan.

728

Zuo Tradition

The king gave her to the court deputy Xiang the Elder.88 Xiang the Elder died at Bi, and his corpse was not retrieved. His son Heiyao then consorted with Xia Ji. Wuchen sent word to her, saying, “Return to Zheng, and I will formalize engagement with you.” He also had someone from Zheng summon her with this message: “The body of Xiang the Elder, the court deputy, can be obtained, but you must come and take it back.” Xia Ji told the king about this, and the king consulted Qu Wuchenb. The latter replied, “This may well be credible. Zhi Ying’s father was Lord Cheng’s favorite and the youngest brother of Xun Linfuc.89 Recently made assistant commander of the central army, he is on good terms with Huang Xu of Zheng and loves this son very much. He must be trying to return the prince and the body of Xiang the Elder through Zheng in order to seek the release of his son.90 The men of Zheng, fearful because of the Bi campaign, wish to court Jin’s favor. They will certainly grant this arrangement.” Qu Wuchen pursues his scheme, marries Xia Ji, and becomes a high officer in Jin. King Gong of Chu rejects vengeance. The king sent Xia Ji to return to Zheng. Upon leaving, she said to those seeing her off: “If I do not obtain the body, I will not return.”91 Qu Wuchena formalized his engagement with Xia Ji in Zheng, and the Liege of Zheng granted his assent. When King Gong acceded to his position, he intended to undertake a campaign at Yangqiao.92 He sent Qu Wuchenb on an official visit to Qi and also to notify Qi of the date when his troops would move. Wuchen took all his valuables with him as he set out. Shen Shugui, who was accompanying his father, Shen Shushi, was about to go to Ying. He encountered him and said, “Strange indeed! That fine man should be full of vigilant anxiety for three armies, yet he shows all the delight of a mulberry patch tryst.93 He must be someone on his way to an elopement!” Arriving in Zheng,94 he sent his aide to carry the Qi gifts back to Chu, and then he set out with Xia Ji. They were going to flee to Qi, but the Qi army had recently been defeated, and he said, “I will not reside in any domain that is not victorious.” He then fled to Jin, and, with the intercession of Xi Zhi, became a Jin subject. The leaders of Jin appointed him the high officer for Xing. Zifan requested that generous bribes be given Jin to have Qu Wuchen forever barred from office. The king said, “Stop! The way he acted in his own interest may have been excessive, but he was loyal in the way he acted in the interest of our former rulers.95 Loyalty is the firm foundation of the altars of the domain. It can cover up much indeed! Moreover, if he can benefit their domain and patrimony, even if we were to offer generous bribes, would Jin give approval? If he does not bring any gains to Jin, then Jin will abandon him. Why bother to have him barred from office?”96

2.6b

Lord Cheng

729

2.7 晉師歸，范文子後入。武子曰：「無為吾望爾也乎？」對曰：「師有功，國

人喜以逆之，先入，必屬耳目焉，是代帥受名也，故不敢。」武子曰：「吾 知免矣。」 郤伯見，公曰：「子之力也夫！」對曰：「君之訓也，二三子之力也， 臣何力之有焉？」范叔見，勞之如郤伯。對曰：「庚所命也，克之制也，燮 何力之有焉？」欒伯見，公亦如之。對曰：「燮之詔也，士用命也，書何力 之有焉？」 2.8a(8–10) 宣公使求好于楚，莊王卒，宣公薨，不克作好。公即位，受盟于晉，會晉

伐齊。衛人不行使于楚，而亦受盟于晉，從於伐齊。故楚令尹子重為陽 橋之役以救齊。將起師，子重曰：「君弱，群臣不如先大夫，師眾而後可。 《詩》曰： 濟濟多士， 文王以寧。

97

Zhonghang Xuanzi (Xun Geng, Xun Linfu’s son) was at the time commander of the central army and did not take part in the campaign. However, Fan Xie, as assistant commander, received orders from him. 98 See Xuan 18.2. 99 King Zhuang of Chu and Lord Xuan of Lu died in the same year (591 Bce). 100 See Cheng 1.3. 101 When King Gong is on his deathbed, he talks about his inexperience when he became king at age ten (Xiang 13.4).

730

Zuo Tradition

Jin commanders and officers, upon their victorious return, show exemplary modesty and disinterestedness. The moral rhetoric stands in stark contrast to the violent power struggles among Jin ministerial lineages (Cheng 8.6, 17.10, Xiang 21.5). When the Jin army returned, Fan Xief was the last to enter the capital. Fan Huif said, “Don’t you know that I have been anxiously waiting for your return?” He replied, “The army has achieved victory. The inhabitants of the capital met it with joy. To enter first is by necessity to attract their attention and to usurp the commander in chief’s good name. That was why I did not dare enter earlier.” Fan Huif said, “Now I know we will escape disaster!” Xi Ked presented himself for an audience with Lord Jing of Jin. The lord said, “This was due to your efforts!” He replied, “This was due to my lord’s instructions and the efforts of all the leaders. How could my effort be credited for anything?” Fan Xied presented himself for an audience, and the lord honored his exertions in the same manner as he did with Xi Ked. He replied, “This was due to the leadership of Zhonghang Xuanzic97 and the discipline of Xi Kee. How could my effort be credited for anything?” Luan Shub presented himself for an audience, and the lord said the same thing. He replied, “This was due to Fan Xied ’s direction and the fact that officers followed their orders. How could my effort be credited for anything?”

2.7

Lu and Wei side with Jin when Jin attacks Qi. Chu comes to Qi’s aid, preparing for war by raising a large army and instituting reforms designed to boost morale. Lord Xuan had sent someone to seek good relations with Chu.98 But then King Zhuang died and Lord Xuan expired, so Lu and Chu did not manage to become allies.99 Our lord acceded to his position and accepted a covenant with Jin just when Jin was attacking Qi.100 The leaders of Wei did not send envoys to Chu and instead accepted a covenant with Jin and followed Jin in attacking Qi. That was why the Chu chief minister, Zichong, undertook the Yangqiao campaign to go to the aid of Qi. When the army was about to set forth, Zichong said, “The ruler is young,101 and we are no match for our former high officers. Our troops must be numerous if we are to succeed.102 As it says in the Odes,

2.8a(8–10)

Mighty and splendid were the many officers, And relying on them King Wen enjoyed peace.103

102 Recall Xi Ke’s similar argument when he requested eight hundred chariots before the An campaign (Cheng 2.3a). 103 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.535.

Lord Cheng

731

夫文王猶用眾，況吾儕乎？且先君莊王屬之曰：『無德以及遠方， 莫如惠恤其民，而善用之。』」乃大戶，已責，逮鰥，救乏，赦罪。悉師， 王卒盡行。彭名御戎，蔡景公為左，許靈公為右。二君弱，皆強冠之。 2.8b 冬，楚師侵衛，遂侵我師于蜀。使臧孫往。辭曰：「楚遠而久，固將退矣。

無功而受名，臣不敢。」楚侵及陽橋，孟孫請往賂之以執斲、執鍼、織 紝，皆百人，公衡為質，以請盟。楚人許平。 十一月，公及楚公子嬰齊、蔡侯、許男、秦右大夫說、宋華元、陳 公孫寧、衛孫良夫、鄭公子去疾及齊國之大夫盟于蜀。卿不書，匱盟 也。於是乎畏晉而竊與楚盟，故曰「匱盟」。蔡侯、許男不書，乘楚車 也，謂之失位。 君子曰：「位其不可不慎也乎！蔡、許之君，一失其位，不得列於 諸侯，況其下乎！《詩》曰： 不解于位， 民之攸塈。 其是之謂矣。」

104 The census might have involved tracking down the tax status of each household; hence, “forgiving debts (owed the government)” followed from the census. 105 King Gong was too young to take part in the campaign, but his war chariot must have been used. Had he ridden in the chariot, he would have been in the middle, with the chariot driver on the left and the spearman on the right. Here the chariot driver sat in the middle because of the king’s absence. 106 Assistants on the right and left of the chariot were supposed to have reached the age for the capping ceremony. 107 Du Yu (ZZ 25.429) identifies Gongheng as Lord Cheng’s son, but Lord Cheng did not marry until twelve years later (Cheng 14.2). Gongheng might have been Lord Xuan’s son (Shen Qinhan, Chunqiu Zuozhuan buzhu, cited in Yang, 2:809). 108 The Annals does not record the presence of the rulers of Cai and Xǔ because they act beneath their station when they ride in a Chu chariot as assistants on the right and the left. 109 Maoshi 249, “Jia le” 假樂, 17C.615–16. Maoshi has jia 假, while Zhongyong (Liji 52.885) and Zuozhuan have jia 嘉 when referring to this ode. This ode praising a ruler is also mentioned or cited in Wen 3.7, Xiang 26.7b, Zhao 21.2, and Ai 5.4.

732

Zuo Tradition

If even King Wen used numerous troops, then how much more should the likes of us rely on them? Moreover, our former ruler King Zhuang enjoined us thus: ‘Lacking the virtue to reach faraway places, it is better to show kindness and compassion to our own people and to use them well.’” Zichong therefore instituted a grand census, forgave debts,104 let beneficence reach the old and the widowed, relieved the impoverished, and pardoned the guilty. He mobilized all the troops; even the king’s guards all marched on. Peng Ming drove the war chariot, Lord Jing of Cai was on his left, and Lord Ling of Xǔ was on his right.105 Those two rulers were young; both of them, though not of age, were made to undergo the capping ceremony.106 The Chu incursion reaches Yangqiao. Lu offers gifts and hostages to sue for peace. Bad faith on all sides mars the ensuing covenant. Lu, Song, and Wei join Jin in attacking Chu’s ally Zheng, which will become their covenant partner the following year. In winter, Chu troops invaded Wei and then also descended on our troops at Shu. The Lu ruler wanted to send Zang Xuanshua there. He declined: “Chu came from afar and has been in the field a long time. Their army would, in any case, leave soon. I do not dare to accept the credit while lacking the merit.” When the Chu incursion reached Yang­ qiao, Meng Xianzia begged leave to go. With gifts of a hundred each of carpenters, needlewomen, and weavers, and with Gongheng107 as hostage, he requested a covenant. The leaders of Chu agreed to make peace. In the eleventh month, our lord and Zichonga of Chu, the Prince of Cai, the Head of Xǔ, Yue (who was the high officer of the right of Qin), Hua Yuan of Song, Gongsun Ning of Chen, Sun Liangfu of Wei, Gongzi Quji of Zheng, and Qi high officers swore a covenant at Shu. The ministers were not recorded because this was a flawed covenant. At this time Lu feared Jin and secretly swore a covenant with Chu: that is why this was called a “flawed covenant.” The Prince of Cai and the Head of Xǔ were not recorded because they were riding in a Chu chariot. This is called “losing one’s rightful position.”108 The noble man said, “Position is something for which one must not fail to be vigilant! The rulers of Cai and Xǔ, once they lost their rightful position, could not be listed among the princes. How much more so then with those of lesser rank! As it says in the Odes,

2.8b

He never slackens in what is due his position; He is the one in whom the people find repose.109

This is what is meant!”

Lord Cheng

733

2.8c 楚師及宋，公衡逃歸。臧宣叔曰：「衡父不忍數年之不宴，以棄魯國，國

將若之何？誰居？後之人必有任是夫！國棄矣。」 是行也，晉辟楚，畏其眾也。君子曰：「眾之不可以已也。大夫為 政，猶以眾克，況明君而善用其眾乎？〈大誓〉所謂『商兆民離，周十人 同』者，眾也。」 2.9 晉侯使鞏朔獻齊捷于周。王弗見，使單襄公辭焉，曰：「蠻夷戎狄，不式

王命，淫湎毀常，王命伐之，則有獻捷。王親受而勞之，所以懲不敬、勸 有功也。兄弟甥舅，侵敗王略，王命伐之，告事而已，不獻其功，所以敬 親暱、禁淫慝也。今叔父克遂，有功于齊，而不使命卿鎮撫王室，所使 來撫余一人，而鞏伯實來，未有職司於王室，又奸先王之禮。余雖欲於

110 In the line shui ju 誰居, the word ju 居 has no substantive meaning but simply indicates an interrogative mood. “Who then?” may mean “who will bear the consequences?” or “whom can we send as hostage?” The compound also appears in Xiang 23.5 (“Who could it be then?”). 111 These lines seem to summarize the quotation from the “Great Oath” (Tai shi 泰誓) cited in Zhao 24.1 (Shangshu 11.155). The “Great Oath” is one of the Ancient Script chapters of the Documents. While Zichong’s victory testifies to the importance of sheer number (as Zichong argued earlier in 2.8a), the noble man’s comment redefines “multitude” (zhong 眾) as persons united by virtue and moral purpose. See also Cheng 6.11. 112 Shi Zhuangbo was a high officer in the upper army during the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2). It was not until the following year (Cheng 3.8) that he became a minister (qing), an appointment supposedly approved by the Zhou king. During this visit to the Zhou court he is thus not yet a “royally commissioned minister.”

734

Zuo Tradition

The Lu hostage, Gongheng, escapes back to Lu. Jin avoids military confrontation with Chu. By the time the Chu army reached Song, Gongheng had escaped and returned to Lu. Zang Xuanshu said, “Gonghenga cannot bear a few years of discomfort and thus abandons Lu to its fate. What will happen to the domain? Who then?110 Those who come after will certainly suffer the consequences. The domain is abandoned to its fate!” In this military action, Jin avoided Chu, fearing its multitudes. The noble man said, “Multitudes cannot be dispensed with. Even high officers in charge of government would prevail on the basis of multitudes. How much more then should an enlightened ruler who excelled in using his multitudes? Where the ‘Great Oath’ says ‘the millions of Shang are divided, the ten persons of Zhou are united,’ it is referring to the true meaning of multitudes.”111

2.8c

The Zhou king chides the Jin ruler for the impropriety of offering spoils from the victory over Qi and of sending an envoy of insufficiently high rank. On the appropriate ritual of “presenting spoils,” see also Zhuang 31.1. Privately, however, the king treats the Jin envoy with courtesy, adding the provision that the royal feast and gifts, representing a ritual breach, should not be recorded in the annals. The Prince of Jin sent Shi Zhuangboa to present Qi captives and the spoils of victory at the Zhou court. The king did not receive him and sent the Shan Duke Xiang to decline the offering, saying, “When the Man, Yi, Rong, and Di tribes do not carry out royal commands, indulge in sensual excesses and wine, and flout the constants of order, and the king gives the command to attack them, then there is the presentation of captives and spoils of victory. The king will personally receive the offerings and honor the exertions of those who undertake the expedition, this being the means whereby he punishes the irreverent and encourages the meritorious. As for domains ruled by the brothers, nephews, and uncles of Zhou, when they encroach upon and undermine the king’s rules and regulations, the king gives the command to attack them. In such cases, there is only report of mission accomplished but no presentation of the fruits of victory. This is the means whereby he shows respect for kin and allies and proscribes excesses and iniquities. Now you, Uncle, are able to succeed and achieve merit in Qi but have not sent a royally commissioned minister to bring stability and solace to the royal house. The man you have sent to comfort me, the lone one, is none other than Shi Zhuangbob, who has no office in the royal house.112 Moreover, this visit

2.9

Lord Cheng

735

鞏伯，其敢廢舊典以忝叔父？夫齊，甥舅之國也，而大師之後也，寧不 亦淫從其欲以怒叔父，抑豈不可諫誨？」士莊伯不能對。 王使委於三吏，禮之如侯伯克敵使大夫告慶之禮，降於卿禮一 等。王以鞏伯宴，而私賄之。使相告之曰：「非禮也，勿籍！」

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，王正月，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯伐鄭。 3.2 辛亥，葬衛穆公。 3.3 二月，公至自伐鄭。 3.4 甲子，新宮災。三日哭。 3.5 乙亥，葬宋文公。 3.6(2) 夏，公如晉。 3.7(3) 鄭公子去疾帥師伐許。 3.8 公至自晉。 3.9(5) 秋，叔孫僑如帥師圍棘。 3.10 大雩。 3.11(6) 晉郤克、衛孫良夫伐廧咎如。 3.12(7) 冬，十有一月，晉侯使荀庚來聘。 3.13(7) 衛侯使孫良夫來聘。

736

Zuo Tradition

violates the ritual propriety of the former kings. Even if I wish to be partial to Shi Zhuangbob, how dare I abandon old statutes and bring shame to my uncle? Now Qi is a domain ruled by our maternal nephews and maternal uncles, who are the descendants of the Grand Lord.113 Did it not indulge in excessive desires and thereby anger my uncle? Was it indeed beyond remonstrance and instruction?” Shi Zhuangbo could not answer. The king had the task of reception entrusted to the three officials and treated Shi Zhuangbo with the ritual appropriate for the occasion when a prince, having vanquished his enemy, sent a high officer to report the felicitous news. This was one rank lower than the ritual for ministers. The king feasted Shi Zhuangbob and privately gave him gifts. He had his assistant tell him, “This is not in accordance with ritual propriety. Do not record it in the historical annals!” LORD CHENG 3 (588 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Cao and attacked Zheng.

3.1(1)

On the xinhai day (28), Lord Mu of Wei was buried.

3.2

In the second month, our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

3.3

On the jiazi day (12), there was a disastrous fire at the New Palace. For three days we wailed.

3.4

On the yihai day (23), Lord Wen of Song was buried.

3.5

In summer, our lord went to Jin.

3.6(2)

Gongzi Quji of Zheng led out troops and attacked Xǔ.

3.7(3)

Our lord arrived from Jin.

3.8

In autumn, Shusun Qiaoru led out troops and laid siege to Ji.

3.9(5)

There was a great rain sacrifice.

3.10

Xi Ke of Jin and Sun Liangfu of Wei attacked Qianggaoru.

3.11(6)

In winter, in the eleventh month, the Prince of Jin sent Xun Geng (Zhonghang Xuanzi) to us on an official visit.

3.12(7)

The Prince of Wei sent Sun Liangfu to us on an official visit.

3.13(7)

113 The ruling house of Qi was related to the Zhou house by marriage. King Ding’s queen was a daughter of Qi (Xuan 6.2, 6.4). The Grand Lord (or “Grand Preceptor”) was Lü Shang or Jiang Shang (Jiang Grand Lord 姜太公), ancestor of Qi. Recall how Cang Ge resists Jin aggression by appealing to his domain’s (Yangfen) marital ties with the Zhou house (Xi 25.2).

Lord Cheng

737

3.14(7) 丙午，及荀庚盟。 3.15(7) 丁未，及孫良夫盟。 3.16 鄭伐許。

左傳 3.1(1) 三年，春，諸侯伐鄭，次于伯牛，討邲之役也，遂東侵鄭。鄭公子偃帥師

禦之，使東鄙覆諸鄤，敗諸丘輿。皇戌如楚獻捷。 3.2(6) 夏，公如晉，拜汶陽之田。 3.3(7) 許恃楚而不事鄭，鄭子良伐許。 3.4 晉人歸楚公子穀臣與連尹襄老之尸于楚，以求知罃。於是荀首佐中軍

矣，故楚人許之。王送知罃，曰：「子其怨我乎？」 對曰：「二國治戎，臣不才，不勝其任，以為俘馘。執事不以釁鼓， 使歸即戮，君之惠也。臣實不才，又誰敢怨？」

114 Zheng is punished for having vacillated between Jin and Chu. 115 Man 鄤 is of unknown location. Qiuyu 丘輿 was located in present-day Yidu County 益都縣, Shandong. 116 After Qi’s defeat at the battle of An, Jin and Qi swear the Covenant of Yuanlou, by which Qi returns to Lu the lands north of the Wen River. See Annals, Cheng 2.4. 117 The word guo 馘, sometimes written with the “ear” 耳 radical, is glossed as ears cut off from the corpses of defeated soldiers (Shuowen jiezi 12A.4a) or, according to the Mao commentary, left ears cut off from recalcitrant prisoners of war (Mao 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.574). Karlgren (gl. 179, 387) argues that guo refers to cut-off heads.

738

Zuo Tradition

On the bingwu day (28), we swore a covenant with Xun Geng (Zhonghang Xuanzi).

3.14(7)

On the dingwei day (29), we swore a covenant with Sun Liangfu.

3.15(7)

Zheng attacked Xǔ.

3.16

ZUO

Jin and its allies attack Zheng but are rebuffed. In the third year, in spring, the princes attacked Zheng and set up camp at Boniu to chastise Zheng for its role in the Bi campaign.114 They then made an eastward incursion into Zheng. Gongzi Yan of Zheng led troops to fight back. He had the troops of the eastern marches lay an ambush at Man and defeated the invaders at Qiuyu.115 Huang Xu went to Chu to present the spoils of victory.

3.1(1)

In summer, our lord went to Jin to bow in thanks for the lands to the north of the Wen River.116

3.2(6)

Xǔ, relying on Chu, did not serve Zheng. Gongzi Qujia of Zheng attacked Xǔ.

3.3(7)

Zhi Ying, a Jin commander taken captive at the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2), is about to be repatriated to Jin (see also Cheng 2.6). His exchange with King Gong is reminiscent of that between Chong’er and King Cheng of Chu a few years before the battle of Chengpu (Xi 23.6): both respond with pride, deference, and subtle aggression to the question of repaying Chu for its generosity. Zhi Ying later plays an important role in the resurgence of Jin under Lord Dao. The leaders of Jin returned Gongzi Guchen and the body of the court deputy, Xiang the Elder, to Chu in order to seek the release of Zhi Ying. At that time Zhi Ying’s father, Xun Shou, was assistant commander of the central army; that was why the leaders of Chu granted the exchange. When he was sending Zhi Ying off, the king asked, “Do you harbor any resentment toward me?” He replied, “Our two domains were at war, and I, lacking talent and unequal to the duties of my position, became a captive awaiting decapitation.117 That your men in charge have not used my blood to smear the war drum, and will instead send me back to meet my execution, is a result of your kindness, my lord. It is I who lack talent; whom do I dare blame?”

3.4

Lord Cheng

739

王曰：「然則德我乎？」對曰：「二國圖其社稷，而求紓其民，各懲其 忿，以相宥也。兩釋纍囚，以成其好。二國有好，臣不與及，其誰敢德？」 王曰：「子歸，何以報我？」對曰：「臣不任受怨，君亦不任受德， 無怨無德，不知所報。」王曰：「雖然，必告不穀。」 對曰：「以君之靈，纍臣得歸骨於晉，寡君之以為戮，死且不朽。 若從君之惠而免之，以賜君之外臣首；首其請於寡君，而以戮於宗，亦 死且不朽。若不獲命，而使嗣宗職，次及於事，而帥偏師，以修封疆。雖 遇執事，其弗敢違，其竭力致死，無有二心，以盡臣禮，所以報也。」王 曰：「晉未可與爭。」重為之禮而歸之。 3.5(9) 秋，叔孫僑如圍棘，取汶陽之田。棘不服，故圍之。 3.6(11) 晉郤克、衛孫良夫伐廧咎如，討赤狄之餘焉。廧咎如潰，上失民也。

118 Alternatively, “to whom would I dare to feel grateful?” Zhi Ying is saying that he should not matter in the dealings between Jin and Chu. Chu is not releasing him as a personal favor; thus, Zhi Ying for his part cannot presume to be grateful, especially when gratitude may involve the fortunes of his domain. 119 If the Jin ruler puts Zhi Ying to death for failing his duty and thereby being captured, it will be a fitting punishment and a just death. He would die but his spirit would live on. 120 The subject from another domain is designated as “external subject.” Zhi Ying refers to his father, Xun Shou, by name because he is addressing a king; for other examples, see Xuan 15.2, Cheng 16.5f, and Xiang 21.5. On the occasions when the taboo for calling one’s father, ancestor, or ruler by name can be legitimately disregarded, see Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 23.546. Zhi Ying is claiming that if his father puts him to death at the Ancestral Temple for failing his duty, he will consider that too a just and rightful death.

740

Zuo Tradition

The king said, “In that case, are you grateful to me?” He replied, “The leaders of our two domains are planning on behalf of the altars of their respective domains and seeking to bring succor to their people. Each side for its part, to bring about mutual forgiveness, cautions against anger. Both release captives to foster good relations. Our two domains will have good relations for which I play no role; to whom would I dare to feel beholden?”118 The king said, “After you return, how will you repay me?” He replied, “I will not be in a position to feel resentment, and you, my lord, will not be in a position to accept gratitude. Without resentment and gratitude, I do not know what there is to repay.” The king said, “Even so, you have to tell me, the deficient one.” He replied, “If by my lord’s blessing this captive subject’s bones are returned to Jin, and if our unworthy ruler then put me to death, I will not perish even in death.119 If, as a consequence of my lord’s kindness, I am pardoned and bestowed upon my lord’s external subject, Xun Shoud, and if Xun Shoud then asks permission from our unworthy ruler to have me put to death at the lineage shrine, in that case too I will not perish even in death.120 If he does not receive the command to put me to death and instead has me succeed him in his duties as lineage head, and if my turn comes to apply myself to affairs of the domain, and to lead a subsidiary army to oversee the domain’s borders, then even if I were to meet your men in charge, I will not dare to avoid them. I will do my utmost, to the point of death, with an undivided heart, so as to fulfill the ritual propriety of a subject. That is how I will repay you.”121 The king said, “It is not yet time to contend with Jin.” He enhanced the ritual entertainment for Zhi Ying and sent him back to Jin. In autumn, Shusun Qiaoru laid siege to Ji,122 taking the lands to the north of the Wen River. Ji did not submit, and that is why Lu laid siege to it.123

3.5(9)

Jin avenges the earlier incursions of the Red Di tribes (Xuan 13.3). Xi Ke of Jin and Sun Liangfu of Wei attacked Qianggaoru to chastise the remnants of the Red Di tribes.124 Qianggaoru collapsed and dispersed, because its leaders lost the support of the people.

3.6(11)

121 Zhi Ying claims that while repayment does not really apply because there is no reason for resentment or gratitude, by loyally fulfilling his duty he will be justifying the Chu king’s kindness in releasing him. 122 Ji 棘 was located in present-day Shandong. Shuijing zhu locates it north of the Wen River (Yang, 2:814). 123 This is the first of seven instances of a rebellious Lu city being besieged and subjugated recorded in Zuozhuan (Yang, 2:814). 124 For the Qianggaoru tribe, see Xi 23.6a, n. 288.

Lord Cheng

741

3.7(12–15) 冬，十一月，晉侯使荀庚來聘，且尋盟。衛侯使孫良夫來聘，且尋盟。公

問諸臧宣叔曰：「中行伯之於晉也，其位在三；孫子之於衛也，位為上 卿，將誰先？」對曰：「次國之上卿，當大國之中，中當其下，下當其上大 夫。小國之上卿，當大國之下卿，中當其上大夫，下當其下大夫。上下如 是，古之制也。衛在晉，不得為次國。晉為盟主，其將先之。」丙午，盟 晉；丁未，盟衛，禮也。 3.8 十二月甲戌，晉作六軍。韓厥、趙括、鞏朔、韓穿、荀騅、趙旃皆為卿，賞

鞌之功也。 3.9 齊侯朝于晉，將授玉。郤克趨進曰：「此行也，君為婦人之笑辱也，寡君

未之敢任。」

125 At this time Xi Ke, as commander of the central army, ranks first; Xun Shou, as assistant commander of the central army, ranks second; while Zhonghang Xuanzi, as commander of the upper army, ranks third. 126 Yang (2:815) suggests that Wei can only be considered a small domain, which means that its high minister, Sun Liangfu, should be treated in the same way as Zhonghang Xuanzi, a low-rank minister in Jin. However, Jin’s role as covenant chief gives Zhonghang Xuanzi priority. 127 Jin originally had three armies, whose commanders and assistant commanders (Xi Ke, Fan Xie, Luan Shu, Xun Shou, Zhonghang Xuanzi, Zhao Tong) were the six ministers. The additional three armies made for six more ministers. Han Jue was commander, and Zhao Kuo assistant commander, of the new central army; Shi Zhuangbo was commander, and Han Chuan assistant commander, of the new upper army; Xun Zhui was the commander, and Zhao Tong assistant commander, of the new lower army. The military expansion here presaged developments during the Warring States era. There is also the possibility that Warring States realities are being projected back into the Spring and Autumn period. Note that the entire military force of Western Zhou in Shaanxi consisted of six armies, in addition to eight armies in Luoyang in the east. 128 When princes met in court visits, there was the ceremony of delivering and receiving the ritual jade. The prince’s bearing in this ceremony is often interpreted as a sign of his destiny; see Cheng 6.1 and Ding 15.1. 129 Xi Ke, as aide of ceremony, is in the central court, while the two rulers are in the hall above. In order to say something during the ceremony of delivering jade, Xi Ke must traverse the distance quickly. “Hastened forward” also indicates respect (Yang, 2:815–16, citing Tao Hongqing). Xi Ke is still harking back to the incivility of the Qi ruler’s mother (Xuan 17.1) as the cause of the conflict. In the parallel account in Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.404, Xi Ke humiliates the Qi ruler with “the ritual for rulers who escaped captivity.” Fen Huang of Miao comments on how he is courting disaster by being “valorous but ignorant of ritual propriety.”

742

Zuo Tradition

A discussion of rules of precedence: the values of rank depend on the size and power of the domain. Compare this with the argument over seniority between the Prince of Teng and the Prince of Xue in 712 Bce (Yin 11.1) or Invocator Tuo’s defense of Wei precedence over Cai in 506 Bce (Ding 4.1c), which both hinge on the interpretation of historical precedents. Forty years hence a Zheng nobleman will argue that rank does not depend on the size and power of the domain (Xiang 24.8). Cf. Liji 11.251. In winter, in the eleventh month, the Prince of Jin sent Zhonghang Xuanzia to us on an official visit and also to renew our covenant. The Prince of Wei sent Sun Liangfu to us on an official visit and also to renew our covenant. Our lord asked Zang Xuanshu about the matter: “Zhonghang Xuanzib in Jin ranks third;125 Sun Liangfub in Wei has the rank of high minister. Who should have precedence?” He replied, “A high minister in a second-tier domain corresponds to a middle-rank minister in a great domain; a middle-rank minister corresponds to its low-rank minister; a low-rank minister corresponds to a senior high officer. A high minister in a small domain corresponds to a low-rank minister in a great domain; a middle-rank minister corresponds to its senior high officer; a low-rank minister corresponds to its low-rank high officer. Positions above and below should be like this; such were the regulations of old. Wei, compared to Jin, cannot be considered a second-tier domain.126 However, Jin is acting as covenant chief, and we will therefore give Jin precedence.” On the bingwu day, we swore a covenant with Jin; on the dingwei day, we swore a covenant with Wei. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

3.7(12–15)

The Jin army expands, and its commanders in the battle of An become ministers. Note that Zhao Kuo, one of the prime culprits responsible for Jin’s defeat at the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2e, 12.2g), is here elevated, while Xian Hu, another commander blamed for defeat at Bi, was eliminated (Xuan 13.4). In the twelfth month, on the jiaxu day (26), Jin created the six armies. Han Jue, Zhao Kuo, Shi Zhuangboa, Han Chuan, Xun Zhui, and Zhao Zhan all became ministers as reward for their merit in the victory at An.127

3.8

Xi Ke is still resentful, but Han Jue, with skillful rhetoric, rebuilds ties between Jin and Qi. The Prince of Qi visited the court of Jin. As he was about to deliver the ritual jade,128 Xi Ke hastened forward and said, “This visit is taking place because you, my lord, were shamed as a result of womenfolk’s laughter. Our unworthy ruler may not presume to deserve this.”129

3.9

Lord Cheng

743

晉侯享齊侯。齊侯視韓厥。韓厥曰：「君知厥也乎？」齊侯曰：「服 改矣。」韓厥登，舉爵曰：「臣之不敢愛死，為兩君之在此堂也。」 3.10 荀罃之在楚也，鄭賈人有將寘諸褚中以出。既謀之，未行，而楚人歸之。

賈人如晉，荀罃善視之，如實出己。賈人曰：「吾無其功，敢有其實乎？ 吾小人，不可以厚誣君子。」遂適齊。

春秋 4.1(1) 四年，春，宋公使華元來聘。 4.2 三月壬申，鄭伯堅卒。 4.3(2) 杞伯來朝。 4.4 夏，四月甲寅，臧孫許卒。 4.5(3) 公如晉。 4.6 葬鄭襄公。 4.7(4) 秋，公至自晉。 4.8 冬，城鄆。 4.9(5) 鄭伯伐許。

744

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin offered ceremonial toasts for the Prince of Qi. The Prince of Qi looked steadily at Han Jue. Han Jue said, “Do you, my lord, recognize Jue?” The Prince of Qi said, “Your costume is changed.” Han Jue ascended the steps and raised his wine cup, saying, “The reason I dared not begrudge death was just so that the two rulers might be in this hall.”130 This is one among other stories about merchants from Zheng (see also Xi 33.1 and Zhao 16.3) and is another example of a humble man with exemplary integrity. The proposed ruse is similar to what Chen Qi uses to smuggle Gongzi Yangsheng to the Qi court in Gongyang, Ai 6 (27.350–51). When Zhi Yingb was in Chu, a Zheng merchant planned to take him out of Chu in a large sack used for carrying clothes. The plan had already been made, but before the trip could take place, the leaders of Chu repatriated him. When the merchant went to Jin, Zhi Yingb treated him as well as if it was he who had personally smuggled him out. The merchant said, “When I do not have the merit, do I dare enjoy the fruits of success? I am but a petty man; I cannot so grievously deceive a noble man.” He thus went to Qi.

3.10

LORD CHENG 4 (587 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, the Duke of Song sent Hua Yuan to us on an official visit.

4.1(1)

In the third month, on the renshen day,131 Jian, the Liege of Zheng, died.

4.2

The Liege of Qǐ came to visit our court.

4.3(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the jiayin day (8), Zangsun Xu (Zang Xuanshu) died.

4.4

Our lord went to Jin.

4.5(3)

Lord Xiang of Zheng was buried.

4.6

In autumn, our lord arrived from Jin.

4.7(4)

In winter, we fortified Yun.

4.8

The Liege of Zheng attacked Xǔ.

4.9(5)

130 Han Jue is trying to make up for Xi Ke’s vindictive outburst. He claims that he fought bravely so that the Qi and Jin rulers can reach harmonious agreement at a feast. The Qi ruler recognizes Han Jue: recall how he refused to shoot Han Jue during the battle of An because Han appeared to be a “noble man” and how he narrowly escaped being arrested by Han by changing places with Feng Choufu (Cheng 2.3d). 131 There is no renshen day in the third month; renshen is the twenty-fifth day of the second month (Yang, 2:817).

Lord Cheng

745

左傳 4.1(1) 四年，春，宋華元來聘，通嗣君也。 4.2(3) 杞伯來朝，歸叔姬故也。 4.3(5) 夏，公如晉。晉侯見公，不敬。季文子曰：「晉侯必不免。《詩》曰：

敬之敬之！ 天惟顯思， 命不易哉！ 夫晉侯之命在諸侯矣，可不敬乎！」 4.4(7) 秋，公至自晉，欲求成于楚而叛晉。季文子曰：「不可。晉雖無道，未可叛

也。國大、臣睦，而邇於我，諸侯聽焉，未可以貳。《史佚之志》有之曰： 非我族類， 其心必異。 楚雖大，非吾族也，其肯字我乎？」公乃止。

132 It was customary for a ruler who had newly acceded to his position, as with Lord Gong of Song here, to dispatch envoys to other domains on formal visits. This is the first of four formal visits from Song to the Lu court. 133 Maoshi 288, “Jing zhi” 敬之, 19C.740; also cited in Xi 22.7. 134 Note the dual meanings of ming 命 as “command” and “destiny.” See also Wen 13.3. 135 Lord Cheng of Lu wants to turn against Jin because Lord Jing of Jin did not receive him with courtesy.

746

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the fourth year, in spring, Hua Yuan of Song came to us on an official visit: this was to establish relations between Lu and his new ruler.132

4.1(1)

Shu Ji was a daughter of a Lu Lord, though of which one is unclear. She was not the daughter of Lord Cheng, who was too young at this time, and probably not of Lord Xuan, whose oldest daughter married Duke Gong of Song four years later (see Cheng 9.5). Shu Ji will return to Lu in the following year (Annals, Cheng 5.1) and will die three years later (Cheng 8.9). The Liege of Qǐ came to visit our court: this was because of the plan to send Shu Ji back.

4.2(3)

A Lu minister, Ji Wenzi, predicts doom for Lord Jing of Jin because of the latter’s lack of respect toward the Lu ruler. Lord Jing will die six years later. In summer, our lord went to Jin. The Prince of Jin granted our lord an audience and was disrespectful. Ji Wenzi said, “The Prince of Jin will certainly not be able to escape disaster. As it says in the Odes,

4.3(5)

Be reverent, be reverent. Heaven is clear to see. Its command is not easy to guard!133

Since the destiny of the Prince of Jin lies with the princes, how can he be disrespectful?”134 Jin Wenzi counsels against alliance with Chu because it is “not of the same kith and kin” as the central domains. In autumn, our lord arrived from Jin. He wished to seek an accord with Chu and to turn against Jin.135 Ji Wenzi said, “This will not do. Although Jin goes against the proper way, we cannot yet turn against it. That domain is great, and its ministers are harmonious. It is close to us and the other princes defer to it. We cannot yet switch allegiance. As it says in Scribe Yi’s Records,

4.4(7)

Those not of the same kith and kin, Their hearts and minds must be different.

Although Chu is great, its people are not our kin.136 Will it be willing to care for us?” Our lord thus desisted. 136 Whereas Chu is more consistently presented as “barbarian” and opposed to the central domains in the Gongyang tradition (although praise for King Zhuang also abounds), Chu’s image is marked by the balance or tension between approbation and critique, sameness and difference, in Zuozhuan.

Lord Cheng

747

4.5(9) 冬，十一月，鄭公孫申帥師疆許田。許人敗諸展陂。鄭伯伐許，取鉏任、

泠敦之田。 晉欒書將中軍，荀首佐之，士燮佐上軍，以救許伐鄭，取氾、祭。 楚子反救鄭，鄭伯與許男訟焉，皇戌攝鄭伯之辭。子反不能決也， 曰：「君若辱在寡君，寡君與其二三臣共聽兩君之所欲，成其可知也。不 然，側不足以知二國之成。」 4.6 晉趙嬰通于趙莊姬。

春秋 5.1 五年，春王正月，杞叔姬來歸。 5.2(2) 仲孫蔑如宋。 5.3(3) 夏，叔孫僑如會晉荀首于穀。 5.4(4) 梁山崩。 5.5 秋，大水。 5.6(8) 冬，十有一月己酉，天王崩。

137 Zheng invaded Xǔ the year before (Cheng 3.3). Here Zheng tries to demarcate the boundaries taken from Xǔ during that incursion but is defeated by Xǔ. Ten years later, Zheng invades Xǔ again, and Xǔ finally gives up these territories. There is a long history of Zheng aggression against Xǔ dating back to Lord Zhuang of Zheng’s invasion of Xǔ in 712 Bce (Yin 11.3). 138 Zhao Yingqi was the son of Zhao Cui, the brother of Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo, and the half brother of Zhao Dun (Xi 24.1). He is also called Lou Ying because he was given the settlement of Lou (Xi 24.1). He fought in the battle of Bi as an officer of the central army (Xuan 12.2). Zhao Zhuang Ji was the wife of Zhao Shuo (Zhao Dun’s son and Zhao Yingqi’s nephew), whose posthumous honorific was “Zhuang.”

748

Zuo Tradition

Chu and Jin side with Zheng and Xǔ, respectively, in a military confrontation between the latter two. The Chu commander Zifan tries to arbitrate the rival claims of Zheng and Xǔ. Chu thus assumes a role in interdomain relations hitherto only taken up by Jin. In winter, in the eleventh month, Gongsun Shen of Zheng led out troops to demarcate the boundaries of lands taken from Xǔ.137 The men of Xǔ defeated them at Zhan Slope. The Liege of Zheng attacked Xǔ and took the lands of Churen and Lingdun. Luan Shu of Jin was commander of the central army, and Xun Shou was his assistant commander. Fan Xieb was assistant commander of the upper army. In order to go to the aid of Xǔ, they attacked Zheng and took Fan and Zhai. When Zifan of Chu went to the aid of Zheng, the Liege of Zheng and the Head of Xǔ disputed their claims before him. Huang Xu spoke on behalf of the Liege of Zheng. Zifan could not arbitrate the case and said, “If you, my lords, deign to come to our unworthy ruler, he and his various subjects will listen to what you desire, and the resolution of your case will be known. If we don’t do it that way, I am not equal to the task of resolving the claims of your two domains.”

4.5(9)

Zhao Yingqib of Jin had a liaison with Zhao Zhuang Ji.138

4.6

LORD CHENG 5 (586 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Shu Ji of Qǐ came home.

5.1

Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) went to Song.

5.2(2)

In summer, Shusun Qiaoru met with Xun Shou of Jin at Gu.

5.3(3)

Mount Liang collapsed.

5.4(4)

139

In autumn, there was a great flood. In winter, in the eleventh month, on the jiyou day (12), the Heavenappointed king succumbed.

5.5 5.6(8)

139 Mount Liang 梁山 was located along the Yellow River in present-day Hancheng County 韓城縣, Shaanxi.

Lord Cheng

749

5.7(7) 十有二月己丑，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、邾子、杞伯同

盟于蟲牢。

左傳 5.1 五年，春，原、屏放諸齊。嬰曰：「我在，故欒氏不作。我亡，吾二昆其憂

哉。且人各有能、有不能，舍我，何害？」弗聽。 嬰夢天使謂己：「祭余，余福女。」使問諸士貞伯。貞伯曰：「不識 也。」既而告其人曰：「神福仁而禍淫。淫而無罰，福也。祭，其得亡 乎？」祭之，之明日而亡。 5.2(2) 孟獻子如宋，報華元也。 5.3(3) 夏，晉荀首如齊逆女，故宣伯餫諸穀。

140 Chonglao 蟲牢 was located north of present-day Fengqiu County 封丘縣, Henan. 141 Lord Jing of Jin will eliminate almost the entire Zhao lineage three years later (Cheng 8.6). 142 At this time Luan Shu, as commander of the central army, is in charge of policies. Zhao Yingqi is arguing that if he is exiled, Luan Shu and his kinsmen will rise up against the Zhao lineage. While he cannot adhere to the rules of proper sexual conduct, he is capable of stopping the Luan lineage from destroying the Zhao lineage. 143 Shi Wozhuo disclaims any knowledge or judgment in the public exchange but gives his opinion in private communication. The same pattern obtains in the exchange between the Ousted Lord of Wei’s messenger and Zigong (Ai 26.3).

750

Zuo Tradition

In the twelfth month, on the jichou day (23), our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Zhu, and the Liege of Qǐ, and they swore a covenant together at Chonglao.140

5.7(7)

ZUO

The narrative is obviously continuous with the event described in Cheng 4.6. Zhao Yingqi’s adulterous affair leads to his exile and doom for his lineage, despite the false promise of succor from a messenger of Heaven in Zhao Yingqi’s dream. The equivocation of the numinous message reminds us of the fickle spirit in Zhuang 32.3. For other dreams open to different interpretations or offering misleading clues, see Zuozhuan, Xi 28.3f, Cheng 17.8, and Zhao 4.8, 7.3. In the fifth year, in spring, Zhao Tonga and Zhao Kuob banished Zhao Yingqi to Qi. Zhao Yingqia said, “It is because I am here that the Luan lineage does not stir up any trouble. If I am exiled, my two older brothers will have cause for concern!141 Moreover, each person has what he can and cannot do. What harm would it do to let me off?”142 They did not heed him. Zhao Yingqia dreamed that a messenger from Heaven said to him, “Offer sacrifice to me, and I will confer blessings on you.” He sent someone to Shi Wozhuoc to inquire about it. Shi Wozhuod said, “I do not know.” Afterward, however, Shi Wozhuo told the man,143 “The gods confer blessings on the noble in spirit and inflict calamities on the licentious. To be licentious and escape punishment is already a blessing. If you offer sacrifices, how can you not be banished?”144 He offered sacrifices, and the following day he was banished.

5.1

Meng Xianzi went to Song: this was to reciprocate Hua Yuan’s visit.145

5.2(2)

In summer, Xun Shou of Jin went to Qi to meet and escort the bride home. This is why Shusun Qiaorua supplied him with provisions at Gu.

5.3(3)

144 Yang (2:821–22) reads wang 亡 as wu 無: “how can there be no [calamitous consequences]?” Our translation, based on Yang’s reading, implies that the offering of sacrifices is preposterous and will only provoke calamities and banishment. Du Yu (ZZ 26.439), on the other hand, interprets banishment as a blessing: “If he offers sacrifice, how can he not obtain banishment [as the lesser punishment that is already a blessing]?” 145 For Hua Yuan’s visit to the Lu court in the previous year, see Cheng 4.1.

Lord Cheng

751

5.4(4) 梁山崩，晉侯以傳召伯宗。伯宗辟重，曰：「辟傳！」重人曰：「待我，不

如捷之速也。」問其所。曰：「絳人也。」問絳事焉。曰：「梁山崩，將召伯 宗謀之。」問將若之何。曰：「山有朽壤而崩，可若何？國主山川，故山崩 川竭，君為之不舉、降服、乘縵、徹樂、出次，祝幣，史辭以禮焉。其如此 而已。雖伯宗，若之何？」伯宗請見之。不可。遂以告，而從之。 5.5 許靈公愬鄭伯于楚。六月，鄭悼公如楚訟，不勝，楚人執皇戌及子國。

故鄭伯歸，使公子偃請成于晉。秋，八月，鄭伯及晉趙同盟于垂棘。 5.6 宋公子圍龜為質于楚而歸，華元享之。請鼓譟以出，鼓譟以復入，曰：

「習攻華氏。」宋公殺之。 5.7(7) 冬，同盟于蟲牢，鄭服也。

146 Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.406, gives an almost identical account. Gongyang, Cheng 4 (17.218), Guliang, Cheng 5 (13.131), and Hanshi waizhuan 8.341 all link the collapse of Mount Liang to the blockage of the Yellow River. The largely overlapping Guliang and Hanshi waizhuan accounts turn this into a story of how a humble man is initially abused (Bo Zong wants to whip the driver for not giving way) and then exploited (he is not given credit for his sound advice). Instead of being an exemplary figure, Bo Zong (or Bo Zun 伯尊 in Guliang) is criticized for not bringing a good adviser to the ruler’s attention. 147 The Xǔ ruler thus follows Zifan’s suggestion in Cheng 4.5. 148 Ziguo is the cognomen of Gongzi Fa, father of the famous Zheng minister Zichan. 149 Lord Gong of Song thus kills his brother or half brother to mollify a powerful minister.

752

Zuo Tradition

Another commoner shows exemplary sagacity when he discourses on a ruler’s appropriate response to natural calamities. For other examples of wise commoners, see Xi 31.1, Xiang 4.4, 15.4, 30.3a. Mount Liang collapsed. The Prince of Jin used a courier-carriage to summon Bo Zong. Bo Zong sent a heavy wagon to one side, saying, “Make way for the courier-carriage!” The driver of the wagon said, “To wait for me will not be as fast as taking a shortcut.” Bo Zong asked where he came from, and he replied, “I am a man of Jiang.” He then asked about affairs in Jiang. He said, “Mount Liang collapsed. The ruler intends to summon Bo Zong to confer with him about it.” Bo Zong asked what was to be done. He replied, “If a mountain has decayed soil and then collapses, what is there to be done? Mountains and rivers are the mainstay of the domain. Thus, when mountains collapse and rivers run dry, the ruler abstains from meat and elaborate food, reduces the splendor of his apparel, rides carriages without decoration, banishes music, and leaves his usual abode. The diviner displays objects to be sacrificed to the spirits; the scribe reads ritually appropriate words to honor them. And that is all. Even with Bo Zong, what can he do?” Bo Zong asked to present him at court, but he refused. He thus told the ruler the driver’s words, which the ruler then followed.146

5.4(4)

Chu arbitrates the Zheng-Xǔ conflict in Xǔ’s favor, and Zheng turns to Jin. Lord Ling of Xǔ lodged a complaint against the Liege of Zheng at the Chu court.147 In the sixth month, Lord Dao of Zheng went to Chu to dispute the charge. He did not win the case, and the men of Chu seized Huang Xu and Ziguo.148 That is why when the Liege of Zheng returned, he sent Gongzi Yan to seek an accord with Jin. In autumn, in the eighth month, the Liege of Zheng and Zhao Tong of Jin swore a covenant at Chuiji.

5.5

Hua Yuan went to Chu as hostage in 594 Bce (Xuan 15.2) but had returned by 589, when he was criticized for mismanaging the burial of Lord Wen of Song (Cheng 2.4). It is possible that he was allowed to return from Chu only because Gongzi Weigui replaced him there as hostage; this would account for the latter’s animus against Hua Yuan. When Gongzi Weigui of Song returned from being a hostage in Chu, Hua Yuan offered him ceremonial toasts. He requested to leave Hua’s residence with drumbeats and shouts and to enter again with drumbeats and shouts, saying, “I am practicing my attack on the Hua lineage.” The lord of Song put him to death.149

5.6

In winter, the princes swore a covenant together at Chonglao: this was on account of Zheng’s submission to Jin.

5.7(7)

Lord Cheng

753



諸侯謀復會，宋公使向為人辭以子靈之難。

5.8(6) 十一月己酉，定王崩。

春秋 6.1 六年，春王正月，公至自會。 6.2(2) 二月辛巳，立武宮。 6.3(3) 取鄟。 6.4(4) 衛孫良夫帥師侵宋。 6.5 夏，六月，邾子來朝。 6.6(7) 公孫嬰齊如晉。 6.7 壬申，鄭伯費卒。 6.8(8) 秋，仲孫蔑、叔孫僑如帥師侵宋。 6.9(9) 楚公子嬰齊帥師伐鄭。 6.10(10) 冬，季孫行父如晉。 6.11(11) 晉欒書帥師救鄭。

左傳 6.1 六年，春，鄭伯如晉拜成，子游相，授玉于東楹之東。士貞伯曰：「鄭伯

其死乎！自棄也已。視流而行速，不安其位，宜不能久。」 150 There are various ideas about the status and location of Zhuan 鄟 (see Yang, 2:827). It was probably located somewhere near present-day Yanzhou 兗州, Shandong. 151 Jin and Zheng swore a covenant at Chuiji the previous year (Cheng 5.5). 152 As equals, rulers of domains should conduct the ceremony of “presenting and receiving jade” (shou shou yu 授受玉) between the eastern and western pillars, in the middle of the hall (zhongtang 中堂). If the guest has a lower status than the host, as might have been argued on the basis of Jin’s status as covenant chief, he should move eastward, somewhere between the middle of the hall and the eastern pillar. In moving too quickly and going farther east, beyond even the eastern pillar, the Zheng ruler is demoting himself to the status of an official. In general, the more august a person’s position is, the more slowly he moves, see Ding 5.4. In Xi 11.2, Lord Hui of Jin also invites dire predictions because of the negligent way he received a ritual jade.

754

Zuo Tradition

When the princes planned to meet again, the Duke of Song sent Xiang Weiren to decline participation on his behalf because of the troubles provoked by Gongzi Weiguia. In the eleventh month, on the jiyou day, King Ding succumbed.

5.8(6)

LORD CHENG 6 (585 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord arrived from the meeting. In the second month, on the xinsi day (16), the Martial Palace was established.

6.1

6.2(2)

We took Zhuan.150

6.3(3)

Sun Liangfu of Wei led out troops and invaded Song.

6.4(4)

In summer, in the sixth month, the Master of Zhu came to visit our court.

6.5

Gongsun Yingqi (Zishu Shengbo) went to Jin.

6.6(7)

On the renshen day (9), Fei, the Liege of Zheng, died.

6.7

In autumn, Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) and Shusun Qiaoru led out troops and invaded Song.

6.8(8)

Gongzi Yingqi (Zichong) of Chu led out troops and attacked Zheng.

6.9(9)

In winter, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Jin.

6.10(10)

Luan Shu of Jin led out troops and went to the aid of Zheng.

6.11(11)

ZUO

A Jin minister interprets the Zheng ruler’s excessive self-abnegation as the sign of his imminent demise. Lord Dao of Zheng dies a few months later. For a similar case of wrong positioning and ritual failure, see Zhao 21.2. In the sixth year, in spring, the Liege of Zheng went to Jin to bow to affirm the alliance.151 Gongzi Yana was his assistant. He received the ceremonial jade eastward of the eastern pillar. Shi Wozhuoc said, “The Zheng ruler will surely die! He has abandoned what he owes himself. His eyes have a roving expression and his movements are hasty. He is not secure in his position. It is fitting that he should not last long.”152

6.1

Lord Cheng

755

6.2(2) 二月，季文子以鞌之功立武宮，非禮也。聽於人以救其難，不可以立武。

立武由己，非由人也。 6.3(3) 取鄟，言易也。 6.4(4) 三月，晉伯宗、夏陽說、衛孫良夫、甯相、鄭人、伊雒之戎、陸渾、蠻氏侵

宋，以其辭會也。師于鍼。衛人不保。說欲襲衛，曰：「雖不可入，多俘而 歸，有罪不及死。」伯宗曰：「不可。衛唯信晉，故師在其郊而不設備。 若襲之，是棄信也。雖多衛俘，而晉無信，何以求諸侯？」乃止。師還，衛 人登陴。

756

Zuo Tradition

Ji Wenzi’s commemoration of Lu’s victory in the An campaign (Cheng 2.3) is deemed improper self-aggrandizement, since Lu had to rely on Jin’s assistance to defeat Qi. His vanity compares unfavorably with the restraint of King Zhuang of Chu in the aftermath of his victory at Bi (Xuan 12.2i). In the second month, Ji Wenzi established the Martial Palace because of his meritorious achievement at the battle of An.153 This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. If one has to rely on others in order to be saved from disaster, one cannot establish a martial palace. A martial palace is to be established because of one’s own achievement, not because of what is achieved through the assistance of others.

6.2(2)

We took Zhuan: this indicates that it was easily done.

6.3(3)

The allies punish Song for not participating in the covenant at Chonglao (Cheng 5.7). A Jin commander is tempted to make a surprise attack on Jin’s supposed ally Wei because of an earlier grudge (Xuan 13.5). Bo Zong refuses and maintains the importance of good faith in leadership. In the third month, Bo Zong and Xiayang Yue of Jin,154 Sun Liangfu and Ning Xiang of Wei, a Zheng leader, the Rong tribes of the Yi and Luo Rivers and of Luhun, together with the Man lineage, invaded Song because Song had declined to attend the meeting last year. The troops were stationed at Qian.155 The men of Wei were not on guard. Xiayang Yue wanted to make a surprise attack on Wei: “Although we cannot enter the capital, so long as we come back with many captives, our offense will not be punishable by death.” Bo Zong said, “This will not do. Precisely because Wei trusts Jin, it has not prepared for attacks, even though our troops are in its outskirts. For us to attack it is to abandon good faith. Although we may get many Wei captives, if Jin is faithless, how can we seek allegiance from the princes?” Xiayang Yue thus desisted. When Jin troops turned back, the men of Wei climbed the parapets.156

6.4(4)

153 Presumably, the Martial Palace (Wugong 武宮) was built to commemorate military achievement. It is obviously different from the Wugong mentioned in Annals, Zhao 15.2. The latter was the Ancestral Temple honoring Lord Wu of Lu. 154 The settlement called Xiayang 下陽 in Xi 2.3 (n. 15) is probably the same as this Xiayang 夏陽. It was in the domain of Guo that was annexed by Jin. Xiayang became the name of the lineage of officers put in power there. 155 For the Rong of Yi and Luo and Luhun, see Xi 11.3, Xi 22.4; the Rong of Man is mentioned in Zhao 16.2. Qian 鍼 was a Wei city not far from Wei’s capital, Diqiu, and was located near present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan. 156 In other words, Wei was actually more vigilant than Xiayang Yue thought.

Lord Cheng

757

6.5 晉人謀去故絳，諸大夫皆曰：「必居郇、瑕氏之地，沃饒而近盬，國利君

樂，不可失也。」韓獻子將新中軍，且為僕大夫。公揖而入。獻子從。公 立於寢庭，謂獻子曰：「何如？」對曰：「不可。郇、瑕氏土薄水淺，其惡 易覯。易覯則民愁，民愁則墊隘，於是乎有沈溺重膇之疾。不如新田， 土厚水深，居之不疾，有汾、澮以流其惡，且民從教，十世之利也。夫 山、澤、林、盬，國之寶也。國饒，則民驕佚。近寶，公室乃貧。不可謂 樂。」公說，從之。夏，四月丁丑，晉遷于新田。 6.6(7) 六月，鄭悼公卒。 6.7(6) 子叔聲伯如晉，命伐宋。 6.8(8) 秋，孟獻子、叔孫宣伯侵宋，晉命也。 6.9(9) 楚子重伐鄭，鄭從晉故也。 6.10(10) 冬，季文子如晉，賀遷也。

157 The result of this discussion was that Jin moved its capital to Xintian (present-day Houma), which was renamed Jiang. The former capital was thus called “Old Jiang.” See Yang, 1:44. 158 For Xun and Xia, see Xi 24 (n. 309) and Xi 30.3. Gu 盬, which means “salt,” is also called Yanchi 鹽池, or Salt Marsh (present-day Jiechi 解池). Xun lies to the northwest, and Xia to the south, of Jiechi. The argument here refers to a site in the general area of Xun and Xia, which is quite large. 159 The palaces of lords had three gates, leading to the outer court, the court of government, and the inner court. The discussion here took place either in the outer court or the court of government. 160 As the high officer of palace affairs, Han Jue should attend to the lord as he entered the inner court. 161 Gongfu Wenbo’s mother offers the same argument in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.205. Han Jue is refuting the argument that Xun-Xia is “profitable for the domain and enjoyable for the ruler.” He asserts that real profit lies in the people’s obedience.

758

Zuo Tradition

The Jin minister Han Jue advises Lord Jing of Jin to move the capital to Xintian. The leaders of Jin conferred about leaving Old Jiang.157 The various high officers all said, “We must stay in the land of the Xun and Xia lineages. It is fertile and close to Gu:158 it is profitable for the domain and enjoyable for the ruler. Such a site is not to be lost.” Han Juea was commander of the new central army and also served as high officer of palace affairs. The lord bowed to the various ministers and entered the inner gate.159 Han Jueb followed.160 The lord stood in the inner court and said to Han Jueb, “What do you think?” He replied, “This will not do. At Xun and Xia the soil is thin and the water is shallow, and foul substances can easily accumulate. If such accumulation is easy, the people will be miserable; if they are miserable, they will be enfeebled; and they will thus be sick with rheumatism and swollen limbs. That area does not compare to Xintian. There the soil is thick and the water is deep; living there does not cause sicknesses; and the Fen and Hui Rivers allow foul substances to flow away. Moreover, the people there heed instruction. This will mean profit for ten generations. For mountains, marshes, forests, and salt are treasures of the domain. If the domain is rich in resources, the people will become arrogant and indolent.161 Being close to treasures, the lord’s house will be impoverished.162 This cannot be called ‘enjoyable’ for the ruler.” The lord was pleased and followed his advice. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingchou day (13), Jin moved its capital to Xintian.

6.5

Shi Wozhuo’s prophecy (Cheng 6.1) is fulfilled. In the sixth month, Lord Dao of Zheng died.

6.6(7)

Zishu Shengbo went to Jin: this was because Jin leaders ordered Lu to attack Song.

6.7(6)

In autumn, Meng Xianzi and Shusun Qiaorub invaded Song: this was Jin’s command.

6.8(8)

Zichong of Chu attacked Zheng: this was because Zheng followed Jin.

6.9(9)

In winter, Ji Wenzi went to Jin: this was to congratulate Jin on the relocation of its capital.

6.10(10)

162 It is not clear why proximity to “treasures” (in this case salt from Salt Marsh) should impoverish the ruling house. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 26.442) suggests that “treasures,” which represent alternative means of livelihood, will lure the people from agriculture to commerce. The poor will become poorer and less able to pay the levy, and the rich will gain in power and become more defiant toward the ruling house.

Lord Cheng

759

6.11(11) 晉欒書救鄭，與楚師遇於繞角。楚師還。晉師遂侵蔡。楚公子申、公子

成以申、息之師救蔡，禦諸桑隧。趙同、趙括欲戰，請於武子，武子將許 之。知莊子、范文子、韓獻子諫曰：「不可。吾來救鄭，楚師去我，吾遂 至於此，是遷戮也。戮而不已，又怒楚師，戰必不克。雖克，不令。成師 以出，而敗楚之二縣，何榮之有焉？若不能敗，為辱已甚，不如還也。」 乃遂還。 於是軍帥之欲戰者眾。或謂欒武子曰：「聖人與眾同欲，是以濟 事，子盍從眾？子為大政，將酌於民者也。子之佐十一人，其不欲戰者， 三人而已。欲戰者可謂眾矣。《商書》曰：『三人占，從二人』，眾故也。」 武子曰：「善鈞從眾。夫善，眾之主也。三卿為主，可謂眾矣。從之，不亦 可乎？」

163 According to Jiang Yong, Raojiao 繞角 was in Cai territory and located southeast of present-day Lushan County 魯山縣, Henan. 164 Sangsui 桑隧 was located east of present-day Queshan County 確山縣, Henan. 165 The same phrase (chengshi yi chu 成師以出) appears in the account of the battle of Bi; see Xuan 12.2 (Yang, 2:726). 166 That is, Shen and Xi. 167 “Hong fan” 洪範, Shangshu 12.174: “When three persons use divination, follow the opinions shared by two.” For an instance of several diviners being simultaneously consulted, see Ai 9.6. Cf. Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 4.7–98 (“Yishi liangzhan” 一事 兩占). “Hong fan” is also cited in Wen 5.5 and Xiang 3.4. In all three cases the quotations are identified as Shang Documents, although in the received text “Hong fan” belongs to the section “Zhou Documents.”

760

Zuo Tradition

Zheng is now siding with Jin at this point in the Jin-Chu conflict (last mentioned in Cheng 4.5, 5.5, 5.7). Three Jin ministers convince their commander, Luan Shu, to avoid military confrontation with Chu. Luan Shu of Jin went to the aid of Zheng, and encountered Chu troops at Raojiao.163 Chu troops turned back. Jin troops thereupon invaded Cai. Gongzi Shen and Gongzi Cheng of Chu led the troops of Shen and Xi to go to the aid of Cai, putting up a defense at Sangsui.164 Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo wanted to fight and requested permission from Luan Shuc. Luan Shuc was about to agree when Xun Shoua, Fan Xiec, and Han Juea remonstrated with him: “This will not do. We came to aid Zheng. The Chu army moved away from us, and we thus reached this place. This is to move the site of killing. To kill and fail to stop and in addition to anger Chu troops—if we fight, we will surely not win. Even if we do win, it will not be good. To have organized troops and set forth165 to defeat two dependencies of Chu166—what glory will there be in this? If we cannot defeat them, the humiliation will be extreme. It is better to turn back.” The Jin army thus turned back.

6.11(11)

Luan Shu defends his decision by redefining what constitutes a majority opinion. This echoes the noble man’s ruminations on the meaning of “multitude” in Cheng 2.8c. To fulfill desires shared by the multitude (or the majority) is the definition of kingship (Cheng 2.3f) and effective government (Xi 20.5, Zhao 4.1c). At that point many of the military leaders wished to fight. Someone said to Luan Shua: “Wise men fulfill desires shared by the majority and thus achieve success. Why would you not follow the majority? You are the chief minister in charge of policies and should weigh the wishes of the people. Of your assistants there are eleven, and those who do not wish to fight amount to three only. Those who wish to fight can be called the majority. The Shang Documents said, ‘When three persons use divination, follow the results obtained by two.’167 It is because they are the majority.” Luan Shuc said, “When the merits of different positions are equal, the majority can be followed. For merit is the master of the majority. Three ministers championing a position can be called the majority. Is it not acceptable to follow them?”168

168 The majority should be followed if the good points of different positions are equal. However, if they are not, then the merit of the position outweighs the number of supporters. Cf. Karlgren’s different reading, gl. 395: “If the good ministers holding different views are equal in number, then follow the views supported by the multitude.”

Lord Cheng

761

春秋 7.1 七年，春，王正月，鼷鼠食郊牛角，改卜牛。鼷鼠又食其角，乃免牛。 7.2(1) 吳伐郯。 7.3(3) 夏，五月，曹伯來朝。 7.4 不郊，猶三望。 7.5(4) 秋，楚公子嬰齊帥師伐鄭。 7.6(4) 公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、杞伯救鄭。八月戊辰，

同盟于馬陵。 7.7 公至自會。 7.8 吳入州來。 7.9 冬，大雩。 7.10(6) 衛孫林父出奔晉。

左傳 7.1(2) 七年，春，吳伐郯，郯成。

季文子曰：「中國不振旅，蠻夷入伐，而莫之或恤。無弔者也夫！ 《詩》曰：

169 For a similar record of how bulls were chosen or rejected for sacrifices, see Annals, Xi 31.3, Xuan 3.1, Ding 15.7, Ai 1.3. 170 See Xi 31.3, n. 470, Zhao 6.4, n. 116. 171 Maling 馬陵 was located southeast of present-day Daming County 大名縣, Hebei. 172 Wu is first mentioned here in the Annals, and in Xuan 8.3 in Zuozhuan. Zhoulai 州 來, which will be mentioned frequently in the Lord Zhao years, was located near present-day Fengtai County 鳳台縣, Anhui (see map 4). 173 This demonstrable military order (zhenlü 振旅) is also associated with ceremonial functions; see Yin 5.1, Xi 28.6.

762

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 7 (584 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, in the royal first month, field mice had gnawed at the horns of the bull designated for the sacrifice in the outskirts. We divined about using another bull. The field mice again gnawed at its horns, so we spared the bull.169

7.1

Wu attacked Tan.

7.2(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, the Liege of Cao came to visit our court.

7.3(3)

We did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts. Still we performed the sacrifices to the Three Prospects.170

7.4

In autumn, Gongzi Yingqi (Zichong) of Chu led out troops and attacked Zheng.

7.5(4)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, and the Liege of Qǐ and went to the aid of Zheng. In the eighth month, on the wuchen day (11), they swore a covenant together at Maling.171

7.6(4)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

7.7

Wu entered Zhoulai.172

7.8

In winter, there was a great rain sacrifice.

7.9

Sun Linfu of Wei departed and fled to Jin.

7.10(6)

ZUO

Lamenting how none came to Tan’s defense during the Wu incursion into Tan, Ji Wenzi invokes the polarity of central domains and barbarians. However, the concept of barbarian is fluid and relational. As a victim of Wu, sometimes decried for its barbarian mores, Tan is considered one of the central domains. However, when the Tan ruler comes to the Lu court and shows unexpected mastery of esoteric knowledge (Zhao 17.3), Confucius declares that learning is lost at the center but found among “tribes of the four quarters” (siyi 四夷). Compared with Lu, Tan’s non-Zhou status becomes obvious. In the seventh year, in spring, Wu attacked Tan. Tan reached an accord with Wu. Ji Wenzi said, “The central domains are not putting their forces in order.173 The Man and Yi tribes enter and attack, and none has any concern for the domain in its plight. Is this not because there is no good leader? As it says in the Odes,

7.1(2)

Lord Cheng

763

不弔昊天， 亂靡有定。 其此之謂乎！有上不弔，其誰不受亂？吾亡無日矣。」君子曰：「知懼如 是，斯不亡矣。」 7.2 鄭子良相成公以如晉，見，且拜師。 7.3(3) 夏，曹宣公來朝。

7.4(5, 6)

秋，楚子重伐鄭，師于氾。諸侯救鄭。鄭共仲、侯羽軍楚師，囚鄖公鍾 儀，獻諸晉。 八月，同盟于馬陵，尋蟲牢之盟，且莒服故也。 晉人以鍾儀歸，囚諸軍府。

7.5a(8) 楚圍宋之役，師還，子重請取於申、呂以為賞田。王許之。申公巫臣曰：

「不可。此申、呂所以邑也，是以為賦，以御北方。若取之，是無申、呂 也，晉、鄭必至于漢。」王乃止。子重是以怨巫臣。

174 Maoshi 191, “Jie nanshan” 節南山, 12A.396. 175 Ju was under Qi’s sway. Qi’s recognition of Jin’s hegemonic status thus entailed Ju’s submission. 176 The small domain of Shen has been frequently mentioned above (for location see map 4). Lü 呂 was a small domain located west of Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan.

764

Zuo Tradition

High Heaven has no compassion, And there is no end to disorder.174

This is what is meant! If there is no good leader above, who will be spared disorder? The day of my death will not be far off.” The noble man said, “He who knows fearful vigilance to this extent will surely not perish.” Gongzi Qujia of Zheng acted as Lord Cheng’s assistant when the latter went to Jin. They had an audience with the Jin ruler and also bowed to thank Jin for its military assistance.

7.2

In summer, Lord Xuan of Cao came to visit our court.

7.3(3)

Zheng commanders take a Chu officer, Zhong Yi, prisoner and present him to Jin leaders. Zhong Yi will impress Jin leaders two years hence (Cheng 9.9). In autumn, Zichong of Chu attacked Zheng, stationing the troops at Fan. The princes went to the aid of Zheng. Gong Zhong and Hou Yu of Zheng encircled Chu troops, took Zhong Yi, Lord of Yun, prisoner, and offered him to Jin. In the eighth month, they swore a covenant together at Maling. This was to renew the covenant of Chonglao and also to recognize Ju’s submission to Jin.175 The leaders of Jin returned with Zhong Yi and imprisoned him at the arsenal.

7.4(5, 6)

Internecine conflict in Chu erupts: Zichong and Zifan, who resent Qu Wuchen because of the aftermath of the Chu-Song conflict (Xuan 14.3, 15.2) and intrigues surrounding Xia Ji (Cheng 2.6), decimate Qu Wuchen’s lineage in Chu. Heiyao, who had adulterous relations with Xia Ji (Cheng 2.6), is also killed. In Lienü zhuan 7.155–56, the destruction of Wuchen’s lineage supplies the moral for a story about the baleful consequences of desire. But in Zuozhuan, Qu Wuchen is able to exact revenge. When the troops returned after the campaign in which Chu had laid siege to Song, Zichong requested certain lands from Shen and Lü as reward.176 The king assented. Qu Wuchena, Lord of Shen, said, “This will not do. It is with these lands that Shen and Lü could become full-fledged settlements. From thence have come the levies and soldiers with which we defend ourselves against the north. If he takes those lands, there will be no more Shen and Lü. Jin and Zheng will certainly reach the Han River.” The king then desisted. As a result Zichong resented Wuchen.

7.5a(8)

Lord Cheng

765

子反欲取夏姬，巫臣止之，遂取以行，子反亦怨之。及共王即位， 子重、子反殺巫臣之族子閻、子蕩及清尹弗忌及襄老之子黑要，而分其 室。子重取子閻之室，使沈尹與王子罷分子蕩之室，子反取黑要與清尹 之室。 巫臣自晉遺二子書，曰：「爾以讒慝貪惏事君，而多殺不辜，余必 使爾罷於奔命以死。」 7.5b 巫臣請使於吳，晉侯許之。吳子壽夢說之。乃通吳於晉，以兩之一卒適

吳，舍偏兩之一焉。與其射御，教吳乘車，教之戰陳，教之叛楚。寘其子 狐庸焉，使為行人於吳。吳始伐楚、伐巢、伐徐，子重奔命。馬陵之會， 吳入州來，子重自鄭奔命。子重、子反於是乎一歲七奔命。蠻夷屬於楚 者，吳盡取之，是以始大，通吳於上國。 7.6(10) 衛定公惡孫林父。冬，孫林父出奔晉。衛侯如晉，晉反戚焉。

766

Zuo Tradition

Zifan had wished to marry Xia Ji. Qu Wuchena stopped him, then married her himself and left Chu. Thus, Zifan also resented Wuchen. After King Gong acceded to his position, Zichong and Zifan put to death Ziyan, Zidang, and Fuji, deputy of Qing, all of them from Wuchen’s lineage, as well as Heiyao, the son of Xiang the Elder, and divided their property. Zichong took Ziyan’s property and had the Shen deputy and Wangzi Pi divide Zidang’s property, and Zifan took the property of Heiyao and of the Qing deputy. From Jin, Wuchen sent Zichong and Zifan a letter, saying, “You serve your ruler with slander, malice, and avarice, and you have killed many innocent persons. I will certainly make you die from exhaustion as you rush about trying to fulfill commands.” Qu Wuchen teaches Wu chariot warfare and battle formation and facilitates relations between Wu and the central domains. Wu becomes a real threat to Chu. In this sense the femme fatale Xia Ji, through her influence on Qu Wuchen’s decisions, plays a role in redefining the balance of power in the sixth century Bce. Qu Wuchena asked to be sent on a mission to Wu, and the Prince of Jin assented. Shoumeng, the Master of Wu, was pleased with him. Wuchen thereupon established relations between Wu and Jin. He took thirty Chu chariots to Wu, left half of them there,177 along with archers and chariot drivers. He taught the men of Wu how to ride chariots, he taught them battle formations, and he taught them to rebel against Chu. He left his son Qu Huyonga there and made him an envoy in Wu. Wu began to attack Chu, Chao, and Xu. Zichong rushed about to fulfill commands. At the meeting at Maling, Wu entered Zhoulai, and Zichong rushed from Zheng to fulfill commands. As a result, Zichong and Zifan in one year rushed about seven times to fulfill commands to stave off Wu incursions. Man and Yi tribes that had submitted to Chu were all taken over by Wu. That was how Wu began to expand; and relations opened between Wu and the domains above it.178

7.5b

Lord Ding of Wei hated Sun Linfu. In winter, Sun Linfu departed and fled to Jin. The Prince of Wei went to Jin, and Jin returned Qī.179

7.6(10)

177 The same expression, pianliang 偏兩, is used for tallying chariots in Xuan 12 (Yang, 2:731). 178 Du Yu (ZZ 26.444) glosses shangguo (“domains above it”) as zhuxia (central domains). Shang (“above”) may have the spatial sense of “to the north” or the historical sense of “culturally superior.” 179 Qī might have been the territories that Sun Linfu offered to Jin when he fled there.

Lord Cheng

767

春秋 8.1(1) 八年，春，晉侯使韓穿來言汶陽之田，歸之于齊。 8.2(2) 晉欒書帥師侵蔡。 8.3(3) 公孫嬰齊如莒。 8.4(4) 宋公使華元來聘。 8.5(5) 夏，宋公使公孫壽來納幣。 8.6(6) 晉殺其大夫趙同、趙括。 8.7(7) 秋，七月，天子使召來賜公命。 8.8(9) 冬，十月癸卯，杞叔姬卒。 8.9(10) 晉侯使士燮來聘。 8.10(10) 叔孫僑如會晉士燮、齊人、邾人伐郯。 8.11(11) 衛人來媵。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年，春，晉侯使韓穿來言汶陽之田，歸之于齊。季文子餞之，私焉，曰：

「大國制義，以為盟主，是以諸侯懷德畏討，無有貳心。謂汶陽之田，敝 邑之舊也，而用師於齊，使歸諸敝邑。今有二命，曰『歸諸齊』。信以行 義，義以成命，小國所望而懷也。信不可知，義無所立，四方諸侯，其誰 不解體？《詩》曰：

180 This is the only time that the Zhou king is referred to as “the Son of Heaven” (tianzi) in the Annals. The term “Heaven-appointed king” (tian wang) is more commonly applied. By contrast, the term “Son of Heaven” appears much more frequently than “Heaven-appointed king” in Zuozhuan. 181 For Shu Ji of Qǐ, see Annals, Cheng 4.2. 182 These were women who were to accompany Bo Ji in her marriage to the Song ruler. 183 The private communication between ministers sometimes differs markedly from official pronouncements; see also Cheng 2.9, 5.1, Zhao 3.3. Cf. Wen 4.7, n. 71.

768

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 8 (583 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Han Chuan to us to speak about returning the lands to the north of the Wen River to Qi.

8.1(1)

Luan Shu of Jin led out troops and invaded Cai.

8.2(2)

Gongsun Yingqi (Zishu Shengbo) went to Ju.

8.3(3)

The Duke of Song sent Hua Yuan to us on an official visit.

8.4(4)

In summer, the Duke of Song sent Gongsun Shou to us to present betrothal gifts.

8.5(5)

Jin put to death its high officers Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo.

8.6(6)

In autumn, in the seventh month, the Son of Heaven sent the Shao Liege to us to bestow an appointment on our lord.180

8.7(7)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the guimao day (23), Shu Ji of Qǐ died.181

8.8(9)

The Prince of Jin sent Shi Xie (Fan Xie) to us on an official visit.

8.9(10)

Shusun Qiaoru met with Shi Xie (Fan Xie) of Jin, a Qi leader, and a Zhu leader and attacked Tan.

8.10(10)

A Wei leader brought secondary consorts.182

8.11(11)

ZUO

Lu gained the lands to the north of the Wen River in the aftermath of the battle of An (Cheng 2.3). Jin, having cemented ties with Qi through marriage (Cheng 5.3), pressures Lu to return the territories to Qi. Ji Wenzi privately protests to Han Chuan by appealing to an overlord’s supposed good faith. In the eighth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Han Chuan to us to speak about returning the lands to the north of the Wen River to Qi. Ji Wenzi provided a feast to send him off and said to him privately,183 “A great domain sets up just measures whereby it rules as covenant chief. As a result the princes cherish its virtues and fear being chastised and will not have divided allegiance. You had said that the lands to the north of the Wen River formerly belonged to our humble settlement and thus used your troops against Qi to facilitate their return to us. Now there is a second command, saying ‘Return them to Qi.’ Good faith is for realizing dutifulness, dutifulness is for fulfilling commands—this is what a small domain hopes for and cherishes. If good faith cannot be ascertained and dutifulness has no basis to be established, who among the princes from the four directions would not break away from you? As it says in the Odes,

8.1(1)

Lord Cheng

769

女也不爽， 士貳其行。 士也罔極， 二三其德。 七年之中，一與一奪，二三孰甚焉？士之二三，猶喪妃耦，而況霸主？霸 主將德是以，而二三之，其何以長有諸侯乎？《詩》曰： 猶之未遠， 是用大簡。 行父懼晉之不遠猶而失諸侯也，是以敢私言之。」 8.2(2) 晉欒書侵蔡，遂侵楚，獲申驪。

楚師之還也，晉侵沈，獲沈子揖初，從知、范、韓也。君子曰：「從 善如流，宜哉！《詩》曰： 愷悌君子， 遐不作人？ 求善也夫！作人，斯有功績矣。」 是行也，鄭伯將會晉師，門于許東門，大獲焉。 8.3(3) 聲伯如莒，逆也。 8.4(4) 宋華元來聘，聘共姬也。 8.5(5) 夏，宋公使公孫壽來納幣，禮也。

184 Maoshi 58, “Mang” 氓, 3C.135. The word translated here as “gentleman” is shi 士, which has a wide semantic range and here probably refers to an officer or official. The last line cited is, literally, “making two and three things of his virtues,” with the numbers “two” and “three” functioning as transitive verbs. This is one of many examples in which the relationship between men and women is used as an analogy for interdomain relations. See also Xiang 8.9, 27.5, Zhao 1.4. 185 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.632. 186 Note that Cai’s proximity to Chu was the ostensible reason for the northern domains’ incursions into Chu; see also Xi 4.1. Shen Li was a Chu official. 187 Maoshi 239, “Hanlu” 旱麓, 16C.560, following Du Yu’s reading (ZZ 26.446). Yang (2:836) proposes a different reading: “Joyous and pleased is the noble man. / Why would he not raise true talents?” 188 Gong Ji was Mu Jiang’s daughter and Lord Cheng’s sister (Cheng 9.5). “Gong” is the posthumous honorific for her husband, Lord Gong of Song.

770

Zuo Tradition

She does not fail him, But the gentleman is duplicitous in his ways. He keeps not to rules and standards, And is inconstant in his virtue.184

Within seven years, we have had one round of giving and another round of seizing. What inconstancy could be more extreme than that? Since even a gentleman’s inconstancy can cost him a worthy mate, how much greater the loss then for an overlord? If an overlord, who should abide by his virtue, is constantly making changes, how can he maintain the princes’ allegiance for long? As it says in the Odes, Plans that will not go far Call for great remonstrance.185

I fear that Jin will lose the princes’ support because its plans will not go far, and that is why I presume to speak about this privately.” By not fighting Chu at Raojiao (Cheng 6.11), Jin achieves victory in Shen. The sound advice of various Jin ministers is credited with Jin victory. Luan Shu of Jin invaded Cai and then invaded Chu, capturing Shen Li.186 With the Chu troops turning back, Jin invaded Shěn and captured Jichu, the Master of Shěn. This was a consequence of following the advice of Xun Shouc, Fan Xiee, and Han Juec. The noble man said, “It is proper indeed to follow good as naturally as water flowing! As it says in the Odes,

8.2(2)

Joyous and pleased is the noble man. From afar he raises true talents.187

Surely this is about seeking good! To raise true talents is to achieve merit.” On that journey, the Liege of Zheng planned to join forces with Jin troops and to storm the Eastern Gate of Xǔ. They took many captives. Zishu Shengboa went to Ju to meet and escort home a bride.

8.3(3)

Hua Yuan of Song came to us on an official visit: this was to formalize the Song ruler’s engagement with Gong Ji.188

8.4(4)

In summer, the Duke of Song sent Gongsun Shou to us to present betrothal gifts. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

8.5(5)

Lord Cheng

771

8.6(6) 晉趙莊姬為趙嬰之亡故，譖之于晉侯，曰：「原、屏將為亂。」欒、郤為

徵。六月，晉討趙同、趙括。武從姬氏畜于公宮。以其田與祁奚。韓厥言 於晉侯曰：「成季之勳，宣孟之忠，而無後，為善者其懼矣。三代之令王 皆數百年保天之祿。夫豈無辟王？賴前哲以免也。《周書》曰：『不敢侮 鰥寡』，所以明德也。」乃立武，而反其田焉。 8.7(7) 秋，召桓公來賜公命。 8.8 晉侯使申公巫臣如吳，假道于莒。與渠丘公立於池上，曰：「城已惡。」

莒子曰：「辟陋在夷，其孰以我為虞？」對曰：「夫狡焉思啟封疆以利社 稷者，何國蔑有？唯然，故多大國矣。唯或思或縱也。勇夫重閉，況國 乎？」 8.9(8) 冬，杞叔姬卒。來歸自杞，故書。

189 The word translated as “put to death” here is tao 討 (literally, “chastise” or “punish”). 190 Zhao Wu was the son of Zhao Shuo (Zhao Dun’s son) and Zhao Zhuang Ji. Zhuang Ji was the daughter of Lord Jing of Jin (r. 599–581), but it is not clear why Zhao Wu should be raised in Lord Jing’s palace. Various commentators suggest that Zhao Wu hid in the palace with his mother to escape being put to death like the rest of the Zhao lineage (Yang, 2:839). The word xu 蓄 (“raised”) suggests a more long-term arrangement, yet it is not clear whether it was common to have widowed daughters of lords keep their children in the lord’s palace. A very different account of the Zhao lineage’s near extinction and miraculous continuation, told in Shiji 43.1783–85, is the basis of the Yuan play The Orphan of Zhao (Zhao shi gu’er 趙氏孤兒) by Ji Junxiang 紀君祥 (thirteenth cent.). For translations of the Yuan and Ming editions of this play, see Hsia, Li and Kao, The Columbia Anthology of Yuan Drama, 17–73. 191 Zhao Cui assisted Chong’er during his years of exile and was rewarded with lands and titles when Chong’er became Lord Wen (Xi 23.6, 24.1). Zhao Dun was Zhao Cui’s son by the Di wife he married in exile (Xi 23.6, 24.1). Despite Zhao Dun’s role in the murder of Lord Ling of Jin (Xuan 2.3), he is cited here as the exemplary loyal official.

772

Zuo Tradition

Zhao Zhuang Ji, on account of the exile of her lover, Zhao Yingqi (Cheng 4.6, 5.1), plots the downfall of the Zhao lineage. Her son, Zhao Wu, eventually continues the Zhao lineage due to the intercession of the Jin minister Han Jue, who was raised by Zhao Dun (Cheng 17.10). Zhao Zhuang Ji of Jin, because of Zhao Yingqib’s banishment, slandered his brothers to the Prince of Jin, saying, “Zhao Tonga and Zhao Kuob are about to rebel.” The Luan and Xi lineage heads confirmed the charge. In the sixth month, Jin put to death Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo.189 Zhao Wud, following his mother Zhao Zhuang Jia, was raised in the lord’s palace.190 The Jin ruler gave the lands of the Zhao lineage to Qi Xi. Han Jue said to the Jin prince, “If for all the achievements of Zhao Cuic and the loyalty of Zhao Dune,191 the Zhao lineage will nevertheless be without progeny, those who do good will surely be fearful! The sage-kings of the Three Dynasties all preserved their Heaven-endowed position for several hundred years. Now, how could there have been no benighted kings? They relied on the former sage-kings to keep them from disasters. As it says in the Zhou Documents, ‘Do not dare to humiliate widows and widowers’: this is to illuminate virtue.”192 The Jin ruler thus established Zhao Wud as head of the Zhao lineage and returned the lands to him.

8.6(6)

In autumn, Shao Duke Huan came to us to bestow an appointment on our lord.

8.7(7)

Ju, last mentioned as the victim of Qi aggression (Xuan 13.2), will fall prey to Chu the following year (Cheng 9.10). Qu Wuchen cautions the Ju ruler against carelessness. The Jin ruler sent Qu Wuchena, Lord of Shen, to Wu. Passing through Ju, he stood with the Master of Jua by the moat and said, “The city walls are too dilapidated.” The Master of Ju said, “Who will care to prey on us, a remote domain among the barbarians?” Wuchen replied, “Scheming ones who plan to expand territories beyond their borders and profit the altars of their domains are everywhere. What domain can be free from their threat? It is for that reason that there are many big domains. Everything hinges on caution or the lack of vigilance. Since even a brave man keeps his gates shut, how much more should a domain do so!”

8.8

In winter, Shu Ji of Qǐ died. She had come home from Qǐ; hence, her death was recorded.

8.9(8)

192 The quote, which appears in “Kang gao” and “Wu yi” 無逸 (Shangshu 14.201, 16.241), is meant to encourage Lord Jing to follow King Wen’s example of mercy. As Takezoe (12.62) points out, Han Jue appeals to Lord Jing’s compassion, instead of debating the injustice of the charge and the persecution, probably because this better serves the purpose of reinstating the Zhao lineage.

Lord Cheng

773



8.10(9, 10)

晉士燮來聘，言伐郯也，以其事吳故。公賂之，請緩師。文子不可，曰： 「君命無貳，失信不立。禮無加貨，事無二成。君後諸侯，是寡君不得 事君也。燮將復之。」季孫懼，使宣伯帥師會伐郯。

8.11(11) 衛人來媵共姬，禮也。凡諸侯嫁女，同姓媵之，異姓則否。

春秋 9.1(1) 九年，春，王正月，杞伯來逆叔姬之喪以歸。 9.2(2) 公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、杞伯，同盟于蒲。 9.3 公至自會。 9.4(3) 二月，伯姬歸于宋。 9.5(5) 夏，季孫行父如宋致女。 9.6(6) 晉人來媵。 9.7 秋，七月丙子，齊侯無野卒。

193 See Cheng 7.1. 194 Fan Xie will be going back on his word if he fails to fulfill his mission. He justifies his mission of aggression with the language of duty and good faith. 195 In other words, bribes are not allowed, and he can undertake the military offensive only as planned. 196 Fan Xie is threatening that Jin will sever relations with Lu.

774

Zuo Tradition

Wu’s subjugation of Tan was lamented as a consequence of Jin weakness (Cheng 7.1), and Tan is now under attack from Jin and its allies for having submitted to Wu. Lu tries to ameliorate Tan’s plight, to no avail, and joins Jin in punishing Tan. Fan Xieb of Jin came to us on an official visit: this was to speak about attacking Tan because it was serving Wu.193 Our lord sent him gifts and requested that they delay military action. Fan Xiea refused, saying, “A ruler’s command cannot bear divided allegiance. Losing good faith, I cannot establish myself.194 Ritual propriety admits of no extra gifts; an appointed task cannot be fulfilled in two ways.195 If you, my lord, fall behind other princes in joining the attack, it means our unworthy ruler will not be able to serve you.196 I plan to thus report on my mission.” Ji Wenzib was fearful, and sent Shusun Qiaorua to lead out troops to join the forces attacking Tan.

8.10(9, 10)

A Wei leader brought secondary consorts for Gong Ji. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when the daughters of princes married, ruling houses with the same clan name sent secondary consorts, while ruling houses with different clan names did not do so.

8.11(11)

LORD CHENG 9 (582 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Liege of Qǐ came to meet Shu Ji’s funeral cortege and took it home with him.

9.1(1)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, and the Liege of Qǐ, and they swore a covenant together at Pu.

9.2(2)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

9.3

In the second month, Bo Ji went to marry in Song.

9.4(3)

In summer, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Song to convey a message to the bride.197

9.5(5)

A Jin leader brought secondary consorts.198

9.6(6)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the bingzi day,199 Wuye, the Prince of Qi, died.

9.7

197 When a lord and a lady of ruling houses were wed, the bride’s family sent a missive to the bride on the occasion of her presentation at the Ancestral Temple three months after the union. For this ritual, see also Zuozhuan, Huan 3.7 (Yang, 1:99; Legge, 371). 198 They were going to accompany Gong Ji in her marriage to the Song ruler. 199 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no bingzi day in the seventh month.

Lord Cheng

775

9.8(7) 晉人執鄭伯。 9.9(8) 晉欒書帥師伐鄭。 9.10 冬，十有一月，葬齊頃公。 9.11(10) 楚公子嬰齊帥師伐莒。庚申，莒潰。楚人入鄆。 9.12(11) 秦人、白狄伐晉。 9.13(12) 鄭人圍許。 9.14(13) 城中城。

左傳 9.1(1) 九年，春，杞桓公來逆叔姬之喪，請之也。杞叔姬卒，為杞故也。逆叔

姬，為我也。 9.2(2) 為歸汶陽之田故，諸侯貳於晉。晉人懼，會於蒲，以尋馬陵之盟。季文

子謂范文子曰：「德則不競，尋盟何為？」范文子曰：「勤以撫之，寬以待 之，堅彊以御之，明神以要之，柔服而伐貳，德之次也。」 是行也，將始會吳，吳人不至。 9.3(3) 二月，伯姬歸于宋。 9.4 楚人以重賂求鄭，鄭伯會楚公子成于鄧。

200 Lu and Ju fought over control of the city of Yun throughout most of the Spring and Autumn era; see Annals, Wen 12.8 (Yang, 2:586). 201 She died because she had been abandoned by Lord Huan of Qǐ. 202 Fan Xie’s defense of Jin virtue contains a barely veiled threat to use force against Lu.

776

Zuo Tradition

Jin leaders arrested the Liege of Zheng.

9.8(7)

Luan Shu of Jin led out troops and attacked Zheng.

9.9(8)

In winter, in the eleventh month, Lord Qing of Qi was buried.

9.10

Gongzi Yingqi of Chu led out troops and attacked Ju. On the gengshen day (17), Ju collapsed. The men of Chu entered Yun.200

9.11(10)

Qin leaders and the White Di tribe attacked Jin.

9.12(11)

Zheng leaders laid siege to Xǔ.

9.13(12)

We fortified the inner city.

9.14(13)

ZUO

Continuing the account of Shu Ji of Qǐ, who is also mentioned in Cheng 4.2, 8.9, and Annals, Cheng 5.1. In the ninth year, in spring, Lord Huan of Qǐ came to meet Shu Ji’s funeral cortege: this was because we requested it. Shu Ji of Qǐ died on account of Qǐ.201 The Qǐ ruler came to meet Shu Ji’s funeral cortege because of our request.

9.1(1)

Disaffection spreads among Jin’s allies because Lu is asked to return the lands to the north of the Wen River. Fan Xie defends Jin policies with the rhetoric of virtue that conceals a threat. On account of the return of the lands to the north of the Wen River to Qi, the princes shifted their allegiance from Jin. Fearful, the leaders of Jin met with other leaders in Pu to renew the covenant of Maling. Ji Wenzi said to Fan Xiec, “What use is it to renew the covenant if one’s virtue is insufficient?” Fan Xiec said, “To care for other domains assiduously, to treat them leniently, to control them firmly, to invoke bright spirits to deter them, to deal gently with the submissive, and to attack those with divided allegiance—these are the next best things after virtue.”202 On this occasion, Jin had planned to have a first meeting with Wu, but the leaders of Wu did not come.

9.2(2)

In the second month, Bo Ji went to marry in Song.

9.3(3)

The leaders of Chu used valuable gifts to seek Zheng’s support. The Liege of Zheng met with Gongzi Cheng of Chu at Deng.203

9.4

203 There were two places by the name of Deng 鄧. One was a domain that was assimilated into Chu in 688 Bce (see Zhuang 6.3). The other, probably meant here, was a Cai settlement.

Lord Cheng

777

9.5(4) 夏，季文子如宋致女，復命，公享之。賦〈韓奕〉之五章。穆姜出于房，再

拜，曰：「大夫勤辱，不忘先君，以及嗣君，施及未亡人，先君猶有望也。 敢拜大夫之重勤。」又賦〈綠衣〉之卒章而入。 9.6(6) 晉人來媵，禮也。 9.7(7) 秋，鄭伯如晉，晉人討其貳於楚也，執諸銅鞮。 9.8(9) 欒書伐鄭，鄭人使伯蠲行成，晉人殺之，非禮也。兵交，使在其間可也。



778

楚子重侵陳以救鄭。

Zuo Tradition

Mu Jiang, widow of Lord Xuan and mother of Lord Cheng and Gong Ji, demonstrates her mastery of polite, refined communication by chanting lines from the Odes (fushi). This is the only example of a woman reciting from the Odes in a public setting in Zuozhuan. (Lady Mu of Xǔ is said to have composed an ode in Min 2.5a.) Her story continues in Cheng 11.3, 16.5, and Xiang 2.3, 9.3. She will later show herself to be equally knowledgeable about the Zhou Changes. Her later schemes against her son and the Ji lineage put her in the chapter on “Pernicious Favorites” (Niebi 孽嬖) in Lienü zhuan 7.155–56. In summer, Ji Wenzi went to Song to convey a message to the bride. He reported the completion of his mission, and our lord offered him ceremonial toasts. He chanted the fifth stanza of “The Lofty Han.”204 Mu Jiang came out of her chamber to the inner court, bowed twice, and said, “You, sir, deigned to be assiduous. You do not forget the former lord, and your regard reaches to his heir and even extends to his soon-to-perish widow.205 The former ruler indeed expected this from you. I presume to bow in gratitude for your repeated, assiduous service.” She also chanted the final stanza of “Green Coat”206 before entering her chamber.

9.5(4)

A Jin leader brought secondary consorts. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

9.6(6)

In autumn, the Liege of Zheng went to Jin. Jin leaders, chastising him for switching allegiance to Chu, arrested him at Tongti.207

9.7(7)

Luan Shu attacked Zheng. The leaders of Zheng sent Bojuan to negotiate for peace. The men of Jin killed him. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. When armies are engaged in conflict, envoys should be allowed to move between them. Zichong of Chu invaded Chen in order to go to the aid of Zheng.

9.8(9)

204 Maoshi 261, “Hanyi” 韓奕, 18D.682–83. The fifth stanza describes how Han Ji, daughter of Quefu, finds honor and happiness in her marriage with the Prince of Han. 205 The term for “widow” here is the conventional expression wei wang ren 未亡人, literally, “the one who is not yet dead” or “the one who can only await death.” The term also appears in Zhuang 28.3 and Cheng 14.5. 206 Maoshi 27, “Lüyi” 綠衣, 2A.77. Her emphasis is presumably on the last two lines: “I long for the ancients. / Indeed, they had what my heart seeks” 我思古人，實獲我心. She is comparing Ji Wenzi to the virtuous ancients. Mu Jiang’s high regard for Ji Wenzi turns into enmity seven years later, when Ji Wenzi’s rival Shusun Qiaoru becomes her lover (Cheng 16.5). 207 Tongti 銅鞮 was located in the domain of Jin and was south of present-day Qin County 沁縣, Shanxi.

Lord Cheng

779

9.9 晉侯觀于軍府，見鍾儀。問之曰：「南冠而縶者，誰也？」有司對曰：「鄭

人所獻楚囚也。」使稅之。召而弔之。再拜稽首。問其族。對曰：「泠人 也。」公曰：「能樂乎？」對曰：「先父之職官也，敢有二事？」使與之琴， 操南音。 公曰：「君王何如？」對曰：「非小人之所得知也。」固問之。對曰： 「其為大子也，師、保奉之，以朝于嬰齊而夕于側也。不知其他。」公語 范文子。文子曰：「楚囚，君子也。言稱先職，不背本也；樂操土風，不忘 舊也；稱大子，抑無私也；名其二卿，尊君也。不背本，仁也；不忘舊，信 也；無私，忠也；尊君，敏也。仁以接事，信以守之，忠以成之，敏以行 之。事雖大，必濟。君盍歸之，使合晉、楚之成？」公從之，重為之禮，使 歸求成。

780

Zuo Tradition

Zhong Yi of Chu, taken prisoner two years earlier (Cheng 7.4), here describes himself as a musician and responds to his Jin captors with dignity and ritual propriety. Music is linked to peaceful accord, which becomes Zhong Yi’s mission upon his repatriation to Chu. The Prince of Jin surveyed the arsenal and saw Zhong Yi. He asked about him, “That bound person with a southern cap, who is he?”208 The officer in charge said, “This is the Chu prisoner presented by the men of Zheng.” The lord had his bonds released, summoned him, and spoke sympathetically to him. Zhong Yi bowed twice, with his forehead touching the ground. The lord asked about his lineage. He replied, “We are musicians.” The lord asked, “Can you play music?” He replied, “This is the hereditary office of our ancestors. Dare I have another vocation?” The lord had a level lute given to him, and he strummed southern tunes. The lord said, “What is your lord and king like?” He replied, “That is not what a humble person like me can know.” The lord persisted with the question. He replied, “When he was the prince and heir apparent, his teacher and guardian served him. Every morning he was with Yingqi and every evening with Ce.209 I do not know the rest.” The lord told Fan Xiec about him. Fan Xiea said, “The Chu prisoner is a noble man. In speaking, he named his forebears’ vocation—thus, he did not turn against his origins. In playing music, he strummed his native tunes—thus, he did not forget his old ties. He spoke of what his ruler was like as heir apparent—thus, he had no partiality.210 He called the two Chu ministers by name—this showed respect for you, my lord. Not turning against one’s origins is nobility of spirit; not forgetting old ties is good faith; not being partial is loyalty; respecting the ruler with such attention to etiquette is adroit intelligence. Nobility of spirit is for taking up important affairs, good faith for guarding them, loyalty for completing them, adroit intelligence for executing them. No matter how momentous the affair, there will be certain success. Why don’t you, my lord, send him back, and have him bring about peace between Jin and Chu?” The lord followed his advice, treated Zhong Yi with redoubled courtesy and ceremony, and sent him back to seek an accord between Jin and Chu.

9.9

208 This is another indication that the style of Chu headdress (and probably costumes) was different from that of the central domains. 209 That is, day and night he sought instruction from Gongzi Yingqi (Zichong), the chief minister, and from Gongzi Ce (Zifan), the supervisor of the military. It is ritually proper to use the given name of one’s superior or father when addressing someone honored as superior to the person one is referring to. See n. 120. 210 The implication is that Zhong Yi is sincere: he is not motivated by partiality to aggrandize his ruler. He speaks about what the Chu king was like when he was heir apparent, because that is what he knows.

Lord Cheng

781

9.10a(11) 冬，十一月，楚子重自陳伐莒，圍渠丘。渠丘城惡，眾潰，奔莒。戊申，楚

入渠丘。莒人囚楚公子平。楚人曰：「勿殺，吾歸而俘。」莒人殺之。楚 師圍莒。莒城亦惡，庚申，莒潰。楚遂入鄆，莒無備故也。 9.10b 君子曰：「恃陋而不備，罪之大者也，備豫不虞，善之大者也。莒恃其

陋，而不修城郭，浹辰之間，而楚克其三都，無備也夫！《詩》曰： 雖有絲、麻， 無棄菅、蒯； 雖有姬、姜， 無棄蕉萃； 凡百君子， 莫不代匱。 言備之不可以已也。」 9.11(12) 秦人、白狄伐晉，諸侯貳故也。 9.12(13) 鄭人圍許，示晉不急君也。是則公孫申謀之，曰：「我出師以圍許，偽將

改立君者，而紓晉使，晉必歸君。」 9.13(14) 城中城，書，時也。

211 Quqiu 渠丘 was probably located southeast of present-day Ju County 莒縣, Shandong. 212 The word chen 辰 refers to two-hour units for measuring the twelve blocks of time in a day. From moushen to gengshen, one cycle of twelve earthly stems is completed. 213 This is not in the received text of Maoshi.

782

Zuo Tradition

Ju falls: the Ju ruler erred in thinking that his domain was too insignificant to merit proper defensive measures. No potential conquest is too meager, and Chu destroys Ju because it has not made preparations, as Qu Wuchen predicted (Cheng 8.8). In winter, in the eleventh month, Zichong of Chu attacked Ju from Chen and laid siege to Quqiu.211 The city walls of Quqiu were dilapidated, and the people dispersed, fleeing to Ju. On the wushen day (5), Chu entered Quqiu. The men of Ju took Gongzi Ping of Chu prisoner. The men of Chu said, “Do not kill him; we will return your captives.” But the men of Ju killed Gongzi Ping, and Chu troops laid siege to Ju. The city walls of Ju were also dilapidated, and on the gengshen day, Ju collapsed. Chu thereupon entered Yun. This came about because Ju had not made any preparations.

9.10a(11)

The noble man said, “To count on one’s insignificance and make no defensive preparations is the greatest of offenses; to be prepared even for the unexpected is the greatest good. Ju counted on its insignificance and did not repair its city walls, so that in the course of twelve days212 Chu vanquished its three major cities. Is this not because of the lack of defensive preparation? As it says in the Odes,

9.10b

Even if you have silk and hemp, Do not abandon the grasses with coarse fibers. Even if you have the ladies of Ji and Jiang, Do not abandon the homely and weathered ones. All types of noble men Without exception suffer want of this or that.213

This is to say how defensive preparation cannot be neglected.” Qin leaders and the White Di tribe attacked Jin: this was because the princes shifted their allegiance.

9.11(12)

Lord Cheng of Zheng went to Jin and was detained (Cheng 9.7). Zheng leaders plot to appear indifferent. By laying siege to Xǔ, Zheng shows itself capable of military action despite the detainment of Lord Cheng. Zheng leaders laid siege to Xǔ: this was to show Jin that it was not anxious about its ruler. This was the plot of Gongsun Shen, who said, “We will send out troops to lay siege to Xǔ, pretend that we are planning to establish another ruler, and temporarily dispense with sending envoys to Jin. Jin will surely return our ruler.”

9.12(13)

We fortified the inner city: this was recorded because it was timely.

9.13(14)

Lord Cheng

783

9.14 十二月，楚子使公子辰如晉，報鍾儀之使，請修好、結成。

春秋 10.1(2) 十年，春，衛侯之弟黑背帥師侵鄭。 10.2 夏，四月，五卜郊，不從，乃不郊。 10.3(3) 五月，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯，伐鄭。 10.4 齊人來媵。 10.5(4) 丙午，晉侯獳卒。 10.6(6) 秋，七月，公如晉。 10.7 冬，十月。

左傳

10. 1

十年，春，晉侯使糴茷如楚，報大宰子商之使也。

10.2(1) 衛子叔黑背侵鄭，晉命也。 10.3(3) 鄭公子班聞叔申之謀。三月，子如立公子繻。夏，四月，鄭人殺繻，立髡

頑，子如奔許。欒武子曰：「鄭人立君，我執一人焉，何益？不如伐鄭而 歸其君，以求成焉。」

214 According to earlier entries in Zuozhuan (Cheng 8.11, 9.6), only domains that share the same clan name should send secondary consorts. The houses of Qi and Lu, however, did not have the same clan name. 215 According to Shiji 42.1770, Gongzi Xu was Lord Xiang’s son and Lord Cheng’s half brother, and he was made ruler when Luan Shu laid siege to Zheng, not, as Zuozhuan records, because Gongzi Ban sought to carry out Gongsun Shen’s plot. 216 Kunwan was Lord Cheng’s son and heir apparent, later Lord Xi (Annals, Xiang 7.9). Sima Qian (Shiji 42.1770) does not mention Kunwan and also records that Xu was killed after Lord Cheng returned to Zheng.

784

Zuo Tradition

Zhong Yi’s role as mediator continues. In the twelfth month, the Chu ruler sent the grand steward Zishanga to Jin in response to Zhong Yi’s mission, requesting that the two domains cultivate good relations and reach an accord.

9.14

LORD CHENG 10 (581 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, Heibei, the younger brother of the Prince of Wei, led out troops and invaded Zheng.

10.1(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, we divined five times about performing the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts.

10.2

In the fifth month, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Cao and attacked Zheng.

10.3(3)

A Qi leader brought secondary consorts.214

10.4

On the bingwu day, Nou, the Prince of Jin, died.

10.5(4)

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord went to Jin.

10.6(6)

Winter, the tenth month.

10.7

ZUO

In the tenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Di Pei to Chu. This was in response to the diplomatic mission of Zishang, the grand steward.

10.1

Zishu Heibei of Wei invaded Zheng: this was because Jin had commanded it to do so.

10.2(1)

The plan of the Zheng minister Gongsun Shen (Cheng 9.12) is carried out, and Jin lets Lord Cheng return to Zheng. Gongzi Ban of Zheng learned of Gongsun Shena’s plan. In the third month, Gongzi Bana established Gongzi Xu as ruler.215 In summer, in the fourth month, the Zheng leaders put Gongzi Xua to death and established Kunwan as ruler.216 Gongzi Bana fled to Xǔ. Luan Shua said, “The Zheng leaders have established a ruler. Of what benefit will it be for us to hold this one man? It would be better to attack Zheng and repatriate its ruler to seek an accord with them.”

10.3(3)

Lord Cheng

785

晉侯有疾，五月，晉立大子州蒲以為君，而會諸侯伐鄭。鄭子罕賂 以襄鐘，子然盟于脩澤，子駟為質。辛巳，鄭伯歸。 10.4(5) 晉侯夢大厲，被髮及地，搏膺而踊，曰：「殺余孫，不義。余得請於帝矣！」

壞大門及寢門而入。公懼，入于室。又壞戶。公覺，召桑田巫。巫言如夢。 公曰：「何如？」曰：「不食新矣。」 公疾病，求醫于秦。秦伯使醫緩為之。未至，公夢疾為二豎子，曰： 「彼，良醫也，懼傷我，焉逃之？」其一曰：「居肓之上、膏之下，若我何？」 醫至，曰：「疾不可為也，在肓之上、膏之下，攻之不可，達之不及，藥不 至焉，不可為也。」公曰：「良醫也。」厚為之禮而歸之。 六月丙午，晉侯欲麥，使甸人獻麥，饋人為之。召桑田巫，示而殺 之。將食，張，如廁，陷而卒。小臣有晨夢負公以登天，及日中，負晉侯出 諸廁，遂以為殉。

217 The received text has Zhoupu 州蒲, but Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 26.449) argued, based on references in Ying Shao’s Jiujun huiyi, that the name should be Zhouman 州滿. Shiji (39.1679) records a phonetically similar name, Shouman 壽曼. He becomes Lord Li of Jin. Note that Lord Jing was still alive when Zhouman was instated as ruler. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 14.338–39) cites this as the first instance of “internal abdication” (neishan 內禪). 218 Xiu Marsh 脩澤 was located in the domain of Zheng southwest of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan. 219 For li 厲 (“vengeful spirit”), see also Xiang 17.2, Zhao 7.7, and Zhao 7.9. A person who dies without surviving progeny and therefore is denied sacrificial offering will likely become a li. 220 In Xi 10.3, the ghost of the Jin prince Shensheng also mentions permission from the high god to punish his half brother, Lord Hui of Jin. 221 Sangtian 桑田 was in Guo, which was annexed by Jin (Xi 5.8). 222 Literally, “the space between the heart and the diaphragm, and below the fat at the tip of the heart.” This becomes the idiom bing ru gaohuang 病入膏肓: an incurable malady is one that “has entered the space between the diaphragm and the heart.” The dream of the boys concretizes the tension between agency and the loss of control (Wai-yee Li, “Dreams of Interpretation”). 223 See Zhao 1.12e for another example of a Qin doctor diagnosing the illness of a Jin ruler.

786

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Jin had been ill. In the fifth month, Jin established the heir apparent Zhouman217 as ruler, met with the princes, and attacked Zheng. Zihan of Zheng sent the Xiang Temple bells as a gift, and Ziran swore a covenant with the allies at Xiu Marsh.218 Zisi became a hostage in Jin. On the xinsi day (11), the Liege of Zheng returned. A vengeful ghost and a strange dream set the stage for Lord Jing of Jin’s dramatic death. The vengeful ghost, presumably an ancestor of the Zhao lineage, demands retribution because Lord Jing wiped out almost the entire Zhao lineage on account of the false accusation of Zhao Zhuang Ji (Cheng 8.6). Victims of political turmoil and violent deaths often appear in dreams to demand vengeance; see also Xiang 18.3, Zhao 7.9, and Ai 17.5. The ghosts of unjustly killed ministers haunt rulers in Mozi (“Minggui”). The Prince of Jin dreamed of a huge vengeful ghost219 with disheveled hair hanging to the ground. It beat its chest, leapt up and down, and said, “For you to murder my descendants was unjust. I have the high god’s approval of my request for revenge!”220 It smashed the main gate and the door to his private quarters and made its entry. Terrified, the lord entered the inner chamber, and the ghost smashed that door also. The lord woke up and summoned the shaman of Sangtian (Mulberry Fields).221 What the shaman described corresponded exactly to the dream. The lord said, “What then?” He replied, “You will not eat the grain of the new harvest!” The lord fell seriously ill and sought a physician from Qin. The Liege of Qin sent a physician named Huan to treat him. Before he arrived, the lord dreamed that his illness assumed the form of two boys, who said, “He is a skilled physician. I fear he will harm us. Where can we escape?” One of them said, “If we lodge above the diaphragm and below the heart,222 then what can he do to us?” The physician arrived and said, “There is nothing to be done about the illness. It is above the diaphragm and below the heart, where it can neither be overcome with heat treatment nor reached through acupuncture. Medicine will not get to it. There is nothing to be done.” The lord said, “He is a good physician.”223 He gave him handsome gifts and sent him back. In the sixth month, on the bingwu day (6), the Prince of Jin wanted to taste the new grain. He had the official in charge of sacrificial grains present it and the cook prepare it. He summoned the shaman of Sangtian, showed him the new grain, and had him killed. When he was about to eat, he became bloated, went to the privy, fell in, and died. A eunuch had dreamed in the morning of ascending to heaven with the lord on his back. By midday, he was carrying the Prince of Jin out of the privy. And then he was killed to attend his lord after death.

10.4(5)

Lord Cheng

787

10.5 鄭伯討立君者，戊申，殺叔申、叔禽。君子曰：「忠為令德，非其人猶不

可，況不令乎？」 10.6(6) 秋，公如晉。晉人止公，使送葬。於是糴茷未反。 10.7 冬，葬晉景公。公送葬，諸侯莫在。魯人辱之，故不書，諱之也。

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年，春，王三月，公至自晉。 11.2(2) 晉侯使郤犨來聘，己丑，及郤犨盟。 11.3(4) 夏，季孫行父如晉。 11.4(6) 秋，叔孫僑如如齊。 11.5 冬，十月。

788

Zuo Tradition

Lord Cheng of Zheng returns from captivity in Jin (Cheng 9.7) and wreaks vengeance on those whose ploy might have secured his return (Cheng 9.12, 10.3). The Liege of Zheng chastised those who had established another ruler. On the wushen day (8), he put Gongsun Shena and Shuqin224 to death. The noble man said, “Loyalty is an admirable virtue. Even so, it cannot be realized when its object is not the right person—how much less so when the loyalty itself may not be worthy!”225

10.5

In autumn, our lord went to Jin. The men of Jin detained him and made him attend the funeral. At this point Di Pei had still not returned to Jin.226

10.6(6)

In winter, Lord Jing of Jin was buried. Our lord attended the funeral, but no other princes were present. Lu leaders considered this a disgrace; that was why the burial was not recorded. This was to conceal it.

10.7

LORD CHENG 11 (580 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, in the royal third month, our lord arrived from Jin. The Prince of Jin sent Xi Chou to us on an official visit. On the jichou day (24), we swore a covenant with Xi Chou.

11.1(1)

11.2(2)

In summer, Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) went to Jin.

11.3(4)

In autumn, Shusun Qiaoru went to Qi.

11.4(6)

Winter, the tenth month.

11.5

224 Shuqin is the younger brother of Gongsun Shen. 225 “Not the right person” has been taken to mean either Lord Cheng (following Du Yu, ZZ 26.450) or Gongsun Shen (Lu Can, cited by Gu Yanwu in Zuozhuan Du jie buzheng; Yang, 2:850). According to the latter reading, the sentence should be rendered: “it cannot be realized when it is not practiced by the right person.” Alternatively, “not the right person” refers to Lord Cheng (i.e., he is not worthy of loyalty), and the virtue that “may not be worthy” refers to Gongsun Shen’s dubious motives. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 22.380) quotes these lines to discuss another case of what he judged to be misapplied loyalty: Xie Ye’s ill-fated attempt to remonstrate with Lord Ling of Chen in Xuan 9.6. 226 The fact that Di Pei had not returned meant that peace between Jin and Chu had yet to be cemented. Lord Cheng of Lu was detained because Jin suspected Lu of leaning toward Chu; this would not have been an issue if Jin and Chu had made peace.

Lord Cheng

789

左傳 11.1(1) 十一年，春，王三月，公至自晉。晉人以公為貳於楚，故止公。公請受

盟，而後使歸。 11.2(2) 郤犨來聘，且蒞盟。 11.3 聲伯之母不聘，穆姜曰：「吾不以妾為姒。」生聲伯而出之，嫁於齊管于

奚，生二子而寡，以歸聲伯。聲伯以其外弟為大夫，而嫁其外妹於施孝 叔。郤犨來聘，求婦於聲伯。聲伯奪施氏婦以與之。婦人曰：「鳥獸猶不 失儷，子將若何？」曰：「吾不能死亡。」婦人遂行。生二子於郤氏。郤氏 亡，晉人歸之施氏。施氏逆諸河，沈其二子。婦人怒曰：「己不能庇其伉 儷而亡之，又不能字人之孤而殺之，將何以終？」遂誓施氏。 11.4(3) 夏，季文子如晉報聘，且蒞盟也。

227 Note that Lord Cheng’s detainment is not mentioned in the Annals. 228 The new Jin ruler did not come, probably because he was in mourning. 229 Recall that Mu Jiang is Lord Xuan’s wife and Lord Cheng’s mother. Zishu Shengbo is the son of Shu Xi, Lord Xuan’s brother. 230 The terms used here are waidi 外弟 and waimei 外妹, literally, “external younger brother” and “external younger sister.”

790

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Jin leaders detain Lord Cheng, suspecting him of leaning toward Chu (Cheng 4.7, 10.6; Annals, Cheng 4.4). In the eleventh year, in spring, the royal third month, our lord arrived from Jin. The leaders of Jin thought that our lord was shifting allegiance to Chu and thus detained him.227 Our lord asked to be granted a covenant; after that, he was sent back.

11.1(1)

Xi Chou came to us for an official visit and also to oversee the covenant.228

11.2(2)

A mother and a daughter are passed back and forth between lineages as pawns and appendages. Both Zishu Shengbo’s mother and his half sister are sent away by their first husbands. The latter, used by her half brother Zishu Shengbo to curry favor with Xi Chou, suffers an even more pitiable fate, as her first husband drowns her children from her second marriage. The story also illustrates the reach of Xi Chou’s power. Zishu Shengboa’s mother had not formalized her engagement before marriage. Mu Jiang said, “I will not have a concubine for a sister-inlaw.”229 After giving birth to Shengbo, she was sent away by her husband Shu Xi and married Guan Yuxi of Qi. Having borne two children, she was widowed and was sent back to Zishu Shengboa. Shengbo made his younger half brother a high officer and married his younger half sister to Shi Xiaoshu.230 When Xi Chou came for an official visit, he sought a wife by turning to Zishu Shengboa.231 Zishu Shengboa procured by force his half sister, who had become Shi Xiaoshua’s wife, and gave her to him. The woman said to Shi Xiaoshu, “Even birds and animals do not lose their mates. What are you going to do?” He said, “I am not willing to die or be banished for this.” The woman thus went. She bore two children as Xi Chou’s wife. When the Xi lineage was destroyed,232 the men of Jin returned her to Shi Xiaoshua, who met her at the Yellow River and drowned her two children. Enraged, the woman said, “You could not protect your own wife and allowed her to be sent away, and you also could not cherish another man’s orphans and killed them. How do you expect to die?” She then, with a vow, cursed Shi Xiaoshua.233

11.3

In summer, Ji Wenzi went to Jin: this was in response to Jin’s official visit and also to oversee the covenant.

11.4(3)

231 We may surmise that Xi Chou had heard about the beauty of Shengbo’s younger half sister. 232 See Cheng 17.10. 233 Following Karlgren, gl. 405. Du Yu (ZZ 27.456) glossed this slightly differently: she vowed to sever relations with Shi Xiaoshu.

Lord Cheng

791

11.5 周公楚惡惠、襄之偪也，且與伯輿爭政，不勝，怒而出。及陽樊，王使劉

子復之，盟于鄄而入。三日復出，奔晉。 11.6 秋，宣伯聘于齊，以修前好。 11.7 晉郤至與周爭鄇田，王命劉康公、單襄公訟諸晉。郤至曰：「溫，吾故

也，故不敢失。」劉子、單子曰：「昔周克商，使諸侯撫封，蘇忿生以溫 為司寇，與檀伯達封于河。蘇氏即狄，又不能於狄而奔衛。襄王勞文公 而賜之溫，狐氏、陽氏先處之，而後及子。若治其故，則王官之邑也，子 安得之？」晉侯使郤至勿敢爭。 11.8 宋華元善於令尹子重，又善於欒武子，聞楚人既許晉糴茷成，而使歸復

命矣。冬，華元如楚，遂如晉，合晉、楚之成。

234 The Zhou Duke Chu might have been from the same lineage as the Zhou Duke Yue (Xi 30.4). The lineages of Hui and Xiang were descendants of King Hui and King Xiang of Zhou. 235 The precise location of Juan 鄄 is unknown but was probably in the royal domain of Zhou. 236 The fields of Hou 鄇 were part of Wen 溫, and Wen was granted to Xi’s lineage. Hou was located to the northwest of present-day Wushe County 武涉縣, Henan. 237 Tan was a Zhou town and not a polity. Zhou control over Su Fensheng and Wen was tenuous; see Yin 11.5. 238 This foreshadows the mediatory efforts by another Song minister, Xiang Xu, some thirty years later (Xiang 27.4, Zhao 1.1c, 1.1d).

792

Zuo Tradition

Internecine struggles occur in the Zhou court. Zhou Duke Chu resented the oppression from the lineages of Hui and Xiang,234 and he was also contending with Bo Yu for control of the government. Failing to win, he left Zhou in anger. When he reached Yangfan, the king sent Liu Duke Kanga to bring him back. Having sworn a covenant with the latter at Juan,235 he entered the Zhou capital. Three days later he departed again and fled to Jin.

11.5

Lu uses diplomacy to try to ease tensions between Qi and Lu, antagonists in the earlier battle of An (Cheng 2). In autumn, Shusun Qiaorua went on an official visit to Qi: this was to restore the former good relations between Qi and Lu.

11.6

A territorial dispute occurs between a Jin high officer and the Zhou court. Both sides appeal to precedents, but Zhou nobles prevail (Cf. Zhao 9.3a). The story of Su Fensheng, who at one point possessed Wen, appears in Xi 10.1. Xi Zhi of Jin contended with Zhou for the lands of Hou. The king ordered Liu Duke Kang and Shan Duke Xiang to dispute the issue with Xi Zhi at Jin. Xi Zhi said, “Wen has been ours from former times; that is why I do not dare lose it.”236 Liu Duke Kanga and Shan Duke Xianga said, “In the old days Zhou vanquished Shang and sent the princes to take care of the lands they had been granted. Su Fensheng, using Wen as a base, served as supervisor of corrections and, together with Tan Liege Da, was placed in power next to the Yellow River.237 A subsequent Su clan leader went over to the Di; he was not able to get along with the Di, and he fled to Wei. King Xiang, to honor Lord Wen’s exertions, bestowed Wen on him. The lineages of Hu and Yang first stayed there, and then it came to you. If we were to examine its past, then it was a settlement held by the king’s official. How can you, sir, lay claim to it?” The Prince of Jin brought it about that Xi Zhi did not dare to contend for it.

11.7

The Song minister Hua Yuan tries to negotiate for peace between Chu and Jin. Hua Yuan of Song was on good terms with Zichong, the chief minister of Chu, and he was also on good terms with Luan Shua. He heard that the leaders of Chu had already agreed to the accord proposed by Di Pei of Jin, and that they had sent the latter to report the completion of his mission. In winter, Hua Yuan went to Chu, and then also to Jin, to cement the accord between Jin and Chu.238

11.8

Lord Cheng

793

11.9 秦、晉為成，將會于令狐。晉侯先至焉。秦伯不肯涉河，次于王城，使史

顆盟晉侯于河東。晉郤犨盟秦伯于河西。范文子曰：「是盟也何益？齊 盟，所以質信也。會所，信之始也。始之不從，其可質乎？」秦伯歸而背 晉成。

春秋 12.1(1) 十有二年，春，周公出奔晉。 12.2(2) 夏，公會晉侯、衛侯于瑣澤。 12.3(3) 秋，晉人敗狄于交剛。 12.4 冬，十月。

左傳 12.1(1) 十二年，春，王使以周公之難來告。書曰「周公出奔晉」，凡自周無出，周

公自出故也。

239 See Xi 15.8, n. 219. Note that this Wangcheng is in Qin. 240 Suo Marsh 瑣澤 was located in present-day Daming County 大名縣, Hebei. 241 The Di here are probably the White Di, because the remnants of the Red Di were destroyed in 588 Bce (Cheng 3.6). Jiaogang 交剛 was located near present-day Xi County 隰縣, Shanxi.

794

Zuo Tradition

Mutual suspicion and failure to agree on the place of meeting mar the peace agreement between Qin and Jin. Qin and Jin reached an accord, and planned to have a meeting at Linghu. The Prince of Jin arrived first. The Liege of Qin refused to cross the Yellow River, set up camp at Wangcheng,239 and sent the scribe Ke to swear a covenant with the Prince of Jin east of the Yellow River. Xi Chou of Jin swore a covenant with the Liege of Qin west of the Yellow River. Fan Xiec said, “What good would this covenant do? A covenant preceded by fasting and purification is for ensuring good faith. To agree on the place of meeting is the beginning of good faith. If the beginning does not go smoothly, how can it ensure anything?” The Liege of Qin returned and turned against his accord with Jin.

11.9

LORD CHENG 12 (579 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, the Zhou Duke departed and fled to Jin.

12.1(1)

In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Jin and the Prince of Wei at Suo Marsh.240

12.2(2)

In autumn, Jin leaders defeated the Di at Jiaogang.241

12.3(3)

Winter, the tenth month.

12.4

ZUO

The Zhou Duke again left Zhou and fled to Jin despite his earlier rehabilitation (Cheng 11.5). In the twelfth year, in spring, the king sent someone to notify us about the troubles connected with Zhou Duke Chua. The text says, “The Zhou Duke departed and fled to Jin.” In all cases concerning Zhou, there is no “departing.” The word chu—meaning “depart”—is used because the Zhou Duke Chua cast himself out.242

12.1(1)

242 Or perhaps less dramatically: “he departed of his own volition.” This exegetical comment is based on the idea that since Zhou laid claim to all lands under heaven (e.g., Maoshi 205, “Beishan” 北山), there could be no “departing from Zhou.” King Xiang is said to “leave the capital and reside in Zheng” because of a rebellion (Xi 24.5), presumably to emphasize the crisis. The word chu is not used when Wangzi Xia and Wangzi Zhao fled Zhou (see Annals, Xiang 30.5, Zhao 26.7). The commentator surmises that the use of the word chu here draws attention to the Zhou Duke Chu’s willful act of casting himself out (zichu 自出) despite his earlier rehabilitation by the king.

Lord Cheng

795

12.2(2) 宋華元克合晉、楚之成，夏，五月，晉士燮會楚公子罷、許偃。癸亥，盟

于宋西門之外，曰：「凡晉、楚無相加戎，好惡同之，同恤菑危，備救凶 患。若有害楚，則晉伐之；在晉，楚亦如之。交贄往來，道路無壅；謀其 不協，而討不庭。有渝此盟，明神殛之，俾隊其師，無克胙國。」鄭伯如 晉聽成，會于瑣澤，成故也。 12.3(3) 狄人間宋之盟以侵晉，而不設備。秋，晉人敗狄于交剛。 12.4 晉郤至如楚聘，且蒞盟。楚子享之，子反相，為地室而縣焉。郤至將登，

金奏作於下，驚而走出。 子反曰：「日云莫矣，寡君須矣，吾子其入也！」 賓曰：「君不忘先君之好，施及下臣，貺之以大禮，重之以備樂。 如天之福，兩君相見，何以代此？下臣不敢。」

243 This last sentence—four lines in the original—also appears in the covenant that Wangzi Hu made with the lords in 632 Bce (Xi 28.3). The term buting 不庭, which means literally “do not come to court” (Yin 10.3), and which we translate here as “turn against us,” also appears in Xiang 16.1. 244 Literally, “the sun is setting,” because 莫 and 暮 are variant graphs with the same meaning of “evening.” But various ritual texts use the word 暯, which means the middle of the day. Here it may refer to the middle of the day or simply indicates that time is passing. 245 King Cheng of Chu feasted Chong’er (later Lord Wen of Jin) during the latter’s exile (Xi 23.6).

796

Zuo Tradition

The Song minister Hua Yuan finalizes the peace agreement between Jin and Chu. The text of the covenant proclaims ideals soon to be betrayed. Hua Yuan of Song finalized the accord between Jin and Chu. In summer, in the fifth month, Fan Xieb of Jin met with Gongzi Pi and Xu Yan of Chu. On the guihai day (4), they swore a covenant outside the west gate of Song to this effect: “In all cases, Jin and Chu are not to take up weapons against each other. They shall have the same friends and enemies. Together they shall cherish those suffering calamities and perils and come to the assistance of the famished and the afflicted. If another domain harms Chu, Jin shall attack it; with Jin, Chu shall act likewise. For envoys going back and forth with diplomatic offerings, the roads shall not be blocked. We shall confer about domains that disagree with us and chastise those who turn against us. Whoever betrays this covenant, may the glorious spirits destroy him, bring about his army’s defeat, and bestow no blessings on his domain.”243 The Liege of Zheng went to Jin to accept the terms of the accord. They met at Suo Marsh: this was because of the accord.

12.2(2)

The Di took advantage of the covenant at Song to invade Jin, but they did not make defensive preparations. In autumn, Jin leaders defeated the Di at Jiaogang.

12.3(3)

When the Chu nobleman Zifan ceremoniously entertains the Jin envoy Xi Zhi, supposedly to finalize the peace agreement, the misuse of music shows a lack of good faith and sets the stage for war. By offering an envoy the kind of musical performance appropriate for the meeting of rulers, Zifan signifies the readiness to renew conflict. On the improper use of music, see also Zhuang 20.1, Zhao 1.12. The Lu minister Shusun Bao will similarly decline to be entertained by excessively grand music ten years hence (Xiang 4.3). Xi Zhi of Jin went to Chu on an official visit and also to oversee the covenant. The Master of Chu offered him ceremonial toasts. Zifan was the Chu king’s assistant. He had had an underground chamber made in which bells and drums were suspended. Xi Zhi was about to ascend to the hall when the music of bells, chimes, and drums sounded from down below. He was so startled that he ran out. Zifan said, “Time is passing;244 our unworthy ruler is waiting. You, sir, should enter!” His guest said, “Your ruler has not forgotten the good relations between our former rulers245 and extends his favor to this humble servant, bestowing on him great ceremony, adding to that grandly prepared music. If, by the blessing of Heaven, our two rulers should meet, what can replace this? Your humble servant does not dare receive this honor.”

12.4

Lord Cheng

797

子反曰：「如天之福，兩君相見，無亦唯是一矢以相加遺，焉用 樂？寡君須矣，吾子其入也！」 賓曰：「若讓之以一矢，禍之大者，其何福之為？世之治也，諸侯 間於天子之事，則相朝也，於是乎有享、宴之禮。享以訓共儉，宴以示慈 惠。共儉以行禮，而慈惠以布政。政以禮成，民是以息。百官承事，朝而 不夕，此公侯之所以扞城其民也。故《詩》曰： 赳赳武夫， 公侯干城。 及其亂也，諸侯貪冒，侵欲不忌，爭尋常以盡其民，略其武夫，以為己腹 心、股肱、爪牙。故《詩》曰： 赳赳武夫， 公侯腹心。 天下有道，則公侯能為民干城，而制其腹心。亂則反之。今吾子之言，亂 之道也，不可以為法。然吾子，主也，至敢不從？」遂入，卒事。 歸以語范文子。文子曰：「無禮，必食言，吾死無日矣夫！」 冬，楚公子罷如晉聘，且蒞盟。十二月，晉侯及楚公子罷盟于 赤棘。

246 Yu Qiang (cited in Yang, 2:897) glossed the word rang 讓 (yield) as rang 饟 (also pronounced shang or xiang, “to offer food and wine,” here translated as “receive”). Xi Zhi persists with the metaphor of feasting. 247 The food and wine in ceremonial toasts (xiang 享) are not consumed by the participants of sacrifices—they are left for the spirits—hence, they constitute a lesson in reverence and restraint. 248 Literally, “this is how the lords act as shields and walls for their people.” By the logic of the quotation from the Odes, Xi Zhi is referring to how the lords can use warriors as “shields and walls” for their people. 249 Xi Zhi presents this quotation and the next one, both from Maoshi 7, “Tu ju” 兔罝, 1C.40, as having opposite meanings. But in the Odes these lines are obviously analogous: both celebrate the importance of the warrior for his lord. Xi Zhi’s fashioning of lines from the Odes to fit his own intent and the context is common practice in Zuozhuan. Cf. Xiang, nn. 342 and 932.

798

Zuo Tradition

Zifan said, “If, by the blessing of Heaven, our two rulers should meet, they will have nothing but an arrow to exchange with each other. What use will there be for music? Our unworthy ruler is waiting. You, sir, should enter!” His guest said, “If they receive246 each other with an arrow, that is the greatest of disasters. What blessing is there? In an era of good government, when there are intervals of leisure from the affairs of the Son of Heaven, princes visit one another’s courts. Then there will be rituals of ceremonial toasts and feastings—ceremonial toasts to offer instruction in reverence and restraint;247 feasts to show kindness and beneficence. With reverence and restraint one practices proper ritual; with kindness and beneficence one lays out government policies. Government is realized through ritual propriety, and the people therewith find rest. The myriad officials receive orders, seeking morning audiences but not evening ones. This is how the lords and princes protect their people like shields and walls.248 Thus, it says in the Odes, Bold and stalwart warriors, Shields and walls of their lord and prince.249

But when there is disorder, the princes in their greed have no compunctions about invading other domains or pursuing their desires. Fighting over a mere stretch of land, they drive their people to the limit, conscripting the fighting men among them to be their own bellies and hearts, legs and rumps, claws and teeth. Thus, it says in the Odes, Bold and stalwart warriors, Belly and heart of their lord and prince.

When the proper way prevails under heaven, the lords can be shields and walls for their people, disciplining their own hearts and minds. With disorder, the situation is reversed. Now your words embody the way of disorder; they cannot be held up as a model. But you, sir, are the host. Dare I not follow?” He thus entered, and completed the business. Upon his return he told Fan Xiec about this. Fan Xiea said, “Without ritual propriety, they are sure to eat their own words. Our death cannot be many days away!” Jin and Chu swear a covenant that will prove to be short-lived. In winter, Gongzi Pi of Chu went to Jin on an official visit and also to oversee the covenant. In the twelfth month, the Prince of Jin and Gongzi Pi of Chu swore a covenant at Chiji.

Lord Cheng

799

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年，春，晉侯使郤錡來乞師。 13.2(2) 三月，公如京師。 13.3(3) 夏，五月，公自京師，遂會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、邾人、滕

人伐秦。 13.4 曹伯盧卒于師。 13.5 秋，七月，公至自伐秦。 13.6(5) 冬，葬曹宣公。

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年，春，晉侯使郤錡來乞師，將事不敬。孟獻子曰：「郤氏其亡乎！

禮，身之幹也；敬，身之基也。郤子無基。且先君之嗣卿也，受命以求 師，將社稷是衛，而惰，棄君命也，不亡，何為？」 13.2(2) 三月，公如京師。宣伯欲賜，請先使。王以行人之禮禮焉。孟獻子從。王

以為介而重賄之。

250 In other words, Shusun Qiaoru received no gifts.

800

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 13 (578 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Xi Yi to us to plead for troops.

13.1(1)

In the third month, our lord went to the Zhou capital.

13.2(2)

In summer, in the fifth month, our lord was coming from the Zhou capital. He then met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, a Zhu leader, and a Teng leader and attacked Qin.

13.3(3)

Lu, the Liege of Cao, died among the troops.

13.4

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from the attack on Qin.

13.5

In winter, Lord Xuan of Cao was buried.

13.6(5)

ZUO

A Lu minister, Meng Xianzi, predicts doom for the Jin minister Xi Yi (Xi Ke’s son and head of the Xi lineage) because of the latter’s irreverence in conducting his mission of asking for troops. The prophecy is fulfilled four years later (Cheng 17.10). Lack of reverence ( bujing 不敬) often leads to predictions of a person’s doom in Zuozhuan. In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Xi Yi to us to plead for troops. The way he conducted his mission was not reverential. Meng Xianzi said, “The Xi lineage will likely perish! Ritual propriety is a person’s trunk; reverence, a person’s foundation. Xi Yib does not have that foundation. Moreover, as a hereditary minister of the former ruler, he had received the charge to request troops. This was for the sake of defending the altars of the domain, and yet he was slack. This amounts to abandoning the ruler’s charge. How can he not perish?”

13.1(1)

One Zhou noble, Liu Duke Kang, predicts doom for another, Cheng Duke Su, because of his irreverent attitude in receiving sacrificial meat. The prophecy, fulfilled two months later (Cheng 13.3), is premised on the multiple meanings of the word ming 命 (translated here as “charge”), which can also mean “command,” “life,” and “destiny” (see also Wen 13.3, Cheng 4.3). In the third month, our lord went to the Zhou capital. Shusun Qiaorua hoped to have gifts bestowed upon him and asked to be sent on beforehand. The king treated him with the ritual proper to intermediaries.250 Meng Xianzi followed; the king, treating him as our lord’s assistant, rewarded him amply.

13.2(2)

Lord Cheng

801

公及諸侯朝王，遂從劉康公、成肅公會晉侯伐秦。成子受脤于 社，不敬。劉子曰：「吾聞之：民受天地之中以生，所謂命也。是以有動 作禮義威儀之則，以定命也。能者養以之福，不能者敗以取禍。 是故君子勤禮，小人盡力。勤禮莫如致敬，盡力莫如敦篤。敬在 養神，篤在守業。 國之大事，在祀與戎。祀有執膰，戎有受脤，神之大節也。今成子 惰，棄其命矣，其不反乎！」 13.3a(3) 夏，四月戊午，晉侯使呂相絕秦，曰： 昔逮我獻公及穆公相好，戮力同心，申之以盟誓，重之以昏

姻。天禍晉國，文公如齊，惠公如秦。無祿，獻公即世。穆公 不忘舊德，俾我惠公用能奉祀于晉。又不能成大勳，而為韓 之師。亦悔于厥心，用集我文公，是穆之成也。

251 Lord Cheng of Lu and the other lords all passed through Zhou on the way to Jin, presumably to legitimize Jin’s aggression against Qin. 252 We follow Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 27.460–61), who reads zhong as “the energy (or spirit) of central harmony” 天地中和之氣, and Hui Dong, who reads zhong as “centrality” (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 883–84). Cf. Karlgren, gl. 412: “humans are granted the central realm between heaven and earth to sustain life.” 253 Cf. Karlgren’s (gl. 413) different reading, following Lin Yaosou: “reverence lies in nurturing one’s spirit.” 254 For references to sacrifice or warfare as “a great affair,” see Yin 5.1, Xi 15.4b, 32.4, Wen 2.5. 255 That is, Lord Xian of Jin and Lord Mu of Qin. 256 Lord Mu of Qin married one of Lord Xian’s daughters; she is called Mu Ji in the text. She interceded on behalf of her half brother, Lord Hui of Jin, after the defeat of Jin in the battle of Han (Xi 15.4). Wen Ying and Huai Ying, both daughters of Lord Mu of Qin, married Lord Wen of Jin. Lord Xiang was Bi Jí’s son (Wen 6.6), but Wen Ying as principal wife was his official mother. Wen Ying urged Lord Xiang of Jin to release three captured Qin commanders (Xi 33.3b). 257 Chong’er (later Lord Wen) was in exile from 656 to 637 Bce, and Yiwu (later Lord Hui) was in exile from 656 to 651 Bce. Chong’er sojourned in many domains (including Qi), and Yiwu resided in Liang before he came to Qin. 258 Wulu 無祿 is a special term used in notification about a lord’s death in communications between domains (Karlgren, gl. 415). 259 Lord Mu of Qin supported Yiwu’s return to Jin as ruler (Xi 9.6). On the conditions of Lord Mu’s assistance, as well as the background to and the course of the battle of Han, see Xi 15.4.

802

Zuo Tradition

Our lord and the other princes visited the court of the king, and then, led by Liu Duke Kang and Cheng Duke Su, they joined forces with the Prince of Jin to attack Qin.251 When Cheng Duke Sua received the sacrificial meat at the altar of earth, he was not reverent. Liu Duke Kanga said, “I have heard that humans are born of the spirit of central harmony between heaven and earth and this is what is called their charge.252 That is why there are models for action and movement, ritual propriety and duty, majesty and bearing for securing this charge. The able ones nurture this charge and find their way to good fortune; the feckless ones ruin this charge and bring on disaster. That is why noble men are assiduous in fulfilling ritual propriety, while common men exert themselves to the utmost in physical labor. In being assiduous in fulfilling ritual propriety, there is nothing equal to offering reverence. In exerting oneself to the utmost in physical labor, there is nothing equal to steady dedication. Reverence lies in nurturing the spirits;253 dedication lies in keeping to one’s vocation. The great affairs of the domain lie with sacrifice and warfare.254 With sacrifices, there is the ritual of distributing roasted sacrificial meat; with warfare, there is the ritual of receiving sacrificial meat. These are the critical junctures in serving the spirits. In the present case, Cheng Duke Sua was slack; he has cast aside his charge. Surely he will not return!” The Jin envoy Lü Xiang (Wei Xiang) threatens to sever relations with Qin by giving a purportedly historical retrospective of Qin-Jin relations over the last eighty years. This famous piece of rhetoric, delivered in an elevated style and laced with compelling examples, presents Jin as invariably righteous and victimized and Qin as ungrateful and aggressive. It skillfully distorts events chronicled elsewhere in Zuozhuan. In summer, in the fourth month, on the wuwu day (5), the Prince of Jin sent Lü Xiang to sever relations with Qin with these words:

13.3a(3)

In former times our Lord Xian and Lord Mu 255 shared good relations. They joined their efforts and were of the same heart and mind, extending their good relations with oaths and covenants and strengthening their relationship with marriage ties.256 When Heaven inflicted calamities on Jin, Lord Wen went to Qi, and Lord Hui went to Qin.257 Misfortune befell us,258 and Lord Xian passed away. Lord Mu did not forget the old ties of beneficence and allowed our Lord Hui to uphold ancestral sacrifices in the domain of Jin. Yet he was not able to complete his great meritorious service to Jin and deployed his army at Han.259 He did, however, have regret in his heart and brought about the success of our Lord Wen. All these were due to the mediation of Lord Mu.

Lord Cheng

803

文公躬擐甲冑，跋履山川，踰越險阻，征東之諸侯， 虞、夏、商、周之胤 而朝諸秦，則亦既報舊德矣。鄭人怒君 之疆埸，我文公帥諸侯及秦圍鄭。秦大夫不詢于我寡君， 擅及鄭盟。諸侯疾之，將致命于秦。文公恐懼，綏靜諸侯， 秦師克還無害，則是我有大造于西也。 無祿，文公即世，穆為不弔，蔑死我君，寡我襄公，迭 我殽地，奸絕我好，伐我保城，殄滅我費滑，散離我兄弟， 撓亂我同盟，傾覆我國家。我襄公未忘君之舊勳，而懼社稷 之隕，是以有殽之師。猶願赦罪于穆公。穆公弗聽，而即楚 謀我。天誘其衷，成王隕命，穆公是以不克逞志于我。 穆、襄即世，康、靈即位。康公，我之自出，又欲闕翦 我公室，傾覆我社稷，帥我蝥賊，以來蕩搖我邊疆，我是以 有令狐之役。康猶不悛，入我河曲，伐我涑川，俘我王官，翦 我羈馬，我是以有河曲之戰。東道之不通，則是康公絕我 好也。 260 There is no record of this in Zuozhuan or other early texts. 261 Qin and Jin were about to join forces to attack Zheng in 630 Bce when Zhu Zhiwu of Zheng, in a masterful rhetorical performance, persuaded Lord Mu of Qin that Zheng’s capitulation could only benefit Jin, to the detriment of Qin (Xi 30.3). Jin’s military ambition vis-à-vis Zheng, fueled by old grudges and eventually deflected by Qin, is here presented as an attempt to defend Qin. 262 It was Hu Yan who wanted to attack Qin, but Lord Wen, recalling Qin’s earlier assistance, refused (Xi 30.3). Jin “restraint” in this instance, probably based on strategic calculations, is here described as a great favor toward Qin. 263 Yang (2:832, 862) reads diao 弔 as shu 叔、淑 (“good,” “kind,” “scrupulous”), following evidence from oracle bones and bronze inscriptions; see also the similar views of Wang Yinzhi and Yu Yue (cited in Karlgren, gl. 416). Takezoe (13.13), Legge (382), and Watson (Tso Chuan, 123) all read budiao more literally as “offered no condolences” or “showed no compassion.” 264 Lu Deming cites this line as “defied our deceased lord” (mie wo sijun 蔑我死君) in Jingdian shiwen, and Hui Dong cites other examples of the compound sijun (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 467). A literal translation of the received text is “defied our lord as if he were deceased” (mie si wojun 蔑死我君). “Defied our deceased lord” makes for a better parallelism with the line that follows. 265 Since the ruling houses of Zheng and Hua both had the clan name Ji, they are referred to as “brother domains.” The original has Bihua: Bi was the capital of Hua. 266 For the battle of Yao, which ended with Qin defeat, see Xi 33.3. 267 This phrase tian you qi zhong 天誘其衷 recurs in Zuozhuan. See Xi 28.4, Xiang 25.10, Ding 4.3, and Ai 16.2 (Yang, 1:469, 3:1105, 4:1547, 4:1698). 268 According to the account given in Wen 14.10, the alliance between Qin and Chu did not come to fruition because of the intrigues of two Chu ministers, not because of King Cheng’s death. 269 Both Lord Mu of Qin and Lord Xiang of Jin died in 621 Bce. They were succeeded by Lord Kang of Qin (r. 620–609) and Lord Ling of Jin (r. 620–607). Lord Kang was born of the union between Lord Mu and Mu Ji, the daughter of Lord Xian of Jin. 270 Lü Xiang is accusing Lord Kang of Qin of trying to destabilize Jin by supporting Gongzi Yong, a rival claimant to the throne. In fact, it was Zhao Dun, chief minister of Jin, who advocated the establishment of Gongzi Yong as Jin ruler (Wen 6.5)

804

Zuo Tradition

Lord Wen personally donned armor and headpiece, traversed mountains and rivers, overcame perils and obstacles, and vanquished the princes of the east, making the descendants of Yu, Xia, Shang, and Zhou visit the court of Qin.260 Thus did he already requite the old ties of beneficence. When the men of Zheng unleashed their fury at the borders of your domain, our Lord Wen led the princes and Qin in laying siege to Zheng.261 The high officers of Qin, without consulting our unworthy ruler, unilaterally swore a covenant with Zheng. The princes were outraged by such conduct and wanted to brave death to attack Qin. Lord Wen, fearing for Qin, pacified the princes; and the Qin army succeeded in returning without suffering any harm. With this we thus performed a great service for the domain in the west.262 Misfortune befell us, and Lord Wen passed away. Lord Mu was ruthless.263 He defied our deceased lord,264 belittled our Lord Xiang as young and weak, encroached upon our land of Yao, cut us off from our allies and friends, attacked our city walls and fortresses, eliminated our domain of Hua, scattered and drove away our brothers,265 brought about strife and chaos among our covenant partners, and threatened to topple our domain and patrimony. Our Lord Xiang had still not forgotten your earlier meritorious service, yet he feared the destruction of the altars of the domain, and that was why the armies were deployed at Yao.266 Even then he was willing to resolve with Lord Mu the causes for recrimination. Yet Lord Mu refused to listen and turned to Chu to plot against us. Heaven’s sentiments were swayed,267 King Cheng of Chu perished, and because of that Lord Mu did not succeed in exerting his will at our expense.268 When Lords Mu and Xiang passed away, Lords Kang and Ling acceded to their positions.269 Lord Kang was of our Jin extraction, yet he wished to disrupt and ruin our lord’s house and to overturn the altars of our domain. He led noxious vermin from our line to destabilize our borders; that is why we had the Linghu campaign.270 Even then Lord Kang did not repent. He entered our territory at Hequ, attacked our Su River area, took captives from among our people at Wangguan, and plundered our Jima. That was why we had the battle of Hequ.271 That the way eastward was blocked for you was because Lord Kang terminated good relations with us.272

before he backed down and switched allegiance to Lord Ling. The battle of Linghu was fought in 620 Bce (Wen 7.4). 271 The battle of Hequ was fought in 615 Bce. According to Zuozhuan, Qin attacked Jin and occupied Jima in retaliation for the battle of Linghu (Wen 12.5). 272 “The way eastward” means “the road from Qin to Jin” and also refers to contact with other states farther to the east. Recall that Qin was referred to earlier as “the domain in the west.”

Lord Cheng

805

13.3b

及君之嗣也，我君景公引領西望曰：「庶撫我乎！」君亦不 惠稱盟，利 吾有狄難，入我河縣，焚我箕、郜，芟夷我農 功，虔劉我邊陲，我是以有輔氏之聚。君亦悔禍之延，而 欲徼福于先君獻、穆，使伯車來命我景公曰：「吾與女同 好棄惡，復修舊德，以追念前勳。」言誓未就，景公即世，我 寡君是以有令狐之會。 君又不祥，背棄盟誓。白狄及君同州，君之仇讎，而我 昏姻也。君來賜命曰：「 吾與女伐狄。寡君不敢顧昏姻，畏 君之威，而受命于吏。君有二心於狄，曰：「 晉將伐女。」狄 應且憎，是用告我。 楚人惡君之二三其德也，亦來告我曰：「 秦背令狐之 盟，而來求盟于我：『昭告昊天上帝、秦三公、楚三王曰：余 雖與晉出入，余唯利是視。』不穀惡其無成德，是用宣之， 以懲不壹。」諸侯備聞此言，斯是用痛心疾首，暱就寡人，寡 人帥以聽命，唯好是求。君若惠顧諸侯，矜哀寡人，而賜之 盟，則寡人之願也，其承寧諸侯以退，豈敢徼亂？君若不施 大惠，寡人不佞，其不能以諸侯退矣。

273 In 594 Bce, Jin attacked the Red Di (Xuan 15.3). 274 We follow Du Yu’s (ZZ 27.462) reading of qianliu 虔劉 as “killing.” Kong Yingda, in his subcommentary to “Lüxing” 呂刑 in the Documents (Shangshu-Kong 19.296), cites Zheng Xuan’s reading of the term as “unsettle” or “cause disorder.” 275 See Xuan 15.5. 276 Both sides came to the meeting with suspicions and ill will; see Cheng 11.9. 277 This is one of several references in the text to intermarriage between the central domains and the “barbarians”; see also Xi 23.6, Xi 24.2, and Xuan 15.3. 278 We follow Wang Yinzhi’s (Jingyi shuwen, 698) reading of ying 應 as shou 受 (“receive”). Wang cites Wei Zhao’s gloss of the phrase ying qie zeng 應且憎 in Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.455: “Outside they receive and accept us; inside they abhor our error.” 279 The phrase “being inconstant in your virtue” (literally, “making two and three things of your virtue”) also appears in Cheng 8.1. 280 “The three lords of Qin” are Lord Mu, Lord Kang, and Lord Gong; the “three kings of Chu” are King Cheng, King Mu, and King Zhuang. 281 Recall that Jin and Chu made a peace agreement brokered by Hua Yuan of Song (Cheng 12.2). 282 Here Lord Li seems to be speaking in his own voice instead of through the voice of his envoy. Yang (2:864) notes the inconsistencies in the uses of the terms “our ruler” (wojun 我君), “our unworthy ruler” (guajun 寡君), and “I, the unworthy one” (guaren 寡人), in Lü Xiang’s speech or letter.

806

Zuo Tradition

When the time came for you, my lord, to succeed your father, our ruler Lord Jing craned his neck and gazed westward, saying, “Perhaps he will cherish us with compassion!” But you, my lord, did not grace us with participation in a covenant. Taking advantage of our troubles with the Di,273 you entered our dependency by the Yellow River, burned our settlements of Ji and Gao, cut down the fruits of our agricultural labor, and committed slaughter at our borders:274 that was why we gathered troops at Fushi.275 You, my lord, also regretted the spreading of calamities and, wishing to elicit the blessings of our former rulers, Lords Xian and Mu, sent Qianb to command our Lord Jing thus: “You and I will share good relations and will abandon hostilities. We will return to the cultivation of former cordiality, so as to honor the memory of earlier meritorious services.” Before the oaths were completed, Lord Jing passed away; that is why our unworthy ruler held the meeting at Linghu.276 You, my lord, were again merciless and turned against the covenant oaths. The White Di and you, my lord, shared the same region; they are your enemies and our partners in marriage.277 You bestowed this command on us: “You and I shall attack the Di.” Our unworthy ruler did not dare consider marriage ties; fearing your authority, he gave the command of war to the officers. Yet you, my lord, had divided allegiance regarding the Di and said to them, “Jin is planning to attack you.” The Di received your notification,278 even as they abhorred it; that is why they notified us about your perfidy. The men of Chu hated your way of being inconstant in your virtue279 and also came to notify us: “Qin turned against the Covenant of Linghu and came to us seeking a covenant with these words, ‘We clearly declare to the god on high of the boundless heavens, to the three lords of Qin, and to the three kings of Chu:280 Although we have maintained relations with Jin, our gaze is on nothing but gain.’ I, the deficient one, detest Qin’s lack of steadfast virtue. I thereby reveal these things, so that it can be punished for its inconstancy!”281 Having heard all these words, the princes, aggrieved in heart and pained in mind, drew close to me.282 I, the unworthy one, led them to await your commands, seeking nothing but amity. If you, my lord, deign to look with beneficence upon the princes, feel compassion for me, and bestow upon us a covenant, that will indeed be my wish. We shall then pacify the princes and retreat, for how would we dare to provoke disorder? If you do not bestow on us any great beneficence, then I, for all my ineptness, will not be able to lead the princes to retreat.

Lord Cheng

13.3b

807

敢盡布之執事，俾執事實圖利之。 13.3c 秦桓公既與晉厲公為令狐之盟，而又召狄與楚，欲道以伐晉，諸侯是以

睦於晉。 晉欒書將中軍，荀庚佐之；士燮將上軍，郤錡佐之；韓厥將下軍， 荀罃佐之；趙旃將新軍，郤至佐之。郤毅御戎，欒鍼為右。孟獻子曰： 「晉帥乘和，師必有大功。」五月丁亥，晉師以諸侯之師及秦師戰于麻 隧。秦師敗績，獲秦成差及不更女父。曹宣公卒于師。師遂濟涇，及侯 麗而還。迓晉侯于新楚。 成肅公卒于瑕。 13.4 六月丁卯夜，鄭公子班自訾求入于大宮，不能，殺子印、子羽，反軍于

市。己巳，子駟帥國人盟于大宮，遂從而盡焚之，殺子如、子駹、孫叔、 孫知。

283 They support Jin as the more trustworthy ally. 284 Xi Yì (Xi Zhi’s younger brother) is not to be confused with his more powerful kinsman Xi Yi, the lineage head of his generation. The two names are written with different characters. 285 Karlgren (gl. 421), following Shen Qinhan, reads cheng 乘 as a verb (“to use,” “to take advantage of”). Du Yu (ZZ 27.463) reads sheng 乘 as a noun, “chariots (with their armored soldiers)”: “The Jin commanders and the armored soldiers on the chariots are in harmonious cohesion.” 286 Masui 麻隧 was located in present-day Jingyang County 涇陽縣, Shaanxi. 287 “Captain” is our translation of the unusual term bugeng. According to Hanshu 19A.739, bugeng 不更 and shuzhang 庶長 (mentioned in Xiang 11.6) were Qin ranks instituted by Shang Yang during the reign of Lord Xiao of Qin (r. 361–338) (ZZ-Kong 27.463). The Song scholar Zheng Qiao (Liujing aolun, j. 4) uses this as one of the “facts” to date Zuozhuan after the reign of Lord Hui of Qin (r. 399–387). We do not know much about the Qin administrative system prior to Shang Yang’s reforms, however, and Shang might have redefined ranks that already existed during the Spring and Autumn period. Liu Wenqi (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 896) cites Liu Shao, who glosses bugeng as the highest rank for an officer (shi 士) and “the spearman on the right in a chariot” in a Han text. But since he was singled out for mention, Rufu might have been of an even higher rank.

808

Zuo Tradition

I have presumed to fully set forth the matter before those in charge, so that they will indeed consider the most advantageous course of action.

Lü Xiang’s dire presentation of Qin-Jin relations turns out to be a declaration of war. Jin and its allies fight Qin at Masui. The Zhou noble Cheng Duke Su dies as predicted (Cheng 13.2). Lord Huan of Qin had already sworn the Covenant of Linghu with Lord Li of Jin, yet he summoned the Di and Chu, hoping to lead them to attack Jin. That was why the princes had cordial relations with Jin.283 Luan Shu of Jin commanded the central army, with Zhonghang Xuanzia assisting him. Fan Xieb commanded the upper army, with Xi Yi assisting him. Han Jue commanded the lower army, with Zhi Yingb assisting him. Zhao Zhan commanded the new army, with Xi Zhi assisting him. Xi Yì was the chariot driver,284 with Luan Qian as his spearman on the right. Meng Xianzi said, “The Jin commanders are taking advantage of the troops’ harmonious cohesion.285 Jin troops will certainly accomplish great things.” In the fifth month, on the dinghai day (4), Jin troops led the troops of the princes and did battle with Qin troops at Masui.286 Qin troops were completely defeated, and Cheng Cha of Qin as well as Captain Rufu 287 were taken captives. Lord Xuan of Cao died among the troops. The allied troops then crossed the Jing River, advancing as far as Houli before turning back.288 They met the Jin ruler at Xinchu. Cheng Duke Su died at Xia.

13.3c

The disaffected Gongzi Ban, whose plan to install a proxy Zheng ruler was thwarted (Cheng 10.3), foments unrest in Zheng. In the sixth month, on the night of dingmao (15), Gongzi Ban of Zheng, coming from Zi,289 sought to enter the Zheng Ancestral Temple. Failing to do so, he killed Ziyin and Ziyu and returned to station his troops at the marketplace. On the jisi day (17), Zisi led the inhabitants of the capital and swore a covenant at the Ancestral Temple. He then pursued the rebels and burned them all, killing Gongzi Bana, Ban’s younger brother Zimang, Ban’s son Sunshu, and Zimang’s son Sunzhi.

13.4

288 Jing River 涇水 and Houli 侯麗, both of unknown location, were presumably deep in Qin territory. 289 Zi 訾 was located in the domain of Zheng between present-day Xinzheng County 新鄭縣 and Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan.

Lord Cheng

809

13.5 曹人使公子負芻守，使公子欣時逆曹伯之喪。秋，負芻殺其大子而自立

也。諸侯乃請討之。晉人以其役之勞，請俟他年。冬，葬曹宣公。既葬， 子臧將亡，國人皆將從之。成公乃懼，告罪，且請焉。乃反，而致其邑。

春秋 14.1 十有四年，春，王正月，莒子朱卒。 14.2(1) 夏，衛孫林父自晉歸于衛。 14.3(2) 秋，叔孫僑如如齊逆女。 14.4(3) 鄭公子喜帥師伐許。 14.5(4) 九月，僑如以夫人婦姜氏至自齊。 14.6(5) 冬，十月庚寅，衛侯臧卒。 14.7 秦伯卒。

810

Zuo Tradition

Jin leaders protect Gongzi Fuchu, a usurper who made himself the ruler of Cao, because of his assistance in the campaign against Qin. Fuchu’s brother Gongzi Xinshi protests by trying to leave Cao. The men of Cao had Gongzi Fuchu guard the domain and sent Gongzi Xinshi to meet the Liege of Cao’s funeral cortege. In autumn, Fuchu killed the heir apparent and established himself as ruler. The princes therefore petitioned Jin to chastise him. The leaders of Jin, because of his service in the campaign against Qin, asked to wait till another year. In winter, Lord Xuan of Cao was buried. After he had been buried, Gongzi Xinshia planned to go into exile. The inhabitants of the capital all intended to follow him. Lord Cheng [the usurper Fuchu] thus became fearful, acknowledged his guilt, and moreover implored Gongzi Xinshi to stay. Gongzi Xinshi thus returned and offered his settlement to the lord [to mend their rift].

13.5

LORD CHENG 14 (577 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Zhu, the Master of Ju, died.

14.1

In summer, Sun Linfu of Wei went home from Jin to Wei.

14.2(1)

In autumn, Shusun Qiaoru went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride.

290

14.3(2)

Gongzi Xi (Zihan) of Zheng led out troops and attacked Xǔ.

14.4(3)

In the ninth month, Qiaoru, bringing our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi.

14.5(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the gengyin day (16), Zang, the Prince of Wei, died. The Liege of Qin died.

14.6(5)

14.7

290 The text is referring to a bride for Lord Cheng.

Lord Cheng

811

左傳 14.1(2) 十四年，春，衛侯如晉，晉侯強見孫林父焉。定公不可。夏，衛侯既歸，

晉侯使郤犨送孫林父而見之。衛侯欲辭。定姜曰：「不可。是先君宗卿 之嗣也，大國又以為請。不許，將亡。雖惡之，不猶愈於亡乎？君其忍 之！安民而宥宗卿，不亦可乎？」衛侯見而復之。 衛侯饗苦成叔，甯惠子相。苦成叔傲。甯子曰：「苦成家其亡乎！ 古之為享食也，以觀威儀、省禍福也，故《詩》曰： 兕觵其觩， 旨酒思柔。 彼交匪傲， 萬福來求。 今夫子傲，取禍之道也。」 14.2(3) 秋，宣伯如齊逆女。稱族，尊君命也。 14.3(4) 八月，鄭子罕伐許，敗焉。戊戌，鄭伯復伐許。庚子，入其郛。許人平以

叔申之封。

291 Sun Linfu’s father, Sun Liangfu, was a minister during the reign of Lord Mu of Wei, father of Lord Ding. According to Shiben, the Sun lineage was descended from Lord Wu of Wei (ZZ-Kong 27.464). 292 Sun Linfu regained his position and the settlement that had supplied his revenue. 293 Xi Chou is called Kucheng Shu 苦成叔 here in the Chinese original. He is also called Kucheng shujia 苦成叔家 in the Kanazawa Bunko version. According to Wang Fu (Qianfu lun), Ku 苦 is the same as Xi 郤, the area that supplied revenue for the Xi lineage, and Cheng 成 is the honorific for Xi Chou. Shu is the order of seniority. Another theory is that Kucheng 苦成 was a place in Jin, presumably associated with Xi Chou (Yang, 2:869). There is a brief account of the Xi lineage’s downfall among the Shanghai Museum Manuscripts, where Xi Chou is called Gucheng Jiafu 姑成家 父 or Kucheng Jiafu 苦成家父 (Shanghai Bowu guan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu, 5:69–78, 239–49) and has a much more positive image than in Zuozhuan or Guoyu. See Li Long-shien, “Xian Qin chuanben/jianben xushi juyu”; Zhou Fengwu, “Shangbo wu ‘Gucheng jiafu’ chongbian xinshi.” 294 Maoshi 215, “Sanghu” 桑扈, 14B.481. 295 The fact that Lord Cheng marries only in the fourteenth year of his reign indicates that he was a small child when he became ruler.

812

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Wei minister Sun Linfu, who fled to Jin seven years earlier (Cheng 7.6), returns through Jin’s intercession and because the Wei ruler’s wife, Ding Jiang, urges the Wei ruler to accept the reconciliation. Xi Chou, the Jin minister who accompanies Sun Linfu, behaves arrogantly, and this is taken as another omen of the ruin of the Xi lineage. On Xi Chou’s abuse of power, see also Cheng 11.3, 16.6, and 16.11. In the fourteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Wei went to Jin. The Prince of Jin insisted on having Sun Linfu brought to the Wei ruler for an audience. The Prince of Wei, Lord Ding, refused. In summer, after the Prince of Wei had returned, the Prince of Jin had Xi Chou take Sun Linfu to Wei to seek an audience. The Prince of Wei wanted to decline. His wife, Ding Jiang, said, “This will not do. He is the successor to a hereditary minister of the former lord.291 Moreover, a great domain is interceding on his behalf. If you refuse, the domain will perish. Even though you hate him, is it not better to bear his presence than to perish? My lord should endure this! To bring peace to the people and to pardon a hereditary minister, is that not the right thing to do?” The Prince of Wei granted him an audience and restored his position.292 The Prince of Wei offered ceremonious toasts for Xi Choua,293 and Ning Zhia acted as the prince’s assistant. Xi Choua was arrogant. Ning Zhib said, “Xi Choua and his patrimony will probably perish! The ancients set forth feasts and ceremonious toasts in order to observe the participants’ majesty and bearing and to discern disaster or blessings. That is why it says in the Odes,

14.1(2)

The rhinoceros drinking horns curve up; The fine wine is soothing. Neither haughty nor arrogant— Myriad blessings come and gather.294

Now that fine man is arrogant. This is the way to bring on disaster!” In autumn, Shusun Qiaorua went to Qi to meet and escort home a bride.295 The designation of his lineage honors the ruler’s command.

14.2(3)

Zheng victory over Xŭ determines the outcome of a territorial dispute that sparked a conflict ten years earlier (Cheng 4.5). In the eighth month, Zihan of Zheng attacked Xǔ and was defeated. On the wuxu day (23), the Liege of Zheng again attacked Xǔ. On the gengzi day (25), Zheng troops breached the outer city walls. The leaders of Xǔ sued for peace by offering the lands that Gongsun Shena had demarcated as Zheng territories.

14.3(4)

Lord Cheng

813

14.4(5) 九月，僑如以夫人婦姜氏至自齊。舍族，尊夫人也。故君子曰：「《春秋》

之稱，微而顯，志而晦，婉而成章，盡而不汙，懲惡而勸善，非聖人，誰 能脩之？」 14.5(6) 衛侯有疾，使孔成子、甯惠子立敬姒之子衎以為大子。冬十月，衛定公

卒。夫人姜氏既哭而息，見大子之不哀也，不內酌飲，歎曰：「是夫也，將 不唯衛國之敗，其必始於未亡人。烏呼！天禍衛國也夫！吾不獲鱄也使 主社稷。」大夫聞之，無不聳懼。孫文子自是不敢舍其重器於衛，盡寘 諸戚，而甚善晉大夫。

296 In our translation of the word cheng 稱 we follow Karlgren (gl. 422), who in turn follows Lin Yaosou. Cheng can mean “to name” and may refer to the way Qiaoru is designated by his given name (rather than by his courtesy name “Xuanbo”) here. However, in this passage the word seems to have broader implications and extends to the ways whereby the Annals articulates judgment by naming people and events in specific ways. 297 We read wu 汙 as kua 夸 or 誇; see Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:161–66.

814

Zuo Tradition

The following passage is an oft-quoted panegyric to the Annals, which is described in terms that might well apply to Zuozhuan itself (see also Zhao 31.5). “The sage,” commonly understood as Confucius, is said to have shaped it, although elsewhere in Zuozhuan Confucius is never referred to as “the sage.” In the ninth month, Qiaoru, bringing our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, arrived from Qi. The lineage name of Qiaoru is left out to honor the lord’s wife. That is why the noble man said, “Such is the way that the Annals articulates judgment:296 subtle yet pointed, clear yet indirect, restrained yet richly patterned, exhaustive yet not excessive,297 chastising evil and encouraging goodness.298 Who but the sage could have shaped it?”

14.4(5)

Ding Jiang, who advised reconciliation with Sun Linfu earlier, again shows her prescience.299 She predicts doom because the newly bereaved Wei ruler shows no grief. He will be driven into exile by Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi eighteen years later (Xiang 14.4). The Prince of Wei became very ill. He had Kong Chengzi and Ning Zhia establish Jing Si’s300 son, Kan, as heir apparent. In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Ding of Wei died. His wife, Lady Jiang, was resting after she had wailed, and when she saw that the heir apparent was not grieving, she would not drink so much as a ladle of water but sighed and said, “As for this man—not only will he destroy the domain of Wei, but also he will begin his iniquities with this soon-to-perish widow. Alas! Heaven is bringing disaster upon Wei! What a pity that we could not have Zhuan301 preside over the altars of the domain!” When the high officers heard this, they were without exception filled with fear and dread. From that time on, Sun Linfua did not dare leave his precious vessels in Wei and placed them all in his lands at Qī.302 He also maintained very good relations with the high officers of Jin.

14.5(6)

298 There are verbal echoes here of Xunzi 8.138: “The noble man effaces himself yet manifests his intent, he is subtle yet clear; his words are yielding, yet they prevail” 君子隱而顯, 微而明, 辭讓而勝. The characterization of the Annals as “subtle” (wei 微) and as “restrained and not quickly grasped” (yue er busu 約而不速) in Xunzi 1.10 and 1.15 also resonates with this passage. 299 Ding Jiang is included in the chapter “Exemplary Mothers” (Muyi 母儀) in Lienü zhuan (1.9–11). 300 Jing Si was Lord Ding’s concubine. 301 Zhuan was Kan’s younger brother by the same mother. 302 Qī was the land supplying revenue for Sun Linfu. When Sun fled to Jin, Jin had returned Qī to Wei. Lord Ding of Wei restored the land to Sun Linfu upon his reinstatement in Wei.

Lord Cheng

815

春秋 15.1 十有五年，春，王二月，葬衛定公。 15.2 三月乙巳，仲嬰齊卒。 15.3(1) 癸丑，公會晉侯、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、宋世子成、齊國佐、邾人，同盟于

戚。晉侯執曹伯歸于京師。 15.4 公至自會。 15.5(2) 夏，六月，宋公固卒。 15.6(3) 楚子伐鄭。 15.7(4) 秋，八月庚辰，葬宋共公。 15.8(4) 宋華元出奔晉。 15.9(4) 宋華元自晉歸于宋。 15.10(4) 宋殺其大夫山。 15.11(4) 宋魚石出奔楚。 15.12(6) 冬，十有一月，叔孫僑如會晉士燮、齊高無咎、宋華元、衛孫林父、鄭公

子鰌、邾人會吳于鍾離。 15.13 許遷于葉。

816

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 15 (576 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Lord Ding of Wei was buried. In the third month, on the yisi day (3), Zhong Yingqi died.303 On the guichou day (11), our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Song heir apparent Cheng, Guo Zuo of Qi, and a Zhu leader, and they swore a covenant together at Qī. The Prince of Jin arrested the Liege of Cao and presented him at the Zhou capital.

15.1

15.2 15.3(1)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

15.4

In summer, in the sixth month, Gu, the Duke of Song, died.

15.5(2)

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng.

15.6(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the gengchen day (10), Lord Gong of Song was buried.

15.7(4)

Hua Yuan of Song departed and fled to Jin.

15.8(4)

Hua Yuan of Song went home from Jin to Song.

15.9(4)

Song put to death its high officer Shan.

15.10(4)

Yu Shi of Song departed and fled to Chu.

15.11(4)

In winter, in the eleventh month, Shusun Qiaoru met with Shi Xie (Fan Xie) of Jin, Gao Wujiu of Qi, Hua Yuan of Song, Sun Linfu of Wei, Gongzi Qiu of Zheng, and a Zhu leader and then met with Wu at Zhongli.304

15.12(6)

Xǔ relocated to She.

15.13

303 Zhong Yingqi is the son of Dongmen Xiangzhong and the younger brother of Gongsun Guifu. 304 The Gongyang commentary emphasizes that Wu is mentioned separately to designate Wu as being “external” to the central domains (wai wu ye 外吳也) and therefore disparaged as “barbarians” (yidi 夷狄).

Lord Cheng

817

左傳 15.1(3) 十五年，春，會于戚，討曹成公也。執而歸諸京師。書曰「晉侯執曹

伯」，不及其民也。凡君不道於其民，諸侯討而執之，則曰：「某人執 某侯」，不然則否。 諸侯將見子臧於王而立之。子臧辭曰：「前志有之曰：『聖達節， 次守節，下失節。』為君非吾節也。雖不能聖，敢失守乎？」遂逃，奔宋。 15.2(5) 夏，六月，宋共公卒。 15.3(6) 楚將北師，子囊曰：「新與晉盟而背之，無乃不可乎？」子反曰：「敵利則

進，何盟之有？」申叔時老矣，在申，聞之，曰：「子反必不免。信以守禮， 禮以庇身，信、禮之亡，欲免，得乎？」 楚子侵鄭，及暴隧。遂侵衛，及首止。鄭子罕侵楚，取新石。 欒武子欲報楚。韓獻子曰：「無庸，使重其罪，民將叛之。無民，孰 戰？」

305 There are plenty of exceptions to this rule (i.e., a ruler can be “arrested” irrespective of whether he “violated the proper way”), but one other instance of similar usage and presumed logic is found in Xi 28.8. 306 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 27.466) cites sages who, as subjects, accept rulership (e.g., Shun, Yu) and those who started new dynasties (e.g., the founders of Shang and Zhou) as instances of “reaching optimal positions with their principles.” But the idea of going beyond fixed rules certainly has broader applications. Whereas “to keep one’s principles” (shoujie) and “to lose one’s principles” (shijie) become common idioms, “to reach optimal positions with one’s principles” (dajie) is not often used. Da implies efficacy, flexibility, and expediency and is in many cases associated with the word quan 權, which conveys the idea of “weighing options” and which Huang Kan glosses as “going against constancy and yet abiding by the Way” 反常而合於道 (Huang Kan’s gloss to Analects 9.30). See Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:206–10. Cf. Xuan 4.2, n. 80. Gongzi Xinshi as an example of one “keeping his principles” is mentioned in Xiang 14.2. 307 Baosui 暴隧 is probably the same place as Bao 暴 in Annals, Wen.8.5. 308 Xinshi 新石 in Chu was located in Ye County 葉縣, Henan. 309 Chu will have redoubled its guilt by turning against a covenant and driving its people into wars of invasion. This logic of biding one’s time and letting an enemy “heighten its errors [or crimes]” appears often in Zuozhuan (e.g., Yin 1.4, Xuan 15.2, Zhao 4.1, 11.2).

818

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Gongzi Xinshi, who earlier showed distress at his brother Lord Cheng’s usurpation (Cheng 13.5), refuses to be installed as ruler after the princes arrest Lord Cheng and take him to the Zhou capital. The explanation of the wording in the Annals implies that a ruler who failed his people should be arrested by leaders of other domains. In the fifteenth year, in spring, the princes met at Qī: this was to confer about chastising Lord Cheng of Cao. They arrested him and presented him at the Zhou capital. The text says, “The Prince of Jin arrested the Liege of Cao”: it was because the punishment did not extend to his people. In all cases when a ruler violated the proper way with his people, and the princes chastised and arrested him, the text would say, “A leader of such and such a domain seized the prince of such and such a domain.” If it were not so, no such formulation is used.305 The princes were about to present Gongzi Xinshia to the king and establish him as ruler. Gongzi Xinshia declined, saying, “An ancient record has this to say: ‘Sages reach optimal positions with their principles;306 second to them are those who keep their principles; the lowest are those who lose their principles.’ To become the ruler is not my idea of principles. Although I cannot be a sage, dare I fail to keep my principles?” He then escaped and fled to Song.

15.1(3)

In summer, in the sixth month, Duke Gong of Song died.

15.2(5)

Chu turns against its covenant with Jin (Cheng 12.4) and invades Zheng and Wei. The Jin minister Han Jue counsels against an immediate military response. Shen Shushi’s dire prediction about the Chu commander Zifan is fulfilled the following year (Cheng 16.5). Chu planned a northward military expedition. Zinang said, “To have newly sworn a covenant with Jin and yet to turn against it, is that not unacceptable?” Zifan said, “We advance when we can press our advantages against the enemy. What difference does a covenant make?” Shen Shushi, already old by then, was living in Shen. He heard of this and said, “Zifan will certainly not escape disaster. Good faith serves to guard ritual propriety; ritual propriety serves to protect one’s person. With the loss of good faith and ritual propriety, even if one wants to escape disaster, how will one succeed?” The Master of Chu invaded Zheng, advancing as far as Baosui.307 He thereupon invaded Wei, advancing as far as Shouzhi. Zihan of Zheng invaded Chu and took Xinshi.308 Luan Shua wanted retaliation against Chu. Han Juea said, “No need. Let Chu redouble its crimes,309 and its own people will rebel against it. Without the people, who will do battle for it?”

15.3(6)

Lord Cheng

819

15.4a(7–11) 秋，八月，葬宋共公。於是華元為右師，魚石為左師，蕩澤為司馬，華喜

為司徒，公孫師為司城，向為人為大司寇，鱗朱為少司寇，向帶為大宰， 魚府為少宰。蕩澤弱公室，殺公子肥。華元曰：「我為右師，君臣之訓， 師所司也。今公室卑，而不能正，吾罪大矣。不能治官，敢賴寵乎？」乃 出奔晉。 15.4b 二華，戴族也；司城，莊族也；六官者皆桓族也。魚石將止華元。魚府曰：

「右師反，必討，是無桓氏也。」魚石曰：「右師苟獲反，雖許之討，必 不敢。且多大功，國人與之，不反，懼桓氏之無祀於宋也。右師討，猶有 戌在。桓氏雖亡，必偏。」魚石自止華元于河上。請討，許之，乃反。使 華喜、公孫師帥國人攻蕩氏，殺子山。書曰「宋殺其大夫山」，言背其 族也。

310 Hua Yuan and Hua Xi were descended from Lord Dai of Song (r. 799–766), Gongsun Shi was descended from Lord Zhuang (r. 710–692), and the other six nobles (Yu Shi, Dang Ze, Xiang Weiren, Lin Zhu, Xiang Dai, and Yu Fu) were descendants of Lord Huan (r. 681–651). 311 Xiang Xu was also of the Huan lineage. Yu Shi surmised that Xiang Xu would not be implicated, perhaps because he was a close associate of Hua Yuan.

820

Zuo Tradition

Internecine conflicts in Song: Dang Ze of the Huan lineage instigates unrest, and Hua Yuan flees to Jin because of his failure to resolve the conflicts between the ruling house and aristocratic lineages in Song. In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Gong of Song was buried. At that time Hua Yuan was minister of the right, Yu Shi was minister of the left, Dang Ze was supervisor of the military, Hua Xi was supervisor of conscripts, Gongsun Shi was supervisor of fortifications, Xiang Weiren was the senior supervisor of corrections, Lin Zhu was the junior supervisor of corrections, Xiang Dai was the senior steward, and Yu Fu was the junior steward. Dang Ze wanted to weaken the lord’s house and killed Gongzi Fei. Hua Yuan said, “I am minister of the right. The instruction on proper relations between ruler and subjects is what the minister oversees. Now the lord’s house is brought low, and I cannot correct it. My offense is great indeed. When I am unable to fulfill the function of my office, do I dare rely on the lord’s favor?” He thus departed and fled to Jin.

15.4a(7–11)

Complex negotiations take place among the Dai, Zhuang, and Huan lineages in Song: leaders of the Huan lineage decide to sacrifice one of their own (Dang Ze) so that stability in Song may be maintained. Hua Yuan of the Dai lineage, who defended Song at critical junctures (Xuan 15.2) and was important in interdomain negotiations (Cheng 11.8, 12.2), returns to Song and puts Dang Ze to death. The two Huas were of the Dai house, the supervisor of fortifications was of the Zhuang house, and the other six officers were all of the Huan house.310 Yu Shi planned to stop Hua Yuan from fleeing. Yu Fu said, “Should the minister of the right return, he will certainly chastise Dang Ze and those related to him, and that means there will be no more Huan lineage.” Yu Shi said, “Should the minister of the right manage to return, then even if he is given permission to chastise the offenders, he will certainly not dare to do so. Moreover, he has many great accomplishments, and the inhabitants of the capital support him. If he does not come back, I fear the Huan lineage will not maintain its sacrifices in Song. The minister of the right may chastise the offenders, but still Xiang Xuc will remain.311 Even if the Huan lineage is to be destroyed, surely only one branch will suffer.” Yu Shi personally stopped Hua Yuan by the banks of the Yellow River. Hua Yuan requested to chastise Dang Ze, Yu Shi allowed it, and he thus returned. He sent Hua Xi and Gongsun Shi to lead the inhabitants of the capital to attack the Dang lineage, and they killed Dang Zea. The text says, “Song put to death its high officer Shan (Dang Ze)”: this is to indicate that he had turned against his house.

15.4b

Lord Cheng

821

15.4c 魚石、向為人、鱗朱、向帶、魚府出舍於睢上，華元使止之，不可。冬十

月，華元自止之，不可，乃反。魚府曰：「今不從，不得入矣。右師視速而 言疾，有異志焉。若不我納，今將馳矣。」登丘而望之，則馳。騁而從之。 則決睢澨、閉門登陴矣。左師、二司寇、二宰遂出奔楚。華元使向戌為左 師、老佐為司馬，樂裔為司寇，以靖國人。 15.5 晉三郤害伯宗，譖而殺之，及欒弗忌。伯州犁奔楚。韓獻子曰：「郤氏其

不免乎！善人，天地之紀也，而驟絕之，不亡，何待？」 初，伯宗每朝，其妻必戒之曰：「『盜憎主人，民惡其上。』子好直 言，必及於難。」 15.6(12) 十一月，會吳于鍾離，始通吳也。 15.7(13) 許靈公畏偪于鄭，請遷于楚。辛丑，楚公子申遷許于葉。

312 Hua Yuan breaks the dam and uses the water to stop the nobles of the Huan lineage from returning. 313 Versions of this saying are found in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.82; and Shuoyuan 10.338. According to Yang (2:876), this means that Bo Zong, lacking the power and position, should not offer criticism in a forthright manner, just as thieves cannot afford to loathe owners (of wealth) and as commoners must not hate their betters. It is also possible that Bo Zong’s wife is comparing him to “owners” or “commoners’ betters,” whose resources and superior position would incur jealousy and calumny. Cf. the parallel accounts in Guoyu, “Jin yu 5,” 11.407, and Lienü zhuan 3.56–57, in which Bo Zong’s wife also suggests that Bo Zong should seek an ally to whom he can entrust his heir. Those accounts end with Bo Zong’s heir, Bo Zhouli, being spared because he had been sent to Chu with the help of Bi Yang, another Jin high officer. 314 Zhongli 鍾離 was a small city situated between Chu and Wu. It could still be a sovereign domain, or it might have been annexed by Wu or partitioned by Chu and Wu at this point. Zhongli is identified as a place to the east of present-day Fengyang County 鳳陽縣, Anhui. 315 She 葉 was located in present-day Ye County 葉縣, Henan. Zheng took over the original Xǔ capital and called it “Old Xǔ.” From this point, Xǔ becomes Chu’s subservient ally.

822

Zuo Tradition

Hua Yuan half-heartedly invites members of the Huan lineage to return to Song. They end up leaving and fleeing to Chu. Xiang Xu remains as the representative of the Huan lineage in Song government. Yu Shi, Xiang Weiren, Lin Zhu, Xiang Dai, and Yu Fu left the capital and stayed by the banks of the Sui River. Hua Yuan sent someone to stop them from leaving, but they refused. In winter, in the tenth month, Hua Yuan personally tried to stop them, but they refused. He thus turned back. Yu Fu said, “Now that we have not gone along with him, we will not be able to gain entry! The minister of the right had flitting eyes and hasty words; he had other intentions. If he did not really want to take us in, he will certainly drive off swiftly.” They climbed a hill and saw that Hua Yuan was already driving off swiftly. They let their horses gallop to follow Hua Yuan, who was already breaking the dam of the Sui River,312 closing the city gates, and ascending the parapets. The minister of the left, the two supervisors of corrections, and the two stewards thereupon departed and fled to Chu. Hua Yuan appointed Xiang Xu as minister of the left, Lao Zuo as supervisor of the military, and Yue Yi as supervisor of corrections to calm the inhabitants of the capital.

15.4c

The Jin minister Bo Zong, known for his sagacity (Xuan 15.2, Cheng 5.2, 6.4), falls victim to the machinations of the Xi lineage (Xi Yi, Xi Chou, Xi Zhi). The foresight of Bo Zong’s wife earns her a place in the chapter on “Benevolent Sagacity” (Renzhi 仁智) in Lienü zhuan 3.56–57. The three Xis of Jin destroyed Bo Zong: they slandered and killed him, implicating Luan Fuji. Bo Zong’s son, Bo Zhouli, fled to Chu. Han Juea said, “The Xi lineage will not escape disaster! Good men are the ordering principles of heaven and earth, yet the Xi lineage leaders cut them down again and again. If they do not go into exile, then what else will await them?” Earlier, whenever Bo Zong had attended court, his wife would always caution him: “‘Thieves loathe owners; commoners hate their betters.’ Since you, sir, love to speak the truth in a forthright manner, you will certainly be overtaken by disaster.”313

15.5

Wu, first mentioned as a covenant partner for Chu (Xuan 8.3), now extends its ties to the central domains. In the eleventh month, the lords met with Wu at Zhongli.314 This was the beginning of relations with Wu.

15.6(12)

Xǔ continues to fear Zheng. Lord Ling of Xǔ, fearing Zheng’s oppression, asked Chu’s permission to relocate. On the xinchou day (3), Gongzi Shen of Chu relocated Xǔ to She.315

15.7(13)

Lord Cheng

823

春秋 16.1 十有六年，春，王正月，雨，木冰。 16.2(2) 夏，四月辛未，滕子卒。 16.3(3) 鄭公子喜帥師侵宋。 16.4 六月丙寅朔，日有食之。 16.5(5) 晉侯使欒黶來乞師。 16.6(5) 甲午晦，晉侯及楚子、鄭伯戰于鄢陵。楚子、鄭師敗績。 16.7(5) 楚殺其大夫公子側。 16.8(6) 秋，公會晉侯、齊侯、衛侯、宋華元、邾人于沙隨，不見公。 16.9 公至自會。 16.10(8) 公會尹子、晉侯、齊國佐、邾人伐鄭。 16.11(10) 曹伯歸自京師。 16.12(11) 九月，晉人執季孫行父，舍之于苕丘。 16.13(11) 冬，十月乙亥，叔孫僑如出奔齊。 16.14(11) 十有二月，乙丑，季孫行父及晉郤犨盟于扈。 16.15 公至自會。 16.16(11) 乙酉，刺公子偃。

824

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 16 (575 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, it rained, and the trees were encrusted with ice. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinwei day (5), the Master of Teng died. Gongzi Xi (Zihan) of Zheng led out troops and invaded Song. In the sixth month, on the bingyin day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.316 The Prince of Jin sent Luan Yan to us to plead for troops. On the jiawu day, the last day of the month, the Prince of Jin did battle with the Master of Chu and the Liege of Zheng at Yanling. The Master of Chu and the Zheng troops were completely defeated.

16.1

16.2(2)

16.3(3) 16.4

16.5(5) 16.6(5)

Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Ce (Zifan).

16.7(5)

In autumn, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Wei, Hua Yuan of Song, and a Zhu leader at Shasui, but the Prince of Jin would not have an audience with him.

16.8(6)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

16.9

Our lord met with the Yin Master, the Prince of Jin, Guo Zuo of Qi, and a Zhu leader and attacked Zheng.

16.10(8)

The Liege of Cao went home from the Zhou capital.

16.11(10)

In the ninth month, Jin leaders arrested Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) and kept him at Tiaoqiu.

16.12(11)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the yihai day (12), Shusun Qiaoru departed and fled to Qi. In the twelfth month, on the yichou day (3), Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) and Xi Chou of Jin swore a covenant at Hu.

16.13(11)

16.14(11)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

16.15

On the yiyou day (23), Gongzi Yan was cut down.

16.16(11)

316 The solar eclipse took place on 9 May 575 Bce.

Lord Cheng

825

左傳 16.1 十六年，春，楚子自武城使公子成以汝陰之田求成于鄭。鄭叛晉，子駟

從楚子盟于武城。 16.2(2) 夏，四月，滕文公卒。 16.3(3) 鄭子罕伐宋，宋將鉏、樂懼敗諸汋陂。退，舍於夫渠，不儆。鄭人覆之，

敗諸汋陵，獲將鉏、樂懼。宋恃勝也。 16.4 衛侯伐鄭，至于鳴雁，為晉故也。 16.5a(5–7) 晉侯將伐鄭。范文子曰：「若逞吾願，諸侯皆叛，晉可以逞。若唯鄭叛，

晉國之憂，可立俟也。」欒武子曰：「不可以當吾世而失諸侯，必伐鄭。」 乃興師。欒書將中軍，士燮佐之；郤錡將上軍，荀偃佐之；韓厥將下軍， 郤至佐新軍。荀罃居守。郤犨如衛，遂如齊，皆乞師焉。欒黶來乞師。孟 獻子曰：「晉有勝矣。」戊寅，晉師起。

317 Wucheng was located in Nanyang in Henan (see Xi 6.4). Ruyin 汝陰 (meaning “south of the Ru River”) was located between Jia 郟 and Ye Counties 葉縣 in Henan. 318 Zhuo Hill 汋陵 was located south of present-day Ningling County 寧陵縣, Henan. 319 Mingyan 鳴雁 was in the domain of Zheng north of present-day Qĭ County 杞縣, Henan. 320 Whereas Luan Shu fears losing Zheng’s allegiance, Fan Xie hopes for their disaffection, for without that outside threat Jin leaders will persist in their errors. The word cheng 逞 (“fulfill,” “satisfy,” “exert”), used twice, thus has very different implications. Yang Shuda argues that the second cheng is a loanword for ting 䋼, meaning “slow” or “relieved” (Yang, 2:880). An alternative is to read wu 吾 as “my”—that is, Fan Xie is stating his wish that the lords rebel against Jin: “If my wish is fulfilled, and the princes rebel against Jin, then Jin’s hopes for reprieve can be fulfilled.” Fan Xie gives a more elaborate account of his reasoning in the analogous passage in Guoyu, “Jin yu 6,” 12.418–19. That passage presents the annihilation of the Xi lineage and Lord Li’s assassination as the direct consequence of Jin victory.

826

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Zheng turns against Jin and sides with Chu when the latter offers territories. In the sixteenth year, in spring, the Master of Chu, from Wucheng, sent Gongzi Cheng to use the lands of Ruyin to seek an accord with Zheng.317 Zheng turned against Jin; Zisi of Zheng went to join the Master of Chu and swore a covenant with him at Wucheng.

16.1

In summer, in the fourth month, Lord Wen of Teng died.

16.2(2)

Zheng is emboldened by its alliance with Chu to attack Song, and Song suffers defeat because its commanders are overconfident. Zihan of Zheng attacked Song. Jiang Chu and Yue Ju of Song defeated Zheng at Zhuo Slope. The Song forces retreated, bivouacked at Fuqu, and posted no guard. The men of Zheng ambushed them, defeated them at Zhuo Hill,318 and captured Jiang Chu and Yue Ju. This came about because Song counted on its earlier victory.

16.3(3)

Wei, as Jin’s ally, attacks Zheng for its alliance with Chu. The Prince of Wei attacked Zheng and advanced as far as Mingyan.319 This was for Jin’s sake.

16.4

Jin prepares for battle with Chu. Luan Shu, who praised Chu and urged caution during the Bi campaign twenty-two years earlier (Xuan 12.2e), is now eager to fight. Fan Xie is filled with foreboding, and his prediction of internal troubles in Jin will soon be fulfilled after Jin’s victory at Yanling. Meng Xianzi’s prediction parallels Shen Shushi’s below. The Prince of Jin planned to attack Zheng. Fan Xiec said, “If we fulfill our wishes, and the lords all rebel against us, then Jin’s hopes for reprieve can be fulfilled.320 If it is only Zheng that rebels against us, then we will not have to wait long for misfortunes and grief to come to Jin!” Luan Shua said, “We cannot in our generation lose the allegiance of the princes. We must attack Zheng.” Jin thus mobilized its troops. Luan Shu was commander of the central army, and Fan Xieb assisted him. Xi Yi was commander of the upper army, and Zhonghang Yana assisted him. Han Jue was commander of the lower army, and Xi Zhi was the assistant commander in the new army. Zhi Yingb remained to guard the domain. Xi Chou went to Wei and then to Qi, all in order to plead for troops. Luan Yan came to us to plead for troops. Meng Xianzi said, “Jin will have its victory!” On the wuyin day (12), Jin troops set out.

16.5a(5–7)

Lord Cheng

827

16.5b 鄭人聞有晉師，使告于楚，姚句耳與往。楚子救鄭。司馬將中軍，令尹

將左，右尹子辛將右。過申，子反入見申叔時，曰：「師其何如？」 對曰：「德、刑、詳、義、禮、信，戰之器也。德以施惠，刑以正邪， 詳以事神，義以建利，禮以順時，信以守物。民生厚而德正，用利而事 節，時順而物成，上下和睦，周旋不逆，求無不具，各知其極。故《詩》 曰： 立我烝民， 莫匪爾極。 是以神降之福，時無災害，民生敦厖，和同以聽，莫不盡力以從上命，致 死以補其闕，此戰之所由克也。今楚內棄其民，而外絕其好；瀆齊盟，而 食話言，奸時以動，而疲民以逞。民不知信，進退罪也。人恤所厎，其誰 致死？子其勉之！吾不復見子矣。」

321 Maoshi 275, “Si wen” 思文, 19B.721. The “you” in the sacrificial hymn refers to Lord Millet, the Zhou ancestor, who is praised for providing livelihood and moral guidance to the people. 322 This is based on Du Yu’s interpretation (ZZ 28.473). Lu Can believes that “gap” (que 闕) means “the gap in military supplies” (cited in Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 918). 323 Chu was mobilizing its forces in spring, the time for agricultural labors.

828

Zuo Tradition

The sagacious Chu minister Shen Shushi gives a normative account of conditions for victory in battle and predicts Chu’s defeat. A Zheng minister gives a similarly dire assessment of Chu. When the leaders of Zheng heard that Jin had mobilized its troops, they sent someone to notify Chu, with Yao Gou’er coming along. The Master of Chu went to the aid of Zheng. The supervisor of the military, Zifan, was commander of the central army; the chief minister, Zichong, was commander of the left army; and the minister of the right, Zixin, was commander of the right army. As they passed through Shen, Zifan entered the city to see Shen Shushi and said, “What do you make of our military expedition?” He replied, “Virtue, punishment, circumspection, duty, ritual propriety, good faith: these are the instruments of battle. Virtue is for extending beneficence; punishment, for correcting deviance; circumspection, for serving the spirits; duty, for establishing advantage; ritual propriety, for according with the times; good faith, for guarding all things. If the people’s livelihood is abundant, then their virtues will be in proper order. If actions bring advantages, then affairs will be regulated. If the right timing is followed, then all things will come to fruition. When those in positions above and below are in harmony, they maneuver in all situations without going against the proper course. Whatever is sought for will already have been prepared, and each will know the apposite standards. That is why it says in the Odes,

16.5b

You have established our multitudinous people. None fails to observe your apposite standards.321

In this way, the spirits will bestow blessings upon them, the seasons will pass with no calamity or injury, the people’s livelihood will be prosperous and abundant, and in harmonious unity they will heed orders. Without exception, the people will exert themselves to the utmost to follow their superiors’ commands, braving death to fill the gap left by the fallen soldiers.322 This is the course by which victory is achieved in battle. But now Chu has abandoned its people at home and has cut off good relations abroad; it desecrates the covenant made after fasting and purification and eats its own words; it violates the right timing in moving its troops323 and exhausts the people to fulfill selfish desires. The people do not know what is good faith, and they will be held guilty whether they advance or retreat. When people worry where they will end up, who will brave death to fight? You, sir, should try your best! I will not see you again!”

Lord Cheng

829

姚句耳先歸，子駟問焉。對曰：「其行速，過險而不整。速則失志， 不整，喪列。志失、列喪，將何以戰？楚懼不可用也。」 16.5c 五月，晉師濟河。聞楚師將至，范文子欲反，曰：「我偽逃楚，可以紓憂。

夫合諸侯，非吾所能也，以遺能者。我若群臣輯睦以事君，多矣。」武子 曰：「不可。」 六月，晉、楚遇於鄢陵。范文子不欲戰。郤至曰：「韓之戰，惠公不 振旅；箕之役，先軫不反命；邲之師，荀伯不復從，皆晉之恥也。子亦見 先君之事矣。今我辟楚，又益恥也。」 文子曰：「吾先君之亟戰也，有故。秦、狄、齊、楚皆彊，不盡力， 子孫將弱。今三彊服矣，敵楚而已。惟聖人能外內無患。自非聖人，外 寧必有內憂，盍釋楚以為外懼乎？」

324 According to Yu Yue (cited in Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 920; Yang, 2:882; Karlgren, gl. 428), the word wei 偽 should be read as wei 為, meaning “if”—”if we flee the Chu army.” If we read wei in its usual sense of “pretend,” then Jin would appear to be fleeing from Chu when in fact it only wanted to avoid war. The appearance of weakness will presumably stave off unrest in Jin.

830

Zuo Tradition

Yao Gou’er came back first, and Zisi asked him about Chu. He replied, “They move quickly, and when they pass through dangerous terrain, their ranks are irregular. To move quickly is to lose the will to deliberate; to be irregular is to forgo the order of the ranks. With the will lost and the order forgone, on what grounds are they going to fight? I am afraid Chu will not be of use to us.” Even when Jin and Chu forces meet at Yanling, Fan Xie remains opposed to battle. He emphasizes again that only an external threat can stave off internecine struggles in Jin. However, other Jin commanders, such as Xi Zhi and Luan Shu, are eager to fight. In the fifth month, Jin troops crossed the Yellow River. When they heard that Chu troops were about to arrive, Fan Xiec wanted to turn back. He said, “If we flee the Chu army,324 we can perhaps relieve the cause for grief in our domain. Now, uniting the princes under our leadership is not something we can achieve. We should leave that to abler men. If we ministers can act in concert and harmony when serving our lord, that will be no mean feat.” Luan Shuc said, “That will not do!” In the sixth month, the Jin and the Chu forces met at Yanling.325 Fan Xiec did not want to engage in battle. Xi Zhi said, “At the battle of Han, Lord Hui did not rouse his troops; in the Ji campaign, Xian Zhen did not return to report on his mission; with the troops at Bi, Xun Linfuc did not persist in confronting the enemy.326 All of these were to the disgrace of Jin. You too, sir, have seen the achievements of our former rulers. Now if we avoid Chu, it will add to our shame.” Fan Xiea said, “Our former rulers engaged in battle again and again for a reason. Qin, the Di, Qi, and Chu were all powerful. Had our former rulers not exerted themselves to the utmost, their descendants would have been reduced to weakness. Now three of those powerful enemies have submitted, and Chu remained our sole enemy. Only sages are capable of handling the situation of being without troubles both at home and abroad. And of course we are not sages: with pacification abroad there will certainly be causes for grief at home. Why do we not let Chu go so that it may inspire fear from abroad?”

16.5c

325 Yanling 鄢陵 was located in the state of Zheng. It was just north of present-day Yanling in Henan (see map 3). 326 For Lord Hui’s defeat at the battle of Han in 645 Bce, see Xi 15.4. Xian Zhen was killed during Jin’s Ji campaign against the Di in 627 Bce (Xi 33.6). During the battle of Bi (597 Bce), Xun Linfu could have used the Jin upper army, which remained intact, to continue fighting, but he did not (Xuan 12.2).

Lord Cheng

831

16.5d 甲午晦，楚晨壓晉軍而陳。軍吏患之。范匄趨進，曰：「塞井夷竈，陳於

軍中，而疏行首。晉、楚唯天所授，何患焉？」文子執戈逐之，曰：「國之 存亡，天也，童子何知焉！」 欒書曰：「楚師輕窕，固壘而待之，三日必退。退而擊之，必獲勝 焉。」 郤至曰：「楚有六間，不可失也。其二卿相惡，王卒以舊，鄭陳而 不整，蠻軍而不陳，陳不違晦，在陳而嚻，合而加嚻。各顧其後，莫有鬬 心；舊不必良，以犯天忌，我必克之。」

327 The Chu forces pressed close so quickly that the Jin ranks were not yet formed. Fan Gai is thus urging that battle formations be established within the encampment, and that this could be better accomplished once the encampment ground is leveled, with the wells filled up and the stoves destroyed. The phrase hangshou 行首, glossed by Du Yu (ZZ 28.475) and Shen Qinhan as “vanguard troops” (Yang, 2:883), is here understood as xingdao 行道, following Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 699. Wang suggests the same reading of shou as dao for the term mengshou 盟首 (which he reads as mengdao 盟道) in Xiang 23.5e. 328 The word jian 間 means, literally, “cracks,” “interstices,” or “space.” 329 Zichong will drive Zifan to commit suicide after Chu’s defeat at Yanling. 330 The translation here follows Karlgren’s gloss (gl. 431) of 以 as 已. Takezoe (13.39) glosses 以 as 用: “the king’s personal troops have been drawn from old families.” This latter reading is plausible, but the logic of Karlgren’s interpretation seems more compelling.

832

Zuo Tradition

Chu’s apparent readiness for battle inspires different responses among Jin commanders. Fan Gai suggests setting up battle formations within the encampment but is silenced by his father, Fan Xie. Luan Shu wants to strengthen fortifications, but Xi Zhi urges a speedy engagement. The different strategic recommendations of Luan Shu and Xi Zhi in part explain the rift between the two (Cheng 17.10; Guoyu, “Jin yu 6”). On the jiawu day, the last day of the month, at dawn Chu pressed close to Jin forces and deployed battle formations. The Jin military officers were alarmed at this. Fan Gai hastened forward with small steps and said, “Fill in the wells and level the stoves, deploy battle formations here in the encampment, and open passages for the troops.327 Whether victory is handed to Jin or to Chu is for Heaven to decide. What good does it do to be alarmed at this?” Fan Xiea seized a dagger-axe and chased him away, saying, “The preservation or destruction of the domain is up to Heaven. What can you, a mere child, know about it!” Luan Shu said, “The Chu troops are insecure and changeable. Let us strengthen our fortifications and wait it out; they will certainly retreat in three days. If we attack as they retreat, we shall certainly achieve victory.” Xi Zhi said, “Chu leaves for us six openings328 that we cannot afford to miss: its two ministers commanding the army, Zifan and Zichong, hate each other;329 the king’s personal troops have been on the battlefield for a long time;330 Zheng’s formations are deployed but in a disorderly fashion; the forces of the Man tribes have joined the army but they do not keep the battle formations;331 battle formations are made without regard for avoiding the last day of the month;332 its soldiers are raucous in their battle formations, and even more so as they press forward for engagement. Each man looks behind him,333 and none has the will to fight. Troops that have been on the field for a long time will fail to obey orders for sure. They have, moreover, flouted Heaven’s taboos. We are certain to overcome them.”

16.5d

331 The Man tribes lived in the area south of Chu and served here as supplementary troops. 332 There was a taboo at the time against beginning military action on the last day of the month. 333 That is, the troops would all look behind for assistance (Karlgren, gl. 432). In Guoyu, “Jin yu 6,” 12.414, we have Xi Zhi predicting that the forces of Zheng, Chu, and Yi (the Man tribes) will all hope to escape the brunt of the fighting: “Zheng will look to Chu; Chu will look to the Yi.”

Lord Cheng

833

16.5e 楚子登巢車，以望晉軍。子重使大宰伯州犁侍于王後。

王曰：「騁而左右，何也？」 曰：「召軍吏也。」 「皆聚於中軍矣。」 曰：「合謀也。」 「張幕矣。」 曰：「虔卜於先君也。」 「徹幕矣。」 曰：「將發命也。」 「甚嚻，且塵上矣。」 曰：「將塞井夷竈而為行也。」 「皆乘矣，左右執兵而下矣。」 曰：「聽誓也。」 「戰乎？」 曰：「未可知也。」 「乘而左右皆下矣。」 曰：「戰禱也。」 伯州犁以公卒告王。 苗賁皇在晉侯之側，亦以王卒告。 皆曰：「國士在，且厚，不可當也。」 苗賁皇言於晉侯曰：「楚之良，在其中軍王族而已。請分良以擊其 左右，而三軍萃於王卒，必大敗之。」 公筮之。史曰：「吉。其卦遇復䷗，曰：『南國䠞，射其元王，中厥 目。』國䠞、王傷，不敗何待？」公從之。

334 The towered chariot or chaoche 巢車 (literally, “nest chariot”) was probably similar to the louche 樓車 mentioned in Xuan 15.2. 335 The implication is that Bo Zhouli’s vision is blocked (at least partially) by the king, but he has the knowledge to explain what the king sees. 336 This means that the Jin commanders actually act upon Fan Gai’s suggestion. 337 “The best man of the domain” refers to Bo Zhouli. Alternatively, we could translate as “men,” referring to the many talented persons in Chu. 338 At the time Jin had four armies. Wang Yinzhi (Jinyi shuwen, 699–700) believes that san is a mistake for 亖. Cf. Xiang 26.10c, where Shengzi quotes Fen Huang’s speech and also refers to “four armies.”

834

Zuo Tradition

There is a distinct sense of symmetry, shifting perspectives, and cinematic spectacle, first as Bo Zhouli (son of Bo Zong), exiled from Jin, interprets for King Gong of Chu, from a high perch, the meaning of various movements of Jin troops, and then as Fen Huang (son of Dou Jiao), exiled from Chu, strategizes for Lord Li of Jin. The Master of Chu ascended a towered chariot334 in order to survey the Jin troops. Zichong sent Bo Zhouli to stand behind the king in attendance.335 The Chu king said, “Chariots are racing right and left. Why is that?” “So as to summon the military officers.” “They are all gathered around the central army!” “So as to plot their strategy together.” “They are setting up tents!” “So as to piously divine before the spirit tablets of the former rulers.” “They are taking down the tents!” “They are about to issue orders.” “It is very noisy; and the dust is also rising.” “They are about to fill in the wells and level the stoves so as to make passages and form their lines.”336 “Will they fight now?” “It is impossible to know yet.” “They mounted their chariots, but are all now dismounting right and left.” “They are listening to the oaths of battle.” Bo Zhouli reported to the king about the lord’s personal troops. Fen Huanga was at the side of the Prince of Jin and also told the lord about the king’s personal troops. All on the Jin side said, “The best man of the domain is there!337 Further, their force is formidable. We are no match for them.” Fen Huanga said to the Prince of Jin, “The finest fighters of Chu are only with the royal soldiers in the central army. I submit that you should separate out your finer fighters and attack from the left and right sides and then concentrate the best of your four armies against the king’s personal troops.338 You are sure to inflict a great defeat on them.” The lord divined about this with milfoil. The scribe said, “Auspicious. The hexagram encountered is ‘Return’ ䷗. It says, ‘The domain in the south is in dire straits. Shoot its prime king. Hit his eye.’ A domain in dire straits, a king injured: what could they expect but defeat?” The lord acted accordingly.

16.5e

Lord Cheng

835

16.5f 有淖於前，乃皆左右相違於淖。步毅御晉厲公，欒鍼為右。彭名御楚共

王，潘黨為右。石首御鄭成公，唐苟為右。 欒、范以其族夾公行。陷於淖。欒書將載晉侯。鍼曰：「書退！國 有大任，焉得專之？且侵官，冒也；失官，慢也；離局，姦也。有三罪焉， 不可犯也。」乃掀公以出於淖。 16.5g 癸巳，潘尪之黨與養由基蹲甲而射之，徹七札焉。以示王，曰：「君有二

臣如此，何憂於戰？」王怒曰：「大辱國！詰朝爾射，死藝。」 呂錡夢射月，中之，退入於泥。占之，曰：「姬姓，日也；異姓，月也， 必楚王也。射而中之，退入於泥，亦必死矣。」及戰，射共王中目。王召養 由基，與之兩矢，使射呂錡，中項，伏弢。以一矢復命。

339 Here the narrative flashes back to the day before jiawu (29). 340 Pan Dang is specified as Pan Wang’s son (literally, “Pan Wang’s Dang”), perhaps because there was another Pan Dang. There are several references in Warring States and early Han texts to suits of armor made of seven layers of leather. Despite the Chu king’s misgivings, Yang Youji’s skill in archery will prove useful (Cheng 16.5g, 16.5j). 341 The Jin house has the same clan name as the Zhou royal house, Ji. The diviner claims that the sun symbolizes the ruling houses with the name Ji; while the moon symbolizes ruling houses with other clan names (such as Mi, clan name of the Chu kings).

836

Zuo Tradition

Lord Li’s chariot is mired in a bog, and Luan Qian reprimands his father, Luan Shu, for leaving his post to try to haul the Jin ruler out. His peremptory tone and manner of calling his father by name indicate the primacy of political hierarchy over family hierarchy and also mark the distinction between duty owed the ruler and duty owed the domain. There was a bog in front of the encampment, and everybody was trying to avoid it by going around to the right or left of it. Xi Yìa was driving the chariot for Lord Li of Jin, and Luan Qian was the spearman on the right. Peng Ming was driving the chariot for King Gong of Chu, and Pan Dang was the spearman on the right. Shi Shou was driving the chariot for Lord Cheng of Zheng, and Tang Gou was the spearman on the right. Luan Shu and Fan Xie led their lineage troops, flanking the lord on either side as they proceeded. Lord Li’s chariot became mired in a bog. Luan Shu was about to take the Prince of Jin into his own chariot when Luan Qian said, “Shu, retreat! The domain has given you a great responsibility as commander, how can you take it all upon yourself? Moreover, to encroach upon another’s office is presumption; to abandon one’s own office is negligence; and to leave one’s post is dereliction. In what you are doing there are these three offenses. You must not be guilty of them!” He then hauled the lord’s chariot out of the bog.

16.5f

The Chu king regards his warriors’ ostentatious display of skill in archery as ill-considered and shameful. Wei Yi, who, despite his valor and courtesy, contributed to Jin’s defeat in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2g), here fulfills the meaning of an ominous dream. On the guisi day (28),339 Pan Wang’s son, Pan Dang, and Yang Youji heaped up leather for armor and shot at them, penetrating seven layers.340 They showed the results to the king, saying, “When you have two subjects like us, my lord, what is there to worry about in battle?” The king burst out in anger, “You are a great disgrace to our domain! When you shoot tomorrow morning, your skill in archery will be the death of you!” Wei Yic dreamed of shooting at the moon. The arrow hit it, while he withdrew and sank into mud. He sought divination about this, and the result said: “The Ji clan is the sun; a different clan, the moon.341 The moon must mean the king of Chu. If you shot at him and hit him and then withdrew and sank into the mud, then you too will certainly die.” When the day of the battle came, Wei Yi shot at King Gong and hit him in the eye. The king summoned Yang Youji and gave him two arrows and had him shoot at Wei Yic. He hit Wei Yi in the neck, and the latter slumped over his quiver. Handing one arrow back to the king, Yang Youji reported on the discharge of his mission.

Lord Cheng

16.5g

837

16.5h 郤至三遇楚子之卒，見楚子，必下，免冑而趨風。楚子使工尹襄問之以

弓，曰：「方事之殷也，有韎韋之跗注，君子也。識見不穀而趨，無乃傷 乎？」 郤至見客，免冑承命，曰：「君之外臣至從寡君之戎事，以君之 靈，間蒙甲冑，不敢拜命。敢告不寧，君命之辱。為事之故，敢肅使者。」 三肅使者而退。 16.5i 晉韓厥從鄭伯，其御杜溷羅曰：「速從之！其御屢顧，不在馬，可及也。」

韓厥曰：「不可以再辱國君。」乃止。 郤至從鄭伯，其右茀翰胡曰：「諜輅之，余從之乘，而俘以下。」郤 至曰：「傷國君有刑。」亦止。

342 We understand the expression qufeng 趨風 here as qu jiu xiafeng 趨就下風. To hasten with small steps (qu 趨) is a sign of respect, as in Fan Gai’s case earlier (Cheng 16.5d). In Zhuangzi 12.243 and Lüshi chunqiu 20.1336, the sage-king Yu “hastened with small steps to the subordinate position” (qu jiu xiafeng) when he seeks the counsel of a wise man; cf. Zhuangzi 11.381, 31.1026. Male and female are said to belong to the “superior position” (shangfeng 上風) and “subordinate position” (xiafeng 下風) in Zhuangzi 14.32 and Huainanzi 20.668. In Sunzi 12.225, xiafeng seems to refer to the less important part of the army. 343 The Chu king is expressing his concern that Xi Zhi might have injured himself by rushing past or that he might have rushed because he had been injured. 344 We read ning 寧 as yin 憖, meaning “wounded” (shang 傷) (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 931). Takezoe (13.44) reads buning 不寧 as 丕寧 or simply 寧. 345 A deep bow (bai 拜) or kneeling and knocking one’s head on the ground (dunshou 頓首) require bending at the waist. Xi Zhi had armor on, and armored soldiers were supposed to execute short bows (subai 肅拜), in which they bent forward slightly and brought their hands together in salutation. 346 Han Jue may be referring to the battle of An, when he caught up with Lord Qing of Qi (Cheng 2.3). Alternatively, he may be referring to the injury that King Gong had already suffered.

838

Zuo Tradition

Xi Zhi, who visited the Chu court four years earlier (Cheng 12.4), behaves toward King Gong of Chu with exemplary decorum, and this is later used against him (Cheng 17.10a). Three times Xi Zhi encountered the Master of Chu’s personal troops. Whenever he saw the Master of Chu, he invariably dismounted, doffed his helmet, and hastened with small steps to the subordinate position.342 The Master of Chu sent the deputy for artisans Xiang to salute him with a bow as gift, saying, “Just now when we were in the thick of battle, there was one with brownish-red leather gaiters: he was a noble man. A moment ago he saw me, the deficient one, and made hasty steps. Could he have been injured?”343 Xi Zhi received the visitor, doffed his helmet, and accepted the message with these words: “I, Zhi, as your external subject, have followed my own unworthy ruler into battle. With your blessing, my lord, I have participated in the ranks of those donning armor and helmets. I do not dare bow to your command but presume to report that I am not wounded.344 For the condescension of your command, I will presume to salute your envoy with short bows in view of the business we have at hand.”345 He withdrew after three short bows to the envoy.

16.5h

Lord Cheng of Zheng is also spared because the Jin commanders Xi Zhi and Han Jue respect the dignity of an enemy ruler. Such generosity, however, can also be faulted as a breach of military discipline (Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.84). Despite Zheng’s defeat, its warriors show valor and resourcefulness. Han Jue of Jin was pursuing the Liege of Zheng when the driver of his chariot, Du Hunluo, said, “Let us pursue him with all speed! His driver is constantly looking back instead of paying attention to his horses. We can catch up with them.” Han Jue said, “I must not for a second time bring shame on the ruler of a domain.”346 They thus gave up the chase. Xi Zhi was pursuing the Liege of Zheng when his spearman on the right, Fu Hanhu, said, “Let us intercept them with a light chariot.347 I will catch up with the chariot and board it, then take the Zheng ruler captive and bring him down.” Xi Zhi said, “Injuring the ruler of a domain will incur punishment.” They also gave up the chase.

16.5i

347 Du Yu (ZZ 28.477) glosses die 諜 as “light chariot,” although the usual meaning of die in Zuozhuan is “spy.” Kong Yingda tries to reconcile the two meanings by claiming that both rely on stealth and speed (ZZ-Kong 28.477). Jiao Xun, citing Guangya 廣雅, notes the connection between die and yi 驛 (posthaste carriage); see Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 932. Liu Wenqi (932) also points out that the old reading of lu 輅 as ya 迓 informs Du’s gloss of lu as “to meet,” “to advance,” and, by implication, “to intercept.”

Lord Cheng

839

石首曰：「衛懿公唯不去其旗，是以敗於熒。」乃內旌於弢中。 唐苟謂石首曰：「子在君側，敗者壹大。我不如子，子以君免，我請止。」 乃死。 16.5j 楚師薄於險，叔山冉謂養由基曰：「雖君有命，為國故，子必射。」乃射，

再發，盡殪。叔山冉搏人以投，中車，折軾。晉師乃止。囚楚公子茷。 欒鍼見子重之旌，請曰：「楚人謂夫旌，子重之麾也，彼其子重 也。日臣之使於楚也，子重問晉國之勇，臣對曰：『好以眾整。』曰：『又 何如？』臣對曰：『好以暇。』今兩國治戎，行人不使，不可謂整；臨事而 食言，不可謂暇。請攝飲焉。」公許之。使行人執榼承飲，造于子重，曰： 「寡君乏使，使鍼御持矛，是以不得犒從者，使某攝飲。」子重曰：「夫 子嘗與吾言於楚，必是故也。不亦識乎！」受而飲之，免使者而復鼓。旦 而戰，見星未已。

348 See Min 2.5. Xing is the same as Xing Marsh (239). 349 The “one thing of primary importance” is the safety of the ruler (Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 27.623). Tang Gou is saying that Shi Shou is in a better position to protect the Zheng ruler. 350 This is the type of parallelism that prose masters like Fang Bao praise as “mutual illumination” (xiangying 相映); see his Guwen yifa juyao 1.54. 351 The Chu king must have forbidden Yang Youji to shoot. Recall the king’s earlier disapproval when Yang Youji boasted about his skill in archery, although Yang Youji has already shot once at the king’s behest.

840

Zuo Tradition

The Zheng ruler’s chariot driver, Shi Shou, said, “It was only because Lord Yi of Wei did not take down his banner that he was defeated at Xing.”348 He thus put the pennant inside his quiver. Tang Gou said to Shi Shou, “You stay by the ruler’s side. For those suffering defeat, one thing is of primary importance. I do not compare to you—you take the ruler with you and escape; I beg permission to stay.”349 He then died in battle. Chu warriors continue with spectacular feats of martial prowess. Luan Qian, Xi Zhi’s spearman on the right, displays great courtesy toward the Chu commander Zichong, in part to fulfill his own earlier description of orderliness and leisurely ease in the Jin army. The polite exchange here echoes that between Xi Zhi and the Chu king earlier (16.5h).350 The Chu army was driven into dangerous terrain. Shushan Ran said to Yang Youji, “Despite the ruler’s command,351 you must shoot for the sake of the domain.” He thus shot one and then another arrow, each time killing his man. Shushan Ran seized a captured Jin man and hurled him; the body struck a Jin chariot and broke its crossbar. The Jin army thus halted its advance, having taken Gongzi Pei of Chu captive. Luan Qian, seeing Zichong’s pennant, made this request: “The men of Chu said of this pennant that it is Zichong’s flag of command. That man must be Zichong. Formerly, when I was an envoy in Chu, Zichong asked how the valor of Jin men is shown. I submitted, ‘We love the orderly arrangement of the troops.’ He asked, ‘And how is that shown?’ I replied, ‘We love to calmly take our time.’ Now the two domains are engaged in warfare, yet we are not sending an envoy; that cannot be called orderly arrangement. Facing battle, we eat our words; that cannot be called calmly taking our time.352 I beg permission to send someone in my stead to offer a drink.” The lord assented. Luan Qian sent an envoy, holding the wine vessel and offering a drink, to go to Zichong with these words: “Our unworthy ruler, lacking proper envoys, has made Qian bear the spear in attendance. He therefore cannot honor the exertions of your followers in person and has sent me, a nonentity, to offer you a drink in his stead.” Zichong said, “That fine man once spoke to me about this in Chu. This must be the reason. Did he then remember?”353 He received the wine and drank it, and he resumed beating the war drums only after dismissing the envoy. The battle began at dawn and had not ended by the time stars appeared.

16.5j

352 That is, they failed to sustain their claim of love of “orderly arrangement.” 353 The translation follows the interpretation of Yang (2:889) and Takezoe (13.37). According to Legge (397) and Watson (136), Zichong is the subject of the “remembering”: thus, “Do I not remember?” or “How well I recall it!”

Lord Cheng

841

16.5k 子反命軍吏察夷傷，補卒乘，繕甲兵，展車馬，雞鳴而食，唯命是聽。晉

人患之。苗賁皇徇曰：「蒐乘、補卒，秣馬、利兵，修陳、固列，蓐食、申 禱，明日復戰！」乃逸楚囚。王聞之，召子反謀。穀陽豎獻飲於子反，子 反醉而不能見。王曰：「天敗楚也夫！余不可以待。」乃宵遁。 晉入楚軍，三日穀。范文子立於戎馬之前，曰：「君幼，諸臣不佞， 何以及此？君其戒之！《周書》曰：『惟命不于常』，有德之謂。」 16.5l 楚師還，及瑕，王使謂子反曰：「先大夫之覆師徒者，君不在。子無以為

過，不穀之罪也。」子反再拜稽首曰：「君賜臣死，死且不朽。臣之卒實 奔，臣之罪也。」

354 That is, the lost men are replaced by soldiers from the reserves. 355 We follow Karlgren (gl. 445) and read zhan 展 as “inspect” (Zhouli-Zheng 19.296). Du Yu (ZZ 28.478) reads zhan as chen 陳, “array.” Jia Kui reads zhan as zheng 整, “put in order” (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 935). 356 For different interpretations of the phrase rushi 蓐食, see Wen 7.4 (Yang, 1:560; Takezoe, 8.50), n. 114. 357 Takezoe (13.47) notes that Fen Huang’s orders are substantially the same as Zichong’s, but his more abrupt syntax conveys a greater sense of urgency. The Chu prisoners were released so that they could spread the word about Jin’s preparations for battle. 358 The story of how Zifan’s fondness for wine leads to his downfall and how Guyang’s loyalty and affection toward Zifan lead to disastrous consequences is told in Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.557; Han Feizi 10.165, 19.308–9; Lüshi chunqiu 15.865; Huainanzi 18.593; Shuoyuan 10.334; Shiji 39.1680, 40.1703. Most of these texts use the story to exemplify how “petty loyalty” (xiaozhong 小忠) undermines “great loyalty” (dazhong 大忠). 359 Recall that the same thing happened during the Chengpu campaign (Xi 28.3), a fact mentioned in the aftermath of the Bi campaign (Xuan 12.5). 360 Shangshu, “Kang gao” 康誥, 14.206. That is, the Mandate to rule depends on the ruler’s virtue. This line is also cited in Xiang 23.2; see also Xiang n. 653. 361 Xia was in the small domain of Sui and is mentioned during Chu’s invasion of Sui (Huan 6.2). Sui seems to have been annexed by Chu or was under Chu control. 362 The former great officer refers to Cheng Dechen, the Chu commander at the battle of Chengpu in 632 Bce (Xi 28). King Cheng of Chu was not present at that battle, and Cheng Dechen was held responsible for Chu’s defeat.

842

Zuo Tradition

Both Jin and Chu prepare for battle in an expeditious and circumspect fashion. Zifan’s inebriation at a critical juncture leads to Chu’s defeat. Fan Xie, however, considers Jin’s victory ill deserved and a cause for anxiety rather than celebration. Zifan gave orders to the military officers to attend to the wounded, to replenish the ranks of the infantry and soldiers in chariots,354 to repair the armor and the weapons, and to inspect355 the chariots and horses. They were to eat at cockcrow and to abide by none but his commands. The men of Jin were troubled by this. Fen Huanga circulated the following order: “Inspect the chariots, replenish the ranks, feed the horses, sharpen the weapons, put in order the battle formations, strengthen your ranks, have a good meal,356 and repeat the prayer before battle. Tomorrow we fight again!” He thereupon released the Chu prisoners.357 The Chu king heard about these preparations and summoned Zifan for consultation. Guyang, the young servant to Zifan, had been offering him wine, and Zifan was so drunk that he could not present himself for an audience.358 The king said, “Heaven is defeating Chu! I cannot afford to wait.” He thus escaped with his troops during the night. Jin entered Chu’s encampment and for three days fed on the store of grains there.359 Fan Xiec stood in front of Lord Li’s chariot and horses and said, “The ruler is young, and the various subjects are inept—how did we come to this? The ruler should be vigilant! The Zhou Documents says, ‘It is the Mandate that does not remain constant’;360 this means that only those with virtue can secure it.”

16.5k

In the aftermath of Chu’s defeat, the Chu commander Zifan, goaded by the other commander, Zichong, kills himself, fulfilling Qu Wuchen’s curse nine years earlier. Then we are presented with a flashback on the role of Jin’s allies in this conflict: Lord Cheng of Lu is somewhat tardy in joining Jin forces because he was threatened by his mother, Mu Jiang, and had to make defensive preparations. Mu Jiang might have gained sway in Lu politics because Lord Cheng was so young when he acceded to his position. (Lord Cheng married only two years earlier.) Chu troops turned back. When they reached Xia,361 the king sent some one to speak to Zifan, “When a former great officer brought about the army’s defeat, the ruler was not present.362 You, sir, have nothing to blame yourself for. The guilt is mine, the deficient one.” Zifan bowed twice, knocking his head to the ground, and said, “If the ruler should grant me the gift of death, I will not perish even in death. It was my troops who fled. The guilt is mine.”

16.5l

Lord Cheng

843

子重使謂子反曰：「初隕師徒者，而亦聞之矣。盍圖之！」對曰： 「雖微先大夫有之，大夫命側，側敢不義？側亡君師，敢忘其死？」王使 止之，弗及而卒。 戰之日，齊國佐、高無咎至于師，衛侯出于衛，公出于壞隤。宣伯 通於穆姜，欲去季、孟而取其室。將行，穆姜送公，而使逐二子。公以晉 難告，曰：「請反而聽命。」姜怒，公子偃、公子鉏趨過，指之曰：「女不 可，是皆君也。」公待於壞隤，申宮、儆備、設守，而後行，是以後。使孟 獻子守于公宮。 16.6(8) 秋，會于沙隨，謀伐鄭也。宣伯使告郤犨曰：「魯侯待于壞隤，以待勝者。」

郤犨將新軍，且為公族大夫，以主東諸侯。取貨于宣伯，而訴公于晉 侯。晉侯不見公。

363 Zichong is referring again to Cheng Dechen, who committed suicide after Chu’s defeat at the battle of Chengpu. By thus driving Zifan to do the same, Zichong confirms Xi Zhi’s earlier judgments that the two commanders “hate each other.” 364 Some other Warring States and Han accounts claim that Zifan was executed (Han Feizi 19.309; Lüshi chunqiu 15.865; Huainanzi 18.593). In Shiji 40.1703 Zifan is shot by the king; while Shiji 39.1680 follows the story in Zuozhuan. 365 The Kanazawa Bunko version has 戰之明日, “on the day after the battle”; the received text in other versions has 戰之日, “on the day of battle.” 366 Jin had acted on its own, so it was only on the day of the battle that the Qi army arrived and that the rulers of Wei and Lu started their march toward Yanling. Huaitui 壞隤 belonged to Lu and was located in present-day Qufu County 曲阜縣, Shandong. 367 Lord Cheng, obviously disagreeing with his mother, is trying to postpone consideration of the matter.

844

Zuo Tradition

Zichong sent someone to Zifan with these words, “As for the man who earlier brought defeat to the troops, you too must have heard what happened to him.363 Why don’t you make your own plans?” Zifan replied, “Even had I not had the example of the former high officer, with you, sir, thus commanding me, how dare I act against duty? I have brought about the loss of the ruler’s troops—would I dare to forget that I should die?” The king sent an envoy to stop him, but before he reached him, Zifan had died.364 On the day of battle,365 Guo Zuo and Gao Wujiu of Qi reached the Jin troops, the Prince of Wei set out from the Wei capital, and our lord set out from Huaitui.366 Shusun Qiaorua, who had been having a liaison with Mu Jiang, wished to do away with the Ji and Meng lineages and to appropriate their property. When our lord was about to leave, Mu Jiang saw him off and urged that he drive out the heads of the Ji and Meng lineages. Our lord told her about troubles in Jin, saying, “I beg to abide by your command upon my return.”367 Mu Jiang was furious. At that moment Gongzi Yan and Gongzi Chu hastened past with small steps, and she pointed to them, saying, “If you refuse, either of these could be ruler.”368 Our lord waited at Huaitui and left only after having extended the palace’s defenses, prepared the fortifications, and appointed sentries. That was why he was late in joining the Jin forces. He had Meng Xianzi keep watch at the lord’s palace.369 Shusun Qiaoru, the lover of Lord Cheng’s mother, Mu Jiang, slanders the Lu ruler to the Jin minister Xi Chou, who convinces the Jin ruler not to grant an audience to the Lu ruler. In autumn, the lords met at Shasui:370 this was to plan the attack against Zheng. Shusun Qiaorua sent someone to notify Xi Chou: “The Prince of Lu was waiting at Huaitui to see which side would win.” Xi Chou was commander of the new army, and he was also hosting the princes from the east in his capacity as a high officer of ruling lineages. Having taken a bribe from Shusun Qiaorua, he accused our lord to the Prince of Jin, who consequently would not have an audience with him.

16.6(8)

368 Mu Jiang is threatening to have Lord Cheng deposed and one of his younger brothers (Gongzi Yan or Gongzi Chu) instated in his place if he refuses to drive out Ji Wenzi and Meng Xianzi. 369 Ji Wenzi accompanied Lord Cheng in the expedition to join Jin in attacking Zheng, while Meng Xianzi stayed behind to guard the lord’s palace. Lord Cheng’s reliance on these two ministers showed that he had no intention of obeying his mother. 370 Shasui 沙隨 was located in the domain of Song north of present-day Ningling County 寧陵縣, Henan.

Lord Cheng

845

16.7 曹人請于晉曰：「自我先君宣公即世，國人曰：『若之何？憂猶未弭。』

而又討我寡君，以亡曹國社稷之鎮公子，是大泯曹也，先君無乃有罪 乎？若有罪，則君列諸會矣。君唯不遺德、刑，以伯諸侯，豈獨遺諸敝 邑？敢私布之。」 16.8(10) 七月，公會尹武公及諸侯伐鄭。將行，姜又命公如初。公又申守而行。

諸侯之師次于鄭西，我師次于督揚，不敢過鄭。子叔聲伯使叔孫豹請 逆于晉師，為食於鄭郊。師逆以至。聲伯四日不食以待之，食使者而 後食。 16.9 諸侯遷于制田，知武子佐下軍，以諸侯之師侵陳，至于鳴鹿。遂侵蔡。

未反，諸侯遷于潁上。戊午，鄭子罕宵軍之，宋、齊、衛皆失軍。

371 See Cheng 13.5. 372 For Gongzi Xinshi’s exile to Song, see Cheng 15.1. 373 According to Du Yu (ZZ 28.479), this refers to the inclusion of Lord Cheng in the meeting at Qī, where he was seized (Cheng 15.1). Takezoe (13.50–51) rightly points out that it would be more logical if the sentence referred to Lord Xuan of Cao’s inclusion in the Covenant of Duandao (Annals, Xuan 17.6). 374 The precise location of Duyang 督揚 is unknown.

846

Zuo Tradition

The leaders of Cao petitions Jin to allow Lord Cheng of Cao, arrested and taken to the Zhou capital a year earlier (Cheng 15.1), to return to Cao. The leaders of Cao petitioned Jin: “Ever since our former ruler Lord Xuan passed away,371 the inhabitants of the capital have been saying, ‘What is to be done? The troubles have not eased.’ And you also chastised our unworthy ruler, causing the noble son who would stabilize the altars of the domain in Cao to go into exile.372 This amounts to putting an end to Cao forever. Could it be that our former ruler was guilty? But if he was guilty, how did it happen that you, my lord, included him in the meeting of princes?373 It is precisely because you, my lord, do not neglect the principles of virtuous conduct and just punishment that you have become the overlord of the princes. How can it be that it is only with our humble settlement that you neglect these principles? We presume to privately set forth our case.”

16.7

Lu ministers try to regain Jin’s favor as Lu joins Jin and its allies to attack Zheng. In the seventh month, our lord met with Yin Duke Wu and the princes and attacked Zheng. When he was about to leave, Mu Jianga gave him the same commands as before. Again our lord set out only after he had made arrangements for extending the defenses of the palace and appointing sentries. The troops of the princes set up camp in the west of Zheng. Not daring to pass through Zheng, our troops set up camp at Duyang.374 Zishu Shengbo sent Shusun Bao to seek permission from Qi to represent Lu, so that he could petition Jin troops to meet the Lu forces.375 Shengbo prepared food for Jin troops in the outskirts of the Zheng capital. Jin troops came to meet our troops. Waiting for the Jin troops, Zishu Shengboa had not eaten for four days. It was only after he had fed the Jin envoy that he himself ate.

16.8(10)

The Zheng commander Zihan’s surprise attack inflicts losses on the allies. The princes moved to Zhitian. Zhi Yinga, acting as assistant commander of the lower army, led the troops of the princes to invade Chen, advancing as far as Minglu. He then invaded Cai.376 Before he turned back, the princes had moved to the banks of the Ying River. On the wuwu day (24), Zihan of Zheng attacked them under the cover of night, and Song, Qi, and Wei all lost troops.377

16.9

375 Shushu Bao, Shusun Qiaoru’s younger brother, was at this point in Qi and might have been accompanying Guo Zuo in the Qi army. 376 Chen and Cai were then subordinate to Chu. 377 Yu Yue (cited in Yang, 2:892) reads shi qi jun 失其軍 as “lost their encampment ground,” which is also plausible.

Lord Cheng

847

16.10(11) 曹人復請于晉。晉侯謂子臧：「反，吾歸而君。」子臧反，曹伯歸。子臧

盡致其邑與卿而不出。 16.11a 宣伯使告郤犨曰：「魯之有季、孟，猶晉之有欒、范也，政令於是乎成。

(12–14,16)

今其謀曰：『晉政多門，不可從也。寧事齊、楚，有亡而已，蔑從晉矣。』 若欲得志於魯，請止行父而殺之，我斃蔑也，而事晉，蔑有貳矣。魯不 貳，小國必睦。不然，歸必叛矣。」九月，晉人執季文子于苕丘。 公還，待于鄆，使子叔聲伯請季孫于晉。郤犨曰：「苟去仲孫蔑， 而止季孫行父，吾與子國，親於公室。」 對曰：「僑如之情，子必聞之矣。若去蔑與行父，是大棄魯國，而 罪寡君也。若猶不棄，而惠徼周公之福，使寡君得事晉君，則夫二人者， 魯國社稷之臣也。若朝亡之，魯必夕亡。以魯之密邇仇讎，亡而為讎，治 之何及？」

378 Shusun Qiaoru is here both pointing out a widely shared perception that the powerful lineages in Jin create disunity and instability there and also appealing to Xi Chou’s probable jealousy of the dominant Luan and Fan lineages. 379 Tiaoqiu 苕丘 is a place of unknown location. 380 Recall that Zishu Shengbo married his younger half sister to Xi Chou (Cheng 11.3). Xi Chou adopts a conspiratorial tone with his brother-in-law and tries to convince Zishu Shengbo to improve his lot by betraying the Ji and Meng lineages. 381 Shengbo is referring to Shusun Qiaoru’s adulterous relations with Mu Jiang and his intrigues against the Ji and Meng lineages. 382 Cf. Analects 18.10: a noble man “does not abandon an old associate, unless there is a momentous reason.” 383 Shengbo is arguing that if Lu perishes, it will only be absorbed by Qi and Chu, domains that are hostile to Jin.

848

Zuo Tradition

The Cao noble son Gongzi Xinshi, in self-imposed exile in Song, demonstrates his integrity and disinterestedness once again (see also Cheng 13.5, 15.1) and insists on supporting his brother, Lord Cheng, despite the latter’s usurpation. Lord Cheng returns to Cao from Zhou. Gongzi Xinshi is praised as a paragon of integrity in Xinxu 7.216–17 (where he is called Gongzi Xishi). The leaders of Cao again petitioned Jin. The Prince of Jin said to Gongzi Xinshia, “Go back, I will return your ruler.” Gongzi Xinshia returned, and the Liege of Cao went home. Gongzi Xinshia surrendered all his settlements and his position as minister to the Cao ruler and did not come out to serve in the government.

16.10(11)

Shusun Qiaoru continues his intrigues against the Ji and Meng lineages by trying to turn Xi Chou against them; in the process he arouses suspicions against the Luan and Fan lineages in Xi Chou. Lord Cheng of Lu sends Zishu Shengbo to counter the charges and suspicions fomented by Shusun Qiaoru. Zishu Shengbo turns down an offer to profit by the fall of the Ji and Meng lineages from Xi Chou (his brother-in-law). The Jin leaders relent. Shusun Qiaorua sent someone to report to Xi Chou: “Lu has the Ji and Meng lineages, just as Jin has Luan and Fan. It is by them that the orders of government are determined. Now they are plotting thus: ‘Jin policies are decided by many noble lineages; Jin is not to be followed. We would rather serve Qi and Chu. Even if we were to perish, so be it: we would not follow Jin.’378 If you wish to achieve your aims in Lu, permit me to request that you detain Ji Wenzic and put him to death. I will eradicate Meng Xianzic, and then we will serve Jin, and Lu will not waver in its allegiance to Jin. If Lu does not waver in its allegiance, other small domains will peacefully submit to Jin for sure. Otherwise, Lu will certainly rebel upon Ji Wenzi’s return.” In the ninth month, Jin leaders arrested Ji Wenzi at Tiaoqiu.379 Our lord returned and waited at Yun. He sent Zishu Shengbo to petition Jin about Ji Wenzib. Xi Chou said, “If Meng Xianzib is removed and Ji Wenzia is detained, I will let you control the government in Lu and will treat you with greater regard than I treat the Lu Lord’s house.”380 Zishu Shengbo replied, “You must have heard the story about Shusun Qiaoruc.381 To remove Meng Xianzic and Ji Wenzic would amount to abandoning Lu completely and laying the blame on our unworthy ruler.382 If, nevertheless, you do not abandon Lu and, looking to the blessings of the Zhou Duke, allow our unworthy ruler to serve the Jin ruler, then those two men can become the ministers who uphold the altars of the domain in Lu. If they perish in the morning, Lu will certainly perish in the evening. With Lu being in such proximity to domains that are your enemies, its destruction will turn it into enemy territory.383 How could Jin then save the situation?”

16.11a

Lord Cheng

849

(12–14,16)

郤犨曰：「吾為子請邑。」對曰：「嬰齊，魯之常隸也，敢介大國以 求厚焉？承寡君之命以請，若得所請，吾子之賜多矣，又何求？」 范文子謂欒武子曰：「季孫於魯，相二君矣。妾不衣帛，馬不食粟， 可不謂忠乎？信讒慝而棄忠良，若諸侯何？子叔嬰齊奉君命無私，謀國 家不貳，圖其身不忘其君。若虛其請，是棄善人也。子其圖之！」乃許魯 平，赦季孫。

16.11 b(13–15)

冬，十月，出叔孫僑如而盟之。僑如奔齊。十二月，季孫及郤犨盟于扈。 歸，刺公子偃。召叔孫豹于齊而立之。

16.11c 齊聲孟子通僑如，使立於高、國之間。僑如曰：「不可以再罪。」奔衛，亦

間於卿。 16.12 晉侯使郤至獻楚捷于周，與單襄公語，驟稱其伐。單子語諸大夫曰：「溫

季其亡乎！位於七人之下，而求掩其上。怨之所聚，亂之本也。多怨而階 亂，何以在位？《夏書》曰：

384 The rulers were Lords Xuan and Cheng. Fan Xie’s judgment below is similar to the praise of Ji Wenzi in Xiang 5.10. 385 For Gongzi Yan, a potential rival to Lord Cheng as Lu ruler, see the end of Cheng 16.5. 386 Sheng Meng Zi was a daughter of Song and the mother of Lord Ling. Shusun Qiaoru later married his own daughter to Lord Ling of Qi (Xiang 25.2). 387 Literally, “he was established in the midst of Gao and Guo.” The Gao and Guo lineages, both related to the Qi ruling house, took up the positions of hereditary high ministers in Qi.

850

Zuo Tradition

Xi Chou said, “I can request a settlement for you in Lu.” He replied, “I am only a lowly servant in the domain of Lu. Would I dare rely on a great domain to seek rich emolument? I made this petition on the command of our unworthy ruler. If what is requested is granted, then you, sir, will have rewarded me richly. What more can I ask?” Fan Xiec said to Luan Shua, “Ji Wenzib has been chief minister for two rulers in Lu.384 His concubines do not wear silk, and his horses do not eat grain. Can he not be called loyal? If we believe the devious and slanderous and abandon the loyal and good, how are we to deal with the princes? Zishu Shengboc upheld the ruler’s command with no wish for private gain and made plans for his domain and patrimony with unwavering allegiance toward Jin. Fending for himself, he did not forget his ruler. If we send him away empty-handed, it will amount to abandoning good men. You should consider this!” Jin thus agreed to peace with Lu and pardoned Ji Wenzib. Shusun Bao becomes the head of the Shusun lineage after the exile of his older brother Shusun Qiaoru. The content of the covenant stating the latter’s guilt and the justification of his exile is given later (Xiang 23.5). In winter, in the tenth month, the leaders of Lu expelled Shusun Qiaoru and swore a covenant against him. Shusun Qiaoruc fled to Qi. In the twelfth month, Ji Wenzib and Xi Chou swore a covenant at Hu. On his return, Ji Wenzi cut down Gongzi Yan and summoned Shusun Bao from Qi to establish him as the leader of the Shusun line.385

16.11b(13–15)

Shusun Qiaoru retains the rank of minister in Qi and Wei despite his misdemeanors. Sheng Meng Zi of Qi had a liaison with Shusun Qiaoruc386 and secured him a position on a par with Gao and Guo.387 Shusun Qiaoruc said, “I cannot offend a second time.” He fled to Wei, where he was also included in the ranks of ministers.

16.11c

A Zhou noble predicts doom for Xi Zhi on account of his arrogance and the ill-will he arouses. In the much longer analogous passage in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.80–81, Xi Zhi credits himself with Jin victory at Yanling, and Shan Duke Xiang faults him for “stealing Heaven’s accomplishment and making it his own.” The Prince of Jin sent Xi Zhi to present the spoils of victory over Chu at the Zhou court. As he spoke to Shan Duke Xiang, he repeatedly boasted about his military achievements. Shan Duke Xianga said to the various high officers, “Xi Zhia will surely perish! He was positioned below seven persons, yet he sought to supersede those above him. Where rancor gathers, there lie the origins of disorder. When he arouses so much rancor and opens up a path to disorder, how can he stay in his position? The Xia Documents says,

16.12

Lord Cheng

851

怨豈在明？ 不見是圖。 將慎其細也。今而明之，其可乎？」

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年，春，衛北宮括帥師侵鄭。 17.2(2) 夏，公會尹子、單子、晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、邾人伐鄭。 17.3(4) 六月乙酉，同盟于柯陵。 17.4 秋，公至自會。 17.5(6) 齊高無咎出奔莒。 17.6 九月辛丑，用郊。 17.7 晉侯使荀罃來乞師。 17.8(7) 冬，公會單子、晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、齊人、邾人伐鄭。 17.9 十有一月，公至自伐鄭。 17.10(8) 壬申，公孫嬰齊卒于貍脤。 17.11 十有二月丁巳朔，日有食之。 17.12 邾子貜且卒。 17.13(10) 晉殺其大夫郤錡、郤犨、郤至。 17.14(11) 楚人滅舒庸。

852

Zuo Tradition

When is rancor only out in the open? What lies invisible is the thing to consider.388

This is to caution us about details betraying rancor. Now that he has brought this resentment into the open, is it at all acceptable?” LORD CHENG 17 (574 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, Beigong Kuo of Wei led out troops and invaded Zheng.

17.1(1)

In summer, our lord met with the Yin Master, the Shan Master, the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, and a Zhu leader and attacked Zheng.

17.2(2)

In the sixth month, on the yiyou day (26), they swore a covenant together at Keling.

17.3(4)

In autumn, our lord arrived from the meeting.

17.4

Gao Wujiu of Qi departed and fled to Ju.

17.5(6)

In the ninth month, on the xinchou day (13), there was a sacrifice in the outskirts.

17.6

The Prince of Jin sent Xun Ying to us to plead for troops.

17.7

In winter, our lord met with the Shan Master, the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, a Qi leader, and a Zhu leader and attacked Zheng.

17.8(7)

In the eleventh month, our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

17.9

On the renshen day,389 Gongsun Yingqi (Zishu Shengbo) died at Lishen.

17.10(8)

In the twelfth month, on the dingsi day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.390

17.11

Jueju, the Master of Zhu, died.

17.12

Jin put to death its high officers Xi Yi, Xi Chou, and Xi Zhi.

17.13(10)

A Chu leader extinguished Shuyong.

17.14(11)

388 These lines are incorporated into “Wuzi zhi ge” 五子之歌 (Shangshu 7.99–100) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. 389 According to the Lu calendar as we know it, there was no renshen day in the eleventh month. 390 This complete solar eclipse took place on 22 October 574 Bce, according to the Gregorian calendar.

Lord Cheng

853

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年，春，王正月，鄭子駟侵晉虛、滑。衛北宮括救晉，侵鄭，至于高

氏。夏，五月，鄭大子髡頑、侯獳為質於楚，楚公子成、公子寅戍鄭。 17.2(2) 公會尹武公、單襄公及諸侯伐鄭，自戲童至于曲洧。 17.3 晉范文子反自鄢陵，使其祝宗祈死，曰：「君驕侈而克敵，是天益其疾

也，難將作矣。愛我者唯祝我，使我速死，無及於難，范氏之福也。」六 月戊辰，士燮卒。 17.4(3) 乙酉，同盟于柯陵，尋戚之盟也。 17.5 楚子重救鄭，師于首止。諸侯還。 17.6(5) 齊慶克通于聲孟子，與婦人蒙衣乘輦而入于閎。鮑牽見之，以告國

武子。武子召慶克而謂之。慶克久不出，而告夫人曰：「國子謫我。」夫 人怒。 國子相靈公以會，高、鮑處守。

391 Gaoshi 高氏 was located in the southwest of present-day Yu County 禹縣 in Henan. 392 Xitong 戲童, also known simply as Xi 戲, is a mountain in the northeast of presentday Songshan County 嵩山縣, Henan. 393 Keling 柯陵 was in the domain of Zheng and was located north of present-day Lin­ ying County 臨潁縣, Henan. 394 Being shrouded in outer clothing (mengyi 蒙衣) seems to have been standard practice for women going out. Female disguise is also employed in Xiang 23.3c and Ai 15.5.

854

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Zheng continues to side with Chu against Jin and its allies (Cheng 16.6, 16.8, 16.9). In the seventeenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Zisi of Zheng invaded Xu and Hua in Jin. Beigong Kuo of Wei came to the aid of Jin and invaded Zheng, advancing as far as Gaoshi.391 In summer, in the fifth month, the Zheng heir apparent Kunwan and the Zheng high officer Hou Nou became hostages in Chu. Gongzi Cheng and Gongzi Yin of Chu garrisoned Zheng.

17.1(1)

Our lord met with Yin Duke Wu, Shan Duke Xiang, and the princes and attacked Zheng. Moving from Xitong,392 they advanced as far as the bend of the Wei River.

17.2(2)

Fan Xie’s forebodings about disorder in Jin deepen. His death is presented as self-willed. For a similar act of praying for death, see also Zhao 25.6h. When Fan Xiec returned from Yanling, he had the invocator and ancestral attendant of his lineage pray for his death. He said, “The ruler is arrogant and extravagant, and yet he overcame the enemy: Heaven is adding to his sickness. Disaster is brewing. Let any man who loves me curse me, nothing more, and make me die soon, so that I will not be overtaken by disaster. That will be a blessing for the Fan lineage.” In the sixth month, on the wuchen day (9), Fan Xieb died. On the yiyou day (26), we swore a covenant together at Keling:393 this was to renew the covenant at Qī. Zichong of Chu went to the aid of Zheng, stationing the army at Shouzhi. The princes turned back.

17.3

17.4(3)

17.5

The Qi ruler’s mother, Sheng Meng Zi, who earlier had a liaison with the exiled Lu minister Shusun Qiaoru (Cheng 16.11), now wreaks havoc in Qi because her new lover, Qing Ke, is reproved by a Qi minister. Qing Ke of Qi had a liaison with Sheng Meng Zi. Shrouded in a woman’s outer clothing394 and accompanied by women, he rode in a carriage drawn by eunuchs and entered the palace compound by way of an alleyway gate. Bao Qian saw him and told Guo Zuob. Guo Zuoc summoned Qing Ke and spoke to him. For a long while Qing Ke did not leave his abode, telling the former lord’s wife, Sheng Meng Zi: “Guo Zuod reproved me.” She was furious. Guo Zuod acted as Lord Ling’s assistant at the meeting, while Gao Wujiua and Bao Qiana stayed behind on guard.

17.6(5)

Lord Cheng

855

及還，將至，閉門而索客。孟子訴之曰：「高、鮑將不納君，而立公 子角，國子知之。」 秋，七月壬寅，刖鮑牽而逐高無咎。無咎奔莒。高弱以盧叛。齊人 來召鮑國而立之。 初，鮑國去鮑氏而來為施孝叔臣。施氏卜宰，匡句須吉。施氏之宰 有百室之邑。與匡句須邑，使為宰，以讓鮑國而致邑焉。施孝叔曰：「子 實吉。」對曰：「能與忠良，吉執大焉？」鮑國相施氏忠，故齊人取以為鮑 氏後。 仲尼曰：「鮑莊子之知不如葵，葵猶能衛其足。」 17.7(8) 冬，諸侯伐鄭。十月庚午，圍鄭。楚公子申救鄭，師于汝上。十一月，諸

侯還。 17.8(10) 初，聲伯夢涉洹，或與己瓊瑰食之，泣而為瓊瑰盈其懷，從而歌之曰：

395 Lú was a settlement that belonged to the Gao lineage. 396 Both Takezoe (13.60–61) and Yang (2:899) note that this kui is not the sunflower (translated as kui in modern Chinese) but an edible vegetable mentioned often in ancient texts. Kui leaves were picked carefully so that the roots remained behind to produce more leaves—hence these lines from an ancient poem: “Pick the kui without injuring its roots. / Injure its roots and the kui will not live” 採葵不傷根, 傷根 葵不生. “Not suffering injury in the roots” is here compared to “being able to pro­ tect one’s feet.” For another story on someone who cannot “protect his feet,” see Zhuang 16.3. 397 The Huan 洹 River is the present-day Anyang River 安陽河, Henan.

856

Zuo Tradition

By the time the lord’s party had returned and was about to reach the city, the gates were closed and the travelers were being searched. Sheng Meng Zia made accusations to the lord, saying, “Gao Wujiua and Bao Qiana meant not to take you in and to establish Gongzi Jiao as ruler instead. Guo Zuod was party to this.” In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renyin day (13), Bao Qian’s feet were chopped off as punishment and Gao Wujiu was expelled. Gao Wujiub fled to Ju. His son Gao Ruo used Lú as a base for revolt.395 The leaders of Qi came to Lu to summon Bao Qian’s brother Bao Guo and establish him as the head of the Bao lineage. Bao Guo is chosen to continue the Bao lineage because of his loyal service as Shi Xiaoshu’s retainer in Lu. Confucius criticizes Bao Qian for failing to protect himself, using a logic reminiscent of his earler disparagement of Xie Ye’s forthright remonstrance (Xuan 9.6). Earlier, Bao Guo had left the Bao lineage estate to come and serve as Shi Xiaoshu’s retainer in Lu. Shi Xiaoshua divined about the choice of steward, and the result was auspicious for the appointment of Kuang Quxu. The steward of the Shi lineage was entitled to a settlement of a hundred households. Kuang Quxu was given the settlement and appointed steward, but he yielded in favor of Bao Guo and also offered him the settlement. Shi Xiaoshu said, “It was you who was the auspicious choice.” He replied, “What could be more auspicious than being able to give to the loyal and good?” Bao Guo served loyally as the steward of the Shi lineage; that was why the leaders of Qi chose him as successor of the Bao lineage. Confuciusc said, “Bao Qianb’s wisdom was not equal to that of a kui plant; even a kui plant can protect its feet.”396 In winter, the princes attacked Zheng. In the tenth month, on the gengwu day (12), they laid siege to Zheng. Gongzi Shen of Chu came to Zheng’s aid, stationing the army by the banks of the Ru River. In the eleventh month, the princes turned back.

17.7(8)

The Lu minister Zishu Shengbo, who bows to expediency (Cheng 11.3) but also upholds the interests of the domain (Cheng 16.8, 16.11), dies while trying to determine the meaning of an ominous dream. For other dreams open to different interpretations or offering misleading clues, see Zuozhuan, Xi 28.3f, Cheng 5.1, Zhao 4.8, 7.3. Earlier, Zishu Shengboa had dreamed of wading across the Huan River.397 Someone gave him agate pieces to eat. He wept, and his tears became agate pieces that filled his arms. Following these events he sang this song:

17.8(10)

Lord Cheng

857

濟洹之水， 贈我以瓊瑰。 歸乎歸乎， 瓊瑰盈吾懷乎！ 懼不敢占也。還自鄭，壬申，至于貍脤而占之，曰：「余恐死，故不敢占 也。今眾繁而從余三年矣，無傷也。」言之，之莫而卒。 17.9 齊侯使崔杼為大夫，使慶克佐之，帥師圍盧。國佐從諸侯圍鄭，以難請

而歸。遂如盧師，殺慶克，以穀叛。齊侯與之盟于徐關而復之。十二月， 盧降。使國勝告難于晉，待命于清。 17.10a(13) 晉厲公侈，多外嬖。反自鄢陵，欲盡去群大夫，而立其左右。胥童以

胥克之廢也，怨郤氏，而嬖於厲公。郤錡奪夷陽五田，五亦嬖於厲公。 郤犨與長魚矯爭田，執而梏之，與其父母妻子同一轅。既，矯亦嬖於 厲公。

398 Zishu Shengbo fears that his dream portends death because agate pieces are put in the mouths of the dead. After three years during which the number of his followers grew, he decides that the dream is already fulfilled in the increased number of his supporters (i.e., the agate pieces symbolize his followers). In pursuing this logic, he is trying to control the meaning of his dream. The moment he is confident of mastery, however, destiny mocks him. Once Zishu Shengbo seeks divination, the meaning of his dream as foretelling his death is concretized in words, and it becomes public and inescapable. Cf. Wai-yee Li, “Dreams of Interpretation.” 399 There are several places by the name of Qing 清 in Zuozhuan. This one probably was in Qi and located in the west of present-day Liaocheng County 聊城縣, Shandong.

858

Zuo Tradition

I crossed the Huan River, And someone gave me agate pieces. Return! Return! Agate pieces filled my arms!

He was fearful and did not dare to prognosticate about the dream’s meaning. Returning from Zheng, he reached Lishen on the renshen day and sought prognostication about the dream, saying: “It was because I feared death that I dared not seek prognostication. Now that a growing multitude of people have been following me for three years, there is no harm in prognostication.” He spoke about his dream and died by the evening.398 Allegations of Guo Zuo’s revolt become reality when he joins the dis­ affected Gao Ruo in Lú and kills Qing Ke. He returns to Qi after swearing a covenant with Lord Ling of Qi. The Prince of Qi sent Cui Zhu as the high officer in command, with Qing Ke assisting him, to lead troops to lay siege to Lú. Guo Zuo had accompanied the princes in laying siege to Zheng; citing troubles in Qi, he requested to return. He thereupon went to the troops at Lú, killed Qing Ke, and used Gu as a base for revolt. The Prince of Qi swore a covenant with him at Xuguan and reinstated him. In the twelfth month, Lú surrendered. The Qi ruler sent Guo Sheng, Guo Zuo’s son, to notify Jin of Qi’s troubles and to await Jin’s command at Qing.399

17.9

Enmity festers between the Xi lineage and the favorites of Lord Li of Jin at court. Calumny from the rival Luan lineage gains ground, and the Jin ruler suspects Xi Zhi of treason. Lord Li of Jin was extravagant, and he also had many favorites at court.400 Upon his return from Yanling, he wanted to remove the entire cohort of high officers and to establish the men close to him in the high officers’ positions. Xu Tong, who resented the Xi lineage on account of the dismissal of his father, Xu Ke,401 was favored by Lord Li. Xi Yi forcibly appropriated fields from Yiyang Wu, who was also favored by Lord Li. Xi Chou and Changyu Jiao had a dispute over some fields. Xi Chou arrested and fettered him, binding him and his parents, wife, and children to the shaft of a single carriage. Not long after, Changyu Jiaoa also gained Lord Li’s favor.

17.10a(13)

400 Du Yu’s (ZZ 28.483) gloss of waibi 外嬖 as “high officers favored by him” (aixing dafu 愛幸大夫) suggests that these might be his male lovers. 401 See Xuan 8.4.

Lord Cheng

859

欒書怨郤至，以其不從己而敗楚師也，欲廢之。使楚公子茷告 公曰：「此戰也，郤至實召寡君，以東師之未至也，與軍帥之不具也，曰： 『此必敗，吾因奉孫周以事君。』」公告欒書，書曰：「其有焉。不然，豈 其死之不恤，而受敵使乎？君盍嘗使諸周而察之？」郤至聘于周，欒書 使孫周見之。公使覘之，信。遂怨郤至。 厲公田，與婦人先殺而飲酒，後使大夫殺。郤至奉豕，寺人孟張奪 之，郤至射而殺之。公曰：「季子欺余！」 17.10b 厲公將作難，胥童曰：「必先三郤。族大，多怨。去大族，不逼；敵多怨，

有庸。」 公曰：「然。」郤氏聞之，郤錡欲攻公，曰：「雖死，君必危。」

402 Xi Zhi’s courtesy toward the Chu king during the battle of Yanling is used against him. 403 Zhouzi (Sun Zhou), later Lord Dao of Jin, was at this point serving Shan Duke Xiang at the court of Zhou. Ever since Lord Xian’s time, Jin had made it a policy not to keep the noble sons within the domain; see Xuan 2.4. 404 Takezoe (13.64) and Yang (2:901) gloss 欺 as “defy”: “Xi Zhi defied me!” Mengzhang was Lord Li’s personal attendant, so for Xi Zhi to kill him without first making a case to Lord Li about it was a sign of defiance. Karlgren (gl. 451) argues that in

860

Zuo Tradition

Luan Shu, who resented Xi Zhi because the latter did not follow his proposal and yet still defeated the Chu army, wanted to destroy him. He sent Gongzi Pei of Chu to tell the lord: “In that battle, it was Xi Zhi who summoned our unworthy ruler. On the grounds that the armies from the east had not yet arrived and that the ranks of military commanders were not fully staffed, Xi Zhi claimed, ‘We are sure to be defeated on this occasion. I will use the opportunity to support Zhouzia as Jin ruler in order to serve you, my lord.’” The lord told Luan Shu about this. Luan Shue said, “There is something to that. Otherwise, why would he have disregarded the danger of death and received the enemy’s envoy?402 Why don’t you, my lord, send him as envoy to Zhou and thereby observe his conduct?” 403 Xi Zhi went on an official visit to Zhou, and Luan Shu had Zhouzia give him an audience. The lord sent an agent to spy on him and came to believe the accusations against him. He thereupon resented Xi Zhi. Lord Li went hunting. Accompanied by his women, he killed the animals first and drank wine, and only then did he allow the high officers to kill the animals. Xi Zhi was holding a boar he had shot when the eunuch Mengzhang snatched it away. Xi Zhi shot and killed him. The lord said, “Xi Zhib deceived me!”404 The demise of the Xi lineage, repeatedly predicted in the last few years (Cheng 13.1, 14.1, 15.5, 16.12), is nevertheless presented not as just punishment but rather as private vengeance wrought by the Jin ruler’s personal favorites and by rival ministers like Luan Shu. Xi Zhi’s dignified refusal to rebel makes the violence against him and his kinsmen seem all the more heinous. In the Shanghai Museum Manuscript, it is Xi Chou who upholds integrity and avows the imperative of martyrdom. Lord Li was about to instigate a purge of the high officers. Xu Tong said, “You must begin with the three Xis.405 Their house is large, and they have incurred much rancor. Remove a big house, and the lord’s house will not be oppressed; with their enemies harboring so much rancor, it will be easy for us to achieve success.” The lord said, “That is so.” The Xi lineage head heard about this. Xi Yi wanted to attack the lord, saying, “Even though we will die, the ruler too will be in peril.”

17.10b



pre-Han texts the word is used only to mean “deceive.” Lord Li is saying that Xi Zhi was the one who snatched Mengzhang’s boar (ZZ 28.483), or that Xi Zhi’s disrespect shows that he was deceiving Lord Li in his earlier dealings with Chu during the battle of Yanling. 405 Xu Tong is claiming that Lord Li will have to first get rid of Xi Yi, Xi Chou, and Xi Zhi. In the Shanghai Museum Manuscript, it is Luan Shu who “wanted to instigate a purge and to destroy the three Xis.”

Lord Cheng

861

郤至曰：「人所以立，信、知、勇也。信不叛君，知不害民，勇不作 亂。失茲三者，其誰與我？死而多怨，將安用之？君實有臣而殺之，其謂 君何？我之有罪，吾死後矣。若殺不辜，將失其民，欲安，得乎？待命而 已。受君之祿，是以聚黨。有黨而爭命，罪孰大焉？」 壬午，胥童、夷羊五帥甲八百將攻郤氏，長魚矯請無用眾，公使清 沸魋助之。抽戈結衽，而偽訟者。三郤將謀於榭，矯以戈殺駒伯、苦成 叔於其位。溫季曰：「逃威也。」遂趨。矯及諸其車，以戈殺之。皆尸諸 朝。 17.10c 胥童以甲劫欒書、中行偃於朝。矯曰：「不殺二子，憂必及君。」

公曰：「一朝而尸三卿，余不忍益也。」 對曰：「人將忍君。臣聞：亂在外為姦，在內為軌。御姦以德，御軌 以刑。不施而殺，不可謂德；臣偪而不討，不可謂刑。德、刑不立，姦、 軌並至，臣請行。」遂出奔狄。

406 Xi Zhi is saying that if they are indeed guilty, then the death they deserve is late in coming. If they are innocent, then Lord Li will imperil his position, even without the Xi lineage starting an insurrection against him. On the justification of the ruler’s absolute authority, see also Xuan 4.3b, Zhao 4.3e. 407 We follow Liji-Zheng 6.120, cited by Shen Qinhan: the word wei 威, used interchangeably with wei 畏, refers to death by persecution for those unable to defend themselves (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 961). Xi Zhi had earlier proclaimed his willingness to accept the command of death, but the assassination and unannounced slaughter did not even have the legitimacy of a formal command. 408 The place where the corpses of offenders are exposed was determined by rank: the court for high officers and above, the marketplace for officers and below (see Shangshu-Zheng 3.44–45; Zhouli-Zheng 35.529; Liji-Zheng 3.56; Lunyu-Zheng 14.129). Ministers and high officers who had their corpses exposed at the marketplace (Xiang 28.11, Zhao 14.7) or the main road (Zhao 2.4) were implicitly demoted because of their crimes.

862

Zuo Tradition

Xi Zhi said, “A person is established through good faith, wisdom, and valor. Good faith means not revolting against the ruler; wisdom means not harming the people; valor means not stirring up disorder. If we lose these three things, who will be on our side? If we die and incur so much rancor, then what use will it be? It is the ruler who has the authority over his subjects to put them to death; what can be done to the ruler? If we are guilty, then our death is late in coming. If the ruler is killing the innocent, then he will lose the people’s support.406 Even if he wants stability, how can he obtain it? We can only await our command. With the emoluments from the ruler we have gathered followers. What offense could be greater if we keep these followers and then dispute his commands?” On the renwu day (26), Xu Tong and Yiyang Wua were at the head of eight hundred armored soldiers on their way to attack the Xi lineage. Changyu Jiao asked to dispense with the multitude, and the lord sent Qing Feitui to assist him. They drew out dagger-axes and tied their lapels, pretending to be disputers requiring the Xis’ mediation. The three Xis were preparing to discuss their case in the chamber on the platform when Changyu Jiaoa used his dagger-axe to kill Xi Yia and Xi Choua where they were sitting. Xi Zhia said, “I will flee this slaughter of the innocent,”407 and then ran. Changyu Jiaoa caught up with his carriage and killed him with the dagger-axe. All their corpses were exposed in the court.408 Lord Li’s favorite, Changyu Jiao, uses elevated rhetoric to urge Lord Li to ruthlessly eliminate other ministerial lineages. Lord Li recoils from the excessive violence, then falls victim to the ministers he tries to spare. The ministers who do not want to be party to his murder also refuse to intervene. The ruler is compared to an “old ox,” a metaphor used earlier in reference to the murder of Lord Ling of Zheng (Xuan 4.2). Xu Tong led armored men to seize Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan at court. Changyu Jiaoa said, “If we do not kill these two, troubles will surely overtake you, my lord.” The lord said, “In a single morning the corpses of three ministers have been exposed. I cannot bear to add to that.” Changyu Jiao replied, “Others can bear to act against your lordship. I have heard that disorder outside the court is dereliction, while disorder inside the court is treason. Use virtue to deal with dereliction; use punishment to deal with treason. To kill without bestowing instruction and leniency cannot be called virtue; and to fail to chastise when oppressed by one’s subjects cannot be called just punishment. If virtue and just punishment are not established, dereliction and treason will arrive hand in hand. I beg leave to go.” He then departed and fled to the Di.

17.10c

Lord Cheng

863

公使辭於二子曰：「寡人有討於郤氏，郤氏既伏其辜矣，大夫無 辱，其復職位！」 皆再拜稽首曰：「君討有罪，而免臣於死，君之惠也。二臣雖死，敢 忘君德？」乃皆歸。公使胥童為卿。 公遊于匠麗氏，欒書、中行偃遂執公焉。召士匄，士匄辭，召韓 厥，韓厥辭，曰：「昔吾畜於趙氏，孟姬之讒，吾能違兵。古人有言曰： 『殺老牛莫之敢尸』，而況君乎？二三子不能事君，焉用厥也？」 17.11(14) 舒庸人以楚師之敗也，道吳人圍巢，伐駕，圍釐、虺，遂恃吳而不設備。

楚公子橐師襲舒庸，滅之。 17.12(18.1) 閏月乙卯晦，欒書、中行偃殺胥童。民不與郤氏，胥童道君為亂，故皆書

曰「晉殺其大夫。」

409 When Zhao Zhuang Ji slandered Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo, the Luan and Xi lineages joined forces with Lord Jing of Jin to destroy the Zhao lineage. Han Jue, however, refused to participate and also convinced the Jin ruler to allow Zhao Wu to continue the Zhao lineage (Cheng 8.6). 410 People would not dare to preside over the slaying of an old ox because of its service in tilling the land. Gongzi Guisheng cited a similar saying when he protested against the plan to murder Lord Ling of Zheng: “Even with an aging domestic animal, one is reluctant to kill it. How much more so then with the ruler?” (Xuan 4.2).

864

Zuo Tradition

The lord sent word of apology to the two ministers Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan: “I, the unworthy one, chastised the Xi lineage, and the Xi lineage had already submitted to their punishment. You, the high officers, should not feel disgraced by your arrest. Resume your positions!” They both bowed twice with their foreheads touching the ground, “You, my lord, chastised the guilty and absolved us from the punishment of death. This was your beneficence, my lord. Even if we two are to die, how can we forget your virtue?” Both of them then returned home. The lord appointed Xu Tong as a minister. The lord was rambling on the grounds of the Jiang Li lineage, when Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan seized him there. They summoned Fan Gaia to join them, but Fan Gaia declined. They summoned Han Jue, but Han Jue declined with these words, “Formerly I was brought up in the Zhao household. During the troubles brought on by Zhao Zhuang Jib’s slander, I managed to not take up arms.409 The ancients had this saying, ‘No one dares to preside at the slaying of an old ox’—how much less so with a ruler!410 You are the ones who cannot serve the ruler—what use would you have for me?” The leaders of Shuyong, because of the defeat of Chu troops, led the men of Wu to lay siege to Chao, attack Jia, and lay siege to Li and Hui.411 They thereupon counted on Wu and did not make any defensive preparations. Gongzi Tuoshi of Chu made a surprise attack on Shuyong and extinguished it.

17.11(14)

Internecine conflict in Jin continues. In the intercalary month, on the yimao day (29), the last day of the lunar month, Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan killed Xu Tong. The people did not support the Xi lineage, and Xu Tong had led the ruler to foment unrest. That was why in both cases the text says, “Jin put to death its high officer.”412

17.12(18.1)

411 On Chao 巢, see Wen 12.3. Jia 駕 and Li 釐 were probably in present-day Wuwei County 無為縣, Anhui, while Hui 虺 was in nearby present-day Lujiang County 廬 江縣, Anhui. 412 This refers to Annals, Cheng 17.13, 18.1. The Lu annal uses the Zhou calendar, while the Jin records adhere to the Xia calendar—hence the discrepancy in dating the death of Xu Tong. Du Yu (ZZ 27.485) believes that the Annals entry follows the official notification (cong fu, cong gao) while the Zuozhuan entry pertains to the actual date of the event. For similar examples, see Xi 9.4 and Annals, Xi 10.3, 10.4, 11.1, 23.4, and 24.5.

Lord Cheng

865

春秋 18.1(17.12) 十有八年，春，王正月，晉殺其大夫胥童。 18.2(1) 庚申，晉弒其君州蒲。 18.3(2) 齊殺其大夫國佐。 18.4(4) 公如晉。 18.5(5) 夏，楚子，鄭伯伐宋。宋魚石復入于彭城。 18.6(6) 公至自晉。 18.7(6) 晉侯使士匄來聘。 18.8(7) 秋，杞伯來朝。 18.9(9) 八月，邾子來朝。 18.10(10) 築鹿囿。 18.11(11) 己丑，公薨于路寢。 18.12(12) 冬，楚人、鄭人侵宋。 18.13(13) 晉侯使士魴來乞師。 18.14(14) 十有二月，仲孫蔑會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、邾子、齊崔杼，同盟于虛朾。 18.15(15) 丁未，葬我君成公。

866

Zuo Tradition

LORD CHENG 18 (573 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Jin put to death its high officer Xu Tong.

18.1(17.12)

On the gengshen day (5), Jin assassinated its ruler, Zhouman.413

18.2(1)

Qi put to death its high officer Guo Zuo.

18.3(2)

Our lord went to Jin.

18.4(4)

In summer, the Master of Chu and the Liege of Zheng attacked Song. Yu Shi of Song again entered Pengcheng.

18.5(5)

Our lord arrived from Jin.

18.6(6)

The Prince of Jin sent Shi Gai (Fan Gai) to us on an official visit.

18.7(6)

In autumn, the Liege of Qǐ came to visit our court.

18.8(7)

In the eighth month, the Master of Zhu came to visit our court.

18.9(9)

The Deer Park was built.

18.10(10)

On the jichou day (7), our lord expired in the Grand Chamber.

18.11(11)

In winter, a Chu leader and a Zheng leader invaded Song.

18.12(12)

The Prince of Jin sent Shi Fang to us to plead for troops.

18.13(13)

In the twelfth month, Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Master of Zhu, and Cui Zhu of Qi, and they swore a covenant together at Xucheng.

18.14(14)

On the dingwei day (26), we buried our ruler, Lord Cheng.

18.15(15)

413 On the variants of Lord Li’s name, see n. 217. Du Yu believes that to have “Jin” instead of “Jin ministers” as the subject implies condemnation of the ruler (ZZ 28.485). In Guoyu, “Lu yu 1,” 4.181, the Lu minister Li Ge blames Lord Li for his own assassination.

Lord Cheng

867

左傳 18.1(2) 十八年，春，王正月庚申，晉欒書、中行偃使程滑弒厲公，葬之于翼東門

之外，以車一乘。使荀罃、士魴逆周子于京師而立之，生十四年矣。大 夫逆于清原。 周子曰：「孤始願不及此，雖及此，豈非天乎！抑人之求君，使出 命也。立而不從，將安用君？二三子用我今日，否亦今日。共而從君，神 之所福也。」 對曰：「群臣之願也，敢不唯命是聽？」 庚午，盟而入，館于伯子同氏。辛巳，朝于武宮。逐不臣者七人。周 子有兄而無慧，不能辨菽麥，故不可立。 18.2(3) 齊為慶氏之難故，甲申晦，齊侯使士華免以戈殺國佐于內宮之朝。師逃

于夫人之宮。

414 Lord Li was seized in the twelfth month of the previous year, an intercalary month passed, and he was murdered in the first month of this year. He was thus in captivity for three months, a point that finds collaboration in accounts in Lüshi chunqiu 20.1404 and Huainanzi 18.591. 415 Yi was the former capital of Jin; see Yin 5.2 (Yang, 1:44). Jin’s former rulers were all buried in Jiang. Lord Li’s inglorious murder might have meant that he was not to be buried with his ancestors. The use of one carriage to accompany him in burial was also a vastly diminished version of burial rites for princes (ZZ 28.485). “Li” 厲, his posthumous honorific, means “violent” and “murderous.” 416 Shi Fang is Fan Hui’s son. The trunk lineage of the Shi line has Fan as a power base; hence, it is also called the Fan lineage. Shi Fang belongs to a branch lineage that is put in power in Zhi 彘, and Shi Fang is posthumously honored as Zhi Gongzi. 417 By invoking Heaven, Zhouzi (the future Lord Dao) is saying that he owes his new position not only to the support of those who murdered Lord Li but also to Heaven. In Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.429, Lord Dao gives a longer speech and asserts his authority more forcefully. 418 Lord Dao is implicitly announcing his hope of creating greater unity and stability in Jin by transferring power from the great lineages to the lord’s house. 419 This could refer to either the men who led Lord Li down the path of disorder, such as Yiyang Wu, or those who were opposed to the new ruler. 420 “The crowd” refers to those present at the scene of the assassination. The event was so unexpected that the crowd dispersed and ran to the palace of the lord’s wife, which would have been adjacent to the inner court.

868

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Jin ministers Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan send an assassin to murder Lord Li of Jin. A Jin noble son in the Zhou court, Zhouzi, is brought back as the new Jin ruler. Posthumously honored as Lord Dao, the young man shows remarkable skills in negotiating with the ministers implicated in the assassination of his uncle and predecessor. Keenly aware of the weakened state of the ruling house, Lord Dao does not seek to punish the murderers. In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the gengshen day (5), Luan Shu and Zhonghang Yan of Jin sent Cheng Hua to assassinate Lord Li.414 They buried him outside the eastern gate of the city of Yi, furnishing his grave with one single carriage.415 They sent Zhi Yingb and Shi Fang416 to meet Zhouzi at the Zhou capital, escorted him back to Jin, and established him as ruler. He was fourteen years old at this time. The high officers came out to meet him at Qingyuan. Zhouzi said, “I, the orphaned one, did not at first wish to come to this position. And even if I have now come to this, is it not by the workings of Heaven?417 Yet men seek a ruler to have him issue commands. If they establish him as a ruler and then do not follow him, what use would they have for a ruler? Today is the day when you, sirs, can use me; it is also the day when you can fail to use me. Those who are respectful and follow the ruler are the ones who receive blessings from the spirits.”418 They replied, “Such is the wish of your many subjects. How dare we abide by any but your commands!” On the gengwu day (15), Zhouzi entered the capital after swearing a covenant, then lodged at the residence of Bo Zitong. On the xinsi day (26), he paid his respects at Lord Wu’s temple. He drove away seven who did not conduct themselves like worthy subjects.419 Zhouzi did have an elder brother, but he was so devoid of intelligence that he could not distinguish beans from wheat. That was why he could not be established as ruler.

18.1(2)

The Qi ruler’s reconciliation with Guo Zuo (Cheng 17.9) turns out to be a mere ploy to lure him back to Qi, where Guo Zuo is assassinated. Guo Zuo, despite his accomplishments as a Qi minister and diplomat (Cheng 2.3), is judged negatively in this passage. Qing Feng, from the resurgent Qing lineage, will wreak much havoc in Qi (Xiang 25.2, 27.7, 28.9). In Qi, because of the troubles with the Qing lineage, the Prince of Qi, on the jiashen day, the last day of the month, sent the officer Hua Mian to kill Guo Zuo with a dagger-axe during a court audience in the inner palace. The crowd escaped into the palace of the lord’s wife.420

18.2(3)

Lord Cheng

869

書曰「齊殺其大夫國佐」，棄命、專殺、以穀叛故也。使清人殺國 勝。國弱來奔。王湫奔萊。慶封為大夫，慶佐為司寇。既，齊侯反國弱， 使嗣國氏，禮也。 18.3 二月乙酉朔，晉悼公即位于朝。始命百官，施舍、已責，逮鰥寡，振廢

滯，匡乏困，救災患，禁淫慝，薄賦斂，宥罪戾，節器用，時用民，欲無犯 時。使魏相、士魴、魏頡、趙武為卿；荀家、荀會、欒黶、韓無忌為公族 大夫，使訓卿之子弟共儉孝弟。使士渥濁為大傅，使修范武子之法；右 行辛為司空，使修士蒍之法。弁糾御戎，校正屬焉，使訓諸御知義。荀 賓為右，司士屬焉，使訓勇力之士時使。卿無共御，立軍尉以攝之。祁 奚為中軍尉，羊舌職佐之；魏絳為司馬，張老為候奄。鐸遏寇為上軍 尉，籍偃為之司馬，使訓卒乘，親以聽命。程鄭為乘馬御，六騶屬焉，使

421 See Cheng 17.9. 422 Lord Ling of Qi had asked Guo Sheng, Guo Zuo’s son, to “await orders at Qing” (Cheng 17.9). Guo Ruo was Guo Sheng’s younger brother. Wang Jiao was presumably one of Guo Zuo’s associates. 423 Qing Feng was made a high officer (dafu), which in Qi seems to have been the equivalent of qing (minister) in other domains. Qing Zuo became a supervisor of corrections (sikou 司寇), which in other domains held ministerial rank but in Qi indicated a rank below dafu; Qing Zuo was promoted to the rank of dafu in 552 Bce (Xiang 21.3). Both Qing Feng and Qing Zuo were Qing Ke’s sons. 424 According to the Guoyu passage cited in Kong Yingda’s subcommentary (ZZ-Kong 28.486), Lord Dao’s accession took place “in the first month, on the yiyou day.” (The received text [Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.432] has “the second month.”) It is possible that the first month in the Zhou calendar (used in Lu) corresponded to the second month in the Xia calendar (used in Jin). (There should be a two-month difference between the two calendrical systems, but the intercalary month in the Lu records last year might have fallen in this year in the Xia-Jin calendar.) 425 The same policies are attributed to Lord Wen after he quelled disorder in Jin; see Lüshi chunqiu 23.1577. 426 Lü Xiang was the person who delivered the proclamation severing relations with Qin (Cheng 13.3); Shi Fang was Fan Hui’s son; Wei Jie was Wei Ke’s (Xuan 15.6) son; Zhao Wu was the survivor who continued the Zhao lineage after the persecution of his lineage (Cheng 8.6). Zhao Wu became minister after the death of Lü Xiang. The account here is thus a summary of Lord Dao’s entire reign rather than policies and appointments instituted at the beginning of his reign. 427 Han Wuji was Han Jue’s eldest son. 428 See Xuan 16.1. 429 Shi Wei, the grandfather of Fan Hui, was Lord Xian’s supervisor of works; see Zhuang 26.1.

870

Zuo Tradition

The text says, “Qi put to death its high officer Guo Zuo”: this is because Guo Zuo abandoned the ruler’s charge, took it upon himself to kill Qing Ke, and used Gu as a base for revolt.421 The Qi ruler sent the men of Qing to put to death Guo Sheng. Guo Ruo came to us in flight. Wang Jiao fled to Lai.422 Qing Feng served as high officer, and Qing Zuo as supervisor of corrections.423 Later, the Prince of Qi allowed Guo Ruo to return and made him succeed as head of the Guo lineage. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. The following passage is a stylized, formulaic account enumerating the various judicious deeds and appointments that allow Lord Dao to become overlord and lead Jin to resurgence. The analogous passage in Guoyu (“Jin yu 7,” 13.432–35) is much longer: it includes Lord Dao’s explanation of how the ministers’ merits and virtues justify his appointments. In the second month, on the yiyou day,424 the first day of the month, Lord Dao of Jin acceded to his position in court. He began to issue charges to the various officials. He bestowed favors, forgave debts, extended dispensations to widows and widowers, redressed the cause of the worthy ones who had been dismissed or kept back, relieved the needy and deprived, came to the aid of those suffering calamities and troubles, prohibited excesses and wickedness, lightened the burden of service and taxation, showed leniency toward offenders, moderated the use of extravagant vessels, and employed the people at the proper time, endeavoring not to interfere with the seasons.425 He appointed Lü Xianga, Shi Fang, Wei Jie, and Zhao Wu as ministers.426 He made Xun Jia, Xun Hui, Luan Yan, and Han Wuji427 high officers of ruling lineages: he had them instruct the sons of ministers in the virtues of respect, frugality, filial piety, and fraternity. He appointed Shi Wozhuo the grand guardian to revive and revise the laws of Fan Huii;428 Jia Xina the supervisor of works to revive and revise the laws of Shi Wei;429 Luan Jiua the principal chariot driver, with overseers of horses under him, to instruct all the chariot drivers in principles of duty; Xun Bin the attendant on the right, with the supervisors of officers under him, to instruct officers in valor and strength, so that they could be available at the right time. Ministers who served as commanders in battle would no longer have specific chariot drivers; army commandants were established to assume their duties. Qi Xi was made commandant of the central army; Yangshe Zhi assisted him. Wei Jiang became supervisor of the military; Zhang Lao became the leader of scouts. Duo Ekou was made commandant of the upper army, with Ji Yan as his supervisor of the military, to instruct soldiers in the infantry and around chariots to synchronize their march and obey commands. Cheng Zheng was made principal horseman, with the grooms of six stables under him, to instruct all the grooms in ritual propriety. All the

Lord Cheng

18.3

871

訓群騶知禮。凡六官之長，皆民譽也。舉不失職，官不易方，爵不踰德， 師不陵正，旅不偪師，民無謗言，所以復霸也。 18.4(4) 公如晉，朝嗣君也。 18.5(5) 夏，六月，鄭伯侵宋，及曹門外。遂會楚子伐宋，取朝郟。楚子辛、鄭皇

辰侵城郜，取幽丘。同伐彭城，納宋魚石、向為人、鱗朱、向帶、魚府焉， 以三百乘戍之而還。 書曰「復入」。凡去其國，國逆而立之，曰「入」；復其位，曰「復歸」； 諸侯納之，曰「歸」；以惡曰「復入」。 宋人患之。西鉏吾曰：「何也？若楚人與吾同惡，以德於我，吾固 事之也，不敢貳矣。大國無厭，鄙我猶憾。不然，而收吾憎，使贊其政， 以間吾釁，亦吾患也。今將崇諸侯之姦而披其地，以塞夷庚。逞姦而攜 服，毒諸侯而懼吳、晉，吾庸多矣，非吾憂也。且事晉何為？晉必恤之。」

430 Chaojia 朝郟 was located near present-day Luyi County 鹿邑縣, Henan. 431 Both Chenggao 城郜 and Youqiu 幽丘 were probably located in present-day Xiao County 蕭縣, Anhui. 432 This refers to two branches of the army: one headed by Lord Cheng of Zheng and King Gong of Chu, the other headed by Zixin and Huang Chen. 433 These Song noblemen fled to Chu in 576 Bce (Cheng 15.4). 434 There are many exceptions to these enumerated “rules” in the Annals. 435 Chu installed the exiled Song nobles in Pengcheng (see map 2), which was on the main routes of communication between various domains.

872

Zuo Tradition

leaders of the six departments were men praised by the people. Those raised to various positions were not remiss in fulfilling their duties; officials did not alter the normative rules and received statutes; the ranks received did not exceed the recipients’ virtues. High officials did not challenge the authority of the highest chief officials; officials did not infringe upon the authority of high officials. Among the people there were no words of dissatisfaction or slander. That was how Jin regained the position of overlord. Our lord went to Jin: this was to visit the court of the ruler who had just succeeded to his position.

18.4(4)

Zheng and Chu invade Song and end up installing Song noblemen of the Huan lineage who were exiled because of intrigues against the Dai lineage (Cheng 15.4). Song looks to Jin for support. In summer, in the sixth month, the Liege of Zheng invaded Song, advancing as far the area outside the Cao Gate. He then joined the Master of Chu in attacking Song, taking Chaojia.430 Zixin of Chu and Huang Chen of Zheng invaded Chenggao and took Youqiu.431 Together they 432 attacked Pengcheng and installed Yu Shi, Xiang Weiren, Lin Zhu, Xiang Dai, and Yu Fu in Song.433 They returned only after using three hundred chariots to garrison their gains. The text says, “again entered.” In all cases concerning persons who left their domains, if the leaders of their domains escorted them in and established them, the text says, “entered.” If their positions were restored, the text says, “again returned.” If the princes installed them, the text says, “returned.” If the princes did so by force and violence, the text says, “again entered.” 434 The men of Song were troubled by this. Xichu Wu said, “What now? Had the men of Chu shared our worries and showed us virtuous consideration, we would of course have served them, and we would not have dared to shift our allegiance. But that great domain is insatiable; even if it were to turn our domain into its borderland, it would still not be satisfied. Even had Chu not done all that, had it taken in those whom we abhor and let them assist in its government, so as to spy out opportunities to attack us, it would mean affliction for us. But now Chu intends to raise up the miscreants from the princes’ realms, whose land is partitioned for these malefactors, thereby blocking the level roads for carriages and horses.435 Chu has given satisfaction to those miscreants and alienated those who had submitted to them; it has poisoned the realms of princes and instilled fear in Wu and Jin. All these will benefit us greatly and should not trouble us. Besides, to what end have we served Jin? Jin will surely show sympathetic concern for us.”

18.5(5)

Lord Cheng

873



18.6(6, 7)

公至自晉。晉范宣子來聘，且拜朝也。君子謂晉於是乎有禮。

18.7(8) 秋，杞桓公來朝，勞公，且問晉故。公以晉君語之。杞伯於是驟朝于晉而

請為昏。 18.8 七月，宋老佐、華喜圍彭城，老佐卒焉。 18.9(9) 八月，邾宣公來朝，即位而來見也。 18.10(10) 築鹿囿，書不時也。 18.11(11) 己丑，公薨于路寢，言道也。 18.12(12) 冬，十一月，楚子重救彭城，伐宋。宋華元如晉告急。韓獻子為政，曰：

「欲求得人，必先勤之。成霸、安彊，自宋始矣。」晉侯師于台谷以救宋。 遇楚師于靡角之谷，楚師還。 18.13(13) 晉士魴來乞師。季文子問師數於臧武仲，對曰：「伐鄭之役，知伯實來，

下軍之佐也。今彘季亦佐下軍，如伐鄭可也。事大國，無失班爵而加敬 焉，禮也。」從之。

436 That is, Lord Cheng died where he should have died; see also Annals, Zhuang 32.4. 437 The location of Taigu 台谷 and the Valley of Mijiao 靡角之谷 are unknown. The latter, however, should be in the vicinity of Pengcheng (Yang, 2:913). 438 In a long speech explaining how “Chu talents have been employed by Jin,” Shengzi claims that the Chu army was defeated at Valley of Mijiao because Jin followed the plan offered by Yongzi, a Chu nobleman who had fled to Jin (Xiang 26.10). 439 See Annals, Cheng 17.7.

874

Zuo Tradition

Our lord arrived from Jin. Fan Gaic of Jin came on an official visit and also to thank Lu for visiting its court. The noble man said that Jin in this situation showed ritual propriety.

18.6(6, 7)

In autumn, Lord Huan of Qǐ came to visit our court: this was to honor our lord’s exertions and also to inquire about Jin. Our lord told him about the Jin ruler. For this reason, the Liege of Qǐ rushed to visit the Jin court and requested a marriage alliance with Jin.

18.7(8)

In the seventh month, Lao Zuo and Hua Xi of Song laid siege to Pengcheng. Lao Zuo died there.

18.8

In the eighth month, Lord Xuan of Zhu came to visit our court. He came for an audience upon acceding to his position.

18.9(9)

The Deer Park was built: this was recorded because it was not the proper season.

18.10(10)

On the jichou day (7), our lord expired in the Grand Chamber: this is to say that it was proper.436

18.11(11)

Jin reasserts itself and fights Chu on behalf of Song. In winter, in the eleventh month, Zichong of Chu went to the aid of Pengcheng and attacked Song. Hua Yuan of Song went to Jin to announce the urgent situation. Han Juea, who was in charge of policies, said, “If we want to obtain the support of others, we must first exert ourselves on their behalf. Establishing ourselves as overlord and reining in a powerful rival will begin with Song.” The Prince of Jin stationed troops at Taigu to go to the aid of Song. They encountered Chu troops at the Valley of Mijiao.437 Chu troops turned back.438

18.12(12)

The Lu minister Zang Wuzhong explains that the rank and title of an envoy seeking military assistance determine how his mission will be fulfilled. On how ranks have to be considered in tandem with the size of a domain in considering ritual protocol, see also Cheng 3.7. Shi Fang of Jin came to us to plead for troops. Ji Wenzi asked Zang Wuzhong about the size of the troops to be sent to assist Jin. He replied, “For the campaign to attack Zheng, it was Zhi Yingc who came, and he was the assistant commander of the lower army. Now Shi Fanga is also assistant commander of the lower army.439 We can send the same number of troops as in the attack against Zheng. In serving a great domain, we should not go against the rank and title of the envoy and, therefore, have to redouble our respect. This is in accordance with ritual propriety.” Ji Wenzi followed his advice.

18.13(13)

Lord Cheng

875

18.14(14) 十二月，孟獻子會于虛朾，謀救宋也。宋人辭諸侯而請師以圍彭城。孟

獻子請于諸侯而先歸會葬。 18.15(15) 丁未，葬我君成公，書，順也。

876

Zuo Tradition

In the twelfth month, Meng Xianzi met with the other leaders at Xuding440 and conferred about going to the aid of Song. The leaders of Song declined their offer and requested troops for laying siege to Pengcheng. Meng Xianzi obtained permission from the princes to return first for Lord Cheng’s funeral. On the dingwei day (26), we buried our ruler, Lord Cheng: this was recorded to show that it was properly done.

18.14(14)

18.15(15)

440 The location of Xuding 虛朾 is unknown.

Lord Cheng

877

襄公

Lord Xiang (572–542 bce) The previous section ends with the assassination of Lord Li of Jin and a laudatory account of how the judicious appointments made by the new Jin ruler, the fourteen-year-old Lord Dao (r. 573–558), allow him to regain the status of overlord. The first half of the period covered here can be read as an account of Jin resurgence. Unlike earlier Jin overlords who sought legitimation through Zhou blessings (Lord Wen in Xi 28.3h, 28.9; Lord Xiang in Wen 1.5), Lord Dao focuses on achieving peace with the Rong tribes, which according to his adviser Wei Jiang will result in the princes being “awed into submission” (Xiang 4.7). In a reversal of a covenant chief’s supposed duty to defend the Zhou house and fend off the barbarians, Jin arrests a Zhou envoy seeking Jin help against Rong incursions (Xiang 5.2). The exchange between Lord Dao and Wei Jiang on the symbolic power of music implies that the most visible token of Jin’s achievement as covenant chief is the gift of chariots, musicians, and sets of bells and chime-stones that Zheng offers to Jin (Xiang 11.5). In fact, Zheng’s submission during these years is at best intermittent, and Zheng remains torn between Chu and Jin in various policy debates (Xiang 2.5, 8.7, 9.8, 11.2). Zheng and Jin publicly argue over the terms of Zheng allegiance during the swearing of a covenant oath (Xiang 9.5), and at one point Jin gives up the siege of Zheng as the Jin minister Zhi Ying acknowledges that Jin has no right to punish Zheng, since it “can neither stop Chu nor protect Zheng” (Xiang 10.11). Lu and Song remain loyal Jin allies, although Jin needs to confirm Song allegiance through the gift of the settlement of Biyang (Xiang 10.2). Qi reluctantly complies with Jin pressure (Xiang 3.3), while Wu defies Jin outright (Xiang 3.5). Even temporary sway over Chen, a Chu ally, arouses anxiety among Jin ministers (Xiang 4.1, 5.9). A Qin-Chu coalition invades Jin and meets with little resistance (Xiang 9.4). In retaliation for its defeat by Qin at Li (Xiang 11.6), Jin leads its allies in a disastrous

879

“Campaign of Changes and Procrastinations” (Xiang 14.3). Jin military operations during these years are characterized by indecisiveness and contention among its leaders and merely half-hearted support from its allies (Xiang 9.5, 10.2, 10.11, 14.3). Juxtaposed with these signs of weakness and division are categorical descriptions of good government in Jin and of its leaders’ virtues (Xiang 9.4, 9.9, 13.3). The idea of Jin resurgence seems to be an attempt on the part of the Zuozhuan compiler (or one of its compilers) to wrest moments of triumph from a mixed record. Toward the end of Lord Dao’s reign, Jin faces a new challenge with Qi disaffection (Xiang 14.10). Lord Ling of Qi (r. 581–554), though mocked for cowardice (Xiang 18.3), extinguishes the small domain of Lai to its east (Xiang 6.7) and also pursues an aggressive policy against Jin’s ally Lu (Xiang 15.5, 16.4, 17.3, 18.3). Jin’s campaign against Qi attains high drama when its commander Zhonghang Yan dreams of disputing a court case with, and being decapitated by, Lord Li of Jin (Xiang 18.3), whom he had murdered eighteen years earlier (Cheng 18.1). The meanings of the dream are fulfilled in the Jin victory at Pingyin (Xiang 18.3) and Zhonghang Yan’s own death (Xiang 19.1). Qi-Jin conflicts continue despite peace agreements (Xiang 19.12, 20.2), and Qi offers refuge to Luan Ying and his followers, who are persecuted by the Fan lineage in Jin (Xiang 21.8, 22.3). Relations deteriorate further after Qi attacks Wei and Jin (Xiang 23.4) and moves toward an alliance with Chu (Xiang 24.5, 24.8). It is only with the assassination of Lord Zhuang of Qi, who was largely responsible for Qi’s aggression against Jin, that Qi and Jin achieve a more lasting peace (Xiang 25.3). By this time there is also a more comprehensive effort to halt military conflict between Jin and Chu and their respective allies. First mentioned by the Jin minister Zhao Wu (Xiang 25.7) and noted by the Zheng minister Zichan (Xiang 26.11) as a possible development, these peace negotiations are initiated by the Song minister Xiang Xu (Xiang 27.4), who seems to be repeating the efforts at mediation of another Song minister, Hua Yuan, more than thirty years earlier (Cheng 11.8, 12.2). Throughout the period covered here, Jin’s main rival remains Chu, which continues intermittent campaigns against Song (Xiang 1.3, 10.3, 12.4), Zheng (Xiang 2.1, 2.5, 8.7, 9.8, 11.4, 18.4, 24.8, 26.11), Chen (Xiang 3.8, 4.2, 7.8), and Lu (Xiang 10.6) in its bid to expand its power and influence. Jin cultivates an alliance with Wu (Cheng 15.6; Xiang 5.5, 5.8, 10.1), because Wu poses a new threat to Chu (Xiang 3.1, 13.5, 14.7, 24.4). Chu commanders collapse in exhaustion as they “rush about trying to fulfill commands,” as Qu Wuchen predicted in his vow of vengeance (Cheng 7.5). By the time Xiang Xu mediates the accord between Jin and Chu, both sides see gains in the cessation of conflict. From the beginning, the peace process is marred, however, by Xiang Xu’s self-interest (Xiang 27.4a, 27.6) and by the mutual suspicions of Jin and Chu. The Chu minister Qu Jian’s readiness to outmaneuver Jin by deception and his insistence on Chu Lord Xiang

881

precedence in swearing the Covenant of Song mean that the laudable goal of halting conflict merely provides some cover for Jin decline (Xiang 27.4c). Jin is praised for its good faith (Xiang 27.4d), almost as apology for yielding to Chu the position of de facto covenant chief, a status that will become evident in the gatherings of princes in the beginning of the next section (Zhao 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 4.1). Confucius is said to consider the Covenant of Song an occasion “replete with finely patterned arguments” (Xiang 27.4b), a statement that seems to convey implicit criticism. Indeed, the covenant does not lead to lasting peace and brings no tangible benefits. It only heightens the burden of court visits and offerings for the smaller domains, which are now required also to attend the courts of their respective leaders’ rivals (Xiang 28.2, 28.8, 28.12, 29.1, 29.3). Song, the domain that hosts the covenant, obtains no relief in the wake of its disastrous fire despite the pledges made to it by other domains (Xiang 30.12). Jin decline finds a palpable symbol in its chief minister, Zhao Wu: for all his cultural competence, his words are “torpid” (Xiang 31.1). Lord Ping of Jin (r. 557–532), who succeeds Lord Dao, also provokes widespread disaffection by forcing his allies to fortify and to return land to Qǐ (Xiang 29.8, 29.11), the natal domain of Lord Ping’s mother. In domestic affairs in many domains, the pattern of weak rulers and powerful ministers continues. Lord Xiang of Lu was only four years old when he acceded to his position, and during his reign Lu government was effectively in the hands of the Jisun (Ji) lineage and, to a lesser extent, the Zhongsun (Meng) and Shusun lineages. Ji Wenzi, head of the Jisun lineage, is vindictive toward Lord Xiang’s grandmother Mu Jiang (Xiang 2.3)1 and dismissive toward his birth mother, Ding Si (Xiang 4.4)—for all that he is fervently praised for his integrity and loyalty when he dies (Xiang 5.10). Under his son Ji Wuzi, the shift of power from the Lu ruling house to the Jisun, Zhongsun, and Shusun lineages is formalized in the reorganization of the Lu armies (Xiang 11.1). Ji Wuzi continues to aggrandize his lineage (Xiang 7.3, 29.4), so much so that Lord Xiang, returning from a diplomatic mission, wonders whether he should reenter Lu at all (Xiang 29.4), and he lacks even the archers to provide entertainment at an official feast (Xiang 29.10). Attending court in Jin (Xiang 3.2, 4.5, 8.1, 12.6, 21.2) and Chu (Xiang 29.1), Lord Xiang is often no more than a pawn forced to negotiate the terms of Lu’s subservience to more powerful domains. The decline of the Lu ruling house is representative of general trends in various domains. While earlier in Zuozhuan such rulers as Lord Huan of Qi, Lord Wen of Jin, and King Zhuang of Chu took center stage as agents for positive political action, in these pages rulers are often in the

1

Mu Jiang plotted with her lover Shusun Qiaoru to bring about the downfall of the Jisun and Zhongsun lineages (Cheng 16.5).

Lord Xiang

883

shadows or portrayed negatively, with the possible exception of Lord Dao of Jin. A ruler’s moment of glory comes only when he acknowledges error or affirms the rights of his minister (Xiang 3.7, 13.4). Rulers who fall victim to assassination are often said to deserve their fate because of ritual impropriety toward their ministers (Lord Xi of Zheng, 7.9), debauchery (Lord Zhuang of Qi, 25.2), adultery (Lord Jing of Cai, 30.5), inconstancy and tyranny (Lord Libi of Ju, 31.8). When Lord Xian of Wei is driven into exile by his ministers Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi, various prescient characters, including his father’s wife Ding Jiang and the Lu minister Zang Wuzhong, denounce his crimes (Xiang 14.4). The music master Kuang justifies Lord Xian’s expulsion and articulates a political vision wherein a ruler can validate his position only by good government, and the exercise of power on all levels is tempered by advice, remon­ strance, and correction (Xiang 14.6). Given the dominance of ministers and noble lineages, it is perhaps not surprising that power struggles among rival lineages as well as between rulers and ministers are often the focus of narrative attention. In Jin, the Fan lineage secures alliances with other lineages and ruthlessly eliminates Luan Ying and his followers (Xiang 21.5). The fanatical loyalty of Luan Ying’s followers, who brave death to support him, already in some ways foreshadows Warring States stories about the bonds between lords and retainers based on the motif of recognition (Xiang 23.3, 23.6). (Alternatively, this example may reflect Warring States concerns retrospectively projected onto narration of events from the Spring and Autumn era.) In Qi, Cui Zhu murders Lord Zhuang, whom he himself installed (Xiang 19.5), when Lord Zhuang cuckolds him (Xiang 25.2). Cui Zhu and his lineage in turn fall victim to his coconspirator Qing Feng (Xiang 27.7), who is eventually driven into exile by self-styled defenders of the Qi ruling house (Xiang 28.9). The most frequently cited scene in this tangled story of betrayals and deception is that of the Qi scribes who defy death to preserve truthful historical records (Xiang 25.2d). They become symbols of the historian’s integrity in the tradition.2 In Wei, Lord Xian’s insults to his ministers culminate in an irreparable breach, and he is driven into exile by Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi (Xiang 14.4). Ning Zhi’s son Ning Xi restores Lord Xian (Xiang 26.2), only to be put to death by the Wei ruler, who is unwilling to share power (Xiang 27.3). Qi intervention in Luan Ying’s rebellion in Jin and Jin involvement in the conflict between Sun Linfu and the Wei ruler show how domestic conflicts can widen in scope and involve other domains. At one point Jin leaders arrest Lord Xian of Wei and release him only 2

As noted in the Introduction (LXXIV), Wen Tianxiang’s “Zhengqi ge” names them, together with the Jin scribe Dong Hu (Xuan 2.3), as representatives of the “righteous breath” between heaven and earth.

Lord Xiang

885

after Qi and Zheng ministers intercede by reciting selections from the Odes (Xiang 26.7). In Zheng, the struggle for control of the government overlaps with the tension between pro-Jin and pro-Chu factions (Xiang 10.9, 15.4, 18.4, 19.9), and even Zichan’s rise to power (Xiang 19.9) does not put a stop to the violent power struggles. In Chu alone is there little evidence of overreaching lineages or power struggles between rival lineages. Instead, Chu kings execute ministers when subordinate domains defect (Xiang 2.8, 5.7) or when ministers seem corrupt or simply too rich and powerful (Xiang 22.6). Thus, Wei Ziping feigns illness to avoid an appointment (Xiang 21.4) and, after becoming minister, narrowly escapes disaster by exercising restraint in time (Xiang 22.6). His son Wei Yan is not so fortunate: Gongzi Wei, soon to usurp the Chu throne (Zhao 1.13), puts him to death and appropriates his possessions (Xiang 30.11). These pages yield memorable images of several wise and capable ministers. These are clusters of anecdotes that develop around a single historical character, although in the present form they are sometimes scattered over different years. Shusun Bao of Lu shows his ritual knowledge, perspicacity, and rhetorical prowess on numerous occasions, often citing apposite lines from the Odes to make his point (Xiang 4.3, 7.7, 14.3, 16.5, 19.12, 22.1, 24.1, 24.4, 27.2, 27.4, 28.9, 28.11, 28.12, 29.1, 30.1, 31.1, 31.3, 31.4), although errors of judgment will bring about his downfall (Zhao 4.8, 5.1). Yue Xi of Song combines incorruptible integrity (Xiang 15.8), political acumen (Xiang 6.2, 27.6), and practical aplomb in responding to crisis (Xiang 9.1, 29.7), but he refuses to recognize the right of the lower orders to appraise those in power, even when those judgments involve only praise for himself (Xiang 17.6). Zang Wuzhong shows good judgment (Xiang 4.2, 11.5, 13.6, 14.4, 22.2), especially when he remonstrates with Ji Wuzi on the dangers of flaunting martial might (Xiang 19.4) and on the consequences of a leader’s example (Xiang 21.2). He falls short of his grandfather Zang Wenzhong, however, when the Lu army under his command is defeated by Zhu (Xiang 4.8). He also uses his cleverness for a more dubious goal when he manipulates the succession in the Jisun lineage (Xiang 23.5), an apparently gratuitous exploit that leads to his exile. Such mixtures are not uncommon. Xiang Xu combines moral judgments (Xiang 15.1) and strivings for peace (Xiang 27.4) with political machinations (Xiang 26.8). The perspicacious Shuxiang of Jin (Xiang 18.3, 21.5, 21.7, 27.4, 27.5) is not above partisan wrangling (Xiang 26.1). Yan Ying of Qi adheres to ritual propriety (Xiang 17.7) but is also capable of calculating political assessments (Xiang 22.3, 22.5, 23.4). He mourns Lord Zhuang of Qi in a ritually proper fashion but refuses to die or go into exile for him and manages to avoid complicity in the new government headed by Cui Zhu and Qing Feng (Xiang 25.2). His philosophy of selfpreservation is evident in his refusal to get involved in power struggles in Qi (Xiang 28.9, Zhao 10.2) and his decision to keep wealth “within Lord Xiang

887

春秋 1.1 元年，春，王正月，公即位。 1.2(1) 仲孫蔑會晉欒黶、宋華元、衛甯殖、曹人、莒人、邾人、滕人、薛人，圍宋

彭城。 1.3(2) 夏，晉韓厥帥師伐鄭，仲孫蔑會齊崔杼、曹人、邾人、杞人，次于鄫。 1.4(3) 秋，楚公子壬夫帥師侵宋。

3

888

To some imperial commentators, Qu Boyu’s withdrawal looks suspiciously like a cowardly refusal to confront evil. Gu Dongguo, for example, describes him as “Feng Dao (882–954) of the Spring and Autumn Period.” (Feng Dao of the Five Dynasties was notorious for switching allegiance between different rulers.) See Gu, Chunqiu dashi biao, 3:2623–24.

Zuo Tradition

proper measure” (Xiang 28.11). Like Yan Ying, Zichan exemplifies a noble man’s choices and dilemmas in an age of violence and disorder. He urges compromises and tolerates hypocrisy (Xiang 10.9, 30.13, Zhao 1.7, 1.9), even as he tries to maintain his neutrality and impartiality in internecine conflicts in Zheng (Xiang 29.17, 30.2, 30.10, Zhao 2.4, 7.9, 7.10. 19.8). A master of diplomatic language, Zichan seems to be making up for Zheng weakness by grand rhetoric in many speeches (and one letter) that defend Zheng’s rights vis-à-vis Jin (Xiang 22.2, 24.2, 25.10, 28.8, 31.6, Zhao 13.3, 16.3). The principles of government that he defines (Xiang 25.14, 30.12) seem to be tied to a program of reform embraced only after initial hostility (Xiang 30.13, Zhao 4.6). Unlike Yue Xi, he welcomes criticism expressed by those outside government (Xiang 30.11). The value he places on worthy opinions is part of a larger concern with appraising worth and employing the right men (Xiang 30.10), a recurrent issue in these pages (Xiang 3.4, 7.5, 15.3, 15.4, 21.8, 26.10, 30.3). Of a different order are characters who choose to withdraw from the political struggles of their times. Qu Boyu leaves via a nearby pass when disorder threatens to engulf Wei (Xiang 14.4, 26.2).3 Jizha accurately appraises the histories and fortunes of various domains by observing the performance of music and odes associated with them (Xiang 29.13). In his case, “knowing music” (zhiyin 知音) is also “knowing people” (zhiren 知人), for he offers unerring advice to contemporary statesmen on how to negotiate the dangers of public life. To guard his integrity, however, Jizha would not accept kingship (Xiang 14.2, 31.9). Jizha is thus an idealized figure who combines a kind of historical knowledge with the promise of escape from history.

LORD XIANG 1 (572 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position.

1.1

Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with Luan Yan of Jin, Hua Yuan of Song, Ning Zhi of Wei, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, and a Xue leader and laid siege to Pengcheng in Song.

1.2(1)

In summer, Han Jue of Jin led out troops and attacked Zheng. Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with Cui Zhu of Qi, a Cao leader, a Zhu leader, and a Qǐ leader and set up camp at Zeng.

1.3(2)

In autumn, Gongzi Renfu of Chu led out troops and invaded Song.

1.4(3)

Lord Xiang

889

1.5 九月辛酉，天王崩。 1.6(4) 邾子來朝。 1.7(5) 冬，衛侯使公孫剽來聘。晉侯使荀罃來聘。

左傳 1.1(2) 元年，春，己亥，圍宋彭城。非宋地，追書也。於是為宋討魚石，故稱宋，

且不登叛人也，謂之宋志。 彭城降晉，晉人以宋五大夫在彭城者歸，寘諸瓠丘。 齊人不會彭城，晉人以為討。二月，齊大子光為質於晉。 1.2(3) 夏，五月，晉韓厥、荀偃帥諸侯之師伐鄭，入其郛，敗其徒兵於洧上。於

是東諸侯之師次于鄫，以待晉師。晉師自鄭以鄫之師侵楚焦、夷及陳。 晉侯、衛侯次于戚，以為之援。 1.3(4) 秋，楚子辛救鄭，侵宋呂、留。鄭子然侵宋，取犬丘。

There was no jihai 己亥 day in the first month of this year, and jihai might be a mistake for yihai 乙亥 day (25). 5 If Pengcheng is not designated as a Song city, then it would seem that the rebels’ sovereignty over Pengcheng is recognized. 6 Yang (3:917) suggests that zhi 志 indicates secret intention; cf. Yin 1.4b, n. 22. In Yin 1.4b, it was Lord Zhuang’s hidden intention to get rid of his younger brother by drawing the latter into conflict. Here, however, the intention of Song leaders (especially the Hua lineage) to retake Pengcheng seems manifest. On how zhi can be an explicitly avowed aim (e.g., Xiang 1.1, Zhao 16.3) or a secret, often illicit goal (e.g., Yin 1.4, Zhuang 7.1), see Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:172–73. 7 Huqiu 瓠丘 (Gourd Mound), also called Huqiu 壺丘 (Flask Mound), was in presentday Shanxi, southeast of Yuanqu County 垣曲縣. This should not confused with Huqiu in Wen 9.7. 8 Jiao and Yi were originally Chen towns that had been seized earlier by Chu (see Xi 23.3). 9 Lü 呂 was southeast of present-day Xuzhou City 徐州市, Jiangsu, and Liu 留 was to the north of Xuzhou City. 10 Ziran is the son of Lord Mu of Zheng, last mentioned in Cheng 10.3. His death is mentioned in Xiang 19.9, and his son Ran Dan will become an important minister in the court of King Ling of Chu. 11 Quanqiu 犬丘 (Dog Mound) was northwest of present-day Yongcheng County 永 城縣, Henan. 4

890

Zuo Tradition

In the ninth month, on the xinyou day (15), the Heaven-appointed king succumbed.

1.5

The Master of Zhu came to visit our court.

1.6(4)

In winter, the Prince of Wei sent Gongsun Piao to come on an official visit. The Prince of Jin sent Xun Ying (Zhi Ying) to come on an official visit.

1.7(5)

ZUO

The narrative of the Huan lineage’s rebellion in Song (Cheng 15.4, 18.5) continues: Chu and Jin side with opposing factions in Song, as a Jin-LuSong coalition punishes the rebels who were supported by Chu and Zheng forces the year before (Cheng 18.5, 18.12). The ability to stabilize Song has always been a key component of the claim to overlordship (Zhuang 13.1, Xi 28.3). In the first year, in spring, on the jihai day,4 we laid siege to Pengcheng in Song. Pengcheng was no longer Song territory: it was designated as such retrospectively. At that time the princes were chastising Yu Shi on behalf of Song; that is why the text makes reference to Song. Furthermore, the text does not countenance rebels.5 It says that this was “Song’s intention.”6 Pengcheng surrendered to Jin. The leaders of Jin took the five Song high officers at Pengcheng and returned with them, placing them at Huqiu.7 The leaders of Qi did not join in the siege of Pengcheng, and because of this the leaders of Jin chastised them. In the second month, the heir apparent Guang of Qi became a hostage in Jin.

1.1(2)

The resurgence of Jin is demonstrated by military victories over Zheng, Chu, and Chen. In summer, in the fifth month, Han Jue and Zhonghang Yana of Jin led out the troops of the princes and attacked Zheng. They entered its outer city walls and defeated its infantry on the bank of the River Wei. At that time the troops of the princes of the eastern domains set up camp at Zeng to await the Jin forces. Jin troops, coming from Zheng, led the troops at Zeng to invade Jiao and Yi of Chu, advancing as far as Chen.8 The Prince of Jin and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Qī in order to provide support for them.

1.2(3)

In autumn, Zixin of Chu went to the aid of Zheng and invaded Lü and Liu of Song.9 Ziran10 of Zheng invaded Song and took Quanqiu.11

1.3(4)

Lord Xiang

891

1.4(6) 九月，邾子來朝，禮也。 1.5(7) 冬，衛子叔、晉知武子來聘，禮也。凡諸侯即位，小國朝之，大國聘焉，

以繼好、結信、謀事、補闕，禮之大者也。

春秋 2.1 二年，春，王正月，葬簡王。 2.2(1) 鄭師伐宋。 2.3(3) 夏，五月庚寅，夫人姜氏薨。 2.4(5) 六月庚辰，鄭伯睔卒。 2.5(5) 晉師、宋師、衛甯殖侵鄭。 2.6(5) 秋，七月，仲孫蔑會晉荀罃、宋華元、衛孫林父、曹人、邾人于戚。 2.7 己丑，葬我小君齊姜。 2.8(6) 叔孫豹如宋。 2.9(7) 冬，仲孫蔑會晉荀罃、齊崔杼、宋華元、衛孫林父、曹人、邾人、滕人、薛

人、小邾人于戚，遂城虎牢。 2.10(8) 楚殺其大夫公子申。

Du Yu (ZZ 29.497) glosses que 闕 as “errors.” By this reading, buque 補闕 (“repair breaches in alliances”) would be “mend errors.” For the distinction between types of court visit, see Annals, Yin 7.4, n. 110. 13 King Jian was buried four months after his death, instead of the ritually proper seven months, as mentioned in Zuozhuan, Yin 1.6. 14 Lady Jiang was the wife of Lord Cheng of Lu. 15 The Zuozhuan entry has “the seventh month.” The gengchen and gengyin were fifty days apart. Du Yu (ZZ 29.497) identifies gengchen as the ninth day of the seventh month. 12

892

Zuo Tradition

Long-standing hostilities between Lu and Zhu temporarily abate. In the ninth month, the Master of Zhu came to visit our court. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

1.4(6)

In winter, Gongsun Piaoa of Wei and Zhi Yinga of Jin came to us on an official visit. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases when princes accede to their positions, the small domains attend their courts, and the great domains undertake an official visit to them, so as to continue amity, cement good faith, confer on affairs, and repair breaches in alliances.12 These are important aspects of ritual propriety.

1.5(7)

LORD XIANG 2 (571 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal first month, King Jian of Zhou was buried.13

2.1

Zheng troops attacked Song.

2.2(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, on the gengyin day (18), our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang,14 expired. In the sixth month, on the gengchen day,15 Gun, the Liege of Zheng, died.

2.3(3)

2.4(5)

Jin troops and Song troops, together with Ning Zhi of Wei, invaded Zheng.

2.5(5)

In autumn, in the seventh month, Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with Xun Ying (Zhi Ying) of Jin, Hua Yuan of Song, Sun Linfu of Wei, a Cao leader, and a Zhu leader at Qī.

2.6(5)

On the jichou day (18), we buried our former lord’s wife, Qi Jiang.16

2.7

Shusun Bao went to Song.

2.8(6)

17

In winter, Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) met with Xun Ying (Zhi Ying) of Jin, Cui Zhu of Qi, Hua Yuan of Song, Sun Linfu of Wei, a Cao leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader at Qī. They then fortified Hulao.

2.9(7)

Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Shen.

2.10(8)

16 17

“Qi” was the posthumous honorific for Lady Jiang (Du Yu, ZZ 29.498), the wife of Lord Cheng of Lu. Both Qi Jiang and her mother-in-law Mu Jiang are sometimes called “Lady Jiang” in the text. For Shusun Bao, see Cheng 16.8. From about this point on, Shusun Bao becomes active in Lu policy decisions.

Lord Xiang

893

左傳 2.1(2) 二年，春，鄭師侵宋，楚令也。 2.2 齊侯伐萊，萊人使正輿子賂夙沙衛以索馬牛，皆百匹，齊師乃還。君子

是以知齊靈公之為「 靈」也。 2.3(3) 夏，齊姜薨。初，穆姜使擇美檟，以自為櫬與頌琴，季文子取以葬。

君子曰：「 非禮也。禮無所逆。婦，養姑者也。虧姑以成婦，逆莫大 焉。《詩》曰： 其惟哲人， 告之話言， 順德之行。 季孫於是為不哲矣。且姜氏，君之妣也。《詩》曰： 為酒為醴， 烝畀祖妣， 以洽百禮， 降福孔偕。」

18 The Annals has the word “attacked” ( fa 伐), while Zuozhuan uses the word “invaded” (qin 侵). 19 For “Ling” 靈 as a negative posthumous honorific, see our introductory remarks to Lord Xuan and also Xiang 13.4 (Yang, 3:1001). For the disorder in Qi preceding and following Lord Ling’s death, see Xiang 19.5. 20 Jia 檟 is a hard and fine-grained wood considered superior for making coffins. Often equated with qiu 楸 (catalpa), it is also mentioned as a valuable wood in Mencius 6A.14. See also Xiang 4.4 and Ai 11.4. The more august a person’s station, the more layers there were to his or her coffin. Here the “inner coffin” refers to the one in contact with the body. The song (“lauds”) lute (song qin 頌琴) was intended as one of the items to be buried with Mu Jiang. 21 This echoes the negative judgment of the reversal of generational sequence in sacrificial order (nisi 逆祀) in Wen 2.5. 22 Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.658. 23 Maoshi 279, “Fengnian” 豐年, 19C.731.

894

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the second year, in spring, Zheng troops invaded Song.18 This was upon Chu’s order.

2.1(2)

The Qi ruler is said to have earned a negative posthumous honorific by allowing his favorite, the eunuch Susha Wei, to intervene in Qi policies. The Prince of Qi attacked Lai. The men of Lai sent Zheng Yuzi to bribe Susha Wei with a hundred choice horses and as many choice oxen. The Qi troops thereupon turned back. Thus did the noble man know why Lord Ling of Qi was given the posthumous honorific of “Ling” (Disordered).19

2.2

Four years earlier, Mu Jiang, Lord Cheng’s mother and Lord Xiang’s grandmother, plotted unsuccessfully to remove the Ji and Meng lineages (Cheng 16.5), and she is at this point under virtual house arrest in the Eastern Palace (Xiang 9.3). Ji Wenzi’s vengeful appropriation of Mu Jiang’s inner coffin and lute for the burial of Lord Cheng’s wife Qi Jiang is deemed a violation of ritual propriety. In summer, Qi Jiang expired. Earlier, Mu Jiang had arranged to have fine jia wood chosen for her own inner coffin and a song lute. Ji Wenzi took these things and buried Qi Jiang with them.20 The noble man said, “This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Ritual propriety does not allow contravention.21 A daughter-in-law is one who nurtures her mother-in-law. There is no greater contravention than to diminish a mother-in-law in order to supply the needs of a daughter-in-law. As it says in the Odes,

2.3(3)

It is thus only with wise men— Admonish them with good words, And they follow the path of virtue.22

In this matter, Ji Wenzib was unwise. Moreover, Mu Jiang was the ruler’s grandmother. As it says in the Odes, Make wine; make sweet liquor— Offer them to grandfather and grandmother So as to fulfill a hundred rites, And bring down blessings shared far and wide.”23

Lord Xiang

895

2.4 齊侯使諸姜、宗婦來送葬，召萊子。萊子不會，故晏弱城東陽以偪之。 2.5(4–6) 鄭成公疾，子駟請息肩於晉。公曰：「 楚君以鄭故，親集矢於其目，非異

人任，寡人也。若背之，是棄力與言，其誰暱我？免寡人，唯二三子。」 秋，七月庚辰，鄭伯睔卒。於是子罕當國，子駟為政，子國為司 馬。晉師侵鄭。諸大夫欲從晉。子駟曰：「 官命未改。」 會于戚，謀鄭故也。孟獻子曰：「 請城虎牢以偪鄭。」知武子曰： 「 善。鄫之會，吾子聞崔子之言，今不來矣。滕、薛、小邾之不至，皆齊 故也。寡君之憂不唯鄭。罃將復於寡君而請於齊。得請而告，吾子之功 也。若不得請，事將在齊。吾子之請，諸侯之福也，豈唯寡君賴之！」 2.6(8) 穆叔聘于宋，通嗣君也。

24

Women were not supposed to leave the domain to attend funerals or to offer condolences (ZZ 29.499; Liji 9.164). 25 Dongyang 東陽 was a Qi settlement located east of Linqu County 臨朐縣, Shandong. 26 Literally, “to rest its shoulders by Jin” (xi jian yu Jin 息肩於晉). Zisi, who was a hostage in Jin (Cheng 10.3), is arguing that by switching allegiance from Chu to Jin, Zheng can be freed of the many burdens that Chu imposes on it. 27 See Karlgren, gl. 464. 28 Guanming (“the ruler’s command”) is literally “the command whose authority is based on the ruler’s office.” Although Lord Cheng of Zheng had died, his charge remained effective until his burial or until his successor’s official accession in the following year. In the absence of a newly elevated ruler, no one has the authority to put aside the Chu alliance and submit to Jin. Alternatively, “the command to this officeholder has not yet changed.” 29 The leaders of Jin, Lu, Wei, and Song were conferring on how to induce Zheng to submit to Jin. 30 It appears that Jin had occupied Hulao (see map 3) by this point. 31 For the meeting at Zeng, see Xiang 1.2. 32 Zhi Ying is saying that Jin also worries about Qi and Chu. If Qi, Chu, and Zheng form an alliance against Jin, Jin will not be able to maintain its status as covenant chief. 33 That is, Jin will attack Qi. The “affair” 事 refers to one of the two “great affairs of the domain” (guo zhi dashi 國之大事) (Cheng 13.2): warfare.

896

Zuo Tradition

During Qi Jiang’s funeral, Lord Ling of Qi flouts ritual propriety by sending Qi ladies to escort the funeral cortege of Qi Jiang, further evidence of his bad judgment (Xiang 2.2). Qi meets with insubordination from Lai. Qi had attacked Lai earlier (Xuan 7.2, Xiang 2.2). The Prince of Qi sent various ladies of the Jiang line married to Qi high officers, as well as the wives of Qi high officers who shared the name of the lord’s house, to escort the funeral cortege.24 He sent for the Master of Lai. The Master of Lai did not meet with him, and so Yan Ruo fortified the walls of Dongyang to exert pressure on him.25

2.4

Zheng leaders follow Lord Cheng’s deathbed wish to side with Chu. Jin, wary not only of Zheng insubordination but also of Qi designs, seeks to enlist Qi help with the fortification of Hulao. When Lord Cheng of Zheng was ill, Zisi requested that Zheng ease its burden by turning to Jin.26 The lord said, “The Chu ruler, on account of Zheng, took an arrow in his very own eye. None but I, the unworthy one, should bear the responsibility.27 If we turn against Chu, it will amount to casting away the Chu ruler’s efforts and our own words. Who would draw close to us then? Only you, sirs, can save me from that offense.” In autumn, in the seventh month, on the gengchen day, Gun, the Liege of Zheng, died. At that time Zihan was managing the domain, Zisi was in charge of policies, and Ziguo was the supervisor of the military. Jin troops invaded Zheng. The various high officers in Zheng wanted to submit to Jin. Zisi said, “The ruler’s command has not yet changed.”28 The leaders met at Qī: this was to confer about Zheng.29 Meng Xianzi said, “I request that Hulao30 be fortified to exert pressure on Zheng.” Zhi Ying a said, “Excellent. At the meeting at Zeng, you, sirs, heard the words of Cui Zhue.31 He will not come this time. That Teng, Xue, and Lesser Zhu did not come was on account of Qi in every case. Our unworthy ruler’s worries pertain not only to Zheng.32 I will report on my mission to our unworthy ruler and make our request to Qi to join the coalition. If our request is granted, and Qi reports their intention to assist at Hulao, the merit will be yours. If our request is not granted, then our affair will be to tackle Qi.33 This request of yours regarding Hulao will confer blessings on the princes. How can it be our unworthy ruler alone who will rely on it?”

2.5(4–6)

Shusun Baoa went on an official visit to Song: this was to establish relations between Song and our new ruler.

2.6(8)

Lord Xiang

897

2.7(9) 冬，復會于戚，齊崔武子及滕、薛、小邾之大夫皆會，知武子之言故也。

遂城虎牢。鄭人乃成。 2.8(10) 楚公子申為右司馬，多受小國之賂，以偪子重、子辛。楚人殺之，故書曰

「 楚殺其大夫公子申。」

春秋 3.1(1) 三年，春，楚公子嬰齊帥師伐吳。 3.2(2) 公如晉。 3.3(2) 夏，四月壬戌，公及晉侯盟于長樗。 3.4 公至自晉。 3.5(5) 六月，公會單子、晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、莒子、邾子、齊世子光。己

未，同盟于雞澤。 3.6(6) 陳侯使袁僑如會。 3.7(6) 戊寅，叔孫豹及諸侯之大夫及陳袁僑盟。 3.8 秋，公至自會。 3.9(9) 冬，晉荀罃帥師伐許。

898

Zuo Tradition

The Jin minister Zhi Ying’s plans to confirm Qi’s allegiance and to bring Zheng to submission are realized. This means Zisi and his allies relent. In winter, the leaders met again at Qī. That Cui Zhua of Qi, as well as high officers from Teng, Xue, and Lesser Zhu, all came to the meeting was on account of Zhi Yinga’s words. They then fortified Hulao. The leaders of Zheng thus reached an accord with Jin.

2.7(9)

Zichong again emerges victorious in internecine conflicts in Chu. The fall of Gongzi Shen may be explained by Zheng’s shift of allegiance to Jin after the fortification of Hulao. Gongzi Shen of Chu was the supervisor of the military on the right. Having received many gifts from small domains, he used them to exert pressure on Zichong and Zixin. The leaders of Chu put him to death. That is why the text says, “Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Shen.”

2.8(10)

LORD XIANG 3 (570 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, Gongzi Yingqi (Zichong) of Chu led out troops and attacked Wu.

3.1(1)

Our lord went to Jin.

3.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the renxu day (25), our lord and the Prince of Jin swore a covenant at Changchu.

3.3(2)

Our lord arrived from Jin.

3.4

In the sixth month, our lord met with the Shan Master, the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, and the Qi heir apparent Guang. On the jiwei day (23), they swore a covenant together at Ji Marsh.34

3.5(5)

The Prince of Chen sent Yuan Qiao to the meeting.

3.6(6)

On the wuyin day (13),35 Shusun Bao and the high officers of the princes swore a covenant with Yuan Qiao of Chen.

3.7(6)

In autumn, our lord arrived from the meeting.

3.8

In winter, Xun Ying (Zhi Ying) of Jin led out troops and attacked Xǔ.

3.9(9)

34 Ji Marsh 雞澤 was located northeast of the city of Hangdan 邯鄲 in Hebei. 35 The wuyin day fell on the thirteenth day of the seventh month. Assuming that the meeting did not last that long, wuyin may be a mistake. Alternatively, the lords might have been waiting for the Chen envoy.

Lord Xiang

899

左傳 3.1(1) 三年，春，楚子重伐吳，為簡之師。克鳩茲，至于衡山。使鄧廖帥組甲三

百、被練三千，以侵吳。吳人要而擊之，獲鄧廖。其能免者，組甲八十、被 練三百而已。 子重歸，既飲至三日，吳人伐楚，取駕。駕，良邑也；鄧廖，亦楚之 良也。君子謂子重於是役也，所獲不如所亡。楚人以是咎子重。子重病 之，遂遇心疾而卒。

3.2(2, 3)

公如晉，始朝也。夏，盟于長樗。孟獻子相。公稽首。知武子曰：「 天子 在，而君辱稽首，寡君懼矣。」孟獻子曰：「 以敝邑介在東表，密邇仇讎， 寡君將君是望，敢不稽首？」

36 Hengshan 衡山, or Heng Mountain, was located in Wu. Known by the same name today, it is in present-day Dangtu County 當涂縣, Anhui. 37 Commentators give different explanations of zujia 組甲 and pilian 被練. Zujia is variously glossed as “string pattern lacquered on leather” (Du Yu), “armor padded with woven silk (for those of higher ranks)” (Ma Rong), and “armor sewn with cords (for soldiers on chariots)” (Jia Kui). Pilian is glossed as “silk coat” (Du Yu), “armor sewn with plain silk (for infantry soldiers)” (Jia Kui), and “armor padded with plain silk (for those of lower ranks)” (Ma Rong). See Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 991. Here we choose to read zujia as a more elaborate type of sewn armor and pilian as a coarser type of defensive clothing. 38 For the ritual toasts to celebrate the army’s return (yinzhi 飲至), see Yin 5.1.

900

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Conflicts between Wu and Chu (Cheng 7.5) continue. After initial victories, Chu suffers grave reversals, which lead to the Chu commander Zichong’s death, fulfilling Qu Wuchen’s vow of vengeance fourteen years ago (Cheng 7.5). In the third year, in spring, Zichong of Chu attacked Wu, having organized his forces based on rigorous selection and training. After over­ coming Jiuzi and advancing as far as Hengshan,36 he sent Deng Liao to lead three hundred soldiers in sewn armor and three thousand soldiers in armored coats to invade Wu.37 The men of Wu struck them in the center of their lines, seizing Deng Liao. Those who managed to escape amounted to only eighty in sewn armor and three hundred in armored coats. Zichong returned. Three days after the ritual toasts to celebrate their arrival,38 the men of Wu attacked Chu and took Jia.39 Jia was a fine settlement, and Deng Liao had also been a fine man of Chu. The noble man said that with this battle, what Zichong gained did not amount to what he lost. For this reason the men of Chu blamed Zichong. Zichong was so distressed by this that he came to be afflicted with a sickness of the heart and died.40

3.1(1)

The six-year-old Lord Xiang of Lu bows low to the seventeen-year-old Lord Dao of Jin with rituals appropriate for the Zhou king. The Lu minister Meng Xianzi deems such self-abnegation necessary to secure Jin support to stave off threats posed by Qi, Chu, and Wu. Our lord went to Jin: that was the first time he visited the court of Jin. In summer, they swore a covenant at Changchu.41 Meng Xianzi assisted our lord. Our lord bowed with his forehead touching the ground. Zhi Yinga said, “The Son of Heaven is still there. Yet you, my lord, deigned to bow with your forehead touching the ground. Our unworthy ruler is fearful.” Meng Xianzi said, “Because our humble settlement is on the eastern rim and in close proximity to our enemies, it is to you, my lord, that our unworthy ruler must look. How should he dare not bow with his forehead touching the ground?”

3.2(2, 3)

39 40

The “fine settlement” of Jia 駕 has already appeared in Cheng 17.11. Since the heart was supposed to be the organ of thought and emotions, “sickness of the heart” 心疾 (see also Zhao 1.12, 21.1) refers to mental disorder or emotional imbalance (Yang, 3:926). Another reference to “sickness of the heart” seems to refer to a more physiological malfunction (Zhao 22.3). 41 Changchu 長樗 was located in the outskirts of the Jin capital.

Lord Xiang

901

3.3 晉為鄭服故，且欲修吳好，將合諸侯。使士匄告于齊曰：「 寡君使匄，以

歲之不易，不虞之不戒，寡君願與一二兄弟相見，以謀不協。請君臨之， 使匄乞盟。」齊侯欲勿許，而難為不協，乃盟於耏外。 3.4 祁奚請老，晉侯問嗣焉。稱解狐，其讎也，將立之而卒。又問焉。對曰：

「 午也可。」於是羊舌職死矣，晉侯曰：「 孰可以代之？」對曰：「 赤也可。」 於是使祁午為中軍尉，羊舌赤佐之。 君子謂祁奚「於是能舉善矣。稱其讎，不為諂；立其子，不為比； 舉其偏，不為黨。《商書》曰：

42 “The difficulties over the years” refers to conflicts among the princes; with such conflicts it would be hard to “guard against the unexpected.” “Those in discord with us” include Qi. 43 The northwestern outskirts of the Qi capital, Linzi 臨淄, were close to the Er River. 44 On the different versions of this story, see Petersen, “The Zuozhuan Story about Qi Xi and His Recommendations and Its Sources.” 45 Qi Xi was made senior officer of the central army in 573 Bce (Cheng 18.3). 46 Yangshe Zhi was Qi Xi’s aide or adjutant (Cheng 18.2). Yangshe Chi was Yangshe Zhi’s son. Qi Xi thus ends up recommending his own son and his adjutant’s son, but the noble man argues that Qi Xi is not being partial (bi 比) or factional (dang 黨). On how the noble man should not be partial or factional, see the Analects 2.14, 7.31.

902

Zuo Tradition

Jin demands and receives a demonstration of allegiance from Qi, despite Qi’s reluctance. Jin, on account of Zheng’s submission and also because it wished to cultivate good relations with Wu, planned to assemble the princes. Jin sent Fan Gaia to notify Qi: “Our unworthy ruler has sent me here. Because of the difficulties over the years and the failure to guard against the unexpected, our unworthy ruler wishes to meet with his brothers to confer about those in discord with us.42 He requests that you, my lord, attend the meeting and has sent me to beg for a covenant.” The Prince of Qi wished to decline, but finding it hard to be the one “in discord,” he thus swore the covenant by the Er River.43

3.3

The Jin army commandant Qi Xi is praised for his unbiased recommendations of men for office; the same judiciousness will lead him to defend his adversary Shuxiang (Yangshe Xi) in Xiang 21.5b. Qi Xi demonstrates his impartiality by recommending his enemy Xie Hu, who conveniently dies. Qi’s eventual recommendation of his son Qi Wu and his ally Yangshe Chi, which results in a pattern of sons succeeding to their fathers’ positions, is proleptically defended as impartiality and virtuous affinity. For another example of recommending an enemy, see Ai 5.1. For similarly elevated rhetoric justifying a politically convenient fait accompli, see Zhao 28.3b, where Wei Shu parcels out rewards after the destruction of the Qi and Yangshe lineages. Versions of this anecdote also appear in Lüshi chunqiu 1.55, Xinxu 1.11–12, Shiji 39.1682, and Han Feizi 33.705 (this last version has different actors but analogous elements). Whereas all these parallel accounts emphasize impartiality (gong 公) and feature the actual elevation of an enemy, the Zuozhuan account is unique in using the rhetoric of impartiality to justify hereditary succession. In Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.439–40, Xie Yang is not men­tioned. Qi Xi recommends his son right away and gives a long panegyric of his virtues.44 Qi Xi requested to retire on account of old age.45 The Prince of Jin asked about his successor. Qi Xi named Xie Hu, who was his enemy. The Jin ruler was about to establish Xie Hu in the position when the latter died. He asked again. Qi Xi replied, “Qi Wua would be acceptable.” At that time Yangshe Zhi had just died, and the Prince of Jin asked, “Who can take his place?” He replied, “Yangshe Chib would be acceptable.” Thus, Qi Wu was made commandant of the central army, with Yangshe Chi assisting him.46 The noble man said that Qi Xi “in this case showed himself capable of recommending good men. He named his enemy, but that was not ingratiation. He established his son in office, but that was not favoritism. He recommended his adjutant, but that was not about forming factions. As it says in the Shang Documents,

3.4

Lord Xiang

903

無偏無黨， 王道蕩蕩。 其祁奚之謂矣。解狐得舉，祁午得位，伯華得官，建一官而三物成，能舉 善也。夫唯善，故能舉其類。《詩》云： 惟其有之， 是以似之。 祁奚有焉。」 3.5(5) 六月，公會單頃公及諸侯。己未，同盟于雞澤。



3.6(6, 7)

晉侯使荀會逆吳子于淮上，吳子不至。

楚子辛為令尹，侵欲於小國，陳成公使袁僑如會求成。晉侯使和組父告 于諸侯。秋，叔孫豹及諸侯之大夫及陳袁僑盟，陳請服也。

3.7 晉侯之弟揚干亂行於曲梁，魏絳戮其僕。晉侯怒，謂羊舌赤曰：「 合諸

侯，以為榮也。揚干為戮，何辱如之？必殺魏絳，無失也！」 對曰：「 絳無貳志，事君不辟難，有罪不逃刑，其將來辭，何辱命 焉？」

Shangshu, “Hong fan” 洪範, 12.173. The word for both “adjutant” and “partial” is pian 偏. 48 The commandant and his adjutant attend to the same affair, hence “one office.” The three things refer to the recommendation, the position, and the office. 49 Maoshi 214, “Chang chang zhe hua” 裳裳者華, 14B.280. The word si 似 in the poem seems to refer to the correspondence of internal and external qualities. Here the “resemblance” refers to Qi Xi and those he recommends, or to him and his progeny. Yang (3:928) suggests that si 似 (“resemble”) may be a loan for si 嗣 (“heir”). 50 It is Wei Jiang’s duty as supervisor of the military to enforce military discipline. Unable to execute Yanggan (because of his rank), he kills Yanggan’s driver as a substitute. 51 Covenants involved gatherings of chariots (bingche zhi hui 兵車之會) or of carriages (chengche zhi hui 乘車之會). In either case there were accompanying soldiers in ranks. Quliang 曲梁 was close to Ji Marsh and northeast of Handan City. 47

904

Zuo Tradition

Not being partial, not forming factions, The kingly way is great and boundless.47

This could refer to Qi Xi! Xie Hu received his recommendation, Qi Wu his position, and Yangshe Chia his office. When he established one office, these three things were accomplished.48 This was because he was capable of recommending worthy men. It was quite simply because he was worthy that he was capable of recommending those of his kind. As it says in the Odes, It is precisely because he has the virtues That they resemble him.49

And so it was with Qi Xi.” Wu defies Jin. In the sixth month, our lord met with the Shan Duke Qing and the princes. On the jiwei day (23), they swore a covenant together at Ji Marsh. The Prince of Jin sent Xun Hui to meet the Master of Wu on the banks of the Huai River, but the Master of Wu did not arrive.

3.5(5)

Chen shifts its allegiance from Chu to Jin. Zixin of Chu became chief minister and rapaciously invaded the small domains. Lord Cheng of Chen sent Yuan Qiao to the meeting to seek an accord. The Prince of Jin sent He Zufu to notify the princes. In autumn, Shusun Bao, the high officers of the princes, and Yuan Qiao of Chen swore a covenant: this was because Chen had requested to submit to Jin.

3.6(6, 7)

The Jin supervisor of the military Wei Jiang punishes the Jin ruler’s younger brother Yanggan by proxy in order to enforce military discipline.50 Lord Dao of Jin, initially enraged, comes to acknowledge his own error. Wei Jiang is rewarded with the rank of minister (assistant commander of the new army) for “knowing how to use punishment.” The Prince of Jin’s younger brother, Yanggan, caused disorder in the ranks at Quliang.51 Wei Jiang executed Yanggan’s driver. Furious, the Prince of Jin said to Yangshe Chi, “Assembling the princes is something we do for the sake of glory. What shame can possibly compare to having Yanggan disgraced and punished? We must put Wei Jiang to death without fail!” Yangshe Chi replied, “Wei Jiang has never had disloyal intent. In serving his ruler he does not avoid difficulties, and having offended he does not flee punishment. Surely he will come to explain his case. Why deign to issue a command?”

3.7

Lord Xiang

905

言終，魏絳至，授僕人書，將伏劍。士魴、張老止之。公讀其書， 曰：「 日君乏使，使臣斯司馬。臣聞：『師眾以順為武，軍事有死無犯為 敬。』君合諸侯，臣敢不敬？君師不武，執事不敬，罪莫大焉。臣懼其 死，以及揚干，無所逃罪。不能致訓，至於用鉞，臣之罪重，敢有不從以 怒君心？請歸死於司寇。」 公跣而出，曰：「 寡人之言，親愛也；吾子之討，軍禮也。寡人有 弟，弗能教訓，使干大命，寡人之過也。子無重寡人之過，敢以為請。」 晉侯以魏絳為能以刑佐民矣，反役，與之禮食，使佐新軍。張老為 中軍司馬，士富為候奄。 3.8 楚司馬公子何忌侵陳，陳叛故也。 3.9(9) 許靈公事楚，不會于雞澤。冬，晉知武子帥師伐許。

52 53

906

The implication is that he extends his own fear to Yanggan and empathizes with his anticipated plight. An alternative reading is “I fear death, and thus extended punishment to Yanggan.” This may be a subtle reminder that the Jin ruler has himself “neglected instruction” (shijiao 失教); cf. Yin 1.4b. Yanggan would have been younger than sixteen.

Zuo Tradition

As he finished speaking, Wei Jiang arrived, handed a letter to one of the lord’s attendants, and prepared to fall on his sword. Shi Fang and Zhang Lao stopped him. The lord read out his letter: “Formerly, you, my lord, lacked better men to serve you and appointed me to this office as supervisor of the military. I have heard, ‘For troops, to obey orders constitutes martial virtue; in military affairs, to die rather than commit transgressions constitutes reverence.’ When you, my lord, have assembled the princes, should we dare to be irreverent? If the ruler’s army lacks martial virtue and those in charge lack reverence, no offense can be greater. I feared that I would be put to death for it and that Yanggan would then be implicated in a crime.52 We would have no way to escape the consequences of our guilt. I failed to offer instruction to him53 and came to use the axe. My offense is grave. Could I presume not to submit, and so infuriate you? I beg leave to put my death in the hands of the supervisor of corrections.” The lord ran out barefoot54 and said, “The words I, the unworthy one, spoke were for love of kin; the chastising that you, sir, meted out was for the sake of military protocol. I have a younger brother but was unable to instruct him, causing him to violate the great command. This was my offense. You are not to compound my offense.55 That is what I presume to request of you.” The Prince of Jin considered Wei Jiang a man who knew how to use punishment to aid in governing the people. After they had returned from their mission, the Jin ruler bestowed upon him a ceremonious meal and made him assistant commander in the new army. Zhang Lao became supervisor of the military in the central army; Shi Fu became leader of scouts. Chu punishes Chen for shifting its allegiance to Jin, as evinced by its participation in the Ji Marsh covenant. The Chu supervisor of the military Gongzi Heji invaded Chen because Chen had revolted.

3.8

Jin attacks Xǔ because the latter sides with Chu and does not join the Ji Marsh covenant. Lord Ling of Xǔ served Chu and did not come to the meeting at Ji Marsh. In winter, Zhi Yinga of Jin led out troops and attacked Xǔ.

54 55

3.9(9)

For another example of a ruler forgetting his shoes in his eagerness to act, see Xuan 14.3. Had the Jin ruler allowed Wei Jiang to commit suicide, he would have committed an even graver offense.

Lord Xiang

907

春秋 4.1(2) 四年，春，王三月。己酉，陳侯午卒。 4.2(3) 夏，叔孫豹如晉。 4.3(4) 秋，七月戊子，夫人姒氏薨。 4.4 葬陳成公。 4.5 八月辛亥，葬我小君定姒。 4.6(5) 冬，公如晉。 4.7(6) 陳人圍頓。

左傳 4.1 四年，春，楚師為陳叛故，猶在繁陽。韓獻子患之，言於朝曰：「 文王帥

殷之叛國以事紂，唯知時也。今我易之，難哉！」 4.2(1) 三月，陳成公卒。楚人將伐陳，聞喪乃止。陳人不聽命。臧武仲聞之，曰：

「 陳不服於楚，必亡。大國行禮焉，而不服，在大猶有咎，而況小乎？」 夏，楚彭名侵陳，陳無禮故也。

56 Fanyang 繁揚 (繁陽) was located north of present-day Xincai County 新蔡縣, Henan. 57 See Yi Zhou shu 2.12.176; Analects 8.20. For an interesting newly discovered version of King Wen’s loyalty to Shang, see the “Rong Cheng shi” 容成氏 manuscript, in Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu, vol. 2. 58 In Xiang 19.6, the Jin army on the way to attack Qi turns back upon receiving news of the Qi ruler’s death.

908

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 4 (569 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the jiyou day, Wu, the Prince of Chen, died. In summer, Shusun Bao went to Jin. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuzi day (28), our lord’s wife, Lady Si, expired. Lord Cheng of Chen was buried. In the eighth month, on the xinhai day (22), we buried our former lord’s consort, Ding Si.

4.1(2)

4.2(3) 4.3(4)

4.4 4.5

In winter, our lord went to Jin.

4.6(5)

Chen leaders laid siege to Dun.

4.7(6)

ZUO

The Jin minister Han Jue argues that it is not timely for Jin to accept Chen’s submission, because Jin is not yet in a position to challenge Chu. In the fourth year, in spring, Chu troops were still in Fanyang because Chen had revolted.56 Han Juea was worried about this and spoke at court: “King Wen led the rebellious domains of Yin (Shang) to serve its last ruler Zhòu.57 This was precisely because he knew the proper time to act. Now because we have acted differently, it will surely be difficult for us!”

4.1

The Lu minister Zang Wuzhong criticizes Chen for failing to submit to Chu despite the latter’s restraint and ritual propriety. This view of Chu stands in sharp contrast to that of another Lu minister, Ji Wenzi, who sees Chu as untrustworthy, “not of the same kith and kin” (Cheng 4.4). In the third month, Lord Cheng of Chen died. The leaders of Chu had been planning to attack Chen but stopped when they heard of the funeral.58 The men of Chen did not heed Chu’s commands. Zang Wuzhong heard about this and said, “Since Chen does not submit to Chu, it will surely perish. When a great domain acts according to ritual propriety, failure to submit to it will incur blame even for a large domain. How much more so for a small one?” In summer, Peng Ming of Chu invaded Chen because Chen lacked ritual propriety.

4.2(1)

Lord Xiang

909

4.3(2) 穆叔如晉，報知武子之聘也。晉侯享之，金奏〈肆夏〉之三，不拜。工歌

〈文王〉之三，又不拜。歌〈鹿鳴〉之三，三拜。 韓獻子使行人子員問之曰：「 子以君命辱於敝邑，先君之禮，藉之 以樂，以辱吾子。吾子舍其大，而重拜其細。敢問何禮也？」 對曰：「 三夏，天子所以享元侯也，使臣弗敢與聞。〈文王〉，兩君 相見之樂也，使臣不敢及。〈鹿鳴〉，君所以嘉寡君也，敢不拜嘉？〈四 牡〉，君所以勞使臣也，敢不重拜？〈皇皇者華〉，君教使臣曰：『必諮於 周。』臣聞之：訪問於善為咨，咨親為詢，咨禮為度，咨事為諏，咨難為 謀。臣獲五善，敢不重拜？」

59 Xiang 1.5. 60 This is the only instance in Zuozhuan where musical performance is mentioned in connection with the ritual of ceremonial toasts (xiang 享). 61 In the parallel passage in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.185–86, “the three forms of Xia” are identified as Fan 樊, E 遏, and Qu 渠, which Wei Zhao further equates with Si Xia 肆夏, Shao Xia 韶夏, and Na Xia 納夏. 62 The received text can be understood as “three stanzas of ‘King Wen’” and “three stanzas of ‘Deer Cry.’” However, in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.185–86, Shusun Bao explains sanzhang 三章 as “three songs in the sequence of”—thus including two songs that follow the one named (according to the arrangement of the songs in the received text): “King Wen” (“Wen wang” 文王), “Great Brightness” (“Da ming” 大明), “Spreading” (“Mian” 緜) (Maoshi 235–37), and “Deer Cry” (“Lu ming” 鹿鳴), “Four Stallions” (“Si mu” 四牡), and “Resplendent Are the Flowers” (“Huanghuang zhe hua” 皇皇者華) (Maoshi 161–63). The reference to “Four Stallions” and “Resplendent Are the Flowers” in Shusun Bao’s reply confirms this reading. 63 “Deer Cry” (Maoshi 161, “Lu ming,” 9B.315–17) is a feast poem that praises the “fine guest” (jiabin 嘉賓) who has the “voice of virtue” (deyin 德音) and whose exemplary conduct demonstrates “the great way” (or the way of Zhou, zhouxing 周行). Shusun Bao is accepting such compliments on behalf of the Lu ruler.

910

Zuo Tradition

The Lu minister Shusun Bao demonstrates his ritual knowledge by declining the honor of musical entertainment and exalted pieces from the Odes beyond what is due his station as a minister on a diplomatic mission. Compare this with the Jin minister Xi Zhi’s trepidation when he is greeted in Chu with “grandly prepared music,” which is meant for rulers and actually implies a threat (Cheng 12.4). Shusun Baoa went to Jin: this was in answer to Zhi Yinga’s official visit to Lu.59 The Prince of Jin offered him ceremonial toasts.60 The bells played out three forms of “The Great Xia,” and he did not bow.61 The musicians sang three songs in the sequence of “King Wen,” and again he did not bow. When they sang three songs in the sequence of “Deer Cry,” he bowed thrice.62 Han Juea sent the envoy Ziyun to ask about it: “You, sir, by your ruler’s command have deigned to come to our humble settlement. We have used the former rulers’ rituals, performed through music, to receive you in a fashion requiring your condescension. Now you, sir, have not acknowledged the great ones but have repeatedly bowed to the minor ones. Dare we ask what ritual this is?” He replied, “The three ‘Xias’ are what the Son of Heaven uses as he offers ceremonial toasts to the leader of princes. I, as a subject on a mission, did not dare to hear of it. ‘King Wen’ is the music for the meeting of two rulers. I did not dare to have anything to do with it. ‘Deer Cry’ was what your ruler used to praise our unworthy ruler.63 How would I dare not bow to such praise? ‘Four Stallions’ was what your ruler used to honor my exertions.64 How would I dare not bow again? With ‘Resplendent Are the Flowers,’ your ruler was instructing me: ‘You must seek counsel from all.’ According to what I have heard, to look for and solicit excellent men is to seek counsel; to seek counsel about kith and kin is inquiry; to seek counsel about ritual is deliberation; to seek counsel about affairs of the domain is consultation; and to seek counsel about difficulties is proper planning.65 Since I have now received five good instructions, how would I dare not bow repeatedly?”

64 65

4.3(2)

In “Four Stallions” (Maoshi 162, “Simu,” 9B.317–18), the officer or emissary endures the hardships of journeys and suppresses longing for home because “the king’s affairs admit of no rest” (wangshi mi gu 王事靡盬). Shusun Bao here paraphrases, summarizes, and explains lines from “Resplendent Are the Flowers” (Maoshi 163, “Huanghuang zhe hua,” 9B.318–20), which contains four lines that repeat the words zhou 周 (“all” or “everywhere”), yuan 爰 (“from”), and zi 諮 or 咨 (“seek counsel”) and vary only in the last word: zou 諏 (“consultation”), mou 謀 (“planning”), du 度 (“deliberation”), and xun 詢 (“inquiry”). He “translates” yuan as yu 於 and then elaborates the meanings of zi, zou, mou, du, and xun.

Lord Xiang

911

4.4(3) 秋，定姒薨。不殯于廟，無櫬，不虞。匠慶謂季文子曰：「 子為正卿，而小

君之喪不成，不終君也。君長，誰受其咎？」 初，季孫為己樹六檟於蒲圃東門之外，匠慶請木，季孫曰：「 略。」 匠慶用蒲圃之檟，季孫不御。 君子曰：「 志所謂『多行無禮，必自及也』，其是之謂乎！」 4.5(6) 冬，公如晉聽政。晉侯享公，公請屬鄫。晉侯不許。孟獻子曰：「 以寡君

之密邇於仇讎，而願固事君，無失官命。鄫無賦於司馬，為執事朝夕之 命敝邑，敝邑褊小，闕而為罪，寡君是以願借助焉。」晉侯許之。 4.6(7) 楚人使頓間陳而侵伐之，故陳人圍頓。

66 67

68

912

For such yu 虞 rituals, see Yili 14.493. For the ritual of “lying in state,” see Xi 8.3, n. 111. The omissions in Ding Si’s funeral contrasts with the pomp and circumstance of the funeral for Qi Jiang, Lord Cheng’s principal wife, in Xiang 2.3. We follow Ma Zonglian’s reading, cited in Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 1008. To keep the funeral rituals simple, Ding Si’s coffin would not have to be made from fine wood. Yet Ji Wenzi’s reply is also deliberately noncommittal, and he does not stop Qing from cutting down the trees. Du Yu (ZZ 29.506) glosses lue 略 (which we render as “simple”) as “to obtain in an improper way” 不以道取, possibly averring that Ji Wenzi’s own wood would have been improperly appropriated if it was used to make Ding Si’s coffin, or (less likely) Ji may be suggesting that the wood for the coffin can be obtained by some other improper means. On the use of jia timber for coffin, see also Xiang 2.3, Ai 11.4. For Dun, a small domain close to Chen, see Xi 23.3, n. 281.

Zuo Tradition

The funeral for Lord Xiang’s birth mother and Lord Cheng’s concubine, Ding Si, raises ritual questions. The Lu minister Ji Wenzi is criticized for his deliberate or inadvertent negligence. Again, a humble character voices authoritative arguments. (Cf. the builders in Xuan 2.1b, the wagon driver in Cheng 5.4, the musicians in Xiang 15.4, and the old man of Jiang in Xiang 30.3a.). In autumn, Ding Si expired. Her coffin did not lie in state, there was no inner coffin, and they did not offer sacrifices to appease her spirit after burial.66 The carpenter Qing said to Ji Wenzi, “You are the chief minister. That the funeral rituals of our former lord’s wife should be so incomplete means that you are not allowing the ruler to fulfill his filial duty to the utmost. When the ruler grows up, who will bear the blame for this?” Earlier, Ji Wenzib had planted for himself six jia trees outside the eastern gate of Pu Gardens. When the carpenter Qing asked about the wood for Ding Si’s coffin, Ji Wenzib said, “Make it simple.”67 But when the carpenter Qing used the jia wood from Pu Gardens, Ji Wenzib did not stop him. The noble man said, “When the Records says, ‘Having acted against ritual propriety many times, he will certainly be overtaken by disaster,’ surely this is what is meant!”

4.4(3)

Reiterating Lu’s perilous situation (Xiang 3.2), the Lu minister Meng Xianzi seeks and obtains Jin’s sanction for Lu’s control of Zeng. Meng argues that Lu can meet the demands that Jin imposes upon it only by claiming Zeng as a subsidiary domain. In winter, our lord went to Jin to attend to its commands. The Prince of Jin offered our lord ceremonial toasts, and our lord requested that Zeng be made subordinate to Lu. The Prince of Jin did not permit it. Meng Xianzi said, “For all our unworthy ruler’s close proximity to our enemies, he is nevertheless willing to serve you, my lord, with unwavering resolve, and he does not fail to fulfill the commands of your offices. Zeng contributes no levies to your supervisors of the military. Your functionaries day and night make demands upon our humble settlement. Our humble settlement is remote and small, and if we are remiss, we will incur offense. That is why our unworthy ruler is hoping to get help from Zeng.” The Prince of Jin granted permission.

4.5(6)

The men of Chu had Dun68 watch for any lapse in Chen’s vigilance and then invade and attack it. That was why Chen leaders laid siege to Dun.

4.6(7)

Lord Xiang

913

4.7a 無終子嘉父使孟樂如晉，因魏莊子納虎豹之皮，以請和諸戎。晉侯曰：

「 戎狄無親而貪，不如伐之。」 魏絳曰：「 諸侯新服，陳新來和，將觀於我。我德，則睦，否，則攜 貳。勞師於戎，而楚伐陳，必弗能救，是棄陳也。諸華必叛。戎，禽獸也。 獲戎失華，無乃不可乎？《夏訓》有之曰：『有窮后羿－－』」 公曰：「 后羿何如？」

69

70 71 72

914

Commentators believe this means that Archer Yi shoots nine suns out of ten to save the world from being burnt up during the reign of Yao (Huainanzi 8.254–55). According to Huainanzi 6.217, Yi also gets the elixir of immortality from the Queen Mother of the West. Wuzhong is a domain of the Shanrong tribe, at this time in Shanxi. The Rong are characterized in the same terms in Yin 9.6. Compare Guan Zhong’s assertion in Min 1.2: “The Rong and the Di are jackals and wolves and cannot be satisfied. The old Xia domains are close intimates and cannot be abandoned.” Note that while Guan Zhong uses the bestial metaphor to justify military confrontation, Wei Jiang employs similar imagery to explain the need to make peace. In Shiji, the “birds and beasts” analogy is used to justify both wars and marriage diplomacy with the Xiongnu. See Wai-yee Li, “Hua Yi zhi bian yu yizu tonghun”; “Historical Understanding in ‘The Account of the Xiongnu’ in Shiji.”

Zuo Tradition

Wei Jiang of Jin advocates peace with the Rong tribes. His remonstrance with Lord Dao on the subject includes an excursus on the dangers of indulging in hunting. The rhetorical connection between wars with the Rong and hunting may be found in the comparison of the Rong to “birds and beasts.” Both represent an inappropriate or excessive use of martial power. Archer Yi appears in many early texts (e.g., Analects, Mencius, Xunzi, Zhuangzi, Han Feizi) as a master archer. “Encountering Sorrow” (Lisao) mentions his sensual excesses and indulgence in hunting and also refers to Han Zhuo and Ao (Chuci buzhu 1.21–22). “Questions to Heaven” (Tianwen) asks, “How did Archer Yi shoot the suns?” (Chuci buzhu 3.96); the story of how Archer Yi “shoots ten suns” to save a parched world is also found in Huainanzi 8.255.69 The focus of this passage in Zuozhuan, however, is on the warning posed by Archer Yi’s errors of judgment. Archer Yi is mentioned in Zhao 28.2 as the destroyer of the evil Bofeng, and the legend of Ao is also told in Wu Zixu’s remonstrance in Ai 1.2. The Master of Wuzhong,70 Jiafu, sent Meng Yue to Jin. Through Wei Jianga he presented furs of tigers and leopards, requesting with these gifts that Jin should reach a peace agreement with the various Rong tribes. The Prince of Jin said, “The Rong and Di, knowing nothing of kith and kin, are avaricious.71 It would be better to attack them.” Wei Jiang said, “The princes have only recently submitted, and Chen has only recently come to seek peace. They are going to observe our every act. If we are virtuous, they will be in concord with us; if not, they will fall away and turn against us. If we are wearing our troops out in a conflict with the Rong and Chu attacks Chen, we will certainly not be able to go to the aid of the latter, and that will amount to abandoning Chen. The various central domains will certainly then rebel. The Rong tribes are birds and beasts.72 Would it not be unacceptable to win control over the Rong and to lose the allegiance of the central domains? As the Xia Instructions has it, ‘Archer Yi of the Youqiong lineage—’”73 The lord said, “What about Archer Yi?”

73

4.7a

This is incorporated into “Wuzi zhi ge” 五子之歌 (Shangshu 7.100) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. Youqiong 有窮 lay to the west of present-day Luo­ yang 洛陽 in Henan. Lord Dao of Jin interrupts Wei Jiang. For another example of one character interrupting another, see Xiang 25.2. For examples of a character interrupting himself, see Zhao 6.3, 8.5. Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian, 1:211–12) enumerates other examples from later historiography and fiction. Jin Shengtan applauds this mode of representing speech as suggestive of verisimilitude; see his comment in chapter 5 in Shuihu zhuan huiping ben, 146.

Lord Xiang

915

對曰：「 昔有夏之方衰也，后羿自鉏遷于窮石，因夏民以代夏政。 恃其射也，不修民事，而淫于原獸，棄武羅、伯因、熊髡、尨圉，而用寒 浞。寒浞，伯明氏之讒子弟也，伯明后寒棄之，夷羿收之，信而使之，以 為己相。浞行媚于內，而施賂于外，愚弄其民，而虞羿于田。樹之詐慝， 以取其國家，外內咸服。羿猶不悛，將歸自田，家眾殺而亨之，以食其 子，其子不忍食諸，死于窮門。靡奔有鬲氏。浞因羿室，生澆及豷，恃其 讒慝詐偽，而不德于民，使澆用師，滅斟灌及斟尋氏。處澆于過，處豷 于戈。靡自有鬲氏，收二國之燼，以滅浞而立少康。少康滅澆于過，后杼 滅豷于戈，有窮由是遂亡，失人故也。昔周辛甲之為大史也，命百官，官 箴王闕。於〈虞人之箴〉曰：

74

Both Chu 鉏 and Qiongshi 窮石 are identified as places in Henan; Qiongshi lies to the south of Luoyang. Archer Yi is called “Lord Yi” (Hou Yi 后羿) and “Yi from Yí” or “Yi among the Yi tribe” (Yí Yi 夷羿, reading Yí as the name of a line [ZZ 29.507] or a place) in the text. 75 We read yu 虞 as wu 誤, “mislead” or “deceive,” following Wang Niansun (Karlgren, gl. 470). Du Yu (ZZ 29.507) glosses yu 虞 as le 樂: “he amused Yi with hunting” or “he induced Yi to be engrossed with hunting.” Li Shan describes yu 虞 and yu 娛 (“to amuse”) as interchangeable (Liu Wenqi, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng, 1013). 76 Alternatively, we could translate this line as “Having established for Archer Yi a bad name for deceit and iniquities” (Karlgren, gl. 471) or “Having set up his deceptions and evil deeds.” 77 Yang (3:937) cites Xiao erya 小爾雅, which glosses quan 悛 as “aware” 覺, which is also plausible: “even then Archer Yi was unaware” or “even then Archer Yi was oblivious.” 78 Lei Xueqi identifies this as the aforementioned Qiongshi (Yang, 3:927), while Du Yu (ZZ 29.507) glosses it as “gate of the capital city.” On the legends of Archer Yi’s ignominious death, see “Encountering Sorrow” and “Questions to Heaven” (Chuci buzhu 1.21–22, 3.100). In Mencius 4B.24, Archer Yi is murdered by a jealous disciple. 79 Mi was a Xia minister who also served Archer Yi. Youge 有鬲 is identified as a place in Shandong, southeast of Dezhou City 德州市. 80 Zhenguan and Zhenxun, both related to the Xia ruling house (ZZ-Kong 29.506), are identified as places in present-day Shandong (Yang, 3:937). 81 Guo 過 is identified as a place in Shandong and is sometimes linked to an ancient domain of the same name (Yang, 3:938). According to Du Yu (ZZ 29.507), Ge 戈 lay between Song and Zheng.

916

Zuo Tradition

He replied, “Formerly, just as Xia was in decline, Archer Yi moved from Chu to Qiongshi74 and, with the support of the Xia people, took over Xia rule. Relying on his archery, he did not attend to the affairs of the people but indulged in hunting beasts of the plain. He cast off Wuluo, Boyin, Xiong Kun, and Mangyu and instead employed Han Zhuo. Han Zhuo was the deviant, slanderous son of the Boming lineage. Boming Lord Han had cast him off, and Archer Yi took him in, trusted him, and gave him assignments, making him his own assistant. Han Zhuoa flattered and seduced those inside the palace, offered bounties to those outside it, fooled and cajoled the people, and misled Archer Yi, making him engrossed with hunting.75 Having planted in him deceit and iniquities,76 he took Archer Yi’s domain and patrimony from him, and those inside and outside all submitted to him. Even then Archer Yi did not repent.77 When he was about to return to the court from the fields, his own men killed him, boiled him, and fed his flesh to his sons. His sons could not bear to eat it and died at the Gate of Qiong.78 Mi fled to the Youge lineage.79 Han Zhuoa took over Archer Yi’s wives and concubines and fathered Ao and Yi. Relying on his slanderous wickedness and deceitful treachery, he showed no virtue toward the people and sent Ao to employ troops to eliminate the Zhenguan and Zhenxun lineages.80 He placed Ao in Guo and Yi in Ge.81 Mi, coming from the Youge line­ age, collected the last embers—the remnant forces of Zhenguan and Zhenxun—to extinguish Han Zhuoa and establish Shaokang as ruler.82 Shaokang killed Ao at Guo, and his son Lord Zhu killed Yi at Ge. That the Youqiong lineage thus perished was because it had failed in the proper use of men.83 Formerly, when Xin Jia of Zhou was the grand scribe, he commanded the hundred officials, in keeping with their official duties, to remonstrate with the king on his shortcomings.84 It is said in the ‘Remonstrance of the Overseer of Hunts,’

82

Wu Zixu cites the story of Shaokang’s resurgence as a cautionary tale to warn the Wu ruler Fucha against leniency toward the defeated Yue ruler Goujian (Ai 1.2). 83 Archer Yi’s Youqiong lineage perished because he trusted Han Zhuo. Han Zhuo then usurped the name of the Youqiong lineage. Shaokang is remembered as a capable Xia king. 84 In Shiji 4.116, Xin Jia was a Shang minister who, after being repeatedly ignored by the last king of Shang, changed sides and became a Zhou minister. Hanshu 30.1729 lists “Xin Jia, twenty-nine chapters,” which is no longer extant, but whose fragments were collected by Ma Guohan in Yuhan shanfang jiyi shu. The “Remonstrance of the Overseer of Hunts” 虞人之箴 might have been taken from Xin Jia. In Wenxin diao­ long 11.409, Liu Xie names Xin Jia’s “Remonstrances of the Hundred Officials” (Baiguan zhen 百官箴) as the most ancient example in the genre of remonstrances. He includes Wei Jiang’s speech as another example (Wenxin diaolong 11.413). The Zhou minister Xin You (Xi 22.4) may be from the same line as Xin Jia.

Lord Xiang

917

芒芒禹跡， 畫為九州， 經啟九道。 民有寢、廟， 獸有茂草； 各有攸處， 德用不擾。 在帝夷羿， 冒于原獸， 忘其國恤， 而思其麀牡。 武不可重， 用不恢于夏家。 獸臣司原， 敢告僕夫。 〈虞箴〉如是，可不懲乎？」於是晉侯好田，故魏絳及之。 4.7b 公曰：「 然則莫如和戎乎？」

對曰：「 和戎有五利焉：戎狄荐居，貴貨易土，土可賈焉，一也。邊 鄙不聳，民狎其野，穡人成功，二也。戎狄事晉，四鄰振動，諸侯威懷， 三也。以德綏戎，師徒不勤，甲兵不頓，四也。鑒于后羿，而用德度，遠 至邇安，五也。君其圖之！」 公說，使魏絳盟諸戎。修民事，田以時。

85 86 87 88

89

918

That is, the people have their places of repose in life and death. In other words, there is no conflict between the nature of humans and animals (what they are) and their functions (what they do). Hunting would be optimal, just enough to provide the needs of humans. In the phrase youmu 麀牡, you means “female deer” and mu means “male beasts.” For the connection between martial drills and hunting, see Yin 5.1. The word sou 蒐, which we have translated as “muster” (see Xi 31.4, Wen 6.1, 6.8, 8.7, 17.4, Xuan 14.2, Xiang 13.3, Zhao 4.3, 8.4, 11.5, 15.7, 29.5), also refers to “spring hunt.” In reading zhong 重 as “grand” or “large scale,” we have followed Fu Qian (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 501). In Du Yu’s (ZZ 29.508) reading, chong 重 means “repeated” or “frequent.” It is because Archer Yi loved hunting that Xia was diminished under his rule. Takezoe (14.25) suggests that Archer Yi’s loss of the people’s support may be linked to the threat of Jin losing the allegiance of the central domains, and Han Zhuo’s expeditions against Zhenguan and Zhenxun may serve as a warning against the careless use of military resources.

Zuo Tradition

Far-flung were the tracks of Yu— Charting out nine regions, He laid out and opened up nine routes. The people had their bedchambers and temple chambers,85 The beasts had their luxuriant grass. All had their place of abode, And their qualities and functions were not confused.86 Archer Yi, in his position as king, Coveted the hunt for beasts of the plains. He forgot the concerns of state, And thought only of does and stags.87 Martial drills must not become too grand, For with them the Xia patrimony abjured greatness.88 The manager of beasts, in charge of the plains, Presumes to notify my lord’s servant.

Thus went the ‘Remonstrance of the Overseer of Hunts.’ Would it not be right to heed the warning?” At that time the Prince of Jin loved hunting; that was why Wei Jiang broached this topic.89 The lord said, “In that case, would it be better to seek peace with the Rong?” He replied, “Peace with the Rong has five advantages. First: the Rong and Di live off grasslands, they value goods and disdain land, and so lands can be purchased from them. Second: if those at the frontiers and borderlands are not fearful, the people will feel close to their fields,90 and the harvesters will achieve success.91 Third: if the Rong and Di serve Jin, our neighbors on four sides will be shaken, and the princes will be awed into submission. Fourth: if we use our virtue to pacify the Rong, the soldiers and officers will not toil, and armor and weapons will not be ruined. Fifth: if we regard Archer Yi as our cautionary mirror 92 and employ the standards of virtue, those from afar will come to us and those close by will be at ease. You, my lord, should consider this!” The lord was pleased and sent Wei Jiang to swear a covenant with the various Rong tribes. He attended to the affairs of the people and hunted only at the proper seasons.

4.7b

90 Karlgren, gl. 474. Du Yu (ZZ 29.508) glosses xia 狎 as xi 習, “to become familiar with.” 91 “Harvesters” (seren 穡人) may refer to the people who reap the harvest or to the overseers who manage the farmers. 92 On the idea of history as a mirror, see also Xi 2.5, n. 24, Zhao 23.9, 26.10.

Lord Xiang

919

4.8 冬，十月，邾人、莒人伐鄫，臧紇救鄫，侵邾，敗於狐駘。國人逆喪者皆

髽，魯於是乎始髽。國人誦之曰： 臧之狐裘， 敗我于狐駘。 我君小子， 朱儒是使。 朱儒朱儒， 使我敗於邾。

春秋 5.1(1) 五年，春，公至自晉。 5.2(3) 夏，鄭伯使公子發來聘。 5.3(4) 叔孫豹、鄫世子巫如晉。 5.4(5) 仲孫蔑、衛孫林父會吳于善道。

93 Hutai 狐駘 was located in the domain of Zhu south of Teng County 滕縣, Shandong. 94 According to Kong Yingda’s annotations to Liji 32.589, zhua 髽 was the mourning headdress for women. There are different types of zhua, whereby the hair was tied with hempen cloth and tied or braided with hemp strings. Here we probably have the simplest form of zhua—hair tied with hemp strings—taken up by both men and women. That this simplest form of mourning headdress was adopted for all implies that a great number of Lu soldiers died and there was no time for more elaborate preparation. 95 This is one of the Zuozhuan entries that explain the beginning of a custom (see also Xi 33.3, Xuan 8.5, and n. 134 in Xuan). 96 The battle took place in the tenth month according to the Lu calendar or in the eighth month according to the Xia calendar. This was not the season for wearing fox furs, which is mentioned only to indicate Zang Wuzhong’s status as a dignitary of the domain. “Fox” may also come up by affective association (xing 興) with Hutai, a place name that contains the word for “fox” (hu 狐).

920

Zuo Tradition

Lu is again defeated by the much smaller Zhu (see also Xi 22.7). Zang Wuzhong is held responsible and mocked in a song. For a comparable example of popular judgments expressed through songs, see the Song commander Hua Yuan’s exchange with laborers and builders (Xuan 2.1). In winter, in the tenth month, the men of Zhu and Ju attacked Zeng. Zang Wuzhonga went to the aid of Zeng, invaded Zhu, and was defeated at Hutai.93 The inhabitants of the capital who met the dead being brought back all had their hair tied in hemp strings.94 It was then that hemp strings were first used to tie the hair of mourners in funeral rites.95 The inhabitants of the capital chanted about this:

4.8

Zang, in robes of fox fur, Brought us to defeat at Hutai.96 Our ruler, the little one, Sends a midget, that’s what he sends.97 Midget, midget— You have brought about our defeat by Zhu.98 LORD XIANG 5 (568 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Jin.

5.1(1)

In summer, the Liege of Zheng sent Gongzi Fa (Ziguo) to come on an official visit.99

5.2(3)

Shusun Bao, the Zeng heir apparent Wu, went to Jin.100

5.3(4)

Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) and Sun Linfu of Wei met with Wu at Shandao.101

5.4(5)

97

Lord Xiang was only seven at this point; but the fact that his mother just died also renders the use of the term “little one” (xiaozi 小子) appropriate. Midgets belonged to a debased class of entertainers. Zang Wuzhong, as an aristocrat, could not have belonged to that class, and the derogatory term is used only to describe his small stature. 98 Lu was defeated by a much smaller domain, Zhu, which made it even more humiliating. 99 Ziguo, a son of Lord Mu of Zheng, was father of the famous Zichan. His lineage came to be known as the Guo lineage. 100 Since the point of the exegetical comment in Xiang 5.4 is the omission of the word “and” (ji 及), we have omitted the conjunction although English grammar requires it. 101 Shandao 善道 was in the domain of Wu and located north of present-day Xuyi County 盱眙縣, Anhui.

Lord Xiang

921

5.5(6) 秋，大雩。 5.6(7) 楚殺其大夫公子壬夫。 5.7(8) 公會晉侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、齊

世子光、吳人、鄫人于戚。 5.8 公至自會。 5.9(9) 冬，戍陳。 5.10(9) 楚公子貞帥師伐陳。 5.11(9) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、齊世子光

救陳。 5.12 十有二月，公至自救陳。 5.13(10) 辛未，季孫行父卒。

左傳 5.1(1) 五年，春，公至自晉。 5.2 王使王叔陳生愬戎于晉，晉人執之。士魴如京師，言王叔之貳於戎也。 5.3(2) 夏，鄭子國來聘，通嗣君也。 5.4(3) 穆叔覿鄫大子于晉，以成屬鄫。書曰「 叔孫豹、鄫大子巫如晉」，言比諸

魯大夫也。

102 Alternatively, “Wangshu Chengsheng had shifted his allegiance to the Rong.” Yu Chang (cited in Yang, 3:942) speculates that Jin, having made peace with the Rong, might be falsely accusing Chensheng in order to ignore the Zhou king’s request for help. 103 Lord Xi of Zheng acceded to his position two years earlier, in 570 Bce (Xiang 3). Zheng’s visits to Lu and other northern domains had become more irregular with its submission to Chu. 104 This is to explain why the conjunction “and” (ji 及) is omitted in the Annals entry. According to Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 30.514), when two Lu high officers are mentioned together, the conjunction ji is often omitted.

922

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, there was a great rain sacrifice.

5.5(6)

Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Renfu (Zixin).

5.6(7)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Qi heir apparent Guang, a Wu leader, and a Zeng leader at Qī.

5.7(8)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

5.8

In winter, we garrisoned Chen.

5.9(9)

Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and attacked Chen.

5.10(9)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, and the Qi heir apparent Guang and went to the aid of Chen.

5.11(9)

In the twelfth month, our lord arrived from the expedition that went to the aid of Chen.

5.12

On the xinwei day (20), Jisun Hangfu (Ji Wenzi) died.

5.13(10)

ZUO

In the fifth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Jin.

5.1(1)

A Zhou noble coming to Jin to seek help against Rong incursions into Zhou territory is arrested by Jin leaders on charges of being in league with the Rong. This represents an inversion of the political goal of defending the Zhou court against barbarians often avowed by covenant chiefs. The Zhou king sent Wangshu Chensheng to make an accusation against the Rong at the Jin court. The leaders of Jin arrested him. Shi Fang went to the Zhou capital and claimed that Wangshu Chenshenga was a double agent for the Rong.102

5.2

In summer, Ziguo (Gongzi Fa) of Zheng came to us on an official visit: this was to establish relations with the new ruler.103

5.3(2)

Jin recognizes Lu’s subjugation of Zeng. Shusun Baoa presented the heir apparent of Zeng at the court of Jin in order to formalize the submission of Zeng to Lu. The text says, “Shusun Bao, the Zeng heir apparent Wu, went to Jin”: this is to treat the latter as the equal of a Lu high officer.104

5.4(3)

Lord Xiang

923

5.5(4) 吳子使壽越如晉，辭不會于雞澤之故，且請聽諸侯之好。

晉人將為之合諸侯，使魯、衛先會吳，且告會期。故孟獻子、孫文 子會吳于善道。 5.6(5) 秋，大雩，旱也。 5.7(6) 楚人討陳叛故，曰：「 由令尹子辛實侵欲焉。」乃殺之。書曰「 楚殺其大

夫公子壬夫」，貪也。 君子謂「楚共王於是不刑。《詩》曰： 周道挺挺， 我心扃扃。 講見不令， 集人來定。 己則無信，而殺人以逞，不亦難乎！《夏書》曰：『成允成功。』」 5.8(7) 九月丙午，盟于戚，會吳，且命戍陳也。



穆叔以屬鄫為不利，使鄫大夫聽命于會。

105 This ode is an “uncollected ode” not found in the received text of Maoshi. 106 The line comes to be included in “Da Yu mo” 大禹謨 (Shangshu 4.55) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. Cf. Zhuang n. 31, Xi n. 344, Wen n. 126, Xiang nn. 583, 832, Ai. n. 434. 107 Shusun Bao wants Zeng to attend the meeting and to receive commands from the covenant chief, Jin, as an independent sovereign domain. His position on Zeng thus

924

Zuo Tradition

Jin is eager to accept Wu overtures and makes its allies meet with Wu. The Master of Wu sent Shou Yue to Jin to explain why Wu had not come to the meeting at Ji Marsh and further to request that Wu be allowed to enjoy amity with the princes. For his sake, the leaders of Jin planned to assemble the princes. They sent Lu and Wei to meet first with Wu and moreover to notify them of the meeting date. That was why Meng Xianzi and Sun Linfua met with Wu at Shandao.

5.5(4)

In autumn, there was a great rain sacrifice, this was because of the drought.

5.6(5)

The Chu minister Zixin (Gongzi Renfu) is put to death because of Chu’s troubles with Chen. Chen leaders blame their defection on Zixin’s rapacity (Xiang 3.6). An exegetical comment accepts this reasoning, but a noble man criticizes King Gong for his miscarriage of justice. The leaders of Chu demanded an explanation for Chen’s revolt. The men of Chen said, “It was all on account of the chief minister, Zixin, who rapaciously invaded us.” Chu therefore put him to death. The text says, “Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Renfu (Zixin)”: this was because of his rapacity. The noble man said, “King Gong of Chu in this case used punishment improperly. As it says in the Odes,

5.7(6)

The great road is level and straight; My mind is keen and discerning. If the affairs planned are going awry, Gather wise men to decide on them.105

He himself lacked good faith, and he put others to death to satisfy his own wishes. Is this not difficult? As it says in the Xia Documents, ‘Fulfill good faith, and achievements will be fulfilled.’”106 Jin and its allies plan to defend Chen against Chu. In the ninth month, on the bingwu day (23), the princes swore a covenant at Qī. This was to meet with Wu leaders and further to issue the command to garrison Chen. Shusun Baoa considered it disadvantageous to have Zeng as a subordinate and had the high officers of Zeng await commands at the meeting.107



5.8(7)

differs from Meng Xianzi’s (Xiang 4.5), possibly as a result of Lu’s luckless intervention on behalf of Zeng (Xiang 4.8).

Lord Xiang

925

5.9(9–11) 楚子囊為令尹。范宣子曰：「 我喪陳矣。楚人討貳而立子囊，必改行，而

疾討陳。陳近于楚，民朝夕急，能無往乎？有陳，非吾事也；無之而後 可。」 冬，諸侯戍陳。子囊伐陳。十一月甲午，會于城棣以救之。 5.10(13) 季文子卒。大夫入斂，公在位。宰庀家器為葬備，無衣帛之妾，無食粟

之馬，無藏金玉，無重器備，君子是以知季文子之忠於公室也：「 相三君 矣，而無私積，可不謂忠乎？」

春秋 6.1(1) 六年，春，王三月，壬午，杞伯姑容卒。 6.2(2) 夏，宋華弱來奔。 6.3 秋，葬杞桓公。 6.4(3) 滕子來朝。 6.5(4) 莒人滅鄫。 6.6(5) 冬，叔孫豹如邾。 6.7(6) 季孫宿如晉。 6.8(7) 十有二月，齊侯滅萊。

108 Zinang, replacing Zixin, is King Gong’s younger brother. 109 Chengdi 城棣 was in the domain of Zheng and located north of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan.

926

Zuo Tradition

Wise ministers distrust the apparent affirmation of power. Just like Shusun Bao of Lu (Xiang 5.8), the Jin minister Fan Gai regards a smaller domain’s submission as a liability, echoing Han Jue’s earlier judgment (Xiang 4.1). Zinang of Chu became chief minister.108 Fan Gaic said, “We have lost Chen. The men of Chu chastised the disloyal and established Zinang in office, and they will certainly change their ways and swiftly chastise Chen. Chen is close to Chu, so its people are anxious day and night. Can they do otherwise than turn to Chu? It is not our business to keep Chen. Only when we cede control over Chen will things turn out all right.” In winter, the princes garrisoned Chen. Zinang attacked Chen. In the eleventh month, on the jiawu day (12), the princes met at Chengdi to go to Chen’s aid.109

5.9(9–11)

The Lu chief minister, Ji Wenzi, who is said to have shown his integrity and loyalty by refusing to aggrandize his lineage, dies. Ji Wenzi died. Since it was a high officer who was being laid in his coffin, our lord took his rightful place to observe the procedure. Ji Wenzi’s steward set forth patrimonial vessels as preparation for the burial. There were no concubines who wore silk, no horses that were fed grains, no stored-up gold and jade, no doubled set of utensils. Thus did the noble man know that Ji Wenzi was loyal to our lord’s house:110 “He assisted three rulers, and yet he had no private accumulation of wealth. Can this not be called loyalty?”

5.10(13)

LORD XIANG 6 (567 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal third month, on the renwu day (2), Gurong, the Liege of Qǐ, died.

6.1(1)

In summer, Hua Ruo of Song came to us in flight.

6.2(2)

In autumn, Lord Huan of Qǐ was buried.

6.3

The Master of Teng came to visit our court.

6.4(3)

Ju leaders extinguished Zeng.

6.5(4)

In winter, Shusun Bao went to Zhu.

6.6(5)

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Jin.

6.7(6)

In the twelfth month, the Prince of Qi extinguished Lai.

6.8(7)

110 Fan Xie appraised Ji Wenzi in similar terms in Cheng 16.11. Active in Lu politics since Wen 6 (621 BCE), Ji Wenzi was chief minister for thirty-three years (601–568).

Lord Xiang

927

左傳 6.1(1) 六年，春，杞桓公卒。始赴以名，同盟故也。 6.2(2) 宋華弱與樂轡少相狎，長相優，又相謗也。子蕩怒，以弓梏華弱于朝。平

公見之，曰：「 司武而梏於朝，難以勝矣。」遂逐之。夏，宋華弱來奔。 司城子罕曰：「 同罪異罰，非刑也。專戮於朝，罪孰大焉？」亦逐子 蕩。子蕩射子罕之門，曰：「 幾日而不我從！」子罕善之如初。 6.3(4) 秋，滕成公來朝，始朝公也。 6.4(5) 莒人滅鄫，鄫恃賂也。 6.5(6) 冬，穆叔如邾，聘，且修平。

111 The minister of the right (youshi 右師) held the highest rank in Song. Yue Xi, as supervisor of fortifications (sicheng 司城), ranked fifth among the six ministers of Song. 112 Both were descended from Duke Dai of Song. This Yue Pei is to be distinguished from the supervisor of fortifications Yue Pei (Ai 26.1, 26.2). 113 According to Du Yu and Kong Yingda (ZZ 30.516), Yue Pei puts the bow around Hua Ruo’s neck, “binding him as manacles bind hands.” Here we imagine Yue Pei putting his bow over Hua Ruo and using the bowstrings to bind his hands (Takezoe, 14.35; Karlgren, gl. 477). 114 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 30.516) suggests that this is part of Yue Xi’s speech: “We should also drive Yue Pei away.” 115 Being defied, Yue Xi is shown to be unequal to his office, just like Hua Ruo. 116 It is not clear which domain received the bribes. Zeng is no longer Lu’s protectorate at this point.

928

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

A Qǐ ruler, earlier designated as “Master of Qǐ” (Xi 24.3), dies: he is said to have his name recorded in the Annals now because Qǐ and Lu had become covenant partners (Annals, Cheng 5.7, 7.6, 9.2). In the sixth year, in spring, Lord Huan of Qǐ died. For the first time Qǐ sent the notice of its ruler’s death by name. This was because Lu and Qǐ were covenant partners.

6.1(1)

Yue Xi, dominant in Song government for twenty-four years (Xiang 6–29, 576–544),111 shows his impartiality by castigating a kinsman. That he relents can be seen as either weakness (Fu Qian) or necessary compromise (Kong Yingda). In similar scenarios, the Song minister Xiang Xu does not punish Hua Chen (Xiang 17.5), and Zichan of Zheng refrains from driving out Gongsun Hei (Zhao 1.7). Hua Ruo and Yue Pei,112 both of Song, were on overly familiar terms when they were young. They taunted each other when grown and also slandered each other. Yue Peia in a rage used his bow to manacle Hua Ruo in court.113 Lord Ping saw this and said, “If he allows himself to be manacled in court, even though he is a supervisor of the military, it will be hard for him to live up to his office!” He thus drove him away. In summer, Hua Ruo of Song came to us in flight. The supervisor of fortifications, Yue Xib, said, “To mete out different sentences to those guilty of the same offense is not proper punishment. He acted on his own authority to humiliate another at court. What offense can be greater than that?” He also drove Yue Peia away.114 Yue Peia shot an arrow at Yue Xia’s gate, saying, “In a few days, will you not be following me?”115 Yue Xia treated him well as before.

6.2(2)

After a lapse of forty-eight years, a Teng ruler comes to the Lu court, probably in the hope of seeking Jin protection through the Jin-Lu accord. In autumn, Lord Cheng of Teng came to visit our court. This was the first time he had visited the court of our lord.

6.3(4)

Ju leaders extinguished Zeng: this was because Zeng was relying on bribery for protection.116

6.4(5)

Lu and Zhu went to war over Zeng in Xiang 4.8. Control over Zeng is by now a dead issue, and Lu and Zhu can reach a peace agreement. This is the only recorded friendly visit of Lu to Zhu in the Annals. In winter, Shusun Baoa went to Zhu on an official visit and also to cultivate peaceful relations.

6.5(6)

Lord Xiang

929

6.6(7) 晉人以鄫故來討，曰：「 何故亡鄫？」季武子如晉見，且聽命。 6.7(8) 十一月，齊侯滅萊，萊恃謀也。

於鄭子國之來聘也，四月，晏弱城東陽，而遂圍萊。甲寅，堙之環 城，傅於堞。及杞桓公卒之月，乙未，王湫帥師及正輿子、棠人軍齊師， 齊師大敗之。丁未，入萊。萊共公浮柔奔棠，正輿子、王湫奔莒，莒人殺 之。四月，陳無宇獻萊宗器于襄宮。晏弱圍棠，十一月丙辰而滅之。遷萊 于郳。高厚、崔杼定其田。

117 It should be “the twelfth month,” as in the Annals. 118 See Annals, Xiang 5.2. 119 The piling of earthen mounds around city walls to allow better surveillance of the enemy is called juyin 距闉 in Sunzi 3.93 (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 8). There is no jiayin day in the fourth month. 120 That is, the third month of this year; see Annals 6.1. 121 Zheng Yuzi bribed Susha Wei of Qi four years earlier (Xiang 2.2). Tang 棠 was a settlement in Lai and was located north of present-day Yutai County 魚臺縣, Shandong.

930

Zuo Tradition

Lu sought Jin sanction for its control over Zeng (Xiang 4.5, 5.4) but lacked the power to control or defend Zeng (Xiang 4.8, 5.8, 6.4). Ji Wuzi (Ji Wenzi’s son) goes to Jin to explain Lu’s position and to seek recognition of his position as the new de facto chief minister of Lu. The men of Jin, on account of Zeng, came to demand an explanation, saying, “Why did you allow Zeng to be destroyed?” Ji Wuzi went to Jin to seek an audience and also to await its commands.

6.6(7)

The small domain of Lai, whose rulers had the same clan name as Qi (Jiang), harbors the disaffected Qi officer Wang Jiao (Cheng 18.2) and relies on bribes (Xiang 2.2) to defy Qi (Xiang 2.4). Qi first attacked Lai thirty-five years earlier (Xuan 7.2). Here it extinguishes Lai, chiefly through the strategies of Yan Ruo (Xiang 2.4), father of the famous Qi minister Yan Ying. In the eleventh month,117 the Prince of Qi extinguished Lai because Lai was relying on its schemes. In the fourth month of the year when Ziguo of Zheng came to us on an official visit,118 Yan Ruo fortified Dongyang and then laid siege to Lai. On the jiayin day, he piled up mounds of earth to encircle the city wall, pressing close to the parapets.119 When it came to the month in which Lord Huan of Qǐ died,120 on the yiwei day (15) Wang Jiao led an army and, together with Zheng Yuzi and an army of the men of Tang, confronted the Qi army.121 The Qi army roundly defeated them. On the dingwei day (27), the Qi army entered Lai. Lord Gong of Lai, Furou, fled to Tang. Zheng Yuzi and Wang Jiao fled to Ju, and the men of Ju put them to death. In the fourth month, Chen Wuyu presented Lai ancestral vessels at the temple of Lord Xiang.122 Yan Ruo laid siege to Tang, and in the eleventh month, on the bingchen day (10), extinguished it.123 The people of Lai were relocated to Ni.124 Gao Hou and Cui Zhu demarcated the boundaries of the fields of Lai.125

6.7(8)

122 Chen Wuyu was the great-great-grandson of Jingzhong of Chen, who fled to Qi in 672 Bce (Zhuang 22.1). Takezoe (14.36) suggests that Lord Xiang is a mistake for Lord Hui (Xiang 6.36–37), who had attacked Lai in 602 and 600 Bce (Xuan 7.2; Annals, Xuan 9.4). 123 Tang might have been singled out for mention because the ruler of Lai, Furou, died in this siege. 124 The precise location of Ni 郳 is unknown. 125 Gao Hou and Cui Zhu survey the lands to be divided among Qi nobles.

Lord Xiang

931

春秋 7.1(1) 七年，春，郯子來朝。 7.2(2) 夏，四月，三卜郊，不從，乃免牲。 7.3(4) 小邾子來朝。 7.4(3) 城費。 7.5(5) 秋，季孫宿如衛。 7.6 八月，螽。 7.7(7) 冬，十月，衛侯使孫林父來聘。壬戌，及孫林父盟。 7.8(8) 楚公子貞帥師圍陳。 7.9(9) 十有二月，公會晉侯、宋公、陳侯、衛侯、曹伯、莒子、邾子于鄬。鄭伯髡

頑如會，未見諸侯，丙戌，卒于鄵。 7.10(10) 陳侯逃歸。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年，春，郯子來朝，始朝公也。 7.2(2) 夏，四月，三卜郊，不從，乃免牲。

孟獻子曰：「 吾乃今而後知有卜、筮。夫郊祀后稷，以祈農事也。是 故啟蟄而郊，郊而後耕。今既耕而卜郊，宜其不從也。」

126 See also Xi 31.3, Cheng 7.1. 127 This is the first instance of high officers being named in sieges. 128 According to Zuozhuan, Xiang 7.9, the Zheng ruler was murdered. The record of his death here may indicate that Zheng notified Lu that he died from illness. Cf. similar discrepancies in Annals, Zhao 1.10 and Ai 10.3. 129 Divination by milfoil is here mentioned by association. In the Annals, divination is always done with turtle shell, whereas both types of divination are common in Zuozhuan. 130 Qizhi 啟蟄 or jingzhi 驚蟄, the awakening of insects from winter dormancy, later becomes one of the twenty-four terms for seasonal changes in the Chinese calendar. Meng Xianzi decries the divination as untimely, but the very propriety of conducting divination for regular sacrifices is questioned (Xi 31.3).

932

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 7 (566 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, the Master of Tan came to visit our court.

7.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, we divined three times about performing the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we spared the sacrificial animals.126

7.2(2)

The Master of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court.

7.3(4)

We fortified Bi.

7.4(3)

In autumn, Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Wei.

7.5(5)

In the eighth month, there were locusts.

7.6

In winter, in the tenth month, the Prince of Wei sent Sun Linfu to come on an official visit. On the renxu day (21), we swore a covenant with Sun Linfu.

7.7(7)

Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and laid siege to Chen.127

7.8(8)

In the twelfth month, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, and the Master of Zhu at Wei. Kunwan, the Liege of Zheng, was going to the meeting, but before he had an audience with the princes, on the bingxu day (16), he died at Cao.128

7.9(9)

The Prince of Chen fled homeward to Chen.

7.10(10)

ZUO

In the seventh year, in spring, the Master of Tan came to visit our court. This was the first time he had visited the court of our lord.

7.1(1)

According to the Lu minister Meng Xianzi, untimely and irrelevant divination yields unfavorable results. In summer, in the fourth month, we divined three times about performing the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we spared the sacrificial animals. Meng Xianzi said, “Only now do I know that there really is such a thing as divination by turtle shell and by milfoil!129 Now sacrifice in the outskirts is offered to Lord Millet as we pray for blessings in agricultural matters. That is why sacrifice in the outskirts is performed after the insects have stirred from their winter dormancy; and plowing begins only after performing sacrifice in the outskirts. Since on this occasion we had plowed and only then divined about sacrifice in the outskirts, it is fitting that the divination was unfavorable.”130

7.2(2)

Lord Xiang

933

7.3(4) 南遺為費宰。叔仲昭伯為隧正，欲善季氏，而求媚於南遺。謂遺：「 請城

費，吾多與而役。」故季氏城費。 7.4(3) 小邾穆公來朝，亦始朝公也。 7.5(5) 秋，季武子如衛，報子叔之聘，且辭緩報，非貳也。 7.6 冬，十月，晉韓獻子告老，公族穆子有廢疾，將立之。辭曰：「 《詩》曰：

豈不夙夜？ 謂行多露。 又曰： 弗躬弗親， 庶民弗信。 無忌不才，讓，其可乎？請立起也。與田蘇游，而曰『好仁』。《詩》曰：

131 Takezoe (14.39) observes that while Shuzhong Zhaobo’s grandfather, Shuzhong Huibo, died defending the rights of the legitimate heir of Lord Wen (Wen 18.5), Shuzhong Zhaobo was eager to flatter the usurping Ji lineage; and whereas Ji Wenzi was lauded for his loyalty (Xiang 5.10), Ji Wuzi was interested in buttressing his own power. 132 Han Jue was supervisor of the military at the battle of An in 589 Bce (Cheng 2.3) and commander of the lower army at the battle of Yanling in 575 (Cheng 16.5). He assumed charge of government as commander of the central army in 573 (Cheng 18.12). 133 Han Wuji was appointed as high officer of ruling lineages in 573 Bce (Cheng 18.3); for the explanation of that position, see Xuan 2.4. Feiji 廢疾 has also been glossed as “incurable illness” or “long-lasting illness” (Yang, 3:951, citing Shuowen jiezi). 134 Maoshi 17, “Xinglu” 行露, 1D.55. Han Wuji uses the hesitation of the speaker who is torn between desire and fear of impropriety as analogy for his own conflicting wish to serve and reservation on account of his sickness. The same lines are cited in Xi 20.4 to aver the importance of “weighing one’s strength.” 135 Maoshi 191, “Jie nan shan” 節南山, 12A.395. Han Wuji is saying that his sickness means he cannot personally attend to his duties, and this will arouse discontent among the people. 136 Han Qi was Han Wuji’s younger brother.

934

Zuo Tradition

Bi, a settlement granted to Gongzi You (Ji You) almost a century earlier (Xi 1.6), is here fortified, a sign of the Ji lineage’s rising power. The stewards of Bi, increasingly entrenched, will in turn challenge Ji leaders; see the rebellions of Nan Kuai (Zhao 12.10) and Gongshan Buniu (Ding 5.4, 8.10). Nan Yi was the steward of Bi. Shuzhong Daia was the director of conscripts. Wishing to please the Ji lineage head, Ji Wuzi, he sought to ingratiate himself with Nan Yi. He said to Nan Yia, “Request to fortify Bi. I will give you more conscripts for the work.” That was why the Ji lineage head fortified Bi.131

7.3(4)

Lord Mu of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court: this was also the first time he had visited the court of our lord.

7.4(3)

Lu returns Wei’s official visit (Xiang 1.5) only after an interval of six years, possibly because of the setbacks Lu suffered in Zeng. The relative weakness of Wei also accounts for this neglect. Lu has sent five missions to Jin over the same period. In autumn, Ji Wuzi went to Wei to reciprocate the official visit of Gongsun Piaoa and also to explain that the delay in the return visit was not on account of double-dealing.

7.5(5)

Han Jue retires, and his eldest son, Han Wuji, who is supposed to succeed to the position of chief minister of Jin, yields the position to his younger brother Han Qi. He justifies his decision with apposite quotations from the Odes. Anecdotes explaining why an appointment is just despite suspicions of impropriety or partiality are common in Jin-related materials. In winter, in the tenth month, Han Juea of Jin announced his retirement on account of old age.132 Han Wujia had a debilitating illness,133 but there was a plan to establish him as successor. He declined, saying, “It says in the Odes,

7.6

How could I not want to go morning and night? Yet what is to be done—for walking there is too much dew.134

It also says, He does not attend to things personally; he does not take charge himself; That is why the common people have no faith in him.135

I lack talent. Is it not acceptable that I should yield? I request to have Han Qid established as successor.136 He associates with Tian Su, who says he ‘loves nobility of spirit.’ As it says in the Odes,

Lord Xiang

935

靖共爾位， 好是正直。 神之聽之， 介爾景福。 恤民為德，正直為正，正曲為直，參和為仁。如是則神聽之，介福降之。 立之，不亦可乎？」 庚戌，使宣子朝，遂老。晉侯謂韓無忌仁，使掌公族大夫。 7.7(7) 衛孫文子來聘，且拜武子之言，而尋孫桓子之盟。公登亦登。叔孫穆子

相，趨進，曰：「 諸侯之會，寡君未嘗後衛君。今吾子不後寡君，寡君未 知所過。吾子其少安！」孫子無辭，亦無悛容。 穆叔曰：「 孫子必亡。為臣而君，過而不悛，亡之本也。《詩》曰： 退食自公， 委蛇委蛇。 謂從者也。衡而委蛇，必折。」 7.8(8) 楚子囊圍陳，會于鄬以救之。

137 Maoshi 207, “Xiaoming” 小明, 13A.447. 138 What is “straight” (zhi 直) does not need to be “aligned” or “rectified” (zheng 正): the verb may indicate “furthering” or “full realization,” or it may imply that even those who are basically just may still have minor flaws. The “three” are virtue (de), rectification (zheng), and straightening (zhi). 139 See Xiang 7.5. 140 Sun Liangfu, father of Sun Linfu, swore a covenant with Lu in 588 Bce (Annals, Cheng 3.11). 141 According to Yili 22.262, the envoy should thrice yield precedence to the hosting ruler, and he should be two steps behind the ruler as they ascend the seven steps linking the central court to the palace hall (Yili 20.242). Backed by Jin, Sun Linfu may be dismissive of the Lu ruler because the latter is only nine or ten years old. 142 Sun Linfu is said to have behaved arrogantly toward the Lu ruler because he defies his own ruler in Wei. 143 Maoshi 18, “Gaoyang” 羔羊, 1D.57. 144 The ode “Gaoyang” praises the free and easy gait of the official who presumably has fulfilled his duties. Sun Linfu’s disregard for Lord Xiang’s rightful precedence and his lack of remorse might have been described as a kind of “free and easy” demeanor, which, however, is here the mark of transgression.

936

Zuo Tradition

Be loyal and vigilant with the duties of your position; Be eager to be the one who rectifies and straightens. The spirits will listen to you And will help you, bestowing great blessings.137

To have compassion for the people is virtue; to align the straight is perfect rectification; to rectify the crooked is perfect straightening. And to be in harmony with these three138 is nobility of spirit. In this way, the spirits will listen to you and will confer great blessings on you. Is it not acceptable to establish him as successor?” On the gengxu day (9), Han Jue had Han Qib attend court and retired forthwith. The Prince of Jin considered Han Wuji noble in spirit and put him in charge of the high officers of ruling lineages. The Lu minister Shusun Bao predicts exile for the visiting Wei dignitary Sun Linfu because of the latter’s incivility toward the Lu ruler. Sun’s conflict with Wei rulers (Cheng 7.6, 14.1) culminates in exile for Lord Xian of Wei (Xiang 14.4), whose restoration, in turn, results in Sun Linfu’s exile (Xiang 26.2). This anecdote is debated in Han Feizi 39.870–71, unfolding as arguments on whether the Wei ruler’s failure or Sun Linfu’s presumption deserves greater censure and on whether and when a subject may claim a ruler’s prerogative. Sun Linfu of Wei came to us on an official visit and also to bow in respect for Ji Wuzic’s words of apology.139 Further, he was renewing the covenant sworn by Sun Liangfua.140 When our lord ascended the steps, Sun Linfu also ascended.141 Shusun Baob, acting as our lord’s assistant, hastened forward and said, “At meetings of the princes, our unworthy ruler has never come after the Wei ruler. Now you, sir, did not stay behind our unworthy ruler. Our unworthy ruler does not yet know where he was at fault. You, sir, should proceed at greater leisure!” Sun Linfub did not offer any explanation, nor did he appear remorseful. Shusun Baoa said, “Sun Linfub will certainly go into exile. Being a subject, he behaves like a ruler, and having erred, he does not repent: these are the root causes of exile.142 As it says in the Odes,

7.7(7)

Retreating from court for supper, With steps free and easy.143

This refers only to those who follow the right course of action. But when the recalcitrant ones are free and easy, they are sure to be broken.”144 Zinang of Chu laid siege to Chen. The princes joined forces at Wei to come to Chen’s aid.

7.8(8)

Lord Xiang

937

7.9(9) 鄭僖公之為大子也，於成之十六年與子罕適晉，不禮焉。又與子豐適

楚，亦不禮焉。及其元年朝于晉，子豐欲愬諸晉而廢之，子罕止之。及將 會于鄬，子駟相，又不禮焉。侍者諫，不聽；又諫，殺之。及鄵，子駟使賊 夜弒僖公，而以瘧疾赴于諸侯。簡公生五年，奉而立之。 7.10(10) 陳人患楚。慶虎、慶寅謂楚人曰：「 吾使公子黃往，而執之。」楚人從之。

二慶使告陳侯于會，曰：「 楚人執公子黃矣。君若不來，群臣不忍社稷宗 廟，懼有二圖。」陳侯逃歸。

145 Gongyang, Xiang 7 (19.244), claims that this turn of events was “concealed on behalf of the central domains” (wei zhongguo hui 為中國諱) in the Annals. 146 Cf. Gao Shiqi, Zuozhuan jishi benmo, 612. 147 The first year of Lord Xi’s reign corresponded to the third year of Lord Xiang’s (570 Bce). 148 The received text has nüeji 瘧疾, the modern Chinese term for malaria. Nüe 瘧 is the same as nüe 虐 (“severe”). Shiji 42.1771 records that Lord Xi was poisoned and the funeral notification claimed that he had died of “sudden, serious illness” 暴病, which would have been derived from nüeji 虐疾. See also Yu Yue, quoted in Karlgren, gl. 482.

938

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xi of Zheng is said to have been assassinated because of his repeated acts of ritual impropriety toward his ministers and his rejection of remonstrance. The Gongyang tradition speculates that the pro-Jin Zheng ruler was assassinated by his pro-Chu ministers.145 The choice between Chu and Jin was the major issue dividing Zheng ministers during these years (Xiang 2.5, 2.7, 8.7).146 Note that the account implies that the corresponding entry in the Annals merely follows the notification (fu) sent to the princes by Zheng ministers. When Lord Xi of Zheng was heir apparent and went with Zihan to Jin in the sixteenth year of Lord Cheng of Lu, he did not treat Zihan with ritual propriety. He went with Zifeng to Chu as well and again did not treat him with ritual propriety. By the first year of his reign,147 when they visited the court of Jin, Zifeng wanted to accuse him before the Jin leaders and depose him, but Zihan stopped him. When he was about to attend the meeting at Wei, Zisi was his assistant, and again he did not treat him with ritual propriety. His attendant remonstrated with him, and he did not heed him; when he remonstrated again, the lord put him to death. When they reached Cao, Zisi sent brigands to assassinate Lord Xi at night and sent to the princes a notice of his death, claiming that it was the result of a sudden, serious illness.148 They supported Lord Jian, who was five years old, and established him as ruler.

7.9(9)

Chen is torn between Jin and Chu (Xiang 3.6, 3.8, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 7.8). Chen high officers, fearful of offending Chu, maneuver to force Lord Ai of Chen to leave the meeting of the princes led by Jin at Wei. The men of Chen were troubled about Chu. Qing Hu and Qing Yin told the men of Chu, “We will send Gongzi Huang to you, and you will arrest him.”149 The men of Chu acted accordingly. The two Qings sent someone to tell the Prince of Chen at the meeting, “The men of Chu have arrested Gongzi Huang! If you, my lord, do not come back, your subjects will find it hard to bear what will happen to the altars of our domain as well as our Ancestral Temples. We fear there will be another plan.”150 The Prince of Chen fled homeward to Chen.

7.10(10)

149 Qing Hu and Qing Yin are ministers in charge of government in Chen. Gongzi Huang is the younger brother of Lord Ai, who is attending the meeting at Wei. 150 Qing Hu and Qing Yin are implicitly threatening to establish another Chen ruler who will be more conciliatory toward Chu.

Lord Xiang

939

春秋 8.1(1) 八年，春，王正月，公如晉。 8.2 夏，葬鄭僖公。 8.3(3) 鄭人侵蔡，獲蔡公子燮。 8.4(4) 季孫宿會晉侯、鄭伯、齊人、宋人、衛人、邾人于邢丘。 8.5 公至自晉。 8.6(5) 莒人伐我東鄙。 8.7(6) 秋，九月，大雩。 8.8(7) 冬，楚公子貞帥師伐鄭。 8.9(8) 晉侯使士匄來聘。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年，春，公如晉，朝，且聽朝聘之數。 8.2 鄭群公子以僖公之死也，謀子駟。子駟先之。夏，四月庚辰，辟殺子狐、

子熙、子侯、子丁。孫擊、孫惡出奔衛。

940

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 8 (565 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord went to Jin.

8.1(1)

In summer, Lord Xi of Zheng was buried.

8.2

Zheng leaders invaded Cai and captured Gongzi Xie of Cai.

8.3(3)

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) met with the Prince of Jin, the Liege of Zheng, a Qi leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, and a Zhu leader at Xingqiu.151

8.4(4)

Our lord arrived from Jin.

8.5

Ju leaders invaded our eastern marches.

8.6(5)

In autumn, in the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

8.7(6)

In winter, Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and attacked Zheng.

8.8(7)

The Prince of Jin sent Shi Gai (Fan Gai) to us on an official visit.

8.9(8)

ZUO

In the eighth year, in spring, our lord went to Jin to visit its court and also to await commands on the appropriate frequency for visiting its court and for official visits.152

8.1(1)

The noble sons of Zheng, on account of Lord Xi’s death, plotted against Zisi. Zisi acted first. In summer, in the fourth month, on the gengchen day (12), he trumped up some charge and put to death Zihu, Zixi, Zihou, and Ziding. Sunji and Sun’e left the domain and fled to Wei.153

8.2

151 Xingqiu was last mentioned in Xuan 6.3. 152 Du Yu (ZZ 30.520) glosses chaopin zhi shu 朝聘之數 as specifications on the amount of gifts and money to be offered and considers this a sign of Jin resurgence under Lord Dao; Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 30.520), citing You Ji’s comment on how princes came on official visits (pin) to Jin every three years and attended its court (chao) every five years during the reigns of Lords Wen and Xiang (Zhao 3.1), argues that chaopin zhi shu refers to the frequency of visits. That this was already Lord Xiang’s third visit to attend court in Jin in eight years suggests that the demands Jin made on the smaller domains had increased significantly since the times of Lords Wen and Xiang. 153 Du Yu (ZZ 30.520) identifies the two as sons of Zihu.

Lord Xiang

941

8.3(3) 庚寅，鄭子國、子耳侵蔡，獲蔡司馬公子燮。鄭人皆喜，唯子產不順，曰：

「 小國無文德而有武功，禍莫大焉。楚人來討，能勿從乎？從之，晉師 必至。晉、楚伐鄭，自今鄭國不四、五年弗得寧矣。」子國怒之曰：「 爾何 知！國有大命，而有正卿，童子言焉，將為戮矣！」 8.4(4) 五月甲辰，會于邢丘，以命朝聘之數，使諸侯之大夫聽命。季孫宿、齊

高厚、宋向戌、衛甯殖、邾大夫會之。鄭伯獻捷于會，故親聽命。大夫不 書，尊晉侯也。 8.5(6) 莒人伐我東鄙，以疆鄫田。 8.6(7) 秋，九月，大雩，旱也。 8.7a(8) 冬，楚子囊伐鄭，討其侵蔡也。

154 The chief minister at this point is Zisi, who plotted Lord Xi’s assassination and served as regent for the new young Zheng ruler. “Great command” refers here to decisions to mobilize an army. On the limits “great command” imposes on remonstrance, see Xunzi 13.294. 155 Zichan died forty-four years later (Zhao 20.9) and must have been quite young at this point. 156 According to Du Yu (ZZ 30.520), the logic seems to be that Lord Dao of Jin deserved respect and narrative attention because he was reasserting Jin’s status as overlord by emphasizing ritual propriety in interdomain relations. 157 Zeng must have been situated between Lu and Ju. Ju had annexed Zeng two years earlier (Xiang 6.4). Lu might have made incursions eastward into former Zeng territories, which would have in turn provoked Ju to invade Lu’s eastern border and to define the boundary between Zeng and Lu.

942

Zuo Tradition

Even as a child Zichan shows great foresight. While Zheng celebrates its victory over Cai, Zichan worries about retaliation from Cai’s ally, Chu, and about Jin reprisals if Zheng capitulates to Chu demands. A child who speaks out precociously to the dismay of his elders is a common trope in early Chinese literature. For another example of a father rebuking a son despite the son’s good judgment, see Cheng 16.5a. A variant of the Zichan story, with further emphasis on the danger of speaking forthrightly, appears in Han Feizi 33.709. On the gengyin day (22), Ziguo and Zi’er of Zheng invaded Cai and captured the Cai supervisor of the military, Gongzi Xie. The leaders of Zheng were all pleased. Only Zichan did not go along but said, “For a small domain, there is no greater calamity than to lack civil virtue and to have instead martial achievement. When the men of Chu come to chastise us, can we not submit to them? But if we submit to them, Jin troops will certainly come. And if both Jin and Chu attack Zheng, Zheng will have no peace for at least the next four or five years.” Infuriated, his father, Ziguo, said, “What can you know! The domain has its great command, for which it has its chief minister.154 This is a child speaking—for this you may be executed!”155

8.3(3)

With the meeting at Xingqiu, Lord Dao of Jin seems to reassert Jin’s status as overlord. In the fifth month, on the jiachen day (7), the princes met at Xingqiu for Jin to issue commands on the appropriate frequency for court visits and official visits, and for the high officers of the princes to await commands. Ji Wuzib, Gao Hou of Qi, Xiang Xu of Song, Ning Zhi of Wei, and the high officers of Zhu attended the meeting. The Liege of Zheng presented the spoils of victory at the meeting; that was why he personally attended to the Jin ruler’s commands. That the names of the high officers were not recorded was to show respect for the Prince of Jin.156

8.4(4)

Ju leaders attacked our eastern marches in order to mark the boundaries of the fields of Zeng.157

8.5(6)

In autumn, in the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice: this was because of the drought.

8.6(7)

Facing Chu aggression, Zheng leaders debate the pros and cons of allegiance to Jin and to Chu. The pro-Jin faction is presented as having more compelling moral reasoning. In winter, Zinang of Chu attacked Zheng: this was to chasten it for invading Cai.

8.7a(8)

Lord Xiang

943

子駟、子國、子耳欲從楚，子孔、子蟜、子展欲待晉。子駟曰：「《周 詩》有之曰： 俟河之清， 人壽幾何？ 兆云詢多， 職競作羅。 謀之多族，民之多違，事滋無成。民急矣，姑從楚，以紓吾民。晉師至， 吾又從之。敬共幣帛，以待來者，小國之道也。犧牲玉帛，待於二竟，以 待彊者而庇民焉。寇不為害，民不罷病，不亦可乎？」 子展曰：「 小所以事大，信也。小國無信，兵亂日至，亡無日矣。五 會之信，今將背之，雖楚救我，將安用之？親我無成，鄙我是欲，不可從 也。不如待晉。晉君方明，四軍無闕，八卿和睦，必不棄鄭。楚師遼遠， 糧食將盡，必將速歸，何患焉？舍之聞之：杖莫如信。完守以老楚，杖信 以待晉，不亦可乎？」 8.7b 子駟曰：「 《詩》云：

謀夫孔多， 是用不集。 發言盈庭， 誰敢執其咎？

158 One can wait for the Yellow River to clear up, but it will never happen in one’s lifetime. Analogously, one may hope for Jin’s assistance (or, more generally, consensus, order, and peace), but it will not happen easily. 159 Alternatively: “They are no more than a net of disputations” (Takezoe, 14.45). Yang (3:957), citing Erya, reads xun 詢 as xin 信 (“indeed”): “The signs of divination are indeed too many.” This is an uncollected ode not found in the received text of Maoshi. 160 Karlgren (gl. 484) reads zu 族 as “category”: “to deliberate on too many categories is to have people turn against each other.” 161 The same line appears in Xiang 22.3 and Ai 7.4a. 162 Meetings took place at Ji Marsh (Xiang 3.5), Qī and Chengdi (Xiang 5.8, 5.9), Wei (Xiang 7.8), and Xingqiu (Xiang 8.4). 163 Reading cheng 成 as zhong 終 (“last”), following Wang Niansun (Karlgren, gl. 485). For bi 鄙 as a verb (“to regard as borders or margins”), see also Xuan 14.3; Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 702–3. 164 Jin’s four armies referred to the middle, upper, lower, and new armies. There were no deficiencies in the ranks of soldiers or in military supplies. 165 The eight ministers (the commanders and assistant commanders of the four armies) are Zhi Ying, Fan Gai, Zhonghang Yan, Han Qi, Luan Yan, Shi Fang, Zhao Wu, and Wei Jiang.

944

Zuo Tradition

Zisi, Ziguo, and Zi’er wanted to follow Chu. Zikong, Zijiao, and Gongsun Shezhia wanted to wait for Jin to come to the aid of Zheng. Zisi said, “As the Zhou Odes has it: Wait for the clearing up of the Yellow River— Yet how long is the span of human life?158 Deliberations over omens, so many, are No more than the weaving of a net to ensnare ourselves.159

The more lineages160 are in on the deliberations, the more the people are divided, and the more likely the affair is to come to nothing. The people are so desperate—let us follow Chu for now to bring relief to our people. Then when the Jin army arrives, we can also follow it. Respectfully offering bolts of silk and waiting for others to come is the way of small domains. Let us wait with sacrificial animals, jade, and silk at the two borders, so as to wait for the stronger one and put our people under its protection. The enemies will do no harm, and the people will not be illused and exhausted. Is that not acceptable?” Gongsun Shezhia said, “The thing whereby the small domain serves the great domain is good faith.161 If a small domain is faithless, war and disorder will come upon it day after day, and its doom will not be far off. Good faith has been built up over five meetings,162 and now we plan to turn against it. Even if Chu were to come to our aid, of what use would it be? Chu’s kindred feeling for us will come to nothing; its desire is to turn us into its borderland.163 We cannot follow them. It is better to wait for Jin. Right now the Jin ruler is enlightened, its four armies have no deficiencies,164 and its eight ministers are in harmony:165 it will certainly not cast off Zheng. The Chu army is far from home, its provisions are nearly exhausted, and it will certainly depart soon. Why be troubled about it? I have heard: nothing offers support like good faith. Would it not be acceptable to complete our defensive fortifications in order to wear out the Chu army and to support ourselves on good faith as we wait for Jin?” Zisi explains Zheng’s defection with masterful rhetoric, but Jin, unappeased, threatens to punish Zheng. Zichan’s dire prediction comes true. Zisi said, “As it says in the Odes,

8.7b

The counselors are very many; That is why nothing will be accomplished. The words spoken fill the court. Who will dare to bear the blame?

Lord Xiang

945

如匪行邁謀， 是用不得于道。 請從楚，騑也受其咎。」 乃及楚平，使王子伯駢告于晉曰：「 君命敝邑：『修而車賦，儆而 師徒，以討亂略。』蔡人不從，敝邑之人不敢寧處，悉索敝賦，以討于 蔡，獲司馬燮，獻于邢丘。今楚來討曰：『女何故稱兵于蔡？』焚我郊 保，馮陵我城郭。敝邑之眾，夫婦男女，不遑啟處，以相救也。翦焉傾 覆，無所控告。民死亡者，非其父兄，即其子弟。夫人愁痛，不知所庇。 民知窮困，而受盟于楚。孤也與其二三臣不能禁止，不敢不告。」 知武子使行人子員對之曰：「 君有楚命，亦不使一个行李告于寡 君，而即安于楚。君之所欲也，誰敢違君？寡君將帥諸侯以見于城下。 唯君圖之！」 8.8(9) 晉范宣子來聘，且拜公之辱，告將用師于鄭。

166 Reading fei 匪 as bi 彼 (ZZ 30.521): those seeking counsel while walking will get so many different kinds of advice that they will become lost. Zheng Xuan reads fei 匪 as fei 非 (Maoshi-Zheng 12B.413): “They are like those seeking counsel while not walking, / And because of that cannot get on their way.” 167 Maoshi 195, “Xiaomin” 小旻, 12B.412–13. 168 Zisi was initially pro-Jin (Xiang 2.5). Zichan later implies (Xiang 22.2) that it was Jin incivility toward Zisi during the meeting at Xingqiu this year that alienated him and induced him to become pro-Chu.

946

Zuo Tradition

They are like those who seek counsel even while walking,166 And because of that cannot gain the right way.167

I submit that we follow Chu, and I will take the blame.”168 They therefore made peace with Chu, sending Wangzi Bopian169 to notify Jin: “You, my lord, issued this command to our humble settlement: ‘Repair your contingent of chariots and put your soldiers on guard so as to chastise the disorderly and deviant.’170 The men of Cai did not submit. The men of our humble settlement did not dare to stand by quietly and therefore mustered our whole meager contingent to chastise Cai. We seized Xie, its supervisor of the military, and presented the spoils of victory at Xingqiu. Now Chu has come to chastise us, saying: ‘For what reason did you raise an army against Cai?’ It has burned the forts in our outskirts and has breached our city walls. The multitudes of our humble settlement, husbands and wives, men and women, have not had time to tarry or dwell171 as they tried to give each other succor. With the domain cut to pieces and thrown topsy-turvy, there is no place to turn to for appeal. Those among the people who perished were either fathers and older brothers or sons and younger brothers. Everyone is in sorrow and pain, not knowing where to find protection. The people realize that they are in dire straits and have therefore accepted the covenant from Chu. I, the lone one, along with my various subjects, cannot put a stop to this, and we would not presume to fail to notify you.” Zhi Yinga sent the envoy Ziyun to reply with these words: “You, my lord, received Chu’s command, and without sending a single envoy to notify our unworthy ruler, you have quickly settled into concord with Chu. If this is your wish, who would dare to oppose you, my lord? Our unworthy ruler plans to lead the princes to have an audience with you beneath the city walls. You, my lord, should consider this.” A Jin minister enlists Lu’s assistance in attacking Zheng. The prospective military alliance is couched in quotations on amity from the Odes. Fan Gaic of Jin came to us on an official visit and also to bow for our lord’s condescension in visiting Jin. He notified us that Jin planned to use its forces against Zheng.

8.8(9)

169 Although the term “Wangzi” (“the king’s son”) usually indicates royal lineage, Wangzi Bopian, like Wangzi Boliao (Xuan 6.6), is a Zheng noble. 170 Yang (3:958) glosses lue 略 as “not following the proper way.” Takezoe (14.46) reads lue 略 as “border” and luanlue 亂略 as “those who wrought havoc at the borders.” Karlgren (gl. 487), following Lin Yaosou, reads lue 略 as a loan for lue 掠, “to rob.” The translation here follows Yang’s reading. Wangzi Bopian is claiming that Zheng was carrying out Jin’s command when it attacked Cai. 171 These words echo a line in Maoshi 162, “Simu,” referred to in Xiang 4.3 and also cited in Xiang 29.4.

Lord Xiang

947

公享之。宣子賦〈摽有梅〉。季武子曰：「 誰敢哉？今譬於草木，寡 君在君，君之臭味也。歡以承命，何時之有？」武子賦〈角弓〉。賓將出， 武子賦〈彤弓〉。宣子曰：「 城濮之役，我先君文公獻功于衡雍，受彤弓 于襄王，以為子孫藏。匄也，先君守官之嗣也，敢不承命？」君子以為 知禮。

春秋 9.1(1) 九年，春，宋災。 9.2(2) 夏，季孫宿如晉。 9.3(3) 五月辛酉，夫人姜氏薨。 9.4 秋，八月癸未，葬我小君穆姜。 9.5(5) 冬，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞伯、小邾

子、齊世子光伐鄭。十有二月己亥，同盟于戲。 9.6(8) 楚子伐鄭。

172 Maoshi 20, “Piao you mei” 摽有梅, 1E.62–63. This is a song celebrating timely courtship. Fan Gai, using the analogy between courtship and interdomain relations, is expressing his hope that Lu will supply military assistance to Jin in a timely fashion. On this analogy, see also Cheng 8.1, Zhao 1.4. 173 Ji Wuzi was acting as aide to Lord Xiang, who was eleven at the time. 174 Our translation is based on Du Yu’s (ZZ 30.522) comment that the comparison implies that “both are of the same kind”—that is, the Lu and Jin rulers are related as “attribute” and “substance” and are inseparable. Cf. Karlgren (gl. 490): “our unworthy ruler is drawn to your ruler by his fragrance (like the fragrance of flowers and fruit).” Zichan employs the same metaphor in Xiang 22.2. 175 Ji Wuzi is responding to Fan Gai’s plea for “timely assistance” by confirming Lu’s unconditional support, for which “the season,” or timeliness, is not even an issue. 176 Maoshi 223, “Jiao gong” 角弓, 15A.503–5. The ode celebrates the mutual assistance of brothers and is here used to confirm the ties between Jin and Lu as “brother domains.”

948

Zuo Tradition

Our lord offered him ceremonial toasts. Fan Gaib recited “Plop Fall the Plums.”172 Ji Wuzi173 said, “Who would dare to miss the right time? Now if we take our analogies from plants, our unworthy ruler is to your ruler what fragrance is to flowers and fruits.174 Gladly we take your decree as our own. What does the season have to do with it?”175 Ji Wuzic recited “Horn Bow.”176 When the guests were about to leave, Ji Wuzic recited “Red Bow.”177 Fan Gaib said, “After the Chengpu campaign, our former ruler Lord Wen offered the spoils of victory at Hengyong and received from King Xiang the red bow, which is to be kept by his descendants. I am the successor of one who guarded his office under our former ruler. How dare I not take your decree as my own?” The noble man considered this a sound understanding of ritual propriety. LORD XIANG 9 (564 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, there was a disastrous fire in Song.

9.1(1)

In summer, Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Jin.

9.2(2)

In the fifth month, on the xinyou day (29), our lord’s wife, Lady Jiang, expired. In winter, in the eighth month, on the guiwei day (23), we buried our former lord’s wife, Mu Jiang.

9.3(3)

9.4

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, the Master of Lesser Zhu, and the Qi heir apparent Guang and attacked Zheng. In the twelfth month, on the jihai day,178 they swore a covenant together at Xi.

9.5(5)

The Master of Chu attacked Zheng.

9.6(8)

177 Maoshi 175, “Tong gong” 彤弓, 10A.351–53. The ode celebrates the joys of convivial feasting as the host welcome the guests. The unstrung red bow in the first line of the ode is a “beginning affective image” (qixing 起興) that does not have a direct logical connection with the rest of the poem. The red bow was one of the gifts bestowed by King Xiang of Zhou on Lord Wen of Jin. Fan Gai thus interprets “Red Bow” as a reminder of how Jin should guard (or regain) its status as overlord. Du Yu (ZZ 30.522) opines that Ji Wuzi also intends that association, although the recitation would also have made sense as a celebration of his guests. Note that Ning Wuzi of Wei declines to accept “Red Bow” in Wen 4.7 because it is too grandiose. 178 There was no jihai day in the twelfth month; it fell on the tenth day of the eleventh month.

Lord Xiang

949

左傳 9.1a(1) 九年，春，宋災，樂喜為司城以為政，使伯氏司里。火所未至，徹小屋，

塗大屋，陳畚、挶；具綆、缶，備水器；量輕重，蓄水潦，積土塗；巡丈 城，繕守備，表火道。使華臣具正徒，令隧正納郊保，奔火所。使華閱 討右官，官庀其司。向戌討左，亦如之。使樂遄庀刑器，亦如之。使皇鄖 命校正出馬，工正出車，備甲兵，庀武守。使西鉏吾庀府守，令司宮、巷 伯儆宮。二師令四鄉正敬享，祝宗用馬于四墉，祀盤庚于西門之外。 9.1b 晉侯問於士弱曰：「 吾聞之：宋災於是乎知有天道，何故？」

179 Cf. Xuan 16.2: a fire sent by Heaven is called “disastrous fire” (zai 災). 180 The supervisor of fortifications ranked fifth among the six ministers of Song (Wen 7.3, Cheng 15.3). Yue Xi was in charge of policies presumably because of his superior talents. 181 We follow Karlgren, gl. 490, and read zhang 丈 as a loanword for chang 長. Du Yu (ZZ 30.523) reads zhang as “measure,” but that violates the syntactic pattern of the three-character lines in this passage (first character a verb, followed by a noun consisting of the second and third characters). 182 Du Yu (ZZ 30.523) identifies Yue Chuan as “supervisor of punishment” and reads xingqi 刑器 (“instruments of punishment”) as xingshu 刑書 (“writings on punishment”). Karlgren (gl. 493) reminds us that such writings were often inscribed on bronze vessels (qi 器) (Zhao 6.3, 29.5), and xingqi would thus mean “vessels with penal codes.” 183 The Song capital was divided into four districts (xiang 鄉). What we translate as “the elder of the lord’s household” (xiangbo 巷伯) may be a eunuch; see Maoshi 200, “Xiangbo” 巷伯, 12C.428–30. The “two ministers” referred to here are the minister of the right (youshi 右師) and the minister of the left (zuoshi 左師), who ranked highest among the six ministers in charge of government in Song. 184 Pangeng, the tenth Shang king, is here honored as the ancestor of Song. According to Yang (3:963), Pangeng moved the Shang capital to Yinxu (Ruins of Yin), by the Anyang River in Anyang, Henan; and Yinxu was situated to the northwest of the Song capital (present-day Shangqiu). Hence, the sacrifices are performed at the west­­ ern gate. 185 We follow Yu Yue’s reading, cited in Takezoe (Xiang 14.53) and Karlgren, gl. 496: the question implies that Song understood the Way of Heaven because of the fire, not that Song could predict the fire because it understood the Way of Heaven (ZZ 30.524). Song seemed to have continued the Shang tradition of linking disastrous fires to planetary movements and turmoil in the realm (ZZ-Kong 30.526). As in Zhao 9.4, 11.2 and 11.5, where the Year-Planet’s cycle is linked to retributory laws deciding the fate of Chen, Chu and Cai, “the Way of Heaven” is here linked to the movements of stars.

950

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

With Yue Xi delegating responsibilities and making necessary preparations, Song leaders manage to control a disastrous fire. For a comparable account, see Zichan’s measures for dealing with a fire in Zhao 18.3. In the ninth year, in spring, there was a disastrous fire in Song.179 Yue Xi, as supervisor of fortifications, was in charge of policies.180 He sent the Bo lineage head to oversee the streets and alleys. He removed the small houses where the fire had not yet reached, covered the big ones with mud, set out baskets and containers for carrying earth, had ropes and urns ready for drawing water, prepared vessels for holding water, assessed the lightness and heaviness of tasks, stored up water, accumulated earth, made inspection tours of the long city walls,181 repaired the equipment for keeping guard, and indicated the path the fire would follow. He sent Hua Chen to bring together the regular conscripts. Hua Chen ordered the director of distant outlying districts to send their conscripts into the capital and hasten to the site of the fire. Yue Xi sent Hua Yue to sternly admonish officials commanding the right, so that each official would make sure that his subordinates were ready. Xiang Xu sternly admonished officials commanding the left in like fashion. Yue Xi also sent Yue Chuan to have implements of punishment ready in like fashion.182 He sent Huang Yun to charge the manager of horses to bring out horses and the manager of carriages to bring out carriages, prepare armor and weapons, and to be ready for guarding the arsenal. He sent Xichu Wu to be ready for guarding the storehouses and archives. He ordered the supervisor of the palace and the elder of the lord’s household to watch over the palace. The two ministers charged the four district directors to reverently offer sacrifices.183 The invocator and the ancestral attendant sacrificed horses at the four city walls and made offerings to Pangeng outside the western gate.184

9.1a(1)

The Jin minister Shi Ruo explains how disastrous fires, planetary movements, and the Way of government are connected. However, he ends up confirming the primacy of “the Way of government” over the knowledge of such connections (see also Zhao 7.14). The implicit praise for Yue Xi’s efficacious measures for combating the fire also shifts attention to the human realm. The Prince of Jin asked Shi Ruo, “I have heard that as a result of the disastrous fire Song knows there is such a thing as the Way of Heaven. Why is that so?”185

9.1b

Lord Xiang

951

對曰：「 古之火正，或食於心，或食於咮，以出內火。是故咮為 鶉火，心為大火。陶唐氏之火正閼伯居商丘，祀大火，而火紀時焉。相 土因之，故商主大火。商人閱其禍敗之釁，必始於火，是以日知其有天 道也。」 公曰：「 可必乎？」 對曰：「 在道。國亂無象，不可知也。」 9.2(2) 夏，季武子如晉，報宣子之聘也。 9.3(3) 穆姜薨於東宮。始往而筮之，遇艮䷳之八。史曰：「 是謂艮之隨䷐。隨，其

出也。君必速出！」

186 See also Zhao 29.4, where the Jin scribe Cai Mo describes how the five phases have their corresponding “offices.” 187 The Heart Asterism is the equivalent of Scorpio. 188 Explanations vary, but most commentators agree that the use of fire (in pottery and metal works) depends on the positions of these two constellations during different seasons of the year. The expression chu nei huo 出內火 has been glossed as “to set fire and to prohibit the setting of fire” (ZZ 30.524) or “to take fire outside and to bring it indoors” (Zhouli-Zheng 30.458). Hong Liangji (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 510), citing Hui Dong, notes that nei 內 is interchangeable with ru 入, not na 納, in early texts. 189 That is, the sacrifices that Ebo (identified as Gaoxin’s son) established were inherited by Shang (Zhao 1.12). 190 That is why Great Fire is also called Chen 辰 (Zhao 1.12). The seasons are marked by the rising of specific constellations at specific times in the year. 191 Great Fire came to be known as the “Shang Stars” (Zhao 1.12). 192 Mu Jiang was banished to the Eastern Palace after threatening to depose her son, Lord Cheng, when the latter hesitated to bring down the Ji and Meng lineages, whose property was coveted by Mu Jiang’s lover Shusun Qiaoru (Cheng 16.5). 193 For explanations of the enigmatic “eight of ‘Restraint,’” see Yang, 3:964; Takezoe, 14.57–58. The “eight” of a hexagram is also mentioned in Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.365–66. These cases involve one unchanging line in the juxtaposition of two hexagrams, in contradistinction to the focus on the changing line in two juxtaposed hexagrams in all other instances of divination by the Zhou Changes. Fu Qian claims that the unchanging line is the focus of divination in the Lianshan 連山 and Guicang 歸藏

952

Zuo Tradition

He replied, “The director for fire186 in ancient times offered matching sacrifices sometimes to the Heart Asterism187 and sometimes to the Beak Asterism, so as to regulate the bringing out or taking in of fire.188 That is why the Beak is Quail Fire, and the Heart is Great Fire. Ebo, the director for fire of the Taotang lineage, stayed in Shangqiu.189 He offered sacrifices to Great Fire and used it to regulate the seasons.190 Xiangtu, the ancestor of Shang, followed this, and that is why Shang made Great Fire the basis of its sacrifices.191 The men of Shang observed how the omens of its calamities and defeat invariably started with fire. That was how in the past they knew there was such a thing as the Way of Heaven.” The lord asked, “Can this be regarded as certain?” He replied, “It depends on the Way of government. A domain in disorder has no interpretable signs, and the Way of Heaven cannot be known.” In summer, Ji Wuzi went to Jin: this was in answer to Fan Gaib’s official visit.

9.2(2)

Mu Jiang, wife of Lord Xuan of Lu, dies. The narrative harks back to the moment eleven years earlier when she was banished to the Eastern Palace in the aftermath of a failed conspiracy against the Ji and Meng lineages (Cheng 16). She maintains that divination results depend on character (on this issue, see also Zhao 12.10). Her understanding of the Changes echoes her knowledge of the Odes (Cheng 9.5). Mu Jiang’s self-indictment might have stemmed from the perceived need to control the subversive forces she embodies. Mu Jiang expired in the Eastern Palace.192 When she first went there, she divined by milfoil and encountered the “eight” of “Restraint” ䷳. The scribe said, “This is called ‘Restraint’ going to ‘Following’” ䷐.193 ‘Following’ is about leaving.194 You are sure to leave soon!”

9.3(3)

traditions (cited in Zhouli-Jia 24.370). Thus, here “Restraint” ䷳ (Gen 艮, hexagram 52) and “Following” ䷐ (Sui 隨, hexagram 17) have the same second line with all five other lines being different. The line statement of the second line in “Following” emphasizes dependence: “Tied to the child, losing the grown man” 係小子，失丈夫 (Zhouyi 3.56). The corresponding line in “Restraint” has this statement: “Restrain the calves, and one cannot raise up what follows (the toes). The heart feels discontent” 艮其腓，不拯其 隨。其心不快 (Zhouyi 5.116). One may argue that the images of dependence and constraint pointedly refer to Mu Jiang’s condition. However, the ensuing speech deals with the judgment of the hexagram “Following” rather than the second line of “Restraint” or of “Following.” 194 The scribe may be taking his cue from the reference to “leave the gate” (chumen 出 門) in the line statement of the first unbroken line of “Following” (Zhouyi 3.56). According to Hui Dong, “Yin follows yang, just as the mother follows the son. That is why ‘Following’ is about ‘leaving’” 陰隨陽，猶母隨子，故隨其出也。 (Hong Liang­ji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 511).

Lord Xiang

953

姜曰：「 亡！是於《周易》曰：『隨，元、亨、利、貞，無咎。』元，體 之長也；亨，嘉之會也；利，義之和也；貞，事之幹也。體仁足以長人，嘉 德足以合禮，利物足以和義，貞固足以幹事。然，故不可誣也，是以雖 隨無咎。今我婦人，而與於亂。固在下位，而有不仁，不可謂元。不靖國 家，不可謂亨。作而害身，不可謂利。棄位而姣，不可謂貞。有四德者， 隨而無咎。我皆無之，豈隨也哉？我則取惡，能無咎乎？必死於此，弗 得出矣。」 9.4 秦景公使士雃乞師于楚，將以伐晉，楚子許之。子囊曰：「 不可，當今吾

不能與晉爭。晉君類能而使之，舉不失選，官不易方；其卿讓於善，其 大夫不失守，其士競於教，其庶人力於農穡，商、工、皁、隸不知遷業。 韓厥老矣，知罃稟焉以為政。范匄少於中行偃而上之，使佐中軍。韓起 少於欒黶，而欒黶、士魴上之，使佐上軍。魏絳多功，以趙武為賢，而為 之佐。君明臣忠，上讓下競。當是時也，晉不可敵，事之而後可。君其 圖之！」

195 Elsewhere in Zuozhuan (Xi 33.6), the head is referred to as yuan 元, the word translated here as “prime.” 196 The above eight lines also appear (with two variant characters) in the “Wenyan” commentary (Zhouyi 1.12) on hexagram 1, “Pure Yang” ䷀ (Qian 乾) of the Changes. 197 Precisely because the words explained above have such meanings, failure to fulfill those meanings amounts to deception or distorted application of the hexagram. 198 Although Mu Jiang was a noblewoman, just by virtue of being a woman she was in a “lowly position.” She was “inhumane” because she threatened her son and the Ji and Meng lineages. 199 Jiao 姣 means “beauty” or “to adorn oneself.” As a widow, Mu Jiang was not supposed to adorn herself. Yet she abandoned her position as the lord’s mother and engaged in adulterous relations with Shusun Qiaoru (Yang 3:966). Du Yu glosses jiao as “licentiousness.” Yu Yue links it to xiao 恔, “to give rein to desires” (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 57–58). 200 Cf. Lienü zhuan 7.6a–6b. The noble man comments at the end of that account: “What a pity! Although Mu Jiang had qualities of intelligence and keen understanding, they could not finally cover up her offense of wreaking disorder through licentiousness.” 201 The translation follows Yang’s (3:966) reading of fang 方 as “methods and policies,” as in Zhao 29.4. Du Yu (ZZ 30.527) glosses fang as “what was appropriate”; Takezoe (14.60) reads it as “what was constant.”

954

Zuo Tradition

Mu Jiang said, “Not so! About this, the Zhou Changes says, “‘Following: prime, offering, benefit, constancy, no blame.’ Prime is the most important part of the body;195 offerings are made when blessings gather; benefit is the harmony of dutifulness; constancy is the mainstay of endeavors. Embodying humaneness suffices to improve a person, bringing blessings to virtue suffices to meld ritual propriety, benefiting others suffices to harmonize dutifulness, and never wavering in one’s constancy suffices to build the mainstay of endeavors.196 Since this is so, there cannot be any deception.197 That is how even with ‘Following,’ there is ‘no blame.’ Now I, as a woman, was yet party to fomenting disorder; and undeniably in a lowly position, I was yet inhumane;198 this cannot be called ‘prime.’ I did not bring peace and stability to the domain and patrimony; there cannot be ‘offerings.’ My action harmed my person; this cannot be called ‘benefit.’ I abandoned my position to indulge in licentiousness; this cannot be called ‘constancy.’199 With these four virtues, ‘Following’ is yet ‘no blame.’ But since I have none of them, how can this be deemed ‘Following’? Since I have taken up evil, how can there be ‘no blame’? I am sure to die here. I will not be able to leave!”200 Zinang of Chu lauds the virtues of yielding and disinterestedness among Jin leaders, although other Zuozhuan accounts tell of their bitter strife. Despite Zinang’s positive assessment of Jin power, Jin cannot fight back when a Qin-Chu coalition invades Jin, and Jin is defeated by Qin in the Li campaign (Xiang 11.6). Lord Jing of Qin sent Shi Qian to Chu to plead for troops. He planned to use these to attack Jin. The Master of Chu granted his request. Zinang said, “This will not do. At the present time we cannot contend with Jin. The Jin ruler sorts out different talents and employs them accordingly. So in making appointments, there are no mistakes with his choices, and in filling offices, there are no changes of methods and policies.201 His ministers yield to men of greater excellence. His high officers do not fail to fulfill their duties. His officers assiduously apply themselves to instruction. His people exert themselves in agricultural labor. Merchants, artisans, servants, and slaves know nothing of changing their inherited employments. Han Jue has grown old, and Zhi Ying defers to him in taking charge of government. Fan Gai is younger than Zhonghang Yan, but the latter honors him as his superior and he has been made assistant commander of the central army. Han Qi is younger than Luan Yan, but Luan Yan and Shi Fang honor him as their superior, and he has been made assistant commander of the upper army. Wei Jiang has many meritorious achievements, but he considers Zhao Wu worthy and acts as his assistant. The ruler is enlightened, the subjects are loyal, those above are yielding, and those below apply themselves assiduously. At this moment, Jin cannot be opposed. The only acceptable course is to serve them. You, my lord, should consider this!”

9.4

Lord Xiang

955



王曰：「 吾既許之矣，雖不及晉，必將出師。」 秋，楚子師于武城，以為秦援。 秦人侵晉。晉饑，弗能報也。

9.5a(5) 冬十月，諸侯伐鄭。庚午，季武子、齊崔杼、宋皇鄖從荀罃、士匄門于鄟

門，衛北宮括、曹人、邾人從荀偃、韓起門于師之梁，滕人、薛人從欒黶、 士魴門于北門，杞人、郳人從趙武、魏絳斬行栗。甲戌，師于氾。令於諸 侯曰：「 修器備，盛餱糧，歸老幼，居疾于虎牢，肆眚，圍鄭。」 鄭人恐，乃行成。中行獻子曰：「 遂圍之，以待楚人之救也，而與之 戰，不然，無成。」 知武子曰：「 許之盟而還師，以敝楚人。吾三分四軍，與諸侯之銳， 以逆來者，於我未病，楚不能矣。猶愈於戰。暴骨以逞，不可以爭。大勞 未艾。君子勞心，小人勞力，先王之制也。」 諸侯皆不欲戰，乃許鄭成。十一月己亥，同盟于戲，鄭服也。

202 Wucheng in Chu was first mentioned in Xi 6.4. 203 Gao Shiqi identifies the Zhuan Gate and Shizhiliang Gate as the eastern and western gates of the Zheng capital (Yang, 3:967). 204 The purpose is probably to open up roads, to get a supply of wood, or to destroy livelihood. 205 A Jin-Zheng peace agreement would provoke Chu to attack Zheng, and Chu would be worn out by the war effort. Note that differences between Zhonghang Yan and Zhi Ying belie the Chu commander Zinang’s portrayal of harmony among Jin leaders. 206 Yang (3:968) explains that the three crack contingents will take turns harrying the advancing Chu force. 207 What we have translated as “resorting to slaughter” is literally “exposing bones.” The biggest struggle is yet to come, so they should not persist in battle now.

956

Zuo Tradition

The king said, “I have already given my word to Qin. Even though we are no match for Jin, we must dispatch our army.” In autumn, the Master of Chu stationed his troops at Wucheng202 in order to assist Qin. The men of Qin invaded Jin. Jin, suffering from a famine, could not retaliate. Jin and its allies lay siege to Zheng. Despite initial dissension, Jin leaders grant Zheng’s request for a peace accord. In winter, in the tenth month, the princes attacked Zheng. On the gengwu day (11), Ji Wuzi, Cui Zhu of Qi, and Huang Yun of Song followed the lead of Zhi Yingb and Fan Gaia to storm the Zhuan Gate. Beigong Kuo of Wei and the men of Cao and Zhu followed the lead of Zhonghang Yana and Han Qi to storm the gate at Shizhiliang.203 The men of Teng and Xue followed the lead of Luan Yan and Shi Fang to storm the northern gate. The men of Qǐ and Ni followed the lead of Zhao Wu and Wei Jiang to cut down chestnut trees along the road.204 On the jiaxu day (15), the troops were stationed at the Fan River. Jin leaders commanded the princes in these words: “Repair your instruments of war, prepare dried food, send home the old and the young, let the sick stay at Hulao, treat leniently those who are guilty, and lay siege to Zheng.” The men of Zheng were fearful and thus sued for peace. Zhonghang Yanb said, “Let us go ahead with the siege so as to wait for the men of Chu to come to its aid, and then we will engage in battle with them. Otherwise, nothing will be accomplished.” Zhi Yinga said, “Grant them a covenant and then let the troops turn back, so as to tire out the men of Chu.205 We will divide our four armies into three. Together with the crack troops of the princes, we will confront the advancing Chu forces.206 For us this will not be too draining, but Chu will not be able to endure it. This is still better than persisting in battle. Resorting to slaughter to satisfy our desire is not the way to contend for victory, for our great toil is not yet at an end.207 Noble men should toil with their minds while common men toil with their strength:208 that is the rule of former kings.” None of the princes wanted to fight. They thus granted Zheng an accord. In the eleventh month, on the jihai day (10), they swore a covenant together at Xi:209 Zheng had submitted.

9.5a(5)

208 The same lines appear in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.208, when Gongfu Wenbo’s mother uses her own weaving to talk about the importance of labor and assiduous application. Cf. Mencius 3A.4: “Those who toil with their minds govern others; those who toil with their strength are governed by others”; Cheng 13.2: “noble men are assiduous in fulfilling ritual propriety, while common men exert themselves to the utmost in physical labor.” 209 Xi 戲 was located in Zheng and probably refers to Xitong Mountain 戲童山, northeast of present-day Songshan County 嵩山縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

957

9.5b 將盟，鄭六卿，公子騑、公子發、公子嘉、公孫輒、公孫蠆、公孫舍之及

其大夫、門子，皆從鄭伯。晉士莊子為載書，曰：「 自今日既盟之後，鄭 國而不唯晉命是聽，而或有異志者，有如此盟！」 公子騑趨進曰：「 天禍鄭國，使介居二大國之間，大國不加德音， 而亂以要之，使其鬼神不獲歆其禋祀，其民人不獲享其土利，夫婦辛苦 墊隘，無所厎告。自今日既盟之後，鄭國而不唯有禮與彊可以庇民者是 從，而敢有異志者，亦如之！」 荀偃曰：「 改載書！」 公孫舍之曰：「 昭大神要言焉。若可改也，大國亦可叛也。」 知武子謂獻子曰：「 我實不德，而要人以盟，豈禮也哉？非禮，何 以主盟？姑盟而退，修德息師而來，終必獲鄭，何必今日？我之不德，民 將棄我，豈唯鄭？若能休和，遠人將至，何恃於鄭？」乃盟而還。

958

Zuo Tradition

Jin ministers yield to Zheng ministers in a dispute over the wording of the covenant document. Zheng makes submission to Jin conditional upon the latter’s ritual propriety and its protection of Zheng. For another example of dispute over covenant wording, see Ding 10.2a. When the covenant was about to be sworn, the six ministers of Zheng— Zisia, Ziguoa, Zikonga, Zi’era, Zijiaoa, Gongsun Shezhi—as well as Zheng high officers and the heirs of ministerial lineages, all followed the Liege of Zheng. Shi Ruoa of Jin composed the covenant document, which said: “From this day on, after the swearing of the covenant, if Zheng does not abide only by Jin’s commands but harbors some other intent, let this covenant bear witness against us!” Zisia hastened forward, saying, “Heaven brought disaster upon the domain of Zheng and has situated it in a place wedged between two great domains.210 Your great domain has not bestowed on us virtuous words and has instead used disorder to bind us to this covenant, so that our ghosts and spirits do not get to savor their cleansed sacrifices, our people do not get to enjoy the advantages of the land, and husbands and wives toil to exhaustion with nowhere to turn to for redress of grievances. From this day on, after the swearing of the covenant, if the domain of Zheng does not submit only to the one that has the ritual propriety and the power to protect its people and if it dares to have perfidious intentions, let this covenant bear witness against us!”211 Zhonghang Yana said, “Change that convenant document!” Gongsun Shezhi said, “We have made ourselves clear to the great spirits with binding words. If the covenant can be changed, then one can also revolt against the great domain.” Zhi Yinga said to Zhonghang Yanc: “It is we who are without virtue, and yet we tried to bind others against their will with a covenant. How could this be in accordance with ritual propriety? Not being in accordance with ritual propriety, how can we preside over the covenant? We should for now swear the covenant and withdraw our forces. If we come after cultivating virtue and letting the army rest, we will in the end gain control over Zheng. Why must it be today? If we have no virtue, the people will cast us off: how could it be only Zheng that would do so? If we can achieve peace and repose, even those from afar will come to us. Why need we rely on Zheng?” Jin thus swore the covenant and turned back.

9.5b

210 That is, Zheng lies between Jin and Chu. 211 Zisi thereby makes Zheng’s submission to Jin conditional on the latter’s policies and also proleptically justifies Zheng’s shift of allegiance to Chu.

Lord Xiang

959

9.6 晉人不得志於鄭，以諸侯復伐之。十二月癸亥，門其三門。閏月戊寅，濟

于陰阪，侵鄭。次於陰口而還。子孔曰：「 晉師可擊也，師老而勞，且有 歸志，必大克之。」子展曰：「 不可。」 9.7 公送晉侯，晉侯以公宴于河上，問公年。季武子對曰：「 會于沙隨之歲，

寡君以生。」 晉侯曰：「 十二年矣，是謂一終，一星終也。國君十五而生子，冠而 生子，禮也。君可以冠矣。大夫盍為冠具？」 武子對曰：「 君冠，必以祼享之禮行之，以金石之樂節之，以先君 之祧處之。今寡君在行，未可具也，請及兄弟之國而假備焉。」 晉侯曰：「 諾。」公還，及衛，冠于成公之廟，假鍾磬焉，禮也。 9.8(6) 楚子伐鄭。子駟將及楚平，子孔、子蟜曰：「 與大國盟，口血未乾而背

之，可乎？」

212 The three gates are Zhuan (east) Gate, Shizhiliang (west) Gate, and North Gate. Jin and its allies do not attack the South Gate, probably because they want to wait to confront (or avoid) Chu forces that might be coming from the south. 213 The received text has runyue wuyin 閏月戊寅. There was no wuyin day in the intercalary month, and the Jin invasion should take place in the twelfth month. According to Du Yu’s (ZZ 30.528) emendation, runyue may be a corruption of men wuri 門 五日, “they stormed the gates for five days.” 214 Yinban 陰阪 was located in Zheng west of present-day Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 215 Jin and its allies met at Shasui (575 Bce; Cheng 16.6) to plan an attack against Zheng. 216 He is referring to the Year-Planet (Jupiter), whose cycle (11.86 years) is thought to span twelve years (Yang, 3:970). Many predictions are tied to Jupiter’s cycle (see, e.g., Xiang 28.1, 28.8, 30.10, Zhao 7.14, 8.6, 9.4, 10.1, 11.2, 32.2). 217 What little we know of the capping ceremony in pre-Han times is based on YiliZheng 1.2, Yili-Jia 1.2. 218 Lord Cheng of Wei (r. 634–600) was the great-grandfather of the reigning Lord Xian of Wei.

960

Zuo Tradition

Jin attacks Zheng again but appears vulnerable to Zheng leaders. Because the men of Jin had not fulfilled their aims in Zheng, they led the princes to attack it again. In the twelfth month, on the guihai day (5), Jin and its allies stormed Zheng’s three gates.212 On the wuyin day (20),213 they crossed the Wei River at Yinban and invaded Zheng.214 They set up camp at Yinkou and then turned back. Zikong said, “We can strike the Jin troops! Their troops are worn out and exhausted and moreover have the desire to turn back. We are sure to crush them completely.” Gongsun Shezhia said, “This will not do.”

9.6

Following the suggestion of Lord Dao of Jin, Lord Xiang of Lu undergoes the capping ceremony on his way back from the allies’ expedition against Zheng. Our lord escorted the Prince of Jin on his way. The Prince of Jin held a feast for our lord on the banks of the Yellow River. He asked our lord’s age. Ji Wuzi replied, “Our unworthy ruler was born the year when there was a meeting at Shasui.”215 The Prince of Jin said, “That was twelve years ago. This is called one completed cycle, for one planet completes its cycle in twelve years.216 That the ruler of a domain begets sons at fifteen, or that he begets sons after the capping ceremony,217 is in accordance with ritual propriety. Your ruler can now have the capping ceremony. Why do your high officers not prepare all the things necessary for it?” Ji Wuzic replied, “Our ruler’s capping ceremony must begin with the ritual of libation of fragrant wine. It must be regulated with the music of bells and chime-stones. It must take place in the temple of his former rulers. Now our unworthy ruler is on the road, and these things cannot be furnished. I beg leave to reach a brother domain and borrow what is needed for preparation there.” The Prince of Jin said, “I agree.” Our lord turned homeward. When he reached Wei, he had his capping ceremony at Lord Cheng’s temple.218 They borrowed the bells and the chime-stones. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

9.7

Zheng, torn between Jin and Chu, now veers toward Chu after Jin fails to protect it from Chu retaliation. Zheng ministers argue that covenants based on coercion are not binding. The Master of Chu attacked Zheng. Zisi planned to seek a peace agreement with Chu. Zikong and Zijiao said, “To have sworn a covenant with a great domain and then to turn against it before the blood has even dried on the mouth—is that acceptable?”

9.8(6)

Lord Xiang

961

子駟、子展曰：「 吾盟固云『唯彊是從』，今楚師至，晉不我救，則 楚彊矣。盟誓之言，豈敢背之？且要盟無質，神弗臨也。所臨唯信，信 者，言之瑞也，善之主也，是故臨之。明神不蠲要盟，背之，可也。」 乃及楚平。公子罷戎入盟，同盟于中分。 楚莊夫人卒，王未能定鄭而歸。 9.9 晉侯歸，謀所以息民。魏絳請施舍，輸積聚以貸。自公以下，苟有積者，

盡出之。國無滯積，亦無困人；公無禁利，亦無貪民。祈以幣更，賓以特 牲，器用不作，車服從給。行之期年，國乃有節。三駕而楚不能與爭。

219 Zisi and Gongsun Shezhi are protesting that they have not violated the covenant as defined by the Zheng participants. 220 Fu Qian glosses zhi 質 as cheng 誠, “sincerity,” extending the meaning of “substance” as “inner truth” and also anticipating the references to “good faith” later in the argument (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 515). 221 Good faith is what gives speech the power of a tally. Zheng Xuan glosses rui 瑞 as fuxin 符信, the tally for conveying commands (Zhouli-Zheng 20.312). See also Ai 14.4. 222 The text gives no subject for “swore a covenant together” (tongmeng 同盟). Taking Xi 28.3h as an example, we assume that the rulers swear a covenant after the more powerful partner of the covenant is represented by its dignitary in a preliminary settlement. Zhongfen 中分 was the name of a road in the Zheng capital. 223 She was the mother of King Gong of Chu.

962

Zuo Tradition

Zisi and Gongsun Shezhia said, “Our covenant already stated: ‘We will submit only to the domain that has the power.’ Now the Chu army has arrived, and Jin is not coming to our aid. Chu then is the powerful one. How would we dare to turn against the words of a covenant vow?219 Moreover, covenants based on coercion have no substance.220 The spirits do not oversee them. What they do oversee are only covenants sworn in good faith. For good faith is the tally221 of speech and the mainstay of excellence. That is why the spirits oversee it. The bright spirits do not purify a covenant made binding by force. To turn against it is acceptable.” Zheng thus reached a peace agreement with Chu. Gongzi Pirong entered the Zheng capital to swear the covenant. The rulers of Zheng and Chu swore a covenant together at Zhongfen.222 The wife of King Zhuang of Chu died.223 The king turned back before he could settle the disorder in Zheng. The Jin high officer Wei Jiang is credited with realizing an idealized vision of society based on due moderation, frugality, and a more equitable distribution of wealth. Despite evidence of Jin weakness during these years, it is said to prevail over Chu. The formulaic language here echoes similar summaries in Min 2.10, Xi 27.4c, Wen 6.1, and Cheng 18.3. When the Prince of Jin returned home, he deliberated over how to let the people rest. Wei Jiang asked permission to grant them exemptions from conscript labor224 and to transport the accumulated wealth of the domain in order to lend it to the people. From the lord downward, whosoever had any accumulation of goods brought them all forward. There were no accumulations of goods held back in the domain, nor were there destitute people. There were no prohibitions on opportunities for profit,225 nor were there covetous people. Supplications to the spirits were made with silk and fur instead of sacrificial victims. Guests were honored with a single head of cattle. No new vessels were cast. Carriages and robes were no more than sufficient. After these practices were carried out for a year, the domain then had proper order. Three times were the chariots mounted,226 and Chu was not able to contend with Jin.

9.9

224 We read shi 施 as chi 弛 (“exemptions”), following Zheng Xuan’s gloss of the term in Zhouli-Zheng 11.168, and as distinct from the term shishe 施舍 in Xuan 12.2b, Zhao 13.2, and Zhao 25.3, which refers to gifts and giving. 225 That is, the domain does not monopolize resources and the people are allowed to profit from access to forests, mountains, marshes, or rivers. 226 This statement is referring to the campaigns at Niushou (Xiang 10.8), the eastern gate of the Zheng capital, and Xiang (both in Xiang 11.3).

Lord Xiang

963

春秋 10.1(1) 十年，春，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞伯、

小邾子、齊世子光會吳于柤。 10.2(2) 夏，五月甲午，遂滅偪陽。 10.3 公至自會。 10.4(3) 楚公子貞、鄭公孫輒帥師伐宋。 10.5(4) 晉師伐秦。 10.6(7) 秋，莒人伐我東鄙。 10.7(8) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、齊世子光、滕子、薛伯、杞

伯、小邾子伐鄭。 10.8(9) 冬，盜殺鄭公子騑、公子發、公孫輒。 10.9(10) 戍鄭虎牢。 10.10(11) 楚公子貞帥師救鄭。 10.11 公至自伐鄭。

左傳 10.1(1) 十年，春，會于柤，會吳子壽夢也。

三月癸丑，齊高厚相大子光，以先會諸侯于鍾離，不敬。士莊子 曰：「 高子相大子以會諸侯，將社稷是衛，而皆不敬，棄社稷也，其將不 免乎！」

227 Zha 柤 was located to the northwest of Pi County 邳縣 in present-day Jiangsu. 228 Biyang 偪陽, to the northwest of Zha, was at the border of present-day Shangdong and Jiangsu, about 135 kilometers southeast of the Lu capital and just south of present-day Yi County 嶧縣, Shandong.

964

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 10 (563 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, the Master of Lesser Zhu, and the Qi heir apparent Guang and then met with Wu at Zha.227 In summer, in the fifth month, on the jiawu day (8), they then extinguished Biyang.228

10.1(1)

10.2(2)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

10.3

Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu and Gongsun Zhe (Zi’er) of Zheng led out troops and attacked Song.

10.4(3)

Jin troops attacked Qin.

10.5(4)

In autumn, Ju leaders attacked our eastern marches.

10.6(7)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Qi heir apparent Guang, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu and attacked Zheng.

10.7(8)

In winter, brigands killed Gongzi Fei (Zisi), Gongzi Fa (Ziguo), and Gongsun Zhe (Zi’er).

10.8(9)

We garrisoned Hulao in Zheng.

10.9(10)

Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and went to the aid of Zheng.

10.10(11)

Our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

10.11

ZUO

The Jin minister Shi Ruo, who showed his prescience earlier (Xiang 9.1), predicts disaster for the Qi heir apparent and the Qi minister Gao Hou because of their irreverence at a meeting. In the tenth year, in spring, the princes met at Zha: this was to meet with Shoumeng, the Master of Wu. In the third month, on the guichou day (26), Gao Hou of Qi acted as assistant to the Qi heir apparent Guang so as to have a prior meeting with the princes at Zhongli. Both behaved irreverently. Shi Ruoa said, “Gao Houa acted as assistant to the heir apparent so as to meet with the princes. They were to guard the altars of the domain, and yet both behaved irreverently. Having cast off the altars of the domain, they will probably not escape disaster!”

10.1(1)

Lord Xiang

965



夏，四月戊午，會于柤。

10.2a(2) 晉荀偃、士匄請伐偪陽，而封宋向戌焉。荀罃曰：「 城小而固，勝之不武，

弗勝為笑。」固請。丙寅，圍之，弗克。孟氏之臣秦堇父輦重如役。偪陽 人啟門，諸侯之士門焉。縣門發，郰人紇抉之。以出門者，狄虒彌建大 車之輪，而蒙之以甲，以為櫓。左執之，右拔戟，以成一隊。孟獻子曰： 「 《詩》   所謂『有力如虎』者也。」主人縣布，堇父登之，及堞而絕之。 隊，則又縣之。蘇而復上者三，主人辭焉，乃退。帶其斷以徇於軍三日。 10.2b 諸侯之師久於偪陽，荀偃、士匄請於荀罃曰：「 水潦將降，懼不能歸，請

班師。」

966

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fourth month, on the wuwu day (1), the princes met at Zha. Jin and its allies extinguish the small domain of Biyang. The campaign is marked by the extraordinary feats of Lu men, including Qin Jinfu, Di Simi, and Shuliang He, Confucius’ father (for Confucius’ ancestry, see Zhao 7.12). Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia of Jin requested to attack Biyang and to put Xiang Xu of Song in power there. Zhi Yingb said, “The city is small yet well defended. To win it would be no great martial achievement, yet to fail to win it would make us a laughingstock.” They persisted in their request. On the bingyin day (9), they laid siege to it and failed to overcome it. A retainer of the Meng lineage, Qin Jinfu, pulled a heavy supply wagon to the site of the campaign. The men of Biyang opened the gate, and the officers of the princes stormed it. The portcullis of the inner gate was released,229 but a man of Zou named He230 held it up to allow the officers storming the gate to go in. Di Simi stood up the wheel of a big carriage, covered it with hides, and used it as a big shield. Holding it with his left hand and pulling out a lance with his right hand, he led a platoon.231 Meng Xianzi said, “This is what the Odes calls one who ‘has strength like a tiger.’”232 Those guarding Biyang233 hung a strip of cloth over the wall, by which Qin Jinfua climbed up. When he reached the parapets, they cut it. He fell, and they hung it again. Three times he revived and climbed it again. Those guarding Biyang acknowledged his feats and desisted, and Qin Jinfua then withdrew.234 For three days he made his circuits among the troops showing the cut cloth, which he wrapped around himself as a belt.

10.2a(2)

The Jin commander Zhi Ying overcomes the irresolution and flagging will of the other leaders, and Jin achieves victory. Trying to consolidate Song’s allegiance, Jin gives Biyang to the Song ruler after the Song minister Xiang Xu declines to be put in power there. The armies of the princes were long detained at Biyang. Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia requested of Zhi Yingb: “Heavy rain is about to fall. We fear we will not be able to turn back, and ask permission to withdraw our troops now.”

10.2b

229 For the portcullis (xuanmen 縣門), see also Zhuang 28.3. 230 He (or Shuliang He), the father of Confucius, was from Zou 郰, a city near the Lu capital, Qufu. Zou has also been identified as the birthplace of Confucius. 231 The number of soldiers in one dui 隊 (translated here as “platoon”) has been given as one hundred or as fifty by various commentators. 232 Maoshi 38, “Jian xi” 簡兮, 2C.100. 233 The text has zhuren 主人, which usually means “host” or “master.” 234 The point may be that Qin Jinfu’s persistent bravery is finally acknowledged and he can therefore withdraw with dignity.

Lord Xiang

967

知伯怒，投之以机，出於其間，曰：「 女成二事，而後告余。余恐亂 命，以不女違。女既勤君而興諸侯，牽帥老夫以至于此，既無武守，而 又欲易余罪，曰：『是實班師。不然，克矣。』余羸老也，可重任乎？七日 不克，必爾乎取之！」 五月庚寅，荀偃、士匄帥卒攻偪陽，親受矢石，甲午，滅之。 書曰「 遂滅偪陽」，言自會也。 以與向戌。向戌辭曰：「 君若猶辱鎮撫宋國，而以偪陽光啟寡君， 群臣安矣，其何貺如之！若專賜臣，是臣興諸侯以自封也，其何罪大焉！ 敢以死請。」乃予宋公。

235 Zhi Ying was commander of the central army. 236 The text has ji 机 (armrest). Zhang Binglin suggests that ji 机 is a loanword for ji 機, the trigger on a big crossbow (Zuozhuan du, cited in Yang, 3:976). Sunzi 5.116 compares an army’s momentum to the release of a crossbow trigger. Wu Jing’an (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 87) suggests that Zhi Ying hurls the trigger to emphasize how retreat is not an option. 237 “The two things” refer to the invasion of Biyang and putting Xiang Xu in power there. 238 Conflicting views among the commanders will lead to confusion. 239 Following Karlgren, gl. 502. Du Yu (ZZ 31.538): “Lacking the martial achievement to hold on to.” Yang (3:976) glosses the term wushou 武守: “to firmly defend and to attack in a martial manner.”

968

Zuo Tradition

Enraged, Zhi Yingc235 hurled the crossbow trigger at them,236 which flew between the two of them, and then said, “You had already made up your minds about these two things, and only then did you notify me.237 I was afraid commands from us would get confused,238 and for that reason did not oppose you. Now you have made the ruler labor, roused the princes, and dragged this old man here. Lacking the martial prowess to hold on,239 you yet want to lay the blame on me by saying, ‘It was that man who withdrew the troops. Otherwise, we would have overcome Biyang.’ I am already old and feeble. Can I bear the heavy responsibility for defeat?240 If you do not overcome the city in seven days, I will certainly take it out of your hide!”241 In the fifth month, on the gengyin day (4), Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia led soldiers to attack Biyang, and they personally bore the shower of arrows and stones. On the jiawu day (8), they extinguished it. The text says, “They then extinguished Biyang”: this is to indicate that they did so coming from the meeting at Zha.242 The Jin ruler gave Biyang to Xiang Xu, but he declined, saying: “If you, my lord, still condescend to bring stability and solace to the domain of Song and use Biyang to expand the realm of our unworthy ruler, all his subjects will be content.243 What generous gift could compare to this? If you bestow it on me alone, then I would have roused the princes just to have myself put in power in a place. What offense could be greater than that? I presume to brave death with my request.” The Jin ruler thus gave Biyang to the Duke of Song.

240 We follow Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 31.539), who reads 重 as zhong (“heavy”). Yang (3:976) reads 重 as chong (“again”): “Can I again bear the responsibility for defeat?” Zhi Ying was taken captive during the Bi campaign (Xuan 12.2h). 241 We follow Takezoe (15.5) and read er hu 爾乎 as yu er 於爾, literally, “take it from you.” Zhi Ying is saying that Zhonghang Yan and Fan Gai will certainly have to bear the blame. 242 The goal of the meeting at Zha was the campaign against Biyang; cf. the similar grammar and context in Xi 4.1. Jin’s allies, gathered at Zha, have been forced to join this campaign. 243 Xiang Xu is implying that if he is given Biyang, there will be discontent, jealousy, and slander among the other Song leaders (Takezoe, 15.5).

Lord Xiang

969

10.2c 宋公享晉侯于楚丘，請以桑林。荀罃辭。荀偃、士匄曰：「 諸侯宋、魯，

於是觀禮。魯有禘樂，賓祭用之。宋以桑林享君，不亦可乎？」舞，師題 以旌夏。晉侯懼而退入于房。去旌，卒享而還。及著雍，疾。卜，桑林見。 荀偃、士匄欲奔請禱焉，荀罃不可，曰：「 我辭禮矣，彼則以之。猶有鬼 神，於彼加之。」 晉侯有間，以偪陽子歸，獻于武宮，謂之夷俘。偪陽，妘姓也。使 周內史選其族嗣納諸霍人，禮也。 師歸，孟獻子以秦堇父為右。生秦丕茲，事仲尼。 10.3(4) 六月，楚子囊、鄭子耳伐宋，師于訾毋。庚午，圍宋，門于桐門。

244 On Chuqiu, see Annals, Yin 7.6, n. 111. 245 On the meanings of the di 禘 sacrifice, see also Min 2.2, n.17. According to Liji 31.577, the di sacrifice is offered in the sixth month to the Zhou duke at the Ancestral Temple, and the music used includes the music of Zhou, Xia, the Eastern Yi, and the Man. The music for the di sacrifice would be inappropriately momentous for entertaining guests, even as Zhi Ying judges the music of Mulberry Woods to be excessive for the occasion of entertaining Lord Dao of Jin. In Liji 21.420, Confucius said, “The sacrifice in the outskirts and di sacrifice of Lu violate ritual propriety. The line of the Zhou duke has declined!” 246 Du Yu (ZZ 31.539) identifies the music of Mulberry Woods (Sanglin) as the music of the Shang kings. Mulberry Woods was supposedly where Tang, the ancestor of Shang, prayed for rain, and it came to be identified as the place for Shang ancestral sacrifices. On the connection between Song and Shang, see Xi 22.8, n. 271. In Zhuangzi 3.117, Cook Ding’s art of cutting up the ox is said to accord with “the dance of Mulberry Woods.” See also Lüshi chunqiu 9.479, 12.634, 14.844. 247 The jingxia banner is decorated at the head of the pole with pheasant feathers dyed in five colors (Yang, 3:977). Karlgren (gl. 505) reads jing 旌 as a verb (“to signal with banners”) and ti 題 as a loanword for ti 提: “The musicians began (ti 題) to signal with banners (jing 旌) the grand Xia music.” 248 They are already in Jin. Zhonghang Yan and Fan Gai want to rush back to Song to pray to the spirit of Mulberry Woods.

970

Zuo Tradition

An inappropriately grand musical entertainment offered by Song is linked to Lord Dao of Jin’s sickness. On matching music with ritual propriety, see also Zhuang 20.1, Cheng 12.4, Xiang 4.3, and Zhao 1.12. The Duke of Song offered the Prince of Jin ceremonial toasts at Chuqiu.244 He requested to use the music of Mulberry Woods. Zhi Yingb declined. Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia said, “Among the princes, it is only in Song and Lu that we can observe the proper rituals. Lu has the music of the di sacrifice and uses it with important guests and at major sacrifices.245 Would it not be acceptable for Song to use Mulberry Woods to offer ceremonial toasts to our ruler?”246 They danced, and the musicians led the way with banners decorated with colorful feathers.247 The Prince of Jin was fearful and retreated into one of the side chambers. They removed the banners, and he then attended the ceremonial toasts before he turned homeward. When he reached Zhuyong, he fell ill. They conducted divination and the spirit of Mulberry Woods manifested itself. Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia wanted to rush back to Song and offer supplicatory prayers.248 Zhi Yingb did not permit this, saying, “We had already declined the ritual, but they used it nonetheless. If there are indeed ghosts and spirits, they will inflict the consequences on Song.” As soon as there was a break in the Prince of Jin’s illness, he took the Master of Biyang back with him and presented him at the Wu palace, calling him “the captive of Yi tribe.” The house of Biyang has the clan name of “Yun.” The Jin ruler made the court scribe of Zhou choose a descendant from that lineage and install him in power in Huoren.249 This was in accordance with ritual propriety.250 When the Lu army returned, Meng Xianzi made Qin Jinfu his spearman on the right. He fathered Qin Pizi, who served Confuciusc.251

10.2c

Chu and Zheng attack Song, now Jin’s confirmed ally. In the sixth month, Zinang of Chu and Zi’er of Zheng attacked Song, stationing their armies at Ziwu.252 On the gengwu day (14), they laid siege to Song, storming its Paulownia Gate.253

10.3(4)

249 Huoren 霍人 was located in the domain of Jin east of present-day Fanzhi County 繁 峙縣, Shanxi. 250 A descendant of the Yun line, presumably not too closely related to the ruler of Biyang, is to continue sacrifices to the Yun ancestors at Huoren, a city in Jin. A Zhou scribe is asked to make this choice to indicate that Jin is acting with deference to the royal house. 251 Pizi 丕茲, also written as Buci 不慈, is the courtesy name of Qin Shang 秦商, one of Confucius’ disciples. See Shiji 67.2223; Kongzi jiayu 9.89. 252 Ziwu 訾毋 was in the domain of Song south of present-day Luyi County 鹿邑縣, Henan. 253 This gate was the northern gate of the Song capital.

Lord Xiang

971

10.4(5) 晉荀罃伐秦，報其侵也。 10.5 衛侯救宋，師于襄牛。鄭子展曰：「 必伐衛。不然，是不與楚也。得罪於

晉，又得罪於楚，國將若之何？」 子駟曰：「 國病矣。」 子展曰：「 得罪於二大國，必亡。病，不猶愈於亡乎？」諸大夫皆以 為然。故鄭皇耳帥師侵衛，楚令也。 孫文子卜追之，獻兆於定姜。姜氏問繇。曰： 兆如山陵， 有夫出征， 而喪其雄。 姜氏曰：「 征者喪雄，禦寇之利也。大夫圖之！」衛人追之，孫蒯獲鄭皇 耳于犬丘。 10.6 秋，七月，楚子囊、鄭子耳侵我西鄙。還，圍蕭。八月丙寅，克之。九月，

子耳侵宋北鄙。 孟獻子曰：「 鄭其有災乎！師競已甚。周猶不堪競，況鄭乎！有災， 其執政之三士乎！」

254 Xiangniu was in the domain of Wei (see Xi 28.1, n. 406). 255 Ding Jiang, wife of Lord Ding of Wei and the official mother of Lord Xian, again shows her perspicacity. In plastromancy and scapulimancy, exposure of the shell or bone to heat produces a crack that is interpreted as an omen. 256 The armies of Chu and Zheng seem to have invaded Lu only as an afterthought; Lu’s proximity to Song meant that it could have been attacked “on the way.” It is curious that this incident is not mentioned in the Annals. 257 On Xiao, see Zhuang 12.1, n. 68. 258 These three officers are Zisi, Ziguo, and Zi’er.

972

Zuo Tradition

The Qin invasion of Jin (Xiang 9.4) provokes Jin retaliation. Zhi Yingb of Jin attacked Qin: this was in retaliation for Qin’s invasion of Jin.

10.4(5)

Wei comes to Song’s aid as Jin’s ally, and Zheng, now siding with Chu, invades Wei. Ding Jiang, one of Zuozhuan’s prescient women (Cheng 14.1, 14.5), interprets divination results in a way that boosts Wei morale. The Prince of Wei came to Song’s aid and stationed his army at Xiangniu.254 Gongsun Shezhia of Zheng said, “We must attack Wei. Otherwise, it would amount to a failure on our part to side with Chu. We have offended Jin. If we also offend Chu, then what is our domain to do?” Zisi said, “Our domain is already afflicted.” Gongsun Shezhia said, “If we offend two great domains, we are sure to perish. Is it not still better to be afflicted than to perish?” The high officers all agreed. That was why Huang Er of Zheng led out troops to invade Wei; this was Chu’s command. Sun Linfua of Wei divined about pursuing the enemy and presented the omen crack to Ding Jiang.255 Lady Jiang asked about the omen verse. It said,

10.5

The crack is like a mound. There are men who leave for battle And lose their leader.

Lady Jiang said, “For the invaders to lose their leader is an advantage for those resisting the enemy. You, high officers, should consider this!” The men of Wei pursued the Zheng forces. Sun Kuai, Sun Linfu’s son, took Huang Er of Zheng captive at Quanqiu. The Zheng leaders’ perception that Zheng is an “afflicted” victim is belied by continued aggression against Lu and Song. The Lu minister Meng Xianzi’s prediction of doom for Zheng leaders is fulfilled three months later. In autumn, in the seventh month, Zinang of Chu and Zi’er of Zheng invaded our western marches.256 On the way back, they laid siege to Xiao.257 In the eighth month, on the bingyin day (11), they overcame it. In the ninth month, Zi’er invaded the northern marches of Song. Meng Xianzi said, “Disaster will surely strike Zheng! Its army has been combative in the extreme. Even the Zhou house cannot bear too much combativeness, let alone Zheng! If there is disaster, it will surely strike the three officers in charge of government!”258

10.6

Lord Xiang

973

10.7(6) 莒人間諸侯之有事也，故伐我東鄙。 10.8(7) 諸侯伐鄭，齊崔杼使大子光先至于師，故長於滕。己酉，師于牛首。 10.9a(8) 初，子駟與尉止有爭，將禦諸侯之師，而黜其車。尉止獲，又與之爭。子

駟抑尉止曰：「 爾車非禮也。」遂弗使獻。 初，子駟為田洫，司氏、堵氏、侯氏、子師氏皆喪田焉。故五族聚 群不逞之人因公子之徒以作亂。 於是子駟當國，子國為司馬，子耳為司空，子孔為司徒。冬十月戊 辰，尉止、司臣、侯晉、堵女父、子師僕帥賊以入，晨攻執政于西宮之 朝，殺子駟、子國、子耳，劫鄭伯以如北宮。子孔知之，故不死。書曰 「 盜」，言無大夫焉。 10.9b 子西聞盜，不儆而出，尸而追盜。盜入於北宮，乃歸，授甲，臣妾多逃，

器用多喪。

259 Leaders of other domains should have precedence over Guang, the Qi heir apparent. Jin leaders may be showing him special regard because Qi support is vital to Jin’s struggle with Chu. 260 Niushou in Zheng was located in present-day Henan; see also Huan 14.4, n. 119. 261 Zisi is denying Wei Zhi credit for his achievement. 262 The text is referring here to the four lineages just mentioned as well as Wei Zhi. 263 This refers to the noble sons whom Zisi put to death in Xiang 8.2. 264 Wei Zhi, Si Chen, Hou Jin, Du Rufu, and Zishi Pu are all officers (shi 士), not high officers. 265 See, for example, the Song scholar Chao Buzhi’s 晁補之 judgment, cited in Cheng Gongshuo, Chunqiu fenji, j. 69. 266 This could also include the other corpses, but the limited time suggests that he may be recovering only his father’s corpse.

974

Zuo Tradition

Ju leaders seized the opportunity of the princes’ involvement in affairs of war, and that was why they attacked our eastern marches.

10.7(6)

The princes attacked Zheng. Cui Zhu of Qi had the Qi heir apparent Guang arrive first among the troops, and that was why he took precedence over Teng.259 On the jiyou day (25), the troops were stationed at Niushou.260

10.8(7)

During internecine conflicts in Zheng, disaffected Zheng officers lead brigands to murder Zheng ministers in charge of government. The chief minister Zisi, who plotted the death of Lord Xi of Zheng (Xiang 7.9) and suppressed his rivals (Xiang 8.2), falls victim to his enemies. Earlier, Zisi and Wei Zhi had clashed with one another. Just when Zheng was about to defend itself against the troops of the princes, Zisi decreased the number of Wei Zhi’s chariots. Wei Zhi took some captives, and Zisi again clashed with him. Zisi suppressed Wei Zhi’s claims, saying, “Your chariots are not in accordance with ritual propriety.”261 He thereupon did not let Wei Zhi present his captives at court. Earlier, Zisi had laid out ditches between fields. The Si, Du, Hou, and Zishi lineages had all lost lands. That was why the five houses262 gathered various disaffected persons and, relying on the support of the noble sons’263 followers, raised a rebellion. At that time Zisi was in charge of the domain. Ziguo was supervisor of the military, Zi’er was supervisor of works, and Zikong was supervisor of conscripts. In winter, in the tenth month, on the wuchen day (14), Wei Zhi, Si Chen, Hou Jin, Du Rufu, and Zishi Pu entered the palace with a gang of brigands. In the morning, they attacked those in charge of government in the court of the Western Palace and killed Zisi, Ziguo, and Zi’er. They abducted the Liege of Zheng and took him to the Northern Palace. Zikong knew about this plot, and for this reason he did not die. The text has “brigands” to indicate that there were no high officers involved.264

10.9a(8)

The different reactions of Zixi and Zichan to the rebellion show the latter’s superior judgment.265 For later moralists who regard filial piety as a more absolute moral imperative, however, Zixi’s impulsive reaction is more praiseworthy than Zichan’s careful defense of his property. The rebels are killed or driven into exile. When Zisi’s son Zixi heard about the brigands, he left the house without taking any precautions, recovered his father’s corpse,266 and then pursued the brigands. After the brigands had entered the Northern Palace, he went back home and distributed arms to his followers. Many of his servants and concubines had run away, and many vessels were missing.

10.9b

Lord Xiang

975

子產聞盜，為門者，庀群司，閉府庫，慎閉藏，完守備，成列而後 出，兵車十七乘。尸而攻盜於北宮，子蟜帥國人助之，殺尉止、子師僕， 盜眾盡死。侯晉奔晉，堵女父、司臣、尉翩、司齊奔宋。 10.9c 子孔當國，為載書，以位序、聽政辟。大夫、諸司、門子弗順，將誅之。

子產止之，請為之焚書。子孔不可，曰：「 為書以定國，眾怒而焚之，是 眾為政也，國不亦難乎？」 子產曰：「 眾怒難犯，專欲難成，合二難以安國，危之道也。不如 焚書以安眾，子得所欲，眾亦得安，不亦可乎？專欲無成，犯眾興禍，子 必從之！」 乃焚書於倉門之外，眾而後定。 10.10(9) 諸侯之師城虎牢而戍之，晉師城梧及制，士魴、魏絳戍之。書曰「 戍鄭

虎牢」，非鄭地也，言將歸焉。鄭及晉平。

267 We follow Karlgren, gl. 506. Reinforced hierarchy in the government may also mean that Zikong is effectively accruing power to himself and barring officials from interfering with his own decisions. Recall that he knew about the plot against the other Zheng ministers but did not intervene, which suggests that he was exploiting the unrest to gain more power. Zichan understands his ambition but, instead of directly confronting him, chooses a mediatory role. Zikong will control Zheng government for nine years. For his downfall and murder, see Xiang 19.9. 268 Zikong would have control of the government. 269 For Hulao, see Xiang 2.5, n. 30, Yin 5.4, n. 95.

976

Zuo Tradition

When Ziguo’s son Zichan heard about the brigands, he established a gatekeeper, had the various supervisors in full readiness, closed the arsenal, carefully secured the respositories, completed the preparations for defense, formed ranks, and only then came out, with seventeen war chariots. He recovered his father’s corpse and then attacked the brigands at the Northern Palace. Zijiao led the inhabitants of the capital to assist him, killing Wei Zhi and Zishi Pu. Every last man in the gang of brigands died. Hou Jin fled to Jin. Du Rufu, Si Chen, Wei Pian, and Si Qi fled to Song. In the aftermath of the rebellion, Zikong’s attempt to dominate the government provokes further unrest. Note that Zikong is not mentioned when Zixi, Zichan, and Zijiao are dealing with the rebellion. Zichan urges compromise because one has to reckon with “the anger of the multitude.” On this idea, see also Zhao 13.2, 25.6, 26.4, and Ai 25.1. Zikong took charge of the domain. He made a covenant document with the provision that required each according to his position to heed the commands of his immediate superior.267 The high officers, various supervisors, and the heirs of ministerial lineages refused to follow these injunctions, and Zikong planned to execute them. Zichan stopped him and requested permission to burn the document on their account. Zikong refused, saying, “We made the document to stabilize the domain. If we burn it because of the anger of the multitude, then that would mean the multitude is in charge of government. Will it not be difficult to govern the domain?” Zichan said, “It is difficult to contravene the anger of the multitude; it is difficult to achieve success with a desire for sole control. To combine both in an effort to calm the domain is the road to danger. It would be better to burn the document to reassure the multitude. You will get what you desire,268 and the multitude will also be reassured. Would that not be acceptable? A desire for sole control will achieve nothing, and contravening the multitude will provoke disaster. You must follow my advice!” They therefore burned the document outside the Cang Gate. Only then was the multitude more settled.

10.9c

The armies of the princes fortified Hulao and garrisoned it.269 The Jin army fortified Wu and Zhi,270 with Shi Fang and Wei Jiang garrisoning them. The text says, “We garrisoned Hulao in Zheng”: this is to indicate that though this was no longer Zheng territory, it was about to be returned to Zheng. Zheng and Jin reached a peace agreement.

10.10(9)

270 Zhi 制 was another name for Hulao. Wu 梧 was probably close to Hulao. Jin’s military presence in Hulao over the last eight years seems to have failed to consolidate Jin control over Zheng.

Lord Xiang

977

10.11(10) 楚子囊救鄭。十一月，諸侯之師還鄭而南，至於陽陵。楚師不退。知武

子欲退，曰：「 今我逃楚，楚必驕，驕則可與戰矣。」 欒黶曰：「 逃楚，晉之恥也。合諸侯以益恥，不如死。我將獨進。」 師遂進。己亥，與楚師夾潁而軍。 子蟜曰：「 諸侯既有成行，必不戰矣。從之將退，不從亦退。退，楚 必圍我。猶將退也，不如從楚，亦以退之。」宵涉潁，與楚人盟。 欒黶欲伐鄭師，荀罃不可，曰：「 我實不能禦楚，又不能庇鄭，鄭何 罪？不如致怨焉而還。今伐其師，楚必救之。戰而不克，為諸侯笑。克不 可命，不如還也。」 丁未，諸侯之師還，侵鄭北鄙而歸。楚人亦還。

978

Zuo Tradition

The Jin commander Zhi Ying again shows his caution (see Xiang 9.5, 10.2), and Jin and its allies desist from attacking Zheng with full force and directly confronting Chu. Zinang of Chu went to the aid of Zheng. In the eleventh month, the armies of the princes made a detour circuit around Zheng and headed southward, advancing as far as Yangling.271 The Chu army did not retreat. Zhi Yinga wanted to retreat, saying: “If we now flee from Chu, Chu will certainly become complacent. Once it is complacent, we can then engage it in battle.”272 Luan Yan said, “To flee from Chu would be Jin’s disgrace. To have assembled the princes with the result of adding to our own disgrace would be worse than death. I will advance alone.”273 The Jin army thus advanced. On the jihai day (16), the Jin and Chu armies stationed their troops on opposite banks of the Ying River. Zijiao said, “Since the princes already have formed ranks,274 they will certainly not engage in battle. If we submit to Jin, they will retreat; if we do not submit to Jin, they will also retreat. If they retreat, Chu will certainly lay siege to us. Since they will retreat anyway, it would be better to submit to Chu, so as to make their army retreat also.” Crossing the Ying River by night, he swore a covenant with the leaders of Chu.275 Luan Yan wanted to attack the Zheng army, but Zhi Yingb would not permit it. He said, “We are the ones who can neither stop Chu nor protect Zheng. What offense is Zheng guilty of? It would be better to turn back, leaving Chu as the target of resentment.276 If we now attack Zheng’s army, Chu will certainly come to its aid. If we engage in battle and do not overcome them, we will be the laughingstock of the princes. When victory cannot be decreed,277 it is better to turn back.” On the dingwei day (24), the armies of the princes turned back, invaded Zheng’s northern marches, and returned. The men of Chu like­ wise turned back.

10.11(10)

271 Yangling 陽陵 was located in the domain of Zheng northwest of present-day Xuchang County 許昌縣, Henan. 272 Zhi Ying is arguing that Chu will be lulled into a state of careless arrogance and will therefore be vulnerable. 273 Cf. similar arguments in Xuan 12.2c. 274 That is, they are prepared to march and, by implication, to withdraw their troops. 275 Zheng and the armies of the princes are both north of the Ying River, while Chu forces are south of the river. 276 Upon Zheng’s submission, Chu will make excessive demands on Zheng and arouse Zheng’s resentment (Yang, 3:982). Karlgren (gl. 508) has a different reading: “It is better to make public our resentment (and admonish Zheng).” 277 Alternatively, “victory cannot be fated” (Takezoe, 15.14). Both readings imply that victory cannot be certain or be taken for granted.

Lord Xiang

979

10.12 王叔陳生與伯輿爭政，王右伯輿。王叔陳生怒而出奔。及河，王復之，

殺史狡以說焉。不入，遂處之。晉侯使士匄平王室，王叔與伯輿訟焉。王 叔之宰與伯輿之大夫瑕禽坐獄於王庭，士匄聽之。王叔之宰曰：「 篳門 閨竇之人而皆陵其上，其難為上矣。」 瑕禽曰：「 昔平王東遷，吾七姓從王，牲用備具，王賴之，而賜之 騂旄之盟，曰：『世世無失職。』若篳門閨竇，其能來東厎乎？且王何賴 焉？今自王叔之相也，政以賄成，而刑放於寵。官之師旅，不勝其富，吾 能無篳門閨竇乎？唯大國圖之！下而無直，則何謂正矣？」 范宣子曰：「 天子所右，寡君亦右之；所左，亦左之。」使王叔氏與 伯輿合要，王叔氏不能舉其契。王叔奔晉。 不書，不告也。單靖公為卿士以相王室。

278 Both Wangshu Chensheng and Boyu were royal ministers (qingshi). Boyu was involved in a similar power struggle with the Zhou Duke Chu in 580 Bce (Cheng 11.5). Upon his defeat, Chu fled to Jin, as did Chensheng in this episode. 279 We may surmise that the scribe Jiao was one of Chensheng’s enemies at the Zhou court. It is possible to read yue 說 as shuo 說, “to make a case” (Takezoe, 15.15). 280 What we translate as “reside” (chu 處) can also mean “judge”: “the king thus had the case judged by the Yellow River.” See Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 103. 281 The term here is zuoyu 坐獄 (literally, “sit in a court case”); elsewhere we also have simply zuo 坐 (“sit”). Jin was often the arbitrator in arguments within or between domains (including Zhou); see Xi 28.8, Zhao 23.2. Du Yu (ZZ 31.542) suggests that persons holding high offices were not sup­­posed to personally argue their cases, hence the presence of their representatives here. 282 Following Takezoe (15.16) and Karlgren (gl. 512), we read fang 放 as “let go” or “set aside.” Alternatively, Du Yu (ZZ 31.549) has “punishments have been only in the hands of favorites.”

980

Zuo Tradition

A Jin minister arbitrates the claims of two Zhou ministers contending for dominance in the Zhou court (see also Wen 14.9). The minister of lower rank is presented as having a more justified case. Wangshu [which means “royal uncle”] Chensheng vied with Boyu for control of the government.278 The king sided with Boyu. Enraged, Wangshu Chensheng left the Zhou capital and fled. When he reached the Yellow River, the king restored his position and put to death the scribe Jiao in order to please him.279 He did not reenter the capital but from that time resided by the Yellow River.280 The Prince of Jin sent Fan Gaia to make peace in the royal house. Wangshu Chenshenga and Boyu brought charges against one another before Fan Gai. The royal uncle’s steward and Boyu’s high officer, Xia Qin, disputed their claims at the royal court.281 Fan Gaia heard their cases. The royal uncle’s steward said, “When even all those living in hovels with brushwood gates and narrow doorways lord it over their superiors, it is difficult to be in superior ranks.” Xia Qin said, “Formerly, when King Ping resettled in the east, we were among the seven clans that followed the king, and we provided the full complement of sacrificial victims and equipment. The king relied on us and bestowed on us a covenant, offering a red bull as sacrifice. The covenant said, ‘For generations to come, do not fail your office.’ If we had truly come from hovels with brushwood gates and narrow doorways, could we have come east and stayed? Moreover, what would the king have relied on? Now since the royal uncle became chief minister, policies have been decided through bribes, while punishments have not been applied to favorites.282 When officials of the various ranks have become so intolerably rich, how can the likes of us not live in hovels with brushwood gates and narrow doorways? Let the great domain consider this! If for those in inferior ranks there is no justice, how can this be called fair?” Fan Gaic said, “Let the one the Son of Heaven favors be the one our unworthy ruler also favors. Let the one the Son of Heaven disfavors be the one our unworthy ruler also disfavors.” He made the royal uncle and Boyu give their respective accusations and statements, which were to be reviewed together. The royal uncle could not give the evidence supporting his case, and he fled to Jin. This was not recorded because we in Lu were not notified. The Shan Duke Jing became the minister serving the royal house.

10.12

Lord Xiang

981

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年，春，王正月，作三軍。 11.2 夏，四月，四卜郊，不從，乃不郊。 11.3(2) 鄭公孫舍之帥師侵宋。 11.4(3) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、齊世子光、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞

伯、小邾子伐鄭。 11.5(3) 秋，七月己未，同盟于亳城北。 11.6 公至自伐鄭。 11.7(4) 楚子、鄭伯伐宋。 11.8(5) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、曹伯、齊世子光、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞

伯、小邾子伐鄭，會于蕭魚。 11.9 公至自會。 11.10(5) 楚人執鄭行人良霄。 11.11(6) 冬，秦人伐晉。

982

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 11 (562 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, in the royal first month, the three armies were created.

11.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, we divined four times about performing the sacrifice in the outskirts. The results were not favorable, so we did not perform the sacrifice in the outskirts.283

11.2

Gongsun Shezhi of Zheng led out troops and invaded Song.

11.3(2)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Qi heir apparent Guang, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu and attacked Zheng.

11.4(3)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jiwei day (10), they swore a covenant together north of Bocheng.284

11.5(3)

Our lord arrived from the attack on Zheng.

11.6

The Master of Chu and the Liege of Zheng attacked Song.

11.7(4)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Cao, the Qi heir apparent Guang, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu and attacked Zheng. They met at Xiaoyu.285

11.8(5)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

11.9

Chu leaders arrested the Zheng envoy Liang Xiao.

11.10(5)

In winter, Qin leaders attacked Jin.

11.11(6)

283 For similar incidents, see Xi 31.3, Xiang 7.2. 284 Bocheng 亳城 was located in the domain of Zheng near present-day Zhengzhou 鄭州, Henan. 285 Xiaoyu 蕭魚 was located in present-day Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan.

Lord Xiang

983

左傳 11.1(1) 十一年，春，季武子將作三軍，告叔孫穆子曰：「 請為三軍，各征其軍。」

穆子曰：「 政將及子，子必不能。」武子固請之。穆子曰：「 然則盟諸？」 乃盟諸僖閎，詛諸五父之衢。 正月，作三軍，三分公室而各有其一。三子各毀其乘。季氏使其乘 之人，以其役邑入者無征，不入者倍征。孟氏使半為臣，若子若弟。叔孫 氏使盡為臣，不然不舍。

286 According to Zhouli, each army (jun 軍) consisted of 12,500 soldiers (Yang, 3:986). Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 31.544) consistently applies this rule, although it is doubtful whether the formulations in Zhouli have any direct relevance for Zuozhuan. The word zuo 作 (“create”) here probably means reorganization of, and additions to, existing military resources. 287 Yang (3:986) suggests that the word zheng 征 means “to have possession of.” That Lord Xiang, who was about thirteen or fourteen at this point, should be bypassed in such important deliberations testifies to the weakness of the Lu ruling house. Ji Wuzi, who succeeded Ji Wenzi in Xiang 5, might still be young at this point, and Shusun Bao is consulted because of both his seniority and his position as supervisor of the military. 288 That is, “unable to do this equitably and bring about unity” (Takezoe, 15.19; Yang, 3:986). Alternatively, Ji Wuzi is “unable to accept the division of power” once he assumes charge of the government. Du Yu (ZZ 31.544) reads zheng 政 as “the overlord’s (Jin) commands”: “The overlord’s commands will come upon you, and you will certainly be unable to deal with them.” Du Yu might have taken his cue from Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.186, where Shusun Bao admonishes Ji Wuzi against the creation of the three armies on the ground that it is transgressive and would anger the great domains. 289 The Crossroad of the Five Fathers (wufu zhi qu 五父之衢), also mentioned in Ding 6.7, 8.10, was just outside present-day Qufu and appears to have been an important landmark in Lu. The location implies that the imprecation is deliberately made known to the inhabitants of the capital. Cf. Zhao 5.1, n. 258. According to Liji 6.113, the crossroad is where Confucius buries his mother. 290 Du Yu (ZZ 31.544) interprets the phrase sanfen gongshi 三分公室 (“divided the lord’s house into three”) as a tripartite division of the people. Takezoe (15.20) surmises that the division concerned financial resources and tax revenue. Here we follow Yang’s (3:986) reading of gongshi as “military resources (or forces) of the lord’s house.”

984

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Lu reorganizes its military: the forces of the lord’s house are expanded and divided into three armies (Lu had two before), and troops of the powerful lineages are assimilated into the new armies in different ways. This in effect transfers control of the military from the Lu ruling house to the Ji, Meng, and Shusun lineages. Since the households sending in conscripts also paid taxes, military reorganization is linked to changes in taxation (Xuan 15.8, Cheng 1.2, Ai 12.1), and control of the armies meant political and economic power. Fearful of the dissension that this may cause, Shusun Bao demands a covenant and a public oath. The Lu house is further diminished in the reorganization of the armies in Zhao 5.1a. In the eleventh year, in spring, Ji Wuzi planned to create the three armies.286 He told Shusun Baob: “We request to organize three armies. Each of us will tax resources to support his own army.”287 Shusun Baoc said, “Control of the government will come to be in your hands. You are sure to be unable to do this well.”288 Ji Wuzic persisted with his request. Shusun Baoc said, “Should we then swear a covenant about it?” They thus swore a covenant at the gate of Lord Xi’s temple. The oath of imprecation was made at the Crossroad of the Five Fathers.289 In the first month, the three armies were created. The three lineages divided the forces of our lord’s house into three, each taking possession of one part.290 Each of the three lineage heads disbanded his own contingent of chariots.291 As for the chariot soldiers, the Ji lineage head absolved from levies those who enlisted from his conscript-supplying settlements but doubled the levies for those who did not do so.292 The Meng lineage head made half of his lineage troops into conscripts; they were either sons or younger brothers of those who did not join the army.293 The Shusun lineage head made all his lineage troops into conscripts; otherwise, he would not have given them up for inclusion in the new armies.294

11.1(1)

291 With the expectation of controlling one-third of the military resources of the lord’s house, there is no need for the three lineages to keep their own private chariots. There is the further implication that the disbanded chariots would enter a common “pool,” enhancing the total number of chariots that are to be divided among the three lineages. 292 This follows Yang’s (3:986–87) reading. Yang further surmises that the bondsmen in Ji’s settlements were in effect freed, and they then had the choice of either paying levies or becoming conscripts. 293 The narrative implies that the older males—the fathers and older brothers— remained free men, while the younger males were conscripted into the army. 294 Whereas Shusun Bao opposes the creation of the three armies in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.186 (as consistent with his image of judiciousness and ritual propriety), he is party to the whole process in Zuozhuan. Here he appears as the most conservative of the leaders of the three lineages in the way he reorganizes the army under his control.

Lord Xiang

985

11.2(3) 鄭人患晉、楚之故，諸大夫曰：「 不從晉，國幾亡。楚弱於晉，晉不吾疾

也。晉疾，楚將辟之。何為而使晉師致死於我？楚弗敢敵，而後可固 與也。」 子展曰：「 與宋為惡，諸侯必至，吾從之盟。楚師至，吾又從之，則 晉怒甚矣。晉能驟來，楚將不能，吾乃固與晉。」 大夫說之，使疆埸之司惡於宋。宋向戌侵鄭，大獲。子展曰：「 師 而伐宋可矣。若我伐宋，諸侯之伐我必疾，吾乃聽命焉，且告於楚。楚 師至，吾乃與之盟，而重賂晉師，乃免矣。」夏，鄭子展侵宋。

11.3(4, 5)

四月，諸侯伐鄭。己亥，齊大子光、宋向戌先至于鄭，門于東門。其莫， 晉荀罃至于西郊，東侵舊許。衛孫林父侵其北鄙。六月，諸侯會于北林， 師于向。右還，次于瑣。圍鄭，觀兵于南門，西濟于濟隧。鄭人懼，乃行 成。

295 The word ji 疾 can also be read as “hate” or “resent”: “Jin does not hate us.” 296 Qi was situated to the northeast of Zheng, and Song was to the east, so their forces gathered at the Zheng capital’s east gate. 297 The former Xǔ has been identified as the “lands of Xǔ” that Lu ceded to Zheng in exchange for the district of Beng near Mount Tai (Yin 8.2) or, alternatively, as the former domain of Xǔ, against which Zheng made repeated incursions, starting in 712 Bce (Yin 11.3). Yang (3:989) points out that the two areas were in any case quite close to each other. Fearing Zheng aggression, Xǔ resettled in She in 576 Bce (Cheng 15.7), which suggests that the territories formerly claimed by Xǔ had been annexed by Zheng. 298 Jin was situated to the west of Zheng, and Wei to its north. 299 On Beilin, see Xuan 1.8, n. 14. Xiang 向 was located in Zheng near present-day Weishi County 尉氏縣, Henan. 300 Youhuan 右還 means, literally, “returned to the right.” The translation follows Du Yu’s (ZZ 31.545) interpretation of the troop movement. Suo 瑣 was north of presentday Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 301 Jisui 濟隧 River was a tributary of the Yellow River when the latter’s course was different from its present one. It was probably located just north of present-day Yuanyang County 原陽縣, Henan.

986

Zuo Tradition

Zheng leaders maneuver to achieve an alliance with Jin by attacking Song. The complicated calculations show Zheng making the most of its weakness and timely capitulation. The reasoning is circuitous—only when Jin jealously guards its influence over Zheng will Zheng be safe from Chu aggression, and Zheng plans to provoke Jin and invite Jin invasion by attacking Song, a Jin ally. As a consequence of the Zheng leaders’ being troubled over Jin and Chu, various high officers of Zheng said, “We did not follow Jin, and our domain almost perished. Chu is weaker than Jin, and Jin is not anxious to gain our allegiance.295 If Jin does become anxious about us, Chu will avoid confrontation with it. What can we do to make the Jin army brave death to attack us? For only then, when Chu dares not oppose it, can we firmly adhere to Jin.” Gongsun Shezhia said, “If we create hostility with Song, the princes are sure to arrive, and we can submit and swear a covenant with them. When the Chu army arrives, and we submit to them as well, then Jin will be very angry indeed! If Jin can come at us again and again, Chu will not be able to oppose it. Then we can adhere firmly to Jin.” The high officers were pleased with this plan and sent supervisors of the borders to provoke hostilities with Song. Xiang Xu of Song invaded Zheng and seized men and goods on a grand scale. Gongsun Shezhia said, “Now we can mobilize and attack Song. If we attack Song, the princes are sure to furiously descend on us. We can then abide by their command and also notify Chu. When the Chu army arrives, we will then swear a covenant with it and give heavy bribes to the Jin army. We shall thus escape disaster.” In summer, Gongsun Shezhia of Zheng invaded Song.

11.2(3)

The princes attack Zheng, and Gongsun Shezhi’s plan materializes. The resulting covenant document outlines principles of common interest and mutual assistance. Zheng leaders will violate this oath immediately after swearing it. In the fourth month, the princes attacked Zheng. On the jihai day (19), the Qi heir apparent Guang and Xiang Xu of Song, arriving at Zheng in advance of the others, stormed the eastern gate of the Zheng capital.296 That evening, Zhi Yingb of Jin arrived in the western outskirts of the Zheng capital and moved eastward to invade the former Xǔ.297 Sun Linfu of Wei invaded Zheng’s northern marches.298 In the sixth month, the princes had a meeting at Beilin and stationed their armies at Xiang.299 Then they moved toward the northwest and set up camp at Suo.300 They laid siege to the Zheng capital, displayed their military might at its southern gate, and crossed westward over the Jisui River.301 Frightened, the men of Zheng sought a peace accord with the princes.

Lord Xiang

11.3(4, 5)

987

秋，七月，同盟于亳。范宣子曰：「 不慎，必失諸侯。諸侯道敝而無 成，能無貳乎？」 乃盟。載書曰：「 凡我同盟，毋蘊年，毋壅利，毋保姦，毋留慝，救 災患，恤禍亂，同好惡，獎王室。或間茲命，司慎、司盟，名山、名川，群 神、群祀，先王、先公，七姓、十二國之祖，明神殛之，俾失其民，隊命亡 氏，踣其國家。」 11.4(7) 楚子囊乞旅于秦。秦右大夫詹帥師從楚子，將以伐鄭。鄭伯逆之。丙

子，伐宋。

11.5a(8, 10)

九月，諸侯悉師以復伐鄭，鄭人使良霄、大宰石㚟如楚，告將服于晉， 曰：「 孤以社稷之故，不能懷君。君若能以玉帛綏晉，不然，則武震以攝 威之，孤之願也。」楚人執之。書曰「 行人」，言使人也。 諸侯之師觀兵于鄭東門。鄭人使王子伯駢行成。甲戌，晉趙武入 盟鄭伯。冬，十月丁亥，鄭子展出盟晉侯。十二月戊寅，會于蕭魚。庚 辰，赦鄭囚，皆禮而歸之；納斥候；禁侵掠。晉侯使叔肸告于諸侯。

302 This applies especially when another domain is afflicted by famines. 303 According to Du Yu (ZZ 31.546), “ancestral kings” refers to first ancestors, and “ancestral lords” refers to those first granted a domain. 304 Jin, Lu, Wei, Cao, and Teng shared the clan name Ji 姬; the clan name of both Zhu and Lesser Zhu was Cao 曹; that of Song, Zi 子; Qi, Jiang 姜; Ju, Ji 己; Qĭ, Si 姒; Xue, Ren 任. 305 Alternatively, we could translate this as “bring down his life” (Yang, 3:990).

988

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, they swore a covenant together at Bo. Fan Gaic said, “If we are not careful, we are sure to lose the allegiance of the princes. When the princes grow weary on the road to battle but achieve nothing, how can they not shift their allegiance?” They thus swore a covenant. The covenant document said: “All of us who swear this covenant together will not hoard ripened grain,302 will not monopolize resources, will not offer refuge to miscreants from other domains, and will not harbor malefactors. Each will relieve calamities and troubles, offer succor against disasters and rebellions, share what is loved and hated, and support the royal house. He who contravenes this command, may the spirit overseeing reverence and the spirit overseeing covenants, the spirits of great mountains and great rivers, the many spirits and recipients of sacrifices, the ancestral kings and ancestral lords,303 the ancestors of the seven clans and the twelve domains,304 and the bright spirits smite him, make him lose his people, cast down his mandate,305 destroy his lineage, and devastate his domain and patrimony.” A Qin-Chu coalition attacks Zheng, and Zheng strikes Song as planned. Zinang of Chu pleaded for troops at Qin. The high officer of the right in Qin, Zhan, led an army to follow the Master of Chu, intending to use it to attack Zheng. The Liege of Zheng met the invading troops. On the bingzi day (27), Zheng attacked Song.

11.4(7)

Zheng envoys seeking Chu military assistance are seized, paving the way for an accord with Jin, as Zheng leaders anticipated (Xiang 11.2). In the ninth month, the princes all mobilized their armies in order to attack Zheng again. The leaders of Zheng sent Liang Xiao and the grand steward Shi Chuo to Chu to notify the latter of their intention to submit to Jin, declaring in the Zheng ruler’s name: “I, the lone one, on account of the altars of the domain, cannot hold fast to you, my lord. What I wish for is that you, my lord, might use jade and silk to placate Jin or, failing that, use devastating martial power to overawe it. That is my very wish.” The men of Chu arrested them. The text says, “envoy”: this is to indicate that Liang Xiao had been sent. The armies of the princes reviewed their troops at the eastern gate of the Zheng capital. The men of Zheng sent Wangzi Bopian on a mission to seek an accord. On the jiaxu day (26), Zhao Wu of Jin entered and swore a covenant with the Liege of Zheng. In winter, in the tenth month, on the dinghai day (9), Gongsun Shezhia of Zheng came out and swore a covenant with the Prince of Jin. In the twelfth month, on the wuyin day (1), they met at Xiaoyu. On the gengchen day (3), Jin leaders pardoned the Zheng prisoners, treated them all with ritual propriety, and sent them home. They called in scouting patrols and forbade raids and pillaging. The Prince of Jin sent Shuxiangb to notify the princes.

11.5a(8, 10)

Lord Xiang

989

公使臧孫紇對曰：「 凡我同盟，小國有罪，大國致討，苟有以藉 手，鮮不赦宥，寡君聞命矣。」 11.5b 鄭人賂晉侯以師悝、師觸、師蠲；廣車、軘車淳十五乘，甲兵備，凡兵車

百乘；歌鐘二肆，及其鎛、磬；女樂二八。 晉侯以樂之半賜魏絳，曰：「 子教寡人和諸戎狄以正諸華，八年之 中，九合諸侯，如樂之和，無所不諧，請與子樂之。」 辭曰：「 夫和戎狄，國之福也；八年之中，九合諸侯，諸侯無慝，君 之靈也，二三子之勞也，臣何力之有焉？抑臣願君安其樂而思其終也。 《詩》曰： 樂只君子， 殿天子之邦。 樂只君子，

306 The term jishou 藉手 means literally “service rendered” or “gift given by hand.” 307 Kong Yingda cites Zheng Xuan, who glosses guangche 廣車 as “chariots arrayed in a horizontal formation” (hengchen zhi che 橫陳之車) (ZZ-Kong 31.574). These chariots were probably of the same type used in the “right sector” (youguang 右廣) and “left sector” (zuoguang 左廣) when Chu confronted Jin in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2). Fu Qian glosses tunche 軘車 as chariots for defending and guarding the army base (ZZ-Kong 31.547). We no longer know the details of how these two types of chariots were equipped differently. 308 These other chariots were probably not equipped with armor and weapons. 309 In 1997 Zheng bells were unearthed in sacrificial pits at the remnants of the Zheng capital. For this remarkable find, see von Falkenhausen, Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius, 359–60. The most impressive set of bronze bells unearthed to date is from the tomb of Prince Yi of Zeng. Discovered in 1978, this set of sixty-four bells arranged in three tiers includes musical inscriptions that label strike points with the names of the notes. The notations lead Yang (3:992) to surmise that only bells with certain notes and pitches may qualify as a “set” (si 肆), identified by some commentators as meaning “a set of thirty-two bells.” For more on the bells from the tomb of Prince Yi of Zeng, see Bagley, “Percussion”; von Falkenhausen, “The Zeng Hou Yi Finds in the History of Chinese Music.” 310 For Wei Jiang’s remonstrance with Lord Dao of Jin on the importance of achieving peace with the Rong and Di tribes, see Xiang 4.7. 311 Lord Dao is referring to the meetings at Qī and Chengdi (Xiang 5.8, 5.9), Wei (Xiang 7.8), Xingqiu (Xiang 8.4), Xi (Xiang 9.5), Zha and Hulao (Xiang 10.1, 10.10), Bo and Xiaoyu (Xiang 11.3, 11.5). 312 Here, as in the rest of the exchange, there are references to the double meanings of the character le 樂 or yue 樂 as “music” and “joy.”

990

Zuo Tradition

Our lord sent Zang Wuzhonge to give this reply, “For all who are our covenant partners: when a small domain commits an offense, the great domain visits chastisement upon it; but so long as the small domain has ways to render service,306 rarely does the great domain not extend forgiveness. Our unworthy ruler has heeded your command!” The word he 和 can mean “musical harmony” and “peaceful accord,” and the Jin minister Wei Jiang is associated with both in Zuozhuan. Lord Dao bestows half of the gifts of musicians and musical instruments submitted by Zheng on Wei Jiang, in recognition of his role in achieving peace with the Rong and the Di (Xiang 4.7), an accord that has in turn facilitated the submission of Zheng. These two developments are considered the centerpiece of Lord Dao’s reassertion of Jin’s status as overlord (fuba). Some scholars consider the gift incommensurate with Wei Jiang’s relatively low rank and interpret this episode as deliberate glorification of the Wei line. The gift confirms Wei’s importance, while his initial refusal underlines his ritual propriety. Wei Jiang also uses the opportunity to remonstrate about the dangers of excess and indulgence. “The gift of musicians and musical instruments” sometimes signals danger and corrupting influence and can be used to undermine another domain (e.g., Zuozhuan, Xiang 15.4; Analects 18.4; Han Feizi 10.186–87). As gifts, Zheng leaders gave the Prince of Jin the music masters Kui, Zhu, and Juan; fifteen pairs of combat chariots and defense chariots complete with armor and weapons;307 a hundred chariots of other kinds;308 two sets of musical bells, with their small bells and chime-stones;309 and sixteen female singers and dancers. The Prince of Jin bestowed on Wei Jiang half of the musicians, singers, dancers, and musical instruments, saying, “You taught me, the unworthy one, to make peace with the various Rong and Di tribes in order to rectify our leadership of the various central domains.310 In eight years, I assembled the princes nine times.311 As with musical harmony, there is nothing not in accord. I ask permission to share with you the music and the joy.”312 Wei Jiang declined the gifts: “Making peace with the Rong and Di tribes meant good fortune for the domain. Assembling the princes nine times in eight years, with the princes committing no transgression, was the result of my lord’s numinous power and of the exertion of these fine men. What part did my efforts play in these things? And yet I hope that you, my lord, will enjoy the music and think about its proper ends. As it says in the Odes,

11.5b

Joyous is the noble man, Securing the realm of the Son of Heaven. Joyous is the noble man,

Lord Xiang

991

福祿攸同。 便蕃左右， 亦是帥從。 夫樂以安德，義以處之，禮以行之，信以守之，仁以厲之，而後可以殿邦 國、同福祿、來遠人，所謂樂也。書曰： 居安思危。 思則有備，有備無患。敢以此規。」 公曰：「 子之教，敢不承命？抑微子，寡人無以待戎，不能濟河。夫 賞，國之典也，藏在盟府，不可廢也。子其受之！」魏絳於是乎始有金石 之樂，禮也。 11.6(11) 秦庶長鮑、庶長武帥師伐晉以救鄭。鮑先入晉地，士魴禦之，少秦師而

弗設備。壬午，武濟自輔氏，與鮑交伐晉師。己丑，秦、晉戰于櫟，晉師 敗績，易秦故也。

313 Maoshi 222, “Caishu” 采菽, 15A.502. The received text has “myriad good fortunes” (wanfu 萬福) instead of “good fortune and position” (fulu 福祿); “in good order” (pingping 平平) instead of “well governed” (bianfan 便蕃). 314 This line is not found in the received text of the Documents. There is a comparable formulation in Yi Zhou shu 12.1936 : “In calmness, think of dangers; at the beginning, think of the end.” In Zhanguo ce (“Chu ce 4,” 17.582), Yu Qing cites, “In calmness, think of dangers, and in dangers, deliberate calmness” as a line from Chunqiu (i.e., its exegetical tradition). The same line appears in Lüshi chunqiu 15.843. 315 This line is incorporated in “Yue ming zhong” 說命中 (Shangshu 13.141) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. 316 That is, he would not have been able to bring about Zheng’s submission. Some commentators have noted how the eulogy of Lord Dao exceeds his recorded accomplishment (e.g., Wu Kaisheng, Zuozhuan wei, 483), while others note how he maximizes Jin power and stability given the circumstantial constraints (e.g., Gu Donggao, “Jin Dao gong lun” 晉悼公論, in Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:2025–26). 317 Du Yu (ZZ 31.547) claims that such archives contained writings on principles of rewards (shanggong zhi zhi 賞功之制), but it is more likely that the writings refer to proclamations of merit, as mentioned in Xi 5.8 and Xi 26.3.

992

Zuo Tradition

In whom blessings and position are brought together. Well governed are the small domains on left and right. They too follow his leadership.313

Now, music is for calming virtue; dutifulness is for situating it; ritual propriety is for realizing it; good faith is for guarding it; and nobility of spirit is for encouraging it. Only with these can one lay the foundation for the realm, bring together good fortune and position, and draw close those from afar: this is called joy. As the Documents says, While living in calmness, think of dangers.314

To dwell on this is to be prepared; to be prepared is to have no cause for anxiety.315 I have presumed to offer these words of correction, my lord.” The lord said, “Should I presume not to receive your teachings as a command? However, if it had not been for you, I, the unworthy one, would have had neither the means to deal with the Rong nor the ability to cross the Yellow River.316 Now rewards become part of the permanent heritage of the domain, and they are stored up in the covenant archives, where they cannot be discarded.317 You, sir, should accept the reward!” It was from this time, then, that Wei Jiang first had the ceremonial music of bells and chime-stones.318 This was in accordance with ritual propriety. Two Qin colonels,319 Bao and Wu, led out troops and attacked Jin in order to go to Zheng’s aid. Bao was the first to enter Jin territories. Shi Fang resisted them but underestimated the Qin army and did not make adequate defensive preparations. On the renwu day (5), Wu crossed the river from Fushi and with Bao attacked the Jin troops from both sides.320 On the jichou day (12), Qin and Jin did battle at Li.321 That the Jin army was completely defeated was because it had made light of Qin.

11.6(11)

318 At this point Wei Jiang, as assistant commander of the new army, ranked eighth among Jin leaders. That he should be singled out for a reward for Jin’s victory over Zheng seems somewhat incongruous. By the same token, Wei Jiang’s general importance during these years, including his speech on peace with the Rong, is not explained by his position. Like the prediction of the greatness of Bi Wan’s progeny (Min 1.6) or the praise of Weì music (Xiang 29.13), these may be derived from Wei sources aggrandizing that lineage. These Weì materials thus represent one stratum of Zuozhuan. 319 The term shuzhang 庶長 (translated here as “colonels”), also used in Xiang 12.4, designates an official title peculiar to Qin. On the use of this and another Qin rank, bugeng, to date the text, see Cheng 13.3, n. 287. 320 Fushi 輔氏 was located just east of present-day Dali County 大茘縣, Shaanxi. 321 This place named Li 櫟, likely in Jin, should be distinguished from the places with the same name in Zheng and Chu, see Huan 15.9, n. 125 and Zhao 1.13, n. 106.

Lord Xiang

993

春秋 12.1(1) 十有二年，春，王二月，莒人伐我東鄙，圍台。 12.2(1) 季孫宿帥師救台，遂入鄆。 12.3(2) 夏，晉侯使士魴來聘。 12.4(3) 秋，九月，吳子乘卒。 12.5(4) 冬，楚公子貞帥師侵宋。 12.6(6) 公如晉。

左傳

12.1(1, 2)

十二年，春，莒人伐我東鄙，圍台。季武子救台，遂入鄆，取其鐘以為 公盤。

12.2(3) 夏，晉士魴來聘，且拜師。 12.3(4) 秋，吳子壽夢卒，臨於周廟，禮也。凡諸侯之喪，異姓臨於外，同姓於宗

廟，同宗於祖廟，同族於禰廟。是故魯為諸姬，臨於周廟；為邢、凡、蔣、 茅、胙、祭，臨於周公之廟。 12.4(5) 冬，楚子囊、秦庶長無地伐宋，師于楊梁，以報晉之取鄭也。

322 Tai 台 was located in the domain of Lu southeast of Fei County 費縣, Shandong. 323 Fu Qian claims that “Shoumeng” is the phonetically drawn out version of “Sheng” 乘 (ZZ-Kong 31.537). He seems to be suggesting that the “barbarian” Wu language tends towards a poly-syllabic structure. 324 Yun was under Lu control (Wen 12.7). The basin (pan 盤) could be used for holding food or water. 325 According to Du Yu (ZZ 31.548), the Zhou Temple was the temple of King Wen of Zhou. The Wu ancestor was Taibo, older brother of King Wen; and the Lu ancestor was the Zhou Duke, younger brother of King Wu and son of King Wen. The kinship ties made the temple of King Wen an appropriate place to bewail Shoumeng. On lamentation in mourning rituals and the word lin 臨, see also Xuan 12.1, n. 180. 326 Du Yu (ZZ 31.548) reads: “Outside the city wall and facing the domain of the deceased.” 327 The six enumerated houses here were descended from the Zhou Duke. 328 Yangliang 楊梁 was located in the domain of Song southeast of Shangqiu County 商丘縣, Henan. 994

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 12 (561 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Ju leaders attacked our eastern marches and laid siege to Tai.322

12.1(1)

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) led out troops and went to the aid of Tai. He then entered Yun.

12.2(1)

In summer, the Prince of Jin sent Shi Fang to come on an official visit.

12.3(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, Sheng (Shoumeng),323 the Master of Wu, died.

12.4(3)

In winter, Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and invaded Song.

12.5(4)

Our lord went to Jin.

12.6(6)

ZUO

In the twelfth year, in spring, Ju leaders attacked our eastern marches and lay siege to Tai. Ji Wuzi went to the aid of Tai. He then entered Yun. He took their bronze bells and made them into a basin for our lord.324

12.1(1, 2)

A Jin leader thanks Lu for its participation in the Jin-led campaign against Zheng (Xiang 11.5). In summer, Shi Fang of Jin came to us on an official visit and moreover bowed in thanks for our troops.

12.2(3)

Wu was castigated as barbarian twenty-three years earlier (Cheng 7.1) but is here recognized for its special ties with the Zhou house. In autumn, Shoumeng, the Master of Wu, died. Our lord lamented his passing at the Zhou Temple:325 this was in accordance with ritual propriety. In all cases concerning the funeral of a prince, if he was of a different clan, the lord would lament his passing outside the city wall;326 if he was of the same clan, the lord would lament his passing at the Ancestral Temple; if he was of the same line, the lord would lament his passing at the founding ruler’s temple; if he was of the same house, the lord would lament his passing at his father’s temple. That was why a Lu lord lamented the passing of lords of the same clan name Ji at the Zhou Temple and lamented the passing of lords with the clan names of Xing, Fan, Jiang, Mao, Zuo, and Zhai at the Zhou Duke’s temple.327

12.3(4)

In winter, Zinang of Chu and Colonel Wudi of Qin attacked Song, stationing their troops at Yangliang.328 This was in retaliation for Jin’s act of taking control of Zheng.

12.4(5)

Lord Xiang

995

12.5 靈王求后于齊，齊侯問對於晏桓子。桓子對曰：「 先王之禮辭有之。天

子求后於諸侯，諸侯對曰：『夫婦所生若而人，妾婦之子若而人。』無女 而有姊妹及姑姊妹，則曰：『先守某公之遺女若而人。』」齊侯許婚。王 使陰里結之。 12.6(6) 公如晉朝，且拜士魴之辱，禮也。 12.7 秦嬴歸于楚。楚司馬子庚聘于秦，為夫人寧，禮也。

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年，春，公至自晉。 13.2(2) 夏，取邿。 13.3(4) 秋，九月庚辰，楚子審卒。 13.4(6) 冬，城防。

329 Yan Ruo, father of Yan Ying, is first mentioned in Xuan 14.4. 330 We follow Gu Yanwu in reading ruo er ren 若而人 as hypothetical names (Rizhi lu jishi, 32.752–53; Karlgren, gl. 521). The prince would refer to his paternal aunts as daughters of his grandfather. 331 The word jie 結 refers to “binding words” 結言, words that seal an agreement. 332 See Xiang 12.2.

996

Zuo Tradition

The proposed marriage between the Zhou king and a lady of the Qi house, formalized three years later (Xiang 15.2), may indicate closer Zhou-Qi ties (Xiang 14.8). For an earlier Zhou-Qi marriage alliance, see Xuan 6.4. King Ling sought a queen from Qi. The Prince of Qi asked Yan Ruoa how he should reply.329 Yan Ruoc replied, “The ritual language of the former kings had the proper formulations. When the Son of Heaven seeks a queen from a prince, the prince replies, ‘Of daughters by husband and wife, there are so-and-so; of daughters by my concubines, there are soand-so.’ If the prince has no daughters but has sisters and paternal aunts, then he says, ‘The former ruler, Lord so-and-so, left behind daughters so-and-so.’330 The Prince of Qi agreed to the marriage. The king sent Yin Li to make the agreement.331

12.5

Our lord went to visit the court of Jin and moreover bowed for the condescension of Shi Fang’s visit.332 This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

12.6(6)

Qin and Chu form closer ties as they unite against Jin (Xiang 9.4). Qin Ying returned to Chu.333 The Chu supervisor of the military, Zigeng,334 went on an official visit to Qin because of the visit of the ruler’s wife to her natal state. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

12.7

LORD XIANG 13 (560 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Jin.

13.1(1)

In summer, we took Shi.335

13.2(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, on the gengchen day (14), Shen, the Master of Chu, died. In winter, we fortified Fang.

13.3(4)

13.4(6)

333 According to Du Yu (ZZ 31.549), Qin Ying was the younger sister of Lord Jing of Qin and consort of King Gong of Chu. She had visited her mother in Qin and was at this point returning to Chu. 334 Zigeng’s tomb was discovered in the Xiasi cemetery. See Zhang Jian and Zhang Shigang, “Henan sheng Xichuan xian Xiasi Chunqiu Chu mu.” 335 Shi 邿 was a small domain located south of present-day Jining City 濟寧市, Shandong.

Lord Xiang

997

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年，春，公至自晉，孟獻子書勞于廟，禮也。 13.2(2) 夏，邿亂，分為三。師救邿，遂取之。凡書取，言易也；用大師焉曰滅；弗

地曰入。 13.3a 荀罃、士魴卒，晉侯蒐于綿上以治兵。使士匄將中軍，辭曰：「 伯游長。

昔臣習於知伯，是以佐之，非能賢也。請從伯游。」荀偃將中軍，士匄 佐之。 使韓起將上軍，辭以趙武。又使欒黶，辭曰：「 臣不如韓起，韓起 願上趙武，君其聽之。」使趙武將上軍，韓起佐之；欒黶將下軍，魏絳佐 之。新軍無帥，晉侯難其人，使其什吏率其卒乘官屬，以從於下軍，禮 也。晉國之民是以大和，諸侯遂睦。

336 We are told earlier that upon a lord’s return from his journey, whether it be to visit the Zhou court, to meet other princes, or to undertake a military expedition, he had to report on his mission at the Ancestral Temple, offer ceremonial toasts to his officials, and have his services written down (Huan 2.7). The ritual of “recording merits on bamboo slips” (cexun 策勳) in Huan 2.7 is probably the same as “writing of his exertion” (shulao 書勞) here.

998

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the thirteenth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Jin. Meng Xianzi wrote of his exertion at the temple. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.336

13.1(1)

In summer, Shi fell into disorder and was partitioned into three sections. Our troops went to Shi’s aid and went on to take it. In all cases when the text has “took,” it is to say that it was easy; when a great army was employed, it says “extinguished”; when territories were not retained, it says “entered.”

13.2(2)

Jin commanders show exemplary disinterestedness in vying to yield power to the most worthy. We have seen similar rhetoric in Cheng 2.3, 2.7, 4.4, 6.11, 8.2. This narrative on the virtues of modesty and yielding also serves to explain how Zhao Wu and Wei Jiang bypass the normal order of ranks and rise to new prominence. Zhi Yingb and Shi Fang died. The Prince of Jin mustered troops at Mianshang, where he drilled them. He appointed Fan Gaia commander of the central army, but he declined: “Zhonghang Yand is my senior. Formerly, I had rapport with Zhi Yingc. On the basis of that connection, I assisted him; it was not because I was capable and worthy. I beg to follow Zhonghang Yand.” Zhonghang Yana commanded the central army, and Fan Gaia assisted him. The Jin ruler appointed Han Qi commander of the upper army, but he declined in favor of Zhao Wu. He then appointed Luan Yan, who declined: “I do not compare to Han Qi, and even Han Qi wishes to have Zhao Wu above him. You, my lord, should heed him.” He appointed Zhao Wu commander of the upper army, and Han Qi assisted him. Luan Yan commanded the lower army, and Wei Jiang assisted him.337 The new army did not have any commanders. The Prince of Jin, finding it difficult to choose the proper men, made its ten senior officers lead their infantry soldiers, chariot soldiers, and officers to follow the lower army. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. On this basis a great harmony prevailed among the people of Jin, and the princes were thus in concord with Jin.

13.3a

337 Du Yu (ZZ 32.555) notes that Zhao Wu, in taking over Zhonghang Yan’s former post as commander of the upper army, was promoted four ranks. As commander of the new army, Zhao Wu had ranked seventh among the eight ministers, but now he ranked third. Wei Jiang was also promoted, from the eighth rank (as assistant commander of the new army) to the sixth (as assistant commander of the lower army).

Lord Xiang

999

13.3b 君子曰：「 讓，禮之主也。范宣子讓，其下皆讓，欒黶為汏，弗敢違也。晉

國以平，數世賴之，刑善也夫！一人刑善，百姓休和，可不務乎！《書》 曰： 一人有慶， 兆民賴之， 其寧惟永。 其是之謂乎！周之興也，其《詩》曰： 儀刑文王， 萬邦作孚。 言刑善也。及其衰也，其《詩》曰： 大夫不均， 我從事獨賢。 言不讓也。世之治也，君子尚能而讓其下，小人農力以事其上，是以上 下有禮，而讒慝黜遠，由不爭也，謂之懿德。及其亂也，君子稱其功以 加小人，小人伐其技以馮君子，是以上下無禮，亂虐並生，由爭善也，謂 之昏德。國家之敝，恆必由之。」

338 See Xiang 14.3. 339 The term baixing 百姓 (“a hundred clan names”), which means “common people” in modern Chinese, here refers to the clans of officials. 340 Shangshu, “Lü xing” 呂刑, 19.300. In the original context of the quotation, “one person” refers to the “Son of Heaven.” Here it simply refers to a person of high station. 341 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.537. 342 Maoshi 205, “Beishan” 北山, 13A.444. The poem is written in the plaintive voice of a high officer toiling in faraway places; he sings of bearing an unfair share of the burden of services. See Wang Fuzhi’s gloss of the word xian 賢 as “many” in Shijing baishu 詩經稗疏, cited in Cheng Junying and Jiang Jianyuan, Shijing zhuxi, 2:643: “The high officers are unequal, / I alone toil in many missions.” Here the quotation “breaks off the section and appropriates the meaning” (duanzhang quyi 斷章取義) and presents the voice of boastful self-assertion. 343 Following Hong Liangji (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 527) and Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 705), who both cite Guangya, we read nong 農 as mian 勉 (“utmost effort”). Takezoe (15.37) suggests that the word nong 農 connotes strength and density; thus, nong 醲, with the wine radical added, means “strong wine.” 344 The argument here concerns contention about merit or superiority. 345 See, for example, Xi Zhi’s self-congratulation, criticized in Cheng 16.12.

1000

Zuo Tradition

The noble man’s comments elaborate the meanings and effects of the virtue of yielding. The speech is reminiscent of Zinang’s earlier praise of Jin leaders (Xiang 9.4) and stands in stark contrast to the accounts of ruthless struggles among rival Jin lineages that unfold elsewhere in Zuozhuan. The noble man said, “Yielding is the mainstay of ritual propriety. Fan Gaib yielded, and those below him all yielded. Even Luan Yan, who was guilty of excesses,338 did not presume to go against it. On the basis of yielding, the domain of Jin achieved stability, relying on it for several successive generations. Is this not the effect of taking the good as model? One person took the good as model, and there was calm and harmony among the hundred clans.339 Can one do anything other than strive for it? As it says in the Documents,

13.3b

One person has the goodness. The myriad people rely on it. The peace it brings will be lasting.340

Surely this refers to such a case! At the time of the rise of Zhou, its Odes says, Take as model King Wen, And the ten thousand realms have trust.341

They were speaking of taking the good as model. By the time of Zhou’s decline, its Odes says, The high officers are unequal. I serve, I alone am worthy.342

They were speaking of refusing to yield. In an era of good government, noble men honor the capable and yield to those below them, while the common men labor to the utmost343 to serve those above them. That is why, above and below, there is ritual propriety, and the slanderous and iniquitous ones are banished afar. This comes about because they do not come into conflict,344 and this is called ‘beautiful virtue.’ When the polity falls into disorder, noble men call attention to their achievements in order to lord it over the common men,345 and the common men boast of their special skills in order to impose on noble men. That is why, above and below, there is no ritual propriety, and disorder and violence arise together. This comes about because they contend over their respective merits, and this is called ‘obscured virtue.’ The ruin of the domain and patrimony must always derive from this.”

Lord Xiang

1001

13.4(3) 楚子疾，告大夫曰：「 不穀不德，少主社稷。生十年而喪先君，未及習師

保之教訓而應受多福，是以不德，而亡師于鄢；以辱社稷，為大夫憂，其 弘多矣。若以大夫之靈，獲保首領以歿於地，唯是春秋窀穸之事、所 以從先君於禰廟者，請為『靈』若『厲』。大夫擇焉。」莫對。及五命， 乃許。 秋，楚共王卒。子囊謀諡。大夫曰：「 君有命矣。」子囊曰：「 君命以 共，若之何毀之？赫赫楚國，而君臨之，撫有蠻夷，奄征南海，以屬諸 夏，而知其過，可不謂共乎？請諡之『共』。」大夫從之。 13.5 吳侵楚，養由基奔命，子庚以師繼之。養叔曰：「 吳乘我喪，謂我不能師

也，必易我而不戒。子為三覆以待我，我請誘之。」子庚從之。戰于庸 浦，大敗吳師，獲公子黨。 君子以吳為不弔，《詩》曰：

346 The term “high officers” can include ministers. 347 King Gong’s father, King Zhuang, died in 589 Bce (Cheng 2.8). 348 “The position of many blessings” or “the greatly blessed position” (duofu 多福) refers to kingship. For the phrase yingshou 應受, we read ying 應 as ying 膺, which has the same meaning as shou 受, “to receive” or “to have something come upon oneself”; see Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 698. In Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.627–31, King Zhuang appoints Shi Wei and Shen Shushi as teachers of the heir apparent (later King Gong), and Shen Sushi gives an account of an exemplary princely education. 349 Yan stands for Yanling; for Chu defeat at the battle of Yanling, see Cheng 16.5. 350 For this expression, see also Yin 3.5, Zhao 25.8. 351 The practice of giving a posthumous honorific, which presumably summed up the achievements or failures of the deceased, seems to have arisen in the middle of Western Zhou; see Wang Shoukuan, Shifa yanjiu. The choice of honorifics was sometimes discussed when a person was about to die, as in this instance. “Ling” and “Li” both convey negative judgments. According to Du Yu (ZZ 32.556), “Disorder without damage is called ‘Ling’; slaughter of the innocent is called ‘Li.’” This episode is told more briefly in Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.531–32. On “Ling” as a negative posthumous honorific, see our introductory remarks to Lord Xuan. Cf. Wen 1.7. 352 Lin 臨, “to look down from above,” is also associated with the compassionate gaze of the spirits (Karlgren, gl. 525). 353 Although Chu is sometimes presented as being “not of the same kith and kin” (fei wo zulei 非我族類) by the central domains in Zuozhuan (e.g., Cheng 4.4), here Zinang’s rhetoric indicates that Chu sees itself as mediating relations between the “barbarians” beyond the pale and the central domains. If anything, Chu adopts the voice of the central domains in dealing with the “barbarians.” 354 This echoes Qu Wuchen’s curse on Chu commanders (Cheng 7.5). 355 Yongpu 庸浦 was located in the domain of Chu south of present-day Wuwei County 無為縣, Anhui.

1002

Zuo Tradition

The Chu king dies and Zinang urges the use of “Gong” (Reverent) as posthumous honorific, in part because the Chu king is said to have turned Chu into the mediator between the central domains and the barbarians. Taking responsibility for the Chu defeat at Yanling fifteen years ago (Cheng 16.5), the king has asked to be given a posthumous honorific that conveys a negative judgment. Zinang argues that such a gesture indicates the king’s reverence (gong), and the proper honorific would thus be “Gong.” Whereas the other Chu ministers adhere to the letter of the Chu king’s final charge, Zinang claims to distill the spirit in which the command was given. When the Master of Chu was seriously ill, he addressed his high officers:346 “I, the deficient one, lack virtue. I have presided over the altars of the domain since my early years. At the age of ten, I lost the former ruler,347 and before I could master the instructions of teachers and guardians, the greatly blessed position came upon me.348 That was how, lacking virtue, I lost troops at Yan, 349 brought disgrace to the altars of the domain, and made the high officers grieve. All these failings were grave indeed. If, thanks to my officers’ numinous power, I manage to die a natural death with my head still upon my shoulders,350 then on this matter, for the purposes of spring and autumn sacrifices and funeral ritual, whereby I will follow the former lord at my father’s temple, I request to be given the posthumous honorific ‘Ling’ (Disordered) or ‘Li’ (Murderous).351 You, high officers, shall choose between them.” None replied. After he had given the command five times, they assented. In autumn, King Gong of Chu died. Zinang held discussions about the posthumous honorific. The high officers said, “The ruler already gave his command.” Zinang said, “His command was given in reverence. How can we betray it? He came to oversee the great and glorious domain of Chu,352 he soothed and gained sway over the Man and Yi barbarians, canvassing far and wide in his expeditions to the Southern Sea and bringing them to submit to the central domains.353 And yet he recognized his errors. Can he not be called ‘reverent’? I request to honor him posthumously as ‘Gong.’” The high officers followed his suggestion.

13.4(3)

Wu invades Chu, continuing earlier hostilities (Xiang 3.1), but succumbs to Chu ambushes. Wu invaded Chu. Yang Youji rushed about to fulfill commands,354 and Zigeng followed with the army. Yang Youjia said: “Wu is taking advantage of our mourning period because they think we cannot field an army. They are sure to make light of us and not take any precautions. If you will prepare three ambushes and await my arrival, I ask permission to bait them.” Zigeng followed his plan. Chu and Wu did battle at Yongpu.355 Chu roundly defeated the Wu army and took Gongzi Dang captive. The noble man considered Wu ruthless. As it says in the Odes,

13.5

Lord Xiang

1003

不弔昊天， 亂靡有定。 13.6(4) 冬，城防。書事，時也。於是將早城，臧武仲請俟畢農事，禮也。 13.7 鄭良霄、大宰石㚟猶在楚。石㚟言於子囊曰：「 先王卜征五年，而歲習其

祥，祥習則行。不習，則增修德而改卜。今楚實不競，行人何罪？止鄭一 卿，以除其偪，使睦而疾楚，以固於晉，焉用之？使歸而廢其使，怨其君 以疾其大夫，而相牽引也，不猶愈乎？」楚人歸之。

356 Maoshi 191, “Jie nanshan” 節南山, 12A.396. Here we follow Jia Kui’s reading of budiao 不弔 as “failing to condole” (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 528). Heaven considers Wu ruthless for “failing to condole with Chu for its loss.” Du Yu (ZZ 32.556) reads diao 弔 as xu 恤 (“to show compassion for”): “High Heaven has no compassion, / And there is no end to disorder.” (This is the reading we chose for the earlier quotation of these lines in Cheng 7.1.) In other words, “high Heaven” is retributory: because Wu shows no compassion for Chu, attacking it while it is in mourning, Heaven shows no compassion for Wu. 357 Cf. Huan 16.4. 358 Legge (458) surmises that it was about this time that the city of Fang was granted to the Zangsun (Zang) lineage. 359 There is no reference to such practices in the Zhou court in other early texts. Shen Tong suggests that “former kings” here may refer to early Chu kings (Yang, 3:1003). 360 According to Lu Deming, the line reads 不習則增，修德而改卜: “If it is not repeated, they would add time (i.e., postpone their plans), cultivate their virtue, and divine again” (Karlgren, gl. 528).

1004

Zuo Tradition

High Heaven deems him ruthless, And there is no end to disorder.356

In winter, we fortified Fang. This event was recorded to show its timeliness.357 There had been plans to fortify the city earlier, but Zang Wuzhong asked to wait till agricultural labor was completed.358 This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

13.6(4)

A detained Zheng envoy (Xiang 11.5) convinces Chu leaders that by sending himself and a fellow detainee back, they can create greater dissension and weakness in Zheng. Chu follows his advice, and one of the repatriated Zheng officers, Liang Xiao, will wreak havoc in Zheng (Xiang 30.2, 30.10). Liang Xiao and the grand steward Shi Chuo of Zheng were still in Chu. Shi Chuo said to Zinang, “The former kings divined for five successive years when it came to military expeditions.359 Year after year they repeated the question of whether it would be auspicious, and only with repeated auspicious results would they set forth. If they were not repeated, then they would even more assiduously cultivate their virtue and divine anew.360 Now it is Chu that is lacking in strength: what offense are we envoys guilty of ? You detain one minister from Zheng in order to fend off their importunate demands,361 but you end up resolving conflicts for Zheng and uniting Zheng leaders in hatred for Chu, and on those grounds they hold fast to Jin. What use is that? If you let the envoy return after having failed in his mission,362 he will resent his ruler and hate the other high officers, and they will be entangled in disagreements and mutual recriminations. Would that not be better?”363 The leaders of Chu repatriated them.

13.7

361 Shi Chuo is referring to Zheng demands for Chu to attack or make peace with Jin (Karlgren, gl. 529). According to Kong Yingda (ZZ 32.556), the line pertains to Liang Xiao: “You detain one minister from Zheng and, in doing so, remove the cause for strife and oppression in Zheng.” 362 Liang Xiao would be blamed for having failed in his mission upon his return to Zheng. 363 Liang Xiao does bring about disorder in Zheng later (Xiang 30.10). In this sense, Shi Chuo allows self-interest—his desire to return to Zheng—to override the interests of the domain.

Lord Xiang

1005

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年，春，王正月，季孫宿、叔老會晉士匄、齊人、宋人、衛人、鄭公

孫蠆、曹人、莒人、邾人、滕人、薛人、杞人、小邾人會吳于向。 14.2 二月乙未朔，日有食之。 14.3(3) 夏，四月，叔孫豹會晉荀偃、齊人、宋人、衛北宮括、鄭公孫蠆、曹人、莒

人、邾人、滕人、薛人、杞人、小邾人伐秦。 14.4(4) 己未，衛侯出奔齊。 14.5 莒人侵我東鄙。 14.6(7) 秋，楚公子貞帥師伐吳。 14.7(9) 冬，季孫宿會晉士匄、宋華閱、衛孫林父、鄭公孫蠆、莒人、邾人于戚。

左傳 14.1a(1) 十四年，春，吳告敗于晉。會于向，為吳謀楚故也。范宣子數吳之不德

也，以退吳人。 執莒公子務婁，以其通楚使也。

364 Du Yu (ZZ 32.557) held that Xiang 向 was a place in Zheng. Jiang Yong maintained that Xiang was in Wu (Yang, 3:1004), as did Takezoe (15.41). If this latter theory is correct, it probably would have been located west of present-day Huaiyuan County 懷遠縣, Anhui. 365 In Zuozhuan, Xiang 20.7, Ning Zhi enjoins his son Ning Xi to restore the Wei ruler so that the fact that “Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi drove their ruler into exile” can be “covered up” in the records of the lords. Is the present entry a result of that “covering up” or a reflection of how the victorious Wei ministers notify the other domains about Lord Xian’s exile? 366 Qī, in present-day Henan, was Sun Linfu’s settlement.

1006

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 14 (559 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) and Shu Lao met with Shi Gai (Fan Gai) of Jin, a Qi leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, Gongsun Chai (Zijiao) of Zheng, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, a Qǐ leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader and then met with Wu at Xiang.364 In the second month, on the yiwei day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. In summer, in the fourth month, Shusun Bao met with Xun Yan (Zhong hang Yan) of Jin, a Qi leader, a Song leader, Beigong Kuo of Wei, Gongsun Chai (Zijiao) of Zheng, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, a Qǐ leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader and attacked Qin.

14.1(1)

14.2

14.3(3)

On the jiwei day (26), the Prince of Wei departed and fled to Qi.365

14.4(4)

Ju leaders invaded our eastern marches.

14.5

In autumn, Gongzi Zhen (Zinang) of Chu led out troops and attacked Wu.

14.6(7)

In winter, Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) met with Shi Gai of Jin, Hua Yue of Song, Sun Linfu of Wei, Gongsun Chai (Zijiao) of Zheng, a Ju leader, and a Zhu leader at Qī.366

14.7(9)

ZUO

Jin refuses to support Wu against Chu but continues to try to isolate the latter. In the fourteenth year, in spring, Wu notified Jin of its defeat. The princes met at Xiang: this was for the purpose of conferring about an attack against Chu on Wu’s behalf. Fan Gaic reprimanded Wu for its lapses from virtue and dismissed the Wu leader.367 Jin arrested Gongzi Wulou of Ju on the grounds that Ju had been in contact with emissaries from Chu.

14.1a(1)

367 Wu and Jin had sworn a covenant. Wu notified Jin of its defeat, presumably expecting Jin to attack Chu on its behalf. Jin summons the meeting at Xiang ostensibly to address Wu’s concerns but actually to assert its own authority. Jin might have decided to take this course because the other princes refuse to attack Chu and hold that Wu was in the wrong. Takezoe (15.42–43) opines that Jin is less dependent on Wu’s support because it had secured Zheng’s allegiance, which in turn came about because Chu was busy fending off the threat posed by Wu. Moreover, at this point Jin is geared for a confrontation with Qin and cannot manage another front against Chu. It is also possible that Wu’s invasion of Chu while Chu was mourning King Gong was such a violation of ritual norms that Jin had to distance itself from Wu.

Lord Xiang

1007

14.1b 將執戎子駒支，范宣子親數諸朝，曰：「 來！姜戎氏！昔秦人迫逐乃祖吾

離于瓜州，乃祖吾離被苫蓋、蒙荊棘來歸我先君，我先君惠公有不腆之 田，與女剖分而食之。今諸侯之事我寡君不如昔者，蓋言語漏洩，則職 女之由。詰朝之事，爾無與焉。與，將執女。」 對曰：「 昔秦人負恃其眾，貪于土地，逐我諸戎。惠公蠲其大德， 謂我諸戎，是四嶽之裔冑也，毋是翦棄。賜我南鄙之田，狐貍所居，豺 狼所噑。我諸戎除翦其荊棘，驅其狐貍豺狼，以為先君不侵不叛之臣， 至于今不貳。昔文公與秦伐鄭，秦人竊與鄭盟，而舍戍焉，於是乎有殽 之師。晉禦其上，戎亢其下，秦師不復，我諸戎實然。譬如捕鹿，晉人角 之，諸戎掎之，與晉踣之。戎何以不免？自是以來，晉之百役，與我諸戎

368 The Rong of Guazhou consisted of the Jiang and Yun lineages, which Du Yu (ZZ 32.557) misidentifies as variant names of the same group. The Yun lineage of Luhun (a place in Guazhou) was moved by Qin and Jin to Yichuan or the Yi River area (Xi 22.4, Zhao 9.3). At one point it submitted to Jin (Cheng 6.4) but eventually sided with Chu and was eliminated by Jin in 525 Bce (Zhao 17.4). The Jiang Rong lineage, on the other hand, was closer to Jin and consistently acknowledged Jin leadership. See notes by Quan Zuwang and Qian Daxin, cited in Takezoe, 15.43. Guazhou 瓜州 is traditionally identified as a place in Gansu, but Gu Jiegang claims that it refers to the northern and southern slopes of the Qinling Mountains (Yang, 3:1005). According to Gu Jiegang, the Jiang Rong, the Rong of Luhun (also called Yin Rong or the Rong of Jiuzhou), the Rong of the Yi and Luo Rivers, and the Man lineage all settled around Yichuan (cited in Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 171–72). 369 The uncouth garb suggests backwardness. Cf. the early Chu king Xiongyi’s “tattered hemp” mentioned in Zhao 12.11a. 370 We read zhi 職 as zhi 只, “only” (Karlgren, gl. 531). Jiang Rong is said to have leaked Jin’s secrets or passed on rumors that undermine the princes’ allegiance to Jin. 371 The term “Four Peaks” (si yue 四嶽、四岳) or “Grand Peaks” (da yue 大嶽) is mentioned in Yin 11.3b, Zhuang 22.1, Zhao 4.1b. Si yue also appears in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 3.104, and Shangshu 2.26, 2.28, 3.35, 3.43–44, 3.46, 18.269, 18.271. Cf. Yin n. 150. 372 Juzhi is both proclaiming Rong allegiance to Jin and also staking out its independence from Jin. He qualifies Rong’s indebtedness to Jin, claiming that the land Jin ceded to Rong was inhospitable wilderness tamed only through Rong efforts. The Rong should thus be considered civilizing agents rather than barbarians. In return, Rong’s ties with Jin are to be defined through negation, as the absence of aggression and rebellion. 373 See Xi 30.3. 374 See Xi 33.1, 33.3. 375 The meaning of “above” and “below” is not clear: it may mean that while Jin engages Qin in open confrontation, the Rong undermine Qin in surprise attacks.

1008

Zuo Tradition

Fan Gai reprimands the Rong chief Juzhi, who in response defends the rights of the Rong tribes and offers his vision of the relationship between the central domains and the Rong. Juzhi appeals to a history of Jin-Rong interdependence that implies a more equal footing. He emphasizes how the Rong are different from the central domains, yet he shows his mastery of their cultural tradition by reciting an ode. The account implies a causal connection between Juzhi’s speech and Jin’s decision to make fewer demands on subordinate domains. For other examples of the “barbarian’s” mastery of ritual tradition and esoteric knowledge, see Xi 29.4 and Zhao 17.3. Jin was about to arrest Juzhi, Master of the Rong. Fan Gaic personally reprimanded him at court, saying, “Come! You Master of the Jiang Rong lineage! Formerly, the men of Qin pressed your ancestor Wuli hard and drove him from Guazhou.368 Your ancestor Wuli, draped in a white rush cape and wearing a headdress made from brambles,369 came to our former ruler for protection. Though our former ruler, Lord Hui, had but meager lands, he divided them with you to provide you with sustenance. Now the reason that the princes no longer serve our unworthy ruler in the same way as before is because word of our negotiations leaked out, and this could have happened only on account of you.370 You are not to take part in the event of the next morning. If you do, we shall have you arrested.” He replied, “Formerly, the men of Qin, relying on their numbers and covetous of territory, expelled us, the various Rong tribes. Lord Hui, making manifest his great virtue, said that we, the various Rong tribes, were the descendants of the chiefs of the Four Peaks, and that we were not to be cut off and abandoned.371 He bestowed on us the lands of Jin’s southern marches, where foxes and wild cats made their lairs, and where jackals and wolves howled. We, the various Rong, removed and cut down their brambles and drove away their foxes and wild cats, jackals and wolves, and became subjects of the former lord. Neither aggressive nor rebellious, we have been unwavering in our allegiance until now.372 Formerly, Lord Wen of Jin, together with Qin, attacked Zheng. Qin secretly swore a covenant with Zheng and set up garrisons there.373 That was why armies were mobilized at Yao.374 Jin resisted Qin from above, and the Rong withstood it from below.375 That the Qin army did not come back is due to none other than us, the various Rong. Just as in the pursuit of a deer, the men of Jin seized its antlers, and the various Rong tribes caught its legs, and with Jin brought it to the ground. How have the Rong failed to absolve themselves from your charges of betrayal? From that time until the present, in the hundred campaigns of Jin, we, the various Rong

14.1b

Lord Xiang

1009

相繼于時，以從執政，猶殽志也，豈敢離逷？今官之師旅無乃實有所 闕，以攜諸侯，而罪我諸戎！我諸戎飲食衣服不與華同，贄幣不通，言 語不達，何惡之能為？不與於會，亦無瞢焉。」賦〈青蠅〉而退。宣子辭 焉，使即事於會，成愷悌也。 於是子叔齊子為季武子介以會，自是晉人輕魯幣而益敬其使。 14.2 吳子諸樊既除喪，將立季札。季札辭曰：「 曹宣公之卒也，諸侯與曹人不

義曹君，將立子臧。子臧去之，遂弗為也，以成曹君。君子曰『能守節』。 君，義嗣也，誰敢奸君，有國，非吾節也。札雖不才，願附於子臧，以無 失節。」固立之，棄其室而耕，乃舍之。

376 This is one of the few references in Zuozhuan to language differences. See also remarks about the Chu language (Xuan 4.3b) and the Wu language as “the barbaric way of speaking” (yiyan 夷言, Ai 12.4b). It is ironic, of course, that having disclaimed interactions with the central domains and dwelling on obstacles to communication, Juzhi should show himself to have mastered a common cultural heritage embodied by the Odes. Maoshi 219, “Qing ying” 青蠅, 14C.489, laments the dangers of slander: “Joyous and civil is the noble man; / He does not believe in words of slander.” The burden of otherness is thus displaced from the barbarian to the slanderer. The quotation apparently clinches the case for Fan Gai, who in acknowledging his error proves himself to be the “joyous and civil noble man.” 377 Shu Lao is the son of Zishu Shengbo (see Cheng 6.7, 6.8, 8.3, 11.3, 16.8, 16.11, 17.8). It was customary to send one high officer to assist a minister on a diplomatic mission. Here Lu is sending two ministers to show its respect, and Jin reciprocates by lightening the burden of contributions from Lu. Fan Gai might have been prompted to scale back demands because of Juzhi’s speech. 378 Zhufan’s father, Shoumeng, died in the ninth month of 561 Bce (Xiang 12.3). Zhufan acceded to his position in the first month of 560 Bce. The mourning period of three years (or twenty-five months) might have already been in place during this period (see also Zhao 15.7). (Here Zhufan completed his mourning in slightly over two years.) According to Gongyang, Xiang 29 (21.266), Zhufan did not yield the throne to Jizha but instead proposed that the throne be passed from the older to the younger brother. Zhufan, as the eldest, would pass it on to Yuzhai, Yuzhai to Yimei, and Yimei to Jizha, the youngest. Shiji 31 follows the account from Zuozhuan.

1010

Zuo Tradition

tribes, have taken part unremittingly. Following those in charge of Jin government, our intent has ever been the same as at Yao. How would we dare to distance ourselves from you or go against you? Now is it not your officials of various ranks who themselves are remiss, and who have in this way alienated the princes, while you lay the blame on us, the various Rong tribes? Our drink, our food, our clothing, and our regalia are all different from those of the central domains. We do not exchange gifts with them, and our language and theirs do not allow communication. How can we possibly harm you? Not to participate in the meeting will be no cause for grief.” He chanted “Blue Fly” and withdrew.376 Fan Gaib acknowledged his error and allowed Juzhi to take part in affairs at the meeting, thus realizing the attributes of being “joyous and civil.” At this time Shu Laob served as Ji Wuzi’s assistant to attend the meeting.377 From then on, the leaders of Jin reduced the obligatory contributions of Lu and treated its envoys with even greater respect. The Wu heir Zhufan wants to yield the throne to his worthy younger brother Jizha, who adamantly refuses. Jizha is one of the most idealized figures in Zuozhuan and Gongyang. Here he cites the noble man’s approbation of Gongzi Xinshi of Zheng, which may indicate how the noble man’s comment circulates as “public opinion,” or it may suggest that Jizharelated materials represent a later stratum of the text. The Master of Wu, Zhufan, having put aside his mourning garb, intended to establish Jizha as ruler.378 Jizha declined, saying, “When Lord Xuan of Cao died, the princes and the men of Cao considered the new Cao ruler undutiful and planned to establish Gongzi Xinshia as ruler. Gongzi Xinshia left Cao, so they did not carry out the plan, and in this way he secured the position for the Cao ruler.379 The noble man said of him that he ‘was able to keep his principles.’380 You, my lord, are the rightful heir. Who would dare to oppose you? To possess the domain is not my idea of principles. Although I lack talent, I wish to follow the example of Gongzi Xinshia, so as not to lose my principles.” When Zhufan persisted about establishing him as ruler, he abandoned his property and took to farming, at which point his brother left him alone.

14.2

379 When Lord Xuan of Cao died, Fuchu (later Lord Cheng) murdered the heir apparent and established himself as ruler. Outraged, the leaders of Cao wanted to support Gongzi Xinshi as ruler, but he declined (Cheng 13.5). 380 Gongzi Xinshi was the one who spoke of “keeping one’s principles” (shoujie 守節); see Cheng 15.1.

Lord Xiang

1011

14.3a(3) 夏，諸侯之大夫從晉侯伐秦，以報櫟之役也。晉侯待于竟，使六卿帥諸

侯之師以進。及涇，不濟。叔向見叔孫穆子，穆子賦〈匏有苦葉〉，叔向 退而具舟。魯人、莒人先濟。 鄭子蟜見衛北宮懿子曰：「 與人而不固，取惡莫甚焉，若社稷 何？」懿子說。二子見諸侯之師而勸之濟。濟涇而次。秦人毒涇上流，師 人多死。鄭司馬子蟜帥鄭師以進，師皆從之，至于棫林，不獲成焉。 荀偃令曰：「 雞鳴而駕，塞井夷竈，唯余馬首是瞻。」 欒黶曰：「 晉國之命，未是有也。余馬首欲東。」乃歸。下軍從之。 左史謂魏莊子曰：「 不待中行伯乎？」 莊子曰：「 夫子命從帥，欒伯，吾帥也，吾將從之。從帥，所以待夫 子也。」 伯游曰：「 吾令實過，悔之何及！多遺秦禽。」 乃命大還。晉人謂之「 遷延之役。」 欒鍼曰：「 此役也，報櫟之敗也。役又無功，晉之恥也。吾有二位 於戎路，敢不恥乎？」與士鞅馳秦師，死焉。士鞅反。

381 Maoshi 34, “Pao you kuye” 匏有苦葉, 2B.87–89. Now commonly interpreted as a song of courtship, it contains images of crossing the river: “The gourd has bitter leaves; / The crossing is deep for wading. / Where it is deep, wade as you are dressed; / Where it is shallow, wade as you raise your skirt.” Shuxiang infers from these lines that Shusun Bao is intent on crossing the river. In Guoyu, “Lu yu 3,” 5.190, Shusun Bao does not actually sing the song but alludes to it as his “enterprise,” and Shuxiang further dwells on the association between the gourd and crossing. “Shuxiang withdrew and summoned the boatmen and officers of war, saying, ‘For the bitter gourd is for humans useless; it is only good as an aid for crossing. Shusun of Lu cited “The Bitter Gourd Has Leaves”: he is sure to cross the river.’” 382 The Zheng leader is urging the Wei leader to continue to support Jin. Jin’s resentment would have dire consequences for Wei and Zheng. 383 Yulin 棫林 was located northeast of present-day Ye County 葉縣, Henan. 384 For a similar strategy, see Cheng 16.5. Zhonghang Yan wants to prepare for swift troop movements and to demonstrate Jin’s determination to press on. “Look to follow where the horses’ heads are pointing” (mashou shi zhan 馬首是瞻) becomes an idiom for the disciplined execution of directions. 385 Qin lay to the west of Jin. Luan Yan is saying that he wants to return to Jin. 386 Luan Yan, as commander of the lower army, was the direct superior of Wei Jiang, the assistant commander. 387 The same word dai 待 is translated here differently as “to wait” and “to heed” or “to await the command of” (daiming 待命). Yang (3:1009) suggests that the second dai also has the meaning of “treat” or “regard” (duidai 對待): “the way to heed (or treat) the master.” 388 Karlgren (gl. 535) believes that the “extension” (yan 延) refers to the troop movements involved in long-distance mobilizations. Here we translate yan as “procrastinations.” 389 Luan Qian was next in rank to the driver of the commander’s chariot (rong lu 戎路). In an alternative reading, Du Yu (ZZ 32.559) reads this as a comment that includes his brother: “There are two of us in the commander’s chariot.”

1012

Zuo Tradition

Jin and its allies attack Qin in retaliation for the defeat at Li (Xiang 11.6). Reluctance and hesitations among Jin’s allies, together with dissensions among Jin leaders, make this a failed campaign characterized by delays and shifting directives. In the aftermath of the battle, discord grows among Jin leaders. In summer, the princes’ high officers followed the Prince of Jin and attacked Qin: this was in retaliation for the campaign of Li. The Jin ruler waited at the border and had the six ministers lead the princes’ armies to advance. They reached the Jing River but did not cross it. Shuxiang had an audience with Shusun Baob, and Shusun Baoc sang “The Gourd Has Bitter Leaves.” Shuxiang withdrew to prepare the boats.381 The men of Lu and Ju were the first to cross the river. Zijiao of Zheng had an audience with Beigong Kuoa of Wei and said to him, “There is nothing that provokes greater antipathy than to support someone and yet not persevere in it. What, then, about the altars of the domain?”382 Beigong Kuob was pleased. The two men presented themselves to the armies of the princes and convinced them to cross the river. Having crossed the Jing River, they set up camp. The men of Qin poisoned the upper reaches of the Jing River, and many among the troops died. The Zheng supervisor of the military, Zijiao, led the Zheng army to press on, and all the troops followed him, advancing as far as Yulin,383 but they did not achieve success. Zhonghang Yana ordered, “When the roosters crow, yoke your chariots, fill in the wells, and level the stoves.384 Look only to follow where my horses’ heads are pointing.” Luan Yan said, “The domain of Jin has never had an order like this. My horses’ heads wish to point east.”385 He thus turned back, and the lower army followed him. The scribe of the left said to Wei Jianga: “Should we not wait for Zhonghang Yane?” Wei Jiangb said, “Our master Zhonghang Yan ordered that we should follow our commanders. Luan Yana is my commander.386 I intend to follow him. To follow our commander, Luan Yan, is the way to heed Zhonghang Yan.”387 Zhonghang Yand said, “It was my command that was in error. Of what avail is regret now? We are only leaving captives in the hands of Qin.” He therefore ordered a large-scale retreat. The men of Jin called this the “Campaign of Changes and Procrastinations.”388 Luan Qian said, “This campaign was supposedly in retaliation for our defeat at Li. Yet the campaign achieved nothing, much to Jin’s shame. As I have the second place in the commander’s chariot,389 do I dare not to acknowledge the shame?” Together with Fan Yanga he galloped into the ranks of the Qin army and died there. Fan Yanga made it back.

14.3a(3)

Lord Xiang

1013

欒黶謂士匄曰：「 余弟不欲往，而子召之。余弟死，而子來，是而子 殺余之弟也。弗逐，余亦將殺之。」士鞅奔秦。 14.3b 於是齊崔杼、宋華閱、仲江會伐秦。不書，惰也。向之會亦如之。衛北宮

括不書於向，書於伐秦，攝也。 秦伯問於士鞅曰：「 晉大夫其誰先亡？」 對曰：「 其欒氏乎！」 秦伯曰：「 以其汏乎？」 對曰：「 然。欒黶汏虐已甚，猶可以免，其在盈乎！」 秦伯曰：「 何故？」 對曰：「 武子之德在民，如周人之思召公焉，愛其甘棠，況其子 乎？欒黶死，盈之善未能及人，武子所施沒矣，而黶之怨實章，將於是 乎在。」秦伯以為知言，為之請於晉而復之。

1014

Zuo Tradition

Luan Yan said to Fan Gaia, “My younger brother did not want to go, and your son beckoned him. My younger brother died, and your son came back. This means your son killed my younger brother. If you do not expel him, I will likewise kill him.” Fan Yanga fled to Qin. The Jin high officer Fan Yang, in exile in Qin because of his brother-in-law Luan Yan’s enmity,390 predicts doom for the Luan lineage. According to Fan Yang, the merits of Luan Shu (Luan Yan’s father) and the potential goodness of Luan Ying (Luan Yan’s son) cannot outweigh the baleful effects of Luan Yan’s excesses. Fan Yang, together with his father, Fan Gai, will eliminate the Luan lineage seven year later (Xiang 21.5). The Qin ruler intercedes for Fan Yang’s reinstatement in Jin. At that time Cui Zhu of Qi and Hua Yue and Zhong Jiang of Song joined forces to attack Qin. That the text does not record their names was because they were remiss. It was the same with the meeting at Xiang.391 That the text does not record the name of Beigong Kuo of Wei for Xiang but does record it for the attack on Qin is because he helped in the latter case. The Liege of Qin asked Fan Yanga, “Who among the Jin high officers will be the first to perish?” He replied, “It will surely be the Luan lineage!” The Liege of Qin said, “Is it because of their excesses?” He replied, “Just so. Luan Yan’s excesses and violence are already extreme. But he can still escape disaster, which will probably befall his son Luan Yinga!” The Liege of Qin said, “Why is that?” He replied, “Luan Shuc’s virtue has lived on among the people. Compare this to the men of Zhou, who, longing for the Shao Duke, love his sweet pear tree.392 How much more would the Jin people love Luan Shu’s son? By the time Luan Yan dies, Luan Yinga’s goodness will still not have reached the people, while what Luan Shuc had bestowed will already have faded, and it will be the resentment Luan Yanb provoked that will become manifest. Disaster will strike at that time.” The Liege of Qin deemed his words astute and interceded on his behalf with Jin to have his position there restored.

14.3b

390 Luan Yan married Fan Gai’s daughter (Xiang 21.5). 391 At that meeting the Annals also records only “a Qi leader” and “a Song leader.” 392 Maoshi 16, “Gantang” 甘棠, 1D.54–55. The people of Zhou, for love of the Shao Duke, will not cut down the pear tree which he loved and under which he found repose. Recall that Luan Shu was one of the ministers responsible for Lord Li’s assassination, yet here he is praised for his virtue. Shuxiang also praises Luan Shu’s virtue in Guoyu, “Jin yu 6,” 14.480. In the Shanghai Museum Manscript, Luan Shu is the chief instigator of the Xi lineage’s destruction and Lord Li’s murder. Note that Zhao Dun is also remembered for his loyalty despite his probable role in Lord Ling’s assassination (Cheng 8.6).

Lord Xiang

1015

14.4a(4) 衛獻公戒孫文子、甯惠子食，皆服而朝，日旰不召，而射鴻於囿。二子從

之，不釋皮冠而與之言。二子怒。孫文子如戚，孫蒯入使。公飲之酒，使 大師歌〈巧言〉之卒章。大師辭。師曹請為之。 初，公有嬖妾，使師曹誨之琴，師曹鞭之。公怒，鞭師曹三百。故 師曹欲歌之，以怒孫子，以報公。公使歌之，遂誦之。蒯懼，告文子。文 子曰：「 君忌我矣，弗先，必死。」 并帑於戚而入，見蘧伯玉，曰：「 君之暴虐，子所知也。大懼社稷之 傾覆，將若之何？」 對曰：「 君制其國，臣敢奸之？雖奸之，庸知愈乎？」遂行，從近 關出。

393 Court robes consisted of a black cap, a black top garment, and a white silk lower garment with folds. 394 Leather caps made from the hide of white deer were worn during hunting. A ruler receiving officials dressed in court robes should take off his cap, as in Zhao 12.11. Lord Xian is deliberately humiliating Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi. Lüshi chunqiu 25.1681 tells the anecdote as an example of a ruler’s careless act that has disastrous consequences. 395 Maoshi 198, “Qiaoyan” 巧言, 12C.425. The last stanza of “Clever Words” denounces the slanderer who brings about disorder: “Who is that man? / He lives by the banks of the river. / Lacking strength and courage, / He is indeed the ladder leading to disorder.” Lord Xian obviously implies a parallel between Sun Linfu and the man castigated in “Clever Words.” He may also want to suggest that Sun Linfu is plotting rebellion (ZZ 32.560). 396 He refuses presumably because he realizes that the ode would goad Sun Linfu to rebellion. 397 Alternatively, “the lord had him sing it and then recite and explain it.” Song 誦 means “to recite” and “to explain” (Karlgren, gl. 538). Musical accompaniment might have made the words less comprehensible, hence the recitation. The initiative to drive home the provocation can be Lord Xian’s or Cao’s, although Cao’s desire for vengeance against Lord Xian suggests that the initiative to recite comes from Cao. 398 Sun Linfu’s family and followers had been in two places: his settlement Qī and the Wei capital, Diqiu. As preparation for his insurrection, he consolidated the group in Qī and then attacked the capital.

1016

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xian of Wei, whose reign began inauspiciously because he showed no grief at his father’s funeral eighteen years ago (Cheng 14.5), wantonly antagonizes his ministers Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi. Sun Linfu, who has his own long history of ritual impropriety (Xiang 7.7) and of conflicts with Wei rulers (Cheng 7.6, 14.1), attacks Wei from his power base in Qī with implicit Jin support. Lord Xian of Wei invited Sun Linfua and Ning Zhia to a meal. They both dressed in formal robes for attending court.393 Even when the sun was setting, the lord still did not summon them but was instead shooting wild geese at the park. When the two men followed him there, he spoke to them without taking off his leather cap.394 The two men were furious. Sun Linfua went to Qī, and his son Sun Kuai entered the court to offer his service. The lord entertained Sun Kuai with wine and told the grand music master to sing the last stanza of “Clever Words.”395 The grand music master refused,396 and the music master Cao asked to perform it. Earlier, the lord had had a favored concubine. He had sent the music master Cao to teach her how to play the horizontal lute, and the music master Cao had whipped her. Enraged, the lord had had the music master Cao whipped three hundred blows. That was why the music master Cao wished to sing “Clever Words.” He did so to enrage Sun Kuai, so as to exact revenge against the lord. The lord had him sing it, and he then recited it.397 Sun Kuai was fearful and told Sun Linfuc. Sun Linfuc said, “The ruler distrusts us. If we do not act first, we are sure to die.” Sun Linfu assembled his family and followers at Qī and then entered the Wei capital.398 He saw Qu Boyu and said,399 “You know full well the oppressive violence of the ruler. I live in great fear that the altars of the domain will be overturned. What is to be done?” Qu Boyu replied, “The ruler controls his domain. How would a subject dare to challenge him? Even if we challenge him, how do we know that things will be better?” He then went on his way, leaving the domain by way of a nearby pass.400

14.4a(4)

399 The absence of a line break between ru 入 and jian 見 would yield a different reading: “and then he entered the Wei capital to have an audience with Qu Boyu.” Yang (3:1015) suggests an accidental encounter. He argues that Qu Boyu, who served in the court of Lord Ling, the grandson of Lord Xian, must have been very young at this point and would not be in any important position in government. There would have been no reason for Sun Linfu to seek him out. 400 The boundaries between domains were marked by passes (guan 關). Qu Boyu, eager to escape the disorder that he expects to ensue, leaves by the closest pass. Twelve years later, he again leaves by a nearby pass (Xiang 26.2) to distance himself from the plot to restore the exiled Lord Xian. (The two passages may be variants of the same anecdote.) Confucius praises Qu Boyu as one who chooses perspicacious withdrawal in an age of disorder (Analects 15.7). He embodies Daoist transformations in Zhuangzi and Huainanzi (Zhuangzi jishi 4.165, 25.905; Huainanzi 1:25).

Lord Xiang

1017

14.4b 公使子蟜、子伯、子皮與孫子盟于丘宮，孫子皆殺之。四月己未，子展奔

齊，公如鄄。使子行請於孫子，孫子又殺之。公出奔齊，孫氏追之，敗公 徒于河澤，鄄人執之。 初，尹公佗學射於庾公差，庾公差學射於公孫丁。二子追公，公孫 丁御公。子魚曰：「 射為背師，不射為戮，射為禮乎？」射兩軥而還。尹公 佗曰：「 子為師，我則遠矣。」乃反之。公孫丁授公轡而射之，貫臂。 14.4c 子鮮從公。及竟，公使祝宗告亡，且告無罪。定姜曰：「 無神，何告？若

有，不可誣也。有罪，若何告無？舍大臣而與小臣謀，一罪也。先君有冢 卿以為師保，而蔑之，二罪也。余以巾櫛事先君，而暴妾使余，三罪也。 告亡而已，無告無罪！」 401 Qiu Palace should be in the Wei capital, Diqiu. Sun’s forces were probably already pressing close to the lord’s palace, and Lord Xian had no choice but to seek a peace agreement. 402 He was presumably preparing for Lord Xian to take refuge in Qi. 403 Juan 鄄 was located in present-day Shandong, northwest of Juancheng County 鄄 城縣; see Annals, Zhuang 14.4, n. 79. 404 He Marsh (Heze 河澤) was located northeast of present-day Yanggu County 陽穀 縣, Shandong. 405 These were yokes over the two middle horses in the team of four horses drawing the chariot. By shooting at the yokes Cha seeks to both fulfill his charge and not betray his teacher. 406 In an anecdote with significant parallels and divergences in Mencius 4B.24, Yugong Zhisi of Wei, sent to pursue Zizuo Ruzi of Zheng’s invading army, shoots at the latter only after removing the arrowhead because Zizuo Ruzi had taught archery to Yingong Zhituo, Yugong Zhisi’s own teacher. For Yugong Zhisi, loyalty to his teacher’s teacher outweighs a political command, which he fulfills only symbolically. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 32.561) takes for granted that the Zuozhuan account is historical while the story in Mencius is elaborated to embellish an argument, but there is no reason to believe that the Zuozhuan account has greater historical veracity. 407 This is the first explicit expression of doubts regarding the existence of spirits in the text. 408 Ding Jiang is referring to Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi, whom Lord Xian humiliated repeatedly. 409 Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 706) claims that the word sequence here might have been corrupted. Instead of “he treated me with a scorn more fitting for a concubine” 蔑之，暴妾使余, he suggests “he treated me with scorn, as if I were a concubine” 暴 蔑之，妾使余. Both bao 暴 and mie 蔑 mean dismissive scorn; see Han Feizi 47.977: “For a ruler to treat his subjects scornfully is called bao”人主輕下曰暴. Karlgren (gl. 542) reads bao (with its usual meaning of violence) as an adjective modifying “concubine”: “he treated me like an abused concubine.” 410 Ding Jiang was not Lord Xian’s birth mother, but she should have been honored as his mother and is cited as an exemplary mother in Lienü zhuan 1.9–11. Maoshi 28, “Yan yan” 燕燕, 2A.77–78, said to have been composed by Zhuang Jiang of Wei for a departing concubine in the Mao tradition, is read as Ding Jiang’s admonition to Lord Xian in Liji-Zheng 11.866. The interpretation of “Yan yan” as an admonition to Lord Xian belongs to the Lu tradition; see Ma Zonglian, Zuozhuan buzhu (cited in Yang, 3:1013). According to Lienü zhuan 1.9, Ding Jiang composes the ode for her departing daughter-in-law.

1018

Zuo Tradition

Sun Linfu kills Lord Xian’s envoys and drives the Wei ruler into exile. A vignette about archers pursuing Lord Xian takes up the theme of conflicting loyalties, in this case loyalty to a teacher and to a political leader. The lord sent Zijiao, Zibo, and Zipi, noble sons of Wei, to swear a covenant with Sun Linfub at Qiu Palace.401 Sun Linfub killed all of them. In the fourth month, on the jiwei day (26), the lord’s younger brother Zizhan fled to Qi.402 The lord went to Juan403 and sent Zihang, another Wei noble son, to negotiate with Sun Linfub. Sun Linfub killed him too. The lord left the domain and fled to Qi. Sun Linfud pursued him and defeated his followers at He Marsh.404 The men of Juan arrested the remnants of the lord’s followers. Earlier, the Yin Lord Tuo had studied archery with the Yu Lord Cha, and the Yu Lord Cha had studied archery with Gongsun Ding. The two men pursued the lord, and Gongsun Ding was driving the lord’s chariot. The Yu Lord Chaa said, “If I shoot, I will be turning against my teacher. If I don’t shoot, I will be punished. Will shooting perhaps accord with ritual propriety?” He shot twice at the two yokes over the horses’ necks and turned back.405 The Yin Lord Tuo said, “You did that for your teacher, but for me he is farther removed.” He thus reversed his course and resumed the pursuit. Gongsun Ding gave the reins to the lord and shot the Yin Lord Tuo, piercing his arm.406

14.4b

Ding Jiang, the wife of Lord Xian’s father, showed her prescience on previous occasions (Cheng 14.1, 14.5, Xiang 10.5) and now authoritatively denounces Lord Xian’s crimes. However, a Lu minister predicts his return to Wei on account of his capable and loyal supporters. One of them (Taishu Yi), however, will be persecuted by Lord Xian upon his return (Xiang 26.2). Zhuana, the lord’s younger full brother, followed the lord. When they reached the border, the lord sent the invocator and the ancestral attendant to announce his flight and also to announce that he had committed no offense. Ding Jiang said, “If there are no spirits, why bother to announce it?407 If there are spirits, they cannot be deceived. Since he has committed offenses, how can he announce that he has not? He set the great officials aside and conferred instead with the minor officials. That was his first offense. The former ruler had eminent ministers to serve as his teachers and guardians, but he treated them with contempt. That was his second offense.408 I served the former ruler with towel and comb, but he treated me with a scorn more fitting for a concubine.409 That was his third offense. He should announce his flight and make an end of it. He is not to announce that he has committed no offense!”410

14.4c

Lord Xiang

1019

公使厚成叔弔于衛，曰：「 寡君使瘠，聞君不撫社稷，而越在他 竟，若之何不弔？以同盟之故，使瘠敢私於執事，曰：『有君不弔，有臣 不敏；君不赦宥，臣亦不帥職，增淫發洩，其若之何？』」 衛人使大叔儀對，曰：「 群臣不佞，得罪於寡君。寡君不以即刑， 而悼棄之，以為君憂。君不忘先君之好，辱弔群臣，又重恤之。敢拜君命 之辱，重拜大貺。」 厚孫歸，復命，語臧武仲曰：「 衛君其必歸乎！有大叔儀以守，有 母弟鱄以出。或撫其內，或營其外，能無歸乎！」 14.4d 齊人以郲寄衛侯。及其復也，以郲糧歸。

右宰穀從而逃歸，衛人將殺之。辭曰：「 余不說初矣。余狐裘而羔 袖。」乃赦之。

411 On the two readings of budiao, see Cheng 13.3, n. 263, Xiang 13.5, n. 356. 412 “Accumulated excesses” refers to the long-standing tensions between Sun Linfu and Wei rulers (Yang, 3:1014). The phrase may also refer to Lord Xian’s transgresssions. The subject of “burst forth” may be the resentment of Wei officers and ministers (Lin Yaosou, cited in Karlgren, gl. 545), or it may describe how the mutual ill will has become widely known and can invite intervention (Takezoe, 15.54). Note the demarcation of a “private exchange” in a formal diplomatic mission (see also Wen 4.7, Xuan 16.4, Cheng 2.9, 8.1, Xiang 26.7, Zhao 3.3). 413 Here, as elsewhere, the use of the term “unworthy” is conventional self-deprecation (on behalf of one’s own ruler). It does not imply criticism of the exiled Wei ruler. 414 The word ji 寄, translated here as “make a refuge for,” comes up in relation to displaced or ousted princes. Jigong 寄公 or yugong 寓公 refers to displaced lords seeking temporary refuge in another domain. 415 According to Yang (3:1112), the title youzai (“steward of the right”) had become the lineage name. 416 The translation follows Takezoe’s reading (15.54). Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 32.562) reading: “Earlier I did not follow the lord gladly; I did so because I could not help it.”

1020

Zuo Tradition

Our lord sent Hou Chengshu to offer condolence in Wei. He said, “Our unworthy ruler has sent me. We have heard that your ruler no longer oversees the altars of the domain and has been exiled to another realm. How can he not offer his condolences?411 On account of our ties as covenant partners, he has sent me to presume to speak privately to your functionaries: ‘You have a ruler who is ruthless, and you have subjects who lack understanding. The ruler is unforgiving, and the subjects also do not fulfill their duties. Accumulated excesses have burst forth. What is to be done?’”412 The leaders of Wei sent Taishu Yi to reply. He said, “We, the subjects, are lacking in talent and have offended our unworthy ruler.413 Our unworthy ruler did not apply punishment and instead has now mournfully cast us off, bringing grief to your ruler. Your ruler has not forgotten the good relations of our former rulers but has deigned to offer condolences to us and has moreover time and again expressed his sympathetic concern. We presume to bow in thanks for the condescension of your ruler’s command and to bow a second time for the great gift of your consideration.” Hou Chengshua returned and reported discharge of his mission. He said to Zang Wuzhong: “The Wei ruler is certain to return! There is Taishu Yi to guard the domain and there is his younger full brother Zhuan, who left with him. One settles what is within the domain, while the other manages what is outside the domain. How can he fail to return!” Lord Xian of Wei is granted refuge in Lai, a small domain annexed by Qi eight years earlier (Xiang 6.7). That he eventually returns to Wei twelve years later (Xiang 26.2) with Lai grains shows his avarice. Lord Xian’s defecting follower quotidianizes political choices with a sartorial metaphor. The men of Qi made Lai into a temporary refuge for the Prince of Wei.414 When it came to the time of his restoration, he returned to Wei with grain from Lai. Youzai Gu had followed Lord Xian but escaped and returned to Wei.415 The leaders of Wei were about to kill him. He offered this defense: “I am no longer happy with my earlier decision.416 I am like a fox-fur coat with sleeves of lambskin.”417 They therefore pardoned him.

14.4d

417 According to Du Yu (ZZ 32.562), the more precious fox fur refers to the greater good, and the common lambskin refers to a minor blemish—Youzai Gu is thus comparing his initial decision to follow the lord as the minor flaw that should not negate his general goodness. Tao Hongqing suggests that the difference between fox fur and lambskin is a metaphor for the divergence between appearance and reality, intention and execution—Youzai is saying that although he followed the lord, he was not loyal to him (Yang, 3:1015).

Lord Xiang

1021

14.4e 衛人立公孫剽，孫林父、甯殖相之，以聽命於諸侯。

衛侯在郲，臧紇如齊唁衛侯。衛侯與之言，虐。退而告其人曰： 「 衛侯其不得入矣。其言糞土也。亡而不變，何以復國？」 子展、子鮮聞之，見臧紇，與之言，道。臧孫說，謂其人曰：「 衛君 必入。夫二子者，或輓之，或推之，欲無入，得乎？」 14.5 師歸自伐秦。晉侯舍新軍，禮也。成國不過半天子之軍。周為六軍，諸侯

之大者，三軍可也。 於是知朔生盈而死，盈生六年而武子卒，彘裘亦幼，皆未可立也。 新軍無帥，故舍之。 14.6 師曠侍於晉侯。晉侯曰：「 衛人出其君，不亦甚乎？」

418 Gongsun Piao was the grandson of Lord Mu of Wei, the son of Zishu Heibei (Cheng 10.2), and Lord Xian’s cousin. 419 They awaited commands for meetings and covenants, which would mark the princes’ recognition of Gongsun Piao as the Wei ruler. 420 According to Shuowen jiezi 2A.5b, the word yan 唁 means “to condole with the living” (diao sheng ye 弔生也). Du Yu (ZZ 32.562) claims that yan in this case refers specifically to condolences offered to one who has lost his kingdom (diao shiguo ye 弔失國也). 421 These final words echo Hou Chengshu’s. Both emphasize the instrumental role of Lord Xian’s supporters (Zizhan, Zhuan, Taishu Yi) in cementing goodwill inside and outside Wei. Both Zizhan and Zhuan were Lord Xian’s younger brothers. 422 Jin military organization underwent many changes in the period covered by Zuozhuan. The Jin army seems to have been largest in the aftermath of the battle of An, when Lord Jing created six armies (Cheng 3.8). The new army broken up in 560 Bce (Xiang 13.3) is mentioned in Cheng 13.3, 16.5, 16.6, and Xiang 3.7. It hardly seems possible that Zhou had a larger military force than Jin, so the ritual prescription may pertain only to the number of armies, which may vary in size.

1022

Zuo Tradition

Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi install a new ruler in Wei. A Lu envoy’s negative and then positive judgments of Lord Xian’s chances for restoration juxtapose his unworthiness with his supporters’ merit. The leaders of Wei established Gongsun Piao as ruler.418 Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi assisted him so as to await the commands of the princes.419 While the Prince of Wei was in Lai, Zang Wuzhonga went to Qi to pay him a visit of condolence.420 The Prince of Wei spoke viciously to him. Zang Wuzhong withdrew and said to his men, “The Prince of Wei is unlikely to succeed in reentering Wei! His words were like dung and dirt. Even in exile, he still has not changed his ways. How can he regain his domain?” Zizhan and Zhuana heard of this and had an audience with Zang Wuzhonga. They spoke to him in the proper way. Zang Wuzhongc was pleased and said to his men: “The Wei ruler is sure to reenter Wei. With two such fine men, one pulling him and one pushing him, even if he did not wish to reenter Wei, how would it be possible not to do so?”421

14.4e

The new army in Jin is abolished: a ritual justification (proper relations between the Zhou king and the princes) is juxtaposed with a political explanation (the heirs of the Fan [Shi] and Zhi lineages, which controlled the new army, are too young). When the armies of the princes returned from attacking Qin, the Prince of Jin abolished the new army. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. The armies of a full-size domain should not exceed half the number of the armies of the Son of Heaven. Zhou had six armies. For the great ones among princes, three armies were sufficient.422 At that time, Zhi Shuo fathered Zhi Daozie and then died. When Zhi Daozie was six, his grandfather Zhi Yingd died. Shi Fang’s son Zhi Qiu was also young. Neither of them could be established as commanders as yet. The new army thus had no commanders, and that was why it was abolished.

14.5

The music master Kuang, known elsewhere in Zuozhuan for his good judgment, divinatory skills, and musical knowledge, justifies the expulsion of Lord Xian of Wei. He articulates a political vision wherein a ruler’s power has inherent limits. Authority is based on just rule and reciprocity, and opinions from various levels of society are supposed to constrain the ruler’s choices. On how the expulsion of a ruler may be justified, see also Zhao 32.4. That the justification of rulership lies in the people’s welfare is a recurrent theme in Zuozhuan and is echoed in various early texts, including Mencius 7B.14, Xunzi 18.389, 27.622, and Shuoyuan 1.39. The music master Kuang was attending the Prince of Jin. The Prince of Jin said, “The leaders of Wei have expelled their ruler. Is that not going too far?”

14.6

Lord Xiang

1023

對曰：「 或者其君實甚。良君將賞善而刑淫，養民如子，蓋之如 天，容之如地；民奉其君，愛之如父母，仰之如日月，敬之如神明，畏之 如雷霆，其可出乎？夫君，神之主而民之望也。若困民之主，匱神乏祀， 百姓絕望，社稷無主，將安用之？弗去何為？天生民而立之君，使司牧 之，勿使失性。有君而為之貳，使師保之，勿使過度。是故天子有公，諸 侯有卿，卿置側室，大夫有貳宗，士有朋友，庶人、工、商、皁、隸、牧、圉 皆有親暱，以相輔佐也。善則賞之，過則匡之，患則救之，失則革之。自 王以下各有父兄子弟以補察其政。史為書，瞽為詩，工誦箴諫，大夫規 誨，士傳言，庶人謗，商旅于市，百工獻藝。故《夏書》曰： 遒人以木鐸徇于路，官師相規，工執藝事以諫。

正月孟春，於是乎有之，諫失常也。天之愛民殃，豈其使一人肆於 民上，以從其淫，而棄天地之性？必不然矣。」 423 The received text has kun min zhi zhu 困民之主 (“a master that straitens the people” [Lin Yaosou, cited in Karlgren, gl. 550]), but Liu Xiang quotes the passage as kun min zhi xing 困民之性 in Xinxu 1.16, which can mean “he straitens (i.e., oppresses) the proper nature of the people” (Karlgren, gl. 550). Since the characters xing 性 and sheng 生 are often used interchangeably in ancient texts, we emend the text to kun min zhi sheng 困民之生 (“ruins the livelihood of the people”) (see the readings of Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 535; and Takezoe, 15.56). 424 We follow the reading of xing 性 as sheng 生: “Not letting them lose their livelihood”; or if we combine sheng and xing: “not letting them lose the natural basis of livelihood.” On the reading of xing as sheng, see also Fu Sinian, “Xing Ming guxun bianzheng”; Fayan yishu 3.86; Baihu tong shuzheng, “Xingqing,” 381: “Nature is what one is born with [or what one lives by]” 性者, 生也. Cf. a similar usage in Zhao 8.1: “no one can protect his livelihood” 莫保其性. 425 “Helpers” (er 貳) may also be translated as “(lesser) doubles.” In this vision of polity, the ruler is not unique and indispensable. His function is supported and duplicated by his officers and ministers, who also serve to keep him within proper bounds. Cf. Huan 2.8. 426 Cf. Huan 2.8: shi you li zi di 士有隸子弟, “the officers have sons and younger brothers who are subordinate to them.” Of course, pengyou 朋友, here “subordinate younger kinsmen or like-minded colleagues,” has a different meaning (“friends”) in modern Chinese. 427 We follow Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 707) and read lü 旅 as lu 臚, meaning “to set forth words” (chenyan 陳言) or “to transmit words” (chuanyan 傳言). Du Yu (ZZ 32.563) takes this to mean “to set forth (goods)”: “merchants set forth their goods in the marketplace.” A similar formulation of how subjects articulate their critiques of the ruler’s errors is found in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.9–10. 428 Our translation of guanshi 官師 as “low-ranking officers” is based on Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 708–9. This passage is incorporated into “Yin zheng” 胤征 (Shangshu 4.102) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. 429 Alternatively, we might translate this line as “remonstrance has lost its regular constancy,” possibly because for minor officials and artisans it can be done only once in a year. 430 A shorter version of this exchange is found in Xinxu 1.16. This passage enunciates a vision of polity with inherent limits on power. Hence, it is often cited by scholars

1024

Zuo Tradition

He replied, “Perhaps it was their ruler who went too far. A good ruler will reward excellence and punish excesses. He will nurture the people like his own children, covering them like the sky and holding them like the earth. The people will hold up their ruler, love him like a parent, look up to him as the sun and the moon, revere him as the bright spirits, and hold him in awe as they do thunderbolts. How can he be expelled? Now the ruler is the master of the spirits and the hope of the people. If he ruins the livelihood423 of the people and deprives the spirits of sacrifices, so that all the clans lose hope and the altars of the domain have no master, of what use is he? What is to be done but have him expelled? Heaven gives birth to the people and establishes rulers to oversee them and take care of them, not letting them lose their livelihood.424 There being rulers, Heaven establishes helpers for them to act as their teachers and guardians, not letting them exceed limits.425 That is why the Son of Heaven has his lords, and princes have their ministers; ministers establish their collateral lineages; high officers have their secondary lines; officers have their subordinate younger kinsmen or like-minded colleagues;426 commoners, artisans, merchants, minions, lackeys, shepherds, and grooms all have their kin and close associates—so that they can assist and support each other. When there is excellence, the helpers praise them; when there are wrongs, they rectify them; when there are troubles, they come to their aid; when there are errors, they change them. From the king down, everyone has fathers, older brothers, sons, and younger brothers to observe and amend the flaws of their governing decisions. Scribes make their writings, blind music masters make their odes, musicians recite admonitions and remonstrances, high officers rectify and instruct, officers transmit opinions, commoners complain, merchants and travelers argue in the marketplace,427 and all kinds of artisans present their views through their skills. Therefore, it says in the Xia Documents, The itinerant officers, waving their metal bells with wooden tongues, made their circuits on the roads. Various low-ranking officers admonished one another.428 Artisans used their skills and crafts to offer remonstrances.

That is why in the first month, at the beginning of spring, this practice was followed. This was for the sake of remonstrating against any loss of constancy and regularity.429 Great indeed is Heaven’s love for the people! Why would it let one person exert his will over the people and indulge his excesses while abandoning the nature of heaven and earth? This would certainly not be allowed.”430

eager to see “progressive” elements in early political thought; see, e.g., Liang Qichao, Xian Qin zhengzhi sixiang shi, 35–44; Xu Fuguan, Zhongguo renxing lun shi, 51–61; Xiao Gongquan, Zhongguo zhengzhi sixiang shi, 1:91.

Lord Xiang

1025

14.7(6) 秋，楚子為庸浦之役故，子囊師于棠，以伐吳。吳人不出而還。子囊殿，

以吳為不能而弗儆。吳人自臯舟之隘要而擊之。楚人不能相救，吳人敗 之，獲楚公子宜穀。 14.8 王使劉定公賜齊侯命，曰：「 昔伯舅大公右我先王，股肱周室，師保萬

民。世胙大師，以表東海。王室之不壞，繄伯舅是賴。今余命女環，茲率 舅氏之典，纂乃祖考，無忝乃舊。敬之哉！無廢朕命！」 14.9(7) 晉侯問衛故於中行獻子。對曰：「 不如因而定之。衛有君矣，伐之，未可

以得志，而勤諸侯。史佚有言曰：『因重而撫之。』仲虺有言曰：『亡者侮 之，亂者取之。推亡、固存，國之道也。』君其定衛以待時乎！」 冬，會于戚，謀定衛也。

431 Tang 棠 was located in the domain of Wei slightly northwest of present-day Liuhe County 六合縣, Jiangsu. 432 The precise location of Gaozhou 臯舟 is unknown. 433 Karlgren (gl. 554) reads “eastern seas” as the direct object of the verb biao 表 (“glorify”): “who glorified the eastern seas.” 434 Lord Dao is asking whether Jin should punish those who drove out Lord Xian of Wei. 435 More literally, “accede to what is weighty [i.e., what cannot be changed easily] and calm the situation.” The scribe Yi is also quoted in Xi 15.4, Wen 15.4, Xuan 12.3, Cheng 4.4, Zhao 1.13. 436 For Zhonghui, see Xuan 12.2, n. 197. He is also quoted in Xiang 30.10a. 437 The fact that the princes are meeting at the power base of Sun Linfu implies acceptance of the Wei ruler’s expulsion.

1026

Zuo Tradition

In a continuation of last year’s skirmishing (Xiang 13.5), Chu underestimates Wu and is defeated. In autumn, the Master of Chu, on account of the campaign of Yongpu, had Zinang station his troops at Tang in order to attack Wu.431 The men of Wu did not come forth, so the Chu army turned back. Zinang brought up the rear and, thinking that Wu was unable to fight, took no precautions. The men of Wu came out through the narrow pass at Gaozhou,432 cut the Chu forces in the middle, and struck them. The men of Chu could not come to each other’s aid. The men of Wu defeated them and captured Gongzi Yigu of Chu.

14.7(6)

King Ling of Zhou charges Lord Ling of Qi, in the archaic and elevated diction characteristic of royal commands, to continue the work of his ancestors in supporting the royal house. Elsewhere in Zuozhuan, Lord Ling (r. 581–554) is generally depicted as incompetent. The king sent the Liu Duke Ding to bestow the following charge on the Prince of Qi: “In the past the senior uncle, the Grand Lord, assisted our former king. He was like the arms and the legs of the Zhou house, and he was teacher and guardian to the myriad people. For successive generations, there was recompense for the grand tutor, who was the glorious exemplar for the eastern seas.433 That the royal house was not destroyed was due to its reliance on the senior uncle. Now I charge you, Huan, to assiduously follow the statutes of the uncle. Continue the work of your ancestors and do not shame your forebears. Be reverent! Do not neglect my command!”

14.8

The Jin minister Zhonghang Yan gives a practical assessment of the power struggle in Wei: Jin is to support the victor and bide its time before intervening. The Prince of Jin asked Zhonghang Yanb about affairs in Wei.434 He replied, “It is better to go along with the status quo and stabilize it accordingly. Wei already has a ruler. If we attack it, we may not fulfill our aims, and we will have taxed the efforts of the princes. The scribe Yi had these words: ‘Go along with what is established and settle it.’435 Zhonghui had these words: ‘For the failing domain, shame it. For the domain in turmoil, take it. To overthrow what is failing and to preserve what is surviving is the way of dealing with domains.’436 You, my lord, should stabilize Wei and wait for the right time.” In winter, the meeting at Qī was designed to confer about stabilizing Wei.437

14.9(7)

Lord Xiang

1027

14.10 范宣子假羽毛於齊而弗歸，齊人始貳。 14.11 楚子囊還自伐吳，卒。將死，遺言謂子庚：「 必城郢！」

君子謂子囊忠。「君薨，不忘增其名；將死，不忘衛社稷，可不謂 忠乎？忠，民之望也。《詩》曰： 行歸于周， 萬民所望。 忠也。」

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年，春，宋公使向戌來聘。二月己亥，及向戌盟于劉。 15.2(2) 劉夏逆王后于齊。 15.3(5) 夏，齊侯伐我北鄙，圍成。公救成，至遇。

438 Both bird feathers and oxtail hair were used in ritual dances. They often formed part of the decorations on flags and banners. 439 Zigeng was to succeed to the position of chief minister after Zinang died. 440 Maoshi 225, “Duren shi” 都人士, 15B.510. The ode is often taken to be an epithalamium, with the first line as the words of the bride or the groom: “He/She returns to Zhou.” Maoshi-Zheng, 15B.210, reads zhou as “loyalty and good faith”: “In his actions he turns to loyalty and good faith.” For Zinang’s role in deciding on King Gong’s honorific, see Xiang 13.2.

1028

Zuo Tradition

A Jin leader’s act of bad faith leads to Qi disaffection. A similar incident will occur more than fifty years later, with the same detrimental consequences (Ding 4.1b). Fan Gaic borrowed feathers and oxtail hair438 from Qi and did not return them. From then on Qi began to shift their allegiance.

14.10

The Chu chief minister, Zinang, dies. He is commended for loyalty because of his final wish to fortify Ying, although the same plan by Nang Wa, another Chu minister, will be criticized (Zhao 23.9). In the ten years he was in power, Zinang led military expeditions against Chen, Zheng, Jin, Song, and Lu without, however, decisive successes. Zinang of Chu returned from the attack on Wu and died. When he was about to die, his last words were addressed to Zigeng:439 “You must fortify Ying!” The noble man considered Zinang loyal: “When the ruler expired, he did not forget to enhance his good name. When he himself was about to die, he did not forget to defend the altars of the domain. Is he not a byword for loyalty? The loyal one is the hope of the people. As it says in the Odes,

14.11

In his actions he turns to Zhou, Being the hope that myriad people look to.440

This refers to loyalty.” LORD XIANG 15 (558 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, the Duke of Song sent Xiang Xu to come on an official visit. In the second month, on the jihai day (11), we swore a covenant with Xiang Xu at Liu.441

15.1(1)

Liu Xia (the Liu Duke Ding) met the queen and escorted her home from Qi.

15.2(2)

In summer, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches and laid siege to Cheng. Our lord went to the aid of Cheng, advancing as far as Yu.442

15.3(5)

441 According to Kong Yingda, Liu 劉 was a place in the outskirts of the Lu capital, Qufu (Yang, 3:1020). 442 The text implies that Qi abandoned the siege of Cheng by the time the Lu army reached Yu.

Lord Xiang

1029

15.4(5) 季孫宿、叔孫豹帥師城成郛。 15.5 秋，八月丁巳，日有食之。 15.6(6) 邾人伐我南鄙。 15.7(6) 冬，十有一月癸亥，晉侯周卒。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年，春，宋向戌來聘，且尋盟。見孟獻子，尤其室，曰：「 子有令聞

而美其室，非所望也。」對曰：「 我在晉，吾兄為之。毀之重勞，且不敢 間。」 15.2(2) 官師從單靖公逆王后于齊。卿不行，非禮也。 15.3 楚公子午為令尹，公子罷戎為右尹，蒍子馮為大司馬，公子橐師為右司

馬，公子成為左司馬，屈到為莫敖，公子追舒為箴尹，屈蕩為連尹，養 由基為宮廄尹，以靖國人。

443 Cheng 成 was located to the northwest of Ningyang County in present-day Shandong (see Annals, Huan 6.2, n. 45). 444 Du Yu (ZZ 32.565) notes rightly that there was no dingsi day in the eighth month. Dingsi was the first day of the seventh month. 445 Lord Dao, who acceded to his position in 573 Bce (Cheng 18.3) at fourteen, was only thirty years old when he died in 558. 446 According to Du Yu (ZZ 32.565), the account shows Meng Xianzi’s honesty and fraternal loyalty. One can, however, also read this as an attempt to justify extravagance. Meng Xianzi has the opposite image in various early texts. In Liji 6.119 Meng Xianzi is praised for an abstemious adherence to ritual that places him above his peers. In Liji 60.988, his opinion on how the ruling classes should not compete for profit with the people is quoted with approbation. An anecdote in Han Feizi 33.699– 700 debates the meaning and appropriateness of Meng Xianzi’s frugality. Xinxu 6.210 contrasts his abstemiousness with Fan Gai’s extravagance. 447 For the term guanshi 官師, see Xiang 14.6, n. 428, above. 448 This implies that the Shan Duke Jing did not go all the way to Qi. Among the “lowranking officers” was Liu Xia. Though posthumously honored as Liu Duke Ding, he was not a minister at this point. The ritual propriety of a Zhou minister escorting the bride for the king, mentioned only here and in Annals, Huan 8.6, and Zuozhuan, Huan 8.4, may not amount to a “rule” as some traditional commentators suggest.

1030

Zuo Tradition

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) and Shusun Bao led out troops and fortified the outer city walls of Cheng.443 In autumn, in the eighth month, on the dingsi day,444 there was an eclipse of the sun. Zhu leaders attacked our southern marches. In winter, in the eleventh month, on the guihai day (9), Zhou, the Prince of Jin, died.445

15.4(5)

15.5

15.6(6) 15.7(6)

ZUO

While on a diplomatic mission in Lu to repay a Lu visit (Xiang 2.6) and to renew the Covenant of Bo (Xiang 11.3), Xiang Xu of Song criticizes the extravagance of the Lu chief minister’s home. This is a recurrent concern in Zuozhuan and other texts from the period. The Qi minister Yan Ying, for example, refuses to aggrandize his home (Zhao 3.3). In Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.541–46, Wu Ju remonstrates with King Ling of Chu, warning that the grandeur of the Terrace of Zhanghua bodes ill for Chu. See also Yanzi chunqiu 2.115, 6.415–16, and Xinshu 7.145. In the fifteenth year, in spring, Xiang Xu of Song came to us on an official visit, and also to renew the Covenant of Bo. He had an audience with Meng Xianzi and found fault with his abode: “You, sir, have a fine reputation and yet you have aggrandized your abode. This is not what we had hoped for.” Meng Xianzi replied, “When I was in Jin, my older brother did it. To take it down would be to redouble the labor. Moreover, I do not dare criticize him.”446

15.1(1)

Various low-ranking officers came along as the Shan Duke Jing met the queen and escorted her home from Qi.447 That a minister did not go violated ritual propriety.448

15.2(2)

New appointments are made following the death of the Chu chief minister, Zinang (Xiang 14.11). Choosing the right men for offices is a recurrent concern in Zuozhuan. Zigenga of Chu became the chief minister; Gongzi Pirong, the deputy of the right; Wei Ziping, the grand supervisor of the military; Gongzi Tuoshi, the supervisor of the right army; Gongzi Cheng, the supervisor of the left army; Qu Dao, the maréchal; Zinana, the deputy for remonstrance; Qu Dang, the court deputy; Yang Youji, the deputy for palace stables. These appointments were made to pacify the inhabitants of the capital.

15.3

Lord Xiang

1031

君子謂「楚於是乎能官人。官人，國之急也。能官人，則民無覦心。 《詩》云： 嗟我懷人， 寘彼周行。 能官人也。王及公、侯、伯、子、男，甸、采、衛大夫，各居其列，所謂周 行也。」 15.4 鄭尉氏、司氏之亂，其餘盜在宋。鄭人以子西、伯有、子產之故，納賂于

宋，以馬四十乘，與師茷、師慧。三月，公孫黑為質焉。司城子罕以堵女 父、尉翩、司齊與之，良司臣而逸之，託諸季武子，武子寘諸卞。鄭人醢 之三人也。 師慧過宋朝，將私焉。其相曰：「 朝也。」 慧曰：「 無人焉。」 相曰：「 朝也，何故無人？」 慧曰：「 必無人焉。若猶有人，豈其以千乘之相易淫樂之矇？必無 人焉故也。」 子罕聞之，固請而歸之。

15.5(3, 4)

夏，齊侯圍成，貳於晉故也。於是乎城成郛。

449 Maoshi 3, “Juan’er” 卷耳, 1B.33. In the first stanza, a woman longs for an absent lover or husband and in her distraction and sadness cannot fill a basket as she picks juan’er (curly grass). In the context of the ode, the quoted lines should read: “Sighing, I long for the man, / And leave the basket by the great road.” “The great road” (zhouhang 周行) in the original is understood here as “the ranks of Zhou.” The Mao commentary and the Zheng Xuan commentary also identify noble men who could properly fill offices as objects of longing (Maoshi-Zheng 1B.33). 450 Dian 甸, cai 采, and wei 衛 are three of the five administrative districts (houfu 侯服, dianfu 甸服, nanfu 男服, caifu 采服, weifu 衛服), each of 500 li (according to Gu­liang, Xuan 15, 12.222, one li is the equivalent of 300 steps or about 0.15 mile), supposedly arranged in concentric squares from the qi 圻, the royal domain, covering 1,000 li. See Zhouli, “Zhi fang shi” 職方氏, 33.501; Shangshu, “Yu gong” 禹貢, 6.91. 451 Zixi’s father (Zisi), Liang Xiao’s father (Zi’er), and Zichan’s father (Ziguo) were all killed by the Wei and Si lines, see Xiang 10.9. 452 One sheng 乘 consists of a carriage or chariot drawn by a team of four horses; sheng here thus indicates foursome teams. 453 Music masters, who were often blind, had special assistants. 454 That is, Song responds to the bribe of horses and Zheng music masters rather than the request of its ministers. Confucius claims that Zheng music should be cast aside because it is licentious (Analects 15.11). Zheng musicians and musical instruments were also offered as a bribe to Jin in Xiang 11.5.

1032

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “Chu was at this time capable of putting the right men in offices. To put the right men in offices is the urgent matter for the domain. If one can put the right men in offices, then the people will have no overreaching desires. It says in the Odes, Sighing, I long for the men, And would place them in all the ranks.449

This is about being capable of putting the right men in offices. The king and the dukes, the princes, the lieges, the chiefs, the heads, and the high officers of the second, the fourth, and the fifth outer rims, all occupy their proper places.450 This is what is meant by ‘all the ranks.’” A blind musician exposes the misjudgment of Song leaders, who would not agree to the demands of Zheng ministers to repatriate miscreants and would comply only after receiving gifts of horses and musicians. After the turmoil caused by the Wei and Si lineages in Zheng, the brigands who escaped justice were in Song. The leaders of Zheng, on account of Zixi, Liang Xiaoa, and Zichan,451 sent to Song gifts of forty teams of horses,452 as well as the music master Pei and the music master Hui. In the third month, Gongsun Hei of Zheng became hostage there. Yue Xib, the supervisor of fortifications in Song, handed over Du Rufu, Wei Pian, and Si Qi to Zheng. Thinking Si Chen a fine man, Yue Xi let him escape, entrusting him to Ji Wuzi’s protection. Ji Wuzi placed him in Bian. The leaders of Zheng minced and pickled the flesh of the other three persons. The music master Hui passed by the Song court and was about to relieve himself there. His assistant 453 said, “This is the court.” Hui said, “There is no one here.” The assistant said, “This is the court. How can there be no one here?” Hui said, “For sure, there is no one. If there are still any proper men, why should ministers of a domain with a thousand chariots be exchanged for blind men playing licentious music? 454 Surely this was done because there is no one here.” Yue Xia heard about this and insistently urged the Song ruler to return the music masters to Zheng.

15.4

Qi, Lu, and Jin were covenant partners. Having turned away from Jin because of the feathers incident (Xiang 14.10), Qi now feels no compunctions about attacking Lu, and Lu prepares accordingly. In summer, the Prince of Qi laid siege to Cheng because Lu had shifted their allegiance from Jin. That was why Lu fortified the outer city walls of Cheng.

15.5(3, 4)

Lord Xiang

1033



15.6(6, 7)

秋，邾人伐我南鄙，使告于晉。晉將為會以討邾、莒，晉侯有疾，乃止。 冬，晉悼公卒，遂不克會。

15.7 鄭公孫夏如晉奔喪，子蟜送葬。 15.8 宋人或得玉，獻諸子罕。子罕弗受。獻玉者曰：「 以示玉人，玉人以為寶

也，故敢獻之。」 子罕曰：「 我以不貪為寶，爾以玉為寶。若以與我，皆喪寶也，不若 人有其寶。」 稽首而告曰：「 小人懷璧，不可以越鄉，納此以請死也。」

1034

Zuo Tradition

Lord Dao of Jin’s premature death at thirty forestalls Jin’s timely protection of its covenant partners. In autumn, Zhu leaders attacked our southern marches. We sent word to Jin. Jin was about to summon a meeting to chastise Zhu and Ju, but the Prince of Jin fell ill, and they thus desisted. In winter, Lord Dao of Jin died, and they therefore could not hold the meeting.455

15.6(6, 7)

Two Zheng ministers attend the funeral and burial of Lord Dao of Jin. This arrangement exceeds not only the ancient ritual prescription for a high officer and an officer to attend (Zhao 30.2) but also the rule for a high officer and a minister to attend when Lords Wen and Xiang of Jin were overlords (Zhao 3.1). Zixia of Zheng went to Jin to mourn at the funeral. Zijiao escorted the funeral cortege.

15.7

The hidden jade is a metaphor for unrecognized worth in Han Feizi 13.238. Here the offer of a jade becomes the occasion for considering the meaning of value. The Song minister Yue Xi demonstrates his integrity and sagacity by refusing a gift of jade and by making sure that its value is revealed and that it should benefit its rightful owner. Versions of this anecdote appear in Han Feizi 21.404, Lüshi chunqiu 10.552, Huainanzi 7.236, and Xinxu 7.233. In Han Feizi, the story is used to illustrate the idea of “desiring the absence of desire” in Laozi. Analogous reasoning is found in Xinxu 6.210, where Meng Xianzi is praised for valuing wise men rather than wealth. Mozi 46.392–93 pursues the same logic in a passage comparing the worth of gems to that of good government. A jade ring also provokes a deliberation over rightful ownership and the proper relationship between a minister and a commoner in Zhao 16.3b. There was a man of Song who obtained a piece of jade and presented it to Yue Xia. Yue Xia refused to accept it. The presenter of the jade said, “I showed this to the jade smith, and the jade smith thought it a treasure. That is why I presume to present it.” Yue Xia said, “I consider not being covetous a treasure, while you consider the jade a treasure. If you give it to me, then we both lose what we treasure most. It is better for each of us to keep his own treasure.” The man bowed with his forehead touching the ground and told his story: “A commoner cherishing a precious jade disk cannot go through a village without meeting harm.456 I am submitting this so as to avoid death.”

15.8

455 The Jin ruler’s death at a young age accounts for the honorific “Dao,” which means “mourned.” 456 Cf. the Zhou proverb quoted in Huan 10.4: “A common man may be without crime until cherishing a valuable jade becomes his crime.”

Lord Xiang

1035



子罕寘諸其里，使玉人為之攻之，富而後使復其所。

15.9 十二月，鄭人奪堵狗之妻，而歸諸范氏。

春秋 16.1(1) 十有六年，春，王正月，葬晉悼公。 16.2(1) 三月，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、薛伯、杞伯、小

邾子于湨梁。戊寅，大夫盟。 16.3(1) 晉人執莒子、邾子以歸。 16.4 齊侯伐我北鄙。 16.5 夏，公至自會。 16.6 五月甲子，地震。 16.7(2) 叔老會鄭伯、晉荀偃、衛甯殖、宋人伐許。 16.8(4) 秋，齊侯伐我北鄙，圍成。 16.9 大雩。 16.10(5) 冬，叔孫豹如晉。

1036

Zuo Tradition

Yue Xia placed him in the lane where he himself lived and had a jadesmith work on the jade and refine it. After the man became rich, he sent him back to his place. In the twelfth month, the men of Zheng seized Du Gou’s wife and returned her to the Fan lineage.457

15.9

LORD XIANG 16 (557 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Lord Dao of Jin was buried.

16.1(1)

In the third month, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu at the Ju Dam.458 On the wuyin day (26), the high officers swore a covenant.

16.2(1)

Jin leaders arrested the Master of Ju and the Master of Zhu and took them home with them.

16.3(1)

The Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches.

16.4

In summer, our lord arrived from the meeting.

16.5

In the fifth month, on the jiazi day (13), there was an earthquake.

16.6

Shu Lao met with the Liege of Zheng, Xun Yan of Jin, Ning Zhi of Wei, and a Song leader and attacked Xǔ.

16.7(2)

In autumn, the Prince of Qin attacked our northern marches and laid siege to Cheng.

16.8(4)

There was a great rain sacrifice.

16.9

In winter, Shusun Bao went to Jin.

16.10(5)

457 Du Gou was of the same lineage as Du Rufu. Having put the latter to death, the men of Zheng were concerned that Du Gou might be able to incite the Fan lineage of Jin to help in some scheme of revenge, and thus they took away his wife so that the link between Du Gou and the Fan lineage would be severed. Cross-domain marriage alliances seem to have been common. 458 The Ju Dam 湨梁 was located in Jin west of present-day Jiyuan County 濟源縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

1037

左傳 16.1(1) 十六年，春，葬晉悼公。平公即位，羊舌肸為傅，張君臣為中軍司馬，祁

奚、韓襄、欒盈、士鞅為公族大夫，虞丘書為乘馬御。改服、修官，烝于 曲沃。警守而下，會于湨梁。命歸侵田。以我故，執邾宣公、莒犁比公， 且曰「 通齊、楚之使」。 晉侯與諸侯宴于溫，使諸大夫舞，曰：「 歌詩必類。」齊高厚之詩 不類。荀偃怒，且曰：「 諸侯有異志矣。」使諸大夫盟高厚，高厚逃歸。 於是叔孫豹、晉荀偃、宋向戌、衛甯殖、鄭公孫蠆、小邾之大夫盟，曰： 「 同討不庭。」 16.2(7) 許男請遷于晉。諸侯遂遷許，許大夫不可，晉人歸諸侯。

鄭子蟜聞將伐許，遂相鄭伯以從諸侯之師。穆叔從公。齊子帥師 會晉荀偃。書曰「 會鄭伯」，為夷故也。 夏，六月，次于棫林。庚寅，伐許，次于函氏。

459 Shi Wozhuo was made grand guardian in 573 Bce (Cheng 18.3). Shuxiang appears to be taking over his position. In Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.445, Shuxiang is appointed as tutor for the heir apparent Biao (the future Lord Ping) because of his knowledge of historical annals. 460 Zhang Junchen is the son of Zhang Lao, the leader of scouts (Cheng 18.3). 461 Han Xiang is the son of Han Wuji, who took charge of the high officers of ruling lineages (Xiang 7.6). 462 The dance is accompanied by the singing of odes. “Odes for dancing” (wushi 舞詩) are mentioned in Mozi (Mozi xiangu 48.418). The “right order” (or “proper category,” lei 類) refers to the correspondence between the music and the dance or to the connection between the performance and the proper intent (ZZ 33.573). The “right order” may also include political hierarchy and ritual propriety. Lei has also been glossed as “good” (Erya). 463 On the term buting 不庭 (“those who turn against us”), see Cheng 12.2, n. 243. 464 Jin leaders intend to use only the Jin army to attack Xǔ. 465 This passage is a flashback on how the various armies were initially mobilized. The old enmity between Zheng and Xǔ might explain why the Zheng ruler wants to personally take part in the campaign. When Zheng decided to join the campaign, Jin had not yet sent the princes’ armies back. 466 The literal meaning of yi 夷 is “level.” The sequencing of names in the Annals is explained: Shu Lao is mentioned with the Zheng ruler (i.e., treated as being “of the same level”) because he is a Lu minister (ZZ 33.573), and the Zheng ruler is mentioned ahead of the Jin commander leading the campaign because of his higher station as a prince. 467 Yulin 棫林 was located in the domain of Xǔ northeast of present-day Ye County 葉縣, Henan. 468 Hanshi 函氏 was located very close to Yulin.

1038

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Upon Lord Ping of Jin’s accession, new leaders are appointed in Jin. Asserting his role as overlord, Lord Ping arrests the rulers of Ju and Zhu for their aggression against Lu and their ties with Qi. At a meeting in Wen, Jin leaders use odes and dance to judge the level of the princes’ allegiance, and the Qi delegate betrays his disaffection. In the sixteenth year, in spring, Lord Dao of Jin was buried. Lord Ping acceded to his position. Shuxianga became grand guardian;459 Zhang Junchen460 became the supervisor of the military for the central army; Qi Xi, Han Xiang,461 Luan Ying, and Fan Yanga became high officers of the ruling lineages; Yuqiu Shu became the chariot driver with foursome teams of horses. Lord Ping put aside his mourning clothes, chose able men for office, and offered the winter sacrifice at Quwo. Having made preparations for guarding the capital, he came down along the Yellow River and gathered the princes for a meeting at the Ju Dam. He commanded the princes to return to one another the territories they had invaded. On our account, Jin arrested Lord Xuan of Zhu and Lord Libi of Ju and in addition accused them: “You colluded with envoys from Qi and Chu.” The Prince of Jin and the princes feasted at Wen. He made the high officers dance, saying, “The ode sung has to match the right order.”462 The ode by Gao Hou of Qi did not match the right order. Enraged, Zhonghang Yana said, “The princes are not of one mind with us.” He had the high officers swear a covenant with Gao Hou, but the latter escaped and returned to Qi. As a consequence, Shusun Bao, Zhonghang Yana of Jin, Xiang Xu of Song, Ning Zhi of Wei, Zijiaoa of Zheng, and the high officers of Lesser Zhu swore a covenant that said, “Together we shall chastise those who turn against us.”463

16.1(1)

Xǔ became a de facto Chu protectorate when it moved its capital to She in 576 Bce (Cheng 15.7). Here the Xǔ ruler wants to shift allegiance to Jin by moving its capital again, but his high officers do not support him. Jin thus attacks Xǔ. The Head of Xǔ asked permission from Jin to move its capital. The princes then agreed to move the Xǔ capital, but the Xǔ high officers would not allow it. The leaders of Jin sent the princes back to their domains.464 When Zijiao of Zheng heard that the allies intended to attack Xǔ, he assisted the Liege of Zheng in following the armies of the princes.465 Shusun Baoa followed our lord, while Shu Laoa led an army to join with Zhonghang Yana of Jin. That the text says, “met with the Liege of Zheng,” is for the sake of proper leveling.466 In summer, in the sixth month, they set up camp at Yulin.467 On the gengyin day (9), they attacked Xǔ and set up camp at Hanshi.468

16.2(7)

Lord Xiang

1039

16.3 晉荀偃、欒黶帥師伐楚，以報宋楊梁之役。楚公子格帥師，及晉師戰于

湛阪。楚師敗績。晉師遂侵方城之外，復伐許而還。 16.4 秋，齊侯圍成，孟孺子速徼之。齊侯曰：「 是好勇，去之以為之名。」速遂

塞海陘而還。 16.5 冬，穆叔如晉聘，且言齊故。晉人曰：「 以寡君之未禘祀，與民之未息，

不然，不敢忘。」 穆叔曰：「 以齊人之朝夕釋憾於敝邑之地，是以大請。敝邑之急， 朝不及夕，引領西望曰：『庶幾乎！』比執事之間，恐無及也。」 見中行獻子，賦〈圻父〉。獻子曰：「 偃知罪矣，敢不從執事以同恤 社稷，而使魯及此？」 見范宣子，賦〈鴻雁〉之卒章。宣子曰：「 匄在此，敢使魯無鳩乎？」

469 Zhanban 湛阪 was located in Chu north of Pingdingshan City 平頂山市, Henan. 470 For Fangcheng, a big buffer zone to the north of Chu that stretched for several hundred miles between the Huai River and the Jiang and Han Rivers, see Xi 4.1 (Yang 1:292–93), n. 42. 471 We follow Takezoe (16.5) in reading jiao 徼 as yao 要. 472 Cheng in northern Lu was close to Qi. Haijing might have been a narrow pass running from Lu to Qi. The word hai 海 indicates that there might have been waterways in this area, not necessarily that the pass was by the sea. 473 Shusun Bao wants to speak about Qi’s aggression against Lu and to get help from Jin. 474 The di sacrifice was offered when the spirit tablet of the recently deceased former ruler was placed in the Ancestral Temple after the mourning period was over (ZZ 33.573). Liji 31.577 gives a different explanation of the sacrifice. The di sacrifice is also mentioned in Min 2.2, Xi 8.3, Xi 33.1, Xiang 10.2, Zhao 15.1, Zhao 25.6, and Ding 8.10. 475 The phrase shuji 庶幾 indicates hope and uncertainty. 476 Maoshi 185, “Qi Fu” 圻父, 11A.377–78. In this ode, Qi Fu is blamed for failing his duty as the king’s minister. As a result, Zhou is defeated by the Qiang and Rong tribes and the people suffer instability and deprivations. Here Shusun Bao is comparing Zhonghang Yan to Qi Fu. 477 Maoshi 181, “Hong yan” 鴻雁, 11A.373–74. The ode compares the sorrows of displaced persons to a wild goose in flight. The last stanza reads: “The wild goose in flight: / Doleful are its sad cries. / These wise men / say we toil. / Those foolish men / Say we parade our arrogance.” Shusun Bao is comparing the plight of Lu to the wild goose in flight and implicitly beseeching Fan Gai to be as discerning as “these wise men.” This ode is also cited in Wen 13.5. 478 We follow Wei Zhao’s annotation in Guoyu, “Jin yu 9,” 15.491–92, reading jiu 鳩 as an 安; cf. Karlgren, gl. 561.

1040

Zuo Tradition

Jin’s punitive expedition against Xǔ becomes a broader campaign against Chu, in retaliation for Chu’s earlier aggression (Xiang 12.4). Chu’s defeat allows Jin to move to the area just beyond the Fangcheng mountain range, a natural barrier said to be of great defensive value (Xi 4.1). Zhonghang Yana and Luan Yan, both of Jin, led an army to attack Chu in retaliation for the campaign of Yangliang in Song. Gongzi Ge of Chu led out troops and did battle with the Jin army at Zhanban.469 Chu troops were completely defeated. Jin troops thus invaded the area beyond Fangcheng470 and then returned after attacking Xǔ again.

16.3

The Qi ruler, said to lack courage (Xiang 18.3), here avows appreciation of a young Lu nobleman’s valor and thus gives up the siege of the Lu city Cheng. In autumn, the Prince of Qi laid siege to Cheng. Meng Zhuangzia cut the Qi force in the middle.471 The Prince of Qi said, “This is a brave man. Let us leave this place and so make his name famous.” Meng Zhuangzi thereupon blocked Haijing Pass and returned.472

16.4

The Lu envoy Shusun Bao shows his mastery of ritual propriety by appealing to Jin leaders for help against Qi aggression with apposite recitations from the Odes. In winter, Shusun Baoa went to Jin on an official visit and also to speak about Qi affairs.473 The leaders of Jin said, “It is just that our unworthy ruler has not yet offered the di sacrifice474 and that the people have not yet had rest. Otherwise, we would not have presumed to forget your troubles.” Shusun Baoa said, “We press our request because the men of Qi have been day and night venting their discontent in the territories of our humble settlement. The urgency for our humble settlement is such that from the morning we may not last to the evening. We anxiously crane our necks, looking westward and say, ‘Perhaps help is close!’475 By the time your functionaries have time for us, I fear it may be too late!” He had an audience with Zhonghang Yanb and recited “Qi Fu.”476 Zhonghang Yanc said, “I know my offense. How could I presume not to follow our men in charge and together with them care for the altars of your domain, and consequently let Lu be reduced to this state!” He had an audience with Fan Gaic and recited the last stanza of “The Wild Goose.”477 Fan Gaib said, “I am here. How could I presume to let Lu have no peace!”478

16.5

Lord Xiang

1041

春秋 17.1 十有七年，春，王二月，庚午，邾子牼卒。 17.2(1) 宋人伐陳。 17.3(2) 夏，衛石買帥師伐曹。 17.4(3) 秋，齊侯伐我北鄙，圍桃。高厚帥師伐我北鄙，圍防。 17.5 九月，大雩。 17.6(5) 宋華臣出奔陳。 17.7(4) 冬，邾人伐我南鄙。

左傳 17.1(2) 十七年，春，宋莊朝伐陳，獲司徒卬，卑宋也。 17.2(3) 衛孫蒯田于曹隧，飲馬于重丘，毀其瓶。重丘人閉門而訽之，曰：「 親逐

而君，爾父為厲。是之不憂，而何以田為？」 夏，衛石買、孫蒯伐曹，取重丘。曹人愬于晉。

1042

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 17 (556 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the gengwu day (23), Jing, the Master of Zhu, died.479

17.1

A Song leader attacked Chen.

17.2(1)

In summer, Shi Mai of Wei led out troops and attacked Cao.

17.3(2)

In autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches and laid siege to Tao.480 Gao Hou led out troops, attacked our northern marches, and laid siege to Fang.

17.4(3)

In the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

17.5

Hua Chen of Song departed and fled to Chen.

17.6(5)

In winter, Zhu leaders attacked our southern marches.

17.7(4)

ZUO

In the seventeenth year, in spring, Zhuang Zhao of Song attacked Chen and seized Ang, the supervisor of conscripts. This happened because Chen looked down on Song.

17.1(2)

The Wei campaign against Cao is explained as the consequence of a personal grudge. The leaders of Cao berate Sun Kuai, Sun Linfu’s son, for his father’s crimes and also blame him for the exile of Lord Xian of Wei (Xiang 14.4). Sun Kuai leads an attack against Cao in retaliation. Sun Kuai of Wei was hunting at Sui in Cao when he let his horses drink at Chongqiu and broke the pitcher for drawing water.481 The men of Chongqiu closed the gate and reviled him with these words: “You personally drove away your ruler. Your father is as vicious as a vengeful ghost.482 How is it that you do not worry about these things and instead indulge in hunting?” In summer, Shi Mai and Sun Kuai of Wei attacked Cao and took Chongqiu. The men of Cao complained to Jin.

17.2(3)

479 Lord Xuan of Zhu was taken as captive to Jin the year before (Xiang 16.1). He seems to have returned to Zhu before he died. 480 Tao 桃 belonged to the domain of Lu and was located northeast of Wenshang County 汶上縣, Shandong. 481 Chongqiu 重丘 was in the domain of Cao southwest of present-day Chiping County 茌平縣, Shandong. 482 Cf. Karlgren, gl. 562: “Your father will become a vicious ghost.” Hong Liangji (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 540), following Maoshi and Guangya, reads li 厲 as e 惡, “the evil one.” In Zhuangzi, li is “the ugly one” or “the evil one” (Zhuangzi jishi 2.70, 12.450).

Lord Xiang

1043

17.3(4) 齊人以其未得志于我故，秋，齊侯伐我北鄙，圍桃。高厚圍臧紇于防。

師自陽關逆臧孫，至于旅松。郰叔紇、臧疇、臧賈帥甲三百，宵犯齊師， 送之而復。齊師去之。 齊人獲臧堅，齊侯使夙沙衛唁之，且曰「 無死」。堅稽首曰：「 拜命 之辱。抑君賜不終，姑又使其刑臣禮於士。」以杙抉其傷而死。 17.4(7) 冬，邾人伐我南鄙，為齊故也。 17.5(6) 宋華閱卒，華臣弱臯比之室，使賊殺其宰華吳，賊六人以鈹殺諸盧門

合左師之後。左師懼，曰：「 老夫無罪。」賊曰：「 臯比私有討於吳。」遂 幽其妻，曰：「 畀余而大璧。」 宋公聞之，曰：「 臣也不唯其宗室是暴，大亂宋國之政，必逐之。」

483 The precise location of Lüsong is unknown, but it was obviously close to Fang 防 near present-day Fei County 費縣, Shanxi. 484 Zang Jian believes that the message of mercy is compromised by the messenger’s status as a mere eunuch. Our translation follows the interpretation of Du Yu (ZZ 33.574) and Takezoe (16.8), reading gu 姑 as gouqie 苟且, “for mere expediency” (Xiang 17.8). Yang (3:1031) reads gu 姑 as gu 故 (guyi 故意): “The ruler has bestowed the gift of reprieve, yet he has deliberately sent a mutilated subject to express courtesy to an officer.” The shame of castration is repeatedly emphasized in Sima Qian’s letter to Ren An (Hanshu 62.2727). 485 Hua Gaobi is Hua Yue’s son.

1044

Zuo Tradition

Qi attacks Lu again in the aftermath of its failed campaign against Lu (Xiang 16.4). Lu commanders show their valor by breaking the siege. Zang Jian, taken captive by Qi, commits suicide to vindicate his honor. On account of the fact that the leaders of Qi had not yet achieved their goals with regard to us, in autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches and laid siege to Tao. Gao Hou laid siege to Zang Wuzhonga at Fang. The Lu army came from Yangguan to meet up with Zang Wuzhongc and advanced as far as Lüsong.483 Shuliang Hea of Zou, Zang Chou, and Zang Jia led three hundred armored soldiers to raid the Qi army during the night. They escorted Zang Wuzhong to Lüsong and then returned to Fang. The Qi army withdrew. The men of Qi captured Zang Jian. The Prince of Qi sent Susha Wei to console him and also to tell him, “You don’t have to die.” Zang Jian bowed with his forehead touching the ground and said, “I bow to the condescension of your command. Yet the gift the lord bestowed is not final, for he has, for mere expediency, sent a mutilated subject to show courtesy to an officer.”484 He drove a stake into his wound and died.

17.3(4)

While the Zhu incursion into Lu is placed close to the end of the entries in the Annals because of chronology, it is here juxtaposed with Qi aggression against Lu to emphasize the collusion of Qi with Zhu. In winter, that Zhu leaders attacked our southern marches was on account of Qi.

17.4(7)

The Song minister Hua Chen instigates the murder of his nephew’s steward and demands bribes from the steward’s widow. The chief minister, Xiang Xu, urges compromise (for comparable examples, see Xiang 6.2, 10.9c, Zhao 1.7). Hua Chen is finally driven out not through orders from Duke Ping of Song or Xiang Xu but by a group of outraged inhabitants of the capital. Hua Yue of Song died. His younger brother Hua Chen, deeming the house of his nephew Hua Gaobia485 vulnerable, sent brigands to murder Hua Gaobi’s steward Hua Wu. These six brigands used daggers to kill him at the Lu Gate, behind the abode of Xiang Xua, the minister of the left whose settlement was He. Xiang Xub was fearful and said, “I am not guilty.” The brigands said, “Hua Gaobia is chastising Hua Wua because of private grudges.” Hua Chen thereupon imprisoned Hua Wu’s wife and said, “Give me your great jade disk.” The Duke of Song heard about these events and said, “Not only did Hua Chen use violence against none other than his own ancestral line, but he has also wrought great havoc on the government of the domain of Song. We must drive him out.”

17.5(6)

Lord Xiang

1045

左師曰：「 臣也，亦卿也。大臣不順，國之恥也。不如蓋之。」乃舍 之。左師為己短策，苟過華臣之門，必騁。 十一月甲午，國人逐瘈狗。瘈狗入於華臣氏，國人從之。華臣懼， 遂奔陳。 17.6 宋皇國父為大宰，為平公築臺，妨於農收。子罕請俟農功之畢，公弗

許。築者謳曰： 澤門之皙， 實興我役。 邑中之黔， 實慰我心。 子罕聞之，親執扑，以行築者，而抶其不勉者，曰：「 吾儕小人皆有闔 廬以辟燥濕寒暑。今君為一臺，而不速成，何以為役？」謳者乃止。 或問其故。子罕曰：「 宋國區區，而有詛有祝，禍之本也。」

486 Xiang Xu might have urged this perversion of justice out of fear for his own life, having seen how Hua Chen had brigands and assassins at his disposal. Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 33.5750) suggests that Xiang Xu used the short whip to help the driver make the horses gallop because he deeply abhors Hua Chen. (The whip has to be short so others cannot see that he is aiding the driver.) It would seem that Xiang Xu is motivated by the desire for self-protection rather than righteous indignation. 487 Huang Guofu is the fair-skinned man who lived at the Marsh Gate (Zemen), which might have been the same as the Gate of Dieze (Mound and Marsh) mentioned in Mencius 7A.36, the south gate of the eastern city wall (Yang, 3:1032). The darkskinned man inside the city refers to Yue Xi.

1046

Zuo Tradition

Xiang Xub said, “Hua Chena, too, is a minister. Insubordination among the great ministers is a disgrace to the domain. It is better to cover this up.” The Song ruler thus dropped the case. Xiang Xub made for himself a short whip. Whenever he passed by Hua Chen’s gate, he never failed to make the horses gallop.486 In the eleventh month, on the jiawu day (22), the inhabitants of the capital were chasing a rabid dog. The rabid dog ran into Hua Chen’s residence, and the inhabitants of the capital followed it in. Hua Chen was fearful and thus fled to Chen. Humble men express their criticism of nobles through songs (as in Xuan 2.1, Xiang 4.8). Yue Xi, despite their commendation of his stance, suppresses such expressions as the source of political instability. For the opposite position on this issue, see Zichan’s refusal to demolish village meeting places (Xiang 31.11). Yan Ying is substituted for Yue Xi in a similar story in Yanzi chunqiu 2.111. In Han Feizi 2.111, 35.763, Huainanzi 12.391–92, Hanshi waizhuan 7.291–92, and Shuoyuan 1.43, Yue Xi’s refusal to accept praise from the people is coupled with his eagerness to take blame. Such gestures paradoxically magnify his authority, and he eventually drives the Song ruler into exile. (In Zuozhuan, Yue Xi is praised throughout as a worthy minister.) Huang Guofu of Song, as grand steward, was building a terrace for Duke Ping. Its construction interfered with the harvest. Yue Xia requested that their work wait until the completion of agricultural labor, but the lord did not grant it. The builders sang:

17.6

The fair one at Marsh Gate, He it is who brings about our toil. The dark one inside the city, He it is who gladdens our hearts.487

When Yue Xi heard this, he personally clutched a bamboo whip and made circuits among the builders, flogging those who were not diligent and saying, “Humble men like us488 all have abodes to protect us from dryness and dampness, heat and cold. Now the ruler is building one terrace, and yet you will not complete it quickly. How can you call this toil?” The singers thus stopped. Someone asked why he acted thus. Yue Xia said, “Tiny as the domain of Song is, whenever there are imprecations and acclamations, these become the taproot of disaster.”489 488 Perhaps to ameliorate the severity of his rebuke, Yue Xi emphasizes his sympathy or solidarity with the builders despite obvious “class difference.” Yue Xi may also be making a point about his humble dwelling. In Lüshi chunqiu 20.1361, Yue Xi’s meager abode signifies his frugality and compassion for the people. 489 Both zu 詛 (imprecation) and zhu 祝 (acclamation) invoke gods and spirits.

Lord Xiang

1047

17.7 齊晏桓子卒，晏嬰麤縗斬，苴絰、帶、杖，菅屨，食鬻，居倚廬，寢苫、枕

草。其老曰：「 非大夫之禮也。」曰：「 唯卿為大夫。」

春秋 18.1(1) 十有八年，春，白狄來。 18.2(2) 夏，晉人執衛行人石買。 18.3(3) 秋，齊師伐我北鄙。 18.4(3) 冬，十月，公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、

杞伯、小邾子同圍齊。 18.5 曹伯負芻卒于師。 18.6(4) 楚公子午帥師伐鄭。

左傳 18.1(1) 十八年，春，白狄始來。 18.2(2) 夏，晉人執衛行人石買于長子，執孫蒯于純留，為曹故也。

490 A similar anecdote is found in Yanzi chunqiu 5.367. The broader meaning of the term “high officer” (dafu 大夫) does include ministers, but it is often used more restrictively to refer to those with ranks lower than ministers. Yan Ying may be modestly claiming that he is inadequate for the rank of high officer, or he may be implying that while ministers could mourn like high officers, high officers should mourn like lower-ranking officers (shi 士). Takezoe (16.11–12) paints a picture—whose historical accuracy cannot be ascertained—whereby the higher one’s station, the less demanding the rites of mourning. Shen Qinhan suggests that warfare and diplomacy might have become the contemporary excuse for diminishing mourning ritual (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 247–48).

1048

Zuo Tradition

The Qi minister Yan Ying chooses to mourn his father’s death with more stringent rituals than is common among high officers. Probably intended as a critique of declining mores, this anecdote presents Yan Ying as adhering to a more ancient and honorable code of conduct. It may also imply that ancient morality survives more stubbornly among the lower ranks of nobility. When Yan Ruoa of Qi died, his son Yan Ying wore a vest of coarse hemp and unhemmed mourning robes, hempen headdress and girdle, carried a bamboo staff, and put on grass shoes. He ate gruel, lived in an austere mourning hut, and slept on a straw mat and a grass pillow. His elder steward said, “This is not the ritual for a high officer.” Yan Ying said, “Only ministers can be considered high officers.”490

17.7

LORD XIANG 18 (555 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, the White Di came.491

18.1(1)

In summer, Jin leaders arrested the Wei envoy Shi Mai.

18.2(2)

In autumn, Qi troops attacked our northern marches.

18.3(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu and laid siege to Qi.

18.4(3)

Fuchu, the Liege of Cao, died among the troops.

18.5

Gongzi Wu (Zigeng) of Chu led out troops and attacked Zheng.

18.6(4)

ZUO

In the eighteenth year, in spring, the White Di came for the first time.

18.1(1)

In summer, Jin leaders arrested the Wei envoy Shi Mai at Changzi and arrested Sun Kuai at Chunliu.492 This was on account of Cao.493

18.2(2)

491 According to Du Yu (ZZ 33.576), borrowing from Gongyang, Xiang 18 (30.255), the customary expression laichao 來朝 (“come to our court”) is not used because the White Di did not know how to perform the proper ritual for attending a lord’s court. 492 Both Changzi 長子 and Chunliu 純留 were in the domain of Jin. The former was west of present-day Changzi County 長子縣, Shanxi, while the latter was south of Tunliu County 屯留縣, Shanxi. 493 See Xiang 17.2.

Lord Xiang

1049



18.3a(3, 4)

秋，齊侯伐我北鄙。中行獻子將伐齊，夢與厲公訟，弗勝。公以戈擊之， 首隊於前，跪而戴之，奉之以走，見梗陽之巫臯。他日，見諸道，與之 言，同。巫曰：「 今茲主必死。若有事於東方，則可以逞。」獻子許諾。 晉侯伐齊，將濟河，獻子以朱絲繫玉二瑴，而禱曰：「 齊環怙恃其 險，負其眾庶，棄好背盟，陵虐神主。曾臣彪將率諸侯以討焉，其官臣 偃實先後之。苟捷有功，無作神羞，官臣偃無敢復濟。唯爾有神裁之。」 沈玉而濟。

494 That is, the military expedition against Qi. 495 Huan is the given name of Lord Ling of Qi. 496 “The masters of the spirits” here refers to the people (Huan 6.2, Xi 19.3), although it can also mean the ruler (Xiang 14.6). 497 Biao is the given name of Lord Ping of Jin. The term “servant of servant” or “subject of subject” (cengchen 曾臣 or peichen 陪臣) refers to a twice-removed relationship with the source of authority. In this case Biao, Lord Ping of Jin, is the servant of the Zhou king, who is the servant of the gods. Analogously, the term also applies to the ministers and officers of great princes, who are subjects of the Zhou king. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 23.546), citing Huainanzi 13.444, notes that a subject can call a ruler by name in prayers. Gu also enumerates instances in Zuozhuan when a son calls his father or grandfather by name when addressing the ruler; see Cheng, n. 120.

1050

Zuo Tradition

Jin comes to Lu’s assistance and attacks Qi. The Jin commander Zhonghang Yan dreams of disputing a court case with Lord Li and being decapitated by the latter. Eighteen years ago, Zhonghang Yan murdered Lord Li (Cheng 18.1), whose favorites had conspired to kill Zhonghang Yan. Zhonghang Yan’s dream is said to portend his death and Jin’s victory. Most imperial commentators claim that the anecdote condemns Zhonghang Yan for the murder, but he is in fact presented in a positive light as one who accepts his fate and holds the interests of the realm paramount. In autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked our northern marches. Zhonghang Yanb was planning to attack Qi when he dreamed of disputing a legal case with Lord Li. He did not win. The lord struck him with a daggeraxe, and his head fell down in front of him. He knelt down and put it back on. While running and holding on to his head, he saw Shaman Gao of Gengyang. A few days after this dream, he did see Shaman Gao on the road. He spoke to Gao, and it turned out they had had the same dream. The shaman said, “This year you, master, will certainly die. Should you have affairs in the east,494 your ambition will be fulfilled.” Zhonghang Yanc assented. The Prince of Jin attacked Qi and was about to cross the Yellow River when Zhonghang Yanc tied two pairs of jade pieces up with red silk threads and prayed: “Huan495 of Qi, relying on the strategic advantages of his lands and trusting in his multitudes, has cast aside good relations, turned against the covenant, and treated cruelly the masters of the spirits.496 The servant of your servant, Biao,497 intends to lead the princes to chastise him, and it is I, Yan, his royally apppointed subject, who will go before or behind him to offer assistance.498 If we are victorious and achieve merit and bring no disgrace to you gods, then I, Yan, the royally appointed subject, will not dare to presume to cross the Yellow River again.499 Only you gods will decide in this case.” He let the jade pieces sink into the Yellow River and then crossed.

18.3a(3, 4)

498 According to Zhouli-Zheng 18.279, the term guanchen 官臣 refers to officials who received charges from the king to appoint their own stewards to administer their settlements (Yang, 3:1036). 499 Zhonghang Yan believes Shaman Gao’s interpretation of his dream and does not presume to pray for his own deliverance. Instead, he prays only for Jin victory.

Lord Xiang

1051

18.3b 冬，十月，會于魯濟，尋湨梁之言，同伐齊。齊侯禦諸平陰，塹防門而守

之，廣里。夙沙衛曰：「 不能戰，莫如守險。」弗聽。諸侯之士門焉，齊人 多死。范宣子告析文子，曰：「 吾知子，敢匿情乎？魯人、莒人皆請以車 千乘自其鄉入，既許之矣。若入，君必失國。子盍圖之！」 子家以告公。公恐。晏嬰聞之，曰：「 君固無勇，而又聞是，弗能久 矣。」 18.3c 齊侯登巫山以望晉師。晉人使司馬斥山澤之險，雖所不至，必旆而疏陳

之。使乘車者左實右偽，以旆先，輿曳柴而從之。齊侯見之，畏其眾也， 乃脫歸。丙寅晦，齊師夜遁。師曠告晉侯曰；「 鳥烏之聲樂，齊師其遁。」 邢伯告中行伯曰：「 有班馬之聲，齊師其遁。」叔向告晉侯曰：「 城上有 烏，齊師其遁。」

500 Participants of the Covenant of the Ju Dam agreed to respect each other’s territorial integrity and to recognize Jin as overlord. Qi, however, has repeatedly attacked Lu and turned away from Jin. 501 Susha Wei is implying that Qi should abandon that moat, which would not serve the same defensive function as Qi’s geographical advantage—the high ridges and narrow passes of Mount Tai. 502 According to Du Yu (ZZ 33.577), this means that Lord Ling cannot persist in his resistance too much longer. But Yan Ying might simply imply that Lord Ling does not have long to live. He will die the following year (Xiang 19.5). 503 The Jin army used the same tactic in the battle of Chengpu (Xi 28.3). 504 Sunzi 9.166–67: “Crows gather where troops are absent” (cited in Takezoe, 16.17; Yang, 3:1038). In Zhuang 28.3, crows are also observed in predictions regarding the enemy troops. 505 We follow Du Yu’s reading (ZZ 33.577) of ban 班 as bie 別 (“separated”): this is the sound of horses running around loose because they have been abandoned by the fleeing troops. Other readings of ban suggest circular movements (Shen Qinhan) or retreat (Hui Dong): the sounds of horses departing (Yang, 3:1038).

1052

Zuo Tradition

Jin and its allies renew the Covenant of the Ju Dam (Xiang 16.1) and attack Qi. Lord Ling of Qi is shown to lack both judgment and courage. In winter, in the tenth month, the princes met at the Ji River in Lu to renew the words of the Covenant of the Ju Dam.500 Together they attacked Qi. The Prince of Qi resisted the incursion at Pingyin, where he dug a one-li-wide moat outside the Gate of Defense to guard it. Susha Wei said, “If we cannot fight, it would be better to guard our strategic advantage.”501 Lord Ling of Qi did not heed him. The officers of the princes stormed the gate. Many died among the men of Qi. Fan Gaic told the Qi high officer Xi Guifub, “I know you. Would I presume to hide the truth of the matter from you? The men of Lu and Ju have both requested to take a thousand chariots and come into Qi from the directions of their domains. We have already agreed to their plans. If they enter, your ruler will be sure to lose the domain. Why don’t you plan accordingly!” Xi Guifua told the lord about this. The lord was terrified. Yan Ying heard about it and said, “The ruler had no courage to begin with. Now that he has heard this, he cannot last for long.”502

18.3b

The Jin army maneuvers to give the impression of being numerous and formidable. Lord Ling of Qi, intimidated, turns back. Unlike the Qi ruler, Jin leaders accurately assess the movement of the enemy. The retreating Qi army suffers further setbacks. The Prince of Qi climbed Mount Wu in order to survey the Jin army. Jin leaders had sent their supervisor of the military to forge a way through strategic points in the mountains and the marshes. Even at the places that the army would not reach, they had unfailingly set up military formations with banners, albeit only sparsely. They had sent chariots, with real soldiers on the left and fake ones on the right, to move ahead with banners, with carts dragging branches following them.503 The Prince of Qi saw this and feared that enemy troops were numerous; he thus absconded and turned back. On the bingyin day (29), the last day of the month, the Qi army fled during the night. The music master Kuang told the Prince of Jin: “The cawing of the crows is joyful. The Qi army has probably fled.”504 Xing Bo told Zhonghang Yane, “There are sounds of horses breaking loose:505 the Qi army has probably fled.” Shuxiang told the Jin ruler, “There are crows on the city wall: the Qi army has probably fled.”506

18.3c

506 Takezoe (16.17) notes the timing of these observations: “When the crows caw joyfully, it is the next morning. The sounds of returning horses are traced to the evening. The crows on the city walls are sighted at the moment of speaking.”

Lord Xiang

1053

十一月丁卯朔，入平陰，遂從齊師。夙沙衛連大車以塞隧而殿。殖 綽、郭最曰：「 子殿國師，齊之辱也。子姑先乎！」乃代之殿。衛殺馬於 隘以塞道。晉州綽及之，射殖綽，中肩，兩矢夾脰，曰：「 止，將為三軍 獲；不止，將取其衷。」 顧曰：「 為私誓。」州綽曰：「 有如日！」乃弛弓而自後縛之。其右具 丙亦舍兵而縛郭最，皆衿甲面縛，坐于中軍之鼓下。 18.3d 晉人欲逐歸者，魯、衛請攻險。己卯，荀偃、士匄以中軍克京茲。乙酉，

魏絳、欒盈以下軍克邿；趙武、韓起以上軍圍盧，弗克。十二月戊戌，及 秦周，伐雍門之萩。范鞅門于雍門，其御追喜以戈殺犬于門中；孟莊子 斬其橁以為公琴。己亥，焚雍門及西郭、南郭。劉難、士弱率諸侯之師 焚申池之竹木。壬寅，焚東郭、北郭，范鞅門于揚門。州綽門于東閭，左 驂迫，還于東門中，以枚數闔。

507 Pingyin 平陰 was located in Qi northeast of present-day Pingyin County 平陰縣, Shandong. 508 We read lian 連 as nian 輦 (Yang, 3:1038); cf. Karlgren, gls. 556, 572. 509 To have a eunuch bring up the rear is presumably the cause for shame. 510 Zhi Chuo describes the oath he demands as “private” (si 私) because it is made between individuals. 511 The ruler of Xu also had his hands bound behind him when he surrendered (Xi 6.4). In his discussion of that passage, Takezoe (5.38) suggests that mianfu 面縛 means “to have one’s hands bound in front.” The context of this passage, however, suggests that their hands were tied behind them. 512 Jingzi 京茲, Shi 邿, and Lú 盧 were all places along the range of Mount Tai. Jingzi and Shi were both near present-day Pingyin County 平陰縣, Shandong. On Lú, see Yin 3.6. 513 Qinzhou 秦周 was close to Yong Gate, the west gate of the Qi capital, present-day Linzi City 臨淄城. Catalpa is a fine-grained wood that can be used for vessels and coffins; see Xiang 2.3, 4.4. 514 The trees near Yong Gate (Yongmen) must have yielded superior wood for lutes. In Shuoyuan 11.367–68, Zizhou from Yongmen plays the lute for Meng Changjun and moves him to tears. “The lute of Yongmen” (Yongmen zhi qin 雍門之琴) becomes a common allusion to the affective power of music. 515 Chariots were drawn by teams of four horses. The two flanking horses were called can 驂. Here the flanking horse on the left could not move forward, probably because the passage was narrow or there were many other chariots making their way. When the left flanking horse stops and the other horses continue to move forward, the chariot turns around. 516 It takes Zhou Chuo quite a while to realign his horses and redirect his chariot, but instead of losing his composure, he demonstrates his self-possession and reassures the soldiers who follow him.

1054

Zuo Tradition

In the eleventh month, on the dingmao day, the first day of the month, the Jin army entered Pingyin and then pursued the Qi army.507 Susha Wei pulled up508 a great chariot to block the mountain paths since he was to bring up the rear. Zhi Chuo and Guo Zui said, “For you to bring up the rear for the army of the domain would be a disgrace to Qi.509 You would do better to just move ahead!” They thus took his place in the rear. Susha Weia killed some horses at a narrow pass to block passage. Zhou Chuo of Jin caught up with the Qi forces, shot Zhi Chuo in the shoulders so that two arrows flanked his neck, and said, “If you stop, you will be taken captive by the three armies; if you do not stop, I will take aim at your midsection.” Zhi Chuo looked back and said, “Make a private oath.”510 Zhou Chuo said, “Let the sun be my pledge!” He then untied his bow and bound Zhi Chuo’s hands from behind. His spearman on the right, Ju Bing, also put down his weapon to bind Guo Zui. Wearing armor but with their hands bound behind them,511 they were seated underneath the drums of the central army. Jin and its allies attack various strategic points in Qi. Their plundering seems methodical, and one commander, Zhou Chuo, demonstrates his extraordinary self-possession. The Qi ruler, anxious to turn back, is prevented from doing so by the adamant intervention of his son Guang, the Qi heir apparent. The leaders of Jin wished to pursue the Qi forces that fled, but Lu and Wei requested to attack the strategic points in Qi. On the jimao day (13), Zhonghang Yana and Fan Gaia overcame Jingzi with the central army. On the yiyou day (19), Wei Jiang and Luan Ying overcame Shi with the lower army; Zhao Wu and Han Qi laid siege to Lú with the upper army but failed to overcome it.512 In the twelfth month, on the wuxu day (2), the princes’ forces advanced as far as Qinzhou and cut down catalpa trees at the Yong Gate.513 Fan Yang stormed the Yong Gate, and his chariot driver Zhui Xi used his dagger-axe to kill the dog at the gate. Meng Zhuangzi cut down the wild varnish trees there to make lutes for Lord Xiang of Lu.514 On the jihai day (3), the princes’ forces burned down the Yong Gate as well as the western and southern outskirts of the Qi capital. Liu Nan and Shi Ruo, both of Jin, led the princes’ troops to burn the bamboos and trees at Shen Pond. On the renyin day (6), they burned the eastern and northern outer walls. Fan Yang stormed the Yang Gate. Zhou Chuo was storming the East Gate when his flanking horse on the left, having been pressed to a halt, caused the chariot to turn around in the middle of the gate.515 He used the interval to count the bosses that decorated the gate.516

18.3d

Lord Xiang

1055

齊侯駕，將走郵棠。大子與郭榮扣馬，曰：「 師速而疾，略也。將退 矣，君何懼焉？且社稷之主不可以輕，輕則失眾。君必待之！」將犯之。 大子抽劍斷鞅，乃止。甲辰，東侵及濰，南及沂。 18.4a(6) 鄭子孔欲去諸大夫，將叛晉而起楚師以去之。使告子庚，子庚弗許。楚

子聞之，使楊豚尹宜告子庚曰：「 國人謂不穀主社稷而不出師，死不從 禮。不穀即位，於今五年，師徒不出，人其以不穀為自逸而忘先君之業 矣。大夫圖之，其若之何？」 子庚歎曰：「 君王其謂午懷安乎！吾以利社稷也。」見使者，稽首 而對曰：「 諸侯方睦於晉，臣請嘗之。若可，君而繼之。不可，收師而退， 可以無害，君亦無辱。」 子庚帥師治兵於汾。於是子蟜、伯有、子張從鄭伯伐齊，子孔、子 展、子西守。二子知子孔之謀，完守入保。子孔不敢會楚師。

517 Also known simply as Tang 棠, Youtang 郵棠 was located southeast of present-day Pingdu County 平度縣, Shandong. 518 Cf. Du Yu (ZZ 33.578): “this is to pass quickly through the land, with no plan for an extended attack.” 519 The martingale attaches the middle two horses to the horizontal beam of the chariot. Lord Ling can no longer control his chariot properly once this connection is cut. 520 The meaning of the official title, tunyin 豚尹, is hard to fathom. Tun 豚 means “piglet,” but this is clearly not an official in charge of animals. The tunyin mentioned in Shuoyuan 12.396 is an emissary. Wu Jing’an (Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 261) suggests that since the earliest meaning of “Yi” 宜 is “meat” (or, more precisely, the placement of two pieces of meat on the sacrificial table), “Tunyin” may be Yang Yi’s courtesy name. (Given names and courtesy names are often semantically related.) 521 “It” refers to assertion of Chu’s challenge to Jin.

1056

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Qi had his horses harnessed to his chariot and was about to flee to Youtang.517 The heir apparent and Guo Rong pulled up the horses and said, “Their armies are moving hastily and ferociously. This means they are intent on plunder.518 They are about to withdraw. Why should you, my lord, be fearful? Moreover, the master of the altars of the domain cannot undertake his movements lightly, lest he lose the allegiance of the multitude. You, my lord, must wait!” Lord Ling was about to dash at them. The heir apparent pulled out his sword and cut through the martingale of the lord’s chariot,519 and only then did the lord stop. On the jiachen day (8), the princes’ armies made incursions eastward, advancing as far as Wei, and they also moved southward, advancing as far as the Yi River. Zikong of Zheng conspires to eliminate his rivals by securing Chu assistance in return for Zheng allegiance. King Kang of Chu is tempted by the offer, but Zigeng, chief minister of Chu, insists on caution. Zikong’s plot to collude with Chu does not materialize. Zikong of Zheng wanted to remove various high officers. He planned to turn against Jin and rouse the Chu army to remove them. He sent word to Zigeng, but Zigeng would not permit it. The Master of Chu heard about this and sent the deputy for diplomacy,520 Yang Yi, to tell Zigeng: “The inhabitants of the capital say that I, the deficient one, preside over the altars of the domain and yet I refuse to dispatch the army, and that if I die, I cannot be honored with the proper rituals. It has been five years since I acceded to my position, and our troops have not been dispatched. People are going to regard me as being concerned with my own comfort and oblivious to the legacy of the former rulers. You, high officer, should consider this. What is to be done?” Zigeng said, sighing, “Does the king think that I long for ease? I acted as I did to benefit the altars of the domain.” He received the emissary, bowed with his forehead touching the ground and replied, “The princes have just reached accord with Jin, and I beg to test the situation. If it is feasible,521 then the ruler can follow. If it is not, we can collect our troops and withdraw. We can then avoid harm, and the ruler will also suffer no disgrace.” Zigeng led out the troops and drilled the soldiers at the Fen River. At this time Zijiao, Liang Xiaoa, and Gongsun Heigonga were accompanying the Liege of Zheng as he attacked Qi, while Zikong, Gongsun Shezhia, and Zixi guarded the domain. The other two, knowing of Zikong’s plot, completed the fortifications and entered the city to protect it. Zikong did not dare meet up with the Chu army.

18.4a(6)

Lord Xiang

1057

18.4b 楚師伐鄭，次於魚陵。右師城上棘，遂涉潁。次于旃然。蒍子馮、公子格

率銳師侵費滑、胥靡、獻于、雍梁，右回梅山，侵鄭東北，至于蟲牢而 反。子庚門于純門，信于城下而還，涉於魚齒之下。甚雨及之。楚師多 凍，役徒幾盡。 晉人聞有楚師，師曠曰：「 不害。吾驟歌北風，又歌南風，南風 不競，多死聲。楚必無功。」董叔曰：「 天道多在西北。南師不時，必無 功。」叔向曰：「 在其君之德也。」

春秋 19.1(1) 十有九年，春，王正月，諸侯盟于祝柯。晉人執邾子。 19.2 公至自伐齊。 19.3(1) 取邾田，自漷水。 19.4(3) 季孫宿如晉。 19.5 葬曹成公。

522 Plum Mountain (Meishan 梅山) was northwest of the Zheng capital, with Shangji 上 棘 and Yongliang 雍梁 to the southwest. The Chu troops appear to have marched northward, turned eastward at Plum Mountain, and attacked the capital from the northeast. On the location of the Zheng capital, known as Xinzheng 新鄭, see map 3. 523 The Chun Gate was on the outer city wall of the Zheng capital. 524 Musical notes are tied to military movements, and one form of divination involves listening to the reverberations of musical notes to predict the fate of military endeavors. See Zhouli, “Tai shi” 大師, 23.357; Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 3.132–33; Shiji 25.139.

1058

Zuo Tradition

The Chu army attacks Zheng, which has acknowledged Jin leadership since the meeting at Xiaoyu (Xiang 11.5), but initial gains for Chu give way to grave setbacks because of heavy rain. Musical notes and the movements of stars are used for military predictions. The Chu army attacked Zheng and set up camp at Yuling. The army of the right fortified Shangji. It then crossed the Ying River and set up camp at the Zhanran River. Wei Ziping and Gongzi Ge led crack troops to make incursions into Bihua, Xumi, Xianyu, and Yongliang, returning on the right by way of Plum Mountain.522 They invaded Zheng from the northeast, advancing as far as Chonglao before they turned back. Zigeng stormed the Chun Gate,523 passed two nights underneath the city wall, and returned, crossing the river at the foot of Mount Yuchi. Torrential rains overtook them. Many in the Chu army suffered from the cold, and the conscripts almost all perished. The men of Jin heard about the Chu army attacking Zheng. The music master Kuang said, “No harm will be done. I have sung music to northern airs and also to southern airs several times. The southern airs cannot prevail, for they are filled with the sounds of death.524 Chu will certainly accomplish nothing.” Dong Shu said, “The Way of Heaven is mostly in the northwest.525 Unless troops from the south come at the right season, they are certain to accomplish nothing.” Shuxiang said, “All depends on the virtue of the ruler.”

18.4b

LORD XIANG 19 (554 BCE) ANNALS

In the nineteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the princes swore a covenant at Zhuke.526 Jin leaders arrested the Master of Zhu.

19.1(1)

Our lord arrived from the attack on Qi.

19.2

We took the lands of Zhu, starting from the Guo River.

527

19.3(1)

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Jin.

19.4(3)

Lord Cheng of Cao was buried.

19.5

525 Dong Shu is referring to the movement of the Year-Planet. See Takezoe, 19.23. For other references to planetary movements as “the Way of Heaven,” see Xiang 9.1, Zhao 9.4, and 11.2. 526 Zhuke 祝柯 was located in Qi northeast of present-day Changqing County 長清縣, Shandong. 527 That is, lands west of the Guo River, reaching as far as Lu, were turned over to Lu.

Lord Xiang

1059

19.6(2) 夏，衛孫林父帥師伐齊。 19.7(5) 秋，七月辛卯，齊侯環卒。 19.8(6) 晉士匄帥師侵齊，至穀，聞齊侯卒，乃還。 19.9 八月丙辰，仲孫蔑卒。 19.10(8) 齊殺其大夫高厚。 19.11(9) 鄭殺其大夫公子嘉。 19.12 冬，葬齊靈公。 19.13(11) 城西郛。 19.14(12) 叔孫豹會晉士匄于柯。 19.15(12) 城武城。

左傳

19.1a(1, 3)

十九年，春，諸侯還自沂上，盟于督揚，曰：「 大毋侵小。」 執邾悼公，以其伐我故。遂次于泗上，疆我田，取邾田，自漷水歸 之于我。 晉侯先歸。公享晉六卿于蒲圃，賜之三命之服；軍尉、司馬、司空、 輿尉、候奄皆受一命之服；賄荀偃束錦、加璧、乘馬，先吳壽夢之鼎。

528 For Gu, see map 2. 529 Ke 柯 was in Jin northeast of present-day Neihuang County 內黃縣, Henan. 530 This Wucheng 武城, to be distinguished from the city in Chu of the same name, was located in Lu near present-day Jiaxiang County 嘉祥縣, Shandong. 531 See Xiang 17.4. Lord Dao’s father, Lord Zhuang, was arrested by Jin in 557 Bce for the same reason (Xiang 16.1). 532 The word gui 歸 seems to suggest that the Zhu lands had once belonged to Lu, although it is also possible to read gui as “give,” which would imply that these had always been Zhu territories. Here Jin defines the boundary between Lu and Zhu along the Guo River, with the lands west of the river belonging to Lu. 533 See Cheng 2.3, n. 76. 534 One bundle (shu 束) consisted of ten rolls (duan 端), and two rolls made up one bolt (pi 匹). 535 The word xian 先 (“precede”) indicates that the objects enumerated before were deemed less valuable than the cauldron. Karlgren (gl. 576) reads xian as referring to the cauldron: “the cauldron formerly given to Lu by King Shoumeng of Wu.”

1060

Zuo Tradition

In summer, Sun Linfu of Wei led out troops and attacked Qi. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the xinmao day (28), Huan, the Prince of Qi, died. Shi Gai (Fan Gai) of Jin led out troops and invaded Qi. When he had advanced as far as Gu,528 he heard that the Prince of Qi had died, and he then began his return journey. In the eighth month, on the bingchen day (23), Zhongsun Mie (Meng Xianzi) died.

19.6(2) 19.7(5)

19.8(6)

19.9

Qi put to death its high officer Gao Hou.

19.10(8)

Zheng put to death its high officer Gongzi Jia (Zikong).

19.11(9)

In winter, Lord Ling of Qi was buried.

19.12

We fortified the western outer city walls.

19.13(11)

Shusun Bao met with Shi Gai (Fan Gai) of Jin at Ke.529

19.14(12)

We fortified Wucheng.

19.15(12)

530

ZUO

After victories over Qi and Chu, Jin defends its allies’ interests and transfers Zhu territories to Lu. Lord Xiang of Lu offers generous gifts and cere­ monial toasts to Jin ministers. In the nineteenth year, in spring, the princes returned from the banks of the Yi River and swore a covenant at Duyang (Zhuke), which said: “The great domains are not to invade the small ones.” The Jin leaders arrested Lord Dao of Zhu because he had attacked us.531 The Jin army thereupon set up camp on the Si River and defined the boundaries for our lands. The lands of Zhu, starting from the Guo River, were returned to us.532 The Prince of Jin returned to Jin first. Our lord offered ceremonial toasts to the six Jin ministers at the Pu Gardens and bestowed on them regalia appropriate to dignitaries of three commands.533 The army commandant, the supervisor of the military, the supervisor of works, the senior officer of military administration, and the leader of scouts all received the regalia appropriate to dignitaries of one command. He conferred on Zhonghang Yana five bolts of brocade,534 adding to them a jade disk and a team of four horses, and these preceded the cauldron that had been given to Lu by King Shoumeng of Wu.535

19.1a(1, 3)

Lord Xiang

1061

19.1b 荀偃癉疽，生瘍於頭。濟河，及著雍，病，目出。大夫先歸者皆反。士匄

請見，弗內。請後，曰：「 鄭甥可。」二月甲寅，卒，而視，不可含。宣子盥 而撫之，曰：「 事吳敢不如事主！」猶視。欒懷子曰：「 其為未卒事於齊故 也乎？」乃復撫之曰：「 主苟終，所不嗣事于齊者，有如河！」乃瞑，受 含。宣子出，曰：「 吾淺之為丈夫也。」 19.2(6) 晉欒魴帥師從衛孫文子伐齊。 19.3(4) 季武子如晉拜師，晉侯享之。范宣子為政，賦〈黍苗〉。季武子興，再拜

稽首，曰：「 小國之仰大國也，如百穀之仰膏雨焉。若常膏之，其天下輯 睦，豈唯敝邑？」賦〈六月〉。

536 Zhonghang Yan is referring to Zhonghang Wu (Xun Wu), whose mother was from Zheng. 537 It was customary to put pearls, jade, shells, grains, or rice in the mouth of the deceased. The ritual was called han (含、唅), “to hold in the mouth.” On unclosed eyes as a sign of being aggrieved in death, see also Wen 1.7. 538 Huan Tan (cited in ZZ-Kong 34.585) and Wang Chong (Lunheng 21.63.892–93) try to give a natural explanation of what happened—Zhonghang Yan has protruding eyes and clenched teeth in the final stage of his illness, but some time after he dies the tension relaxes, his eyes shut, and his mouth opens. The narrative here, however, obviously intends to show Zhonghang Yan’s spirit responding to Luan Ying’s promise. 539 Fan Gai regrets that he tried to appeal to Zhonghang Yan’s self-interest, thereby underestimating him and showing his own limited understanding. Cf. Takezoe 16.26: “I am but a lesser man of shallow understanding”; and Karlgren, gl. 577: “I took him as shallow, but he was a real man.” 540 We may surmise that Luan Ying sends Luan Fang on this expedition to fulfill the promise he made Zhonghang Yan. Sun Linfu has a special interest in attacking Qi because his foes, the exiled Lord Xian of Wei and his followers, are in Qi. 541 Ji Wuzi is thanking Jin for attacking Qi but probably also for defining the boundary between Lu and Zhu to Lu’s advantage. 542 Maoshi 227, “Shumiao” 黍苗, 15B.513–15. The ode celebrates the Zhou Duke Shao’s successful expedition against Xie and also praises him for honoring the exertion of his troops (or other lords who participated in the campaign). Fan Gai is using the ode to celebrate Jin’s successful campaign and to honor the exertion of its allies.

1062

Zuo Tradition

The meaning of Zhonghang Yan’s dream (Xiang 18.3) is fulfilled in his death. His sense of duty is such, however, that the rituals of death cannot be completed unless his spirit is assured that his expedition against Qi will continue. Despite Zhonghang Yan’s role in the murder of Lord Li of Jin (Cheng 18.1), he is commended for his loyalty and determination. Zhonghang Yana was suffering from a tumor, which grew and ulcerated on his head. By the time he crossed the Yellow River and reached Zhu­ yong, he had become seriously ill and his eyes were protruding. The high officers who had returned to Jin earlier all came back. Fan Gaia requested to have an audience with him, but Zhonghang Yan refused to admit him. Fan Gai sent someone to ask who should succeed him, and he said, “My son born of the one from Zheng.”536 In the second month, on the jiayin day (19), he died, but his eyes were still open and staring, and his mouth could not be made to hold anything.537 Fan Gaib went through the ablutions and then stroked his corpse, saying, “Dare I serve your son, Wu, in any way less than I serve you, master!” But he was still staring and they were unable to close his eyes. Luan Ying said, “Is it because he had not completed his undertaking against Qi?” He thus again stroked his corpse and said, “If, after the master dies, I do not continue your undertaking against Qi, let the Yellow River bear witness against me!” Zhonghang Yan’s eyes thus closed and he received the jade to be put in his mouth.538 Fan Gaia came out and said, “I with my shallow understanding took him to be a lesser man.”539

19.1b

Luan Fang of Jin led out an army and followed Sun Linfua of Wei as he attacked Qi.540

19.2(6)

Jin and Lu dignitaries use quotations from the Odes to cement their ties. The celebration of military success is conjoined with images of amity, protection, and sustenance. Ji Wuzi went to Jin to bow in thanks for Jin’s military assistance.541 The Prince of Jin offered him ceremonial toasts. Fan Gaib, who was in charge of government, recited “Millet Shoots.”542 Ji Wuzi rose, bowed twice with his forehead touching the ground, and said, “A small domain looks up to a great domain just as the hundred grains look up to nourishing rain. If they are constantly nourished, then there will be peace and harmony for all-under-heaven. How can it be merely our humble settlement that will benefit?” He recited “The Sixth Month.”543

19.3(4)

543 Ji Wuzi’s response alludes to the first two lines of “Millet Shoots”: “Luxuriant are the millet shoots. / The cool rain has nourished them.” Maoshi 177, “Liuyue” 六月, 10B.357–60, celebrates Yin Jifu’s campaign against the Xianyun tribe. Ji Wuzi is comparing the Jin ruler or Jin commanders to Yin Jifu. Both “Millet Shoots”and “The Sixth Month” are set during the reign of King Xuan of Zhou (r. 827–782). Lord Mu of Qin recited “The Sixth Month” in Xi 23.6f.

Lord Xiang

1063

19.4 季武子以所得於齊之兵作林鐘而銘魯功焉。臧武仲謂季孫曰：「 非禮

也。夫銘，天子令德，諸侯言時計功，大夫稱伐。今稱伐，則下等也；計 功，則借人也；言時，則妨民多矣，何以為銘？且夫大伐小，取其所得， 以作彝器，銘其功烈，以示子孫，昭明德而懲無禮也。今將借人之力以 救其死，若之何銘之？小國幸於大國，而昭所獲焉以怒之，亡之道也。」 19.5(7) 齊侯娶于魯，曰顏懿姬，無子。其姪鬷聲姬，生光，以為大子。諸子仲

子、戎子，戎子嬖。仲子生牙，屬諸戎子。戎子請以為大子，許之。仲子 曰：「 不可。廢常，不祥；間諸侯，難。光之立也，列於諸侯矣。今無故而 廢之，是專黜諸侯，而以難犯不祥也。君必悔之。」公曰：「 在我而已。」 遂東大子光。使高厚傅牙，以為大子，夙沙衛為少傅。

544 Following Du Yu (ZZ 34.585), we read ling 令 as a verb, meaning “to inscribe” or “to manifest,” to better sustain the symmetry with the following two clauses. But it is also possible to take the phrase lingde 令德 in its customary meaning of “exemplary virtue.” 545 In Wenxin diaolong 11.387–425, Liu Xie uses the distinctions between virtue, achievements, and military campaigns to classify categories of inscriptions. 546 This can mean either that Lu’s efforts under Jin’s command are not commendable enough for it to “name campaigns” or that to “name campaigns” is already the least worthy motive for creating inscriptions. 547 Zi was their clan name, which meant they were daughters of Song. 548 Guang represented Qi in various covenants and expeditions; see, e.g., Annals, Xiang 3.5, 5.7, 5.11, 9.5, 10.1, 10.7, 11.4, and 11.8. 549 Since Guang has been widely recognized as heir apparent by the other princes, to displace him for no reason would be to treat the other princes with contempt. Zhong Zi’s remonstrance earns her a place in the chapter on “Benevolent Sagacity” (Renzhi) in Lienü zhuan (3.58–59).

1064

Zuo Tradition

Inscribing Lu’s martial achievement on a bronze bell, Ji Wuzi shows heedless arrogance, in contrast to his humble protestations in Jin (Xiang 19.3). The incident echoes his father Ji Wenzi’s similarly presumptuous exploit when he built the Martial Palace to commemorate Lu’s victory over Qi (Cheng 6.2). Zang Wuzhong remonstrates with Ji Wuzi. On the dangers of martial success for a small domain, see also Xiang 8.3. Jin Wuzi used the metal from the weapons he obtained in Qi to cast a bell, tuned to the note of lin, and inscribed on it Lu’s achievements. Zang Wuzhong said to Ji Wuzid, “This is not in accordance with ritual propriety. When it comes to inscriptions, the Son of Heaven manifests virtue;544 the princes speak of good timing and tabulate achievements; and the high officers name their campaigns.545 Now, we are of the lower echelons when it comes to naming campaigns;546 we have relied on another’s power to justify tabulating achievements; we have interfered with agricultural labor in too many ways to speak of good timing. What was there to inscribe? Moreover, when a great domain attacks a small one and takes its spoils to cast ritual vessels, it inscribes glorious achievements and shows its descendants how it manifested bright virtue and punished those who violated ritual propriety. Now when we have relied on another’s power to save ourselves from death, why would we inscribe it? For a small domain that has, through sheer good fortune, overcome a great domain to then display its spoils in order to anger the latter is the way to destruction.”

19.4

A crisis of succession arises in Qi: Lord Ling deposed his heir apparent, Guang, and instated Ya, the son of a favorite. Guang regains his position with the support of the Qi minister Cui Zhu and eliminates his opponents. The Prince of Qi had taken a wife in Lu. She was called Yan Yi Ji, and she bore him no son. Her niece Zong Sheng Ji gave birth to Guang, who became the heir apparent. Among his concubines were Zhong Zi and Rong Zi,547 and the latter was his favorite. Zhong Zi bore Ya and entrusted him to Rong Zi. Rong Zi requested that Ya should become the heir apparent. The Qi ruler assented. Zhong Zi said, “This will not do. To abandon the regular rule is inauspicious. To offend the princes will bring difficulties. Having been established as heir apparent, Guang is ranked among the princes.548 Now to cast him aside for no reason is to arbitrarily defy the princes.549 By trying something difficult to accomplish, you will also be committing an inauspicious transgression. You, my lord, will certainly regret it.” The lord said, “It is all up to me.” He thus moved heir apparent Guang to the eastern border. He sent Gao Hou to tutor Gongzi Yaa, who became the heir apparent. Susha Wei became his junior preceptor.

19.5(7)

Lord Xiang

1065

齊侯疾，崔杼微逆光，疾病而立之。光殺戎子，尸諸朝，非禮也。 婦人無刑。雖有刑，不在朝市。 夏，五月壬辰晦，齊靈公卒。莊公即位。執公子牙於句瀆之丘。以 夙沙衛易己，衛奔高唐以叛。 19.6(8) 晉士匄侵齊，及穀，聞喪而還，禮也。 19.7 於四月丁未，鄭公孫蠆卒，赴於晉大夫。范宣子言於晉侯，以其善於伐

秦也。六月，晉侯請於王，王追賜之大路，使以行，禮也。 19.8(10) 秋，八月，齊崔杼殺高厚於灑藍，而兼其室。書曰「 齊殺其大夫，」從君

於昏也。

550 Qi used the Xia calendar and Lu the Zhou calendar, hence the discrepancy of two months. 551 Gaotang 高唐 was located southeast of Gaotang County 高唐縣 in present-day Shandong. 552 On this ritual, see also Xiang 4.21, Ai 10.3 and 15.2.

1066

Zuo Tradition

When the Prince of Qi fell ill, Cui Zhu secretly went to meet Guang and escorted him back. When the ruler’s illness became critical, Cui Zhu established Guang as heir apparent. Guang had Rong Zi killed and exposed her corpse at court. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. Women are not to be subjected to mutilating punishments. Even if one enforces such punishments, they would not be carried out in court or in the marketplace. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renchen day (29), the last day of the month, Lord Ling of Qi died.550 Lord Zhuang acceded to his position. He arrested Gongzi Ya at Goudou Knoll. He thought that Susha Wei was the one who had had him replaced by Gongzi Ya. Susha Weia fled to Gaotang551 and led it in revolt. Fan Gaia of Jin invaded Qi. When he had advanced as far as Gu, he heard that the Qi ruler had died and thus began his return journey. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.552

19.6(8)

The Zheng nobleman Zijiao receives posthumous honors in recognition of his sound advice that the allies should cross the Jing River (Xiang 14.3) during the campaign against Qin. In the fourth month, on the dingwei day (13), Zijiaoa of Zheng died, and notice of his death was sent to the high officers of Jin. Fan Gaia spoke to the Prince of Jin about him, because he had acquitted himself well while attacking Qin. In the sixth month, the Prince of Jin made a request to the king. The king bestowed on him posthumously a great carriage,553 which was used in the funeral procession. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

19.7

The Qi high officer Gao Hou is put to death for having supported Gongzi Ya, Lord Zhuang’s former rival. Gao Hou was criticized nine years earlier for irreverence (Xiang 10.1) and three years ago for inappropriate recitations from the Odes (Xiang 16.1). In autumn, in the eighth month, Cui Zhu of Qi killed Gao Hou at Salan and appropriated his land and property.554 That the text says, “Qi put to death its high officer,” is because he followed the ruler blindly.

19.8(10)

553 According to Maoshi-Zheng 9C.333 (cited in ZZ-Kong 34.586), dalu 大路 refers to carriages used by those holding the rank of minister or above. Du Yu (ZZ 5.91) asserts that all carriages bestowed by the Zhou king could be called dalu; see Huan 2.2. 554 Salan 灑藍 was located just outside the Qi capital of Linzi 臨淄, Shandong.

Lord Xiang

1067

19.9(11) 鄭子孔之為政也專，國人患之，乃討西宮之難與純門之師。子孔當罪，

以其甲及子革、子良氏之甲守。甲辰，子展、子西率國人伐之，殺子孔而 分其室。書曰「 鄭殺其大夫」，專也。 子然、子孔，宋子之子也；士子孔，圭媯之子也。圭媯之班亞宋 子，而相親也；二子孔亦相親也。僖之四年，子然卒；簡之元年，士子孔 卒。司徒孔實相子革、子良之室，三室如一，故及於難。子革、子良出奔 楚。子革為右尹。鄭人使子展當國，子西聽政，立子產為卿。 19.10 齊慶封圍高唐，弗克。冬，十一月，齊侯圍之。見衛在城上，號之，乃下。

問守備焉，以無備告。揖之，乃登。聞師將傅，食高唐人。殖綽、工僂會 夜縋納師，醢衛于軍。 19.11(13) 城西郛，懼齊也。

555 556 557 558 559

See Xiang 10.8 and 18.4. Both Song Zi and Gui Gui were concubines of Lord Mu of Zheng. The fourth year of the rule of Lord Xi of Zheng was 567 Bce. The first year of the rule of Lord Jian was 565 Bce. Susha Wei and Lord Zhuang of Qi are probably separated by a moat surrounding the city during this exchange. Du Yu (ZZ 34.587), following Jia Kui, believes that Lord Zhuang bows to Susha Wei to thank him for his frankness, and possibly to convey the wish to spare him. Takezoe (16.31) claims that Lord Zhuang is bowing to bid Susha Wei farewell. 560 Zhi Chuo was captured by Jin (Xiang 18.3) but has been repatriated to Qi. This scheme succeeds probably because the men of Gaotang are away at Susha Wei’s feast.

1068

Zuo Tradition

Further conflicts occur between rival lineages in Zheng: Zikong, guilty of complicity in an earlier rebellion (Xiang 10.9) and collusion with Chu (Xiang 18.4), is killed for trying to monopolize power. Zichan, who demonstrated his sagacity earlier (Xiang 8.3, 10.9, 15.4), becomes a minister. Zikong of Zheng monopolized power in the way he ran the government. Troubled by this, the inhabitants of the capital chastised him for the disaster at the Western Palace and the military action at the Chun Gate,555 for which Zikong bore the guilt. He used his own armored soldiers and armored soldiers from Ran Dana’s and Ziliang’s lineages as guards. On the jiachen day (11), Gongsun Shezhia and Zixi led the inhabitants of the capital to attack him. They put Zikong to death and divided his lands and property. That the text says, “Zheng put to death its high officer,” is because he had monopolized power. Ziran and Zikong were the sons of Song Zi. Shi Zikong was the son of Gui Gui.556 Gui Gui’s rank was lower than Song Zi’s, but the two were attached to each other, as were the half brothers, the two Zikongs. In the fourth year of Lord Xi,557 Ziran died. In the first year of Lord Jian,558 Shi Zikong died. It was none other than the supervisor of conscripts, Zikongb, who assisted with the management of the lands and property of both Ran Dana (son of Ziran) and Ziliang (son of Shi Zikong). The three houses were as one, and that was why they were embroiled in the disaster. Ran Dana and Ziliang left the domain and fled to Chu, and Ran Dana became deputy of the right in Chu. The men of Zheng had Gongsun Shezhia take charge of the domain. They had Zixi attend to administration and established Zichan as minister.

19.9(11)

Lord Zhuang of Qi completes the purge of Gongzi Ya’s supporters. The eunuch Susha Wei seems ingenuous and self-assured as he meets his doom. Qing Feng of Qi laid siege to Gaotang but failed to overcome it. In winter, in the eleventh month, the Prince of Qi laid siege to it. He saw Susha Weia on the city wall and called out to him, so the latter came down. When the Qi ruler asked him about his preparations for defense, he told him there was no preparation. The Qi ruler bowed to Susha Wei, who then ascended the wall.559 When Susha Weia heard that the Qi army was planning to press close to the city walls, he feasted the men of Gaotang. Zhi Chuo and Gonglü Hui let down ropes to bring up Qi troops during the night.560 They minced and pickled Susha Weia amid the army.

19.10

We fortified the western outer city walls because we feared Qi.

19.11(13)

Lord Xiang

1069

19.12(14,15) 齊及晉平，盟于大隧。故穆叔會范宣子于柯。穆叔見叔向，賦〈載馳〉之

四章。叔向曰：「 肸敢不承命！」穆叔歸，曰：「 齊猶未也，不可以不懼。」 乃城武城。 19.13 衛石共子卒，悼子不哀。孔成子曰：「 是謂蹶其本，必不有其宗。」

春秋 20.1(1) 二十年，春，王正月辛亥，仲孫速會莒人盟于向。 20.2(2) 夏，六月庚申，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、

滕子、薛伯、杞伯、小邾子盟于澶淵。 20.3 秋，公至自會。 20.4(3) 仲孫速帥師伐邾。 20.5(4) 蔡殺其大夫公子燮。蔡公子履出奔楚。 20.6(4) 陳侯之弟黃出奔楚。 20.7(5) 叔老如齊。 20.8 冬，十月丙辰朔，日有食之。 20.9(6) 季孫宿如宋。

561 Dasui 大隧 was located in Gaotang County 高唐縣, Shandong. 562 Maoshi 54, “Zai chi” 載馳, 3B.124–26. Shusun Bao cites the fourth stanza to convey his plaint and appeal to Jin for protection: “I go forth in the wilderness. / Luxuriant grows the caltrop. / I appeal to the great domain. / To whom could I go, on whom rely? / High officers and noble men, / Do not hold me guilty. / All your many plans / Are not equal to what I propose.” “Gallop” is said to have been composed by Lady Mu of Xǔ (Min 2.5b) as she planned to seek Qi help to revive the fortunes of her natal Wei. Gongzi Guisheng of Zheng also recited the last stanza of “Gallop” in Wen 13.5. 563 Shuxiang pledges to assist Lu to counter Qi aggression. 1070

Zuo Tradition

Shusun Bao appeals for Jin assistance with an apposite citation from the Odes. Despite the Jin minister Shuxiang’s assurance, Lu proceeds with further fortifications. Qi and Jin reached an accord and swore a covenant at Dasui.561 That was why Shusun Baoa met with Fan Gaic at Ke. Shusun Baoa had an audience with Shuxiang and recited the fourth stanza of “Gallop.”562 Shuxiang said, “Would I presume not to receive your command?”563 When Shusun Baoa came back, he said, “Qi has not yet stopped its aggressive ambitions. We cannot but be fearful.” We therefore fortified Wucheng.

19.12(14,15)

The Wei minister Kong Chengzi predicts doom for a Wei nobleman who shows no grief at his father’s funeral. The nobleman is exiled nine years later (Xiang 28.3). For comparable prophecies, see Cheng 14.5 and Xiang 31.5. Shi Maia of Wei died, and his son Shi Ea showed no grief. Kong Chengzi said, “This is called tearing out the roots. He will surely not keep his ancestral line.”

19.13

LORD XIANG 20 (553 BCE) ANNALS

In the twentieth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the xinhai day (21), Zhongsun Su (Meng Zhuangzi) met with a Ju leader and swore a covenant at Xiang. In summer, in the sixth month, on the gengshen day (3), our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu and swore a covenant at Chanyuan.564

20.1(1)

20.2(2)

In autumn, our lord arrived from the meeting.

20.3

Zhongsun Su (Meng Zhuangzi) led out troops and attacked Zhu.

20.4(3)

Cai put to death its high officer Gongzi Xie. Gongzi Lü of Cai departed and fled to Chu.

20.5(4)

The younger brother of the Prince of Chen, Huang, departed and fled to Chu.

20.6(4)

Shu Lao went to Qi.

20.7(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, on the bingchen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Song.

20.8

20.9(6)

564 According to Yao Nai, Chanyuan 澶淵, formerly in Wei, is at this point in Jin (Yang, 3:1052). It was located northwest of present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

1071

左傳 20.1(1) 二十年，春，及莒平。孟莊子會莒人盟于向，督揚之盟故也。 20.2(2) 夏，盟于澶淵，齊成故也。 20.3(4) 邾人驟至，以諸侯之事弗能報也。秋，孟莊子伐邾以報之。

20.4(5, 6)

蔡公子燮欲以蔡之晉，蔡人殺之。公子履，其母弟也，故出奔楚。 陳慶虎、慶寅畏公子黃之偪，愬諸楚曰：「 與蔡司馬同謀。」楚人 以為討，公子黃出奔楚。 初，蔡文侯欲事晉，曰：「 先君與於踐土之盟，晉不可棄，且兄弟 也。」畏楚，不能行而卒。楚人使蔡無常，公子燮求從先君以利蔡，不能 而死。書曰「 蔡殺其大夫公子燮」，言不與民同欲也；「 陳侯之弟黃出奔 楚」，言非其罪也。公子黃將出奔，呼於國曰：「 慶氏無道，求專陳國， 暴蔑其君，而去其親，五年不滅，是無天也。」

565 Lord Wen of Cai died in 592 Bce (Annals, Xuan 17.4). For the Covenant of Jiantu, see Xi 28.3i. 566 Chu might have made ever more severe and unpredictable demands, but Cai has been closer to Chu than to Jin, and Cai leaders probably fear reprisals from Chu. 567 The implied “rule” in the Annals is that the designation of Huang as the Chen ruler’s younger brother indicates that he is not guilty—hence Kong Yingda’s subcommentary (ZZ-Kong 34.588): “When an elder brother harms a younger brother, the latter is called ‘younger brother’ to make manifest the older brother’s guilt.” 568 For the death of Qing Hu and Qing Yin three years later, see Xiang 23.2.

1072

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Covenant of Duyang (Xiang 19.1) paves the way for an accord between Lu and Ju, which lasts until 538 Bce (Zhao 4.5). In the twentieth year, in spring, we reached an accord with Ju. Meng Zhuangzi met with a Ju leader and swore a covenant at Xiang: this was on account of the Covenant of Duyang.

20.1(1)

The peace agreement between Qi and Jin now extends to other domains. In summer, the princes swore a covenant at Chanyuan: this was on account of the peace agreement with Qi.

20.2(2)

Hostilities between Lu and Zhu break out despite the Covenant of Chanyuan. The men of Zhu repeatedly attacked us. We could not retaliate on account of our involvement in the affairs of the princes. In autumn, Meng Zhuangzi attacked Zhu in retaliation.

20.3(4)

The relationship with Chu determines the fate of nobles in smaller domains: Gongzi Xie of Cai is put to death for trying to make Cai shift allegiance from Chu to Jin, and Gongzi Huang of Chen, accused of being Gongzi Xie’s accomplice, flees to Chu to clear his name. Gongzi Xie of Cai wanted to bring Cai over to Jin, and for that the leaders of Cai put him to death. It was for this reason that Gongzi Lü, who was Xie’s younger full brother, departed and fled to Chu. Qing Hu and Qing Yin of Chen feared the encroachment of Gongzi Huang and slandered him to Chu leaders: “He was in league with the Cai supervisor of the military Gongzi Xie.” The men of Chu intended to chastise him for it, but Gongzi Huang departed and fled to Chu. Earlier, Lord Wen of Cai had wanted to serve Jin. He said, “The former ruler participated in the Covenant of Jiantu. Jin cannot be cast off. Moreover, we are brother domains.” But he was afraid of Chu, and he died before he could make the trip to Jin.565 The leaders of Chu made demands on Cai without any regard for regular procedure. Gongzi Xie sought to follow the wishes of the former lord in order to benefit Cai, but he failed and died for it. The text says, “Cai put to death its high officer Gongzi Xie”: this is to indicate that he did not share the same wishes with the people.566 “The younger brother of the Prince of Chen, Huang, left the domain and fled to Chu”: this is to indicate that the fault was not his.567 When Gongzi Huang was about to depart and flee, he proclaimed in the capital: “These Qings lack the Way and seek to monopolize power in Chen. They defy and scorn their ruler and remove his kin. If they are not destroyed in five years, then there is no Heaven.”568

20.4(5, 6)

Lord Xiang

1073

20.5(7) 齊子初聘于齊，禮也。 20.6(9) 冬，季武子如宋，報向戌之聘也。褚師段逆之以受享，賦〈常棣〉之七章

以卒。宋人重賄之。歸，復命，公享之，賦〈魚麗〉之卒章。公賦〈南山有 臺〉。武子去所，曰：「 臣不堪也。」 20.7 衛甯惠子疾，召悼子曰：「 吾得罪於君，悔而無及也。名藏在諸侯之策，

曰『孫林父、甯殖出其君』。君入，則掩之。若能掩之，則吾子也。若不 能，猶有鬼神，吾有餒而已，不來食矣。」悼子許諾，惠子遂卒。

569 Xiang Xu went on an official visit to Lu five years earlier (Xiang 15.1). 570 Maoshi 164, “Chang di” 常棣, 9B.320–23 also cited in Xi 24.2b, Zhao 1.4, 7.11. The ode celebrates the concord of brothers. The context might well have been a clan feast. The last two stanzas further emphasize fraternal harmony in joyous households. 571 Maoshi 170, “Yu li” 魚麗, 9D.341–42. The final stanza affirms how the feast is fine and bountiful because of timely action. Ji Wuzi is praising the Song mission as a timely charge.

1074

Zuo Tradition

Lu tries to improve relations with Qi. Shu Laoa went on an official visit to Qi for the first time in Lord Zhuang’s reign. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

20.5(7)

As envoy in Song, Ji Wuzi emphasizes Lu-Song amity through an ode on fraternal harmony. The success of the mission is underlined in an exchange of Odes citations between Lord Xiang of Lu and Ji Wuzi upon the latter’s return. Despite the exchange of compliments, the rift between the Lu ruling house and the powerful Ji lineage is deepening. In winter, Ji Wuzi went to Song in answer to Xiang Xu’s official visit.569 The market overseer Duan met him and led him to receive the ceremonial toasts. Ji Wuzi recited the seventh and final stanzas of “Cherry Trees.”570 The leaders of Song gave him handsome gifts. He returned and reported the discharge of his mission. The lord offered him ceremonial toasts, and he recited the final stanza of “Fish Netted.”571 The lord recited “On the Southern Hills Grows Nut Grass.” Ji Wuzic left his place at the feast and said, “I am not worthy of that.”572

20.6(9)

The Wei minister Ning Zhi drove Lord Xian into exile six years earlier (Xiang 14.4) but is compelled on his deathbed by the fear of leaving a bad name in historical records to enjoin his son Ning Xi to bring back the exiled ruler. The entry in Annals, Xiang 14.4, may reflect the “covering up” that Ning Zhi refers to.573 Ning Xi eventually restores Lord Xian (Xiang 26.2). On how anticipation of how one’s actions will be recorded influences choices, see also Zhuang 23.1 and Wen 15.2. When Ning Zhia of Wei was very ill, he summoned his son Ning Xia and said to him, “I am guilty of a crime against the ruler. I regret it, but it is too late to do anything about it. My name has been stored up in the bamboo slips of the princes, which say, ‘Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi drove out their ruler.’ If the ruler reenters the domain, then that can be covered up. If you can cover that up, then you are truly my son. If you cannot, then I will not come to imbibe your offerings even if there are ghosts and spirits and I am one of them: I would rather suffer hunger.”574 Ning Xia assented and promised to do so, and Ning Zhib then died.

20.7

572 Maoshi 172, “Nan shan you tai” 南山有臺, 10A.347. The ode praises the noble man as “the foundation of the realm and home” and “the light of the realm and home.” Ji Wuzi protests that the praise is excessive. 573 See n. 365 above. 574 Ning Zhi is saying that he will disavow Ning Xi as his son. On hungry ghosts, see also Xuan 4.2.

Lord Xiang

1075

春秋 21.1(1) 二十有一年，春，王正月，公如晉。 21.2(2) 邾庶其以漆、閭丘來奔。 21.3 夏，公至自晉。 21.4(5) 秋，晉欒盈出奔楚。 21.5 九月庚戌朔，日有食之。 21.6 冬，十月庚辰朔，日有食之。 21.7(6) 曹伯來朝。 21.8(7) 公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子于商任。

左傳 21.1(2) 二十一年，春，公如晉，拜師及取邾田也。 21.2a(2) 邾庶其以漆、閭丘來奔，季武子以公姑姊妻之，皆有賜於其從者。於是

魯多盜。季孫謂臧武仲曰：「 子盍詰盜？」 武仲曰：「 不可詰也。紇又不能。」

575 It is not possible to have solar eclipses in two successive months, although partial eclipses may be observed in two different places over that period of time This is a mistake either with observation or with recording (Yang, 3:1056; Huang Zongxi, cited in Takezoe, 16.20). 576 Shangren 商任 was located in present-day Anyang County 安陽縣, Henan. 577 In Maoshi 255, “Dang” 蕩, 18A.641–44, “giving entry to brigands and criminals” (kou rang shi nei 寇攘式內) is also one of the charges King Wen of Zhou levels against Shang. 578 Lord Xiang’s aunt should be Lord Cheng’s sister and Lord Xuan’s daughter. Lord Xuan died thirty-nine years ago, and this aunt must therefore be around forty or older. She might have been a widow. Shen Qinhan (cited in Karlgren, gl. 579) maintains that guzi 姑姊 refers to a daughter of Lord Xiang’s aunt. 579 Alternatively, there may be an implied connection: “as a result, there were many brigands in Lu.”

1076

Zuo Tradition

LORD XIANG 21 (552 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord went to Jin.

21.1(1)

Shuqi of Zhu, bringing Qi and Lüqiu with him, came in flight.

21.2(2)

In summer, our lord arrived from Jin.

21.3

In autumn, Luan Ying of Jin departed and fled to Chu.

21.4(5)

In the ninth month, on the gengxu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. In winter, in the tenth month, on the gengchen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.575

21.5

21.6

The Liege of Cao came to visit our court.

21.7(6)

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, and the Master of Zhu at Shangren.576

21.8(7)

ZUO

Lord Xiang repeats Ji Wuzi’s mission, thanking Jin (Xiang 19.3) for using its army against Qi (Xiang 18.3) and for giving Zhu territories to Lu (Xiang 19.1). In the twenty-first year, in spring, our lord went to Jin to bow in thanks for its military assistance and for taking the fields of Zhu.

21.1(2)

Shuqi of Zhu is generously rewarded for offering Zhu settlements to Lu leaders. We may surmise that Shuqi tried unsuccessfully to rebel against the Zhu ruler and is seeking refuge in Lu by offering the Zhu settlements of Qi and Lüqiu as a bribe. Zang Wuzhong argues that harboring Shuqi amounts to a miscarriage of justice that causes brigandry to flourish in Lu. For similar arguments equating acceptance of miscreants with complicity, see Wen 18.7, Xiang 26.2, Zhao 7.2, Ai 14.2.577 On how a ruler’s example can change mores, see Yin 5.1, Huan 2.2, and Zhuang 23.1, 24.1, 24.2. Shuqi of Zhu, bringing Qi and Lüqiu with him, came in flight. Ji Wuzi gave our lord’s aunt to him as wife578 and bestowed gifts on all his followers. At that time there were many brigands in Lu.579 Ji Wuzid said to Zang Wuzhong, “Why have you not stopped the brigands?” Zang Wuzhonga said, “They cannot be stopped. And in any case, I would be incapable of doing it.”

21.2a(2)

Lord Xiang

1077

季孫曰：「 我有四封，而詰其盜，何故不可？子為司寇，將盜是務 去，若之何不能？」 武仲曰：「 子召外盜而大禮焉，何以止吾盜？子為正卿，而來外 盜；使紇去之，將何以能？庶其竊邑於邾以來，子以姬氏妻之，而與之 邑。其從者皆有賜焉。若大盜禮焉以君之姑姊與其大邑，其次皁牧輿 馬，其小者衣裳劍帶，是賞盜也。賞而去之，其或難焉。紇也聞之：在上 位者洒濯其心，壹以待人；軌度其信，可明徵也，而後可以治人。夫上之 所為，民之歸也。上所不為，而民或為之，是以加刑罰焉，而莫敢不懲。 若上之所為，而民亦為之，乃其所也，又可禁乎？《夏書》曰： 念茲在茲， 釋茲在茲， 名言茲在茲， 允出茲在茲， 惟帝念功。 將謂由己壹也。信由己壹，而後功可念也。」 21.2b 庶其非卿也，以地來，雖賤，必書，重地也。

580 Du Yu claims that the settlements in question refer to Qi and Lüqiu, but these are probably Lu settlements; otherwise, they would not count as a gift (Takezoe, 16.38). 581 The word translated here and later in the passage as “integrity” is yi 壹, which means, literally, “oneness”—the complete coincidence of appearance and reality, word and deed. 582 Cf. Mencius 3A.2: “If those in positions above desire something, those below are sure to do so in an even more extreme way.” 583 This fragment becomes part of “Da Yu mo” in Shangshu 4.52–59. For “Da Yu mo,” see n. 106.

1078

Zuo Tradition

Ji Wuzi said, “We have borders on all four sides. Why should it be impossible to stop the brigands? You are the supervisor of corrections, and removing brigands is precisely what you should strive to do. How can you be incapable of it?” Zang Wuzhong said, “You, sir, have summoned brigands from abroad and have honored them with a great show of courtesy. How can we curb our own brigands? You, sir, are the chief minister, and yet brigands from abroad have been brought in because of you. You would have me eliminate our brigands, but on what basis can I do so? When Shuqi stole settlements from Zhu and used them to seek refuge with us, you married Lady Ji to him and also offered him settlements.580 His followers all have gifts bestowed on them. If a prominent brigand is treated with a show of courtesy by being given the ruler’s aunt and her major settlement, and if for the lesser ones there are lackeys, herdsmen, carriages, and horses, and if even for the least among them there are clothes, swords, and belts, then this amounts to rewarding brigands. Will it not perhaps be difficult to eliminate them by giving them rewards? I have heard, those in positions above can govern others only when they cleanse their hearts of deviance, treat others with integrity,581 and set their good faith within proper bounds to which one can clearly appeal. For what those above do is that to which the people turn.582 What those above do not do, some among the people may yet do. Consequently, punishment is meted out to them, and none would dare not to accept chastisement. If the people also do what those above do, then the situation we have is inevitable. Indeed, how could it be prevented? It says in the Xia Documents, That which you think of depends on this, That which you forgive depends on this. That which you speak of in your command depends on this, That which you truly reject depends on this. Only the god on high is to think of these achievements.583

Perhaps this refers to how results must come from one’s own integrity. When good faith comes from one’s own integrity, then achievements can be recorded.” The following exegetical comment claims that the Annals places special importance on territorial gains, an attitude that, however, has just been decried as immoral. Shuqi was not a minister but he came bringing land. Although his position was lowly, this had to be recorded because of the importance placed on land.

21.2b

Lord Xiang

1079

21.3(2) 齊侯使慶佐為大夫，復討公子牙之黨，執公子買于句瀆之丘。公子鉏來

奔。叔孫還奔燕。 21.4 夏，楚子庚卒。楚子使薳子馮為令尹，訪於申叔豫。叔豫曰：「 國多寵而

王弱，國不可為也。」遂以疾辭。方暑，闕地，下冰而牀焉。重繭，衣裘， 鮮食而寢。楚子使醫視之。復曰：「 瘠則甚矣，而血氣未動。」乃使子南 為令尹。 21.5a(4) 欒桓子娶於范宣子，生懷子。范鞅以其亡也，怨欒氏，故與欒盈為公

族大夫而不相能。桓子卒，欒祁與其老州賓通，幾亡室矣。懷子患之。

584 Since Wei Ziping seems too sick to be apointed, King Kang settles on his uncle Zinan as the next choice. Zinan was King Gong’s younger brother. 585 See Li Long-shien, “Xian Qin xushi wenxian.” 586 Fan Yang was forced to flee to Qin because Luan Yan accused him of bringing about the death of his younger brother Luan Qian and threatened to kill him. Fan Yang had predicted the Luan lineage’s downfall in an exchange with the Qin ruler seven years earlier (Xiang 14.3). 587 This may refer to mismanagement or Zhou Bin’s appropriation of the Luan lineage’s property. Cf. Qian Zhongshu’s alternative reading of wangshi 亡室 (wushi 無室) as “effacing division between inner quarters (shi 室) and the outside world”; i.e., the liaison was flagrant and became public knowledge (Guanzhui bian, 1:213–14). See Zhao 25.6 for another story of a widow’s disastrous liaison with an inferior.

1080

Zuo Tradition

The Qing lineage rises in Qi, and Lord Zhuang of Qi continues to persecute the party of Gongzi Ya, his rival for the Qi throne. The Prince of Qi appointed Qing Zuo high officer. He further chastised the party of Gongzi Ya, arresting Gongzi Mai at Goudou Knoll. Gongzi Chu came in flight. Shusun Xuan fled to Yan.

21.3(2)

Wei Ziping of Chu avoids being appointed chief minister by feigning illness. Shen Shuyu, who implicitly counsels him to refuse the appointment, turns out to be right. Zinan, the new chief minister, comes to grief the following year (Xiang 22.4). In summer, Zigeng of Chu died. The Master of Chu appointed Wei Ziping chief minister, and the latter consulted with Shen Shuyu. Shen Shuyua said, “There are many who enjoy special favor in the domain, and the king is young. The domain cannot be governed properly.” Wei Ziping thus declined on the grounds of illness. Just then the weather was hot. He dug a hole in the ground, filled it with ice, and set up his bed over it. He wore two padded silk robes and a fur coat, ate little, and lay on the bed. The Chu ruler sent a physician to examine him. The physician reported, “He was emaciated in the extreme, but his blood and breath are not yet unsettled.” The king thus appointed Zinan584 chief minister.

21.4

The old enmity between the Luan and Fan lineages (Xiang 14.3) flares up again because Luan Qi, daughter of Fan Gai and wife of Luan Yan, is involved in an adulterous and ruinous liaison and plots against her own son Luan Ying in order to forestall the latter’s punishment of her lover. Fan Gai eliminates supporters of the Luan lineage. While Zuozhuan focuses on the power struggle between the Luan and Fan lineages, Guoyu (“Jin yu 8,” 14.447–51) presents the Jin ruler Lord Ping and his adviser Yang Bi as the ones who destroy the Luan lineage in the interest of centralizing power. Xinian (bamboo strips 91–95) and Shiji (39.1683–84) subsume Luan’s rebellion into a narrative about Qi-Jin relations.585 Luan Yanc married a daughter of Fan Gaic. She bore Luan Yingc. Fan Gai’s son Fan Yang resented the Luan lineage because of his exile.586 That was why, though he and Luan Yan both served as high officers of ruling lineages, they could not abide each other. After Luan Yand died, his wife Luan Qi had a liaison with the senior steward of the Luan lineage, Zhou Bin, who liquidated almost all the land and property of the Luan lineage.587 Luan Yingb was outraged by this.

21.5a(4)

Lord Xiang

1081

祁懼其討也，愬諸宣子曰：「 盈將為亂，以范氏為死桓主而專 政矣，曰：『吾父逐鞅也，不怒而以寵報之，又與吾同官而專之。吾父死 而益富。死吾父而專於國，有死而已，吾蔑從之矣。』其謀如是，懼害於 主，吾不敢不言。」范鞅為之徵。 懷子好施，士多歸之。宣子畏其多士也，信之。懷子為下卿，宣子 使城著而遂逐之。秋，欒盈出奔楚。宣子殺箕遺、黃淵、嘉父、司空靖、 邴豫、董叔、邴師、申書、羊舌虎、叔羆，囚伯華、叔向、籍偃。 21.5b 人謂叔向曰：「 子離於罪，其為不知乎？」叔向曰：「 與其死亡若何？

《詩》曰： 優哉游哉， 聊以卒歲。 知也。」

588 Fan Yang should not have been allowed to return but instead was appointed, along with Luan Yan, as a high officer of a ruling lineage (Xiang 16.1). 589 As Wei Xi (cited in Takezoe, 16.42) points out, Luan Ying seems to have been the precursor of the Warring States nobleman supporting a group of talented men who are in turn fanatically devoted to him. 590 He was the assistant commander of the lower army, ranking sixth among the ministers. 591 Fan Gai thus plucks Luan Ying from a military milieu where he had direct control over his troops. He sends Luan Ying to Zhu presumably because of its distance from the Jin capital. This Zhu 著, a place in Jin, should not be confused with the small domain of Zhu 邾 near Lu. 592 These ten are of the same party as Luan Ying. 593 All three seem to have been subsequently released.

1082

Zuo Tradition

His mother, Luan Qia, feared he would punish Zhou Bin and slandered Luan Ying to her father, Fan Gaib: “Luan Yinga is about to start a revolt. He thinks the Fan lineage brought about Luan Yan’s death in order to monopolize power in the government. He says, ‘My father drove Fan Yangd away. Upon his return, Fan Gai, instead of being angry, requited him with special favor.588 Moreover, Fan Yang’s rank is the same as mine, yet he monopolizes power. My father died and the Fan lineage became even richer. Since he brought about my father’s death and has monopolized power in the domain, I would rather die: I am not going to go along with him!’ Such is his plot, and I fear that he may harm you, Father. I did not dare not to speak up.” Fan Yang confirmed what she said by his own testimony. Luan Yingb was generous and liberal with gifts, and many officers became loyal to him.589 Fan Gaib, apprehensive that Luan Ying had the support of so many officers, believed the accusation. Luan Yingb was the lower minister.590 Fan Gaib appointed him to fortify Zhu and then drove him away.591 In autumn, Luan Ying departed and fled to Chu. Fan Gaib put to death Ji Yi, Huang Yuan, Jia Fu, Supervisor of Works Jing, Bing Yu, Dong Shu, Bing Shi, Shen Shu, Yangshe Hu, and Shu Pi592 and imprisoned Yangshe Chia, Shuxiang (Yangshe Xi), and Ji Yan.593 Through his half brother Yangshe Hu, the Jin minister Shuxiang is implicated in the purge of the Luan lineage, but he maintains his equanimity. He ignores an offer for help from the Jin ruler’s favorite, Yue Wangfu, and places his hopes in Qi Xi, who showed his impartiality earlier (Xiang 3.4). Qi Xi is also the prescient judge of Shuxiang’s character in Shuoyuan 11.372 and in Kongzi jiayu 3.29. Shuxiang’s judgment of Qi Xi’s fair-mindedness summarizes the message of the anecdote and harks back to Xiang 3.4. Someone asked Shuxiang, “You have been implicated in a crime. Is that not because you are unwise?” Shuxiang said, “How does that compare to death or exile? It says in the Odes,

21.5b

Freely, easily, Just let the year come to an end like this.594

This is wisdom.”

594 These lines are from an ode no longer extant. The first quoted line appears in the final stanza of Maoshi 222, “Cai shu” 采菽, 15A.503, which praises the noble man for fulfilling the king’s commands. Whereas Shuxiang emphasizes composed detachment, that ode glorifies engagement with duties. Shuxiang is chided for failing to confirm his alliance with the Fan lineage, and he responds by citing lines lauding the wisdom of being uninvolved.

Lord Xiang

1083

樂王鮒見叔向，曰：「 吾為子請。」叔向弗應。出，不拜。其人皆咎 叔向。叔向曰：「 必祁大夫。」室老聞之，曰：「 樂王鮒言於君，無不行， 求赦君子，吾子不許。祁大夫所不能也，而曰必由之，何也？」 叔向曰：「 樂王鮒，從君者也，何能行？祁大夫外舉不棄讎，內舉 不失親，其獨遺我乎？《詩》曰： 有覺德行， 四國順之。 夫子覺者也。」 21.5c 晉侯問叔向之罪於樂王鮒。對曰：「 不棄其親，其有焉。」



於是祁奚老矣，聞之，乘馹而見宣子，曰：「 《詩》曰： 惠我無疆， 子孫保之。

書曰： 聖有謩勳， 明徵定保。

595 This judgment of such recommendations as proof of impartiality (gong 公) is attributed in variants of the anecdote told in Xiang 3.4 to Confucius in Lüshi chunqiu 1.55, to the noble man in Shiji 39.1682, and to the narrator in Han Feizi 33.705 and Xinxu 1.12. 596 Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.645. 597 Qi Xi had asked to retire on account of old age in 570 Bce (Xiang 3.4). He was reappointed as a high officer of a ruling lineage in 557 Bce (Xiang 16.1). He seems to have retired again by this time.

1084

Zuo Tradition

Yue Wangfu had a meeting with Shuxiang and said, “I will intercede on your behalf.” Shuxiang did not respond. When he went out, Shuxiang did not bow. His followers all rebuked Shuxiang. Shuxiang said, “It has to be the high officer Qi Xi.” His senior steward heard about this and said, “Nothing that Yue Wangfu tells the ruler fails to be done! He sought to have you pardoned, and you, sir, refused. A pardon is something the high officer Qi Xi will not be able to accomplish, and yet you say it has to be done through him. How can it be?” Shuxiang said, “Yue Wangfu is one who follows the ruler. How can he accomplish this? The high officer Qi Xi, in recommending those outside his lineage, did not cast out his enemy; and in recommending those inside his lineage, he did not neglect his kin.595 How could I alone be passed over by him? As it says in the Odes, To the power of upright virtue Domains on four sides will submit.596

That fine man is an upright man.” Shuxiang’s predictions are fulfilled. Yue Wangfu implies Shuxiang’s guilt, while Qi Xi eloquently praises his indispensable talents and argues against guilt by association. The Prince of Jin asked Yue Wangfu about Shuxiang’s guilt. He replied, “He would not have abandoned his kin and probably played a role.” At that time Qi Xi was already old and had retired.597 He heard about this and rode in a courier-carriage to have an audience with Fan Gaib.598 He said, “It says in the Odes,

21.5c

Their beneficence for us is boundless; May sons and grandsons forever guard it.599

It says in the Documents, The sages have their plans and instructions, for which there is clear evidence and steady protection.600

598 The carriage Qi Xi rides, ri 馹, is probably the same as the courier-carriage (chuan­ che) mentioned in Cheng 5.4. His choice of the ri carriage emphasizes the urgency of his mission. Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 29.671) identifies the ri 馹 as yi 驛. 599 Maoshi 269, “Lie wen” 烈文, 18A.710–12. Qi Xi is using a hymn glorifying Zhou dynastic destiny to remind Fan Gai that a virtuous and talented man like Shuxiang is crucial for the continuation of just and glorious rule. 600 These lines are included in “Yin zheng” (Shangshu 7.102). For “Yin zheng,” see n. 428.

Lord Xiang

1085

夫謀而鮮過、惠訓不倦者，叔向有焉，社稷之固也，猶將十世宥之，以勸 能者。今壹不免其身，以棄社稷，不亦惑乎？鯀殛而禹興；伊尹放大甲 而相之，卒無怨色；管、蔡為戮，周公右王。若之何其以虎也棄社稷？子 為善，誰敢不勉？多殺何為？」 宣子說，與之乘，以言諸公而免之。不見叔向而歸，叔向亦不告免 焉而朝。 21.5d 初，叔向之母妬叔虎之母美而不使，其子皆諫其母。其母曰：「 深山大

澤，實生龍蛇。彼美，余懼其生龍蛇以禍女。女，敝族也。國多大寵，不 仁人間之，不亦難乎？余何愛焉？」使往視寢，生叔虎，美而有勇力，欒 懷子嬖之，故羊舌氏之族及於難。

601 The “single misstep” or “one thing” refers to Shuxiang’s being the half brother of Yangshe Hu, who was favored by Luan Ying. 602 Gun, the father of the legendary sage-king Yu, did not fulfill his charge of stopping the floods and was put to death by Shun. Yu succeeded where his father failed. 603 Yi Yin, the chief minister of Tang, the first Shang king, exiled Tang’s grandson, Taijia, to the Tong Palace for three years when he deemed Taijia unfit for kingship. Taijia showed no resentment after he was restored as king. 604 Guan Shu, Cai Shu, and the Zhou Duke were all sons of King Wen, brothers of King Wu, and uncles of King Cheng. The Zhou Duke quelled the rebellion of Guan Shu and Cai Shu and supported King Cheng. 605 In the first case, the son was not blamed for the father’s failure. In the second case, ruler and minister rose above rancor. In the third case, a minister is not blamed for his brothers’ rebellion. Qi Xi thus questions guilt by association and criticizes excessive resentment. 606 Qi Xi cannot go to court with the courier-carriage; hence, Fan Gai offers his carriage. 607 This story also appears in Lüshi chunqiu 21.1427, where it serves a broader argument about judicious rewards and punishment. The injustice of excessive punishment is said to be far worse than that of excessive rewards, a point also made in Xiang 26.10a.

1086

Zuo Tradition

Shuxiang is one who rarely errs in making plans and who tirelessly benefits us with instruction. He is the firm basis of the altars of our domain, and even his descendants ten generations hence should be pardoned so as to encourage men of talent. Is it not deluded if now you fail to spare his life because of a single misstep and, in doing so, abandon the altars of the domain?601 Gun was put to death but Yu was raised to office.602 Yi Yin exiled Taijia but later Yi Yin continued as Taijia’s minister, and to the end Taijia showed no resentment.603 Guan Shu and Cai Shu604 were executed, but their brother the Zhou Duke was the king’s chief helper.605 How can you, on account of Yangshe Hub, abandon the altars of the domain? If you do good, who will dare not to try their best? What is the point of putting so many to death?” Fan Gaib was pleased. Riding with Qi Xi in the same carriage, he spoke to the lord about the matter and had Shuxiang pardoned.606 Qi Xi returned without seeing Shuxiang, and Shuxiang, for his part, had not told him of his acquittal before he attended court.607 Yangshe Hu and Shuxiang are implicated through no apparent flaw in their characters or judgment. The beauty of Yangshe Hu’s mother is retrospectively presented as the cause of troubles for the Yangshe lineage. The femme fatale Xia Ji’s daughter, who marries Shuxiang, features in a similar argument thirty-eight years later (Zhao 28.2) in the account of the fall of the Yangshe lineage. Both prescient judgments come from Shuxiang’s mother, who might have been motivated by jealousy. References to possible jealousy are removed in her story in the chapter entitled “Benevolent Sagacity” (Renzhi 仁智) in Lienü zhuan 3.61–64. Earlier, Shuxiang’s mother was jealous of Yangshe Hu’s mother, who was beautiful but was not sent to wait on their husband. Her sons all remonstrated with their mother. Their mother said, “It is great mountains and deep marshes that produce dragons and snakes. She is beautiful, and I fear she will give birth to dragons and snakes to bring disaster upon you.608 Yours is a declining house, and the domain has many that enjoy great favor. Will it not be ruinous when ignoble persons set them against you? Why else would I begrudge her our husband?” Shuxiang’s mother thus sent her to wait on their husband in the bedchamber. She bore Yangshe Hu, who was handsome, valiant, and strong. Luan Yingc was enamored of him. That was why the Yangshe house came to grief.

21.5d

608 Shuxiang’s mother argues in Zhao 28.2b that great beauty is pernicious. Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 1,” 7.255–63, where the scribe Su lists the beautiful femme fatales in history and concludes that great beauty comes with a heart of evil; cf. Xunzi 12.278; Lunheng jiaoshi 66.958.

Lord Xiang

1087

21.5e 欒盈過於周，周西鄙掠之。辭於行人曰：「 天子陪臣盈得罪於王之守臣，

將逃罪。罪重於郊甸，無所伏竄，敢布其死：昔陪臣書能輸力於王室， 王施惠焉。其子黶不能保任其父之勞。大君若不棄書之力，亡臣猶有所 逃。若棄書之力，而思黶之罪，臣，戮餘也，將歸死於尉氏，不敢還矣。 敢布四體，唯大君命焉。」 王曰：「 尤而效之，其又甚焉。」使司徒禁掠欒氏者，歸所取焉，使 候出諸轘轅。 21.6(7) 冬，曹武公來朝，始見也。 21.7(8) 會於商任，錮欒氏也。

齊侯、衛侯不敬。叔向曰：「 二君者必不免。會朝，禮之經也；禮， 政之輿也；政，身之守也。怠禮，失政；失政，不立，是以亂也。」

609 That is, Luan Ying has offended Lord Ping of Jin. Fan Gai banished Luan Ying in the name of the Jin ruler. Du Yu (ZZ 34.592) thinks that “the subject guarding the king” (wang zhi shouchen 王之守臣) refers to Fan Gai, but it is hard to imagine that Luan Ying would be so complimentary toward his enemy. 610 According to Du Yu (ZZ 34.592), “distant outskirts” (dian 甸) is the area beyond “outskirts” (jiao 郊). In addressing his plaint to the king, Luan Ying has to politely efface the boundary between victim and offender. He thus describes his plight in terms of his own presumed guilt. 611 Literally, “to set forth four limbs.” Here we follow Du Yu’s reading (ZZ 34.593). Takezoe (16.46) suggests that the phrase means “to be ready for any punishments.” Both interpretations are plausible. 612 King Ling of Zhou is saying that Jin wronged the Luan lineage by persecuting it, and further mistreatment of Luan Ying would make the injustice even greater. Takezoe (16.46) suggests that the “wrong” refers to some unspecified crime of Luan Yan’s (Xiang 21.46). 613 For the term hou or houren (“attending officer”), see Xuan 12.2f. 614 Huanyuan 轘轅 Mountain was located northwest of Dengfeng County 登封縣 in present-day Henan. 615 Fan Gai is trying to bar Luan Ying from seeking refuge in other domains. Both Gongyang, Xiang 21 (20.257), and Guliang, Xiang 21 (16.157), record the birth of Confucius in an entry following the Shangren meeting, the last entry for this year: “In the eleventh month, on the gengzi day, Confucius was born” (Gongyang); “On the gengzi day, Confucius was born” (Guliang).

1088

Zuo Tradition

Luan Ying, fleeing persecution in Jin, is robbed in Zhou. He states his case with humility and dignity to the royal envoy, arguing that his grandfather’s merit outweighs his father’s possible culpability. When Luan Ying was passing through Zhou, a group on its western marches robbed him. He set forth his case to the king’s envoy: “I, Ying, the subject of one serving the Son of Heaven, have offended against the king’s subject, the guardian of his land.609 I had intended to escape the consequences of my guilt, but I am again found guilty at the distant outkirts of the king’s domain.610 With nowhere to hide or escape, I presume to set forth what may cost me death: formerly, the subject of your subject, Luan Shue, was able to fully exert himself on behalf of the royal house, and the king bestowed favors on him. His son, Luan Yanb, could not guard the fruits of his father’s toil. If the great ruler does not cast off the efforts of Luan Shue, then there is still a place to which this exiled subject can escape. If the great ruler casts off Luan Shue’s efforts and instead thinks of Luan Yanb’s guilt, then this subject, who barely escaped punishment, intends to face death under your sentencing officer. I dare not go back. I have presumed to hide nothing611 and will abide by nothing but the command of the great ruler.” The king said, “To imitate a wrong makes for an even greater wrong.”612 He sent the supervisor of conscripts to stop those who had been robbing Luan Ying and to make them return what they had taken. He sent the attending officer613 to lead him out by way of Huanyuan Mountain.614

21.5e

In winter, Lord Wu of Cao came to visit our court. This was the first time he had an audience with us.

21.6(7)

At the meeting at Shangren, Shuxiang predicts disaster for the rulers of Qi and Wei, which comes to pass in Xiang 25.2 and 26.2. The princes met at Shangren: this was to bar Luan Ying from refuge in other domains.615 The Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei were not respectful. Shuxiang said, “The two rulers will certainly not escape disaster. Meetings and court visits are the warp threads of ritual propriety; ritual propriety is the vehicle for government; government is the means for guarding one’s person. To debase ritual propriety is to lose control of government; to lose control of government is to fail to establish oneself as a person. On this account disorder will ensue.”

21.7(8)

Lord Xiang

1089

21.8 知起、中行喜、州綽、邢蒯出奔齊，皆欒氏之黨也。樂王鮒謂范宣子曰：

「 盍反州綽、邢蒯？勇士也。」宣子曰：「 彼欒氏之勇也，余何獲焉？」王 鮒曰：「 子為彼欒氏，乃亦子之勇也。」 齊莊公朝，指殖綽、郭最曰：「 是寡人之雄也。」州綽曰：「 君以為 雄，誰敢不雄？然臣不敏，平陰之役，先二子鳴。」莊公為勇爵，殖綽、 郭最欲與焉。州綽曰：「 東閭之役，臣左驂迫，還於門中，識其枚數，其 可以與於此乎？」公曰：「 子為晉君也。」對曰：「 臣為隸新，然二子者，譬 於禽獸，臣食其肉而寢處其皮矣。」

春秋 22.1 二十有二年，春，王正月，公至自會。 22.2 夏，四月。

616 This is already very close to the ethos of “keeping retainers” (yangshi 養士) during the Warring States period. It transpires that Fan Gai does not act on Yue Wangfu’s advice. 617 I.e., they are his “superb warriors.” The word xiong 雄 means literally “male birds,” and the bird metaphor continues with Zhou Chuo’s remark on “crowing” (in the lore of cockfights, the victor is supposedly the first to crow). Lord Zhuang may be specifically comparing the brave men at his court to fighting cocks. 618 See Xiang 18.3.

1090

Zuo Tradition

Brave men who belong to Luan Ying’s party flee to Qi. The question arises as to whether and how talent can be dissociated from loyalty. Fan Gai refuses to employ his enemy’s adherents, but these men protest their worth to their new master, the Qi ruler, also a former enemy. One of them, Zhou Chuo, boasts of his valor and composure during the Qi-Jin conflict at Ping­ yin. On the issue of valuing talent, see also Gongsun Guisheng’s famous speech in Xiang 26.10. Zhi Qi, Zhonghang Xi, Zhou Chuo, and Xing Kuai departed and fled to Qi. They were all partisans of the Luan lineage. Yue Wangfu said to Fan Gaic, “Why not have Zhou Chuo and Xing Kuai come back? These are valiant men.” Fan Gaib said, “Their valor is for the Luan lineage. What do I have to gain by it?” Wangfu said, “If you were to be their Luan Ying, they would then be your valiant men.”616 Lord Zhuang of Qi was holding court and pointed to Zhi Chuo and Guo Zui: “These are my fighting cocks.”617 Zhou Chuo said, “If you, my lord, consider them fighting cocks, who would dare to consider them otherwise? However, this subject, for all his lack of talent, crowed before these two at the Pingyin campaign.”618 Lord Zhuang created a special official rank to honor valiant men.619 Zhi Chuo and Guo Zui wanted to belong to it. Zhou Chuo said, “During the East Gate campaign, my flanking horse on the left, having been pressed to a halt, caused the chariot to turn around in the middle of the gate. I came to know the number of bosses upon the gate.620 Can I, because of that, share in this rank?” The lord said, “You were doing that for the Jin ruler.” He replied, “I am new as your servant. But as for these two men, if I may compare them to beasts—I wish I could eat their flesh and sleep on their pelts already!”621

21.8

LORD XIANG 22 (551 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-second year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord arrived from the meeting.

22.1

Summer, the fourth month.

22.2

619 This follows Du Yu’s (ZZ 34.593) reading. Takezoe (16.48) reads jue 爵 as “wine cups.” 620 See Xiang 18.3. 621 Literally, “I would have already eaten their flesh and slept on their pelts!” Zhou Chuo despises them because he shot Zhi Chuo and took both Zhi Chuo and Guo Zui prisoners in Xiang 18.3c. Similar (but more laconic) expressions conveying contempt come up in Xiang 28.9 and Zhao 3.10.

Lord Xiang

1091

22.3 秋，七月辛酉，叔老卒。 22.4(5) 冬，公會晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、薛伯、杞伯、

小邾子于沙隨。 22.5 公至自會。 22.6(6) 楚殺其大夫公子追舒。

左傳 22.1 二十二年，春，臧武仲如晉。雨，過御叔。御叔在其邑，將飲酒，曰：「 焉

用聖人？我將飲酒，而己雨行，何以聖為？」穆叔聞之，曰：「 不可使也， 而傲使人，國之蠹也。」令倍其賦。 22.2 夏，晉人徵朝于鄭。鄭人使少正公孫僑對，曰：

1092

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the xinyou day (16), Shu Lao died.

22.3

In winter, our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu at Shasui.

22.4(5)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

22.5

Chu put to death its high officer Gongzi Zhuishu (Zinan).

22.6(6)

ZUO

The Lu high officer Yu Shu is punished for mocking Zang Wuzhong’s assiduity. Yu Shu contrasts his pleasures (symbolized by drinking) with Zang’s reputation of wisdom that leads only to hard work. In the twenty-second year, in spring, Zang Wuzhong went to Jin. It was raining, and he passed by Yu Shu’s abode. Yu Shu, who happened to be in his settlement, was about to drink wine and said, “What use is there for a sage? I am about to drink, while he is traveling in the rain. What good does it do to be a sage?” Shusun Baoa heard this and said, “He cannot be employed, and yet he disdains the person sent as envoy.622 He is the vermin in the domain.” He ordered to have his levy doubled.

22.1

The Zheng minister Zichan blames Zheng’s vacillations (Xiang 8.7) on Jin’s ritual impropriety and implies that Zheng may claim the moral high ground precisely because of its victimization by Jin and Chu. Reminding Jin of Zheng’s earlier defiance at Xi (Xiang 9.5) and its submission at Xiaoyu (Xiang 11.5), Zichan combines resistance to Jin’s demands with the professed intent of loyalty. This is the first of Zichan’s rhetorical defenses of Zheng’s rights vis-à-vis Jin (see also Xiang 24.2a, 25.10, 28.8, 31.6, Zhao 16.3). In summer, the leaders of Jin summoned Zheng to attend court. The leaders of Zheng sent its junior director,623 Zichana, to reply as follows:

22.2

622 Du Yu (ZZ 35.598) links both shi 使 to the diplomatic mission: “He cannot be sent as envoy, and yet he disdains the person sent as envoy.” Our reading of the first shi as “use” or “employ” (shiyong 使用) follows Lu Deming (cited in Karlgren, gl. 589; Takezoe, 16.49). 623 Zichan ranked third among ministers in Zheng; see Xiang 19.9.

Lord Xiang

1093

在晉先君悼公九年，我寡君於是即位。即位八月，而我先大

夫子駟從寡君以朝于執事，執事不禮於寡君，寡君懼。因 是行也，我二年六月朝于楚，晉是以有戲之役。楚人猶競， 而申禮於敝邑。敝邑欲從執事，而懼為大尤，曰：「晉其謂 我不共有禮。」是以不敢攜貳於楚。我四年三月，先大夫子 蟜又從寡君以觀釁於楚，晉於是乎有蕭魚之役。謂我敝邑， 邇在晉國，譬諸草木，吾臭味也，而何敢差池？ 楚亦不競，寡君盡其土實，重之以宗器，以受齊盟。遂 帥群臣隨于執事，以會歲終。貳於楚者，子侯、石盂，歸而 討之。湨梁之明年，子蟜老矣，公孫夏從寡君以朝于君，見 於嘗酎，與執燔焉。間二年，聞君將靖東夏，四月，又朝以 聽事期。不朝之間，無歲不聘，無役不從。以大國政令之無 常，國家罷病，不虞荐至，無日不惕，豈敢忘職？

624 The first year of Lord Jian of Zheng was the ninth year of Lord Dao of Jin and the eighth year of Lord Xiang of Lu (565 Bce). 625 Zisi must have accompanied Lord Jian to Jin after the meeting at Xingqiu (Xiang 8.4). 626 Jin and Zheng disputed the terms of the covenant at Xi, and Jin was unable to make Zheng submit (Xiang 9.5). 627 Note the deliberate contrast between Jin treating the Zheng ruler “without ritual propriety” (buli 不禮) and Chu “extending ritually proper treatment” (shenli 申禮) to Zheng. 628 Zichan designates Jin as “the domain that abides by ritual propriety” as a reminder that Jin should be held to high moral standards. 629 It is part of Zichan’s diplomatic rhetoric that Zheng’s trip to Chu to attend court should be presented as an attempt to distance itself from Chu or perhaps even to observe Chu’s vulnerability and seek the possible opening for military action. 630 Ji Wuzi employs the same analogy in referring to the relationship between Jin and Lu (Xiang 8.8, n. 174). 631 For the Covenant of the Ju Dam (557 Bce), see Xiang 16.1. 632 Zichan is referring to Jin’s expedition against Qi, situated to the east of Jin. In 555 Bce, Zheng joined the princes to lay siege to Qi (Xiang 18.2), and two years later Zheng participated in the Covenant of Chanyuan (Xiang 20.2). 633 Zheng thus visited the Jin court two months prior to the meeting at Chanyuan.

1094

Zuo Tradition

It was in the ninth year of the reign of Lord Dao, former ruler of Jin, when our unworthy ruler acceded to his position.624 Eight months later, our former high officer Zisi accompanied our unworthy ruler to visit the court of those charged with government in Jin.625 They failed to treat our unworthy ruler with ritual propriety, and our unworthy ruler was fearful. It was because of this trip that, in the sixth month of the second year of our lord’s reign, we visited the Chu court. That was the reason that Jin undertook the Xi campaign.626 Chu was still strong, and extended ritually proper treatment to our humble settlement.627 We wished to follow those charged with government in Jin, but were afraid of incurring great blame. We said, “Jin will think that we were disrespectful toward the domain that abides by ritual propriety.”628 We thus did not dare waver in our allegiance by turning to Chu. In the third month of the fourth year of our lord’s reign, our former high officer Zijiao again accompanied our unworthy ruler to Chu to look for an opening for maneuvers.629 That was why Jin undertook the Xiaoyu campaign. We considered our humble settlement so close to Jin that, to take an analogy from plants, we are to Jin what fragrance is to flowers and fruits.630 How should we dare to diverge from them? Also, Chu was no longer strong. In order to take part in a Jinled covenant solemnized by fasting and purification, our unworthy ruler exhausted the produce of his land and in addition offered ancestral vessels. He thus led some of his subjects to follow those charged with government in Jin and attended the meeting at the year’s end in the Jin court. Upon our return we chastised Zihou and Shi Yu, who had shifted allegiance to Chu. The year following the Covenant of the Ju Dam, Zijiao retired on account of old age, and Zixia accompanied our unworthy ruler to visit the court of your ruler.631 He was received at the summer sacrifice that involved offerings of thrice-distilled spirits and took his share of the sacrificial meat. Two years passed, and we heard that your ruler was planning to pacify the Eastern Xia.632 In the fourth month, we again visited the court of Jin to await your command regarding the time of the meeting.633 In the intervals when there was no court visit, there has been no year in which we did not make an official visit to Jin, no campaign in which we did not follow Jin. As the policies and commands of your great domain are inconstant, our domain and patrimony are weakened and diminished. With unexpected troubles frequently coming upon us, there have been no days when we could let down our guard. How would we dare to forget our duties toward Jin?

Lord Xiang

1095

大國若安定之，其朝夕在庭，何辱命焉？若不恤其患， 而以為口實，其無乃不堪任命，而翦為仇讎？敝邑是懼，其 敢忘君命？委諸執事，執事實重圖之。 22.3 秋，欒盈自楚適齊。晏平仲言於齊侯曰：「 商任之會，受命於晉。今納欒

氏，將安用之？小所以事大，信也。失信，不立。君其圖之。」弗聽。退告 陳文子曰：「 君人執信，臣人執共。忠、信、篤、敬，上下同之，天之道也。 君自棄也，弗能久矣。」 22.4 九月，鄭公孫黑肱有疾，歸邑于公，召室老、宗人立段，而使黜官、薄

祭。祭以特羊，殷以少牢，足以共祀，盡歸其餘邑，曰：「 吾聞之：生於亂 世，貴而能貧，民無求焉，可以後亡。敬共事君與二三子。生在敬戒，不 在富也。」

634 Karlgren (gl. 529) relates “empty words” to Zheng’s distress: “But if you have no compassion for our distress, and instead regard it as empty complaints . . .” 635 Xiang 21.7. 636 The same line appears in Xiang 8.7a and Ai 7.4a. 637 Lord Zhuang of Qi is murdered three years later (Xiang 25.2).

1096

Zuo Tradition

If your great domain will grant us peace and stability, we will attend your court day and night. Why would you need to condescend to command us? But if you have no compassion for our distress, and instead fob us off with empty words,634 will that not make us unfit to bear your commands? Will you not be discarding us and turning us into enemies? This is what our humble domain fears. How would we dare to forget your ruler’s commands? We entrust this case to those charged with government in Jin, in the hope that they will give it serious consideration.

The Jin noble Luan Ying, persecuted by the Fan lineage (Xiang 21.5), flees to Qi, following his supporters who had already found refuge there (Xiang 21.8). Yan Ying urges their removal for fear of offending Jin, but the Qi ruler does not heed him. In autumn, Luan Ying went from Chu to Qi. Yan Yinga said to the Prince of Qi, “At the meeting at Shangren,635 we received the command from Jin. Now if we take Luan Ying in, how do we plan to use him? That by which the small domain serves the great one is good faith.636 If one loses good faith, one will not stand. You, my lord, should consider it.” The lord did not heed him. Yan Ying withdrew and told Chen Xuwua, “Those who would rule over men well hold on to good faith; those who would serve men well hold on to reverence. When those in high and low positions share loyalty, good faith, steadfastness, and reverence, it is the Way of Heaven. The ruler has abandoned what he owes himself. He cannot last for long.”637

22.3

The Zheng noble Gongsun Heigong (son of Ziyin and grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng), on his deathbed, seeks to protect his Yin lineage by making it less wealthy and powerful. Heigong’s ideas anticipate a similar argument by the Qi minister Yan Ying (Xiang 28.11a, 29.13e, Zhao 10.2c). In the ninth month, Gongsun Heigong of Zheng was ill. He returned his settlement to the lord. Having summoned his senior steward and ancestral attendant to establish Yin Duan as his successor, he made them reduce the number of his retainers and diminish the elaborateness of sacrifices. One single sheep was to be used for a regular sacrifice; a lesser set of animals, comprising only a sheep and a pig, was to be used for a grand sacrifice. He kept enough land to provide for the sacrifices and had the rest of the settlement all returned to the lord, saying, “I have heard that if high-placed men, being born in an age of disorder, can make themselves poor, so that the people make no demands of them, they will be able to perish later than others. Reverently serve the ruler and his various fine men. Survival depends on reverence and vigilance, not on wealth.”

22.4

Lord Xiang

1097



己巳，伯張卒。君子曰：「 善戒。《詩》曰： 慎爾侯度， 用戒不虞。

鄭子張其有焉。」 22.5(4) 冬，會于沙隨，復錮欒氏也。



欒盈猶在齊。晏子曰：「 禍將作矣。齊將伐晉，不可以不懼。」

22.6a(5) 楚觀起有寵於令尹子南，未益祿而有馬數十乘。楚人患之，王將討焉。

子南之子棄疾為王御士，王每見之，必泣。棄疾曰：「 君三泣臣矣，敢問 誰之罪也？」 王曰：「 令尹之不能，爾所知也。國將討焉，爾其居乎？」 對曰：「 父戮子居，君焉用之？洩命重刑，臣亦不為。」 王遂殺子南於朝，轘觀起於四竟。

638 Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.644–49. 639 That Guan Qi received emoluments rather than titles and ranks suggests that Guan Qi was a commoner. His possession of these horses thus went well beyond his station. 640 Qiji was King Kang’s cousin.

1098

Zuo Tradition

On the jisi day (25), Gongsun Heigongb died. The noble man said, “He excelled at urging vigiliance. As it says in the Odes, Pay heed to your manner and measure as prince, And in this way use vigilance against the unforeseen.638

Gongsun Heigonga of Zheng probably had such qualities!” The Qi minister Yan Ying repeats his earlier warning (Xiang 22.3) about impending Jin hostilities prompted by Luan Ying’s presence in Qi. A year later, Luan Ying returns to Jin with Qi help, and Qi attacks Jin in retaliation for the Pingyin campaign (Xiang 18.3). Yan Ying foresees the disastrous consequences of Qi aggression. In winter, the princes met at Shasui to try again to bar Luan Ying from refuge in other domains. Luan Ying was still in Qi. Yan Yingb said, “Disaster is about to rear its head. Qi is about to attack Jin. We cannot but be fearful.”

22.5(4)

The Chu chief minister, Zinan, favors a commoner who flaunts his consequence. For this and other unspecified crimes, King Kang of Chu executes him but wants to spare his son Qiji. Torn between filial duty and loyalty, Qiji kills himself. Chu rulers prune overreaching ministers, in contrast to Jin rulers, who have been sidelined by powerful lineages in Jin. Guan Qi of Chu found favor with the chief minister, Zinan. His official emoluments had not yet been increased; nonetheless, he had scores of teams of horses.639 The men of Chu were troubled by it, and the king planned to chastise Zinan and Guan Qi. Zinan’s son Qiji was in the king’s royal guard.640 The king always wept whenever he saw Qiji. Qiji said, “Three times now you have wept before me, my lord. Dare I ask whose crime it is?” The king said, “The chief minister’s malfeasance is well known to you. The domain plans to chastise him. Will you still stay if that happens?” He replied, “If the father is executed and the son stays, what can you, my lord, use the son for? But I will never reveal your command, lest I incur even greater punishment.”641 The king thus put Zinan to death at court and had chariots tear Guan Qi limb from limb at the place where roads from four directions converged.642

22.6a(5)

641 Qiji would have been guilty of betraying the king’s confidence had he disclosed his command. Had he communicated the king’s plan to Zinan, the latter might also have started an insurrection and incurred even greater punishment. 642 Following Karlgren, gl. 595. Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 35.600) different reading: “torn by chariots and circulated” (che lie yi xun 車裂以徇), which implies that the torn limbs were circulated among “territories in four directions” (sijing 四竟).

Lord Xiang

1099

子南之臣謂棄疾：「 請徙子尸於朝。」曰：「 君臣有禮，唯二三 子。」三日，棄疾請尸。王許之。既葬，其徒曰：「 行乎？」曰：「 吾與殺吾 父，行將焉入？」曰：「 然則臣王乎？」曰：「 棄父事讎，吾弗忍也。」遂縊 而死。 22.6b 復使薳子馮為令尹，公子齮為司馬，屈建為莫敖。有寵於薳子者八人，

皆無祿而多馬。他日朝，與申叔豫言，弗應而退。從之，入於人中。又從 之，遂歸。退朝，見之，曰：「 子三困我於朝，吾懼，不敢不見。吾過，子姑 告我，何疾我也？」 對曰：「 吾不免是懼，何敢告子？」 曰：「 何故？」 對曰：「 昔觀起有寵於子南，子南得罪，觀起車裂，何故不懼？」 自御而歸，不能當道。至，謂八人者曰：「 吾見申叔，夫子所謂生死 而肉骨也。知我者如夫子則可；不然，請止。」辭八人者，而後王安之。

643 Zinan’s retainers are proposing to steal Zinan’s corpse so that it can be buried with the proper rites. Qiji, however, does not wish to move Zinan’s corpse without the king’s permission. 644 Had King Kang not felt a personal attachment to Qiji and divulged his plans to him, Qiji could have sought refuge in another domain because he would not have been party to his father’s death.

1100

Zuo Tradition

Zinan’s retainers said to Qiji: “We beg to move the master’s corpse from the court.” Qiji said, “There is ritual propriety that obtains between ruler and subject. It will be up to the various ministers to decide.”643 Three days later, Qiji begged to have his father’s corpse, and the king gave his permission. After Zinan had been buried, his followers said, “Are you leaving?” Qiji said, “I was party to the killing of my father; if I leave, where can I go?” They said, “In that case, will you then be the king’s subject?” He said, “I cannot bear to abandon my father and serve the enemy.” He thereupon hanged himself.644 The new Chu chief minister, Wei Ziping, makes the same mistake as his predecessor and gathers favorites who parade their privileges. Shen Shuyu, who earlier advised Wei against accepting the appointment (Xiang 21.4), dramatizes his censure. The king again appointed Wei Ziping chief minister. Gongzi Yi became supervisor of the military, and Qu Jian became maréchal. Those who found favor with Wei Ziping were eight in number, and without exception they had no emolument but many horses. Some days later at court, Wei Ziping tried to talk to Shen Shuyu, but the latter withdrew without responding. Wei Ziping followed him, but he disappeared into the crowd. He again followed him, whereupon the latter returned home. After Wei Ziping had retired from court, he went to see Shen Shuyu and said, “Three times you have shunned me at court. I am fearful and do not dare not to see you. If I am at fault, you should just tell me. Why do you abhor me so?” He replied, “What I fear is that I will not escape disaster. How would I presume to tell you anything?” Wei Ziping said, “What is this all about?” He replied, “Formerly, Guan Qi gained favor with Zinan. Zinan was found guilty, and Guan Qi was torn apart with carriages. Why should I not be fearful?” Wei Ziping then drove the carriage himself and returned home, but he could not keep his chariot on the road properly.645 When he arrived, he said to the eight persons, “I had an audience with Shen Shuyub. It may be said of the master that he breathes life into the dead and puts flesh on bleached bones. Those among you who know me as the master does can stay. Otherwise, please go.” Only after he had dismissed these eight men did the king feel at peace with him.

22.6b

645 Wei drives home himself presumably because he is eager to disband his favorites, but he is so preoccupied with Shen Shuyu’s warning that he cannot drive his carriage properly.

Lord Xiang

1101

22.7 十二月，鄭游眅將歸晉，未出竟，遭逆妻者，奪之，以館于邑。丁巳，其夫

攻子明，殺之，以其妻行。 子展廢良而立大叔，曰：「 國卿，君之貳也，民之主也，不可以茍。 請舍子明之類。」求亡妻者，使復其所。使游氏勿怨。曰：「 無昭惡也。」

春秋 23.1 二十有三年，春，王二月癸酉朔，日有食之。 23.2(1) 三月己巳，杞伯匄卒。 23.3 夏，邾畀我來奔。 23.4 葬杞孝公。 23.5(2) 陳殺其大夫慶虎及慶寅。 23.6 陳侯之弟黃自楚歸于陳。 23.7(3) 晉欒盈復入于晉，入于曲沃。 23.8(4) 秋，齊侯伐衛，遂伐晉。 23.9(4) 八月，叔孫豹帥師救晉，次于雍榆。 23.10(5) 己卯，仲孫速卒。 23.11(5) 冬，十月乙亥，臧孫紇出奔邾。

646 Dingsi was the fourteenth day of the eleventh month. The “twelfth month” above might be a mistake for “eleventh month.” 647 We may surmise that Liang is also suspected of being ruthless like his father.

1102

Zuo Tradition

The Zheng noble You Fan abuses his power by taking away the wife of a presumably lower-ranking man, who kills him. The Zheng chief minister, Gongsun Shezhi, pardons the killer and establishes You Fan’s younger brother You Ji as head of the You lineage. In the twelfth month, You Fan of Zheng was about to return to Jin. Before he passed beyond the border of the domain, he encountered someone escorting home his new bride. He seized the bride and lodged her in his settlement. On the dingsi day,646 the bride’s husband attacked You Fana, killed him, and, taking back his wife, went away. Gongsun Shezhia deposed You Fan’s son Liang and instead established You Jia, the oldest of You Fan’s younger brothers, as his successor. He said, “A minister of the domain is the ruler’s second and the master of the people. One cannot be careless about his appointment. Let us cast aside You Fan’sa kind.”647 He sought the man who had lost his wife and had him return home.648 He made sure the You lineage did not resent him, saying, “Do not make a wrongdoing even more flagrant.”

22.7

LORD XIANG 23 (550 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-third year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the guiyou day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.

23.1

In the third month, on the jisi day (28), Gai, the Liege of Qǐ, died.

23.2(1)

In summer, Biwo of Zhu came in flight.

23.3

Lord Xiao of Qǐ was buried.

23.4

Chen put to death its high officers Qing Hu and Qing Yin.

23.5(2)

Huang, the younger brother of the Prince of Chen, went home from Chu to Chen.

23.6

Luan Ying of Jin again entered Jin. He entered Quwo.

23.7(3)

In autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked Wei. He then attacked Jin.

23.8(4)

In the eighth month, Shusun Bao led out troops, went to the aid of Jin, and set up camp at Yongyu.649

23.9(4)

On the jimao day (10), Zhongsun Su (Meng Zhuangzi) died. In winter, in the tenth month, on the yihai day (7), Zangsun He (Zhang Wuzhong) departed and fled to Zhu.

23.10(5) 23.11(5)

648 Having killed You Fan, that man presumably fled Zheng. 649 Yongyu 雍榆 was located in Jin southwest of present-day Jun County 浚縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

1103

23.12(6) 晉人殺欒盈。 23.13(7) 齊侯襲莒。

左傳 23.1(2) 二十三年，春，杞孝公卒，晉悼夫人喪之。平公不徹樂，非禮也。禮，為

鄰國闕。 23.2(5) 陳侯如楚，公子黃愬二慶於楚，楚人召之。使慶樂往，殺之。慶氏以陳

叛。夏，屈建從陳侯圍陳。陳人城，板隊而殺人。役人相命，各殺其長， 遂殺慶虎、慶寅。楚人納公子黃。君子謂慶氏不義，不可肆也。故《書》 曰：「 惟命不于常。」 23.3a(7) 晉將嫁女于吳，齊侯使析歸父媵之，以藩載欒盈及其士，納諸曲沃。欒

盈夜見胥午而告之。對曰：「 不可。天之所廢，誰能興之？子必不免。吾 非愛死也，知不集也。」

650 Lord Ping’s mother, the widow of Lord Dao, was the younger sister of Lord Xiao of Qǐ. Her marriage to Lord Dao was arranged in 573 Bce (Cheng 18.7). 651 Wooden frames holding pounded earth between them were used in the construction of city walls. 652 The translation follows Du Yu’s reading (ZZ 35.602). Takezoe (17.3) suggests that the plank fell down and killed someone. But it is less obvious why that accident should lead to the workmen’s insurrection. 653 Shangshu, “Kang gao,” 14.206. Fan Xie quotes the same line during the battle of Yanling (Cheng 16.5k). Cf. Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.536: “Heaven’s Mandate is not constant.” 654 Takezoe (5.35, 12.64–65) suggests that ying 媵 can sometimes mean just “escort” and can apply to either a man or a woman: “the Prince of Qi sent Xi Guifu to escort her (the Jin lady).” 655 Luan Ying sought refuge in Qi the year before, much to Yan Ying’s chagrin (Xiang 22.3). Here Qi smuggles Luan Ying into Jin to foment disorder there. Du Yu (ZZ 35.602) claims that Quwo was Luan Ying’s settlement, but as Jin’s former capital, Quwo should not have become a minister’s settlement. It is possible that Quwo covered a large area and had subdivisions, one of which became Luan’s settlement. There could also have been two places named Quwo, one in Shanxi and one in Henan, as Zhang Qi suggests in his study of geography in Zhanguo ce (Yang, 3:1073; Takezoe, 17.3).

1104

Zuo Tradition

Jin leaders put Luan Ying to death.

23.12(6)

The Prince of Qi made a surprise attack on Ju.

23.13(7)

ZUO

Lord Ping of Jin is criticized for failing to observe mourning for the ruler of a neighboring domain who was also his maternal uncle. On the occasions that call for the cessation of musical performances, see also Cheng 5.4, Xiang 26.10, and Zhao 9.5. In the twenty-third year, in spring, Lord Xiao of Qǐ died. The widow of Lord Dao of Jin went into mourning for him. Lord Ping did not stop the usual musical performances. This was not in accordance with ritual propriety. According to ritual, music should be suspended on the occasion of the death of a ruler of a neighboring domain.650

23.1(2)

Gongzi Huang of Chen, slandered by the Qing lineage (Xiang 20.4), brings about the latter’s defeat with Chu’s help. An insurrection of workmen abused by the Qing lineage contributes to their downfall. The Prince of Chen went to Chu. Gongzi Huang complained about Qing Hu and Qing Yin at the Chu court, and the leaders of Chu summoned them. They had Qing Yue go to Chu, and he was put to death. The Qing lineage used Chen as a base for revolt. In summer, Qu Jian went with the Prince of Chen and laid siege to Chen. The men of Chen fortified their city. The frame collapsed,651 and leaders of the Qing lineage put some workmen to death.652 The workmen passed orders to one another, and each group of men killed their respective chief, and then they killed Qing Hu and Qing Yin. The leaders of Chu restored Gongzi Huang to his domain. The noble man said that the Qing lineage was undutiful: its excesses could not be left unchecked. That is why it says in the Documents, “It is the Mandate that does not remain constant.”653

23.2(5)

Luan Ying returns to Jin through Qi support. After confirming his retainers’ loyalty, he emerges from hiding. The Jin ruler was about to marry one of his daughters to the Wu ruler. The Prince of Qi sent Xi Guifu to bring Qi ladies to serve as secondary wives654 and used a screened carriage to convey Luan Ying and his retainers to Jin, installing them in Quwo.655 Luan Ying met with Xu Wu by night and told him about his plans. Xu Wu replied, “This will not do. Who can raise up what Heaven has cast down? You, sir, will certainly not escape disaster. It is not that I begrudge death. I know this plan will not come to fruition.”

23.3a(7)

Lord Xiang

1105

盈曰：「 雖然，因子而死，吾無悔矣。我實不天，子無咎焉。」許 諾。伏之而觴曲沃人，樂作，午言曰：「 今也得欒孺子何如？」對曰：「 得 主而為之死，猶不死也。」皆歎，有泣者。爵行，又言。皆曰：「 得主，何貳 之有！」盈出，遍拜之。 23.3b 四月，欒盈帥曲沃之甲，因魏獻子，以晝入絳。初，欒盈佐魏莊子於下

軍，獻子私焉，故因之。趙氏以原、屏之難怨欒氏。韓、趙方睦。中行氏 以伐秦之役怨欒氏，而固與范氏和親。知悼子少，而聽於中行氏。程鄭 嬖於公。唯魏氏及七輿大夫與之。 樂王鮒侍坐於范宣子。或告曰：「 欒氏至矣。」宣子懼。桓子曰： 「 奉君以走固宮，必無害也。且欒氏多怨，子為政，欒氏自外，子在位，其 利多矣。既有利權，又執民柄，將何懼焉？欒氏所得，其唯魏氏乎，而可 強取也。夫克亂在權，子無懈矣！」

656 Luan Ying is referred to as Luan Ruzi 欒孺子. The term ruzi usually means “youth,” but in some cases it also means “successor,” without implying youth. Luan Ying was already assistant commander of the lower army in 555 Bce (Xiang 18.3), so he could not have been that young. We may surmise that these retainers in Quwo served Luan Yan before and thus regarded Luan Ying as the “successor” or “the junior master.” 657 Wei Xi (Takezoe, 17.4) notes Luan Ying’s perfect timing. Xu Wu’s questions, twice posed, have stirred up strong emotions, which may ebb if Luan Ying waits longer. 658 When Zhao Tong and Zhao Kuo were accused of staging a rebellion in 583 Bce, the Luan and Xi lineages confirmed the charges against them. The Zhao lineage was almost completely destroyed (Cheng 8.6). 659 In 583 Bce, Han Jue saved the Zhao house by convincing Lord Jing of Jin that Zhao Wu should continue the Zhao lineage (Cheng 8.6). He acknowledged nine years later, in the context of another argument, that he had been brought up by the Zhao lineage (Cheng 17.10). When Lord Dao appointed Han Qi (Han Jue’s son) commander of the upper army in 560 Bce, he declined in favor of Zhao Wu (Xiang 13.3). 660 In the conflict with Qin in 559 Bce (“Campaign of Changes and Procrastinations”), Zhonghang Yan, assisted by Fan Gai, tried to lead the army to advance, but Luan Yan, Luan Ying’s father, was insubordinate and turned back with the lower army (Xiang 14.3). 661 Zhi Daozi, the grandson of Zhi Ying, was seventeen at the time. Recall that Zhi and Zhonghang were lineages of the Xun house. 662 Cheng Zheng belonged to a branch lineage of the Zhonghang line. 663 For the term “seven high officers of the chariots” (qiyu dafu 七輿大 夫), see also Xi 10.3 (Yang, 1:336). 664 The name “Gu” 固 suggests that the palace was fortified and well guarded. Being with Lord Ping of Jin allows Fan Gai to present his side as the legitimate defender of the lord’s house. 665 The “eight handles” (babing 八柄) in Zhouli 2.28 refer to enumerated rewards and punishments.

1106

Zuo Tradition

Luan Yinga said, “Nevertheless, so long as I can rely on you, even if I die, I will have no regrets. I am the one who lacks Heaven’s favor. You will bear no blame.” Xu Wu agreed to his request and, having concealed him, invited the men of Quwo to a feast. When the music struck up, Xu Wu said, “How would it be if we could have the junior Luan master656 with us here today?” They replied, “If we had our master and could die for him, it would be as if we were undying even in death.” They all sighed, and there were some who wept. As the cups circulated, Xu Wu spoke again. They all said, “If we had our master, how could we have another allegiance!” Luan Yinga came out and bowed to all of them.657 What follows is a brief survey of how the lines are drawn in the struggle between the powerful lineages in Jin. The Han, Zhao, and Zhonghang lineages all resent the Luan lineage because of earlier grudges (Cheng 8.6, Xiang 14.3). Wei Shu alone supports Luan Ying and helps him reenter Jiang, the Jin capital. In the fourth month, relying on the help of Wei Shua, Luan Ying led his armored Quwo followers and entered Jiang in broad daylight. Earlier, Luan Ying had assisted Wei Jianga, Wei Shu’s father, in the lower army. Wei Shub had private ties with Luan Ying, and that was why the latter relied on him. The Zhao lineage bore a grudge against the Luan lineage on account of the disaster suffered by Zhao Tonga and Zhao Kuob.658 This was just when the Han and Zhao lineages were on good terms.659 The Zhonghang lineage bore a grudge against the Luan lineage because of the campaign against Qin but had always had peaceful and intimate relations with the Fan lineage.660 Zhi Daozi was young and followed the leadership of the Zhonghang lineage.661 Cheng Zheng was the lord’s favorite.662 Only the Wei lineage and the seven high officers of the chariots supported the Luan lineage.663 Yue Wangfu was sitting in attendance on Fan Gaic. Someone told him, “Luan Yingd has arrived.” Fan Gaib was fearful. Yue Wangfua said, “Take the ruler under your care and hurry to the Fortified Palace.664 Then certainly no harm will come to you. Moreover, the Luan lineage has had many enemies, while you have been in charge of government. Luan Ying is coming from outside, while you are in the position of power inside. The advantages of this are many indeed! Since you have the advantage and the authority and moreover hold the handle of reward and punishment for the people,665 why should you be fearful? As for the support that the Luan lineage has garnered, is it not limited to the Wei lineage alone? Even that we can wrest from them by force. Overcoming disorder depends entirely upon exercising authority. You are not to be negligent!”

23.3b

Lord Xiang

1107

23.3c 公有姻喪，王鮒使宣子墨縗、冒、絰，二婦人輦以如公，奉公以如固宮。

范鞅逆魏舒，則成列既乘，將逆欒氏矣。趨進，曰：「 欒氏帥賊以入，鞅 之父與二三子在君所矣，使鞅逆吾子。鞅請驂乘。」持帶，遂超乘。右撫 劍，左援帶，命驅之出。僕請，鞅曰：「 之公。」宣子逆諸階，執其手，賂 之以曲沃。 初，斐豹，隸也，著於丹書。欒氏之力臣曰督戎，國人懼之。斐豹 謂宣子曰：「 苟焚丹書，我殺督戎。」宣子喜，曰：「 而殺之，所不請於君 焚丹書者，有如日！」乃出豹而閉之。督戎從之。踰隱而待之，督戎踰入， 豹自後擊而殺之。 23.3d 范氏之徒在臺後，欒氏乘公門。宣子謂鞅曰：「 矢及君屋，死之！」鞅

用劍以帥卒，欒氏退，攝車從之。遇欒樂，曰：「 樂免之。死，將訟女於 天。」樂射之，不中；又注，則乘槐本而覆。或以戟鉤之，斷肘而死。欒魴 傷。欒盈奔曲沃。晉人圍之。

666 The term yinsang 姻喪 refers to mourning for relatives related to the lord’s house by marriage. In this case, the lord is mourning for his uncle, the Lord of Qǐ (Xiang 23.1). 667 Fan Gai is disguised as one of the female attendants of Lord Dao’s widow presumably because he fears that Luan Ying has supporters or informers inside the capital or even the palaces. Female disguise is also used in Cheng 17.6 and Ai 15.5. 668 The alternative reading, “two women pulled the carriage and went to the lord,” seems implausible. 669 Du Yu (ZZ 35.603) punctuates the text differently: “I beg leave to take the third place in your chariot and to hold the strap” 鞅請驂乘持帶. Yu Yue (cited in Takezoe, 17.7) argues convincingly that it is by holding on to Wei Shu’s belt—though dai 帶 probably refers to the chariot’s strap—that Fan Yang sprang into the chariot. 670 Crimes that resulted in a person being branded as a slave were recorded in red ink on bamboo slips. 671 Fan Gai is saying that as Luan Ying and his men shoot from the gate at the lord’s abode, Fan Yang should be prepared to die defending it. 672 Shen Qinhan (Yang, 3:1076) glosses sheche 攝車 as chaosheng 超乘, “to spring into a carriage or chariot.” 673 Although Fan is the one pursuing the men of the Luan lineage, Luan Yue has put him in a disadvantageous position.

1108

Zuo Tradition

Following Yue Wangfu’s counsel, Fan Gai, disguised as a woman in mourning, goes to the Jin ruler’s palace. Combining coercion with enticement (the promise of Luan Ying’s erstwhile settlement), Fan Gai brings Wei Shu over to his side. He also promises to erase all records of Fei Bao’s crime and enslavement when Fei offers to kill the strongman among Luan’s retainers. The lord was in mourning for his maternal uncle.666 Yue Wangfub had Fan Gaib wear black hempen mourning clothes, a black scarf, and a black girdle.667 He then rode in a hand-drawn carriage with two women and went to the lord668 and, bringing the lord with him, made his way to the Fortified Palace. By the time Fan Yang went to meet Wei Shu, the latter’s soldiers had formed ranks and were already seated in drawn-up chariots, all prepared to meet Luan Yingd. Fan Yang hastened forward and said, “Luan Ying has entered the capital at the head of a band of brigands. My father and various fine men are already with the ruler in his palace. He has sent me to meet you, sir. I beg leave to take the third place in your chariot.” He had been holding the mounting strap, and with these words he sprang into the chariot.669 Stroking his sword with his right hand and grasping the strap in his left, he commanded that they should leave the ranks at full gallop. The chariot driver asked where they were going, and Fan Yangd said, “To the lord.” Fan Gaib met them at the steps, held Wei Shu’s hands, and offered to give him Quwo. Earlier, Fei Bao had been a slave, his crime recorded in a red writ.670 Luan Ying had a strong retainer named Du Rong, whom the inhabitants of the capital feared. Fei Bao said to Fan Gaia, “If you will just burn the red writ, I will kill Du Rong.” Fan Gaia was pleased and said, “If you kill him, then should I fail to request that the ruler burn the red writ, may the sun bear witness against me!” He thus sent Fei Baoa forth and closed the palace gate. Du Rong went after him. Fei Baoa jumped over a low wall, hid there and waited for him. Then, when Du Rong jumped over, Fei Baoa struck him from behind and killed him.

23.3c

Fan Yang shows his valor as he pushes back the Luan fighters. Luan Ying flees to Quwo. The followers of the Fan lineage stayed behind the terrace as men of the Luan lineage climbed up the lord’s gate. Fan Gaia said to Fan Yangd, “If their arrows reach the ruler’s chamber, go and fight to the death.”671 Fan Yangd wielded his sword as he led the soldiers. As the men of the Luan lineage were retreating, Fan Yang sprang into a chariot and pursued them.672 Met by Luan Yue, he said, “Yue, have done! If I die, I will accuse you in heaven.”673 Luan Yue shot an arrow at him and missed. When he was putting another arrow on the bowstring, his chariot hit the roots of a locust tree and overturned. Someone caught him by the hook of his dagger-axe and cut off his arm, whereupon he died. Luan Fang was wounded. Luan Ying fled to Quwo, and the men of Jin laid siege to it.

23.3d

Lord Xiang

1109



23.4a(8, 9)

秋，齊侯伐衛。先驅，穀榮御王孫揮，召揚為右；申驅，成秩御莒恆，申 鮮虞之傅摯為右。曹開御戎，晏父戎為右。貳廣，上之登御邢公，盧蒲 癸為右；啟，牢成御襄罷師，狼蘧疏為右；胠，商子車御侯朝，桓跳為 右；大殿，商子游御夏之御寇，崔如為右；燭庸之越駟乘。自衛將遂伐 晉。

23.4b 晏平仲曰：「 君恃勇力，以伐盟主。若不濟，國之福也。不德而有功，憂

必及君。」 崔杼諫曰：「 不可。臣聞之：『小國間大國之敗而毀焉，必受其咎。』 君其圖之。」弗聽。 陳文子見崔武子，曰：「 將如君何？」武子曰：「 吾言於君，君弗聽 也。以為盟主，而利其難。群臣若急，君於何有？子姑止之。」 文子退，告其人曰：「 崔子將死乎！謂君甚而又過之，不得其死。 過君以義，猶自抑也，況以惡乎？」

674 The text can be rendered literally as “Shen Xianyu’s Fuzhi.” For a similar usage, see Cheng 16.5. 675 Yang (3:1076) notes that the different sections of the army are named after body parts—thus, the left wing is called qi 啟 or 䏿, meaning the intestines; the right wing is called qu 胠 or A, meaning the underarm area; the rear is called dian 殿 (or tun 臀 in modern Chinese), meaning buttocks. Both qi and qu also mean “open,” for these are the left and right flanks of the army, which “open up” on the side. 676 In the parallel passage in Yanzi chunqiu 3.175, Yan Ying addresses this speech to Lord Zhuang, whose heedless rejection of Yan Ying’s remonstrance leads directly to his assassination. For other examples of forebodings about the consequences of victory, see Zuozhuan, Cheng 16.5 and Xiang 8.3. 677 Chen Xuwu implies that Cui Zhu’s subversive intent is already evident. Cui Zhu seems to suggest that Qi ministers might have to depose Lord Zhuang to appease Jin. 678 We follow Lin Yaosou (cited in Karlgren, gl. 604). Alternatively, we can read guo 過 as “to fault” (rather than “to exceed”): “Even if one faults the ruler by the standard of dutifulness, one should still restrain oneself. How much more so when one faults the ruler from base motives!”

1110

Zuo Tradition

Qi attacks Jin by way of Wei. Details on the structure of the command, not given to this extent for other Qi military operations, suggest the importance of this campaign. In autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked Wei. In the vanguard, Gu Rong drove the chariot for Wangsun Hui, while Shao Yang was the spearman on his right. In the second line of attack, Cheng Zhi drove the chariot for Ju Heng, while Shen Xianyu’s son Fuzhi was the spearman on his right.674 Cao Kai drove the chariot for Lord Zhuang, while Yan Furong was the spearman on his right. In the lord’s secondary chariot, Shang Zhideng was the driver of the Lord of Xing, while Lupu Gui was the spearman on his right. On the left wing, Lao Cheng drove the chariot for Xiang Pishi, while Lang Qushu was the spearman on his right. On the right wing, Shang Ziche drove the chariot for Hou Zhao, while Huan Tiao was the spearman on his right. In the rear, Shang Ziyou drove the chariot for Yukou of Xia, while Cui Ru was the spearman on his right and Yue of Zhuyong was the fourth person in the chariot. Qi thereupon planned to attack Jin from Wei.675

23.4a(8, 9)

Exploiting unrest in Jin, Lord Zhuang of Qi turns against earlier covenants (Xiang 20.2, 21.7, 22.5) to attack Jin, in retaliation for Qi’s defeat in the Pingyin campaign (Xiang 18.3). Yan Ying predicts disaster, and Cui Zhu’s halfhearted remonstrance presages his assassination of Lord Zhuang two years later (Xiang 25.2). Yan Yinga said, “The ruler is relying on valor and strength as he attacks the covenant chief. If he fails, it will be good fortune for the domain. If, lacking virtue, he nevertheless achieves success, grief will surely come to him.”676 Cui Zhu remonstrated with the Qi ruler, “This will not do. I have heard, ‘If a small domain exploits a great domain’s troubles to wreak havoc there, it will certainly bring baleful consequences.’ You, my lord, should consider this.” The Qi ruler did not heed him. Chen Xuwua had an audience with Cui Zhua and said, “What should we do with the ruler?” Cui Zhub said, “I have already spoken to the ruler, but he would not listen to me. Having acknowledged Jin as covenant chief, he is yet taking advantage of its troubles. If all his subjects are caught up in the urgency of the matter, then what do they care about the ruler? You, sir, should simply desist.” Chen Xuwub withdrew and told his followers, “Cui Zhue will probably die! He called the ruler excessive, yet his fault exceeds the ruler’s.677 He will not die a natural death. Even if one exceeds the ruler in the sense of duty, one should still restrain oneself. How much more so when one exceeds the ruler in deviance!”678

23.4b

Lord Xiang

1111

齊侯遂伐晉，取朝歌。為二隊，入孟門，登大行。張武軍於熒庭， 戍郫邵，封少水，以報平陰之役，乃還。趙勝帥東陽之師以追之，獲晏 氂。八月，叔孫豹帥師救晉，次于雍榆，禮也。 23.5a 季武子無適子，公彌長，而愛悼子，欲立之。訪於申豐曰：「 彌與紇，吾

皆愛之，欲擇才焉而立之。」申豐趨退，歸，盡室將行。他日，又訪焉。對 曰：「 其然，將具敝車而行。」乃止。 訪於臧紇。臧紇曰：「 飲我酒，吾為子立之。」 季氏飲大夫酒，臧 紇為客。既獻，臧孫命北面重席，新樽絜之。召悼子，降，逆之。大夫皆 起。及旅，而召公鉏，使與之齒。季孫失色。

679 Zhaoge 朝歌 was located in present-day Qi County 淇縣, Henan. 680 Xingting 熒庭, identified as the same as Xingting 陘庭 mentioned in Huan 2.8, was located in present-day Yicheng County 翼城縣, Shandong. The military monument at Xingting probably also involved some sort of mass grave for enemy soldiers, like the one mentioned in Xuan 12.2i. 681 Pishao 郫邵 is the same as Pi 郫, mentioned in Wen 6.5, see n. 100. 682 Today the Shao River 少水 is called the Qin River 沁水; it is a tributary of the Yellow River in Shanxi. 683 In Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.198–200, the Lu minister Zifu Huibo (Meng Jiao) reminds Han Qi of this episode as an example of Lu’s support of Jin. 684 “Mi” is Gongchu’s given name, and “He” is Daozi’s given name. Gongchu and Daozi (Ji Daozi), the names we are using for the translation, are posthumous honorifics. Gongchu became the name of a branch lineage of the Jisun lineage. Daozi was established as heir but died before he could be made minister. 685 Shen Feng was one of Ji Wuzi’s retainers (jiachen 家臣). He did not want to be party to Ji Wuzi’s plan, which he apparently regarded as unjustified and dangerous, and thus withdrew without giving an answer. 686 The number and direction of the mats were markers of a person’s status. According to Yili 10.100–102, lords sit on three mats and officials on two. The north side, where the person sitting will face south, was the position of honor. Zang Wuzhong is treating Ji Daozi as if he were the successor of Ji Wuzi.

1112

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Qi thereupon attacked Jin and took Zhaoge.679 He divided his army into two branches, one entering the narrow road of Mengmen, the other ascending the Taihang Pass. In retaliation for the Jin campaign at Pingyin, he established a military monument at Xingting,680 garrisoned Pishao,681 and set up a giant grave mound at the Shao River.682 He then returned to Qi. Zhao Sheng led the army of Dongyang to pursue him and took Yan Li (Yan Ying’s son) captive. In the eighth month, Shusun Bao led out troops, went to the aid of Jin, and set up camp at Yongyu.683 This was in accordance with ritual propriety. Zang Wuzhong, known for his sagacity (Xiang 19.4, 21.2, 22.1, 23.8), here uses his cleverness for a dubious cause. He stages a dramatic legitimation of Ji Wuzi’s establishment of his younger son as his heir. The inversion of the order of succession in the Ji lineage will result in similar breaches in the Meng and the Zang lineages. Ji Wuzi had no son by his principal wife. Gongchua was the eldest of his sons, but Ji Wuzi loved Daozi and wanted to establish him as heir. He conferred with Shen Feng: “I love both Mi and He 684 and wish to choose the more talented of the two to be established as my heir.” Shen Feng hastily withdrew, returned home, and prepared to move away with his entire household.685 A few days later, Ji Wuzi conferred with Shen Feng again. The latter replied, “If it is to be like this, I intend to prepare my humble carriage and be on my way.” Ji Wuzi thus desisted. Ji Wuzi conferred with Zang Wuzhonga. Zang Wuzhonga said, “Entertain me with wine, and I will establish him as heir for you, sir.” Ji Wuzia entertained the high officers with wine, and Zang Wuzhonga was the honored guest. After one round of wine offering, Zang Wuzhongc ordered that one mat be stacked upon another at the north end of the hall and that new cups be washed. He summoned Daozi and came down the steps to meet him. The high officers all rose.686 Only when it came to the moment when host and guests were inviting one another to drink did he summon Gongchu, and he had him sit with the other guests according to the order of age. Ji Wuzi blanched.687

23.5a

687 After several rounds of polite exchanges when the host, the aide to the hosts, the master of ceremonies, and the guests took turns to express their felicity and invite the others to drink, the more humble guests would also be summoned. Then a more general invitation to drink and to sit according to age and rank (lü 旅, lüchou 旅酬, or chou 酬、醻) would ensue. Gongchu is thus treated like an officer of lower rank or like any other son born of a concubine. Du Yu (ZZ 35.605) suggests that Ji Wuzi blanches because he is afraid that Gongchu will not submit to his sudden displacement. But it is just as likely that Ji Wuzi is simply shocked by this sudden turn of events. Although Zang Wuzhong is supposedly fulfilling Ji Wuzi’s own wish, the latter is reduced to being a helpless observer. This is also an uncomfortable reminder that a person’s status in life is defined through other people’s perception and recognition rather than birthright or intrinsic merit.

Lord Xiang

1113

23.5b 季氏以公鉏為馬正，慍而不出。閔子馬見之，曰：「 子無然。禍福無門，

唯人所召。為人子者，患不孝，不患無所。敬共父命，何常之有？若能孝 敬，富倍季氏可也。姦回不軌，禍倍下民可也。」公鉏然之，敬共朝夕， 恪居官次。季孫喜，使飲己酒，而以具往，盡舍旃。故公鉏氏富，又出為 公左宰。 23.5c(10) 孟孫惡臧孫，季孫愛之。孟氏之御騶豐點好羯也，曰：「 從余言，必為孟

孫。」再三云，羯從之。孟莊子疾，豐點謂公鉏：「 苟立羯，請讎臧氏。」 公鉏謂季孫曰：「 孺子秩固其所也。若羯立，則季氏信有力於臧氏矣。」 弗應。己卯，孟孫卒。公鉏奉羯立于戶側。季孫至，入，哭而出，曰：「 秩 焉在？」公鉏曰：「 羯在此矣。」季孫曰：「 孺子長。」公鉏曰：「 何長之 有？唯其才也。且夫子之命也。」遂立羯。秩奔邾。

688 On how misfortune and good fortune are changeable and mutually dependent, see also Zhanguo ce, “Chu 4,” 17.551; Xunzi 27.608; Huainanzi 18.587; Shiji 128.3233. 689 Min Zima is urging Gongchu to hold on to the principle of reverence and filial piety, because other things are inconstant and unpredictable. Yu Yue (Karlgren, gl. 606) reads fu 富 (“wealth”) as fu 福 (“good fortune”), which is also plausible. 690 Alternatively: “I will, with your permission, wreak vengeance against Zang Wuzhong” (Karlgren, gl. 608). Throughout this conversation, Meng Xiaobo is referred to by his given name “Jie.” Meng Xiaobo, the name we have chosen for the translation, is his posthumous honorific. 691 On the use of the term ruzi (“junior”) to refer to the successor, see n. 656 above. 692 According to Du Yu (ZZ 35.505), Gongchu is arguing that if Zang Wuzhong proved his power by following Ji Wuzi’s wish and changing his successor, Ji Wuzi could go one step further by changing the order of succession in the Meng lineage without consulting Meng Zhuangzi. Alternatively, Gongchu may be arguing that if Ji Wuzi supports Meng Xiaobo, the latter will be beholden to him. In both cases, power is defined as arbitrary intervention. It is by going against the rules of lawful succession and ritual propriety that one can prove one’s power. 693 According to the funeral rites of the times, the corpse was placed in the chamber while the successor stood beside the door, facing south, as he received the condolences of the guests. Gongchu has thus presented Meng Xiaobo as the successor. As with Gongchu’s own displacement, the public setting and the tacit acknowledgment of the other high officers turn an arbitrary change into a fait accompli. 694 Of course, Meng Zhuangzi left no such command. Ji Gongchu is using the same argument that Ji Wuzi made to Shen Feng. By calling Meng Zhi “the junior Meng,” Ji Wuzi shows that he still recognizes him as the Meng heir. He gives in, however, to his son Gongchu.

1114

Zuo Tradition

Ji Gongchu (Ji Wuzi’s eldest son, who was cast aside) follows the wise counsel of Min Zima and accepts the new status quo with equanimity and seeks to establish himself in his new office through reverence and dutifulness. Ji Wuzia appointed Gongchu manager of horses. Angered, he did not take up the office. Min Zima had a meeting with him and said, “You, sir, should not behave this way. Disaster and good fortune have no special gate whereby they enter: they are precisely what people bring upon themselves.688 As a son one should be troubled about being unfilial, not about having no proper place. Respect and honor your father’s command. What constancy is there in gain and loss? If you can be filial and reverent, your wealth could well double that of the Ji lineage head.689 If you are deviant and lawless, and if you flout the proper way, your ruin could well be twice as disastrous as that of lowly commoners.” Gongchu assented. He respected and honored his father day and night and fulfilled the duties of his office carefully and assiduously. Ji Wuzid was pleased. He had Gongchu entertain him with wine, then brought along his own vessels for feasting and left them all there. That was why Gongchu’s lineage was rich. He also took office as our lord’s steward of the left.

23.5b

Succession struggles in the Meng lineage mirror those in the Ji lineage. Meng Zhuangzi’s younger son, Meng Xiaobo, displaces the legitimate heir, Meng Zhi, through a retainer’s machinations and Ji Gongchu’s assistance. Gongchu’s goal is to align forces against Zang Wuzhong, but to avenge the injustice he suffered he inflicts the same injustice on Meng Zhi. Meng Zhuangzic hated Zang Wuzhongc, while Ji Wuzid was partial to him. Meng Zhuangzi’s chariot driver and groom, Feng Dian, was fond of Meng Zhuangzi’s younger son Meng Xiaoboa and said to the latter, “If you follow my advice, you are sure to become your father’s heir.” He pressed the point again and again, and Meng Xiaoboa agreed to it. When Meng Zhuangzi was ill, Feng Dian said to Gongchu, “If you establish Jie as heir, I will, with your permission, make sure that he regards Zang Wuzhongd as an enemy.”690 Gongchu said to Ji Wuzid, “The junior Meng, Meng Zhi, is of course in his rightful place as the heir.691 But if Meng Jie is established as heir, then the Ji lineage will indeed be more powerful than the Zang lineage.”692 Ji Wuzi did not respond. On the jimao day, Meng Zhuangzic died. Gongchu, attending on Meng Xiaoboa, had him stand by the door of the chamber.693 Ji Wuzid arrived, entered, wailed, came out, and said, “Where is Meng Zhia?” Gongchu said, “Jie is already here.” Ji Wuzid said, “The junior Meng, Meng Zhi, is the elder.” Gongchu said, “What does being the elder have to do with it? It is only a matter of talent. Moreover, this is the master’s command.”694 So Meng Xiaoboa was established as heir. Meng Zhia fled to Zhu.

23.5c(10)

Lord Xiang

1115

23.5d(11) 臧孫入哭，甚哀，多涕。出，其御曰：「 孟孫之惡子也，而哀如是。季孫

若死，其若之何？」 臧孫曰：「 季孫之愛我，疾疢也；孟孫之惡我，藥石也。美疢不如 惡石。夫石猶生我，疢之美，其毒滋多。孟孫死，吾亡無日矣。」 孟氏閉門，告於季孫曰：「 臧氏將為亂，不使我葬。」季孫不信。臧 孫聞之，戒。冬，十月，孟氏將辟，藉除於臧氏。臧孫使正夫助之，除於 東門，甲從己而視之。孟氏又告季孫。季孫怒，命攻臧氏。乙亥，臧紇斬 鹿門之關以出，奔邾。 23.5e 初，臧宣叔娶于鑄，生賈及為而死。繼室以其姪，穆姜之姨子也，生紇，

長於公宮。姜氏愛之，故立之。臧賈、臧為出在鑄。

695 More specifically, yao 藥 refers to herbal medicine, while shi 石 designates either mineral substances from various stones that could be used as medicine or the stones used for preparing acupuncture needles. 696 What we translate as “benign” can mean “beguiling” or “beautiful.” Moral or spiritual sickness is often rooted in the pursuit of desires that promise to bring pleasure and gratification; on this theme, see also Zhao 1.12 The medicinal stone is used to prepare needles for acupuncture, which is painful. 697 Takezoe (17.14), following Lin Yaosou, suggests that Zang Wuzhong knows that disaster is brewing for him when he sees Gongchu supporting Meng Xiaobo as Meng Zhuangzi’s heir—hence his grief. Zang’s explanation dignifies power politics with self-knowledge and moral rhetoric. 698 Meng Xiaobo is trying to stir up resentment against Zang Wuzhong, as Feng Dian promised Gongchu. He is claiming that Zang Wuzhong tries to disrupt the burial, probably because Zang Wuzhong disputes Meng Xiaobo’s claim to be Meng Zhuangzi’s successor. 699 Zang Wuzhong comes with armored soldiers because he is afraid of being attacked, but their presence lends credence to Meng Xiaobo’s slander. 700 Zhù 鑄, a domain of the Ren clan name, seems to have been annexed by Qi. It was situated south of present-day Feicheng County 肥城縣, Shandong. It is mentioned also in Zhao 25.6.

1116

Zuo Tradition

Zang Wuzhong’s prediction of his own exile following Meng Zhuangzi’s death is soon fulfilled. Though the immediate cause is Meng Xiaobo’s slander, Zang looks to his relationship with the Meng and Ji lineage heads for explanation: Ji Wuzi’s partiality to Zang is dangerous though beguiling, while Meng Zhuangzi’s aversion to him is corrective though painful. Zang Wuzhongc entered and wailed. He grieved bitterly, weeping copious tears. After he had come out, his chariot driver said, “Meng Zhuangzic hated you, sir, and yet you are grieving like this. If Ji Wuzid were to die, how would you bear it?” Zang Wuzhongc said, “Ji Wuzid ’s partiality to me was a malady; Meng Zhuangzic’s hatred for me was medicine.695 A benign sickness is worse than the pain from a medicinal stone.696 That stone may yet restore life to me, while the malady is all the more poisonous for being apparently benign. Now that Meng Zhuangzic is dead, my exile is not far off.”697 Meng Xiaoboc shut the gate and said to Ji Wuzid, “Zang Wuzhongd is planning to foment unrest. He is not letting me bury my father.”698 Ji Wuzid did not believe him. Zang Wuzhongc heard about this and took precautions. In winter, in the tenth month, Meng Xiaoboc planned to build a ramp down into the grave and borrowed conscripted workers from the Zang household to do the clearing work. Zang Wuzhong sent the manager of workmen to help them. They were doing clearing work at the East Gate, as Zang Wuzhong, followed by armored soldiers, surveyed the procedure. Meng Xiaoboc again accused Zang Wuzhong to Ji Wuzid.699 Furious, Ji Wuzid gave orders to attack Zang Wuzhongd. On the yihai day (7), Zang Wuzhonga hacked through the crossbar of Deer Gate, left the domain, and fled to Zhu.

23.5d(11)

Comparable succession struggles occur in the Zang lineage. Zang Wuzhong, himself a younger son, became the head of the lineage through connections with Lord Xuan’s wife Mu Jiang, thereby violating the order of succession. His eldest half brother, Zang Jia, to whom he entrusts the lineage, is tricked out of his patrimony by his younger brother Zang Wei. Since Zang’s fate is tied up with the inversion of the order of succession in the Ji and Meng lineages, the explanation of Zang Wuzhong’s exile would expose the Ji and Meng lineages’ dubious maneuverings, whose skillful concealment in the covenant statement elicits Zang Wuzhong’s admiration. Earlier, Zang Xuanshu had taken a wife in Zhù,700 who had died after giving birth to Zang Jiaa and Zang Weia. He then raised to her place her niece, the daughter of Mu Jiang’s younger sister. She gave birth to Zang Wuzhonge, who grew up in our lord’s palace. Mu Jiang loved him, and that was why he was established as heir. Zang Jia and Zang Wei were sent out to Zhù.

23.5e

Lord Xiang

1117

臧武仲自邾使告臧賈，且致大蔡焉，曰：「 紇不佞，失守宗祧，敢告 不弔。紇之罪不及不祀，子以大蔡納請，其可。」 賈曰：「 是家之禍也，非子之過也。賈聞命矣。」再拜受龜，使為以 納請，遂自為也。 臧孫如防，使來告曰：「 紇非能害也，知不足也。非敢私請。苟守 先祀，無廢二勳，敢不辟邑？」乃立臧為。 臧紇致防而奔齊。其人曰：「 其盟我乎？」臧孫曰：「 無辭。」將盟 臧氏，季孫召外史掌惡臣而問盟首焉。 對曰：「 盟東門氏也，曰『毋或如東門遂不聽公命，殺適立庶』。 盟叔孫氏也，曰『毋或如叔孫僑如欲廢國常，蕩覆公室』。」 季孫曰：「 臧孫之罪皆不及此。」 孟椒曰：「 盍以其犯門斬關？」 季孫用之，乃盟臧氏，曰：「 毋或如臧孫紇干國之紀，犯門斬關！」 臧孫聞之，曰：「 國有人焉，誰居？其孟椒乎！」

701 Cf. Du Yu (ZZ 35.606): “I presume to tell how Heaven has no compassion for me.” On the two readings of budiao, see Cheng 13.3, n. 263. 702 The turtle was valued because it was used in divination. The larger the turtle, the greater the spiritual power attributed to it. 703 Fang 防 was the settlement of the Zang lineage. 704 Zang Wuzhong’s message conveys great humility, but there is a harsher interpretation of Zang Wuzhong’s intention in Analects 14.14, where he is said to “threaten the ruler” (yaojun 要君)—that is, he implies that he would rebel, with Fang as his base, if Lu does not allow the Zang lineage to continue. 705 That is, there is no wording that would not draw unwelcome attention to the problematic succession in the Meng and Ji lineages. 706 Du Yu (ZZ 35.607) believes that this refers to “the first section of the covenant.” The reading here follows Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 699), who reads mengshou 盟首 as mengdao 盟道, “the way of (phrasing) the covenant.”

1118

Zuo Tradition

Zang Wuzhong sent word from Zhu to apprise Zang Jia of what had happened, and he also sent along a large turtle: “I lack ability and have thus failed to guard the Ancestral Temple. I presume to tell how I have failed.701 My crime did not reach the point punishable by the abrogation of sacrifices. You should use the large turtle to submit your request to continue the Zang sacrifices. The request may well be granted.”702 Zang Jiaa said, “This is our family’s misfortune, not any crime on your part, sir. I have heard your command!” He bowed twice and received the turtle, then sent Zang Weia to use it to submit his request. Zang Weia thereupon made the request on his own behalf. Zang Wuzhongc went to Fang.703 An envoy came from him with this message: “It was not in my power to do any harm. It was just that I lacked wisdom. I do not presume to make any request for myself. As long as we can guard our ancestral sacrifices, so that the glorious achievements of our forefathers, Zang Wenzhong and Zang Xuanshu, will not be cast aside, how would I presume not to leave this settlement!”704 Zang Wei was thus established as heir. Zang Wuzhonga gave Fang back to our lord and fled to Qi. His men said, “Will they swear a covenant against us?” Zang Wuzhongc said, “There is no proper wording for the case.”705 Planning to swear a covenant against Zang Wuzhonga, Ji Wuzid summoned the scribe of the outer court, whose task was to deal with deviant officials, and asked him about the wording of the covenant.706 He replied, “The covenant against the head of the Dongmen lineage said, ‘Let no one be like Xiangzhongd, who did not abide by our lord’s command, who killed the rightful heir, and who established as heir the son of a secondary wife.’707 The covenant against Shusun Qiaoru said, ‘Let no one be like Shusun Qiaoru, who wanted to cast aside the constant order of the domain and overturn our lord’s house.’”708 Ji Wuzid said, “Zang Wuzhongc’s offense is not as heinous as either of these.” Zifu Huiboa said, “Why not accuse him of trespassing at the gate and hacking through its crossbar?”709 Ji Wuzid adopted his suggestion and thus swore a covenant against Zang Wuzhongd that said, “Let no one be like Zang Wuzhonge, who transgressed against the principles of the domain, trespassed at the gate, and hacked through its crossbar!” Zang Wuzhongc heard this and said, “The domain has its man of talent. Who could it be then? Would it not be Zifu Huibod?”

707 See Wen 18.5. 708 See Cheng 16.11. 709 Zifu Huibo (Meng Jiao) is the grandson of Meng Xianzi. Zifu became a branch of the Meng lineage.

Lord Xiang

1119

23.6(11) 晉人克欒盈于曲沃，盡殺欒氏之族黨。欒魴出奔宋。書曰「 晉人殺欒

盈」，不言大夫，言自外也。 23.7(12) 齊侯還自晉，不入，遂襲莒。門于且于，傷股而退。明日，將復戰，期于壽

舒。杞殖、華還載甲夜入且于之隧，宿於莒郊。明日，先遇莒子於蒲侯 氏。莒子重賂之，使無死，曰：「 請有盟。」華周對曰：「 貪貨棄命，亦君所 惡也。昏而受命，日未中而棄之，何以事君？」莒子親鼓之，從而伐之，獲 杞梁。莒人行成。 齊侯歸，遇杞梁之妻於郊，使弔之。辭曰：「 殖之有罪，何辱命焉？ 若免於罪，猶有先人之敝廬在，下妾不得與郊弔。」齊侯弔諸其室。

710 Takezoe notes that this was the first time in early Chinese history that an offender’s lineage members (zu 族) and followers (dang 黨) were summarily executed. 711 Juyu 且于 was located in present-day Ju County 莒縣, Shandong. Shoushu 壽舒, mentioned just below, was nearby. 712 Qi Liang’s wife comes to be celebrated as an exemplar of female virtue and felicitous rhetoric in a number of early texts, including Liji 10.191, Mencius 6B.26, Shuoyuan 4.114–15, and Lienü zhuan 4.81–82. These accounts are more embellished and dramatic than the one in Zuozhuan. In Mencius, the widows of Qi Liang and Hua Zhou

1120

Zuo Tradition

The Fan lineage, with the support of other powerful lineages in Jin, kills Luan Ying and almost all his followers. The men of Jin overcame Luan Ying at Quwo and killed all the members and partisans of the Luan house.710 Luan Fang left the domain and fled to Song. The text says, “Jin leaders put Luan Ying to death.” It does not say, “high officer,” because he arrived from abroad.

23.6(12)

Lord Zhuang of Qi attacks Ju while on his way home from a successful campaign against Jin (Xiang 23.4b). After initial setbacks, Qi achieves an inconclusive victory. Qi Liang’s widow, who meets Lord Zhuang upon his return, demonstrates her ritual propriety and rhetorical prowess. A Qi woman who meets returning troops also appears in Cheng 2.3. The Prince of Qi was returning from Jin. He did not enter the domain but went on to make a surprise attack on Ju. He stormed the gate at Juyu,711 withdrawing after suffering a wound in his thigh. The following day, he intended to resume battle and arranged to meet his troops at Shoushu. Qi Lianga and Hua Zhoua put armored soldiers in chariots, and during the night they entered the narrow pass in Juyu, staying overnight in the outskirts of Ju. The following day, they were the first to encounter the Master of Ju at the Puhou residence. The Master of Ju gave them lavish gifts and wanted them to agree to not fight to the death, saying, “I beg leave to have a covenant.” Hua Zhou replied, “To be greedy for profit and to abandon commands is indeed something you, my lord, would abhor. If, having received the ruler’s command in the evening, we abandon it before midday, how can we serve any ruler?” The Master of Ju personally beat the war drum against Qi. He pursued and attacked Qi troops and seized Qi Liang’s corpse. The leaders of Ju went to seek an accord. As the Prince of Qi returned, he encountered Qi Liang’s wife in the outskirts of the capital. He sent a messenger to offer his condolences. She declined, “If Qi Liangb had committed offenses, why condescend to give this command? If he had managed to avoid committing offenses, then the humble abode of our ancestor still exists, and this lowly concubine cannot accept condolences in the outskirts of the capital.” The Prince of Qi offered condolences at her abode.712



23.7(12)

are said to “transform the mores of their domain” through their lamentation. In Shuoyuan and Lienü zhuan, her wailing brought down the city wall, and this trope eventually merges with the legend of Meng Jiangnü 孟姜女, whose lament brought down the Great Wall; see Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 25.585–86 (“Qi Liang qi” 杞梁妻). She also appears often in classical poetry as a symbol of the mournful wife (e.g., “Nineteen Old Poems”).

Lord Xiang

1121

23.8 齊侯將為臧紇田。臧孫聞之，見齊侯。與之言伐晉，對曰：「 多則多矣，

抑君似鼠。夫鼠，晝伏夜動，不穴於寢廟，畏人故也。今君聞晉之亂而 後作焉，寧將事之，非鼠如何？」乃弗與田。 仲尼曰：「 知之難也。有臧武仲之知，而不容於魯國，抑有由也， 作不順而施不恕也。《夏書》曰：『念茲在茲』，順事、恕施也。」

春秋 24.1(1) 二十有四年，春，叔孫豹如晉。 24.2(3) 仲孫羯帥師侵齊。 24.3(4) 夏，楚子伐吳。 24.4 秋，七月甲子朔，日有食之，既。 24.5(6) 齊崔杼帥師伐莒。 24.6 大水。

713 This is a final echo of the theme of Zang Wuzhong’s reputed cleverness and its misuse. Although the word zhi 智 is usually translated as “wisdom,” Zang Wuzhong’s exploits in this section of Zuozhuan seem to lack the moral compass implied by the word “wisdom.” His sagacity and moral judgment are evident elsewhere in Zuozhuan. Confucius may be trying to explain the inconsistency, or he may be using zhi to mean “cleverness.”

1122

Zuo Tradition

Lord Zhuang of Qi is about to grant land to Zang Wuzhong when the latter’s deliberately offensive remark makes him revoke his gift. Perhaps Zang foresees the disasters that will befall Qi and does not want to be too closely associated with it, as Du Yu suggests. Such prescience was not evident in his intervention in the affairs of the Ji lineage, which “Confucius” summarizes as contravention of right order and failure of reciprocity. The Prince of Qi intended to grant land to Zang Wuzhonga. Zang Wuzhongc heard this and had an audience with the Prince of Qi, who then spoke to him about attacking Jin. Zang Wuzhong replied, “Your military achievements have indeed been considerable. But you, my lord, are like a mouse. For a mouse lies low during the day and moves about at night. It does not dig its hole in Ancestral Temples because it is afraid of people. Now you, my lord, raised your troops only after you had heard of the disorder in Jin. Had Jin been at peace, you would have served it. What are you like if not a mouse?” The Qi ruler thus did not grant him land. Confuciusc said, “It is indeed difficult to be wise. For someone with Zang Wuzhong’s wisdom to find no place in Lu, there should yet be a reason.713 What he did went against the right order, and in his dealings with others he did not show empathy.714 The Xia Documents says, ‘That which you think of depends on this.’ 715 This refers to putting affairs in the right order and showing empathy in dealing with others.”

23.8

LORD XIANG 24 (549 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, Shusun Bao went to Jin.

24.1(1)

Zhongsun Jie (Meng Xiaobo) led out troops and invaded Qi.

24.2(3)

In summer, the Master of Chu attacked Wu.

24.3(4)

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jiazi day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. It was a total eclipse.

24.4

Cui Zhu of Qi led out troops and attacked Ju.

24.5(6)

There was a great flood.

24.6

714 See Analects 15.24: asked whether there is one principle that one can abide by for one’s whole life, Confucius replies, “It is probably empathy! What one does not desire for oneself, do not apply it to another person.” What we translate as “empathy” (shu 恕) is what dictates the imperative of reciprocity. 715 Also quoted in Xiang 21.2. See nn. 106 and 583.

Lord Xiang

1123

24.7 八月癸巳朔，日有食之。 24.8(7) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞伯、小

邾子于夷儀。 24.9(8) 冬，楚子、蔡侯、陳侯、許男伐鄭。 24.10 公至自會。 24.11(10) 陳鍼宜咎出奔楚。 24.12(11) 叔孫豹如京師。 24.13 大饑。

左傳 24.1(1) 二十四年，春，穆叔如晉，范宣子逆之，問焉，曰：「 古人有言曰：『死而

不朽』，何謂也？」穆叔未對。宣子曰：「 昔匄之祖，自虞以上為陶唐氏， 在夏為御龍氏，在商為豕韋氏，在周為唐杜氏，晉主夏盟為范氏，其是 之謂乎！」 穆叔曰：「 以豹所聞，此之謂世祿，非不朽也。魯有先大夫曰臧文 仲，既沒，其言立，其是之謂乎！豹聞之：『大上有立德，其次有立功，其 次有立言。』雖久不廢，此之謂不朽。若夫保姓受氏，以守宗祊，世不絕 祀，無國無之。祿之大者，不可謂不朽。」

716 If there was a complete solar eclipse the month before, there could not have been another eclipse now. Some commentators suggest that the entry refers to the solar eclipse on the guisi day, the last day of the month in Wen 11 (616 Bce), and that the confusion arose from misplaced bamboo slips. 717 The precise location of Yiyi 夷儀 is not known. 718 According to Shen Qinhan, in the ritual for official visits, when the envoy from another domain reached the outskirts of the capital, the ruler would send a minister in court robes to meet him, giving him a bolt of silk as a gift to honor his exertion (Yang, 3:1087). 719 On the Yulong (Dragon-Rearing) lineage, see also Zhao 29.4. 720 According to Guoyu, “Zheng yu,” 16.511, Shiwei was descended from Zhurong and was one of the “Shang overlords” eventually destroyed by Shang kings. Cf. Cheng 2.3f, n. 68. 721 The theory that “Han is descended from Yao” (Han wei Yao hou 漢為堯後), championed by, among others, Liu Xiang (Hanshu 1.81), Ban Gu (“Dian yin” 典引, in Wen­ xuan 48.2159), and Jia Kui (Hou Hanshu 26.1237), is based on this account of the Fan lineage (see also Zhao 29.4) and the presumed link between the Fan lineage and the surname Liu (Wen 13.2). Cf. Zhao n. 1177. These passages have been used to “prove” that Zuozhuan contains Han interpolations, but the evidence is not convincing.

1124

Zuo Tradition

In the eighth month, on the guisi day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.716

24.7

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu at Yiyi.717

24.8(7)

In winter, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Chen, and the Head of Xǔ attacked Zheng.

24.9(8)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

24.10

Qian Yijiu of Chen departed and fled to Chu.

24.11(10)

Shusun Bao went to the Zhou capital.

24.12(11)

There was a great famine.

24.13

ZUO

The Jin minister Fan Gai, after suppressing the revolt of his longtime rival Luan Ying (Xiang 23.3, 23.6), boasts of the ancient roots and enduring power of the Fan lineage to the Lu minister Shusun Bao. The latter, however, deflates his self-aggrandizement and famously defines the “three ways to never perish.” In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, Shusun Baoa went to Jin. Fan Gaic came out to escort him in718 and asked, “The ancients have this saying, ‘To die but not perish.’ What does that mean?” Shusun Baoa had not yet answered when Fan Gaib continued, “Long ago, before the reign of King Shun, my ancestors became the Taotang lineage; under Xia, they became the Yulong lineage;719 under Shang, the Shiwei lineage;720 under Zhou, the Tangdu lineage; under Jin, which presides over the covenant of the central domains, the Fan lineage.721 Surely this is what is meant!” Shusun Baoa said, “From what I have heard, this is called hereditary office and emolument; those do not signify ‘never perishing.’ Lu has a former high officer called Zang Wenzhong. He died, but his words have been established among us. Surely this is what is meant! According to what I have heard, ‘the highest of all is to establish virtue; next to that is to establish achievements; next to that is to establish words.’ Even with the passage of time these glories are not cast aside. This is called ‘never perishing.’ As for keeping one’s clan name and receiving lineage status, so as to guard one’s Ancestral Temple and to maintain sacrifices for generations, there is no domain without such things. Hereditary office and emolument, even at their greatest, cannot be called ‘never perishing.’”

24.1(1)

Lord Xiang

1125

24.2a 范宣子為政，諸侯之幣重，鄭人病之。二月，鄭伯如晉，子產寓書於子西，

以告宣子，曰： 子為晉國，四鄰諸侯不聞令德，而聞重幣，僑也惑之。僑聞

君子長國家者，非無賄之患，而無令名之難。夫諸侯之賄聚 於公室，則諸侯貳。若吾子賴之，則晉國貳。諸侯貳，則晉國 壞；晉國貳，則子之家壞，何沒沒也？將焉用賄？ 夫令名，德之輿也；德，國家之基也。有基無壞，無亦 是務乎！有德則樂，樂則能久。《詩》云： 樂只君子， 邦家之基。 有令德也夫！

上帝臨女， 無貳爾心。 有令名也夫！恕思以明德，則令名載而行之，是以遠至邇安。毋

寧使人謂子「子實生我」，而謂「子浚我以生」乎？象有齒 以焚其身，賄也。

宣子說，乃輕幣。

722 Maoshi 172, “Nan shan you tai” 南山有臺, 10A.347. 723 Maoshi 236, “Da ming” 大明, 16B.544. 724 The word we translate as “use up” is jun 浚, which Du Yu (ZZ 35.610) glosses as “take” 取, and which also means “to hollow out,” as in dredging a river (Annals, Zhuang 9.7) or digging a well (Mencius 4A.2). See Karlgren, gl. 613. 725 Fu Qian reads fen 焚 (“to burn”) as fen 僨 (“to fall down,” “to stiffen and die”); see Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 568.

1126

Zuo Tradition

Zichan resists Jin demands for offerings in an eloquent letter to Fan Gai. He warns that the accumulation of material gain will cause alienation and dissension and thereby endanger both the domain and the Fan lineage. Zichan’s remonstrance succeeds in lightening the burden of Jin demands on subordinate domains. When Fan Gaic was in charge of government, the offerings demanded of the princes were burdensome, and Zheng leaders were distressed by them. In the second month, the Liege of Zheng went to Jin. Zichan sent a letter with Zixi to tell Fan Gaib the following:

24.2a

With you, sir, in charge in Jin, your neighboring princes on all four sides have not heard of your exemplary virtue but only of burdensome offerings. I am perplexed by this. I have heard that noble men who lead domains and patrimonies are not troubled by the lack of gifts but are disturbed by the lack of a good name. When the princes’ gifts are gathered in the lord’s house, then the princes will have divided allegiance. If you, sir, rely so much on all these gifts, then the domain of Jin will have divided allegiance. If the princes have divided allegiance, then the domain of Jin will be ruined, and if the domain of Jin has divided allegiance, then your patrimony will be ruined. How can you be so misguided? Of what use can the gifts be? Now a good name is the vehicle of virtue, and virtue is the foundation of domain and patrimony. Should one not strive to have a foundation and not let it be ruined? With virtue one is joyful, and with joy one is able to endure. As it says in the Odes, Joyful is the noble man— He is the foundation of domain and patrimony.722 Surely this is because he has exemplary virtue! The god on high is watching over you. Do not let your heart be divided.723 Surely this is because he has a good name! Use the longing for reciprocity to illuminate virtue, which will then be carried forth by a good name, so that those afar will be drawn close and those nearby will be calmed. Would you rather have others say about you, sir, “It is you who sustain us,” or “You use us up to sustain yourself”?724 It is because elephants have tusks that their bodies are destroyed:725 such is the danger of gifts.

Fan Gaib was pleased, and thus he lightened the burden of offerings.

Lord Xiang

1127

24.2b 是行也，鄭伯朝晉，為重幣故，且請伐陳也。鄭伯稽首，宣子辭。子西相，

曰：「 以陳國之介恃大國，而陵虐於敝邑，寡君是以請請罪焉，敢不稽 首？」 24.3(2) 孟孝伯侵齊，晉故也。 24.4(3) 夏，楚子為舟師以伐吳，不為軍政，無功而還。 24.5 齊侯既伐晉而懼，將欲見楚子。楚子使薳啟彊如齊聘，且請期。齊社，

蒐軍實，使客觀之。陳文子曰：「 齊將有寇。吾聞之：兵不戢，必取其 族。」 24.6(5) 秋，齊侯聞將有晉師，使陳無宇從薳啟彊如楚，辭，且乞師。崔杼帥師

送之，遂伐莒，侵介根。

24.7(6, 8)

會于夷儀，將以伐齊。水，不克。

726 Some texts have only one qing 請; see Yang, 3:1090. 727 Du Yu (ZZ 35.610) glosses junzheng 軍政 (literally, “military administration”) as “the distinctions of reward and punishment”; and Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong, 23.390) explains it as “instruction in the army.” See also Xuan 12.2a. 728 Yang (3:1090) suggests that sacrifices are performed at the altar of earth that has been set up by the army (junshe 軍社). 729 Following Karlgren (gl. 617), who cites Xu Shen on the implied homology of zu 族 and zu 鏃 (“arrowhead”). Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 35.610) reading of zu as “kin” or “clan”: “A display of weapons will surely harm one’s own.” 730 The precise location of the Qi domain settlement Jiegen 介根 is unknown.

1128

Zuo Tradition

The Zheng ruler bows to the Jin chief minister with rituals reserved for the Zhou king in order to seek Jin’s acquiescence to Zheng’s plans to attack Chen, a Chu ally. Jin seems to have withheld its assent, because Zichan has to defend the Zheng campaign the following year (Xiang 25.10). On this trip, the Liege of Zheng visited the court of Jin because of the heavy burden of offerings and also to beg leave to attack Chen. The Liege of Zheng bowed with his forehead touching the ground, and Fan Gaib declined to accept such reverence. Zixi, who was serving as the lord’s assistant, said, “Chen, relying on the support of a great domain, unleashed its tyranny upon our humble settlement. That is why our unworthy ruler begs leave to hold Chen accountable for its offenses.726 Would he dare not bow with his forehead touching the ground?”

24.2b

Lu invades Qi in retaliation for the Qi campaign against Jin (Xiang 23.4). Meng Xiaobo invaded Qi on account of Jin.

24.3(2)

Chu engages in a fruitless campaign against Wu. In summer, the Master of Chu attacked Wu with a flotilla. He did not enforce military discipline727 and so returned without accomplishing anything.

24.4(3)

Qi seeks an alliance with Chu but takes pains to display its strength, lest it appear subservient. The Qi minister Chen Xuwu’s prediction of disaster for Qi is fulfilled the following year (Xiang 25.2). Having attacked Jin, the Prince of Qi was fearful and wished to have an audience with the Master of Chu. The Master of Chu sent Wei Qiqiang to Qi on an official visit and also to request a date for the meeting. Qi leaders performed sacrifices at the altar of earth728 and reviewed the troops and equipment, having invited the guests to observe the parade. Chen Xuwua said, “Qi will suffer raiders. I have heard that a display of weapons will surely cause arrowheads to fly.”729

24.5

Qi prepares for conflict with Jin. In autumn, when the Prince of Qi heard that Jin troops were coming, he sent Chen Wuyu to follow Wei Qiqiang to Chu to decline the meeting and also to beg for troops. Cui Zhu led out troops to send him off. He thereupon attacked Ju and invaded Jiegen.730

24.6(5)

The princes met at Yiyi: they were planning then to attack Qi. There were floods, and they did not succeed in mounting an attack.

24.7(6, 8)

Lord Xiang

1129

24.8(9) 冬，楚子伐鄭以救齊，門于東門，次于棘澤。諸侯還救鄭。

晉侯使張骼、輔躒致楚師，求御于鄭。鄭人卜宛射犬，吉。子大叔 戒之曰：「 大國之人不可與也。」對曰：「 無有眾寡，其上一也。」大叔曰： 「 不然。部婁無松柏。」 二子在幄，坐射犬于外；既食，而後食之。使御廣車而行，己皆乘 乘車。將及楚師，而後從之乘，皆踞轉而鼓琴。近，不告而馳之。皆取冑 於櫜而冑，入壘，皆下，搏人以投，收禽挾囚。弗待而出。皆超乘，抽弓 而射。既免，復踞轉而鼓琴，曰：「 公孫！同乘，兄弟也，胡再不謀？」對 曰：「 曩者志入而已，今則怯也。」皆笑，曰：「 公孫之亟也！」 楚子自棘澤還，使薳啟彊帥師送陳無宇。

731 Brambles Marsh (Jize 棘澤) was located in the domain of Zheng south of presentday Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 732 On the practice of using a single chariot to “challenge the enemy” by some extraordinary feat of bravery, see Xuan 12.2. Jin commanders want a Zheng chariot driver because he would be more familiar with the terrain. 733 Cf. Yang (3:1091): “It does not matter whether a domain has a great army or a small one; the chariot driver should have a higher position all the same.” You Ji is trying to convince Yuan Shequan to defer to the two Jin officers, but Yuan Shequan counters that the usual hierarchy (regarding positions in a chariot) applies irrespective of the size and power of the domains involved. Takezoe (17.26) notes, however, that the person on the left side of the chariot should have a higher position than the chariot driver. 734 We follow Hu Yujin’s reading of zhuan 轉 as zhen 軫 (Yang, 3:1092). Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 35.611) reading of zhuan as “bundles of clothing,” which Takezoe (17.26) supports and links to the related words zhuan 縳 and tuan 摶.

1130

Zuo Tradition

The following passage offers a memorable vignette from the battlefield. When the Jin-Zheng coalition confronts the Qi-Chu alliance, two Jin officers slight the Zheng nobleman who is driving their chariot. The latter argues that rank does not depend on the size and power of the domain (for an opposite argument, see Cheng 3.7) and tries to put the Jin officers in their place through his valor and ready wit. The Jin officers for their part seem unruffled as they display their courage and supercilious calmness. In winter, the Master of Chu attacked Zheng to relieve Qi. Chu troops stormed the eastern gate of the Zheng capital and set up camp at Brambles Marsh.731 The princes turned back to relieve Zheng. The Prince of Jin sent Zhang Ge and Fu Li to challenge the Chu army, and they sought a chariot driver from Zheng.732 The men of Zheng divined about sending Yuan Shequan, and the result was auspicious. You Jib cautioned him, “You should not put yourself on a par with men from a great domain.” He replied, “It does not matter whether a domain has multitudes or few people, those above are honored in the same way.”733 You Jia said, “Not so. There are no pines and cypresses on puny knolls.” The two officers, Zhang Ge and Fu Li, were inside their tent, but they made Yuan Shequana sit outside and gave him his meal only after they had eaten. They had him drive a combat chariot and proceed while they themselves rode in a regular chariot. Only when they were about to reach the Chu army did they join Yuan Shequan in his chariot. They both perched on the horizontal beam at the back of the chariot734 and strummed their lutes. As the combat chariot approached the Chu camp, Yuan Shequan dashed in without notifying them. Zhang Ge and Fu Li took their helmets from the armory case and put them on. When they entered the ramparts, both got down from the chariot, seized enemy soldiers, and hurled them back, tying up some captives and clamping others under their arms. Without waiting for them, Yuan Shequan sped out of the ramparts. Zhang Ge and Fu Li both sprang onto the chariot, pulled out their bows, and shot at the enemy. Having escaped from the danger zone, they again perched on the horizontal beam at the back of the chariot and strummed their lutes. They said, “Noble grandson!735 Sharing a chariot makes us brothers. Why did you twice fail to confer with us?” He replied, “The first time I was intent only on entering the enemy camp. Just now I was worried.”736 They both laughed and said, “What a hasty temperament the noble grandson has!” The Master of Chu returned from Brambles Marsh and had Wei Qi­qiang lead out troops to send off Chen Wuyu.

24.8(9)

735 Yuan Shequan is the grandson of a Zheng lord. 736 Yuan Shequan claims to be worried about the Jin-Zheng coalition army being outnumbered. With these blatantly unconvincing excuses, Yuan Shequan thus manages to show his displeasure without admitting that he is offended.

Lord Xiang

1131

24.9 吳人為楚舟師之役故，召舒鳩人。舒鳩人叛楚。楚子師于荒浦，使沈

尹壽與師祁犁讓之。舒鳩子敬逆二子，而告無之，且請受盟。二子復命。 王欲伐之。薳子曰：「 不可。彼告不叛，且請受盟，而又伐之，伐無罪也。 姑歸息民，以待其卒。卒而不貳，吾又何求？若猶叛我，無辭，有庸。」 乃還。 24.10(11) 陳人復討慶氏之黨，鍼宜咎出奔楚。 24.11(12) 齊人城郟。穆叔如周聘，且賀城。王嘉其有禮也，賜之大路。

1132

Zuo Tradition

Wu incites Shujiu, a dependent of Chu, to rebel in retaliation for the Chu naval campaign (Xiang 23.4). Chu refrains from punishing Shujiu when the latter protests its allegiance, and such restraint will justify Chu’s later campaign against the recalcitrant Shujiu (Xiang 25.8), as the Chu chief minister, Wei Ziping, argues. The men of Wu, because of the campaign by Chu naval forces, summoned the men of Shujiu,737 who then rebelled against Chu. The Master of Chu mobilized the army at Huangpu and sent Shou, governor of Shěn, and Shiqi Li to reprimand them. The Master of Shujiu respectfully met the two Chu high officers, told them that there was no such rebellion, and moreover asked to receive a covenant. The two men reported the discharge of their mission to the king. The king wanted to attack Shujiu. The chief minister, Wei Zipinga, said, “This will not do. They submitted that they were not rebelling, and moreover, they asked to receive a covenant. If we attack them, we are attacking the guiltless. For now, we should just return, let the people rest, and await the outcome. If the outcome is that they do not shift allegiance, what more can we ask for? If they nevertheless rebel against us, then they will have no excuse, and we can act with success.” The Chu army thus turned back.

24.9

The leaders of Chen continue to persecute the Qing lineage because of its earlier rebellion (Xiang 23.2). The leaders of Chen again chastised partisans of the Qing lineage. Qian Yijiu departed and fled to Chu.

24.10(11)

Qi fortifies Jia for the Zhou king, possibly to gain support in the wake of its breach with Jin. The men of Qi fortified Jia.738 Shusun Baoa went to Zhou on an official visit and also to congratulate the king on the fortification. The king commended him for his ritual propriety and bestowed on him a great carriage.

24.11(12)

737 Shujiu 舒鳩 was located in present-day Shucheng County 舒城縣 in Anhui. 738 Jia is the same as Jiaru, the Zhou royal city mentioned in Xuan 3.3.

Lord Xiang

1133

24.12 晉侯嬖程鄭，使佐下軍。鄭行人公孫揮如晉聘，程鄭問焉，曰：「 敢問降

階何由？」子羽不能對，歸以語然明。然明曰：「 是將死矣。不然，將亡。 貴而知懼，懼而思降，乃得其階。下人而已，又何問焉？且夫既登而求 降階者，知人也，不在程鄭。其有亡釁乎！不然，其有惑疾，將死而憂 也。」

春秋 25.1(1) 二十有五年，春，齊崔杼帥師伐我北鄙。 25.2(2) 夏，五月乙亥，齊崔杼弒其君光。 25.3(3) 公會晉侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、薛伯、杞伯、小

邾子于夷儀。 25.4(5) 六月壬子，鄭公孫舍之帥師入陳。 25.5(6) 秋，八月己巳，諸侯同盟于重丘。

739 See Xiang 23.3b. 740 The implied question is “Dare I ask how one may attain a lower rank?” 741 Cheng Zheng came to be assistant commander of the lower army because he was a favorite of Lord Ping of Jin. The assumption is that he could not have been genuinely interested in self-abnegation. For similar formulations on the importance of restraint

1134

Zuo Tradition

A question that would usually indicate vigilant self-restraint becomes a sign of doom when posed by the wrong person. The Zheng high officer Ran Ming, who rightly predicts Cheng Zheng’s death (Xiang 25.14) by seeing through the latter’s apparent humility, is himself ugly and can be appreciated only by those who see beyond appearance (Xiang 25.4, Zhao 28.3). The Prince of Jin was enamored of Cheng Zheng739 and made him the assistant commander of the lower army. When the Zheng envoy, Gongsun Hui, went to Jin on an official visit, Cheng Zheng asked him, “May I presume to ask how one can descend the steps?”740 Gongsun Huia could not reply and upon his return spoke about this to Ran Ming. Ran Ming said, “He must be about to die—or else, he will go into exile. To be in an exalted position and know fear, to be fearful and think of stepping down: such are the ways one can obtain the proper rank. The key is to place oneself beneath others and nothing more. What is there to ask about? Moreover, those who seek to step down after rising high are the wise ones, not the likes of Cheng Zheng.741 This is probably a sign that he will be exiled! Otherwise, he has perhaps become sick with confusion. He is about to die and is worried about it.”

24.12

LORD XIANG 25 (548 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, Cui Zhu of Qi led out troops and attacked our northern marches. In summer, in the fifth month, on the yihai day (17), Cui Zhu of Qi assassinated his ruler, Guang. Our lord met with the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu at Yiyi. In the sixth month, on the renzi day (24), Gongsun Shezhi of Zheng led out troops and entered Chen. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the jisi day, the princes swore a covenant together at Chongqiu.742

25.1(1)

25.2(2)

25.3(3)

25.4(5)

25.5(6)

and vigilance, see Xi 22.7, Xuan 16.1, and Xiang 11.5. Cf. Zhouyi 9.188: “to ascend without stopping will certainly result in an impasse.” 742 Du Yu (ZZ 36.617) notes that jisi was the twelfth day of the seventh month. There was no jisi day in the eighth month. The precise location of the Qi settlement of Chongqiu 重丘 is unknown. This should not be confused with Chongqiu in Cao (n. 481).

Lord Xiang

1135

25.6 公至自會。 25.7(9) 衛侯入于夷儀。 25.8(8) 楚屈建帥師滅舒鳩。 25.9 冬，鄭公孫夏帥師伐陳。 25.10(12) 十有二月，吳子遏伐楚，門于巢，卒。

左傳 25.1(1) 二十五年，春，齊崔杼帥師伐我北鄙，以報孝伯之師也。公患之，使告于

晉。孟公綽曰：「 崔子將有大志，不在病我，必速歸，何患焉？其來也不 寇，使民不嚴，異於他日。」齊師徒歸。 25.2a(2) 齊棠公之妻，東郭偃之姊也。東郭偃臣崔武子。棠公死，偃御武子以弔

焉。見棠姜而美之，使偃取之。偃曰：「 男女辨姓，今君出自丁，臣出自 桓，不可。」

1136

Zuo Tradition

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

25.6

The Prince of Wei entered Yiyi.

25.7(9)

Qu Jian of Chu led out troops and extinguished Shujiu.

25.8(8)

In winter, Gongsun Xia (Zixi) of Zheng led out troops and attacked Chen.

25.9

In the twelfth month, E (Zhufan), the Master of Wu, attacked Chu and stormed its gate at Chao. He died.

25.10(12)

ZUO

Qi invades Lu, but the Qi commander Cui Zhu is too intent on his ambitions at home to truly challenge Lu. If this is the same person as the Cui Zhu exiled in 599 Bce (Xuan 10.2), he must be at least seventy at this point. In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, Cui Zhu of Qi led out troops and attacked our northern marches in retaliation for Meng Xiaobo’s incursion.743 Our lord was troubled by this and sent word to Jin. Meng Gongchuo said, “Cui Zhue will have grand ambitions, and he is not bent on hurting us. He is sure to return soon. Why be troubled? Since he has come, there have been no raids, and he has not treated our people with severity. This is different from before.” The Qi army returned without gaining anything.

25.1(1)

Cui Zhu, in defiance of inauspicious divination results, takes Dongguo Jiang, the widow of the Lord of Tang, as his wife (who comes to be known as Lady Jiang). Lord Zhuang, whom Cui Zhu had helped to establish as ruler six years earlier (Xiang 19.5), flaunts his adulterous relations with Lady Jiang. Cui Zhu plots his assassination. The wife of the Lord of Tang in Qi, Dongguo Jiang, was an older sister of Dongguo Yan, who served Cui Zhua as a retainer. When the Lord of Tang died, Dongguo Yana drove Cui Zhu to offer condolences. Upon seeing Dongguo Jianga, Cui Zhu was struck with her beauty and sent Dongguo Yana, acting as intermediary, to take her as his wife. Dongguo Yana said, “Man and wife should be of different clan names. Now you, my lord, come from the line of Lord Ding, while I, your servant, come from the line of Lord Huan. This will not do.”744

25.2a(2)

743 For Meng Xiaobo’s invasion of Qi, see Xiang 24.3. 744 Lord Ding was the son of the Grand Lord, the ancestor of the Qi house. Lord Huan was the famous overlord. Thus, both Cui Zhu and Dongguo Yan had the clan name Jiang. On the taboo against marrying someone with the same clan name, see Xi 23.6d, Zhao 1.12, Guoyu, “Jin yu 4,” 10.349.

Lord Xiang

1137

武子筮之，遇困䷮之大過䷛。史皆曰「 吉」。示陳文子，文子曰：「 夫 從風，風隕妻，不可娶也。且其繇曰：『困于石，據于蒺梨，入于其宮，不 見其妻，凶。』困于石，往不濟也；據于蒺梨，所恃傷也；入于其宮，不見 其妻，凶，無所歸也。」崔子曰：「 嫠也，何害？先夫當之矣。」遂取之。 莊公通焉，驟如崔氏，以崔子之冠賜人。侍者曰：「 不可。」公曰： 「 不為崔子，其無冠乎？」崔子因是，又以其間伐晉也，曰：「 晉必將 報。」欲弒公以說于晉，而不獲間。公鞭侍人賈舉，而又近之，乃為崔子 間公。 25.2b 夏，五月，莒為且于之役故，莒子朝于齊。甲戌，饗諸北郭，崔子稱疾，不

視事。乙亥，公問崔子，遂從姜氏。姜入于室，與崔子自側戶出。公拊楹 而歌。侍人賈舉止眾從者而入，閉門。

745 “Impasse” ䷮ (Kun 困) is hexagram 47 and “Great Surpassing” ䷛ (Daguo 大過) is hexagram 28 in the received version of Zhouyi. When the broken, or yin, line, third from the bottom in the hexagram “Impasse,” is transformed into an unbroken, or yang, line, the result is the hexagram “Great Surpassing.” 746 The scribes are presumably trying to please Cui Zhu. Hexagram 47 is made up of the trigrams “Sinkhole” ☵ (Kan 坎) below and “Joy” ☱ (Dui 兌) above. In terms of family relationships “Sinkhole” and “Joy” denote middle son and young daughter, respectively. On that basis one can claim that hexagram 47 symbolizes the wellmatched union of “middle son” and “young daughter.” 747 Hexagram 28 is made up of the trigrams “Compliance” ☴ (Sun 巽) below and “Joy” ☱ (Dui) above. The image of “Compliance” is wind. Thus, when hexagram 47 is transformed into hexagram 28, “Sinkhole” becomes “Compliance,” which may be interpreted as the middle son or husband being overcome by the wind. The wind can also undermine the “Joy” above—hence the image of the wind blowing down the young daughter or wife. 748 This is the omen verse for the third line of hexagram 47. 749 The trigram “Sinkhole,” the lower component of hexagram 47, has the attribute of “dangerous” and the image of water, which may account for Chen Xuwu’s explanation. 750 We follow Du Yu’s reading (ZZ 36.618). Cf. Yu Yue’s reading (cited in Karlgren, gl. 621): “But no! Isn’t he Cui Zhu? How can he lack hats?”

1138

Zuo Tradition

Cui Zhub divined by milfoil about this and came upon the hexagram “Impasse” ䷮ and the line whereby it becomes the hexagram “Great Surpassing” ䷛.”745 The scribes all pronounced the result auspicious.746 But when Cui Zhu showed it to Chen Xuwua, the latter said, “The husband follows the wind, and the wind blows down the wife.747 You must not take her as wife. Also, the omen verse says, ‘Caught among rocks, he leans on thorns and thistles. He enters his chamber and does not see his wife. Inauspicious.’748 ‘Caught among rocks’ means that going forward with your plan will bring no success.749 ‘He leans on thorns and thistles’ means being harmed by what one depends on. ‘He enters his chamber and does not see his wife. Inauspicious’ means that there is no place to return to.” Cui Zhue said, “She is a widow. What harm is there? Her former husband already suffered the consequences of the ill omen.” He then took her as wife. Lord Zhuang had a liaison with Lady Jiang. As he went often to Cui Zhu’s residence, he took Cui Zhue’s hats and bestowed them on others. His attendant said, “This will not do.” The lord said, “Can it be that one must have no hat if one does not happen to be Cui Zhu?”750 Prompted by these acts and also because of the way the lord had used Jin’s troubles as the opportunity to attack it, Cui Zhue said, “Jin will certainly retaliate.” He wanted to assassinate the lord to curry favor with Jin but had not found the opportunity. The lord had whipped an attendant, Jia Ju, and yet had continued to keep him close at hand. Jia Ju thus looked for an opportunity for Cui Zhu. Cui Zhu’s followers murder Lord Zhuang when the latter comes to Cui’s residence for an assignation with Cui Zhu’s wife. Pretending to be ignorant of his identity, they kill Lord Zhuang in the name of defending the lord’s palace. Despite Lord Zhuang’s depravity, many of his followers remain loyal to him and die with him. In summer, in the fifth month, the Master of Ju visited the court of Qi on account of the Juyu campaign.751 On the jiaxu day (16), the lord offered him ceremonial toasts at the northern outer wall of the capital. Cui Zhue pleaded illness and did not oversee the event. On the yihai day (17), the lord went to inquire after Cui Zhu, and he then followed Lady Jiang, who entered the chamber and left with Cui Zhue from the side door. The lord tapped a pillar and sang.752 The eunuch Jia Ju stopped all the lord’s entourage, entered himself, and shut the gate.

25.2b

751 For the Juyu campaign, see Xiang 23.7. 752 According to Fu Qian, the lord may be trying to get Lady Jiang’s attention because he thinks she does not know that he is waiting outside; or he may already be aware that he is trapped and is singing to express his regret (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 572).

Lord Xiang

1139

甲興，公登臺而請，弗許；請盟，弗許；請自刃於廟，弗許。皆曰： 「 君之臣杼疾病，不能聽命。近於公宮，陪臣干掫有淫者，不知二命。」 公踰牆，又射之，中股，反隊，遂弒之。賈舉、州綽、邴師、公孫敖、 封具、鐸父、襄伊、僂堙皆死。祝佗父祭於高唐，至，復命，不說弁而死 於崔氏。申蒯，侍漁者，退，謂其宰曰：「 爾以帑免，我將死。」其宰曰： 「 免，是反子之義也。」與之皆死。崔氏殺鬷蔑于平陰。 25.2c 晏子立於崔氏之門外，其人曰：「 死乎？」

曰：「 獨吾君也乎哉，吾死也？」 曰：「 行乎？」 曰：「 吾罪也乎哉，吾亡也？」 曰：「 歸乎？」 曰：「 君死，安歸？君民者，豈以陵民？社稷是主。臣君者，豈為其 口實，社稷是養。故君為社稷死，則死之；為社稷亡，則亡之。若為己 死，而為己亡，非其私暱，誰敢任之？且人有君而弒之，吾焉得死之？而 焉得亡之？將庸何歸？」

753 The received text has you 又 (“again”), which will make sense only if Lord Zhuang had already been shot. Yu Yue (Yang, 3:1097) suggests that the graph should be read as you 有, meaning “there was someone.” 754 This is a different Jia Ju, not to be confused with the attendant of the same name who plotted with Cui Zhu against Lord Zhuang. 755 On Zhou Chuo’s valor, see Xiang 18.3c, 18.3d, 21.8. 756 Pingyin was a strategic area in the outskirts of the Qi capital, Linzi, see n. 477 above. Zong Mie was probably related to Zong Sheng Ji, mother of Lord Zhuang. 757 According to Du Yu (ZZ 36.619), the eight men who die defending Lord Zhuang are all his personal favorites. Ma Su points out that Lord Zhuang’s followers (Lupu Kui, Wang He) later avenge his murder by wiping out the Qing lineage, but the fact that it is his favorites rather than Qi ministers who remain loyal to him underlines his failings as a ruler (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 413–14).

1140

Zuo Tradition

Cui Zhu’s armed men rose up from their ambush. The lord climbed up a terrace and begged to be spared. They would not grant it. He begged to swear a covenant. They would not grant it. He begged to put himself to the sword at the Ancestral Temple. They would not grant it. They all said, “The ruler’s subject, Cui Zhuc, is very ill. He cannot personally attend to the lord’s commands. Being close to the lord’s palace, we, the subjects of the lord’s subject, are to make our night circuit and round up the depraved. We know of no other command.” The lord was trying to jump over the wall when someone753 shot him and hit him in the thigh. He fell back, and they then assassinated him. His followers—Jia Ju,754 Zhou Chuo,755 Bing Shi, Gongsun Ao, Feng Ju, Duofu, Xiang Yi, and Lü Yin—all died. Invocator Tuofu had been offering sacrifices at Gaotang. He arrived, reported discharge of his mission, and died at Cui Zhu’s residence without taking off his ceremonial cap. Shen Kuai, the superintendent of the fishery, withdrew and said to his steward, “Spare yourself and take care of my family. I am prepared to die.” His steward said, “If I spare myself, I will be going against your principle of abiding by duty.” He died with Shen Kuai. Cui Zhu killed Zong Mie at Pingyin.756 The sagacious Yan Ying mourns Lord Zhuang in a ritually appropriate fashion but refuses to die or go into exile for him. His judgment exemplifies the choices and dilemmas of a noble man in an age of disorder (see also Zhao 10.2). Yan Yingb stood outside the gate of Cui Zhu’s residence. His followers said, “Will you die?” He said, “Was he my ruler only? Why should I die?” “Will you leave?” “Is it my crime? Why should I leave?” “Will you return home?” “With the ruler dead, where is the home to return to? He who rules over the people, how can he use his position to lord it over the people? It is the altars of the domain that he should take as master. He who serves the ruler, how can he do it for the sake of material recompense? It is the altars of the domain that he should nurture. Thus, if a ruler dies for the altars of the domain, then the subject dies for him. If the ruler is exiled for the altars of the domain, then the subject goes into exile for him. If a ruler dies for himself or is exiled because of his deeds, who, except for his personal favorites, would presume to bear the responsibility?757 Besides, it was that person, Cui Zhu, who had made him ruler and assassinated him, so how could I die for him? And how could I go into exile for him? Where then is the home to return to?”

25.2c

Lord Xiang

1141

門啟而入，枕尸股而哭，興，三踊而出。人謂崔子：「 必殺之」。崔 子曰：「 民之望也，舍之，得民。」 25.2d 盧蒲癸奔晉，王何奔莒。

叔孫宣伯之在齊也，叔孫還納其女於靈公，嬖，生景公。丁丑，崔 杼立而相之，慶封為左相，盟國人於大宮，曰：「 所不與崔、慶者－－」晏 子仰天歎曰：「 嬰所不唯忠於君、利社稷者是與，有如上帝！」乃歃。辛 巳，公與大夫及莒子盟。 大史書曰：「 崔杼弒其君。」崔子殺之。其弟嗣書，而死者二人。其 弟又書，乃舍之。南史氏聞大史盡死，執簡以往。聞既書矣，乃還。

758 The Chinese original, zhen shi gu 枕尸股, can also be read as “putting his head on the corpse’s thighs.” Our translation follows Du Yu’s (ZZ 36.619) reading, which is based on the phrase zhen zhi gu 枕之股 in analogous accounts of mourning ritual (Xi 28.5, Xiang 27.3, 30.10). See Xi 28.5, n. 444. Both Yanzi chunqiu 5.296 and Shiji 32.1501 present Yan Ying putting his head on the corpse. On the three leaps as mourning ritual, see also Liji 20.726. 759 The parallel passage from Yanzi chunqiu 5.295–96 more clearly delineates moral choices. In Yanzi chunqiu, Yan Ying wisely withdraws from government because of Lord Zhuang’s mistrust and incivility. He sighs and smiles as he returns lands and titles to the Qi ruler. He explains to his servant, “I sigh, grieving that my lord will not escape from calamity. I smile, being glad of what I have gained. I will be spared death.” Defying Cui Zhu, who reproaches him for not committing suicide, he implies ultimate goals of “preserving the (rightful) ruler” (cunjun 存君) and “establishing merit” (ligong 立功).

1142

Zuo Tradition

When the gates were opened, Yan Ying entered, pillowed the corpse’s head on his thigh758 and wailed, rose, leaped thrice, and left Cui Zhu’s residence. Someone said to Cui Zhue, “He must be killed!” Cui Zhue said, “He is the one to whom the people feel allegiance. Let him be, so that we can gain the people’s support.”759 Yan Ying manages to uphold his integrity and protect himself when forced to swear a covenant with Cui Zhu and Qing Feng. The scribes of Qi defend truthful historical records with their lives. The political power of the usurper is shown to be ultimately no match for the moral authority of historical judgment. These Qi scribes, along with Dong Hu (Xuan 2.3c), become the emblem of the historian’s integrity in the tradition. This is one of the most famous passages in the text. Lupu Gui fled to Jin. Wang He fled to Ju.760 When Shusun Qiaorub was in Qi, Shusun Xuan had Shusun Qiaoru’s daughter taken into Lord Ling’s harem. He was enamored of her, and she gave birth to Lord Jing.761 On the dingchou day (19), Cui Zhu established the latter as ruler and made himself the chief minister. Qing Feng became the minister of the left. They swore a covenant with the inhabitants of the capital at the Ancestral Temple, and as they said, “Should we not support Cui and Qing . . . ,” Yan Yingb raised his head heavenward and sighed, “Should I fail to support those who are loyal to the ruler and who benefit the altars of the domain, let the god on high bear witness against me!”762 Then he smeared his mouth with the blood. On the xinsi day (23), the lord and the high officers swore a covenant with the Master of Ju. The grand scribe wrote, “Cui Zhu assassinated his ruler.” Cui Zhue put him to death. The scribe’s younger brothers succeeded him and wrote the same thing, and so two more persons were killed. Another younger brother again wrote it, whereupon Cui Zhu desisted. The scribe of the south, having heard that the grand scribes had all died, clutched the bamboo strips and set out. When he heard that the record had already been made, he turned back.763

25.2d

760 Both men were of the party of Lord Zhuang. 761 The Lu minister Shusun Qiaoru fled to Qi in 575 Bce (Cheng 16.11). Lord Jing was thus the half brother of the murdered Lord Zhuang. Lord Jing’s mother, Mu Meng Ji, is mentioned in Zhao 10.2c, n. 487. 762 In the analogous passage in Yanzi chunqiu 5.298–99, Yan Ying denounces Cui Zhu and Qing Feng in a more direct and forceful manner. On interrupted speech, see n. 73 above. 763 The version of this story in Xinxu 7.231 concludes with a noble man’s commendation: “These are the fine scribes of ancient times” (gu zhi liangshi 古之良史).

Lord Xiang

1143

25.2e 閭丘嬰以帷縛其妻而載之，與申鮮虞乘而出，鮮虞推而下之，曰：「 君昏

不能匡，危不能救，死不能死，而知匿其暱，其誰納之？」行及弇中，將 舍。嬰曰：「 崔、慶其追我。」鮮虞曰：「 一與一，誰能懼我？」遂舍，枕轡 而寢，食馬而食，駕而行。出弇中，謂嬰曰：「 速驅之！崔、慶之眾，不可 當也。」遂來奔。 崔氏側莊公于北郭。丁亥，葬諸士孫之里。四翣，不蹕，下車七乘， 不以兵甲。 25.3(3) 晉侯濟自泮，會于夷儀，伐齊，以報朝歌之役。齊人以莊公說，使隰鉏

請成，慶封如師。男女以班。賂晉侯以宗器、樂器。自六正、五吏、三十 帥、三軍之大夫、百官之正長、師旅及處守者皆有賂。晉侯許之。使叔 向告於諸侯。公使子服惠伯對曰：「 君舍有罪，以靖小國，君之惠也。寡 君聞命矣。」

764 Yanzhong 弇中 was located southwest of the Qi capital Linzi 臨淄. 765 The pass is so narrow that they will be fighting their pursuers one chariot at a time. 766 We follow Hong Liangji’s (Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 574) reading of ce 側 as ze 仄, “not proper.” Yu Yue (Yang, 3:1100) reads ce as ji 塈, “to burn earth and make it into mud bricks” (i.e., Cui Zhu surrounded Lord Zhuang’s coffin with mud bricks). 767 The Lane of Shisun must have been located at the northern outer wall. Criminals are banished from family burial grounds (Ai 2.3a). A lord of the domain should have been interred at the ancestral cemetery. The interval between death and burial should have been five months (instead of thirteen days). Here the roads are not cleared as they should have been for the funeral; there are four instead of the customary six fans, seven inferior carriages instead of nine fine carriages; and armed soldiers that should have been employed are absent.

1144

Zuo Tradition

Two supporters of Lord Zhuang escape. Their different reactions to exigencies will result in divergent fates (Xiang 27.9, 31.2). Lord Zhuang is buried in a manner beneath his station. Lüqiu Ying wrapped his wife in carriage drapes and took her in a carriage. As he rode out with Shen Xianyu, the latter pushed the woman down from the carriage and said to Lüqiu Ying, “When the ruler was benighted, you failed to correct him. When he was in danger, you failed to save him. When he died, you failed to die with him. And yet you know how to conceal your loved one. Who will take us in?” They journeyed forth and reached the narrow pass at Yanzhong,764 preparing to rest there for the night. Lüqiu Yinga said, “Cui Zhud and Qing Fenga are pursuing us.” Shen Xianyua said, “It will be one against one. Who can make us afraid?”765 They thus rested for the night and slept using their reins as pillows. After feeding their horses, they ate, yoked the horses, and drove on. Once they came out of Yanzhong, Shen Xianyu said to Lüqiu Yinga, “Spur on the horses at top speed! We are no match for the multitudes of Cui Zhud and Qing Fenga!” And so they came in flight. Cui Zhu buried Lord Zhuang improperly at the northern outer wall of the capital.766 On the dinghai day (29), Lord Zhuang was interred at the Lane of Shisun. There were four plume-fans flanking the carriage carrying the coffin, the roads were not cleared, seven inferior carriages formed the funeral procession, and no soldiers with weapons and armor were employed.767

25.2e

Jin plans to attack Qi in retaliation for the Zhaoge campaign (Xiang 23.4) but agrees to an accord when Qi leaders offer abundant gifts. Jin may also have been placated by the removal of Lord Zhuang, who was largely responsible for the deterioration of Qi-Jin relations. Note that Cui Zhu cited Jin enmity as one of the reasons why Lord Zhuang should be deposed (Xiang 25.2a). The Prince of Jin crossed the Pan River. He gathered the princes for a meeting at Yiyi with a view to attacking Qi in retaliation for the Zhaoge campaign. The leaders of Qi made Lord Zhuang their excuse for past troubles and sent Xi Chu to request an accord. Qing Feng went to the Jin army with rows of men and women, signifying submission. He offered the Prince of Jin gifts of sacrificial vessels and musical instruments. All received gifts—from the six directors on down through the ranks of the five senior officers, the thirty subcommanders, the high officers of the three armies, the superintendents of the hundred offices and their subordinates, to those who remained to guard the domain. The Prince of Jin granted his assent to the accord and had Shuxiang notify the princes. Lord Xiang of Lu sent Zifu Huibo to reply: “You, my lord, have let the guilty off in order to bring peace to a small domain. This is your beneficence. Our unworthy ruler has heeded your command!”

25.3(3)

Lord Xiang

1145

25.4 晉侯使魏舒、宛沒逆衛侯，將使衛與之夷儀。崔子止其帑，以求五鹿。 25.5(4) 初，陳侯會楚子伐鄭，當陳隧者，井堙，木刊，鄭人怨之。六月，鄭子展、

子產帥車七百乘伐陳，宵突陳城，遂入之。 陳侯扶其大子偃師奔墓，遇司馬桓子，曰：「 載余！」曰：「 將巡 城。」遇賈獲，載其母妻，下之，而授公車。公曰：「 舍而母。」辭曰：「 不 祥。」與其妻扶其母以奔墓，亦免。 子展命師無入公宮，與子產親御諸門。陳侯使司馬桓子賂以宗 器。陳侯免，擁社，使其眾男女別而纍，以待於朝。子展執縶而見，再拜 稽首承，飲而進獻。子美入，數俘而出。祝祓社，司徒致民，司馬致節， 司空致地，乃還。

768 For a man and a woman who are unrelated to each other to ride together violates propriety and is therefore inauspicious. Recall how a Jin officer makes his sons dismount his chariot (and sacrifice their lives) and yield their place to a minister of higher rank in the battle of Bi (Xuan 12.2h). 769 Yu 御 can also be read as yu 禦, “to defend”: “and together with Zichan he personally defended the palace at the gates.” 770 Cf. Han Jue’s manner toward Lord Qing of Qi following Jin’s victory in the An campaign (Cheng 2.2). 771 In other words, Zichan just ascertains the extent of Zheng victory without taking Chen captives back to Zheng as prisoners of war. 772 According to Yang (3:1103), these are Zheng officers who restored the people, the tallies, and the land to their Chen counterparts.

1146

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xian of Wei, who had fled to Qi eleven years earlier (Xiang 14.4), will gain a power base in Yiyi with Jin’s help, even as Cui Zhu tries to use Lord Xian’s family as hostages to bargain for Wei territories. The Prince of Jin sent Wei Shu and Yuan Mo to meet the Prince of Wei [the exiled Lord Xian]. He planned to have Wei give Yiyi to the exiled Wei ruler. Cui Zhue detained the family of the exiled Wei ruler in order to demand Wulu from Wei.

25.4

Zheng attacks Chen in retaliation for the Chen-Chu incursion of the previous winter (Annals, Xiang 24.9; Zuozhuan, Xiang 24.8). Chen’s defeat is dignified by the ritually proper behavior of its high officer Jia Huo. Zheng victors enforce military discipline and restore order in Chen. The account glorifies Zheng leaders as benevolent victors. Earlier, the Prince of Chen had joined with the Master of Chu to attack Zheng. Along the route taken by the Chen army, wells were filled up and trees cut down. The men of Zheng resented this. In the sixth month, Gongsun Shezhia and Zichan of Zheng, leading seven hundred chariots, attacked Chen, broke through the walls of its capital at night, and then entered it. The Prince of Chen, helping along his heir apparent, Yanshi, fled to the graveyard. They encountered the supervisor of the military, Huanzi, and said, “Let us ride in your chariot!” Huanzi replied, “I am preparing to make a circuit of the city walls.” They then encountered Jia Huo, who was riding with his mother and wife. Jia Huo made them come down and gave the chariot to the lord. The lord said, “Leave your mother.” He declined, saying, “That would be inauspicious.”768 Along with his wife, Jia Huo helped his mother along and fled to the graveyard. They were also spared. Gongsun Shezhia ordered the army not to enter the lord’s palace, and together with Zichan he personally took charge at the palace gates.769 The Prince of Chen sent the supervisor of the military, Huanzi, to offer them gifts of sacrificial vessels. The Prince of Chen, in mourning clothes and embracing the tablets of the altars, had numerous men and women in bondage arranged in separate rows, and with them he awaited Zheng commands at court. Gongsun Shezhia, holding on to a bridle, had an audience with the Chen ruler. He bowed twice with his forehead touching the ground, held up a wine cup, and came forward to offer it ceremoniously.770 Zichanb entered, counted the number of captives, and then left.771 They had the invocator cleanse all baleful influences at the altar of earth. The supervisor of conscripts restored their people to them, the supervisor of the military restored their tallies of command to them, and the supervisor of works restored their land to them, and they then returned to Zheng.772

25.5(4)

Lord Xiang

1147

25.6(5) 秋，七月己巳，同盟于重丘，齊成故也。 25.7 趙文子為政，令薄諸侯之幣，而重其禮。穆叔見之，謂穆叔曰：「 自今以

往，兵其少弭矣。齊崔、慶新得政，將求善於諸侯。武也知楚令尹。若敬 行其禮，道之以文辭，以靖諸侯，兵可以弭。」 25.8(8) 楚薳子馮卒，屈建為令尹，屈蕩為莫敖。舒鳩人卒叛，楚令尹子木伐之，

及離城，吳人救之。子木遽以右師先，子彊、息桓、子捷、子駢、子盂帥 左師以退。吳人居其間七日。子彊曰：「 久將墊隘，隘乃禽也，不如速 戰。請以其私卒誘之，簡師，陳以待我。我克則進，奔則亦視之，乃可以 免。不然，必為吳禽。」從之。五人以其私卒先擊吳師，吳師奔；登山以 望，見楚師不繼，復逐之，傅諸其軍，簡師會之。吳師大敗。遂圍舒鳩， 舒鳩潰。八月，楚滅舒鳩。

773 “Finely patterned arguments,” also translated as “ornamented words and phases” below (Xiang 25.10b), refer specifically to efficacious diplomatic language. 774 Licheng 離城 was probably very close to Shujiu 舒鳩 just west of present-day Shucheng County 舒城縣, Anhui.

1148

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jisi day (12), the princes swore a covenant together at Chongqiu: this was on account of good relations with Qi.

25.6(5)

Zhao Wu succeeds Fan Gai as chief minister in Jin and lessens demands on the princes. His goal to end conflicts with Chu results in the Covenant of Song two years later (Xiang 27.4), although the quest for peace ultimately proves futile. Zhao Wua was in charge of government. He issued orders to lighten the burden of offerings from the princes and to redouble ritual honors for them. When Shusun Baoa had an audience with him, he said to Shusun Baoa, “Henceforth, military conflicts will likely abate somewhat. In Qi, Cui Zhud and Qing Fenga have newly obtained control of the government and are planning to secure the goodwill of the princes. I also know the chief minister of Chu. If we respectfully fulfill ritual propriety and open the way with finely patterned arguments,773 thereby calming the princes, then military conflicts can be made to abate.”

25.7

Shujiu revolts with Wu aid after its earlier halfhearted submission to Chu (Xiang 24.9). Chu strategic ploys lead to its elimination, a culmination of Chu aggression against various Shu domains, including Shuliao (Wen 12.3, 14.10, Xuan 8.3) and Shuyong (Cheng 17.11). Wei Ziping of Chu died, and Qu Jian became chief minister. Qu Dang became maréchal. The leaders of Shujiu finally revolted, and the Chu chief minister Qu Jiana attacked it. When the Chu forces reached Licheng,774 the men of Wu came to the aid of Shujiu. Qu Jiana swiftly deployed the right army to move ahead and had Ziqiang, Xi Huan, Zijie, Zipian, and Ziyu lead the left army in retreat. The men of Wu were positioned between the right and left armies of Chu for seven days. Ziqiang said, “A prolonged stalemate will weaken us, and in that weakened state we will be captured. It is better to fight soon. I request to use our private soldiers to lead the enemy on, while you select our crack troops and wait for me with ready battle formations. If we overcome the enemy, then you advance. Even if we flee, you can still observe the situation and act accordingly, and we can then be spared. Otherwise, we will certainly be captured by Wu.” They followed his plan. The five men used their clan troops to first strike the Wu army. The Wu army fled, climbed the mountain to survey the scene, saw that the Chu soldiers were not backed up, and pursued them again. Once they had drawn the Wu troops close to the Chu army, the select crack troops closed in on them. The Wu army was roundly defeated. Chu then laid siege to Shujiu, which collapsed. In the eighth month, Chu extinguished Shujiu.

25.8(8)

Lord Xiang

1149

25.9(7) 衛獻公入于夷儀。 25.10a 鄭子產獻捷于晉，戎服將事。晉人問陳之罪。對曰： 昔虞閼父為周陶正，以服事我先王。我先王賴其利器用也，

與其神明之後也，庸以元女大姬配胡公，而封諸陳，以備三 恪。則我周之自出，至于今是賴。桓公之亂，蔡人欲立其 出，我先君莊公奉五父而立之，蔡人殺之，我又與蔡人奉戴 厲公。至於莊、宣，皆我之自立。夏氏之亂，成公播蕩，又我 之自入，君所知也。 今陳忘周之大德，蔑我大惠，棄我姻親，介恃楚眾，以 憑陵我敝邑，不可億逞，我是以有往年之告。未獲成命，則 有我東門之役。當陳隧者，井堙、木刊。敝邑大懼不競而恥 大姬，天誘其衷，啟敝邑 之心。陳知其罪授手于我。用敢 獻功。

晉人曰：「 何故侵小？」

775 The ensuing exchange shows that the speaker is Shi Ruo. 776 The former king referred to is King Wu of Zhou. 777 According to Liji 39.696, after the Zhou conquest of Shang, King Wu put the descendants of the Yellow Emperor, Yao, and Shun in power in Ji, Zhu, and Chen, respectively. The “three respected lines” thus refer to the descendants of the Yellow Emperor, Yao, and Shun (Yang, 3:1104). Du Yu (ZZ 36.622) claims that the term refers to the ruling houses before Zhou, that is, Yu, Xia, and Shang. 778 The Chen heir born of a Cai lady is the future Lord Li (r. 706–700). Lord Zhuang of Zheng at first supported Wufu, Lord Huan’s (r. 744–707) younger brother, but eventually recognized Lord Li (Lord Huan’s son) after Wufu was killed by the leaders of Cai; see Huan 5.1, Zhuang 22.1; Annals, Huan 6.4. 779 Lords Zhuang (r. 699–693) and Xuan (r. 692–648) are sons of Lord Li. There is no mention of Zheng’s role in establishing these two Chen rulers in Zuozhuan. 780 Chu played a major role intervening in Chen affairs at this point. Zichan ignores that and instead focuses on how Lord Cheng, in exile in Jin, came back to Chen through Zheng’s help, which is not mentioned in the account in Xuan 11.5. 781 See Xiang 24.2. 782 Chu invaded Zheng on the request of Chen, see Xiang 24.8. 783 Zichan is implying that since Zhou, Jin, and Zheng all share the clan name Ji, Zheng’s weakness will bring shame on the Zhou princess Tai Ji, “Grand Lady Ji,” the ancestress of Chen.

1150

Zuo Tradition

Jin intercession gains the exiled Wei ruler a place in Yiyi. Lord Xian of Wei entered Yiyi.

25.9(7)

Zheng requested Jin permission to attack Chen last year (Xiang 24.2b) but did not seem to have obtained it. Here Zichan defends the Zheng invasion of Chen by mixing moral and pragmatic arguments. He appeals to ZhouZheng ties, Jin-Zheng ties, and historical examples of beneficial Zheng intercession in Chen, but he also frankly avows the logic of power politics (see also Zhao 1.2b). Zichan of Zheng presented the spoils of victory to Jin and wore his military garb while attending to affairs. A Jin leader775 asked about Chen’s offenses. Zichan replied,

25.10a

Long ago, Yu Efu became the Zhou director of pottery production so as to serve our former king.776 Commending the beneficial utility of his vessels and his descent from the sage-king Shun, our former king gave his eldest daughter, Grand Lady Ji, in marriage to Yu Efu’s son, the Hu Lord, and put him in power in Chen to complete the honors due the “three respected lines.”777 Thus, Chen came from our Zhou house and to this day relies on its beneficence. With the unrest following the death of Lord Huan of Chen, the leaders of Cai wanted to establish as ruler the Chen heir born of a Cai lady. Our former ruler, Lord Zhuang, supported Wufu and established him as ruler. The leaders of Cai killed him, and we worked with them to support and maintain Lord Li.778 Coming to Lords Zhuang and Xuan, each was established as ruler by us.779 During the rebellion of Xia Zhengshu, Lord Cheng wandered as an exile and was also brought back into Chen through our effort. That is something you, my lord, knew about.780 Now Chen has forgotten the great virtue and beneficence of Zhou, rejected our ties by marriage, and relied on Chu forces to threaten the demolition of our humble settlement. It could not be satisfied. That was why we had last year’s request.781 Before we received your complete approval, there was the East Gate cam­ paign.782 Along the route taken by the Chen army, wells were stopped up and trees cut down. Our humble settlement was greatly fearful that, failing to assert ourselves, we would bring great shame on Grand Lady Ji.783 Heaven's sentiments were swayed and opened our minds to the idea of attacking Chen. Chen realized its guilt and accepted punishment from us. That is why we presume to offer the spoils of our victorious achievement.

The Jin leader said, “For what reason did you invade a small domain?”

Lord Xiang

1151

對曰；「 先王之命，唯罪所在，各致其辟。且昔天子之地一圻，列 國一同，自是以衰。今大國多數圻矣，若無侵小，何以至焉？」 晉人曰：「 何故戎服？」 對曰：「 我先君武、莊為平、桓卿士。城濮之役，文公布命，曰：『各 復舊職。』命我文公戎服輔王，以授楚捷－－不敢廢王命故也。」 士莊伯不能詰，復於趙文子。文子曰：「 其辭順。犯順，不祥。」乃 受之。 25.10b 冬，十月，子展相鄭伯如晉，拜陳之功。子西復伐陳，陳及鄭平。

仲尼曰：「 《志》有之：『言以足志，文以足言。』不言，誰知其志？ 言之無文，行而不遠。晉為伯，鄭入陳，非文辭不為功。慎辭也。」

1152

Zuo Tradition

Zichan replied, “By the command of the former kings, the only thing that matters is where the guilt lies. To each and every offender punishment is meted out. Moreover, long ago the territories of the Son of Heaven amounted to one thousand square li; that of the various domains, one hundred square li; and with the lower ranks, the territories were smaller still. Now most of the great domains span several thousand square li. If they had not invaded small domains, how could they have reached that?” The Jin leader said, “Why are you wearing military garb?” He replied, “Our former rulers Lords Wu and Zhuang were the ministers in attendance on Kings Ping and Huan.784 After the Chengpu campaign, Lord Wen of Jin proclaimed the command, saying, ‘All should resume their former duties.’ He commanded our Lord Wen to don military attire and assist the king as Jin presented its Chu spoils.785 We would not presume to cast aside the king’s command.” Shi Ruob could not press further and reported discharge of his mission to Zhao Wua. Zhao Wub said, “His words follow propriety and good sense. It is inauspicious to go against propriety and good sense.” He then accepted the Zheng spoils. Confucius commends the power of masterful diplomatic rhetoric. His comment is often cited in writings on literary thought that address the relationship between intent and expression, meaning and rhetoric.786 In the context here, however, the emphasis is on efficacious language that justifies political gains. In winter, in the tenth month, Gongsun Shezhia assisted the Liege of Zheng as they went to Jin to bow in thanks for Jin’s acceptance of Zheng’s achievements in Chen. Zixi again attacked Chen. Chen and Zheng reached a peace agreement. Confuciusc said, “As the Records has it: ‘Use words that are adequate to the intent; use ornamentation that is adequate to the words.’ Without words, who can know the intent? Words without ornamentation cannot go far. For Jin to become overlord, and Zheng to enter Chen, there would have been no merit had it not been for ornamented words and phrases. Words and phrases must be used with care!”

25.10b

784 See Yin 3.3. 785 This is a reminder of Zheng’s role in Jin’s moment of glory; see Xi 28.3. 786 E.g., Wenxin diaolong 31.1144–75. In the annotation to Lu Ji’s “Wen fu” 文賦, these lines are cited differently: “the words are adequate for conveying intent, and the ornamentation is adequate for facilitating words” 言足以志，文足以言 (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 441). Cf. Xunzi 5.85 and 5.89 on the relationship between words, intent, and action.

Lord Xiang

1153

25.11 楚蒍掩為司馬，子木使庀賦，數甲兵。甲午，蒍掩書土田，度山林，鳩藪

澤，辨京陵，表淳鹵，數疆潦，規偃豬，町原防，牧隰皋，井衍沃，量入 修賦，賦車、籍馬，賦車兵、徒兵、甲楯之數。既成，以授子木，禮也。 25.12(10) 十二月，吳子諸樊伐楚，以報舟師之役。門于巢。巢牛臣曰：「 吳王勇而

輕，若啟之，將親門。我獲射之，必殪。是君也死，疆其少安。」從之。吳 子門焉，牛臣隱於短牆以射之，卒。 25.13 楚子以滅舒鳩賞子木。辭曰：「 先大夫蒍子之功也。」以與蒍掩。 25.14 晉程鄭卒，子產始知然明，問為政焉。對曰：「 視民如子。見不仁者，誅

之，如鷹鸇之逐鳥雀也。」子產喜，以語子大叔，且曰：「 他日，吾見蔑之 面而已，今吾見其心矣。」

787 This jiawu day is the eighth day of the tenth month. 788 An alternative reading is “defined the boundaries of districts liable to flooding.”

1154

Zuo Tradition

Chu leaders systematically review the conditions and resources of the domain. Wei Yan of Chu became supervisor of the military. Qu Jiana had him regulate revenues and review weapons and armor. On the jiawu day,787 Wei Yan recorded the conditions of resources and lands: he measured the timber of mountain forests, examined wetlands and marshes, made distinctions between high altitudes and lesser mounds, marked out saline fields with trees, defined districts with dense soil liable to flooding,788 drew boundaries for reservoirs, divided lands up into small parcels for cultivation, used wetlands for pastures, established subdivisions for flat, fertile lands, calculated the domain’s revenues and regularized levies, and determined the contribution of chariots, of horses, and of the weapons for chariot drivers and for foot soldiers, as well as the number of armor suits and shields. Having completed this, he delivered the results to Qu Jiana. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

25.11

Wu attacks Chu in retaliation for the latter’s flotilla-borne attack (Xiang 24.4). The reckless Wu king dies in battle. In the twelfth month, Zhufan, the Master of Wu, attacked Chu in retaliation for the campaign of the flotilla. Wu forces stormed the gate of Chao. Niuchen of Chao said, “The Wu king is valiant and reckless. If we open the gate, he will personally break through it. I will get the chance to shoot him, and he will be sure to die. If that ruler dies, our borders will enjoy peace for a little while.” The men of Chao followed his suggestion. The Master of Wu stormed the gate, and Niuchen, hiding behind a low wall, shot him, and he died.

25.12(10)

The Master of Chu rewarded Qu Jiana for extinguishing Shujiu. The latter declined, “This was the achievement of the former high officer Wei Zipinga.” The reward was thus given to Wei Ziping’s son Wei Yan.

25.13

Cheng Zheng’s death reminds Zichan of Ran Ming’s negative judgment of Cheng Zheng (Xiang 24.12). Ran Ming’s ugliness (Zhao 28.3c) means that Zichan is slow to appreciate his foresight. Ran Ming had seen through Cheng Zheng’s apparent humility, and now Zichan can get past Ran Ming’s appearance. Ran Ming and Zichan offer similar views on discipline and assiduity in government. Cheng Zheng of Jin died, and only then did Zichan recognize Ran Ming’s prescience. Zichan asked the latter about the way of government. Ran Ming replied, “Regard the people as your children. If you see an ignoble person, put him to death the way hawks pounce on sparrows.” Zichan was glad and told You Jib about this, adding, “In the old days I saw only Ran Minga’s face, but now I have seen his heart.”

25.14

Lord Xiang

1155

子大叔問政於子產。子產曰：「 政如農功，日夜思之，思其始而成 其終，朝夕而行之。行無越思，如農之有畔，其過鮮矣。」 25.15 衛獻公自夷儀使與甯喜言，甯喜許之。大叔文子聞之，曰：「 烏呼！《詩》

所謂 我躬不說， 皇恤我後 者，甯子可謂不恤其後矣。將可乎哉？殆必不可。君子之行，思其終也， 思其復也。書曰： 慎始而敬終，終以不困。

《詩》曰： 夙夜匪解， 以事一人。 今甯子視君不如弈棋，其何以免乎？弈者舉棋不定，不勝其耦；而況置 君而弗定乎？必不免矣。九世之卿族，一舉而滅之，可哀也哉！」

789 For a similar comparison, see Yin 6.4, Zhao 1.1b. 790 These lines appear in both Maoshi 35, “Gufeng” 谷風, 2B.90, and Maoshi 197, “Xiao pan” 小弁, 12C.423. 791 These lines are not found in the received version of Shangshu. They appear in a slightly altered version in Yi Zhou shu 1.3.1929a and in Xu Gan, Zhong lun 2.11. In Liji 54.918, being “cautious at the beginning and reverential at the end” is said to be “the way to serve rulers.”

1156

Zuo Tradition

You Jib asked Zichan about the way of government. Zichan said, “Governing is like farming,789 in that one thinks about it day and night, in that one thinks about its beginnings so as to achieve its ends, in that one acts on these thoughts from morning till evening. Do not act on what you have not thought through; do this in the same way that fields follow dividing boundaries. In this way there will be few errors.” The Wei minister Ning Xi, whose father drove out Lord Xian of Wei (Xiang 14.4), promises to restore the latter, fulfilling his father’s dying wish (Xiang 20.7). The Wei minister Taishu Yi’s prediction of Ning Xi’s doom will be fulfilled two years later (Xi 27.3a). From Yiyi Lord Xian of Wei sent someone to talk to Ning Xi about his restoration. Ning Xi gave his assent. Taishu Yia heard about this and said, “Alas! There are those of whom the Odes says,

25.15

Even for my person there is no place, Whence the means to worry about what comes after me?790

Ning Xic can be said not to worry about what comes after him! Can what is planned be done? Surely it cannot be done. When it comes to a noble man’s action, he thinks about its consequences and its continuance. As the Documents says, Be cautious at the beginning and reverential at the end, and you will finish with no difficulty.791

It says in the Odes, Day and night, unflaggingly, He serves the One Man.792

Now that Ning Xic regards dealing with the ruler as a lesser game than chess, how can he escape disaster? If a chess player holds a piece and cannot decide, he will not overcome his opponent. How much more is it so with one who is about to put a ruler in his place and cannot decide? He will certainly not escape disaster. A house that has held ministerial positions for nine generations will be destroyed with one stroke. It is lamentable indeed!”

792 Maoshi 260, “Zhengmin” 蒸民, 18C.675. Yin Jifu, a Zhou nobleman, is praising another Zhou nobleman, Zhong Shanfu, for his service to the royal house. “One Man” refers to King Xuan of Zhou (r. 827–781). These lines are also cited in Wen 3.4.

Lord Xiang

1157

25.16 會于夷儀之歲，齊人城郟。其五月，秦、晉為成，晉韓起如秦蒞盟，秦伯

車如晉蒞盟。成而不結。

春秋 26.1(2) 二十有六年，春，王二月辛卯，衛甯喜弒其君剽。 26.2(2) 衛孫林父入于戚以叛。 26.3(2) 甲午，衛侯衎復歸于衛。 26.4(5) 夏，晉侯使荀吳來聘。 26.5(7) 公會晉人、鄭良霄、宋人、曹人于澶淵。 26.6(8) 秋，宋公殺其世子痤。 26.7(7) 晉人執衛甯喜。 26.8(11) 八月壬午，許男甯卒于楚。 26.9(11) 冬，楚子、蔡侯、陳侯伐鄭。 26.10(11) 葬許靈公。

1158

Zuo Tradition

Qin and Jin made a peace agreement in the previous year, but the realization of the covenant in the coming year, to which this entry properly belongs, is fraught with difficulties. The year when the meeting at Yiyi took place, the leaders of Qi fortified Jia. In the fifth month of that year, Qin and Jin reached a peace agreement. Han Qi of Jin went to Qin to oversee the covenant. Qianb of Qin went to Jin to oversee the covenant. The peace agreement was made but did not last.793

25.16

LORD XIANG 26 (547 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the xinmao day (7), Ning Xi of Wei assassinated his ruler Piao.

26.1(2)

Sun Linfu of Wei entered Qī and led it in revolt.

26.2(2)

On the jiawu day (10), the Prince of Wei, Kan, went home again to Wei.

26.3(2)

In summer, the Prince of Jin sent Xun Wu (Zhonghang Wu) to us on an official visit.

26.4(5)

Our lord met with a Jin leader, Liang Xiao of Zheng, a Song leader, and a Cao leader at Chanyuan.794

26.5(7)

In autumn, the Duke of Song put to death his heir apparent Cuo.

26.6(8)

Jin leaders arrested Ning Xi of Wei.

26.7(7)

In the eighth month, on the renwu day (1), Ning, the Head of Xǔ, died in Chu.

26.8(11)

In winter, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Cai, and the Prince of Chen attacked Zheng.

26.9(11)

Lord Ling of Xǔ was buried.

26.10(11)

793 This narrative is separated from its continuation in Xiang 26.1 by Annals entries. 794 Chanyuan 澶淵 was in the domain of Wei northwest of Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

1159

左傳 26.1 二十六年，春，秦伯之弟鍼如晉修成，叔向命召行人子員。行人子朱曰：

「 朱也當御。」三云，叔向不應。子朱怒，曰：「 班爵同，何以黜朱於朝？」 撫劍從之。叔向曰：「 秦、晉不和久矣。今日之事，幸而集，晉國賴之。不 集，三軍暴骨。子員道二國之言無私，子常易之。姦以事君者，吾所能御 也。」拂衣從之。人救之。 平公曰：「 晉其庶乎！吾臣之所爭者大。」師曠曰：「 公室懼卑。臣 不心競而力爭，不務德而爭善，私欲已侈，能無卑乎？」 26.2a 衛獻公使子鮮為復，辭。敬姒強命之。對曰：「 君無信，臣懼不免。」敬姒

曰：「 雖然，以吾故也。」許諾。 初，獻公使與甯喜言，甯喜曰：「 必子鮮在。不然，必敗。」故公使 子鮮。子鮮不獲命於敬姒，以公命與甯喜言，曰：「 苟反，政由甯氏，祭 則寡人。」 甯喜告蘧伯玉。伯玉曰：「 瑗不得聞君之出，敢聞其入？」遂行，從 近關出。

795 See Xiang 4.3 and 8.7b. 796 Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.463, has an almost identical passage. 797 Cf. Xiang 14.4, n. 400.

1160

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Two Jin envoys fight over the right to serve during Qin-Jin negotiations. Shuxiang, elsewhere commended for his wisdom, here seems more partisan. The music master Kuang sees the signs of Jin decline. In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, Qian, the younger brother of the Liege of Qin, went to Jin to cultivate good relations. Shuxiang gave orders to summon the envoy Ziyun. The envoy Zizhu said, “But I am the one who should go up.” Thrice he said this, and Shuxiang did not respond. Enraged, Zizhu said, “Ziyun and I have the same rank. Why are you dismissing me from court?” Holding his sword, he went after Shuxiang. Shuxiang said, “Qin and Jin have not been at peace for a long time. If fortunately today’s affair comes to fruition, the domain of Jin will depend on it. If it does not come to fruition, our three armies will be slaughtered and will have their bones exposed on the battlefield. Ziyun conveys the words of the two domains without interposing his private views,795 whereas you often alter them. I will fight any who serve the ruler with treachery!” He shook his robes and went after Zizhu. The others stopped them. Lord Ping said, “Jin seems to be improving its good government! What my subjects fight over are important matters.” The music master Kuang said, “I fear the lord’s house will be brought low. The subjects are not competing with their minds but fighting with their strength. They do not strive for virtue but fight for approval. Their private desires are already excessive. How can the lord’s house not be brought low?”796

26.1

Ning Xi carries out his father’s deathbed wish (Xiang 20.7) and prepares to restore the exiled Lord Xian, although various prescient characters predict disaster. Lord Xian of Wei assigned his younger brother Zhuana the task of preparing for his restoration. Zhuan declined. Their mother, Jing Si, forced him by command to do so. He replied, “The ruler is faithless. I fear we will not escape disaster.” Jing Si said, “Even so, do this for my sake.” Zhuana agreed to comply. Earlier, Lord Xian had sent someone to talk to Ning Xi. Ning Xi said, “Zhuana has to be there. Otherwise, we will fail for sure.” That was why the lord sent Zhuana. Not having been instructed on the details of his mission by Jing Si, he conveyed the lord’s command to Ning Xi: “If I return, the government will be in the hands of the Ning lineage, but I, the unworthy one, will be in charge of sacrifices.” Ning Xi told Qu Boyu. Boyu said, “I did not get to hear about the lord’s exile. How dare I hear about his reentry?” He then went on his way, leaving the domain by way of a nearby pass.797

26.2a

Lord Xiang

1161

告右宰穀。右宰穀曰：「 不可。獲罪於兩君，天下誰畜之？」悼子 曰：「 吾受命於先人，不可以貳。」穀曰：「 我請使焉而觀之。」遂見公於 夷儀。反，曰：「 君淹恤在外十二年矣，而無憂色，亦無寬言，猶夫人也。 若不已，死無日矣。」悼子曰：「 子鮮在。」右宰穀曰：「 子鮮在，何益？多 而能亡，於我何為？」悼子曰：「 雖然，不可以已。」

26.2b(1, 2)

1162

孫文子在戚，孫嘉聘於齊，孫襄居守。二月庚寅，甯喜、右宰穀伐孫氏， 不克，伯國傷。甯子出舍於郊。伯國死，孫氏夜哭。國人召甯子，甯子復 攻孫氏，克之。辛卯，殺子叔及大子角。 書曰「 甯喜弒其君剽」，言罪之在甯氏也。孫林父以戚如晉。書曰 「 入于戚以叛」，罪孫氏也。臣之祿，君實有之。義則進，否則奉身而 退。專祿以周旋，戮也。

Zuo Tradition

Ning Xi told Youzai Gu. The latter said, “This will not do. When your lineage will have committed crimes against two rulers,798 who in the world will take you in?” Ning Xia said, “I received the command from my late father. I cannot swerve onto another course.” Youzai Gua said, “I beg leave to be sent as emissary so that I can observe the situation.” He thus had an audience with the lord at Yiyi. Upon his return, he said, “The ruler has been mired in troubles and sorrows abroad for twelve years. Yet he did not appear worried, nor did he have any generous words. He still remains that same person. If you do not desist, our death is not far off.” Ning Xia said, “Zhuana is there.” Youzai Gu said, “Even if Zhuana is there, what good will it do? At the most he will go into exile. What can he do for us?” Ning Xia said, “Even so, we cannot stop now.” Ning Xi kills Piao, who ruled in Wei during Lord Xian’s exile. He also attacks the lineage of Sun Linfu, his father’s accomplice in driving out Lord Xian. Although Sun Linfu is criticized for turning Qī into a semiautonomous Jin protectorate (in a manner comparable to Yu Shi’s position in Pengcheng [Cheng 18.5]), it is obvious that Lord Xian deserves no loyalty. Sun Linfua was in Qī. His son Sun Jia was on an official visit in Qi, while another son, Sun Xiang, remained in the Wei capital. In the second month, on the gengyin day (6), Ning Xi and Youzai Gu attacked the Sun lineage. They did not overcome them, but Sun Xianga was wounded. Ning Xic came out of the capital and lodged in the outskirts. Sun Xianga died, and members of the Sun lineage wailed at night. The inhabitants of the capital summoned Ning Xic, who again attacked the Sun lineage and overcame them. On the xinmao day (7), Ning Xi killed the Wei ruler Piaoa and the heir apparent Jiao. The text says, “Ning Xi assassinated his ruler Piao”: this is to indicate that the guilt lay with Ning Xib. Sun Linfu, taking Qī, went over to Jin. The text says that he “entered Qī and led it in revolt”: this is to hold Sun Linfu guilty. It is the ruler who possesses the emolument of the subject. When dutiful action is viable, then one advances to serve; if not, one withdraws, preserving one’s honor. To lay sole claim to one’s emolument and use it to maneuver for advantages is a crime that deserves public execution.799

26.2b(1, 2)

798 Sun Linfu and Ning Zhi (Ning Xi’s father) drove out Lord Xian of Wei in 559 Bce (Xiang 14.4), and Ning Xi is now planning to murder the current Wei ruler, Piao. In Chunqiu shiyu, Youzai Gu predicts that Lord Xian will not honor his promises because he is gaining reentry through bribery. 799 Fu Qian defines zhuanlu 專祿 (“lay sole claim to one’s emolument”) as “regarding one’s settlement as a small domain.” Li Yide links zhouxuan 周旋 (“maneuver for advantages”) to the way Sun deals with Wei and Jin (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 465).

Lord Xiang

1163

26.2c 甲午，衛侯入。書曰「 復歸」，國納之也。

大夫逆於竟者，執其手而與之言；道逆者，自車揖之；逆於門者， 頷之而已。公至，使讓大叔文子曰：「 寡人淹恤在外，二三子皆使寡人朝 夕聞衛國之言，吾子獨不在寡人。古人有言曰：『非所怨，勿怨。』寡人 怨矣。」對曰：「 臣知罪矣。臣不佞，不能負羈絏以從扞牧圉，臣之罪一 也。有出者，有居者，臣不能貳，通外內之言以事君，臣之罪二也。有二 罪，敢忘其死？」乃行，從近關出。公使止之。 26.3 衛人侵戚東鄙，孫氏愬于晉，晉戍茅氏。殖綽伐茅氏，殺晉戍三百人。

孫蒯追之，弗敢擊。文子曰：「 厲之不如。」遂從衛師，敗之圉。雍鉏獲殖 綽。復愬于晉。

800 This could be the gate of the capital or of the palace. 801 Taishu Yi is referring to Lord Xian’s exile and Piao’s instatement as the Wei ruler. He implies that they are equally legitimate and he cannot betray Piao. Taishu Yi’s argument echoes the covenant Ning Wuzi swore with Wei leaders (Xi 28.5). In Chunqiu shiyu from the Mawangdui manuscripts, Lord Xian eventually makes Taishu Yi minister because of his “undivided allegiance” (bu’er 不貳); see also Xiang 27.3. 802 Qī was about 80 li to the northeast of the Wei capital, Diqiu. According to Du Yu (ZZ 37.631), Maoshi 茅氏 was on the eastern side of Qī. 803 Zhi Chuo, the Qi officer whose exploits are told in Xiang 18.3, 19.11 and 21.8, might have fled to Wei following the murder of Lord Zhuang of Qi.

1164

Zuo Tradition

Lord Xian returns to Wei and shows his vindictiveness right away. The Wei minister Taishu Yi, who honors Lord Xian as the exiled ruler (Xiang 14.4c) but disparages Ning Xi’s plan for restoring him (Xiang 25.15), defends his undivided support of Piao and implicitly reproaches Lord Xian for his unfair persecution of Wei ministers. On the jiawu day (10), the Prince of Wei entered the capital. The text says that he “went home again” because the domain took him in. As for the high officers who met him at the border, he held their hands and spoke with them. As for those who met him on the road, he bowed to them from his carriage. As for those who met him at the gate,800 he merely nodded to them. When the lord arrived, he sent someone to reprimand Taishu Yia: “I, the unworthy one, was mired in troubles and sorrows abroad. Various fine men have all, day and night, let me hear of news from Wei. You alone, sir, have shown no concern for me. The ancients had this saying, ‘Do not resent what should not be resented.’ I do feel resentment.” Taishu Yi replied, “Your subject knows his offenses. I lack talent and was not able to carry bridles and reins to follow you and defend your property as herdsman and groom. That was my first offense. There was the one who left the domain, and there was the one who stayed.801 I was not able to shift allegiance and serve the ruler by becoming a conduit for talk inside and outside the domain. That was my second offense. Being guilty of these two offenses, how could I presume to forget that I deserve to die?” He thus went on his way, leaving the domain by way of a nearby pass. The lord sent someone to stop him.

26.2c

Lord Xian pursues another foe, the exiled Wei minister Sun Linfu. The latter, who has relied on Jin for almost four decades to oppose errant Wei rulers (e.g., Cheng 7.6, 14.1), complains about Wei to Jin. The men of Wei invaded the eastern marches of Qī. Sun Linfud accused Wei to Jin. Jin garrisoned Maoshi.802 Zhi Chuo attacked Maoshi and killed three hundred Jin soldiers garrisoned there.803 Sun Kuai, one of Sun Linfu’s sons, pursued Zhi Chuo but did not dare to strike. Sun Linfuc said, “You are not even the equal of vengeful ghosts.”804 Sun Kuai then pursued the Wei troops and defeated them at Yu.805 Yong Chu took Zhi Chuo captive. Sun Linfu again accused Wei to Jin.

26.3

804 The three hundred Jin soldiers, having been killed by Zhi Chuo, would presumably turn into vengeful ghosts. In Xiang 17.2, the men of Cao reviled Sun Kuai by calling his father, Sun Linfu, “a vengeful ghost.” 805 Yu 圉 was in the domain of Wei in the east of Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan.

Lord Xiang

1165

26.4 鄭伯賞入陳之功，三月甲寅朔，享子展，賜之先路三命之服，先八邑；賜

子產次路再命之服，先六邑。子產辭邑，曰：「 自上以下，降殺以兩，禮 也。臣之位在四，且子展之功也，臣不敢及賞禮，請辭邑。」公固予之，乃 受三邑。公孫揮曰：「 子產其將知政矣。讓不失禮。」 26.5(4) 晉人為孫氏故，召諸侯，將以討衛也。夏，中行穆子來聘，召公也。 26.6a 楚子、秦人侵吳，及雩婁，聞吳有備而還。遂侵鄭。五月，至于城麇。鄭

皇頡戍之，出，與楚師戰，敗。穿封戌囚皇頡，公子圍與之爭之，正於伯 州犁。伯州犁曰：「 請問於囚。」乃立囚。伯州犁曰：「 所爭，君子也，其何

806 See Cheng 2.3h, n. 76. In the ritual of gift giving, the most important gifts are given last; hence, other gifts precede the gift of land here. 807 According to Xiang 27.5, Zichan is ranked after Gongsun Shezhi, Liang Xiao, and Zixi. 808 Yulou 雩婁 was in the domain of Chu east of Shangcheng County 商城縣 and north of Jinzhai County 金寨縣, Anhui. 809 The precise location of Chengjun 城麇 is not known.

1166

Zuo Tradition

Lord Jian of Zheng rewards his ministers for victory in Chen. Zichan tries to decline the honors bestowed on him and thereby demonstrates his suitability for even greater responsibility. The Liege of Zheng rewarded his ministers for their achievement in entering the Chen capital. In the third month, on the jiayin day, the first day of the month, he offered Gongsun Shezhia ceremonial toasts and bestowed on him superior carriages and regalia appropriate to dignitaries of three commands,806 and these gifts were followed by eight settlements. He bestowed on Zichan second-tier carriages and regalia appropriate to dignitaries of two commands, and these gifts were followed by six settlements. Zichan declined the settlements: “Going from above to below, for each lower rank the number of gifts and honors is diminished by two. That is in accordance with ritual propriety. Your subject ranks fourth among the ministers.807 What is more, the achievement was Gongsun Shezhia’s. I do not dare to be included in the ritual of rewards. I beg to decline the settlements.” The lord insisted on giving them to him, so he accepted three settlements. Gongsun Hui said, “Zichan will probably assume responsibility for government. In yielding he did not go against ritual propriety.”

26.4

Jin rallies its allies to attack Wei because of Sun Linfu’s machinations. The leaders of Jin, on account of Sun Linfud, summoned the princes so as to prepare to chastise Wei. In summer, Zhonghang Wua came to us on an official visit: this was to summon our lord.

26.5(4)

A Qin-Chu coalition attacks Zheng. Chuanfeng Xu, a district governor, and Gongzi Wei both claim credit for taking a Zheng officer captive. The adjudicating Chu minister Bo Zhouli, who had fled to Chu from Jin and showed good judgment earlier (Cheng 15.5, 16.5), here twists the truth to pander to Gongzi Wei. When Gongzi Wei becomes king six years later, he will punish Bo Zhouli (Zhao 1.13) and will reward Chuanfeng Xu (Zhao 8.6). The Master of Chu and the men of Qin invaded Wu, advancing as far as Yulou.808 Having heard that Wu was well prepared, they turned back and then invaded Zheng. In the fifth month, they reached Chengjun.809 Huang Jie of Zheng, who was garrisoned there, came out and did battle with Chu troops, and he suffered defeat. Chuanfeng Xu took Huang Jie prisoner. Gongzi Wei fought with him over the credit for taking a Zheng nobleman prisoner, and so they had Bo Zhouli determine who was in the right. Bo Zhouli said, “I submit that we ask the prisoner.” They thus had the prisoner stand before them. Bo Zhouli said, “They are fighting over you, and

26.6a

Lord Xiang

1167

不知？」上其手，曰：「 夫子為王子圍，寡君之貴介弟也。」下其手，曰： 「 此子為穿封戌，方城外之縣尹也。誰獲子？」囚曰：「 頡遇王子，弱焉。」 戌怒，抽戈逐王子圍，弗及。楚人以皇頡歸。 26.6b 印堇父與皇頡戍城麇，楚人囚之，以獻於秦。鄭人取貨於印氏以請之，

子大叔為令正，以為請。子產曰：「 不獲。受楚之功，而取貨於鄭，不可 謂國，秦不其然。若曰『拜君之勤鄭國。微君之惠，楚師其猶在敝邑之 城下』，其可。」弗從，遂行。秦人不予。更幣，從子產，而後獲之。

26.7a(5, 7)

六月，公會晉趙武、宋向戌、鄭良霄、曹人于澶淵，以討衛，疆戚田。取衛 西鄙懿氏六十以與孫氏。 趙武不書，尊公也。向戌不書，後也。鄭先宋，不失所也。 於是衛侯會之。晉人執甯喜、北宮遺，使女齊以先歸。衛侯如晉， 晉人執而囚之於士弱氏。

810 This story gives rise to a common idiom, “to raise and lower one’s hand” (shangxia qi shou 上下其手), which means interference that perverts justice or correct judgment. 811 Instead of the reality of the Qin-Chu coalition invading Zheng (Xiang 26.6a), Zichan presents Qin as the force restraining Chu aggression. 812 The implication is that these are ritually proper gifts, which Qin can accept without suspicion of receiving a bribe from the Yin lineage.

1168

Zuo Tradition

you are a nobleman. How can you fail to understand?” He raised his hand and said, “This fine man is Gongzi Weia, our humble ruler’s exalted younger brother.” He lowered his hand and said, “This man is Chuanfeng Xu, the governor of the district outside Fangcheng. Now who took you captive?” The prisoner said, “I encountered the king’s son, who showed I was the weaker man.” Infuriated, Chuanfeng Xu pulled out his daggeraxe and pursued Gongzi Weia but could not overtake him. The leaders of Chu took Huang Jie with them and turned back.810 Zichan’s skillful diplomatic rhetoric conceals the reality of a transaction, enlists a former foe as ally, and secures the return of a Zheng officer held in Qin. Yin Jinfu was garrisoned with Huang Jie at Chengjun. The men of Chu took Yin Jinfu prisoner and offered him to Qin. The leaders of Zheng took goods from the Yin lineage to request Yin Jinfu’s ransom. You Jib, who was serving as director of decrees, was to submit the request. Zichan said, “You will not get him back. Receiving the fruit of Chu’s victory and then using it to obtain goods from Zheng is hardly what we call the behavior of a proper domain. Qin will not do that. But it will work if you say, ‘I bow to acknowledge my lord’s exertions on behalf of Zheng. If it were not for your beneficence, Chu troops would still be beneath the city wall of our humble domain.’”811 You Ji did not follow his advice. He then set out for Qin. The leaders of Qin did not give him Yin Jinfu. They sent another envoy bringing another set of gifts, following Zichan’s advice, and only then did they get Yin Jinfu back.812

26.6b

Jin leaders summon a meeting to strengthen Sun Linfu’s lineage and to punish the Wei ruler and his supporters. In the sixth month, our lord met with Zhao Wu of Jin, Xiang Xu of Song, Liang Xiao of Zheng, and a Cao leader at Chanyuan to chastise Wei and also to set up boundaries for the territories of Qī. They took sixty settlements of the Yi lineage on the western marches of Wei and gave them to the Sun lineage. That Zhao Wu is not recorded is to honor our lord. That Xiang Xu is not recorded is because he came late. That Zheng is recorded before Song is because the Zheng delegates arrived on time and did not lose their place. At that time the Prince of Wei met with them. The leaders of Jin arrested Ning Xi and Beigong Yi and had Ru Qi first take them back to Jin. The Prince of Wei went to Jin. The leaders of Jin arrested him and imprisoned him at Shi Ruo’s residence.

26.7a(5, 7)

Lord Xiang

1169

26.7b 秋，七月，齊侯、鄭伯為衛侯故如晉，晉侯兼享之。晉侯賦〈嘉樂〉。國

景子相齊侯，賦〈蓼蕭〉。子展相鄭伯，賦〈緇衣〉。叔向命晉侯拜二 君，曰：「 寡君敢拜齊君之安我先君之宗祧也，敢拜鄭君之不貳也。」 國子使晏平仲私於叔向，曰：「 晉君宣其明德於諸侯，恤其患而 補其闕，正其違而治其煩，所以為盟主也。今為臣執君，若之何？」叔 向告趙文子，文子以告晉侯。晉侯言衛侯之罪，使叔向告二君。國子 賦〈轡之柔矣〉，子展賦〈將仲子兮〉，晉侯乃許歸衛侯。 叔向曰：「 鄭七穆，罕氏其後亡者也，子展儉而壹。」

813 Maoshi 249, “Jia le” 假樂, 17C.615–16. Also cited or mentioned in Wen 3.7, Cheng 2.8, Zhao 21.2, and Ai 5.4, this ode praises the virtuous government of the noble man that is rewarded by Heaven and brings good to all. Lord Ping of Jin is probably using the ode to praise the Qi and Zheng rulers. Cf. The uses of “Chang di” in Xi 24.b, Xiang 20.7, and Zhao 7.11. 814 Maoshi 173, “Luxiao” 蓼蕭, 10A.348–50. This is a feast poem celebrating the fraternal harmony between the Zhou king and the princes. The great joy of “having seen my lord” (ji jian junzi 既見君子) lies in the certainty that he is “good for the elder brother and the younger brother” (yi xiong yi di 宜兄宜弟). Guo Ruo is implicitly appealing to Jin to release the Wei ruler in the interest of harmonious relations among “brother domains.” This ode also features in Jin-Wei negotiations in Zhao 7.11. Lu ministers recite this ode for the Song envoy Hua Ding in Zhao 12.3, but Hua Ding fails to respond properly. 815 Maoshi 75, “Ziyi” 緇衣, 4B.159–61. Zheng is protesting its loyalty to Jin as Zheng implicitly intercedes on behalf of the Wei ruler, comparing itself to the lady who mends the black robe for the lord in the poem. Gongsun Shezhi emphasizes how the Zheng ruler’s journey underlines Jin-Zheng amity: “We have come to your lodgings” (shi zi zhi guan xi 適子之館兮). The image of the mended robe may also refer to reconciliation between the Jin and Wei rulers. 816 Shuxiang understands the appeals of Qi and Zheng on behalf of the Wei ruler but is deliberately deflecting the issue. Since “Luxuriant Artemisia” praises the lord’s “good name and rightful place” (yu chu 譽處), Shuxiang thanks Qi for augmenting Jin rule, possibly also harking back to the assistance that Lord Huan of Qi rendered Chong’er, later Lord Wen of Jin (Xi 23.6b). Shuxiang also acknowledges Zheng loyalty as expressed in “Black Robe,” without, however, accepting Zheng mediation.

1170

Zuo Tradition

Jin, with a history of supporting Wei ministers accusing their rulers (Xi 28.8, Cheng 14.1), again sides with Sun Linfu against Lord Xian of Wei. At the meeting at Chanyuan, diplomatic negotiations conducted through the recitation of odes eventually convince the Jin ruler to release the Wei ruler. In autumn, in the seventh month, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng went to Jin on behalf of the Prince of Wei. The Prince of Jin offered them ceremonial toasts together. The Prince of Jin recited “Great Happiness.”813 Guo Ruoa acted as assistant to the Prince of Qi and recited “Luxuriant Artemisia.”814 Gongsun Shezhia acted as assistant to the Liege of Zheng and recited “Black Robe.”815 Shuxiang told the Prince of Jin to bow to the two rulers and said, “Our unworthy ruler presumes to bow to the Qi ruler for securing the Ancestral Temples of our former rulers. He presumes to bow to the Zheng ruler for his unwavering allegiance.”816 Guo Ruob sent Yan Yinga to speak privately to Shuxiang: “The Jin ruler manifests his bright virtue among the princes, allays their troubles and supplements their deficiencies, corrects their errors and brings order to their turmoil. That is how he can be the covenant chief. Now Jin has seized the ruler on behalf of the subject. What is to be done?” Shuxiang told Zhao Wua, and Zhao Wub told the Prince of Jin. The Prince of Jin spoke of the crimes of the Prince of Wei and sent Shuxiang to report them to the two rulers. Guo Ruo recited “The Reins Are Soft.”817 Gongsun Shezhia recited “Please, Zhongzi.”818 The Prince of Jin thus agreed to let the Prince of Wei return to his domain. Shuxiang said, “Of the seven lineages descended from Lord Mu of Zheng, the Han lineage will probably be the last to perish. Gongsun Shezhia is temperate and constant.”819

26.7b

817 This is an “uncollected ode” not found in the received text of the Odes. It may be associated with a citation from an ode in Yi Zhou shu (64.1982) that summons the image of “soft reins.” Guo Ruo is urging the Jin ruler to use leniency to bring peace to the lords, just as soft reins may be employed to control recalcitrant horses. 818 Maoshi 76, “Qiang Zhongzi” 將仲子, 4B.161–62. In this song, a woman admonishes her overly ardent lover to desist, “fearing the many things people would say” (wei ren zhi duoyan 畏人之多言). Gongsun Shezhi is suggesting that “public opinion” would turn against Jin if it sides with a subject against his ruler. 819 Gongsun Shezhi (Zizhan) belongs to the Han lineage. On the seven Mu lineages, see Xuan 3.6b. Nothing is known of the fate of the Han lineage in Zheng, and this is one of the unverifiable predictions in Zuozhuan.

Lord Xiang

1171

26.8(6) 初，宋芮司徒生女子，赤而毛，棄諸堤下，共姬之妾取以入，名之曰棄。

長而美。平公入夕，共姬與之食。公見棄也，而視之，尤。姬納諸御，嬖， 生佐，惡而婉。大子痤美而很，合左師畏而惡之。寺人惠牆伊戾為大子 內師而無寵。 秋，楚客聘於晉，過宋。大子知之，請野享之，公使往。伊戾請從 之。公曰：「 夫不惡女乎？」對曰：「 小人之事君子也，惡之不敢遠，好之 不敢近，敬以待命，敢有貳心乎？縱有共其外，莫共其內，臣請往也。」 遣之。 至，則欿，用牲，加書，徵之，而騁告公，曰：「 大子將為亂，既與楚 客盟矣。」公曰：「 為我子，又何求？」對曰：「 欲速。」公使視之，則信有 焉。問諸夫人與左師，則皆曰：「 固聞之。」公囚大子。大子曰：「 唯佐也 能免我。」召而使請，曰：「 日中不來，吾知死矣。」左師聞之，聒而與之 語。過期，乃縊而死。佐為大子。公徐聞其無罪也，乃亨伊戾。

820 Gong Ji is the wife of Lord Gong of Song and the daughter of Lord Xuan of Lu and Mu Jiang. The name “Qi” 棄 means “abandoned.” 821 Fu Qian reads you 尤 as “excessive” or “too long”: “He found her pleasing and stared at her for too long” (cited in Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 585). Qian Zhongshu (Guanzhui bian 1:223) glosses you as yishi 異視 (regarded her in a special way). We read you as youwu 尤物 (Zhao 28.2), which refers to a bewitching and dangerous woman. 822 The text gives no example of Cuo’s ruthlessness, and Zuo later turns out to be a faithless ruler. Hui Dong thus suggests the reading that Zuo is “inwardly evil but appears gentle,” while Cuo is “inwardly good but appears ruthless” (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 479).

1172

Zuo Tradition

The Song ruler’s heir apparent, Cuo, falls victim to groundless allegations of treason. Similar stories in the text often feature victimized innocence (e.g., Huan 16.5, Xi 5.2), but Cuo is said to be ruthless, and Zuo, the half brother who profits by his demise, is supposedly kind. Zuo’s mother, Qi, however, fits the stereotype of the bewitchingly beautiful but devious and dangerous woman. Xiang Xu, sometimes praised elsewhere, here seems conniving and manipulative. Although Zuo (later Lord Yuan of Song) is praised here, he will be judged negatively as a ruler (Zhao 20.3). Earlier, the Song supervisor of conscripts Rui had sired a girl. As she was born red-skinned and hairy, he had had her abandoned at the bottom of an embankment. A concubine subordinate to Gong Ji took her in and named her “Qi.”820 She grew up and became beautiful. Once, when Lord Ping entered his mother Gong Ji’s quarters to pay an evening visit, Gong Ji gave him a meal. Catching sight of Qi, the lord gazed at her, entranced by her bewitching loveliness.821 Gong Jid included her among the lord’s concubines. She was favored and gave birth to Zuo, who was ugly but gentle. The heir apparent, Cuo, was handsome but ruthless.822 Xiang Xub, the minister of the left, feared and hated Cuo. The eunuch Huiqiang Yili was the heir’s court preceptor but did not enjoy any favor. In autumn, a Chu visitor came on an official visit to Jin and passed through Song. The heir apparent knew him and requested that he be allowed to offer him ceremonial toasts in the countryside. The lord let him go. Huiqiang Yilia asked for permission to go with the heir apparent. The lord said, “Does he not hate you?” He replied, “If a petty man serving a noble man is hated, he would not presume to distance himself; if he is loved, he would not presume to draw close. Respectfully he awaits commands. How could he presume to shift allegiance? Even if there are those supplying the heir’s needs in external affairs, there is none supplying his needs in internal affairs. Your servant begs leave to go.” The lord sent him. Upon his arrival, he dug a hole, sacrificed an animal, placed a written document there to serve as proof, and then galloped back and told the lord, “The heir apparent is about to raise a rebellion. He has already sworn a covenant with the visitor from Chu.” The lord said, “He is my heir. What else can he ask for?” He replied, “He wants to become ruler sooner.” The lord sent someone to examine the site, and there was indeed evidence. He asked his consort, Qi, and Xiang Xub about this, and they both said, “We have actually heard about it.” The lord imprisoned the heir apparent, who said, “Only Zuo can save me.” He summoned Zuo and sent him to intercede on his behalf with the lord, saying, “If by midday he does not come, I know I will die.” Xiang Xub heard about this and kept up an endless conversation with Zuo. The appointed time passed, and Cuo thus hanged himself and died. Zuo became the heir apparent. The lord gradually came to hear that Cuo was guiltless, and he thus had Huiqiang Yilia boiled alive.

26.8(6)

Lord Xiang

1173

左師見夫人之步馬者，問之。對曰：「 君夫人氏也。」左師曰：「 誰 為君夫人？余胡弗知？」圉人歸，以告夫人。夫人使饋之錦與馬，先之 以玉，曰：「 君之妾棄使某獻」。左師改命曰「 君夫人」，而後再拜稽首 受之。 26.9 鄭伯歸自晉，使子西如晉聘，辭曰：「 寡君來煩執事，懼不免於戾，使夏

謝不敏。」君子曰：「 善事大國。」 26.10a 初，楚伍參與蔡大師子朝友，其子伍舉與聲子相善也。伍舉娶於王子

牟。王子牟為申公而亡，楚人曰：「 伍舉實送之。」伍舉奔鄭，將遂奔晉。 聲子將如晉，遇之於鄭郊，班荊相與食，而言復故。聲子曰：「 子行也， 吾必復子。」 及宋向戌將平晉、楚，聲子通使於晉，還如楚。令尹子木與之語， 問晉故焉，且曰：「 晉大夫與楚孰賢？」

823 Xiang Xu thereby demonstrates his power over his erstwhile co-conspirator Qi as well as the new heir apparent Zuo. Having established her son as heir, Qi flaunts her more elevated status. “When a concubine’s son becomes the ruler, his mother could be regarded as the lord’s wife” (ZZ-Kong 1.50). Gongyang 1, 1.11, maintains that “the mother is elevated through the son” (mu yi zi gui 母以子貴) But Xiang Xu here makes it clear that the de facto “promotion” of Qi from concubine to the lord’s wife depends on his support. 824 In the analogous passage in Guoyu, “Chu yu 1,” 17.534–36, Gongsun Guisheng enumerates roughly the same examples (Wangsun Qi, Lord of Xi, Yongzi, Qu Wu), but more briefly. 825 Cf. Hong Liangji, Chunqiu shilun, 7, “Chunqiu shi Chu guo renwen zui sheng lun” 春秋時楚國人文最盛論. In Zhao 26.9a, Wangzi Zhao took Zhou canonical documents and fled to Chu, and Hong takes this as one indication of Chu cultural eminence. 826 See the Covenant of Song (Xiang 27.4).

1174

Zuo Tradition

Xiang Xub saw the groom walking the horses for the lord’s wife and asked whose horses they were. He replied, “The ruler’s wife.” Xiang Xub said, “Who is the ruler’s wife? How is it that I do not know?” The groom came back and told the lord’s wife. The ruler’s wife sent Xiang Xu gifts of brocade and horses, preceding these with jades, along with this message: “The lord’s concubine, Qi, sent this emissary to present them.” Xiang Xub changed the wording to “the ruler’s wife,” and then he bowed twice with his forehead touching the ground and accepted the gifts.823 The following passage records Zheng’s humble diplomatic rhetoric vis-àvis Jin. The Liege of Zheng returned from Jin and sent Zixi to Jin on an official visit with this statement: “Our unworthy ruler has brought troubles to your functionaries. He fears that he will not escape blame and has sent me to apologize for his lapses.” The noble man said, “He was skillful in serving the great domain.”

26.9

Gongsun Guisheng, a Cai noble serving in Chu, convinces the Chu chief minister, Qu Jian, that the exiled high officer Wu Ju should be allowed to return to Chu.824 His brilliant rhetorical performance, which Zhu Xi characterized as proto–Warring States, gives rise to an idiom on losing talented people to the enemy: “Jin employs Chu talents” (Chu cai Jin yong 楚材晉 用). His examples remind us of the political and cultural achievements of Chu.825 He begins by arguing against excessively harsh punishments. It is true that throughout Zuozhuan, ministers and commanders fall victim to the suspicions and persecution of their rulers more frequently in Chu than in other domains. Earlier, Wu Can of Chu and grand preceptor Zizhao of Cai, were friends. Wu Can’s son, Wu Ju, was on good terms with Zizhao’s son Gongsun Guishengb. Wu Ju married a daughter of Wangzi Mou, who became the Lord of Shen before going into exile. The leaders of Chu said, “It was none other than Wu Ju who sent him off.” Wu Ju fled to Zheng and then was planning to flee to Jin. Gongsun Guishengb, who was about to go to Jin, met him in the outskirts of Zheng. They spread hay on the ground as a kind of mat, ate together, and spoke about the way Wu Ju could be restored. Gongsun Guishengb said, “You go on your way. I will certainly have you restored.” By the time Xiang Xu was preparing for peace between Jin and Chu,826 Gongsun Guishengb was sent as envoy to Jin. On his return to Chu, the chief minister, Qu Jiana, had a talk with him and asked about Jin affairs. Qu Jian further asked, “If we compare Jin high officers and Chu ones, who are more worthy?”

26.10a

Lord Xiang

1175

對曰：「 晉卿不如楚，其大夫則賢，皆卿材也。如杞梓、皮革，自楚 往也。雖楚有材，晉實用之。」 子木曰：「 夫獨無族、姻乎？」 對曰： 雖有，而用楚材實多。歸生聞之：善為國者，賞不僭而刑不

濫。賞僭，則懼及淫人；刑濫，則懼及善人。若不幸而過，寧 僭，無濫。與其失善，寧其利淫。無善人，則國從之。《詩》 曰： 人之云亡， 邦國殄瘁。 無善人之謂也。故夏書曰『與其殺不辜，寧失不經』，懼失

善也。商頌有之曰： 不僭不濫， 不敢怠皇。 命于下國， 封建厥福。 此湯所以獲天福也。

827 The graph cai 材 in the passage is variously translated as “timber,” “materials,” and “talents.” 828 As noted before (introduction to Xuan), there were far fewer members of the lord’s lineage employed in high positions in Jin than anywhere else during the Spring and Autumn period. 829 The Mao commentary cites this line to explain the line “Not indiscriminate, not excessive” 不僭不濫 in Maoshi 305, “Yin wu” 殷武, 20D.805, which Gongsun Gui­ sheng also quotes below. 830 There are similar passages on rewards and punishments in Xunzi 14.309 and Lüshi chunqiu 21.1427. Huainanzi 13.455 and Shangjun shu 18.147 speak more generally about the importance of judicious rewards and punishments.

1176

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Guisheng replied, “The Jin ministers are not the equal of the Chu ministers. Its high officers, however, are worthy; they all have the talent to be ministers. Just like the timber from medlar and catalpa trees and fur and leather, they made their way there from Chu. Although Chu has the talents,827 it is Jin that makes use of them.” Qu Jiana said, “Does Jin alone not have worthy members of the ruling house or relatives by marriage?”828 He replied, Although there are those, the fact remains that in many cases it is Chu talent that is employed. I have heard that those who are adept at governing a domain are neither indiscriminate with rewards nor excessive with punishments.829 If rewards are indiscriminately handed out, then one fears that they will reach depraved men; if punishments are excessively meted out, then one fears that they will reach worthy men. If, unfortunately, one is to err, then one would rather be indiscriminate with rewards than be excessive with punishments. Instead of losing the worthy ones, one would rather benefit the depraved ones.830 If there are no worthy men, then the domain follows the path of ruin. As it says in the Odes,

The good men have gone into exile. The realm is sickly and wasting away.831

That refers to not having superior men. That is why it says in the Xia Documents, “Rather than killing the innocent, it is better to miss out on punishing the deviant.”832 This is for fear of losing the superior ones. As the “Shang Hymns” has it,

Not indiscriminate, not excessive— None dare to be lax or wallow in leisure. The command is given to domains below To grandly establish their blessings.833

That was how the first Shang ruler, Tang, obtained the blessings of Heaven.

831 Maoshi 264, “Zhanyang” 瞻卬, 18E.696. 832 Du Yu (ZZ 37.635) identifies this as a passage not found in the Documents he knew. These lines are incorporated into “Da Yu mo” (Shangshu 4.55). For “Da Yu mo,” see nn. 106 and 583. Two Han texts cite them as lines from the Documents (Hanshu 51.2369; Shuoyuan 5.139); they could be citing Zuozhuan. 833 Maoshi 305, “Yinwu” 殷武, 20D.805.

Lord Xiang

1177

26.10b

古之治民者，勸賞而畏刑，恤民不倦。賞以春夏，刑以秋冬。是 以將賞，為之加膳，加膳則飫 賜，此以知其 勸賞也。將 刑，為之不舉，不舉則徹樂，此以知其畏刑也。夙 興夜 寐，朝夕臨政，此以知其恤民也。三者，禮之大節也。有 禮，無敗。 今楚多淫刑，其大夫逃死於四方，而為之謀主，以害楚 國，不可救療，所謂不能也。子儀之亂，析公奔晉，晉人寘 諸戎車之殿，以為謀主。繞角之役，晉將遁矣，析公曰：「楚 師輕窕，易震蕩也。若多鼓鈞聲，以夜軍之，楚師必遁。」晉 人從之，楚師宵潰。晉遂侵蔡，襲沈，獲其君，敗申、息之師 於桑隧，獲申麗而還。鄭於是不敢南面。楚失華夏，則析公 之為也。

834 It is possible that Jin sources devote less attention to advisers from other domains. 835 See Zhuang 20.1. 836 We follow Du Yu’s (ZZ 37.635) reading. Yang (3:1121) reads buneng 不能 as bunai 不耐, “being unable to bear with (minor infractions).” Talented men are lost to the realm if they are too easily deemed guilty. 837 See Wen 14.10.

1178

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Guisheng maintains that rewards should be emphasized over punishments. Two exiled Chu nobles, the Lord of Xi and Yongzi, are said to be instrumental in the erosion of Chu influence over the central and eastern domains by bringing about Chu’s defeat by Jin at the campaigns of Raojiao (Cheng 6.11) and Mijiao (Xiang 5.7) respectively, although they are not mentioned in the Zuozhuan accounts of those battles.834 Those who governed the people well in ancient times encouraged rewards and dreaded punishments, and they cared for the people untiringly. Rewards were granted in spring and summer; punishments were meted out in autumn and winter. That was why, when preparing to dispense rewards, the lords added dishes to meals. Adding dishes to meals meant that what remained after satiation could be bestowed as gifts. That is how we know they encouraged rewards. When preparing to mete out punishments, the lords did not dine with full ceremony.835 Not dining with full ceremony meant that they stopped the music. That is how we know they dreaded punishments. They rose early and went to sleep late, and from morning till evening they presided over government. That is how we know they cared for the people. These three things are the great tenets of ritual propriety. Where there is ritual propriety, there is no failure. Now Chu has many unwarranted punishments. Its high officers flee death in domains of the four quarters, for which they have become chief strategists, inflicting on Chu harm that cannot be remedied or healed. This is what is called failure to employ one’s own talented people.836 In the aftermath of Dou Kea’s insurrection,837 the Lord of Xi fled to Jin. Jin leaders placed him at the back of the Jin ruler’s battle chariot and made him their chief strategist. At the Raojiao campaign, as Jin was preparing to flee, the Lord of Xi said, “The Chu troops show levity and debility. They will be easily dazed and destroyed.838 If we play the war drums many times, rivaling their sounds, and use the cover of night to attack them with full force, Chu troops will certainly flee.” Jin leaders followed his plans, and the Chu army collapsed during the night. Jin then invaded Cai, attacked Shěn by surprise and took its ruler captive, and defeated the army of Shen and Xi at Sangsui, took Shen Lia captive, and returned.839 That was why Zheng did not dare to turn south and follow Chu. That Chu lost the allegiance of the central domains was the doing of the Lord of Xi.

26.10b

838 We follow Wei Zhao’s gloss in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 3,” 147, and read dang 蕩 as huai 壞, “destroy” (cited in Karlgren, gl. 638). 839 In the account of the battle in Cheng 8.2, Zhi Ying, Fan Xie, and Han Jue, not the Lord of Xi, are mentioned as the strategists responsible for Jin victories.

Lord Xiang

1179

雍子之父兄譖雍子，君與大夫不善是也，雍子奔晉，晉 人與之鄐，以為謀主。彭城之役，晉、楚遇於靡角之谷。晉 將遁矣，雍子發命於軍曰：「歸老幼，反孤疾，二人役，歸一 人。簡兵蒐乘，秣馬蓐食，師陳焚次，明日將戰。」行歸者， 而逸楚囚。楚師宵潰，晉降彭城而歸諸宋，以魚石歸。楚失 東夷，子辛死之，則雍子之為也。 26.10c

子反與子靈爭夏姬，而雍害其事，子靈奔晉，晉人與之邢，以 為謀主，扞禦北狄，通吳於晉，教吳叛楚，教之乘車、射 御、驅侵，使其子狐庸為吳行人焉。吳於是伐巢、取駕、克 棘、入州來，楚罷於奔命，至今為患，則子靈之為也。

840 We follow Yang’s (3:1121) reading of shan 善 as “resolve” or “mediate.” Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 37.636) implied reading of shi 是 as shi 諟 (“rectify”) in the phrase bu shan shi 不善是, “not skilled at judging right and wrong” (bu shi qi quzhi 不是其曲直). 841 The city of Chù 鄐 was located in the domain of Jin near Wen County 溫縣, Henan. 842 See Cheng 18.5 and 18.12. 843 Yongzi wants Chu to hear about Jin’s preparations for battle. 844 See Xiang 1.1.

1180

Zuo Tradition

Yongzi’s father and older brother slandered Yongzi. The ruler and the high officers did not resolve their conflicts.840 Yongzi fled to Jin. The Jin leaders gave him the city of Chù and made him their chief strategist.841 At the Pengcheng campaign, the Jin and Chu armies confronted each other at the Valley of Mijiao.842 Jin was about to flee when Yongzi issued a command to the soldiers: “Let the old and the young return. Repatriate the orphans and sickly ones. If two brothers are on military duty, let one of them return. Choose the best foot soldiers, and review the chariots and their troops. Feed the horses well, and give the soldiers a good meal. Array the troops in battle formations, and burn the tents for setting up camp. Be prepared for battle tomorrow.” Those to be returned were sent on their way, and he allowed Chu prisoners to escape.843 The Chu army collapsed during the night. Jin vanquished Pengcheng, returned it to Song, and took Yu Shi back to Jin.844 That Chu lost the allegiance of the Eastern Yi, a loss that led to Zixin’s death,845 was the doing of Yongzi.

Gongsun Guisheng elaborates two more examples: Qu Wuchen’s defection to Jin, which leads to the rise of Wu, Chu’s nemesis (Cheng 2.6, Ding 4.3), and Fen Huang’s role in bringing about Jin’s victory over Chu during the Yanling campaign (Cheng 16.5). Qu Jian is persuaded to restore Wu Ju’s position. Zifan, who fought over Xia Ji with Qu Wuchenc, obstructed and ruined the latter’s plans.846 Qu Wuchenc fled to Jin, and Jin leaders gave him Xing and made him their chief strategist. He defended Jin against the Northern Di, established relations between Wu and Jin, taught Wu to rebel against Chu, taught Wu men how to ride chariots, shoot, drive, and charge into battle, and he made his son Huyong an envoy in Wu.847 Wu thus attacked Chao, took Jia, overcame Ji, and entered Zhoulai. That Chu commanders became exhausted as they rushed to fulfill urgent commands and that Chu is in distress down to this day are the doing of Qu Wuchenc.

26.10c

845 See Xiang 3.8 and 5.7. Chen and other domains to the east of Chu revolted against Chu because of Chu’s failure to relieve Pengcheng. Chen leaders blamed their defection on the avarice of the Chu minister Zixin (Gongzi Renfu). 846 See Cheng 2.6. 847 See Cheng 7.5.

Lord Xiang

1181

若敖之亂，伯賁之子賁皇奔晉，晉人與之苗，以為謀 主。鄢陵之役，楚晨壓晉軍而陳。晉將遁矣，苗賁皇曰：「楚 師之良在其中軍王族而已，若塞井夷竈，成陳以當之，欒、 范易行以誘之，中行、二郤必克二穆，吾乃四萃於其王族， 必大敗之。」晉人從之，楚師大敗，王夷、師熸，子反死之。 鄭叛、吳興，楚失諸侯，則苗賁皇之為也。 子木曰：「 是皆然矣。」 聲子曰：「 今又有甚於此者。椒舉娶於申公子牟，子牟得戾而亡， 君大夫謂椒舉：『女實遣之。』懼而奔鄭，引領南望，曰：『庶幾赦余。』 亦弗圖也。今在晉矣。晉人將與之縣，以比叔向。彼若謀害楚國，豈不 為患？」 子木懼，言諸王，益其祿爵而復之。聲子使椒鳴逆之。 26.11(8–10) 許靈公如楚，請伐鄭，曰：「 師不興，孤不歸矣。」八月，卒于楚。楚子曰：

「 不伐鄭，何以求諸侯？」

848 See Xuan 4.3. 849 For Fen Huang’s role in the battle of Yanling, see Cheng 16.5b. The strategy of filling up wells and leveling stoves comes from Fan Gai (Cheng 16.5a). 850 Wu Ju was also known as Jiao Ju, or Ju of Jiao; Jiao is the settlement assigned to him. Jiao becomes his son’s lineage name.

1182

Zuo Tradition

In the aftermath of the Ruo’ao lineage’s insurrection,848 Dou Jiaoe’s son Fen Huang fled to Jin. Jin leaders gave him Miao and made him their chief strategist. During the Yanling campaign, when at dawn Chu pressed close to Jin forces and deployed battle formations, Jin was preparing to flee, but Fen Huanga said, “The finest fighters of Chu are only with the central army of the royal house. If we fill up our wells and level our stoves, deploy battle formations to confront them, and have Luan Shud and Fan Xie advance out of line to lure the Chu troops, then Zhonghang Yanf, Xi Qi, and Xi Zhi will certainly overcome the two Chu commanders descended from King Mu, Zichong and Zixin. We can then bring our four armies to bear on the troops of the royal house, and we will be sure to roundly defeat them.”849 Jin leaders followed his plan, and the Chu army was roundly defeated. The king was injured, the army was snuffed out like flames, and Zifan died as a result. That Zheng revolted against Chu, Wu rose to power, and Chu lost the allegiance of the princes were the doing of Fen Huanga.

Qu Jiana said, “It is indeed as you said.” Gongsun Guishengb said, “Now we have something even worse than these examples. Wu Jua married a daughter of Wangzi Moua, the Lord of Shen. Wangzi Moua was incriminated and went into exile. The ruler and the high officers said to Wu Ju: ‘It was indeed you who sent him off.’ Fearful, he fled to Zheng, but longing for home, he craned his neck to gaze southward and said, ‘If only I could be pardoned.’ Even then Chu paid no attention. Now he is in Jin. Jin leaders are about to give him a dependency, making him the equal of Shuxiang. If he strategizes to harm Chu, will he not pose a threat?” Qu Jiana was fearful and spoke to the king, who added to Wu Ju’s rank and emoluments and restored his position. Gongsun Guishengb sent Wu Ju’s son Jiao Ming to meet him and escort him back.850 Zheng and Xǔ, with a long history of hostilities reaching back to the beginning of the period covered by Zuozhuan (Yin 11.3), last confronted each other ten years earlier (Xiang 16.2). Here Chu attacks Zheng on behalf of Xǔ, but Zheng manages to defend itself without full-fledged fighting. Lord Ling of Xǔ went to Chu and asked Chu to attack Zheng: “If the army is not mobilized, I will not go back.” In the eighth month, he died in Chu. The Master of Chu said, “If we do not attack Zheng, how can we seek the allegiance of the princes?”

26.11(8–10)

Lord Xiang

1183

冬，十月，楚子伐鄭，鄭人將禦之。子產曰：「 晉、楚將平，諸侯將 和，楚王是故昧於一來。不如使逞而歸，乃易成也。夫小人之性，釁於 勇、嗇於禍、以足其性而求名焉者，非國家之利也，若何從之？」 子展說，不禦寇。十二月乙酉，入南里，墮其城。涉於樂氏，門于師 之梁。縣門發，獲九人焉。涉于氾而歸。而後葬許靈公。 26.12 衛人歸衛姬于晉，乃釋衛侯。君子是以知平公之失政也。 26.13 晉韓宣子聘于周，王使請事。對曰：「 晉士起將歸時事於宰旅，無他事

矣。」王聞之，曰：「 韓氏其昌阜於晉乎！辭不失舊。」

1184

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the tenth month, the Master of Chu attacked Zheng. The leaders of Zheng were planning to resist Chu. Zichan said, “Jin and Chu are about to make peace, and the princes are about to reach an accord. That is why the Chu king is reckless to have come.851 It is better to let Chu have its way and turn back, for then a peace agreement will be easily achieved. Now it is in the nature of petty men to be roused by their own daring and to hanker after calamity so that they can satisfy their urges and seek fame. That will not be to the advantage of the domain and patrimony. Why should we follow them?” Gongsun Shezhia was pleased and Zheng did not resist the enemy. In the twelfth month, on the yiyou day (5), Chu entered Nanli and demolished its city walls.852 They crossed the river at Yueshi and stormed the Shizhiliang Gate. The portcullis of the inner gate was let down, and nine persons were taken captive. Only after the men of Chu had crossed the Fan River and returned to Chu did they bury Lord Ling of Xǔ. Lord Ping of Jin releases Lord Xian of Wei, whom Jin had arrested earlier (Xiang 26.7a), after Wei leaders send a Wei lady (Wei Ji) as consort. Union with a lady of the same clan name (Ji) is a sign of the ruler’s moral laxity (Zhao 1.12). The leaders of Wei sent Wei Ji to Jin, and Jin then released the Prince of Wei. That is how the noble man knew that Lord Ping was remiss in government.

26.12

Han Qi, as Jin envoy in Zhou, shows proper self-abasement. Han Qia of Jin was on an official visit in Zhou. The king sent an officer to inquire about his mission. He replied, “The officer of Jin, Qi, is preparing to present the offerings of the season to the steward’s subordinates.853 I have no other mission.” The king heard about this and said, “The Han lineage will surely flourish in Jin! His words have not lost the old decorum.”

26.13

851 We read mei 昧 as “being blinded” or “lacking in judgment.” Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 37.637) reading of mei as tanmao 貪冒 “avaricious”: “The Chu king came because of his avarice.” 852 On Nanli, see Xuan 3.6. 853 Han Qi, a minister in Jin, describes himself with the lower rank of “officer” (shi 士) because the royal court is supposed to have more exalted standards than the Jin court. To show proper deference, Han Qi mentions the steward’s subordinates rather than the king or his ministers.

Lord Xiang

1185

26.14 齊人城郟之歲，其夏，齊烏餘以廩丘奔晉，襲衛羊角，取之；遂襲我高

魚。有大雨，自其竇入，介于其庫，以登其城，克而取之。又取邑于宋。於 是范宣子卒，諸侯弗能治也。及趙文子為政，乃卒治之。文子言於晉侯 曰：「 晉為盟主，諸侯或相侵也，則討而使歸其地。今烏餘之邑，皆討類 也，而貪之，是無以為盟主也。請歸之。」公曰：「 諾。孰可使也？」對曰： 「 胥梁帶能無用師。」晉侯使往。

春秋 27.1(2) 二十有七年，春，齊侯使慶封來聘。 27.2(4) 夏，叔孫豹會晉趙武、楚屈建、蔡公孫歸生、衛石惡、陳孔奐、鄭良霄、

許人、曹人于宋。 27.3(3) 衛殺其大夫甯喜。 27.4(3) 衛侯之弟鱄出奔晉。

854 See Xiang 24.11. 855 Linqiu 廩丘 was located northeast of present-day Juancheng County 鄄城縣, Shandong. 856 Gaoyu 高魚 was located north of present-day Yuncheng County 鄆城縣, Shandong. Yangjiao 羊角 was located northwest of Yuncheng County.

1186

Zuo Tradition

Wu Yu of Qi gains refuge in Jin by bringing Qi land with him. He acquired territories through surprise attacks and sought Jin protection with bribes (Xiang 24). Zhao Wu, who succeeds Fan Gai as chief minister, urges Lord Ping to return Wu Yu’s unlawfully gained settlements to their owners. For comparable remonstrances, see Wen 18.7 and Xiang 21.1. In the summer of the year that the leaders of Qi fortified Jia,854 Wu Yu of Qi, taking the settlement of Linqiu with him,855 fled to Jin. He made a surprise attack on Yangjiao in Wei and took it, and then he made a surprise attack on our Gaoyu.856 There was then heavy rain, and he entered the city from the opened drains, armed his men with weapons from the arsenal of Gaoyu, climbed up its city walls, overcame the city, and took control of it. He also took settlements from Song. It was at that time that Fan Gaic died,857 and the princes could not deal with the situation. When Zhao Wua came to be in charge of government, he finally dealt with it. Zhao Wub said to the Prince of Jin, “When the princes invade each other’s territories, Jin, as covenant chief, should chastise the invaders and make them return the lands they have taken. Now Wu Yu’s settlements are all in the category that deserves chastisement. If we covet them, then we will not have the wherewithal to be covenant chief. I request to have the land returned.” The lord said, “I agree. Whom can we send for this mission?” He replied, “Xu Liangdai will be able to accomplish this without using force.”858 The Prince of Jin sent him on the mission.

26.14

LORD XIANG 27 (546 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, the Prince of Qi sent Qing Feng to us on an official visit.

27.1(2)

In summer, Shusun Bao met with Zhao Wu of Jin, Qu Jian of Chu, Gong sun Guisheng of Cai, Shi E of Wei, Kong Huan of Chen, Liang Xiao of Zheng, a Xǔ leader, and a Cao leader at Song.

27.2(4)

Wei put to death its high officer Ning Xi.859

27.3(3)

Zhuan, the younger brother of the Prince of Wei, departed and fled to Jin.

27.4(3)

857 Fan Gai died the year before (Xiang 25). 858 The narrative continues in Xiang 27.1 and is broken off because of the chronological arrangement of the text. 859 The sequence of entries in Zuozhuan suggests that the covenant sworn at Song takes place after the death of Ning Xi.

Lord Xiang

1187

27.5(4) 秋，七月辛巳，豹及諸侯之大夫盟于宋。 27.6(10) 冬，十有二月乙亥朔，日有食之。



左傳

27.1 二十七年，春，胥梁帶使諸喪邑者具車徒以受地，必周。使烏餘具車徒

以受封。烏餘以其眾出，使諸侯偽效烏餘之封者，而遂執之，盡獲之。 皆取其邑，而歸諸侯。諸侯是以睦於晉。 27.2(1) 齊慶封來聘，其車美。孟孫謂叔孫曰；「 慶季之車，不亦美乎！」



叔孫曰：「 豹聞之： 服美不稱， 必以惡終。

美車何為？」 叔孫與慶封食，不敬。為賦〈相鼠〉，亦不知也。

1188

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the xinsi day (5), Bao (Shusun Bao) and the high officers of the princes swore a covenant at Song. In winter, in the twelfth month, on the yihai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.

27.5(4)

27.6(10)

ZUO

In a continuation of the last entry of Xiang 26, Zuozhuan here reports how Xu Liangdai maneuvers to have Wu Yu seized and the settlements he appropriated given back to their owners. In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, Xu Liangdai made the various parties that had lost settlements to Wu Yu come equipped with chariots and soldiers, so that they might get back their lands, and they were to maintain the utmost secrecy. He made Wu Yu come equipped with chariots and soldiers to receive entitlement to the lands he had taken. Wu Yu came with the throng of his followers. Xu Liangdai made the princes pretend to be the ones conferring entitlement on Wu Yu. They then arrested him, seized all his followers, retrieved all the settlements he had taken, and returned them to the princes. That was why the princes had harmonious relations with Jin.860

27.1

Qing Feng, whose career has been ascendant after Cui Zhu’s murder of Lord Zhuang (Xiang 25.2), comes to Lu as a Qi envoy. His ignorance of ritual, evident in his failure to register the criticism implied in a recited ode, belies the splendor of his equipage. He will show his ignorance of odes again in Xiang 28.9. Qing Feng of Qi came to us on an official visit. His carriage was splendid. Meng Xiaobod said to Shusun Baod, “Isn’t Qing Feng c’s carriage splendid!” Shusun Baod said, “I have heard,

27.2(1)

He whose splendid garments do not match him Will certainly come to a bad end.861

Of what use is a splendid carriage?” Shusun Baod gave a feast for Qing Feng, and the latter was disrespectful. Shusun Bao recited “Rats” on his account, but Qing Feng also did not understand.862

860 In thus reversing the policy of Fan Gai, Zhao Wu is the implied hero of this account. 861 This appears to be an ancient proverb. It is echoed in Maoshi 151, “Houren” 候人, 7C.269–71 (cited in Xi 24.3) and in Liji 54.911. 862 Maoshi 52, “Xiang shu” 相鼠, 3B.122–23. The ode pointedly criticizes those ignorant of ritual propriety and is cited for that purpose in Zhao 3.4 and Ding 10.4.

Lord Xiang

1189

27.3a(3) 衛甯喜專，公患之，公孫免餘請殺之。公曰：「 微甯子，不及此。吾與之

言矣。事未可知，祇成惡名，止也。」 對曰：「 臣殺之，君勿與知。」乃與公孫無地、公孫臣謀，使攻甯 氏，弗克，皆死。 公曰：「 臣也無罪，父子死余矣！」夏，免餘復攻甯氏，殺甯喜及右 宰穀，尸諸朝。石惡將會宋之盟，受命而出，衣其尸，枕之股而哭之。欲 斂以亡，懼不免，且曰：「 受命矣。」乃行。 27.3b(4) 子鮮曰：「 逐我者出，納我者死。賞罰無章，何以沮勸？君失其信，而國

無刑，不亦難乎！且鱄實使之。」遂出奔晉。公使止之，不可。及河，又使 止之，止使者而盟於河。

863 By turning against Ning Xi, Lord Xian will gain notoriety for bad faith. 864 Du Yu (ZZ 38.643) notes that Gongsun Chen’s father was killed in 559 Bce, when Lord Xian was driven out of Wei (Xiang 14.4). 865 Zhuan is referring to Sun Linfu.

1190

Zuo Tradition

Ning Xi, who brought Lord Xian of Wei back from exile (Xiang 26.2), is killed because Lord Xian cannot tolerate his dominance over Wei affairs. Lord Xian has no intention of honoring their earlier agreement that Ning Xi would control the government while Lord Xian would preside over sacrifices. Ning Xi of Wei was monopolizing power, and the lord worried about it. Gongsun Mianyu requested to have him killed. The lord said, “If it were not for Ning Xi, I could not have attained my position. I already had a prior agreement with him. We cannot know whether this plan has any chance of success, and it may end up only making a bad name for me.863 Please desist.” Gongsun Mianyu replied, “Your subjects will kill him. You, my lord, do not have to know about it.” He thus plotted with Gongsun Wudi and Gongsun Chen to attack the Ning lineage. The latter two failed to prevail and both died. The lord said, “Gongsun Chena was guiltless. Father and son both died for me!”864 In summer, Mianyu again attacked the Ning residence, killed Ning Xic and Youzai Gu, and exposed their corpses at court. Having been preparing to join the meeting for swearing the covenant at Song, Shi E received his command and was just setting out. He dressed Ning Xi’s corpse, rested its head on his thigh, and wailed for Ning Xi. He wanted to encoffin it and then go into exile, but he feared that he would not escape disaster. Further, he said, “I have already received the command to go,” and he thus set forth.

27.3a(3)

Zhuan, Lord Xian’s younger brother and loyal supporter during his exile, laments the injustice of Ning Xi’s death, flees to Jin, and refuses to serve in any government. Gongsun Mianyu declines the settlements and honors bestowed on him as reward for destroying Ning Xi and his supporters. For similar arguments on the dangers of excessive wealth and power, see Xiang 22.4, 22.6b, 28.11a, 29.13e, Zhao 10.2c. Zhuana said, “He who drove us out is in exile;865 he who installed us was killed. Rewards and punishments have no obvious justifications, so how can one deter wrongdoings and encourage good deeds? The ruler has lost all credibility, and the domain has no just penalties. Is it not difficult to govern? What’s more, I was the one who brought this about.” He thus departed and fled to Jin. The lord sent someone to stop him. He refused. When he reached the Yellow River, the lord again sent someone to stop him. He stopped the messenger and swore a covenant with him by the Yellow River.

27.3b(4)

Lord Xiang

1191

託於木門，不鄉衛國而坐。木門大夫勸之仕，不可，曰：「 仕而廢其 事，罪也；從之，昭吾所以出也。將誰愬乎？吾不可以立於人之朝矣。」 終身不仕。公喪之如稅服終身。 公與免餘邑六十，辭曰：「 唯卿備百邑，臣六十矣。下有上祿，亂 也。臣弗敢聞。且甯子唯多邑，故死，臣懼死之速及也。」公固與之，受 其半。以為少師。公使為卿，辭曰：「 大叔儀不貳，能贊大事，君其命 之。」乃使文子為卿。 27.4a(2) 宋向戌善於趙文子，又善於令尹子木，欲弭諸侯之兵以為名。如晉，告

趙孟。趙孟謀於諸大夫。韓宣子曰：「 兵，民之殘也，財用之蠹，小國之 大菑也。將或弭之，雖曰不可，必將許之。弗許，楚將許之，以召諸侯，則 我失為盟主矣。」晉人許之。如楚，楚亦許之。如齊，齊人難之。陳文子 曰：「 晉、楚許之，我焉得已？且人曰『弭兵』，而我弗許，則固攜吾民 矣，將焉用之？」齊人許之。告於秦，秦亦許之。皆告於小國，為會於宋。

866 According to Du Yu (ZZ 38.643), Mumen 木門 was a settlement in Jin. Gu Donggao (Yang, 3:1128) situates it to the northwest of Hejian County 河間縣, Hebei. 867 In Gongyang, Xiang 27 (21.264), Zhuan makes a pledge with his wife to never set foot on Wei soil or eat Wei grains. In Guliang, Xiang 27 (16.160), Zhuan, “to the end of his life, never spoke of Wei again.” 868 Zhuan is saying that if he serves competently and successfully in another court, his exile from Wei will be seen in the light of Lord Xian’s failings. 869 The implication is that Lord Xian observes mourning rites beyond what are due a younger brother. Lord Xian dies two years after Zhuan went into self-imposed exile (Annals 29.3). Zhuan might have died only a few months before him. Lu Can glosses shui 稅 as “hearing of the death and wearing mourning clothes retroactively” (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 515).

1192

Zuo Tradition

He lodged in reclusion at Mumen,866 and whenever he sat down, he would not face the direction of the domain of Wei.867 The high officers of Mumen tried to convince him to serve in government, but he refused: “To serve and cast off one’s duties is an offense; to follow through in my duties would be to draw attention to the cause of my exile.868 To whom can I plead my case? I can no longer be allowed to stand in anybody’s court.” To the end of his life he did not serve. Lord Xian mourned Zhuan’s death by keeping to hempen mourning clothes to the end of his life.869 The lord gave Gongsun Mianyu a sixty settlements. He declined: “Only ministers are provided with a hundred settlements. I already have sixty. For the one below to have the emoluments of the one above creates disorder. I would not presume to hear of it. Moreover, it is precisely because Ning Xic had many settlements that he died. I fear that death will come to me soon if I accept.” The lord insisted on giving them to him. He accepted half of them and was appointed junior tutor. The lord wanted to make him minister, but he declined: “Taishu Yi did not shift allegiance and can be instrumental in important affairs. You, my lord, should charge him with the office.” The lord thus made Taishu Yib minister. The Song minister Xiang Xu tries to halt conflicts among the princes by convening a covenant meeting at Song, following earlier intimations of this possibility (Xiang 25.7, 26.11). This laudable goal is, however, marred by Xiang Xu’s selfish desire for fame and the continued rivalry between Jin and Chu. Xiang Xu of Song was on good terms with Zhao Wua of Jin and also with chief minister Qu Jiana of Chu. He wanted to make military conflicts abate among the princes and in this way make a name for himself. He went to Jin and told Zhao Wuc about his plans. Zhao Wuc conferred with the various high officers. Han Qia said, “Military conflicts are devastation for the people, parasites on wealth and resources, and a great bane for small domains. If there is a plan that may make conflicts abate, even though some may say it will not work, we will certainly grant it. If we do not do so, Chu will grant it. With that assent Chu will summon the princes, and we will lose our position as covenant chief.” The leaders of Jin agreed. Xiang Xu went to Chu, and Chu also agreed. He went to Qi, and the leaders of Qi raised difficulties about it. Chen Xuwua said, “Jin and Chu have agreed, so how can we not take part? What’s more, if others say ‘make conflicts abate’ and we do not agree, then we will have already alienated our people. What is the use of doing that?” The leaders of Qi agreed. He told Qin about it, and Qin also agreed. He told all the small domains, and a meeting was held at Song.

27.4a(2)

Lord Xiang

1193

27.4b(5) 五月甲辰，晉趙武至於宋。丙午，鄭良霄至。六月丁未朔，宋人享趙文

子，叔向為介。司馬置折俎，禮也。仲尼使舉是禮也，以為多文辭。 戊申，叔孫豹、齊慶封、陳須無、衛石惡至。甲寅，晉荀盈從趙武 至。丙辰，邾悼公至。壬戌，楚公子黑肱先至，成言於晉。丁卯，宋向戌 如陳，從子木成言於楚。戊辰，滕成公至。 子木謂向戌，請晉、楚之從交相見也。庚午，向戌復於趙孟。趙孟 曰：「 晉、楚、齊、秦，匹也，晉之不能於齊，猶楚之不能於秦也。楚君若 能使秦君辱於敝邑，寡君敢不固請於齊？」 壬申，左師復言於子木，子木使馹謁諸王。王曰：「 釋齊、秦，他 國請相見也。」秋七月戊寅，左師至。是夜也，趙孟及子皙盟，以齊言。 庚辰，子木至自陳。陳孔奐、蔡公孫歸生至。曹、許之大夫皆至。以藩 為軍。

870 According to the dating of the Gongyang and Guliang traditions, as well as in Shiji 47, Confucius is about six or seven at this juncture. If the author of this Zuozhuan entry abides by the same chronology, then he is claiming that some years later Confucius draws attention to the record of this rhetorical display, presumably because it is praiseworthy, although there are commentators who suggest that Confucius is emphasizing the discrepancy between fine words and suspicious calculations. Fang Bao (Zuozhuan yifa juyao, 1.66–67) notes, for example, that the meeting highlights Jin weakness despite splendid rhetorical display. 871 Qu Jian is suggesting that the allies of Jin should attend court in Chu, and the allies of Chu should attend court in Jin.

1194

Zuo Tradition

Complex maneuvering and negotiations precede the Covenant of Song. Confucius notes the wealth of elaborate phrases in the diplomatic ritual, whose narrative context is the mutual suspicion of Jin and Chu. Commentators differ as to whether Confucius is expressing praise or criticism. In the fifth month, on the jiachen day (27), Zhao Wu of Jin arrived at Song. On the bingwu day (29), Liang Xiao of Zheng arrived. In the sixth month, on the dingwei day, the first day of the month, the leaders of Song offered ceremonial toasts to Zhao Wua, and Shuxiang was his aide. The supervisors of the military put in place the meat, cutting it up and arranging it on stands. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. Confuciusc had these rituals set forth and recorded, considering them replete with finely patterned arguments.870 On the wushen day (2), Shusun Bao of Lu, Qing Feng and Chen Xuwu of Qi, and Shi E of Wei arrived. On the jiayin day (8), Zhi Daozib of Jin, following Zhao Wu, arrived. On the bingchen day (10), Lord Dao of Zhu arrived. On the renxu day (16), Gongzi Heigong of Chu arrived in advance and settled on the wording of the covenant with Jin. On the dingmao day (21), Xiang Xu of Song went to Chen and, deferring to Qu Jiana, settled on the wording of the covenant with Chu. On the wuchen day (22), Lord Cheng of Teng arrived. Qu Jiana spoke to Xiang Xu and requested that the allies of Jin and Chu each have an audience with their leader’s rival.871 On the gengwu day (24), Xiang Xu reported back to Zhao Wuc. Zhao Wuc said, “Jin, Chu, Qi, and Qin are peers. Jin cannot control Qi, just as Chu cannot control Qin. If the Chu ruler can make the Qin ruler deign to visit our humble settlement, will our unworthy ruler presume not to insist on requesting that the Qi ruler should do likewise with Chu?” On the renshen day (26), the minister of the left, Xiang Xu, reported on his mission to Qu Jiana. Qu Jiana sent a courier-carriage to seek an audience with the Chu king. The king said, “Leave out Qi and Qin, and request that the other domains each have an audience with their leader’s rival.”872 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuyin day (2), Xiang Xub arrived. That night, Zhao Wu and Gongzi Heigonga worked on the covenant so that the parties could agree on the wording. On the gengchen day (4), Qu Jiana arrived from Chen. Kong Huan of Chen and Gongsun Guisheng of Cai arrived. The high officers of Cao and Xǔ all arrived. The delegates used bamboo fences to separate their respective troops.873

27.4b(5)

872 Note that Zhao Wu can act according to his own judgment, while Qu Jian has to seek approval from the Chu king. 873 The bamboo fences take the place of the customary ramparts.

Lord Xiang

1195

27.4c 晉、楚各處其偏。伯夙謂趙孟曰：「 楚氛其惡，懼難。」趙孟曰：「 吾左

還，入於宋，若我何？」辛巳，將盟於宋西門之外。楚人衷甲。伯州犁曰： 「 合諸侯之師，以為不信，無乃不可乎？夫諸侯望信於楚，是以來服。 若不信，是棄其所以服諸侯也。」固請釋甲。 子木曰：「 晉、楚無信久矣，事利而已。苟得志焉，焉用有信？」 大宰退，告人曰：「 令尹將死矣，不及三年。求逞志而棄信，志將 逞乎？志以發言，言以出信，信以立志。參以定之。信亡，何以及三？」 趙孟患楚衷甲，以告叔向。叔向曰：「 何害也？匹夫一為不信，猶不 可，單斃其死。若合諸侯之卿，以為不信，必不捷矣。食言者不病，非子 之患也。夫以信召人，而以僭濟之，必莫之與也，安能害我？且吾因宋以 守病，則夫能致死。與宋致死，雖倍楚可也，子何懼焉？又不及是。曰弭 兵以召諸侯，而稱兵以害我，吾庸多矣；非所患也。」

874 According to Du Yu (ZZ 38.645), Jin stayed on the north side and Chu on the south side. 875 We follow Du Yu (ZZ 38.645), who asserts that Bosu 伯夙 (the name written here) is another name for Zhi Daozi, but Fu Qian simply identifies Bosu as a high officer in Jin. 876 In a corresponding entry in Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.464, Qu Jian plans to launch a surprise attack on the Jin delegation. 877 The graph can or san 參 means both “three” and “intertwine” or “interact.” 878 If the Song capital becomes the battlefield, the men of Song will be fighting for the survival of their own domain.

1196

Zuo Tradition

Chu soldiers wear armor under their clothes, and the Chu chief minister, Qu Jian, seems prepared to attack Jin, but Shuxiang calculates rightly that Chu will not risk the consequences. Ministers on both sides note the importance of good faith. Jin and Chu each stayed on its side.874 Zhi Daozid875 said to Zhao Wuc, “The atmosphere on the Chu side is very hostile. I fear disaster.”876 Zhao Wuc said, “If we veer left, we will enter Song. What can they do to us?” On the xinsi day (5), the delegates were about to swear a covenant outside the west gate of Song. The men of Chu wore armor under their clothes. Bo Zhouli said, “Is it not unacceptable to gather the armies of the princes for a meeting so as to act in bad faith? Now the princes look to Chu for good faith, and that is why they have come in submission. If we act in bad faith, we will be abandoning the very thing that has brought the princes to submission.” He persisted in requesting the removal of the armor. Qu Jiana said, “Jin and Chu have been faithless with each other for a long time, caring only to do whatever is advantageous. So long as we fulfill our ambition, what use do we have for good faith?” The grand steward Bo Zhouli withdrew and told others, “The chief minister will die soon. He will not last even three years. He seeks to fulfill his ambition, yet he abandons good faith. Can his ambition be fulfilled? Ambition is to be expressed through words, words are for bringing forth good faith, and good faith is for establishing ambition. These three things are intertwined, sustaining and stabilizing each other.877 If good faith is lost, how can he last three years?” Zhao Wuc, troubled by the fact that Chu men were wearing armor under their clothes, told Shuxiang about it. Shuxiang said, “What harm is there? One act of bad faith is unacceptable even for commoners. Without exception they fall to their death. If one gathers the ministers of the princes for a meeting so as to act in bad faith, one will certainly have no success. He who eats his words has no power to endanger others. This is not what should trouble you. For if one summons others in the name of good faith, and yet uses duplicity to achieve one’s goal, the others will certainly not give their support or acquiescence. How can they harm us? Moreover, since we can use Song to guard against attempts to harm us, all of our men will fight to the death, and with Song men who will also fight to the death, we could resist Chu, even if its army were double its size.878 What is there for you to fear? In addition, the course of events will not come to this point. If Chu claims to use abatement of military conflicts to summon the princes, and yet initiates military action against us, we can use the situation to our advantage in many ways. This is not something we have to worry about.”

27.4c

Lord Xiang

1197

27.4d 季武子使謂叔孫以公命曰：「 視邾、滕。」既而齊人請邾，宋人請滕，皆

不與盟。叔孫曰：「 邾、滕，人之私也；我，列國也，何故視之？宋、衛，吾 匹也。」乃盟。故不書其族，言違命也。 晉、楚爭先。晉人曰：「 晉固為諸侯盟主，未有先晉者也。」楚人 曰：「 子言晉、楚匹也，若晉常先，是楚弱也。且晉、楚狎主諸侯之盟也久 矣，豈專在晉？」叔向謂趙孟曰：「 諸侯歸晉之德只，非歸其尸盟也。子務 德，無爭先。且諸侯盟，小國固必有尸盟者，楚為晉細，不亦可乎？」乃 先楚人。書先晉，晉有信也。 27.4e 壬午，宋公兼享晉、楚之大夫，趙孟為客，子木與之言，弗能對；使叔向

侍言焉，子木亦不能對也。

879 According to Du Yu (ZZ 38.646), Ji Wuzi wants Lu to be regarded as a small domain to forestall excessive demands from Jin and Chu for offerings. Qu Jian’s proposal that Jin’s allies should pay their respects to Chu, and Chu’s allies should do likewise to Jin, may mean that the smaller domains will face demands from both Chu and Jin. Teng and Zhu, as subordinate allies, do not participate in the covenant and are not bound by its demands. 880 Annals, Xiang 27.5, refers to Shusun Bao as “Bao.”

1198

Zuo Tradition

Exegetical explanations of why Shusun Bao’s name is omitted (he violates a command) and Jin is recorded first (its leaders have good faith) are belied by implicit debates on what constitutes a reasonable command and good faith, as well as complex considerations of motives and circumstantial exigencies. Shusun Bao’s political acumen justifies insubordination, and Jin’s good faith may be the rhetorical cover for weakness. Ji Wuzi sent word to Shusun Baod, conveying it as our lord’s command: “Look to Zhu and Teng as equals.”879 Shortly thereafter the leaders of Qi requested to have Zhu as its subordinate ally, while the leaders of Song requested to have Teng as its subordinate ally, and as a result neither Zhu nor Teng participated in the covenant. Shusun Baod said, “Zhu and Teng are like the private possessions of other domains, while we are arrayed with other domains. Why should we look to them as equals? Song and Wei are on a par with us.” He thus swore the covenant. Hence, the name of his house is not recorded.880 This is to say that he acted against the command. Jin and Chu fought over precedence. The leaders of Jin said, “Jin has always been the covenant chief among the princes. There has not been any instance of another domain taking precedence over Jin.” The leaders of Chu said, “You, sir, said that Jin and Chu are on a par. If Jin always has precedence, then Chu is the weaker party. Moreover, Jin and Chu have alternated as covenant chiefs among the princes for a long time. How can Jin have exclusive claim to leadership?” Shuxiang said to Zhao Wuc, “The princes turn to Jin for its virtue; they do not turn to Jin because it presides over the swearing of the covenant. You, sir, should just strive for virtue instead of fighting over precedence. Moreover, when the princes swear covenants, there have always been cases when small domains preside over the ceremony.881 Is it not acceptable for Chu to be Jin’s lesser partner?” Thus, precedence was given to the leaders of Chu. That Jin is recorded first is because Jin had good faith.

27.4d

Memory of the Jin minister Fan Hui’s virtue, as well as Shuxiang’s eloquence and ritual knowledge, augments Jin’s prestige with respect to the rivalry between Jin and Chu. On the renwu day (6), the Duke of Song offered ceremonial toasts to the high officers of both Jin and Chu. Zhao Wuc was the honored guest. When Qu Jiana spoke with him, Zhao Wu could not reply. Zhao Wu sent Shu­ xiang to assist him in the exchange, and Qu Jiana also could not reply.

27.4e

881 The leader of the covenant would be the first to smear his mouth with blood and swear the oath, while high officers of other domains would preside over the ceremony by holding the bull’s ears and officiating in other ways; see Ding 8.7, Ai 17.6. In other words, Shuxiang is trying to justify yielding precedence to Chu by redefining what it means to “preside over the covenant.”

Lord Xiang

1199

乙酉，宋公及諸侯之大夫盟于蒙門之外。子木問於趙孟曰：「 范武 子之德何如？」對曰：「 夫子之家事治，言於晉國無隱情，其祝史陳信於 鬼神無愧辭。」 子木歸以語王。王曰：「 尚矣哉！能歆神、人，宜其光輔五君以為盟 主也。」子木又語王曰：「 宜晉之伯也，有叔向以佐其卿，楚無以當之，不 可與爭。」 晉荀盈遂如楚蒞盟。 27.5a 鄭伯享趙孟于垂隴，子展、伯有、子西、子產、子大叔、二子石從。趙孟

曰：「 七子從君，以寵武也。請皆賦，以卒君貺，武亦以觀七子之志。」 子展賦〈草蟲〉，趙孟曰：「 牀哉，民之主也！抑武也，不足以當 之。」 伯有賦〈鶉之賁賁〉，趙孟曰：「 床笫之言不踰閾，況在野乎？非 使人之所得聞也。」 子西賦〈黍苗〉之四章，趙孟曰：「 寡君在，武何能焉！」 子產賦〈隰桑〉，趙孟曰：「 武請受其卒章。」 子大叔賦〈野有蔓草〉，趙孟曰：「 吾子之惠也。」 印段賦〈蟋蟀〉，趙孟曰：「 善哉，保家之主也！吾有望矣。」

882 Fan Hui was the spearman on the right under Lord Wen, the high officer of Lords Ling and Xiang, one of Lord Cheng’s ministers, and grand tutor of Lord Jing. 883 Zhao Wu is returning to Jin from Song via Zheng. Chuilong 垂隴 is located to the northeast of present-day Xingyang County 滎陽縣 in Henan. 884 The text has “the two Zishis”: both Yin Duan and the Gongsun Duan have the cognomen “Zishi” 子石. 885 Maoshi 14, “Cao cong” 草蟲, 1D.51–52. Gongsun Shezhi is using this ode, which articulates a woman’s longing for “the noble man” before their meeting and her expectation of joy when they meet, to convey his hopes for the Zheng-Jin relationship. Zhao Wu declares that “the noble man” in the ode is “the master of the people” but considers himself unworthy of the comparison. As with Zichan and You Ji below, relationship between domains is compared to love and courtship. 886 Maoshi 49, “Chun zhi ben ben” 鶉之賁賁, 3A.114. The ode directly denounces the ruler and might have been associated with condemnation of licentiousness in the ruling house (as told in the Mao commentary), hence Zhao Wu’s reference to “words spoken near the bedstead” and his later prediction of Liang Xiao’s doom. It is also possible to interpret lines from this ode (“The man is no good, / But I treat him as older brother) as criticism of how Jin yielded precedence to Chu (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 531). 887 Maoshi 227, “Shu miao” 黍苗, 15B.513–15. The ode glorifies the exploits of the Shao Duke who built the settlement of Shen during the reign of King Xuan. Zixi implicitly compares Zhao Wu to the Shao Duke, hence Zhao Wu’s disclaimer. 888 Maoshi 228, “Xi sang” 隰桑, 15B.515. Zichan is also using a woman’s love for “the noble man” to convey Zheng’s devotion to Jin. Zhao Wu’s acceptance of the last stanza, which tells how love and devotion will always be remembered even if the emotions may not be expressed, implies that while he does not deserve to be compared to the fervently praised “noble man” in the earlier stanzas, he will not forget the ties between Zheng and Jin.

1200

Zuo Tradition

On the yiyou day (9), the Duke of Song and the high officers of the princes swore the covenant outside the Meng Gate. Qu Jiana asked Zhao Wuc, “What was Fan Huii ’s virtue like?” He replied, “That fine man’s domestic affairs were well governed, and when he spoke in the domain of Jin, he had nothing to hide. His invocator and scribe presented the truth to ghosts and spirits with no need for apologies.” Qu Jiana, upon his return, told the Chu king. The king said, “Lofty indeed! He could delight spirits and men. It was fitting that he gloriously assisted five rulers who became covenant chiefs.”882 Qu Jiana also said to the king, “It is fitting that Jin should be the overlord. It has Shuxiang to assist its ministers. Chu has no one that can match up. We cannot contend with them.” Zhi Daozib of Jin then went to Chu to oversee the covenant. Seven Zheng nobles recite odes to convey their intent, which the Jin minister Zhao Wu successfully decodes. For a comparable episode, see Zhao 16.3d. The Liege of Zheng offered ceremonial toasts to Zhao Wuc at Chuilong.883 Gongsun Shezhia, Liang Xiaoa, Zixi, Zichan, You Jib, Yin Duanb, and Gongsun Duanb884 accompanied their ruler. Zhao Wuc said, “These seven fine men, in thus accompanying the ruler, show me favor. I request that they all recite odes to bring to completion the ruler’s gift, and I will also thereby observe the intent of these seven fine men.” Gongsun Shezhia recited “Crickets in the Grass.” Zhao Wuc said, “Excellent indeed! This is the master of the people! However, I am inadequate to bear the comparison!”885 Liang Xiaoa recited “Quails Forging Ahead.” Zhao Wuc said, “Words spoken near the bedstead do not go beyond the threshold, let alone spread to the countryside! This is not something an envoy should get to hear.”886 Zixi recited the fourth stanza of “Shoots of Millet.” Zhao Wuc said, “Our unworthy ruler is there. What competence could I claim?”887 Zichan recited “Mulberry of the Marshes.” Zhao Wuc said, “I beg leave to accept the last stanza.”888 You Jib recited “In the Wilds There Are Creepers.” Zhao Wuc said, “This is your kindness, sir.”889 Yin Duan recited “Crickets.” Zhao Wuc said, “Excellent indeed! This is the master who guards the patrimony! I have hope indeed.”890

27.5a

889 Maoshi 94, “Ye you mancao” 野有蔓草, 4D.182. The ode celebrates the joyous encounter between a man and a woman, and You Ji is using it to express his gladness in meeting Zhao Wu for the first time. 890 Maoshi 114, “Xishuai” 蟋蟀, 6A.215–17. In this ode, a man with public responsibilities mourns the passage of time, cautions against excesses, and urges attention to duty.

Lord Xiang

1201

公孫段賦〈桑扈〉，趙孟曰：「 『匪交匪敖』，福將焉往？若保是言 也，欲辭福祿，得乎？」 27.5b 卒享，文子告叔向曰：「 伯有將為戮矣。詩以言志，志誣其上而公怨之，

以為賓榮，其能久乎？幸而後亡。」叔向曰：「 然，已侈，所謂不及五稔 者，夫子之謂矣。」文子曰：「 其餘皆數世之主也。子展其後亡者也，在 上不忘降。印氏其次也，樂而不荒。樂以安民，不淫以使之，後亡，不亦 可乎！」 27.6a 宋左師請賞，曰：「 請免死之邑。」公與之邑六十，以示子罕。子罕曰：

「 凡諸侯小國，晉、楚所以兵威之，畏而後上下慈和，慈和而後能安靖 其國家，以事大國，所以存也。無威則驕，驕則亂生，亂生必滅，所以亡 也。天生五材，民並用之，廢一不可，誰能去兵？兵之設久矣，所以威不

891 Maoshi 215, “Sanghu” 桑扈, 14B.480–81. This is a feast song that celebrates the virtues and refinement of the king and his lords. Its last two lines—”Neither haughty nor arrogant: / Myriad blessings come and gather”—link moral attributes to blessings. The received text of the Maoshi has bi jiao fei ao 彼交匪傲, which is also how the line appears in Cheng 14.1. 892 Liang Xiao is killed three years later (Xiang 30.10). 893 “Crickets in the Grass” has the line “My heart is humbled” 我心則降. As superior minister in Zheng, Gongsun Shezhi nevertheless claims to be awed by the noble man (i.e., Zhao Wu). Gongsun Shezhi’s Han lineage is also mentioned as long lasting in Xiang 26.7b, but little is known about it beyond sporadic references in Zuozhuan. 894 “Crickets in the Grass” has the line “To love joy without abandonment” 好樂無荒, hence Zhao Wu’s comment. 895 Extant sources do not inform us about the fate of the Yin lineage in Zheng. Zichan, a prominent figure in Zuozhuan, is curiously not singled out for praise. 896 Had the negotiations for the cessation of conflict failed, Xiang Xu might have been punished by death. He thus presents his achievement as the feat whereby he escaped death (Takezoe, 18.40). Lü Zuqian suggests that Xiang Xu is asking for the privilege to “escape death” (miansi 免死) should he be accused of crimes (Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 535). 897 The “Five Resources” (wucai) are also mentioned in Zhao 11.2. References to “five colors,” “five tones,” and “five tastes” (Zhao 25.3) are sometimes understood as a nascent version of the theory of “Five Phases.” The term “five phases” (wuxing 五行) is used in Zhao 25.3, 29.4, and 32.3, but theories of “five phases” or “five agents” developed later (ca. 3rd to 2nd cent. Bce). 898 The meanings of the graph bing 兵 include “weapons,” “warfare,” and “military conflict.” Weapons are made of at least one of the five elements (e.g., metal; Takezoe, 18.41), or their making can involve all five (metal, wood, water, fire, and earth; Yang, 3:1136). Yue Xi is arguing that the “naturalness” of weapons, as evinced by their derivation from the “Five Resources,” means that military conflicts are inevitable. Similar arguments on the inevitability of conflict and warfare are found in Zhuangzi jishi 23.795; Han Feizi 49.1042; Zhanguo ce, “Zhao 3,” 712–13; and Lüshi chunqiu 7.383–84. Ban Gu links warfare to punishment and cosmic order (Hanshu 32.1081–86). Cf. Qian Zhongshu, Guanzhui bian, 1:223–24.

1202

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Duan recited “Mulberry Finch.” Zhao Wuc said, “‘Neither haughty nor arrogant.’ Where else can good fortune go? If one can guard these words, even if one were to decline good fortune and emoluments, would it be possible?”891 The Jin ministers Zhao Wu and Shuxiang diagnose the recitations and link them to the destiny of the Zheng nobles. When the ceremonial toasts were over, Zhao Wub said to Shuxiang, “Liang Xiaoa will be executed.892 Odes are for articulating intent. His intent was to slander those above him and to publicly express his resentment against them, and he presents it as a way to honor the guest. Can he last for long? He would be lucky to end up in exile.” Shuxiang said, “Indeed. He is excessively extravagant. The phrase ‘not reaching five harvests’ applies to that man.” Zhao Wub said, “The rest are all masters for several generations. Gongsun Shezhia’s Han lineage will surely be among the last to perish. Being in a superior position, he yet does not forget to humble himself.893 Next to Gongsun Shezhi is Yin Duana, who expresses joy without abandonment.894 He uses joy to bring peace to the people and employs them with no excess. Is it not proper that his lineage should be among the last to perish?”895

27.5b

The Song minister Yue Xi castigates Xiang Xu for trying to profit by his effort to halt military conflict. He further characterizes such attempts as fatuous and dangerous because warfare is said to play a positive role in creating order. Xiang Xub, minister of the left in Song, requested a reward: “I request to be granted settlements for having escaped death.”896 The lord gave him sixty settlements, and Xiang Xu showed the document of the bestowal to Yue Xia. Yue Xia said, “In all cases concerning small domains of the princes, Jin and Chu use military might to establish authority over them. Only with awe are there compassion and harmony between those above and below. Only with compassion and harmony can they then bring peace and stability to their domains and patrimonies. In that way they serve the great domains, for such is their means of survival. Without authority there will be arrogance, and as a result of arrogance disorder will arise. When disorder arises, these small domains will be extinguished, for such is the road to destruction. Heaven gives rise to the Five Resources,897 and the people use all of them. Discarding even one of them will not do. Who can remove weapons?898 Weapons have been in use for a long time: such is the means for using authority to forestall

27.6a

Lord Xiang

1203

軌而昭文德也。聖人以興，亂人以廢。廢興、存亡、昏明之術，皆兵之由 也，而子求去之，不亦誣乎！以誣道蔽諸侯，罪莫大焉。縱無大討，而又 求賞，無厭之甚也。」削而投之。左師辭邑。 27.6b 向氏欲攻司城。左師曰：「 我將亡，夫子存我，德莫大焉。又可攻乎？」



君子曰： 「彼己之子， 邦之司直。

樂喜之謂乎！ 何以恤我， 我其收之。 向戌之謂乎！」 27.7a 齊崔杼生成及彊而寡，娶東郭姜，生明。東郭姜以孤入，曰棠無咎，與

東郭偃相崔氏。崔成有疾而廢之，而立明。成請老于崔，崔子許之，偃 與無咎弗予，曰：「 崔，宗邑也，必在宗主。」 成與強怒，將殺之，告慶封曰：「 夫子之身，亦子所知也，唯無咎 與偃是從，父兄莫得進矣。大恐害夫子，敢以告。」

899 Maoshi 80, “Gao qiu” 羔裘, 4C.168. 900 Du Yu (ZZ 38.649) claims that this ode is no longer extant, but the lines seem to be variants of “How will it be bestowed on me? / I will embrace it” 假以溢我,我其收之 from Maoshi 267, “Wei tian zhi ming” 維天之命, 19A.708–9. 901 See Xiang 25.2.

1204

Zuo Tradition

transgressions and for making manifest the virtue of culture. The sages rise by them, and those who foment disorder fall by them. The ways to determine rise and fall, preservation and destruction, darkness and illumination, all originate in weapons. Yet you seek to remove them. Is that not deceptive? There is no defense worse than using deceptive tactics to confound the princes! You are lucky to have escaped great chastisement. How can you be seeking rewards! This is the extreme of insatiable greed!” He cut out the words from the bamboo strips and threw them down. Xiang Xub declined the settlements. Xiang Xu accepts Yue Xi’s judgment. A noble man praises both Song ministers with quotations from the Odes. The Xiang lineage wanted to attack Yue Xib, the supervisor of fortifications. Xiang Xub, the minister of the left, said, “I was about to perish, and that fine man let me live. No virtuous beneficence is greater than that! How can we attack him?” The noble man said,

27.6b

“The fine man Is the supervisor of justice in the realm.899

Does that not refer to Yue Xi? How will you show concern for me? I will embrace it.900

Does that not refer to Xiang Xu?” Dongguo Jiang brings strife into Cui Zhu’s household. Her brother, Dongguo Yan, and her son from her first marriage, Tang Wujiu, plot against Cui Zhu’s sons, who in turn seek revenge with the assistance of Qing Feng. Cui Zhu of Qi had become a widower after the birth of Cheng and Qiang. He then took as wife Dongguo Jiang, who gave birth to Ming.901 Dongguo Jiang took the child from her previous marriage into Cui Zhu’s household. He was called Tang Wujiu, and together with Dongguo Yan he assisted Cui Zhu. Cui Cheng had a serious illness and Cui Zhu cast him aside, establishing Ming as his heir instead. Cui Cheng begged leave to retire in Cui. Cui Zhu granted it, but Dongguo Yana and Tang Wujiu would not give it to him, saying, “Cui is the ancestral settlement. It must stay with the head of the lineage.” Enraged, Cui Chenga and Cui Qianga planned to kill them. They told Qing Feng, “You, sir, know well how our father conducts his affairs. He abides by none but Tang Wujiua and Dongguo Yana, and the elders of the lineage can no longer put in a word. We are very anxious that they will harm our father, and we presume to tell you this.”

27.7a

Lord Xiang

1205

慶封曰：「 子姑退。吾圖之。」告盧蒲嫳。盧蒲嫳曰：「 彼，君之讎 也。天或者將棄彼矣。彼實家亂，子何病焉？崔之薄，慶之厚也。」他日 又告。慶封曰：「 苟利夫子，必去之。難，吾助女。」 27.7b 九月庚辰，崔成、崔彊殺東郭偃、棠無咎於崔氏之朝。崔子怒而出，其

眾皆逃，求人使駕，不得。使圉人駕，寺人御而出，且曰：「 崔氏有福，止 余猶可。」遂見慶封。 慶封曰：「 崔、慶一也。是何敢然？請為子討之。」使盧蒲嫳帥甲 以攻崔氏。崔氏堞其宮而守之。弗克，使國人助之，遂滅崔氏，殺成與 彊，而盡俘其家，其妻縊。嫳復命於崔子，且御而歸之。至，則無歸矣。 乃縊。崔明夜辟諸大墓。辛巳，崔明來奔。慶封當國。

902 Takezoe (18.45) comments on the word qie 且 (“but then”): “Cui Zhu actually did not want to go. He faced forward but his heart lagged behind.” 903 Following Karlgren, gl. 645. Cui Zhu knows that a mission of vengeance is ultimately self-destructive. Cf. Du Yu (ZZ 38.649): “The Cui lineage will still be blessed if destruction stops with me”; Takezoe 18.45: “If the Cui lineage stops me from going, it can still be saved from destruction.” Alternatively: “The Cui lineage is blessed. It will be acceptable even if only I am left alive.”

1206

Zuo Tradition

Qing Feng said, “You retire for now. I will consider this.” He told Lupu Pie about this. Lupu Pie said, “He is the former ruler’s enemy. Perhaps Heaven is about to abandon him. Since he is the one whose house is in turmoil, why should you worry about it? Any diminution of the Cui lineage is an enhancement of the Qing lineage.” Some days later, Cui Cheng and Cui Qiang again told Qing Feng about their concerns. Qing Feng said, “So long as it benefits that fine man your father, I will certainly get rid of them. In case of difficulties, I will assist you.” Cui Cheng and Cui Qiang kill Dongguo Yan and Tang Wujiu. Cui Zhu, with great foreboding, turns to Qing Feng for help to punish his sons. The inauspicious omen from two years earlier (Xiang 25.2) is fulfilled as Qing Feng uses the opportunity to annihilate Cui Zhu’s lineage. Cui Zhu hangs himself, and Qing Feng takes over the government in Qi. This story is also told in Lüshi chunqiu 22.1482–83. In the ninth month, on the gengchen day (5), Cui Cheng and Cui Qiang killed Dongguo Yan and Tang Wujiu in Cui Zhu’s court. Cui Zhue left his residence in a fury. His followers had all run away, and he could not get anyone to harness the horses to his carriage. Having made a groom harness the horses to his carriage and a eunuch drive his carriage, he left. But then he said,902 “The Cui lineage will be blessed if someone can stop me from going.”903 He thus went to see Qing Feng, who said, “The Cui and Qing lineages are one.904 How did they dare do that? I beg to chastise them on your behalf.” He sent Lupu Pie to lead armored soldiers to attack the Cui residence. Members of the Cui lineage fortified their palace walls and guarded it. Failing to overcome them, Qing Feng had the inhabitants of the capital assist him. They thus annihilated the Cui lineage, killed Cui Chenga and Cui Qianga, and took all the members of the household as captives. Cui Zhu’s wife hanged herself. Lupu Piea reported the discharge of his mission to Cui Zhue and also drove him home. When he arrived, there was no place to return to.905 He thus hanged himself. Cui Ming escaped at night to his ancestral graveyard. On the xinsi day (6), Cui Ming came in flight. Qing Feng assumed charge of the government.

27.7b

904 That is, they share the same interests and should behave as one close-knit unit. 905 Recall the omen verse of hexagram 47, “Impasse,” cited in Xiang 25.2: “Caught among rocks, he leans on thorns and thistles. He enters his chamber and does not see his wife. Inauspicious.”

Lord Xiang

1207

27.8 楚薳罷如晉蒞盟，晉侯享之。將出，賦〈既醉〉。叔向曰：「 薳氏之有後

於楚國也，宜哉！承君命，不忘敏。子蕩將知政矣。敏以事君，必能養 民，政其焉往？」 27.9 崔氏之亂，申鮮虞來奔，僕賃於野，以喪莊公。冬，楚人召之，遂如楚，

為右尹。 27.10(6) 十一月乙亥朔，日有食之。辰在申，司歷過也，再失閏矣。

春秋 28.1(1) 二十有八年，春，無冰。 28.2(3) 夏，衛石惡出奔晉。 28.3(4) 邾子來朝。 28.4(5) 秋，八月，大雩。

1208

Zuo Tradition

Wei Pi, party to Gongzi Wei’s usurpation (Xiang 30.1), will become chief minister when Gongzi Wei becomes King Ling of Chu (Zhao 1.14). However, all associations with transgression are suppressed here in Shuxiang’s prediction of Wei Pi’s great destiny, based on his apt recitation of an ode. Wei Pi of Chu went to Jin to oversee the covenant, and the Prince of Jin offered him ceremonial toasts. When he was about to leave, he recited “Having Become Inebriated.”906 Shuxiang said, “That the Wei lineage should have descendants in Chu is fitting indeed! He received the ruler’s command and is not remiss with a timely and astute response. Wei Pia will be in charge of government. He who serves the ruler with astuteness will certainly be capable of nurturing the people. Where else can the charge of government go but to him?”

27.8

Shen Xianyu, who showed good judgment when he fled Qi (Xiang 25.2), mourns Lord Zhuang with proper ritual, augmenting the ranks of mourners by hiring servants to wear mourning clothes. He becomes a minister in Chu. As a result of the havoc wreaked by Cui Zhu, Shen Xianyu came in flight. He hired servants in the countryside and had them wear mourning clothes for Lord Zhuang. In winter, the leaders of Chu summoned him. He thus went to Chu and became deputy of the right.

27.9

Calendrical miscalculations in the Annals are noted; see also Ai 12.5. In the eleventh month, on the yihai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. The Handle of the Ladle pointed to the Shen asterism. This was an error on the part of the supervisor of the calendar. Twice he had missed the intercalary months.907

27.10(6)

LORD XIANG 28 (545 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, there was no ice.

28.1(1)

In summer, Shi E of Wei departed and fled to Jin.

28.2(3)

The Master of Zhu came to visit our court.

28.3(4)

In autumn, in the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

28.4(5)

906 Maoshi 247, “Jizui” 既醉, 17B.603–7. The ode probably has a sacrificial context whereby the abundance of the feast is linked to satiation in virtue and the conferring of blessings. Wei Pi is comparing the Jin ruler to “the noble man” who receives blessings in the ode. 907 According to Yasui Kō 安井衡, the missed intercalary months should have been in 549 and 547 Bce (Takezoe, 18.46).

Lord Xiang

1209

28.5(7) 仲孫羯如晉。 28.6(9) 冬，齊慶封來奔。 28.7(12) 十有一月，公如楚。 28.8(10,14) 十有二月甲寅，天王崩。 28.9(12) 乙未，楚子昭卒。

左傳 28.1(1) 二十八年，春，無冰。梓慎曰：「 今茲宋、鄭其饑乎！歲在星紀，而淫於玄

枵。以有時菑，陰不堪陽。蛇乘龍。龍，宋、鄭之星也。宋、鄭必饑。玄 枵，虛中也。枵，秏名也。土虛而民秏，不饑何為？」 28.2 夏，齊侯、陳侯、蔡侯、北燕伯、杞伯、胡子、沈子、白狄朝于晉，宋之盟

故也。 齊侯將行，慶封曰：「 我不與盟，何為於晉？」陳文子曰：「 先事後 賄，禮也。小事大，未獲事焉，從之如志，禮也。雖不與盟，敢叛晉乎？ 重丘之盟，未可忘也。子其勸行！」

908 There was no yiwei day in the twelfth month of this year. 909 The cycle of the Year-Planet (Jupiter), erroneously believed to last twelve years (it is actually 11.86 years), is matched with the twelve branches (zhi) and the twelve meeting points of the sun and the moon in one year. Asterial Order (Xingji 星紀) and Dark Hollow (Xuanxiao 玄枵) are names of asterisms at two of the twelve meeting points. Zi Shen unravels the figural equivalents and semantic associations of the names. Dark Hollow consists of three subconstellations: Woman (Nü 女), Empty (Xu 虛), and Danger (Wei 危). Xu and Wei are associated with the snake, and the Year-Planet is identified with the element wood and the blue dragon. An inversion of the order of nature is thus obtained when the Year-Planet moves too soon to Dark Hollow—the snake rides the dragon. Dark Hollow is “empty at the center” because the name of one of its subconstellations is Empty. Also, Dark Hollow contains the word xiao 枵, which means “hollow,” “hunger,” or “depletion.” Dark Hollow is called Mound of Zhuanxu in Zhao 10.1. 910 Chen, Cai, Hu, and Shěn, formerly subordinate allies of Chu, now also acknowledge Jin leadership, as stipulated by the Covenant of Song. 911 Qi and Qin were left out of the Covenant of Song; see Xiang 27.4b. 912 Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 38.652) reading: “In serving a great domain, one should follow its lead in administrative affairs and then offer gifts to confirm one’s loyalty.” 913 In other words, although Qi is not bound by the Covenant of Song, it should go out of its way to please its more powerful ally, Jin. For similar reasoning, see Zhao 30.2. 914 For the Covenant of Chongqiu, see Xiang 25.6.

1210

Zuo Tradition

Zhongsun Jie (Meng Xiaobo) went to Jin.

28.5(7)

In winter, Qing Feng of Qi came in flight.

28.6(9)

In the eleventh month, our lord went to Chu.

28.7(12)

In the twelfth month, on the jiayin day (16), the Heaven-appointed king succumbed. On the yiwei day,908 Zhao, the Master of Chu, died.

28.8(10,14)

28.9(12)

ZUO

The Lu high officer Zi Shen predicts famine in Song and Zheng when he traces the lack of ice to the irregular movement of the Year-Planet and to the Dark Hollow asterism. Famines occur in Song and Zheng the following year (Xiang 29.7). In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, there was no ice. Zi Shen said, “Now Song and Zheng will probably have famines! The Year-Planet should be at Asterial Order, but it has overreached and moved into Dark Hollow. Because of that there is the calamity of climatic irregularities: yin is no match for yang. The Snake rides the Dragon, and Dragon is the star whose position corresponds to Song and Zheng. There will certainly be famines in Song and Zheng. Dark Hollow is empty at the center, as “hollow” is a term for depletion. When the earth is empty and the people are depleted, how can they avoid famine?”909

28.1(1)

In the aftermath of the Covenant of Song, leaders of various domains prepare to attend the Jin court. Two Qi ministers, Qing Feng and Chen Xuwu, debate whether Qi should also acknowledge Jin leadership. In summer, the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Cai, the Liege of Northern Yan, the Liege of Qǐ, the Master of Hu, the Master of Shěn, and the White Di visited the court of Jin. This was on account of the Covenant of Song.910 The Prince of Qi was about to set forth, when Qing Feng said, “Since we were not party to the covenant,911 why should we attend the Jin court?” Chen Xuwua said, “Serve first and consider the cost of gifts later:912 that is in accordance with ritual propriety. When a small domain serves a great one and fails to obtain the opportunity to serve, it should anticipate the latter’s wishes and comply accordingly: that is in accordance with ritual propriety.913 Even if we were not party to the covenant, do we dare revolt against Jin? The Covenant of Chongqiu cannot yet be forgotten.914 You, sir, should encourage the ruler to set forth.”

28.2

Lord Xiang

1211

28.3(2) 衛人討甯氏之黨，故石惡出奔晉。衛人立其從子圃，以守石氏之祀，禮

也。 28.4(3) 邾悼公來朝，時事也。 28.5(4) 秋，八月，大雩，旱也。 28.6 蔡侯歸自晉，入于鄭。鄭伯享之，不敬。子產曰：「 蔡侯其不免乎！日其過

此也，君使子展迋勞於東門之外，而傲。吾曰猶將更之。今還，受享而 惰，乃其心也。君小國，事大國，而惰傲以為己心，將得死乎？若不免， 必由其子。其為君也，淫而不父。僑聞之：如是者，恆有子禍。」 28.7(5) 孟孝伯如晉，告將為宋之盟故如楚也。

1212

Zuo Tradition

Shi E, after mourning Ning Xi’s death (Xiang 27.3a), flees to Jin, fulfilling a prophecy from nine years earlier (Xiang 19.13). His lineage, however, is allowed to continue, perhaps because of the great merit of his ancestor (Yin 3.7, 4.5). The leaders of Wei chastised the party of the Ning lineage, and that was why Shi E departed and fled to Jin. The leaders of Wei established his nephew Shi Pua as his successor so that he could guard the sacrifices of the Shi lineage. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

28.3(2)

Lord Dao of Zhu came to visit our court: that was a customary seasonal visit.

28.4(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice because of the drought.

28.5(4)

Lord Jing of Cai’s negligent and arrogant manner leads the Zheng minister Zichan to predict disaster. Zichan’s judgment is supposedly based on the Cai ruler’s ritual infractions, but Zichan might also have been influenced by rumors of the Cai ruler’s adulterous relations with his daughter-in-law. His son murders him two years later (Xiang 30.5). When the Prince of Cai was returning from Jin, he entered Zheng. The Liege of Zheng offered him ceremonial toasts, and he was irreverent. Zichan said, “The Prince of Cai will not escape disaster, surely! The other day, when he passed through here on his way to Jin, the lord sent Gongsun Shezhia to go and honor his exertions outside the eastern gate, but he was arrogant. I said then that he might still change his ways. Now on his return, he received ceremonial toasts and yet was negligent. It is thus really a matter of his nature!915 As the ruler of a small domain serving a great one, he yet lets negligence and arrogance become his nature. How will he manage to die a natural death? If he cannot escape disaster, then it will certainly be because of his son. As a ruler, he is licentious, and he has not acted like a father.916 I have heard that a man like this is always plagued by disasters instigated by his son.”

28.6

Meng Xiaobo went to Jin to notify the Jin court that Lu, on account of the Covenant of Song, would go to Chu.

28.7(5)

915 The original has heart or mind (xin 心), which in this context means nature. 916 Zichan is referring to Lord Jing’s adulterous relations with his daughter-in-law.

Lord Xiang

1213

28.8a 蔡侯之如晉也，鄭伯使游吉如楚。及漢，楚人還之，曰：「 宋之盟，君實

親辱。今吾子來，寡君謂吾子姑還，吾將使馹奔問諸晉而以告。」 子大叔曰：「 宋之盟，君命將利小國，而亦使安定其社稷，鎮撫其 民人，以禮承天之休，此君之憲令，而小國之望也。寡君是故使吉奉其 皮幣，以歲之不易，聘於下執事。今執事有命曰：『女何與政令之有？必 使而君棄而封守，跋涉山川，蒙犯霜露，以逞君心。』小國將君是望，敢 不唯命是聽？無乃非盟載之言，以闕君德，而執事有不利焉，小國是 懼。不然，其何勞之敢憚？」 28.8b 子大叔歸，復命。告子展曰：「 楚子將死矣。不修其政德，而貪昧於諸侯，

以逞其願，欲久，得乎？《周易》有之：在復䷗之頤䷚，曰『迷復，凶』，其

917 Jin-Chu negotiations would determine the degree of submission each is exacting from the adherents of the other. 918 That is, the top (sixth) line of hexagram 24, “Return” ䷗ (Fu 復). When this broken line is unbroken, we have hexagram 27, “Nourishment” ䷚ (Yi 頤). For other examples of the rhetorical use the Zhou Changes, see Xuan 6.6, 12.2c.

1214

Zuo Tradition

Chu leaders indicate to the visiting Zheng envoy You Ji that they expect the Zheng ruler personally to attend court in Chu. You Ji eloquently criticizes such demands. When the Prince of Cai was going to Jin, the Liege of Zheng sent You Ji to Chu. When he reached the Han River, the leaders of Chu sent him back, saying, “At the Covenant of Song, your ruler was the one who deigned to participate personally. Now that you have come, sir, our unworthy ruler is saying that you should turn back for now. We will send a courier-carriage posthaste to inquire about this of Jin and then notify you about it.”917 You Jib said, “At the Covenant of Song, your ruler commanded that there be plans to benefit the small domains, and also that you let them bring peace and stability to the altars of their domains, settle and comfort their people, and use ritual propriety to receive the munificence of Heaven. This was your ruler’s binding command and the very hope of the small domains. That was why our unworthy ruler, considering the difficulties of the times, sent me to present the gifts of fur and silk on this official visit to those in charge of your government. Now those in charge have a command that says, ‘How could you have anything to do with the orders of government in Zheng? We must have your ruler abandon the land which he was put in power to guard, climb mountains and wade through rivers, and expose himself to the hazards of frost and dew, so as to satisfy our ruler’s desires.’ Our small domain looks only to your ruler. Would we dare fail to abide by none but your command? Will it not undermine your ruler’s virtue to make demands beyond those recorded in the original covenant? Will that not mean harm for those in charge of your government? This is what our small domains fears. Otherwise, what toils would we dare to shrink from?”

28.8a

You Ji, on the basis of Chu’s unreasonable demands, predicts the death of King Kang of Chu as well as Chu’s failure to become covenant chief. The irregular movement of the Year-Planet, said to portend famines in Song and Zheng (Xiang 28.1), is here taken to be an omen of death for King Ling of Zhou and King Kang of Chu. Both die later this year. You Jib returned and reported discharge of his mission. He told Gongsun Shezhia, “The Master of Chu is going to die. He does not cultivate the virtues of his government and is instead driven by greed and blindness to satisfy his wishes when dealing with the princes. He may wish to last long, but will he succeed? As the Zhou Changes has it, with the line whereby the hexagram ‘Return’ ䷗ becomes the hexagram ‘Nourishment’ ䷚:918 ‘Lost, turn back. Inauspicious.’ Does that not refer to the

28.8b

Lord Xiang

1215

楚子之謂乎！欲復其願，而棄其本，復歸無所，是謂迷復，能無凶乎？君 其往也，送葬而歸，以快楚心。楚不幾十年，未能恤諸侯也，吾乃休吾 民矣。」 裨竈曰：「 今茲周王及楚子皆將死。歲棄其次，而旅於明年之次， 以害鳥帑，周、楚惡之。」 28.8c 九月，鄭游吉如晉，告將朝于楚以從宋之盟。子產相鄭伯以如楚。舍不

為壇。外僕言曰：「 昔先大夫相先君適四國，未嘗不為壇。自是至今亦 皆循之。今子草舍，無乃不可乎？」 子產曰：「 大適小，則為壇；小適大，苟舍而已，焉用壇？僑聞之， 大適小有五美：宥其罪戾，赦其過失，救其菑患，賞其德刑，教其不及。 小國不困，懷服如歸，是故作壇以昭其功，宣告後人，無怠於德。

919 The graph fu 復 means both “to return” and “to fulfill a wish.” Instead of “returning to basic concerns,” the Chu king seeks to “realize his wishes.” 920 That is, he fails to adhere to the right path or cultivate virtue. This may also connect to the image of “forgetting the right road” from the line statement cited above. 921 You Ji is predicting that the Chu ruler will die before or during the Zheng ruler’s visit. Despite You Ji’s disparagement of Chu, he is basically capitulating to Chu’s demand that the Zheng ruler should personally attend the Chu court. 922 The statement of the top line of “Return”: “To use this to send forth troops will end in great defeat. For the ruler of the domain, this is inauspicious. Even in ten years the expedition will not succeed.” 923 The inauspicious consequences of the irregular movement of the Year-Planet affect the Vermilion Bird (Zhuque 朱雀) constellation, which includes “Quail Fire” (Chunhuo 鶉火) and “Quail’s Tail Feathers” (Chunwei 鶉尾). According to the theory of fenye 分野, or “field allocation astrology” (Pankenier’s translation), the latter two govern events in Zhou and Chu.

1216

Zuo Tradition

Master of Chu! He wants to realize919 his wishes, yet he abandons the basic concerns.920 To try to return but have no place to come back to is what is meant by ‘lost, turn back.’ How can this fail to be inauspicious? Our ruler should go there, send off the funeral procession, and come back, so as to gratify Chu’s desires.921 It will be close to ten years before Chu will be able to exert any sway over the Princes.922 We can then let our people rest.” Pi Zao said, “This year the Zhou king and the Master of Chu will both die. The Year-Planet has abandoned its proper place and is moving to its position for next year, bringing harm to the ‘Bird’ and the ‘Quail’s Tail Feathers.’ Zhou and Chu will suffer because of this.”923 While complying with Chu demands, Zichan demonstrates Zheng’s discontent by refusing to build the customary earthern platform. As with You Ji earlier (Xiang 28.8a), criticism of the stronger domain is the rhetorical compensation for submission. In the ninth month, You Ji of Zheng went to Jin to notify Jin that Zheng would visit the court of Chu in accordance with the Covenant of Song. With Zichan acting as assistant to the Liege of Zheng, they went to Chu. Zichan set up a tent but did not build an earthen platform.924 The external officer in charge of this ceremony said, “In the past, when the former high officers acted as the former rulers’ assistants as they traveled to all the domains in the four quarters of the land, they never neglected to clear the ground and build an earthen platform. That is why to this day we still all follow this practice. Now you, sir, have set up a tent on the grass. Is that not unacceptable?” Zichan said, “When those from a great domain travel to a small domain, they build an earthen platform. But when those from a small domain travel to a great domain, they merely make do with a tent. What need is there for an earthen platform? I have heard that there are five good things when those from a great domain travel to a small one: they forgive the latter’s offenses, pardon its errors, relieve its troubles, reward it for its beneficence and punishments,925 and instruct it about its lapses and inadequacies. Thus free from difficulties, the small domain cherishes submission to the great one, finding refuge as if it is returning home. That is why the great domain creates an earthen platform to make manifest its achievement and to proclaim to those who come after that they should not be remiss in cultivating virtue.

28.8c

924 It was customary for the ruler of a domain, during an official visit to another domain, to build an earthen platform in the outskirts of the domain he was visiting to receive the host’s gifts honoring the visiting ruler’s exertions. 925 Takezoe (18.54): de 德 (virtue or beneficence) refers to rewards, xing 刑 refers to punishment. De and xing are often named together as complementary measures that are, respectively, ameliorative and punitive; see Xuan 12.2, n. 189

Lord Xiang

1217

小適大有五惡：說其罪戾，請其不足，行其政事，共其職貢，從其 時命。不然，則重其幣帛，以賀其福而弔其凶，皆小國之禍也，焉用作壇 以昭其禍？所以告子孫，無昭禍焉可也。」 28.9a(7) 齊慶封好田而耆酒，與慶舍政，則以其內實遷于盧蒲嫳氏，易內而飲

酒。數日，國遷朝焉。使諸亡人得賊者，以告而反之，故反盧蒲癸。癸 臣子之，有寵，妻之。慶舍之士謂盧蒲癸曰：「 男女辨姓，子不辟宗，何 也？」曰：「 宗不余辟，余獨焉辟之？賦詩斷章，余取所求焉，惡識宗？」 癸言王何而反之，二人皆嬖，使執寢戈而先後之。 28.9b 公膳日雙雞，饔人竊更之以鶩。御者知之，則去其肉，而以其洎饋。子

雅、子尾怒。慶封告盧蒲嫳。盧蒲嫳曰：「 譬之如禽獸，吾寢處之矣。」 使析歸父告晏平仲。

926 It is possible to have “the great domain” as the subject of the first two clauses: the great domain “justifies its offenses with fine words, requests to be supplied with what it lacks” (Yang, 3:1145). However, it makes more sense here to have the small domain as the subject suffering all “five evils.” 927 “Timely commands” (shiming 時命) are justified, as in Zhao 30.2. Here Zichan is implying that the commands are supposedly seasonal but actually unpredictable. 928 Although Qing Feng has supposedly yielded control of the government to Qing She, he is still acknowledged as the person in charge, and the ministers and high officers must therefore attend court in Lupu Pie’s residence. 929 The “exiled persons” are those exiled in the aftermath both of Lord Zhuang’s assassination (Xiang 25.2) and of Cui Zhu’s downfall (Xiang 27.7). The “malefactors” (zei 賊) are probably Lord Zhuang’s supporters or the remnants of Cui Zhu’s party. 930 Lupu Gui, formerly Lord Zhuang’s supporter (Xiang 23.4a), had fled to Jin (Xiang 25.2d). 931 Both Lupu Gui and Qing Feng have the clan name Jiang. Note that Cui Zhu violated the same taboo (Xiang 25.2a). 932 Self-interest that overrides taboos is compared to the practice of breaking off stanzas to create meanings that fit the occasion during the recitation of odes (duanzhang 斷章). This indicates an awareness of the gap between performed and “originally intended” meanings in the quotation of odes. “Taking what one seeks” in the recitation of odes is common practice in Zuozhuan. 933 The attendant understands the cook’s intention of provoking Ziya and Ziwei into opposing Qing Feng and makes the slight more offensive. For “food stories,” see Xuan 2.1a. 934 Ziya and Ziwei, Lord Hui’s grandsons of the Luan and Gao lineages, respectively, hold Qing Feng responsible for the diminution of their official meals. 935 Literally, “If I may compare them to beasts, I would readily sleep on their pelts.” Zhou Chuo makes the same remark about Zhi Chuo and Guo Zui in Xiang 21.8; see n. 621. Cf. Zhao 3.10. 936 Since Qing Feng appeals to Yan Ying for help to get rid of Ziya and Ziwei, he must have enlarged on stories of their disaffection and unruliness. Yan Ying’s response echoes his refusal to become embroiled in Qi internecine struggles in Xiang 25.2c and Zhao 10.2b.

1218

Zuo Tradition

“There are five evils when those from a small domain travel to a great one: they have to explain the small domain’s alleged offenses, request leniency for its deficiencies,926 carry out the great domain’s policies, supply it with obligatory offerings, and follow its supposedly timely commands.927 If the small domain fails to do these things, the great domain will increase the burden of offerings, whether it be for congratulations on its good fortunes or for condolences over its misfortunes. All these are disasters for the small domain. What need is there to build an earthen platform to advertise its disasters? Tell our descendants this: do not advertise your disasters, and that will be all.” The seeds of doom for the Qing lineage are sown: having monopolized power in Qi (Xiang 27.7), Qing Feng indulges in licentious behavior. Probably through the intercession of Qing Feng’s favorite Lupu Pie, Qing Feng’s former enemies, including Lupu Gui and Wang He (Lord Zhuang’s supporters who fled in Xiang 25.2d), are allowed to return to Qi. Qing Feng of Qi, who loved hunting and drinking, handed government over to his son Qing She and moved with his women and valuables to Lupu Pie’s residence, where the two men exchanged their women and drank. In a few days, the domain moved its court there.928 Qing Feng allowed various exiled persons to return if they had reported any news about malefactors.929 That was why he brought back Lupu Gui.930 Lupu Guia became a retainer serving Qing Shea, who favored Lupu Gui and gave his daughter to him as wife. Qing She’s officers said to Lupu Gui, “Man and wife should have different clan names, yet you, sir, have not avoided marriage with someone who shares a common ancestor with you.931 Why is this?” He said, “Since her father, who shares a common ancestor with me, has not avoided me, how can I for my part avoid him? Just as one breaks off stanzas when reciting odes, I take what I seek.932 What do I know about common ancestors?” Lupu Guia spoke to Qing She about Wang He and brought Wang He back. Qing She was enamored of both of them and had them guard him closely with dagger-axes, one in front and one behind him.

28.9a(7)

Qing Feng tries but fails to enlist the support of other factions to topple disaffected Qi nobles. The Chen lineage, which will eventually win out by the end of the period covered by Zuozhuan, predicts the downfall of the Qing lineage and seeks to profit by it. For the official meals at court, there were two chickens every day. The cook secretly substituted ducks for them. The attendant bringing in the meal knew about this and took away the meat and served only the broth.933 Ziya and Ziwei were furious.934 Qing Feng told Lupu Pie, who said, “Those beasts—I wish I could sleep on their pelts already!”935 Qing Feng sent Xi Guifu to tell Yan Yinga.936

28.9b

Lord Xiang

1219

平仲曰：「 嬰之眾不足用也，知無能謀也。言弗敢出，有盟可也。」 子家曰：「 子之言云，又焉用盟？」告北郭子車。子車曰：「 人各有以事君， 非佐之所能也。」陳文子謂桓子曰：「 禍將作矣，吾其何得？」對曰：「 得 慶氏之木百車於莊。」文子曰：「 可慎守也已。」 28.9c 盧蒲癸、王何卜攻慶氏，示子之兆，曰：「 或卜攻讎，敢獻其兆。」子之曰：

「 克，見血。」 冬，十月，慶封田于萊，陳無宇從。丙辰，文子使召之，請曰：「 無 宇之母疾病，請歸。」慶季卜之，示之兆，曰：「 死。」奉龜而泣，乃使歸。 慶嗣聞之，曰：「 禍將作矣。」謂子家：「 速歸，禍作必於嘗，歸猶可及 也。」子家弗聽，亦無悛志。子息曰：「 亡矣！幸而獲在吳、越。」陳無宇 濟水，而戕舟發梁。

1220

Zuo Tradition

Yan Ying d said, “My followers are not worth calling upon for this task. They lack the wits to devise any plan or strategy. I would not dare let the word out. Let us swear a covenant about this.” Qing Fengb said, “You have already given your word. What need is there for a covenant?”937 He told Beiguo Zuoa. Beiguo Zuob said, “Each person has his way of serving the ruler. This is not something I can do.” Chen Xuwua said to his son Chen Wuyub, “Disaster is about to rear its head. What can we gain from it?” He replied, “We can gain a hundred cartloads of lumber from the Qing lineage on Broad Avenue.”938 Chen Xuwub said, “You should be on your guard.” The plot against the Qing lineage thickens. Divination is tied to deception and hubris: Qing She and Qing Feng are repeatedly fooled by omens. Lupu Gui and Wang He divined about attacking the Qing lineage and showed the omen cracks to Qing Shea. They said, “Someone divined about attacking an enemy, and we presume to present to you the omen.” Qing Shea said, “Prevail. See blood.”939 In winter, in the tenth month, Qing Feng was hunting at Lai, with Chen Wuyu in attendance. On the bingchen day (17), Chen Xuwub had someone summon him and make this request: “Wuyu’s mother is very ill. We ask your permission to let him return.” Qing Fengc divined about this and showed the omen to Chen Wuyu, who said, “This portends death.” He held the turtle shell and wept. Qing Feng thus let him return. When his kinsman Qing Si heard about this, he said, “Disaster is about to rear its head.” He said to Qing Fengb, “Go back quickly! Disaster is certain to rear its head at the time of autumnal sacrifice, but there is still time to go back.” Qing Fengb did not heed him, nor did he show any signs of remorse or desire to change his ways. Qing Sia said, “He will surely be driven into exile! If he is lucky, he will manage to find refuge in Wu and Yue.”940 After Chen Wuyu crossed the river, he destroyed his boat and took down the bridge.

28.9c

937 Du Yu (ZZ 38.654) identifies Zijia, the speaker of this line, as Xi Guifu, which makes sense according to the logic of the sentence. However, Qing Feng is elsewhere referred to as Zijia (Xiang 28.9c), and if Xi Guifu has the same cognomen, the text would have marked it more explicitly. 938 Chen Xuwu is predicting ruin for the Qing lineage. His son replies likewise in code, asserting that they can hope to take over the resources of the Qing lineage and assume control of the Qi government. 939 This is Qing She’s reading of the cracks on the turtle shell. 940 See Xiang 28.9e and Zhao 4.4.

Lord Xiang

1221

28.9d 盧蒲姜謂癸曰：「 有事而不告我，必不捷矣。」癸告之。姜曰：「 夫子愎，

莫之止，將不出。我請止之。」癸曰：「 諾。」十一月乙亥，嘗于大公之廟， 慶舍蒞事。盧蒲姜告之，且止之，弗聽，曰：「 誰敢者？」 遂如公。麻嬰為尸，慶奊為上獻。盧蒲癸、王何執寢戈，慶氏以其 甲環公宮。陳氏、鮑氏之圉人為優。慶氏之馬善驚，士皆釋甲束馬，而 飲酒，且觀優，至於魚里。欒、高、陳、鮑之徒介慶氏之甲。子尾抽桷，擊 扉三，盧蒲癸自後刺子之，王何以戈擊之，解其左肩。猶援廟桷，動於 甍。以俎、壺投，殺人而後死。遂殺慶繩、麻嬰。公懼，鮑國曰：「 群臣為 君故也。」陳須無以公歸，稅服而如內宮。

1222

Zuo Tradition

Qing She’s daughter, Lupu Jiang, sides with her husband, Lupu Gui, and goads her father to attend the autumnal sacrifice at the Qi Ancestral Temple, where Lupu Gui and his allies, emerging from ambush, murder Qing She and his supporters. Lupu Jiang’s choice offers a striking contrast with women who side with their fathers against their husbands or sons in Zuozhuan (Huan 15.2, Xiang 21.5a). Paradoxically, Lupu Jiang ensnares her father in her husband’s plot by revealing the truth and using it as a provocation. Lupu Jiang, Qing She’s daughter and Lupu Gui’s wife, said to Lupu Guia, “You will certainly not succeed if you are planning something and are not telling me!” Lupu Guia told her about the plot to attack the Qing lineage during the autumnal sacrifice. Lupu Jianga said, “My father is stubborn and contrary. If no one stops him, he will not go. I beg leave to stop him.” Lupu Guia said, “I agree.” In the eleventh month, on the yihai day (7), the autumnal sacrifice was to take place at the temple of the Qi ancestor Grand Lord, and Qing She was to oversee the ceremony. Lupu Jiang told him about the plot and moreover tried to stop him from going. He did not heed her, saying, “Who would dare do such a thing?” He thus went to the temple. Ma Ying was the personator receiving sacrifices. Qing Xie was the leading guest who would present the first offerings. Lupu Gui and Wang He were holding dagger-axes in close attendance, and Qing She used his armored men to surround the lord’s palace. The grooms of the Chen and Bao lineages were the entertainers.941 Since Qing She’s horses were easily startled, the officers all took off their armor and tied up their horses. They then drank and also watched the entertainers, going off with them to Yuli. The followers of the Luan, Gao, Chen, and Bao lineages put on the armor left behind by the officers of the Qing lineage. Ziwei pulled out a beam and hit the door thrice.942 Lupu Gui stabbed Qing Shea from behind, while Wang He struck him with his dagger-axe, splitting open his left shoulder. Even then he still grabbed the square pillar of the temple and shook it till the roof tiles quivered. Hurling ritual vessels and a stand for sacrificial meat, he killed some men before he died. The attackers then killed Qing Xiea and Ma Ying. The lord was terrified, but Bao Guo said, “We, your subjects, are acting on behalf of the ruler.” Chen Xuwu went back with the lord, who took off his sacrificial robes and went to the inner palace.

28.9d

941 The temple was inside the palace. Possibly because of his daughter’s duplicitous warning, Qing She is making provisions to defend the palace against attackers. The entertainers prepared by the Chen and Bao lineages might have been intended to distract Qing She’s officers. 942 Ziwei (Gao lineage) is giving the signal for the attack to begin. The account of the attack indicates that the Luan, Gao, Chen, and Bao lineages are all plotting together with Lupu Gui and Wang He.

Lord Xiang

1223

28.9e 慶封歸，遇告亂者。丁亥，伐西門，弗克。還伐北門，克之。入，伐內宮，

弗克。反，陳于嶽，請戰，弗許，遂來奔。 獻車於季武子，美澤可以鑑。展莊叔見之，曰：「 車甚澤，人必瘁， 宜其亡也。」叔孫穆子食慶封，慶封氾祭。穆子不說，使工為之誦〈茅 鴟〉，亦不知。既而齊人來讓，奔吳。吳句餘予之朱方，聚其族焉而居 之，富於其舊。子服惠伯謂叔孫曰：「 天殆富淫人，慶封又富矣。」穆子 曰：「 善人富謂之賞，淫人富謂之殃。天其殃之也，其將聚而殲旃。」 28.10(8) 癸巳，天王崩。未來赴，亦未書，禮也。

1224

Zuo Tradition

Qing Feng learns about the insurrection on his way back from hunting at Lai (Xiang 28.9c), and he flees to Lu after a series of skirmishes. Repeating motifs from his earlier visit (Xiang 27.2), his fine carriage, ritual impropriety, and ignorance of the Odes invite negative judgments from Lu dignitaries. Defying such denunciations with new prosperity in Wu, Qing Feng will meet his end only seven years later (Zhao 4.4). When Qing Feng was on his way back from hunting, he met someone who told him about the turmoil. On the dinghai day (19), he attacked the western gate but did not prevail. Upon returning, he attacked the northern gate and did prevail. He entered the city and attacked the inner palace but did not prevail. He turned back and set forth his forces at Peaks Avenue. He requested engagement in battle, but his opponents did not agree. He thus came to Lu in flight. He presented to Ji Wuzi a carriage whose lustrous sheen was such that its surface could be used as a mirror. Zhan Zhuangshu saw this and said, “His carriage is so very splendid, there must be people who suffer for it.943 It is fitting that he is in exile.” Shusun Baob invited Qing Feng to a meal, and Qing Feng first offered sacrifices to all the spirits.944 Shusun Baoc was displeased and had the musicians chant for him “The Bird of Prey.”945 Yet again he did not understand. Not long afterward, the leaders of Qi came to reprimand Lu, and Qing Feng fled to Wu. Yimoa, the ruler of Wu, gave him Zhufang.946 He gathered his kinsmen and resided there, where he became even richer than before. Zifu Huibo said to Shusun Baod, “Heaven seems to enrich depraved people! Qing Feng is becoming rich again.” Shusun Baoc said, “For a good man, riches are called ‘just recompense.’ For a depraved man, riches are called ‘calamity.’ Heaven is surely going to bring calamity on him. Perhaps it is gathering them all so that the lineage can be entirely destroyed.” On the guisi day, the twenty-fifth day of the eleventh month, the Heavenappointed king succumbed.947 Notice of his passing did not arrive, and it was also not recorded. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

28.9e

28.10(8)

943 That is, Qing Feng accumulates wealth at the expense of the people. Alternatively, ren 人 can refer to Qing Feng: “he must suffer for it” or “he must have wreaked destruction,” reading cui 瘁 as either the state of illness and depletion or the act of inflicting pain and depletion. 944 Ritual requires the offering of sacrifices before a meal. However, making “sacrifices to all the spirits” (fanji 氾祭) is deemed ritually inappropriate, probably because it is too general or grandiose. 945 This ode is no longer extant. We may surmise that the ode criticizes transgression and the ignorance of ritual. 946 Zhufang 朱方 was located east of present-day Zhenjiang City 鎮江市, Jiangsu. 947 The Annals and Zuozhuan give different dates for the death of King Ling of Zhou. Cf. n. 961.

Lord Xiang

1225

28.11a 崔氏之亂，喪群公子，故鉏在魯，叔孫還在燕，賈在句瀆之丘。及慶氏

亡，皆召之，具其器用，而反其邑焉。與晏子邶殿其鄙六十，弗受。子尾 曰：「 富，人之所欲也。何獨弗欲？」 對曰：「 慶氏之邑足欲，故亡。吾邑不足欲也，益之以邶殿，乃足 欲。足欲，亡無日矣。在外，不得宰吾一邑。不受邶殿，非惡富也，恐失富 也。且夫富，如布帛之有幅焉。為之制度，使無遷也。夫民，生厚而用 利，於是乎正德以幅之，使無黜嫚，謂之幅利。利過則為敗。吾不敢貪 多，所謂幅也。」與北郭佐邑六十，受之。與子雅邑，辭多受少。與子尾 邑，受而稍致之。公以為忠，故有寵。釋盧蒲嫳于北竟。

948 Lord Zhuang drove them away because they had supported his rival Gongzi Ya. But Lord Zhuang was instated through Cui Zhu’s help; hence, “the havoc wreaked by Cui Zhu” is presented as the cause for their exile; see Xiang 19.5, 21.3. Following Yang, 3:1150, we take it that Gongzi Mai 買 of Xiang 21.3 and the character here called Jia 賈, both associated with Goudou Knoll, are the same person. The graphs for the two names are very similar. 949 Beidian 邶殿 was located northwest of Changyi County 昌邑縣, Shandong. 950 It is also possible to read zuyu 足欲, translated here as “satisfy desires,” as “worth desiring.” 951 The word “measurements” here, fu 幅, is a homophone of the word for “wealth,” fu 富. 952 Bolts of cloth and silk were supposed to be of fixed width. 953 In Wen 7.8, “correcting virtue, using things advantageously, and enriching livelihood” (zhengde 正德, liyong 利用, housheng 厚生) are named as the “three official affairs.”

1226

Zuo Tradition

In the aftermath of the Qing lineage’s downfall, the noble sons from Qi exiled seven years earlier (Xiang 21.3) are reinstated. In the dispensation of rewards that follows, Yan Ying declines settlements bestowed on him and discourses on the necessity of keeping wealth within “proper measure” (see also Xiang 27.3b). As a consequence of the havoc wreaked by Cui Zhu, the noble sons had been dispersed. That was why Gongzi Chua had been in Lu, Shusun Xuan had been in Yan, and Gongzi Maia had been at Goudou Knoll.948 By the time the Qing lineage head went into exile, they had all been summoned back. Vessels and household implements were provided for them, and their settlements were returned. Yan Yingb was granted sixty settlements on the border of Beidian,949 but he declined to accept them. Ziwei said, “Riches are what men desire, so why do you alone not desire them?” He replied, “The Qing lineage’s settlements were enough to satisfy their desires, and that is why they are in exile. Admittedly, my settlements are not enough to satisfy my desires. But if Beidian were added to them, then they would satisfy my desires. Once they satisfied my desires, exile would not be far off.950 If I were abroad, I could not be in charge of even one of my settlements. I refuse to accept Beidian, not because I abhor riches but because I fear losing them. What’s more, riches are like bolts of cloth and silk that have proper measurements.951 Dimensions are set up for them so that there will be no deviations.952 Now the people all want their livelihood to prosper and their operations to be profitable. That is why correcting virtue is the way to keep them to proper measure,953 so that there is neither want nor excess. This is called keeping profit within proper measure. Excessive profit makes for ruin. That I do not dare to covet excesses is what is called proper measure.” The lord granted Beiguo Zuo sixty settlements, and he accepted them. He granted Ziya settlements, and he declined many but accepted a few. Ziwei accepted the settlements granted him, but he returned all of them to the lord.954 The lord considered him loyal, and that was why he was favored. Lupu Pie was released at the northern territories.955

28.11a

954 Takezoe (18.62) notes that at this juncture the Qing lineage’s property is divided among the high officers. Whatever Ziwei declines would have been further divided, but since he first accepts the settlements and only later returns them to Lord Jing, the latter is ensured gain and thus considers Ziwei loyal. Ziwei seems to be following the same reasoning as Yan Ying. 955 A parallel passage appears in Yanzi chunqiu 6.405.

Lord Xiang

1227

28.11b 求崔杼之尸，將戮之，不得。叔孫穆子曰：「 必得之。武王有亂臣十人，崔

杼其有乎？不十人，不足以葬。」既，崔氏之臣曰：「 與我其拱璧，吾獻其 柩。」於是得之。十二月乙（己）亥朔，齊人遷莊公，殯于大寢，以其棺尸 崔杼於市。國人猶知之，皆曰：「 崔子也。」 28.12a(7) 為宋之盟故，公及宋公、陳侯、鄭伯、許男如楚。公過鄭，鄭伯不在，伯

有迋勞於黃崖，不敬。穆叔曰：「 伯有無戾於鄭，鄭必有大咎。敬，民之 主也，而棄之，何以承守？鄭人不討，必受其辜。濟澤之阿，行潦之蘋 藻，寘諸宗室，季蘭尸之，敬也。敬可棄乎？」 28.12b(9) 及漢，楚康王卒。公欲反。叔仲昭伯曰：「 我楚國之為，豈為一人？行

也！」子服惠伯曰：「 君子有遠慮，小人從邇。飢寒之不恤，誰遑其後？不 如姑歸也。」叔孫穆子曰：「 叔仲子專之矣；子服子，始學者也。」榮成伯 曰：「 遠圖者，忠也。」公遂行。

956 See Analects 8.20 and the “Great Oath” quoted in Zhao 24.1. For a short summary of the way a variant of 司 becomes confused with 亂, see Karlgren, Grammata Serica Recensa, 180a–b. Karlgren points to the solution also in his gl. 651. 957 Huangya 黃崖 was located in the domain of Zheng south of present-day Xinzheng County 新鄭縣, Henan. 958 See Xuan 2.3a: “he who does not forget reverence is the master of the people.” 959 These lines appear to be a paraphrase or variant version of lines from Maoshi 15, “Cai pin” 采蘋, 1D.52–54, which is also quoted in Yin 3.3 to substantiate an argument about good faith. The idea is that even humble objects such as duckweed and algae can be proper sacrificial offerings so long as everything is done in a spirit of reverence. Some commentators suggest that Jilan should be read as a variant of jiluan 季孌, “the young and beautiful one” (Wu Jin’an, Chunqiu Zuoshui zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 577). 960 The somewhat abstract sense of duty here is concretized as an argument about Chu power in Shuzhong Zhaobo’s much longer speech in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.191–93.

1228

Zuo Tradition

Cui Zhu’s corpse is desecrated, and Lord Zhuang of Qi’s improper burial (Xiang 25.2e) is rectified. Qi leaders sought Cui Zhu’s corpse, as they intended to publicly desecrate it, but it was not found. Shusun Baob said, “It is sure to be found. King Wu had ten ministers who brought order.956 Did Cui Zhu have any? Without ten such men, there will not be the wherewithal for him to remain buried.” Shortly thereafter, a retainer of Cui Zhu said, “Give me his great jade disk, and I will present his coffin.” Thus, his corpse was found. In the twelfth month, on the jihai day, the first day of the month, the leaders of Qi reburied Lord Zhuang and had his coffin lie in state at the Grand Chamber in the Ancestral Temple. Cui Zhu’s coffin was opened to have his corpse exposed in the marketplace. The inhabitants of the capital could still recognize him, and all said, “This is Cui Zhue.”

28.11b

The Lu minister Shusun Bao predicts disaster for the Zheng noble Liang Xiao, who lacks reverence as he honors the exertions of Lu delegates on their way to Chu. Liang Xiao is killed two years later (Xiang 30.2, 30.10). On account of the Covenant of Song, our lord, together with the Duke of Song, the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, and the Head of Xǔ, went to Chu. Our lord passed through Zheng, and the Liege of Zheng was not there. Liang Xiaoa went to honor our exertions at Huangya but was irreverent.957 Shusun Baoa said, “If Liang Xiaoa is not punished for his offense in Zheng, Zheng will certainly suffer great misfortune. Reverence sustains one as the master of the people.958 If one abandons it, how can one uphold and guard one’s patrimony? If the leaders of Zheng do not chastise him, they are sure to suffer from a calamity of his making. The thin soil by fords and marshes and the duckweed and algae in puddles by the wayside are placed as offerings in the Ancestral Temple, with Jilan acting as personator at the sacrifices.959 This is what is meant by reverence. Can reverence be abandoned?”

28.12a(7)

King Kang of Chu dies as the rulers of various domains are on their way to attend court in Chu. Lu continues but Song turns back, and both choices seem justified. By the time our lord reached the Han River, King Kang of Chu died. Our lord wanted to turn back. Shuzhong Zhaobo said, “We have come for Chu, so how could one person matter? Let us go forth!”960 Zifu Huibo said, “The noble man considers what lies far ahead, while the petty man acts by what is close at hand. But if we cannot allay hunger and cold, who has time to worry about what comes after? It would be better to return for now.” Shusun Baob said, “Shuzhong Zhaoboc has all the right on his side. Zifu Huiboa is one who is just beginning to learn.” Rong Jia’ea said, “He who plans far ahead is loyal.” Our lord thus continued on his way.

28.12b(9)

Lord Xiang

1229

宋向戌曰：「 我一人之為，非為楚也。飢寒之不恤，誰能恤楚？姑 歸而息民，待其立君而為之備。」宋公遂反。 28.13 楚屈建卒，趙文子喪之如同盟，禮也。 28.14(8) 王人來告喪，問崩日，以甲寅告，故書之，以徵過也。

春秋 29.1(1) 二十有九年，春，王正月，公在楚。 29.2(4) 夏，五月，公至自楚。 29.3 庚午，衛侯衎卒。 29.4(6) 閽弒吳子餘祭。 29.5(8) 仲孫羯會晉荀盈、齊高止、宋華定、衛世叔儀、鄭公孫段、曹人、莒人、

滕人、薛人、小邾人城杞。 29.6(10) 晉侯使士鞅來聘。 29.7(12) 杞子來盟。 29.8(13) 吳子使札來聘。 29.9 秋，九月，葬衛獻公。 29.10(14) 齊高止出奔北燕。 29.11(15) 冬，仲孫羯如晉。

961 The Annals entry is said to deliberately record the wrong date in order to censure those responsible for the error. 962 As noted by Wang Kekuan (cited in Yang, 1:115), starting from Zhuang 27.6, the Annals normally refers to the ruler of Qǐ as a liege (bo 伯). The only exceptions besides this one are in Xi 23.4 and Xi 27.1.

1230

Zuo Tradition

Xiang Xu of Song said, “We have come for one man, not for Chu. We cannot even allay hunger and cold, so who can allay the Chu threat? Let us return for now and bring rest to the people, wait for Chu to establish its ruler, and prepare for a possible attack.” The Duke of Song thus turned back. Qu Jian of Chu died. Zhao Wua mourned him in the way appropriate for covenant partners. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

28.13

Two dates are given for the death of King Ling of Zhou (Xiang 28.10, 28.14). The author of the following passage claims that the Annals entry (28.8) is based on an erroneous Zhou report. The king’s envoy came to notify us of the royal funeral. We asked about the date he succumbed and were told that it happened on the jiayin day (16). That was why the date was recorded, to chastise those responsible for the error.961

28.14(8)

LORD XIANG 29 (544 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Chu.

29.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, our lord arrived from Chu.

29.2(4)

On the gengwu day, the sixth day of the fifth month, Kan, the Prince of Wei, died.

29.3

A gatekeeper assassinated Yuzhai, the Master of Wu.

29.4(6)

Zhongsun Jie (Meng Xiaobo) met with Xun Ying (Zhi Daozi) of Jin, Gao Zhi of Qi, Hua Ding of Song, Shishu Yi (Taishu Yi) of Wei, Gongsun Duan of Zheng, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader and fortified Qǐ.

29.5(8)

The Prince of Jin sent Shi Yang (Fan Yang) to us on an official visit.

29.6(10)

The Master of Qǐ came and swore a covenant.

29.7(12)

The Master of Wu sent Zha (Jizha) to us on an official visit.

29.8(13)

In autumn, in the ninth month, Lord Xian of Wei was buried.

29.9

Gao Zhi of Qi departed and fled to Northern Yan.

29.10(14)

In winter, Zhongsun Jie (Meng Xiaobo) went to Jin.

29.11(15)

Lord Xiang

1231

962

左傳 29.1(1) 二十九年，春，王正月，公在楚，釋不朝正于廟也。

楚人使公親襚，公患之。穆叔曰：「 祓殯而襚，則布幣也。」乃使巫 以桃、茢先祓殯。楚人弗禁，既而悔之。 29.2 二月癸卯，齊人葬莊公於北郭。 29.3 夏，四月，葬楚康王，公及陳侯、鄭伯、許男送葬，至於西門之外，諸侯

之大夫皆至于墓。楚郟敖即位，王子圍為令尹。鄭行人子羽曰：「 是謂不 宜，必代之昌。松柏之下，其草不殖。」

963 This story is also found in Liji 10.190–91. 964 The ruler attended court (chao zheng 朝正) following sacrifices at the Ancestral Temple on the first day of the month, this is called gao shuo 告朔, shi shuo 視朔, or ting shuo 聽朔. Rulers’ attendance at such rituals seems to have been in decline since the mid-Chunqiu period. Cf. Xi 5.2, n. 60. 965 The ceremony of “dressing the dead” (sui 襚) is undertaken by envoys from other domains attending the funeral of a lord; see Liji 41.723. It may have involved actually putting a robe on the dead lord or symbolically placing it on the eastern side of the coffin. Since King Kang seems to have been encoffined by this point, we may surmise that the ceremony is symbolic.

1232

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Chu leaders try to humiliate Lord Xiang of Lu by asking him to dress the dead, a ritual usually performed by a subject for a ruler. Lu manages to return the insult by having Lord Xiang perform an exorcistic ritual reserved for a ruler when he attends funerals for his subjects, thus demoting the deceased Chu king to the status of subject.963 In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Chu: this is to explain why he did not attend court following sacrifices at the Ancestral Temple that marked the beginning of the month.964 The leaders of Chu had our lord personally dress the dead with burial garments.965 Our lord was troubled by it. Shusun Baoa said, “If you exorcise the inauspiciousness of the funeral chamber and then dress the dead, it will be no different from setting forth gifts in court visits.” Our lord thus had shamans use peach branches and reed brooms to first exorcise the inauspiciousness of the funeral chamber. The leaders of Chu did not prevent the ceremony, but shortly thereafter they regretted it.966

29.1(1)

Lord Zhuang of Qi is reburied after the fall of the Cui and Qing lineages. Although Lord Zhuang lay in state at the Ancestral Temple, he was ultimately buried outside the city, possibly because his former enemies now regain their power (Xiang 28.11a). In the second month, on the guimao day (6), the men of Qi buried Lord Zhuang at the northern outer wall of the city.

29.2

Jia’ao, the son of King Kang of Chu, accedes to his position, and his uncle Gongzi Wei becomes chief minister. The Zheng envoy Gongsun Hui warns of the danger of usurpation posed by an overly powerful minister, comparing the young king to grass and Gongzi Wei to imposing trees (for similar arguments, see Huan 18.3, Zhao 11.10). Gongzi Wei will murder Jia’ao three years hence (Zhao 1.13). In summer, in the fourth month, King Kang of Chu was buried. Our lord, together with the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, and the Head of Xǔ, escorted the funeral cortege till they reached the area outside the west gate of the city. The high officers of the princes all went as far as the tomb. Jia’ao of Chu acceded to his position, and Gongzi Weia became chief minister. The Zheng envoy Gongsun Huia said, “This is what we call unfitting. Gongzi Wei will certainly flourish in place of the king. Under the pines and cypresses, the grass does not flourish.”

29.3

966 Shusun Bao argues that by returning the insult, the Lu ruler can put the robe on the coffin without suffering humiliation—it will be like the customary practice of setting forth gifts during court visits. Chu leaders seem to grasp this only after the ceremony.

Lord Xiang

1233

29.4a(2) 公還，及方城。季武子取卞，使公冶問，璽書追而與之，曰：「 聞守卞者

將叛，臣帥徒以討之，既得之矣。敢告。」公冶致使而退，及舍，而後聞 取卞。公曰：「 欲之而言叛，祇見疏也。」 公謂公冶曰：「 吾可以入乎？」對曰：「 君實有國，誰敢違君？」公 與公冶冕服。固辭，強之而後受。公欲無入。榮成伯賦〈式微〉，乃歸。 五月，公至自楚。 29.4b 公冶致其邑於季氏，而終不入焉。曰：「 欺其君，何必使余？」季孫見之，

則言季氏如他日；不見，則終不言季氏。及疾，聚其臣，曰：「 我死，必無 以冕服斂，非德賞也。且無使季氏葬我。」 29.5 葬靈王，鄭上卿有事。子展使印段往。伯有曰：「 弱，不可。」子展曰：

「 與其莫往，弱，不猶愈乎？《詩》云：

967 Fangcheng seems to refer to an area south of the Huai River and north of the Han River. See n. 470; Xi 4.1, n. 42. 968 Gongye is called Jiye in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.194. According to Wei Zhao, Gongye belonged to a branch lineage of the Ji house. 969 Lord Xiang is saying, with bitter irony, that if Ji Wuzi wants the settlement, he only has to say so; there is no need to talk about a revolt and not take Lord Xiang into his confidence. 970 Maoshi 36, “Shi wei” 式微, 2B.92. Rong Jia’e is using the line “Why do we not return?” (hu bu gui 胡不歸) in the ode to urge Lord Xiang to go back.

1234

Zuo Tradition

While Lord Xiang of Lu was in Chu, the Lu minister Ji Wuzi used the excuse of pacifying unrest in Bian to gain control of that settlement. Angered and distressed, the Lu ruler questions whether he should enter Lu. His followers convince him that there is no danger of an open insurrection. Our lord began his homeward journey and reached Fangcheng.967 Ji Wuzi, who had taken Bian and had sent Gongye968 to inquire after our lord, dispatched someone to catch up with Gongye and gave him a letter stamped with a seal to be delivered to our lord. The letter said, “I heard that the person guarding Bian intended to revolt. I led my followers to chastise him and have gained sway over it. I presume to notify you, my lord.” Gongye carried out his mission and then withdrew. Only when he reached his lodgings did he hear that Ji Wuzi had taken Bian. Our lord said, “To want the place and talk about a revolt only shows that he is keeping me at arm’s length.”969 Our lord said to Gongye, “Can I enter Lu?” He replied, “It is you, my lord, who have possession of the domain. Who will dare to oppose you?” Our lord granted Gongye ministerial cap and robes. He persisted in declining them and accepted only after our lord forced him. Our lord did not want to enter Lu. Rong Jia’ea sang “How Few of Us,”970 and thus he returned. In the fifth month, our lord arrived from Chu.

29.4a(2)

The Lu officer Gongye, who delivered Ji Wuzi’s letter conveying his ambition to take over Bian, feels guilty about his inadvertent role as deceiver of the Lu ruler. He retains a conditional loyalty to the Ji lineage to which he belongs, but he also registers his protest and criticism of Ji Wuzi. Gongye gave his settlement back to the Ji lineage and to the end of his life did not enter Ji Wuzi’s residence. He said, “When he deceived his ruler, why did he have to send me to do it?” If Ji Wuzid went to see him, he would talk about affairs of the Ji lineage as before, but if Ji Wuzi did not go to see him, he never spoke about them. When Gongye was very ill, he gathered his retainers and said, “After I die, you must not bury me with ministerial cap and robes, for my virtue does not deserve such rewards. What’s more, do not let Ji Wuzia bury me.”

29.4b

While Lord Jian of Zheng is attending King Kang’s funeral in Chu, a junior minister goes to Zhou for King Ling’s burial. Despite this obvious slight of the Zhou house, the Zheng chief minister Gongsun Shezhi adheres to the rhetoric of honoring the Zhou king. At the time when King Ling of Zhou was to be buried, the high ministers of Zheng were occupied with affairs of state. Gongsun Shezhia sent Yin Duan to go to Zhou. Liang Xiaoa said, “He is too young. It will not do.” Gongsun Shezhia said, “Isn’t it better to send someone young if the alternative is that no one would go? As it says in the Odes,

29.5

Lord Xiang

1235

王事靡盬， 不遑啟處。 東西南北，誰敢寧處？堅事晉、楚，以蕃王室也。王事無曠，何常之有？」 遂使印段如周。 29.6(4) 吳人伐越，獲俘焉，以為閽，使守舟。吳子餘祭觀舟，閽以刀弒之。 29.7 鄭子展卒，子皮即位。於是鄭饑，而未及麥，民病。子皮以子展之命餼國

人粟，戶一鍾，是以得鄭國之民，故罕氏常掌國政，以為上卿。 宋司城子罕聞之，曰：「 鄰於善，民之望也。」宋亦饑，請於平公， 出公粟以貸；使大夫皆貸。司城氏貸而不書，為大夫之無者貸。宋無 飢人。 叔向聞之，曰：「 鄭之罕，宋之樂，其後亡者也，二者其皆得國乎！ 民之歸也。施而不德，樂氏加焉，其以宋升降乎！」

971 Maoshi 162, “Si mu” 四牡, 317–18. 972 Serving the king in an era dominated by great domains like Jin and Chu calls for expedient measures: there is no invariable rule. On how circumstances justify deviation from precedents, see also Xiang 23.5, Zhao 1.2b, 26.9. 973 One zhong equals approximately 1.3 dan, or 80 kilograms (Yang, 3:1157). 974 For other encomiums to the Han lineage, see Xiang 26.7b and 27.5.

1236

Zuo Tradition

The king’s affairs admit of no carelessness; I have no time to tarry or dwell.971

East and west, north and south, who would dare to dwell in complacent ease? We should steadily serve Jin and Chu so as to defend the royal house. The king’s affairs are not to be neglected. But what is there about this principle that stipulates a constant way of acting?”972 He thus sent Yin Duan to Zhou. Yuzhai, the King of Wu, is assassinated. The leaders of Wu attacked Yue and took captives, one of whom was made a gatekeeper. He was assigned to guard the boats. When Yuzhai, the Master of Wu, was inspecting the boats, the gatekeeper assassinated him with a knife.

29.6(4)

Han Hu of Zheng and Yue Xi of Song both deal with famines in their respective domains with remarkable compassion and efficiency. The Jin minister pronounces Yue Xi’s generosity even more laudable. Gongsun Shezhia of Zheng died, and his son Han Hua acceded to his position. At the time there was a famine in Zheng, and it was not yet time for the wheat harvest, so the people were suffering. Han Hua, acting on his late father’s command, gave out rations of grain to the inhabitants of the capital, with one zhong for each household.973 As a result he gained the support of the people of Zheng, and that was why the Han lineage was consistently in charge of government, with its leaders appointed as high ministers.974 Hearing about this, Yue Xib, the supervisor of fortifications in Song, said, “We are neighbor to excellence.975 That is what the people look up to.” There was also a famine in Song, and Yue Xia requested of Lord Ping that grain from the lord’s granary be given out as loans, and he made all the high officers lend their grain. Yue Xib lent grain but kept no record of the transactions, and he also lent on behalf of the high officers who had no store of grain. As a result, there were no starving people in Song. Shuxiang heard about it and said, “The Han lineage of Zheng and the Yue lineage of Song will be the last to perish.976 Their descendants will surely remain in charge in their respective domains, for the people will turn to them. In giving and not considering it an act of virtue to be repaid, Yue Xib is even better. His lineage will probably rise and fall with Song.”

29.7

975 Cf. Analects 4.25: “The virtuous ones are not solitary, they will certainly have neighbors.” Yue Xi is implying that Song and Zheng share virtues. 976 This is another unverifiable prediction.

Lord Xiang

1237

29.8(5) 晉平公，杞出也，故治杞。六月，知悼子合諸侯之大夫以城杞，孟孝伯會

之，鄭子大叔與伯石往。子大叔見大叔文子，與之語。文子曰：「 甚乎其 城杞也！」子大叔曰：「 若之何哉！晉國不恤周宗之闕，而夏肄是屏，其 棄諸姬，亦可知也已。諸姬是棄，其誰歸之？吉也聞之：棄同即異，是謂 離德。《詩》曰： 協比其鄰， 婚姻孔云。 晉不鄰矣，其誰云之？」 29.9 齊高子容與宋司徒見知伯，女齊相禮。賓出，司馬侯言於知伯曰：「 二子

皆將不免。子容專，司徒侈，皆亡家之主也。」知伯曰：「 何如？」對曰： 「 專則速及，侈將以其力斃，專則人實斃之，將及矣。」

1238

Zuo Tradition

Lord Ping of Jin demands that other domains contribute to the fortification of Qǐ, his mother’s natal domain. Zheng and Wei ministers express their disaffection. Lord Ping of Jin was born of a lady from Qǐ, so Jin managed its affairs. In the sixth month, Zhi Daozi assembled the high officers of the princes to fortify Qǐ. Meng Xiaobo attended the meeting, and You Jib and Gongsun Duana of Zheng also went. You Jib met with the Wei noble Taishu Yia and spoke to him. Taishu Yib said, “Excessive indeed is Jin’s attempt to fortify Qǐ!” You Jib said, “What is to be done? Jin does not care for the needs of the ancestral Zhou domains and instead protects the remnants of Xia.977 That Jin thereby casts aside the various domains with the Ji clan name is indeed plain to see. Having cast aside those Ji domains, who will give their allegiance to it? I have heard: to cast aside those of the same name and to move close to those of different ones is called estranged virtue. As it says in the Odes,

29.8(5)

He is in accord with his neighbors And with kith and kin he is in harmony.978

Jin is not being neighborly. Who will be in harmony with it?” The Jin supervisor of the military Ru Qi predicts the downfall of Gao Zhi of Qi and Hua Ding of Song, which will come to pass later this year (Xiang 29.14) and twenty-four years hence (Zhao 20.3, 20.5), respectively. Gao Zhia of Qi and Hua Ding, the supervisor of conscripts in Song, had an audience with Zhi Daozic of Jin, with Ru Qi, the supervisor of the military, assisting in the ceremony. After the guests had left, Ru Qib said to Zhi Daozic: “Neither of these two men will escape disaster. Gao Zhib monopolizes power, and Hua Dinga indulges in excesses. Both are men who will bring ruin to their patrimonies.” Zhi Daozic said, “How so?” He replied, “He who monopolizes power will soon be overtaken by disaster. He who indulges in excesses will be destroyed by his own power, whereas he who monopolizes power will be destroyed by other people. Disaster will come upon them soon.”

29.9

977 The ruling houses of Zheng, Wei, and Lu were all descended from Zhou and shared the clan name Ji. Qǐ was descended from Xia. 978 Maoshi 192, “Zheng yue” 正月, 12A.401. The received text of Maoshi has qia 洽 instead of xie 協. While in the ode the lines criticize the oblivious abandon of those in power, they are understood affirmatively in the quotation here. Du Yu (ZZ 39.667), following the “Mao Commentary” (Maoshi 12A.401), reads yun 云 as xuan 旋, implying concordant, circular movements. These lines are also quoted in Xi 22.6.

Lord Xiang

1239

29.10(6) 范獻子來聘，拜城杞也。公享之，展莊叔執幣。射者三耦。公臣不足，取

於家臣。家臣展瑕、展王父為一耦；公臣公巫召伯、仲顏莊叔為一耦， 鄫鼓父、黨叔為一耦。 29.11 晉侯使司馬女叔侯來治杞田，弗盡歸也。晉悼夫人慍曰：「 齊也取貨，

先君若有知也，不尚取之。」公告叔侯。叔侯曰：「 虞、虢、焦、滑、霍、 楊、韓、魏，皆姬姓也，晉是以大。若非侵小，將何所取？武、獻以下，兼 國多矣，誰得治之？杞，夏餘也，而即東夷。魯，周公之後也，而睦於晉。 以杞封魯猶可，而何有焉？魯之於晉也，職貢不乏，玩好時至，公卿大 夫相繼於朝，史不絕書，府無虛月。如是可矣，何必瘠魯以肥杞？且先君 而有知也，毋寧夫人，而焉用老臣？」

979 The archers displayed their skills as part of the entertainment at feasts. Commentators note that the feast of the Zhou king and the lords calls for six pairs of archers; that of the lords among themselves, four pairs; and that of the lords and ministers or high officers, three pairs. 980 We follow Fu Qian’s equation of bushang 不尚 with shang 尚 (cited in ZZ-Kong 39.667): “He would have approved of taking Ru Qi and killing him.” Cf. Du Yu’s (ZZ 39.667) reading: “If the former lord could know of this, he would not approve of him taking bribes.” Yang (3:1160) suggests that huo 貨 refers to Qǐ territories and reads shang 尚 as you 佑 (bless): “Thus did Ru Qi take back Qǐ territories. If the former lord could know of this, he would not bless such an undertaking.” 981 These domains were annexed by Jin before and during the reign of Lord Xian (r. 676–651). Jin extinguished Geng (whose clan name was either Ji or Ying), Huo, and Weì in 661 Bce (Min 1.6), and it extinguished Yu and Guo in 655 Bce (Xi 5.8). According to the Bamboo Annals, Prince Wen of Jin (Jin Wen Hou) extinguished Han in 760 Bce. On Jin annexation of these and other domains, see Li Mengcun and Li Shangshi, Jin guo shi, 40–57. 982 Cf. Zichan’s similar argument in Xiang 25.10a. 983 Cf. Takezoe’s (19.9) alternative reading, based in part on Du Yu (ZZ 39.667): “Would he not blame his wife [for siding with her natal family against the interests of her husband’s family]? Why would he use me to manage such an affair?”

1240

Zuo Tradition

Another indication of the decline of the Lu ruling house is reported in the following passage: when archers are lacking for entertainment at an official feast, retainers of ministers have to fill in. In a comparable incident twenty-seven years later, only two Wan dancers are available for a ceremony at Lord Xiang’s temple (Zhao 25.6b). On ritual prescriptions regarding this dance, see Yin 5.7. Fan Yangb came on an official mission to bow in thanks for Lu’s contribution to the fortification of Qǐ. Our lord offered him ceremonial toasts, and Zhan Zhuangshu held the bolts of silk that were to be given as gifts. There were three pairs of archers.979 Our lord’s own officers had not sufficed, so archers were taken from the retainers of ministers. From the ministers’ retainers, Zhan Xia and Zhan Zhuangshu formed one pair; from the lord’s officers, Gongwu Shaobo and Zhongyan Zhuangshu formed one pair, and Zeng Gufu and Zhang Shu formed another pair.

29.10(6)

Under Jin pressure Lu returns some, but not all, of the lands it took from Qǐ. The case against Jin policy is argued in terms of historical affinities (Zhou versus Xia genealogies), power politics (the strong against the weak), and a woman’s divided loyalties to her natal domain and her husband’s domain (the ties of Lord Ping’s mother with Qǐ and with Jin). The Prince of Jin sent the supervisor of the military Ru Qid to Lu to manage the return of Qǐ territories, but Lu did not return all of them. The wife of Lord Dao of Jin, Lord Ping’s mother, said heatedly, “Ru Qic has taken bribes. If the former lord had known of this, he would have taken Ru Qi and gotten rid of him.”980 The lord told Ru Qie about this. Ru Qie said, “Yu, Guo, Jiao, Hua, Huo, Yang, Han, and Weì were all domains ruled by lineages with the clan name Ji. Jin became great by annexing them.981 How else can lands be taken, if not by invading small domains?982 There have been so many cases, from Lord Wu and Lord Xian on, of Jin taking over other domains that no one can deal with them! Qǐ, a remnant of Xia, has gone over to the Eastern Yi. Lu is descended from the Zhou Duke and has harmonious relations with Jin. Even if Lu were to be put in power in Qǐ, it would still be acceptable. Why be concerned about this? Lu, when it comes to Jin, has not been remiss with dues and offerings. Fine things and precious objects have come regularly from Lu, and the lords, ministers, and high officers of Lu have come one after another to our court. The scribes have never ceased writing about these things, and not a month passes without our treasury receiving something from them. Such a state of affairs is acceptable enough. Why must we impoverish Lu to enrich Qǐ? What’s more, if the former lord had known of this, wouldn’t he have preferred to let his wife manage this? Why would he have had any use for this old servant?”983

29.11

Lord Xiang

1241

29.12(7) 杞文公來盟，書曰「 子」，賤之也。 29.13a(8) 吳公子札來聘，見叔孫穆子，說之。謂穆子曰：「 子其不得死乎！好善而

不能擇人。吾聞君子務在擇人。吾子為魯宗卿，而任其大政，不慎舉，何 以堪之？禍必及子！」 29.13b 請觀於周樂。使工為之歌周南、召南，曰：「 美哉！始基之矣，猶未也，

然勤而不怨矣。」 為之歌邶、鄘、衛，曰：「 美哉淵乎！憂而不困者也。吾聞衛康叔、 武公之德如是，是其衛風乎！」 為之歌王，曰：「 美哉！思而不懼，其周之東乎！」 為之歌鄭，曰：「 美哉！其細已甚，民弗堪也。是其先亡乎！」 為之歌齊，曰：「 美哉，泱泱乎！大風也哉！表東海者，其大公乎！ 國未可量也。」

984 On the concert for Jizha, see Schaberg, Patterned Past, 86–95; Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 136–47. 985 The formulation here is echoed in the “Mao Preface,” which describes the “Zhounan” and “Shaonan” as “the way of proper beginnings and the foundation of royal culture” (zhengshi zhi dao wanghua zhi ji 正始之道，王化之基). According to the “Mao Preface,” nan 南 refers to how Zhou culture (here linked to the Zhou Duke and the Shao Duke) extends southward. Some scholars believe that nan designates a kind of music; see Gu Yanwu, Rizhi lu jishi, 3.49–50; Gu Jiegang, Gushi bian, 3:642–44. Chen Pan refutes the Mao tradition and claims that nan refers to how the poems in those sections were collected and put to music in the south; see his “Zhou Shao er nan yu Wenwang zhi hua” 周召二南與文王之化 in Gushi bian 3:424–39. 986 After the Zhou conquest of Shang, Shang territories were divided into Bei, Yong, and Wei. In the wake of a subsequent rebellion, the Zhou Duke amalgamated these territories and created the domains of Wei and put Kang Shu, King Wu’s younger brother, in power there. See also Ding 4.1, for the identification of Wei as former Shang territory. Being anxious but not distressed may refer to how Kang Shu and Lord Wu endured rebellions and chaos or how errant Wei rulers in the period covered by Zuozhuan create “anxiety but no distress” because of their ancestors’ virtue. 987 Si 思 can also mean “filled with longing” or “sorrowful” (as in yousi 憂思, aisi 哀思). 988 The Zhou court moved east in 770 Bce. 989 The “fine points” (xi 細) may refer to musical properties (high-pitched sounds or rapid rhythm) or personal, trivial feelings (as distinct from political concerns), or they may pertain to the proliferation of rules and regulations. Confucius is said to want to banish Zheng music because it is excessive or licentious (yin 淫) (Analects 15.11). 990 According to Jizha’s reasoning, the “fine points” noted above thus imply moral laxity and pose a political danger. Zheng was destroyed in 376 Bce by Han, long after the de facto division of Jin by the Han, Zhao, and Weì houses in 453 Bce. This is either an inaccurate prophecy, or the comparison may be between Zheng and some other domains. 991 That is, it has a great destiny. Since by this point the Jiang ruling house of Qi is in decline (as Jizha points out in Xiang 29.13e), the “great destiny” may simply refer to

1242

Zuo Tradition

Lord Wen of Qǐ came to swear a covenant with us. The text says, “Master,” to disparage him.

29.12(7)

Before attending a concert, Jizha, noble son of Wu, warns the wise Lu minister Shusun Bao about the dangers of misjudging people. Six years hence Shusun Bao will die because of misplaced trust in his illegitimate son (Zhao 4.8). Jizha’s appraisal of statesmen precedes and follows the concert held for him, suggesting the connection between “knowing music” (zhiyin 知音) and “knowing people” (zhiren 知人). Jizhaa of Wu came on an official mission. He met with Shusun Baob and was pleased with him. He said to Shusun Baoc, “You, sir, will likely not die a natural death! You may love goodness but you cannot choose the right men. I have heard that a noble man strives to choose the right men. You, sir, are the ancestral minister of Lu and bear the chief responsibility for government. If you are not cautious with your choice of persons for office, how can you bear the consequences? Disaster will certainly overtake you!”

29.13a(8)

A concert is held for Jizha in the Lu court. His aesthetic appreciation of music is tied to political and historical judgments. The order of the odes presented suggests broad parallels with the received text of the Odes. This concert is often included in histories of Chinese aesthetics as a prime example illustrating the moral and political dimensions of musical understanding.984 Since Jizha asked to hear Zhou music, the musicians were made to sing “Zhounan” and “Shaonan” for him. He said, “Beautiful indeed! The foundation is beginning to be laid down,985 but the task is not yet accomplished. For all that, it shows industry but not rancor!” The Airs of Bei, Yong, and Wei were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! How profound! This is anxious but not distressed. I have heard that such was the virtue of Kang Shu of Wei and Lord Wu. These must be the Airs of Wei!”986 The Airs of the royal domain were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! This is deliberate but not fearful.987 This must have been composed when Zhou moved east!”988 The Airs of Zheng were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! The fine points are extreme,989 and the people will not be able to bear it. This must be the one that will perish first!”990 The Airs of Qi were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! How expansive! Great airs indeed! As the exemplar of the eastern seas, this must be the Grand Lord! The domain cannot yet be fathomed!”991

29.13b

the power and prosperity of the domain rather than of the ruling lineage. Up to this point the order of odes from various domains is the same as that in the received text of Maoshi.

Lord Xiang

1243

為之歌豳，曰：「 美哉，蕩乎！樂而不淫，其周公之東乎！」 為之歌秦，曰：「 此之謂夏聲。夫能夏則大，大之至也，其周之舊 乎！」 為之歌魏，曰：「 美哉，渢渢乎！大而婉，險而易行，以德輔此，則 明主也。」 為之歌唐，曰：「 思深哉！其有陶唐氏之遺民乎！不然，何其憂之 遠也？非令德之後，誰能若是？」 為之歌陳，曰：「 國無主，其能久乎！」 自鄶以下無譏焉。 29.13c 為之歌小雅，曰：「 美哉！思而不貳，怨而不言，其周德之衰乎？猶有先

王之遺民焉。」 為之歌大雅，曰：「 廣哉，熙熙乎！曲而有直體，其文王之德乎！」

992 Confucius (Analects 3.20) comments that “Guanju,” the first poem in the Mao tradition, is “joyous but not licentious.” 993 According to Du Yu (ZZ 39.669), this refers to the Zhou Duke’s eastern expeditions after quelling the rebellion of Guan Shu and Cai Shu. 994 Areas formerly demarcated as Zhou territories are now under Qin rule. Du Yu (ZZ 39.669) links xia 夏 to “central domains” (as in the term zhuxia 諸夏), the implication being that Qin has embraced the civilization of the central domains although Qin is situated in the west. Takezoe (19.13) suggests that xia is identified with the west. Jizha is thus moving from xia as a geographical designation (west) to its semantic content (“greatness”). Yang (3:1163) cites Fangyan, according to which xia means “great” in the language spoken west of the Pass (i.e., in the Zhou homeland and in Qin). 995 Weì was a domain eliminated by Jin. The Jin minister Bi Wan was put in power there (Min 1.6). 996 Yao Nai (“Zuoshi buzhu xu” 左氏補注序, cited in Qian Mu, Xian Qin zhuzi xinian, 192–93) argues that glorification of the Wei lineage here and the anachronistic usage of the term “enlightened ruler” suggest an author (or editor) with special ties to Weì and Weì-based “additions” in the process of transmission. The term “enlightened ruler” (mingzhu 明主) appears as “covenant chief” (mengzhu 盟主) in Shiji 31.1452. See also Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 54–56. 997 Yao 堯 was first enfeoffed at Tao 陶 and then at Tang 唐. The house of Tao and Tang thus refers to the ancient sage-king Yao. Shuyu 叔虞 (Tang Shuyu, Tang Shu), founder of Jin and younger brother of King Cheng of Zhou, was enfeoffed at Tang (see Zhao 1.12). 998 Chu extinguished Chen sixty-five years later (Ai 17.4). 999 Kuai was in present-day Zhengzhou in Henan. Kuai was extinguished by Lord Wu of Zheng (r. 770–744).

1244

Zuo Tradition

The Airs of Bin were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! How grand! This is joyous but not licentious.992 This must have been composed when the Zhou Duke moved east!”993 The Airs of Qin were sung for him, and he said, “These are called sounds of Xia. Now to be capable of being majestic (xia) is to be great. This is the epitome of greatness: this must have been composed in the former seat of Zhou!”994 The Airs of Weì995 were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! How fluid and flowing! This is forceful yet gentle, arduous yet easily realized. Use virtue to assist them, and they will be enlightened rulers.”996 The Airs of Tang were sung for him, and he said, “Profound longing indeed! Do they not have the people remaining from those ruled by the Tao and Tang lineages!997 Otherwise, why would their concerns reach so far back? If they were not descendants of those of exemplary virtue, how could they be capable of this?” The Airs of Chen were sung for him, and he said, “The domain has no master. How can it last long?”998 From the Airs of Kuai999 on, Jizha did not make any comments. Good government and ideal ritual relations between humans and spirits supposedly yield superior music, and Jizha becomes progressively more laudatory as the order of performance moves back in time. He reserves the highest praise for the “Hymns,” an extended description of modulated emotional-mental states suggesting perfect balance and harmony. The implication of restraint and moderation echoes what Confucius (Analects 3.20) remarks about “Fish Hawk” (“Guanju”) in the Odes: “Joyous but not licentious, grieving yet not injurious” (le er buyin ai er bushang 樂而不淫，哀 而不傷). The Lesser Odes were sung for him, and he said, “Beautiful indeed! This is deliberate but not disloyal, expressing resentment, but not in so many words.1000 Is this not Zhou virtue in its period of decline? There are still people remaining from those ruled by the former kings!” The Greater Odes were sung for him, and he said, “Sweeping indeed! How resplendent!1001 Modulated yet forthright in nature, this must be explained by the virtue of King Wen!”

29.13c

1000 It is said that the Odes “can be used to express resentment” (keyi yuan 可以怨) (Analects 17.9). In Shiji 84.2482, the Lesser Odes are described as “expressing resentment, but not to the extent of fomenting disorder” (yuanfei er buluan 怨誹而不亂). The formulation “expressing resentment, but without anger” (yuan er bunu 怨而 不怒), often used to characterize the Odes in the tradition, suggests the restraint and modulation of emotions. 1001 We follow Karlgren, gl. 658. Cf. Takezoe’s (19.15) reading of xixi 熙熙 as “allencompassing” or “far-reaching.”

Lord Xiang

1245

為之歌頌，曰：「 至矣哉！直而不倨，曲而不屈，邇而不偪，遠而不 攜，遷而不淫，復而不厭，哀而不愁，樂而不荒，用而不匱，廣而不宣， 施而不費，取而不貪，處而不底，行而不流。五聲和，八風平。節有度， 守有序，盛德之所同也。」 29.13d 見舞〈象箾〉、〈南籥〉者，曰：「 美哉！猶有憾。」

見舞〈大武〉者，曰：「 美哉！周之盛也，其若此乎！」 見舞〈韶濩〉者，曰：「 聖人之弘也，而猶有慚德，聖人之難也。」 見舞〈大夏〉者，曰：「 美哉！勤而不德，非禹，其誰能修之？」 見舞〈韶箾〉者，曰：「 德至矣哉，大矣！如天之無不幬也，如地之 無不載也。雖甚盛德，其蔑以加於此矣，觀止矣。若有他樂，吾不敢請 已。」

1002 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong, 39.671) interprets qian 遷 (“changing”) as the dislocations suffered by the Zhou court. 1003 On the “eight winds” as a musical term, see Yin 5.7, Zhao 20.8, Zhao 25.3; Lüshi chunqiu 5.285, 22.1526; Yanzi chunqiu 7.443, “Fulu 2,” 537; Huainanzi 1.15, 20.673; Shiji 14.1208–11; Fayan 2.54–56. Cf. Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 720–21.

1246

Zuo Tradition

The “Hymns” were sung for him, and he said, “Supreme indeed! This is forthright yet not arrogant, modulated yet not bent, proximate yet not pressing, afar yet not alienating, changing yet not licentious,1002 repetitive yet not tiresome, grieving yet not disconsolate, joyous yet not unbridled, put to use yet not used up, sweeping yet not revealing, giving yet not extravagant, taking yet not avaricious, staying yet not stagnant, going forth yet not wantonly flowing. The five sounds harmonize; the eight winds are balanced.1003 The rhythm has proper measure, the gradations are in the right order: this is the common ground of great virtue.” The concert continues with the music and dance of even greater antiquity, and Jizha watches the dances identified with the first kings of Xia, Shang, Zhou, and the sage-kings Yao, Shun, and Yu. The highest virtue is revealed in the spectacle of greatest beauty. He watched the dances of “Elephant Steps to Flute Music” and “Southern Tunes on the Pipes” and said, “Beautiful indeed! But there is still regret.”1004 He watched “Great Martial Prowess”1005 and said, “Beautiful indeed! The rise of Zhou to greatness must have been like this!” He watched “Great Harmony”1006 and said, “Even sages in their capacious understanding have causes for shame. It is difficult indeed to be a sage.”1007 He watched “Great Xia”1008 and said, “Beautiful indeed! He toiled without claiming merit. Who but Yu could have fashioned this?” He watched “Harmony to Flute Music”1009 and said, “Supreme virtue indeed! Great indeed! This is like heaven, which leaves nothing uncovered; like earth, which leaves nothing uncradled. This is the epitome of great virtue, to which nothing can be added. I should stop with this utmost spectacle. Even if there are other kinds of music, I would not dare to ask about them.”

29.13d

1004 Du Yu (ZZ 39.672) identifies these as “King Wen’s music” and surmises that King Wen regrets how his virtue had not spread far before the Zhou conquest of Shang. It is perhaps fitting that the performance of the “Hymns” should culminate in dances. The “Mao Preface” characterizes the “Hymns” as “glorifying the spectacle of great virtue.” 1005 Du Yu (ZZ 39.672) identifies this as “King Wu’s music.” 1006 Du Yu (ZZ 39.672) identifies this as “the music of Tang, the founder of Shang.” 1007 The “shame” may refer to the violence of the Shang conquest of Xia (Du Yu, ZZ 39.672), but it is odd that the same is not said of the Zhou conquest of Shang in relation to the dance praising King Wu of Zhou. 1008 Du Yu (ZZ 39.672) identifies this as “[The Xia founder] Yu’s music.” 1009 Du Yu (ZZ 39.672) identifies this as “Shun’s music.”

Lord Xiang

1247

29.13e 其出聘也，通嗣君也。故遂聘于齊，說晏平仲，謂之曰：「 子速納邑與

政。無邑無政，乃免於難。齊國之政將有所歸，未獲所歸，難未歇也。」 故晏子因陳桓子以納政與邑，是以免於欒、高之難。 29.13f 聘於鄭，見子產，如舊相識。與之縞帶，子產獻紵衣焉。謂子產曰：「 鄭

之執政侈，難將至矣，政必及子。子為政，慎之以禮。不然，鄭國將敗。」 適衛，說蘧瑗、史狗、史鰌、公子荊、公叔發、公子朝，曰：「 衛多 君子，未有患也。」 29.13g 自衛如晉，將宿於戚，聞鐘聲焉，曰：「 異哉！吾聞之也：辯而不德，必加

於戮。夫子獲罪於君以在此，懼猶不足，而又何樂？夫子之在此也，猶 燕之巢於幕上。君又在殯，而可以樂乎？」遂去之。文子聞之，終身不聽 琴瑟。

1010 The “new ruler” 嗣 refers to Yimo (Fu Qian, Jia Kui). Du Yu (ZZ 39.673) identifies him as Yuzhai (r. 547–544) and implies that Yuzhai is assassinated after Jizha leaves Wu. Du might have wished to defend Jizha against the charge of attending a concert while in mourning. 1011 For the power struggle in Qi, with the Chen and Bao lineages on one side and the Luan and Gao lineages on the other, see Zhao 10.2. Yan Ying will refuse to get involved in the conflict. 1012 According to Xiang 26.2a (possibly from another source), Qu Boyu left Wei. 1013 Du Yu (ZZ 39.673) identifies Qiu as the upright Scribe Yu 史魚, who is also mentioned in Analects 15.7. 1014 Du Yu (ZZ 39.673) identifies Gongshu Fa as the sincere and generous Gongshu Wenzi 公叔文子, who is mentioned in Analects 14.13, 14.18; and Liji 8.146, 10.186. 1015 This man should not be confused with the Gongzi Zhao who is involved in a rebellion in Wei in Zhao 20.4. 1016 Du Yu (ZZ 39.673) reads bian 辯 as “contention” (zheng 爭). Liang Lüsheng reads bian as bian 變: “having been involved in a rebellion (bianluan 變亂), he yet [even now] has no virtue” (cited in Yang, 3:1166–67). Takezoe (19.21) reads bian 辨／辯 as “powers of judgment” and infers a broader meaning of bian er bude 辯而不德 as “talent without virtue.” 1017 A tent can be dismantled at any moment, and therefore, the swallow is under constant threat without realizing it. 1018 Lord Xian of Wei, whom Sun Linfu ousted (Xiang 14.4) and whose restoration caused Sun to go into exile (Xiang 26.2), died earlier this year (Annals, Xiang 29.3).

1248

Zuo Tradition

Jizha’s musical judgments are framed by his appraisals of contemporary statesmen. He alerts Yan Ying to the dangers of power and wealth, an issue that Yan Ying expounded on earlier (Xiang 28.11a). That Jizha left the domain on official visits was to establish relations between his new ruler and other domains.1010 That was why he then went on an official visit to Qi. He was pleased with Yan Yinga and said to him, “You, sir, should quickly turn in your settlements and your control of the government. You will be spared disaster if you have neither settlements nor control over the government. Government in Qi will then go where it should. But before it gets to go where it should, disaster will not abate.” That was why Yan Ying, through Chen Wuyua, relinquished his control of the government and his settlements and as a result was spared the disaster that befell the Luan and Gao lineages.1011

29.13e

Jizha predicts unrest in Zheng (see Xiang 29.17, 30.10) and urges Zichan to rely on caution and ritual propriety. Despite recent turmoil in the wake of Lord Xian’s restoration in Wei, Jizha sees the ameliorative effect of noble men. When Jizha went on an official visit to Zheng, he met with Zichan, and it was as if the two had known each other for a long time. He gave Zichan a broad white-silk sash, and Zichan offered him a robe made from fine hemp. Jizha said to Zichan, “Those controlling government in Zheng are extravagant. Disaster will come soon, and government is sure to fall to you. When you take charge of government, conduct it cautiously by the rules of ritual propriety. Otherwise, the domain of Zheng will go to ruin.” He went to Wei and was pleased with Qu Boyua,1012 the scribe Gou, the scribe Qiu,1013 Gongzi Jing, Gongshu Fa,1014 and Gongzi Zhao.1015 He said, “Wei has many noble men. It will not yet have troubles.”

29.13f

Jizha castigates Sun Linfu, in exile from Wei, for indulging in music. While in Jin, he approves of the rise of the Han, Wei, and Zhao lineages but translates their ascendancy into danger for Shuxiang, whose Yangshe lineage will be destroyed thirty years hence, some years after Shuxiang’s own death (Zhao 28.2). From Wei he went to Jin and was preparing to spend the night at Qī, where he heard the sound of bells and said, “Strange indeed! I have heard: he who is skillful with words and yet has no virtue will certainly be executed.1016 This fine man is here because he offended his ruler. Even had he lived in fearful vigiliance, it might still have not been enough for keeping disaster at bay. How dare he indulge in music and pleasure? This fine man here is like a swallow that has built its nest atop a tent.1017 What’s worse, his ruler is still lying in state in the Ancestral Temple.1018 Now is it acceptable to take pleasure in music?” He thus left. When Sun Linfuc heard about this, he did not, to the end of his life, listen to any lute or zither.

29.13g

Lord Xiang

1249

適晉，說趙文子、韓宣子、魏獻子，曰：「 晉國其萃於三族乎！」說 叔向。將行，謂叔向曰：「 吾子勉之！君侈而多良，大夫皆富，政將在家。 吾子好直，必思自免於難。」 29.14(10) 秋，九月，齊公孫蠆、公孫竈放其大夫高止於北燕。乙未，出。書曰「 出

奔」，罪高止也。高止好以事自為功，且專，故難及之。 29.15(11) 冬，孟孝伯如晉，報范叔也。 29.16 為高氏之難故，高豎以盧叛。十月庚寅，閭丘嬰帥師圍盧。高豎曰：「 苟

使高氏有後，請致邑。」齊人立敬仲之曾孫酀，良敬仲也。十一月乙卯， 高豎致盧而出奔晉，晉人城緜而寘旃。 29.17 鄭伯有使公孫黑如楚，辭曰：「 楚、鄭方惡，而使余往，是殺余也。」伯有

曰：「 世行也。」子皙曰：「 可則往，難則已，何世之有？」伯有將強使之。 子皙怒，將伐伯有氏，大夫和之。十二月己巳，鄭大夫盟於伯有氏。

1019 These three houses partitioned Jin in 453 Bce. 1020 See Xiang 29.10. 1021 Mian 緜 is the same place as Mianshang 緜上 (see Xi 24.1). 1022 In fact, Chu-Zheng relations seem cordial at this point: Lord Jian of Zheng attended court in Chu (Xiang 28.12) and probably attended King Kang’s funeral in Chu.

1250

Zuo Tradition

Jizha went to Jin and was pleased with Zhao Wua, Han Qia, and Wei Shua. He said, “The government of Jin will likely be concentrated in the hands of these three houses!”1019 He was pleased with Shuxiang. When he was about to leave, he said to Shuxiang, “You, sir, should exert yourself! Your ruler is extravagant but has many good ministers. The high officers are all wealthy. Government is going to fall into the hands of the great houses. You, sir, love justice and forthrightness. You must consider how to spare yourself disaster.” The exile of the Qi high officer Gao Zhi fulfills an earlier prophecy (Xiang 29.9). In autumn, in the ninth month, Ziweia and Ziyaa of Qi exiled their high officer Gao Zhi to Northern Yan. On the yiwei day (2), he departed. That the text says, “departed and fled,” is to blame Gao Zhi for his offense. Gao Zhi liked to claim merit for anything accomplished and, moreover, monopolized power. That was why disaster overtook him.

29.14(10)

In winter, Meng Xiaobo went to Jin: this was in answer to Fan Yange’s visit to Lu.1020

29.15(11)

Gao Zhi’s exile leads to his son’s revolt in Qi. On account of the disaster that overtook the Gao lineage, Gao Zhi’s son Gao Shu used Lú as a base to rebel. In the tenth month, on the gengyin day (27), Lüqiu Ying led out troops and laid siege to Lú. Gao Shu said, “If the Gao lineage can be allowed to continue, I beg to return my settlements to the ruler.” The leaders of Qi established Gao Xia’s great-grandson Gao Yan as his successor out of high regard for Gao Xia. In the eleventh month, on the yimao day (23), Gao Shu gave Lú back, departed, and fled to Jin. The leaders of Jin fortified Mian and put him there.1021

29.16

Contention in Zheng between Liang Xiao and Gongsun Hei, of the Liang and Si lineages, respectively, ends in temporary reconciliation. Zichan is pronounced the best hope for Zheng. Liang Xiaoa of Zheng appointed Gongsun Hei to go to Chu. He declined, saying, “As relations between Chu and Zheng are so hostile just now,1022 to send me there is to have me killed.” Liang Xiaoa said, “For generations those of your lineage have gone.” Gongsun Heia said, “We go when it is feasible but desist when it is dangerous. What do generations have to do with it?” Liang Xiaoa planned to force the issue. Furious, Gongsun Heia was preparing to attack Liang Xiaoa’s lineage when the high officers had them make peace. In the twelfth month, on the jisi day (7), the high officers of Zheng swore a covenant at Liang Xiaoa’s residence.

29.17

Lord Xiang

1251



裨諶曰：「 是盟也，其與幾何？《詩》曰： 君子屢盟， 亂是用長。

今是長亂之道也，禍未歇也，必三年而後能紓。」然明曰：「 政將焉往？」 裨諶曰：「 善之代不善，天命也，其焉辟子產？舉不踰等，則位班也。擇 善而舉，則世隆也。天又除之，奪伯有魄，子西即世，將焉辟之？天禍鄭 久矣，其必使子產息之，乃猶可以戾。不然，將亡矣。」

春秋 30.1(1) 三十年，春，王正月，楚子使薳罷來聘。 30.2(5) 夏，四月，蔡世子般弒其君固。 30.3(7) 五月甲午，宋災，宋伯姬卒。 30.4(6) 天王殺其弟佞夫。 30.5(6) 王子瑕奔晉。 30.6(9) 秋，七月，叔弓如宋，葬宋共姬。 30.7(10) 鄭良霄出奔許，自許入于鄭，鄭人殺良霄。 30.8 冬，十月，葬蔡景公。 30.9(12) 晉人、齊人、宋人、衛人、鄭人、曹人、莒人、邾人、滕人、薛人、杞人、小邾人，

會于澶淵，宋災故。

1023 According to Takezoe (19.24), Pi Chen and Pi Zao are the same person. Du Yu (ZZ 39.674) seems to consider them different persons. 1024 Maoshi 198, “Qiao yan” 巧言, 12C.424. These lines are also cited in Huan 12.2. 1025 Zixi (Gongsun Xia) of the Si lineage was last mentioned in Xiang 27.5. He must have died in the interval. Zixi is supposed to be next in line to hold power in Zheng after Liang Xiao.

1252

Zuo Tradition

Pi Chen1023 said, “How much can this covenant control? As it says in the Odes, Noble men repeatedly swear covenants, But disorder is thereby only prolonged.1024

What is happening now is the way to prolong disorder. Calamity will not yet come to an end. Three years will have to pass before it eases.” Ran Ming said, “To whom will the charge of government go?” Pi Chen said, “To have worthy men replace unworthy ones is the command of Heaven. How can the charge of government elude Zichan? If the right order for raising men to office is not flouted, it should be Zichan’s turn. If it is a matter of choosing worthy men to raise to office, then our generation esteems him. What’s more, Heaven has cleared the way for him by undoing Liang Xiaoa’s spirit. Zixi, next in line to Liang Xiao, has passed away.1025 How can the charge of government elude Zichan? Heaven has inflicted calamities on Zheng for too long. It will surely send Zichan to pacify disorder, and only then can there be stability. If not, Zheng will be destroyed!” LORD XIANG 30 (543 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirtieth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Master of Chu sent Wei Pi to us on an official visit.

30.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, the Cai heir apparent Ban assassinated his ruler, Gu.

30.2(5)

In the fifth month, on the jiawu day (5), there was a disastrous fire in Song. Bo Ji of Song died.

30.3(7)

The Heaven-appointed king put to death his younger brother Ningfu (Wangzi Ningfu).

30.4(6)

Wangzi Xia fled to Jin.

30.5(6)

In autumn, in the seventh month, Shu Gong went to Song for the burial of Gong Ji of Song.

30.6(9)

Liang Xiao of Zheng departed and fled to Xǔ, and from Xǔ he reentered Zheng. Zheng leaders put Liang Xiao to death.

30.7(10)

In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Jing of Cai was buried.

30.8

A Jin leader, a Qi leader, a Song leader, a Wei leader, a Zheng leader, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, a Qǐ leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader met at Chanyuan on account of the disastrous fire in Song.

30.9(12)

Lord Xiang

1253

左傳 30.1(1) 三十年，春，王正月，楚子使薳罷來聘，通嗣君也。穆叔問王子圍之為

政何如。對曰：「 吾儕小人食而聽事，猶懼不給命，而不免於戾，焉與知 政？」固問焉，不告。穆叔告大夫曰：「 楚令尹將有大事，子蕩將與焉助 之，匿其情矣。」 30.2 子產相鄭伯以如晉，叔向問鄭國之政焉。對曰：「 吾得見與否，在此歲

也。駟、良方爭，未知所成。若有所成，吾得見，乃可知也。」叔向曰：「 不 既和矣乎？」對曰：「 伯有侈而愎，子皙好在人上，莫能相下也。雖其和 也，猶相積惡也，惡至無日矣。」 30.3a 二月癸未，晉悼夫人食輿人之城杞者，絳縣人或年長矣，無子而往，與

於食，有與疑年，使之年。曰：「 臣，小人也，不知紀年。臣生之歲，正月 甲子朔，四百有四十五甲子矣，其季於今三之一也。」吏走問諸朝。

1026 Literally, “eat and heed commands concerning affairs.” 1027 The assassination of a ruler is also referred to as “a great matter” 大事 in Wen 1.7. 1028 Gongsun Hei is of the Si lineage, and Liang Xiao is of the Liang lineage.

1254

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

An evasive Chu envoy convinces Shusun Bao that the Chu chief minister, Gongzi Wei, will usurp the throne (see Zhao 1.13). In the thirtieth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Master of Chu sent Wei Pi to us on an official visit: this was to establish relations between the new ruler and Lu. Shusun Baoa asked how Gongzi Weia was conducting government. He replied, “Petty men like us merely earn our keep and do as we are told.1026 Even then, we fear that we are not adequate to the task of fulfilling our charges and thus will not be able to escape offenses. On what basis can we know about government?” Shusun Bao persisted in asking, but Wei Pi did not tell him anything. Shusun Baoa told the high officers, “The chief minister of Chu will take up a great matter.1027 Wei Pia will help him and be party to it. He is dissembling and hiding the truth.”

30.1(1)

Zichan predicts that the reconciliation between Liang Xiao and Gongsun Hei (Xiang 29.17) will not last, and violence indeed erupts later because of their mutual ill will (Xiang 30.10). Zichan, assisting the Liege of Zheng, went to Jin. Shuxiang asked him about government in the domain of Zheng. He replied, “This year will determine whether I get to see how the government turns out. The Si and Liang lineages1028 are just now at loggerheads with each other, and we do not yet know how their conflict will be resolved. If there is a resolution and I get to see it, then I will be able to know.” Shuxiang said, “Have they not already made peace?” He replied, “Liang Xiaoa is extravagant and willful, and Gongsun Heia loves to place himself above others. Neither will give way to the other. Although they have made peace, they are still accumulating mutual ill will, which will come to a head before too long.”

30.2

An old man drafted to work on the fortification of Qǐ calculates the passage of time with uncommon precision and is rewarded for it. For other examples of characters of low social status showing sagacity, see Cheng 5.4 and Xiang 15.4. In the second month, on the guiwei day (22), the wife of Lord Dao of Jin feasted the workmen who had been fortifying Qǐ. An aged man from the Jiang dependency went to work there because he had no sons. He partook of the feast. There were those who wondered about his age and had him talk about it. He said, “Your servant is but a petty man. I do not know about keeping a record of the years. Since the year I was born on a jiazi day, the first day of the first month, the jiazi day in the sexagenary cycle has come around four hundred and forty-five times, and we have gone through, by today, one-third of the last cycle.” The officers ran to ask about this at court. Lord Xiang

30.3a

1255

師曠曰：「 魯叔仲惠伯會郤成子于承匡之歲也。是歲也，狄伐魯， 叔孫莊叔於是乎敗狄于鹹，獲長狄僑如及虺也、豹也，而皆以名其子。 七十三年矣。」 史趙曰：「 亥有二首六身，下二如身，是其日數也。」 士文伯曰：「 然則二萬六千六百有六旬也。」 趙孟問其縣大夫，則其屬也。召之而謝過焉，曰：「 武不才，任君 之大事，以晉國之多虞，不能由吾子，使吾子辱在泥塗久矣，武之罪也。 敢謝不才。」遂仕之，使助為政。辭以老。與之田，使為君復陶，以為絳 縣師，而廢其輿尉。 30.3b 於是魯使者在晉，歸以語諸大夫。季武子曰：「 晉未可媮也。有趙孟以

為大夫，有伯瑕以為佐，有史趙、師曠而咨度焉，有叔向、女齊以師保 其君。其朝多君子，其庸可媮乎！勉事之而後可。」 30.4 夏，四月己亥，鄭伯及其大夫盟。君子是以知鄭難之不已也。 30.5(2) 蔡景侯為大子般娶于楚，通焉。大子弒景侯。

1029 See Wen 11.2. 1030 See Wen 11.5. Shusun Qiaoru and Shusun Bao are both well-known figures in Zuozhuan. Takezoe (19.28) identifies Hui as Shuzhong Zhaobo or Shuzhong Dai. On the naming of sons to commemorate victory, see also Ding 8.5. 1031 The old man of Jiang was born in 616 Bce (Wen 11), the first day of the third month according to the Zhou calendar or the first day of the first month according to the Xia calendar. 1032 We cannot know what the Warring States Jin version of the graph hai 亥 was. Taking our cue from the seal script version of the graph in Shuowen jiezi, we may surmise that it has the sign for “two” on top and three shapes that can each be read as “six” at the bottom, hence the numeric associations of 26,660. It is not clear why Scribe Zhao uses the graph hai for computation. On this basis Hui Dong (Zuozhuan buzhu, j. 4) suggests that “Hai” is the old man’s given name and identifies him as Hai Tang 亥唐, the commoner whom Lord Ping of Jin treats with great deference in Mencius 5B.12. 1033 That is, four hundred forty-five sexagenary cycles minus forty days, since only onethird of the last cycle has passed. 1034 Futao 復陶 is the name of the fur or feather coat that King Ling of Chu wore in Zhao 12.11, hence Du Yu’s (ZZ 40.680) inference that the old man was appointed “keeper of the lord’s wardrobe.” That office would involve residence in the palace, but the position might have been symbolic enough for the old man to simultaneously serve as preceptor in Jiang. 1035 The text has dafu 大夫, in this case used in the broad sense that includes both ministers and high officers. 1036 See also Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.445, and “Jin yu 8,” 14.462.

1256

Zuo Tradition

The music master Kuang said, “That was the year when Shuzhong Huibo of Lu met with Xi Quea of Jin at Chengkuang.1029 In that same year, the Di attacked Lu, and Shusun Dechenb at the time defeated the Di at Xian, seizing the leaders of the Chang Di, Qiaoru, Hui, and Bao, after whom he named his sons.1030 This was seventy-three years ago.”1031 The scribe Zhao said, “The graph hai has ‘two’ as head and shapes of ‘six’ as its body. Move the ‘two’ down to the body of the graph, and that will be the number of days.”1032 Shi Gaia said, “In that case, we have twenty-six thousand six hundred sixty days.”1033 Zhao Wuc asked the old man who was the high officer in his dependency, and it turned out that he was Zhao Wu’s subordinate. Zhao Wu summoned the old man and apologized, “I lack talent but bear responsibility for the ruler’s great affairs. On account of the many problems in Jin, I have not been able to employ you properly. I am to blame for the fact that you, sir, have to be shamed by being mired in a lowly position for so long. Allow me to apologize for my lack of talent.” He then gave the old man an appointment and had him assist in government. He declined on account of old age. Zhao Wu then gave him land and made him keeper of the lord’s wardrobe, serving as preceptor in the Jiang dependency.1034 The senior officer of military administration in charge of the old man was relieved of his position. The eagerness of Jin ministers to reward the old man of Jiang convinces Lu of their competence and good judgment. At that time the Lu envoy was in Jin. Upon his return he told the various high officers about this incident. Ji Wuzi said, “Jin cannot yet be discounted, as it has Zhao Wuc as minister,1035 Shi Gaib as his assistant, the scribe Zhao and the music master Kuang to provide consultation, and Shu­x iang and Ru Qi to serve as the teacher and the guardian of the ruler.1036 The Jin court has many noble men. How can it be discounted! The only acceptable course is to strive to serve them.”

30.3b

Repeated covenants in Zheng betray unresolved conflicts among its leaders. In the fourth month, on the jihai day, the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant with his high officers. Thus did the noble man know that the troubles in Zheng had not yet come to an end.

30.4

Lord Jing of Cai commits adultery with his son’s wife and is murdered by his son, as Zichan predicted (Xiang 28.6). Prince Jing of Cai had taken a wife for his heir apparent, Ban, in Chu. The Cai ruler had a liaison with her. The heir apparent assassinated Prince Jing.

30.5(2)

Lord Xiang

1257



30.6(4, 5)

初，王儋季卒，其子括將見王，而歎。單公子愆期為靈王御士，過諸廷， 聞其歎，而言曰：「 烏乎！必有此夫！」入以告王，且曰：「 必殺之！不慼而 願大，視躁而足高，心在他矣。不殺，必害。」王曰：「 童子何知！」 及靈王崩，儋括欲立王子佞夫。佞夫弗知。戊子，儋括圍蒍，逐成 愆。成愆奔平畤。五月癸巳，尹言多、劉毅、單蔑、甘過、鞏成殺佞夫。 括、瑕、廖奔晉。書曰「 天王殺其弟佞夫」，罪在王也。

30.7(3) 或叫于宋太廟曰：「 譆譆，出出。」鳥鳴于亳社，如曰「 譆譆」。甲午，宋

大災。宋伯姬卒，待姆也。君子謂宋共姬女而不婦。女待人，婦義事也。

1037 Dan Kuo’s father had just died. Dan Kuo’s overweening ambition and lack of filial devotion are indicated by his having an audience with the king, coveting royal power, and showing no grief. Failure to mourn properly also leads to dire predictions in Cheng 14.5 and in Xiang 19.13 and 31.4. 1038 For another instance of subversive intent revealed through “high steps,” see how Dou Bobi rightly predicts Qu Xia’s defeat because “he lifts his feet high; his intentions are not firm” (Huan 13.1). 1039 Du Yu (ZZ 40.681) identifies Chengqian as a high officer in Wei 蒍. Some commentators suggest that Chengqian may be another name for Qianqi. Wei (not to be confused with the domain of Wei) was first mentioned in Yin 11.5. 1040 Pingzhi 平畤 was part of the royal domain of Zhou and was located near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. 1041 Gongyang, Xiang 30 (21.268–69), even suggests that the purpose of the meeting (to relieve Song) is stated to honor Bo Ji (also known as Gong Ji, the name we chose for our translation). It also asserts that the lords are moved to aid Song because of Bo Ji, although according to Zuozhuan (Xiang 30.11) no aid is given. The account of Bo Ji in Lienü zhuan (4.74–75) follows Gongyang. By Han times, it is common to use Bo Ji as an example of self-sacrifice that inspires political rectitude; see, for

1258

Zuo Tradition

The newly installed King Jing of Zhou eliminates his presumed rival Wangzi Ningfu. Dan Kuo, a cousin of King Jing of Zhou, plots to put Wangzi Ningfu, King Jing’s younger brother, on the throne. The root of the unrest is traced to Dan Kuo’s earlier overreaching demeanor, which another minister correctly decodes. The result is a miscarriage of justice for Ningfu. King Jing is blamed for killing his younger brother, a mere pawn in the intrigues of his ministers. Earlier, when King Ling’s younger brother, Dan Ji, died, his son Dan Kuo was about to see the king and sighed. Qianqi, a son of the Shan Duke who was serving in King Ling’s royal guard, passed him at court. Qianqi overheard him sighing and saying, “Alas, I must make all of this mine!” Qianqi entered and told the king, adding, “You must put him to death! Kuo is not grieving and his ambitions are great;1037 his gaze is impatient and his steps are high.1038 His heart is elsewhere. If he is not killed, there is sure to be harm.” The king said, “What would a mere child like you know!” When it came to the time of King Ling’s death, Dan Kuo wanted to establish Wangzi Ningfu, King Ling’s younger son, as ruler. Ningfu did not know about it. On the wuzi day (28), Dan Kuo laid siege to Wei and drove away Chengqian,1039 who fled to Pingzhi.1040 In the fifth month, on the guisi day (5), Yin Yanduo, Liu Yi, Shan Mie, the Gan Duke Daoa, and Gong Cheng killed Ningfu. Dan Kuo, Wangzi Xia, and Liao fled to Jin. The text says, “The Heaven-appointed king put to death his younger brother Ningfu”: this is to indicate that the blame lay with the king.

30.6(4, 5)

Gong Ji, whose attitude toward ritual prescriptions could not be more different from that of her mother, Mu Jiang, dies in a fire in Song because she refused to leave the palace unaccompanied. Whereas Gongyang, Guliang, Lienü zhuan, and Huainanzi all praise her exemplary modesty and decorum,1041 Zuozhuan implies criticism of such rigid adherence to ritual propriety. Someone cried at the Song Ancestral Temple, making the sounds “Xi-xi! Out! Out!” Birds sang at the altar of earth at Bo, as if saying, “Xi-xi!” On the jiawu day, the fifth day of the fifth month, there was a catastrophic fire in Song. Gong Jic died because she had been waiting for her chaperone. The noble man said of Gong Jic that she acted like a young girl, not like a married woman. A young girl should wait for others, but a married woman should attend to her duties judiciously.1042

30.7(3)

example, Dongfang Shuo’s remonstrancein Hanshu 65.2856: “In former times, Bo Ji burned herself, and the princes became fearful.” 1042 Gong Ji married Duke Gong of Song in 582 Bce (Cheng 9.5). She was widowed six years later (Cheng 15.2) and must have been around sixty at the time of this fire.

Lord Xiang

1259

30.8 六月，鄭子產如陳蒞盟，歸，復命。告大夫曰：「 陳，亡國也，不可與也。

聚禾粟，繕城郭，恃此二者，而不撫其民。其君弱植，公子侈，大子卑， 大夫敖，政多門，以介於大國，能無亡乎？不過十年矣。」 30.9(6) 秋，七月，叔弓如宋，葬共姬也。 30.10a(7) 鄭伯有耆酒，為窟室，而夜飲酒，擊鐘焉。朝至，未已。朝者曰：「 公焉

在？」其人曰：「 吾公在壑谷。」皆自朝布路而罷。 既而朝，則又將使子皙如楚，歸而飲酒。庚子，子皙以駟氏之甲 伐而焚之。伯有奔雍梁，醒而後知之。遂奔許。 大夫聚謀。子皮曰：「《仲虺之志》云：『亂者取之，亡者侮之。推 亡固存，國之利也。』罕、駟、豐同生，伯有汏侈，故不免。」

1043 As the minister in charge of government, Liang Xiao meets the other ministers and the high officers in his own court of audience. 1044 “Hollow ravine” refers to the underground chamber. The retainer’s rejoinder may convey a hint of criticism or even derision. 1045 Liang Xiao’s attempt to send Gongsun Hei to Chu the year before caused tension between the Si and Liang lineages (Xiang 29.17). 1046 For Zhonghui, see Ding 1.1. He is also quoted in Xuan 12.2 and Xiang 14.9. The wording of this quotation is slightly different in Xiang 14.9. 1047 Han Hu, Gongsun Hei, and Gongsun Duan belong to the Han, Si, and Feng lineages, respectively. According to this, the ancestors of these three lineages were born of the same consort of Lord Mu of Zheng. 1048 That is, Liang Xiao’s flaws as well as the natural ties among the three lineages opposing him make for his defeat.

1260

Zuo Tradition

Zheng’s recent victory over Chen (Xiang 25.10) might have emboldened Zichan to enumerate its weaknesses and predict its doom. Chu will overrun Chen nine years hence (Zhao 8.6) and will extinguish Chen sixty-five years later (Ai 17.4). In the sixth month, Zichan of Zheng went to Chen to oversee the covenant. Upon his return, he reported the discharge of his mission, telling the high officers, “Chen is a domain doomed to perish. We should not form ties with them. Their leaders have accumulated grain and repaired city walls. Relying on these two things, they do not care for the people. Their ruler is feebly implanted in his position, the noble sons are extravagant, the heir apparent is put in a lowly position, the high officers are arrogant, and the government is controlled by many rival houses. When it is thus afflicted while being situated among great domains, how can it not perish? It will not last more than ten years.”

30.8

In autumn, in the seventh month, Shu Gong went to Song: this was for the burial of Gong Ji.

30.9(6)

Zheng is roiled by internal strife: Gongsun Hei leads the forces of the Si lineage to attack the Liang lineage. Liang Xiao, a drunkard, flees while drunk. Zichan tries to maintain impartiality in this conflict. Gongsun Hei will foment disorder in Zheng and will be put to death three years hence (Zhao 2.4). Liang Xiaoa of Zheng was a drunkard. He built an underground chamber and once drank there through the night as chime-bells played, and he had not stopped drinking by the time the high officers arrived at his court of audience.1043 Those who came to his court said, “Where is your lord?” Liang Xiao’s retainer said, “My lord is in the hollow ravine,”1044 at which they gave up the wait and left by different roads. Later, when Liang Xiao attended the Zheng ruler’s court, he again wanted to send Gongsun Heia to Chu.1045 Upon his return from court, he fell to drinking. On the gengzi day (11), Gongsun Heia used the armored men of the Si lineage to attack Liang Xiao’s residence and burn it. Liang Xiaoa fled to Yongliang, but only after he sobered up did he realize what was happening. He then fled to Xǔ. The high officers gathered to confer about the situation. Han Hua said, “It says in the Records of Zhonghui, ‘Take the domain in turmoil. Shame the failing domain. It will benefit the domain to overthrow whatever is failing and to stabilize whatever can be preserved.’1046 Our Han, Si, and Feng lineages1047 were born of the same mother. Liang Xiaoa is extravagant and arrogant, and that is why he could not escape disaster.”1048

30.10a(7)

Lord Xiang

1261

人謂子產就直助彊。子產曰：「 豈為我徒？國之禍難，誰知所敝？ 或主彊直，難乃不生。姑成吾所。」辛丑，子產斂伯有氏之死者而殯之， 不及謀而遂行。印段從之。子皮止之。眾曰：「 人不我順，何止焉？」子皮 曰：「 夫子禮於死者，況生者乎？」遂自止之。 壬寅，子產入。癸卯，子石入。皆受盟于子皙氏。乙巳，鄭伯及其大 夫盟于大宮，盟國人于師之梁之外。 30.10b(7) 伯有聞鄭人之盟己也，怒，聞子皮之甲不與攻己也，喜，曰：「 子皮與我

矣。」癸丑晨，自墓門之瀆入，因馬師頡介于襄庫，以伐舊北門。駟帶率 國人以伐之。皆召子產。子產曰：「 兄弟而及此，吾從天所與。」伯有死 於羊肆。子產襚之，枕之股而哭之，斂而殯諸伯有之臣在市側者，既而 葬諸斗城。子駟氏欲攻子產。子皮怒之，曰：「 禮，國之幹也。殺有禮，禍 莫大焉。」乃止。

1049 In this case, justice is aligned with power. According to Du Yu (ZZ 40.682), Gongsun Hei is supposed to have justice on his side, and the Han, Si, and Feng lineages are powerful. 1050 Alternatively: “Even if I were to abide by the just and powerful ones, would disasters then not arise?” (Yang, 3:1176); “Had the three lineages been truly capable of justice and power, disasters would not have arisen” (Du Yu, ZZ 40.682; Takezoe, 19.33). Zichan is implicitly disagreeing with Han Hu and suggesting that the feud between the Si and Liang lineages cannot be cast in black-and-white terms. 1051 That is, Zichan will keep his place by exercising impartiality and neutrality. Readings of suo 所 as wei 為 (“action”) (Takezoe, 19.33) and yi 意 (“intent”) (Yang, 3:1176) would imply that Zichan is insisting on his principles: “For now, I will simply follow through with my action [or my intent].” Zichan’s attitude is comparable to Yan Ying’s in Xiang 25.2, 28.9, and Zhao 10.2. 1052 Both Si Dai and Liang Xiao were great-grandsons of Lord Mu. Zichan, Gongsun Hei, and Gongsun Duan were grandsons of Lord Mu. 1053 On the meaning of this gesture, see also Xi 28.6, Xiang 25.2c, and Xiang 27.3.

1262

Zuo Tradition

People said that Zichan should side with the just one and help the powerful ones.1049 Zichan said, “How can they be of my ilk? Who among them knows how to put a stop to the troubles and disasters suffered by the domain? Perhaps if we abide by the truly just and powerful, disasters will then not arise.1050 For now, I will simply keep my place.”1051 On the xinchou day (12), Zichan had the dead of Liang Xiaoa’s lineage dressed in burial clothes and placed in coffins to lie in state. He then left the domain without waiting to confer with the other ministers and high officers. Yin Duan followed suit. Han Hua tried to stop them. The others said, “If the two of them are not going along with us, why should we stop them?” Han Hua said, “If that fine man is treating even the dead with ritual propriety, how much more would he do well by the living?” He thus personally tried to stop Zichan. On the renyin day (13), Zichan reentered Zheng. On the guimao day (14), Yin Duanb did the same. They both accepted a covenant at Gongsun Heia’s house. On the yisi day (16), the Liege of Zheng and his high officers swore a covenant at the Grand Ancestral Temple, and they swore a covenant with the inhabitants of the capital outside the Shizhiliang Gate. The violent power struggle between the Si and Liang lineages continues, and Liang Xiao dies. His ghost will haunt Zheng eight years hence (Zhao 7.9a). Zichan tries to maintain neutrality. His Guo lineage and the You lineage, like the Yin lineage above, reach a truce with the Si lineage. When Liang Xiaoa heard that the leaders of Zheng had sworn a covenant against him, he was furious, but he brightened up when he heard that Han Hua’s men in armor were not party to the attack against him, saying, “Han Hua is on my side.” On the morning of the guichou day (24), he entered the Zheng capital from the drains on the Tomb Gate. Relying on the help of Yu Jiea, the trainer of horses, Liang Xiao armed his followers at the arsenal set up by Lord Xiang and led them to attack the old North Gate. Si Dai, the head of the Si lineage, led out the inhabitants of the capital to fight them. Both sides summoned Zichan, who said, “To be brothers and yet to have come to this! I can only follow the one favored by Heaven.”1052 Liang Xiaoa died among the vendors of mutton at the marketplace. Zichan dressed the corpse, pillowed its head on his thigh, and wailed for him.1053 He put the corpse in a coffin and had it lie in state in the house of one of Liang Xiaoa’s retainers who lived beside the marketplace. Later, he buried him at Doucheng. The Si lineage wanted to attack Zichan. Furious at this, Han Hua said, “Ritual propriety is the pillar of the domain. There is no greater disaster than to kill the one who has ritual propriety.” The Si lineage thus desisted.

30.10b(7)

Lord Xiang

1263

於是游吉如晉還，聞難，不入。復命于介。八月甲子，奔晉。駟帶 追之，及酸棗。與子上盟，用兩珪質于河。使公孫肸入盟大夫。己巳，復 歸。 書曰「 鄭人殺良霄」，不稱大夫，言自外入也。 30.10c 於子蟜之卒也，將葬，公孫揮與裨竈晨會事焉。過伯有氏，其門上生

莠。子羽曰：「 其莠猶在乎？」於是歲在降婁，降婁中而旦。裨竈指之,曰： 「 猶可以終歲，歲不及此次也已。」及其亡也，歲在娵訾之口，其明年乃 及降婁。 僕展從伯有，與之皆死。羽頡出奔晉，為任大夫。 雞澤之會，鄭樂成奔楚，遂適晉。羽頡因之，與之比而事趙文子， 言伐鄭之說焉。以宋之盟故，不可。子皮以公孫鉏為馬師。

1264

Zuo Tradition

At that time You Ji was on his way back from his mission in Jin. Having heard of the disaster, he did not enter the capital and sent his aide to report the discharge of his mission. In the eighth month, on the jiazi day (6), he fled to Jin. Si Dai pursued him, catching up with him at Suanzao. You Ji swore a covenant with Si Daia, sinking two jade tablets to call upon the Yellow River to bear witness. He then sent Gongsun Xi to enter the capital and swear a covenant with the high officers. On the jisi day (11), he came home again. The text says, “the leaders of Zheng put Liang Xiao to death,” and does not call him “high officer”: this is to indicate that he came in from outside the domain. Recapitulation of how eleven years earlier Pi Zao predicted Liang Xiao’s demise by referring to planetary movements. After Zijiao had died, when he was about to be buried,1054 Gongsun Hui and Pi Zao met in the morning to confer about his funeral. They passed by Liang Xiaoa’s residence, and foxtail weeds were growing on his gate. Gongsun Huia said, “Are the foxtail weeds still there?”1055 At that time the Year-Planet was at the Bound Bovine asterism, which was in the middle of the sky as dawn was breaking. Pi Zao pointed to it and said, “It seems he can still last through another cycle of the Year-Planet, only by then the Year-Planet will not have reached this asterism again.” By the time Liang Xiao died, the Year-Planet was at the mouth of the Consort asterism,1056 and only in the following year did it reach Bound Bovine. Pu Zhan followed Liang Xiaoa and died with him. Yu Jie left the domain and fled to Jin, where he became a high officer in Ren. At the meeting at Ji Marsh,1057 Yue Cheng of Zheng fled to Chu and then went to Jin. Relying on Yue Cheng, Yu Jie became his partner in the service of Zhao Wua, and he made arguments in favor of an attack on Zheng. On account of the Covenant of Song, this was considered unacceptable. To replace Yu Jie, Han Hua appointed Gongsun Chu as trainer of horses.1058

30.10c

1054 See Xiang 19.7. 1055 Gongsun Hui is implicitly comparing Liang Xiao to the foxtail weeds. 1056 We derive our translation of Jianglou 降婁 (the equivalent of Aries) as “Bound Bovine” from Gongyang, Zhao 25 (24.302): “A bound bovine is called lou.” Shuowen jiezi 12B.4a glosses lou as “being empty.” We translate Juzi 娵訾 (the equivalent of Pisces) as “Consort” because Juzi is the name of Di Ku’s consort in Han texts, although it is not clear that the association existed at the time of Zuozhuan’s compilation. 1057 See Xiang 3.5. 1058 Gongsun Chu was Zihan’s son, Gongsun Shezhi’s brother, and Han Hu’s uncle.

Lord Xiang

1265

30.11 楚公子圍殺大司馬蒍掩而取其室。申無宇曰：「 王子必不免。善人，國之

主也。王子相楚國，將善是封殖，而虐之，是禍國也。且司馬，令尹之偏， 而王之四體也。絕民之主，去身之偏，艾王之體，以禍其國，無不祥大 焉，何以得免？」 30.12(9) 為宋災故，諸侯之大夫會，以謀歸宋財。冬，十月，叔孫豹會晉趙武、齊

公孫蠆、宋向戌、衛北宮佗、鄭罕虎及小邾之大夫會于澶淵。既而無歸 於宋，故不書其人。 君子曰：「 信其不可不慎乎！澶淵之會，卿不書，不信也。夫諸侯 之上卿，會而不信，寵名皆棄，不信之不可也如是。《詩》曰： 文王陟降， 在帝左右。 信之謂也。又曰： 淑慎爾止， 無載爾偽。

1059 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.533. 1060 Du Yu (ZZ 40.683) classifies this as an ode that is no longer extant, but the first line of the quotation appears in Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.648, which is also quoted in Zhao 1.1b to support an argument about good faith. “Yi” is also quoted in Xi 9.6, Xiang 31.13, Zhao 5.1b.

1266

Zuo Tradition

A Chu noble predicts doom for Gongzi Wei when the latter wantonly destroys Wei Yan, the Chu supervisor of the military, who was praised earlier for his achievements (Xiang 25.11). Body and limbs are elsewhere also used as a metaphor for loyalty and the cohesion of the polity (e.g., Xi 9.4, 26.3, Wen 7.3, Cheng 12.4, Xiang 14.8, Zhao 9.5, 13.2, Ai 6.4). Gongzi Wei of Chu put to death Wei Yan, the grand supervisor of the military, and seized his possessions. Shen Wuyu said, “The royal son [Gongzi Wei] will certainly not escape disaster. Worthy men are masters of the domain. The royal son, serving as chief minister in Chu, should establish and nurture worthy men, but instead, he destroyed them, which amounts to bringing disaster to the domain. What’s more, the supervisor of the military is like one side of the chief minister’s body and the king’s four limbs. Nothing can be more inauspicious than to destroy the master of the people, remove one side of the chief minister’s own body, hack off limbs from the king’s person, and consequently visit calamity on the domain. How can he escape disaster?”

30.11

Ministers from various domains meet to confer about disaster relief for Song, but in the end no aid is given. Such a breach of good faith is turned into an exegetical comment on why names and titles are omitted in the Annals. Zuozhuan also tries to reconcile the absence of Shusun Bao in the Annals with its own record of his role at Chanyuan. On account of the disastrous fire in Song, the high officers of the princes met to confer about providing resources to Song. In winter, in the tenth month, Shusun Bao joined Zhao Wu of Jin, Ziwei of Qi, Xiang Xu of Song, Beigong Tuo of Wei, Han Hu of Zheng, and the high officers of Lesser Zhu in a meeting at Chanyuan. But thereafter no aid was offered to Song. That was why the names of the delegates are not recorded. The noble man said, “One must not fail to be cautious about good faith! For the meeting at Chanyuan, the names of the ministers are not recorded, because they lacked good faith. Now when it is the high ministers of the princes who meet, and yet they lack good faith, both rank and name are cast aside. That is how unacceptable a failure of good faith is. As it says in the Odes,

30.12(9)

King Wen, be he in ascent or descent, Is always by the side of the god on high.1059

This refers to good faith. It also says, Use caution well in your conduct; Do not harbor any deceit.1060

Lord Xiang

1267

不信之謂也。」書曰「 某人某人會于澶淵，宋災故」，尤之也。不書魯大 夫，諱之也。 30.13a 鄭子皮授子產政。辭曰：「 國小而偪，族大寵多，不可為也。」子皮曰：「 虎

帥以聽，誰敢犯子？子善相之。國無小，小能事大，國乃寬。」 子產為政，有事伯石，賂與之邑。子大叔曰：「 國皆其國也，奚獨 賂焉？」 子產曰：「 無欲實難。皆得其欲，以從其事，而要其成。非我有成， 其在人乎？何愛於邑，邑將焉往？」 子大叔曰：「 若四國何？」 子產曰：「 非相違也，而相從也，四國何尤焉？《鄭書》有之曰： 安定國家， 必大焉先。 姑先安大，以待其所歸。」 既伯石懼而歸邑，卒與之。伯有既死，使大史命伯石為卿，辭。大 史退，則請命焉。復命之，又辭。如是三，乃受策入拜。子產是以惡其為 人也，使次己位。

1061 That is, he is not mentioned in order to conceal his participation in a covenant that betrays good faith. 1062 Alternatively, Zichan may be claiming that so long as a task is accomplished, he can claim credit as chief minister: “Wouldn’t I be the one who achieves success? Or would it be the others who achieve success?”

1268

Zuo Tradition

That refers to the lack of good faith.” The text says, “So-and-so and soand-so met at Chanyuan on account of the disastrous fire in Song”: this is to blame them. That the high officer from Lu is not mentioned is for the sake of concealment.1061 Braving great difficulties, Zichan takes charge of policy decisions in Zheng. His pragmatism is evident in the ways he promotes the devious and hypocritical Gongsun Duan, the head of the Feng lineage. Han Hua wanted to give to Zichan the charge of government. Zichan declined: “Our domain is small and hard-pressed. The houses are powerful and favorites are numerous. It will be impossible to govern well.” Han Hua said, “With me leading them in abiding by your commands, who will dare to go against you, sir? You should do your best to assist in good government. The smallness of a domain does not matter. When a small domain can serve the great domains well, it will find relief.” Zichan took charge of the government. He wanted to enlist Gongsun Duana for a certain task and gave him settlements as gifts. You Jia said, “The domain is a domain for all. Why give gifts only to him?” Zichan said, “It is indeed difficult to entirely ignore personal desires. Let them all obtain what they desire, so that they attend to their tasks and strive to accomplish them. It is not I alone who can accomplish all these tasks; does it not depend on others?1062 Why begrudge settlements? Where can settlements go?” You Jia said, “What about our neighboring domains on four sides?” Zichan said, “In granting these settlements we are not opposing but rather complying with each other. How can our neighboring domains on four sides blame us? As the Zheng Documents has it,

30.13a

To bring peace and stability to the domain and patrimony, It is necessary to give priority to the great lineages.

Let us for now give the great lineages a sense of security, and wait to see which way they go.” Shortly thereafter, Gongsun Duana returned the settlements out of fear, but in the end they were given to him. Liang Xiaoa had already died, so Zichan sent the grand scribe to appoint Gongsun Duana minister. Gongsun Duana declined. But when the grand scribe withdrew, he requested that the appointment be repeated. When Gongsun Duana was appointed again, he again declined. Only after repeating this exchange three times did he accept the bamboo document of appointment and enter the court to bow in gratitude. Because of this, Zichan abhorred his character, but he made his position next to his own.

Lord Xiang

1269

30.13b 子產使都鄙有章，上下有服；田有封洫，廬井有伍。大人之忠儉者，從而

與之；泰侈者,因而斃之。 豐卷將祭，請田焉。弗許，曰：「 唯君用鮮，眾給而已。」子張怒，退 而徵役。子產奔晉，子皮止之，而逐豐卷。豐卷奔晉。子產請其田、里， 三年而復之，反其田、里及其入焉。 從政一年，輿人誦之，曰： 取我衣冠而褚之， 取我田疇而伍之。 孰殺子產， 吾其與之！ 及三年，又誦之，曰： 我有子弟， 子產誨之； 我有田疇， 子產殖之。 子產而死， 誰其嗣之？

春秋 31.1(1) 三十有一年，春王正月。

1063 We follow Takezoe’s (19.40) identification of fu 服 with the graph fu B in Shuowen jiezi 3B.4b, which Xu Shen glosses as zhi 治 (“manage”), with jie 卩 being “the regulation of affairs” 事之節. Alternatively, we can follow the literal meaning of the line: “Those above and those below had their distinctive regalia.”

1270

Zuo Tradition

Zichan judiciously reins in powerful lineages and establishes rules and regulations that initially provoke the people’s resentment but eventually win their allegiance. As in Zhao 4.6, Zichan tolerates but is ultimately not swayed by popular criticism. For political criticism expressed through songs, see also Xuan 2.1b, Xiang 4.8, 17.6. Zichan brought it about that the cities and the country had distinctions, those above and those below had their respective duties,1063 fields had their boundaries and irrigation ditches, and houses and wells had their levies regulated.1064 He listened to and supported the loyal and frugal among the high officers, and he demoted the arrogant and extravagant among them accordingly. Feng Juan was preparing for sacrifices and asked permission to go on a hunt. Zichan refused to grant it and said, “The ruler alone uses animals fresh from the hunt. The rest of us only make do.”1065 Furious, Feng Juana withdrew and began enlisting troops. Zichan fled to Jin. Han Hua stopped him and drove away Feng Juan.1066 Feng Juan fled to Jin. Zichan requested to have his land and residence. Three years later, he let Feng Juan return and restored to him his land and residence, as well as the income that had accrued. After Zichan had been in charge of government for one year, the common workers chanted about him:

30.13b

He takes our clothes and caps and imposes taxes on them. He takes our lands and fields and measures them for levies. Whoever wants to kill Zichan, We will join him.

After three years, they again chanted about him: We have sons and younger brothers; Zichan instructs them. We have lands and fields; Zichan makes them yield more. If Zichan were to die, Who would succeed him? LORD XIANG 31 (542 BCE) ANNALS

The thirty-first year, spring, the royal first month.

31.1(1)

1064 A number of households would gather around wells, which thus serve as a way to measure land use. 1065 All but the ruler make do with domestic animals or preserved meat of animals captured in earlier hunts. 1066 Feng Juan belongs to the Feng lineage mentioned above (Xiang 30.10a). He was probably Zifeng’s son and Gongsun Duan’s brother.

Lord Xiang

1271

31.2(3) 夏，六月辛巳，公薨于楚宮。 31.3(3) 秋，九月癸巳，子野卒。 31.4(4) 己亥，仲孫羯卒。 31.5(5) 冬，十月，滕子來會葬。 31.6(6) 癸酉，葬我君襄公。 31.7(8) 十有一月，莒人弒其君密州。

左傳 31.1(1) 三十一年，春，王正月，穆叔至自會。見孟孝伯，語之曰：「 趙孟將死矣。

其語偷，不似民主。且年未盈五十，而諄諄焉如八、九十者，弗能久矣。 若趙孟死，為政者其韓子乎！吾子盍與季孫言之，可以樹善，君子也。晉 君將失政矣，若不樹焉，使早備魯，既而政在大夫，韓子懦弱，大夫多 貪，求欲無厭，齊、楚未足與也，魯其懼哉！」 孝伯曰：「 人生幾何，誰能無偷？朝不及夕，將安用樹？」 穆叔出，而告人曰：「 孟孫將死矣。吾語諸趙孟之偷也，而又甚 焉。」又與季孫語晉故，季孫不從。及趙文子卒，晉公室卑，政在侈家。 韓宣子為政，不能圖諸侯。魯不堪晉求，讒慝弘多，是以有平丘之會。

1067 For a similar judgment, see Wen 17.7. 1068 Shusun Bao has been in disagreement with Ji Wuzi on several occasions (e.g., Xiang 11.1, 27.4d), and this may be why he asks Meng Xiaobo to convey his opinion. 1069 Jin leaders arrested Ji Wuzi at the meeting at Pingqiu (Zhao 13.3). Pingqiu 平丘 was in the domain of Wei east of present-day Fengqiu County 封丘縣, Henan.

1272

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the sixth month, on the xinsi day (28), our lord expired at the Chu Palace.

31.2(3)

In autumn, in the ninth month, on the guisi day (11), Ziye died.

31.3(3)

On the jihai day (17), Zhongsun Jie (Meng Xiaobo) died.

31.4(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, the Master of Teng came and met with us for the burial.

31.5(5)

On the guiyou day (21), we buried our ruler Lord Xiang.

31.6(6)

In the eleventh month, Ju leaders assassinated their ruler, Mizhou.

31.7(8)

ZUO

Torpid words spell doom for Zhao Wu and Meng Xiaobo. The prescient Shusun Bao predicts Jin decline and urges Lu leaders to secure an alliance with Han Qi, but he is not heeded. Jin-Lu relations will deteriorate, and Jin will gather its allies for an expedition against Lu at the meeting at Pingqiu thirteen years later (Zhao 13.3). In the thirty-first year, in spring, in the royal first month, Shusun Baoa arrived from the meeting. He met with Meng Xiaobo and said to him, “Zhao Wuc is about to die. His words are torpid and do not fit a master of the people.1067 What’s more, he is not yet fifty, but he is babbling like an eighty- or ninety-year-old. He cannot last much longer. If Zhao Wuc were to die, the one in charge of government would likely be Han Qic. Why don’t you, sir, speak to Ji Wuzid about it?1068 We should establish good relations with Han Qi, who is a noble man, since the Jin ruler is about to lose control of the government. If we fail to establish good relations with Han Qi and early on make him ready to act on Lu’s behalf, then later, when the Jin government falls to the high officers, Han Qi will be timid and weak, the high officers will be greedy and insatiable in their demands, and with Qi and Chu being untrustworthy allies, Lu will indeed have much to fear!” Meng Xiaobo said, “How long is the span of human life? Who can avoid being torpid? From the morning we may not last till the evening. Of what use is it to establish good relations?” Shusun Baoa came out and told his followers, “Meng Xiaobod will soon die. I told him about Zhao Wuc being torpid, yet he is even more so.” He also spoke to Ji Wuzid about affairs in Jin, but Ji Wuzid did not follow his advice. By the time Zhao Wua died, the lord’s house in Jin was brought low, and overreaching nobles controlled the government. Han Qia was in charge of the government, but he could not enlist the allegiance of the princes. Lu could not bear Jin’s many demands, and the slanderous charges against it multiplied. That was why the meeting at Pingqiu took place.1069

31.1(1)

Lord Xiang

1273

31.2 齊子尾害閭丘嬰，欲殺之，使帥師以伐陽州。我問師故。夏，五月，子尾

殺閭丘嬰，以說于我師。工僂灑、渻竈、孔虺、賈寅出奔莒。出群公子。

31.3(2, 3)

公作楚宮。穆叔曰：「〈大誓〉云： 民之所欲， 天必從之。 君欲楚也夫，故作其宮。若不復適楚，必死是宮也。」六月辛巳，公薨于 楚宮。 叔仲帶竊其拱璧，以與御人，納諸其懷，而從取之，由是得罪。 立胡女敬歸之子子野，次于季氏。秋九月癸巳，卒，毀也。

31.4(4) 己亥，孟孝伯卒。

1070 Ziwei belongs to the Gao lineage, whom Lüqiu Ying attacked two years earlier (Xiang 29.16). Yangzhou 陽州 was a Lu settlement on the border with Qi. It was located in the area of present-day Dongping County 東平縣, Shandong. 1071 The “Great Oath” that Du Yu (ZZ 40.685) and the various Han scholars before him saw did not contain these lines, which are incorporated into the “Great Oath” (Shangshu 11.154), one of the Ancient Script chapters in the Documents. 1072 Shuzhong Dai, earlier commended for his judgment, is here disgraced. His grandson, Shuzhong Zhi, “did not fulfill his ambitions in Lu” (Ding 8.10).

1274

Zuo Tradition

The Qi officer Lüqiu Ying (erstwhile supporter of Lord Zhuang of Qi) fled to Lu (Xiang 25.2) and returned to Qi (Xiang 28.9) only to be caught up in Qi internecine struggles (Xiang 29.11). He dies as a pawn in Qi-Lu skirmishes. The power struggle among noble lineages in Qi will result in turmoil ten years later (Zhao 10.2). Ziwei of Qi feared the worst from Lüqiu Ying and wanted to kill him, so he had Lüqiu Ying lead out troops to attack Yangzhou.1070 We demanded to know the reason for this military action. In summer, in the fifth month, Ziwei put Lüqiu Ying to death to placate our army. Gonglü Sa, Xing Zao, Kong Hui, and Jia Yin, all of Lüqiu Ying’s party, left the domain and fled to Ju. The noble sons were exiled.

31.2

Lord Xiang’s infatuation with Chu architecture seems vaguely inauspicious, and he dies in the Chu-style palace he built in Lu. For another ruler who takes to “barbarian” mores, see the Ousted Lord of Wei, who imitates “the barbaric way of speaking” and is thus destined to “die among the barbarians” (Ai 12.4, 26.1). Our lord built the Chu Palace. Shusun Baoa said, “It says in the ‘Great Oath,’

31.3(2, 3)

What the people desire Heaven is sure to grant.1071

Perchance our lord desires Chu, and so built his palace. If he does not go again to Chu, he will certainly die in that palace.” In the sixth month, on the xinsi day (28), our lord expired at the Chu Palace. Shuzhong Dai stole Lord Xiang’s big jade disk and gave it to his carriage driver. He inserted it into his clothing and afterward took it from him. As a result, Shuzhong Dai was deemed guilty.1072 Ziye, our lord’s son born of Jing Gui, a Hu woman, was established as ruler. He dwelt temporarily in the Ji residence. That he died in autumn, on the guisi day (11), was because of excessive grief.1073 Meng Xiaobo dies, as Shusun Bao predicted (Xiang 31.1). Gongzi Chou, the future Lord Zhao, is instated as the Lu ruler against Shusun Bao’s recommendation. His lack of grief and negligence (symbolized by his soiled lapels) at his father’s funeral are said to portend his exile twenty-five years hence (Zhao 25.6). On the jihai day (17), Meng Xiaobo died.

31.4(4)

1073 Ziye’s mysterious death leads some commentators (e.g., Fang Bao, Gu Donggao, cited in Takezoe, 19.45–46) to suspect foul play, especially because earlier assassinations of Lu rulers also took place when those rulers “temporarily dwelt” in a minister’s residence (Yin 11.8, Zhuang 32.5).

Lord Xiang

1275

立敬歸之娣齊歸之子公子裯。穆叔不欲，曰：「 大子死，有母弟， 則立之，無，則立長。年鈞擇賢，義鈞則卜，古之道也。非適嗣，何必娣 之子？且是人也，居喪而不哀，在慼而有嘉容，是謂不度。不度之人，鮮 不為患。若果立之，必為季氏憂。」 武子不聽，卒立之。比及葬，三易衰，衰衽如故衰。於是昭公十九 年矣，猶有童心，君子是以知其不能終也。 31.5(5) 冬，十月，滕成公來會葬，惰而多涕。子服惠伯曰：「 滕君將死矣。怠於

其位，而哀已甚，兆於死所矣，能無從乎？」 31.6a(6) 癸酉，葬襄公。

1276

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Chou, born of Jing Gui’s younger sister Qi Gui, was established as ruler. Shusun Baoa opposed this, saying, “When the heir apparent dies, if he has a full younger brother, he should be established as heir. If not, then the oldest among the lord’s sons should be established. If the sons are of the same age, the worthy one is chosen.1074 If they are equally dutiful, then divination is used. This was the way of the ancients. Ziye was not the heir born of the principal consort, so why must we establish the son of a concubine’s younger sister as ruler? Moreover, this person is in mourning and yet does not grieve; he is bereaved and yet has the countenance of gladness. This is called violation of rules and standards.1075 Rarely does the person who violates rules and standards not make trouble. If he is indeed established as ruler, he is sure to cause distress for the Ji lineage.” Ji Wuzic did not heed him and in the end established Gongzi Chou as ruler. By the time of the burial, he had changed his hempen mourning clothes three times, but the hempen lapels still looked soiled. At that time Lord Zhao was nineteen years old, yet he still had the mind of a child. By this, the noble man could know that he would not be able to come to a good end. The Teng ruler’s demeanor at Lord Xiang’s funeral portends his own death three years later (Zhao 3.2). In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Cheng of Teng came and met with us for the burial of our lord. He was negligent and shed many tears. Zifu Huibo said, “The Teng ruler is going to die. He was negligent in his place of mourning, and his grief was excessive. The omen pertains to how death will come to him. Can he but follow the dead?”

31.5(5)

Zichan and Lord Jian of Zheng go to Jin for an official visit and are treated dismissively. Zichan takes down the walls of the guest lodgings and eloquently defends the rights of Zheng as the subordinate ally. On the guiyou day, the twenty-first day of the tenth month, we buried Lord Xiang.

31.6a(6)

1074 Cf. Zhao 26.9b. 1075 Yang (3:1185), on the basis of a Xiaojing quotation cited in Liji-Kong 49.830, argues that the phrase budu 不度 refers specifically to the unfilial conduct of lords. For other examples of improper mourning that portends doom, see Cheng 14.5, Xiang 30.6, Zhao 14.4.

Lord Xiang

1277

公薨之月，子產相鄭伯以如晉，晉侯以我喪故，未之見也。子產使 盡壞其館之垣而納車馬焉。士文伯讓之，曰：「 敝邑以政刑之不修，寇 盜充斥，無若諸侯之屬辱在寡君者何，是以令吏人完客所館，高其閈 閎，厚其牆垣，以無憂客使。今吾子壞之，雖從者能戒，其若異客何？以 敝邑之為盟主，繕完葺牆，以待賓客。若皆毀之，其何以共命？寡君使 匄請命。」 對曰： 以敝邑褊小，介於大國，誅求無時，是以不敢寧居，悉索敝

賦，以來會時事。逢執事之不閒，而未得見；又不獲聞命，未 知見時。不敢輸幣，亦不敢暴露。其輸之，則君之府實也，非 薦陳之，不敢輸也。其暴露之，則恐燥濕之不時而朽蠹，以 重敝邑之罪。 僑聞文公之為盟主也，宮室卑庳，無觀臺榭，以崇大諸 侯之館，館如公寢；庫廄繕修，司空以時平易道路，圬人以 時塓館宮室；諸侯賓至，甸設庭燎，僕人巡宮；車馬有所，

1076 The Zheng delegation has been kept waiting for four months.

1278

Zuo Tradition

The month that Lord Xiang expired, Zichan acted as assistant to the Liege of Zheng as they went to Jin. The Prince of Jin, on account of our lord’s death, had not yet received them.1076 Zichan had the walls of their lodgings all taken down so he could bring in the carriages and horses. Shi Gaia reprimanded him: “Our humble domain, for want of attention to administration and punishment, is filled with bandits and brigands. Yet what is to be done when the princes and their retinues deign to visit our unworthy ruler? That is why we have ordered the officers to make the guests’ lodgings perfect, making their doors and gates high and their walls and barriers thick, so as to free the guest envoys from worries. Now you, sir, have taken down the walls. Although your followers will be able to keep guard, what are we to do about guests from other domains? As covenant chief, our humble domain should refurbish the courtyards and repair the walls so as to treat our guests properly. If the walls are all demolished, how are we to meet the demands of our guests? Our unworthy ruler has sent me to inquire about your command.” Zichan replied, Our humble domain is small and situated among great domains that demand gifts on no set schedule. That is why we do not dare to dwell at ease and have mustered all our meager resources to come to meetings and court visits. It so happens that your functionaries here do not have time to spare, and we have not yet obtained an audience. Not having heard your commands, we do not yet know when we will be received in audience. We do not dare to submit our gifts, nor do we dare to leave them in the open air. As for submitting them, since these are to be the content of your treasuries, we would not dare to submit them without formally displaying and offering them. As for leaving them in the open air, we fear that they will rot from untimely heat and humidity, thereby doubling the offense ascribed to our humble settlement. I have heard, when Lord Wen was covenant chief, his palaces were small and low, devoid of terraces and towers that afford fine prospects. Such moderation meant that the lodgings of the princes could be made lofty and spacious. The lodgings then were like your lord’s main chambers now. The storehouses and stables were refurbished and in good repair. The supervisor of works regularly leveled the roads. Plasterers regularly smoothed the walls of the chambers. When the princes arrived as guests, the managers of firewood prepared the torches in the courtyards, watchmen made their circuits around the quarters, carriages and horses had appropriate places to go, the guests’ retinues had

Lord Xiang

1279

賓從有代，巾車脂轄，隸人、牧、圉各瞻其事；百官之屬各展 其物；公不留賓，而亦無廢事；憂樂同之，事則巡之；教其 不知，而恤其不足。賓至如歸，無寧菑患；不畏寇盜，而亦 不患燥濕。 今銅鞮之宮數里，而諸侯舍於隸人，門不容車，而不可 踰越；盜賊公行，而天厲不戒。賓見無時，命不可知。若又 勿壞，是無所藏幣以重罪也。敢請執事：將何所命之？雖君 之有魯喪，亦敝邑之憂也。若獲薦幣，修垣而行，君之惠 也，敢憚勤勞！ 文伯復命。趙文子曰：「 信。我實不德，而以隸人之垣以贏諸侯，是吾罪 也。」使士文伯謝不敏焉。 31.6b 晉侯見鄭伯，有加禮，厚其宴、好而歸之。乃築諸侯之館。叔向曰：「 辭

之不可以已也如是夫！子產有辭，諸侯賴之，若之何其釋辭也？《詩》 曰：

1077 Zichan is justifying why he had to take down the walls. 1078 Only by taking down the walls could Zichan enter the compound for visiting princes and envoys, and the gifts are to be stored inside that compound. 1079 Zheng, Lu, and Jin are all domains with the clan name Ji. The Jin ruler may use the Lu funeral as an excuse for negligence, but Zheng, with the same cause for distress, has not been deterred from making the trip to Jin. 1080 Alternatively, Du Yu (ZZ 40.687) has “he treated him with added courtesy.”

1280

Zuo Tradition

replacements to take over their duties, the managers of carriages oiled wheels and axles, menials, herdsmen, and grooms all attended to their respective affairs, and the retinues of various officials all set forth their supplies for the guests. The lord did not detain the guests, yet there was no business neglected. Host and guests shared their sorrows and joys. When something came up, the lord attended to it. He instructed the guests in what they were ignorant about and took care of what they lacked. The guests arrived as if they were returning home. How could there be troubles or calamities? They did not fear bandits and brigands, nor did they worry about heat and humidity. Now the Palace of Tongti extends for several li, while the princes are lodged in abodes fit for servants. The gates are not wide enough to admit carriages, which of course cannot scale the walls.1077 Bandits and brigands move about openly, and there is no guard against the pestilence of heaven. There is no set time for the guests to be received, and the lord’s command cannot be known. If, facing such difficulties, we are also not to take down the walls, then we will have no place to store our gifts and will thereby double our offense.1078 We presume to inquire of the functionaries: how would you command us? Although your ruler is occupied with the Lu funeral, that is also a cause of distress shared by our humble settlement.1079 If we can manage to offer the gifts, repair the walls, and leave, it will be due to your ruler’s beneficence. How would we dare to evade the toil and the responsibility!

Shi Gaic returned to tell of his mission. Zhao Wua said, “It is truly so. It is we who are lacking in virtue and have used walls fit for servants quarters to receive the princes. This was my offense.” He sent Shi Gaia to apologize for his lapses. Lord Ping of Jin treats the Zheng ruler and other princes with new respect. Zichan’s diplomatic success prompts Shuxiang to laud the importance of rhetorical prowess. Recall that Confucius praises Zichan’s diplomatic rhetoric in Xiang 25.10. The Prince of Jin received the Liege of Zheng in an audience, and he treated him with additional ritual.1080 He lavished feasts and gifts on him before sending him home. He then rebuilt the lodgings for the princes. Shuxiang said, “How indispensable eloquent words are! Zichan masters eloquent words, and the princes benefited accordingly. How can we discard eloquent words? As it says in the Odes,

31.6b

Lord Xiang

1281

辭之輯矣， 民之協矣； 辭之繹矣， 民之莫矣。 其知之矣。」 31.7 鄭子皮使印段如楚，以適晉告，禮也。 31.8(7) 莒犁比公生去疾及展輿。既立展輿，又廢之。犁比公虐，國人患之。十

一月，展輿因國人以攻莒子，弒之，乃立。去疾奔齊，齊出也。展輿，吳出 也。書曰「 莒人弒其君買朱鉏」，言罪之在也。 31.9 吳子使屈狐庸聘于晉，通路也。趙文子問焉，曰：「 延州來季子其果立

乎？巢隕諸樊，閽戕戴吳，天似啟之，何如？」 對曰：「 不立。是二王之命也，非啟季子也。若天所啟，其在今嗣君 乎！甚德而度。德不失民，度不失事。民親而事有序，其天所啟也。有吳 國者，必此君之子孫實終之。季子，守節者也，雖有國，不立。」

1081 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.633. The received text has yi 懌 (“in accord,” “glad”) instead of yi 繹 (“continuous,” “patterned,” “reasonable”). Some scholars have argued that ci 辭 is a loanword for 辝, which means “I” or “we” in bronze inscriptions (Cheng Junying and Jiang Jianyuan, Shijing zhuxi, 2:843). According to this reading, the lines describe how those in positions of power set examples for the people without resorting to the power of words. 1082 The difference between “Mizhou” in the Annals and “Maizhuchu” in Zuozhuan may testify to variants in oral transmission. 1083 Qu Huyong is the son of Qu Wuchen, the Chu noble who went to Wu in Cheng 7.5. 1084 Jizha was first given the settlement of Yanling 延陵 (present-day Changzhou 常州, Jiangsu) and then Zhoulai (present-day Fengtai County, Anhui; see Cheng 7.5). 1085 According to Shiji 31.1460–65, this prediction is not fulfilled. Yimo’s son Liao was assassinated by order of Zhufan’s son Guang, whose son Fucha was the last Wu ruler. However, Fu Qian (cited in Kong Yingda’s subcommentary) claims that Liao was Yimo’s half brother and Guang was his son. As in the case of Gongzi Xinshi (Xiang 15.1), “to keep one’s principles” is associated with rejecting the lure of power.

1282

Zuo Tradition

The words follow the right order; The people are harmonious. The words follow reason; The people take them as example.1081

He already understood this.” Zheng notifies Chu of its leaders’ visit to Jin, in accordance with the Covenant of Song (Xiang 27.4). Han Hua of Zheng sent Yin Duan to Chu to notify Chu that Zheng had gone to Jin. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

31.7

The Ju ruler is assassinated by his son, but the victim is blamed for his own death. Lord Libi of Ju sired Quji and Zhanyu. Having established Zhanyu as heir apparent, he then deposed him. Lord Libi was tyrannical, and the inhabitants of the capital were distressed by him. In the eleventh month, Zhanyu, relying on the support of the inhabitants of the capital, attacked the Master of Ju and assassinated him, after which Zhanyu was thus established as ruler. Quji fled to Qi because he was born of a lady of Qi. Zhanyu was born of a lady of Wu. The text says, “Ju leaders assassinated their ruler, Maizhuchu”:1082 this is to indicate that the guilt lies with Mai Zhuchu, Lord Libi.

31.8(7)

The Wu envoy praises the Wu king Yimo, defending him against the perception that Jizha might have been the worthier ruler. The Master of Wu sent Qu Huyong1083 on an official visit to Jin, so as to keep open the possibility of relations between the two domains. Zhao Wua asked him, “Will Jizhab of Yanling and Zhoulai eventually be established as ruler?1084 At Chao, Zhufan fell, and a gatekeeper slew Yuzhaia. Heaven seems to be opening a way for him. What of it then?” He replied, “He will not be established as ruler. That was the fate of the two kings; it was not a matter of opening the way for Jizhab. As for the person for whom Heaven is opening the way, it is likely our succeeding ruler. He has great virtue and abides by rules and standards. Being virtuous, he will not lose the support of the people; abiding by rules and standards, he will not be remiss in the affairs of the domain. The people adhere to him and affairs are in proper order. He is the one for whom Heaven is opening the way. It will certainly be this ruler’s descendants who will have possession of the domain of Wu to the very end.1085 Jizhab is one who keeps to his principles. Although he could have possession of the domain, he will not be established as ruler.”

31.9

Lord Xiang

1283

31.10a 十二月，北宮文子相衛襄公以如楚，宋之盟故也。過鄭，印段迋勞于

棐林，如聘禮而以勞辭。文子入聘。子羽為行人，馮簡子與子大叔逆客。 事畢而出，言於衛侯曰：「 鄭有禮，其數世之福也，其無大國之討乎！ 《詩》云： 誰能執熱， 逝不以灈？ 禮之於政，如熱之有濯也。濯以救熱，何患之有？」 31.10b 子產之從政也，擇能而使之：馮簡子能斷大事，子大叔美秀而文，公孫

揮能知四國之為，而辨於其大夫之族姓、班位、貴踐、能否，而又善為辭 令。裨諶能謀，謀於野則獲，謀於邑則否。鄭國將有諸侯之事，子產乃 問四國之為於子羽，且使多為辭令；與裨諶乘以適野，使謀可否；而告 馮簡子使斷之。事成，乃授子大叔使行之，以應對賓客，是以鮮有敗事。 北宮文子所謂有禮也。

1086 Lord Xiang was the son of the errant and ruthless Lord Xian, whose death and burial are not recorded in Zuozhuan. 1087 Zheng troubles resumed around 460 Bce. 1088 Maoshi 257, “Sang rou” 桑柔, 18B.654. 1089 Analects 14.8 gives a structurallly similar but somewhat different account of the different talents in Zheng. Shuoyuan 7.206 has a very similar passage.

1284

Zuo Tradition

A Wei envoy is impressed by the ritual propriety of Zheng leaders and compares ritual propriety to a bath that can ameliorate the harsh heat of governmental discipline. In the twelfth month, Beigong Tuoa served as assistant to Lord Xiang of Wei as they went to Chu.1086 The visit was on account of the Covenant of Song. They passed through Zheng, and Yin Duan went to meet them at Feilin to honor their exertions. The ceremony was like that for an official visit, but Yin Duan used the speech for honoring exertions. To reciprocate, Beigong Tuob entered the Zheng capital on an official visit. Gongsun Huia was the envoy, and Feng Jianzi and You Jia went forth to meet the guest. When the visit was over, Beigong Tuo came out and said to the Prince of Wei, “Zheng abides by ritual propriety. This will bring blessings for several generations. It will likely be free from chastisement by the great domains.1087 As it says in the Odes,

31.10a

Who can suffer the heat And not bathe or wash?1088

Ritual propriety is to government what taking a bath is to heat. When they save themselves from the heat with a bath, what do they have to worry about?” The perfect ritual performance above is shown to be based on a judicious choice of talents and careful division of labor. In taking charge of government, Zichan chose the able and employed them. Feng Jianzi was able to make decisions in important matters. You Jia was handsome and gracious, refined and learned. Gongsun Hui was able to know the policies of domains in the four quarters and could make distinctions regarding their high officers’ houses and clans, ranks and positions, nobility or lowliness, and competence or incompetence; in addition, he was adept with eloquent speeches. Pi Chen was able to plan strategically: when he made plans while he was in the countryside, he would get it right, but when he did so in the city, he would not. When the domain of Zheng was preparing for dealings with the princes, Zichan asked Gongsun Huia about the policies of the domains in the four quarters and also made him prepare many eloquent speeches. He then rode with Pi Chen in a carriage to go to the countryside and made him plan about what was feasible and what was not. Then he told Feng Jianzi and had him make decisions. When these things were done, he gave the task to You Jia and sent him as envoy to respond to guests and visitors.1089 Consequently, there were rarely any failures. This was what Beigong Tuoa referred to as “abiding by ritual propriety.”

31.10b

Lord Xiang

1285

31.11 鄭人游于鄉校，以論執政。然明謂子產曰：「 毀鄉校何如？」

子產曰：「 何為？夫人朝夕退而游焉，以議執政之善否。其所善 者，吾則行之；其所惡者，吾則改之，是吾師也。若之何毀之？我聞忠善 以損怨，不聞作威以防怨。豈不遽止？然猶防川。大決所犯，傷人必多， 吾不克救也。不如小決使道，不如吾聞而藥之也。」 然明曰：「 蔑也今而後知吾子之信可事也。小人實不才，若果行 此，其鄭國實賴之，豈唯二三臣？」 仲尼聞是語也，曰：「 以是觀之，人謂子產不仁，吾不信也。」 31.12 子皮欲使尹何為邑。子產曰：「 少，未知可否。」

子皮曰：「 愿，吾愛之，不吾叛也。使夫往而學焉，夫亦愈知治 矣。」

1286

Zuo Tradition

Zichan regards the debates about Zheng policies in village meeting places as instructive rather than threatening and refuses to suppress potential dissent. Such compassionate tolerance wins the approval of “Confucius” and contrasts with anecdotes about Zichan’s sterner side (e.g., Zhao 20.9). For an opposite view of “public opinion,” see Xiang 17.6. The men of Zheng gathered freely in the village meeting places and passed judgment on those in charge of government. Ran Ming said to Zichan, “What about dismantling the village meeting places?” Zichan said, “Why should we do that? Having retired from their tasks, which last from morning till evening, people gather freely to debate whether those in charge of government have done well or not. I will then carry out whatever they deem to be good policies and emend whatever they regard as bad. They are my teachers. Why should we dismantle the village meeting places? I have heard of using loyalty and goodness to diminish resentment, but I have not heard of assuming the forceful pose of authority to block resentment. Wouldn’t forceful authority swiftly put a stop to resentment? But that would be like blocking a river.1090 The damage caused by a great break in the dyke would surely injure so many people that we would not have the means to save the situation! It is better to have a small break to lead the flow, and it is better that I hear criticism and let it be my medicine.” Ran Ming said, “Henceforth I know that you, sir, are truly one whom I should serve. I am indeed a petty man who lacks talent, but if this can actually be done, then it will be the domain of Zheng that benefits. How would the benefit be limited to a few ministers or officers?”1091 Confuciusc heard this story and remarked, “Judging from this, when people say that Zichan was not humane, I do not believe it.”1092

31.11

Zichan dissuades Han Hu from conferring power and authority on a novice. Han Hu trusts Zichan even more after the latter’s criticism.1093 Han Hua wanted to let Yin He take charge of his settlement. Zichan said, “He is young, and we cannot yet know whether this will be feasible.” Han Hua said, “He is careful and well intentioned. I am fond of him, and he will not turn against me. If we send him to go and learn, he will eventually learn how to govern.”

31.12

1090 “Public opinion” that cannot be repressed is compared to a river that cannot be blocked in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.9. 1091 A similar passage is found in Xinxu 4.133 and Kongzi jiayu 9.41.98. 1092 Confucius was eleven at this point, so this was supposedly his comment when he later heard this story. The comment suggests that there were also critical assessments of Zichan. 1093 Note that Han Hu remains the leader even though Zichan seems to make the most important decisions.

Lord Xiang

1287

子產曰：「 不可。人之愛人，求利之也。今吾子愛人則以政，猶未能 操刀而使割也，其傷實多。子之愛人，傷之而已，其誰敢求愛於子？子 於鄭國，棟也。棟折榱崩，僑將厭焉，敢不盡言？子有美錦，不使人學製 焉。大官、大邑，身之所庇也，而使學者製焉，其為美錦不亦多乎？僑聞 學而後入攻，未聞以政學者也。若果行此，必有所害。譬如田獵，射御 貫，則能獲禽，若未嘗登車射御，則敗績厭覆是懼，何暇思獲？」 子皮曰：「 善哉！虎不敏。吾聞君子務知大者、遠者，小人務知小 者、近者。我，小人也。衣服附在吾身，我知而慎之；大官、大邑所以庇 身也，我遠而慢之。微子之言，吾不知也。他日我曰：子為鄭國，我為吾 家，以庇焉，其可也。今而後知不足。自今請，雖吾家，聽子而行。」 子產曰：「 人心之不同如其面焉，吾豈敢謂子面如吾面乎？抑心所 謂危，亦以告也。」 子皮以為忠，故委政焉，子產是以能為鄭國。 31.13 衛侯在楚，北宮文子見令尹圍之威儀，言於衛侯曰：「 令尹似君矣，將有

他志。雖獲其志，不能終也。《詩》云：

1094 Cf. Analects 11.25. 1095 On the relationship between mind (or “heart”) and face, see also Xiang 25.14, Zhao 28.3c. 1096 The text has “majesty in his bearing” (weiyi 威儀). However, since Beigong Tuo goes on to argue that Wei lacks “majesty in his bearing,” we have followed Wang Yinzhi’s (Jingyi shuwen, 728) suggestion that the word wei is extraneous. As cited in Hanshu 27B1.1360, this line also has yi instead of weiyi. 1097 Some commentators suggest that si 似 is a mistake for yi 以, often used interchangeably with yi 已 in early texts.

1288

Zuo Tradition

Zichan said, “This will not do. When one is fond of someone, one seeks to benefit him. Now you, sir, just because you are fond of someone, would entrust him with the charge of government, which is like making someone cut something up before he can wield a knife properly. His injuries will be many, surely!1094 If your fondness for someone merely ends up injuring him, who will dare to seek your fond regard? You, sir, are the roof beam for the domain of Zheng. If the roof beam breaks and the rafters collapse, I will be crushed. Would I presume not to state the case to the fullest? If you have a piece of beautiful brocade, you would not let someone learn tailoring with it. Great government positions and great settlements are what protect one’s person, and yet you would let a novice who is still learning ‘tailor’ them? Are they not much more important than a piece of beautiful brocade? I have heard that one learns first before entering government service; I have not heard that one uses the conduct of government to learn. If you do indeed proceed with this, you are sure to do harm. Take an example from hunting: if a man is schooled in shooting and driving, he will then be able to capture birds and animals. But if he has never climbed a carriage to shoot and drive, then the fear of being defeated in his purpose and of being crushed by his overturning carriage will overpower him. How can he spare any time or attention to think of capturing anything?” Han Hua said, “Well said! I lack discernment. I have heard that a noble man applies himself to understanding what is important and farreaching, while a petty man applies himself to understanding what is minor and close at hand. I am but a petty man. I know how to take care of the clothes I put on my body, yet I treat lightly the great government offices and great settlements whereby I protect my person, keeping my distance from these issues. If it were not for your words, sir, I would not have understood. In the past I said that it would do if you took charge of the domain of Zheng, and I took charge of protecting my patrimony. Only now do I know that will not suffice. Henceforth, I request that even with my patrimony, I heed your commands and act accordingly.” Zichan said, “Men’s minds are different, even as their faces are. How would I dare to say that your face is like mine?1095 All the same, if my mind senses danger, I will tell you about it.” Han Hua considered Zichan loyal and thus entrusted government to him. That is why Zichan was able to run the domain of Zheng. The Wei envoy Beigong Tuo predicts Gongzi Wei’s downfall because he has the demeanor of overreaching ambition but not majesty in his bearing. The Prince of Wei was in Chu. When Beigong Tuoa saw the bearing1096 of Chief Minister Wei, he remarked to the Prince of Wei, “The chief minister is already like a ruler.1097 He will have another ambition. Even though he will fulfill his ambition, he will not be able to come to a good end. As it says in the Odes,

31.13

Lord Xiang

1289

靡不有初， 鮮克有終。 終之實難，令尹其將不免。」 公曰：「 子何以知之？」 對曰：「 《詩》云： 敬慎威儀， 惟民之則。 令尹無威儀，民無則焉。民所不則，以在民上，不可以終。」 公曰：「 善哉！何謂威儀？」 對曰：「 有威而可畏謂之威，有儀而可象謂之儀。君有君之威儀， 其臣畏而愛之，則而象之，故能有其國家，令聞長世。臣有臣之威儀，其 下畏而愛之，故能守其官職，保族宜家。順是以下皆如是，是以上下能 相固也。衛詩曰： 威儀棣棣， 不可選也。

言君臣、上下、父子、兄弟、內外、大小皆有威儀也。周詩曰： 朋友攸攝， 攝以威儀。

言朋友之道必相教訓以威儀也。《周書》數文王之德，曰：

1098 Maoshi 255, “Dang” 蕩, 18A.641. Also cited in Xuan 2.3a. 1099 Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.645. Cf. n. 1060. 1100 On the importance of weiyi (majesty of bearing) in early Chinese thought, see Yang Rubin, Rujia shenti guan, 28–42. 1101 Maoshi 26, “Bozhou” 柏舟, 2A.74. 1102 Maoshi 247, “Ji zui” 既醉, 17B.605. Besides “Bozhou” and “Ji zui,” the term weiyi also appears in Maoshi 253, “Min lao” 民勞; Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑; Maoshi 260, “Zhengmin” 烝民; as well as in bronze inscriptions (“Wangsun yi zhu zhong” 王孫 遺諸鐘; “Guoshu lüzhong” 虢叔旅鐘) and in the Documents (“Jiu gao” 酒誥; “Gu ming” 顧命).

1290

Zuo Tradition

There is none who does not have beginnings. Few are those who fulfill them as endings.1098

It is indeed difficult to fulfill them as endings. The chief minister will likely not escape disaster.” The lord said, “How do you, sir, know it?” He replied, “As it says in the Odes, Be reverent and cautious about your majesty of bearing. It will make you an example for the people.1099

As the chief minister has no majesty in his bearing, the people have no example to look up to. If he remains above the people without being held up by them as an example, he will not be able to come to a good end.” Beigong Tuo praises the majesty of bearing—the observable movements and gestures—that define moral exemplarity. These ideas are dominant in the Odes and echo similar discussions in Zuozhuan (e.g., Huan 2.2, Zhao 5.4a).1100 The lord said, “Well said! What is meant by the majesty of bearing?” He replied, “To have majesty that can inspire awe is called ‘majesty,’ and to have bearing that can serve as a model is called ‘bearing.’ When a ruler has the ruler’s majesty of bearing, his subjects hold him in awe and love him, take him as an example, and follow him as a model. That is how he can possess his domain and patrimony and how his good name can last through the generations. When a minister has the minister’s majesty of bearing, those below him hold him in awe and love him. That is how he can guard his position and duties, protect his house, and bring harmony to his patrimony. If, following this order down the hierarchy, all behave like this, it will be the means for those above and those below to support each other. As its says in an ode from Wei, The majesty of bearing is gentle and refined In ways too many to be numbered.1101

This is saying that rulers and ministers, those above and those below, fathers and sons, older brothers and younger brothers, those inside and those outside, the big ones and the small ones, all have the majesty of bearing. As it says in an ode from Zhou, Where your friends offer their assistance, They assist you by their majesty of bearing.1102

This is saying that, with the way of friendship, friends must instruct each other in the majesty of bearing. The Zhou Documents enumerates King Wen’s virtues:

Lord Xiang

1291

大國畏其力， 小國懷其德。 言畏而愛之也。《詩》云： 不識不知， 順帝之則。 言則而象之也。紂囚文王七年，諸侯皆從之囚，紂於是乎懼而歸之，可 謂愛之。文王伐崇，再駕而降為臣，蠻夷帥服，可謂畏之。文王之功，天 下誦而歌舞之，可謂則之。文王之行，至今為法，可謂象之。有威儀也。 故君子在位可畏，施舍可愛，進退可度，周旋可則，容止可觀，作事可 法，德行可象，聲氣可樂；動作有文，言語有章，以臨其下，謂之有威儀 也。」

1292

Zuo Tradition

The great domains are awed by his strength. The small domains cherish his virtues.1103

This is saying that they held him in awe yet loved him. It says in the Odes, Without being aware, without knowing how, He follows the example of the god on high.1104

This is saying that he followed the example and took it as a model. When the last king of Shang, Zhòu, imprisoned King Wen for seven years, the princes all followed him in his imprisonment. Zhòu thus became fearful and sent him home. It can be said that they loved King Wen. When King Wen attacked Chong, during his second expedition he made the ruler of Chong demote himself to become a subject.1105 Tribes and border peoples led each other in submission. It can be said that they held him in awe. As for King Wen’s achievements, all-under-heaven chanted them and sang and danced about them. It can be said that they took him as an example. King Wen’s actions to this day serve as rules and standards. It can be said that the people follow him as a model. King Wen had the majesty of bearing. That is why the noble man in his position inspires awe, and in his acts of giving he inspires love. His steps forward and back can serve as a standard, his every turn can be imitated as an example, his demeanor is well worth observing, his conduct of affairs can be set up as rules, his virtues and actions can be realized as a a model, his voice and aura can bring joy, his gestures have refinement, and his speeches are elegant. With all these attributes he oversees those below him. This is called having the majesty of bearing.”

1103 Similar lines are incorporated into “Wucheng” 武成 (Shangshu 11.161) in the Ancient Script version of the Documents. 1104 Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.573. 1105 This is also mentioned in Xi 19.5.

Lord Xiang

1293

Zuo Tradition / Zuozhuan Volume 3

昭公

Lord Zhao (541–510 bce) The rule of Lord Zhao lasts just one year longer than that of his predecessor, Lord Xiang, and the Zuozhuan offers, for these years, an equally rich documentation of events in Lu and in the other major domains of the era. The narratives of this period tell again and again of the deterioration of hierarchical control, the rise of powerful subjects, who vie with weak rulers, and strife among noble lines. Perhaps in response to these trends, we also read several notable reassertions of the importance of ritual propriety in statecraft. Episodes from the spectacular rise and fall of King Ling of Chu (r. 540–529) dominate the action during the first thirteen years. Introduced already as an ambitious prince (Xiang 31.13), Gongzi Wei murders his king (Zhao 1.13) and moves quickly to confirm Chu’s new overlord status, convening the northern princes, including Jin, at Shen (4.3), then annexing the domains of Chen (8.6) and Cai (11.8). As observers in other domains note the arrogance of the upstart king, he makes domestic enemies who ultimately rise up and destroy him (12.11, 13.2). After a period of infighting and uncertainty, King Ling’s brother Gongzi Qiji comes to power and, as King Ping (r. 528–516), restores Chen and Cai and stabilizes the domain of Chu. The later years of King Ping’s reign and the early years of King Zhao (r. 515–489) set the stage for the major late Spring and Autumn period events in Chu: the Wu conquest of Chu under the leadership of the Chu exile Wu Zixu (506 Bce; Ding 4.3) and the rebellion of the Bo Lord, son of the heir apparent Jian, a disaffected and exiled son of King Ping (479 Bce; Ai 16.5). Relations among the domains of the northern plain are relatively calm during and after the period of Chu dominance, with many narratives featuring a marked interest in ritual correctness and the protocol that governs various aspects of diplomacy. Jin largely maintains its traditional influence, hosting visits from allied princes and on occasion

1297

attempting to exercise a sort of punitive prerogative. Although it is observed that Jin has lost the allegiance of the princes (7.11), no major military conflicts pit the northern domains against one another. Peace among the northern domains was perhaps a function of a remarkable surge of violence inside these domains. The years of Lord Zhao feature an abortive uprising by Gongsun Hei in Zheng (2.4). Chen strife makes possible its annexation by an ascendant Chu (8.6). In Qi, struggles among the old ministerial lines advance the fortunes of the Chen lineage, which, by means of an infamous murder in a later generation, will come to rule Qi (481 Bce; Ai 14.5). The ruler of Wei is temporarily driven from his capital (20.4). Song is riven by the rebellion of the Hua and Xiang lineages (20.5, 21.4, 21.6). In Lu, the three Huan lineages—the Jisun or Ji, Shusun, and Zhongsun or Meng—turn against Lord Zhao, who dies in exile in Ganhou, in Jin territory (32.4); yet these same lineages are divided by tensions among them and occasionally convulsed by challenges from within. Finally, a succession crisis in the Zhou royal domain leads to the disastrous rebellion of Wangzi Zhao, who for several years battles the forces of King Jìng (r. 519–476), until Jin interventions at last succeed in restoring order. Against the backdrop of Chu’s rise and local violence, several statesmen emerge as heroes of foresight, competence, and perseverance in the ways of ritual. The most famous of these is Zichan of Zheng, whose rise to power has been a prominent story line in the preceding years (Xiang 26.4, 30.13, 31.6, 31.10–31.12). Zichan is criticized for a tendency toward clarity and forcefulness in his executive measures, but he manages by these same measures to keep his domain in good order through several moments of tension. His ability is perhaps best exemplified by his production, in 536 Bce (6.3), of a written penal code cast in metal, a step that Jin first censures and then, years later, imitates (29.5). In Jin, Zhao Wu, Han Qi, and Wei Shu succeed one another as leaders of government and de facto heads of the northern alliance, aided by the able Shuxiang and others. In Qi, Yan Ying—some of whose words and deeds will later be commemorated in the Annals of Master Yan—exerts a firm but futile moral influence on his ruler. Meanwhile, in Lu, Confucius begins to be noticed as an up-and-coming teacher of ritual (7.12). While the extraordinary length of the annalistic narrative for Lord Zhao’s rule is due primarily to the text’s wealth of incident and detail, these years also feature a large number of lengthy and learned disquisitions: on matters of ritual (2.2, 2.3, 4.2, 5.3, 17.2, 20.8); on history (1.12, 7.7 26.9, 32.4); on military preparedness (5.4); on dragons (29.4); and on many other topics. A brief reflection on the Annals (31.5) echoes a similar passage at Cheng 14.4.

Lord Zhao

1299

春秋 1.1 元年春王正月，公即位。 1.2(1) 叔孫豹會晉趙武、楚公子圍、齊國弱、宋向戌、衛齊惡、陳公子招、蔡

公孫歸生、鄭罕虎、許人、曹人于虢。 1.3(2) 三月，取鄆。 1.4(8) 夏，秦伯之弟鍼出奔晉。 1.5 六月丁巳，邾子華卒。 1.6(10) 晉荀吳帥師敗狄于大鹵。 1.7(11) 秋，莒去疾自齊入于莒。莒展輿出奔吳。 1.8(11) 叔弓帥師疆鄆田。 1.9 葬邾悼公。 1.10 冬十有一月己酉，楚子麇卒。 1.11(13) 楚公子比出奔晉。

1300

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 1 (541 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded to his position.

1.1

Shusun Bao met with Zhao Wu of Jin, Gongzi Wei of Chu, Guo Ruo of Qi, Xiang Xu of Song, Qi E of Wei, Gongzi Zhao of Chen, Gongsun Guisheng of Cai, Han Hu of Zheng, a Xǔ leader, and a Cao leader at Guo.

1.2(1)

In the third month, we took Yun.1

1.3(2)

In summer, Qian, younger brother of the Liege of Qin, departed and fled to Jin.

1.4(8)

In the sixth month, on the dingsi day (9), Hua, the Master of Zhu, died.

1.5

Xun Wu (Zhonghang Wu) of Jin led out troops and defeated the Di at Dalu.2

1.6(10)

In autumn, Quji of Ju entered Ju from Qi. Zhanyu of Ju departed and fled to Wu.

1.7(11)

Shu Gong led out troops and marked off the lands of Yun.

1.8(11)

Lord Dao of Zhu was buried.

1.9

In winter, in the eleventh month, on the jiyou day (4), Jun, the Master of Chu, died.3 Gongzi Bi of Chu departed and fled to Jin.

1.10(13)

1.11(13)

1 Yun 鄆 had belonged to Lu (Wen 12.7) and then to Ju (Cheng 9.10a). It was located northeast of present-day Yishui County 沂水縣, Shandong, about 50 kilometers north of the Ju capital and more than 150 kilometers northeast of the Lu capital. 2 Gongyang, Zhao 1 (22.284), and Guliang, Zhao 1 (18.176), both of which read “Taiyuan” 大原 where this version of the Annals has “Dalu” 大鹵, explain that it was called Dalu in the central domains, and Taiyuan by the non-Sinitic groups in the area. It was situated to the southwest of present-day Taiyuan, Shanxi. 3 As in a number of other passages (e.g., Min 2.3), the Annals here conceals the fact that the ruler was murdered. See Zhao 1.13 for Gongzi Wei’s assassination of the Chu king.

Lord Zhao

1301

左傳 1.1a(2) 元年，春，楚公子圍聘于鄭，且娶於公孫段氏。伍舉為介。將入館，鄭人

惡之，使行人子羽與之言，乃館於外。既聘，將以眾逆。子產患之，使子 羽辭曰：「 以敝邑褊小，不足以容從者，請墠聽命。」令尹命大宰伯州犁 對曰：「 君辱貺寡大夫圍，謂圍將使豐氏撫有而室。圍布几筵，告於莊、 共之廟而來。若野賜之，是委君貺於草莽也，是寡大夫不得列於諸卿 也。不寧唯是，又使圍蒙其先君，將不得為寡君老，其蔑以復矣。唯大夫 圖之！」 子羽曰：「 小國無罪，恃實其罪。將恃大國之安靖己，而無乃包藏 禍心以圖之。小國失恃，而懲諸侯，使莫不憾者，距違君命，而有所壅 塞不行是懼。不然，敝邑，館人之屬也，其敢愛豐氏之祧？」 伍舉知其有備也，請垂櫜而入。許之。

4 5

6

1302

See Xiang 27.5. The Zheng officials apparently suspected that the Chu prince and his troops would pose a threat if allowed within the walls of the city, where their lodging was located. Gongsun Hui’s eloquence and familiarity with the policies and personnel of neighboring domains are remarked upon in Xiang 31.10. It was traditional for the groom to escort the bride home starting from the ancestral hall of her family. Zichan wants to keep the delegation from entering within the city walls and is proposing that a space be prepared outside the city for this ceremony.

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Gongzi Wei, the ambitious prince of Chu (see Xiang 31.13) who will eventually reign in Chu as King Ling, visits Zheng to escort home a bride and shows that he has ulterior motives. In the first year, in spring, Gongzi Wei of Chu made an official visit to Zheng, where he was going to take a wife from the house of Gongsun Duan.4 Wu Ju acted as his aide. They were about to enter their lodging when the Zheng leaders, disliking the idea, had the envoy Gongsun Huia speak with them.5 They therefore lodged outside the walls. Having concluded the formal visit, Gongzi Wei was going to enter with all his troops to escort the bride out. Troubled by this, Zichan sent Gongsun Huia to decline the proposal: “Because our humble settlement is small, it would not suffice to accommodate your followers. Permit us to build an earthen platform where we may receive your commands.”6 The chief minister, Gongzi Wei, commanded the grand steward Bo Zhouli to respond: “Your lord condescended to bestow a gift upon our unworthy high officer Wei,7 telling him, ‘I will cause the Feng lineage to provide for your household.’8 Gongzi Wei set out his stands and mats, made his announcement at the temples of Kings Zhuang and Gong, then came. Should you give him the bride in an open field, this would amount to casting your ruler’s gift away among the weeds, and it would amount to our high officer’s not achieving equal rank with the other ministers. This is not all. You would also cause Gongzi Wei to have deceived our former rulers. He would not succeed in acting as one of our unworthy ruler’s senior men, and he would have nothing to take back with him in his report. It is up to you, high officers, to consider this.”9 Gongsun Huia said, “Our small domain is not at fault. Rather, our only fault is our dependence. We had thought to depend upon your great domain to bring us peace and ease. But have you not harbored ruinous designs in making your plans? Should our small domain turn out to be misguided in its dependence upon you and thus to have become a caution and lesson to the princes, so that not a single one of them fails to feel resentment, they will break away from your commands, my lord. Your commands, blocked by this obstacle, will then not be carried out. And it is this that I fear. If this were not so, how could our humble settlement, who were hostelers to you, presume to begrudge the ancestral hall of the Feng lineage?” Wu Ju knew that they had prepared their defenses, so he asked permission to enter with weapons cases hanging empty. This was granted. 7 8 9

1.1a(2)

That is, Gongzi Wei. The “gift” is the bride. Feng was the name given to Gongsun Duan’s lineage. Bo Zhouli’s speech is notable for its formality and its marked use of archaic forms appropriate to ritual speech among the states of the northern plain.

Lord Zhao

1303

1.1b 正月乙未，入，逆而出。遂會於虢，尋宋之盟也。

祁午謂趙文子曰：「 宋之盟，楚人得志於晉。今令尹之不信，諸侯 之所聞也。子弗戒，懼又如宋。子木之信稱於諸侯，猶詐晉而駕焉，況 不信之尤者乎？楚重得志於晉，晉之恥也。子相晉國，以為盟主，於今 七年矣。再合諸侯，三合大夫，服齊、狄，寧東夏，平秦亂，城淳于，師徒 不頓，國家不罷，民無謗讟，諸侯無怨，天無大災，子之力也。有令名 矣，而終之以恥，午也是懼，吾子其不可以不戒。」 文子曰：「 武受賜矣。然宋之盟，子木有禍人之心，武有仁人之 心，是楚所以駕於晉也。今武猶是心也，楚又行僭，非所害也。武將信 以為本，循而行之。譬如農夫，是穮是蔉；雖有饑饉，必有豐年。且吾聞 之：能信不為人下，吾未能也。《詩》曰： 不僭不賊， 鮮不為則。 信也。能為人則者，不為人下矣。吾不能是難，楚不為患。」

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20

1304

The Covenant of Song, sworn in 546 Bce (Xiang 27.4), established peace between Jin and Chu and required that their allied domains pay court visits to both powers. Qi Wu succeeded his father, Qi Xi, as senior officer of Jin’s central army in Xiang 3.4. He reenters the narrative for the first time here. At the covenant at Song, the Chu side insisted that its representative be the first to smear his lips with blood, thus signifying precedence over Jin in the ceremony. Qi Wu does not wish to see this symbolic subordination to Chu reaffirmed. See Xiang 27.4. Zhao Wu became head of the Jin government in Xiang 25.7. See Xiang 25.3 and 26.7. See Xiang 27.4, 30.12, and the present meeting. See Xiang 28.2. For Qin, see Xiang 25.16 and 26.1. For Chunyu, see Xiang 29.8. Chunyu is the new capital of the small domain of Qǐ 杞. Qi Wu’s present assessment of this act is contradicted by You Ji of Zheng, who at the time of the fortifying of Chunyu felt it unwise for Jin to be protecting Xia descendants while neglecting Zhou affiliates. For further examples of agriculture as a metaphor for governing, see Yin 6.4 and Xiang 25.14. Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.648.

Zuo Tradition

Representatives of several domains meet at Guo to renew the covenant sworn at Song (see Xiang 27.4). Jin yields precedence to Chu, but this apparent weakness is justified as moral superiority according to the reasoning of Zhao Wu, the chief minister of Jin. In the first month, on the yiwei day (15), they entered, greeted the bride, escorted her out, and departed. Afterward the leaders from the domains met at Guo and renewed the covenant sworn at Song.10 Qi Wu11 said to Zhao Wua, “At the treaty at Song, Chu got its way with Jin. Now, the current chief minister’s lack of good faith is known to all the princes. If you do not take precautions, I fear that we will see a repetition of what happened at Song.12 Qu Jiana was famous among the princes for his good faith, and still he lorded it over us by deceiving Jin.13 How much worse will it be with someone so egregious in his lack of good faith? It will be a disgrace for Jin if Chu twice gets its way with Jin. For seven years now you have guided the domain of Jin and made it covenant chief.14 Twice you have gathered together the princes themselves.15 Three times you have gathered their high officers.16 You subdued Qi and the Di and pacified the eastern region.17 You settled the disorder with Qin and fortified Chunyu.18 The troops were not fatigued; the domain and patrimony not exhausted. Among the people there was no seditious talk, among the princes no complaints, and from Heaven no great calamity. All of this was due to your efforts. To have won such a good name and then to let it all end in shame is something I myself would fear, and you too must take care.” Zhao Wub said, “I accept your words as a gift. But at the covenant meeting at Song, Qu Jiana was of a mind to ruin others, while I was of a mind to treat others with nobility of spirit. That is why Chu was able to lord it over Jin. Now I am still of the same mind, and Chu again oversteps. I will not let it become a source of harm. I will take good faith as my starting point and act accordingly. I am like a farmer: here I weed, here I mound the earth up around the shoots, and though there be times of want, there are certain to be years of plenty.19 What is more, I have heard it said that a man capable of good faith never becomes another man’s inferior. I have not been capable of such good faith. As it says in the Odes,

1.1b

Who does not overstep, who does not arrogate— Rare is it that such a man does not serve as a model.20

That is good faith. One who is capable of serving as a model to others never becomes their inferior. It is my own lack of ability that I regard as the problem; Chu is not my worry.”

Lord Zhao

1305



楚令尹圍請用牲讀舊書加于牲上而已，晉人許之。

1.1c 三月甲辰，盟。楚公子圍設服、離衛。叔孫穆子曰：「 楚公子美矣，君

哉！」鄭子皮曰：「 二執戈者前矣。」蔡子家曰：「 蒲宮有前，不亦可乎？」 楚伯州犁曰：「 此行也，辭而假之寡君。」鄭行人揮曰：「 假不反矣。」伯 州犁曰：「 子姑憂子皙之欲背誕也。」子羽曰：「 當璧猶在，假而不反，子 其無憂乎？」齊國子曰：「 吾代二子愍矣。」陳公子招曰：「 不憂何成？二 子樂矣。」衛齊子曰：「 苟或知之，雖憂何害？」宋合左師曰：「 大國令， 小國共，吾知共而已。」晉樂王鮒曰：「 〈小旻〉之卒章善矣，吾從之。」 1.1d 退會，子羽謂子皮曰：「 叔孫絞而婉，宋左師簡而禮，樂王鮒字而敬，子

與子家持之，皆保世之主也。齊、衛、陳大夫其不免乎！國子代人憂，子 招樂憂，齊子雖憂弗害，夫弗及而憂，與可憂而樂，與憂而弗害，皆取 憂之道也，憂必及之。〈大誓〉曰： 民之所欲， 天必從之。

21

Du Yu (ZZ 41.698) believed that because of the procedure Gongzi Wei suggested, there was no smearing of the covenantors’ mouths with blood, and thus no record of the covenant in the Annals. 22 According to Liji (22.784) and Du Yu (ZZ 41.698), cited in Yang 4:1203, such a guard was the prerogative of a ruler. 23 According to Fu Qian (cited in Yang 4:1203), Gongzi Wei was already residing at the Pu Palace, a secondary residence of the Chu ruler. 24 Gongsun Hei’s attack on the drunken Liang Xiao and the latter’s flight to Xǔ are recounted at Xiang 30.10. 25 For the episode of the jade disk, see the flashback in Zhao 13.2. “The one who hit upon the jade disk” is Gongzi Qiji, who will become King Ping after King Ling’s fall. 26 According to Du Yu (ZZ 41.698–99), the two men in question are Gongzi Wei and Bo Zhouli. But according to Fu Qian (ZZ-Kong 41.699), the two men are Bo Zhouli and Gongsun Hui, who are facing threats to their domains from Gongzi Wei and Gongsun Hei, respectively. 27 That is, Gongzi Wei and Bo Zhouli will accomplish nothing, precisely because they do not know enough to be worried about their undertaking. 28 The speaker in the last stanza of Maoshi 195, “Xiaomin” 小旻, 12B.414, declares his intention to be cautious in judging affairs he does not completely understand. 29 As Yang (4:1204) notes, Gongzi Zhao’s “finding pleasure in worry” is not quite the same as “finding pleasure in something you should worry about.” The speaker is imprecise. 30 See Xiang 31.3, where the same lines are cited.

1306

Zuo Tradition

The Chu chief minister Gongzi Wei requested that, after the sacrifice, the previous covenant document be read aloud and placed upon the victim, and that the ceremony end there. The Jin leaders granted this request.21 Participants in the covenant ceremony make predictions, especially concerning the Chu royal house. In the third month, on the jiachen day (25), they swore the covenant. Gongzi Wei of Chu displayed a ruler’s regalia and paired guards. Shusun Baob said, “How fine the Chu prince’s son is! A ruler!” Han Hua of Zheng said, “He has two men armed with dagger-axes as his front-guards!”22 Gongsun Guishenga of Cai said, “Is it not permissible for the prince of the Pu Palace to have front-guards?”23 Bo Zhouli of Chu said, “For this expedition he submitted a request and borrowed them from our unworthy ruler.” The Zheng envoy Gongsun Huib said, “What was borrowed will not be returned!” Bo Zhouli said, “For now, worry about your Gongsun Heia’s desire to be defiant and reckless!”24 Gongsun Huia said, “The one who hit upon the jade disk is still alive.25 If what has been borrowed is not returned, will you not have worries of your own?” Guo Ruob of Qi said, “I grieve on behalf of both these men!”26 Gongzi Zhao of Chen said, “What is ever accomplished without worry? These two men are too complacent!”27 Qi Ea of Wei said, “So long as someone is aware of it, even if there is cause for worry, what harm can come of it?” The minister of the left Xiang Xua said, “The great domains issue commands and the small domains respect them. I know only how to be respectful.” Yue Wangfu of Jin said, “The last stanza of ‘Xiaomin’ is good. I will follow it.”28

1.1c

Two Zheng ministers comment on behavior during the covenant ceremony, making predictions on the basis of the various high officers’ remarks. Withdrawing from the meeting, Gongsun Huia said to Han Hua, “Shusun Baod was pointed and yet indirect. The Song minister of the left, Xiang Xub, was curt yet ritually proper. Yue Wangfu was caring and yet respectful. You, sir, and Gongsun Guishenga gave balanced appraisals. All of you are lineage heads who will preserve your houses for generations. The high officers from Qi, Wei, and Chen, on the other hand, likely will not escape disaster. Guo Ruob worries on others’ behalf, Gongzi Zhaoa finds pleasure in worry, and Qi Ea, though he worries, sees no harm. Worrying about something when it does not affect you, finding pleasure in something you should worry about,29 worrying but seeing no harm: all are ways of bringing on more worries, so worries are certain to come to them. As it says in the ‘Great Declaration,’

1.1d

What the people desire Heaven is sure to grant.30

Lord Zhao

1307

三大夫兆憂，憂能無至乎？言以知物，其是之謂矣。」

1.2a (3)

季武子伐莒，取鄆。莒人告於會。楚告於晉曰：「 尋盟未退，而魯伐莒， 瀆齊盟，請戮其使。」樂桓子相趙文子，欲求貨於叔孫，而為之請。使請 帶焉，弗與。梁其踁曰：「 貨以藩身，子何愛焉？」叔孫曰：「 諸侯之會， 衛社稷也。我以貨免，魯必受師，是禍之也，何衛之為？人之有牆，以蔽 惡也；牆之隙壞，誰之咎也？衛而惡之，吾又甚焉。雖怨季孫，魯國何 罪？叔出季處，有自來矣，吾又誰怨？然鮒也賄，弗與，不已。」召使者， 裂裳帛而與之，曰：「 帶其褊矣。」

1.2b 趙孟聞之，曰：「 臨患不忘國，忠也；思難不越官，信也；圖國忘死，貞

也；謀主三者，義也。有是四者，又可戮乎？」 乃請諸楚曰：

31

32 33 34 35 36 37

38 39

1308

Guo Ruo’s son Guo Xia is forced to flee Qi for Lu in Ai 6.3. Gongzi Zhao is banished to Yue after Chu’s annexation of Chen in the Annals, Zhao 8.9; cf. Zuozhuan, Zhao 8.6. Qi E’s son Qi Bao leads a revolt that brings about the destruction of the Qi lineage in Zhao 20.4. The notion that “words are for knowing things” is not elsewhere expressed in precisely the same terms as it is here, but it lies behind the statement (Liji 33.933) that “in words there are things” (yan you wu 言有物), Mencius’s (2A.2) comment that he was capable of “knowing words” (zhi yan 知言), and much of the “hermeneutic of character” discussed in Van Zoeren, Poetry and Personality, 55–74. Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.195, gives a somewhat different account of the responses to Gongzi Wei’s regalia and guards, with a longer speech from Shusun Bao. The covenant was “sacred” in the sense that it was preceded by fasting on the part of the oath swearers. See Cheng 11.9. That is, Yue Wangfu is prepared to help Shusun Bao for a price. According to Du Yu (ZZ 41.699), Liangqi Jing was a retainer of the Shusun lineage. That is, if Jin does not succeed in punishing the Lu envoy Shusun Bao for Ji Wuzi’s offense, it will punish Lu directly with a military attack. The Jisun lineage is the lineage of Ji Wuzi. Since Ji Wuzi must have known full well that a precipitous attack on Ju would imperil Shusun Bao, the latter has good reason for complaint. The ancestor of the Shu (or Shusun) lineage, Gongzi Ya, was an older brother of the ancestor of the Ji (or Jisun) lineage, Ji You. Both were sons of Lord Huan of Lu. The Annals contains numerous records of diplomatic journeys by members of the Shusun lineage. According to Kong Yingda (41.699), there are also many recorded instances of members of the Ji lineage going on diplomatic missions. The Ji lineage head stays in Lu because he is the chief minister, not because the lineage is descended from the younger son. Shusun Bao demeaningly refers to Yue Wangfu by his personal name, and in an abbreviated form. Instead of the bribe that Yue Wangfu wants, Shusun Bao offers a substitute of lesser value, thus signaling both compliance and implicit criticism. The gesture wins Zhao Wu’s approval.

Zuo Tradition

Since the three high officers themselves provide portents of worry, can worries fail to come? When it is said that ‘words are for knowing things,’ this is what is meant!”31 The Lu representative at the meeting, Shusun Bao, is nearly arrested by Chu when Lu attacks Chu’s small ally, Ju, and brings to an end the long détente with Ju established in the Covenant of Duyang (553 Bce; Xiang 20.1). He is pardoned after a plea from the Jin representative, Zhao Wu, who argues eloquently but cynically that covenant heads, charged with maintaining order, must inevitably ignore small transgressions. Ji Wuzi attacked Ju and took Yun. The Ju leaders reported this at the meeting. Chu then reported it to Jin: “The covenant was being renewed and the meeting had not yet adjourned when Lu attacked Ju and violated the sacred covenant.32 We request that Lu’s delegate be executed.” Yue Wangfuc, who was aide to Zhao Wua, wanted to ask the Lu delegate, Shusun Baod, for some of his property and then make a plea on his behalf.33 He sent someone to ask for a belt from Shusun Baod, but the latter would not give it to him. Liangqi Jing said, “Property is to be used for sheltering oneself. Why should you be stingy with it?”34 Shusun Baod said, “Meetings of the princes are for defending the altars of the domain. If I am pardoned because I donated my property, Lu is sure to face a military force.35 In this way I would bring trouble to the altars of the domain. How would I be acting to defend them? When people have walls, it is to shield themselves from evils. But when the walls are cracked and decaying, whose fault is it? And if in defending I summon an evil, I will be still worse than that. Even if I have a complaint against the Jisun lineage,36 what offense has the domain of Lu committed? Precedent supports the older lineage, my own Shu lineage, going out, while the younger lineage, the Ji lineage, remains at home. Against whom should I then complain?37 And yet Fu wants a bribe, and if I do not give it to him, there will be no end to it.”38 Calling the messenger, he tore a strip of silk from his skirt and gave it to him, saying, “The belt would be too narrow.”39

1.2a(3)

Zhao Wuc heard of it and said, “Not to forget one’s domain when faced with troubles is loyalty. Not to overstep one’s official duties when contemplating difficulties is good faith. To put death out of one’s mind when planning for the domain is steadfastness. To plan on the ruler’s behalf with these three qualities is dutifulness. Is it then acceptable to put to death one who possesses these four qualities?” He therefore pleaded the case with Chu:

1.2b

Lord Zhao

1309

魯雖有罪，其執事不辟難，畏威而敬命矣。子若免之，以勸

左右，可也。若子之群吏，處不辟污，出不逃難，其何患之 有？患之所生，污而不治，難而不守，所由來也。能是二者， 又何患焉？不靖其能，其誰從之？魯叔孫豹可謂能矣，請 免之，以靖能者。子會而赦有罪，又賞其賢，諸侯其誰不欣 焉望楚而歸之，視遠如邇？疆埸之邑，一彼一此，何常之 有？王、伯之令也，引其封疆，而樹之官，舉之表旗，而著之制 令，過則有刑，猶不可壹。於是乎虞有三苗，夏有觀、扈，商 有姺、邳，周有徐、奄。 1.2c 自無令王，諸侯逐進，狎主齊盟，其又可壹乎？恤大舍小，足

以為盟主，又焉用之？封疆之削，何國蔑有？主齊盟者，誰 能辯焉？吳、濮有釁，楚之執事豈其顧盟？莒之疆事， 楚勿與知，諸侯無煩，不亦可乎？莒、魯爭鄆，為日久矣。 苟無大害於其社稷，可無亢也。去煩宥善，莫不競勸。子 其圖之。 固請諸楚，楚人許之，乃免叔孫。

40 Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen, 729) reads jing 旌 for jing 靖: “if you do not make prominent your able men.” 41 This formula “What about them is constant?” (he chang zhi you 何常之有) appears elsewhere in passages justifying some deviation from precedent. See Xiang 23.5, 29.5, and Zhao 26.9. 42 At Xiang 25.10, in his justification of Zheng’s invasion of Chen, Zichan observes that large domains have grown through annexation of small domains. 43 According to Shangshu, “Yao dian” 堯典, 3.40, Shun campaigned against the domain or tribe Sanmiao, which is sometimes identified with the Taotie mentioned at Wen 18.7c. Guan 觀 was a small domain near present-day Guancheng County 觀 城縣, Shandong, and Hu 扈 was north of Hu County 戶縣, Shaanxi. Xia’s campaign against them is mentioned in several Warring States and Han texts. Maoshi 263, “Changwu” 常武, 18E.691–94, mentions one of what may have been numerous Western Zhou attacks on Xu. 44 Chu leaders made a similar observation at Xiang 27.4d, speaking only of the alternation of the overlordship between Chu and Jin. Zhao Wu here may also have in mind the period during which Qi, under Lord Huan, presided over the northern alliance. For other overlords, see Cheng 2.3f and note. 45 The Pu, mentioned as the Hundred Pu at Wen 16.4a, were scattered to the west of the Chu capital. Zhao Wu implies that Chu would certainly take advantage of an opportunity to attack its rival Wu or the groups of Pu in its western regions, regardless of any binding covenants. Chu should therefore forgive Lu for seizing on a similar opportunity despite an ongoing covenant ceremony. 46 See note on Annals, Zhao 1.3, above. 47 For alternative versions of this episode, see Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.196–97, and “Jin yu 8,” 14.467–69.

1310

Zuo Tradition

Even though Lu is guilty, their functionary does not shrink from hardship but has shown that he fears your formidable authority and respects your commands. It would be acceptable to release him in order to encourage your attendants. If your many officers do not shy away from toil when at home, nor shun difficulty when abroad, what troubles will you ever encounter? What gives rise to trouble is when there is toil and no one takes it in hand, or when there is difficulty and no one stands fast. That is where it starts. For one who is capable of these two things, what troubles can there be? If you do not make your capable men secure,40 then who will follow you? Shusun Bao of Lu can be considered a capable man. I request that you release him in order to make all capable men feel secure. If during this meeting you, sir, should forgive the guilty and then go on to reward the worthy, who among the princes will not look joyfully to Chu and give you their allegiance, treating you as near at hand even though you are far away? Border settlements belong now to this domain, now to that. What about them is constant?41 By command of kings and covenant elders the borders were drawn out; officers were set up for these borders, and they were marked with signs and flags and noted in statutes and regulations, so that transgressors would be punished. But still the borders could not be maintained.42 Thus, under Shun there were the Sanmiao, under Xia there were Guan and Hu, under Shang there were Shen and Pi, and under Zhou there were Xu and Yan.43 Since there ceased to be kings who commanded, the princes have competed to get ahead, presiding over the sacred covenants by turns.44 Can the order now be kept unchanged? To act as covenant chief, it is enough to concern oneself with major affairs and to let trivial things go. And in any case, what use do you have for the latter? In what domain has there not been some trimming of borders? Of those who have presided over the sacred covenants, who has been able to enforce rulings about this? If there should be an opening against Wu or the Pu, is it conceivable that the functionaries in Chu will keep in mind their covenants?45 Would it not be acceptable if, for this affair on the Ju border, Chu did not take notice and the princes did not inconvenience themselves? For a long time now Ju and Lu have struggled over Yun.46 So long as there is no great threat to the altars of the Ju domain, it need not be protected. Dispense with this inconvenience and forgive a good man, and all will be encouraged in their efforts. Pray consider it, sir.

1.2c

As he was insistent in his plea to Chu, the Chu leaders granted his plea and therefore pardoned Shusun Baod.47

Lord Zhao

1311

1.3 令尹享趙孟，賦〈大明〉之首章。趙孟賦〈小宛〉之二章。



事畢，趙孟謂叔向曰：「 令尹自以為王矣，何如？」 對曰：「 王弱，令尹彊，其可哉！雖可，不終。」 趙孟曰：「 何故？」對曰：

彊以克弱而安之，彊不義也。不義而彊，其斃必速。《詩》曰：

赫赫宗周， 褒姒滅之。 彊不義也。

令尹為王，必求諸侯。晉少懦矣，諸侯將往。若獲諸 侯，其虐滋甚，民弗堪也，將何以終？夫以彊取，不義而克， 必以為道。道以淫虐，弗可久已矣。 1.4 夏四月，趙孟、叔孫豹、曹大夫入于鄭，鄭伯兼享之。子皮戒趙孟，禮

終，趙孟賦〈瓠葉〉。 子皮遂戒穆叔，且告之。穆叔曰：「 趙孟欲一獻，子其從之。」 子皮曰：「 敢乎？」 穆叔曰：「 夫人之所欲也，又何不敢？」

In Du Yu’s (ZZ 41.700) reading, the first stanza of Maoshi 236, “Da ming” 4, 16B.540– 45, speaks of King Wen of Zhou and of the majesty of the king’s position, and Gongzi Wei presumptuously compares himself to a Zhou founder. Since the stanza also refers to the unreliability of Heaven’s command and the fall of the last Shang king, Gongzi Wei may also be hinting at his coming usurpation of the Chu throne (Zhao 1.13a). 49 The second stanza of Maoshi 196, “Xiao yuan” 小宛, 12C.419–20, describes how drunkenness imperils the holders of Heaven’s command. Zhao Wu uses the lines as a means of cautioning Gongzi Wei against excessive confidence. 50 The lines are from Maoshi 192, “Zheng yue” 正月, 12A.397–401. King You (r. 781–771) abused his powers while his queen, Bao Si, urged him on. He was later forced to abdicate. Their extraordinary story is told at Guoyu, “Zheng yu,” 16.519, and Shiji 4.147–49. 51 This is the first of several predictions of Gongzi Wei’s demise, which comes in Zhao 13.2. 52 For the ritual of apprising (jie 戒), see Takezoe, 19.48; Yang, 4:1208. 53 Maoshi 231, “Hu ye” 瓠葉, 15C.522–23, describes a simple feast with a single toast. 54 Yang (4:1208–9) discusses ritual texts’ regulations for the number of toasts appropriate in entertaining guests of different ranks. According to Du Yu (ZZ 41.701), five was the correct number for the minister of a great domain and thus was appropriate for Zhao Wu. A single toast would have been appropriate for an ordinary officer. 48

1312

Zuo Tradition

In a feast with the Prince of Chu, a Jin official sees further signs that he intends to take control of Chu. The chief minister, Gongzi Wei, offered Zhao Wuc ceremonial toasts and recited the first stanza of “Great Bright.”48 Zhao Wuc recited the second stanza of “Diminutive.”49 When the affair was over, Zhao Wuc said to Shuxiang, “The chief minister presents himself as king. What will come of it?” He replied, “The king is weak and the chief minister is strong. He is capable of it. Although he is capable of it, he will not come to a good end.” Zhao Wuc said, “Why?” He replied,

1.3

When a strong man overcomes a weaker man and is serene about it, that is because the strong man is unjust. A man unjust but strong is sure to meet a speedy death. As it says in the Odes,

Blazing was the ancestral Zhou: Bao Si doused it.50

That was a case in which the strong man was unjust. If the chief minister becomes king, then he will certainly seek the allegiance of the princes. Jin is somewhat weak, and the princes will go over to Chu. If the chief minister wins the princes, then his savagery will wax great, and the people will not tolerate it. How can he come to a good end? If one takes something by strength and prevails by unjust behavior, one will inevitably make that one’s habitual way. One who takes the way of excess and savagery cannot last long.51

When Zhao Wu of Jin visits Zheng, Shusun Bao, Han Hu, and a Cao noble feast with him and recite poetry for him reaffirming the smaller domains’ reliance upon Jin’s protection. Zhao Wu’s preference for extreme simplicity in the ritual arrangements and his cryptic final remark may foreshadow his death (see Zhao 1.5, 1.12). In summer, in the fourth month, Zhao Wuc, Shusun Bao, and a Cao high officer entered the Zheng capital, where the Liege of Zheng offered them ceremonial toasts all together. Han Hua apprised Zhao Wuc of the coming toasts.52 That ritual completed, Zhao Wuc recited “Gourd Leaves.”53 Han Hua then went to apprise Shusun Baoa of the feast and told him what had happened. Shusun Baoa said, “Zhao Wuc wants a single toast.54 You should do as he wishes.” Han Hua said, “Do we dare?” Shusun Baoa said, “When that is what such a man wants, why should we not dare?”

1.4

Lord Zhao

1313

及享，具五獻之籩豆於幕下。趙孟辭，私於子產曰：「武請於冢宰 矣。」乃用一獻。趙孟為客。 禮終乃宴。穆叔賦〈鵲巢〉，趙孟曰：「武不堪也。」 又賦〈采蘩〉，曰：「小國為蘩，大國省穡而用之，其何實非命？」 子皮賦〈野有死麇〉之卒章，趙孟賦〈常棣〉，且曰：「吾兄弟比以 安，尨也可使無吠。」 穆叔、子皮及曹大夫興，拜，舉兕爵，曰：「小國賴子，知免於戾 矣。」 飲酒樂，趙孟出曰：「吾不復此矣。」 1.5 天王使劉定公勞趙孟於潁，館於雒汭。劉子曰：「美哉禹功！明德遠矣。

微禹，吾其魚乎！吾與子弁冕、端委，以治民、臨諸侯，禹之力也。子盍 亦遠績禹功而大庇民乎？」對曰：「老夫罪戾是懼，焉能恤遠？吾儕偷 食，朝不謀夕，何其長也？」 劉子歸，以語王曰：「諺所謂老將知而耄及之者，其趙孟之謂乎！ 為晉正卿，以主諸侯，而儕於隸人，朝不謀夕，棄神、人矣。神怒、民叛， 何以能久？趙孟不復年矣。神怒，不歆其祀；民叛，不即其事。祀、事不 從，又何以年？」

55 The “chief steward” is Han Hu. 56 In Maoshi 12, “Que chao” 鵲巢, 1C.45–46, it is observed that the cuckoo depends upon the hospitality of the magpie, whose nest it occupies. Shusun Bao is comparing himself and his domain to the needy cuckoo, and Zhao Wu and Jin to the magpie. 57 In Maoshi 13, “Cai fan” 采蘩, 1C.46–48, a woman gathers humble plants for noble rituals. The same poem is cited in Wen 3.4. 58 In the final stanza of Maoshi 23, “Ye you sijun” 野有死麇, 1E.65–66, a girl urges her lover to move cautiously, so as to keep the watching dog from barking. 59 Maoshi 164, “Tang di” 常棣, 9B.320–23, celebrates brotherhood. 60 Ying, once a Zhou settlement, is the Zheng settlement where the mother of Lord Zhuang of Zheng was sequestered in Yin 1.4. 61 The Luo River flowed eastward through the Zhou capital, and about 40 kilometers to the east of the capital, at the place here mentioned, it turned sharply to the north. 62 Ding is referring here to Great Yu, successor to the sage-king Shun and unwitting founder of the Xia dynasty. Yu’s achievements as a remaker of river courses are described in Shangshu, “Yu gong” 禹貢, 6.77–93, and in “The Basic Annals of Xia” (Shiji 2.49–83). 63 It was suggested in Xiang 31.1 that Zhao Wu showed signs of senility although he was not yet fifty. 64 Zhao Wu’s death is recorded in Zhao 1.15.

1314

Zuo Tradition

At the time of the ceremony, they readied the food stands for the five toasts behind a curtain. Zhao Wuc declined them and privately told Zichan, “I have already made my request to the chief steward.”55 They therefore made only one toast. Zhao Wuc took the part of guest. When the ritual was over, they had the feast. Shusun Baoa recited “Magpie’s Nest.”56 Zhao Wuc said, “I am not worthy.” Shusun Bao then recited “Gathering Artemisia,”57 explaining, “The small domain is the artemisia. The great domain uses it sparingly. What from you could we fail to receive as a command?” Han Hua recited the last stanza of “There Is a Dead Deer in the Wilds,”58 and Zhao Wuc recited “Plum Tree,”59 saying, “If we brothers join together for peace, then we can keep the dog from howling.” Shusun Baoa, Han Hua, and the Cao high officer rose, bowed, raised their buffalo-horn goblets, and said, “The small domains rely upon you and know that they will be delivered from violence.” They drank wine and made merry. When Zhao Wuc exited, he said, “Never again do I expect to know such pleasure.” A conversation with Zhao Wu of Jin convinces a representative of the Zhou court that Zhao Wu is nearing death. The Heaven-appointed king sent the Liu Duke Ding to Ying to honor Zhao Wuc’s exertions.60 The two delegations lodged at the bend in the Luo River.61 The Liu Duke Dinga said, “How beautiful are the deeds of Yu!62 Far-reaching are the effects of his bright virtue. If not for Yu, we would have become fish! That you and I, sir, wear the caps of officials and dress in formal robes as we govern people and oversee the princes is because of Yu’s efforts. Why should you not also extend Yu’s accomplishments further so as to give the people your grand protection?” Zhao Wu replied, “What an old man fears is committing some offense. How can I concern myself with things far off? At my age one lives from meal to meal, and in the morning plans nothing for the evening. How would I look so far ahead?” On his return, the Liu Duke Dinga spoke of this to the king and said, “As the saying has it, ‘The old man was about to become wise when senility found him.’ 63 Could this not be said of Zhao Wuc? Acting as chief minister for Jin, he hosted the princes, yet he classes himself with menials who in the morning can plan nothing for the evening. He has abandoned both the spirits and men. When the spirits grow angry and people turn against him, how will he be able to carry on for long? Zhao Wuc will not live through another year. The spirits, in their anger, will not savor his sacrifices, while the people, turning against him, will not join in his projects. When neither sacrifices nor projects get results, what means will he have of living through the year?”64

1.5

Lord Zhao

1315

1.6 叔孫歸，曾夭御季孫以勞之。旦及日中不出。曾夭謂曾阜，曰：「旦及日

中，吾知罪矣。魯以相忍為國也。忍其外，不忍其內，焉用之？」阜曰： 「數月於外，一旦於是，庸何傷？賈而欲贏，而惡囂乎？」阜謂叔孫曰： 「可以出矣。」叔孫指楹，曰：「雖惡是，其可去乎？」乃出見之。 1.7a 鄭徐吾犯之妹美，公孫楚聘之矣，公孫黑又使強委禽焉。犯懼，告子

產。子產曰：「是國無政，非子之患也。唯所欲與。」 犯請於二子，請使女擇焉。皆許之。子皙盛飾入，布幣而出。子南 戎服入，左右射，超乘而出。 女自房觀之，曰：「子皙信美矣，抑子南，夫也。夫夫婦婦，所謂順 也。」適子南氏。 子皙怒，既而櫜甲以見子南，欲殺之而取其妻。子南知之，執戈逐 之，及衝，擊之以戈。子皙傷而歸，告大夫曰：「我好見之，不知其有異 志也，故傷。」

65

Zeng Yao is a retainer of the Ji lineage. Zeng Fu, a retainer of the Shusun lineage, is the son of the last heir apparent of the domain of Zeng 鄫, which was extinguished by Ju in Xiang 6.4. 66 Cf. Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.198. 67 You Chu and Gongsun Hei are first cousins. Both are grandsons of Lord Mu of Zheng, You Chu being the son of Gongzi Yan and Gongsun Hei being the son of Zisi (Gongzi Fei). Gongsun Hei’s penchant for violence has come to the fore in previous years, especially in his battling on behalf of his own Si lineage against the Liang lineage; see Xiang 29.17, 30.2, and 30.10a.

1316

Zuo Tradition

Returning to Lu, Shusun Bao expresses his displeasure with Ji Wuzi over his attack on Ju, which caused Shusun Bao to be arrested and imprisoned during his diplomatic mission to Jin (see Zhao 1.2). Upon Shusun Bao’sd return to Lu, Zeng Yao drove for Ji Wuzid as he went to honor Shusun’s exertions. Early morning stretched to midday, and still Shusun did not come out. Zeng Yao said to Zeng Fu,65 “Early morning has stretched to midday: we have acknowledged our offense. But Lu functions as a domain because of mutual tolerance. What use is it to be tolerant of outsiders and not of one’s own?” Fu replied, “Several months spent abroad and one morning here: where is the insult? Would one who trades for the sake of profit object to the noise of the marketplace?” Fu then advised Shusun Baod, “It is now acceptable to go out.” Shusun Baod pointed to the main supporting pillar of the chamber and said, “Even if I loathed this, could I do without it?” Then he went out and received Ji Wuzi.66

1.6

In Zheng, contention over a beautiful young bride pits You Chu against the presumptuous and belligerent Gongsun Hei. Zichan forestalls open strife by expelling You Chu, but Gongsun Hei remains a threat to public order. The younger sister of Xuwu Fan of Zheng was beautiful. You Chua had already formalized his engagement with her when Gongsun Hei sent someone who insisted on presenting her with a betrothal fowl.67 Alarmed, Xuwu Fan told Zichan. Zichan said, “This is because the domain lacks correct governing. It is not your worry. Go with whichever one you want.” Fan requested the two men to allow the girl to choose between them. Both consented. Gongsun Heia entered in elegant attire, laid out gifts of cloth, and exited. You Chub entered in military dress, shot arrows to the left and to the right, leaped into his chariot, and exited. Having watched from her chamber, the girl said, “Gongsun Heia is handsome, to be sure, but You Chub is manly. For the man to be manly and the wife wifely: that is what is fitting.” She married into the family of You Chub. Gongsun Heia was enraged. Later he went to have an audience with You Chub, having put on armor under his clothes. He intended to kill You Chu and take his wife. You Chub, who understood this, chased after him with a dagger-axe until they came to a crossroads, where he struck him with the dagger-axe. Gongsun Heia returned wounded and told the high officers, “I went for an audience with him on good terms, not knowing that he had other intentions. That is why I was wounded.”

1.7a

Lord Zhao

1317

1.7b 大夫皆謀之。子產曰：「直鈞，幼賤有罪，罪在楚也。」乃執子南，而數

之，曰：「國之大節有五，女皆奸之。畏君之威，聽其政，尊其貴，事其 長，養其親，五者所以為國也。今君在國，女用兵焉，不畏威也；奸國之 紀，不聽政也；子皙，上大夫；女，嬖大夫，而弗下之，不尊貴也；幼而不 忌，不事長也；兵其從兄，不養親也。君曰：『余不女忍殺，宥女以遠。』 勉，速行乎，無重而罪！」 五月庚辰，鄭放游楚於吳。將行子南，子產咨於大叔。大叔曰：「吉 不能亢身，焉能亢宗？彼，國政也，非私難也。子圖鄭國，利則行之，又 何疑焉？周公殺管叔而蔡蔡叔，夫豈不愛？王室故也。吉若獲戾，子將 行之，何有於諸游？」 1.8a(4) 秦后子有寵於桓，如二君於景。其母曰：「弗去，懼選。」癸卯，鍼適晉，

其車千乘。書曰「秦伯之弟鍼出奔晉」，罪秦伯也。

68

You Ji, though a nephew of You Chu, is nonetheless the head of the lineage to which the latter belongs. There are many passages in which Zichan and You Ji discuss Zheng policies. Here You Ji agrees with Zichan that You Chu has to be sacrificed for the sake of harmony in Zheng. 69 Guan Shu and Cai Shu were brothers of the Zhou Duke. During the latter’s regency for the young King Cheng, they joined with Shang loyalists in a rebellion against the Zhou royal house. See Shiji 4.132. 70 Lord Huan reigned from 604 to 577. Lord Jing (r. 576–537) was now in the thirtysixth year of his reign. 71 We follow Yang (4:1214), who cites Shuowen in glossing xuan 選 as qian 遣, “to remove.”

1318

Zuo Tradition

All the high officers deliberated about the matter. Zichan said, “When both are equally justified, the younger, inferior one bears the blame. The blame lies with You Chuc.” He therefore arrested You Chub and enumerated his crimes: “The great ordering principles of the domain are five, and you have violated all of them. To hold in awe the authority of the ruler, to heed his governance, to revere the nobles, to serve the elders, and to nurture one’s own kin: these five are what one adopts in managing the domain. But on this occasion, while the ruler was in the domain, you used weapons there: you did not hold in awe his authority. You violated the regulations of the domain: you did not heed his governance. Gongsun Heia is a superior officer, while you are an inferior one, yet you did not submit to him: you did not revere the nobles. You are younger, yet you did not act respectfully: you did not serve the elders. You wielded a weapon against an older kinsman: you did not nurture your own kin. The ruler has said, ‘I cannot bear to put you to death. I reduce your sentence to banishment.’ Do your best and set out quickly. Do not aggravate your offense!” On the gengchen day (2) of the fifth month, Zheng expelled You Chu to Wu. As he was about to banish You Chub, Zichan consulted with You Jia.68 You Jia said, “I cannot protect myself. How can I protect my ancestral house? The trouble between Gongsun Hei and You Chu was a matter of the domain’s governance, not mere private wrangling. As you make policy for the domain of Zheng, sir, you implement whatever is advantageous. What further doubts should you have? When the Zhou Duke put Guan Shu to death and expelled Cai Shu, was it that he did not love them? No, it was for the sake of the royal house.69 Even if I myself were to be convicted of an offense, you would carry out the punishment, so why should there be any difficulty with other members of the You lineage?”

1.7b

Qian, a wealthy younger son of Lord Huan of Qin, had visited Jin as an envoy during peace negotiations (see Xiang 25.16, 26.1). In wealth and power he rivals his brother, the ruler of Qin, and he is now forced into temporary exile with no fewer than one thousand chariots. Arriving in Jin, he makes a show of humility. Qiana of Qin had been a favorite son of Lord Huan and was like a second ruler under Lord Jing.70 Their mother said to Qian, “If you do not depart, I fear that you will be sent away.”71 In the fifth month, on the guimao day (25), when Qian went to Jin, his chariots numbered one thousand. That the text says, “Qian, younger brother of the Liege of Qin, departed and fled to Jin,” is to blame the Liege of Qin.

1.8a(4)

Lord Zhao

1319

后子享晉侯，造舟于河，十里舍車，自雍及絳。歸取酬幣，終事八 反。司馬侯問焉，曰：「子之車盡於此而已乎？」對曰：「此之謂多矣。若 能少此，吾何以得見？」女叔齊以告公，且曰：「秦公子必歸。臣聞君子 能知其過，必有令圖。令圖，天所贊也。」 1.8b 后子見趙孟。趙孟曰：「吾子其曷歸？」對曰：「鍼懼選於寡君，是以

在此，將待嗣君。」趙孟曰：「秦君何如？」對曰：「無道。」趙孟曰：「亡 乎？」對曰：「何為？一世無道，國未艾也。國於天地，有與立焉。不數世 淫，弗能斃也。」趙孟曰：「夭乎？」對曰：「有焉。」趙孟曰：「其幾何？」 對曰：「鍼聞之：國無道而年穀和熟，天贊之也。鮮不五稔。」趙孟視蔭， 曰：「朝夕不相及，誰能待五？」后子出，而告人曰：「趙孟將死矣。主 民，翫歲而愒日，其與幾何？」 1.9 鄭為游楚亂故，六月丁巳，鄭伯及其大夫盟于公孫段氏。罕虎、公孫僑、

公孫段、印段、游吉、駟帶私盟于閨門之外，實薰隧。公孫黑強與於 盟，使大史書其名，且曰「七子」。子產弗討。

72

Yong and Jiang were the Qin and Jin capitals, respectively. They were over 400 kilometers apart. 73 According to Yang (4:1214), the most elaborate version of the ceremony involved nine distinct cycles of toasts and responses, with the host (here Qian) presenting a gift to the guest during each cycle. Qian brought the first set of gifts with him in preparation for the first toast, then returned to his chariots eight times during the ceremony to retrieve gifts for successive toasts. 74 That is, if Qian had had fewer chariots, he would not have been seen as a threat to his brother, the Qin ruler, and would not have had to leave Qin for Jin. Qian’s response brings to mind Yan Ying’s observations on the dangers of wealth at Xiang 28.11a. 75 Qian returns to Qin after the death of Lord Jing of Qin (Annals, Zhao 5.7; Zuozhuan, Zhao 5.9). 76 The death of Lord Jing is recorded in Annals, Zhao 5.7. 77 Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.472. The oft-predicted death of Zhao Wu comes in Zhao 1.15. 78 Gongsun Hei, who heads a collateral branch of the Si lineage, in this way puts himself on the same level as Zheng’s six ministers. Citing the episode in which seven gentlemen of Zheng feast with Zhao Wu of Jin (Xiang 27.5), Takezoe (20.25) speculates that “the seven gentlemen” was an established term for the Zheng ruling circle.

1320

Zuo Tradition

Qiana offered the Prince of Jin ceremonial toasts, building a bridge of boats over the Yellow River and stationing carriages every ten li from Yong to Jiang.72 Returning to his carriages to fetch gifts for the wine toasts, he came and went eight times in the course of the ceremony.73 The supervisor of the military Ru Qib asked him, “Are these chariots all you have?” He replied, “Even these are thought to be too many. If I had been capable of keeping the number lower, would I have had occasion to have this audience with you?”74 Ru Qia reported this to the lord, adding, “The Qin noble son is certain to return home. I have heard that when the noble man is able to see his error, he will certainly find a worthy plan, something that Heaven upholds.”75 Qiana had an audience with Zhao Wuc. Zhao Wuc said, “When do you return home, sir?” He replied, “I feared that I would be sent away by my ruler. That is why I am here waiting for his successor.” Zhao Wuc said, “What sort of man is the Qin ruler?” He replied, “He lacks the Way.” Zhao Wuc said, “Will the domain perish?” He replied, “How could that happen? When a domain lacks the Way for one generation, the domain is not yet cut off. When a domain is set up between heaven and earth, there are those who help in its support. Unless there is depravity for several generations, it cannot be toppled.” Zhao Wuc said, “Will he die early?” He replied, “That he will.” Zhao Wuc said, “How long will it be?” He replied, “I have heard that when the harvest ripens well in a domain that lacks the Way, that is because Heaven is helping. In such cases most rulers can last five years.”76 Zhao Wuc looked at the sun’s shadow and said, “When one might not make it to the next morning or the next evening, who can wait five years?” After leaving, Qiana told others, “Zhao Wuc is set to die. When the master of the people finds the years too slow but is alarmed by a single day’s passing, how long can he last?”77

1.8b

In a continuation of the narrative of Zheng strife (see Zhao 1.7), the chief noblemen swear a covenant to reassert unity. Gongsun Hei again behaves with insubordination. Because of the insubordination of You Chu in Zheng, in the sixth month, on the dingsi day (9), the Liege of Zheng and his high officers swore a covenant at the home of Gongsun Duan. Han Hu, Zichana, Gongsun Duan, Yin Duan, You Ji, and Si Dai swore a covenant of their own outside the Gui Gate, that is, at Xun Road. Gongsun Hei insisted on joining in the covenant and had the grand scribe write his name and refer to “seven gentlemen.”78 Zichan did not chastise him.

1.9

Lord Zhao

1321

1.10(6) 晉中行穆子敗無終及群狄于大原，崇卒也。將戰，魏舒曰：「彼徒我車，

所遇又阨，以什共車，必克。困諸阨，又克。請皆卒，自我始。」乃毀車以 為行，五乘為三伍。荀吳之嬖人不肯即卒，斬以徇。為五陳以相離，兩於 前，伍於後，專為右角，參為左角，偏為前拒，以誘之。翟人笑之。未陳 而薄之，大敗之。

1.11(7, 8)

莒展輿立，而奪群公子秩。公子召去疾于齊。秋，齊公子鉏納去疾，展 輿奔吳。叔弓帥師疆鄆田，因莒亂也。於是莒務婁、瞀胡及公子滅明以 大厖與常儀靡奔齊。 君子曰：「莒展之不立，棄人也夫！人可棄乎？《詩》曰：『無競維 人』，善矣。」

79 For Wuzhong, see Xiang 4.7. 80 An alternative translation would be: “If they surround each chariot with ten men, they are sure to overcome us. And if they box our chariots in difficult terrain, they are again sure to win.” However, commentators have understood the passage as we have, citing passages in military texts that recommend smaller numbers of support infantry for each chariot depending on the difficulty of the terrain, ranging from eighty troops per chariot on level ground down to ten troops per chariot in mountainous terrain. See Yang, 4:1215–16; and Takezoe, 20.27. 81 Wei Shu volunteers to go first because the chariot riders, normally of higher status than the infantrymen, would in some cases have regarded this measure as a disgrace. The execution of Zhonghang Wu’s favorite helps enforce the order. 82 These were perhaps five-man squads, as the term wu 伍 suggests. But the five men in each squad would presumably have acted as leaders of the support infantrymen originally assigned to each chariot and now distributed among the three squads. 83 The terms for these formations are obscure. According to Fu Qian (ZZ-Kong 41.705), the “double” comprised fifty chariots; the “quintuple,” 120; the “single,” 81; the “triple,” 29; and the “platoon,” 25. 84 Quji, Zhanyu’s elder brother, fled to Qi when Zhanyu assassinated their father, Lord Libi, and seized the succession for himself. See Xiang 31.8.

1322

Zuo Tradition

By reducing chariot forces to infantry, Jin defeats a Di force. The episode recalls and at points closely parallels another encounter with seminomadic forces in Yin 9.6. That Zhonghang Wua of Jin defeated Wuzhong and multiple Di groups at Taiyuan was because he had built up his foot soldiers.79 Just before they were to fight, Wei Shu said, “They are on foot, while we are in chariots, and the place where we are to meet is difficult terrain. If we support each chariot with ten men, we are sure to overcome them. And if we box them in in difficult terrain, we are again sure to win.80 I request that all our men be made foot soldiers, starting with mine.”81 He therefore split up his chariot teams and formed them into lines of foot soldiers, five chariots supplying three squads.82 A favorite of Zhonghang Wub’s, who was unwilling to join the foot soldiers, was put to death, and his corpse was shown around to the troops as an example. Five formations were arrayed together: a double at the fore, a quintuple at the rear, a single as the right point, a triple as the left point, and a platoon as the van.83 This was to lure the Di out. The Di men laughed at them. Before the Di troops had formed up, the Jin troops fell on them and roundly defeated them.

1.10(6)

Both Qi and Lu benefit as political strife brings a change of rulers in the small neighboring domain of Ju. Ju is often the buffer zone where Qi and Lu noblemen flee during political troubles. There have also been skirmishes between Ju and both Qi and Lu. When Zhanyua was established as ruler in Ju, he took away the emoluments of the various lords’ sons. The lords’ sons summoned Quji from Qi.84 In autumn, Gongzi Chu of Qi installed Quji in power, and Zhanyu fled to Wu. That Shu Gong led out troops and marked off the lands of Yun was in order to take advantage of the turmoil in Ju.85 At this time Gongzi Wulou, Maohu, and Gongzi Mieming of Ju fled to Qi, taking the settlements of Dapang and Changyimi with them.86 The noble man said, “That Zhanyub did not succeed in being established as ruler in Ju was because he cast other people aside! Is it permissible to cast people aside? Where the Odes says, ‘There is no strength but in other people,’ it is quite right.”87

1.11(7, 8)

85

The territory of Yun had changed hands a number of times (Annals, Wen 12.8, Cheng 9.11). Lu took Yun in the spring of this year (Annals, Zhao 1.3) and now moves to consolidate possession. 86 These are Ju settlements, presumably to the northwest of the Ju capital, along Ju’s frontier with Qi. Dapang 大厖 and Changyimi 常儀靡 were both located northwest of present-day Ju County 莒縣, Shandong. 87 Maoshi 269, “Liewen” 烈文, 19A.710–12.

Lord Zhao

1323

1.12a 晉侯有疾，鄭伯使公孫僑如晉聘，且問疾。叔向問焉，曰：「寡君之疾

病，卜人曰『實沈、臺駘為祟』，史莫之知。敢問此何神也？」子產曰： 昔高辛氏有二子，伯曰閼伯，季曰實沈，居于曠林，不相能

也，日尋干戈，以相征討。后帝不臧，遷閼伯于商丘，主辰。 商人是因，故辰為商星。 遷實沈于大夏，主參，唐人是因，以服事夏、商。其季世 曰唐叔虞。當武王邑姜方震大叔，夢帝謂己：『余命而子曰 虞，將與之唐，屬諸參，而蕃育其子孫。』及生，有文在其手 曰虞，遂以命之。及成王滅唐，而封大叔焉，故參為晉星。由 是觀之，則實沈，參神也。 1.12b

昔金天氏有裔子曰昧，為玄冥師，生允格、臺駘。臺駘能業 其官，宣汾、洮，障大澤，以處大原。帝用嘉之，封諸汾川， 沈、姒、蓐、黃實守其祀。今晉主汾而滅之矣。由是觀之，則 臺駘，汾神也。

88 For translation and detailed discussion of the following passage, see Pankenier, “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology,” 266–67. Gaoxin, or Emperor Ku (di ku 帝嚳), was one of several legendary rulers thought by the early Chinese to have ruled before the rise of the first dynasties. See Shiji 1.13–14. Zichan’s explanation, virtuosic as it is, is likely based in astrological lore rather than firm historical traditions. 89 Shangqiu was located far to the east of Jin, at the Song capital, near present-day Shangqiu City, Henan. Chen corresponded to three stars in Scorpio. According to Yang (4:1218), to “rule according to” (zhu 主) an asterism was to assign it a key role in determining the calendar. Cf. Xiang 9.1b, where Ebo becomes the manager of fire for the Taotang lineage and resides at the Shang Mound. For this story of the bickering of east and west, of Scorpio and Orion (which cannot be seen at the same time), see Pankenier “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology,” 267. 90 Shen corresponded to seven stars in Orion. According to Du Yu (ZZ 41.705), Daxia 大夏 was the site of the later Taiyuan. According to Fu Qian (ZZ-Kong 41.705), it was located further to the south, near the site of the Spring and Autumn period Jin capitals. 91 Tang 唐, like Daxia, was supposed to have been located near present-day Taiyuan, Shanxi. 92 This Tang Shuyu, ruler of the domain of Tang during the Shang, must be distinguished from the Jin founder Yu (sometimes called Tang Shu or Tang Shuyu) mentioned below (cf. Xi 15.8, 23.6e). 93 For other examples of graphs appearing in the lines of the hand, see the passage preceding Yin 1.1 and Min 2.4. 94 Jintian was Shaohao or his line of descendants. 95 The Fen (see Xi 16.3) and Tao 洮, both tributaries of the Yellow River, flow through present-day Shanxi, in ancient times the territory of Jin. The swamp was south of Taiyuan, Shanxi, but is now dry. “Great plain” (taiyuan 大原) refers to what is now northern Shanxi, including Taiyuan City.

1324

Zuo Tradition

Zichan of Zheng diagnoses the illness of the Jin prince, showing a magisterial knowledge of the legendary history of third millennium Bce rulers but ultimately asserting that the ruler’s health problems stem from ritual violation and excessive indulgence in sensual pleasures. He will diagnose another illness of the same ruler in six years (Zhao 7.7). The Prince of Jin was ill. The Liege of Zheng sent Zichana to make an official visit to Jin and also to inquire about the ruler’s illness. Shuxiang inquired with him about it: “Regarding our unworthy ruler’s illness, a diviner said, ‘Shishen and Taitai are haunting him.’ None of the scribes know them. May I ask what spirits these are?” Zichan said,

1.12a

Long ago, Gaoxin had two sons.88 The elder was named Ebo, the younger Shishen, and they dwelt in the Great Forest. Since they did not get along, every day they resorted to shields and daggeraxes, attacking and chastising each other. Emperor Yao did not approve and moved Ebo to Shangqiu, where he ruled according to the Chen asterism.89 The Shang people followed him in this, and Chen therefore became the Shang Stars. The Emperor moved Shishen to Daxia, where he ruled according to the Shen asterism.90 The Tang people followed him in this, as they served the Xia and the Shang.91 A later scion of theirs was called Tang Shuyu.92 Just after Yi Jiang, wife of King Wu, had conceived the child who would become Taishu, she dreamed that the god on high said to her, “I name your son Yu. I will give him Tang, placing him under Shen and multiplying his descendants.” When he was born, he had the graph yu on his hand, so they named him Yu.93 When King Cheng extinguished Tang, he put Taishu in power there, and Shen therefore became the Jin Stars. From this perspective, Shishen is the spirit of the Shen asterism. Long ago, there was a descendant of the Jintian lineage named Mei.94 He was Preceptor of the Dark and Murky and sired Yunge and Taitai. Taitai succeeded in passing his office to his descendants, who opened the river courses of Fen and Tao and built dikes around the great swamp when they dwelt on the great plain.95 For this reason the god on high was pleased with them and put them in power along the Fen River, where the domains of Shěn, Si, Ru, and Huang maintained sacrifices to their ancestor Taitai. Now Jin rules over the Fen Valley but has destroyed these domains. From this perspective, Taitai is the spirit of the Fen.

Lord Zhao

1.12b

1325

抑此二者，不及君身。山川之神，則水旱癘疫之災於是 乎禜之；日月星辰之神，則雪霜風雨之不時，於是乎禜之。 1.12c

若君身，則亦出入、飲食、哀樂之事也，山川、星辰之神又何為 焉？僑聞之，君子有四時：朝以聽政，晝以訪問，夕以修 令，夜以安身。於是乎節宣其氣，勿使有所壅閉湫底以露 其體，茲心不爽，而昏亂百度。今無乃壹之，則生疾矣。 僑又聞之：內官不及同姓，其生不殖。美先盡矣，則相 生疾，君子是以惡之。故志曰：「買妾不知其姓，則卜之。」 違此二者，古之所慎也。男女辨姓，禮之大司也。今君 內實有四姬焉，其無乃是也乎？若由是二者，弗可為也已。 四姬有省猶可，無則必生疾矣。

叔向曰：「善哉！肸未之聞也，此皆然矣。」

1326

Zuo Tradition

Yet these two would not affect the body of the ruler. For the spirits of mountains and rivers, expiatory sacrifices should be ­performed in cases of drought and plague. For the spirits of the sun, the moon, the stars, and the constellations, expiatory sacrifices should be performed in cases of untimely snow, frost, wind, and rain. As for the body of the ruler, that is a matter of his behavior while abroad and while at home, his drinking and eating, and his sorrows and delights. What do the spirits of the mountains and rivers or stars and constellations have to do with it? I have heard that for the noble man there are four periods to the day: in the early morning he hears administrative business, during the daylight hours he consults, in the evening he crafts his commands, and at night he rests his body. In this way he releases his life force in regulated fashion, not allowing any blockage or stagnation to weaken his constitution, lest his heart be muddied and all the standards of order be thrown into confusion. But now he has collapsed all four periods into one, has he not? And he has in consequence fallen ill. I have also heard that in choosing candidates for the inner chambers one does not include women who share one’s clan name, as their offspring do not flourish.96 When an infatuation reaches an extreme, it makes a person ill. It is for this reason that noble men detest such matches. That is why the Records say, “If in buying a concubine you do not know her clan name, then divine about her.” Men in times past were cautious about violations of these two sorts of rules. For man and wife to have different clan names is a mainstay of ritual propriety. Now in your ruler’s inner chambers there are in fact four women of the Ji clan.97 Is this not the cause of the illness? If the illness results from these two violations, then nothing can be done about it. It might have been all right if the four Ji women had been removed, but otherwise he was bound to fall ill.

1.12c

Shuxiang said, “Excellent! I had not heard of this, but everything you have said is true.”

96 Cf. Xi 23.6d. 97 Ji 姬 is the clan name that the Jin ruling line shares with the Zhou royal house and several other domains’ rulers. Among them is the lady from Wei mentioned in Xiang 26.12.

Lord Zhao

1327

1.12d 叔向出，行人揮送之。叔向問鄭故焉，且問子皙。對曰：「其與幾何！無

禮而好陵人，怙富而卑其上，弗能久矣。」 晉侯聞子產之言，曰：「博物君子也。」重賄之。 1.12e 晉侯求醫於秦，秦伯使醫和視之，曰：「疾不可為也。

是謂近女， 室疾如蠱。 非鬼非食， 惑以喪志。 良臣將死， 天命不佑。」

公曰：「女不可近乎？」對曰：

節之。先王之樂，所以節百事也，故有五節；遲速本末以相

及，中聲以降。五降之後，不容彈矣。於是有煩手淫聲，慆堙 心耳，乃忘平和，君子弗聽也。

98 99

1328

This section of the diagnosis is rhymed. “The good subject” refers to Zhao Wu; see below. This use of music as a figure for sexual and social harmony anticipates the speech of Yan Ying at Zhao 20.8. The translators thank Lothar von Falkenhausen for his advice on the meaning of technical terms in this passage.

Zuo Tradition

During the visit of Zichan and the Zheng delegation to Jin, Shuxiang of Jin asks Gongsun Hui of Zheng about the latter’s compatriot, Gongsun Hei (see Zhao 1.1c, 1.7, 1.9), whose predicted demise will come in the following year (Zhao 2.4). As Shuxiang left the meeting, the envoy Gongsun Huib escorted him out. Shuxiang asked him about Zheng affairs and also inquired about Gongsun Heia. He replied, “How long can he last? He lacks ritual propriety and has a habit of bullying others. He trusts in his wealth and demeans his superiors. He cannot continue in this way for very long.” When the Prince of Jin heard of Zichan’s remarks, he said, “He is a noble man and widely versed in the things of the world.” He rewarded him lavishly.

1.12d

The Jin ruler gets another diagnosis of his illness, this time from a Qin doctor. Like Zichan, the Qin doctor attributes the illness to improper sexual activity, but he adds a prediction of Zhao Wu’s own failure and death. For another episode in which a Jin ruler seeks treatment from a Qin doctor, see Cheng 10.4. The Prince of Jin sought a physician from Qin, and the Liege of Qin had the physician He go to diagnose him. He said, “The illness cannot be cured.

1.12e

This is what is known as proximity to the female, A sexual exhaustion that is like a spell. It is not from ghosts, not from diet, But is a bewilderment that destroys the will. A good subject will die, And Heaven’s command does not protect him.”98

The lord said, “Is contact with women not permissible?” He replied, It is to be regulated. The musical entertainments of the former kings were what they used to regulate all the hundred affairs, and there were therefore five notes, which were juxtaposed, slow and fast, basic and supplementary. Concord was achieved by hitting them correctly. Aside from these five notes being in concord, no further playing could be accommodated, for beyond that are excessive sounds that are too intricate for the fingers and that overwhelm and block up the mind and the ears, so that balance and harmony are forgotten. A noble man does not listen to these.99

Lord Zhao

1329

物亦如之。至于煩，乃舍也已，無以生疾。君子之近琴 瑟，以儀節也，非以慆心也。天有六氣，降生五味，發為五 色，徵為五聲。淫生六疾。六氣曰陰、陽、風、雨、晦、明也， 分為四時，序為五節，過則為菑：陰淫寒疾，陽淫熱疾，風 淫末疾，雨淫腹疾，晦淫惑疾，明淫心疾。女，陽物而晦時， 淫則生內熱惑蠱之疾。今君不節、不時，能無及此乎？ 1.12f 出，告趙孟。趙孟曰：「誰當良臣？」對曰：「主是謂矣。主相晉國，於今

八年，晉國無亂，諸侯無闕，可謂良矣。和聞之：國之大臣，榮其寵祿、 任其大節。有菑禍興，而無改焉，必受其咎。今君至於淫以生疾，將不 能圖恤社稷，禍孰大焉？主不能禦，吾是以云也。」 趙孟曰：「何謂蠱？」對曰：「淫溺惑亂之所生也。於文，皿蟲為 蠱。穀之飛亦為蠱。在《周易》：女惑男、風落山謂之蠱䷑。皆同物也。」趙 孟曰：「良醫也。」厚其禮而歸之。

100 Zither and harp are the instruments with which a nobleman woos his beloved in Maoshi 1, “Guanju” 關雎, 1A.11–23; see also Maoshi 164, “Chang di” 常棣, 9B.320–23, where the sound of the same instruments serves as a metaphor for harmony within the family. Zichan’s reference to them here appears to be a euphemism for sexual intercourse. 101 The “four periods” may be the four seasons or the four periods of the day. The “five regularities” may be the “five notes” referred to above. 102 Du Yu (ZZ 41.709) understood the passage differently, explaining that the female’s pairing with the male in sexual intercourse makes her a “thing of the yang” (yang wu 陽物). It is also conceivable that in the early development of correlative thinking the female would be classed as yang, although it was later always classed as yin. 103 The graph gu 蠱 has “vermin” (chong 蟲) upon a “dish” (min 皿). For another example of reasoning through analysis of a written graph, see Xuan 12.2i.

1330

Zuo Tradition

With other things it is the same. When something becomes too intricate, one gives it up, lest one fall ill because of it. When he draws near to “the zither and the harp,”100 the noble man uses them according to the regulations of decency, not for the sake of overwhelming his mind. Heaven has its six vapors, which descend to form the five flavors, are expressed in the five colors, and are revealed in the five sounds. Excess produces the six maladies. The six vapors—yin, yang, wind, rain, darkness, and light— separate to form the four periods and are put in order to form the five regularities.101 Superabundance brings calamities: an excess of yin brings illnesses of cold; an excess of yang brings illnesses of fever; an excess of wind brings illnesses of the limbs; an excess of rain brings illnesses of the abdomen; an excess of darkness brings illnesses of bewilderment; and an excess of light brings illnesses of the heart. As the female draws out the yang in things and belongs to the dark time, too extended a contact with females brings illnesses of internal fever, bewilderment, and spells.102 Now you, lord, have failed both to regulate yourself and to act in timely fashion. Could you have failed to come to this?

The physician exited and reported to Zhao Wuc. Zhao Wuc asked, “Who is the ‘good subject’ you mentioned?” He replied, “You are the one meant, sir. You have guided Jin for eight years now. There is no turmoil in Jin, and the princes lack nothing. That is what makes you ‘good.’ I have heard that the great subjects of a domain glory in favor and emoluments and take responsibility for its great regulations. When some calamity arises but they do not change their ways, then they must suffer the consequences. Now the ruler has become ill by falling into excess and will not be able to deliberate for the sake of the altars of the domain. What calamity could be greater? You, sir, have been unable to prevent it. That is why I say what I do.” Zhao Wuc said, “What is meant by ‘spell’?” He replied, “It is what arises from excess, indulgence, bewilderment, and disorderly living. In writing, a dish with vermin is ‘infestation’ or ‘spell.’103 The flying insects in grain are also an ‘infestation’ or ‘spell.’ In the Zhou Changes, when the female bewitches the male, and when the wind falls upon the mountain, that is called a ‘spell’ ䷑.104 All are things of the same sort.” Zhao Wuc said, “He is a good physician.” He gave him generous gifts before sending him home.105

1.12f

104 The physician here refers to hexagram 18 of the Zhou Changes, “Spell” or “Ills to Be Cured” ䷑ (Gu 蠱) (Zhouyi 3.57–58), consisting of the Sun 巽 ☴ trigram below and the Gen 艮 ☶ trigram above. The Sun trigram is linked with images of a grown woman and of the wind, while the Gen trigram is linked with images of a young man and of mountains. 105 Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.473–74, includes a shorter account of the Qin physician’s diagnosis of the lord and conversation with Zhao Wu. Note that the diagnosis episode in Cheng 10.4 ends as Zhao 1.12 does: the physician is declared good and sent on his way.

Lord Zhao

1331



1.13a (10,11)

楚公子圍使公子黑肱、伯州犁城犨、櫟、郟。鄭人懼。子產曰：「不害。 令尹將行大事，而先除二子也。禍不及鄭，何患焉？」冬，楚公子圍將聘 于鄭，伍舉為介。未出竟，聞王有疾而還。伍舉遂聘。十一月己酉，公子 圍至，入問王疾，縊而弒之，遂殺其二子幕及平夏。右尹子干出奔晉，宮 廄尹子皙出奔鄭。殺大宰伯州犁于郟。葬王於郟，謂之「郟敖」。使赴 于鄭，伍舉問應為後之辭焉，對曰：「寡大夫圍。」伍舉更之曰：「共王之 子圍為長。」

1.13b 子干奔晉，從車五乘，叔向使與秦公子同食，皆百人之餼。趙文子曰：

「秦公子富。」叔向曰：「厎祿以德，德鈞以年，年同以尊。公子以國，不 聞以富。且夫以千乘去其國，彊禦已甚。《詩》曰： 不侮鰥寡， 不畏彊禦。 秦、楚，匹也。」

106 Chou 犫 and Jia 郟, located southeast of present-day Lushan County 魯山縣, Henan, and northwest of present-day Sanmenxia 三門峽, respectively, had been Zheng settlements before falling under Chu control (Du Yu, ZZ 41.710). Li 櫟 was north of present-day Xincai County 新蔡縣, Henan. The three settlements were all within a hundred kilometers southwest of the Zheng capital; Li was nearest, then Jia, then Chou furthest away. 107 Assassination of a ruler is likewise referred to as “a great undertaking” at Wen 1.7. 108 “Eleventh” (shiyi 十一) is perhaps a scribal error for “twelfth” (shi’er 十二). According to Du Yu’s (ZZ 41.710) calculations, no jiyou day fell in the eleventh month, but the sixth day of the twelfth month was a jiyou day. 109 As Yang (4:1223–24) explains, Chu kings who were not given posthumous honorifics were referred to as the ao 敖, perhaps “chief” or “mound,” of a particular place. 110 “Unworthy” (gua 寡) is standard ceremonial language and in this context would not necessarily imply a condemnation of Gongzi Wei, despite his actions. Wu Ju’s alternative suggests a justification for Gongzi Wei’s succession. 111 Gongzi Wei has been the oldest among King Gong’s surviving sons since the death of King Kang ( Jia’ao’s father). 112 For the arrival in Jin of the Qin noble son Qian with his numerous chariots, see 1.8 above. 113 Maoshi 260, “Zhengmin” 烝民, 18C.674–77.

1332

Zuo Tradition

Prince Wei of Chu kills his king and nephew and takes power. After this episode, Zuozhuan normally refers to him by his posthumous honorific, King Ling. Gongzi Wei of Chu had Gongzi Heigong and Bo Zhouli fortify Chou, Li, and Jia.106 The Zheng leaders were alarmed. Zichan said, “It does no harm. The chief minister, preparing to embark on a great undertaking, is simply getting these two men out of the way.107 The trouble will not reach as far as Zheng. Why worry about it?” In winter, Gongzi Wei of Chu was preparing to make an official visit to Zheng, with Wu Ju as his aide. Before they had crossed the border, Gongzi Wei heard that the king had fallen ill and went back home. As a result, Wu Ju made the official visit. In the eleventh month, on the jiyou day,108 Gongzi Wei arrived in Chu, went into the palace to inquire about the king’s illness, and assassinated him by strangling him. He then killed the king’s two sons, Mu and Pingxia. Gongzi Bia, deputy of the right, fled to Jin, while Gongzi Heigonga, deputy of the palace stables, fled to Zheng. The grand steward Bo Zhouli was put to death at Jia. The king was buried at Jia and was called “Jia’ao.”109 Notice of the death was sent to Zheng, where Wu Ju asked the messenger what response should be given to inquiries about the successor. “‘Our unworthy high officer Wei,’” he said.110 Wu Ju changed it to “The son of King Gong, Wei, who is the eldest.”111

1.13a(10,11)

Qian, the Qin noble son in exile in Jin, again shows his worthiness by declining honors equivalent to those of the Chu exile Gongzi Bi. Such humility presages Qian’s restoration to Qin in Zhao 5.9. When Gongzi Bia fled to Jin, he had five carriages in his retinue. Shuxiang had him given the same stipend as the Qin noble son:112 both had provisions for one hundred men. Zhao Wua said, “But the Qin noble son is wealthier.” Shuxiang said, “Emoluments are apportioned on the basis of virtue. For men of equal virtue they are apportioned according to age, and for men of the same age they are apportioned according to status. For the lords’ sons, one goes by the size of their domains; I have not heard of ever going by their wealth. What is more, a man who quits his domain with one thousand carriages is too powerful already. As the Odes says,

1.13b

Do not humiliate the widowed and the orphaned; Do not fear the powerful.113

Qin and Chu are peers.”

Lord Zhao

1333

使后子與子干齒，辭曰：「鍼懼選，楚公子不獲，是以皆來，亦唯 命。且臣與羈齒，無乃不可乎？史佚有言曰：『非羈，何忌？』」 1.14 楚靈王即位，薳罷為令尹，薳啟彊為大宰。鄭游吉如楚葬郟敖，且聘立

君。歸，謂子產曰：「具行器矣。楚王汏侈，而自說其事，必合諸侯，吾往 無日矣。」子產曰：「不數年未能也。」 1.15 十二月，晉既烝，趙孟適南陽，將會孟子餘。甲辰朔，烝于溫，庚戌，卒。

鄭伯如晉弔，及雍乃復。

春秋 2.1(1) 二年春，晉侯使韓起來聘。 2.2(3) 夏，叔弓如晉。 2.3(4) 秋，鄭殺其大夫公孫黑。

114 The shorter Guoyu version of this episode (“Jin yu 8,” 14.476) does not say that Qian declined the honor. 115 Nanyang was the location of the Zhao line’s Ancestral Temple. For hui 會, Yang (4:1225) follows Yang Shuda in reading hui 襘, “to supplicate, pray for blessings.” Zhao Cui is Zhao Wu’s ancestor and an influential follower of Chong’er, later Lord Wen of Jin.

1334

Zuo Tradition

He had Qiana and Gongzi Bia put on a par, but Qian declined, saying, “I feared expulsion, and the Chu noble son did not win approval: that is why the two of us are here, and we cannot but follow the commands that were given us. What is more, is it not unacceptable that I, as your subject, should be put on a par with a visitor? As the saying of the scribe Yi puts it, ‘For whom should one show respect if not for a visitor?’”114 You Ji of Zheng, visiting Chu, foresees the new king’s moves to become overlord. On the accession of King Ling of Chu, Wei Pi became chief minister and Wei Qiqiang became grand steward. You Ji of Zheng went to Chu for the burial of Jia’ao and to make an official visit to the newly established ruler. On his return, he said to Zichan, “Prepare the traveling equipment. The Chu king is extravagant and pleased with his own enterprises. He is bound to gather the princes. We could go any day now.” Zichan said, “It will be several years before he is capable of it.”

1.14

The death of Zhao Wu of Jin has long been anticipated in predictions (see Xiang 31.1, Zhao 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.12f). In the twelfth month, after Jin had conducted its winter sacrifice, Zhao Wuc went to Nanyang, where he was going to pray for blessings from Zhao Cuid.115 On the jiachen day, the first day of the month,116 he performed the winter sacrifice at Wen. On the gengxu day (7), he died. The Liege of Zheng set out for Jin on a visit of condolence but turned back after reaching Yong.117

1.15

LORD ZHAO 2 (540 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Han Qi to us on an official visit.

2.1(1)

In summer, Shu Gong went to Jin.

2.2(3)

In autumn, Zheng put to death its high officer Gongsun Hei.

2.3(4)

116 This was perhaps the first day of the first month of the new year. Note, however, that in Zhao 1.6 it was predicted that Zhao Wu would not live into the new year. The discrepancy may result from the differences between Jin’s Xia calendar, which began the year with the second new moon after the winter solstice, two months later than Lu’s Zhou calendar. 117 It would have been highly unusual for the ruler of one domain to pay a condolence visit on the death of the minister of another domain. That the ruler of Zheng even set out on this occasion is indicative of Jin’s power and of the demands it was imposing on its subordinate allies.

Lord Zhao

1335

2.4(5) 冬，公如晉，至河乃復。 2.5(5) 季孫宿如晉。

左傳 2.1a(1) 二年春，晉侯使韓宣子來聘，且告為政，而來見，禮也。觀書於大史氏，

見《易》《象》與魯《春秋》，曰：「周禮盡在魯矣，吾乃今知周公之德與 周之所以王也。」 公享之，季武子賦〈緜〉之卒章。韓子賦〈角弓〉。季武子拜，曰： 「敢拜子之彌縫敝邑，寡君有望矣。」武子賦〈節〉之卒章。 既享，宴于季氏。有嘉樹焉，宣子譽之。武子曰：「宿敢不封殖此 樹，以無忘〈角弓〉。」遂賦〈甘棠〉。宣子曰：「起不堪也，無以及召公。 」 2.1b 宣子遂如齊納幣。見子雅。子雅召子旗，使見宣子。宣子曰：「非保家之

主也，不臣。」見子尾。子尾見彊，宣子謂之如子旗。大夫多笑之，唯晏 子信之，曰：「夫子，君子也。君子有信，其有以知之矣。」 自齊聘於衛，衛侯享之。北宮文子賦〈淇澳〉，宣子賦〈木瓜〉。

118 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.718), Han Qi was shown the Images (xiang 象) commentary on the Zhou Changes. Yang (4:1227), following Wang Yinglin (1223–96 CE), argues that Xiang 象 is an abbreviation for Xiangwei 象魏, a work or collection named after a tower where public proclamations were posted (see Ai 3.2). The “Lu Annals” may simply be an early version of our Annals; but on the basis of Han Qi’s response, Yang speculates that the Lu Annals that Han saw may have been a version that, unlike the received text, covered the whole period of Lu’s history from its founding in the early Western Zhou. 119 The final stanza of Maoshi 237, “Mian” 緜, 16B.545–52, recalls the virtuous leadership of King Wen of Zhou. Ji Wuzi implicitly compares the Jin ruler to King Wen and Han Qi to the Zhou officials who helped the king spread his virtuous teachings and stable governance. 120 Maoshi 223, “Jiao gong” 角弓, 15A.503–5, emphasizes brotherly devotion. 121 “Jie” (“Cresting”) is Maoshi 191, “Jie nanshan” 節南山, 12A.393–97. The last stanza speaks of nurturing the myriad domains. 122 Maoshi 16, “Gan tang” 甘棠, 1D.54–55, describes the revered tree under which the Shao Duke once rested. 123 He did this to secure the engagement of Shao Jiang to Lord Ping of Jin. 124 Maoshi 55, “Qi yu” 淇澳, 3B.126–28, from the “Wei” section of the “Airs,” praises a nobleman. It is famously cited by Confucius’ disciple Zigong at Analects 1.15. 125 Maoshi 64, “Mugua” 木瓜, 3C.141–42, also from the “Wei” section of the “Airs,” describes an exchange of gifts and the initiation of a lasting friendship.

1336

Zuo Tradition

In winter, our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back.

2.4(5)

Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Jin.

2.5(5)

ZUO

Han Qi, new chief administrator of Jin, pays ceremonial visits to Lu and Qi, viewing traditional texts in Lu and escorting home from Qi a bride for the Jin ruler. In the second year, in spring, the Prince of Jin sent Han Qia to us on an official visit and also to report that he was now in charge of the government. That he came to have an audience for this purpose was in accordance with ritual propriety. He viewed documents at the offices of the grand scribe and saw Changes, Images, and the Lu Annals.118 He said, “The rituals of Zhou are all here in Lu. Only now do I comprehend the virtue of the Zhou Duke and the reasons for the rise of the Zhou.” When our lord offered Han Qi ceremonial toasts, Ji Wuzi recited the final stanza of “Spreading.”119 Han Qic recited “Horn Bow.”120 Ji Wuzi bowed and said, “I presume to bow in response to your mending of our humble settlement. Our unworthy ruler has cause for hope.” Wuzi recited the final stanza of “Cresting.”121 When the ceremony was over, there was a feast at the Ji residence. There was a fine tree there, which Han Qib praised. Ji Wuzi said, “Should I dare not cultivate this tree? By this I will never forget ‘Horn Bow.’” Then he recited “Sweet Pear Tree.”122 Han Qib said, “I am not worthy. In no respect do I equal the Shao Duke.”

2.1a(1)

In Qi, Han Qi predicts that two young noblemen, scions of the Luan and Gao lineages, respectively, will cause trouble in the future. His forebodings will be borne out in Zhao 8.5 and 10.2, when the two young men lead their lineages in civil strife and are forced out of Qi. Han Qib then went to Qi to present betrothal gifts.123 When he had an audience with Ziya, Ziya summoned his son Luan Shia and had him presented to Han Qib. Han Qib said, “He will not be a family head who can preserve his patrimony: he does not act like a subject.” When Han Qib had an audience with Ziwei, Ziwei had his son Gao Qiangb presented, and Han Qib spoke of him as he had of Luan Shia. Many of the high officers laughed at him. Only Yan Yingb believed him, saying, “This man is a noble man. A noble man exemplifies good faith. He must have some grounds for knowing what he does.” From Qi, Han Qi made a formal visit to Wei, where the Prince of Wei offered him ceremonial toasts. Beigong Tuoa recited “Bend of the Qi.”124 Han Qib recited “Quince.”125

2.1b

Lord Zhao

1337

2.2 夏四月，韓須如齊逆女。齊陳無宇送女，致少姜。少姜有寵於晉侯，晉

侯謂之少齊。謂陳無宇非卿，執諸中都。少姜為之請，曰：「送從逆班。 畏大國也，猶有所易，是以亂作。」 2.3(2) 叔弓聘于晉，報宣子也。晉侯使郊勞，辭曰：「寡君使弓來繼舊好，固曰

『女無敢為賓』，徹命於執事，敝邑弘矣，敢辱郊使？請辭。」致館，辭 曰：「寡君命下臣來繼舊好，好合使成，臣之祿也。敢辱大館！」 叔向曰：「子叔子知禮哉！吾聞之曰：『忠信，禮之器也；卑讓，禮 之宗也。』辭不忘國，忠信也；先國後己，卑讓也。《詩》曰： 敬慎威儀， 以近有德。 夫子近德矣。」

126 The prince showed his favor by referring to her by the name of her domain of origin (Qi) rather than by her maiden name (the name of her natal clan, Jiang). 127 According to Jiang Yong (cited in Yang, 4:1229), Zhongdu 中都 was in one of two locations in the vicinity of present-day Taiyuan, approximately 200 kilometers northeast of the Jin capital. 128 In standard practice, the escorts from the two domains were of the same rank. Han Xu was a high officer of the ruling lineage; Chen Wuyu, a senior high officer. By sending Chen Wuyu, whose rank was higher than that of Han Xu, Qi sought to show deference. Jin appears to have expected an escort of an even higher rank, even though Shao Jiang was not to be the Jin prince’s main wife. Further observations on the rules for escorting a bride are given in Huan 3.6. 129 The lines are from Maoshi 253, “Min lao” 民勞, 17D.630–32.

1338

Zuo Tradition

A Jin bride from Qi explains the etiquette of interstate marriages in an effort to save a compatriot (see Zhao 2.5). Her clever rejoinder demonstrates a firm grasp of the ritual expectations governing relations among the powerful domains of the era. In summer, in the fourth month, Han Xu went to Qi to meet and escort home the bride. Chen Wuyu of Qi escorted the bride to Jin and thus brought to Jin the woman who became Shao Jiang. Shao Jiang became a favorite of the Prince of Jin, who called her Shao Qi, or Young Qi.126 Declaring that Chen Wuyu was not of ministerial rank, the prince detained him at Zhongdu.127 In a plea she made on his behalf, Shao Jiang said, “The status of the bride’s home escort should equal that of the visiting escort. In awe of your great domain, we went so far as to make a substitution.128 That is why the confusion arose.”

2.2

A Lu envoy demonstrates extraordinary ritual fastidiousness in a visit to Jin. That Shu Gong made a formal visit to Jin was to reciprocate Han Qib’s visit. The Prince of Jin directed that he be honored in the outskirts of the city for his exertions, but he declined the honor: “Our unworthy ruler sent me to extend an age-old amity. He insisted, ‘You must not presume to act as guest.’ In receiving our commands from your men in charge, our humble settlement is already greatly honored. Should we then presume upon your condescension in having an envoy sent to the outskirts of the city? I beg to decline.” When they took him to the guest quarters, he declined to stay in them: “Our unworthy ruler commanded me, an inferior subject, to come to extend an age-old amity. For the amicable meeting to be brought to completion is my reward. Would we presume upon your condescension in providing sumptuous guest quarters?” Shuxiang said, “Shu Gonga comprehends ritual propriety! I have heard it said that ‘Devotion and good faith are the vessels of ritual propriety; and humility and deference, the origins of ritual propriety.’ Not to forget one’s domain in one’s formal speeches constitutes devotion and good faith. To put one’s domain first and oneself second constitutes humility and deference. As it says in the Odes,

2.3(2)

Be respectful and cautious of your dignified demeanor That you may be close to the virtuous.129

This man is close to virtue.”

Lord Zhao

1339

2.4(3) 秋，鄭公孫黑將作亂，欲去游氏而代其位，傷疾作而不果。駟氏與諸大

夫欲殺之。子產在鄙，聞之，懼弗及，乘遽而至。使吏數之，曰：「伯有之 亂，以大國之事，而未爾討也。爾有亂心無厭，國不女堪。專伐伯有，而 罪一也；昆弟爭室，而罪二也；薰隧之盟，女矯君位，而罪三也。有死罪 三，何以堪之？不速死，大刑將至。」 再拜稽首，辭曰：「死在朝夕，無助天為虐。」 子產曰：「人誰不死？凶人不終，命也。作凶事，為凶人。不助天， 其助凶人乎！」 請以印為褚師。子產曰：「印也若才，君將任之；不才，將朝夕從 女。女罪之不恤，而又何請焉？不速死，司寇將至。」 七月壬寅，縊。尸諸周氏之衢，加木焉。

2.5(4, 5)

晉少姜卒，公如晉，及河，晉侯使士文伯來辭，曰：「非伉儷也，請君無 辱。」公還。季孫宿遂致服焉。

130 By destroying the You lineage, Gongsun Hei would stand to take over the position of You Ji, who is head of the lineage and a minister to the Zheng ruler (Xiang 22.7). 131 See Xiang 30.10. The “great domain” is Jin, and the service Zichan refers to may be the meeting called in Xiang 30.12 to plan for aid to Song after its disastrous fire. 132 See Zhao 1.7. 133 See Zhao 1.9. Gongsun Hei insisted on being included in a covenant among the high officers and ordered the grand scribe to include him with the six ministers as one of “the seven gentlemen” who rule Zheng. In effect, then, he demanded his own promotion. 134 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.720), Gongsun Hei’s crimes were enumerated in writing upon this tablet. 135 Again, as in Zhao 1.15, the text indicates that Jin’s allies were prepared to pay mourning visits that clearly displayed their inferiority to Jin in the interdomain ritual and political hierarchy.

1340

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Hei of Zheng, whose violence and contentiousness have been apparent in earlier episodes (see Zhao 1.7, 1.9, 1.12), attempts to destroy his rivals in the You lineage and is forced to commit suicide. As before (Xiang 30.10a), Zichan seems to remove himself from the strife. Once it is clear that Gongsun Hei’s own lineage, the Si lineage, has turned against him, Zichan returns to the Zheng capital and condemns the would-be rebel. In autumn, Gongsun Hei of Zheng was preparing to cause turmoil. He hoped to remove the You lineage and take its place.130 But pain from his wound flared up and he did not go through with his plans. The Si lineage and all the high officers wanted to put him to death. Zichan, who was at the border, heard of it. Fearing that he would not get there in time, he rode back to the capital by post carriages. He had an officer enumerate Gongsun Hei’s offenses: “During the turmoil caused by Liang Xiaoa, it was because of our service to a great domain that we did not chastise you.131 You have an insatiable thirst for insubordination; the domain cannot tolerate you. Taking it upon yourself to attack Liang Xiaoa was your first crime. Vying with a kinsman for a wife was your second crime.132 Arrogating the ruler’s prerogative at the Xun Road covenant was your third crime.133 When you have committed three capital crimes already, how are you to be tolerated? Unless you die soon, the great punishment will be inflicted.” Bowing twice with his forehead touching the ground, Gongsun Hei made this statement: “My death might come any morning or evening. Do not help Heaven carry out its cruelty.” Zichan said, “What man does not die? It is commanded that evildoers should not come to a good end. One who performs evil deeds is an evildoer. If we do not help Heaven, are we then to help evildoers?” Gongsun Hei asked that his son Yin be made market overseer. Zichan said, “If Yin is qualified, the ruler will employ him. If he is not qualified, then any morning or evening he will follow you in death. Since you take no thought of your own crimes, how can you make any further requests? Unless you die soon, the supervisor of corrections will arrive.” In the seventh month, on the renyin day (1), he hanged himself. They exposed his corpse at the Zhoushi thoroughfare, placing a wooden tablet above it.134

2.4(3)

Shao Jiang dies and Chen Wuyu is released from detention at Zhongdu (see Zhao 2.2). Shao Jiang of Jin died. Our lord set out for Jin, but when he reached the Yellow River, the Prince of Jin sent Shi Gaia to decline the visit, saying, “As she was not the primary wife, we beg you to spare yourself this act of condescension.”135 Our lord turned back. As a result, Ji Wuzid presented the burial clothes in Jin.

2.5(4, 5)

Lord Zhao

1341

叔向言陳無宇於晉侯曰：「彼何罪？君使公族逆之，齊使上大夫 送之，猶曰不共，君求以貪。國則不共，而執其使。君刑已頗，何以為盟 主？且少姜有辭。」冬十月，陳無宇歸。 十一月，鄭印段如晉弔。

春秋 3.1(2) 三年春王正月丁未，滕子原卒。 3.2(5) 夏，叔弓如滕。 3.3(5) 五月，葬滕成公。 3.4(8) 秋，小邾子來朝。 3.5(9) 八月，大雩。 3.6 冬，大雨雹。 3.7(11) 北燕伯欸出奔齊。

1342

Zuo Tradition

Shuxiang spoke to the Prince of Jin about Chen Wuyu: “What is his offense? You sent a member of the ruling lineage to meet and escort her back home, while Qi sent a senior high officer to escort her out.136 If still you say that Qi was disrespectful, you are being greedy in your expectations. It was our domain that was disrespectful, yet their envoy is the one being detained. If you show too great a bias in your punishments, then how will you act as covenant chief? What is more, Shao Jiang herself gave an explanation of the matter.”137 In winter, in the tenth month, Chen Wuyu returned to Qi. In the eleventh month, Yin Duan of Zheng went to Jin to offer condolences. LORD ZHAO 3 (539 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the dingwei day (9), Yuan, the Master of Teng, died.

3.1(2)

In summer, Shu Gong went to Teng.

3.2(5)

In the fifth month, Lord Cheng of Teng was buried.

3.3(5)

In autumn, the Master of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court.

3.4(8)

In the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

3.5(9)

In winter, there was a great fall of hail.

3.6

Ai, Liege of Northern Yan, departed and fled to Qi.

3.7(11)

136 For the institution of the “high officer of the ruling lineage” (gongzu dafu 公族大 夫), see Xuan 2.4. Han Xu, Jin’s envoy to Qi, was of a lower rank than the Qi “senior high officer” Chen Wuyu. 137 See Shao Jiang’s explanation in Zhao 2.2.

Lord Zhao

1343

左傳 3.1 三年春王正月，鄭游吉如晉，送少姜之葬。梁丙與張趯見之。梁丙曰：

「甚矣哉，子之為此來也！」子大叔曰：「將得已乎！昔文、襄之霸也，其 務不煩諸侯，令諸侯三歲而聘，五歲而朝，有事而會，不協而盟。君薨， 大夫弔，卿共葬事；夫人，士弔，大夫送葬。足以昭禮、命事、謀闕而已， 無加命矣。今嬖寵之喪，不敢擇位，而數於守適，唯懼獲戾，豈敢憚煩？ 少姜有寵而死，齊必繼室。今茲吾又將來賀，不唯此行也。」 張趯曰：「善哉，吾得聞此數也！然自今子其無事矣。譬如火焉， 火中，寒暑乃退。此其極也，能無退乎？晉將失諸侯，諸侯求煩不獲。」 二大夫退。 子大叔告人曰：「張趯有知，其猶在君子之後乎！」 3.2(1) 丁未，滕子原卒。同盟，故書名。

138 Both men are Jin high officers. 139 It is irregular for You Ji, a man of ministerial rank in Zheng, to attend the funeral of a concubine. 140 For similar mourning protocols, see Zhao 30.2. 141 The Fire Star is the red supergiant Antares (i.e., Alpha Scorpii). According to Yang (4:1233), it is in the center of the sky just before dawn at the end of winter and in the evening at the end of summer.

1344

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The following passage continues the narrative of Zhao 2.5, on events related to the funeral of the Jin consort Shao Jiang. As in earlier and later episodes (Zhao 1.15, 30.2), the issue of subordinate domains’ ritual duties to Jin comes to the fore. In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, You Ji of Zheng went to Jin to escort the funeral cortege of Shao Jiang. Liang Bing and Zhang Ti had an audience with him.138 Liang Bing said, “How extraordinary that you, sir, should come for this affair!”139 You Jib said, “Could I have done otherwise? In times past, when Lords Wen and Xiang were overlords, their endeavors did not overtax the princes. By their command, the princes sent envoys on official visits every three years, and they themselves visited court every five years. Whenever there was some matter at hand, they met, and when there was discord, they swore a covenant. When rulers expired, high officers paid visits of condolence and ministers participated in the burial. When rulers’ wives died, officers paid visits of condolence, while high officers escorted the funeral cortege.140 This system sufficed to display ritual propriety, to give commands about affairs, and to deliberate about shortcomings, and it stopped at that. No additional commands were given. Now, however, for the funeral of a favorite concubine, the princes dare not select men of the proper rank but exceed the specifications they would use for a presiding wife. They fear only that they will be caught in some offense, so how would they dare balk at being overtaxed? Shao Jiang enjoyed favor when she died, and Qi is bound to send someone to succeed her. Now for this I will again come to present congratulations. This will not be my only trip.” Zhang Ti said, “How excellent that I have had the opportunity to hear these specifications! Even so, henceforth you will likely have no more duties. It is like the Fire Star: when the Fire Star reaches the center of the sky, the cold and the heat retreat.141 Here the Jin ruler has reached an extreme. Can he do anything other than retreat? Jin will surely lose the allegiance of the princes.142 And then even if the princes seek to be overtaxed, they will not have the opportunity.” The two high officers withdrew. You Jib told the others, “Zhang Ti has understanding. He will still be classed among the noble men.” On the dingwei day (9), Yuan, the Master of Teng, died. He was a covenant partner, so his name is written.143

3.1

3.2(1)

142 Jin will lose the allegiance of the other princes during the coming decade. See Zhao 8.1, 8.3, and 13.3a. 143 On the correlation between diplomatic relations and names in the Annals records of rulers’ deaths, see Van Auken, “A Formal Analysis of the Chuenchiou,” 219–21.

Lord Zhao

1345

3.3a 齊侯使晏嬰請繼室於晉，曰：「寡君使嬰曰：『寡人願事君朝夕不倦，將

奉質幣以無失時，則國家多難，是以不獲。不腆先君之適以備內官，焜 燿寡人之望，則又無祿，早世隕命，寡人失望。君若不忘先君之好，惠 顧齊國，辱收寡人，徼福於大公、丁公，照臨敝邑，鎮撫其社稷，則猶有 先君之適及遺姑姊妹若而人。君若不棄敝邑，而辱使董振擇之，以備嬪 嬙，寡人之望也。』」 韓宣子使叔向對曰：「寡君之願也。寡君不能獨任其社稷之事， 未有伉儷，在縗絰之中，是以未敢請。君有辱命，惠莫大焉。若惠顧敝 邑，撫有晉國，賜之內主，豈唯寡君，舉群臣實受其貺，其自唐叔以下實 寵嘉之。」

1346

Zuo Tradition

In a continuation of the narrative of Zhao 3.1, Qi arranges to provide a wife for the Jin prince.144 Despite the exemplary ceremonial speeches that accompany this engagement, Ziwei of Qi will ultimately deceive Jin, marrying his own daughter to the Jin ruler and marrying the Qi ruler’s daughter to a Jin minister (Zhao 3.6). The Prince of Qi sent Yan Ying with a request to provide a successor to Shao Jiang in Jin. Yan Ying said, “Our unworthy ruler directed me to say, ‘I am willing to serve you tirelessly, my lord, morning and night, and would present visiting gifts without ever failing the proper times, yet there are many troubles in our domain and patrimony, and for that reason I have not succeeded. That a humble daughter of our former ruler by his primary wife was chosen to fill a place in your inner chambers brightened my hopes. Yet she was not blessed: she died before her time, and my hopes came to nothing. If your domain has not forgotten the amity of our former rulers and still looks kindly on the domain of Qi; if you will deign to take me under your wing and seek blessings from the Grand Lord and Lord Ding;145 and if you will oversee and shine down upon our humble settlement, steadying the altars of our domain, then there are still several daughters of our former ruler by his primary wife and by others. It is my hope that you will not abandon our humble settlement but will deign to send someone to choose carefully from among these and use her to fill a place among your ladies.’” Han Qia had Shuxiang respond, “That is what our unworthy ruler wishes. He is not able on his own to perform all the duties of the altars of the domain and as yet he has no wife. As he is in mourning garb, he has not presumed to make his request. No kindness could be greater than your ruler’s condescending to issue this command. If you look kindly on our humble settlement, keep the domain of Jin steady, and give us a mistress for the inner chambers, then not only our unworthy ruler but all of the many subjects will also receive this as a boon, and all in the line descended from Tang Shu will bestow their favor and their blessings upon you.”146

3.3a

144 Takezoe (20.50) cites evidence that while Shao Jiang was a secondary consort, her successor is to be a primary wife. 145 Lord Ding was the son of and successor to the Qi founder, the Grand Lord. 146 The descendants of Tang Shu are the Jin ruling house and all its noble branches. See Zichan’s remarks in Zhao 1.12a, with notes.

Lord Zhao

1347

3.3b 既成婚，晏子受禮，叔向從之宴，相與語。叔向曰：「齊其何如？」晏子

曰：「此季世也，吾弗知齊其為陳氏矣。公棄其民，而歸於陳氏。齊舊四 量，豆、區、釜、鍾。四升為豆，各自其四，以登於釜。釜十則鍾。陳氏三 量皆登一焉，鍾乃大矣。以家量貸，而以公量收之。山木如市，弗加於 山；魚、鹽、蜃、蛤，弗加於海。民參其力，二入於公，而衣食其一。公聚 朽蠹，而三老凍餒，國之諸市，屨賤踊貴。民人痛疾，而或燠休之。其愛 之如父母，而歸之如流水。欲無獲民，將焉辟之？箕伯、直柄、虞遂、伯 戲，其相胡公、大姬已在齊矣。」

147 The grammar of the sentence is perplexing, but Du Yu (42.722) and Takezoe (20.51) agree in punctuating it this way. 148 That the grain is rotting suggests that the lord has accumulated far too much. The “three classes of elders” may mean people over eighty, in three distinct age brackets (Du Yu, ZZ 42.722); elders among the artisans, merchants, and farmers (Fu Qian, ZZ-Kong 42.722); or “three elders,” officials given honorary appointments because of their age (Yang, 4:1235–36, following Zheng Xuan).

1348

Zuo Tradition

In a passage almost unparalleled within Zuozhuan for the breadth of its historical vision, Yan Ying of Qi and Shuxiang of Jin discuss their domains’ futures, rightly foreseeing the decline of the old ruling houses and the rise of the noble lineages that will lead Qi and Jin after the end of Zuozhuan’s narrative, during the Warring States period. Notable is the contrast between the formal language used above to affirm historical precedents and good relations and the following pessimistic exchange on the decline of Qi and Jin. Yan Ying offers a similar prediction in Zhao 26.11. Once the wedding engagement had been made, Yan Yingb accepted the ritually prescribed toasts, and Shuxiang joined him for the banquet. There the two of them spoke together. Shuxiang said, “What is to come in Qi?” Yan Yingb said, “These are the ruling house’s last generations. I do not know but that Qi will go to the Chen lineage.147 The lord is abandoning his own people, and they are shifting their allegiance to the Chen lineage. From times of old, Qi has had four units of measure: the dou, the qu, the fu, and the zhong. Four pints make one dou, then each succeeding measure, up to fu, results from multiples of four. Ten fu is one zhong. To each of the first three measures the Chen lineage adds one unit, so that their zhong is larger. When they lend out, they use their household measures, but when they collect on their loans, they use the lord’s measures. When they bring timber from their mountains to market, they keep the price no higher than it is in the mountains. For their fish, salt, mussels, and clams, they keep the price no higher than it is at the seashore. If the strength of the people is divided into three parts, two parts go to the lord and only one part goes to clothing and feeding the people themselves. The lord’s grain stores are rotting and bug infested, while the three classes of elders are freezing and starving.148 In all the markets of the capital, ordinary shoes are cheap, but the shoes designed for amputees are expensive. The people are suffering torments, yet there is someone there to benefit them generously. The people will love the Chen lineage like parents and will give their allegiance to them like water flowing downhill. Even if the Chen lineage did not want to win the people over, how could they avoid doing so? Jibo, Zhibing, Yusui, and Boxi have followed the Hu Lord and the grand lady Ji and are already in Qi.”149

3.3b

149 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.723), Jibo, Zhibing, Yusui, and Boxi were descendants of the sage-king Shun and ancestors of the Chen line. The Hu Lord and his wife grand lady Ji were the ancestors appointed by Zhou as founders of the domain of Chen. See Shiji 36.1575. The Chen line’s control over Qi was confirmed when Chen Heng and Chen Ni murdered their ruler and installed a successor (Ai 14.5). In 386 Bce a Chen descendant formally replaced the last scion of the Grand Lord’s line as ruler of Qi.

Lord Zhao

1349

3.3c 叔向曰：「然，雖吾公室，今亦季世也。戎馬不駕，卿無軍行，公乘無人，

卒列無長。庶民罷敝，而宮室滋侈。道殣相望，而女富溢尤。民聞公命， 如逃寇讎。欒、郤、胥、原、狐、續、慶、伯降在皁隸，政在家門，民無所 依。君日不悛，以樂慆憂。公室之卑，其何日之有？讒鼎之銘曰：『昧旦 丕顯，後世猶怠。』況日不悛，其能久乎？」 晏子曰：「子將若何？」叔向曰：「晉之公族盡矣。肸聞之：公室將 卑，其宗族枝葉先落，則公室從之。肸之宗十一族，唯羊舌氏在而已。肸 又無子，公室無度，幸而得死，豈其獲祀？」 3.3d 初，景公欲更晏子之宅，曰：「子之宅近市，湫隘囂塵，不可以居，請更

諸爽塏者。」辭曰：「君之先臣容焉，臣不足以嗣之，於臣侈矣。且小人近 市，朝夕得所求，小人之利也，敢煩里旅？」

150 As Xi 33.6b implies, it had been customary for the ministers of Jin to be chosen from among nobles who had led military forces. 151 These lineages, related to the ruler’s house, were powerful in earlier times, especially in the age of Lord Wen. For the fall of the Luan lineage, see Xiang 23.6; for Xi, see Cheng 17.10; for Xu 胥, see Cheng 17.12; for Hu and Xu 續, see Wen 6.8; for Xian, see Wen 9.1; for Bo, see Cheng 15.5. 152 A cauldron of this name is mentioned in Lu and then in Qi; see Yang, 4:1237, for references. 153 The “line” (zong 宗) of which Shuxiang speaks is the group sharing descent from a single Jin ruler; it is not known which ruler that was (Takezoe, 20.55). 154 Shuxiang does have a son, Yang Shi (Zhao 28.2). Either he has not yet been born at this time, or as Du Yu suggests (ZZ 42.723), Shuxiang is saying that he has no “worthy sons” (xianzi 賢子).

1350

Zuo Tradition

Shuxiang said, “That is true. Even our lord’s house is now also in its last generations. His war horses are not harnessed, and his ministers participate in no military campaigns.150 The lord’s chariot has no riders; the infantry ranks have no captains. The common people are exhausted, while the palaces and mansions are ever more extravagant. Corpses lie staring at each other along the roads, while the wealth of the families of female favorites grows more and more offensive. The people, hearing the commands of the lord, behave as if they were fleeing marauders and enemies. The Luan, Xi, Xu, Yuan, Hu, Xu, Qing, and Bo lineages have fallen, so they are now among the menial classes.151 The administration is run from the gates of the noble houses, and the people have no one upon whom to rely. Day after day, the ruler does not change his behavior, instead indulging in pleasure to while away his sorrow. Any day could bring the downfall of the lord’s house. The inscription on the Chan cauldron152 says, ‘The early dawn was exceedingly brilliant, but later generations are still remiss.’ How much worse when he does not change day after day? Can he last long?” Yan Yingb said, “What will you do about it, sir?” Shuxiang said. “The lateral branches of the Jin lord’s house are all gone now, and I have heard that when the lord’s house is going to fall, the branches and leaves of its ancestral house fall beforehand, and then the lord’s house follows them. In my ancestral line there were eleven houses, and only the Yangshe lineage now remains.153 Further, I have no sons,154 and since the lord’s house lacks all standards, I will consider myself fortunate if I die a natural death. How can I expect to receive ancestral sacrifices?”155

3.3c

With a politic frugality that he has shown before (Xiang 28.11a, 29.13e), Yan Ying rejects the Qi prince’s efforts to provide him with a new and grander residence, taking the opportunity also to remonstrate with the ruler over his extravagant habits, mentioned already in Zhao 3.3b. Earlier, Lord Jing had wished to relocate Yan Yingb’s residence and said, “Your residence, sir, is near the marketplace. It is damp, cramped, noisy, dusty, and not fit to occupy. Permit me to move you to a bright, dry place.” Yan Ying declined, saying, “Our ruler’s former subjects found lodging there, and I am not fit to succeed them: for me these lodgings are already extravagant. What is more, when an insignificant man like myself lives near the marketplace, he can get what he needs morning or night, and that is an advantage for him. Would I dare to trouble the provisioners?”

3.3d

155 For a parallel to this passage, see Yanzi chunqiu 4.268–69. Shuxiang’s lineage is extinguished in Zhao 28.2a. By the end of the Spring and Autumn period, the Jin ruling house was irreversibly weakened, and the houses that would divide Jin into three at the start of the Warring States period—Zhao, Wei, and Han—had eliminated their main rivals. See Ai 27.5.

Lord Zhao

1351

公笑曰：「子近市，識貴賤乎？」對曰：「既利之，敢不識乎？」公曰： 「何貴？何賤？」於是景公繁於刑，有鬻踊者，故對曰：「踊貴，屨賤。」 既已告於君，故與叔向語而稱之。景公為是省於刑。 君子曰：「仁人之言，其利博哉！晏子一言，而齊侯省刑。《詩》 曰： 君子如祉， 亂庶遄已。 其是之謂乎！」 3.3e 及晏子如晉，公更其宅。反，則成矣。既拜，乃毀之，而為里室，皆如其

舊，則使宅人反之，曰：「諺曰：『非宅是卜，唯鄰是卜。』二三子先卜鄰 矣。違卜不祥。君子不犯非禮，小人不犯不祥，古之制也。吾敢違諸 乎？」卒復其舊宅，公弗許；因陳桓子以請，乃許之。

1352

Zuo Tradition

The lord smiled and said, “Since you live near the marketplace, do you know what is dear and what cheap?” He replied, “Since I find advantage in that, how would I dare not know?” The lord said, “So what is dear and what is cheap?” At this time Lord Jing was excessive in his use of punishments, and there were those who sold special shoes for amputees. Therefore, Yan Ying replied, “Shoes for amputees are expensive. Ordinary shoes are cheap.” He had already made this declaration to his ruler and therefore made reference to it in his conversation with Shuxiang.156 Because of this, Lord Jing became more sparing in his use of punishments. The noble man said, “How far-reaching are the advantages from the words of a man who is noble in spirit! With one word from Yan Yingb, the Prince of Qi became more sparing in his use of punishments. As it says in the Odes, If the noble man is pleased, The turmoil will quickly end.157

Surely this is what is meant!”158 When Yan Yingb went to Jin, the lord relocated his residence. The new residence was already finished by the time he returned. After he had bowed in thanks, he tore the residence down and rebuilt all the neighborhood homes as they had been before. He then had the former residents return to them. He said, “As the saying goes, ‘It is not the residence itself one divines about: what one divines about is the neighborhood.’ You, sirs, have already divined about the neighborhood. To go against a divination is inauspicious. The noble man does not commit any deed not in accordance with ritual propriety; the petty man does not commit any deed that is inauspicious: such was the system of ancient times. Do I dare go against it?” In the end he returned to his former residence. When the lord did not grant his wish to do so, Yan Ying enlisted Chen Wuyua to plead on his behalf, and the lord therefore permitted it.159

3.3e

156 See Zhao 3.3b above. It is highly unusual for Zuozhuan to explain its own narrative in this way, and this short passage may indicate an effort, perhaps by a later editor, to bring together different narratives. 157 The lines are from Maoshi 198, “Qiao yan” 巧言, 12C.423–25. 158 For a parallel to this passage, see Yanzi chunqiu 6.415–16. 159 A shorter version of this episode is found in Yanzi chunqiu 6.418.

Lord Zhao

1353

3.4a 夏四月，鄭伯如晉，公孫段相，甚敬而卑，禮無違者。晉侯嘉焉，授之以

策，曰：「子豐有勞於晉國，余聞而弗忘。賜女州田，以胙乃舊勳。」伯石 再拜稽首，受策以出。 君子曰：「禮，其人之急也乎！伯石之汏也，一為禮於晉，猶荷其 祿，況以禮終始乎！《詩》曰： 人而無禮， 胡不遄死。 其是之謂乎！」 3.4b 初，州縣，欒豹之邑也。及欒氏亡，范宣子、趙文子、韓宣子皆欲之。文子

曰：「溫，吾縣也。」二宣子曰：「自郤稱以別，三傳矣。晉之別縣不唯州， 誰獲治之？」文子病之，乃舍之。二宣子曰：「吾不可以正議而自與也。」 皆舍之。 及文子為政，趙獲曰：「可以取州矣。」文子曰：「退！二子之言，義 也。違義，禍也。余不能治余縣，又焉用州，其以徼禍也？君子曰：『弗知 實難。』知而弗從，禍莫大焉。有言州必死！」

160 Zifeng belonged to the pro-Jin faction in the Zheng court; see Xiang 7.9. 161 Note that the Zhou in question is not the royal domain but a small district within Jin. See Yin 11.5. 162 For Gongsun Duan’s ambitions, see Xiang 30.13a. 163 Maoshi 52, “Xiang shu” 相鼠, 3B.122. Cf. Xiang 27.2 and Ding 10.4. 164 Xiang 21.5, 21.7, 22.3, 22.5, 23.3, and 23.6. 165 According to Yang (4:1239), Zhou was originally part of Wen, which belonged to the Zhao lineage, but when Xi Cheng (mentioned at Xi 10.3) became a high officer in Jin, Zhou was divided off from Wen and given to him. The settlement had later passed to the Zhao lineage and then to Luan Bao. 166 It is unusual that the views of the noble man should be quoted by a speaker. They are normally quoted at the end of a passage of narrative.

1354

Zuo Tradition

In recognition of a Zheng nobleman’s service, Jin rewards him with a gift of lands that had been an object of contention among Jin noble houses. Despite the virtuous motivations cited in the episode, a flashback suggests that the award has been arranged through the self-serving machinations of the Jin minister Han Qi, who will indeed receive these lands as a gift from Zheng in just four years (Zhao 7.8). In summer, in the fourth month, the Liege of Zheng went to Jin. Gongsun Duan, acting as his assistant, was extremely deferential and humble, and his performance of rituals was flawless. The Prince of Jin was pleased with him and presented him with a declaration inscribed on bamboo strips, which said, “Your father, Zifeng, exerted himself on behalf of the domain of Jin.160 So I have heard, and I have not forgotten it. I bestow upon you the fields of Zhou as a blessing for your line’s lasting merit.”161 Gongsun Duana bowed twice and touched his forehead to the ground, accepted the strips, and exited. The noble man said, “Ritual propriety is indeed the most pressing matter for a man. As overreaching as he had been, Gongsun Duana nevertheless managed with one good performance of ritual in Jin to come away laden with rewards.162 How much better should it be for someone who practiced ritual propriety from beginning to end? As it says in the Odes,

3.4a

A man who lacks ritual propriety: Why should he not die before his time?163

Surely this is what is meant!” Some time before, the district of Zhou had been Luan Bao’s settlement. After the fall of the Luan lineage,164 Fan Gaib, Zhao Wua, and Han Qia all wanted it. Zhao Wub said, “Wen is a dependency of ours.” Fan Gaib and Han Qib said, “Since Xi Cheng split Zhou off, it has changed hands three times.165 Zhou is not the only district in Jin to have been split off from another. Who could return all of them to their original order?” Zhao Wub was chagrined by this and therefore renounced his claim to Zhou. Fan Gaib and Han Qib said, “We cannot award it to ourselves after we have discussed the matter in such proper fashion.” Both of them then also renounced their claims. When Zhao Wub took charge of the government, Zhao Huo said, “Now you have the means to take Zhou.” Zhao Wub said, “You are dismissed! What the two men said was dutiful. To violate duty is disastrous. I cannot govern my own dependency, so what use would I have for Zhou? Will I use it to invite disaster? The noble man said, ‘It is failures of understanding that bring on difficulties.’166 If I do understand but fail to act accordingly, what disaster could be greater than that? Anyone who speaks of Zhou will die!”

3.4b

Lord Zhao

1355

豐氏故主韓氏，伯石之獲州也，韓宣子為之請之，為其復取之 之故。

3.5(2, 3)

五月，叔弓如滕，葬滕成公，子服椒為介。及郊，遇懿伯之忌，敬子不入。 惠伯曰：「公事有公利，無私忌。椒請先入。」乃先受館。敬子從之。

3.6 晉韓起如齊逆女。公孫蠆為少姜之有寵也，以其子更公女，而嫁公子。

人謂宣子：「子尾欺晉，晉胡受之？」宣子曰：「我欲得齊，而遠其寵，寵 將來乎？」 3.7 秋七月，鄭罕虎如晉，賀夫人，且告曰：「楚人日徵敝邑以不朝立王之

故。敝邑之往，則畏執事其謂寡君而固有外心；其不往，則宋之盟云。 進退，罪也。寡君使虎布之。」

167 As Yang (4:1240) notes, visiting nobles could stay in lodgings sponsored by the lord of the domain, or they could lodge with private noble families, thus consolidating ties between their own lineage and that of the host. For another example, see Ding 6.6. 168 See Zhao 7.8. 169 Yang (4:1240–41) identifies Yibo as the father of Zifu Huibo and the uncle of Shu Gong. As son of the deceased, Huibo faces a stronger taboo. By going in first, Shu Gong would have seemed callous; but by preceding him, Huibo shows that, difficult as it is, the official mission is more important than private mourning. Du Yu (ZZ 42.724) identifies Yibo as Zifu Huibo’s uncle. The context supports Yang’s interpretation. 170 A brief account of this episode is found in Liji, 10.191, among many other passages on the ritual problems associated with mourning.

1356

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Duan’s family, the Feng lineage, had in former times been hosted by the Han lineage.167 That Gongsun Duana obtained Zhou was because Han Qia had requested it for him, so that the Han lineage would eventually be able to retake it.168 On the occasion of the funeral of Lord Cheng of Teng, two Lu participants show exemplary ritual care (see Zhao 3.2). In the fifth month, Shu Gong went to Teng for the burial of Lord Cheng of Teng. Zifu Huibob acted as his aide. When they reached the outskirts of the city, it happened to be a taboo day, the anniversary of Yibo’s death, and Shu Gongb would not enter the city.169 Zifu Huiboe said, “Public affairs bring public advantages, and they are not affected by private taboos. Permit me to enter the city first.” As a result, he was the first to receive lodgings, and Shu Gongb came later.170

3.5(2, 3)

An unforeseen substitute for the Qi bride for the Jin ruler renders ridiculous the lofty ceremonial speeches of Shuxiang and Yan Ying (see Zhao 3.3a). Han Qi of Jin went to Qi to meet and escort a bride home. Because Shao Jiang had enjoyed the favor of the lord, Ziweia substituted his own daughter for the Qi lord’s daughter and married the latter to a son of the Jin lord. Someone said to Han Qib, “Ziwei has deceived Jin. How can Jin tolerate that?” Han Qib said, “If we wish to win the allegiance of Qi, yet alienate a favorite of theirs, then will the favorite come over to our side?”171

3.6

The following passage continues the narratives of Zhao 3.6 and 3.1. Here Zheng uses a congratulatory visit to Jin to warn of new Chu assertions of interstate influence. In autumn, in the seventh month, Han Hu of Zheng went to Jin to present congratulations for the new bride. He also made a report: “Every day the Chu leaders berate us for not having visited the court of their newly established king. Should our humble settlement go, we fear that your men in charge will claim that our unworthy ruler truly has thoughts of straying from our alliance with you. But if we do not go, there are the stipulations of the Covenant of Song.172 Either to go forward or to retreat represents an offense. Our unworthy ruler has sent me to make this full disclosure.”

3.7

171 Ziwei, a grandson of Lord Hui of Qi, has been powerful in Qi since the overthrow of the Qing lineage in Xiang 28.9. See Han Qi’s prediction of trouble for Ziwei’s line in Zhao 2.1b. 172 According to Zhao 4.1, the Song covenant (see Xiang 27.4) stipulated that Jin’s subsidiary domains would visit Chu, and Chu’s subsidiary domains would visit Jin.

Lord Zhao

1357

宣子使叔向對曰：「君若辱有寡君，在楚何害？修宋盟也。君苟思 盟，寡君乃知免於戾矣。君若不有寡君，雖朝夕辱於敝邑，寡君猜焉。 君實有心，何辱命焉？君其往也！苟有寡君，在楚猶在晉也。」 張趯使謂大叔曰：「自子之歸也，小人糞除先人之敝廬，曰：『子 其將來。』今子皮實來，小人失望。」大叔曰：「吉賤，不獲來，畏大國、 尊夫人也。且孟曰『而將無事』，吉庶幾焉。」 3.8(4) 小邾穆公來朝，季武子欲卑之。穆叔曰：「不可。曹、滕二邾實不忘我

好，敬以逆之，猶懼其貳，又卑一睦，焉逆群好也？其如舊而加敬焉。志 曰：『能敬無災。』又曰：『敬逆來者，天所福也。』」季孫從之。 3.9(5) 八月，大雩，旱也。 3.10 齊侯田於莒，盧蒲嫳見，泣，且請曰：「余髮如此種種，余奚能為？」公曰：

「諾。吾告二子。」歸而告之。子尾欲復之，子雅不可，曰：「彼其髮短而 心甚長，其或寢處我矣。」九月，子雅放盧蒲嫳于北燕。

173 By “commands,” the Jin side refers politely to the report Han Hu has made about the Zheng ruler’s planned trip. 174 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.725), You Ji is not a senior minister. 175 From this exchange it would appear that Zhang Ti’s earlier prediction has been fulfilled, and that Jin’s demands upon its subordinate allies have now begun to abate. 176 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.725), Ji Wuzi planned not to treat the ruler of Lesser Zhu with the ritual honors due the ruler of a state. 177 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.725), this Ju is not the domain of the same name but a settlement in the eastern reaches of Qi, also mentioned at Zhao 10.2c. 178 The two noblemen are Ziya and Ziwei, who overthrew the Qing lineage and Lupu Pie in Xiang 27–28. 179 The language echoes Pie’s own remark at Xiang 28.9. A similar expression is used in Xiang 21.8.

1358

Zuo Tradition

Han Qib had Shuxiang reply, “If your ruler condescends to keep our unworthy ruler in his thoughts, then what harm is there if he is in Chu? He would then be upholding the Covenant of Song. As long as your ruler has his mind on the covenant, our unworthy ruler will know that he has avoided giving offense. If your ruler did not have our unworthy ruler in his thoughts, then even if you condescended to be in our humble settlement every morning and evening, our ruler would still be suspicious of him. Since your ruler does indeed have his thoughts on us, why must he condescend to give us such commands?173 Let him go. As long as he has our ruler in his thoughts, being in Chu is the same as being in Jin.” Zhang Ti sent someone to say to You Jia, “Since your return home, sir, I have cleaned out the lodgings of your predecessors, saying, ‘He is going to come.’ Now it is Han Hua who has come, and I have been disappointed in my hopes.” You Jia said, “Being lowly, I did not get the opportunity to come;174 we are showing awe for your great domain and respect for the bride. Further, you said, ‘You will have no duties.’ I am perhaps reaching that point.”175 The Lu leadership abandons a plan to decrease ritual honors due their allies in Lesser Zhu. When Lord Mu of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court, Ji Wuzi wanted to decrease his honors.176 Shusun Baoa said, “This will not do. Cao, Teng, and the two Zhu have in fact never forgotten their amity with us, and even if we were to receive them respectfully, we would have cause to fear that their allegiance might be divided. If we go so far as to decrease the honors due an intimate of theirs, then how are we to receive the others with whom we enjoy amity? Please do as before, but with added respect. The Records says, ‘One capable of respect suffers no calamities.’ It also says, ‘One who receives visitors respectfully is one blessed by Heaven.’” Ji Wuzid followed this advice.

3.8(4)

In the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice: there was a drought.

3.9(5)

Lupu Pie, a Qi miscreant banished in Xiang 28.11, begs forgiveness. The Prince of Qi was hunting in Ju when Lupu Pie had an audience with him.177 Weeping, Lupu made a request: “Now that my hair is like this, thinning and short, what trouble could I cause at court?” The lord said, “Quite true. I will tell the two noblemen.”178 On his return the ruler told them. Ziwei wanted to recall the man, but Ziya would not allow it. He said, “His hair may be short, but his ambitions are long enough. He is the one who would have used our skins like pelts.”179 In the ninth month, Ziya expelled Lupu Pie to Northern Yan.

3.10

Lord Zhao

1359

3.11(7) 燕簡公多嬖寵，欲去諸大夫而立其寵人。冬，燕大夫比以殺公之外嬖。

公懼，奔齊。書曰「北燕伯款出奔齊」，罪之也。 3.12 十月，鄭伯如楚，子產相。楚子享之，賦〈吉日〉。既享，子產乃具田備，

王以田江南之夢。 3.13 齊公孫竈卒。司馬竈見晏子，曰：「又喪子雅矣。」晏子曰：「惜也！子旗

不免，殆哉！姜族弱矣，而媯將始昌。二惠競爽猶可，又弱一个焉，姜其 危哉！」

春秋 4.1(2) 四年春王正月，大雨雹。 4.2(3) 夏，楚子、蔡侯、陳侯、鄭伯、許男、徐子、滕子、頓子、胡子、沈子、小

邾子、宋世子佐、淮夷會于申。

180 Maoshi, “Ji ri” 吉日, 10C.369–70, describes a hunting expedition. 181 Meng Marsh 夢澤 is mentioned in Xuan 4.3b. The precise location is unknown. 182 According to Takezoe (20.63), the “too” (you 又) suggests that Zao has in mind Yan Ying’s remarks to Shuxiang at Zhao 3.3b above.

1360

Zuo Tradition

A plan to replace Yan noblemen with the lord’s personal favorites fails. The circumstances recall the turmoil under Lord Li of Jin in Cheng 17.10. Lord Jian of Yan, who had many favorites, wanted to remove all the high officers and establish his favorites in their places. In the winter, the high officers of Yan banded together to kill the lord’s favorites from outside court. Alarmed, the lord fled to Qi. That the text says, “Ai, Liege of Northern Yan, departed and fled to Qi,” puts the blame on him.

3.11(7)

The following passage continues the narrative of Zhao 3.7. Zheng pays an official visit to Chu. Zichan knows from the Chu king’s choice of a recitation that there will be an invitation to hunt. In the tenth month, the Liege of Zheng went to Chu with Zichan assisting. The Master of Chu offered them ceremonial toasts and recited “Auspicious Day.”180 After the ceremony, Zichan prepared the hunting equipment, and the king hunted with them in Meng Marsh, south of the Yangzi River.181

3.12

Yan Ying of Qi adds to his earlier predictions of the coming decline of the Qi ruling house. (See Zhao 3.3, 8.5, 10.2.) Ziyaa of Qi died. The supervisor of the military Zao met with Yan Yingb and said, “And now we have lost Ziya too.”182 Yan Yingb said, “It is a pity! His son Luan Shia will not escape disaster. It is a perilous situation. Now that the Jiang house is weakened, the Gui will begin to rise.183 There was still some possibility when the two descendants of Lord Hui were strong and bright, but what dangers the Jiang face now that the house is further weakened by the loss of one of them!”184

3.13

LORD ZHAO 4 (538 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, there was a great fall of hail.

4.1(2)

In summer, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, the Master of Xu, the Master of Teng, the Master of Dun, the Master of Hu, the Master of Shěn, the Master of Lesser Zhu, the Song heir apparent Zuo, and the Yi of the Huai River met at Shen.

4.2(3)

183 Jiang is the clan name (xing 姓) of the Qi ruling house, descended from the Grand Lord. Gui is the clan name of the ruling house of Chen, and thus of Qi’s Chen lineage (see Zhuang 22.1). The triumph of the Chen lineage comes in Ai 14.5. 184 Both Ziya and Ziwei were grandsons of Lord Hui of Qi.

Lord Zhao

1361

4.3(3) 楚人執徐子。 4.4(4) 秋七月，楚子、蔡侯、陳侯、許男、頓子、胡子、沈子、淮夷伐吳，執齊慶

封，殺之。遂滅賴。 4.5(5) 九月，取鄫。 4.6(8) 冬十有二月乙卯，叔孫豹卒。

左傳 4.1a 四年春王正月，許男如楚，楚子止之；遂止鄭伯，復田江南，許男與焉。

使椒舉如晉求諸侯，二君待之。椒舉致命曰：「寡君使舉曰：日君有惠， 賜盟于宋，曰：『晉、楚之從交相見也。』以歲之不易，寡人願結驩於二 三君，使舉請間。君若苟無四方之虞，則願假寵以請於諸侯。」 晉侯欲勿許。司馬侯曰：「不可。楚王方侈，天或者欲逞其心，以 厚其毒，而降之罰，未可知也。其使能終，亦未可知也。晉、楚唯天所 相，不可與爭。君其許之，而修德以待其歸。若歸於德，吾猶將事之，況 諸侯乎？若適淫虐，楚將棄之，吾又誰與爭？」

1362

Zuo Tradition

Chu leaders arrested the Master of Xu.

4.3(3)

In autumn, in the seventh month, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Chen, the Head of Xǔ, the Master of Dun, the Master of Hu, the Master of Shěn, and the Yi of the Huai River attacked Wu, arrested Qing Feng of Qi, and put him to death. They then extinguished Laì.

4.4(4)

In the ninth month, we took Zeng.

4.5(5)

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the yimao day (28), Shusun Bao died.

4.6(8)

ZUO

Chu, seeking to confirm its status as overlord (see Zhao 3.12), calls a meeting of the princes. Jin reluctantly agrees in the hope that the ambitious king of Chu will either overreach and fall or turn to a more virtuous style of rule. In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Head of Xǔ went to Chu, where the Master of Chu detained him. The Master of Chu then detained the Liege of Zheng in Chu and hunted with him again south of the Yangzi River, with the Head of Xǔ joining them. He sent Wu Jua to Jin to seek to convene a meeting of the princes, while the two visiting rulers waited. Wu Jua communicated his ruler’s command thus: “Our unworthy ruler sends me to say: ‘In days past you, lord, were kind enough to grant us a covenant at Song, saying, “The adherents of Jin and Chu will exchange court audiences with one another.” Given the lack of ease in these years, I hope to form a bond of good cheer with the other rulers and have sent Ju to request an opportune time. Provided you have no cause for worry in the four quarters, I would hope to avail myself of your favor in presenting a request to the princes.’” The Prince of Jin wanted to refuse this request. The supervisor of the military Ru Qib said, “You cannot refuse. At the moment the king of Chu is extravagant, and it may be that Heaven wants to indulge his desires in order to add to his ills before it sends down punishment. It is impossible to know yet. Perhaps Heaven will make him capable of lasting to the end, but that too is impossible to know. Both Jin and Chu rely entirely on Heaven’s help, and we cannot contend with them. Permit the meeting, my lord, but also cultivate your virtue and wait to see which way the Chu king will turn. If he turns to virtue, even we will serve him, not to speak of the princes. If he goes over to excess and cruelty, Chu will cast him off, and then whom will we have to struggle with?”

4.1a

Lord Zhao

1363

4.1b 公曰：「晉有三不殆，其何敵之有？國險而多馬，齊、楚多難；有是三者，

何鄉而不濟？」對曰： 恃險與馬，而虞鄰國之難，是三殆也。四嶽、三塗、陽城、大

室、荊山、中南，九州之險也，是不一姓。 冀之北土，馬之所生，無興國焉。恃險與馬，不可以為 固也，從古以然。是以先王務修德音以亨神、人，不聞其務 險與馬也。鄰國之難，不可虞也。或多難以固其國，啟其疆 土；或無難以喪其國，失其守宇，若何虞難？齊有仲孫之 難，而獲桓公，至今賴之。晉有里、丕之難而獲文公，是以為 盟主。衛、邢無難，敵亦喪之。故人之難，不可虞也。恃此三 者，而不修政德，亡於不暇，又何能濟？

185 The four peaks are the following: in the east, Mount Tai 泰, Shandong; in the west, Mount Hua 華, Shaanxi; in the south, either Mount Heng 衡, Anhui, or another Mount Heng, in Hunan; in the north, Mount Heng 恆, Shanxi. Santu 三塗 is a mountain south of Luhun 陸渾, Henan. Yangcheng 陽城 is southeast of Dengfeng 登封, Henan. Taishi 大室 is Mount Song 嵩, north of Dengfeng 登封, Henan. Mount Jing is west of Nanzhang 南漳, Hubei. Zhongnan 中南, now written Zhongnan 終南, is south of Xi’an, Shaanxi.

1364

Zuo Tradition

When the Jin ruler continues to insist upon resistance to the Chu request, Ru Qi, supervisor of the military in Jin, warns the ruler not to rely on the domain’s natural defenses and resources, since assets of these kinds have not saved earlier rulers from destruction. As in many other passages, highminded arguments tend to obscure the real weakness of Jin in comparison to Chu during these years. The lord said, “With Jin’s three barriers against danger, how can we have any rivals? Our domain is protected by natural defenses. We are rich in horses. And Qi and Chu are suffering many difficulties. These facts give us three defensive barriers. Why should we not succeed in anything we attempt?” Ru Qi replied,

4.1b

If you plan to rely on natural defense and horses while counting on difficulties in neighboring domains, your three barriers are in fact three dangers. The Four Peaks, Santu, Yangcheng, Taishi, Jingshan, and Zhongnan are natural defenses in the nine provinces, yet they have not always been held by rulers of a single clan name.185 The northern territory of Ji is where horses are bred, but no domain has ever arisen there.186 Since ancient times it has been true that one cannot achieve true security by relying on natural defenses and horses. For this reason the former kings cultivated their reputation for virtue in order to bring ritual entertainment to the spirits and the human ancestors. One never hears of their having devoted themselves to natural defenses and horses. As for the difficulties of neighboring domains, one cannot count on such things. While facing many difficulties one ruler might consolidate the domain and open up territories on the borders, while without any difficulties at all another ruler might lose his domain and be deprived of his place of refuge. How can one count on difficulties? It was when Qi had difficulties with Gongsun Wuzhib that it got Lord Huan, and they benefit from his prestige to this day.187 It was when Jin had difficulties with Li Kea and Pi Zhenga that it got Lord Wen and therefore became covenant chief.188 Wei and Xing had no difficulties, yet their enemies destroyed them nonetheless.189 Therefore, the difficulties of others cannot be counted on. If one relies on these three alone, without cultivating virtue in government, one will perish in no time, and then how will one succeed in anything? 186 187 188 189

Ji corresponds to present-day northern Hebei and Shanxi. For the difficulties with Gongsun Wuzhi, see Zhuang 8.3. For the difficulties with Li Ke and Pi Zheng, see Xi 9.4. For the (temporary) destruction of Wei, see Min 2.5; for the destruction of Xing, see Xi 25.1.

Lord Zhao

1365

君其許之！紂作淫虐，文王惠和，殷是以隕，周是以 興，夫豈爭 諸侯？ 乃許楚使。使叔向對曰：「寡君有社稷之事，是以不獲春秋時見。 諸侯，君實有之，何辱命焉？」椒舉遂請昏，晉侯許之。 4.1c 楚子問於子產曰：「晉其許我諸侯乎？」對曰：「許君。晉君少安，不在

諸侯。其大夫多求，莫匡其君。在宋之盟又曰如一。若不許君，將焉用 之？」王曰：「諸侯其來乎？」對曰：「必來。從宋之盟，承君之歡，不畏大 國，何故不來？不來者，其魯、衛、曹、邾乎！曹畏宋，邾畏魯，魯、衛偪 於齊而親於晉，唯是不來。其餘，君之所及也，誰敢不至？」王曰：「然 則吾所求者無不可乎？」對曰：「求逞於人，不可；與人同欲，盡濟。」

1366

Zuo Tradition

Give your permission, my lord! Zhòu engaged in excess and cruelty, while King Wen was kind and harmonious. This is how the Yin dynasty fell and the Zhou dynasty arose. What did this have to do with struggling for the allegiance of the princes?

They therefore granted the request of the Chu envoy. They had Shu­ xiang respond, “Our unworthy ruler has had duties at the altars of the domain and has therefore not had the opportunity to meet regularly with you. As for the princes, it is you who have sway over them. Why condescend to give a command to us?” Wu Jua then asked for a marriage between the domains, and the Prince of Jin granted his request. Zichan predicts in fine detail the responses of Jin and the other northern domains to the Chu king’s decision to call a covenant meeting. His predictions are borne out in Zhao 4.3a. At the same time, his conversation with the king allows him to deliver a warning about the dangers of overreaching. Zichan’s subtle critique recalls the conversation that immediately precedes the king’s downfall (Zhao 12.11c). The Master of Chu asked Zichan, “Will Jin grant overlordship of the princes to us?” He replied, “They will. The ruler of Jin is somewhat complacent,190 and his mind is not on the princes. His high officers are avaricious, and none of them straightens out his ruler. In the Covenant of Song the domains were also said to be ‘as one.’ If Jin does not grant them to you, what purpose will that covenant serve?” The king said, “Will the princes come to us?” He replied, “They are certain to come. They will follow the Covenant of Song, they will take advantage of your good cheer, and they will have no fear of the large domain. Why would they not come? The ones likely not to come are Lu, Wei, Cao, and Zhu. Cao fears Song, Zhu fears Lu, and Lu and Wei are hard-pressed by Qi and on friendly terms with Jin. These are the only reasons they have for not coming. As for the others, they are domains that you can reach. Who would dare not be present?” The king said, “In that case, is there nothing I want that I cannot have?” He replied, “One cannot seek fulfillment at the expense of others. If you share the desires of others, you will succeed in everything.”191

4.1c

190 Du Yu (ZZ 42.728) understands “The ruler of Jin is satisfied with petty things.” We follow Takezoe, 21.5. 191 A similar saying is attributed to the Lu minister Zang Wenzhong in Xi 20.5.

Lord Zhao

1367

4.2(1) 大雨雹。季武子問於申豐曰：「雹可禦乎？」對曰：「聖人在上，無雹。雖

有，不為災。古者日在北陸而藏冰，西陸朝覿而出之。其藏冰也，深山窮 谷，固陰沍寒，於是乎取之。其出之也，朝之祿位，賓、食、喪、祭，於是 乎用之。其藏之也，黑牡、秬黍以享司寒。其出之也，桃弧、棘矢，以除其 災。其出入也時。食肉之祿，冰皆與焉。大夫命婦喪浴用冰。祭寒而藏 之，獻羔而啟之，公始用之，火出而畢賦，自命夫命婦至於老疾，無不受 冰。山人取之，縣人傳之，輿人納之，隸人藏之。夫冰以風壯，而以風出。 其藏之也周，其用之也徧，則冬無愆陽，夏無伏陰，春無凄風，秋無苦 雨，雷出不震，無菑霜雹，癘疾不降，民不夭札。今藏川池之冰棄而不 用，風不越而殺，雷不發而震。雹之為菑，誰能禦之？〈七月〉之卒章，藏 冰之道也。

192 The constellation Beilu corresponded to parts of Aquarius, Equuleus, and Pegasus. Xilu corresponded to parts of Taurus. The sun would have been in Beilu during the Xia twelfth month and in Xilu during the Xia fourth month, roughly corresponding to our January and May, respectively. 193 It is unclear in the passage whether the ice was stored at points well upstream or simply gathered from such places. In any case, before it was brought out, the ice would have been kept for a time in an ice storage room. Zhouli 5.81 describes the duties of the Ice Room Keeper (lingren 凌人). 194 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.729), the “Overseer of Cold” was a spirit of the north also known as Xuanming 玄冥 (“Dark and Obscure”); the latter is mentioned among seasonal spirits in the “Monthly Ordinances” (“Yueling” 月令) chapter of Liji (17.340).

1368

Zuo Tradition

A hailstorm in Lu prompts an account of the proper ancient way of collecting and storing ice. There was a great fall of hail. Ji Wuzi asked Shen Feng, “Can hail be prevented?” He replied, “When a sage is the ruler, there is no hail. Even if there were to be, it would cause no destruction. The ancients stored up ice when the sun was in Beilu and brought it out for the court audiences of Xilu.192 In the storing up of ice, the places were box canyons in the deep mountains, places of gelid and frozen cold. That is where they gathered it.193 The occasions for which they brought it out were for rewarding ranking officials in court, for guests, for meals, for funerals, and for sacrifices. These were the occasions when they used it. When they stored it up, they made ceremonial offerings to the spirit Overseer of Cold with a black ram and black millet.194 When they brought it out, they exorcised destructive influences with a peach-wood bow and arrows of thorn. They were timely in bringing it out and putting it away. Ice was given to all officers with salaries sufficient to include meals of meat. For the funerals of high officers and their officially recognized wives, ice was used in the bathing of the corpses. It was stored up with sacrifices to the Cold, and it was unsealed with the presentation of a lamb. The lord was the first to use it, and it was distributed to all eligible with the appearance of the Fire Star.195 From commissioned officers and their recognized wives down to the elderly and the sick, everyone received some ice. Mountain people gathered it, locals transported it, workmen brought it in, and menials stored it. Ice became solid because of the wind and was brought out because of the wind.196 Because they stored it up securely and then used it widely, there was no excessive yang in winter, no lurking yin in summer, no freezing wind in spring, and no bitter rain in autumn. Thunder sounded but lightning did not strike, there were no disastrous frosts or hail, plagues did not descend upon them, and the people did not die young in epidemics. Nowadays ice collected from rivers and ponds is thrown away without being used. The wind is not dissipated but instead kills. Even though thunder does not sound, lightning strikes. If hail causes a disaster, who can prevent it? The final stanza of ‘Seventh Month’ describes how to store ice.”197

4.2(1)

195 The Fire Star appeared above the horizon in the evening in the third month of the Xia calendar, roughly corresponding to our April. 196 According to Takezoe (21.8), ice “melted because of the (spring) wind.” The idea is that distribution and melting took place in accordance with the change of the season and the warming of the wind. 197 Maoshi, “Qi yue” 七月, 8A.279–88, describes a range of agricultural activities, including the gathering, storing, and bringing out of ice in the second, third, and fourth months of the Zhou calendar, respectively.

Lord Zhao

1369



4.3a(2, 3)

夏，諸侯如楚，魯、衛、曹、邾不會。曹、邾辭以難，公辭以時祭，衛侯辭 以疾。鄭伯先待于申。六月丙午，楚子合諸侯于申。椒舉言於楚子曰： 「臣聞諸侯無歸，禮以為歸。今君始得諸侯，其慎禮矣。霸之濟否，在 此會也。夏啟有鈞臺之享，商湯有景亳之命，周武有孟津之誓，成有岐 陽之蒐，康有酆宮之朝，穆有塗山之會，齊桓有召陵之師，晉文有踐土 之盟。君其何用？宋向戌、鄭公孫僑在，諸侯之良也，君其選焉。」 王曰：「吾用齊桓。」王使問禮於左師與子產。左師曰：「小國習之， 大國用之，敢不薦聞？」獻公合諸侯之禮六。子產曰：「小國共職，敢不 薦守？」獻伯子男會公之禮六。君子謂合左師善守先代，子產善相小國。

4.3b 王使椒舉侍於後以規過，卒事不規。王問其故，對曰：「禮，吾所未見者

有六焉，又何以規？」

198 Zichan predicted in Zhao 4.1c that these four rulers would not attend. 199 This terrace was perhaps in present-day Yu 禹, Henan. According to the “Suoyin” commentary on Shiji, this place, the terrace at Jun 鈞 or Jun 均, was the “Xia Terrace,” where the evil last king of Xia would imprison the future King Tang of Shang. See Shiji 2.88; and cf. 40.1704. Zhushu jinian (cited in Takezoe, 21.9) puts the ceremonial entertainment in the first year of Qi’s reign. 200 According to Yang (4:1250), Jingbo 景亳 was located either south of present-day Cao 曹, Shandong, or north of Shangqiu City 商丘, Henan. The “command” referred to is perhaps the now-lost text called “Proclamation of the god on high” (“Di gao” 帝誥), mentioned at Shiji 3.93 as having been composed after the founding of the Shang capital at Bo 亳. 201 This was a ford across the Yellow River in Henan. King Wu addressed his armies here before the conquest of Shang. See Shiji 4.120–21. 202 Qiyang 岐陽 was located south of Mount Qi in Shaanxi. According to Zhushu jinian 2.239, this spring muster took place in the sixth year of King Cheng’s reign. See also Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 14.466. 203 Feng 酆 was the location of a temple for King Wen, east of present-day Hu County 戶縣, Shaanxi. According to Zhushu jinian 2.242, the princes gathered here in the first year of King Kang’s reign. 204 Mount Tu 塗山 was located east of present-day Huaiyuan 懷遠, Anhui. According to Zhushu jinian 2.247, this meeting took place in the thirty-ninth year of King Mu’s reign. 205 See Xi 4.1. 206 See Xi 28.3. 207 The rituals unfamiliar to Wu Ju were apparently ones performed by Xiang Xu and Zichan, rituals that had not previously been practiced in Chu.

1370

Zuo Tradition

In Chu, the king consults with Wu Ju and visitors from Song and Zheng on the correct ritual for the upcoming meeting of princes. In summer, the princes went to Chu. Lu, Wei, Cao, and Zhu did not join in the meeting. Cao and Zhu excused themselves on the grounds of political difficulties. Our lord excused himself because of a seasonal ancestral sacrifice. The Prince of Wei excused himself because of illness.198 The Liege of Zheng waited beforehand at Shen. In the sixth month, on the bingwu day (16), the Master of Chu gathered the princes at Shen. Wu Jua spoke to the Master of Chu: “I have heard that the princes give their allegiance not to a particular lord but to ritual propriety itself. Now that you, my lord, are winning the princes for the first time, you must be careful about ritual propriety. The success or failure of your overlordship depends on this meeting. Under King Qi of the Xia there were the ceremonial toasts at the Jun Terrace.199 Under King Tang of the Shang there was the command at Jingbo.200 Under King Wu of Zhou there was the oath at Meng Ford.201 Under King Cheng there was the muster at Qiyang.202 Under King Kang there was the court assembly at the Feng Palace.203 Under King Mu there was the meeting at Mount Tu.204 Under Lord Huan of Qi there was the Shaoling campaign.205 Under Lord Wen of Jin there was the covenant at Jiantu.206 Which precedent will you use? Xiang Xu of Song and Zichana of Zheng are here, both of them among the best men from the princes’ domains, so you may choose from among the precedents.” The king said, “I will use the precedent of Lord Huan of Qi.” The king sent someone to ask the minister of the left Xiang Xub and Zichan about the ritual. Xiang Xub said, “What a small domain practices for, a great domain uses. Would I presume not to offer up what I have heard?” He presented six rituals by which a lord gathers the princes together. Zichan said, “A small domain reverently upholds its appointed duties. Would I presume not to offer up what I have maintained as duty?” He presented six rituals by which lieges, chiefs, and heads meet with a lord. The noble man said of Xiang Xua that he was excellent at maintaining what was passed down from previous generations, and of Zichan that he was excellent at assisting the small domain.

4.3a(2 ,3)

The King of Chu completes the ceremony using the rituals taught him by northern visitors. The king had Wu Jua stand in waiting behind him so that he could correct any error, and Wu Jua did not correct him right through to the end of the ceremony. When the king asked him the reason, he replied, “Among the rituals there were six that I had not seen. How could I correct you?”207

4.3b

Lord Zhao

1371

宋大子佐後至，王田於武城，久而弗見。椒舉請辭焉。王使往，曰： 「屬有宗祧之事於武城，寡君將墮幣焉，敢謝後見。」 徐子，吳出也，以為貳焉，故執諸申。 4.3c 楚子示諸侯侈。椒舉曰：「夫六王、二公之事，皆所以示諸侯禮也，諸侯

所由用命也。夏桀為仍之會，有緡叛之。商紂為黎之蒐，東夷叛之；周幽 為大室之盟，戎狄叛之，皆所以示諸侯汏也，諸侯所由棄命也。今君以 汏，無乃不濟乎？」王弗聽。 子產見左師曰：「吾不患楚矣。汏而愎諫，不過十年。」左師曰： 「然。不十年侈，其惡不遠。遠惡而後棄。善亦如之，德遠而後興。」 4.4a(4) 秋，七月，楚子以諸侯伐吳，宋大子、鄭伯先歸，宋華費遂、鄭大夫從。

使屈申圍朱方，八月甲申，克之，執齊慶封而盡滅其族。

208 The heir Zuo is the future Lord Yuan of Song (r. 531–517). His story is told in Xiang 26.8 and Zhao 20.3. 209 On Wucheng, see Xi 6.4. 210 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.731), the king is claiming to be hunting at Wucheng to provide victims for the Ancestral Temple. 211 The six kings and two lords are listed in Wu Ju’s speech at the beginning of Zhao 4.3. 212 Like the other rebellious groups mentioned in this passage, the Min were apparently a non-Sinitic group; they are mentioned again in connection with King Jie at Zhao 11.2, but little else is known about them. See Chen Pan, Chunqiu dashi biao, 7:648–51. 213 Li is perhaps the same as the Li mentioned in Xuan 15.5. 214 Taishi is Mount Song 嵩. 215 The fall of King Ling of Chu is recorded in Zhao 12.11 and 13.2. 216 Zhufang 朱方 was near the mouth of the Yangzi River, near present-day Zhenjiang City 鎮江市, Jiangsu. Du Yu (ZZ 42.731) notes that there must have been a mistake in the dating, as no jiashen day fell in the eighth month. Gassmann (Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen, 129–30) speculates that the words ba yue 八月 here are in error and that the jiashen day referred to is the one that fell on the twenty-fifth day of the seventh month.

1372

Zuo Tradition

The Song heir apparent Zuo arrived after the ceremony was over.208 The king was hunting at Wucheng and did not grant him an audience for a long time.209 Wu Jua asked permission to give him an explanation. The king had him go and say, “It happens that we have duties at the Ancestral Temple at Wucheng,210 where our unworthy ruler will deposit your gifts of cloth. We presume to apologize for being tardy in holding an audience for you.” The Master of Xu was born of a woman from Wu, and the king suspected him of having divided allegiance. That is why the king arrested him at Shen. The Chu king demonstrates his arrogance during the meeting, prompting predictions of his coming fall. The Master of Chu showed off his lack of moderation in the presence of all the princes. Wu Jua said, “The ceremonies conducted by the six kings and the two lords were in every case means of displaying ritual propriety before the princes, and they were the reason the princes obeyed commands.211 When King Jie of Xia held his meeting at Reng, the Min turned against him.212 When Zhòu of Shang held his spring muster at Li, the Eastern Yi turned against him.213 And when King You of Zhou held the covenant ceremony at Taishi, the Rong and the Di turned against him.214 In each case the ceremonies became occasions on which they displayed their excesses to the princes and were the reason the princes ignored their commands. Now that you are acting excessively, is it not the case that you will fail to prevail?” The king did not heed him. Zichan met with Xiang Xub and said, “I am no longer worried about Chu. The Chu king is excessive and stubborn in the face of remonstrance. He will last no longer than ten years.” Xiang Xub said, “That is so. Unless he continues his immoderate behavior for ten years, his defects will not spread far and wide. And he will be deposed only when he has spread his defects far and wide. It is the same with excellence: only when one’s virtue has spread far and wide does one rise.”215

4.3c

The Chu king leads a decreased contingent of allies in an attack on Wu, then captures and executes the Qi miscreant Qing Feng (see Xiang 28.9) and annexes the domain of Lai. Qing Feng takes advantage of the opportunity to publicize the king’s usurpation of Chu rule. The mishandling of the execution portends the king’s own fall. In autumn, in the seventh month, the Master of Chu attacked Wu with the princes and their troops. The Song heir apparent and the Liege of Zheng had gone home beforehand, but Hua Feisui of Song and high officers from Zheng accompanied the king. The king had Qu Shen lay siege to Zhufang, which was vanquished in the eighth month, on the jiashen day.216 Qing Feng of Qi was captured and his entire house exterminated.

4.4a(4)

Lord Zhao

1373

將戮慶封，椒舉曰：「臣聞無瑕者可以戮人。慶封唯逆命，是以在 此，其肯從於戮乎？播於諸侯，焉用之？」王弗聽，負之斧鉞，以徇於 諸侯，使言曰：「無或如齊慶封弒其君，弱其孤，以盟其大夫！」慶封曰： 「無或如楚共王之庶子圍弒其君－－兄之子麇－－而代之，以盟諸 侯！」王使速殺之。 遂以諸侯滅賴。賴子面縛銜璧，士袒，輿櫬從之，造於中軍。王 問諸椒舉，對曰：「成王克許，許僖公如是。王親釋其縛，受其璧，焚其 櫬。」王從之。遷賴於鄢。 4.4b 楚子欲遷許於賴，使鬬韋龜與公子棄疾城之而還。申無宇曰：「楚禍之

首將在此矣。召諸侯而來，伐國而克，城，竟莫校，王心不違，民其居 乎？民之不處，其誰堪之？不堪王命，乃禍亂也。」 4.5(5) 九月，取鄫，言易也。莒亂，著丘公立而不撫鄫，鄫叛而來，故曰取。凡克

邑，不用師徒曰取。

217 For these events, see Zhao 1.1 and 1.13. 218 It is possible that the destruction of Lai came before the attack on Zhufang. As Yang (4:1253) argues, the meeting had been held at Shen 申, near present-day Nanyang 南陽 in the southwestern part of Henan. Lai 賴 was some 150 kilometers to the southeast, near present-day Sui County 隨縣 in the north of Hubei. The Chu army could have returned from Shen to the Chu capital, Ying, by way of Laì, then proceeded downriver to Zhufang. 219 See Xi 6.4.

1374

Zuo Tradition

As the king was preparing to execute Qing Feng publicly, Wu Jua said, “I have heard that only one who is himself without stain can publicly execute a man. It was precisely because Qing Feng defied orders that he ended up here. Will he then quietly submit to execution? What is the use of broadcasting things to the allies?” The king paid him no attention and made Qing Feng shoulder a great axe and go around to all the princes to say, “Let no man do what Qing Feng of Qi did, killing his ruler and enfeebling the orphaned son, then swearing covenants with the high officers!” But Qing Feng said, “Let no man do what Gongzi Wei, a son of King Gong of Chu by a secondary consort, did, killing his ruler—his elder brother’s son Jun—and taking his place to swear a covenant with the princes.”217 The king hurriedly had him killed. They then extinguished Lai with the help of the princes.218 The Master of Lai approached the central army with his hands tied behind his back, holding a jade disk in his mouth. His officers were stripped to the waist, and the group was followed by a coffin in a cart. The king asked Wu Jua about how to respond, and he replied, “When King Cheng defeated Xǔ, Lord Xi of Xǔ behaved just this way. The king personally loosed his bonds, accepted the jade disk, and burned the coffin.”219 The king followed this advice. He relocated Lai to Yan.220 The series of successes that King Ling of Chu has enjoyed in his campaign occasions a prediction of doom from Shen Wuyu, who will later (Zhao 7.2) prove to be a forceful critic of the king’s arrogance. The Master of Chu wanted to relocate Xǔ to Lai.221 He had Dou Weigui and Gongzi Qiji build a wall for the new Xǔ before he returned to Chu. Shen Wuyu said, “The beginnings of Chu’s disaster are to be found in this. He summoned the allies and they came. He attacked walled cities and prevailed. And he built walls at the border and no one defied him. When nothing goes against the king’s desires, will the people have any ease? And if the people cannot abide by it, then who will be able to bear it? When the commands of the king cannot be borne, then there will be disaster and turmoil.”222

4.4b

In the ninth month we took Zeng: this conveys how easy it was. There was turmoil in Ju. Lord Zhuqiu had been established as ruler but could not establish peace in Zeng, and Zeng came over to us after turning against him. That is why it says “took.” In all cases when one gains control over a city without using an army, the text says “took.”223

4.5(5)

220 Yan 鄢 was located southwest of present-day Yicheng County 宜城縣, Hubei, just over 100 kilometers to the west of the former site of Lai. 221 On relocations of Xǔ, see Cheng 15.7 and Zhao 9.2 and 18.7. 222 See Zhao 12.11 and 13.2. 223 Cf. Xiang 13.2.

Lord Zhao

1375

4.6 鄭子產作丘賦，國人謗之，曰：「其父死於路，己為蠆尾，以令於國，國

將若之何？」子寬以告。子產曰：「何害？苟利社稷，死生以之。且吾聞為 善者不改其度，故能有濟也。民不可逞，度不可改。《詩》曰： 禮義不愆， 何恤於人言？ 吾不遷矣。」 渾罕曰：「國氏其先亡乎！君子作法於涼，其敝猶貪。作法於貪， 敝將若之何？姬在列者，蔡及曹、滕其先亡乎！偪而無禮。鄭先衛亡，偪 而無法。政不率法，而制於心。民各有心，何上之有？」

224 See Cheng 1.2 and Ai 11.2 for Lu measures that may have been similar to this. According to Fu Qian’s commentary on Zhouli 11.170 (cited in Yang, 2:783), a qiu 丘 district comprised 144 households. According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.732), each district had originally been required to supply one horse and three head of cattle; Zichan now requires an additional levy for each district. Takezoe (21.15), noting Confucius’ praise of Zichan at Zhao 20.9, argues that Zichan reformed the Zheng levy system from collections by dian 甸 districts of 520 households to the smaller qiu district. He speculates that Zichan did so not to increase the taxes but to allow a more precise accounting and prevent smaller households from bearing a disproportionate burden. See Gu Donggao, “Chunqiu tianfu junlü biao” 春秋田賦軍旅表, Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1425–28. 225 For the death of Zichan’s father, Ziguo, see Xiang 10.9. According to an apocryphal text related to Xiaojing (cited in Yang, 4:1154), the scorpion’s harm comes after: at the tip of its tail or, in this case, in the son of the murdered man. 226 These lines are not found in the extant Odes. The “Correcting Names” (Zheng ming 正名) chapter of Xunzi (22.524) likewise cites them as coming from an ode and gives a variant and expanded version. 227 The Guo line is Zichan’s; his father’s courtesy name was Ziguo. Zuozhuan does not confirm You Su’s prediction. Du Yu (ZZ 53.931) states that the Guo Can mentioned at Annals, Zhao 32.5, is Zichan’s son, but the later fate of the lineage is not known. Although You Su is the son of You Ji, who is normally depicted as agreeing with Zichan, You Su is here surprisingly critical of the latter’s policies.

1376

Zuo Tradition

A change in tax policy in Zheng prompts predictions of early doom for Zichan’s lineage and for certain domains. These predictions are not borne out in Zuozhuan and may indicate both that the authors of this passage had a conservative bias against certain kinds of government reform and that they lived before the true ends of Zichan’s lineage and Zheng were known. As in Xiang 31.11, Zichan shows a remarkable tolerance of popular criticism. In Zheng, Zichan instituted a levy according to district.224 The inhabitants of the capital criticized him, saying, “His father died in the street, and he himself is a scorpion’s tail. With someone like that giving orders in the domain, what is the domain going to do about it?”225 You Sua reported this. Zichan said, “What harm does it do? As long as there is some benefit to the altars of the domain, one undertakes it, live or die. Besides, I have heard that those who do good do not alter their standards, and that is why they succeed in doing good. The people cannot be indulged, and the standards cannot be altered. As it says in the Odes,

4.6

If ritual and duty are not compromised, Why concern yourself with the words of others?226

I will not move.” You Sub said, “The Guo lineage will be the first to fall.227 Even when the noble man makes a model of frugality, the degraded version of that is greed. And when he makes a model of greed, what will the degraded version be? Of the ranking domains bearing the Ji clan name, Cai, Cao, and Teng should be the first to fall, since they are hard-pressed and lack ritual propriety.228 Zheng will perish before Wei, since it is hard-pressed and lacks proper models.229 Its policies do not follow proper models but are determined by one man’s inclinations. Since every commoner has his own inclinations, why should he look to any superior?”

228 Cai is “hard-pressed” by its powerful neighbor Chu; Cao and Teng, by their neighbor Song. Cai will be extinguished by Chu in Zhao 11.8 and restored in Zhao 13.2f, only to be annexed at last by Chu in 447 Bce (Shiji 15.699). Cao is extinguished by Song in Ai 8.1. According to both Yang (4:1255) and Takezoe (21.16), Teng was extinguished by Qi under the sixth ruler after the Spring and Autumn period; but according to a passage from Zhushu jinian cited in the “Suoyin” commentary on the Shiji, Teng was extinguished by Yue near the end of the fifth century Bce (Shiji 41.1747). 229 The presence of this prediction suggests that this passage was composed earlier than 375 Bce, when the domain of Zheng was extinguished (Shiji 15.716). Although the Wu Prince Jizha predicted that Zheng would “perish first” (Xiang 29.13b), Zheng outlasts a number of the other domains that Jizha mentions. Wei survived as a political entity, albeit a very weak one, right through the Warring States period and into the Qin dynasty (Shiji 37.1604–5).

Lord Zhao

1377

4.7 冬，吳伐楚，入棘、櫟、麻，以報朱方之役。楚沈尹射奔命於夏汭，葴尹

宜咎城鍾離，薳啟彊城巢，然丹城州來。東國水，不可以城。彭生罷賴 之師。 4.8a(8) 初，穆子去叔孫氏，及庚宗，遇婦人，使私為食而宿焉。問其行，告之

故，哭而送之。適齊，娶於國氏，生孟丙、仲壬。夢天壓己，弗勝，顧而 見人，黑而上僂，深目而豭喙，號之曰：「牛！助余！」乃勝之。旦而皆召 其徒，無之。且曰：「志之！」 及宣伯奔齊，饋之。宣伯曰：「魯以先子之故，將存吾宗，必召女。 召女，何如？」對曰：「願之久矣。」 4.8b 魯人召之，不告而歸。既立，所宿庚宗之婦人獻以雉。問其姓，對曰：「余

子長矣，能奉雉而從我矣。」召而見之，則所夢也。未問其名，號之曰 「牛」，曰：「唯。」皆召其徒使視之，遂使為豎。有寵，長使為政。

230 Ji, Li, and Ma were located in the eastern reaches of Chu territory, in areas corresponding to the east of present-day Henan and to Anhui. 231 The Xia River bend was near present-day Fengtai County 鳳臺縣, Anhui. 232 Zhongli 鍾離 was on the Huai River, near present-day Fengyang County 鳳陽縣, Anhui. 233 Chao was south of the Xia River bend (see map 4). 234 Zhoulai, where King Ling of Chu will suffer the shock that leads to his death (see Zhao 12.11), was near the Xia River bend (see map 4). 235 Pengsheng is a Chu high officer. The army at Lai is the force led by Dou Weigui and Gongzi Qiji at Zhao 4.4b. 236 From Cheng 16.8 and the present passage it is clear that these events happened many years before the present time, Zhao 4. See Yang, 2:892. Gengzong 庚宗 was in Lu, perhaps east of present-day Sishui County 泗水縣, Shandong, about 25 kilometers east of the Lu capital. 237 The word niu 牛 means “bull” or “ox.” It may be that the dreamer is calling out to the strange creature by the only name that seems to fit it. 238 As becomes clear as the narrative continues, the dream is a deceptive one, one of the few such in Zuozhuan. 239 Shusun Qiaoru is Shusun Bao’s elder brother. For Shusun Qiaoru’s affair with the Lu ruler’s mother, plot against the ruler himself, and eventual flight from Lu, see Cheng 16.5, 16.6, and 16.11. 240 Yang (4:1257) hypothesizes that Shusun Bao was recalled to Lu at the end of Cheng 16, and that he did not warn Shusun Qiaoru of his departure because the latter had already begun his affair with Sheng Meng of Qi (Cheng 16.11b). 241 This signified that she had given birth to a son.

1378

Zuo Tradition

Wu responds to Chu’s attack at Zhufang (see Zhao 4.4). Chu’s frantic defensive missions recall the vow Qu Wuchen swore after his departure from Chu (Cheng 7.5). Wuchen helped make Wu powerful enough to challenge Chu. In winter, Wu attacked Chu and entered Ji, Li, and Ma in revenge for the campaign against Zhufang.230 The Chu Governor of Shěn, She, rushed to fulfill his orders at the bend of the Xia River.231 The deputy for remonstrance Qian Yijiua fortified Zhongli.232 Wei Qiqiang fortified Chao.233 Ran Dan fortified Zhoulai.234 The eastern part of the domain was watery, and walls could not be built there, so Pengsheng dismissed the army at Lai.235

4.7

Shusun Bao (see Zhao 1.6), head of one of Lu’s three most powerful noble lineages, is destroyed by an illegitimate son. Earlier, when Shusun Baoe separated himself from his lineage, the Shusun, he had made his way to Gengzong, where he met a woman.236 He had her feed him secretly and lodged with her. When she asked about his trip, he told her the reason for it, and she wailed as she saw him off. He went to Qi, took a wife of the Guo lineage, and fathered Mengbing and Zhongren. He dreamed that the sky was pressing down on him, so that he could not get up, and that when he looked behind him, he caught sight of a man, swarthy, hunchbacked, with deep-set eyes and the snout of a pig. He called to him and said, “Niu!237 Save me!” And then he was able to get up. In the morning, he summoned all his followers, but he did not find the man among them. He said, “Make a record of it.”238 When Shusun Qiaorua fled to Qi,239 Shusun Bao provided him with food. Shusun Qiaorua said, “For the sake of our predecessors, Lu will preserve our ancestral line. They are sure to summon you. If they summon you, what will you do?” Shusun Bao replied, “It is what I have long wished for.”

4.8a(8)

The Lu leaders summoned Shusun Bao, and he returned without telling Shusun Qiaoru.240 Once he had been established in his position, the woman he had lodged with at Gengzong presented him with a pheasant.241 Shusun Bao asked about the child she had borne, and she replied, “My son is grown now and can follow me holding a pheasant.” When he summoned him and saw him, it turned out to be the man he had dreamed of. Without asking him his name, he called him “Niu,” and he said, “Yes.” Summoning all his followers, he had them look at him and then appointed him as a young servant. The young man enjoyed favor, and when he had grown up, he assumed administrative duties.

4.8b

Lord Zhao

1379

公孫明知叔孫於齊，歸，未逆國姜，子明取之，故怒，其子長而後 使逆之。 4.8c 田於丘蕕，遂遇疾焉。豎牛欲亂其室而有之，強與孟盟，不可。叔孫為

孟鐘，曰：「爾未際，饗大夫以落之。」既具，使豎牛請日。入，弗謁；出， 命之日。及賓至，聞鐘聲。牛曰：「孟有北婦人之客。」怒，將往，牛止之。 賓出，使拘而殺諸外。 牛又強與仲盟，不可。仲與公御萊書觀於公，公與之環，使牛入示 之。入，不示；出，命佩之。牛謂叔孫：「見仲而何？」叔孫曰：「何為？」 曰：「不見，既自見矣，公與之環而佩之矣。」遂逐之，奔齊。 疾急，命召仲，牛許而不召。杜洩見，告之飢渴，授之戈。對曰： 「求之而至，又何去焉？」 豎牛曰：「夫子疾病，不欲見人。」使寘饋于个而退。牛弗進，則置 虛命徹。十二月癸丑，叔孫不食；乙卯，卒。牛立昭子而相之。

242 Du Yu (ZZ 42.733) offers no speculation as to the location of Qiuyou. 243 Du Yu (ZZ 42.733) explains that Niu wanted Mengbing (and Zhongren, below) to pledge to go along with his wish to succeed Shusun Bao. 244 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.734), Niu is hinting that the guest is Gongsun Ming, second husband to Shusun’s wife in Qi, and that Mengbing is using the gift bells to entertain his stepfather, meanwhile neglecting his natural father, Shusun Bao. 245 Niu implies that Zhongren has already privately arranged with Lord Zhao to be established as successor to Shusun Bao and that the jade ring is evidence of the agreement. 246 Du Yu (ZZ 42.734) explains that Du Xie is household steward to the Shusun lineage and that Shusun Bao’s gift signifies his hope that Du Xie will kill Niu for him. Du Xie appears not to have the strength to remove Niu. As Yang (4:1258) suggests, Du Xie may also be expressing his anger at Shusun Bao for having had Niu summoned. 247 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.734), Shusun Chuo was Shusun Bao’s son by a secondary consort.

1380

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Ming had been acquainted with Shusun Baod in Qi. When Shusun Bao went home, before he had had the opportunity to bring his wife Guo Jiang to join him in Lu, Gongsun Minga took her as his wife. Shusun Bao was angry because of this, and he sent for the two sons he had had by her only after they were grown up. Shusun Bao went hunting at Qiuyou and there came down with an illness.242 The young servant Niu wanted to throw the house into chaos and take it for himself. He tried to force a covenant with the elder son, Mengbinga, but Mengbing would not accept it.243 Shusun Baob had made bells for Mengbinga and said, “You have not yet established social connections. Hold a feast for the high officers to dedicate these bells.” Once everything was ready, Mengbing sent the young servant Niu to request a date for the feast. Niu went in but did not mention the matter to Shusun Bao; he then went out and set the date himself. When the guests arrived, Shusun Bao heard the sound of bells. Niu said, “Mengbinga has a guest from that woman in the north.”244 Angry, Shusun Bao was going to go over to Mengbing’s chambers, but Niu stopped him. Once the guests had departed, Shusun Bao sent men to seize Mengbing and kill him outside. Niu then tried to force a covenant with the younger son, Zhongrena, who would not accept it. When Zhongren went with our lord’s driver Laishu on a tour at our lord’s palace, our lord gave Zhongren a jade ring, which Zhongren then directed Niu to take in and show to Shusun Bao. Niu went in but did not show it. He went out and commanded Zhongren to wear it at his waist. Niu said to Shusun Baod, “How would it be if you arranged an audience for Zhongrena with our lord?” Shusun Baod said, “For what purpose?” He said, “Even if you do not arrange an audience, he has already arranged an audience for himself. Our lord has given him a jade ring, which he wears at his waist.”245 As a result, Shusun Bao banished Zhongren, who fled to Qi. When Shusun Bao’s illness grew serious, he ordered that Zhongrena be summoned. Niu assented but did not actually summon him. Du Xie had an audience with Shusun Bao, who told him he was hungry and thirsty and gave him a dagger-axe. Du Xie replied, “You sought him and he came. How are we to get rid of him now?”246 The young servant Niu said, “The master’s illness is severe. He does not wish to see people.” He had the servers withdraw after putting Shusun Bao’s meals in a side chamber. Niu would not actually carry these meals in to Shusun Bao but would return the baskets empty and order that they be cleared away. In the twelfth month, on the guichou day (26), Shusun Baod stopped being fed. On the yimao day (28), he died. Niu established Shusun Chuoc as Shusun Bao’s successor and acted as his assistant.247

4.8c

Lord Zhao

1381

4.8d 公使杜洩葬叔孫，豎牛賂叔仲昭子與南遺，使惡杜洩於季孫而去之。杜

洩將以路葬，且盡卿禮。南遺謂季孫曰：「叔孫未乘路，葬焉用之？且冢 卿無路，介卿以葬，不亦左乎？」 季孫曰：「然。」使杜洩舍路。不可，曰：「夫子受命於朝而聘於王， 王思舊勳而賜之路，復命而致之君。君不敢逆王命而復賜之，使三官書 之。吾子為司徒，實書名；夫子為司馬，與工正書服；孟孫為司空以書 勳。今死而弗以，是棄君命也。書在公府而弗以，是廢三官也。若命服， 生弗敢服，死又不以，將焉用之？」乃使以葬。 季孫謀去中軍，豎牛曰：「夫子固欲去之。」

春秋 5.1(1) 五年春王正月，舍中軍。 5.2(2) 楚殺其大夫屈申。 5.3(3) 公如晉。 5.4(6) 夏，莒牟夷以牟婁及防、茲來奔。

248 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.734), Nan Yi was a retainer of the Ji lineage. See Xiang 7.3. 249 Shusun Bao was given a great carriage by the Zhou king in Xiang 24.11. 250 According to Du Yu (ZZ 42.735), Niu misrepresents Shusun Bao’s wishes in order to curry favor with Ji Wuzi. As Yang (4:1259–60) points out, the “Nei chushuo shang” chapter of Han Feizi states that after Shusun Bao’s death Niu emptied the Shusun treasury and fled to Qi. See Han Feizi 30.532.

1382

Zuo Tradition

Our lord directed Du Xie to bury Shusun Baod. The young servant Niu bribed Shuzhong Daic and Nan Yi to slander Du Xie so that Ji Wuzid would expel him.248 Du Xie was preparing to bury Shusun Bao with his great carriage and was also going to carry out all the rituals due to one of ministerial rank.249 Nan Yi said to Ji Wuzid, “Shusun Baod never rode in the great carriage. Why should it be used in burying him? Besides, even the ministers of the highest rank do not have a great carriage. Is it not irregular to bury a secondary minister with one?” Ji Wuzid said, “Just so.” He directed Du Xie to do away with the great carriage. Du Xie would not consent but said, “The master received a command at court and paid an official visit to the king. The king, recalling achievements of earlier times, bestowed a great carriage upon him, and Shusun Bao presented this carriage to our ruler as he reported on the completion of his orders. Our ruler did not dare defy the command of the king but again bestowed the carriage on him and had three officials record the gift in writing. As supervisor of conscripts, sir, you recorded the name. As supervisor of the military, this gentleman, Shusun Bao, joined the director of artisans in recording the regalia. And as supervisor of works, Meng Xiaobod recorded the achievement. If the carriage is not to be used now that he is dead, this would be tantamount to ignoring the ruler’s command. If the carriage is not used when the records are in the lord’s archives, this would be tantamount to abandoning the three offices. What is the purpose of these practices if he was given these regalia by command, then did not dare employ them while he was alive and again does not use them after death?” Du Xie was therefore directed to bury Shusun Bao with the carriage. At this point Ji Wuzid was plotting to do away with the central army. Niu said, “The master fervently desired just that.”250

4.8d

LORD ZHAO 5 (537 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the central army was abolished.

5.1(1)

Chu put to death its high officer Qu Shen.

5.2(2)

Our lord went to Jin.

5.3(3)

In summer, Mouyi of Ju, bringing Moulou as well as Fang and Zi with him, came in flight.251

5.4(6)

251 For Moulou, see Annals, Yin 4.1. Fang 防 was southwest of present-day Anqiu County 安丘縣, Shangdong. Zi 茲 was between Anqiu County and present-day Zhucheng County 諸城縣. All three settlements were approximately 200 kilometers to the northeast of the Lu capital.

Lord Zhao

1383

5.5(6) 秋七月，公至自晉。 5.6(7) 戊辰，叔弓帥師敗莒師于蚡泉。 5.7(9) 秦伯卒。 5.8(8) 冬，楚子、蔡侯、陳侯、許男、頓子、沈子、徐人、越人

伐吳。

左傳 5.1a(1) 五年春王正月，舍中軍，卑公室也。毀中軍于施氏，成諸臧氏。初，作中

軍，三分公室，而各有其一。季氏盡征之，叔孫氏臣其子弟，孟氏取其半 焉。及其舍之也，四分公室，季氏擇二，二子各一，皆盡征之，而貢于公。 以書使杜洩告於殯，曰：「子固欲毀中軍，既毀之矣，故告。」杜洩 曰：「夫子唯不欲毀也，故盟諸僖閎，詛諸五父之衢。」受其書而投之， 帥士而哭之。 叔仲子謂季孫曰：「帶受命於子叔孫曰：『葬鮮者自西門。』」季 孫命杜洩。杜洩曰：「卿喪自朝，魯禮也。吾子為國政，未改禮而又遷 之。群臣懼死，不敢自也。」既葬而行。

252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259

1384

The precise location of Fenquan (“Fen Spring”) is not known. For the reorganization of Lu forces into three armies, see Xiang 11.1. The Shi line is that of Shi Xiaoshu; the Zang line is that of Zang Wuzhong. According to Yang (4:1261), the Ji line supplied its military needs by requisition, whether of matériel and personnel or of harvests. The Shusun line fielded both free troops and younger, stronger conscripted men. Cf. Xiang 11.1. The corpse is that of Shusun Bao. See Zhao 4.8d. See Zhao 4.8, where the young servant Niu falsely attributes this wish to Shusun Bao. See Xiang 11.1. In that passage Shusun Bao shows more acquiescence than indignation; in the parallel passage in Guoyu, “Luyu 2,” 5.188, he objects more strongly to the move. At Zhao 4.8d, Shuzhong Dai and Nan Yi accepted bribes from Niu and attempted to interfere with the burial arrangements for Shusun Bao. Here Shuzhong Dai again suggests a demeaning ritual, falsely attributing the plan to Shusun Bao himself.

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from Jin. On the wuchen day (14), Shu Gong led out troops and defeated Ju troops at Fenquan.252

5.5(6) 5.6(7)

The Liege of Qin died.

5.7(9)

In winter, the Master of Chu, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Chen, the Head of Xǔ, the Master of Dun, the Master of Shěn, a Xu leader, and a Yue leader attacked Wu.

5.8(8)

ZUO

In Lu, a change in the military conscription system puts power more firmly in the hands of the three Huan lineages. In the fifth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the central army was abolished.253 This was to diminish our lord’s house. Criticisms of the central army were made at the home of the Shi lineage, and formal action was completed at the home of the Zang lineage.254 Originally, the central army had been formed when the holdings of our lord’s house were divided in three, each lineage keeping possession of one division of the army. The Ji lineage supplied its part entirely through levies. The Shusun lineage drafted young men. And the Meng lineage used both methods.255 When the central army was abolished, the holdings of our lord’s house were divided into four parts. The Ji lineage chose two parts, and the other two noblemen took one each. All of them supplied their armies entirely through levies, paying a tribute portion to our lord. By letter they directed Du Xie to declare before the encoffined corpse,256 “As you, sir, fervently desired to eliminate the central army, now that it has been eliminated, we make this declaration.”257 Du Xie said, “Its elimination was precisely what the master did not want, and he therefore swore a covenant about it at the gate of Lord Xi’s temple. The oath of imprecation was made at the Crossroad of the Five Fathers.”258 When Du received the letter, he flung it on the ground, then led the officers in wailing about it. Shuzhong Daib said to Ji Wuzid, “I received a command from Shusun Baoe, who said, ‘In burying those who have died without living out their years, proceed from the western gate.’”259 Ji Wuzid conveyed this command to Du Xie. Du Xie said, “The funeral for a high minister proceeds from court: that is the Lu ritual. In your capacity as head of the government, you have made no formal changes in the ritual up to now, yet you are now deviating from it. Your many subjects, though fearing punishment by death, do not dare proceed in this way.” He departed once Shusun Bao was buried.

5.1a(1)

Lord Zhao

1385

5.1b 仲至自齊，季孫欲立之。南遺曰：「叔孫氏厚，則季氏薄。彼實家亂，子

勿與知，不亦可乎？」南遺使國人助豎牛以攻諸大庫之庭，司宮射之，中 目而死。豎牛取東鄙三十邑以與南遺。 昭子即位，朝其家眾，曰：「豎牛禍叔孫氏，使亂大從，殺適立庶； 又披其邑，將以赦罪，罪莫大焉。必速殺之！」豎牛懼，奔齊。孟、仲之 子殺諸塞關之外。投其首於寧風之棘上。 仲尼曰：「叔孫昭子之不勞，不可能也。周任有言曰：『為政者不賞 私勞，不罰私怨。』《詩》云： 有覺德行， 四國順之。 5.1c 初，穆子之生也，莊叔以《周易》筮之，遇明夷䷣之謙䷎，以示卜楚丘。楚

丘曰：

260 Note that the young servant Niu has already installed Shusun Chuo as successor. 261 As Yang (4:1263) notes, this location is possibly related to the “long stores” (changfu 長府) mentioned in Analects 11.14. If there is textual corruption, it may be identical to the “Dating lineage’s storehouse,” mentioned in Zhao 18.3a. 262 As becomes apparent in Shusun Chuo’s remarks below, these were cities belonging to the Shusun lineage. 263 Or “among thorns at Ningfeng.” Their aim was perhaps to prevent the head from being recovered and buried. Ningfeng must have been located near the Qi-Lu frontier. The Sai Pass was on the border between Lu and Qi. 264 For the ancient sage Zhou Ren, see Yin 6.4. 265 The lines are from Maoshi 256, “Yi” 抑, 18A.644–50. They are cited by Shuxiang at Xiang 21.5b. Despite Confucius’ praise of Shusun Chuo, it is important to note that the latter has turned against his accomplice Niu after Niu set him up as heir and engineered the deaths of Mengbing and Zhongren, both of them rivals for the succession. He now has Niu killed to suppress the truth of his own violent rise to power. 266 The death of Shusun Dechen is recorded in Annals, Xuan 5.4 (604 Bce); the divination and prophecy recounted here therefore preceded the present episode by at least sixty-seven years. 267 Much of what follows will depend upon Chuqiu’s interpretation of Zhouyi language and of the images associated with the trigrams that make up the two hexagrams mentioned here. In “Suppression of the Light” ䷣ (Mingyi 明夷, hexagram 36), the lower trigram is “Cohesion” ☲ (Li 離), and the upper trigram is “Pure Yin” ☷ (Kun 坤). In “Modesty” ䷎ (Qian 謙, hexagram 15), the lower trigram is “Restraint” ☶ (Gen 艮), and the upper trigram is “Pure Yin,” that is, the same as in “Suppression of the Light.” The two hexagrams thus differ only in that the first (i.e., bottom) line is solid in “Suppression of the Light” and broken in “Modesty”; the former hexagram thus “becomes” the latter through the change of this first line from solid to broken. Yang (4:1264) explains the images traditionally associated with the constituent trigrams for these hexagrams. The lower trigram in “Suppression of the Light,” “Cohesion,” is associated with images of fire and the sun; the diviner refers to it as

1386

Zuo Tradition

When Zhongrena arrived from Qi, Ji Wuzia wanted to establish him as successor to Shusun Bao.260 Nan Yi said, “Whenever the Shusun lineage waxes, the Ji lineage wanes. For them this is a matter of domestic strife. Would it not be best for you to ignore it?” Nan Yi had inhabitants of the capital help Niu attack Zhongren in the courtyard of the great storehouse.261 The supervisor of palaces shot Zhongren, who was hit in the eye and died. The young servant Niu took thirty settlements on the eastern frontier and gave them to Nan Yi.262 When Shusun Chuoc acceded to his position, he held a court audience with all his domestic staff and said, “Niu has brought disaster upon the Shusun lineage, wreaking havoc in the great order of succession. He killed the legitimate heir and established the son of a secondary consort in his place. He has also divided up and distributed the settlements of the Shusun lineage in an effort to win pardon for his offenses. There are no crimes greater than these. He must be killed, and quickly.” Alarmed, Niu fled to Qi, but the sons of Mengbinga and Zhongren killed him outside the Sai Pass, then tossed his head into a thorn tree at Ningfeng.263 Confuciusc said, “Shusun Chuob’s refusal to reward Niu’s exertions was something beyond the ability of an ordinary man. There is a saying of Zhou Ren: ‘One acting as head of government neither rewards private exertions nor punishes private complaints.’264 As it says in the Odes,

5.1b

To the power of upright virtue Domains on four sides will submit.”265

In this flashback, divination by milfoil stalks, using the Zhou Changes, yields a correct prediction of Shusun Bao’s fate, in contrast to the omen of Shusun Bao’s deceptive dream (Zhao 4.8a). Earlier, when Shusun Baoc was born, his father, Shusun Dechena, had performed a milfoil divination about him with the Zhou Changes.266 Receiving as his response the “Suppression of the Light” ䷣ hexagram and the line by which it becomes the “Modesty” ䷎ hexagram, he showed it to the diviner Chuqiu.267 Chuqiu said,

5.1c

the “Sun” trigram. The lower trigram in “Modesty,” “Restraint,” is associated with the image of the mountain. Finally, the upper trigram in both hexagrams, “Pure Yin,” is associated with the image of earth and is also referred to below as the “Ox” trigram. In the Zhouyi, the line statement for the first or bottom line of “Suppression of the Light” reads, “The calling pheasant in flight. It keeps its wings low. The noble man is traveling. He does not eat for three days. He has somewhere to go. The ruler has words.” See Lynn, Classic of Changes, 357–62; and Wilhelm and Baynes, I Ching, 140. The diviner cites and interprets this language throughout his prognostication.

Lord Zhao

1387

是將行，而歸為子祀。以讒人入，其名曰牛，卒以餒死。

明夷，日也。日之數十，故有十時，亦當十位。自王已 下，其二為公、其三為卿。日上其中，食日為二，旦日為三。 明夷之謙，明而未融，其當旦乎，故曰「為子祀」。 日之謙，當鳥，故曰「明夷于飛」。明而未融，故曰「垂 其翼」。象日之動，故曰「君子于行」。當三在旦，故曰「三日 不食」。 離，火也；艮，山也。離為火，火焚山，山敗。於人為言。 敗言為讒，故曰「有攸往。主人有言」。言必讒也。 純離為牛，世亂讒勝，勝將適離，故曰「其名曰牛。」 謙不足，飛不翔；垂不峻，翼不廣。故曰「其為子後乎」 。吾子，亞卿也；抑少不終。 5.2(2) 楚子以屈申為貳於吳，乃殺之。以屈生為莫敖，使與令尹子蕩如晉逆

女。過鄭，鄭伯勞子蕩于氾，勞屈生于菟氏。晉侯送女于邢丘。子產相 鄭伯會晉侯于邢丘。

268 In this section the diviner focuses on the significance of the changing first line. The solid first line of “Suppression of the Light” is bright but close to the horizon, just like the dawn sun. The sun at noon corresponds to the king, at the time of the morning meal it corresponds to the lord, and at dawn it corresponds to the minister. Thus, the divination results indicate that Shusun Bao will achieve the rank of minister, succeeding his father and overseeing the family’s sacrifices. According to Du Yu (ZZ 43.743; cited in Yang, 4:1264), “the solar number is ten” is a reference to the ancient ten-day cycle designated by the Heavenly Stems. An alternative translation would be “the number of suns is ten,” referring to the myth that there were at one time ten suns; Yang cites this myth but deems it irrelevant to this passage. 269 See above: one of the images associated with the “Pure Yin” trigram is the ox. For “accompany,” see Jiao Xun (1763–1820), cited in Yang, 4:1265. 270 Since he does not fly high and his wingspan is not broad, he will not go far from his starting point but will return to succeed his father. 271 Takezoe (21.30–31) notes that this suspicion may have arisen because of circumstances surrounding the Zhufang campaign of Zhao 4.4a. 272 The daughter of Lord Ping of Jin is to marry King Ling of Chu. See Zhao 4.1b. The office of maréchal had been held by members of the Qu lineage: Qu Dao (Xiang 15.3), Qu Jian (Xiang 22.6b), Qu Dang (Xiang 25.8), and now Qu Jian’s son Qu Shen, who is the grandson of Qu Sheng’s brother Qu Dao. Qu Shen and Qu Sheng therefore represent different branches of the Qu lineage. 273 It is extraordinary that the ruler of a domain should go out to honor traveling officials from another domain. Zheng here shows its deference to Chu. Fan (see Xi 24.2) and the Tu estate 菟氏 were both located in Zheng. The latter was located northwest of present-day Weishi County 尉氏縣, Henan. 274 Xingqiu 邢丘 was to the northeast of present-day Wen County 溫縣, Henan, on the northern bank of the Yellow River, approximately 50 kilometers east of the Zhou royal domain and far to the southeast of the Jin capital. According to Huan 3.6, there was no occasion that would require the ruler to escort his own daughter out as a bride. Like Zheng, Jin is showing exceptional deference to powerful Chu.

1388

Zuo Tradition

This child will go into exile and return to perform ancestral sacrifices for you. He will bring a slanderer into the domain, whose name will be Niu, and in the end he will starve to death. “Suppression of the Light” is the sun. The solar number is ten, so there are ten periods in the day, which also correspond to the ten official ranks. From the king down, the second is lord, and the third is the minister. The sun at its height is in the center; the time of eating is second; dawn is third. Where “Suppression of the Light” goes to “Modesty” in its first line, it is bright but not yet high; would this not correspond to dawn? Therefore I say, “He will perform ancestral sacrifices for you.”268 Where the “Sun” ☲ trigram transforms into the lower trigram of “Modesty” ䷎, the line corresponds to a bird, so the Changes says, “The calling pheasant is in flight.” It is bright but not yet high, so it says, “It keeps its wings low.” This resembles the movement of the sun, so it says, “The noble man is traveling.” Corresponding to the third place is dawn, so it says, “He does not eat for three days.” The “Cohesion” ☲ trigram is fire. The “Restraint” ☶ trigram is a mountain. As fire, the “Cohesion” trigram burns the mountain, and the mountain is destroyed. In the human world this refers to words. Destructive words are slander, so it says, “He has somewhere to go. The ruler has words.” These words will necessarily be slanderous. Accompanying the “Cohesion” trigram is the Niu, or “Ox” ☷, trigram.269 In a chaotic world slander will prevail, and when it prevails it will attach itself to the “Cohesion” trigram, so I say, “His name will be Niu.” “Modesty” is insufficiency, and in flying Shusun Bao will not soar far. “Keeping his wings low” means they are not high; his wings are not broad. So I say, “He will be your successor.”270 You, sir, are a secondary minister; but he will fall somewhat short of having a good end.

The Chu ruler continues to consolidate his power violently, while northern rulers show extreme deference on the occasion of his wedding. The Master of Chu suspected Qu Shen of shifting his allegiance to Wu and therefore put him to death.271 He made Qu Sheng maréchal and had him go to Jin with the chief minister Wei Pia to meet and escort home a bride.272 As they passed through Zheng, the Liege of Zheng honored Wei Pia’s exertions at Fan and honored Qu Sheng’s exertions at the Tu estate.273 The Prince of Jin escorted the bride as far as Xingqiu.274 Zichan assisted the Liege of Zheng in a meeting with the Prince of Jin at Xingqiu.

5.2(2)

Lord Zhao

1389

5.3(3) 公如晉，自郊勞至于贈賄，無失禮。晉侯謂女叔齊曰：「魯侯不亦善於

禮乎？」對曰：「魯侯焉知禮！」公曰：「何為？自郊勞至于贈賄，禮無違 者，何故不知？」對曰：「是儀也，不可謂禮。禮，所以守其國、行其政 令、無失其民者也。今政令在家，不能取也；有子家羈，弗能用也；奸大 國之盟，陵虐小國；利人之難，不知其私。公室四分，民食於他。思莫在 公，不圖其終。為國君，難將及身，不恤其所。禮之本末將於此乎在，而 屑屑焉習儀以亟。言善於禮，不亦遠乎？」 君子謂叔侯於是乎知禮。

1390

Zuo Tradition

When Lord Zhao of Lu visits Jin, his actions prompt a Jin man to draw a careful distinction between ritual propriety and mere ceremonial expertise. Ru Qi’s speech is one of several in Zuozhuan that represent ritual as an overarching system of social order connecting human beings with their natural environment (cf. Zhao 25.3, 26.11). When our lord went to Jin, he made no mistakes in ritual performance, all the way from the ceremony recognizing his exertions in the outskirts of the city right through to the presentation of gifts. The Prince of Jin said to Ru Qia, “Is the Prince of Lu not excellent in his performance of ritual?” He replied, “In what way does the Prince of Lu comprehend ritual?” The lord said, “What do you mean? A man who in no way violated ritual, all the way from the ceremony recognizing his exertions in the outskirts of the city right through to the presentation of gifts! In what way does he not comprehend it?” He replied, “These are ceremonies. They cannot be called ritual.275 Ritual is that by which one keeps the domain, implements administrative commands, and does not lose his subjects. At present the issuing of administrative commands is in the hands of the great houses, and he cannot retrieve them.276 He has Zijia Yiboc but is incapable of employing him.277 He has violated his covenant with a great domain and bullied a small domain.278 He takes advantage of others’ difficulties but knows nothing of his own private affairs. The lord’s holdings have been divided in four parts,279 and the people get their sustenance elsewhere. Nobody’s thoughts are on the lord, yet he makes no plans for a good end. He acts as ruler of the domain, and the difficulties will affect him personally, yet he takes no thought of his situation. In these things are the very roots and branches of ritual, yet he busies himself with the petty details of ceremonial practice. Is it not far off the mark to say that he is excellent in his performance of ritual?” The noble man said that in this instance Ru Qie comprehended ritual.

5.3(3)

275 The same distinction is drawn in Zhao 25.3. 276 The “great houses” are the three Huan lineages, i.e., Zhongsun, Shusun, and Jisun. The head of the Jisun lineage, Ji Pingzi, will exercise de facto control of Lu during the later years of Lord Zhao’s rule while the lord languishes in exile. 277 Several episodes in Zhao 25–31 illustrate Zijia Yibo’s value as a loyal adviser to Lord Zhao, who repeatedly fails to heed his advice. 278 That is, he turned against the Jin-led covenant and annexed Ju territories; see Zhao 1.11 and 4.5. Ru Qi here contradicts himself by blaming Lord Zhao both for weakness and for bad policy, since the decision to violate the covenant and attack Ju would have been made, not by Lord Zhao, but by Ji Wuzi, who now controls the Lu government. 279 See the military reorganization described in Zhao 5.1.

Lord Zhao

1391

5.4a 晉韓宣子如楚送女，叔向為介。鄭子皮、子大叔勞諸索氏。大叔謂叔向

曰：「楚王汏侈已甚，子其戒之！」叔向曰：「汏侈已甚，身之災也，焉能 及人？若奉吾幣帛，慎吾威儀；守之以信，行之以禮；敬始而思終，終無 不復。從而不失儀，敬而不失威；道之以訓辭，奉之以舊法，考之以先 王，度之以二國，雖汏侈，若我何？」 5.4b 及楚。楚子朝其大夫，曰：「晉，吾仇敵也。苟得志焉，無恤其他。今其

來者，上卿、上大夫也。若吾以韓起為閽，以羊舌肸為司宮，足以辱晉， 吾亦得志矣。可乎？」大夫莫對。薳啟彊曰： 可。苟有其備，何故不可？恥匹夫不可以無備，況恥國乎？

是以聖王務行禮，不求恥人。朝聘有珪，享覜有璋，小有述 職，大有巡功。設机而不倚，爵盈而不飲；宴有好貨，飧有

280 See Zhao 5.2. 281 The Suo estate, or Suoshi, was located in Zheng. Zheng representatives meet with the Jin escorts as the latter travel to Chu and again on their return journey. 282 On the “majesty of bearing” (weiyi 威儀), see the long exchange in Xiang 31.13. 283 Gatekeepers were often men who had been punished with the mutilation of their feet. Palace supervisors were eunuchs.

1392

Zuo Tradition

The Chu ruler contemplates an abomination against envoys from Jin. Like Zichan (Zhao 4.1c) and Ran Dan (Zhao 12.11b), Wei Qiqiang admonishes the ambitious king while seeming almost to sanction his ambitions. Wei Qiqiang’s speech offers an account of the ritual principles of visiting, a fine overview of the history of Chu-Jin military conflict, and the single best account of the distribution of power among noble lineages in Jin and, by extension, in northern domains ruled on the same principles as Jin. Han Qia of Jin went to Chu to escort the bride there.280 Shuxiang acted as his aide. Han Hua and You Jib of Zheng rewarded their exertions at the Suo estate.281 You Jia said to Shuxiang, “The Chu king has gone beyond all bounds in his extravagance. Beware of him, sir.” Shuxiang said, “To go beyond all bounds in extravagance is a calamity for one’s own person, but how can it affect others? There will be nothing that cannot be carried out in order to the end if we present our gifts of silk, taking care over the majesty of our bearing; if we make the majesty of our bearing fast with good faith and put it into practice according to ritual propriety;282 and if we are respectful at the beginning and think about the end. We comply with him but in no way slight ceremony. We are respectful yet in no way slight our dignity. We guide him with words of instruction. We present to him the old models. We hold him to account against the former kings. We measure him by the relations between our two domains. Even if he is extravagant, what can he do to us?”

5.4a

When they had reached Chu, the Master of Chu held court with his high officers. He said, “Jin is our enemy and rival. As long as we can gain our aims with them, we need not concern ourselves with anything else. The ones who have come on this occasion are a high minister and a senior high officer. If we turned Han Qi into a gatekeeper and Shuxianga into a palace supervisor,283 it would suffice to humiliate Jin, and we would certainly have accomplished our aims. Can this be done?” None of the high officers answered. Wei Qiqiang said,

5.4b

It is acceptable. As long as you have made the necessary preparations, why should it not be acceptable? But even when you humiliate a common man, you cannot do without the necessary preparations. How much more so when you humiliate an entire domain? For this reason the sage-kings devoted themselves to practicing ritual and did not seek to humiliate others. For rulers and envoys visiting court or paying official visits there were presents of jade tablets, and for feasts and audiences there were presents of jade plaques. For small domains there were visits to report on their official duties; for great domains there were excursions to inspect meritorious deeds. Armrests were set out, but no one leaned on them. Goblets were filled, but no one drank from them.

Lord Zhao

1393

陪鼎，入有郊勞，出有贈賄，禮之至也。國家之敗，失之道 也，則禍亂興。 5.4c

城濮之役，晉無楚備，以敗於邲。邲之役，楚無晉備，以敗於 鄢。自鄢以來，晉不失備，而加之以禮，重之以睦，是以楚 弗能報，而求 親焉。既獲姻親，又欲恥之，以召寇讎，備之 若何，誰其重此？若有其人，恥之可也。若其未有，君亦圖 之。晉之事君，臣曰可矣：求諸\侯而麇至；求昏而薦女，君 親送之，上卿及上大夫致之。 猶欲恥之，君其亦有備矣。不然，奈何？韓起之下，趙 成、中行吳、魏舒、范鞅、知盈；羊舌肸之下，祁午、張趯、籍 談、女齊、梁丙、張骼、輔躒、苗賁皇，皆諸侯之選也。韓襄 為公族大夫，韓須受命而使矣；箕襄、邢帶、叔禽、叔椒、子 羽，皆大家也。韓賦七邑，皆成縣也。羊舌四族，皆彊家也。 晉人若喪韓起、楊肸，五卿、八大夫輔韓須、楊石，因其十 家九縣，長轂九百，其餘四十縣，遺守四千，奮其武怒，以

284 See Xi 28.3 (Chengpu) and Xuan 12.2 (Bi). 285 Cheng 16.5. Yan is Yanling. 286 According to Du Yu (ZZ 43.747), Wei Qiqiang means that if Chu had a worthy minister to lead the defense against Jin revenge, the plan to humiliate the envoys might succeed. 287 According to Du Yu (ZZ 43.747), Ji Xiang and Xing Dai were of the Han lineage, while Shu Qin, Shu Jiao, and Ziyu were sons of Han Qi by secondary consorts. 288 The “nine districts” are the seven of the Han lineage and two of the Yang lineage. As for “ten branches,” Yu Yue (cited in Yang, 4:1269) believes that the “four Yangshe branches” above should read “three Yangshe branches,” so that with the seven Han branches the total would be ten. 289 According to Yang (4:1269), “long-axle chariots” are war chariots. Each of the nine districts would supply one hundred chariots.

1394

Zuo Tradition

At banquets there were amity gifts. For meals there were supplementary dishes. On the entry of a visitor there was a reward for his exertions in the outskirts of the city, and on his departure there was a presentation of gifts. This was the height of ritual propriety. The failure of domains and patrimonies comes when this way is lost and trouble and turmoil erupt in consequence. After the Chengpu campaign, Jin made no preparations against Chu and was therefore defeated at Bi.284 After the campaign at Bi, Chu made no preparations against Jin and was therefore defeated at Yan.285 Since Yan, Jin has not failed to make preparations and has even supplemented these with ritual propriety and fortified them with friendliness. For this reason Chu has not been able to take revenge but has instead sought a marriage alliance. Having succeeded in contracting a marriage with them, if you now want to humiliate them and summon up that enmity, then how will you prepare yourself against it? Who could hold up under such a burden? If you had the right person for it, then it might be acceptable to humiliate them.286 But as you do not, then think carefully about it! Jin’s service to you, my lord, has been what this subject would describe as “acceptable.” When you made your request to gather the princes, they all came together. When you sought a marriage alliance, they offered a bride. The ruler himself led her forth, and a high minister and a senior high officer escorted her to you. If still you wish to humiliate them, then indeed you must have the necessary preparations in place. Otherwise, how will you manage? Han Qi’s staff includes Zhao Cheng, Zhonghang Wu, Wei Shu, Fan Yang, and Zhi Daozia. Shuxianga’s staff includes Qi Wu, Zhang Ti, Ji Tan, Ru Qi, Liang Bing, Zhang Ge, Fu Li, and Fen Huanga. All of them are the cream of the crop among men serving the princes. Han Xiang acts in the capacity of high officer of the ruling lineages. Han Xu has already received commands and undertaken missions. Ji Xiang, Xing Dai, Shuqin, Shujiao, and Gongsun Huia are all of great patrimonies.287 The territory from which Han exacts levies consists of seven settlements, all of them full-sized dependencies. The four Yangshe branches to which Shuxiang belongs are all powerful patrimonies. Should the Jin leaders lose Han Qi and Shuxiangd, and their five ministers and eight high officers assist Han Xu and Shuxiang’s son Yang Shi, and they also draw upon their ten branches and nine districts,288 they will have altogether nine hundred long-axle chariots289—with the remaining forty districts furnishing a defending force of four thousand—and rise in armed indignation to take vengeance for this great humiliation. With Yangshe Chia outlining the strategy and Zhonghang Wud and Wei Shu leading the force, there is no

Lord Zhao

5.4c

1395

報其大恥。伯華謀之，中行伯、魏舒帥之，其蔑不濟矣。君將 以親易怨，實無禮以速寇，而未有其備，使群臣往遺之禽， 以逞君心，何不可之有？ 王曰：「不穀之過也，大夫無辱。」厚為韓子禮。王欲敖叔向以其所不 知，而不能，亦厚其禮。 韓起反，鄭伯勞諸圉。辭不敢見，禮也。 5.5 鄭罕虎如齊，娶於子尾氏。晏子驟見之。陳桓子問其故。對曰：「能用善

人，民之主也。」

5.6(4, 5)

夏，莒牟夷以牟婁及防、茲來奔。牟夷非卿而書，尊地也。莒人愬于晉， 晉侯欲止公。范獻子曰：「不可。人朝而執之，誘也；討不以師，而誘 以成之，惰也。為盟主而犯此二者，無乃不可乎！請歸之，間而以師討 焉。」乃歸公。秋七月，公至自晉。

5.7(6) 莒人來討，不設備。戊辰，叔弓敗諸蚡泉，莒未陳也。

290 Yu 圉 was perhaps south of present-day Qi 杞, Henan, about 80 kilometers east of the Zheng capital. 291 It would be presumptuous of Han Qi, minister of a domain, to accept this honor from the ruler of another domain. 292 On the “master of the people,” see Xuan 15.2 and note 286.

1396

Zuo Tradition

obstacle they will not overcome. But if you, my lord, have your heart set on replacing friendship with enmity and speeding on our attackers by a concrete display of ritual impropriety, meanwhile making none of the necessary preparations, in effect sending your many subjects forth to be taken prisoner by them, all to indulge your desire, then what would be unacceptable about that?

The king said, “This is my mistake, deficient as I am. You, sir, need not condescend to say more.” The king arranged a lavish ritual entertainment for Han Qic. The king wanted to overawe Shuxiang with things the latter knew nothing of, but he could not do it. The king also arranged a lavish ritual entertainment for him. On Han Qi’s return, the Liege of Zheng honored his exertions at Yu.290 Han Qi declined, claiming that he did not dare have an audience.291 His refusal was in accordance with ritual propriety. Han Hu of Zheng went to Qi to marry a wife from the lineage of Ziwei. Yan Yingb had several audiences with him. Chen Wuyua asked him the reason for this. Yan Ying replied, “He has been able to employ excellent men. He is the good master of the people.”292

5.5

For some decades Lu and the small domain of Ju have conducted skirmishes along their shared border (see, e.g., Xiang 6.4, 8.5), only recently returning to fighting after a long period of peace (Xiang 20.1, Zhao 1.2a). As on other occasions (e.g., Zhao 13.3e), Lu’s aggressions against its neighbor endanger relations with Jin, the overlord and defender of covenants, and bring retribution upon Lu representatives at the Jin court. In summer, Mouyi of Ju, bringing Moulou as well as Fang and Zi with him, came in flight. That Mouyi’s name was written even though he was not a minister is to show respect for his territory. The Ju leaders protested to Jin, and the Prince of Jin wanted to detain our lord. Fan Yangb said, “That is not acceptable. To arrest a man when he visits court amounts to availing oneself of false pretenses. Not to chastise him by means of military action but instead to do it by means of false pretenses is laziness. Would it not be unacceptable to violate these two precepts while acting as covenant chief? I request that he be repatriated, then chastised by military action after a due interval.” Our lord was therefore repatriated. In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from Jin.

5.6(4, 5)

The men of Ju came to chastise us, but they had made no defensive preparations. On the wuchen day (14), Shu Gong defeated them at Fenquan: this was because Ju had not formed ranks.

5.7(6)

Lord Zhao

1397

5.8a(8) 冬十月，楚子以諸侯及東夷伐吳，以報棘、櫟、麻之役。薳射以繁揚之

師會於夏汭。越大夫常壽過帥師會楚子于瑣。聞吳師出，薳啟彊帥師 從之，遽不設備，吳人敗諸鵲岸。楚子以馹至於羅汭。 5.8b 吳子使其弟蹶由犒師，楚人執之，將以釁鼓。王使問焉，曰：「女卜來吉

乎？」對曰：「吉。寡君聞君將治兵於敝邑，卜之以守龜，曰：『余亟使 人犒師，請行以觀王怒之疾徐，而為之備，尚克知之！』龜兆告吉，曰： 『克可知也。』君若驩焉好逆使臣，滋敝邑休怠，而忘其死，亡無日矣。 今君奮焉震電馮怒，虐執使臣，將以釁鼓，則吳知所備矣。敝邑雖羸， 若早修完，其可以息師。難易有備，可謂吉矣。且吳社稷是卜，豈為一 人？使臣獲釁軍鼓，而敝邑知備，以禦不虞，其為吉，孰大焉？國之守 龜，其何事不卜？一臧一否，其誰能常之？城濮之兆，其報在邲。今此行 也，其庸有報志？」乃弗殺。

293 See Zhao 4.7. 294 Fanyang 繁揚 was located in present-day Xincai 新蔡, Henan. 295 Suo 瑣 was located east of present-day Huoqiu 霍丘, Anhui. 296 Que’an 鵲岸 was an area on the north bank of the Yangzi extending from presentday Wuwei 無為 to Tongling 銅陵, Anhui. 297 The Luo River enters the Huai River at Luoshan 羅山, Henan. The bend of the Luo River referred to here may be at Miluo 汩羅, Hunan. 298 Chu was defeated at Chengpu (see Xi 28.3) but victorious at Bi (Xuan 12.2). According to Yang (4:1272), an auspicious Chu divination before Chengpu anticipated the later victory at Bi. That divination is not mentioned in Zuozhuan. 299 That is, just as Chu prevailed at Bi after an initial loss at Chengpu, Wu might respond to the execution of its envoy by striving even harder for victory over Chu.

1398

Zuo Tradition

Chu forces fail to make progress in continued campaigns against Wu (see Zhao 4.7). A clever Wu envoy saves his own life with a heroic discourse on divination. In winter, in the tenth month, the Master of Chu attacked Wu with the forces of the princes and the Eastern Yi in revenge for the campaign of Ji, Li, and Ma.293 Wei She joined them at the bend of the Xia River with an army from Fanyang.294 The Yue high officer Changshou Guo led an army and met the Master of Chu at Suo.295 When he heard that the Wu army had set out, Wei Qiqiang led an army to pursue them, but in his hurry he made no defensive preparations, and the Wu forces defeated him at Que’an.296 The Master of Chu reached the bend of the Luo River by post carriage.297

5.8a(8)

When the Master of Wu sent his younger brother Guiyou to feast the Chu army for its exertions, the Chu forces took him prisoner and prepared to consecrate their drums with his blood. The king sent someone to ask him, “When you divined about coming, was it auspicious?” He replied, “It was auspicious. When our unworthy ruler heard that you were preparing to drill your troops in our humble settlement, he divined about it with the guardian turtle shell kept in the domain and said, ‘I would urgently send a man to celebrate the efforts of the army, requesting that he go to observe the intensity of the king’s anger, then make the defensive preparations accordingly. Would that he succeed in learning of this.’ The cracks on the shell gave an auspicious report, indicating, ‘His success can be known.’ Our fall could come any day if you, my lord, receive this subject envoy happily and with goodwill, deepening our humble settlement’s indolence and making us forget about death. But Wu will know what defensive preparations to make now if you, my lord, are enraged and let fly the lightning bolt of your anger, brutally seizing an envoy and preparing to consecrate your drums with his blood. Weak as our humble settlement is, if we put all in readiness well in advance, we will have the wherewithal to stop your army. To make defensive preparations regardless of difficulties or ease can be deemed auspicious. What is more, it was for the altars of the Wu domain that we divined. How could it have been for a single man? If this envoy should have an opportunity to be used in consecrating the drums of the army, so that our humble settlement knows that defensive preparations are necessary in order to protect itself against unexpected calamity, what auspiciousness could be greater? What affair does the domain’s guardian turtle shell not divine for? Sometimes auspicious, sometimes inauspicious, who is there who can be sure of it? The auspices for Chengpu had their fulfillment at Bi.298 Might not Wu have an ambition for similar fulfillment after my mission?”299 Therefore, he was not put to death.

5.8b

Lord Zhao

1399

5.8c 楚師濟於羅汭，沈尹赤會楚子，次於萊山，薳射帥繁揚之師先入南懷，

楚師從之，及汝清。吳不可入。楚子遂觀兵於坁箕之山。是行也，吳早 設備，楚無功而還，以蹶由歸。楚子懼吳，使沈尹射待命于巢，薳啟彊 待命于雩婁，禮也。 5.9(7) 秦后子復歸於秦，景公卒故也。

春秋 6.1(1) 六年春王正月，杞伯益姑卒。 6.2(2) 葬秦景公。 6.3(4) 夏，季孫宿如晉。 6.4 葬杞文公。 6.5(5) 宋華合比出奔衛。 6.6(8) 秋九月，大雩。 6.7(9) 楚薳罷帥師伐吳。 6.8(10) 冬，叔弓如楚。 6.9(11) 齊侯伐北燕。

300 Mount Lai 萊山 was possibly in the south of Guangshan County 光山縣, Henan. 301 For the Fanyang army, see Zhao 5.8a. Nanhuai 南懷 and Ruqing 汝清 were probably situated between the Huai and Yangzi Rivers. 302 Du Yu (ZZ 43.749) explains that Wu had already prepared its defenses against the Chu campaign.

1400

Zuo Tradition

The Chu army crossed at the bend of the Luo, where the Governor of Shěn, Chi, joined the Master of Chu. They camped at Mount Lai.300 Wei She led the army of Fanyang ahead into Nanhuai; the Chu army followed them, and they reached Ruqing.301 It was not possible to enter Wu.302 The Master of Chu then reviewed his troops at Mount Zhiji.303 On this expedition, Wu had made its defensive preparations well in advance, and Chu turned back without achieving anything, taking Guiyou back with them. Fearing Wu, the Master of Chu had the Governor of Shěn, She, await orders at Chao and Wei Qiqiang await orders at Yulou.304 This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

5.8c

An exiled Qin nobleman returns home from Jin, fulfilling the prediction of Ru Qi (Zhao 1.8a). Qiana of Qin went home to Qin because Lord Jing had died.

5.9(7)

LORD ZHAO 6 (536 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Yigu, the Liege of Qǐ, died.

6.1(1)

Lord Jing of Qin was buried.

6.2(2)

In summer, Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) went to Jin.

6.3(4)

Lord Wen of Qǐ was buried.

6.4

Hua Hebi of Song departed and fled to Wei.

6.5(5)

In autumn, in the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

6.6(8)

Wei Pi of Chu led out troops and attacked Wu.

6.7(9)

In winter, Shu Gong went to Chu.

6.8(10)

The Prince of Qi attacked Northern Yan.

6.9(11)

303 Mount Zhiji 坻箕之山 was located near present-day Chichu 踟躕, south of Chao 巢, Anhui. 304 For Chao, northwest of modern Hefei, Anhui, see map 4. Yulou (see Xiang 26.6) was about 100 kilometers to the west, north of present-day Jinzhai, Anhui. Takezoe (21.41) notes that this Governor of Shěn, She, who appears also at Zhao 4.7, may be the same as the Governor of Shěn, Chi, mentioned earlier in the passage.

Lord Zhao

1401

左傳 6.1(1) 六年春王正月，杞文公卒。弔如同盟，禮也。 6.2(2) 大夫如秦，葬景公，禮也。 6.3a 三月，鄭人鑄刑書。叔向使詒子產書，曰： 始吾有虞於子，今則已矣。昔先王議事以制，不為刑辟，懼

民之有爭心也。猶不可禁禦，是故閑之以義，糾之以政，行 之以禮，守之以信，奉之以仁；制為祿位，以勸其從；嚴斷刑 罰，以威其淫。懼其未也，故誨之以忠，聳之以行，教之以 務，使之以和，臨之以敬，蒞之以彊，斷之以剛；猶求聖哲 之上、明察之官、忠信之長、慈惠之師，民於是乎可任使也， 而不生禍亂。民知有辟，則不忌於上。並有爭心，以徵於書， 而徼幸以成之，弗可為矣。 6.3b

夏有亂政，而作禹刑；商有亂政，而作湯刑；周有亂政，而作 九刑： 三辟之興，皆叔世也。

305 Du Yu (ZZ 43.749) suggests that Lu is praised because it offered proper condolences despite the Qǐ-Lu tensions of Xiang 29. 306 Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen 19.735–36) reads yi 儀 for yi 議: “provided models for affairs as they decided them.” 307 Given a detailed penal code, subjects would contend over definitions and loopholes. 308 As Yang (4:1275) notes, Mozi 19.138 cites “Tang’s Punishments for Officials” (Tang zhi guan xing 湯之官刑). 309 For the “Nine Punishments,” see Wen 18.7a.

1402

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Lord Wen of Qǐ died. Condolences were offered as for a covenant partner, in accordance with ritual propriety.305

6.1(1)

High officers went to Qin for the burial of Lord Jing. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

6.2(2)

Jin leaders object to the introduction of a written law code in Zheng. Jin itself would adopt the same measure, and be censured for it in similar terms, some twenty-three years later (Zhao 29.5). In the third month, the Zheng leaders cast a penal code in bronze. Shuxiang had a letter carried to Zichan, which said:

6.3a

In the beginning I expected much from you, but now I no longer do so. Long ago the former kings consulted about matters to decide them306 but did not make penal codes, for they feared that the people would become contentious.307 When they still could not manage the people, they fenced them in with dutifulness, bound them with governance, employed them with ritual propriety, maintained them with good faith, and fostered them with nobility of spirit. They determined the correct emoluments and ranks, to encourage their obedience, and meted out strict punishments and penalties, to overawe them in their excesses. Fearing that that still was not enough, they taught them loyalty, rewarded good conduct, instructed them in their duties, employed them harmoniously, supervised them with vigilance, oversaw them with might, and judged them with rigor. Moreover, they sought superiors who were sage and principled, officials who were brilliant and discerning, elders who were loyal and trustworthy, and teachers who were kind and generous. With this, then, the people could be employed without disaster or disorder. When the people know that there is a code, they will not be in awe of their superiors. All together, they bicker, appeal to the code, and seek to achieve their goals by trying their luck. They cannot be governed. When there was disorder in the Xia government, they created the “Punishments of Yu.” When there was disorder in the Shang government, they created the “Punishments of Tang.”308 When there was disorder in the Zhou government, they composed the “Nine Punishments.”309 These three penal codes in each case arose in the dynasty’s final age.

Lord Zhao

6.3b

1403

今吾子相鄭國，作封洫，立謗政，制參辟，鑄刑書，將 以靖民，不亦難乎？《詩》曰： 儀式刑文王之德， 日靖四方。 又曰：

儀刑文王， 萬邦作孚。 如是，何辟之有？民知爭端矣，將棄禮而徵於書，錐刀之

末，將盡爭之。亂獄滋豐，賄賂並行。 終子之世，鄭其敗乎？肸聞之：「國將亡，必多制」，其 此之謂乎！ 復書曰：「若吾子之言－－僑不才，不能及子孫，吾以救世也。既不承命， 敢忘大惠！」 士文伯曰：「火見，鄭其火乎！火未出，而作火以鑄刑器，藏爭辟 焉。火如象之，不火何為？」

310 311 312 313 314 315

1404

See Xiang 30.13. See Zhao 4.6. For initial opposition to Zichan’s reforms, see Xiang 30.13b. The nature of the three statutes is not known. Maoshi 272, “Wo jiang” 我將, 19B.717–18. Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.37. These lines are also cited at Xiang 13.3b. Yang (4:1276) argues that these tools are the ones used to inscribe the characters of the penal code in the mold before casting. Alternatively, they are the implements used to inflict mutilating punishments on lawbreakers.

Zuo Tradition

Now as chief minister in the domain of Zheng you have created fields and ditches,310 established an administration that is widely reviled,311 fixed the three statutes,312 and cast the penal code. Will it not be difficult to calm the people by such means? As it says in the Odes, Take the virtue of King Wen as a guide, a model, a pattern; Day by day calm the four quarters.313 And as it says elsewhere, Take as model King Wen, And the ten thousand realms have trust.314 In such an ideal case, why should there be any penal codes at all? When the people have learned how to contend over points of law, they will abandon ritual propriety and appeal to what is written. Even at chisel’s tip and knife’s edge they will contend.315 A chaotic litigiousness will flourish and bribes will circulate everywhere. Will Zheng perhaps perish at the end of your generation? I have heard that “when a domain is about to fall, its regulations are sure to proliferate.” Perhaps this is what is meant?316

Zichan wrote back to him: “It is as you have said, sir. I am untalented, and my good fortune will not reach as far as my sons and grandsons. I have done it to save this generation. Although I cannot obey your orders, how would I dare to forget your great kindness?” Shi Gaia said, “When the Fire Star appears, there will be a fire in Zheng.317 The Fire Star has not yet appeared, yet they have built a great fire to cast the penal vessels in which they will keep the controversial code. The Fire Star is then the sign of fire: how can there fail to be a fire?”318

316 It is worth recalling here that Shuxiang’s line was extinguished shortly after his death (Zhao 28.2a), while Zichan’s domain survived for some decades. While the Zuozhuan authors are sometimes thought to have sided with Shuxiang in his condemnation of the Zheng code, this failed prediction suggests a reading more sympathetic with Zichan and his methods. 317 According to Zhao 17.5, the Fire Star (Antares) appeared above the horizon at evening starting in the fifth month of the Zhou calendar. 318 The predicted fires come in Zhao 6.6.

Lord Zhao

1405

6.4(3) 夏，季孫宿如晉，拜莒田也。晉侯享之，有加籩。武子退，使行人告曰：

「小國之事大國也，苟免於討，不敢求貺。得貺不過三獻。今豆有加，下 臣弗堪，無乃戾也？」韓宣子曰：「寡君以為驩也。」對曰：「寡君猶未 敢，況下臣，君之隸也，敢聞加貺？」固請徹加，而後卒事。晉人以為知 禮，重其好貨。 6.5(5) 宋寺人柳有寵，大子佐惡之。華合比曰：「我殺之。」柳聞之，乃坎、用

牲、埋書，而告公曰：「合比將納亡人之族，既盟于北郭矣。」公使視 之，有焉，遂逐華合比。合比奔衛。 於是華亥欲代右師，乃與寺人柳比，從為之徵，曰：「聞之久矣。」 公使代之。見於左師，左師曰：「女夫也必亡。女喪而宗室，於人何有？ 人亦於女何有？《詩》曰： 宗子維城， 毋俾城壞， 毋獨斯畏。 女其畏哉！」

319 That is, there were more stands of food than were called for according to the ritual for such visits. 320 Cf. Zhao 1.4, where five toasts are prepared for Zhao Meng as representative of the leading domain. 321 It should be noted that Ji Wuzi is at the time the most powerful man in Lu, and the man he formally serves as ruler, Lord Zhao, is in reality very weak. 322 For the “exiled ones,” see Xiang 17.5. This is the same ploy that the eunuch Huiqiang Yilei employed to incriminate Cuo, Zuo’s rival, in Xiang 26.8. 323 According to Du Yu (ZZ 43.752), Hua Hai was Hua Hebi’s younger brother. 324 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.632–36. 325 For Hua Hai’s departure from Song, see Zhao 20.5.

1406

Zuo Tradition

A Lu envoy, thanking Jin for acquiescing to Mouyi’s secession to Lu, insists on ritual correctness during ceremonial toasts. (See Zhao 5.6.) In summer, Ji Wuzic went to Jin: this was to bow in thanks for the Ju territories. When the Prince of Jin offered him ceremonial toasts, there were extra dishes.319 Ji Wuzid withdrew and had an envoy make a report: “When a small domain serves a large domain, as long as it escapes chastisement, it does not dare to seek any gifts. If it does receive gifts, these are not to exceed three toasts.320 Now there are extra food stands, and I, a lowly subject, am unworthy of it. Will it not give offense?” Han Qia said, “Our unworthy ruler has done it for your enjoyment’s sake.” He replied, “Even our unworthy ruler would not dare to accept, much less a lowly subject. Should the slave of a ruler presume to hear of extra gifts?”321 He staunchly requested that the extra dishes be removed, and only when they were removed did he complete the ceremony. The Jin leaders considered him one who understood ritual and increased the amity gifts presented to him.

6.4(3)

In a renewal of internecine tensions in Song, a powerful eunuch plots successfully against a noble enemy by forging a covenant document. (See Xiang 17.5, Zhao 10.5.) In Song, the eunuch Liu enjoyed the ruler’s favor but was hated by the heir apparent Zuo. Hua Hebi said, “I will kill him.” Hearing of this threat, Liu dug a pit, sacrificed a victim, buried a document, and then reported to the lord, “Hebi is preparing to admit those from the house of the exiled ones, with whom he has already sworn a covenant at the outer enclosure, in the north.”322 The lord sent someone to look there, and there it was. He then expelled Hua Hebi. Hebi fled to Wei. At this point Hua Hai323 wanted to take Hua Hebi’s place as minister of the right, so he allied himself with the eunuch Liu and went along with him in furnishing evidence against Hebi, saying, “I have been hearing of this for a long time.” The lord had him take Hua Hebi’s place. When he was presented to the minister of the left, Xiang Xub, the latter said, “A man of your ilk is bound to go into exile. When you have destroyed your own ancestral house, what qualms would you have about others? And what qualms would others have about you? As it says in the Odes,

6.5(5)

The ancestral heirs are our walls: Do not let the wall fall. Do not stand alone: this you must fear.324

You should be afraid.”325

Lord Zhao

1407

6.6 六月丙戌，鄭災。 6.7a 楚公子棄疾如晉，報韓子也。過鄭，鄭罕虎、公孫僑、游吉從鄭伯以勞

諸柤，辭不敢見。固請，見之。見如見王。以其乘馬八匹私面。見子皮如 上卿，以馬六匹；見子產以馬四匹；見子大叔以馬二匹。禁芻牧採樵，不 入田，不樵樹，不采蓺，不抽屋，不強匄。誓曰：「有犯命者，君子廢，小 人降！」舍不為暴，主不慁賓。往來如是，鄭三卿皆知其將為王也。 6.7b 韓宣子之適楚也，楚人弗逆。公子棄疾及晉竟，晉侯將亦弗逆。叔向曰：

「楚辟，我衷，若何效辟？《詩》曰： 爾之教矣， 民胥效矣。 從我而已，焉用效人之辟？書曰：『聖作則。』無寧以善人為則，而則人 之辟乎？匹夫為善，民猶則之，況國君乎？」晉侯說，乃逆之。

326 Zhao 5.4. 327 Zha 柤 is supposed to have been in Zheng, near the Zheng capital. 328 According to Du Yu (ZZ 43.752), ritual does not permit Qiji to be honored with an audience with a ruler. 329 Qiji offered Han Hu gifts suitable to a Chu high minister. 330 Note that even though Zichan is in charge of the Zheng government (Xiang 30.13a), he is a secondary minister, ranking below the superior minister Han Hu in Zheng’s ritual and official hierarchy. You Ji is an inferior minister. 331 Qiji’s measures suggest that the large retinue of a traveling nobleman would normally live off the land, causing a good deal of harm to the local populace. Yang (4:1279) here cites the “Visiting Ritual” chapter of Yili (19.226), which stipulates that on entering the domain the envoy must swear a vow, presumably guaranteeing that he will heed the host domain’s wishes. Gongzi Qiji may also be forcing his men to swear this vow. 332 Maoshi 223, “Jiao gong” 角弓, 15A.503–6. 333 A version of this passage, not attested elsewhere in early texts, was incorporated into the spurious “Yue ming” chapter of the Documents (10.139).

1408

Zuo Tradition

Shi Gai’s prediction (Zhao 6.3b) is fulfilled when fires break out in Zheng. In the sixth month, on the bingxu day (7), there was a conflagration in Zheng.

6.6

A Chu nobleman, acting as envoy to Jin, distinguishes himself by his correct behavior during a stop in Zheng. Gongzi Qiji is King Ling’s younger brother and the future King Ping. Gongzi Qiji of Chu went to Jin: this was in answer to Han Qic’s visit.326 As he passed through Zheng, Han Hu, Zichana, and You Ji of Zheng accompanied the Liege of Zheng as he honored Qiji’s exertions at Zha.327 Qiji declined on the grounds that he would not dare accept an audience.328 After they pressed the request insistently, he had an audience with them. He behaved in this audience as if he were having an audience with the king, presenting eight horses from his chariot teams as a gift for the private meeting. He behaved in his audience with Han Hua as if Han Hu were a high minister, presenting six horses.329 For his audience with Zichan he presented four horses, and for his audience with You Jib he presented two horses.330 He barred the fodder gatherers and herdsmen from gathering firewood, entering the fields, cutting trees, and gathering crops. He told them not to remove timbers from buildings and not to enforce requests. He swore a vow: “For those who violate these commands, noblemen will be removed from office, and commoners will be demoted.”331 The lodgers committed no acts of violence, and the hosts were in no way troubled by their guests. Both on his trip out and on his return it was like this, and all the three ministers knew that he would one day be king of Chu.

6.7a

When Han Qia went to Chu, the Chu leaders did not come out to meet him. When Gongzi Qiji reached the Jin border, the Prince of Jin likewise intended not to go out to meet him. Shuxiang said, “Chu has erred, while we are on the straight and narrow. Why should we imitate error? As it says in the Odes,

6.7b

These things you have taught, And all the people imitate them.332

Let us follow our own way, and nothing more. What need do we have to imitate the errors of others? As it says in the Documents, ‘The sage acts as exemplar.’333 Would it not be better to take excellent men as exemplars rather than treating others’ errors as exemplary? The people treat as exemplary even a commoner who does something excellent. How much more so the ruler of a domain?” The Prince of Jin was pleased and therefore went out to meet Gongzi Qiji.

Lord Zhao

1409



6.8 (6)

秋九月，大雩，旱也。



6.9 (7)

徐儀楚聘于楚，楚子執之，逃歸。懼其叛也，使薳洩伐徐。吳人救之。令 尹子蕩帥師伐吳，師于豫章，而次于乾谿。吳人敗其師於房鍾，獲宮廄 尹棄疾。子蕩歸罪於薳洩而殺之。

6.10(8) 冬，叔弓如楚，聘，且弔敗也。 6.11(9) 十一月，齊侯如晉，請伐北燕也。士匄相士鞅逆諸河，禮也。晉侯許之。

十二月，齊侯遂伐北燕，將納簡公。晏子曰：「不入。燕有君矣，民不貳。 吾君賄，左右諂諛，作大事不以信，未嘗可也。」

春秋 7.1(1) 七年春王正月，暨齊平。 7.2(3) 三月，公如楚。 7.3 叔孫婼如齊涖盟。 7.4(4) 夏四月甲辰朔，日有食之。 7.5(11) 秋八月戊辰，衛侯惡卒。

334 Although Du Yu (ZZ 43.752) identified Yichu as a high officer of Xu, Yang (4:1279), cites the 1888 discovery, in Gao’an County, Jiangxi, of two vessels associated with Yichu 義楚, King of Xu, who must be the same individual. 335 Yuzhang 豫章 was a large region encompassing present-day Huoqiu 霍丘, Liu’an 六安, and Huoshan 霍山, Anhui, stretching westward into Guangshan 光山 and Gushi 固始, Henan. Ganxi 乾谿 was to the southeast of present-day Bo County 亳縣, Anhui, about 100 kilometers east of the Chen capital. 336 Fangzhong 房鍾 was about 100 kilometers southeast of Ganxi. This Qiji from the Dou line, father of Dou Weigui, is not the same as the one mentioned in Zhao 6.7.

1410

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice: there was a drought.

6.8(6)

When Yichu of Xu went on an official visit to Chu, the Master of Chu arrested him, but Yichu escaped and returned home.334 Fearing lest he turn against him, the Chu king sent Wei Xie to attack Xu, but the men of Wu came to the aid of Xu. The chief minister Wei Pia led out troops and attacked Wu. They stationed the army at Yuzhang, then set up camp at Ganxi.335 The men of Wu defeated their army at Fangzhong and captured the deputy of the palace stables, Qiji.336 Wei Pia blamed Wei Xie and put him to death.

6.9(7)

In winter, Shu Gong went to Chu. This was for an official visit and to offer condolences on the defeat.

6.10(8)

In the eleventh month, the Prince of Qi went to Jin; this was to request permission for the attack on Northern Yan. Fan Gaia acted as assistant to Fan Yanga, and they went out to meet him at the Yellow River. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. The Prince of Jin granted the Prince of Qi’s request. In the twelfth month, then, the Prince of Qi attacked Northern Yan, intending to install Lord Jian in power. Yan Yingb said, “He will not enter Yan. Yan already has a ruler, and the people are not divided in their allegiance to him. Our ruler is greedy for gifts, his attendants are fawning, and in undertaking great affairs they do not keep good faith. This has never been acceptable.”

6.11(9)

LORD ZHAO 7 (535 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, in the royal first month, they made peace with Qi.337

7.1(1)

In the third month, our lord went to Chu.

7.2(3)

Shusun Chuo went to Qi to oversee the swearing of the covenant.

7.3

In summer, in the fourth month, on the jiachen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.338 In autumn, in the eight month, on the wuchen day (26), E, the Prince of Wei, died.

7.4(4)

7.5(11)

337 Following upon Annals, Zhao 6.9, and explicated by Zuozhuan, Zhao 7.1, this entry should mean that Yan made peace with Qi. Guliang, Zhao 6 (17.127), and some commentators understand instead that it was Lu that made peace with Qi. 338 The eclipse took place on 18 March 535 Bce.

Lord Zhao

1411

7.6(12) 九月，公至自楚。 7.7(14) 冬十有一月癸未，季孫宿卒。 7.8(15) 十有二月癸亥，葬衛襄公。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年春王正月，暨齊平，齊求之也。癸巳，齊侯次于虢。燕人行成，曰：

「敝邑知罪，敢不聽命？先君之敝器請以謝罪。」公孫皙曰：「受服而 退，俟釁而動，可也。」二月戊午，盟于濡上。燕人歸燕姬，賂以瑤罋、玉 櫝、斝耳。不克而還。 7.2 楚子之為令尹也，為王旌以田。芋尹無宇斷之，曰：「一國兩君，其誰堪

之？」及即位，為章華之宮，納亡人以實之。無宇之閽入焉。無宇執之， 有司弗與，曰：「執人於王宮，其罪大矣。」執而謁諸王。王將飲酒，無宇 辭曰： 天子經略，諸侯正封，古之制也。封略之內，何非君土？食

土之毛，誰非君臣？故《詩》曰：

339 Du Yu (ZZ 44.758) puts Guo 虢 at the frontier between Qi and Yan. It was perhaps to the northwest of present-day Renqiu County 任丘縣, Hebei. 340 According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.758), Gongsun Xi was a Qi high officer. 341 The location of the river is uncertain. According to Du Yu, it flowed through present-day Gaoyang 高陽, Henan, and entered the Yi 易 at Zheng 鄭, Henan. For pronunciation, see Wang Li gu Hanyu zidian, 639. 342 That is, they turned back without installing Lord Jian. 343 Takezoe, 21.55. 344 According to Zhouli 27.420–22 (cited in Yang, 4:1283), only the Zhou king could use twelve pennants of some sixty chi in length as decoration for his hunting chariot. Sixty chi would be approximately 13.5 meters, or 44 feet, according to the reconstructions of the editors of Hanyu da cidian; see Hanyu da cidian, appendix. Men of lower ranks used fewer and shorter pennants. Cf. Zhao 10.2b.

1412

Zuo Tradition

In the ninth month, our lord arrived from Chu. In winter, in the eleventh month, on the guiwei day (13), Jisun Su (Ji Wuzi) died. In the twelfth month, on the guihai day (23), Lord Xiang of Wei was buried.

7.6(12) 7.7(14)

7.8(15)

ZUO

In a continuation of the previous year’s narrative, Qi and Yan make an uneasy peace. In the seventh year, in spring, in the royal first month, they made peace with Qi: this was because Qi sought it. On the guisi day (18), the Prince of Qi set up camp at Guo.339 The Yan leaders sent a mission seeking an accord, saying, “Our humble settlement understands its offense. Would we dare not heed your command? We request to redeem our crime with the humble vessels of our former rulers.” Gongsun Xi said, “It would be permissible to accept their surrender and retreat, then to await an opening and make our move.”340 In the second month, on the wuwu day (14), they swore a covenant on the banks of the Er River.341 The Yan leaders sent the bride Yan Ji and presented as bribes a jade vase, a jade-decorated case, and an eared goblet. The Qi forces turned back without gaining their objective.342

7.1(1)

In Chu, Shen Wuyu, who has already appeared as a critic of the Chu king (Zhao 4.4b), defends his prerogatives against the waxing power of the Chu king by an apt reference to Zhou and Chu classical precedents. The speech has been called one of the most pointed remonstrances in all history.343 When the Master of Chu was chief minister, he used the pennants reserved for the Chu king while hunting.344 Shen Wuyu, the deputy for the hunt, cut the pennants to shorten them, saying, “Who will tolerate it if one domain has two rulers?” When the king acceded to his position and was building the Zhanghua Palace, he gave absconders refuge in order to fill out its staff. Wuyu’s gatekeeper took refuge there. Wuyu came to seize him, but the officer in charge refused to hand him over, explaining, “It is a great offense to seize someone in the king’s palace.” They seized Wuyu and brought him before the king, who was preparing to drink wine. Shen Wuyu explained himself by saying,

7.2

The Son of Heaven determines the borders and the princes rectify the frontiers: that was the system of old. Within the borders and frontiers, what land is there that does not belong to the ruler? Of those who eat what grows upon the land, who is there who is not a subject of the ruler? Therefore, as it says in the Odes,

Lord Zhao

1413

普天之下， 莫非王土； 率土之濱， 莫非王臣。 天有十日，人有十等。下所以事上，上所以共神也。故王臣公，

公臣大夫，大夫臣士，士臣皁，皁臣輿，輿臣隸，隸臣僚，僚 臣僕，僕臣臺。馬有圉，牛有牧，以待百事。 今有司曰：「女胡執人於王宮？」將焉執之？周文王之 法曰：「有亡，荒閱」，所以得天下也。吾先君文王作僕區之 法，曰：「盜所隱器，與盜同罪」，所以封汝也。若從有司， 是無所執逃臣也。逃而舍之，是無陪臺也。王事無乃闕乎？ 昔武王數紂之罪以告諸侯曰：「紂為天下逋逃主，萃淵藪。」 故夫致死焉。君王始求諸侯而則紂，無乃不可乎？若以二 文之法取之，盜有所在矣。 王曰：「 取而臣以往。盜有寵，未可」。遂赦之。

345 Maoshi 205, “Beishan” 北山, 13A.444–45. 346 For day-periods, see Zhao 5.1c. 347 King Wen reigned from 689 to 675 Bce. For the fixing of the Chu borders at the Ru, see Ai 17.4. As the Kong Yingda subcommentary notes (ZZ-Kong 44.759), wiping out robbers would allow Chu to extend its political control into new regions.

1414

Zuo Tradition

Everywhere under heaven, No land is not the king’s; To the very edges of the land, No one is not a subject of the king.345 In Heaven there are the ten day-periods; among men there are the ten ranks.346 By this means inferiors serve their superiors and superiors show reverence for the spirits. Therefore, a king is served by his lords, the lords are served by high officers, high officers are served by officers, officers are served by menials, menials are served by commoners, commoners are served by convicts, convicts are served by hard laborers, hard laborers are served by bondsmen, and bondsmen are served by slaves. For horses there are grooms and for cattle there are herdsmen to handle all the many duties. Now the officer in charge has said, “Why are you seizing a man in the royal palace?” Where else should I seize him? The law of King Wen of Zhou said, “When there is a fugitive, conduct a grand search.” That is how King Wen obtained all-under-heaven. Our own former ruler King Wen of Chu instituted a law concerning the hiding of stolen goods: “Whosoever is the receiver of robbers’ goods is guilty of the same offense as the robbers.” That is how he extended his borders to the Ru River.347 Were we to go along with the officer in charge, that would amount to there being no place where absconding servants can be seized. And if they were pardoned after they absconded, there would be no service staff. Would there not then be lapses in royal affairs? In past times, King Wu enumerated Zhòu’s crimes in a proclamation to the princes, saying, “Zhòu made himself host to all the wanted absconders in the realm, gathering them like fish in a deep pool or beasts in a marsh.”348 Therefore, men gave their lives for King Wu. Would it not be unacceptable if you, my lord, were to follow the example of Zhòu as you begin to seek the allegiance of the princes? If we are to claim property in accordance with the laws of the two Kings Wen, then the place where the robber dwells is now apparent.349

The king said, “Take your servant and go. This ‘robber’ enjoys favor and as yet cannot be touched.” Wuyu was then pardoned.

348 This passage, otherwise unattested in early texts, was incorporated into the “Wu cheng” 武成 chapter of the Documents (11.162). 349 Although he stops short of stating it directly, Wuyu has made the case that the Chu king himself, as one who harbors a fugitive, is a robber.

Lord Zhao

1415

7.3a 楚子成章華之臺，願與諸侯落之。大宰薳啟彊曰：「臣能得魯侯。」薳啟

彊來召公，辭曰：「昔先君成公命我先大夫嬰齊曰：『吾不忘先君之好， 將使衡父照臨楚國，鎮撫其社稷，以輯寧爾民。』嬰齊受命于蜀。奉承 以來，弗敢失隕，而致諸宗祧。日我先君共王引領北望，日月以冀，傳序 相授，於今四王矣。嘉惠未至，唯襄公之辱臨我喪。孤與其二三臣悼心 失圖，社稷之不皇，況能懷思君德？今君若步玉趾，辱見寡君，寵靈楚 國，以信蜀之役，致君之嘉惠，是寡君既受貺矣，何蜀之敢望？其先君 鬼神實嘉賴之，豈唯寡君？君若不來，使臣請問行期，寡君將承質幣而 見于蜀，以請先君之貺。」

350 After Chu’s defeat of Lu forces at Shu (likely to the northwest of the Lu capital, near Mount Tai), Lord Cheng promised to send his son Gongheng to Chu as a hostage. Gongheng fled home to Lu without reaching Chu. See Cheng 2.8. 351 For Lord Xiang’s attendance of King Kang’s funeral, see Xiang 29.1. 352 The “orphaned son” of King Kang was Jia’ao, murdered by Gongzi Wei, the present King Ling (Zhao 1.13a). For the Lu Lord’s funeral visit, see Xiang 28.12.

1416

Zuo Tradition

Chu leaders secure the attendance of the Lord of Lu at the opening of a grand new building, the Zhanghua Terrace. The invitation amounts to a very elegant threat of military attack. When the Master of Chu had completed the Zhanghua Terrace, he hoped to have princes in attendance as he dedicated it. The grand steward Wei Qiqiang said, “I can secure the Prince of Lu.” Wei Qiqiang came to summon our lord, offering this explanation: “In times past, your former ruler Lord Cheng gave a command to our former high officer Zichonga, saying, ‘We have not forgotten the good relations of our former rulers, so we will send Gonghenga to oversee and shine over the domain of Chu and to steady the altars of the domain, in order to pacify your people.’ Zichonga received this command at Shu.350 He carried it back with him, not daring to forget any part of it, and announced it at the Ancestral Temple. In days past our former ruler King Gong craned his neck as he gazed northward, keeping hope alive from day to day and month to month, and this hope has been passed down in order from one king to another for four reigns now. But the expected magnanimity has not reached us yet. Only Lord Xiang deigned to attend one of our funerals.351 The orphaned son and his closest men, in their bereavement, erred in their planning.352 Even for the altars of the domain they did not have enough time, much less for cherishing the virtue of your ruler in their thoughts. If now you should put forward your jade foot and condescend to give our unworthy ruler an audience, favoring the domain of Chu with your numinous power, in order to make good on the covenant made during the campaign at Shu and to present your magnanimity, then this in itself our unworthy ruler would receive as a gift. How would he presume to hope for fulfillment of the promise made at Shu?353 Even the ghosts and spirits of our former rulers would endorse this with goodwill. How could it only be our unworthy ruler himself? On the other hand, if you, my lord, fail to come, I, a subject envoy, must ask you to specify a date for setting out. Our unworthy ruler will bear gifts of silk and hold an audience with you at Shu in order to request the gift promised by your former ruler.”354

7.3a

353 Du Yu (ZZ 44.760) specifies that Chu is not requesting a fulfillment of the original promise for a hostage but hopes only for a visit from the Lu ruler. 354 Although the terminology employed here would normally apply to the date for “setting out” for a covenant meeting between the two domains, Wei Qiqiang is threatening that Chu would demand the promised hostage, taking military action against Lu to enforce the claim.

Lord Zhao

1417

7.3b(2) 公將往，夢襄公祖。梓慎曰：「君不果行。襄公之適楚也，夢周公祖而

行。今襄公實祖，君其不行！」子服惠伯曰：「行！先君未嘗適楚，故周公 祖以道之；襄公適楚矣，而祖以道君。不行，何之？」三月，公如楚。鄭伯 勞于師之梁。孟僖子為介，不能相儀。及楚，不能答郊勞。 7.4(4) 夏四月甲辰朔，日有食之。晉侯問於士文伯曰：「誰將當日食？」對曰：

「魯、衛惡之。衛大，魯小。」公曰：「何故？」對曰：「去衛地如魯地，於 是有災，魯實受之。其大咎其衛君乎！魯將上卿。」公曰：「《詩》所謂 彼日而食， 于何不臧 者，何也？」對曰：「不善政之謂也。國無政，不用善，則自取謫于日月之 災，故政不可不慎也。務三而已：一曰擇人，二曰因民，三曰從時。」

355 A sacrifice was performed to the spirit of the roads before a journey. Yang (4:1286) cites references to the practice in Odes pieces—Maoshi 261, “Han yi” 韓奕, 18D.679– 84; 260 “Zheng min” 烝民, 18C.674–77; and 245 “Sheng min” 生民, 17A.587–96—all thought to date to the first centuries of the first millennium Bce. 356 This dream was not mentioned in the narrative of Lord Xiang’s visit in Xiang 28 and 29. The Lu ruler’s visit to Chu was so unusual that it may have been thought to have needed the extra sanction that would come from a dream of this kind. 357 Zi Shen holds that only a dream of the Zhou Duke sacrificing could justify a new trip to Chu. As Zifu Huibo will rightly argue, however, the dream seems to suggest that the precedent of Lord Xiang’s trip was enough to justify Lord Zhao’s expedition. 358 See Xiang 9.5a. 359 Meng Xizi’s failure in ritual performance will justify his later decision to have his sons study with Confucius (Zhao 7.12).

1418

Zuo Tradition

As our lord was preparing to go, he dreamed of Lord Xiang offering sacrifice to the spirit of the roads.355 Zi Shen said, “The ruler will not make good on his plan to go. When Lord Xiang went to Chu, he dreamed of the Zhou Duke sacrificing to the spirit of the roads before he went.356 Now that the dream has Lord Xiang sacrificing to the spirit of the roads, the ruler will not go.”357 Zifu Huibo said, “He will go. Our former ruler had never gone to Chu, so the Zhou Duke sacrificed to the spirit of the roads to show him the way. Lord Xiang has already gone to Chu and has sacrificed to the spirit of the roads to show our ruler the way. If he does not go there, where will he go?” In the third month, our lord went to Chu. The Liege of Zheng rewarded his exertions at Shizhiliang.358 Meng Xizi acted as our lord’s aide but was unable to help him with the ceremonies. When they reached Chu, he was unable to respond properly to the ritual honors for exertions in the outskirts of the capital.359

7.3b(2)

In Jin, ruler and minister discuss the implications of a solar eclipse. The predictions are fulfilled later in this year (Zhao 7.11, 7.14). In summer, in the fourth month, on the jiachen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. The Prince of Jin asked Shi Gaia, “To whom will the eclipse of the sun be matched?” He replied, “Lu and Wei will suffer for it. In Wei it will be great suffering; in Lu, less.” The lord said, “Why?” He replied, “It left the field of Wei and entered the field of Lu.360 In the first of these there will be a disaster, and Lu will suffer the effects. The greater punishment will fall upon the ruler of Wei. In Lu it will be a high minister.” The lord said, “What does the ode refer to when it says,

7.4(4)

That eclipse of the sun: In what way have we failed to be good?”361

He replied, “It refers to poor administration. If the domain lacks correct administration and fails to use excellent men, it brings upon itself punishment in the form of calamities of the sun and moon. Therefore, one cannot but be careful about administration. Be devoted to three things, and nothing more: first, choosing men; second, acting in the interests of the people; and third, acting in accordance with the seasons.”362

360 That is, the path of the eclipse passed through celestial fields corresponding to the two domains. The fields corresponding to Lu and Wei were the Jianglou 降婁 and Zouzi 娵訾 Jupiter stations, respectively, the former in the west-northwest, in Andromeda and Aries, the latter in the north-northwest, in Aquarius and Pegasus. For the “field-allocation” system and the astrological equivalents to terrestrial regions, see Pankenier, “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology.” 361 Maoshi 193, “Shiyue zhi jiao” 十月之交, 12B.405–9. 362 A version of this anecdote is found in the “Zheng li” 政理 chapter of Shuoyuan (7.222).

Lord Zhao

1419

7.5 晉人來治杞田，季孫將以成與之。謝息為孟孫守，不可，曰：「人有言曰：

『雖有挈缾之知，守不假器，禮也。』夫子從君，而守臣喪邑，雖吾子亦 有猜焉。」季孫曰：「君之在楚，於晉罪也。又不聽晉，魯罪重矣。晉師必 至，吾無以待之，不如與之。間晉而取諸杞。吾與子桃，成反，誰敢有 之？是得二成也。魯無憂，而孟孫益邑，子何病焉？」辭以無山，與之 萊、柞。乃遷于桃。晉人為杞取成。 7.6 楚子享公于新臺，使長鬣者相。好以大屈。既而悔之。薳啟強聞之，見

公。公語之，拜賀。公曰：「何賀？」對曰：「齊與晉、越欲此久矣。寡君 無適與也，而傳諸君。君其備禦三鄰，慎守寶矣，敢不賀乎？」公懼，乃 反之。

363 See Zhao 6.1 and note 300. 364 Cheng had originally been Qǐ territory but had since passed into the hands of Lu’s Zhongsun lineage. Ji Wuzi’s plan would thus weaken a rival noble lineage. Cheng was about 25 kilometers to the northwest of the Lu capital. See also Annals, Huan 6.2, note 45. 365 Cf. Cheng 2.2 and Zhao 32.4b. 366 Xie Xi, serving as sheriff of Cheng for the Zhongsun lineage, cannot relinquish Cheng while his master Meng Xizi is in Chu with the Lu ruler. 367 Tao was about 20 kilometers west and slightly north of Cheng. See also Annals, Xiang 17.4, note 480. Lu and the Zhongsun lineage did indeed recover Cheng (see Ding 8.10), but exactly when is not known. 368 According to Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao; cited in Yang, 4:1288–89), Lai 萊 and Zuo 柞 were the names of small mountains or the settlements associated with them. Both are thought to have been located near present-day Laiwu County 萊蕪 縣, Shandong.

1420

Zuo Tradition

In response to the Lu Lord’s trip to Chu, Jin forces Lu to return lands taken from Qǐ. Lord Ping of Jin acts on behalf of his mother, whose natal domain is Qǐ (see Xiang 29.11). The trading of settlements between the Jisun and Zhongsun lineages, completed without consulting the absent Lu ruler, shows how the powerful lineages of Lu exercise control over lands outside the capital. Jin leaders came to demarcate the territories of Qǐ.363 Ji Wuzid was going to give them Cheng.364 Xie Xi, in his capacity as sheriff of Cheng for the Zhongsun line, would not permit it. He said, “There is a saying among men: ‘Even for one whose knowledge is sufficient only for drawing water with a flask, accordance with ritual propriety means not lending out the vessels one is supposed to protect.’365 If, while our master is in attendance upon the ruler, his subject, in his capacity as sheriff, should lose a settlement, then even you, sir, would have your suspicions about it.”366 Ji Wuzid said, “That the ruler is in Chu is already in Jin’s eyes an offense. If we do not heed Jin now, Lu will bear a double burden of guilt. The Jin army is bound to come, and we will have made no preparations to meet them. It would be better to give them Cheng now. We will then wait for an opportunity from Jin and retake it from Qǐ. I will give you Tao, and when Cheng returns to us, who else would dare hold it?367 In this way you will get two Chengs, Lu will suffer no misfortune, and Zhongsun will get an additional settlement. What worry is there in that?” When he declined on the grounds that there were no mountains at Tao, he was given Lai and Zuo.368 He therefore moved to Tao, and the Jin leaders took Cheng for Qǐ.

7.5

Wei Qiqiang, displaying the same sort of rhetorical cleverness he showed in his invitation to Lord Zhao of Lu (see Zhao 7.3a), recovers for the Chu king a gift he regrets having given. The Master of Chu offered our lord ceremonial toasts at the new terrace and had his long-maned strongmen wait upon them. The Chu king gave our lord the Great Curve bow as an amity gift but afterward regretted it. Wei Qiqiang, hearing of it, went to see our lord. When our lord spoke of the gift, Qiqiang bowed low and congratulated him. Our lord said, “Why do you congratulate me?” He replied, “Qi, Jin, and Yue have lusted after this bow for a long time. Our unworthy ruler did not single any of them out as recipient of this gift but passed it on to you. Should I presume not to congratulate you when you have defenses so well prepared against your neighbors on three sides that you can protect such a treasure with care?” Alarmed, our lord returned the bow.

7.6

Lord Zhao

1421

7.7 鄭子產聘于晉。晉侯有疾，韓宣子逆客，私焉，曰：「寡君寢疾，於今三

月矣，並走群望，有加而無瘳。今夢黃熊入于寢門，其何厲鬼也？」對曰： 「以君之明，子為大政，其何厲之有？昔堯殛鯀于羽山，其神化為黃熊， 以入于羽淵，實為夏郊，三代祀之。晉為盟主，其或者未之祀也乎！」韓 子祀夏郊。晉侯有間，賜子產莒之二方鼎。 7.8 子產為豐施歸州田於韓宣子，曰：「日君以夫公孫段為能任其事，而賜

之州田。今無祿早世，不獲久享君德。其子弗敢有，不敢以聞於君，私致 諸子。」宣子辭。子產曰：「古人有言曰：『其父析薪，其子弗克負荷。』 施將懼不能任其先人之祿，其況能任大國之賜？縱吾子為政而可，後之 人若屬有疆埸之言，敝邑獲戾，而豐氏受其大討。吾子取州，是免敝邑 於戾，而建置豐氏也。敢以為請。」宣子受之，以告晉侯。晉侯以與宣 子。宣子為初言，病有之，以易原縣於樂大心。

369 That is, according to Du Yu (44.762), they have hurried to offer prayers at all the sacred mountains and rivers in Jin. Compare Chu high officers’ recommendation that King Zhao perform sacrifices to the Yellow River at a time of illness (Ai 6.4c). 370 Gun was the legendary father of the sage-king Yu. The location of Feather Mount is not known. While Yu was famous for having ended a great flood by creating river channels and draining the floodwaters to the sea (see, e.g., Mencius 3B.9), Gun was known for his futile attempt to block up the sources of the waters. After his execution for this failure, his spirit changed into the form of a bear and dove into the depths of the Yellow River at the foot of Feather Mount. Yet according to Zichan, Gun received sacrifices in recognition of his efforts at flood control. 371 These cauldrons, presented to Jin as gifts by the little domain of Ju, would have been square and four-legged rather than round and three-legged. For this episode, cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 8,” 478. 372 Note again that the lands in question are not lands of the royal domain Zhou 周 but of the Jin district of Zhou 州. 373 Yue Daxin is a Song high officer (see Zhao 21.4). For the “earlier dispute,” see Zhao 3.4. Yuan, approximately 50 kilometers north of the Zhou capital at present-day Luoyang, became Jin territory back in Xi 25.4. It is not clear when it had passed into the hands of Song’s Yue lineage.

1422

Zuo Tradition

As he did once before (Zhao 1.12), Zichan of Zheng puts his historical knowledge to use in diagnosing an illness of Lord Ping of Jin. Zichan of Zheng went on an official visit to Jin. The Prince of Jin had an illness, and when Han Qia went to meet the guest, he said to him privately, “Our unworthy ruler has lain sick for three months already. We have hastened to complete all the prospect sacrifices, yet he has not recovered but has grown worse.369 Now he has dreamed of a tawny bear entering through the door of his bedchamber. What vengeful wraith or ghost would that be?” Zichan replied, “Given your ruler’s illustriousness and your role as chief administrator, how could there be a vengeful ghost? Long ago, when Yao exterminated Gun at Feather Mount, his spirit changed into a tawny bear and entered the deep pool of Yu.370 He was the recipient of the outskirts sacrifice under Xia, and all three dynasties of the Xia, Shang, and Zhou made offerings to him. Could it be that Jin, as covenant chief, has not yet made offerings to him?” As soon as Han Qic made offerings in the Xia outskirts, the Prince of Jin rallied. He then bestowed upon Zichan the two square cauldrons of Ju.371

7.7

After the death of Gongsun Duan of Zheng, his son, Feng Shi, declines to inherit a gift of land awarded to Gongsun Duan by the Jin ruler, instead returning it to Jin through Zichan. Thus is fulfilled Han Qi’s expectation that the Han lineage would ultimately recover this supposed gift (Zhao 3.4b). Zichan returned the lands of Zhou372 to Han Qia for Feng Shi and said, “Some time ago, because you regarded Gongsun Duan as capable of upholding his duties, you bestowed upon him the lands of Zhou. Now misfortune has befallen us, and he has died young. As he has failed to enjoy your ruler’s gift for very long, his son dares neither to keep the lands nor to bring them to the attention of his own ruler. Privately he presents them to you, sir.” Han Qib declined. Zichan said, “The ancients had a saying: ‘The father splits firewood, but the son can’t so much as shoulder it.’ Feng Shib fears that he will not even be able to maintain the emoluments of his predecessors, much less the gift of a great domain. Even if you, sir, should permit it as chief administrator, our humble settlement will get the blame if people of later times should happen to have a dispute about the border, and the Feng lineage will suffer a great chastisement. If you, sir, will now take Zhou, you will save us from blame and shore up the Feng lineage. I presume to present this request.” Han Qib accepted the lands and reported it to the Prince of Jin, who then bestowed them on Han Qib. Because of the earlier dispute, Han Qib was not comfortable keeping them, so he traded them to Yue Daxin for the Yuan district.373

7.8

Lord Zhao

1423

7.9a 鄭人相驚以伯有，曰：「伯有至矣！」則皆走，不知所往。鑄刑書之歲二

月，或夢伯有介而行，曰：「壬子，余將殺帶也。明年壬寅，余又將殺段 也。」及壬子，駟帶卒，國人益懼。齊、燕平之月，壬寅，公孫段卒，國人 愈懼。其明月，子產立公孫洩及良止以撫之，乃止。 子大叔問其故。子產曰：「鬼有所歸，乃不為厲，吾為之歸也。」大 叔曰：「公孫洩何為？」子產曰：「說也。為身無義而圖說，從政有所反 之，以取媚也。不媚，不信。不信，民不從也。」

374 That is, last year; see Zhao 6.3. 375 This day was the second day of the third month, 536 Bce. 376 The month of the truce was the first month of this year. See Zhao 7.1. The thirtyninth day of the cycle was the twenty-seventh day of the month. 377 Gongsun Xie was the son of Zikong, who was killed in Xiang 19.9. Liang Zhi was the son of Liang Xiao. 378 This is an example of paronomasia: by Schuessler’s reconstruction (ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, 267), gui 歸 was Old Chinese *kwəi; gui 鬼 was Old Chinese *kuiʔ.

1424

Zuo Tradition

The ghost of Liang Xiao (see Xiang 30.10) haunts Zheng. Zichan calms the people by appointing heirs for Liang Xiao and Zikong, both of whom had failed in their attempts to monopolize Zheng power and died as a result of internecine conflicts in Zheng (see Xiang 29.17, 30.2, 30.10a). Whatever his own beliefs about the existence of these ghosts, Zichan shows here a canny ability to maintain the balance of power among noble lineages and to manipulate public opinion by appearing to appease the spirits of his vanquished enemies. The people of Zheng spooked one another with tales of Liang Xiaoa, saying, “Liang Xiaoa is here!” And with that they would all rush off with no idea where they were going. In the second month of the year when the penal writings were cast in bronze, 374 someone dreamed that Liang Xiaoa walked in armor and said, “On the renzi day (49) of the sexagenary cycle I will kill Dai. Next year on the renyin day (39) of a cycle I will also kill Duan.” When the renzi day came and Si Dai died, the inhabitants of the capital were more frightened than ever before.375 In the month of the peace accord between Qi and Yan, on the renyin day, Gongsun Duan died, and the inhabitants of the capital grew still more terrified.376 In the following month, Zichan established Gongsun Xie and Liang Zhi as successors to calm Liang Xiao’s ghost, and the haunting then stopped.377 You Jib asked the reasons for this. Zichan said, “When ghosts have hosts,378 they do not become vengeful ghosts. I made a hosting place for him.” You Jia said, “What about Gongsun Xie?”379 Zichan said, “I did it to please the people. In their own lives Liang Xiao and Zikong lacked propriety and sought pleasure. That we who are in charge of government now commit a minor violation is to curry favor, for lacking favor, we will have no credibility.380 Without credibility, the people will not follow us.”381

7.9a

379 The question is why a successor should be set up for Zikong, who has not become a vengeful ghost. 380 The “violation” in question is instituting sacrifices for two men whose deeds in life in no way merited posthumous rewards. 381 Setting up Gongsun Xie as a successor for Zikong helped divert attention from the unusual act of appointing a successor to Liang Xiao; it also helped win the favor of the populace.

Lord Zhao

1425

7.9b 及子產適晉，趙景子問焉，曰：「伯有猶能為鬼乎？」子產曰：「能。人生

始化曰魄，既生魄，陽曰魂。用物精多，則魂魄強，是以有精爽至於神 明。匹夫匹婦強死，其魂魄猶能馮依於人，以為淫厲，況良霄，我先君穆 公之冑、子良之孫、子耳之子、敝邑之卿、從政三世矣。鄭雖無腆，抑諺 曰『蕞爾國』，而三世執其政柄，其用物也弘矣，其取精也多矣，其族又 大，所馮厚矣，而強死，能為鬼，不亦宜乎！」 7.10 子皮之族飲酒無度，故馬師氏與子皮氏有惡。齊師還自燕之月，罕朔殺

罕魋。 罕朔奔晉。韓宣子問其位於子產。子產曰：「君之羈臣，苟得容以 逃死，何位之敢擇？卿違，從大夫之位；罪人以其罪降，古之制也。朔於 敝邑，亞大夫也；其官，馬師也，獲戾而逃，唯執政所寘之。得免其死， 為惠大矣，又敢求位？」宣子為子產之敏也，使從嬖大夫。

382 That is, dies. 383 Since yong 用 can mean “use” or “sacrifice,” it is unclear whether the goods referred to here are those the deceased has consumed during his life or instead the offerings made during and after the funeral. 384 On possession, see Zhao 8.1. Takezoe (21.65) says that the person possessed might reproduce the sound or movements of the deceased. 385 According to Takezoe (21.65), Gongzi Quji, Zi’er, and Liang Xiao had served as chief administrators.

1426

Zuo Tradition

When Zichan went to Jin, Zhao Chenga asked him, “Is Liang Xiaoa still capable of appearing as a ghost?” Zichan said, “He is. When a person’s vitality first undergoes transformation,382 it is called an aura. Once this aura has been produced, its brighter aspect is called a soul. If the deceased has consumed choice foods in plentiful quantities, then the aura-soul retains its vitality, and for this reason it has an unsullied brightness that may extend to spiritual manifestations.383 Even an ordinary man or woman who suffers a violent death has an aura-soul capable of possessing some other person and in this way becoming an aggressive demon.384 How much more so Liang Xiao, a descendant of our former ruler Lord Mu, a grandson of Gongzi Qujia, and a son of Zi’er, for as chief ministers of our domain he and his forefathers participated in government for three generations?385 Although Zheng has no great bounty, still, as the saying puts it, ‘Small it is, to be sure, but still a domain.’ So when that family held the handle of government for three generations, the goods they consumed were abundant, choice, and plentiful. And since their house was also large, its basis of support was sturdy. And then in addition Liang Xiao suffered a violent death. Is it not appropriate that he should be able to appear as a ghost?”

7.9b

After civil strife in Zheng, an exile takes office in Jin. The house of Han Hua went beyond all bounds in their drinking, and for this reason there arose an enmity between the lineage of Han Shuo, a trainer of horses, and the lineage of Han Hua. In the month of the Qi army’s return from Yan, Han Shuo killed Han Tui.386 Han Shuo fled to Jin. Han Qia inquired of Zichan about a rank for Han Shuo.387 Zichan said, “When an itinerant subject of our lord manages to find some place of refuge where he may escape death, how should he presume to choose a rank? When a minister departs his domain, he assumes the rank of a high officer, and those guilty of crimes are demoted according to their crimes. This was the system of old. In our humble settlement, Shuo was a secondary high officer, holding the office of commander of horse. Now that he has fled after committing a crime, it is entirely up to those in charge of government how they should place him. It will be a great kindness if he manages to avoid execution. How should he presume to ask for a rank?” On account of Zichan’s astuteness, Han Qib had Han Shuo assume the rank of favored high officer.388

7.10

386 Han Tui was a younger brother of Han Hu and therefore a cousin of Han Shuo. According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.764), the murder took place in the second month of this year. 387 Although their names are romanized in the same way, the Han 韓 lineage of Jin and the Han 罕 lineage of Zheng are unrelated. 388 Favored high officer was one rank lower than secondary high officer.

Lord Zhao

1427

7.11(5) 秋八月，衛襄公卒。晉大夫言於范獻子曰：「衛事晉為睦，晉不禮焉，庇

其賊人而取其地，故諸侯貳。《詩》曰： 䳭鴒在原， 兄弟急難。 又曰： 死喪之威， 兄弟孔懷。 兄弟之不睦，於是乎不弔；況遠人，誰敢歸之？今又不禮於衛之嗣，衛 必叛我，是絕諸侯也。」獻子以告韓宣子。宣子說，使獻子如衛弔，且反 戚田。 衛齊惡告喪于周，且請命。王使郕簡公如衛弔，且追命襄公曰：「叔 父陟恪，在我先王之左右，以佐事上帝，余敢忘高圉、亞圉？」 7.12(6) 九月，公至自楚。孟僖子病不能相禮，乃講學之，苟能禮者從之。

389 In Xiang 26.3, 26.5, and 26.7, Jin sided with the Wei rebel Sun Linfu and seized Wei territories. Jin has a history of siding with Wei ministers against Wei rulers. 390 Both passages are from Maoshi 164, “Chang di” 常棣, 9B.320–22. The figure of domains as brothers joined in fraternal harmony appears also in the recitation scene in Xiang 26.7, specifically in Guo Ruo’s choice of Maoshi 173, “Luxiao” 蓼蕭, 10A.348–50, as the princes persuade Jin to release the Wei ruler. 391 Qī was the settlement that Sun Linfu led in revolt against the Wei ruler in Xiang 26.2.

1428

Zuo Tradition

After the death of the Lord of Wei (fulfilling the prediction of Zhao 7.4), Jin takes the opportunity to restore good relations with Wei. In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Xiang of Wei died. The high officers of Jin said to Fan Yangb, “Although Wei has served Jin on good terms, Jin has not treated Wei with propriety, for it has harbored Wei thugs and seized its lands.389 For this reason the princes have shifted their allegiance. As it says in the Odes,

7.11(5)

Water birds on dry ground: Brothers make haste in times of trouble.

And, in another place, In awful times of death and mourning, Brothers cherish each other most.390

When brothers are not on good terms, and therefore do not exchange condolence visits, then how much less likely is it that any outsider will dare to give allegiance? Now if we go further by not treating the Wei successor with ritual propriety, Wei is certain to turn against us, and this will amount to breaking with the princes.” Fan Yangc communicated this to Han Qia. Pleased, Han Qib had Fan Yangc go to Wei on a condolence visit and also return the lands of Qī.391 Qi E of Wei sent notice of the death to the Zhou court and requested a commission. The king sent the Cheng Duke Jian to Wei on a condolence visit and also bestowed a retroactive commission upon Lord Xiang, which said, “Our uncle, having ascended to Heaven, is counted among the attendants to the left and right of the former kings and ancestors, there to aid them in their service to the god on high. Would I dare to forget Gaoyu and Yayu?”392 In Lu, Meng Xizi, embarrassed at his own earlier incompetence (see Zhao 7.3), looks forward to the rise of Confucius, who will be famous as a teacher of ritual. In the ninth month, our lord arrived from Chu. Meng Xizi, chagrined that he had been unable to assist in the rituals,393 now discussed them and practiced them. Any man who had some ability in ritual became part of his entourage.

7.12(6)

392 Gaoyu and Yayu were members of the predynastic Zhou line who had received retroactive honors from the Shang king. According to Takezoe (21.67), the king means that when even such remote ancestors were not forgotten, the Zhou king’s distant relative Lord Xiang is certain to be remembered. 393 At Zhao 7.3, it is noted that while accompanying Lord Zhao on the road to Chu, Meng botched ceremonial responses during an entertainment in Zheng.

Lord Zhao

1429

及其將死也，召其大夫，曰：「禮，人之幹也。無禮，無以立。吾聞 將有達者曰孔丘，聖人之後也，而滅於宋。其祖弗父何以有宋而授厲 公；及正考父、佐戴、武、宣，三命茲益共，故其鼎銘云： 一命而僂， 再命而傴， 三命而俯， 循牆而走， 亦莫余敢侮。 饘於是， 鬻於是， 以餬余口。 其共也如是。臧孫紇有言曰：『聖人有明德者，若不當世，其後必有達 人。』今其將在孔丘乎！我若獲沒，必屬說與何忌於夫子，使事之，而學 禮焉，以定其位。」 故孟懿子與南宮敬叔師事仲尼。 仲尼曰：「能補過者，君子也。《詩》曰： 君子是則是效。 孟僖子可則效已矣。」 7.13 單獻公棄親用羈。冬十月辛酉，襄、頃之族殺獻公而立成公。

394 Annals, Zhao 24.1, records his death. As Du Yu (ZZ 44.765) notes, Zuozhuan here looks ahead. 395 If tradition is correct about Confucius’ birth, he was about thirty-four in the year of Meng’s death (518 Bce). 396 Fufu He was a son of Lord Min of Song (r. 691–682); Lord Min’s death is mentioned at Zhuang 12.1. Although accounts of the event differ, Du Yu (ZZ 44.765) and other sources suggest that Fufu He, in line for the succession after the assassination of the lord, declined in favor of his younger brother, Lord Li. See Yang, 4:1295. 397 Zheng Kaofu was a great-grandson of Fufu He. This image of Confucius’s ancestor contrasts strikingly with the martial depiction of his purported father, He of Zou (or Shuliang He), given in Xiang 10.2a. 398 Read in the language of the middle first millennium Bce, the inscription would have rhymed in lines 1–4 and 8. Line 5 was a near rhyme. 399 Yue is Nangong Jingshu and Heji is Meng Yizi. Nangong Jingshu (literally, “revered younger brother of the southern palace”) has his name in this form because he was to become the head of the Nangong (or “southern palace”) branch lineage of the Meng lineage. 400 Maoshi 161, “Lu ming” 鹿鳴, 9B.315–17. 401 Lord Qing was Lord Xian’s grandfather; Lord Xiang, his great-grandfather.

1430

Zuo Tradition

When he was about to die, 394 he summoned his high officers and said, “Ritual propriety is the very trunk of man, for without ritual propriety, one lacks the means to stand up. I have heard that there will be an accomplished man named Confuciusa,395 a descendant of a sagely line extinguished in Song.396 His ancestor Fufu He, having Song in his possession, bestowed it upon Lord Li. Coming down to the generation of Zheng Kaofu, the latter assisted Lords Dai, Wu, and Xuan, and with each of his three commissions he became more reverent.397 Thus, his cauldron inscription says, With the first commission I bent, with the second I stooped, and with the third I bowed low, hurrying along beside the wall. And indeed no one dared insult me. Make porridge in this vessel. Make gruel in this, and with it fill my mouth.398

That is how reverent he was. Zang Wuzhongb had a saying: ‘If a sage whose virtue is bright does not rule in his own time, then there will certainly be an accomplished man among his descendants.’ Now this will fall to Confuciusa! If I should succeed in dying a natural death, you must entrust my sons Yue and Heji to this man. Make them serve him and study ritual with him so as to establish them firmly in their official ranks.”399 Thus, Meng Yizi and Nangong Jingshu served Confuciusc as their teacher. Confuciusc said, “One who can make good his errors is a noble man. As it says in the Odes, The noble man: him you take as a model, him you emulate.400

Meng Xizi can be taken as a model for emulation.” There is trouble in one of the noble houses of the Zhou royal court. As in Cheng 17.10 and Zhao 3.11, the problems arise from the appointment of outsiders and favorites in the place of nobles. The Shan Duke Xian dismissed his own relations and employed itinerants in their places. In winter, in the tenth month, on the xinyou day (20), the houses of Dukes Xiang and Qing killed Duke Xian and established Duke Cheng as ruler.401

7.13

Lord Zhao

1431

7.14(7) 十一月，季武子卒。晉侯謂伯瑕曰：「吾所問日食，從矣。可常乎？」對

曰：「不可。六物不同，民心不壹，事序不類，官職不則，同始異終，胡可 常也？《詩》曰： 或燕燕居息， 或憔悴事國。 其異終也如是。」 公曰：「何謂六物？」對曰：「歲、時、日、月、星、辰，是謂也。」 公曰：「多語寡人辰而莫同，何謂辰？」對曰：「日月之會是謂辰，故以配 日。」 7.15(8) 衛襄公夫人姜氏無子，嬖人婤姶生孟縶。孔成子夢康叔謂己：「立元，

余使羈之孫圉與史苟相之。」史朝亦夢康叔謂己：「余將命而子苟與孔 烝鉏之曾孫圉相元。」史朝見成子，告之夢，夢協。 晉韓宣子為政聘于諸侯之歲，婤姶生子，名之曰元。

402 As predicted, there were deaths in Wei (Zhao 7.11) and now in Lu. 403 Maoshi 205, “Beishan” 北山, 13A.444–45. 404 As the lord’s remark implies, the term chen 辰 has various meanings in early calendrical and astronomical texts. The context here demands identification with the twelve earthly branches, defined as the points where the paths of the sun and moon intersect, that is, as the sun’s location on the first day of each of the twelve lunar months. When matched with the ten heavenly stems (here perhaps referred to simply as “days”), the branches yield the sexagenary cycle. See Pankenier, “Applied FieldAllocation Astrology,” 265, for a chart coordinating chen with related sets of terms. 405 Kang Shu was the founder of Wei appointed by the Zhou ruler early in the Western Zhou dynasty. 406 Yuan is the as-yet-unborn younger brother of Gongmeng Zhi. 407 Kong Chengzi’s great-grandson Kong Yu plays a central role in Wei politics in the years from Ding 4 to Ai 15. The scribe Gou is one of the men admired by Ji Zha of Wu in Xiang 29.13f. 408 This scribe Zhao 朝 of Wei, who appears only in this episode, is to be distinguished from the scribe Zhao 趙 of Jin, also active in these years. 409 See Zhao 2.1.

1432

Zuo Tradition

A prediction made by Shi Gai in Zhao 7.4 comes true. Nonetheless, he rejects the notion that “constant principles” might guide the interpretation of planetary movements. His caution recalls his father Shi Ruo’s claim that “the Way of Heaven” cannot be determined for certain (Xiang 9.1b). In the eleventh month, Ji Wuzi died. The Prince of Jin said to Shi Gaib, “The eclipse that I asked about has turned out as you said.402 Can any constant principle be derived from this?” He replied, “No, none can. How can any constant principle be derived when the Six Bodies are not the same, when the minds of the people are not identical, when the ordering of affairs is not of the same kind, when the official ranks do not share a single model, and when from the same beginnings come different endings? As it says in the Odes,

7.14(7)

Some, idle, reside in repose; Some, haggard, serve their domain.403

Such are their different endings.” The lord said, “What is meant by the ‘Six Bodies’?” He replied, “It means the Year-Planet, the season, the day, the month, the stars, and the chen.”404 The lord said, “Many have spoken to me of chen, but none say the same thing. What is meant by chen?” He replied, “It refers to the conjunction of the moon and the sun, and that is why it is matched with the days.” Dream interpretation and a divination confirm the passing over of a handicapped heir to the Wei succession. The alternate choice, supported by an ingenious sophistry in the interpretation of omens, proves disastrous for Wei as Yuan, who will become Lord Ling of Wei, turns out to be a divisive ruler (see Zhao 20.4). Lady Jiang, the wife of Lord Xiang of Wei, bore no sons. Lord Xiang’s favorite Chouyan bore Gongmeng Zhia. Kong Chengzi dreamed that Kang Shu405 said to him, “Establish Yuan as heir.406 I will cause your son Ji’s grandson Yu and the scribe Gou to assist him.”407 The scribe Zhao also dreamed that Kang Shu said to him, “I intend to command your son Gou to assist Yuan with Kong Chengzia’s great-grandson Yu.” 408 The scribe Zhao met with Kong Chengzib and told him his dream, and the dreams matched. In the year when Han Qia of Jin, acting as head of government, made his visits to the princes,409 Chouyan bore another son, who was given the name Yuan.

7.15(8)

Lord Zhao

1433

孟縶之足不良能行。孔成子以《周易》筮之，曰：「元尚享衛國，主 其社稷。」遇屯䷂。又曰：「余尚立縶，尚克嘉之。」遇屯䷂之比䷇。以示史 朝。史朝曰：「『元亨』，又何疑焉？」成子曰：「非長之謂乎？」對曰：「康 叔名之，可謂長矣。孟非人也，將不列於宗，不可謂長。且其繇曰：『利 建侯。』嗣吉，何建？建非嗣也。二卦皆云，子其建之！康叔命之，二卦告 之，筮襲於夢，武王所用也，弗從何為？弱足者居。侯主社稷，臨祭祀， 奉民人，事鬼神，從會朝，又焉得居？各以所利，不亦可乎？」故孔成子 立靈公。十二月癸亥，葬衛襄公。

春秋 8.1(2) 八年春陳侯之弟招殺陳世子偃師。 8.2(2) 夏四月辛丑，陳侯溺卒。 8.3(3) 叔弓如晉。

410 In “Birth Throes” ䷂ (Zhun 屯, hexagram 3), the lower trigram is “Quake” ☳ (Zhen 震), and the upper trigram is “Sinkhole” ☵ (Kan 坎). 411 In “Closeness” ䷇ (Bi 比, hexagram 8), the lower trigram is “Pure Yin” ☷ (Kun 坤), and the upper trigram is again “Sinkhole.” 412 The hexagrams “Birth Throes” and “Closeness” are identical except in the first, or lowest, line, which in “Birth Throes” is solid and in “Closeness” is broken. The change of the solid first line of the “Birth Throes” hexagram to a broken first line yields the “Closeness” hexagram. The process of divination would have yielded “Birth Throes” and directed the diviner’s attention to the first line’s readiness to change.

1434

Zuo Tradition

Gongmeng Zhia’s feet were deformed. Kong Chengzi divined about it using the Zhou Changes. As he performed the divination, he said, “May Yuan enjoy the domain of Wei and preside over its altars.” In response he got the hexagram “Birth Throes” ䷂.410 He divined again and said, “May I establish Gongmeng Zhib as heir, and may he be blessed in it.” In response he got the hexagram “Birth Throes” and the line by which it becomes the hexagram “Closeness” ䷇.411 This he showed to the scribe Zhao.412 The scribe Zhao said, “‘The Yuan, or Prime, is great’: what further doubt can there be about it?”413 Kong Chengzib said, “Does the hexagram not refer to the elder son?” He replied, “Since Kang Shu gave him his name, Yuan can be considered the elder. Gongmeng Zhic, being deformed, will not be given his place in the Ancestral Temple; he cannot be considered the elder. What is more, the line statement for him says, ‘It is advantageous to set up a ruler.’414 If it were auspicious for him to succeed his father, then why ‘set up’ someone? The phrase ‘setting up’ does not refer to ordinary successions. Both hexagrams concur: you should set Yuan up. Kang Shu commanded it and two hexagrams communicated it. A divination confirming a dream is what King Wu employed in his decisions.415 What would you be doing by not following them? Those who are afflicted in their feet stay at home. A prince presides at the altars of the domain, oversees the sacrifices, upholds the commoners and the leaders, serves the ghosts and spirits, and attends meetings and court visits; so how then could he stay at home? Is it not indeed right for each to get what is more advantageous for him?” Kong Chengzi therefore established Lord Ling as ruler. In the twelfth month, on the guihai day (23), Lord Xiang of Wei was buried. LORD ZHAO 8 (534 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, Zhao, the younger brother of the Prince of Chen, put to death the Chen heir apparent Yanshi. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinchou day (3), Ni, the Prince of Chen, died. Shu Gong went to Jin.

8.1(2)

8.2(2)

8.3(3)

413 The scribe Zhao here cites the hexagram statement for “Birth Throes”; see Zhouyi 1.21. On Yuan, “prime,” cf. Zhao 12.10b. 414 The scribe Zhao here cites the line statement for the first line of “Closeness.”. 415 According to a passage from “Great Oath” (Tai shi 大誓) cited in Guoyu, “Zhouyu 3,” 3.100, King Wu said, “My dream accords with my divination and they match the good auspices: if we attack Shang, we are certain to overcome them.” These lines were incorporated in the late Ancient Script version of “Great Oath” now included in Shangshu 11.152.

Lord Zhao

1435

8.4(2) 楚人執陳行人干徵師殺之。 8.5(4) 陳公子留出奔鄭。 8.6(4) 秋，蒐于紅。 8.7(6) 陳人殺其大夫公子過。 8.8 大雩。 8.9(6) 冬十月壬午，楚師滅陳。執陳公子招，放之于越。殺陳孔奐。 8.10(6) 葬陳哀公。

左傳 8.1 八年春，石言于晉魏榆。晉侯問於師曠曰：「石何故言？」

對曰：「石不能言，或馮焉。不然，民聽濫也。抑臣又聞之曰：『作 事不時，怨讟動于民，則有非言之物而言。』今宮室崇侈，民力彫盡，怨 讟並作，莫保其性，石言，不亦宜乎？」 於是晉侯方築虒祁之宮。 叔向曰：「子野之言君子哉！君子之言，信而有徵，故怨遠於其身小 人之言，僭而無徵，故怨咎及之。《詩》曰： 哀哉不能言， 匪舌是出， 唯躬是瘁。 哿矣能言， 巧言如流， 俾躬處休。

416 Hong 紅 was northeast of the Lu capital, just east of Mount Tai. 417 Weiyu 魏榆 was located about 20 kilometers southwest of present-day Taiyuan, Shanxi, in the far north of Jin’s territory. 418 According to Li Daoyuan’s 酈道元 (d. 527 CE) Commentary on the “Classic of Rivers” (Shuijing zhu 水經注), 6.555 (cited in Yang, 4:1300–1301), remains of Lord Ping’s Siqi Palace were visible along the Fen 汾 River near present-day Houma 侯馬, Shanxi. 419 Maoshi 194, “Yu wu zheng” 雨無正, 12B.409–12.

1436

Zuo Tradition

Chu leaders arrested the Chen envoy Gan Zhengshi and put him to death.

8.4(2)

Gongzi Liu of Chen departed and fled to Zheng.

8.5(4)

In autumn, there was a muster at Hong.416

8.6(4)

Chen leaders put to death their high officer Gongzi Guo.

8.7(6)

There was a great rain sacrifice.

8.8

In winter, in the tenth month, on the renwu day (17), Chu troops extinguished Chen. They arrested Gongzi Zhao of Chen and expelled him to Yue. They put to death Kong Huan of Chen. Lord Ai of Chen was buried.

8.9(6)

8.10(6)

ZUO

The Jin music master Kuang, famed for his wisdom and rectitude, cunningly interprets an omen as a sign of popular resentment over a costly construction project. (See Zhao 8.3, 13.3.) In the eighth year, in spring, a stone spoke in Weiyu, in Jin.417 The Prince of Jin asked the music master Kuang, “For what reason did the stone speak?” He answered, “Stones cannot speak. They may be possessed by something, or if not, then the people may have misheard something. Yet the saying goes, ‘When a person is not timely in attending to his affairs, grudges and enmities stir among the people, and mute things speak.’ At present your palace is lofty and extravagant, but the strength of the people is exhausted. Grudges and enmity arise together, and no one can protect his livelihood. Is it not appropriate that a stone should speak?” The Prince of Jin was building the Siqi Palace at this time.418 Shuxiang said, “What a noble man the music master Kuanga was in his speech! The words of the noble man are true and they reflect the evidence. Thus, enmity stays far from his person. The words of the petty man are presumptuous and they lack proof, so resentment and blame follow after him. As it says in the Odes,

8.1

Sad it is not to be able to speak well: From the tongue poor speech comes forth, But it’s the body it harms. Fine it is to be able to speak well: Clever words flow in a stream, Letting the body rest at its ease.419

Lord Zhao

1437

其是之謂乎！是宮也成，諸侯必叛，君必有咎，夫子知之矣。」

8.2(1, 2, 4)

陳哀公元妃鄭姬生悼大子偃師，二妃生公子留，下妃生公子勝。二妃嬖， 留有寵，屬諸司徒招與公子過。哀公有癈疾，三月甲申，公子招、公子 過殺悼大子偃師而立公子留。 夏四月辛亥，哀公縊。干徵師赴于楚，且告有立君。公子勝愬之于 楚。楚人執而殺之。公子留奔鄭。書曰「陳侯之弟招殺陳世子偃師」， 罪在招也；「楚人執陳行人干徵師殺之」，罪不在行人也。

8.3(3) 叔弓如晉，賀虒祁也。游吉相鄭伯以如晉，亦賀虒祁也。史趙見子大叔，

曰：「甚哉其相蒙也！可弔也，而又賀之。」子大叔曰：「若何弔也？其非 唯我賀，將天下實賀。」 8.4(6) 秋，大蒐于紅，自根牟至于商、衛，革車千乘。

420 The heir’s name is given in an unusual form, with his posthumous name Dao (“mourned”) attached to his title. This way of naming him reflects the grim circumstances of his death. 421 Both Zhao and Gongzi Guo were younger brothers of Lord Ai. 422 The Annals says that it was the third day of the month. Du Yu (44.769) believes that Zuozhuan records the date of the suicide, while the Annals records the date on which the news was reported in Lu. 423 As Legge (622) indicates in his handling of this passage, the reasoning in this interpretation of Annals wording is obscure. 424 Genmou was on the eastern frontier of Lu, about 30 kilometers southwest of presentday Juxian 莒縣, Shandong; see also Annals, Xuan 9.5. Shang is another name for the domain of Song, whose rulers were descended from the Shang dynasty kings. With Wei, Song marked Lu’s western border. Lu thus was able to muster a total of one thousand chariots from its whole territory.

1438

Zuo Tradition

It is referring to speech of this kind. When this palace is completed, the princes are certain to turn against us, and our lord is sure to be blamed. This fine man knows it already.” Lord Ai of Chen falls ill in the thirty-fifth year of his reign and commits suicide after the murder of his heir apparent. The resulting turmoil lays Chen open to Chu aggression (see Zhao 8.6). Zheng Ji, primary consort of Lord Ai of Chen, bore the heir apparent Yanshi, posthumously named Dao,420 while the secondary consort bore Gongzi Liu and the lesser consort bore Gongzi Sheng. The secondary consort enjoyed the most favor, so Gongzi Liu was particularly cherished, and he was put in the care of Zhao, the supervisor of conscripts, and of Gongzi Guo.421 Lord Ai had a chronic illness. In the third month, on the jiashen day (16), Gongzi Zhao and Gongzi Guo put to death the heir apparent Yanshi, posthumously named Dao, and established Gongzi Liu as ruler instead. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinhai day (13), Lord Ai hanged himself.422 Gan Zhengshi gave notice of the death to Chu while also reporting the establishment of the new ruler. Gongzi Sheng denounced him to Chu. Chu leaders arrested Gan Zhengshi and put him to death, at which point Gongzi Liu fled to Zheng. The text says, “Zhao, younger brother of the Prince of Chen, put to death the Chen heir apparent Yanshi”: this signifies that the crime was Zhao’s. It says, “Chu leaders arrested the Chen envoy Gan Zhengshi and put him to death”: this is because the crime was not the envoy’s.423

8.2(1 ,2, 4)

As the Zheng ruler offers Jin ceremonial congratulations on the completion of the Siqi Palace, the project continues to provoke criticism. (See Zhao 8.1.) Shu Gong went to Jin: this was to present congratulations on Siqi. You Ji acted as assistant to the Liege of Zheng during his visit to Jin, which was also to present congratulations on Siqi. In an audience with You Jib, the scribe Zhao said, “How egregiously they deceive one another! For something that merits condolences they go so far as to offer congratulations.” You Jib said, “How should we give condolences? It is not only we who present congratulations; it will be the whole world congratulating them for this.”

8.3(3)

In autumn, there was a great muster at Hong. The muster went from Genmou all the way to Shang and Wei; there were one thousand war chariots in all.424

8.4(6)

Lord Zhao

1439

8.5 七月甲戌，齊子尾卒。子旗欲治其室。丁丑，殺梁嬰。八月庚戌，逐子成、

子工、子車，皆來奔，而立子良氏之宰。其臣曰：「孺子長矣，而相吾室， 欲兼我也。」授甲，將攻之。陳桓子善於子尾，亦授甲，將助之。或告子 旗，子旗不信，則數人告。將往，又數人告於道，遂如陳氏。桓子將出 矣，聞之而還，游服而逆之，請命。對曰：「聞彊氏授甲將攻子，子聞 諸？」曰：「弗聞。」「子盍亦授甲，無宇請從。」子旗曰：「子胡然？彼，孺子 也。吾誨之，猶懼其不濟，吾又寵秩之－－其若先人何？子盍謂之。《周書》 曰：『惠不惠，茂不茂』，康叔所以服弘大也。」桓子稽顙曰：「頃、靈福 子，吾猶有望。」 遂和之如初。

425 According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.769), Liang Ying was a household steward of Ziwei. 426 According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.769), all were Qi high officers and adherents of Ziwei. 427 Yang (4:1303) points out that there is likely a lacuna here, since the text as it stands does not make sense. It is possible too that the text is capturing the irregularities of natural speech; cf. the interruption of Wei Jiang’s speech at Xiang 4.7a.

1440

Zuo Tradition

In Qi, open war between the Luan and Gao lineages—the adherents of Ziwei’s son Gao Qiang on one side, and of Ziya’s son Luan Shi on the other (see Zhao 3.13)—is narrowly averted when Chen Wuyu intervenes. Chen Wuyu, apparently acting for the sake of peace and the good of Qi, nevertheless succeeds in establishing his lineage as one of the two most powerful families in Qi, as Zuozhuan later notes (Zhao 10.2c). In the seventh month, on the jiaxu day (8), Ziwei of Qi died, and Luan Shia wanted to take control of his estate. On the dingchou day (11), Luan killed Liang Ying.425 In the eighth month, on the gengxu day (14), he expelled Zicheng, Zigong, and Ziyuan Jieb,426 all of whom came in flight to Lu, then established a steward for Gao Qiangd. Gao Qiang’s retainers said, “This young man, Gao Qiang, is already grown up: that Luan Shi provides an ‘overseer’ for our estate means that he wants to take possession of what is ours.” They distributed weapons in preparation for an attack on Luan Shi. Chen Wuyua, who had been on good terms with Ziwei, also distributed weapons to his men, intending to assist them. Someone reported this to Luan Shia, who did not believe it at first. Then several people reported it. He was prepared to join the fray, but when several more people reported to him while he was on the road, he headed for the Chen residence. Chen Wuyub, who was already at the point of setting out, heard of this and turned back. Changing into casual clothes, he greeted Luan Shi, who asked about his plans. Chen Wuyu replied, “I have heard that the household of Gao Qiangc has distributed weapons in preparation for an attack on you. Have you heard this?” He said, “I had not heard it.” “Why do you not also distribute weapons? I beg permission to accompany you.” Luan Shia said, “Why should you do that? That man is but a youngster. I have given him instruction, and still afraid that he will not succeed, I have gone so far as to favor him by putting an administrator in place on his behalf. . . . How should we face our predecessors if we did?427 Why do you not address him? As it says in the Zhou Documents, ‘Favor those who should not be favored; encourage those who should not be encouraged’;428 with these words Kang Shu managed great and far-ranging deeds.” Chen Wuyub bowed low, with his forehead to the ground, and said, “If Lords Qing and Ling will bless you, we still have prospects.”429 Thus, he made peace between them so that the two lineages were on good terms, as they had been at the beginning.

8.5

428 These words, from Shangshu, “Kang gao,” 11.202, read 惠不惠，懋不懋 in the received edition. 429 Lord Ling of Qi (r. 581–554) was the son of Lord Qing (r. 598–582). Luan Shi’s and Gao Qiang’s grandfathers were brothers of Lord Qing, and their fathers were cousins of Lord Ling.

Lord Zhao

1441



8.6a(7, 9)

陳公子招歸罪於公子過而殺之。九月，楚公子棄疾帥師奉孫吳圍陳，宋 戴惡會之。冬十一月壬午，滅陳。輿嬖袁克殺馬毀玉以葬。楚人將殺 之，請寘之，既又請私。私於幄，加絰於顙而逃。 使穿封戌為陳公，曰：「城麇之役不諂。」侍飲酒於王，王曰：「城 麇之役，女知寡人之及此，女其辟寡人乎！」對曰：「若知君之及此，臣 必致死禮以息楚。」

8.6b 晉侯問於史趙曰：「陳其遂亡乎？」對曰：「未也。」公曰：「何故？」對曰：

「陳，顓頊之族也，歲在鶉火，是以卒滅。陳將如之。今在析木之津，猶 將復由。且陳氏得政于齊而後陳卒亡。自幕至于瞽瞍無違命，舜重之以 明德，寘德於遂。遂世守之。及胡公不淫，故周賜之姓，使祀虞帝。臣聞 盛德必百世祀。虞之世數未也，繼守將在齊，其兆既存矣。」

430 In Zhao 8.2, Gongzi Zhao and Gongzi Guo had together killed Yanshi, the heir apparent to Lord Ai, and put Gongzi Liu, son of a favored secondary consort, in place as Lord Ai’s successor. 431 According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.770), Wu was a son of Yanshi, heir apparent to Lord Dao of Chen. See Zhao 8.2. 432 That is, the burial of Lord Ai. 433 See Xiang 26.6, where Chuanfeng Xu chased the future king with a dagger-axe after the two of them vied over the prisoner Huang Jie of Zheng. 434 That is, he would have died to keep the present king, Gongzi Wei, from murdering his predecessor. 435 According to Du Yu (ZZ 44.770), the sage-king Shun, ancestor to Chen’s ruling line, was himself derived from the early ruler Zhuanxu. 436 Quail Fire (chunhuo 鶉火) corresponded to our constellation Hydra. 437 The Split Wood Ford (ximu 析木) is the section of the Milky Way between the asterisms Ji 箕 and Dou 斗 and corresponds to our Scorpio and Sagittarius. Jupiter would be situated in the Split Wood Ford five years after it was in Quail Fire. See Pankenier, “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology,” 235. According to Gu Yanwu (cited in Yang, 4:1305), you 由 is a loan for a graph meaning “to send forth shoots.” 438 For the destruction of Chen, see Ai 17.4. The Chen lineage consolidates its power in Qi by Ai 14.5. See also the prophecy of Chen greatness in Qi in Zhuang 22.1 and the exchange between Yan Ying and Shuxiang in Zhao 3.3b.

1442

Zuo Tradition

Chen strife (Zhao 8.2) leads to the annexation of the domain by Chu. A Jin observer predicts Chen’s restoration and eventual downfall. (See Zhao 9.4.) The Chu high officer Chuanfeng Xu, who once challenged the future King Ling of Chu (Xiang 26.2), again shows his independent-mindedness. Gongzi Zhao of Chen, laying the blame on Gongzi Guo, put him to death.430 In the ninth month, Gongzi Qiji of Chu led an army to support the grandson Wu in laying siege to Chen.431 Dai E of Song joined them. In winter, in the tenth month, on the renwu day (17), they extinguished Chen. Yuan Ke, the favorite in charge of the Chen lord’s chariots, slaughtered the horses and broke the jades so that they could be used in his lord’s burial.432 The Chu leaders were going to put him to death, but he asked that they pardon him. Then he asked that they allow him to relieve himself. He relieved himself in a tent and then fled with a hempen mourning band still wrapped around his head. The Chu king appointed Chuanfeng Xu as Lord of Chen, saying, “At the battle of Chengjun he did not play the toady.” 433 Chuanfeng Xu attended upon the king as he drank, and the king said, “If you had known that I would attain this rank during the Chengjun campaign, you would surely have yielded to me!” Chuanfeng Xu replied, “If I had known that my lord would attain this position, I would have died for ritual propriety in order to bring peace to Chu.”434

8.6a(7, 9)

The Prince of Jin asked the scribe Zhao, “Will Chen perish?” The scribe replied, “It is not yet time.” “Why?” asked the lord. The scribe replied, “Chen belongs to the house of Zhuanxu.435 It was when the Year-Planet was in Quail Fire that Zhuanxu perished. Chen will be the same.436 Now the Year-Planet is at the Split Wood Ford. Chen will send forth a new shoot.437 What is more, Chen will perish only after the Chen lineage has taken over the government in Qi.438 From Mu down to the Blind Old Man there was none who disobeyed commands. Shun added to this with his own bright virtue, and their charismatic virtue was installed in Sui, where they preserved it for generations.439 It came down as far as the Hu Lord Buyin, so Zhou bestowed a clan name upon them and caused them to make sacrifice to Shun, the Yu Emperor.440 I have heard that flourishing virtue is certain to receive sacrifices for one hundred generations. Since the number of generations of the Yu Lord on high is not yet complete, the line’s continued preservation will be in Qi. The auspices for it are already in place.”

8.6b

439 Mu was a descendant of Zhuanxu and an ancestor of Shun; the Blind Old Man was Shun’s father. According to Takezoe (22.9), Sui is a place name; but it is likely related to the Chen ancestor Yusui, mentioned at Zhao 3.3b. 440 According to Shiji 36.1575, this establishment of Chen took place just after the Zhou conquest in the mid–eleventh century Bce.

Lord Zhao

1443

春秋 9.1(1) 九年春，叔弓會楚子于陳。 9.2(2) 許遷于夷。 9.3(4) 夏四月，陳災。 9.4(6) 秋，仲孫貜如齊。 9.5(7) 冬，築郎囿。

左傳 9.1(1) 九年春，叔弓、宋華亥、鄭游吉、衛趙黶會楚子于陳。 9.2(2) 二月庚申，楚公子棄疾遷許于夷，實城父。取州來淮北之田以益之，伍

舉授許男田。然丹遷城父人於陳，以夷濮西田益之。遷方城外人於許。 9.3a 周甘人與晉閻嘉爭閻田。晉梁丙、張趯率陰戎伐潁。

441 As Yang notes (4:1306), Xǔ underwent several relocations in the course of its history. See Annals, Cheng 15.3, Zhao 13.2a, 13.5, 18.5, and Ding 4.7. 442 Shu Gong is the Lu representative at the meeting. 443 Reconstructed calendars show no gengshen day in the second month. There has likely been an error in recording or transmission. 444 According to Yang (4:1307), this Yi (or Chengfu) is the Chen settlement mentioned with Jiao at Xiang 23.3; Yang (1:402) also states that Chengfu was a settlement in the Yi region. Both areas are referred to as belonging to Chu at Xiang 1.2. 445 Ran Dan fled from Zheng to Chu in Xiang 19.9 and was given the position of deputy of the right (youyin 右尹). He will play a key role in the fall of King Ling of Chu in Zhao 12.11 and 13.2.

1444

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 9 (533 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, Shu Gong met with the Master of Chu in Chen.

9.1(1)

Xǔ relocated to Yi.441

9.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, there was a disastrous fire in Chen.

9.3(4)

In autumn, Zhongsun Jue (Meng Xizi) went to Qi.

9.4(6)

In winter, the Lang Park was built.

9.5(7)

ZUO

In the ninth year, in spring, Shu Gong,442 Hua Hai of Song, You Ji of Zheng, and Zhao Yan of Wei met with the Master of Chu in Chen.

9.1(1)

Chu leaders relocate populations in annexed territories. (See Zhao 4.4, 8.6.) In the second month, on the gengshen day,443 Gongzi Qiji of Chu relocated Xǔ to Yi, also known as Chengfu.444 He added the lands taken from Zhoulai and from north of the Huai River, and Wu Ju presented these lands to the Head of Xǔ. Ran Dan relocated the people of Chengfu to Chen, adding to it the Yi lands to the west of the Pu River.445 People from beyond Fangcheng were relocated to Xǔ.446

9.2(2)

After a territorial dispute between nobles from Jin and Zhou leads to military action, traditional good relations are reestablished between the courts. A similar dispute between Jin and Zhou is recounted in Cheng 11.7. The speech of the king’s envoy offers a rare outline of the putative extent of the early Zhou realm. The high officer Xiang, the leader of the Gan lineage in Zhou, struggled with Jia of Yan, in Jin, over some Yan lands.447 Liang Bing and Zhang Ti of Jin led the Rong of Yin in an attack on Ying.448

9.3a

446 Du Yu (ZZ 45.777) offers a clarification of this confusing sequence of events: In Cheng 15.7 Xǔ was relocated to She, which was then referred to as Xǔ. Now Xǔ is being relocated to Yi, so the population from beyond Fangcheng is moved to fill the territory left unpopulated. 447 The location of Yan 閻 is not known, but it must have been close to Gan 甘, which was to the northwest of present-day Luoyang 洛陽 in Henan. A mention of Yan (Youyan) in Ding 4.1e suggests that Yan was close to the Zhou capital. 448 Ying is the settlement where Lord Zhuang of Zheng placed his mother during her time of internal exile (Yin 1.4c); it was located to the west of the Zheng capital and to the southeast of the Zhou capital. The Rong of Yin are thought to be the same as the Rong of Luhun (Takezoe, 22.11), who inhabited territory to the south of Jin and the southwest of Zhou. By leading Rong troops right past the Zhou capital, Jin was intimidating Zhou without mounting a direct attack.

Lord Zhao

1445

王使詹桓伯辭於晉曰：「我自夏以后稷，魏、駘、芮、岐、畢，吾西 土也。及武王克商，蒲姑、商奄，吾東土也；巴、濮、楚、鄧，吾南土也； 肅慎、燕、亳，吾北土也。吾何邇封之有？文、武、成、康之建母弟，以蕃 屏周，亦其廢隊是為，豈如弁髦，而因以敝之。先王居檮杌于四裔，以 禦螭魅，故允姓之姦居于瓜州。伯父惠公歸自秦，而誘以來，使偪我諸 姬，入我郊甸，則戎焉取之。戎有中國，誰之咎也？后稷封殖天下，今戎 制之，不亦難乎？伯父圖之！我在伯父，猶衣服之有冠冕，木水之有本 原，民人之有謀主也。伯父若裂冠毀冕，拔本塞原，專棄謀主，雖戎狄， 其何有余一人？」 9.3b 叔向謂宣子曰：「文之伯也，豈能改物？翼戴天子，而加之以共。自文以

來，世有衰德，而暴蔑宗周，以宣示其侈；諸侯之貳，不亦宜乎？且王辭 直，子其圖之。」

449 All these ancient domains lay within about 150 kilometers of the Western Zhou capital. Weì 魏 and Rui 芮 were furthest away, situated to the east, near where the Luo River enters the Yellow River as the latter turns eastward. Bi 畢 was a few kilometers north of the capital, Tai 駘 was further to the west, and Qi was northwest of Tai. Qi 岐 (or Mount Qi) was famous as the home of the Zhou people under their predynastic ruler the Grand King 大王, grandfather of King Wen; see Maoshi 237, “Mian” 緜, 16B.545–52. 450 Pugu 蒲姑 was near the northern coast of the Shandong Peninsula, not far from the capital of the later domain of Qi. Shangyan 商奄 was the later capital of Lu, in present-day Qufu, Shandong; see Ding 4.1d for the investiture of the son of the Zhou Duke as the first Lord of Lu. 451 Ba 巴 was perhaps in the vicinity of Chongqing 重慶, Sichuan, far to the south of the Western Zhou capital. Pu 濮 lay further down the Yangzi, between Ba and Chu, which was situated near present-day Jiangling, Hubei. Yang (4:1308) believes this is to be identified with the Hundred Pu mentioned in Wen 16.4. Deng 鄧 was to the north, on the Han River. 452 Yan 燕 was in present-day Beijing, and Sushen 肅慎 was in the region to the northeast. Bo 亳 had been the name of the Shang capital, which moved a number of times. One location was to the north of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan, but Yang (4:1308) does not believe that that location is far enough north to fit the context. 453 Yang (4:1308), citing Shiji 35.1563, notes that Guo Zhong and Guo Shu were younger full brothers of King Wen; the founders of Guan 管, Cai, Cheng 郕, Huo 霍, Lu, Wei, Mao, and Dan 耼 were younger full brothers of King Wu; and the founder of Jin was a younger full brother of King Cheng. 454 According to Yang (4:1308–9), the jet-black cap, worn with others during the capping ceremony for a boy just reaching maturity, was discarded once the ceremony was complete. By one interpretation, the term bianmao 弁髦 refers only to this cap; by another, bian is the cap, while mao refers to the discarded clippings of an infant’s hair.

1446

Zuo Tradition

The king sent the Zhan Liege Huan to make a case to Jin. He said, “Since Xia times Weì, Tai, Rui, Qi, and Bi have been our lands to the west because of Lord Millet.449 When King Wu conquered Shang, Pugu and Shangyan became our lands to the east;450 Ba, Pu, Chu, and Deng became our lands to the south;451 and Sushen, Yan, and Bo became our lands to the north.452 How could we have any frontier nearer than these? Kings Wen, Wu, Cheng, and Kang set up their younger full brothers to serve as defensive barriers for the Zhou to forestall decline and collapse.453 Are hereditary lands like a jet-black cap or the first clippings of an infant’s hair, and therefore something to be thrown away?454 The former kings settled Taowu among the four external lineages to confront the beasts and demons,455 and for this reason the miscreants of the Yun clan were settled in Guazhou.456 When our elder uncle, your Lord Hui, returned home from Qin, he lured them to Jin, causing them to crowd in among the many members of the Ji clan, and even to enter the outskirts of our city, and that is how the Rong came to take these lands.457 Whose fault is it then that the Rong hold territory among the central domains? Is it not distressing that although Lord Millet cultivated all-under-heaven, the Rong now exercise control there?458 Consider this, my elder uncle. To you we should be like the cap or headdress to a suit of clothing, the root or source to a tree or a river, the maker of plans for a people. If even you, my elder uncle, would tear the cap and destroy the headdress, uproot the tree and block the source, and willfully abandon the maker of plans, then what will be left of me, the One Man, among the Rong and the Di?” Shuxiang said to Han Qib, “When Lord Wen was overlord, was he able to change accepted practice?459 He aided and supported the Son of Heaven and showed him added reverence. Since the times of Lord Wen, our virtue has declined with each generation, and we have treated the ancestral Zhou with violence and spite, thus advertising our own excesses. Is it not appropriate that our allies are disloyal? Moreover, the king’s statement is reasonable. You, sir, should consider it.”

9.3b

455 On the expulsion of Taowu, see Wen 18.7c. 456 On the Yun lineage of Rong in Guazhou, see Xiang 14.1b and note 368. 457 Lord Hui of Jin was captured at the battle of Han and taken to Qin in Xi 15.4; he is returned to Jin in Xi 15.8. In Xi 22.4, Qin and Jin act together to move the Rong of Luhun to Yichuan or the Yi River, which flowed past the Zhou capital from the south. 458 Note that the realm the king outlined at the beginning of his remarks is supposed to have been equivalent to “all-under-heaven.” In the king’s own time, the royal domain was restricted to a small area to the south of Jin. 459 As Yang (4:1309) notes, the Zhou king refused Lord Wen of Jin’s request to be buried with certain honors due the king.

Lord Zhao

1447

宣子說。王有姻喪，使趙成如周弔，且致閻田與襚，反潁俘。王亦 使賓滑執甘大夫襄以說於晉，晉人禮而歸之。 9.4(3) 夏四月，陳災。鄭裨竈曰：「五年陳將復封，封五十二年而遂亡。」子產問

其故。對曰：「陳，水屬也；火，水妃也。而楚所相也。今火出而火陳，逐 楚而建陳也。妃以五成，故曰五年。歲五及鶉火，而後陳卒亡，楚克有 之，天之道也，故曰五十二年。 9.5 晉荀盈如齊逆女，還，六月，卒于戲陽。殯于絳，未葬。晉侯飲酒，樂。

膳宰屠蒯趨入，請佐公使尊。 許之，而遂酌以飲工，曰：「女為君耳，將司聰也。辰在子、卯，謂之 疾日，君徹宴樂，學人舍業，為疾故也。君之卿佐，是謂股肱。股肱或 虧，何痛如之？女弗聞而樂，是不聰也。」 又飲外嬖嬖叔，曰：「女為君目，將司明也。服以旌禮，禮以行事， 事有其物，物有其容。今君之容，非其物也；而女不見，是不明也。」

460 Chen is restored in Zhao 13.2f (529 Bce) and finally extinguished in Ai 17.4 (478 Bce). 461 According to Zhao 17.5, the Fire Star appeared above the horizon in the fifth month of the Zhou calendar. Here, however, its appearance is dated to the fourth month. Du Yu (ZZ 45.780) argues that there had been a misplaced intercalary month in the preceding year. 462 Various explanations are possible. Yang (4:1310) cites the scheme by which each of the Five Resources was assigned a number, starting with Water at 1 and proceeding through Fire at 2, Wood at 3, Metal at 4, Earth (tu) at 5, then returning, after one cycle, to Water at 6 and continuing according to pattern. Since odd and even numbers correspond to Heaven and Earth (di), respectively, one iteration of the cycle changes the marking of any given phase from Heaven to Earth or vice versa: Water is associated with Heaven in the first iteration and with Earth in the second. If this interpretation is correct, then this passage must have been composed at a time— possibly in the late Warring States or even the Han dynasty—when the Five Resources were already understood as being related in a cycle of “Five Phases.” 463 Cf. Zhao 11.2a. 464 Yang (4:1311), citing Du Yu (ZZ 45.780), works out the calculations according to the order of the twelve Jupiter stations. In the fourth year after the Chen restoration, the year-star will reach Chunhuo (Zhao 13; 529 Bce). Then, at the end of four Jupiter cycles of twelve years each, when Jupiter reaches Chunhuo for the fifth time, Chen will be extinguished again, this time forever (Ai 17; 478 Bce). The whole prediction is informed by the number 5 (inclusive), which gives the number of years of the present subjugation and the number of Jupiter cycles before the permanent destruction. 465 According to Yang (4:1311), Xiyang 戲陽 was north of present-day Neihuang 内黃, Henan, about 40 kilometers southeast of Anyang. 466 Because the master chef Kuai (tu Kuai 屠蒯) is called Du Kuai 杜蕢 in Liji, 9.177–78, it is unclear whether tu 屠 is here only the name of Kuai’s office or has already become a lineage name, later to be written du 杜. In the case of another Jin court official, the music master Kuang (shi Kuang 師曠), for example, the shi is clearly an official title rather than a lineage name. 467 Yang (4:1311) cites evidence suggesting that these days are taboo because of the fall of the Xia (on yimao) and the Shang (on jiazi). 468 King Zhao of Chu makes the same comparison in Ai 6.4b.

1448

Zuo Tradition

Han Qib was pleased. When one of the king’s relatives by marriage died, Han Qi sent Zhao Cheng to Zhou to present condolences. At that time the envoy also presented the fields of Yan along with suits of clothing for the funeral escort and repatriated the Ying prisoners. The king, for his part, had Bin Hua arrest the Gan high officer Xiang to appease Jin. The Jin leaders treated him with ritual propriety and sent him home. The following passage further specifies predictions regarding the domain of Chen. (See Zhao 8.6.) In summer, in the fourth month, there was a disastrous fire in Chen. Pi Zao of Zheng said, “In the fifth year from now Chen will be established anew. After having been reestablished for fifty-two years, it will then perish.”460 Zichan asked for the reasons for this prediction. He replied, “Chen belongs to water. Fire is the consort of water and is that to which Chu corresponds. Now, at the appearance of the Fire Star, there is a fire in Chen.461 Chu is to be expelled and Chen established. I say ‘in the fifth year’ because the consort is completed by fives.462 When the Year-Planet, Jupiter, has come around to Chunhuo for the fifth time, Chen will finally perish and Chu will annex it, as is the Way of Heaven.463 Thus, I say it will be fifty-two years.”464

9.4(3)

In Jin, a chef ’s clever remonstrance ends ritually inappropriate celebrations and leads indirectly to the survival of the Zhi lineage of Jin nobility. Zhi Daozib of Jin went to Qi to meet and escort a bride home. On his way back, in the sixth month, he died at Xiyang.465 He was lying in state at Jiang and had not yet been buried when the Prince of Jin feasted and made merry. The master chef Kuai hurried in and asked to help the lord handle the goblets.466 Granted permission, he poured a cup for the musicians to drink and said, “You act for the ears of the ruler and so you have as your responsibility the acuity of his hearing. When the day-cycle is in zi or mao, which are known as taboo days,467 the ruler should refrain from banqueting and musical performance. The performers should put aside their duties because of the taboo. The ministers and helpers of the ruler are like his limbs.468 What pain can match that of losing a limb? That you have not heeded this and still make music is a failure of your own acuity.” Then he poured a cup for the court favorite, Shu, saying, “You act for the eyes of the ruler and have as your responsibility the clarity of his vision. Clothing is for displaying ritual propriety. Ritual propriety is for conducting affairs well. Affairs have their proper components, and each component has its proper appearances. Now the ruler’s appearance is improper, and yet you do not see that. This is a failure of your own clarity.”

9.5

Lord Zhao

1449

亦自飲也，曰：「味以行氣，氣以實志，志以定言，言以出令。臣實 司味，二御失官，而君弗命，臣之罪也。」 公說，徹酒。 初，公欲廢知氏而立其外嬖，為是悛而止。秋八月，使荀躒佐下軍 以說焉。 9.6(4) 孟僖子如齊殷聘，禮也。 9.7 冬，築郎囿。書，時也。季平子欲其速成也，叔孫昭子曰：「《詩》曰：

經始勿亟， 庶民子來。 焉用速成，其以勦民也？無囿猶可；無民，其可乎？」

春秋 10.1 十年春王正月。 10.2(2) 夏，齊欒施來奔。 10.3(3) 秋七月，季孫意如、叔弓、仲孫貜帥師伐莒。 10.4(4) 戊子，晉侯彪卒。

1450

Zuo Tradition

And then again he poured a cup for himself and said, “With flavors the life force is activated; with the life force activated, the intent can be consolidated; with the intent consolidated, speeches can be fixed; and with speeches fixed, commands can be issued. As master chef, I bear responsibility for the flavors. It is my fault that the two attendants have failed in their official duties and the ruler has failed to issue the proper commands.” Pleased, the lord refrained from drinking. Earlier, the lord had wished to remove the Zhi lineage and establish his court favorites in their place, but because of this incident he changed his mind and desisted. In autumn, in the eighth month, he appointed Zhi Wenzia as assistant to the lower army to appease the Zhi lineage. That Meng Xizi went to Qi for a state visit was in accordance with ritual propriety.469

9.6(4)

A construction project in Lu is carried out correctly with guidance from the Odes. The text’s stress on the propriety of timeliness here perhaps implies a pointed contrast with Jin’s Siqi Palace project (Zhao 8.1, 8.3), which will alienate Jin’s allies (Zhao 13.3a). In winter, the Lang Park was built. That it was recorded is because it was timely. When Ji Pingzi desired that it be completed quickly, Shusun Chuob said, “As it says in the Odes,

9.7

He planned and began without haste; The people came willingly.470

Why must it be completed quickly, since that would exhaust the people? It would be all right not to have a game park, but would it be all right to lack the people’s support?” LORD ZHAO 10 (532 BCE) ANNALS

The tenth year, spring, the royal first month.

10.1

In summer, Luan Shi of Qi came in flight.

10.2(2)

In autumn, in the seventh month, Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi), Shu Gong, and Zhongsun Jue (Meng Xizi) led out troops and attacked Ju.

10.3(3)

On the wuzi day (3), Biao, the Prince of Jin, died.

10.4(4)

469 Yang (4:1312) notes that it had been twenty years since Shu Lao’s visit to Qi in Xiang 20.5, and Yang cites Zhouli passages prescribing especially elaborate visits on certain occasions. 470 Maoshi 242, “Lingtai” 靈臺, 16E.578–81.

Lord Zhao

1451

10.5(4) 九月，叔孫婼如晉，葬晉平公。 10.6(5) 十有二月甲子，宋公成卒。

左傳 10.1 十年春王正月，有星出于婺女。鄭裨竈言於子產曰：「七月戊子，晉君將

死。今茲歲在顓頊之虛，姜氏、任氏實守其地，居其維首，而有妖星焉， 告邑姜也。邑姜，晉之妣也。天以七紀，戊子逢公以登，星斯於是乎出， 吾是以譏之。」 10.2a(2) 齊惠欒、高氏皆耆酒，信內多怨，彊於陳、鮑氏而惡之。夏，有告陳桓子

曰：「子旗、子良將攻陳、鮑。」亦告鮑氏。桓子授甲而如鮑氏。遭子良醉 而騁，遂見文子，則亦授甲矣。使視二子，則皆將飲酒。桓子曰：「彼雖 不信，聞我授甲，則必逐我。及其飲酒也，先伐諸？」陳、鮑方睦，遂伐 欒、高氏。子良曰：「先得公，陳、鮑焉往？」遂伐虎門。

471 According to the earliest available star catalog, this six-star constellation in Aquarius had Epsilon Aquarii as its lead star. See Sun and Kistemaker, The Chinese Sky during the Han, 158. It was identified as one of the markers for the Jupiter station known as Xuanxiao 玄枵 (translated as “Dark Hollow” in Xiang 28.1), here called “the Mound of Zhuanxu,” and corresponded in field-allocation astrology to the terrestrial domain of Qi. 472 Yi Jiang was the daughter of Grand Lord Jiang, Lü Wang, to whom King Wu awarded the territory of Qi after the Zhou conquest. She was the mother of the founding ruler of Jin. 473 The twenty-eight lunar mansions are divided into four quadrants, with seven mansions to each quadrant. 474 The Feng Lord may be the Youfeng Bo Ling mentioned at Zhao 20.8b, a Shang ruler in the territory held by Qi. 475 This was the entryway to the lord’s private chambers.

1452

Zuo Tradition

In the ninth month, Shusun Chuo went to Jin for the burial of Lord Ping of Jin. In the twelfth month, on the jiazi day (2), Cheng, the Duke of Song, died.

10.5(4)

10.6(5)

ZUO

In Zheng, a prediction is made concerning the death of the Jin ruler, which will be fulfilled later in the year (see Zhao 10.4). In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, a star appeared in Lovely Woman.471 In Zheng, Pi Zao said to Zichan, “In the seventh month, on the wuzi day (3), the ruler of Jin will die. This year the YearPlanet is in the Mound of Zhuanxu. It is the Jiang and Ren lineages that hold the corresponding lands. That Lovely Woman is at the head of this node, and that there is a baleful star there, is an announcement to Yi Jiang, one of Jin’s female ancestors.472 Heaven is divided by sevens;473 the wuzi, or third, day of that month was the day on which the Feng Lord ascended to Heaven, and it was there that the star appeared.474 This is the basis for my evaluation.”

10.1

Further strife among noble lines in Qi leads to greater power for the Chen lineage. (See Zhao 8.5.) Here the Luan lineage and the Gao lineage, headed by Luan Shi and Gao Qiang, battle the Chen and Bao lineages, headed by Chen Wuyu and Bao Guo. The Luan and Gao lineages, descended from Lord Hui of Qi, both indulged in drinking. And because they heeded their womenfolk, they held many grudges. Quite as powerful as the Chen and Bao lineages, they hated them. In summer, someone reported to Chen Wuyua: “Luan Shia and Gao Qianga are going to attack Chen and Bao.” He reported the same to the Bao lineage. After distributing weapons, Chen Wuyub went to the Bao establishment. Encountering Gao Qianga drunk and galloping his horses, he then paid a visit to Bao Guob, who in turn distributed weapons. Someone was sent to get a look at the two noblemen, Luan Shi and Gao Qiang, both of whom were just about to drink. Chen Wuyub said, “Although the first report about the attack was not true, when they hear that we have distributed weapons, they are bound to come after us. Shall we attack them first, while they are drinking?” At the time the Chens and Baos were on excellent terms, so they attacked the Luan and Gao lineages. Gao Qianga said, “If we take the ruler first, then where will the Chens and Baos be able to go?” So Luan and Gao attacked the Tiger Gate.475

10.2a(2)

Lord Zhao

1453

10.2b 晏平仲端委立于虎門之外，四族召之，無所往。其徒曰：「助陳、鮑乎？」

曰：「何善焉？」「助欒、高乎？」曰：「庸愈乎？」「然則歸乎？」曰：「君 伐，焉歸？」公召之而後入。 公卜使王黑以靈姑銔率，吉，請斷三尺焉而用之。五月庚辰，戰于 稷，欒、高敗，又敗諸莊。國人追之，又敗諸鹿門。欒施、高彊來奔。陳、 鮑分其室。 10.2c 晏子謂桓子：「必致諸公！讓，德之主也。讓之謂懿德。凡有血氣，皆有

爭心，故利不可強，思義為愈。義，利之本也。薀利生孽。姑使無蘊乎！ 可以滋長。」桓子盡致諸公，而請老于莒。 桓子召子山，私具幄幕、器用、從者之衣屨，而反棘焉。子商亦如 之，而反其邑。子周亦如之，而與之夫子。反子城、子公、公孫捷，而皆 益其祿。凡公子、公孫之無祿者，私分之邑。國之貧約孤寡者，私與之 粟。曰：「《詩》云： 陳錫載周。 能施也。桓公是以霸。」公與桓子莒之旁邑，辭。穆孟姬為之請高唐，陳 氏始大。

476 According to Zhang Binglin (cited in Yang, 4:1316), Linggupi was the name of a “dragon banner” (long qi 龍旗) presented to Lord Huan of Qi by the Zhou king in Guoyu, “Qi yu,” 345. For other named implements, see, e.g., the Maohu banner of the Liege of Zheng (Yin 11.3a), the Yuhuang boat of Wu (Zhao 17.6), and the Wasp flag of Zhao Yang of Jin (Ai 2.3). 477 As a high officer serving as proxy for the Qi ruler, Wang Hei is reluctant to use the banner at its full length. The shortening of the banner here recalls the shortening of Gongzi Wei’s banner at Zhao 7.2. 478 According to Yang (4:1316), here was no gengchen day in the fifth month. 479 Both the Ji Gate and Zhuang, a major thoroughfare, were in the Qi capital. 480 The Lu 鹿 (“Deer”) Gate is thought to have been the southeastern gate of the Qi capital. 481 Yan Ying himself declined a gift of settlements at Xiang 28.11a, where he explained his decision in remarks resembling the present speech; and in Xiang 29.13e, he submitted his remaining settlements to the Qi ruler at the urging of Jizha of Wu. 482 Ju is a Qi settlement; see Zhao 3.10. For another version of this episode, see Yanzi chunqiu 6.402–03. 483 Zishan, along with Zishang and Zizhou, was among the noble sons exiled by Ziwei in Xiang 31.2. Ji 棘 was northwest of present-day Linzi 臨淄, site of the Qi capital. 484 Fuyu 夫于 was about 50 kilometers west of the Qi capital. 485 The three were banished by Luan Shi in Zhao 8.5. 486 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.531–37. The line is also cited at Xuan 15.6. 487 Mu Meng Ji is the mother of the current ruler of Qi, Lord Jing. For Gaotang 高唐, see Xiang 19.5.

1454

Zuo Tradition

The following passages record Yan Ying’s reaction to the internecine struggles in Qi. The choices he deliberates over with his followers recall a similar exchange in Xiang 25.2, while his recommendation to Chen Wuyu also echoes his earlier arguments against accumulating riches and land (Xiang 28.11a, 29.13e). Yan Yinga, dressed in full court garb, stood outside the Tiger Gate. Each of the four houses summoned him, but he would join none. His followers said, “Will you help Chen and Bao?” He said, “What good is there in them?” “Will you help Luan and Gao?” “Are they any better?” “In that case will you go home?” He said, “When the ruler is under attack, how can I go home?” Only after the ruler summoned him did he go to court. The ruler divined about having Wang Hei lead forces under the Linggupi banner, and it was auspicious.476 Wang Hei asked to shorten the banner by three feet before using it.477 In the fifth month, on the gengchen day,478 the forces battled at the Ji Gate, and Luan and Gao were defeated. They were defeated again at Zhuang.479 The inhabitants of the capital pursued them and defeated them again at the Lu Gate.480 Luan Shi and Gao Qiang came to Lu in flight. The Chen and Bao lineage divided up their estates.

10.2b

Yan Yingb said to Chen Wuyub, “You must hand your portion over to the lord!481 Yielding is the mainstay of virtue. Yielding is deemed an excellent virtue. Anything that has blood and life force is disposed to contention. Therefore, profit cannot be seized by force; it is better to think of duty. Dutifulness is the root of profit. Stored-up profits give rise to trouble. So for now do not allow them to be stored up! In this way you can receive nourishment and grow.” Chen Wuyub turned his whole portion over to the lord and asked permission to retire to Ju.482 Chen Wuyub summoned Zishan and, without telling the ruler, provided him with draperies, utensils, and clothing and shoes for his followers, then returned Ji to him.483 For Zishang he provided the same things, also returning his settlement to him. For Zizhou he did the same, giving him Fuyu.484 He brought back Zichenga, Zigonga, and Ziyuan Jiea, in each case increasing their emoluments.485 For all the lords’ sons and grandsons who did not have emoluments, he made distributions from among his own cities. For all in the domain who were impoverished or orphaned, he made distributions from his private stores of grain. He said, “As it says in the Odes,

10.2c

By bestowing gifts he founded the Zhou.486

That is, King Wen was capable of generosity. And it was in this way that Lord Huan became overlord.” The lord gave Chen Wuyub settlements near Ju, but he declined them. Mu Meng Ji requested Gaotang for him, and with this the Chen lineage first became a great house in Qi.487 Lord Zhao

1455

10.3(3) 秋七月，平子伐莒，取郠。獻俘，始用人於亳社。臧武仲在齊，聞之，曰：

「周公其不饗魯祭乎！周公饗義，魯無義。《詩》曰： 德音孔昭， 視民不佻。 佻之謂甚矣，而壹用之，將誰福哉？」 10.4a(4) 戊子，晉平公卒。鄭伯如晉，及河，晉人辭之。游吉遂如晉。九月，叔孫

婼、齊國弱、宋華定、衛北宮喜、鄭罕虎、許人、曹人、莒人、邾人、滕人、 薛人、杞人、小邾人如晉，葬平公也。 10.4b 鄭子皮將以幣行，子產曰：「喪焉用幣？用幣必百兩，百兩必千人。千人

至，將不行。不行，必盡用之。幾千人而國不亡？」子皮固請以行。

488 Maoshi 161, “Lu ming” 鹿鳴, 9B.316. 489 According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.783), ritual did not require that rulers attend the funerals of other rulers; see specifications in Zhao 3.1. As this passage shows, however, rulers of lesser domains might attend the funerals of rulers of larger domains. See also Xiang 29.1, where the ruler of Lu attends the funeral of King Kang of Chu.

1456

Zuo Tradition

Ji Pingzi conducts a human sacrifice, in this era an exceptional practice found in only a few other Zuozhuan passages (see Xi 19.3, Zhao 11.8). Zang Wuzhong, exiled because of his own errors in judgment (Xiang 23.5d), nonetheless keeps up his line’s tradition of offering judicious predictions. In autumn, in the seventh month, Ji Pingzic attacked Ju and took Geng. He presented the prisoners in Lu, then for the first time conducted a human sacrifice at the Bo Altar in honor of Lu ancestors. Zang Wuzhong, hearing about it while in Qi, said, “The Zhou Duke will not savor Lu’s offerings! The Zhou Duke savors dutifulness, but Lu has none. As it says in the Odes,

10.3(3)

Very brilliant is the sound of his virtue; he shows the people how not to be remiss.488

When even being remiss was considered excessive, this one goes so far as to sacrifice a human being. Who will receive blessings for this?” The Lord of Jin dies, fulfilling the prediction of Pi Zao of Zheng (Zhao 10.1) and prompting discussions of the protocol of funeral visits in Zheng and of filial behavior in Lu. On the wuzi day (3) of this month, Lord Ping of Jin died. The Liege of Zheng set out for Jin, but when he reached the Yellow River, the Jin leaders declined his visit.489 You Ji then went to Jin. In the ninth month, a group went to Jin for the burial of Lord Ping: Shusun Chuo, Guo Ruo of Qi, Hua Ding of Song, Beigong Xi of Wei, Han Hu of Zheng, a Xǔ leader, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, a Qǐ leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader. As Han Hua of Zheng was preparing to set out with gifts for the new ruler, Zichan said, “What use is there for gifts at a funeral?490 A gift presentation requires one hundred chariots, and for one hundred chariots there must be one thousand men. If a thousand men arrive there, they will not set out for home again,491 and if they do not set out, your gifts are sure to be used up. How many times will you send out a thousand men before the domain falls?” After insisting on his request to give gifts, Han Hua set out for Jin.

10.4a(4)

10.4b

490 Funeral guests were not expected to offer gifts. Han Hu is mistakenly anticipating the ceremonies attending the installation of the new Jin ruler. 491 Yang (4:1319) thinks that the thousand men, having arrived in Jin, will not be capable of returning to Zheng. Takezoe (22.25–26) thinks that Zheng, with one thousand men in attendance, will not be permitted to conduct the ritual of having an audience with the new ruler. See also Zhao 13.3b, where You Ji likewise takes too much along with him during a trip to Jin.

Lord Zhao

1457

既葬，諸侯之大夫欲因見新君。叔孫昭子曰：「非禮也。」弗聽。叔 向辭之曰：「大夫之事畢矣，而又命孤。孤斬焉在衰絰之中，其以嘉服 見，則喪禮未畢；其以喪服見，是重受弔也，大夫將若之何？」皆無辭以 見。 子皮盡用其幣。歸，謂子羽曰：「非知之實難，將在行之。夫子知 之矣，我則不足。《書》曰： 欲敗度， 縱敗禮。 我之謂矣。夫子知度與禮矣，我實縱欲，而不能自克也。」 10.4c 昭子至自晉，大夫皆見，高彊見而退。昭子語諸大夫曰：「為人子不可不

慎也哉！昔慶封亡，子尾多受邑，而稍致諸君，君以為忠，而甚寵之。將 死，疾于公宮，輦而歸，君親推之。其子不能任，是以在此。忠為令德， 其子弗能任，罪猶及之，難不慎也。喪夫人之力，棄德、曠宗，以及其 身，不亦害乎？《詩》曰： 不自我先， 不自我後。 其是之謂乎！」

492 The line is not found in the jinwen chapters of the Documents. The compiler of the guwen chapters included this line in “Taijia zhong” 太甲中 (8.118). 493 For the principle that ritual implies control over or restraint of the self, see Zhao 13.2. 494 See Xiang 28.9 and 28.11. 495 These lines, lamenting the coming of troubles, are found in Maoshi 192, “Zhengyue” 正月, 12A.397–401; and 264, “Zhanyang” 瞻卬, 18E.694–97. According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.784), the lines as quoted here suggest that Gao Qiang’s troubles, which came not before or after his time, are entirely the result of his own actions.

1458

Zuo Tradition

Once the burial was completed, the high officers of the princes wished to use the opportunity to have an audience with the new Jin ruler. Shusun Chuob argued, “That would not be in accordance with ritual propriety,” but they did not heed him. Shuxiang declined on the Jin ruler’s behalf: “The high officers have fulfilled their duty, and yet they would now go on to give their commands to me, the lone one. Bereaved now, clad in untrimmed mourning hemp, how can I hold my audience with them in court dress? The funeral rituals have not yet been completed. Would I hold an audience with them in mourning dress? In that case, I would receive condolences for a second time. How would the high officers manage this?” None of them had any justification for an audience. Han Hua used up all his gifts. On his return, he said to Gongsun Huia, “Understanding something is not difficult, but putting it into practice is difficult. This fine man, Zichan, understood the problem while I fell short. Where the Documents says, Desires ruin standards; indulgence ruins ritual,492

it refers to someone like myself. This fine man understood the proper standards and ritual, but all I did was indulge my desires, and I was not able to restrain myself.”493 Gao Qiang, who fled from Qi to Lu earlier this year (Zhao 10.2b), fails to impress Shusun Chuo. (See Ding 13.2.) When Shusun Chuoc returned from Jin, all the high officers had an audience with him. After Gao Qiang withdrew from the audience, Shusun Chuoc spoke of him to the high officers: “A son must not fail to be cautious! Some time ago, when Qing Feng went into exile, Ziwei received many settlements and turned a few of them over to the Qi ruler.494 The ruler thought this loyal of him and showed him great favor. So when Ziwei was nearing death, he fell ill in the lord’s palace, and he was taken home in a hand-drawn carriage, which our lord himself pushed. Ziwei’s son Gao Qiang has been unable to live up to his father’s example. That is why he is here. Loyalty is an admirable virtue, but his son was unable to live up to it, and he has even been implicated in crimes. How can one fail to be cautious? Is it not indeed a great waste of the exertions of that man, Ziwei, to have thrown away his virtue, to have left the Ancestral Temple deserted, and to have brought such trouble upon himself? The Odes refers to situations of this kind where it says,

10.4c

It did not come before our time; It did not come after our time.”495

Lord Zhao

1459

10.5(6) 冬十二月，宋平公卒。初，元公惡寺人柳，欲殺之。及喪，柳熾炭于位，將

至，則去之。比葬，又有寵。

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年春王二月，叔弓如宋。 11.2(1) 葬宋平公。 11.3(2) 夏四月丁巳，楚子虔誘蔡侯般殺之于申。 11.4(2) 楚公子棄疾帥師圍蔡。 11.5(3) 五月甲申，夫人歸氏薨。 11.6(3) 大蒐于比蒲。 11.7(4) 仲孫貜會邾子，盟于祲祥。 11.8(5) 秋，季孫意如會晉韓起、齊國弱、宋華亥、衛北宮佗、

鄭罕虎、曹人、杞人于厥憖。 11.9(7) 九月己亥，葬我小君齊歸。 11.10(8) 冬十有一月丁酉，楚師滅蔡，執蔡世子有以歸，用之。

左傳

11.1(1, 2)

十一年春王二月，叔弓如宋，葬平公也。 496 Yang (4:1320) notes that in 1980 a dagger-axe was discovered in Beijing bearing an inscription indicating that it was a gift from Lord Ping to Liu. 497 This was the mother of Lord Zhao; see Xiang 31.4. 498 The precise location of Bipu 比蒲 is not known.

1460

Zuo Tradition

After death and succession in Song, the eunuch Liu—who has already shown himself a master of self-serving deception (Zhao 6.5)—wins the favor of an inimical ruler. In winter, in the twelfth month, Lord Ping of Song died. Earlier, his son, the future Lord Yuan, had wanted to kill Eunuch Liu, as he hated him. At the time of Lord Ping’s funeral, Liu burned charcoal to warm Lord Yuan’s ceremonial place, and he removed it just before Lord Yuan arrived. By the time the burial was over, Liu again enjoyed favor.496

10.5(6)

LORD ZHAO 11 (531 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, in the royal second month, Shu Gong went to Song.

11.1(1)

Lord Ping of Song was buried.

11.2(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (7), Qian, the Master of Chu, lured Ban, the Prince of Cai, to Shen and put him to death. Gongzi Qiji of Chu led out troops and laid siege to Cai. In the fifth month, on the jiashen day (4), Lord Xiang’s wife Lady Gui died.497

11.3(2)

11.4(2) 11.5(3)

There was a great muster at Bipu.498

11.6(3)

Zhongsun Jue (Meng Xizi) met with the Master of Zhu and swore a covenant at Jinxiang.499

11.7(4)

In autumn, Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi) met with Han Qi of Jin, Guo Ruo of Qi, Hua Hai of Song, Beigong Tuo of Wei, Han Hu of Zheng, a Cao leader, and a Qǐ leader at Jueyin.500

11.8(5)

In the ninth month, on the jihai day (21), we buried our lord’s secondary wife, Qi Gui.501 In winter, in the eleventh month, on the dingyou day (20), Chu troops extinguished Cai. They arrested the Cai heir apparent You (heir apparent Yin), took him home with them, and sacrificed him.

11.9(7)

11.10(8)

ZUO

In the eleventh year, in spring, in the royal second month, Shu Gong went to Song: this was for the burial of Lord Ping.

11.1(1, 2)

499 Jinxiang 祲祥 was located in the domain of Lu near Qufu 曲阜, Shandong. 500 Jueyin 厥憖 was located in the domain of Wei in present-day Xinxiang County 新 鄉縣, Henan. 501 I.e., Lady Gui, secondary wife of Lord Xiang and Lord Zhao’s birth mother.

Lord Zhao

1461

11.2a 景王問於萇弘曰：「今茲諸侯何實吉？何實凶？」對曰：「蔡凶。此蔡侯

般弒其君之歲也，歲在豕韋，弗過此矣。楚將有之，然壅也。歲及大梁， 蔡復，楚凶，天之道也。」

11.2b(3, 4)

楚子在申，召蔡靈侯。靈侯將往，蔡大夫曰：「王貪而無信，唯蔡於感。 今幣重而言甘，誘我也，不如無往。」蔡侯不可。三月丙申，楚子伏甲而 饗蔡侯於申，醉而執之。夏四月丁巳，殺之。刑其士七十人。公子棄疾帥 師圍蔡。

11.2c 韓宣子問於叔向曰：「楚其克乎？」對曰：「克哉！蔡侯獲罪於其君，而不

能其民，天將假手於楚以斃之，何故不克？然肸聞之：不信以幸，不可 再也。楚王奉孫吳以討於陳，曰：『將定而國。』陳人聽命，而遂縣之。今 又誘蔡而殺其君，以圍其國，雖幸而克，必受其咎，弗能久矣。桀克有 緡，以喪其國；紂克東夷，而隕其身。楚小、位下，而亟暴於二王，能無 咎乎？天之假助不善，非祚之也，厚其凶惡而降之罰也。且譬之如天其 有五材，而將用之，力盡而敝之，是以無拯，不可沒振。」

502 See Xiang 30.5. Shiwei was in the Yingshi 營室 or Shi 室 mansion of the twenty-eight lunar mansions, corresponding to a part of Pegasus. In twelve years, Jupiter has returned to the place where it was when the ruler of Cai was assassinated. 503 Daliang was one of the twelve Jupiter stations. Jupiter was in Daliang when King Ling murdered his predecessor (Zhao 1.13) and will reach Daliang in Zhao 13, when King Ling dies and Cai is restored. For the “Way of Heaven” in reference to planetary movements and related omens, see Zhao 9.4. On the Way of Heaven and predictions more generally, see Xiang 9.1b. 504 The term used for “punishments” (xing 刑) suggests mutilating punishments, perhaps along the lines of those contemplated for Jin envoys at Zhao 5.4. 505 See Zhao 8.6. 506 Jie and Zhòu were the despotic last rulers of the Xia and Shang dynasties, respectively. 507 The Five Resources are metal, wood, water, fire, and earth.

1462

Zuo Tradition

Persisting in his conquests (see Zhao 9.2), the Master of Chu moves against Cai. Observers in Zhou and Jin predict near-term success and ultimate failure. For the restoration of Cai, see Zhao 13.5. King Jing asked Chang Hong, “For whom among the princes will this be an auspicious year? And for whom inauspicious?” He replied, “For Cai it will be inauspicious. The Year-Planet is just where it was when Ban, Prince of Cai, killed his ruler; the Year-Planet was in Shiwei then, and the result will not be delayed beyond this year.502 Chu will take possession of Cai, but that will leave it overfull. When the Year-Planet reaches Daliang, Cai will be restored, and it will be inauspicious for Chu. This is the Way of Heaven.”503

11.2a

While in Shen, the Master of Chu summoned Prince Ling of Cai for an audience. As Prince Ling was preparing to go, the high officers of Cai said, “The king is greedy and lacking in good faith. His only source of disappointment is Cai. Now his gifts are extravagant and his words sweet; he is trying to lure us there. It would be better not to go.” The Prince of Cai did not agree. In the third month, on the bingshen day (15), the Master of Chu, having concealed soldiers, feasted the Prince of Cai in Shen, then seized him once he was drunk. In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (7), he put him to death. He inflicted punishments upon seventy of the prince’s officers.504 Gongzi Qiji led out troops and laid siege to Cai.

11.2b(3, 4)

Han Qia asked Shuxiang, “Will Chu prevail?” He replied, “It will! The Prince of Cai committed a crime against his ruler and does not have the allegiance of his people. Heaven has merely borrowed Chu’s hands to put him to death. Why then should Chu not prevail? However, as the saying goes, one may win good fortune through bad faith, but not twice. The King of Chu went to chastise Chen, claiming to support the grandson Wu’s claim to the succession. The king said, ‘I will settle your domain.’ The people heeded his commands, so he annexed them for a Chu dependency.505 Now once again he has lured the Cai ruler here and killed him, then laid siege to that domain. Even if he should be fortunate enough to prevail, he is certain to suffer the consequences. He will not be able to last long. Jie prevailed over the Min but in this way lost his domain. Zhòu prevailed over the Eastern Yi but in this way lost his life.506 Chu is smaller and of lower status, and its king has repeatedly committed greater outrages than either of those two kings. Could he escape the consequences? When Heaven avails itself of aid from someone who is not good, it is not giving its blessing. Rather, it is piling up evil deeds for him, to speed the punishments that fall upon him. What is more, this resembles Heaven’s keeping the Five Resources in reserve;507 once they are depleted, it casts them aside. Therefore, there will be no help for the Chu king, and there will be no way to restore him in the end.”

11.2c

Lord Zhao

1463



11.3(5, 6)

五月，齊歸薨。大蒐于比蒲，非禮也。

11.4(7) 孟僖子會邾莊公，盟于祲祥，修好，禮也。

泉丘人有女，夢以其帷幕孟氏之廟，遂奔僖子，其僚從之。盟于清 丘之社，曰：「有子，無相棄也！」僖子使助薳氏之簉。反自祲祥，宿于 薳氏，生懿子及南宮敬叔於泉丘人。其僚無子，使字敬叔。 11.5(8) 楚師在蔡，晉荀吳謂韓宣子曰：「不能救陳，又不能救蔡，物以無親。晉

之不能亦可知也已。為盟主而不恤亡國，將焉用之？」 秋，會于厥憖，謀救蔡也。鄭子皮將行。子產曰：「行不遠，不能 救蔡也。蔡小而不順，楚大而不德，天將棄蔡以壅楚，盈而罰之，蔡必 亡矣。且喪君而能守者鮮矣。三年，王其有咎乎！美惡周必復，王惡周 矣。」 晉人使狐父請蔡于楚，弗許。

508 Quanqiu 泉丘 is thought to have been situated just north of the Lu capital, between present-day Ningyang 寧陽 and Sishui 泗水, Shandong. 509 Alternatively, the women cause Meng Xizi to swear to them that if either of them should bear a child, he will not abandon them. The exact location of the Qingqiu Altar is not known. 510 Takezoe (22.31) relates zao 簉 to zao 竈, “stove,” hence “kitchen assistant.” Yang (4:1324) understands it more generally as “assistant.” 511 This passage suggests that the two sons were twins, both fathered during this single visit. 512 See Karlgren, gl. 711. 513 The truism that anything that reaches the height of its power must inevitably go into decline is quite common in Zuozhuan and other early Chinese works. See, e.g., Zhuang 4.1 and Zhao 11.2a.

1464

Zuo Tradition

In the fifth month, Qi Gui died and there was a great muster at Bipu: this was not in accordance with ritual propriety.

11.3(5, 6)

In Lu, the dream of a servant woman brings her to the home of the Meng lineage, where she becomes mother of Meng Yizi and Nangong Jingshu, the lineage’s two most important representatives in the next generation. Meng Xizi met with Lord Zhuang of Zhu and swore a covenant at Jinxiang: this was to foster good relations and was in accordance with ritual propriety. Among the people of Quanqiu there was a woman who dreamt that she hung her draperies in the Meng temple.508 She therefore ran away to Meng Xizi, taking a friend with her. At the Qingqiu Altar they swore a pact, saying, ‘If one of us should bear a child, she will not abandon the other!’ 509 Meng Xizi made them kitchen assistants under Lady Wei, his wife.510 Upon his return from Jinxiang he spent the night at Lady Wei’s dwelling, fathering Meng Yizic and Nangong Jingshu with the woman from Quanqiu.511 Her friend, who had no child, was appointed to rear Nangong Jingshub.

11.4(7)

Zichan of Zheng echoes predictions that the king of Chu will ultimately fall (see Zhao 11.2). When the Chu army was in Cai, Zhonghang Wub of Jin said to Han Qia, “We were unable to give aid to Chen, and now we are again unable to give aid to Cai. Because of this there will be no allegiance to us among the people of the world.512 Jin’s impotence is indeed plain for all to see. What use is a host of covenants if Jin cannot care for domains that are perishing?” The meeting at Jueyin in autumn was to devise a plan to save Cai. When Han Hua of Zheng was about to set out for the meeting, Zichan said, “You will have to travel a long way before you are able to save Cai. Cai is small and disobedient, while Chu is large and lacking in virtue. Heaven will abandon Cai in order to make Chu overfull, at which point Heaven will inflict its punishment.513 Cai is bound to perish. Moreover, it is rare that domains that lose their rulers are able to survive.514 Within three years, the Chu king will suffer the consequences. Good and bad repeat themselves in a cycle, and the king’s bad deeds are coming full cycle.”515 The Jin leaders sent Hu Fu to request the return of Cai from Chu. This request was not granted.

11.5(8)

514 The ruler of Cai was put to death in Zhao 11.2b. 515 According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.786), Zichan is referring to the completion of one Jupiter cycle since the year in which the Chu king murdered his predecessor (see Zhao 1.13a).

Lord Zhao

1465

11.6 單子會韓宣子于戚，視下，言徐。叔向曰：「單子其將死乎！朝有著定，

會有表；衣有襘，帶有結。會朝之言必聞于表著之位，所以昭事序也； 視不過結襘之中，所以道容貌也。言以命之，容貌以明之，失則有闕。今 單子為王官伯，而命事於會，視不登帶，言不過步，貌不道容，而言不昭 矣。不道，不共；不昭，不從。無守氣矣。」 11.7(9) 九月，葬齊歸，公不慼。晉士之送葬者，歸以語史趙。史趙曰：「必為魯

郊。」侍者曰：「何故？」曰：「歸姓也，不思親，祖不歸也。」 叔向曰：「魯公室其卑乎！君有大喪，國不廢蒐；有三年之喪，而無 一日之慼。國不恤喪，不忌君也；君無慼容，不顧親也。國不忌君，君不 顧親，能無卑乎？殆其失國。」

516 For Lord Zhao’s mother, see Xiang 31.3–4. 517 Zhao 11.3. It should be noted that the decision to proceed with the muster was likely Ji Wuzi’s rather than Lord Zhao’s.

1466

Zuo Tradition

A Zhou nobleman’s poor performance during a meeting brings a prediction of death from Shuxiang of Jin (see Zhao 11.9). The scene recalls other episodes in which inappropriate ritual behavior signals doom (see, e.g., Xi 11.2 and the very next passage, Zhao 11.7). Meeting with Han Qia at Qī, the Shan Duke Chenga directed his gaze downward and spoke slowly. Shuxiang said, “The Shan lord is going to die. The members of the court have their designated positions, meetings have their hierarchical arrangements, robes have their crossed lapels, and belts have their fastenings. In a court meeting speeches must be heard only from among those who are in their positions in the hierarchy; this is how the protocols of the ritual affair are displayed. The line of the host’s gaze must not leave the area between the belt-fastening and the crossed lapels of his guest; this is how their dignified expressions are conveyed. The command is spoken aloud, and looks and expressions make it clear. When one fails in these, there are shortcomings. Now the Shan Duke Chenga, acting as head of the royal officials, has given commands about his officials’ duties at a meeting, yet his gaze never rose above his guest’s belt-fastening, and his words carried no further than a pace. His expression did not convey his dignity, nor were his words sonorous. What is not properly conveyed is disrespectful; what is not sonorous will be disobeyed. He no longer has the vital energy to live on.”

11.6

The Lu Lord, who at age nineteen was still too immature to mourn his father properly (Xiang 31.4), now fails to show sorrow at the death of his mother. His dereliction brings predictions of disaster for him, which are fulfilled in Zhao 25.6. In the ninth month, we buried Qi Gui. Our lord was not sorrowful. The officers from Jin who escorted the cortege spoke of it to the scribe Zhao upon their return home. The scribe Zhao said, “He is certain to end up in the outskirts of Lu.” His attendants said, “Why do you say so?” He said, “He is of the Gui, or ‘Homing,’ clan on his mother’s side,516 yet he does not think of his own kin. His ancestors will not come home to him.” Shuxiang said, “The Lu Lord’s house will sink low! The ruler has cause for intense mourning, but the domain did not cancel the muster.517 The ruler has cause for three years’ mourning, yet he failed to be sorrowful even for a single day. That the domain does not share in mourning means that they do not even hold their ruler in awe. That the ruler lacks the appearance of sorrow means that he does not remember his own kin. When the domain does not hold the ruler in awe and the ruler does not remember his kin, can the lord’s house not sink low? He is in danger of losing the domain.”

11.7(9)

Lord Zhao

1467

11.8(10) 冬十一月，楚子滅蔡，用隱大子于岡山。申無宇曰：「不祥。五牲不相為

用，況用諸侯乎！王必悔之！」 11.9 十二月，單成公卒。 11.10 楚子城陳、蔡、不羹。使棄疾為蔡公。王問於申無宇曰：「棄疾在蔡何

如？」對曰：「擇子莫如父，擇臣莫如君。鄭莊公城櫟而寘子元焉，使昭 公不立。齊桓公城穀而寘管仲焉，至于今賴之。臣聞五大不在邊，五細 不在庭。親不在外，羈不在內。今棄疾在外，鄭丹在內，君其少戒！」王 曰：「國有大城，何如？」對曰：「鄭京、櫟實殺曼伯，宋蕭、亳實殺子游， 齊渠丘實殺無知，衛蒲、戚實出獻公。若由是觀之，則害於國。末大必 折，尾大不掉，君所知也。」

518 The heir apparent You is referred to by his posthumous name Yin 隱, perhaps in memory of his unavenged murder; cf. Lord Yin of Lu. Mount Gang 岡山 is of unknown location. 519 See the prediction attributed to Shuxiang at Zhao 11.6. 520 It is clear from a later passage (Zhao 12.11) that King Ling extended Chu rule to two regions called Bugeng 不羮. They were in present-day Xiangcheng 襄城 and Wu­yang 舞陽, Henan, more than 350 kilometers north of the Chu capital. 521 As Yang (4:1327–28) notes, Shen Wuyu’s opening lines are quoted as a common saying in Guanzi 18.335; in Guoyu, “Jin yu 7,” 13.439; and elsewhere. 522 For Li, see Annals, Huan 15.9. Because the identity of Ziyuan is uncertain, various interpretations are possible. Yang (4:1328) follows Ma Zonglian in supposing that Ziyuan was Gongzi Tu (later Lord Li 厲) and that he took the Zheng capital and drove Lord Zhao out. Takezoe (22.35) adopts the same view. See Yin 5.4 and Huan 5.3. 523 See Zhuang 32.1, where the settlement is referred to as Xiaogu. Gu was in presentday Dong’e 東阿, Shandong, about 200 kilometers southwest of the Qi capital. 524 According to Jia Kui (ZZ-Kong 45.788), the five major relations were the designated heir, the ruler’s younger brothers by the same mother, favorite sons, grandsons, and high ministers holding hereditary offices. The five minor relations, according to Zheng Zhong 鄭眾 (ZZ-Kong 45.788), included anyone lowly, young, distantly related, newly acquainted, or of small importance. 525 Ran Dan fled to Chu from Zheng in Xiang 19.9. He resides within the Chu court in the sense that he is serving as deputy of the right (youyin 右尹). 526 Jing and Li were both walled settlements in Zheng (see Yin 1.4, n. 16; and Annals, Huan 15.9, n. 126, respectively). The identity of Manbo is uncertain. Yang (4:1328) cites Ruan Zhisheng 阮芝生, who argued that Manbo was the Ziyi mentioned in Zhuang 14.2. 527 See Zhuang 12.1.

1468

Zuo Tradition

The Master of Chu destroys Cai (see Zhao 11.2) and conducts a human sacrifice, prompting further predictions of his fall. The episode and the response recall similar sacrifices in Xi 19.3 and Zhao 10.3. In winter, in the eleventh month, the Master of Chu extinguished Cai and sacrificed the heir apparent Yin at Mount Gang.518 Shen Wuyu said, “This is inauspicious. The five sacrificial animals are not substituted for one another. How much worse is it to sacrifice one of the princes! The king is sure to regret this.”

11.8(10)

In the twelfth month, the Shan Duke Cheng died.519

11.9

Citing historical examples, Shen Wuyu points out to the King of Chu that he is unwise to build fortresses within his domain and to appoint a brother to rule in a newly annexed border territory. The passage recalls similar perilous divisions of power in Yin 1.4a and Zhuang 28.2. The Master of Chu fortified Chen, Cai, and the Bugeng regions.520 He appointed Gongzi Qiji as Cai Lord. The king asked Shen Wuyu, “How is it for Gongzi Qiji to be in Cai?” He replied, “No one is better than a father for selecting from among sons; no one is better than a ruler for selecting from among subjects.521 That Lord Zhuang of Zheng walled the town of Li and installed Ziyuan there kept Lord Zhao from standing firm in his rule.522 By contrast, Lord Huan of Qi walled the town of Gu and installed Guan Zhong there, and to this very day Qi is still relying upon the benefits.523 I have heard that the five major relations do not reside at the borders, while the five minor relations do not reside at court.524 Kin do not reside outside; visitors do not reside within. Now Gongzi Qiji is residing outside the court, while Ran Danc is residing within:525 I hope you, my ruler, will be a bit more cautious!” The king said, “How is it for the domain to have great walls?” He replied, “In Zheng it was Jing and Li that were the death of Manbo.526 In Song it was Xiao and Bo that were the death of Ziyou.527 In Qi it was Quqiu that was the death of Gongsun Wuzhia.528 And in Wei it was Pu and Qī that brought the expulsion of Lord Xian.529 Viewing the matter from this perspective, then the situation will be harmful to the domain. When the tip of a branch is large, it is certain to break. When a tail is large, it will not wag. This is something that my ruler already knows.”

11.10

528 Quqiu 渠丘 was perhaps the city of Yong Lin, mentioned as Wuzhi’s murderer in Zhuang 9.1. According to Yang (4:1328–29), Quqiu was Kuiqiu 葵丘, near presentday Linzi 臨淄, Shandong. 529 Pu was Ning Zhi’s city; Qī was Sun Linfu’s city. For the expulsion of Lord Xian, see Xiang 14.4.

Lord Zhao

1469

春秋 12.1(1) 十有二年春，齊高偃帥師納北燕伯于陽。 12.2(2) 三月壬申，鄭伯嘉卒。 12.3(3) 夏，宋公使華定來聘。 12.4(4) 公如晉，至河乃復。 12.5(6) 五月，葬鄭簡公。 12.6(5) 楚殺其大夫成熊。 12.7 秋七月。 12.8(10) 冬十月，公子憖出奔齊。 12.9(11) 楚子伐徐。 12.10(12) 晉伐鮮虞。

左傳 12.1(1) 十二年春，齊高偃納北燕伯款于唐，因其眾也。 12.2(2) 三月，鄭簡公卒。將為葬除，及游氏之廟，將毀焉。子大叔使其除徒執

用以立，而無庸毀，曰：「子產過女，而問何故不毀，乃曰：『不忍廟也。 諾，將毀矣。』」既如是，子產乃使辟之。

530 Note that Zuozhuan has Tang 唐 where the Annals has Yang 陽. According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.789), Yang was Tang, located in the west of Qi. Wang Fuzhi (cited in Yang, 4:1330) notes that Qi would have found it difficult to support a Yan ruler in the west of Qi and argues instead that this Yang was a settlement mentioned in Hanshu and located along the major route from Qi to Yan. 531 Gu Yanwu argued (Rizhi lu jishi 4.95) that the two passages record a single event: those who wrote Zhao 18.6a understood the event as a military review, while those who wrote the present passage understood it as a funerary procession.

1470

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 12 (530 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, Gao Yan of Qi led out troops and installed the Liege of Northern Yan in power at Yang.

12.1(1)

In the third month, on the renshen day (27), Jia, the Liege of Zheng, died.

12.2(2)

In summer, the Duke of Song sent Hua Ding to us on an official visit.

12.3(3)

Our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back.

12.4(4)

In the fifth month, Lord Jian of Zheng was buried.

12.5(6)

Chu put to death its high officer Cheng Xiong.

12.6(5)

Autumn, the seventh month.

12.7

In winter, in the tenth month, Gongzi Yin (Zizhong) departed and fled to Qi.

12.8(10)

The Master of Chu attacked Xu.

12.9(11)

Jin attacked the Xianyu.

12.10(12)

ZUO

In the twelfth year, in spring, Gao Yan of Qi installed Kuan, the Liege of Northern Yan, in power at Tang;530 in this he was using the support of the multitude of that place.

12.1(1)

As Zheng administrators clear a route for a funeral cortege, Zichan shows an ability to preserve ritual propriety while also protecting the living. For an uncannily similar scene, see Zhao 18.6a.531 In the third month, Lord Jian of Zheng died. As they were preparing to clear the route for the funerary procession, they reached the Ancestral Temple of the You lineage, which they were just about to pull down. You Jib had his workers stand there, tools in hand, without actually beginning the work. He said, “When Zichan visits you and asks you why you did not pull it down, say, ‘It is because we could not bear to do this to a temple. But, sir, we will pull it down now if you say so.’” They did as he said, and Zichan ordered that they clear a route at some distance from the temple.

12.2(2)

Lord Zhao

1471

司墓之室有當道者，毀之，則朝而堋；弗毀，則日中而堋。子大叔 請毀之，曰：「無若諸侯之賓何？」子產曰：「諸侯之賓能來會吾喪，豈憚 日中？無損於賓，而民不害，何故不為？」遂弗毀，日中而葬。 君子謂子產於是乎知禮。禮，無毀人以自成也。 12.3(3) 夏，宋華定來聘，通嗣君也。享之，為賦〈蓼蕭〉，弗知，又不答賦。昭子

曰：「必亡。宴語之不懷，寵光之不宣，令德之不知，同福之不受，將何以 在？」 12.4(4) 齊侯、衛侯、鄭伯如晉，朝嗣君也。公如晉，至河，乃復。取郠之役，莒人

愬于晉，晉有平公之喪，未之治也，故辭公。公子憖遂如晉。 晉侯享諸侯，子產相鄭伯，辭於享，請免喪而後聽命。晉人許之， 禮也。 晉侯以齊侯宴，中行穆子相。投壺，晉侯先，穆子曰：

532 The cortege would be slowed by having to go around the home of the supervisor of tombs. 533 Lord Ping of Song died in the twelfth month of Zhao 10 (Zhao 10.5) and was buried in the second month of Zhao 11 (Zhao 11.1). His successor, Lord Yuan, has just acceded to his position. According to Takezoe (22.39), Song waits until this year to complete this official visit because Lu had shown Song exceptional honor in sending the high minister Shu Gong to attend the funeral of Lord Ping. 534 Maoshi 173, “Luxiao” 蓼蕭, 10A.348–50. This song was recited at another ceremonial gathering in Xiang 26.7b, where an appropriate response follows. Cf. Xiang 27.2, where Qing Feng likewise fails to understand a song recited for him. 535 “Luxiao” is a praise song describing the pleasures of a feast. Shusun Chuo alludes to the following lines: “Now we have seen the gentleman:/our hearts are relieved./ Feasting we laugh and talk,/and in this way we have our pleasure and respite”; “Now we have seen the gentleman:/he is favor to us, he is light to us”; “Fit to be an elder brother, fit to be a younger brother,/in his excellent virtue he is long-lived and merry”; “Now we have seen the gentleman:/the bronze and leather of his bridles hang heavy,/his matched jingle bells ring;/here the myriad blessings join together.” 536 See Zhao 10.3. 537 Zizhong of Lu will play a role in the rebellion of Nan Kuai (Zhao 12.10). 538 The new Liege of Zheng was at this time still in mourning for his father. 539 In pitch-pot (touhu 投壺), the players took turns tossing arrows into a narrownecked vase or pot. The rules are given in the “Touhu” chapter of Liji (40.965–70). See also the overview given in Lee, “Touhu.”

1472

Zuo Tradition

The home of one of the supervisors of tombs lay along the route to the burial ground. Were it to be pulled down, then the burial could take place in the morning, but if it were not pulled down, then the burial would have to take place later, at midday.532 You Jib requested that it be pulled down, saying, “If we do not pull it down, then what are we to do about the guests sent by the princes?” Zichan said, “If guests from the princes are able to take part in our funeral, then will they be loath to wait until midday? If it is no loss to the guests and does no harm to the people, then why should we pull it down?” So they did not pull it down, and the burial took place at midday. The noble man said that in this Zichan understood ritual propriety. In ritual propriety, one does not pull others down in order to build oneself up. A Song nobleman, visiting Lu, shows an inability to use the Odes, prompting predictions of disaster (see Zhao 22.2). In summer, Hua Ding of Song came on an official visit: this was to establish relations between the new Song ruler and Lu.533 He was provided with ceremonial toasts and “Luxuriant Artemisia” was recited for him, but he did not know it, nor did he respond with a recitation of his own.534 Shusun Chuoc said, “He is certain to go into exile. On what grounds will he be able to remain if he does not cherish the words of the feast, if he does not let shine the light of favor, if he does not know exemplary virtue, and if he does not receive joined blessings?”535

12.3(3)

On the accession of Lord Zhao of Jin, lords of three domains pay visits to the Jin court. The princes of Jin and Qi play at an arrow-tossing game together, with results that highlight the enduring rivalry between the two domains. The Prince of Qi, the Prince of Wei, and the Liege of Zheng went to Jin; this was to visit the court of the new ruler. Our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back. After the campaign in which Geng was taken,536 the Ju leaders had presented a formal complaint in Jin, but the Jin court was in mourning for Lord Ping and had not taken care of the matter. Therefore, they declined our lord’s visit. As a result, Zizhonga went to Jin.537 The Prince of Jin offered ceremonial toasts for the princes. Zichan, acting as assistant to the Liege of Zheng, declined the invitation, requesting to obey this command only later, after the mourning period had ended.538 That the Jin leaders granted this request was in accordance with ritual propriety. When the Prince of Jin gave a banquet for the Prince of Qi, Zhonghang Wua acted as the Jin ruler’s assistant. They played at pitch-pot.539 The Prince of Jin went first, and Zhonghang Wuf said,

12.4(4)

Lord Zhao

1473

有酒如淮， 有肉如坻。 寡君中此， 為諸侯師。 中之。齊侯舉矢，曰： 有酒如澠， 有肉如陵。 寡人中此， 與君代興。 亦中之。伯瑕謂穆子曰：「子失辭。吾固師諸侯矣，壺何為焉，其以中儁 也？齊君弱吾君，歸弗來矣。」穆子曰：「吾軍帥彊禦，卒乘競勸，今猶 古也，齊將何事？」公孫傁趨進，曰：「日旰君勤，可以出矣！」以齊侯 出。 12.5(6) 楚子謂成虎，若敖之餘也，遂殺之。或譖成虎於楚子，成虎知之，而不

能行。書曰「楚殺其大夫成虎」，懷寵也。 12.6(5) 六月，葬鄭簡公。 12.7 晉荀吳偽會齊師者，假道於鮮虞，遂入昔陽。秋八月壬午，滅肥，

以肥子緜皋歸。 12.8 周原伯絞虐，其輿臣使曹逃。冬十月壬申朔，原輿人逐絞，而立公子跪

尋。絞奔郊。

540 The Sheng River originated northeast of the Qi capital and flowed into Bohai Bay north of the Shandong Peninsula. 541 According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.790), Cheng Xiong was a grandson of the chief minister Cheng Dechen and thus kin to the Dou Jiao who raised a rebellion in Xuan 4.3. Since sixty-five years have passed since the rebellion, it appears that the link with the Ruo’ao was made a pretext for the execution. 542 The Annals dates the burial to the fifth month. 543 Xiyang 昔陽 was located west of present-day Jin County 晉縣, Hebei, and Fei 肥 was southwest of Gaocheng County 藁城縣, Hebei, in the territory between Jin, Yan, and Qi. 544 Jiao 郊 seems to have been located just northeast of the Zhou capital near presentday Gong County 鞏縣, Henan.

1474

Zuo Tradition

With wine as abundant as the Huai River, With meat like an island in it, If our unworthy ruler should hit this, May he be commander of the princes!

He hit it. Raising his own arrow, the Prince of Qi said, With wine as abundant as the Sheng River,540 With meat like a hillock beside it, If I should hit this, May I rise in your stead.

He too hit it. Shi Gaib said to Zhonghang Wuf, “You misspoke. Jin is, in fact, already commander of the princes. What can the pitch-pot do, that hitting it should make a difference? The Qi ruler now considers our ruler weak, and once he has gone home, he will not return here again.” Zhonghang Wuf said, “Our armies are as mighty today as they were of old, and our foot soldiers and chariots as full of vigor. What will Qi be able to do?” Gongsun Sou of Qi hurried forward and said, “The day is late and the ruler weary. It would be acceptable now to retire.” He hustled the Prince of Qi away, and they retired. King Ling of Chu continues to behave despotically. The Master of Chu, noting that Cheng Xionga was a survivor of the line of Ruo’ao, put him to death.541 Someone had slandered Cheng Xionga to the Master of Chu, and Cheng Xionga knew of it, but he was not able to leave. That the text says, “Chu put to death its high officer Cheng Xiong,” indicates that he clung to the favor he enjoyed.

12.5(6)

In the sixth month, Lord Jian of Zheng was buried.542

12.6(5)

Zhonghang Wub of Jin, pretending to be meeting with a Qi army, requested passage through Xianyu territory and then entered Xiyang. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the renwu day (10), he destroyed Fei and took Miangao, the Master of Fei, back with him.543

12.7

The next two episodes signal rising instability in the royal domain, which within a decade will be torn apart by civil war (Zhao 22.3). In Zhou, the Yuan Liege Jiao was tyrannical, and his commoners, subjects, and envoys fled in droves. In winter, in the tenth month, on the renshen day (1), the commoners of Yuan drove Jiao out, and they established Gongzi Guixun in his place. Jiao fled to the settlement of Jiao.544

12.8

Lord Zhao

1475

12.9 甘簡公無子，立其弟過。過將去成、景之族。成、景之族賂劉獻公，丙

申，殺甘悼公，而立成公之孫鰍。丁酉，殺獻大子之傅庾皮之子過，殺瑕 辛于市，及宮嬖綽、王孫沒、劉州鳩、陰忌、老陽子。 12.10a(8) 季平子立，而不禮於南蒯。南蒯謂子仲：「吾出季氏，而歸其室於公，子

更其位，我以費為公臣。」子仲許之。南蒯語叔仲穆子，且告之故。 季悼子之卒也，叔孫昭子以再命為卿。及平子伐莒克之，更受三命。 叔仲子欲構二家，謂平子曰：「三命踰父兄，非禮也。」平子曰：「然。」 故使昭子。昭子曰：「叔孫氏有家禍，殺適立庶，故婼也及此。若 因禍以斃之，則聞命矣。若不廢君命，則固有著矣。」昭子朝，而命吏曰： 「婼將與季氏訟，書辭無頗。」季孫懼而歸罪於叔仲子。

545 Dukes Cheng and Jing were the grandfather and father of Duke Jian. Guo prepares to move against other descendants of his grandfather and father. 546 Qiu would be given the posthumous name Lord Ping. 547 The identity of this heir, Xian, is mysterious. Yang (4:1335) notes that according to one commentator, Xian is the posthumous name of the royal heir who will die in Zhao 15.3. He and the others executed were apparently supporters of the Gan Duke Dao. 548 Du Yu (45.791) identifies the six as Zhou high officers and adherents of the Gan Duke Dao. 549 Ji Pingzi would have become head of the Ji lineage after the death of Ji Wuzi in Zhao 7.14. Resentment has thus been growing for five years. 550 According to Yang (4:1335), Ji Daozi was the father of Ji Pingzi and the son of Ji Wuzi. He seems never to have acted in the position of minister and may have predeceased his father, who died in Zhao 7.14. His posthumous honorific, Daozi 悼子 (“mourned”) indicates that he died young. 551 As Yang (4:1336) explains, officials under the first command follow a strict hierarchy of age, those under a second command follow the hierarchy based on their fathers’ ages, and those under a third command disregard age altogether and follow the hierarchy of their offices alone. By making this argument to Ji Pingzi, Shuzhong Xiao may be seeking to diminish the larger Shusun lineage in order to enhance the power of his own lineage, the Shuzhong, which is a branch of the Shusun. 552 The events that brought Shusun Chuo, a younger son born to a secondary wife, to power within his family are described in Zhao 4.8 and 5.1.

1476

Zuo Tradition

There is a succession crisis in another Zhou lineage. The Gan Duke Jian, who had no son, had established his younger brother Guo as heir. When Guo, posthumously known as the Gan Duke Dao, prepared to do away with the houses of the Gan Dukes Cheng and Jing, the houses of those dukes gave gifts to the Liu Duke Xian.545 In the tenth month, on the bingshen day (25), the Liu Duke Xian had the Gan Duke Dao put to death, and then he established Qiu, grandson of Duke Cheng, as his successor.546 On the dingyou day (26) of the month, he also put to death Guo, son of the heir apparent Xian’s tutor Yu Pi.547 He had Xia Xin publicly executed in the marketplace, along with the palace favorite Chuo, Wangsun Mo, Zhoujiu of Liu, Yin Ji, and Laoyangzi.548

12.9

In Lu, enemies of the Ji lineage and supporters of Lord Zhao challenge the power of the Ji lineage but are ultimately foiled as Ji Pingzi reaffirms his ties with Shusun Chuo, head of the Shusun lineage. Nan Kuai, the steward of the Ji lineage’s town of Bi, rebels against the Ji lineage and eventually turns the town over to Qi. He is aided in his efforts by Shuzhong Xiao, a member of a branch lineage of the Shusun, and by Zizhong, a close associate of Lord Zhao (Zhao 12.4). When Ji Pingzi was established in his position, he did not treat Nan Kuai with ritual propriety.549 Nan Kuai said to Zizhong, “I will expel the Ji lineage and turn its property over to our lord. You can then take over his place, while I rule Bi as minister to our lord.” Zizhong agreed to this. Nan Kuai spoke to Shuzhong Xiaob about it, also telling him the reasons for it. On the death of Ji Daozi, Shusun Chuob had received a second command making him a minister.550 When Ji Pingzic attacked and defeated Ju, Shusun Chuo was promoted to a third command. Shuzhong Xiaoa, wishing to drive the two houses apart, said to Ji Pingzic, “With a third command he will take precedence over his father and elder brother; this would not be in accordance with ritual propriety.” 551 Ji Pingzic said, “You are right.” He therefore sent someone to Shusun Chuoc with this message. Shusun Chuoc said, “There was domestic turmoil within the Shusun lineage; the heirs were put to death and the son of a secondary wife was established as successor.552 That is how I came to my present position. If you should wish to execute me on account of that turmoil, then I will heed your command. But if you do not ignore our lord’s command, then the established order of succession is firmly in place.” Presenting himself in court, Shusun Chuoc then gave a command to the officers, saying, “I intend to dispute a case with the Ji lineage. Show no partiality in writing out the testimony.” Frightened, Ji Pingzib laid the blame on Shuzhong Xiaoa.

12.10a(8)

Lord Zhao

1477

故叔仲小、南蒯、公子憖謀季氏。憖告公，而遂從公如晉。南蒯懼不 克，以費叛如齊。子仲還，及衛，聞亂，逃介而先。及郊，聞費叛，遂奔齊。 12.10b 南蒯之將叛也，其鄉人或知之，過之而歎，且言曰：

恤恤乎，湫乎攸乎！ 深思而淺謀， 邇身而遠志， 家臣而君圖， 有人矣哉！ 南蒯枚筮之，遇坤䷁之比䷇曰：「黃裳元吉」，以為大吉也。示子服惠伯 曰：「即欲有事，何如？」惠伯曰：「吾嘗學此矣，忠信之事則可，不然，必 敗。外彊內溫，忠也；和以率貞，信也，故曰『黃裳元吉』。黃，中之色 也；裳，下之飾也；元，善之長也。中不忠，不得其色；下不共，不得其 飾；事不善，不得其極。外內倡和為忠，率事以信為共，供養三德為善， 非此三者弗當。且夫《易》不可以占險，將何事也？且可飾乎？中美能 黃，上美為元，下美則裳，參成可筮。猶有闕也，筮雖吉，未也。」 12.10c 將適費，飲鄉人酒。鄉人或歌之曰：

553 Yao Nai (cited in Yang, 4:1336), explains that Zizhong hoped to convince Jin to assist the Lu ruler in removing the Ji lineage from power. When the Lu ruler is refused entry to Jin, Nan Kuai fears that he will not succeed in a direct confrontation with the Ji lineage and instead gives his city over to Qi. 554 “His man” would be Ji Pingzi, whom he serves as household retainer, but against whom he is now plotting. 555 “Pure Yin” ䷁ (Kun 坤, hexagram 2), consists of six broken lines, that is, a “Pure Yin” ☷ (Kun 坤) trigram below and the same trigram above. “Closeness” ䷇ (Bi 比, hexagram 8) is a “Pure Yin” ☷ (Kun 坤) trigram below and “Sinkhole” ☵ (Kan 坎) trigram above; the hexagram is therefore all broken lines except for the fifth, which is solid. Nan Kuai’s divination pointed to the “Pure Yin” hexagram with a fifth line showing a tendency to change. The text cited is the line statement for the fifth line of “Pure Yin.” 556 “Sinkhole,” which is the upper, or outer, trigram in the “Closeness” hexagram, is often understood to mean “steep, perilous,” and therefore “strong.” The lower, or inner, trigram in “Closeness” is “Pure Yin”: “obedient” and therefore “gentle.” 557 In the “Closeness” hexagram, the “Pure Yin” (earth) trigram below and the “Sinkhole” (water) trigram above are in “harmony.” 558 As Maoshi 27, “Lüyi” 綠衣, 2A.75, puts it, “The green cloak has a yellow lining.” 559 Compare Kong Chengzi’s interpretation of Yuan, “prime,” in the divination in Zhao 7.15. 560 In a complicated pun that would have worked in Zhou period Chinese as it does in Mandarin, zhong 中, “center, middle,” recalls zhong 忠, “loyal,” and zhong 衷, “inner garment.” 561 According to Yang (4:1337), the “three virtues” are loyalty, good faith, and the “end” or “ultimate” (ji 極).

1478

Zuo Tradition

Shuzhong Xiao, Nan Kuai, and Zizhonga therefore plotted against the Ji lineage. Zizhongb reported this to our lord and as a result accompanied our lord in his visit to Jin. Nan Kuai, fearing that he could not prevail, used Bi as a base to rebel and went over to Qi.553 Returning, Zizhong heard of the turmoil when he reached Wei, and he left his aides behind so as to arrive early, before them. When he reached the outskirts of the Lu capital he heard of the Bi rebellion, and as a result he fled to Qi. When Nan Kuai was preparing to rebel, some among his countrymen knew of it. They sighed as they passed by him and said,

12.10b

Sad, sad, sorrowful and full of woe! So deep his thoughts, so shallow his plans! So near to his man, so far-reaching his ambitions!554 A household retainer who plans on behalf of his ruler— For that, one would have to have a true man!

Nan Kuai divined about it without specifying the subject and obtained the line by which “Pure Yin” ䷁ becomes “Closeness” ䷇, which says, “Yellow skirt: prime auspiciousness.”555 This he took to be highly auspicious. Showing it to Zifu Huibo, he said, “Should I wish to undertake some affair, how would it turn out?” Huibo said, “I have studied this in the past. For affairs of loyalty and good faith, this result would allow you to go forward, but otherwise you are certain to fail. A strong exterior with a gentle interior: that is loyalty.556 To carry out prognostication with harmony: that is good faith.557 Therefore, it says, ‘Yellow skirt: prime auspiciousness.’ Yellow is the color of what is inside, the lining or inner garment;558 the skirt is an adornment for the lower parts; the prime is the foremost of the good.559 If the center is not loyal,560 it will not acquire its proper color. If the lower parts are not reverent, they will not acquire their adornments. If an affair is not good, it will not attain its end. When exterior and interior accord in harmony, there is loyalty. When affairs are carried out with good faith, there is reverence. And when the three virtues are upheld and fostered, there is goodness.561 For anything other than these three virtues, the divination results will not apply. What is more, the Changes is not to be used for divinations about dangerous initiatives. What affair is it that you are undertaking? Can it be adorned? When the center is fine, it is called ‘yellow.’ When the upper parts are fine, they are called ‘prime.’ And when the lower parts are fine, they are clad in ‘skirts.’ And when these are all complete, it is permissible to divine with the milfoil. If something is lacking, then even if the divination is auspicious, the initiative is not permissible.” When Nan Kuai was ready to set out for Bi, he entertained his countrymen with drinking. Someone among them sang of him,

12.10c

Lord Zhao

1479

我有圃，生之杞乎！ 從我者子乎， 去我者鄙乎， 倍其鄰者恥乎！ 已乎已乎！ 非吾黨之士乎！ 平子欲使昭子逐叔仲小。小聞之，不敢朝。昭子命吏謂小待政於 朝，曰：「吾不為怨府。」 12.11a(9) 楚子狩于州來，次于潁尾，使蕩侯、潘子、司馬督、囂尹午、陵尹喜帥師

圍徐以懼吳。楚子次于乾谿，以為之援。雨雪，王皮冠，秦復陶，翠被， 豹舄，執鞭以出。僕析父從。右尹子革夕，王見之，去冠、被，舍鞭，與之 語，曰：

562 The singer hints that, like the gardener who lets trees grow in his vegetable patch, Nan Kuai has gotten unintended results. He has further disgraced himself by turning against his own kin in the Ji lineage. 563 As in Zhao 12.10a, Ji Pingzi hopes to repair his relations with Shusun Chuo by blaming Shuzhong Xiao. 564 Zhoulai was located far to the northeast of the Chu capital, at the location of the third Cai capital, on the Huai River near present-day Fengtai 鳳臺, Anhui (see map 4). 565 Yingwei 潁尾 was about 35 kilometers southwest of Zhoulai, where the Ying River flows into the Huai near present-day Zhengyangguan 正陽關, Anhui.

1480

Zuo Tradition

We have a garden patch, but in it grow willows! Who stays with us is a man, Who leaves us is a fool— And he who turns his back on his neighbors is a disgrace! Enough, then, enough— He’s no bravo of our band!562

Ji Pingzic wanted to make Shusun Chuoc expel Shuzhong Xiao.563 Shuzhong Xiao heard of it and did not dare visit court. Shusun Chuoc ordered the officers to notify Shuzhong Xiao that he should attend to administrative affairs in court, and said, “I will not store up grudges.” The ambitious King Ling of Chu, whose demise has long been predicted by observers in the other domains, once again displays his extravagance and ambition during a winter expedition in the northeastern reaches of Chu territory. When the king asks a series of questions about his hopes for even greater influence among the princes, his deputy of the right, Ran Dan, at first seems to answer sycophantically. As it turns out, however, his answers prepare the way for a dramatic and highly effective indirect criticism of the king, who suffers a physical collapse in the wake of the episode. Ran Dan’s strategy recalls the approaches adopted by Zichan (Zhao 4.1c) and Wei Qiqiang (Zhao 5.4a) in their responses to King Ling. The Master of Chu held his winter hunt at Zhoulai.564 Setting up camp at Yingwei,565 he sent Dang Hou, Panzi, the supervisor of the military Du, the overseer Wu, and the mound overseer Xi to lead armies in a siege of Xu, so as to intimidate Wu.566 The Master of Chu then set up camp at Ganxi to provide assistance for them.567 There was a snowstorm, and the king dressed in a leather cap, a feathered coat from Qin, a kingfisher-feather cape, and leopard-skin boots and went out holding a whip, accompanied by his attendant Xifu. The deputy of the right Ran Danb waited upon the king in the evening, and when the king saw him, he removed his cap and cape and put down his whip to chat with him.

12.11a(9)

566 All five men are Chu high officers. According to Gu Donggao (Chunqiu dashi biao, 2:1143), xiaoyin was an official title here translated “overseer”. As in other official titles, yin is “overseer” or “deputy,” but the meaning of the element xiao is unknown. Xu, kin and ally to Wu (see Zhao 4.3b), was situated between the Huai and Si Rivers, about 150 kilometers to the northeast of Zhoulai. 567 On Ganxi, see Zhao 6.9, n. 335.

Lord Zhao

1481

「昔我先王熊繹與呂伋、王孫牟、燮父、禽父並事康王，四國皆有 分，我獨無有。今吾使人於周，求鼎以為分，王其與我乎？」對曰：「 與 君王哉！昔我先王熊繹辟在荊山，篳路藍縷以處草莽，跋涉山林以事天 子，唯是桃弧、棘矢以共禦王事。齊，王舅也；晉及魯、衛，王母弟也。楚 是以無分，而彼皆有。今周與四國服事君王，將唯命是從，豈其愛鼎？」 12.11b 王曰：「昔我皇祖伯父昆吾，舊許是宅。今鄭人貪賴其田，而不我與。我

若求之，其與我乎？」 對曰：「與君王哉！周不愛鼎，鄭敢愛田？」 王曰：「昔諸侯遠我而畏晉，今我大城陳、蔡、不羹，賦皆千乘，子 與有勞焉，諸侯其畏我乎？」 對曰：「畏君王哉！是四國者，專足畏也。又加之以楚，敢不畏君王 哉？」 工尹路請曰：「君王命剝圭以為鏚柲，敢請命。」王入視之。 12.11c 析父謂子革：「吾子，楚國之望也。今與王言如響，國其若之何？」

子革曰：「摩厲以須，王出，吾刃將斬矣。」 王出，復語。左史倚相趨過，王曰：「是良史也，子善視之！是能讀 三墳、五典、八索、九丘。」

568 According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.794), Xiongyi was the first ruler to be established in power in Chu. Lü Ji was Lord Ding of Qi, son of the Jiang Grand Lord (Jiang Taigong 姜大公), Lü Wang 呂望. Wangsun Mou was the son of Kang Shu of Wei. Xiefu was the son of Tang Shu of Jin. Boqin, a son of the Zhou Duke, succeeded his father as ruler of Lu. King Kang of Zhou reigned from 1005/3 to 978 Bce, according to the reconstruction in Shaughnessy, Sources of Western Zhou History, xix. 569 Cf. Zhao 15.7a. 570 An earlier ruler of Chu, King Zhuang, had also had designs on Zhou cauldrons; see Xuan 3.3. In this case, the king appears to want not the whole set of nine cauldrons, but only ritual status equal to that of the domains closest to the Zhou house. 571 Kunwu was a brother of Jilian, from whom the Chu royal lineage was descended. The domain of Xǔ had moved its capital, thus leaving behind its “old” territory. According to Yang (4:1339–40), this old capital was near Xuchang, Henan. 572 For Zheng-Xǔ conflicts, see Xiang 26.11. The oldest capital of Xǔ was only about 50 kilometers southeast of the Zheng capital, even closer than the Ying Valley held by Zheng as early as Yin 1.4c. 573 All Du Yu (ZZ 45.795) says is that these were four ancient texts. They are otherwise unknown. Takezoe (22.52) cites various speculations. According to Documents prefaces attributed to Kong Anguo (Shangshu 1.8), “Three Barrows” derived from the ancient rulers Fuxi and Shennong, and “Five Canons” from Shaohao, Zhuanxu, Gaoxin, Tang, and Yu. “Eight Guidelines” may correspond to the eight trigrams, and “Nine Mounds” to the “nine categories” (jiuchou 九疇) of the “Great Plan” (Hong fan 洪範) chapter of the Documents (12.167–79).

1482

Zuo Tradition

The king said, “In times past our former king Xiongyi served King Kang of Zhou, together with Lü Ji of Qi, Wangsun Mou of Wei, Xiefu of Jin, and Boqina of Lu.568 The other four domains all got their portions of reward.569 We alone did not. If we now send someone to Zhou to ask for a cauldron as our portion, will the king give it to us?”570 Ran Dan answered, “He will give it to you, Your Highness! In times past our former king Xiongyi dwelt far off in the wilds of Mount Jing. Riding in a rugged wooden cart and clad in tattered hemp, he lived in the grasses of the plain. He trod over mountains and forests to serve the Son of Heaven, and all he had was a bow of peach wood and arrows of thorn to present as tribute to the royal court. The Qi founder was an uncle to the king; Jin, Lu, and Wei were full brothers of the king. That was why Chu was without its portion, while the others all had theirs. Now Zhou and those four domains all serve you, Your Highness, obeying only your command. How could they begrudge you a cauldron?” The king said, “In times past my ancestral uncle Kunwu dwelt in the old territory of Xǔ.571 Now Zheng greedily exploits Kunwu’s fields and will not give them to us.572 If I ask for them, will Zheng give them to us?” Ran Dan said, “They will give them to you, Your Highness! If Zhou will not begrudge a cauldron, how can Zheng begrudge these fields?” The king said, “In times past the princes kept their distance from us and feared Jin. But now we have fortified Chen, Cai, and the two Bugeng regions on a grand scale and received a thousand chariots from each. You yourself had a part in this accomplishment. Certainly the princes will fear us now!” Ran Dan said, “They will fear you, Your Highness! With these four domains plus Chu, how could they not fear Your Highness?” The deputy for artisans Lu then presented a request, saying, “Your Highness has ordered that a jade tablet be carved for the decoration of an axe handle; I beg permission to seek further instructions from you.” The king went in to look at the axe handle.

12.11b

Xifu said to Ran Dana, “You, sir, are the great hope of the domain of Chu. Now that you speak to the king like his own echo, what is the domain to do?” Ran Dana said, “I am like a blade ground sharp in preparation. When the king emerges, I will cut him down.” When the king emerged, they continued their conversation. The scribe of the left Yixiang hurried across the court, and the king said, “This is a good scribe. Look well upon him. He is able to recite ‘Three Barrows,’ ‘Five Canons,’ ‘Eight Guidelines,’ and ‘Nine Mounds.’”573

12.11c

Lord Zhao

1483

對曰：「臣嘗問焉：昔穆王欲肆其心，周行天下，將皆必有車轍馬 跡焉。祭公謀父作〈祈招〉之詩以止王心，王是以獲沒於祗宮。臣問其 詩而不知也。若問遠焉，其焉能知之？」 王曰：「子能乎？」 對曰：「能。其詩曰： 祈招之愔愔， 式昭德音。 思我王度， 式如玉， 式如金。 形民之力， 而無醉飽之心。」 王揖而入，饋不食，寢不寐，數日，不能自克，以及於難。 仲尼曰：「古也有志：『克己復禮，仁也。』信善哉！楚靈王若能如 是，豈其辱於乾谿？」 12.12(10) 晉伐鮮虞，因肥之役也。

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年春，叔弓帥師圍費。 13.2(2) 夏四月，楚公子比自晉歸于楚，弒其君虔于乾谿。

574 Already in antiquity King Mu was notorious for his wanderlust. The third-century Bce text now known as Mu tianzi zhuan 穆天子傳 (Biography of Heaven’s Son Mu) gives a fantastic account of his journey to the far west. See Loewe, Early Chinese Texts, 342–46. 575 That is, he did not die in the wilderness. The Zhi Palace is supposed to have been located in the territory that would later become the domain of Zheng (Yang, 4:1341). The Zhai Duke Moufu is famous for his remonstrance against King Mu’s attack on the Quanrong (see Min 2.1); see Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.1–8; and Shiji 4.135–36. The meaning of the title of the poem, qizhao 祈招, here translated “Prayer Summons,” is not well understood. Du Yu (ZZ 45.795) refers to Qifu 祈父, a Zhou supervisor of the military, whose given name was Zhao 招, and implies that the Zhai Duke Moufu named his remonstrative poem after the officer who would have been responsible

1484

Zuo Tradition

Ran Dan replied, “I once asked him a question. In times past King Mu wanted to give free rein to the desires of his heart and travel everywhere under heaven, so that every place would show his carriage ruts and the hoofprints of his horses.574 The Zhai Duke Moufu composed the poem ‘Prayer Summons’ to still the king’s heart, and it was for this reason alone that the king managed to die in the Zhi Palace.575 I asked Yixiang about this poem, but he did not know it. If you ask him something at all obscure, how will he ever know it?” The king said, “Do you know it?” Ran Dan replied, “I do. The poem says: Sonorous is the prayer summons, Showing forth the sound of virtue. Think on our king’s good order— Like jade, Like bronze. He makes the strength of the people his standard And has no heart for drunken satiety.”

The king saluted him and went in. When given food, he would not eat, nor would he sleep when lying down.576 For several days he could not master himself. And thus he came to grief. Confuciusc said, “There is a maxim from times long past: ‘To master oneself and to restore the rites—that is true nobility of spirit.’577 How true this is! If King Ling of Chu could have done this, how could he ever have been disgraced at Ganxi?” Jin attacked the Xianyu: this was because of the campaign against Fei.578

12.12(10)

LORD ZHAO 13 (529 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, Shu Gong led out troops and laid siege to Bi.

13.1(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, Gongzi Bi (Zigan) of Chu went home from Jin to Chu and assassinated his ruler Qian at Ganxi.579

13.2(2)

576 577 578 579

for the king’s expeditions. It seems more plausible that the title refers to a summons of some kind, whether delivered to worshipers who will join in the king’s prayers or, possibly, to the ancestral spirits themselves. According to Du Yu (ZZ 45.795), the king was deeply affected by Ran Dan’s words. The saying appears with a very slight variation at Analects 12.1. See also Zhao 10.4. See Zhao 12.7. The Jin army may have made its attack while returning from the campaign against Fei. As noted in Zuozhuan, Zhao 13.2, the King of Chu in fact committed suicide. The Annals assigns responsibility to Gongzi Bi, who was the first successor to King Ling. Compare Xuan 2.3c, where Zhao Dun is held responsible for a murder actually committed by his kinsman Zhao Chuan.

Lord Zhao

1485

13.3(2) 楚公子棄疾殺公子比。 13.4(3) 秋，公會劉子、晉侯、齊侯、宋公、衛侯、鄭伯、曹伯、莒子、邾子、滕子、

薛伯、杞伯、小邾子于平丘。 13.5(3) 八月甲戌，同盟于平丘。公不與盟。 13.6(3) 晉人執季孫意如以歸。 13.7 公至自會。 13.8(5) 蔡侯廬歸于蔡。陳侯吳歸于陳。 13.9(6) 冬十月，葬蔡靈公。 13.10(7) 公如晉，至河乃復。 13.11(8) 吳滅州來。

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年春，叔弓圍費，弗克，敗焉。平子怒，令見費人執之，以為囚俘。

冶區夫曰：「非也，若見費人，寒者衣之，飢者食之，為之令主，而共其乏 困，費來如歸，南氏亡矣。民將叛之，誰與居邑？若憚之以威，懼之以 怒，民疾而叛，為之聚也。若諸侯皆然，費人無歸，不親南氏，將焉入 矣？」平子從之，費人叛南氏。

580 Pingqiu 平丘 was to the east of present-day Fengqiu 封丘, Henan, about 200 kilometers east and slightly north of the Zhou capital. Situated south of the Yellow River, in the triangle formed by the Wei, Cao, and Zheng capitals, it was a convenient central location for this meeting.

1486

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Qiji of Chu put Gongzi Bi (Zigan) to death.

13.3(2)

In autumn, our lord met with the Liu Master, the Prince of Jin, the Prince of Qi, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Wei, the Liege of Zheng, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, and the Master of Lesser Zhu at Pingqiu.580

13.4(3)

In the eighth month, on the jiaxu day (7), they swore a covenant together at Pingqiu. Our lord did not take part in the covenant.

13.5(3)

Jin leaders arrested Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi) and took him home with them.

13.6(3)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

13.7

The Prince of Cai, Lu, went home to Cai. The Prince of Chen, Wu, returned to Chen.

13.8(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Ling of Cai was buried.

13.9(6)

Our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back.

13.10(7)

Wu extinguished Zhoulai.

13.11(8)

ZUO

The story of the Bi rebellion in Lu is continued from last year (see Zhao 12.10). In the thirteenth year, in spring, Shu Gong laid siege to Bi. He did not achieve a victory there. Ji Pingzic, infuriated, had Shu Gong give an audience to the men of Bi, then arrested them and kept them as prisoners. Ye Oufu said,581 “That is the wrong course of action. When you grant an audience to the men of Bi, you should clothe any who are cold, feed any who are hungry, act as a good host to them, and provide anything they might lack. Then Bi will regard you as their home, and Nan Kuaia will fall. For if the people turn against him, then with whom will he hold the city? But instead you intimidate them with your power and frighten them with your rage. If, then, in their distress the people rebel, you will have gathered forces for him. If all the princes acted this way, the people of Bi would have no domain to call home, and if they do not stay close to Nan Kuaia, where else can they turn?” Ji Pingzic followed this advice, and the people of Bi rebelled against Nan Kuaia.582

13.1(1)

581 Du Yu (ZZ 46.805) identifies Ye Oufu as a Lu high officer. 582 As Du Yu (ZZ 46.805) notes, the people of Bi turn against Nan Kuai next year, in Zhao 14.2.

Lord Zhao

1487



13.2a(2, 3)

楚子之為令尹也，殺大司馬薳掩，而取其室。及即位，奪薳居田；遷許而 質許圍。蔡洧有寵於王，王之滅蔡也，其父死焉，王使與於守而行。申 之會，越大夫戮焉。王奪鬬韋龜中犨，又奪成然邑，而使為郊尹。蔓成然 故事蔡公。故薳氏之族及薳居、許圍、蔡洧、蔓成然，皆王所不禮也， 因群喪職之族，啟越大夫常壽過作亂，圍固城，克息舟，城而居之。

13.2b 觀起之死也，其子從在蔡，事朝吳，曰：「今不封蔡，蔡不封矣。我請

試之。」 以蔡公之命召子干、子皙，及郊，而告之情，強與之盟，入襲蔡。蔡 公將食，見之而逃。觀從使子干食，坎，用牲，加書，而速行。己徇於蔡， 曰：「蔡公召二子，將納之，與之盟而遣之矣，將師而從之。」

583 Cf. Xiang 30.11. 584 Cf. Zhao 9.2. 585 According to Du Yu (ZZ 46.805), Wei’s father was in Cai during the Chu conquest and died because of it. 586 Cf. Zhao 4.3, where the Yue minister Changshou Guo is not mentioned. One supposes that the king had ample opportunity to offend his guests. 587 Zhongchou 中犫 was in what is now Nanyang 南陽, Henan. According to Du Yu (ZZ 46.805), Dou Chengran, lord of the Chu city of Man, was the son of Dou Weigui. 588 According to Du Yu (ZZ 46.805), Dou Chengran had his son serve the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji because of the episode of the jade disk, for which see Zhao 13.2h. The Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji is the future King Ping and himself a younger brother of King Ling. 589 The precise location of these settlements is not known, though it is clear that they were along the eastern frontier of Chu. 590 Guan Qi was put to death by King Kang of Chu at Xiang 22.6a. According to Du Yu (ZZ 46.805), Zhao Wu 朝吳 (not to be confused with Zhao Wu 趙武 of Jin) is the son of the Cai minister Shengzi, who at Xiang 26.10 delivers the famous speech on exiled Chu ministers’ tendency to find useful employment in Jin. 591 Cai was annexed by Chu at Zhao 11.8; see attending predictions (of destruction and restoration) at Zhao 11.2 and 11.5. 592 The Cai Lord Qiji, Gongzi Bi, and Gongzi Heigong are all younger brothers of King Ling. For the appointment of Gongzi Qiji as the Cai Lord, a lord deputed by the Chu King to rule the annexed region, see Zhao 11.10.

1488

Zuo Tradition

King Ling of Chu dies and Gongzi Qiji, as King Ping of Chu, becomes his successor. The account of King Ling’s downfall begins with details on how his actions turned other powerful figures against him. When the ruler of Chu was chief minister, he killed the grand supervisor of the military Wei Yan and confiscated his property.583 After he had acceded to his position as ruler, he seized the fields of Wei Ju. He relocated the people of the domain of Xǔ and held Wei of Xǔ hostage.584 Wei of Cai was a favorite of the king’s whose father had died when the king annexed Cai;585 but the king left him as one of the people in charge when he went off to Ganxi. During the meeting at Shen the minister from Yue was insulted.586 The king took Zhongchou away from Dou Weigui and then took cities away from Dou Chengranc and made him deputy for sacrifices in the outskirts of the city.587 Dou Chengrana had long served the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji.588 Thus, the entire Wei house, along with Wei Ju, Wei of Xǔ, Wei of Cai, and Dou Chengrana, had all been victims of the king’s disregard of ritual propriety. With the help of the lineages of all those who had lost their official positions, they incited the Yue minister Changshou Guo to foment unrest. He laid siege to Gucheng and overcame Xizhou, fortifying its walls and then occupying it.589

13.2a(2, 3)

The rebellion against King Ling begins when loyalists of the annexed state of Cai trick the king’s younger brothers into a false covenant. Another of the brothers, the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji, at first shows reluctance to support the rebellion but in the end joins it; he will ultimately be elevated as King Ling’s successor, King Ping of Chu. Fueled by resentment against the king, the insurrection quickly gathers momentum. When Guan Qi died, his son Guan Congb was in Cai, serving Zhao Wu of Cai.590 He said, “If we do not put a ruler in power in Cai now, then Cai will never again have its own ruler. Let us try.”591 Feigning a command from the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji, Guan Cong summoned Gongzi Bia and Gongzi Heigonga.592 When they reached the outskirts of the Cai capital, he explained the situation to them and forced them to swear a covenant with him. They then made a surprise attack on the Cai capital. The Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji was about to dine when he saw them and fled. Guan Cong had Gongzi Bia eat the meal. Then he had him dig a pit, sacrifice a victim, add a covenant document, and hurriedly depart. Guan Cong himself went around showing the document in Cai, saying, “The Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji summoned these two men in order to put them in power in Chu. He made a covenant with them and sent them off, and he is going to assemble an army and follow them.”

13.2b

Lord Zhao

1489

蔡人聚，將執之。辭曰：「失賊成軍，而殺余，何益？」乃釋之。 朝吳曰：「二三子若能死亡，則如違之，以待所濟。若求安定，則如 與之，以濟所欲。且違上，何適而可？」 眾曰：「與之！」乃奉蔡公，召二子而盟于鄧，依陳、蔡人以國。楚 公子比、公子黑肱、公子棄疾、蔓成然、蔡朝吳帥陳、蔡、不羹、許、葉 之師，因四族之徒，以入楚。 及郊，陳、蔡欲為名，故請為武軍。蔡公知之，曰：「欲速，且役病 矣，請藩而已。」乃藩為軍。 蔡公使須務牟與史猈先入，因正僕人殺大子祿及公子罷敵。公子 比為王，公子黑肱為令尹，次于魚陂。公子棄疾為司馬，先除王宮，使觀 從從師于乾谿，而遂告之，且曰：「先歸復所，後者劓。」師及訾梁而潰。 13.2c 王聞群公子之死也，自投于車下，曰：「人之愛其子也，亦如余乎？」



侍者曰：「甚焉，小人老而無子，知擠于溝壑矣。」 王曰：「余殺人子多矣，能無及此乎？」

593 Deng 鄧 was about 35 kilometers northwest of the capital of Cai, just east of Luohe city 漯河市, Henan. 594 For this interpretation of this somewhat cryptic line, see Takezoe, 23.5. 595 These are the four houses that King Ling had offended by ritual impropriety in previous years; see Zhao 13.2a. 596 The term wujun 武軍, here best understood as a kind of fortification, elsewhere (Xuan 12.2i, Xiang 23.4b) designates a mass tomb built as a military monument. 597 The two were Chu high officers and adherents of Gongzi Qiji. 598 Both were sons of King Ling. 599 Yupi 魚陂 was located northwest of present-day Tianmen 天門, Hubei, about 50 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital at Ying. 600 The army stationed at Ganxi was the army that had accompanied King Ling and could have been expected to fight for his return to the capital. 601 This weir was near present-day Xinyang 信陽, Henan, about 275 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital and about 160 kilometers southwest of Ganxi. 602 For a full discussion of the King Ling narrative, see Schaberg, A Patterned Past, 193–207.

1490

Zuo Tradition

The leaders of Cai gathered together to seize Guan Cong. He excused himself, saying, “What good does it do to kill me if you have already let the offenders go and form their own army?” They released him. Zhao Wu of Cai said to them, “If you, sirs, are prepared to die, then it would be better to defy the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji and wait to see who wins. But if you want peace and calm, then it would be better to join him and fulfill your desires. In any case, if you defy your superior, where can you go?” The multitude said, “We will join him!” So they gave their support to the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji and summoned Gongzi Bi and Gongzi Heigong for a covenant at Deng.593 They enlisted the support of the people of Chen and Cai, promising restoration of these domains to their former status.594 Gongzi Bi of Chu, Gongzi Heigong, and the Cai Lord Gongzi Qiji, along with Dou Chengrana and Zhao Wu of Cai led armies from Chen, Cai, Bugeng, Xǔ, and She. Aided by members of the four houses,595 they invaded Chu. When they reached the outskirts of the Chu capital, the Chen and Cai forces wanted to secure fame for themselves, so they asked permission to make a walled encampment.596 Learning of this, Gongzi Qijic said, “We have to move quickly, and besides the laborers are exhausted. Please just set up a fenced camp.” They therefore made camp by fencing it around. Gongzi Qijic sent Xu Wumou and the scribe Pi in first.597 With the complicity of the heir apparent’s personal attendants, they killed the royal heir apparent Lu and Gongzi Pidi.598 Gongzi Bi was named king and Gongzi Heigong chief minister. Together they set up camp at Yupi.599 Gongzi Qiji was made supervisor of the military. He first emptied the royal palace and then sent Guan Cong to the army at Ganxi in order to explain what had happened and also to say, “Those of you who return first will win back your places. Those who arrive last will have your noses amputated.” 600 The returning army reached the Zi weir and then disintegrated.601 King Ling of Chu has been characterized since his first appearance (Xiang 26.6a) by his ambivalent relation to ritual propriety, which he has treated both as a tool and as an obstacle to his extraordinary ambitions. His death comes as he finally recognizes the consequences of his flouting of ritual procedure.602 When the king heard of the death of his sons, he threw himself from his chariot and said, “Do others love their sons the way I do?” His attendants said, “Even more. When a common man grows old without sons, he knows that his corpse will end up being pitched into a ditch.” The king said, “I have killed the sons of many. Could I have avoided coming to this?”

13.2c

Lord Zhao

1491



右尹子革曰：「請待于郊，以聽國人。」 王曰：「眾怒不可犯也。」 曰：「若入於大都，而乞師於諸侯。」 王曰：「皆叛矣。」 曰：「若亡於諸侯，以聽大國之圖君也。」 王曰：「大福不再，衹取辱焉。」 然丹乃歸于楚。

13.2d 王沿夏，將欲入鄢。芋尹無宇之子申亥曰：「吾父再奸王命，王弗誅，惠

孰大焉？君不可忍，惠不可棄，吾其從王。」乃求王，遇諸棘闈以歸。 夏五月癸亥，王縊于芋尹申亥氏。申亥以其二女殉而葬之。 13.2e 觀從謂子干曰：「不殺棄疾，雖得國，猶受禍也。」子干曰：「余不忍也。」

子玉曰：「人將忍子，吾不忍俟也。」乃行。 國每夜駭曰：「王入矣！」乙卯夜，棄疾使周走而呼曰：「王至矣！」 國人大驚。使蔓成然走告子干、子皙曰：「王至矣，國人殺君司馬，將 來矣。君若早自圖也，可以無辱。眾怒如水火焉，不可為謀。」又有呼而 走至者，曰：「眾至矣！」二子皆自殺。

603 604 605 606 607

A similar principle is voiced at Zhao 26.4c. The Xia is the Han River. Yan 鄢 was near present-day Yicheng 宜城, Hubei. See Zhao 7.2. The location of the Ji Gate, or Jiwei 棘闈, is not known. According to Annals, Zhao 13.2, Gongzi Bi killed the king at Ganxi in the fourth month. Yet Zuozhuan here states that the king left Ganxi and committed suicide in the fifth month. According to Ruan Zhisheng 阮芝生 (cited in Yang, 4:1347), the Annals notation reflects the date on which Lu received the report of King Ling’s death and burial as faked by King Ping at Zhao 13.2i below. As Du Yu (ZZ 46.807) points out, Zuozhuan’s date notations suggest that this faked burial preceded the real king’s suicide. 608 It is uncertain whether the people of the Chu capital would genuinely have continued to support King Ling up to this moment. Still, even false reports of his arrival in this city might have elicited some support from the populace, and in any case fears of an angry mob could easily have secured the result Gongzi Qiji hopes for: the suicide of his rivals.

1492

Zuo Tradition

The deputy of the right Ran Danb said, “Please wait in the outskirts of the city so as to hear from the inhabitants of the capital.” The king said, “One must not face down the anger of the multitude.”603 Ran Dan said, “What if you enter one of your dependent domains and plead for troops from the princes?” The king said, “The dependent domains have all rebelled.” Ran Dan said, “What if you go into exile among the princes and wait for some great domain to plan on your behalf?” The king said, “Great blessings are not repeated. I would only be disgracing myself.” Ran Dan therefore went back to Chu. The king went along the Xia River, intending to go to the city of Yan.604 Shen Hai, a son of Shen Wuyu, the deputy for the hunt, said, “My father twice violated the orders of the king, but the king did not put him to death.605 What kindness could be greater than that? One cannot bear to be cruel to a ruler, nor can one reject kindness. I will follow the king.” So he sought the king, finding him at the gate of Ji and taking him home from there.606 In the fifth month, on the guihai day (25), the king hanged himself at the home of the deputy for the hunt Shen Hai.607 Sacrificing two of his own daughters as tomb companions, Shen Hai buried him.

13.2d

Despite his initial reluctance to join in the plotting against King Ling of Chu, Gongzi Qiji, a brother of the king, moves to eliminate his rival, Gongzi Bi, who has already been designated as king (Zhao 13.2b), and to secure the succession for himself. Guan Cong said to Gongzi Bia, “If you do not put Gongzi Qiji to death, then you will still suffer a catastrophe even if you gain control of the domain.” Gongzi Bia said, “I cannot bear to be so cruel.” Guan Conga said, “When someone else is preparing to treat you cruelly, I cannot bear to sit waiting.” He therefore departed. Every night the frightened people in the capital said, “The king has entered the city!” On the night of the yimao day (17), Gongzi Qiji had runners go throughout the city crying, “The king has arrived!” The inhabitants of the capital were thrown into a panic. He sent Dou Cheng­ rana in haste to report to Gongzi Bia and Gongzi Heigonga: “The king has arrived. The inhabitants of the capital have put to death Gongzi Qiji, the supervisor of the military, and are about to arrive. If you make arrangements for yourself well in advance, then you will be able to avoid disgrace. The anger of the multitude is like a flood or a fire.608 There is no way to plan against it.” There were also others who came, crying as they ran, “The mob is here!” Both men killed themselves.

13.2e

Lord Zhao

1493

丙辰，棄疾即位，名曰熊居。葬子干于訾，實訾敖。殺囚，衣之王 服，而流諸漢，乃取而葬之，以靖國人。使子旗為令尹。 13.2f 楚師還自徐，吳人敗諸豫章，獲其五帥。平王封陳、蔡，復遷邑，致群

賂，施舍、寬民，宥罪、舉職。召觀從，王曰：「唯爾所欲。」對曰：「臣之 先佐開卜。」乃使為卜尹。 使枝如子躬聘于鄭，且致犨、櫟之田。事畢弗致。鄭人請曰：「聞 諸道路，將命寡君以犨、櫟，敢請命。」對曰：「臣未聞命。」既復，王問 犨、櫟，降服而對曰：「臣過失命，未之致也。」王執其手，曰：「子毋勤！ 姑歸，不穀有事，其告子也。」 13.2g 他年，芋尹申亥以王柩告，乃改葬之。

初，靈王卜曰：「余尚得天下！」不吉。投龜，詬天而呼曰：「是區區 者而不余畀，余必自取之。」民患王之無厭也，故從亂如歸。

609 As Fang Xuanchen (“Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 532–33) notes, the personal names of the rulers of Chu frequently, if not always, had the prefix xiong 熊, “bear.” 610 Zi 訾 was located about 270 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital, near presentday Xinyang 信陽, Henan. As Kong Yingda notes (ZZ-Kong 46.807), both Jia’ao (Zhao 1.13a) and this Ao of Zi are the posthumous names of men who were designated king but did not live long enough to accede officially to the position of ruler. Their names, Jia and Zi, indicate the sites of their tombs. It is not known what was done with the corpse of Gongzi Heigong. 611 By this measure Gongzi Qiji hopes to convince the populace that King Ling is dead. 612 See Zhao 12.11a. 613 See Zhao 13.5. 614 The new king here shows a conciliatory bent. Guan Cong had presciently urged Gongzi Bi to eliminate the ambitious Gongzi Qiji at Zhao 13.2e. 615 See Karlgren, gl. 720. 616 See Zhao 1.13a, where Gongzi Wei, preparing to make himself king, sends Bo Zhouli and Gongzi Heigong to wall these two settlements, which had originally belonged to Zheng. 617 For this method of humbling oneself by a change of clothing, see Xi 23.6f. 618 Although the newly installed Chu king had intended to secure Zheng support by offering Chou and Li as a bribe (Du Yu, ZZ 46.807), Zhiru Zigong has ignored these orders on his own initiative. He had perhaps discovered during the meeting that Zheng leaders were in no position to challenge the new Chu regime.

1494

Zuo Tradition

On the bingchen day (18), Gongzi Qiji acceded to his position, taking the name Xiong Ju.609 He buried Gongzi Bia at Zi; he was posthumously called Ao of Zi.610 Gongzi Qiji put a prisoner to death, dressed the corpse in royal clothing and cast it into the Han River. He then retrieved it and buried it, so as to calm the inhabitants of the capital.611 He appointed Dou Chengranb as his chief minister. The newly empowered King Ping of Chu undoes some of the damage his predecessor had done by restoring the independence of annexed domains and by showing lenience to a supporter of one of his rivals. When it comes to returning lands to Zheng, however, the king is obviously pleased by the actions of his envoy Zhiru Zigong, who on his own initiative decides that Chu can safely keep the lands for itself. As the Chu army returned from Xu, the men of Wu defeated it at Yuzhang and captured its five generals.612 The new Chu king, King Ping, reestablished Chen and Cai, restored to their original sites the cities that had been relocated,613 bestowed all the required gifts, gave generously, and treated the people with lenience, pardoning crimes and appointing worthy men to office. Summoning Guan Cong, the king said, “Whatever you desire you may have.”614 He replied, “My ancestors served in notching the divinatory cracks.”615 The Chu king therefore appointed him deputy for divination. The Chu king sent Zhiru Zigong to pay an official visit to Zheng and also to turn over territory in Chou and Li.616 But when the ceremony was completed, Zhiru Zigong did not turn the lands over to Zheng. The Zheng leaders requested the lands, saying, “We heard it said on the roads that you were to give our unworthy ruler commands about the lands of Chou and Li. We presume to request that you tell us your command.” He replied, “I heard no commands on this matter.” Once he had returned, the king asked him about Chou and Li. Removing a piece of his official uniform,617 he replied, “I erred in failing to carry out my orders: I did not turn over the territory.” The king took him by the hand and said, “Do not trouble yourself, sir. Go home for now, and when I have some affair in hand, I will inform you of it.”618

13.2f

The following passage reports on the reburial of King Ling of Chu and offers a final note on his overweening ambition. Some years later, the deputy for the hunt Shen Hai reported that he had the coffin of King Ling, who was therefore reburied. Earlier, King Ling had divined about the future, saying, “May I gain control of all-under-heaven!” It was not auspicious. Throwing down the turtle shell, he cursed Heaven, shouting, “Such a petty thing and yet you do not give it to me! I will take it for myself!” It was because the people were troubled by the king’s insatiable demands that they joined the uprising as readily as someone going home.

13.2g

Lord Zhao

1495

13.2h 初，共王無冢適，有寵子五人，無適立焉。乃大有事于群望，而祈曰：「請

神擇於五人者，使主社稷。」乃徧以璧見於群望，曰：「當璧而拜者，神 所立也，誰敢違之？」既，乃與巴姬密埋璧於大室之庭，使五人齊，而長 入拜。康王跨之，靈王肘加焉，子干、子皙皆遠之。平王弱，抱而入，再 拜，皆厭紐。鬬韋龜屬成然焉，且曰：「棄禮違命，楚其危哉！」 13.2i 子干歸，韓宣子問於叔向曰：「子干其濟乎！」對曰：「難。」宣子曰：「同

惡相求，如市賈焉，何難？」對曰：

1496

Zuo Tradition

The following passage presents a recollection of the unprecedented ceremony by which King Gong of Chu, father of Kings Kang, Ling, and Ping, had sought to identify his successor. Although the anecdote is clearly designed to justify King Ping as the rightful successor to King Gong, this unprecedented way of examining potential successors constitutes a telling violation of ritual propriety, and as retold here, it also offers a poor prediction of the sons’ careers. The reigns of Kings Kang, Ling, and Ping were about equal in length (fifteen, thirteen, and thirteen years, respectively), and while Kings Kang and Ling had some success in centralizing and expanding Chu power, King Ping, seemingly marked here by Heaven’s choice, actually presides over the initial stages of Chu decline. Earlier, when King Gong still had had no sons by his queen, he did have five other favored sons, none of whom had been established as heir. He therefore held grand sacrifices at all the sites for the prospect sacrifices, and he prayed, saying, “We beg the spirits to choose among these five and to make him master of the altars of the domain.” He then showed a jade disk at all the sites for prospect sacrifices and said, “Whoever bows over the jade disk is the one whom the spirits will have established as heir. Who would presume to go against this?” Afterward, he secretly buried the jade disk in the courtyard of the great hall with his lady Ba Ji, then had his five sons purify themselves and enter in order of age and bow. King Kang stood straddling the jade disk, King Ling touched it with his elbow, and both Gongzi Bia and Gongzi Heigonga stayed far away from it. King Ping, being a little boy, was carried in. He bowed twice, both times hitting the center knob of the disk. Dou Weigui entrusted his son Dou Chengranc to the future King Ping,619 but he also said, “Casting aside ritual propriety and violating the command, Chu will be endangered!”

13.2h

When Gongzi Bia went back to Chu, Han Qia asked Shuxiang, “Gongzi Bia is sure to succeed, is he not?” He replied, “It will be difficult.” Han Qib said, “When people who hate the same thing seek each other out, they are like traders in the marketplace, each succeeding by pursuing his own interests.620 What is so difficult about it?” He replied,

13.2i

619 Dou Chengran resents King Ling (Zhao 13.2a) and aids King Ping in his rise to power and is then destroyed by him; see Zhao 14.5. 620 Fu Qian (cited in Yang, 4:1350) notes that traders in the marketplace seek profit. The reasoning seems to be that just as each trader profits by pursuing his own interest in a deal, all the enemies of King Ling will likewise profit from their shared hatred of him.

Lord Zhao

1497

無與同好，誰與同惡？取國有五難：有寵而無人，一也；有

人而無主，二也；有主而無謀，三也；有謀而無民，四也；有 民而無德，五也。子干在晉，十三年矣。晉、楚之從，不聞達 者，可謂無人。族盡親叛，可謂無主。無釁而動，可謂無謀。 為羈終世，可謂無民。亡無愛徵，可謂無德。王虐而不忌， 楚君子干，涉五難以弒舊君，誰能濟之？ 有楚國者，其棄疾乎！君陳、蔡，城外屬焉。苛慝不作， 盜賊伏隱，私欲不違，民無怨心。先神命之，國民信之。羋姓 有亂，必季實立，楚之常也。獲神，一也；有民，二也；令德， 三也；寵貴，四也；居常，五也。有五利以去五難，誰能害 之？子干之官，則右尹也；數其貴寵，則庶子也；以神所命， 則又遠之。其貴亡矣，其寵棄矣。民無懷焉，國無與焉，將 何以立？ 13.2j 宣子曰：「齊桓、晉文不亦是乎？」對曰：

621 622 623 624

Gongzi Bi fled to Jin after Gongzi Wei assassinated Jia’ao (Zhao 1.13a). The “wall” is Fangcheng 方城. A similar principle of Chu succession in times of crisis is expressed at Wen 1.7. That is, Qiji is the youngest and is therefore, according to a constant observed in the Chu past, likely to come to power in this time of strife. For the reading of lingde as a verb-object formulation, see Xiang 19.4, n. 544. 625 That is, like Gongzi Bi, they both came to power after a period of exile from their domains.

1498

Zuo Tradition

If there is no one who loves the same things as he, then who hates the same things? There are five difficulties in taking a domain. The first is to enjoy favor but not have the right people. The second is to have the right people but no sponsor in place. The third is to have a sponsor in place but no strategy. The fourth is to have a strategy but lack the support of the people. The fifth is to have the support of the people but lack virtue. Gongzi Bia has been in Jin for thirteen years.621 Among his followers in Jin and in Chu we have heard of no able men: he can be said not to have the right people. The members of his house are all gone and his relations have all turned against him: he can be said to have no sponsor in place. He has made his move without any opening: he can be said to have no strategy. He has lived abroad all his life: he can be said to lack the support of the people. When he was in exile, there was no sign of yearning for him: he can be said to lack virtue. Although the king was harsh, he was not prone to holding a grudge. If Chu should make Gongzi Bia its ruler, who will achieve victory for him when, faced with these five difficulties, he also killed the previous ruler? It is Gongzi Qiji who will win possession of the domain of Chu! He is ruler of Chen and Cai, and the area outside the wall belongs to him.622 No petty offenses have occurred. Bandits and marauders have gone into hiding. Private desires have led to no violations. And the people have no resentment in their hearts. The ancestors and the spirits gave him their command, and the people of the domain have faith in him. When there is turmoil in the Mi clan, it is inevitably the younger son who is established as ruler. This is a constant in Chu.623 First, he has obtained the blessing of the spirits. Second, he has the support of the people. Third, he manifests virtue. Fourth, he is favored and nobly placed. Fifth, he occupies the position of the constant.624 With these five advantages he disposes of the one with five difficulties. Who will be able to harm him? Gongzi Bia’s rank is deputy of the right. If one considers his nobility and favor, he is only the son of a secondary consort. And as for what the spirits commanded, he was also far from it. His nobility has disappeared and his favor has been cast off. Among the people no one cherishes him, and in the domain no one allies with him. On what basis should he be estab­ lished as ruler?

Han Qib said, “Were not Lord Huan of Qi and Lord Wen of Jin the same?”625 He replied,

13.2j

Lord Zhao

1499

齊桓，衛姬之子也，有寵於僖；有鮑叔牙、賓須無、隰朋以

為輔佐；有莒、衛以為外主；有國、高以為內主；從善如流， 下善齊肅；不藏賄，不從欲，施舍不倦，求善不厭。是以有 國，不亦宜乎？ 我先君文公，狐季姬之子也，有寵於獻；好學而不貳， 生十七年，有士五人。有先大夫子餘、子犯以為腹心，有魏 犨、賈佗以為股肱，有齊、宋、秦、楚以為外主，有欒、郤、 狐、先以為內主，亡十九年，守志彌篤。惠、懷棄民，民從而 與之。獻無異親，民無異望。天方相晉，將何以代文？ 此二君者，異於子干。共有寵子，國有奧主；無施於 民，無援於外；去晉而不送，歸楚而不逆，何以冀國？ 13.3a(4–6) 晉成虒祁，諸侯朝而歸者皆有貳心。為取郠故，晉將以諸侯來討。叔向

曰：「諸侯不可以不示威。」乃並徵會，告于吳。秋，晉侯會吳子于良，水 道不可，吳子辭，乃還。

626 The Zuozhuan account of these events mentions very few of these reasons for Lord Huan’s rise, instead focusing on the troubles that brought his predecessor down and prevented another contender, Gongzi Jiu, from succeeding in Lord Huan’s place. See Zhuang 8.3 and 9.3–9.5 627 Luan Zhi, Xi Hu, Hu Tu, and Xian Zhen. 628 See Xi 5.2–24.1. 629 I.e., Gongzi Qiji. There was no indication of that before this passage. 630 Liang 良 was about 150 kilometers southeast of the Lu capital, near present-day Pi County 邳縣, Jiangsu. 631 As is clear from Ding 4.3b and Ai 9.5, Wu military forces favored traveling by boat. Here it would appear that water levels in the rivers were too low for them to make their way to the meeting at Liang.

1500

Zuo Tradition

Lord Huan of Qi was the son of Wei Ji and enjoyed favor with Lord Xi. He had Bao Shuya, Bin Xuwu, and Xi Peng as his aides. He had Ju and Wei as his supporters outside the domain. He had Guo and Gao as his supporters inside the domain. He followed goodness as water flows downhill and submitted to goodness swiftly. He did not accept bribes. He did not indulge his desires. He was tireless in his generosity. And he was insatiable in his search for goodness. Was it not appropriate that he should win possession of the domain because of these things?626 Our former ruler Lord Wen was the son of the younger Lady Ji of the Hu and enjoyed the favor of Lord Xian. He was unswerving in his fondness for study. When he was seventeen years old, he already had five officers in his entourage. He had our former high officers Zhao Cuia and Hu Yana as his bosom companions. He had Wei Chou and Jia Tuo as his right-hand men. He had the domains of Qi, Song, Qin, and Chu as his supporters outside the domain. He had Luan, Xi, Hu, and Xian as supporters inside the domain.627 He was in exile for nineteen years but still he preserved his ambitions all the more firmly.628 When Lords Hui and Huai cast the people aside, the people followed Lord Wen and allied themselves with him. Lord Xian had no other kin, and there was no one else to whom the people looked. At the time Heaven was aiding Jin. Who could take Lord Wen’s place? These two rulers were different from Gongzi Bia. King Gong had a favorite son, and the domain of Chu has a secret ruler.629 Gongzi Bi has made no gifts to the people and has no support outside the domain. He was not escorted away when he left Jin, nor was he escorted in when he returned to Chu. How can he ever hope to possess the domain?

As predicted at Zhao 8.1 and 8.3, the completion of the Siqi Palace in Jin repulses Jin’s allies. Jin nevertheless summons its allies, nominally for an expedition against Lu in retaliation for Lu’s annexation of Geng (see Zhao 10.3), but also to reassert its status as overlord after the fall of Jin’s powerful rival in Chu, King Ling. Jin is hampered in its efforts by the corruption of certain of its own leaders (Yangshe Fu) and by the recalcitrance of allies, including Qi. After Jin completed the Siqi Palace, those of the princes who visited the Jin court all had disloyal intentions. Because of Lu’s taking of Geng, Jin prepared to come with the princes to chastise us. Shuxiang said, “Our majesty must be displayed to the princes.” He therefore called a general meeting and notified Wu. In autumn, the Prince of Jin was to meet with the Master of Wu at Liang,630 but the water routes were not passable, and the Master of Wu declined the meeting, so the Prince of Jin turned back.631

13.3a(4–6)

Lord Zhao

1501

13.3b 七月丙寅，治兵于邾南。甲車四千乘。羊舌鮒攝司馬，遂合諸侯于平丘。

子產、子大叔相鄭伯以會，子產以幄、幕九張行，子大叔以四十，既而 悔之，每舍，損焉。及會，亦如之。 次于衛地，叔鮒求貨於衛，淫芻蕘者。衛人使屠伯饋叔向羹與一 篋錦，曰：「諸侯事晉，未敢攜貳；況衛在君之宇下，而敢有異志？芻蕘 者異於他日，敢請之。」叔向受羹反錦，曰：「晉有羊舌鮒者，瀆貨無厭， 亦將及矣。為此役也，子若以君命賜之，其已。」客從之，未退而禁之。 13.3c 晉人將尋盟，齊人不可。晉侯使叔向告劉獻公曰：「抑齊人不盟，若之

何？」對曰：「盟以厎信，君苟有信，諸侯不貳，何患焉？告之以文辭，董 之以武師，雖齊不許，君庸多矣。天子之老請帥王賦， 元戎十乘， 以先啟行。 遲速唯君。」

632 Cf. Zhao 10.4b, where Han Hu of Zheng goes to Jin with far more men than are needed and in the end loses them, as Zichan had predicted. 633 That is, they presume to ask that Shuxiang put a stop to the pillaging. 634 According to Yang (4:1355), the “elders” were the king’s high ministers. 635 Maoshi 177, “Liuyue” 六月, 10B.357–60. The same lines are cited at Xuan 12.2g.

1502

Zuo Tradition

In the seventh month, on the bingyin day (29), the troops were drilled in the south of Zhu. There were 4,000 war chariots. As acting supervisor of the military, Yangshe Fu of Jin gathered the princes at Pingqiu. Zichan and You Jib assisted the Liege of Zheng as he attended the meeting. Zichan set out with nine tents, complete with canopies and side draperies, while You Jib took forty tents. You Jib later regretted this and reduced the number every time he set up camp. By the time of the meeting, he had the same number as Zichan.632 When the force set up camp in Wei territory, Yangshe Fub wanted luxury goods from Wei, and he let the fodder- and firewood-gatherers run wild. The Wei leaders sent Tu Bo to present Shuxiang with a stew and a case of brocade, saying, “None of the princes has dared to be fractious in serving Jin. How much less should Wei, dwelling here under your ruler’s very eaves, dare to have contrary ambitions? The gatherers of fodder and firewood behave differently than in other days; we presume to make our request to you about this matter.”633 Shuxiang accepted the stew and returned the brocade, saying, “There is in Jin one Yangshe Fu, who is insatiable in his demands for luxury goods. To be sure, he is bound to get what he deserves. For the present matter, if you should present this brocade to him by your ruler’s command, then he may stop.” The visitor followed this advice, and Yangshe Fu reined in the fodder- and firewood-gatherers before the guest had even withdrawn.

13.3b

In an unusual move, Jin has recourse to the authority of the Zhou royal court when Qi hesitates to renew the covenant that binds its allies. The episode prompts an explanation of the ancient system of diplomatic visits, bolstered by an implicit threat of military retaliation. The Jin leaders were prepared to renew the covenant, but the Qi leaders would not permit it. The Prince of Jin sent Shuxiang to report to the Liu Duke Xian, saying, “Alas, the Qi leaders will not swear a covenant. What is to be done?” He replied, “Covenants are sworn to bring about good faith. If your ruler has good faith, then the princes will not be disloyal: what is there to worry about? Report to the princes in embellished speeches, direct them by means of military forces, and then even if Qi does not give its permission, your ruler’s achievements will be legion. The elders of the Son of Heaven request permission to lead the royal armies:634

13.3c

Prime war chariots, ten of them: Charge ahead and force through the enemy’s ranks.635

How soon is entirely up to your ruler.”

Lord Zhao

1503

叔向告于齊，曰：「諸侯求盟，已在此矣。今君弗利，寡君以為 請。」對曰：「諸侯討貳，則有尋盟。若皆用命，何盟之尋？」叔向曰： 國家之敗，有事而無業，事則不經；有業而無禮，經則不序；

有禮而無威，序則不共；有威而不昭，共則不明。不明棄 共，百事不終，所由傾覆也。 13.3d

是故明王之制，使諸侯歲聘以志業，間朝以講禮，再朝而會以示威， 再會而盟以顯昭明。志業於好，講禮於等，示威於眾，昭 明於神。自古以來，未之或失也。存亡之道，恆由是興。晉 禮主盟，懼有不治；奉承齊犧，而布諸君，求終事也。君曰 「余必廢之」，何齊之有？唯君圖之。寡君聞命矣。

齊人懼，對曰：「小國言之，大國制之，敢不聽從？既聞命矣，敬共以往， 遲速唯君。」

636 As at Xi 28.3g and Cheng 2.3f, the “command” is an invitation to battle; Qi’s refusal will be understood as a direct provocation of Jin and cause for punishment.

1504

Zuo Tradition

Shuxiang reported this to Qi and said, “The princes sought a covenant and are already here in place. Now your ruler does not consider it advantageous: our unworthy ruler presents his request about it.” They replied, “It is when the princes chastise the disloyal that they arrange for the renewal of the covenant. When everyone has followed their orders, then what need is there to renew the covenant?” Shuxiang said, What brings down a domain or a patrimony is when there is fealty but no standard tribute, and the fealty therefore violates regular practice; or when there is standard tribute but no ritual, and the regular practice therefore violates the order of precedence. If there is ritual but no dignity, then the order of precedence shows no reverence. If there is authority but it is not displayed, then reverence is not conspicuous enough. Because it is not conspicuous, reverence is abandoned and all the hundred deeds of service fail to be brought to completion. This is how the domain or house is overthrown. For this reason, in the system of enlightened kings, the princes are made to schedule one diplomatic visit each year in order to keep their minds on the standard tribute. Every third year they themselves pay a court visit in order to practice ritual. For every second court visit they hold a general meeting in order to display their authority. And for every second general meeting they swear a covenant in order to make it shine forth radiant and conspicuous. One remembers standard tribute for the sake of those with whom one is on good terms. One practices ritual for the sake of making distinctions in ranks. One displays one’s authority for the sake of the multitude. And one makes it radiant and conspicuous for the sake of the spirits. From ancient times down to the present day, no one has ever failed in this; the main method of preserving or ruining a domain has always arisen from this. Jin presides over the covenant according to ritual propriety, fearing only that it will not be maintained properly. It respectfully provides the ceremonial victims and distributes them to the various rulers, seeking to preserve fealty through to the end. If your ruler says, “I am determined to do away with this,” then what ceremony can there be? It is entirely up to your ruler to make your plans. Our unworthy ruler will heed your command.636

13.3d

Frightened, the Qi leaders replied, “Our small domain spoke about it, but your large domain decides it. Would we dare not obey? Now that we have heard your command, we will go and respectfully carry it out. How soon is entirely up to your ruler.”

Lord Zhao

1505

叔向曰：「諸侯有間矣，不可以不示眾。」八月辛未，治兵，建而不 旆。壬申，復旆之。諸侯畏之。 13.3e 邾人、莒人愬于晉曰：「魯朝夕伐我，幾亡矣。我之不共，魯故之以。」晉

侯不見公。使叔向來辭曰：「諸侯將以甲戌盟，寡君知不得事君矣，請 君無勤。」子服惠伯對曰：「君信蠻夷之訴，以絕兄弟之國，棄周公之 後，亦唯君。寡君聞命矣。」叔向曰：「寡君有甲車四千乘在，雖以無道 行之，必可畏也。況其率道，其何敵之有？牛雖瘠，僨於豚上，其畏不 死？南蒯、子仲之憂，其庸可棄乎？若奉晉之眾，用諸侯之師，因邾、 莒、杞、鄫之怒，以討魯罪，間其二憂，何求而弗克？」魯人懼，聽命。 13.3f 甲戌，同盟于平丘，齊服也。令諸侯日中造于除。癸酉，退朝。子產命外

僕速張於除，子大叔止之，使待明日。及夕，子產聞其未張也，使速往， 乃無所張矣。

637 Yang (4:1357) speculates that this signifies that the Jin vanguard was prepared to do battle. 638 Two relevant attacks are mentioned at Zhao 1.2a and 10.3. On Lu’s relations with Zhu and Ju, see Gao Shiqi, Zuozhuan jishi benmo, 1:127–44. 639 Both Zhu and Ju were sometimes regarded as domains of the Eastern Yi, with indigenous affiliations predating the arrival of Shang or Zhou rule. 640 See Zhao 12.10 and 13.1 641 That is, according to Du Yu (ZZ 46.812), they did not presume to take part in the covenant.

1506

Zuo Tradition

Shuxiang said, “There is dissension among the princes. We must make a display for the multitude.” In the eighth month, on the xinwei day (4), the troops were drilled; flags were set up, but without streamers. On the renshen day (5), the streamers were reattached.637 The princes were intimidated. Jin forbids Lu to take part in the covenant because of Lu’s aggressions against small neighboring domains. Notable is Shuxiang’s response to Zifu Huibo, which is far more aggressive than most of the positions attributed to him. The leaders from Zhu and Ju presented a complaint to Jin, saying, “Lu makes attacks on us day and night, and we are on the point of perishing.638 That we present no tribute is because of Lu.” The Prince of Jin would not grant our lord an audience. He sent Shuxiang with an explanation, saying, “The princes are going to swear a covenant on the jiaxu day (7). Our unworthy ruler knows that he will not be able to wait upon your ruler, and he begs your ruler not to be exercised about it.” Zifu Huibo replied, “If your ruler will believe an accusation from barbarians and cut off relations with a brother domain,639 casting aside the descendants of the Zhou Duke, that is entirely up to your ruler. Our unworthy ruler has heard your command.” Shuxiang said, “Our unworthy ruler has 4,000 war chariots here with him. Even if we were to send them into action without abiding by the proper way, they would certainly be formidable. How much more so if they should go by the proper way? What rival would there then be for them? As emaciated as a cow might be, if it falls upon a piglet, is there any doubt that the piglet will die? Is it possible that you have forgotten the crisis with Nan Kuai and Zizhong? 640 If we should devote the Jin multitude, employ the troops of the princes, and rely upon the anger of Zhu, Ju, Qǐ, and Zeng in order to chastise Lu’s offense, taking advantage of these two crises, what aim would we fail to achieve?” Frightened, the Lu leaders heeded Jin’s command.641

13.3e

The covenant at Pingqiu, which should serve to demonstrate Jin’s power, falls short when Zichan offers a principled refutation of Jin claims, as he has done on earlier occasions (see Xiang 22.2, 24.2, 25.10, 28.8, 31.6). As in a number of other episodes, You Ji serves as a foil for Zichan’s forethought. On the jiaxu day (7), they swore a covenant together at Pingqiu; Qi had submitted. The princes were made to come to the cleared space at midday. On the guiyou day (6), they had withdrawn from their court visits to the Jin ruler. Zichan ordered his travel attendants to make haste in setting up the tents at the cleared space, but You Jib stopped them and made them wait until the following day. In the evening, Zichan heard that the tents had not yet been set up and had someone hurry over to the place, but already there was no space to set them up. Lord Zhao

13.3f

1507

及盟，子產爭承，曰：「昔天子班貢，輕重以列。列尊貢重，周之制 也。卑而貢重者，甸服也。鄭伯，男也，而使從公侯之貢，懼弗給也，敢 以為請。諸侯靖兵，好以為事。行理之命無月不至，貢之無藝，小國有 闕，所以得罪也。諸侯修盟，存小國也。貢獻無極，亡可待也。存亡之 制，將在今矣。」自日中以爭，至于昏，晉人許之。 既盟，子大叔咎之曰：「諸侯若討，其可瀆乎？」子產曰：「晉政多 門，貳偷之不暇，何暇討？國不競亦陵，何國之為？」 13.3g 公不與盟。晉人執季孫意如，以幕蒙之，使狄人守之。司鐸射懷錦，奉壺

飲冰，以蒲伏焉。守者御之，乃與之錦而入。晉人以平子歸，子服湫從。 子產歸，未至，聞子皮卒，哭，且曰：「吾已！無為為善矣。唯夫子 知我。」仲尼謂子產：「於是行也，足以為國基矣。《詩》曰： 樂只君子， 邦家之基。 子產，君子之求樂者也。」且曰：「合諸侯，藝貢事，禮也。」

642 Numerous explanations have been offered for these lines; see Yang, 4:1358. In an idealized early system of political geography, the Zhou court was surrounded by nine concentric zones of allies, each 500 li further from the central court. Tribute duties corresponded to distance and to rank. See, e.g., Shangshu, “Tribute of Yu,” 6.77–93. The nan 男 or nan 南 zone was the third from the center, one of the nearer allies of the Zhou court, and its ruler might thus have been expected to pay as heavy a tribute as a higher-ranked but more peripheral ruler. 643 For this interpretation of bing 冰, see Yang, 4:1359–60. It is possible that the text means “he carried to him a pot of ice-chilled water to drink,” but this seems unlikely, given the difficulty of obtaining ice (Zhao 4.2) and the fact that it is now summer. 644 For the arrest of Ji Pingzi and the contributions of Zifu Huibo here and in Zhao 13.3e, see Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.198. 645 Maoshi 172, “Nanshan you tai” 南山有臺, 10A.347. 646 Cf. Confucius’ comment on Zichan in Xiang 31.11.

1508

Zuo Tradition

When they swore the covenant, Zichan disputed the sequence of tribute, saying, “In former times, when the Son of Heaven established the order of tribute presentations, the amount was set according to the way they were ranked, and those who were given eminent places paid heavy tribute. That was the Zhou system. Those who were humble yet paid heavy tribute were those who resided in the near zone. The Liege of Zheng is ranked in the nan zone for tribute purposes,642 and if he is made to conform to the tribute amounts for a duke or prince who is near, then we fear that he will not be able to make up the full amount. We presume to present our request about this. The princes have calmed their troops and are carrying out the ceremony with amity. There is no month in which a command to make a tribute journey does not reach us, and because there is no limit to the tribute amount, our small domain has fallen short. That is why we have offended. When princes extend a covenant, it is to preserve the small domains. When there is no limit to the tribute amounts demanded, then the fall of these domains can be expected. Today will determine whether we stand or fall.” From midday they began their dispute, and when evening came the Jin leaders finally yielded. Once they had sworn the covenant, You Jib rebuked Zichan, saying, “If the princes chastise us, will you be able to take back what you have done?” Zichan said, “The government of Jin is divided among so many houses that they have not the leisure to deal with disloyalty and negligence. So what leisure will they have to chastise anyone? If a domain will not fight for itself and is the victim of bullying, then how is it worthy to be called a domain?” Our lord did not take part in the covenant. The Jin leaders arrested Ji Pingzia, isolated him in a tent, and had the Di men guard him. She, the supervisor of bells, crawled to him clasping a length of brocade and carrying a pot of water and a quiver cover as a drinking cup.643 When the guards caught him and held him back, he gave them the brocade and went in. The Jin leaders took Ji Pingzic back with them, and Zifu Huibob went along.644 Zichan, returning home, had not yet arrived when he heard that Han Hua had died. He wailed and said, “It is all over for me! There is no one to help me in doing good. Only this fine man knew me.” Confuciusc said of Zichan, “In this expedition, he acted in a way to serve as a foundation for his domain. As it says in the Odes,

13.3g

Happy this noble man, Foundation of his domain and his house.645

As a noble man, Zichan seeks happiness of this kind.” He also said, “They gathered the princes and set limits for tribute service: this was in accordance with ritual propriety.”646

Lord Zhao

1509

13.4 鮮虞人聞晉師之悉起也，而不警邊，且不修備。晉荀吳自著雍以上軍侵

鮮虞，及中人，驅衝競，大獲而歸。 13.5(8) 楚之滅蔡也，靈王遷許、胡、沈、道、房、申於荊焉。平王即位，既封陳、

蔡，而皆復之，禮也。隱大子之子廬歸于蔡，禮也。悼大子之子吳歸于 陳，禮也。 13.6(9) 冬十月，葬蔡靈公，禮也。 13.7(10) 公如晉。荀吳謂韓宣子曰：「諸侯相朝，講舊好也。執其卿而朝其君，有

不好焉，不如辭之。」乃使士景伯辭公于河。 13.8(11) 吳滅州來，令尹子期請伐吳。王弗許，曰：「吾未撫民人，未事鬼神，未

修守備，未定國家，而用民力，敗不可悔。州來在吳，猶在楚也。子姑 待之。」

647 Zhuyong 著雍 was in Jin, probably along the route from Jin toward Qi and Song. See Xiang 10.2c. Zhongren 中人 was located just northwest of Tang County 唐縣, Hebei, about 150 kilometers southwest of present-day Beijing. 648 See Zhao 13.2f. 649 Cai had been extinguished in Zhao 11.8 and Gongzi Qiji (now King Ping) appointed as a sort of viceroy there in Zhao 11.10. Despite the sacrifice of the heir apparent You (posthumous name Yin) in Zhao 11.8, the reinstatement of his son as ruler restores the Cai ruling line to its position of power. 650 Chen was extinguished in Zhao 8.6. The present restoration fulfills the prediction made in Zhao 9.4 651 For the death of Lord Ling of Cai, see Zhao 11.2b. 652 See the similar claim by Han Qi in Zhao 3.7.

1510

Zuo Tradition

Zhonghang Wu leads a successful attack on the Xianyu. The episode is a prelude to the moralizing tale of Zhonghang Wu’s siege of the Xianyu settlement of Gu (Zhao 15.5). The Xianyu leaders had heard that the Jin armies were all on the march, yet they did not put their borders on alert and did not repair their defenses. Zhonghang Wub of Jin led the upper army from Zhuyong in an incursion into Xianyu territory, advancing as far as Zhongren.647 There he urged his ramming chariots forward, capturing many before he returned home.

13.4

King Ping of Chu continues his efforts to restore domains extinguished or annexed by King Ling. When Chu extinguished Cai, King Ling had relocated Xǔ, Hu, Shěn, Dao, Fang, and Shen in Chu territory. When King Ping acceded to his position, after he had established Chen and Cai, he restored all of these:648 this was in accordance with ritual propriety. Lu, the son of the heir apparent Yin, returned to Cai:649 this was in accordance with ritual propriety. Wu, the son of the heir apparent Dao, returned to Chen:650 this was in accordance with ritual propriety.

13.5(8)

In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Ling of Cai was buried; this was in accordance with ritual propriety.651

13.6(9)

In a continuation of the tension between Lu and the Jin overlord (see Zhao 13.3g), the Lu ruler is refused permission to pay a court visit. Our lord was going to Jin. Zhonghang Wub said to Han Qia, “When the princes pay court visits to one another, it is to preserve old amity. If, after we have arrested their high minister, we should then receive a court visit from their ruler, that would contradict the idea of amity. It would be better to decline the visit.” They therefore sent Shi Mimoub to decline the lord’s visit as he reached the Yellow River.

13.7(10)

King Ping rejects a proposal for an attack on Wu, citing the need to bring stable rule to Chu first. When Wu extinguished Zhoulai, the Chu chief minister Dou Chengranb asked to attack Wu. The Chu king did not grant permission, saying, “We have not yet brought comfort to the commoners and leaders, we have not yet done services for the ghosts and spirits, we have not yet repaired our defenses, and we have not yet stabilized domain and patrimony. If we were now to use the strength of the populace, then we would regret it later, but to no use once we are defeated. For Zhoulai to be in Wu is the same as its being in Chu.652 For now, sir, just wait.”

13.8(11)

Lord Zhao

1511

13.9 季孫猶在晉，子服惠伯私於中行穆子曰：「魯事晉，何以不如夷之小

國？魯，兄弟也，土地猶大，所命能具。若為夷棄之，使事齊、楚，其何 瘳於晉？親親、與大，賞共、罰否，所以為盟主也。子其圖之！諺曰：『臣 一主二。』吾豈無大國？」穆子告韓宣子，且曰：「楚滅陳、蔡，不能救， 而為夷執親，將焉用之？」 乃歸季孫。惠伯曰：「寡君未知其罪，合諸侯而執其老。若猶有 罪，死命可也。若曰無罪而惠免之，諸侯不聞，是逃命也，何免之為？請 從君惠於會。」宣子患之，謂叔向曰：「子能歸季孫乎？」對曰：「不能。鮒 也能。」乃使叔魚。叔魚見季孫，曰：「昔鮒也得罪於晉君，自歸於魯 君，微武子之賜，不至於今。雖獲歸骨於晉，猶子則肉之，敢不盡情？歸 子而不歸，鮒也聞諸吏，將為子除館於西河，其若之何？」且泣。平子 懼，先歸。惠伯待禮。

653 Zifu Huibo is referring to the small border domains of Zhu and Ju; see Zhao 13.3e. 654 The incident is perhaps the one narrated in Xiang 21.5. 655 Although Shuxiang’s commendation of Yangshe Fu here seems genuine, it is presented in a different light in the comments of Confucius in Zhao 14.7b. 656 As Yang (4:1362) notes, Ji Pingzi is frightened because Jin proposes to lodge him permanently in a region far from Lu. 657 This would have been the ritual for seeing off the high minister of another domain after a diplomatic visit. In the Guoyu version of this episode (“Lu yu 2,” 5.199–200), Zifu Huibo secures the release of Ji Pingzi with a speech to Han Qi.

1512

Zuo Tradition

Ji Pingzi of Lu, held in custody for some months by the Jin leaders (see Zhao 13.3), is sent home. The situation is an awkward one for the Jin covenant hosts. Perhaps in retaliation for Ji Pingzi’s humiliating arrest, his representative Zifu Huibo demands what amounts to a public admission of error. Yangshe Fu solves the problem for Jin in a speech that cleverly combines humility and threat, but in the following year he is criticized for having been deceptive (Zhao 14.7b). Ji Pingzib was still in Jin. Zifu Huibo spoke privately with Zhonghang Wua, saying, “In what way has Lu fallen short of these small border domains in its service to Jin?653 Lu is a brother, and its territory is large; what Jin commands Lu is able to furnish. What improvement will it be for Jin if you cast Lu off for the sake of the barbarians and cause us to serve Qi and Chu? To stay close to kin and to associate with the large domain, to reward those who are reverent, and to punish those who are not—this is how one acts as covenant chief. Please consider it, sir! As the saying has it, ‘For any servant there are two masters.’ Can it be that there are no other great domains for us to serve?” Zhonghang Wuf reported this to Han Qia and said, “When Chu destroyed Chen and Cai we were not able to save them, and now we have arrested a kinsman on behalf of barbarians. What use is this?” They therefore gave Ji Pingzib permission to go home. Zifu Huiboe said, “Our unworthy ruler was not aware of his offense when you gathered the princes and arrested his senior minister. If he is still guilty of an offense, then it would be permissible for him to die at your command. If you are saying that he has committed no offense, and you have kindly pardoned him, then unless you publicize this among the princes, it will be tantamount to his fleeing your commands. How will it be a pardon? We request to enjoy this kindness of yours at a meeting.” Disturbed by this, Han Qib said to Shuxiang, “Can you get Ji Pingzic to go home?” He replied, “I cannot. But my younger brother Yangshe Fuc can.” They therefore sent Yangshe Fua to do it. Yangshe Fua had an audience with Ji Pingzib and said, “Some time ago I committed an offense against the ruler of Jin and turned myself over to the ruler of Lu.654 Were it not for the generosity of Ji Wuzib, I would not have survived to the present day. Although I had managed to have my bones returned to Jin, it was as if you were the ones who put the flesh upon them. Should I then presume not to do everything in my power for you? They send you home, but you do not go. I have heard from the officers that they are going to clear out a lodge for you in the region west of the Yellow River. What will you do about this?”655 And he wept. Frightened, Ji Pingzic set off early to return home.656 Zifu Huiboe stayed behind to await the performance of the ritual.657

13.9

Lord Zhao

1513

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年春，意如至自晉。 14.2 三月，曹伯滕卒。 14.3 夏四月。 14.4 秋，葬曹武公。 14.5(4) 八月，莒子去疾卒。 14.6(6) 冬，莒殺其公子意恢。

左傳 14.1(1) 十四年春，意如至自晉，尊晉、罪己也。尊晉、罪己，禮也。 14.2 南蒯之將叛也，盟費人。司徒老祁、慮癸偽癈疾，使請於南蒯曰：「臣願

受盟而疾興。若以君靈不死，請待間而盟。」許之。二子因民之欲叛也， 請朝眾而盟。遂劫南蒯曰：「群臣不忘其君，畏子以及今，三年聽命矣。 子若弗圖，費人不忍其君，將不能畏子矣。子何所不逞欲？請送子。」請 期五日。遂奔齊。 侍飲酒於景公。公曰：「叛夫！」對曰：「臣欲張公室也。」子韓皙 曰：「家臣而欲張公室，罪莫大焉。」司徒老祁、慮癸來歸費，齊侯使鮑 文子致之。

658 The Annals refers to Ji Pingzi only by his given name Yiru, without including his lineage name. This form is supposed to signify humility on the part of Lu; cf. Zhao 24.2. 659 Various interpretations of the names are possible. Both individuals may be supervisors of conscripts. There may be two individuals, the supervisor of conscripts Lao and Qi Lügui. Or there may be one individual, the supervisor of conscripts Laoqi Lügui. See Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 240, 581. 660 See Zhao 12.10a. It is telling that by “ruler” Laoqi and Lü Gui mean Ji Pingzi, not Lord Zhao of Lu. This language presages the eventual exile of Lord Zhao and the Ji lineage’s monopoly of power in Lu. 661 Nan Kuai, a Jisun retainer, had allied himself with Lord Zhao of Lu (see Zhao 12.10a). It is most unusual that Zihan Xi, a Qi high officer, should make this declaration in the presence of the Qi ruler, since the principle he expresses would tend to reinforce the power of noble lineages at the ruler’s expense. Zihan Xi objects to a low-level retainer’s presumption in challenging any part of the hierarchical order. 662 Qi returns the settlement of Bi as a conciliatory gesture, since Nan Kuai had sought Qi protection by bringing Bi to Qi.

1514

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 14 (528 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, Yiru (Ji Pingzi) arrived from Jin.

14.1(1)

In the third month, Teng, the Liege of Cao, died.

14.2

Summer, the fourth month.

14.3

In autumn, Lord Wu of Cao was buried.

14.4

In the eighth month, Quji, the Master of Ju, died.

14.5(4)

In winter, Ju put Gongzi Yihui to death.

14.6(6)

ZUO

In the fourteenth year, in spring, Ji Pingzid arrived from Jin: this shows respect for Jin’s reproof of us.658 To show respect for Jin’s incrimination of us was in accordance with ritual propriety.

14.1(1)

Nan Kuai’s rebellion against his Jisun masters (see Zhao 13.1) comes to an end, and the city of Bi is returned to Jisun control. The final failure of Nan Kuai’s efforts was presaged in the song and divination of Zhao 12.10b. When Nan Kuai was preparing to rebel, he swore a covenant with the people of Bi. The supervisor of conscripts Laoqi and Lü Gui659 pretended to have fallen ill and sent someone with a request to Nan Kuai: “We were willing to accept the covenant, but then this illness flared up. If by your numinous power we do not die, then we will await a break in the illness when we might swear the covenant.” He gave his permission. The two men, in response to the people’s desire to rebel, asked to hold a court audience with the multitude to swear a covenant. They then seized Nan Kuai and said, “We servants have not forgotten our ruler, but we have come to this day because we feared you; for three years we have obeyed your orders.660 Unless you can make some plan, the people of Bi will not be able to bear such cruelty to their ruler, and they will no longer be able to fear you. What place is there where you cannot indulge your desires? We request permission to escort you on your way.” Nan Kuai asked to set his departure for five days later. Then he fled to Qi. In Qi Nan Kuai waited in attendance upon Lord Jing as he drank. The lord said, “You rebel!” He replied, “I wanted to strengthen our lord’s house.” Zihan Xi said, “There is no greater crime than for a retainer in a noble house to wish to strengthen the lord’s house.”661 The supervisor of conscripts Lao Qi and Lü Gui came to return Bi, and the Prince of Qi sent Bao Guoa to hand it over formally.662

14.2

Lord Zhao

1515

14.3 夏，楚子使然丹簡上國之兵於宗丘，且撫其民。分貧，振窮；長孤幼，養

老疾；收介特，救災患；宥孤寡，赦罪戾；詰姦慝，舉淹滯；禮新，敘舊； 祿勳，合親；任良，物官。使屈罷簡東國之兵於召陵，亦如之。好於邊 疆。息民五年，而後用師，禮也。 14.4(5) 秋八月，莒著丘公卒，郊公不慼，國人弗順，欲立著丘公之弟庚輿。蒲

餘侯惡公子意恢，而善於庚輿；郊公惡公子鐸，而善於意恢。公子鐸因 蒲餘侯而與之謀曰：「爾殺意恢，我出君而納庚輿。」許之。 14.5 楚令尹子旗有德於王，不知度，與養氏比，而求無厭。王患之。九月甲

午，楚子殺鬬成然，而滅養氏之族。使鬬辛居鄖，以無忘舊勳。

663 Zongqiu 宗丘 was in present-day Zigui 秭歸, Hubei. The “upper parts” of the domain are regions to the west of the Chu capital, upstream along the Yangzi and other rivers. 664 This translation of xujiu 敘舊 follows the intepretation in Takezoe, 23.30. 665 Shaoling was likely located about 100 kilometers south of the Zheng capital, near present-day Yancheng, Henan; see Annals, Xi 4.3. 666 Chu forces resume military action in Zhao 17.6, but not at Chu’s instigation. Only in Zhao 19.6 does King Ping deliberately undertake a campaign, ending his people’s period of rest. 667 The Prince of Puyu was a Ju high officer. 668 As Du Yu (ZZ 47.820) notes, the Yang lineage was descended from Yang Youji and had formed a faction with Dou Chengran. 669 Dou Xin was Dou Chengran’s son; he saves the life of King Zhao of Chu in Ding 4.3e. For Yun, see Huan 11.2.

1516

Zuo Tradition

Immediately after his accession, King Ping of Chu takes measures to strengthen his people by governing them with generosity and ritual propriety. His deeds and decisions in later years (e.g., Zhao 19.2) sharply contradict this idealizing picture of his character as a ruler. In summer, the Master of Chu had Ran Dan review the troops of the upper parts of the domain at Zongqiu and also had him soothe the people.663 He distributed alms to the poor and relieved the indigent. He gave support for the orphaned and the young and provided for the elderly and the sick. He gathered together the single and lonely and succored those who had suffered from natural disasters. He lessened the burden on orphans and widows and pardoned criminals. He interrogated evildoers and raised up the unappreciated. He treated new lines of officeholders with ritual propriety and treated old officeholders with the rituals appropriate to their rank.664 He rewarded high achievers and created fellowship in kin groups. He employed the excellent and made appropriate official appointments. He had Qu Pi review the troops of the eastern part of the domain at Shaoling and had him implement the same policies there.665 Good relations were established with neighboring domains. He rested his people for five years and only then used his armies.666 This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

14.3

Succession struggles disturb the small domain of Ju (see Zhao 14.6). Negligence in grieving for one’s father is a breach of ritual propriety that more than once presages personal failure. See the failure of Lord Xian of Wei to grieve (Xiang 14.5) and the childishness of Lord Zhao of Lu during mourning (Xiang 31.4). In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Zhuqiu of Ju died. Lord Jiao, his son, did not show grief, and the inhabitants of the capital would not obey him. They wished to establish Lord Zhuqiu’s younger brother, Gengyu, as ruler. The Prince of Puyu hated Gongzi Yihui but was on good terms with Gengyu.667 Lord Jiao hated Gongzi Duo but was on good terms with Gongzi Yihuia. Gongzi Duo, responding to the Prince of Puyu, plotted with him: “If you kill Gongzi Yihuia, I will expel the ruler and install Gengyu in power.” The Prince of Puyu agreed to it.

14.4(5)

King Ping of Chu kills Dou Chengran, head of a powerful Chu line and a key aide in his own rise to power (see Zhao 13.2). The Chu chief minister Dou Chengranb, who had been a benefactor to the king, did not know the proper limits. Forming a clique with the Yang lineage, he was insatiable in his greed.668 The Chu king was disturbed by this behavior. In the ninth month, on the jiawu day (3), the Master of Chu killed Dou Chengran and extinguished the entire Yang house. He had Dou Xin dwell in Yun so as not to forget the lineage’s achievements in former times.669

14.5

Lord Zhao

1517

14.6(6) 冬十二月，蒲餘侯茲夫殺莒公子意恢。郊公奔齊。公子鐸逆庚輿於齊，

齊隰黨、公子鉏送之，有賂田。 14.7a 晉邢侯與雍子爭鄐田，久而無成。士景伯如楚，叔魚攝理。韓宣子命斷

舊獄，罪在雍子。雍子納其女於叔魚，叔魚蔽罪邢侯。邢侯怒，殺叔魚 與雍子於朝。宣子問其罪於叔向。叔向曰：「三人同罪，施生戮死可也。 雍子自知其罪，而賂以買直；鮒也鬻獄，邢侯專殺，其罪一也。己惡而 掠美為昏，貪以敗官為墨，殺人不忌為賊。《夏書》曰：『昏、墨、賊， 殺』，皋陶之刑也，請從之。」乃施邢侯而尸雍子與叔魚於市。

1518

Zuo Tradition

Turmoil continues in Ju (see Zhao 14.4). In winter, in the twelfth month, the Prince of Puyu, Zifu, put Gongzi Yihui of Ju to death. Lord Jiao fled to Qi. Gongzi Duo went to meet Gengyu at Qi and escort him back to Ju. On the Qi side Xi Dang and Gongzi Chu saw him off. They were given gifts of land.670

14.6(6)

Shuxiang shows his impartiality after his younger brother, Yangshe Fu, is murdered for having delivered a biased legal judgment. Confucius’ praise of Shuxiang’s “rectitude” and willingness to “conceal nothing for the sake of his kin” seems to contradict the gentler views expressed in Analects 13.18, where rectitude consists in the willingness of father and son to conceal the truth in order to protect each other from the law. In Jin, Xing Boa and Yongzi disputed over the lands around Chù.671 After a long time the matter was still not settled. When Shi Mimoub went on a visit to Chu, Yangshe Fua took his place as arbiter. Han Qia ordered him to decide old cases, and he found Yongzi to be in the wrong. When Yongzi gave his daughter to Yangshe Fua, the latter instead found Xing Boa to be in the wrong. Infuriated, Xing Boa killed Yangshe Fua and Yongzi at court. Han Qib asked Shuxiang how Xing Boa should be charged. Shuxiang said, “The three men were equally guilty. It would be right to execute the survivor and expose his corpse and to put the corpses of the dead men on display. Yongzi was aware of his own crime but used bribery to buy a judgment that justified him. As for Yangshe Fuc, he sold his ruling. Xing Boa killed on his own authority. Their offenses were equivalent. Appropriating the semblance of goodness when one is evil is disorder. Failing in one’s official duties out of greed is corruption. And killing others without qualms is lawlessness. As the Xia Documents says, ‘The disorderly, the corrupt, and the lawless are to be executed.’672 This was the Code of Gao Yao. I request that we follow it.” They therefore put Xing Boa to death and exposed his corpse and the corpses of Yongzi and Yangshe Fua in the marketplace.673

14.7a

670 According to Yang (4:1366), Gengyu gave Qi land as a bribe to secure Qi support. The move would prevent Qi from reinstalling Lord Jiao, who had taken refuge in Qi. 671 Xiang 26.10b refers to a Yongzi from Chu who fled to Jin, participated in the Pengcheng campaign (Cheng 18.5, 18.12), and was awarded Chù. If this is the same Yongzi, he must be quite aged. According to Du Yu (ZZ 47.820), Xing Bo is the son of Qu Wuchen, whose flight from Chu to Jin is recorded in Cheng 2.6 and recalled in Xiang 26.10c. 672 The passage is not found in the extant Shangshu. 673 Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 9,” 15.483.

Lord Zhao

1519

14.7b 仲尼曰：「叔向，古之遺直也。治國制刑，不隱於親。三數叔魚之惡，不

為末減。曰義也夫，可謂直矣！平丘之會，數其賄也，以寬衛國，晉不為 暴。歸魯季孫，稱其詐也，以寬魯國，晉不為虐。邢侯之獄，言其貪也， 以正刑書，晉不為頗。三言而除三惡，加三利。殺親益榮，猶義也夫！」

春秋 15.1 十有五年春王正月，吳子夷末卒。 15.2(1) 二月癸酉，有事于武宮。籥入，叔弓卒。去樂，卒事。 15.3(2) 夏，蔡朝吳出奔鄭。 15.4 六月丁巳朔，日有食之。 15.5(5) 秋，晉荀吳帥師伐鮮虞。 15.6(6) 冬，公如晉。

674 The remark recalls Confucius’ assessment of Zichan at Zhao 20.9. 675 We have accepted Wang Yinzhi’s suggestion that yue 曰 be amended to you 由 (Yang, 4:1367). 676 Confucius’ review of Shuxiang’s relations with Yangshe Fu differs slightly from the account given in Zuozhuan. At Zhao 13.3b, though Shuxiang does expose Yangshe Fu’s greedy eagerness to receive bribes, no direct rebuke is recorded. 677 See Zhao 13.9, where Shuxiang makes use of Yangshe Fu’s cunning to get Ji Pingzi of Lu to leave Jin. Confucius here again offers a retrospective justification of Shuxiang’s behavior.

1520

Zuo Tradition

Confuciusc said, “Shuxiang’s was a kind of rectitude passed down from ancient times.674 In governing the domain and administering punishments he concealed nothing for the sake of his kin. On the three occasions when he accused Yangshe Fua of misdeeds, he did not relent in the slightest. How true to his duty he was!675 This can be called rectitude! At the meeting at Pingqiu, when Shuxiang accused Yangshe Fu of accepting bribes, it was so that Wei could be treated with generosity and Jin would not behave oppressively.676 When Yangshe Fu sent Ji Pingzib of Lu home and Shuxiang pointed out Yangshe Fu’s deceptiveness, it was so that Lu could be treated with generosity and Jin would not behave cruelly.677 In the court case of Xing Boa, when Shuxiang spoke of Yangshe Fu’s greed, it was so that the penal texts would be correct and Jin would not behave with partiality. With three remarks he cleared away three evils and secured three advantages. By killing his kinsman he added to his own glory. How true to his duty he was!”678

14.7b

LORD ZHAO 15 (527 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Yimo, the Master of Wu, died. In the second month, on the guiyou day (15), there was a ceremony at the temple of Lord Wu.679 As the pipers entered, Shu Gong died. The musicians were dismissed and the ceremony was completed. In summer, Zhao Wu of Cai departed and fled to Zheng. In the sixth month, on the dingsi day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.

15.1

15.2(1)

15.3(2) 15.4

In autumn, Xun Wu (Zhonghang Wu) of Jin led out troops and attacked the Xianyu.

15.5(5)

In winter, our lord went to Jin.

15.6(6)

678 See Yin 4.5 for the notion that one might have to kill one’s own kin for the sake of duty. 679 Although both this temple and the Martial Palace mentioned at Annals, Cheng 6.2, are called wugong 武宮, they are not the same structure. See Yang, 2:826.

Lord Zhao

1521

左傳 15.1(2) 十五年春，將禘于武公，戒百官。梓慎曰：「禘之日其有咎乎！吾見赤黑

之祲，非祭祥也，喪氛也。其在蒞事乎！」二月癸酉，禘。叔弓蒞事，籥入 而卒。去樂，卒事，禮也。 15.2(3) 楚費無極害朝吳之在蔡也，欲去之，乃謂之曰：「王唯信子，故處子於

蔡，子亦長矣，而在下位，辱，必求之，吾助子請。」又謂其上之人曰：「王 唯信吳，故處諸蔡，二三子莫之如也，而在其上，不亦難乎？弗圖，必及 於難。」夏，蔡人逐朝吳，朝吳出奔鄭。王怒，曰：「余唯信吳，故寘諸 蔡。且微吳，吾不及此。女何故去之？」無極對曰：「臣豈不欲吳？然而 前知其為人之異也。吳在蔡，蔡必速飛。去吳，所以翦其翼也。」 15.3 六月乙丑，王大子壽卒。 15.4 秋八月戊寅，王穆后崩。

680 According to Shiji 14.518–20, Lord Wu ruled from 825 to 816 Bce. Yang (4:1369) explains that this di sacrifice is the annual spring sacrifice to a former ruler like those mentioned at Zhao 25.6b and Ding 8.10a, not the great five-year di sacrifice mentioned at Min 2.2. 681 According to Du Yu (ZZ 47.823), he was the son of King Jing. 682 According to Du Yu (ZZ 47.823), she was the mother of the royal heir apparent Shou.

1522

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

A Lu minister correctly predicts calamity on the basis of an atmospheric omen. Shu Gong, long trusted as a Lu envoy and ritual representative, dies in fulfillment of the prediction. In the fifteenth year, in spring, there was to be a di sacrifice for Lord Wu,680 and the many officials were alerted. Zi Shen said, “On the day of the di sacrifice there will be a misfortune. I have seen a vapor in reddish black, not a good omen for a sacrifice, but a vapor of mourning. It will settle on the one who officiates!” In the second month, on the guiyou day (15), the di sacrifice was performed. Shu Gong, who was officiating, died when the pipers entered. The musicians were dismissed and the ceremony was completed. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

15.1(2)

Fei Wuji of Chu, whose continual scheming in the coming years will contribute to the long-term weakening of his domain, acts to maintain Chu influence in Cai, engineering the departure of Zhao Wu of Cai (see Zhao 13.2) and incurring the displeasure of King Ping of Chu. In Chu, Fei Wuji thought it disadvantageous that Zhao Wu of Cai was in Cai, and he wished to remove him. So he said to him, “It was precisely because the king trusted you that he placed you in Cai. You are a grown man now, yet you occupy a lowly position, which is humiliating. You must seek better, and I will second your request.” At the same time he said to Zhao Wu’s superiors, “It was precisely because the king trusted Zhao Wu that he placed him in Cai. None of you are any match for him, yet you are more highly placed than he is. Does that not pose a problem? If you do not plan about the matter, you are bound to be caught up in a disaster.” In summer, the Cai leaders expelled Zhao Wu, and Zhao Wu departed and fled to Zheng. Infuriated, the king said, “It was precisely because I trusted Zhao Wu that I set him up in Cai. What is more, if it had not been for Zhao Wu, I would never have attained my present position. Why did you send him away?” Fei Wujia replied, “How could I not want to keep Zhao Wu? Yet for a long time I have known of his disloyalty. With Zhao Wu in Cai, Cai was bound to take flight quickly. Sending Zhao Wu away was a way to clip Cai’s wings.” In the sixth month, on the yichou day (9), the royal heir apparent Shou died.681 In autumn, in the eighth month, on the wuyin day (22), Queen Mu died.682

Lord Zhao

15.2(3)

15.3

15.4

1523

15.5(5) 晉荀吳帥師伐鮮虞，圍鼓。鼓人或請以城叛，穆子弗許。左右曰：「師徒

不勤，而可以獲城，何故不為？」穆子曰：「吾聞諸叔向曰：『好惡不愆， 民知所適，事無不濟。』或以吾城叛，吾所甚惡也；人以城來，吾獨何好 焉？賞所甚惡，若所好何？若其弗賞，是失信也，何以庇民？力能則進， 否則退，量力而行。吾不可以欲城而邇姦，所喪滋多。」使鼓人殺叛人 而繕守備。 圍鼓三月，鼓人或請降。使其民見，曰：「猶有食色，姑修而城。」 軍吏曰：「獲城而弗取，勤民而頓兵，何以事君？」穆子曰：「吾以事君 也。獲一邑而教民怠，將焉用邑？邑以賈怠，不如完舊。賈怠無卒，棄舊 不祥。鼓人能事其君，我亦能事吾君。率義不爽，好惡不愆，城可獲而 民知義所，有死命而無二心，不亦可乎？」鼓人告食竭力盡，而後取之。 克鼓而反，不戮一人，以鼓子䳒鞮歸。 15.6(6) 冬，公如晉，平丘之會故也。

683 Gu 鼓 was near present-day Jin County 晉縣, Hebei, about 50 kilometers east of Shijiazhuang and about 435 kilometers northwest of the Jin capital. 684 The Guoyu version of this episode (“Jin yu 9,” 15.484–86) includes an additional anecdote about the Master of Gu’s virtuous subject Susha Xi 夙沙釐.

1524

Zuo Tradition

In an act reminiscent of Lord Wen of Jin (see Xi 25.4), Zhonghang Wu teaches virtue during a siege on Gu, a settlement of the Xianyu. Jin will ultimately annex Gu outright (see Zhao 22.4). Zhonghang Wub of Jin led out troops and attacked the Xianyu and laid siege to Gu.683 Someone from Gu asked to betray the city to him, but Zhonghang Wuf would not permit it. His staff said, “The city could be taken without any exertion on the part of our troops. Why not do it?” Zhonghang Wuf said, “I heard from Shuxiang that ‘when one does not err in what one praises and condemns, the people know what course to follow, and every endeavor succeeds.’ For someone to betray one of our cities is something that we would strongly condemn. What would we find to praise when someone else comes over to us with a city? If we were to reward something that we strongly condemn, then what would we do about things that we praise? If we were not to reward it, that would be a violation of good faith, and how would we then protect our people? If we are strong enough, we will go forward. If not, we will withdraw. We will proceed after considering our strength. We should not associate ourselves with evildoing out of a desire to take the city. What we would lose by such an action would be greater by far than what we would gain.” He had the people of Gu kill the traitor and improve their defenses. After the siege of Gu had gone on for three months, someone from Gu asked to surrender. Zhonghang Wu had the people come for an audience and said, “You still have the appearance of people who are eating well. For now, repair your walls.” The Jin military officers said, “You have won the city, but you do not take it. You are exhausting your people and blunting their weapons. How is this a service to the ruler?” Zhonghang Wuf said, “With this we do serve the ruler. If in winning one city we teach the people laziness, then what use do we have for the city? If for the price of this one city one purchases laziness, then it would be far better to maintain the status quo. No good can come from purchasing laziness, and there is nothing auspicious about throwing away the status quo. The people of Gu are capable of serving their ruler, and we are also capable of serving our ruler. Would it not be acceptable if in doing our duty we do not fail, if in what we praise and condemn we do not err, if the city can be taken and our people understand the scope of their duty, and if people can die in obeying their orders and never have a second thought?” He took the city only when the people of Gu reported that their food supplies were exhausted and their strength depleted. Overcoming Gu and returning, he did not put to death a single person, and he brought Yuandi, the Master of Gu, back with him.684

15.5(5)

In winter, our lord went to Jin. This was on account of the meeting at Pingqiu.

15.6(6)

Lord Zhao

1525

15.7a 十二月，晉荀躒如周，葬穆后，籍談為介。既葬，除喪，以文伯宴，樽以

魯壺。王曰：「伯氏，諸侯皆有以鎮撫王室，晉獨無有，何也？」文伯揖籍 談。對曰：「諸侯之封也，皆受明器於王室，以鎮撫其社稷，故能薦彝器 於王。晉居深山，戎狄之與鄰，而遠於王室，王靈不及，拜戎不暇，其何 以獻器？」 15.7b 王曰：「叔氏，而忘諸乎！叔父唐叔，成王之母弟也，其反無分乎？密須

之鼓與其大路，文所以大蒐也；闕鞏之甲，武所以克商也，唐叔受之，以 處參虛，匡有戎狄。其後襄之二路，鏚鉞、秬鬯，彤弓、虎賁，文公受之， 以有南陽之田，撫征東夏，非分而何？夫有勳而不廢，有績而載，奉之 以土田，撫之以彝器，旌之以車服，明之以文章，子孫不忘，所謂福也。 福祚之不登，叔父焉在？且昔而高祖孫伯黶司晉之典籍，以為大政，故 曰籍氏。及辛有之二子董之晉，於是乎有董史。女，司典之後也，何故忘 之？」籍談不能對。賓出，王曰：「籍父其無後乎！數典而忘其祖。」

685 Various gradations of regalia mark the passage of time in mourning. Here, according to Yang (4:1371), the mourners change from hempen clothing to clothing woven from kudzu fibers. 686 As Du Yu (ZZ 47.823) notes, this remark appears to be spurred by the use of the Lu pot. According to Zhouli 2.32 (cited in Yang, 4:1371), sacrificial vessels were among the gifts given the royal house by local rulers. 687 King Ling of Chu mentioned these gifts at Zhao 12.11. 688 Mixu 密須, or simply Mi 密, was near present-day Lingtai County 靈臺縣, Gansu, about 150 kilometers northwest of the Western Zhou capital near Xi’an. The location of Quegong is unknown. 689 These stars mark the celestial regions that correspond to Jin territory. See Zichan’s explanation of celestial regions at Zhao 1.12a. 690 For these gifts, see Xi 28.3h. For Nanyang, see Xi 25.2. 691 On the prescient Zhou minister Xin You, see Xi 22.4. The “Dong scribes” are represented both by the celebrated Dong Hu (see Xuan 2.3) and by the martyr Dong Anyu (see Ding 13.2, 14.2).

1526

Zuo Tradition

A dispute between the Zhou king and Jin over ritual gifts leads to predictions of doom for both, as the king and Ji Tan, a member of the Jin delegation, both violate ritual propriety as they vie to show off their knowledge of ancient history and ritual precedent. In the twelfth month, Zhi Wenzia of Jin went to Zhou for the burial of Queen Mu. Ji Tan acted as his aide. Once the burial had taken place and the mourners had adopted a lesser degree of mourning,685 a feast was held for Zhi Wenzib, with drinks served from a pot given by Lu. The king said, “Elder Uncle, why is it that when all the princes have given something to secure the royal house, Jin alone has not?”686 Zhi Wenzib saluted Ji Tan, who replied, “When the princes were put in power, they all received illustrious vessels with which to secure the altars of their domains,687 and for this reason they were able to present sacrificial vessels to the king. Jin was located deep in the mountains, a neighbor to the Rong and Di, and was far from the royal house. The king’s numinous power did not reach us, and our efforts to subdue the Rong left us no leisure. How could we present vessels to you?”

15.7a

The king said, “Younger Uncle, you have forgotten! The royal uncle Tang Shu was a younger full brother of King Cheng. Could he have had no portion? The drum and grand chariot of Mixu were the items King Wen used as he conducted his grand muster. The Quegong armor was what King Wu wore as he overcame the Shang.688 Tang Shu received all of these and was placed with them in the region governed by the asterism Shen,689 where there were Rong and Di within his borders. Later there were King Xiang’s two chariots, his bronze axe, his millet wine, his vermilion bow, and his ‘tiger runner’ guards, which Lord Wen received as he took possession of the Nanyang territory and pacified the eastern Xia regions.690 If this was not a portion, what was it? What we call a blessing is having an achievement that is not neglected, an accomplishment that is recorded, and then having it upheld with landholdings, confirmed with sacrificial vessels, marked with chariots and regalia, and made conspicuous with patterned flags, so that one’s descendants do not forget it. If your blessings are not registered, then what place is there for you, Uncle? What is more, in times past your distant ancestor Sun Boyan was supervisor of Jin’s archival records, which were used for great administrative matters, and he was therefore called Ji, or ‘Records.’ It was when Xin You’s second son, Dong, went to Jin that Jin first had the Dong scribes.691 You are the descendant of supervisors of the archives. Why have you forgotten these things?” Ji Tan was unable to reply. After the guests departed, the king said, “Ji Tana will have no descendants! He cites archival materials but forgets his own ancestors.”

15.7b

Lord Zhao

1527

15.7c 籍談歸，以告叔向。叔向曰：「王其不終乎！吾聞之：『所樂必卒焉。』今

王樂憂，若卒以憂，不可謂終。王一歲而有三年之喪二焉，於是乎以喪 賓宴，又求彝器，樂憂甚矣，且非禮也。彝器之來，嘉功之由，非由喪也。 三年之喪，雖貴遂服，禮也。王雖弗遂，宴樂以早，亦非禮也。禮，王之 大經也。一動而失二禮，無大經矣。言以考典，典以志經。忘經而多言， 舉典，將焉用之？」

春秋 16.1(2) 十有六年春，齊侯伐徐。 16.2(2) 楚子誘戎蠻子殺之。 16.3(4) 夏，公至自晉。 16.4(5) 秋八月己亥，晉侯夷卒。 16.5(6) 九月，大雩。 16.6(7) 季孫意如如晉。 16.7(7) 冬十月，葬晉昭公。

692 The same notion underlies Shusun Bao’s reasoning about Lord Xiang’s Chu Palace at Xiang 31.3. 693 See Zhao 15.3 and 15.4. 694 You Ji also compares ritual propriety to a warp thread in Zhao 25.3a. 695 Karlgren (gl. 723) translates “The [royal] speeches, by them one achieves the standard texts,” pointing out that the Documents is made up largely of royal speeches.

1528

Zuo Tradition

When Ji Tan returned to Jin, he told Shuxiang about this episode. Shuxiang said, “The king will come to no good end! I have heard it said that ‘what one delights in, one must die in.’ 692 At present the king takes delight at a time of sorrow, and if he should die in sorrow, that could not be called a good end. Twice in a single year the king has had cause for mourning periods of three years,693 yet he uses mourning as an opportunity to feast his guests and even to request bronze vessels from them. This is an extreme case of taking delight in a time of sorrow, and it is not in accordance with ritual propriety. Sacrificial vessels come as a result of fine accomplishments. They do not come as a result of mourning. When three years’ mourning is required, it is in accordance with ritual propriety even for the highborn to complete the mourning period. Even if the king was not going to complete the mourning period, he took to feasting and entertainment too readily, an act that is likewise not in accordance with ritual propriety. Ritual is the king’s great warp thread.694 If in a single action he abandons two ritual requirements, he lacks the great warp thread. With one’s words one completes the archived texts,695 and with the archived texts one marks the warp thread. What good does it do to talk a lot and cite the archives if one forgets the warp thread?”

15.7c

LORD ZHAO 16 (526 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked Xu.

16.1(2)

The Master of Chu lured the Rong Man Master in and put him to death.

16.2(2)

In summer, our lord arrived from Jin.

16.3(4)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the jihai day (20), Yi, the Prince of Jin, died.

16.4(5)

In the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

16.5(6)

Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi) went to Jin.

16.6(7)

In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Zhao of Jin was buried.

16.7(7)



We suspect that what is meant by dian 典 (“archived texts”) is not, or not only, such collections as the Documents but a larger corpus of written materials kept at the royal court and preserving important royal commands and proclamations. Speaking thus “completes” the archived texts in that it brings the texts’ old principles to bear on the speaker’s new deliberations.

Lord Zhao

1529

左傳 16.1 十六年春王正月，公在晉，晉人止公。不書，諱之也。

16.2a(1, 2)

齊侯伐徐。 楚子聞蠻氏之亂也與蠻子之無質也，使然丹誘戎蠻子嘉殺之，遂 取蠻氏。既而復立其子焉，禮也。

16.2b 二月丙申，齊師至于蒲隧，徐人行成。徐子及郯人、莒人會齊侯，盟于蒲

隧，賂以甲父之鼎。叔孫昭子曰：「諸侯之無伯，害哉！齊君之無道也， 興師而伐遠方，會之，有成而還，莫之亢也。無伯也夫！《詩》曰： 宗周既滅， 靡所止戾。 正大夫離居， 莫知我肄。 其是之謂乎！」 16.3a 三月，晉韓起聘于鄭，鄭伯享之。子產戒曰：「苟有位於朝，無有不共

恪！」孔張後至，立於客間，執政禦之；適客後，又禦之；適縣間。客從而 笑之。

696 Yang (4:1375) equates this Man 蠻 with the Man mentioned at Cheng 6.4. Man territory is thought to have been located along the Ru River, about 50 kilometers south of the Zhou capital. 697 This passage on the annexation of Man territory is clearly out of place, as Yang (4:1375) notes. We retain Yang’s numbering. 698 Pusui 蒲隧 was about 320 kilometers south of the Qi capital, south of present-day Suining County 睢寧縣, Jiangsu. 699 Jiafu was the name of an ancient domain. 700 Maoshi 194, “Yu wu zheng” 雨無正, 12B.409–12.

1530

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

The Lu ruler is detained in Jin by the Jin leaders. In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Jin, and the Jin leaders kept him there. That it was not written in the text was to conceal it.

16.1

Qi campaigns against the Man and Xu, earning criticism from a Lu observer. The Prince of Qi attacked Xu. Hearing of the disorderly conduct of the Man people and the faithlessness of the Man Master, the Master of Chu had Ran Dan lure in Jia, the Rong Man Master, and put him to death. He then took possession of Man territory.696 Afterward he established the master’s son as ruler again. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.697 In the second month, on the bingshen day (14), the Qi army reached Pusui, and the Xu leaders sought a peace accord.698 The Master of Xu, along with leaders from Tan and Ju, met with the Prince of Qi and swore a covenant at Pusui, giving the prince the Jiafu cauldron as a bribe.699 Shusun Chuob said, “What harm it does for the princes to have no overlord! Contrary to the Way, the ruler of Qi has mustered an army and attacked a distant region, meeting with them and returning only after coming to terms, and no one opposed him. This indeed is the result of having no overlord! As it says in the Odes,

16.2a(1, 2)

16.2b

Once ancestral Zhou was destroyed, There was no one to stop the outrages. The legitimate high officers dwell apart, And none of them knows our travails.700

Surely this is what is meant.” After a Zheng nobleman embarrasses himself during a ritual entertainment for a Jin visitor, Zichan angrily rebuts charges that this failure reflects poorly on his own leadership. In the third month, Han Qi of Jin made an official visit to Zheng, where the Liege of Zheng offered him ceremonial toasts. Zichan issued a warning, saying, “If you have a place in court, commit no act that is disrespectful.” Kong Zhang, arriving late, would have taken his stand among the guests, but the men in charge prevented him. They prevented him again when he moved behind the guests, and he moved among the hanging musical instruments. The guests joined together in laughing at him.

16.3a

Lord Zhao

1531

事畢，富子諫曰：「夫大國之人，不可不慎也，幾為之笑，而不陵 我？我皆有禮，夫猶鄙我。國而無禮，何以求榮？孔張失位，吾子之恥 也。」 子產怒曰：「發命之不衷，出令之不信，刑之頗類，獄之放紛，會 朝之不敬，使命之不聽，取陵於大國，罷民而無功，罪及而弗知，僑之恥 也。孔張，君之昆孫子孔之後也，執政之嗣也，為嗣大夫；承命以使，周 於諸侯；國人所尊，諸侯所知。立於朝而祀於家，有祿於國，有賦於軍， 喪、祭有職，受脤、歸脤。其祭在廟，已有著位。在位數世，世守其業， 而忘其所，僑焉得恥之？辟邪之人而皆及執政，是先王無刑罰也。子寧 以他規我。」 16.3b 宣子有環，其一在鄭商。宣子謁諸鄭伯，子產弗與，曰：「非官府之守器

也，寡君不知。」子大叔、子羽謂子產曰：「韓子亦無幾求，晉國亦未可 以貳。晉國、韓子不可偷也。若屬有讒人交鬬其間，鬼神而助之，以興 其凶怒，悔之何及？吾子何愛於一環，其以取憎於大國也？盍求而與 之？」

701 According to Du Yu (ZZ 47.826), Fuzi was a Zheng high officer. 702 The terminology of the passage is slightly strange. Kong Zhang is either “the descendant of Zikong, who was a grandson (kunsun 昆孫) of a ruler” or “a grandson of the elder brother of a ruler, a descendant of Zikong.” On the strange term kunsun, Du Yu (47.826) notes that Zikong was the “elder brother” (kun) of Lord Xiang of Zheng. But Shao Jinhan 邵晉函 (cited in Yang, 4:1377), argues instead that kunsun is a general term for distant descendants. 703 Kong Zhang’s father was Gongsun Xie; see Zhao 7.9a. 704 According to an alternative interpretation proposed by Wang Guowei (cited in Yang, 4:1378), the ring or bracelet was divided into sections and the Zheng merchant held the section that could complete Han Qi’s.

1532

Zuo Tradition

After the ceremony was over, Fuzi remonstrated,701 saying, “One cannot but be careful with people from a great domain. How can they not lord it over us when we are the butt of their laughter? Even if we all maintain ritual propriety, they still scorn us. When a domain lacks ritual propriety, how is it ever to seek glory? That Kong Zhang failed to take his place is a disgrace for you, sir.” Infuriated, Zichan said, “To issue a command that is not fitting, to give orders that are not in good faith, to show bias in punishments, to be arbitrary in lawsuits, to be disrespectful in meetings and court audiences, to give commands that are not heeded, to incur bullying from great domains, to tire the people without achieving anything, to be guilty of an offense without knowing it—any of these would be a disgrace for me. Kong Zhang is a descendant of Zikong, that is, the descendant of a ruler’s elder brother;702 he is the successor of a man in charge of government, a hereditary high officer.703 He has received orders for a diplomatic mission and has traveled among the princes. He is respected by the inhabitants of the capital and known to the princes. He takes his stand in court and makes ancestral sacrifices at home. He has his emolument from the domain and contributes a detachment to the army. He has official duties at times of mourning and sacrifice. He both receives and submits portions of sacrificial meat. For sacrifices taking place at the domain’s Ancestral Temple, he already has a designated place. This place has been his family’s for several generations, and each generation has maintained the traditional duties, yet he has apparently forgotten its location. Why should this be a disgrace for me? If every malefactor’s offenses are laid at the feet of the man in charge of government, that would be tantamount to having no penal code from the former kings. You would do better to correct me on some other point.” Zichan refuses to bully a Zheng merchant for the sake of his Jin visitor, citing principle and the ancient ties between Zheng’s government and its merchants. On this issue, see the introduction to Yin 11.5, Xi 11.2, 33.1, Cheng 3.10. Han Qib had a jade ring whose twin was held by a Zheng merchant.704 Han Qib asked for the twin ring from the Liege of Zheng, but Zichan refused, saying, “If it is not an object kept in the official treasury, our unworthy ruler does not know about it.” You Jib and Gongsun Huia said to Zichan, “Truly, Han Qic has hardly asked for anything, and being disloyal to the domain is still unacceptable. The domain of Jin and Han Qic cannot be treated shabbily. If some slanderer should happen to stir up trouble between our domains with the aid of ghosts and spirits, in this way arousing a destructive anger, then it will be too late for regrets. Why should you, sir, begrudge one jade ring and incur the hatred of a great domain? Why not find it and give it to him?”

16.3b

Lord Zhao

1533

子產曰：「吾非偷晉而有二心，將終事之，是以弗與，忠信故也。 僑聞君子非無賄之難，立而無令名之患。僑聞為國非不能事大、字小之 難，無禮以定其位之患。夫大國之人令於小國，而皆獲其求，將何以給 之？一共一否，為罪滋大。大國之求，無禮以斥之，何饜之有？吾且為鄙 邑，則失位矣。若韓子奉命以使，而求玉焉，貪淫甚矣，獨非罪乎？出一 玉以起二罪，吾又失位，韓子成貪，將焉用之？且吾以玉賈罪，不亦銳 乎？」 16.3c 韓子買諸賈人，既成賈矣。商人曰：「必告君大夫！」韓子請諸子產曰：

「日起請夫環，執政弗義，弗敢復也。今買諸商人，商人曰『必以聞』，敢 以為請。」 子產對曰： 昔我先君桓公與商人皆出自周，庸次比耦以艾殺此地，斬

之蓬、蒿、藜、藋，而共處之；世有盟誓，以相信也，曰：「爾 無我叛，我無強賈，毋或匄奪。爾有利市寶賄，我勿與知。」 恃此質誓，故能相保以至于今。

705 For a similar use of jade as a figure for and measure of virtue, see Xiang 15.8. 706 It would appear from the ensuing discussion that Han Qi has forced the merchant to sell him the ring. 707 Zheng was founded when Lord Huan, a younger son of King Li of Zhou, was given the territory in 806 Bce. See Shiji 42.1757.

1534

Zuo Tradition

Zichan said, “I am not treating Jin shabbily or having disloyal thoughts. I intend to serve them to the end, and that is why I do not give it to him: for the sake of loyalty and good faith. I have heard that the noble man is unconcerned about not receiving gifts, but he worries instead that as an officer he may not enjoy a good name. I have heard that when governing a domain one should be unconcerned about not finding an opportunity to serve the great and to foster the little. Instead, one should worry about lacking the ritual propriety with which to steady one’s position. If people from great domains get what they want whenever they give orders to small domains, then how will we ever have enough to give to them? If we give on one occasion and refuse on another, the offense only becomes more serious. If we do not refuse the demands of great domains with the proper ritual, then how will they ever be sated? And if we are treated like a minor domain on their border, then we lose our official position. If Han Qic has come on this mission under orders, and he then seeks a jade from us, then this is an extraordinary case of greed and excess. How could it not be a crime? What use is it if by handing over one jade we give rise to two crimes, losing our official position and letting Han Qic yield to greed in the bargain? What is more, if we buy a crime for the price of a jade, would that not be a petty transaction?”705 Han Qic was buying the jade ring from the tradesman, and an agreement for the transaction had already been reached, when the merchant said, “I shall report this to the ruler’s high officers.”706 Han Qic presented a request to Zichan, saying, “I requested this ring before, but the men in charge of government did not find that the request accorded with duty, and I did not dare to repeat it. Now I am buying it from the merchant, and the merchant says, ‘I shall make this known.’ I presume to make my request about this.” Zichan replied,

16.3c

In times past, our former ruler Lord Huan departed from Zhou together with merchants.707 Working side by side, they cleared this land, cutting down the tumbleweed, the mugwort, the pigweed, and the saltbrush, and together they dwelt here. With every generation they swore covenants and vows to establish good faith with one another, saying, “You will not rebel against us, and we will not force you to sell anything, nor will we in any case importune you or seize anything from you. You will have your profitable market and your precious goods, and we will know nothing about them.” It was because we relied upon these trusty vows that we were able to preserve each other to this day.

Lord Zhao

1535

今吾子以好來辱，而謂敝邑強奪商人，是教敝邑背盟 誓也，毋乃不可乎！吾子得玉，而失諸侯，必不為也。若大國 令，而共無藝，鄭鄙邑也，亦弗為也。僑若獻玉，不知所成。 敢私布之。 韓子辭玉，曰：「起不敏，敢求玉以徼二罪？敢辭之。」 16.3d 夏四月，鄭六卿餞宣子於郊。宣子曰：「二三君子請皆賦，起亦以知鄭

志。」子齹賦〈野有蔓草〉。宣子曰：「孺子善哉！吾有望矣。」子產賦鄭 之〈羔裘〉。宣子曰：「起不堪也。」子大叔賦〈褰裳〉。宣子曰：「起在 此，敢勤子至於他人乎？」子大叔拜。宣子曰：「善哉，子之言是！不有是 事，其能終乎？」子游賦〈風雨〉。子旗賦〈有女同車〉。子柳賦〈蘀兮〉。

708 Maoshi 94, “Ye you mancao” 野有蔓草, 4D.182. The relevant lines are “From afar we meet together, / Just as we had hoped.” You Ji recited the same ode in Xiang 27.5. 709 Maoshi 80, “Gaoqiu” 羔裘, 4C.168. Three couplets praise a traveler. The poem is referred to as “the Zheng ‘Lambskin Cloak’” because two other poems bear the same title (Maoshi 120 and 146). 710 Maoshi 87, “Qian chang” 褰裳, 4C.173–74. The relevant lines are “If he thinks kindly on me, / He will hike up his skirts to wade across the Zhen. / If he does not think of me, / Can it be that there are not others for me?” 711 Han Qi is saying that the incident of the jade and the warning implicit in You Ji’s recitation will ensure good relations between Jin and Zheng, in contrast to an empty celebration of amity that will not result in a good end. 712 Maoshi 90, “Feng yu” 風雨, 4D.179. The relevant lines are “Now that I have seen the noble son, / How could I not be eased?” 713 Maoshi 83, “You nü tongche” 有女同車, 4C.170–71. The relevant line is “Truly fine and elegant.” 714 Maoshi 85, “Tuo xi” 蘀兮, 4C.172–73. The relevant line is “Sing and I will harmonize.”

1536

Zuo Tradition

Now if you, sir, relying on our good relationships, come here to shame us, telling our humble settlement to seize something by force from a merchant, you will be teaching our settlement to turn its back on its covenants and vows. Would that be acceptable? You, sir, would certainly not want to obtain a jade but lose the princes’ allegiance. And indeed we would not want our tribute amounts, by the orders of the great domain, to have no set limits, for then Zheng would amount to a mere border settlement of Jin’s. If I present you with the jade, I do not know on what terms the deal will be completed. I presume to expound upon this privately.

Han Qic declined the jade and said, “For all my lack of talent, would I dare to cause two crimes by asking for a jade? I presume to decline it.” Han Qi’s visit to Zheng ends with an exchange of poetry recitations and gifts. His comments on the recitations recall Ji Zha’s comments on performances and individuals (Xiang 29.13). In traditional poetics, as in the “Great Preface” to the “Mao Commentary” on the Odes and in the “Canons of Yao” chapter of the Documents, the role of poetry (shi 詩) is to express “ambitions” or “intentions” (zhi 志). Here all the Zheng noblemen recite poems now included in the Zheng section of “Airs of the States,” the first of the four divisions of the Odes. And despite Confucius’ condemnation of the “sounds of Zheng” (Analects 15.11, 17.18), certain Zheng songs that read very much like love songs serve handily in diplomatic negotiations. This discrepancy between a Zuozhuan example and an Analects judgment suggests that the latter emphasizes the words of the pieces over their occasional function. In summer, in the fourth month, the six ministers of Zheng saw Han Qib off in the outskirts of the city. Han Qib said, “I request that you several noble men recite in turn, so that I may know Zheng’s ambitions.” Zichuo recited “In the Wilds There Are Creepers.”708 Han Qib said, “How excellent this young man is! There are hopes for us.” Zichan recited the Zheng “Lambskin Cloak.”709 Han Qib said, “I am not worthy.” You Jib recited “Hiking Up His Skirts.”710 Han Qib said, “While I am here, would I dare trouble you to go to others?” You Jib bowed. Han Qib said, “How excellent that you should speak of this! If not for this incident, would we have been able to reach a good end?”711 Si Yana recited “Wind and Rain.”712 Feng Shia recited “There Is a Woman Sharing the Carriage.”713 Yin Guia recited “Bark.”714

16.3d

Lord Zhao

1537

宣子喜，曰：「鄭其庶乎！二三君子以君命貺起，賦不出鄭志，皆 昵燕好也。二三君子，數世之主也，可以無懼矣。」 宣子皆獻馬焉，而賦〈我將〉。子產拜，使五卿皆拜，曰：「吾子靖 亂，敢不拜德！」 宣子私覲於子產以玉與馬，曰：「子命起舍夫玉，是賜我玉而免吾 死也，敢不藉手以拜！」 16.4(3) 公至自晉，子服昭伯語季平子曰：「晉之公室其將遂卑矣。君幼弱，六卿

彊而奢傲，將因是以習，習實為常，能無卑乎！」平子曰：「爾幼，惡識 國？」 16.5(4) 秋八月，晉昭公卒。 16.6(5) 九月，大雩，旱也。

鄭大旱，使屠擊、祝款、豎柎有事於桑山。斬其木，不雨。子產曰： 「有事於山，蓺山林也；而斬其木，其罪大矣。」奪之官邑。

16.7(6, 7)

1538

冬十月，季平子如晉葬昭公。平子曰：「子服回之言猶信。子服氏有子 哉！」

Zuo Tradition

Delighted, Han Qib said, “Zheng comes close to perfection! You several noblemen have entertained me at the command of your ruler. In not departing from the expressed intent of Zheng in your recitations, all of you showed intimacy and good cheer. You several noblemen are masters for several generations to come. You would be justified in having no fears.” Han Qib presented horses to all of them and recited “We Take.”715 Zichan bowed and had his five high ministers bow, saying, “With you, sir, calming disorder, should we presume not to bow in response to your virtuous generosity?” Han Qib saw Zichan privately, giving him jade and horses. Han Qi said, “By commanding me to give up that jade, you bestowed upon me something as valuable as jade and rescued me from death. Should I presume not to hold these things in my hands as I make my bow?” A young Lu nobleman predicts troubles for Jin. His views, at first rejected, are soon confirmed (see Zhao 16.7). When our lord arrived from Jin, Zifu Zhaobo said to Ji Pingzi, “The Jin Lord’s house is going to see decline.716 The ruler is young and weak, while the six high ministers are strong, extravagant, and overbearing. They will become accustomed to this situation, and what one is accustomed to will become regular practice. Can the lord’s house avoid a decline?” Ji Pingzic said, “You are young. What do you know about domains?”

16.4(3)

In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Zhao of Jin died.

16.5(4)

In the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice: this was because of a drought. There was a major drought in Zheng, and Tu Ji, the invocator Kuan, and the young servant Fu were made to offer sacrifices on Mount Sang.717 They cut down trees there, and it did not rain. Zichan said, “When a sacrifice is offered at a mountain, it is to cultivate the mountain forests, yet they cut down trees. Their crime is a serious one.” He removed them from their offices and confiscated their settlements.

16.6(5)

Zifu Zhaobo is vindicated (see Zhao 16.4). In winter, in the tenth month, Ji Pingzi went to Jin for the burial of Lord Zhao. Ji Pingzic said, “Zifu Zhaoboa’s words were accurate. The Zifu lineage has a fine son!”718

16.7(6, 7)

715 Maoshi 272, “Wo jiang” 我將, 19B.717–18. The poem describes the tireless work of the man who brings peace to the world and protects small domains. 716 Shuxiang made the same prediction in Zhao 3.3c. 717 The precise location of Mount Sang is not known. 718 The Zifu lineage is a branch of the Zhongsun or Meng lineage.

Lord Zhao

1539

春秋 17.1(1) 十有七年春，小邾子來朝。 17.2(2) 夏六月甲戌朔，日有食之。 17.3(3) 秋，郯子來朝。 17.4(4) 八月，晉荀吳帥師滅陸渾之戎。 17.5(5) 冬，有星孛于大辰。 17.6(6) 楚人及吳戰于長岸。

左傳 17.1(1) 十七年春，小邾穆公來朝，公與之燕。季平子賦〈釆叔〉，穆公賦〈菁菁

者莪〉。昭子曰：「不有以國，其能久乎？」

719 The dating of the eclipse is apparently mistaken. According to Yang (4:1383), it took place in the ninth month, not in the sixth. 720 Chang’an 長岸 was a stretch of the Yangzi River just southwest of present-day Dangtu County 當塗縣, Anhui, about 600 kilometers east-northeast of the Chu capital and about 200 kilometers west-northwest of the Wu capital. This would have been a water battle.

1540

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 17 (525 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventeenth year, in spring, the Master of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court. In summer, in the sixth month, on the jiaxu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.719

17.1(1)

17.2(2)

In autumn, the Master of Tan came to visit our court.

17.3(3)

In the eighth month, Xun Wu (Zhonghang Wu) of Jin led out troops and extinguished the Rong of Luhun.

17.4(4)

In winter, there was a star that became indistinct in Dachen.

17.5(5)

Chu leaders did battle with Wu at Chang’an.720

17.6(6)

ZUO

The Zhu ruler’s skillful response to an Odes recitation prompts a positive assessment from a Lu observer. In the seventeenth year, Lord Mu of Lesser Zhu came to visit our court. Our lord feasted him. Ji Pingzi recited “Gathering Plants” and Lord Mu recited “Luxuriant Is the Tarragon.”721 Shusun Chuoc said, “If he did not have the wherewithal to rule his domain, how could he have lasted so long?”722

17.1(1)

721 The first poem is Maoshi 222, “Caishu” 采菽, 15A.499–503; it is also cited at Xiang 11.5b. The relevant lines are “When the noble man comes to court, / What should we give him?” The second poem is Maoshi 176, “Jingjing zhe e” 菁 菁者莪, 10A.353–54. The relevant lines are “Now that we have seen the noble man, / We take pleasure and maintain our demeanour.” 722 Du Yu (ZZ 48.834) explains that Lord Mu’s choice of recitation shows his moral excellence. Lord Mu visited Lu in Xiang 7.4 and has thus ruled his domain for at least forty-two years.

Lord Zhao

1541

17.2(2) 夏六月甲戌朔，日有食之。祝史請所用幣。昭子曰：「日有食之，天子不

舉，伐鼓於社；諸侯用幣於社，伐鼓於朝，禮也。」平子禦之，曰：「止 也。唯正月朔，慝未作，日有食之，於是乎有伐鼓、用幣，禮也。其餘則 否。」大史曰：「在此月也。日過分而未至，三辰有災，於是乎百官降物； 君不舉，辟移時；樂奏鼓，祝用幣，史用辭。故《夏書》曰：『辰不集于 房，瞽奏鼓，嗇夫馳，庶人走』，此月朔之謂也。當夏四月，是謂孟夏。」 平子弗從。昭子退，曰：「夫子將有異志，不君君矣。」

723 Ji Pingzi and the scribe appear to have different interpretations of the term “first month” or, in the original, month of “correction” or “regulation” (zhengyue 正月). Normally, zhengyue is the first month of the lunar year, and that is how Ji Pingzi understands it. Since this eclipse occurs in the sixth month of the Zhou calendar, he does not regard it as proper to offer sacrifices in response. The grand scribe counters by offering a special alternative explanation of zhengyue, according to which

1542

Zuo Tradition

The following passage contains a discussion of the proper ritual responses to solar eclipses, with a prediction of Ji Pingzi’s future opposition to the Lu ruler. Ji Pingzi’s unwillingness to conduct the appropriate sacrifices shows that he will refuse to restore the proper hierarchy of lord and subject. In Zhao 25.6, Lord Zhao is forced into exile, and Ji Pingzi seizes de facto control of the Lu government. In summer, in the sixth month, on the jiaxu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. The invocators and scribes asked what sacrificial goods should be used. Shusun Chuoc said, “When there is an eclipse of the sun, the Son of Heaven does not dine with full ceremony, and he has drums struck at the altar of earth. The princes offer sacrificial goods at their altars of earth, and they have drums struck in court. That is in accordance with ritual propriety.” Ji Pingzic forbade it. “Stop. It is only when there is an eclipse of the sun on the first day of the first month, before the adverse forces have begun their rise, that beating drums and offering sacrificial goods is in accordance with ritual propriety. At other times it is improper.”723 The grand scribe said, “It is in this month. The sun has passed the equinox but has not reached the solstice, and there are catastrophes among the three heavenly bodies.724 Under these circumstances, the many officials should adopt less sumptuous regalia. The ruler should not mount full banquets and should absent himself from his chambers during the time of the eclipse. The musicians should beat the drums, the invocators should offer sacrificial goods, and the scribes should offer expiatory words. Thus, the Xia Documents says, ‘When the heavenly bodies do not settle in their proper places, the blind musicians strike the drums, the district officers hurry about, and the commoners run.’ This refers to the first day of the month. It corresponds to the fourth month of the Xia calendar, which was called early summer.” Ji Pingzic did not follow this advice. Withdrawing, Shusun Chuoc said, “This man is going to have rebellious ambitions. He no longer treats his ruler as a ruler.”725

17.2(2)

this is the “the month of perfect yang” (zhengyang zhi yue 正陽之月), that is, the month of the summer solstice, or the sixth Zhou month. As Yang (4:1384) notes, the Odes offers some evidence that the scribe’s interpretation of the term zhengyue is correct. An eclipse at the supposed height of the yang forces would indeed constitute an ill omen and require full ritual response. 724 The three heavenly bodies are the sun, the moon, and the stars. 725 As Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 48.835) explains, the way that yin encroaches upon yang during a solar eclipse is a celestial image of the subject Ji Pingzi’s gradual usurpation of his ruler Lord Zhao’s powers.

Lord Zhao

1543

17.3(3) 秋，郯子來朝，公與之宴。昭子問焉，曰：「少皞氏鳥名官，何故也？」郯

子曰：「吾祖也，我知之。昔者黃帝氏以雲紀，故為雲師而雲名；炎帝氏 以火紀，故為火師而火名；共工氏以水紀，故為水師而水名；大皞氏以 龍紀，故為龍師而龍名。我高祖少皞摯之立也，鳳鳥適至，故紀於鳥， 為鳥師而鳥名：鳳鳥氏，歷正也；玄鳥氏，司分者也；伯趙氏，司至者也； 青鳥氏，司啟者也；丹鳥氏，司閉者也。祝鳩氏，司徒也；雎鳩氏，司馬 也；鳲鳩氏，司空也。爽鳩氏，司寇也；鶻鳩氏，司事也。五鳩，鳩民者 也。五雉為五工正，利器用、正度量，夷民者也。九扈為九農正，扈民無 淫者也。自顓頊以來，不能紀遠，乃紀於近。為民師而命以民事，則不能 故也。」 仲尼聞之，見於郯子而學之。既而告人曰：「吾聞之：『天子失官， 官學在四夷』，猶信。」

726 The Flaming Emperor (Yandi 炎帝) was also known as Shennong or the Divine Farmer. 727 Taihao, also known as Fuxi, was one of the legendary predynastic sage-kings. In later myths he would be associated with the goddess Nüwa and the creation of the world. Cf. Zhao 29.4a, with its legends of dragon husbandry. 728 The Falcons (shuangjiu 爽鳩) are mentioned at Zhao 20.8 as once having ruled over the territory of Qi. 729 According to Jia Kui and others cited by Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 48.837), the five types are workers of wood, clay, metal, leather, and color.

1544

Zuo Tradition

During a visit to the Lu court, the ruler of the small non-Zhou domain of Tan discourses on the history of administrative systems and earns praise from Confucius. The passage recalls other episodes in which representatives of non-Sinitic groups show their wisdom and propriety (Xi 29.4, Xiang 14.1b). In autumn, the Master of Tan came to visit our court. The lord held a feast for him. Shusun Chuoc asked him, “The lineage of Shaohao named its offices for birds. Why is that?” The Master of Tan said, “He was my ancestor; I know about this. Long ago, the lineage of the Yellow Emperor took clouds as its guide in regulating affairs and therefore established cloud masters who were named for clouds. The lineage of the Flaming Emperor took fire as its guide and therefore established fire masters who were named for fires.726 The lineage of Gonggong took water as its guide and therefore established water masters who were named for waters. The lineage of Taihao had dragons as its guide and therefore established dragon masters who were named for dragons.727 Just at the moment when my distant ancestor Shaohao Zhi was established as ruler, a phoenix appeared, so he took birds as his guide and established bird masters who were named for birds. The Phoenixes were regulators of the calendar. The Swallows were supervisors of the equinoxes. The Shrikes were supervisors of the solstices. The Orioles were supervisors of the opening of the seasons. The Pheasants were supervisors of the close of seasons. The Snipes were supervisors of conscripts. The Ospreys were supervisors of the military. The Cuckoos were supervisors of works. The Falcons were supervisors of corrections.728 The Turtledoves were supervisors of affairs. These last five birds, all of the jiu variety, were for gathering ( jiu) the people. Five types of pheasants were leaders for the five types of artisans;729 making objects useful and establishing measures, they created common standards for the people. Nine birds, all of the hu variety, were leaders of the nine agricultural activities, and they stopped (hu) people from committing any excesses. Since the time of Zhuanxu, no one has been able to take distant things as guides, so they have taken things near at hand. Being unable to follow the earlier practice, they have established masters for the people and named them for the affairs of the people.” Hearing of this, Confuciusc had an audience with the Master of Tan and studied these things. Afterward, he told others, “I have heard that ‘when the Son of Heaven has lost his officials,730 knowledge about the officials remains among the aliens of the four quarters.’731 This is still credible.”

17.3(3)

730 The use of this phrase (shi guan 失官) at Zhao 9.5 indicates that “losing officials” is forgetting proper knowledge and execution of their duties. 731 A slightly different version of the saying is attributed to Confucius in Hanshu 30.1746.

Lord Zhao

1545

17.4(4) 晉侯使屠蒯如周，請有事於雒與三塗。萇弘謂劉子曰：「客容猛，非祭

也，其伐戎乎！陸渾氏甚睦於楚，必是故也。君其備之！」乃警戎備。九 月丁卯，晉荀吳帥師涉自棘津，使祭史先用牲于雒。陸渾人弗知，師從 之。庚午，遂滅陸渾，數之以其貳於楚也。陸渾子奔楚，其眾奔甘鹿。周 大獲。 宣子夢文公攜荀吳而授之陸渾，故使穆子帥師，獻俘于文宮。 17.5(5) 冬，有星孛于大辰，西及漢。申須曰：「彗所以除舊布新也。天事恆象，

今除於火，火出必布焉，諸侯其有火災乎！」

732 For Mount Santu, see Zhao 4.1b. It was about 70 kilometers southwest of the Zhou capital, along the Yi River. 733 For details on the Rong of Luhun, see Xi 22.4. 734 Several commentators (cited in Yang, 4:1389–90), locate the Ji Ford 棘津 about 40 kilometers to the northeast of present-day Kaifeng, Henan. However, Jiang Yong 江 永 (1681–1762) notes that this would put the ford far to the east of Luhun territory, and he argues that the ford referred to here was the Meng Ford 孟津, just north of the Zhou capital. 735 Ganlu 甘鹿 was about 35 kilometers south of the Zhou capital, just northwest of present-day Song County 嵩縣. 736 This success was a consequence of Chang Hong’s foresight and the preparations he had urged the Liu Duke to make.

1546

Zuo Tradition

Using a sacrificial expedition as a pretext, Jin mounts a surprise attack on the Luhun lineage of the non-Sinitic Rong, who were relocated by Qin and Jin in Xi 22.4. The foresight of Chang Hong allows Zhou to benefit from the Luhun lineage’s disaster. The Prince of Jin sent the master chef Kuai to Zhou to request that he offer sacrifices at the Luo River and Mount Santu.732 Chang Hong said to the Liu Duke Xianb, “The visitor’s expression is fierce. Their aim is not sacrifice. They are going to attack the Rong. The Luhun lineage is very close to Chu. This must be the reason.733 You, my lord, should be prepared for it.” They therefore put their forces on alert. In the ninth month, on the dingmao day (24), Zhonghang Wub of Jin led his troops and crossed the Yellow River at the Ji Ford,734 sending the sacrifice functionaries ahead to offer their victims at the Luo River. The Luhun leaders did not discover the deception, and the Jin army pursued them. As a result, they destroyed the Luhun on the gengwu day (27), rebuking them for having shifted their allegiance to Chu. The chief of the Luhun fled to Chu, while his multitudes fled to Ganlu.735 Zhou captured many of them.736 Han Qib had dreamed that Lord Wen took Zhonghang Wub by the hand and gave him the Luhun, so he had Zhonghang Wuf lead the army and present the prisoners at the temple of Lord Wen.

17.4(4)

A comet prompts predictions of fire from the Lu high officers Shen Xu and Zi Shen and from the Zheng high officer Pi Zao. In keeping with his general reluctance to sponsor special or luxurious religious ceremonies, Zichan refuses to make a propitiatory offering. The predictions are fulfilled in Zhao 18.3. In winter, there was a star that became indistinct in Dachen and swept west as far as the Celestial Han River.737 Shen Xu said, “A comet, or broom-star, is for sweeping away the old and spreading out the new.738 Events in heaven are regularly signified in images. Now that the Fire Star is being swept away, when Fire reappears it is bound to be spread abroad.739 The princes will likely suffer conflagrations!”

17.5(5)

737 Dachen was also known as “Great Fire.” It was the Jupiter station that corresponded to Song. See Pankenier, “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology,” 265. The Celestial Han River is our Milky Way. 738 Compare Yan Ying’s explanation of comets at Zhao 26.10. 739 The light of the comet obscures Dachen, or Great Fire, and therefore appears to “sweep it away,” spreading the fire to other regions of heaven and their corresponding domains on earth.

Lord Zhao

1547

梓慎曰：「往年吾見之，是其徵也。火出而見，今茲火出而章，必火 入而伏，其居火也久矣，其與不然乎？火出，於夏為三月，於商為四月， 於周為五月。夏數得天，若火作，其四國當之，在宋、衛、陳、鄭乎！宋， 大辰之虛也；陳，大皞之虛也；鄭，祝融之虛也，皆火房也。星孛及漢， 漢，水祥也。衛，顓頊之虛也，故為帝丘，其星為大水，水，火之牡也。其 以丙子若壬午作乎！水火所以合也。若火入而伏，必以壬午，不過其見 之月。」 鄭裨灶言於子產曰：「宋、衛、陳、鄭將同日火。若我用瓘斝玉瓚， 鄭必不火。」子產弗與。 17.6(6) 吳伐楚，陽匄為令尹，卜戰，不吉。司馬子魚曰：「我得上流，何故不吉？

且楚故，司馬令龜，我請改卜。」令曰：「魴也以其屬死之，楚師繼之，尚 大克之！」吉。戰于長岸，子魚先死，楚師繼之，大敗吳師，獲其乘舟餘 皇。使隨人與後至者守之，環而塹之，及泉，盈其隧炭，陳以待命。

740 Dachen would cease to be visible in autumn. 741 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.839), Wei’s constellation was Yingshi 營室, which corresponded to water. 742 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.839), bing and ren among the ten Heavenly Stems correspond to fire, while zi and wu among the twelve Earthly Branches correspond to water. Thus, bingzi and renwu are days when fire and water are paired. 743 The bingzi day and the renwu day are the thirteenth and the nineteenth in the sexagenary cycle, respectively. In the coming year, a bingzi day will fall on the seventh day of the fifth month, while a renwu day will fall on the thirteenth day. Shen Xu appears to reason that the fires will come as late as possible in the fifth month, that is, on the renwu day, and will not wait until the subsequent bingzi day, which would fall in the seventh month. 744 It may be significant that the name of the boat includes the graph huang 皇, “august,” a word often connected with supernatural entities, such as Heaven. 745 These measures, designed to keep Wu forces from retaking the boat, may also be intended to have some magical effect.

1548

Zuo Tradition

Zi Shen said, “I saw it last year. This is the omen that confirms it. It was visible then when Fire appeared, and this year it was very bright when Fire appeared. It is bound to disappear when Fire sinks below the horizon. Could it be otherwise, since it has dwelt in Fire for so long?740 Fire’s appearance is in the third month by the Xia calendar, the fourth month by the Shang calendar, and the fifth month by the Zhou calendar. The Xia numbering of the months corresponds to Heaven’s. If the fires start, four domains will likely suffer the consequences: Song, Wei, Chen, and Zheng! For Song is the territory corresponding to Dachen, Chen is the territory corresponding to Taihao, and Zheng is the territory corresponding to Zhurong. All are lodgings of fire. The comet reaches as far as the Celestial Han, and the Han is an omen of water. Wei is the territory corresponding to Zhuanxu and is therefore Diqiu, or the Emperor’s Hillock. Its constellation is Great Water, and water is the male to fire’s female.741 The fires will start on the bingzi day or the renwu day, for these are the days when water and fire overlap.742 If the comet disappears when Fire sinks below the horizon, then the fires will certainly start on the renwu day; it will not come later than the month in which Fire first appears.”743 Pi Zao of Zheng said to Zichan, “Song, Wei, Chen, and Zheng will have fires on the same day. If we offer a pouring vessel and a jade ladle, Zheng is certain not to have a fire.” Zichan would not provide these things. In skirmishing between Chu and Wu, a Chu commander dies to secure an auspicious divination, and the armies battle over a sacred Wu boat. Wu attacked Chu. When Yang Gai, as chief minister, divined by turtle shell about doing battle, it was not auspicious. The supervisor of the military Gongzi Fanga said, “We have the advantage of being upstream. Why should this be inauspicious? Moreover, according to the longstanding practice in Chu, it is the supervisor of the military who addresses commands to the turtle shell. I request to perform the divination again.” He addressed this command to the turtle shell: “If I die in this battle along with my followers, but the Chu army continues the fight, may we still defeat them soundly!” The result was auspicious. They did battle at Chang’an. Gongzi Fanga died first, then the Chu army came after, roundly defeating the Wu army and capturing their boat, the Yuhuang.744 They had the men of Sui and latecomers guard the boat; they dug a ditch all the way around it as deep as the groundwaters, then filled the entrances of the ditch with charcoal and stood in formation to await their orders.745

17.6(6)

Lord Zhao

1549

吳公子光請於其眾，曰：「喪先王之乘舟，豈唯光之罪？眾亦有 焉。請藉取之以救死。」眾許之。使長鬣者三人潛伏於舟側，曰：「我呼 餘皇，則對。師夜從之。」三呼，皆迭對。楚人從而殺之。楚師亂，吳人大 敗之，取餘皇以歸。

春秋 18.1(2) 十有八年春王三月，曹伯須卒。 18.2(3) 夏五月壬午，宋、衛、陳、鄭災。 18.3(4) 六月，邾人入鄅。 18.4(5) 秋，葬曹平公。 18.5(7) 冬，許遷于白羽。

左傳 18.1 十八年春王二月乙卯，周毛得殺毛伯過、而代之。萇弘曰：「毛得必亡。

是昆吾稔之日也，侈故之以。而毛得以濟侈於王都，不亡，何待？」 18.2(1) 三月，曹平公卒。

746 The response of the strongmen, which would have seemed to emanate from the sacred boat itself, was apparently intended to spook the Chu army. 747 Yu was north of present-day Linyi, Shandong, about 130 kilometers and about 115 kilometers east-southeast of the Lu capital and the Zhu capital, respectively.

1550

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Guang of Wu presented a request to his rank and file, saying, “How could the loss of the boat of our former kings be my fault alone? The rank and file also bear some responsibility for it. I beg to rely on you all in retaking it, so that we may be saved from death.” The rank and file agreed to this. He sent three strongmen to lie hidden in the water beside the boat and said, “When we shout ‘Yuhuang,’ you respond. The army will then follow you in by night.” Three times they shouted, and the strongmen responded in turn.746 The men of Chu tracked them down and killed them. But the Chu army was nonetheless thrown into turmoil, and the men of Wu roundly defeated them, retaking Yuhuang and returning home. LORD ZHAO 18 (524 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal third month, Xu, the Liege of Cao, died. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renwu day (13), there were disastrous fires in Song, Wei, Chen, and Zheng.

18.1(2)

18.2(3)

In the sixth month, Zhu leaders entered Yu.747

18.3(4)

In autumn, Lord Ping of Cao was buried.

18.4(5)

In winter, Xǔ was relocated to Baiyu.

18.5(7)

ZUO

Deadly infighting occurs among the Maos, a noble lineage in the Zhou royal territory. In the eighteenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the yimao day (15), Mao De of Zhou killed the Mao Liege Guo and took his place. Chang Hong said, “Mao De is certain to go into exile. This is the day on which Kunwu reached the height of excess on account of his immoderate behavior.748 If Mao De succeeds in his own immoderate ways on this day in the royal city, what can he expect other than to go into exile?”749

18.1

In the third month, Lord Ping of Cao died.

18.2(1)

748 Kunwu was an ancient ruler, perhaps a contemporary and abettor of the depraved last king of the Xia dynasty; see Du Yu’s commentary (ZZ 25.426) on the “five overlords” in Cheng 2.3f. The Kong Yingda commentary to the “Oath of Tang” chapter of Documents (8.108; cited in Yang, 4:1394) states that Kunwu and Jie died together on the yimao day. Kunwu is referred to at Zhao 12.11 as an ancestor of the Chu kings. 749 Chang Hong suggests that because of its historical associations, the day yimao is an especially inauspicious day for Mao De’s crime. Mao De leaves Zhou for Chu in Zhao 26.9.

Lord Zhao

1551

18.3a(2) 夏五月，火始昏見。丙子，風。梓慎曰：「是謂融風，火之始也；七日，其

火作乎！」戊寅，風甚。壬午，大甚。宋、衛、陳、鄭皆火。梓慎登大庭氏 之庫以望之，曰：「宋、衛、陳、鄭也。」數日皆來告火。 裨竈曰：「不用吾言，鄭又將火。」鄭人請用之，子產不可。子大叔 曰：「寶以保民也，若有火，國幾亡。可以救亡，子何愛焉？」子產曰：「天 道遠，人道邇，非所及也，何以知之？竈焉知天道？是亦多言矣，豈不或 信？」遂不與。亦不復火。 18.3b 鄭之未災也，里析告子產曰：「將有大祥，民震動，國幾亡。吾身泯焉，

弗良及也。國遷，其可乎？」子產曰：「雖可，吾不足以定遷矣。」及火， 里析死矣，未葬，子產使輿三十人遷其柩。

750 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.840), the “melting” wind was the northeast wind; since northeast corresponded to wood among the Five Resources, and since wood was the mother to fire, this wind could be called the “beginning of fire.”

1552

Zuo Tradition

Catastrophic fires start, as predicted in Zhao 17.5. Zichan’s exemplary handling of the fires in Zheng recalls the measures taken by the Song minister Yue Xi in Xiang 9.1 and anticipates Zichan’s own refusal to offer sacrifices to battling dragons in Zhao 19.10. Both men conduct only the basic propitiatory rituals, emphasizing instead the practical aspects of firefighting. In summer, in the fifth month, the Fire Star first became visible at evening. On the bingzi day (7), a wind blew. Zi Shen said, “This is known as the melting wind, the beginning of fire.750 On the seventh day from now the fires will start.” On the wuyin day (9) of the month, the wind was very strong. On the renwu day (13), it was extremely strong. There were fires in Song, Wei, Chen, and Zheng. Zi Shen ascended the Dating lineage’s storehouse to view the fires and said, “They are in Song, Wei, Chen, and Zheng.” Several days afterward all these domains reported the fires. Pi Zao said, “If you do not take my advice, there will be fires in Zheng again.” The Zheng leaders requested that his advice be followed, but Zichan would not permit it. You Jib said, “Valuable objects are for preserving the people. If there is a fire, the domain will be in danger of falling. If we can use valuable objects to save us from falling, why begrudge them?” Zichan said, “The Way of Heaven is far away, while the Way of men is near at hand, and it does not have access to the former. How can we know anything of it? How can you know the Way of Heaven? In truth this fellow only talks a lot.751 Why should he not be right once in a while as luck would have it?” So he did not provide the objects, and indeed the fires did not recur.

18.3a(2)

Before the conflagration in Zheng, Li Xi reported to Zichan,752 “There will be a great omen, the people will be shaken, and the domain will be in danger of falling. I myself will have died; I will not be able to last very long. What if we were to relocate the capital?” Zichan said, “Although that would work, I am not up to the task of settling a relocated people.” By the time of the fire, Li Xi had died but had not yet been buried. Zichan had thirty bearers relocate his coffin.

18.3b

751 Likewise, Confucius characterizes Zigong as “talking a lot” or being “a man of many words” (duoyan 多言) when Zigong makes an accurate prediction at Ding 15.3. Zichan’s skepticism about the possibility of knowing the Way of Heaven may well reflect the tendency in later Warring States thought to see Heaven as independent of the human world. See, e.g., Graham, Disputers of the Tao, 213–15. 752 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.841), Li Xi was a Zheng high officer.

Lord Zhao

1553

火作，子產辭晉公子、公孫于東門，使司寇出新客，禁舊客勿出於 宮。使子寬、子上巡群屏攝，至于大宮。使公孫登徙大龜，使祝史徙主 祏於周廟，告於先君。使府人、庫人各儆其事。商成公儆司宮，出舊宮 人，寘諸火所不及。司馬、司寇列居火道，行火所焮。城下之人伍列登 城。明日，使野司寇各保其徵，郊人助祝史，除於國北，禳火于玄冥、回 祿，祈于四鄘。書焚室而寬其征，與之材。三日哭，國不市。使行人告於 諸侯。宋、衛皆如是。陳不救火，許不弔災，君子是以知陳、許之先亡也。 18.4(3) 六月，鄅人藉稻，邾人襲鄅。鄅人將閉門，邾人羊羅攝其首焉，遂入之，

盡俘以歸。鄅子曰：「余無歸矣。」從帑於邾，邾莊公反鄅夫人，而舍 其女。

753 Yang (4:1395) points out that although Jin was to the north and west of Zheng, the east gate of the Zheng capital appears to have been its main gate; the other gates of the city are never mentioned. 754 Both You Su and Zishang are Zheng high officers. 755 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.842), Xuanming was a water spirit, Huilu a fire spirit. 756 Chen is extinguished by Chu in Ai 17.4; Xǔ by Zheng in Ding 6.1.

1554

Zuo Tradition

When the fires started, Zichan bade farewell to the Jin noble sons and grandsons at the east gate.753 He had the supervisor of corrections send away newly arrived visitors, and he barred visitors who had arrived long before from leaving their residences. He had You Sua and Zishang patrol the sacrificial venues, including the Great Temple.754 He had Gongsun Deng move the great turtle shell, and he had the invocators and scribes move the stone arks for the ancestral tables to the Zhou Temple, where they made report to the former rulers. He had the personnel of the treasuries and storehouses take extra care in their duties. Shang Chenggong cautioned the supervisor of the palace, who brought out the old palace women and put them where the fire would not reach them. The supervisor of the military and the supervisor of corrections took up positions along the path of the fire, going wherever the fire had burned. People from below the city wall formed up in brigades to mount the wall. On the following day, Zichan had the supervisor of corrections in the outlying regions protect their conscripted forces, while the people who lived in the outskirts helped the invocators and scribes to clear a sacrificial place north of the capital, where fire was exorcised with addresses to Xuanming and Huilu.755 Prayers were made on the four sides of the city walls. Records were kept of the houses that had burned, and the owners were given tax relief and gifts of building materials. For three days there was wailing and the city markets did not open, and envoys were sent to report to the princes. Song and Wei both did the same things. Chen did not fight the fires and Xǔ did not offer condolences to the domains that had suffered conflagrations. From this the noble man knew that Chen and Xǔ would fall first.756 Zhu annihilates the smaller domain of Yu. In the sixth month, when the Yu leaders were inspecting the rice paddies,757 the men of Zhu made a surprise attack on Yu. One Yu leader was going to close the city gate, but a Zhu man, Yang Luo, jammed his head in the way of the closing gate,758 and as a result the men of Zhu entered the city, made prisoners of everyone, and took them back with them. The Master of Yu said, “I have nowhere to go.” He followed his household to Zhu, where Lord Zhuang of Zhu returned the Lady of Yu to him, but kept his daughter in lodgings.759

18.4(3)

757 Or “imposing a tax on rice paddies.” The meaning of jie dao 藉稻 is uncertain. 758 See Takezoe, 24.5. Du Yu (ZZ 48.842) and others argue that Yang Luo seized a defender’s head and held it in the way of the closing gate. 759 That is, the Lord of Zhu kept the daughter in his own household.

Lord Zhao

1555

18.5(4) 秋，葬曹平公。往者見周原伯魯焉，與之語，不說學。歸以語閔子馬。閔

子馬曰：「周其亂乎！夫必多有是說，而後及其大人。大人患失而惑，又 曰：『可以無學，無學不害。』不害而不學，則苟而可，於是乎下陵上 替，能無亂乎？夫學，殖也。不學，將落，原氏其亡乎！」 18.6a 七月，鄭子產為火故，大為社，祓禳於四方，振除火災，禮也。乃簡兵大

蒐，將為蒐除。子大叔之廟在道南，其寢在道北，其庭小，過期三日，使 除徒陳於道南廟北，曰：「子產過女，而命速除，乃毀於而鄉。」子產朝， 過而怒之。除者南毀。子產及衝，使從者止之曰：「毀於北方。」 18.6b 火之作也，子產授兵登陴。子大叔曰：「晉無乃討乎？」子產曰：「吾聞

之：小國忘守則危，況有災乎？國之不可小，有備故也。」既，晉之邊吏

760 The son of the Yuan Liege Lu is put to death in Zhao 29.2. 761 That is, by placing the workers as he had, You Ji led Zichan to order the destruction of the living quarters instead of the more precious shrine or, worse yet, both buildings. 762 Cheng 9.10b makes a similar point.

1556

Zuo Tradition

Learning of a Zhou nobleman who has no taste for studying, a Lu observer discourses upon the importance of study and predicts trouble in Zhou. In autumn, Lord Ping of Cao was buried. A Lu man who attended the burial had an audience with the Yuan Liege Lu of Zhou and spoke with him. The Yuan Liege took no delight in the study of proper behavior. On returning to Lu this man told Min Mafua. Min Mafua said, “Zhou will suffer disorders! There are bound to be many who have this same sort of taste, and then it will affect the senior leaders. The senior leaders, though they worry about failure, are confused, and they even say, ‘One may do without studying. It does no harm to do without studying.’ If they do not study, thinking that it does no harm, then they will consider carelessness acceptable, and with this inferiors will be offensive while superiors will be lax. Can there not be disorder? To study is to cultivate a plant. When one does not study, the plant loses its leaves. The Yuan lineage will fall!”760

18.5(4)

Further details on Zheng’s response to the fires are given. In an echo of an earlier scene (Zhao 12.2), You Ji strategizes to keep his Ancestral Temple from being demolished to make way for a government-ordered road. In the seventh month, on account of the fires, Zichan of Zheng made a great altar of earth and performed exorcisms in the four directions to ward off conflagration. This was in accordance with ritual propriety. He then selected the troops for a grand military review and was about to clear a space for the review. You Jib’s ancestral shrine was to the south of the intended path and his living quarters to the north of the path, and the courtyard between them was small. The deadline for clearing was three days past when You Jib ordered his workers to line up on the south side of the path, on the north side of the shrine, and said, “When Zichan visits you and orders you to proceed rapidly with the clearing, pull down this building that you are facing.” Zichan visited on his way to court and was angry with them. The workers began to pull down the building to the south. When Zichan reached the crossroads, he had one of his retinue stop them, saying, “Pull down the building to the north.”761

18.6a

When the fires started, Zichan handed out weapons and mounted the ramparts. You Jib said, “Won’t Jin chastise us?” Zichan said, “I have heard that ‘when a small domain forgets to defend itself, it is in danger.’762 How much more so when there is a conflagration? Our domain is not to be considered a small one, because it has made defensive preparations.” Afterward, Jin’s border officials rebuked Zheng, saying,

18.6b

Lord Zhao

1557

讓鄭曰：「鄭國有災，晉君、大夫不敢寧居，卜筮走望，不愛牲玉。鄭之有 災，寡君之憂也。今執事撊然授兵登陴，將以誰罪？邊人恐懼，不敢不 告。」 子產對曰：「若吾子之言，敝邑之災，君之憂也。敝邑失政，天降 之災，又懼讒慝之間謀之，以啟貪人，荐為敝邑不利，以重君之憂。幸而 不亡，猶可說也；不幸而亡，君雖憂之，亦無及也。鄭有他竟，望走在晉。 既事晉矣，其敢有二心？」 18.7(5) 楚左尹王子勝言於楚子曰：「許於鄭，仇敵也，而居楚地，以不禮於鄭。

晉、鄭方睦，鄭若伐許，而晉助之，楚喪地矣。君盍遷許。許不專於楚， 鄭方有令政，許曰：『余舊國也。』鄭曰：『余俘邑也。』葉在楚國，方城 外之蔽也。土不可易，國不可小，許不可俘，讎不可啟，君其圖之！」楚 子說。冬，楚子使王子勝遷許於析，實白羽。

763 Or, according to Gu Yanwu (cited in Yang, 4:1399), “If Zheng should have troubles on its other borders.” 764 Xǔ was relocated to the She region (Cheng 15.7) and was apparently restored there after the fall of King Ling of Chu (Zhao 13.5). For Xǔ’s many relocations, see Annals, Zhao 9.2, and n. 441. 765 The new location of Xi 析, called Baiyu 白羽 in the Annals above, was about 150 kilometers to the west, near the present-day city of Xishan, Henan.

1558

Zuo Tradition

“When there was a conflagration in the domain of Zheng, the ruler and high officers of Jin did not dare dwell at ease but divined with turtle shell and milfoil, hurried about performing prospect sacrifices, and begrudged neither sacrificial victim nor jade. Zheng’s conflagration was a sorrow for our unworthy ruler. Now that your functionaries have belligerently handed out weapons and mounted the ramparts, who are you trying to blame? We border keepers are fearful and dare not fail to make a report.” Zichan replied, “According to your remarks, sir, the conflagration in our humble settlement was a sorrow for your ruler. Because our humble settlement failed in governmental matters, Heaven sent down a conflagration. We feared that lying detractors might interfere and plot against us so as to lay us open to greedy parties, multiplying the disadvantages for our humble settlement and doubling your ruler’s sorrow. Since we were fortunate enough not to perish, our actions can still be explained. But if we had had the misfortune to perish, then even if your ruler felt sorrow about it, indeed it would be too late for him to change the outcome. Zheng has other borders;763 but it is Jin to whom we look, to whom we flee. Now that we are serving Jin, should we dare to have disloyal thoughts?” Hoping to maintain tighter control over Chu’s northern border regions and the territory abutting Zheng, the Chu leadership relocates the people of Xǔ. Conflict between Zheng and Xǔ began as early as Yin 11.3, when with the help of Qi and Lu, Zheng invaded Xǔ and annexed its capital. Wangzi Sheng fears that, with Xǔ now located in Chu territory lying close to Zheng, the old enmity will bring new conflict, and with Jin help Zheng will be able to seize more Chu land. By moving Xǔ and taking direct control of the She region, Chu will remove a potential source of conflict and consolidate its defenses in the key area beyond the Fangcheng barrier. Despite these measures, Zheng does ultimately attack and extinguish Xǔ; see Ding 6.1. In Chu, the deputy of the left, Wangzi Sheng, addressed the Master of Chu, saying, “Xǔ, as an enemy to Zheng, resides in Chu territory and in consequence does not treat Zheng with ritual propriety.764 Jin and Zheng are on good terms at present, and if Zheng should attack Xǔ with help from Jin, Chu will lose territory. Why not relocate Xǔ? If Xǔ is not held exclusively by Chu just now, when Zheng has an excellent administration, Xǔ will say, ‘This is our former capital,’ while Zheng will say, ‘This is a settlement that we captured.’ The She region will be in Chu proper, as a screen outside the Fangcheng barrier. Land cannot be regarded as a matter of little import. The domain of Zheng cannot be treated as a small one. Nor can the way be opened for our enemies. May the ruler consider it!” The Master of Chu was pleased. In winter, the Master of Chu had Wangzi Sheng relocate Xǔ to Xi, that is, Baiyu.765

18.7(5)

Lord Zhao

1559

春秋 19.1(3) 十有九年春，宋公伐邾。 19.2(4) 夏五月戊辰，許世子止弒其君買。 19.3 己卯，地震。 19.4(7) 秋，齊高發帥師伐莒。 19.5 冬，葬許悼公。

左傳 19.1 十九年春，楚工尹赤遷陰于下陰，令尹子瑕城郟。叔孫昭子曰：「楚不

在諸侯矣，其僅自完也，以持其世而已。」 19.2 楚子之在蔡也，郹陽封人之女奔之，生大子建。及即位，使伍奢為之師，

費無極為少師，無寵焉，欲譖諸王，曰：「建可室矣。」王為之聘於秦， 無極與逆，勸王取之。正月，楚夫人嬴氏至自秦。 19.3(1) 鄅夫人，宋向戌之女也，故向寧請師。二月，宋公伐邾，圍蟲。三月，取

之，乃盡歸鄅俘。

766 Du Yu (ZZ 45.778) identified the Yin with the Rong of Luhun (see Zhao 17.4), and Yang (4:1401) believes that the Yin referred to here may have been groups south of the Yi River and thus beyond the reach of Jin. Lower Yin 下陰 was located near present-day Guanghua 光化, Hubei, on the northern bank of the Han River, about 250 kilometers north-northeast of the Chu capital. 767 For Jia, see Zhao 1.13a. 768 King Ping, then known as Gongzi Qiji, ruled as a viceroy in Cai from Zhao 11.10 through the death of King Ling in Zhao 13.2. But a child conceived during those years would not be old enough to marry now, so Du Yu (ZZ 48.844) is probably correct in suggesting that the king sired Jian while visiting Cai on official business in his younger years. 769 Juyang 郹陽 was a Cai settlement, likely near present-day Xincai 新蔡, Henan. 770 Chong 蟲 was a Zhu settlement near present-day Jining 濟寧, Shandong, about 40 kilometers southwest of the Lu capital in the direction of the Song capital, which lay about 140 kilometers further to the southwest.

1560

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 19 (523 BCE) ANNALS

In the nineteenth year, in spring, the Duke of Song attacked Zhu. In summer, in the fifth month, on the wuchen day (5), the Xǔ heir apparent Zhi assassinated his ruler Mai.

19.1(3) 19.2(4)

On the jimao day (16), there was an earthquake.

19.3

In autumn, Gao Fa of Qi led out troops and attacked Ju.

19.4(7)

In winter, Lord Dao of Xǔ was buried.

19.5

ZUO

As Chu continues to make local administrative changes (see Zhao 18.7), a Lu observer sees no threat to the northern domains. In the nineteenth year, in spring, the Chu deputy for artisans Chi relocated the Yin to Lower Yin,766 and the chief minister Yang Gaia fortified Jia.767 Shusun Chuob said, “Chu is not paying sufficient attention to the princes. It is merely completing its defenses in order to protect itself through this generation.”

19.1

King Ping of Chu takes his son’s intended bride for himself, planting the seed for years of civil strife in Chu (see Zhao 19.6). When the Master of Chu was in Cai,768 the daughter of the sheriff of Juyang fled to him and bore him the heir apparent Jian.769 When the king acceded to his position, he appointed Wu She as the boy’s preceptor and Fei Wuji as his junior preceptor. Since Fei Wuji did not enjoy Jian’s favor, he wanted to malign him before the king, so he said, “Jian can now be given a wife.” When the king arranged for a bride for Jian from Qin, Fei Wujia went along to meet and escort her to Chu and then urged the king to take her for himself. In the first month, the Chu Lady Ying arrived from Qin.

19.2

Extinguished in the previous year (see Zhao 18.4), Yu is restored with the help of powerful allies in Song. The wife of the lord of Yu was a daughter of Xiang Xu of Song, so her brother Xiang Ning requested an army. In the second month, the Duke of Song attacked Zhu and laid siege to Chong.770 In the third month, he took the city and returned all the Yu prisoners.

19.3(1)

Lord Zhao

1561

19.4(2) 夏，許悼公瘧。五月戊辰，飲大子止之藥卒。大子奔晉。書曰「弒其君」，

君子曰：「盡心力以事君，舍藥物可也。」 19.5 邾人、郳人、徐人會宋公。乙亥，同盟于蟲。 19.6 楚子為舟師以伐濮。費無極言於楚子曰：「晉之伯也，邇於諸夏；而楚

辟陋，故弗能與爭。若大城城父，而寘大子焉，以通北方，王收南方，是 得天下也。」王說，從之。故大子建居于城父。 令尹子瑕聘于秦，拜夫人也。 19.7(4) 秋，齊高發帥師伐莒，莒子奔紀鄣。使孫書伐之。初，莒有婦人，莒子殺

其夫，已為嫠婦。及老，託於紀鄣，紡焉以度而去之。及師至，則投諸 外。或獻諸子占，子占使師夜縋而登。登者六十人，縋絕。師鼓譟，城上 之人亦譟。莒共公懼，啟西門而出。七月丙子，齊師入紀。

771 See Gongyang, Zhao 19 (23.292); Xinxu 7.222. 772 The noble man seems to suggest that the amateur need not meddle in medical matters, particularly when the death of the patient may arouse suspicions, as it does in this case. 773 On Ni, also known as Lesser Zhu, see Annals, Zhuang 5.3. 774 According to Du Yu (ZZ 48.844), this was the home of the Southern Yi and other non-Sinitic tribes, for example, the “Hundred Pu” of Wen 16.4 (see ZZ-Kong 20.347). The region was situated about 150 kilometers southwest of the Chu capital. 775 According to Yang (4:1402), this is not the Chengfu 城父 of Zhao 9.2 but was instead located to the east of present-day Baofeng 寶豐, Henan, more than 400 kilometers north of the Chu capital, on the southwest frontier of Zheng. 776 See Zhao 19.2, where the Chu king arranged to have a bride from Qin. 777 Jizhang 紀鄣 was on the seacoast about 75 kilometers southeast of the Ju capital. The latter was about 170 kilometers east of the Lu capital (see map 2). 778 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 48.845) identified this Ji with Jizhang.

1562

Zuo Tradition

In an unusual case, the Xǔ heir apparent Zhi is held responsible for murdering his father when in fact there is no way to prove that he was responsible. Both the Gongyang commentary and Xinxu represent Zhi as the filial son who goes into exile because he blames himself for negligence.771 In summer, Lord Dao of Xǔ was suffering from malaria. In the fifth month, on the wuchen day (5), he died after taking medicine provided by the heir apparent Zhi. The heir apparent then fled to Jin. The text says, “assassinated his ruler”; the noble man said, “If you devote all your thoughts and all your strength to serving your ruler, it is permissible to dispense with medicines.”772

19.4(2)

A Zhu leader, a Ni leader, and a Xu leader met with the Duke of Song.773 On the yihai day (12) of the fifth month, they swore a covenant together at Chong.

19.5

In a continuation of the story of the Chu heir Jian (see Zhao 19.2), the heir is put in charge of a northern city. As in the case of the Jin heir apparent Shensheng (see Zhuang 28.2), this assignment is part of a plot to demote the heir. The Master of Chu assembled a fleet of boats in order to make an attack on the Pu region.774 Fei Wuji addressed the Master of Chu and said, “In acting as overlord, Jin is close to the central domains, while Chu is remote and uncultivated and therefore cannot compete with Jin. We will acquire all-under-heaven if we build a great wall around Chengfu and install the heir apparent there, opening the way to the northern regions, while the king takes control of the southern regions.” Pleased, the king followed this advice. The heir apparent Jian therefore dwelt at Chengfu.775 The chief minister Yang Gaia made a diplomatic visit to Qin; this was to bow in gratitude for the king’s wife.776

19.6

A widow of Ju, exacting revenge on her murderous ruler, helps Qi invaders take the capital. In autumn, Gao Fa of Qi led out troops and attacked Ju, and the Master of Ju fled to Jizhang.777 Chen Shua was sent to attack him there. Earlier, a woman in Ju had been widowed when the Master of Ju killed her husband. Now an old woman, she had taken refuge in Jizhang. Making a rope to the measure of the city wall’s height, she concealed it, then threw it down when the army arrived. Someone gave Chen Shub the good news about the rope, and Chen Shub had troops climb the rope to the top of the wall by night. Sixty men climbed up before the rope broke. When the army beat its drums and made a clamor, the men atop the wall also did the same. Frightened, Lord Gong of Ju opened the western gate and fled. In the seventh month, on the bingzi day (14), the Qi army entered Ji.778

19.7(4)

Lord Zhao

1563

19.8 是歲也，鄭駟偃卒。子游娶於晉大夫，生絲，弱，其父兄立子瑕。子產憎

其為人也，且以為不順，弗許，亦弗止。駟氏聳。他日，絲以告其舅。冬， 晉人使以幣如鄭，問駟乞之立故。駟氏懼，駟乞欲逃，子產弗遣；請龜以 卜，亦弗予。大夫謀對，子產不待而對客曰：「鄭國不天，寡君之二三臣 札瘥夭昏，今又喪我先大夫偃。其子幼弱，其一二父兄懼隊宗主，私族 於謀，而立長親。寡君與其二三老曰：『抑天實剝亂是，吾何知焉？』諺 曰：『無過亂門』，民有亂兵，猶憚過之，而況敢知天之所亂？今大夫將 問其故，抑寡君實不敢知，其誰實知之？平丘之會，君尋舊盟曰：『無或 失職！』若寡君之二三臣，其即世者，晉大夫而專制其位，是晉之縣鄙 也，何國之為？」辭客幣而報其使，晉人舍之。

1564

Zuo Tradition

Zichan of Zheng establishes a successor for Zheng’s Si lineage, overcoming his own qualms about the chosen heir in order to support the decision of the Si lineage elders and fend off Jin interference. It was in this year that Si Yan of Zheng died. Si Yana had married a Jin high officer’s daughter, who had given birth to Si Si. He was still very young at this time. His elders established Si Qia as heir.779 Zichan, who disapproved of Si Qi’s character and also considered the move contrary to proper order, did not agree, but he also did nothing to stop it. The Si lineage was alarmed. Sometime later, Si Si reported this to his Jin uncle. In the winter, the Jin leaders sent an envoy with gifts to Zheng and asked the reasons for the establishment of Si Qi as heir. Members of the Si household lineage were again frightened, and Si Qi wanted to flee, but Zichan would not send him on his way. So Si Qi asked permission to perform a divination with the turtle shell, but Zichan would not give it to him. The high officers deliberated over the proper response, but Zichan, without waiting for them, replied to the visitor, saying, “The domain of Zheng lacks Heaven’s favor. Our unworthy ruler’s few good officials are afflicted with illness and die young, and now we have even lost our former high officer Si Yanb. His son being quite young, a few of his elders dreaded the fall of the ancestral successor, so they conducted deliberations among the members of their own house and established an older kinsman as heir.780 Our unworthy ruler and his few senior advisers said, ‘It would seem that Heaven is creating disorder here: what understanding can we have of it?’ The adage has it, ‘Never cross the threshold of a disordered house.’781 When there are disorderly troops among the people, we fear to cross past them. How much less should we then claim to understand a disorder brought by Heaven? Now that your high officers ask our rationale, since even our unworthy ruler does not claim to understand it, who could understand it? At the meeting at Pingqiu, our rulers renewed their old covenant, which said, ‘Let no one fail in his official duties.’782 If Jin high officers took control of choosing successors for any of our unworthy ruler’s officials who have died, then this would make us a mere dependent district of Jin. In what sense would we be a domain?”783 He declined the gifts and made the proper responses to the envoy. The Jin leaders set the matter aside.

19.8

779 Si Qi was a younger brother of Si Yan. 780 That is, instead of establishing Si Yan’s son Si Si as his successor, they chose Si Si’s “older kinsman,” his uncle Si Qi. 781 The saying is given in a different form in Zhao 22.2. 782 For the meeting at Pingqiu, see Zhao 13.3. 783 Zichan here echoes concerns he expressed in Zhao 16.3b, c.

Lord Zhao

1565

19.9 楚人城州來，沈尹戌曰：「楚人必敗。昔吳滅州來，子旗請伐之。王曰：

『吾未撫吾民。』今亦如之，而城州來以挑吳，能無敗乎？」侍者曰：「王 施舍不倦，息民五年，可謂撫之矣。」戌曰：「吾聞撫民者，節用於內，而 樹德於外，民樂其性，而無寇讎。今宮室無量，民人日駭，勞罷死轉，忘 寢與食，非撫之也。」 19.10 鄭大水，龍鬬于時門之外洧淵，國人請為禜焉。子產弗許，曰：「我鬬，

龍不我覿也；龍鬬，我獨何覿焉？禳之，則彼其室也。吾無求於龍，龍亦 無求於我。」乃止也。 19.11 令尹子瑕言蹶由於楚子，曰：「彼何罪？諺所謂『室於怒市於色』者，楚

之謂矣。舍前之忿可也。」乃歸蹶由。

784 Defeat comes at Zhao 23.5. 785 The Wei River passed south of the Zheng capital. The Shi Gate was the southern gate of the Zheng capital.

1566

Zuo Tradition

A Chu leader deplores the decision to provoke Wu by fighting to keep Zhoulai, recalling the king’s virtuous earlier refusal to do so (see Zhao 13.8) and pointing out his current failures. The men of Chu fortified Zhoulai. The governor of Shěn, Xu, said, “The men of Chu are bound to be defeated. In the past, when Wu extinguished Zhoulai, Dou Chengranb asked permission to attack them. But the king refused, saying, ‘We have not yet brought comfort to our people.’ Even though the situation is now the same, they are fortifying Zhoulai in order to provoke Wu. Can they fail to be defeated?”784 One of his attendants said, “The king is tireless in his generosity and he has let the people rest for five years. That can be considered bringing them comfort.” Xu said, “I have heard that one who brings comfort to the people is frugal in his expenditures at home, while he does his utmost to perform virtuous deeds abroad. The people then take pleasure in their way of life and there are no marauders or enemies. Now, however, no limits are set for the palaces and abodes, while the people pass their days in dread. They are exhausted from their toil, and when they die their corpses are pitched aside. They are forgetful even of sleeping and eating. This is not bringing them comfort.”

19.9

Zichan’s fundamentally pragmatic approach to policy was exemplified in his earlier response to the Zheng fires (Zhao 18.3), when he famously declared, “The Way of Heaven is far away, while the Way of men is near at hand.” Now Zichan refuses to take special religious measures in response to the appearance of dragons outside the Zheng capital. There was a great flood in Zheng, and dragons fought in the Wei pool outside the Shi Gate.785 The inhabitants of the capital asked permission to perform an expiatory sacrifice to them. Zichan would not permit it, saying, “When we fight, dragons take no notice of us, so why should we alone take notice when dragons fight? You might exorcise them, but then the water is their home. We have nothing to seek from dragons, and dragons likewise have nothing to seek from us.” They therefore gave up the idea.

19.10

Guiyou of Wu, who saved himself from death with a brilliant and courageous speech after being taken prisoner by Chu in Zhao 5.8, is now sent home. The chief minister Yang Gaia spoke to the Master of Chu about Guiyou, saying, “What crime has he committed? What Chu is doing now is what the adage refers to when it says, ‘Being angry with one’s family and showing it in the marketplace.’ It would be right to give up our earlier anger.” Guiyou was therefore sent home.

19.11

Lord Zhao

1567

春秋 20.1 二十年春，王正月。 20.2 夏，曹公孫會自鄸出奔宋。 20.3(4) 秋，盜殺衛侯之兄縶。 20.4(5) 冬十月，宋華亥、向寧、華定出奔陳。 20.5 十有一月辛卯，蔡侯廬卒。

左傳 20.1 二十年春王二月己丑，日南至。梓慎望氛，曰：「今茲宋有亂，國幾亡，三

年而後弭。蔡有大喪。」叔孫昭子曰：「然則戴、桓也。汏侈，無禮已甚， 亂所在也。」 20.2a 費無極言於楚子曰：「建與伍奢將以方城之外叛，自以為猶宋、鄭也，

齊、晉又交輔之，將以害楚，其事集矣。」王信之，問伍奢。伍奢對曰： 「君一過多矣，何信於讒？」

786 Gongsun Hui was a grandson of Lord Xuan of Cao and a son of Gongzi Xinshi, whose virtuous refusal to become ruler of Cao and flight to Song are recorded in Cheng 15.1. According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.852), Meng 鄸 was a city in Cao, about 20 kilometers northwest of the Cao capital; the Cao capital was at present-day Dingtao, Shandong.

1568

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 20 (522 BCE) ANNALS

The twentieth year, spring, the royal first month.

20.1

In summer, Gongsun Hui of Cao departed from Meng and fled to Song.786

20.2

In autumn, brigands killed Zhi, elder brother of the Prince of Wei.

20.3(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, Hua Hai, Xiang Ning, and Hua Ding of Song departed and fled to Chen.

20.4(5)

In the eleventh month, on the xinmao day (7), Lu, the Prince of Cai, died.

20.5

ZUO

Atmospheric conditions at the time of the winter solstice prompt predictions of trouble in Song and death in Cai. In the twentieth year, in spring, on the jichou day (1) of the royal second month, the sun reached the winter solstice. Zi Shen looked out at the vapors for portents and said, “This year there will be disorder in Song. The domain will come close to falling, and the troubles will end only after three years. There will be a great funeral in Cai.”787 Shusun Chuob said, “If so, then it will be the Dai and Huan lines that cause disorder in Song.788 Their excesses and impropriety have reached an extreme. Disorder has its place with them.”

20.1

In a continuation of the story of the heir Jian of Chu (see Zhao 19.6), the king has Jian’s tutor arrested, while Jian himself goes into exile. Fei Wuji spoke to the Master of Chu and said, “The heir apparent Jian and Wu She are going to make the territory outside Fangcheng their base and turn against us. They consider that territory the equivalent of Song or Zheng, and with Qi and Jin to support them they will use it to harm Chu. The affair has now come to a head.” Believing him, the king asked Wu She about it. Wu She replied, “It is enough that you erred once.789 Why believe a slanderer?”

20.2a

787 The latter prediction is fulfilled in Zhao 21.2. 788 The Dai and Huan lines are the Hua and Xiang lineages, descended from younger sons of Lord Dai (r. 799–766) and Lord Huan (r. 681–651), respectively. Their rebellion begins in Zhao 20.3. 789 That is, he erred by taking Jian’s wife for himself. See Zhao 19.6.

Lord Zhao

1569

王執伍奢，使城父司馬奮揚殺大子。未至，而使遣之。三月，大子 建奔宋。王召奮揚，奮揚使城父人執己以至。王曰：「言出於余口，入於 爾耳，誰告建也？」對曰：「臣告之。君王命臣曰：『事建如事余。』臣不 佞，不能苟貳。奉初以還，不忍後命，故遣之。既而悔之，亦無及已。」王 曰：「而敢來，何也？」對曰：「使而失命，召而不來，是再奸也。逃無所 入。」王曰：「歸，從政如他日。」 20.2b 無極曰：「奢之子材，若在吳，必憂楚國，盍以免其父召之。彼仁，必來。

不然，將為患。」 王使召之曰：「來，吾免而父。」棠君尚謂其弟員曰：「爾適吳，我 將歸死。吾知不逮，我能死，爾能報。聞免父之命，不可以莫之奔也； 親戚為戮，不可以莫之報也。奔死免父，孝也；度功而行，仁也；擇任 而往，知也；知死不辟，勇也。父不可棄，名不可廢，爾其勉之！相從為 愈。」伍尚歸。 奢聞員不來，曰：「楚君、大夫其旰食乎！」楚人皆殺之。

790 Chengfu is the Chu city where the heir was installed at Zhao 19.6. 791 See Johnson, “The Wu Tzu-hsü Pien-wen and Its Sources.” 792 That is, the troubles that a vengeful Wu Zixu will bring by inciting Wu attacks on Chu will keep the Chu King and his high officers from taking their meals early.

1570

Zuo Tradition

The king arrested Wu She and sent the Chengfu supervisor of the military Fen Yang to kill the heir apparent.790 Before he arrived, Fen Yang sent someone ahead to send the heir away. In the third month, the heir apparent Jian fled to Song. The king summoned Fen Yang. Fen Yang went to court after having himself placed under arrest by the men of Chengfu. The king said, “The words emerged from my mouth and entered your ears. Who told Jian?” He replied, “I told him. You, my lord, once gave me your command in these words: ‘Serve Jian as you serve me.’ Although I am not talented, I cannot stoop to disloyalty. Proceeding according to my first orders, I could not bear to follow the later command, and I therefore sent him away. Even if I had regretted it afterward, it was already too late to do anything.” The king said, “How is it that you dared to come here?” He replied, “If I disobeyed my orders in this mission, then did not come when summoned, this would be a double offense. There would be no refuge for me if I fled.” The king said, “Go home. Take part in governing as before.” The famous tale of Wu Zixu begins with the arrest and execution of his brother and his father, the heir apparent Jian’s tutor. Wu Zixu devotes his life to seeking vengeance on Chu. During the Warring States period and the early Han dynasty, Wu Zixu became a heroic figure. Sima Qian’s Shiji includes a much more elaborate and dramatic account of Wu Zixu’s life, and his story would be retold and embellished in various narrative genres for centuries afterward.791 Fei Wujia said, “Wu Shea’s sons are made of excellent stuff. If they find a place in Wu, they are certain to raise worries for the domain of Chu. Why not summon them to court with promises of sparing their father? They are noble in spirit and are bound to come. Otherwise, they will cause trouble.” The king sent someone to summon them, saying, “Come and I will spare your father.” Wu Shanga said to his younger brother Wu Zixu, “You go to Wu. I will go home to die. In wisdom I cannot match you. I am able to die, while you are able to take revenge. Now that we have received a command that would spare our father, we cannot but rush to obey it. But when our kinsman is to be slaughtered, we cannot but take vengeance for him. Rushing to death in order to spare our father is filial. Gauging the merit of the deed before proceeding is noble in spirit. Choosing one’s duties and then going to perform them is wise. And knowing that death is certain but not avoiding it is brave. A father cannot be forsaken, but our good name cannot be abandoned. Do your utmost! It is best that we should go our own ways.” Wu Shang went back to court. When Wu Shea heard that Wu Zixub was not coming, he said, “The ruler of Chu and his high officers will take their meals late!”792 The Chu leaders put both Wu She and Wu Shang to death.

20.2b

Lord Zhao

1571

員如吳，言伐楚之利於州于。公子光曰：「是宗為戮，而欲反其 讎，不可從也。」員曰：「彼將有他志，余姑為之求士，而鄙以待之。」乃 見鱄設諸焉，而耕於鄙。 20.3 宋元公無信多私，而惡華、向。華定、華亥與向寧謀曰：「亡愈於死，先

諸？」華亥偽有疾，以誘群公子。公子問之，則執之。夏六月丙申，殺公 子寅、公子御戎、公子朱、公子固、公孫援、公孫丁，拘向勝、向行於其 廩。公如華氏請焉，弗許，遂劫之。 癸卯，取大子欒與母弟辰、公子地以為質。公亦取華亥之子無慼、 向寧之子羅、華定之子啟，與華氏盟，以為質。 20.4a(3) 衛公孟縶狎齊豹，奪之司寇與鄄。有役則反之，無則取之。公孟惡北宮

喜、褚師圃，欲去之。公子朝通于襄夫人宣姜，懼而欲以作亂。故齊豹、 北宮喜、褚師圃、公子朝作亂。

793 According to Shiji 86.2516, Zhuan Shezhu was from Wutang 吳堂, in territory inhabited by the Yi of the Huai River, near the confluence of the Si and Huai Rivers in present-day Jiangsu. For the form of the name Zhuan Shezhu, with the particle she 設, see Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 71. In Zhao 27.2b, Zhuan Shezhu assassinates King Liao of Wu (r. 526–515), clearing the way for Gongzi Guang’s usurpation as King Helu (r. 514–496). 794 All eight men were supporters of the ruler of Song. 795 The Hua lineage releases Duke Yuan of Song in return for these three hostages. The first two are his sons by his wife; the third is his son by a secondary consort. 796 Juan 鄄 was northwest of present-day Juancheng 鄄城, Shandong, about 50 kilometers east of the Wei capital.

1572

Zuo Tradition

Wu Zixub went to Wu, where he spoke to King Zhouyu of the advantages of attacking Chu. Gongzi Guang said, “This is a man whose ancestral line has been put to death and who wants to take revenge. It would be wrong to follow his advice.” Wu Zixub said, “That man Gongzi Guang is going to have ambitions of his own. For now I will recruit officers for him and in the meantime settle in the countryside to await the time.” He therefore presented Zhuan Shezhu to Gongzi Guang and took up plowing in the countryside.793 Trouble between the Song Duke and the two most powerful noble lines of his domain results in a shaky détente, supported by an exchange of hostages. Lord Yuan of Song would not keep his word and had many private entanglements. He also hated the Hua and Xiang lineages. Hua Ding and Hua Hai plotted with Xiang Ning, saying, “To flee is better than to die. Shall we act before he does?” Hua Hai feigned an illness in order to lure the noble sons to him. As the noble sons came to wish him well, he took them prisoner. In the sixth month, on the bingshen day (9), he killed Zizhonga, Gongzi Yurong, Gongzi Zhu, Gongzi Gu, Gongsun Yuan, and Gongsun Ding and confined Xiang Sheng and Xiang Xing in his granary.794 When the lord went to the Hua lineage to plead for them, the plotters did not grant his pleas but instead seized him and held him prisoner. On the guimao day (16), the plotters made the heir apparent Luan, his younger full brother Chen, and Gongzi Di their hostages.795 For his part, the lord took Hua Hai’s son Wuqi, Xiang Ning’s son Luo, and Hua Ding’s son Qi as his hostages and swore a covenant with the Hua lineage.

20.3

Gongmeng Zhi of Wei, elder brother of the present ruler of Wei, had been passed over for the succession because of his deformed feet (see Zhao 7.15). His behavior now brings strife in the domain, resulting in open fighting and the temporary exile of the ruler. The honorable Zong Lu determines to die for duty’s sake. Gongmeng Zhi of Wei was presumptuous in his treatment of Qi Bao. He deprived him of his position as supervisor of corrections and of his settlement, Juan.796 When there was a military campaign, he would return these to him, but when there was no campaign, he would take them back for himself. Gongmeng Zhid hated Beigong Xi and the market overseer Pu and wanted to get rid of them. Gongzi Zhao was having a liaison with Xuan Jiang, widow of Lord Xiang, and in his fright he wanted to start a revolt. Therefore, Qi Bao, Beigong Xi, the market overseer Pu, and Gongzi Zhao started a revolt.

20.4a(3)

Lord Zhao

1573

初，齊豹見宗魯於公孟，為驂乘焉。將作亂，而謂之曰：「公孟之不 善，子所知也，勿與乘，吾將殺之。」對曰：「吾由子事公孟，子假吾名 焉，故不吾遠也。雖其不善，吾亦知之；抑以利故，不能去，是吾過也。 今聞難而逃，是僭子也。子行事乎，吾將死之，以周事子；而歸死於公 孟，其可也。」 20.4b 丙辰，衛侯在平壽。公孟有事於蓋獲之門外，齊子氏帷於門外，而伏甲

焉。使祝鼃寘戈於車薪以當門，使一乘從公孟以出；使華齊御公孟，宗 魯驂乘。及閎中，齊氏用戈擊公孟，宗魯以背蔽之，斷肱，以中公孟之 肩。皆殺之。 公聞亂，乘驅自閱門入。慶比御公，公南楚驂乘。使華寅乘貳車。 及公宮，鴻駵魋駟乘于公。公載寶以出。褚師子申遇公于馬路之衢，遂 從。過齊氏，使華寅肉袒，執蓋以當其闕，齊氏射公，中南楚之背，公遂 出。寅閉郭門，踰而從公。公如死鳥。析朱鉏宵從竇出，徒行從公。

797 This bingchen day was still in the sixth month, counting from the days mentioned in Zhao 20.3. According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.854), Pingshou 平壽 was a settlement in Wei. Its precise location is unknown. 798 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.854), this is a gate in the outer wall of the Wei capital. 799 We follow Takezoe, 24.22. Yang (4:1411) argues that since the main gate had been blocked by the cart carrying firewood and dagger-axes, Gongmeng Zhi’s driver was forced to take a side-gate (qumen 曲門), here referred to as hong 閎.

1574

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, Qi Bao had presented Zong Lu to Gongmeng Zhid, who made him third man on his chariot. When Qi Bao was preparing to start his revolt, he said to Zong Lu, “Gongmeng Zhid ’s failings are well known to you. Do not ride with him. I am going to kill him.” He replied, “It was through you that I came to serve Gongmeng Zhid. You provided me with a fine recommendation, and for this reason he did not keep me at a distance. To be sure, he has failed to be good, and I do know it. Yet it is my fault that, out of consideration for my own advantage, I have not been able to leave him. If now I should flee upon hearing of trouble, that would be tantamount to giving you the lie. Go ahead with your business, sir, and I will die in this matter in order to serve you completely. It is right for me to go back and die with Gongmeng Zhid.” Gongmeng Zhi is murdered and Lord Ling of Wei flees the capital. On the bingchen day (29), the Prince of Wei was at Pingshou.797 Gongmeng Zhid was going to conduct a sacrifice outside the Gaihuo Gate.798 Qi Bao’s household set up tents outside the gate and concealed armored men in them. They had the invocator Wa hide dagger-axes in a cart of firewood that would stop in front of the gate and then had one carriage follow behind Gongmeng Zhid as he came out through the gate. Hua Qi was made to drive for Gongmeng Zhid and Zong Lu to serve as third man on his chariot. When Gongmeng Zhi had come under the gate,799 Qi Bao’s men attacked Gongmeng Zhid with the dagger-axes. Zong Lu sheltered him with his own back, but with one blow they cut off his forearm and struck Gongmeng Zhid ’s shoulder. They then killed them both. When the lord heard of the uprising, he mounted his chariot and galloped in from the Yue Gate.800 Qing Bi drove for the lord, with Gongnan Chu as the third man on the chariot. Hua Yin was made to ride an auxiliary chariot. When they reached the lord’s palace, Hong Liutui mounted the lord’s chariot as a fourth rider. The lord loaded up his precious vessels and set out. The market overseer Pua, meeting the lord at an intersection, joined him. When they passed the Qi residence, they had Hua Yin strip to the waist and hold the chariot canopy in front of them to cover any openings.801 The Qi men shot at the lord, but hit Gongnan Chua in the back. In this way the lord escaped. Hua Yina closed the gate in the outer wall, then climbed over the wall to follow the lord. The lord entered Siniao.802 Xi Zhuchu escaped through a culvert by night and followed the lord on foot.

20.4b

800 According to Kong Yingda’s commentary (ZZ-Kong 49.854), the Yue Gate was a smaller gate in the Wei city wall, probably distant from the Qi lineage compound. 801 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.854), they had Hua Yin remove his armor to show that they did not intend to fight the Qi forces. 802 Siniao 死鳥 is thought to have been east of the Wei capital, along the road to Qi.

Lord Zhao

1575

20.4c 齊侯使公孫青聘于衛。既出，聞衛亂，使請所聘。公曰：「猶在竟內，則

衛君也。」乃將事焉，遂從諸死鳥。請將事。辭曰：「亡人不佞，失守社 稷，越在草莽，吾子無所辱君命。」賓曰：「寡君命下臣於朝曰：『阿下 執事。』臣不敢貳。」主人曰：「君若惠顧先君之好，照臨敝邑，鎮撫其 社稷，則有宗祧在。」乃止。衛侯固請見之。不獲命，以其良馬見，為未 致使故也。衛侯以為乘馬。 賓將掫，主人辭曰：「亡人之憂，不可以及吾子；草莽之中，不足以 辱從者。敢辭。」賓曰：「寡君之下臣，君之牧圉也。若不獲扞外役，是 不有寡君也。臣懼不免於戾，請以除死。」親執鐸，終夕與於燎。

803 That is, this official visit should be received in the Ancestral Temple in the Wei capital. The visit could take place there only if, with the help of Qi or some other power, the Wei ruler were reinstated.

1576

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Qing, sent by Qi for an official visit to the ruler of Wei in his time of trouble, demonstrates extraordinary courtesy and solicitude. The Wei ruler likewise demonstrates his mastery of ritually proper rhetoric, although the honorific name “Ling” assigned to him posthumously indicates that his later deeds were judged negatively. The Prince of Qi sent Gongsun Qing on an official visit to Wei. After Gongshun Qing had set out, he heard of the uprising in Wei and sent someone back to ask whom he should visit. The Qi lord said, “If he is still within the borders of the domain, then he is the ruler of Wei.” Gongsun Qing therefore prepared to carry out his duties with the Lord of Wei, seeking him out at Siniao. When Gongsun Qing requested permission to carry out his duties, the Lord of Wei declined: “A man in exile, all inept, I have failed in the defense of the altars of my domain and find myself adrift in the wilderness. Do not, sir, bring any disgrace upon your ruler’s command.” The guest said, “Our unworthy ruler issued this command to his lowly servant in court: ‘Humbly support my counterpart in these duties.’ I dare not do otherwise.” The host said, “If your ruler should wish, in his kindness, to look back upon our former rulers’ good relations and to oversee and shine upon our humble settlement, thus steadying the altars of our domain, then the Ancestral Temple is still there in its place.”803 Gongsun Qing therefore desisted. The Prince of Wei earnestly requested to see him.804 Not having received the commands he had hoped to receive, Gongsun Qing presented his own fine horses as his audience gift. This was because he had not carried out the mission assigned him.805 The Prince of Wei used the horses as his chariot team. When the guest prepared to conduct night patrols, the host declined: “That the sorrows of this man in exile should affect you, sir, is not to be permitted. This locale, in the midst of the wilderness, in no way warrants your condescension. I presume to decline this honor.” The guest said, “A lowly servant of our unworthy ruler, I serve as herdsman and groom to you, my lord. Should I not have the opportunity to protect you against the aggressions of others, that would be tantamount to defiance of my ruler. Fearing only that I should not escape incrimination, I make this request so that I may redeem myself from death.” Holding the bell in his own hands, he attended to the torches all night.806

20.4c

804 Although Lord Ling refuses the full ceremonies of an official visit, he does request a private meeting with the Qi envoy. 805 In a visit to the ruler of a domain, the envoy would normally have presented silk. Here, because he cannot carry out the usual ritual of audience, Gongsun Qing instead presents horses. See Takezoe, 24.23. 806 According to Takezoe (24.24), he held the bell ready to give commands to his troops should any trouble arise.

Lord Zhao

1577

20.4d 齊氏之宰渠子召北宮子。北宮氏之宰不與聞，謀殺渠子，遂伐齊氏，滅

之。丁巳晦，公入，與北宮喜盟于彭水之上。秋七月戊午朔，遂盟國人。八 月辛亥，公子朝、褚師圃、子玉霄、子高魴出奔晉。閏月戊辰，殺宣姜。 衛侯賜北宮喜諡曰「貞子」，賜析朱鉏諡曰「成子」，而以齊氏之墓予之。 衛侯告寧于齊，且言子石。齊侯將飲酒，徧賜大夫曰：「二三子之 教也。」苑何忌辭，曰：「與於青之賞，必及于其罰。在〈康誥〉曰：『父子 兄弟，罪不相及』，況在群臣？臣敢貪君賜以干先王？」 琴張聞宗魯死，將往弔之。仲尼曰：「齊豹之盜，而孟縶之賊，女 何弔焉？君子不食姦，不受亂，不為利疚於回，不以回待人，不蓋不義， 不犯非禮。」 20.5(4) 宋華、向之亂，公子城、公孫忌、樂舍、司馬彊、向宜、向鄭、楚建、郳甲

出奔鄭。其徒與華氏戰于鬼閻，敗子城。子城適晉。

807 As at Zhao 12.10a, a steward acts independently of the lineage head he is supposed to serve. 808 The Peng River no longer exists. Beigong Xi is the head of the Beigong lineage. 809 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.855), the four were partisans of the Qi lineage. These are Gongmeng Zhi’s enemies enumerated at the beginning of this account. 810 According to Zhao 20.4a, she had plotted a revolt with Gongzi Zhao. According to Zhao 7.15, Lord Ling, who here puts Xuan Jiang to death, was not her son but the son of Lord Xiang’s favorite Chouyan. Still, she is the “official mother” (dimu 嫡母) of Lord Ling and the principal wife of Lord Ling’s father. 811 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.855), this passage carries the story forward to the time of Beigong Xi’s and Xi Zhuchu’s deaths. But Yang (4:1413) notes that the titles and tombs could indeed be granted while the recipients were still alive. 812 The “Announcement to Kang” (“Kang gao” 康誥) is the Documents chapter (14.200– 206) containing the founding appointment of a ruler for Wei. The passage as cited is not found in the extant version of the “Announcement” but reads as a paraphrase of the passage cited at Xi 33.6b. Yuan Heji cites it here to separate himself from the round of rewards attending upon Gongsun Qing’s successful mission and the restoration of Lord Ling of Wei. Takezoe (24.25) observes that Yuan Heji may be refusing this irregular reward from Lord Jing of Qi in order to protect himself from other irregularities in the lord’s treatment of his officials. 813 Yang (4:1319) argues that since Confucius was thirty-one years old at this time, and since his disciple Qin Zhang was known to be more than forty years younger than Confucius, the Qin Zhang mentioned here cannot be the disciple of that name. If there is anything at all legendary in this brief anecdote, however, then it is entirely possible that the narrators had in mind the disciple Qin Zhang; it makes little sense for Confucius to remark on his plans otherwise. 814 Confucius’ judgment of Zong Lu’s loyal martyrdom is surprising for its harshness. In its rejection of private uses of violence and its presciptions for the retainer, it suggests a view that differs somewhat from the view implied by the narrative starting in Zhao 20.4a. Overall, Confucius as depicted in the Zuozhuan is harsher in his judgments than the Confucius of the Analects, though he is well aware of the pitfalls and dangers of service in troubled times; see his comments on the death of his disciple Zhong You (Ai 15.5b). 815 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.856), all eight men were partisans of the Song ruler. 816 Guiyan 鬼閻 was located northeast of Xihua County 西華縣, Henan.

1578

Zuo Tradition

The ruler of Wei reenters his capital by exploiting the dissension between the rebels and gaining the support of the Beigong lineage. Confucius offers an assessment of the events, including Zong Lu’s self-sacrifice. The Qi lineage’s steward Quzi summoned Beigong Xia, head of the Beigong lineage. The Beigong lineage’s steward did not bring this to Beigong Xi’s attention, instead plotting to kill Quzi. He then attacked the Qi lineage and extinguished it.807 In the sixth month, on the dingsi day (30), the lord entered the capital and swore a covenant with Beigong Xi beside the Peng River.808 Then, in autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuwu day (1), he swore a covenant with the inhabitants of the capital. In the eighth month, on the xinhai day (25), Gongzi Zhao, the market overseer Pu, Ziyu Xiao, and Zigao Fang departed and fled to Jin.809 In the intercalary month, on the wuchen day (20), Xuan Jiang was put to death.810 The Prince of Wei granted Beigong Xi the honorary title Zhenzi, or “The Fastidious,” granted Xi Zhuchu the honorary title Chengzi, or “The Complete,” and presented them with the tombs of the Qi lineage.811 The Prince of Wei reported to Qi that peace had been restored and spoke also of Gongsun Qinga. The Prince of Qi was on the point of drinking, so he presented gifts to all his high officers and said: “This is due to your teachings, my fine companions.” Yuan Heji declined the gift: “One who has a part in Gongsun Qingb’s reward must also be implicated in his punishment. In the ‘Announcement to Kang’ it says, ‘Fathers, sons, elder brothers, and younger brothers do not suffer for one another’s crimes.’812 How much more does this apply in the case of the many officials? Should I presume, out of greed for your gifts, to defy a former king?” When Qin Zhang heard that Zong Lu had died, he prepared to go and mourn for him.813 Confuciusc said, “He was a brigand for Qi Bao and an assassin for Gongmeng Zhia. Why should you mourn for him? The noble man does not earn his keep from a miscreant. He does not accept things from the rebellious. He does not taint himself with deviations for the sake of profit. He does not serve others with deviations of his own. He neither covers up unjust behavior nor commits deeds that are not in accord with ritual propriety.”814

20.4d

Strife in Song ends with the defeat of the ruler’s enemies (see Zhao 20.3). During the Hua and Xiang uprising in Song, Gongzi Cheng, Gongsun Ji, Yue She, the supervisor of the military Qiang, Xiang Yi, Xiang Zheng, the exiled heir Jian of Chu, and Ni Jia left Song and fled to Zheng.815 Their troops fought with the Hua lineage at Guiyan, and Gongzi Chenga was defeated.816 Gongzi Chenga went to Jin.

20.5(4)

Lord Zhao

1579

華亥與其妻，必盥而食所質公子者而後食。公與夫人每日必適華 氏，食公子而後歸。 華亥患之，欲歸公子。向寧曰：「唯不信，故質其 子。若又歸之，死無日矣。」公請於華費遂，將攻華氏。對曰：「臣不敢 愛死，無乃求去憂而滋長乎！臣是以懼，敢不聽命？」公曰：「子死亡有 命，余不忍其訽。」冬十月，公殺華、向之質而攻之。戊辰，華、向奔陳， 華登奔吳。 向寧欲殺大子。華亥曰：「干君而出，又殺其子，其誰納我？且歸 之有庸。」使少司寇牼以歸，曰：「子之齒長矣，不能事人。以三公子為 質，必免。」公子既入，華牼將自門行。公遽見之，執其手，曰：「余知而 無罪也，入，復而所。」 20.6a 齊侯疥，遂痁，期而不瘳。諸侯之賓問疾者多在。梁丘據與裔款言於公

曰：「吾事鬼神豐，於先君有加矣。今君疾病，為諸侯憂，是祝、史之罪 也。諸侯不知，其謂我不敬，君盍誅於祝固、史嚚以辭賓？」

817 818 819 820 821

For these hostages, all sons of the Song ruler, see Zhao 20.3. Hua Feisui is senior supervisor of the military and a member of the Hua lineage. For these hostages, sons of Hua Hai, Xiang Ning, and Hua Ding, see Zhao 20.3. According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.856), Hua Deng was the son of Hua Feisui. Gu Shikao (Scott Cook) argues on the basis of graphic variations found in Chu bamboo strips that shan 痁 (“fever”) originally read gu 痼, “to become chronic.” See his “Chu wen ‘hu’ zi zhi shuangchong yongfa.” 822 The two men were Qi high officers. Liangqu Ju always appears as a sycophant and a foil for Yan Ying’s uprightness.

1580

Zuo Tradition

Hua Hai, along with his wife, unfailingly washed his hands and gave the noble sons who were his hostages their meal before he took his own meal.817 Every day, the lord and his lady unfailingly visited the Hua residence, returning home only after they had fed their sons. Troubled by this, Hua Hai hoped to send the noble sons home. Xiang Ning said, “It was precisely because he does not stand by his word that we made hostages of his sons. If you now go on to send them home, then any day could be the day of your death.” The lord presented a request to Hua Feisui, giving notice that he would attack the Hua lineage.818 He replied, “I would not presume to begrudge my own death. But as you try to remove trouble, will you not instead be adding to it? For this reason I am afraid. Still, would I presume not to heed your command?” The lord said, “Should my sons die, that is a matter of fate. But I cannot bear this disgrace.” In winter, in the tenth month, the lord put to death the hostages from the Hua and Xiang lineages and then attacked those lineages.819 On the wuchen day (13), Hua Hai and Xiang Ning fled to Chen, Hua Deng to Wu.820 Xiang Ning wanted to kill the heir apparent. Hua Hai said, “If we depart after having wronged the lord, and then go so far as to kill his sons, who will take us in? What is more, by sending the lord’s sons home we will have done a useful deed.” They had Hua Kenga, the junior supervisor of corrections, take them home, saying to him, “You, sir, are long in the tooth now and are not able to give your service over to some other person. With these three noble sons as your pledge, you are certain to be forgiven.” Once the noble sons had entered the palace and Hua Keng was preparing to go out the gate, the lord suddenly called him in for an audience. Grasping his hand, the lord said, “I know that you have committed no crime. Go in and resume your former place.” In Qi, Yan Ying argues against a proposal that invocators and scribes be sacrificed in an effort to cure the ruler’s illness, proposing instead a renewed attention to administrative order. The Prince of Qi had scabies, then developed bouts of fever.821 For a year he did not get well. At court were many guests who had been sent by the princes to inquire about his illness. Liangqiu Ju and Yi Kuan said to the lord,822 “We have been most generous in our service to the ghosts and spirits, even adding to what the former rulers gave in their sacrifices. Now your illness, lord, has become a concern for the princes. This is the fault of the invocators and scribes. Not knowing this, the princes will think that we have been irreverent. Why not execute the invocator Gu and the scribe Yin in order to send the guests on their way?”

20.6a

Lord Zhao

1581

公說，告晏子。晏子曰：「日宋之盟，屈建問范會之德於趙武。趙 武曰：『夫子之家事治；言於晉國，竭情無私。其祝、史祭祀，陳信不愧； 其家事無猜，其祝、史不祈。』建以語康王。康王曰：『神、人無怨，宜夫 子之光輔五君以為諸侯主也。』」 20.6b 公曰：「據與款謂寡人能事鬼神，故欲誅于祝、史，子稱是語，何故？」

對曰：「若有德之君，外內不廢，上下無怨，動無違事，其祝、史薦信，無 愧心矣。是以鬼神用饗，國受其福，祝、史與焉。其所以蕃祉老壽者，為 信君使也，其言忠信於鬼神。其適遇淫君，外內頗邪，上下怨疾，動作辟 違，從欲厭私，高臺深池，撞鐘舞女。斬刈民力，輸掠其聚，以成其違， 不恤後人。暴虐淫從，肆行非度，無所還忌，不思謗讟，不憚鬼神。神怒 民痛，無悛於心。其祝、史薦信，是言罪也；其蓋失數美，是矯誣也。進 退無辭，則虛以求媚。是以鬼神不饗其國以禍之，祝、史與焉。所以夭 昏孤疾者，為暴君使也，其言僭嫚於鬼神。」

823 See Xiang 27.4. 824 See Xiang 27.4e for this episode, with a slightly different version of Zhao Wu’s answer. 825 Fan Hui and his descendants Fan Xie, Fan Gai, and Fan Yang served as ministers to the Jin Lords Wen, Xiang, Ling, Cheng, and Jing. 826 The “account” (yu 語) in this context is a didactic anecdote, such as the story about Qu Jian’s questions, that can be used in argumentation. See Zhang Jun, “‘Yu’ di chuanliu, leibie he Churen songxi, zhizuo di ‘yu.’”

1582

Zuo Tradition

Pleased, the lord informed Yan Yingb of the proposal. Yan Yingb said, “Some time ago, during the covenant meeting at Song,823 Qu Jian asked Zhao Wu about the virtue of Fan Hui. Zhao Wu said, ‘That fine man’s domestic affairs were well governed, and when he spoke in the domain of Jin, he showed a full understanding of the facts without giving in to any private partiality. When his invocators and scribes offered sacrifices, they presented the truth without dishonor. In his domestic affairs there was no distrust, and his invocators and scribes did not make entreaties.’824 Qu Jianb spoke of this to King Kang of Chu. King Kang said, ‘There was no cause for complaint, whether among spirits or men. How fitting that that fine man was able to aid five rulers illustriously in their role as hosts of the princes.’”825 The lord said, “It is because Liangqiu Jua and Yi Kuan believe that I am capable in my service to the ghosts and spirits that they wish to execute the invocator and scribe. Why is it that you allude to this account?”826 Yan Ying replied, “In the case of a ruler who has virtue, outside the palace and within it no one is lax in their duties, superiors and inferiors have no complaints, in no action does he violate duties, and the invocators and scribes set forth the truth. They have no cause to feel shame. For this reason the ghosts and spirits consume the offerings and the domain receives the blessings, and the invocators and scribes have their part in these blessings. The reason they enjoy blessings and longevity is that they are representatives of a ruler who shows good faith, and in their words they have shown loyalty and good faith to the ghosts and spirits. But it may happen that they encounter a profligate ruler, under whom there is irregularity and deviation outside the palace and within it, under whom superiors and inferiors complain in their jealousy, whose every action is a violation, who indulges his desires and satisfies his private wishes with lofty pavilions and deep pools and with the striking of bells and girls’ dancing. He cuts off the people’s strength at its roots and purloins their stores to underwrite his own violations, taking no thought of his own successors. Tyrannical and prodigal, unrestrained and guided by no standard, lacking any afterthought or prohibition, he gives no thought to the voice of critique and does not fear the ghosts and spirits. Though the spirits grow angry and the people suffer, he does not repent in his heart. If his invocators and scribes set forth the truth, it is tantamount to bringing an indictment against him. But if they cover up his failures and enumerate his better points, it is tantamount to lying. For advancing and withdrawing alike they have no words of justification, and so with empty words they curry favor. For this reason the ghosts and spirits do not consume the domain’s sacrifices but bring calamity down upon it, and the invocators and scribes have their part in this calamity. The reason they die young, lose their wits, lose their loved ones, and suffer illness is that they are representatives of a tyrannical ruler, and their words are false and an insult to the ghosts and spirits.”

20.6b

Lord Zhao

1583

20.6c 公曰：「然則若之何？」對曰：「不可為也。山林之木，衡鹿守之；澤之萑

蒲，舟鮫守之；藪之薪蒸，虞候守之；海之鹽、蜃，祈望守之。縣鄙之人， 入從其政；偪介之關，暴征其私；承嗣大夫，強易其賄。布常無藝，徵斂 無度；宮室日更，淫樂不違。內寵之妾，肆奪於市；外寵之臣，僭令於 鄙。私欲養求，不給則應。民人苦病，夫婦皆詛。祝有益也，詛亦有損。 聊、攝以東，姑、尤以西，其為人也多矣。雖其善祝，豈能勝億兆人之 詛？君若欲誅於祝、史，修德而後可。」公說，使有司寬政，毀關，去禁， 薄斂，已責。 20.7 十二月，齊侯田于沛，招虞人以弓，不進。公使執之。辭曰：「昔我先君

之田也，旃以招大夫，弓以招士，皮冠以招虞人。臣不見皮冠，故不敢 進。」乃舍之。仲尼曰：「守道不如守官。」君子韙之。

827 As Du Yu (ZZ 49.857) explains, the lord’s representatives keep a jealous watch on all the resources of the domain, preventing the people from using them for their own economic benefit. 828 According to Takezoe (24.30), citing annotations to Zhouli 15.230, duty-stations were to be situated at the borders, not along the roads within the borders of a domain. Setting up duty-stations just outside the capital would be a means of extracting extra revenue from travelers. 829 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.858), the cities named define the limits of Qi territory, Liao and She in the west and Gu and You in the east. 830 For parallel passages, see Yanzi chunqiu 7.446–47 and the text “Jing gong nüe” 競公 瘧, in Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu, 6:15–30, 157–91. 831 Pei 沛 may have been located south of present-day Boxing 博興, Shandong, about 25 kilometers northwest of the Qi capital. But Shiji 14.656 suggests that it was instead located far to the southwest, on the frontier of Qi and Lu.

1584

Zuo Tradition

The lord said, “If that is the case, then what is to be done?” He replied, “Nothing can be done. The timber on the mountainsides is watched over by foresters. The rushes in the marshes are watched over by boatmen. The firewood and kindling in the lowlands are watched over by wardens. The salt and mussels in the sea are watched over by coast guards.827 Men from dependent and outlying territories come in to serve in the government. Duty-stations just outside the capital exact heavy duties on private property,828 and hereditary holders of high office force people to sell their goods. Rules are promulgated without principles, taxes are levied without limits, palaces and abodes increase by the day, and there is no break in the excesses and merrymaking. Concubines who enjoy favor within the palace seize property wantonly in the marketplace. Subjects who enjoy favor outside the palace usurp command for themselves in the outlying territories. When private desires are fostered and pursued but are not satisfied, incriminations follow. The common people and the leaders suffer and fret, and man and woman alike curse you. If an invocator’s prayer brings benefits, then curses also bring harm. From Liao and She eastward and from Gu and You westward,829 many are the men who live in this land. How could even an excellent invocator overcome the curses of so many millions? If you wish to carry out executions among the invocators and scribes, then you may do so only after you have cultivated your virtue.” Pleased, the lord had the officers in charge ease government policies, tear down the duty-stations, eliminate the controls on resources, reduce taxes, and forgive tax debts.830

20.6c

Commenting on a Qi episode, Confucius speaks well of a principled punctiliousness in official duties. Mencius (5B.7) later alluded both to the story of the game warden and to Confucius’ comment, stressing the dignity of the virtuous man and his freedom to decide whether he will serve in the court of the lord. In the twelfth month, the Prince of Qi hunted at Pei.831 When he summoned the game warden to him with a bow, the game warden did not come forward, and the lord had him taken into custody. He offered this justification: “In times past, when our former rulers hunted, they summoned high officers with a flag, summoned officers with a bow, and summoned the game warden with a leather cap. As I did not see the leather cap, I did not dare come forward.” The lord therefore released him. Confuciusc said, “Keeping to the Way is not as good a thing as keeping to one’s official duties.” The noble man affirmed this to be true.

20.7

Lord Zhao

1585

20.8a 齊侯至自田，晏子侍于遄臺，子猶馳而造焉。公曰：「唯據與我和夫！」

晏子對曰：「據亦同也，焉得為和？」公曰：「和與同異乎？」 異。和如羹焉，水、火、醯、醢、鹽、梅，以烹魚肉，燀之以薪，

宰夫和之，齊之以味，濟其不及，以洩其過。君子食之，以平 其心。 君臣亦然。君所謂可而有否焉，臣獻其否以成其可；君 所謂否而有可焉，臣獻其可以去其否，是以政平而不干，民 無爭心。故《詩》曰：

亦有和羹， 既戒既平。 鬷嘏無言， 時靡有爭。

先王之濟五味、和五聲也，以平其心，成其政也。

聲亦如味，一氣，二體，三類，四物，五聲，六律，七音， 八風，九歌，以相成也；清濁、小大，短長、疾徐，哀樂、剛 柔，遲速、高下，出入、周疏，以相濟也。君子聽之，以平 其心。

832 The terrace was located somewhere near the Qi capital at present-day Linzi, Shandong. 833 Maoshi 302, “Lie zu” 烈祖, 20C.791–92. 834 According to Du Yu (ZZ 49.859), the “two forms” are wen 文 (“civil”) and wu 武 (“martial”), two distinct types of dance. The “three genres” are the three major sections of the Odes, the “Airs,” the “Elegantiae,” and the “Hymns.” The “four materials” come from the four quarters of the world and are used in the making of musical instruments. The “five tones” are the notes of the pentatonic scale. The “six pitches,” with their changed forms, make up the twelve half steps of the octave. The “seven notes” are the notes of the heptatonic scale. The “eight airs” are the winds arising from the four cardinal directions with the added half points. Finally, the “nine songs” are songs for the nine endeavors (see Wen 7.8).

1586

Zuo Tradition

Adopting metaphors from cookery and music, Yan Ying advances a vision of harmonious dissension in court policy making. The use of cookery and music as figures for social and psychological harmony recalls the physician He’s reasoning in his diagnosis of Lord Ping of Jin in Zhao 1.12e. When the Prince of Qi returned from the hunt, Yan Yingb waited upon him at the Chuan Terrace.832 Liangqiu Jub galloped his horses to join them there. The lord said, “Liangqiu Jua alone is in harmony with us!” Yan Yingb replied, “Ju is in fact in unison with you. How can he be said to be in harmony?” The lord said, “Are harmony and unison different?” Yan Ying replied,

20.8a

They are different. Harmony is like a stew. Water, fire, jerky, mincemeat, salt, and plum vinegar are used to cook fish and meat. These are cooked over firewood. The master chef harmonizes them, evening them out with seasonings, compensating for what is lacking, and diminishing what is too strong. The noble man eats it and calms his heart. With ruler and subject it is the same. When there is something wrong in what the ruler considers right, the subject sets forth the wrong in order to perfect the right. When there is something right about what the ruler considers wrong, the subject sets forth the right in order to eliminate the wrong. In this way the administration is calm and does not violate standards, and the people will have no heart for contending with one another. Thus, it says in the Odes,

There is a well-harmonized stew. We are careful and calm. We advance silently; There is no contention.833

The former kings’ seasoning of the five flavors and harmonizing of the five tones were for the calming of hearts and the perfecting of government. Sounds are just like flavors. The single breath, the two forms, the three genres, the four materials, the five tones, the six pitches, the seven notes, the eight airs, the nine songs—these are used to complete one another.834 The clear and the muddy, the piano and the forte, the short and the long, the presto and the adagio, the somber and the joyous, the hard and the soft, the delayed and the immediate, the high and the low, the going out and coming in, the united and separate—these are used to complement one another. The noble man listens to it and thus calms his heart.

Lord Zhao

1587

心平，德和。故《詩》曰： 德音不瑕。 今據不然。君所謂可，據亦曰可；君所謂否，據亦曰否。若以

水濟水，誰能食之？若琴瑟之專壹，誰能聽之？同之不可也 如是。 20.8b 飲酒樂。公曰：「古而無死，其樂若何！」

晏子對曰：「古而無死，則古之樂也，君何得焉？昔爽鳩氏始居此 地，季萴因之，有逢伯陵因之，蒲姑氏因之，而後大公因之。古若無死， 爽鳩氏之樂，非君所願也。」 20.9 鄭子產有疾，謂子大叔曰：「我死，子必為政。唯有德者能以寬服民，其

次莫如猛。夫火烈，民望而畏之，故鮮死焉；水懦弱，民狎而翫之，則多 死焉，故寬難。」疾數月而卒。 大叔為政，不忍猛而寬。鄭國多盜，取人於萑苻之澤。大叔悔之， 曰：「吾早從夫子，不及此。」興徒兵以攻萑苻之盜，盡殺之，盜少止。

Maoshi 160, “Lang ba” 狼跋, 8C.303–4. A parallel passage appears in Yanzi chunqiu 7.442–43. The Shuangjiu clan are the Falcons mentioned by the ruler of Tan at Zhao 17.3. For parallel passages, see Yanzi chunqiu 7.441, along with the reflections on death at 1.63. 839 We follow Yang (4:1421), who follows Yang Shuda, who suspected that quren 取人 was a mistake for ju 聚. Unemended, the text would read, “who would seize people at the rush-filled swamps,” an acceptable alternative. 835 836 837 838

1588

Zuo Tradition

When the heart is calm, the virtue is in harmony. Thus, as it says in the Odes,

The sound of his virtue is unblemished.835

Now Liangqiu Jua is not like this. Whatever you, the ruler, consider right, Liangqiu Jua also calls right. Whatever you consider wrong, Ju also calls unacceptable. If you season water with water, who can eat it? If the zithers and dulcimers hold to a single sound, who can listen to it? This is how unison is wrong.836

In a conversation that is especially telling in the context of the decline of the Qi ruling house and the rise of the Chen lineage, Yan Ying teaches his ruler about the necessity of dynastic change. His views will later be echoed by the scribe Mo of Cai (Zhao 32.4b). They drank and made merry. The lord said, “What a joy it would be if there had been no death since ancient times!” Yan Yingb replied, “If there had been no death since ancient times, that would be a joy for the ancients. But then what joy could you have gotten for yourself ? Long ago the Shuangjiu lineage occupied this land,837 and they were followed by the Jize lineage, who were followed by the Youfeng Bo Ling lineage, who were followed by the Pugu lineage, who were at last followed by the Grand Lord. If no one had died since ancient times, it would be the joy of the Shuangjiu lineage. And that is not something you would consider desirable.”838

20.8b

The death of Zichan of Zheng is reported, along with reflections by Confucius on his life and policies. It is notable that this passage picks up the theme of harmony, found in Zhao 20.8a, and includes even the notion of “seasoning,” or moderation. Falling ill, Zichan of Zheng said to You Jib, “When I die, you, sir, will certainly take charge of the government. Only one who has virtue is capable of controlling the people by means of leniency. Failing that, nothing is better than harshness. Consider the flames of a fire: when they look at it, the people fear it, and therefore few die in it. But water is soft and yielding: the people play with it, feeling that it is familiar, and as a result many die in it. Therefore, to rule with leniency is the more difficult of the two.” He died after an illness of several months. When he took charge of the government, You Jia could not bear to be harsh, so he was instead lenient. Many robbers around the capital of Zheng would gather in the rush-filled marshes.839 You Jia regretted this and said, “If I had heeded that fine man’s advice from the beginning, it would not have come to this.” He mobilized an army to attack the robbers of the rushes and killed them all. Robberies then declined somewhat.

20.9

Lord Zhao

1589

仲尼曰：「善哉！政寬則民慢，慢則糾之以猛。猛則民殘，殘則施 之以寬。寬以濟猛，猛以濟寬，政是以和。《詩》曰： 民亦勞止， 汔可小康； 惠此中國， 以綏四方。 施之以寬也。 毋從詭隨， 以謹無良； 式遏寇虐， 慘不畏明。 糾之以猛也。 柔遠能邇， 以定我王。 平之以和也。又曰： 不競不絿， 不剛不柔， 布政優優， 百祿是遒。 和之至也。」 及子產卒，仲尼聞之，出涕曰：「古之遺愛也。」

春秋 21.1(2) 二十有一年春王三月，葬蔡平公。 21.2(3) 夏，晉侯使士鞅來聘。

840 This and the two following passages come from Maoshi 253, “Min lao” 民勞, 17D.630–32. The last two lines are also cited at Xi 28.6. 841 Maoshi 304, “Changfa” 長發, 20D.800–804. The final two lines are also cited at Cheng 2.3f.

1590

Zuo Tradition

Confuciusc said, “Excellent! When government is lenient, the people are presumptuous, and when they are presumptuous, one corrects them with harshness. When government is harsh, the people get wounded, and when they are wounded, one indulges them with leniency. Leniency seasons harshness, harshness seasons leniency, and in this way the policies are harmoniously adjusted. As it says in the Odes, Weary are the people from toil, And they seek to take their ease for a time. Show kindness to the central domains, And thereby pacify the four quarters.840

This is indulging them with kindness. Do not forgive the artful and deceptive— Thus, make those who are in no way good cautious. Do put a stop to the rapacious and the cruel, Who have never feared the illustrious standards.

This is correcting them with harshness. He is gentle to those far away, kind to those near at hand, And in this way steadies our king.

This is calming them with harmony. As it says elsewhere in the Odes, Neither forceful nor lax, Neither hard nor soft, Gently and carefully he lays out his decrees. A hundred blessings he gathers around him.841

This is the perfection of harmony.” When Zichan died and Confuciusc heard of it, he shed tears and said, “His was a way of cherishing people that was passed down from ancient times.”842 LORD ZHAO 21 (521 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-first year, in spring, in the royal third month, Lord Ping of Cai was buried.

21.1(2)

In summer, the Prince of Jin sent Shi Yang (Fan Yang) to us on an official visit.

21.2(3)

842 For this interpretation, see Wang Yinzhi, Jingyi shuwen, 19.758. Confucius also offers positive assessments of Zichan at Analects 5.16, 14.8, and 14.9. Compare this remark with Confucius’ praise of Shuxiang at Zhao 14.7.

Lord Zhao

1591

21.3(4) 宋華亥、向寧、華定自陳入于宋南里以叛。 21.4(5) 秋七月壬午朔，日有食之。 21.5(5) 八月乙亥，叔輒卒。 21.6(7) 冬，蔡侯朱出奔楚。 21.7(8) 公如晉，至河乃復。

左傳 21.1 二十一年春，天王將鑄無射，泠州鳩曰：「王其以心疾死乎！夫樂，天

子之職也。夫音，樂之輿也；而鐘，音之器也。天子省風以作樂，器以鍾 之，輿以行之。小者不窕，大者不摦，則和於物。物和則嘉成。故和聲入 於耳而藏於心，心億則樂。窕則不咸，摦則不容，心是以感，感實生疾。 今鐘摦矣，王心弗堪，其能久乎！」 21.2(1) 三月，葬蔡平公。蔡大子朱失位，位在卑。大夫送葬者歸，見昭子。昭子

問蔡故，以告。昭子歎曰：「蔡其亡乎！若不亡，是君也必不終。《詩》曰：

843 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.867), Nanli 南里 was an area within the Song capital. 844 This eclipse took place on 10 June 521 Bce. 845 The bells are named for wuyi, the sixth of twelve pitches. The bell array in question would have wuyi as its do. To judge from parallels in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.119–33, the trouble with the array is that it includes bells that are too large and loud; see Hart, “Discussion of the Wu-yi Bells in the Kuo-yu.” According to Yang (4:1423–24), when Qin extinguished the remainder of the Zhou royal house, this bell array was moved from Luoyang to the Qin capital at present-day Xi’an, remaining there through the Jin dynasty and later being moved to present-day Nanjing during the Southern Dynasties period and returning finally to Xi’an during the Sui, when they were destroyed. 846 King Jing of Zhou does indeed die as predicted here (see Zhao 22.3), but the contentious political circumstances suggest the possibility of foul play. 847 The word zhong 鍾 (“concentrates”) could also mean zhong 鐘, “bell.” The bells, as the most prestigious of musical instruments, concentrate the music and all its functions. 848 For a more elaborate version of this anecdote, see Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.126–31.

1592

Zuo Tradition

Hua Hai, Xiang Ning, and Hua Ding of Song entered Nanli in Song from Chen and led it in revolt.843 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renwu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.844

21.3(4)

21.4(5)

In the eighth month, on the yihai day (25), Shu Zhe died.

21.5(5)

In winter, Zhu, the Prince of Cai, departed and fled to Chu.

21.6(7)

Our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back.

21.7(8)

ZUO

King Jing of Zhou casts an exceptional set of bells and prompts a prediction of his own death. Zhoujiu’s speech echoes others that emphasize the power of music (Xiang 11.5b) and the importance of regulation and balance in music (Zhao 1.12e). In the twenty-first year, in spring, the Heaven-appointed king was preparing to cast the Wuyi bells.845 The musician Zhoujiu said, “The king will die of an acute ailment of the heart!846 Music is a responsibility of the Son of Heaven. Sound is the vehicle of music. And bells are the instruments for making sound. The Son of Heaven gauges the airs so as to make his music and then concentrates the sound in his instruments,847 which serve as vehicles to carry it forward. If the small ones are not too faint of sound and the large ones not too overwhelming, they harmonize with the other components of the ceremony. When all the components of the ceremony are in harmony, good cheer is brought about. Therefore, harmonious sounds enter the ear and are stored in the heart, and when the heart is at ease, there is the pleasure of music. A sound too faint cannot reach everybody; one too overwhelming cannot be contained. In this way the heart is disturbed, and it is precisely when it is disturbed that it becomes diseased. In the present case, the set of bells is overwhelming. The king’s heart will not be able to bear it. How can he survive long?”848

21.1

The Cai heir commits a ritual error during his father’s funeral and precipitates a prediction of trouble, which will be fulfilled later this year (Zhao 21.7). In the third month, Lord Ping of Cai was buried. The Cai heir apparent Zhu failed to stand in his proper place but instead stood in a lowly position. High officers who had gone to escort the cortege returned and had an audience with Shusun Chuoc. When Shusun Chuoc asked about affairs in Cai, they reported the matter of the heir. Shusun Chuoc sighed and said, “Cai is sure to fall. If it does not fall, then the ruler is certain not to come to a good end. As it says in the Odes,

21.2(1)

Lord Zhao

1593

不解于位， 民之攸塈。 今蔡侯始即位，而適卑，身將從之。」 21.3(2) 夏，晉士鞅來聘，叔孫為政。季孫欲惡諸晉，使有司以齊鮑國歸費之禮

為士鞅。士鞅怒，曰：「鮑國之位下，其國小，而使鞅從其牢禮，是卑敝 邑也，將復諸寡君。」魯人恐，加四牢焉，為十一牢。 21.4(3) 宋華費遂生華貙、華多僚、華登。貙為少司馬，多僚為御士，與貙相惡，

乃譖諸公曰：「貙將納亡人。」亟言之。公曰：「司馬以吾故，亡其良子。 死亡有命，吾不可以再亡之。」對曰：「君若愛司馬，則如亡。死如可逃， 何遠之有？」公懼，使侍人召司馬之侍人宜僚，飲之酒，而使告司馬。司 馬歎曰：「必多僚也。吾有讒子，而弗能殺，吾又不死。抑君有命，可若 何？」

849 Maoshi 249, “Jia le” 假樂, 17C.615–16. The same lines are cited in Cheng 2.8b and Ai 5.4. 850 A similar case of ritual failure and baleful prediction is found in Cheng 6.1. 851 See Zhao 14.2. Bao Guo was entertained with seven sets of sacrificial animals. 852 This episode becomes a precedent for the even more egregious demand by Wu, at the height of its power, of one hundred sets of sacrificial animals at Ai 7.3. 853 Hua Feisui was supervisor of the military in Song. 854 Hua Deng, son of Hua Feisui, fled to Wu at Zhao 20.5. 855 That is, he had Yiliao tell Hua Feisui that the ruler would be expelling Hua Chu. 856 The “lying son” is Hua Duoliao, who has slandered his brother Hua Chu.

1594

Zuo Tradition

He never slackens in what is due his position; He is the one in whom the people find repose.849

Now, just as he accedes to his position, the lord of Cai has taken up a lowly position. His person will end up in a lowly position.”850 In Lu, Ji Pingzi engineers a ritual embarrassment for a noble rival, Shusun Chuo. In summer, Fan Yanga of Jin came on an official visit. Shusun Chuoa was responsible for arrangements for the reception. Ji Pingzib, who hoped to discredit him with Jin, had the officers in charge use for Fan Yanga the same ritual protocol they had used when Bao Guo of Qi had returned the city of Bi.851 Infuriated, Fan Yanga said, “Bao Guo’s rank is lowly and his domain small. That you would have me proceed with the same number of sets of sacrificial animals as he had is tantamout to demeaning our humble settlement. I will report this to our unworthy ruler.” The Lu leaders were afraid and added four sets of sacrificial animals, for a total of eleven.852

21.3(2)

Civil strife continues in Song (see Zhao 20.5) as the machinations of a conniving brother and a series of accidents foil efforts to forestall trouble. Ironically, a jealous brother’s entirely false claim that Hua Chu plans to admit the exiled Hua and Xiang lineages ultimately leads Hua Chu to join in just such a conspiracy. The Hua and Xiang lineages reenter the domain. Hua Feisui of Song, supervisor of the military, was father to Hua Chu, Hua Duoliao, and Hua Deng.853 Hua Chua became junior supervisor of the military, while Hua Duoliaoa became chariot officer. He and Hua Chua disliked each other, so he maligned Hua Chu before the lord: “Hua Chua is going to bring in the exiles.” He spoke of it several times. The lord said, “For my sake the supervisor lost one fine son.854 Death and exile are matters of fate, but for me it is not acceptable to send another son into exile.” Hua Duoliao replied, “If you, my lord, cherish the supervisor, then you ought to go into exile. As long as you could escape death, then what would the distance matter?” Alarmed, the lord had his attendants summon Hua Feisui’s attendant Yiliao and entertain him with drinking, then had him report the matter to Hua Feisui.855 The latter sighed and said, “It must be Hua Duoliaoa’s doing. I have a lying son, yet I cannot bring myself to put him to death, and I myself am not yet at death’s door.856 But the lord has given his command. What is to be done?”

21.4(3)

Lord Zhao

1595

乃與公謀逐華貙，將使田孟諸而遣之。公飲之酒，厚酬之，賜及從 者。司馬亦如之。張匄尤之，曰：「必有故。」使子皮承宜僚以劍而訊之。 宜僚盡以告。張匄欲殺多僚。子皮曰：「司馬老矣，登之謂甚，吾又重 之，不如亡也。」 五月丙申，子皮將見司馬而行，則遇多僚御司馬而朝。張匄不勝 其怒，遂與子皮、臼任、鄭翩殺多僚，劫司馬以叛，而召亡人。壬寅，華、 向入。樂大心、豐愆、華牼禦諸橫。華氏居盧門，以南里叛。六月庚午， 宋城舊鄘及桑林之門而守之。

21.5(4, 5)

秋七月壬午朔，日有食之。公問於梓慎曰：「是何物也？禍福何為？」對 曰：「二至二分，日有食之，不為災。日月之行也，分，同道也；至，相過 也。其他月則為災，陽不克也，故常為水。」 於是叔輒哭日食。昭子曰：「子叔將死，非所哭也。」八月，輒卒。

857 Mengzhu Marsh was about 30 kilometers northeast of the Song capital. See Xi 28.4. 858 Du Yu (ZZ 50.868) states that Zhang Gai was a servant of Hua Chu. 858 This Lu Gate, mentioned also at Huan 14.4, was a gate in the outskirts of the Song capital. 860 This gate was perhaps in the outer walls of the Song capital.

1596

Zuo Tradition

Hua Feisui therefore plotted with the lord to expel Hua Chu, preparing to have him hunt at Mengzhu Marsh and then to send him away.857 The lord treated Hua Chu to drinks and gave him generous gifts, with bestowals even for his followers. Hua Feisui did the same. Zhang Gai thought this strange and said, “There must be some reason for this.”858 He had Hua Chub question Yiliao at swordpoint. Yiliao informed him of the whole plan. Zhang Gai wanted to kill Yiliao. Hua Chub said, “The supervisor is aged, and on Hua Denga’s account he has suffered excessively. Better that I should go into exile than to add to his suffering.” In the fifth month, on the bingshen day (14), Hua Chub was going to see the supervisor and then go into exile. He encountered Hua Duoliaoa driving their father the supervisor to court. Zhang Gai could not master his own anger, so with Hua Chub, Jiu Ren, and Zheng Pian, he killed Hua Duoliaoa and kidnapped the supervisor, starting a revolt and summoning the exiles. On the renyin day (20), the Hua and Xiang lineages entered Song. Yue Daxin, Feng Qian, and Hua Keng opposed them at Heng. The Huas encamped at the Lu Gate and led Nanli in revolt.859 In the sixth month, on the gengwu day (19), Song fortified and manned its old walls as far as the Mulberry Grove Gate.860 In Lu, Zi Shen explains the proprieties of ritual response to an eclipse, while another man’s inappropriate mourning portends his death. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renwu day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Our lord asked Zi Shen, “What matter is this? What calamity or blessing does it portend?” He replied, “When on either of the two solstices or either of the two equinoxes there is an eclipse of the sun, it does not bring disaster. In the movements of the sun and moon, at the equinoxes they are on the same path, while at the solstices they pass each other.861 In other months an eclipse does bring disaster, but because the yang force does not prevail, the disaster is regularly a flood.”862 On this occasion Shu Zhe bewailed the eclipse of the sun. Shusun Chuoc said, “Shu Zhea will die. This is not something that one should bewail.” In the eighth month, Shu Zhe died.

21.5(4, 5)

861 The ecliptic plane (the path of the sun as seen from the perspective of the earth in its annual revolution, known in Chinese as huangdao 黃道) and the celestial equator (the plane equidistant from the north and south poles of the earth and perpendicular to the axis of its rotation, known as chidao 赤道) make an angle of 23°26’. At the equinoxes, the sun and moon are “on the same path” in the sense that the two planes intersect; the apparent paths of the sun and the moon are parallel or near parallel. Because of the closeness of the moon’s orbit to the ecliptic (the two planes are inclined by 5.1°), even at the solstices the moon may pass directly between the sun and the earth, creating syzygy and an eclipse. 862 Compare the remarks on the timing of eclipses at Zhao 17.2.

Lord Zhao

1597

21.6a 冬十月，華登以吳師救華氏。齊烏枝鳴戍宋。廚人濮曰：「《軍志》有之：

『先人有奪人之心，後人有待其衰。』盍及其勞且未定也伐諸！若入而 固，則華氏眾矣，悔無及也。」從之。丙寅，齊師、宋師敗吳師于鴻口，獲 其二帥公子苦雂、偃州員。華登帥其餘以敗宋師。 公欲出，廚人濮曰：「吾小人，可藉死，而不能送亡，君請待之。」 乃徇曰：「揚徽者，公徒也。」眾從之。公自楊門見之，下而巡之，曰：「國 亡君死，二三子之恥也，豈專孤之罪也？」齊烏枝鳴曰：「用少莫如齊致 死，齊致死莫如去備。彼兵多矣，請皆用劍。」從之。華氏北，復即之。廚 人濮以裳裹首，而荷以走，曰：「得華登矣！」遂敗華氏于新里。翟僂新 居于新里，既戰，說甲于公而歸。華妵居于公里，亦如之。 21.6b 十一月癸未，公子城以晉師至。曹翰胡會晉荀吳、齊苑何忌、衛公子朝

救宋。丙戌，與華氏戰于赭丘。鄭翩願為鸛，其御願為鵝。

863 Hua Deng, a son of Hua Feisui but a partisan of the Hua and Xiang lineages, had fled to Wu at Zhao 20.5. 864 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.869), Wu Zhiming was a Qi high officer. 865 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.869), Pu was the high officer for this settlement. 866 The first half of this passage is cited at Wen 7.4a and Xuan 12.2g. 867 Hongkou 鴻口 was located northwest of present­-day Yucheng County 虞城縣, Henan, about 20 kilometers east of the Song capital. 868 See Zhao 20.5 for Hua Deng’s departure from Song. 869 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.870), the Yang Gate was in the vicinity of the Song capital. 870 By this ruse Pu of Chu convinces the Hua forces that Hua Deng is dead. 871 Like Nanli, Xinli is perhaps a precinct within the Song capital. 872 Xinli was in territory held by the Hua lineage, but Dilou sides with the lord nonetheless. Hua Tou would have been expected to side with his own lineage. 873 This Han Hu of Cao is to be distinguished from the more famous Han Hu of Zheng, whose name is written with different characters. 874 Zheqiu 赭丘, or the Zhe Mound, seems to have been near Nanli 南里 in Song. 875 According to sources cited by Yang (4:1429), in the former the army would circle like soaring birds, while in the latter it would imitate the lines of the flight of swans.

1598

Zuo Tradition

Further fighting occurs in Song (see Zhao 21.4), with Wu forces supporting the Huas and Qi forces supporting the Song Duke. The Huas suffer setbacks. In winter, in the tenth month, Hua Deng came to the aid of the Hua lineage with an army from the domain of Wu.863 Wu Zhiming of Qi held a garrison in Song.864 Pu, from the settlement of Chu in Song,865 said, “According to the Maxims for the Military, ‘To preempt the enemy is to rob him of his will. Coming after the enemy, one waits for him to flag.’866 Why not attack them while they are still weary and have not yet settled themselves? Once they have entered the city and dug in, the Hua forces will outnumber us. Then it will be too late for regrets.” Song heeded his advice. On the bingyin day (17), the Qi army and the Song army defeated the Wu army at Hongkou, capturing its two generals, Gongzi Kuqian and Yan Zhouyun.867 Hua Deng, leading the remnants of these forces, defeated the Song army.868 The lord wished to leave the city, but Pu of Chu said, “I am an ordinary man. I could be your proxy in death, but I cannot accompany you in your exile. I beg you, my lord, to await the outcome.” Pu then circulated the command, “Whoever raises a banner is an adherent of the lord.” The mass of troops did as he said. Seeing this from the Yang Gate,869 the lord went down and inspected them and said, “Should the domain fall and the ruler die, it would be to the disgrace of you, my friends. How could it be my fault alone?” Wu Zhiming of Qi said, “When using small numbers of men, it is best to be prepared to fight to the death, and when prepared to fight to the death, it is best to do away with fortifications. They have many more weapons than we do. I submit that we should all use our swords.” They followed his plan. The Hua forces broke and fled, and they went after them again. Pu of Chu wrapped a head in his skirts and ran about carrying it, saying, “Hua Deng has been taken!”870 The Hua forces were then defeated at Xinli.871 Dilü Xin, who lived in Xinli, took off his armor and joined the lord once battle was joined. Hua Tou, who lived in the lord’s precinct, did the same.872

21.6a

Armies from Jin and other northern domains join the fight in Song, supporting the duke against the Hua and Xiang fighters. After an archery duel between leaders of the two sides, the Hua forces are defeated, but they go on to seek aid from Chu (see Zhao 22.2). In the eleventh month, on the guiwei day (4), Gongzi Cheng arrived with a Jin army. Han Hu of Cao joined with Zhonghang Wub of Jin, Yuan Heji of Qi, and Gongzi Zhao of Wei to come to Song’s assistance.873 On the bingxu day (7), they did battle with Hua forces at Zheqiu.874 Zheng Pian, on the Hua side, wanted to make the stork formation, while his driver wanted to make the swan formation.875

Lord Zhao

21.6b

1599

子祿御公子城，莊堇為右。干犨御呂封人華豹，張匄為右。相遇， 城還。華豹曰：「城也！」城怒，而反之。將注，豹則關矣。曰：「平公之 靈，尚輔相余！」豹射，出其間。將注，則又關矣。曰：「不狎，鄙。」抽矢， 城射之，殪。張匄抽殳而下，射之，折股。扶伏而擊之，折軫。又射之， 死。干犨請一矢，城曰：「余言汝於君。」對曰：「不死伍乘，軍之大刑 也。干刑而從子，君焉用之？子速諸！」乃射之，殪。大敗華氏，圍諸 南里。 華亥搏膺而呼，見華貙，曰：「吾為欒氏矣！」貙曰：「子無我迋，不 幸而後亡。」使華登如楚乞師，華貙以車十五乘、徒七十人犯師而出，食 於睢上，哭而送之，乃復入。 楚薳越帥師將逆華氏，大宰犯諫曰：「諸侯唯宋事其君。今又爭 國，釋君而臣是助，無乃不可乎！」王曰：「而告我也後，既許之矣。」

876 Hua Bao insults Gongzi Cheng by addressing him directly by his given name, which is normally reserved for humble references to oneself. 877 Lord Ping, whose long reign lasted from 575 to 532, was Cheng’s father. 878 Gongzi Cheng’s cynical invocation of battlefield courtesy recalls the disastrous deference of Lord Xiang of Song at the Hong River (Xi 22.8) and the mistake of Kuang Jiao during the battle of Daji (Xuan 2.1a). 879 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.870), Hua Hai here refers to the suppression of Luan Ying’s revolt in Jin at Xiang 23.6. He fears the destruction of the Hua lineage.

1600

Zuo Tradition

Xiang Yia drove for Gongzi Cheng, with Zhuang Jin as the spearman on the right. Gan Chou drove for the Lü border official Hua Bao, with Zhang Gai as the spearman on the right. When they met each other, Gongzi Chengb turned back. Hua Bao said, “You, Cheng!” In his anger, Gongzi Chengb turned back to face him.876 Gongzi Cheng went to put an arrow to his bowstring, but Hua Baoa had already drawn his bow full, and Gongzi Cheng said, “May the numinous power of Lord Ping sustain me!”877 Hua Baoa shot, his arrow passing between Gongzi Cheng and Xiang Yi. Gongzi Cheng again went to put an arrow to his bowstring, but Hua Bao had again already drawn his bow full. Gongzi Cheng said, “It is base of you not to give me my turn.” Hua Bao removed his arrow, then Gongzi Chengb shot him dead.878 Zhang Gai pulled out his pike and stepped out of the chariot, but Gongzi Cheng shot him and broke his thigh. As Zhang Gai crawled on the ground, Gongzi Cheng struck him again, breaking the chariot fender. He then shot him again and killed him. Gan Chou asked to be shot dead, but Gongzi Chengb said, “I will speak to the ruler about you.” He replied, “Not to die with one’s chariot men is a great offense in the military. What use would the ruler have for one who has committed such an offense and then gone over to you? Be quick about it, sir!” So Gongzi Cheng shot him dead. They completely defeated the Hua forces and surrounded them at Nanli. Pounding his chest and shouting, Hua Hai saw Hua Chu and said, “We have become another Luan lineage!”879 Hua Chua said, “Do not try to frighten me. We will fall only if we are unlucky.” Sending Hua Deng off to the domain of Chu to plead for troops, Hua Chu broke through the besieging forces with fifteen chariots and seventy foot soldiers. After taking a meal on the banks of the Sui River, they sent off Hua Deng with lamentations, then went back into Nanli.880 Wei Yue of Chu led his army out and was going to welcome the Hua forces, but the grand steward Fan remonstrated: “Among the princes, only in Song do men still serve their ruler. Now that they too are fighting over the domain, would it not be wrong for us to throw over the ruler and aid the subjects?”881 The king said, “You report to me too late. I have already granted them my permission.”

880 The Sui River flowed from northwest to southeast, passing just south of the Song capital. 881 Fan’s observation suggests the extent of political change in the late Spring and Autumn period and the widespread redistribution of power away from the domains’ old ruling houses.

Lord Zhao

1601

21.7(6) 蔡侯朱出奔楚。費無極取貨於東國，而謂蔡人曰：「朱不用命於楚，君

王將立東國。若不先從王欲，楚必圍蔡。」蔡人懼，出朱而立東國。朱愬 于楚，楚子將討蔡。無極曰：「平侯與楚有盟，故封。其子有二心，故廢 之。靈王殺隱大子，其子與君同惡，德君必甚。又使立之，不亦可乎？且 廢置在君，蔡無他矣。」

21.8 (7)

公如晉，及河。鼓叛晉，晉將伐鮮虞，故辭公。

春秋 22.1(1) 二十有二年春，齊侯伐莒。 22.2(2) 宋華亥、向寧、華定自宋南里出奔楚。 22.3 大蒐于昌間。 22.4(3) 夏四月乙丑，天王崩。 22.5(5) 六月，叔鞅如京師，葬景王。 22.6(5) 王室亂。 22.7(5) 劉子、單子以王猛居于皇。

882 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.871), the lord of the Eastern Region was a younger brother of Prince Ping of Cai, who died this year, and an uncle of Zhu. 883 See Zhao 13.2b. 884 For King Ling of Chu’s sacrifice of the heir apparent Yin of Cai, see Zhao 11.8. 885 For Gu, see Zhao 15.5. 886 Changjian 昌間 was perhaps in the southern part of later Sishui County 泗水縣, Shandong.

1602

Zuo Tradition

Fulfilling a prediction (see Zhao 21.2), the new Cai ruler flees his domain. Fei Wuji of Chu engineers the installation of the Cai lord of the Eastern Region as Lord Dao. Annexed by Chu (Zhao 11.8) and restored on the accession of King Ping (Zhao 13.5), Cai had for many years been a de facto Chu protectorate. Zhu, the Prince of Cai, departed and fled to Chu. Fei Wuji, who had received property from the lord of the Eastern Region,882 said to the leaders of Cai, “Zhu is not obeying orders from Chu, and the king intends to establish the lord of the Eastern Region as ruler. If you do not anticipate the king’s wishes, Chu is sure to lay siege to Cai.” Frightened, the Cai leaders expelled Zhu and established the lord of the Eastern Region as ruler. Zhu brought his case to Chu, and the Master of Chu prepared to chastise Cai. Fei Wujia said, “It was because Prince Ping of Cai swore a covenant with Chu that he was appointed.883 His son has disloyal intentions, so he is deposed. King Ling killed the heir apparent Yin,884 and the latter’s son, the lord of the Eastern Region, has the same enemies as you. He is bound to consider you a great benefactor. Is it not right to have him established as ruler now? What is more, deposing and setting up are in your hands, my lord. Cai has no other intentions.”

21.7(6)

Our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River when Gu turned against Jin, and Jin prepared to attack the Xianyu.885 Jin therefore declined our lord’s visit.

21.8(7)

LORD ZHAO 22 (520 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-second year, in spring, the Prince of Qi attacked Ju.

22.1(1)

Hua Hai, Xiang Ning, and Hua Ding of Song departed from Nanli, in Song, and fled to Chu.

22.2(2)

There was a great muster at Changjian.886

22.3

In summer, in the fourth month, on the yichou day (18), the Heavenappointed king succumbed.

22.4(3)

In the sixth month, Shu Yang went to the Zhou capital for the burial of King Jing.

22.5(5)

The royal house was in turmoil.

22.6(5)

The Liu Master and the Shan Master, taking the king Meng with them, resided at Huang.887

22.7(5)

887 It is unprecedented for a king to be referred to by his personal name in the Annals. Meng died within the year (see Annals, Zhao 22.9; Zuozhuan, Zhao 22.5) and never formally assumed the throne.

Lord Zhao

1603

22.8(5) 秋，劉子、單子以王猛入于王城。 22.9(5) 冬十月，王子猛卒。 22.10 十有二月癸酉朔，日有食之。

左傳 22.1(1) 二十二年春王二月甲子，齊北郭啟帥師伐莒。莒子將戰，苑羊牧之諫曰：

「齊帥賤，其求不多，不如下之，大國不可怒也。」弗聽，敗齊師于壽 餘。齊侯伐莒，莒子行成。司馬竈如莒蒞盟；莒子如齊蒞盟，盟于稷門 之外。莒於是乎大惡其君。 22.2(2) 楚薳越使告于宋曰：「寡君聞君有不令之臣為君憂，無寧以為宗羞，寡君

請受而戮之。」對曰：「孤不佞，不能媚於父兄，以為君憂，拜命之辱。抑 君臣日戰，君曰『余必臣是助』，亦唯命。人有言曰：『唯亂門之無過。』君 若惠保敝邑，無亢不衷，以獎亂人，孤之望也。唯君圖之！」楚人患之。

888 For Wangcheng, the “City of the King,” located in what is now Luoyang, Henan, see Zhuang 21.2. 889 The person referred to above as “the king Meng” (see Zhao 22.7) is now called Wangzi (“Prince”) Meng. Instead of using beng 崩, “succumb,” the usual term for the death of a king, the text says simply that he “died” (zu 卒). 890 This eclipse took place on 23 November 520 Bce. See Stephenson and Houlden, Atlas of Historical Eclipse Maps, 127. 891 The name is given in a somewhat unusual form. Yuan is his lineage name, Yang his style name, and Muzhi his given name. 892 Shouyu 壽餘 was located in the domain of Ju near present-day Anqiu County 安丘 縣, Shandong. 893 Forcing the Master of Ju to swear a covenant outside the Qi city was a way of adding humiliation. The Ji Gate was either the west gate or the south gate of the Qi capital. 894 Wei Yue expresses, in the politest terms, Chu’s interest in offering refuge to the Song ruler’s enemies. From the Song response it is clear that the Chu offer to put the Hua and Xiang men to death is empty show. 895 Cf. Zhao 19.8. 896 Song fears that by offering refuge to the Hua and Xiang forces, Chu will end up supporting their claims against the Song ruling house.

1604

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, the Liu Master and the Shan Master, taking the king Meng with them, entered Wangcheng.888

22.8(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, Wangzi Meng died.889

22.9(5)

In the twelfth month, on the guiyou day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.890

22.10

ZUO

After a defeat by Qi, the Master of Ju submits to an unequal exchange of treaty delegations, arousing the anger of his own people (see Zhao 23.4). In the twenty-second year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the jiazi day (16), Beiguo Qi of Qi led an army in an attack on Ju. The Master of Ju was preparing to fight when Yuan Yang Muzhi891 remonstrated: “The Qi general is a lowly man, and their demands do not amount to much. It would be better to surrender to them: one should not infuriate a great domain.” The Ju ruler did not heed his advice, but instead he defeated the Qi army at Shouyu.892 When the Prince of Qi then attacked Ju, the Master of Ju sued for peace. The supervisor of the military Zao of Qi went to Ju to oversee the covenant. The Master of Ju went to Qi to oversee the covenant, and the covenant was sworn outside the Ji Gate.893 For this reason, the people of Ju loathed their ruler.

22.1(1)

Prepared to aid Hua forces in their fight against the Song Duke, Chu desists after a wise intervention from the northern forces supporting Song (see Zhao 21.6). Order is restored in Song. Wei Yue of Chu had an announcement made to Song: “Our unworthy ruler has heard that you, my lord, have disgraceful subjects who have brought you sorrow. Do you not consider this a shame for the Ancestral Temple? Our unworthy ruler asks to take custody of them and put them to death.”894 The Song Duke replied, “In my ineptness I was unable to win favor with my kinsmen and thus brought sorrow to your ruler. I bow in response to the condescension of your command. If, when ruler and subjects did battle, you, my lord, were to say, ‘It is the subjects I am bound to help,’ then indeed it would be just as you commanded. Men have a saying: ‘Cross not the threshold of a disordered house.’895 If you, my lord, would generously preserve our humble settlement, then it is my hope that you will not defend the disloyal or reward the instigators of disorder.896 It is up to you, my lord, to make your plans about it!” The Chu leaders worried about this.

22.2(2)

Lord Zhao

1605

諸侯之戍謀曰：「若華氏知困而致死，楚恥無功而疾戰，非吾利 也。不如出之，以為楚功，其亦無能為也已。救宋而除其害，又何求？」 乃固請出之，宋人從之。己巳，宋華亥、向寧、華定、華貙、華登、皇奄 傷、省臧、士平出奔楚。 宋公使公孫忌為大司馬，邊卬為大司徒，樂祁為司城，仲幾為左 師，樂大心為右師，樂輓為大司寇，以靖國人。 22.3(4) 王子朝、賓起有寵於景王，王與賓孟說之，欲立之。劉獻公之庶子伯

蚠事單穆公，惡賓孟之為人也，願殺之；又惡王子朝之言，以為亂，願 去之。 賓孟適郊，見雄雞自斷其尾，問之。侍者曰：「自憚其犧也。」遽歸 告王，且曰：「雞其憚為人用乎！人異於是。犧者實用人，人犧實難，己犧 何害？」王弗應。

1606

Zuo Tradition

The garrisons from the princes plotted as follows: “It would not be in our interest if the Hua forces, understanding their predicament, should decide to sacrifice their own lives, and if Chu should hasten to do battle out of shame at having achieved no merit. It would be better to expel the Hua forces, turning this into Chu’s achievement. In this way too the Huas will be reduced to impotence. Chu will have come to Song’s rescue and removed the harm facing it. What more could Chu want?” They therefore insisted that the Huas be expelled, and the leaders of Song followed them. On the jisi day (21), Hua Hai, Xiang Ning, Hua Ding, Hua Chu, Hua Deng, Huang Yanshang, Xing Zang, and Shi Ping, all of Song, departed and fled to Chu. The Duke of Song appointed Gongsun Ji as senior supervisor of the military, Bian Ang as senior supervisor of conscripts, Yue Qilia as supervisor of fortifications, Zhong Ji as minister of the left, Yue Daxin as minister of the right, and Yue Wan as senior supervisor of corrections, in this way calming the inhabitants of the capital. King Jing of Zhou dies as intrigues swirl around him. Liu Di, an enemy of the king’s son Wangzi Zhao, becomes head of the Liu lineage, which joins the Shan lineage in opposing Wangzi Zhao’s succession as Zhou king. In this episode lie the seeds of a succession crisis and the long rebellion of Wangzi Zhao. Wangzi Zhao and Bin Qi both enjoyed the favor of King Jing.897 Both the king and Bin Qia were pleased with Wangzi Zhao and wanted to establish him as heir. Liu Dia, a son of the Liu Duke Xian by a concubine, was in service to the Shan Duke Mu. Liu Di hated Bin Qia for his behavior and was eager to have him put to death. He also hated Wangzi Zhao’s manner of speaking, which he considered insubordinate, and was eager to have him removed. Bin Qia, on his way to the outskirts of the city, saw a rooster plucking out its own tail feathers and asked about it. His attendant said, “The rooster fears that he will be sacrificed.” Bin Qi returned immediately to court and informed the king, adding, “The rooster must fear that he will be made use of by humans. But humans are different from this. To be sacrificed is to be used by others, and it is indeed difficult to be the sacrifice of others. But what harm is there in sacrificing oneself?” The king made no response.898

22.3(4)

897 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.872), Bin Qi was the tutor of the Prince, Wangzi Zhao. 898 Bin Qi contrasts the behavior of the rooster, which destroys the adornments that make it a suitable sacrificial offering, with the ways of Wangzi Zhao, who has apparently made no secret of his desire to replace the present heir. For Bin, Wangzi Zhao’s willingness to put himself forward as successor is blameless, since he is agent rather than victim. According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.873), the king’s silence is acquiescence. The Guoyu version of this episode (“Zhou yu 3,” 3.142–43) gives Bin a slightly longer speech.

Lord Zhao

1607

夏四月，王田北山，使公卿皆從，將殺單子、劉子。王有心疾，乙 丑，崩于榮錡氏。戊辰，劉子摯卒，無子，單子立劉蚠。五月庚辰，見王， 遂攻賓起，殺之，盟群王子于單氏。 22.4 晉之取鼓也，既獻而反鼓子焉。又叛於鮮虞。六月，荀吳略東陽，使師

偽糴者負甲以息於昔陽之門外，遂襲鼓，滅之，以鼓子䳒鞮歸，使涉佗 守之。 22.5a(5) 丁巳，葬景王。王子朝因舊官、百工之喪職秩者與靈、景之族以作亂。帥

郊、要、餞之甲，以逐劉子。壬戌，劉子奔揚。單子逆悼王于莊宮以歸。 王子還夜取王以如莊宮。癸亥，單子出。

899 These two men, linked through Liu Di, presumably shared his hatred of the king’s son Wangzi Zhao and favorite Bin Qi. 900 Although it was predicted (Zhao 21.1) that the king would die of a heart ailment, the circumstances strongly suggest the possibility that he was murdered. 901 This is the newly installed Wangzi Meng. 902 See Zhao 15.5. 903 Dongyang 東陽 was a general term for the area of Jin to the east of the present-day Taihang Mountains, in northern Henan and southern Hebei. For this Xiyang, see Zhao 12.7. 904 Du Yu (ZZ 50.874) thought that the bai gong 百工 mentioned here were the “hundred officials.” Yu Yue (cited in Yang, 4:1435–36) argues instead that these were artisans, and that by the nature of their work they were a more politically unified and therefore more powerful group than any other in the populace. 905 The settlements mentioned were all in the Zhou domain. For Jiao, see Zhao 12.8. Yao 要 was about 50 kilometers northwest of the Zhou capital in present-day Xin’an County 新安縣, Henan. The location of Jian 餞 is unknown. 906 For Yang, see Xi 11.3. 907 King Dao is the king Meng or Wangzi Meng of Annals, Zhao 22.7 and 22.9. The Zhuang Palace was in Wangcheng.

1608

Zuo Tradition

In summer, in the fourth month, the king hunted in the northern mountains. He had all of the high ministers accompany him, since he was planning to put the Shan Duke Mub and the Liu Duke Xianb to death.899 The king developed an acute heart ailment and, on the yichou day (18), succumbed at the residence of Rong Yi.900 On the wuchen day (22), Zhi, the Liu Duke Xianb, died. As he had no sons by his main wife, the Shan Duke Mub established Liu Dib, the future Liu Duke Wen, as his successor. In the fifth month, on the gengchen day (4), he had an audience with the king,901 then attacked Bin Qi, killed him, and swore a covenant with all the king’s sons at the Shan residence. Jin extinguishes Gu (see Zhao 15.5). Gu is a settlement of the White Di, who have warred intermittently with Jin throughout the era (see Xi 33.6, Xuan 8.1, Cheng 9.11). When Jin took Gu, they restored the Master of Gu after having presented their spoils in the temple.902 He then again went over to the side of the Xianyu. In the sixth month, Zhonghang Wub made a tour of Dongyang and had his troops disguise themselves as grain purchasers, hauling their armor on their backs and then resting outside the gate at Xiyang.903 They then made a surprise attack on Gu and extinguished it. They took Yuanti, the Master of Gu, back with them and had She Tuo hold the place.

22.4

Wangzi Zhao, claimant to the Zhou succession, openly rebels, supported by Wangzi Huan, the Shao Duke Zhuang, and many others. He is opposed by the Liu Duke Wen and the Shan Duke Mu and their adherents. In a first phase of fighting, the Liu Duke Wen and the Shan Duke Mu are driven out, but the Liu forces then fight their way back into Wangcheng, as Wangzi Zhao takes refuge at Jing. In the sixth month, on the dingsi day (11), King Jing was buried. Wangzi Zhao raised a revolt with the support of those among the old officials and the many artisans who had lost their employment and with the support of the houses of Kings Ling and Jing.904 He led armed men from Jiao, Yao, and Jian to drive out the Liu Duke Wena.905 On the renxu day (16), the Liu Duke Wena fled to Yang.906 The Shan Duke Mub went to bring King Dao from the Zhuang Palace to the Shan residence.907 Wangzi Huan of Wangzi Zhao’s party stole the king away by night and went to the Zhuang Palace. On the guihai day (17), the Shan Duke Mub fled.

Lord Zhao

22.5a(5)

1609

王子還與召莊公謀，曰：「不殺單旗，不捷。與之重盟，必來。背盟 而克者多矣。」從之。樊頃子曰：「非言也，必不克。」遂奉王以追單子， 及領，大盟而復。殺摯荒以說。 劉子如劉，單子亡。乙丑，奔于平畤。群王子追之，單子殺還、姑、 發、弱、鬷、延、定、稠，子朝奔京。丙寅，伐之。京人奔山。劉子入于王 城。辛未，鞏簡公敗績于京。乙亥，甘平公亦敗焉。 22.5b(9) 叔鞅至自京師，言王室之亂也。閔馬父曰：「子朝必不克。其所與者，天

所廢也。」 單子欲告急於晉。秋七月戊寅，以王如平畤，遂如圃車，次于皇。 劉子如劉。單子使王子處守于王城。盟百工于平宮。 辛卯，鄩肸伐皇。大敗，獲鄩肸。壬辰，焚諸王城之市。 八月辛酉，司徒醜以王師敗績于前城。百工叛。己巳，伐單氏之 宮，敗焉。庚午，反伐之。辛未，伐東圉。

908 Shan Qi is the Shan Duke Mu. 909 Du Yu (ZZ 50.874) identifies Fan Qi as a partisan of Shan and Liu. 910 Ling 領 was perhaps the mountain known as Huanyuan 轘轅, 50 kilometers southeast of the Zhou capital. By swearing a covenant they aimed to lure the Shan Duke Mu back so that he could be killed. 911 According to Takezoe (22.54), they blamed the nighttime kidnapping of the king on Zhi Huang. 912 See Xiang 30.6. The Shan Duke Mu fled because he realized that Wangzi Zhao’s party would not honor the covenant. 913 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.874), all were descendants of Kings Ling and Jing. 914 Jing 京 was located southwest of the Zhou capital, to the south of the Yi River. 915 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.874), both lords were Zhou ministers. They were supporters of the king. 916 Shu Yang had been in the capital for the burial of King Jing; see Annals, Zhao 22.5. 917 Min Mafu is a Lu high officer. 918 Both Puche 圃車 and Huang 皇 were about 40 kilometers east of the Zhou capital. 919 This covenant would split the artisans from Wangzi Zhao and deprive the latter of a powerful group of supporters. 920 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.874), Xun Xi was of the party of Wangzi Zhao. He is not the same man as Xun Xi 荀息 of Jin, who was active during the years of Lord Xi of Lu. 921 Qiancheng 前城, southeast of the Zhou capital, was held by Wangzi Zhao’s forces. 922 Dongyu 東圉 was located east of the capital.

1610

Zuo Tradition

Wangzi Huan plotted with the Shao Duke Zhuang as follows: “If we do not put Shan Qi to death, we will not succeed in our revolt.908 If we offer a repetition of the covenant, he is certain to come. Many are the men who have prevailed by betraying a covenant.” The Shao Duke Zhuang followed this plan. Fan Qia said, “This is no proper way of speaking. They will certainly not prevail.”909 Wangzi Huan’s party then pursued the Shan Duke Mub, carrying the king with them. When they reached Ling, they swore a great covenant and returned.910 For an appeasement, they put Zhi Huang to death.911 The Liu Duke Wena went to Liu, but the Shan Duke Mub went into exile. On the yichou day (19), he fled to Pingzhi.912 The various royal princes pursued him, and the Shan Duke Mub killed Huana, Gu, Fa, Ruo, Zong, Yan, Ding, and Chou.913 Wangzi Zhao fled to Jing.914 On the bingyin day (20), the Shan Duke Mu attacked him. The leaders of Jing then fled into the mountains. The Liu Duke Wena entered Wangcheng. On the xinwei day (25), the Gong Duke Jian was routed at Jing. On the yihai day (29), the Gan Duke Ping was also defeated there.915 Despite a Lu prediction that Wangzi Zhao will ultimately fail, the intervention of Jin forces on the side of the Shan Duke Mu and the Liu Duke Wen meets with stiff resistance. The king Meng dies and is replaced by King Jìng, now held up by Shan and Liu as the rightful heir. Shu Yang arrived from the capital city and spoke of the turmoil in the royal house.916 Min Mafu said, “Wangzi Zhao is certain not to prevail. The men he allies himself with are people Heaven has discarded.”917 The Shan Duke Mub wanted to notify Jin of the emergency. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuyin day (3), he went to Pingzhi, taking the king with him, then went on to Puche, setting up camp at Huang.918 The Liu Duke Wena went to Liu. The Shan Duke Mub had Wangzi Chu hold Wangcheng and swear a covenant with the many artisans at the temple of King Ping.919 On the xinmao day (16), Xun Xi attacked Huang.920 They were completely defeated, and Xun Xi himself was captured. On the renchen day (17), they burned him alive in the marketplace of Wangcheng. In the eighth month, on the xinyou day (16), the supervisor of conscripts Chou, with a royal army, was routed at Qiancheng, and the many artisans revolted.921 On the jisi day (24), they attacked the palace of the Shan lineage and were defeated there. On the gengwu day (25), the Shan lineage made a counterattack against them. On the xinwei day (26), the Shan lineage attacked Dongyu.922

22.5b(9)

Lord Zhao

1611

冬十月丁巳，晉籍談、荀躒帥九州之戎及焦、瑕、溫、原之師，以納 王于王城。庚申，單子、劉蚠以王師敗績于郊，前城人敗陸渾于社。十 一月乙酉，王子猛卒。不成喪也。己丑，敬王即位。館于子旅氏。 十二月庚戌，晉籍談、荀躒、賈辛、司馬督帥師軍于陰，于侯氏， 于谿泉，次于社。王師軍于氾，于解，次于任人。閏月，晉箕遺、樂徵、右 行詭濟師取前城，軍其東南。王師軍于京楚。辛丑，伐京，毀其西南。

春秋 23.1(2) 二十有三年春王正月，叔孫婼如晉。 23.2 癸丑，叔鞅卒。 23.3(2) 晉人執我行人叔孫婼。 23.4(1) 晉人圍郊。 23.5 夏六月，蔡侯東國卒于楚。

923 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.874), these Rong troops were drawn from the Rong of Luhun. Xia, Jiao, Yuan, and Wen were Jin cities ranging from west to east along the border between Jin and Zhou territory. 924 The forces of Qiancheng were allied with Wangzi Zhao. She 社 was near the confluence of the Luo River and the Yellow River, about 60 kilometers northeast of the Zhou capital. 925 This line explains why the Annals does not in this case use the usual term for a king’s death, beng 崩 (“succumb”). Wangzi Meng was the successor to King Jing but had not ruled through the beginning of a new year and therefore had not formally assumed the throne. According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.875), he was posthumously named King Dao. 926 King Jìng is Wangzi Meng’s younger full brother. 927 Zilü was a Zhou high officer. 928 Yin 陰 was on the south bank of the Yellow River, just over 20 kilometers directly north of the Zhou capital. The same place is referred to as Pingyin 平陰 in Zhao

1612

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the tenth month, on the dingsi day (13), Ji Tan and Zhi Wenzia of Jin led Rong troops from the nine districts and armies from Jiao, Xia, Wen, and Yuan in installing the king in power in Wangcheng.923 On the gengshen day (16), the Shan Duke Mub and the Liu Duke Wenc, with a royal army, were routed at Jiao, while the men of Qiancheng defeated the Luhun Rong forces at She.924 In the eleventh month, on the yiyou day (12), “Wangzi Meng died”: this means that his funeral rites were not completed.925 On the jichou day (16), King Jìng acceded to his position.926 He lodged at the home of Zilü.927 In the twelfth month, on the gengxu day (7), Ji Tan, Zhi Wenzia, Jia Xin, and the supervisor of the military Du, all of Jin, stationed armies at Yin, at Houshi, and at Xiquan and set up camp at She.928 The royal forces stationed their armies at Fan and Jie and set up camp at Renren.929 In the intercalary month, Ji Yi, Yue Zheng, and Youhang Gui, all of Jin, crossed their armies over the rivers and took Qiancheng, setting up their camp to the southeast. The royal army set up its camp at Jingchu.930 On the xinchou day (29), they attacked Jing and destroyed its southwestern part.931 LORD ZHAO 23 (519 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-third year, in spring, in the royal first month, Shusun Chuo went to Jin.

23.1(2)

On the guichou day (12), Shu Yang died.

23.2

Jin leaders arrested our envoy Shusun Chuo.

23.3(2)

Jin leaders laid siege to Jiao.

23.4(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, the lord of the Eastern Region, the Prince of Cai, died in Chu.

23.5



23.1. Houshi 侯氏 was 30 kilometers southeast of the capital; Xiquan 谿泉 was closer to the capital in the same direction. According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.875), Ji Tan was at Yin, Zhi Wenzi at Houshi, Jia Xin at Xiquan, and the supervisor of the military Du at She. 929 There were several settlements known as Fan 氾. Yang (4:1438–39) suspects that this is the Fan mentioned in Cheng 4.5, located some 60 kilometers east of the Zhou capital. Jie 解 was south of the Zhou capital. Renren 任人 was somewhere near the capital. 930 Jingchu 京楚 was somewhere near the capital. 931 Wangzi Zhao was in Jing. According to Gu Yanwu (cited in Yang, 4:1439), a version of the classics carved on stone tablets during the Tang dynasty here had the additional sentence “Wangzi Zhao fled to Jiao” (Zizhao ben jiao 子朝奔郊).

Lord Zhao

1613

23.6(4) 秋七月，莒子庚輿來奔。 23.7(5) 戊辰，吳敗頓、胡、沈、蔡、陳、許之師于雞父。胡子髡、沈子逞滅，獲陳

夏齧。 23.8(3) 天王居于狄泉。尹氏立王子朝。 23.9(6) 八月乙未，地震。 23.10(8) 冬，公如晉，至河，有疾，乃復。

左傳 23.1(4) 二十三年春王正月壬寅朔，二師圍郊。癸卯，郊、鄩潰。丁未，晉師在平

陰，王師在澤邑。王使告間，庚戌，還。

23.2a(1, 3)

邾人城翼，還，將自離姑。公孫鉏曰：「魯將御我。」欲自武城還，循山而 南。徐鉏、丘弱、茅地曰：「道下，遇雨，將不出，是不歸也。」遂自離姑。 武城人塞其前，斷其後之木而弗殊，邾師過之，乃推而蹙之，遂取邾 師，獲鉏、弱、地。

932 All the domains here defeated by Wu were allies of Chu. Hu 胡 was near present-day Fuyang 阜陽, Anhui, about 75 kilometers east of the Cai capital. Jifu 雞父 was south of present-day Gushi 固始, Henan, about 400 kilometers northwest of the Chu capital and just over 100 kilometers southeast of the Cai capital. 933 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.875), the rulers of Hu and Shěn were killed, but the domains survived. 934 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.875), Diquan 狄泉 (same as Diquan 翟泉 in Annals, Xi 29.3) lay just outside the walls of the capital, and the king was taking refuge there as Wangzi Zhao entered the city. 935 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.876), the armies were those of King Jìng and Jin. 936 Both settlements had been held by Wangzi Zhao’s forces. 937 Pingyin is the Yin referred to in Zhao 22.5b. Zeyi is Diquan, where King Jìng has taken refuge. 938 Yi 翼 and Ligu 離姑 were both Zhu settlements, about 60 kilometers east-southeast of the Zhu capital. 939 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.876), Gongsun Chu was a Zhu high officer. Wucheng belonged to Lu (see Annals, Xi 19.15). To pass the settlement would constitute an incursion into Lu territory, so the Zhu leaders decide to march close to Wucheng but then turn to the west—homeward—and proceed along the southern side of the mountains. The local mountains run in a northwest–southeast direction. 940 That is, they decided to risk passing through Lu territory. 941 In this way the two detachments from Wucheng trapped the Zhu army on the road between them.

1614

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, Gengyu, the Master of Ju, came in flight. On the wuchen day (29), Wu defeated the troops of Dun, Hu, Shěn, Cai, Chen, and Xǔ at Jifu.932 Kun, the Chief of Hu, and Cheng, the Master of Shěn, were extinguished, and Xia Nie of Chen was captured.933 The Heaven-appointed king resided at Diquan.934 The Yin lineage head established Wangzi Zhao as king. In the eighth month, on the yiwei day (26), there was an earthquake. In winter, our lord was going to Jin. He had advanced as far as the Yellow River when he was taken ill, then turned back.

23.6(4)

23.7(5)

23.8(3)

23.9(6) 23.10(8)

ZUO

In a continuation of last year’s maneuvering (see Zhao 22.5), Jin forces and the king’s army gain the advantage (see Zhao 23.3). In the twenty-third year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the renyin day (1), the two armies laid siege to Jiao.935 On the guimao day (2), Jiao and Xun fell.936 On the dingwei day (6), the Jin army was at Pingyin, while the royal army was at Zeyi.937 The king sent a messenger to report that the troubles were easing, and on the gengxu day (9), the Jin army turned to go home.

23.1(4)

After a defeat by Lu, Zhu complains to Jin. As a result, Jin arrests Shusun Chuo of Lu and holds him in Jin (see Zhao 23.8). The episode recalls Jin’s arrest of Ji Pingzi under similar circumstances at Zhao 13.3g. Shusun Chuo behaves exemplarily during his time in Jin. The men of Zhu fortified Yi. As they were returning home, they prepared to go by way of Ligu.938 When Gongsun Chu said, “Lu will come out to oppose us,” they wanted to turn back from Wucheng and proceed south of the mountains.939 But Xu Chu, Qiu Ruo, and Mao Di said, “The road is on low ground, so if we have rain, we will not get out. From this route there is no way to return!” They therefore went by way of Ligu.940 One force from Wucheng blocked their way in front, while another made cuts in trees beside the road behind them, but without felling them. Once the Zhu army had passed these trees, the Wucheng forces pushed the trees down.941 They then captured the Zhu army and made prisoners of Xu Chua, Qiu Ruoa, and Mao Dia.

23.2a(1, 3)

Lord Zhao

1615

邾人愬于晉，晉人來討。叔孫婼如晉，晉人執之。書曰「晉人執我 行人叔孫婼」，言使人也。 晉人使與邾大夫坐，叔孫曰：「列國之卿當小國之君，固周制也。 邾又夷也。寡君之命介子服回在，請使當之，不敢廢周制故也。」乃不 果坐。 23.2b 韓宣子使邾人聚其眾，將以叔孫與之。叔孫聞之，去眾與兵而朝。士彌

牟謂韓宣子曰：「子弗良圖，而以叔孫與其讎，叔孫必死之。魯亡叔孫， 必亡邾。邾君亡國，將焉歸？子雖悔之，何及？所謂盟主，討違命也。若 皆相執，焉用盟主？」 乃弗與。使各居一館。士伯聽其辭，而愬諸宣子，乃皆執之。士伯 御叔孫，從者四人，過邾館以如吏。先歸邾子。士伯曰：「以芻蕘之難， 從者之病，將館子於都。」叔孫旦而立，期焉。乃館諸箕。舍子服昭伯於 他邑。

942 For more on such equivalences, see Cheng 3.7. 943 Since the ruling lineage of the domain of Zhu descended from non-Sinitic Yi forebears, representatives of the domain were not entitled to the same ritual treatment as representatives of states whose lineages belonged to the extended Zhou royal line. 944 While Shusun Chuo was of ministerial rank, Zifu Zhaobo was a Lu high officer and therefore closer to being on a ritual par with the Zhu high officer. 945 See Yang, 4:1442.

1616

Zuo Tradition

The Zhu leaders made a complaint to Jin, and the men of Jin came to chastise us. When Shusun Chuo went to Jin, Jin leaders arrested him. That the text has “Jin leaders arrested our envoy Shusun Chuo” is to con­ vey that he was sent as an envoy. The Jin leaders wanted to have him sit and argue the case with a Zhu high officer, but Shusun Chuoa said, “The minister of a ranking domain is on a par with the ruler of a small domain. That is the long-standing Zhou rule.942 What is more, Zhu belongs to the Yi people.943 By the command of our unworthy ruler, my aide Zifu Zhaoboa is here with me.944 I request that he be placed on a par with the Zhu high officer, since I would not presume to abandon the Zhou rule.” He therefore did not end up arguing the case. Han Qia had the Zhu leaders gather their men. He was going to hand Shusun Chuoa over to them. Hearing of this, Shusun Chuoa went to court, leaving his men and weapons behind. Shi Mimou said to Han Qia, “If you fail to plan this matter well and hand Shusun Chuoa over to his enemies, he is certain to die for it. If Lu loses Shusun Chuoa, it is certain to destroy Zhu. If the ruler of Zhu loses his domain, where will he make his home? Although you may regret it then, sir, will there be time to do anything about it? Being the host of covenants means that one chastises violations of command. If everyone arrests one another, what use will the host of covenants be?” As a result, Han Qi did not hand Shusun Chuo over to Zhu. He had Shusun Chuo and Zifu Zhaobo occupy separate lodgings.945 Shi Mimoua listened to their statements and reported them to Han Qib, who placed both of them under arrest.946 Carrying Shusun Chuoa in his carriage and accompanied by four of his followers, Shi Mimoua went past the Zhu lodgings as he took Shusun Chuo to place him in the custody of the Jin officers.947 The Master of Zhu was sent home first. Shi Mimoua said to Shusun Chuo, “Because of the difficulties facing your gatherers of fuel and fodder and because of the sufferings of your followers, we are going to lodge you in an outlying city.” Shusun Chuoa rose at dawn and stood waiting for further orders. He was then lodged at Ji.948 They housed Zifu Zhaobo in another settlement.

23.2b

946 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.877), the remarks of Shusun Chuo and Zifu Zhaobo showed that they would not submit. 947 Shi Mimou thus intentionally humiliates the Lu envoy. 948 Ji 箕 was just over 100 kilometers north of the Jin capital, northeast of present-day Pu 蒲 County, Shanxi.

Lord Zhao

1617

23.2c 范獻子求貨於叔孫，使請冠焉。取其冠法，而與之兩冠，曰：「盡矣。」

為叔孫故，申豐以貨如晉。叔孫曰：「見我，吾告女所行貨。」見，而不 出。吏人之與叔孫居於箕者，請其吠狗，弗與。及將歸，殺而與之食之。 叔孫所館者，雖一日，必葺其牆、屋，去之如始至。 23.3(8) 夏四月乙酉，單子取訾，劉子取牆人、直人。六月壬午，王子朝入于尹。癸

未，尹圉誘劉佗殺之。丙戌，單子從阪道，劉子從尹道伐尹。單子先至 而敗，劉子還。己丑，召伯奐、南宮極以成周人戍尹。庚寅，單子、劉子、 樊齊以王如劉。甲午，王子朝入于王城，次于左巷。秋七月戊申，鄩羅納 諸莊宮。 尹辛敗劉師于唐。丙辰，又敗諸鄩。甲子，尹辛取西闈。丙寅，攻 蒯，蒯潰。

949 According to Yang (4:1443), Fan Yang’s request for a cap was a veiled demand for much larger bribes. Shusun Chuo sidesteps the demand by taking the initial request literally. 950 Shusun Chuo does not let Shen Feng go out to distribute the goods he has brought as bribes. 951 This incident is meant to show Shusun’s virtue. He does not give the dog to the Jin functionary initially because this would be a bribe. After he is released, giving the dog away shows he was not in the first case being stingy. 952 Zi 訾 was some 40 kilometers east of the capital, south of present-day Gong County 鞏縣, Henan, while both Qiangren 牆人 and Zhiren 直人 were about 30 kilometers west of the capital, in the vicinity of present-day Xin’an 新安, Henan. 953 Yin 尹 was about 15 kilometers south of Qiangren. 954 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.877), Liu Tuo was an adherent of King Jìng. 955 The location of these roads, if these are indeed the names of roads, is unknown. In the interpretation of Tao Hongqing (cited in Yang, 4:1444), the ban 阪 road is a side road or shortcut, and the yin 尹 road is the main road.

1618

Zuo Tradition

Like Zichan of Zheng, who refused to force a Zheng merchant to sell his jade (Zhao 16.3b, 16.3c), and like Shusun Bao of Lu, who refused to bribe his Jin captors (Zhao 1.2a), Shusun Chuo resists pressures from Jin leaders. Fan Yangb hoped to get goods as a bribe from Shusun Chuoa and sent someone to ask for a cap from him.949 Shusun Chuo found out his cap size and gave him two caps, saying, “That is all I have.” Acting on Shusun Chuoa’s behalf, Shen Feng went to Jin, taking goods with him. Shusun Chuoa said, “Come and have an audience with me. I will tell you how to distribute the goods.” Although Shen Feng had his audience with Shusun Chuo, he did not end up going out to distribute the goods.950 One of the Jin officers who was residing in Ji with Shusun Chuoa asked him for his barking dog, but he did not give it to him. When Shusun Chuo was preparing to go home, he killed the dog and gave it to the Jin officer to eat.951 Wherever Shusun Chuoa lodged, even if it were for a single day, he would always mend the walls and roof, so that when he left the lodging, it was as he had found it when he first arrived.

23.2c

In Zhou, Wangzi Zhao gains the upper hand, and the Shan and Liu forces, with the king, take refuge at Liu (see Zhao 23.1). In summer, in the fourth month, on the yiyou day (14), the Shan Duke Mub took Zi, and the Liu Duke Wena took Qiangren and Zhiren.952In the sixth month, on the renwu day (12), Wangzi Zhao entered Yin.953 On the guiwei day (13), the Yin Duke Wena lured Liu Tuo to him and killed him.954 On the bingxu day (16), the Shan Duke Mub went by the Ban Road, and the Liu Duke Wena by the Yin Road, to attack Yin.955 Arriving first, the Shan Duke Mub was defeated, and the Liu Duke Wena turned back. On the jichou day (19), the Shao Duke Zhuanga and Nangong Ji guarded Yin with men from Chengzhou. On the gengyin day (20), the Shan Duke Mub, the Liu Duke Wena, and Fan Qi went to Liu, taking the king with them. On the jiawu day (24), Wangzi Zhao entered Wangcheng, setting up camp at Zuoxiang.956 In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wushen day (9), Xun Luo placed Wangzi Zhao in the Zhuang Palace. Yin Xin defeated the Liu army at Tang.957 On the bingchen day (17), he defeated them again at Xun. On the jiazi day (25), Yin Xin took Xiwei.958 On the bingyin day (27), he attacked Kuai, and Kuai fell.959

23.3(8)

956 According to Du Yu (ZZ 50.877), Zuoxiang 左巷 was near the eastern wall of the city. 957 Tang 唐 was less than 10 kilometers east of the capital. 958 Xiwei 西闈 was in the vicinity of the capital, but its precise location is unknown. 959 Kui 蒯 was just northwest of the capital.

Lord Zhao

1619

23.4(6) 莒子庚輿虐而好劍。苟鑄劍，必試諸人。國人患之。又將叛齊。烏存帥

國人以逐之。庚輿將出，聞烏存執殳而立於道左，懼將止死。苑羊牧 之曰：「君過之！烏存以力聞可矣，何必以弒君成名？」遂來奔。齊人納 郊公。 23.5(7) 吳人伐州來，楚薳越帥師及諸侯之師奔命救州來。吳人禦諸鍾離，子

瑕卒，楚師熸。吳公子光曰：「諸侯從於楚者眾，而皆小國也，畏楚而不 獲已，是以來。吾聞之曰：『作事威克其愛，雖小必濟。』胡、沈之君幼 而狂，陳大夫齧壯而頑，頓與許、蔡疾楚政。楚令尹死，其師熸。帥賤、 多寵，政令不壹。七國同役而不同心，帥賤而不能整，無大威命，楚可 敗也。若分師先以犯胡、沈與陳，必先奔。三國敗，諸侯之師乃搖心矣。 諸侯乖亂，楚必大奔。請先者去備薄威，後者敦陳整旅。」吳子從之。

1620

Zuo Tradition

After having lost the support of his people (see Zhao 22.1), Lord Gong of Ju is driven into exile and is replaced by Lord Jiao. Gengyu, the Master of Ju, was cruel and fond of swordplay. Any time he had a sword cast, he was sure to try it out on a person. The inhabitants of the capital found this appalling. He was also preparing to turn against Qi. Wucun led the inhabitants of the capital in expelling him. As Gengyu prepared to flee, he heard that Wucun was standing to the left of the road with a pike in hand, and he feared that he would be stopped and killed. Yuan Yang Muzhi said, “Go past him. It is enough that Wucun should be known for his strength. Why must he make his reputation from having killed his ruler?”960 Gengyu then fled. The leaders of Qi installed Lord Jiao in power.

23.4(6)

Wu attacks Chu’s border regions (see Zhao 19.9, 20.2, 27.2). Gongzi Guang of Wu offers an astute analysis of Chu weakness. The men of Wu attacked Zhoulai, and Wei Yue of Chu led an army, along with armies of the princes, rushing about to fulfill his commands by bringing aid to Zhoulai.961 The men of Wu opposed them at Zhongli. Yang Gaib died, so the Chu army was demoralized. Gongzi Guang of Wu said, “Many are the princes who followed Chu, yet they are all small domains. They fear Chu and could not do as they wished. That is why they came. I have heard it said, ‘If in an undertaking awesome dignity prevails over affections, then one is certain to succeed, small or not.’ The rulers of Hu and Shěn are young and heedless. The Chen high officer Xia Niea is full-grown but stubborn. Dun, Xǔ, and Cai chafe under Chu policies. The Chu chief minister has died, and their army is demoralized. The general, who is of low status, has many favorites. The administrative commands are not unified. The seven domains share in their campaign, but they do not share one purpose. The commander, being of low status, cannot put them in order; he has no great and awe-inspiring command. Chu can be defeated. If we divide our army and first attack Hu, Shěn, and Chen, they are certain to flee first. When these three domains have been defeated, the armies of the princes will be shaken in their purpose. When the princes are divided and disorderly, Chu is sure to turn in wholesale flight. I request that the vanguard let down its defenses and make itself less formidable, while the rear strengthens its formations and puts the troops in close order.” The Master of Wu followed this advice.

23.5(7)

960 Yuan Yang Muzhi rightly surmises that Wucun would not actually want to kill Gengyu. 961 The phrase recalls the curse pronounced by the Chu exile Qu Wuchen against Chu leaders in the letter quoted at Cheng 7.5a.

Lord Zhao

1621

戊辰晦，戰于雞父。吳子以罪人三千先犯胡、沈與陳，三國爭之。 吳為三軍以繫於後，中軍從王，光帥右，掩餘帥左。吳之罪人或奔或 止，三國亂，吳師擊之，三國敗，獲胡、沈之君及陳大夫。舍胡、沈之囚 使奔許與蔡、頓，曰：「吾君死矣！」師譟而從之，三國奔，楚師大奔。 書曰「胡子髡、沈子逞滅，獲陳夏齧」，君臣之辭也。不言戰，楚未 陳也。 23.6(9) 八月丁酉，南宮極震。萇弘謂劉文公曰：「君其勉之！先君之力可濟也。

周之亡也，其三川震。今西王之大臣亦震，天棄之矣。東王必大克。」 23.7 楚大子建之母在郹，召吳人而啟之。冬十月甲申，吳大子諸樊入郹，取

楚夫人與其寶器以歸。楚司馬薳越追之，不及；將死，眾曰：「請遂伐 吳以徼之。」薳越曰：「再敗君師，死且有罪。亡君夫人，不可以莫之死 也。」乃縊於薳澨。

962 To judge from Zuozhuan depictions, only the southeastern domains of Wu and Yue customarily used convicts in battle. See Ding 14.5. 963 Gongzi Guang (later known as King Helu of Wu) was the son either of King Zhufan of Wu or of King Yimo of Wu and was therefore a nephew of the present Wu ruler, King Liao. Gongzi Yanyu appears to have been a younger brother of King Liao. See Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 157, 302. 964 Du Yu (ZZ 50.878) explains the appropriate use of the two verbs. 965 Du Yu (ZZ 50.878) states that the Liu Duke Wen’s father, the Liu Duke Xian, who died at Zhao 22.3, had opposed Wangzi Zhao’s ambitions. 966 This legend about the fall of the Western Zhou is attested at Guoyu, “Zhou yu 1,” 1.26–27. 967 Ju is Juyang, where the heir’s maternal grandfather had been sheriff; see Zhao 19.2. 968 As Yang points out (4:1447), Zhufan was the name of the Wu King Zhouyu’s uncle (see Xiang 25.10 for his death), so it cannot also be the name of Zhouyu’s son. In Shiji 31.1487, it is Gongzi Guang who attacks Chu. 969 Weishi 薳澨 was about 80 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital, on the east bank of the Han River, west of present-day Jingshan 京山, Hubei.

1622

Zuo Tradition

In the seventh month, on the wuchen day (1), they did battle at Jifu. The Master of Wu first attacked Hu, Shěn, and Chen with three thousand convicts, and the three domains vied to capture them.962 Wu had divided its forces into three armies, which were lined up at the rear. The middle went under the direction of the king, while Gongzi Guanga led the right and Gongzi Yanyua led the left.963 Some of the Wu convicts fled, while others stood their ground, but as the three domains were thrown into confusion, the Wu armies attacked them. The three domains were defeated, and the rulers of Hu and Shěn and a high officer of Chen were captured. Captives from Hu and Shěn were released and sent fleeing to Xǔ, Cai, and Dun, saying, “Our rulers are dead!” The army then pursued them with a great cry, and these three domains fled. The Chu army turned back in wholesale flight. The text has “Kun, the Master of Hu, and Cheng, the Master of Shěn, were extinguished, and Xia Nie of Chen was captured” because “extinguish” and “capture” are the words appropriate to rulers and subjects respectively.964 The text does not speak of “doing battle” because Chu had not yet set up its formation. One of Wangzi Zhao’s military leaders (see Zhao 23.3) dies in an earthquake, giving encouragement to the Zhou king’s proponents. The Western King is Wangzi Zhao, and the Eastern King is King Jìng. In the eighth month, on the dingyou day (27), Nangong Ji died in the earthquake. Chang Hong said to the Liu Duke Wen, “Exert yourself, my lord! The efforts made by our former lord can be brought to fruition.965 When Zhou fell, there were earthquakes along its three rivers.966 Now a highly placed subject of the Western King has also perished in an earthquake. Heaven has abandoned them. Our Eastern King is certain to win a great victory.”

23.6(9)

The mother of the Chu heir Jian (see Zhao 19.2) betrays her town, Juyang, to Wu forces and is taken to Wu. Wei Yue commits suicide over this disgrace to the Chu king. Residing in Ju,967 the mother of the Chu heir apparent Jian summoned the men of Wu and opened the gates for them. In winter, in the tenth month, on the jiashen day (16), the Wu heir apparent Zhufan entered Ju, seizing the Chu lady and her precious vessels and taking them back with him.968 The Chu supervisor of the military, Wei Yue, pursued him, but he could not catch them. He was preparing to die for this, but the rankand-file soldiers said, “Let us instead take advantage of this situation by attacking Wu.” Wei Yue said, “Should I twice lead the ruler’s army into defeat, I would be guilty even beyond the penalty of death. Having lost the wife of our ruler, it would be wrong for me not to die for it.” He therefore hanged himself at Weishi.969

23.7

Lord Zhao

1623

23.8(10) 公為叔孫故如晉，及河，有疾，而復。 23.9 楚囊瓦為令尹，城郢。沈尹戌曰：「子常必亡郢。苟不能衛，城無益也。

古者，天子守在四夷；天子卑，守在諸侯。諸侯守在四鄰；諸侯卑，守 在四竟。慎其四竟，結其四援，民狎其野，三務成功。民無內憂，而又無 外懼，國焉用城？今吳是懼，而城於郢，守已小矣。卑之不獲，能無亡 乎？昔梁伯溝其公宮而民潰，民棄其上，不亡，何待？夫正其疆埸，修其 土田，險其走集，親其民人，明其伍候，信其鄰國，慎其官守，守其交 禮，不憯不貪，不僭不耆，完其守備，以待不虞，又何畏矣？《詩》曰： 無念爾祖， 聿修厥德。 無亦監乎若敖、蚡冒至于武、文，土不過同，慎其四竟，猶不城郢。今土 數圻，而郢是城，不亦難乎？」

970 For the fall of Liang, see Xi 19.7. 971 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.531–37. 972 All four were earlier rulers of Chu. According to Shiji 14.528–72, Ruo’ao ruled from 790 to 764, Fenmao ruled from 757 to 741, King Wu ruled from 740 to 690, and King Wen ruled from 689 to 677.

1624

Zuo Tradition

Our lord was going to Jin for Shusun Chuoa’s sake. He had reached the Yellow River when he was taken ill, then turned back.

23.8(10)

As Nang Wa fortifies Ying, the capital of Chu, a noble observer correctly predicts that the city will ultimately be taken by enemies (see Zhao 24.9, Ding 4.3). In his capacity as chief minister in Chu, Nang Wa fortified Ying. The Governor of Shěn, Xu, said, “Nang Waa is certain to lose Ying. As long as it cannot be defended, a wall does no good. In ancient times, the defensive line of the Heaven-appointed king lay among the outlying Yi in all four directions. When the Heaven appointed king was brought low, his defensive line lay among the princes. The defensive lines of the princes lay among their neighbors in all four directions. When the princes were brought low, their defensive lines lay on their own borders in all four directions. In their caution over these borders in all four directions, they formed alliances with supporters in all four directions. The people were at ease in the countryside, and their duties in the three agricultural seasons bore fruit. The people suffered neither from disturbances within the domain nor from alarms originating outside. What use did they have for walls? Now, although it is Wu that Chu finds alarming, the fortification is all done at Ying. The area to defend is very small. When they are brought so low that they are impotent, can they not lose Ying? Long ago, the Liege of Liang dug a moat around his lord’s palace and the people scattered. As the people had abandoned their superiors, what did the superiors expect, if not a loss?970 What will Chu have to fear if it rectifies its borders, cultivates its territories and fields, builds up its frontier fortifications, wins the affection of its people and leading men, clarifies its system of neighborhood guards, establishes good faith with neighboring domains, uses caution in handling officials and defenders, and preserves the rituals for diplomatic exchanges, neither falling short nor asking for too much, showing neither weakness nor excessive force, and perfecting its defenses in order to be ready for the unexpected? As it says in the Odes,

23.9

Think on your ancestors; Cultivate their virtue.971

Might they not indeed take as a mirror the period from Ruo’ao and Fenmao to Kings Wu and Wen, when Chu territory did not exceed a square of one hundred li on a side? At that time, despite its caution over the borders in all four directions, Chu nevertheless did not fortify Ying.972 Now its territory is equivalent to many thousand li on a side, and still they fortify Ying. Is that not a problem?”

Lord Zhao

1625

春秋 24.1 二十有四年春王二月丙戌，仲孫貜卒。 24.2(2) 婼至自晉。 24.3(4) 夏五月乙未朔，日有食之。 24.4(7) 秋八月，大雩。 24.5 丁酉，杞伯郁釐卒。 24.6(9) 冬，吳滅巢。 24.7 葬杞平公。

左傳 24.1 二十四年春王正月辛丑，召簡公、南宮嚚以甘桓公見王子朝。劉子謂萇

弘曰：「甘氏又往矣。」對曰：「何害？同德度義。〈大誓〉曰：『紂有億兆 夷人，亦有離德；余有亂臣十人，同心同德』，此周所以興也。君其務德， 無患無人。」戊午，王子朝入于鄔。 24.2(2) 晉士彌牟逆叔孫于箕。叔孫使梁其踁待于門內，曰：「余左顧而欬，乃

殺之。右顧而笑，乃止。」叔孫見士伯。士伯曰：「寡君以為盟主之故，是 以久子。不腆敝邑之禮，將致諸從者，使彌牟逆吾子。」叔孫受禮而歸。 二月，「婼至自晉」，尊晉也。

973 9 April 518 Bce. 974 The dingyou day fell in the ninth month. The Annals entry here omits the month notation. 975 For the domain of Chao, see Annals, Wen 12.4. 976 Zhòu was the personal name of the last king of the Shang dynasty. 977 This is not the powerful southeastern domain but the small settlement (written with a different character) mentioned in Yin 11.5, located in present-day Henan.

1626

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 24 (518 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the bingxu day (25), Zhongsun Jue (Meng Xizi) died.

24.1

Chuo (Shusun Chuo) arrived from Jin.

24.2(2)

In summer, in the fifth month, on the yiwei day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.973

24.3(4)

In autumn, in the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

24.4(7)

On the dingyou day (5), Yuli, the Liege of Qǐ, died.

24.5

In winter, Wu extinguished Chao.975

24.6(9)

Lord Ping of Qǐ was buried.

24.7

974

ZUO

As Wangzi Zhao gains a new ally, his opponents take comfort in the thought that virtue will prevail (see Zhao 23.6, 24.3). In the twenty-fourth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the xinchou day (5), the Shao Liege Yinga and Nangong Yin took the Gan Duke Huan for an audience with Wangzi Zhao. The Liu Duke Wena said to Chang Hong, “The Gan lineage head has gone to Wangzi Zhao again.” He replied, “What harm is there in it? Sharing the same virtue depends upon dutifulness. As it says in the ‘Great Oath,’ ‘Zhòu had his common people in the millions, but he also had a divisive virtue. I had ten ministers for untangling chaos, but we were of the same mind and the same virtue.’976 It was in this way that the Zhou dynasty rose. You, my lord, should devote yourself to virtue and be unconcerned about lacking supporters.” On the wuwu day (22), Wangzi Zhao entered Wu.977

24.1

Shusun Chuo expects the worst but is allowed to return from his long detention in Jin (see Zhao 23.2, 23.6). Shi Mimou of Jin came out to meet Shusun Chuoa at Ji. Shusun Chuoa had Liangqi Jing wait inside the gate: “If I look back to my left and cough, kill him. If I look back to my right and smile, hold off.” Shusun Chuoa had an audience with Shi Mimoua. Shi Mimoua said, “On account of his duties as host of covenants, our unworthy ruler has detained you long, sir. As deficient as the rituals of our humble settlement are, he would extend them to whoever accompanies you, and he has sent me to meet you.” Shusun Chuoa accepted the ritual, then went home. In the second month, “Chuo arrived from Jin”: this is to show respect for Jin.

24.2(2)

Lord Zhao

1627

24.3 三月庚戌，晉侯使士景伯蒞問周故。士伯立于乾祭，而問於介眾。晉人

乃辭王子朝，不納其使。 24.4(3) 夏五月乙未朔，日有食之。梓慎曰：「將水。」昭子曰：「旱也。日過分而陽

猶不克，克必甚，能無旱乎？陽不克莫，將積聚也。」 24.5 六月壬申，王子朝之師攻瑕及杏，皆潰。 24.6 鄭伯如晉，子大叔相，見范獻子。獻子曰：「若王室何？」對曰：「老夫其

國家不能恤，敢及王室？抑人亦有言曰：『嫠不恤其緯，而憂宗周之隕， 為將及焉。』今王室實蠢蠢焉，吾小國懼矣；然大國之憂也，吾儕何知 焉？吾子其早圖之！《詩》曰： 缾之罄矣， 惟罍之恥。 王室之不寧，晉之恥也。」獻子懼，而與宣子圖之。乃徵會於諸侯，期以 明年。

978 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.885), Ganzhai was the northern gate of Wangcheng. For an overview of public discussions of this sort in the Spring and Autumn period, see Lewis, The Construction of Space in Early China, 146–47. 979 The location of Xia 瑕 is unknown, though according to Gu Yanwu (Rizhi lu jishi, 31.893), there were three places named Xia, two in Jin, one in Zhou. Xing 杏 was just north of Nanyu County 南禹縣, Henan, about 80 kilometers southeast of the capital. 980 The story of the woman of Qishi (Lienü zhuan 3.66) shows how a woman might very reasonably worry about the ill effects of high-level political failures, since these can lead to the death of her male relatives and the destruction of her livelihood. 981 Maoshi 202, “Lu’e” 蓼莪 , 13A.436–37. Just as a the vat is a larger vessel than the bottle and is the source from which the bottle is filled, Jin in its role as overlord is more powerful than the Zhou royal house and has a historic responsibility to support it.

1628

Zuo Tradition

After an inquiry by means of a public meeting in Zhou, Jin refuses to support Wangzi Zhao (see Zhao 24.1, 24.5). In the third month, on the gengxu day (15), the Prince of Jin sent Shi Mimoub to go personally and make inquiries about events in Zhou. Shi Mimoua stood at the Ganzhai Gate and held a great meeting of the city’s populace to hear their views.978 As a result, the Jin leaders renounced Wangzi Zhao and did not admit his envoys.

24.3

An eclipse prompts opposite predictions (see Zhao 24.7, 25.5). In summer, in the fifth month, on the yiwei day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. Zi Shen said, “There will be floods.” Shusun Chuoc said, “No, it will be a drought. When the sun has passed the equinox and still the yang force does not prevail, it is bound to be excessive when it does prevail. How could there not be a drought? When the yang force does not prevail and is delayed, it will build up.”

24.4(3)

Wangzi Zhao’s forces conquer two Zhou settlements (see Zhao 24.3, 24.8). In the sixth month, on the renshen day (8), the armies of Wangzi Zhao attacked Xia and Xing. Both settlements fell.979

24.5

You Ji of Zheng, refusing pointedly to concern himself with the troubles in the Zhou house, delivers a stinging rebuke to the leaders of Jin, who prepare for more decisive action (see Zhao 24.8, 25.3). The Liege of Zheng went to Jin, with You Jib assisting. You Jib had an audience there with Fan Yangb. Fan Yangc said, “What should be done about the royal house?” You Jib replied, “As aged as I am, I cannot take care even of my own domain and patrimony. Do I dare involve myself with the royal house? And yet men have a saying: ‘A widow takes no thought of her weaving but worries instead over the fall of the ancestral Zhou because troubles are about to befall her.’980 Now the royal house is roiling with turmoil, and we small domains are afraid. But this is a matter of worry for the great domains. What do people like us know about it? Make your plans about this well in advance, sir! As it says in the Odes,

24.6

That the bottle is empty Is a disgrace to the vat alone.981

In other words, that the royal house is not at peace is a disgrace to Jin.” Alarmed, Fan Yangc made plans with Han Qib. They therefore requested a meeting of the princes, setting the time for the coming year.

Lord Zhao

1629

24.7(4) 秋八月，大雩，旱也。 24.8 冬十月癸酉，王子朝用成周之寶珪沈于河。甲戌，津人得諸河上。陰不佞

以溫人南侵，拘得玉者，取其玉。將賣之，則為石。王定而獻之，與之東 訾。 24.9(6) 楚子為舟師以略吳疆。沈尹戌曰：「此行也，楚必亡邑。不撫民而勞之，

吳不動而速之，吳踵楚，而疆埸無備，邑，能無亡乎？」 越大夫胥犴勞王於豫章之汭，越公子倉歸王乘舟。倉及壽夢帥 師從王，王及圉陽而還。吳人踵楚，而邊人不備，遂滅巢及鍾離而還。 沈尹戌曰：「亡郢之始於此在矣。王一動而亡二姓之帥，幾如是而 不及郢？《詩》曰： 誰生厲階？ 至今為梗， 其王之謂乎！」

982 The tablet had apparently been sunk at the Meng Ford, northeast of the capital. 983 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.886), Yin Buning was a high officer supporting King Jìng, here leading troops from Jin. 984 According to Yang (4:1452), Dongzi 東訾 was to the east of present-day Gong County 鞏縣, Henan. 985 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.886), Yuzhang was a territory east of the Han River and north of the Yangzi River (see Zhao 6.9). 986 Note that this Shoumeng is a Yue man, not the Shoumeng who led Wu in earlier decades. Yuyang 圉陽 was south of present-day Chao County 巢縣, Anhui. 987 The “leaders of two clans” are, according to Du Yu (ZZ 51.886), the leaders of Chao and Zhongli. 988 Maoshi 257, “Sangrou” 桑 柔, 18B.653–58.

1630

Zuo Tradition

Drought sets in, fulfilling Shusun Chuo’s earlier prediction and disproving that of Zi Shen (see Zhao 24.4). In autumn, in the eight month, there was a great rain sacrifice: this was because there was a drought.

24.7(4)

Wangzi Zhao’s attempt to sacrifice a precious Zhou jade fails, apparently signifying the illegitimacy of his royal claims. The seemingly temporary transformation of the jade into stone may indicate that there is supernatural support for the true king, King Jìng. In winter, in the tenth month, on the guiyou day (11), Wangzi Zhao sacrificed a precious jade tablet from Chengzhou by sinking it in the Yellow River. On the jiaxu day (12), the keepers of the ford retrieved it beside the Yellow River.982 Yin Buning, making a foray south with troops from Wen in Jin, took the men who had found the jade into custody and seized the jade.983 But when he was about to sell it, it turned into stone. Once the king was settled in his place, Yin Buning presented it to him and was given Dongzi.984

24.8

Chu attacks Wu, only to end up losing some of its own territory in a counterattack (see Zhao 23.9, 25.11, 27.2). In this defeat a Chu official sees the seeds of the Chu defeat that will come in Ding 4.3. The Master of Chu formed a fleet to probe the Wu frontier. The Governor of Shěn, Xu, said, “In this campaign, Chu is certain to lose settlements, for Chu does not comfort the people but tires them out. Wu is not on the march, but Chu speeds them on. Wu will pursue Chu, but Chu’s frontiers are undefended. Is it possible for them not to lose settlements?” The Yue high officer Xu’an honored the Chu king for his exertions at the Yuzhang river bend,985 and Gongzi Cang of Yue presented the king with a passenger boat. Gongzi Canga and Shoumeng of Yue led armies to accompany the king, who went as far as Yuyang before turning back.986 When the men of Wu pursued Chu, the men at the frontier made no defense, and as a result Wu extinguished Chao and Zhongli before turning back. The Governor of Shěn, Xu, said, “In this lies the beginning of the loss of Ying. If in a single movement the king loses the leaders of two great clans, then how many times can he repeat a thing before it affects Ying itself?987 As it says in the Odes,

24.9(6)

Who made these steps to evil? To this very day they are an affliction.988

Does it not refer to the king?”

Lord Zhao

1631

春秋 25.1(1) 二十有五年春，叔孫婼如宋。 25.2(3) 夏，叔詣會晉趙鞅、宋樂大心、衛北宮喜、鄭游吉、曹

人、邾人、滕人、薛人、小邾人于黃父。 25.3(4) 有鸜鵒來巢。 25.4(5) 秋，七月上辛，大雩；季辛，又雩。 25.5(6) 九月己亥，公孫于齊，次于陽州。齊侯唁公于野井。 25.6(6) 冬十月戊辰，叔孫婼卒。 25.7(8) 十有一月己亥，宋公佐卒于曲棘。 25.8(9) 十有二月，齊侯取鄆。

左傳 25.1(1) 二十五年春，叔孫婼聘于宋，桐門右師見之。語，卑宋大夫而賤司

城氏。昭子告其人曰：「右師其亡乎！君子貴其身，而後能及人，是 以有禮。今夫子卑其大夫而賤其宗，是賤其身也，能有禮乎？無禮， 必亡。」

989 Huangfu was a mountain about 70 kilometers east of the Jin capital, northeast of present-day Yicheng, Shanxi (see Wen 17.4). 990 As Yang (4:1454) notes, Yangzhou had been a Lu settlement (see Xiang 31.2), but at Ding 8.1 it is clearly a Qi settlement, and here, at Zhao 25.5, it no doubt belonged to Qi. It was about 90 kilometers northwest of Qufu, north of present-day Dongping, Shandong. Yejing was 100 kilometers farther to the northwest, along the path from Yangzhou to the Qi capital, just west of present-day Jinan, Shandong. 991 Yejing 野井 was located in Qi just southeast of present-day Qihe County 齊河縣, Shandong.

1632

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 25 (517 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, Shusun Chuo went to Song.

25.1(1)

In summer, Shu Yi met with Zhao Yang of Jin, Yue Daxin of Song, Beigong Xi of Wei, You Ji of Zheng, a Cao leader, a Zhu leader, a Teng leader, a Xue leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader at Huangfu.989

25.2(3)

A mynah came and made a nest.

25.3(4)

In autumn, on the first xin day (3), there was a great rain sacrifice. On the last xin day (23), there was again a rain sacrifice. In the ninth month, on the jihai day (12), our lord retired to Qi, setting up camp at Yangzhou.990 The Prince of Qi offered our lord consolation at Yejing.991 In winter, in the tenth month, on the wuchen day (11), Shusun Chuo died. In the eleventh month, on the jihai day (13), Zuo, the Duke of Song, died at Quji.992 In the twelfth month, the Prince of Qi took Yun.993

25.4(5)

25.5(6)

25.6(6) 25.7(8)

25.8(9)

ZUO

During a visit to Song, Shusun Chuo predicts exile for Yue Daxin (see Ding 9.1), while a Song minister, Yue Qili, predicts death for the Song ruler (see Zhao 25.8) and for Shusun Chuo himself (see Zhao 25.6). In the twenty-fifth year, in spring, Shusun Chuo went to Song. The Tongmen minister of the right, Yue Daxin, had an audience with him.994 As they spoke, the general demeaned the Song high officers and denigrated the supervisors of fortifications.995 Shusun Chuoc announced to his entourage, “The minister of the right will surely go into exile! The noble man, valuing his own person, is then able to extend this to others: in this way he has ritual propriety. In the present case, this fine man demeans his high officers and denigrates his ancestral line. This amounts to denigrating himself. Can he be said to have ritual propriety? Lacking ritual propriety, he is certain to perish.”

25.1(1)

992 Quji 曲棘 was southeast of present-day Lankao County 蘭考縣, Henan, about 80 kilometers northwest of the Song capital, on the way from Song to Jin. 993 This Yun was located about 80 kilometers west of the Lu capital at Qufu (see map 2). 994 Tongmen, or the Tong Gate, was the northern gate of the Song capital, where, according to Du Yu (ZZ 51.887), Yue Daxin had his residence. 995 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.887), these supervisors of fortifications were part of Yue’s extended family.

Lord Zhao

1633

宋公享昭子，賦〈新宮〉。昭子賦〈車轄〉。明日宴，飲酒，樂，宋公 使昭子右坐，語相泣也。樂祁佐，退而告人曰：「今茲君與叔孫其皆死 乎！吾聞之：『哀樂而樂哀，皆喪心也。』心之精爽，是謂魂魄。魂魄去 之，何以能久？」 25.2 季公若之姊為小邾夫人，生宋元夫人，生子，以妻季平子。昭子如宋聘，

且逆之。公若從，謂曹氏勿與，魯將逐之。曹氏告公。公告樂祁。樂祁 曰：「與之。如是，魯君必出。政在季氏三世矣，魯君喪政四公矣。無民 而能逞其志者，未之有也，國君是以鎮撫其民。《詩》曰： 人之云亡， 心之憂矣。 魯君失民矣，焉得逞其志？靖以待命猶可，動必憂。」

996 The piece is not included in the received Odes. According to Jiang Yong (cited in Yang, 4:1455), the piece the duke cited was Maoshi 189, “Sigan” 斯干, 11B.383–88, which celebrates the completion of a new home. 997 Maoshi 218, “Che xia” 車舝, 14B.484–85. According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.887), “Chariot Hub” speaks of the longing for an excellent wife, and Shusun Chuo recites it because he is in Song to escort home a daughter of the Song Duke as bride for the Jisun lineage.

1634

Zuo Tradition

The Duke of Song feasted Shusun Chuoc and recited “The New Palace.”996 Shusun Chuoc recited “Chariot Hub.”997 During the banquet on the following day, as they drank and made merry, the Duke of Song had Shusun Chuoc sit to his right, and as they spoke they wept together. Yue Qilia, who was assisting, withdrew and reported to others, “This ruler of ours and Shusun Chuoa will both die. I have heard that ‘grieving in the midst of pleasures or taking pleasure in the midst of grief—either way one loses one’s heart.’998 The pure part of the heart is known as the soul. When their souls are lost to them, how can they last long?” In Song, Yue Qili foresees the coming exile of Lord Zhao of Lu (see Zhao 25.6). The elder sister of Ji Gonghaia was a wife of the ruler of Lesser Zhu and mother of the wife of Lord Yuan of Song.999 This wife of Lord Yuan bore a daughter who was betrothed to Ji Pingzi. Shusun Chuoc went on an official visit to Song and also to meet and escort this bride back to Lu.1000 Ji Gonghaib accompanied him and told Lady Cao—the wife of Lord Yuan—not to hand over the bride, as Lu was about to expel Ji Pingzi. Lady Cao told the Lord of Song, and the Lord of Song told Yue Qilia. Yue Qilia said, “Hand her over. If that happens,1001 the Lu ruler himself is sure to go into exile. The Lu government has been in the hands of the Ji lineage for three generations already, and it has been four reigns since the Lu Lord’s house lost control over the government. No one has ever yet fulfilled his ambitions while lacking the people’s support. That is why the ruler of a domain settles and comforts his people. As it says in the Odes,

25.2

When good men perish— For this the heart grieves.1002

The Lu ruler has lost his people, so how can he fulfill his ambitions? It might be acceptable for him to rest at his ease and await his fate, but if he moves, he is bound to come to grief.”1003

998 A similar principle is adduced in Zhuang 20.1. 999 Ji Gonghai’s sister would be an aunt of Ji Pingzi, currently the most powerful man in Lu. 1000 This explains Shusun Chuo’s visit to Song in Zhao 25.1. 1001 That is, if Lu attempts to expel Ji Pingzi. 1002 Maoshi 264, “Zhanyang” 瞻卬, 18E.694–97. 1003 Here apparently refers to fate, Heaven’s command for him.

Lord Zhao

1635

25.3a(2) 夏，會于黃父，謀王室也。趙簡子令諸侯之大夫輸王粟、具戍人，曰：「明

年將納王。」 子大叔見趙簡子，簡子問揖讓、周旋之禮焉。對曰：「是儀也，非 禮也。」簡子曰：「敢問，何謂禮？」對曰： 吉也聞諸先大夫子產曰：「夫禮，天之經也，地之義也，民之

行也。」天地之經，而民實則之。則天之明，因地之性，生其 六氣，用其五行。氣為五味，發為五色，章為五聲。 25.3b

淫則昏亂，民失其性。是故為禮以奉之：為六畜、五牲、三 犧，以奉五味；為九文、六采、五章，以奉五色；為九歌、八 風、七音、六律，以奉五聲。為君臣上下，以則地義；為夫婦 外內，以經二物；為父子、兄弟、姑姊、甥舅、婚媾、姻亞，以 象天明，為政事、庸力、行務，以從四時；為刑罰威獄，使民 畏忌，以類其震曜殺戮；為溫慈惠和，以效天之生殖長育。

1004 For “they are born in the midst of,” see Takezoe, 25.22. The six vapors are yin, yang, wind, rain, dark, and light. The “Five Resources” are metal, wood, water, fire, and earth. The supposed date of this episode (517 Bce) makes this the earliest purported appearance of the five grouped together under the name wuxing 五行, a term that for later Warring States and Han texts is routinely translated “Five Phases.” See also Zhao 29.4b. For the same group of five under the name “Five Resources” (wucai 五 材), see Xiang 27.6a and Zhao 11.2. 1005 The five flavors are sour, salty, acrid, bitter, and sweet. The five colors are blue, yellow, red, white, and black. The five tones are five notes in the anhemitonic pentatonic scale: do, re, mi, sol, la. 1006 The six domestic animals are horse, bovine, sheep, chicken, dog, and pig. The five sacrificial animals are bovine, sheep, pig, dog, and chicken. The three offerings are bovine, sheep, and pig. 1007 The nine textile patterns are, according to Yang (4:1457–58), dragon, mountain, flowers with insects, fire, and tigers and apes (these five being painted on the surface of the cloth), then water plants, white rice kernels, interlocking white and black, and interlocking black and blue (these four being embroidered upon the cloth). Du Yu (ZZ 51.889) identifies the six color mixtures as the colors resulting from mixtures of blue and white, red and black, and jet and yellow; he identifies the five color patterns as the mixtures of blue and red, red and white, white and black, black and blue, and all colors. 1008 Compare Zhao 20.8, where some of the same terms are used. 1009 The two kinds are yin and yang, or soft and hard.

1636

Zuo Tradition

Jin calls its allies and plans to quell the strife in Zhou (see Zhao 24.6). In one of the Zuozhuan’s grandest expositions of ritual and its role in ordering human life in accordance with natural principles, You Ji of Zheng discourses upon the difference between mere ceremony and the glories of true ritual; see comparable arguments in Zhao 5.3. The summer meeting at Huangfu was to strategize on behalf of the royal house. Zhao Yanga ordered the high officers of the princes to transport grain to the king and to provide garrison guards. He said, “Next year we will install the king in power.” You Jib had an audience with Zhao Yanga, who asked about the proper rituals for saluting, yielding, and turning. He replied, “These are ceremonies. This is not the same thing as ritual propriety.” Zhao Yangb said, “I presume to ask what is meant by ‘ritual propriety,’ then.” You Ji replied,

25.3a(2)

I heard our former high officer Zichan say that ritual propriety is the warp thread of heaven, the proper duty of earth, and the best conduct of the people. It is the warp thread of heaven and earth, and it is this that people make their model. They make a model of the brightness of heaven, they go along with the nature of earth, and they are born in the midst of the six vapors and use the Five Resources.1004 The vapors become the five flavors, emerge as the five colors, and form patterns as the five tones.1005 With excess these become disordered and chaotic, and the people lose their innate qualities. Thus, ritual was made to sustain these innate qualities. There were the six domestic animals, the five sacrificial animals, and the three offerings to furnish the five flavors.1006 There were the nine textile patterns, the six color mixtures, and the five color patterns to furnish the five colors.1007 There were the nine songs, the eight airs, the seven notes, and the six pitches to furnish the five tones.1008 Ruler and subject, superior and inferior, were created in such a way as to follow the model of the proper duty of the earth. Husband and wife, nondomestic and domestic, were created in such a way as to put in order the two kinds.1009 Father and son, elder brother and younger brother, elder sister and younger sister, nephew and uncle, relations by marriage and parents-in-law, were created in such a way as to figure forth the brightness of heaven. Administrative affairs, labor and exertions, conduct and commitments, were created in such a way as to accord with the four seasons. Punishments and penalties, authority and legal suits, which cause the people to have fear and restraint, were created in such a way as to resemble thunder and lightning, with its deadly strikes. Warmth and kindness, generosity and affability, were made to imitate heaven’s way of

Lord Zhao

25.3b

1637

民有好惡、喜怒、哀樂，生于六氣，是故審則宜類，以制六 志。哀有哭泣，樂有歌舞，喜有施舍，怒有戰鬬；喜生於好， 怒生於惡。是故審行信令，禍福賞罰，以制死生。生，好物 也；死，惡物也。好物，樂也；惡物，哀也。哀樂不失，乃能協 于天地之性，是以長久。 簡子曰：「甚哉，禮之大也！」對曰：「禮，上下之紀、天地之經緯也，民之 所以生也，是以先王尚之。故人之能自曲直以赴禮者，謂之成人。大，不 亦宜乎！」簡子曰：「鞅也請終身守此言也。」 25.3c 宋樂大心曰：「我不輸粟。我於周為客，若之何使客？」晉士伯曰：「自踐

土以來，宋何役之不會，而何盟之不同？曰『同恤王室』，子焉得辟之？ 子奉君命，以會大事，而宋背盟，無乃不可乎？」右師不敢對，受牒 而退。 士伯告簡子曰：「宋右師必亡。奉君命以使，而欲背盟以干盟主， 無不祥大焉。」

1010 The effort to connect the six human emotions with the six vapors here leads to some awkwardness in the text, with “liking” and disliking” adduced as subordinated to “joy” and “anger” as preconditions. 1011 Yue Daxin here responds to Zhao Yang’s command to the princes, given at the beginning of Zhao 25.3a; Zhao Yang’s and You Ji’s long exchange on ritual interrupts the episode. Because its ruling line is descended from the Shang kings, Song is treated as a guest by the Zhou kings; cf. Xi 24.4. 1012 For the Covenant of Jiantu, which concluded the battle at Chengpu and sealed the power of the northern alliance under the overlordship of Lord Wen of Jin, see Annals, Xi 28.8, and the associated Zuozhuan passages.

1638

Zuo Tradition

giving birth and fostering things. In the people there are liking and disliking, joy and anger, sorrow and pleasure, emotions that originate in the six vapors. For this reason, appropriate types of behavior were examined and imitated so as to govern these six impulses. For sorrow there is wailing and weeping, for pleasure there is singing and dancing, for joy there is giving and forgiving, for anger there is war and contention, while joy originates in liking and anger originates in disliking.1010 For this reason rulers were careful in their conduct and made their orders trustworthy, using troubles and blessings and rewards and punishments to govern death and life. Life is something that is liked. Death is something that is disliked. To like a thing is to take pleasure in it. To dislike a thing is to find sorrow in it. When there is no impropriety in the way one feels sorrow or takes pleasure, then it is possible to be in accord with the nature of heaven and earth and, in this way, to last long.

Zhao Yangb said, “Extraordinary indeed is the greatness of ritual propriety!” He replied, “Ritual propriety is the marking line of superior and inferior, the warp and woof of heaven and earth, and the basis for the people’s livelihood. That is why the former kings esteemed it. Therefore, men who are able to bend or straighten themselves in order to enter into the realm of ritual propriety are called perfected men. Is it not fitting, this greatness of ritual propriety?” Zhao Yangb said, “I would request to hold this saying close for the rest of my life.” Yue Daxin of Song refuses a part in serving the royal house, earning a second prediction about his exile (see Zhao 25.1, Ding 9.1). Yue Daxin of Song said, “We will not transport grain, for in the Zhou court we are treated as guests.1011 How can guests be put to work?” Shi Mimoua of Jin said, “In the years since Jiantu, what campaign has Song not joined?1012 What covenant has Song not shared? The covenant at Jiantu said, ‘Join in caring for the royal house.’ How can you, sir, evade this? How would it be right for Song to violate the terms of the covenant as you obey your ruler’s command to meet with us for this great undertaking?” The minister of the right, Yue Daxin, did not dare reply but took the commission document and withdrew. Shi Mimoua told Zhao Yangb, “The Song minister of the right is certain to go into exile. He came on this mission to uphold his ruler’s command, yet he wished to violate the covenant and commit a transgression against the covenant host. Nothing is more inauspicious than that.”

25.3c

Lord Zhao

1639

25.4(3) 「有鸜鵒來巢」，書所無也。師己曰：「異哉！吾聞文、成之世，童謠有

之曰： 鸜之鵒之， 公出辱之。 鸜鵒之羽， 公在外野， 往饋之馬。 鸜鵒跦跦， 公在乾侯， 徵褰與襦。 鸜鵒之巢， 遠哉遙遙， 禂父喪勞， 宋父以驕。 鸜鵒鸜鵒， 往歌來哭。 童謠肴是。今鸜鵒來巢，其將及乎！」 25.5(4) 秋，書再雩，旱甚也。

25.6a(5, 6)

初，季公鳥娶妻於齊鮑文子，生甲。公鳥死，季公亥與公思展與公鳥之 臣申夜姑相其室。及季姒與饔人檀通，而懼，乃使其妾抶己，以示秦遄 之妻，曰：「公若欲使余，余不可而抶余。」又訴於公甫曰：「展與夜姑將

1013 Chou is Lord Zhao; Song is his successor Lord Ding. 1014 The song rhymes throughout. Yang (4:1460) reconstructs the rhyme scheme as follows: aa-bbb-ccc-dddd-aa. According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.892), the final line means that as Lord Zhao went into exile, the people sang, and that he would return only once he was dead, when the people would weep for him. 1015 Ji Gongniao is an uncle of Ji Pingzi. 1016 See Xiang 21.5 for a similar story and also the story of Qi Sheng in Zhao 28.2a. 1017 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.892), Qin Ji was a younger sister of Ji Gongniao. 1018 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.892), both Gongfu and Gongzhi were younger brothers of Ji Pingzi.

1640

Zuo Tradition

An omen, interpreted with the help of a children’s ditty, portends the exile of the Lu ruler (see Zhao 25.2, 25.6, 28.1). For another example of a children’s ditty, see Xi 5.8. “A mynah came and made a nest”: this records something that had never happened before. The preceptor Ji said, “Strange! I have heard that in the era from Lord Wen to Lord Cheng, there was a children’s ditty that said:

25.4(3)

Mynah: The lord departs in shame. The mynah’s feathers: The lord is in the far countryside; Go to feed his horses. The mynah hops: The lord is at Ganhou, Seeking trousers and jackets. The mynah’s nest: Far, far away from us, Father Chou dies in his exertions, While Father Song is raised high.1013 Mynah, mynah: As he goes we sing; as he returns we wail.1014

There was such a children’s ditty. Now that the mynah has come and made a nest, it will come true.” Shusun Chuo’s prediction of drought continues to be fulfilled (see Zhao 24.4). That in autumn the text records the repeated rain sacrifice is because the drought was severe.

25.5(4)

The chain of events that will lead ultimately to the exile of Lord Zhao begins with the causes for Ji Gonghai’s resentment of Ji Pingzi. Previously, Ji Gongniao had taken the daughter of Bao Guoa of Qi as his wife, and she had borne a certain child.1015 After Ji Gongniaoa died, his younger brother Ji Gonghai, joining with Gongsi Zhan and Ji Gongniaoa’s retainer Shen Yegu, managed Ji Gongniao’s household. When Ji Gongniao’s widow Ji Si had a liaison with the feast official Tan, she became afraid.1016 She therefore had a concubine beat her and showed herself to Qin Ji, the wife of Qin Chuan,1017 saying, “Ji Gonghaib wanted to have his way with me. When I would not go along with him, he beat me.” She also made a complaint to Gongfu1018: “Gongsi Zhana and Shen

25.6a(5, 6)

Lord Zhao

1641

要余。」秦姬以告公之。公之與公甫告平子，平子拘展於卞，而執夜姑， 將殺之。公若泣而哀之，曰：「殺是，是殺余也。」將為之請，平子使豎 勿內，日中不得請。有司逆命，公之使速殺之。故公若怨平子。 25.6b 季、郈雞鬬。季氏介其雞，郈氏為之金距。平子怒，益宮於郈氏，且讓

之。故郈昭伯亦怨平子。 臧昭伯之從弟會為讒於臧氏，而逃於季氏。臧氏執旃。平子怒，拘 臧氏老。將禘於襄公，萬者二人，其眾萬於季氏。臧孫曰：「此之謂不能 庸先君之廟。」大夫遂怨平子。 25.6c 公若獻弓於公為，且與之出射於外，而謀去季氏。公為告公果、公賁。公

果、公賁使侍人僚枏告公。公寢，將以戈擊之，乃走。公曰：「執之！」亦 無命也。懼而不出，數月不見。公不怒。又使言，公執戈以懼之，乃走。又 使言，公曰：「非小人之所及也。」公果自言，公以告臧孫。臧孫以難，告 郈孫。

1019 For details, see Zhao 25.10. Zang Zhaobo is the head of the Zang lineage at this point. 1020 On the wan dance and the appropriate numbers, see Yin 5.7, with its reference to Analects 3.1, on the Ji lineage’s usurpation of privileges above their status. Xiang 29.10 shows that the Lu Lord’s ritual archers, like his dancers, were now in short supply. 1021 Gongwei, Gongguo, and Gongfen are all sons of Lord Zhao of Lu. 1022 According to Yang (4:1462), Lord Zhao is feigning anger at Liaozha because he does not want to associate himself with Ji Gonghai’s plot.

1642

Zuo Tradition

Yegua are trying to force me to give myself to Ji Gonghai.” Qin Ji reported this to Gongzhi. Gongzhi and Gongfu reported to Ji Pingzic. Confining Gongsi Zhana at Bian, Ji Pingzic then arrested Shen Yegua and prepared to put him to death. Learning of this, Ji Gonghaib wept in his grief, saying: “To kill this man is to kill me!” He was going to plead for him, but Ji Pingzic had his servants refuse him admittance, and by noon he still had not had an opportunity to make his plea. But when the officials in charge came to receive their orders, Gongzhi had them execute Shen Yegu quickly. Ji Gonghaib therefore bore a grudge against Ji Pingzic. Ji Pingzi alienates the Hou and Zang lineages. The Ji and Hou lineages held cockfights. When the Ji lineage put armor on their cocks, the Hou lineage made spurs for theirs. Angered by this, Ji Pingzic increased the number of his palaces at the expense of the Hou lineage and further rebuked them. Hou Zhaobo therefore also bore a grudge against Ji Pingzic. Zang Zhaobo’s junior cousin Zang Huia, having spread malicious lies in the Zang lineage, fled to the Ji lineage.1019 When members of the Zang lineage seized him there, Ji Pingzic was enraged, and he imprisoned the elders of the Zang lineage. When preparations were being made for the di sacrifice at the temple of Lord Xiang, there were only two wan dancers; the main body of them were dancing at the Ji household.1020 Zang Zhaoboa observed, “This is what is known as ‘being incapable of commemorating merit at the temples of former rulers.’” The high officers therefore bore a grudge against Ji Pingzic.

25.6b

Ji Gonghai puts in motion his plot against Ji Pingzi by approaching Lord Zhao’s sons. The lord fails to take any resolute action to maintain the peace. Throughout the narrative Zijia Yibo, a loyal adviser to Lord Zhao, is presented as a voice of wisdom and moderation. Ji Gonghaib presented a bow to Gongwei.1021 He was going to go out shooting with him so that they could make plans for the removal of the Ji lineage. Gongwei informed his brothers Gongguo and Gongfen. Gongguo and Gongfen had the eunuch Liaozha inform our lord. When our lord, who had been sleeping, made as if to strike Liaozha with a dagger-axe, he fled. Our lord said, “Seize him,” yet he issued no formal command. Afraid, Liaozha did not go out and for several months had no audience with our lord. Our lord was not actually angry,1022 but when Liaozha was again sent to speak of the matter, our lord again brandished his dagger-axe to intimidate him, and he fled. When Gongguo and Gongfen sent Liaozha a third time to speak of it, our lord said, “This is not something that an inferior like you can concern himself with.” When Gongguo himself spoke of it, our lord informed Zang Zhaoboa. Zang Zhaoboa, who considered the effort to remove the Ji lineage too difficult, informed Hou Zhaoboa.

25.6c

Lord Zhao

1643

郈孫以可，勸。 告子家懿伯。懿伯曰：「讒人以君徼幸，事若不克，君受其名，不 可為也。舍民數世，以求克事，不可必也。且政在焉，其難圖也。」公退 之。辭曰：「臣與聞命矣，言若洩，臣不獲死。」乃館於公宮。 25.6d 叔孫昭子如闞，公居於長府。九月戊戌，伐季氏，殺公之于門，遂入之。

平子登臺而請曰：「君不察臣之罪，使有司討臣以干戈，臣請待於 沂上以察罪。」弗許。請囚于費，弗許。請以五乘亡，弗許。子家子曰：「君 其許之！政自之出久矣，隱民多取食焉，為之徒者眾矣。日入慝作，弗可 知也。眾怒不可蓄也，蓄而弗治，將薀。薀蓄，民將生心。生心，同求將 合。君必悔之！」弗聽。郈孫曰：「必殺之。」 25.6e 公使郈孫逆孟懿子。

1023 Like the leaders of the three most powerful lineages of Lu, Zijia Yibo is a member of a lineage descended from a Lu ruler, in this case the Dongmen, or East Gate, lineage, descended from Gongzi Sui (Annals, Xi 26.5), a son of Lord Zhuang. 1024 Kan 闞 was about 60 kilometers west of Qufu. 1025 Bi is the settlement awarded to the Ji lineage as its appanage and source of income. 1026 Lord Zhao sends Hou Zhaobo in an effort to enlist the Meng lineage’s support in the campaign against the Ji lineage.

1644

Zuo Tradition

Hou Zhaoboa considered the plans practicable and urged our lord on. When our lord informed Zijia Yibo of the plans1023 Zijia Yibod said, “Those who slander the Ji lineage are taking their chances by trying to manipulate the ruler. If the plans do not succeed, then the ruler will get all the blame. This cannot be allowed. If the lord’s house seeks success in an endeavor of this kind after having abandoned the people for several generations, there can be no guarantee of success. What’s more, the government is in the Ji lineage’s hands. It will be very difficult to plan for this.” Our lord asked Zijia Yibo to withdraw from court. He declined: “I have been included among those hearing your commands. If this discussion should leak out, I will not be allowed to die a natural death.” He was therefore housed in our lord’s palace. Lord Zhao and his supporters attack Ji Pingzi, defeating his forces but failing to put him to death. Shusun Chuob entered Kan.1024 Our lord resided at the Long Treasury. In the ninth month, on the wuxu day (11), he and his supporters attacked the Ji household, killing Gongzhi at the gate and then entering. Ji Pingzic, climbing a terrace, presented a request: “You, my lord, have not investigated the accusations against me but have already had your officers in charge, armed with shield and dagger-axe, chastise me. I request permission to wait on the banks of the Yi while the accusations are investigated.” Our lord did not permit this. He requested that he be imprisoned at Bi, but our lord did not permit this.1025 He requested that he go into exile with five carriages, but our lord did not permit this. Zijia Yiboa said, “Permit it, my lord! For a long time the government has been in his control, and many of the poor have received food from him. His followers are legion. When the sun goes down and malefactors rise up, one cannot know what might happen. The anger of the multitude must not be nurtured; if it is nurtured rather than controlled, it will flourish. The people will become restive, and once they have become restive, those who have the same aims will join together. You are certain to regret it!” Our lord did not heed him. Hou Zhaoboa said, “You must put him to death.”

25.6d

Both the Shusun lineage and the Meng lineage join the Ji lineage against Lord Zhao, who now prepares to leave Lu with his supporters from the Hou, Zang, and Zijia lineages. After the Shusun lineage drives away troops of Lord Zhao who have occupied the Ji lineage compound, the Meng lineage puts to death an envoy from Lord Zhao. Our lord had Hou Zhaoboa go forth to meet Meng Yizi.1026

25.6e

Lord Zhao

1645

叔孫氏之司馬鬷戾言於其眾曰：「若之何？」莫對。又曰：「我，家 臣也，不敢知國。凡有季氏與無，於我孰利？」皆曰：「無季氏，是無叔孫 氏也。」鬷戾曰：「然則救諸！」帥徒以往，陷西北隅以入。公徒釋甲執冰 而踞，遂逐之。 孟氏使登西北隅，以望季氏。見叔孫氏之旌，以告。孟氏執郈昭 伯，殺之于南門之西，遂伐公徒。子家子曰：「諸臣偽劫君者，而負罪以 出，君止。意如之事君也，不敢不改。」公曰：「余不忍也。」與臧孫如墓 謀，遂行。 25.6f 己亥，公孫于齊，次于陽州。齊侯將唁公于平陰，公先至于野井。齊侯

曰：「寡人之罪也。使有司待于平陰，為近故也。」書曰「公孫于齊，次于 陽州。齊侯唁公于野井」，禮也。將求於人，則先下之，禮之善物也。 齊侯曰：「自莒疆以西，請致千社，以待君命。寡人將帥敝賦以從 執事，唯命是聽。君之憂，寡人之憂也。」公喜。子家子曰：「天祿不再。 天若胙君，不過周公。以魯足矣。失魯而以千社為臣，誰與之立？且齊君 無信，不如早之晉。」弗從。

1027 For this interpretation of bing 冰, see Zhao 13.3g. 1028 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.887), Yangzhou was situated on the frontier between Qi and Lu. 1029 Pingyin lay about halfway between Yangzhou and Yejing (see nn. 940 and 941 above). That Lord Zhao has advanced farther toward the Qi capital is a sign of his eagerness for the Qi ruler’s support. 1030 This comment on the propriety of the actions recorded in the Annals is especially out of place, given the Lu lord’s circumstances and the Qi ruler’s shabby treatment of him. 1031 By Du Yu’s (ZZ 51.894) calculations, one “community” (she 社) is twenty-five households. The Ju frontier would have been more than 150 kilometers east of the Lu capital, effectively in the hinterlands.

1646

Zuo Tradition

Zong Li, the Shusun lineage’s supervisor of the military, addressed his multitude: “What are we to do about this?” No one responded. He then said, “As household retainers we do not presume to understand domain affairs, but which is more advantageous to us: the survival of the Ji lineage or its disappearance?” They all said, “The disappearance of the Ji lineage would mean the disappearance of the Shusun lineage.” Zong Li said, “In that case, let us save them!” Leading his troops to the Ji compound, Zong Li battered down the northwestern corner of the wall and entered. Our lord’s troops had removed their armor and were squatting, holding their quiver covers as drinking cups.1027 They were therefore driven away. The Meng lineage had one of their men climb the northwestern corner of their compound wall to look at the Ji compound. The man reported that he could see the flags of the Shusun lineage at the Ji compound. The Meng lineage seized Hou Zhaobo and put him to death at a place west of the south gate, then attacked our lord’s troops. Zijia Yiboa said to Lord Zhao, “All of us, the subjects who have forced you into this action against your better judgment, will accept blame for it and depart the domain, while you, my lord, remain here. Ji Pingzid will not dare not to change his way of serving you.” Our lord said, “I cannot bear that.” With Zang Zhaoboa he went out among the tombs outside the city to make plans, then set out from Lu. Lord Zhao of Lu goes into exile in Qi and, ignoring the advice of Zijia Yibo, accepts a grant of territory. On the jihai day (12), our lord retired to Qi, setting up camp at Yangzhou.1028 The Prince of Qi was preparing to offer our lord consolation at Pingyin, but our lord had already advanced as far as Yejing.1029 The Prince of Qi said, “It is my fault. I had my officers in charge wait at Ping­y in because it was closer.” The text has “Our lord retired to Qi, setting up camp at Yangzhou. The Prince of Qi offered our lord consolation at Yejing.” This was in accordance with ritual propriety. It is a fine institution of ritual that a man humbles himself to another before making a request of him.1030 The Prince of Qi said, “I request to hand over to you one thousand communities in the east, along our border with Ju, and await your commands.1031 I, the unworthy one, will lead the humble allotment of Qi and follow your functionaries, and just as you command, we will abide by your command alone, for your sorrow is also mine.” Our lord was delighted. Zijia Yiboa said, “Heaven’s boon does not come a second time. If Heaven truly blessed you, my lord, your lot would not exceed the Zhou Duke’s. It was enough to have held Lu. But if, having lost Lu, you hold a thousand communities as vassal of another ruler, who will join with you to reestablish you as ruler? What is more, the Qi ruler lacks good faith. It would be better to proceed as soon as possible to Jin.” Our lord did not heed him.

Lord Zhao

25.6f

1647

25.6g 臧昭伯率從者將盟，載書曰：「戮力壹心，好惡同之。信罪之有無，繾綣

從公，無通外內！」以公命示子家子。子家子曰：「如此，吾不可以盟。 羈也不佞，不能與二三子同心，而以為皆有罪。或欲通外內，且欲去君。 二三子好亡而惡定，焉可同也？陷君於難，罪孰大焉？通外內而去 君，君將速入，弗通何為？而何守焉？」乃不與盟。 25.6h 昭子自闞歸，見平子。平子稽顙，曰：「子若我何？」昭子曰：「人誰不

死？子以逐君成名，子孫不忘，不亦傷乎？將若子何？」平子曰：「苟使 意如得改事君，所謂生死而肉骨也。」 昭子從公于齊，與公言。子家子命適公館者執之。公與昭子言於 幄內，曰：「將安眾而納公。」公徒將殺昭子，伏諸道。左師展告公。公 使昭子自鑄歸。 平子有異志。冬十月辛酉，昭子齊於其寢，使祝宗祈死。戊辰，卒。

1032 Shusuan Chuo travels this changed route to avoid ambush. For Zhu, see Xiang 23.5e. 1033 That is, he had no intention of readmitting the ruler. 1034 For a similar act, see Cheng 17.3. According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.895), Shusun Chuo is ashamed at having been deceived by Ji Pingzi.

1648

Zuo Tradition

Zijia Yibo refuses to join in a covenant with the lord’s followers, arguing that the terms of the covenant harm the lord and the domain by preventing any reconciliation between the exiles and Lu power holders. Zang Zhaobo brought together all of the lord’s followers in preparation for swearing a covenant. The covenant document said, “We will strive together with a single purpose, sharing loves and hatreds. We will verify guilt and innocence, follow our lord resolutely, and allow no association between insiders and outsiders.” On our lord’s orders, Zang Zhaobo showed this to Zijia Yiboa, who said, “Under these terms, I cannot be allowed to join the covenant for several reasons: In my own incompetence, I am not able to share a single purpose with you, my companions. I hold that all of us are guilty. It may also be that I will wish to have outsiders and insiders associate with one another, and I may further wish to leave our lord. You, my companions, apparently love exile and hate stability, so how can I share your goals? It is you who plunged our lord into difficulties. What guilt can be greater than that? Only if outsiders and insiders can associate with one another, that is, only if someone leaves our lord for a time, will our lord quickly return to the domain. What would be accomplished by not engaging in such associations? And what would I be protecting?” Therefore, he refused to join in the covenant.

25.6g

After failing to reconcile Lord Zhao and Ji Pingzi, Shusun Chuo starves himself to death. When Shusun Chuoc returned from Kan, he had an audience with Ji Pingzic. Ji Pingzic bowed with his forehead touching the ground and said, “What would you have me do, sir?” Shusun Chuoc said, “Who among men does not die? You, sir, have made your name as one who expelled his ruler, and your descendants will not forget it. Are you not grieving? What should we do about you?” Ji Pingzic said, “If you could make it possible for me to serve the ruler in a new way, that would be what we call ‘bringing the dead to life and returning flesh to bare bones.’” Shusun Chuoc went to our lord in Qi and spoke with him of this. Zijia Yiboa had commanded that anyone entering our lord’s lodging would be taken into custody. As our lord spoke with him in his tent, Shusun Chuoc said, “We will settle the multitude and install you, my lord, in power again.” Intending to kill Shusun Chuoc, our lord’s followers had meanwhile set an ambush for him along the road. The minister of the left, Zhan, informed our lord of this, and our lord had Shusun Chuoc return by way of Zhù.1032 Ji Pingzic, however, had aims very different from those of Shusun Chuo.1033 So in winter, in the tenth month, on the xinyou day (4), Shusun Chuoc fasted in his chambers and asked the invocator and ancestral attendant of his lineage to pray for his death.1034 On the wuchen day (11), he died.

25.6h

Lord Zhao

1649



左師展將以公乘馬而歸，公徒執之。

25.7 壬申，尹文公涉于鞏，焚東訾，弗克。 25.8(7) 十一月，宋元公將為公故如晉，夢大子欒即位於廟，己與平公服而相

之。旦，召六卿。公曰：「寡人不佞，不能事父兄，以為二三子憂，寡人之 罪也。若以群子之靈，獲保首領以歿，唯是楄柎所以藉幹者，請無及先 君。」仲幾對曰：「君若以社稷之故，私降昵宴，群臣弗敢知。若夫宋國 之法，死生之度，先君有命矣，群臣以死守之，弗敢失隊。臣之失職，常 刑不赦。臣不忍其死，君命祇辱。」宋公遂行。己亥，卒于曲棘。 25.9(8) 十二月庚辰，齊侯圍鄆。

1650

Zuo Tradition

The minister of the left, Zhan, was going to flee back to Lu with a team of our lord’s horses, but our lord’s followers arrested him. There is more maneuvering in Zhou, as a partisan of Wangzi Zhao stages a raid (see Zhao 24.8, 25.3, 26.5). On the renshen day (15), the Yin Duke Wen crossed at Gong and burned Dongzi but did not take it.1035

25.7

Lord Yuan of Song dies after a premonitory dream, fulfilling an earlier prediction (see Zhao 25.1). In the eleventh month, Duke Yuan of Song was about to make a visit to Jin on behalf of the Lu Lord when he dreamed that Luan, his heir apparent, acceded to his position in the Ancestral Temple, while he himself, with Lord Ping, attended him in court clothing.1036 At dawn he summoned the six high ministers. The lord said, “In my ineptness, I, the unworthy one, have been unable to serve my kinsmen,1037 bringing sorrow to you, my men. This is my fault. But if by your numinous power I should manage to die with my head upon my shoulders, then I ask that the supports upon which my corpse rests in its coffin not be as fine as those of our former rulers.”1038 Zhong Ji said, “If you, my lord, wish for the sake of the domain altars to make a private reduction in the scale of your personal entertainments, then we, your many subjects, cannot presume to have any say about the matter. But there are commands from the former rulers for the laws of the domain of Song and the standards appropriate to death and life. We, your many subjects, will guard them to the death, not daring to let them be abandoned.1039 Should we fail in our official duties, the standing system of punishments allows of no pardon. We cannot bear death for this. Your command, my lord, will not be honored in this case.” The Duke of Song then set out. On the jihai day (12), he died at Quji. In the twelfth month, on the gengchen day (24), the Prince of Qi laid siege to Yun.

25.8(7)

25.9(8)

1035 The Yin Duke crossed the Luo River from north to south about 40 kilometers east of the Zhou capital. Dongzi was a settlement loyal to King Jìng; see Zhao 24.8. 1036 Duke Ping is Duke Yuan’s father. 1037 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.895), these kinsmen (literally, “fathers and elder brothers”) are the Hua and Xiang lines. 1038 According to Yang (4:1467), Duke Yuan requests that not only the supports for his corpse but also all the funereal accoutrements be diminished so as to show his humility. This apparent self-abasement is in stark contrast to the mostly negative depiction of the duke elsewhere in Zuozhuan. 1039 See Cheng 2.4 for some details of extravagance in Song rulers’ funerals.

Lord Zhao

1651

25.10 初，臧昭伯如晉，臧會竊其寶龜僂句，以卜為信與僭，僭吉。臧氏老將如

晉問，會請往。昭伯問家故，盡對。及內子與母弟叔孫，則不對。再三 問，不對。 歸，及郊，會逆。問，又如初。至，次於外而察之，皆無之。執而戮 之，逸，奔郈。 郈魴假使為賈正焉。計於季氏，臧氏使五人以戈楯伏諸桐汝之 閭，會出，逐之，反奔，執諸季氏中門之外。平子怒，曰：「何故以兵入吾 門？」拘臧氏老。季、臧有惡。及昭伯從公，平子立臧會。會曰：「僂句不 余欺也。」

1040 Zang Hui creates the false impression of an affair between Zang Zhaobo’s wife and his younger brother. 1041 According to the Kong Yingda commentary (ZZ-Kong 51.896), Hou 郈 and its leaders would later align themselves exclusively with the Shusun lineage but at this time still gave their allegiance to the lord’s establishment. Zang Hui will therefore present his accounts to the head of the Ji household in his capacity as supervisor of conscripts for the lord. Hou was located southeast of present-day Dongping County 東平縣, Shandong.

1652

Zuo Tradition

A flashback retells in greater detail events already narrated in Zhao 25.6b. Although most of the Zang lineage follows Lord Zhao of Lu into exile, one man, Zang Hui, tries to win a place for himself in Lu through deception, with the apparent sanction of a divination. Although he fails in this effort, the divination is borne out when Zang Hui later triumphs through the help of Ji Pingzi. Previously, when Zang Zhaobo was away on a visit to Jin, Zang Hui purloined his precious turtle shell, the Lougou, and used it to divine whether he should be truthful or deceitful. According to the divination it was auspicious to act deceitfully. Elders of the Zang lineage were preparing to visit Zang Zhaobo in Jin with greetings, and Zang Huia asked to accompany them. When Zang Zhaobob asked after affairs at home, Zang Huia answered every question, except when he asked after his wife and his younger full brother Shusun. Those questions Zang Huia did not answer. He asked a second and third time, but Zang Huia still did not answer.1040 On Zang Zhaobob’s return from Jin, when he reached the outskirts of the Lu capital, Zang Huia went out to meet him. To Zang Zhaobob’s questions, his answers were as before. On arriving in the Lu capital, Zang Zhaobob set up camp outside the city and conducted an investigation of his wife and brother, but he found nothing suspicious. He then took Zang Huia into custody, and he was preparing to put him to death when Zang Huia escaped and fled to Hou.1041 Fang Jia of Hou appointed Zang Hui director of merchants in Hou. When Zang Hui went to present his accounts to the Ji household,1042 the Zang lineage had five men lie in wait for him with dagger-axes and shields at the village gate of Tongru.1043 As Zang Huia was returning from the Ji compound to Hou, these men chased him. He tried to flee back to the Ji compound, but they arrested him outside the middle gate to the Ji household. Enraged, Ji Pingzic said, “What cause was there for entering our gates armed?” Ji Pingzi seized elders of the Zang lineage, creating enmity between the Ji and Zang lineages. When Zang Zhaobob went into exile with our lord,1044 Ji Pingzic established Zang Hui in his place. Zang Huia said, “Lougou did not deceive me.”

25.10

1042 According to Yang (4:1468), the director of merchants was subordinate to the supervisor of conscripts, which post was at this time held by the head of the Ji lineage. 1043 According to Du Yu (ZZ 51.896), Tongru 桐汝 was a village. Its location is unknown. 1044 Zhao 25.6e.

Lord Zhao

1653

25.11 楚子使薳射城州屈，復茄人焉；城丘皇，遷訾人焉。使熊相禖郭巢，季

然郭卷。子大叔聞之，曰：「楚王將死矣。使民不安其土，民必憂，憂將 及王，弗能久矣。」

春秋 26.1(2) 二十有六年春王正月，葬宋元公。 26.2(3) 三月，公至自齊，居于鄆。 26.3(4) 夏，公圍成。 26.4(b) 秋，公會齊侯、莒子、邾子、杞伯、盟于鄟陵。 26.5 公至自會，居于鄆。 26.6(8) 九月庚申，楚子居卒。 26.7(9) 冬十月，天王入于成周。尹氏、召伯、毛伯以王子朝

奔楚。

1045 This is the only mention of Jia 茄 in Zuozhuan, and it is unclear how they had been displaced from Zhouqu 州屈. Zhouqu was about 550 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital, on the south bank of the Huai River, west of present-day Fengyang County 鳳陽縣, Anhui. 1046 Qiuhuang 丘皇 was about 215 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital, near presentday Xinyang County 信陽縣, Henan.

1654

Zuo Tradition

Chu continues its work of fortification (see Zhao 24.9). The death of King Ping of Chu, here predicted by a Zheng observer, comes next year (see Zhao 26.8). The Master of Chu had Wei She fortify Zhouqu and restore the Jia people there.1045 He fortified Qiuhuang and relocated the people of Zi there.1046 He had Xiongxiang Mei build an outer wall for Chao and Ji Ran build an outer wall for Quan.1047 You Jib heard of it and said, “The king of Chu is going to die soon. Whenever one causes people not to be at ease on their land, the people are sure to feel sorrow, and that sorrow will reach the king. He cannot bear it for long.”

25.11

LORD ZHAO 26 (516 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Lord Yuan of Song was buried.

26.1(2)

In the third month, our lord arrived from Qi and resided at Yun.

26.2(3)

In summer, our lord laid siege to Cheng.

26.3(4)

1048

In autumn, our lord met with the Prince of Qi, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, and the Liege of Qǐ and swore a covenant at Zhuanling.1049

26.4(6)

Our lord arrived from the meeting and resided at Yun.

26.5

In the ninth month, on the gengshen day (9), Ju, the Master of Chu, died.

26.6(8)

In winter, in the tenth month, the Heaven-appointed king entered Chengzhou. The Yin lineage head, the Shao Liege (the Shao Liege Ying), and the Mao Liege (Mao De), taking Wangzi Zhao with them, fled to Chu.

26.7(9)

1047 Quan 卷 was just over 400 kilometers north-northeast of the Chu capital, near present-day Ye County 葉縣, Henan. 1048 Cheng belonged to the Meng lineage. It was located about 25 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital. 1049 The location of Zhuanling 鄟陵 is not known.

Lord Zhao

1655

左傳 26.1 二十六年春王正月庚申，齊侯取鄆。 26.2(1) 葬宋元公，如先君，禮也。 26.3(2) 三月，公至自齊，處于鄆，言魯地也。 26.4a(3) 夏，齊侯將納公，命無受魯貨。申豐從女賈，以幣錦二兩，縳一如瑱，適

齊師，謂子猶之人高齮：「能貨子猶，為高氏後，粟五千庾。」高齮以 錦示子猶，子猶欲之。齮曰：「魯人買之，百兩一布。以道之不通，先入 幣財。」 子猶受之，言於齊侯曰：「群臣不盡力于魯君者，非不能事君也。 然據有異焉。宋元公為魯君如晉，卒於曲棘；叔孫昭子求納其君，無疾 而死。不知天之棄魯邪，抑魯君有罪於鬼神故及此也？君若待于曲棘， 使群臣從魯君以卜焉。若可，師有濟也，君而繼之，茲無敵矣。若其無 成，君無辱焉。」齊侯從之，使公子鉏帥師從公。

1050 According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.900), Shen Feng and Ru Jia are household retainers of the Ji lineage. The brocade amounts to two rolls, each forty feet (chi 尺) in length. Wrapping the bribe of brocade in the shape of a jade tablet (zhen 瑱) makes it easy to conceal. According to Takezoe (25.43), the brocade is wrapped in a square shape to look like a jade or stone weight for a mat. 1051 It is remarkable that a member of the Gao lineage, an old noble lineage in Qi, has sunk so low as to serve among Liangqiu Ju’s personal staff. With the flight of Gao Qiang to Lu (Zhao 10.2b), Gao Yi stands to become the head of the Gao lineage, with an income of five thousand bushels of grain. 1052 The two rolls of brocade are just a sample of the larger bribe the Ji lineage is promising. 1053 Zhao 25.8. 1054 Zhao 25.6h. 1055 Yang (4:1471) follows Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 52.901) in emending Quji 曲棘 to Ji 棘. For Ji, see Cheng 3.5. The settlement was about 60 kilometers north of the Lu capital. 1056 Yang (4:1471) understands this as a figurative divination rather than a literal one. The Qi ruler’s representatives should examine the Lu ruler’s plans and forces to see if it will really be possible for him to reenter the Lu capital. 1057 Gongzi Chu is a younger brother of the Prince of Qi.

1656

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In the twenty-sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the gengshen day (5), the Prince of Qi took Yun.

26.1

Song ministers refuse to honor their ruler’s wish for a more humble funeral (Zhao 25.8). The episode recalls the death and posthumous naming of King Gong of Chu (Xiang 13.4). The burial of Lord Yuan of Song was like that of his predecessors. This was in accordance with ritual propriety.

26.2(1)

In the third month, our lord arrived from Qi and dwelt at Yun. This is to say that this was a place within Lu.

26.3(2)

The Qi ruler prepares to reinstate Lord Zhao of Lu but hedges his bets on the advice of his confidant Liangqiu Ju, who has received bribes from Lord Zhao’s enemies in the Ji lineage. In summer, the Prince of Qi was preparing to reinstate the Lu Lord, and he gave orders that no bribes be received from Lu. Shen Feng, who was accompanying Ru Jia, took two gift rolls of brocade, having wrapped them in the shape of a jade tablet, and went to the Qi army.1050 There they addressed Liangqiu Jub’s man Gao Yi: “If you are able to present a bribe to Liangqiu Jub, then you will be named heir to the Gao lineage, with five thousand bushels of grain.”1051 Gao Yi showed the brocade to Liangqiu Jub, who wanted it. Gao Yia said, “Men in Lu have purchased brocade, laying it out in stacks of one hundred rolls each. Since the paths are not open now, they submit these wares as a sample of the gift.”1052 Having accepted the bribe, Liangqiu Jub spoke to the Prince of Qi: “That your many subjects have not exerted themselves to the utmost for the Lu ruler is not because they are unable to serve a ruler. As a matter of fact, there is something here that I find strange. Lord Yuan of Song went to Jin on behalf of the Lu ruler and died at Quji.1053 Shusun Chuob sought to reinstate his ruler and died, though he had not been ill.1054 I do not know whether the Lu ruler has come to this because Heaven has abandoned Lu or because the Lu ruler has committed some offense against the ghosts and spirits. You, my lord, should wait at Ji1055 and have your many subjects seek out the Lu ruler so as to divine about the matter.1056 If reinstating him seems feasible, and if you proceed with your plans only after your army has had some success, then that will be tantamount to having no enemy at all. And if the army does not achieve its aims, then you will have suffered no disgrace.” The Prince of Qi followed this advice and had Gongzi Chu lead an army to accompany the Lu Lord.1057

26.4a(3)

Lord Zhao

1657

26.4b 成大夫公孫朝謂平子曰：「有都，以衛國也，請我受師。」許之。請納質，

弗許，曰：「信女，足矣。」 告於齊師曰：「孟氏，魯之敝室也。用成已甚，弗能忍也，請息肩于 齊。」齊師圍成。成人伐齊師之飲馬于淄者，曰：「將以厭眾。」魯成備 而後告曰：「不勝眾。」 26.4c 師及齊師戰于炊鼻。齊子淵捷從洩聲子，射之，中楯瓦，繇朐汏輈，匕

入者三寸。聲子射其馬，斬鞅，殪。 改駕，人以為鬷戾也，而助之。子車曰：「齊人也。」將擊子車，子車 射之，殪。其御曰：「又之。」子車曰：「眾可懼也，而不可怒也。」 子囊帶從野洩，叱之。洩曰：「軍無私怒，報乃私也，將亢子。」又 叱之，亦叱之。 冉豎射陳武子，中手，失弓而罵。以告平子曰：「有君子白皙鬒 鬚眉，甚口。」平子曰：「必子彊也，無乃亢諸？」對曰：「謂之君子，何敢 亢之？」

1058 According to Yang (4:1471), Gongsun Zhao is a member of the Meng household establishment in the Meng settlement of Cheng. A hostage might be required as a guarantee of Meng loyalty to the Ji line. 1059 As Du Yu (ZZ 52.901) explains, Gongsun Zhao claims to the Qi forces that this attack is only to appease Cheng inhabitants’ desire to fight the Qi attackers. 1060 Gongsun Zhao finally claims that despite his own wish to surrender to Qi, Cheng troops have forced him to fight. 1061 Chuibi 炊鼻 may have been in present-day Ningyang County 寧陽縣, Shandong, between Cheng and the Lu capital. 1062 Zong Li is supervisor of the military for Lu’s Shusun lineage. See Zhao 25.6e. 1063 Compare Zhao 13.2c, where King Ling of Chu expresses a similar notion. According to Yang, this means that Qi is only supporting Lord Zhao half-heartedly and does not want to cause too many casualties in Lu. 1064 Ran Shu is a retainer of the Ji lineage. Chen Ziqiang is the eldest son of Chen Wuyu and thus scion of one of the most powerful noble houses in Qi. 1065 For a similar principle, see Cheng 2.3d.

1658

Zuo Tradition

In skirmishing near the Lu city of Cheng, Gongsun Zhao fends off Qi attackers by pretending to be ready to surrender to them. The Cheng high officer Gongsun Zhao said to Ji Pingzic, “An outlying city exists to defend the capital. We request that we be permitted to face the army’s attack.” His request was granted. Gongsun Zhao then asked that he might turn over a hostage, but this was not granted. Ji Pingzi said, “I trust you. That is enough.”1058 Gongsun Zhao then reported to the Qi army: “The Meng lineage is in decline in Lu. They have already exploited Cheng to excess, and Cheng cannot bear it. We ask to ease our burden by giving our allegiance to Qi.” The Qi army laid siege to Cheng. The men of Cheng attacked Qi soldiers watering their horses at the Zi River, saying, “We will use this means to satisfy our multitude.”1059 Only after the Lu side had completed its defenses did Gongsun Zhao report to Qi: “We could not resist our multitude.”1060

26.4b

In a series of battle anecdotes reminiscent of military narratives elsewhere in Zuozhuan, Lu troops behave heroically as they oppose the Qi army and the reentry of Lord Zhao. The passage suggests that Lu high officers and troops were eager to fight for Ji Pingzi and the Ji lineage. Our army did battle with the Qi army at Chuibi.1061 Ziyuan Jie of Qi pursued Ye Xiea, shooting at him and hitting the central flange of his shield. Even after the arrow had passed the yoke and glanced off the shaft, its point penetrated as deep as three inches. Ye Xieb shot at a horse of Ziyuan Jie, cutting through its harness strap and killing it. When Ziyuan Jie changed chariots, someone helped him, thinking he was Zong Li.1062 Ziyuan Jieb said, “I am on the Qi side.” The man then intended to strike Ziyuan Jieb, but Ziyuan Jieb shot and killed him first. His driver said, “Do that again.” Ziyuan Jieb said, “The multitude may be intimidated, but they must not be provoked.”1063 Zinang Dai of Qi pursued Ye Xie, insulting him. Ye Xie said, “In a military expedition there can be no private animosity. To respond to you would be a private matter. I will lead my troops against you, sir.” When he insulted him again, Ye Xiec hurled insults at him in return. Ran Shu shot at Chen Ziqianga and struck him in the hand.1064 Chen Ziqiang dropped his bow and cursed. Ran Shu reported to Ji Pingzic: “There is a noble man, light-skinned with a thick black beard and brows, who has quite a mouth on him.” Ji Pingzic said, “That is sure to be Chen Ziqiangb. Can’t you lead your troops against him?” He replied, “Having just called him a noble man, how could I presume to lead troops against him?”1065

26.4c

Lord Zhao

1659

林雍羞為顏鳴右，下。苑何忌取其耳。顏鳴去之。苑子之御曰：「視 下！」顧。苑子刜林雍，斷其足，鑋而乘於他車以歸。顏鳴三入齊師，呼 曰：「林雍乘！」 26.5 四月，單子如晉告急。五月戊午，劉人敗王城之師于尸氏。戊辰，王城

人、劉人戰于施谷，劉師敗績。 26.6(4) 秋，盟于鄟陵，謀納公也。 26.7 七月己巳，劉子以王出。庚午，次于渠。王城人焚劉。丙子，王宿于褚氏。

丁丑，王次于萑谷。庚辰，王入于胥靡。辛巳，王次于滑。 晉知躒、趙鞅帥師納王，使女寬守闕塞。

1066 Du Yu (ZZ 52.902) explains that this detail shows that the Lu forces were united in their support for the Ji lineage and did not let private grudges divide them. 1067 Shishi 尸氏 was about 30 kilometers east of the Zhou capital, west of present-day Yanshi County 偃師縣, Henan. 1068 Shigu 施谷, or the Shi Valley, was part of the Dagu 大谷, or Great Valley, lying east of present-day Luoyang, Henan. 1069 Liu and Shan are on the side of King Jìng, while the Wangcheng troops support Wangzi Zhao. 1070 Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 52.902) believes that the two had been in the Liu Duke’s home city, Liu. 1071 Qu 渠 was close to the Zhou capital.

1660

Zuo Tradition

Lin Yong of Lu, ashamed to be acting as spearman on the right in Yan Ming’s chariot, got down from it. Yuan Heji of Qi cut off his ear. Yan Ming left him behind. Yuan Hejia’s driver said to Yuan Heji, “Look down,” and glanced back at Lin Yong. Yuan Hejia then struck at Lin Yong and cut off his foot. Hopping on his remaining foot, Lin Yong rode back on another chariot. Three times Yan Ming entered the Qi lines shouting, “Lin Yong, ride with me!”1066 Fighting continues in Zhou, with Wangzi Zhao’s forces gaining the upper hand (see Zhao 25.9, 26.7). In the fourth month, the Shan Duke Mub visited Jin to report the crisis. In the fifth month, on the wuwu day (5), Liu troops defeated the Wangcheng army at Shishi.1067 On the wuchen day (15), the men of Wangcheng did battle with the men of Liu at Shigu,1068 and the Liu army was completely defeated.1069

26.5

In autumn, the Covenant of Zhuanling was sworn to plan for reinstating our lord.

26.6(4)

As Zhou loyalist forces continue to retreat before Wangzi Zhao, a Jin army enters the fight (see Zhao 24.6, 25.3, 26.5, 26.9). In the seventh month, on the jisi day (17), the Liu Duke Wena departed, taking the king with him.1070 On the gengwu day (18), they set up camp at Qu.1071 The Wangcheng troops set fire to Liu. On the bingzi day (24), the king lodged at Chushi.1072On the dingchou day (25), the king set up camp at Wangu.1073 On the gengchen day (28), the Zhou king entered Xumi.1074 On the xinsi day (29), the king set up camp at Hua.1075 Zhi Wenzid and Zhao Yang of Jin led an army to reinstate the Zhou king, deputing Ru Kuan to guard the Que Pass.1076

26.7

1072 Chushi 褚氏 was just over 20 kilometers east of the Zhou capital. 1073 Wangu 萑谷 was a valley associated with Shigu, likewise located to the east of Luoyang. 1074 Xumi 胥靡 was about 30 kilometers east of the capital (see Xiang 18.4). 1075 Hua 滑 was about 40 kilometers east and slightly south of the capital. 1076 This is the present-day Longmen 龍門 Pass, south of Luoyang.

Lord Zhao

1661

26.8(6) 九月，楚平王卒。令尹子常欲立子西，曰：「大子壬弱，其母非適也，王

子建實聘之。子西長而好善。立長則順，建善則治。王順、國治，可不務 乎？」子西怒曰：「是亂國而惡君王也。國有外援，不可瀆也；王有適嗣， 不可亂也。敗親、速讎、亂嗣，不祥。我受其名。賂吾以天下，吾滋不從 也，楚國何為？必殺令尹！」令尹懼，乃立昭王。 26.9a(7) 冬十月丙申，王起師于滑。辛丑，在郊，遂次于尸。十一月辛酉，晉師克

鞏。召伯盈逐王子朝，王子朝及召氏之族、毛伯得、尹氏固、南宮嚚奉 周之典籍以奔楚。陰忌奔莒以叛。召伯逆王于尸，及劉子、單子盟。遂軍 圉澤，次于隄上。癸酉，王入于成周。甲戌，盟于襄宮。晉師使成公般戍 周而還。十二月癸未，王入于莊宮。

1077 His death fulfills the prediction recounted at Zhao 25.8. 1078 According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.902; cited in Yang, 4:1474), Gongzi Shen was the eldest of King Ping’s sons by concubines. Although Zuozhuan here indicates that he was older than the heir Ren, who would become King Zhao, Shiji 40.1718 says he was King Zhao’s younger brother. More confusingly still, Shiji 40.1714 identifies him as a younger brother of King Ping. 1079 See Zhao 19.2. 1080 Because Ren’s mother was from Qin, he has the support of Qin. 1081 Shi is the Shishi of Zhao 26.5. 1082 Gong was about 45 kilometers east and slightly north of the capital (see 25.7 above). 1083 What these documents might have been is unknown, but Gong Yuanjie 龔元玠 (cited in Takezoe, 25.48–49) argues that this episode is one reason for the gaps in our knowledge of Western Zhou texts. One wonders whether Wangzi Zhao’s possession of canonical texts, and perhaps of the personnel who used and understood such

1662

Zuo Tradition

In Chu, an able prince refuses to be named heir, while the installation of the new king, King Zhao, exacerbates tensions with the heir Jian, who had previously been passed over for the succession (see Zhao 20.2, 25.11, 27.2). In the ninth month, King Ping of Chu died.1077 The chief minister Nang Waa, who wanted to establish Gongzi Shena as ruler,1078 said, “Ren, the heir apparent, is young, and his mother is not a principal wife to the king. It was really the heir apparent Jiana to whom she was engaged.1079 Gongzi Shena is older and he loves goodness. Establishing the elder as ruler will follow the proper order; setting up the good will make for orderly rule. A king established in proper order, a well-ordered domain— can one fail to strive for these?” Angry, Gongzi Shena said, “This amounts to throwing the domain into chaos and besmirching the reputation of our lord and king. When there is aid from abroad for the domain, it must not be trifled with;1080 when there is a legitimate succession for the king, it must not be disturbed. To ruin kinship, to spur enmity, and to disturb succession—these are all inauspicious acts. In addition, I would be saddled with infamy for it. If you were to offer me the whole world in return for this, I would be all the more unwilling to go along with it. What would I do with the domain of Chu? The chief minister must be put to death.” Frightened, the chief minister established King Zhao as ruler.

26.8(6)

Jin and Zhou forces drive Wangzi Zhao out of Zhou and reinstate King Jìng (see Zhao 26.7, 29.2). In the winter, in the tenth month, on the bingshen day (16), the Zhou king mobilized an army at Gu. On the xinchou day (21) they were at Jiao, and then they set up camp at Shi.1081 In the eleventh month, on the xinyou day (11), the Jin army took Gong.1082 The Shao Liege Ying expelled Wangzi Zhao. With members of the Shao house, Mao Dea, Yin Gua, and Nangong Yin, Wangzi Zhao fled to Chu, carrying with him Zhou canonical documents.1083 Yin Ji fled to Ju and led it in rebellion.1084 The Shao Liege Yingb went out to escort the Zhou king in from Shi, and Ying swore a covenant with the Liu Duke Wena and the Shan Duke Mub. They then formed an army at Yu Marsh and set up camp at Tishang.1085 On the guiyou day (23), the king entered Chengzhou. On the jiaxu day (24), he swore a covenant at the temple of King Xiang. Having deputed Chenggong Ban to lead a garrison at Zhou, the Jin army went home. In the twelfth month, on the guiwei day (4), the king entered the Zhuang Palace.1086

26.9a(7)



texts, bolstered the legitimacy of his royal claims and explains his ability to deploy the impressive archaist rhetoric of Zhao 26.9b. 1084 Ju 莒 was a Zhou settlement, location unknown. 1085 Yu Marsh 圉澤 was east of Luoyang. Tishang 隄上, precise location unknown, was also in Zhou territory. 1086 This palace was in Wangcheng. See Zhao 23.3.

Lord Zhao

1663

26.9b 王子朝使告于諸侯曰： 昔武王克殷，成王靖四方，康王息民，並建母弟，以蕃屏周，

亦曰：「吾無專享文、武之功，且為後人之迷敗傾覆而溺入 于難，則振救之。」至于夷王，王愆于厥身，諸侯莫不並走 其望，以祈王身。至于厲王，王心戾虐，萬民弗忍，居王于 彘。諸侯釋位，以間王政。宣王有志，而後效官。至于幽王， 天不弔周，王昏不若，用愆厥位。攜王奸命，諸侯替之，而建 王嗣，用遷郟鄏－－則是兄弟之能用力於王室也。 至于惠王，天不靖周，生頹禍心，施于叔帶。惠、襄辟 難，越去王都。則有晉、鄭咸黜不端，以綏定王家。則是兄 弟之能率先王之命也。 在定王六年，秦人降妖，曰：「周其有頿王，亦克能修其 職，諸侯服享，二世共職。王室其有間王位，諸侯不圖，而受 其亂災。」

1087 That is, they drove the king out of the capital of the royal domain and settled him in the hinterlands. Zhi 彘 was located near present-day Huo County 霍縣, Shanxi, about 360 kilometers northeast of the Western Zhou capital near Xi’an, Shaanxi. 1088 For you zhi 有志 (“cognizant,” “mentally mature,” here paraphrased “of age”), we follow Takezoe’s (25.50) argument that zhi 志 is equivalent to shi 識. One might otherwise translate: “Only when King Xuan had his own ambitions . . .” 1089 Jiaru 郟鄏 was the eastern capital of the Zhou royal house, in present-day Luoyang, Henan. According to a source cited by Kong Yingda (see Yang, 4:1476), the Prince of Shen and the Prince of Lu had already established the heir apparent, the future King Ping, as successor to King You even before the latter’s death. The Guo Duke Han then established another prince, Yuchen, in Xi as the “Xi King.” King Ping and the Xi King vied for power until the latter was killed by Prince Wen of Jin. 1090 Tui is an uncle of King Hui. Dai is a younger brother of King Hui’s successor, King Xiang. See Zhuang 19.2, Xi 24.2. 1091 Jin put Wangzi Dai to death at Xi 25.2. Zheng put Wangzi Tui to death at Zhuang 21.1. 1092 Xuan 8 (601 Bce).

1664

Zuo Tradition

From exile, Wangzi Zhao sends envoys to the various princes to plead his case. His appeal, remarkable for its elegance and the depth of its historical information, fails to persuade. Min Mafu’s response is in keeping with his role (see Zhao 18.5, 22.5b) as a critic of Wangzi Zhao and predicter of trouble for Zhou. Wangzi Zhao had a proclamation made to the princes:

26.9b

In times past, after King Wu prevailed over Yin, King Cheng pacified the four quarters, and King Kang gave the people their ease. Both of them set up their younger full brothers as vassals to serve as a bulwark for Zhou. Indeed, they said, “We would by no means care to enjoy the exclusive possession of the lands won by the achievements of Kings Wen and Wu. What is more, should our successors lose their way and fail, capsizing and drowning in troubles, these men will come to their rescue.” When it came to the reign of King Yi, that king suffered a serious illness, and every one of the princes hurried about to offer all the prospect sacrifices in order to pray for the king’s health. When it came to the reign of King Li, that king was cruel, and the myriad people could not tolerate him, so they settled the king at Zhi,1087 at which point the princes left their own posts to join the royal government. Only when King Xuan came of age was he given his official position.1088 When it came to the reign of King You, Heaven was ruthless to Zhou. The king, being benighted and incompetent, therefore lost his place. But when the Xie King usurped the Zhou Mandate, the princes put him aside, setting up a successor to the Zhou king and at the same time moving him to Jiaru.1089 This, then, is how brothers can exert themselves on behalf of the royal house. When it came to the reign of King Hui, Heaven gave Zhou no peace, but conceived in Wangzi Tuib thoughts of insurrection, which then implicated Wangzi Daic.1090 King Hui and his son, the future King Xiang, escaped the troubles by leaving the royal city. Then Jin and Zheng duly extirpated the crooked men so as to stabilize the royal house.1091 This, then, is how brothers can carry forward the Mandate of the former kings. In the sixth year of the reign of King Ding,1092 a phantom that came down among the people in Qin said, “In Zhou there will be a king with a mustache who will be capable of cultivating his official duties. The princes will submit to him and offer what they have, and for two generations they will revere their duties. Then there will be in the royal house one who usurps the royal office. The princes will not plan against him but instead they will suffer the disturbance and disaster that will ensue.”

Lord Zhao

1665

至于靈王，生而有頿。王甚神聖，無惡於諸侯。靈王、 景王克終其世。 26.9c

今王室亂，單旗、劉狄剝亂天下，壹行不若，謂先王何常之 有，唯余心所命，其誰敢討之，帥群不弔之人，以行亂于王 室。侵欲無厭，規求無度，貫瀆鬼神，慢棄刑法，倍奸齊 盟，傲很威儀，矯誣先王。晉為不道，是攝是贊，思肆其 罔極。 茲不穀震盪播越，竄在荊蠻，未有攸厎。若我一二兄弟 甥舅獎順天法，無助狡猾，以從先王之命，毋速天罰，赦圖 不穀，則所願也。敢盡布其腹心及先王之經，而諸侯實深 圖之。 昔先王之命曰：「王后無適，則擇立長。年鈞以德，德 鈞以卜。」王不立愛，公卿無私，古之制也。穆后及大子壽早 夭即世，單、劉贊私立少，以間先王。亦唯伯仲叔季圖之！

閔馬父聞子朝之辭，曰：「文辭以行禮也。子朝干景之命，遠晉之大，以 專其志，無禮甚矣，文辭何為？」

1093 Shan Qi is the Shan Duke Mu. Liu Di is the Liu Duke Wen. 1094 Jing is Chu, where Wangzi Zhao has taken refuge (Zhao 26.9a). 1095 Cf. Xiang 31.4. 1096 See Zhao 15.3 and 15.4. According to Yang (4:1479), Wangzi Zhao appears not to have regarded Wangzi Meng (the King Dao of Zhao 22.5a) as a legitimate heir apparent. 1097 King Jing had established Wangzi Meng as his heir.

1666

Zuo Tradition

When it came down to the time of King Ling, he was born with a mustache. The king was very spiritual and sage and he was in no way hated by the princes. Kings Ling and Jing were thus able to bring their reigns to completion without trouble. Now the royal house is in disorder, and Shan Qi and Liu Di have thrown the world into confusion.1093 They act on their own, defying precedent, and they declare that the former kings maintained no standards, so that now they may do whatever their hearts bid them do without fear that anyone would dare punish them for it. At the head of a mob of depraved, ruthless men, they have sown disorder in the royal house. In their grasping desires they are insatiable. In their plotting and requests they abide by no standards. They habitually offend the ghosts and spirits. They haughtily toss aside the penal codes. They violate covenants, they superciliously trample upon the royal dignity, and they deceitfully arrogate to themselves the authority of the former kings. Jin has acted contrary to the Way, aiding these men and abetting them, in this way thinking to indulge them with no limit. This is why I, the inadequate one, have been shaken and cast to the winds, skulking among the Man tribes of Jing,1094 with no place as yet to stop and rest. If one or two of you, my brothers, nephews, and uncles, should restore and comply with Heaven’s law, offering no aid to these rogues but rather following the commands of the former kings, not exacerbating Heaven’s punishments but rather relieving me and planning on my behalf, then that is precisely what I would wish. Although I presume to lay out in full my own heart’s desires as well as the constant rules of the former kings, it is you, the princes, who must deliberate about it. In times past, the command of the former kings said, “When there is no legitimate heir by the queen, then choose and establish the eldest as heir. When sons are of equal age, go by their virtue. When they are of equal virtue, go by divination.”1095 A king does not establish his heir on the basis of personal preference, and lords and ministers should be without personal bias. That was the system of old. When Queen Mu and the heir apparent Shou died young, Shan and Liu helped a personal favorite of theirs, establishing this younger son as heir, and thereby violated the command of the former kings.1096 Indeed, it is up to you alone, my kinsmen old and young, to plan about it.

26.9c

Min Mafu heard Wangzi Zhaoa’s declaration and said, “Elegant speeches are used for implementing ritual. Wangzi Zhaoa has violated the command of King Jing1097 and alienated himself from Jin’s greatness in his single-minded pursuit of his own ambitions, and this is a great failure of ritual propriety. So what will he accomplish by composing such an elegant speech?” Lord Zhao

1667

26.10 齊有彗星，齊侯使禳之。晏子曰：「無益也，祇取誣焉。天道不謟，不貳

其命，若之何禳之？且天之有彗也，以除穢也。君無穢德，又何禳焉？若 德之穢，禳之何損？《詩》曰： 惟此文王， 小心翼翼。 昭事上帝， 聿懷多福。 厥德不回， 以受方國。 君無違德，方國將至，何患於彗？詩曰： 我無所監， 夏后及商。 用亂之故， 民卒流亡。 若德回亂，民將流亡，祝、史之為，無能補也。」公說，乃止。 26.11 齊侯與晏子坐于路寢。公歎曰：「美哉室！其誰有此乎！」晏子曰：「敢

問，何謂也？」公曰：「吾以為在德。」對曰：「如君之言，其陳氏乎！陳氏

1098 Du Yu (ZZ 52.905) notes that the comet appeared in the sector of the sky corresponding to Qi (i.e., Xuanxiao 玄枵, corresponding to part of Aquarius) and argues that the reason it was not noted in the Annals is that it was not visible in Lu. Takezoe (25.54) points out the absurdity of that position and argues that the comet was not important enough to be noted in the Annals. Since the passage appears in other texts, it seems possible that this account of Yan Ying’s response to the comet was legendary and did not trace back to any specific astronomical event. 1099 See the similar pronouncement at Zhao 17.5. 1100 Maoshi 236, “Da ming” 大明, 16B.540–45. 1101 This passage is not found in the extant Odes. 1102 This episode appears also in Yanzi chunqiu 7.445, Xinxu 4.147, and Lunheng 4.204–5.

1668

Zuo Tradition

In another in a series of conversations with the Qi ruler, Yan Ying explains the proper response to comets (see Zhao 20.6, 20.8, 26.11). Yan Ying again rejects the idea of ritual or sacrificial intercession and focuses intead on the ruler’s moral failures. There was a comet in Qi,1098 so the Prince of Qi arranged to have a sacrifice made for it. Yan Yingb said, “That will do no good; it will only bring on deception. Heaven’s way cannot be questioned, nor does it err in its commands, so what do you accomplish by making a sacrifice for it? What is more, when there is a comet, or broom-star, in the Heavens, it is to sweep away filth.1099 If there is no filth in the ruler’s behavior, then why sacrifice? If there is filth in it, then how will sacrificing bring any reduction of it? As it says in the Odes,

26.10

It was this King Wen, Reserved of heart and cautious, Who brilliantly served the god on high And cherished many blessings. His virtue did not swerve And for it he won the domains of all the regions.1100

If you have no erring in your virtue, then the domains of all the regions will come to you of their own accord. What worries will you have about comets? As it says in the Odes, We have nothing that serves as mirror but the Xia rulers and the Shang. All because of their disorderly behavior, Their people in the end streamed away from them.1101

If your conduct swerves, if it is disorderly, then the people will stream away from you, and nothing that the invocators and scribes do will make amends.” Pleased, the lord desisted from his plan to offer sacrifices.1102 Yan Ying and the ruler of Qi discuss the future of Qi. The episode recalls Yan Ying’s prediction in Zhao 3.3b and earlier conversations with the lord in Zhao 20.6 and 20.8. As in Ru Qi’s speech in Zhao 5.3, You Ji’s speech in Zhao 25.3b, and several others recorded for these years, the theme is ritual propriety. Despite Lord Jing’s admirable receptiveness to remonstrance and others, the decline of the Qi ruling house continues. The Prince of Qi was sitting with Yan Yingb in the Grand Chamber. With a sigh, the lord said, “How lovely this chamber is! Who will own these when I am gone?” Yan Yingb said, “May I presume to ask what you mean?” The lord said, “I take it to be a matter of virtue.” He replied, “As you have put the matter, it will be the Chen lineage. Although the

26.11

Lord Zhao

1669

雖無大德，而有施於民。豆、區、釜、鍾之數，其取之公也薄，其施之民 也厚。公厚斂焉，陳氏厚施焉，民歸之矣。《詩》曰： 雖無德與女， 式歌且舞。 陳氏之施，民歌舞之矣。後世若少惰，陳氏而不亡，則國其國也已。」 公曰：「善哉！是可若何？」 對曰：「唯禮可以已之。在禮，家施不及國，民不遷，農不移，工賈 不變，士不濫，官不滔，大夫不收公利。」 公曰：「善哉！我不能矣。吾今而後知禮之可以為國也。」 對曰：「禮之可以為國也久矣，與天地並。君令、臣共，父慈、子 孝，兄愛、弟敬，夫和、妻柔，姑慈、婦聽，禮也。君令而不違，臣共而不 貳；父慈而教，子孝而箴；兄愛而友，弟敬而順；夫和而義，妻柔而正； 姑慈而從，婦聽而婉：禮之善物也。」 公曰：「善哉，寡人今而後聞此禮之上也！」 對曰：「先王所稟於天地以為其民也，是以先王上之。」

1103 The grain measures mentioned here are dou, qu, fu, and zhong. For details on the Chen lineage’s generosity, see the conversation between Yan Ying and Shuxiang at Zhao 3.3b. 1104 Maoshi 218, “Che xia” 車舝, 14B.484–85. 1105 See Wen 7.8 and Zhao 20.8a. 1106 This prediction is effectively fulfilled at Ai 14.5. 1107 A briefer account of this episode is also found in Yanzi chunqiu 7.454–55.

1670

Zuo Tradition

Chens lack any great virtue, they are generous to the people. They use their grain measures to tax their public holdings sparingly and give to the people generously.1103 Because you tax generously and the Chens give generously, the people have gone over to them. As it says in the Odes, Although I have no virtuous attainment to share with you, I will sing and dance.1104

The people sing and dance in response to the gifts of the Chen lineage.1105 If future generations are even slightly remiss in their conduct, and the Chen clan lineage has not perished, then the domain will be theirs.”1106 The lord said, “Excellent! What can we do about it?” He replied, “Only ritual propriety can bring an end to this situation. According to ritual propriety, the gifts of a lineage cannot equal those of the ruler’s domain. Then the people will not relocate, the farmers will not move, the craftsmen and merchants will not change their occupation, the officers will not fail in their duties, the court officials will not encroach on their superiors, and high officers will not collect benefits owed to the lord.” The lord said, “Excellent! This is something I have not been capable of doing. Only today have I discovered the usefulness of ritual propriety in the governing of a domain.” Yan Ying replied, “The usefulness of ritual propriety to governing a domain is old, as old as heaven and earth. When the ruler commands well, the subject follows. When the father is kind, the son is filial. When the elder brother is loving, the younger brother is respectful. When the husband is mild, the wife is compliant. When the mother-in-law is kind, the daughter-in-law is obedient. That is in accordance with ritual propriety. So when the ruler gives commands without erring, the subject follows without duplicity. When the father is kind in his teaching, the son is filial in his remonstrances. When the elder brother is loving and friendly, the younger brother is respectful and compliant. When the husband is mild yet dutiful, the wife is gentle yet correct. When the mother-in-law is kind and cooperative, the daughter-in-law is obedient and gentle. These are the fine institutions of ritual propriety.” The lord said, “Excellent! Only today have I heard of these heights of ritual.” He replied, “This is what the former kings received from heaven and earth for the managing of the people, and that is why they held it in high esteem.”1107

Lord Zhao

1671

春秋 27.1(1) 二十有七年春，公如齊。 27.2(1) 公至自齊，居于鄆。 27.3(2) 夏四月，吳弒其君僚。 27.4(3) 楚殺其大夫郤宛。 27.5(4) 秋，晉士鞅、宋樂祁犁、衛北宮喜、曹人、邾人、滕人會于扈。 27.6 冬十月，曹伯午卒。 27.7 邾快來奔。 27.8(7) 公如齊。 27.9 公至自齊，居于鄆。

左傳

27.1(1, 2)

二十七年春，公如齊。公至自齊，處于鄆，言在外也。

27.2a(3) 吳子欲因楚喪而伐之，使公子掩餘、公子燭庸帥師圍潛，使延州來季

子聘于上國，遂聘于晉，以觀諸侯。 楚莠尹然、王尹麇帥師救潛，左司馬沈尹戌帥都君子與王馬之屬 以濟師，與吳師遇于窮，令尹子常以舟師及沙汭而還。左尹郤宛、工尹 壽帥師至于潛，吳師不能退。

1108 This Hu was located in Zheng, about 70 kilometers north of the Zheng capital, west of Yuanyang, Henan. See Wen 17.4. 1109 Shiji 86.2516–18. 1110 See Zhao 26.8. 1111 Qian 潛 was north of present-day Huoshan 霍山, Anhui, about 400 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital and about 400 kilometers west of the Wu capital. Yanyu and Zhuyong are younger brothers of the Wu King Liao and sons of King Shoumeng. 1112 The “upper domains” are Jin and the other domains of the central plain. 1113 Qiong 窮 was southwest of Qian and of present-day Huoshan, Anhui. 1114 Sharui 沙汭, or “Sandy Bend,” was on the Huai River, about 30 kilometers west of present-day Bangbu, Anhui. 1115 The Chu armies at Qian and Qiong have trapped the Wu army.

1672

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 27 (515 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, our lord went to Qi.

27.1(1)

Our lord arrived from Qi and resided at Yun.

27.2(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, Wu assassinated its ruler Liao.

27.3(2)

Chu put to death its high officer Xi Wan.

27.4(3)

In autumn, Shi Yang (Fan Yang) of Jin, Yue Qili of Song, Beigong Xi of Wei, a Cao leader, a Zhu leader, and a Teng leader met at Hu.1108

27.5(4)

In winter, in the tenth month, Wu, the Liege of Cao, died.

27.6

Kuai of Zhu came in flight.

27.7

Our lord went to Qi.

27.8(7)

Our lord arrived from Qi and resided at Yun.

27.9

ZUO

In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, our lord went to Qi. Our lord arrived from Qi and dwelt at Yun. This is to say that he was outside the domain.

27.1(1, 2)

As Wu continues its attacks on Chu (see Zhao 24.9), Gongzi Guang uses a man presented by Wu Zixu (see Zhao 20.2) to assassinate his ruler and make himself King of Wu. The story of the murder of the Wu king is included among Sima Qian’s “Biographies of the Assassins.” 1109 The Master of Wu wanted to take advantage of the mourning in Chu to mount an attack on it.1110 He had Gongzi Yanyu and Gongzi Zhuyong lead an army to lay siege to Qian,1111 and he had Jizhab of Yan and Zhoulai make an official visit to the upper domains,1112 going on from there to make an official visit to Jin so as to observe the reactions of the princes. The Chu deputy for fields Ran and royal palace deputy Jun led an army to come to Qian’s aid. Meanwhile, the supervisor of the left army, the Governor of Shěn, Xu, led out the noble men of the city and the king’s own horse teams to reinforce the army. They encountered the Wu army at Qiong.1113 The chief minister Nang Waa went as far as Sharui with a flotilla before turning back.1114 When the deputy of the left, Xi Wan, and the deputy for artisans, Shou, led an army and reached Qian, the Wu army could not retreat.1115

27.2a(3)

Lord Zhao

1673

吳公子光曰：「此時也，弗可失也。」告鱄設諸曰：「上國有言曰： 『不索，何獲？』我，王嗣也，吾欲求之。事若克，季子雖至，不吾廢也。」 鱄設諸曰：「王可弒也。母老、子弱，是無若我何？」光曰：「我，爾身 也。」 27.2b 夏四月，光伏甲於堀室而享王。王使甲坐於道及其門。門、階、戶、席，

皆王親也，夾之以鈹。羞者獻體改服於門外。執羞者坐行而入，執鈹者 夾承之，及體，以相授也。光偽足疾，入于堀室。鱄設諸寘劍於魚中以 進，抽劍刺王，鈹交於胸，遂弒王。闔廬以其子為卿。 季子至，曰：「苟先君無廢祀，民人無廢主，社稷有奉，國家無傾， 乃吾君也，吾誰敢怨？哀死事生，以待天命。非我生亂，立者從之，先人 之道也。」復命哭墓，復位而待。吳公子掩餘奔徐，公子燭庸奔鍾吾。楚 師聞吳亂而還。

1116 See n. 793. In other texts, this person is usually called Zhuan Zhu. 1117 According to Kong Yingda and Fu Qian (ZZ-Kong 52.907; cited in Yang, 4:1483), Gongzi Guang is a son of the Wu King Yimo who had been set aside, while the present King Liao is a younger brother of Yimo by a lesser consort. 1118 Jizha declined to succeed his brother Zhufan as ruler of Wu forty-four years ago (Xiang 14.2) and therefore has a legitimate claim to the succession now. 1119 Literally, “my body is your body.” That is, Guang will provide for Zhuan Shezhu’s mother and children should Zhuan die during the attack on the king.

1674

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Guang of Wu said, “This is the moment: it must not be missed.” He informed Zhuan Shezhu,1116 “In the upper domains there is a saying: ‘If you do not seek it, what will you gain?’ As the rightful heir to the king, I want to seek it for myself.1117 If my endeavor should succeed, then Jizhab will not depose me even if he arrives home from his mission.”1118 Zhuan Shezhu said, “The king can be assassinated. But my mother is aged and my son young. Is there anything that I can do about that?” Gongzi Guanga said, “I will provide for them just as I would if they were my own kin.”1119 In summer, in the fourth month, Gongzi Guanga hid armored men in a basement chamber and offered the king ceremonial toasts. The king had his own armored men sit along the path right up to the gate. At the gate, the steps, the door, and the seating mats were men, all of them members of the king’s inner circle, who guarded him on both sides with cutlasses. The servers were made to strip and change clothes outside the gates, and then they had to enter the hall on their knees. The guards brandished the blades of their cutlasses close to the servers’ bodies as they took the food dishes from them and handed them onward. Pretending to be too ill to stand up, Gongzi Guanga went down into the basement chamber,1120 at which point Zhuan Shezhu, disguised as a server, brought in a fish with a sword hidden in it. He pulled the sword out and stabbed the king with it even as the guards’ cutlasses pierced his own chest. And with that he assassinated the king. Gongzi Guang, now King Helu, appointed Zhuan Shezhu’s son as a high minister. When Jizhab arrived home from his mission, he said, “So long as the former rulers do not cast aside our sacrifices, the people and their leaders do not cast aside their master, the altars of the domain maintain their ceremonies, and the domain and patrimony are not overturned, then he is our ruler. Against whom should we presume to bear a grudge? We mourn for the dead and serve the living, awaiting Heaven’s commands. When one has not started a coup oneself, one follows the person established as ruler. That was the way of our ancestors.” He reported the discharge of his mission, lamented at the tomb of the king, then returned to his official place and awaited orders. Gongzi Yanyu fled to Xu, while Gongzi Zhuyong fled to Zhongwu.1121 The Chu army turned back when it heard of the coup in Wu.

27.2b

1120 The text has “feigned an illness of his feet.” Takezoe (26.4) speculates that Gongzi Guang pretended to fall down, then went into the basement chamber. 1121 Zhongwu 鍾吾 was located about 25 kilometers south of Xinyi, Jiangsu, or about 400 kilometers northwest of the Wu capital.

Lord Zhao

1675

27.3(4) 郤宛直而和，國人說之。鄢將師為右領，與費無極比而惡之。令尹子

常賄而信讒，無極譖郤宛焉，謂子常曰：「子惡欲飲子酒。」又謂子惡： 「令尹欲飲酒於子氏。」子惡曰：「我，賤人也，不足以辱令尹。令尹將 必來辱，為惠已甚，吾無以酬之，若何？」無極曰：「令尹好甲兵，子出之， 吾擇焉。」取五甲五兵，曰：「寘諸門。令尹至，必觀之，而從以酬之。」 及饗日，帷諸門左。無極謂令尹曰：「吾幾禍子。子惡將為子不 利，甲在門矣。子必無往！且此役也，吳可以得志。子惡取賂焉而還； 又誤群帥，使退其師，曰：『乘亂不祥』。吳乘我喪，我乘其亂，不亦可 乎？」 令尹使視郤氏，則有甲焉。不往，召鄢將師而告之。將師退，遂令 攻郤氏，且爇之。子惡聞之，遂自殺也。國人弗爇，令曰：「不爇郤氏，與 之同罪。」或取一編菅焉，或取一秉秆焉，國人投之，遂弗爇也。令尹炮 之，盡滅郤氏之族、黨，殺陽令終與其弟完及佗與晉陳及其子弟。

1122 The capital denizens’ halfhearted efforts to burn down the house by tossing in bundles of burning thatch and straw were not successful. 1123 According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.909), Yang Lingzhong is a son of the former chief minister Yang Gai, while Jin Chen is a Chu high officer.

1676

Zuo Tradition

In Chu, Fei Wuji engineers the murder of a rival (see Zhao 21.7). Xi Wan was straight yet mild, and all the inhabitants of the capital liked him. Yan Jiangshi, acting as captain of the right, was a crony of Fei Wuji, and both men hated Xi Wan. Since the chief minister Nang Waa accepted personal gifts and believed slander, Fei Wujia slandered Xi Wan, telling Nang Waa, “Xi Wana wants to entertain you with drinks.” Then he told Xi Wana, “The chief minister wants to drink at your home.” Xi Wana said, “I am a lowly man and do not merit the chief minister’s condescension in that way. If the chief minister should insist upon condescending to come, it will be an enormous act of generosity. I have nothing to give him as a gift of thanks. What should I do?” Fei Wujia said, “The chief minister is fond of armor and weapons. If you bring them out, I will select from among them.” Choosing five suits of armor and five types of weapons, he said, “Place these at the gate. When the chief minister arrives he is bound to inspect them, and then you can proceed to give them to him as your gift of thanks.” When the day of the feast came, Xi Wan placed the armor and weapons behind a curtain to the left of the gate. Fei Wujia said to the chief minister, “I very nearly brought disaster down upon you. Xi Wana is preparing to act to your disadvantage; the armor is already beside the gate. You must not go! What is more, during this most recent campaign, we could have achieved our aims against Wu, but Xi Wana turned back after accepting a bribe. He also deceived the other generals and made them withdraw their armies by saying that ‘it was inauspicious to take advantage of a coup.’ Since Wu took advantage of our period of mourning, would it not have been acceptable for us to take advantage of their coup?” The chief minister sent someone to take a look at the Xi household, and the armor was indeed discovered there. The chief minister did not go there himself but summoned Yan Jiangshi and informed him of what had happened. Withdrawing, Yan Jiangshia ordered that the Xi household be attacked and burned to the ground. When Xi Wana heard of this, he killed himself. When the inhabitants of the capital would not burn the house, they were given this order: “If you do not burn the Xi house, you will be guilty of the same crime as the Xis.” Someone brought a bundle of thatch, someone a handful of straw, and the inhabitants of the capital threw these in, with the result that they did not burn the house down.1122 The chief minister then burned the house down and exterminated the entire Xi house with its followers. He put to death Yang Lingzhong and his younger brothers Wan and Tuo, as well as Jin Chen and his sons and younger brothers.1123

27.3(4)

Lord Zhao

1677

晉陳之族呼於國曰：「鄢氏、費氏自以為王，專禍楚國，弱寡王 室，蒙王與令尹以自利也，令尹盡信之矣，國將如何？」令尹病之。 27.4(5) 秋，會于扈，令戍周，且謀納公也。宋、衛皆利納公，固請之。范獻子取

貨于季孫，謂司城子梁與北宮貞子曰：「季孫未知其罪，而君伐之。請 囚、請亡，於是乎不獲，君又弗克，而自出也。夫豈無備而能出君乎？季 氏之復，天救之也。休公徒之怒，而啟叔孫氏之心。不然，豈其伐人而說 甲執冰以游？叔孫氏懼禍之濫，而自同於季氏，天之道也。魯君守齊， 三年而無成。季氏甚得其民，淮夷與之，有十年之備，有齊、楚之援，有 天之贊，有民之助，有堅守之心，有列國之權，而弗敢宣也，事君如在 國。故鞅以為難。二子皆圖國者也，而欲納魯君，鞅之願也，請從二子以 圍魯。無成，死之。」二子懼，皆辭。乃辭小國，而以難復。

1124 For these events, see Zhao 25.6d and 25.6f. 1125 As Yang (4:1486) explains, that the Ji lineage had made no defensive preparations shows that they had no intention of driving Lord Zhao into exile. That they were able to prevail despite a lack of preparations shows their true military strength. 1126 See Zhao 25.6e. It is interesting that this detail of the half-heartedness of the lord’s troops would have circulated so widely as to have become part of Fan Yang’s defense of Ji Pingzi. The Shusun lineage comes to support the Ji lineage because Heaven “opens its heart.” 1127 Fan Yang hereby presents two contradictory claims: on the one hand the Ji lineage is said to be the victim of Lord Zhao’s groundless suspicions, on the other hand he points out that the Ji lineage has been making preparations to consolidate its power.

1678

Zuo Tradition

Members of Jin Chen’s house raised a cry throughout the capital: “Yan and Fei take themselves for kings. They concentrate all their efforts to bring disaster to the domain of Chu, plunging the royal house into weakness and isolation, while deceiving the king and the chief minister, in order to win advantages for themselves. And the chief minister has believed every bit of it. What is the domain to do?” The chief minister was disturbed by this. The northern domains provide a garrison for Zhou. In a cunning piece of speechmaking, Fan Yang of Jin, who has accepted gifts from Ji Pingzi, persuades leaders of the other domains not to invade Lu in order to reinstate Lord Zhao (see Zhao 26.4, 26.6, 27.1, 27.5). The autumn meeting at Hu was to give commands for the garrisoning of Zhou and also to make plans for reinstating our lord. Both Song and Wei considered it advantageous to reinstate our lord and requested it time and time again. Fan Yangb, who had taken gifts from Ji Pingzib, said to Supervisor of Fortifications Yue Qilib of Song and Beigong Xib of Wei, “Before Ji Pingzib even knew what crime he had committed, the ruler attacked him. He asked to be imprisoned and he asked to go into exile, but neither of these was granted him, and then the ruler, failing to defeat him in battle, himself fled the domain.1124 Indeed, how could Ji Pingzi have been able to expel his ruler without making preparations?1125 That the Ji lineage recovered is because Heaven has saved it. Heaven assuaged the anger of the lord’s followers and opened the hearts of the Shusun lineage. If that were not so, then how is it that, while making an attack, the Lu Lord’s troops would remove their armor and take their ease drinking from their quiver covers?1126 That the Shusun lineage, fearing the spread of the troubles, itself took the Ji lineage’s side is the Way of Heaven. Meanwhile, the Lu ruler’s requests to Qi have come to nothing for three years. The Ji lineage has won the utmost allegiance of the people. The Yi of the Huai River region have sided with them. They have ten years’ preparation.1127 They have the support of Qi and Chu. They have Heaven’s aid and the people’s help. They have the will to defend themselves staunchly and power equal to that of rulers of domains. Even so, they do not presume to flaunt it but still serve the ruler as if he were in the domain. I therefore consider this a difficult matter. That both of you gentlemen, in planning for your domains, should wish to reinstate the Lu ruler is in accordance with my wishes. I request permission to accompany you as you lay seige to Lu. Should we not succeed, we will die together for it.” Alarmed, both men declined. Jin therefore declined the request of the smaller domains, reporting that it would be too difficult.

27.4(5)

Lord Zhao

1679

27.5 孟懿子、陽虎伐鄆，鄆人將戰。子家子曰：「天命不慆久矣，使君亡者，

必此眾也。天既禍之，而自福也，不亦難乎！猶有鬼神，此必敗也。嗚呼！ 為無望也夫！其死於此乎！」公使子家子如晉。公徒敗于且知。 27.6 楚郤宛之難，國言未已，進胙者莫不謗令尹。沈尹戌言於子常曰：「夫

左尹與中廄尹，莫知其罪，而子殺之，以興謗讟，至于今不已。戌也惑 之：仁者殺人以掩謗，猶弗為也。今吾子殺人以興謗，而弗圖，不亦異 乎！夫無極，楚之讒人也，民莫不知。去朝吳，出蔡侯朱，喪大子建，殺 連尹奢，屏王之耳目，使不聰明。不然，平王之溫惠共儉，有過成、莊， 無不及焉。所以不獲諸侯，邇無極也。今又殺三不辜，以興大謗，幾及 子矣。子而不圖，將焉用之？夫鄢將師矯子之命，以滅三族。三族，國之 良也，而不愆位。吳新有君，疆埸日駭。楚國若有大事，子其危哉！知者

1128 Yang Hu, also known as Yang Huo 陽貨 (see Analects 17.1), is a household retainer of the Jisun lineage. His rise to power in Lu and his fall and execution are recorded in Ding 5–9. 1129 By “this band” Zijia Yibo means the men of Yun. 1130 Juzhi 且知 was somewhere near Yun. 1131 Allies would present portions of sacrificial meat to ministers and high officers in the court of the leading domain. 1132 See Zhao 15.2. 1133 See Zhao 21.7. 1134 For both events, see Zhao 20.2. 1135 The three houses were Xi Wan’s, Yang Lingzhong’s, and Jin Chen’s. See Zhao 27.3. In fact, Yang Jiangshi did not feign the command. The governor of Shěn, Xu, is offering a way for Nang Wa to shift blame to his accomplices.

1680

Zuo Tradition

As Lu forces move against Lord Zhao at Yun (see Zhao 27.1), the lord’s man Zijia Yibo (see Zhao 25.6) foresees the ultimate failure of the lord’s efforts to return to power. Meng Yizi and Yang Hu attacked Yun.1128 The men of Yun prepared to fight. Zijia Yiboa said, “For a long time there has been no doubt about Heaven’s command: it is bound to be this band of men that finally causes the ruler to go into exile.1129 Is it not a problem that they consider themselves blessed when Heaven has already brought trouble down on them? If ghosts and spirits exist, these men are bound to be defeated. Alas! The hopelessness of it all! They will die here!” Our lord sent Zijia Yiboa on a visit to Jin. Our lord’s followers were defeated at Juzhi.1130

27.5

On the urging of the Shěn governor Xu, the chief minister of Chu, Nang Wa, puts to death Fei Wuji and Yan Jiangshi, who had abused their power in machinations against Chu’s noble families (see Zhao 27.3). In the Chu capital, discussion of the Xi Wan crisis had not ceased, and no one who came to present portions of sacrificial meat failed to criticize the chief minister.1131 The Governor of Shěn, Xu, said to Nang Waa, “Neither the deputy of the left, Xi Wan, nor the deputy for the central stables, Yang Lingzhong, knew what crime they had committed, yet you put them to death. In this way you aroused criticism that has continued to this very day. I am troubled by it: when it comes to killing a man in order to suppress criticism, a man who is noble in spirit will not do it. Now, when you have killed two men in such a way as to arouse criticism, is it not strange that you make no plans to save the situation? There is no one among the people who does not know that Fei Wujia is the chief slanderer in Chu. He sent Zhao Wu of Cai away,1132 he expelled Zhu, Prince of Cai,1133 he caused the loss of the heir apparent Jian, and he killed the deputy for carriage management Wu She.1134 He blocked the ears and eyes of our king, keeping him from hearing or seeing clearly. If that were not the case, King Ping, with his gentleness and kindness, his respectfulness and frugality, would in some respects have surpassed Kings Cheng and Zhuang, and in no respect fallen short of them. The reason he did not win the allegiance of the princes was that he kept Fei Wujia close to him. Now that Fei Wuji has killed three innocent men and aroused extensive criticism, he is on the verge of implicating you in his crime. If you, sir, do not make plans to deal with this problem, then what use are you in your position? Yan Jiangshi feigned a command from you in order to exterminate three houses.1135 These three included some of the most excellent people in the domain, nor had they erred in their official duties. Wu has a new ruler, and there are daily alarms at the borders. Should the

27.6

Lord Zhao

1681

除讒以自安也，今子愛讒以自危也，甚矣，其惑也！」子常曰：「是瓦之 罪，敢不良圖！」九月己未，子常殺費無極與鄢將師，盡滅其族，以說于 國。謗言乃止。 27.7(8) 冬，公如齊，齊侯請饗之。子家子曰：「朝夕立於其朝，又何饗焉，其飲

酒也。」乃飲酒，使宰獻，而請安。子仲之子曰重，為齊侯夫人，曰：「請 使重見。」子家子乃以君出。 27.8 十二月，晉籍秦致諸侯之戍于周，魯人辭以難。

春秋 28.1 二十有八年春王三月，葬曹悼公。 28.2(1) 公如晉，次于乾侯。 28.3 夏四月丙戌，鄭伯寧卒。 28.4 六月，葬鄭定公。 28.5 秋七月癸巳，滕子寧卒。 28.6 冬，葬滕悼公。

1136 The latter form of entertainment would be less formal and therefore more intimate. 1137 According to Yang (4:1489), even during an entertainment with drinks, one lord would pour for another. By having his steward pour, the ruler of Qi treats Lord Zhao like a subject.

1682

Zuo Tradition

domain of Chu embark on a great undertaking, then you, sir, will be in a dangerous position! Wise men get rid of slanderers to bring peace for themselves, but you now cherish a slanderer and put yourself in danger. How extraordinarily deluded you are!” Nang Waa said, “This is my fault, so would I presume not to change my plans?” In the ninth month, on the jiwei day (14), Nang Waa put Fei Wuji and Yan Jiangshi to death, and he then extinguished all members of their houses in order to win the favor of the domain. The criticism then stopped. Discourteous treatment in Qi shows that Lord Zhao of Lu is in danger of losing his prestige as a ruler. On the advice of his man Zijia Yibo he leaves Qi (see Zhao 27.5, 28.1). In winter, our lord went to Qi. The Prince of Qi asked to offer him ceremonial toasts. Zijia Yiboa said, “When you stand in his court day and night, what is the point in his offering you ceremonial toasts? Let him entertain you with a wine feast.”1136 The Prince of Qi then did entertain our lord with wine, but he had his steward pour, while he excused himself, saying that he was resting.1137 Zizhong’s daughter Zhong was wife of the Prince of Qi, and the Prince said, “I request permission to send Zhong for an audience with you.”1138 Zijia Yiboa then took the ruler and departed.

27.7(8)

In the twelfth month, when Ji Qin of Jin took the garrison force of the princes to Zhou, the Lu troops declined on the grounds of the domestic troubles.

27.8

LORD ZHAO 28 (514 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, in the royal third month, Lord Dao of Cao was buried.

28.1

Our lord went to Jin and set up camp at Ganhou.

28.2(1)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingxu day (14), Ning, the Liege of Zheng, died. In the sixth month, Lord Ding of Zheng was buried. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the guisi day (23), Ning, the Chief of Teng, died. In winter, Lord Dao of Teng was buried.

28.3

28.4 28.5

28.6

1138 Zizhong left Lu for Qi after the rebellion of Nan Kuai at Zhao 12.10. According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.910), Zizhong wanted his daughter to spy on Lord Zhao and his men during the drinking.

Lord Zhao

1683

左傳 28.1(2) 二十八年春公如晉，將如乾侯。子家子曰：「有求於人，而即其安，人孰

矜之？其造於竟。」弗聽，使請逆於晉。晉人曰：「天禍魯國，君淹恤在 外，君亦不使一个辱在寡人，而即安於甥舅，其亦使逆君？」使公復于 竟，而後逆之。 28.2a 晉祁勝與鄔臧通室。祁盈將執之，訪於司馬叔游。叔游曰：「《鄭書》有

之：『惡直醜正，實蕃有徒。』無道立矣，子懼不免。《詩》曰： 民之多辟， 無自立辟。 姑已，若何？」盈曰：「祁氏私有討，國何有焉？」遂執之。 祁勝賂荀躒，荀躒為之言於晉侯。晉侯執祁盈。祁盈之臣曰：「鈞 將皆死，憖使吾君聞勝與臧之死也以為快。」乃殺之。夏六月，晉殺祁盈 及楊食我。食我，祁盈之黨也，而助亂，故殺之，遂滅祁氏、羊舌氏。

1139 Ganhou was in Jin territory, in present-day Cheng’an County 成安縣, Hebei, about 225 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital. A prophetic children’s ditty had hinted that Lord Zhao would end up there (Zhao 25.4). 1140 The proper place from which to request an escort to the Jin capital would be the Jin border, not a city in Jin territory. 1141 According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.911), these two members of Qi Ying’s household establishment exchanged wives. 1142 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.632–36. These lines are also cited in Xuan 9.6. It is interesting that in both cases the speaker cites the lines to argue against overt criticism of sexual excesses, and that both are also linked to Xia Ji. Qi Ying’s downfall brings about the death of Yang Shi and the demise of the Yangshe lineage, and Yang Shi is Shuxiang’s son by Xia Ji’s daughter. 1143 Shu You is hinting rather broadly that Jin power holders are so corrupt at this point that even a justified action like the one Qi Ying is contemplating may end up bringing disaster upon him. 1144 Yang Shi was a member of the Yangshe lineage. The move is especially significant because both the Qi and Yangshe lineages were related to the Jin ruling house.

1684

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In Jin, Lord Zhao of Lu fails to heed Zijia Yibo and further harms his chances for outside support (see Zhao 27.7, 29.1). In the twenty-eighth year, in spring, our lord went to Jin and was going to enter Ganhou.1139 Zijia Yiboa said, “If you take your ease while you are seeking help from another domain, then who will pity you? You should go to the Jin border.”1140 Our lord did not heed him but sent someone to request an escort to the Jin capital. The Jin leaders said, “Heaven has brought down disaster upon the domain of Lu, whose ruler has long been stranded outside the domain. All that time he has not sent a single envoy to deign to visit our unworthy ruler, instead taking his ease with our nephew in Qi. Why will he then have us send an escort for him?” They had our lord return to the border, and only then did they send an escort for him.

28.1(2)

In Jin, an unusual household arrangement brings about the destruction of two lineages. In Jin, Qi Sheng and Wu Zang opened their domestic quarters to each other.1141 Qi Ying, who was about to arrest them both, inquired with the supervisor of the military Shu You about it. Shu You said, “The Zheng Documents says the following: ‘Many are those who hate the upright and vilify the right.’ When those who lack a sense of the Way are established in office, you must fear that you will not escape disaster. As it says in the Odes,

28.2a

When the people have many deviations, Do not set up your own law against deviations.1142

Why not put off your plans to arrest them?”1143 Qi Yinga said, “When the Qi lineage is chastising someone for its own private reasons, what does the domain have to do with it?” He went ahead and arrested them. Qi Sheng bribed Zhi Wenzia, who spoke to the Prince of Jin on his behalf. The Prince of Jin then arrested Qi Ying. Qi Ying’s retainers said, “Since in any case we are all going to die, let us at least give our master the satisfaction of hearing of the deaths of Qi Shenga and Wu Zanga.” They therefore killed the two men. In summer, in the sixth month, Jin put Qi Ying and Yang Shia to death. Yang Shib was a member of Qi Ying’s clique who had supported him in his insubordination, and it was for this reason that he was put to death. Thereupon, the Qi and Yangshe lineages were extinguished.1144

Lord Zhao

1685

28.2b 初，叔向欲娶於申公巫臣氏，其母欲娶其黨。叔向曰：「吾母多而庶鮮，

吾懲舅氏矣。」其母曰： 子靈之妻殺三夫，一君、一子，而亡一國、兩卿矣，可無懲

乎？ 吾聞之：「甚美必有甚惡。」是鄭穆少妃姚子之子，子 貉之妹。子貉早死無後，而天鍾美於是，將必以是大有 敗也。 昔有仍氏生女，黰黑而甚美，光可以鑑，名曰玄妻。樂 正后夔取之，生伯封，實有豕心，貪惏無饜，忿纇無期，謂 之封豕。有窮后羿滅之，夔是以不祀。 且三代之亡、共子之廢，皆是物也，女何以為哉？夫有 尤物，足以移人。苟非德義，則必有禍。 叔向懼，不敢取。平公強使取之，生伯石。伯石始生，子容之母走謁諸 姑曰：「長叔姒生男。」姑視之。及堂，聞其聲而還，曰：「是豺狼之聲 也。狼子野心。非是，莫喪羊舌氏矣。」遂弗視。

1145 As Yang’s (4:1492) note reminds us, Qu Wuchen is the Chu man who ran away with the notorious femme fatale Xia Ji of Chen. The text implies that Shuxiang wishes to marry a daughter of Xia Ji. 1146 Yang (4:1492) argues that Shuxiang’s mother and her sisters did not give the Yangshe family many sons. Xiang 21.5d suggests that the issue is rather that Shuxiang’s mother and her sisters jealously controlled their husbands’ access to concubines. 1147 The three husbands are Ziman, Yushu, and Wuchen. The one ruler is Lord Ling of Chen. The one son is Xia Zhengshu. The one domain is Chen. The two high ministers are Gongsun Ning and Yi Hangfu. See Xuan 9.6 and Cheng 2.6. 1148 For the death of Lord Ling of Zheng, see Xuan 4.2. 1149 These events would have taken place just before and after the founding of the Xia dynasty. The story of Archer Yi was last referred to in Wei Jiang’s remonstrance to the Jin ruler against hunting (Xiang 4.7a), where it is part of a longer discussion of making peace with the Rong. 1150 Tradition blamed Moxi 末喜, favorite of King Jie 桀, for the fall of the Xia; Daji 妲己, favorite of King Zhòu 紂, for the fall of the Shang; and Bao Si 褒姒, favorite of King You 幽, for the fall of the Western Zhou. For the story of Lord Xian of Jin, his favorite Li Ji, and the deposed heir Shensheng, see Xi 4.6. 1151 For similar observations on the young Dou Jiao, see Xuan 4.3a, where the principle of the wolf cub is cited as a proverb. Although Yang Shi is associated with Qi Ying’s supposed insubordination in Zhao 28.2a, Zuozhuan offers little evidence that he was as “wild at heart” as Shuxiang’s mother predicts he will be.

1686

Zuo Tradition

The destruction of the Yangshe lineage is linked to Xia Ji, the woman who in the previous generation was implicated in troubles in Zheng, Chen, and Chu (see Xuan 9.6, Cheng 2.6). The warning of Shuxiang’s mother recalls her speech at Xiang 21.5d. Earlier, Shuxiang had wished to marry a woman from the family of Qu Wuchen, Lord of Shen,1145 but his mother wanted him to marry a woman from her own birth family. Shuxiang said, “I have many mothers but few half brothers. I have learned my lesson from observing your side of the family.”1146 His mother said,

28.2b

Qu Wuchenc’s wife Xia Ji has killed three husbands, one ruler, and one son and has brought one domain and two high ministers to their destruction.1147 How can you fail to learn a lesson from that? I have heard that “great beauty always holds great evil.” That woman was the daughter of Yao Zi, the lesser wife of Lord Mu of Zheng. She was also the younger sister of Lord Ling of Zhenga. Lord Ling died early without an heir,1148 and Heaven concentrated beauty in this one child, certain to use her to bring about great destruction. Long ago a girl was born to the Youreng lineage. Her thick black hair was very beautiful and glossy enough to use as a mirror. For this reason they called her the Dark Wife. The music master Lord Kui took her as wife, and she bore Bofeng, who had the heart of a swine, being insatiably greedy and violent beyond all bounds. They in fact called him the Great Swine. Archer Yi of Youqiong destroyed him, with the result that Lord Kuia now receives no sacrifices.1149 What is more, the falls of the Three Dynasties and the deposing of the Jin heir Shenshengb were all due to such creatures of great beauty.1150 What do you intend to accomplish by this marriage to a great beauty? This is an extraordinary creature, one capable of ruining a man. Unless her husband is a man of virtue and dutifulness, there is sure to be disaster.

Alarmed by this, Shuxiang did not dare marry her. When Lord Ping forced Shuxiang to marry her, she bore Yang Shic. Just after Yang Shic was born, Zirong’s mother—the wife of Shuxiang’s elder brother Yangshe Chi—ran to tell Shuxiang’s mother the news: “The wife of the eldest of our younger brothers has borne a son.” Shuxiang’s mother went to see the child. She had just reached the hall when she heard the sound of his cry and turned back, saying, “This is the sound of a jackal or wolf. A wolf cub is wild at heart. This very child—he and no other—will destroy the Yangshe lineage.”1151 And she refused to see him.

Lord Zhao

1687

28.3a 秋，晉韓宣子卒，魏獻子為政，分祁氏之田以為七縣，分羊舌氏之田以

為三縣。司馬彌牟為鄔大夫，賈辛為祁大夫，司馬烏為平陵大夫，魏戊 為梗陽大夫，知徐吾為塗水大夫，韓固為馬首大夫，孟丙為盂大夫，樂 霄為銅鞮大夫，趙朝為平陽大夫，僚安為楊氏大夫。 謂賈辛、司馬烏為有力於王室，故舉之；謂知徐吾、趙朝、韓固、 魏戊，餘子之不失職、能守業者也；其四人者，皆受縣而後見於魏子， 以賢舉也。 28.3b 魏子謂成鱄：「吾與戊也縣，人其以我為黨乎？」對曰： 何也！戊之為人也，遠不忘君，近不偪同；居利思義，在約思

純，有守心而無淫行，雖與之縣，不亦可乎！ 昔武王克商，光有天下，其兄弟之國者十有五人，姬姓 之國者四十人，皆舉親也。夫舉無他，唯善所在，親疏一也。 《詩》曰：

1152 Wu 鄔 was presumably the territory that had belonged to Wu Zang. Wu, Qi 祁, Pingling 平陵, Gengyang 梗陽, Tushui 塗水, Mashou 馬首, and Yu 盂 were all located in the territory around present-day Taiyuan 太原, Shanxi. Tongti 銅鞮 (Cheng 9.7) was about 160 kilometers northeast of the Jin capital, near present-day Qin County 沁縣, Shanxi. Pingyang 平陽 was about 50 kilometers south of the Jin capital, near present-day Linfen 臨汾, Shanxi. Yangshi 楊氏 was about 75 kilometers northeast of the capital, near present-day Hongdong 洪洞, Shanxi. 1153 Both men were instrumental in leading Jin forces in support of King Jìng; see Zhao 22.5b.

1688

Zuo Tradition

In the wake of the troubles in Jin, Han Qi dies and is succeeded as head of government by Wei Shu, who divides up the land of the exterminated lineages and appoints officials to oversee the newly established districts. In autumn, Han Qia of Jin died and Wei Shua took charge of the Jin administration. He divided the lands of the Qi lineage into seven districts and those of the Yangshe lineage into three districts. The supervisor of the military Shi Mimouc was made high officer for Wu. Jia Xin was made high officer for Qi. The supervisor of the military Dua was made high officer for Pingling. Wei Wu was made high officer for Gengyang. Zhi Xuwu was made high officer for Tushui. Han Gu was made high officer for Mashou. Mengbing was made high officer for Yu. Yue Xiao was made high officer for Tongti. Zhao Zhao was made high officer for Pingyang. Liao An was made high officer for Yangshi.1152 Wei Shu, thinking that Jia Xin and the supervisor of the military Dua had exerted themselves on behalf of the royal house, promoted them.1153 He deemed Zhi Xuwu, Zhao Zhao, Han Gu, and Wei Wu to be men who, though they were younger sons or concubine’s sons, had not failed in their duties but had been able to uphold hereditary responsibilities. The four others had their audiences with Wei Shuc only after being granted their districts; they too were appointed on the basis of their merit.

28.3a

Wei Shu is praised for having appointed his son to office. The passage recalls Xiang 3.4, where Qi Xi’s recommendation of his son is likewise both praiseworthy and ultimately self-serving. The Wei line benefits directly from the destruction of the Qi and Yangshe lineages, while the rhetoric of virtue and impartiality is used to justify hereditary succession. Wei Shuc said to Cheng Zhuan, “Since I have granted a district to my son, Wei Wua, will people think that I have shown favoritism?” He replied,

28.3b

What are you saying? It is Wei Wua’s way of comporting himself as a man that even when he is far away, he does not forget his ruler, and when he is near at hand, he does not crowd his peers. In the midst of benefits he keeps his thoughts on dutifulness, and in straitened circumstances keeps his thoughts on purity. He is mindful of rules and principles and never excessive in his behavior. Is it not right to give him a district? In former times, when King Wu conquered the Shang, taking broad possession of all-under-heaven, fifteen of his brothers governed domains, and forty who had the Ji clan name governed domains. In all these cases kinsmen had been appointed. The right way of making appointments consists in nothing other than appointing the good, whether they are kin or not. As it says in the Odes,

Lord Zhao

1689

惟此文王， 帝度其心。 莫其德音， 其德克明。 克明克類， 克長克君。 王此大國， 克順克比。 比于文王， 其德靡悔。 既受帝祉， 施于孫子。 心能制義曰度，德正應和曰莫，照臨四方曰明，勤施無私曰

類，教誨不倦曰長，賞慶刑威曰君，慈和徧服曰順，擇善而 從之曰比，經緯天地曰文。九德不愆，作事無悔，故襲天 祿，子孫賴之。主之舉也，近文德矣，所及其遠哉！ 28.3c 賈辛將適其縣，見於魏子。魏子曰：「辛來！昔叔向適鄭，鬷蔑惡，欲觀

叔向，從使之收器者，而往，立於堂下，一言而善。叔向將飲酒，聞之， 曰：『必鬷明也！』下，執其手以上，曰：『昔賈大夫惡，娶妻而美，三年

1154 The Mao tradition (Maoshi 241, “Huang yi” 皇矣, 16D.570) has “There was Wang Ji” 維此王季. 1155 Mo 莫 is mo 貊 in the Mao text (16D.567–64); glosses suggest that a kind of tranquillity or silence is meant, but the word is defined later in this speech as a responsive harmony developing from virtue. 1156 Lei 類 is regularly glossed shan 善, “good.” Here there is an added connotation, suggested in the speech, that the good man gathers people of his own “type” or “kind” around him. 1157 Maoshi 241, “Huang yi,” 16D.567–64. 1158 See Xiang 25.14, where Zichan recognizes the excellence of Ran Ming despite the ugliness of his face.

1690

Zuo Tradition

There was King Wen:1154 The god on high gave him discernment in his heart. Concordant was the news of his virtue,1155 And his virtue could shine. He could shine; he could be good;1156 He could lead; he could rule. He reigned over these great domains, And could bring compliance and unity. The domains joined with King Wen, Whose virtue none regretted. Having received the blessings of the god on high, He extended these blessings to his sons and grandsons.1157 When the heart can take its ordering principles from dutifulness, that is discernment. When virtue is correct and the response harmonious, that is concordance. Overseeing and shining upon all in the four directions is shining. Giving assiduously without concern for oneself is being good. Teaching tirelessly is being a leader. Using rewards, celebrations, punishments, and awe, one is a ruler. When through kindness and gentle harmoniousness one brings general submission, that is compliance. When one chooses the good and follows it, that brings unity. Establishing the warp and woof of heaven and earth is cultural patterning. Never erring in these nine virtues, one acts without bringing regrets. In this way one wins Heaven’s rewards, upon which one’s sons and grandsons can rely. Your appointments come close to this virtue of cultural patterning and will have far-reaching effects.

Wei Shu tells his appointee Jia Xin a story of Shuxiang’s recognition of excellence. Just as Shuxiang was able to see past Ran Ming’s unprepossessing physical appearance and discern his excellence—and just as the wife of the ugly high officer of Gu was able at last to see her husband’s merit— Wei Shu declares that he too has exercised an admirable form of moral discernment. Confucius expresses his approval of Wei Shu’s leadership and echoes an earlier prediction (Min 1.6) of lasting Wei greatness. Before going to his district, Jia Xin went to visit Wei Shuc. Wei Shuc said, “Come, Xin! Some time ago Shuxiang went to Zheng. Ran Mingb of Zheng, an ugly man, wanted to observe Shuxiang, so he went in following the men who had been sent to clear away the ritual vessels. He stood at the lower end of the hall and displayed his excellence with a single remark. Shuxiang was about to drink when he heard Ran Ming speak. He said, ‘This must be Ran Mingc!’1158 He descended, led him up by the hand, and said, ‘Some time ago there was a high officer of Gu who was ugly. He took a wife who was beautiful, and for three years she neither spoke nor smiled. He drove her

28.3c

Lord Zhao

1691

不言不笑。御以如臯，射雉，獲之，其妻始笑而言。賈大夫曰：「才之不 可以已。我不能射，女遂不言不笑夫！」今子少不颺，子若無言，吾幾失 子矣。言之不可以已也如是！』遂如故知。今女有力於王室，吾是以舉 女。行乎！敬之哉！毋墮乃力！」 仲尼聞魏子之舉也，以為義，曰：「近不失親，遠不失舉，可謂義 矣。」又聞其命賈辛也，以為忠，「《詩》曰： 永言配命， 自求多福。 忠也。魏子之舉也義，其命也忠，其長有後於晉國乎！」 28.4 冬，梗陽人有獄，魏戊不能斷，以獄上。其大宗賂以女樂，魏子將受之。

魏戊謂閻沒、女寬曰：「主以不賄聞於諸侯，若受梗陽人，賄莫甚焉。吾 子必諫！」皆許諾。退朝，待於庭。饋入，召之。比置，三歎。既食，使坐。 魏子曰：「吾聞諸伯叔，諺曰：『唯食忘憂。』吾子置食之間三歎，何也？」 同辭而對曰：「或賜二小人酒，不夕食。饋之始至，恐其不足，是以歎。 中置，自咎曰：『豈將軍食之而有不足？』是以再歎。及饋之畢，願以小 人之腹為君子之心，屬厭而已。」

1159 Maoshi 235, “Wen wang” 文王, 16A.531–37. 1160 After the division of Jin into three parts in the mid-fifth century Bce, Wei Shu’s descendants will rule the state of Weì through the Warring States period until its annexation by Qin in 225 Bce. Read alongside the predictions made on the occasion of Bi Wan’s birth in Min 1.6, this passage has caused some readers to interpret Zuozhuan as a text originating in Weì and defending Weì interests. See Introduction, n. 117. 1161 According to Du Yu (ZZ 52.915), he turned the case over to his father Wei Shu, who as head of government now would have final say in the case. Wei Wu was put in charge of Gengyang in Zhao 28.3a. 1162 The two men are Jin subjects. Du Yu (ZZ 52.915) identifies them as members of Wei Shu’s household staff. 1163 Wei Shu is the head of Jin’s center army. This is the only appearance in Zuozhuan of the term jiangjun 將軍, later a regular term for “general.”

1692

Zuo Tradition

out into a marsh in his chariot and shot at a pheasant. When he hit it, his wife smiled and spoke for the first time. The high officer of Gu said, “Talent is something one cannot do without. If I could not shoot, you would never have spoken or smiled!’” Now you are a young man, and not outstanding in appearance. If you had not spoken, I might have overlooked you. That is how indispensable good speech is.’ Afterward Shuxiang and Ran Ming were like old friends. Now you have exerted yourself on behalf of the royal house, and that is why I have given you an appointment. Go now! Perform it reverently! Do not let your exertions flag!” When he heard of the appointments Wei Shuc had made, Confuciusc considered them dutiful. He said, “Near at hand he does not fail his kin, while at a further remove he does not fail in his way of making appointments. This can be called dutifulness.” When he heard of the command to Jia Xin, he considered it loyal: “As it says in the Odes, Long he conformed to the command; For himself he brought many blessings.1159

That is loyalty. Wei Shuc’s appointments are dutiful and his commands loyal. He will have a long posterity in the domain of Jin!”1160 Through a clever admonition, two Jin men deter Wei Shu from accepting a bribe. In winter, certain people from Gengyang were involved in a lawsuit. Wei Wu, unable to reach a judgment, had turned the case over to his superior, Wei Shu.1161 Senior-branch members of one of the parties involved offered a bribe of female musicians, which Wei Shuc was going to accept. Wei Wu said to Yan Mo and Ru Kuan,1162 “The head of our house is well known among the princes for not taking bribes. There could be no case of bribery worse than accepting this gift from the people from Gengyang. You two must remonstrate with him.” They both assented. When Wei Shuc withdrew from court, he found them waiting for him in his courtyard, and he called them in when supper was served. When the food was placed before them, they sighed three times. After they had finished eating, Wei Shu had them sit with him. He said, “I have heard from my seniors a saying: ‘It is when one eats that one forgets one’s troubles.’ Why is it that when the food was placed before you, you sighed three times?” They answered together with the same words, saying, “Last night someone treated us to drinks, lowly as we are, and we did not have an evening meal. When this meal first arrived, we were worried that it might not be enough, so we sighed. In the middle of the meal, we blamed ourselves, saying, ‘How could there not be enough when it is the commander who is feeding us?’1163 So we sighed again. When the meal was over, we wished that the bellies of the lowly could become the heart of the noble man, and that he would stop at what was sufficient.”

28.4

Lord Zhao

1693



獻子辭梗陽人。

春秋 29.1(1) 二十有九年春，公至自乾侯，居于鄆。齊侯使高張來唁公。 29.2(1) 公如晉，次于乾侯。 29.3 夏四月庚子，叔詣卒。 29.4 秋七月。 29.5 冬十月，鄆潰。

左傳

29.1(1, 2)

二十九年春，公至自乾侯，處于鄆。齊侯使高張來唁公，稱主君。子家子 曰：「齊卑君矣，君祇辱焉。」公如乾侯。

29.2 三月己卯，京師殺召伯盈、尹氏固及原伯魯之子。尹固之復也，有婦人

遇之周郊，尤之，曰：「處則勸人為禍，行則數日而反，是夫也，其過三 歲乎？」 夏五月庚寅，王子趙車入于鄻以叛，陰不佞敗之。 29.3 平子每歲賈馬，具從者之衣屨，而歸之于乾侯。公執歸馬者，賣之，乃不

歸馬。

1164 Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 9,” 15.488–89. 1165 As Yang (4:1498–99) shows, the term of address Gao Zhang uses is appropriate to high officers, not to domain rulers. 1166 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.921), all were supporters of Wangzi Zhao. The fall of the Yuan lineage and the disorders of Zhou were predicted at Zhao 18.5. 1167 For Yin Gu’s departure, see Zhao 26.9. 1168 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.921), Wangzi Zhaoju, like the men executed above, is a partisan of Wangzi Zhao. Lian 鄻 was a settlement in Zhou territory. Its precise location is unknown.

1694

Zuo Tradition

Wei Shub declined the offer of the people from Gengyang.1164 LORD ZHAO 29 (513 BCE) ANNALS

In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Ganhou and resided at Yun. The Prince of Qi sent Gao Zhang to offer our lord consolation.

29.1(1)

Our lord went to Jin and set up camp at Ganhou.

29.2(1)

In summer, on the gengzi day (5), Shu Yi died.

29.3

Autumn, the seventh month.

29.4

In winter, in the tenth month, Yun collapsed.

29.5

ZUO

Qi’s humiliating treatment of Lord Zhao of Lu drives him back to Ganhou, in Jin (see Zhao 28.1). In the twenty-ninth year, in spring, our lord arrived from Ganhou and dwelt at Yun. When the Prince of Qi sent Gao Zhang to offer our lord consolation, Gao Zhang referred to our lord as “master.”1165 Zijia Yiboa said, “Qi is demeaning you, my lord. You will only suffer disgrace there.” Our lord went to Ganhou.

29.1(1, 2)

Supporters of Wangzi Zhao are executed in Zhou (see Zhao 26.9, 27.4). In the third month, on the jimao day (13), the Shao Liege Ying, Yin Gua, and the son of the Yuan Liege Lu were put to death in the Zhou capital.1166 When Yin Gu had returned from Chu,1167 a woman encountered him in the outskirts of the Zhou capital and reproached him. She said, “When he stays in one place, he urges people to make trouble, but when he sets out, he comes back after a few days. This man! Can he survive more than three years?” In summer, in the fifth month, on the gengyin day (25), Wangzi Zhao­che entered Lian and used it as a base for revolt.1168 Yin Buning defeated him.

29.2

The following passage describes the fortunes of Lord Zhao of Lu in exile (see Zhao 29.1), including the change in his choice of heir. Every year, Ji Pingzic would buy horses and supply clothing and shoes for our lord’s retinue, sending all of these to Ganhou. When our lord arrested the men who brought the horses and sold the horses, Ji Pingzi stopped supplying the horses.

29.3

Lord Zhao

1695

衛侯來獻其乘馬，曰啟服，塹而死。公將為之櫝。子家子曰：「從 者病矣，請以食之。」乃以帷裹之。 公賜公衍羔裘，使獻龍輔於齊侯，遂入羔裘。齊侯喜，與之陽 穀。公衍、公為之生也，其母偕出。公衍先生。公為之母曰：「相與偕出， 請相與偕告。」三日，公為生，其母先以告，公為為兄。公私喜於陽穀， 而思於魯，曰：「務人為此禍也。且後生而為兄，其誣也久矣。」乃黜之， 而以公衍為大子。 29.4a 秋，龍見于絳郊。魏獻子問於蔡墨曰：「吾聞之：蟲莫知於龍，以其不生

得也，謂之知，信乎？」對曰：「人實不知，非龍實知。古者畜龍，故國有 豢龍氏，有御龍氏。」獻子曰：「是二氏者，吾亦聞之，而不知其故，是何 謂也？」對曰：

1169 As Yang (4:1499) suggests, the name may indicate that this horse was one of the two central horses in the four-horse team and had a white right pastern. 1170 The story of King Zhuang of Chu and his horse (Shiji 126.3200) reads like a muchelaborated version of this episode. 1171 Yanggu was a Qi settlement (see Annals, Xi 3.5).

1696

Zuo Tradition

The Prince of Wei came and presented to our lord one of the horses of his chariot team, called Qifu.1169 When it died after falling into a pit, our lord was going to have a coffin made for it. Zijia Yiboa said, “Your retinue are suffering: please use the funds to feed them.” Our lord therefore had the horse wrapped in a drapery.1170 Our lord conferred a lambskin cloak upon his son Gongyan and had him present a jade tablet, carved with dragon patterns, to the Prince of Qi. Gongyan then submitted the lambskin cloak as well. Delighted, the Prince of Qi gave him Yanggu.1171 When Gongyan and Gongwei were about to be born, their mothers both withdrew from the palace.1172 Gongyan was born first. Gongwei’s mother said, “We withdrew together. Let us also make our report together.” Three days later, Gongwei was born. His mother made her report first, and Gongwei was identified as the older brother. Later, when our lord was secretly delighted about the gift of Yanggu and was reminiscing about what had happened in Lu, he said, “It was Gongweib who brought about this crisis.1173 What is more, he is called the older brother even though he was born later. This deception of his has gone on too long.” He therefore demoted Gongwei and made Gongyan his heir apparent.1174 The appearance of a dragon prompts a long discourse from the scribe Mo of Cai on the history of dragons’ interactions with Chinese ruling courts, along with an account of several official sacrifices. Despite the matter-offact statement that a dragon has appeared (see also Zhao 19.10), the passage seems to contradict itself when Wei Shu asks why dragons are no longer seen. Like many other scribes, Mo of Cai is represented as a master of ancient and recondite lore, including knowledge of the references to dragons in the “Pure Yang” hexagram of the Zhou Changes and theories on the workings of nature’s “Five Resources.” In autumn, a dragon appeared in the outskirts of Jiang.1175 Wei Shua questioned the scribe Mo of Caia about it: “I have heard that there is no wiser beast than the dragon, because it cannot be captured alive. Would it be accurate to call it wise?” He replied, “It is not that dragons are wise but rather that human beings have been unwise. The ancients kept dragons. For that reason there were in our domain the Huanlong, or DragonFeeding, lineage and the Yulong, or Dragon-Rearing, lineage.” Wei Shub said, “I too have heard of these two lineages, yet I do not know their origins. What do these names refer to?” He replied,

29.4a

1172 Yang (4:1500) cites Liji 12.534, which indicates that women in childbirth were confined to a chamber separate from their regular palace quarters. 1173 See Zhao 25.6c. 1174 Despite this command, Gongyan never becomes ruler of Lu. See Ding 1.2. 1175 Jiang was the Jin capital, near present-day Houma, Shanxi (see map 3).

Lord Zhao

1697

昔有飂叔安，有裔子曰董父，實甚好龍，能求其耆欲以飲食

之，龍多歸之，乃擾畜龍，以服事帝舜，帝賜之姓曰董，氏曰 豢龍，封諸鬷川，鬷夷氏其後也。故帝舜氏世有畜龍。 及有夏孔甲，擾于有帝，帝賜之乘龍，河、漢各二，各有 雌雄。孔甲不能食，而未獲豢龍氏。有陶唐氏既衰，其後有 劉累，學擾龍于豢龍氏，以事孔甲，能飲食之。夏后嘉之，賜 氏曰御龍，以更豕韋之後。龍一雌死，潛醢以食夏后。夏后 饗之，既而使求之。懼而遷于魯縣，范氏其後也。 29.4b 獻子曰：「今何故無之？」對曰： 夫物，物有其官，官修其方，朝夕思之。一日失職，則死及

之。失官不食。官宿其業，其物乃至。若泯棄之，物乃坻伏， 鬱湮不育。 故有五行之官，是謂五官，實列受氏姓，封為上公，祀 為貴神。社稷五祀，是尊是奉。木正曰句芒，火正曰祝融， 金正曰蓐收，水正曰玄冥，土正曰后土。

1176 The Dong lineage will become scribes in Jin. See Xuan 2.3c and Zhao 15.7b. The Zong River 鬷川 was said to have flowed north of present-day Dingtao County 定陶縣, Shandong. 1177 This passage and Xiang 24.1 (see note 721) were used to trace the ancestry of the Han emperors, whose surname was Liu, to Emperor Yao. 1178 For more information on the lineages mentioned here, see Xiang 24.1. According to Yang (4:1501; citing Guoyu, “Zheng yu,” 16.510), Shiwei was descended from Zhurong (Director for Fire). 1179 Luxian 魯縣 was northeast of present-day Lushan County 魯山縣, Henan, just over 100 kilometers southeast of the Eastern Zhou capital at Luoyang. 1180 The “five sacrifices” are mentioned in Zhouli 3.272, Liji 2.97, and other texts, but without this insistence on coordination with the Five Resources and with the various named directors.

1698

Zuo Tradition

In times past, Shu’an of Youliu had a descendant whose name was Dongfu. Dongfu was extremely fond of dragons and was able to seek out for them the things they liked to drink and eat. Dragons came to him in large numbers, so he tamed them and reared them, offering them to Emperor Shun. The emperor bestowed upon him the clan name Dong with the lineage branch name Huanlong, putting him in power at the Zong River.1176 The Zong lineage of Yi are descended from Dongfu. Thus, in the geneations since Emperor Shun there was dragon-keeping. Later, Kongjia of Xia was obedient to the god on high, and the god on high bestowed upon him a team of four dragons, two each from the Yellow and Han Rivers, each a mating pair. Kongjia was not able to feed them himself, and he had not yet obtained the service of the Huanlong or Dragon-Feeding lineage. The Taotang lineage branch had already fallen into decline, but among its descendants was a certain Liu Lei, who had studied dragon-taming with the Dragon-Feeding lineage and who served Kongjia, so that Liu Lei was able to provide the dragons with the proper drink and food.1177 The Xia ruler, commending him, bestowed upon him the lineage name Yulong, or Dragon-Rearing, and appointed him in place of the descendants of Shiwei.1178 When one of the female dragons died, Liu Lei pickled its flesh and fed it to the Xia ruler. After feasting upon it, the Xia ruler asked him to get more such food. Alarmed, Liu Lei moved to Luxian.1179 The Fan lineage are his descendants.

Wei Shub said, “Why, then, are there no dragons nowadays?” Scribe Mo replied,

29.4b

Every kind of thing has its official, who is charged with perfecting the methods for it and keeping these in mind day and night. If one day the official fails in his duties, then death comes to him, for a failure in carrying out his official duties means that he does not receive his salary. When the official remains in his duties, then the kind of thing to which his office is devoted will make itself manifest. If he abandons his duties, then that thing will hide away, becoming obstructed and unproductive. Thus, there were the officials of the Five Resources, known as the Five Officials. These officials were granted hereditary titles and lineage and clan names, were put in power as great nobles, and were offered sacrifices as the most exalted spirits. At the altars of the domain and in the five sacrifices, these are the ones who were revered and exalted.1180 The Director for Wood was known as Goumang, the Director for Fire was known as Zhurong, the Director for Metal was known as Rushou, the Director for Water was known as Xuanming, and the Director for Earth was known as Houtu.

Lord Zhao

1699

龍，水物也，水官棄矣，故龍不生得。不然，《周易》有 之：在乾䷀之姤䷫曰「潛龍勿用」；其同人䷌曰「見龍在田」； 其大有䷍曰「飛龍在天」；其夬䷪曰「亢龍有悔」，其坤䷁曰「 見群龍無首，吉」；坤之剝䷖曰「龍戰于野」。若不朝夕見， 誰能物之？ 獻子曰：「社稷五祀，誰氏之五官也？」 對曰： 少皞氏有四叔，曰重、曰該、曰修、曰熙，實能金、木及水。

使重為句芒，該為蓐收，修及熙為玄冥，世不失職，遂濟窮 桑，此其三祀也。 顓頊氏有子曰犁，為祝融；共工氏有子曰句龍，為后 土，此其二祀也。 后土為社；稷，田正也，有烈山氏之子曰柱為稷，自夏 以上祀之。周棄亦為稷，自商以來祀之。

1181 In the traditional order of Zhou Changes, “Pure Yang” is the first of the sixty-four hexagrams. It consists of six unbroken lines. In the original Zuozhuan text, the scribe Mo identifies individual lines of this hexagram, along with the “Pure Yang” hexagram’s accompanying line statements from the Zhou Changes (Zhouyi 1.8–18), by naming the hexagram that would result if that line were changed from its present status (solid in the case of “Pure Yang”) to the opposite. “Pure Yang” changes to “Encounter” (Gou 姤, hexagram 44), “Fellowship” (Tongren 同人, 13), “Great Holdings” (Dayou 大有, 14), and “Resolution” (Guai 夬, 43) when its first, second, fifth, and sixth lines, respectively, change from solid to broken. The quoted passages are the line statements for those lines of the “Pure Yang” hexagram. 1182 This Zhou Changes passage (Zhouyi 1.10) is a special statement for the whole set of six identical solid lines in the “Pure Yang” hexagram. The original uses “its ‘Pure Yin’” (“the ‘Pure Yin’ that will result if all six unbroken lines become broken) to refer to the totality of all six lines in the “Pure Yang” hexagram. 1183 The “Pure Yin” hexagram, made up of six broken lines, becomes the “Peeling” (Bo 剝, 23) hexagram when the sixth, or top, line is replaced with a solid line. The quoted passage is the line statement for the sixth line of “Pure Yin” (Zhouyi 1.20). 1184 Yang (4:1503) cites two passages showing that Qiongsang was Shaohao’s city. Depending on the source one chooses, this line might also mean that the three officers helped the Shaohao line finally to attain imperial status at Qiongsang. Qiongsang may have been located in the vicinity of the Lu capital.

1700

Zuo Tradition

The dragon is a water creature. Since the office of water has been abandoned, dragons are no longer taken alive. If that were not the case, then how could the Zhou Changes have what it has? There is the first line of the “Pure Yang” ䷀ hexagram: “The hidden dragon is not employed.” The second line of the same hexagram says, “The dragon appears in the fields.” The fifth line says, “The flying dragon is in the sky,” and the sixth says, “The ramping dragon has regrets.”1181 Finally, the statement for the whole “Pure Yang” hexagram says, “One sees the many dragons without a head: auspicious.”1182 The sixth line of the “Pure Yin” ䷁ hexagram says, “Dragons battle in the wilds.”1183 If dragons did not appear day and night, who could have regarded them as real things in this way?

Wei Shub said, “At the altars of the domain and in the five sacrifices, what lineages hold these five offices?” He replied, Shaohao had four younger brothers named Chong, Gai, Xiu, and Xi, who were talented with metal, wood, and water. He made Chong the Goumang, or Director for Wood; Gai the Rushou, or Director for Metal; and Xiu and Xi the Xuanming, or Director for Water. Through generations, by never failing in their duties they preserved Qiongsang and the ruling line.1184 These account for three of the five sacrifices. Zhuanxu had a son named Li, who was the Zhurong, or Director for Fire. Gonggong had a son named Goulong, who was the Houtu, or Director for Earth. These account for the remaining two of the five sacrifices. The Director for Earth presided over the altar of earth, while the altar of grain fell to the Director for Fields. Zhu, a son of the Lieshan lineage, was in charge of the altar of grain and was offered sacrifices until the Xia.1185 Qi of Zhou was also in charge of the altar of grain and has been offered sacrifices since the Shang.1186

1185 Shen Qinhan 沈欽韓 (cited in Yang, 4:1503) associated the Lieshan lineage with Yandi, or the Flaming Emperor, and identified Lieshan with Lishan 歷山, north of present-day Sui County, Hubei. 1186 Qi of Zhou, whose miraculous birth, exposure, and triumph are commemorated in Maoshi 245, “Sheng min” 生民, 17A.587–96, was Lord Millet under the Zhou and is the best known of all the characters mentioned in this passage.

Lord Zhao

1701

29.5 冬，晉趙鞅、荀寅帥師城汝濱，遂賦晉國一鼓鐵，以鑄刑鼎，著范宣子

所為刑書焉。 仲尼曰： 晉其亡乎！失其度矣。夫晉國將守唐叔之所受法度，以經緯

其民，卿大夫以序守之，民是以能尊其貴，貴是以能守其 業。貴賤不愆，所謂度也。文公是以作執秩之官，為被廬之 法，以為盟主。 今棄是度也，而為刑鼎，民在鼎矣，何以尊貴？貴何業 之守？貴賤無序，何以為國？且夫宣子之刑，夷之蒐也，晉 國之亂制也，若之何以為法？ 蔡史墨曰：「范氏、中行氏其亡乎！中行寅為下卿，而干上令，擅作 刑器，以為國法，是法姦也。又加范氏焉，易之，亡也。其及趙氏，趙孟與 焉。然不得已，若德，可以免。」

1187 The Ru River flows eastward from its source southwest of Mount Tianxi 天息 in Henan, passing about 60 kilometers south of the Zhou capital (see Cheng 17.7). 1188 Wagner (Iron and Steel in Ancient China, 57–59) argues that the text here may well be corrupt, since there is little corroborating evidence for the availability of iron in the necessary quantities in the late sixth century Bce. Even if one questions the historical veracity of this episode, there is little doubt that it reflects a vibrant debate on the subject at the time of Zuozhuan’s compilation. 1189 For the enfeoffment of Tang Shu (or Tang Shuyu) as founding ruler of Jin, see Zhao 1.12a and 15.7b. 1190 For the gathering at Pilu and the keeper of ranks, see Xi 27.4. According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.926), Lord Wen used the occasion of the muster at Pilu to revive the Code of Tang Shu. 1191 For the muster at Yi, see Wen 6.1, where the laws are attributed to Zhao Dun. 1192 The idea, according to Du Yu (ZZ 53.926), is that since Zhonghang Yin has changed current law and revived the faulty law code promulgated by Fan Gai, both the Zhonghang lineage and the Fan lineage will suffer. Wang Yinzhi (Jingyi shuwen 19.762–63) understands yi 易 as “swiftly”: “he hastens their destruction.”

1702

Zuo Tradition

Jin leaders produce a legal code, publicizing it on a cauldron, and are criticized for the deed by Confucius. See Zhao 6.3, where Shuxiang of Jin criticized Zichan for having done something very similar in Zheng. These passages either anticipate or reflect a later split between thinkers (like Lord Shang and Han Feizi) who favored strict application of codified law and thinkers (like Mencius and other self-identified successors to Confucius) who favored an emphasis on unwritten moral norms in the management of behavior. The scribe Mo’s predictions anticipate the Jin strife that begins in Ding 13.2 and culminates with the final suppression of the Fan and Zhonghang rebellion in Ai 5.1. In winter, Zhao Yang and Zhonghang Yina of Jin led out an army and built walls on the banks of the Ru River.1187 They then levied one drummeasure of iron from the domain of Jin and used it to cast the so-called penal cauldron, upon which they inscribed the penal code that Fan Gaib had composed.1188 Confuciusc said,

29.5

Jin will perish, for it has lost its standards. Jin should maintain the legal standards received by Tang Shu from the Zhou king so as to provide guidelines for the governance of its people, while ministers and high officers maintain these standards, each according to his rank.1189 By this means the people are able to esteem the nobles, and the nobles are able to maintain their hereditary duties. When nobles and commoners do not deviate from the standards, that is what we call “standards.” For this ­reason, when Lord Wen created the office of the keeper of ranks and made the code at Pilu, he became covenant chief.1190 Now that Jin has abandoned these standards and made a penal cauldron, the people attend only to the cauldron! How are they to respect the exalted, and how will the exalted maintain their hereditary duties? When there is no proper order for the exalted and the lowly, how will they manage the domain? What is more, Fan Gaia’s penal code is derived from the muster at Yi, a period of disorder in Jin.1191 How can it be used as a legal norm?

The scribe Mo of Cai said, “The Fan and Zhonghang lineages will likely perish! As low-rank minister, Zhonghang Yin has interfered in his superiors’ issuing of commands and has taken it upon himself to create a vessel for the penal code that is to be the legal norm for the domain. This is a perversion of legal norms. And he has moreover implicated the Fans in his actions. Because he has now made these changes, they will perish.1192 Insofar as it affects the Zhaos, Zhao Yange will have a part in it. But he had no choice, and if he is virtuous, he will be able to escape.”

Lord Zhao

1703

春秋 30.1(1) 三十年春王正月，公在乾侯。 30.2(2) 夏六月庚辰，晉侯去疾卒。 30.3(2) 秋八月，葬晉頃公。 30.4(3) 冬十有二月，吳滅徐，徐子章羽奔楚。

左傳 30.1(1) 三十年春王正月，公在乾侯，不先書鄆與乾侯，非公，且徵過也。

30.2(2, 3)

夏六月，晉頃公卒。秋八月，葬。鄭游吉弔，且送葬。魏獻子使士景伯詰 之，曰：「悼公之喪，子西弔，子蟜送葬。今吾子無貳，何故？」對曰：「諸 侯所以歸晉君，禮也。禮也者，小事大、大字小之謂。事大在共其時命， 字小在恤其所無。以敝邑居大國之間，共其職貢，與其備御不虞之患， 豈忘共命？先王之制：諸侯之喪，士弔，大夫送葬；唯嘉好、聘享、三軍

1193 That is, Annals entries for earlier years (Zhao 27.2, 27.9, 28.2, 29.1, 29.2) obscured the fact that Lord Zhao was in exile. Starting with this entry, the Annals dispenses with references to “setting up camp” and “residing,” as used earlier, and makes it clear that the lord now lives outside Lu. 1194 See Xiang 15.7. 1195 Cf. Xiang 28.2. 1196 Cf. Zhao 3.1.

1704

Zuo Tradition

LORD ZHAO 30 (512 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirtieth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou. In summer, in the sixth month, on the gengchen day (22), Quji, the Prince of Jin, died.

30.1(1)

30.2(2)

In autumn, in the eighth month, Lord Qing of Jin was buried.

30.3(2)

In winter, in the twelfth month, Wu extinguished Xu, and Zhangyu, the Master of Xu, fled to Chu.

30.4(3)

ZUO

Lord Zhao of Lu remains in Ganhou (see Zhao 29.3). In the thirtieth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou. The text did not previously say this of Yun or of Ganhou. This is to blame the lord and also to expose his error.1193

30.1(1)

A funeral for the Jin ruler occasions questioning of Zheng’s adherence to ritual protocol, with impeccable responses from You Ji of Zheng. The scene recalls You Ji’s remarks under similar circumstances in Zhao 3.1 and is also reminiscent of Zichan’s many speeches defending Zheng from excessive Jin demands (Xiang 22.2, 24.2a, 25.10, 28.8, 31.6, Zhao 16.3). In summer, in the sixth month, Lord Qing of Jin died. In autumn, in the eighth month, he was buried. You Ji of Zheng went to express condolences and to accompany the cortege. Wei Shua had Shi Mimoub question him: “For the funeral of Lord Dao, Zixi expressed condolences and Zijiao accompanied the cortege.1194 Why is it that you, sir, are now without a second?” He replied, “The reason the princes give their allegiance to Jin is ritual propriety. By definition, ritual propriety means that the lesser serve the greater and the greater care for the lesser.1195 Serving the greater consists of respecting timely commands from them. Caring for the lesser consists of showing concern about the things that they lack. As a humble settlement dwelling in the midst of great domains, we have fulfilled our tribute duties and have taken our part in defending against unexpected disturbances: can anybody accuse us of having forgotten to obey commands? According to the system of the former kings, during the funeral of a prince, officers expressed condolences, and high officers accompanied the cortege.1196 Only for occasions of court visits, ceremonial toasts for official visits, and affairs of the three armies were officials at the level

30.2(2, 3)

Lord Zhao

1705

之事於是乎使卿。晉之喪事，敝邑之間，先君有所助執紼矣。若其不 間，雖士、大夫有所不獲數矣。大國之惠，亦慶其加，而不討其乏，明厎 其情，取備而已，以為禮也。靈王之喪，我先君簡公在楚，我先大夫印 段實往－－敝邑之少卿也。王吏不討，恤所無也。今大夫曰：『女盍從 舊？』舊有豐有省，不知所從。從其豐，則寡君幼弱，是以不共；從其省， 則吉在此矣。唯大夫圖之！」晉人不能詰。 30.3a(4) 吳子使徐人執掩餘，使鍾吾人執燭庸，二公子奔楚。楚子大封，而定其

徙，使監馬尹大心逆吳公子，使居養，莠尹然、左司馬沈尹戌城之；取 於城父與胡田以與之，將以害吳也。

1706

Zuo Tradition

of ministers sent. For Jin funerals, there were times, specifically when our humble settlement was at leisure, when our former rulers helped to pull the ropes of the hearse. When we were not at leisure, there were occasions when there was not even a full complement of officers and high officers for a Jin funeral. The magnanimity of a great domain is such that it applauds any enhancement of ritual but does not chastise others for any shortfall. Once it has ascertained that the small domain had presented itself with sincere regard, the great domain does no more than accept what the small domain has furnished. This is regarded as ritual propriety. During the funeral of King Ling,1197 our former ruler Lord Jian was in Chu, so it was our former high officer Yin Duan who went; Yin Duan was a junior minister of our humble settlement. The king’s officers did not chastise us because they were showing concern about the thing we lacked. Now your high officers say, ‘Why do you fail to follow the practices of times gone by?’ But in times gone by there were both times of abundance and times of retrenchment, and we do not know which we should follow. If we must follow the precedent set down in times of abundance, then our unworthy ruler is young, and this is why he cannot but abstain. But if we must follow the precedent set down in times of retrenchment, then I am here. It is entirely up to you, the high officers, to determine this.” The Jin leaders had no way to question him further. Despite the advice of Gongzi Shen, the king of Chu behaves aggressively toward Wu, increasing the likelihood of conflict (see Zhao 27.2) and setting the stage for Wu’s long and ultimately successful campaign against Chu, which will result in the sack of the Chu capital (Ding 4.3). The Master of Wu ordered the leaders of Xu to arrest Gongzi Yanyua and the leaders of Zhongwu to arrest Gongzi Zhuyonga.1198 The two noble sons fled to Chu. The Master of Chu put them in charge of large territories and determined the places of their relocation. He had the deputy for horse inspections, Daxin, escort the Wu noble sons in and had them reside at Yang, which the deputy for fields, Ran, and the supervisor of the left army, the Governor of Shěn, Xu, fortified.1199 Lands were taken from Chengfu and Hu territory and given to them,1200 for the Wu noble sons were to be used to harm Wu.1201

30.3a(4)

1197 See Xiang 29.5. 1198 See Zhao 27.2b. 1199 Yang 養 was about 70 kilometers north-northeast of the former Cai capital at Xincai 新蔡, Henan, near present-day Shenqiu County 沈丘縣, Henan. 1200 These lands were to the northeast and southeast of Yang, respectively. 1201 From Yang the Wu exiles could travel down the Ying River and the Huai River to strike at Wu.

Lord Zhao

1707

子西諫曰：「吳光新得國，而親其民，視民如子，辛苦同之，將用之 也。若好吳邊疆，使柔服焉，猶懼其至。吾又彊其讎，以重怒之，無乃不 可乎？吳，周之冑裔也，而棄在海濱，不與姬通，今而始大，比于諸華。 光又甚文，將自同於先王。不知天將以為虐乎？使翦喪吳國而封大異姓 乎？其抑亦將卒以祚吳乎？其終不遠矣。我盍姑億吾鬼神，而寧吾族 姓，以待其歸，將焉用自播揚焉？」王弗聽。 30.3b 吳子怒。冬十二月，吳子執鍾吾子。遂伐徐，防山以水之。己卯，滅徐。

徐子章禹斷其髮，攜其夫人以逆吳子。吳子唁而送之，使其邇臣從之， 遂奔楚。楚沈尹戌帥師救徐，弗及。遂城夷，使徐子處之。 30.4 吳子問於伍員曰：「初而言伐楚，余知其可也，而恐其使余往也，又惡人

之有余之功也。今余將自有之矣。伐楚何如？」對曰：「楚執政眾而乖， 莫適任患。若為三師以肄焉，一師至，彼必皆出。彼出則歸，彼歸則出，

1202 Legend held that Wu had been founded by Taibo, rightful successor as ruler of the predynastic Zhou people, who yielded in favor of his younger brother Wang Ji (father of King Wen) and fled to Wu. His story is alluded to at Min 1.6, Xi 5.8, and Ai 7.3b; it is told in full at Shiji 31.1445. 1203 The outcome is not King Helu’s death, which does not come until Ding 14.5, but the conquest of Chu, which comes in Ding 4.3. 1204 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.928), Yi is Chengfu (see Zhao 30.3a).

1708

Zuo Tradition

Gongzi Shena remonstrated: “King Helud of Wu has recently acquired power over his domain and he is close to his people, whom he regards as his own children. He shares their bitter hardships with them; clearly, he is preparing to use them. Even if you manage to preserve good relations at the border with Wu, seeking their submission by being gentle, you must still fear the arrival of Wu forces. If we now go further, strengthening Wu’s enemies in such a way as to aggravate the king’s anger, is that not the wrong approach? Wu is a distant scion of Zhou that was abandoned long ago on the seacoast without contact with the Ji clan, but lately it has started to become great, and it is on a par with the central domains.1202 King Helu himself is exceedingly cultured, and he will emulate the former kings of Zhou. I do not know whether Heaven will perform some act of violence through him or ultimately cut down the domain of Wu to enlarge the territory of another clan name, or even if he will indeed end by bringing blessings to Wu. But the outcome is not far off.1203 Why do we not, for now, give our ghosts and spirits ease and settle our own houses and clans as we await the outcome? What use is it to bestir ourselves now?” The king did not heed him. The Master of Wu was angry about what Chu had done. In winter, in the twelfth month, the Master of Wu arrested the Master of Zhongwu. He then attacked Xu and built a dam in the mountains to flood the city. On the jimao day (23), he extinguished Xu. The Master of Xu, Zhangyu, cut his hair short like a slave and took his wife with him as he went out to meet the Master of Wu in defeat. The Master of Wu offered him consolation and sent him on his way, and had his personal servants accompany him, whereupon he fled to Chu. The Chu Governor of Shěn, Xu, led an army to relieve Xu, but he did not get there in time. He then fortified Yi and had the Master of Xu take refuge there.1204

30.3b

King Helu takes up Wu Zixu’s old idea of attacking Chu (see Zhao 20.2, 30.3, 31.4). The Master of Wu asked Wu Zixua, “Some time ago, when you spoke of attacking Chu, I knew it would be possible, yet I feared that my father, the king, would make me go, and I moreover hated the idea that someone else should take credit for my accomplishments. Now I will take credit for them myself. How should we go about attacking Chu?” He replied, “The men in charge of government in Chu are numerous and divided, and none of them is fit to shoulder responsibilities. We should form three armies to carry out raids there. Then, when one army arrives there, the Chu forces are bound to march out all at once. But as their army marches out, ours will retreat, and when theirs returns home, ours will march out. Chu is certain to be worn down by all the traveling.

30.4

Lord Zhao

1709

楚必道敝。亟肄以罷之，多方以誤之。既罷而後以三軍繼之，必大克之。」 闔廬從之，楚於是乎始病。

春秋 31.1(1) 三十有一年春正月，公在乾侯。 31.2(2) 季孫意如會晉荀躒于適歷。 31.3(3) 夏四月丁巳，薛伯穀卒。 31.4(2) 晉侯使荀躒唁公于乾侯。 31.5 秋，葬薛獻公。 31.6(5) 冬，黑肱以濫來奔。 31.7(6) 十有二月辛亥朔，日有食之。

左傳 31.1(1) 三十一年春王正月，公在乾侯，言不能外內也。

31.2a(2, 4)

晉侯將以師納公。范獻子曰：「若召季孫而不來，則信不臣矣，然後伐 之，若何？」晉人召季孫。獻子使私焉，曰：「子必來，我受其無咎。」季 孫意如會晉荀躒于適歷。荀躒曰：「寡君使躒謂吾子：『何故出君？有 君不事，周有常刑。子其圖之！』」季孫練冠，麻衣，跣行，伏而對曰：「事

1205 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.929), Shili 適歷 was in Jin. 1206 The eclipse took place on 14 November 511 Bce.

1710

Zuo Tradition

Thus, by repeated raids we will exhaust their force, and by coming from many directions we will deceive them. If we follow up by attacking with our three armies after they are exhausted, we are certain to defeat them completely.” King Helu followed this advice, and Chu first began to suffer. LORD ZHAO 31 (511 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou.

31.1(1)

Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi) met with Xun Li (Zhi Wenzi) of Jin at Shili.1205

31.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, on the dingsi day (3), Gu, the Liege of Xue, died.

31.3(3)

The Prince of Jin sent Xun Li (Zhi Wenzi) to offer our lord consolation at Ganhou.

31.4(2)

In autumn, Lord Xian of Xue was buried.

31.5

In winter, Heigong, bringing Lan with him, came in flight.

31.6(5)

In the twelfth month, on the xinhai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.1206

31.7(6)

ZUO

Zuozhuan reminds us that Lord Zhao of Lu is still in exile at Ganhou (see Zhao 30.1). In the thirty-first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou: this expresses his incompetence in relations with other domains and with his own.

31.1(1)

As Jin again considers reinstating Lord Zhao of Lu, Ji Pingzi protects himself by a show of great subordination (see Zhao 27.4). The Prince of Jin was preparing to use an army to reinstate our lord. Fan Yangb said, “If we summon Ji Pingzib here and he does not come, then he will have acted in truly insubordinate fashion, and in that case we can attack him. How would that be?” The Jin leaders summoned Ji Pingzib. Fan Yangc sent a private envoy to him to say, “You must come. I will undertake to ensure that you are not impugned.” Ji Pingzia met with Zhi Wenzia of Jin at Shili. Zhi Wenzia said, “Our unworthy ruler has sent me to ask you, sir: ‘For what reason have you expelled your ruler? The Zhou have their established punishments for those who have a ruler but cannot serve him. Think on it, sir!’” Wearing a cap of boiled white silk and a robe of hemp and coming forward on bare feet, Ji Pingzib bent low and

31.2a(2, 4)

Lord Zhao

1711

君，臣之所不得也，敢逃刑命？君若以臣為有罪，請囚于費，以待君之 察也，亦唯君。若以先臣之故，不絕季氏，而賜之死。若弗殺弗亡，君之 惠也，死且不朽。若得從君而歸，則固臣之願也，敢有異心？」 31.2b 夏四月，季孫從知伯如乾侯。子家子曰：「君與之歸。一慙之不忍？而終

身慙乎？」曰：「諾。」眾曰：「在一言矣，君必逐之！」荀躒以晉侯之命唁 公，且曰：「寡君使躒以君命討於意如，意如不敢逃死，君其入也！」公 曰：「君惠顧先君之好，施及亡人，將使歸糞除宗祧以事君，則不能見夫 人。己所能見夫人者，有如河！」荀躒掩耳而走，曰：「寡君其罪之恐，敢 與知魯國之難？臣請復於寡君。」退而謂季孫：「君怒未怠，子姑歸 祭。」子家子曰：「君以一乘入于魯師，季孫必與君歸。」公欲從之。眾從 者脅公，不得歸。 31.3(3) 薛伯穀卒，同盟，故書。

1207 Bi is the Ji lineage’s settlement in Lu. 1208 For this notion, see Cheng 3.4 and 16.5l and Xiang 24.1. 1209 The men believe that Lord Zhao could get Jin’s help in removing Ji Pingzi from power. 1210 The Lu army is the force accompanying Ji Pingzi. Zijia Yibo urges Lord Zhao to return to Lu at the head of this force, thus putting Ji Pingzi in his place. 1211 As Zijia Yibo had predicted (Zhao 27.5), Lord Zhao’s band of followers stands in the way of his return to Lu, likely because they fear reprisals against themselves from the Ji lineage.

1712

Zuo Tradition

replied, “To serve my ruler is something that I have not yet had an opportunity to do. Shall I presume then to evade the command for punishment? If my ruler holds that I have committed a crime, I request that he confine me at Bi to await his investigation.1207 Whether he will do so is entirely up to him. If, for the sake of my predecessors, he refuses to cut off the Ji lineage, he may yet grant me permission to die. If he neither puts me to death nor sends me into exile, that would be a kindness on his part, and I will not perish even in death.1208 Should I have the opportunity to follow my ruler in returning home, that would delight me: would I presume to harbor any other intentions?” Because of his own pride and the intransigence of his followers, Lord Zhao of Lu again misses a chance to return to Lu (see Zhao 32.1). In summer, in the fourth month, Ji Pingzib accompanied Zhi Wenzie on a visit to Ganhou. Zijia Yiboa said to the Lu ruler, “Return home with him, my lord. If you think you cannot bear this one abasement, how will you instead bear a lifetime of abasement?” The lord said, “You are right.” His band of men said, “It would take no more than a single well-placed remark to Jin now, and you would be sure to be able to expel Ji Pingzi!”1209 On the command of the Prince of Jin, Zhi Wenzia offered our lord consolation and added, “Our unworthy ruler has sent me to chastise Ji Pingzid at your command, and Ji Pingzid does not dare flee death. You should enter your domain.” Our lord said, “Your ruler, in kind consideration of the good relations between our former rulers, has extended these good relations to me, a man in exile. Although he will thus make it possible for me to return home and cleanse our Ancestral Temples so as to serve Jin, I am not able to grant an audience to this man, Ji Pingzi. Let the Yellow River be my pledge that I am not able to grant this man an audience.” Covering his ears, Zhi Wenzia ran away, saying, “Our unworthy ruler worries only about committing some offense. Would he then dare to share knowledge of troubles in the domain of Lu? I request to report this to our unworthy ruler.” Withdrawing, Zhi Wenzi said to Ji Pingzib, “The ruler’s anger has not yet abated. For now, you should return and conduct the sacrifices yourself.” Zijia Yiboa said to our lord, “If you were to drive your chariot in among the Lu army, Ji Pingzib would certainly return with you.”1210 Our lord wished to follow this advice, but his band of followers put pressure on him, so that he failed to take the opportunity to return home.1211

31.2b

Gu, the Liege of Xue, died. The text records this because he was a covenant partner.

31.3(3)

Lord Zhao

1713

31.4 秋，吳人侵楚，伐夷，侵潛、六。楚沈尹戌帥師救潛，吳師還。楚師遷潛

於南岡而還。吳師圍弦，左司馬戌、右司馬稽帥師救弦，及豫章，吳師 還－－始用子胥之謀也。 31.5(6) 冬，邾黑肱以濫來奔。賤而書名，重地故也。



君子曰：

名之不可不慎也如是：夫有所有名而不如其已。以地叛，雖

賤，必書地，以名其人，終為不義，弗可滅已。 是故君子動則思禮，行則思義；不為利回，不為義疚。 或求名而不得，或欲蓋而名章，懲不義也。 齊豹為衛司寇，守嗣大夫，作而不義，其書為「盜」。 邾庶其、莒牟夷、邾黑肱以土地出，求食而已，不求其名。賤 而必書。 此二物者，所以懲肆而去貪也。若艱難其身，以險危大 人，而有名章徹，攻難之士將奔走之。若竊邑叛君以徼大利 而無名，貪冒之民將寘力焉。

1212 Yi (or Chengfu) was where the Master of Xu had been placed; see Zhao 30.3. For Qian, see Zhao 27.2. 1213 Nangang 南岡 was somewhere close to Qian. 1214 Xian was near the Huai River, south of present-day Xi County, Henan, about 335 kilometers northeast of the Chu capital (see also Annals, Xi 5.7). Yuzhang was the region downriver in the direction of Wu (see Zhao 6.9). 1215 See Annals, Zhao 20.3; and Zuozhuan, Zhao 20.4. 1216 See Annals, Xiang 21.2 and Zhao 5.4; Zuozhuan, Xiang 21.2 and Zhao 5.6.

1714

Zuo Tradition

Wu begins the campaign against Chu that Wu Zixu had advocated (see Zhao 30.4, Ding 2.2). In autumn, the men of Wu invaded Chu, attacking Yi and invading at Qian and Liu.1212 When the Chu Governor of Shěn, Xu, led an army to relieve Qian, the Wu army retreated. After relocating Qian to Nangang, the Chu army turned back.1213 The Wu army laid siege to Xian, and when the supervisor of the left army, Xu, and the supervisor of the right army, Ji, led troops to relieve Xian, advancing as far as Yuzhang, the Wu army retreated.1214 This was the first use of Wu Zixuc’s strategy.

31.4

A notation on a minor gain of territory prompts one of Zuozhuan’s two reflections on the meaning of differences of wording in the Annals. Similar remarks are to be found at Cheng 14.4. In winter, Heigong of Zhu, bringing Lan with him, came in flight. Although he was lowly, his name was written so as to show the importance of the land. The noble man said,

31.5(6)

This is why one must be careful about names. Under certain circumstances it is better not to have fame. This man committed treason, bringing land with him, and though he was lowly, the land had to be recorded in writing. Thus, the man himself was named. In the end, his undutifulness could not be erased. Thus, the noble man ponders on ritual propriety whenever he acts and ponders on dutifulness whenever he moves. He does not deviate for the sake of profit and does not incur blame in matters of dutifulness. Some seek a name and do not achieve it, while others wish to hide their names but see them made public. That is the punishment for a failure of duty. Qi Bao was the Wei supervisor of corrections, a hereditary holder of a high officer’s position, but once he had done something contrary to duty, he was written up as a “brigand.”1215 Shuqi of Zhu, Mouyi of Ju, and Heigong of Zhu departed their domains with land.1216 They sought only incomes, not fame. Yet even though they were lowly, their names had to be written. These two institutions of writing are ways of punishing aberration and eliminating greed. If every man who plunges himself into difficulties and thus endangers important men were to win an illustrious name for it, then every bravo who courted difficulty would rush to do the same. If men who steal cities and betray their lords to win great profits did not get their names recorded, then whole crowds of greedy adventurers would devote their energies to such behavior.

Lord Zhao

1715

是以《春秋》書齊豹曰「盜」，三叛人名，以懲不義，數 惡無禮，其善志也。 故曰：《春秋》之稱微而顯，婉而辨。上之人能使昭明， 善人勸焉，淫人懼焉，是以君子貴之。 31.6(7) 十二月辛亥朔，日有食之。是夜也，趙簡子夢童子臝而轉以歌，旦占諸史

墨，曰：「吾夢如是，今而日食，何也？」對曰：「六年及此月也，吳其入郢 乎！終亦弗克。入郢必以庚辰，日月在辰尾。庚午之日，日始有謫。火勝 金，故弗克。」

春秋 32.1(1) 三十有二年春王正月，公在乾侯。 32.2 取闞。 32.3(2) 夏，吳伐越。 32.4 秋，七月。

1217 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.931), Chenwei is Longwei 龍尾, or the Dragon’s Tail, roughly corresponding to Scorpio. The scribe Mo takes from the name of the asterism the word chen, which figures in his prediction of the day of the Wu invasion of Ying. In fact, as Yang (4:1514) observes, though chen is the same character in both cases, the two senses are unrelated. 1218 As Yang (4:1514) notes, the gengwu day fell on the nineteenth day of the tenth month, forty-one days before the xinhai day. Whatever it was, the flaw referred to must have been unrelated to the eclipse. From this observation the scribe Mo derives the prediction that the invasion will take place on a geng day.

1716

Zuo Tradition

Therefore, the Annals records Qi Bao as a “brigand,” while the three rebels are named. Punishing the undutiful and rebuking the ritually improper, it is indeed an excellent record. Thus, it is said that the Annals’ notations are subtle yet radiantly clear and that they express indirectly yet with discrimination. The superior man can make them shine forth brightly so that the good are encouraged and the licentious are fearful. This is why the noble man prizes this text.

A dream and an eclipse prompt a prediction of the coming Wu sack of the Chu capital (see Ding 4.3). It is curious that Zhao Yang of Jin should have this dream rather than someone from Chu or Wu. Unlike other dreams in Zuozhuan, the imagery of the dream in this case seems to bear little obvious relation to the resulting prediction. In the twelfth month, on the xinhai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun. The night before, Zhao Yanga had dreamed of a naked boy whirling and singing. In the morning he went to the scribe Mo of Caib for an interpretation of the dream: “This is what I dreamed, and now there is an eclipse of the sun. What does this mean?” He replied, “In the sixth year, counting from this month, Wu will likely enter Ying, but in the end they will not prevail. Their entry into Ying must take place on a gengchen day. The sun and the moon are now in Chenwei.1217 It was on the gengwu day that the sun first showed signs of a flaw.1218 Fire overcomes metal, so they will not prevail.”1219

31.6(7)

LORD ZHAO 32 (510 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirty-second year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou.

32.1(1)

We took Kan.1220

32.2

In summer, Wu attacked Yue.

32.3(2)

Autumn, the seventh month.

32.4

1219 Du Yu (ZZ 53.931) explains: “Wu is the south, the position of Chu. Wu is fire; geng is metal. The sun showed some change on gengwu, so the disaster will be in Chu. Chu’s only enemy is Wu, so he knows that it is certain to be Wu that will enter Ying. Fire overcomes metal; metal is counterpart to fire; and the eclipse took place on xinhai, hai being water. Water’s number is six, so it will be in the sixth year.” 1220 This was perhaps a city of Zhu, possibly identical to Lan (see Zhao 31.5), or perhaps a city of Lu taken by Lord Zhao. See Annals, Huan 11.7 and Zhao 25.6.

Lord Zhao

1717

32.5(3) 冬，仲孫何忌會晉韓不信、齊高張、宋仲幾、衛世叔申、鄭國參、曹人、

莒人、薛人、杞人、小邾人城成周。 32.6(4) 十有二月己未，公薨于乾侯。

左傳 32.1(1) 三十二年春王正月，公在乾侯，言不能外內，又不能用其人也。 32.2(3) 夏，吳伐越，始用師於越也。史墨曰：「不及四十年，越其有吳乎！越得

歲而吳伐之，必受其凶。」 32.3a(5) 秋八月，王使富辛與石張如晉，請城成周。天子曰：「天降禍于周，俾我

兄弟並有亂心，以為伯父憂。我一二親昵甥舅不遑啟處，於今十年。勤 戍五年。余一人無日忘之，閔閔焉如農夫之望歲，懼以待時。伯父若肆 大惠，復二文之業，弛周室之憂，徼文、武之福，以固盟主，宣昭令名， 則余一人有大願矣。昔成王合諸侯城成周，以為東都，崇文德焉。今我

1221 The Year-Planet, or Jupiter, was in the station Xingji 星紀, corresponding to parts of Sagittarius and Capricorn and, on earth, to Wu and Yue. 1222 Prince Wen of Jin helped King Ping of Zhou during the period of the Zhou house’s move to the eastern capital; the king’s command to the prince is cited at Xuan 12.2f. For Lord Wen of Jin’s efforts on behalf of King Xiang of Zhou, see Xi 25.2.

1718

Zuo Tradition

In winter, Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) met with Han Buxin of Jin, Gao Zhang of Qi, Zhong Ji of Song, Shishu Shen of Wei, Guo Can of Zheng, a Cao leader, a Ju leader, a Xue leader, a Qǐ leader, and a Lesser Zhu leader and fortified Chengzhou. In the twelfth month, on the jiwei day (14), our lord expired at Ganhou.

32.5(3)

32.6(4)

ZUO

To the last year of his life, Lord Zhao of Lu remains in Ganhou, outside Lu territory. In the thirty-second year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was in Ganhou: this expresses his incompetence in relations both with other domains and with his own, as well as his failure to employ the right men.

32.1(1)

Wu campaigns against Yue, prompting a prediction from the scribe Mo of Cai that Yue will eventually conquer Wu (see Ai 22.2). In summer, Wu attacked Yue: this was the first time they used their armies against Yue. The scribe Mo of Caib said, “In less than forty years, Yue will possess Wu. Since Wu has attacked Yue when the Year-Planet is in Yue’s celestial field, Wu is certain to suffer baleful consequences.”1221

32.2(3)

In a very formal address, the Zhou king asks the Jin leaders to fortify the Zhou capital, perhaps hoping in this way to defend himself and his successors against rebellions like Wangzi Zhao’s (see Zhao 26.9). In autumn, in the eight month, the Zhou king sent Fu Xin and Shi Zhang on a visit to Jin to request that Chengzhou be fortified. The Son of Heaven said, “Heaven has sent down disaster upon Zhou, causing all our brothers to have thoughts of insubordination, which have become a source of sorrow for you, our uncle. For ten years now one or two nephew domains, our closest intimates, have had no leisure to take their ease, and for five years they have exerted themselves in manning a garrison. I, the one man, have not forgotten this even for a single day, and I am as full of worry as a farmer looking forward to his harvest and awaiting the time with anxiety. My greatest wish is that you, our uncle, should dispense a great beneficence, resurrecting the enterprise of the two Wen rulers,1222 assuaging the woes of the Zhou house, and seeking the blessings of Kings Wen and Wu in order to confirm your position as covenant chief and to make illustrious your good name. In times past, King Cheng gathered the princes to fortify Chengzhou so that it would serve as an eastern capital where cultured virtue could be exalted. Now, we wish to seek blessings and avail ourselves

32.3a(5)

Lord Zhao

1719

欲徼福假靈于成王，修成周之城，俾戍人無勤，諸侯用寧，蝥賊遠屏， 晉之力也。其委諸伯父，使伯父實重圖之，俾我一人無徵怨于百姓，而 伯父有榮施，先王庸之。」 32.3b 范獻子謂魏獻子曰：「與其戍周，不如城之。天子實云，雖有後事，晉勿

與知可也。從王命以紓諸侯，晉國無憂；是之不務，而又焉從事？」魏獻 子曰：「善。」使伯音對曰：「天子有命，敢不奉承以奔告於諸侯？遲速 衰序，於是焉在。」 32.3c 冬十一月，晉魏舒、韓不信如京師，合諸侯之大夫于狄泉，尋盟，且令城

成周。 魏子南面。衛彪徯曰：「魏子必有大咎。干位以令大事，非其任 也。《詩》曰： 敬天之怒， 不敢戲豫； 敬天之渝， 不敢馳驅， 況敢干位以作大事乎？」 己丑，士彌牟營成周，計丈數，揣高卑，度厚薄，仞溝洫，物土方， 議遠邇，量事期，計徒庸，慮材用，書餱糧，以令役於諸侯。屬役賦丈， 書以授帥，而效諸劉子。韓簡子臨之，以為成命。

1223 To stand facing south during a ritual was the prerogative of a ruler. 1224 According to Du Yu (ZZ 53.933), Biao Xi was a high officer of Wei. The Guoyu account of the fortification of the capital (“Zhou yu 3,” 3.144–49) does not include the speech Biao Xi makes here but does attribute to him a long prediction of doom for Chang Hong and the Liu Duke Wen; cf. Biao Xi’s prediction about Wei Shu at Ding 1.1a. 1225 Maoshi 254, “Ban” 板, 17D.632–36. 1226 Wei Shu’s death comes in the following year, at Ding 1.1. 1227 Compare the similar passage in Xuan 11.3, where Sunshu Ao of Chu fortifies the city of Yi.

1720

Zuo Tradition

of the numinous power of King Cheng, repairing the walls of Chengzhou so that the exertions of the garrison may be reduced, the princes may be at ease, and the vermin may be banished afar, and this depends upon Jin’s strength. I shall submit it to you, Uncle, causing you to plan anew about it, so that I, the one man, will have no reason to arouse resentment among the hundred clans, while you will win the credit for a glorious act of generosity, which the former kings will reward.” Fan Yangb said to Wei Shua, “It would be better to fortify Zhou than to garrison it. Indeed, the Son of Heaven has said so. Even if something more happens later, it will be acceptable for Jin not to take any notice of it. We would be relieving the princes while following the king’s command, and the domain of Jin would then have no worries. If we do not dedicate ourselves to this, then is there some other project we are going to take on?” Wei Shua said, “Excellent.” He had Han Buxina reply, “The Son of Heaven has issued a command. Should we presume not to obey it respectfully and hurry to report it to the princes? The timing of the work and the details of the appointments are up to the royal house.”

32.3b

As Jin and allies proceed to fortify the capital, a ritual violation on Wei Shu’s part prompts a prediction of disaster for him. In winter, in the eleventh month, Wei Shu and Han Buxin of Jin visited the capital. They gathered high officers fom the princes at Diquan and renewed the covenant, and they also ordered them to fortify Chengzhou. Wei Shuc stood facing south.1223 Biao Xi of Wei said,1224 “Wei Shuc is certain to suffer a great calamity. He usurps this position as he issues orders for a great undertaking, and it is not his place. As it says in the Odes,

32.3c

Revering Heaven’s anger, Do not dare be frivolous. Revering Heaven’s changes, Do not dare be impulsive.1225

How much worse is it to usurp a position as one begins a great undertaking?”1226 On the jichou day (14), Shi Mimou made plans for the work at Chengzhou. He calculated the size of the walls, reckoned their elevation, measured their thickness, gauged the depth of the moat, surveyed the land, consulted about distances, estimated the time required for the work, calculated the number of workers required, considered the amount of material necessary, and put in writing the quantity of grain provisions. Then, with this information in hand, he issued orders for the labor to the princes.1227 Apportioning the work according to the size of the section of the wall that each force was to complete, he put the orders in writing and gave them to the commanders, then turned responsibility over to the Liu Duke Wena. Han Buxinb oversaw the work, taking these plans as approved orders. Lord Zhao

1721

32.4a(6) 十二月，公疾，徧賜大夫，大夫不受。賜子家子雙琥，一環、一璧、輕服，

受之。大夫皆受其賜。己未，公薨。子家子反賜於府人，曰：「吾不敢逆 君命也。」大夫皆反其賜。書曰「公薨于乾侯」，言失其所也。 32.4b 趙簡子問於史墨曰：「季氏出其君，而民服焉，諸侯與之；君死於外而

莫之或罪，何也？」對曰：「物生有兩、有三、有五、有陪貳。故天有三 辰，地有五行，體有左右，各有妃耦，王有公，諸侯有卿，皆有貳也。天 生季氏，以貳魯侯，為日久矣。民之服焉，不亦宜乎！魯君世從其失，季 氏世修其勤，民忘君矣。雖死於外，其誰矜之？社稷無常奉，君臣無常 位，自古以然。故《詩》曰： 高岸為谷， 深谷為陵。

1722

Zuo Tradition

Lord Zhao of Lu dies in exile. In the twelfth month, our lord fell ill. When he bestowed gifts upon his high officers, at first they refused to accept them. But when he bestowed upon Zijia Yiboa a pair of tiger-shaped jades, a jade ring, a jade disk, and light clothing, Zijia Yibo accepted all of the gifts. The other high officers then accepted their gifts. On the jiwei day (14), our lord expired. Zijia Yiboa then returned the gifts he had received to the keepers of the treasury, saying, “I did not dare defy the ruler’s command.” The other high officers then returned their gifts. The text has “Our lord expired at Ganhou” to express that he had lost his rightful place.

32.4a(6)

In Jin, Zhao Yang discusses Lu events with the scribe Mo of Cai, who recounts the long history of the Ji lineage’s rise in Lu (see Min 2.4). For Zhao Yang, whose lineage will be one of the three to divide Jin into separate domains, the account would have served as a form of historical justification for subversive political aims. For another explanation of the decline and expulsion of a ruling line, see the music master Kuang’s speech at Xiang 14.6. Zhao Yanga asked the scribe Mo of Caib: “The Ji lineage expelled their ruler, yet the people submit to them and the princes associate with them. Their ruler died outside the domain, yet no one blames them. Why?” He replied, “As things are born there are twos, threes, fives, and partners and seconds. Therefore, Heaven has its three heavenly bodies, earth has its Five Resources, a body has its left and right, each person has a partner, kings have their lords, and princes have their high ministers. Everything has its second. It has been a long time since Heaven gave birth to the Ji lineage as a second to the Prince of Lu. Is it not appropriate that the people should submit to them? For generations the Lu rulers have indulged their negligence, while for generations the Ji lineage have cultivated their sedulousness, and the people have forgotten their ruler. Even though he did die outside the domain, who would take pity on him? Since ancient times it has been the case that there are no constant sacrificants for the altars of a domain and no constant relation between rulers and subjects. Thus, it says in the Odes,

32.4b

The high banks became valleys; Deep valleys became mounds.1228

1228 Maoshi 193, “Shiyue zhi jiao” 十月之交, 12B.405–9.

Lord Zhao

1723

三后之姓於今為庶，主所知也。在《易》卦，雷乘乾曰大壯䷡，天之道 也。昔成季友，桓之季也，文姜之愛子也。始震而卜，卜人謁之曰：『生有 嘉聞，其名曰友，為公室輔。』及生，如卜人之言，有文在其手曰『友』， 遂以名之。既而有大功於魯，受費以為上卿。至於文子、武子，世增其 業，不廢舊績。魯文公薨，而東門遂殺適立庶，魯君於是乎失國，政在 季氏，於此君也四公矣。民不知君，何以得國？是以為君慎器與名，不 可以假人。」

1724

Zuo Tradition

That the clans of the Three Dynasties have become commoners is something that you, sir, know. In the hexagrams of the Changes, ‘Thunder’ ☳ mounting on ‘Pure Yang’ ☰ is called ‘Great Strength’ ䷡.1229 That is the Way of Heaven. In times past, Gongzi Youc or Ji You, younger son of Lord Huan, was the beloved son of Wen Jiang. She divined when she first became pregnant, and the diviner made the following report to our lord: ‘The child born will have a fine reputation. His name will be You, and he will be a support to our lord’s house.’ When he was born, it was just as the diviner had said, and he had on his hand the graph you, which was then adopted as his name.1230 Afterward, he performed great deeds for Lu and received Bi as his reward, becoming a high minister.1231 Coming down to Ji Wenzid and Ji Wuzic, generation after generation they added to their duties, never turning their backs on their earlier achievements.1232 The Lu rulers lost control of their domain when Lord Wen of Lu expired and Xiangzhongd killed the legitimate heir and established the son of a secondary consort as ruler. Administrative power has remained with the Ji lineage; for four rulers, up to Lord Zhao, it has been so.1233 If the people do not know their ruler, how is he to win control of the domain? This is why a ruler is careful with his ritual objects and titles, which cannot be lent to others.”1234

1229 As Du Yu (ZZ 53.934) explains, the “Pure Yang” ☰ (Qian 乾) trigram, with its three unbroken lines, represents the king or the Son of Heaven, while the “Thunder” ☳ (Zhen 震) trigram, with its unbroken bottom line and two broken upper lines, represents the princes. In “Great Strength” ䷡ (Dazhuang 大壯), hexagram 34, the “Thunder” trigram is placed above the “Pure Yang” trigram. This overturning of the implicit hierarchy of the two trigrams signifies the “great strength” of the usurping prince. 1230 See Min 2.4. 1231 See Xi 1.6. Bi is the settlement awarded to Ji You and to the Ji lineage after him. 1232 Ji Wenzi and Ji Wuzi were active in the years of the Lu Lords Wen, Cheng, and Xiang. 1233 See Wen 18.5. 1234 Compare Cheng 2.2, where Confucius expresses the same view on ritual vessels and titles, and Zhao 7.5.

Lord Zhao

1725

定公

Lord Ding (509–495 bce) Dwarfed by the colossal scale of Lords Xiang and Zhao, the slim chronicle of the years of Lord Ding is an anomaly, closer in character to the records of the early Spring and Autumn years than to any other part of Zuozhuan. Many events are dispatched with a line or two of straight narration, with little in the way of detail or quoted speech. Yet these years are historically decisive. As Jin and Chu, the era’s two greatest domains, lose their ability to control stable alliances, and as strife becomes more common both within and among domains, the stage is set for the fluid relations and frequent warfare of the coming centuries, known to us as the Warring States period. By far the lengthiest and most significant episode of Lord Ding’s years is Wu’s conquest of Chu and its sacking of the Chu capital at Ying (4.3). Some credit for this triumph must no doubt go to the Chu exile Wu Yun, better known to history as Wu Zixu, whose father and brother had been killed by King Ping of Chu (r. 528–516; see Zhao 20.2) and who took his revenge by instigating the Wu campaign (Zhao 30.4). Yet the weakness of Chu at this time derives in part from high-handedness on the part of the chief minister, Nang Wa, and a general mismanagement of relations with allied domains (3.4). Wu’s victory also comes after years of border skirmishes between the two domains and likely bespeaks a more general trend toward political and military empowerment in the domains of the southeast. Indeed, Wu’s brief years of dominance will come to an end when it is conquered by Yue, its neighbor to the southeast (Ai 22.2), an event that Wu Zixu purportedly foresaw (Ai 1.2). This catastrophe is presaged by the death of the Wu King Helu in an attack on Yue (14.5). Even as Wu prepares its attack on a weakened Chu, Jin presides over a meeting of its allies at Shaoling. Through a trivial but telling ritual faux pas (a display of borrowed feathers on a banner during the ceremony), the Jin delegation succeeds in alienating its partners (4.1). Like the Wu

1727

conquest of Chu, however, the disintegration of the northern alliance appears to have been a long time coming; Jin was said to have lost the allegiance of the other princes decades before (see Zhao 13.3), on the completion of the Siqi Palace. In the wake of the Shaoling meeting, the shaky peace that held throughout the later years of Lord Zhao fails. While Lu continues to follow Jin, even acting as a Jin proxy in an attack on Zheng (6.2), Wei turns against Jin and casts its lot with Qi (7.4). Years of small-scale warfare follow. Qi fights Lu (7.5, 8.1, 8.4), drawing in Lu’s allies Jin and Song (8.6). Qi and Jin fight (9.4). Wei twice faces Jin on its own (8.7, 10.4). Although the narratives never match the grander battle scenes found earlier in Zuozhuan, they do amount to a sustained celebration of courage (8.1, 10.1, 10.4, 12.1). This trend toward detailed accounts of individual heroism will continue in Lord Ai. As in the years of Lord Zhao, tensions within domains occasionally flare into violence. Although Wangzi Zhao is dead (5.1), surviving partisans continue to fight over the Zhou succession, aided by Zheng (6.5). Favoritism and jealousy tear apart the ruling elite in Song (9.1, 11.1) and draw other domains into the struggle (15.4, 15.5). In Wei, Lord Ling’s (r. 534–493) excessive indulgence of his lady, Nan Zi, causes the exile of his son and heir, Kuaikui (14.8), and sets in motion a bloody decades-long succession struggle. The three Huan lineages in Lu struggle to bring their own insubordinate subjects under control (12.2), and the Lu government is dominated for years by Yang Hu, a powerful household subject of the Jisun line and de facto successor to Ji Pingzi. Yang Hu ultimately rebels and is driven out of the domain (8.10, 9.3), but not before implementing a series of audacious policies (5.6, 6.2, 6.7, 7.5). Finally, in the home of the erstwhile covenant chief, Jin itself, the long rebellion of the Fan and Zhonghang lines begins (13.2). Confucius is an active participant in and observer of events of these years, famous especially for his firm handling of the ritual confrontation with a Qi delegation at Jiagu (10.2). His disciple Zigong, who will rise in prominence in the following decades, makes his first appearance here (15.1, 15.3). Equally notable are a pair of impressive speeches on ritual practice and history (1.1, 4.1) and the curious demise of a hapless ruler of Zhu, victim of his own fiery rage (3.1).

Lord Ding

1729



春秋

1.1 元年春王。 1.2(1) 三月，晉人執宋仲幾于京師。 1.3(3) 夏六月癸亥，公之喪至自乾侯。 1.4(3) 戊辰，公即位。 1.5(4) 秋，七月癸巳，葬我君昭公。 1.6 九月，大雩。 1.7(5) 立煬宮。 1.8 冬，十月，隕霜殺菽。



左傳

1.1a(2) 元年春王正月辛巳，晉魏舒合諸侯之大夫于狄泉，將以城成周。魏子

蒞政。衛彪徯曰：「將建天子，而易位以令，非義也。大事奸義，必有大 咎。晉不失諸侯，魏子其不免乎！」是行也，魏獻子屬役於韓簡子及原 壽過，而田於大陸，焚焉，還，卒於甯。范獻子去其柏椁，以其未復命而 田也。

1

2 3 4

1730

According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.940), the entry is abbreviated because Lord Ding did not formally begin his rule until later in the year. Van Auken (“A Formal Analysis of the Chuenchiou,” 736–37 [cf. 109–10]) offers an attractive alternative by overriding Du Yu and reading this entry with the succeeding one: “In the first year, in spring, in the royal third month, Jin leaders . . .” That is, they rebuilt the temple for Lord Yang (r. 992–987). Pines (Foundations of Confucian Thought, 227–31) argues that Ding 1.1 and Zhao 32.3 are accounts of the same events recorded by different scribes and that the repetition is accidental. According to Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 54.940–41), the representative of the king should have been in charge of the gathering.

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 1 (509 BCE) ANNALS

The first year, spring, royal.1

1.1

In the third month, Jin leaders arrested Zhong Ji of Song in the Zhou capital.

1.2(1)

In summer, in the sixth month, on the guihai day (21), our lord’s cortege arrived from Ganhou. On the wuchen day (26), our lord acceded to his position. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the guisi day (22), we buried our ruler Lord Zhao.

1.3(3)

1.4(3) 1.5(4)

In the ninth month, there was the great rain sacrifice.

1.6

We erected the Yang Temple.2

1.7(5)

In winter, in the tenth month, there fell a frost that killed bean plants.

1.8

ZUO

In a passage that is likely a restatement of events already reported for the previous year, Jin and its allies gather to fortify the Zhou capital (see Zhao 32.3).3 Wei Shu again oversteps his prerogatives, again prompting predictions of his death, and then dies. In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the xinsi day (7), Wei Shu of Jin assembled the high officers of the princes at Diquan in preparation for fortifying Chengzhou. Wei Shuc assumed the role of administrator.4 Biao Xi of Wei said, “He aims to buttress the Son of Heaven, yet he usurps his place in issuing commands. This is contrary to duty. Anyone who violates duty in the great affairs of state is certain to incur great blame. Even if Jin does not lose the princes’ allegiance, Wei Shuc will not escape disaster.” On this expedition, Wei Shua placed the laborers under the direction of Han Buxinb and Yuan Shouguo, while he hunted at Dalu.5 He suffered a burn there and died at Ning as he was returning.6 Fan Yangb did away with his cedar outer coffin on the grounds that he had hunted before reporting discharge of his mission.

5

6

1.1a(2)

According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.940), Han Buxin was a grandson of Han Qi and Yuan Shouguo was a Zhou high officer. Dalu 大陸 was about 130 kilometers northeast of the Zhou capital, northwest of present-day Huojia County 獲嘉縣, Henan. Ning 甯 was a few kilometers to the west, on the road home. Hunters often set fires to flush out animals. Most commentators do not connect Wei Shu’s death with the lighting of fires, but a parallel account in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 3,” 3.148, indicates that he died from a burn suffered during the hunt.

Lord Ding

1731



1.1b

孟懿子會城成周，庚寅，栽。宋仲幾不受功，曰：「滕、薛、郳，吾役也。」 薛宰曰：「宋為無道，絕我小國於周，以我適楚，故我常從宋。晉文公為 踐土之盟，曰：『凡我同盟，各復舊職。』若從踐土，若從宋，亦唯命。」 仲幾曰：「踐土固然。」薛宰曰：「薛之皇祖奚仲居薛，以為夏車正，奚仲 遷于邳，仲虺居薛，以為湯左相。若復舊職，將承王官，何故以役諸 侯？」仲幾曰：「三代各異物，薛焉得有舊？為宋役，亦其職也。」士彌牟 曰：「晉之從政者新，子姑受功，歸，吾視諸故府。」仲幾曰：「縱子忘 之，山川鬼神其忘諸乎？」 士伯怒，謂韓簡子曰：「薛徵於人，宋徵於鬼。宋罪大矣。且己無 辭，而抑我以神，誣我也。『啟寵納侮』，其此之謂矣。必以仲幾為戮。」乃 執仲幾以歸。三月，歸諸京師。城三旬而畢，乃歸諸侯之戍。 齊高張後，不從諸侯。晉女叔寬曰：「周萇弘、齊高張皆將不免。 萇叔違天，高子違人。天之所壞，不可支也；眾之所為，不可奸也。」

7

According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.941), Zhong Ji wants to have these three domains do Song’s part of the work. Teng was located near present-day Teng County (see map 2), Shandong, about 150 kilometers northeast of the Song capital. Xue was about 25 kilometers south (see map 2). Ni 郳 (see Zhao 19.5) was about 20 kilometers to the east and north of Teng and Xue, respectively. 8 See Cheng 2.8. 9 For the Covenant of Jiantu, see Xi 28.3. 10 Some texts credit the Xue ancestor Xizhong with the invention of the chariot. 11 This Zhonghui was revered for his wisdom. Speakers in Zuozhuan attribute a number of aphorisms to him. See Xuan 12.2b, Xiang 14.9, and Xiang 30.10. 12 The reasoning is somewhat clearer in the Guoyu parallel to this passage. See Guoyu, “Zhou yu 3,” 3.144–47. Chang Hong “defies Heaven” in that he supports fortifying the capital of the doomed Zhou house; the Guoyu parallel makes it clear that he was a key proponent and initiator of the plan. Gao Zhang “defies man” in that he fails to participate in the work. Chang Hong is put to death in Ai 3.3, and Gao Zhao flees to Lu in Ai 6.3. 13 The Guoyu passage gives a different version of the lines on Heaven, citing them as a Zhou poem (Zhou shi 周詩).

1732

Zuo Tradition

In a dispute over the distribution of labor during the fortification, representatives of Xue and Song cite precedent and the Covenant of Jiantu (see Xi 28.3). Zhong Ji of Song is punished for his part in the dispute. Trouble is predicted for Chang Hong of Zhou (see Ai 3.3) and Gao Zhang of Qi (see Ai 6.3). Meng Yizi joined in the fortifying of Chengzhou. On the gengyin day (16), they set up the wooden frames for the earthworks. Zhong Ji of Song did not accept his work assignment but said, “Teng, Xue, and Ni are our laborers.”7 The Xue steward said, “Song has acted without regard for the Way. They cut our small domain off from Zhou and took us along with them to Chu.8 That is why we have been adherents of Song ever since. When Lord Wen of Jin made the covenant at Jiantu, it said, ‘All who join in this covenant will in every case resume their old duties.’9 Whether we follow Jiantu or follow Song shall be for you to command.” Zhong Ji said, “This is in fact what Jiantu says.” The Xue steward said, “Xue’s august ancestor Xizhong dwelt in Xue. When he was made the Xia superintendant of chariots, Xizhong moved to Pi.10 His descendant Zhonghui dwelt in Xue and was made minister of the left to the Shang founder Tang.11 If we are to resume our old duties, then we will be taking up our royal office, so why should we be made mere laborers of the princes?” Zhong Ji said, “The Three Dynasties all had different practices. How can Xue claim any precedent in them? To act as laborers for Song is indeed their duty.” Shi Mimou said, “Those concerned with government in Jin are new to their positions. For now, accept your work assignment. When we return home, we will look it up in the old archives.” Zhong Ji said, “Even if you have forgotten it, will the ghosts and spirits of the mountains and rivers have forgotten it?” Enraged, Shi Mimoua said to Han Buxinb, “Xue calls upon men to support its claims, but Song calls upon ghosts. Song’s offense is serious. What is more, to try to curb us by referring to spirits just because Song had run out of arguments amounts to deception. This is what is known as ‘opening the way for favor and letting in insult.’ We must expose Zhong Ji to public disgrace.” And so they arrested Zhong Ji and took him back to Jin. In the third month, they returned him to the Zhou capital. After thirty days the fortifying was finished, so they sent home the princes’ garrisons. Gao Zhanga of Qi, having come too late, did not join in with the princes. Ru Kuana of Jin said, “Neither Chang Hong of Zhou nor Gao Zhang of Qi will escape unscathed. Chang Honga has defied Heaven, and Gao Zhanga has defied man.12 What Heaven would destroy cannot be propped up, and what the multitude pursues cannot be opposed.”13

Lord Ding

1.1b

1733

1.2 夏，叔孫成子逆公之喪于乾侯。季孫曰：「子家子亟言於我，未嘗不中吾

志也。吾欲與之從政，子必止之，且聽命焉。」子家子不見叔孫，易幾而 哭。叔孫請見子家子。子家子辭曰：「羈未得見，而從君以出。君不命而 薨，羈不敢見。」叔孫使告之曰：「公衍、公為實使群臣不得事君，若公 子宋主社稷，則群臣之願也。凡從君出而可以入者，將唯子是聽。子家 氏未有後，季孫願與子從政。此皆季孫之願也，使不敢以告。」對曰： 「若立君，則有卿士、大夫與守龜在，羈弗敢知。若從君者，則貌而出 者，入可也；寇而出者，行可也。若羈也，則君知其出也，而未知其入也， 羈將逃也。」喪及壞隤，公子宋先入，從公者皆自壞隤反。

1.3(3, 4)

六月癸亥，公之喪至自乾侯。戊辰，公即位。季孫使役如闞公氏，將溝 焉。榮駕鵝曰：「生不能事，死又離之，以自旌也。縱子忍之，後必或恥 之。」乃止。

14 15 16 17 18

1734

Mourning ritual specifies that ministers weep at court at certain times of day. Zijia Yibo changes the times of his weeping for the departed Lord Zhao because he does not want to have to see Shusun Bugan. See Zhao 25.6c and 29.3. Huaitui was somewhere near the Lu capital; see Cheng 16.5l. According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.942), this ditch would have set the tomb of Duke Zhao apart from the tombs of his predecessors. Kan, or Kangongshi (literally, “estates of the lords at Kan”), was the name of the burial ground for Lu lords. Rong Jia’e was a Lu high officer.

Zuo Tradition

As Lord Zhao of Lu is laid to rest and Gongzi Song comes to power as Lord Ding, the old rift between the exiled followers of Lord Zhao and the supporters of the Ji line continues. Zijia Yibo refuses to go home to Lu (see Zhao 32.4). In summer, Shusun Bugana went out to meet our lord’s cortege at Ganhou. Ji Pingzib said to him, “The gentleman Zijia, who has spoken to me many times, has never failed to speak to my aims. I would like to give him the opportunity to join the government. You must keep him from departing and then heed his commands.” Zijia Yiboa would not see Shusun Buganb and changed the times of his own weeping in court.14 Shusun Buganb asked to see Zijia Yiboa. Zijia Yiboa declined, saying, “I had not had the opportunity to see you before I followed the ruler into exile. Now that the ruler has died without issuing a command, I dare not see you.” Shusun Buganb sent someone to inform him, “It was Gongyan and Gong­ wei who prevented many subjects from serving the ruler.15 That Gongzi Song should be appointed master of the altars of the domain is the desire of the many subjects. In the case of any man who accompanied the ruler into exile and who may now be repatriated, we will obey you and no one else. The Zijia lineage does not yet have a successor, and Ji Pingzib would like to give you the opportunity to join the government. All these things are the desire of Ji Pingzib, who has sent me to inform you of them.” Zijia Yibo replied, “For the task of setting up a ruler, we already have the ministers, high officers, and the guardian turtle shell for divination. I would not presume to claim any knowledge of it. As for those who followed the ruler, repatriation is acceptable for the ones who fled for the sake of appearance; but for those who fled in enmity, it is acceptable to let them continue in their travels. As for me, the ruler knew of my departure, but he did not know of my repatriation. I will flee.” When the cortege reached Huaitui, Gongzi Song entered the domain first,16 and those who had accompanied our lord turned back at Huaitui.

1.2

Ji Pingzi is stymied in his efforts to demean the deceased Lord Zhao (see Ding 5.4). In the sixth month, on the guihai day (21), our lord’s cortege arrived from Ganhou. On the wuchen day (26), our lord acceded to his position. Ji Pingzib had sent laborers to Kangongshi, intending to have a ditch dug there.17 Rong Jia’e said,18 “In life you could not serve him, and now in death will you again isolate him in order to draw attention to your own behavior? Even if you can bear it, certainly someone in the future will be ashamed of it.” He therefore gave up his plan.

Lord Ding

1.3(3, 4)

1735

季孫問於榮駕鵝曰：「吾欲為君諡，使子孫知之。」對曰：「生弗能 事，死又惡之，以自信也。將焉用之？」乃止。 1.4(5) 秋七月癸巳，葬昭公於墓道南。孔子之為司寇也，溝而合諸墓。 1.5(7) 昭公出故，季平子禱於煬公。九月，立煬宮。 1.6 周鞏簡公棄其子弟而好用遠人。

春秋 2.1 二年春王正月。 2.2 夏五月壬辰，雉門及兩觀災。 2.3(2) 秋，楚人伐吳。 2.4 冬十月，新作雉門及兩觀。

左傳 2.1 二年夏四月辛酉，鞏氏之群子弟賊簡公。

1736

Zuo Tradition

Ji Pingzib asked Rong Jia’e, “I want to choose a posthumous name for the ruler that will cause his descendants to know what he was like.” He replied, “In life you could not serve him, and now in death will you again insult him in order to advertise your own views? What good will that do?” He therefore gave up his plans. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the guisi day (22), we buried Lord Zhao to the south of the tomb road.19 When Confuciusb was serving as supervisor of corrections, he had a ditch dug to join it with the other tombs.

1.4(5)

The construction of a temple for Lu’s early ruler Lord Yang, who succeeded his elder brother, is meant to legitimize Lord Ding’s succession of his own elder brother Lord Zhao. This form of succession was widely practiced in Shang and early Zhou times but was unusual by the late Spring and Autumn period. Because Lord Zhao had gone into exile, Ji Pingzi prayed to Lord Yang. In the ninth month, he erected the Yang Temple.

1.5(7)

In Zhou, the Gong Duke Jian ignored his sons and younger brothers, preferring to employ men from far away.20

1.6

LORD DING 2 (508 BCE) ANNALS

The second year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renchen day (25), there was a disastrous fire at the Zhi Gate and its two towers.21

2.1 2.2

In autumn, a Chu leader attacked Wu.

2.3(2)

In winter, in the tenth month, we rebuilt the Zhi Gate and its two towers.

2.4

ZUO

Duke Jian’s assassination follows from his action in Ding 1.6. In the second year, in summer, in the fourth month, on the xinyou day (24), the many sons and younger brothers of the Gong lineage assassinated Duke Jian.

2.1

19

As a rule, tombs were located to the north of the road. Ji Pingzi thus succeeds in creating a partial separation of Lord Zhao’s tomb from those of his ancestors. 20 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.942), “men from far away” are men of other families. This passage introduces the events of Ding 2.1. 21 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.943), the Zhi Gate was a southern gate in the ruler’s palace.

Lord Ding

1737

2.2(3) 桐叛楚。吳子使舒鳩氏誘楚人，曰：「以師臨我，我伐桐，為我使之無

忌。」秋，楚囊瓦伐吳，師于豫章。吳人見舟于豫章，而潛師于巢。冬十 月，吳軍楚師于豫章，敗之。遂圍巢，克之，獲楚公子繁。 2.3 邾莊公與夷射姑飲酒，私出。閽乞肉焉，奪之杖以敲之。

春秋 3.1 三 年春王正月，公如晉，至河，乃復。 3.2(1) 二月辛卯，邾子穿卒。 3.3 夏四月。 3.4 秋，葬邾莊公。 3.5(3) 冬，仲孫何忌及邾子盟于拔。

1738

Zuo Tradition

There is continued fighting between Wu and Chu (see Zhao 31.4). Wu masks its real intentions by seeming to support Chu in repressing a rebellion in Tong. Tong revolted against Chu.22 The Master of Wu had the Shujiu lineage lure the men of Chu onward.23 He said, “When they approach us with their army, we will attack Tong. For our sake, lull them into blithe unconcern about any attack from us.” In autumn, Nang Wa of Chu attacked Wu, stationing his troops at Yuzhang. The men of Wu showed their boats at Yuzhang but hid their army in ambush at Chao.24 In winter, in the tenth month, Wu formed up against the Chu army at Yuzhang and defeated it. They then laid siege to Chao, reduced it, and captured Gongzi Fan of Chu.25

2.2(3)

An episode in Zhu prepares the way for trouble in the coming year (see Ding 3.1). Lord Zhuang of Zhu had Yi Yigu drink with him.26 When Yi Yigu went out to relieve himself, the gatekeeper begged him for some meat. Yi Yigu snatched his staff from him and beat him with it.

2.3

LORD DING 3 (507 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord was going to Jin. He advanced as far as the Yellow River, then turned back. In the second month, on the xinmao day (29), Chuan, the Master of Zhu, died.

3.1

3.2(1)

Summer, the fourth month.

3.3

In autumn, Lord Zhuang of Zhu was buried.

3.4

In winter, Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) and the Master of Zhu swore a covenant at Ba.

3.5(3)

22 Tong 桐 was located near present-day Tongcheng County 桐城縣, Anhui, about 450 kilometers east of the Chu capital and 65 kilometers north of the Yangzi River. 23 Shujiu was a small domain annexed by Chu. See Xiang 24.9 and 25.8. 24 Chao lay between Tongcheng and the Yangzi River (see map 4). 25 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.943), Gongzi Fan was the Chu high officer who had been defending Chao. 26 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.943), Yi Yigu was a Zhu high officer.

Lord Ding

1739

左傳 3.1(2) 三年春二月辛卯，邾子在門臺，臨廷。閽以缾水沃廷，邾子望見之，怒。

閽曰：「夷射姑旋焉。」命執之。弗得，滋怒，自投于牀，廢于鑪炭，爛， 遂卒。先葬以車五乘，殉五人。莊公卞急而好潔，故及是。 3.2 秋九月，鮮虞人敗晉師于平中，獲晉觀虎，恃其勇也。 3.3(5) 冬，盟于郯，修邾好也。 3.4 蔡昭侯為兩佩與兩裘以如楚，獻一佩一裘於昭王。昭王服之，以享蔡

侯。蔡侯亦服其一。子常欲之，弗與，三年止之。

1740

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Anger and an obsession with cleanliness result in the death of the ruler of Zhu (see Ding 2.3). In the third year, in spring, in the second month, on the xinmao day (29), the Master of Zhu stood upon the gate terrace, overlooking the outer court. The gatekeeper was sprinkling the court with a bottle of water. Looking out and seeing him at it, the Master of Zhu was furious. The gatekeeper said, “Yi Yigu pissed here.”27 The Master commanded the arrest of Yi Yigu. When Yi Yigu was not apprehended, the Master became even more furious. Throwing himself upon his bed, he fell upon the coals in the brazier. The burns suppurated, and as a result he died. There was a preliminary burial of five chariots and five human victims.28 Lord Zhuang was irascible and obsessed with cleanliness, and therefore he came to this end.

3.1(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, the men of Xianyu defeated a Jin army at Pingzhong and captured Guan Hu of Jin, who had been overconfident of his own courage.29

3.2

In winter, we made a covenant at Tan.30 This was to maintain our good relations with Zhu.

3.3(5)

In Chu, the chief minister, Nang Wa, alienates allies by his greedy ways, detaining them in order to gain presents from them. The Prince of Cai goes to Jin to seek an attack on Chu (see Ding 2.2, 4.3). Prince Zhao of Cai had two waist-pendants and two fur cloaks made in preparation for going to Chu, where he presented one pendant and one cloak to King Zhao. King Zhao wore them when he offered the Prince of Cai ceremonial toasts, and the Prince of Cai also wore his. Nang Waa wanted them, but the Prince of Cai would not give them to him, so Nang Wa detained him for three years.

3.4

27 In this way the gatekeeper takes revenge for the beating he received in Ding 2.3. 28 Du Yu (ZZ 54.944) explains that for reasons of hygiene, Lord Zhuang had commanded that the chariots and victims be placed in a side chamber within the tomb. 29 Pingzhong 平中 was perhaps near Zhongren (see Zhao 13.4) not far from present-day Tang County 唐縣, Hebei. 30 Note that Zuozhuan has Tan 郯 for the Annals’ Ba 拔. Du Yu (ZZ 54.944) remarks that these were the same place (see Annals, Xuan 4.1).

Lord Ding

1741

唐成公如楚，有兩肅爽馬，子常欲之，弗與，亦三年止之。唐人或 相與謀，請代先從者，許之。飲先從者酒，醉之，竊馬而獻之子常。子常 歸唐侯。自拘於司敗，曰：「君以弄馬之故，隱君身，棄國家。群臣請相 夫人以償馬，必如之。」唐侯曰：「寡人之過也。二三子無辱！」皆賞之。 蔡人聞之，固請，而獻佩于子常。子常朝，見蔡侯之徒，命有司曰：「蔡 君之久也，官不共也。明日禮不畢，將死。」蔡侯歸，及漢，執玉而沈， 曰：「余所有濟漢而南者，有若大川！」蔡侯如晉，以其子元與其大夫之 子為質焉，而請伐楚。

春秋 4.1 四年春王二月癸巳，陳侯吳卒。 4.2(1) 三月，公會劉子、晉侯、宋公、蔡侯、衛侯、陳子、鄭伯、許男、曹伯、莒

子、邾子、頓子、胡子、滕子、薛伯、杞伯、小邾子、齊國夏于召陵， 侵楚。 4.3(3) 夏四月庚辰，蔡公孫姓帥師滅沈，以沈子嘉歸，殺之。

31 32 33

1742

According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.944), Sushuang was the name of a particularly excellent kind of horse. For this translation of sibai 司敗, see Wen 10.3. As Yang (4:1533) points out, the guisi day would have been the sixth day of the first month; Du Yu (ZZ 54.944) suggests that the text has “second month” because that was when the report of the death reached Lu.

Zuo Tradition

When Lord Cheng of Tang went to Chu, he had two Sushuang horses.31 Nang Waa wanted them, but Lord Cheng would not give them to him, so Nang Wa also detained him for three years. Certain men from Tang plotted among themselves, then asked permission to replace the men who had first accompanied the lord. They were granted permission. They treated the men who had first accompanied the lord to drinks and got them drunk; they then stole the horses and presented them to Nang Waa, whereupon Nang Waa sent the Prince of Tang home. The men who had stolen the horses turned themselves in to the supervisor of corrections32 and said, “Because of his connoisseurship of horses, the ruler consigned himself to obscurity and abandoned his domain. We several officials ask permission to assist the concerned personnel in replacing the horses, with the promise that these will be as good as the original horses.” The Prince of Tang said, “It was my error. My companions, do not demean yourselves.” He then rewarded each of them. When the people of Cai heard of it, they insisted upon making their request and presented a pendant to Nang Waa. Attending court, Nang Waa saw the attendants of the Prince of Cai and issued a command to his officers in charge: “The reason the ruler of Cai has remained so long in our domain is that our officials have not made their parting gifts. If tomorrow the ritual is not completed, you will die.” As the Prince of Cai was returning home, when he reached the Han River, he held up a jade and sunk it, saying, “If ever I should cross the Han and travel south, let the great river bear witness of it!” The Prince of Cai went to Jin. There he made hostages of his son Yuan and the sons of his high officers and then requested permission to attack Chu. LORD DING 4 (506 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the guisi day, Wu, the Prince of Chen, died.33 In the third month, our lord met with the Liu Master, the Prince of Jin, the Duke of Song, the Prince of Cai, the Prince of Wei, the Master of Chen, the Liege of Zheng, the Head of Xǔ, the Liege of Cao, the Master of Ju, the Master of Zhu, the Master of Dun, the Master of Hu, the Master of Teng, the Liege of Xue, the Liege of Qǐ, the Master of Lesser Zhu, and Guo Xia of Qi at Shaoling.34 They invaded Chu. In summer, in the fourth month, on the gengchen day (24), Gongsun Xing of Cai led out troops and extinguished Shěn. He took Jia, Master of Shěn, home with him and put him to death. 34

4.1

4.2(1)

4.3(3)

Shaoling was located to the east of present-day Yancheng County 郾城縣, Henan, about 70 kilometers west of Chen, at a convenient place for a gathering to forge south­ ward into Chu territory; see Xi 4.1 and map 4.

Lord Ding

1743

4.4(1) 五月，公及諸侯盟于臯鼬。 4.5 杞伯成卒于會。 4.6 六月，葬陳惠公。 4.7 許遷于容城。 4.8 秋七月，公至自會。 4.9 劉卷卒。 4.10 葬杞悼公。 4.11(3) 楚人圍蔡。 4.12 晉士鞅、衛孔圉帥師伐鮮虞。 4.13 葬劉文公。 4.14(3) 冬十有一月庚午，蔡侯以吳子及楚人戰于柏舉，楚師敗績。楚囊瓦出奔

鄭。庚辰，吳入郢。

左傳

4.1a(2,4)

四年春三月，劉文公合諸侯于召陵，謀伐楚也。晉荀寅求貨於蔡侯，弗 得，言於范獻子曰：「國家方危，諸侯方貳，將以襲敵，不亦難乎！水潦 方降，疾瘧方起，中山不服，棄盟取怨，無損於楚，而失中山，不如辭蔡 侯。吾自方城以來，楚未可以得志，祇取勤焉。」乃辭蔡侯。

35 Gaoyou 皋鼬 was south of present-day Linying County 臨潁縣, Henan, about 30 kilometers northwest of Shaoling. 36 Rongcheng 容城 was south of present-day Lushan County 魯山縣, Henan, near the northern reaches of Chu’s Fangcheng defenses and about 35 kilometers northwest of an earlier Xǔ capital at She. For earlier relocations of Xǔ, see Zhao 9.2, 13.2a, 13.5, 18.7, notes, and map 4. 37 Boju 柏舉 was located northeast of present-day Macheng County 麻城縣, Hubei, about 175 kilometers south of the Cai capital.

1744

Zuo Tradition

In the fifth month, our lord and the princes swore a covenant at Gaoyou.35

4.4(1)

Cheng, the Liege of Qǐ, died at the meeting.

4.5

In the sixth month, Lord Hui of Chen was buried.

4.6

Xǔ relocated to Rongcheng.

4.7

36

In autumn, in the seventh month, our lord arrived from the meeting.

4.8

Liu Juan (the Liu Duke Wen) died.

4.9

Lord Dao of Qǐ was buried.

4.10

Chu leaders laid siege to Cai.

4.11(3)

Shi Yang (Fan Yang) of Jin and Kong Yu of Wei led out troops and attacked the Xianyu.

4.12

Lord Wen of Liu was buried.

4.13

In winter, in the eleventh month, on the gengwu day (18), the Prince of Cai, taking the Master of Wu with him, did battle with Chu leaders at Boju.37 The Chu troops were completely defeated. Nang Wa of Chu departed and fled to Zheng. On the gengchen day (28), Wu entered Ying.

4.14(3)

ZUO

At the meeting at Shaoling, Jin first considers and then rejects a request from the Prince of Cai to attack Chu (see Zhao 3.4). In the fourth year, in spring, in the third month, the Liu Duke Wen gathered the princes at Shaoling to plan the attack on Chu. Zhonghang Yina of Jin sought tribute goods from the Prince of Cai but did not obtain them. Speaking with Fan Yangb, he said, “Just now our domain is imperiled, and the princes are disloyal. Will it not be difficult to make a surprise attack on an enemy with these? The rainwater floods have just receded, pestilence is just now abroad, and Zhongshan has not submitted.38 If we violate a covenant and earn resentment for ourselves, it will be no loss to Chu, yet we will lose Zhongshan. It would be better to refuse the Prince of Cai’s request. Ever since Fangcheng,39 we have not been able to achieve our aims with Chu and have succeeded only in tiring ourselves out.” Therefore, they refused the Prince of Cai’s request to attack Chu.

4.1a(2, 4)

38 Zhongshan 中山 was a domain of non-Sinitic Xianyu origin that survived into the Warring States period. It was located near Pingshan County 平山縣, Hebei, where excavations in 1974–77 brought to light two richly furnished tombs, one of them the tomb of a Zhongshan king. 39 See Xiang 16.3.

Lord Ding

1745



4.1b

晉人假羽旄於鄭，鄭人與之。明日，或旆以會。晉於是乎失諸侯。 將會，衛子行敬子言於靈公曰：「會同難，嘖有煩言，莫之治也。 其使祝佗從！」公曰：「善。」乃使子魚。子魚辭，曰：「臣展四體，以率舊 職，猶懼不給而煩刑書。若又共二，徼大罪也。且夫祝，社稷之常隸也。 社稷不動，祝不出竟，官之制也。君以軍行，祓社、釁鼓，祝奉以從，於 是乎出竟。若嘉好之事，君行師從，卿行旅從，臣無事焉。」公曰：「行 也。」



4.1c

及皋鼬，將長蔡於衛。衛侯使祝佗私於萇弘曰：「聞諸道路，不知信否。 若聞蔡將先衛，信乎？」萇弘曰：「信。蔡叔，康叔之兄也，先衛，不亦可 乎？」 子魚曰：

以先王觀之，則尚德也。昔武王克商，成王定之，選建明德，以

蕃屏周。故周公相王室，以尹天下，於周為睦。

40 Feathers were used to decorate flags. See Xiang 14.10. 41 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.946), Zihang Jingzi was a Wei high officer. 42 Invocator Tuo was famed for his oratorical skills. See Analects 6.16: “Unless one has the glibness of Invocator Tuo and the beauty of Zizhao of Song, it is difficult to get along without trouble in our time.” 43 Takezoe (27.22) explains that a large expedition carried with it a “military altar” (junshe 軍社), attended by invocators. 44 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.946), a shi 師 (“division”) comprised 2,500 soldiers; a lü 旅 (“battalion”), 500.

1746

Zuo Tradition

Jin alienates its allies with a selfish and ostentatious deed at the meeting. Invocator Tuo of Wei defends his domain’s ritual prerogatives in a dazzling speech on historical precedents that contains much information on early Western Zhou history, including the founding of Lu, Wei, and Jin. The men of Jin asked to borrow feathers from Zheng, and the men of Zheng gave them some. The next day, someone attended the meeting with the feathers attached to his banner.40 With this, Jin lost the allegiance of the princes. As they were preparing to meet, Zihang Jingzi of Wei spoke to Lord Ling, saying,41 “Meeting as equals is difficult, for when there are disputes and differing claims, no one exerts control over them. Let us appoint Invocator Tuo to accompany us.”42 The lord agreed, so they appointed Invocator Tuoa. Invocator Tuoa declined, however, saying, “I am already stretched thin trying to fulfill the duties I inherited, yet I still fear lest I should fall short and create a nuisance for those who enforce the penal code. Should I proceed to hold two offices concurrently, I would be inviting grave incrimination. What is more, an invocator is the permanent servant of the domain’s altars. The rules for officials stipulate that an invocator does not cross the border if the domain’s altars do not move. When the ruler travels with the army, he performs a purification sacrifice at the altar of earth, and he anoints the drums with blood; the invocators accompany him to attend to their duties,43 and in this way the group crosses the borders. In affairs of good cheer, if the ruler goes, a division accompanies him, and if a high minister goes, a battalion accompanies him.44 We invocators have no business there.” The lord told him to go.

4.1b

When they reached Gaoyou, they were going to give Cai precedence over Wei. The Prince of Wei had Invocator Tuo approach Chang Hong privately and say, “One never knows if what one hears on the road is accurate. If I heard that Cai is to precede Wei, would that be accurate?” Chang Hong said, “It would. The royal younger brother Cai was the elder brother of the royal younger brother Kang. Is it not permissible that Cai should come before Wei?” Invocator Tuoa said,

4.1c

If one considers it in light of the former kings, then one gives priority to virtue. In the past, when King Wu overcame Shang, King Cheng consolidated it, selecting and installing notably virtuous men in order to make a bulwark around Zhou. Therefore, the Zhou Duke assisted the royal house as it governed all-under-heaven. Of all in Zhou he was closest to the king.

Lord Ding

1747

4.1d 分魯公以大路、大旂，夏后氏之璜，封父之繁弱，殷民六族，條

氏、徐氏、蕭氏、索氏、長勺氏、尾勺氏，使帥其宗氏，輯其 分族，將其類醜，以法則周公。用即命于周。是使之職事 于魯，以昭周公之明德。分之土田陪敦、祝、宗、卜、史，備 物、典策，官司、彝器；因商奄之民，命以伯禽而封於少皞 之虛。

分康叔以大路、少帛、綪茷、旃旌、大呂，殷民七族，陶氏、 施氏、繁氏、錡氏、樊氏、饑氏、終葵氏；封畛土略，自武 父以南及圃田之北竟，取於有閻之土以共王職；取於相土 之東都以會王之東蒐。聃季授土，陶叔授民，命以《康 誥》而封於殷虛。皆啟以商政，疆以周索。 分唐叔以大路、密須之鼓、闕鞏、沽洗，懷姓九宗，職 官五正。命以《唐誥》而封於夏虛，啟以夏政，疆以戎索。

4.1e

45

The Lord of Lu was Boqin, son of the Zhou Duke Dan and the founding ruler of Lu. According to Yang (4:1536), the grand chariot was a chariot with bronze fittings and the grand banner was a flag decorated with intertwined dragons, to be displayed upon the grand chariot. The jade half disk—actually one-half of a perforated disk— had belonged to the rulers of Xia. Fanruo is mentioned at Xunzi 23.558 as the name of a bow, and Fengfu is mentioned as the name of a domain in a note by Zheng Xuan on Liji 14.582. Little is known about the six lineages of the Yin or Shang, but the Suo may have been rope makers, and the Changshao and Weishao may have been makers of wine vessels. 46 Yang (4:1536) equates peidun 陪敦 with fuyong 附庸 (“dependents”). 47 According to Kuodizhi (cited in Yang, 4:1537), Shangyan 商奄 was in the vicinity of the Lu capital Qufu. Gu Yanwu (cited in Yang, 4:1537) argued that the “Boqin,” no longer extant, was an investiture address like the Kang Proclamation in Shangshu 14.200–206. Du Yu (ZZ 54.948) places the Mound of Shaohao within the city walls of Qufu. 48 Kang Shu was the founding ruler of Wei. Takezoe (27.24–25) and Yang (4:1537) both equate shaobo 少帛 with xiaobo 小白, the name of a flag. The Tao may have been potters; the Shi, flag makers; the Po, bridle makers; the Qi, knife or pot makers; the Fan, fence makers; the Zhongkui, awl makers. Nothing is known of the employment of the Ji lineage. 49 The location of Wufu 武父 is unknown. Putian 圃田 was about 20 kilometers southsoutheast of present-day Zhengzhou 鄭州, Henan, in territory that would later belong to Zheng. 50 Youyan 有閻 was a settlement near the Eastern Zhou capital. Xiangtu was a Shang royal ancestor (see Xiang 9.1b); his “eastern city” was either near present-day Shangqiu 商丘, Henan (site of the later Song capital), or near Puyang 濮陽, Henan, about 160 kilometers to the northwest. The “eastern musters” or “winter hunts” were the king’s sacrificial visits to Mount Tai in present-day Shandong. 51 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.948), Nan Ji was supervisor of works and a younger brother of the Zhou Duke, while Tao Shu was supervisor of conscripts, possibly the same man as Cao Shu Zhenduo, founding ruler of the domain of Cao. 52 The Mound of Yin was the site of the Yin city at Zhaoge 朝歌, thought to be in Qi County 淇縣 in present-day Henan, about 190 kilometers northeast of Luoyang.

1748

Zuo Tradition

53 54

55 56

To the Lord of Lu was allotted a grand chariot, a grand banner, the jade half disk of the Xia ruling line, the Fanruo bow of Fengfu, and six houses of Yin people, the Tiao, Xu, Xiao, Suo, Changshao, and Weishao lineages. These six houses were made to lead those who shared their ancestral lineages, to gather together their collateral houses, and to guide their many dependents in following the Zhou Duke’s models.45 With that, the Lord of Lu assumed his command from the Zhou ruling house, and in this way he was appointed to take up his duties in Lu, in order to display the notable virtue of the Zhou Duke. To him were allotted lands and fields and dependents,46 invocators, ancestral attendants, diviners, scribes, regalia, statutory documents, officials, and sacrificial vessels. Taking over the people of Shangyan, our lord was given his command in the Boqin and enfeoffed at the Mound of Shaohao.47

4.1d

To Kang Shu was allotted a grand chariot, a Shaobo flag, a bright red flag, pennants plain and decorated with feathers, a Dalü bell, and seven houses of Yin people, the Tao, Shi, Po, Qi, Fan, Ji, and Zhongkui lineages.48 Borders were set for his territory, stretching from Wufu in the south as far as the northern frontier of Putian.49 Some of the lands of Youyan were set aside for sharing royal duties, and the eastern city at Xiangtu was set aside for joining in the king’s eastern musters.50 Nan Ji bestowed the lands, and Tao Shu bestowed the people upon him.51 He was given his command in the Kang Proclamation and enfeoffed at the Mound of Yin.52 Both Boqin and Kang Shu led their people by means of Shang regulations and surveyed the land in accord with Zhou models.53 To Tang Shu was allotted a grand chariot, a Mixu drum, Quegong armor, a Guxi bell, nine ancestral lines of the Huai clan, and five regulators for overseeing official duties.54 He was given his command in the Tang Proclamation and enfeoffed at the Mound of Xia.55 He led his people by means of Xia regulations and surveyed the land in accord with Rong models.56

4.1e

The Zhou interest in surveying is apparent in such odes as Maoshi 210, “Xin nanshan” 信南山, 13B.459–62, and 250, “Gong liu” 公劉, 17C.616–22. Tang Shu was the founding ruler of Jin. For Mixu and Quegong, see Zhao 15.7b. Like Dalü, Guxi is a bell, named for its pitch. Yang (4:1539) cites a parallel at Yin 6.2 that suggests that wuzheng 五正 (here “five regulators”) was a single officer’s title. We follow Takezoe, 27.26. According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.949), the Mound of Xia was near present-day Taiyuan 太原, Shanxi. Yang (4:1539–40) cites evidence suggesting that among the people of the domain of Jin, certain Xia practices, such as calendrical calculations, were retained into the Spring and Autumn period, as was the system of roads and paths dictated by the Rong people’s seminomadic ways.

Lord Ding

1749

4.1f 三者皆叔也，而有令德，故昭之以分物。不然，文、武、成、康之

伯猶多，而不獲是分也，唯不尚年也。 管、蔡啟商，惎間王室，王於是乎殺管叔而蔡蔡叔，以 車七乘、徒七十人。其子蔡仲改行帥德，周公舉之，以為己卿 士，見諸王，而命之以蔡。其命書云：「王曰：胡！無若爾考 之違王命也！」若之何其使蔡先衛也？ 武王之母弟八人，周公為大宰，康叔為司寇，聃季為司 空，五叔無官，豈尚年哉？ 曹，文之昭也；晉，武之穆也。曹為伯甸，非尚年也。今 將尚之，是反先王也。晉文公為踐土之盟，衛成公不在，夷 叔，其母弟也，猶先蔡。其載書云：「王若曰：晉重、魯申、衛 武、蔡甲午、鄭捷、齊潘、宋王臣、莒期。」藏在周府，可覆 視也。吾子欲復文、武之略，而不正其德，將如之何？

57 58 59 60 61

1750

萇弘說，告劉子，與范獻子謀之，乃長衛侯於盟。

For the full account of the rebellion of Guan and Cai, see Shiji 35.1563–74. Hu is Cai Zhong’s given name. According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.949), the five other brothers were Guan Shu, Cai Shu, Cheng Shu, Huo Shu, and Mao Shu. The Suoyin commentary on Shiji 35.1565 lists Cao Shu in place of Mao Shu. Cao’s lands were farther from the royal center than Jin’s, and its ruler’s appointment was therefore of lower status. Precedence among domains was signified by the order in which they performed their part of the covenant ceremony. See Xiang 27.4 and Ai 17.6. The sequence Tuo gives below differs from the sequence for Jiantu, given in Annals, Xi 28.8, where Cai does in fact precede Wei. Lord Cheng of Wei had fled his domain in the face of Jin aggression during the battle of Chengpu, and his younger brother Shuwu had taken his place during the covenant ceremony at Jiantu; see Xi 28.3i.

Zuo Tradition

All three men—Boqin, Kang Shu, Tang Shu—were younger brothers to kings, who had exemplary virtue. All three were therefore made illustrious by means of the goods allotted to them. Had that not been so, then there were still many older sons of Kings Wen, Wu, Cheng, and Kang; yet those sons did not win such allotments, precisely because no priority was given to age. Guan and Cai led the Shang people in a plot to attack the royal house, and for this reason the king executed Guan Shu and exiled Cai Shu, giving the latter seven chariots and seventy troops.57 When Cai Shu’s son Cai Zhong changed his ways and followed the path of virtue, the Zhou Duke employed him as his own assistant minister. He then presented him to the king, who gave him command over Cai. The investiture document said, “The king said, ‘Hu!58 Do not, like your father, defy the king’s command!’” How could Cai be put before Wei? King Wu had eight younger brothers by the same mother. The Zhou Duke was grand steward. Kang Shu was supervisor of corrections. Nan Shu was supervisor of works. The five others had no official appointment.59 How could it be said that Zhou gave priority to age? The Cao founder was a son of King Wen, and the Jin founder was a son of King Wu. That Cao served as elder in the second-tier territories was because no priority was given to age.60 In now intending to give age priority, you are going against the former kings. When Lord Wen of Jin made the covenant at Jiantu, Lord Cheng of Wei was not present. Shuwub was his younger brother by the same mother, yet he still preceded Cai.61 The covenant document begins, “The king said, ‘Chong of Jin, Shen of Lu, Shuwuc of Wei, Jiawu of Cai, Jie of Zheng, Pan of Qi, Wangchen of Song, Qi of Ju.’”62 It is stored in the Zhou archive and can be consulted. If you, sir, wish to restore the way of Kings Wen and Wu, and yet you do not interpret their character correctly, then how will you accomplish your goal?

4.1f

Pleased, Chang Hong reported to the Liu Master. They discussed it with Fan Yangb and as a result gave the Prince of Wei precedence at the covenant.

62

Chong is an abbreviation of Chonger, the personal name of Duke Wen of Jin. Shen of Lu is Lord Xi of Lu. Wu of Wei is the Shuwu mentioned above, the younger brother of Lord Cheng of Wei. Jiawu of Cai is Lord Zhuang of Cai. Jie of Zheng is Lord Wen of Zheng. Pan of Qi is Lord Zhao of Qi. Wangchen of Song is Duke Cheng of Song. Qi of Ju is also known as the Zipi Lord 茲丕公 of Ju.

Lord Ding

1751

4.2 反自召陵，鄭子大叔未至而卒。晉趙簡子為之臨，甚哀，曰：「黃父之

會，夫子語我九言，曰：『無始亂，無怙富，無恃寵，無違同，無敖禮，無 驕能，無復怒，無謀非德，無犯非義。』」

4.3a (3, 11, 14)

沈人不會于召陵，晉人使蔡伐之。夏，蔡滅沈。秋，楚為沈故，圍蔡。伍 員為吳行人以謀楚。楚之殺郤宛也，伯氏之族出。伯州犁之孫嚭為吳大 宰以謀楚。楚自昭王即位，無歲不有吳師，蔡侯因之，以其子乾與其大 夫之子為質於吳。

4.3b 冬，蔡侯、吳子、唐侯伐楚。舍舟于淮汭，自豫章與楚夾漢。左司馬戌謂

子常曰：「子沿漢而與之上下，我悉方城外以毀其舟，還塞大隧、直轅、 冥阨。子濟漢而伐之，我自後擊之，必大敗之。」既謀而行。

63 64

See Zhao 25.3. See Zhao 27.3. According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.950), the Bo lineage were supporters of Xi Wan. 65 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.950), the Wu forces went up the Huai River and left their boats upstream of the Cai capital. 66 Proceeding toward the Chu capital at Ying from the Cai capital, Wu forces would have crossed through the region known as Yuzhang—stretching to the west of present-day Hefei, Anhui, for more than 100 kilometers—and reached the Han

1752

Zuo Tradition

Upon the death of You Ji of Zheng, Zhao Yang of Jin recalls some of his wisdom (see Zhao 30.2). On his return from Shaoling, You Jib of Zheng died before reaching home. Zhao Yanga of Jin lamented his passing with great sadness and said, “At the meeting at Huangfu,63 this fine man taught me nine sayings: ‘Do not be the first to act out of order. Do not presume upon your wealth. Do not rest on the favor you enjoy. Do not defy your colleagues. Do not act arrogantly in ritual. Do not gloat about your abilities. Do not repeat an affront. Do not plot anything that is not virtuous. Do not venture anything that is not right.’”

4.2

The events leading to the Wu sacking of the Chu capital at Ying originate in tensions with Cai (see Ding 3.4, 5.4). No Shěn leaders joined in the meeting at Shaoling, and the Jin leaders had Cai attack Shěn. In summer, Cai extinguished Shěn. In autumn, Chu, acting on Shěn’s behalf, laid siege to Cai. Wu Zixua, in his capacity as Wu’s envoy, plotted against Chu. When Chu executed Xi Wan, the whole Bo lineage had left the domain.64 Bo Zhouli’s grandson Pi, in his capacity as Wu grand steward, then plotted against Chu. From the time King Zhao came to power, there was no year in which Chu did not face a Wu army. The Prince of Cai, taking advantage of this enmity, made his son Gan and his high officers’ sons hostages in Wu.

4.3a(3, 11, 14)

In winter, the Prince of Cai, the Master of Wu, and the Prince of Tang attacked Chu. Leaving their boats at the bend in the Huai River,65 they proceeded from Yuzhang and faced Chu across the Han River.66 The supervisor of the left army, Xu, said to Nang Waa, “You go along the Han and stay with them upriver and down, while I muster all the troops outside Fangcheng to destroy their boats and then return to block Dasui, Zhiyuan, and Ming’e.67 You cross the Han to attack them and I will strike them from behind. We are certain to crush them.” The plan settled, they set out.

4.3b

67

River 40 or more kilometers northeast of Ying (see Zhao 6.9). The distance would have been approximately 450 kilometers. These names specify three passes about 280 kilometers northeast of Ying, south of the city of Xinyang 信陽, Henan, and perhaps to be identified with the present-day Jiuli 九里, Wusheng 武勝, and Pingjing 平靖 Passes, respectively.

Lord Ding

1753

武城黑謂子常曰：「吳用木也，我用革也，不可久也，不如速戰。」 史皇謂子常：「楚人惡子而好司馬。若司馬毀吳舟于淮，塞城口而入， 是獨克吳也。子必速戰！不然，不免。」乃濟漢而陳，自小別至于大別。 三戰，子常知不可，欲奔。史皇曰：「安，求其事；難而逃之，將何所入？ 子必死之，初罪必盡說。」 4.3c 十一月庚午，二師陳于柏舉。闔廬之弟夫槩王晨請於闔廬曰：「楚瓦不

仁，其臣莫有死志。先伐之，其卒必奔；而後大師繼之，必克。」弗許。夫 槩王曰：「所謂『臣義而行，不待命』者，其此之謂也。今日我死，楚可 入也。」以其屬五千先擊子常之卒。子常之卒奔，楚師亂，吳師大敗之。 子常奔鄭。史皇以其乘廣死。 吳從楚師，及清發，將擊之。夫槩王曰：「困獸猶鬬，況人乎？若知 不免而致死，必敗我。若使先濟者知免，後者慕之，蔑有鬬心矣。半濟 而後可擊也。」從之，又敗之。楚人為食，吳人及之，奔。食而從之，敗諸 雍澨。五戰，及郢。

68

According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.950), Wucheng Hei was the high officer in charge of the settlement of Wucheng, northeast of present-day Xinyang, Henan, and thus directly in the path of the Wu advance. Wucheng Hei would have seen the Wu chariots for himself. Chariot bodies constructed of leather would be less durable than wooden chariots in wet conditions. 69 The supervisor of the military is the governor of Shěn, Xu. The scribe Huang was a Chu high officer. 70 This refers to the three passes mentioned above. 71 These are mountain ranges between the Han and the Huai Rivers, northeast of present-day Wuhan, Hubei. 72 See Ding 3.4 for Nang Wa’s “earlier crimes.” 73 Fugai could properly be called “king” only after King Helu’s death. 74 Qingfa 清發 was the stretch of the present-day Yun 溳 River above the confluence with the Han River northwest of Wuhan. Fugai and Helu determine not to make Chu forces fight with their backs to the river but to let them instead begin crossing and then attack.

1754

Zuo Tradition

Wucheng Hei said to Nang Waa, “Wu uses wood for its chariots, while we use hides. We cannot wait long. It would be best to provoke an early battle.”68 The scribe Huang said to Nang Waa, “The Chu leaders detest you but are fond of the supervisor of the military.69 If the supervisor of the military should destroy the Wu boats by the Huai, block the Cheng­ kou passes,70 then enter, this will be tantamount to his having defeated Wu single-handedly. You must provoke an early battle, or otherwise, you will not escape disaster.” They therefore crossed the Han and drew up their formation, which reached from Xiaobie to Dabie.71 After three engage­ ments, Nang Waa knew that success was beyond his reach, so he wished to flee. The scribe Huang said, “In a time of ease you sought these duties. If, in the face of difficulties, you run away from them, then where will you go? You must die for it, and then your earlier crimes are sure to be forgiven.”72 In the eleventh month, on the gengwu day (18), the two armies formed their lines at Boju. King Helu’s younger brother King Fugai73 presented a request to King Helu in the morning: “Nang Wab of Chu is inhumane, and none of his subjects has the will to die fighting. If I attack him first, his troops are sure to flee, and if you then follow up with the larger army, we are sure to defeat him.” King Helu did not allow it. King Fugai said, “This is what we mean by the saying ‘A subject acts when it is right and does not wait for orders.’ If I die today, Chu can be overcome.” He went ahead and struck at Nang Waa’s troops with five thousand of his men. Nang Waa’s troops fled, the Chu army was thrown into confusion, and the Wu army defeated it soundly. Nang Waa fled to Zheng, while the scribe Huang died fighting in Nang Wa’s command chariot. Wu pursued the Chu army as far as Qingfa74 and there prepared to strike them, but King Fugai said, “Even a beast will fight when pressed: how much more so men?75 If they fight to the death, knowing there is no escape, then they are sure to defeat us. But if we allow the first to cross to get a taste of escape, so that the latecomers envy them, then no one will have the heart to fight. They can then be attacked only after half of them have crossed.” King Helu heeded his advice, and so Wu defeated Chu again. The men of Wu caught up with the men of Chu as they were preparing a meal, and they fled. Wu ate the abandoned meal and then pursued them, defeating them at Yongshi.76 After five engagements, they reached Ying.

4.3c

75 Lord Wen of Jin used the same idiom with regard to Chu in Xuan 12.5. 76 Yongshi 雍澨 was the region northeast across the Han River, about 70 kilometers northeast of the city of Ying.

Lord Ding

1755



4.3d

己卯，楚子取其妹季羋畀我以出，涉雎。鍼尹固與王同舟，王使執燧象 以奔吳師。庚辰，吳入郢，以班處宮。子山處令尹之宮，夫槩王欲攻之， 懼而去之，夫槩王入之。 左司馬戌及息而還，敗吳師于雍澨，傷。初，司馬臣闔廬，故恥 為禽焉，謂其臣曰：「誰能免吾首？」吳句卑曰：「臣賤，可乎？」司馬曰： 「我實失子，可哉！」三戰皆傷，曰：「吾不可用也已。」句卑布裳，剄而 裹之，藏其身，而以其首免。



4.3e

楚子涉雎，濟江，入于雲中。王寢，盜攻之，以戈擊王，王孫由于以背受 之，中肩。王奔鄖。鍾建負季羋以從。由于徐蘇而從。 鄖公辛之弟懷將弒王，曰：「平王殺吾父，我殺其子，不亦可乎？」 辛曰：「君討臣，誰敢讎之？君命，天也。若死天命，將誰讎？《詩》曰： 柔亦不茹， 剛亦不吐。 不侮矜寡， 不畏強禦。

77

This is the present-day Ju 沮 River, which lies to the north and west of the site of Ying. 78 The title is elsewhere written zhenyin 箴尹; see especially Ai 16.5, where the officeholder may be this same Gu. Use of the word zhen 箴 in Xiang 14.6 and elsewhere suggests that this official’s duties included remonstrating. 79 According to Du Yu (ZZ 54.951), the elephants had torches tied to their tails. 80 Zishan was a son of the Wu king. 81 Xi 息 was near present-day Xi County, Henan, on the north bank of the Huai River and about 190 kilometers west of the Cai capital. Xu had been sent to destroy the Wu boats, left along the Huai upstream of Cai; see Ding 4.3b. 82 Although Goubei hails from Wu, he has followed the governor of Shěn, Xu, in his service in Chu. 83 The Yunmeng 雲夢 Marshes lay in the 100 kilometers to the east of Ying, to the north of the Yangzi River. The king has thus circled back after initially proceeding west from the capital and crossing the Ju River. 84 Yun 鄖 was near Jingshan 京山 and Anlu 安陸 in present-day Hubei, about 180 kilometers northeast of Ying. 85 Zhong Jian was a Chu high officer. 86 Their father was Dou Chengran, killed by King Ping at Zhao 14.5. 87 See Maoshi 260, “Zheng min” 烝民, 18C.674–77. Cf. Wen 10.5 above.

1756

Zuo Tradition

As Wu forces enter Ying, King Zhao of Chu flees. On the jimao day (27), the Master of Chu departed, taking his younger sister, the royal younger sister Mi Biwo, with him. They crossed the Ju River.77 The deputy for remonstrance,78 Wei Gua, happened to share a boat with the king. The king ordered him to lead elephants bearing fire in a charge against the Wu army.79 On the gengchen day (28), the Wu forces entered Ying and took up quarters in the palaces according to their ranks. Zishan initially lodged in the chief minister’s palace, but King Fugai was eager to attack him;80 when Zishan became fearful and abandoned the palace, King Fugai moved into it. The supervisor of the left army, Xu, went as far as Xi before turning back. Then he was wounded while defeating the Wu army at Yongshi.81 Earlier, the supervisor of the military had served King Helu as subject, and he therefore considered it a disgrace to be captured by him. He said to his subjects, “Who can keep my head from them?” Goubei of Wu said, “I am a lowly man, but might I be permitted to do so?”82 The supervisor of the military said, “It was I who failed to recognize you: so it is indeed permitted!” After receiving wounds during each of three clashes, Xu said, “I am no longer of any use.” Spreading out his skirt, Goubei cut off the supervisor’s head and wrapped it, hiding his body, and in this way kept Xu’s head from the enemy.

4.3d

Loyalty prevails as Dou Xin prevents his brother from killing King Zhao, who is saved by being taken to Sui. Having crossed the Ju River, the Master of Chu then crossed the Yangzi and went into the Yunmeng Marshes.83 Raiders attacked the king as he rested, striking at him with a dagger-axe, but Wangsun Youyu took the blow while turning his back and was hit in the shoulder. The king then fled to Yun.84 Zhong Jian followed, carrying the royal younger sister Mi on his back,85 and Wangsun Youyua followed too after a slow recovery. Huai, the younger brother of Dou Xina, the Lord of Yun, was going to kill the king of Chu. He said, “King Ping killed our father.86 Is it not permissible for us to kill his son?” Dou Xina replied, “When a ruler punishes his subject, who can presume to take revenge for it? The ruler’s command is like that of Heaven. If a man dies by Heaven’s command, then on whom should one take revenge? As it says in the Odes,

4.3e

Though it was soft, he did not eat it; Though it was hard, he did not spit it out. He did not lord it over widowers and orphans, Nor did he fear the powerful and domineering.87

Lord Ding

1757

唯仁者能之。違彊陵弱，非勇也；乘人之約，非仁也；滅宗廢祀，非孝 也；動無令名，非知也。必犯是，余將殺女。」 鬬辛與其弟巢以王奔隨。吳人從之，謂隨人曰：「周之子孫在漢川 者，楚實盡之。天誘其衷，致罰於楚，而君又竄之，周室何罪？君若顧報 周室，施及寡人，以獎天衷，君之惠也。漢陽之田，君實有之。」 楚子在公宮之北，吳人在其南。子期似王，逃王，而己為王，曰：「以 我與之，王必免。」隨人卜與之，不吉，乃辭吳曰：「以隨之辟小，而密邇 於楚，楚實存之。世有盟誓，至于今未改。若難而棄之，何以事君？執事 之患不唯一人，若鳩楚竟，敢不聽命？」吳人乃退。 鑢金初宦於子期氏，實與隨人要言。王使見，辭，曰：「不敢以約 為利。」王割子期之心以與隨人盟。

1758

Zuo Tradition

It is only the humane who are capable of this. To shy away from a powerful one and then to abuse a weak one would not be brave; to take advantage of a man’s straitened circumstances would not be humane; to destroy his ancestral line and abandon our sacrifices would not be filial;88 to have no good repute for our actions would not be wise. I will kill you if you insist on committing these violations.”89 Dou Xin and his younger brother Chao fled to Sui, taking the king of Chu with them.90 The men of Wu pursued them and said to the people of Sui, “It is Chu in fact that took every last one of the Zhou descendants located along the Han River. Heaven’s sentiments have been swayed by this, so it has inflicted a punishment on Chu. Yet you, lord, give him refuge. What crime has the Zhou house committed? If you think to avenge the Zhou house, and assist me in bringing Heaven’s sentiments to fruition, that would be an act of generosity. The lands to the north of the Han River would then be yours.” The Master of Chu was north of the Sui Lord’s palace, the men of Wu to the south. Gongzi Jiea, who resembled the king, made his way to him in secret and himself offered to play the role of king, saying, “If you hand me over to them, then the king is sure to escape.”91 Meanwhile, the people of Sui divined about handing the king over to Wu, but it was not auspicious, so they declined Wu’s offer, saying, “Because Sui is small and remote, yet close to Chu, it has in fact been Chu that has preserved us. For generations we have made covenants and pledges to Chu, which to this day have not been altered. If in a time of difficulty we should abandon them, then how should we serve you, my lord? The concern of your men in charge should not merely be for this one man. If you bring peace within the borders of Chu, will we presume not to heed your commands?” The men of Wu therefore retreated. Lü Jin had earlier been in service in the household of Gongzi Jiea, and it was in fact he who secured the agreement with the people of Sui. The king summoned him for an audience, but he declined, saying, “I would not presume to gain an advantage by making an agreement.” The king cut Gongzi Jiea’s breast to make a covenant with the people of Sui.

We follow Takezoe, 27.38. Alternatively, “to destroy our ancestral line and abandon our sacrifices.” 89 Dou Xin’s attitude serves as a foil for that of Wu Zixu, who has urged the Wu attack on Chu in an effort to avenge the murder of his father and brother. See Zhao 20.2b and 30.4, and compare Guoyu, “Chu yu 2,” 18.577. 90 Sui 睢 was about 60 kilometers north of Yun, upstream along the Yun River, now called the Zha 溠 River. 91 Similar cases of a subject’s standing in for a threatened ruler are to be found at Zhuang 8.3 and Cheng 2.3d. 88

Lord Ding

1759



4.3f

初，伍員與申包胥友。其亡也，謂申包胥曰：「我必復楚國。」申包胥曰： 「勉之！子能復之，我必能興之。」及昭王在隨，申包胥如秦乞師，曰：「吳 為封豕、長蛇，以荐食上國，虐始於楚。寡君失守社稷，越在草莽，使下 臣告急，曰：『夷德無厭，若鄰於君，疆埸之患也。逮吳之未定，君其取 分焉。若楚之遂亡，君之土也。若以君靈撫之，世以事君。』」秦伯使辭 焉，曰：「寡人聞命矣。子姑就館，將圖而告。」對曰：「寡君越在草莽， 未獲所伏，下臣何敢即安？」立，依於庭牆而哭，日夜不絕聲，勺飲不入 口七日。秦哀公為之賦〈無衣〉。九頓首而坐。秦師乃出。

春秋 5.1 五年春三月辛亥朔，日有食之。 5.2(2) 夏，歸粟于蔡。 5.3(3) 於越入吳。 5.4(4) 六月丙申，季孫意如卒。

92 93

94

1760

According to Takezoe (27.40) and others, fu 復 is a loan for fu 覆 (“topple”). Maoshi 133, “Wuyi” 無衣, 6B.225–26. The first stanza reads: “How could you say that you are naked? / With you we share our robes. / The king goes to raise his army; / he restores our dagger-axes and spears. / With you we share an enemy.” This is the last instance of Odes recitation in Zuozhuan. This eclipse took place on 16 February 505 Bce.

Zuo Tradition

Wu Zixu’s old friend Shen Baoxu saves Chu by securing help from Qin. Earlier, Wu Zixua and Shen Baoxu had been friends. When Wu Zixu went into exile, he said to Shen Baoxu, “I am bound and determined to topple the domain of Chu.”92 Shen Baoxu said, “Do your best! If you are able to topple it, then I am bound to find a way to right it.” When King Zhao was in Sui, Shen Baoxu went to Qin to plead for troops, saying, “Wu has become a huge boar or a long serpent that will swallow the domains above it. Chu is the first victim of its cruelty. My ruler, having failed to defend the altars of the domain, is now cast out upon the moors. He has sent his lowly servant to report this emergency and to say this: ‘The disposition of the Yi barbarians is insatiable. Should they become your neighbors, my lord, then they will be a threat on your borders. So long as Wu has not yet firmly established its rule in Chu, you, my lord, should take a part of it. If Chu should then fall, it will come to be your territory. But if by your numinous power Chu should be preserved, then it will serve you for generations.’” The Liege of Qin sent someone to decline, saying, “I have heard your request. For now, sir, take to your quarters. I will report to you after I have made my plans.” He replied, “With my ruler cast out upon the moors, and having not yet found shelter, how should I, a lowly subject, presume to take my ease?” He stood leaning against the wall of the audience hall wailing. Day and night he wailed without ceasing, and for seven days not a dipperful of water passed his lips. When Lord Ai of Qin recited “Naked”93 for him, he prostrated himself nine times and sat down. The Qin army then set out.

4.3f

LORD DING 5 (505 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, in the third month, on the xinhai day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.94

5.1

In summer, we presented grain to Cai.

5.2(2)

Yue entered Wu.

5.3(3)

In the sixth month, on the bingshen day (17), Jisun Yiru (Ji Pingzi) died.

5.4(4)

95

95

Here and in Annals, Ding 14.4, and Annals, Ai 13.5, Yue is referred to as Wuyue 於 越. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.958), wu 於 is a meaningless preliminary word. However, we know that the language spoken in Yue was quite different from that of the central domains, perhaps even belonging to the Austronesian languages family (see Norman, Chinese, 8). It is likely this initial yu/wu 於 captures an early Austronesian pronunciation of the domain name.

Lord Ding

1761

5.5 秋，七月壬子，叔孫不敢卒。 5.6(8) 冬，晉士鞅帥師圍鮮虞。

左轉 5.1 五年春，王人殺子朝于楚。 5.2(2) 夏，歸粟于蔡，以周亟，矜無資。 5.3(3) 越入吳，吳在楚也。 5.4(4) 六月，季平子行東野。還，未至，丙申，卒于房。陽虎將以璵璠斂，仲梁

懷弗與，曰：「改步改玉。」陽虎欲逐之，告公山不狃。不狃曰：「彼為君 也，子何怨焉？」 既葬，桓子行東野，及費。子洩為費宰，逆勞於郊，桓子敬之。勞 仲梁懷，仲梁懷弗敬。子洩怒，謂陽虎：「子行之乎！」 5.5a 申包胥以秦師至。秦子蒲、子虎帥車五百乘以救楚。子蒲曰：「吾未知

吳道。」使楚人先與吳人戰，而自稷會之，大敗夫槩王于沂。吳人獲薳 射於柏舉，其子帥奔徒以從子西，敗吳師于軍祥。

96 As Du Yu (ZZ 55.958) notes, the death fulfills a prediction made by Min Mafu; see Zhao 22.5b. 97 Cai was still feeling the effects of having been besieged by Chu in Ding 4.3a. 98 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.958), Dongye 東野 was a Ji lineage settlement near Bi 費. According to Yu Yue (cited in Yang, 4:1550), Ji Pingzi visited not Dongye but the “eastern countryside.” 99 Yang (4:1550) notes that Fang 房 here is equivalent to Fang 防, the name of at least three Spring and Autumn period settlements. In Yang’s view, this Fang is probably the one mentioned at Xi 14.2, just east of the Lu capital. 100 According to Shuowen (cited in Yang, 4:1550), the Yufan jade was a precious Lu jade ornament. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.958), it was worn by the Lu Lord. 101 Zhongliang Huai, like Yang Hu, is a Jisun household retainer. By “gait” is meant the manner of walking appropriate to one’s rank. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.958), Jisun had used the lord’s gait and the Yufan jade when he acted as regent during Lord Zhao’s exile, but after the accession of Lord Ding, he had given up both. Words similar to the ones here attributed to Zhongliang Huai are cited at Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 2.54, as an aphorism. 102 Gongshan Buniu urges Yang Hu to follow through on his earlier plan to expel Zhongliang Huai. See Ding 5.6. 103 Ji 稷 was near present-day Tongbo 桐柏, Henan. Yi 沂 was near present-day Zhengyang 正陽, Henan. Both were about 225 kilometers north of present-day Wuhan. 104 Junxiang 軍祥 was likely to the southwest of present-day Sui County 隨縣, about 75 kilometers south of Ji.

1762

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renzi day (4), Shusun Bugan died. In winter, Shi Yang (Fan Yang) of Jin led out troops and laid siege to the Xianyu.

5.5

5.6(8)

ZUO

Wangzi Zhao (see Zhao 26.9, Ding 6.5) dies. In the fifth year, in spring, the king’s men killed Wangzi Zhaoa in Chu.96

5.1

In summer, we presented grain to Cai in order to help them through their crisis and out of pity for their lack of provisions.97

5.2(2)

That Yue entered Wu was because Wu forces were in Chu.

5.3(3)

Ji Pingzi, for years the most powerful man in Lu (see Ding 1.3, 1.5), dies. Yang Hu begins to consolidate his power. In the sixth month, Ji Pingzi made a tour of Dongye.98 On his return, before he had reached home, on the bingshen day (17), he died at Fang.99 Yang Hu intended to adorn the corpse with the Yufan jade,100 but Zhongliang Huai would not give it to him and said, “With a change in gait, a change in jade.”101 Yang Hu wanted to expel him and told Gongshan Buniu. Gongshan Buniua said, “He is acting on behalf of the ruler. How can you bear a grudge against him for it?” After Ji Pingzi had been buried, Ji Huanzib made a tour of Dongye and reached Bi. Gongshan Buniub, who was steward at Bi, came out to honor his exertions in the outskirts of the city, and Ji Huanzib treated him with respect. Gongshan Buniu also honored the exertions of Zhongliang Huai, but Zhongliang Huai did not treat him with respect. Enraged, Gongshan Buniub said to Yang Hu, “Go ahead with your plan.”102

5.4(4)

Wu forces are driven back in Chu, with the help of a Qin army (see Ding 4.3, 5.7). Shen Baoxu arrived with the Qin army. Zipu and Zihu of Qin led five hundred chariots to reinforce Chu. Zipu said, “We do not yet know Wu’s methods.” He had the men of Chu do battle first with the men of Wu, then joined up with them from Ji and crushed King Fugai at Yi.103 When the men of Wu captured Wei She at Boju, his son led the scattered soldiers to serve under Gongzi Shena of Chu, and they defeated a Wu army at Junxiang.104

5.5a

Lord Ding

1763

5.5b 秋七月，子期、子蒲滅唐。九月，夫槩王歸，自立也，以與王戰，而敗，奔

楚，為棠谿氏。 吳師敗楚師于雍澨。秦師又敗吳師。吳師居麇，子期將焚之，子 西曰：「父兄親暴骨焉，不能收，又焚之，不可。」子期曰：「國亡矣，死者 若有知也，可以歆舊祀，豈憚焚之？」焚之，而又戰，吳師敗，又戰于公壻 之谿。吳師大敗，吳子乃歸。囚闉輿罷。闉輿罷請先，遂逃歸。 葉公諸梁之弟后臧從其母於吳，不待而歸。葉公終不正視。 5.6 乙亥，陽虎囚季桓子及公父文伯，而逐仲梁懷。冬十月丁亥，殺公何藐。

己丑，盟桓子于稷門之內，庚寅，大詛。逐公父歜及秦遄，皆奔齊。 5.7a 楚子入于郢。初，鬬辛聞吳人之爭宮也，曰：「吾聞之：『不讓，則不和；

不和，不可以遠征。』吳爭於楚，必有亂；有亂，則必歸，焉能定楚？」

105 For Tang’s troubles with Chu, see Ding 3.4 and 4.3b. 106 Tangxi 棠谿 was in present-day Suiping 遂平, Henan. 107 Jun 麇 must have been near Yongshi and located in present-day Jingshan County 京山縣, Hubei. 108 That is, earlier generations of Chu men had fought to win the settlement of Jun. 109 We follow Yang (4:1552) in reading he 何 for ke 可. 110 The location of this ravine is unknown. 111 Yin Yupi is a Chu high officer. 112 The She Lord Zhuliang, son of the Shěn governor Xu, makes an appearance in Analects 7.19, where he asks one of Confucius’ disciples about the master’s character. Zhu­liang’s mother had been captured by invading Wu forces and was being held in Wu. 113 Ji Huanzi is the head of the Jisun lineage; Gongfu Chu is his cousin, a son of Gongfu Jing, who is the younger brother of Ji Huanzi’s father, Ji Pingzi.

1764

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, Gongzi Jiea of Chu and Zipu of Qin extinguished Tang.105 In the ninth month, when King Fugai returned home, it was to set himself up as king. As king, he then made war on the Wu king but was defeated and fled to Chu, where his line would become the Tangxi lineage.106 The Wu army defeated the Chu army at Yongshi. The Qin army defeated the Wu army for the second time. The Wu army was holding Jun,107 and Gongzi Jiea was going to set fire to the town, but Gongzi Shena said, “Our fathers and elder brothers allowed their own bones to be bleached there.108 Not to be able to retrieve them, and even to burn the town, cannot be allowed.” Gongzi Jiea said, “The domain has fallen. If the dead are conscious, then how can they enjoy the old sacrificial offerings?109 Why should we fear burning the place?” They burned it, then fought again, and the Wu army was defeated. When they fought again at the Gongxu ravine,110 the Wu army was roundly defeated, and the Master of Wu thereupon returned home, holding Yin Yupi prisoner.111 Yin Yupi asked permission to go ahead of the army, then escaped and went home to Chu. Houzang, the younger brother of the She Lord Zhuliang, had accompanied his mother to Wu but returned home to Chu without waiting for her. The She Lord never again looked him in the eye.112

5.5b

Yang Hu drives his enemies out of Lu (see Ding 5.4, 6.2). On the yihai day (28), Yang Hu imprisoned Ji Huanzi and Gongfu Chua and expelled Zhongliang Huai.113 In winter, in the tenth month, on the dinghai day (10), he executed Gonghe Miao.114 On the jichou day (12), he made a covenant with Ji Huanzib inside the Ji Gate.115 On the gengyin day (13), they swore a great oath of imprecation. They expelled Gongfu Chu and Qin Chuan, both of whom fled to Qi.116

5.6

The Chu king returns to his capital, distributes rewards, and restores order (see Ding 6.4). The Master of Chu entered Ying. Previously, when Dou Xin heard that the Wu leaders were fighting over the palaces, he had said, “I have heard: ‘Without yielding, there is no harmony. Without harmony, one cannot launch a distant expedition.’ If Wu is fighting in Chu, there is sure to be dissension, and if there is dissension, then they are sure to go home. How will they be able to consolidate their rule in Chu?”

5.7a

114 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.959), Gonghe Miao is a member of the extended Jisun house. 115 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.959), this is the south gate in the wall of the Lu capital. 116 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.959), Qin Chuan is a son-in-law of Ji Pingzi.

Lord Ding

1765

王之奔隨也，將涉於成臼。藍尹亹涉其帑，不與王舟。及寧，王欲 殺之。子西曰：「子常唯思舊怨以敗，君何效焉？」王曰：「善。使復其 所，吾以志前惡。」 王賞鬬辛、王孫由于、王孫圉、鍾建、鬬巢、申包胥、王孫賈、宋 木、鬬懷。子西曰：「請舍懷也。」王曰：「大德滅小怨，道也。」申包胥 曰：「吾為君也，非為身也。君既定矣，又何求？且吾尤子旗，其又為諸？」 遂逃賞。 王將嫁季羋，季羋辭曰：「所以為女子，遠丈夫也。鍾建負我矣。」 以妻鍾建，以為樂尹。 5.7b 王之在隨也，子西為王輿服以保路，國于脾洩。聞王所在，而後從王。

王使由于城麇，復命。子西問高厚焉，弗知。子西曰：「不能，如 辭。城不知高厚，小大何知？」對曰：「固辭不能，子使余也。人各有能有 不能。王遇盜於雲中，余受其戈，其所猶在。」袒而示之背，曰：「此余所 能也。脾洩之事，余亦弗能也。」

5.8(6)

晉士鞅圍鮮虞，報觀虎之敗也。

117 Yang (4:1553) believes that the king crossed the Jiu River. Takezoe (27.45) argues that the presence of the word yu 於 indicates that the crossing took place at a specific point, which he identifies as the Chengjiu Ford. 118 Yang (4:1553) suggests, by underlining lan 藍, that the word is the name of a place: “The Lan deputy Wei.” But no place named Lan is attested in Zuozhuan, and this lanyin 藍尹 may be equivalent to the jianyin 監尹, “supervising deputy,” mentioned by Du Yu (ZZ 57.1000) in his note on the duties of the “commissioned high officer Shi Mie” at Ai 4.2. 119 See Zhao 3.4 and 4.3. 120 In the Guoyu version of this episode (“Chu yu 2,” 18.575–76), Wei is given an opportunity to explain himself. 121 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.959), all nine men had served the king well during the Wu invasion. 122 For his plot to kill the king, see Ding 4.3. For the king’s pardon, see Guoyu, “Chu yu 2,” 18.578. 123 See Zhao 14.5. 124 See Ding 4.3e. 125 Pixie 脾洩 was perhaps near the Chu capital in present-day Jiangling 江陵, Hubei. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.959), Gongzi Shen was keeping the domain together by pretending to be the king.

1766

Zuo Tradition

When the king was fleeing to Sui and was about to make a crossing at the Chengjiu Ford,117 the supervising deputy Wei was ferrying his family across, so he would not give the king his boat.118 When peace came, the king wanted to put him to death. Gongzi Shena said, “It was precisely because he dwelt on old grudges that Nang Waa was brought down.119 Why do you, my lord, imitate him?” The king said, “Excellent. Have Wei restored to his position, and by this I will mark the failures of the past.”120 The king rewarded Dou Xin, Wangsun Youyu, Wangsun Yu, Zhong Jian, Dou Chao, Shen Baoxu, Wangsun Jia, Song Mu, and Dou Huai.121 Gongzi Shena said, “I request that Dou Huaia be excluded.”122 The king said, “Great generosity cancels a small grudge. That is the Way.” Shen Baoxu said, “I acted for you, my lord, not for myself. Now that you are settled, what more could I ask for? In addition, I blamed Dou Cheng­ ranb, so why should I now do what he did?”123 He therefore shunned the reward. The king was going to give the royal younger sister Mi away in marriage, but she declined: “A woman must keep men at a distance. Yet Zhong Jian once carried me on his back.”124 The king married her to Zhong Jian and appointed him deputy for entertainments. Wangsun Youyu and Gongzi Shen compare the services they performed for the king during the invasion. While the king was in Sui, Gongzi Shena made use of the royal carriage and regalia to secure the roads and to make Pixie the capital.125 Only after he had heard the king’s whereabouts did he go to join him. The king appointed Wangsun Youyua to fortify Jun. When he reported the discharge of his mission, Gongzi Shena asked him about the height and thickness of the walls, but he did not know. Gongzi Shena said, “If you were not competent, it would have been better to decline.126 If you do not know the height and thickness of the walls, how can you know their size?” He replied, “I did my best to decline, admitting that I was not competent, yet you appointed me. Every man has things he is able to do well and things he is not able to do. When the king fell in among raiders at Yunzhong, I took a blow from a dagger-axe.127 The scar is still there.” He opened his robe, showed him his back, and said, “This is what I was able to do. As for the business at Pixie, however, that is something I would not have been able to do.”128

5.7b

That Fan Yanga of Jin laid siege to the Xianyu was in revenge for the defeat of Guan Hu.129

5.8(6)

126 We follow Takezoe, 27.47. 127 See Ding 4.3e. Yunzhong is the Yunmeng Marshes. 128 According to Takezoe (27.47), Wangsun Youyu’s remark is in no way meant as an insult. Each man has served the king well according to his own abilities. 129 See Ding 3.2.

Lord Ding

1767

春秋 6.1(1) 六年春王正月癸亥，鄭游速帥師滅許，以許男斯歸。 6.2(2) 二月，公侵鄭。 6.3 公至自侵鄭。 6.4(3) 夏，季孫斯、仲孫何忌如晉。 6.5(6) 秋，晉人執宋行人樂祁犁。 6.6 冬，城中城。 6.7 季孫斯、仲孫忌帥師圍鄆。

左傳 6.1(1) 六年春，鄭滅許，因楚敗也。 6.2(2) 二月，公侵鄭，取匡，為晉討鄭之伐胥靡也。往不假道於衛；及還，陽虎

使季、孟自南門入，出自東門，舍於豚澤。衛侯怒，使彌子瑕追之。

1768

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 6 (504 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the guihai day (18), You Su of Zheng led out troops and extinguished Xǔ, taking Si, the Head of Xǔ, home with him.

6.1(1)

In the second month, our lord invaded Zheng.

6.2(2)

Our lord arrived from the invasion of Zheng.

6.3

In summer, Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) went to Jin.

6.4(3)

In autumn, Jin leaders arrested the Song envoy Yue Qili.

6.5(6)

In winter, we fortified the inner city.

6.6

Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) and Zhongsun Ji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and laid siege to Yun.130

6.7

ZUO

In the sixth year, in spring, Zheng extinguished Xǔ; they were taking advantage of Chu’s defeat.131

6.1(1)

As Lu attacks Zheng on Jin’s behalf, Yang Hu humiliates the domain of Wei. A Wei elder predicts trouble for Yang Hu. In the second month, our lord invaded Zheng and took Kuang;132 acting on Jin’s behalf, he was punishing Zheng for its attack on Xumi.133 On their way there, they did not ask Wei’s permission to pass, and when returning, Yang Hu had Ji Huanzid and Meng Yizid enter through Wei’s southern gate, exit through its eastern gate, then set up camp at the Tun Marsh.134 Infuriated, the Prince of Wei sent Mi Zixia to pursue them.135

6.2(2)

130 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.960), Yun had shifted its allegiance to Qi. 131 Zheng has warred with Xǔ since the beginning of the Spring and Autumn period; see Yin 11.3 and, e.g., Zhao 9.2 and 18.7. 132 Kuang 匡 was located in present-day Changyuan County 長垣縣, Henan, about 215 kilometers west-southwest of the Lu capital and about 120 kilometers northeast of the Zheng capital. 133 Xumi was located in present-day Yanshi 偃師, Henan, about 30 kilometers east of the Zhou capital. Zheng’s attack is mentioned only in retrospect; see Ding 6.5. 134 The Tun Marsh 豚澤 must have been located outside the east gate of the Wei capital. 135 Mi Zixia was a favored subject of Lord Ling of Wei. He appears as a typical villain in the anecdotes collected in such late Warring States and Western Han texts as Han Feizi, Lüshi chunqiu, Xinshu, Han shi waizhuan, Zhanguo ce, Shuoyuan, and Xinxu.

Lord Ding

1769

公叔文子老矣，輦而如公，曰：「尤人而效之，非禮也。昭公之難， 君將以文之舒鼎、成之昭兆、定之鞶鑑，苟可以納之，擇用一焉。公子 與二三臣之子，諸侯苟憂之，將以為之質。此群臣之所聞也。今將以小 忿蒙舊德，無乃不可乎？大姒之子，唯周公、康叔為相睦也，而效小人 以棄之，不亦誣乎？天將多陽虎之罪以斃之，君姑待之，若何？」乃止。 6.3(4) 夏，季桓子如晉，獻鄭俘也。陽虎強使孟懿子往報夫人之幣，晉人兼享

之。孟孫立于房外，謂范獻子曰：「陽虎若不能居魯，而息肩於晉，所不 以為中軍司馬者，有如先君！」獻子曰：「寡君有官，將使其人，鞅何知 焉？」 獻子謂簡子曰：「魯人患陽虎矣。孟孫知其釁，以為必適晉，故強 為之請，以取入焉。」 6.4 四月己丑，吳大子終纍敗楚舟師，獲潘子臣、小惟子及大夫七人。楚國

大惕，懼亡。子期又以陵師敗于繁揚。令尹子西喜曰：「乃今可為矣。」 於是乎遷郢於鄀，而改紀其政，以定楚國。

136 According to Yang (4:1556), the treasures listed here had belonged to Lords Wen, Cheng, and Ding of Wei and were pledged by Lord Ling of Wei to anyone who could restore Lord Zhao of Lu after he was effectively driven out of Lu by the Jisun lineage during the final years of his rule. On the “Shu cauldron,” Jia Kui (ZZ 55.960) notes only that this was the name of the cauldron. Takezoe (27.49) adds that it was likely named for the small domain of Shu 舒 and notes further that these Wei treasures date only as far back as Lord Wen, since before his time (Min 2.5) Wei was sacked by the Di. 137 The grand lady Si was queen to King Wen of Zhou. 138 We follow Takezoe, 27.50. We do not know when the Jin lady visited Lu. It was highly unusual for a separate deputation of high ministers to be sent in reciprocation of the visit of a lady, and as Du Yu (ZZ 55.960) observes, Yang Hu hoped by this move to curry favor with Jin. 139 Although this pledge is presented as a request that Yang Hu’s success at Kuang be honored, it also signifies Meng Yizi’s conviction that Yang Hu’s authoritarian ways will eventually bring about his expulsion from Lu. 140 Or Zichen of Pan, a Chu settlement. See Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 591. 141 Fanyang was about 20 kilometers north of the Cai capital at present-day Xincai, Henan (see Xiang 4.1). 142 Ruo 鄀 was located in present-day Yicheng County 宜城縣, Hubei, about 160 kilometers north of the former site of Ying near Jiangling, Hubei.

1770

Zuo Tradition

Gongshu Faa of Wei, already aged, had himself carried to the lord in a palanquin. He said, “To follow suit when someone else acts despicably does not accord with ritual. During Lord Zhao’s troubles, you, my lord, were prepared to take our Lord Wen’s Shu cauldron, Lord Cheng’s resplendent divinatory shell, and Lord Ding’s belt with its decorative mirror and to allow anyone who could restore the Lu Lord to choose one from among these for his own use.136 You were equally prepared to make your own sons, and the sons of your highest subjects, hostages to any of the princes who would make the Lu Lord’s worries his own. Of these things all your subjects have heard report. But if now you should obscure this old kindness because of a minor annoyance, is that not unacceptable? Of the sons of the grand lady Si, only the Zhou Duke and Kang Shu were close to each other.137 Would it not be a mistake to throw that away in following the lead of a petty man? Heaven will multiply Yang Hu’s crimes in order to ruin him. How would it be if, for now, you were to wait for that?” The lord therefore desisted. On a mission to Jin, Meng Yizi looks ahead to the likely exile of Yang Hu, which will indeed occur several years later (see Ding 6.7, 9.3). In summer, Ji Huanzi went to Jin; this was to present the Zheng prisoners of war. Yang Hu forced Meng Yizi to go and reciprocate the visiting gifts of the Jin Lord’s wife.138 The Jin leaders offered the two of them ceremonial toasts together. Meng Yizie stopped outside the chamber and said to Fan Yangb, “If Yang Hu cannot be allowed to stay in Lu and then finds refuge in Jin, I swear by the former rulers that he will become supervisor of the military for the central army.”139 Fan Yangc said, “When our ruler has an official post opening, he will appoint the person for it. How would I know anything about that?” Fan Yangc said to Zhao Yangb, “The Lu leaders are troubled by Yang Hu. Meng Yizie knows the signs, and he considers it certain that Yang Hu will go to Jin. That is why he has presented his request so forcefully, in order to secure asylum for him here.”

6.3(4)

After Chu suffers further defeats by Wu, Gongzi Shen institutes effective reforms in Chu, going so far as to relocate the capital (see Ding 5.7, Ai 1.1). In the fourth month, on the jichou day (15), the Wu heir apparent Zhonglei defeated a Chu fleet and captured Pan Zichen,140 Xiaoweizi, and seven high officers. All Chu was dejected and feared that the domain would fall. Gongzi Jiea then suffered another defeat with a land army at Fanyang.141 Delighted, Chief Minister Gongzi Shena said, “Now at last something can be done.” And with that he relocated Ying to Ruo,142 changed the protocol of the administration, and in this way brought stability to the domain of Chu.

Lord Ding

6.4

1771

6.5 周儋翩率王子朝之徒因鄭人將以作亂于周，鄭於是乎伐馮、滑、胥靡、

負黍、狐人、闕外。六月，晉閻沒戍周，且城胥靡。 6.6(5) 秋八月，宋樂祁言於景公曰：「諸侯唯我事晉，今使不往，晉其憾矣。」

樂祁告其宰陳寅。陳寅曰：「必使子往。」他日，公謂樂祁曰：「唯寡人說 子之言，子必往！」陳寅曰：「子立後而行，吾室亦不亡，唯君亦以我為 知難而行也。」見溷而行。 趙簡子逆，而飲之酒於緜上，獻楊楯六十於簡子。陳寅曰：「昔吾 主范氏，今子主趙氏，又有納焉，以楊楯賈禍，弗可為也已。然子死晉 國，子孫必得志於宋。」范獻子言於晉侯曰：「以君命越疆而使，未致使 而私飲酒，不敬二君，不可不討也。」乃執樂祁。 6.7 陽虎又盟公及三桓於周社，盟國人于亳社，詛于五父之衢。 6.8 冬十二月，天王處于姑蕕，辟儋翩之亂也。

143 Huren 狐人 was located about 30 kilometers south of the Zheng capital in presentday Linying County 臨潁縣; the other five settlements were ranged east of the Zhou capital. 144 The statement is not literally true, but as Yang (4:1558) notes, Song had remained loyal to Jin more consistently than other domains had. 145 Yang (4:1558) suggests that yang 楊 does not mean “willow” here but huangyang 黃楊, “boxwood.” Mianshang was about 30 kilometers east of the Jin capital, near present-day Yicheng, Shanxi (see Xi 24.1). 146 Because Yue Qili would die for Song’s sake, his descendants would be favored in Song. Yue Qili does die in Jin (Ding 8.3), and his grandson Yue Pei becomes superior minister in Song in Ai 26.2. 147 This crossroad or thoroughfare was the site of several imprecations; see, e.g., Xiang 11.1. 148 Guyou 姑蕕 was somewhere in Zhou territory.

1772

Zuo Tradition

Despite the death of Wangzi Zhao, his adherents fight on with support from Zheng (see Ding 5.1, 6.2, 7.1). Dan Pian of Zhou had led followers of Wangzi Zhao, intending, with help from the men of Zheng, to start a rebellion in Zhou. For that reason Zheng had attacked Feng, Hua, Xumi, Fushu, Huren, and Quewai.143 In the sixth month, Yan Mo of Jin garrisoned Zhou and fortified Xumi.

6.5

Although tensions among the leading families in Jin make an official visit there risky, Yue Qili of Song takes it upon himself to go, leaving a designated heir for himself in Song on the advice of his steward. He is arrested after offending an old family connection (see Ding 8.3). In autumn, in the eighth month, Yue Qilia of Song said to Duke Jing, “Of all the princes, only we serve Jin.144 If no emissary goes now, then Jin will be resentful.” Yue Qilia related this to his steward, Chen Yin. Chen Yin said, “He is certain to appoint you to go.” On another day, the Duke said to Yue Qilia, “Precisely because I am pleased by your remarks, you must be the one to go.” Chen Yin said, “If you set up an heir before you go, then, on the one hand, our house will not perish, and, on the other hand, the ruler, for his part, will understand that we went knowing the difficulty of the matter.” Yue Qili presented his son Hun to the duke before setting out. Coming out to meet Yue Qili, Zhao Yanga entertained him with wine at Mianshang, and Yue Qili presented sixty shields of boxwood.145 Chen Yin said, “In former times we were hosted by the Fan lineage. But now you make the Zhao lineage your host and have even presented a gift to them. With these boxwood shields you have purchased your ruin, and there is nothing to be done about it. Yet if you die in Jin, your descendants are sure to win their aims in Song.”146 Fan Yangb said to the Prince of Jin, “Coming as an emissary, having crossed the frontier on his ruler’s orders, he privately indulged in drinking wine before he had completed his mission. This was disrespectful to the two rulers and cannot go unpunished.” Yue Qilia was therefore arrested.

6.6(5)

Yang Hu takes steps to create unity in Lu (see Ding 6.3, 7.2). Yang Hu again made a covenant with our lord and the three Huan families at the Zhou altar of earth, made a covenant with the inhabitants of the capital at the Bo altar of earth, and swore an oath of imprecation at the Crossroad of the Five Fathers.147

6.7

In winter, in the twelfth month, the Heaven-appointed king took up residence at Guyou;148 he was keeping clear of Dan Pian’s uprising.

6.8

Lord Ding

1773

春秋 7.1 七年春王正月。 7.2 夏四月。 7.3(4) 秋，齊侯、鄭伯盟于鹹。 7.4(4) 齊人執衛行人北宮結以侵衛。 7.5(4) 齊侯、衛侯盟于沙。 7.6 大雩。 7.7(5) 齊國夏帥師伐我西鄙。 7.8 九月，大雩。 7.9 冬十月。

左傳 7.1 七年春二月，周儋翩入于儀栗以叛。 7.2 齊人歸鄆、陽關，陽虎居之以為政。 7.3 夏四月，單武公、劉桓公敗尹氏于窮谷。 7.4(3–5) 秋，齊侯、鄭伯盟于鹹，徵會于衛。衛侯欲叛晉，諸大夫不可。使北宮結

如齊，而私於齊侯曰：「執結以侵我。」齊侯從之，乃盟于瑣。

149 Xian 鹹 was southeast of present-day Puyang County 濮陽縣, Henan, about 160 kilometers northeast of the Zheng capital and 310 kilometers southwest of the Qi capital. 150 The precise location of Sha 沙, called Suo 瑣 in Zuozhuan (see n. 154 below), is unknown. Yang (4:1560; citing Du Yu ZZ 55.962) puts it near Daming County 大名 縣, Hebei, about 290 kilometers west-southwest of the Qi capital and about 60 kilometers north-northeast of the Wei capital. 151 Du Yu (ZZ 55.962) notes only that Yili 儀栗 was a Zhou settlement.

1774

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 7 (503 BCE) ANNALS

The seventh year, spring, the royal first month.

7.1

Summer, the fourth month.

7.2

In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Xian.149

7.3(4)

Qi leaders arrested the Wei envoy Beigong Jie and took him with them when they invaded Wei.

7.4(4)

The Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei swore a covenant at Sha.150

7.5(4)

There was a great rain sacrifice.

7.6

Guo Xia of Qi led out troops and attacked our western marches.

7.7(5)

In the ninth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

7.8

Winter, the tenth month.

7.9

ZUO

Strife continues in the Zhou royal domain; see also Ding 7.3. In the seventh year, in spring, in the second month, Dan Pian of Zhou entered Yili and revolted.151

7.1

The Qi leaders returned Yun and Yangguan.152 Yang Hu occupied them as a base for his administration.

7.2

In summer, in the fourth month, the Shan Duke Wu and the Liu Duke Huan defeated the Yin lineage at Qionggu.153

7.3

The Prince of Wei devises a stratagem by which his state may break with Jin and join an alliance with Qi (see Ding 8.7). In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Xian and convened a meeting in Wei. The Prince of Wei wished to break with Jin, but all his high officers rejected the plan. He had Beigong Jie go to Qi, then communicated privately with the Prince of Qi and said, “Arrest Beigong Jiea and hold him while you invade us.” The Prince of Qi complied, and as a result they swore a covenant at Suo.154

7.4(3–5)

152 Yangguan was about 50 kilometers north-northeast of the Lu capital (see Xiang 17.3). 153 Qionggu 窮谷 is thought to have been to the east of the Zhou capital. 154 Suo is thought to be a different way of writing the name of the place called Sha in Annals, Ding 7.5. The two graphs had the same pronunciation in Old Chinese, according to Yang (4:1560).

Lord Ding

1775

7.5(7) 齊國夏伐我。陽虎御季桓子，公斂處父御孟懿子，將宵軍齊師。齊師聞

之，墮，伏而待之。處父曰：「虎不圖禍，而必死。」苫夷曰：「虎陷二子於 難，不待有司，余必殺女。」虎懼，乃還，不敗。 7.6 冬十一月戊午，單子、劉子逆王于慶氏。晉籍秦送王。己巳，王入于王

城，館于公族黨氏，而後朝于莊宮。

春秋 8.1(1) 八年春王正月，公侵齊。 8.2 公至自侵齊。 8.3(4) 二月，公侵齊。 8.4 三月，公至自侵齊。 8.5 曹伯露卒。 8.6(6) 夏，齊國夏帥師伐我西鄙。 8.7(6) 公會晉師于瓦。 8.8 公至自瓦。 8.9 秋七月戊辰，陳侯柳卒。 8.10(8) 晉士鞅帥師侵鄭，遂侵衛。

155 As Du Yu (ZZ 55.962) reminds us, Qi is free to take this step because it has broken from the Jin alliance in Ding 7.4. 156 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.962), this is the household of a high minister in Guyou.

1776

Zuo Tradition

Yang Hu narrowly escapes death in a night raid on Qi forces (see Ding 7.2, 8.1, 8.4). Guo Xia of Qi attacked us.155 Yang Hu acted as chariot driver for Ji Huanzi, and Gonglian Yanga for Meng Yizi. They intended to make a nighttime attack on the Qi army. The Qi army got wind of it, dropped their defenses, and lay in wait for them. Gonglian Yangb said, “Yang Hua, you made no provision for catastrophe, and you must die for it.” Shan Yuea said, “If you plunge the two noblemen into difficulty, Yang Hua, I will not wait for the officers in charge: I am sure to kill you myself.” Yang Hua, in alarm, turned back, and so was not defeated.

7.5(7)

King Jìng of Zhou enters his capital (see Zhao 26.7, 26.9, 32.3, Ding 8.2). In winter, in the eleventh month, on the wuwu day (23), the Shan Master and the Liu Master went to greet the king at the Qing household.156 Ji Qin of Jin escorted the king back to the capital. On the jisi day (25), the king entered Wangcheng and lodged with a certain Zhang from one of the lateral branches of the lord’s house.157 Only afterward did he hold court at the temple of King Zhuang.

7.6

LORD DING 8 (502 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord invaded Qi.

8.1(1)

Our lord arrived from the invasion of Qi.

8.2

In the second month, our lord invaded Qi.

8.3(4)

In the third month, our lord arrived from the invasion of Qi.

8.4

Lu, the Liege of Cao, died.

8.5

In summer, Guo Xia of Qi led out troops and attacked our western marches.

8.6(6)

Our lord met with Jin troops at Wa.158

8.7(6)

Our lord returned from Wa.

8.8

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the wuchen day (7), Liu, the Prince of Chen, died. Shi Yang (Fan Yang) of Jin led out troops and invaded Zheng. He then went on to invade Wei.

8.9

8.10(8)

157 As Takezoe (27.55) points out, the lord in question could be the Shan or the Liu Lord, but it is uncertain. Du Yu (ZZ 55.962) identifies Zhang as a Zhou high officer. 158 Wa 瓦 was in Wei, south of Wen County 溫縣, Henan, about 220 kilometers due west of the Lu capital.

Lord Ding

1777

8.11 葬曹靖公。 8.12 九月，葬陳懷公。 8.13(9) 季孫斯、仲孫何忌帥師侵衛。 8.14 冬，衛侯、鄭伯盟于曲濮。 8.15(10) 從祀先公。 8.16(10) 盜竊寶玉、大弓。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年春王正月，公侵齊，門于陽州。士皆坐列，曰：「顏高之弓六鈞。」皆

取而傳觀之。陽州人出，顏高奪人弱弓，籍丘子鉏擊之，與一人俱斃。偃， 且射子鉏，中頰，殪。 顏息射人中眉，退曰：「我無勇，吾志其目也。」 師退，冉猛偽傷足而先。其兄會乃呼曰：「猛也殿！」 8.2 二月己丑，單子伐穀城，劉子伐儀栗。辛卯，單子伐簡城，劉子伐盂，以

定王室。

159 Du Yu (ZZ 55.963) explains that Wei and Zheng are here confirming their pact against Jin. Qupu 曲濮 was in Wei. The name suggests that it was a bend in the Pu River, the location of which is uncertain. Tan Qixiang (Zhongguo lishi ditu ji, 1:24– 25) puts it about 30 kilometers south of the Wei capital. 160 See Wen 2.5, where Duke Xi was put ahead of his predecessor, Duke Min, in the sacrificial order. 161 Du Yu (ZZ 55.963) notes that the brigand in question is Yang Hu (who cannot be named in the Annals because, as a household retainer, he is too lowly); the precious jades were jade half disks thought to have been passed down from the Xia dynasty, and the great bow was the Fanruo bow of Fengfu, mentioned in Ding 4.1d. 162 For Yangzhou, see Annals, Zhao 25.5. 163 Literally, “six jun.” One jun is supposed to have been equal to thirty ancient catties (jin 斤), or to ten modern catties. The bow would have had a tension of 45 kilograms. 164 Du Yu (ZZ 55.963) understood the final sentence as an attempt at deception, but Yang (4:1564) notes that it is possibly a command: “Meng, guard the rear!”

1778

Zuo Tradition

Lord Jing of Cao was buried.

8.11

In the ninth month, Lord Huai of Chen was buried.

8.12

Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and invaded Wei.

8.13(9)

In winter, the Prince of Wei and the Liege of Zheng swore a covenant at Qupu.159

8.14

Sacrifices were made in correct order to our former lords.160

8.15(10)

Brigands stole the precious jades and the great bow.

8.16(10)

161

ZUO

Fighting continues between Lu and Qi (see Ding 7.5, 8.4). In the eighth year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord invaded Qi and attacked a gate at Yangzhou.162 As the fighting men were all sitting in their lines, they said, “Yan Gao’s bow has a tension of one hundred eighty catties.”163 All of them took it and examined it in turn. When the men of Yangzhou came out, Yan Gao tried to snatch someone else’s weaker bow, but Jiqiu Zichu hit them, and Yan Gao and the other man both fell as if dead. Lying there, Yan Gao shot at Jiqiu Zichua, struck him in the cheek, and killed him. Yan Xi, after shooting at someone and hitting him in the forehead, retreated and said, “I have no valor. I was aiming for his eye.” When the army withdrew, Ran Meng preceded it, pretending to have been wounded in the foot. So his elder brother Hui shouted, “Ran Menga guarded the rear!”164

8.1(1)

Conflict is quelled in Zhou as the king’s forces mop up the last remnants of Wangzi Zhao’s rebellion (see Ding 7.6). In the third165 month, on the jichou day (26), the Shan Master attacked Gucheng,166 while the Liu Master attacked Yili.167 On the xinmao day (28), the Shan Master attacked Jiancheng, while the Liu Master attacked Yu,168 in order to bring stability to the Zhou royal house.

8.2

165 The text says, “On the jichou day of the second month.” Since the second month contained no jichou day, Yang (4:1564) suggests that “second” (er 二) is a copyist’s error for “third” (san 三). 166 Gucheng 穀城 was located just northwest of the Eastern Zhou capital, near presentday Luoyang, Henan. 167 For Yili, site of the Zhou rebel Dan Pian’s base, see Ding 7.1. 168 Yu 盂, about 70 kilometers northeast of Luoyang, is written 邘 in Yin 11.5. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.963), this attack was likewise directed against adherents of Dan Pian (Ding 6.5, 6.8, 7.1).

Lord Ding

1779

8.3 趙鞅言於晉侯曰：「諸侯唯宋事晉，好逆其使，猶懼不至；今又執之，是

絕諸侯也。」將歸樂祁，士鞅曰：「三年止之，無故而歸之，宋必叛晉。」 獻子私謂子梁曰：「寡君懼不得事宋君，是以止子。子姑使溷代子。」子 梁以告陳寅。陳寅曰：「宋將叛晉，是棄溷也，不如待之。」樂祁歸，卒于 大行。士鞅曰：「宋必叛，不如止其尸以求成焉。」乃止諸州。 8.4(3) 公侵齊，攻廩丘之郛。主人焚衝，或濡馬褐以救之，遂毀之。主人出，師

奔。陽虎偽不見冉猛者，曰：「猛在此，必敗。」猛逐之，顧而無繼，偽 顛。虎曰：「盡客氣也。」 8.5 苫越生子，將待事而名之。陽州之役獲焉，名之曰「陽州」。

8.6(6, 7)

夏，齊國夏、高張伐我西鄙。晉士鞅、趙鞅、荀寅救我。公會晉師于瓦， 范獻子執羔，趙簡子、中行文子皆執雁。魯於是始尚羔。

169 According to Du Yu (55.964), these were mountains in southeastern Jin. See Xiang 23.4b. 170 For the settlement of Zhou, see Zhao 3.4a. 171 Linqiu 廩丘 was located just over 110 kilometers west and somewhat north of Qufu (see also Xiang 26.14). 172 That is, Ran Meng’s fighting spirit came entirely from Yang Hu’s remark, while the Linqiu men did not show any great courage or initiative themselves. 173 For Shan Yue of Lu, see Ding 7.5. For the Yangzhou campaign, see Ding 8.1.

1780

Zuo Tradition

Yue Qili of Song is finally released by Jin, only to die on his way home (see Ding 6.6). Strains continue in Jin-Song relations (see Ding 9.1). Zhao Yang said to the Prince of Jin, “Of all the princes, only Song serves Jin. Even if we treated Song’s emissary well, we would still fear that they might not come. That we have now gone so far as to arrest him amounts to severing our ties with the princes.” They were going to send Yue Qilia home, but Fan Yanga said, “If, after detaining him for three years, we now send him home without giving any reason, then Song is sure to break with Jin.” Fan Yangc approached Yue Qilib privately and said, “Our ruler feared that he would not be given the opportunity to serve the ruler of Song, and it was for this reason that he detained you. Sir, have your son Hun stand in for you for the time being.” Yue Qilib related this to Chen Yin, who said, “Song will break with Jin, and this would amount to abandoning Hun. It would be better to wait.” As Yue Qilia was returning home, he died at Taihang.169 Fan Yanga said, “Song is certain to break with us. It would be best to detain his corpse and use it to sue for peace with them.” So they detained it at Zhou.170

8.3

Fighting continues between Lu and Qi (see Ding 8.1, 8.6). Our lord invaded Qi and attacked the outer wall at Linqiu.171 The defenders set fire to the siege carts, but our men wet their burlap shirts and went to the rescue, and as a result the wall was taken. When the defenders streamed out, our army ran away. Yang Hu, pretending not to see Ran Meng, said, “With Ran Menga on the scene, we are certain to defeat them.” Ran Menga went after the Linqiu forces, but looking back and seeing that there was no one to second him, he pretended to fall. Yang Hua had said, “All their fighting spirit is borrowed.”172

8.4(3)

When Shan Yue had a son, he determined to wait for some event and then to name him. After capturing prisoners during the Yangzhou campaign, he named him Yangzhou.173

8.5

As Qi attacks Lu again, Song and Jin come to Lu’s assistance (see Ding 8.4). In summer, Guo Xia and Gao Zhang of Qi attacked our western marches. Fan Yanga, Zhao Yang, and Zhonghang Yina of Jin came to our assistance. When our lord met with Jin troops at Wa, Fan Yangb held a lamb, while Zhao Yanga and Zhonghang Yinb held geese. It was then that Lu first gave the lamb precedence.174

8.6(6, 7)

174 In a chapter concerning the ritual employed when officials meet with one another, the ritual text Yili (7.72–73) says that senior high officers hold lambs while low-rank high officers hold geese. Lu had formerly allowed all three of its high ministers to hold lambs. Starting from this meeting, it allows only the high minister to hold a lamb, the others holding geese in imitation of the Jin practice.

Lord Ding

1781

8.7 晉師將盟衛侯于鄟澤，趙簡子曰：「群臣誰敢盟衛君者？」涉佗、成何

曰：「我能盟之。」衛人請執牛耳。成何曰：「衛，吾溫、原也，焉得視諸 侯？」將歃，涉佗捘衛侯之手，及捥。衛侯怒，王孫賈趨進，曰：「盟以信 禮也，有如衛君，其敢不唯禮是事而受此盟也？」 衛侯欲叛晉，而患諸大夫。王孫賈使次于郊。大夫問故，公以晉詬 語之，且曰：「寡人辱社稷，其改卜嗣，寡人從焉。」大夫曰：「是衛之禍， 豈君之過也？」公曰：「又有患焉，謂寡人『必以而子與大夫之子為質』。」 大夫曰：「苟有益也，公子則往，群臣之子敢不皆負羈絏以從？」 將行，王孫賈曰：「苟衛國有難，工商未嘗不為患，使皆行而後可。」 公以告大夫，乃皆將行之。 行有日，公朝國人，使賈問焉，曰：「若衛叛晉，晉五伐我，病何如 矣？」皆曰：「五伐我，猶可以能戰。」賈曰：「然則如叛之，病而後質焉， 何遲之有？」乃叛晉。晉人請改盟，弗許。

175 Zhuanze 鄟澤 (literally, “the Zhuan swamp”) was in Wei, but its location is unknown. The Jin army would have passed this place on its return from Wa. 176 As Du Yu (ZZ 55.965) notes, Zhao Yang is indicating that he wants Wei to be humiliated for its earlier actions, and Jin’s envoys will therefore face a risk. 177 In a covenant ceremony, the task of holding the bull’s ear goes to the party with lower status. See Xiang 27.4 and Ai 17.6. Wei asks that the high officers from Jin take this lower position, but the Jin representatives refuse. This distortion of precedence ultimately makes the covenant unacceptable to Wei. 178 Cheng He is arguing that Wei is exceedingly small, no larger than Wen and Yuan, which by this time are districts of Jin. 179 In the covenant ceremony, the participants smear blood on their lips before pronouncing the words of the oath. She Tuo may have pushed the Wei ruler’s hand deep into the blood, or the blood may have trickled onto the ruler’s wrist. 180 Wangsun Jia is urging the inhabitants of the capital, including the artisans and merchants, to consider revolting against Jin and suffering the inevitable punitive attack rather than sending the hostages that Jin has demanded. 181 Presumably, Jin asked to change the order of the covenant swearing, accepting the lower position for Jin representatives. According to Shuoyuan 13.449 (cited in Yang, 4:1567), Zhao Yang put She Tuo to death for his part in this episode.

1782

Zuo Tradition

After Wei shifted its allegiance from Jin to Qi (see Ding 7.4), Jin seeks to reestablish ties and to humiliate Wei in the process. After first preparing to comply with the humiliating terms of the covenant, Wei leaders instead resolve to fight Jin (see Ding 8.8, 10.4). The Jin army was going to swear a covenant with the Prince of Wei at Zhuanze.175 Zhao Yanga said, “Who among the lord’s subjects dares attempt a covenant with the ruler of Wei?”176 She Tuo and Cheng He said, “We can swear a covenant with him.” When the Wei leaders asked the two of them to hold the bull’s ear,177 Cheng He said, “Wei is equivalent to our Wen or Yuan.178 How can it be a peer to the princes?” As they were about to smear the blood, She Tuo bumped the Prince of Wei’s arm, and the blood reached as far his wrist.179 The Prince of Wei was furious, but Wangsun Jia rushed forward and said, “Covenants are made to further ritual propriety, just as the Master of Wei has done. How should he presume to do anything other than serve ritual propriety and accept this covenant?” The Prince of Wei wished to break with Jin, but he worried about what his high officers would think. Wangsun Jia had him lodge in the outskirts of the Wei capital. When the high officers asked the reason, the Lord of Wei spoke to them of Jin’s insult and said, “I have disgraced the altars of the domain. Please divine about substituting for me another successor, and I will comply with the result.” The high officers said, “This is a disaster for Wei. How could it be considered your mistake, my lord?” The lord said, “There was yet another cause for concern there. They said to me, ‘You must make your sons and the sons of your high officers hostages.’” The high officers said, “If it were really of any advantage, the lord’s sons would go as hostages, and then would any of the sons of your subjects dare not be shackled and follow behind?” As they prepared to set out with the hostages, Wangsun Jia said, “Whenever the Wei domain has suffered some crisis, the artisans and the merchants have never failed to consider it their own concern. It will work only if all are made to go.” The lord informed the high officers, who as a result were prepared to send all the artisans and merchants. On the day set for their departure, the lord held court with the inhabitants of the capital and had Wangsun Jiaa ask them, “If Wei breaks with Jin, and Jin attacks us five times, then how serious would the suffering be?”180 All said, “If they attack us five times, we will still have the wherewithal to fight.” Wangsun Jiaa said, “In that case, we should break with them. Would it be too late to send hostages only after we are in distress?” They therefore broke with Jin, and when the Jin leaders requested that the covenant be changed, they did not permit it.181

8.7

Lord Ding

1783

8.8(10) 秋，晉士鞅會成桓公侵鄭，圍蟲牢，報伊闕也。遂侵衛。 8.9(13) 九月，師侵衛，晉故也。

8.10a(15, 16)

季寤、公鉏極、公山不狃皆不得志於季氏，叔孫輒無寵於叔孫氏，叔仲 志不得志於魯，故五人因陽虎。陽虎欲去三桓，以季寤更季氏，以叔孫 輒更叔孫氏，己更孟氏。冬十月，順祀先公而祈焉。辛卯，禘于僖公。壬 辰，將享季氏于蒲圃而殺之；戒都車，曰「癸巳至」。 成宰公斂處父告孟孫曰：「季氏戒都車，何故？」孟孫曰：「吾弗 聞。」處父曰：「然則亂也，必及於子，先備諸。」與孟孫以壬辰為期。

8.10b 陽虎前驅。林楚御桓子，虞人以鈹、盾夾之，陽越殿。將如蒲圃。桓

子咋謂林楚曰：「而先皆季氏之良也，爾以是繼之。」對曰：「臣聞命後。 陽虎為政，魯國服焉，違之徵死，死無益於主。」桓子曰：「何後之有？ 而能以我適孟氏乎？」對曰：「不敢愛死，懼不免主。」桓子曰：「往也！」

182 Chonglao was located north of present-day Fengqiu, Henan, about 100 kilometers northeast of the Zheng capital (see Annals, Cheng 5.7). 183 Yique 伊闕 is possibly to be identified with the Quewai 闕外 mentioned in Ding 6.5. 184 Du Yu (ZZ 55.965) identifies Ji Wu as a younger brother of Ji Huanzi and Gongchu Ji as a descendant of Ji Wuzi. For Gongshan Buniu’s allegiance to Yang Hu, see Ding 5.4. Shusun Zhe is the son of a Shusun concubine. Shuzhong Zhi is the son of the Shuzhong Xiao who attempted to drive the Jisun and Shusun lineages apart in Zhao 12.10. 185 According to Yang (4:1568), the di 禘 sacrifice, directed to all the former rulers, should be conducted in the Grand Temple. If it was in this case conducted in the temple of Lord Xi, that may have been because of a special fear of Lord Xi’s spirit, as Du Yu (ZZ 55.965) suggests. The line may also mean that the di sacrifice was conducted in the Grand Temple but with special attention to or for the sake of Lord Xi’s spirit. 186 The Pu Gardens were outside the east gate of the Lu capital. See Xiang 4.4 and 19.1a. 187 Yang Hu is steward of the Ji lineage. Gonglian Yang does not know that Yang Hu plans to move against the Ji lineage.

1784

Zuo Tradition

Jin and Zhou punish Zheng for its meddling in Zhou (Ding 6.5) and Wei for its insubordination (see Ding 8.7). In autumn, Fan Yanga of Jin met with the Cheng Duke Huan to invade Zheng, and they laid siege to Chonglao182 as revenge for Yique.183 They then went on to invade Wei.

8.8(10)

In the ninth month, our troops invaded Wei. This was for Jin’s sake.

8.9(13)

In Lu, Yang Hu plots a coup with various disaffected men. He fails and openly rebels (see Ding 9.3). Ji Wu, Gongchu Ji, and Gongshan Buniu had all failed to achieve their aims with the Ji lineage. Shusun Zhe enjoyed no favor with the Shusun lineage, nor did Shuzhong Zhi achieve his aims in Lu. So the five of them took the part of Yang Hu,184 who wished to remove the heads of the three Huan lineages, putting Ji Wu in place of the Ji head, Shusun Zhe in place of the Shusun head, and himself in place of the Meng head. In winter, in the tenth month, Yang Hu made sacrifice to our former lords in order and prayed to them. On the xinmao day (2), the rebels made the di sacrifice to all the lords at the temple of Lord Xi.185 On the renchen day (3), they were going to assassinate the Ji head while offering him ceremonial toasts at the Pu Gardens.186 They put the capital guard on alert and said, “Arrive on the guisi day (4).” Gonglian Yanga, steward of Cheng, told Meng Yizie, “The Ji lineage has put the capital guard on alert.187 Why is that?” Meng Yizie said, “I had not heard.” Gonglian Yangb said, “In that case there must be a coup afoot, which is bound to involve you. Prepare for it.” He and Meng Yizie set the renchen day (3) as the time to move.

8.10a(15, 16)

As Yang Hu galloped ahead, Lin Chu was the chariot driver for Ji Huanzib, rangers with cutlasses and shields flanked him, and Yang Yue brought up the rear.188 They were going to go to the Pu Gardens. Suddenly, Ji Huanzib said to Lin Chu, “Your forefathers were all good men of the Ji lineage, and may you succeed them in the same spirit.”189 He replied, “It is late for me to obey this command. With Yang Hu controlling the administration, the whole domain of Lu submits to him, and to defy him is to invite death. Dying would be of no advantage to my master.” Ji Huanzib said, “How is it too late? Can you get me to the Mengs?” He replied, “I would not dare to begrudge dying; I fear only that I might not save you.” Ji Huanzib said, “Then we go!”

8.10b

188 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.966), Yang Yue is a younger half brother of Yang Hu. He was party to the conspiracy against Ji Huanzi. 189 According to Yang (4:1569), Ji Huanzi knows that the invitation to the Pu Gardens is a trap and here appeals for Lin Chu’s help.

Lord Ding

1785

孟氏選圉人之壯者三百人以為公期築室於門外。林楚怒馬，及衢 而騁。陽越射之，不中。築者闔門。有自門間射陽越，殺之。陽虎劫公與 武叔，以伐孟氏。公斂處父帥成人自上東門入，與陽氏戰于南門之內， 弗勝；又戰于棘下，陽氏敗。 陽虎說甲如公宮，取寶玉、大弓以出，舍于五父之衢，寢而為食。 其徒曰：「追其將至。」虎曰：「魯人聞余出，喜於徵死，何暇追余？」從 者曰：「嘻！速駕，公斂陽在。」公斂陽請追之，孟孫弗許。 陽欲殺桓子，孟孫懼而歸之。子言辨舍爵於季氏之廟而出。陽虎 入于讙、陽關以叛。 8.11 鄭駟歂嗣子大叔為政。

春秋 9.1 九年春王正月。 9.2 夏四月戊申，鄭伯蠆卒。 9.3(3) 得寶玉、大弓。 9.4 六月，葬鄭獻公。 9.5(4) 秋，齊侯、衛侯次于五氏。

190 Gongqi is a member of the Meng lineage. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.966), this construction project was merely a pretext to station defensive forces outside the Meng gate. 191 Shusun Zhouchou is a son of Shusun Bugan, current head of the Shusun lineage. 192 Jixia 棘下 is an otherwise unidentified spot within the Lu capital.

1786

Zuo Tradition

The Meng lineage had chosen three hundred strong workers and put them to building chambers for Gongqi outside their gate.190 Lin Chu whipped on his horses, breaking into a gallop as they reached the avenue. Yang Yue shot at him but missed. The builders closed the gates. Someone shot at Yang Yue from an opening in the gate and killed him. Yang Hu seized our lord and Shusun Zhouchoua and held them as he attacked the Meng lineage.191 Gonglian Yanga led the men of Cheng and entered from the upper eastern gate, fighting with the Yang forces inside the southern gate, but he did not defeat them. When they fought again at Jixia,192 the Yang forces were defeated. Removing his armor, Yang Hu entered our lord’s palace, took the precious jades and the great bow, and departed. He made camp at the Crossroad of the Five Fathers, then lay down to rest while a meal was prepared. His troops said, “Your pursuers will be here any time.” Yang Hua said, “When the Lu leaders hear that I have departed, they will be delighted simply to have postponed their deaths. How will they have the time to pursue me?” His followers said, “Ah! Hurry and harness your horses! Gonglian Yang is there among them.” Gonglian Yang asked permission to pursue him, but Meng Yizie did not grant it. Gonglian Yangc wanted to kill Ji Huanzib, but Meng Yizie was fearful and returned Ji Huanzi home. Ji Wua departed after dedicating goblets all around in the Ji lineage temple.193 Yang Hu entered Huan and Yangguan, making them a base for his rebellion.194 In Zheng, Si Chuan succeeded You Jib in heading up the administration.

8.11

LORD DING 9 (501 BCE) ANNALS

The ninth year, spring, the royal first month. In summer, in the fourth month, on the wushen day (22), Chai, the Liege of Zheng, died.

9.1 9.2

We obtained the precious jades and the great bow.

9.3(3)

In the sixth month, Lord Xian of Zheng was buried.

9.4

In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Wushi.195

9.5(4)

193 In this way Ji Wu bids farewell to the ancestors before fleeing the domain. 194 For Huan and Yangguan (or the Yang Pass), see Huan 3.6 and Xiang 17.3, respectively. 195 Wushi 五氏 was in the north of Wei, to the west of present-day Handan 邯鄲, Hebei.

Lord Ding

1787

9.6 秦伯卒。 9.7 冬，葬秦哀公。

左傳 9.1 九年春，宋公使樂大心盟于晉，且逆樂祁之尸。辭，偽有疾；乃使向巢

如晉盟，且逆子梁之尸。子明謂桐門右師出，曰：「吾猶衰絰，而子擊 鐘，何也？」右師曰：「喪不在此故也。」既而告人曰：「己衰絰而生子， 余何故舍鐘？」子明聞之，怒，言於公曰：「右師將不利戴氏。不肯適晉， 將作亂也。不然，無疾。」乃逐桐門右師。 9.2 鄭駟歂殺鄧析，而用其竹刑。君子謂子然於是不忠。苟有可以加於國家

者，棄其邪可也。《靜女》之三章，取彤管焉。《竿旄》：「何以告之」，取 其忠也。故用其道，不棄其人。《詩》云： 蔽芾甘棠， 勿翦勿伐， 召伯所茇。 思其人，猶愛其樹，況用其道而不恤其人乎！子然無以勸能矣。

196 The Dai lineage is the Song ruling lineage. 197 This expulsion actually happened in the following year; see Annals, Ding 10.8. 198 Maoshi 42, “Jingnü” 靜女, 2C.104–5. The poem anticipates a romantic liaison, but from it one can take the image of the red tube given as a gift in the second stanza. According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.967), the red tube was the red-handled brush used by female scribes in recording events and offering correction. 199 Maoshi 53, “Ganmao” 干旄, 3B.123–24. The poem, in three stanzas, appears to praise the addressee by comparing him to a flagstaff, asking what gift is worthy of such a man. 200 Maoshi 16, “Gantang” 甘棠, 1D.54–55.

1788

Zuo Tradition

The Liege of Qin died.

9.6

In winter, Lord Ai of Qin was buried.

9.7

ZUO

Yue Daxin is driven out of Song after a conflict with Hun, the son of Yue Qili (see Ding 8.3, 11.1). In the ninth year, in spring, the Duke of Song appointed Yue Daxin to swear a covenant with Jin and to escort back the corpse of Yue Qilia. He declined and pretended to be ill, so the lord appointed Xiang Chao to go to Jin for the covenant and to escort back Yue Qilib’s corpse. Huna, Yue Qilin’s son, told Yue Daxina to depart, saying, “How is it that while I am still wearing mourning, you are having bells played?” Yue Daxina said, “It is because the obsequies are not here.” Afterward he told others, “He himself sired a son while wearing mourning. Why should I give up my bells?” When Huna heard of this, he was angry and said to the lord, “Yue Daxina is going to act against the interests of the Dai lineage.196 He is not willing to go to Jin because he is preparing to raise a rebellion. If that were not the case, he would not have claimed to be ill without being ill.” Yue Daxina was therefore expelled.197

9.1

Deng Xi, author of a legal code in Zheng, is executed. In later centuries Deng Xi would be identified alongside such thinkers as Lord Shang and Han Feizi as a “Legalist,” that is, a proponent of strict rule of law. By the Han dynasty a number of additional anecdotes about him were recorded in such collections as Shuoyuan, and there is a text, Deng Xizi, that is somewhat dubiously attributed to him. In Zheng, Si Chuan killed Deng Xi but used his “Bamboo Code.” The noble man said of Si Chuana that in this he was not loyal. If one truly has something with which he might benefit the domain and its patrimonies, then it is right to forgive his aberrations. From the three stanzas of “Graceful Girl,” what one takes is the red tube.198 From the line “What shall I report to him?” in “Flagstaffs,” what one takes is loyalty.199 Therefore, when we use someone’s Way, we do not discard his person. As it says in the Odes,

9.2

Lush is the wild pear. Do not trim it, do not cut it: It was here that the Shao Liege rested.200

Thinking of the man, they even loved his tree. How could they have used a man’s Way and not have cared for his person? Si Chuana will not have the means to encourage able men.

Lord Ding

1789

9.3(3) 夏，陽虎歸寶玉、大弓，書曰「得」，器用也。凡獲器用曰「得」，得用焉曰

「獲」。 六月，伐陽關。陽虎使焚萊門。師驚，犯之而出奔齊，請師以伐 魯，曰：「三加，必取之。」齊侯將許之。鮑文子諫曰：「臣嘗為隸於施氏 矣，魯未可取也。上下猶和，眾庶猶睦，能事大國，而無天菑，若之何取 之？陽虎欲勤齊師也，齊師罷，大臣必多死亡，己於是乎奮其詐謀。夫 陽虎有寵於季氏，而將殺季孫，以不利魯國，而求容焉。親富不親仁，君 焉用之？君富於季氏，而大於魯國，茲陽虎所欲傾覆也。魯免其疾，而 君又收之，無乃害乎？」 齊侯執陽虎，將東之。陽虎願東，乃囚諸西鄙。盡借邑人之車，鍥 其軸，麻約而歸之。載葱靈，寢於其中而逃。追而得之，囚於齊。又以葱 靈逃，奔宋，遂奔晉，適趙氏。仲尼曰：「趙氏其世有亂乎！」 9.4a(5) 秋，齊侯伐晉夷儀。敝無存之父將室之，辭，以與其弟，曰：「此役也，不

死，反，必娶於高、國。」先登，求自門出，死於霤下。

201 Yang Hu had taken these items in Ding 8.10. 202 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.968), this was one of the gates of Yangguan. 203 The Shi line are high officers in Lu. For Bao Guo’s stay with them, see Cheng 17.6. He must be in his nineties by this year. 204 By this move Yang Hu attempts to prevent pursuit when he escapes. 205 Confucius’ prediction anticipates the Zhao lineage’s long struggle against the Fan and Zhonghang lineages, beginning in Ding 13.2. 206 According to Yang (4:1574), Yiyi was located west of present-day Xingtai 邢臺, Hebei, about 40 kilometers north of Handan; see Xiang 24.7. Tan Qixiang puts Yiyi close to Liaocheng 聊城, Shandong, about 130 kilometers east and slightly south of Handan.

1790

Zuo Tradition

Tempted to aid Yang Hu in his rebellion against Lu, the Lord of Qi instead arrests him (see Ding 8.10). As predicted, Yang Hu escapes to Jin (see Ding 6.3). Confucius foresees trouble for the Zhao line in Jin (Ding 13.2). In summer, Yang Hu returned the precious jades and the great bow.201 The text says “obtained” because these were utensils. Whenever utensils are taken, it has “obtained”; whenever victims are taken, it has “captured.” In the sixth month, there was an attack on Yangguan. Yang Hu had the Lai Gate burned.202 While the army was taken by surprise, he struck at them and departed, fleeing to Qi. There he requested an army to attack Lu, saying, “We are bound to take the domain with three campaigns.” The Prince of Qi was going to grant his request, but Bao Guoa remonstrated, saying, “I once served as a menial in the Shi household, and Lu cannot yet be taken.203 Superiors and inferiors are still in harmony. The multitude of commoners are still congenial. Lu is able to serve a great domain, and there is no natural disaster. How could we ever take the domain? Yang Hu wishes to strain the Qi army. When the Qi army is exhausted, many of the great subjects are sure to have died, and he will then set his scheme in motion. Now this Yang Hu enjoyed favor with the Ji lineage, yet he was going to kill Ji Huanzic in order to act against the interests of the domain of Lu and seek acceptance here. He sticks close to wealth, not to humaneness: how will you employ him? You are wealthier than the Ji lineage and greater than the domain of Lu, and this is what Yang Hu wants to overturn. Would it not be harmful if Lu were to throw off its affliction while you then claim it as your own?” The Prince of Qi arrested Yang Hu and was going to send him to the east. Yang Hu was quite willing to go east, so they confined him in a western border settlement. He borrowed all the townspeople’s carriages and returned them after he had scored their axles and bound them up with hemp.204 Loading a dray with clothes, he concealed himself among them and escaped. When they pursued and caught him, they imprisoned him in the Qi capital, but he again escaped in a clothing dray and fled to Song, then to Jin, where he went to the Zhao lineage. Confuciusc said, “The Zhao line will have trouble for generations!”205

9.3(3)

In a Qi campaign against Jin, heroic deeds are performed by two Qi men. The Wei ruler treats the campaigning Jin army with caution and is spared trouble (see Ding 9.7, 9.9). Qi is defeated, but its fighters are rewarded. In autumn, the Prince of Qi attacked Yiyi in Jin.206 Bi Wucun’s father was going to get him a wife, but Bi Wucun refused her. Bi gave her to his younger brother, saying, “If I do not die on this campaign, then when I return, I am determined to take a wife from the Gao or Guo family.” He was the first to climb the wall, then tried to come out through the gate, but died under its eaves.

9.4a(5)

Lord Ding

1791

東郭書讓登，犁彌從之，曰：「子讓而左，我讓而右，使登者絕而 後下。」書左，彌先下。書與王猛息。猛曰：「我先登。」書斂甲，曰：「曩 者之難，今又難焉！」猛笑曰：「吾從子，如驂之有靳。」 9.4b 晉車千乘在中牟，衛侯將如五氏，卜過之，龜焦，衛侯曰：「可也！衛車當

其半，寡人當其半，敵矣。」乃過中牟。 中牟人欲伐之。衛褚師圃亡在中牟，曰：「衛雖小，其君在焉，未可 勝也。齊師克城而驕，其帥又賤，遇，必敗之，不如從齊。」乃伐齊師，敗 之。齊侯致禚、媚、杏於衛。 齊侯賞犁彌，犁彌辭曰：「有先登者，臣從之，皙幘而衣貍製。」公 使視東郭書，曰：「乃夫子也－－吾貺子。」公賞東郭書，辭曰：「彼，賓 旅也。」乃賞犁彌。 齊師之在夷儀也，齊侯謂夷儀人曰：「得敝無存者，以五家免。」 乃得其尸。公三襚之，與之犀軒與直蓋，而先歸之。坐引者，以師哭之， 親推之三。

207 Zhongmou 中牟 was located either west of present-day Tangyin County 湯陰縣, Henan, southwest of the Wei capital, or between present-day Xingtai and Handan, Hebei, northwest of the Wei capital. The expedition to Wushi, mentioned in the next line, would take the Wei ruler north toward Handan. The two locations had historically been sites of the capital of Xing 邢. 208 Du Yu (ZZ 55.969) explains that in his anger the Wei ruler disregards the failure of the divination and believes that his own charisma or leadership can make up for the disparity in forces.

1792

Zuo Tradition

As Dongguo Shu was vying to climb the wall, Wang Menga followed behind him and said, “You vie to go left, and I will vie to go right. We will go down only after all the climbers have arrived.” Dongguo Shua went to the left, but Wang Mengb went down before him. As Dongguo Shua and Wang Meng were resting, Wang Mengc said, “I was the first to climb the wall.” Dongguo Shua tightened his armor and said, “You made trouble then, and now you are making trouble again!” Smiling, Wang Mengc said, “I followed you as closely as a trace horse on its lead.” One thousand Jin chariots were at Zhongmou.207 The Prince of Wei, who was preparing to go to Wushi, divined by turtle shell about going past them. When the turtle shell was scorched, the Prince of Wei said, “It is permitted. The Wei chariots are a match for half of them, and I myself am a match for half of them. The forces are therefore equal.”208 They then went past Zhongmou. The Zhongmou leaders wanted to attack them, but Chushi Pu,209 who had taken refuge in Zhongmou, said, “Although Wei is small, its ruler is there, and they cannot be defeated. The Qi army is puffed up after taking a city, and its general is also of low rank.210 If we face them, then we are bound to defeat them. It would be best to go after Qi.” They therefore attacked the Qi army and defeated it. The Prince of Qi handed Gao, Mei, and Xing over to Wei.211 When the Prince of Qi gave Wang Menga a reward, Wang Menga refused it, saying, “There was one who climbed the wall before me, whom I followed. He had a white turban and wore a mantle of fox fur.” After sending someone to look at Dongguo Shu, he said, “So this is the man. I have a prize to give you.” The lord gave Dongguo Shu his reward, but he refused it, saying, “That one is a visitor.”212 So he rewarded Wang Menga. While the Qi army was in Yiyi, the Prince of Qi said to the Yiyi leaders, “Whoever can retrieve Bi Wucun’s body will get five households and exemptions.” They therefore secured his corpse. The lord had him dressed in three suits of clothing, gave him a leather-decorated chariot with a high canopy, and sent him home in advance. Making the hearse pullers kneel, he had the army lament Bi’s death and personally pushed the hearse three times.

9.4b

209 See Zhao 20.4 for his troubles in Wei. 210 The identity of the Qi general is unknown. Du Yu’s statement (ZZ 55.969) that it was Dongguo Shu appears to be unfounded. The city taken was Yiyi. 211 The three towns were situated along Qi’s western frontier. 212 Ruan Zhisheng 阮芝生 (Du zhu shiyi, cited in Yang, 4:1575) argues that Wang Meng had come from another domain to serve in Qi.

Lord Ding

1793

春秋 10.1(1) 十年春王三月，及齊平。 10.2(2) 夏，公會齊侯于夾谷。 10.3 公至自夾谷。 10.4(4) 晉趙鞅帥師圍衛。 10.5(3) 齊人來歸鄆、讙、龜陰田。 10.6(5) 叔孫州仇、仲孫何忌帥師圍郈。 10.7(5) 秋，叔孫州仇、仲孫何忌帥師圍郈。 10.8 宋樂大心出奔曹。 10.9(6) 宋公子地出奔陳。 10.10 冬，齊侯、衛侯、鄭游速會于安甫。 10.11(7) 叔孫州仇如齊。 10.12(6) 宋公之弟辰暨仲佗、石彄出奔陳。

左傳 10.1(1) 十年春，及齊平。

1794

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 10 (500 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal third month, we made peace with Qi.

10.1(1)

In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Jiagu.213

10.2(2)

Our lord arrived from Jiagu.

10.3

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and laid siege to Wei. A Qi leader came to return the lands of Yun, Huan, and Guiyin.

10.4(4) 214

10.5(3)

Shusun Zhouchou and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and laid siege to Hou.215

10.6(5)

In autumn, Shusun Zhouchou and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and laid siege to Hou.

10.7(5)

Yue Daxin of Song departed and fled to Cao.

10.8

Gongzi Di of Song departed and fled to Chen.

10.9(6)

In winter, the Prince of Qi, the Prince of Wei, and You Su of Zheng met at Anfu.216

10.10

Shusun Zhouchou went to Qi.

10.11(7)

Chen, the younger brother of the Duke of Song, departed and fled to Chen, along with Zhong Tuo and Shi Kou.

10.12(6)

ZUO

In the tenth year, in spring, we made peace with Qi.

10.1(1)

213 According to Yang (4:1576), Jiagu 夾谷 was located about 90 kilometers northeast of the Lu capital in present-day Jiawu County 莢蕪縣, Shandong. 214 The towns were all north of the Wen 汶 River, close to Qi. According to Takezoe (28.19), Qi had taken the towns during the turmoil caused by Yang Hu (Ding 8.10). 215 Hou was the main Lu city belonging to the Shusun lineage (see Zhao 25.10). 216 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.976), the location of Anfu 安甫 is unknown. Takezoe (28.30) speculates that Anfu was in Qi, and that this meeting on Qi territory signals success in forming an alliance against Jin under Qi leadership.

Lord Ding

1795

10.2a(2) 夏，公會齊侯于祝其，實夾谷。孔丘相，犁彌言於齊侯曰：「孔丘知禮而

無勇，若使萊人以兵劫魯侯，必得志焉。」齊侯從之。孔丘以公退，曰： 「士兵之！兩君合好，而裔夷之俘以兵亂之，非齊君所以命諸侯也。裔 不謀夏，夷不亂華，俘不干盟，兵不偪好－－於神為不祥，於德為愆義， 於人為失禮，君必不然。」齊侯聞之，遽辟之。 將盟，齊人加於載書曰：「齊師出竟而不以甲車三百乘從我者，有 如此盟！」孔丘使茲無還揖對，曰：「而不反我汶陽之田，吾以共命者亦 如之！」 10.2b 齊侯將享公。孔丘謂梁丘據曰：「齊、魯之故，吾子何不聞焉？事既成

矣，而又享之，是勤執事也。且犧、象不出門，嘉樂不野合。饗而既具， 是棄禮也；若其不具，用秕稗也。用秕稗，君辱；棄禮，名惡。子盍圖之！ 夫享，所以昭德也。不昭，不如其已也。」乃不果享。 10.3(5) 齊人來歸鄆、讙、龜陰之田。

217 The Jiagu episode is recounted in many early texts. For some translations and discussion, see Lewis, Writing and Authority in Early China, 219–27. 218 As Yang (4:1577) points out, assistants to the Lu Lord on ritual occasions were normally ministers, that is, heads of the three Huan lineages. Yang speculates that the turmoil brought on by Yang Hu’s monopoly on power has opened the way for the lower-born Confucius to serve as the lord’s assistant on this occasion. 219 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.976), the Lai men are non-Sinitic Yi survivors of Qi’s destruction of Lai (Xiang 6.7). 220 That is, the curses specified for violators of the covenant will be fulfilled. 221 It is uncertain whether the name should be transcribed Zi Wuxuan or Ziwu Xuan. We follow Du Yu (ZZ 56.976), but see Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 433. 222 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.977), “fine music” was music with bells and chimestones. Takezoe (28.24) cites several instances of ceremonial entertainments offered outside cities but argues that these were exceptions to the rule. 223 According to Du Yu (ZZ 55.977), Confucius knew that the ruler of Qi planned some deception and therefore refused toasts on the basis of ritual requirements.

1796

Zuo Tradition

In a famous episode, Confucius shows resolve, cleverness, and ritual expertise while officiating at a meeting between the Lu ruler and the Qi ruler (see Ding 9.3, 10.1). In summer, our lord met with the Prince of Qi at Zhuqi, properly Jiagu.217 As Confuciusa was assisting,218 Wang Menga said to the Prince of Qi, “Confuciusa understands ritual but lacks valor. If we have Lai men threaten the Prince of Lu with their weapons, we are certain to achieve our aims.”219 The Prince of Qi agreed with this plan. Retreating with our lord, Confuciusa said, “Men, use your weapons! The two rulers have come together with good cheer, yet captive Yi aliens are using their weapons to disrupt the meeting. This is not how the Prince of Qi should command the princes. Aliens should not plot against the Xia domains, Yi should not disrupt the Hua people, captives should not interfere with covenants, and weapons should not strain good cheer. These things are inauspicious with regard to the spirits, they are failures of propriety with regard to virtue, and they are shortcomings in ritual propriety with regard to other men. You, my lord, must not act in this way.” When the Prince of Qi heard this, he immediately sent the Lai men away. As they were about to swear the covenant, the Qi leaders added language to the document: “If the Qi army should go across its frontiers and Lu does not accompany us with three hundred chariots, then let this covenant be our pledge!”220 Confuciusa had Zi Wuxuan 221 salute in response and say, “And should you not return our lands north of the Wen River, with which we shall obey your commands, then too let this covenant be our pledge!”

10.2a(2)

The Prince of Qi was going to offer our lord ceremonial toasts. Confuciusa said to Liangqiu Ju, “How is it that you have not heard the ancient practice of Qi and Lu? Going on to offer our lord toasts once the ceremony has been completed will overtax the functionaries. What is more, the wine vessels in the shapes of the sacrificial bulls and the elephants do not go out the gates, nor is fine music played in the wilds.222 To feast with all these items furnished would be to discard ritual propriety. And if all is not furnished, then the implements will be of the meanest sort. With implements of the meanest sort, your ruler will be disgraced. But discarding ritual propriety means his reputation will be ruined. Why not reconsider? Ceremonial toasts are for displaying virtue, and if there is no such display, then it would be best to do without.” Therefore, they did not end up having toasts.223

10.2b

A Qi leader came to return the lands of Yun, Huan, and Guiyin.

10.3(5)

Lord Ding

1797

10.4(4) 晉趙鞅圍衛，報夷儀也。

初，衛侯伐邯鄲午於寒氏，城其西北而守之，宵熸。及晉圍衛，午 以徒七十人門於衛西門，殺人於門中，曰：「請報寒氏之役。」涉佗曰： 「夫子則勇矣；然我往，必不敢啟門。」亦以徒七十人旦門焉，步左右， 皆至而立如植。日中不啟門，乃退。 反役，晉人討衛之叛故，曰：「由涉佗、成何。」於是執涉佗，以求 成於衛。衛人不許。晉人遂殺涉佗，成何奔燕。 君子曰：「此之謂棄禮，必不鈞。《詩》曰： 人而無禮， 胡不遄死？ 涉佗亦遄矣哉！」 10.5a(6) 初，叔孫成子欲立武叔，公若藐固諫曰：「不可。」成子立之而卒。公南

使賊射之，不能殺。 公南為馬正，使公若為郈宰。武叔既定，使郈馬正侯犯殺公若，不 能。其圉人曰：「吾以劍過朝，公若必曰：『誰之劍也？』吾稱子以告，必 觀之。吾偽固而授之末，則可殺也。」使如之。公若曰：「爾欲吳王我 乎？」遂殺公若。

224 See Ding 9.4. 225 Fang Xuanchen (“Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 369–70) argues that Wu of Handan was of the Zhao lineage. According to Yang (4:1579), Hanshi is Wushi, mentioned in Ding 9.4. 226 According to Yang (4:1580), the unfairness (or “unevenness,” bujun 不鈞) is the disparity in the punishments suffered by She Tuo and Cheng He for a shared offense. 227 Maoshi 52, “Xiang shu” 相鼠, 3B.122–23. Cf. Zhao 3.4a. 228 The text is ambiguous at this point. Gongnan was a household retainer of the Shusun line. According to Yang Shuda (cited in Yang, 4:1580), he sided with Gongruo Miao and here attempts to kill Zhouchou, whose succession Gongruo Miao opposed. Du Yu (ZZ 56.978) states, however, that Gongnan sided with Shusun Zhouchou. The actions of Hou Fan make Yang Shuda’s interpretation more plausible. 229 The sense may be that Shusun Zhouchou tried to have Hou Fan kill Gongruo Miao but did not succeed in having him accept the mission. Hou Fan’s rebellion and resistance to the siege by Shusun Zhouchou and Meng Yizi suggest that he was not of Shusun Zhouchou’s party and feared that he would be killed as Gongruo Miao had been. 230 “Court” here is the court that Gongruo Miao oversees as steward of Hou. 231 For the assassination of the Wu king, Liao, see Zhao 27.2.

1798

Zuo Tradition

In continuing operations against the new Qi alliance, Jin attacks Wei. Wu of Handan and She Tuo of Jin vie in demonstrations of bravado. She Tuo is put to death for his role in disturbing Jin-Wei relations (see Ding 8.7). Zhao Yang of Jin laid siege to Wei; this was in revenge for Yiyi.224 Earlier, the Prince of Wei had attacked Wu of Handan at Hanshi.225 When he took the northwestern part of the wall and held it, Wu slipped away by night. When Jin laid siege to Wei, Wu attacked Wei’s western gate with seventy troops. Having killed someone inside the gate, Wu said, “Allow me to repay you for the Hanshi campaign.” She Tuo said, “The man is brave, to be sure. But if I go, they will certainly not dare to open the gate.” So he too took seventy troops and attacked the gate at dawn. The troops marched to the left and the right of the gate, then all stood as still as trees when they had reached their places. By noon, the gate had not been opened, and they withdrew. On returning from the campaign, the Jin leaders conducted an inquiry into the reasons for Wei’s estrangement, and said, “It was because of She Tuo and Cheng He.” With that they arrested She Tuo in order to seek reconciliation with Wei. Because the Wei leaders did not grant it, the Jin leaders put She Tuo to death, and Cheng He fled to Yan. The noble man said, “This is what we mean by saying, ‘Discarding ritual propriety invariably results in unfairness.’226 As it says in the Odes,

10.4(4)

A man, yet he lacks ritual propriety: Why should he not die quickly?227

She Tuo did indeed die quickly.” No sooner have the troubles of Lu’s Jisun lineage and the rebellion of Yang Hu ended (Zhao 9.3) than similar troubles arise in the Shusun lineage. Earlier, Shusun Bugana had wanted to designate Shusun Zhouchoua as his heir, but Gongruo Miao had remonstrated stubbornly, saying, “It is not to be permitted.” Shusun Bugand died after having designated Zhouchou. Gongnan had assassins shoot at Zhouchou, but they did not succeed in killing him.228 While serving as the director of horses, Gongnan had appointed Gongruo Miaoa as steward of Hou. Once Shusun Zhouchoua had established himself, he sent the Hou director of horses, Hou Fan, to kill Gong­ ruo Miaoa, but he did not succeed.229 One of Shusun Zhouchou’s grooms said, “If I pass through court with a sword,230 Gongruo Miaoa is bound to say, ‘Whose sword is that?’ I will refer to you as I tell him, and he is certain to examine it. If I pretend to be uncouth and present it to him blade first, then he can be killed.” Shusun Zhouchou had him carry out the plan in that way. Gongruo Miaoa asked, “Do you want to treat me like the Wu king?”231 And so Gongruo Miaoa was killed.

10.5a(6)

Lord Ding

1799



侯犯以郈叛，武叔、懿子圍郈。弗克。

10.5b(7) 秋，二子及齊師復圍郈，弗克。叔孫謂郈工師駟赤曰：「郈非唯叔孫氏

之憂，社稷之患也，將若之何？」對曰：「臣之業在《揚水》卒章之四言 矣。」叔孫稽首。 駟赤謂侯犯曰：「居齊、魯之際而無事，必不可矣。子盍求事於齊 以臨民？不然，將叛。」侯犯從之。 齊使至。駟赤與郈人為之宣言於郈中曰：「侯犯將以郈易于齊， 齊人將遷郈民。」眾兇懼。駟赤謂侯犯曰：「眾言異矣。子不如易於齊， 與其死也，猶是郈也，而得紓焉，何必此？齊人欲以此偪魯，必倍與子 地。且盍多舍甲於子之門以備不虞。」侯犯曰：「諾。」乃多舍甲焉。侯犯 請易於齊，齊有司觀郈。將至，駟赤使周走呼曰：「齊師至矣！」郈人大 駭，介侯犯之門甲，以圍侯犯。駟赤將射之，侯犯止之，曰：「謀免我。」 侯犯請行，許之。駟赤先如宿，侯犯殿。每出一門，郈人閉之。及郭門， 止之，曰：「子以叔孫氏之甲出，有司若誅之，群臣懼死。」駟赤曰：「叔 孫氏之甲有物，吾未敢以出。」犯謂駟赤曰：「子止而與之數。」駟赤止， 而納魯人。侯犯奔齊。齊人乃致郈。

232 It is uncertain whether the name should be transcribed Si Chi or if both graphs belong to his given name, Sichi. According to Fang Xuanchen (“Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu,” 398), he may be the Rang Sichi mentioned at Shiji 67.2221. 233 Maoshi 116, “Yang zhi shui” 揚之水, 4A.150. The closing lines read: “I have heard that there is a command; / I do not dare tell others of it” 我聞有命，不敢以告人. “Four words” probably refers to the first of these lines. 234 Si Chi has agreed to help Shusun Zhouchou with the problems at Hou, and Shusun now expresses his gratitude with a bow. 235 According to Yang (4:1582), Su was a Qi settlement about 10 li west of Hou. See Yin 1.8. 236 Takezoe (28.28) suggests that Si Chi was not far ahead of Hou Fan and came back to the outer wall as the Hou people questioned Hou Fan. 237 According to Yang (4:1582), Hou Fan had handed over the maps and registers of Hou to Qi in preparation for the land swap.

1800

Zuo Tradition

Hou Fan led Hou in rebellion. Shusun Zhouchoua and Meng Yizic laid siege to Hou, but they failed to take it. Through clever strategizing, Si Chi of the city of Hou outwits his rebel master, Hou Fan, fends off advances from Qi, and keeps his city as a Shusun lineage possession within Lu (see Ding 10.7). In autumn, the two noblemen, with the Qi army, again laid siege to Hou, but they failed to take it. Shusun Zhouchoub said to Si Chi,232 the Hou preceptor of artisans, “Hou is not merely a concern for the Shusun lineage; it is a worry for the altars of the domain. What will you do about it?” He replied, “My business is in four words in the last stanza of ‘Coursing Waters.’”233 Shusun Zhouchoub bowed his head to the ground.234 Si Chi said to Hou Fan, “It is inevitably impossible to dwell on the border between Qi and Lu and to serve neither. Why not seek to serve Qi in order to oversee the people? Otherwise, they will turn against you.” Hou Fan followed his advice. When Qi envoys arrived, Si Chi and the Hou men made an announcement about it throughout Hou, saying, “Hou Fan is going to trade Hou to Qi, and the Qi leaders are going to relocate the people of Hou.” The multitude were worried and fearful. Si Chi said to Hou Fan, “The multitude have voiced their opposition. It would be better to trade it to Qi than to die; if the town you get is equivalent to this town of Hou, and you manage to win a respite, then why is it necessary to stay here? The Qi leaders want to use this town to put pressure on Lu, and they are certain to give you double the land. Also, why not put plenty of armor at your gate in order to be prepared for the unexpected?” Hou Fan said, “Agreed.” He therefore put plenty of armor there. Hou Fan asked to trade with Qi and asked that the Qi officers in charge inspect Hou. When they were about to arrive, Si Chi had runners go everywhere shouting, “The Qi army is here!” Terrified, the people of Hou put on the armor at Hou Fan’s gate and surrounded his home. Si Chi was going to shoot at them, but Hou Fan stopped him, saying, “Make plans to save me.” Hou Fan then asked permission to leave and it was granted. While Si Chi went on ahead to Su, Hou Fan guarded the rear.235 Each time he went out a gate, the people of Hou closed it behind him. When he reached the gate in the outer wall, they stopped him and said, “You are departing with armor belonging to the Shusun lineage. Should the officers in charge bring charges on account of this, we subjects fear that it is we who will die.” Si Chi said,236 “The Shusun lineage’s armor bears a mark. We have not dared take it with us.” Hou Fana said to Si Chi, “Stay here and do a count with them.” Si Chi stayed and admitted the men of Lu, at which point Hou Fan fled to Qi. As a result, the Qi leaders handed over Hou.237

10.5b(7)

Lord Ding

1801



10.6(9, 12)

宋公子地嬖蘧富獵，十一分其室，而以其五與之。公子地有白馬四，公 嬖向魋，魋欲之。公取而朱其尾、鬣以與之。地怒，使其徒抶魋而奪之。 魋懼，將走，公閉門而泣之，目盡腫。 母弟辰曰：「子分室以與臘也，而獨卑魋，亦有頗焉。子為君禮，不 過出竟，君必止子。」公子地出奔陳，公弗止。辰為之請，弗聽。辰曰： 「是我迋吾兄也。吾以國人出，君誰與處？」冬，母弟辰暨仲佗、石彄出 奔陳。

10.7(11) 武叔聘于齊，齊侯享之，曰：「子叔孫！若使郈在君之他竟，寡人何知

焉？屬與敝邑際，故敢助君憂之。」對曰：「非寡君之望也。所以事君，封 疆社稷是以，敢以家隸勤君之執事？夫不令之臣，天下之所惡也，君豈 以為寡君賜？」

238 According to Yang (4:1582), Gongzi Di is a younger brother of Duke Jing, the current ruler of Song, but is older than the younger full brother Chen who is mentioned below. 239 Possibly, ti 體 should be read for li 禮: “You are of the same stock as the ruler.” See Yang, 4:1582.

1802

Zuo Tradition

Favoritism and jealousy send members of the Song ruling house into exile (see Ding 9.1, 11.1). Gongzi Di of Song favored Qu Fulie.238 Dividing his property into eleven parts, he gave five to him. Gongzi Di had four white horses. The Lord of Song favored Xiang Tui, and Xiang Tuia wanted the horses. The lord took them, dyed their tails and manes vermilion, and gave them to him. Infuriated, Gongzi Dia had his attendants give Xiang Tuia a beating and seize the horses from him. Xiang Tuia was so afraid that he was going to run away, but the lord closed the gate and cried over him, so that his eyes were swollen shut. Chen, the lord’s younger full brother, said to Gongzi Di, “You divided your house to make a gift to Qu Fulie, and yet you treated Xiang Tuia like an underling. You have certainly shown a bias in this matter. You serve the ruler with ritual propriety,239 and if you so much as cross beyond the borders, he is sure to stop you.” Gongzi Di departed and fled to the domain of Chen, but the lord did not stop him. Chen made requests on his behalf, but the lord did not heed him. Chen said, “This amounts to my having deceived my elder brother. If I depart with the inhabitants of the capital, then who will stay with the ruler here?” In winter, Chen, the younger brother, departed and fled to Chen, along with Zhong Tuo and Shi Kou.240

10.6(9, 12)

Shusun Zhouchou refuses to recognize as a favor Qi’s willingness to abandon claims to the Lu city of Hou (see Ding 10.5). Shusun Zhouchoua made an official visit to Qi. When the Prince of Qi offered him ceremonial toasts, he said, “Sir Shusun! Were Hou located somewhere else on your ruler’s frontiers, what would I know of it? But it happens to share a border with our humble settlement, and I have therefore presumed to assist your ruler in worrying about it.” Shusun replied, “This is not something that our unworthy ruler should even hope for. The reason we serve you, my lord, is for the sake of our borders and our domain’s altars, nothing more. Would we presume to trouble your functionaries on account of our domestic servants?241 Bad subjects are despised everywhere in the world, so how could you consider this a gift to our ruler?”

10.7(11)

240 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.979), Zhong Tuo and Shi Kou are the sons of Zhong Ji and Chushi Duan, respectively, and were of ministerial rank. 241 The domestic servant in question is Hou Fan.

Lord Ding

1803

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年春宋公之弟辰及仲佗、石彄、公子地自陳入于蕭以叛。 11.2 夏四月。 11.3(1) 秋，宋樂大心自曹入于蕭。 11.4(2) 冬，及鄭平。叔還如鄭蒞盟。

左傳

11.1(1, 3)

十一年春，宋公母弟辰暨仲佗、石彄、公子地入于蕭以叛。秋，樂大心 從之，大為宋患，寵向魋故也。

11.2(4) 冬，及鄭平，始叛晉也。

春秋 12.1 十有二年春，薛伯定卒。 12.2 夏，葬薛襄公。 12.3(2) 叔孫州仇帥師墮郈。 12.4(1) 衛公孟彄帥師伐曹。 12.5(2) 季孫斯、仲孫何忌帥師墮費。 12.6 秋，大雩。 12.7 冬十月癸亥，公會齊侯盟于黃。

242 Xiao was a Song settlement northwest of present-day Xiao County, Anhui, about 120 kilometers east and slightly south of the Song capital (see map 2). 243 Yue Daxin left Song for Cao after trouble with the Song Duke. See Ding 9.1; Annals, Ding 10.8.

1804

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 11 (499 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, Chen, the younger brother of the Duke of Song, with Zhong Tuo, Shi Kou, and Gongzi Di, entered Xiao from Chen and led it in revolt.242

11.1(1)

Summer, the fourth month.

11.2

In autumn, Yue Daxin of Song entered Xiao from Cao.

11.3(1)

In winter, we made peace with Zheng. Shu Xuan went to Zheng to oversee the swearing of the covenant.

11.4(2)

ZUO

Disaffected Song nobles openly rebel against the Song ruler (see Ding 9.1, 10.6, 15.4). In the eleventh year, in spring, Chen, the younger brother of the Duke of Song, with Zhong Tuo, Shi Kou, and Gongzi Di, entered Xiao from Chen and led it in rebellion. In autumn, Yue Daxin followed them, and they created great trouble for Song.243 This was because of the favor shown Xiang Tui.

11.1(1, 3)

In winter, we made peace with Zheng. This was the beginning of the break with Jin.244

11.2(4)

LORD DING 12 (498 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, Ding, the Liege of Xue, died.

12.1

In summer, Lord Xiang of Xue was buried.

12.2

Shusun Zhouchou led out troops and razed the walls of Hou.

12.3(2)

Gongmeng Kou of Wei led out troops and attacked Cao.

12.4(1)

Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and razed the walls of Bi.

12.5(2)

In autumn, there was a great rain sacrifice.

12.6

In winter, in the tenth month, on the guihai day (27), our lord met with the Prince of Qi and swore a covenant at Huang.245

12.7

244 Zheng has allied itself with Qi and Wei. See Annals, Ding 10.10. 245 Huang was to the northeast of present-day Linzi, Shandong, not far from the Qi capital (see Huan 17.1).

Lord Ding

1805

12.8 十有一月丙寅朔，日有食之。 12.9 公至自黃。 12.10(2) 十有二月，公圍成。 12.11 公至自圍成。

左傳 12.1(4) 十二年夏，衛公孟彄伐曹，克郊。還，滑羅殿。未出，不退於列。其御曰：

「殿而在列，其為無勇乎！」羅曰：「與其素厲，寧為無勇。」

12.2(3, 5, 10)

仲由為季氏宰，將墮三都，於是叔孫氏墮郈。季氏將墮費，公山不狃、 叔孫輒帥費人以襲魯。公與三子入于季氏之宮，登武子之臺。費人攻 之，弗克。入及公側，仲尼命申句須、樂頎下，伐之，費人北。國人追之， 敗諸姑蔑。二子奔齊，遂墮費。 將墮成，公斂處父謂孟孫：「墮成，齊人必至于北門。且成，孟氏 之保障也。無成，是無孟氏也。子偽不知，我將不墮。」冬十二月，公圍 成，弗克。

246 The date is incorrect. According to Yang (4:1585), the eclipse took place on 22 September 498 Bce. Several authorities he cites argue that whoever calculated the date of the eclipse failed to figure in an intercalary month earlier in the year. 247 Jiao 郊 was a Cao settlement, perhaps near present-day Heze County 菏澤縣, Shandong, northwest of the Cao capital. 248 Zhong You, better known as Zilu, is famous as one of the disciples of Confucius, appearing in numerous passages in Analects, where he shows a marked interest in the practical problems of governing. Shiji 47.1916 follows the Zuo account almost verbatim but, significantly, credits Confucius rather than Zilu with the idea of razing the three cities’ walls. 249 Both men were disaffected with the Ji lineage; see Ding 8.10a. 250 The three noblemen are the heads of the three Huan lineages. 251 This Yue Qi is a Lu high minister, not the Song minister mentioned in Ding 6.6 and elsewhere. 252 Gumie 姑蔑, called Mie at Yin 1.2, was about 50 kilometers due east of the Lu capital, on the way to Bi. 253 The two noblemen are Gongshan Buniu and Shusun Zhe. 254 According to Fu Qian (Jijie commentary on Shiji 47.1916, cited in Yang, 4:1587), Gonglian Chufu is steward of Cheng. He here reports to the head of the Meng lineage. 255 Cheng lay about 25 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital and would have been a crucial element of Lu’s defenses against invasion by Qi (see map 2).

1806

Zuo Tradition

In the eleventh month, on the bingyin day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.246

12.8

Our lord arrived from Huang.

12.9

In the twelfth month, our lord laid siege to Cheng.

12.10(2)

Our lord arrived from laying siege to Cheng.

12.11

ZUO

Cao, host to the Song exile Yue Daxin (Annals, Ding 10.8, 11.3), is in the Jin camp and thus outside the Qi-Wei alliance. A Wei attack on Cao occasions reflections on the true nature of valor (see Ding 14.8). In the twelfth year, in summer, Gongmeng Kou of Wei attacked Cao and reduced Jiao.247 As they returned, Hua Luo guarded the rear. Until the army had left Cao, he did not pull back from the main lines. His driver said, “To remain in the lines while guarding the rear is surely to lack valor!” Hua Luoa said, “Better to lack valor than to make an empty show of force.”

12.1(4)

As the cities that have served as the three Huan lineages’ power bases gain power and begin to resist the authority of their noble masters, the Lu ruling house and the three noble lineages attempt to rein them in by razing their walls (see Ding 10.7). The willingness of lineage stewards to act against lineage interests recalls the earlier rebellion of Nan Kuai (Zhao 12.10a) and similar events in Wei (Zhao 20.4d). As steward for the Ji lineage, Zhong You was going to raze the walls of the three main cities, and it was at this point that Shusun Zhouchoub razed the walls of Hou.248 When the Ji lineage was preparing to raze the walls of Bi, Gongshan Buniu and Shusun Zhe led the men of Bi in a surprise attack on Lu.249 Our lord and the three noblemen entered the palace of the Ji lineage and ascended Ji Wuzic’s terrace.250 The men of Bi attacked them but did not prevail. When they had advanced to very near our lord, Confuciusc ordered Shen Quxu and Yue Qi251 to go down and attack them. The men of Bi were duly routed, and the inhabitants of the Lu capital pursued them and defeated them at Gumie.252 The two noblemen253 fled to Qi, and Bi’s walls were then razed. As they were about to raze the walls of Cheng, Gonglian Yanga said to Meng Yizie,254 “If you raze the walls of Cheng, the Qi forces are sure to arrive at Lu’s northern gate.255 What is more, Cheng is the fortress of the Meng lineage. If there is no Cheng, there is no Meng lineage. You pretend not to know, and I will not raze the walls.” In winter, our lord laid siege to Cheng but did not reduce it.

12.2(3, 5, 10)

Lord Ding

1807

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年春，齊侯、衛侯次于垂葭。 13.2 夏，築蛇淵囿。 13.3 大蒐于比蒲。 13.4 衛公孟彄帥師伐曹。 13.5(2) 秋，晉趙鞅入于晉陽以叛。 13.6(2) 冬，晉荀寅、士吉射入于朝歌以叛。 13.7(2) 晉趙鞅歸于晉。 13.8 薛弒其君比。

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年春，齊侯、衛侯次于垂葭，實郹氏。使師伐晉。將濟河，諸大夫皆

曰不可，邴意茲曰：「可。銳師伐河內，傳必數日而後及絳。絳不三月不 能出河，則我既濟水矣。」乃伐河內。齊侯皆斂諸大夫之軒，唯邴意茲 乘軒。 齊侯欲與衛侯乘，與之宴而駕乘廣，載甲焉。使告曰：「晉師至 矣！」齊侯曰：「比君之駕也，寡人請攝。」乃介而與之乘，驅之。或告曰： 「無晉師。」乃止。

256 Chuijia 垂葭 was perhaps located southwest of Juye County 巨野縣, Shandong. 257 Cf. Annals, Zhao 11.3, Ding 14.13. Du Yu (ZZ 56.980) suggests that the event is recorded because summer was the wrong season for a muster, but Takezoe (28.35) shows that musters were sometimes held in response to military activity among Lu’s neighbors. 258 Jinyang 晉陽 was southwest of present-day Taiyuan 太原, Shanxi, in the north of Jin territory.

1808

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 13 (497 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Chuijia.256

13.1(1)

In summer, the Sheyuan Garden was built.

13.2

There was a great muster at Bipu.

13.3

257

Gongmeng Kou of Wei led out troops and attacked Cao. In autumn, Zhao Yang of Jin entered Jinyang and led it in a revolt.

13.4 258

13.5(2)

In winter, Xun Yin (Zhonghang Yin) and Shi Jishe (Fan Jishe) of Jin entered Zhaoge and led it in a revolt.259

13.6(2)

Zhao Yang of Jin went home to Jin.

13.7(2)

Xue assassinated its ruler Bi.

13.8

ZUO

Qi and Wei campaign against Jin (see Ding 9.4, 10.4). In the thirteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Chuijia, properly Jushi, and had their armies attack Jin. As the armies were preparing to cross the Yellow River, all the high officers said it would not do, except for Bing Yizi, who said, “It can be done. If a crack force attacks on the Jin side of the Yellow River,260 relay carriages will reach Jiang only after several days.261 From Jiang they will not be able to put an army across the Yellow River in less than three months, and by then we will already have crossed.” Therefore, they attacked on the Jin side of the Yellow River. The Prince of Qi confiscated all the high officers’ canopies, allowing only Bing Yizi to ride in a canopied chariot. Wanting to ride with the Prince of Wei, the Prince of Qi feasted him. He had a command chariot harnessed and loaded with armor and then had someone report, “The Jin army is here!” The Prince of Qi said, “Until your chariot is harnessed, permit me to put mine at your disposal.” He therefore armed him and had him board the chariot. He urged the horses forward and stopped only when someone reported, “There is no Jin army.”

13.1(1)

259 Zhaoge was far to the east of the Jin capital, near Wei and present-day Qi County, Henan (see Xiang 23.4). 260 This would have been in territory corresponding to Ji 汲, north of the Yellow River in Henan. 261 Jiang was the first Jin capital, about 250 kilometers west of where the Qi and Wei armies would have crossed the Yellow River (see map 3).

Lord Ding

1809

13.2a(5–7) 晉趙鞅謂邯鄲午曰：「歸我衛貢五百家，吾舍諸晉陽。」午許諾。歸告

其父兄。父兄皆曰：「不可。衛是以為邯鄲，而寘諸晉陽，絕衛之道也。 不如侵齊而謀之。」乃如之，而歸之于晉陽。趙孟怒，召午，而囚諸晉 陽，使其從者說劍而入，涉賓不可。乃使告邯鄲人曰：「吾私有討於午 也，二三子唯所欲立。」遂殺午。趙稷、涉賓以邯鄲叛。 夏六月，上軍司馬籍秦圍邯鄲。邯鄲午，荀寅之甥也；荀寅，范吉 射之姻也，而相與睦，故不與圍邯鄲，將作亂。董安于聞之，告趙孟，曰： 「先備諸？」趙孟曰：「晉國有命，始禍者死，為後可也。」安于曰：「與其 害於民，寧我獨死。請以我說。」趙孟不可。秋七月，范氏、中行氏伐趙 氏之宮，趙鞅奔晉陽，晉人圍之。 13.2b 范皋夷無寵於范吉射，而欲為亂於范氏。梁嬰父嬖於知文子，文子欲以

為卿。韓簡子與中行文子相惡，魏襄子亦與范昭子相惡。故五子謀，將 逐荀寅，而以梁嬰父代之；逐范吉射，而以范皋夷代之。

262 Zhao Yang and this man, Zhao Wu of Handan, are distant relations, their common ancestor being Zhao Su 趙夙, father of the mid-seventh-century Zhao Cui. According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.981), Wei had handed over five hundred households after the siege in Ding 10.5. These households were placed in Handan. Zhao Yang is building a power base at Jinyang and plans to add the Wei households to Jinyang’s population. 263 Du Yu (ZZ 56.981) explains: if Handan invades Qi, then Qi is sure to retaliate. Handan can then claim that invasion as a reason for handing over the five hundred Wei households to Jinyang, and Handan will preserve its good ties with Wei. 264 Zhao Yang was infuriated either because Wu had not obeyed his commands or because, owing to the time it took to invade Qi, Wu was late in obeying his command. 265 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.981), this She Bin, who refuses to give up his sword, is one of Wu’s household retainers.

1810

Zuo Tradition

As predicted by Confucius (see Ding 9.3), trouble strikes the Zhao line of Jin as its leaders fight over control of the cities of Handan and Jinyang; the Zhao line battles against the Jin ruling house and the Fan and Zhonghang lines (see Ding 10.5). Fan Jishe and Zhonghang Yin lose and are forced from power (see Ding 14.2, 14.6). Zhao Yang of Jin said to Wu of Handan, “Send me the five hundred households submitted by Wei, and I will settle them in Jinyang.”262 Wu agreed. Returning to Handan, he told the elders of the town, who all replied, “It is not to be done, since it is for the sake of those households that Wei acts on Handan’s behalf; to put them in Jinyang would be to cut off all channels with Wei. It would be better to strategize for it by invading Qi.”263 So Wu did precisely that and then sent the households to Jinyang. Infuriated, Zhao Yange summoned Wu and imprisoned him in Jinyang.264 He told Wu’s attendants to remove their swords before they entered Jinyang with Wu, but She Bin would not comply.265 Zhao Yang sent someone out to announce to the Handan men, “My punishment of Wu is a private matter. Gentlemen, please set up whoever you please in his stead.” He then put Wu to death. Zhao Ji and She Bin led Handan in revolt.266 In summer, in the sixth month, Ji Qin, the supervisor of the military for the upper army, laid siege to Handan. Wu of Handan was the nephew of Zhonghang Yina; Zhonghang Yina was Fan Jishe’s father-in-law. The two of them were close, so they did not take part in the siege of Handan but instead were preparing to start a rebellion. Dong Anyu heard of it and informed Zhao Yange, saying, “Shall we prepare for it beforehand?” Zhao Yange said, “There are orders in the domain of Jin that whoever starts trouble dies. It will be all right to act afterward.” Dong Anyua said, “Better for me to die alone than for the people to suffer harm. Please use me as a scapegoat.” Zhao Yange would not permit it. In autumn, in the seventh month, the Fan and Zhonghang lineages attacked the palace of the Zhao line. Zhao Yang fled to Jinyang, which the men of Jin besieged.

13.2a(5–7)

There is trouble within the Fan and Zhonghang camp. Fan Gaoyi enjoyed no favor with Fan Jishe, so he wished to stage a revolt within the Fan lineage. Liang Yingfu was favored by Zhi Wenzi, who wanted to make him a minister.267 Han Buxinb and Zhonghang Yinb detested each other, as did Wei Manduoa and Fan Jisheb. The five noblemen268 therefore plotted together to expel Zhonghang Yina and put Liang Yingfu in his place, and to expel Fan Jishe and put Fan Gaoyi in his place.

13.2b

266 Zhao Ji is the son of the imprisoned man, Zhao Wu of Handan. 267 Zhi Wenzi (Xun Li) is distantly related to Zhonghang Yin (Xun Yin) through Xun Linfu (Zhonghang Huanzi), who was active in the mid–seventh century. 268 I.e., Fan Gaoyi, Liang Yingfu, Zhi Wenzi, Han Buxin, and Wei Manduo.

Lord Ding

1811

荀躒言於晉侯曰：「君命大臣，始禍者死，載書在河。今三臣始 禍，而獨逐鞅，刑已不鈞矣。請皆逐之。」冬十一月，荀躒、韓不信、魏曼 多奉公以伐范氏、中行氏，弗克。 二子將伐公。齊高彊曰：「三折肱知為良醫。唯伐君為不可，民弗 與也。我以伐君在此矣。三家未睦，可盡克也。克之，君將誰與？若先伐 君，是使睦也。」弗聽，遂伐公。國人助公，二子敗，從而伐之。丁未，荀 寅、士吉射奔朝歌。韓、魏以趙氏為請。十二月辛末，趙鞅入于絳，盟于 公宮。 13.3 初，衛公叔文子朝，而請享靈公。退，見史鰌而告之。史鰌曰：「子必禍

矣！子富而君貪，其及子乎！」文子曰：「然。吾不先告子，是吾罪也。君 既許我矣，其若之何？」史鰌曰：「無害。子臣，可以免。富而能臣，必免 於難。上下同之。戍也驕，其亡乎！富而不驕者鮮，吾唯子之見。驕而不 亡者，未之有也。戍必與焉。」及文子卒，衛侯始惡於公叔戍，以其富 也。公叔戍又將去夫人之黨，夫人愬之曰：「戍將為亂。」

269 The three subjects, according to Jia Kui (Jijie commentary on Shiji 43.1790, cited in Yang, 4:1590), are the Fan, Zhonghang, and Zhao lines. Zhao Yang has already withdrawn to Jinyang (Ding 13.2a). For the concern with fairness in punishments, see also Ding 10.4. 270 Fan Jishe and Zhonghang Yin. 271 For Gao Qiang’s departure from Qi, see Zhao 10.2. 272 The three houses are the Zhi, Han, and Wei lineages, the lineages that have just shifted their allegiance to the lord. 273 The wife of Lord Ling (r. 534–493) was known as Nan Zi. Her faction was the faction of Zizhao of Song (see Ding 14.8), a Song Duke’s son, with whom Nan Zi had been on intimate terms during her younger years in her home domain of Song.

1812

Zuo Tradition

Zhi Wenzia said to the Prince of Jin, “By your command to your great subjects, whoever starts trouble dies; the covenant document has been consigned to the Yellow River. Now three subjects are starting trouble, yet only Zhao Yangc has been expelled. The punishments are unfair.269 I request that all be expelled.” In winter, in the eleventh month, Zhi Wenzia, Han Buxin, and Wei Manduo attacked the Fan and Zhonghang lineages on the lord’s orders but they were unsuccessful. The two noblemen270 were going to attack the Lord of Jin, but Gao Qiang of Qi said, “When you have broken your arm three times, you know how to practice good medicine. The one thing that must not be done is to attack the ruler, for the people will not support you. It is precisely because I attacked the ruler that I am here.271 As long as the three houses are not working in concert, all of them can be defeated.272 Once defeated, who will the ruler side with? But if you first attack the ruler, you will cause them to work in concert.” They did not heed him and attacked the lord. When the inhabitants of the capital went to the aid of the lord, the two noblemen were defeated and were then pursued and attacked. On the dingwei day (18) of the month, Zhonghang Yina and Fan Jishe fled to Zhaoge. The Han and Wei lineages pled Zhao’s case with the Lord of Jin, and in the twelfth month, on the xinwei day (12), Zhao Yang entered Jiang and swore a covenant at the lord’s palace. In Wei, the scribe Qiu predicts trouble for Gongshu Shu, the son of the wealthy Gongshu Fa (see Ding 14.1). Earlier, Gongshu Faa of Wei had attended court and invited Lord Ling to ceremonial toasts. As Fa withdrew, he met the scribe Qiu and told him about the audience. The scribe Qiu said, “You are bound to come to grief. You are wealthy and the ruler is greedy. It will catch up with you.” Gongshu Fab said, “That is so. That I did not inform you first is my fault. Now that the ruler has granted my request, what should I do about it?” The scribe Qiu said, “No harm will be done. Act like a subject and you can be saved. Whoever is wealthy and yet can act as a subject can always be saved from trouble, whether highborn or low. As for your son Gong­ shu Shua, he is arrogant, and he will fall. Few are the men who are wealthy and yet not arrogant; you are the only such man I have seen. And there has never been a man who was arrogant and yet did not fall. Gongshu Shua will be one of those.” When Gongshu Fab died, the Prince of Wei was already on bad terms with Gongshu Shu on account of his wealth, and Gongshu Shu was also preparing to eliminate the faction around the lord’s wife.273 The lord’s wife informed against him, saying, “Gongshu Shua is going to start a revolt.”

13.3

Lord Ding

1813

春秋 14.1(1) 十有四年春，衛公叔戍來奔。衛趙陽出奔宋。 14.2(3) 二月辛巳，楚公子結、陳公孫佗人帥師滅頓，以頓子牂歸。 14.3(4) 夏，衛北宮結來奔。 14.4(5) 五月，於越敗吳于檇李。 14.5(5) 吳子光卒。 14.6(6) 公會齊侯、衛侯于牽。 14.7 公至自會。 14.8(7) 秋，齊侯、宋公會于洮。 14.9 天王使石尚來歸脤。 14.10(8) 衛世子蒯聵出奔宋。 14.11(8) 衛公孟彄出奔鄭。 14.12 宋公之弟辰自蕭來奔。 14.13 大蒐于比蒲。 14.14 邾子來會公。 14.15 城莒父及霄。

左傳 14.1(1) 十四年春，衛侯逐公叔戍與其黨，故趙陽奔宋，戍來奔。

274 Note that this is Zhao Yang of Wei, not the more famous Zhao Yang of Jin. According to Mao Qiling (cited in Yang, 4:1592), Zhao Yang is forced out of Wei because he is allied with Gongshu Shu against the lord and his wife. 275 Zuili 檇李 was about 55 kilometers south of the Wu capital at present-day Suzhou, or about 70 kilometers north of the Yue capital at Kuaiji. 276 Qian 牽 was just north of present-day Jun County 浚縣, Henan, about 25 kilometers northwest of the Wei capital. 277 Tao was about 30 kilometers southeast of the Wei capital and, according to Du Yu (ZZ 56.983), was situated in Cao territory (see Xi 8.1). 278 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.983), Shi Shang was one of the king’s officers. 279 See Ding 11.1.

1814

Zuo Tradition

LORD DING 14 (496 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, Gongshu Shu of Wei came in flight. Zhao Yang of Wei departed and fled to Song.274 In the second month, on the xinsi day (23), Gongzi Jie of Chu and Gongsun Tuoren of Chen led out troops and extinguished Dun, taking Zang, the Master of Dun, home with them.

14.1(1)

14.2(3)

In summer, Beigong Jie of Wei came in flight.

14.3(4)

In the fifth month, Yue defeated Wu at Zuili.275

14.4(5)

Guang, the Master of Wu, died.

14.5(5)

Our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei at Qian.276

14.6(6)

Our lord arrived from the meeting.

14.7

In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Duke of Song met at Tao.277

14.8(7)

The Heaven-appointed king sent Shi Shang to us to present sacrificial meat.278

14.9

The Wei heir apparent Kuaikui departed and fled to Song.

14.10(8)

Gongmeng Kou of Wei departed and fled to Zheng.

14.11(8)

Chen, the younger brother of the Duke of Song, came in flight from Xiao.279

14.12

There was a great muster at Bipu.

14.13

The Master of Zhu came and met with our lord.

14.14

We fortified Jufu and Xiao.

14.15

280

ZUO

In a continuation of the events of last year (see Ding 13.3), the ruler of Wei banishes the faction of Gongshu Shu, who has opposed the influence of the ruler’s wife, Nan Zi. In the fourteenth year, in spring, the Prince of Wei expelled Gongshu Shu and his faction. Zhao Yang therefore fled to Song, and Gongshu Shua came in flight to Lu.

14.1(1)

280 According to Yang (4:1594), both cities were located near present-day Ju County 莒 縣, Shandong, in the east of Lu. Du Yu (ZZ 56.983) judges that the Lu ruler fortified these cities in preparation for Jin retaliation after his decision to aid the Fan and Zhonghang lineages (see Ding 14.6). However, the location of the cities made them an unlikely target of Jin attack. Lu may instead have been preparing to defend itself against attack by Wu and Yue in the southeast.

Lord Ding

1815

14.2 梁嬰父惡董安于，謂知文子曰：「不殺安于，使終為政於趙氏，趙氏必

得晉國，盍以其先發難也討於趙氏？」文子使告於趙孟曰：「范、中行氏 雖信為亂，安于則發之，是安于與謀亂也。晉國有命，始禍者死。二子既 伏其罪矣，敢以告。」 趙孟患之。安于曰：「我死而晉國寧，趙氏定，將焉用生？人誰不 死？吾死莫矣。」乃縊而死。趙孟尸諸市，而告於知氏曰：「主命戮罪 人安于，既伏其罪矣，敢以告。」知伯從趙孟盟，而後趙氏定，祀安于 於廟。 14.3(2) 頓子牂欲事晉，背楚而絕陳好。二月，楚滅頓。 14.4(3) 夏，衛北宮結來奔，公叔戍之故也。

14.5(4, 5)

吳伐越，越子句踐禦之，陳于檇李。句踐患吳之整也，使死士再禽焉， 不動。使罪人三行，屬劍於頸，而辭曰：「二君有治，臣奸旗鼓。不敏於 君之行前，不敢逃刑，敢歸死。」遂自剄也。師屬之目，越子因而伐之， 大敗之。靈姑浮以戈擊闔廬，闔廬傷將指，取其一屨。還，卒於陘，去檇 李七里。

281 In Ding 13.2a, Dong Anyu suggested to Zhao Yang that he might strike first against the Fan and Zhonghang lineages as they prepared their rebellion. 282 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.982), Beigong Jie is a partisan of Gongshu Shu. 283 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.984), Ling Gufu is a Yue high officer.

1816

Zuo Tradition

Dong Anyu, a supporter of the Jin ruler and Zhao Yang, willingly dies as a scapegoat for the troubles among the noble lines in Jin (see Ding 13.2). Liang Yingfu, who detested Dong Anyu, said to Zhi Wenzi, “If you do not put Dong Anyua to death but allow him to manage administrative affairs for the Zhao lineage, the Zhao lineage is sure to gain control of the domain of Jin. Why not have him punished by the Zhao lineage on the grounds that he was the first to set off the troubles?”281 Zhi Wenzig had someone report to Zhao Yange, “Although the Fan and Zhonghang lineages did indeed raise a revolt, it was Dong Anyua who started it. That is, Dong Anyua took part in planning for the revolt. In the domain of Jin there are orders that whoever starts trouble dies. The two noblemen have already paid for their crime. We presume to report this to you.” Zhao Yange worried over it. Dong Anyua said, “If by my death the domain of Jin will attain peace and the Zhao lineage stability, why should I live? Who is there who does not die? My death is overdue.” He hanged himself and died. Zhao Yange displayed his corpse in the marketplace and reported to Zhi Wenzig, “Your lordship commanded that we punish the offender Dong Anyua, and he has already paid for his crime. We presume to report this to you.” Zhi Wenzie joined Zhao Yange in swearing a covenant, and thereafter, the Zhao lineage was stabilized and made sacrifices to Dong Anyua in its temple.

14.2

Zang, the Master of Dun, wished to serve Jin, so he turned against Chu and cut off good relations with Chen. In the second month, Chu extinguished Dun.

14.3(2)

In summer, Beigong Jie of Wei came in flight; this was because of Gongshu Shu.282

14.4(3)

The Wu king attacks Yue and loses his life, and his son, Fucha, promises revenge (see Ding 5.3, Ai 1.2). Wu attacked Yue. Goujian, the Master of Yue, went forward to face them, setting up his battle lines at Zuili. Worried by the good order of Wu’s army, Goujian had do-or-die fighters make two raids on the Wu army, yet it did not budge. He had three lines of criminals put swords to their necks and declare, “As the two rulers ordered their men to assume their positions, we violated the commands signaled by the flags and drums. Having failed before our ruler’s ranks, we dare not flee punishment but presume to give ourselves over to death.” Then they slit their own throats. As the Wu army looked on, stunned, the Master of Yue took advantage of the opportunity to attack them, and he defeated them roundly. Ling Gufu struck King Helu of Wu with a dagger-axe, wounding him in the middle finger and taking one of his shoes.283 On their return, the king died at Xing, seven li from Zuili.

14.5(4, 5)

Lord Ding

1817

夫差使人立於庭，苟出入，必謂己曰：「夫差！而忘越王之殺而父 乎？」則對曰：「唯。不敢忘！」三年乃報越。 14.6(6) 晉人圍朝歌，公會齊侯、衛侯于脾、上梁之間，謀救范、中行氏。析成

鮒、小王桃甲率狄師以襲晉，戰于絳中，不克而還。士鮒奔周，小王桃甲 入于朝歌。 14.7(8) 秋，齊侯、宋公會于洮，范氏故也。

14.8(10, 11)

衛侯為夫人南子召宋朝。會于洮，大子蒯聵獻盂于齊，過宋野。野人歌 之曰： 既定爾婁豬， 盍歸吾艾豭？ 大子羞之，謂戲陽速曰：「從我而朝少君，少君見我，我顧，乃殺之。」速 曰：「諾。」乃朝夫人。夫人見大子。大子三顧，速不進。夫人見其色，啼 而走，曰：「蒯聵將殺余。」公執其手以登臺。大子奔宋。盡逐其黨，故 公孟彄出奔鄭，自鄭奔齊。 大子告人曰：「戲陽速禍余。」戲陽速告人曰：「大子則禍余。大子 無道，使余殺其母。余不許，將戕於余，若殺夫人，將以余說。余是故 許而弗為，以紓余死。諺曰：『民保於信』，吾以信義也。」

284 Zhaoge is where Zhonghang Yin and Fan Jishe fled in Ding 13.2b. Du Yu (ZZ 56.984) identifies Bi and Shangliang with Qian in Annals, Ding 14.6. 285 The two men are Jin high officers and partisans of the Fan and Zhonghang lineages. 286 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.984), they are preparing to aid the Fan lineage. 287 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.984), Nan Zi had had an affair with the Song Lord’s son Zizhao, who, according to Analects 6.16, was a handsome man. 288 The precise location of Yu 盂 is uncertain, but it was probably in the eastern part of Wei. 289 To go from the Wei capital to Tao, where he is to meet with the ruler of Qi, Kuaikui would not have had to pass through Song, which is far to the southeast. Yang (4:1597) speculates that he was in Song on some other business. 290 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.984), Xiyang Su is a member of Kuaikui’s household staff.

1818

Zuo Tradition

King Fucha of Wu had someone stand in his courtyard to say to him whenever he went out or came in, “Fucha! Have you forgotten that the King of Yue killed your father?” And he would reply, “Very well. I dare not forget!” In the third year he took revenge on Yue. Qi, Wei, and Lu aid the Fan and Zhonghang rebels against Jin (see Ding 13.2, 14.9). When the men of Jin laid siege to Zhaoge, our lord met with the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei between Bi and Shangliang.284 They made plans to aid the Fan and Zhonghang lineages. Shi Fua and Xiaowang Taojia led a Di army in a surprise attack on Jin.285 They did battle within the city of Jiang but failed to take it, and they turned back. Shi Fu fled to Zhou, and Xiaowang Taojia entered Zhaoge.

14.6(6)

In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Duke of Song met at Tao; this was because of the Fan lineage.286

14.7(8)

Lord Ling of Wei’s affection for the beauty Nan Zi (see Ding 13.3) results in the exile of his son and a long battle over the succession (see Ai 2.3). The Prince of Wei summoned Zizhao of Songa at the request of his lady, Nan Zi.287 For the meeting at Tao, the Wei heir apparent Kuaikui went to present the settlement of Yu to Qi.288 He passed through the Song countryside.289 A local sang to him,

14.8(10, 11)

She’s satisfied now, your sow in heat­— why not give us back our fine stud boar?

Ashamed at this, the heir apparent said to Xiyang Su,290 “Go with me to visit the court of the lady. When she grants me an audience, and I look back at you, kill her.” Xiyang Sua said, “Agreed.” They then visited the court of the lady. As she gave the heir apparent an audience, he looked back three times, but Xiyang Sua did not come forward. Seeing the looks on their faces, the lady fled, screaming, “Kuaikui is going to kill me!” Taking her by the hand, the lord climbed up his terrace with her. The heir apparent fled to Song. His whole faction was expelled. It was for this reason that Gongmeng Kou departed and fled to Zheng, and then from Zheng fled to Qi. The heir apparent told people, “Xiyang Su entrapped me.” Xiyang Su told people, “It was the heir who entrapped me. Lacking the Way, the heir asked me to kill his mother. If I had not agreed, he would have cut me down. But had I killed the lady, he would have made me his scapegoat. For this reason I agreed to it but did not carry it out, thereby postponing my own death. The adage says, ‘The people take their protection from good faith.’ I take mine from good faith and duty.”

Lord Ding

1819

14.9 冬十二月，晉人敗范、中行氏之師於潞，獲籍秦、高彊。又敗鄭師及范氏

之師于百泉。

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年春王正月，邾子來朝。 15.2 鼷鼠食郊牛，牛死，改卜牛。 15.3(2) 二月辛丑，楚子滅胡，以胡子豹歸。 15.4 夏五月辛亥，郊。 15.5(3) 壬申，公薨于高寢。 15.6(4) 鄭罕達帥師伐宋。 15.7(5) 齊侯、衛侯次于渠蒢。 15.8 邾子來奔喪。 15.9(6) 秋七月壬申，姒氏卒。 15.10 八月庚辰朔，日有食之。 15.11 九月，滕子來會葬。 15.12(7) 丁巳，葬我君定公，雨，不克葬。戊午，日下昃，乃克葬。 15.13(8) 辛巳，葬定姒。 15.14(9) 冬，城漆。

291 Lù 潞 was about 115 kilometers northwest of Zhaoge 朝歌, just to the northwest of present-day Lucheng County 潞城縣, Shanshi. 292 Baiquan 百泉 was about 40 kilometers southwest of Zhaoge near present-day Hui County 輝縣, Henan. 293 Cf. Xi 31.3 and Xuan 3.2. 294 As Yang (4:1599) notes, it is unusual that the Annals does not say shuo 朔, “the first day of the month.” 295 An explanation of this Annals passage, quoted in Shuoyuan 19.661 but not found in any of the extant three commentaries, says that the “high chamber” is one of three bedchambers in the lord’s palace. Since the founding lord of the domain is supposed to have occupied the room, later rulers do not sleep there. See Yang, 4:1599. 296 The location of Quchu 渠蒢 is unknown. 297 Lady Si is the wife of Lord Ding and mother of Lord Ai. 298 The eclipse took place on 22 July 495 Bce.

1820

Zuo Tradition

Jin defeats the rebellious lines (see Ding 14.6). In winter, in the twelfth month, the men of Jin defeated the Fan and Zhonghang armies at Lù, capturing Ji Qin and Gao Qiang.291 They then also defeated a Zheng army and a Fan army at Baiquan.292

14.9

LORD DING 15 (495 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, the Master of Zhu came to court.

15.1(1)

Field mice had gnawed at the bull designated for the sacrifice in the outskirts. The bull died, and we divined about using another bull.293

15.2

In the second month, on the xinchou day (19), the Master of Chu extinguished Hu, taking Bao, the Master of Hu, home with him. In summer, in the fifth month, on the xinhai day (1),294 we performed the sacrifice in the outskirts.

15.3(2)

15.4

On the renshen day (22), our lord expired in the high chamber.295

15.5(3)

Han Da of Zheng led out troops and attacked Song.

15.6(4)

The Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Quchu.

296

The Master of Zhu came for the mourning period. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renshen day (23), Lady Si died.297 In the eighth month, on the gengchen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.298 In the ninth month, the Master of Teng came and met with us for the burial. On the dingsi day (9), we were to bury our ruler Lord Ding. It rained, and we did not succeed in burying him. Only as the sun declined on the wuwu day (10) did we succeed in burying him.

15.7(5) 15.8 15.9(6)

15.10

15.11

15.12(7)

On the xinsi day (3), Ding Si was buried.299

15.13(8)

In winter, we fortified Qi.300

15.14(9)

299 As Du Yu (ZZ 56.985) notes, a month notation is missing; this was the third day of the tenth month. 300 According to Du Yu (ZZ 56.985), this was the settlement of the Zhu high officer Shuqi, who fled to Lu in Xiang 21.2. It was located about 15 kilometers south of the Lu capital.

Lord Ding

1821

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年春，邾隱公來朝。子貢觀焉。邾子執玉高，其容仰；公受玉卑，其

容俯。子貢曰：「以禮觀之，二君者，皆有死亡焉。夫禮，死生存亡之體 也，將左右、周旋，進退、俯仰，於是乎取之；朝、祀、喪、戎，於是乎觀 之。今正月相朝，而皆不度，心已亡矣。嘉事不體，何以能久？高、仰，驕 也；卑、俯，替也。驕近亂，替近疾，君為主，其先亡乎！」 15.2(3) 吳之入楚也，胡子盡俘楚邑之近胡者。楚既定，胡子豹又不事楚，曰：

「存亡有命，事楚何為？多取費焉。」二月，楚滅胡。 15.3(5) 夏五月壬申，公薨。仲尼曰：「賜不幸言而中，是使賜多言者也。」 15.4(6) 鄭罕達敗宋師于老丘。 15.5(7) 齊侯、衛侯次于蘧挐，謀救宋也。

301 For the Wu invasion of Chu, see Ding 4.3. Hu 胡 was situated along the Ying River near present-day Fuyang 阜陽, Anhui. It lay near the path taken by Wu forces westward toward the Chu capital in Ding 4.3b. 302 Laoqiu 老丘 was in the far northwest of Song, perhaps to the southeast of presentday Kaifeng 開封, Henan. 303 I.e., Quchu.

1822

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

After the rulers of Zhu and Lu commit mistakes in ritual, Confucius’ famous disciple Zigong predicts death for them both (see Ding 15.3, Ai 7.4). In the fifteenth year, in spring, Lord Yin of Zhu came to court. Zigong observed the ritual. The Master of Zhu held the jade high while looking upward. Our lord received the jade low while looking downward. Zigong said, “Observed from the perspective of ritual propriety, both rulers have death or exile in store for them. Ritual propriety is the very armature of death and life, survival and failure. Anyone who moves left or right, turns, advances or withdraws, or looks down or up must draw on this; anyone who pays court, sacrifices, mourns, or goes to war must observe this. Now in the first month they shared a court visit, yet both fell short of standards: in their hearts they had already failed. When in a celebratory affair they do not adhere to this armature called ritual, how can they last long? One raised it high and looked upward: he is arrogant. One kept it low and looked downward: he is to be replaced. Arrogance is close to insubordination, and replacement is close to an affliction. Our ruler is the host: he will be the first to die.”

15.1(1)

Chu destroys Hu for refusing its allegiance. When Wu entered Chu, the Master of Hu made prisoners of everyone in the Chu cities near Hu.301 Even after there was stability in Chu, the Master of Hu still did not serve Chu, saying, “Survival and failure are decreed by fate. What would I accomplish by serving Chu? I would only be running up expenses.” In the second month, Chu extinguished Hu.

15.2(3)

Zigong’s prediction comes true (see Ding 15.1), prompting a rueful remark from Confucius. Representations of Zigong in the years of Lord Ai and in other Warring States and Han texts bear out Confucius’ suggestion that he was famed especially for his skill as a speaker. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renshen day (22), our lord expired. Confuciusc said, “Unfortunately, Zigongc hit the mark in what he said; this will make Zigongc a man who always has much to say.”

15.3(5)

Zheng fights on behalf of the Song exile Gongzi Di (see Ding 11.1, 15.5). Han Da of Zheng defeated a Song army at Laoqiu.302

15.4(6)

Qi and Wei, opposing Zheng’s moves, support Song (see Ding 15.4). The Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei set up camp at Quru;303 they were making plans to assist Song.

15.5(7)

Lord Ding

1823

15.6(9) 秋七月壬申，姒氏卒。不稱夫人，不赴，且不祔也。 15.7(12) 葬定公，雨，不克襄事，禮也。 15.8(13) 葬定姒，不稱小君，不成喪也。 15.9(14) 冬，城漆，書，不時告也。

1824

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the renshen day (23), Lady Si died. That she is not called “wife” is because a death announcement was not sent out, and her tablet was not placed in the Ancestral Temple.304

15.6(9)

Ceremonies could not be completed when it rained during the burial of Lord Ding; this was in accordance with ritual.305

15.7(12)

That in the burial of Ding Si, she was not referred to as “the wife of our former lord” was because her funeral ceremonies were not completed.

15.8(13)

In winter, we fortified Qi: this is written because it was not reported in timely fashion.306

15.9(14)

304 According to Kong Yingda (cited in Yang, 4:1602), the deceased was first called “wife” (furen 夫人) when the announcement of her death was sent to covenant partners of the state or when her tablet was placed in the Ancestral Temple. 305 See Xuan 8.5, where another funeral is delayed due to rain. 306 The walling itself was done earlier, when it would have interfered with laborers’ agricultural duties, but report was made to court only in winter.

Lord Ding

1825

哀公

Lord Ai (494–468 bce, with one entry for 453 Bce) The Spring and Autumn era draws to a close in gathering gloom and exercises of petty Realpolitik. The old powers of ritual propriety are little more than a memory. Warfare dominates the narrative. Succession crises and rebellions divide domains against themselves and draw neighboring domains into protracted proxy wars. Rulers and chief noblemen are murdered or driven into exile. Two ancient domains are destroyed. Wu completes its swift rise to power and promptly falls. Confucius dies, the Annals ends, and Zuozhuan carries on for several years more, following a few tales of internecine strife to their dismal conclusions. The few men who win glory in these years earn it for acts of military bravery or diplomatic savvy, deeds that often prove futile. Given the circumstances of directionless chaos and the absence of any clear alliance leader, it is not surprising that the middle decades of the fifth century Bce, immediately following the exile and death of Lord Ai, are poorly documented and little understood. Domestic troubles spark general warfare. The rebellion of the Fan and Zhonghang lineages in Jin (see Ding 13.2, Ai 1.7) brings an intervention from Jin’s eastern rival, Qi, and its smaller ally Wei (Ai 1.3, 4.3). The confrontation stretches over a period of years, with Lu and Zheng occasionally joining on Qi’s side (1.5, 2.3). Long after Jin suppresses the rebellion and drives its leaders into exile (4.3, 5.1, 6.1), old grudges continue to motivate the key players among the northern domains. In the closing pages of Zuozhuan, Zhi Yao rises to dominance in Jin, only to be overthrown by Zhao Wuxu and his allies in the Wei and Han families (27.5). Within decades, Zhao, Wei, and Han will divide the domain of Jin among themselves, establishing the tripartite political division that will persist through most of the Warring States era.

1827

A Wei succession crisis provides a ready opportunity for Jin to punish its enemy. Kuaikui, the designated heir to Lord Ling of Wei (r. 534–493), had gone into exile after a failed attempt on the life of his father’s consort, Nan Zi (Ding 14.8). When Lord Ling dies, he is succeeded by his grandson Zhe, Kuaikui’s son (Ai 2.2). Jin immediately takes up the cause of Kuaikui, fighting to install him in the Wei city of Qī. The battle at Qī is the grandest military narrative of these years and a showcase for tales of battlefield bravery (2.3). Kuaikui eventually reenters the Wei capital and accedes to the throne as Lord Zhuang (15.5), displacing his own son, who thus acquires the name by which he is known to history, the “Ousted Lord.” But Kuaikui is soon expelled again, and when he enters Wei once again, he is killed (17.5). As for the Ousted Lord, he returns to Wei after Lord Zhuang’s death (18.3), but he is soon driven from power (25.1). He dies in exile in Yue (26.1). Jin’s support of Kuaikui furnishes pretexts for continued attacks on its enemies in Wei (17.3, 17.5). Even as the domain of Qi challenges Jin influence in the east, developments on the Qi home front bring about a startling change in its government. After the death of the long-reigning Lord Jing of Qi (r. 547–490), the accession of his heir, a mere child, leaves the ruling house in a weak position (5.3). In the culmination of its long rise to power, the Chen line seizes on this opportunity to consolidate its control, in this way fulfilling old predictions (Zhao 3.3). Chen Qi stages a coup (Ai 6.3), installs a new ruler, Lord Dao (r. 488–485), and has the deposed child ruler murdered (6.6). After Lord Dao is himself killed (10.2), Chen Heng and Chen Ni imprison and ultimately murder his successor, Lord Jian (r. 484–481; see 14.3, 14.5). Despite Confucius’ principled demand for a punitive expedition against the Chen usurpers (14.5), they effectively take Qi for themselves and leave it to their descendants to rule there throughout the ensuing Warring States period. In the south, Wu, reveling in its strength ever since the invasion of Chu (Ding 4.3), shows an ambition to overshadow even the northern powers of Jin and Qi in order to act as covenant host and treaty leader. Through a series of military and ritual engagements involving Qi, Lu, and Zhu, Wu demonstrates an ability to influence events far from its home territory (Ai 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 8.5, 9.1, 9.7, 10.2, 10.3, 10.5, 11.3, 12.3, 12.4). But at the very moment that should mark Wu’s triumph, when King Fucha (r. 495–473) brings Jin and Lu rulers to a meeting at Huangchi (13.2, 13.4), Wu’s rival Yue invades from the south, decisively ending Wu’s hopes for broader power. Wu never truly recovers from this blow, and after repeated attacks, Yue finally conquers Wu, leaving King Fucha to choose suicide over a pitiful exile (22.2). Thus, in the closing years of the era, Yue, like Wu before it, works to extend its influence northward (24.4, 26.1, 27.2). Smaller-scale narratives echo the tensions and conflicts that rack Jin, Wei, and Qi. Like Wei, Chu suffers the consequences of an old succession Lord Ai

1829

春秋 1.1 元年春王正月，公即位。 1.2(1) 楚子、陳侯、隨侯、許男圍蔡。 1.3 鼷鼠食郊牛，改卜牛。夏四月辛巳，郊。 1.4(3) 秋，齊侯、衛侯伐晉。 1.5 冬，仲孫何忌帥師伐邾。

1

2

1830

Since Zheng extinguished Xǔ in Ding 6.1, it is extraordinary that the Head of Xǔ should here be active as a leader of a distinct military force. Takezoe (29.1) speculates that Chu must have restored Xǔ after its destruction by Zheng and cites parallels to this restoration. For Xǔ’s numerous relocations, see Annals, Zhao 9.2, and note. Note other instances of problems with the sacrificial bull in Annals, Xuan 3.1, Cheng 7.1, Ding 15.2.

Zuo Tradition

crisis as the Bo Lord, son of the exiled heir Jian (see Zhao 20.2), returns to Chu and stages a rebellion (Ai 16.5). Stability is barely maintained in Song, as defenders of the ruling line drive Xiang Tui and his powerful Huan line out of the domain (14.4). The nobleman Huang Yuan is wrongly put to death (17.7), while an unnamed court official threatens to monopolize control of the domain (26.2). The ancient domains of Cao and Chen do not survive the era, as Song annexes Cao (7.5, 8.1) and Chu swallows up Chen (17.4). The weak Lu ruler, Lord Ai, ends his life in exile after alienating the more powerful noblemen of the domain (27.4). The deeds of Confucius and his followers provide some relief from the general fecklessness and foolhardiness of these years. Glimpsed in the midst of his travels among the domains of his day, Confucius reflects on events (3.2, 6.4, 12.5, 15.5) and occasionally attempts to influence them (11.6, 11.7, 12.1, 12.2, 14.5). In a famous conjunction of events, Confucius identifies as a lin a strange beast captured during a hunt (14.1) and then dies not long after (16.3), his death being the last event recorded in the Annals. Later readers would find in this coincidence evidence that Confucius authored the Annals and foresaw his own death in the portent of the lin. Confucius’ disciple Ran Qiu distinguishes himself as a military hero (11.1), Zhong You (better known as Zilu) dies nobly defending his patron in Wei (15.5), and Zigong displays his brilliance as a diplomatic orator and interpreter of events (7.3, 11.3, 12.3, 12.4, 15.4, 16.3, 26.3, 27.2). Meanwhile, despite some expatiations on ritual practice (7.3, 13.4), ritualism itself comes in for not a little ridicule when a Qi delegation sings a song of complaint about Lu fastidiousness (21.2).

LORD AI 1 (494 BCE) ANNALS

In the first year, in spring, in the royal first month, our lord acceded.

1.1

The Master of Chu, the Prince of Chen, the Prince of Sui, and the Head of Xǔ laid siege to Cai.1

1.2(1)

Field mice had gnawed at the bull designated for the sacrifice in the outskirts. We divined about using another bull. In summer, in the fourth month, on the xinsi day (6), we performed the sacrifice in the outskirts.2

1.3

In autumn, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei attacked Jin.

1.4(3)

In winter, Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and attacked Zhu.

1.5

Lord Ai

1831

左傳 1.1(2) 元年春，楚子圍蔡，報柏舉也。里而栽，廣丈，高倍。夫屯晝夜九日，如

子西之素。蔡人男女以辨。使疆于江、汝之間而還。蔡於是乎請遷于 吳。 1.2 吳王夫差敗越于夫椒，報檇李也。遂入越。越子以甲楯五千保于會稽，

使大夫種因吳大宰嚭以行成。吳子將許之。 伍員曰：

3 4 5

1832

As Takezoe (29.2) notes, Chu’s thirteen-year delay in taking revenge shows both that the domain has gone through a period of weakness and that it is now perhaps powerful enough to take advantage of the troubles among the northern states. The ramparts are perhaps designed to prevent reinforcements from reaching Cai; see Takezoe, 29.2. One zhang was 231 centimeters; see Yin 1.4a. The significance of this action is uncertain. Perhaps they divided into groups to present themselves to the Chu forces as captives (Du Yu, ZZ 57.990). Perhaps they brought gifts to the Chu forces in separate groups (Liu Xuan, cited in Yang, 4:1604, with reference to a similar line in Xiang 25.3). Alternatively, they might have waited in the Cai court in separate groups to respond quickly to any development (Takezoe, 29.2).

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Cai forces were allied with Wu when it defeated Chu at Boju (see Ding 4.3). Chu now punishes Cai (see Ai 2.4). Notwithstanding Chu’s apparent success in subjugating and relocating Cai, Cai soon turns to Wu and will rebel next year. In the first year, in the spring, the Master of Chu laid siege to Cai; this was in retaliation for Boju.3 At a distance of one li he built his ramparts, which were one zhang thick and twice as high.4 The troops worked at the pile for nine straight days and nights, in accordance with the plans of Gongzi Shena. The people of Cai separated themselves into two groups, the men and the women.5 Chu withdrew after making Cai inhabitants occupy territory between the Jiang and Ru rivers. Cai thereupon requested to move into Wu territory.6

1.1(2)

King Fucha of Wu defeats Yue in battle but does not take Wu Zixu’s advice to destroy his rival. The decision will prove fatal, as Wu Zixu predicts (see Ding 14.5, Ai 1.4, 11.4, 22.2). In his remonstrance Wu Zixu relates the legend of Shaokang’s vengeance, last mentioned in Xiang 4.6. Fucha, King of Wu, defeated Yue at Fujiao; this was in retaliation for Zuili.7 He then entered Yue. The Master of Yue, defended by five thousand armored shield bearers at Kuaiji,8 had the high officer Zhong sue for peace through the Wu grand steward Pi. The Master of Wu was prepared to permit it. Wu Zixua said,

6 7 8

1.2

Chu moves Cai to the territory between the Jiang and Ru Rivers so that it can be closer to Chu and become more of a Chu satellite state. But once Chu withdraws, Cai looks to Wu as its protector. For the battle at Zuili, see Ding 14.5. According to Yang (4:1605), Fujiao 夫椒 was in Yue, north of present-day Shaoxing 紹興, Zhejiang. Mount Kuaiji 會稽 is just southeast of present-day Shaoxing.

Lord Ai

1833

不可。臣聞之：「樹德莫如滋，去疾莫如盡。」昔有過澆殺斟

灌以伐斟鄩，滅夏后相，后緡方娠，逃出自竇，歸于有仍，生 少康焉。為仍牧正，惎澆能戒之。澆使椒求之，逃奔有虞，為 之庖正，以除其害。虞思於是妻之以二姚，而邑諸綸，有田 一成，有眾一旅。能布其德，而兆其謀，以收夏眾，撫其官 職；使女艾諜澆，使季杼誘豷。遂滅過、戈，復禹之績，祀夏 配天，不失舊物。 今吳不如過，而越大於少康，或將豐之，不亦難乎！句 踐能親而務施，施不失人，親不棄勞。與我同壤，而世為仇 讎。於是乎克而弗取，將又存之，違天而長寇讎，後雖悔之， 不可食已。 姬之衰也，日可俟也。介在蠻夷，而長寇讎，以是求伯， 必不行矣。 弗聽。退而告人曰：「越十年生聚，而十年教訓，二十年之外，吳其為沼 乎！」 三月，越及吳平。吳入越，不書，吳不告慶、越不告敗也。 1.3(4) 夏四月，齊侯、衛侯救邯鄲，圍五鹿。

9 In Zhanguo ce, “Qin 3,” 172, a very similar saying is cited from Shu. 10 The story of Ao of Youguo is told in greater detail at Xiang 4.7a. 11 According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.991), the Lady Min, wife of Xiang, was of Reng ancestry. 12 By finding refuge in Yu, Shaokang escapes persecution by Ao. The rulers of Yu 虞 were thought to have been descended from the sage-king Shun. Yu was located near Yucheng 虞城, Henan, just east of present-day Shangqiu 商丘, Henan. This line indirectly relates the tale of Shaokang to the saying that Wu Zixu cited, which in the Zhanguo ce (“Qin ce 3,” 5.112) version has chuhai 除害 (“rid of trouble”) for Zuozhuan’s quji 去疾 (“eliminate harm”). 13 Literally, “the two Yao women.” Si, leader of Yu, had the clan name “Yao.” 14 Si is one of the Yu leaders. Lun 綸 was southeast of present-day Yucheng, Henan. Du Yu (ZZ 57.991) defines one cheng 成 as one hundred square li and one lü 旅 as five hundred people. 15 Guo was the territory claimed by Ao; Ge, the territory claimed by Xi. Note that Yu here (“the traces of Yu”) refers to the legendary flood controller and the founder of Xia. He should not be confused with Si of Yu above. 16 We follow Takezoe, 29.5. As noted in Shiji 41.1739, the Yue ruling line was supposed to have been descended from Yu and from Shaokang. 17 In legend, the Wu ruling house was a distant relation of the Zhou royal house and a member of the Ji clan. See Zhao 30.3a and note. 18 Yue’s destruction of Wu comes in Ai 22.2, twenty-one years after this warning. 19 Zhao Ji had led Handan in revolt against Jin. Wulu 五鹿 was a Jin settlement near modern Shalu 沙鹿, east of Daming County 大名縣, Hebei.

1834

Zuo Tradition

This cannot be allowed. I have heard, “In setting up one’s virtue it is best to be generous; in eliminating harm it is best to be thorough.”9 In former times, Ao of Youguo killed the ruler of Zhenguan and attacked Zhenxun, then extinguished Xiang, Lord of Xia.10 The Lady Min, who was pregnant, escaped through a culvert in the walls and returned to Reng.11 There she bore Shaokang, who became director of herdsmen for Reng. Hating Ao, Shaokang was able to defend himself against him. When Ao sent Jiao to seek him out, he fled to Yu and served there as director of cooks, thus ridding himself of his trouble.12 Si of Yu thereupon married his two daughters13 to him and established him in the settlement Lun, where he ruled over one hundred square li of land and a population of five hundred.14 He was able to extend his virtue and to give his plans a start. Thus, he gathered in the Xia populace and reinstated their official ranks. He sent Ru’ai to spy on Ao and sent Lord Zhua to lead Ao’s younger brother Xi astray. He thereby extinguished Guo and Ge and restored the traces of Yu, offering sacrifices to the Xia ancestors, paired with Heaven, and erring in none of the old practices.15 Now, when Wu is not the equal of Guo and Yue is greater than Shaokang, you are ready to strengthen Yue; will this not lead to disasters?16 Goujian is capable of close ties and he exerts himself when giving. In his giving he does not choose the wrong people, and in his close ties he does not exclude the diligent. Yue shares borders with us, and for generations we have been enemies. If now, having overcome Yue, you do not annex it but instead preserve it, fostering a warlike enemy in defiance of Heaven, then even if you regret it later, it will already be impossible to undo it. As for the decline of the Ji clan, it will come any day.17 You are hemmed in among the Man and the Yi, and yet you foster a warlike enemy. If this is your way of seeking to be overlord, then you most certainly will not succeed.

The Wu ruler did not heed him. Wu Zixu withdrew and told others, “For ten years Yue will multiply its masses, and for ten years it will indoctrinate them. Twenty years from now, will Wu be anything but a bog?”18 In the third month, Yue and Wu made peace. That Wu’s entry into Yue is not written down is because Wu did not report its exultation and Yue did not report its defeat. Qi and Wei intervene to support Zhao Ji, adherent of the Fan and Zhonghang lines in Jin (see Ding 13.2, Ai 1.5). In summer, in the fourth month, the Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei relieved Handan and surrounded Wulu.19

1.3(4)

Lord Ai

1835

1.4 吳之入楚也，使召陳懷公。懷公朝國人而問焉，曰：「欲與楚者右，欲與

吳者左。陳人從田，無田從黨。」 逢滑當公而進，曰：「臣聞：國之興也以福，其亡也以禍。今吳未 有福，楚未有禍，楚未可棄，吳未可從。而晉，盟主也；若以晉辭吳，若 何？」 公曰：「國勝君亡，非禍而何？」 對曰：「國之有是多矣，何必不復？小國猶復，況大國乎？臣聞：國 之興也，視民如傷，是其福也；其亡也，以民為土芥，是其禍也。楚雖無 德，亦不艾殺其民。吳日敝於兵，暴骨如莽，而未見德焉。天其或者正 訓楚也，禍之適吳，其何日之有？」 陳侯從之。及夫差克越，乃修先君之怨。秋八月，吳侵陳，修舊 怨也。 1.5 齊侯、衛侯會于乾侯，救范氏也。師及齊師、衛孔圉、鮮虞人伐晉，取

棘蒲。

20 According to Yang (4:1607), the Chen ruler would have faced south during this announcment. Chu would have been to the west (to his right) and Wu to the east (to his left). Those who own land will side with Chu or Wu depending on the location of their property. 21 The Chen ruler refers here to Wu’s defeat of Chu and the flight of the Chu king in Ding 4.3.

1836

Zuo Tradition

During the Wu invasion of Chu (see Ding 4.3), the ruler of Chen decided to continue serving Chu instead of shifting his allegiance to Wu. Following its defeat of Yue, Wu now takes revenge on Chen (see Ai 1.2, 1.6). When Wu invaded Chu, they sent someone to summon Lord Huai of Chen. Holding court with the inhabitants of the capital, Lord Huai asked them about it: “Those who wish to join in alliance with Chu, stand to my right. Those who wish to join in alliance with Wu, stand to my left. Inhabitants of the Chen capital should make their choice according to the location of their land, while those without land should make their choice in keeping with the groups with which they are associated.”20 Feng Hua advanced directly toward the Chen lord and said, “I have heard that the rise of a domain comes through its blessings, while its fall comes through calamities. Now Wu has had no blessings, and Chu has had no calamities; Chu cannot yet be rejected, and Wu cannot yet be followed. However, Jin is the covenant host. How would it be if we use Jin as an excuse to refuse Wu?” The lord said, “The domain was defeated and its ruler has fled.21 If that is not a calamity, what is it?” He replied, “Many are the domains that have undergone such things. What certainty is there that it will not recover? Even small domains have recovered. How much more so for great domains! I have heard that during the rise of a domain the people are viewed as gently as the victims of a wound,22 and this is its blessing, while during its fall the people are treated like dirt or weeds, and this is its calamity. Chu may have no virtue, but still it does not mow its people down. Day by day Wu taxes its people in campaigning, so much so that their bones lie exposed among the grasses of the field. Yet Wu has shown no virtue in this. It may be that Heaven is correcting Chu and teaching it a lesson. Calamity could come to Wu any day.” The Prince of Chen heeded him. Once Fucha had conquered Yue, he settled the grudges of the former ruler. In autumn, in the eighth month, Wu invaded Chen; this was a matter of settling an old grudge.

1.4

Lu joins Qi and Wei in the campaign against Jin (see Ai 1.3, 1.7). The Prince of Qi and the Prince of Wei met at Ganhou; this was to reinforce the Fan lineage. Our army, along with the Qi army, Kong Yu of Wei, and the men of Xianyu, attacked Jin and took Jipu.23

1.5

See Karlgren, gl. 775. Cf. Mencius 4B.8: “King Wen regarded the people as if they were wounded.” 23 Jipu 棘蒲 was near present-day Zhao County 趙縣, Hebei. 22

Lord Ai

1837

1.6 吳師在陳，楚大夫皆懼，曰：「闔廬惟能用其民，以敗我於柏舉。今聞其

嗣又甚焉，將若之何？」 子西曰： 二三子恤不相睦，無患吳矣。昔闔廬食不二味，居不重席，

室不崇壇，器不彤鏤，宮室不觀，舟車不飾；衣服財用，擇 不取費。在國，天有菑癘，親巡孤寡而共其乏困。在軍，熟 食者分而後敢食，其所嘗者，卒乘與焉。勤恤其民，而與之 勞逸，是以民不罷勞，死知不曠。吾先大夫子常易之，所以 敗我也。 今聞夫差，次有臺榭陂池焉，宿有妃嬙嬪御焉；一日之 行，所欲必成，玩好必從；珍異是聚，觀樂是務；視民如讎， 而用之日新。夫先自敗也已，安能敗我？ 1.7 冬十一月，晉趙鞅伐朝歌。

24 25 26

27 28

1838

Cf. Xiang 23.5. A single layer of matting was the simplest sort of furnishing, suitable for an officer rather than for a king. That is, sacrifices would be made to their spirits. See Karlgren, gl. 776. All commentators follow Du Yu (ZZ 57.993) in glossing yi 易 as fan 反, “to oppose, to overturn”; in this reading, Nang Wa adopted the opposite of King Helu’s good policies. Understanding yi as “easy” or “to consider easy” makes for a less forced reading of the passage. Parallels to this passage are to be found in Guoyu, “Chu yu 2,” 18.578–79; and Shuoyuan 13.327. Zhaoge has been a base of operations for the Fan and Zhonghang lines since Ding 13.2b.

Zuo Tradition

Despite Wu’s advances, the virtuous Gongzi Shen of Chu (see Zhao 26.8) does not fear King Fucha, whose profligate habits set him apart from his predecessor (see Ai 1.4, 6.2). While the Wu army was in Chen, all the Chu high officers were afraid. They said, “It was because King Helu was able to use his people that he defeated us at Boju. Now we hear that his successor goes even further than he did. What are we to do about it?” Gongzi Shena said,

1.6

My men, worry about not getting on with one another, and do not bother yourselves about Wu. In former times King Helu never combined flavors when he ate and never sat upon layered matting.24 For his buildings he did not raise high foundations, and his dishes were not lacquered red or carved. On his palaces and apartments he did not build towers, and his boats and carriages were not adorned. In choosing his clothing and objects of daily use, he did not select expensive things. In the domain, when Heaven sent some disaster or plague, he personally visited the orphans and widows and provided for those who were needy and troubled. When with the army, he dared eat only after the cooked food had been distributed, and the foot soldiers and chariot drivers also received a part of whatever fine foods he tasted. It was because he worked at caring for his people, and shared their exertions and pleasures, that the people did not become exhausted, and they knew that if they died they would not be neglected.25 Our former high officer Nang Waa underestimated them, and that is how they defeated us.26 Now I have heard that Fucha has terraces, pavilions, ponds, and pools wherever he lodges. He has consorts and concubines wherever he stays a night. Even for a day’s travel, he must have everything he desires and he must be accompanied by his playthings. It is the valuable and exotic that he collects, spectacles and musical performance that he strives after. He views the people as his enemies, every day finding new ways to exploit them. In this way he will first have defeated himself. How can he defeat us?27

Jin campaigns against the Fan and Zhonghang lines (see Ai 1.5, 2.2, 3.3). In winter, in the eleventh month, Zhao Yang of Jin attacked Zhaoge.28

1.7

Lord Ai

1839

春秋 2.1(1) 二年春王二月，季孫斯、叔孫州仇、仲孫何忌帥師伐邾，取漷東田及沂

西田。癸巳，叔孫州仇、仲孫何忌及邾子盟于句繹。 2.2(2) 夏四月丙子，衛侯元卒。 2.3 滕子來朝。 2.4(2) 晉趙鞅帥師納衛世子蒯聵于戚。 2.5(3) 秋八月甲戌，晉趙鞅帥師及鄭罕達帥師戰于鐵。鄭師敗績。 2.6 冬十月，葬衛靈公。 2.7(4) 十有一月，蔡遷于州來。蔡殺其大夫公子駟。

左傳 2.1(1) 二年春，伐邾，將伐絞。邾人愛其土，故賂以漷、沂之田而受盟。

2.2(2, 4)

初，衛侯遊于郊，子南僕。公曰：「余無子，將立女。」不對。他日又謂之， 對曰： 「郢不足以辱社稷，君其改圖。君夫人在堂，三揖在下，君命衹辱。」 29 Guoyi 句繹 was southeast of present-day Zou County 鄒縣, Shandong. By Ai 14.2 it is part of the territory of Lesser Zhu. 30 This is the last court visit to Lu recorded in the Annals. 31 Tie 鐵 was about 10 kilometers north of the Wei capital, just west of present-day Puyang 濮陽, Henan. 32 Jiao 絞 was a Zhu settlement, thought to have been located north of present-day Teng County 滕縣, Shandong. 33 The Guo and Yi Rivers were about 50 kilometers and 150 kilometers to the southeast of the Lu capital, respectively. Both rivers drain into the Si River. Lu seized Zhu lands west of the Guo River in Xiang 19.1a. 34 Gongzi Ying is apparently the lord’s son by a concubine. 35 That is, he has no sons he considers worthy to succeed him. In fact, he does have sons. Shuxiang of Jin makes a similar remark at Zhao 3.3c. 36 According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.994), the groups whom the lord salutes include the ministers (qing 卿), the high officers (daifu 大夫), and the officers (shi 士). Gongzi Ying declines to be appointed, reminding the Wei ruler that there are many more people he should be consulting.

1840

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 2 (493 BCE) ANNALS

In the second year, in spring, in the royal second month, Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi), Shusun Zhoucho, and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and attacked Zhu. They took lands to the east of the Guo River and lands to the west of the Yi River. On the guisi day (23), Shusun Zhouqiu, Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi), and the Master of Zhu swore a covenant at Gouyi.29 In summer, in the fourth month, on the bingzi day (7), Yuan, the Prince of Wei, died.

2.1(1)

2.2(2)

The Master of Teng came to pay a court visit.30

2.3

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and installed the Wei heir apparent Kuaikui in power at Qī.

2.4(2)

In autumn, in the eighth month, on the jiaxu day (7), Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and did battle at Tie with troops led out by Han Da of Zheng.31 The Zheng troops were roundly defeated.

2.5(3)

In winter, in the tenth month, Lord Ling of Wei was buried.

2.6

In the eleventh month, Cai relocated to Zhoulai. Cai put to death its high officer Gongzi Si.

2.7(4)

ZUO

In the second year, in spring, we attacked Zhu and were preparing to attack Jiao.32 The people of Zhu, because they valued their land, presented the lands around the Guo and Yi Rivers as a gift and accepted a covenant.33

2.1(1)

On the death of Lord Ling of Wei, Jin supports Lord Ling’s exiled heir Kuaikui’s bid for the Wei succession, installing him in the Wei city of Qī (see Ding 14.8, Ai 2.3). In Wei, Gongzi Ying declines attempts to make him Lord Ling’s successor, and Kuaikui’s son Zhe (posthumously known as the Ousted Lord) becomes the new Wei ruler. Previously, the Prince of Wei went roaming in the outskirts of the city, with Gongzi Yinga as his driver.34 The lord said, “I have no sons.35 I will set you up as my heir.” He did not answer. On another day he spoke to him again, and Gongzi Ying replied, “I am not worthy of disgracing the domain’s altars. Would that my lord made other plans! With my lord’s lady in the hall, and with the three ranks you salute supporting you from below, 36 this would be nothing more than a disgrace to my lord’s command.”

2.2(2, 4)

Lord Ai

1841

夏，衛靈公卒。夫人曰：「命公子郢為大子，君命也。」對曰：「郢 異於他子，且君沒於吾手，若有之，郢必聞之。且亡人之子輒在。」乃 立輒。 六月乙酉，晉趙鞅納衛大子于戚。宵迷，陽虎曰：「右河而南，必 至焉。」使大子絻，八人衰絰，偽自衛逆者。告於門，哭而入，遂居之。 2.3a(5) 秋八月，齊人輸范氏粟，鄭子姚、子般送之。士吉射逆之，趙鞅禦之，遇

於戚。陽虎曰：「吾車少，以兵車之旆與罕、駟兵車先陳。罕、駟自後隨 而從之，彼見吾貌，必有懼心，於是乎會之，必大敗之。」從之。 卜戰，龜焦。樂丁曰：「《詩》曰： 爰始爰謀， 爰契我龜。 謀協，以故兆詢可也。」 簡子誓曰：

Ying may be referring to his own virtue (so Du Yu, ZZ 57.994); more likely, he is referring to his low birth (Takezoe, 29.11). 38 The heir is the exile Kuaikui, son of the deceased Lord Ling and father of Zhe. 39 Takezoe (29.12) explains that the Jin forces, which have not yet crossed the Yellow River, must cross in order to enter Wei territory, then turn south, keeping the river to their right. 40 For this difficult line we follow Takezoe (29.13). The “flags for the war chariots” are the flags displayed on the commander’s chariot. The Zheng forces would see the flags and overestimate Jin’s readiness to fight. 41 For another scorched turtle shell, see Ding 9.4b. There too the divination is considered invalid. 42 Maoshi 237, “Mian” 緜, 16B.545–52. According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.994), the point of the citation is that one makes one’s plans first, before conducting any divination. Yue Ding is a Jin high officer. 43 As Takezoe (29.13) points out, the Jin forces must have divined about doing battle before they set out on campaign. 37

1842

Zuo Tradition

In summer, Lord Ling of Wei died. His lady said, “The command that Gongzi Ying be made heir was the command of our ruler.” Gongzi Ying replied, “I am different from the other sons,37 and the ruler died in my arms. Had there been such a thing, I certainly would have heard of it. Moreover, Zhe is here, the son of the exile.” Therefore, they set up Zhe as lord. In the sixth month, on the yiyou day (17), Zhao Yang of Jin installed the Wei heir apparent in Qī.38 They lost their way at night, and Yang Hu said, “If we keep the Yellow River to our right and head south,39 we will surely get there without fail.” They had the heir wear a mourning cowl. Eight men dressed in mourning pretended to have come from Wei to escort him. He had them make their report at the gate, then entered weeping and resided there. In battling at the city of Qī, where by Jin intervention the Wei heir apparent Kuaikui has been installed as a shadow ruler (see Ai 2.2, 15.5), Jin defeats Qi and Zheng, supporters of Jin’s Fan and Zhonghan rebels (see Ai 1.7, 3.1, 7.1) and of the newly installed Wei ruler (Kuaikui’s son Zhe). Yang Hu, the exiled Lu strongman who sought refuge with the Zhao lineage (see Ding 9.3), shows his military talents as he advises Zhao Yang, leader of the Jin forces. On the Jin side, divination and a formal harangue from Zhao Yang precede the battle. In autumn, in the eighth month, the Qi leaders shipped grain to the Fan lineage, with Han Daa and Si Honga of Zheng escorting the shipment. Fan Jishea went out to meet them, while Zhao Yang blocked them. They met at the city of Qī. Yang Hu said, “Our chariots are few. Let us use the flags for the war chariots to form our lines before the war chariots of Han and Si do the same.40 Han and Si will come up to them afterward, and when they see how we look, they are sure to take fright. In that case when we meet them we will roundly defeat them.” This course was adopted. When they divined about doing battle, the turtle shell was scorched.41 Yue Ding said, “As it says in the Odes:

2.3a(5)

Then we made a start, then we made our plans, Then we engraved our turtle shell.42

When the plans are concordant, then it is permissible to trust the earlier divination results.”43 Zhao Yangb delivered a harangue:

Lord Ai

1843

范氏、中行氏反易天明，斬艾百姓，欲擅晉國而滅其君。寡

君恃鄭而保焉。今鄭為不道，棄君助臣，二三子順天明，從 君命，經德義，除詬恥，在此行也。克敵者，上大夫受縣，下 大夫受郡，士田十萬，庶人、工、商遂，人臣隸圉免。 志父無罪，君實圖之！若其有罪，絞縊以戮，桐棺三 寸，不設屬辟，素車、樸馬，無入于兆，下卿之罰也。 2.3b 甲戌，將戰，郵無恤御簡子，衛大子為右。登鐵上，望見鄭師眾，大子

懼，自投于車下。子良授大子綏，而乘之，曰：「婦人也。」 簡子巡列，曰：「畢萬，匹夫也，七戰皆獲，有馬百乘，死於牖下。 群子勉之！死不在寇。」 繁羽御趙羅，宋勇為右。羅無勇，麇之。吏詰之，御對曰：「痁作 而伏。」

Both Yang (4:1613) and Takezoe (29.13) identify tianming 天明 with tianming 天命, “Heaven’s command.” 45 Yang (4:1614) notes that down through the Spring and Autumn period, a xian (here “district,” normally “county”) encompassed more territory than a jun (here “county,” normally “commandery”), though during the Warring States period the opposite was true. See also the exhaustive note at Takezoe, 29.13–15. 46 Since the unit of measure is left unexpressed, this is conjecture. Takezoe (29.15) calculates one square li at 900 mu and one hundred thousand mu as just over one hundred square li. 47 As Yuri Pines (personal communication) notes, the historical Zhao Yang was not buried with the simplicity invoked in this vow. For Zhao’s sumptuous tomb, see Tao Zhenggang, Hou Yi, and Qu Chuanfu, Taiyuan Jinguo Zhaoqing mu. Although Zhao Yang is a high minister, he is enumerating the punishments appropriate for a lower minister to emphasize his self-abnegation. 48 Du Yu (ZZ 57.996) identifies You Wuxu (You Liang 郵良, Ziliang 子良) as the Wang Liang 王良 (Wang Ziqi 王子期, Wang Liang 王梁) famed for his chariot driving skills and mentioned in numerous Warring States philosophical texts. 44

1844

Zuo Tradition

The Fan and Zhonghang lineages have opposed and altered Heaven’s revelation44 and have cut to pieces the hundred clans. They wish to take over the domain of Jin and to destroy its ruler. Our ruler depended upon Zheng and found his protection there. Now Zheng acts in defiance of the Way by setting aside a ruler and aiding his subjects. My men, may you follow Heaven’s revelation, obey the ruler’s command, abide by virtue and rightness, and eliminate blemishes and disgraces: all of these are to be realized in this campaign. Should we overcome our opponent, then superior high officers will receive districts, while lesser high officers will receive counties.45 Officers will get one hundred thousand mu of land.46 Commoners, artisans, and merchants will win advancement. Personal servants, slaves, and menials will be given their freedom. If I, Zhao Yangd, commit no offense, then let my lord make plans for these things. But if I do commit any offense, then strangle me in a public execution, make my coffin a single layer of pawlonia wood three inches thick and surround it with no outer layers, have it carried in an unadorned carriage drawn by an ungroomed horse, and do not admit me into the family’s burial ground. These are the penalties appropriate to a lower minister.47

The Wei heir apparent Kuaikui fights on the Jin side, eventually proving his valor. On the jiaxu day (7), as they prepared to do battle, You Wuxu drove for Zhao Yangb, with the Wei heir apparent Kuaikui as the spearman on the right.48 When they climbed to the top of Tie49 and, gazing down, saw how numerous the Zheng forces were, the heir apparent became afraid and threw himself underneath the chariot. You Wuxua handed the mounting strap to him and brought him aboard, saying, “You are a woman.” As Zhao Yangb inspected the lines, he said, “Bi Wan was a commoner, yet in seven battles he always took prisoners. He had one hundred teams of horses and he died beside his own window.50 Do your utmost, all of you! Your deaths are not in the hands of the raiders.” Po Yu drove for Zhao Luo, with Song Yong as the spearman on the right.51 Zhao Luoa had no courage, and they tied him up. When an officer asked about it, the driver replied, “He was having a bout of fever and had slumped over.”

49 50 51

2.3b

According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.996), Tie was the name of a knoll. That is, he died a peaceful death at home. Bi Wan was the ancestor of the Wei line in Jin; see Min 1.6. All three are Jin high officers. Zhao Luo is thought to have been a grandson of Zhao Wu; see 4:1616.

Lord Ai

1845

衛大子禱曰：「曾孫蒯聵敢昭告皇祖文王、烈祖康叔，文祖襄公： 鄭勝亂從，晉午在難，不能治亂，使鞅討之。蒯聵不敢自佚，備持矛焉。 敢告無絕筋，無折骨，無面傷，以集大事，無作三祖羞。大命不敢請，佩 玉不敢愛。」 鄭人擊簡子中肩，斃于車中，獲其蠡旗。大子救之以戈。鄭師北， 獲溫大夫趙羅。大子復伐之，鄭師大敗，獲齊粟千車。趙孟喜曰：「可 矣。」傅叟曰：「雖克鄭，猶有知在，憂未艾也。」 2.3c 初，周人與范氏田，公孫尨稅焉，趙氏得而獻之。吏請殺之。趙孟曰：「為

其主也，何罪？」止而與之田。及鐵之戰，以徒五百人宵攻鄭師，取蜂旗 於子姚之幕下，獻，曰：「請報主德。」 追鄭師，姚、般、公孫林殿而射，前列多死。趙孟曰：「國無小。」 既戰，簡子曰：「吾伏弢嘔血，鼓音不衰，今日我上也。」大子曰： 「吾救主於車，退敵於下，我，右之上也。」郵良曰：「我兩靷將絕，吾能 止之，我，御之上也。」駕而乘材，兩靷皆絕。

52 53

Kang Shu was the founding ruler of Wei. Lord Xiang ruled from 650 to 637 Bce. Sheng of Zheng is Lord Sheng 聲 of Zheng. Wu of Jin is Lord Ding 定 of Jin. Yang (4:1616) notes that there is a wine vessel, the “Jin gong zun” 晉公尊, with an inscription suggesting that it was made by Lord Ding. 54 According to Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 57.996), the “greater decree” (daming 大命) is one’s personal destiny (in this case, Kuaikui’s death or his chance of becoming Wei ruler). 55 Kuaikui is making an offering of his jade pendant. Guoyu, “Jin yu 9,” 15.495, gives a shorter version of his prayer. 56 Du Yu (ZZ 57.996) says only that this is the name of a flag. 57 As Yu Chang (cited in Yang, 4:1617) noted, this Zhao Luo of Wen, a supporter of the Fan lineage, is apparently not the Zhao Luo in Zhao Yang’s camp mentioned above. 58 According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.996), Fu Sou was one of Zhao Yang’s men. The Zhi are one of the branches of the Xun line. They will dominate Jin during the remaining years of the Spring and Autumn period, until the spectacular fall of Zhi Yao in 453 (Ai 27.5 = Dao 4). 59 According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.996), Gongsun Mang was a subject of the Fan line who went to collect taxes for the Fans; the Zhaos would have wanted the revenue to go to the Jin central government. 60 Zheng has often been characterized as a small domain in comparison to Jin; see Zhao 24.6. Compare the same reasoning in Xi 22.7. 61 As commanding officer, Zhao Yang would have been responsible for beating the drums to signal an advance. In Cheng 2.3c, wounds ultimately force another commander, Xi Ke, to let his driver beat the drum for him. 62 Cf. Guoyu, “Jin yu 9,” 15.494.

1846

Zuo Tradition

The Wei heir apparent prayed: “The descendant Kuaikui presumes to make radiant proclamation to his august forefather King Wen, to his shining forefather Kang Shu, and to his cultured forefather Lord Xiang:52 Sheng of Zheng heeds the lawless ones, and Wu of Jin is beset by difficulties.53 Unable to control the lawless ones, he has sent Zhao Yangc to punish them. I, Kuaikui, do not dare take my leisure but play my part holding a spear in the lines. I presume to proclaim that with no severed tendons, with no broken bones, and with no wounds to my face, I will complete this grand undertaking and will not bring shame to my three forefathers. About the greater decree I dare not make any request.54 I dare not begrudge the jade pendant I wear at my waist.”55 When someone from Zheng struck Zhao Yangb in the shoulder, he collapsed in the chariot, and his Wasp flag was captured.56 The heir apparent Kuaikui saved him with his dagger-axe. The Zheng army retreated, capturing Zhao Luo, the high officer of Wen.57 When the heir apparent charged again, the Zheng army was roundly defeated, and one thousand carriage loads of Qi grain were captured. Pleased, Zhao Yange said, “That is fine.” Fu Sou said, “Although we have overcome Zheng, the Zhi lineage is still in place. The cause of our concern has not been eliminated.”58 Some individual acts of heroism at the battle of Qī are recorded. Earlier, someone from Zhou had given the Fan lineage some land. When Gongsun Mang was there collecting taxes on it, the Zhao lineage captured him and presented him to Zhao Yang.59 The officers requested that he be killed. Zhao Yange said, “He was acting on behalf of his master. What is his crime then?” He kept him there and gave him some land. During the battle at Tie, Gongsun Mang led five hundred troops in a night attack on the Zheng recapturing the Wasp flag from beside the tent of Han Daa. This he presented, saying, “Permit me to repay my master’s favor.” When they pursued the Zheng army, Han Daa, Si Hongc, and Gongsun Lin stayed in the rear and shot, and many in the Jin vanguard died. Zhao Yange said, “There is no such thing as a small domain.”60 When the battle was over, Zhao Yangb said, “I was hunched over my quiver vomiting blood, and yet the sound of the drums never slackened.61 Today I am the best man.” The heir apparent Kuaikui said, “In the chariot I saved the commander, while on the ground I repulsed the enemy. I am the best among right-hand men.” You Wuxub said, “The reins for our trace horses were on the point of breaking, and yet I was able to hold them back. I am the best among chariot drivers.” He drove on, carrying a load of sticks, and both trace reins broke.62

2.3c

Lord Ai

1847

2.4(7) 吳洩庸如蔡納聘。而稍納師。師畢入，眾知之。蔡侯告大夫，殺公子駟

以說。哭而遷墓。冬，蔡遷于州來。

春秋 3.1(1) 三年春，齊國夏、衛石曼姑帥師圍戚。 3.2 夏四月甲午，地震。 3.3(2) 五月辛卯，桓宮、僖宮災。 3.4 季孫斯、叔孫州仇帥師城啟陽。 3.5 宋樂髡帥師伐曹。 3.6(4) 秋七月丙子，季孫斯卒。 3.7 蔡人放其大夫公孫獵于吳。 3.8 冬十月癸卯，秦伯卒。 3.9 叔孫州仇、仲孫何忌帥師圍邾。

63

It is implied that the officials opposed the relocation and that the Cai ruler made an example of Gongzi Si. 64 The Cai ruler, administration, and capital dwellers move from their second capital, at present-day Xincai 新蔡, Henan, 160 kilometers east to present-day Fengtai 鳳台, Anhui, on the Huai River (see map 4). 65 Qiyang 啟陽 was near present-day Linyi 臨沂, Shangdong, about 135 kilometers east and somewhat south of the Lu capital.

1848

Zuo Tradition

Over the opposition of his closest advisers, but in keeping with the wishes of the capital residents (see Ai 1.1), the ruler of Cai relocates his people to Wu territory. Chu subjugation of Cai (Ai 1.1) proves ephemeral. Xieyong of Wu, visiting Cai to present engagement gifts, also introduced some troops into the city. The multitude learned of this only when all the troops had already entered. The Prince of Cai informed his high officers and put to death Gongzi Si to mollify Wu.63 They moved their tombs with lamentation. In winter, Cai relocated to Zhoulai.64

2.4(7)

LORD AI 3 (492 BCE) ANNALS

In the third year, in spring, Guo Xia of Qi and Shi Mangu of Wei led out troops and laid siege to Qī. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jiawu day (1), there was an earthquake. In the fifth month, on the xinmao day (28), there were disastrous fires in the temples of Lords Huan and Xi.

3.1(1)

3.2

3.3(2)

Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) and Shusun Zhoucho led out troops and fortified Qiyang.65

3.4

Yue Kun of Song led out troops and attacked Cao.66

3.5

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the bingzi day (14), Jisun Si (Ji Huanzi) died. Cai leaders expelled their high officer Gongsun Lie to Wu.67 In winter, in the tenth month, on the guimao day (13), the Liege of Qin died. Shusun Zhoucho and Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and laid siege to Zhu.

66 67

3.6(4)

3.7 3.8

3.9

This is the first in a series of attacks that will culminate in Song’s annexation of Cao; see Annals, Ai 6.10, 7.5, and 8.1. According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.997), Gongsun Lie was a supporter of Gongzi Si, who was executed for his opposition to the capital relocation (Ai 2.4).

Lord Ai

1849

左傳 3.1(1) 三年春，齊、衛圍戚，求援于中山。 3.2(3) 夏五月辛卯，司鐸火。火踰公宮，桓、僖災。救火者皆曰顧府。南宮敬叔

至，命周人出御書，俟於宮，曰：「庀女，而不在，死。」 子服景伯至，命宰人出禮書，以待命。命不共，有常刑。校人乘 馬，巾車脂轄，百官官備，府庫慎守，官人肅給。濟濡帷幕，鬱攸從 之。蒙葺公屋，自大廟始，外內以悛。助所不給。有不用命，則有常刑， 無赦。 公父文伯至，命校人駕乘車。 季桓子至，御公立于象魏之外，命救火者傷人則止，財可為也。命 藏象魏，曰：「舊章不可亡也。」 富父槐至，曰：「無備而官辦者，猶拾瀋也。」於是乎去表之槀，道 還公宮。 孔子在陳，聞火，曰：「其桓、僖乎！」

68

According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.997), Zhongshan 中山 was a Xianyu (i.e., a non-Sinitic) domain. It was about 270 kilometers north of Qī, about 25 kilometers northeast of present-day Shijiazhuang, Hebei. See note 38 in Ding. 69 According to Zhang Binglin (cited in Yang, 4:1620), this was likely the building assigned to the keeper of clapper-type bells (duo 鐸) within the city. 70 Nangong Jingshu was a student of Confucius; see Shiji 47.1907–9. No one has given a satisfactory explanation of the term “Zhou men.” According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.997), the Zhou ren 周人 are officials charged with care of the Zhou writings; Takezoe (29.22) cites Zhouli 7.105 in support of Du. Yu Yue and Zhang Binglin (both cited in Yang, 4:1620) suggested that zhou 周 was a loan for chou 疇, chouren 疇人 being holders of hereditary offices. Both Yang Bojun and Takezoe cite this view without endorsing it. 71 The sentence is obscure. This translation is based upon Du Yu’s (ZZ 57.998) identification of yu you 鬱攸 with huo qi 火氣, “the fiery vapor,” and upon Zhang Binglin’s suggestion (cited in Yang, 4:1621) that ji 濟 is to be understood in the same sense as the ru 濡 that follows it. 72 The Xiangwei were the twin towers of the Pheasant Gate (zhi men 雉門), which stood outside the Ancestral Temple. 73 Cf. Analects 10.12: when Confucius hears about a fire at the stables, he is concerned only about the safety of people, not of horses. 74 This is thought to have been a legal text posted on the Xiangwei. See Yang, 4:1622. Recall the legal codes cast on bronze vessels cast in Zheng and Jin as well as the “bamboo codes” in Zheng (Zhao 6.3, 29.5, Ding 9.2). 75 Kongzi jiayu 4.40 gives a longer version of this paragraph in which Confucius explains that the reason he knew that the fire occurred in the temples of Huan and Xi was because Lu admiration for these lineages and their achievements had already faded.

1850

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

Despite the defeat of Zheng (see Ai 2.3), fighting continues around the city of Qī (see Ai 3.3). In the third year, in spring, Qi and Wei laid siege to the city of Qī, which sought assistance from Zhongshan.68

3.1(1)

When fire breaks out in buildings adjacent to the Lu Lord’s palace, nobles of the state distinguish themselves in their fire-fighting measures. The passage recalls episodes in Song (Xiang 9.1a) and Zheng (Zhao 18.3b). In summer, in the fifth month, on the xinmao (28) day, the Siduo caught fire.69 The flames passed over our lord’s palace, and there were disastrous fires in the temples of Lords Huan and Xi. All the people fighting the fire urged that attention be given to the treasury. When Nangong Jingshu arrived, he commanded the Zhou men to bring out the ruler’s documents and then wait at the palace.70 He said, “If you fail to keep what is entrusted to you, then you will die.” When Zifu Jingbo arrived, he commanded the stewards to bring out the ritual writings and to await orders. Those who did not respect this command received regular penalties. The grooms yoked the horses, the manager of carriages greased the hubs, the hundred officials were all on duty in their offices, the treasuries and storehouses were carefully guarded, and the keepers of hostels attended carefully to provisioning. Moistened tarps were applied wherever the flames tended.71 Our lord’s rooms were shrouded, starting with the Ancestral Temple and proceeding in order from center to periphery. Aid was given to those in want. Those who did not follow orders received regular punishments and no pardons. When Gongfu Chua arrived, he commanded the grooms to yoke our lord’s carriage. When Ji Huanzi arrived, he drove for our lord, halting outside Xiang­ wei;72 he ordered the firefighters to stop when injury threatened, since property could always be replaced.73 He commanded that the “Xiangwei” text74 be put away, saying, “It would be wrong for the old regulations to be lost.” When Fufu Huai arrived, he said, “When officials try to perform their duties without the necessary preparations, it is like trying to pick up spilled soup.” Therefore, they removed all the dry brush lying in the path of the fire and opened a firebreak around our lord’s palace. Confuciusb was in Chen. When he heard about the fire, he said, “This must have been in the temples of Lords Huan and Xi.”75

Lord Ai

3.2(3)

1851

3.3 劉氏、范氏世為昏姻，萇弘事劉文公，故周與范氏。趙鞅以為討。六月癸

卯，周人殺萇弘。 3.4(6) 秋，季孫有疾，命正常曰：「無死！南孺子之子，男也，則以告而立之；女

也，則肥也可。」季孫卒，康子即位。既葬，康子在朝。 南氏生男，正常載以如朝，告曰：「夫子有遺言，命其圉臣曰：『南 氏生男，則以告於君與大夫而立之。』今生矣，男也，敢告。」遂奔衛。康 子請退。公使共劉視之，則或殺之矣。乃討之。召正常，正常不反。 3.5 冬十月，晉趙鞅圍朝歌，師于其南，荀寅伐其郛，使其徒自北門入，己犯

師而出。癸丑，奔邯鄲。 十一月，趙鞅殺士皋夷，惡范氏也。

76 77

78 79

1852

According to Du Yu, Zhao Yang sets out to punish Zhou and the Fan lineage (Yang, 4:1622). The parallel passage in Guoyu, “Zhou yu 2,” 3.145, singles out Chang Hong as the victim of Zhao Yang’s wrath. Servants, concubines, and sometimes even noble men are killed (or kill themselves) to follow their dead lords as an act of loyalty (Wen 6.3, Xuan 15.5, Cheng 2.4, 10.4, Zhao 13.2, Ding 3.1). According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.998), Zhengchang was a favorite domestic servant of Huanzi’s. Fei is Ji Kangzi. Zhonghang Yin is one of the defenders of Zhaoge. As Yang (4:1623–24) explains, Zhonghang Yin feints in order to get Zhao Yang to concentrate his forces south of the city, then brings in reinforcements through the northern gate and flees northward with the help of these reinforcements.

Zuo Tradition

The Liu lineage from the Zhou royal domain supports the Fan rebellion in Jin, bringing about the death of Chang Hong in fulfillment of an old prediction (see Ding 1.1, Ai 1.7, 3.1). Chang Hong often appears as a wise man in Zuozhuan (Zhao 11.2, 17.4, 18.1, 23.6, 24.1). The prediction of his demise was based on his doomed attempt to reverse the tide for the declining Zhou, but here he seems just to be caught in the crossfire. The Liu lineage of Zhou and the Fan lineage of Jin had intermarried for generations, and Chang Hong was in the service of the Liu Duke Wen, so Zhou sided with the Fan lineage. On this account Zhao Yang punished Chang Hong.76 In the sixth month, on the guimao day (6), the leaders of Zhou executed Chang Hong.

3.3

Ji Huanzi dies and is succeeded as head of the Jisun line—and de facto ruler of Lu—by his son Ji Kangzi, who defends his claims against those of a younger brother, a baby born of Ji Huanzi’s concubine Nan. According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.998), the Lu high officer Gongliu, sent to investigate the respective claims of Ji Kangzi and Nan’s son, is probably murdered on Ji Kangzi’s orders. In the autumn, Ji Huanzic was sick. He commanded Zhengchang, “Do not follow me in death!77 If the child of the little concubine Nan is a boy, then announce that he should be set up as my heir. If the child is a girl, then Fei will have to do.”78 When Ji Huanzic died, Ji Kangzib acceded to his position. After the burial, Ji Kangzib took his place in court. The Nan woman meanwhile gave birth to a son, whom Zhengchang brought by carriage into court, where he announced, “My master left behind a will in which he commanded his humble servant as follows: ‘If the Nan woman should give birth to a boy, then announce him to the ruler and the high officers and set him up as my heir.’ Now she has given birth, and it is a boy. I presume to make my announcement.” With this he fled to Wei. Ji Kangzib asked permission to withdraw. When our lord sent Gongliu to investigate the claims of Nan’s son, someone had killed him. The culprit was punished for it. Zhengchang was summoned, but Zhengchang did not return.

3.4(6)

The Jin rebel Zhonghang Yin, besieged at Zhaoge, makes his escape to Handan (see Ding 14.6, Ai 3.1, 3.3, 3.6, 4.3). In winter, in the tenth month, Zhao Yang of Jin laid siege to Zhaoge, stationing his troops to the south. Zhonghang Yina attacked the outer wall at that point and had his troops enter from the north gate; he then broke through the army and escaped.79 On the guichou day (23), he fled to Handan. In the eleventh month, Zhao Yang killed Fan Gaoyia; this was out of hatred for the Fan lineage.

3.5

Lord Ai

1853

春秋 4.1(1) 四年春，王二月庚戌，盜殺蔡侯申。 4.2(1) 蔡公孫辰出奔吳。 4.3 葬秦惠公。 4.4 宋人執小邾子。 4.5(1) 夏，蔡殺其大夫公孫姓、公孫霍。 4.6(2) 晉人執戎蠻子赤歸于楚。 4.7 城西郛。 4.8 六月辛丑，亳社災。 4.9 秋八月甲寅，滕子結卒。 4.10 冬十有二月，葬蔡昭公。 4.11 葬滕頃公。

左傳

4.1(1, 2, 5)

四年春，蔡昭將如吳。諸大夫恐其又遷也，承公孫翩逐而射之，入於家 人而卒。 以兩矢門之，眾莫敢進。文之鍇後至，曰：「如牆而進，多而殺二 人。」鍇執弓而先，翩射之，中肘；鍇遂殺之。故逐公孫辰而殺公孫姓、 公孫盱。

80 The Gongyang and Guliang versions of the Annals both have the expected “assassinate” (shi 弒) here rather than “kill” (sha 殺) (Gongyang 21.226; Guliang 20.200). Only here in the Annals is sha used in connection with the murder of a ruler. Yang (4:1624) sees no significance in this aberration, noting that there are many ancient examples of the two graphs being used interchangeably. Van Auken (“Formal Analysis of the Chuenchiou,” 226) notes that Annals, Zhao 11.3, shares the verb and other features with this Annals entry and concludes that shi was used for the killing of a ruler by his own subjects, while sha was used for all other killings of a ruler. But according to Zuozhuan, the Cai ruler is murdered by his own subjects.

1854

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 4 (491 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourth year, in spring, in the royal second month, on the gengxu day (21), brigands killed Shen, the Prince of Cai.80

4.1(1)

Gongsun Chen of Cai departed and fled to Wu.

4.2(1)

Lord Hui of Qin was buried.

4.3

Song leaders arrested the Master of Lesser Zhu.

4.4

In summer, Cai put to death its high officers Gongsun Xing and Gongsun Huo.

4.5(1)

Jin leaders arrested Chi, the Rong Man Master, and returned him to Chu.

4.6(2)

We fortified the western outer city walls.

4.7

In the sixth month, on the xinchou day (14), there was a disastrous fire at the Bo Altar.

4.8

In the eighth month, on the jiayin day (28), Jie, the Master of Teng, died.

4.9

In winter, in the twelfth month, Lord Zhao of Cai was buried.

4.10

Lord Qing of Teng was buried.

4.11

ZUO

Disaffected officers murder the ruler of Cai, who was responsible for shifting his domain’s allegiance to Wu and relocating the Cai capital to Zhoulai (see Ai 2.4). In the fourth year, in spring, Lord Zhao of Cai was preparing to go to Wu. All the high officers feared that he would again relocate the capital. Following after Gongsun Pian,81 they pursued the ruler and shot him; he entered a local home and died there. Gongsun Pian, who had two arrows, barricaded himself in the home where the ruler was dying, and none of the massed troops dared advance. Arriving after a time, Wen Zhikai said, “If we press forward like a wall, he will kill two men at most.” Wen Zhikaia took his bow and went ahead. Gongsun Piana shot him, striking him in the elbow, and then Wen Zhikaia killed him. As a result they expelled Gongsun Chen and killed Gongsun Xing and Gongsun Huoa.82 81 82

4.1(1, 2, 5)

Yang (4:1625) and Takezoe (29.28) agree that the Zhengyi commentary (ZZ 57.999) is wrong in punctuating after cheng 承. Yang understands the word in the sense of ji 繼, “to come after.” Takezoe understands it in the sense of zuo 佐, “to help.” Gongsun Xing and Gongsun Huo are presumably allies of the murdered Cai ruler.

Lord Ai

1855

4.2(6) 夏，楚人既克夷虎，乃謀北方。左司馬眅、申公壽餘、葉公諸梁致蔡於

負函，致方城之外於繒關，曰：「吳將泝江入郢，將奔命焉。」為一昔之 期，襲梁及霍。單浮餘圍蠻氏，蠻氏潰。 蠻子赤奔晉陰地。司馬起豐、析與狄戎，以臨上雒。左師軍于菟 和，右師軍于倉野，使謂陰地之命大夫士蔑曰：「晉、楚有盟，好惡同 之。若將不廢，寡君之願也。不然，將通於少習以聽命。」 士蔑請諸趙孟。趙孟曰：「晉國未寧，安能惡於楚？必速與之！」士 蔑乃致九州之戎，將裂田以與蠻子而城之，且將為之卜。蠻子聽卜，遂 執之與其五大夫，以畀楚師于三戶。司馬致邑立宗焉，以誘其遺民，而 盡俘以歸。

83

According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.999), the Yihu were a non-Sinitic group that had rebelled against Chu control. 84 After the Cai ruler’s assassination, the pro-Chu faction recovered control of Cai. Fuhan 負函 was near present-day Xinyang 信陽, Henan, between the Chu capital and the Cai capital. Zengguan 繒關, or the Zeng Pass, was well to the north of the Chu capital, just west of the Fangcheng 方城 barrier. 85 As Du Yu (ZZ 57.999) points out, this is a false statement, designed to hide plans for the coming attack on Liang and Huo, which lie in the opposite direction from Ying. 86 Both Liang 梁 and Huo 霍 were about 60 kilometers southeast of the Zhou capital, along the upper reaches of the Ru River, near present-day Linru 臨汝, Henan. 87 Man territory was to the west of Huo. 88 Yindi is territory just south of the Yellow River bend, originally controlled by the Zhou royal domain but by this time controlled by Jin (see Xuan 2.2). 89 Feng 豐 and Xi 析 lay near present-day Xichuan 淅川, Henan, about 140 kilometers southeast of Shangluo 上雒, which was in Yindi on the upper reaches of the Luo River.

1856

Zuo Tradition

With the help of Jin, Chu campaigns against the non-Sinitic Man, tightening control over its northern marches. Jin takes on this role because it is still reeling from the unrest fomented by the Fan and Zhonghang lineages. In summer, when the men of Chu had subdued the Yihu, 83 they made plans to conquer the northern regions. The supervisor of the left army, Pan, the Shen Lord Shouyu, and the She Lord Zhuliang assembled the inhabitants of Cai at Fuhan and assembled all those from beyond Fangcheng at Zengguan,84 saying, “Wu is preparing to come up the Jiang River and enter Ying. We are going to rush to fulfill our command there.”85 They made an overnight pact, and then mounted sneak attacks on Liang and Huo.86 Shan Fuyu laid siege to the Man, and the Man collapsed.87 The Man Master Chi fled to Yindi, in Jin.88 Having mustered men from Feng, Xi, and the Di and Rong for the campaign, the supervisor of the military approached Shangluo.89 The left army made its encampment at Tuhe, while the right army made its encampment at Cangye.90 They had a message taken to Shi Mie, the commissioned high officer at Yindi: “Jin and Chu have a covenant: good and ill they share alike. It is our lord’s hope that this will not be set aside. But if such is not to be the case, then we will press on through to Shaoxi in order to hear your orders.”91 Shi Mie passed on the request to Zhao Yange. Zhao Yange said, “The domain of Jin is not yet at peace. How can we incur the enmity of Chu? You must grant it to them with all haste!” So Shi Mie summoned the Rong of Jiuzhou, letting it be known that he was going to separate off and fortify some of their lands to give to the Master of Man, and that he was going to perform a divination about it. When the Master of Man came to hear the divination, Shi Mie arrested him and his five high officers, after which he handed them over to the Chu army at Sanhu.92 The supervisor of the military designated a city and set up an ancestral temple there in order to lure in the Man Master’s adherents. Then he made prisoners of them all before going home.

4.2(6)

90 The mountains Tuhe 菟和 and Cangye 倉野 were to the east of present-day Shang County 商縣, Shanxi, and therefore lay along the route from Feng and Xi to Shangluo. 91 The Chu forces threaten the Jin official who is giving refuge to the Man leader. Shaoxi 少習 was a mountain to the east of present-day Shangxian. By way of the pass there, later called the Wu, or “Martial,” Pass, Chu forces could approach Jin. 92 Sanhu 三戶 was southeast of Shaoxi; Chu forces did not enter the pass. The promised gift of land is thus a ruse to lure the Man to come to the meeting.

Lord Ai

1857

4.3 秋七月，齊陳乞、弦施、衛甯跪救范氏。庚午，圍五鹿。九月，趙鞅圍邯

鄲。冬十一月，邯鄲降。荀寅奔鮮虞，趙稷奔臨。十二月，弦施逆之，遂 墮臨。國夏伐晉，取邢、任、欒、鄗、逆畤、陰人、盂、壺口，會鮮虞，納荀 寅于柏人。

春秋 5.1 五年春，城毗。 5.2 夏，齊侯伐宋。 5.3(2) 晉趙鞅帥師伐衛。 5.4(3) 秋九月癸酉，齊侯杵臼卒。 5.5 冬，叔還如齊。 5.6 閏月，葬齊景公。

左傳 5.1 五年春，晉圍柏人，荀寅、士吉射奔齊。

93 94 95

1858

Qi and Wei forces attack Wulu in order to support the Fan and Zhonghang rebellion against Jin. Zhonghang Yin had fled from Zhaoge to Handan (Ai 3.5). Zhao Ji and She Bin had led Handan in revolt against Jin (Ding 13.2a). The Xianyu were concentrated around Zhongshan; see Ai 3.1. Lin 臨 was in Jin, southwest of present-day Lincheng 臨城, Hebei, about 100 kilometers south of Zhongshan.

Zuo Tradition

Qi and Wei continue to support the Fan line in its rebellion against Jin central authority. The Fan stronghold falls, and the leader Zhonghang Yin flees to the territory of the Xianyu, a non-Sinitic polity that has a history of conflict with Jin (see Zhao 13.4, 15.5, 21.8, 22.4, Ding 3.2, 5.8, Ai 3.5, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1). In autumn, in the seventh month, Chen Qi and Xian Shi of Qi and Ning Gui of Wei reinforced the Fan lineage. On the gengwu day (14), they laid siege to Wulu.93 In the ninth month, Zhao Yang laid siege to Handan.94 In winter, in the eleventh month, Handan fell. Zhonghang Yina fled to the Xianyu and Zhao Ji fled to Lin.95 In the twelfth month, Xian Shi went forward to meet Zhao Ji there and consequently razed the Lin walls.96 Guo Xia attacked Jin, taking Xing, Ren, Luan, Hao, Nizhi, Yinren, Yu, and Hukou.97 He held a meeting with the Xianyu and placed Zhonghang Yina at Boren.98

4.3

LORD AI 5 (490 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifth year, in spring, we fortified Bi.99

5.1

In summer, the Prince of Qi attacked Song.

5.2

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and attacked Wei.

5.3(2)

In autumn, in the ninth month, on the guiyou day (24), Chujiu, the Prince of Qi, died.

5.4(3)

In winter, Shu Xuan went to Qi.

5.5

In the intercalary month, Lord Jing of Qi was buried.

5.6

ZUO

As the Jin rebels are driven out of their stronghold at Boren, an exemplary man dies for honor (see Ai 4.3, 5.2, 6.1, 10.4). The idea of separating private enmity and public recommendation also appears in Xiang 3.4 and 21.5. In the fifth year, in spring, Jin laid siege to Boren. Zhonghang Yina and Fan Jishea fled to Qi. 96 97

98 99

5.1

Xian Shi escorts Zhao Ji back to Qi with him, then razes the walls of Jin’s city Lin. These settlements, to the extent that their locations are known, lay mostly along a line stretching from about 60 kilometers north of Handan northward to the vicinity of present-day Baoding, Hebei, that is, along a north–south line roughly halfway between the Jin and Qi capitals. Only Hukou was certainly farther west, about 90 kilometers west of Handan. Boren was about 90 kilometers north of Handan. The location of this Bi is unknown.

Lord Ai

1859

初，范氏之臣王生惡張柳朔，言諸昭子，使為柏人。昭子曰：「夫 非而讎乎？」對曰：「私讎不及公，好不廢過，惡不去善，義之經也，臣敢 違之？」 及范氏出，張柳朔謂其子：「爾從主，勉之！我將止死，王生授我 矣，吾不可以僭之。」遂死於柏人。 5.2(3) 夏，趙鞅伐衛，范氏之故也，遂圍中牟。 5.3(4) 齊燕姬生子，不成而死。諸子鬻姒之子荼嬖，諸大夫恐其為大子也，言

於公曰：「君之齒長矣，未有大子，若之何？」 公曰：「二三子間於憂虞，則有疾疢，亦姑謀樂，何憂於無君？」 公疾，使國惠子、高昭子立荼，寘群公子於萊。秋，齊景公卒。冬 十月，公子嘉、公子駒、公子黔奔衛，公子鉏、公子陽生來奔。萊人歌 之曰： 景公死乎不與埋， 三軍之事乎不與謀， 師乎師乎， 何黨之乎？ 5.4 鄭駟秦富而侈，嬖大夫也，而常陳卿之車服於其庭。鄭人惡而殺之。子

思曰：「《詩》曰：

100 Wang Sheng and Zhangliu Shuo appear in Mozi 1.11 as Wang Sheng 王勝 and Chang­ liu Shuo 長柳朔. 101 See Karlgren, gl. 785: “I cannot be false about it” or “I cannot fail in good faith.” 102 For Zhongmou, see Ding 9.4b. 103 According to Fu Qian (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 854; cited in Yang, 4:1630), Yan Ji was the wife given by Yan leaders to Lord Jing of Qi during the Qi invasion of Yan in Zhao 7.1. 104 According to Du Yu (ZZ 57.1001), this was a city in Qi’s eastern marches. It was perhaps near Huangxian, Shandong, about 230 kilometers east and somewhat north of the Qi capital.

1860

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, Wang Sheng, a retainer of the Fan lineage, had hated Zhangliu Shuo.100 Yet he spoke to Fan Jishec about having Zhangliu Shuo govern Boren. Fan Jishec said, “Isn’t he your enemy?” He replied, “Let no private enmity affect public affairs, do not overlook the errors of those you love, and do not dismiss the excellence of those you hate. These are constants of propriety. Dare I violate them?” When the Fan lineage fled, Zhangliu Shuo said to his son, “You follow our lord and do your utmost for him. I will stay and die. This was Wang Sheng’s gift to me, and I cannot betray him.”101 So he died at Boren. Jin punishes Wei for its support of the rebels (see Ai 4.3, 7.2). In summer, Zhao Yang attacked Wei; this was on account of the Fan lineage, and as a result he laid siege to Zhongmou.102

5.2(3)

Lord Jing of Qi dies, leaving the powerless child Tu as his heir and initiating a period of strife in Qi (see Ai 6.6). The succession is disputed because Tu is born of a concubine, and Lord Jing failed to secure his ministers’ support for Tu before his death. Yan Ji of Qi had given birth to a son, but he died before he reached maturity.103 Of the concubines’ sons, Tu, the son of Yu Si, was the favorite, and all the high officers feared that he would be made heir apparent. They said to the lord, “My lord, you are getting on in years, and you do not yet have an heir. What do you propose to do about it?” The lord said, “My men, if you share in my worries, then you will fall ill. For the time being, just plan for pleasures. Why worry that you will have no ruler?” When the lord grew sick, he had Guo Xiaa and Gao Zhangb set up Tu and settle the other lord’s sons at Lai.104 In autumn, Lord Jing of Qi died. In winter, in the tenth month, Gongzi Jia, Gongzi Ju, and Gongzi Qian fled to Wei. Nanguo Juyua and Gongzi Yangsheng came to us in flight. The people of Lai sang about them:

5.3(4)

Lord Jing died, but you didn’t help bury him. In the three armies’ planning you had no part. Such a crew, such a crew— Where are you to go?

The death of the Zheng officer Si Qin prompts Guo Can, son of Zichan, to offer a classicist interpretation of his failures. Si Qin of Zheng was wealthy and extravagant. He was only a favorite high officer, yet he always displayed the caparison of a minister in his courtyard. The people of Zheng killed him out of hatred for him. Guo Cana said, “As it says in the Odes:

5.4

Lord Ai

1861

不解于位， 民之攸塈。 不守其位而能久者鮮矣。商頌曰： 不僭不濫， 不敢怠皇， 命以多福。」

春秋 6.1 六年春，城邾瑕。 6.2(1) 晉趙鞅帥師伐鮮虞。 6.3(2) 吳伐陳。 6.4(3) 夏，齊國夏及高張來奔。 6.5 叔還會吳于柤。 6.6(4) 秋七月庚寅，楚子軫卒。 6.7 齊陽生入于齊。 6.8(6) 齊陳乞弒其君荼。 6.9 冬，仲孫何忌帥師伐邾。 6.10 宋向巢帥師伐曹。

左傳 6.1(2) 六年春，晉伐鮮虞，治范氏之亂也。 6.2(3) 吳伐陳，復修舊怨也。楚子曰：「吾先君與陳有盟，不可以不救。」乃救

陳，師于城父。

105 Maoshi 249, “Jiale” 假樂, 17C.615–16. The same lines are quoted at Cheng 2.8b and Zhao 21.2. 106 Cf. Maoshi 305, “Yinwu” 殷武, 20D.804–6. The third line in Zisi’s quotation appears to be a combination of two lines in the Mao version. 107 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1006), Zhuxia 邾瑕 was about 40 kilometers southwest of the Lu capital. 108 For Zha, see Annals, Xiang 10.1.

1862

Zuo Tradition

He never slackens in what is due his position; He is the one in whom the people find repose.105

Few are the men who can last long when they do not stay in their position. And as it says in the ‘Shang Hymns’: Not indiscriminate, not excessive— None dare to be lax or wallow in leisure. The command is given for grand blessings.”106 LORD AI 6 (489 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixth month, in spring, we fortified Zhuxia.107

6.1

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and attacked the Xianyu.

6.2(1)

Wu attacked Chen.

6.3(2)

In summer, Guo Xia and Gao Zhang of Qi came in flight.

6.4(3)

Shu Xuan met with Wu at Zha.108

6.5

In autumn, in the seventh month, on the gengyin day (16), Zhen, the Master of Chu, died.

6.6(4)

Yangsheng (Gongzi Yangsheng) of Qi entered Qi.

6.7

Chen Qi of Qi assassinated his ruler Tu.

6.8(6)

In winter, Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) led out troops and attacked Zhu.

6.9

Xiang Chao of Song led out troops and attacked Cao.

6.10

ZUO

Jin pursues remnants of Fan rebel forces among the Xianyu (see Ai 4.3). In the sixth year, in spring, Jin attacked the Xianyu; this was a matter of controlling the Fan rebellion.

6.1(2)

Chu aids Chen in the face of Wu aggression (see Ai 1.6, 6.4). Wu attacked Chen; this was a matter of again settling an old grudge. The Master of Chu said, “Our former ruler had a covenant with Chen.109 Not to aid them would be unacceptable.” Therefore, they gave aid to Chen, stationing troops at Chengfu.110

6.2(3)

109 This covenant was probably sworn when Chu put Lord Hui of Chen in power in Zhao 13.5. 110 See Zhao 9.2. Chengfu lay approximately 105 kilometers east of the Chen capital.

Lord Ai

1863

6.3(4) 齊陳乞偽事高、國者，每朝，必驂乘焉。所從，必言諸大夫曰：「彼皆偃

蹇，將棄子之命。皆曰：『高、國得君，必偪我，盍去諸？』固將謀子，子 早圖之！圖之，莫如盡滅之。需，事之下也。」 及朝，則曰：「彼，虎狼也。見我在子之側，殺我無日矣，請就之 位。」 又謂諸大夫曰：「二子者禍矣，恃得君而欲謀二三子，曰：『國之多 難，貴寵之由，盡去之而後君定。』既成謀矣，盍及其未作也，先諸？作 而後，悔亦無及也。」大夫從之。 夏，六月戊辰，陳乞、鮑牧及諸大夫以甲入于公宮。昭子聞之，與惠 子乘如公。戰于莊，敗。國人追之，國夏奔莒，遂及高張、晏圉、弦施來 奔。 6.4a(6) 秋，七月，楚子在城父，將救陳。卜戰，不吉；卜退，不吉。王曰：「然則死

也。再敗楚師，不如死；棄盟、逃讎，亦不如死。死一也。其死讎乎！」

111 Zhuang was a major avenue within the Qi capital; cf. Zhao 10.2b. 112 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1006), Yan Yu was the son of Yan Ying. Shiji 32.1506–7 gives a somewhat different account of the events retold here and in Ai 6.6, adding the detail of Chen Qi’s bringing Gongzi Yangsheng into the Qi court hidden in a leather bag.

1864

Zuo Tradition

Chen Qi, scion of the powerful Chen lineage, engineers a coup in Qi. Defenders of the ruler, the newly installed Tu, are driven into exile, including Gao Zhang, whose flight was predicted earlier (see Ding 1.1b). Chen Qi of Qi made a show of serving Gao Zhangd and Guo Xiac, and whenever they went to court, he would always ride along with them. As they proceeded, he would talk about the other high officers: “All of them are presumptuous and are preparing to ignore your commands. They all say, ‘If Gao and Guo control the ruler, they will lord it over us. Why not eliminate them?’ It is certain that they are going to plot against you. Move first to make plans against them! And if you are making plans against them, nothing could be better than destroying them completely. To hesitate would be the worse policy.” When they reached court, he would say, “They are tigers and wolves. If they see me at your side, they could kill me any day. Permit me to take my place with them.” Meanwhile, he would say to the other high officers, “The two of them are instigating disaster. They count on controlling the ruler and they want to plot against all of you. They say, ‘The domain’s many problems come from the nobles and the favorites, so the ruler will be securely established only when he eliminates them.’ They have already finished making their plans. Why not move first, before they have had a chance to act? If you have regrets only after they have acted, it will already be too late.” The high officers went along with him. In summer, in the sixth month, on the wuchen day (23), Chen Qi, Bao Mu, and the other high officers entered the lord’s palace in full armor. When Gao Zhangc heard of it, he and Guo Xiab rode to the lord. They battled at Zhuang and were defeated.111 When the inhabitants of the capital pursued them, Guo Xia first fled to Ju, then he came to us in flight with Gao Zhang, Yan Yu, and Xian Shi.112

6.3(4)

Braving ominous predictions, King Zhao of Chu campaigns in defense of Chen (see Ai 6.2) but dies on the march. His decision to place the welfare of the realm above his personal fortune echoes Lord Wen of Zhu’s similar priority (Wen 13.3). King Zhao is succeeded by Zhang, who will become King Hui of Chu (r. 488–432). In autumn, in the seventh month, the Master of Chu was in Chengfu, preparing to go to the aid of Chen. When they divined about doing battle, it was not auspicious. When they divined about retreating, it was not auspicious. The king said, “In that case, let us die. Better to die than to let the Chu army be defeated twice. Better to die, too, than to abandon a covenant and flee an enemy. If it is one and the same death, then let us die fighting our enemies!”

6.4a(6)

Lord Ai

1865

命公子申為王，不可；則命公子結，亦不可；則命公子啟，五辭而 後許。 將戰，王有疾。庚寅，昭王攻大冥，卒于城父。子閭退，曰：「君王 舍其子而讓，群臣敢忘君乎？從君之命，順也；立君之子，亦順也。二順 不可失也。」 與子西、子期謀，潛師，閉塗，逆越女之子章立之，而後還。 6.4b 是歲也，有雲如眾赤鳥，夾日以飛三日。楚子使問諸周大史。周大史曰：

「其當王身乎！若禜之，可移於令尹、司馬。」王曰：「除腹心之疾，而 寘諸股肱，何益？不穀不有大過，天其夭諸？有罪受罰，又焉移之？」遂 弗禜。 6.4c 初，昭王有疾，卜曰：「河為祟。」王弗祭。大夫請祭諸郊。王曰：「三代命

祀，祭不越望。江、漢、雎、漳，楚之望也。禍福之至，不是過也。不穀雖 不德，河非所獲罪也。」遂弗祭。

113 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1007), Gongzi Shen, Gongzi Jie, and Gongzi Qi were all elder half brothers of King Zhao. Once before, at Zhao 26.8, Gongzi Shen had vehemently refused to succeed a dying Chu king. 114 Daming 大冥 was about 35 kilometers south of the Chen capital and about 105 kilometers west of Chengfu near present-day Xiangcheng County 項城縣, Henan. 115 According to Takezoe (29.38), Gongzi Qi seals the roads to keep Chu’s enemies from learning of King Zhao’s death. The Yue woman is a daughter of King Goujian, the Dowager Zhao of Ai 16.5d. According to Lienü zhuan 5.97–99 (cited in Yang, 4:1635), she committed suicide to accompany King Zhao as he accepted the death foretold in Ai 6.4b, c. On sources related to this story, see Jens Østergaard Petersen, “The Zuozhuan Account of the Death of King Zhao of Chu and Its Sources,” Sino-Platonic Papers 159 (August 2005), 1–47. 116 The Sui and Zhang drain into the Jiang to the west of the Chu capital; the Han, to the east. The king restricts the purview of Chu sacrifices to the domain’s small early sphere of influence. To judge from the inclusion of a hymn to the Yellow River Earl (“He bo” 河伯) among the “Nine Songs” (“Jiu ge” 九歌)—Chu devotional texts preserved in the Chuci 楚辭 (Songs of Chu)—within a century or two of King Zhao’s death Chu did consider the Yellow River a fitting recipient of sacrifice. The prospect (wang 望) sacrifice was offered to mountains and rivers within the purview of the domain. The term “Three Prospects (Sanwang 三望) is mentioned in Annals, Xi 31.3, Cheng 7.4, and Zuozhuan, Xi 31.3, Xuan 3.1.

1866

Zuo Tradition

He commanded Gongzi Shen to act as king in his stead, but Shen would not agree. So he gave the command to Gongzi Jie, who also refused. So he gave the command to Gongzi Qi, who assented to it only after refusing five times.113 When they were about to do battle, the king became ill. On the geng­ yin day (16), King Zhao attacked Daming and died at Chengfu.114 Gongzi Qia withdrew and said, “When our king has set aside his own sons out of deference to other noble lineages, do his subjects dare forget their ruler? To follow the command of the ruler is compliance; and to set up the son of the ruler is also compliance. These two acts of compliance must not be neglected.” Taking counsel with Gongzi Shena and Gongzi Jiea, Gongzi Qia secretly placed troops to block the roads. He then received Zhang, the king’s son by a Yue woman, and set him up as successor. Only then did he return.115 Like Lord Wen of Zhu (Wen 13.3), King Zhao hears predictions of his death but refuses to save himself at the expense of his subordinates. There are two acts of divination here, and the king is praised for ignoring the prognostication in both cases, although the rationale differs. This year, there were clouds that resembled a flock of red birds. For three days they flew with the sun in their midst. The Master of Chu sent to inquire about this with the Zhou grand scribe. The Zhou grand scribe said, “This ill luck will fall upon your highness himself! If you perform a sacrifice, it can be shifted to the chief minister or the supervisor of the military.” The king said, “What good would it do to expel an illness from my midriff only to inflict it upon my limbs? Had I not committed a great error, would Heaven cut me down in my prime? I am guilty and must take my punishment. How can I shift it?” He thus did not perform any sacrifice.

6.4b

Earlier, when King Zhao had first become ill, the diviners said, “The Yellow River is creating a demonic disturbance.” The king did not offer sacrifice. The high officers requested permission to offer sacrifice to the Yellow River in the outskirts of the capital. The king said, “During the Three Dynasties, the commands regarding offerings forbade one to perform sacrifice beyond one’s purview. The Jiang, the Han, the Sui, and the Zhang Rivers are in Chu’s purview.116 Banes and blessings do not cross these when they come. As lacking in virtue as I am, it is not the Yellow River that I have offended.” Consequently, he did not offer sacrifice.

6.4c

Lord Ai

1867

孔子曰：「楚昭王知大道矣。其不失國也，宜哉！《夏書》曰：『惟 彼陶唐，帥彼天常，有此冀方。今失其行，亂其紀綱，乃滅而亡。』又曰： 『允出茲在茲。』由己率常，可矣。」 6.5 八月，齊邴意茲來奔。

6.6a(7, 8)

陳僖子使召公子陽生。陽生駕而見南郭且于，曰：「嘗獻馬於季孫，不入 於上乘，故又獻此，請與子乘之。」出萊門而告之故。闞止知之，先待諸 外。公子曰：「事未可知，反，與壬也處。」戒之，遂行。逮夜，至於齊，國 人知之。僖子使子士之母養之，與饋者皆入。

6.6b 冬十月丁卯，立之。將盟，鮑子醉而往。其臣差車鮑點曰：「此誰之命

也？」陳子曰：「受命于鮑子。」遂誣鮑子曰：「子之命也！」鮑子曰：「女 忘君之為孺子牛而折其齒乎，而背之也？」悼公稽首，曰：「吾子，奉義 而行者也。若我可，不必亡一大夫；若我不可，不必亡一公子。義則進， 否則退，敢不唯子是從？廢興無以亂，則所願也。」鮑子曰：「誰非君之 子？」乃受盟。

117 Confucius is referring to the near fall of Chu in Ding 4.3. 118 Taotang is the name of the territory or territories over which the sage-king Yao is supposed to have ruled. The name is sometimes used as a name for Yao or for his family line. 119 Neither of the cited passages is found in the extant Modern Script chapters of the Shangshu, though both have been incorporated into the Ancient Script chapters later re-created on the basis of citations like these. 120 The omen of the clouds and King Zhao’s refusal to offer sacrifice to the Yellow River are found also in Shiji 40.1717 and Shuoyuan 30–31. 121 For Bing Yizi, see Ding 13.1. According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1007), he was a partisan of Gao Zhang and Guo Xia. 122 Nanguo Juyu is a son of Lord Jing of Qi who fled to Lu with Gongzi Yangsheng in Ai 5.3. 123 According to Yang (4:1637), Gongzi Yangsheng must by this time already have married the younger sister of Ji Kangzi; see Ai 8.3. 124 According to Yang (4:1637), this was a gate in the outer wall of the Lu capital, not the Lai Gate at Yangguan mentioned at Ding 9.3. Gongzi Yangsheng is claiming to take the horses for a “test drive” before offering them to Ji Kangzi. The real reason is of course to confer about the coup. 125 Yang (4:1637) notes early suggestions that this Kan Zhi, a household retainer of Gongzi Yangsheng’s who is called Ziwo 子我 at Ai 14.3, is the disciple of Confucius known as Zaiyu 宰予; see Analects 3.21, 6.26, 11.3, 17.21. 126 Ren is Gongzi Yangsheng’s son, the future Lord Jian (see Ai 14.5). 127 Zishi’s mother was one of Chen Qi’s concubines. 128 The ruler mentioned here is Lord Jing, recently deceased (see Ai 5.3). The “child” is the child ruler Tu, left by Lord Jing as his intended heir. 129 Yangsheng is saying that if he is acceptable as Qi ruler, there will be no recrimination against officers who support his rivals (including Bao Mu). If he is not acceptable, he (the lord’s son) will back off and escape harm.

1868

Zuo Tradition

Confuciusb said, “King Zhao of Chu knew the great Way. How appropriate it was that he did not lose his domain!117 The Xia Documents says, ‘It was that Yao of Taotang who acted in accord with Heaven’s constants and held this northern territory.118 Now we have fallen short of his exemplary conduct and wreaked havoc with his scheme of order. For this reason we will perish and be extinguished.’ It also says, ‘Good faith arises from this and resides in this.’119 It was right for him to start with himself in following the constants.”120 In the eighth month, Bing Yizi of Qi came in flight.121

6.5

Having taken control in Qi (see Ai 6.3), Chen Qi now summons Gongzi Yangsheng from Lu (see Ai 5.3) and installs him as the ruler who will come to be known as Lord Dao of Qi (r. 488–485). He displaces the child ruler Tu, who is put to death with the acquiescence of the high officers. Yang­ sheng defends his choice with an eloquent speech. Chen Qia sent an emissary to summon Gongzi Yangsheng. Gongzi Yangshenga drove in his chariot to visit Nanguo Juyu122 and said, “I once made a gift of horses to Ji Kangzic,123 but he did not use them for his best chariot, so I am going to give him these as well. I would like to drive them with you.” He explained the true reason once they had gone out the Lai Gate.124 Kan Zhi knew of it beforehand and was waiting for them outside.125 Gongzi Yangsheng said to him, “The matter is as yet uncertain. Go back and stay with Ren.”126 Once he had cautioned Kan Zhi, he set out. He arrived in Qi by night, but the inhabitants of the capital knew of it. Chen Qib had the mother of Zishi care for him,127 and he entered the palace with the provisioners. In winter, in the tenth month, on the dingmao day (24), Gongzi Yangsheng was set up as successor. When they were about to make the covenant, Bao Mua arrived drunk. His underling, the chariot officer Bao Dian, said, “Whose orders are these?” Chen Qic said, “We received our orders from Bao Mua.” And then he tried to fool Bao Mua, saying, “They were your orders!” Bao Mua said, “Have you forgotten how the ruler let his heir, then a child, lead him around like an ox, even breaking a tooth while at it?128 So would you now betray him?” Lord Dao bowed his head to the ground and said, “You, sir, are a person who acts by upholding the right course. If I am acceptable, there is no need to lose a single officer. If I am not acceptable, there is no need to lose a single lord’s son.129 If it is right, then move forward; otherwise, withdraw. Would I dare do anything but follow you in this? What I hope for is only that removing one and installing another will involve no mayhem.” Bao Mua said, “Which one of you is not a son of the ruler?” And with that he accepted the covenant.

Lord Ai

6.6a(7, 8)

6.6b

1869

使胡姬以安孺子如賴，去鬻姒，殺王甲，拘江說，囚王豹于句竇 之丘。 6.6c 公使朱毛告於陳子，曰：「微子，則不及此。然君異於器，不可以二。器

二不匱，君二多難，敢布諸大夫。」僖子不對而泣，曰：「君舉不信群臣 乎？以齊國之困，困又有憂，少君不可以訪，是以求長君，庶亦能容群 臣乎！不然，夫孺子何罪？」 毛復命，公悔之。毛曰：「君大訪於陳子，而圖其小可也。」使毛遷 孺子於駘。不至，殺諸野幕之下，葬諸殳冒淳。

春秋

7.1(1)

七年春，宋皇瑗帥師侵鄭。

7.2(2) 晉魏曼多帥師侵衛。 7.3(3) 夏，公會吳于鄫。

130 Hu Ji, a concubine of Lord Jing’s, must have been of non-Sinitic, northern origin. 131 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1008), Yu Si is Tu’s mother, and Wang Jia, Jiang Yue, and Wang Bao are favorites of Lord Jing’s and supporters of the child ruler Tu. For Goudou Knoll (usually written 句瀆), see Xiang 28.11a. 132 Zhu Mao is a Qi high officer. 133 Chen Qi argues that Tu was deposed because of political considerations. He should not suffer harm because he was not guilty of any offense.

1870

Zuo Tradition

They had Hu Ji take the child ruler Tua to Lai.130 They eliminated Yu Si, killed Wang Jia, arrested Jiang Yue, and imprisoned Wang Bao at Goudou Knoll.131 Having acceded as ruler in Qi, Gongzi Yangsheng has his rival, Tu, eliminated. Chen Qi displays strong scruples, although it is obvious that he is ambitious and ruthless. Note that the Annals identifies Chen Qi as the one who assassinates Tu, just as Zhao Dun is named as the one responsible for the murder of Lord Ling of Jin in Xuan 2.3. The Lord of Qi had Zhu Mao make an announcement to Chen Qic:132 “Were it not for you, I would not have attained this position. Yet rulers are different from vessels: there cannot be another option. With vessels, having another option means there is no shortage; with rulers, having another option bodes great troubles. I presume to set this before all my high officers.” Chen Qic did not answer but wept and said, “Must rulers always mistrust their subjects? Because of Qi’s straitened circumstances, and because in these straits we faced further worries, which a young ruler could not deliberate upon, we sought a mature ruler, who should also be able to accommodate his subjects. Had it not been thus, what crime would the child have been guilty of?”133 When Zhu Maoa reported on his visit, the lord regretted his words. Zhu Maoa said, “So long as you, my lord, deliberate upon great matters with Chen Qic, you can take charge of small matters.” The lord had Zhu Maoa transport the child ruler to Tai.134 They had not yet arrived there when Mao killed the child in his tent and had him buried at Shumaochun.135

6.6c

LORD AI 7 (488 BCE) ANNALS

In the seventh year, in spring, Huang Yuan of Song led out troops and invaded Zheng.

7.1(1)

Wei Manduo of Jin led out troops and invaded Wei.

7.2(2)

In summer, our lord met with Wu at Zeng.136

7.3(3)

134 Lord Dao, the new Qi ruler, having attained his position with Chen Qi’s help, feels that his hands are tied because Chen Qi is reportedly upset about the idea of murdering Tu. Zhu Mao assures Lord Dao that Chen Qi will countenance Tu’s murder so long as Lord Dao yields the control of Qi policies to Chen. Chen’s apparently conscientious objection earlier is thus shown to be a way to bargain for greater power. Tai 駘 was about 50 kilometers southeast of the Qi capital, near present-day Linqu 臨朐, Shandong, on the way to Lai. 135 The location of Shumaochun 殳冒淳 is unknown. 136 Zeng was about 90 kilometers south and somewhat east of the Lu capital. See Annals, Xi 14.1.

Lord Ai

1871

7.4 秋，公伐邾。八月己酉，入邾，以邾子益來。 7.5(5) 宋人圍曹。 7.6(5) 冬，鄭駟弘帥師救曹。

左傳 7.1(1) 七年春，宋師侵鄭，鄭叛晉故也。 7.2(2) 晉師侵衛，衛不服也。 7.3a(3) 夏，公會吳于鄫。吳來徵百牢。子服景伯對曰：「先王未之有也。」吳人

曰：「宋百牢我，魯不可以後宋。且魯牢晉大夫過十，吳王百牢，不亦可 乎？」 景伯曰：「晉范鞅貪而棄禮，以大國懼敝邑，故敝邑十一牢之，君 若以禮命於諸侯，則有數矣。若亦棄禮，則有淫者矣。周之王也，制禮， 上物不過十二，以為天之大數也。今棄周禮，而曰必百牢，亦唯執事。」 吳人弗聽。景伯曰：「吳將亡矣，棄天而背本。不與，必棄疾於我。」 乃與之。

137 For the lao, see Huan 6.6. Each lao consisted of one ox, one sheep, and one pig. According to Zhouli (cited in Takezoe, 29.43), nine was the largest number of lao permissible in any ritual entertainment. 138 Fan Yang was given eleven sets in Zhao 21.3. 139 The Wu ruling line traces its ancestry to the Zhou house. See below and Zhao 30.3a.

1872

Zuo Tradition

In autumn, our lord attacked Zhu. In the eighth month, on the jiyou day (11), we entered Zhu and brought Yi, the Master of Zhu, back with us.

7.4

Song leaders laid siege to Cao.

7.5(5)

In winter, Si Hong of Zheng led out troops and went to the aid of Cao.

7.6(5)

ZUO

Acting on Jin’s behalf, Song punishes Zheng (see Ai 2.3). In the seventh year, in spring, Song troops invaded Zheng; this was because Zheng had turned against Jin.

7.1(1)

Jin continues to punish Wei for its support of Jin rebels (see Ai 5.2). Jin troops invaded Wei because Wei had not submitted.

7.2(2)

At the peak of its power, Wu demands egregious ritual treatment during a meeting with Lu; Lu observers comply, predicting disaster for Wu (see Ai 7.4). In summer, our lord met with Wu at Zeng. Wu came and demanded one hundred sets of sacrificial animals.137 Zifu Jingbo replied, “The former kings never had such a request.” The men from Wu said, “Song offered us one hundred sets of sacrificial animals, and Lu cannot come second to Song. What is more, Lu has offered Jin high officers more than ten sets of sacrificial animals.138 Is it not acceptable for the Wu King to demand one hundred sets?” Zifu Jingboa said, “Fan Yang of Jin discarded ritual propriety in his greed and intimidated our humble settlement with the greatness of his domain, so our humble settlement offered him eleven sets of sacrificial animals. If your ruler wishes to command the princes by means of ritual propriety, then there are specifications. If he too discards ritual propriety, then he will also be guilty of excesses like Fan Yang. For the Kings of Zhou, when they established rituals, the number for the accoutrements of the great never exceeded twelve; they understood this as Heaven’s number signifying greatness. Now if you discard the Zhou rituals and say that there must be one hundred sets of sacrificial animals, then indeed we will have no choice but to do just as your functionaries direct.” The men of Wu did not yield. Zifu Jingboa said, “Wu is going to fall. They dismiss Heaven and neglect their roots.139 If we do not give the animals to them, they will harm us.” Therefore, the hundred sets of sacrificial animals were given.

7.3a(3)

Lord Ai

1873



7.3b

大宰嚭召季康子，康子使子貢辭。大宰嚭曰：「國君道長，而大夫不出 門，此何禮也？」 對曰：「豈以為禮？畏大國也。大國不以禮命於諸侯，苟不以禮， 豈可量也？寡君既共命焉，其老豈敢棄其國？大伯端委以治周禮，仲雍 嗣之，斷髮文身，臝以為飾，豈禮也哉？有由然也。」反自鄫，以吳為無 能為也。

7.4a(4) 季康子欲伐邾，乃饗大夫以謀之。子服景伯曰：「小所以事大，信也；大

所以保小，仁也。背大國，不信；伐小國，不仁。民保於城，城保於德。失 二德者，危，將焉保？」 孟孫曰：「二三子以為何如？惡賢而逆之？」 對曰：「禹合諸侯於塗山，執玉帛者萬國。今其存者，無數十焉， 唯大不字小、小不事大也。知必危，何故不言？魯德如邾，而以眾加之， 可乎？」不樂而出。 7.4b 秋，伐邾，及范門，猶聞鐘聲。大夫諫，不聽。茅成子請告於吳，不許，曰：

「魯擊柝聞於邾；吳二千里，不三月不至，何及於我？且國內豈不足？」

140 If Wu is capable of making such ritually improper demands, what is the limit? Zi­gong is implying that Wu may be planning something more dire. 141 Taibo was the predynastic Zhou scion who declined to succeed his father, instead fleeing to Wu. Zhongyong was his younger brother; see Shiji 31.1445–46. Zigong is saying that while Wu may claim Zhou origins, its leaders seem to have forgotten about ritual propriety, perhaps because they have been among barbarians for too long. 142 The same line appears in Xiang 8.7a, 22.3. 143 Lu and Wu must have sworn a covenant during the meeting at Zeng in Ai 7.3; see Mao Yihong’s reference to the covenant made at Zengyan (i.e., Zeng) below. 144 The “two virtues” here are good faith and humaneness. 145 In Takezoe’s (29.45) reading, Meng Yizi shares Ji Kangzi’s desire to attack Zhu and here signals his opposition to Zifu Jingbo’s argument. 146 Various locations have been proposed for Mount Tu, including Kuaiji, near the Yue capital and present-day Shaoxing, Zhejiang; see Zhao 4.3a. Yang (4:1642) puts Mount Tu near present-day Song County 嵩縣, Henan. This legendary meeting is mentioned also in Huainanzi 1.14. 147 Like Zifu Jingbo, the high officers oppose the planned attack on Zhu. 148 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1010), the Fan Gate was a gate in the outer wall of the Zhu capital. Zhu took no defensive precautions against the Lu invaders. 149 It is unclear whether these high officers are Lu’s, continuing to oppose the attack on Zhu for fear of Wu reprisal, or Zhu’s, urging their ruler to put aside his entertainment and defend the realm. 150 Mao Yihong was a Zhu high officer. His settlement, Mao, was located northwest of present-day Jinxiang, Shandong, about 100 kilometers southwest of the Lu capital. See Xi 24.2a.

1874

Zuo Tradition

The grand steward Pi of Wu summoned Ji Kangzi, but Ji Kangzib sent Zigong to make his apologies. The grand steward Pi said, “What sort of ritual propriety is it when the ruler of a domain has traveled a long road and yet the high officers of the domain receiving him will not go out their own gates?” He replied, “What does this have to do with ritual propriety? We act out of fear for your great domain. Your great domain is not commanding the princes according to ritual propriety, and if you fail to act according to ritual propriety, then how is it possible for us to take your proper measure?140 When our unworthy ruler is already following your commands, how can his senior officials presume to relinquish their domain? Taibo implemented the Zhou rituals in robes and cap, but when Zhongyong succeeded him, he cut his hair and tattooed his body, adorning himself in his nakedness:141 was that ritual propriety? There is a reason for the way things are.” Returning from Zeng, Ji Kangzi reckoned that Wu would not be able to accomplish anything.

7.3b

After the departure of the Wu forces, Lu attacks Zhu, testing the resolve of the new alliance leader, and Wu prepares to attack (see Ai 7.3, 8.2). Ji Kangzi wished to attack Zhu, so he offered ceremonial toasts to the high officers in order to make plans. Zifu Jingbo said, “That by which the small serve the great is good faith. That by which the great protect the small is humaneness.142 To betray a great domain is not good faith, and to attack a small domain is not humaneness.143 People are protected by walls, but walls are protected by virtue. Once we lose these two virtues, if we find ourselves in danger, where will we find protection?”144 Meng Yizie said, “How do you view the matter, my men? Which is the worthier way that we should welcome?”145 They replied, “When Yu gathered the princes together at Mount Tu, ten thousand domains came with jade and silk.146 What remains of those today amounts to no more than a few score. This is all because the great have not fostered the small and the small have not served the great. We know that there is certain to be danger, so why should we not speak of it? When Lu’s virtue is like Zhu’s, is it permissible then to pressure them by means of our larger population?” They departed unhappy.147

7.4a(4)

In autumn, we attacked Zhu, and even when we advanced as far as the Fan Gate, the sound of Zhu bells could still be heard.148 The high officers remonstrated but were not heeded.149 Mao Yihonga of Zhu requested permission to report to Wu, but it was not granted:150 “When a watchman’s rattle is struck in Lu, it is heard in Zhu. Wu is two thousand li away, and one cannot get there in less than three months. How could they reach us in time? And do we not have sufficient resources here within the domain?”

7.4b

Lord Ai

1875

成子以茅叛，師遂入邾，處其公宮。眾師晝掠，邾眾保于繹。師宵 掠，以邾子益來，獻于亳社，囚諸負瑕，負瑕故有繹。 邾茅夷鴻以束帛乘韋自請救於吳，曰：「魯弱晉而遠吳，馮恃其 眾，而背君之盟，辟君之執事，以陵我小國。邾非敢自愛也，懼君威之不 立。君威之不立，小國之憂也。若夏盟於鄫衍，秋而背之，成求而不違， 四方諸侯其何以事君？且魯賦八百乘，君之貳也；邾賦六百乘，君之私 也。以私奉貳，唯君圖之！」吳子從之。

7.5(5, 6)

宋人圍曹，鄭桓子思曰：「宋人有曹，鄭之患也，不可以不救。」冬，鄭師 救曹，侵宋。 初，曹人或夢眾君子立于社宮，而謀亡曹。曹叔振鐸請待公孫彊， 許之。旦而求之，曹無之。戒其子曰：「我死，爾聞公孫彊為政，必去之。」 及曹伯陽即位，好田弋。曹鄙人公孫彊好弋，獲白雁，獻之，且言 田弋之說，說之。因訪政事，大說之。有寵，使為司城以聽政。夢者之子 乃行。

151 Mount Yi was southeast of present-day Zou, Shandong, just northwest of the Zhu capital. See Wen 13.3. 152 Fuxia 負瑕 was about 20 kilometers west of the Lu capital. 153 That is, there are still people in Fuxia who are descended from the Zhu populace who took refuge at Mount Yi and then accompanied the captured Zhu ruler to Fuxia, carrying the name of the mountain with them. Wu Kaisheng (cited in Yang, 4:1643) speculates that this is an early commentator’s remark that has made its way into the text. 154 According to Yang (4:1644), “a bundle of silk” (shu bo) consisted of ten duan 端, or five pi 匹, of silk. Each pi (or liang 兩) was two duan; each duan was two zhang 丈; and a zhang was ten chi in length. Mao Yihong thus offers bolts of silk totaling two hundred chi in length. Cf. Zhao 26.4. One “load” of leather consisted of four oxhides; cf. Xi 33.1. It may have been necessary for Mao Yihong to present gifts because he was requesting aid on his own, without orders from his ruler. 155 According to Yang (4:1644), this “temple” was the enclosed area around the domain’s altar (she 社). 156 Cao Shu, or the Cao Uncle, named Zhenduo, was the founder of the domain of Cao, appointed to rule there by his elder brother, King Wu of Zhou. 157 Yang, Liege of Cao, acceded to his position in 501 Bce (Ding 9). An arrow with a cord attached was sometimes used in bird-hunting; see Maoshi 82, “Nü yue ji ming” 女曰雞鳴, 4C.169 and Mencius 6A.9.

1876

Zuo Tradition

Mao Yihongb led Mao in revolt, and as a result our army entered Zhu and resided in the lord’s palace. While the mass of troops looted during the day, the Zhu populace took shelter at Yi.151 While the armies looted by night, they brought Yi, the Master of Zhu, to present him at the Bo Altar, and then they imprisoned him at Fuxia.152 For this reason there is an Yi at Fuxia.153 Mao Yihong of Zhu took a bundle of silk and a load of tanned oxhides and on his own initiative requested aid from Wu.154 He said, “Lu considers Jin weak and Wu far. Taking advantage of numbers, my lord, betraying your covenant, and belittling your functionaries, they are bullying our small domain. It is not that Zhu presumes to worry about itself; rather, we fear that your authority will not stand. For your authority not to stand would cause sorrow for the small domain. If Lu can make a covenant at Zengyan in the summer and betray it in the fall, achieving their objectives without any opposition, then on what basis should the princes in all directions serve you, my lord? Moreover, with its military allotment of eight hundred chariots, Lu is but your subsidiary. With its military allotment of six hundred chariots, Zhu is but your private reserve. You are handing over your private reserve to your subsidiary: pray consider this.” The Master of Wu heeded him. After a dream presages difficulties for Cao upon the appearance of one Gongsun Qiang, a man by that very name leads the ruler astray and brings on an attack from Song (see Ai 8.1). When Song leaders laid siege to Cao, Guo Canb of Zheng said, “For the men of Song to hold Cao would mean trouble for us. We have no choice but to give aid.” In winter, Zheng troops went to the aid of Cao and invaded Song. Earlier, someone in Cao had dreamt that a group of noblemen were standing in the temple of the domain altar, planning Cao’s destruction.155 In the dream, Zhenduo, a royal younger brother and the founder of Cao, asked to put that off until Gongsun Qiang should arrive, and this was granted.156 Waking in the morning, the dreamer asked about Gongsun Qiang, but there was no one in Cao by that name. He cautioned his sons, “If after I die you hear that a Gongsun Qiang is active in the administration of the realm, then you must depart.” When Yang, the Liege of Cao, came into power, he was fond of hunting and of shooting with a corded arrow.157 Gongsun Qiang, who was a man from the marches of Cao, was also fond of shooting this way. He bagged a white goose and presented it to the lord. He also spoke on the subject of hunting with a corded arrow, and the lord was pleased with him. As a result he consulted with him about matters of policy and was extremely pleased with him. He favored him and had him participate in the administration as supervisor of fortifications. With this, the sons of the dreamer set out and left Cao.

7.5(5, 6)

Lord Ai

1877



彊言霸說於曹伯，曹伯從之，乃背晉而奸宋。宋人伐之，晉人不救。 築五邑於其郊，曰黍丘、揖丘、大城、鐘、邘。

春秋 8.1(1) 八年春王正月，宋公入曹，以曹伯陽歸。 8.2(2) 吳伐我。 8.3(3) 夏，齊人取讙及闡。 8.4(5) 歸邾子益于邾。 8.5 秋七月。 8.6 冬十有二月癸亥，杞伯過卒。 8.7(7) 齊人歸讙及闡。

左傳 8.1(1) 八年春，宋公伐曹將還，褚師子肥殿。曹人詬之，不行。師待之。公聞

之，怒，命反之，遂滅曹，執曹伯陽及司城彊以歸，殺之。

158 This “proposal on the subject of becoming the overlord”—presumably a set of recommendations as to how Cao could amass power and achieve the status of overlord once held by such figures as Lord Huan of Qi and Lord Wen of Jin—is unusual for its time, but it anticipates similar political persuasions from such figures as the famous administrative theorist Gongsun Yang 公孫鞅, Lord Shang, who is said to have won his way into the good graces of Lord Xiao of Qin (r. 361–338) by speaking on the techniques of the overlord; see Shiji 68.2228. That rulers of the Warring States period were eager to follow in the footsteps of the overlords is apparent in Mencius 3B.6, 6B.26, 6B.27 and in Xunzi 11.229–60. 159 This sentence introduces Ai 9.1 below. Of the settlements mentioned whose locations are known, all were within about 40 kilometers of the Cao capital.

1878

Zuo Tradition

When Gongsun Qianga presented to the Liege of Cao a proposal on the subject of becoming the overlord, the Liege of Cao heeded his advice, and he therefore turned against Jin and struck at Song.158 The men of Song attacked Cao and Jin did not send aid. Gongsun Qiang built five cities in the outskirts of the domain city: Shuqiu, Yiqiu, Dacheng, Zhong, and Yu.159 LORD AI 8 (487 BCE) ANNALS

In the eighth year, in the royal first month, the Duke of Song entered Cao and took Yang, the Liege of Cao, home with him.160

8.1(1)

Wu attacked us.

8.2(2)

In summer, a Qi leader took Huan and Chan.

161

8.3(3)

We sent Yi, the Master of Zhu, home to Zhu.

8.4(5)

Autumn, the seventh month.

8.5

In winter, in the twelfth month, on the guihai day (3), Guo, the Liege of Qǐ, died. A Qi leader returned Huan and Chan.

8.6

8.7(7)

ZUO

The Song attack ends with the destruction of Cao and the murder of the ruler and Gongsun Qiang (see Ai 7.5). In the eighth year, in spring, the Duke of Song, who had attacked Cao, was about to return.The market overseer Zifei was to bring up the rear.162 The people of Cao insulted Zifei, and he halted. The army waited for him. When the Duke heard of it, he was angry and commanded the army to return. He then extinguished Cao, seized Yang, the Liege of Cao, and Gongsun Qianga, the supervisor of fortifications, took them home with him, and put them to death.

8.1(1)

160 This final liege of Cao does not receive the burial of a ruler and therefore is not assigned a posthumous name. 161 Huan was about 50 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital; see Annals, Huan 3.6. Chan was about 15 kilometers west of Huan. 162 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1011), the market overseer Zifei was a Song high officer.

Lord Ai

1879

8.2a(2) 吳為邾故，將伐魯，問於叔孫輒。叔孫輒對曰：「魯有名而無情，伐之，

必得志焉。」 退而告公山不狃。公山不狃曰：「非禮也。君子違，不適讎國。未 臣而有伐之，奔命焉，死之可也。所託也則隱。且夫人之行也，不以所惡 廢鄉。今子以小惡而欲覆宗國，不亦難乎？若使子率，子必辭。王將使 我。」子張疾之。 王問於子洩。對曰：「魯雖無與立，必有與斃；諸侯將救之，未可 以得志焉。晉與齊、楚輔之，是四讎也。夫魯，齊、晉之脣。脣亡齒寒， 君所知也，不救何為？」 8.2b 三月，吳伐我，子洩率，故道險，從武城。初，武城人或有因於吳竟田

焉，拘鄫人之漚菅者，曰：「何故使吾水滋？」及吳師至，拘者道之以伐 武城，克之。 王犯嘗為之宰，澹臺子羽之父好焉，國人懼。 懿子謂景伯：「若之何？」對曰：「吳師來，斯與之戰，何患焉？且召 之而至，又何求焉？」

163 According to the Kong Yingda subcommentary (ZZ-Kong 58.1011), Shusun Zhe and Gongshan Buniu made their way to Wu after having fled Lu (Ding 12.2). 164 For this saying, see also Xi 5.8. 165 Wucheng, about 80 kilometers southeast of the Lu capital, was in rugged territory; see Zhao 23.2a. 166 These “thatch-soakers” would have been engaged in soaking and stripping stalks of jian 菅, or Themeda triandra, red oat grass, for use in thatching roofs, weaving sandles, and the like. Zeng was about 40 kilometers southeast of Wucheng. The activities of the thatch-soakers may have polluted the Yi and Si Rivers, which flowed south from Lu and Zeng toward the Huai River and Wu territory. 167 The people of the Lu capital feared that Wucheng had fallen because Dantai Ziyu, who lived there, had let the city be taken by Wang Fan. According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1012), Wang Fan was a Wu high officer who, during a period of exile from Wu, had served as steward in Wucheng. Dantai Ziyu is the disciple whom Confucius misjudges because of his appearance (Han Feizi 19.1092, Lunheng jiaoshi, 11.122). 168 That is, Wu reprisal for Lu’s campaign against Zhu is expected. Zifu Jingbo had opposed the attack on Zhu at Ai 7.4. According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1012), Lu had violated a treaty agreement by attacking Zhu.

1880

Zuo Tradition

Wu attacks Lu to punish it for the campaign against Zhu. As a Lu exile leads the Wu forces, he intentionally blunts their effectiveness against his homeland. Wu withdraws again after the two domains swear a covenant (see Ai 7.4, 8.5). Gongshan Buniu’s expression of patriotic principle is unusual and calls into question the virtue of characters who are otherwise represented as heroic; Wu Zixu, for example, takes a terrible vengeance on his homeland of Chu. Wu was preparing to attack Lu on Zhu’s account and asked Shusun Zhe about it.163 Shusun Zhe replied, “Lu has a reputation but lacks any substance. If you attack it, you are bound to get your way.” Shusun Zhe withdrew and told Gongshan Buniu about it. Gongshan Buniu said, “This is not ritually proper. When the noble man departs, he does not go to an enemy domain. If he has not yet served his own domain as minister, but on the contrary attacks it, rushing to fulfill the orders of his new master, then he might as well die for the offense. As for the campaign entrusted to him by his new master, he avoids it. Moreover, in his conduct a man does not abandon his homeland because of the people he dislikes. Now, should we wish to overturn our ancestral domain on account of petty grudges, would that not be a problem indeed? If they appoint you to lead this attack, you must decline. The king will appoint me.” Shusun Zhea anguished over the matter. The king of Wu asked Gongshan Buniub about it. He replied, “Although it is true that Lu will have no one who will stand by it as ally, it will certainly have many who will fall with it. The princes will come to its rescue; it is not yet possible to get your way there. If Jin and Qi and Chu support Lu, then you will have four enemies. Lu is like the lips of Qi and Jin; and when the lips are gone, the teeth grow cold, as you know.164 What would Qi and Jin accomplish by failing to come to the rescue?”

8.2a(2)

In the third month, Wu attacked us, with Gongshan Buniub leading the way. He purposely chose a rugged route, going by way of Wucheng.165 Earlier, someone from Wucheng farming on the Wu frontier had seized thatch-soakers from Zeng, saying, “Why are you dirtying my drinking water?”166 When the Wu army arrived, the very ones who had been seized led it in an attack on Wucheng, and the Wu army took the settlement. At one time Wang Fan had acted as steward there, and since the father of Dantai Ziyu was on good terms with him, the inhabitants of the capital were afraid.167 Meng Yizic said to Zifu Jingboa, “What should we do about it?” He replied, “The Wu army has come, and we therefore do battle with them. What is there in this to worry about? What’s more, they came because we virtually summoned them, so what can we ask of them?”168

8.2b

Lord Ai

1881

吳師克東陽而進，舍於五梧。明日，舍於蠶室。公賓庚、公甲叔子 與戰于夷，獲叔子與析朱鉏，獻於王。王曰：「此同車，必使能，國未可 望也。」明日，舍于庚宗，遂次於泗上。 微虎欲宵攻王舍，私屬徒七百人三踊於幕庭，卒三百人，有若與 焉。及稷門之內，或謂季孫曰：「不足以害吳，而多殺國士，不如已也。」 乃止之。吳子聞之，一夕三遷。 8.2c 吳人行成，將盟，景伯曰：「楚人圍宋，易子而食，析骸而爨，猶無城下

之盟；我未及虧，而有城下之盟，是棄國也。吳輕而遠，不能久，將歸 矣，請少待之。」 弗從。景伯負載，造於萊門。乃請釋子服何於吳，吳人許之，以王 子姑曹當之，而後止。 吳人盟而還。 8.3(3) 齊悼公之來也，季康子以其妹妻之，即位而逆之。季魴侯通焉，女言其

情，弗敢與也。齊侯怒。夏五月，齊鮑牧帥師伐我，取讙及闡。

169 Dongyang 東陽 was a few kilometers east of Wucheng, and Wuwu 五梧 was a few kilometers north of both settlements. These places are near present-day Fei 費 and Pingyi 平邑 counties, Shandong. 170 Judging from the progress of the Wu army, Canshi 蠶室 and Yi 夷 must have been about 25 kilometers north of Wuwu, near present-day Pingyi. 171 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1012), the king judges that since two men from the same chariot were both able to give their lives, Lu must be sending its finest men into battle. “Capture” in this case refers to seizing their dead bodies. Cf. Xuan 2.1a, n. 16. 172 Gengzong was about 40 kilometers east and slightly south of the Lu capital (see Zhao 4.8). The upper reaches of the Si River lay on the path to the capital. 173 Wei Hu is a Lu high officer. 174 At Xi 28.3a jumping is likewise used as a measure of stamina and military readiness. You Ruo is a disciple of Confucius; see Analects 1.2, 1.12, 1.13, and 12.9. 175 For this siege, see Xuan 15.2. On the humiliation of swearing a covenant beneath the walls of the capital, see Huan 12.3, Wen 15.7, and Xuan 15.2. The desirable place for the swearing of a covenant is well away from the capital of any of the participating domains. 176 See Ai 6.6a. The covenant is to be sworn outside a gate in the Lu capital’s outer wall. 177 Wangzi Gucao is a son of the Wu king Fucha. 178 See Ai 5.3. 179 Ji Fanghou is an uncle of Ji Kangzi.

1882

Zuo Tradition

Taking Dongyang, the Wu army advanced and set up camp at Wuwu.169 On the next day, the army set up camp at Canshi. When Gongbin Geng and Gongjia Shuzi fought them at Yi,170 Wu troops captured Gongjia Shuzia and Xi Zhuchu and presented them to their king, who said, “These were from the same chariot: they must be using their able men.171 It will be fruitless to covet this domain.” On the following day the Wu army set up camp at Gengzong, and later it went on to establish a camp on the Si River.172 Wei Hu wanted to attack the Wu King’s camp by night.173 In private he had seven hundred of his troops perform three sets of leaping exercises in the tent court; in the end three hundred were left, among them You Ruo.174 These men had reached the inside of the Ji Gate when someone said to Ji Kangzic, “There are not enough of them to do real harm to Wu, yet this operation will be the death of many of the best men in the realm. It would be better to desist.” So he stopped them. The Master of Wu heard about this and moved his troops three times in a single night. The men of Wu sought an accord. As Wu and Lu were about to make the covenant, Zifu Jingboa said, “During Chu’s siege of Song, they traded sons and ate them, splitting their bones to feed the cooking fires; yet no covenant was made beneath their walls.175 If, not having suffered so very desperately, we yet swear a covenant beneath our walls, this will amount to throwing the domain away. Wu, being lightly equipped and far afield, cannot last long, and the Wu army is about to go home. I request that we bide our time for a while and wait for this.” The Lu leaders did not follow this advice. Carrying the covenant document on his back, Zifu Jingboa went to the Lai Gate.176 Lu then asked permission to place Zifu Jingbob as hostage in Wu. The Wu leaders agreed to it. Only when Lu requested also that Wangzi Gucao serve as hostage in exchange did the Wu leaders desist in their plan to keep a hostage.177 The Wu leaders swore a covenant and turned back.

8.2c

Qi attacks Lu as the result of an illicit sexual liaison involving a bride intended for the Qi ruler (see Ai 5.3, 6.6). When Lord Dao of Qi came,178 Ji Kangzi gave him his younger sister in marriage. Once he had secured the succession, Lord Dao sent someone to meet her and escort her to Qi. Ji Fanghou had had an affair with her,179 and the woman told the truth about it. Ji Kangzi did not dare to give her in marriage to the Qi ruler. The Prince of Qi was furious. In summer, in the fifth month, Bao Mu of Qi led an army in an attack upon us, taking Huan and Chan.

8.3(3)

Lord Ai

1883

8.4 或譖胡姬於齊侯曰：「安孺子之黨也。」六月，齊侯殺胡姬。 8.5(4) 齊侯使如吳請師，將以伐我，乃歸邾子。邾子又無道，吳子使大宰子餘

討之，囚諸樓臺，栫之以棘。使諸大夫奉大子革以為政。 8.6 秋，及齊平。九月，臧賓如如齊蒞盟。齊閭丘明來蒞盟，且逆季姬以

歸，嬖。 鮑牧又謂群公子曰：「使女有馬千乘乎？」公子愬之。公謂鮑子： 「或譖子，子姑居於潞以察之。若有之，則分室以行；若無之，則反子 之所。」出門，使以三分之一行；半道，使以二乘。及潞，麇之以入，遂 殺之。 8.7(7) 冬十二月，齊人歸讙及闡，季姬嬖故也。

180 Ge is the future Lord Huan of Zhu. 181 Ji Ji is the woman who had an illicit liaison with her uncle Ji Fanghou in Ai 8.3. 182 Bao Mu offers to put one of the lord’s sons in power as ruler, influencing the succession as he did in Ai 6.3 and 6.6. One thousand chariots would represent Qi’s entire chariot force. 183 Lù is thought to have been located near the Qi capital. See also Ai 17.5.

1884

Zuo Tradition

Hu Ji, a concubine of Lord Jing of Qi, falls victim to Lord Dao’s suspicions. Hu Ji had played a role in protecting the child ruler Tu (Ai 6.6b). Someone spoke ill of Hu Ji to the Prince of Qi, saying, “She was in league with the child ruler Tua.” In the sixth month, the Prince of Qi executed Hu Ji.

8.4

With support from Qi and Wu, the Zhu ruler is reinstated, but he soon falls from power again (see Ai 7.4). Wu launched a punitive campaign against Lu in the name of defending Zhu interests, but here Wu leaders punish the errant Zhu leader. The Prince of Qi sent an envoy to Wu to ask for military assistance in preparation for an attack upon us. We therefore sent the Master of Zhu home to Zhu. The Master of Zhu again violated the Way. The Master of Wu sent the grand steward Pib to punish him; they imprisoned him in a tower on a terrace, fencing him in with thorny brush, and had the high officers of Zhu look to the heir apparent Ge in conducting government business.180

8.5(4)

Qi makes peace with Lu and accepts the Lu bride whose earlier liaison led to Qi-Lu conflicts (Ai 8.3). Bao Mu of Qi plots a coup and is duly executed by the ruler whom he installed after initial misgivings. In autumn, we made peace with Qi. In the ninth month, Zang Binru went to Qi to oversee the covenant. Lüqiu Ming of Qi came to oversee the covenant and also to meet and escort Ji Ji back with him. She won favor.181 Bao Mu, in keeping with his past behavior, said to the noble sons, “Shall I see to it that you have a thousand teams of horses?”182 The noble sons reported this to Lord Dao. The lord said to Bao Mua, “Some are speaking ill of you. Stay for the time being at Lù while we investigate the matter.183 If there is any truth to the charges, then you will relinquish half your property and leave; if there is not, then you may return to your place.” As he exited the gate, the lord let him leave with one-third of his chariots. When Bao had covered half the route, the lord had him go on with only two chariots. When he reached Lù, Qi men bound him and brought him back to Qi, where they executed him.

8.6

Qi returns lands taken from Lu (see Ai 8.3). In winter, in the twelfth month, a Qi leader returned Huan and Chan. This was because of the favor Ji Ji enjoyed.

8.7(7)

Lord Ai

1885

春秋 9.1 九年春王二月，葬杞僖公。 9.2(2) 宋皇瑗帥師取鄭師于雍丘。 9.3(3) 夏，楚人伐陳。 9.4 秋，宋公伐鄭。 9.5 冬十月。

左傳 9.1 九年春，齊侯使公孟綽辭師于吳。吳子曰：「昔歲寡人聞命，今又革之，

不知所從，將進受命於君。」 9.2(2) 鄭武子賸之嬖許瑕求邑，無以與之。請外取，許之，故圍宋雍丘。宋皇瑗

圍鄭師，每日遷舍，壘合。鄭師哭。子姚救之，大敗。二月甲戌，宋取鄭 師于雍丘，使有能者無死，以郟張與鄭羅歸。 9.3(3) 夏，楚人伐陳，陳即吳故也。 9.4(4) 宋公伐鄭。 9.5 秋，吳城邗，溝通江、淮。

184 Yongqiu 雍丘 was about 80 kilometers west and slightly north of the Song capital, near present-day Qi County 杞縣, Henan, about 100 kilometers east and slightly north of the Zheng capital. 185 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1013), these are two able men of Zheng. 186 According to Yang (4:1652), this canal stretched from near present-day Yangzhou, Jiangsu, on the Yangzi northward to near present-day Qingjiang, Jiangsu, a distance of about 140 kilometers. Completion of this canal would give Wu flotillas ready access to Lu by way of the Si and Yi Rivers, tributaries of the Huai. Han 邗 was located north of present-day Yangzhou, Jiangsu.

1886

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 9 (486 BCE) ANNALS

In the ninth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Lord Xi of Qǐ was buried.

9.1

Huang Yuan of Song led out troops and took Zheng troops at Yongqiu.184

9.2(2)

In summer, Chu leaders attacked Chen.

9.3(3)

In autumn, the Duke of Song attacked Zheng.

9.4

Winter, the tenth month.

9.5

ZUO

Wu, displeased by Qi’s decision to reconcile with Lu, now prepares to advance against Qi (see Ai 8.5, 8.6). In the ninth year, in spring, the Prince of Qi sent Gongmeng Chuo to Wu to decline the offer of an army. The Master of Wu said, “Last year I heard your command, and now you have changed it. I do not know which to follow and will advance to receive commands from your ruler.”

9.1

The Zheng minister Han Da’s efforts on behalf of his favorite lead to military disaster as a Zheng army suffers defeat by Song (see Ai 7.5, 8.1). Xu Xia, the favorite of Han Dad of Zheng, asked him for a settlement. Since Han Da had none that he could give him, he asked that one be taken outside the domain. This request was granted. Zheng therefore laid siege to Yongqiu in Song. Huang Yuan of Song surrounded the Zheng army, moving his camps forward every day until his fortifications were all linked. The Zheng army wailed. Han Daa came to reinforce them and was completely defeated. In the second month, on the jiaxu day (14), Song took Zheng troops at Yongqiu. Those of ability they allowed to live, and Song leaders took Jia Zhang and Zheng Luo back with them.185

9.2(2)

Chu punishes Chen for siding with Wu (see Ai 6.2, 6.4). In summer, Chu leaders attacked Chen; this was because Chen was allied with Wu.

9.3(3)

Song now advances against Zheng (see Ai 9.2). The Duke of Song attacked Zheng.

9.4(4)

In autumn, Wu fortified Han and linked the Jiang and the Huai Rivers by canal.186

9.5

Lord Ai

1887

9.6 晉趙鞅卜救鄭，遇水適火，占諸史趙、史墨、史龜。史龜曰：

是謂沈陽， 可以興兵， 利以伐姜， 不利子商。 伐齊則可，敵宋不吉。 史墨曰：「盈，水名也；子，水位也。名位敵，不可干也。炎帝為火師， 姜姓其後也。水勝火，伐姜則可。」 史趙曰：「是謂如川之滿，不可游也。鄭方有罪，不可救也。救鄭 則不吉，不知其他。」 陽虎以《周易》筮之，遇泰䷊之需䷄曰：「宋方吉，不可與也。微子 啟，帝乙之元子也。宋、鄭，甥舅也。祉，祿也。若帝乙之元子歸妹而有 吉祿，我安得吉焉？」乃止。 9.7 冬，吳子使來儆師伐齊。

187 The meaning of this enigmatic formulation, likely a formula in describing the cracks on oracle bones, cannot be ascertained. 188 As water “goes to” fire in this divination, it inundates or sinks the fiery or sunny yang force. 189 Since Fire is being overcome in the divination results, and since the Jiang clan is descended from the Flaming Emperor, the controller of fire (see below), an attack on Jiang would be beneficial. 190 Jiang is the clan name of the ruling house of Qi. Zi 子 is the clan name of the Shang dynasty kings and their successors, the Dukes of Song. The four lines of Gui’s prognostication rhyme, all ending in -ang. 191 According to Du Yu and Kong Yingda (ZZ-Kong 58.1014; cited in Yang, 4:1653), ying 盈 (“full”) is the ancient clan name of the Zhao line, which was distantly related to the Qin ruling house and its clan, the Ying 贏. According to Yang, it is not known in what sense zi 子 is a place of water, though. 192 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1014), the offense is the decision to attack Song for the sake of Han Da’s favorite Xu Xia; see Ai 9.2. 193 The “Peace” ䷊ (Tai 泰) hexagram differs from the “Waiting” ䷄ (Xu 需) hexagram only in the fifth line, which is broken in “Peace” and solid in “Waiting.” The line statement for the fifth line of “Peace” reads: “Emperor Yi gives a girl to wife, and by this one is blessed. Great auspiciousness.” As Du Yu (ZZ 58.1014) notes, Emperor Yi was a Shang dynasty ruler, second to last before the end of the dynasty.

1888

Zuo Tradition

Using different methods, four men, including Yang Hu, offer prognostications for Zhao Yang and counsel against attacking Song in defense of Zheng (see Ai 9.4, 10.4). Divining by oracle bones about giving aid to Zheng, Zhao Yang of Jin got Water going to Fire.187 He sought prognostication about it from the scribe Zhao, the scribe Mo of Caib, and the scribe Gui. The scribe Gui said,

9.6

This is called inundating the yang.188 On the basis of this, one may undertake a military campaign. It is beneficial to attack the Jiang clan189 but not the Zi-Shang clan.190

Attacking Qi is possible, but to face Song would be inauspicious.” The scribe Mo of Caib said, “Ying, or ‘full,’ is a name related to water, while Zi is the position of water.191 Given that your name and Song’s position are evenly matched, they cannot be assailed. The Flaming Emperor was preceptor of fire, and the Jiang clan are his descendants. Since water overcomes fire, attacking the Jiang clan is possible.” The scribe Zhao said, “This is called ‘Like a river at full flood: one cannot swim in it.’ Zheng has recently been guilty of an offense, so it cannot be given aid.192 To give aid to Zheng would be inauspicious. I do not know anything else.” Yang Hu used the Zhou Changes to divine about the proposed attack with milfoil stalks. He got the line by which “Peace” ䷊ becomes “Waiting” ䷄.193 He said, “At this moment Song is in an auspicious position and cannot be resisted. Weizi Qi was the eldest son of Emperor Yi.194 Song and Zheng are related by marriage.195 ‘Blessings’ are rewards. If the eldest son of Emperor Yi is giving a girl in marriage and there are auspicious rewards for Song, how could we win an auspicious outcome from it?”196 Jin leaders therefore desisted. Wu makes further preparations for its campaign against Qi (see Ai 9.1, 9.5). In winter, the Master of Wu sent someone to give us warning about the Wu army about to attack Qi.

9.7

194 After the fall of the Shang, Weizi Qi was established as founding ruler of the domain of Song. Yang Hu understands the yuan 元 of the line statement, usually understood to mean “great,” to refer to the “eldest son,” that is, Weizi Qi. 195 That is, daughters of the Song ruling house were married into the Zheng ruling house. 196 Yang Hu’s divination suggests that Song is at present in a position of good fortune, comparable to that of a groom winning the granddaughter of a king as his wife. This is the last instance of divining by the Zhou Changes in Zuozhuan.

Lord Ai

1889

春秋 10.1(1) 十年春王二月，邾子益來奔。 10.2(2) 公會吳伐齊。 10.3(3) 三月戊戌，齊侯陽生卒。 10.4 夏，宋人伐鄭。 10.5(4) 晉趙鞅帥師侵齊。 10.6 五月，公至自伐齊。 10.7 葬齊悼公。 10.8 衛公孟彄自齊歸于衛。 10.9 薛伯夷卒。 10.10 秋，葬薛惠公。 10.11(6) 冬，楚公子結帥師伐陳。 10.12(6) 吳救陳。

左傳 10.1(1) 十年春，邾隱公來奔；齊甥也，故遂奔齊。 10.2(2) 公會吳子、邾子、郯子伐齊南鄙，師于鄎。

1890

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 10 (485 BCE) ANNALS

In the tenth year, in spring, in the royal second month, Yi, the Master of Zhu, came in flight.

10.1(1)

Our lord met with Wu and attacked Qi.

10.2(2)

In the third month, on the wuxu day (14), Yangsheng (Gongzi Yangsheng), the Prince of Qi, died.197

10.3(3)

In summer, Song leaders attacked Zheng.

10.4

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and invaded Qi.

10.5(4)

In the fifth month, our lord arrived from the attack on Qi.

10.6

Lord Dao of Qi was buried.

10.7

Gongmeng Kou of Wei went home from Qi to Wei.198

10.8

Yi, the Liege of Xue, died.

10.9

In autumn, Lord Hui of Xue was buried.

10.10

In winter, Gongzi Jie of Chu led out troops and attacked Chen.

10.11(6)

Wu went to the aid of Chen.

10.12(6)

ZUO

The ruler of Zhu goes into exile (see Ai 8.5). In the tenth year, in spring, Lord Yin of Zhu came in flight. He was associated with Qi by marriage, so he then fled to Qi.

10.1(1)

An alliance under Wu leadership attacks Qi (see Ai 9.7). Note that Qi had wanted to invade Lu with Wu aid, but now Lu forms an alliance with Wu against Qi. Our lord met with the Master of Wu, the Master of Zhu, and the Master of Tan, and together they attacked the southern marches of Qi. The troops were stationed at Xi.199

10.2(2)

197 The word “die” (zu 卒) here conceals an assassination, as at Annals, Xiang 7.9 and Zhao 1.10. 198 According to Li Lian 李廉 (fl. 1351) (cited in Yang, 4:1655), Gongmeng Kou is a partisan of Kuaikui who here turns against Kuaikui and joins the latter’s son, Zhe (later to be known as the Ousted Lord), in the Wei capital. Gongmeng Kou flees Wei after Kuaikui enters; see Annals, Ai 15.8. 199 Xi 鄎 must have been located along Qi’s southern frontier.

Lord Ai

1891

10.3(3) 齊人弒悼公，赴于師。吳子三日哭于軍門之外。徐承帥舟師將自海入

齊，齊人敗之，吳師乃還。 10.4(5) 夏，趙鞅帥師伐齊，大夫請卜之。趙孟曰：「吾卜於此起兵，事不再令，卜

不襲吉。行也！」於是乎取犁及轅，毀高唐之郭，侵及賴而還。 10.5 秋，吳子使來復儆師。

10.6(11, 12)

冬，楚子期伐陳，吳延州來季子救陳，謂子期曰：「二君不務德，而力爭 諸侯，民何罪焉？我請退，以為子名，務德而安民。」乃還。

春秋 11.1(1) 十有一年春，齊國書帥師伐我。

200 See Ai 9.6, where the divination results indicated that an attack on Qi (with its Jiang affiliations) would be auspicious. 201 Zhao Yang was similarly dismissive of divination when the tortoise shell was scorched in Ai 2.3a. 202 All the named places were in the western area of Qi. Li 犁, Yuan 轅, and Gaotang 高 唐 were situated to the north and west of present-day Jinan 濟南, Shandong. Lai was

1892

Zuo Tradition

Wu attacks Qi but is turned back by the murder of the Qi ruler and the defeat of a Wu fleet (see Ai 10.2). On the ritual stipulating that an invading army should turn back upon receiving news of the ruler’s death in the enemy domain, see also Xiang 19.6 and Ai 15.2. The men of Qi killed Lord Dao and sent notice of his death to the Wu army. The Master of Wu wailed for three days outside the gate of the army camp. Xu Cheng was leading a fleet that was to enter Qi from the sea. When the people of Qi defeated it, the Wu army turned back.

10.3(3)

Jin attacks Qi in response to positive divinations (see Ai 9.6). In summer, Zhao Yang led out troops and attacked Qi. The high officers asked to divine about it. Zhao Yange said, “We divined about taking up weapons here.200 One does not put a matter to question twice, and in divining one does not strive to repeat auspicious results. Let us just go!”201 With that, they took Li and Yuan, destroyed the outer wall of Gaotang, invaded as far as Lai, and then turned back.202

10.4(5)

Wu prepares for yet another campaign against Qi (see Ai 10.3, 11.3). In autumn, the Master of Wu sent someone to give us warning again about a military campaign.

10.5

Chu now attacks Chen for siding with Wu (see Ai 9.3). Wu comes to the aid of Chen, but its commander, Jizi, disparages the confrontation and is eager to turn back. He claims to want to cede to the Chu leader the glory of victory. In winter, Gongzi Jiea of Chu attacked Chen. Jizi of Yan and Zhoulai in Wu went to the aid of Chen.203 Jizi said to Gongzi Jiea, “Our two rulers do not serve virtue but contend by arms for the allegiance of the princes. What crime have the people committed? I ask leave to retreat in order to make a name for you. Let us serve virtue and give comfort to the people.” Therefore, they turned back.

10.6(11, 12)

LORD AI 11 (484 BCE) ANNALS

In the eleventh year, in spring, Guo Shu of Qi led out troops and attacked us.

11.1(1)



just to the east. This Lai 賴 is to be distinguished from the Lai 萊 located a great distance east of the Qi capital at Linzi, Shandong, far beyond Jin reach. 203 Although the Jizha of Xiang 29.13 is sometimes referred to as “Jizi of Yan and Zhoulai” (Xiang 31.9), he would by this time be around one hundred years old. This Jizi is perhaps Jizha’s son or grandson. Alternatively, “Jizha” can become the nodal point for anecdotes about wise counsel, of which this is one example.

Lord Ai

1893

11.2(2) 夏，陳轅頗出奔鄭。 11.3(3) 五月，公會吳伐齊。甲戌，齊國書帥師及吳戰于艾陵，齊師敗績，獲齊

國書。 11.4 秋七月辛酉，滕子虞毋卒。 11.5 冬十有一月，葬滕隱公。 11.6(6) 衛世叔齊出奔宋。

左傳 11.1a(1) 十一年春，齊為鄎故，國書、高無丕帥師伐我，及清。季孫謂其宰冉求

曰：「齊師在清，必魯故也，若之何？」求曰：「一子守，二子從公禦諸 竟。」季孫曰：「不能。」求曰：「居封疆之間。」季孫告二子，二子不可。求 曰：「若不可，則君無出。一子帥師，背城而戰，不屬者，非魯人也。魯之 群室眾於齊之兵車，一室敵車優矣，子何患焉？二子之不欲戰也宜，政 在季氏。當子之身，齊人伐魯而不能戰，子之恥也，大不列於諸侯矣。」 季孫使從於朝，俟於黨氏之溝。武叔呼而問戰焉。對曰：「君子有 遠慮，小人何知？」懿子強問之，對曰：「小人慮材而言，量力而共者也。」 武叔曰：「是謂我不成丈夫也。」退而蒐乘。

204 Ailing 艾陵 was about 70 kilometers south of the Qi capital, near the upper reaches of the Yi River. 205 See Ai 10.2 and 10.3. The Wu army had threatened Qi’s southern border, forcing the murder of Lord Dao of Qi. 206 Yang (4:1658) agrees with Shen Qinhan that Qing was located about 100 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital near present-day Dong’e County 東阿縣. 207 See Analects 3.6, 4.4, 6.12, 7.15, 11.3, 11.13, 11.22, 11.24, 11.26, 13.9, 13.14, 14.12, and 16.1. 208 According to Yang (4:1658), the three noblemen are the heads of Lu’s three leading noble lineages: Ji, Meng, and Shusun. 209 According to Takezoe (29.63), this must have been a place in or adjacent to the court of the Lu Lord, perhaps named for a nearby home of the Zhang lineage, also mentioned in Zhuang 32.4, 32.5. 210 Without overt criticism, Ran Qiu manages to convey his disapproval of the Meng and Shusun lineages for their refusal to fight.

1894

Zuo Tradition

In summer, Yuan Po of Chen departed and fled to Zheng. In the fifth month, our lord met with Wu and attacked Qi. On the jiaxu day (27), Guo Shu of Qi led out troops and did battle with Wu at Ai­ling.204 The Qi troops were completely defeated, and Guo Shu of Qi was captured. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the xinyou day (15), Yuwu, the Master of Teng, died.

11.2(2) 11.3(3)

11.4

In winter, in the eleventh month, Lord Yin of Teng was buried.

11.5

Shishu Qi of Wei departed and fled to Song.

11.6(6)

ZUO

As Qi invades Lu, Confucius’ disciple Ran Qiu distinguishes himself as a military commander (see Ai 10.2, 11.3). There are other noteworthy details, such as Ji Kangzi’s cowardice, Meng Wubo’s reluctance to fight, and anecdotes about the heroism of Lu fighters. In the eleventh year, in spring, because of the incident at Xi,205 Guo Shu and Gao Wupi led out troops and attacked us, advancing as far as Qing,206 Ji Kangzic said to his steward Ran Qiu,207 “That the Qi army is in Qing is certainly on account of Lu’s failures. What should we do about it?” Ran Qiua said, “Let one nobleman stay as defender while the two other noblemen accompany our lord and confront the invaders at the frontier.”208 Ji Kangzic said, “I cannot do that.” Ran Qiua said, “Have them position themselves in the near outskirts of the capital.” Ji Kangzic reported this to Meng Yizi and Shusun Zhoucho, but the latter two did not agree to do this. Ran Qiua said, “If they do not agree to it, then the ruler does not set out. Let one nobleman lead an army and do battle with his back to the city. Anyone who does not join him is not a man of Lu. The assembled households of Lu would then outnumber the war chariots of Qi. One household, facing one chariot, would have the advantage. What do you have to worry about in this? It is appropriate that the two noblemen do not wish to do battle, for the government is in the hands of the Ji lineage. If during your lifetime Lu cannot do battle when the men of Qi attack Lu, the disgrace to you will be great. We would no longer be ranked among the princes.” Ji Kangzic had Ran Qiu accompany him to court and wait at the Zhang family canal.209 Shusun Zhouchoua called to Ran Qiu and asked about doing battle. He replied, “The noble men have far-reaching considerations, but what can a petty man know?” When Meng Yizic insisted upon asking him, he replied, “A petty man speaks after considering resources and obeys after assessing strengths.” Shusun Zhouchoua said, “He is saying that we do not qualify as true men.”210 They withdrew and marshaled their chariots. Lord Ai

11.1a(1)

1895

孟孺子洩帥右師，顏羽御，邴洩為右。冉求帥左師，管周父御，樊 遲為右。季孫曰：「須也弱。」有子曰：「就用命焉。」 季氏之甲七千，冉有以武城人三百為己徒卒，老幼守宮，次于雩 門之外。五日，右師從之。公叔務人見保者而泣，曰：「事充，政重，上不 能謀，士不能死，何以治民？吾既言之矣，敢不勉乎！」 11.1b 師及齊師戰于郊。齊師自稷曲，師不踰溝。樊遲曰：「非不能也，不信子

也，請三刻而踰之。」如之，眾從之。師入齊軍。 右師奔，齊人從之。陳瓘、陳莊涉泗。孟之側後入以為殿，抽矢策 其馬，曰：「馬不進也。」 林不狃之伍曰：「走乎？」不狃曰：「誰不如？」曰：「然則止乎？」不 狃曰：「惡賢？」徐步而死。 師獲甲首八十，齊人不能師。宵諜曰：「齊人遁。」冉有請從之三， 季孫弗許。 孟孺子語人曰：「我不如顏羽，而賢於邴洩。子羽銳敏，我不欲戰 而能默，洩曰：『驅之』。」 公為與其嬖僮汪錡乘，皆死，皆殯。孔子曰：「能執干戈以衛社稷， 可無殤也。」 冉有用矛於齊師，故能入其軍。孔子曰：「義也。」

211 Like Ran Qiu, Fan Chi is known as a disciple of Confucius. See Analects 2.5, 6.22, 12.21, 12.22, 13.4, and 13.19. 212 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1016), this was a gate in the southern wall of the Lu capital. 213 The tardiness of the right army led by Meng Wubo indicates the reluctance of the Meng lineage to join the war effort. 214 Gongwei is a son of Lord Zhao. 215 Having criticized others for their failures and halfheartedness, Gongwei is pledging to brave death. Liji 10.189 offers a slightly different account of Gongwei’s words. 216 Du Yu (ZZ 58.1016) says no more than that Jiqu was a location in the outskirts of the Lu capital. 217 The two men are Qi high officers. By crossing the Si River they approach the Lu capital from the north. 218 Confucius comments upon this act of heroic modesty at Analects 6.15. 219 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1016), Bing Xie urged the driver to flee at a gallop. 220 Funerals for youths (shang 殤) call for lesser mourning rituals. The boy favorite Wang Yi dies young, but his bravery is such that he should be mourned as a grown man. Liji 10.189 offers a slightly different account of Confucius’ remarks on mourning in this case.

1896

Zuo Tradition

Meng Yizi’s son Meng Wubob led the right army; Yan Yu drove for him, and Bing Xie was the spearman on the right. Ran Qiu led the left army; Guan Zhoufu drove for him, and Fan Chi was the spearman on the right.211 Ji Kangzic said, “Fan Chia is too young.” Ran Qiub said, “I took him for his ability to follow orders.” The armored troops of the Ji lineage numbered seven thousand. Ran Qiuc took three hundred men of Wucheng for his own troops. Leaving the elderly and the underage to defend the palace, he set up camp outside the Yu Gate.212 On the fifth day, the right army followed him.213 Gongweia saw the defenders and wept.214 He said, “Their occupations are pressing; their taxes heavy. The superiors are not capable of planning, and the fighters are not capable of dying. By what means will they keep the people in order? Now that I have spoken of it, do I dare not give my all?”215 The army fought with the Qi army in the outskirts of the city. The Qi troops approached from Jiqu, and Ran Qiu’s troops refused to cross a ditch.216 Fan Chi said to Ran Qiu, “It is not that they are incapable; they do not trust you. I request that you declare your orders three times and then you yourself cross it.” Ran Qiu did so, and his men followed him en masse, entering the Qi ranks. The right army under Meng Wubo fled, and the men of Qi pursued them. Chen Guan and Chen Zhuang crossed the Si River.217 Meng Zhice entered last in order to act as a rear guard. He pulled out an arrow and whipped his horse along, saying, “My horse would not advance.”218 Lin Buniu’s squad said, “Shall we run?” Lin Buniua said, “Then who would not do the same?” They said, “In that case, then, should we stay?” Lin Buniua said, “How would that be counted as worthiness?” Walking slowly, they died. Ran Qiu’s army took the heads of eighty armored men. The men of Qi could not put their army in formation. Nighttime spies reported, “The men of Qi are retreating.” Three times, Ran Qiuc asked to follow them, but Ji Kangzic would not allow it. Meng Wuboc spoke about his men to others: “I am not the equal of Yan Yu, yet I am worthier than Bing Xie. Yan Yua is sharp and focused. Even if I do not wish to do battle, I am able to remain silent. But Bing Xiea said, ‘Drive them at a gallop.’”219 Gongwei and his boy favorite Wang Yi were riding together. They both died and both were given funerals. Confuciusb said, “Since Wang Yi was able to grasp the shield and dagger-axe in order to defend the altars of the domain, it would be right to mourn him as a grown man.”220 It was because Ran Qiuc used his spearmen against the Qi army that he was able to enter their ranks. Confuciusb said, “This was right behavior.”

11.1b

Lord Ai

1897

11.2(2) 夏，陳轅頗出奔鄭。初，轅頗為司徒，賦封田以嫁公女；有餘，以為己大

器。國人逐之，故出。道渴，其族轅咺進稻醴、粱糗、腶脯焉。喜曰：「何 其給也？」對曰：「器成而具。」曰：「何不吾諫？」對曰：「懼先行。」 11.3a(3) 為郊戰故，公會吳子伐齊。五月，克博。壬申，至于嬴。中軍從王，胥門

巢將上軍，王子姑曹將下軍，展如將右軍。齊國書將中軍，高無丕將上 軍，宗樓將下軍。 陳僖子謂其弟書：「爾死，我必得志。」宗子陽與閭丘明相厲也。 桑掩胥御國子。公孫夏曰：「二子必死。」 將戰，公孫夏命其徒歌《虞殯》。陳子行命其徒具含玉。公孫揮命 其徒曰：「人尋約，吳髮短。」東郭書曰：「三戰必死，於此三矣。」使問 弦多以琴，曰：「吾不復見子矣。」陳書曰：「此行也，吾聞鼓而已，不聞 金矣。」

221 Other changes in taxation are mentioned at Cheng 1.2 and Zhao 4.6. 222 Bo 博 was located about 70 kilometers northeast of the Lu capital. 223 This should not be confused with the Chu capital Ying 郢. Ying 嬴 was 45 kilometers northeast of Bo, along the Wen River; see Annals, Huan 3.1. 224 The Lu commanders are not recorded, but Yang (4:1662) believes that Lord Ai and the three high ministers led Lu troops. 225 That is, Sang Yanxu and Guo Shu. 226 According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1017), this was a dirge, here sung to signify the fighters’ readiness to die. The title of the piece suggests that it was associated with the sageruler Shun. 227 Jade was placed in the mouth of a corpse before burial. Chen Ni’s troops are prepared to die in battle. See also Xi 6.4. 228 More precisely, eight chi of rope are allotted to each man, to be used either in binding captives or in stringing severed heads together, purposes normally served by the defeated soldiers’ long hair. Note that this is not the famous Gongsun Hui of Zheng but an otherwise unknown Qi man. 229 Zuozhuan records only one other battle for Dongguo Shu; see Ding 9.4. 230 Drums signaled an advance, bells a retreat.

1898

Zuo Tradition

When the Chen minister Yuan Po is expelled for malfeasance and selfaggrandizement, his kinsman Yuan Xuan shows foresight. Yuan Xuan’s judgment recalls the forebodings associated with the Zhou king’s casting of the Wuyi bells (Zhao 21.1) and Jin’s construction of the Siqi Palace (Zhao 8.1, 8.3, 13.3a). In the summer, Yuan Po of Chen departed and fled to Zheng. Earlier, when Yuan Po was acting as supervisor of conscripts, he had taxed all the lands in Chen’s allotted territory to provide for the marriage of the lord’s daughter.221 When there was a surplus, he used it to make a large bronze vessel for himself. He left because the inhabitants of the capital expelled him. On the road he was thirsty, and his kinsman Yuan Xuan, presented him with rice wine, choice millet, and spiced jerky. Pleased, he said, “Why such abundance?” He replied, “I prepared these when the vessel was completed.” He said, “Why did you not remonstrate with me?” He replied, “I feared that my departure would come even before yours.”

11.2(2)

Lu and Wu attack Qi in retaliation for Qi’s invasion of Lu (Ai 11.1). Qi fighters urge each other to sacrifice themselves in battle and predict victory. Because of the battle in the outskirts of the city, our lord met with the Master of Wu and attacked Qi. In the fifth month, they overcame Bo.222 On the renshen day (25), they advanced as far as Ying.223 The central army of Wu followed their king. Xumen Chao was commander of the upper army. Wangzi Gucao was commander of the lower army. Zhan Ru was commander of the right army.224 For Qi, Guo Shu was commander of the central army, Gao Wupi was commander of the upper army, and Zong Lou was commander of the lower army. Chen Qia said to his younger brother, Chen Shuc, “If you die, then we are certain to achieve our aims.” Zong Loua and Lüqiu Ming urged each other on. Sang Yanxu drove for Guo Shua. Gongsun Xia said to them, “You two gentlemen will certainly die.”225 As they were about to do battle, Gongsun Xia ordered his troops to sing “The Funeral of Yu.”226 Chen Nia ordered all his troops to hold jade in their mouths.227 Giving orders to his troops, Gongsun Hui said, “A length of rope for each man: in Wu they cut their hair short.”228 Dongguo Shu said, “If I go to war three times, I am certain to die. With this it comes to three.”229 He sent someone to pay his respects to Xian Shia with a zither, saying, “I will not see you again.” Chen Shu said, “In this march, I will hear the drums alone. I will not hear the bells.”230

11.3a(3)

Lord Ai

1899

11.3b 甲戌，戰于艾陵。展如敗高子，國子敗胥門巢，王卒助之，大敗齊師，獲

國書、公孫夏、閭丘明、陳書、東郭書，革車八百乘，甲首三千，以獻 于公。 將戰，吳子呼叔孫曰：「而事何也？」對曰：「從司馬。」王賜之甲、 劍鈹，曰：「奉爾君事，敬無廢命！」叔孫未能對。衛賜進，曰：「州仇奉 甲從君。」而拜。 公使大史固歸國子之元，寘之新篋，褽之以玄纁，加組帶焉。寘書 于其上，曰：「天若不識不衷，何以使下國？」 11.4 吳將伐齊，越子率其眾以朝焉，王及列士皆有饋賂。吳人皆喜，唯子胥

懼，曰：「是豢吳也夫！」諫曰：「越在我，心腹之疾也，壤地同，而有欲 於我。夫其柔服，求濟其欲也，不如早從事焉。得志於齊，猶獲石田也， 無所用之。越不為沼，吳其泯矣。使醫除疾，而曰『必遺類焉』者，未之 有也。〈盤庚之誥〉曰：『其有顛越不共，則劓殄無遺育，無俾易種于茲 邑』，是商所以興也。今君易之，將以求大，不亦難乎？」弗聽。

231 As Yang (4:1663) notes, the gift of a sword normally indicates a command to commit suicide (see, e.g., Ai 11.4). Here it does not. Shusun Zhouchou does not have the ritual competence to reply to the king’s gift and words, but Zigong, famous for his eloquence and understanding of ritual, does. 232 That is, Heaven has used Lu and Wu to punish Qi. This note from the Lu ruler seems to condemn the lord of Qi rather than Guo Shu. In the Guoyu parallel to this episode (“Wu yu,” 19.600), the words here included in the note are supposed to have been sent to Qi as the Wu envoy Xi Si’s oral message from the Wu king. 233 This extraordinary visit to the Wu court is a sign of Yue subservience to Wu, which began with the Wu conquest of Yue in Ai 1.2. 234 The Zuozhuan version of this passage differs slightly from the version in the extant Shangshu.

1900

Zuo Tradition

On the jiaxu day (27), they did battle at Ailing. Zhan Ru of Lu defeated Gao Wupia. Guo Shua defeated Xumen Chao, but the Wu King’s troops reinforced him, and they routed the Qi army, capturing Guo Shu, Gongsun Xia, Lüqiu Ming, Chen Shu, Dongguo Shu, eight hundred chariots covered in hide, and the heads of three thousand armored men, which they presented to our lord. As they were about to do battle, the Wu King called to Shusun Zhou­ choub and said, “What is your position?” He replied, “I serve as supervisor of the military.” The Wu King bestowed on him a suit of armor and a double-edged sword sheathed as a single-edged sword. He said, “Attend to the affairs of your lord. Revere him and do not neglect his commands.” Shusun Zhouchoub was not able to answer. Zigongb advanced and said, as he bowed, “Zhouchou receives this armor and follows his lord.”231 Our lord had the grand scribe Gu return the head of Guo Shua to Qi. They put it in a newly made case, cushioned it with cloth of deep red and pink, and attached a decorated ribbon to it. They put a note on top of it that read, “If Heaven did not recognize the unjust, then for what purpose did it employ the domain below?”232

11.3b

Wu Zixu again warns the Wu ruler of the threat that Yue poses (see Ai 1.2); he has his own family prepare for the coming disaster (Ai 13.3, 22.2). The King of Wu puts him to death. As Wu was preparing to attack Qi, the Master of Yue led his multitude to visit the Wu court.233 The king and his officials of all ranks received gifts. The Wu men were all pleased, with the exception of Wu Zixuc, who alone was alarmed and said, “They are fattening Wu!” Remonstrating against Wu complacency, Wu Zixu said, “To us Yue is a disease of the heart and the vitals: their territory is the same as ours, and they have something that they desire from us. With this docile submission of theirs they are seeking to further their desires; it would be best to take care of business with them immediately. Winning our aims in Qi is like securing a field of stones: there is no way to use it. Unless Yue is made into a swamp, Wu will go under. There has never yet been anyone who told a doctor to treat his illness but said, ‘Be sure to leave a sample of it there.’ The ‘Proclamation of Pangeng’ says, ‘Should there be among them those who are perverse and disrespectful, I will mutilate and exterminate them, so that there will be no survivors. I will not let them spread their seed to this settlement.’234 It was on the basis of this that the Shang rose. Now if you reverse that course and seek thereby to achieve greatness, will it not be difficult?” He was not heeded.

11.4

Lord Ai

1901

使於齊，屬其子於鮑氏，為王孫氏。反役，王聞之，使賜之屬鏤以 死。將死，曰：「樹吾墓檟，檟可材也。吳其亡乎！三年，其始弱矣。盈必 毀，天之道也。」 11.5 秋，季孫命修守備，曰：「小勝大，禍也，齊至無日矣。」 11.6a(6) 冬，衛大叔疾出奔宋。初，疾娶于宋子朝，其娣嬖。子朝出，孔文子使疾

出其妻，而妻之。疾使侍人誘其初妻之娣寘於犁，而為之一宮，如二妻。 文子怒，欲攻之，仲尼止之。遂奪其妻。 或淫于外州，外州人奪之軒以獻。 恥是二者，故出。衛人立遺，使室孔姞。疾臣向魋，納美珠焉，與 之城鉏。宋公求珠，魋不與，由是得罪。及桓氏出，城鉏人攻大叔疾，衛 莊公復之，使處巢，死焉，殯於鄖，葬於少禘。

235 Gu Yanwu (cited in Yang, 4:1664) notes that a Wu envoy would have been sent to Qi as a normal part of the military hostilities between Wu and Qi. 236 The Shulou sword may have been named after a place in Wu. 237 On the use of jia timber for coffin, see Xiang 3.1, 4.4. 238 See Ai 13.5, where Wu seeks a peace accord with Yue after the Yue military has taken the Wu capital. In the version given at Shiji 41.1744, Wu Zixu asks that his eyes be affixed to the East Gate of Wu after his death so that they can see the invading Yue army enter the city in future. 239 A similar saying is quoted in Zhuang 4.1. 240 This reasoning appears often in Zuozhuan; see, for example, Xuan 9.8. 241 Zizhao would likely have departed in Ai 2.2, on the death of his protector Lord Ling of Wei. When Shishu Qi divorced his wife, he would naturally have also had to send away her younger sister, for whom he feels a stronger affection. 242 That is, the attendant was to lure her away from her family. 243 Li 犁 was a Wei settlement about 40 kilometers west and slightly north of the Wei capital. 244 Waizhou 外州 was a Wei settlement, but its location is unknown. 245 Kong Jí is the daughter of Kong Yu who had previously been married to Shishu Qi. 246 Shishu Qi served the Song minister Xiang Tui after fleeing to Song. According to Du Yu (ZZ 58.1018), Chengchu 城鉏 was a Song settlement; references in Ai 25.1b and Ai 26.1b indicate that the settlement was in Wei but near Song territory.

1902

Zuo Tradition

Sent as emissary to Qi,235 Wu Zixu entrusted his sons to the Bao lineage, where they became the Wangsun lineage. On returning from the campaign, the king heard of it and had the Shulou sword presented to Wu Zixu so that he could die by it.236 As he was about to die, he said, “Plant jia trees on my tomb; jia can be used for coffins.237 Wu is going to perish. In three years it will begin to weaken.238 What comes to fullness is inevitably destroyed: that is the Way of Heaven.”239 Lu prepares for retribution from Qi (see Ai 11.3). In autumn, Ji Kangzic ordered that the defenses be rebuilt. He said, “For the small to defeat the large is a catastrophe:240 Qi could come any day.”

11.5

The following passage presents the colorful life and death of Shishu Qi of Wei. His father-in-law, Kong Yu, wants to attack him because of his clandestine union with a concubine whom he is supposed to have divorced. Confucius, residing in Wei at this time, decides to leave because he does not want to get involved in the internecine conflict. He departs despite Kong Yu’s efforts to keep him. In winter, Shishu Qia of Wei departed and fled to Song. Earlier, Shishu Qib had married the daughter of Zizhao of Song; her younger sister had accompanied her in marriage. When Zizhao departed, Kong Yub had Shishu Qib divorce his wife so that he could give him his own daughter in marriage.241 Shishu Qib then had an attendant lure his first wife’s younger sister to him.242 Setting her up in Li, he built a palace for her alone, as if he had two wives.243 Infuriated, Kong Yuc wanted to attack him, but Confuciusc stopped him. In consequence, Kong Yu took back the daughter he had married to Shishu Qi. At some point Shishu Qi had an affair in Waizhou, and someone from Waizhou had stolen his carriage and submitted it to court.244 He was ashamed of these two events and therefore departed. The people of Wei set up his younger brother Taishu Xizib in his place and had him marry Kong Jí.245 Shishu Qib, who came to serve Xiang Tui, presented a beautiful pearl to him; Xiang Tuia gave him Chengchu.246 When the Duke of Song asked for the pearl, Xiang Tuia did not give it to him and for this reason incurred blame. When Xiang Tui’s Huan lineage departed, the people of Chengchu attacked Shishu Qia.247 Lord Zhuang of Wei restored Shishu Qi and had him reside in Chao, where he died.248 His funeral was held at Yun and he was buried at Shaodi.249

11.6a(6)

247 Because Xiang Tui and his brothers are descended from Xiangxi 向盻, a son of Duke Huan of Song (r. 681–651), they belong to the Huan lineage. For the departure of the lineage, see Ai 14.4. 248 Chao 巢 was about 50 kilometers west of the Song capital. 249 The locations of Yun 鄖 and Shaodi 少禘 are unknown.

Lord Ai

1903

11.6b 初，晉悼公子憖亡在衛，使其女僕而田，大叔懿子止而飲之酒，遂聘之，

生悼子。悼子即位，故夏戊為大夫。悼子亡，衛人翦夏戊。 孔文子之將攻大叔也，訪於仲尼。仲尼曰：「胡簋之事，則嘗學 之矣；甲兵之事，未之聞也。」退，命駕而行，曰：「鳥則擇木，木豈能擇 鳥？」文子遽止之曰：「圉豈敢度其私，訪衛國之難也。」將止，魯人以幣 召之，乃歸。 11.7 季孫欲以田賦，使冉有訪諸仲尼。仲尼曰：「丘不識也。」三發，卒曰：「子

為國老，待子而行，若之何子之不言也？」仲尼不對，而私於冉有曰： 「君子之行也，度於禮：施取其厚，事舉其中，斂從其薄。如是，則以丘 亦足矣。若不度於禮，而貪冒無厭，則雖以田賦，將又不足。且子季孫若 欲行而法，則周公之典在；若欲苟而行，又何訪焉？」弗聽。

250 This may be the only example of a woman carriage driver in early Chinese texts. 251 According to Takezoe (29.71), Xia Wu is the son of Shishu Qi’s full sister, who had been married to the Xia lineage. 252 Analects 15.1 records a similar exchange. There, however, the questioner is Lord Ling of Wei, and Confucius’ answer is differently worded. 253 Or, “I was trying to forestall troubles in Wei,” if we read fang 訪 as a loan word for fang 防.

1904

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, when Yin, the son of Lord Dao of Jin, was in exile in Wei, he had his daughter drive for him when he hunted.250 Shishu Shena had them stop and treated them to drinks, and as a result he took her as his wife. She bore Shishu Qic. Shishu Qic succeeded his father, and Xia Wu therefore became a high officer.251 When Shishu Qic went into exile, the people of Wei dispossessed Xia Wu. When Kong Yub was preparing to attack Shishu Qid, he consulted with Confuciusc. Confuciusc said, “As for matters of the sacrificial vessels, I have studied them; yet of matters of armor and weaponry, I have heard nothing.”252 He withdrew and issued the command to drive away. He said, “A bird chooses its tree, but how can a tree choose its bird?” Kong Yuc hurriedly stopped him and said, “How should I presume to plan private matters? I was trying to forestall troubles in the domain of Wei.”253 Confucius was going to stop, but the people of Lu summoned him home with gifts, so he went home.

11.6b

As Ji Kangzi changes Lu’s system of taxation, he attempts to consult with Confucius, who refuses to offer his advice (see Ai 12.1). For Lu’s various systems of taxation and conscription, see Xuan 15.8 and Cheng 1.5. Yang (4:1667–68) reviews various hypotheses on the nature of the new tax, speculating finally that it is a land tax of at least two parts in ten, exceeding the level set in Cheng 1.5. In the parallel to this passage in Guoyu, “Lu yu 2,” 5.218, Confucius outlines the ancient kings’ taxation system and rejects Ji Kangzi’s innovation as a violation of the norms of the Zhou Duke. In Analects 11.17, Confucius is much more indignant about Ran Qiu’s role in serving Ji Kangzi and supporting the new taxation. Ji Kangzic, who wanted to set military requisitions according to land holdings, had Ran Qiuc consult about it with Confuciusc. Confuciusc said, “I do not know.” Three times Ran Qiu put the question and finally said, “You, sir, are an elder of the domain, and I am waiting upon you before I act. What am I to do when you do not speak?” Confuciusc did not answer publicly, but in private said to Ran Qiuc, “The conduct of the noble man takes its measure from ritual propriety. In giving he tends to liberality, in undertaking affairs he upholds moderation, and in collecting taxes he pursues thriftiness. In this way, to requisition by districts is surely satisfactory. If he does not take his measure from ritual propriety but covets without satiety, then even if he taxes according to landholdings, it will still not be satisfactory. What is more, if the nobleman Jisund wishes to act in accordance with standards, then the statutes of the Zhou Duke are at hand. If he prefers to be careless in his actions, then why consult with me?” He was not heeded.

11.7

Lord Ai

1905

春秋 12.1(1) 十有二年春，用田賦。 12.2(2) 夏五月甲辰，孟子卒。

12.3(3)

公會吳于橐皋。

12.4(4) 秋，公會衛侯、宋皇瑗于鄖。 12.5(6) 宋向巢帥師伐鄭。 12.6(5) 冬十有二月，螽。

左傳 12.1(1) 十二年春王正月，用田賦。 12.2(2) 夏五月，昭夫人孟子卒。昭公娶于吳，故不書姓。死不赴，故不稱夫人。

不反哭，故不言葬小君。孔子與弔，適季氏。季氏不絻，放絰而拜。

254 Tuogao 橐皋, present-day Zhegao Town 柘皋鎮, northwest of Chao County 巢縣, Anhui, was about 400 kilometers south of the Lu capital and about 300 kilometers west and slightly north of the Wu capital. 255 Yang (4:1669) puts Yun 鄖 about 170 kilometers east of the Lu capital, along the path Lord Ai would have taken on his return from Wu. 256 Compare the changes in tax policy mentioned at Xuan 15.8, Cheng 1.2, and Zhao 4.6.

1906

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 12 (483 BCE) ANNALS

In the twelfth year, in spring, requisition by landholdings was implemented.

12.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, on the jiachen day (3), Meng Zi died.

12.2(2)

Our lord met with Wu at Tuogao.

12.3(3)

254

In autumn, our lord met with the Prince of Wei and Huang Yuan of Song at Yun.255

12.4(4)

Xiang Chao of Song led out troops and attacked Zheng.

12.5(6)

In winter, in the twelfth month, there were locusts.

12.6(5)

ZUO

The new taxation system is implemented over the objections of Confucius (see Ai 11.7). In the twelfth year, in spring, in the royal first month, requisition by landholdings was implemented.256

12.1(1)

On the death of the wife of the former ruler of Lu, some reflections are presented on the language of the Annals and on ritual protocol. Note that in Zuozhuan Confucius is less strident in his criticism of the Ji lineage than he is in the Analects. Here Confucius’ removal of his hempen mourning cap also seems to be a gesture of ritual accommodation. In summer, in the fifth month, Meng Zi, wife of Lord Zhao, died. Lord Zhao had married a woman of Wu, so her clan name is not written.257 When she died, no notice of her death was sent, so she was not called “wife.” There was no wailing upon return from her funeral, so it does not say, “we buried the wife of the former ruler.” Confuciusb took part in the condolences and visited Ji Kangzie. Ji Kangzie did not wear a mourning cowl, so Confucius removed his hempen cap and sash and bowed.258

12.2(2)

257 The Lu and Wu ruling lines shared the Zhou clan name, Ji 姬, and were thus ritually forbidden to intermarry (on this issue see also Xi 23.6, Zhao 1.12). The “Fang ji” 坊 記 chapter of Liji (51.872) refers to this passage in the Annals and to its avoidance of Meng Zi’s true clan name. See also Analects 7.31, where Chen Sibai instructs Confucius in the correct naming of Meng Zi. 258 As Yang (4:1670) notes, Lord Zhao had already been dead for many years (though not just twelve years, as Yang erroneously states), Lord Zhao and the Ji lineage had been at loggerheads, and Meng Zi was not the mother of Lord Ai. These factors may have mattered more than Meng Zi’s clan background in keeping Lu from reporting her death correctly. On how the death of the lord’s wife or consort is recorded, see also Yin 3.2.

Lord Ai

1907

12.3(3) 公會吳于橐皋，吳子使大宰嚭請尋盟。公不欲，使子貢對曰：「盟，所以

周信也，故心以制之，玉帛以奉之，言以結之，明神以要之。寡君以為苟 有盟焉，弗可改也已。若猶可改，日盟何益？今吾子曰『必尋盟』，若可 尋也，亦可寒也。」乃不尋盟。 12.4a(4) 吳徵會于衛。初，衛人殺吳行人且姚而懼，謀於行人子羽。子羽曰：「吳

方無道，無乃辱吾君，不如止也。」子木曰：「吳方無道，國無道，必棄疾 於人。吳雖無道，猶足以患衛。往也！長木之斃，無不摽也；國狗之瘈， 無不噬也，而況大國乎！」 12.4b 秋，衛侯會吳于鄖。公及衛侯、宋皇瑗盟，而卒辭吳盟。吳人藩衛侯

之舍。 子服景伯謂子貢曰：「夫諸侯之會，事既畢矣，侯伯致禮，地主歸 餼，以相辭也。今吳不行禮於衛，而藩其君舍以難之，子盍見大宰？」乃 請束錦以行。

259 The original contains an untranslatable figure of speech. The word xun 尋, “to renew” a covenant, also means “to warm up”; see Schuessler, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, 539. The word here translated “expire” (han 寒) is literally “to cool.” If a treaty can be rewarmed, then it can be left to grow cold. The term “to renew a convenant” (xunmeng 尋盟) also appears in Xi 3.3, 9.2, Wen 13.5, Cheng 3.7, 9.2, Xiang 15.1, Zhao 1.2, 32.3, Ai 14.2). 260 Nothing further is known about this episode. 261 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1026), both Ziyu and Zimu are Wei high officers. Just as a tall tree can cause more harm, a remarkable dog is more dangerous when it becomes rabid. 262 That is, Lu declined to renew its covenant with Wu. See Ai 12.3. According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1026), the Annals does not record the covenant with Wei and Song because Lu feared Wu’s reaction.

1908

Zuo Tradition

Zigong, the disciple of Confucius most famous for his rhetorical skills, convinces Wu not to insist on a renewed covenant with Lu (see Ai 8.2). Renewing the covenant would mean acceding to Wu’s demand for a hundred sets of sacrificial animals, hence the reluctance of Lu to agree. When our lord met with Wu at Tuogao, the Master of Wu had the grand steward Pi request the renewal of the covenant. Our lord did not desire it, so he had Zigong reply, “A covenant is that by which good faith is confirmed. Therefore, it is made fast with the heart, upheld with jade and silk, secured with words, and controlled by the bright spirits. Our lord holds that once there is a covenant in place, it cannot be changed and that is all there is to it. If it could still be changed, then what benefit would there be even if covenants were made every day? Now you, sir, say that it is necessary to renew the covenant. If it can be renewed, then it can also be allowed to expire.”259 Therefore, they did not renew the covenant.

12.3(3)

The current Wei ruler, later to be known as the Ousted Lord, hesitates when Wu demands a meeting but finally decides to go. After he declines to make a covenant with Wu, Wu detains him at the meeting site until Zigong persuades the Wu grand steward Pi to let him go. Trouble is predicted for the Wei ruler. Wu called for a meeting with Wei. The people of Wei were afraid because sometime earlier they had killed the Wu envoy Juyao.260 When they strategized with their envoy Ziyu, Ziyu said, “At this moment Wu lacks the Way. Will Wu then not disgrace our lord? It would be best to stand fast and resist their demand.” Zimu said, “At this moment Wu lacks the Way; and when a domain lacks the Way, it always afflicts others. Still, even if Wu lacks the Way, it has the wherewithal to harm Wei. Let us go! When a tall tree dies, there is nothing it will not fall upon; when the best dog in the domain goes rabid, there is no one it will not bite. How much more is this true of a great domain!”261

12.4a(4)

In autumn, the Prince of Wei met with Wu at Yun. Our lord made a covenant with the Prince of Wei and Huang Yuan of Song but to the end declined a covenant with Wu.262 The men of Wu built a palisade around the lodging of the Prince of Wei. Zifu Jingbo said to Zigong, “In a meeting of the princes, once the proceedings have been completed, the presiding lord presents ritual gifts, while the local host furnishes a feast, and only with this do they take their leave of one another. Now Wu has not carried out the ritual with Wei but has instead made trouble for them by building a palisade around their ruler’s lodging. Why do you not visit the Wu grand steward?” So, after asking for bolts of brocade, Zigong set out.

12.4b

Lord Ai

1909

語及衛故，大宰嚭曰：「寡君願事衛君，衛君之來也緩，寡君懼， 故將止之。」子貢曰：「衛君之來，必謀於其眾，其眾或欲或否，是以緩 來。其欲來者，子之黨也；其不欲來者，子之讎也。若執衛君，是墮黨而 崇讎也，夫墮子者得其志矣。且合諸侯而執衛君，誰敢不懼？墮黨、崇 讎，而懼諸侯，或者難以霸乎！」大宰嚭說，乃舍衛侯。 衛侯歸，效夷言。子之尚幼，曰：「君必不免，其死於夷乎！執焉而 又說其言，從之固矣。」 12.5(6) 冬十二月，螽，季孫問諸仲尼。仲尼曰：「丘聞之：火伏而後蟄者畢。今火

猶西流，司曆過也。」 12.6(5) 宋、鄭之間有隙地焉，曰彌作、頃丘、玉暢、喦、戈、鍚。子產與宋人為

成，曰「勿有是」。及宋平、元之族自蕭奔鄭，鄭人為之城喦、戈、鍚。九 月，宋向巢伐鄭，取鍚，殺元公之孫，遂圍喦。十二月，鄭罕達救喦。丙 申，圍宋師。

263 Zigong’s remarks accurately reflect the views of Zimu and Ziyu in Ai 12.4a. 264 With this speech Zigong, a forerunner of Warring States persuaders, achieves Lu’s aims while appearing to advise the prospective overlord. On the theory of the overlord, see also Ai 7.5. 265 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1027), the Ousted Lord of Wei did die in Yue. Imitating the ways of barbarians bodes ill. For another example, see Lord Xiang of Lu, who wants to build his palace in the Chu style (Xiang 31.3). 266 That insects are still active and the Fire Star (Antares) can still be seen above the western horizon at evening signifies to Confucius that it cannot yet truly be the twelfth month of the year (in the Gregorian calendar, Antares is visible above the western horizon at dusk only through late November); he must believe that the supervisor of the calendar should have added an intercalary month in the previous year, so that the month in which there were locusts would be reckoned the eleventh month rather than the twelfth. According to Yang (4:1673), the suggestion that there should have been an intercalary month earlier this year is incorrect. On the Fire Star as a seasonal marker, cf. Zhuang 29.4. 267 These settlements are thought to have been situated in the vicinity of present-day Tongxu 通許, Qixian 杞縣, and Chenliu 陳留, Henan, that is, about halfway between the Zheng and Song capitals. 268 According to Yang (4:1673), these groups fled in Ding 15. 269 This account is continued in Ai 14.1.

1910

Zuo Tradition

When in their conversation they came to the matter of Wei, the grand steward Pi said, “Our humble ruler is eager to serve the Lord of Wei, but the Lord of Wei was slow in coming. Our lord was afraid, and we have therefore kept him here.” Zigong said, “In coming here, the Lord of Wei no doubt strategized with his multitude, and among his multitude there were some who wanted him to come to Wu and some who did not.263 That is why he was slow to come. Those who wanted him to come are of your party, while those who did not want him to come are your enemies. If you seize the Lord of Wei, this will be toppling your party and raising up your enemies, and those who would topple you will achieve their aims. What is more, if you gather the princes only to seize the Lord of Wei, then who will dare to have no fear? You would topple your party, raise up your enemies, and frighten the princes: it is perhaps difficult in this way to act as overlord.”264 The grand steward Pi was pleased and therefore released the Prince of Wei. When the Prince of Wei returned home, he imitated the barbaric way of speaking. Gongsun Mimoua, who was still a young man, said, “The lord is certain not to escape trouble but will die among the barbarians. He was seized by them, and yet he takes pleasure in their way of speaking: that he is following them is confirmed.”265 Confucius comments authoritatively on calendrical matters and the winter dormancy of insects. In winter, in the twelfth month, there were locusts. Ji Kangzic asked Confuciusc about it. Confuciusc replied, “I have heard that only after the Fire Star has set are all the dormant insects in place. Now the Fire Star is still moving to the west: the supervisor of the calendar has made a mistake.”266

12.5(6)

Fighting continues between Song and Zheng (see Ai 9.4). The bone of contention is the disputed territory between Song and Zheng. Between Song and Zheng there was unclaimed territory, namely Mizuo, Qingqiu, Yuchang, Nie, Ge, and Yang.267 Zichan had made a compact with the people of Song that said, “Do not take possession of these.” When the houses of Lords Ping and Yuan of Song fled from Xiao to Zheng, the people of Zheng had fortified Nie, Ge, and Yang for them.268 In the ninth month, Xiang Chao of Song attacked Zheng, took Yang, killed the grandson of Lord Yuan, and then laid siege to Nie. In the twelfth month, Han Da of Zheng went to the aid of Nie. On the bingshen day (28), he surrounded the Song army.269

12.6(5)

Lord Ai

1911

春秋 13.1(1) 十有三年春，鄭罕達帥師取宋師于喦。 13.2 夏，許男成卒。 13.3(2) 公會晉侯及吳子于黃池。 13.4 楚公子申帥師伐陳。 13.5(3) 於越入吳。 13.6 秋，公至自會。 13.7 晉魏曼多帥師侵衛。 13.8 葬許元公。 13.9 九月，螽。 13.10 冬十有一月，有星孛于東方。 13.11 盜殺陳夏區夫。 13.12 十有二月，螽。

左傳 13.1(1) 十三年春，宋向魋救其師。鄭子賸使徇曰：「得桓魋者有賞。」魋也逃

歸。遂取宋師于喦，獲成讙、郜延。以六邑為虛。 13.2(3) 夏，公會單平公、晉定公、吳夫差于黃池。

1912

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 13 (482 BCE) ANNALS

In the thirteenth year, in spring, Han Da of Zheng led out troops and took Song troops at Nie.

13.1(1)

In summer, Cheng, the Head of Xǔ, died.270

13.2

Our lord met with the Prince of Jin and the Master of Wu at Huangchi.271

13.3(2)

Gongzi Shen of Chu led out troops and attacked Chen.

13.4

Yue entered Wu.

13.5(3)

In autumn, our lord arrived from the meeting.

13.6

Wei Manduo of Jin led out troops and invaded Wei.

13.7

Lord Yuan of Xǔ was buried.

13.8

In the ninth month, there were locusts.

13.9

In winter, in the eleventh month, there was a star that became indistinct in the east.

13.10

Brigands killed Xia Qufu of Chen.

13.11

In the twelfth month, there were locusts.

13.12

ZUO

Zheng defeats Song in battle after the Song general abandons his men (see Ai 12.6). In the thirteenth year, in spring, Xiang Tui of Song came to the aid of their army. Han Dae of Zheng proclaimed, “Whoever captures Xiang Tuib will have a reward.” Xiang Tuia returned home in flight. As a result, they took Song troops at Nie, made prisoners of Cheng Huan and Gao Yan, and turned the six settlements into an unguarded buffer zone.272

13.1(1)

In the summer, our lord met with the Shan Duke Ping, Lord Ding of Jin, and Fucha of Wu at Huangchi.

13.2(3)

270 According to Takezoe (29.81), this was Lord Yuan of Xǔ, put in place by Chu after Zheng extinguished Xǔ in Ding 6.1. 271 Huangchi 黃池 was likely located on the south bank of the old course of the Ji 濟 River, south of present-day Fengqiu 封丘, Henan, just over 20 kilometers north of Kaifeng. According to Guoyu, “Wu yu,” 19.604, Wu extended the canal built in Ai 9.5 in order to carry its men to this meeting. 272 For the six settlements, see Ai 12.6. Despite Song defeat, Zheng acknowledges that the most it can hope for is to have a neutral buffer zone between the two domains. Zheng cannot claim sovereignty over these six settlements by fortifying them.

Lord Ai

1913

13.3(5) 六月丙子，越子伐吳，為二隧，疇無餘、謳陽自南方，先及郊。吳大子

友、王子地、王孫彌庸、壽於姚自泓上觀之。彌庸見姑蔑之旗，曰：「吾 父之旗也。不可以見讎而弗殺也。」大子曰：「戰而不克，將亡國，請待 之。」彌庸不可，屬徒五千，王子地助之。乙酉，戰，彌庸獲疇無餘，地獲 謳陽。 越子至，王子地守。丙戌，復戰，大敗吳師，獲大子友、王孫彌庸、 壽於姚。丁亥，入吳。吳人告敗于王。王惡其聞也，自剄七人於幕下。 13.4a 秋七月辛丑盟，吳、晉爭先。吳人曰：「於周室，我為長。」晉人曰：「於

姬姓，我為伯。」 趙鞅呼司馬寅曰：「日旰矣，大事未成，二臣之罪也。建鼓整列，二 臣死之，長幼必可知也。」 對曰：「請姑視之。」反，曰：「肉食者無墨。今吳王有墨，國勝 乎？大子死乎？且夷德輕，不忍久，請少待之。」 乃先晉人。

273 We follow the interpretation of Yang (4:1676), who identifies Hong 泓 with presentday Mount Heng 橫山, southwest of Wuxian 吳縣, Jiangsu. According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1028) and Jiang Yong (cited in Yang), Hong was a river in Wu, and the Wu commanders viewed the Yue forces from its banks. 274 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1028), Gumie 姑蔑 was a place in Yue near present-day Quzhou 衢州, Zhejiang, about 200 kilometers southwest of the Yue capital. Wangsun Miyong’s father had been captured by Yue, and his flag was now being carried by the Gumie forces. 275 The supposed founder of Wu, Taibo, was the older brother of King Wen and therefore senior to the founding ruler of Jin. See Xi 5.8. 276 “Inky” is the literal translation of a term (mo 墨) meant to indicate a beclouded countenance. According to Takezoe (29.84), when one is mournful, one’s qi does not rise, and one’s face becomes dark. “Meat-eaters” are those in positions of power, as in Zhuang 11.1.

1914

Zuo Tradition

While the king of Wu is away at the Huangchi meeting (see Ai 13.2), Yue invades Wu and takes the capital (see Ai 11.4, 13.4, 17.2). In the sixth month, on the bingzi day (11), the Master of Yue attacked Wu, taking two routes. Chou Wuyu and Ou Yang approached from the south, reaching the outskirts of the capital first. The Wu heir apparent You, Wangzi Di, Wangsun Miyong, and Shou Yuyao viewed them from atop Mount Hong.273 Seeing the Gumie flag, Wangsun Miyonga said, “This is my father’s flag. When one sees one’s enemy, it will not be right not to kill him.”274 The heir apparent You said, “If we do battle and do not prevail, the domain will perish. Please wait.” Miyong would not agree and gathered five thousand troops with the help of Wangzi Di. On the yiyou day (20), they did battle. Wangsun Miyonga captured Chou Wuyu, and Wangzi Dia captured Ou Yang. When the Master of Yue arrived, Wangzi Di kept to his defenses. On the bingxu day (21), they did battle again. Yue roundly defeated the Wu army, capturing the heir apparent You, Wangsun Miyong, and Shou Yuyao. On the dinghai day (22), they entered the Wu capital. The people of Wu reported the defeat to the Wu King. The king, horrified that the news of defeat would be heard, personally slit seven men’s throats in his tent.

13.3(5)

Shaken by the news of the Yue invasion, the King of Wu accepts a lower position than Jin during the covenant ceremony, thus effectively giving up his bid for the position of overlord (see Ai 13.3). In autumn, in the seventh month, on the xinchou day (6), they made a covenant. Wu and Jin contended for precedence. The men of Wu said, “In the Zhou house we are senior.”275 The men of Jin said, “Among those with the Ji clan name, we are the overlord.” Zhao Yang called to his supervisor of the military, Yin, and said, “That the day is growing late and we have not yet completed the great business is our fault, yours and mine. Set up the flags. Put the battle lines in order. We two will die for it, and then it will certainly be possible to see who is senior and who is junior.” He replied, “Let me have a look at them.” He returned and said, “Meat-eaters should not look inky. Now the King of Wu does look inky.276 Has his domain been defeated? Has his heir died? Besides, the temperament of barbarians is unstable.277 They cannot bear to wait long. Let us wait for a short time.” Therefore, the men of Jin were given precedence.278

13.4a

277 The Rong tribe is also described as lax and unstable in Yin 9.6. 278 Various sources, including Guoyu, “Wu yu,” 19.615, and Shiji 39.1685 and 43.1792, state to the contrary that Wu was given precedence in this covenant ceremony.

Lord Ai

1915

13.4b 吳人將以公見晉侯，子服景伯對使者曰： 王合諸侯，則伯帥侯牧以見於王；伯合諸侯，則侯帥子、男

以見於伯。自王以下，朝聘玉帛不同；故敝邑之職貢於吳， 有豐於晉，無不及焉，以為伯也。 今諸侯會，而君將以寡君見晉君，則晉成為伯矣，敝邑 將改職貢：魯賦於吳八百乘，若為子、男，則將半邾以屬於 吳，而如邾以事晉。且執事以伯召諸侯，而以侯終之，何利 之有焉？ 吳人乃止。 既而悔之，將囚景伯。景伯曰：「何也立後於魯矣，將以二乘與六 人從，遲速唯命。」遂囚以還。及戶牖，謂大宰曰：「魯將以十月上辛有 事於上帝、先王，季辛而畢，何世有職焉，自襄以來，未之改也。若不 會，祝宗將曰『吳實然』，且請魯不共，而執其賤者七人，何損焉？」大 宰嚭言於王曰：「無損於魯，而祇為名，不如歸之。」乃歸景伯。

279 The “superintendents” (literally, “shepherds” or “pastors”) are local domain rulers appointed by the king but lower in rank than princes. 280 According to Ai 7.4, Zhu’s contribution to the Wu allied forces was six hundred chariots. Zifu Jingbo reasons as follows. As things currently stand, Wu is in the position of king, and Jin is in the position of overlord. However, if Wu takes the Lu ruler to have an audience with Jin, Jin will still have the position of overlord, but Wu will have put itself in the position of prince and Lu in the position of a master or head. That reduction in rank will be matched by a reduction in military allotment. Whereas Lu currently provides Wu with eight hundred chariots, if Jin is recognized in the position of overlord, Wu in the position of prince, and Lu in the position of master or head, then Lu will serve the overlord Jin as Zhu serves Wu, with six hundred chariots, and will serve the Wu prince with half that number of chariots. See Takezoe, 29.85. 281 Huyou 戶牖 was just over 40 kilometers east and somewhat south of Huangchi, near present-day Lankao 蘭考, Henan.

1916

Zuo Tradition

The Huangchi meeting occasions an explanation of protocol in visits with the overlord. Zifu Jingbo keeps Lu from having to display its subordination to Wu at the meeting, then secures his own release from Wu custody. The anecdotes suggest that Lu noblemen had little respect for the Wu leaders. The men of Wu were preparing to take our lord with them to have an audience with the Prince of Jin, but Zifu Jingbo replied to the messenger,

13.4b

When the king gathers the princes, the overlord leads the princes and superintendents to have an audience with the king.279 When the overlord gathers the princes, the princes lead the masters and heads to have an audience with the overlord. Starting with the king and proceeding downward, the jades and silks used in official visits are of different types. Therefore, our humble settlement’s designated tribute to Wu is in some respects richer than that to Jin and in no case fails to equal it: we are thus treating you as overlord. If now, when the princes are meeting together, you are preparing to take our lord with you to have an audience with the Lord of Jin, then Jin will have become the overlord, and our humble settlement will have to change our designated tribute. Our allotment to Wu is eight hundred chariots, but if we are to be ranked as a master or a head, then we will take half the number Zhu uses and allow them to be commanded by Wu, and we will serve Jin as Zhu serves Wu.280 Further, if your functionaries summon the princes in the capacity of overlord but bring the matter to an end in the capacity of an ordinary lord, what profit will they have obtained from it?

The Wu leaders therefore desisted. Afterward they regretted it and were ready to arrest Zifu Jingboa. Zifu Jingboa said, “I have designated an heir in Lu and will follow you with two chariots and six men. How soon depends entirely upon your command.” So they arrested him and headed homeward with him. When they reached Huyou,281 he said to the grand steward, “On the first xin day of the tenth month, Lu will perform sacrifices to the god on high and to the former kings. These will conclude on the last xin day. By hereditary office I have duties in these sacrifices, and these have not changed since the time of Lord Xiang. If I do not join them, the invocator and ancestral attendant will say, ‘It was Wu that caused this.’ Further, if you think Lu has been disrespectful and seize seven of its lowliest men, what loss have you inflicted on it?” The grand steward Pi said to the Wu King, “This inflicts no loss on Lu. It only makes a bad name for us. It would be better to send them back.” So they sent Zifu Jingboa back.

Lord Ai

1917

13.4c 吳申叔儀乞糧於公孫有山氏，曰：

佩玉繠兮， 余無所繫之； 旨酒一盛兮， 余與褐之父睨之。 對曰：「粱則無矣，麤則有之。若登首山以呼曰『庚癸乎』，則諾。」 王欲伐宋，殺其丈夫而囚其婦人。大宰嚭曰：「可勝也，而弗能居 也。」乃歸。 13.5 冬，吳及越平。

春秋 14.1 十有四年春，西狩獲麟。 14.2(2) 小邾射以句繹來奔。 14.3(3) 夏四月，齊陳恆執其君，寘于舒州。 14.4 庚戌，叔還卒。 14.5 五月庚申朔，日有食之。

282 Du Yu (ZZ 59.1029) states that the men, both of them high officers in their domains, are old acquaintances. 283 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1029), Shenshu Yi is saying that the Wu king’s officials, himself included, have not been permitted to share in the king’s luxuries. 284 According to Takezoe (29.87; citing Yuejueshu 4.100), “Genggui” is Wu language for two of the very lowest grades of grain. The location of Mount Shou is not known, but if Gongsun Youshan is indeed offering to furnish grain secretly to Shenshu Yi and his men, Mount Shou was likely located near the Wu camp. Yang (4:1679) is not certain whether this is the same Mount Shou that is known to have been located south of Xiangcheng County 襄城縣, Henan. 285 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1029), this attack would be to punish Song for not having attended the Huangchi meeting.

1918

Zuo Tradition

Communicating in riddles reminiscent of the ones found in Xuan 12.6, a Wu high officer expresses his need and a Lu high officer offers to secretly provide him with grain. Shenshu Yi of Wu asked for grain from Gongsun Youshana of Lu:282

13.4c

His pendants of jade dangle, But I have nothing to tie to my sash. There is a goblet of fine spirits, But with the men in rough clothes, I can only gaze at it from the corner of my eye.283

Gongsun Youshan replied, “We have no fine grain, but we do have coarse grain. If you climb Mount Shou and call out ‘Genggui,’ then your request will be granted.”284 The Wu King wished to attack Song in order to put its grown men to death and enslave their wives.285 The grand steward Pi said, “It can be defeated, but it cannot be occupied.” So they went home. In winter, Wu made peace with Yue.286

13.5

LORD AI 14 (481 BCE) ANNALS

In the fourteenth year, in spring, a lin was captured during hunting in the west.287

14.1(1)

Yi of Lesser Zhu, bringing Gouyi with him, came in flight.288

14.2(2)

In summer, in the fourth month, Chen Heng of Qi arrested his ruler and placed him at Shuzhou.289

14.3(3)

On the gengxu day (20), Shu Xuan died. In the fifth month, on the gengshen day, the first day of the month, there was an eclipse of the sun.290

14.4 14.5

286 Wu’s request for a peace treaty reveals Wu’s weakness, fulfilling Wu Zixu’s dying prophecy (Ai 11.4). 287 In other versions of the Annals (Gongyang 28.355; Guliang 20.205), this is the final entry, a fact that perhaps contributes to the legends of the lin’s portentous meaning and Confucius’ response. See note on Zuozhuan, Ai 14.1. 288 For Gouyi, southeast of the Lu capital, see Annals, Ai 2.1. 289 According to Jiang Yong (cited in Yang, 4:1680–81), Shuzhou 舒州 was about 65 kilometers southwest of present-day Tianjin 天津, Hebei, that is, in the far northern reaches of Qi territory, near Yan. 290 The eclipse took place on 19 April 481.

Lord Ai

1919

14.6 陳宗豎出奔楚。 14.7(4) 宋向魋入于曹以叛。 14.8 莒子狅卒。 14.9(7) 六月，宋向魋自曹出奔衛。 14.10(7) 宋向巢來奔。 14.11(5) 齊人弒其君壬于舒州。 14.12 秋，晉趙鞅帥師伐衛。 14.13(6) 八月辛丑，仲孫何忌卒。 14.14 冬，陳宗豎自楚復入于陳，陳人殺之。 14.15 陳轅買出奔楚。 14.16 有星孛。 14.17 饑。

左傳 十四年春，西狩於大野，叔孫氏之車子鉏商獲麟，以為不祥，以賜虞 人。仲尼觀之，曰：「麟也。」然後取之。

14.1(1)

291 The “great wilds” (Daye 大野) were a marsh about 70 kilometers west of the Lu capital, north of present-day Juye 巨野, Shandong. 292 The lin was said to have a deer’s body but a tail like that of a cow, hooves like a horse’s, and a single horn. According to the Gongyang commentary (28.355), the lin is a “humane creature” (renshou 仁獸) and appears only when a “true king” (wangzhe 王者) is present; on its arrival, Confucius wept and asked, “For whom has it come? For whom has it come?” and added, “My way is at an end.” The account at Shiji 47.1942 echoes Gongyang. Cf. Wai-yee Li, Readability of the Past, 411–21. It is significant that the earliest source known to mention the lin itself is “Lin zhi zhi” 麟之趾, or “The Foot of the Lin” (Maoshi 11, 1C.44–45), a song that, according to

1920

Zuo Tradition

Zong Shu of Chen departed and fled to Chu.

14.6

Xiang Tui of Song entered Cao and led it in revolt.

14.7(4)

Qing, the Master of Ju, died.

14.8

In the sixth month, Xiang Tui of Song departed from Cao and fled to Wei.

14.9(7)

Xiang Tui of Song came in flight.

14.10(7)

Qi leaders assassinated their ruler Ren in Shuzhou.

14.11(5)

In autumn, Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and attacked Wei.

14.12

In the eighth month, on the xinchou day (13), Zhongsun Heji (Meng Yizi) died.

14.13(6)

In winter, Zong Shu of Chen entered Chen again from Chu, and Chen leaders put him to death.

14.14

Yuan Mai of Chen departed and fled to Chu.

14.15

There was a star that became indistinct.

14.16

There was famine.

14.17

ZUO

Confucius identifies a strange beast captured on the hunt. Although in Zuozhuan the story may be presented merely as an example of Confucius’ broad learning, great significance has been attached to this event in Gongyang, Guliang, and Shiji. The capture of the lin is variously linked to Confucius’ sagehood, his great destiny as an “uncrowned king” (suwang 素王), his fate of not being recognized in his lifetime, and his authorship of the Annals. Even in later periods, the capture of a lin is often taken as miraculous and prophetic. In the fourteenth year, in spring, there was hunting to the west, in the great wilds,291 and Zichu Shang, driver for the Shusun lineage, captured a lin. Considering it inauspicious, he bestowed it upon the game warden. Confuciusc examined it and said, “It is a lin.” Only afterward would the game warden take it.292

14.1(1)

the pre-Han or early Han “Mao Preface,” shows the widespread response to the moral influence represented in the first song of Shijing, “The Osprey” (Maoshi 1, “Guan ju” 關雎, 1A.11–23); by contrast, the “Great Preface” to the “Mao Commentary” lists both “Guan ju” and “Lin zhi zhi” as “the foundation of the royal influence” (Maoshi 1A.19).

Lord Ai

1921

14.2(2) 小邾射以句繹來奔，曰：「使季路要我，吾無盟矣。」使子路，子路辭。季

康子使冉有謂之曰：「千乘之國，不信其盟，而信子之言，子何辱焉？」對 曰：「魯有事于小邾，不敢問故，死其城下可也。彼不臣，而濟其言，是 義之也，由弗能。」 14.3a 齊簡公之在魯也，闞止有寵焉。及即位，使為政。陳成子憚之，驟顧諸

朝。諸御鞅言於公曰：「陳、闞不可並也，君其擇焉！」弗聽。 子我夕，陳逆殺人，逢之，遂執以入。陳氏方睦，使疾，而遺之潘 沐，備酒肉焉，饗守囚者，醉而殺之，而逃。子我盟諸陳於陳宗。

1922

Zuo Tradition

Displaying a fastidiousness that characterizes several of Confucius’ disciples, Zhong You (see Ding 12.2) refuses to broker an informal agreement with an exile from Lesser Zhu. Exiles who seek accommodation by bringing land or ritual vessels from the domains they flee are often said to be a corrupting influence (e.g., Huan 2.1, Xiang 15.4, 21.2). Yi of Lesser Zhu, bringing Gouyi with him, came in flight. He said, “If you appoint Zhong Youa to make an agreement with us, then we will have no need for a covenant.”293 They appointed Zhong Youb, but Zhong Youb declined. Ji Kangzi had Ran Qiuc say to Zhong You, “Though we have a domain of a thousand chariots, Yi does not put faith in a covenant with us, but he does put faith in your word. What disgrace is there for you in this?” He replied, “If Lu had to go to war with Lesser Zhu,294 it would be right to die below the city walls without presuming to ask the reason why. But to act as guarantor for his words when he has not acted well as a subject would make him seem dutiful, and that I am unable to do.”

14.2(2)

In Qi, Kan Zhi attempts to move against the Chen family but is driven into exile by Chen Heng and Chen Ni, who go on to make a prisoner of Lord Jian of Qi (see Ai 14.5). When Lord Jian of Qi was in Lu, Kan Zhi enjoyed favor with him.295 When the lord acceded to his position, he had Kan Zhi serve in the government. In court, Chen Hengb, who was afraid of Kan Zhi, several times looked over his shoulder at him. The chariot driver Yang spoke to the lord, saying, “Chen and Kan cannot be on a par with each other. You should choose between them.” The lord did not heed him. Kan Zhia was going to attend the Lord of Qi at night. Coming across Chen Ni in the act of killing someone, he arrested him and entered court with him. The Chen lineage was at this time quite harmonious.296 They had Chen Ni feign illness and provided him with a rice-water shampoo, including with it both liquor and meat. Feasting his jailers, Chen Ni got them drunk, and then he killed them and escaped. Kan Zhia made a covenant with all the Chens at the Chen Ancestral Temple.297

14.3a

293 According to Yang (4:1682), Yi knows Zhong You’s reputation for good faith and would be satisfied to have a simple agreement or pact (yao 要) with him rather than a formal covenant with the Lu authorities. 294 Literally, “If Lu has an important matter to take up with Zhu.” Sacrifice and warfare are said to the “important matters of the domain” (Cheng 13.2). 295 Lord Jian is Ren, son of Gongzi Yangsheng (Lord Dao). See Ai 6.6a. 296 The implications of this are driven home later when Kan Zhi tries to stoke the ambition of Chen Bao to replace the powerful Chen Qi and Chen Heng. 297 That is, Kan Zhi and the Chens swore a covenant against the fugitive Chen Ni. For covenants of this kind, see Yin 11.4 and Ding 5.6.

Lord Ai

1923

14.3b 初，陳豹欲為子我臣，使公孫言己，已有喪而止，既而言之曰：「有陳豹

者，長而上僂，望視，事君子必得志，欲為子臣，吾憚其為人也，故緩以 告。」子我曰：「何害？是其在我也。」使為臣。他日，與之言政，說，遂有 寵，謂之曰：「我盡逐陳氏而立女，若何？」對曰：「我遠於陳氏矣，且其 違者不過數人，何盡逐焉？」遂告陳氏。子行曰：「彼得君，弗先，必禍 子。」子行舍於公宮。 14.3c 夏五月壬申，成子兄弟四乘如公。子我在幄，出，逆之，遂入，閉門。侍

人禦之，子行殺侍人。公與婦人飲酒于檀臺，成子遷諸寢。公執戈，將 擊之。大史子餘曰：「非不利也，將除害也。」 成子出舍于庫，聞公猶怒，將出，曰：「何所無君？」子行抽劍，曰： 「需，事之賊也。誰非陳宗？所不殺子者，有如陳宗！」乃止。

298 According to Jia Kui (Hong Liangji, Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu, 875), Gongsun is a Qi high officer. He is to speak to Kan Zhi. 299 Yang suggests that Chen Bao was a descendant of a secondary wife (4:1684). 300 By residing in the lord’s palace he will be able to provide support to his Chen kin as they move against Kan Zhi. 301 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), eight brothers rode out: Chen Heng, Chen Zhuang, Chen Chi, Chen Yi, Chen An, Chen Yizi, Chen Ying, and Chen De. 302 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), this was the area in which the lord heard official business. 303 Entering the inner palace, Chen Heng and his men shut Kan Zhi out. 304 According to Ma Zonglian (cited in Yang, 4:1685), the Tan Terrace was northeast of present-day Linzi. To judge from the context, it was within the Qi Lord’s palace compound. 305 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), Chen Heng is afraid of what the ruler will do in his anger. 306 Chen Heng is declaring his intention to flee Qi and find a new master in another domain. Alternatively, he may be implying that the Qi Lord can be replaced. 307 Chen Ni vows to kill Chen Heng if he attempts to leave Qi for another domain. But this threat is also ambiguous. Chen Ni seems to be urging Chen Heng to act decisively (i.e., assassinate Lord Jian of Qi). At the same time he threatens Chen Heng, reminding him that his position as leader of Chen lineage is replaceable when so many can claim Chen lineage. He seems to be both forcing Chen’s hand and acknowledging him as leader.

1924

Zuo Tradition

The following “flashback” explains how Chen Bao gains Kan Zhi’s confidence and becomes a Chen lineage spy intent on undermining Kan Zhi’s influence. Earlier, Chen Bao had wished to become a subject of Kan Zhia and engaged Gongsun to speak on his behalf.298 Just then a period of mourning began for Gongsun, so he delayed, but once it was over he spoke on behalf of Chen Bao: “There is a certain Chen Bao. He is tall and stooped, with an upward-looking gaze. When he serves a noble man, he is sure to achieve his aims, and he would like to become your subject. Because I was hesitant about his character, I was slow in telling you about him.” Kan Zhia said, “What is the harm? This is up to me.” Kan Zhi made Bao a subject. On another day, Kan spoke with him about governing and was pleased, and as a result Chen Bao enjoyed favor. Kan Zhi said to him, “How would it be if I expelled the whole Chen lineage and set you up?” He replied, “I am far removed from the Chen lineage,299 but there are no more than a few of them who go against you. Why expel them all?” Then Chen Bao reported it to the Chen lineage. Chen Nib said, “He has the lord’s support. Unless we act first, he will cause trouble for you all.” Chen Nib took up residence in the lord’s palace.300

14.3b

Chen Heng, the leader of the Chen lineage, leads his brothers in an attack upon Kan Zhi and the Lord of Qi. He becomes fainthearted at a critical moment, but his somewhat more decisive younger brother, Chen Ni, intercedes in dramatic fashion to save the day for the Chens. In summer, in the fifth month, on the renshen day (13), Chen Henga and his brothers went to the lord in four chariots.301 Kan Zhia, who was within the screened area, came out and greeted them.302 Chen Heng and his men then entered and closed the gate.303 When an attendant fought them, Chen Nib killed the attendant. The lord and his lady were drinking at the Tan Terrace.304 When Chen Henga tried to force them to move to the private chambers, the lord took up his dagger-axe and was about to strike him when the grand scribe Ziyu said to him, “He intends no harm againt you. He is going to get rid of the troublemakers.” Chen Henga went out and stayed in the storehouse.305 Hearing that the lord was still angry, he prepared to flee the domain, saying, “What place lacks a lord?”306 Drawing his sword, Chen Nib said, “Delay is the murderer of deeds. Who here is not of Chen ancestry? If I would not kill you, let the Chen ancestors be my pledge!”307 Chen Henga therefore did not flee.

Lord Ai

14.3c

1925

14.3d 子我歸，屬徒，攻闈與大門，皆不勝，乃出。陳氏追之，失道於弇中，適

豐丘。豐丘人執之，以告，殺諸郭關。 成子將殺大陸子方，陳逆請而免之。以公命取車於道，及耏，眾知 而東之。 出雍門，陳豹與之車，弗受，曰：「逆為余請，豹與余車，余有私 焉。事子我而有私於其讎，何以見魯、衛之士？」東郭賈奔衛。 庚辰，陳恆執公于舒州。公曰：「吾早從鞅之言，不及此。」

14.4a(7, 9, 10)

宋桓魋之寵害於公，公使夫人驟請享焉，而將討之。未及，魋先謀公， 請以鞌易薄。公曰：「不可。薄，宗邑也。」乃益鞌七邑，而請享公焉，以 日中為期，家備盡往。

308 Kan Zhi attacks the gates of the lord’s palace. 309 For Yanzhong, a region southwest of the Qi capital, see Xiang 25.2e. According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), Fengqiu 豐丘 was a settlement belonging to the Chen line. 310 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), Dongguo Jia is one of Kan Zhi’s men. 311 According to Yang (4:1868), Er 耏 was located near Qi’s frontier with Lu. The Er people, partisans of the Chens, know that Dongguo Jia has feigned the lord’s command and therefore send him eastward, back to the Qi capital. 312 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1032), the Yong Gate was a gate in the walls of the Qi capital. Chen Bao is allowing Dongguo Jia to flee unharmed. 313 The chariot driver Yang advised the lord to choose between Kan Zhi and Chen Heng; see Ai 14.3a. As Du Yu (ZZ 59.1033) says, the lord regrets not having eliminated the Chens. 314 The harm caused by Duke Jing’s fondness for Xiang Tui becomes apparent starting in Ding 10.6. 315 That is, the dowager’s gathering had not yet taken place when Xiang Tui made plans to ambush the duke during the ceremonial toasts that would accompany this exchange of settlements. According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1033), An was Xiang Tui’s own settlement, while Bo belonged to the Song Duke. Bo 薄 is the same as Bo 亳, the site where Tang, founding king of the Shang dynasty, ruled. It is thought to have been located to the north of present-day Shangqiu 商丘, Henan, about 30 kilometers north of the Song capital; see Zhuang 12.1. An 鞌 was somewhere near Bo and is different from the famous battlefield of the same name mentioned in Cheng 2.3.

1926

Zuo Tradition

The Chens consolidate their power by eliminating rivals and seizing the Lord of Qi, who regrets not eliminatng them when he had a chance. Kan Zhia went home and assembled his own troops. Attacking both at the small gates and at the main gate, he prevailed in neither place and therefore fled.308 As the Chen lineage pursued him, he lost his way at Yanzhong and went to Fengqiu.309 The people of Fengqiu seized him and then reported to Chen Heng. Kan Zhi was put to death at a gate in the Qi domain city’s outer wall. Chen Henga was about to put Dongguo Jiaa to death, but at Chen Ni’s request he pardoned him.310 Invoking his lord’s command, Dongguo Jia seized a carriage along the way and reached Er, where the multitude knew what he had done and sent him east.311 As he departed though the Yong Gate,312 Chen Bao gave him a carriage, but he would not accept it, and said, “If Chen Nic pleads for me and Chen Baoa gives me a carriage, that shows that I have a private connection with them. If having served Kan Zhia I keep a private connection with his enemies, then how will I ever face the officers of Lu and Wei?” Dongguo Jia fled to Wei. On the gengchen day (21), Chen Heng arrested the lord at Shuzhou. The lord said, “If I had followed the chariot driver Yang’s advice in the beginning, I would not have come to this.”313

14.3d

In Song, Duke Jing and his loyalists succeed in driving out the powerful Xiang Tui and his family, the Huan lineage. Xiang Tui’s older brother, Xiang Chao, loyal to the duke, nonetheless leaves the domain. The supervisor of the military Niu, younger brother of Xiang Tui, dies in exile (see Ding 11.1, Ai 13.1, 17.7). The passages below can be read as a struggle between loyalty to clan and loyalty to the lord, with Xiang Tui and his brother Xiang Chao, who are both ultimately forced to flee the domain, as antagonists. The favor enjoyed by Xiang Tuib of Song did harm to his lord.314 The lord had the dowager urge him to enjoy ceremonial toasts with her, and the lord was preparing to attack him there. But before this took place, Xiang Tuia first plotted against the lord, asking to exchange An for Bo.315 The lord said, “It is not permissible. Bo is an ancestral city.” Xiang Tui then increased the territory of An by seven settlements and asked to offer his lord ceremonial toasts there. He set noon as the time, and all his household defenders were to go there with him.

14.4a(7, 9, 10)

Lord Ai

1927

公知之，告皇野曰：「余長魋也，今將禍余，請即救。」司馬子仲曰： 「有臣不順，神之所惡也，而況人乎？敢不承命！不得左師不可，請以君 命召之。」左師每食，擊鐘。聞鐘聲，公曰：「夫子將食。」既食，又奏。公 曰：「可矣。」 以乘車往，曰：「跡人來告曰：『逢澤有介麇焉。』公曰：『雖魋未 來，得左師，吾與之田，若何？』君憚告子，野曰：『嘗私焉。』君欲速， 故以乘車逆子。」與之乘。 至，公告之故，拜，不能起。司馬曰：「君與之言。」公曰：「所難子 者，上有天，下有先君。」對曰：「魋之不共，宋之禍也，敢不唯命是 聽。」 司馬請瑞焉，以命其徒攻桓氏。其父兄故臣曰：「不可。」其新臣 曰：「從吾君之命。」遂攻之。子頎騁而告桓司馬。司馬欲入，子車止之， 曰：「不能事君，而又伐國，民不與也，衹取死焉。」向魋遂入于曹以叛。 14.4b 六月，使左師巢伐之，欲質大夫以入焉。不能，亦入于曹，取質。魋曰：

「不可。既不能事君，又得罪于民，將若之何？」乃舍之。民遂叛之。向魋 奔衛。

316 Cao, formerly an independent domain, became a subordinate city of Song in Ai 8.1. 317 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1033), Xiang Chao had failed to defeat Xiang Tui and wanted to hold a hostage in order to keep the ruler from punishing him.

1928

Zuo Tradition

The lord, who learned of Xiang Tui’s plan, reported to Huang Ye, “I raised Xiang Tuia to adulthood, and now he is ready to bring down calamity upon me. Please come to my rescue.” The supervisor of the military Huang Yea said, “A disobedient subject is detested by the spirits; how much more so by men? Should I dare not undertake your command? However, if we do not have the support of the minister of the left, Xiang Chao, it will be impossible. Permit me to summon him by your order.” Whenever the minister of the left ate, bells were rung. Hearing the sound of the bells, the lord said, “He is about to eat.” Once he had eaten, he sounded them again, and the lord said, “Now it is the right time.” Huang Ye went in one carriage and said to Xiang Chao, “A tracker came to report, ‘There is a lone jun deer in the Feng Marsh.’ The lord said, ‘Although Xiang Tuia has not yet come, how would it be if we get the support of the minister of the left and hunt with him?’ The lord was afraid to report this to you, but I said, ‘Let me approach him privately.’ The lord wants you to hurry, so he has sent a carriage to fetch you.” Huang Ye had Xiang Chao ride with him in the carriage. When they arrived, the lord told Xiang Chao the reason. He bowed and was unable to rise. Huang Yeb said, “My lord, give him your word.” The lord said, “If ever I should cause adversity for you, then there is Heaven above and the former rulers below.” Xiang Chao replied, “Tui’s disrespect is a calamity for Song. Would I presume not to heed your commands and your commands alone?” Huang Yeb requested a tally from the lord and with it commanded his troops to attack Xiang Tuie. Xiang Chao’s father, elder brothers, and his older subjects all said, “This will not do.” His newer subjects said, “We follow the command of our lord.” As a result, they attacked Xiang Tui. Ziqi, younger brother of Xiang Tui, galloped to tell Xiang Tuic. Xiang Tuid wished to march into the palace, but his younger brother Ziche stopped him, saying, “If you are unable to serve your ruler and then go on to attack the domain, the people will not take your part. You will only be securing your own death.” As a result, Xiang Tui entered Cao and led it in revolt.316 In the sixth month, the Song ruler had Xiang Chaoa attack Xiang Tui. Xiang Chao wanted to take a high officer as his hostage before returning to the domain city.317 Failing in this, he too entered Cao and took a hostage there. Xiang Tuia said, “This is not permissible. When you are already unable to serve your ruler, if you then compound your error by incurring blame among the people, what will you do about it?” Xiang Chao therefore let the hostage go, and the people then revolted against them. Xiang Tui fled to Wei.

14.4b

Lord Ai

1929

向巢來奔，宋公使止之，曰：「寡人與子有言矣，不可以絕向氏之 祀。」辭曰：「臣之罪大，盡滅桓氏可也。若以先臣之故，而使有後，君之 惠也。若臣，則不可以入矣。」 司馬牛致其邑與珪焉，而適齊。向魋出於衛地，公文氏攻之，求 夏后氏之璜焉。與之他玉，而奔齊。陳成子使為次卿，司馬牛又致其邑 焉，而適吳，吳人惡之，而反。趙簡子召之，陳成子亦召之，卒於魯郭門 之外，阬氏葬諸丘輿。 14.5(11) 甲午，齊陳恆弒其君壬于舒州。孔丘三日齊，而請伐齊三。公曰：「魯為

齊弱久矣，子之伐之，將若之何？」對曰：「陳恆弒其君，民之不與者半。 以魯之眾加齊之半，可克也。」公曰：「子告季孫。」孔子辭，退而告人曰： 「吾以從大夫之後也，故不敢不言。」 14.6(13) 初，孟孺子洩將圉馬於成，成宰公孫宿不受，曰：「孟孫為成之病，不

圉馬焉。」孺子怒，襲成，從者不得入，乃反。成有司使，孺子鞭之。秋八 月辛丑，孟懿子卒，成人奔喪，弗內；袒、免，哭于衢，聽共，弗許；懼， 不歸。

318 The Huan lineage, including Xiang Chao and his brothers, are descended from Duke Huan of Song through his son Xiangxi. See Ai 11.6 and note. 319 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1034), the supervisor of the military Niu was the younger brother of Xiang Tui. Yang (4:1688) doubts traditional claims that this Niu is the Sima Niu of Analects 12.3–5. The jade tablet was the symbol of his legitimate control of a settlement in Song. 320 The Gongwen lineage is related to the Wei ruling line. The jade mentioned here is not likely to be the one of the same name granted to Lu at the founding of the domain (Ding 4.1d). 321 After his flight to Qi, Niu had been given new lands by the Qi government, which he now abandons upon the arrival and appointment of Xiang Tui. 322 Du Yu (ZZ 59.1034) identifies the Kengs as a Lu lineage. Qiuyu 丘輿 was about 70 kilometers southeast of the Lu capital. 323 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1034) and Takezoe (30.11), Confucius means that he had been a high officer and was still regarded in this light by the Lu ruler even though he currently held no office. In Analects 11.8, Confucius also describes himself as “having followed after the high officers.” 324 This account continues in Ai 15.1.

1930

Zuo Tradition

As Xiang Chao was coming to us in flight, the Duke of Song sent someone to stop him, saying, “I had an agreement with you. The sacrifices of the Xiang lineage should not be cut off on account of this affair.” Xiang Chao demurred, “My offense is great. To exterminate our Huan lineage entirely would be justifiable.318 If, on account of the former subjects, you should allow us to have successors, it would be your beneficence, my lord. As for me, it is not right that I should enter the domain.” Submitting his settlement and his jade tablet, the supervisor of the military Niu went to Qi.319 Xiang Tui had fled to Wei territory, where the Gongwen lineage attacked him and demanded the Xia rulers’ jade half disk.320 Giving them another jade, he fled to Qi. Chen Hengb had him act as a secondary chief minister. The supervisor of the military Niu again submitted his settlement and went to Wu.321 But the people of Wu disliked him, and so he returned to Song. Zhao Yanga summoned him; as did Chen Hengb. He died outside a gate in the Lu outer wall. The Keng lineage buried him at Qiuyu.322 When the Chen line in Qi murders the ruler of that state, Confucius begs in vain for a Lu punitive expedition (see Ai 14.3). For a slightly different version of this anecdote, see Analects 14.21. In the sixth month, on the jiawu day (5), Chen Heng of Qi killed his ruler Ren in Shuzhou. Confuciusa fasted for three days and three times requested that Qi be attacked. Our lord said, “Lu has been weaker than Qi for a long time. Now you propose to attack them, but how can it be done?” He replied, “Now that Chen Heng has killed his ruler, a full half of the people do not side with him. If we add Lu’s multitude to half of Qi, then we can prevail.” Our lord said, “Tell it to the Jisun lineage.” Confuciusb took his leave, withdrew, and told others, “It was because I once followed after the high officers that I did not dare not to speak.”323

14.5(11)

Meng Wubo, head of the Meng line in Lu, alienates the people of Cheng, the settlement assigned to his line (see Ai 15.1, 15.4). Meng Wubo is shown to be an unworthy successor of his father, Meng Yizi. Earlier, Meng Wubob was preparing to raise horses in Cheng, but the steward of Cheng, Gongsun Su, would not allow it and said, “Because of Cheng’s poverty, Meng Yizie does not raise horses here.” Infuriated, Meng Wubod attacked Cheng, but his followers could not enter, and they therefore returned. When the Cheng officers in charge came as envoys, Meng Wubod had them flogged. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the xinchou day (13), Meng Yizi died. The people of Cheng rushed to the funeral but were not admitted. They stripped to the waist, doffed their caps, wailed at the crossroads, and asked to obey orders from the Meng lineage; but this was not permitted. Fearful, they did not return to Cheng.324

14.6(13)

Lord Ai

1931

春秋 15.1(1) 十有五年春王正月，成叛。 15.2 夏五月，齊高無丕出奔北燕。 15.3 鄭伯伐宋。 15.4 秋八月，大雩。 15.5 晉趙鞅帥師伐衛。 15.6 冬，晉侯伐鄭。 15.7(4) 及齊平。 15.8 衛公孟彄出奔齊。

左傳 15.1(1) 十五年春，成叛于齊。武伯伐成，不克，遂城輸。 15.2 夏，楚子西、子期伐吳，及桐汭，陳侯使公孫貞子弔焉，及良而卒，將以

尸入。吳子使大宰嚭勞，且辭曰：「以水潦之不時，無乃廩然隕大夫之 尸，以重寡君之憂，寡君敢辭。」

325 According to Du Yu (ZZ 59.1034), the fortification of Shu 輸, somewhere near Cheng, was intended to increase pressure on the rebels at Cheng. 326 This bend in the Tong River was about 170 kilometers west of the capital of Wu, perhaps 40 kilometers upstream of the junction of the Tong and the Yangzi. 327 According to Yang (4:1692), Gongsun Zhenzi is the Sicheng (supervisor of fortifications) Zhenzi with whom, according to Mencius 5A.8, Confucius stayed while in Chen.

1932

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 15 (480 BCE) ANNALS

In the fifteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, Cheng revolted.

15.1(1)

In summer, in the fifth month, Gao Wupi of Qi departed and fled to Northern Yan.

15.2

The Liege of Zheng attacked Song.

15.3

In autumn, in the eighth month, there was a great rain sacrifice.

15.4

Zhao Yang of Jin led out troops and attacked Wei.

15.5

In winter, the Prince of Jin attacked Zheng.

15.6

We made peace with Qi.

15.7(4)

Gongmeng Kou of Wei departed and fled to Qi.

15.8

ZUO

In a continuation of the narrative of Ai 14.6, Cheng revolts against Meng Wubo and Lu, shifting its allegiance to Qi. In the fifteenth year, in spring, Cheng revolted in favor of Qi. Meng Wuboe attacked Cheng and, not prevailing, fortified Shu.325

15.1(1)

Taking advantage of Wu’s new weakness, Chu invades Wu (see Ai 13.3). An envoy sent by Chen to offer condolences in Wu dies en route, prompting a discussion of ritual protocol in such cases (see Ai 10.6, 17.4). Here, the question revolves around the proper role that the corpse of the chief delegate should play in “completing” his mission. In summer, Gongzi Shena and Gongzi Jiea of Chu attacked Wu, advancing as far as the bend in the Tong River.326 The Prince of Chen sent Gongsun Zhenzi to offer condolences in Wu.327 Because he died when he reached Liang, his party intended to enter court with his corpse on a bier.328 The Master of Wu sent the grand steward Pi to honor their exertions, while also declining their visit, “Given the untimeliness of the floods, would they not soak and destroy the high officer’s corpse and thereby add to our lord’s sorrow? Our lord presumes to decline your visit.”

15.2

328 According to Jiang Yong (cited in Yang, 4:1690), this Liang 良 must have been near the Wu capital (and thus distinct from the Liang mentioned at Zhao 13.3a). Yang (4:1690–91) cites Yili 20.282, which says that if an envoy dies en route, the host country is to perform the encoffining while the senior assistant completes the diplomatic mission.

Lord Ai

1933

上介芋尹蓋對曰：「寡君聞楚為不道，荐伐吳國，滅厥民人，寡君 使蓋備使，弔君之下吏。無祿，使人逢天之慼，大命隕隊，絕世于良。廢 日共積，一日遷次。今君命逆使人曰『無以尸造于門』，是我寡君之 命委于草莽也。且臣聞之曰：『事死如事生，禮也。』於是乎有朝聘而 終、以尸將事之禮，又有朝聘而遭喪之禮。若不以尸將命，是遭喪而 還也，無乃不可乎！以禮防民，猶或踰之，今大夫曰『死而棄之』，是棄 禮也，其何以為諸侯主？先民有言曰：『無穢虐士。』備使奉尸將命，苟 我寡君之命達于君所，雖隕于深淵，則天命也，非君與涉人之過也。」吳 人內之。 15.3 秋，齊陳瓘如楚，過衛，仲由見之曰：「天或者以陳氏為斧斤，既斲喪公

室，而他人有之，不可知也；其使終饗之，亦不可知也。若善魯以待時， 不亦可乎！何必惡焉？」子玉曰：「然。吾受命矣，子使告我弟。」

1934

Zuo Tradition

The chief aide Gai, the deputy for the hunt, replied, “Our lord heard that Chu, acting in defiance of the Way, has repeatedly attacked the domain of Wu, decimating its people. Our lord sent me as diplomatic functionary and to offer condolences to your lower officers. Unfortunately, the envoy met with sorrows sent from Heaven; he died and was cut off from the world of the living at Liang. We spent days stocking the funerary stores while moving our camp daily. If now your ruler commands that you meet the envoy and tell him, ‘Do not come to my gate with a corpse,’ our ruler’s command will lie as if abandoned in the weeds.329 Further, I have heard it said, ‘To serve the dead as one serves the living is ritual propriety.’330 On these grounds alone there is a ritual by which affairs are conducted with the corpse when someone dies during an official visit; and there is also a ritual for encountering a time of bereavement while making an official visit. If we do not undertake our command with the corpse, then this would be to encounter a time of bereavement and turn back. Is that not unacceptable? Even when one uses ritual propriety to keep people in check, there are still those who transgress it. If the high officer now says, ‘Abandon it, as he has died,’ this amounts to abandoning ritual propriety. On what basis will you then act as master of the princes? People of earlier times had a saying: ‘Do not treat the dead as impure.’ As diplomatic functionaries, we present the corpse and carry out the commands. Just so long as our unworthy ruler’s commands have arrived at your ruler’s court, then even if I should fall into a deep abyss, it would be Heaven’s command and not the fault of your ruler or the keeper of the ford.” The people of Wu then admitted him with the corpse. Zhong You, the prominent disciple of Confucius, intercedes with Chen Guan, the elder brother of Chen Heng, to ask that Qi treat Lu well (see Ai 14.5, 15.1, 15.4). In autumn, Chen Guan of Qi went to Chu. As he passed through Wei, Zhong You met with him and said, “It may be that Heaven is using the Chen lineage as an axe, and that once they have cut down the lord’s house, someone else will gain possession of it. It is impossible to know. Or it may allow the Chen lineage to enjoy it in the end. That too is impossible to know. Would it not be permissible to treat Lu well while awaiting the fullness of time? Why must you treat Lu poorly?” Chen Guana said, “It is so. I have received my command. Have someone sent to report this to my younger brother, Chen Heng.”

15.3

329 Compare the similar fear expressed at Zhao 1.1a, also in response to the prospect of an improperly conducted ritual visit. 330 This principle, expressed at Liji 47.808 and 52.887, Xunzi 19.451, and elsewhere, is one of the fundamentals of early Chinese funerary practice.

Lord Ai

1935

15.4(7) 冬，及齊平，子服景伯如齊，子贛為介，見公孫成，曰：「人皆臣人，而有

背人之心，況齊人雖為子役，其有不貳乎？子，周公之孫也，多饗大利， 猶思不義。利不可得，而喪宗國，將焉用之？」成曰：「善哉！吾不早聞 命。」 陳成子館客，曰：「寡君使恆告曰：『寡人願事君如事衛君。』」景 伯揖子贛而進之，對曰：「寡君之願也。昔晉人伐衛，齊為衛故，伐晉冠 氏，喪車五百。因與衛地，自濟以西，禚、媚、杏以南，書社五百。吳人加 敝邑以亂，齊因其病，取讙與闡，寡君是以寒心。若得視衛君之事君也， 則固所願也。」成子病之，乃歸成，公孫宿以其兵甲入于嬴。

331 Gongsun Su as a subject disloyal to Lu cannot inspire loyalty among the men of Qi. 332 Gongsun Su, as his name indicates, is a descendant of the Lu ruling line and therefore, ultimately, of the Zhou Duke, whose son was the first ruler of Lu. 333 That is, Qi and Wei are allies at this point, while Lu is not in accord with Qi. 334 For the Jin attack on Wei, see Ding 8.8. For Qi’s retaliation against Jin, see Ding 9.4. Guanshi 冠氏 was in the far east of Jin territory, near present-day Guantao 館陶, Hebei, about 90 kilometers northeast of the Wei capital and 60 kilometers west of the Yiyi mentioned in Ding 9.4.

1936

Zuo Tradition

As Lu makes peace with Qi, Zigong again shows his cunning as a diplomatic speaker (see Ai 12.4) and secures the return of the city of Cheng, which has gone over to Qi (see Ai 15.1). The steward of Cheng, Gongsun Su, the Lu noble who defected to Qi, is forced out (see Ai 14.6). In winter, we made peace with Qi. Zifu Jingbo went to Qi. Zigonga, acting as his aide, met with Gongsun Sua and said, “Everyone is a subject to someone else and yet still has a mind to turn against that person. How much more so is this true in the case of the men of Qi? Although they work in your service, how could there not be disaffection?331 You are a descendant of the Zhou Duke and have enjoyed great benefits, yet you still set your mind on undutiful behavior.332 When the benefits cannot be secured, and you have nonetheless destroyed your ancestral domain, what use will you make of it?” Gongsun Sub said, “Excellent. I had not previously heard the command.” Chen Hengb, visiting the guests at the hostel, said, “Our ruler sent me to declare, ‘I wish to serve your ruler as I serve the ruler of Wei.’” 333 Zifu Jingboa saluted Zigonga and sent him ahead to reply: “This is our ruler’s desire. Some time ago the men of Jin attacked Wei, and on Wei’s behalf Qi attacked Guanshi in Jin, losing five hundred chariots.334 Qi went on to give to Wei lands to the west of the Ji River and to the south of Zhuo, Mei, and Xing, five hundred registered hamlets in all.335 When the men of Wu fomented turmoil in our humble settlement, Qi took advantage of our hardship and seized Huan and Chan, and for this reason our unworthy ruler felt a chill in his heart.336 If he is to be permitted to serve your ruler as does the ruler of Wei, then that is certainly his desire.” Disturbed by Zigong’s words, Chen Henga returned Cheng to Lu. Gongsun Su entered Ying with his weapons and armor.337

15.4(7)

335 The precise location of these three settlements is not known. According to Gao Shiqi (cited in Yang, 4:1693), Qi handed over only lands to the south of the settlements, not the settlements themselves. A “registered hamlet” is a group of twenty-five registered households. 336 See Ai 8.3. 337 Ying was a Qi settlement northwest of present-day Laiwu, Shangdong, about halfway between the Qi and Lu capitals (see Ai 11.3a).

Lord Ai

1937

15.5a 衛孔圉取大子蒯聵之姊，生悝。孔氏之豎渾良夫長而美，孔文子卒，通

於內。大子在戚，孔姬使之焉。大子與之言曰：「苟使我入獲國，服冕、 乘軒，三死無與。」與之盟，為請於伯姬。 閏月，良夫與大子入，舍於孔氏之外圃。昏，二人蒙衣而乘，寺人羅 御，如孔氏。孔氏之老欒寧問之，稱姻妾以告，遂入，適伯姬氏。既食， 孔伯姬杖戈而先，大子與五人介，輿豭從之。迫孔悝於廁，強盟之，遂劫 以登臺。 欒寧將飲酒，炙未熟，聞亂，使告季子；召獲駕乘車，行爵食炙， 奉衛侯輒來奔。 15.5b 季子將入，遇子羔將出，曰：「門已閉矣。」季子曰：「吾姑至焉。」子羔曰：

「弗及，不踐其難！」季子曰：「食焉，不辟其難。」子羔遂出，子路入。

338 According to Liji 27.520 (cited by Yang, 4:1694), women covered their faces with their clothes when they went out. The same ruse appears in Cheng 17.6. 339 The boar is for use in the anticipated covenant sacrifice, in which the ear of a victim, usually a bull, would be cut and the blood smeared on the lips of the participants. 340 Nothing more is known about Huo. Du Yu (ZZ 59.1036) understands the word we have translated “summon” (zhao 召) as the man’s surname (shao 召), identifying him as a Wei high officer: “Luan Ning . . . sent someone to report to Zhong You and Shao Huo.” 341 Their casual completion of the meal before fleeing with the Prince of Wei to Lu perhaps indicates that they were not afraid despite the tumult. 342 Gao Chai, also known as Zigao, is a disciple of Confucius. He appears in Analects 11.25 and in the text known as “Zigao,” which dates to about 300 Bce and is included in the archaeological finds published by the Shanghai Museum. See Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu, 2:31–47, 183–89. 343 Zhong You pledges to assist Kong Kui in his time of difficulty.

1938

Zuo Tradition

Zuozhuan now shifts the focus to Wei, mentioned above as now being on good terms with Qi. With inside help from his sister Kong Ji, Kuaikui succeeds in reentering Wei, taking a hostage from the Kong line, and replacing his own son as ruler of Wei (see Ai 2.2, 2.3). As in the case of Luan Qi (Xiang 21.5), Kong Ji is motivated by her illicit affair with an underling and plots against her own son. Kong Yu of Wei married the elder sister of the heir apparent Kuaikui. She bore Kong Kuib. A young servant of the Kong lineage, Hun Liangfu, was tall and handsome, and after Kong Yub died, he gained access to the inner quarters. When Kuaikui was in the city of Qī, Kong Ji, the widow of Kong Yu, sent Hun Liangfu as messenger to him. In conversation with him, Kuaikui said, “If you can bring it about so that I enter and seize the domain, then you will wear an official’s cap and ride in a carriage with a canopy, and even if you commit three capital offenses, you will not be charged with a crime.” Hun Liangfu made a covenant with him and presented a request to Kong Jib on his behalf. In the intercalary month, Hun Liangfua and Kuaikui entered and lodged in the garden outside the Kong lineage home. In the evening, covering their faces with their clothing,338 the two men rode into the Kong home in a chariot, with the eunuch Luo driving. When Luan Ning, the Kong lineage elder, asked about them, Luo claimed that they were servingwomen of the in-laws. As a result, they entered and went directly to Kong Jic’s chambers. After they had eaten, Kong Jia led the way, leaning on a dagger-axe; the heir apparent and five others, wearing armor, followed her with a boar in a cart.339 They cornered Kong Kui in the privy, forced him to swear a covenant, and then climbed the terrace, taking him prisoner. Luan Ning was about to drink, and the broiled meats were not yet cooked through, when he heard the tumult and sent someone to report to Zhong Youd and summoned Huo to drive the chariot.340 After passing around the goblets and eating the broiled meats, they attended Zhe, Prince of Wei, as he came to us in flight.341

15.5a

Confucius’ disciple Zhong You (Zilu) displays his sense of loyalty, as well as his impetuosity (on this characteristic, see Analects 5.7, 7.11, etc.), in rushing to Kong Kui’s defense. He is killed but maintains proper ritual to the end, securing his cap before he dies (see Liji 2.36) . When Zhong Youd was on his way to enter the Wei capital, he met Gao Chaia, who was about to flee the domain.342 Gao Chaia said, “The gate is already closed.” Zhong Youd said, “I will go there, if only for a short while.” Gao Chaia said, “You will not get there in time. Do not walk into Kong’s troubles.” Zhong Youd said, “I gained my sustenance from him. I will not shun him in his time of troubles.”343 Gao Chaia then departed, while Zhong Youb entered the city.

15.5b

Lord Ai

1939

及門，公孫敢門焉，曰：「無入為也。」季子曰：「是公孫也，求利 焉，而逃其難。由不然，利其祿，必救其患。」有使者出，乃入，曰：「大子 焉用孔悝？雖殺之，必或繼之。」且曰：「大子無勇，若燔臺，半，必舍孔 叔。」大子聞之，懼，下石乞、盂黶敵子路，以戈擊之，斷纓。子路曰：「君 子死，冠不免。」結纓而死。 孔子聞衛亂，曰：「柴也其來，由也死矣。」 孔悝立莊公。莊公害故政。欲盡去之，先謂司徒瞞成曰：「寡人離 病於外久矣，子請亦嘗之。」歸告褚師比，欲與之伐公，不果。

春秋 16.1(2) 十有六年春王正月己卯，衛世子蒯聵自戚入于衛，衛侯輒來奔。 16.2(1) 二月，衛子還成出奔宋。 16.3(3) 夏四月己丑，孔丘卒。

1940

Zuo Tradition

When Zhong You reached the gate of the Kong compound, Gongsun Gan, who was standing guard there, said, “There is nothing to be accomplished by entering.” Zhong Youd said, “This is Gongsun.344 He sought benefits from Kong, yet he has abandoned him in his time of troubles. I am not like that. Once I have had the benefit of gifts from him, I will unfailingly come to his aid in his time of trouble.” By coincidence, a messenger then exited the gate, so he slipped through and said, “What use will the heir apparent make of Kong Kui? Even if he should kill him, there will certainly be someone to succeed him.” He also said, “The heir apparent has no courage. If we set fire to the terrace, when it is half engulfed, he is bound to set Kong Kuia free.” Hearing of this, the heir apparent was afraid and sent down Shi Qi and Yu Yan to confront Zhong Youb. They struck him with a dagger-axe and severed his cap string. Zhong Youb said, “When the noble man dies, he does not remove his cap.” Tying up the cap string, he died. When Confuciusb heard of the turmoil in Wei, he said, “Gao Chaib will come. But as for Zhong Youc, he is dead already.” Kong Kui set up Kuaikui, who would become Lord Zhuang. Considering his predecessor’s administrators a danger, Lord Zhuang wished to remove all of them. He first said to the supervisor of conscripts Man Cheng, “For a long time I suffered hardship outside the domain. Please try it for yourself and see how you like it.” Returning home, Man Cheng reported to the market overseer Bi, wishing to attack the lord with him. But they did not go through with it.345 LORD AI 16 (479 BCE) ANNALS

In the sixteenth year, in spring, in the royal first month, on the jimao day (29), the Wei heir apparent Kuaikui entered Wei from Qī. Zhe, the Prince of Wei, came in flight.346 In the second month, Zixuan Cheng (Man Cheng) of Wei departed and fled to Song. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jichou day (11), Kong Qiu (Confucius) died.

16.1(2)

16.2(1)

16.3(3)

344 Gongsun Gan apparently spoke to Zhong You from behind the closed gate. Zhong You now identifies him. 345 This account is continued in Ai 16.1. 346 According to Zuozhuan, Kuaikui entered Song in the intercalary month, that is, in the thirteenth month of the previous year (Ai 15.5). The discrepancy may be due to differences in local calendars, a difference in the handling of the intercalary month, or a delay in reporting. Gassmann (Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen, 337) shows no intercalary month in the Lu calendar for Ai 15.

Lord Ai

1941

左傳 16.1(2) 十六年春，瞞成、褚師比出奔宋。 16.2(1) 衛侯使鄢武子告于周曰：「蒯聵得罪于君父、君母，逋竄于晉。晉以王

室之故，不棄兄弟，寘諸河上。天誘其衷，獲嗣守封焉，使下臣肸敢告 執事。」王使單平公對，曰：「肸以嘉命來告余一人，往謂叔父：余嘉乃 成世，復爾祿次。敬之哉！方天之休。弗敬弗休，悔其可追？」 16.3(3) 夏四月己丑，孔丘卒。公誄之曰：

旻天不弔， 不憖遺一老， 俾屏余一人以在位， 煢煢余在疚。 嗚呼哀哉尼父！ 無自律。

347 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1041), Yan Wuzi is a Wei high officer. 348 See Ai 2.2. 349 As noted by Liang Yusheng (cited by Yang, 4:1698), Lord Ai’s eulogy echoes three lines from Shijing. For this line compare Maoshi 191, “Jie nanshan” 節南山, 12A.393– 97, “Unkind Is High Heaven” 不弔昊天.

1942

Zuo Tradition

ZUO

In a continuation of Ai 15.5, the loyalists of Zhe, the Wei Ousted Lord, go into exile. In the sixteenth year, in spring, Man Cheng and the market overseer Bi departed and fled to Song.

16.1(2)

Kuaikui reports formally to the Zhou royal house, finalizing his succession as lord of Wei (see Ai 15.5). This passage demonstrates the importance of royal approbation at a time when the Zhou exercised little more than ritual authority. The Prince of Wei sent Yan Wuzi to report to Zhou:347 “Kuaikui, having incurred blame from his lordly father and mother, skulked away to Jin. For the sake of the royal house, Jin did not abandon its brother but settled him beside the Yellow River.348 Heaven’s sentiments were swayed, and he has now been able to succeed as keeper of the settlement there. He sends his lowly subject Yan Wuzia to presume to inform your functionaries.” The Zhou king had the Shan Duke Ping reply, “You have come on commendable orders to report to me, the lone man. Go and say to my kinsman: I commend your completion of the succession and restore your place in the order of emoluments. Revere it! And keep Heaven’s blessing. But if you do not revere it, if you do not keep it, will you be able then to make good your regrets?”

16.2(1)

The death of Confucius, announced in Annals 16.3 above, is the final entry of that text. For the remaining eleven years, we have only Zuozhuan. On the death of Confucius, the ruler of Lu commits a ritual error by eulogizing him inappropriately, prompting a prediction from Zigong. The prediction is fulfilled in Ai 27.4. In summer, in the fourth month, on the jichou day (11), Confuciusa died. Our lord eulogized him, saying,

16.3(3)

High Heaven, unkind,349 Does not spare me one elderly man,350 To aid and hedge me, the lone man, as I stand in my place. Forlorn am I in my deficiency.351 Alas and woe for Father Ni!352 I lack the wherewithal to regulate myself.

350 Cf. Maoshi 193, “Shiyue zhi jiao” 十月之交, 12B.405–9. 351 Cf. Maoshi 286, “Min yu xiaozi” 閔予小子, 19C.738–39. 352 Father Ni (Zhongni) is Confucius.

Lord Ai

1943

子贛曰：「君其不沒於魯乎！夫子之言曰：『禮失則昏，名失則愆。』失志 為昏，失所為愆。生不能用，死而誄之，非禮也；稱一人，非名也。君兩失 之。」 16.4 六月，衛侯飲孔悝酒於平陽，重酬之。大夫皆有納焉。醉而送之，夜半而

遣之。載伯姬於平陽而行，及西門，使貳車反祏於西圃。子伯季子初為 孔氏臣，新登于公，請追之，遇載祏者，殺而乘其車。 許公為反祏，遇之，曰：「與不仁人爭明，無不勝。」必使先射，射三 發，皆遠許為。許為射之，殪。或以其車從，得祏於橐中。孔悝出奔宋。

1944

Zuo Tradition

Zigonga said, “The ruler will not die in Lu! As the saying of the Master goes, ‘When ritual propriety is lost, one is benighted; when naming is lost, one is errant.’ To lose one’s proper aims is to be benighted; to lose one’s place is to be errant. That the Lord of Lu would not employ him when he was alive but eulogizes him when he has died is contrary to ritual propriety. That he calls himself ‘the lone man’ is contrary to proper naming.353 The ruler has failed on both counts.” In Wei, Kuaikui drives out the Kong family and other high officers who had supported his predecessor (see Ai 16.2, 16.6). Retaining possession of their ancestral tablet is important for the family, and a number of chance encounters and killings take place before the tablet, contained in an “ark,” ultimately comes into the possession of the Kongs. In the sixth month, the Prince of Wei treated Kong Kui to drinking at Pingyang, where he gave him generous gifts.354 All the high officers received presents. Once they were drunk, he saw them off, and in the middle of the night he expelled them from Wei. Kong Kui put Kong Jib in his carriage at Pingyang and set out. Once they had reached the western gate, he sent an auxiliary carriage to retrieve the ancestral tablet in its stone ark from Xipu.355 Zibo Jizi, who had formerly been a retainer of the Kong lineage but who had recently been promoted to the lord’s staff, asked to pursue Kong Kui. When he encountered the man who was moving the stone ark, he killed him and took over his carriage. Going to retrieve the stone ark,356 Xu Gongwei encountered Zibo Jizi and said, “One never fails to win when competing for glory with a man ignoble in spirit.” He insisted on having Zibo Jizi shoot first. Zibo Jizi shot three times and each time missed Xu Gongweia by a wide margin. Xu Gongweia then shot and killed Zibo with one arrow. Someone had been following along in Zibo Jizi’s chariot, and the stone ark was discovered in a sack. Kong Kui departed from Wei and fled to Song.

16.4

353 “The lone man” is an epithet reserved for use by the king in referring to himself; see Cheng 2.7, Zhao 9.3, 32.3. 354 Pingyang 平陽 was southeast of present-day Hua County 滑縣, Henan, about 40 kilometers southwest of the Wei capital. 355 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1041–42), the Kong family’s Ancestral Temple was in Xipu (literally, “western garden”), whose location is unknown. 356 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1042), Kong Kui had sent Gongwei when the first man failed to return.

Lord Ai

1945

16.5a 楚大子建之遇讒也，自城父奔宋；又辟華氏之亂於鄭。鄭人甚善之。又

適晉，與晉人謀襲鄭，乃求復焉。鄭人復之如初。晉人使諜於子木，請 行而期焉。子木暴虐於其私邑，邑人訴之。鄭人省之，得晉諜焉，遂殺 子木。 其子曰勝，在吳，子西欲召之。葉公曰：「吾聞勝也詐而亂，無乃害 乎？」子西曰：「吾聞勝也信而勇，不為不利。舍諸邊竟，使衛藩焉。」葉 公曰：「周仁之謂信，率義之謂勇。吾聞勝也好復言，而求死士，殆有私 乎！復言，非信也；期死，非勇也－－子必悔之。」 弗從，召之，使處吳竟，為白公。請伐鄭，子西曰：「楚未節也。不 然，吾不忘也。」他日，又請，許之，未起師。晉人伐鄭，楚救之，與之盟。 勝怒，曰：「鄭人在此，讎不遠矣。」 16.5b 勝自厲劍，子期之子平見之，曰：「王孫何自厲也？」曰：「勝以直聞，不

告女，庸為直乎？將以殺爾父。」

357 The heir apparent is placed in Chengfu at Zhao 19.6 and chased away at Zhao 20.2. For the Hua rebellion, see Zhao 20.3 and 20.5. 358 We follow Yu Yue and Takezoe (30.27), who see er 而 as a corruption. Yang (4:1700) would keep the er: “[The spy], asking to depart, set a time.” 359 Guoyu, “Chu yu 2,” 18.583–90, gives a longer version of the She Lord’s warning. 360 According to Yang (4:1701), Bo 白 was in Chu territory near Wu, east of present-day Xi County 息縣, Henan. 361 Because Gongzi Shen has aided Zheng, Sheng now considers him an enemy.

1946

Zuo Tradition

The Chu heir apparent Jian left Chu (see Zhao 20.2) and died in exile. His son, Sheng (later made the Bo Lord in Chu), is now brought back to Chu with the support of Gongzi Shen. Prior to that return, the She Lord Zhuliang and Gongzi Shen dispute Sheng’s character. The very fact that Zuozhuan attributes the loftier moral sentiments to the former indicates that his opposition to Sheng’s return is well founded. When the Chu heir apparent Jian was slandered, he fled from Chengfu to Song. To escape the turmoil caused by the Hua lineage, he fled to Zheng,357 where the leaders of Zheng treated him extremely well. Later proceeding to Jin, he plotted with the men of Jin to make a surprise attack on Zheng, and to achieve that he sought to be restored to his place in Zheng. The leaders of Zheng restored him to his former position. The men of Jin had sent a spy to the heir apparent Jianb to ask that a time be set for carrying out the plot.358 The heir apparent Jianb had been violent and cruel in the settlement assigned to him, and the people of the settlement informed against him. The men in Zheng investigated, found the Jin spy there, and as a result put the heir apparent Jianb to death. His son, named Sheng, was in Wu, and Gongzi Shena wished to summon him back to Chu. The She Lord Zhuliangb said, “I have heard that this man Sheng is deceptive and rebellious. Will he not be a source of harm?” Gongzi Shena said, “I have heard that this Sheng is of good faith and brave and will not do anything harmful. Lodge him on the frontier and have him guard the border.” The She Lord Zhuliangb said, “Being in all ways noble in spirit is what we call good faith; following what is right is what we call courage. I have heard that this Sheng is given to going back on his word, and that he is seeking dare-to-die fighters. He likely has some secret plot in mind. To go back on one’s word is not good faith, and to court death is not courageous. You will certainly regret this.”359 Gongzi Shen did not follow this advice but summoned Sheng and had him reside on the Wu frontier as the Bo Lord Shenga.360 When he asked to attack Zheng, Gongzi Shena said, “Chu is not yet well regulated. When this is no longer the case, I will not forget your grudge against Zheng.” When he asked again another day, he was given permission. He had not yet mustered an army when the men of Jin attacked Zheng, and Chu went to its aid, making a covenant with it. Infuriated, the Bo Lord Sheng said, “There is a man of Zheng right here. My enemy is close by.”361

16.5a

Sheng’s violent intentions are revealed, but his mentor, the chief minister Gongzi Shen, refuses to take action. Sheng was sharpening his sword when Gongzi Jiea’s son Ping saw him and asked, “Why is a king’s grandson sharpening his own sword?” He said, “I am known for my straightforwardness. How could I be considered straightforward if I don’t tell you? I am going to use it to kill your father.”

16.5b

Lord Ai

1947

平以告子西。子西曰：「勝如卵，余翼而長之。楚國，第我死，令 尹、司馬，非勝而誰？」勝聞之，曰：「令尹之狂也！得死，乃非我。」子西 不悛。 勝謂石乞曰：「王與二卿士，皆五百人當之，則可矣。」乞曰：「不可 得也。」曰：「市南有熊宜僚者，若得之，可以當五百人矣。」乃從白公而 見之。與之言，說。告之故，辭。承之以劍，不動。勝曰：「不為利諂，不 為威惕，不洩人言以求媚者，去之。」 16.5c 吳人伐慎，白公敗之。請以戰備獻，許之，遂作亂。秋七月，殺子西、子期

于朝，而劫惠王。子西以袂掩面而死。子期曰：「昔者吾以力事君，不可 以弗終。」抉豫章以殺人而後死。 石乞曰：「焚庫、弒王。不然，不濟。」白公曰：「不可。弒王，不祥； 焚庫，無聚，將何以守矣？」乞曰：「有楚國而治其民，以敬事神，可以得 祥，且有聚矣，何患？」弗從。

362 Gongzi Shen does not believe that Sheng will risk a rebellion, since he is already next in line for high office. 363 Du Yu (ZZ 60.1042): “If he gets to die a natural death, I will have betrayed myself” or, in modern parlance: “I’ll be damned if he gets to die a natural death!” 364 The two men are Gongzi Shen and Gongzi Jie. This Shi Qi of Chu is to be distinguished from the Shi Qi of Wei who appears at Ai 15.5b.

1948

Zuo Tradition

Ping told Gongzi Shena about it. Gongzi Shena said, “Sheng is like an egg: I have sheltered him with my wings to let him grow. In Chu, when I die, who else but Sheng will be chief minister or supervisor of the military?”362 Sheng heard of this and said, “What recklessness on the part of the chief minister! If he somehow manages to die a natural death, it will not be my doing.”363 Gongzi Shena took no precautions. Sheng said to Shi Qi, “A total of five hundred men against the king and two ministers will do the job.”364 Qi said, “The men cannot be found.” He said, “To the south of the city there is a certain Xiong Yiliao. If we get him, he is the equal of five hundred men.” So Shi Qi went with the Bo Lord Shenga to visit Xiong Yiliao. They spoke with him and were pleased. Shi Qi told him their plan, and he declined to participate. He held a sword to Xiong Yiliao’s throat, but Xiong remained unmoved. Sheng said, “He is one who will not fawn for gain, will not blanch at threats, and will not reveal the words of another man in order to seek favor. Let him go.” In the midst of his machinations, Sheng manages to lead a successful attack against Wu. Immediately upon his return, he raises a rebellion. Gongzi Shen dies, with a gesture of shame for having supported Sheng, and another defender of the king, Gongzi Jie, is revealed as one of those Zuozhuan heroes of astounding strength. (Zhuang 12.1, 32.4, Cheng 2.3b, Xiang 10.2a) When the men of Wu attacked Shen, the Bo Lord Shenga defeated them365 and then asked permission to present their battle gear at court. This was granted, and in consequence he began his uprising. In autumn, in the seventh month, he killed Gongzi Shena and Gongzi Jiea at court and seized King Hui. Gongzi Shena died while covering his face with his sleeve. Gongzi Jiea said, “In the past I served the ruler with brawn: I cannot but carry it through to the end.” He died only after uprooting a camphor tree and killing a man with it. Shi Qi said, “Burn the storehouses and kill the king.366 Otherwise you will not prevail.” The Bo Lord Shenga said, “That will not do. If we kill the king, it will be inauspicious. If we burn the storehouses, we will have no reserves, so what will we rely upon in maintaining our defense?” Shi Qia said, “You hold the domain of Chu and govern its people; you serve the spirits with reverence. For this you will win good auspices, and in addition you will have reserves. What troubles could there be?” The Bo Lord Shenga did not follow this advice.

16.5c

365 Shen 慎 was northwest of present-day Yingshang 潁上, Anhui, on the Ying River about 50 kilometers above its junction with the Huai River. 366 Takezoe (30.29) speculates, on the basis of a reference in Huainanzi 20.381, that the storehouses are granaries; since the Bo Lord will not use them to help the people, he should burn them rather than let the grain fall into the hands of his enemies.

Lord Ai

1949

16.5d 葉公在蔡，方城之外皆曰：「可以入矣。」子高曰：「吾聞之，以險徼幸

者，其求無饜，偏重必離。」聞其殺齊管脩也，而後入。 白公欲子閭為王，子閭不可，遂劫以兵。子閭曰：「王孫若安靖楚 國，匡正王室，而後庇焉，啟之願也，敢不聽從？若將專利以傾王室，不 顧楚國，有死不能。」遂殺之，而以王如高府。石乞尹門。圉公陽穴宮， 負王以如昭夫人之宮。 16.5e 葉公亦至，及北門，或遇之，曰：「君胡不冑？國人望君如望慈父母焉，

盜賊之矢若傷君，是絕民望也，若之何不冑？」乃冑而進。又遇一人曰： 「君胡冑？國人望君如望歲焉，日日以幾，若見君面，是得艾也。民知不 死，其亦夫有奮心，猶將旌君以徇於國；而又掩面以絕民望，不亦甚乎！」 乃免冑而進。

367 That is, he was in Zhoulai; see Ai 2.4. 368 There is a similar saying in “Zhongyong” (Liji 31.883). 369 We favor this concrete interpretation of the terms of the final sentence. Takezoe (30.30) understands it differently: “He has been partial in his emphasis [on profit], and [the commons] will separate themselves from him.” 370 According to sources cited by Yang (4:1703), Guan Xiu is a descendant of Guan Zhong and had left Qi for Chu. 371 Gongzi Qi refused to be king at Ai 6.4a.

1950

Zuo Tradition

The She Lord Zhuliang, who had previously warned against Sheng’s perfidious intentions, returns to Chu as Sheng tries to make Gongzi Qi, who had refused the rulership five times before (Ai 6.4a), the new king of Chu. The current king, under serious threat, escapes. The She Lord Zhuliangb was in Cai.367 Everyone beyond Fangcheng said, “You may march in now.” The She Lord Zhuliangc said, “As I have heard, the desires of one who takes risks to try his luck are insatiable.368 A load out of balance always goes off track.”369 He entered the capital only after he heard that the Bo Lord Sheng had killed Guan Xiu of Qi.370 The Bo Lord Shenga wanted Gongzi Qia to become king, but Gongzi a Qi would not permit it, so he seized him by force of arms.371 Gongzi Qia said, “If you, the king’s grandson, should bring peace to the domain of Chu and put right its royal house, and if only then I should receive protection, that would be my own hope. Would I dare not comply with your orders? But if you take all the advantages for yourself and upend the royal house, disregarding the domain of Chu, then even on pain of death I am unable to obey.” As a result, the Bo Lord Sheng killed him and went to the tall storehouse with the king in tow.372 Shi Qi guarded the gate. Yu Gongyang bored a hole into the palace and carried the king on his back to the palace of Dowager Zhao.373

16.5d

The She Lord Zhuliang arrives back in Chu and leads the inhabitants of the capital against Sheng, who flees and ignominously hangs himself, while his loyal supporter Shi Qi casually accepts a horrible fate. The She Lord Zhuliangb also arrived. As he reached the northern gate, someone encountered him and asked, “Why are you not wearing a helmet, my lord? All the inhabitants of the capital look to you with hope, as they would look to a kind father or mother. If the brigands’ arrows should injure you, it would cut off the hopes of the people. What are you accomplishing by not wearing a helmet?” So he put on a helmet and went forward. He then encountered someone else, who asked, “Why are you wearing a helmet, my lord? The inhabitants of the capital look to you with hope, as they would to the harvest. Day by day they have put their hopes in you, and if only they should see your face, they will feel relieved. If the people know that you have not died, every one of them will have the spirit to fight. They will even raise your banner and parade it throughout the domain. Yet now you go and cover your face, which cuts off their hopes. Is that not going too far?” So he removed his helmet and went forward.

16.5e

372 Takezoe (30.29) identifies this storehouse with the storehouses mentioned in Ai 16.5c but notes at Ai 30.30 that the tall storehouse is identified as a distinct structure in Huainanzi 20.687. 373 Dowager Zhao is the widow of King Zhao and is originally from the domain of Yue. See Ai 6.4.

Lord Ai

1951

遇箴尹固帥其屬，將與白公。子高曰：「微二子者，楚不國矣。棄 德從賊，其可保乎？」乃從葉公。使與國人以攻白公，白公奔山而縊。 其徒微之。生拘石乞而問白公之死焉。對曰：「余知其死所，而長 者使余勿言。」曰：「不言將烹。」乞曰：「此事克則為卿，不克則烹，固其 所也，何害？」乃烹石乞。 王孫燕奔頯黃氏。沈諸梁兼二事，國寧，乃使寧為令尹，使寬為司 馬，而老於葉。 16.6 衛侯占夢，嬖人求酒於大叔僖子，不得，與卜人比，而告公曰：「君有大

臣在西南隅，弗去，懼害。」乃逐大叔遺。遺奔晉。 16.7 衛侯謂渾良夫曰：「吾繼先君而不得其器，若之何？」良夫代執火者而

言，曰：「疾與亡君，皆君之子也，召之而擇材焉可也。若不材，器可得 也。」 豎告大子。大子使五人輿豭從己，劫公而強盟之，且請殺良夫。 公曰：「其盟免三死。」曰：「請三之後有罪殺之。」公曰：「諾哉！」

374 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1043), “those two men” are Gongzi Jie and Gongzi Shen, by whose efforts Chu was restored after the Wu invasion; see Ding 4.3 and 5.5. 375 What we translate as “master” is literally “elder” (i.e., the Bo Lord Sheng). 376 Wangsun Yan is the younger brother of the Bo Lord. Kuihuangshi was in Wu, near present-day Xuancheng, Anhui. 377 That is, the offices of chief minister and supervisor of the military, once held by Gongzi Shen and Gongzi Jie, respectively. 378 Ning is the son of Gongzi Shen. Kuan is the son of Gongzi Jie. 379 Taishu Xizi’s residence must have been to the southwest of the lord’s palace. 380 The heir Ji is a younger son of Kuaikui. The “exiled ruler” is Kuaikui’s older son and his predecessor, the Ousted Lord, who according to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1044) took the Wei ritual vessels with him when he left Wei. 381 For “choosing the talented” in a succession, see Xiang 23.5. For more general principles of selection, see Xiang 31.4 and Zhao 29.6. 382 The only way to obtain the Ousted Lord’s vessels is to lure him back by pretending to reinstate him as heir apparent. It is not clear whether Lord Zhuang really means to make him heir apparent. Hun Liangfu’s proposition is ambiguous: Would the Ousted Lord have to yield his vessels if he is considered a worthy successor? 383 In this way the heir apparent Ji repeats Kuaikui’s own measures for forcing a covenant; see Ai 15.5a. According to this new covenant, the Ousted Lord, who is the heir apparent Ji’s rival, will not be summoned. 384 See Ai 15.5a. 385 This account is continued in Ai 17.1.

1952

Zuo Tradition

He met Wei Gub, the deputy for remonstrance, leading his adherents and preparing to join the Bo Lord Shenga. The She Lord Zhuliangc said, “If not for those two men, Chu would no longer be a domain.374 If you abandon the virtuous and follow brigands, can the domain be preserved?” So Wei Gu followed the She Lord Zhuliangb and was sent to join the inhabitants of the capital in attacking the Bo Lord Shenga. After fleeing into the mountains, the Bo Lord Shenga hanged himself. The Bo Lord’s Sheng’s troops hid his corpse. The She Lord Zhuliang captured Shi Qi alive and questioned him about the death of the Bo Lord Shenga. He replied, “I know where he died, but my master made me promise not to tell.”375 The She Lord Zhuliang said, “If you do not tell, I will boil you alive.” Qi said, “If in this affair we had been successful, I would have been named a high minister. But since it was not successful, I am to be boiled. This is precisely the way things stand. What’s the harm in it?” So Shi Qi was boiled alive. Wangsun Yan fled to Kuihuangshi.376 The She Lord Zhulianga performed the duties of both offices,377 and once the domain was at peace, he appointed Gongsun Ninga as chief minister and Gongsun Kuana as supervisor of the military,378 while he himself went into retirement in She. In Wei, Taishu Xizi is forced to flee after refusing to honor a favorite of Kuaikui (see Ai 11.6a, 11.7). The Prince of Wei was having a dream interpreted. A favorite of his, who had asked for wine from Taishu Xizi but had not gotten it, conspired with the diviner and told the lord, “My lord has a powerful subject who is in the southwest quadrant.379 If you do not remove him, I fear there will be harm.” So he expelled Taishu Xizia. Taishu Xizib fled to Jin.

16.6

Kuaikui is forced to choose his successor in an unusual way, while his crony Hun Liangfu, who has previously been promised that he would be forgiven for three capital crimes, is set up for destruction (see Ai 15.5, 16.6, 17.1). The Prince of Wei said to Hun Liangfu, “I have succeeded the former ruler, but I have not gotten his ritual vessels. What should I do about it?” Taking the place of the torchbearer, Hun Liangfua said, “Both the heir apparent Ji and the exiled ruler are your sons.380 It would be permissible to summon them both and then choose the talented one.381 If the exiled ruler is not talented, then his vessels can be obtained.”382 A young servant informed the heir apparent Ji of this. Taking five men with him and bringing along a boar, the heir apparent Ji seized the lord and forced him to make a covenant.383 He further requested permission to kill Hun Liangfua. The lord said, “By the covenant we made with him, he may be pardoned for three capital offenses.”384 The heir apparent said, “I request that if he commits any offense at all after these three, you kill him.” The lord said, “Granted!”385

16.7

Lord Ai

1953

左傳 17.1 十七年春，衛侯為虎幄於藉圃，成，求令名者而與之始食焉。大子請使

良夫。良夫乘衷甸兩牡，紫衣狐裘。至，袒裘，不釋劍而食。大子使牽以 退，數之以三罪而殺之。 17.2 三月，越子伐吳，吳子禦之笠澤，夾水而陳。越子為左右句卒，使夜或

左或右，鼓譟而進；吳師分以御之。越子以三軍潛涉，當吳中軍而鼓之， 吳師大亂，遂敗之。 17.3 晉趙鞅使告于衛，曰：「君之在晉也，志父為主。請君若大子來，以免志

父。不然，寡君其曰志父之為也。」衛侯辭以難，大子又使椓之。 夏六月，趙鞅圍衛。齊國觀、陳瓘救衛，得晉人之致師者。子玉使 服而見之，曰：「國子實執齊柄，而命瓘曰『無辟晉師』，豈敢廢命？子 又何辱？」 簡子曰：「我卜伐衛，未卜與齊戰。」乃還。

386 Takezoe (30.33) argues on the basis of the context that this is not a tent but a more permanent structure, and that for wo 幄 the text should read wo 楃, a larger tentlike wooden building, in this case carved with depictions of tigers or abstract patterns. The location of Wei’s Jie Garden (see also Ai 25.1a) is not known. 387 Yang (4:1706) rejects Du Yu’s (ZZ 60.1044) statement that a carriage of this type was the prerogative of a minister. 388 Opening his cloak reveals the purple robe within. 389 The crimes, according to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1044) are wearing a purple robe, opening his cloak, and wearing his sword. As Yang (4:1707) notes, given the lord’s promise to Liangfu in Ai 15.5, there must have been one further crime to bring about Liangfu’s prosecution. Takezoe (30.34) speculates that the last crime is Liangfu’s plot to summon the Ousted Lord. 390 According to Yang (4:1707), the Li Marsh 笠澤 was perhaps the Song 松 River, which flows into Taihu. Tan Qixiang (Zhongguo lishi ditu ji, 1:29–30) puts the marsh about 20 kilometers south of the Wu capital. 391 While in exile from Wei, Kuaikui took Zhao Yang as his patron and fought alongside him in Jin’s civil struggles; see Ai 2.3b. 392 Jin would have expected official notification of the Wei succession. According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1044), Zhao Yang worries that the Jin ruler may believe that Zhao Yang himself is keeping the new Wei ruler from sending an envoy to the Jin court. 393 Gu Yanwu and others cited by Yang (4:1707) read zhuo 諑 for zhuo 椓. 394 For the custom of challenging the enemy to battle, see Xuan 12.2f. 395 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1045), the man had been dressed in prisoner’s garb and was now given his regular clothes back. 396 As Yang (4:1708) notes, Chen Heng is the real power in Qi at this time. Chen Guan’s remark, phrased in the polite language of diplomacy, reflects the traditional role of the Guo lineage as ministers in Qi.

1954

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 17 (478 BCE) ZUO

The new Wei heir apparent puts Hun Liangfu to death, as he exceeds his “three crimes” (see Ai 16.7) on the ground of three ritual infractions. In the seventeenth year, in spring, the Prince of Wei set up a tiger tent in the Jie Garden.386 When it was finished, he sought a man of good reputation to dine with him there for the first time. The heir apparent Ji asked that Hun Liangfua be engaged to do it. Hun Liangfua rode in a fine carriage drawn by a pair of stallions and wore a purple robe with a cloak of fox fur.387 Upon his arrival, he opened his cloak and dined without removing his sword.388 The heir apparent Ji had him dragged away, charged him with three crimes, and put him to death.389

17.1

Yue again defeats Wu in battle (see Ai 13.3). In the third month, the Master of Yue attacked Wu. The Master of Wu came out to confront him at the Li Marsh.390 They formed their lines on either side of the water. The Master of Yue formed detachments for the left and right and sent these out at night, one to the left and one to the right, drumming and shouting as they advanced. The Wu army then split up to fight them. The Master of Yue stole across with a third army and drummed them forward until they were directly in front of the Wu central army. The Wu army was thrown into utter confusion, and as a result Yue defeated it.

17.2

In a renewal of old conflicts with Wei and Qi, Zhao Yang of Jin again shows an inclination to selectively heed the results of divination (see Ai 9.6, 10.4), attacking Wei but withdrawing in the face of a Qi advance. Fearing Qi reprisal, Zhang Yang uses divination results as an excuse to back down. Zhao Yang of Jin sent someone to make a report in Wei: “When the ruler was in Jin, I acted as his host.391 I request that the ruler or the heir apparent Ji come here in order to free me from blame. Otherwise, our ruler may well say that this was my doing.”392 The Prince of Wei declined Zhao Yang’s request on account of his difficulties, and the heir apparent Ji, for his part, had someone malign his father, Lord Zhuang.393 In summer, in the sixth month, Zhao Yang laid siege to Wei. Guo Guan and Chen Guan of Qi came to the aid of Wei and captured one of the Jin men who had been challenging the army to battle.394 Chen Guana had him dressed and presented to Zhao Yang,395 saying, “It is Guo Guana who grasps the handles of government in Qi, and it is he who commanded me ‘not to avoid the Jin army.’ How dare I ignore his command? Why do you condescend to challenge us?”396 Zhao Yangb said, “We divined about attacking Wei, but we did not divine about doing battle with Qi.” So they turned back.

17.3

Lord Ai

1955

17.4 楚白公之亂，陳人恃其聚而侵楚。楚既寧，將取陳麥。

楚子問帥於大師子穀與葉公諸梁，子穀曰：「右領差車與左史老 皆相令尹、司馬以伐陳，其可使也。」子高曰：「率賤，民慢之，懼不用命 焉。」子穀曰：「觀丁父，鄀俘也，武王以為軍率，是以克州、蓼，服隨、 唐，大啟群蠻。彭仲爽，申俘也，文王以為令尹，實縣申、息，朝陳、蔡， 封畛於汝。唯其任也，何賤之有？」 子高曰：「天命不諂。令尹有憾於陳，天若亡之，其必令尹之子是 與，君盍舍焉？臣懼右領與左史有二俘之賤而無其令德也。」 王卜之，武城尹吉。使帥師取陳麥。陳人御之，敗，遂圍陳。秋七月 己卯，楚公孫朝帥師滅陳。 王與葉公枚卜子良以為令尹。沈尹朱曰：「吉。過於其志。」葉公 曰：「王子而相國，過將何為！」他日，改卜子國而使為令尹。

397 The offices that Chache and Lao hold are relatively low. 398 Guan Dingfu is otherwise unknown, as are the specifics of the campaigns alluded to here. Members of the Guan lineage of Chu included Guan Qi (Xiang 22.6) and Guan Cong (Zhao 13.2). King Wu of Chu ruled from 740 to 690; his death during a campaign against Sui is recorded at Zhuang 4.1. For Ruo, see Xi 25.3. Sui, Tang, and Liao lay northeast of the Chu capital, along the Zha River and farther north. Zhou was to the southeast, on the Yangzi River. 399 Like Guan Dingfu, Peng Zhongshuang appears only in this passage. Gu Donggao (cited in Yang, 4:1708) surmises that he was chief minister after Dou Qi (Zhuang 4.1) and before Ziyuan (Zhuang 28.3, 30.2). King Wen of Chu ruled from 689 to 677. His reign was indeed a period of expansion for Chu: see Zhuang 6.3 (Shen) and 14.3 (Xi, Cai). Shen lay due north of the Chu capital, more than halfway to the Zhou capital (see map 4). Xi was farther east, on the upper reaches of the Huai River. Cai lay on the Ru River, a tributary of the Huai, and with Chen was one of the central domains founded early in the Zhou (also see map 4). The Chu conquests mentioned here expanded its territory vastly and made it a major rival to Jin and its allies. 400 A similar notion is expressed at Zhao 27.5. 401 See Ai 15.2, where Chen offered Wu condolences on the occasion of the Chu chief minister Gongzi Shen’s invasion of Wu. Gongzi Shen’s son is Gongsun Zhao. 402 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1045), in a silent divination (meibu 枚卜) the questioners did not speak aloud about the matter under divination; cf. Zhao 12.10. Ziliang is a younger brother of King Hui. 403 The fear is that the appointee might determine to make himself king, as King Ling of Chu did when he was made chief minister. See Zhao 1.13a. 404 This appointment is also mentioned in Ai 16.5e. Gongsun Ning was the son of Gongzi Shen.

1956

Zuo Tradition

Chen, having taken advantage of the recent troubles in Chu to invade Chu (see Ai 16.5), and now deprived of Wu as a strong ally (see Ai 10.6, 15.2), is destroyed by Chu. This fulfills old predictions (see Zhao 8.6, 9.4). Divinations are now made concerning Chu’s new chief minister (see Ai 18.2). During the rebellion of the Bo Lord Shenga in Chu, the men of Chen invaded Chu, relying on the grain reserves they had already amassed. Once Chu was at peace, it prepared to seize the Chen grain. The Master of Chu asked the grand preceptor Zigu and the She Lord Zhuliang about a leader for the forces. The grand preceptor Zigua said, “The captain of the right Chache and the scribe of the left Lao both assisted the chief minister and the supervisor of the military in attacking Chen. They may be appointed.” The She Lord Zhuliangc said, “If the leaders are of low status, the people will lord it over them.397 I fear that they will refuse to take orders from them.” The grand preceptor Zigua said, “Guan Dingfu was a captive from Ruo. Our King Wu made him leader of an army and by this means defeated Zhou and Liao, caused Sui and Tang to submit, and opened wide the way to the Man.398 Peng Zhongshuang was a captive from Shen. Our King Wen made him chief minister, and it was he who made Shen and Xi into dependencies of Chu, caused Chen and Cai to pay court, and fixed our borders at the Ru River.399 It is solely a matter of a man’s duties; what does low status have to do with it?” The She Lord Zhuliangc said, “About Heaven’s command there is no doubt.400 The chief minister Gongzi Shen had a grudge against Chen, and if Heaven intends to destroy Chen, it will certainly take the part of the chief minister’s son.401 Why do you not put him in place? I fear that the captain of the right and the scribe of the left have the low status of the two captives you cite but not their exemplary virtue.” The king divined about it, and the Wucheng deputy, Gongsun Zhaoa, was deemed auspicious. The king had him lead out troops to seize the Chen grain. When the men of Chen came out to oppose him, they were defeated, so he then laid siege to Chen. In autumn, in the seventh month, on the jimao day (8), Gongsun Zhao of Chu led out troops and extinguished Chen. The king and the She Lord Zhuliangb made a silent divination about appointing Ziliang chief minister.402 The Governor of Shěn, Zhu, said, “It is auspicious. He will surpass his aims.” The She Lord Zhuliangb said, “When the son of a king acts as minister to the domain, what will he do if he surpasses his aims?”403 On another day they divined about Gongsun Ningb and appointed him as chief minister instead.404

17.4

Lord Ai

1957

17.5a 衛侯夢于北宮，見人登昆吾之觀，被髮北面而譟曰：

登此昆吾之墟， 緜緜生之瓜。 余為渾良夫， 叫天無辜。 公親筮之，胥彌赦占之，曰：「不害。」與之邑，寘之而逃，奔宋。 衛侯貞卜，其繇曰： 如魚竀尾， 衡流而方羊。 裔焉大國， 滅之，將亡。 闔門塞竇， 乃自後踰。 17.5b 冬十月，晉復伐衛，入其郛，將入城。簡子曰：「止，叔向有言曰：『怙亂

滅國者無後。』」衛人出莊公而與晉平。晉立襄公之孫般師而還。 十一月，衛侯自鄄入，般師出。

405 Kunwu of Xia was identified as one of five ancient overlords (Cheng 2.3f and note). See also Zhao 12.11b and 18.1. According to Yang (4:1709), the tower was built on a site in the Wei capital associated with Kunwu and was south of the lord’s Northern Palace. 406 The language of this line recalls Maoshi 237, “Mian” 緜, 16B.545–52, where the growth of gourd vines is a figure for the early flourishing of the Zhou people. According to Yang (4:1709), the dream about Hun Liangfu points to the continuing prosperity of the Wei people and to Hun’s own role in putting Lord Zhuang in power. 407 Du Yu (ZZ 60.1045) identifies Xumi She as a Wei divination scribe. 408 As Du Yu (ZZ 60.1045) explains, Xumi She feared the Wei ruler and had intentionally hidden the true meaning of the divination. 409 The fish represents the Wei ruler himself. The ruddiness of the fish’s tail, an image found in Maoshi 10, “Rufen” 汝墳, 1C.43–44, may signify that the ruler is exhausted or fattened from the excesses of his rule. Its hesitation signifies the unsettled nature of Lord Zhuang’s rule. Wei is positioned between the great domains of Jin and Qi. The final two lines, as noted above, prefigure the final hours of Lord Zhuang’s life. 410 The injunction to “not take advantage of disorder” is attributed to the scribe Yi in Xi 15.4 and Xuan 12.3.

1958

Zuo Tradition

A dream of the executed Hun Liangfu (see Ai 17.1) troubles Lord Zhuang (Kuaikui) and presages further unrest. The lord then conducts divination with oracle bones and receives a somewhat enigmatic answer that will subsequently be shown to prefigure the final hours of his life. The Prince of Wei had a dream in the northern palace. He saw a man climbing the Kunwu Tower,405 where, with his hair hanging free, he faced north and shouted,

17.5a

I climb this, the barrow of Kunwu, Where with long tendrils the gourd vines grow.406 I am Hun Liangfu, And I cry to Heaven that I am blameless.

The lord personally divined about the dream with milfoil stalks. Interpreting the results, Xumi She said, “The dream will do no harm.”407 The lord gave him a settlement, but once he had been installed, he absconded and fled to Song.408 The Prince of Wei then consulted the spirits by means of divination with oracle bones, and the divination verse said, Like a fish ruddy of tail That cuts across the current but hesitates there. Lying on the borders of great domains, When it is extinguished it will disappear. When the gates are closed and the holes blocked up, He climbs out from the back.409

Trouble comes to Wei when Jin attacks again (see Ai 17.3) and the people expel Lord Zhuang. The lord briefly reenters the domain, but after a series of events revealing his own fecklessness, he is soon killed. He is succeeded at first by Gongsun Banshi, a grandson of Lord Xiang supported by Jin, and then by Gongzi Qi, a son of Lord Ling favored by Qi. In winter, in the tenth month, Jin again attacked Wei. It breached the outer walls and was about to enter the city itself. Zhao Yangb said, “Halt. As the saying of Shuxiang has it, ‘Those who take advantage of disorder to extinguish a domain will have no descendants.’”410 The Wei people ousted Lord Zhuang and made peace with Jin. Jin established Gongsun Banshia, a grandson of Lord Xiang, in power before turning back. In the eleventh month, the Prince of Wei entered the domain from Juan, and Gongsun Banshia departed.411

17.5b

411 That is, Kuaikui reenters Wei after the withdrawal of the Jin army. According to Yang (4:1710), Juan 鄄, once a Wei settlement, now belonged to Qi. It was about 50 kilometers east of the Wei capital, across the Yellow River (see also Annals, Zhuang 14.4).

Lord Ai

1959

初，公登城以望，見戎州。問之，以告。公曰：「我，姬姓也，何戎之 有焉？」翦之。公使匠久。公欲逐石圃，未及而難作。 辛巳，石圃因匠氏攻公。公闔門而請，弗許。踰于北方而隊，折 股。戎州人攻之，大子疾、公子青踰從公，戎州人殺之。公入于戎州 己氏。 初，公自城上見己氏之妻髮美，使髡之，以為呂姜鬄。既入焉，而 示之璧，曰：「活我，吾與女璧。」己氏曰：「殺女，璧其焉往？」遂殺之， 而取其璧。 衛人復公孫般師而立之。十二月，齊人伐衛，衛人請平，立公子 起，執般師以歸，舍諸潞。 17.6 公會齊侯盟于蒙，孟武伯相。齊侯稽首，公拜。齊人怒。武伯曰：「非天

子，寡君無所稽首。」 武伯問於高柴曰：「諸侯盟，誰執牛耳？」季羔曰：「鄫衍之役，吳 公子姑曹；發陽之役，衛石魋。」武伯曰：「然則彘也。」

412 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1046), there was a settlement of the Rong 戎 in the near vicinity of the Wei capital. 413 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1046), Shi Pu is the son of Shi E, who was forced into exile at Xiang 28.3, fulfilling a prediction made at Xiang 19.13. 414 The north would have been the back of the palace, as predicted in the divination verse. 415 Gongzi Qing is a younger brother of the heir apparent Ji. 416 A version of this story is told in Lüshi chunqiu 25.1681. 417 Lü Jiang is Lord Zhuang’s wife. 418 That Lord Zhuang had taken refuge in the Qi settlement of Juan shows that Qi supported him over his rivals. Qi here punishes the Wei for the murder of Lord Zhuang. 419 Gongzi Qi is a son of Lord Ling of Wei and a younger brother to Lord Zhuang. 420 Lù was perhaps located just outside the Qi capital. See Ai 8.6. 421 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1046), the Lord of Qi at this time is Lord Ping, younger brother of Lord Jian. Meng 蒙 was about 75 kilometers east of the Lu capital, near present-day Mengyin 蒙陰, Shandong. 422 See Ai 7.3. 423 Takezoe (30.40) argues that Fayang here designates Yun, where a covenant was sworn in Ai 12.4. 424 Precedent dictates that the representative of the inferior state hold the bull’s ear (xiaoguo shimeng 小國尸盟).

1960

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, the lord had climbed the city wall to look out into the distance. Catching sight of the Rong hamlet, he asked about it and was given a report.412 The lord said, “We are of the royal Ji clan. How is it that we have the Rong here?” He had the hamlet razed. The lord had employed his artisans for too long without rest. He wished to expel Shi Pu but had not gotten to it when the troubles began.413 On the xinsi day (12), Shi Pu attacked the lord of Wei with the help of the artisans. Closing his gates, the lord made a plea, but it was not granted. While crossing the wall to the north, he fell and broke his femur.414 People from the Rong hamlet attacked him. The heir apparent Ji and Gongzi Qing had crossed over the wall after the lord, and the people from the Rong hamlet killed them both.415 The lord then entered the home of the Jıˇ lineage in the Rong hamlet.416 Earlier, the lord had, from atop the city wall, seen what beautiful hair the wife of the Jĭ lineage head had, and so he had ordered it sheared to make a wig for Lü Jiang.417 Once he had entered the Jĭ house, he showed them a jade disk and said, “If you save my life, I will give you this disk.” The Jĭ men said, “And what happens to the disk if we kill you?” So they killed him and took his disk. The men of Wei recalled Gongsun Banshi and set him up as lord. In the twelfth month, the men of Qi attacked Wei.418 When the men of Wei requested peace, Qi set up Gongzi Qi as lord,419 made Gongsun Banshia their prisoner, and returned, lodging him at Lù.420 Arrangements during a covenant between Lu and Qi (see Ai 15.4) prompt a discussion of protocol and arouse Qi resentment. But then Lu accepts Qi’s leadership in the covenant by agreeing to “hold the ear” of the sacrificial bull (see Xiang 27.4d and n. 848). Meng Wubo insists on Lu dignity in one case but is ready to humble himself on another matter: Qi may resent the first action but will be mollified by the second one. Meng is implicitly praised for striking the balance between ritual propriety and strategic humility. Our lord met with the Prince of Qi and made a covenant at Meng, with Meng Wubo assisting.421 When the Prince of Qi lowered his head to the ground, our lord only bowed. The Qi men were infuriated. Meng Wuboe said, “Except for the Son of Heaven, there is no one for whom my ruler lowers his head to the ground.” Meng Wuboe asked Gao Chai, “When the princes make a covenant, who holds the ear of the bull?” Gao Chaic said, “In the Zengyan campaign, it was Wangzi Gucaoa of Wu.422 In the Fayang campaign, it was Shi Tui of Wei.”423 Meng Wuboe said, “In that case, I am the one.”424

17.6

Lord Ai

1961

17.7 宋皇瑗之子麇有友曰田丙，而奪其兄酁般邑以與之。酁般慍而行，告桓

司馬之臣子儀克。子儀克適宋，告夫人曰：「麇將納桓氏。」 公問諸子仲。初，子仲將以杞姒之子非我為子。麇曰：「必立伯 也，是良材。」子仲怒，弗從，故對曰：「右師則老矣，不識麇也。」公執 之。皇瑗奔晉，召之。

左傳 18.1 十八年春，宋殺皇瑗。公聞其情，復皇氏之族，使皇緩為右師。 18.2 巴人伐楚，圍鄾。初，右司馬子國之卜也，觀瞻曰：「如志。」故命之。

及巴師至，將卜帥。王曰：「寧如志，何卜焉？」使帥師而行。請承，王曰： 「寢尹、工尹勤先君者也。」三月，楚公孫寧、吳由于、薳固敗巴師于 鄾，故封子國於析。

425 Chan 酁 is a Song settlement. Its precise location is unknown. 426 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1046), Ziyi Ke had been in another city and had not participated in Xiang Tui’s revolt. 427 The dowager is the mother of Duke Jing, current ruler of Song. By this slander Ziyi Ke hopes to destroy Jun. 428 Huang Ye is apparently a younger member of the generation of Jun’s father, Huang Yuan. 429 Because Jun had angered him earlier, Huang Ye now refuses to protect Jun from the Song Lord’s preemptive action. He implies that Jun could indeed be capable of plotting a coup to restore the Huan line. 430 Huang Huan is a nephew of Huang Yuan and a younger brother of Jun. 431 For Ba and You, see Huan 9.2. 432 The former ruler was King Zhao. For the deeds of Wu Youyu and Wei Gu, see Ding 4.3e and 4.3d, respectively. 433 Xi 析 was on the Xi River about 115 kilometers northwest of You (see Xi 25.3).

1962

Zuo Tradition

In Song, fears of a return of the Huan lineage—the family of the exiled rebel Xiang Tui (Ai 14.4)—and a series of slanders lead to moves against the Huang lineage and the execution of Huang Yuan, which takes place in the continuation of this narrative below (see Ai 18.1). Jun, a son of Huang Yuan of Song, had a friend named Tian Bing. Jun confiscated the settlement of his own elder brother, Ban of Chan, and gave Chan to Tian Bing.425 Indignant, Ban of Chan set out and informed Ziyi Ke, who had been a subject of Xiang Tuic.426 Ziyi Ke went to the Song capital, where he told the dowager, “Jun is planning to restore the Huan lineage.”427 The lord asked Huang Yea about it.428 Earlier, Huang Yea had been preparing to make Huang Feiwoa, his son by Qǐ Si, his heir apparent. Jun said, “You must set up his elder brother as your heir; he is good material.” Infuriated, Huang Yea had not followed this advice. So he now replied, “As for the minister of the right, Huang Yuan, he is old. I do not know about Jun.”429 The lord arrested Jun. Huang Yuan fled to Jin, and Song summoned him.

17.7

LORD AI 18 (477 BCE) ZUO

The Huang line is restored (see Ai 17.7, 26.2). In the eighteenth year, in spring, Song put Huang Yuan to death. When the lord had heard the true circumstances, he restored the whole Huang house and appointed Huang Huan minister of the right.430

18.1

The Chu appointment of Gongsun Ning, the chief minister (see Ai 17.4), to lead the response to a Ba invasion prompts reflections from the king and from the anonymous noble man on the proper use of divination. Divination results seem to matter only when they fit well with human intent (zhi 志) and deliberation. Recall the Chu adviser Dou Lian’s assertion: “Divination is for resolving doubts. Why divine when there are no doubts?” (Huan 11.2). The men of Ba attacked Chu and laid siege to You.431 Previously, during the divination concerning the supervisor of the right army Gongsun Ningb, Guan Zhan had said, “The divination result fits our purpose.” They therefore appointed him. When the Ba army arrived, Chu prepared to divine about a commander, but the king said, “Gongsun Ninga fits our purpose. What is there to divine about?” He appointed Gongsun Ning to lead the army, and they set out. When Gongsun Ning requested lieutenants, the king said, “The chamberlain and the deputy for artisans are men who worked diligently for the former ruler.”432 In the third month, Gongsun Ning, Wangsun Youyuc, and Wei Gu of Chu defeated the Ba army at You; therefore Gongsun Ningb was put in power at Xi.433

18.2

Lord Ai

1963

君子曰：「惠王知志。《夏書》曰：『官占唯能蔽志，昆命于元龜』， 其是之謂乎！《志》曰：『聖人不煩卜筮』，惠王其有焉。」 18.3 夏，衛石圃逐其君起，起奔齊。衛侯輒自齊復歸，逐石圃，而復石魋與

大叔遺。

左傳 19.1 十九年春，越人侵楚，以誤吳也。夏，楚公子慶、公孫寬追越師，至冥，

不及，乃還。 19.2 秋，楚沈諸梁伐東夷，三夷男女及楚師盟于敖。 19.3 冬，叔青如京師，敬王崩故也。

434 The passage is now found, with slight variations in wording, in the Documents chapter “Da Yu mo,” one of the Ancient Script chapters (4.57). Zhang Taiyan opines that divination is thought to have become ineffective in an era of decline because of overuse and ritual infractions (cited in Wu Jing’an, Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu, 2221–22). 435 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1046–47), Shi Tui is a son of Shi Mangu, and both Shi Tui and Taishu Xizi had been expelled by Lord Zhuang. For the expulsion of Taishu Xizi, see Ai 16.6.

1964

Zuo Tradition

The noble man said, “King Hui understood proper purpose. As it says in the Xia Documents, ‘In official divinations it is a matter precisely of being able to determine one’s purpose and then uttering the command to the great turtle shell.’434 This is what is meant. As it says in Records, ‘Sages do not bother to resort to bone cracking and stalk casting.’ King Hui would seem to have been such a man.” As Gongzi Qi is expelled, the Ousted Lord Zhe returns to his position as ruler of Wei (see Ai 15.5, 17.5, 25.1). In summer, Shi Pu of Wei expelled his ruler Gongzi Qia, who fled to Qi. Zhe, Prince of Wei, returning again from Qi, expelled Shi Pu, and restored Shi Tui and Taishu Xizia.435

18.3

LORD AI 19 (476 BCE) ZUO

Yue makes an incursion into Chu (see Ai 17.2). In the nineteenth year, in spring, the men of Yue invaded Chu; this was in order to deceive Wu. In summer, Gongzi Qing and Gongsun Kuan of Chu pursued the Yue troops, going as far as Ming.436 They did not catch them and therefore turned back.

19.1

In autumn, the She Lord Zhulianga of Chu attacked the Eastern Yi.437 Men and women of the three Yi swore a covenant with the Chu army at Ao.438

19.2

The Annals, at least as we have it today, has concluded in Ai 17 above, but the record below of a Lu minister’s journey to the capital, like other records in these last Zuozhuan years, very much follows the form of an Annals entry and a short Zuozhuan explanation of that entry. In winter, Shu Qing went to the capital; this was because King Jing succumbed.

19.3

436 Ming 冥 was in Yue, between present-day Guangde 廣德, Anhui, and Changxing 長興, Zhejiang, about 130 kilometers northwest of the Yue capital. 437 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1047), this was in revenge for Yue’s spring invasion of Chu. 438 According to Jiang Yong (cited in Yang, 4:1714), the three Yi resided in the vicinity of present-day Ningbo, Taizhou, and Wenzhou, Zhejiang, to the east and south of the Yue capital. Ao was somewhere along the coast south of the Yangzi.

Lord Ai

1965

左傳 20.1 二十年春，齊人來徵會。夏，會于廩丘，為鄭故，謀伐晉。鄭人辭諸侯。

秋，師還。 20.2 吳公子慶忌驟諫吳子曰：「不改，必亡。」弗聽。出居于艾，遂適楚。聞越

將伐吳，冬，請歸平越，遂歸。欲除不忠者以說于越。吳人殺之。 20.3 十一月，越圍吳，趙孟降於喪食。楚隆曰：「三年之喪，親暱之極也，主又

降之，無乃有故乎？」趙孟曰：「黃池之役，先主與吳王有質，曰：『好惡同 之。』今越圍吳，嗣子不廢舊業而敵之，非晉之所能及也，吾是以為降。」

439 Linqiu 廩丘 was in Qi, near present-day Fan County 范縣, Shandong, about 135 kilometers east and somewhat north of the Lu capital; see Xiang 25.14. 440 Jin attacked Zheng at Annals, Ai 15.6. 441 Ai 艾 was a Wu settlement near present-day Xiushui 修水, Jiangxi, well over 600 kilometers west and south of the Wu capital. 442 The disloyal might include such men as the steward Pi, who in many texts (e.g., Shiji 41.1740–41) is portrayed as a rival to Wu Zixu and a traitor to Wu. 443 Zhao Wuxu is the son of Zhao Yang, who was last active at Ai 17.5b and must have died since. 444 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1048), Chu Long is one of Zhao Wuxu’s household retainers. Various early texts imply that three years’ mourning, or more precisely mourning into the twenty-fifth month after death, was the norm; see Analects 17.21, Mozi 6.160, and Xunzi 19.445. 445 For the Huangchi campaign, see Ai 13.4. The “former master” is Zhao Yang.

1966

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 20 (475 BCE) ZUO

Under Chen Heng’s leadership, Qi begins to assert its territorial ambitions, calling for a meeting and assuming the role of a regional overlord. A planned mission against Jin fails as Zheng refuses the princes’ assistance. In the twentieth year, in spring, Qi men came to summon us to a meeting. summer, a meeting was held at Linqiu.439 For Zheng’s sake they planned to attack Jin.440 The men of Zheng declined the offer of the princes. In autumn, our troops turned back.

20.1

In Wu, Gongzi Qingji dies, apparently because of his eagerness to warn the king about the threat from Yue (see Ai 17.2, 19.1). Qingji also seems to be trying to appease Yue. He dies not because of his remonstrance about the Yue threat but because he tries to remove powerful men who block rapprochement with Yue. Gongzi Qingji of Wu remonstrated repeatedly with the Master of Wu, saying, “If you do not change course, you are sure to perish.” But the Master did not heed him. Gongzi Qingji accordingly departed and dwelt at Ai before proceeding on to Chu.441 He heard that Yue was going to attack Wu, and in the winter he requested permission to return and sue for peace with Yue. He then returned. He wished to please Yue by removing men who were disloyal.442 The leaders of Wu put him to death.

20.2

As Yue besieges Wu, Zhao Wuxu, the new head of the Zhao line in Jin, endures further self-abnegation while being in mourning for his father, Zhao Yang, because he feels shame that Jin cannot provide the aid to Wu promised in a covenant to which his father was a party. He sends his apologies to his covenant partner, the Wu King Fucha, by way of Chu Long (see Ai 20.2). Yue leaders allow the conference between Chu Long and Fucha because Jin weakness is so obvious that there is no fear of mischief. Fucha, even in his defeat, commands a certain respect as he ceremoniously thanks Jin and alludes to the scribe Mo’s prediction of Wu defeat by Yue. In the eleventh month, Yue laid siege to Wu, and Zhao Wuxua further diminished his mourning diet.443 Chu Long said, “Three years’ mourning is the height of familial feeling, and you, my master, have made a further reduction. Is there not some reason for this?”444 Zhao Wuxua said, “During the Huangchi campaign, the former master and the Wu King made a commitment to one another that said, ‘Good things or bad, we will share them.’445 Now Yue has laid siege to Wu. As his successor I would not neglect our old engagements but would go and oppose Yue. Yet this is not something Jin is capable of accomplishing. That is why I

20.3

Lord Ai

1967

楚隆曰：「若使吳王知之，若何？」趙孟曰：「可乎？」隆曰：「請嘗之。」 乃往，先造于越軍，曰：「吳犯間上國多矣，聞君親討焉，諸夏之 人莫不欣喜，唯恐君志之不從，請入視之。」許之。 告于吳王曰：「寡君之老無恤使陪臣隆，敢展謝其不共：黃池之 役，君之先臣志父得承齊盟，曰『好惡同之』。今君在難，無恤不敢憚 勞，非晉國之所能及也，使陪臣敢展布之。」王拜稽首曰：「寡人不佞， 不能事越，以為大夫憂，拜命之辱。」與之一簞珠，使問趙孟曰：「句踐 將生憂寡人，寡人死之不得矣。王曰：「溺人必笑，吾將有問也。史黯何 以得為君子？」對曰：「黯也進不見惡，退無謗言。」王曰：「宜哉！」

左傳 21.1 二十一年夏五月，越人始來。 21.2 秋八月，公及齊侯、邾子盟于顧。齊人責稽首，因歌之曰：

446 That is, Zhao Wuxu. 447 According to Yang (4:1717), this must have been an adage of the time. A similar line appears in Lüshi chunqiu 5.256, where Gao You’s 高誘 (ca. 168–212) note explains that although the drowning man may go through the motions of laughing, it is not out of delight. 448 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1048), this is the same scribe Mo of Cai who in Zhao 32.2 predicted the fall of Wu.

1968

Zuo Tradition

have made this reduction.” Chu Long said, “How would it be if we should let the Wu King know of it?” Zhao Wuxua said, “Is that possible?” Chu Longa said, “Permit me to attempt it.” He therefore set out, first approaching the Yue army, to which he said, “Many are the times Wu has assailed the superior domains. On hearing that you, my lord, are personally punishing them, the people of the central domains are without exception overjoyed. They fear only that your ambitions will not be fulfilled. I request permission to enter your ranks and observe them.” His request was granted. Reporting to the Wu King, he said, “Wuxu,446 an elder of our ruler, has sent me, his personal subject Chu Longa, to presume to make a public apology for his disrespect. During the Huangchi campaign, our ruler’s former subject Zhao Yangd was privileged to take part in the fasting and to swear a covenant, which said, ‘Good things or bad, we will share them.’ Now that you are in the midst of difficulties, it is not that Wuxu dares to fear any exertion; the problem is rather that this is not something the domain of Jin is capable of accomplishing. He has sent his personal subject, presuming to disclose the matter, presenting it in full.” The Wu King bowed, touching the ground with his forehead, and said, “In my ineptitude, I was unable to serve Yue and so have become a source of sorrow for the high officer. I bow in response to the condescension of your command.” He gave Chu Long a peck of pearls and had him carry word to Zhao Wuxua: “Goujian intends to keep me alive, but in sorrow. I would die well, but I cannot find a way to do so.” The king added, “‘Drowning men always have a laugh.’447 I will put a question to you: How is it that the scribe Mo of Caic managed to become a noble man?”448 Chu Long replied, “When the scribe Mo of Caid advanced, he was never disliked, and when he withdrew, he was never slandered.” The king said, “How fitting!” LORD AI 21 (474 BCE) ZUO

While in the process of conquering Wu, Yue begins to assert power in the northern domains (see Ai 20.3). In the twenty-first year, in summer, in the fifth month, Yue leaders came for the first time.

21.1

In a new covenant meeting between Lu and Qi, Qi representatives sing a satiric song about the unequal bows Lu had insisted upon during the last meeting (see Ai 17.6). In autumn, in the eighth month, our lord swore a covenant at Gu with the Prince of Qi and the Master of Zhu. The men from Qi, censuring us for our refusal to bow with our forehead touching the ground, sang about it:

21.2

Lord Ai

1969

魯人之皋， 數年不覺， 使我高蹈。 唯其儒書， 以為二國憂。 是行也，公先至于陽穀。齊閭丘息曰：「君辱舉玉趾，以在寡君之軍，群 臣將傳遽以告寡君。比其復也，君無乃勤。為僕人之未次，請除館於舟 道。」辭曰：「敢勤僕人？」

左傳 22.1 二十二年夏四月，邾隱公自齊奔越，曰：「吳為無道，執父立子。」越人歸

之，大子革奔越。 22.2 冬十一月丁卯，越滅吳，請使吳王居甬東。辭曰：「孤老矣，焉能事君？」

乃縊。越人以歸。

1970

Zuo Tradition

The fault of the men of Lu:449 For many years they have not perceived it, And it makes us leap high. Just for the sake of their ritualist writings,450 They cause sorrows for our two domains.

On this trip, our lord was the first to arrive at Yanggu.451 Lüqiu Xi of Qi said, “You, my lord, have deigned to raise your toes of jade to travel here and ask after our ruler’s army. We subjects will send a carriage relay to inform our ruler. But until he responds, will you not be inconvenienced? Since the servants have not yet prepared a lodging for you, permit us to clear out the hostel at Zhoudao.”452 Our lord declined, saying, “Should I presume to inconvenience the servants?” LORD AI 22 (473 BCE) ZUO

The ruler of Zhu, forced into exile by Wu (Ai 10.1), is restored by Yue. In the twenty-second year, in summer, in the fourth month, Lord Yin of Zhu fled from Qi to Yue. He said, “Wu acted without the Way in arresting a father and setting up his son.”453 The Yue men returned him, and the heir apparent Ge fled to Yue.454

22.1

As predicted decades before (see Zhao 32.2), Yue destroys Wu (see Ai 20.3). In winter, in the eleventh month, on the dingmao day (27), Yue extinguished Wu. They asked to have the Wu King reside at Yongdong.455 He declined, saying, “I, the lone one, am old already. How would I be able to serve my lord?” With that, he hanged himself. The Yue men took his body back with them.

22.2

449 Yang (4:1717–18) understands gao 皋 as a loan for gao 咎. 450 Note that this is the only instance of the use of the word ru 儒 in the sense of “claiming ritual knowledege” in Zuozhuan. 451 Yanggu was near present-day Yanggu, Shandong, about 120 kilometers northwest of the Lu capital; see Xi 3.2. 452 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1048), Zhoudao 舟道 was in Qi. Its precise location is not known. 453 See Ai 8.5. 454 The heir apparent Ge has been de facto ruler of Zhu since the departure of his father in Ai 8.5. 455 Yongdong 甬東 was about 150 km east of the Yue capital, near present-day Weng Mountain 翁山, Dinghai County 定海縣, Zhejiang.

Lord Ai

1971

左傳 23.1 二十三年春，宋景曹卒。季康子使冉有弔，且送葬，曰：「敝邑有社稷之

事，使肥與有職競焉，是以不得助執紼，使求從輿人，曰：『以肥之得備 彌甥也，有不腆先人之產馬，使求薦諸夫人之宰，其可以稱旌繁乎！』」 23.2 夏六月，晉荀瑤伐齊，高無丕帥師禦之。知伯視齊師，馬駭，遂驅之，曰：

「齊人知余旗，其謂余畏而反也。」及壘而還。 將戰，長武子請卜。知伯曰：「君告於天子，而卜之以守龜於宗祧， 吉矣，吾又何卜焉？且齊人取我英丘，君命瑤，非敢燿武也，治英丘也。 以辭伐罪足矣，何必卜？」壬辰，戰于犁丘，齊師敗績。知伯親禽顏庚。 23.3 秋八月，叔青如越，始使越也。越諸鞅來聘，報叔青也。

456 Jing Cao, from Lesser Zhu, is the wife of Duke Yuan of Song and the mother of Lord Jing. She is also the maternal grandmother of Ji Huanzi, the father of Ji Kangzi (see Ai 3.4), who is called “distant nephew” to the present Song ruler, Duke Jing. 457 Fei is Ji Kangzi’s personal name, which the ritual circumstances of this speech allow Ran Qiu to use. 458 Chang Wuzi, a Jin high officer, appears as Zhang Wu 張武 in Lüshi chunqiu 2.95, 22.1526; and Huainanzi 18.591, 18.609. 459 Yingqiu 英丘 was Jin territory, but its location is unknown. Gu Donggao (cited in Yang, 4:1721) reckoned that it must be near Liqiu, where Jin and Qi forces do battle on this occasion. 460 As at Ai 18.2, Zuozhuan implies disapproval of excessive divination. 461 Liqiu 犂丘, called Xi 隰 at Ai 27.3, was perhaps near present-day Linyi 臨邑, Shandong, about 130 kilometers west and slightly north of the Qi capital. 462 According to Lüshi chunqiu 4.205, Yan Zhuoju is a brigand who had studied with Confucius; according to Han Feizi 3.192, it was only with Yan’s assistance that the Chen (Tian) lineage was able to seize power in Qi.

1972

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 23 (472 BCE) ZUO

Ran Qiu, a disciple of Confucius in the employ of the Ji lineage, offers an example of appropriate ritual language in the funeral for a Song noble lady, who was the great grandmother of the Lu minister Ji Kangzi. In the twenty-third year, in spring, Jing Cao of Song died.456 Ji Kangzi sent Ran Qiuc to offer condolences and to escort the cortege. He said, “Our humble settlement, because of matters concerning the altars of the domain, requires Fei to be involved with pressing duties there.457 For this reason he has no opportunity to help in pulling the ropes of the hearse and has sent me to follow the bearers, saying, ‘Because I am privileged to play the part of a distant nephew, I have some inferior horses, a breed propagated by my ancestors, and I send Ran Qiua to present them to the lady’s steward, in the hope that they will be appropriate to her banners and caparison.’”

23.1

In another episode of Jin military action, Zhi Yao attacks and defeats Qi (see Ai 20.1). We have here another example of a leader dismissing divination (see also Ai 17.3, 18.2). In summer, in the sixth month, Zhi Yaoa of Jin attacked Qi, and Gao Wupi led an army to oppose him. When Zhi Yaob reconnoitered the Qi army, his horses shied, and as a result he galloped them. He said, “The men of Qi know my flags, and they might have thought that I turned around because I was afraid.” He reached their fortifications before turning back. As they were preparing to do battle, Chang Wuzi requested that a divination be made.458 Zhi Yaob said, “Having reported the matter to the Son of Heaven, the ruler divined about it with the guardian turtle shell in the Ancestral Temple. The result was auspicious. What is there to divine about again? What is more, the Qi people took our lands at Yingqiu, and the ruler issued a command to me.459 It is not that I dare show off my military prowess: I am establishing control in Yingqiu. It is enough to attack the guilty with this justification; why must we divine?”460 On the renchen day (26), they did battle at Liqiu, and the Qi army was roundly defeated.461 Zhi Yaob himself captured Yan Zhuojua.462

23.2

Ties between Lu and Yue develop further (see Ai 21.1). The Lu ruler will seek Yue assistance to counter the sway of the powerful Ji lineage in Lu (Ai 24.4). In autumn, in the eighth month, Shu Qing went to Yue. This was the first time an envoy was sent to Yue. Zhuyang of Yue came on an official visit. This was to reciprocate the visit of Shu Qing.

23.3

Lord Ai

1973

左傳 24.1 二十四年夏四月，晉侯將伐齊，使來乞師，曰：「昔臧文仲以楚師伐齊，

取穀；宣叔以晉師伐齊，取汶陽。寡君欲徼福於周公，願乞靈於臧氏。」 臧石帥師會之，取廩丘。 軍吏令繕，將進。萊章曰：「君卑、政暴，往歲克敵，今又勝都，天 奉多矣，又焉能進？是躗言也。役將班矣。」晉師乃還。 餼臧石牛，大史謝之，曰：「以寡君之在行，牢禮不度，敢展謝 之。」 24.2 邾子又無道，越人執之以歸，而立公子何。何亦無道。 24.3 公子荊之母嬖，將以為夫人，使宗人釁夏獻其禮。對曰：「無之。」公怒

曰：「女為宗司，立夫人，國之大禮也，何故無之？」對曰：「周公及武公 娶於薛，孝、惠娶於商，自桓以下娶於齊，此禮也則有。若以妾為夫人， 則固無其禮也。」公卒立之，而以荊為大子，國人始惡之。

463 464 465 466 467 468

Xi 26.4. Gu was located in Qi (see map 2). Cheng 2.3. Zang Xuanshu was Zang Wenzhong’s son. See similar language at Wen 12.5. See Ai 20.1, where Linqiu is the site of a meeting between Lu and Qi. According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1049), the preparations are being made on the Jin side. According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1049), Lai Zhang is a Qi minister. Jin defeated Qi in Ai 23.2. 469 Gongzi Jing’s mother is one of Lord Ai’s concubines. 470 Xin Xia’s surname, xin 釁, “to consecrate” a bell or other ritual object with blood, reflects his and his predecessors’ official duties. 471 That is, they took them from Song, the domain that sacrificed to the Shang kings as ancestors of the ruling house. According to Shiji 14, Lord Xiao ruled from 806 to 769, and Lord Hui ruled from 768 to 723.

1974

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 24 (471 BCE) ZUO

Despite a covenant with Qi (see Ai 21.2), Lu joins Jin in an attack on Qi. In the twenty-fourth year, in summer, in the fourth month, the Prince of Jin was preparing to attack Qi and sent an envoy to plead for troops. He said, “In the past, Zang Wenzhong attacked Qi with a Chu army and took Gu,463 and Zang Xuanshuc attacked Qi with a Jin army and took the lands north of the Wen River.464 Our ruler desires to seek blessings from the Zhou Duke and wishes to plead for help from the numinous power of the Zang lineage.”465 Zang Shi led an army to reinforce him, and they took Linqiu.466 The military officers ordered equipment repairs in preparation for an advance.467 Lai Zhang said, “Their ruler is powerless and their administration ruthless. Last year they defeated their enemy and now they have gone on to conquer a capital.468 Already Heaven’s gifts are abundant. How will they be able to advance again? This is mere bluster. The campaigners will retreat.” The Jin army did indeed turn back. When they presented Zang Shi with a live ox for provisions, the Jin grand scribe apologized for it, saying, “Because our ruler is present on the march, the rituals for the sets of sacrificial animals do not meet the ritual specifications. I presume to offer our apologies for it.”

24.1

Lord Yin, having been returned to Zhu (see Ai 22.1), again loses his position. Yue leaders put his son Gongzi He in power, but Gongzi He also turns out to be an errant ruler. The Master of Zhu again violated the Way. The men of Yue arrested him and took him back with them, setting up Gongzi He, who also violated the Way.

24.2

Over the objections of a ritual specialist, Lord Ai of Lu chooses an inappropriate wife and earns the contempt of his subjects (see Ai 25.2). The mother of Gongzi Jing was favored.469 Intending to make her his wife, our lord appointed the ancestral attendant, Xin Xia, to make the ritual presentation.470 Xin Xia replied, “There is no such ritual.” Outraged, our lord said, “You are the ancestral attendant, and setting up the lord’s wife is a major ritual of the domain. Can it be that there is no appropriate ritual?” He replied, “The Zhou Duke and Lord Wu took their wives from Xue. Lords Xiao and Hui took their wives from Shang.471 And from Lord Huan on down, they took their wives from Qi. This ritual does exist. But there certainly is no ritual for making a concubine the wife of the lord.” Our lord did in the end set her up, making Gongzi Jinga his heir apparent, and it was then, for the first time, that the inhabitants of the capital despised him.

24.3

Lord Ai

1975

24.4 閏月，公如越，得大子適郢，將妻公而多與之地。公孫有山使告于季孫。

季孫懼，使因大宰嚭而納賂焉，乃止。

左傳 25.1a 二十五年夏五月庚辰，衛侯出奔宋。

衛侯為靈臺于藉圃，與諸大夫飲酒焉，褚師聲子韈而登席，公 怒。辭曰：「臣有疾，異於人；若見之，君將㱿之，是以不敢。」公愈怒。 大夫辭之，不可。褚師出。公戟其手，曰：「必斷而足！」聞之。褚師與司 寇亥乘，曰：「今日幸而後亡。」 25.1b 公之入也，奪南氏邑，而奪司寇亥政。公使侍人納公文懿子之車于池。

472 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1050), the intercalary month was in this case added after the tenth month. Gassmann (Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen, 344) indicates instead that it was added after the twelfth month, as was customary. 473 Several other sources cited by Yang (4:1723) indicate that the Wu grand steward Pi was executed when Yue conquered Wu (Ai 22.2). Only this Zuozhuan passage suggests that he survived in Yue.

1976

Zuo Tradition

Fearing that Lord Ai would use his new Yue connections against him, Ji Kangzi employs bribery to protect his interests (see Ai 23.3, 25.2). In the intercalary month,472 our lord visited Yue, where he became close with the heir apparent Shiying, who was going to marry his daughter to our lord and give him a great deal of land. Gongsun Youshan had this reported to Ji Kangzic, who became alarmed. Through the grand steward Pi, he had a bribe given to the heir apparent, who therefore desisted.473

24.4

LORD AI 25 (470 BCE) ZUO

After having offended numerous noblemen through his high-handed and greedy behavior, the Ousted Lord of Wei is again driven out of his domain (see Ai 18.3). Quan Mi, who seems at first to defend the interests of the Ousted Lord, betrays him at the last minute, perhaps in retaliation for an earlier slight, when the Wei ruler sent an entertainer to swear a covenant with him. In the twenty-fifth year, in summer, in the fifth month, on the gengchen day (25), the Prince of Wei departed and fled to Song.474 The Prince of Wei had built his Terrace of Numinous Power at the Jie Garden, and he drank wine there with all his high officers. The market overseer Bia took his place on the mats while wearing his socks, and the lord grew angry. He excused himself by saying, “I have an illness, so I am different from the others. It would make you gag to see it. For this reason I do not dare remove my socks.” The lord was even angrier. The high officers made excuses for it, but the lord would not permit it. The market overseer Bib departed. Planting his hands on his hips, the lord said, “I will cut off your feet, be assured of it.” Bi heard this. Riding away with supervisor of corrections Hai, the market overseer Bib said, “I will be lucky today if I manage only to be sent into exile.” When the Wei ruler entered the domain,475 he had confiscated the settlement of Gongsun Mimoub and relieved the supervisor of corrections Hai of his administrative duties. The lord had his attendant sink the carriage of Gongwen Yaoa in a pool.

25.1a

25.1b

474 Although these years are covered only by Zuozhuan (the Annals having ended in Ai 16), passages like this one have the form of an Annals entry, commented upon immediately afterward. Such passages may be vestiges of the Annals or of an Annals-like text originally transmitted with Zuozhuan; see introduction, page xxxi. 475 See Ai 18.3.

Lord Ai

1977

初，衛人翦夏丁氏，以其帑賜彭封彌子。彌子飲公酒，納夏戊之 女，嬖，以為夫人。其弟期，大叔疾之從孫甥也，少畜於公，以為司徒。 夫人寵衰，期得罪。公使三匠久。公使優狡盟拳彌，而甚近信之。故褚 師比、公孫彌牟、公文要、司寇亥、司徒期因三匠與拳彌以作亂。 皆執利兵，無者執斤。使拳彌入于公宮，而自大子疾之宮譟以攻 公。鄄子士請禦之，彌援其手，曰：「子則勇矣，將若君何？不見先君 乎？君何所不逞欲？且君嘗在外矣，豈必不反？當今不可，眾怒難犯。 休而易間也。」 乃出。將適蒲，彌曰：「晉無信，不可。」將適鄄，彌曰：「齊、晉爭 我，不可。」將適泠，彌曰：「魯不足與。請適城鉏，以鉤越。越有君。」乃 適城鉏。彌曰：「衛盜不可知也，請速，自我始。」乃載寶以歸。 25.1c 公為支離之卒，因祝史揮以侵衛。衛人病之。懿子知之，見子之，請逐

揮。文子曰：「無罪。」懿子曰：「彼好專利而妄，夫見君之入也，將先道 焉。若逐之，必出於南門，而適君所。夫越新得諸侯，將必請師焉。」

476 See Ai 11.6b. 477 The Wei ruler humiliates the high officer Quan Mi by having a debased person (an entertainer) swear a convenant with him, yet he unwisely relies on Quan Mi. 478 Recall that heir apparent Ji, son of Kuaikui (Lord Zhuang) and brother or half brother of Zhe (the Ousted Lord), died in Ai 17.5. 479 See Ai 17.5. The former ruler is Kuaikui, who was killed outside the Wei capital. 480 Juan Zishi is encouraging Quan Mi to leave the realm with the Ousted Lord, who would be able to indulge his desires elsewhere. Otherwise he may suffer the same fate of being murdered as his father Kuaikui. 481 The same notion is expressed by King Ling of Chu at Zhao 13.2c. On the wrath of the multitude, see also Xiang 10.9 and Zhao 25.6. 482 Pu was near Jin territory, about 50 kilometers south and somewhat west of the Wei capital, near present-day Changyuan 長垣, Henan; see Annals, Huan 3.2. 483 Juan was northwest of present-day Juancheng 鄄城, Shandong, about 55 kilometers east of the Wei capital; see Annals, Zhuang 14.4. 484 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1051), Ling 泠 was a Wei settlement near the frontier with Lu. For Chengchu and the questions surrounding its location, see Ai 11.6a. Chengchu was apparently close to Song, and Du Yu suggests that because Song was linked with Yue to the south, fleeing to Chengchu would help the Wei ruler win the support of the Yue ruler. 485 Quan Mi has deceived the ruler throughout the episode. As Du Yu (ZZ 60.1051) explains, once Quan Mi has used the threat of brigands to take the treasures from the ruler, he races ahead and returns to the Wei capital, leaving the ruler to go into exile without him.

1978

Zuo Tradition

Earlier, the men of Wei had dispossessed the lineage of Xia Wua and bestowed its property upon Mi Zixiab.476 Mi Zixiaa treated the lord to wine and presented the daughter of Xia Wu to him. Having gained the lord’s favor, she was made his wife. Her younger brother Qi was a grandnephew of Shishu Qia. From his youth he had been supported by the lord, and he was made supervisor of conscripts. When the favor enjoyed by the lord’s wife faded, Qi was accused of crimes. The lord had employed three groups of craftsmen for too long a time. The lord had his entertainer Jiao swear a covenant with Quan Mi, yet placed extraordinary confidence in him.477 Therefore, the market overseer Bi, Gongsun Mimou, Gongwen Yao, the supervisor of corrections Hai, and the supervisor of conscripts Qi, with the support of the three groups of craftsmen and Quan Mi, fomented a rebellion. All of them carried sharpened weapons, and those who did not have these carried ordinary axes. They had Quan Mi enter the lord’s palace. Then, with a loud uproar, they attacked the lord from the heir apparent Ji’s palace.478 Juan Zishi asked to confront them, but Quan Mia took his hand and said, “You are courageous, to be sure, but what will it do for the ruler? Did you not see what happened to the former ruler?479 What place is there where the ruler cannot indulge his desires?480 Besides, the ruler has been abroad before; how is it certain that he will not return? At present it is impossible, since it is difficult to withstand the multitude when they are angry.481 Once they have calmed down, it will be easy to turn them against one another.” Therefore, the lord fled. He was going to go to Pu, but Quan Mia said, “Jin lacks good faith. It will not do.”482 He was going to go to Juan, but Quan Mia said, “Qi and Jin will struggle over us. It will not do.”483 He was going to go to Ling, but Quan Mia said, “Lu is not worth associating with. I request that we go to Chengchu in order to link up with Yue. Yue has a capable ruler.”484 Therefore, they set out for Chengchu. Quan Mia said, “It is impossible to know about brigands in Wei. I request that we move quickly, with me in the lead.” Then, with the treasures in his carriages, he returned to the Wei domain city.485 The Wei ruler divided his army into small squads and invaded Wei with the support of the invocator-scribe Hui. The Wei people fretted over this, and Gongwen Yaob knew of it. He saw Gongsun Mimoua and asked to expel the invocator-scribe Huia. Gongsun Mimouc said he was blameless. Gongwen Yaob said, “That one is fond of keeping benefits for himself, and he knows no bounds in his desires. When he sees a way for the ruler to enter, he will go first and make a path for him. If we expel him, he is sure to depart through the south gate and go where the ruler is. Yue has recently won the allegiance of the princes, and the ruler will undoubtedly request to send an army there.”

25.1c

Lord Ai

1979

揮在朝，使吏遣諸其室。揮出，信，弗內。五日，乃館諸外里，遂有 寵，使如越請師。 25.2 六月，公至自越，季康子、孟武伯逆於五梧。郭重僕，見二子，曰：「惡言

多矣，君請盡之。」 公宴於五梧，武伯為祝，惡郭重，曰：「何肥也？」季孫曰：「請飲彘 也！以魯國之密邇仇讎，臣是以不獲從君，克免於大行，又謂重也肥？」 公曰：「是食言多矣，能無肥乎？」飲酒不樂，公與大夫始有惡。

左傳 26.1a 二十六年夏五月，叔孫舒帥師會越皋如、舌庸、宋樂茷納衛侯，文子欲

納之。懿子曰：「君愎而虐，少待之，必毒於民，乃睦於子矣。」師侵外 州，大獲。出禦之，大敗。掘褚師定子之墓，焚之于平莊之上。

486 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1051), the Ousted Lord is in Waili 外里, that is, in or near Chengchu. 487 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1051), Wuwu was in the southern reaches of Lu territory (see Ai 8.2). 488 Zhi is Meng Wubo. Ji Kangzi is saying that Meng Wubo misspoke and should drink a cup of wine for “punishment.” 489 Yang (4:1727) suggests that the ruler is indirectly rebuking Jisun and Meng for going back on promises they made to him personally. He may also be playing on the personal names of Ji Kangzi and Meng Wubo, which were Fei 肥, “fat,” and Zhi 彘, “pig,” respectively. 490 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1051), the market overseer Dingzi is the father of the lord’s enemy, the market overseer Bi (see Ai 25.1b); Liang Lüsheng (cited in Yang, 4:1728) identifies the market overseer Dingzi with the rebel market overseer Pu (see Zhao 20.4). Desecrating a tomb was the most vicious form of attack in this period. See Xuan 10.13. According to Shiji 66.2176, when Wu sacked the Chu capital, Wu Zixu disinterred the corpse of King Ping of Chu and whipped it three hundred

1980

Zuo Tradition

While the invocator-scribe Huia was at court, officers were sent to remove him from his house. The invocator-scribe Huia departed. He passed two nights outside the city but then was not readmitted. On the fifth day, he was given lodgings at Waili.486 As a result he was favored by the Ousted Lord and was sent to Yue to request an army. Relations between Lord Ai of Lu and the powerful lineages of the domain continue to deteriorate (see Ai 24.4, 27.2). In the sixth month, our lord arrived from Yue. Ji Kangzi and Meng Wubo went to meet him at Wuwu.487 Guo Chong was driving for our lord. After Guo Chong had seen the two noblemen, he said, “They have said many insulting things. My lord, please get to the bottom of it.” As our lord feasted at Wuwu, Meng Wuboe made a toast and insulted Guo Chong, asking, “Why is he so fat?” Ji Kangzic said, “I request that Zhi be made to drink.488 Because the domain of Lu is in such close proximity to its enemy, we subjects did not have an opportunity to follow our lord and were able to avoid the long journey. And yet you call Guo Chonga fat.” Our lord said, “Because he has had to eat his words so many times, can he help being fat?”489 They took no pleasure in drinking their wine, and this was the beginning of bad feelings between our lord and his high officers.

25.2

LORD AI 26 (469 BCE) ZUO

Forces from Lu, Yue, and Song move to restore the Ousted Lord in Wei. Harsh acts during the invasion turn Wei more surely against the former ruler, and the Ousted Lord is reduced to threatening his own wife and murdering his own heir apparent, ultimately dying in Yue (see Ai 25.1, 26.3). In the twenty-sixth year, in summer, in the fifth month, Shusun Shu led out troops and met with Gao Ru and She Yong of Yue and Yue Pei of Song to restore the Prince of Wei. Gongsun Mimouc wished to admit him. Gongwen Yaob said, “The ruler is stubborn and cruel. Just wait a little longer: he will inevitably become poisonous to the people, and they will therefore draw closer to you.” The troops invaded the outer districts and pillaged widely, and when the Wei army went out to oppose them, it was roundly defeated. The lord dug open the tomb of the market overseer Dingzi and burned his corpse upon the Pingzhuang Mound.490



26.1a

times. That episode is not mentioned in the Zuozhuan record of the event at Ding 4.3, although in some early texts (e.g., Guliang, Huainanzi) Wu Zixu is said to have whipped King Ping’s grave. Nothing is known about the Pingzhuang Mound.

Lord Ai

1981

26.1b 文子使王孫齊私於皋如，曰：「子將大滅衛乎？抑納君而已乎？」皋如

曰：「寡君之命無他，納衛君而已。」文子致眾而問焉，曰：「君以蠻夷伐 國，國幾亡矣，請納之。」眾曰：「勿納。」曰：「彌牟亡而有益，請自北門 出。」眾曰：「勿出。」重賂越人，申開、守陴而納公，公不敢入。師還。立 悼公，南氏相之。以城鉏與越人。 公曰：「期則為此。」令苟有怨於夫人者報之。司徒期聘於越，公攻而奪

之幣。期告王，王命取之，期以眾取之。公怒，殺期之甥之為大子者，遂 卒于越。 26.2a 宋景公無子，取公孫周之子得與啟畜諸公宮，未有立焉。於是皇緩為右

師，皇非我為大司馬，皇懷為司徒，靈不緩為左師，樂茷為司城，樂朱鉏 為大司寇，六卿三族降聽政，因大尹以達。大尹常不告，而以其欲稱君 命以令。國人惡之。司城欲去大尹，左師曰：「縱之，使盈其罪。重而無 基，能無敝乎？」

491 That is, the gates in the outer and the inner walls of the city. 492 Lord Dao is a younger brother of Kuaikui (Lord Zhuang) and thus an uncle of the Ousted Lord. 493 By this order the Ousted Lord sought to punish the supervisor of conscripts Qi, who is the younger brother of the Ousted Lord’s wife (see Ai 25.1b). 494 These gifts are the gifts brought by the diplomatic visitor from Wei for his hosts in Yue. 495 The Ousted Lord kills his own son by the older sister of the supervisor of conscripts Qi. 496 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1052), Gongsun Zhou is a grandson of Duke Yuan of Song (r. 531–517) and a nephew of the current ruler, Duke Jing (r. 516–451). De is the future Duke Zhao (r. 450–404). Qi is De’s younger brother. 497 The “Senior Official” (dayin 大尹) is curiously not named. This official title appears in Zuozhuan only in this episode, and it is not known who held this rank or what his duties were. The “three houses” referred to here are the Huangs, the Lings, and the Yues—that is, those families who occupy the positions of the six high ministers given here. 498 Compare the similar reasoning in Xuan 6.3.

1982

Zuo Tradition

Gongsun Mimouc sent Wangsun Qi in secret to ask Gao Ru, “Do you intend to destroy Wei entirely? Or will you stop with restoring the ruler?” Gao Ru said, “By the orders of my ruler I was to stop with restoring the Wei ruler and do nothing more.” Gongsun Mimouc assembled the multitude and asked them, “The ruler has attacked the domain with the Man and Yi, and the domain has all but perished. I ask that we admit him.” The multitude said, “Do not admit him.” Gongsun Mimou said, “It will be helpful if I go into exile. Permit me to depart from the north gate.” The multitude said, “Do not go.” After giving generous bribes to Yue, they opened both gates,491 mounted a defense on the ramparts, and finally admitted the lord. The lord did not dare enter, and the invading army turned back. Lord Dao was set up, with Gongsun Mimoub assisting him.492 The Wei settlement Chengchu was given to the Yue people. The Ousted Lord of Wei said, “It was the supervisor of conscripts Qi who did this.” He issued an order urging that any who had a grudge against his wife should take revenge on her.493 When the supervisor of conscripts Qi was making an official visit to Yue, the lord attacked him and seized his gifts.494 Qi informed the king of Yue, and the king commanded that the gifts be recovered. Qi, leading his larger forces, took the gifts back. Infuriated, the lord killed Qi’s nephew, who was the heir apparent.495 Eventually the lord died in Yue.

26.1b

When Duke Jing of Song dies, noble families work together to remove a dictatorial Senior Official and to secure the succession of the ruler’s adopted son De (see Ai 18.1). What transpires is a succession struggle between the two claimants Qi and De (both adopted sons of Duke Jing of Song), supported by the vilified Senior Official and the Song powerful ministerial lineages, respectively. Duke Jing of Song had no son. He took Gongsun Zhou’s sons De and Qi and raised both of them in the lord’s palace, but he had not yet designated either of them as heir apparent.496 At this time Huang Huan was minister of the right; Huang Feiwo was senior supervisor of the military; Huang Huai was supervisor of conscripts; Ling Buhuan was minister of the left; Yue Pei was supervisor of fortifications; and Yue Zhuchu was senior supervisor of corrections. These six high ministers and these three houses together minded the affairs of government and carried out their policies through the Senior Official.497 The Senior Official regularly failed to report to the lord. Instead, he appealed to his lord’s command to order whatever he himself desired. The inhabitants of the capital despised him. The supervisor of fortifications wanted to depose the Senior Official, but the minister of the left said, “Give him free rein, so that he fills up a full measure of crimes.498 He is weighty but lacks support. Can he avoid falling?”

26.2a

Lord Ai

1983

26.2b 冬十月，公游于空澤，辛巳，卒于連中。大尹興空澤之士千甲，奉公自空

桐入如沃宮，使召六子，曰：「聞下有師，君請六子畫。」六子至，以甲劫 之曰：「君有疾病，請二三子盟。」乃盟于少寢之庭，曰：「無為公室不 利！」 大尹立啟，奉喪殯于大宮，三日而後國人知之。司城茷使宣言于 國曰：「大尹惑蠱其君，而專其利，今君無疾而死，死又匿之，是無他 矣，大尹之罪也。」 得夢啟北首而寢於盧門之外，己為烏而集於其上，咮加於南門， 尾加於桐門。曰：「余夢美，必立。」 26.2c 大尹謀曰：「我不在盟，無乃逐我？復盟之乎！」使祝為載書。六子在唐

盂，將盟之。祝襄以載書告皇非我。皇非我因子潞、門尹得、左師謀曰： 「民與我，逐之乎！」 皆歸授甲，使徇于國曰：「大尹惑蠱其君，以陵虐公室；與我者， 救君者也。」眾曰：「與之！」大尹徇曰：「戴氏、皇氏將不利公室，與我 者，無憂不富。」眾曰：「無別！」

499 The Kong Marsh 空澤 was about 40 kilometers to the east of the Song capital, east of present-day Yucheng 虞城, Henan. 500 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1052), Lianzhong was a residence the Song Duke kept near the Kong Swamp. 501 Kongtong 空桐 was a settlement a few kilometers west of the Kong Marsh. The Wo Palace was in the Song capital. 502 According to Yu Yue (cited in Yang, 4:1730), this was the Song Ancestral Temple. 503 That is, gain exclusive control of the sources of profit or gain in the realm. The term zhuanli 專利 also appears in Xi 7.2. For its opposite, keeping wealth within “proper measure” (fuli 幅利), see Xiang 28.11. 504 According to Du Yu (ZZ 60.1052), the Lu and Tong Gates are the east and north gates, respectively, of the Song capital. Lying with one’s head to the north is the position of a corpse, and the corpse lies outside the gate because Qi has lost his claim to the domain. The crow, facing south, occupies the position of the ruler. 505 The covenant made in the hall of the lesser chamber seemed to have been orchestrated by the Senior Official. For this covenant, he issued a command in the ruler’s name but did not formally join in the covenant. 506 According to Yang (4:1731), Tangyu 唐盂 must have been close to the Song capital. 507 That is, by promising rich rewards, the Senior Official himself fails to “benefit the lord’s house.”

1984

Zuo Tradition

In winter, in the tenth month, the duke of Song made an excursion to the Kong Marsh.499 On the xinsi day (4), he died at Lianzhong.500 The Senior Official mobilized one thousand armored fighters from the Kong Marsh and escorted the corpse of the duke into the capital from Kongtong, proceeding to the Wo Palace.501 There he had the six noblemen summoned, saying, “We have heard that there is an army downcountry. The ruler requests that the six of you devise a plan for this.” When the six noblemen arrived, he had his armored men seize them, saying, “The ruler has a serious illness, and he asks that you, sirs, swear a covenant.” They therefore swore a covenant in the hall of the lesser bedchamber, which said, “Do not do anything that does not benefit our duke’s house.” The Senior Official set up Qi, the son of Gongsun Zhou, as ruler and conducted the mourning and encoffining at the Great Palace.502 Only on the third day did the inhabitants of the capital learn of these proceedings. The supervisor of fortifications Yue Peia had a proclamation circulate throughout the domain, which said, “The Senior Official bewitched and poisoned his ruler so as to monopolize gain.503 Now the ruler has died without ever having been sick, and after he had died, the Senior Official went so far as to hide it. These are serious crimes committed by the Senior Official.” De, the son of Gongsun Zhou, dreamed that his brother Qi was lying with his head to the north outside the Lu Gate in the east, and that he himself was a crow perching on him, with its beak touching the south gate and its tail touching the Tong Gate in the north.504 He said, “My dream is a fine one. I am certain to be set up as duke.”

26.2b

The Senior Official plotted, “I was not party to the covenant.505 Is that not virtually the same as expelling me? Make another covenant for this!” He had the invocators compose a covenant document. The six noblemen were in Tangyu and were about to make the covenant with him,506 when the invocator Xiang reported the contents of the covenant document to Huang Feiwo. Huang Feiwo plotted with the support of Yue Peib, the gates deputy Yue Dea, and the minister of the left Ling Buhuan, saying, “The people take our part. Let us expel him!” All of them went home and distributed armor, and they had a declaration made throughout the domain saying, “The Senior Official bewitched and poisoned his ruler and in this way has terrorized the lord’s house. Those who join us are the ruler’s saviors.” The multitude said, “Let us join them.” The Senior Official declared, “The Dai and Huang lineages will harm the ruling house. Those who join us will have no worries about not getting rich.” The multitude said, “You are no different.”507

26.2c

Lord Ai

1985

戴氏、皇氏欲伐公，樂得曰：「不可。彼以陵公有罪；我伐公，則 甚焉。」使國人施于大尹，大尹奉啟以奔楚，乃立得。司城為上卿，盟 曰：「三族共政，無相害也！」 26.3 衛出公自城鉏使以弓問子贛，且曰：「吾其入乎？」子贛稽首受弓，對曰：

「臣不識也。」私於使者曰：「昔成公孫於陳，甯武子、孫莊子為宛濮之 盟而君入。獻公孫於齊，子鮮、子展為夷儀之盟而君入。今君再在孫 矣，內不聞獻之親，外不聞成之卿，則賜不識所由入也。《詩》曰： 無競惟人， 四方其順之。 若得其人，四方以為主，而國於何有？」

1986

Zuo Tradition

The Dai and Huang lineages wanted to attack the duke,508 but Yue De said, “This will not do. The Senior Official is incriminated because he tyrannized the duke. If we now attack the duke, we are even worse than he.” They had the inhabitants of the capital indict the Senior Official, and the Senior Official, escorting Qi, fled to Chu. De was therefore set up as lord of Song. The supervisor of fortifications Yue Pei, who became high minister, made a covenant saying, “The three houses share the control of government and will not harm one another!”509 Although the text has already recounted the death of the Ousted Lord of Wei (see Ai 26.1), it now adds the story of how Zigong indirectly informed the ruler that he would never return to Wei. From Chengchu, the Ousted Lord of Wei sent someone to greet Zigonga and also asked, “Will I enter the domain?” Zigonga bowed, touching the ground with his forehead, accepted the bow, and replied, “I do not know.” In private communication with the envoy, he said, “In the past, when Lord Cheng of Wei took refuge in Chen, Ning Wuzi and Sun Zhuangzi made the Covenant of Yuanpu so that the ruler could enter the domain.510 When Lord Xian took refuge in Qi, Zhuana and Zizhan made the Covenant of Yiyi so that the ruler could enter the domain.511 Now, as the ruler is taking refuge for the second time, one does not hear of kinsmen within the domain like those of Lord Xian nor does one hear of high ministers outside the domain like those of Lord Cheng. Therefore, I do not know by what route he will enter the domain. As it says in the Odes:

26.3

Is he not mighty, that man? The four quarters all submit to him.512

If he were to get the right men, the whole world would regard him as its master. As for the domain, how can there be any problem?”

508 This is Qi, the ruler installed by the Senior Official. He is later known as Lord Dao of Wei. 509 The three houses are the Huang, Ling, and Yue lineages. 510 Xi 28.1, 28.3, and 28.5. 511 Xiang 14.4 and 26.7. 512 Maoshi 269, “Liewen” 烈文, 19A.710–12. Translation adapted from Karlgren, Book of Odes, 240. The ode is also cited in Zhao 1.11.

Lord Ai

1987

左傳 27.1 二十七年春，越子使舌庸來聘，且言邾田，封于駘上。二月，盟于平陽，

三子皆從。康子病之，言及子贛，曰：「若在此，吾不及此夫！」武伯曰： 「然。何不召？」曰：「固將召之。」文子曰：「他日請念。」 27.2 夏四月己亥，季康子卒。公弔焉，降禮。 27.3a 晉荀瑤帥師伐鄭，次于桐丘。鄭駟弘請救于齊。齊師將興，陳成子屬孤

子三日朝。設乘車兩馬，繫五邑焉。召顏涿聚之子晉，曰：「隰之役，而 父死焉。以國之多難，未女恤也。今君命女以是邑也，服車而朝，毋廢前 勞！」 乃救鄭。及留舒，違穀七里，穀人不知。及濮，雨，不涉。子思曰： 「大國在敝邑之宇下，是以告急。今師不行，恐無及也。」

513 After territorial struggles between Lu and Zhu (see Ai 7.4b), Yue uses its power to fix the border between the two domains at Taishang 駘上, which was perhaps identical to Hutai (see Xiang 4.8), about 70 kilometers southeast of the Lu capital, southeast of present-day Teng County 滕縣, Shandong. 514 Pingyang 平陽 was about 25 kilometers south of the Lu capital, near present-day Zou County 鄒縣, Shandong. 515 Tongqiu was about 60 kilometers southeast of the Zheng capital, west of present-day Fugou County 扶溝縣, Henan; see Zhuang 28.3. 516 These were presumably the orphaned sons of Qi soldiers who had died in battle (Yang, 4:1733). 517 Yang (4:1733) cites Zhang Binglin’s suggestion that yi 邑 here is a loan for yi 裛, “document case.” 518 See Ai 23.2. 519 The army passed in a very disciplined manner. Liushu 留舒 was on the Ji River, near present-day Dong’e 東阿, Shandong, about 190 kilometers southwest of the Qi capital. For Gu, see Annals, Zhuang 7.5. 520 In the area in question, the Pu River ran roughly north and south, parallel to the Ji River and about 10 kilometers distant (see Zhao 9.2). 521 The “great domain” here is Jin.

1988

Zuo Tradition

LORD AI 27 (468 BCE) ZUO

Lu leaders, worried about a covenant with Yue, wish that Zigong, the disciple of Confucius famous for his rhetorical prowess, were present to lend them his diplomatic expertise (see Ai 16.3). In the twenty-seventh year, in spring, the Master of Yue sent She Yong to us on an official visit and also to speak about the lands of Zhu, fixing the border at Taishang.513 In the second month, they swore a covenant at Pingyang, with the three noblemen all in attendance.514 Ji Kangzib fretted about it and mentioned Zigonga, saying, “If he were here, we would not have come to this.” Meng Wuboe said, “That is so. Why not summon him?” He said, “I will indeed summon him.” Shusun Shua said, “I would beg that we remember this in the days to come.”

27.1

The Lu ruler’s poor relations with the nobles are apparent in his minimal ritual response to the death of Ji Kangzi (see Ai 25.2). In summer, in the fourth month, on the jihai day (25), Ji Kangzi died. Our lord made a visit of condolence, but with reductions in the ritual.

27.2

Jin and Qi again confront each other over Zheng, and Jin again shows its weakness, withdrawing in the name of abiding strictly by divination results (see Ai 20.1). Chen Heng predicts disaster for Zhi Yao (see Ai 27.5), while Zhonghang Yin, a Jin exile in Qi, reflects on the reasons for his own failures (see Ai 5.1). Zhi Yaoa of Jin led an army and attacked Zheng, setting up his camp at Tongqiu.515 Si Hong of Zheng requested assistance from Qi. As the Qi army was preparing to mobilize, Chen Hengb gathered the orphaned sons of the war dead during three days of court visits.516 He sent out a chariot with two horses and attached five document cases.517 Summoning Yan Zhuoju’s son Jin, he said, “During the Xi campaign your father died.518 Because of the domain’s many difficulties, I have not yet comforted you. Today the ruler gives you his commands with these document cases. Harness these horses to your chariot, attend court, and do not abandon the model of your ancestor’s exertions.” The Qi army then went to the assistance of Zheng. They had reached Liushu and were seven li from Gu, yet the people of Gu did not know it.519 When they reached the Pu River, it was raining, and they did not cross.520 Guo Cana of Zheng said, “The great domain is under the very eaves of our humble settlement, and it is for this reason that we reported the crisis.521 If the army now does not advance, I fear that it will never arrive in time.”

27.3a

Lord Ai

1989

成子衣製、杖戈，立於阪上，馬不出者，助之鞭之。知伯聞之，乃 還，曰：「我卜伐鄭，不卜敵齊。」使謂成子曰：「大夫陳子，陳之自出。陳 之不祀，鄭之罪也，故寡君使瑤察陳衷焉，謂大夫其恤陳乎？若利本之 顛，瑤何有焉？」成子怒曰：「多陵人者皆不在，知伯其能久乎！」 27.3b 中行文子告成子曰：「有自晉師告寅者，將為輕車千乘以厭齊師之門，

則可盡也。」成子曰：「寡君命恆曰：『無及寡，無畏眾。』雖過千乘，敢 辟之乎？將以子之命告寡君。」文子曰：「吾乃今知所以亡。君子之謀也， 始、衷、終皆舉之，而後入焉。今我三不知而入之，不亦難乎！」 27.4 公患三桓之侈也，欲以諸侯去之；三桓亦患公之妄也，故君臣多間。公

游于陵阪，遇孟武伯於孟氏之衢，曰：「請有問於子：余及死乎？」對曰： 「臣無由知之。」三問，卒辭不對。 公欲以越伐魯而去三桓，秋八月甲戌，公如公孫有陘氏。因孫於 邾，乃遂如越。國人施公孫有山氏。

522 Yang (4:1734) argues that Zheng had nothing to do with the destruction of Chen, although Zheng did vanquish Chen in Xiang 25.10. Takezoe (30.60) suggests that Zheng forces may have taken part in the Chu campaign to extinguish Chen in Ai 17.4. Zhi Yao may be grasping at a pretext for the attack on Zheng. He may also be taunting Chen for having forgotten his ancestral domain. Recall that the powerful Chen lineage in Qi started with Chen Wan, who fled Chen and sought refuge in the court of Lord Huan of Qi in Zhuang 22.1. 523 Chen Heng’s remark anticipates Zhi Yao’s arrogance and fall at Ai 27.5. 524 According to Liang Lüsheng (cited in Yang, 4:1735), Lingban 陵阪 was the site of the burial mounds of the Yellow Emperor and of Shaohao, northeast of the Lu capital. 525 Apparently the inhabitants of the capital blame Gongsun Youshan for not preventing the lord from fleeing the domain. According to Shiji 33.1545, Lord Ai later returned to the home of Gongsun Youshan and ultimately died there.

1990

Zuo Tradition

Chen Henga, wearing a rain cloak and leaning upon his dagger-axe, stood upon the bank. When there was someone whose horses would not move out, he helped to flog them. Zhi Yaob heard of it and turned back because of it. “We divined about attacking Zheng,” he said, “we did not divine about facing Qi.” He sent someone to say to Chen Henga, “The high officer Chen Hengc originally comes from the domain of Chen. That Chen does not continue its yearly sacrifices is the fault of Zheng.522 Therefore, our ruler sent me to investigate the true facts about Chen. I thought a high officer such as you would feel pity for Chen. But if you derive some profit from the overthrow of your roots, what does that have to do with me?” Enraged, Chen Henga said, “All those who frequently bullied others have perished. Can Zhi Yaob last long?”523 Zhonghang Yinb reported to Chen Henga, “Someone has come from the Jin army to report to me that they intend to use one thousand light chariots to apply pressure at the gate of the Qi army camp and in this way manage to annihilate us.” Chen Henga said, “Our ruler commanded me, ‘Do not go after the few; do not fear the many.’ Even if it were more than one thousand chariots, would I dare evade them? I will report your command to our ruler.” Zhonghang Yind said, “Now at last I know why I went into exile. When the noble man lays a plan, he considers the beginning, middle, and end in turn and only then enters into it. Now I entered into a plan ignorant of all three. Was it not bound to prove difficult?”

27.3b

The conflict between Lord Ai of Lu and the three Huan families comes to a head as the lord first seeks refuge with the Lu official Gongsun Youshan and then is driven into exile in Yue, as Zigong once predicted (see Ai 16.3, 27.2). Our lord, troubled by the excesses of the three Huan lineages, wanted to use the princes to depose them. The three Huan lineages were also troubled by our lord’s conceit, so there were many rifts between ruler and subjects. Our lord was on an excursion to Lingban when he encountered Meng Wubo on the Avenue of the Mengs.524 Our lord said, “Permit me to put a question to you: will I die a natural death?” Meng replied, “I have no way of knowing that.” Three times he asked, and to the end Meng Wubo refused to answer. Our lord wanted to use Yue forces to attack Lu and depose the three Huan lineages. In autumn, in the eighth month, on the jiaxu day (1), our lord went to the home of Gongsun Youshanb. From there he sought refuge in Zhu and then traveled on to Yue. The inhabitants of the capital laid the blame on Gongsun Youshana.525

27.4

Lord Ai

1991

27.5 悼之四年，晉荀瑤帥師圍鄭，未至，鄭駟弘曰：「知伯愎而好勝，早下

之，則可行也。」乃先保南里以待之。知伯入南里，門于桔柣之門。鄭人 俘酅魁壘，賂之以知政，閉其口而死。 將門，知伯謂趙孟：「入之！」對曰：「主在此。」知伯曰：「惡而無 勇，何以為子？」對曰：「以能忍恥，庶無害趙宗乎！」知伯不悛。 趙襄子由是惎知伯，遂喪之。知伯貪而愎，故韓、魏反而喪之。

1992

Zuo Tradition

As Jin attacks Zheng yet again (see Ai 27.3), Zhi Yao alienates Zhao Wuxu. As predicted (see Ai 27.3), Zhi Yao ultimately falls because of his own stubbornness and arrogance. This last entry in Zuozhuan is strangely fragmentary. Although the beginning of this passage refers to the siege of Zheng, which took place in 463 BCE, the death of Zhi Yao, mentioned at the end of the passage, did not occur until 453 BCE. In the fourth year of Lord Dao,526 Zhi Yaoa of Jin led an army and laid siege to Zheng. Before he arrived, Si Hong of Zheng said, “Zhi Yaob is stubborn and loves to win. If we surrender to him early,527 then we can persuade him to go away.” Therefore, they moved in advance of his troop movement by setting up defenses in Nanli in order to wait for him.528 Zhi Yaob entered Nanli and then attacked the Xiedie Gate. The men of Zheng took the Jin officer Xi Kuilei prisoner and tried to bribe him to turn against his own domain by offering him a position in the government, but Xi stopped up his own mouth and died.529 As they prepared to attack the gate, Zhi Yaob ordered Zhao Wuxua to go in. Zhao replied, “You, my master, are here.”530 Zhi Yaob said, “As ugly as you are and totally bereft of courage, how can you be the heir apparent in your family?” Zhao replied, “Because I am able to endure humiliation, I will bring no harm to the Zhao ancestral line.” Zhi Yaob did not change his ways. From this time on, Zhao Wuxub loathed Zhi Yaob and as a result sought to destroy him. Zhi Yaob was greedy and stubborn, so the Han and Wei lineages turned against him and did indeed destroy him.531

27.5

526 Lord Dao (r. 466–429) is Lord Ai’s son. 527 The ensuing narrative contains no such development. 528 Nanli was outside the gates of the Zheng capital. For the Xiedie Gate, see Zhuang 28.3. 529 There are two quite different explanations of this sentence. Yang (4:1736) believes that when Xi Kuilei refused to serve Zheng, the men of Zheng “stopped up his mouth” and killed him. Takezoe says Xi somehow gagged himself, refusing to give any answer to the attempt to turn his loyalties, and thus committed suicide. 530 As Du Yu (ZZ 60.1042) explains, Zhao Wuxu urges Zhi Yao to go in himself. 531 Zhi Yao is defeated at Jinyang and killed in 453 Bce. See Shiji 15.696 and 43.1795.

Lord Ai

1993

Bibliography FULL-TEXT COMMENTARIES AND CRITICAL EDITIONS

Chunqiu jingzhuan jijie 春秋經傳集解. Commentaries by Du Yu 杜預. 2 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1978. Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhengyi 春秋左傳正義. Commentaries by Du Yu and Kong Yingda 孔穎達. In SSJZS, vol. 6. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Liu Wenqi 劉文淇. Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng 春秋左氏傳舊注 疏證. Beijing: Kexue, 1959. Qin ding Chunqiu zhuanshuo huizuan 欽定春秋傳說彙纂. Commentaries collated by Wang Shan 王掞 et al. In SKQS, vol. 173. Takezoe Kōkō 竹添光鴻, ed. and annotator. Saden Kaisen 左傳會箋. 1912. Reprint, Taipei: Fenghuang, 1961. Wu Jing’an 吳靜安. Chunqiu Zuoshi zhuan jiuzhu shuzheng xu 春秋左氏傳舊 注疏證續. Changchun: Dongbei shifan daxue, 2005. Yang Bojun 楊伯峻, ed. and annotator. Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu 春秋左傳注. Rev. ed. 4 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990.

RESEARCH AIDS

Cheng Faren 程發軔. Chunqiu renpu 春秋人譜. Taipei: Shangwu, 1990. Combined Concordances to Ch’un-ch’iu, Kung-yang, Ku-liang, and Tso-chuan 春秋經傳引得. 4 vols. Harvard-Yenching Sinological Index Series, Supplement 11. 1937. Reprint, Taipei: Ch’eng-wen, 1966. A Concordance to the Chunqiu Zuozhuan 春秋左傳逐字索引. Edited by Chen Fangzheng 陳方正 and Liu Dianjue 劉殿爵. 2 vols. Institute of Chinese Studies (Hong Kong University), vol. 11. Hong Kong: Shangwu, 1995. Fang Zhaohui 方朝暉. Chunqiu Zuozhuan renwu pu 春秋左傳人物譜. 2 vols. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 2001.

1995

Fraser, Everand D. H., and James H. S. Lockhart. Index to the Tso Chuan. ­London: Oxford University Press, 1930. Gudai Hanyu cidian 古代漢語詞典. Edited by Chen Fuhua 陳復華. Beijing: Shangwu, 1998. Hanyu da cidian 漢語大辭典. Edited by Luo Zhufeng 羅竹風. 12 vols. Shanghai: Shangwu, 1990. Hanyu da zidian 漢語大字典. Compiled and edited by Hanyu da zidian weiyuan hui 漢語大字典委員會. 8 vols. Wuhan: Hubei cishu, 1986–89. Hong Liangji 洪亮吉. Chunqiu Zuozhuan gu 春秋左傳詁. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1987. Lu Deming 陸德明. Jingdian shiwen 經典釋文. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983. Page, John, and Maria Isabel Garcia Hidalgo. The Zuozhuan Digital Concordance. El Colegio de México. http://mezcal.colmex.mx/Zuozhuan/Scripts/ cuenta.idc. Schuessler, Axel. A Dictionary of Early Zhou Chinese. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1987. Shigezawa, Toshirō 重澤俊郎. Zuozhuan renming diming suoyin 左傳人名地 名索引. Taipei: Guangwen, 1962. Wang Li gu Hanyu zidian 王力古漢語字典. Compiled and edited by Wang Li 王力. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2000. Yang Bojun 楊伯峻 and Xu Ti 徐提. Chunqiu Zuozhuan cidian 春秋左傳詞典. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1985. Zhou Fagao 周法高. Zhou Qin mingzi jiegu huishi 周秦名字解詁彙釋. Taipei: Zhonghua, 1958.

TRANSLATIONS OF CHUNQIU AND ZUOZHUAN

Bauer, Wolfgang, ed. Tsch’un-ts’iu: Mit den drei Kommentaren Tso-tschuan, Kung-yang tschuan und Ku-liang-tschuan in mandschuischer Übersetzung. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft / Franz Steiner, 1959. Couvreur, Séraphin, trans. Tch’ouen ts’iou et Tso tchouan: La chronique de la principauté de Lòu. 3 vols. Paris: Cathasia (Impr. de Bellenand), 1951. Hu Zhihui 胡志揮 et al., trans. Zuo’s Commentary. 2 vols. Changsha: Hunan Press, 1996. Legge, James, trans. The Ch’un Ts’ew with the Tso Chuen. Vol. 5 of The Chinese Classics. 1872. Reprint, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1895. Li Zongtong 李宗侗, trans. Chunqiu Zuozuan jinzhu jinyi 春秋左傳今註今譯. Taipei: Shangwu, 1972. Shen Yucheng 沈玉成, trans. Zuozhuan yiwen 左傳譯文. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1981. Takeuchi, Teruo 竹內照夫, trans. Shunjū Sashiden 春秋左氏傳. Chūgoku koten bungaku zenshū 中國古典文學全集, vol. 3. Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1958.

1996

Bibliography

Wang Shouqian 王守謙 et al., trans. Zuozhuan quanyi 左傳全譯. Guizhou: Renmin, 1990. Watson, Burton, trans. The Tso Chuan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1989. Zhang Yanjin 張燕瑾 et al., trans. Wen bai duizhao quanyi Zuozhuan 文白對 照全譯左傳. 2 vols. Beijing: Guoji wenhua, 1993.

EARLY AND IMPERIAL CHINESE SOURCES AND CRITICAL EDITIONS (LISTED BY TITLE)

Baihu tong shuzheng 白虎通疏證. By Ban Gu 班固. Compiled by Chen Li 陳 立. Edited by Wu Zeyu 吳則虞. Chengdu: Sichuan renmin, 1997. Chongkan Song ben Shisan jing zhushu fu jiaokan ji 重刊宋本十三經注疏附校 勘記. Edited by Ruan Yuan 阮元 et al. 8 vols. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Chuci jizhu 楚辭集注. Collated commentaries by Zhu Xi 朱熹. Hong Kong: Zhonghua, 1987. Chunqiu fanlu yizheng 春秋繁露義證. Annotated by Su Yu 蘇輿. Edited by Zhong Zhe 鍾哲. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992. Chunqiu Gongyang zhuan zhushu 春秋公羊傳注疏. Commentaries by He Xiu 何休 and Xu Yan 徐彥. In SSJZS, vol. 7. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Chunqiu Guliang zhuan zhushu 春秋穀梁傳注疏. Commentaries by Fan Ning 范寧 and Yang Shixun 楊士勛. In SSJZS, vol. 7. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Da Dai Liji jinzhu jinyi 大戴禮記今註今譯. Annotated and translated by Gao Ming 高明. Taipei: Shangwu, 1984. Erya zhushu 爾雅注疏. Commentaries by Guo Pu 郭璞 and Xing Bing 邢昺. In SSJZS, vol. 8. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Fangyan jiaojian ji tongjian 方言校箋及通檢. By Yang Xiong 揚雄. Compiled by Zhou Zumo 周祖謨. Shanghai: Kexue, 1956. Fayan yishu 法言義疏. By Yang Xiong 揚雄. Compiled by Wang Rongbao 汪 榮寶. Edited by Chen Zhongfu 陳仲夫. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1997. Fengsu tongyi 風俗通義. By Ying Shao 應邵. SBBY ed. Taipei: Zhonghua, 1981. Gu ben Zhushu jinian jizheng 古本竹書紀年輯證. Compiled by Fang Shiming 方詩銘, Wang Xiuling 王修齡. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1981. Guanzi jinzhu jinyi 管子今註今譯. Annotated and translated by Li Mian 李 勉. Taipei: Shangwu, 1990. Guoyu jijie 國語集解. Annotated by Xu Yuangao 徐元誥. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002. Guoyu 國語. Commentaries by Wei Zhao 韋昭. Annotated by Shanghai Shifan daxue guji zhengli yanjiu suo 上海師範大學古籍整理研究所. 2 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1988. Han Feizi jishi 韓非子集釋. Annotated by Chen Qiyou 陳奇猷. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959.

Bibliography 1997

Han shi waizhuan jinzhu jinyi 韓詩外傳今註今譯. Annotated and translated by Lai Yanyuan 賴炎元. Taipei: Shangwu, 1986. Hanshu 漢書. By Ban Gu 班固 et al. Annotated by Yan Shigu 顏師古. 12 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1962. Hanshu “Yiwen zhi” jiangshu 漢書藝文志講疏. Annotated by Gu Shi 顧實. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2009. Hou Hanji jiaozhu 後漢紀校註. By Yuan Hong 袁宏. Edited by Zhou Tianyou 周天游. Tianjin: Tianjin guji, 1987. Hou Hanshu 後漢書. By Fan Ye 范瞱. Annotated by Li Xian 李賢 et al. 18 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1965. Huainan honglie jijie 淮南鴻烈集解. Compiled by Liu Wendian 劉文典. Edited by Feng Yi 馮逸 and Qiao Hua 喬華. XBZZJC ed. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989. Jinben Zhushu jinian shuzheng 今本竹書紀年疏證. Compiled and edited by Wang Guowei 王國維. In Wang Guantang xiansheng quanji 王觀堂先生 全集, vol. 13. Taipei: Wenhua, 1968. Kongzi jiayu 孔子家語. Annotated by Wang Su 王肅. XBZZJC ed. Taipei: Shijie, 1991. Liang Hanji 兩漢紀. Including Hanji 漢紀 by Xun Yue 荀悅 and Hou Hanji 後漢紀 by Yuan Hong. Edited by Zhang Lie 張烈. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002. Lienü zhuan 列女傳. Compiled by Liu Xiang 劉向. SBBY ed. Taipei: Zhonghua, 1987. Liji zhushu 禮記注疏. Commentaries by Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 and Kong Yingda 孔穎達. In SSJZS, vol. 5. Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Lunheng jiaoshi 論衡校釋. By Wang Chong 王充. Annotated edition compiled by Huang Hui 黃暉. Collated commentaries by Liu Pansui 劉盼遂. XBZZJC ed. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990. Lunyu jishi 論語集釋. Collated commentaries by Cheng Shude 程樹德. Edited by Cheng Junying 程俊英 and Jiang Jianyuan 蔣見元. XBZZJC ed. 4 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990. Lunyu zhushu 論語注疏. Commentaries by He Yan 何晏 and Xing Bing 邢昺. In SSJZS, vol. 8. Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Lüshi chunqiu jiaoshi 呂氏春秋校釋. Annotated by Chen Qiyou 陳奇猷. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2002. Maoshi zhengyi 毛詩正義. Commentaries by Zheng Xuan and Kong Yingda. In SSJZS, vol. 2. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Mengzi zhengyi 孟子注疏. Commentaries by Zhao Qi 趙歧 and Sun Shi 孫奭. In SSJZS, vol. 8. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Mozi jiangu 墨子間詁. Annotated by Sun Yirang 孫詒讓. Edited by Sun Yikai 孫以楷. XBZZJC ed. Taipei: Huazheng, 1987. Sanguo zhi 三國志. By Chen Shou 陳壽. Commentaries by Pei Songzhi 裴松之. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959. Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書. Edited by Ma Chengyuan 馬承源. Vol. 2. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2001.

1998

Bibliography

Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書. Edited by Ma Chengyuan. Vol. 6. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2007. Shangjun shu jinzhu jinyi 商君書今註今譯. Annotated and translated by He Lingxu 賀凌虛. Taipei: Shangwu, 1988. Shangshu zhengyi 尚書正義. Commentaries by Kong Yingda et al. In SSJZS, vol. 1. 1815. Reprint, Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Shiben ba zhong 世本八種. Annotated by Song Zhong 宋衷注 (Han). Collected by Qin Jiamo 秦嘉謨 et al. Shanghai: Shangwu, 1957. Shiji 史記. By Sima Qian 司馬遷. Annotated by Pei Yin 裴駰, Sima Zhen 司馬 貞, and Zhang Shoujie 張守節. 10 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959. Shishuo xinyu jianshu 世說新語箋疏. By Liu Yiqing 劉義慶. Commentaries by Liu Xiaobiao 劉孝標. Annotated by Yu Jiaxi 余嘉錫. Edited by Zhou Zumo 周祖謨. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1996. Shitong tongshi 史通通釋. By Liu Zhiji 劉知幾. Annotated by Pu Qilong 浦起龍. Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1988. Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注. By Xu Shen 許慎. Commentaries by Duan Yucai 段玉裁. Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji, 1998. Shuoyuan jinzhu jinyi 說苑今註今譯. By Liu Xiang 劉向. Annotated and translated by Lu Yuanjun 盧元駿. Taipei: Shangwu, 1995. Sishu zhangju jizhu 四書章句集注. Compiled by Zhu Xi 朱熹. Edited by Xu Deming 徐德明. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2001. Songshi 宋史. By Tuotuo 脫脫 et al. 40 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1977. Soushen ji 搜神記. By Gan Bao 干寶. Punctuated by Hu Huaichen 胡懷琛. Shanghai: Shangwu, 1957. Sunzi jinzhu jinyi 孫子今註今譯. Annotated and translated by Wei Rulin 魏汝霖. Taipei: Shangwu, 1988. Wenxin diaolong yizheng 文心雕龍義證. By Liu Xie 劉勰. Annotated by Zhan Ying 詹鍈. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1989. Wenxuan 文選. Compiled by Xiao Tong 蕭統. Annotated by Li Shan 李善 et al. 6 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1986. Xinshu 新書. By Jia Yi 賈誼. SBBY ed. Taipei: Zhonghua, 1981. Xinxu jinzhu jinyi 新序今註今譯. By Liu Xiang 劉向. Annotated and translated by Lu Yuanjun 盧元駿. Taipei: Shangwu, 1991. Xunzi jijie 荀子集解. Annotated by Wang Xianqian 王先謙. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1988. Xunzi jishi 荀子集釋. Annotated by Li Disheng 李滌生. Taipei: Xuesheng, 1979. Yanzi chunqiu jishi 晏子春秋集釋. Edited by Wu Zeyu 吳則虞. Beijing: Zhong­hua, 1962. Yi Zhou shu huijiao jizhu 逸周書彙校集注. Edited by Huang Huaixin 黃懷信 et al. 2 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1995. Yi Zhou shu jixun jiaoshi 逸周書集訓校釋. Compiled by Zhu Youzeng 朱右曾. Taipei: Hanjing wenhua, 1980. Yili zhushu 儀禮注疏. Commentaries by Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 and Jia Gongyan 賈公彥. In SSJZS, vol. 3. Taipei: Yiwen, 1973.

Bibliography 1999

Yingyin Wenyuange siku quanshu 景印文淵閣四庫全書. 1,500 vols. Taipei: Shangwu, 1983. Zhanguo ce 戰國策. Compiled by Liu Xiang 劉向. 3 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1978. Zhanguo ce jianzheng 戰國策箋證. Annotated by Fan Xiangyong 范祥雍 and Fan Bangjin 范邦瑾. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2006. Zhong lun 中論. By Xu Gan 徐幹. Taipei: Shijie, 1975. Zhouli zhushu 周禮注疏. Commentaries by Zheng Xuan and Jia Gongyan. In SSJZS, vol. 4. Taipei: Yiwen, 1973. Zhuzi yulei 朱子語類. By Zhu Xi 朱熹. Compiled by Li Jingde 黎靖德. Edited by Wang Xingxian 王星賢. 8 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1994. Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒. By Sima Guang 司馬光 et al. Punctuated by Biaodian Zizhi tongjian xiaozu 標點資治通鑑小組. 20 vols. Beijing: Guji, 1956. Zizhi tongjian gangmu 資治通鑒綱目. By Zhu Xi 朱熹. In SKQS, vols. 689– 691.

SECONDARY SOURCES

Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Presentation of Reality in Western Literature. Translated by Willard R. Task. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1953. Bagley, Robert. “Anyang Writing and the Origin of the Chinese Writing ­System.” In The First Writing, edited by Stephen D. Houston, 190–249. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. ———. “Percussion.” In Music in the Age of Confucius, edited by Jenny So, 35–64. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2000. Bauer, Wolfgang. A Concordance to the “Kuo-yü.” 2 vols. Taipei: Chinese ­Materials and Research Aids Service Center, 1973. Bielenstein, Hans. “Wang Mang, the Restoration of the Han Dynasty, and Later Han.” In The Cambridge History of China, vol. 1, The Ch’in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.–A.D. 220, edited by Denis Twitchett and Michael Loewe, 223–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Biot, Édouard, trans. Le Tcheou-li, ou Rites des Tcheou. 2 vols. 1851. Reprint, Taipei: Ch’eng-wen, 1969. Birrell, Anne. Chinese Mythology: An Introduction. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999. Bissell, Jeff. “Literary Studies of Historical Texts: Early Narrative Accounts of Chung’er, Duke Wen of Chin.” PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, ­Madison, 1996. Blakeley, Barry B. “An Annotated Genealogy of the Royal Clan of Ch’u in the Ch’un Ch’iu Period.” EC 1 (1975): 33–51. ———. “The Factor of Clan Ties in the Distribution of Political Offices in the Spring and Autumn Period.” In Chine ancienne, 1–4. Actes du XXIXe ­Congrès Internationale des Orientalistes. Paris: L’Asiathèque, 1977.

2000

Bibliography

———. “Notes on the Reliability and Objectivity of the Tu Yü Commentary on the Tso Chuan.” JAOS 101, no. 2 (1981): 207–12. ———. “‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the Zuo zhuan’ Revisited.” EC 29 (2004): 217–67. ———. “On the Location of the Chu Capital in Early Chunqiu Times.” EC 15 (1990): 49–70. Blondeau, Anne-Marie, and Kristofer Schipper, eds. Essais sur le rituel: ­Colloque du centenaire de la Section des Sciences Religieuses de l’École ­Pratique des Hautes Études. 2 vols. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études: Sciences religieuses 95. Louvain: Peeters, 1988. Boltz, William. “Language and Writing.” In Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 74–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ———. “Notes on the Textual Relation between the Kuo yü and the Tso chuan.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 53, no. 3 (1990): 491–502. Brooks, A. Taeko. “Heaven, Li, and the Formation of the Zuozhuan 左傳.” Oriens Extremus 44 (2003/4): 51–100. ———. “The Historical Value of the Chun/Chyou 春秋.” Warring States Papers 1 (2010): 73–76. Brooks, Bruce E., and Taeko Brooks, trans. The Original Analects: Sayings of Confucius and His Successors. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. ———. An Overview of Selected Classical Chinese Texts. http://www.umass. edu/wsp/chronology/overview.html. Broschat, Michael Robert. “Guiguzi: A Textual Study and Translation.” PhD diss., University of Washington, 1985. Cai Miaozhen 蔡妙真. Zhuixun yu quanshi: Zuoxiu dui Zuozhuan de jieshou 追尋與詮釋：左繡對左傳的接受. Taipei: Wanjuanlou, 2003. Chang Chun-shu. Nation, State, and Imperialism in Early China, ca. 1600 B.C.– A.D. 8. Vol. 1 of The Rise of the Chinese Empire. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2007. Chang, C. K. Art, Myth, and Ritual, the Path to Political Authority in Ancient China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983. Chavannes, Édouard, trans. Les mémoires historiques de Se-ma Ts’ien. 5 vols. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1895–1905. Reprint (with 6th vol.), Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1969. Chen Houyao 陳厚耀. Chunqiu changli 春秋長曆. In SKQS, vol. 178. Chen Mengjia 陳夢家. Shangshu tonglun 尚書通論. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1985. Chen Pan 陳槃. Chunqiu dashi biao lieguo jue xing ji cunmie biao zhuan yi 春秋 大事表列國爵姓及存滅表譔異. Taipei: Academia Sinica, 1969. Chen Tongsheng 陳桐生. Zhongguo shiguan wenhua yu Shiji 中國史官文化與 史記. Shantou: Shantou daxue, 1993. Chen Yumo 陳禹謨. Zuoshi binglue 左氏兵略. In Siku quanshu cunmu cong­ shu 四庫全書存目叢書, ser. 3, vols. 32–33. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 1997.

Bibliography 2001

Cheng Gongshuo 程公說. Chunqiu fenji 春秋分記. In SKQS, vol. 154. Cheng Junying 程俊英 and Jiang Jianyuan 蔣見元. Shijing zhuxi 詩經注析. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991. Cheng Rongjing 成蓉鏡. Chunqiu rinan zhipu 春秋日南至譜. In Xu xiu Siku quanshu 續修四庫全書, vol. 148. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1995–99. Cole, Thomas. The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991. Crump, James I., trans. Chan-kuo ts’e. Rev. ed. Michigan Monographs in ­Chinese Studies 77. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 1996. ———. Intrigues: Studies of the Chan-Kuo Ts’e. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1964. Demiéville, Paul. Choix d’études sinologiques. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973. Di Cosmo, Nicola. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Dong Zuobin 董作賓. Zhongguo nianli zongpu 中國年曆總譜. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University, 1960. Du Zhengsheng 杜正勝. Gudai shehui yu guojia 古代社會與國家. 1992. Taipei: Yunchen wenhua, 2005. ———. Zhoudai chengbang 周代城邦. Taipei: Lianjing, 1979. Durrant, Stephen. The Cloudy Mirror: Tension and Conflict in the Writings of Sima Qian. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. ———. “Ssu-ma Ch’ien’s Conception of Tso chuan.” JAOS 112, no. 2 (1992): 295–301. ———. “The Task and Ritual of Historical Writing in Early China.” In Thinking, Recording, and Writing History in the Ancient World, edited by Kurt A. Raaflaub, 19–40. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell Press, 2014. Duyvendak, J. J. L. The Book of Lord Shang. 1928. Reprint, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963. Egan, Ronald C. “Narratives in Tso chuan.” HJAS 37, no. 2 (1977): 323–52. Elman, Benjamin A., and Martin Kern, eds. Premodern East Asian Statecraft in Comparative Context: The “Rituals of Zhou” in Chinese and East Asian History. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009. Fang Bao 方苞. Guwen yuexuan 古文約選. Taipei: Taiwan Zhonghua shuju, 1969. ———. Zuozhuan yifa juyao 左傳義法舉要. Taipei: Guangwen, 1977. Fang Xuanchen 方炫琛. “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu” 左傳人物名號研 究. PhD diss., National Chengchi University, 1983. Felber, Roland. “Neue Möglichkeiten und Kriterien für die Bestimmung der Authentizität des Zuo-Zhuan.” Archiv Orientálni 34 (1966): 80–91. Forke, Alfred, trans. Lun-hêng. 2 vols. 1907–11. Reprint, New York: Paragon, 1962. Fu Lipu 傅隸樸. Chunqiu sanzhuan biyi 春秋三傳比義. 2 vols. Taipei: Shangwu, 1983.

2002

Bibliography

Fu Sinian 傅斯年. “Xing Ming guxun bianzheng” 性命古訓辯證. In Dajia guoxue: Fu Sinian juan 大家國學：傅斯年卷, 194–354. Tianjin: Tianjin ­renmin, 2009. Gao Shiqi 高士奇. Zuozhuan jishi benmo 左傳紀事本末. 3 vols. Beijing: ­Zhonghua, 1979. Gassmann, Robert H. Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen: Die Rekonstruktion der Chunqiu-Zeitlichen Kalendar des Fürstentums Lu und der Zhou-Könige. Schweizer asiatische Studien, Studienhefte, vol. 16. Bern: Peter Lang, 2002. Gentz, Joachim. Das Gongyang zhuan: Auslegung und Kanonisierung der Frühlings und Herbstannalen (Chunqiu). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2001. Girardot, Norman J. The Victorian Translation of China: James Legge’s Oriental Pilgrimage. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002. Goldin, Paul, R. Ancient Chinese Civilization: Bibliography of Materials in Western Languages. 5 December 2010. http://www.sas.upenn.edu/ealc/ paul-r-goldin. Graham, A. C. Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Early China. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989. Gu Donggao 顧棟高. Chunqiu dashi biao 春秋大事表. Edited by Wu Shuping 吳樹平 and Li Jiemin 李解民. 3 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1995. Gu Jiegang 顧頡剛. Chunqiu sanzhuan ji Guoyu zhi zonghe yanjiu 春秋三傳及 國語之綜合研究. Chengdu: Ba Shu shushe, 1988. ———, comp. Gushi bian 古史辨. 7 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1982. Gu Lisan 顧立三. Sima Qian zhuanxie Shiji caiyong Zuozhuan de yanjiu 司馬 遷撰寫史記採用左傳的研究. Taipei: Zhongzheng, 1981. Gu Shike 顧史考 [Scott Cook]. “Chu wen ‘hu’ zi zhi shuangchong yongfa: Shuo ‘Jing gong “gu”’ ji Miaomin ‘wu “hao” zhi xing’” 楚文「唬」字之雙重 用法：說「景公『痼』」及苗民「五『號』之刑」. Guwenzi yanjiu 27 (2008): 387–93. Gu Yanwu 顧炎武. Rizhi lu jishi 日知錄集釋. Compiled by Huang Rucheng 黃汝成. 1936. Reprint, Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou guji, 1990. ———. Zuozhuan Dujie buzheng 左傳杜解補正. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991. Han Yu 韓愈. Dongya tang Changli jizhu 東雅堂昌黎集註. Compiled by Liao Yingzhong 廖瑩中. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1993. Hao Jing 郝敬. Chunqiu fei Zuo 春秋非左. Hubei congshu 36. Hubei: San yu cao tang, Guangxu 17 [1891]. Hardy, Grant. Worlds of Bronze and Bamboo: Sima Qian’s Conquest of History. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. Hart, James. “The Discussion of the Wu-yi Bells in the Kuo-yu.” Monumenta Serica 29 (1970–71): 391–418. Hawkes, David, trans. The Songs of the South. 2nd ed. Harmondsworth: ­Penguin, 1985. He Leshi 何樂士. Zuozhuan xuci yanjiu 左傳虛詞研究. Beijing: Shangwu, 1989. ———. Zuozhuan yuyan yanjiu wenji 左傳語言研究文集. Changsha: Yuelu shushe, 1994.

Bibliography 2003

Henderson, John B. Scripture, Canon, and Commentary: A Comparison of Confucian and Western Exegesis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991. Henry, Eric. “‘Junzi yue’ versus ‘Zhongni yue’ in Zuozhuan.” HJAS 59, no. 1 (1999): 125–61. ———. “The Motif of Recognition in Early China.” HJAS 47, no. 1 (1987): 5–30. ———. “A Note on Chun/Chyou Shr-yw 春秋事語 Item 5.” In Warring States Papers: Studies in Chinese and Comparative Philology, 52–55. Amherst: Warring States Project, University of Massachusetts, 2010. Hightower, James Robert, trans. Han Shih wai chuan: Han Ying’s Illustrations of the Didactic Application of the Classic of Songs. Harvard-Yenching Institute Monograph Series 11. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1952. Hirase Takao 平勢隆郎. Saden no shiryō hihanteki kenkyū 左伝の資料批判的 研究. Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Tōyō Bunka Kenkyūjo, 1998. Hong Liangji 洪亮吉. “Chunqiu shi lun” 春秋十論. In Hong Liangji ji 洪亮吉集, edited by Liu Dequan, 3:982–98. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2001. Hsü, Cho-yun. Ancient China in Transition: An Analysis of Social Mobility, 722–222 B.C. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1965. ———. “James Legge and the Chinese Classics. Asian Culture 23, no. 1 (1995): 43–58. ———. “The Spring and Autumn Period.” In Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 545–86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Hu Anguo 胡安國. Chunqiu zhuan 春秋傳. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan, 2006. Hu Nianyi 胡念貽. “Zuozhuan de zhenwei he xiezuo shidai wenti kaobian” 左傳的真偽和寫作時代問題 考辯. Wenshi 文史 11 (1981): 1–33. Huang Lili 黃麗麗. “Shuo Zuozhuan” 說左傳. Zhongguo lishi bowuguan guankan 中國歷史博物館館刊 1996, no. 1, 31–46. ———. Zuozhuan xinlun 左傳新論. Hefei: Huangshan, 2008. Huang Zhaoji 黃肇基. Jian’ao yu yuanzhao: Fang Bao Lin Shu de Zuozhuan pingdian 鑒奧與圓照：方苞林紓的左傳評點. Taipei: Yunchen, 2008. Hucker, Charles O. A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1985. Hui Dong 惠棟. Zuozhuan buzhu 左傳補注. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991. Hung, William. Preface to Combined Concordances to Ch’un-ch’iu, Kungyang, Ku-liang, and Tso-chuan. 4 vols. Harvard-Yenching Sinological Index Series, Supplement 11. 1937. Reprint, Taipei: Ch’eng-wen, 1966. Jao, Tsung-[y]i. “Le Canon des Rites et quelques théories majeures du ritualisme suivant le Commentaire de Zuo des Annales des Printemps et Automnes.” In Essais sur le rituel: Colloque du centenaire de la Section des Sciences Religieuses de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études, edited by AnneMarie Blondeau and Kristofer Schipper, 2:27–44. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études: Sciences religieuses 95. Louvain: Peeters, 1988.

2004

Bibliography

Jiang Bingzhang 姜炳璋. Du Zuo buyi 讀左補義. 1769. Reprint, Taipei: Wenhai, 1968. Jin Dejian 金德建. Sima Qian suojian shu kao 司馬遷所見書考. Shanghai: Renmin, 1963. Jin Shengtan. 金聖嘆. Guanhua tang di liu caizi shu Xixiang ji 貫華堂第六才 子書西廂記. In Jin Shengtan quanji 金聖嘆全集, edited by Lu Lin 陸林. 6 vols. Nanjing: Fenghuang, 2008. ———. “Tianxia caizi bidu shu” 天下才子必讀書. In Jin Shengtan pingdian caizi quanji 金聖嘆評點才子全集. Edited by Lin Qian 林乾. Beijing: Guangming ribao, 1997. ———. “Zuozhuan shi” 左傳釋. In Jin Shengtan pingdian caizi quanji. Edited by Lin Qian 林乾. Beijing: Guangming ribao, 1997. Johnson, David [G.] “Epic and History in Early China: The Matter of Wu ­Tzu-hsü.” HJAS 40, no. 2 (1981): 255–71. ———. “The Wu Tzu-hsü Pien-wen and Its Sources.” HJAS 40, no. 1 (1980): 93–156; 40, no. 2 (1980): 465–505. Johnston, Ian, trans. The Mozi: A Complete Translation. Translations from the Asian Classics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010. Kalinowski, Marc. “La rhétorique oraculaire dans les chroniques anciennes de la Chine.” Divination et rationalité en Chine ancienne, Extrême-Orient, Extrême-Occident: Cahiers de recherches comparative 21 (1999): 37–65. Kang Youwei 康有為. Xinxue weijing kao 新學偽經考. In Kang Youwei quanji 康有為全集, edited by Jiang Yihua 姜義華 and Zhang Ronghua 張榮華, 1:353–558. Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue, 2007. Karlgren, Bernhard. The Authenticity and Nature of the Tso Chuan. Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1926. ———, trans. The Book of Documents. Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1950. ———, trans. The Book of Odes. Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1950. ———. “The Early History of the Chou Li and Tso Chuan Texts.” BMFEA 3 (1931): 1–59. ———. Glosses on the “Book of Odes.” Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1964. ———. “Glosses on the Tso Chuan.” BMFEA 41 (1969): 1–158. ———. Grammata Serica Recensa. Stockholm: Museum of Far East Antiquities, 1972. ———. “Legends and Cults in Ancient China.” BMFEA 18 (1946): 199–365. Keightley, David N. “The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty.” In Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 232–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ———. Sources of Shang History. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978.

Bibliography 2005

Kennedy, George A. “Interpretation of the Ch’un-ch’iu.” In Selected Works of George A. Kennedy, edited by Tien-yi Li, 79–103. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1964. Kern, Martin. “Offices of Writing and Reading in the Zhouli.” In Premodern East Asian Statecraft in Comparative Context: The “Rituals of Zhou” in ­Chinese and East Asian History, edited by Benjamin A. Elman and Martin Kern, 64–93. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009. ———. “The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China.” In The Poetics of Grammar and the Metaphysics of Sound and Sign, edited by Sergio La Porta and David Shulman, 109–76. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2007. ———, ed. Text and Ritual in Early China. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2005. Kierman, Frank A., and John K. Fairbank, eds. Chinese Ways in Warfare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974. Knechtges, David R., trans. Wen xuan, or Selections of Refined Literature. 3 vols. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982–96. Knoblock, John, and Jeffrey K. Reigel, trans. The Annals of Lü Buwei: A Complete Translation and Study. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000. ———, trans. Xunzi: A Translation and Study of the Complete Works. 3 vols. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1988–94. Kramers, Robert P., trans. K’ung tzu chia yu: The School Sayings of Confucius. Sinica Leidensia 7. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1950. Lau, D. C., trans. The Analects. New York: Penguin, 1998. ———, trans. Mencius. Rev. ed. Penguin Classics. New York: Penguin, 2004. Lee, Isabelle. “Touhu: Three Millennia of the Chinese Arrow Vase and the Game of Pitch-Pot.” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society (London) 56 (1991–92): 13–27. Legge, James, trans. The Lî Kî. Sacred Books of the East, vols. 27–28. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885. Lewis, Mark Edward. The Construction of Space in Early China. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006. ———. “Ritual Origins of the Warring States.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 84 (1997): 73–98. ———. Sanctioned Violence in Early China. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990. ———. “Warring States Political History.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 587–650. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ———. Writing and Authority in Early China. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. Li Feng. Landscape and Power in Early China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. ———. “Transmitting Antiquity: The Origin and Paradigmitization of the

2006

Bibliography

‘Five Ranks.’” In Perceptions of Antiquity in Chinese Civilization, edited by Dieter Kuhn and Helga Stahl, 103–34. Heidelberg: Edition Forum, 2008. Li Jianjun 李建軍. Songdai Chunqiu xue yu Song xing wenhua 宋代春秋學與 宋型文化. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 2008. Li Ling 李零. “Chutu faxian yu gushu niandai de zai renshi” 出土發現與古書 年代的再認識. Jiuzhou xuekan 九州學刊 3, no. 1 (1988): 105–36. Li Longxian 李隆獻. “Fuchou guan de xingcha yu quanshi: Xian Qin liang Han Wei Jin Nanbeichao Sui Tang bian” 復仇觀的省察與詮釋：先秦兩漢 魏晉南北朝隋唐編. Taipei: Guoli Taiwan daxue, 2012. ———. “Xian Qin chuanben/jianben xushi juyu—yi san Xi zhi wang weili” 先秦傳本／簡本敘事舉隅－以「三卻之亡」為例. Taida zhongwen xuebao 臺大中文學報 32 (June 2010): 31–78. ———. “Xian Qin xushi wenxian ‘xushi’ yu ‘tishi’ yulun—yi Jin ‘Luanshi zhi mie’ weili” 先秦敘史文獻「敘事」與「體式」隅論－以晉「欒氏之滅」為例. Taida wenshizhe xuebao 臺大文史哲學報 80 (May 2014): 1–41. ———. “You Zuozhuan de ‘Shenguai xushi’ lun qi renwen jingshen” 由左傳的 「神怪敘事」論其人文精神. Beijing daxue Zhongguo guwenxian yanjiu zhongxin jikan 北京大學中國古文獻研究中心集刊, no. 9 (2010): 155–76. Li Mengcun 李孟存 and Li Shangshi 李尚師. Jinguo shi 晉國史. Taiyuan: Shanxi guji, 1999. Li, Wai-yee. “Dreams of Interpretation in Early Chinese Historical and Philosophical Writings.” In Dream Cultures: Toward a Comparative History of Dreaming, edited by David Shulman and Guy Stroumsa, 17–42. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. ———. “Hua Yi zhi bian yu yizu tonghun” 〈華夷之辨與異族通婚〉  , in Tanqing shuoyi《談情説異》.  Taipei: Center for the Study of Foreign Cultures, Shih-hsin University, 2012, pp. 45–63. ———. “Historical Understanding in ‘The Account of the Xiongnu’ in Shiji,” in Views from Within, Views from Beyond: Shiji as an Early Work of Historiography, edited by Dorothee Shaab-Hanke, Olga Lomova, Hans van Ess. Harrasowitz Verlag, 2015, pp. 79–102. ———. “The Idea of Authority in the Shih chi (Records of the Historian).” HJAS 54 (1994): 345–405. ———. “Knowledge and Skepticism in Ancient Chinese Historiography.” In The Limits of Historiography: Genre and Narrative in Ancient Historical Texts, edited by Christina Shuttleworth Kraus, 27–54. Leiden: Brill, 1999. ———. “Poetry and Diplomacy in Zuozhuan.” Journal of Chinese Literature and Culture 1 (2014): 242–61. ———. “Pre-Qin Annals.” In The Oxford History of Historiography, vol. 1, Beginnings to AD 600, edited by Grant Hardy, 415–39. Oxford: Oxford ­University Press, 2011. ———. The Readability of the Past in Early Chinese Historiography. Harvard East Asian Monographs 253. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2007. ———. “Riddles, Concealment, and Rhetoric in Early China.” In Facing the

Bibliography 2007

Monarch: Modes of Advice in the Early Chinese Court, edited by Garret Olberding, 100–132. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2013. Li Xueqin 李學勤. “Boshu Chunqiu shiyu yu Zuozhuan de chuanliu” 帛書春 秋事語與左傳的傳流. Guji zhengli yanjiu xuekan 古籍整理學刊 4 (1989): 1–6. ———. “Bulun Zifan bianzhong” 補論子犯編鐘. Zhongguo wenwu bao 中國 文物報, 28 May 1995, 5–28. ———. Eastern Zhou and Qin Civilizations. Translated by K. C. Chang. Early Chinese Civilization Series. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985. Li Yuanchun 李元春. Zuoshi bingfa 左氏兵法. Zhaoyi: Liushi, 1837. Liang Qichao 梁啟超. Liang Qichao quanji 梁啟超全集. Edited by Zhang Pinxing 張品興. Beijing: Beijing, 1999. ———. Xian Qin zhengzhi sixiang shi 先秦政治思想史. Taipei: Dongda tushu, 1993. Liao, W. K., trans. The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu: A Classic of Legalism. 2 vols. Probsthain’s Oriental Series 25–26. London: A. Probsthain, 1939–59. Lin Yaosou 林堯叟. Zuozhuan Du Lin hezhu 左傳杜林合註. Edited by Wang Daokun 王道焜 and Zhao Ruyuan 趙如源. In SKQS, vol. 171. Liu Fenglu 劉逢錄. Zuoshi chunqiu kaozheng 左氏春秋考證. Edited by Gu ­Jiegang. Beijing: Pu she, 1933. Liu Jie 劉節. Chunqiu liezhuan 春秋列傳. In Siku quanshu cunmu congshu 四庫全書 存目叢書, ser. 2, Shi bu, vol. 89. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 1997. Liu Liming 劉黎明. Chunqiu jingzhuan yanjiu 春秋經傳研究. Chengdu: Ba Shu shushe, 2008. Liu Shenning 劉申寧. Zhongguo bingshu zongmu 中國兵書總目. Beijing: ­Guofang daxue, 1990. Liu Shipei 劉師培. “Sima Qian Zuozhuan yi xuli” 司馬遷左傳義序例. In Liu Shipei shixue lunzhu xuanji 劉師培史學論著選集, 468–90. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2006. Liu Zhenghao 劉正浩. Liang Han zhuzi shu Zuozhuan kao 兩漢諸子述左傳考. Taipei: Taiwan Shangwu, 1968. ———. Zhou Qin zhuzi shu Zuozhuan kao 周秦諸子述左傳考. Taipei: Taiwan Shangwu, 1966. Loewe, Michael. A Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han and Xin Periods (221 BC–AD 24). Handbuch der Orientalistik IV.16. Leiden: Brill, 2000. ———, ed. Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 1993. ———. The Men Who Governed Han China: Companion to a Biographical ­Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han and Xin Periods. Handbuch der Orientalistik IV.17. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Loewe, Michael, 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. Lu Chun 陸淳. Chunqiu jizhuan zuanli 春秋集傳纂例. In SKQS, vol. 146.

2008

Bibliography

Lü Zuqian 呂祖謙. Donglai boyi 東萊博議. Reprint, Beijing: Zhongguo, 1986. ———. Zuoshi zhuan shuo 左氏傳說. In SKQS, vol. 152. Luo Junfeng 羅軍鳳. Qingdai Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue yanjiu 清代春秋左傳 學研究. Beijing: Renmin, 2010. Luo Shilin 羅士琳. Chunqiu shuorun yitong 春秋朔閏異同. Xuxiu Siku quanshu, vols. 147–48. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1995–99. Lynn, Richard John. The Classic of Changes: A New Translation of the I Ching as Interpreted by Wang Bi. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994. Ma Guohan 馬國翰. Yuhan shanfang jiyi shu 玉函山房輯佚書. Xuxiu Siku quanshu, vols. 1200–1205. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1995–99. Ma Su 馬驌. Zuozhuan shi wei 左傳事緯. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 1992. Ma Yong 馬勇. Handai chunqiu xue yanjiu 漢代春秋學研究. Chengdu: Sichuan renmin, 1992. Major, John, Sarah Queen, Andrew Meyer, and Harold D. Roth, trans. The Huainanzi: A Guide to the Theory and Practice of Government in Early Han China. Translations from the Asian Classics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010. Makeham, John, trans. Balanced Discourses: A Bilingual Edition. Classical Library of Chinese Literature and Thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002. ———. “The Formation of Lunyu as a Book.” Monumenta Serica 44 (1996): 1–24. Malmqvist, Göran. “Studies on the Gongyang and Guliang Commentaries.” BMFEA 43 (1971): 67–222; 47 (1975): 19–69; and 49 (1977): 33–215. Manthe, Ulrich. Review of Antikchinesisches Kalenderwesen, by Robert H. Gassmann. EC 29 (2004): 303–21. Mao Qiling 毛奇齡. Chunqiu Maoshi zhuan 春秋毛氏傳. In SKQS, vol. 176. Maspero, Henri. China in Antiquity. Translated by Frank A. Kierman Jr. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1978. ———. “La composition et la date du Tso-chuan.” Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 1 (1931–32): 137–215. Mather, Richard B., trans. Shih-shuo Hsin-yü: A New Account of Tales of the World. 2nd ed. Michigan Monographs in Chinese Studies 95. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 2002. Needham, Joseph. Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and the Earth. Vol. 3 of Science and Civilization in China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959. Nienhauser, William H., Jr., et al., trans. The Grand Scribe’s Records. 6 vols. to date. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994–2008. Niu Hongen 牛鴻恩. “Lun Zuozhuan de chengshu niandai” 論《左傳》的成書 年代. Shoudu shifan daxue xuebao: Sheke ban 首都師範大學學報：社科版 5 (1994): 19–27. Nivison, David S. “Chu shu chi nian.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, edited by Michael Loewe, 39–47. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 1993.

Bibliography 2009

———. The Riddle of the Bamboo Annals. Taipei: Airiti, 2009. Nylan, Michael. “The Chin wen / Ku wen Controversy in Han Times.” Toung Pao 80 (1994): 83–145. ———. The Five “Confucian” Classics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001. ———. “The Many Dukes of Zhou in Early Sources.” In Premodern East Asian Statecraft in Comparative Context: The “Rituals of Zhou” in Chinese and East Asian History, edited by Benjamin A. Elman and Martin Kern, 94–128. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009. ———. “Textual Authority in Pre-Han and Han.” EC 25 (2000): 205–58. Pankenier, David. “Applied Field-Allocation Astrology: Duke Wen of Jin and the Battle of Chengpu.” JAOS 119, no. 2 (April–June 1999): 261–79. Petersen, Jens Østergård. “The Zuozhuan Account of the Death of King Zhao of Chu and Its Sources.” Sino-Platonic Papers 159 (2005): 1–47. Pi Xirui 皮錫瑞. Jingxue lishi 經學歷史. With notes by Zhou Yutong 周予同. Shanghai: Shangwu, 1928. ———. Jingxue tonglun 經學通論. Taipei: Da’an, 2005. Pines, Yuri. “Biases and Their Sources: Qin History in the Shiji.” Oriens Extremus 45 (2005–6): 10–34. ———. Envisioning Eternal Empire: Chinese Political Thought of the Warring States Era. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2009. ———. Foundations of Confucian Thought. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2002. ———. “History as a Guide to the Netherworld: Rethinking the Chunqiu shiyu.” Journal of Chinese Religions 31 (2003): 101–26. ———. “Rethinking the Origins of Chinese Historiography: The Zuo zhuan Revisited.” Review of The Readability of the Past in Early Chinese Historiography, by Wai-yee Li. Journal of Chinese Studies 49 (2009): 429–42. ———. “The Search for Stability: Late Ch’un-ch’iu Thinkers.” Asia Major, 3rd ser., 10, nos. 1–2 (1997): 1–47. ———. “Zhou History and Historiography: Introducing the Bamboo Xinian.” T’oung Pao 100.3–5 (2014): 325–59. Plaks, Andrew. Archetype and Allegory in “The Dream of the Red Chamber.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976. ———. Chinese Narrative: Critical and Theoretical Essays. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1977. ———. The Four Masterworks of the Ming Novel: Ssu Ta Ch’i Shu. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987. ———, trans. Ta Hsüeh and Chung Yung (“The Highest Order of Cultivation” and “On the Practice of the Mean”). Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2003. Pokora, Timoteus. Hsin-lun (New Treatise) and Other Writings by Huan T’an (43 B.C.–28 A.D.). Michigan Papers in Chinese Studies no. 20. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 1975. Pu Weizhong 浦衛忠. Chunqiu sanzhuan zonghe yanjiu 春秋三傳綜合研究. Beijing: Wenjin, 1995.

2010

Bibliography

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1995. Qian Hang 錢杭. Zhoudai zongfa zhidu shi yanjiu 周代宗法制度史研究. Shanghai: Xuelin, 1991. Qian Mu 錢穆. “Liu Xiang Xin fuzi nianpu” 劉向歆父子年譜. In Liang Han jingxue jinguwen pingyi 兩漢經學今古文平議, 1–163. Taipei: Dongda, 1989. ———. Xian Qin zhuzi xinian 先秦諸子繫年. Taipei: Dongda, 1990. Qian Zhongshu 錢鍾書. Guanzhui bian 管錐編. 4 vols. Hong Kong: Zhonghua, 1980. Qiu Xigui. Chinese Writing. Translated by Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry N ­ orman. Early China Special Monograph Series no. 4. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of ­California, 2000. Queen, Sarah. From Chronicle to Canon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Rickett, W. Allyn, trans. Guanzi: Political, Economic, and Philosophical Essays from Early China. 2 vols. Princeton Library of Asian Translations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985–98. Rosthorn, A. “Das Tschu’un-tsch’iu und seine Verfasser.” Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien: Philosophisch-historische Klasse Sitzungsberichte 189, no. 5 (1919): 1–21. Schaberg, David. “Chinese History and Philosophy.” In The Oxford History of Historical Writing: Beginnings to AD 600, edited by Andrew Feldherr and Grant Hardy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. ———. “Command and the Content of Tradition.” In The Magnitude of Ming, edited by Christopher Lupke. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2004. ———. “Functionary Speech: On the Work of Shi 使 and Shi 史.” In Facing the Monarch: Modes of Advice in the Early Chinese Court, edited by Garrett P. S. Olberding, 19–41. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2013. ———. A Patterned Past: Form and Thought in Early Chinese Historiography. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2001. ———. “Platitude and Persona: Junzi Comments in Zuozhuan and Beyond.” In Historical Truth, Historical Criticism, and Ideology: Chinese Historiography and Historical Culture from a New Comparative Perspective, edited by Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer et al., 177–96. Leiden Studies in Comparative Historiography 1. Leiden: Brill, 2005. ———. “Playing at Critique: Indirect Remonstrance and the Formation of Shi Identity.” In Text and Ritual in Early China, edited by Martin Kern, 193– 225. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2005. ———. “Remonstrance in Eastern Zhou Historiography.” EC 22 (1997): 133–79. Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig, et al., eds. Historical Truth, Historical Criticism, and Ideology: Chinese Historiography and Historical Culture from a New Comparative Perspective. Leiden Studies in Comparative Historiography 1. Leiden: Brill, 2005.

Bibliography 2011

Schuessler, Axel. ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2007. Shao Bao 邵寶. Chunqiu zhu mingchen zhuan 春秋諸名臣傳. Supplements by Yao Zi 姚咨. Siku quanshu cunmu congshu, ser. 2, vol. 98. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 1997. Shaughnessy, Edward L., ed. New Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of Inscriptions and Manuscripts. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 1997. ———. Rewriting Early Chinese Texts. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006. ———. Sources of Western Zhou History: Inscribed Bronze Vessels. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1991. ———. “Western Zhou History.” In Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 292–351. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Shen Yucheng 沈玉成 and Liu Ning 劉寧. Chunqiu Zuozhuan xue shi gao 春秋 左傳學史稿. Nanjing: Jiangsu guji, 1992. Shuihu zhuan huiping ben 水滸傳會評本. Edited by Chen Xizhong 陳曦鐘, Hou Zhongyi 侯忠義, and Lu Yuchuan 呂玉川. Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1987. Smith, Adam Daniel. “Learning to Write in Early China: Archaeological Evidence for the Emergence of Literacy.” PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 2008. Smith, Kidder. “Zhouyi Interpretation from Accounts in the Zuozhuan.” HJAS 49 (December 1989): 421–63. So, Jenny, ed. Music in the Age of Confucius. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2000. Song Dingzong 宋鼎宗. Chunqiu Hu shi xue 春秋胡氏學. Taipei: Wanjuan lou, 2000. ———. Chunqiu Song xue fawei 春秋宋學發微. Taipei: Wenshizhe, 1986. Sun Fu 孫復. Chunqiu zunwang fawei 春秋尊王發微. In SKQS, vol. 147. Sun, Xiaochun, and Jacob Kistemaker. The Chinese Sky during the Han: ­Constellating Stars and Society. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Tam, Koo-yin. “The Use of Poetry in Tso chuan.” PhD diss., University of Washington, 1975. Tan Qixiang 譚其驤. Zhongguo lishi ditu ji 中國歷史地圖集. Vols. 1–2. Beijing: China Cartographic Publishing House, 1987. Tang Shunzhi 唐順之. Zuoshi shimo 左氏始末. Edited by Jin Jiugao 金九臯 et al. 4 vols. Tangshi jiashu, 1562. Tao Zhenggang 陶正剛, Hou Yi 侯毅, and Qu Chuanfu 渠川福. Taiyuan Jinguo Zhaoqing mu 太原晉國趙卿墓. Beijing: Wenwu, 1996. Tay, C. N. “On the Interpretation of Kung (Duke?) in the Tso-chuan.” JAOS 93, no. 4 (1973): 550–55.

2012

Bibliography

Thatcher, Melvin P. “Central Government of the State of Ch’in in the Spring and Autumn Period.” JAOS 23, no. 1 (1985): 29–53. ———. “A Structural Comparison of the Central Governments of Ch’in, Ch’i, and Chin.” Monumenta Serica 33 (1977–78): 140–61. Tjan, Tjoe Som, trans. Po Hu T’ung: The Comprehensive Discussions in the White Tiger Hall. 2 vols. Sinica Leidensia 6. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1949–52. Tong Shuye 童書業. Chunqiu shi 春秋史. Shanghai: Kaiming, 1947. ———. Chunqiu shiliao ji 春秋史料集. Edited by Tong Jiaoying 童教英. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2008. ———. Chunqiu Zuozhuan yanjiu 春秋左傳研究. Shanghai: Renmin, 1980. ———. “Guoyu yu Zuozhuan wenti hou’an” 國語與左傳問題後案. In Zuozhuan lunwen ji 左傳論文集, edited by Chen Xinxiong 陳新雄 and Yu Dacheng 于大成, 159–73. Taipei: Muduo, 1976. Tsuda Sōkichi 津田左右吉. Saden no shisōshiteki kenkyū 左傳の思想史的研究. 1935. Reprint, Tokyo: Iwanami shoten 岩波書店, 1955. Twitchett, Denis, and Michael Loewe, eds. The Ch’in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.–​ A.D. 220. Vol. 1 of The Cambridge History of China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Van Auken, Newell Ann. “Could ‘Subtle Words’ Have Conveyed ‘Praise and Blame’? The Implications of Formal Regularity and Variation in the Chuunqiu Records.” EC 31 (2007): 47–112. ———. “A Formal Analysis of the Chuenchiou 春秋 (Spring and Autumn Classic).” PhD diss., University of Washington, 2006. ———. “Killings and Assassinations in the Spring and Autumn as Records of Judgments.” Asia Major 27, no. 1 (2014): 1–31. Van Zoeren, Steven. Poetry and Personality: Reading, Exegesis, and Herme­ neutics in Traditional China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991. Vogelsang, Kai. “Prolegomena to Critical Zuozhuan Studies.” Asiatische Studien / Études asiatiques 61, no. 3 (2007): 941–88. von Falkenhausen, Lothar. Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius (1000– 250 BC): The Archaeological Evidence. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, 2006. ———. “Issues in Western Zhou Studies: A Review Article.” EC 18 (1993): 139–226. ———. “The Zeng Hou Yi Finds in the History of Chinese Music.” In Music in the Age of Confucius, edited by Jenny So, 101–13. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2000. Wagner, Donald B. Iron and Steel in Ancient China. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996. Wai, Pauli. “Merging Horizons: Authority, Hermeneutics and the Zuo Tradition from Western Han to Western Jin (2nd c. Bce–3rd c. CE).” PhD diss., University of California, Berkeley, 2013. Waley, Arthur, trans. The Book of Songs: The Ancient Chinese Classic of Poetry. Edited, with additional translations, by Joseph R. Allen. New York: Grove Press, 1996.

Bibliography 2013

Walker, Richard L. The Multi-state System of Ancient China. Hamden, CT: Shoe String Press, 1953. Wang, C. H. “Towards Defining a Chinese Heroism.” JAOS 95, no. 1 (1975): 25–35. Wang Dang 王當. Chunqiu lieguo zhuchen chuanshuo 春秋列國諸臣傳說. In SKQS, vol. 448. Wang Fuzhi 王夫之. Chunqiu jia shuo 春秋家說. In Chuanshan quanshu 船山 全書, edited by Chuanshan quanshu bianji weiyuan hui 船山全書編輯委 員會, vol. 5. Changsha: Yuelu shushe, 1988. Wang, Haicheng. “Writing and the State in Early China in Comparative Perspective.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2007. Wang, John C. Y. “Early Chinese Narrative: The Tso-chuan as Example.” In Chinese Narrative: Critical and Theoretical Essays, edited by Andrew H. Plaks, 3–20. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1977. ———. “The Nature of Chinese Narrative: A Preliminary Statement of Methodology.” Tamkang Review 6.2/7.1 (1975–76): 229–45. Wang Shoukuan 汪受寬. Shifa yanjiu 謚法研究. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1995. Wang Tao 王韜. Chunqiu lixue sanzhong 春秋曆學三種. Reprint, Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959. Wang Yinzhi 王引之. Jingyi shuwen 經義述聞. Taipei: Shijie, 1963. ———. Jingzhuan shi ci 經傳釋詞. Nanjing: Jiangsu guji, 2000. ———. Zhou Qin ming zi jiegu 周秦名字解詁. 1790. Reedited by Zhou Fagao 周法高. Hong Kong: Zhonghua, 1958. Watson, Burton, trans. The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. Records of Civilization: Sources and Studies 80. New York: Columbia University Press, 1970. ———. Early Chinese Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962. ———. Ssu-ma Ch’ien: Grand Historian of China. New York: Columbia University Press, 1958. Weld, Susan. “The Covenant Texts from Houma and Wenxian.” In New Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of Inscriptions and Manuscripts, edited by Edward L. Shaughnessy, 125–60. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 1997. Wen Tianxiang quanji 文天祥全集. Edited by Xiong Fei 熊飛, Qi Shenqi 漆身起, and Huang Shunqiang 黃順強. Nanchang: Jiangxi renmin, 1987. Wilhelm, Richard, and Cary F. Baynes, The I Ching; or, Book of Changes. 3rd. ed. Bollingen Series 19. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1967. Wilkinson, Endymion. Chinese History: A Manual. Rev. ed. Harvard-Yenching Institute Monograph Series 52. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Wu Chucai 吳楚材 and Wu Diaohou 吳調侯. Guwen guanzhi 古文觀止. ­Beijing: Zhonghua, 1987. Wu Kaisheng 吳闓生. Zuozhuan wei 左傳微. Edited by Bao Zhaolin 白兆麟. Hefei: Huangshan, 1995.

2014

Bibliography

Wu Xifei 鄔錫非. “Zuozhuan zhengyi zhushuo shuping” 《左傳》爭議諸說 述評. Zhejiang xuekan 1 (1992): 108–13. Wu Zengqi 吳曾祺. Hanfenlou gujinwen chao 涵芬樓古今文鈔. Shanghai: Shangwu, 1910. Xiao Gongquan 蕭公權. Zhongguo zhengzhi sixiang shi 中國政治思想史. 2 vols. Taipei: Zhongguo Wenhua daxue, 1983. Xu Fuguan 徐復觀. Liang Han sixiang shi 兩漢思想史. 3 vols. Taipei: Xue­ sheng, 1989. ———. Zhongguo renxing lun shi 中國人性論史. Taipei: Shangwu, 1994. Xu Xiqi 徐錫祺. Xinbian Zhongguo sanqian nian liri jiansuobiao 新編中國三 千年曆日檢索表. Beijing: Renmin jiaoyu, 1992. Yang Pingnan 陽平南. Zuozhuan xu zhan de zijian jingshen 左傳敘戰的資鑑 精神. Taipei: Wenjin, 2001. Yang Rubin 楊儒賓. Rujia shenti guan 儒家身體觀. Taipei: Zhongguo wenzhe yanjiu suo, 1999. Yao Nai 姚鼐. Gu wenci leizuan 古文辭類纂. Edited by Hu Shiming 胡士明 and Li Zuotang 李祚唐. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1998. Yu Yingshi 余英時. Shi yu Zhongguo wenhua 士與中國文化. Shanghai: Renmin, 1987. Yuan Shu 袁樞. Tongjian jishi benmo 通鑑紀事本末. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan, 2005. Zeng Guofan 曾國藩. Zeng Guofan shiwen ji 曾國藩詩文集. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2005. Zhang Gaoping 張高評. Chunqiu shufa yu Zuozhuan xue shi 春秋書法與左傳 學史. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2005. ———. Zuozhuan zhi wenxue jiazhi 左傳之文學價值. Taipei: Wenshizhe, 1982. Zhang Guangyuan 張光遠. “Gugong xin cang Chunqiu Jin Wen chengba ‘Zifan hezhong’ chushi” 故宮新藏春秋晉文稱霸「子犯和鐘」初釋. Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 145, no. 4 (1995): 4–31. Zhang Handong 張漢東. “Zuo zhuan ji qi xiang Chunqiu xue de yanbian” 左傳 及其向春秋學的演變. Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國史研究 4 (1988): 154–62. Zhang Jian 張劍 and Zhang Shigang 張世剛. “Henan sheng Xichuan xian Xiasi Chunqiu Chu mu” 河南省淅川縣下寺春秋楚墓. Wenwu 10 (1980): 13–20. Zhang Jiliang 張吉梁, comp. and annot. Zuozhuan bingfa, fu ji Zhanguo bingfa, Kong Meng yan bingshi 左傳兵法、附集戰國兵法、孔孟言兵事. Kaifeng: Juwen zhai, 1868. Zhang Jun 張君. “Guoyu chengbian xinzheng” 《國語》成編新證. Hubei daxue xuebao 湖北大學學報 2 (1991): 77–82. ———. “‘Yu’ de chuanliu, leibie he Churen songxi, zhizuo de ‘yu’” “語”的傳 流，類別和楚人誦習，製作的“語.” Hubei daxue xuebao (zhexue shehui kexue ban) 湖北大學學報（哲學社會科學版）5 (1991): 55–60. Zhang Shuyi 張淑一. Xian Qin xingshi zhidu kaosuo 先秦姓氏制度考索. Fuzhou: Fujian renmin, 2008. Zhang Suqing 張素卿. Qingdai Han xue yu Zuozhuan xue 清代漢學與左傳學. Taipei: Liren, 2007.

Bibliography 2015

———. Xushi yu jieshi—Zuozhuan jingjie yanjiu 敘事與解釋──《左傳》經 解研究. Taipei: Shulin, 1998. ———. Zuozhuan chengshi yanjiu 左傳稱詩研究. Taipei: Guoli Taiwan daxue, 1991. Zhang Xincheng 張心澂. Weishu tongkao 偽書通考. Shanghai: Shanghai ­shudian, 1998. Zhang Xuecheng 章學誠. Wenshi tongyi jiaozhu 文史通義校注. Annotated by Ye Ying 葉瑛. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1994. Zhang Xuecheng 章學誠. Yimao zhaji, Bingchen zhaji, Zhifei rizha 乙卯劄記、 丙辰劄記、知非日札.  Punctuated by Feng Huimin 馮惠民.  Beijing: Zhong­ hua shuju, 1986. Zhao Guangxian 趙光賢. “Zuozhuan bianzhuan kao (xia)” 《左傳》編撰考 (下). 2 pts. Zhongguo lishi wenxian yanjiu jikan 中國歷史研究集刊 1 (1980): 135–53; 2 (1980): 45–58. Zhao Shengqun 趙生群. Chunqiu jing zhuan yanjiu 春秋經傳研究. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2000. Zhao Yi 趙翼. Gaiyu congkao 陔餘叢考. 1790. Reprint, Taipei: Shijie, 2009. Zhen Dexiu 真德秀. Wenzhang zhengzong: Ershisi juan 文章正宗：二十四卷. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan, 2006. Zheng Qiao 鄭樵. Liujing aolun 六經奧論. SKQS, vol. 184. Zhou Fengwu 周鳳五. “Shangbo wu ‘Gucheng jiafu’ chongbian xinshi” 上博 五「姑成家父」重編新釋. Taida zhongwen xuebao 25 (December 2006): 1–24.

2016

Bibliography

Place Name Index Most of the information below has been drawn from Yang Bojun and Xu Ti, Chunqiu Zuozhuan cidian. This has been a choice of convenience. Yang’s and Xu’s work, in turn, draws upon a rich tradition of historical geography in China that culminates in the Qing with such works as Gao Shiqi (1645–1703), Chunqiu diming kaolue, and Jiang Yong (1681–1762), Chunqiu dili kaoshi. In preparing the index, we have also drawn upon Shen Shu (1702–30), Chunqiu Zuozhuan fenguo tudiming, to help determine the domain in which a place was located and occasionally Tan Qixiang, ed., Zhongguo lishi ditu ji, vol. 1. While the effort to locate the places mentioned in the Annals and Zuozhuan has resulted in an immense body of scholarship, many problems remain. We indicate when the location of a particular place is unknown (Unk) or seriously problematic (P). We typically provide the name of the domain in which a particular place is located. If the place is a river, mountain, or domain (dom), we have so indicated. Otherwise, the place is a settlement. We have next given an indication of the location of the ancient place by reference to a modern place. In the case of domains, we have, where known, additionally provided the clan name of the ruling family (CN). This is important information because in ancient China the strict practice of exogamy means that clan names have important implications for marriage and thus influence relationships between domains. Finally, we list passages in the text where the place name appears, marking references to the Annals (Chunqiu) with (C). References to certain domains are so numerous, however, that in such cases we list only the first passage in the text where that domain name appears. Entries for place names that appear in the maps in this volume include a reference to the relevant map. Whenever several places are known by the same Chinese name—that is, by the same Chinese character(s)— they are numbered successively to facilitate cross-referencing.

2017

ABBREVIATIONS

C Annals (Chunqiu) cap capital CN clan name Co county (xian 縣) dom domain (guo 國, often translated by others as “state”) E, W, N, S, NE, etc. east, west, north, south, northeast, etc. P location problematic Unk location unknown Ai 艾. Qi. SW of Xintai Co 新泰縣, Shandong. Yin 6.2(C), 6.3, 7.3; Huan 15.5. Ailing 艾陵. Qi. E of Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Ai 11.3(C), 11.3. An 鞌 (1). Qi. Near Lixia 歷下, W of Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. Cheng 2.3(C), 2.3. See map 2. An 鞌 (2). Song. S of Dingtao Co 定陶縣, Shandong. Ai 14.4. Anfu 安甫. Unk. Ding 10.10. Ao 敖. A place along the coast of modern Zhejiang. Ai 19.2. Ao 敖 (mountain). Zheng. N of Xingyang Co 滎陽縣, Henan. Xuan 12.2. Ba 巴. Dom, CN Ji 姬. Near Xiangfan City 襄樊市, Hubei. Huan 9.2; Zhao 9.3. Baiquan 百泉. Jin. NW of Hui Co 輝縣, Henan. Ding 14.9. Baiyu 白羽. Xu. Same place as Xi 析. W of Xixia Co 西峽縣, Henan. Zhao 18.5(C), 18.3, 18.7. Bang 玤. Zhou. Mianchi Co 澠池縣, Henan. Zhuang 21.1. Bangao 阪高. Chu. NE of Dangyang Co 當陽縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Banquan 阪泉. E of Zhuolu Co 涿鹿縣, Hebei. Xi 25.2. Bao 暴 / Baosui 暴隧. Zhou, then Zheng. W of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Wen 8.5(C); Cheng 15.3. Beidian 邶殿. Qi. NW of Changyi Co 昌邑縣, Shandong. Xiang 28.11; Zhao 1.2; Ding 1.1. Beilin 北林 / Feilin 棐林. Zheng. N of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xuan 1.8, 1.10; Xiang 11.3. Probably the same place as Fei 斐. Beiqiu 貝丘. Qi. S of Boxing Co 博興縣, Shandong. Zhuang 8.3. Beixing 北杏. Qi. Dong’a Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Zhuang 13.1(C), 13.1, 13.3. Beizheng 北徵. Jin. P, Chengcheng Co 澄城縣, Shaanxi. Wen 10.2. Bend of the Luo (Luorei) 羅汭. Chu. P, at Miluo 汩羅, Hunan. Zhao 5.8. Bend of the Yellow River: see Hequ. Beng 祊. Zheng, then Lu. E of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Yin 8.2(C), 8.2; Huan 1.1, 1.2. Bi 邲. Zheng. NE of Xingyang Co 滎陽縣, Henan. Xuan 12.3(C), 12.2, 13.4, 14.2; Cheng 2.6, 3.1, 16.5; Zhao 5.4, 5.8. Bi 畢. Dom, CN Ji 姬. NW of Xi’an City 西安市, Shaanxi. Xi 24.2; Zhao 9.3. Bi 費. Lu. SW of Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Xi 1.6; Xiang 7.4(C), 7.3; Zhao

2018

Place Name Index

12.1, 13.1(C), 13.1, 14.2, 21.3, 25.6, 31.2, 32.4; Ding 5.4, 12.5(C), 12.2. See map 2. Bian 卞. Lu. E of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Xi 17.3(C), 17.4; Xiang 15.4, 29.4; Zhao 25.6. Bihua 費滑. An alternate name for the domain Hua 滑 (see Hua [2]). The capital of Hua was located at Bi 費, the latter to be distinguished from the place of the same name in Shandong. Cheng 13.3; Xiang 18.4. Bipu 比蒲. Lu. Unk. Zhao 11.6(C), 11.3; Ding 13.3(C), 14.13. Biyang 偪陽. Dom, CN Yun 妘, taken by Jin, then given to Song. S of Yi Co 嶧縣, Shandong. Xiang 10.11(C), 10.2. Bo 白. Chu. P, E of Xi Co 息縣, Henan. Ai 16.5. Bo 柏. Dom. SE of Wuyang Co 舞陽縣, Henan. Xi 5.7. Bo 亳. Song. N of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Zhuang 12.1; Zhao 11.1. Bo 博. Qi. SE of Taian Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Ai 11.3. Bo 薄. Song. N of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Xi 21.7(C), 21.3; Ai 14.4. Bocheng 亳城. Zheng. Near Zhengzhou 鄭州, Henan. Xiang 11.5(C), 11.3. Boju 柏舉. Chu. NW of Macheng Co 麻城縣, Hubei. Ding 4.3, 5.5; Ai 1.1, 1.6. See map 4. Boniu 伯牛. Zheng. Unk. Cheng 3.1. Boren 柏人. Jin. Longyao Co 隆堯縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3, 5.1. Brambles Marsh 棘澤. Zheng. Near Changge Co 長葛縣, S of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 24.8. Bugeng 不羮. Chu. Two small regions: East Bugeng is just north of Wuyang Co 舞陽縣, Henan, and West Bugeng is southeast of Xiangcheng Co 襄城縣, Henan. Zhao 11.10, 12.1, 13.2. Cai. 蔡. Dom. Originally near Shangcai Co 上蔡縣, Henan. Later relocated near modern Xincai Co 新蔡縣, Henan. Moved in 493 Bce to region of Zhoulai 州來, Henan, where it was known as “Lower Cai” 下蔡. Yin 4.4(C) et passim. See map 4. Caisang 采桑. Jin. W of Xiangning Co 鄉寧縣, Shanxi. Xi 8.2. Cangye 倉野. Jin. SE of Shang Co 商縣, Shaanxi. Ai 4.2. Cao 曹 (1). Dom, CN Ji 姬. Cap Taoqiu 陶丘. SW of Dingtao Co 定陶縣, ­Shandong. Huan 5.9(C) et passim. Later absorbed by Song. Ai 14.7(C), 14.9(C), 14.4. See map 2. Cao 曹 (2). Wei. SW of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Huan 14.1. Cao 鄵. Zheng. Unk. Xiang 7.9(C), 7.8. Chan 闡. Lu. NE of Ningyang Co 寧陽縣. Ai 8.3(C), 8.7(C), 8.3, 8.7, 15.4. Chan 酁. Song. Ai 17.7. Changan 長岸. Chu. SW of Dangtu Co 當塗縣, Anhui. Zhao 17.6. Changchu 長樗. Jin. P, outskirts of cap. Xiang 3.3(C), 3.2. Changge 長葛. Zheng. NE of Changge Co 長葛縣, Henan. Also known as Xuge 繻葛. Yin 5.8(C), 5.10, 6.5(C). Changjian 昌間. Lu. In Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Zhao 22.3(C). Changqiu 長丘. Song. S of Fengqiu Co 封丘縣, Henan. Wen 11.5.

Place Name Index 2019

Changshao 長勺. Lu. P, N of Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Zhuang 10.1(C), 10.1. Changyan 昌衍. Lu. SE of Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Xi 29.1. Changyimi 常儀靡. Ju. NW of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Zhao 1.11. Chanshi 蠶室. Lu. Pingyi Co 平邑縣, Shandong. Ai 8.2. Chanyuan 澶淵. Wei, then Jin. NW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xiang 20.2(C), 20.2, 26.5(C), 26.7, 30.9(C), 30.12. Chao 巢 (1). Dom, passed back and forth between Chu and Wu. Wen 12.4(C), 12.3; Cheng 7.5, 17.11; Xiang 25.10(C), 25.12, 26.10, 31.9; Zhao 4.7, 5.8, 24.6(C), 24.9, 25.1; Ding 2.2. See map 4. Chao 巢 (2). Wei. Unk. Ai 11.6. Chaojia 朝郟. Song. Luyi Co 鹿邑縣, Henan. Cheng 18.5. Chaoqiu 巢丘. Lu. P, near Taishan Co 泰山縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.1. Chen 陳. Dom, CN Gui 媯. Cap Wanqiu 宛丘 in modern Huaiyang Co 淮陽 縣, Henan. Yin 3.7 et passim. See map 1. Cheng 成 (also Cheng 郕). Lu. NE of Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Huan 6.2(C), 6.3; Zhuang 30.2(C); Xiang 15.3(C), 15.4(C), 15.5, 16.8(C), 16.4; Zhao 7.5, 26.4; Ding 8.1, 12.10(C), 12.11(C), 12.2; Ai 14.6, 15.1(C), 15.1, 15.4. See map 4. Cheng 郕. Small dom SE of Pu Co 濮縣, Shandong. Yin 5.3(C), 5.6, 10.5(C), 10.4; Zhuang 8.3(C), 8.2; Xi 24.2; Wen 11.6, 12.1. Cheng 檉. Song. See Luo 犖. Xi 1.7(C). Chengchu 城鉏. Song, then Wei. E of Huaxian 滑縣, Henan. Ai 11.6, 25.1, 26.3. Chengdi 城棣. Zheng. N of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Xiang 5.9. Chengfu 城父 (1). Chu. SE of Bo Co 亳縣, Anhui. Zhao 9.2, 30.3 Chengfu 城父 (2). Chu. E of Baofeng Co 寶豐縣, Henan. Zhao 19.6; Ai 6.2, 6.4, 16.5. Chenggao 城郜. Song. Xiao Co 蕭縣, Anhui. Cheng 18.5. Chengjiu 成臼 (river). Chu. P, flowed just S of Zhongxiang Co 鍾祥縣, Hubei. Ding 5.7. Chengjun 城麇. Zheng. Unk. Xiang 26.6; Zhao 8.6. Chengkou passes 城口. Chu. Collective name of the three passes Dasui 大隧, Zhiyuan 直轅, and Ming’e 冥阨. Ding 4.3. Chengkuang 承匡. Song. Wen 11.2(C), 11.2; Xiang 30.3. Chengpu 城濮. Wei. Same as modern Linpu Cheng 臨濮城 in Fan Co 范縣, Shandong. Zhuang 27.7(C); Xi 28.5(C), 28.3, 28.6; Wen 10.3; Xuan 12.5; Cheng 2.3; Xiang 8.8, 25.10; Zhao 5.4, 5.8. See map 2. Chengqiu 乘丘. Lu. Gunzhou Co 衮州縣, Shandong. Zhuang 10.4(C), 10.2, 11.1, 11.4. Chengying 城潁. Zheng. NW of Linying Co 臨潁縣, Henan. Yin 1.4. Chengzhou 成周. Zhou. Eastern cap of Zhou. E of Loyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Yin 3.3; Zhuang 20.1; Xi 24.2; Xuan 16.2(C), 16.2; Zhao 24.8, 26.7(C), 26.9, 32.5(C), 32.3; Ding 1.1. See map 3. Chenling 辰陵. Chen. W of Huaiyang Co 淮陽縣, Henan. Xuan 11.2(C), 11.1, 11.6. Chi 袲. Song. Su Co 宿縣, Henan. Huan 15.10(C), 15.7.

2020

Place Name Index

Chi 絺. Originally Zhou, then Zheng and Jin. P, SW of Qinyang Co 沁陽縣, Henan. Yin 11.5. Chiji 赤棘. Jin. Unk. Cheng 1.5(C), 1.3, 12.4. Chong 重. Lu. NW of Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Xi 31.1. Chong 崇. Small dom, later Wei. E of Hu Co 戶縣, Shaanxi. Xi 19.5; Xiang 31.13. Chong 蟲. Zhu. Jining Co 濟寧縣, Shandong. Zhao 19.3, 19.5. Chonglao 蟲牢. Zheng. N of Fengqiu Co 封丘縣, Henan. Cheng 5.7(C), 5.7, 7.4; Xiang 18.4; Ding 8.8. Chongqiu 重丘 (1). Qi. Unk. Xiang 25.5(C), 25.6, 28.2. Chongqiu 重丘 (2). Cao. SW of Chaping Co 茬平縣, Shandong. Xiang 17.2. Chou 鯈. A place on the Jin/Zheng border. Unk. Wen 17.4. Chou 犫. Chu. SE of Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Zhao 1.13, 13.2. Chu 楚. Dom, CN Mi 羋. Huan 2.4 et passim. See map 1. Chu 鉏. E of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Xiang 4.7. Chù 鄐. Jin. Near Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Xiang 26.10; Zhao 14.7. Chu 廚. Song. Unk. Zhao 21.6. Chui 垂 (1). Qi. Pingyin Co 平隱縣, Shandong. Xuan 8.3(C). Chui 垂 (2). Wei. P N of Cao Co 曹縣, Shandong, or SE of Juancheng Co 鄄城縣, Shandong. Yin 8.1(C); Huan 1.2(C); Zhuang 4.3(C). Chuibi 炊鼻. Lu. P near Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Zhao 26.4. Chuiji 垂棘. Jin. N of Lucheng Co 潞城縣, Shanxi. Xi 2.2; Cheng 5.5. Chuijia 垂葭. Qi. SW of Juye Co 巨野縣, Shandong. Ding 13.1(C), 13.1. Chuilong 垂隴. Zheng. NE of Xingyang Co 滎陽縣, Henan. Wen 2.4(C), 2.4; Xiang 27.5. Chunliu 純留. Jin. S of Tunliu Co 屯留縣, Shanxi. Xiang 18.2. Chunyu 淳于. Cap of Zhou 州. NE of Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Huan 5.6; Zhao 1.1. Chuqiu 楚丘 (1). Wei. E of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Min 2.9; Xi 2.1(C). Chuqiu 楚丘 (2). Between Song and Cao. SW of Chengwu Co 成武縣, Shandong. Yin 7.6(C), 7.5; Xiang 10.2. Churen 鉏任. Xu. Xuchang Co 許昌縣, Henan. Cheng 4.5. Chushi 褚氏. Zhou. P near Luoyang 洛陽, Henan. Zhao 26.7. Crossroad of the Five Fathers 五父之衢. Lu. Xiang 11.1; Zhao 5.1; Ding 6.7, 8.10. Cuanhan 欑函. Wei. Unk. Xuan 11.4. Cuanmao 櫕茅. Zhou, then Jin. Xiuwu Co 修武縣, Henan. Yin 11.5; Xi 25.2. Cui 崔. Qi. NE of Jiyang Co 濟陽縣, Shandong. Xiang 27.7. Cui 趡. Lu. Unk. Huan 17.2. Dabie 大別 (mountain). Chu. Modern Anyang Mountain 安陽山, SW of Huoqiu Co 霍丘縣, Anhui. Ding 4.3. Dacheng 大城. Cao. In Heze Co 菏澤縣, Shandong. Ai 7.5. Dai 戴. Dom. E of Minquan Co 民權縣, Henan. Yin 10.4(C), 10.4. Daji 大棘. Song. S of Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Xuan 2.1(C), 2.1, 2.2. Dalin 大林. Chu. NW of Jingmen Co 荆門縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4.

Place Name Index 2021

Daling 大陵. Zheng. N of Linying Co 臨潁縣, Henan. Zhuang 14.2. Dalu 大陸. Jin. NW of Huojia Co 獲嘉縣, Henan. Ding 1.1. Dalu 大鹵. Jin. SW of Taiyuan City 太原市, Shanxi. Zhao 1.6(C). Daming 大冥. Chen. In Xiangcheng Co 項城縣, Henan. Ai 6.4. Dan 聃. Dom. Region of modern-day Kaifeng City 開封市, Henan. Xi 24.2. Dao 道. Dom. N of Queshan Co 確山縣, Henan. Xi 5.7; Zhao 13.4. Dapang大厖. Ju. NW of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Zhao 1.11. Dasui 大隧 (1). Modern Jiuliguan 九里關, border of Hubei and Henan. Ding 4.3. Dasui 大隧 (2). Chu. In Gaotang Co 高唐縣, Shandong. Xiang 19.12. Daxia 大夏. Jin. Ji Co 吉縣, Xi Co 隰縣, Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Zhao 1.12. Daye 大野. Lu. N of Juye Co 巨野縣, Shandong. Ai 14.1. Deng 鄧 (1). Lu. Unk. Yin 10.1. Deng 鄧 (2). Cai. SE of Luohe City 漯河市, Henan. Huan 2.6(C), 2.4, Zhao 13.2. Deng 鄧 (3). Dom, CN Man 曼; later Chu. In Deng Co 鄧縣, Henan. Huan 9.2; Zhuang 6.3; Cheng 9.4; Zhao 9.3. See map 4. Dianling 顛軨. Yu. Modern Yuban 虞坂, NE of Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Xi 2.2. Diqiu 帝丘 (Emperor’s Hillock). Relocated cap of Wei 衛 dom. SW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xi 31.6(C), 31.5; Zhao 17.5. Diquan 翟泉 / 狄泉. Zhou. In Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Xi 29.3(C), 29.2. Dong 董. Jin. E of Ronghe Town 榮河鎮, Wanrong Co 萬榮縣, Shanxi. Wen 6.1. Dong Marsh 董澤. Jin. NE of Wenxi Co 聞喜縣, Shanxi. Xuan 12.2. Dongshan 東山. Jin. Unk, perhaps just “eastern mountains.” Min 2.7. Dongyang 東陽 (1). Lu. NW of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Ai 8.2. Dongyang 東陽 (2). Qi. E of Linqu Co 臨朐縣, Shandong. Xiang 2.4, 6.7. Dongyang 東陽 (3). Jin. Around Handan 邯鄲縣 and Xingtai Co 邢台縣, Hebei. Xiang 23.4; Zhao 22.4. Dongye 東野. Lu. Eastern outskirts of cap. Ding 5.4. Dongyu 東圉. Zhou. SW of Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Dongzi 東訾. Zhou. In Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 24.8, 25.7. Doucheng 斗城. Zheng. NE of Tongxu Co 通許縣, Henan. Xiang 30.10. Duandao 斷道. Jin. W of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Xuan 17.6(C), 17.1. Dun 頓. Dom, later Chu. Nandun Old Town 南頓故城, W of Xiangcheng Co 項城縣, Henan. Xi 23.3. Duoyu 多魚. Que. In Yucheng Co 虞城縣, Henan. Xi 2.4. Duyang 督揚 (1). Qi. Modern Zhuke 祝柯, NE of Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Xiang 19.1, 20.1. Duyang 督揚 (2). Zheng. Unk. Cheng 16.8. E 鄂. Jin. S of Xiangning Co 鄉寧縣, Shanxi. Yin 6.2. Ecao 惡曹. Wei. SE of Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Huan 11.1(C), 11.1. Er 耏 (river). Qi. Near cap. Xiang 3.3; Ai 14.3. Er 貳. Dom, later Chu. P. Near Yingshan Co 應山縣. Huan 11.1. Er 濡 (river). Yan. NW of Renqiu Co 任丘縣, Hebei. Zhao 7.1.

2022

Place Name Index

Fan 凡. Dom. SW of Hui Co 輝縣, Henan. Xi 24.2; Xiang 12.3. Fan 氾 (1). Zheng. S of Xiangcheng Co 襄城縣, Henan. Xi 24.2, 24.5; Cheng 7.4; Zhao 5.2. Fan 氾 (2). Zhou. NE of Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Fan 樊. Jin. P, Yangfan 陽樊. SE of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Yin 11.5; Zhuang 30.1. Fang 防 (1). Lu, formerly Song. NE of Fei Co, 費縣, Shandong. Yin 9.6(C); Zhuang 7.1(C), 7.1, 22.5(C), 29.5(C), 29.4; Xiang 13.4(C), 13.6, 17.4(C), 17.3, 23.5. Fang 防 (2). Song, later Lu. SW of Jinxiang Co 金鄉縣, Shandong. Yin 10.3(C). Fang 防 (3). Ju, later returned to Lu. SW of Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Zhao 5.4(C), 5.6. Fang 房 (1). Dom. General area of Suiping Co 遂平縣, Henan. Zhao 13.5. Fang 房 (防) (2). Lu. E of Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Xi 14.2(C), 14.2; Ding 5.4. Fangcheng 方城 (1). Yong. E of Zhushan Co 竹山縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Fangcheng 方城 (2). Chu. Unk. Xi 4.1. Fangzhong 房鐘. Wu. Modern Kantuan Town 闞疃鎮, SW of Mengcheng Co 蒙城縣, Anhui. Zhao 6.9. Fangzhu 防渚. Chu. In Fang Co 房縣, Hubei. Wen 11.1. Fanyang 繁揚 (繁陽). Chu. N of Xincai Co 新蔡縣, Henan. Zhao 5.8; Ding 6.4, Xiang 4.1. Feather Mount 羽山. P NW of Donghai Co東海縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 7.7. Fei 肥. Dom. Feiziguo Old Town 肥子國故城, Dongyetou Town 東冶頭鎮, Xiyang Co 昔陽縣, Shanxi. Zhao 12.7, 12.12. Fei 棐. Zheng. N of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Wen 13.9(C). Feilin 棐林. See Fei 棐 and Beilin 北林 / Feilin 棐林. Xuan 1.10(C); Xiang 31.10. Fen 汾. Chu. SW of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Xiang 18.4. Fen River 汾川. Jin. Flows from SW of Ningwu Co 寧武縣 to NE of Houma City 侯馬市 and SW of Hejin Co 河津縣, entering the Yellow River 黃河, Shanxi. Xi 16.3; Cheng 6.5; Zhao 1.12. Feng 馮. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Ding 6.5. Feng 豐. Chu. SW of Xichuan Co 淅川縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Feng 酆. Dom, CN Ji 姬. E of Hu Co 戶縣, Shaanxi. Xi 24.2. Feng Marsh 逢澤. Song. N of cap. S of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Ai 14.4. Fengqiu 豐丘. Qi. Unknown. Ai 14.3. Fenquan 蚡泉. Lu. Unk. Border of Lu and Ju. Zhao 5.6(C), 5.7. Four Peaks 四嶽. Ancient Taishan 泰山, Huashan 華山, Hengshan 衡山, and Hengshan 恒山. Unk. Zhao 4.1. Fuhan 負函. Chu. In Nanyang Co 南陽縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Fujiao 夫椒. Wu. Near Shaoxing Co 紹興縣, Zhejiang. Ai 1.2. Fulai 浮來. Ju. W of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Yin 8.7(C), 8.7. Fuqu 夫渠. Song. Between Shangqiu Co 商丘縣 and Ningling Co 寧陵縣, Henan. Cheng 16.3. Fushan 阜山. Chu. S of Fang Co 房縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Fushi 輔氏. Jin. E of Dali Co 大荔縣, Shaanxi. Xuan 15.5; Cheng 13.3; Xiang 11.6.

Place Name Index 2023

Fushu 負黍. Zhou. SW of Dengfeng Co 登封縣, Henan. Ding 6.5. Fuxia 負瑕. Lu. W of Yanzhou Co 兖州縣, Shandong. Ai 7.4. Fuyu 夫于. Qi. Near former Changshan Co 長山縣, Shandong. Zhao 10.2. Fuzhong 夫鐘. Cheng, later Lu. NE of Wenshang Co 汶上縣, Shandong. Huan 11.6(C); Wen 11.6, 12.1. Gangshan 岡山. Chu. Unk. Zhao 11.8. Ganhou 乾侯. Jin. SE of Cheng’an Co 成安縣, Hebei. Zhao 25.4, 28.2(C), 28.1, 29.1(C), 29.2(C), 29.1, 29.3, 30.1(C), 30.1, 31.1(C), 31.4(C), 31.1, 32.1(C), 32.6(C), 32.1, 32.4; Ding 1.3(C), 1.2, 1.3; Ai 1.5. See map 3. Ganlu 甘鹿. Zhou. NW of Song Co 嵩縣, Henan. Zhao 17.4. Ganshi 乾時. Qi. SW of Linzi 臨淄, Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. Zhuang 9.5(C), 9.4. Ganxi 乾谿. Chu. SE of Bo Co 亳縣, Anhui. Zhao 6.9, 12.11, 13.2(C), 13.2. Gao 郜 (1). Dom, CN Ji 姬. SE of Chengwu Co 成武縣, Shandong. Xi 24.2. Gao 郜 (2). Song. P, former Gao dom. Yin 10.3(C), 10.3. Gao 郜 (3). Jin. Unk. Cheng 13.3. Gao 臯. Rong. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Xi 11.3. Gaoliang 高梁. Jin. NE of Linfen City 臨汾市, Shanxi. Xi 9.5, 15.4, 24.1. Gaoshi 高氏. Zheng. SW of Yu Co 禹縣, Henan. Cheng 17.1. Gaotang 高唐. Qi. E of Gaotang Co 高唐縣, Shandong. Xiang 19.1, 19.5, 25.2; Zhao 10.2; Ai 10.4. Gaoyou 皋鼬. S of Linying Co 臨潁縣, Henan. Ding 4.4(C), 4.1. Gaoyu 高魚. Lu. N of Yuncheng Co 鄆城縣, Shandong. Xiang 26.14. Gaozhou 臯舟. Wu. Unk. Xiang 14.7. Gate of Qiong 窮門. S of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Xiang 4.7. Ge 戈. Between Zheng and Song. Xiang 4.7; Ai 1.2, 12.6. Ge 葛. Dom, CN Yin 嬴. P, N of Ningling Co 寧陵縣, Henan. Huan 15.8(C). Geng 耿. Dom. SE of Hejin Co 河津縣, Shanxi. Min 1.6. Geng 郠. Ju, later taken by Lu. In Yishui Co 沂水縣, Shandong. Zhao 10.3, 12.4, 13.3. Gengyang 梗陽. Jin. In Qingxu Co 清徐縣, Shanxi. Xiang 18.3; Zhao 28.3, 28.4. Gengzong 庚宗. Lu. E of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Zhao 4.8; Ai 8.2. Genmou 根牟. Lu. S of Yishui Co 沂水縣, Shandong. Xuan 9.5(C), 9.2; Zhao 8.4. Gong 鞏. Zhou. In Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 25.7, 26.9. Gong 共. Dom, later Wei. P, Hui Co 輝縣, Henan. Yin 1.4; Min 2.5. Gongchi 共池. Jin. In Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Huan 10.4. Gongxu ravine 公壻之谿. Chu. P, E of Xiangfan City 襄樊市, Hubei. Ding 5.5. Goudou Knoll 句瀆之丘 (1). Song. See Guqiu 穀丘. Huan 12.2. Goudou Knoll 句瀆之丘 (2). Qi. P, in Linzi 臨淄, Shandong. Xiang 19.5, 21.3, 28.11; Ai 6.5. Goushi 句澨. Yong, later Chu. Covered by a reservoir in an area once governed by Jun Co 均縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Gouyi 句繹. Zhu, later Lu. SE of Zou Co 鄒縣, Shandong. Ai 2.1(C), 14.1(C), 14.2.

2024

Place Name Index

Gu 姑 (river). Qi. Modern Dagu River 大姑河, Shandong. Zhao 20.6. Gu 鼓. Dom. Jin Co 晉縣, Hebei. Zhao 15.5, 21.8, 22.4. Gu 穀 (1). Dom. P, NW of Gucheng Co 穀城縣, Hubei. Huan 7.2(C), 7.1. Gu 穀 (2). Qi. Dong’e Town 東阿鎮, Shandong. Zhuang 7.5(C), 23.6(C); Xi 26.7(C), 26.7, 27.4, 28.3; Wen 17.3(C), 17.5(C), 17.3, 17.7; Xuan 14.6(C), 14.4; Cheng 5.3(C), 17.9, 18.2; Xiang 19.8(C), 19.6; Zhao 11.10; Ai 24.1, 27.3. See map 2. Guan 管. Zheng. Modern Zhengzhou City 鄭州市, Henan. Xuan 12.2. Guan 菅. Song. N of Dan Co 單縣, Shandong. Yin 10.3(C), 10.3. Guan 觀. Dom, CN Yao 姚, later Wei. W of former Guancheng Co 觀城縣, Shandong. Zhao 1.2. Guan 貫. Song. S of Cao Co 曹縣, Shandong. Xi 2.4(C), 2.3. Guanshi 冠氏. Jin. N of Guan Co 冠縣 and near Guantao 館陶, Shandong. Ai 15.4. Guayan 瓜衍. Jin. N of Xiaoyi Co 孝義縣, Shanxi. Xuan 15.6. Guazhou 瓜州. Wei. P, Modern Qinling Mountains 秦嶺, Shaanxi. Xiang 14.1; Zhao 9.3. Gucheng 穀城. Zhou. NE of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Ding 8.2. Gufen 姑棼. Qi. NE of Boxing Co 博興縣, Shandong. Zhuang 8.3. Gui 龜. Song. In Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Huan 12.6(C), 12.2. Guiyan 鬼閻. Song. NE of Xihua Co 西華縣, Henan. Zhao 20.5. Guiyin 龜陰. Lu. SW of Xintai Co 新泰縣, Shandong. Ding 10.5(C), 10.3. Gumie 姑蔑 (1). Lu. Also known as “Mie” 蔑. NE of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Ding 12.2. Gumie 姑蔑 (2). Yue, near Quzhou 衢州, Zhejiang. Ai 13.3. Guo 虢 (1). Yan. NW of Renqiu Co 任丘縣, Hebei. Zhao 7.1. Guo 虢 (2). Dom, CN Ji 姬. In Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Zhuang 26.3, 27.5; Xi 2.2, 5.8. Guo River 漷水. Zhu. Modern Nansha River 南沙河, Hebei. Xiang 19.3(C), 19.1; Ai 2.1. Guqiu 穀丘. Song. Same as Goudou Mound 句瀆之丘. SE of Shangqiu Co 商丘縣, Shandong. Huan 12.3(C). Guyou 姑蕕. Zhou. Unk. Ding 6.8. Han 韓. Dom. Originally SE of Gu’an Co 固安縣, Hebei; later moved to Hancheng Co 韓城縣, Shaanxi. Xi 24.2; Xiang 29.11. Han 漢 (river). Chu. Unk. Huan 8.2; Zhuang 4.1; Xi 4.1; Wen 10.3; Cheng 7.5; Xiang 28.8, 28.12; Zhao 13.2, 17.5, 29.4; Ding 3.4, 4.3; Ai 6.4. Handan 邯鄲. Wei, later incorporated into Jin. Modern Handan City 邯鄲市, Hebei. Ding 13.2; Ai 1.3, 3.5, 4.3. See map 3. Hanling 函陵. Zheng. N of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xi 30.3. Hanrui 漢汭. Chu. P, N of Zhongxiang Co 鍾祥縣, Hubei. Zhuang 4.1. Hanshi 函氏. Xu. N of Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Xiang 16.2. Hanshi 寒氏. Jin. Ding 10.4. Hanyuan 韓原. Jin. In Ruicheng Co 芮城縣, Shanxi. Xi 15.12(C), 15.4; Cheng 13.3, 16.5.

Place Name Index 2025

Hao 鄗. Jin. Gaoyi Co 高邑縣 and Baixiang Co 柏鄉縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3. He Marsh 河澤. NE of Yanggu Co 陽穀縣, Shandong. Xiang 14.4. Heirang 黑壤. Jin. Possibly same as Huangfu 黃父 Mountain. Modern Wu­ ling Mountains 烏嶺, NE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Xuan 7.5(C), 7.4. Heng 橫. Song. SW of Shangqiu Co 商丘縣, Henan. Zhao 21.4. Hengshan 衡山 (mountain). Wu. Modern Heng Mountain 衡山, Dangtu Co 當涂縣, Anhui. Xiang 3.1. Hengyong 衡雍. Zheng. W of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Xi 28.3; Wen 8.4(C), 8.4, Xuan 12.2; Xiang 8.8. Hequ 河曲 (the bend of the Yellow River). Jin. S of modern Yellow River黃河, flowing east, Shanxi. Wen 12.7(C), 12.6; Cheng 13.3. See map 3. Heyang 河陽. Jin. W of Meng Co 孟縣, Henan. Xi 28.16(C), 28.9. Hong 紅. Lu. Unk. Zhao 8.6(C), 8.4. Hong 泓 (river) (1). N of Zhecheng Co 柘城縣, Henan. Xi 22.4(C), 22.8, 23.2. Hong 泓 (2). P, another name for Mount Heng 橫山. Ai 13.3. Hongkou 鴻口. Song. NW of Yucheng Co 虞城縣, Henan. Zhao 21.6. Hou 郈. Lu. SE of Dongping Co 東平縣, Shandong. Zhao 25.10; Ding 10.6(C), 10.5, 10.7, 12.3(C), 12.2. Hou 鄇. Zhou. SW of Wuzhi Co 武陟縣, Henan. Cheng 11.7. Houli 侯麗. Qin. S bank of Jing River 涇水, a tributary of Wei River 渭水. Cheng 13.3. Hu 胡 (1). Dom, CN Gui 歸, later Chu. Modern Fuyang City 阜陽市, Anhui. Ding 15.1(C) et passim. Hu 胡 (2). Dom, CN Ji 姬, later Qi. E of Luohe City 漯河市, Henan. Ai 6.6, 8.4. Hu 扈 (1). Ancient dom. N of Hu Co 戶縣, Shaanxi. Zhao 1.2. Hu 扈 (2). Qi. P, in Fan Co 范縣, Shandong. Zhuang 23.1(C). Hu 扈 (3). Zheng. W of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Wen 7.8(C), 7.6, 8.4, 15.10(C), 15.9, 17.4(C), 17.4; Xuan 1.8, 9.7(C), 9.9(C), 9.4; Cheng 16.14(C), 16.11; Zhao 27.5(C), 27.4. Hua 滑 (1). Zheng. NW of Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Zhuang 3.5(C), 3.4. Hua 滑 (2). Dom, CN Ji 姬, taken by Zheng, then Jin, then Zhou. Also known as Bihua 費滑. Goushi Town 緱氏鎮, Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Xi 20.4(C), 20.2, 24.2, 33.1(C), 33.1; Cheng 17.1; Xiang 29.11; Zhao 26.7, 26.9; Ding 6.5. Huai 淮 (river). Modern Huai River 淮河. Huan 8.2; Zhao 12.4; Ding 4.3; Ai 9.5. Huai 懷. Zhou, taken by Zheng, then Jin. W of Wushe Co 武涉縣, Henan. Yin 11.5; Xuan 6.3. Huaitui 壞隤. Lu. In Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Cheng 16.5, 16.6; Ding 1.2. Huan 讙. Lu, taken and then returned by Qi. N of Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Huan 3.6(C), 3.7; Ding 8.10, 10.5(C), 10.3; Ai 8.3(C), 8.7(C), 8.3, 8.7, 15.4. Huan 洹 (river). Modern Anyang River 安陽河, Henan. Cheng 17.8. Huang 皇. Zhou. SW of Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 22.7(C), 22.5. Huang 黃 (1). Dom, CN Ying 嬴. In Huangchuan Co 潢川縣, Henan. Huan 8.2.

2026

Place Name Index

Huang 黃 (2). Song. E of Minquan Co 民權縣, Henan. Yin 1.8. Huang 黃 (3). Qi. NE of Zichuan District 淄川區, Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. Huan 17.1(C), 17.1; Xuan 8.2(C); Ding 12.7(C), 12.9(C). Huangchi 黃池. S of Fengqiu Co 封丘縣, Henan. Ai 13.3(C), 13.2, 20.3. Huangfu 黃父 (mountain). Jin. Possibly same as Heirang 黑壤. Modern Wu­ling Mountains 烏嶺, NE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shandong. Wen 17.4; Xuan 7.4; Zhao 25.2(C), 25.3; Ding 4.2. Huanggu 荒谷. Chu, outside cap. W of Jinan Wall 紀南城, N of Jiangling Co 江陵縣, Hubei. Huan 13.1. Huangpu 荒浦. Shu 舒. On Huangpi River 黃陂河, SE of Shucheng Co 舒城縣, Anhui. Xiang 24.9. Huangya 黃崖. Zheng. S of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 28.12. Huanyuan 轘轅 (mountain). Zhou. NW of Dengfeng Co 登封縣, Henan. Xiang 21.5. Huarui 滑汭 (river). Chu. Unk. Xuan 8.3. Huchu 狐、厨 (disputed whether this is two places or one). Jin. P, near Former Xiangling Town 襄陵鎮, Shanxi. Xi 16.3. Hui 虺. Chu. In Lujiang Co 廬江縣, Anhui. Cheng 17.11. Hukou 壺口. Jin. Modern Huguan 壺關, SE of Changzhi Co 長治縣, Shanxi. Ai 4.3. Hulao 虎牢. Zheng. Probably to be identified with Zhi 制. Modern Sishui Community 汜水公社, Rongyang Co 榮陽縣, Henan. Zhuang 21.1; Xi 4.2; Wen 8.1; Xiang 2.9(C), 2.5, 2.7, 9.5, 10.9(C), 10.10. See map 3. Huo 霍 (1). Dom, CN Ji 姬, later Jin. SW of Huo Co 霍縣, Shanxi. Min 1.6; Xi 24.2; Xiang 29.11. Huo 霍 (2). Unclaimed, later Chu. In Linru Co 臨汝縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Huoren 霍人. Jin. E of Fanshi Co 繁峙縣, Shanxi. Xiang 10.2. Huqiu 壺丘. Chen. SE of Xincai Co 新蔡縣, Henan. Wen 9.7. Huqiu 瓠丘. Jin. SE of Yuanqu Co 垣曲縣, Shanxi. Xiang 1.1. Hurang 狐壤. Zheng. N of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Yin 11.8. Huren 狐人. Zhou. In Linying Co 臨潁縣, Henan. Ding 6.5. Hutai 狐駘. Same place as Taishang 駘上. Zhu. S of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Xiang 4.8. Huyou 戶牖. NE of Lankao Co 蘭考縣, Henan. Ai 13.4. Ji 紀. Dom, CN Jiang 姜. S of Shouguang Co 壽廣縣, Shandong. Yin 1.6 ­ et passim. See map 2. Ji 極. Dom. Neighboring Lu, also considered part of Lu. S of Jinxiang Co 金鄉縣, Shandong. Yin 2.3(C), 2.3. Ji 棘 (1). Chu. S of Yongcheng Co 永城縣, Henan. Xiang 26.10; Zhao 4.7, 5.8. Ji 棘 (2). Lu. S of Feicheng Co 肥城縣, Shandong. Cheng 3.9(C), 3.5. Ji 棘 (3). Qi. NW of Linzi District 臨淄區, Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. Zhao 10.2. Ji 冀 (1). Dom. NE of Hejin Co 河津縣, Shanxi. Xi 2.2, 25.4, 33.6. Ji 冀 / Jifang 冀方 (2). Jin. N of Hebei and Shanxi. Zhao 4.1; Ai 6.4.

Place Name Index 2027

Ji 箕. Jin. NE of Bo Co 薄縣, Shanxi. Xi 33.8(C), 33.6; Wen 2.1; Cheng 13.3, 16.5; Zhao 23.2, 24.2. Ji 蔇. Lu. Unk. Zhuang 9.2(C), 9.2. Ji Ford 棘津. P, perhaps the same as the Meng Ford 孟津. Zhao 17.4. Ji Marsh 雞澤. Jin. NE of Handan City 邯鄲市, Hebei. Xiang 3.5(C), 3.5, 3.9, 5.5, 30.10. Ji River, west 濟西. Lu. West bank of the Ji River 濟水. Zhuang 18.2(C), 18.3; Xi 31.1(C), 31.1; Xuan 1.8(C), 1.7, 10.3(C), 10.1. Jia 郟 (1). Zhou. Modern Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Huan 7.3; Xiang 24.11, 25.16, 26.14. Jia 郟 (2). Zheng, then Chu. Area formerly governed by Jia Co 郟縣, Henan. Zhao 1.13, 19.1. Jia 駕. Chu. Unk. Cheng 17.11; Xiang 3.1. Jiagu 夾谷. Qi. Jiawu Co 莢蕪縣, Shandong. Ding 10.2(C), 10.3(C), 10.1. See map 2. Jian 餞. Zhou. Unk. Zhao 22.5. Jiancheng 簡城. Zhou, near Wangcheng 王城. Unk. Ding 8.2. Jiang 江. Dom. SW of Xi Co 息縣, Henan. Xi 2.3, 5.7; Wen 3.4(C), 3.7(C), 3.6, 4.4(C), 4.6; Xuan 3.6. Jiang 江 (river). Modern Yangzi River 長江. Wen 10.3; Xuan 12.1; Zhao 3.12, 4.1; Ding 4.3; Ai 1.1, 4.2, 6.4, 9.5. Jiang 絳 (1). Former cap of Jin 晉. SE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Zhuang 26.2, 28.2; Xi 13.4, 32.3; Wen 17.4; Cheng 5.4. Jiang 絳 (2). Cap of Jin 晉. Modern Houma City 侯馬市, Shanxi. Xiang 23.3; Zhao 1.8, 9.5; Ding 13.1, 13.2, 14.6. See map 3. Jiang 蔣. Dom, CN Ji 姬. NE of Gushi Co 固始縣, Henan. Xi 24.2; Xiang 12.3. Jiantu 踐土. Zheng. SW of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Xi 28.8(C), 28.3, 29.2; Xiang 20.4; Zhao 4.3, 25.3; Ding 1.1, 4.1. See map 3. Jiao 郊 (1). Zhou. Near Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 12.8, 22.5, 23.4(C), 23.1, 26.9. Jiao 郊 (2). Jin. Possibly same as Hao 鄗. In Wenxi Co 聞喜縣, Shanxi. Wen 3.4. Jiao 郊 (3). Lu. Unk. Ai 11.1, 11.3. Jiao 郊 (4). Cao. In Heze Co 菏澤縣, Shandong. Ding 12.1. Jiao 焦 (1). Dom, later Jin. Modern Sanmenxia City 三門峽市, Henan. Xi 30.3; Xuan 2.2; Xiang 29.11; Zhao 22.5. Jiao 焦 (2). Chen, later Chu. Modern Bo Co 亳縣, Anhui. Xi 23.3; Xiang 1.2. Jiao 絞 (1). Dom, later Chu. NW of Yun Co 鄖縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2, 12.3, 12.4. Jiao 絞 (2). Zhu. N of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Ai 2.1. Jiaogang 交剛. Jin. Modern Xi Co 隰縣, Shanxi. Cheng 12.3(C), 12.3. Jiaoying 郊郢. Chu. Modern Zhongxiang Co 鍾祥縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2. Jiaru 郟鄏. See Jia 郟. Zhou. Xuan 3.3; Zhao 26.9. Jie 解. Zhou. S of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Jie 介. Dom. S of Shandong, N of Xiao Co 蕭縣, Anhui. Xi 30.5(C). Jiegen 介根. Qi. Unk. Xiang 24.6.

2028

Place Name Index

Jifu 雞父. Chu. SE of Gushi Co 固始縣, Henan. Zhao 23.7(C), 23.5. Jiling 踖陵. Huang, later Chu. SW of Huangchuan Co 潢川縣, Henan. Zhuang 19.1. Jima 羈馬. Jin. S of Yongji Co 永濟縣, Shanxi. Wen 12.6; Cheng 13. 3. Jin 晉. Dom, CN Ji 姬. Cap Jiang 絳 et al. Yin 5.2 et passim. See map 1. Jin 津. Chu. Near Jiangjincheng 江津成, S of Jiangling Co 江陵縣, Hubei. Zhuang 19.1. Jin side of the Yellow River 河內. Jin. Ji Co, 汲縣, Henan. Ding 13.1. Jing 京 (1). Zheng. SE of Xingyang Co 滎陽縣, Henan. Yin 1.4. Jing 京 (2). Zhou. SW of Luonan City 洛南市, Shaanxi. Zhao 22.5. Jing 荊. Chu. Unk. Zhuang 10.5(C), 14.3(C), 16.3(C), 28.3(C); Zhao 13.5. Jing 涇 (river). Qin. Unk. Cheng 13.3; Xiang 14.3. Jingbo 景亳. N of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Zhao 4.3. Jingchu 京楚. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Jingshan 荊山 (mountain). Chu. W of Nanzhang Co 南漳縣, Hubei. Zhao 4.1, 12.11. Jingzi 京茲. Qi. SE of Pingyin Co 平陰縣, Shandong. Xiang 18.3. Jinxiang 祲祥. Lu. In Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Zhao 11.7(C), 11.4. Jinyang 晉陽. Jin. SW of Taiyuan City 太原市, Shanxi. Ding 13.5(C), 13.2. Jinyin 堇陰. Jin. E of Linyi Co 臨猗縣, Shanxi. Wen 7.4, 8.7. Jipu 棘蒲. Jin. Zhao Co 趙縣, Hebei. Ai 1.5. Jiquan 谿泉. Zhou. SE of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Jisui 濟隧. Zheng. A tributary of a former course of the Yellow River W of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Xiang 11.3. Jiucui 臼衰. Jin. NW of Former Jie Co 解縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1. Jiuxu 舊許. Xu, old territory. Unk. Xiang 11.3; Zhao 12.11. Jiuzi 鳩茲. Wu. SE of Wuhu Co 蕪湖縣, Anhui. Xiang 3.1. Jiwei 棘圍. Chu. Unk. Zhao 13.2. Jixia 棘下. Lu, within cap walls. Unk. Ding 8.10. Jizhang 紀鄣 / Ji 紀 / Jipeng 紀彭. Ju. N of Ganyu Co 贛榆縣, Jiangsu. See also Zhang 鄣. Zhao 19.7. Ju 莒 (1). Dom. First cap Jiegen 介根, SW of Jiao Co 膠線, Shandong. Later cap Ju 莒, modern Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Yin 2.2(C) et passim. See map 2. Ju 莒 (2). Qi. Unk. Zhao 3.10, 10.2. Ju 莒 (3). Zhou. Unk. Zhao 26.9. Ju 郹. Cai. In Shangcai Co 上蔡縣, Henan. Zhao 23.7. Ju 聚. Jin. SE of Jiang Co 絳縣, Shanxi. Zhuang 25.4. Ju Dam 湨梁. Jin. W of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Xiang 16.2(C), 16.1, 18.3, 22.2. Juan 鄄 (1). Zhou. Unk. Cheng 11.5. Juan 鄄 (2). Wei. NW of Juancheng Co 鄄城縣, Shandong. Zhuang 14.4(C), 14.4, 15.1(C), 19.3(C); Xiang 14.4; Zhao 20.4; Ai 17.5, 25.1. Juanchu 卷楚. Jin. SW of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Xuan 17.1. Juemo 厥貉. Que. In Xiangcheng Co 項城縣, Henan. Wen 10.7(C), 10.5, 10.6. Jueyin 厥憖. Wei. In Xinxiang Co 新鄉縣, Henan. Zhao 11.8(C), 11.5.

Place Name Index 2029

Jufu 莒父. Lu. Modern Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Ding 14.15(C). Juju 鞫居. Wei. Unk. Cheng 2.2. Jumeng 句鼆. Lu. Unk. Wen 15.4. Jun 麇 (1). Chu. In Jingshan Co 京山縣 and Tianmen Co 天門縣, Hubei. Ding 5.5, 5.7. Jun 麇 (2). Dom. Modern Yun Co 鄖縣, Hubei. Wen 11.1, 16.4. Junxiang 軍祥. Chu. SW of Sui Co 隨縣, Hebei. Ding 5.5. Juyang 郹陽. Cai. See Ju 郹. Zhao 19.2. Juyu 且于. Ju. In Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Xiang 23.7, 25.2. Juzhi 且知. Lu. Near Yuncheng Co 鄆城縣, Shandong. Zhao 27.5. Kan 闞. Lu. In an area covered by modern Nanwang Lake 南旺湖, Shandong. Huan 11.7(C); Zhao 25.6, 32.2(C). Kankan 坎欿. Zhou. SE of Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Ke 柯 (1). Jin. NE of Neihuang Co 內黃縣, Henan. Xiang 19.14(C), 19.12. Ke 柯 (2). Qi. E’cheng Town 阿城鎮, Shandong. Zhuang 13.4(C), 13.2. Ke Marsh 柯澤. Zheng. Unk. Xi 22.9. Keling 柯陵. Zheng. S of Xuchang Co 許昌縣, N of Linying Co 臨潁縣, Henan. Cheng 17.3(C), 17.4. Kong Marsh 空澤. Song. Unk. Ai 26.2. Kongtong 空桐. Song. Palace in Song cap. Unk. Ai 26.2. Kuai 蒯. Zhou. NW of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Kuaicheng 鄶城. Zheng. NW of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xi 33.9. Kuaiji 會稽. Cap of Yue 越 near modern-day Kuaiji Mountain 會稽山, Shao­x ing Co 紹興縣, Zhejiang. Ai 1.2. See map 4. Kuang 匡 (1). Song. W of Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Xi 15.3(C), 15.1. Kuang 匡 (2). Zheng. Changyuan Co 長垣縣, Henan. Wen 1.5, 8.1; Ding 6.2. Kui 睽. Chu. Unk. Xi 27.4. Kui 夔. Wei. Near Zigui 秭歸, Hubei. Xi 26.6(C), 26.5. Kuihuangshi 頯黃氏. Wu. In Xuancheng Co 宣城縣, Anhui. Ai 16.5. Kuiqiu 葵丘 (1). Qi. W of Linzi 臨淄, Shandong. Zhuang 8.3. Kuiqiu 葵丘 (2). Song. E of Lankao Co 蘭考縣, Henan. Xi 9.2(C), 9.4(C), 9.2, 15.1. Kuiquan 逵泉. Lu. SE of Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Zhuang 32.4. Kundu 昆都. Jin. S of Linfen City 臨汾市, Shanxi. Xi 16.3. Kunwu Tower 昆吾之觀 (昆吾之虛). Wei. In cap, S of Northern Palace. Ai 17.5. Kushou 刳首. Jin. Former Linjin Co 臨晉縣, Shanxi. Wen 7.4. Lai 郲 (1). Qi. P, ancient Lai 萊 dom. SE of Changyi Co 昌邑縣, Shandong. Xiang 14.4. Lai 郲 (2). Zheng. Possibly same as Shilai 時郲. N of Zhengzhou City 鄭州市, Henan. Yin 11.2. Lai 萊 (1). Dom, CN Jiang 姜, later Qi. SE of Changyi Co 昌邑縣, Shandong. Xuan 7.2(C); Xiang 2.2, 6.8(C), 6.7, 14.4, 28.9.

2030

Place Name Index

Lai 萊 (2). Qi. At Lai Mountain 萊山, SE of Huang Co 黃縣, Shandong. Ai 5.3. Lai 萊 (mountain) (3). Lu. In Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Zhao 7.5. Lai 賴 (1). Dom. Modern Lishandian 厲山店, Sui Co 隨縣, Hubei. Huan 13.1; Zhao 4.4(C), 4.4, 4.7. Lai 賴 (2). Qi. NW of Zhangqiu Co 章丘縣, Shandong. Ai 6.6, 10.4. Lan 濫. Zhu, later Lu. SE of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Zhao 31.6(C), 31.5. Lane of Shisun 士孫之里. Qi, near cap. Unk. Xiang 25.2. Lang 郎. Lu. NE of former Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Yin 1.3; Huan 4.1(C), 4.1; Zhuang 8.1(C), 10.4(C), 10.2; Min 1.4. Langyuan 狼淵. Zheng. W of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Wen 9.5. Laoqiu 老丘. Song. SE of Kaifeng City 開封市, Henan. Ding 15.4. Laotao 老桃. Song. NE of Jining City 濟寧縣, Shandong. Yin 10.3. Lesser Zhu 小邾. Dom, CN Cao 曹. Possibly the same place as Ni 郳 (1). SE of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Xi 7.2(C), et passim. See map 2. Li 犁 (1). Qi. Unk. Ai 10.4. Li 犁 (2). Wei. P, near Anyang 安陽, Henan. Ai 11.6. Li 黎 / Lishidi 黎氏地. Wei. SW of Changzhi Co 長治縣, Shanxi. Zhao 4.3; Xuan 15.3. Li 厲. Dom. E of Luyi Co 鹿邑縣, Henan. Xi 15.5(C), 15.3, 16.2; Xuan 9.7, 11.6. Li 櫟 (1). Chu. N of Shangcai Co 上蔡縣, Henan. Zhao 1.13, 4.7, 5.8, 13.2. Li 櫟 (2). Jin. Unk. Xiang 11.6, 14.3. Li 櫟 (3). Zheng. Yu Co 禹縣, Henan. Huan 15.9(C), 15.6; Zhuang 14.2, 16.2, 20.1; Xi 24.2; Xuan 11.1; Zhao 11.10. Li 釐. Chu. In Wuwei Co 無為縣, Anhui. Cheng 17.11. Li 酈. Lu. Unk. Xi 1.9(C), 1.6. Li Marsh 笠澤. Wu. Modern Wusong River 吳淞江. Ai 17.2. Lian 鄻. Zhou. Unk. Zhao 29.2. Liang 良 (1). P, near Pi Co 丕縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 13.3. Liang 良 (2). P, near Suzhou 蘇州, Jiangshu. Ai 15.2. Liang 梁 (1). Dom, CN Ying 嬴. S of Hancheng Co 韓城縣, Shaanxi. Huan 9.3. Liang 梁 (2). Wei. W of Linru Co 臨汝縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Liangqiu 梁丘. Song. NE of Chengwu Co 城武縣, Shandong. Zhuang 32.2(C), 32.2. Liangu 連穀. Chu, area outside Fangcheng 方城. Unk. Xi 28.4. Lianyu 斂盂. Wei. SE of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xi 28.1; Xuan 17.1. Liao 蓼 (1). Dom. S of Tanghe Co 唐河縣, Henan. Huan 11.2; Ai 17.4. Liao 蓼 (2). Dom. NE of Gushi Co 固始縣, Henan. Wen 5.4. Liaoshe 聊攝. Qi. NW of Liaocheng Co 聊城縣, Shandong. Zhao 20.6. Liaoyang 轑陽. Chu. P, NW of Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan. Xuan 4.3. Licheng 離城. Wei. W of Shucheng Co 舒城縣, Anhui. Xiang 25.8. Ligu 離姑. Zhu. Unk. Zhao 23.2. Lin 臨. Jin. SW of Lincheng Co 臨城縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3. Ling 泠. Wei, near Lu. Unk. Ai 25.1.

Place Name Index 2031

Ling 領 (mountain). Zhou. Modern Huanyuan Mountain 轘轅山, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Lingban 陵阪. Lu. NE of Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Ai 27.4. Lingdun 泠敦. Xu. In Xuchang Co 許昌縣, Henan. Cheng 4.5. Linghu 令狐. Jin. W of Linyi Co 臨猗縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1; Wen 7.6(C), 7.4, 8.2, 12.6; Cheng 11.9, 13.3. Linpin 臨品. Chu. In Jun Co 均縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Linqiu 廩丘. Qi. NE of Juancheng Co 鄄城縣, Shandong. Xiang 26.14; Ding 8.4; Ai 20.1, 24.1. Linyan 廩延. Zheng. N of Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Yin 1.4, 1.11. Lishen 貍脤. Que. Unk. Cheng 17.10(C), 17.8. Liu 六. Ancient dom, later Chu. N of Liu’an Co 六安縣, Anhui. Wen 5.6(C), 31.4. Liu 劉 (1). Lu. In Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Xiang 15.1(C). Liu 劉 (2). Zheng. S of Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Yin 11.5. Liu 劉 (3). Zhou. SW of Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5, 23.3, 26.5, 26.7. Liufen 柳棼. Zheng. Unk. Xuan 9.8. Long 龍. Lu. SE of Tai’an Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.1. Loulin 婁林. Que. NE of Si Co 泗縣, Anhui. Xi 15.11(C), 15.7, 17.1. Lower Yin 下陰. Chu. NW of Guanghua Co 光化縣, Hubei. Zhao 19.1. Lu 魯. Dom, CN Ji 姬. Cap near Qufu 曲阜, Shandong. Yin preface et passim. See map 1. Lù 潞 (1). Di 狄 land, then Jin. NE of Lucheng Co 潞城縣, Shaansi. Wen 11.5; Xuan 15.3; Ding 14.9. Lu 潞 (2). Qi. Unk. Ai 8.6, 17.5. Lú 盧 (1). Qi. SW of Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Yin 3.6; Cheng 17.6, 17.9; Xiang 18.3, 29.16 Lu 廬 (2). Chu. E of Nanzhang Co 南漳縣, Hubei. Wen 14.10, 16.4. Lü 呂 (1). Chu. W of Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan. Cheng 7.5. Lü 呂 (2). Song. SE of Xuzhou City 徐州市, Jiangsu. Xiang 1.3. Luan 欒. Jin. N of Luancheng Co 欒城縣 and Zhao Co 趙縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3. Luliu 廬柳. Jin. N of Linyi Co 臨猗縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1. Lun 綸. Wei. SE of Yucheng Co 虞城縣, Henan. Ai 1.2. Luo 犖. Song. Same as Cheng 檉. P, NW of Huaiyang Co 淮陽縣, Henan. Xi 1.4. Luo 雒 (1). Jin. SE of Dali Co 大荔縣, Shaanxi. Xuan 15.5. Luo 雒 (river) (2). Zhou. Modern Luo River 洛水. Xuan 3.3; Zhao 17.4. Luo 羅. Dom, CN Xiong 熊. Unk. Huan 12.4, 13.1. Luo 濼. Qi. Modern Baotu Spring 趵突泉, Jinan Co 濟南市, Shandong. Huan 18.1(C), 18.1. Luogu 落姑. Qi. P, in Pingyin Co 平陰縣, Shandong. Min 1.4(C), 1.4. Luoyi 雒邑. Zhou. Modern Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Huan 2.2. Lüqiu 閭丘. Zhu, later Lu. NE of Zou Co 鄒縣, Shandong. Xiang 21.2(C), 21.2. Lurong 盧戎. Dom, CN Wei 媯. NE of Nanzhang Co 南漳縣, Hubei. Huan 13.1.

2032

Place Name Index

Lushang 鹿上. Song. SW of Juye Co 巨野縣, Shandong. Xi 21.2(C), 21.1. Lüsong 旅松. Lu. Unk, near Fang 防. Xiang 17.3. Luxian 魯縣. NE of Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Zhao 29.4. Ma 麻. Chu. NE of Dangshan Co 碭山縣, Anhui. Zhao 4.7, 5.8. Maling 馬陵. Que. SE of Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Cheng 7.6(C), 7.4, 7.5. Man 蠻. Wei. SE of Ruyang Co 汝陽縣, Henan. Zhao 16.2. Man 鄤. Zheng. Unk. Cheng 3.1. Manshi 蠻氏. Wei. P, modern Rongman 戎蠻, Ruyang Co 汝陽縣, Henan. Cheng 6.4; Zhao 16.2; Ai 4.2. Mao 毛. Dom, CN Ji 姬. In Yiyang Co 宜陽縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Mao 茅. Dom, later Zhu. NW of Jinxiang Co 金鄉縣, Shandong. Xi 24.2; Xiang 12.3; Ai 7.4. Mao Ford 茅津. Jin. Ford on the Yellow River 黃河. In Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Wen 3.4. Maorong 茅戎. Wei. W of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Cheng 1.1. Maoshi 茅氏. Wei. NW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xiang 26.3. Mashou 馬首. Jin. Modern Mashou Town 馬首鎮, S of Shouyang Co 壽陽縣, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Masui 麻隧. Qin. N of Jingyang Co 涇陽縣, Shaanxi. Cheng 13.3. Maxing 馬陘. Qi. SW of Yidu Co 益都縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Mei 媚. Qi. Yucheng Co 禹城縣, Shandong. Ding 9.4; Ai 15.4. Mei 郿. Lu. S of former Shouchang Co 壽長縣, Shandong. Zhuang 28.4(C), 28.5. Meishan 梅山 (mountain). Zheng. On the border between Zhengzhou Co 鄭州縣 and Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 18.4. Meng 鄸. Cao. NW of Heze Co 菏澤縣, Shandong. Zhao 20.2(C). Meng 蒙. Lu. E of Mengyin Co 蒙陰縣, Shandong. Ai 17.6. Meng Ford 孟津. Jin. Yellow River 黃河, S of Meng Co 孟縣, Henan. Zhao 4.3. Meng Marsh 夢澤. Chu. Same as Yunmeng Marshes 雲夢澤. Unk. Xuan 4.3; Zhao 3.12. Meng Marsh 蒙澤. Song. N of Shangqiu Co 商丘縣, Henan. Zhuang 12.1. Mengmen 孟門. Jin. W of Hui Co 輝縣, Henan. Xiang 23.4. Mengzhu Marsh 孟諸. Song. Lakes and ponds. Xi 28.4; Wen 10.5, 16.5; Xuan 14.3; Zhao 21.4. Mi 弭. Zheng. In Mi Co 密縣, Henan. Zhuang 21.1. Mi 密 (1). Lu. N of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Min 2.3. Mi 密 (2). Ju. E of Changyi Co 昌邑縣, Shandong. Yin 2.7(C), 2.6. Mian 緜 (1). Zheng. Unk. Wen 1.5. Mian 緜 (2). Jin. See Mianshang 緜上. Xiang 29.16. Mianshang 緜上. Jin. Foot of modern Mount Jie 介山, Jiexiu Co 介休縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1; Xiang 13.3; Ding 6.6. Miao 苗. Jin. SW of Jiyuan Co 濟垣縣, Henan. Xiang 26.10. Mie 蔑. Lu. Possibly the same place as Gumie 故蔑. E of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Yin 1.2(C), 1.2; Huan 17.2.

Place Name Index 2033

Min 緡. Song. NE of Jinxiang Co 金鄉縣, Shandong. Xi 23.1(C), 23.1, 26.7(C), 26.6. Ming 冥. Yue. Between Guangde Co 廣德縣, Anhui, and Changxing Co 長興縣, Zhejiang. Ai 19.1. Ming 鄍. Yu. NE of Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Xi 2.2. Ming’e 冥阨. Chu. Narrow pass. Modern Pingjingguan 平靖關, Henan and Hubei border. Ding 4.3. Minglu 鳴鹿. Chen. W of Luyi Co 鹿邑縣, Henan. Cheng 16.9. Mingyan 鳴雁. Zheng. N of Qi Co 杞縣, Henan. Cheng 16.4. Mixu 密須. Dom. P, W of Lingtai Co 靈臺縣, Gansu. Zhao 15.7; Ding 4.1. Mizuo 彌作. Split between Zheng and Song. Unk. Ai 12.6. Mou 牟. Dom dependent upon Lu. E of Laiwu County 萊蕪縣, Shangdong. Huan 15.8(C); Xi 5.3(C), 5.3. Moulou 牟婁. Ju. Modern Louxiang 婁鄉, Zhucheng Co 諸城縣, Shandong. Yin 4.1(C); Zhao 5.4(C), 5.6. Mound of Shaohao 少皞之虛. Lu. In Qufu 曲阜. Ding 4.1. Mound of Xia 夏虛. Jin. Taiyuan City 太原市 or E of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Ding 4.1. Mound of Yin 殷虛 / 殷墟. Area in Qi Co 淇縣, Henan. Ding 4.1. Mount Hua 華山. Jin. Modern Hua Mountain 華山, Shaanxi. Xi 15.4. Mount Huabuzhu 華不注. Qi. NE of Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Mount Lai 萊山. Chu. S of Guangshan Co 光山縣, Henan. Zhao 5.8. Mount Liang 梁山. Jin. In Hancheng Co 韓城縣, Shaanxi. Cheng 5.4(C), 5.4. Mount Miji 靡笄. Qi. Modern Qianfo Mountain 千佛山, Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Mount Sang 桑山. Zheng. Unk. Zhao 16.6. Mount Shou 首山 (1). Jin. Modern Leishou Mountain 雷首山, Yongji Co 永濟縣, Shanxi. Xuan 2.3. Mount Shou 首山 (2). S of Xiangcheng Co 襄城縣, Henan. Ai 13.4. Mount Tu 塗山. SE of Huaiyuan Co 懷遠縣, Anhui. Zhao 4.3; Ai 7.4. Mount Wu 巫山. Qi. NW of Feicheng Co 肥城縣, Shandong. Xiang 18.3. Mount Yuchi 魚齒. NW of Pingdingshan City 平頂山市, Henan. Xiang 18.4. Mount Zhiji 坻箕之山. Chu. Modern Chichu 踟蹰, S of Chao Co 巢縣, Anhui. Zhao 5.8. Muling 穆陵. Qi. N of Macheng Co 麻城縣, Hubei. Xi 4.1. Mumen 木門. Jin. NW of Hejian Co 河間縣, Hebei. Xiang 27.3. Muqiu 牡丘. Lu. NE of Liaocheng Co 聊城縣, Shandong. Xi 15.3(C), 15.1. Nachu 那處. Chu. SE of Jingmen Co 荆門縣, Hubei. Zhuang 18.5. Nan’gang 南岡. Chu. N of Huoshan Co 霍山縣, Anhui. Zhao 31.4. Nanhuai 南懷. Chu. Between the Yangzi 長江 and Huai Rivers 淮河, Anhui. Zhao 5.8. Nanli 南里 (1). Song. Unk. Zhao 21.3(C), 21.4, 22.2(C).

2034

Place Name Index

Nanli 南里 (2). Zheng. S of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xuan 3.6; Xiang 2.11; Ai 27.5. Nanyang 南陽. Jin. Xinxiang Area 新鄉地區, Henan. Xi 25.2; Wen 1.5; Zhao 1.15, 15.7. Ni 郳 (1). Dom. Near Yong 庸. Possibly the same as Xiaozhu 小邾. Zhuang 5.3(C). Ni 郳 (2). Qi. Unk. Xiang 6.7. Niebei 聶北. Qi. Modern Boping Town 博平鎮, Chiping Co 茌平縣, Shandong. Xi 1.2(C). Ning 甯. Jin. NW of Huojia Co 獲嘉縣, Henan. Wen 5.5; Ding 1.1. Ningfeng 寧風. Qi. Unk. Near border of Qi and Lu. Zhao 5.1. Ningmu 甯母. Lu. In Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Xi 7.4(C), 7.3. Niushou 牛首. Zheng. Slightly NE of Tongxu Co 通許縣, Henan. Huan 14.4; Xiang 10.8. Nizhi 逆畤. Jin. SE of Wan Co 完縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3. Northern Yan (Beiyan) 北燕. See Yān 燕. Xiang 29.10(C). Old Jiang 故絳. Jin, former cap. SE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Cheng 6.5. Pan 泮 (river). In Shandong. Xiang 25.3. Pei 沛 (marsh). Qi. Unk. Zhao 20.7. Peng 彭 (river). Chu. Modern Nanhe River 南河, originating SW of Fang Co 房縣, Hubei. Huan 12.4. Peng River 彭水. Wei. Near cap. No longer in existence. Zhao 20.4. Pengcheng 彭城. Song. Modern Xuzhou City 徐州市, Jiangsu. Cheng 18.5(C), 18.5, 18.8, 18.12, 18.14; Xiang 1.2(C), 1.1, 26.10. See map 2. Pengya 彭衙. Qin. NE of Baishui Co 白水縣, Shaanxi. Wen 2.1(C), 2.1, 2.6. Pi 邳. Ancient dom near Pi Co 邳縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 1.2; Ding l.1. Pi 郫. Jin. Near modern Shaoyuan Township 邵源鎮, W of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Wen 6.5. Pi 脾. Jin. N of Jun Co 浚縣, Henan. Ding 14.6. Pilu 被廬. Jin. Unk. Xi 27.4; Zhao 29.5. Ping 郱. Ji, later taken by Qi. W of Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Zhuang 1.8(C). Pingling 平陵. Jin. NE of Wenshui Co 文水縣, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Pingqiu 平丘. Wei. E of Fengqiu Co 封丘縣, Henan. Xiang 31.1; Zhao 13.4(C), 13.5(C), 13.3, 14.7, 15.6, 19.8. Pingshou 平壽. Wei. Unk. Zhao 20.4. Pingyang 平陽 (1). Lu, East Pingyang 東平陽. NW of Xintai Co 新泰縣, Shandong. Xuan 8.9(C), 8.6. Pingyang 平陽 (2). Lu, West Pingyang 西平陽. Modern area governed by Zou Co 鄒縣, Shandong. Ai 27.1. Pingyang 平陽 (3). Jin. Modern Linfen City 臨汾市, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Pingyang 平陽 (4). Wei. SE of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Ai 16.4.

Place Name Index 2035

Pingyin 平陰 (1). Qi. NE of Pingyin Co 平陰縣, Shandong. Xiang 18.3, 21.8, 23.4, 25.2; Zhao 25.6. Pingyin 平陰 (2). Zhou. N of Mengjin Co 孟津縣, Henan. See also Yin 陰. Zhao 23.1. Pingzhi 平畤. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Xiang 30.6; Zhao 22.5. Pingzhong 平中. Jin. Near Tang Co 唐縣, Hebei. Ding 3.2. Pingzhou 平州. Qi, border of Qi and Lu. W of Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Xuan 1.6(C), 1.5. Pingzhuang 平莊 (name of a mound or hill). Wei. Unk. Ai 26.1. Pishao 郫邵. See Pi 郫. Xiang 23.4. Pixie 脾洩. Chu. Near Jiangling Co 江陵縣, Hubei. Ding 5.7. Pu 蒲 (1). Wei. E of Changyuan Co 長垣縣, Henan. Huan 3.2(C), 3.3; Cheng 9.2(C), 9.2; Zhao 11.10; Ai 25.1. Pu 蒲 (2). Jin. NW of Xi Co 隰縣, Shanxi. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6, 5.2, 23.6, 24.1. Pu 濮 (1). Chen. SE of Bo Co 亳縣, Anhui. Yin 4.6(C), 4.5. Pu 濮 (2). Wei. In Hua Co 滑縣 and Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Ai 25.1. Pu 濮 (river). Chu. Flows within Heze Co 菏澤縣, Shandong. Zhao 9.2; Ai 27.3. Puche 圃車. Zhou. In Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Pugu 蒲故. SE of Boxing Co 博興縣, Shandong. Zhao 9.3. Puhou residence 蒲侯氏. Ju. Near Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Xiang 23.7. Pusao 蒲騷. Dom. NW of Yingshan Co 應山縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2. Pusui 蒲隧. SW of Suining Co 睢寧縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 16.2. Putian 圃田. Zheng, P Yuanpu 原圃. Unk. Ding 4.1. Puxu 蒲胥. Chu. Unk, possibly the name of the marketplace in the Chu cap. Xuan 14.3. Qǐ 杞. Dom, CN Si 姒. SE of Changle Co 長樂縣, Shandong. Yin 4.1(C) et passim. See map 2. Qi 祁. Jin. SE of Qixian 祁縣, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Qī 戚. Wei. N of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Wen 1.9(C), 1.5, 1.6, 8.1; Cheng 7.6, 14.5, 15.3(C), 15.1, 17.4; Xiang 1.2, 2.6(C), 2.9(C), 2.7, 5.7(C), 5.8, 14.7(C), 14.4, 14.9, 26.2(C), 26.2, 26.3, 26.7, 29.13; Zhao 7.11, 11.6, 11.10; Ai 2.4(C), 2.2, 2.3, 3.1(C), 3.1, 15.5, 16.1(C). See map 3. Qi 齊. Dom, CN Jiang 姜. Cap Linzi 臨淄 near modern-day Linzi City 臨淄市, Shandong. Yin 3.6 et passim. See map 1. Qi 漆. Zhu, later Lu. Unk. Xiang 21.2(C), 21.2; Ding 15.14(C), 15.9. Qian 牽. Qi. N of Jun Co 浚縣, Henan. Ding 14.6(C). Qian 潛 (1). Dom. S of Huoshan Co 霍山縣, Anhui. Zhao 27.2, 31.4. Qian 潛 (2). Lu. Modern Jining City 濟寧市, Shandong. Yin 2.1(C), 2.1. Qian 鍼. Wei. Near Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Cheng 6.4. Qiancheng 前城. Zhou. SE of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 22.5. Qiangren 牆人. Zhou. NE of Xin’an Co 新安縣, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Qianmu 千畝. Jin. N of Anze Co 安澤縣, Shanxi. Huan 2.8. Qin 秦 (1). Dom, CN Ying 嬴. Capital at Yong 雍, S of Fengxiang Co 鳳翔縣, Shaanxi. Huan 4.3 et passim. See map 1.

2036

Place Name Index

Qin 秦 (2). Lu. S of former Fan Co 范縣, Shandong. Zhuang 31.5(C). Qing 清 (1). Jin, same place as Qingyuan 清原. Xuan 13.3, 13.4. Qing 清 (2). Wei. S of Dong’e Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Yin 4.3(C), 4.2. Qingfa 清發 (river). Chu. Modern Yun River 溳水, Anlu Co 安陸縣, Hubei. Ding 4.3. Qingqiu 清丘. Wei. SE of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xuan 12.6(C), 12.7, 13.2, 13.5; Zhao 11.4. Qingqiu 頃丘. Split between Zheng and Song. Unk. Ai 12.6. Qingyuan 清原. Jin. SE of Jishan Co 稷山縣, Shanxi. Xi 31.4; Cheng 18.1. Qinzhou 秦周. Lu. Outside Linzicheng 臨淄城. Xiang 18.3. Qiong 窮. Chu. SW of Huoqiu Co 霍丘縣, Anhui. Zhao 27.2. Qionggu 窮谷. Zhou. E of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Ding 7.3. Qiongsang 窮桑. Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Zhao 29.4. Qiongshi 窮石. See Gate of Qiong 窮門. Qiqiu 郪丘. Qi. Unk. Wen 16.2. Qiu 湫. Chu. N of Zhongxiang Co 鍾祥縣, Hubei. Zhuang 19.1. Qiu Palace 丘宮. Wei. In cap. SW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xiang 14.4. Qiuhuang 丘皇. Chu. In Xinyang Co 信陽縣, Henan. Zhao 25.11. Qiuyou 丘蕕. Lu. Unk. Zhao 4.8. Qiuyu 丘輿 (1). Lu. In Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Ai 14.4. Qiuyu 丘輿 (2). Qi. In Yidu Co 益都縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Qiuyu 丘輿 (3). Zheng, eastern area. Unk. Cheng 3.1. Qiyang 岐陽 / Qi 岐. Qin. In Qishan Co 岐山縣, Shaanxi. Zhao 4.3, 9.3. Qu 渠. Zhou. In Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 26.7. Quan 卷. Chu. SW of Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Zhao 25.11. Quan 權. Dom, wiped out by Chu. SE of Dangyang Co 當陽縣, Hubei. Zhuang 18.5. Quanqiu 泉丘. Lu. Between Ningyang Co 寧陽縣 and Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Zhao 11.4. Quanqiu 犬丘 (1). Wei. NW of Yongcheng Co 永城縣, Henan. Xiang 1.3. Quanqiu 犬丘 (2). Song. N of Cao Co 曹縣, Shandong. Yin 8.1; Xiang 10.5. Quchi 曲池. Lu. NE of Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Huan 12.2(C), 12.1. Quchu 渠蒢. Probably the same place as Quru 蘧挐. Unk. Ding 15.7(C). Que Pass 闕塞. Zhou. Modern Longmen 龍門, S of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 26.7. Que’an 鵲岸. Chu. Modern area spans from N of Tongling City 銅陵市 to N bank of Yangzi River 長江, S of Wuwei Co 無爲縣, Anhui. Zhao 5.8. Quewai 闕外. Zhou. N of Yichuan Co 伊川縣, Henan. Ding 6.5. Quji 曲棘. Song. SE of Lankao Co 蘭考縣, Henan. Zhao 25.7(C), 25.8, 26.4. Quliang 曲梁 (1). Lu 潞, later taken by Jin. N of Lucheng Co 潞城縣, Shanxi. Xuan 15.3. Quliang 曲梁 (2). NE of Handan City 邯鄲市, Hebei. Xiang 3.7. Qupu 曲濮. Wei. Unk. Ding 8.14(C). Quqiu 渠丘 (1). Qi, Kuiqiu 葵丘. W of Linzi District 臨淄區, Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. Zhao 11.10.

Place Name Index 2037

Quqiu 渠丘 (2). Ju. SE of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Cheng 9.10. Quru 蘧挐. Probably the same place as Quchu 渠蒢. Unk. Ding 15.5. Quwo 曲沃 (1). Jin, cap. E of Wenxi Co 聞喜縣, Shanxi. See also Xincheng 新城 (1). Yin 5.5; Huan 2.8, 9.3; Zhuang 28.2; Min 1.6; Xi 4.6, 24.1, 32.3; Xiang 16.1, 23.7(C). See map 3. Quwo 曲沃 (2). Jin. Modern Quwo Town 曲沃鎮, S of Xia Co 陜縣, Henan. Xiang 23.3, 23.6. Raojiao 繞角. Cai. SE of Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Cheng 6.11; Xiang 26.10. Ren 仞. Wei. P, on boundary of old Jun Co 均縣, near Danjiangkou 丹江口, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Ren 任 (1). Jin. SE of Ren Co任縣, Hebei. Ai 4.3. Ren 任 (2). Dom, CN Feng 風. Modern Jining City 濟寧市, Shandong. Xi 21.4. Renren 任人. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 22.5. River Ji in Lu 魯濟. Modern Ji River 濟水, flowing through Juye Co 巨野縣, former Shouzhang Co 壽張縣, Dongping Co 東平縣, Shandong. Zhuang 30.6(C), 30.3; Xiang 18.3. Rong hamlet 戎州. Wei. Outside cap. Unk. Ai 17.5. Rongcheng 容城. Xu. SE of Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Ding 4.7(C). Ru 汝濱. Jin. Banks and valley of Ru River 汝河. Cheng 17.7; Zhao 7.2, 29.5; Ai 1.1, 17.4. Rui 芮. Dom, CN Ji 姬. S of former Chaoyi Co 朝邑縣, Shanxi. Huan 3.8, 10.3; Zhao 9.3. Ruli 女栗. Unk. Wen 10.5(C), 10.4. Ruo 鄀 (1). Wei. SE of Yicheng Co 宜城縣, Hubei. Ding 6.4. Ruo 鄀 (2). Chu. SW of Xichuan Co 淅川縣, Henan. Sometimes called “Lower Ruo” 下鄀 and probably a continuation of the same river listed above. Xi 25.3; Wen 5.5(C), 5.2; Ai 17.4. See map 4. Ruqing 汝清. Chu. Between Yangzi 長江 and Huai Rivers 淮河, Anhui. Zhao 5.8.
 Ruyin 汝陰. Chu. Between Jia Co 郟縣 and Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Cheng 16.1. Sai Pass 塞關. Lu. Unk. Zhao 5.1. Salan 灑藍. Qi. Outside Linzicheng 臨淄城. Xiang 19.8. Sangquan 桑泉. Jin. NE of Linjin Town 臨晉鎮, Linyi Co 臨猗縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1. Sangsui 桑隧. Cai. E of Queshan Co 確山縣, Henan. Cheng 6.11; Xiang 26.10. Sangtian 桑田. Jin. Modern Chousangyi 稠桑驛, Lingbao Co 靈寶縣, Henan. Xi 2.5; Cheng 10.4. Sanhu 三戶. Chu. S of modern Danjiang 丹江, Xichuan Co 淅川縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Santu 三塗 (mountain). Modern Santu Mountain 三塗山, N bank of Yi River 伊河, SW of Gao Co 嵩縣, Henan. Zhao 4.1. Sha 沙. Same place as Suo 瑣 (2). Jin. E of Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Shalu 沙鹿 (mountain). Jin. E of Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Xi 14.3(C), 14.3.

2038

Place Name Index

Shan 單. Zhou. SW of Meng Co 孟縣, Henan. Zhuang 1.3(C) et passim. Shandao 善道. Wu. N of Xuyi Co 盱眙縣, Anhui. Xiang 5.4(C), 5.5. Shang 商. Dom. Unk. Huan 2.2. Shangji 上棘. Zheng. S of Yu Co 禹縣, Henan. Xiang 18.4. Shangliang 上梁. Jin. N of Jun Co 浚縣, Henan. Ding 14.6. Shangluo 上雒. Jin. Shang Co 商縣, Shaanxi. Ai 4.2. Shangming 上鄍. Que. In Yanggu Co 陽穀縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Shangmi 商密. Chu. SW of Xichuan Co 淅川縣, Henan. Xi 25.3; Wen 14.10. Shangqiu 商丘. Song. Cap. Modern Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Xiang 9.1; Zhao 1.12. See map 2. Shangren 商任. Que. In Anyang Co 安陽縣, Henan. Xiang 21.8(C), 21.7, 22.3. Shangyan 商奄. Ancient dom near Qufu Co 曲阜縣, Shandong. Ding 4.1. Shangyang 上陽. Nanguo. S of Xia Co 陜縣, Henan. Xi 5.8. Shao River 少水. Jin. Modern Qin River 沁水. Xiang 23.4. Shaodi 少禘. Wei. Unk. Ai 11.6. Shaoliang 少梁. Qin. S of Hancheng Co 韓城縣, Shaanxi. Wen 10.1. Shaoling 召陵. P, E of Yancheng Co 郾城縣, Henan. Xi 4.3(C), 4.1, 5.5; Zhao 4.3, 14.3; Ding 4.2(C), 4.1, 4.2, 4.3. See map 4. Shaoxi 少習 (mountain). Chu. E of Shang Co 商縣, Shaanxi. Ai 4.2. Sharui 沙汭. Chu. NE of Huaiyuan Co 懷遠縣, Anhui. Zhao 27.2. Shasui 沙隨. Song. N of Ningling Co 寧陵縣, Henan. Cheng 16.8(C), 16.6; Xiang 9.7, 22.5. She 社. Zhou. NE of Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5. She 葉. Chu. S of Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Xuan 3.6; Cheng 15.13(C), 15.7; Zhao 18.7; Ai 16.5. Shen 申 (1). Dom, CN Jiang 姜, later Chu. Modern Nanyang City 南陽市 and northern surroundings, Henan. Yin 1.4; Zhuang 6.3, 18.5; Xi 7.2, 25.3, 28.3, 28.4; Wen 16.4; Cheng 6.11, 7.5, 15.3, 16.5; Xiang 26.10; Zhao 4.2(C), 4.3, 11.3(C), 11.2, 13.2, 13.5; Ai 17.4. See map 4. Shen 申 (2). Zheng. E of Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Wen 8.1. Shěn 沈 (1). Dom. SW of Fuyang City 阜陽市, Anhui. Wen 3.1(C); Cheng 8.2; Xiang 26.10. Shěn 沈 (2). Wei. Unk. An ancient dom. Zhao 1.12. Shen 莘 (1). Cai. In Runan Co 汝南縣, Henan. Zhuang 10.5(C), 10.3, 14.3. Shen 莘 (2). Wei, Chengpu 城濮. Former Linpucheng 臨濮城, Fan Co 范縣, Shandong. Xi 28.3. Shen 莘 (3). Guo. Unk. Zhuang 32.3. Shen 莘 (4). Qi/Wei. N of Shen Co 莘縣, Shandong. Huan 16.5; Cheng 2.3. Shen Pond 申池. Qi. Unk. Wen 18.2; Xiang 18.3. Shenchui 邥垂. Zhou. S of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Wen 17.5. Sheng 笙. Lu. Unk. Xuan 18.8(C), 18.5. Shengdou 生竇. Lu. N of Heze Co 菏澤縣, Shandong. Zhuang 9.5. Shengxing 升陘. Lu. Unk. Xi 22.3(C), 22.7, 33.5. Shenlu 沈鹿. Chu. E of Zhongxiang Co 鍾祥縣, Hubei. Huan 8.2. Shi 邿 (1). Qi. W of Pingyin Co 平陰縣, Shandong. Xiang 18.3.

Place Name Index 2039

Shi 邿 (2). Dom, CN Ren 妊. S of Jining City 濟寧市, Shandong. Xiang 13.2(C), 13.2. Shigu 施谷. Zhou. E of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 26.5. Shilai 時來. Zheng. N of Zhengzhou City 鄭州市, Henan. Yin 11.2(C). Shili 適歷. Jin. Unk. Zhao 31.2(C), 31.2. Shiliu 石窌. Qi. SE of Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.3. Shimen 石門. Qi. SW of Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Yin 3.6(C), 3.6. Shishi 尸氏 / Shi 尸. Zhou. W of Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Zhao 26.5, 26.9. Shixi 石溪. Wei. Jun Co 均縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Shouduo 受鐸. Jin. Near Xiangling 襄陵, Shanxi. Xi 16.3. Shoushu 壽舒. Ju. In Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Xiang 23.7. Shouyu 壽餘. Ju. In Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Zhao 22.1. Shouzhi 首止. Wei. SE of Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Huan 18.2; Xi 5.4, 6.2; Cheng 15.3, 17.5. Shu 舒. Dom. CN Yan 偃. Ancestral dom of the three Shu doms listed below: Shujiu, Shuliao, and Shuyong. SW of Lujiang Co 廬江縣, Anhui. Xi 3.3(C). Shu 蜀. Lu. W of Tai’an Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Xuan 18.4; Cheng 2.9(C), 2.10(C), 2.8; Zhao 7.3. Shu 輸. Lu. Near Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Ai 15.1. Shujiu 舒鳩. Dom. Shucheng Co 舒城縣, Anhui. Xiang 24.9, 25.8(C), 25.8, 25.13; Ding 2.2. Shuliao 舒蓼. Dom. Between Shucheng Co 舒城縣 and Lujiang Co 廬江縣, Anhui. Wen 14.1; Xuan 8.6(C), 8.3. Shumaochun 殳冒淳. Qi. Unk. Ai 6.6. Shuqiu 黍丘. Cao. Unk. Ai 7.5. Shuyong 舒庸. Dom. Shucheng Co 舒城縣, Anhui. Cheng 17.14(C), 17.11. Shuzhou 舒州. Qi. In Dacheng Co 大城縣, Hebei. Ai 14.3(C), 14.3, 14.11(C), 14.5. Siniao 死鳥. Wei. Eastern outskirts of cap. Unk. Zhao 20.4. Song 宋. Dom, CN Zi 子. Cap at Shangqiu 商丘 near modern Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Yin preface et passim. See map 1. Springs of Hua 華泉. Qi. Spring on Mount Hua 華山. Unk. Cheng 2.3. Su 宿. Dom. Slightly SE of Dongping Co 東平縣, Shandong. Yin 1.5(C); Xi 21.4. Su 蘇. Ancient dom, Wen 溫. SW of Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Xuan 3.6. Su River 涑川. Jin. NE of Yongji Co 永濟縣, Shanxi. Cheng 13.3. Suanzao 酸棗. Zheng. SW of Yangjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Xiang 30.10. Sui 睢 (river). Song. Unk. Cheng 15.4; Zhao 21.6; Ding 4.3. Sui 遂. Dom. NW of Ningyang Co 寧陽縣, Shandong. Zhuang 13.2(C), 13.1, 17.2(C), 17.2. Sui 隨 (1). Dom, CN Ji 姬. S of Sui Co 隨縣, Hubei. Huan 6.2. Sui 隨 (2). Jin. SE of Jiexiu Co 介休縣, Shanxi. Yin 5.2, 6.2. Suo 瑣 (1). Chu. E of Huoqiu Co 霍丘縣, Anhui. Zhao 5.8. Suo 瑣 (2). Same place as Sha 沙. Jin. E of Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Ding 7.4. Suo 瑣 (3). Zheng. N of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 11.3.

2040

Place Name Index

Suo Marsh 瑣澤. Jin. In Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Cheng 12.2(C), 12.2. Suqi 速杞. Sui. W of Yingshan Co 應山縣, Hubei. Huan 8.2. Ta 沓. Wei. Unk. Wen 13.6(C), 13.5. Tai 台. Lu. SE of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Xiang 12.1(C), 12.2(C), 12.1. Tai 駘 (1). Qi. In Linqu Co 臨朐縣, Shandong. Ai 6.6 Tai 駘 (2). SW of Wugong Co 武功縣, Shaanxi. Zhao 9.3. Taigu 台谷. Jin. P, in Jincheng Co 晉城縣, Shanxi. Cheng 18.12. Taihang Pass 大行. Jin. NW of Qinyang Co 沁陽縣. Xiang 23.4; Ding 8.3. Taishang 駘上. Same place as Hutai 狐駘. Zhu. SE of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Ai 27.1. Taishi 大室 (mountain). Same as modern Mount Song 嵩, N of Dengfeng 登封, Henan. Zhao 4.1. Taiyuan 大原. See Dalu 大鹵. Zhao 1.10, 1.12. Tan 郯. Wei. SW of Tanxiancheng 郯縣城, Shandong. Xuan 4.1(C), 4.1. Tan 譚. Dom, later Qi. SE of Jinan City 濟南市, Shandong. Zhuang 10.6(C), 10.4. Tang 唐 (1). Lu. NE of former Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Yin 2.4(C), 2.4; Huan 2.8(C), 2.9(C), 2.7. Tang 唐 (2). Zhou. E of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Tang 唐 (3). Dom. Modern Tangxian Town 唐縣鎮, Zaoyang Co 棗陽縣, Hubei. Ding 5.5, Ai 17.4. Tang 唐 (4). Ancient dom. Said to be at modern Taiyuan City 太原市 or S of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Zhao 1.12. Tang 唐 (5). Yan. Unk. Zhao 12.1. Tang 棠 (1). Lu. Yucheng Town 魚城鎮, N of former Yutai Co 魚臺縣, Shandong. Yin 5.1(C), 5.1. Tang 棠 (2). Qi, also named Chuitang 郵棠. SE of Pingdu Co 平度縣, Shandong. Xiang 6.7. Tang 棠 (3). Chu. W of Suiping Co 遂平縣, Henan. Zhao 20.2. Tang 棠 (4). Wei. Slight NW of Liuhe Co 六合縣, Jiangsu. Xiang 14.7. Tangfu 堂阜. Qi. Zhuang 9.5; Wen 15.4. Tangyu 唐盂. Song. P, outskirts of cap. Ai 26.2. Tao 洮 (1). Lu. Former Taoxu 桃墟, Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Zhuang 27.1(C), 27.1; Xi 25.7(C), 25.5, 26.1, 26.3; Xiang 17.4(C). Tao 洮 (2). Cao. NW of Juancheng Co 鄄城縣, Shandong. Xi 8.1(C), 8.1, 31.1; Ding 14.8(C), 14.7. Tao 洮 (river) (3). Jin. SE of Wenxi Co 聞喜縣, Shanxi. Zhao 1.12. Tao 桃 (4). Lu. N and slightly E of Wenshang Co 汶上縣, Shandong. Xiang 17.4(C), 17.3; Zhao 7.5. Taolin 桃林. Jin. Modern Wenxiang 閿鄉 with a western boundary at the ­border of Tongguan 潼關, Lingbao Co 靈寶縣, Henan. Wen 13.1. Taoqiu 桃丘. Wei. E of Anping Township 安平鎮, Dong’e Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Huan 10.3(C). Taoyuan 桃園. Jin, name of a garden in cap. Unk. Xuan 2.3. Teng 滕 (1). Dom. Unk. Yin 7.2(C).

Place Name Index 2041

Teng 滕 (2). Wei. Unk. Min 2.5. Tiao 條. Jin. N of Anyi Town 安邑鎮, Shanxi. Huan 2.8. Tiaoqiu 苕丘. Jin. Unk. Cheng 16.11. Tie 鐵. Wei. NW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Ai 2.5(C), 2.3. Tishang 隄上. Zhou. Unk. Zhao 26.9. Tong 桐. Wei. N of Tongcheng Co 桐城縣, Anhui. Ding 2.2. Tong River 桐汭. Wu. NW of Guangde Co 廣德縣, Anhui. Ai 15.2. Tongqiu 桐丘. Zheng. W of Fugou Co 扶溝縣, Henan. Zhuang 28.3; Ai 27.3. Tongru 桐汝. Lu, village of Tongru 桐汝 and Qufu 曲阜. Unk. Zhao 15.10. Tongti 銅鞮. Jin. S of Qin Co 沁縣, Shanxi. Cheng 9.7; Zhao 28.3. Tuhe 菟和. Jin. Modern Tuhe Mountain 菟和山, E of Shang Co 商縣, Shaanxi. Ai 4.2. Tui 隤. Zhou, later taken by Zheng. N of Huojia Co 獲嘉縣, Henan. Yin 11.5. Tun Marsh 豚澤. Wei. Outside eastern gate of Wei capital at Diqiu 帝丘. Ding 6.2. Tuogao 橐皋. Wu. Modern Zhegao Town 柘皋鎮, NW of Chao Co 巢縣, ­Anhui. Ai 12.3(C), 12.3. Tupu 菟圃. Wei. In Changyuan Co 長垣縣, Henan. Xi 18.4, 19.4. Tuqiu 菟裘. Lu. SE of Tai’an Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Yin 11.8. Tushui 塗水. Jin. SW of Yuci City 榆次市, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Two Qu 二屈. Jin, northern and southern Qu. Northern Qu was located NE of Ji Co 吉縣, Shanxi. Southern Qu was adjacent. Zhuang 28.2. Wa 瓦. Wei. S of Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Ding 8.6, 8.7(C), 8.8. Waili 外里. Wei. In Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Ai 25.1. Waizhou 外州. Wei. Unk. Ai 11.6, 26.1. Wang 汪. Qin. Near Pengya 彭衙, in Baishui Co 白水縣, Shaanxi. Wen 2.6. Wangcheng 王城 (1). Qin. E of Dali Co 大荔縣, Shaanxi. Xi 15.8, 24.1; Cheng 11.9. Wangcheng 王城 (2). Zhou, cap of E Zhou 東周. NE of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhuang 21.1; Xi 11.3, 25.2; Zhao 22.8(C), 22.5, 23.3, 26.5; Ding 7.6. See map 3. Wangguan 王官. Jin. W of Wenxi Co 聞喜縣, Shanxi. Wen 3.4, 4.5; Cheng 13.3. Wangu 萑谷. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 26.7. Wawu 瓦屋. Zhou. NW of Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Yin 8.5(C), 8.5. Wei 蒍. Chu. Unk. Xi 27.4. Wei 衛. Dom, CN Ji 姬. Cap at Diqiu 帝丘, SW of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Yin 1.10 et passim. See map 1. Wei 鄬. Zheng. In Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Xiang 7.9(C), 7.8. Weì 魏. Zhou, later Jin. W of Ruicheng Co 芮城縣, Shanxi. Xuan 3.8, 4.4; Min 1.6; Wen 13.2; Xiang 29.11; Zhao 9.3. Wei 濰 (river). Unk. Xiang 18.3. Wei pool 洧淵. Zheng. Outside Shi Gate 時門 of Zheng cap. Zhao 19.10. Wei River 洧上. Zheng. Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 1.2.

2042

Place Name Index

Wei River 曲洧. Zheng. Former Weichuan Co 洧川縣, Henan. Cheng 17.2. Wei River 渭汭. Xiguo. Area where Wei River enters Yellow River, NE of Huayin Co 華陰縣, Shaanxi. Min 2.1. Weishi 薳澨. Chu. W of Jingshan Co 京山縣, Hubei, E shore of Han River. Zhao 23.7. Weiyu 魏榆. Jin. NW of Yuci Co 榆次縣, Shanxi. Zhao 8.1. Wen 溫. Zhou, later Jin. S of Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Yin 3.3, 8.5, 11.5; Zhuang 19.2; Xi 10.2(C), 10.1, 24.2, 25.2, 28.15(C), 28.7; Wen 1.5, 5.5, 6.1; Xuan 17.1; Cheng 11.7; Xiang 16.1; Zhao 1.15, 3.4, 22.5; Ding 8.7. See map 3. Wen River, lands on the northern bank of the Wen River 汶陽. Lu. Unk. Xi 1.8, Cheng 2.7(C), 2.3, 3.2, 3.5, 8.1(C), 8.1, 9.2; Ding 10.2; Ai 24.1. Wu 吳. Dom, CN Ji 姬. Cap located in area of modern-day Suzhou 蘇州, Jiangsu. Xuan 8.3 et passim. See map 4. Wu 郚 (1). Ji, later taken by Qi. SW of Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Zhuang 1.8(C). Wu 郚 (2). Lu. SE of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Wen 7.3(C). Wu 鄔 (1). Jin. NE of Jiexiu Co 界休閒, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Wu 鄔 (2). Zheng, taken by Zhou. Unk. Yin 11.5; Zhuang 20.1; Zhao 24.1. Wucheng 武城 (1). Lu. Near Qi area. Jiaxiang Co 嘉祥縣, Shandong. Xiang 19.15(C), 19.12. Wucheng 武城 (2). Chu. NE of Nanyang City 南陽市, Henan. Xi 6.4; Cheng 16.1; Xiang 9.4; Zhao 4.3. Wucheng 武城 (3). Jin. NE of Hua Co 華縣, Shaanxi. Wen 8.2. Wudi 無棣. Qi. Tangshan Prefecture 唐山地區, Hebei. Xi 4.1. Wufu 武父 (1). Wei. Unk. Ding 4.1. Wufu 武父 (2). Zheng. S of Dongming Co 東明縣, Henan. Xuan 12.7(C), 12.2. Wulou 無婁. Unk. Xuan 15.7(C). Wulu 五鹿. Jin then Wei. Modern Shalu 沙鹿, E of Daming Co 大名縣, Hebei. Xi 23.6, 28.1; Xiang 25.4; Ai 1.3, 4.3. Wushi 五氏. Jin. W of Handan City 邯鄲市, Hebei. Ding 9.5(C), 9.4. Wuwu 五梧. Lu. NW of Pingyi Co 平邑縣, Shandong. Ai 8.2, 25.2. Xi 析. Chu. Same place as Baiyu 白羽. Area NW of Xichuan Co 淅川縣 and Neixiang Co 内鄉縣, Henan. Xi 25.3; Zhao 18.7; Ai 4.2, 18.2. Xi 奚. Lu. S of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Huan 17.3(C), 17.3. Xi 息. Dom then Chu. Unk. Yin 11.6; Xi 25.3, 28.4; Wen 10.5, 16.4; Cheng 7.11; Xiang 26.10; Ding 4.3; Ai 17.4. Xi 鄎. Qi, southern frontier. Unk. Ai 10.2, 11.1. Xi 酅 (1). Qi. S of Dong’e Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Xi 26.2(C). Xi 酅 (2). Ji, later Qi. E of Linzi Town 臨淄鎮, Shandong. Zhuang 3.4(C), 3.3, 12.1(C). Xi 戲. Zheng. Modern Xitong Mountain 戲童山, NE of Songshan Co 嵩山縣, Henan. Xiang 9.5(C), 9.5, 22.2. Xia 瑕 (1). Sui, later Chu. Unk. Huan 6.2; Cheng 16.5.

Place Name Index 2043

Xia 瑕 (2). Jin. Formerly Quwo 曲沃, E of Lingbao Co 靈寶縣, Henan. Xi 30.3; Wen 12.6, 13.1; Cheng 13.3; Zhao 22.5. Xia 瑕 (3). Zhou. Unk. Zhao 24.5. Xia 夏 (river). Chu. Modern Han River 漢水. Zhao 13.2. Xia River 夏汭. Chu. Area where Xifei River 西肥河 flows into Huai 淮. Zhao 4.7, 5.8. Xian 弦. Dom. NW of Gouchuan Co 溝川縣, Henan. Xi 5.7(C), 5.7; Zhao 31.4. Xian 鹹 (1). Wei. SE of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xi 13.3(C), 13.2; Ding 7.3(C), 7.4. Xian 鹹 (2). Lu. S of Juye Co 巨野縣, Shandong. Wen 11.6(C), 11.5; Xiang 30.3. Xiang 向 (1). Wu. W of Huaiyuan Co 懷遠縣, Anhui. Xiang 14.1(C), 14.1, 14.3. Xiang 向 (2). Zhou, royal household area. S of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Yin 11.5; Huan 7.2, 7.3. Xiang 向 (3). Dom, CN Jiang 姜; wiped out by Ju, later Lu. S of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Yin 2.2(C), 2.2; Huan 16.4(C), 16.4; Xi 26.1(C), 26.1; Xiang 20.1(C), 20.1. Xiang 向 (4). Zheng. Near Weishi Co 尉氏縣, Henan. Xiang 11.3. Xiang 項. Dom. In Xiangcheng Co 項城縣, Henan. Xi 17.2(C), 17.3. Xiangniu 襄牛. Wei. S of Fan Co 范縣, Shandong. Xi 28.1; Xiang 10.5. Xiangyin 向陰. Jin. Unk. Xuan 7.3. Xianqiu 咸丘. Lu. S of Juye Co 巨野縣, Shandong. Huan 7.1(C). Xianyu 獻于. Zheng. Unk. Xiang 18.4. Xianyu 鮮虞. Dom. of non-Sinitic origin. Modern Zhengding Co 正定縣, Hebei. Zhao 12.10(C),12.7, 13.4, 15.5(C), 15.5, 21.8, 22.4; Ding 4.12(C), 3.2, 5.6(C), 5.8; Ai 1.5, 4.3, 6.2(C), 6.1. See map 1. Xiao 霄. Lu. In Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Ding 14.15(C). Xiao 蕭. Song. NW of Xiao Co 蕭縣, Anhui. Zhuang 12.1; Xi 30.5(C); Wen 10.6, 14.12; Xiang 10.6; Zhao 11.10; Ding 11.1(C), 11.3(C), 11.1, 14.12(C); Ai 12.6. See map 2. Xiaobie 小別 (mountain). Chu. Unk. Ding 4.3. Xiaogu 小穀. Qi. Dong’e Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Zhuang 32.1(C), 32.1. Xiaoyu 蕭魚. Zheng. Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Xiang 11.8(C), 22.2. Xiayang 下陽. Guo. In Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Xi 2.3(C). Xiazhou 夏州. Chu. N of Hanyang Co 漢陽縣. Xuan 11.5. Xicheng 隰郕. Zhou, later taken by Zheng. In Wushe Co 武涉縣, Henan. Yin 11.5. Xicheng 隰城. See Xicheng 隰郕. Xi 25.2. Xincheng 新城 (1). Jin. Alternative name for Quwo 曲沃. Unk. Xi 4.6. Xincheng 新城 (2). Song. P. SW of Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Wen 14.4(C), 14.5, 15.7, 15.9. Du Yu believes that Xincheng mentioned in Wen 14.4(C) is in Song, but Wang Fuzhi argues that this may just be Xincheng in Zheng. Xincheng 新城 (3). Zheng. SE of Mi Co 密縣, Henan. Xi 6.2(C), 6.2. Xinchu 新楚. Qin. In former Chaoyi Co 朝邑縣, Shaanxi. Cheng 13.3. Xing 杏 (1). Qi. S of Chiping Co 茌平縣, Shandong. Ding 9.4; Ai 15.4.

2044

Place Name Index

Xing 杏 (2). Zhou. N of Nanyu Co 南禹縣, Henan. Zhao 24.5. Xing 邢 (1). Dom. Modern Xingtai City 邢臺市, Xingtai Co 邢臺縣, Hebei. Yin 4.6. See map 2. Xing 邢 (2). Jin. Unk. Xiang 26.10; Ai 4.3. Xing 陘 (1). Chu. N area of Yingshan Co 應山縣, Hubei. Xi 4.1(C), 4.1. Xing 陘 (2). Wu. Near Zuili 檇李. Ding 14.5. Xing 陘 (3). Zhou. NW of Qinyang Co 沁陽縣, Henan. Yin 11.5. Xing Marsh 滎澤. Zheng. E of Xingyang Co 熒陽縣, Henan. Min 2.5; Xuan 12.2; Cheng 16.5. Xingqiu 邢丘. Jin. NE of Wen Co 溫縣, Henan. Xuan 6.3; Xiang 8.4(C), 8.4, 8.7; Zhao 5.2. Xingting 陘庭. Jin. SE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Huan 2.8, 3.1. Xingting 熒庭. Jin. S of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Xiang 23.4. Xingxi 陘隰. Chu. E of Jiangling Co 江陵縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Xinli 新里 (1). Qin. NE of Chengcheng Co 澄城縣, Shaanxi. Xi 18.5. Xinli 新里 (2). Song. Outskirts of cap. P, E of Kaifeng City 開封市, Henan. Zhao 21.6. Xinmi 新密. See Xincheng 新城. Zheng. Xinshi 新石. Chu. In Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Cheng 15.3. Xintian 新田. Jin. First name of area to which cap was moved. Near Houma City 侯馬市, Shanxi. Cheng 6.5. Xinzhu 新築. P, on border of Qi and Wei. Unk. Cheng 2.2(C), 2.2, 2.3. Xitong 戲童. See Xi 戲. Cheng 17.2. Xiu Marsh 脩澤. Zheng. SW of Yuanyang Co 原陽縣, Henan. Cheng 10.3. Xiwei 西闈. Zhou. In Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Xiyang 戲陽. Jin. N of Neihuang Co 内黃縣, Henan. Zhao 9.5. Xiyang 昔陽. Wei. W of Jin Co 晉縣, Hebei. Zhao 12.7, 22.4. Xizhou 息舟. Chu. Unk. Zhao 13.2. Xu 徐 (1). Dom. NW of Sishui Co 泗水縣, Anhui. Zhuang 26.4(C); Xi 3.3(C). Xu 徐 (2). Ancient dom. Near Hongze Lake 洪澤湖, S of Sihong Co 泗洪縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 1.2. See map 4. Xu 虛 (1). Jin. In Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Cheng 17.1. Xu 虛 (2). Song. E of Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Huan 12.5(C), 12.2. Xuˇ 許. Dom, CN Ji 姬. First cap, E of modern Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Yin 11.3(C) et passim. See map 4. Xuˇ, lands of, 許田. Lu. S of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Yin 8.2. Xuan 選. Chu. Zhijiang Co 枝江縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Xucheng 虛朾. Song. Unk. Cheng 18.14(C), 18.14. Xue 薛 (1). Lu. Unk. Zhuang 31.2(C); Xiang 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 16.2(C), 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C); Zhao 13.4(C); Ding 4.2(C). See map 2. Xue 薛 (2). Dom, CN Ren 任. S of Teng Co 滕縣, Shandong. Yin 11.1. Xuge 繻葛. Zheng. Also known as Changge 長葛. NE of Changge Co 長葛縣, Henan. Huan 5.3. Xuguan 徐關 (pass). Qi. SW of Zibo City 淄博市, Shandong. Cheng 2.3, 17.9.

Place Name Index 2045

Xumi 胥靡. Zhou. E of Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Xiang 18.4; Zhao 26.7; Ding 6.2, 6.5. Xuqu 須句. Dom. SE of Dongping Co 東平縣, Shandong. Xi 21.4, 22.2(C), 22.1, 22.7; Wen 7.2(C), 7.2. Xun 郇. Jin. SW of Linyi Co 臨猗縣, Shanxi. Xi 24.1; Cheng 6.5. Xun 鄩. Zhou. In Gong Co 鞏縣, Henan. Zhao 23.1, 23.3. Xun Road 薰隧. Zheng. Outside Gui Gate 閨門. Unk. Zhao 1.9, 2.4. Xuqiu 虛丘. Zhu. In Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Xi 1.5. Xuwushi 徐吾氏. Wei. Unk. Cheng 1.1. Yan 偃. Zhu. S of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Xi 1.8(C), 1.5. Yan 喦. Split between Zheng and Song. Unk. Ai 12.6, 13.1(C), 13.1. Yan 燕 (1). Also known as Beiyan 北燕 (Northern Yan). Dom, CN Ji 姬. Near Beijing City 北京市. Zhuang 30.3. See map 1. Yān 燕 (2). Also known as Nanyan 南燕 (Southern Yan). Dom, CN Ji 姞. ­Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Yin 5.4. Yan 閻. Zhou. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 9.3. Yan 郔 (1). Chu. Area between the three domains of Chen, Song, and Zheng. Xuan 11.2. Yan 郔 (2). Zheng. N of Zhengzhou City 鄭州市, Henan. Xuan 3.2, 12.2. Yan 鄢 (1). Chu. SW of Yicheng Co 宜城縣, Hubei. Zhao 4.4, 13.2. Yan 鄢 (2). Dom, later Zheng. N of Yanling Co 鄢陵縣, Henan. Yin 1.3(C), 1.4; Xiang 13.4; Zhao 5.4. Yan 甗. Qi. Near Jiyuan City 濟南市, Shandong. Xi 18.3(C), 18.3. Yan River 鄢. Chu. Modern Man River 蠻河. Huan 13.1. Yang 揚. Zhou. Not far from Yanshi Co 偃師縣, Henan. Xi 22.3; Zhao 22.5. Yang 陽 (1). Dom. SW of Yishui Co 沂水縣, Shandong. Min 2.1(C). Yang 陽 (2). Yan. Between Dacheng Co 大城縣 and Wen’an Co 文安縣, Hebei. Zhao 12.1(C). Yang 楊. Dom. SE of Hongdong Co 洪洞縣, Shanxi. See also Yangshi 楊氏. Xiang 29.11. Yang 養. Chu. SE of Shenqiu Co 沈丘縣, Henan. Zhao 30.3. Yangcheng 陽城 (mountain). Modern Chengshanling 城山嶺, SE of Dengfeng Co 登封縣, Henan. Zhao 4.1. Yangfan 陽樊. Zhou, Fan 樊. SE of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Xi 25.2; Cheng 11.5. Yanggu 陽穀. Qi. N of Yanggu Co 陽谷縣, Shandong. Xi 3.5(C), 3.2, 3.3, 11.2(C); Wen 16.1(C), 16.1; Xuan 18.1; Zhao 29.3; Ai 21.2. Yangguan 陽關. Lu. On border of Lu and Qi. S and slightly E of Tai’an Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Xiang 17.3; Ding 7.2, 8.10, 9.3. Yangjiao 羊角. Wei. NW of Yuncheng Co 鄆城縣, Shandong. Xiang 26.14. Yangliang 楊梁 / 揚梁. Song. SE of Shangqiu Co 商丘縣, Henan. Xiang 16.3. Yangling 陽陵. Zheng. NW of Xuchang Co 許昌縣, Henan. Xiang 10.11. Yangqiao 陽橋. Lu/Qi. NW of Tai’an Co 泰安縣, Shandong. Cheng 2.6, 2.8. Yangqiu 陽丘. Chu. Unk. Wen 16.4.

2046

Place Name Index

Yangshi 楊氏. The ancient domain of Yang 楊. Zhao 28.3. Yangxue 鍚穴. Wei. E of Baihe Co 白河縣, Shaanxi. Wen 11.1. Yangzhou 陽州. Lu/Qi. N area of Dongping Co 東平縣, Shandong. Xiang 31.2; Zhao 25.5(C), 25.6; Ding 8.1, 8.5. Yanling 延陵. Dom. Near Changzhou City 常州市, Jiangsu. Xiang 31.9. Yanling 鄢陵 (1). Ju. In Linshu Co 臨沭縣, Shandong. Wen 7.7. Yanling 鄢陵 (2). See Yan 鄢. Cheng 16.6(C), 16.5, 17.3, 17.10; Xiang 26.10. Yao 要. Zhou. In Xin’an Co 新安縣, Henan. Zhao 22.5 Yao 洮. Cao. SW of Juancheng Co 鄄城縣, Shandong. Xi 8.1(C), 8.1, 31.1; Ding 14.8(C), 14.7. Yao 殽. Jin. NW of Luoning Co 洛寧縣, Henan. Xi 32.3, 33.3; Wen 1.9, 2.1, 3.4, 14.10; Cheng 13.3; Xiang 14.1. See map 3. Yefu 冶父. Chu. Jiangling City 江陵市, Hubei. Huan 13.1. Yejing 野井. Qi. SE of Qihe Co 齊河縣, Shandong. Zhao 25.5, 25.6. Yellow River, East Bank 河東. Jin. E bank of Yellow River 黃河. Xi 15.8, 17.2; Cheng 11.9. Yewang 野王. Jin. Area governed by Qinyang Co 沁陽縣, Henan. Xuan 17.1. Yi 夷 (1). Chen, later Chu. SE of Bo Co 亳縣, Anhui. Xiang 1.2; Zhao 9.2(C), 9.2, 30.3, 31.4. Yi 夷 (2). Dom. Old Zhuangwu 壯武, W of Jimo Co 即墨縣, Shandong. Yin 1.6; Min 2.3. Yi 夷 (3). Lu, near Gengzong 庚宗. E of Xishui Co 泗水縣, Shandong. Ai 8.2. Yi 夷 (4). Qi/Lu. Min 2.3; Xi 1.5(C). Yi 夷 (5). Zhou, later Jin. Unk. Zhuang 16.6; Wen 6.1, 6.8, 8.7; Zhao 19.5. Yi 沂. Chu. In Zhengyang Co 正陽縣, Henan. Xuan 11.3; Ding 5.5. Yi 沂 (river) (1). Lu. Flows from Yiyuan Co 沂源縣, Shandong, into Yellow River 黃河. Xiang 18.3. Yi 沂 (river) (2). Flows from NE of Zou Co鄒縣, Shandong, into the Si 泗. Xiang 19.1; Zhao 25.6; Ai 2.1(C), 2.1. Yi 翼 (1). Zhu. SW of Huang Co 黃縣, Shandong. Yin 1.11; Zhao 23.2. Yi 翼 (2). Jin. SE of Yicheng Co 翼城縣, Shanxi. Yin 5.2, 5.5, 6.2; Huan 2.8, 3.1, 8.1; Cheng 18.1. Yi 繹. Zhu. Unk. Wen 13.3; Ai 4.7. Yichuan 伊川. Zhou. Areas passed by the Yi River 伊水. Xi 22.4. Yili 儀栗. Zhou. Unk. Ding 7.1, 8.2. Yin 尹. Zhou, royal household. In Luoning Co 洛寧縣, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Yin 陰. Zhou. N of Mengjin Co 孟津縣, Henan. Same place as Pingyin 平陰 (2). Zhao 22.5. Yinban 陰阪. Zheng. W of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 9.6. Yindi 陰地. Jin. NE of Lushi Co 廬氏縣, Henan. Xuan 2.2; Ai 4.2. Ying 郢. Chu, cap. Modern Jinancheng 紀南城, N of Jiangling Co 江陵縣, Hubei. Xi 12.2; Wen 10.3, 14.10; Cheng 2.6; Xiang 14.11; Zhao 23.9, 24.9, 31.6; Ding 4.14(C), 4.3, 5.7, 6.4; Ai 4.2. See map 4. Ying 潁. Zhou. E of Dengfeng Co 登封縣, Henan. Zhao 1.5, 9.3. Ying 潁 (river). Flows through Yu Co 禹縣, Henan. Xuan 10.12; Xiang 10.11, 18.4. Ying 嬴. Qi. NW of Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Huan 3.1(C), 3.2; Ai 11.3, 15.4.

Place Name Index 2047

Ying 應. Dom, CN Ji 姬. E of Lushan Co 魯山縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Yingqiu 英丘. Jin. Unk. Ai 23.2. Yingshi 英氏. Dom, CN Yan 偃. Between Huoshan Co 霍山縣 and Jinzhai Co 金寨縣, Anhui. Xi 17.1(C), 17.1. Yingwei 潁尾. Chu. Modern Zhengyangguan 正陽關, Anhui. Zhao 12.11. Yinkou 陰口. Zheng, N of Yinban 陰阪. W of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 9.6. Yinren 陰人. Jin. Unk. Ai 4.3. Yiqiu 揖丘. Cao. In Cao Co 曹縣, Shandong. Ai 7.5. Yique 伊闕 (mountain). Zhou. Unk. Ding 8.8. Yiyi 夷儀 (1). Wei, later Jin. Unk. Xiang 24.7, 25.3, 25.4, 25.9, 25.15, 25.16, 26.2; Ding 9.4, 10.4; Ai 26.3. Yiyi 夷儀 (2). Xing. W of Liaocheng Co 聊城縣, Shandong. Min 2.9; Xi 1.3. Yong 涌. Chu. Modern Gangang Lake 乾港湖, SE of Jianli Co 監利縣, Hubei. Zhuang 18.5. Yong 庸. Dom. E of Zhushan Co 竹山縣, Hubei. Wen 16.6(C), 16.4; Xuan 12.2. Yong 雍 (1). Qin. S of Fengxiang Co 鳳翔縣, Shaanxi. Xi 13.4; Zhao 1.8. See map 3. Yong 雍 (2). Dom, CN Ji 姬. W of Xiuwu Co 修武縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Yongdong 甬東 (mountain). Yue. Modern Weng Mountain 翁山, Dinghai Co 定海縣, Zhejiang. Ai 22.2. Yongliang 雍梁. Zheng. NE of Yu Co 禹縣, Henan. Xiang 18.4, 30.10. Yongpu 庸浦. Chu. P, S of Wuwei Co 無為縣, Anhui. Xiang 13.5. Yongqiu 雍丘. Song. Area governed by Qi Co 杞縣, Henan. Ai 9.2(C), 9.2. Yongshi 雍澨. Chu. Lands next to a tributary of Tianmen River 天門河. Ding 4.3, 5.5. Yongyu 雍榆. Jin. SW of Jun Co 浚縣, Henan. Xiang 23.9(C), 23.4. You 尤 (river). Qi. Xiaogu River 小故河, on W border. Zhao 20.6. You 幽. Song. P, in Lankao Co 蘭考縣, Henan. Zhuang 16.4(C), 27.2(C), 27.2. You 鄾. Dom, wiped out by Chu. Old city NE of former Xiangyang Co 襄陽縣, Hubei. Huan 9.2; Ai 18.2. Youge 有鬲. Wei. SE of Dezhou City 德州市, Shandong. Xiang 4.7. Youqiu 幽丘. Song. Xiao Co 蕭縣, Anhui. Cheng 18.5. Youshen, ruins of 有莘之虛. Wei, originally an area in ancient Shen dom 莘國. See Shen 莘 (2). Xi 28.3. Youtang 郵棠. Qi, Tang 棠. SE of Pingdu Co 平度縣, Shandong. Xiang 18.3. Youyan 有閻. Wei. Near Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Ding 4.1. Yu 邘 (1). Cao. In Dingjie Co 定界縣, Shandong. Ai 7.5. Yu 邘 (2). Wu. N of Yangzhou City 揚州市, Jiangsu. Ai 9.5. Yu 邘 (3). Old Yu 邘 area, then Zheng, finally Zhou. Unk. Yin 11.5. Yu 邘 (4). Dom, before Spring and Autumn period. CN Ji 姬. Modern Yutai Town 邘臺鎮, NW of Qinyang Co 沁陽縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Yu 盂 (1). Jin. Yu Co 盂縣, Shanxi. Zhao 28.3. Yu 盂 (2). Jin. Modern Wu’eryu 吾兒峪 of Taihang Mountains 太行山, NE of Licheng Co 黎城縣, Shanxi. Ai 4.3.

2048

Place Name Index

Yu 盂 (3). Song. Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Xi 21.4(C), 21.3. Yu 盂 (4). Wei, E area. Unk. Ding 14.8. Yu 盂 (5). Zhou. Unk. Ding 8.2. Yu 魚. Wei. P, E of Fengjie Co 奉節縣, Sichuan. Wen 16.4. Yu 圉 (1). Wei. E area of Puyang Co 濮陽縣, Henan. Xiang 26.3. Yu 圉 (2). Zheng. Modern Yu Town 圉鎮, S of Qi Co 杞縣, Henan. Zhao 5.4. Yu 鄅. Dom, CN Yun 妘. N of Linyi Co 臨沂縣, Shandong. Wen 12.8(C), 12.7; Cheng 9.11(C), 9.10; Xiang 12.2(C), 12.1; Zhao 1.3(C), 1.8(C), 1.2, 1.11. Yu 虞. Dom, CN Ji 姬. NE of Pinglu Co 平陸縣, Shanxi. Huan 10.2 et passim. Yu Marsh 圉澤. Zhou. Marsh located in E Yu 東圉. E of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 26.9. Yuan 原 (1). Zhou, W Zhou 西周. NW of Jiyuan Co 濟源縣, Henan. Xi 24.2. Yuan 原 (2). Wei, former Yuan dom. Yin 11.5; Xi 25.2, 25.4, 25.6, 27.4; Xuan 17.1; Zhao 7.8, 12.8, 22.5; Ding 8.7. Yuanling 緣陵. Qǐ. SE of Changle Co 長樂縣, Shandong. Xi 14.1(C), 14.1. Yuanlou 袁婁. Qi. Unk. Cheng 2.4(C). Yuanpu 宛濮. Wei. SW of Changyuan Co 長垣縣, Henan. Xi 28.5; Ai 26.3. Yuchang 玉暢. Split between Song and Zheng. Unk. Ai 12.6. Yue 越 (1). Wei. In modern Cao Co 曹縣, Shandong. Huan 1.3(C), 1.2. Yue 越 (2). Dom. Cap Kuaiji 會稽 near modern-day Kuaiji Mountain 會稽山, Shaoxing Co 紹興縣, Zhejiang. Xuan 8.3 et passim. See map 1. Yueshi 樂氏. Zheng. Ford on the river. In Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xiang 26.11. Yuli 魚里. Song. A place located somewhere in the outskirts of the Song ­capital. Xiang 28.9. Yulin 棫林 (1). Qin. Modern Jingyang Co 涇陽縣, Shaanxi. Xiang 14.3. Yulin 棫林 (2). Xu. NE of Ye Co 葉縣, Henan. Xiang 16.2. Yuling 魚陵. Zheng. Unk. Xiang 18.4. Yulou 雩婁. Chu. E of Shangcheng Co 商城縣 and N of Jinzhai Co 金寨縣, Anhui. Xiang 26.6; Zhao 5.8. Yun 鄆 (1). Lu. NE of Yishui Co 沂水縣, Shandong. Wen 12.8(C), 12.7; Cheng 9.11(C), 9.10; Xiang 12.2(C), 12.1; Zhao 1.3(C), 1.8(C), 1.2, 1.11. Yun 鄆 (2). Lu. E of Yuncheng Co 鄆城縣, Shandong. Cheng 4.8(C), 16.11; Zhao 25.8(C), 25.9, 26.2(C), 26.5(C), 26.1, 26.3, 27.2(C), 27.9(C), 27.1, 27.5, 29.1(C), 29.5(C), 29.1; Ding 6.7(C), 7.2, 10.5(C), 10.3. See map 2. Yun 鄖 (1). Dom, later Chu. P, near Anlu Co 安陸縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2; Zhao 14.5; Ding 4.3. See map 4. Yun 鄖 (2). Que. P, S of Ju Co 莒縣, Shandong. Ai 12.4(C), 12.4. Yun 鄖 (3). Wei. Unk. Ai 11.6. Yunmeng Marshes 雲中. Chu. Unk. Ding 4.3, 5.7. Yupi 魚陂. Chu. NW of Tianmen Co 天門縣, Hubei. Zhao 13.2. Yuyang 圉陽. Chu. S area of Chao Co 巢縣, Anhui. Zhao 24.9. Yuyuan 羽淵. Said to be NW of Donghai Co 東海縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 7.7. Yuyuqiu 於餘丘. Dom. P, in Linyi Co 臨沂縣, Shandong. Zhuang 2.2(C). Yuzhang 豫章. Chu. Area from Houqiu Co 霍丘縣, Anhui, passing through

Place Name Index 2049

Guangshan Co 光山縣 and Gushi Co 固始縣, Henan, up to the border of Yingshan Co 應山縣, Hebei. Zhao 6.9, 13.2, 24.9, 31.4; Ding 2.2, 4.3. Zeng 鄫 (1). Dom. E of Zaozhuang 棗莊市, Shandong. Xi 15.8. Zeng 鄫 (2). Zheng. SE of Sui Co 睢縣, Henan. Xiang 1.2, 1.3(C), 2.5. Zengguan 繒關. Chu. Fangcheng Co 方城縣, Henan. Ai 4.2. Zengyan 鄫衍. See Zeng 鄫. Zheng. Ai 7.4, 17.6. Zeyi 澤邑. Zhou. Diquan 狄泉, Luoyang 洛陽, Henan. Zhao 23.1. Zha 柤 (1). Chu. N or Pei Co 邳縣, Jiangsu. Xiang 10.1(C), 10.1; Ai 6.7(C). Zha 柤 (2). Zheng. Near the Zheng cap. Ai 6.5(C). Zha 溠 (river). Chu. Fugong River 扶恭河, Sui Co 隨縣, Hubei. Zhuang 4.1. Zhai 祭. Zheng. Near Zhengzhou 鄭州, Henan. Yin 1.6(C); Cheng 4.5. Zhanban 湛阪. Chu. N of Pingdingshan City 平頂山市, Henan. Xiang 16.3. Zhang 鄣. Ji, same place as Jizhang 紀鄣. N of Ganyu Co 贛榆縣, Jiangsu. Zhuang 30.3(C). Zhanghua Palace 章華. Chu. Unk. Zhao 7.2. Zhangshi 漳澨. Chu. W of Jinmen Co 荊門縣, Hubei. Xuan 4.3. Zhangzi 長子. Jin. W of Zhangzi Co 長子縣, Shanxi. Xiang 18.2. Zhanran 旃然. Zheng. S of Rongyang Co 榮陽縣, Henan. Xiang 18.4. Zhan Slope 展陂. Xu. NW of Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Cheng 4.5. Zhaoge 朝歌. Wei. Qi Co 淇縣, Henan. Xiang 23.4, 25.3; Ding 13.6(C), 13.2, 14.6; Ai 1.7, 3.5. Zhe 折. Que. Unk. Huan 11.5. Zhen 軫. Dom, later Chu. Near Yingcheng Co 應城縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2. Zheng 鄭. Dom. CN Ji 姬. From N of Hua Co 華縣, Shanxi, to Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Yin 1.3(C) et passim. See map 3. Zhengye 烝野. Chu. Xinye Co 新野縣, Henan. Xuan 4.3. Zheqiu 赭丘. Song. Unk. Zhao 21.6. Zhi 制. Zheng. Probably to be identified with Hulao 虎牢. Sishui Gongshe 泗水公社, Rongyang Co 榮陽縣, Henan. Ying 1.4; Xiang 10.10. Zhi 泜 (river). Sha River 沙河. Unk. Xi 33.10. Zhi 彘. Near Huo Co 霍縣, Shanxi. Zhao 26.9. Zhiren 直人. Zhou. Xin’an Co 新安縣, Henan. Zhao 23.3. Zhitian 制田. Zheng. NE of Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Cheng 16.9. Zhiyuan 直轅. Chu. P, S of Xinyang 信陽, Henan, and to be identified with modern Wushengguan 武勝關. Ding 4.3. Zhong 鐘. Cao. Dingtao Co 定陶縣, Shandong. Ai 7.5. Zhongcheng 中城. Lu. Unk. Cheng 9.14(C), 9.13; Ding 6.6(C). Zhongchou 中犫. Chu. P, Nanyang 南陽, Henan. See Zhao 13.2. Zhongdu 中都. Jin. E of Yuci Co 榆次縣, NE of Jiexiu Co 介休縣, Shanxi. Zhao 2.2. Zhongfen 中分. Zheng, cap. Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣, Henan. Xuan 9.8. Zhongli 鍾離. Chu. NE of Fengyang Co 鳳陽縣, Anhui. Cheng 15.12(C), 15.8; Xiang 10.1; Zhao 4.7, 23.5, 24.9.

2050

Place Name Index

Zhongmou 中牟. Jin. W of Tangyin Co 湯陰縣, Henan; P, between Xingtai City 邢台市 and Handan City 邯鄲市, Hebei. Ding 9.4; Ai 5.2. Zhongnan 中南 (mountain). Zhongnanshan 終南山. Zhao 4.1. Zhongqiu 中丘. Lu. NE of Linyi Co 臨沂縣, Shandong. Yin 7.2, 7.3(C), 10.1, 10.1(C). Zhongren 中人. Wei. NW of Tang Co 唐縣, Hebei. Zhao 13.4. Zhongshan 中山. Dom of non-Sinitic Xianyu origin that survived into the Warring States period and was located near Pingshan Co 平山縣, Hebei. Ding 4.1; Ai 3.1. Zhongwu 鍾吾. Dom. NE of Suqian Co 宿遷縣, Jiangsu. Zhao 27.2, 30.3. Zhou 周. Royal dom. Yin 3.3 et passim. See map 1. Zhou 州 (1). Dom, later Chu. E of Jianli Co 監利縣, Hubei. Huan 11.2; Ai 17.4. Zhou 州 (2). Zhou, later Jin. SE of Qinyang Co 沁陽縣, Henan. Yin 11.5; Zhao 3.4, 7.8; Ding 8.3. Zhoulai 州來. Chu. Fengtai Co 鳳台縣, Anhui. Cheng 7.8(C), 7.5; Xiang 26.1; Zhao 4.7, 9.2, 12.11, 13.11(C), 13.8, 19.9, 23.5; Ai 2.7(C), 2.4. See map 4. Zhouqu 州屈. Chu. W of Fengyang Co 鳳陽縣, Anhui. Zhao 25.11. Zhoushi zhi wang 周氏之汪. Zheng. Unk. Huan 15.2; Xi 33.9. Zhoushou 周首. Qi. E of Dong’e Co 東阿縣, Shandong. Wen 11.5. Zhu 著. Jin. Unk. Xiang 21.5. Zhu 邾. Dom. Yin 1.2(C) et passim. See map 2. Zhu 諸. Lu. SW of Zhucheng Co 諸城縣, Shandong. Zhuang 29.5(C), 29.4; Wen 12.8(C), 12.7. Zhù 鑄. Dom, CN Ren 任. S of Feicheng Co 肥城縣, Shandong. Xiang 23.5; Zhao 25.6. Zhu 洙 (river). Lu. Unk. Zhuang 9.7(C). Zhuanling 鄟陵. Qi(?). Unk. Zhao 26.4(C), 26.6. Zhuanyu 顓臾. Lu. NW of Fei Co 費縣, Shandong. Xi 21.4. Zhufang 朱方. Wu. E of Zhenjiang City 鎮江市, Jiangsu. Xiang 28.9; Zhao 4.4, 4.7. Zhufu 諸浮. Jin. Unk. Wen 13.2. Zhuke 祝柯. Qi. NE of Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Xiang 19.1(C). Zhuo 禚. Qi. Changqing Co 長清縣, Shandong. Zhuang 2.4(C), 2.1, 4.7(C); Ding 9.4; Ai 15.4. Zhuoling 汋陵. Song. S of Ningling Co 寧陵縣, Henan. Cheng 16.3. Zhuo Slope 汋陂. Song. Between Ningling Co 寧陵縣 and Shangqiu City 商丘市, Henan. Cheng 16.3. Zhuqi 祝其. Qi. Same place as Jiagu 夾谷. Jiaguyu 夾谷峪, Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Ding 10.2. Zhuqiu 祝丘. Lu. E of Linyi Co 臨沂縣, Shandong. Huan 5.5(C); Zhuang 4.1(C). Zhuyong 著雍. Jin. Unk. Xiang 10.2, 19.1; Zhao 13.4. Zhuxia 邾瑕. Dom. Unk. Ai 6.1(C). Zi 茲. SW of Anqiu Co 安丘縣, Shandong. Zhao 5.4(C), 5.6.

Place Name Index 2051

Zi 淄 (river). Qi and Lu. To be identified with the modern Xiaowen River 小汶河. Zhao 26.4. Zi 訾 (1). Zheng. SW of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Wen 1.5. Zi 訾 (2). Zheng. Between Xinzheng Co 新鄭縣 and Xuchang City 許昌市, Henan. Cheng 13.4. Zi 鄑. Ji. NW of Changyi Co 昌邑縣, Shandong. Zhuang 1.8(C). Ziliang 訾梁. Chu. Xinyang Co 信陽縣, Henan. Zhao 13.2. Zilou 訾婁 (1). Zheng. SW of Hua Co 滑縣, Henan. Xi 18.4. Zilou 訾婁 (2). Zhu. Unk. Xi 33.6(C), 33.5. Ziwu 訾毋. Song. S of Luyi Co 鹿邑縣, Henan. Xiang 10.3. Zizhi 訾枝. Chu. Zhijiang Co 枝江縣, Hubei. Wen 16.4. Zong 宗. Dom. Between ancient Longshucheng 龍舒城, E of Lujiang Co 廬江縣, and Shucheng Co 舒城縣, Anhui. Wen 12.3. Zongchuan 鬷川. N of Dingtao Co 定陶縣, Shandong. Zhao 29.4. Zongqiu 宗丘. Chu. Zigui Co 秭歸縣, Hubei. Zhao 14.3. Zuili 檇李. Wu. Jiayu Co 嘉與縣, Zhejiang. Ding 14.4(C), 14.5; Ai 1.2. See map 4. Zuo 柞. Lu. Laiwu Co 萊蕪縣, Shandong. Zhao 7.5. Zuo 胙. Dom. N of Yanjin Co 延津縣, Henan. Xi 24.2; Xiang 12.3. Zuoxiang 左巷. Zhou. E of Luoyang City 洛陽市, Henan. Zhao 23.3.

2052

Place Name Index

Personal Name Index In each entry below, the only name or the main name by which a person is known in the translation is listed first. Following this, we provide the domain or ethnic group to which the person belongs and additionally note if the person is a woman (W) or a ruler (R). For women born into one domain and marrying into another and for ministers or officers whose careers span two domains, we provide both domain names. When known, we have also given the lineage to which each person belongs. In cases where a person has multiple names or titles, these are listed next. Such cases are of two types. The first type includes persons with alternative names that are either self-evident or not of high importance. In these cases, we have preserved the alternative names in the translation and introduce them in the index by “also.” (This pertains, for example, to persons whose change of status necessitates different designations, as in the case of Chong’er, who became Lord Wen of Jin, or Gongzi Wei, who became King Ling of Chu.) The second type includes those persons whose alternative names have been regularized in the translation to accord with the head name in the index entry below. The alternative names following the head name are preceded by the letters a, b, c, d, etc. As explained in the introduction, when a person is designated in the Chinese text by one of these alternative names, in our translation we have used the head name listed below and then have added a superscript a, b, c, d, etc. after the regularized name to indicate which alternative name that name is replacing. Rulers of domains have typically been indexed under their titles and posthumous names (e.g., “Lord Huan of Lu”), with some cross-referencing provided for other names by which they are commonly known in Zuozhuan. Where a ruler of Lu appears in the text during the period of his reign, he is normally referred to as “the lord” or “our lord,” without being otherwise named. We have not indexed these passages, as they are easily found by scanning the text. We have sometimes used the title of a person as the head name in the index if the name of the person is a single Chinese character or the person appears in only one or two places (e.g., Scribe Su 史蘇, Lady Jiang 姜氏, Ritual Officer Qu

2053

宗人區). Such rules are difficult to apply with absolute consistency, and we have attempted to use cross-references for problematic cases. In the listings of the passages where the names occur we have marked references to the Annals (Chunqiu) with (C). Three works have been particularly helpful in preparing this index: Gu Donggao, Chunqiu dashi biao; Fang Xuanchen, “Zuozhuan renwu minghao yanjiu”; and Yang Bojun and Xu Ti, Chunqiu Zuozhuan cidian. Ai Jiang 哀姜 (d. 660). Lu (W). Daughter of a Qi ruler. Wife of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Lover of Gongzi Qingfu. Also Lord Zhuang’s wife Lady Jiang 夫人 姜氏, Lord Zhuang’s wife 夫人氏. Zhuang 24.5(C), 24.2; Min 2.4(C), 2.3; Xi 1.5(C), 1.7, 2.2(C), 8.3. Ai Jiang 哀姜. Lu (W). Daughter of a Qi ruler. Wife of Lord Wen of Lu. Also Jiang 姜, Lady Jiang 姜氏, Chu Jiang 出姜. Wen 4.2(C), 4.4, 9.2(C), 9.5(C), 18.7(C), 18.6. Ai, Liege of Northern Yan. See Lord Jian of Yan. Ancestral attendant Xin Xia 宗人釁夏. Lu. Ai 24.3. Ancestral attendant Qu 宗區. Guo. Zhuang 32.3. Ao of Youguo 有過澆. Legendary figure of antiquity. Also Ao 澆. Xiang 4.7; Ai 1.2. Archer Yi. See Lord Yi of Youqiong. Ba Ji 巴姬. Chu (W). Consort of King Gong of Chu. Zhao 13.2. Bai Yi 白乙. Qin. a. Bai Yibing 白乙丙. Xi 32.3, 33.3. Baili 百里. Xǔ. Yin 11.3. Baili 百里. Yu/Qin. Xi 13.4. Ban, Liege of Cao. See Lord Zhao of Cao. Ban, Prince of Cai. See Lord Ling of Cai. Ban of Chan 劖般. Song. Huang lineage. Ai 17.7. Bao 豹. Souman (Chang Di). Xiang 30.3. Bao Dian 鮑點. Qi. Bao lineage. Ai 6.6. Bao, Duke of Song. See Lord Wen of Song. Bao Gui 鮑癸. Jin. Xuan 12.2. Bao Guo 鮑國. Qi. Bao lineage head. Younger brother of Bao Qian. a. Bao Wenzi 鮑文子, b. Wenzi 文子. Cheng 17.6; Xiang 28.9; Zhao 10.2, 14.2, 20.2, 21.3, 25.6; Ding 9.3. Bao, Master of Hu 胡子豹. Hu. Also Master of Hu 胡子. Ding 4.2(C), 15.3(C), 15.2. Bao Mu 鮑牧 (d. 487). Qi. Bao lineage. Grandson of Bao Guo. a. Baozi 鮑子. Ai 6.3, 6.6, 8.3, 8.6. Bao, Prince of Chen. See Lord Huan of Chen. Bao Qian 鮑牽. Qi. Bao lineage head. Great-grandson of Bao Shuya. a. Bao 鮑, b. Bao Zhuangzi 鮑莊子. Cheng 17.6. Bao Shuya 鮑叔牙. Qi. First person of the Bao lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Bao Shu 鮑叔. Zhuang 8.3, 9.5; Zhao 13.2. Bao Si 褒姒. Zhou (W). Queen of King You of Zhou. Zhao 1.3.

2054

Personal Name Index

Beigong Jie 北宮結. Wei. Beigong lineage. a. Jie 結. Ding 7.4(C), 7.4, 14.3(C), 14.4. Beigong Kuo 北宮括. Wei. First person of the Beigong lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. Descendant of King Cheng of Wei. a. Beigong Yizi 北宮懿子, b. Yizi 懿子. Cheng 17.1(C), 17.1; Xiang 9.5, 14.3(C), 14.3. Beigong Tuo 北宮佗. Wei. Beigong lineage. Son of Beigong Kuo. a. Beigong Wenzi 北宮文子, b. Wenzi 文子. Xiang 30.12, 31.10, 31.13; Zhao 2.1. Beigong Xi 北宮喜. Wei. Beigong lineage. a. Beigong zi 北宮子, b. Beigong Zhenzi 北宮貞子. Also Zhenzi 貞子. Zhao 10.4, 20.4, 25.2(C), 27.5(C), 27.4. Beigong Yi 北宮遺. Wei. Beigong lineage. Son of Beigong Kuo. Xiang 26.7. Beiguo Qi 北郭啟. Qi. Zhao 22.1. Beiguo Zuo 北郭佐. Qi. a. Beiguo Ziche 北郭子車, b. Ziche 子車. Also Zuo 佐. Xiang 28.9, 28.11. Bi 比. Xue (R, 4. 498–497). Ruler of Xue. Succeeded Lord Xiang of Xue 薛襄公. Ding 13.8(C). Bi Jí 偪姞. Jin (W). Consort of Lord Wen of Jin. Mother of Lord Xiang of Jin. Wen 6.5. Bi Wan 畢萬. Jin. Ancestor of the Wei 魏 lineage. Min 1.6; Ai 2.3. Bi Wucun 敝無存 (d. 501). Qi. Ding 9.4. Bian Ang 邊卬. Song. Bian lineage. Zhao 22.2. Bian Bo 邊伯. Zhou. Zhuang 19.2. Bian Jiu 弁糾. Jin. Luan lineage. Also Luan Jiu 欒糾. Cheng 18.3. Biao, Prince of Jin. See Lord Ping of Jin. Biao Xi 彪徯. Wei. Zhao 32.3; Ding 1.1. Bin Hua 賓滑. Zhou. Zhao 9.3. Bin Qi 賓起 (d. 520). Zhou. a. Bin Meng 賓孟. Zhao 22.3. Bin Xuwu 賓須無. Qi. Zhao 13.2. Bing Chu 邴歜. Qi. Also Chu 歜. Wen 18.2. Bing Shi 邴師. Jin. Xiang 21.5. Bing Shi 邴師 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Bing Xia 邴夏. Qi. Cheng 2.3. Bing Xie 邴洩. Lu. a. Xie 洩. Ai 11.1. Bing Yizi 邴意茲. Qi. Ding 13.1; Ai 6.5. Bing Yu 邴豫. Jin (d. 552). Xiang 21.5. Biwo of Zhu 邾畀我. Zhu. Xiang 23.3(C). Blind Old Man (Gusou 瞽瞍). Legendary figure of antiquity. Father of Shun. Zhao 8.6. Bo 伯. Song. Huang lineage. Older brother of Huang Feiwo. Ai 17.7. Bo Fu 伯服 (d. 771). Zhou. Son of King You of Zhou and Bao Si. Xi 24.2. Bo Hu 伯虎. Wen 18.7. Bo Ji 伯姬. Jin/Lù (W). Sister of Lord Jing of Jin. Wife of Ying’er, Master of Lù. Xuan 15.3. (Bo Ji, which means the oldest daughter with the Ji clan name, is used to refer to several aristocratic women in Zuozhuan; see names listed below.) Bo Ji 伯姬. Lu/Ji (W). Daughter of Lord Hui of Lu. Wife of the Ji ruler. Yin 2.6(C); Zhuang 4.2(C), 4.5(C).

Personal Name Index 2055

Bo Ji. Jin/Qin (W). See Mu Ji of Qin. Bo Ji. Lu/Song (W). See Gong Ji. Bo Ji of Qǐ 杞伯姬. Lu/Qǐ (W). Daughter of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Wife of Lord Cheng of Qǐ. Also Bo Ji 伯姬. Zhuang 25.4(C), 27.1(C), 27.4(C), 27.1, 27.4; Xi 5.2(C), 9.3(C), 28.13(C), 31.5(C). Bo Ji of Tan 郯伯姬. Lu/Tan (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Divorced wife of a Tan ruler. Xuan 16.3(C), 16.3. Bo Ji of the Dang lineage 蕩伯姬. Lu/Song (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Wife of Gongzi Dang or another person from the Dang lineage in Song. Xi 25.3(C). Bo lineage head 伯氏. Song. Xiang 9.1. Bo Lord Sheng 白公勝 (d. 479). Chu. Son of heir apparent Jian. a. Bo Lord 白公. Ai 16.5, 17.4. Bo Zhouli 伯州犁 (d. 541). Jin/Chu. Son of Bo Zong. Also grand steward Bo Zhouli 大宰伯州犁, grand steward 大宰. Cheng 15.5, 16.5; Xiang 26.6, 27.4; Zhao 1.1, 1.13; Ding 4.3. Bo Zitong 伯子同. Jin. Cheng 18.1. Bo Zong 伯宗 (d. 576). Jin. First person of the Bo lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xuan 15.2, 15.3; Cheng 5.4, 6.4, 15.5. Bochou 伯鯈. Jin. Son of Lord Wen of Jin and Ji Huai. Xi 23.6. Bochou 伯鯈. Ancestor of Southern Yan. Xuan 3.6. Bofen 伯奮. Son of the legendary Gaoxin lineage. Wen 18.7. Bofeng 伯封. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of music master Lord Kui and Dark Wife. Zhao 28.2. Bojia 伯嘉. Luo. Huan 12.4. Bojuan 伯蠲 (d. 582). Zheng. Cheng 9.8. Boming Lord Han 伯明后寒. Legendary figure of antiquity. Boming was the name of an ethnic group during the legendary Xia dynasty (R). Xiang 4.7. Boqin 伯禽. Lu (R). Ancestral ruler of Lu. Son of the Zhou Duke. a. Qinfu 禽父. Also Lord of Lu 魯公. Wen 12.5; Zhao 12.11; Ding 4.1. Boxi 伯戲. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 3.3. Boyin 伯因. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 4.7. Boyu 伯輿. Zhou minister. Cheng 11.5; Xiang 10.12. Bu Yang 步揚. Jin. Xi lineage. Father of Xi Chou. Xi 15.4. Bu Zhao 步招. Jin. Wen 7.4. Buku 不窋. Legendary figure of antiquity. One of the ancestors of Zhou. Wen 2.5. Buyin, Lord of Hu. See Hu Lord. Cai Ji 蔡姬. Cai/Qi (W). Sister of Lord Mu of Cai. Wife of Lord Huan of Qi. Xi 3.5, 17.5. Cai Jiuju 蔡鳩居. Chu. Xuan 12.2. Cai Shu 蔡叔. Son of King Wen of Zhou. Younger brother of King Wu and the Zhou Duke. Ancestral ruler of Cai. Xiang 21.5; Zhao 1.7; Ding 4.1.

2056

Personal Name Index

Cai Shu 蔡叔. Cai. Younger brother of Liege Huan of Cai. Huan 11.5(C). Cai Zhao 蔡朝. Qi. Xuan 17.1, 18.1. Cai Zhong 蔡仲. Early Zhou ruler of Cai. Son of Cai Shu. Cai. Ding 4.1. Cangge 蒼葛. Zhou (Yangfan). Xi 25.2. Cangshu 蒼舒. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Cao Gui 曹劌. Lu. Also Gui 劌. Zhuang 10.1, 23.1. Cao Kai 曹開. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Captain of the right Chache 右領差車. Chu. Ai 17.4. Captain Rufu 不更女父. Qin. Cheng 13.3. Carpenter Qing 匠慶. Lu. Xiang 4.4. Chai, Zheng Liege. See Lord Xian of Zheng. Chang Hong 萇弘 (d. 492). Zhou. a. Chang Shu 萇叔. Zhao 11.2, 17.4, 18.1, 23.6, 24.1; Ding 1.1, 4.1; Ai 3.3. Chang Wuzi 長武子. Jin. Ai 23.2. Chang Zang 長牂. Wei. Xi 28.5. Changshou Guo 常壽過. Yue. Zhao 5.8, 13.2. Changyu Jiao 長魚矯. Jin. a. Jiao 矯. Cheng 17.10. Chariot driver Yang 諸御鞅. Qi. Ai 14.3. Chen 辰. Song. Zhao 20.3; Ding 10.12(C), 10.6, 11.1(C), 11.1, 14.12(C). Chen Bao 陳豹. Qi. Chen lineage. a. Bao 豹. Ai 14.3. Chen Guan 陳瓘. Qi. Chen lineage. a. Ziyu 子玉. Also Guan 瓘. Ai 11.1, 15.3, 17.3. Chen Gui 陳媯. Chen/Zheng (W). Wife of Ziyi (uncle of Lord Wen of Zheng) and then wife of Lord Wen of Zheng. Xuan 3.6. Chen Gui. See Queen Hui. Chen Heng 陳恆. Qi. Chen lineage head. a. Chengzi 成子, b. Chen Chengzi 陳成子, c. Chenzi 陳子. Also Heng 恆. Zhuang 22.1; Ai 14.3(C), 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, 15.3, 15.4, 27.3. Chen Ni 陳逆. Qi. Chen lineage. a. Chen Zixing 陳子行, b. Zixing 子行, c. Ni 逆. Ai 11.3, 14.3. Chen Qi 陳乞. Qi. Chen lineage head. Son of Chen Wuyu. a. Chen Xizi 陳僖子. b. Xizi 僖子. c. Chenzi 陳子. Ai 4.3, 6.8(C), 6.3, 6.6, 11.3. Chen Shu 陳書. Qi. Chen lineage. a. Sun Shu 孫書, b. Zizhan 子占, c. Shu 書. Zhao 19.7; Ai 11.3. Chen Wuyu 陳無宇. Qi. Chen lineage head. Son of Chen Xuwu. a. Chen Huanzi 陳桓子, b. Huanzi 桓子. Also Wuyu 無宇. Zhuang 22.1; Xiang 6.7, 24.6, 24.8, 28.9, 29.13; Zhao 2.2, 2.5, 3.3, 5.5, 8.5, 10.2. Chen Xuwu 陳須無. Qi. Chen lineage head. a. Chen Wenzi 陳文子, b. Wenzi 文子. Xiang 22.3, 23.4, 24.5, 25.2, 27.4, 28.2, 28.9. Chen Yin 陳寅. Song. Ding 6.6, 8.3. Chen Zhuang 陳莊. Qi. Chen lineage. Brother of Chen Heng. Ai 11.1. Chen Ziqiang 陳子彊. Qi. Chen lineage head. Son of Chen Wuyu. a. Chen Wuzi 陳武子, b. Ziqiang 子彊. Zhao 26.4. Chen Zishi 陳子士. Qi. Chen lineage. Called Zishi in the text. Ai 6.6. Cheng Cha 成差. Qin. Cheng 13.3. Cheng Daxin 成大心 (d. 615). Chu. Cheng lineage head. Son of Cheng Dechen.

Personal Name Index 2057

a. Daxin 大心, b. Sunbo 孫伯, c. Dasunbo 大孫伯. Xi 28.4, 33.10; Wen 5.3, 11.1, 12.3. Cheng Dechen 成得臣 (d. 632). Chu. First person of the Cheng lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Ziyu 子玉, b. Dechen 得臣. Xi 23.3, 23.6, 26.4, 26.5, 26.6, 27.4, 28.3, 28.4; Wen 10.3; Xuan 12.5. Cheng Duke Huan 成桓公. Zhou. Cheng lineage. Ding 8.8. Cheng Duke Jian 成簡公. Zhou. Cheng lineage. Zhao 7.11. Cheng, Duke of Song. See Lord Ping of Song. Cheng Duke Su 成肅公 (d. 578). Zhou. First person of the Cheng lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Cheng Master 成子. Cheng 13.2, 13.3. Cheng Feng 成風. Xuqu/Lu (W). Consort of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Mother of Lord Xi of Lu. Also Lady Feng 風氏. Min 2.8; Xi 21.4; Wen 4.7(C), 4.8, 5.2(C), 9.13(C), 9.10. Cheng He 成何. Jin. Ding 8.7, 10.4. Cheng, Head of Xuˇ. See Lord Yuan of Xǔ. Cheng Hua 程滑. Jin. Cheng 18.1. Cheng Huan 成讙. Song. Ai 13.1. Cheng Jia 成嘉. Chu. Cheng lineage. Son of Cheng Dechen, younger brother of Cheng Daxin. a. Zikong 子孔. Wen 12.3, 14.10. Cheng, Master of Shěn 沈子逞. Shěn. Also Master of Shěn 沈子. Zhao 23.7(C), 23.5. Cheng, Master of Wu. See Shoumeng, Master of Wu. Cheng Xiong 成熊 (d. 530). Chu. Cheng lineage. a. Cheng Hu 成虎. Zhao 12.6(C), 12.5. Cheng Zheng 程鄭 (d. 548). Jin. Branch of the Xun lineage. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 23.3, 24.12, 25.14. Cheng Zhi 成秩. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Cheng Zhuan 成鱄. Jin. Zhao 28.3. Chenggong Ban 成公般. Jin. Zhao 26.9. Chengqian 成愆. Zhou. Xiang 30.6. Chengshi 成師. Jin. Son of Prince Mu of Jin. a. Huanshu 桓叔. Also Huan 桓. Huan 2.8; Zhuang 23.2; Xi 5.8. Chi 赤. Cao. Zhuang 24.10(C). Chi, Rong Man Master 戎蠻子赤. Rong Man. Also Man Master Chi 蠻子赤, Man Master 蠻子. Ai 4.6(C), 4.2. Chief of the Luhun 陸渾子. Zhao 17.4. Chief of the White Di 白狄子. White Di (R). Xi 33.6. Chong 重. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of the Shaohao lineage. Zhao 29.4. Chong’er, Prince of Jin. See Lord Wen of Jin. Chou 仇. Jin (R). Son of Prince Mu of Jin. Also Prince Wen 文侯. Huan 2.8. Chou 稠 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Chou, Duke of Guo 虢公醜. Xiguo (R, r. ?–655). Also Duke of Guo 虢公, Guo Shu 虢叔. Zhuang 16.5, 18.1, 18.2, 20.1, 21.1, 27.5, 30.1, 32.3; Min 2.1; Xi 2.5, 5.8.

2058

Personal Name Index

Choumu 仇牧. Song. Zhuang 12.3(C), 12.1. Chou Wuyu 疇無餘. Yue. Ai 13.3. Chouyan 婤姶. Wei (W). Consort of Lord Xiang of Wei. Mother of Gongmeng Zhi. Zhao 7.15. Chu Long 楚隆. Jin. a. Long 隆. Ai 20.3. Chu Mi 鉏麑. Jin. Also Ni 麑. Xuan 2.3. Chuan, Master of Zhu. See Lord Zhuang of Zhu. Chuan Sun 歂孫. Lu. Zhuang 11.4. Chuanfeng Xu 穿封戌. Chu. Also Xu 戌. Xiang 26.6; Zhao 8.6. Chujiu. See Lord Zhao of Song. Chujiu, Prince of Chen. See Lord Xuan of Chen. Chujiu, Prince of Qi. See Lord Jing of Qi. Chuo, the palace favorite 宮嬖綽 (d. 530). Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Colonel Bao 庶長鮑. Qin. Xiang 11.6. Colonel Wu 庶長武. Qin. Xiang 11.6. Colonel Wudi 庶長無地. Qin. Xiang 12.4. Confucius. Lu. (551–479). a. Kong Qiu 孔丘, b. Kongzi 孔子, c. Zhongni 仲尼. Also Father Ni 尼父, also Qiu 丘. Xi 28.9; Wen 2.5; Xuan 2.3, 9.6; Cheng 2.2, 17.6; Xiang 10.2, 23.8, 25.10, 27.4, 31.1; Zhao 5.1, 7.12, 12.11, 13.3, 14.7, 17.3, 20.4, 20.7, 20.9, 28.3, 29.5; Ding 1.4, 9.3, 10.2, 12.2, 15.3; Ai 3.2, 6.4, 11.1, 11.6, 11.7, 12.2, 12.5, 14.1, 14.5, 15.5, 16.3(C), 16.3. Court scribe Guo 內史過. Zhou. Zhuang 32.3; Xi 11.2. Court scribe Shufu 內史叔服. Zhou. Wen 1.1, 14.7. Court scribe Shuxing 內史叔興. Zhou. a. court scribe Shuxingfu 內史叔興父. Xi 16.1, 28.3. Cui Cheng 崔成 (d. 546). Qi. Cui lineage. Son of Cui Zhu. Xiang 27.7. Cui Ming 崔明. Qi. Cui lineage. Son of Cui Zhu. Also Ming 明. Xiang 27.7. Cui Qiang 崔彊 (d. 546). Qi. Cui lineage. Son of Cui Zhu. Xiang 27.7. Cui Ru 崔如. Qi. Cui lineage. Xiang 23.4. Cui Yao 崔夭. Qi. First person of the Cui lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xi 28.3. Cui Zhu 崔杼 (d. 546). Qi. Cui lineage head. a. Cui Wuzi 崔武子, b. Wuzi 武子, c. Zhu 杼, d. Cui 崔, e. Cuizi 崔子. Xuan 10.2; Cheng 17.9, 18.14(C); Xiang 1.3(C), 2.9(C), 2.5, 2.7, 6.7, 9.5, 10.8, 14.3, 19.5, 19.8, 23.4, 24.6(C), 24.6, 25.1(C), 25.2(C), 25.1, 25.2, 25.5, 27.7, 27.9, 28.11. Dai E 戴惡. Song. Zhao 8.6. Dai Gui 戴媯. Chen/Wei (W). Consort of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Mother of Lord Huan of Wei. Yin 3.7. Dai Ji 戴己 (d. 620). Ju/Lu (W). Also Lady Ji 己氏. Wife of Meng Mubo. Mother of Meng Wenbo. Wen 7.7, 8.5, 14.11. Dalin 大臨. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of the Gaoyang lineage. Wen 18.7. Dan Ji 儋季. Zhou Younger brother of King Ling of Zhou. First person of the Dan lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xiang 30.6.

Personal Name Index 2059

Dan Kuo 儋括. Zhou. Dan lineage. Son of Dan Ji. Xiang 30.6. Dan Pian 儋翩. Zhou. Dan lineage. Son of Dan Kuo. Ding 6.5, 6.8, 7.1. Dang Hou 蕩侯. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Dang Hui 蕩虺. Song. Dang lineage. Son of Gongsun Shou. Younger brother of Dang Yizhu. Wen 16.5. Dang Yizhu 蕩意諸 (d. 611). Song. Dang lineage. Grandson of Gongzi Dang. Son of Gongsun Shou. Also the Song supervisor of fortifications 宋司城. Wen 8.6, 11.4, 16.5. Dang Ze 蕩澤 (d. 576). Song. Dang lineage. Son of Dang Hui. Also Zishan 子山. Cheng 15.4. Dantai Ziyu 澹臺子羽. Lu. Disciple of Confucius. Ai 8.2. Dao 悼 (Lord Dao). Lu (R). Ai 27.5. Dao, Liege of Qin 秦伯稻. Qin (R, r. 608–605). Identified as Lord Gong of Qin 秦共公 in Guliang, although Shiji gives He 和 as Lord Gong’s given name. Dao Shuo 道朔. Chu. Huan 9.2. Dark Wife 玄妻. (W). Legendary figure of antiquity. Wife of music master Lord Kui. Zhao 28.2. Daxin 大心. Xiao. Also the younger son Daxin from Xiao 蕭叔大心; the Younger brother from Xiao 蕭叔. Zhuang 12.1, 23.7(C). De 得. Song (R, r. 619–611). Lord Zhao of Song 宋昭公. Ai 26.2. Deng Liao 鄧廖. Chu. Xiang 3.1. Deng Man 鄧曼. Deng/Zheng (W). Consort of Lord Zhuang of Zheng. Huan 11.3. Deng Man 鄧曼. Deng/Chu (W). Wife of King Wu of Chu. Mother of King Wen of Chu. Huan 13.1; Zhuang 4.1. Deng Xi 鄧析 (d. 501). Zheng. Ding 9.2. Deputy for artisans Chi 工尹赤. Chu. Zhao 19.1. Deputy for artisans Lu 工尹路. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Deputy for artisans Qi 工尹齊. Chu. Xuan 12.2. Deputy for artisans Shou 工尹壽. Chu. Zhao 27.2. Deputy for artisans Xiang 工尹襄. Chu. Cheng 16.5. Deputy for fields Ran 莠尹然. Chu. Zhao 27.2, 30.3. Deputy for horse inspections Daxin 監馬尹大心. Chu. Zhao 30.3. Deputy for the hunt Gai 芋尹蓋. Chen. Ai 15.2. Deputy of Shěn 沈尹. Chu. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 7.5. Deputy of the palace stables Qiji 宮廄尹棄疾. Chu. Dou lineage head. Father of Dou Weigui. Zhao 6.9. Di Pei 糴茷. Jin. Cheng 10.1, 10.6, 11.8. Di Simi 狄虒彌. Lu. Xiang 10.2. Dian Xie 顛頡 (d. 632). Jin. Xi 23.6, 28.3. Dilü Xin 翟僂新. Song. Zhao 21.6. Ding 定 (d. 520). Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Ding Jiang 定姜. Wei (W). Daughter of a Qi ruler. Wife of Lord Ding of Wei. Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Cheng 14.1, 14.5; Xiang 10.5, 14.4. Ding, Liege of Xue. See Lord Xiang of Xue.

2060

Personal Name Index

Ding Si 定姒. Lu (W). Consort of Lord Cheng of Lu. Mother of Lord Xiang of Lu. Xiang 4.5(C), 4.4. Ding Si 定姒 (d. 495). Lu (W). Wife of Lord Ding of Lu. Mother of Lord Ai of Lu. Also Lady Si 夫人姒氏. Ding 15.9(C), 15.13(C), 15.6, 15.8. Diviner Chuqiu 卜楚丘. Lu. Min 2.4; Wen 18.1. Diviner Tufu 卜徒父. Qin. Xi 15.4. Diviner Yan 卜偃. Jin. Min 1.6; Xi 2.5, 5.8, 14.3, 23.4, 25.2, 32.3. Diviner Yi 卜齮. Lu. Min 2.3. Diviner Zhaofu 卜招父. Liang. a. Zhao 招. Xi 17.2. Dong 董. Zhou/Jin. Son of Xinyou 辛有. Zhao 15.7. Dong Anyu 董安于 (d. 496). Jin. a. Anyu 安于. Ding 13.2, 14.2. Dong Hu 董狐. Jin. Scribe. Xuan 2.3. Dong Shu 董叔 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 18.4, 21.5. Dongfu 董父. Zhao 29.4. Dongguo Jia 東郭賈. Qi. a. Dalu Zifang 大陸子方. Ai 14.3. Dongguo Jiang. See Lady Jiang. Dongguo Shu 東郭書. Qi. a. Shu 書. Ding 9.4; Ai 11.3. Dongguo Yan 東郭偃 (d. 546). Qi. a. Yan 偃. Xiang 25.2, 27.7. Dou Ban 鬬班. Chu. Dou lineage. Also Dou Ban, the Lord of Shen 申公鬬班. Zhuang 28.3, 30.2. Dou Ban 鬬般. Chu. Dou lineage head. Son of Dou Gouwutu. a. Ziyang 子揚. Xuan 4.3. Dou Bo 鬬勃 (d. 627). Chu. Dou lineage. a. Zishang 子上. Xi 28.3, 33.9, 33.10; Wen 1.7. Dou Bobi 鬬伯比. Chu. Son of Ruo’ao. First person of the Dou lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Huan 6.2, 8.2, 13.1; Xuan 4.3. Dou Chao 鬬巢. Chu. Dou lineage. Also Chao 巢. Ding 4.3, 5.7. Dou Chengran 鬬成然 (d. 528). Chu. Dou lineage head. Son of Dou Weigui. a. Man Chengran 蔓成然, b. Ziqi 子旗, c. Chengran 成然. Zhao 13.2, 13.8, 14.5, 19.9; Ding 5.7. Dou Dan 鬬丹. Chu. Dou lineage. Huan 8.2. Dou Gouwutu 鬬穀於菟. Chu. Dou lineage head. Son of Dou Bobi. a. Ziwen 子文. Zhuang 30.2; Xi 5.7, 7.2, 20.4, 23.3, 27.4; Xuan 4.3. Dou Huai 鬬懷. Chu. Dou lineage. a. Huai 懷. Ding 5.7. Dou Jiao 鬬椒 (d. 605). Chu. Dou lineage. Son of Ziliang. Grandson of Dou Bobi. a. Ziyue 子越, b. Yuejiao 越椒, c. Ziyuejiao 子越椒, d. Bofen 伯棼, e. Boben 伯賁. Xi 28.3; Wen 9.9, 16.4; Xuan 2.2, 4.3. Dou Ke 鬬克 (d. 613). Chu. Dou lineage. a. Ziyi 子儀. Also Ziyi, the Lord of Shen 申公子儀. Xi 25.3; Wen 14.10; Xiang 26.10. Dou Lian 鬬廉. Chu. Dou lineage. According to Du Yu, this is the same as Dou Sheshi 鬬射師. Huan 9.2, 11.2; Zhuang 30.2(?). Dou Min 鬬緡. Chu. Dou lineage. Zhuang 18.5. Dou Qi 鬬祁. Chu. Dou lineage. Zhuang 4.1. Dou Sheshi 鬬射師. Chu. Dou lineage. Perhaps the same person as Dou Lian above. Zhuang 30.2.

Personal Name Index 2061

Dou Weigui 鬬韋龜. Chu. Dou lineage head. Zhao 4.4, 13.2. Dou Wu 鬬梧. Chu. Dou lineage. Zhuang 28.3. Dou Xin 鬬辛. Chu. Dou lineage head. a. Xin, Zhao 14.5; Ding 4.3, 5.7. Dou Yishen 鬬宜申 (d. 617). Chu. Dou lineage. a. Yishen 鬬申, b. Zixi 子西. Xi 26.5, 26.6, 28.3, 28.4; Wen 10.3, 10.4. Dou Yuqiang 鬬御彊. Chu. Dou lineage. Zhuang 28.3. Dou Zhang 鬬章. Chu. Dou lineage. Xi 2.6, 32.1. Du Ao 堵敖. Chu. Son of King Wen of Chu and Xi Gui. Zhuang 14.3. Du Gou 堵狗. Zheng. Xiang 15.9. Du Hui 杜回. Qin. Xuan 15.5. Du Hunluo 杜溷羅. Jin. Cheng 16.5. Du Qi 杜祁. Jin (W). Consort of Lord Wen of Jin. Mother of Gongzi Yong. Wen 6.5. Du Rufu 堵女父 (d. 558). Zheng. Xiang 10.9, 15.4. Du Shu 堵叔. See Xiedu Yumi. Zheng. Xi 7.3. Du Xie 杜洩. Lu. Zhao 4.8, 5.1. Du Yuankuan 杜原款 (d. 656). Jin. Xi 4.6. Duke Cheng. See Gan Duke Cheng. Duke Jian. See Gong Duke Jian. Duke of Guo 郭公. Zhuang 24.11(C). Duke of Yu 虞公. Yu (R). Huan 10.4; Xi 2.2, 5.9(C), 5.8. Duo Ekou 鐸遏寇. Jin. Cheng 18.3. Duofu 鐸父 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Durong 督戎 (d. 550). Jin. Xiang 23.3. E 惡 (d. 609). Lu. Son of Lord Wen of Lu and Ai Jiang. Wen 18.5. E, Prince of Wei. See Lord Xiang of Wei. E Xi 蛾析. Jin. Xi 15.8. Ebo 閼伯. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 9.1; Zhao 1.12. Emperor Hong 帝鴻. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Emperor Shun. See Shun. Emperor Yi 帝乙. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ancestor of the Song domain. Wen 2.5; Ai 9.6. Entertainer Jiao 優狡. Wei. Ai 25.1. Eunuch Bi 徒人費 (d. 686). Qi. Also Bi 費. Zhuang 8.3. Eunuch Diao 寺人貂. Qi. Xi 2.4, 17.5. Eunuch Huiqiang Yili 寺人惠牆伊戾. Song. a. Yili 伊戾. Xiang 26.8. Eunuch Liu 寺人柳. Song. Zhao 6.5, 10.5. Eunuch Luo 寺人羅. Wei. Ai 15.5. Eunuch Mengzhang 寺人孟張. Jin. Xiang 17.7. Eunuch Pi 寺人披. Jin. a. Bodi 勃鞮. Xi 5.2, 24.1, 25.6. Fa 發 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Fan Chi 樊遲. Lu. Disciple of Confucius. a. Xu 須. Ai 11.1. Fan Gai 范匄. Jin (d. 548). Fan lineage head. Son of Fan Xie. a. Shi Gai 士匄,

2062

Personal Name Index

b. Xuanzi 宣子, c. Fan Xuanzi 范宣子. Cheng 16.5, 17.10, 18.7(C), 18.6; Xiang 3.3, 5.9, 8.9(C), 8.8, 9.2, 9.4, 9.5, 10.2, 10.12, 11.3, 13.3, 14.1(C), 14.1, 14.3, 14.10, 16.5, 18.3, 19.8(C), 19.14(C), 19.1, 19.3, 19.6, 19.7, 19.12, 21.5, 21.8, 23.3, 24.1, 24.2, 26.14; Zhao 3.4, 29.5. Fan Gaoyi 范皋夷 (d. 492). Jin. Fan lineage. a. Shi Gaoyi 士皋夷. Ding 13.2; Ai 3.5. Fan Hui 范會. Jin. Fan lineage head. Grandson of Shi Wei. a. Shi Hui 士會, b. Shi Ji 士季, c. Sui Wuzi 隨武子, d. Sui Ji 隨季, e. Wu Ji 武季, f. Wuzi 武子, g. Jishi 季氏, h. Sui Hui 隨會, i. Fan Wuzi 范武子. Xi 28.6; Wen 6.5, 7.4, 12.6, 13.2; Xuan 2.3, 3.2, 10.12, 12.2, 16.1, 16.4, 17.2; Cheng 18.3; Xiang 27.4; Zhao 20.6. Fan Jishe 范吉射. Jin. Fan lineage head. Son of Fan Yang. a. Shi Jishe 士吉射, b. Fan Zhaozi 范昭子, c. Zhaozi 昭子. Ding 13.6(C), 13.2; Ai 2.3, 5.1. Fan Liege 凡伯. Zhou. Yin 7.6(C), 7.5. Fan Pi 樊皮. Zhou. a. Fan Zhongpi 樊仲皮. Zhuang 29.5, 30.1. Fan Qi 樊齊. Zhou. a. Fan Qingzi 樊頃子. Zhao 22.5, 23.3. Fan Shan 范山. Chu. Wen 9.5. Fan Wuxu 范無恤. Jin. Fan lineage. Wen 12.6. Fan Xie 范燮. Jin (d. 574). Fan lineage head. Son of Fan Hui. a. Wenzi 文子, b. Shi Xie 士燮, c. Fan Wenzi 范文子. Also Fan Shu 范叔. Xuan 17.2; Cheng 2.3, 2.7, 4.5, 6.11, 8.9(C), 8.10(C), 8.10, 9.2, 9.9, 11.9, 12.2, 12.4, 13.3, 15.12(C), 16.5, 16.11, 17.3; Xiang 26.10. Fan Yang 范鞅. Jin (d. 501). Fan lineage head. Son of Fan Gai. a. Shi Yang 士鞅, b. Fan Xianzi 范獻子, c. Xianzi 獻子, d. Yang 鞅, e. Fan Shu 范叔, son of Fan Gai. Xiang 14.3, 16.1, 18.3, 21.5, 23.3, 29.6(C), 29.10, 29.15; Zhao 5.4, 5.6, 6.11, 7.11, 21.2(C), 21.3, 23,2, 24.6, 27.5(C), 27.4, 31.2, 32.3; Ding 1.1, 4.12(C), 4.1, 5.6(C), 5.8, 6.3, 6.6, 8.10(C), 8.3, 8.6, 8.8; Ai 7.3. Fang Jia 魴假. Lu. Zhao 25.10. Favorite Shu 嬖叔. Jin. Zhao 9.5. Favorite Wu from Dongguan 東關嬖五. Jin. Zhuang 28.2. Feast official Tan 饔人檀. Lu. Zhao 25.6. Fei Bao 斐豹. Jin. a. Bao 豹. Xiang 23.3. Fei, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Dao of Zheng. Fei Wuji 費無極 (d. 515). Chu. a. Wuji 無極. Zhao 15.2, 19.2, 19.6, 20.2, 21.7, 27.3, 27.6. Fen Huang 賁皇. Chu/Jin. Originally of Dou lineage. Later served in Jin. Son of Dou Jiao. a. Fen Huang of Miao 苗賁皇. Xuan 17.1; Cheng 16.5; Xiang 26.10; Zhao 5.4. Fen Yang 奮揚. Chu. Zhao 20.2. Feng Bo 逢伯. Chu. Xi 6.4. Feng Choufu 逢丑夫. Qi. Also Choufu 丑夫. Cheng 2.3. Feng Dian 豐點. Lu. Xiang 23.5. Feng Hua 逢滑. Chen. Ai 1.4. Feng Jianzi 馮簡子. Zheng. Xiang 31.10. Feng Ju 封具 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Feng Juan 豐卷. Zheng. Feng lineage. Probably son of Zifeng. a. Zizhang 子張. Xiang 30.13.

Personal Name Index 2063

Feng Lord. 逢公. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 10.1. Feng Qian 豐愆. Song. Zhao 21.4. Feng Shi 豐施. Zheng. Feng lineage head. Son of Gongsun Duan. a. Ziqi 子旗, b. Shi 施. Zhao 7.8, 16.3. Feng Shu 酆舒 (d. 594). Lù. Wen 7.5; Xuan 15.3. Fengren, Prince of Cai 蔡侯封人. Cai (R, r. 714–695). Also Prince of Cai 蔡侯, Prince Huan of Cai 蔡桓侯. Huan 2.6(C), 2.4, 16.1(C), 16.2(C), 17.4(C), 17.6(C), 17.4. Fengsun 逢孫. Qin. Xi 30.3, 33.1. Fenmao 蚡冒. Chu (R, r. 747–741). Elder brother of King Wu of Chu. Identified in some early sources as King Li of Chu. Wen 16.4; Xuan 12.2; Zhao 23.9. Fenru 焚如. Souman (Chang Di). Wen 11.5. Flaming Emperor 炎帝. Legendary emperor of antiquity. Zhao 17.3; Ai 9.6. Fu Chen 富辰. Zhou. Xi 22.6, 24.2. Fu Hanhu 茀翰胡. Jin. Cheng 16.5. Fu Li 輔躒. Jin. Xiang 24.8; Zhao 5.4. Fu Sou 傅傁. Jin. Ai 2.3. Fu Xia 傅瑕. Zheng. Zhuang 14.2. Fu Xin 富辛. Zhou. Zhao 32.3. Fucha, King of Wu 吳王夫差. Wu (R, r. 495–473). Son of King Helu. Also Fucha 夫差, Master of Wu 吳子, King of Wu 吳王, Fuchai of Wu 吳夫差. Ding 14.5; Ai 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 8.5, 9.1, 9.7, 10.2, 10.3, 10.5, 11.3, 12.3, 13.3(C), 13.2, 13.4, 15.2, 17.2, 20.2, 20.3, 22.2. Fuchu. See Lord Cheng of Cao. Fufu He 弗父何. Song. Ancestor of Confucius. Zhao 7.12. Fufu Huai 富父槐. Lu. Ai 3.2. Fufu Zhongsheng 富父终甥. Lu. Wen 11.5. Fuji, deputy of Qing 清尹弗忌 (d. 584). Chu. Qu lineage. Cheng 7.5. Fusui, Lord of Qisi 期思公復遂. Chu. Wen 10.5. Fuzhi 傅摯. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Fuzi 富子. Jin. Zhuang 23.2. Fuzi 富子. Zheng. Zhao 16.3. Gai 該. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 29.4. Gan 乾. Cai. Ding 4.3. Gan Chou 干犨. Song. Zhao 21.6. Gan Chu 甘歜. Zhou. Gan lineage. Wen 17.5. Gan Duke Cheng 甘成公. Zhou. Gan lineage. Also Duke Cheng. Zhao 12.9. Gan Duke Dao 甘悼公 (d. 530). Zhou. Gan lineage. Younger brother and successor of Gan Duke Jian. a. Gan Guo 甘過. Xiang 30.6; Zhao 12.9. Gan Duke Huan 甘桓公. Zhou. Gan lineage. Son of Gan Duke Ping. Zhao 24.1. Gan Duke Jian 甘簡公. Zhou. Gan lineage. Zhao 12.9. Gan Duke Jing. See Jing. Gan Duke Ping. See Qiu. Gan Duke Zhao. See Wangzi Dai.

2064

Personal Name Index

Gan Zhengshi 干徵師. Chen. Zhao 8.4(C), 8.2. Gao Chai 高柴. Lu/Wei. Disciple of Confucius. a. Zigao 子羔, b. Chai 柴, c. Jigao 季羔. Ai 15.5, 17.6. Gao Fa 高發. Qi. Gao lineage. Zhao 19.4(C), 19.7. Gao Gu 高固. Qi. Gao lineage head. a. Gao Xuanzi 高宣子, b. Gaozi 高子. Xuan 5.3(C), 5.5(C), 5.1, 5.3, 14.4, 15.7(C), 17.1; Cheng 2.3. Gao Hou 高厚 (d. 554). Qi. Gao lineage. Son of Gao Gu. a. Gaozi 高子. Xiang 6.7, 8.4, 10.1, 16.1, 17.4(C), 17.3, 19.10(C), 19.5, 19.8. Gao Ke 高克. Zheng. Min 2.6. Gao Qiang 高彊. Gao lineage. Qi. a. Ziliang 子良, b. Qiang 彊, c. Qiang shi 彊氏, d. Ziliang shi 子良氏. Zhao 2.1, 8.5, 10.2, 10.4; Ding 13.2, 14.9. Gao Qumi 高渠彌. Zheng. a. Gao Bo 高伯. Huan 5.3, 17.8, 18.2. Gao Ru 皋如. Yue. Ai 26.1. Gao Ruo 高弱. Qi. Gao lineage head. Son of Gao Wujiu. Cheng 17.6. Gao Shu 高豎. Qi. Gao lineage. Son of Gao Zhi. Xiang 29.16. Gao Wujiu 高無咎. Qi. Gao lineage head. Son of Gao Gu. a. Gao 高, b. Wujiu 無咎. Cheng 15.12(C), 16.5, 17.5(C), 17.6. Gao Wupi 高無㔻. Qi. Gao lineage. a. Gaozi 高子. Ai 11.1, 11.3, 15.2(C), 23.2. Gao Xi 高傒. Qi. Gao lineage head. a. Jingzhong 敬仲. Also Gaozi 高子. Zhuang 9.5, 22.5(C); Min 2.6(C); Xiang 29.16. Gao Yan 郜延. Song. Ai 13.1. Gao Yan 高酀. Qi. Gao lineage. Xiang 29.16. (Du Yu identifies him as Gao Xi’s great-grandson, and the Gao Yan 高偃 below as Gao Xi’s great-greatgrandson, but Kong Yingda believes that the two instances of the name ­refer to the same person.) Gao Yan 高偃. Qi. Gao lineage. Also Yan 偃. Zhao 12.1(C), 12.1. Gao Yi 高齮. Qi. Gao lineage. a. Yi 齮. Zhao 26.4. Gao Zhang 高張. Qi. Gao lineage. Son of Gao Yan. a. Gaozi 高子, b. Gao Zhaozi 高昭子, c. Zhaozi 昭子, d. Gao 高. Zhao 29.1(C), 29.1, 32.5(C); Ding 1.1, 8.6; Ai 5.3, 6.4(C), 6.3. Gao Zhi 高止. Qi. Gao lineage. Son of Gao Hou. a. Gao Zirong 高子容, b. Zirong 子容. Xiang 29.5(C), 29.10(C), 29.9, 29.14, 29.16. Gaoxin lineage head 高辛氏. Legendary ruler of antiquity. Wen 18.7; Zhao 1.12. Gaoyao 臯陶. Legendary ruler of antiquity. Zhuang 8.2; Wen 5.4. Gaoyu 高圉. An ancestor of Zhou. Zhao 7.11. Ge Ying 葛嬴. Ge/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. Mother of Lord Zhao of Qi. Xi 17.5. Gelu of Jie 介葛盧. Jie (R). Gelu 葛盧. Xi 29.1(C), 29.5(C), 29.1, 29.4. Geng Zhibubi 耿之不比. Chu. Zhuang 28.3. Gengyu, Master of Ju 莒子庚輿. Ju. Also Gengyu 庚輿, Master of Ju 莒子, Lord Gong of Ju 莒共公. Zhao 14.4, 14.6, 19.7, 22.1, 23.6(C), 23.4. Gong Cheng 鞏成. Zhou. Xiang 30.6. Gong Duke Jian 鞏簡公. Zhou. Also Duke Jian 簡公. Zhao 22.5; Ding 1.6, 2.1. Gong Hua. Jin. Also leader of the left file, Gong Hua 左行共華. Xi 10.3.

Personal Name Index 2065

Gong Ji 共姬. Zhou/Qi (W). Daughter of a Zhou king. Wife of Lord Huan of Qi. a. Wang Ji 王姬. Zhuang 11.4(C), 11.3. Gong Ji 共姬. Lu/Song (W) (d. 543). Daughter of Mu Jiang and Lord Xuan of Lu. Wife of Duke Gong of Song. a. Song Gong Ji 宋共姬, b. Bo Ji 伯姬, c. Bo Ji of Song 宋伯姬, d. Ji 姬. Cheng 8.4, 8.11, 9.4(C), 9.3; Xiang 26.8, 30.3(C), 30.6(C), 30.7, 30.9. Gong Zhiqi 宮之奇. Yu. Xi 2.2, 5.8. Gong Zhong 共仲. Zheng. Cheng 7.4. Gongbin Geng 公賓庚. Lu. Ai 8.2. Gongchu 公鉏. Lu. Head of Gongchu lineage, branch of Jisun lineage. Son of Ji Wuzi. a. Gong Mi 公彌, b. Mi 彌. Also Gongchu shi 公鉏氏. Xiang 23.5. Gongchu Ji 公鉏極. Gongchu lineage, branch of Jisun lineage. Great-grandson of Gongchu. Lu. Ding 8.10. Gongfen 公賁. Lu. Zhao 25.6. Gongfu 公甫. Lu. Jisun lineage. Younger brother of Ji Pingzi. Zhao 25.6. Gongfu Chu 公父歜. Lu. Gongfu lineage, branch of the Jisun lineage. a. Gongfu Wenbo 公父文伯. Ding 5.6; Ai 3.2. Gongfu Dingshu 公父定叔. Zheng. Zhuang 16.3. Gonggong 共工. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 17.3, 29.4. Gongguo 公果. Lu. Zhao 25.6. Gonghe Miao 公何藐 (d. 505). Lu. Jisun lineage. Ding 5.6. Gongheng 公衡. Lu. Probably son of Lord Xuan of Lu. a. Hengfu 衡父. Cheng 2.8; Zhao 7.3. Gongjia Shuzi 公甲叔子. Lu. a. Shuzi 叔子. Ai 8.2. Gonglian Yang 公斂陽. Lu. a. Gonglian Chufu 公斂處父, b. Chufu 處父, c. Yang 陽. Ding 7.5, 8.10, 12.2. Gongliu 共劉. Lu. Ai 3.4. Gonglü Hui 工僂會. Qi. Xiang 19.10. Gonglü Sa 工僂灑. Qi. Xiang 31.2. Gongmeng Chuo 公孟綽. Qi. Ai 9.1. Gongmeng Kou 公孟彄. Wei. Son of Gongmeng Zhi. Ding 12.4(C), 12.1, 13.4(C), 14.11(C), 14.8; Ai 10.8(C), 15.8(C). Gongmeng Zhi 公孟縶 (d. 522). Wei. Son of Lord Xiang of Wei and Chouyan. a. Meng Zhi 孟縶, b. Zhi 縶, c. Meng 孟 , d. Gongmeng 公孟. Zhao 7.15, 20.4. Gongnan 公南. Lu. Ding 10.5. Gongnan Chu 公南楚. Wei. a. Nan Chu 南楚. Zhao 20.4. Gongqi 公期. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Ding 8.10. Gongran Wuren 公冉務人 (d. 609). Lu. Wen 18.5. Gongruo Miao 公若藐 (d. 500). Lu. Shusun lineage. a. Gongruo 公若. Ding 10.5. Gongshan Buniu 公山不狃. Lu/Wu. Steward of Ji Pingzi. Fled to Wu after an unsuccessful rebellion. a. Buniu 不狃, b. Zixie 子洩. Ding 5.4, 8.10, 12.2; Ai 8.2. Gongshu Duan 共叔段. Zheng. Younger brother of Lord Zhuang of Zheng. a. Gongshu 共叔, b. Duan 段. Also the senior younger brother 大叔, the

2066

Personal Name Index

senior younger brother Duan 大叔段, the senior younger brother of the walled city Jing 京城大叔. Yin 1.3c, 1.4, 1.11; Zhuang 16.3. Gongshu Fa 公叔發. Wei. Gongshu lineage head. a. Gongshu Wenzi 公叔文子, b. Wenzi 文子. Xiang 29.13; Ding 6.2, 13.3. Gongshu Shu 公叔戍. Wei. Gongshu lineage head. Son of Gongshu Fa. a. Shu 戍. Ding 13.3, 14.1(C), 14.1, 14.4. Gongsi Zhan 公思展. Lu. Jisun lineage. a. Zhan 展. Zhao 25.6. Gongsun Ao 公孫敖 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Gongsun Banshi 公孫般師. Wei (R, r. 478). Grandson of Lord Xiang of Wei. a. Banshi 般師. Ai 17.5. Gongsun Chen 公孫臣 (d. 546). Wei. Xiang 27.3. Gongsun Chen 公孫辰. Cai. Ai 4.2(C), 4.1. Gongsun Chu 公孫鉏. Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Zihan. Xiang 30.10. Gongsun Chu 公孫鉏. Zhu. Zhao 23.2. Gongsun Deng 公孫登. Zheng. Zhao 18.3. Gongsun Ding 公孫丁 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3. Gongsun Ding 公孫丁. Wei. Xiang 14.4. Gongsun Duan 公孫段 (d. 535). Zheng. Son of Zifeng. Grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng. Feng lineage head. a. Boshi 伯石, b. Zishi 子石. Xiang 27.5, 29.5(C), 29.8, 30.13; Zhao 1.1, 1.9, 3.4, 7.8. 7.9. Gongsun Gan 公孫敢. Wei. Ai 15.5. Gongsun Gu 公孫固 (d. 620). Song. Xi 27.4, 29.2; Wen 7.3. Gongsun Guifu 公孫歸父. Lu. Dongmen lineage head. Son of Xiangzhong. a.  Zijia 子家. Also Guifu 歸父. Xuan 10.11(C), 10.14(C), 10.17(C), 10.10, 11.3(C), 14.6(C), 14.4, 15.1(C), 15.1, 18.6(C), 18.8(C), 18.5. Gongsun Guisheng 公孫歸生. Cai. a. Zijia 子家, b. Shengzi 聲子. Also Gui­ sheng 歸生. Xiang 26.10, 27.4; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1. Gongsun Hei 公孫黑 (d. 540). Zheng. Son of Zisi. Grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng. Si lineage. a. Zixi 子皙. Xiang 15.4, 29.17, 30.2, 30.10; Zhao 1.1, 1.7, 1.9, 1.12, 2.3(C), 2.4. Gongsun Heigong 公孫黑肱 (d. 551). Zheng. Yin lineage. Son of Ziyin. Grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng. a. Zizhang 子張, b. Bozhang. Xuan 14.2; Xiang 18.4, 22.4. Gongsun Hua 公孫滑. Zheng. Yin 1.11, 2.7. Gongsun Hui 公孫會. Cao. Zhao 20.2(C). Gongsun Hui 公孫揮. Qi. Ai 11.3. Gongsun Hui 公孫揮. Zheng. a. Ziyu 子羽, b. Envoy Hui 行人揮. Also Gongsun Hui 公孫揮, Envoy Ziyu 行人子羽. Xiang 24.12, 26.4, 29.3, 30.10, 31.10; Zhao 1.1, 1.12, 5.4, 10.4, 16.3. Gongsun Huo 公孫獲. Zheng. Also Huo 獲. Yin 11.3. Gongsun Huo 公孫霍 (d. 491). Cai. a. Gongsun Xu 公孫盱. Ai 4.5(C), 4.1. Gongsun Ji 公孫忌. Song. Zhao 20.5, 22.2. Gongsun Kuan 公孫寬. Chu. a. Kuan 寬. Ai 19.1. Gongsun Lie 公孫獵. Cai. Ai 3.7(C). Gongsun Lin 公孫林. Zheng. Ai 2.3.

Personal Name Index 2067

Gongsun Mang 公孫尨. Lu. Ai 2.3. Gongsun Mianyu 公孫免餘. Wei. Also Mianyu 免餘. Xiang 27.3. Gongsun Mimou 公孫彌牟. Wei. Nan lineage head. Son of Zinan. a. Zizhi 子之, b. Nanshi 南氏, c. Wenzi 文子. Ai 12.4, 25.1, 26.1. Gongsun Ming 公孫明. Qi. a. Ziming 子明. Zhao 4.8. Gongsun Ning 公孫寧. Chen. a. Kongning 孔寧. Also Kong 孔. Wen 17.1; Xuan 9.6, 10.4, 11.7(C), 11.5; Cheng 2.8. Gongsun Ning 公孫寧. Chu. Son of Gongzi Shen. a. Ning 寧, b. Ziguo 子國. Ai 16.5, 17.4, 18.2. Gongsun Pian 公孫翩 (d. 491). Cai. a. Pian 翩. Ai 4.1. Gongsun Piao. a. Zishu 子叔. See Lord Shang of Wei. Gongsun Qiang 公孫彊 (d. 487). Cao. a. Qiang 彊. Ai 7.5, 8.1. Gongsun Qing 公孫青. Qi. a. Zishi 子石, b. Qing 青. Zhao 20.4. Gongsun Shen 公孫申 (d. 581). Zheng. a. Shushen 叔申. Cheng 4.5, 9.12, 10.3, 10.5, 14.3. Gongsun Shezhi 公孫舍之 (d. 544). Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Zihan. a. Zi­ zhan 子展. Also Shezhi 舍之. Xiang 8.7, 9.5, 9.6, 9.8, 10.5, 11.3(C), 11.2, 11.5, 18.4, 19.9, 22.7, 25.4(C), 25.5, 25.10, 26.4, 26.7, 26.11, 27.5, 28.6, 28.8, 29.5, 29.7. Gongsun Shi 公孫師. Song. Zhong lineage. Grandson of Lord Zhuang of Song. Wen 18.8; Cheng 15.4. Gongsun Shou 公孫壽. Song. Dang lineage. Son of Gongzi Dang. Wen 16.5; Cheng 8.5(C), 8.5. Gongsun Sou 公孫傁. Qi. Zhao 12.4. Gongsun Su 公孫宿. Lu. a. Gongsun Cheng 公孫成, b. Cheng 成. Ai 14.6, 15.4. Gongsun Tuoren 公孫佗人. Chen. Ding 14.2(C). Gongsun Wudi 公孫無地 (d. 546). Wei. Xiang 27.3. Gongsun Wuzhi 公孫無知 (d. 685). Qi (R, r. 685). Nephew of Lord Xi of Qi. Son of Yi Zhongnian. a. Wuzhi 無知, b. Zhongsun 仲孫. Also Qi Wuzhi 齊無知. Zhuang 8.5(C), 8.3, 8.4, 9.1(C), 9.1; Zhao 4.1, 11.10. Gongsun Xi 公孫皙. Qi. Zhao 7.1. Gongsun Xi 公孫肸. Zheng. Xiang 30.10. Gongsun Xia 公孫夏. Qi. Ai 11.3. Gongsun Xia 公孫夏. See Zixi 子西. Gongsun Xie 公孫洩. Zheng. Kong lineage. Son of Zikong. Zhao 7.9. Gongsun Xing 公孫姓 (d. 491). Cai. Ding 4.3(C); Ai 4.5(C), 4.1. Gongsun You 公孫友. Song. Son of Ziyu. Yu 魚 lineage. Son of Gongzi Muyi. Wen 7.3, 16.5. Gongsun Youshan 公孫有山. Lu. a. Gongsun Youshan shi 公孫有山氏, b. Gongsun Youxing shi 公孫有陘氏. Ai 13.4, 24.4, 27.4. Gongsun Yuan 公孫援 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3. Gongsun Zhao 公孫朝. Lu. Zhao 26.4. Gongsun Zhao 公孫朝. Chu. a. Wucheng deputy 武城尹. Ai 17.4. Gongsun Zheng 公孫鄭 (d. 620). Song. Wen 7.3. Gongsun Zhenzi 公孫貞子 (d. 480). Chen. Ai 15.2. Gongsun Zhi 公孫枝. Qin. a. Zisang 子桑. Xi 9.6, 13.4, 15.4; Wen 3.4.

2068

Personal Name Index

Gongsun Zhongli 公孫鍾離 (d. 619). Song. Wen 8.6. Gongsun Zhou 公孫周. Song. Ai 26.2. Gongwei 公為 (d. 484). Lu. Son of Lord Zhao of Lu. a. Gongshu Wuren 公叔 務人, b. Wuren 務人. Zhao 25.6, 29.3; Ding 1.2, Ai 11.1. Gongwen Yao 公文要. Wei. a. Gongwen Yizi 公文懿子, b. Yizi 懿子. Ai 25.1, 26.1. Gongwu Shaobo 公巫召伯. Lu. Xiang 29.10. Gongxu Chi 公壻池. Jin. Wen 8.1, 17.4. Gongyan 公衍. Lu. Son of Lord Zhao of Lu. Zhao 29.3; Ding 1.2. Gongye 公冶. Lu. Jisun lineage. Xiang 29.4. Gongzhi 公之 (d. 519). Lu. Jisun lineage, younger brother of Ji Pingzi. Zhao 25.6. Gongzi Ang 公子卬 (d. 619). Song. Also grand supervisor of the military Gongzi Ang 大司馬公子卬. Wen 7.3, 8.6. Gongzi Ban 公子班 (d. 578). Zheng. a. Ziru 子如. Cheng 10.3, 13.4. Gongzi Bao. See Lord Wen of Song. Gongzi Bi 公子比 (d. 529). Chu. Son of King Gong of Chu. Younger brother of King Kang and King Ling. a. Zigan 子干. Also Ao of Zi 訾敖. Zhao 1.11(C), 1.13, 13.2(C), 13.3(C), 13.2. Gongzi Bing 公子丙 (d. 597). Chu. Xuan 12.6. Gongzi Cang 公子倉. Yue. a. Cang 倉. Zhao 24.9. Gongzi Cheng 公子成. Song. Ancestor of the Zhong lineage in Song. Wen 2.6, 7.3. Gongzi Cheng 公子成. Chu. Cheng 6.11, 9.4, 16.1, 17.1; Xiang 15.3. Gongzi Cheng 公子城. Song. a. Zicheng 子城, b. Cheng 城. Zhao 20.5, 21.6. Gongzi Chou See Lord Zhao. Gongzi Chu 公子鉏. Lu. Son of Lord Xuan of Lu. Cheng 16.5. Gongzi Chu 公子鉏. Qi. a. Chu 鉏. Xiang 21.3, 28.11; Zhao 1.11, 14.6, 26.4. Gongzi Chuanquan 公子歂犬 (d. 632). Wei. Also Chuanquan 歂犬. Xi 28.5. Gongzi Da 公子達. Lu. (Du Yu identifies Gongzi Da as a high officer in Lu commenting on events in Zheng). Huan 17.8. Gongzi Dang 公子蕩. Song. Son of Lord Huan of Song. (Not to be confused with Gongzi Dang’s grandson Dang Yizhu.) Ancestor of the Dang lineage. Wen 7.3. Gongzi Dang 公子黨. Wu. Xiang 13.5. Gongzi Di 公子地. Song. a. Di 地. Zhao 20.3; Ding 10.9(C), 10.6, 11.1(C), 11.1. Gongzi Duo 公子鐸. Ju. Zhao 14.4, 14.6. Gongzi E 公子閼. Zheng. Zhuang 16.3. Gongzi Fan 公子繁. Chu. Ding 2.2. Gongzi Fang 公子魴 (d. 525). Chu. a. Ziyu 子魚. Zhao 17.6. Gongzi Fei 公子肥 (d. 576). Song. Cheng 15.4. Gongzi Ge 公子格. Chu. Xiang 16.3, 18.4. Gongzi Gu 公子固 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3. Gongzi Guang 公子光. Wu (R, r. 514–496). Son of King Yimo. Also Helu 闔盧 (King Helu), Master of Wu, 吳子, Guang, Master of Wu 吳子光. Zhao 17.6, 20.2, 23.5, 27.2, 30.3, 30.4; Ding 2.2, 4.14(C), 4.3, 5.5, 14.5(C), 14.5; Ai 1.6.

Personal Name Index 2069

Gongzi Guchen 公子榖臣. Chu. Son of King Zhuang of Chu. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 3.4. Gongzi Guisheng 公子歸生 (d. 599). Zheng. a. Zijia 子家. Also Guisheng 歸生. Wen 2.6, 13.5, 17.4; Xuan 2.1(C), 2.1, 4.3(C), 4.2. 10.13. Gongzi Guixun 公子跪尋. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Younger brother of Yuan Liege Jiao. Zhao 12.8. Gongzi Guo 公子過 (d. 534). Chen. Zhao 8.7(C), 8.2, 8.6. Gongzi Gusheng 公子榖甥. Song. Wen 11.5. Gongzi He 公子何. Zhu. Ai 24.2. Gongzi Heigong 公子黑肱 (d. 529). Chu. Son of King Gong of Chu. a. Zixi 子皙. Xiang 27.4; Zhao 1.13, 13.2. Gongzi Heji 公子何忌. Chu. Xiang 3.8. Gongzi Heitun. See Lord Cheng of Jin. Gongzi Hu 公子忽. Zheng (R, r. 701, 697–695). Also Lord Zhao of Zheng 鄭昭公. a. Manbo 曼伯, b. heir apparent Hu 大子忽/世子忽, c. Zheng Hu 鄭忽. Yin 3.3, 7.7, 8.4; Huan 6.4, 10.5, 11.3, 15.3, 15.5(C), 17.8. Gongzi Huang 公子黃. Chen. Xiang 7.10, 20.4, 23.2. Gongzi Hui 公子翬. Lu. a. Yufu 羽父. Yin 4.5(C), 4.4, 8.9, 10.2(C), 10.2, 11.1, 11.8; Huan 3.5(C), 3.5. Gongzi Jia 公子嘉. Qi. Ai 5.3. Gongzi Jia 公子嘉. See Zikong. Gongzi Jiao 公子角. Qi. Cheng 17.6. Gongzi Jie 公子結 (d. 479). Chu. Son of King Ping of Chu. a. Ziqi 子期. Ding 4.3, 5.5, 6.4, 14.2(C); Ai 6.4, 10.6, 10.11(C), 15.2, 16.5. Gongzi Jie 公子結. Lu. Zhuang 19.3(C). Gongzi Jing 公子荊. Wei. Xiang 29.13. Gongzi Jing 公子荊. Lu. a. Jing 荊. Ai 24.3. Gongzi Jiu 公子糾 (d. 685). Qi. Younger brother of Lord Xiang of Qi. Elder brother of Lord Huan of Qi. a. Zijiu 子糾. Zhuang 8.3, 9.3(C), 9.6(C), 9.3, 9.5. Gongzi Ju 公子駒. Qi. Ai 5.3. Gongzi Kuqian 公子苦雂. Wu. Zhao 21.6. Gongzi Lan. See Lord Mu of Zheng. Gongzi Liu 公子留. Chen. Zhao 8.5(C), 8.2. Gongzi Lü 公子呂. Zheng. a. Zifeng 子封. Yin 1.4. Gongzi Lü 公子履. Cai. Younger brother of Gongzi Xie. Xiang 20.5(C), 20.4. Gongzi Mai 公子買 (d. 632). Lu. a. Zicong 子叢. Xi 28.2(C), 28.2. Gongzi Mai 公子買. Qi. a. Mai 買. Xiang 21.3, 28.11. Gongzi Mang 公子尨. Zheng. Wen 9.5. Gongzi Manman 公子曼滿 (d. 603). Zheng. Xuan 6.6. Gongzi Mieming 公子滅明. Ju. Zhao 1.11. Gongzi Pei 公子茷. Chu. Wen 9.8; Cheng 16.5, 17.10. (Yang Bojun suspects that there are actually two men by this name and that the references in Cheng 16.5 and 17.10 are to the second. Forty-four years separate the first and last appearance of this name.)

2070

Personal Name Index

Gongzi Pengsheng 公子彭生 (d. 694). Qi. a. Pengsheng 彭生. Huan 18.1; Zhuang 8.3. Gongzi Pi 公子罷. Chu. Cheng 12.2, 12.4. Possibly the same person as Wangzi Pi. Gongzi Pidi 公子罷敵 (d. 629). Chu. Son of King Ling of Chu. Zhao 13.2. Gongzi Ping 公子平 (d. 582). Chu. Cheng 9.10. Gongzi Ping 公子馮. Chu. Xuan 14.3. Gongzi Ping. See Lord Zhuang of Song. Gongzi Pirong 公子罷戎. Chu. Xiang 9.8, 15.3. Gongzi Qi 公子起. Wei (R, r. 478–477). Son of Lord Ling of Wei. a. Qi 起. Ai 17.5, 18.3. Gongzi Qi 公子啟 (d. 479). Chu. Son of King Ping of Chu. Elder brother of King Zhao of Chu. a. Zilü 子閭. Also Qi 啟. Ai 6.4, 16.5. Gongzi Qian 公子黔. Qi. Son of King Jing of Qi. Ai 5.3. Gongzi Qiang 公子彊. Qi. Xuan 18.1. Gongzi Qianmou 公子黔牟. Wei (R, r. 696–688). Son of Lord Xuan of Wei. Instated as ruler in the interval when Lord Hui of Wei was expelled. Huan 16.5, Zhuang 6.1. Gongzi Qiji 公子棄疾. Chu (R, r. 528–516). Son of King Gong of Chu. Also King Ping 平王, King Ping of Chu 楚平王. a. Ju, the Master of Chu 楚子居, b. Qiji 棄疾, c. Cai Lord 蔡公, d. supervisor of the military 君司馬, e. Xiong Ju 熊居. Zhao 4.4, 6.7, 8.6, 9.2, 11.4(C), 11.2, 11.10, 13.3(C). 13.2, 13.5, 13.8, 14.3, 14.5, 15.2, 16.2(C), 16.2, 18.7, 19.2, 19.6, 19.9, 19.11, 20.2, 21.7, 24.9, 25.11, 26.6(C), 26.8, 27.6; Ding 4.3. Gongzi Qing 公子慶. Chu. Ai 19.1. Gongzi Qing 公子青. Wei. Son of Kuaikui. Younger brother of heir apparent Ji. Ai 17.5. Gongzi Qingfu 公子慶父. Lu (d. 660). Son of Lord Huan of Lu. Ancestor of the Zhongsun/Meng lineage. a. Zhong Qingfu 仲慶父, b. Qingfu 慶父, c. Gong Zhong 共仲. Zhuang 2.2(C), 8.2, 32.6(C), 32.5; Min 1.5, 2.5(C), 2.3; Wen 15.4. Gongzi Qingji 公子慶忌 (d. 475). Wu. Ai 20.2. Gongzi Qiu 公子鰌. Zheng. Cheng 15.12(C). Gongzi Quji 公子去疾. Zheng. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Ancestor of the Liang 良 lineage. a. Ziliang 子良. Also Quji 去疾. Xuan 4.2, 7.2, 7.9, 9.8, 11.1, 12.1, 12.2, 14.2; Cheng 2.8, 3.7(C), 3.3, 7.2; Zhao 7.9. Gongzi Shangren. See Lord Yi of Qi. Gongzi Shen 公子申 (d. 571). Chu. Cheng 6.11, 15.7, 17.7; Xiang 2.10(C), 2.8. (There are two men with the name Gongzi Shen in Chu. Gongzi Shen below is almost always referred to as Zixi in the text. We have chosen the name Gongzi Shen to avoid confusion with the Zheng minister Zixi.) Gongzi Shen 公子申 (d. 479). Chu. Younger half brother of King Ping of Chu (Shiji) or son of King Ping (Fu Qian). a. Zixi 子西. Zhao 26.8, 30.3; Ding 5.5, 5.7, 6.4; Ai 1.1, 1.6, 6.4, 13.4(C), 15.2, 16.5, 17.4. Gongzi Sheng 公子勝. Chen. Zhao 8.2.

Personal Name Index 2071

Gongzi Shi 公子士. Zheng. Son of Lord Wen of Zheng. Xi 20.2, 24.2; Xuan 3.6. Gongzi Shou 公子首. Cao. Cheng 2.3(C). Gongzi Si 公子駟 (d. 493). Cai. Ai 2.7(C), 2.4. Gongzi Song 公子宋. Lu (R, r. 509–495). Younger brother of Lord Zhao of Lu. Lord Ding of Lu 魯定公. Also Songfu 宋父, Prince of Lu 魯侯, Lord Ding 定公. Zhao 25.4; Ding 1.2(C). Gongzi Song 公子宋. Zheng. a. Zigong 子公. Xuan 4.2, 7.4. Gongzi Tu. See Lord Li of Zheng Gongzi Tuoshi 公子橐師. Chu. Cheng 17.11; Xiang 15.3. Gongzi Wei. See King Ling of Chu. Gongzi Wei 公子亹 (d. 694). Zheng (R, r. 695–694). Son of Lord Zhuang of Zheng. Younger brother of Lord Zhao and Lord Li of Zheng. a. Ziwei 子亹. Huan 17.8, 18.2. Gongzi Weigui 公子圍龜 (d. 586). Song. Son of Lord Wen of Song. Ling lineage. a. Ziling 子靈. Cheng 5.6, 5.7. Gongzi Wukui 公子無虧 (d. 642). Qi (R, r. 643–642). Son of Lord Huan of Qi and Wei Ji the Elder. a. Wumeng 武孟, b. Wukui 無虧. Min 2.5; Xi 17.5, 18.1. Gongzi Wulou 公子務婁. Ju. a. Wulou 務婁. Xiang 14.1. Zhao 1.11. Gongzi Xia 公子瑕 (d. 627). Zheng. Son of Lord Wen of Zheng. a. Zixia 子瑕. Also Xia 瑕. Xi 31.6, 33.9; Xuan 3.6. Gongzi Xiaobai. See Lord Huan of Qi. Gongzi Xie 公子燮 (d. 613). Chu. Wen 5.4, 14.10. Gongzi Xie 公子燮 (d. 553). Cai. Also supervisor of the military Gongzi Xie 司馬公子燮, supervisor of the military Xie 司馬燮, Cai supervisor of the military 蔡司馬. Xiang 8.3(C), 8.3, 8.7, 20.5(C), 20.4. Gongzi Xinshi 公子欣時. Cao. Son of Lord Xuan of Cao. a. Zizang 子臧. Cheng 13.5, 15.1, 16.10; Xiang 14.2. Gongzi Xu 公子繻 (d. 581). Zheng (R, r. 581). a. Xu 繻. Cheng 10.3. Gongzi Ya 公子牙. Lu (d. 662). Son of Lord Huan of Lu. Ancestor of the Shusun lineage in Lu. a. Shuya 叔牙, b. Xishu 僖, c. Ya 牙. Zhuang 32.4. Gongzi Ya 公子牙. Qi. a. Ya 牙. Son of Lord Ling of Qi. Briefly heir apparent. Xiang 19.5, 21.3. Gongzi Yan 公子偃. Lu. Younger brother of Lord Cheng of Lu. Cheng 16.16(C), 16.5, 16.11. Gongzi Yan 公子偃. Lu. Zhuang 10.2. Gongzi Yan 公子偃. Zheng. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Ancestor of the You 游 lineage. a. Ziyou 子游. Cheng 3.1, 5.5, 6.1. Gongzi Yangsheng. See Lord Dao of Qi. Gongzi Yanyu 公子掩餘. Wu. a. Yanyu 掩餘. Zhao 23.5, 27.2, 30.3. Gongzi Yi 公子齮. Chu. Xiang 22.6. Gongzi Yigu 公子宜穀. Chu. Xiang 14.7. Gongzi Yihui 公子意恢 (d. 528). Ju. a. Yihui 意恢. Zhao 14.6(C), 14.4, 14.6. Gongzi Yin 公子寅. Chu. Cheng 17.1. Gongzi Yin 公子寅 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3.

2072

Personal Name Index

Gongzi Ying 公子郢. Wei. Ancestor of the Nan lineage. Son of Lord Ling of Wei. a. Zinan 子南. Ai 2.2. Gongzi Yishi 公子益師 (d. 722). Lu. a. Zhongfu 眾父. Yin 1.7(C), 1.14. Gongzi Yong 公子雍. Qi. Son of Lord Huan of Qi. a. Yong 雍. Xi 17.5, 26.6. Gongzi Yong 公子雍. Jin. Son of Lord Wen of Jin and Du Qi. Wen 6.5, 7.5. Gongzi You 公子友. Lu (d. 644). Son of Lord Huan of Lu. Ancestor of the Ji or Jisun lineage in Lu. a. Gongzi Jiyou 公子季友, b. Cheng Ji 成季, c. Cheng Jiyou 成季友, d. Jizi 季子, e. Ji You 季友. Also You 友. Zhuang 25.6(C), 27.3(C), 27.3, 32.4, 32.5; Min 1.4(C), 1.4, 2.3, 2.4, 2.8; Xi 1.9(C), 1.6, 3.6(C), 3.3, 7.6(C), 13.5(C), 16.2(C); Zhao 32.4. Gongzi Yu 公子豫. Lu. Yin 1.11. Gongzi Yu 公子魚. Lu. a. Xisi 奚斯. Min 2.3. Gongzi Yuan. See Lord Hui of Qi. Gongzi Yuchen 公子魚臣 (d. 597). Zheng. a. Pushu 僕叔. Xuan 12.3. Gongzi Yue 公子樂 (d. 621). Son of Lord Wen of Jin and Huai Ying. Jin. Wen 6.5. Gongzi Yukou. See Heir apparent Yukou. Gongzi Yumi 公子俞彌. Zheng. Son of Lord Wen of Zheng. Also Yumi 俞彌. Xuan 3.6. Gongzi Yurong 公子御戎 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3. Gongzi Yuyue. See Lord Huan of Song. Gongzi Zhao 公子招. Chen. Son of Lord Cheng of Chen. a. Zizhao 子招. Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 8.9(C), 8.2, 8.6. Gongzi Zhao 公子朝 (d. 609). Song. Wen 16.5, 18.8. Gongzi Zhao 公子朝. Wei. Xiang 29.13. Gongzi Zhao 公子朝. Wei. Zhao 20.4, 21.6. Jizha praises the Gongzi Zhao of Xiang 29.13 as one of the noble men of Wei. This Gongzi Zhao is guilty of adultery and foments unrest in Wei. Liang Yusheng suggests that Gongzi Zhao above may be a mistake for Gongsun Zhao. Gongzi Zhi 公子縶. Qin. Xi 15.4, 24.1. Gongzi Zhu 公子朱 (d. 522). Song. Zhao 20.3. Gongzi Zhuyong 公子燭庸. Chu. a. Zhuyong 燭庸. Zhao 27.2, 30.3. Goubei of Wu 吳句卑. Wu. Ding 4.3. Goujian, Master of Yue 越子句踐. Yue (R, r. 496–465). Also Goujian 句踐, the Master of Yue 越子, the King of Yue 越王. Ding 14.5; Ai 1.2, 11.4, 13.3, 17.2, 20.3, 27.1. Goulong 句龍. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of Gonggong. Zhao 29.4. Governor of Shěn, Chi 沈尹赤. Chu. Zhao 5.8. Governor of Shěn, She 沈尹射. Chu. Zhao 4.7, 5.8. Governor of Shěn, Xu 沈尹戌. Chu (R). Also supervisor of the left army Xu 左司馬戌. Zhao 19.9, 23.9, 24.9, 27.2, 27.6, 30.3, 31.4; Ding 4.3. Governor of Shěn, Zhu 沈尹朱. Chu. Ai 17.4. Grand King 大王. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ancestor of Zhou. Called Gugong Danfu 古公亶父 in other early texts. Xi 5.8.

Personal Name Index 2073

Grand Lady Ji 大姬. Zhou (W). Eldest daughter of King Wu of Zhou. Wife of Lord Hu. Ancestress of Chen. Xiang 25.10; Zhao 3.3. Grand Lady Si 大姒. Zhou (W). Wife of King Wen of Zhou. Ding 6.2. Grand Lord 大公. Qi. Ancestral ruler of Qi. Also grand preceptor 大師. Xi 4.1, 26.3; Cheng 2.9; Xiang 14.8, 28.9, 29.13; Zhao 3.3, 20.8. Grand preceptor Jia Tuo 大師賈佗. Jin. Also Jia Tuo 賈佗. Wen 6.1; Zhao 13.2. Grand preceptor Zigu 大師子穀. Chu. a. Zigu 子穀. Ai 17.4. Grand preceptor Zizhao 大師子朝. Cai. Xiang 26.10. Grand scribe Gu 大史固. Lu. Ai 11.3. Grand scribe Ke 大史克. Lu. Wen 18.7. Grand scribe Ziyu 大史子餘. Qi. Ai 14.3. Grand steward Fan 大宰犯. Chu. Zhao 21.6. Grand steward Pi 大宰嚭. Chu/Wu. (Identified as Bo Pi in Shiji.) Grandson of Bo Zhouli. a. Pi 嚭, b. Grand Steward Ziyu 大宰子餘. Ai 1.2, 7.3, 8.5, 12.3, 12.4, 13.4, 15.2, 24.4. Grand steward Shi Chuo 大宰石㚟. Zheng. Also Shi Chuo 石㚟. Xiang 11.5, 13.7. Grand steward Zishang 大宰子商. Chu. a. Gongzi Chen 公子辰. Cheng 9.14, 10.1. Gu Rong 穀榮. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Gu, Duke of Song. See Lord Gong of Song. Gu, Liege of Xue. See Lord Xian of Xue. Gu 姑 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Guan Cong 觀從. Chu. a. Ziyu 子玉, b. Cong 從. Zhao 13.2. Guan Dingfu 觀丁父. Ruo/Chu. Ai 17.4. Guan Hu 觀虎. Jin. Ding 3.2, 5.8. Guan Qi 觀起. Chu. Xiang 22.6; Zhao 13.2. Guan Shu 管叔. Guan. Younger brother of King Wu of Zhou. Also Guan 管. Xi 24.2; Xiang 21.5; Zhao 1.7; Ding 4.1. Guan Xiu 管脩 (d. 479). Qi/Chu. Guan lineage. Ai 16.5. Guan Yuxi 管于奚. Qi. Guan lineage. Cheng 11.3. Guan Zhan 觀瞻. Chu. Ai 18.2. Guan Zhifu 管至父. Qi. First person of the Guan lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. Zhuang 8.3. Guan Zhong 管仲. Qi (d. 643). Guan lineage. a. Guan Yiwu 管夷吾, b. Guan Jingzhong 管敬仲. Zhuang 8.3, 9.5, 32.1; Min 1.2; Xi 4.1, 7.3, 12.4, 17.5, 24.1, 33.6; Zhao 11.10. Guan Zhoufu 管周父. Lu. Ai 11.1. Guang, Master of Wu. See Gongzi Guang. Gui Gui 圭媯. Zheng. Consort of Lord Wu of Zheng. Xiang 19.9. Guiyou 蹶由. Wu. Zhao 5.8, 19.11. Guizhu, Prince of Jin. See Lord Xian of Jin. Gun 鯀. Legendary figure of antiquity. Father of the sage king Yu. Xi 33.6; Wen 2.5; Xiang 21.5; Zhao 7.7. Gun, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Cheng of Zheng. Guo 過 (d. 530). Zhou. Son of Yu Pi. Zhao 12.9.

2074

Personal Name Index

Guo Can 國參. Zheng. Guo lineage. Son of Zichan. a. Zisi 子思, b. Huanzi Si 桓子思 (son of Zichan). Zhao 32.5(C); Ai 5.4, 7.5, 27.3. Guo Chong 郭重. Lu. a. Chong 重. Ai 25.2. Guo Guan 國觀. Qi. Guo lineage. a. Master of Guo 國子. Ai 17.3. Guo Guifu 國歸父. Qi. Guo lineage head. First person of the Guo lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Guo Zhuangzi 國莊子, b. Master of Guo 國子. Xi 28.3, 29.2, 33.2(C), 33.2. Guo Jiang 國姜. Qi/Lu (W). Daughter of Guo lineage in Qi. Wife of Shusun Bao of Lu. Zhao 4.8. Guo Rong 郭榮. Qi. Xiang 18.3. Guo Ruo 國弱. Qi. Guo lineage head. Son of Guo Zuo. a. Guo Jingzi 國景子, b. Guozi 國子. Cheng 18.2; Xiang 26.7; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 10.4, 11.8(C). Guo She 虢射. Jin. Xi 8.2, 14.4, 15.4. Guo Sheng 國勝 (d. 573). Qi. Guo lineage head. Son of Guo Zuo. Cheng 17.9, 18.2. Guo Shu 虢叔. Dongguo or Xiguo. Lord of Guo in the last years of Western Zhou. Yin 1.4. Guo Shu 虢叔. See Chou, Duke of Guo. Guo Shu 國書. Qi. Guo lineage. a. Master of Guo 國子. Ai 11.1(C), 11.3(C), 11.1, 11.3. Guo Xia 國夏. Qi. Guo lineage. Grandson of Guo Zuo. a. Guo Huizi 國惠子, b. Huizi 惠子, c. Guo 國. Ding 4.2(C), 7.7(C), 7.5, 8.6(C), 8.6; Ai 3.1(C), 4.3, 5.3, 6.4(C), 6.3. Guo Zhong 虢仲. Dongguo or Xiguo. Son of Wang Ji 王季 or Jili 季歷, ancestor of Zhou. Xi 5.8. Guo Zhong 虢仲. Xiguo. a. Linfu, the Lord of Guo 虢公林父, b. Lord of Guo 虢公. Huan 5.3, 8.3, 9.3, 10.2. Guo Zui 郭最. Qi. Xiang 18.3, 21.8. Guo Zuo 國佐 (d. 573). Qi. Guo lineage head. Son of Guo Guifu. a. Bin meiren 賓媚人, b. Guo Wuzi 國武子, c. Wuzi 武子, d. Guozi 國子. Xuan 10.18(C), 10.11; Cheng 2.4(C), 2.3, 15.3(C), 16.1(C), 16.10(C), 16.5, 17.6, 17.9, 18.3(C), 18.2. Guozi 國子. Xing (d. 635). Xi 25.1. Gurong, Liege of Qǐ. See Lord Huan of Qǐ. Han Buxin 韓不信. Jin. Han lineage head. Grandson of Han Qi. a. Boyin 伯音, b. Han Jianzi 韓簡子. Zhao 32.5(C), 32.3; Ding 1.1, 13.2. Han Chuan 韓穿. Jin. Han lineage. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 3.8, 8.1(C), 8.1. Han Da 罕達. Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Zichuo. a. Ziyao 子姚, b. Han 罕, c. Yao, d. Wu Zisheng 武子賸, e. Zisheng 子賸. Ding 15.6(C), 15.4; Ai 2.5(C), 2.3, 9.2, 12.6, 13.1(C), 13.1. Han Fu 韓服. Ba. Huan 9.2. Han Gu 韓固. Jin. Han lineage. Zhao 28.3. Han Hu 罕虎 (d. 529). Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Gongsun Shezhi. a. Zipi 子皮, b. Hu 虎. Xiang 29.7, 30.10, 30.12, 30.13, 31.7, 31.12; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 1.4, 1.9, 3.7, 5.5, 6.7, 7.10, 10.4, 11.8(C), 11.5, 13.3.

Personal Name Index 2075

Han Hu 翰胡. Cao. Zhao 21.6. Han Jian 韓簡. Jin. Han lineage. Grandson of Han Wan. Xi 15.4. Han Jue 韓厥. Jin. Han lineage head. a. Han Xianzi 韓獻子, b. Xianzi 獻子, c. Han 韓. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.3, 3.8, 3.9, 6.5, 6.11, 8.2, 8.6, 13.3, 15.3, 15.5, 16.5, 17.1, 17.10, 18.12; Xiang 1.3(C), 1.2, 4.1, 4.3, 7.6, 9.4. Han Qi 韓起 (d. 514). Jin. Han lineage head. Son of Han Jue. a. Han Xuanzi 韓宣子, b. Xuanzi 宣子, c. Hanzi 韓子, d. Qi. Xiang 7.6, 9.4, 9.5, 13.3, 18.3, 25.16, 26.13, 27.4, 29.13, 31.1; Zhao 2.1(C), 2.1, 2.3, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 3.7, 5.4, 6.4, 6.7, 7.7, 7.8, 7.10, 7.11, 7.15, 9.3, 11.8(C), 11.2, 11.5, 11.6, 13.2, 13.7, 13.9, 14.7, 16.3, 16.4, 17.4, 23.2, 28.3. Han Shuo 罕朔. Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Gongsun Chu. Also trainer of horses 馬師氏. Zhao 7.10. Han Tui 罕魋 (d. 535). Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Gongsun Shezhi. Zhao 7.10. Han Wan 韓萬. Jin. First person of the Han lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. Huan 3.1. Han Wuji 韓無忌. Jin. Han lineage. Son of Han Jue. a. Gongzu Muzi 公族穆子. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 7.6. Han Xiang 韓襄. Jin. Han lineage. Son of Han Wuji. Xiang 16.1; Zhao 5.4. Han Xu 韓須. Jin. Han lineage. Son of Han Qi. Zhao 2.2, 5.4. Han Yi 罕夷. Jin. Min 2.7. Han Zhuo 寒浞. Legendary figure of antiquity. a. Zhuo 浞. Xiang 4.7. He, Duke of Song. See Lord Mu of Song. He Zufu 和組父. Jin. Xiang 3.6. Head of Su 宿男. Su (R). Yin 8.4(C). Head of the Li Rong 驪戎男. Lirong. Zhuang 28.2. Heigong 黑肱. Zhu. Zhao 31.6(C), 31.5. Heir apparent Ban. See Lord Ling of Cai. Heir apparent Cheng. See Lord Ping of Song. Heir apparent Cuo 世子痤/ 大子痤. Song. Son of Lord Ping of Song. Xiang 26.6(C), 26.8. Heir apparent Dechen 東宮得臣. Qi. Son of Lord Xi of Qi. Yin 3.7. Heir apparent Ge 大子革. Zhu. Later Lord Huan of Zhu 邾桓公. Also Master of Zhu 邾子. Ai 8.5, 22.1. Heir apparent Guang. See Lord Zhuang of Qi. Heir apparent Ji 大子疾 (d. 478). Wei. Son of Kuaikui, Lord Zhuang of Wei. Also Ji 疾. Ai 16.7, 17.1, 17.3, 17.5, 25.1. Heir apparent Jian 大子建 (d. 522). Chu. Son of King Ping of Chu. a. Wangzi Jian 王子建, b. Zimu 子木, c. Jian of Chu. Zhao 19.2, 19.6, 20.2, 20.5, 23.7, 26.8, 27.6; Ai 16.5. Heir apparent Jiao 大子角 (d. 547). Wei. Son of Lord Shang of Wei. Xiang 26.2. Heir apparent Kuaikui. See Kuaikui. Heir apparent Kuan. See Lord Mu of Chen. Heir apparent Kunwan. See Lord Xi of Zheng. Heir apparent Lu 大子祿 (d. 529). Chu. Son of King Ling of Chu. Zhao 13.2.

2076

Personal Name Index

Heir apparent Luan. See Lord Jing of Song. Heir apparent Mian 大子免 (d. 707). Chen. Son of Lord Huan of Chen. Huan 5.1. Heir apparent of Wei. See Lord Zhuang of Wei. Heir apparent Pu 大子僕. Ju. Also Pu of Ju 莒僕. Wen 18.7. Heir apparent Shiying 大子適郢. Yue. Son of King Goujian. Ai 24.4. Heir apparent Wu 世子巫/大子巫. Zeng. Also heir apparent of Zeng 鄫大子. Xiang 5.3(C), 5.4. Heir apparent Xian 獻大子. Zhou. (Yang Bojun identifies him as royal heir apparent Shou, son of King Jing of Zhou.) Zhao 12.9. See Royal heir apparent Shou. Heir apparent Yanshi 世子偃師/大子偃師 (d. 534). Chen. Son of Lord Ai of Chen. Also the heir apparent Yanshi posthumously named Dao 悼大 子偃師, Dao, the heir apparent 悼大子. Xiang 25.5; Zhao 8.1(C), 8.2. Heir apparent Yi 大子夷. See Lord Ling of Zheng. Heir apparent Ying. See Lord Kang of Qin. Heir apparent You 世子有. Cai. Son of Lord Ling of Cai. a. Yin, the heir apparent 隱大子. Zhao 11.10(C), 11.8. Heir apparent You 大子友. Wu. Son of King Fucha. Ai 13.3. Heir apparent Yu. See Lord Huai of Jin. Heir apparent Yukou 大子御寇. Chen. Also Gongzi Yukou 公子御寇. Son of Lord Xuan of Chen. Zhuang 22.3(C), 22.1. Heir apparent Zang. See Lord Ding of Wei. Heir apparent Zhi 世子止/大子止. Xǔ. Son of Lord Dao of Xǔ. Zhao 19.2(C), 19.4. Heir apparent Zhonglei 大子終纍. Wu. Son of King Helu. Ding 6.4. Heir apparent Zhufan 大子諸樊. Wu. Son of King Zhouyu of Wu. Zhao 23.7. (The Wu ruler Zhufan, King Zhouyu’s uncle, died in Xiang 25.10. King Zhouyu should not have named his son Zhufan. In the parallel account in Shiji 31.1462, we have “Gongzi Guang” [later, the Wu ruler Helu] in place of “heir apparent Zhufan.”) Heir apparent Zifu. See Lord Xiang of Song. Heir apparent Zuo. See Lord Yuan of Song. Heiyao 黑要 (d. 584). Chu. Son of Xiang Elder. Cheng 2.6, 7.5. Helu. See Gongzi Guang. High officer Feng 逢大夫. Jin. Xuan 12.2. High officer of the right Yue 右大夫說. Qin. Cheng 2.8. High officer of the right Zhan 右大夫詹. Qin. Xiang 11.4. High officer of Yangshe 羊舌大夫. Jin. First person of the Yangshe lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. Min 2.7. High officer Xiang of Gan 甘大夫襄. Zhou. Zhao 9.3. High officer Zhong 大夫種. Yue. Ai 1.2. Hong 弘. Qin. Xi 15.4. Hong Liutui 鴻駵魋. Wei. Zhao 20.4.

Personal Name Index 2077

Hou Chengshu 厚成叔. Lu. Hou lineage. a. Housun 厚孫. Xiang 14.4. (Gu Donggao identifies him as Hou Chengzi 郈成子 of the Hou 郈 lineage.) Hou Fan 侯犯. Lu. a. Fan 犯. Ding 10.5. Hou Jin 侯晉. Zheng. Xiang 10.9. Hou Nou 侯獳. Cao. Xi 28.12. Hou Nou 侯獳. Zheng. Cheng 17.1. Hou Shuxia 侯叔夏. Lu. Wen 11.5. Hou Xuanduo 侯宣多. Zheng. Xi 24.6, 30.3; Wen 17.4; Xuan 3.6. Hou Yu 侯羽. Zheng. Cheng 7.4. Hou Zhao 侯朝. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Hou Zhaobo 郈昭伯 (d. 517). Lu. Hou lineage. a. Housun 郈孫. Zhao 25.6. Houzang 后臧. Chu. Ding 5.5. Hu Fu 狐父. Jin. Zhao 11.5. Hu Ji Ji 狐季姬. Rong/Jin (W). Consort of Lord Xian of Jin. Mother of Lord Wen of Jin. According to Guoyu, she is the daughter of Hu Tu. Also Hu Ji of the Greater Rong 大戎狐姬. Zhuang 28.2; Zhao 13.2. Hu Ji of the Greater Rong. See Hu Ji Ji. Hu Ji 胡姬 (d. 487). Hu/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Jing of Qi. Ai 6.6, 8.4. Hu Juju 狐鞫居 (d. 621). Jin. Hu lineage. a. Xu Jianbo 續簡伯 , b. Xu Juju 續鞫居. Wen 2.1, 6.6, 6.8. Hu Lord 胡公. Chen (R). Ancestral ruler of Chen. Also the Hu Lord Buyin 胡公不淫. Xiang 25.10; Zhao 3.3. Hu Mao 狐毛. Jin. Hu lineage. Son of Hu Tu. a. Mao 毛. Xi 23.4, 27.4, 28.3. Hu Tu 狐突 (d. 637). Jin. First person of the Hu lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. According to Guoyu, he is the maternal grandfather of Chong’er. Min 2.7; Xi 10.3, 23.4. Hu Yan 狐偃. Jin. Hu lineage. Son of Hu Tu and younger brother of Hu Mao. a. Zifan 子犯. Xi 23.4, 23.6, 24.1, 25.2, 27.4, 28.3, 29.2, 30.3; Wen 8.7; Xuan 12.2; Zhao 13.2. Hu Yigu 狐射姑. Jin. Hu lineage. a. Jia Ji 賈季. Wen 6.8(C), 6.1, 6.5, 6.6, 6.8, 7.5, 13.2. Hu Zhen 狐溱. Jin. Hu lineage. Son of Hu Mao. Xi 25.4. Hua Bao 華豹. Song. Hua lineage. a. Bao 豹. Zhao 21.6. Hua Chen 華臣. Song. Hua lineage. Son of Hua Yuan. a. Chen 臣. Xiang 9.1, 17.6(C), 17.5. Hua Chu 華貙. Song. Hua lineage. Son of Hua Feisui. a. Chu 貙, b. Zipi 子皮. Zhao 21.4, 21.6, 22.2. Hua Deng 華登. Song. Hua lineage. Son of Hua Feisui. a. Deng 登. Zhao 20.5, 21.4, 21.6, 22.2. Hua Ding 華定. Song. Hua lineage. Grandson of Hua Jiao. a. supervisor of conscripts in Song 宋司徒. Xiang 29.5(C), 29.9; Zhao 10.4, 12.3(C), 12.3, 20.4(C), 21.3(C), 21.3, 22.2(C), 22.2. Hua Duoliao 華多僚 (d. 521). Song. Hua lineage. a. Duoliao 多僚. Zhao 21.4. Hua Feisui 華費遂. Song. Hua lineage. Zhao 4.4, 20.5, 21.4.

2078

Personal Name Index

Hua Gaobi 華臯比. Song. Hua lineage. Son of Hua Yue. a. Gaobi 皐比. Xiang 17.5. Hua Hai 華亥. Song. Hua lineage. Younger brother of Hua Hebi. Zhao 6.5, 9.1, 11.8(C), 20.4(C), 20.3, 20.5, 21.3(C), 21.6, 22.2(C), 22.2. Hua Hebi 華合比. Song. Hua lineage. Also Hebi 合比. Zhao 6.5(C), 6.5. Hua Jiao 華椒. Song. Hua lineage. Xuan 12.6, 12.7. Hua Keng 華牼. Song. Hua lineage. Half brother of Hua Hebi and Hua Hai. a. Keng 牼. Zhao 20.5, 21.4. Hua Luo 滑羅. Wei. a. Luo 羅. Ding 12.1. Hua Mian 華免. Qi. Cheng 18.2. Hua Ou 華耦. Song. Hua lineage. Great-grandson of Huafu Du. a. Zibo 子伯. Also Huasun 華孫. Wen 9.6, 15.2(C), 15.2, 16.5, 18.8; Xuan 3.5. Hua Qi 華啟. Son of Hua Ding. Wei. Zhao 20.4. Hua Ruo 華弱. Song. Hua lineage. Grandson of Hua Jiao. Xiang 6.2(C), 6.2. Hua, the Master of Zhu. See Lord Dao of Zhu. Hua Tou 華妵. Song. Hua lineage. Zhao 21.6. Hua Wu 華吴 (d. 556). Song. Hua lineage. a. Wu 吴. Xiang 17.5. Hua Wuqi. See Wuqi. Hua Xi 華喜. Song. Hua lineage. Great-great-grandson of Huafu Du. Cheng 15.4, 18.8. Hua Yin 華寅. Wei. a. Yin 寅. Zhao 20.4. Hua Yuan 華元. Song. Hua lineage head. Wen 16.5; Xuan 2.1(C), 2.1, 14.3, 15.2; Cheng 2.4, 2.8, 4.1(C), 4.1, 5.2, 5.6, 8.4(C), 8.4, 11.8, 12.2, 15.8(C), 15.9(C), 15.12(C), 15.4, 16.8(C), 18.12; Xiang 1.2(C), 2.6(C), 2.9(C). Hua Yue 華閱 (d. 556). Song. Hua lineage head. Son of Hua Yuan. Xiang 9.1, 14.7(C), 14.3, 17.5. Hua Yushi 華御事. Song. Hua lineage. Father of Hua Yuan. Wen 7.3, 10.5. Hua Zhong 華周. Wei. Xi 28.5. Hua Zhou 華周. Qi. a. Hua Xuan 華還. Xiang 23.7. Hua Zi of Song 宋華子. Song/Qi (W). Daughter of the Hua lineage of Song. Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. Xi 17.5. Huafu Du 華父督 (d. 682). Song. First person of the Hua lineage of Song ­mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Song Du 宋督. b. Du 督. Also grand steward Du 大宰督. Huan 1.5, 2.1(C), 2.1; Zhuang 12.1. Huai Ying 懷嬴. Qin/Jin (W). Daughter of Lord Mu of Qin. Wife of Lord Huai of Jin. Later, wife of Lord Wen of Jin. a. Chen Ying 辰嬴. Also Lady Ying 嬴氏. Xi 22.5, 23.6; Wen 6.5. Huan, Prince of Jin. Lord Xiang of Jin. Huan, Prince of Qi. Lord Ling of Qi. Huan Tiao 桓跳. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Huang Bo. See Bo 伯. Huang Chen 皇辰. Zheng. Cheng 18.5. Huang Er 皇耳. Zheng. Xiang 10.5 Huang Feiwo 皇非我. Song. Huang lineage. Son of Huang Ye and Qi Si. a. Feiwo 非我. Ai 17.7, 26.2.

Personal Name Index 2079

Huang Guofu 皇國父. Song. Huang lineage. Xiang 17.6. Huang Huai 皇懷. Song. Huang lineage. Ai 26.2. Huang Huan 皇緩. Song. Huang lineage. Ai 18.1, 26.2. Huang Jie 皇頡. Zheng. Xiang 26.6. Huang Wuzi 皇武子. Zheng. Xi 24.4, 33.1. Huang Xu 皇戌. Zheng. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.6, 3.1, 4.5, 5.5. Huang Yanshang 皇奄傷. Song. Huang lineage. Zhao 22.2. Huang Ye 皇野. Song. Huang lineage a. Zizhong 子仲, b. supervisor of the military 司馬. Ai 14.4, 17.7. Huang Yi 黃夷. Wei. Min 2.5. Huang Yuan 皇瑗 (d. 477). Song. Huang lineage. Ai 7.1(C), 9.2(C), 9.2, 12.4(C), 12.4, 17.7, 18.1. Huang Yuan 黃淵 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 21.5. Huang Yun 皇鄖. Sond. Huang lineage. Xiang 9.1, 9.5. Huangfu Chongshi 皇父充石. Song. Son of Lord Dai of Song. First person of the Huang lineage of Song mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also Huangfu 皇父. Wen 11.5. Hui 會. Lu. Ran Meng’s older brother. Ding 8.1. Hui 虺. Souman (Chang Di). Xiang 30.3. Hui 虺. Lu. Shusun lineage. Son of Shusun Dechen. Xiang 30.3. Huishu 惠叔. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Son of Meng Mubo and Sheng Ji. a. Nan 難. Wen 1.1, 7.7, 14.11, 15.4. Hui, Prince of Wei. See Lord Wen of Wei. Hun 溷. Song. Yue lineage. Son of Yue Qili. Also Yue Hun. a. Ziming 子明. Ding 6.6, 8.3, 9.1. Hun Liangfu 渾良夫 (d. 478). Wei. a. Liangfu 良夫. Ai 15.5, 16.7, 17.1, 17.5. Hundun 渾敦. Mythological figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Invocator Gu. 祝固. Qi. Zhao 20.6. Invocator Kuan 祝款. Zheng. Zhao 16.6. Invocator Tuo 祝佗. Wei. a. Ziyu 子魚. Ding 4.1. Invocator Tuofu 祝佗父 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Invocator Wa 祝鼃. Wei. Zhao 20.4. Invocator Xiang 祝襄. Song. Ai 26.2. Invocator Ying 祝應. Guo. Zhuang 32.3. Invocator-scribe Hui 祝史揮. Wei. a. Hui 揮. Ai 25.1. Ji 羈. Wei. Kong lineage. Son of Kong Chengzi. Zhao 7.15. Ji of Cao 曹羈. Cao. Zhuang 24.9(C). Ji Daozi 季悼子. Lu. Jisun lineage head. Son of Ji Wuzi. a. Daozi 悼子, b. He 紇. Xiang 23.5; Zhao 12.10. Ji Fanghou 季魴侯. Lu. Jisun lineage. Lover of Ji Ji. Ai 8.3. Ji Gonghai 季公亥. Lu. Jisun lineage. a. Ji Gongruo 季公若, b. Gongruo 公若. Zhao 25.2, 25.6.

2080

Personal Name Index

Ji Gongniao 季公鳥. Lu. Jisun lineage. a. Gongniao 公鳥. Zhao 25.6. Ji Huanzi 季桓子 (d. 492). Lu. Jisun lineage head. Son of Ji Pingzi. a. Jisun Si 季孫斯, b. Huanzi 桓子, c. Jisun 季孫, d. Ji 季. Ding 5.4, 5.6, 6.4(C), 6.2, 6.7(C), 6.3, 7.5, 8.13(C), 8.10, 9.3, 12.5(C); Ai 2.1(C), 3.4(C), 3.6(C), 3.2, 3.4. Ji Ji 季姬. Lu/Qi (W). Younger sister of Ji Kangzi. Wife of Lord Dao of Qi. Lover of Ji Fanghou. Ai 8.3, 8.6, 8.7. Ji Ji 紀季. Ji. Zhuang 3.4(C), 3.3, 4.2. Ji Ji of Zeng 鄫季姬. Lu/Zeng. Also Ji Ji 季姬. Xi 14.2(C), 14.2, 16.3(C). Ji Jiang of Ji 紀季姜. (W) Ji/Zhou. Wife of King Huan of Zhou. Huan 9.1(C), 9.1. Ji Kangzi 季康子 (d. 468). Lu. Jisun lineage head. Son of Ji Huanzi. a. Fei 肥, b. Kangzi 康子, c. Jisun 季孫, d. Zijisun 子季孫, e. Ji shi 季氏. Ai 3.4, 6.6, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 8.3, 11.1, 11.5, 11.7, 12.2, 12.5, 14.2, 14.5, 23.1, 23.2, 24.4, 25.2, 27.1, 27.2. Ji Liang 季梁. Sui. Huan 6.2, 8.2. Ji Liexu 紀裂繻. Ji. a. Ji Zibo 紀子帛. Yin 2.5(C), 2.7(C), 2.5, 2.6. Ji Pingzi 季平子 (d. 505). Lu. Jisun lineage head. Son of Ji Daozi. a. Jisun Yiru 季孫意如, b. Jisun 季孫, c. Pingzi 平子, d. Yiru 意如. Zhao 9.7, 10.3(C), 10.3, 11.8(C), 12.10, 13.6(C), 13.1, 13.3, 13.9, 14.1(C), 14.1, 14.7, 16.6(C), 16.4, 16.7, 16.8, 17.1, 17.2, 21.3, 25.2, 25.6, 25.10, 26.4, 27.4, 29.3, 31.2(C), 31.2; Ding 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 5.4(C), 5.4. Ji Qin 籍秦. Jin. Ji lineage. Zhao 27.8; Ding 1.3, 7.6, 13.2, 14.9. Ji Ran 季然. Chu. Zhao 25.11. Ji Si 季姒. Qi/Lu (W). Daughter of Bao Wenzi. Wife of Ji Gongniao. Zhao 25.6. Ji Tan 籍談. Jin. Ji lineage. a. Jifu 籍父. Also Younger Uncle 叔氏 Zhao 5.4, 15.7, 22.5. Ji Wei 季隗. Di/Jin (W). Wife of Lord Wen of Jin. Xi 23.6, 24.1; Wen 6.5. Ji Wenzi 季文子 (d. 568). Lu. Jisun lineage head. Grandson of Gongzi You (Ji You). a. Jisun Hangfu 季孫行父, b. Jisun 季孫, c. Hangfu 行父, d. Wenzi 文子. Wen 6.2(C), 6.3(C), 6.2, 6.4, 12.8(C), 13.5, 15.1(C), 15.1, 15.9(C), 15.4, 15.8, 15.11, 16.1(C), 16.1, 18.8(C), 18.7; Xuan 1.4(C), 1.3, 10.16(C), 10.9, 18.5; Cheng 2.3(C), 2.3, 4.3, 4.4, 6.10(C), 6.2, 6.10, 7.1, 8.1, 8.10, 9.5(C), 9.2, 9.5, 11.3(C), 11.4, 16.12(C), 16.14(C), 16.11, 18.13; Xiang 2.3, 4.4, 5.13(C), 5.10. Ji Wu 季寤. Lu. Jisun lineage. a. Ziyan 子言. Ding 8.10. Ji Wuzi 季武子 (d. 535). Lu. Jisun lineage head. Son of Ji Wenzi. a. Ji shi 季氏, b. Jisun Su 季孫宿, c. Wuzi 武子, d. Jisun 季孫. Xiang 6.7(C), 6.6, 7.5(C), 7.3, 7.5, 7.7, 8.4(C), 8.4, 8.8, 9.2(C), 9.2, 9.5, 9.7, 11.1, 12.2(C), 12.1, 14.1(C), 14.7(C), 14.1, 15.4(C), 15.4, 19.4(C), 19.3, 19.4, 20.9(C), 20.6, 21.2, 23.5, 27.4, 28.9, 29.4, 30.3, 31.1, 31.4; Zhao 1.2, 1.6, 2.5(C), 2.1, 2.5, 3.8, 4.2, 4.8, 5.1, 6.3(C), 6.4, 7.7(C), 7.5, 7.14, 13.9, 32.4; Ding 12.2. Ji Yan 籍偃. Jin. Ji lineage. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 21.5. Ji Yi 箕遺. Jin (d. 552). Xiang 21.5. (Not the same person as the “Ji Yi” below.) Ji Yi 箕遺. Jin. Zhao 22.5. Ji Zhengfu 箕鄭父 (d. 618). Jin. a. Ji Zheng 箕鄭. Wen 7.4, 8.7, 9.6(C), 9.4. Ji Zibo. See Ji Liexu.

Personal Name Index 2081

Jia 甲. Lu. Jisun lineage. This may be a placeholder rather than a personal name. Zhao 25.6. Jia Hua 賈華. Jin. Also leader of the right file, Jia Hua 右行賈華. Xi 6.1, 10.3. Jia Ju 賈舉. Qi. Retainer of Cui Zhu. Xiang 25.2. Jia Ju 賈舉 (d. 548). Qi. Attendant of Lord Zhuang of Qi. Xiang 25.2. (These eponymous persons named Jia Ju are two different men.) Jia, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Jian of Zheng. Jia, Master of Shěn 沈子嘉. Shěn. Ding 4.3(C). Jia of Yan 閻嘉. Jin. Zhao 9.3. Jia, Rong Man Master 戎蠻子嘉 (R, d. 526). Rong Man. Also Rong Man ­Master 戎蠻子, Man Master 蠻子. Zhao 16.2(C), 16.2. Jia Tuo. See Grand preceptor Jia Tuo. Jia Xin 賈辛. Jin. a. Xin 辛. Cheng 18.3; Zhao 22.5, 28.3. Jia Yin 賈寅. Qi. Xiang 31.2. Jia Zhang 郟張. Zheng. Ai 9.2 Jiafu 嘉父. Jin. Yin 6.2. Jiafu 嘉父 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 21.5. Jiafu 家父. Zhou. Huan 8.2(C), 15.1(C), 15.1. Jiafu, Master of Wuzhong 無終子嘉父. Wuzhong (Rong) (R). Xiang 4.7. Jian, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Xiang of Zheng. Jian Shifu 簡師父. Zhou. Xi 24.5. Jian Shu 蹇叔. Qin. Xi 32.3, 33.3. Jianbi 簡璧. Qin (W). Daughter of Lord Mu of Qin and Mu Ji. Xi 15.4. Jiang Li 匠麗. Jin. Cheng 17.10. Jiang Mi 江羋. Chu/Jiang (W). Younger sister of King Cheng of Chu. (She is identified as the consort of King Cheng in Shiji.) Wen 1.7. Jiang Yue 江說. Qi. Ai 6.5. Jiangchu 將鉏. Song. Yue lineage. Cheng 16.3. Jianru 簡如. Souman (Chang Di). Wen 11.5. Jiao 角 (d. 632). Wei. Son of Yuan Xuan. Xi 28.5. Jiao 椒. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ai 1.2. Jiao Ming 椒鳴. Chu. Wu lineage. Son of Wu Ju. Xiang 26.10. Jiapu Tu 家僕徒. Jin. Xi 15.4. Jiawu of Cai 蔡甲午. Cai (R). Also the prince of Cai 蔡侯. Ding 4.1. Jibo 箕伯. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 3.3. Jichu, Master of Shěn 沈子揖初. Shěn. Cheng 8.2. Jie. See King Jie of Xia. Jie, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Wen of Zheng. Jie, Master of Teng. See Lord Qing of Teng. Jie Zhitui 介之推. Jin. Xi 24.1. Jiezi 捷葘. Zhu. Wen 14.7(C), 14.4, 14.8. Jifu, the Guo Duke 虢公忌父. Xiguo. a. Guo Duke 虢公. Yin 3.3, 5.5, 8.3. Jilan 季蘭. (W) Xiang 28.12. Jili 季貍. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of the Gaoxin lineage. Wen 18.7. Jin 晉. Qi. Son of Yan Zhuoju. Ai 27.3.

2082

Personal Name Index

Jin Chen 晉陳 (d. 515). Chu. Zhao 27.3. Jin Ji 晉姬. Zhu (W). Consort of Lord Wen of Zhu. Wen 14.4. Jin, Prince of Wei. See Lord Xuan of Wei. Jing 景. Zhou. Gan lineage. Gan Duke Jing 甘景公. Zhao 12.9. Jing Bo 井伯. Yu. Xi 5.8. Jing Cao of Song 宋景曹 (d. 472). Zhu/Song (W). Also wife of Lord Yuan of Song 宋元夫人, Lady Cao 曹氏. Zhao 25.2; Ai 23.1. Jing Gui 敬歸. Hu/Lu (W). Consort of Lord Xiang of Lu. Xiang 31.3, 31.4. Jing Si 敬姒. Wei (W). Consort of Lord Ding of Wei. Mother of Lord Xian of Wei. Cheng 14.5; Xiang 26.2. Jing Ying 敬嬴. Lu (W). Consort of Lord Wen of Lu. Mother of Lord Xuan of Lu. Also the lord’s wife, Lady Ying 夫人嬴氏. Wen 18.4; Xuan 8.4(C), 8.8(C), 8.5. Jingzhong 敬仲. Chen/Qi. Ancestor of the Chen lineage in Qi. a. Gongzi Wan 公子完. Zhuang 22.1. Jiqiu Zichu 籍丘子鉏. Qi. Also Zichu 子鉏. Ding 8.1. Jituo 季佗. Ju. Wen 18.7. Jiu Ren 臼任. Song. Zhao 21.4. Jixiang 箕襄. Jin. Han 韓 lineage. Zhao 5.4. Jizha 季札. Wu. Son of King Shoumeng of Wu. a. Gongzi Zha 公子札, b. Jizi 季子. Xiang 14.2, 29.8(C), 29.13, 31.9; Zhao 27.2. Jizhong 季仲. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of the Gaoxin lineage. Wen 18.7. Jizi 箕子. Minister in the court of the last Shang king. Xi 15.8. Jizi 急子 (d. 696). Son of Lord Xiang of Wei and Yi Jiang. Wei. Huan 16.5. Jizi of Yan and Zhoulai 延州來季子: Probably the son or the grandson of Jizha. Ai 10.6. Ju Bing 具丙. Jin. Xiang 18.3. Ju Heng 莒恆. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Ju Qi 莒期. Ju (R). Also Master of Ju 莒子, Lord Zi Pei of Ju 莒茲㔻公. Xi 26.1(C), 26.1, 28.8(C), 28.15(C). Juan Zishi 鄄子士. Wei. Ai 25.1. Jueju, Master of Zhu. See Lord Ding. Jun 麇. Song. Huang lineage. Ai 17.7. Jun, Master of Chu 楚子麇. Chu (R, r. 544–541). Son of King Kang of Chu. Also Jia’ao 郟敖, Jun 麇. Xiang 29.3, 30.1(C), 30.1; Zhao 1.10(C), 1.13, 1.14. Juyao 且姚 (d. 483). Wu. Ai 12.4. Juzhi, Master of the Rong 戎子駒支. Jiang Rong. Also Master of the Jiang Rong lineage 姜戎氏. Xiang 14.1. Kan, Prince of Wei. See Lord Xian of Wei. Kan Zhi 闞止 (d. 481). Qi. Some commentators identify him as Zaiyu, the disciple of Confucius. a. Ziwo 子我. Ai 6.6, 14.3. Kang Shu of Wei 衛康叔. Wei (R). Younger brother of King Wu of Zhou.

Personal Name Index 2083

Ancestral ruler of Wei. Also Kang Shu 康叔. Xi 31.5; Xiang 29.13; Zhao 7.15, 8.5; Ding 4.1, 6.2; Ai 2.3. Kaofu, Prince of Cai. See Lord Xuan of Cai. Ke, Master of Zhu 邾子克. Zhu (R). Also Zhu Yifu 邾儀父, Yifu 儀父, Master of Zhu 邾子. Yin 1.2(C), 1.2, 1.11; Huan 17.2(C), 17.2; Zhuang 16.5(C). Kehuang 克黃. Chu. Dou lineage head, Dou Gouwutu’s grandson. Also ­deputy for remonstrance Kehuang 箴尹克黃. Xuan 4.3. Keng lineage 阬氏. Lu. Ai 14.4. Keng, Master of Zhu. See Lord Xuan of Zhu. King Cheng 成王. Zhou (R). King Cheng of Zhou 周成王. Early Zhou king. Son of King Wu of Zhou. Also Cheng 成. Xi 26.3, 31.5; Xuan 3.3, Zhao 1.12, 4.3, 9.3, 15.7, 26.9, 32.3; Ding 4.1. King Cheng 成王. Chu (R, r. 672–626). King Cheng of Chu 楚成王. Son of King Wen of Chu. Also Master of Chu 楚子, King of Chu 楚王, Cheng 成, Jun 頵. Zhuang 14.3; Wen 1.10(C), l.7, 10.3; Cheng 13.3; Zhao 4.4, 27.6. King Ding 定王. Zhou (R, r. 606–586). King Ding of Zhou 周定王. Son of King Kuang of Zhou. Xuan 3.3, 6.2, 16.4; Cheng 5.8; Zhao 26.9. King Fucha. See Fucha. King Fugai 夫槩王. Wu (R). King Helu’s younger brother. Ding 4.3, 5.5. King Gong of Chu 楚共王. Chu (R, r. 590–560). Son of King Zhuang of Chu. Also Shen, Master of Chu 楚子審, King Gong 共王, Master of Chu 楚子, King of Chu 楚王, Gong 共. Cheng 2.6, 7.5, 9.14, 12.4, 15.6(C), 15.3, 16.6(C), 16.1, 16.5, 18.5(C), 18.5; Xiang 2.5, 5.7, 9.6(C), 9.4, 9.8, 11.7(C), 11.4, 13.3(C), 13.4; Zhao 1.1, 1.13, 4.4, 7.3, 13.2. King Helu. See Gongzi Guang. King Huan 桓王. Zhou (R, r. 719–697). King Huan of Zhou 周桓王. Grandson of King Ping of Zhou. Yin 6.7, 11.5; Huan 18.3; Zhuang 3.3(C), 3.2; Xiang 25.10. King Hui 惠王. Chu (R, r. 489–432). King Hui of Chu 楚惠王. Son of King Zhao of Chu. Also Master of Chu 楚子, Zhang 章. Ai 6.4, 16.5, 17.4, 18.2. King Hui 惠王. Zhou (R, r. 676–653). King Hui of Zhou 周惠王. Son of King Xi of Zhou 周僖王. Zhuang 16.6, 19.2. 32.3; Xi 7.5, 24.2; Cheng 11.5; Zhao 26.9. King Jian 簡王. Zhou (R, r. 585–572). King Jian of Zhou 周簡王. Son of King Ding of Zhou. Xiang 2.1(C). King Jie of Xia 夏桀. Legendary ruler of antiquity. Last king of Xia dynasty. Also Jie 桀. Zhuang 11.2; Xuan 3.3; Zhao 4.3, 11.2. King Jìng 敬王. Zhou (R, r. 519–476). King Jìng of Zhou 周敬王. Son of King Jing of Zhou. Also Eastern King 東王. Zhao 22.5, 23.6; Ai 19.3. King Jing 景王. Zhou (R, r. 544–520). King Jing of Zhou 周景王. Son of King Ling of Zhou. Also Jing 景. Zhao 11.2, 22.5(C), 22.3, 22.5, 26.9. King Kang 康王. Zhou (R). King Kang of Zhou 周康王. Son of King Cheng of Zhou. Also Kang 康, King Kang of Zhou 周康王. Zhao 4.3, 9.3, 12.11, 26.9; Ding 4.1. King Kang of Chu 楚康王. Chu (R, r. 559–545). Son of King Gong of Chu. Also

2084

Personal Name Index

Zhao, Master of Chu 楚子昭, King Kang 康王, Master of Chu 楚子, King of Chu 楚王. Xiang 14.7, 18.4, 21.4, 24.3(C), 24.9(C), 24.4, 24.5, 24.8, 24.9, 25.5, 25.13, 26.9(C), 26.6, 26.11, 27.4, 28.9(C), 28.8, 28.12, 29.3; Zhao 13.2, 20.6. King Kuang 匡王. Zhou (R, r. 612–607). King Kuang of Zhou 周匡王. Son of King Qing of Zhou. Xuan 3.2(C). King Li 厲王. Zhou (R, r. ca. 857–842). King Li of Zhou 周厲王. Son of King Yi of Zhou 周夷王. Also Li 厲. Xi 24.2. Xuan 12.1. Wen 2.5; Zhao 26.9. King Ling 靈王. Zhou (R, r. 571–545). King Ling of Zhou 周靈王. Son of King Jian of Zhou. Also King of Zhou 周王, Ling 靈, Ziwang 頿王. Xiang 5.2, 10.12, 12.5, 14.8, 19.7, 21.5, 26.13, 28.8(C), 28.8, 28.10, 28.14, 29.5, 30.6; Zhao 26.9, 30.2. King Ling of Chu 楚靈王. Chu (R, r. 540–529). Son of King Gong of Chu. Also Qian, Master of Chu 楚子虔, Master of Chu 楚子, King of Chu 楚王, King Ling 靈王 Gongzi Wei 公子圍, a. Wangzi Wei 王子圍, chief minister Wei 令尹圍, chief minister 令尹, Wei 圍, Qian 虔. Xiang 26.6, 30.11, 31.13; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 1.3, 1.13, 1.14, 3.1, 3.7, 3.12, 4.2(C), 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 5.8(C), 5.2, 5.4, 5.8, 6.9, 7.2, 7.3, 7.6, 8.6, 9.1(C), 9.1, 11.3(C), 11.2, 11.5, 11.8, 11.10, 12.9(C), 12.5, 12.11, 13.2, 13.5, 21.7, 30.2. King Meng 王猛. Zhou (R, r. 520). Son of King Jing of Zhou. Also Wangzi Meng 王子猛, King Dao 悼王. Zhao 22.7(C), 22.8(C), 22.9(C), 22.5. King Mu 穆王. Chu (R, r. 625–614). King Mu of Chu 楚穆王. Son of King Cheng of Chu. Also Master of Chu 楚子, heir apparent Shangchen 世子商臣/ 大子 商臣, Shangchen 商臣. Xi 33.10; Wen 1.10(C), 1.7, 10.3. King Mu 穆王. Zhou (R). King Mu of Zhou 周穆王. Son of King Zhao of Zhou. Also Mu. Zhao 4.3, 12.11. King Ping of Chu. See Gongzi Qiji. King Ping of Zhou 平王. Zhou (R, r. 770–720). King Ping of Zhou 周平王. Son of King You of Zhou. Also Ping 平. Yin 3.1, 3.3; Xi 22.4, 24.2; Xuan 12.2; Xiang 10.12, 25.10. King Qi of the Xia 夏啟. Son of legendary ruler Yu 禹. First ruler of the Xia dynasty. Zhao 4.3. King Qing of Zhou 周頃王. Zhou (R, r. 618–613). Son of King Xiang of Zhou. Also King Qing 頃王. Wen 10.4, 14.1. King Wen of Chu 楚文王. Chu (R, r. 689–675). Son of King Wu of Chu. Also Master of Chu 楚子, King Wen 文王. Zhuang 6.3, 10.3, 14.3, 18.5, 19.1; Xi 7.2; Xuan 4.3; Zhao 7.2; Ai 17.4. King Wen of Zhou 周文王. Zhou (R). Also King Wen 文王, Wen 文. Xi 5.8, 9.6, 19.5, 32.3; Xuan 11.4, 15.6; Cheng 2.6, 2.8; Xiang 4.1, 4.3, 13.3, 29.13, 30.12, 31.13; Zhao 4.1, 6.3, 7.2, 26.10, 28.3; Ai 2.3, 17.4. King Wu 武王. Zhou (R). King Wu of Zhou 周武王. Son of King Wen of Zhou. The founder of the Zhou dynasty. Also Wu 武, King Wu of Zhou 武. Huan 2.2; Xi 6.4, 9.2, 24.2, 28.12; Wen 2.5; Xuan 12.2; Xiang 28.11; Zhao 1.12, 4.3, 7.2, 7.15, 9.3, 15.7, 26.9, 28.3; Ding 4.1. King Wu of Chu 楚武王. Chu (R, r. 741–690). Son of Fenmao. Also Master of Chu 楚子, King Wu 武王. Huan 6.2, 8.2, 9.2, 13.1; Zhuang 4.1, 18.5.

Personal Name Index 2085

King Xiang 襄王. Zhou (R, r. 652–619). King Xiang of Zhou 周襄王. Son of King Hui of Zhou. Also royal heir apparent Zheng 王大子鄭, royal heir apparent 王世子, Xiang 襄. Xi 5.4(C), 5.4, 7.5, 8.1, 24.2, 27.4; Wen 8.3, 8.6, 9.3(C), 9.3; Cheng 11.7; Xiang 8.8; Zhao 7.13, 15.7. King Xuan 宣王. Zhou (R, r. 827–782). King Xuan of Zhou 周宣王. Son of King Li of Zhou. Also Xuan 宣. Xi 24.2; Xuan 12.1; Zhao 26.9. King Yi 夷王. Zhou (R). King Yi of Zhou 周夷王. Son of King Yì of Zhou 周懿王. Zhao 26.9. King You of Zhou 周幽王. Zhou (R, r. 781–771). Also King You 幽王. Zhao 4.3, 26.9. King Zhao 昭王. Zhou (R). King Zhao of Zhou 周昭王. Son of King Kang of Zhou. Xi 4.1. King Zhao of Chu 楚昭王. Chu (R, r. 515–489). Son of King Ping of Chu. Also Zhen, Master of Chu 楚子軫, King Zhao 昭王, Master of Chu 楚子, heir apparent Ren 大子壬. Zhao 26.8, 30.3; Ding 3.4, 4.3, 5.7, 15.3(C); Ai 1.2(C), 1.1, 6.6(C), 6.2, 6.4. King Zhuang 莊王. Zhou (R, r. 697–682). King Zhuang of Zhou 周莊王. Son of King Huan of Zhou. Huan 18.3; Zhuang 19.2. King Zhuang of Chu 楚莊王. Chu (R, 613–592). Son of King Mu of Chu. Also Lü, Master of Chu 楚子, Master of Chu, King Zhuang 莊王. Wen 14.1, 16.4; Xuan 1.10(C), 1.8, 3.3(C), 3.3, 4.7(C), 4.3, 4.4, 5.5, 8.3, 9.12(C), 9.7, 9.12, 10.20(C), 10.12, 11.2(C), 11.6(C), 11.1, 11.5, 12.2(C), 12.3(C), 12.5(C), 12.1, 12.2, 12.6, 13.2(C), 13.2, 14.4(C), 14.3, 15.1(C), 15.1, 15.2, 18.5(C), 18.4; Cheng 2.6, 2.8. King’s concubine Yao 王姚. Zhou (W). Consort of King Zhuang of Zhou. Zhuang 19.2. Kong Chengzi 孔成子. Wei. Kong lineage head. Grandson of Kong Da. a. Kong Zhengchu 孔烝鉏, b. Chengzi 成子. Cheng 14.5; Xiang 19.13; Zhao 7.15. Kong Da 孔達 (d. 595). Wei. First person of the Kong lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Da 達. Wen 1.5, 2.4, 4.1, 9.6, 17.1; Xuan 12.7, 12.8, 13.5, 14.1(C), 14.1. Kong Huan 孔奐. Chen. Xiang 27.2(C), 27.4; Zhao 8.9(C). Kong Hui 孔虺. Qi. Xiang 31.2. Kong Jí 孔姞. Wei (W). Daughter of Kong Yu. Wife of Shishu Qi. Later, wife of Taishu Xizi. Ai 11.6. Kong Ji 孔姬. Wei (W). Younger sister of Kuaikui. Wife of Kong Yu. Mother of Kong Kui. a. Kong Bo Ji 孔伯姬, b. Bo Ji 伯姬, c. Bo Ji shi, 伯姬氏. Ai 15.5, 16.4. Kong Jiangchu 孔將鉏. Zheng. Xi 24.6; Xuan 3.6. Kong Kui 孔悝. Wei. Son of Kong Yu and Kong Ji. a. Kong Shu 孔叔, b. Kui 悝. Ai 15.5, 16.4. Kong Shu 孔叔. Zheng. Also Kong shi 孔氏. Xi 3.4, 5.6, 7.1, 7.3. Kong Shu 孔叔 (d. 619). Song. Grandson of Lord Xiang of Song. Wen 8.6. Kong Yingqi 孔嬰齊. Wei. Kong lineage. Min 2.5.

2086

Personal Name Index

Kong Yu 孔圉 (d. 480). Kong lineage head. Son of Ji (Kong Ji). Wei. a. Yu 圉, b. Kong Wenzi 孔文子, c. Wenzi 文子. Ding 4.12(C); Ai 1.5, 11.6, 15.5. Kong Zhang. 孔張. Zheng. Kong lineage. Zhao 16.3. Kongfu 孔父 (d. 710). Song. a. Kongfu Jia 孔父嘉. Yin 3.5; Huan 1.5, 2.1(C), 2.1. (Kongzi jiayu identifies him as Confucius’ ancestor.) Kongjia of Xia 有夏孔甲. Legendary ruler of the Xia dynasty. Also Kongjia 孔甲. Zhao 29.4. Kuai De 蒯得. Jin (d. 618). Wen 8.7, 9.4. Kuaikui 蒯聵. Wei (R, r. 480–478). Son of Lord Ling of Wei. Father of the Ousted Lord of Wei. Also heir apparent Kuaikui ­­ 大子蒯聵/世子蒯聵, Lord Zhuang of Wei 衛莊公. Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Zhuang 莊公, the Wei heir apparent 衛大子, heir apparent Kuaikui 大子蒯聵/世子 蒯聵. Ding 14.10(C), 14.8; Ai 2.4(C), 2.3, 11.6, 15.5, 16.1(C), 16.2, 16.4, 16.6, 16.7, 17.1, 17.5. Kuai of Zhu 邾快. Zhu. Zhao 27.7(C). Kuan, Prince of Chen. See Lord Mu of Chen. Kuang Jiao 狂狡. Song. Xuan 2.1. Kuang Quxu 匡句須. Qi. Cheng 17.6. Kun, Master of Hu 胡子髡. Hu (R). Master of Hu 胡子. Zhao 23.7(C), 23.5. Kuntun 髡屯. Zheng. Xi 33.9. Kunwan, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Xi of Zheng. Kunwu 昆吾. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 12.11, 18.1. Lady Feng. See Cheng Feng. Lady Gui 媯氏. Chen/Zheng. Wife of Gongzi Hu (Lord Zhao of Zheng). Also Gui 媯. Yin 8.4. Lady Ji 己氏. See Dai Ji. Lady Jia 賈君. Jia/Jin. Probably wife of Shensheng. Xi 15.4. Lady Jiang 姜氏 (d. 546). Qi. Wife of Lord of Tang. Later, Wife of Cui Zhu. a. Tang Jiang 棠姜. Also Jiang 姜, Dongguo Jiang 東郭姜. Xiang 25.2, 27.7. Lady Jiang. See Ai Jiang (Lord Zhuang’s wife); Ai Jiang (Lord Wen’s wife); Ding Jiang (Lord Ding’s wife). Lady Mi. See Wen Mi. Lady Min 后緡. (W). Legendary figure of antiquity. Mother of Shaokang. Ai 1.2. Lady Mu of Xuˇ 許穆夫人. Wei/Xǔ. Daughter of Lord Yi of Wei. Wife of Lord Mu of Xǔ. Min 2.5. Lady of Yu 鄅夫人. Yu. Zhao 18.4, 19.3. Lady Si. See Ding Si. Lady Wang Ji: see Wife of Lord Xiang of Song Lady Wei 隗氏. Di/Zhou. Queen of King Xiang of Zhou. Xi 24.2. Lady Wei 薳氏. Lu. Zhao 11.4. Lady Ying. See Jing Ying. Lady Ying. See Huai Ying.

Personal Name Index 2087

Lady Ying. See Wen Ying. Lady Yun 䢵夫人. Yun. Xuan 4.3. Lady Zi. See Zhong Zi. Lai Ju 萊駒. Jin. Xi 33.3; Wen 2.1. Laishu 萊書. Lu. Zhao 4.8. Laizhang 萊章. Qi. Ai 24.1. Lan, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Mu of Zheng. Lang Qushu 狼蘧疏. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Lang Shen 狼瞫 (d. 625). Jin. Wen 2.1. Lao Cheng 牢成. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Lao Zuo 老佐 (d. 573). Song. Cheng 15.4, 18.8. Laoyangzi 老陽子 (d. 530). Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Lei Hu 櫐虎. Jin. Xi 10.3. Li Gui 厲媯. Chen/Wei (W). Consort of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Yin 3.7. Li Ji 驪姬 (d. 651). Rong/Jin(W). Consort of Lord Xian of Jin. Mother of Xiqi. Also Ji 姬, Ji shi 姬氏. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6. Li Ke 里克 (d. 650). Jin. a. Li 里. Min 2.7; Xi 2.2, 8.2, 9.6(C), 9.4, 10.3(C), 10.5(C), 10.2, 10.3; Zhao 4.1. Li Kong 禮孔. Wei. Min 2.5. Li Lai of Ni 郳犁來. Ni/Xiaozhu (R). Also Master of Lesser Zhu 小邾子. Zhuang 5.3(C), 5.1; Xi 7.2(C). Li Xi 里析. Zheng. Zhao 18.3. Li Zhi 禮至. Wei. Xi 24.7, 25.1. Lian Cheng 連稱 (d. 685). Qi. Zhuang 8.3. Liang 良. Zheng. You lineage. Son of You Fan. Xiang 22.7. Liang Bing 梁丙. Jin. Zhao 3.1, 5.4, 9.3. Liang Hong 梁弘. Jin. Huan 3.1. Liang Hong 梁弘. Jin. Xi 33.3; Wen 2.1. (These two men called Liang Hong are separated by eighty-three years.) Liang the Elder 大良. Northern Rong. Huan 6.4. Liang the Younger 少良. Northern Rong. Huan 6.4. Liang Wu 梁五. Jin. Also Wu 五. Zhuang 28.2. Liang Xiao 良霄 (d. 543). Zheng. Liang lineage. Son of Zi’er (Gongsun Zhe). a. Boyou 伯有, b. Boyou shi 伯有氏. Xiang 11.10(C), 11.5, 13.7, 15.4, 18.4, 26.5(C), 26.7, 27.2(C), 27.4, 27.5, 28.12, 29.5, 29.17, 30.7(C), 30.2, 30.10, 30.13; Zhao 2.4, 7.9. Liang Yi’er 梁益耳 (d. 618). Jin. Wen 8.7, 9.1. Liang Ying 梁嬰 (d. 534). Qi. Zhao 8.5. Liang Ying 梁嬴 (W). Liang/Jin. Daughter of Liang Bo. Wife of Lord Hui of Jin. Xi 17.2. Liang Yingfu 梁嬰父. Jin. Ding 13.2, 14.2. Liang Youmi 梁由靡. Jin. Xi 8.2, 15.4. Liang Yuzi Yang 梁餘子養. Jin. Min 2.7. Liang Zhi 良止. Zheng. Liang lineage. Son of Liang Xiao. Zhao 7.9. Liang Zuo 良佐. Zheng. Yin 7.6.

2088

Personal Name Index

Liangqi Jing 梁其踁. Lu. Zhao 1.2, 24.2. Liangqiu Ju 梁丘據. Qi. a. Ju 據, b. Ziyou 子猶. Zhao 20.6, 20.8, 26.4; Ding 10.2. Liangzi 梁子. Lu. Zhuang 9.4. Liao 廖. Zhou. Xiang 30.6. Liao 僚 (d. 515). Wu (R, r. 526–515). King Liao of Wu 吳王僚. Also Master of Wu 吳子. Zhao 23.5, 27.3(C), 27.2. Liao An 僚安. Jin. Zhao 28.3. Liaozha 僚枏. Lu. Zhao 25.6. Liege Cheng of Qǐ. See Lord Dao of Qi. Liege Gai of Qǐ. See Lord Xiao of Qǐ. Liege Guo of Qǐ. See Lord Xi of Qǐ. Liege of Cheng 郕伯 (d. 615). Cheng (R). Also heir apparent Zhuru 大子朱儒. Cheng (R). Wen 11.6, 12.1(C) 12.1. Liege of Jia 賈伯. Jia (R). Huan 9.3. Liege of Liang 梁伯. Liang (R). Huan 9.3. Liege of Liang 梁伯. Liang (R). Xi 17.2, 18.5, 19.7; Zhao 23.9. This Liang ruler is separated from the one above by about sixty years. Liege of Qǐ 杞伯. Qǐ (R). Zhuang 27.6(C). Liege of Quwo. See Lord Wu of Jin. Liege Yuli of Qǐ. See Lord Ping of Qǐ. Liege Zhuang of Quwo 曲沃莊伯. Jin (R, r. 730–716). Also Zhuang 莊. Yin 5.2; Huan 2.8. Lin Buniu 林不狃 (d. 484). Lu. a. Buniu 不狃. Ai 11.1. Lin Chu 林楚. Lu. Ding 8.10. Lin Guan 鱗矔. Song. Lin lineage. Grandson of Lord Huan of Song. Wen 7.3, 16.5. Lin, Prince of Chen. See Lord Zhuang of Chen. Lin Yong 林雍. Lu. Zhao 26.4. Lin Zhu 鱗朱. Song. Lin lineage. Grandson of Lin Guan. Cheng 15.4, 18.5. Ling Buhuan 靈不緩. Song. Ling lineage. Ai 26.2. Ling Gufu 靈姑浮. Yue. Ding 14.5. Ling Zhe 靈輒. Jin. Xuan 2.3. Ling Zhi 泠至. Qin. Xi 10.3. Little concubine Nan 南孺子. Lu (W). Concubine of Ji Huanzi. Also the Nan woman 南氏. Ai 3.4. Liu Di 劉狄. See Liu Duke Wen. a. Bofen 伯蚠, b. Liu Fen 劉蚠 Liu Duke Ding 劉定公 (d. 531). Zhou. Liu lineage. Son of Liu Duke Kang. a. the Liu Master 劉子. Also Liu Xia 劉夏. Zhao 1.5, 12.9, 13.4(C), 13.3, 17.4, 22.3. Liu Duke Huan 劉桓公. Zhou. Son of Liu Duke Wen. a. the Liu Master 劉子. Ding 7.3, 7.6, 8.2. Liu Duke Kang 劉康公 (d. 544). Zhou. First person of the Liu lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. the Liu Master 劉子. Also Wang Jizi 王季子, a disputed identification. Xuan 10.13(C), 10.7, 15.7; Cheng 1.1, 11.5, 11.7, 13.2. Liu Duke Wen 劉文公 (d. 506). Zhou. Son of Liu Duke Xian. See also Liu Di.

Personal Name Index 2089

Also the Liu Master 劉子, Liu Juan 劉卷, Liu Fen 劉蚠, Bofen 伯蚠. Zhao 22.7(C), 22.8(C), 22.3, 22.5, 23.3, 23.6, 24.1, 26.7, 26.9, 32.3; Ding 4.2(C), 4.9(C), 4.13(C), 4.1; Ai 3.3. Liu Duke Xian 劉獻公. Zhou. Son of Liu Duke Ding. a. Zhi, Master of Liu, 劉子摯. Zhao 12.9, 13.4(C), 13.3, 17.4, 22.3. Liu Lei 劉累. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 29.4. Liu Nan 劉難. Jin. Xiang 18.3. Liu, Prince of Chen. See Lord Huai of Chen. Liu Tuo 劉佗 (d. 519). Zhou. Liu lineage. Zhao 23.3. Liu Yi 劉毅. Zhou. Liu lineage. Xiang 30.6. Lord Ai of Chen 陳哀公. Chen (R, r. 568–534). Son of Lord Cheng of Chen. Also Ni, Prince of Chen 陳侯溺, Prince of Chen 陳侯, Lord Ai 哀公. Xiang 5.7(C), 7.9(C), 7.10(C), 7.10, 20.6(C), 20.4, 23.6(C), 23.2, 24.9(C), 25.5, 26.9(C), 28.2, 28.12, 29.3; Zhao 4.2(C), 4.4(C), 5.8(C), 8.1(C), 8.2(C), 8.10(C), 8.2. Lord Ai of Qin 秦哀公. Qin (R, r. 536–501). Son of Lord Jing of Qin. Also Liege of Qin 秦伯. Ding 4.3, 9.6(C), 9.7(C). Lord Cheng 成公. Lu (R, r. 590–573). Lord Cheng of Lu 魯成公. Son of Lord Xuan of Lu. Also Prince of Lu 魯侯, Cheng 成. Xiang 7.9; Zhao 25.4; Cheng 16.6, 18.11(C), 18.15(C), 18.15; Zhao 7.3. Lord Cheng of Cao 曹成公. Cao (R, r. 577–555). Son of Lord Xuan of Cao. Also Liege Fuchu of Cao 曹伯負芻, Lord Cheng 成公. Liege of Cao 曹伯, ruler of Cao 曹君, Gongzi Fuchu 公子負芻, Fuchu 負芻. Cheng 13.5, 15.3(C), 15.1, 16.11(C), 16.10, 17.2(C), 17.8(C); Xiang 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.9(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.8(C), 11.4, 14.2, 16.2(C), 18.4(C), 18.5(C), 19.5(C). Lord Cheng of Chen 陳成公. Chen (R, r. 598–569). Son of Lord Ling of Chen. Also Wu, Prince of Chen 陳侯午, Lord Cheng 成公, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Xuan 11.2(C), 11.5; Xiang 3.6, 4.1(C), 4.4(C), 4.2, 25.10. Lord Cheng of Jin 晉成公. Jin (R, r. 606–600). Son of Lord Wen of Jin. Also Lord Cheng 成公, Heitun, Prince of Jin 晉侯黑臀, Gongzi Heitun 公子 黑臀. Xuan 2.3, 2.4, 3.2, 6.3, 7.5(C), 7.4, 9.7(C), 9.9(C), 9.4. Lord Cheng of Qǐ 杞成公. Qǐ (R, r. 654–637). Master of Qǐ 杞子. Xi 23.4(C), 23.5. Lord Cheng of Song 宋成公. Song (R, r. 636–620). Song of Lord Xiang of Song. Also Wangchen, Duke of Song 宋公王臣, Duke of Song 宋公, Wangchen of Song 宋王臣. Xi 24.4, 28.8(C), 28.15(C), 28.3; Wen 2.4(C), 7.4(C), 7.3; Ding 4.1. Lord Cheng of Tang 唐成公. Tang (R, reign ended 505). Also Prince of Tang 唐侯. Ding 3.4, 4.3. Lord Cheng of Teng 滕成公. Teng (R, r. 574–539). Succeeded Lord Wen of Teng. Also Yuan, Master of Teng 滕子原, Master of Teng 滕子. Xiang 5.7(C), 6.4(C), 6.3, 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 25.3(C), 27.4, 31.5(C), 31.5; Zhao 3.1(C), 3.3(C), 3.2, 3.5. Lord Cheng of Wei 衛成公. Wei (R, r. 634–603). (For some months in 632, Lord Cheng’s younger brother Zishi [Gongzi Xia] ruled in Wei.) Son of Lord Wen of Wei. Also Zheng, Prince of Wei 衛候鄭, Master of Wei 衛子, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Cheng 成公, Cheng 成公. Xi 25.7(C), 28.7(C), 28.11(C), 28.18(C), 28.1, 28.3, 28.5, 28.8, 30.3(C), 30.2, 31.5; Wen 1.5, 3.2, 4.6(C),

2090

Personal Name Index

4.2, 7.6, 13.6(C), 13.5, 14.4(C), 15.9; Xuan 1.10(C), 7.1(C), 7.5(C), 9.7(C), 9.10(C); Xiang 9.7, Ding 4.1, Ai, 26.3. Lord Cheng of Zheng 鄭成公. Zheng (R, r. 584–571). (For some months in 581, Gongzi Xu ruled in Zheng.) Son of Lord Xiang of Zheng. Also Gun, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯睔, Lord Cheng 成公, the Liege of Zheng 鄭伯. Cheng 7.2, 8.2, 9.2(C), 9.8(C), 9.4, 9.7, 9.12, 10.3, 10.5, 12.2, 13.3(C), 14.3, 15.3(C), 16.6(C), 16.5, 18.5(C), 18.5; Xiang 2.4(C), 2.5. Lord Dai 戴公. Wei (R, r. 660). Lord Dai of Wei 衛戴公. Cousin of Lord Yi of Wei. Min 2.5. Lord Dao 悼公. Wei (R, r. 469–65). Lord Dao of Wei 衛悼公. Son of Lord Ling of Wei. Uncle of the Ousted Lord of Wei. Ai 26.1. Lord Dao of Cao 曹悼公. Cao (R, r. 523– 515). Son of Lord Ping of Cao. Also Wu, Liege of Cao 曹伯午. Zhao 27.6(C), 28.1(C). Lord Dao of Jin 晉悼公. Jin (R, r. 573–558, b. 586). Great-grandson of Lord Xiang of Jin. Nephew of Lord Li of Jin. Also Zhouzi 周子, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Zhou, Prince of Jin 晉侯周, Lord Dao, Prince of Jin 晉侯悼公, ruler of Jin 晉公. Cheng 17.10, 18.7(C), 18.13(C), 18.14(C), 18.1, 18.3, 18.4, 18.7, 18.12; Xiang 1.7(C), 1.2, 3.3(C), 3.5(C), 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 4.3, 4.5, 4.7, 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.9(C), 7.6, 8.4(C), 8.9(C), 8.4, 8.7, 9.5(C), 9.1, 9.7, 9.9, 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 10.2, 10.12, 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 11.5, 12.3(C), 13.3, 14.3, 14.5, 14.6, 14.9, 15.7(C), 15.6, 16.1(C), 16.1, 22.2; Zhao 30.2; Ai 11.6. Lord Dao of Qǐ 杞悼公. Qǐ (R, r. 517–506). Son of Lord Ping of Qǐ. Also Liege Cheng of Qǐ 杞伯成, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯. Zhao 26.4(C); Ding 4.2(C), 4.5(C), 4.10(C). Lord Dao of Qi 齊悼公. Qi (R, r. 488–485). Succeeded Tu and Lord Jing of Qi. Also Yangsheng, Prince of Qi 齊侯陽生 (a. Yangsheng 陽生), Gongzi Yangsheng 公子陽生, Lord Dao 悼公, Prince of Qi 齊侯. Ai 5.3, 6.7(C), 6.6, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 9.1, 10.3(C), 10.7(C), 10.3. Lord Dao of Teng 滕悼公. Teng (R, r. 538–514). Succeeded Lord Cheng of Teng. Also Ning, Master of Teng 滕子寧, Master of Teng 滕子. Zhao 4.2(C), 13.4(C), 28.5(C), 28.6(C). Lord Dao of Xuˇ 許悼公. Xǔ (R, r. 546–523). Son of Lord Ling of Xu. Also Head of Xǔ 許男, Mai 買. Xiang 28.12, 29.3; Zhao 4.2(C), 4.4(C), 4.1, 5.8(C), 9.2, 19.2(C), 19.5(C), 19.4. Lord Dao of Zheng 鄭悼公. Zheng (R, r. 586–585). Son of Lord Xiang of Zheng. Also Fei, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯費, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯. Cheng 4.9(C), 4.5, 5.7(C), 5.5, 6.7(C), 6.1, 6.6. Lord Dao of Zhu 邾悼公. Zhu (R, r. 555–541). Son of Lord Xuan of Zhu. Also Hua, Master of Zhu 邾子, Master of Zhu 邾子. Xiang 19.1(C), 19.1, 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C), 27.4, 28.4; Zhao 1.5(C). Lord Ding 定公. Lu (R, r. 509–495). Lord Ding of Lu 魯定公. Ding 10.2(C), 10.2, 15.12(C), 15.7. See also Gongzi Song. Lord Ding 定公. Zhu (R, r. 614–573). Lord Ding of Zhu 邾定公. Son of Lord Wen of Zhu. Also Jueju, Master of Zhu 邾子貜且, Jueju 貜且. Wen 14.4; Cheng 17.12(C).

Personal Name Index 2091

Lord Ding of Jin 晉定公. Jin (R, r. 511–475). Son of Lord Qing of Jin 晉頃公. Also Wu of Jin 晉午, Prince of Jin 晉侯, ruler of Jin 晉君. Zhao 31.4(C), 31.2; Ding 4.2(C), 6.6, 8.3, 13.2; Ai 2.3, 13.3(C), 13.2, 13.4, 15.6(C), 24.1. Lord Ding of Wei 衛定公. Wei (R, r. 588–577). Son of Lord Mu of Wei 衛穆公. Also Zang, Prince of Wei 衛侯臧, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Ding 定公, Ding 定, heir apparent Zang 大子臧. Xuan 18.1(C), 18.1; Cheng 3.1(C), 3.13(C), 3.7, 5.7(C), 7.6(C), 7.6, 9.2(C), 10.1(C), 10.3(C), 12.2(C), 13.3(C), 14.6(C), 14.1, 14.5, 15.1(C); Ding 6.2. Lord Ding of Zheng 鄭定公. Zheng (R, r. 529–514). Son of Lord Jian of Zheng. Also Ning, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯寧, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯. Zhao 12.4, 13.4(C), 13.3, 16.3, 24.6, 28.3(C), 28.4(C). Lord Gao of the Xia dynasty 夏后臯. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xi 32.3. Lord Gong of Cao 曹共公. Cao (R, r. 652–618). Son of Lord Zhao of Cao 曹昭公. Also Xiang, Liege of Cao 曹伯襄. Liege of Cao 曹伯. Xi 8.1(C), 8.1, 9.2(C), 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 18.1(C), 21.4(C), 23.6, 28.4(C), 28.20(C), 28.3; Wen 4.3, 7.6, 9.10(C), 9.14(C). Lord Gong of Chen 陳共公. Chen (R, r. 631–614). Son of Lord Mu of Chen 陳穆公. Also Shuo, the Prince of Chen 陳侯朔, Master of Chen 陳子, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Xi 28.15(C); Wen 1.5, 2.4(C), 2.4, 7.6, 10.5, 13.2(C), 17.4; Xuan 1.8. Lord Gong of Lai 萊共公. Lai (R). Also Master of Lai 萊子. Xiang 2.4, 6.7. Lord Gong of Song 宋共公. Song (R, r. 588–576). Son of Lord Wen of Song. Also Gu, Duke of Song 宋公固, Duke of Song 宋公. Cheng 3.1(C), 4.1(C), 5.7(C), 5.6, 5.7, 7.6(C), 8.4(C), 8.5(C), 8.5, 9.2(C), 10.3(C), 13.3(C), 15.5(C), 15.7(C). Lord Huai 懷公. Jin (R, r. 637). Lord Huai of Jin 晉懷公. Son of Lord Hui of Jin and Liang Ying. Also Ziyu 子圉, the heir apparent Yu 大子圉, Yu 圉, Huai 懷. Xi 17.2, 22.5, 23.4, 24.1; Zhao 13.2. Lord Huai of Chen 陳懷公. Chen (R, r. 505–502). Son of Lord Hui of Chen. Also Liu, Prince of Chen 陳侯柳, Master of Chen 陳子, Lord Huai 懷公. Ding 4.2(C), 8.9(C), 8.12(C); Ai 1.4. Lord Huan 桓公. Lu (R, r. 711–694). Lord Huan of Lu 魯桓公. Son of Lord Hui of Lu. Younger brother of Lord Yin of Lu. Yin preface, 11.8; Huan 18.5(C); Zhuang 1.6(C); Min 2.4; Zhao 32.4; Ai 3.2, 24.3. Lord Huan of Cao 曹桓公. Cao (R, r. 756–702). Son of Lord Mu of Cao. Also Zhongsheng, Liege of Cao 曹伯終生, Liege of Cao 曹伯. Huan 9.4(C), 10.1(C), 10.2(C), 10.1. Lord Huan of Chen 陳桓公. Chen (R, r. 744–707). Son of Lord Wen of Chen. Also Bao, Prince of Chen 陳侯鮑, Prince of Chen 陳侯, Lord Huan of Chen, Lord Huan 桓公. Yin 4.4(C), 4.5(C), 4.3, 4.5, 6.4, 7.6, 7.7; Huan 2.3(C), 5.1(C), 5.1, 5.4(C). Lord Huan of Qǐ 杞桓公. Qǐ (R, r. 636–567. Reign period the longest of any Chunqiu period lord). Son of Lord Cheng of Qǐ. Also Gurong, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯姑容, Master of Qǐ 杞子, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯. Xi 27.1(C), 27.1; Wen 12.2(C), 12.2; Cheng 4.3(C), 4.2, 5.7, 7.6(C), 9.1(C), 9.2(C), 9.1, 18.8(C), 18.7; Xiang 6.1(C), 6.3(C), 6.1, 6.7.

2092

Personal Name Index

Lord Huan of Qi 齊桓公. Qi (R, r. 685–643). Son of Lord Xi of Qi. Younger brother of Lord Xiang of Qi. Also Xiaobai, the Prince of Qi 齊侯小白, Lord Huan 桓公, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Qi Huan 齊桓, Huan 桓, Gongzi Xiaobai 公子小白 (a. Xiaobai 小白, b. Qi Xiaobai 齊小白). Zhuang 3.1, 8.3, 9.3(C), 9.3, 9.5, 10.4, 11.3, 13.1(C), 13.4(C), 14.4(C), 15.1(C), 16.4(C), 19.3(C), 22.1, 23.6(C), 23.10(C), 27.2(C), 27.7(C), 27.6, 28.1, 30.6(C), 31.4(C), 31.1, 32.2(C), 32.2; Min 1.4(C), 1.2, 1.4, 2.5, 2.9; Xi 1.7(C), 2.4(C), 3.5(C), 3.3, 3.5, 4.1(C), 4.1, 4.2, 5.4(C), 6.2(C), 7.4(C), 7.3, 8.1(C), 9.2(C), 9.2, 9.3, 9.5, 10.4(C), 11.2(C), 12.4, 13.3(C), 13.1, 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 17.3(C), 17.4, 17.5, 18.5(C), 18.3, 19.3, 19.6, 23.6, 24.1, 26.3, 26.6, 28.12, 33.6; Xiang 25.2; Zhao 4.1, 4.3, 10.2, 11.10, 13.2. Lord Huan of Qin 秦桓公. Qin (R, r. 604–577). Son of Lord Gong of Qin. Also Liege of Qin 秦伯, Huan 桓. Xuan 15.5; Cheng 10.4, 11.9, 13.3, 14.7(C); Zhao 1.8. Lord Huan of Song 宋桓公. Song (R, r. 681–651). Son of Lord Zhuang of Song. Younger brother of Lord Min of Song. Also Yuyue, Duke of Song 宋公 御說, Duke of Song 宋公, Gongzi Yuyue 公子御說. Zhuang 11.2, 11.4, 12.1, 14.4(C), 15.1(C), 16.4(C), 19.3(C), 27.2(C), 32.2(C), 32.2; Min 2.5; Xi 1.7(C), 2.4(C), 3.5(C), 4.1(C), 5.4(C), 6.2(C), 7.4(C), 8.1(C), 8.5, 9.1(C); Wen 16.5, 18.8; Xuan 3.5; Zhao 20.1. Lord Huan of Wei 衛桓公. Wei (R, r. 734–719). Son of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Older brother of Zhouxu and of Lord Xuan of Wei. Also Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Huan, Wan 完. Yin 1.10, 3.7, 4.2(C), 4.1, 5.2(C), 5.3. Lord Huan of Zheng 鄭桓公. Ancestral ruler of Zheng. Zhuang 14.2; Xuan 12.1; Zhao 16.3. Lord Hui 惠公. Lu (R). Lord Hui of Lu 魯惠公. Father of Lords Yin and Huan. Yin preface, 1.4(C), 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 2.1; Huan 2.8; Ai 24.3. Lord Hui of Chen 陳惠公. Chen (R, r. 529–506). Grandson of Lord Ai of Chen. Son of heir apparent Yanshi. Also Wu, Prince of Chen 陳侯吳. The grandson Wu 孫吳, Wu 吳. Zhao 8.6, 11.2, 13.8(C); Ding 4.1(C), 4.6(C). Lord Hui of Jin 晉惠公. Jin (R, r. 650–637). Son of Lord Xian of Jin and Zi of the Lesser Rong. Also Lord Hui 惠公, Yiwu, Prince of Jin 晉侯夷吾, Yiwu 夷吾, ruler of Jin 晉君. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6, 6.1, 9.6, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 15.12(C), 15.4, 15.8, 23.6, 24.5(C), 24.1; Cheng 13.3; Xiang 14.1; Zhao 9.3, 13.2. Lord Hui of Qi 齊惠公. Qi (R, r. 608–599). Son of Lord Huan of Qi and Wei Ji the Younger. Also Yuan, the Prince of Qi 齊侯元, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Lord Hui 惠公, Gongzi Yuan 公子元, Yuan 元. Xi 17.5; Wen 14.6, 14.13, 18.2, 18.4; Xuan 1.6(C), 4.1(C), 4.1, 5.1, 7.2(C), 7.2, 9.4(C), 10.5(C), 10.1, 10.2; Zhao 10.2. Lord Hui of Qin 秦惠公. Qin (R, r. 500–492). Son of Lord Yi of Qin 秦夷公. Also Liege of Qin秦伯. Ai 3.8(C), 4.3(C). Lord Hui 惠公. Wei (R, r. 699–696, 688–669). Lord Hui of Wei. Son of Lord Xuan of Wei. Also Shuo, Prince of Wei 衛侯朔, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Shuo 朔 (a. Gongzi Shuo 公子朔). Huan 13.1(C), 15.10(C), 16.1(C), 16.2(C), 16.5(C), 16.5; Zhuang 5.2, 6.2(C), 6.1, 14.4(C), 15.1(C), 16.4(C), 25.2(C); Min 2.5. Lord Hui of Xue 薛惠公. Xue (R, r. 496–485 ). Succeeded Bi. Also Yi, Liege of Xue 薛伯夷. Ai 10.9(C), 10.10(C).

Personal Name Index 2093

Lord Jian of Qi 齊簡公. Qi (R, r. 484–481). Son of Lord Dao of Qi. Also Ren 壬. Ai 6.6, 14.11(C), 14.3, 14.5. Lord Jian of Yan 燕簡公. Northern Yan (R). Also Kuan, Liege of Northern Yan 北燕伯款, Liege of Northern Yan 北燕伯, Lord Jian 簡公. Xiang 28.2; Zhao 3.7(C), 3.11, 6.11, 12.1(C), 12.1. Lord Jian of Zheng 鄭簡公. Zheng (R, r. 565–530). Son of Lord Xi of Zheng. Also Jia, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯嘉, Lord Jian 簡公, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Jian 簡. Xiang 7.5, 8.4(C), 8.4, 9.5, 10.9, 11.7(C), 11.4, 11.5, 16.2(C), 16.7(C), 16.2, 18.4(C), 18.4, 19.9, 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 24.2, 25.3(C), 25.3, 26.4, 26.7, 26.9, 27.5, 28.6, 28.8, 28.12, 29.3, 30.2, 30.4, 30.10, 31.6; Zhao 1.4, 1.9, 1.12, 1.15, 3.4, 3.12, 4.2(C), 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 5.2, 5.4, 6.7, 7.3, 8.3, 12.2(C), 12.5(C), 12.2, 12.6, 30.2. Lord Jiao 郊公. Ju (R, r. 519–481). Son of Qiji, Master of Zhu. Zhao 14.4, 14.6, 23.4. Lord Jing of Cai 蔡景公. Cai (R, r. 591–543). Son of Lord Wen of Cai. Also Prince of Cai 蔡侯, Prince Jing of Cai 蔡景侯, Prince Jing 景侯. Cheng 2.8; Xiang 24.9(C), 28.2, 28.6, 28.8, 30.8(C), 30.5. Lord Jing of Cao 曹靖公. Cao (R, r. 505–502). Younger brother of Lord Yin of Cao. Lu, Liege of Cao 曹伯露, Liege of Cao 曹伯. Ding 4.2(C), 8.5(C), 8.11(C). Lord Jing of Jin 晉景公. Jin (R, r. 599–581). Son of Lord Cheng of Jin. Also Lord Jing 景公, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Nou, Prince of Jin 晉侯獳, ruler of Jin 晉君. Xuan 11.4(C), 12.5, 14.3(C), 14.2, 15.2, 15.3, 15.5, 15.6, 15.7, 16.1, 16.4, 17.6(C), 17.1, 18.1(C), 18.1; Cheng 1.5(C), 1.1, 2.3, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1(C), 3.12(C), 3.7, 3.9, 4.3, 5.7(C), 5.4, 6.5, 7.6(C), 7.5, 8.1(C), 8.9(C), 8.1, 8.6, 8.8, 9.2(C), 9.9, 10.3(C), 10.5(C), 10.1, 10.3, 10.4, 10.7. Lord Jing of Qi 齊景公. Qi (R, r. 547–490). Son of Lord Ling of Qi. Younger brother of Lord Zhuang of Qi. Also Chujiu, Prince of Qi 齊侯杵臼, Lord Jing 景公, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Qi ruler 齊君. Xiang 26.7, 27.1(C), 28.2; Zhao 3.3, 3.10, 6.9(C), 6.11, 7.1, 12.4, 13.4(C), 14.2, 16.1(C), 16.2, 20.4, 20.6, 20.7, 20.8, 22.1(C), 22.1, 25.5(C), 25.8(C), 25.6, 25.9, 26.4(C), 26.1, 26.4, 26.10, 26.11, 27.7, 29.1(C), 29.1, 29.3; Ding 7.3(C), 7.5(C), 7.4, 9.5(C), 9.3, 9.4, 10.2(C), 10.10(C), 10.2, 10.7, 12.7(C), 13.1(C), 13.1, 14.6(C), 14.8(C), 14.6, 14.7, 15.7(C), 15.5; Ai 1.4(C), 1.3, 1.5, 5.2(C), 5.4(C), 5.6(C), 5.3. Lord Jing of Qin 秦景公. Qin (R, r. 576–537). Son of Lord Huan of Qin. Also Liege of Qin 秦伯, Lord Jing 景公, Jing 景. Xiang 9.4, 14.3, 16.8(C), 26.1, 27.4; Zhao 1.4(C), 1.8, 1.12, 5.7(C), 5.9, 6.2(C), 6.2. Lord Jing of Song 宋景公. Song (R, r. 516–469). Son of Lord Yuan of Song. Also Duke of Song 宋公, Lord Jing 景公, heir apparent Luan 大子欒. Zhao 20.3, 25.8; Ding 4.2(C), 6.6, 8.3, 9.1, 10.12(C), 11.1(C), 11.1, 14.8(C), 14.12(C), 14.7; Ai 8.1(C), 8.1, 9.4(C), 9.4, 11.6, 14.4, 26.2. Lord Kang of Qin 秦康公. Qin (R, r. 620–609). Son of Lord Mu of Qin. Also Yin, Liege of Qin 秦伯瑩, Liege of Qin 秦伯, Lord Kang 康公, Kang 康, heir apparent Ying 大子瑩. Wen 7.4, 10.2, 12.5, 12.6(C), 12.6, 13.2, 18.2(C); Cheng 13.3.

2094

Personal Name Index

Lord Li 厲公. Song (R). Lord Li of Song 宋厲公. Son of Lord Min of Song. Nephew of Lord Yang of Song. Zhao 7.12. Lord Li of Chen 陳厲公. Chen (R, r. 706–700). Son of Lord Huan of Chen. Father of Gongzi Wan (Chen Wan). Also Yue, Prince of Chen 陳侯躍, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Lord Li 厲公. Huan 11.5(C), 12.4(C); Zhuang 22.1; Xiang 25.10. Lord Li of Jin 晉厲公. Jin (R, r. 580–574). Son of Lord Jing of Jin. Also Prince of Jin 晉侯, Jin ruler 晉君, heir apparent Zhoupu, 大子州蒲, Zhoupu 州蒲. The received text has Zhoupu, but Kong Yingda argued that the name should be Zhouman 州滿. Our translation follows Kong’s suggestion. Cheng 10.3, 11.2(C), 11.7, 11.9, 12.2(C), 12.4, 13.1(C), 13.3(C), 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 14.1, 15.3(C), 15.1, 16.5(C), 16.6(C), 16.10(C), 16.5, 16.6, 16.8(C), 16.10(C), 16.10, 16.12, 17.2(C), 17.7(C), 17.8(C), 17.10, 18.2(C). Lord Li of Zheng 鄭厲公. Zheng (R, r. 700–697, 680–673). Son of Lord Zhuang of Zheng and Yong Ji. Younger brother of Gongzi Hu (Lord Zhao of Zheng). Also Tu, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯突, Lord Li 厲公, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Ziyuan 子元, Gongzi Tu 公子突, Tu 突. Yin 9.6; Huan 11.4(C), 11.3, 12.7(C), 12.2, 13.1(C), 14.1(C), 14.3(C), 15.4(C), 15.9(C), 15.2, 15.6, 15.7; Zhuang 14.2, 15.1(C), 16.4(C), 16.2, 16.3, 18.2, 20.1, 21.2(C), 21.4(C), 21.1. Lord Libi of Ju 莒犁比公. Ju (R, r. 577–542). Son of Zhu, Master of Ju. Also Master of Ju 莒子, Lord Libi 犁比公, Mizhou 密州, Maizhuchu 買朱鉏. Xiang 3.5(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.9(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 16.2(C), 16.3(C), 16.1, 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 22.4(C), 23.7, 24.8(C), 25.3(C), 25.2, 31.7(C), 31.8. Lord Ling 靈公. Zheng (R, r. 605). Lord Ling of Zheng 鄭靈公. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. a. Zihe 子貉. Also Lord You 幽公, Zimo 子貉, heir apparent Yi 大子夷, Ling 靈, Yi 夷. Wen 17.6; Xuan 4.2, 10.13; Zhao 28.2. Lord Ling of Cai 蔡靈公 (d. 531). Cai (R, r. 542–531). Son of Lord Jing of Cai. Also Ban, Prince of Cai 蔡侯般, heir apparent Ban 世子般/大子般, Prince of Cai 蔡侯, Prince Ling of Cai 蔡靈侯, Prince Ling 靈侯. Lord Ling of Cai. Xiang 30.2(C), 30.5; Zhao 4.2(C), 4.4(C), 5.8(C), 11.3(C), 11.2, 13.9(C), 13.6. Lord Ling of Chen 陳靈公. Chen (R, r. 613–594). Succeeded Lord Gong of Chen. Also Pingguo 平國, Prince Ling 靈侯, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Wen 14.4(C), 15.9, 17.4; Xuan 1.10(C), 1.8, 9.4, 9.6, 10.9(C), 10.4, 12.1(C); Cheng 2.6. Lord Ling of Jin 晉靈公. Jin (R, r. 620–607). Son of Lord Xiang of Jin and Mu Ying. Also Lord Ling 靈公, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Yigao 夷臯. Wen 6.5, 7.4, 7.6, 8.1, 8.7, 9.5, 13.8(C), 13.1, 15.9, 17.4; Xuan 2.4(C), 2.3; Cheng 13.3. Lord Ling of Qi 齊靈公. Qi (R, r. 581–554). Succeeded Lord Qing of Qi. Also Huan, Prince of Qi 齊侯環, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Lord Ling 靈公, Huan of Qi 齊環, Huan 環. Cheng 10.3(C), 13.3(C), 16.8(C), 17.2(C), 17.6, 17.9, 18.2; Xiang 2.2, 2.4, 3.3, 6.8(C), 6.7, 12.5, 14.8, 15.3(C), 15.5, 16.4(C), 16.8(C), 16.4, 17.4(C), 17.3, 18.3, 19.7(C), 19.8(C), 19.12(C), 19.5, 25.2; Zhao 8.5. Lord Ling of Wei 衛靈公. Wei (R, b. 540, r. 534–493 ). Son of Lord Xiang of Wei. Also Yuan, Prince of Wei 衛侯元, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Ling 靈公,

Personal Name Index 2095

Yuan 元. Zhao 7.15, 12.4, 13.4(C), 20.3(C), 20.4, 29.3; Ding 4.2(C), 4.1, 6.2, 7.5(C), 7.4, 8.14(C), 8.7, 9.5(C), 9.4, 10.10(C), 10.4, 13.1(C), 13.1, 13.3, 14.6(C), 14.1, 14.6, 14.8, 15.7(C), 15.5; Ai 1.4(C), 1.3, 1.5, 2.2(C), 2.6(C), 2.2. Lord Ling of Xuˇ 許靈公. Xǔ (R, r. 591–547). Succeeded Lord Zhao of Xu. Also Ning, Head of Xǔ 許男甯, Head of Xǔ 許男. Cheng 2.8, 4.5, 5.5, 15.7; Xiang 3.9, 16.2, 24.9(C), 26.8(C), 26.10(C), 26.11. Lord Millet. See Qi of Zhou. Lord Min 閔公. Lu (R, r. 661–660). Lord Min of Lu 魯閔公. Son of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Zhuang 32.5; Min 2.3. See also Wen 2.6(C), 2.6. Lord Min of Song 宋閔公. Song (R, r. 691–682). Son of Lord Zhuang of Song. Also Lord Min 閔公, Jie 捷, Duke of Song 宋公. Zhuang 11.4, 12.3(C), 12.1. Lord Mu of Chen 陳穆公. Chen (R, r. 647–632). Son of Lord Xuan of Chen. Also Kuan, Prince of Chen 陳侯款, Prince of Chen 陳侯, heir apparent Kuan 世子款. Xi 7.4(C), 8.1(C), 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 19.6, 21.4(C), 27.5(C), 28.9(C), 28.12(C). Lord Mu of Lesser Zhu 小邾穆公. Lesser Zhu (R). Also Master of Lesser Zhu 小邾子, Lord Mu. Xiang 7.3(C), 7.4, 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 16.2(C), 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C); Zhao 3.4(C), 3.8, 4.2(C), 13.4(C), 17.1(C), 17.1. Lord Mu of Qin 秦穆公. Qin (R, r. 659–621). Son of Lord De of Qin 秦德公. Younger brother of Lord Xuan 秦宣公 and Lord Cheng of Qin 秦成公. Also Renhao, Liege of Qin 秦伯任好, Liege of Qin 秦伯, Lord Mu 穆公, Mu of Qin 秦穆, Mu 穆. Xi 9.6, 10.3, 13.4, 15.12(C), 15.4, 15.8, 17.2, 23.6, 24.1, 25.2, 30.3, 32.3, 33.3; Wen 1.9, 2.1, 2.6, 3.4, 4.6, 6.3; Cheng 13.3. Lord Mu of Song 宋穆公. Song (R, r. 728–720). Son of Lord Wu of Song. Also He, Duke of Song 宋公和, Lord Mu 穆公, Mu 穆. Yin 3.7(C), 3.5; Zhuang 12.1; Wen 7.3, 18.8; Xuan 3.5. Lord Mu of Wei 衛穆公. Wei (R, r. 598–589). Son of Lord Cheng of Wei. Also Su, Prince of Wei 衛侯速, Prince of Wei 衛侯. Xuan 17.6(C); Cheng 2.6(C), 2.2, 2.5, 3.2(C). Lord Mu of Xuˇ 許穆公. Xǔ (R, r. 697–656). Succeeded Lord Huan of Xǔ. Also Xinchen, Head of Xǔ 許男新臣, Head of Xǔ 許男, Xǔ Shu 許叔. Yin 11.3; Huan 15.4; Zhuang 16.4(C), 16.4; Xi 4.2(C), 4.7(C), 4.4. Lord Mu of Zheng 鄭穆公. Zheng (R, r. 627–606). Son of Lord Wen of Zheng. Also Lan, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯蘭, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Lord Mu 穆公, Gongzi Lan 公子蘭, Lan 蘭, Zheng Mu 鄭穆. Xi 30.3, 33.1; Wen 2.4(C), 7.6, 10.5, 13.9(C), 13.5, 14.4(C), 15.9, 17.4; Xuan 1.8, 3.7(C), 3.8(C), 3.6; Zhao 28.2. Lord of Chunyu. See Lord of Zhōu. Lord of Lu. See Boqin. Lord of Tang 棠公. Qi. Xiang 25.2. Lord of the Eastern Region. See Prince of Cai. Lord of Xi 析公. Chu. Xiang 26.10. Lord of Xing 邢公. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Lord of Zhōu 州公. Zhōu (R). Also Lord of Chunyu 淳于公. Huan 5.9(C), 5.6.

2096

Personal Name Index

Lord Ping of Cai 蔡平公. Cai (R, r. 529–522). Son of Lord Ling of Cai. Also Lu, Prince of Cai 蔡侯盧 , Prince Ping 平侯. Zhao 13.8(C), 20.5(C), 21.1(C), 21.2. Lord Ping of Cao 曹平公. Cao (R, r. 527–524). Son of Lord Wu of Cao. Also Xu, Liege of Cao 曹伯須. Zhao 18.1(C), 18.4(C), 18.2, 18.5. Lord Ping of Jin 晉平公. Jin (R, r. 557–532). Son of Lord Dao of Jin. Also Lord Ping 平公, Biao, Prince of Jin 晉侯彪, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Jin ruler 晉君. Xiang 16.2(C), 16.1, 18.4(C), 18.3, 19.1, 19.3, 19.7, 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 21.5, 21.8, 22.4(C), 23.1, 23.3, 24.8(C), 24.8, 24.12, 25.3(C), 25.3, 25.4, 26.4(C), 26.1, 26.7, 26.12, 26.14, 27.8, 29.6(C), 29.11, 31.1, 31.6; Zhao 1.8, 1.12, 2.1, 2.1(C), 2.2(C), 2.3(C), 2.5(C), 3.4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6, 6.7, 6.11, 7.4, 7.7, 7.8, 7.14, 8.1, 8.6, 9.5, 10.4(C), 10.5(C), 10.1, 10.4, 13.9, 28.2. Lord Ping of Qǐ 杞平公. Qǐ (R, r. 535–518). Younger brother of Lord Wen of Qǐ. Also Liege Yuli of Qǐ 杞伯郁釐, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯. Zhao 13.4(C), 24.5(C), 24.7(C). Lord Ping of Song 宋平公. Song (R, r. 575–532). Son of Lord Gong of Song. Also Cheng, Duke of Song 宋公成, Lord Ping 平公, Duke of Song 宋公, heir apparent Cheng 世子成, Ping 平. Cheng 15.3(C), 17.2(C), 17.8(C), 18.14(C); Xiang 3.5(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 6.2, 7.9(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 15.1(C), 16.2(C), 17.5, 17.6, 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C), 26.6(C), 26.8, 27.4, 28.12, 29.7; Zhao 10.6(C), 10.5, 11.2(C), 11.1, 21.6, 25.8. Lord Qing of Jin 晉頃公. Jin (R, r. 525–512). Son of Lord Zhao of Jin. Also Lord Jing 景公, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Quji, Prince of Jin 晉侯去疾, ruler of Jin 晉君. Zhao 17.4, 18.6, 21.2(C), 24.3, 28.2, 30.2(C), 30.3(C), 30.2. Lord Qing of Qi 齊頃公. Qi (R, r. 598–582). Son of Lord Hui of Qi. Also Wuye, Prince of Qi 齊侯無野, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Lord Qing 頃公, ruler of Qi 齊君. Xuan 10.18(C), 14.6(C), 14.4, 17.1, 18.1; Cheng 2.1(C), 2.3(C), 2.4(C), 2.1, 2.3, 3.9, 5.7(C), 7.6(C), 9.2(C), 9.7(C), 9.10(C). Lord Qing of Teng 滕頃公. Teng (R, r. 513–491). Succeeded Lord Dao of Teng. Also Jie, Master of Teng 滕子結, Master of Teng. Ding 4.2(C), 15.11(C); Ai 2.3(C), 4.9(C), 4.11(C). Lord Shang of Song 宋殤公. Song (R, r. 719–710 ). Son of Lord Xuan of Song. Also Lord Shang 殤公, Duke of Song 宋公, Yuyi 與夷. Yin 3.5, 4.3(C), 4.3, 4.4(C), 4.5(C), 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 8.1(C), 8.5(C), 8.1, 9.3; Huan 2.1(C), 2.1; Wen 15.2. Lord Shang of Wei 衛殤公 (d. 547). Wei (R, r. 558–547). Younger brother of Lord Xian of Wei. Also Gongsun Piao 公孫剽, Zishu 子叔, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Piao 剽. Xiang 1.5, 7.5, 14.4, 16.2(C), 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 21.7, 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C), 26.1(C), 26.2. Lord Wen 文公. Lu (R, 626–609). Lord Wen of Lu 魯文公. Son of Lord Xi of Lu. Also Lord Wen 文公. Wen 18.4(C), 18.3, 18.4; Zhao 32.4. Lord Wen of Cai 蔡文公. Cai (R, r. 611–592). Son of Lord Zhuang of Cai. Also Shen, Prince of Cai 蔡侯申, Prince of Cai 蔡侯, Prince Wen of Cai 蔡文侯. Wen 17.4; Xuan 17.2(C), 17.4(C); Xiang 20.4. Lord Wen of Cao 曹文公. Cao (R, r. 617–595). Son of Lord Zhao of Cao. Also Shou, the Liege of Cao 曹伯壽, Liege of Cao 曹伯. Wen 11.3(C), 11.3, 14.4(C), 15.3(C), 15.3, 15.9; Xuan 1.10(C), 7.5(C), 9.7(C), 14.2(C), 14.5(C).

Personal Name Index 2097

Lord Wen of Jin 晉文公. Jin (R, r. 636–628). Son of Lord Xian of Jin and Hu Ji Ji. Also Lord Wen 文公, Prince of Jin 晉侯, Wen of Jin 晉文, Chong’er, the Prince of Jin 晉侯重耳, Chong’er 重耳, Gongzi Chong’er 公子重耳, Chong of Jin 晉重. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6, 5.2, 9.4, 10.3, 23.4, 23.6, 24.1, 25.2, 25.4, 25.6, 26.6, 27.4, 28.1(C), 28.4(C), 28.5(C), 28.8(C), 28.15(C), 28.1, 28.3, 28.4, 28.6, 28.9, 28.12, 28.13, 30.2, 30.3, 32.4(C), 32.3, 33.4(C), 33.6; Wen 1.5, 7.4; Xuan 3.6, 12.5; Cheng 11.7, 13.3; Xiang 8.8, 14.1, 25.10, 31.6; Zhao 4.1, 4.3, 13.2, 15.7, 17.4, 29.5, 32.3; Ding 1.1, 4.1. Lord Wen of Qǐ 杞文公. Qǐ (R, r. 549–536). Son of Lord Xiao of Qǐ. Also Yigu, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯益姑, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯, Master of Qǐ 杞子. Xiang 24.8(C), 25.3(C), 28.2, 29.7(C), 29.12; Zhao 6.1(C), 6.4(C), 6.1. Lord Wen of Song 宋文公. Song (R, r. 610–589). Younger half brother of Lord Zhao of Song. Also Bao, Duke of Song 宋公鮑, Lord Wen 文公, Duke of Song 宋公, Gongzi Bao 公子鮑. Wen 16.5, 17.1, 18.8; Xuan 1.10(C), 1.8, 3.5, 7.5(C), 9.7(C); Cheng 2.5(C), 2.4, 3.5(C). Lord Wen of Teng 滕文公. Teng (R). Also Master of Teng 滕子. Cheng 16.2(C), 16.2. Lord Wen of Wei 衛文公. Wei (R, r. 659–635). Son of Zhaobo and Xuan Jiang. Younger brother of Lord Dai of Wei. Also Hui, Prince of Wei 衛侯燬, Wei, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Wen 文公, Hui 燬. Min 2.5, 2.10; Xi 4.1(C), 5.4(C), 6.2(C), 8.1(C), 9.2(C), 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 18.4, 22.2(C), 23.6, 25.1(C), 25.2(C), 25.6(C), 25.1, 25.5. Lord Wen of Zheng 鄭文公. Zheng (R, r. 672–628). Son of Lord Li of Zheng. Also Jie, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯捷, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Lord Wen 文公, Zheng Jie 鄭捷. Zhuang 27.2(C); Xi 1.7(C), 3.4, 4.1(C), 5.4(C), 5.6(C), 5.5, 5.6, 7.1, 7.3, 7.4, 8.1(C), 8.1, 9.2(C), 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 18.2, 21.4(C), 22.2, 23.6, 24.2, 24.3, 24.4, 24.6, 27.5(C), 28.8(C), 28.15(C), 28.3, 30.3, 31.6, 32.2(C); Wen 17.4; Xuan 3.6; Xiang 25.10. Lord Wen of Zhu 邾文公. Zhu (R, r. 665–614). Also Quchu, Master of Zhu 邾子籧蒢, Master of Zhu 邾子. Xi 19.3, 28.15; Wen 13.3(C), 13.3, 14.2, 14.4. Lord Wu 武公. Lu (R, r. 824–816). Wu 武. Lord Wu of Lu 魯武公. Zhao 15.2(C), 15.1; Ai 24.3. Lord Wu 武公. Wei (R, r. 812–758). Lord Wu of Wei 衛武公. Xiang 29.13. Lord Wu of Cao 曹武公. Cao (R, r. 554–528). Son of Lord Cheng of Cao. Also Teng, Liege of Cao 曹伯滕, Liege of Cao 曹伯. Xiang 20.2(C), 21.7(C), 21.8(C), 21.6, 22.4(C), 24.8(C), 25.3(C); Zhao 13.4(C), 14.2(C), 14.4(C). Lord Wu of Jin 晉武公. Quwo/Jin (R, r. 715–678). Son of Liege Zhuang of Quwo. Lord of Quwo and then lord of the entire Jin in 679. Also Lord Wu of Quwo 曲沃武公, Liege of Quwo 曲沃伯. Huan 3.1, 7.4; Zhuang 16.5, 16.6; Cheng 18.1; Xiang 29.11. Lord Wu of Song 宋武公. Song (R, r. 765–748). Song of Lord Dai of Song. Lord Wu 武公, Duke of Song 宋公. Yin preface; Huan 6.6; Wen 11.5. Lord Wu of Zheng 鄭武公. Zheng (R, r. 771–744). Son of Lord Huan of Zheng. Father of Lord Zhuang of Zheng. Also Lord Wu 武公, Wu 武. Yin 1.4, 3.3; Zhuang 21.2; Xuan 12.2; Xiang 25.10.

2098

Personal Name Index

Lord Xi 僖公. Lu (R, r. 659–627). Lord Xi of Lu 魯僖公. Son of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Min 2.3, 2.8; Xi 33.11(C); Wen 1.4(C), 1.3, Wen 2.6(C), 2.2, 2.5, 9.13(C), 9.10; Ding 8.10. Lord Xi of Qi 齊僖公. Qi (R, r. 730–698). Son of Lord Zhuang of Qi. (This Lord Zhuang ruled before the Spring and Autumn period and should not be confused with the Lord Zhuang of Qi in Zuozhuan.) Also Lufu, Prince of Qi 齊侯祿父, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Lord Xi 僖公, Xi 僖. Yin 3.6(C), 6.2(C), 7.4(C), 7.3, 8.5(C), 8.1, 8.8, 9.6(C), 9.5, 10.1(C), 10.1, 10.2, 11.3(C), 11.3; Huan 2.3(C), 3.1(C), 3.2(C), 3.6(C), 3.7(C), 3.9(C), 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 4.6(C), 5.2(C), 5.2, 6.4, 10.4(C), 13.1(C), 14.6(C), 15.3(C); Zhuang 8.3; Zhao 13.2. Lord Xi of Qǐ 杞僖公. Qǐ (R, r. 505–487). Younger brother of Lord Yin of Qǐ. Also Liege Guo of Qǐ 杞伯過. Ai 8.6(C), 9.1(C). Lord Xi of Xuˇ 許僖公. Xǔ (R, r. 655–622). Succeeded Lord Mu of Xu. Also Ye, Head of Xǔ 許男業, Head of Xǔ 許男. Xi 5.4(C), 6.4, 8.1(C), 9.2(C), 10.4(C), 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 21.4(C), 22.2(C), 27.5(C); Wen 5.7(C), 6.1(C); Zhao 4.4. Lord Xi of Zheng 鄭僖公. Zheng (R, r. 581, 570–566). Son of Lord Cheng of Zheng. Also Kunwan, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯髡頑, Kunwan 髡頑, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Lord Xi 僖公, heir apparent Kunwan 大子髡頑. Cheng 10.3, 17.1; Xiang 3.5(C), 5.2(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.9(C), 7.9. Lord Xian of Jin 晉獻公. Jin (R, r. 676–651). Son of Lord Wu of Jin. Also Lord Xian 獻公, Prince of Jin 晉侯 Guizhu, the Prince of Jin 晉侯佹諸, Jin gongzi 晉公子. Zhuang 18.1, 18.2, 24.3, 25.5, 27.5, 28.2; Min 1.6, 2.7; Xi 4.6, 5.1(C), 5.2, 5.8, 6.1, 9.5(C), 9.3, 9.4, 15.4; Zhao 13.2. Lord Xian of Wei 衛獻公. Wei (R, r. 576–559, 547–544). Son of Lord Ding of Wei. Also Kan, Prince of Wei 衛侯衎, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Kan 衎. Cheng 14.5, 15.3(C), 16.8(C), 16.4, 16.5, 17.2(C), 17.8(C), 18.14(C); Xiang 1.7(C), 1.2, 3.5(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.7(C), 7.9(C), 7.7, 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 10.5, 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 14.4(C), 14.4, 25.7(C), 25.4, 25.9, 25.15, 26.3(C), 26.2, 26.7, 26.12, 27.4(C), 29.3(C), 29.9(C); Zhao 11.10; Ai 26.3. Lord Xian of Xue 薛獻公. Xue (R, r. ?–511). Also Gu, Liege of Xue 薛伯穀. Zhao 31.3(C), 31.5(C), 31.3. Lord Xian of Zheng 鄭獻公. Zheng (R, r. 513–501). Son of Lord Ding of Zheng. Also Chai, the Liege of Zheng 鄭伯蠆, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯. Ding 4.2(C), 7.3(C), 7.4, 8.14(C), 9.2(C), 9.4(C). Lord Xiang 襄公. Lu (R, b. 575, r. 572–542). Lord Xiang of Lu 魯襄公. Son of Lord Cheng of Lu. Also Xiang 襄. Xiang 31.6(C), 31.6; Zhao 7.3, 25.6; Ai 13.4. Lord Xiang of Jin 晉襄公. Jin (R, r. 627–621). Son of Lord Wen of Jin. Also Lord Xiang 襄公, Prince of Jin 晉侯, ruler of Jin 晉君, Huan, Prince of Jin 晉侯驩. Xi 33.6; Wen l.6(C), 1.9(C), 1.5, 1.6, 2.1(C), 2.1, 3.6(C), 3.7, 4.5(C), 4.5, 6.4(C), 6.6(C), 6.5, 6.7, 17.4; Cheng 13.3; Zhao 13.1. Lord Xiang of Qi 齊襄公. Qi (R, r. 697–686). Son of Lord Xi of Qi. Also Prince of Qi 齊侯, Zhu’er 諸兒. Huan 15.7(C), 15.5, 17.1(C), 18.1(C), 18.1, 18.2; Zhuang 2.4(C), 2.1, 4.1(C), 4.3(C), 4.5(C), 7.1(C), 7.5(C), 7.1, 8.5(C), 8.3, 9.4(C); Wen 7.4.

Personal Name Index 2099

Lord Xiang of Song 宋襄公. Song (R, r. 650–637). Son of Lord Huan of Song. Also Zifu, Duke of Song 宋公茲父, Lord Xiang 襄公, Duke of Song 宋公, Master of Song 宋子 heir apparent Zifu 大子茲父. Xi 8.5, 9.2(C), 9.1, 9.7, 13.3(C), 15.3(C), 16.5(C), 16.1, 17.5, 18.1(C), 18.1, 19.2(C), 19.3, 19.5, 20.5, 21.4(C), 21.7(C), 21.3, 22.2(C), 22.4(C), 22.3, 22.8, 23.2(C), 23.2, 23.6; Wen 7.3, 8.6. (Wen 16.5.) Lord Xiang of Wei 衛襄公. Wei (R, r. 543–535). Son of Lord Xian of Wei. Also E, Prince of Wei 衛侯惡, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Xiang 襄公. Xiang 31.10, 31.13; Zhao 2.1, 4.3, 7.5(C), 7.8(C), 7.4, 7.11, 7.15; Ai 2.3, 17.5. Lord Xiang of Xue 薛襄公. Xue (R, r. 510–498). Also Ding, Liege of Xue 薛伯定. Ding 12.1(C), 12.2(C). Lord Xiang of Zheng 鄭襄公. Zheng (R, r. 604–587). Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Also Jian, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯堅, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Gongzi Jian 公子堅. Wen 9.5; Xuan 4.2, 7.5(C), 7.4, 9.7(C), 9.8, 11.2(C), 11.6, 12.1, 12.4, 14.2; Cheng 2.6, 4.2(C), 4.6(C). Lord Xiao of Qǐ 杞孝公. Qǐ (R, r. 566–550). Son of Lord Huan of Qǐ. Also Liege Gai of Qǐ 杞伯匄, Liege of Qǐ 杞伯. Xiang 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 16.2(C), 18.4(C), 20.2(C), 22.4(C), 23.2(C), 23.4(C), 23.1. Lord Xiao of Qi 齊孝公. Qi (R, r. 642–633). Son of Lord Huan of Qi and Zheng Ji. Also Zhao, Prince of Qi 齊侯昭, Lord Xiao 孝公, Prince of Qi 齊侯. Xi 17.6, 18.3, 23.1(C), 23.1, 26.3, 27.2(C), 27.3(C), 27.2. Lord Xiao 孝. Lu (R). Lord Xiao of Lu 魯孝公. Son of Lord Wu of Lu. Ai 24.3. Lord Xuan 宣公. Lu (R, r. 608–591). Lord Xuan of Lu 魯宣公. Son of Lord Wen of Lu. Wen 18.4, 18.5, 18.7; Cheng 1.2(C), 2.8, 9.5. Lord Xuan of Cai 蔡宣公. Cai (R, r. 749–715). Son of Lord Dai of Cai. Also Kaofu, Prince of Cai蔡侯考父. Yin 8.3(C), 8.6(C). Lord Xuan of Cao 曹宣公. Cao (R, r. 594–578). Son of Lord Wen of Cao. Also Lu, Liege of Cao 曹伯盧, Liege of Cao 曹伯, Lord Xuan 宣公. Xuan 17.6(C); Cheng 3.1(C), 5.7(C), 7.3(C), 7.6(C), 7.3, 9.2(C), 10.3(C), 13.3(C), 13.4(C), 13.6(C), 13.3, 13.5, 16.7. Lord Xuan of Chen 陳宣公. Chen (R, r. 692–648). Younger brother of Lord Zhuang of Chen. Also Chujiu, Prince of Chen 陳侯杵臼, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Zhuang 4.3(C), 15.1(C), 16.4(C), 25.1(C), 27.2(C); Xi 4.1(C), 5.4(C), 6.2(C), 12.4(C), 13.2(C). Lord Xuan of Song 宋宣公. Song (R, d. 729). Son of Lord Wu of Song. Yin 3.5. Lord Xuan of Teng 滕宣公. Teng (R, ?–641). Also Yingqi, Master of Teng 滕子 嬰齊Master of Teng 滕子. Xi 19.1(C), 19.1. Lord Xuan of Wei 衛宣公. Wei (R, r. 718–700). Son of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Also Jin, Prince of Wei 衛侯晉, Prince of Wei 衛侯, Lord Xuan 宣公, Jin of Wei 衛晉, heir apparent Jin 公子晉. Yin 4.7(C), 4.6, 8.1(C), 8.5(C), 8.1; Huan 3.2(C), 3.3, 10.3(C), 10.4(C), 12.8(C), 13.2(C), 16.5. Lord Xuan of Zhu 邾宣公. Zhu (R, r. 573–556). Son of Lord Ding of Zhu. Also Keng, Master of Zhu 邾子牼, Master of Zhu 邾子. Cheng 18.9; Xiang 1.4, 1.6(C), 3.5(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 7.9(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 16.2(C), 16.3(C), 16.1, 17.1(C).

2100

Personal Name Index

Lord Yang 煬公. Lu. Lord Yang of Lu 魯煬公. Early ruler of Lu. Son of Boqin. Ding 1.5. Lord Yi of Qi 齊懿公. Qi (R, r. 612–609). Son of Lord Huan of Qi and Mi Ji. Also Gongzi Shangren 公子商人, Lord Yi 懿公, Shangren 商人, Prince of Qi 齊侯. Xi 17.5; Wen 14.9(C), 14.3, 14.6, 14.13, 15.12(C), 15.11, 16.1(C), 16.3(C), 16.1, 16.2, 17.3(C), 17.3, 17.7, 18.1, 18.2. Lord Yi of the Youqiong 有窮后羿. Legendary figure of antiquity. See also Lord Yi 后羿; Yi of the Yi 夷羿; Yi 羿. Xiang 4.7; Zhao 28.2. Lord Yi of Wei 衛懿公. Wei (R, r. 668–660). Son of Lord Hui of Wei. Also Lord of Wei 衛侯. Min 2.5; Cheng 16.5. Lord Yin 隱公. Lu (R, r. 722–712). Son of Lord Hui of Lu and Shengzi. Yin preface. Lord Yin of Teng 滕隱公. Teng (R, r. 490–484). Yuwu, Master of Teng 滕子 虞毋. Ai 11.4(C), 11.5(C). Lord Yin of Zhu 邾隱公. Zhu (R, r. 491–484). Also Yi, Master of Zhu 邾子益, Master of Zhu 邾子. Ding 4.2(C), 14.14(C), 15.1(C), 15.8(C), 15.1; Ai 2.1(C), 7.4(C), 7.4, 8.4(C), 8.5, 10.1, 22.1. Lord Yuan of Song 宋元公. Song (R, r. 531–517). Son of Lord Ping of Song. Also Zuo, Duke of Song 宋公佐, Lord Yuan 元公, Duke of Song 宋公, heir apparent Zuo 世子佐大子佐, Song heir apparent 宋大子, Zuo 佐. Xiang 26.8; Zhao 4.2(C), 4.3, 4.4, 10.5, 12.3(C), 13.4(C), 19.1(C), 19.3, 19.5, 20.3, 22.2, 25.7(C), 25.1, 25.2, 25.8, 26.1(C), 26.2, 26.4; Ai 12.6. Lord Yuan of Xuˇ 許元公. Xǔ (R, r. 503–482). Son of Si, the Head of Xu. Also Cheng, Head of Xǔ 許男成, Head of Xǔ 許男. Ai 1.2(C), 13.2(C), 13.8(C). Lord Zhao 昭公. Lu (R, r. 541–510). Lord Zhao of Lu 魯昭公. Son of Lord Xiang of Lu. Also Prince of Lu 魯侯, ruler of Lu 魯君, Gongzi Chou 公子裯, Choufu 裯父. Xiang 31.4; Zhao 5.3, 7.3, 25.2, 25.4, 26.4, 27.4, 32.4; Ding 1.5(C), 1.4, 1.5. Lord Zhao of Cai 蔡昭公. Cai (R, r. 518–491). Younger brother of Lord Dao of Cai. Also Shen, Prince of Cai 蔡侯申. Prince Zhao of Cai 蔡昭侯, Prince of Cai蔡侯, Lord Zhao 昭公. Ding 3.4, 4.2(C), 4.14(C), 4.1, 4.3; Ai 2.4, 4.1(C), 4.10(C), 4.1. Lord Zhao of Cao 曹昭公. Cao (R, r. 661–653). Son of Lord Xi of Cao. Also Ban, the Liege of Cao 曹伯班, Liege of Cao 曹伯. Xi 4.1(C), 5.4(C), 6.2(C), 7.5(C), 7.7(C). Lord Zhao of Jin 晉昭公. Jin (R, r. 531–526). Son of Lord Ping of Jin. Prince of Jin 晉侯, Yi, Prince of Jin 晉侯夷. Zhao 12.4, 13.4(C), 13.3, 16.4(C), 16.7(C), 16.5. Lord Zhao of Qi 齊昭公. Qi (R, r. 632–613). Son of Lord Huan of Qi and Ge Ying. Also Pan, Prince of Qi 齊侯潘, Prince of Qi 齊侯, Qi Pan 齊潘. Xi 28.8(C), 28.15(C), 28.1, 33.2(C); Wen 7.6, 14.3(C), 14.3; Ding 4.1. Lord Zhao of Song 宋昭公. Song (R, r. 619–611). Son of Lord Cheng of Song. Also Chujiu 杵臼, Lord Zhao 昭公, Lord of Song 宋公. Wen 7.3, 7.6, 8.6, 10.5, 14.4(C), 14.7, 14.12, 15.9, 16.7(C), 16.5, 17.1, 18.8; Xuan 1.8, 3.5. Lord Zhao of Teng 滕昭公. Teng (R). Also Master of Teng 滕子. Xi 22.2C); Wen 12.5(C), 12.4; Xuan 9.3(C), 9.3.

Personal Name Index 2101

Lord Zhao of Xuˇ 許昭公. Xǔ (R, r. 621–592). Also Xiwo, Head of Xǔ 許男錫我 Head of Xǔ 許男. Wen 7.6, 14.4(C), 15.9; Xuan 12.4, 17.1(C), 17.3(C). Lord Zhao of Zheng. See Gongzi Hu. Lord Zhu 后杼. Legendary figure of antiquity. a. Jishu 季杼. Xiang 4.7; Ai 1.2. Lord Zhuang 莊公. Lu (R, r. 693–662). Lord Zhuang of Lu 魯莊公. Son of Lord Huan of Lu. Also Zitong 子同, Tong 同. Huan 6.5(C), 6.6; Min 1.3(C), 1.3. Lord Zhuang of Cao 曹莊公. Cao (R, r. 701–671). Son of Lord Huan of Cao. Also Yigu, Liege of Cao 曹伯射姑, Yigu 射姑, heir apparent Yigu 世子射姑, heir apparent of Cao 曹大子. Huan 9.4(C), 9.4; Zhuang 23.9(C), 24.2(C). Lord Zhuang of Chen 陳莊公. Chen (R, r. 699–693). Son of Lord Li of Chen. Also Lin, Prince of Chen 陳侯林, Prince of Chen 陳侯. Huan 15.10(C), 16.2(C); Zhuang 1.5(C), 2.1(C). Lord Zhuang of Qi 齊莊公. Qi (R, r. 553–548). Son of Lord Ling of Qi. Also Lord Zhuang 莊公, Prince of Qi 齊侯, heir apparent Guang 世子光, heir apparent Guang 大子光, Guang 光. Xiang 1.1, 3.5(C), 5.7(C), 5.11(C), 9.5(C), 10.1(C), 10.7(C), 10.1, 10.8, 11.4(C), 11.8(C), 11.3, 19.5, 19.10, 20.2(C), 21.8(C), 21.3, 21.7, 21.8, 22.4(C), 22.3, 23.8(C), 23.13(C), 23.3, 23.4, 23.7, 23.8, 24.5, 24.6. Lord Zhuang of Song 宋莊公. Song (R, r. 709–692). Son of Lord Mu of Song. Also Ping, Duke of Song 宋公馮, Lord Zhuang 莊公, Duke of Song 宋公, Gongzi Ping 公子馮, Ping 馮. Yin 3.5, 4.3; Huan 2.1, 11.5(C), 11.6(C), 11.7(C), 11.3, 12.3(C), 12.5(C), 12.6(C), 12.2, 13.1(C), 15.10(C), 16.1(C), 16.2(C); Zhuang 2.5(C), 3.2(C), 12.1; Wen 18.8. Lord Zhuang of Wei 衛莊公. Wei (R, r. 751–723). Son of Lord Wu of Wei. Father of Lord Huan of Wei, Zhouxu, and Lord Xuan of Wei. Yin 3.7. (This Lord Zhuang should not be confused with Kuaikui, whose posthumous honorific is also “Lord Zhuang.”) Lord Zhuang of Wei. See Kuaikui. Lord Zhuang of Xuˇ 許莊公. Xǔ (R, r. 731–712). Also Lord of Xǔ 許公, Head of Xǔ 許男. Yin 11.3. Lord Zhuang of Zheng 鄭莊公. Zheng (R, r. 743–701). Son of Lord Wu of Zheng. Also Wusheng, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯寤生, Liege of Zheng 鄭伯, Lord Zhuang 莊公, Wusheng 寤生. Yin 1.3(C), 1.4, 3.6(C), 3.3, 3.6, 6.4, 6.7, 7.6, 8.2(C), 8.2, 8.6, 9.3, 9.6, 10.1(C), 10.4(C), 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, 11.2(C), 11.3(C), 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.6, 11.7; Huan 1.2(C), 1.3(C), 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.3(C), 2.6(C), 2.4, 5.2(C), 5.2, 5.3, 6.4, 10.4(C), 11.2(C), 11.3(C), 11.3, 13.4(C); Zhuang 14.2; Zhao 11.10. Lord Zhuang of Zhu 邾莊公. Zhu (R, r. 540–507). Son of Lord Dao of Zhu. Also Chuan, Master of Zhu 邾子穿, the Master of Zhu 邾子, Lord Zhuang 邾公. Zhao 11.7(C), 11.4, 18.4, 23.2, 26.4(C); Ding 2.3, 3.2(C), 3.1. Lord Zibian of Xi. See Qu Yukou. Lü Gui 慮癸. Lu. Zhao 14.2. Lü Ji 呂伋. Qi. Legendary ancestor of the Qi domain rulers. Also Ding 丁, Lord Ding 丁公. Xiang 25.2; Zhao 3.3, 12.11. Lü Jiang 呂姜. Wei (W). Wife of Kuaikui (Lord Zhuang of Wei). Ai 17.5. Lu Jili 廬戢梨. Chu. Wen 14.10, 16.4.

2102

Personal Name Index

Lu Jin 鑪金. Chu. Ding 4.3. Lu Shen 魯申. Lu. Also Lord Xi 僖公, Xi 僖. Ding 4.1. Lü Sheng 呂甥 (d. 636). Jin. a. Zijin 子金, b. Xialü Yisheng 瑕呂飴甥, c. Xia sheng 瑕甥, d. Yin Yisun 陰飴孫. Also Lü 呂. Xi 10.3, 15.4, 24.1; Wen 7.4. Lu, Liege of Cao. See Lord Jing of Cao. Lu, Liege of Cao. See Lord Xuan of Cao. Lü, Master of Chu. See King Zhuang of Chu. Lu, Prince of Cai. See Lord Ping of Cai. Lü Xiang 呂相. Jin. Wei lineage. Son of Wei Yi. a. Wei Xiang 魏相. Cheng 13.3, 18.3. Lü Yin 僂堙 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Luan Bao 欒豹. Jin. Luan lineage. Zhao 3.4. Luan Bin 欒賓. Jin. First person of the Luan lineage of Jin mentioned in ­Zuozhuan. Huan 2.8. Luan Dun 欒盾. Jin. Luan lineage head. Son of Luan Zhi. Wen 12.6. Luan Fang 欒魴. Jin. Luan lineage. Xiang 19.2, 23.3, 23.6. Luan Fuji 欒弗忌 (d. 576). Jin. Luan lineage. Cheng 15.5. Luan Gongshu 欒共叔 (d. 709). Jin. Luan lineage. Son of Luan Bin. Huan 3.1. Luan Jinglu 欒京廬. Jin. Luan lineage. Xuan 17.1. Luan Ning 欒寧. Wei. Ai 15.5. Luan Qi 欒祁. Jin(W). Daughter of Fan Gai. Wife of Luan Yan. Mother of Luan Ying. a. Qi 祁. Xiang 21.5. Luan Qian 欒鍼 (d. 559). Jin. Luan lineage. Son of Luan Shu. Also Qian 鍼. Cheng 13.3, 16.5; Xiang 14.3. Luan Shi 欒施. Qi. Luan lineage. a. Ziqi 子旗. Zhao 2.1, 3.13, 8.5, 10.2(C), 10.2. Luan Shu 欒書 (d. 573). Jin. Luan lineage head. Son of Luan Duan. a. Luan Wuzi 欒武子 b. Luan Bo 欒伯, c. Wuzi 武子, d. Luan 欒, e. Shu 書. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.3, 2.7, 4.5, 6.11(C), 6.11, 8.2(C), 8.2, 9.9(C), 9.8, 10.3, 11.8, 13.3, 15.3, 16.5, 16.11, 17.10, 17.12, 18.1. Xiang 14.3, 21.5. Luan Yan 欒黶 (d. 556). Jin. Luan lineage head. Son of Luan Shu. a. Luan Bo 欒伯, b. Yan 黶, c. Luan Huanzi 欒桓子, d. Huanzi 桓子. Also Huan­ zhu 桓主. Cheng 16.5(C), 16.5, 18.3; Xiang 1.2(C), 9.4, 9.5, 10.11, 13.3, 14.3, 16.3, 21.5. Luan Ying 欒盈 (d. 550). Jin. Luan lineage head. Son of Luan Yan and Luan Qi. a. Ying 盈, b. Huaizi 懷子. Also Luan Huaizi 欒懷子, Luan ruzi (junion Luan master) 欒孺子. Xiang 14.3, 16.1, 18.3, 19.1, 21.4(C), 21.5, 21.7, 22.3, 22.5, 23.7(C), 23.12(C), 23.3, 23.6. Luan Yue 欒樂 (d. 550). Jin. Luan lineage. Also Yue 樂. Xiang 23.3. Luan Zhi 欒枝 (d. 622). Jin. Luan lineage head. Grandson of Luan Bin. a. Luan Zhenzi 欒貞子. Xi 27.4, 28.3, 33.3; Wen 5.5. Lufu, Prince of Qi. See Lord Xi of Qi. Luo, the stable master 圉人犖. Lu. Also Luo 犖. Zhuang 32.4, 32.5. Lupu Gui 盧蒲癸. Qi. a. Gui 癸. Xiang 23.4, 25.2, 28.9. Lupu Jiang 盧蒲姜. Qi (W). Daughter of Qing She. Wife of Lupu Kui. a. Jiang 姜. Xiang 28.9.

Personal Name Index 2103

Lupu Jiukui 盧蒲就魁 (d. 589). Qi. Cheng 2.1. Lupu Pie 盧蒲嫳. Qi. a. Pie 嫳. Xiang 27.7, 28.9, 28.11; Zhao 3.10. Lüqiu Ming 閭丘明. Qi. Ai 8.6, 11.3. Lüqiu Xi 閭丘息. Qi. Ai 21.2. Lüqiu Ying 閭丘嬰 (d. 542). Qi. a. Ying 嬰. Xiang 25.2, 29.16, 31.2. Ma Ying 麻嬰 (d. 545). Qi. Xiang 28.9. Mai. See Lord Dao of Xǔ. Maizhuchu. See Lord Libi of Ju. Man Cheng 瞞成. Wei. a. Zixuan Cheng 子還成. Ai 15.5, 16.2(C), 16.1. Man Master Chi. See Chi, Rong Man Master. Mangxiang 尨降. Wen 18.7. Mangyu 尨圉. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 4.7. Mao De 毛得 (d. 524). Zhou. Mao lineage. a. Mao Liege De 毛伯得, b. the Mao liege 毛伯. Zhao 18.1, 26.7(C), 26.9. Mao Di 茅地. Zhu. a. Di 地. Zhao 23.2. Mao Liege Guo 毛伯過. Zhou. Mao lineage. Zhao 18.1. Mao Liege Wei 毛伯衛 (d. 594). Zhou. First person of the Mao lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also the Mao liege 毛伯. Wen 1.5(C), 1.4, 9.1(C), 9.2; Xuan 15.5(C), 15.4. Mao Pei 茅茷. Jin. Xi 28.6. Mao Yihong 茅夷鴻. Zhu. a. Mao Chengzi 茅成子, b. Chengzi 成子. Ai 7.4. Maohu 瞀胡. Ju. Zhao 1.11. Market overseer Bi 褚師比. Wei. a. market overseer Shengzi 褚師聲子, b. market overseer 褚師. Ai 15.5, 16.1, 25.1. Market overseer Dingzi 褚師定子. Wei. Ai 26.1. Market overseer Duan 褚師段. Song. Ancestor of the Shi 石 lineage. Xiang 20.6. Market overseer Pu 褚師圃. Wei. a. Chushi Zishen 褚師子申. Zhao 20.4. Market overseer Zifei 褚師子肥. Song. Ai 8.1. Master chef Kuai 屠蒯. Jin. Zhao 9.5, 17.4. Master of Ba 巴子. Ba (R). Huan 9.2. Master of Biyang 偪陽子. Biyang (R). Xiang 10.2. Master of Dun 頓子. Dun (R). Xi 25.5(C), 25.3. Master of Dun 頓子. Dun (R). Zhao 4.2(C), 4.4(C), 5.8(C). Master of Gao 郜子. Gao (R). Xi 20.2(C). Master of Jun 麇子. Jun (R). Wen 10.6. Master of Kui 夔子. Kui (R). Xi 26.6(C), 26.5. Master of Lai 賴子. Lai (R). Also Lai 賴. Zhao 4.4. Master of Shujiu 舒鳩子. Shujiu (R). Xiang 24.9. Master of Su 蘇子. Wen/Su (R). Also Master of Wen 溫子. Given the span of years in these references, this may be two or more “Masters.” Zhuang 19.2; Xi 10.2(C), 10.1.; Wen 10.5(C), 10.4. Master of Tan 譚子. Tan (R). Zhuang 10.6(C), 10.4. Master of Tan 郯子. Tan (R). Xiang 7.1(C), 7.1. Master of Tan 郯子. Zhao 17.3(C), 17.3.

2104

Personal Name Index

Master of Tan 郯子. Ai 10.2(C). Master of Teng 滕子. Teng (R). Huan 2.2(C); Zhuang 16.4(C). Master of Xian 弦子(R). Xian. Xi 5.7(C), 5.7. Master of Xuqu 須句子. Xuqu (R). Xi 21.4. Master of Yin. See Yin Duke Wu. Master of Yu 鄅子. Yu (R). Zhao 18.4. Master of Yun 䢵子. Yun (R). Xuan 4.3. Master of Zeng 鄫子. Zeng (R). Xi 14.2(C), 14.2, 19.3(C), 19.3; Xuan 18.4(C), 18.3. Mei 昧. Legendary figure of antiquity. Son of Shaohao. Zhao 1.12. Meng Gongchuo 孟公綽. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Xiang 25.1. Meng Huo 猛獲. Song. Zhuang 12.1. Meng Mubo 孟穆伯 (d. 613). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Gongzi Qingfu. a. Gongsun Ao 公孫敖, b. Mubo 穆伯. Xi 15.3(C); Wen 1.9(C), 1.11(C), 1.1, 1.6, 1.8, 2.4(C), 2.4, 5.4, 7.10(C), 7.7, 8.6(C), 8.5, 14.8(C), 14.11, 15.4(C), 15.4. Meng Ren 孟任. Lu (W). Wife of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Zhuang 32.4. Meng Wenbo. See Wenbo. Meng Wubo 孟武伯. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Meng Yizi. a. Zhi 彘, b. Xie, the junior Meng master 孟孺子洩, c. the junior Meng master 孟孺子, d. the child 孺子, e. Wubo 武伯. Ai 11.1, 14.6, 15.1, 17.6, 25.2, 27.1, 27.4. Meng Xianzi 孟獻子 (d. 554). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Meng Wenbo. a. Mengsun 孟孫, b. Zhongsun Mie 仲孫蔑, c. Mie 蔑, d. Xianzi 獻子. Wen 15.4; Xuan 9.3(C), 9.1, 14.5, 15.7(C); Cheng 2.8, 5.2(C), 5.2, 6.8(C), 6.8, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 16.5, 16.11, 18.14(C), 18.14; Xiang 1.2(C), 1.3(C), 2.6(C), 2.9(C), 2.5, 3.2, 4.5, 5.4(C), 5.5, 7.2, 10.2, 10.6, 13.1, 15.1, 19.9(C). Meng Xiaobo 孟孝伯 (d. 542). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Meng Xianzi. a. Jie 羯, b. Zhongsun Jie 仲孫羯, c. Meng shi 孟氏, d. Mengsun 孟孫. Also Xiaobo 孝伯. Xiang 23.5, 24.2(C), 24.3, 25.1, 27.2, 28.5(C), 28.7, 29.5(C), 29.11(C), 29.8, 29.15, 31.4(C), 31.1, 31.4; Zhao 4.8. Meng Xizi 孟僖子 (d. 518). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Meng Xiaobo. Zhongsun Jue 仲孫貜. Zhao 7.3, 7.12, 9.4(C), 9.6, 10.3(C), 11.7(C), 11.4, 24.1(C). Meng Yizi 孟懿子 (d. 481). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage head. Son of Meng Xizi. a. Zhongsun Heji 仲孫何忌, b. Heji 何忌, c. Yizi 懿子, d. Meng 孟, e. Mengsun 孟孫. Also Zhongsun Ji 仲孫忌. Zhao 7.12, 11.4, 25.6, 27.5, 32.5(C); Ding 1.1, 3.5(C), 6.4(C), 6.7(C), 6.2, 6.3, 7.5, 8.13(C), 8.10, 10.6(C), 10.7(C), 12.5(C), 12.2; Ai 1.5(C), 2.1(C), 3.9(C), 6.9(C), 7.4, 8.2, 11.1, 14.13(C), 14.6. Meng Yue 孟樂. Wuzhong (Rong). Xiang 4.7. Meng Zhi 孟秩. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Son of Meng Zhuangzi. a. Zhi 秩. Xiang 23.5. Meng Zhice 孟之側. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Ai 11.1. Meng Zhuangzi 孟莊子 (d. 550). Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Song of Meng Xianzi. a. Su, the Meng child 孟孺子速, b. Zhongsun Su 仲孫速, c. Mengsun 孟孫. Xiang 16.4, 18.3, 20.1(C), 20.1, 20.4(C)20.3, 23.10(C), 23.5.

Personal Name Index 2105

Meng Zi 孟子. Lu (W). First wife of Lord Hui of Lu. Yin preface. Meng Zi 孟子. Wu/Lu (W). Wife of Lord Zhao of Lu. Ai 12.2(C), 12.2. Mengbing 孟丙 (d. 538). Lu. Shusun lineage. Son of Shusun Bao and Guo Jiang. a. Meng 孟. Zhao 4.8, 5.1. Mengbing 孟丙. Jin. Zhao 28.3. Mengming 孟明. Qin. a. Mengzi 孟子, b. Mengming Shi 孟明視, c. Mengming Shi of Baili 百里孟明視. Xi 32.3, 33.1, 33.3; Wen 1.9, 2.1, 3.4. Mengyang 孟陽 (d. 686). Qi. Zhuang 8.3. Mengzi, wife of Lord Zhao 昭夫人孟子 (d. 483). Lu (W). Wife of Lord Zhao of Lu. Ai 12.2(C), 12.2. Mi 靡. Legendary figure of high antiquity. Xiang 4.7. Mi Ji 密姬. Qi (W). Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. Xi 17.5. Mi Zixia 彌子瑕. Wei. a. Mizi 彌子, b. Mizi of Pengfeng 彭封彌子. Ding 6.2; Ai 25.1. Mian Fangsheng 緜房甥. Lu. Wen 11.5. Miangao, Master of Fei 肥子緜皋. Fei (R). Zhao 12.7. Min 緡. Jin (R, r. 706–679). Younger brother of Prince Ai of Jin. Huan 8.3. Min Mafu 閔馬父. Lu. a. Min Zima 閔子馬. Xiang 23.5; Zhao 18.5, 22.5, 26.9. Mizhou. See Lord Libi of Ju. Mound overseer Xi 陵尹喜. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Mouyi of Ju 莒牟夷. Ju. Zhao 5.4(C), 5.6, 31.5. Mu 幕. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 8.6. Mu 幕 (d. 541). Chu. Son of Jun, Master of Chu (King Jia’ao). Zhao 1.13. Mu Ji of Qin 秦穆姬. Jin/Qin (W). Daughter of Lord Xian of Jin. Wife of Lord Mu of Qin. a. Bo Ji 伯姬. Also Mu Ji 穆姬. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 5.8, 15.4. Mu Jiang 穆姜 (d. 564). Qi/Lu (W). Daughter of a Qi ruler. Wife of Lord Xuan of Lu. Mother of Lord Cheng of Lu. Grandmother of Lord Xiang of Lu. Lover of Shusun Qiaoru. Also Jiang 姜, Lady Jiang 姜氏. Xuan 1.3(C), 1.2; Cheng 9.3(C), 9.4(C), 9.5, 11.3, 16.5, 16.8; Xiang 2.3, 9.3, 23.5. Mu Meng Ji 穆孟姬. Qi (W). Mother of Lord Jing of Qi. Zhao 10.2. Mu Ying 穆嬴. Qin/Jin (W). Daughter of Lord Mu of Qin. Wife of Lord Xiang of Jin. Wen 7.4. Music master Cao 師曹. Wei. Xiang 14.4. Music master Chu 師觸. Zheng. Xiang 11.5. Music master Hui 師慧. Zheng. Xiang 15.4. Music master Jin 師縉. Chu. Xi 22.9. Music master Juan 師蠲. Zheng. Xiang 11.5. Music master Kuang 師曠. Jin. a. Ziye子野. Xiang 14.6, 18.3, 18.4, 26.1, 30.3; Zhao 8.1. Music master Kui 師悝. Zheng. Xiang 11.5. Music master Lord Kui 樂正后夔. Legendary figure of antiquity. a. Kui 夔. Zhao 28.2. Music master Pei 師茷. Zheng. Xiang 15.4. Musician Zhoujiu 泠州鳩. Zhou. Zhao 21.1.

2106

Personal Name Index

Nan Bo 聃伯. Zheng. Xi 2.6. Nan Ji 南季. Zhou. Yin 9.1(C). Nan Ji 聃季. Zhou. Ding 4.1. Nan Kuai 南蒯. Lu. a. Nanshi 南氏. Zhao 12.10, 13.1, 13.3, 14.2. Nan Qi 聃啟. Zhou. Wen 14.9. Nan Yi 南遺. Lu. a. Yi 遺. Xiang 7.3; Zhao 4.8, 5.1. Nan Zi 南子. Song/Wei (W). Wife of Lord Ling of Wei. Ding 14.8. Nang Wa 囊瓦. Chu. Nang lineage. a. Zichang 子常, b. Wa 瓦. Also Chu Wa 楚瓦. Zhao 23.9, 26.8, 27.2, 27.3, 27.6; Ding 2.2, 3.4, 4.14(C), 4.3, 5.7; Ai 1.6. Nangong Chang Wan 南宮長萬 (d. 682). Song. a. Nangong Wan 南宮萬, b. Song Wan 宋萬. Zhuang 11.4, 12.1, 12.4(C). Nangong Ji 南宮極. Zhou. Zhao 23.3, 23.6. Nangong Jingshu 南宮敬叔. Lu. Son of Meng Xizi. Younger half brother of Meng Yizi. Nangong is a branch of the Zhongsun/Meng lineage. a. Yue 說. b. Jingshu 敬叔. Zhao 7.12, 11.4; Ai 3.2. Nangong Niu 南宮牛. Song. Zhuang 12.1. Nangong Yin 南宮嚚. Zhou. Zhao 24.1, 26.9. Nanguo Juyu 南郭且于. Qi. Son of Lord Jing of Qi. a. Gongzi Chu 公子鉏. Ai 5.3, 6.6. Nanguo Yan 南郭偃. Qi. Xuan 17.1, 18.1. Nephew Nan 聃甥. Deng. Huan 9.2; Zhuang 6.3. Nephew Yang 養甥. Deng. Huan 9.2; Zhuang 6.3. Ni 溺. Lu. Zhuang 3.1(C), 3.1. Ni Jia 郳甲. Song. Zhao 20.5. Ni, Prince of Chen. See Lord Ai of Chen. Ning Gui 甯跪. Wei. Ning lineage. Zhuang 6.1. (Different from the Ning Gui below.) Ning Gui 甯跪. Wei. Ning linege. Ai 4.3. Ning, Head of Xuˇ. See Lord Ling of Xǔ. Ning, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Ding of Zheng. Ning, Master of Teng. See Lord Dao of Teng. Ning Wuzi 甯武子. Wei. Ning lineage head. a. Ning Yu 甯俞, b. Ningzi 甯子. Xi 28.5, 28.8, 30.2, 31.5; Wen 4.6(C), 4.7; Ai 26.3. Ning Xi 甯喜 (d. 546). Wei. Ning lineage head. Son of Ning Zhi. a. Daozi 悼子, b. Ningshi 甯氏, c. Ningzi 甯子. Xiang 20.7, 25.15, 26.1(C), 26.7(C), 26.2, 26.7, 27.3(C), 27.3. Ning Xiang 甯相. Wei. Ning lineage head. Son of Ning Wuzi. Cheng 2.2, 6.4. Ning Ying 甯嬴. Jin. Also Ying 嬴. Wen 5.5. Ning Zhi 甯殖 (d. 553). Wei. Ning lineage head. a. Ning Huizi 甯惠子, b. Ningzi 甯子. Also Huizi 惠子. Cheng 14.1, 14.5; Xiang 1.2(C), 2.5(C), 8.4, 14.4, 16.7(C), 16.1, 20.7. Ning Zhuangzi 甯莊子. Wei. First person of the Ning lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also Ning Su 甯速. Min 2.5; Xi 19.4, 26.1(C), 26.1. Niuchen of Chao 巢牛臣. Chu. Xiang 25.12.

Personal Name Index 2107

Nou, the Prince of Jin. See Lord Jing of Jin. Nou Yangjian 獳羊肩. Wei. Yin 4.5. Ou Yang 謳陽. Yue. Ai 13.3. Ousted Lord of Wei 衛出公. Wei (R, r. 492–480, 477–470). Son of Kuaikui. Also Zhe, Prince of Wei 衛侯輒, Wei hou 衛侯, Zhe 輒. Ai 12.4(C), 12.4, 15.4, 15.5, 16.1(C), 18.3, 25.1, 26.1, 26.3. Overseer Wu 嚻尹午. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Pan Chong 潘崇. Chu. First person of the Pan lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Wen 1.7, 11.1, 14.10. Pan Dang 潘黨. Chu. Pan lineage. Son of Pan Wang. a. Shu Dang 叔黨. Also Dang 黨. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 16.5. Pan, Prince of Qi. See Lord Zhao of Qi. Pan Wang 潘尪. Chu. Pan lineage. a. Preceptor Shu 師叔. Wen 16.4; Xuan 12.1, 12.2; Cheng 16.5. Pan Zichen 潘子臣. Chu. Pan lineage. Ding 6.4. Pangeng 盤庚. Ancient ruler of Yin/Shang. Xiang 9.1; Ai 11.4. Panfu 潘父. Jin. Huan 2.8. Panzi 潘子. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Peng Ming 彭名. Chu. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.8, 16.5; Xiang 4.2. Peng Zhongshuang 彭仲爽. Shen/Chu. Ai 17.4. Pengsheng 彭生. Chu. Zhao 4.7. Physician He 醫和. Qin. Zhao 1.12. Physician Huan 醫緩. Qin. Cheng 10.4. Physician Yan 醫衍. Jin. Xi 30.2. Pi Bao 丕豹. Jin. Also Bao 豹. Xi 10.3, 13.4. Pi Zao 裨竈. Zheng. Also Zao 竈. Xiang 28.8, 29.17, 30.10, 31.10; Zhao 10.1, 17.5, 18.3. (The identification with Pi Chen 裨諶 is controversial. See Xiang, n. 1023.) Pi Zheng 丕鄭 (d. 650). Jin. a. Pi 丕. Also Pi Zhengfu 丕鄭父. Xi 9.4, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1(C), 11.1, 13.4; Zhao 4.1. Ping 平. Chu. Ai 16.5. Ping, Duke of Song. See Lord Zhuang of Song. Ping, Master of Shu 舒子平. Shu. Wen 12.3. Pingguo, Prince Ling. See Lord Ling of Chen. Pingxia 平夏 (d. 541). Chu. Son of Jun, Master of Chu. Zhao 1.13. Po Yu 繁羽. Jin. Ai 2.3. Preceptor Fu 師服. Jin. Huan 2.8. Preceptor Ji 師己. Lu. Zhao 25.4. Prince Ai of Cai. See Xianwu, Prince of Cai. Prince Ai of Jin 晉哀侯. Jin (R, r. 717–709). Son of Prince E of Jin. Also Prince Ai 哀侯. Yin 5.5; Huan 2.8, 8.3. Prince E 鄂侯. Jin (R, r. 724–718). Also Prince of Yi 翼侯, Prince of Jin 晉侯. Yin 6.2; Huan 2.8. (First mention of the Wangshu lineage in Zhou.)

2108

Personal Name Index

Prince Hui of Tang 唐惠侯. Tang (R). Also Prince of Tang 唐侯. Xuan 12.2. Prince Jing 靖侯. Jin (R, r. 859–841). Huan 2.8. Prince Jing of Cai. See Lord Jing of Cai. Prince Mu of Jin 晉穆侯. Jin (R, r. 812–785). Huan 2.8. Prince of Cai 蔡侯. Cai (R). Also lord of the Eastern Region 東國. Zhao 21.7, 23.5(C). Prince of Ji 紀侯. Ji (R). Also Ji 紀. Huan 6.2(C), 6.6(C), 6.7, 13.1(C), 17.1(C); Zhuang 4.4(C), 4.2. Prince of Li 黎侯. Li (R). Xuan 15.5. Prince of Puyu, Zifu 蒲餘侯茲夫. Ju (R). Also Prince of Puyu 蒲餘侯. Zhao 14.4, 14.6. Prince of Qǐ 杞侯. Qǐ (R). Huan 2.5(C), 2.3, 3.3(C), 3.4, 12.2(C). Prince of Sui 隨侯. Sui (R). Ai 1.2(C). Prince of Sui 隨侯. Sui (R). Huan 6.2, 8.2; Zhuang 4.1. Prince of Teng 滕侯 (d. 716). Teng (R). Yin 7.2(C), 7.1. Prince of Teng 滕侯. Teng (R). Yin 11.1(C), 11.1. Prince of Xi 息侯. Xi (R). Yin 11.6; Zhuang 10.3. Prince of Xing 邢侯. Xing (R). Xi 16.5(C). Prince of Xue 薛侯. Xue (R). Yin 11.1(C), 11.1. Prince of Xun 荀侯. Xun (R). Huan 9.3. Prince Qi of Deng 鄧祁侯. Deng (R). Also Prince of Deng 鄧侯. Zhuang 6.3. Prince Xi 僖侯. Jin (R, r. 841–823). Huan 6.6. Prince Xiao 孝侯. Jin (R, r. 739–724). Huan 2.8. Prince Zhao 昭侯. Jin (R, r. 746–740). Huan 2.8. Pu, from the settlement of Chu 廚人濮. Song. Zhao 21.6. Pu Zhan 僕展 (d. 543). Zheng. Xiang 30.10. Qi 啟. Song. Younger brother of Lord Zhao of Song. Ai 26.2. Qi 啟. Song. Hua lineage. Zhao 20.3. Qi 棄. Song (W). Consort of Lord Ping of Song. Also wife of the ruler 君夫人. Xiang 26.8. Qi Bao 齊豹. Wei. Zhao 20.4, 31.5. Qi E 齊惡. Wei. a. Qizi 齊子. Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 7.11. Qi Gui 齊歸 (d. 531). Hu/Lu (W). Also Lady Gui 歸氏. Consort of Lord Xiang of Lu. Mother of Lord Zhao of Lu. Xiang 31.4; Zhao 11.5(C), 11.9(C), 11.3, 11.7. Qi Jiang 齊姜. Qi/Jin (W). Daughter of a Qi ruler. Consort of Lord Wu of Jin. Later, wife of Lord Xian of Jin. Mother of Mu Ji of Qin and Shensheng. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6. Qi Jiang 齊姜. Qi/Lu (W). Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Wife of Lord Cheng of Lu. Xiang 2.7(C), 2.3. Qi Jiang 齊姜. Qi/Zhu (W). Wife of Lord Wen of Zhu. Wen 14.4. Qi Ju 祁舉. Jin. Qi lineage. Xi 10.3. Qi Liang 杞梁 (d. 550). Qǐ. a. Qi Zhi 杞殖; b. Zhi 殖. Xiang 23.7. Qi Man 祁瞞 (d. 632). Jin. Qi lineage. Xi 28.6.

Personal Name Index 2109

Qi of Zhou 周棄. Legendary founder of the Zhou royal lineage. Also Lord Millet 后稷. Wen 2.5; Xuan 3.6; Xiang 7.2; Zhao 9.3, 29.4. Qi Sheng 祁勝 (d. 514). Jin. Qi lineage. a. Sheng 勝. Zhao 28.2. Qi Si 杞姒. Song (W). Wife of Huang Ye. Mother of Huang Feiwo. Ai 17.7. Qi Wu 祁午. Jin. Qi lineage head. Son of Qi Xi. a. Wu 午. Xiang 3.4; Zhao 1.1, 5.4. Qi Xi 祁奚. Jin. First person of the Qi lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also High Officer Qi 祁大夫. Cheng 8.6, 18.3; Xiang 3.4, 16.1, 21.5. Qi Ying 祁盈 (d. 514). Jin. Qi lineage head. Son of Qi Wu. a. Ying 盈. Zhao 28.2. Qian 鍼. Qin/Jin. Son of Lord Huan of Qin. Brother of Lord Jing of Qin. a. son of the Lord 后子, b. Boche 伯車. Cheng 13.3; Xiang 25.16, 26.1; Zhao 1.4(C), 1.8, 1.13, 5.9. Qian Wu 鍼巫. Lu. a. Qian Ji 鍼季. Zhuang 32.4. Qian Yijiu 鍼宜咎. Chen/Chu. a. deputy for remonstrance Yijiu 咸(鍼)尹宜咎. Xiang 24.11(C), 24.10; Zhao 4.7. Qian Zhuangzi 鍼莊子. Wei. Xi 28.8. Qiangchu 強鉏. Zheng. Zhuang 16.3. Qianhu 鍼虎 (d. 621). Qin. Wen 6.3. Qianqi 愆期. Zhou. Shan lineage. Younger brother of Shan Duke Jing. Xiang 30.6. Qianzi 鍼子. Chen. Yin 8.4. Qiaoru of the Chang Di 長狄僑如 (d. 616). Souman. Also Qiaoru 僑如. Wen 11.5; Xiang 30.3. Qie 妾. Jin (W). Daughter of Lord Hui of Jin and Liang Ying. Xi 17.2. Qiji 棄疾 (d. 551). Chu. Son of Guan Qi. Xiang 22.6. Qin Chuan 秦遄. Lu. Zhao 25.6; Ding 5.6. Qin Ji 秦姬. Lu (W). Younger sister of Ji Gongniao. Wife of Qin Chuan. Zhao 25.6. Qin Jinfu 秦堇父. Lu. Xiang 10.2. Qin Pizi 秦丕茲. Lu. Disciple of Confucius. Identified as Qin Shang 秦商 in Shiji. Xiang 10.2. Qin Ying 秦嬴. Chu (W). Younger sister of Lord Jing of Qin. Wife of King Gong of Chu. Xiang 12.7. Qin Zhang 琴張. Wei. Disciple of Confucius (although the identification flouts the chronology of Shiji 67). Zhao 20.4. Qin Zheng 禽鄭. Lu. Cheng 2.3. Qinfu of Bi 費庈父. Lu. a. Bi Bo 費伯. Yin 1.3, 2.3. Qing Bi 慶比. Wei. Zhao 20.4. Qing Feitui 清沸魋. Jin. Cheng 17.10. Qing Feng 慶封 (d. 538). Qi. Qing lineage head. Son of Qing Ke. a. Qing 慶, b. Zijia 子家, c. Qing Ji 慶季. Cheng 18.2; Xiang 19.10, 25.2, 25.3, 25.7, 27.1(C), 27.2, 27.4, 27.7, 28.6(C), 28.2, 28.9; Zhao 4.4(C), 4.4, 10.4. Qing Hu 慶虎 (d. 550). Chen. Xiang 7.10, 20.4, 23.5(C), 23.2. Qing Ke 慶克 (d. 574). Qi. First person of the Qing lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. Cheng 17.6, 17.9, 18.2; Xiang 21.3.

2110

Personal Name Index

Qing of Ju 莒慶. Ju. Zhuang 27.5(C); Xi 25.7(C). Qing She 慶舍 (d. 545). Qi. Qing lineage. Son of Qing Feng. a. Zizhi 子之. Xiang 28.9. Qing Si 慶嗣. Qi. Qing lineage. a. Zixi 子息. Xiang 28.9. Qing Xie 慶奊 (d. 545). Qi. Qing lineage. a. Qing Sheng 慶繩. Xiang 28.9. Qing Yin 慶寅 (d. 550). Chen. Xiang 7.10, 20.4, 23.5(C), 23.2. Qing Yue 慶樂 (d. 550). Chen. Xiang 23.2. Qing Zheng 慶鄭 (d. 645). Jin. Xi 14.4, 15.4, 15.8. Qing Zuo 慶佐. Qi. Qing lineage. Son of Qing Ke. Cheng 18.2; Xiang 21.3. Qing, Master of Ju 莒子狅. Ju (R). Ai 14.8(C). Qingfu 頃父. Jin. Yin 6.2. Qinzi 秦子. Lu. Zhuang 9.4. Qiongqi 窮奇. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Qiu 鰍. Zhou. Gan lineage. Grandson of Gan Duke Cheng. Also Gan Duke Ping 甘平公. Zhao 12.9, 22.5. Qiu Ruo 丘弱. Zhu. a. Ruo 弱. Zhao 23.2. Qiwu Zhang 綦毋張. Jin. Cheng 2.3. Qizi 杞子. Qin. Xi 30.3, 32.3, 33.1. Qizi 齊子. Wei. Wife of Lord Huan of Qi. See also Wei Ji the Elder. Min 2.5. Qu Bojiu 渠伯糾. Zhou. Huan 4.2(C), 4.2. Qu Boyu 蘧伯玉. Wei. a. Qu Yuan 蘧瑗. Also Boyu 伯玉, Yuan 瑗. Xiang 14.4, 26.2, 29.13. Qu Dang 屈蕩. Chu. Qu lineage. Xiang 15.3, 25.8. (This and the Qu Dang below are separated by forty years and probably do not refer to the same person.) Qu Dang 屈蕩. Chu. Qu lineage. Xuan 12.2. Qu Dao 屈到. Chu. Qu lineage. Son of Qu Dang. Xiang 15.3. Qu Fulie 蘧富獵. Song. Also Lie 獵. Ding 10.6. Qu Huyong 屈狐庸. Chu/Jin/Wu. Qu lineage. Son of Qu Wuchen. a. Hu­yong 狐庸, Prince of Xing 邢侯. See also Liege of Xing 邢伯, Xiang 18.3, 31.9; Zhao 14.7. Qu Jian 屈建 (d. 545). Chu. Qu lineage. Son of Qu Dao. a. Zimu 子木, b. Jian 建. Xiang 22.6, 23.2, 25.8(C), 25.8, 25.11, 25.13, 26.10, 27.2(C), 27.4, 28.13(C); Zhao 1.1, 20.6. Qu Kong 渠孔. Wei. Min 2.5. Qu Pi 屈罷. Chu. Qu lineage. Zhao 14.3. Qu Shen 屈申 (d. 537). Chu. Qu lineage. Son of the later Qu Dang. Zhao 4.4, 5.2(C), 5.2. Qu Sheng 屈生. Chu. Qu lineage. Son of Qu Jian. Zhao 5.2. Qu Wan 屈完. Chu. Qu lineage. Xi 4.1. Qu Wuchen. Chu/Jin/Wu. Qu lineage. a. Wuchen 巫臣, b. Qu Wu 屈巫, c. ­Ziling 子靈. Also Wuchen, Lord of Shen 申公巫臣. Xuan 12.6; Cheng 2.6, 7.5, 8.8; Xiang 26.10; Zhao 28.2. Qu Xia 屈瑕. Chu. First person of the Qu lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also maréchal Qu Xia 莫敖屈瑕. Huan 11.2, 12.3, 13.1.

Personal Name Index 2111

Qu Yukou 屈禦寇. Chu. a. Zibian 子邊. Also Lord Zibian of Xi 息公子邊. Xi 25.3. Qu Zhong 屈重. Chu. Qu lineage. Zhuang 4.1. Quan Mi 拳彌. Wei. a. Mi 彌. Ai 25.1. Queen Hui 惠后. Zhou. Wife of King Hui of Zhou. Mother of King Xiang of Zhou and Wangzi Dai. Also Chen Gui 陳媯. Zhuang 18.2; Xi 24.2. Queen Mu 王穆后. Zhou. Wife of King Jing of Zhou. Also Queen Mu 穆后. Zhao 15.4, 15.7, 26.9. Quchu, Master of Zhu. See Lord Wen of Zhu. Quji, Master of Ju 莒子去疾. Ju (R, r. 541–528). Son of Libi, Lord of Ju. Younger brother of Zhanyu. a. Quji 去疾, Quji of Ju 莒去疾, Master of Ju 莒子, Lord Zhuqiu of Ju 莒著丘公. Zhao 1.7(C), 13.4(C), 14.5(C), 14.4. Quji, Prince of Jin. See Lord Qing of Jing. Quzi 渠子. Wei. Zhao 20.4. Ran Dan 然丹. Zheng/Chu. Son of Ziran of Zheng. Grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng. a. Zige 子革, b. commander of the right army Zige 右尹子革, c. Zheng Dan 鄭丹. Xiang 19.9; Zhao 4.7, 9.2, 11.10, 12.11, 13.2, 14.3, 16.2. Ran Meng 冉猛. Lu. a. Meng 猛. Ding 8.1, 8.4. Ran Ming 然明. Son of Ran Dan. Zheng. a. Mie 蔑, b. Zong Mie 鬷蔑, c. Zong Ming 鬷明. Xiang 24.12, 25.2, 25.14, 29.17, 31.11; Zhao 28.3. Ran Qiu 冉求. Lu. Disciple of Confucius. a. Qiu 求, b. Youzi 有子, c. Ran You 冉有. Ai 11.1, 11.7, 14.2, 23.1. Ran Shu 冉豎. Lu. Zhao 26.4. Rao Zhao 繞朝. Qin. Wen 13.2. Reng Shu 仍叔. Zhou. Huan 5.3(C), 5.4. Renhao, Liege of Qin. See Lord Mu of Qin. Rong Huang 榮黃. Chu. a. Rong Ji 榮季. Xi 28.4. Rong Jia’e 榮駕鵝. Lu. a. Rong Chengbo 榮成伯. Xiang 28.12, 29.4; Ding 1.3. Rong Jin 戎津. Jin. Wen 7.4. Rong Shu 榮叔. Zhou. Zhuang 1.6(C). Rong Shu 榮叔. Zhou. Wen 5.1(C), 5.1. Rong Yi 榮錡. Zhou. Zhao 22.3. Rong Zi 戎子 (d. 554). Qi (W). Consort of Lord Ling of Qi. Xiang 19.5. Rongru 榮如. Souman (Chang Di). Wen 11.5. Rou 柔. Lu. Huan 11.5(C). Royal heir apparent Shou 王大子壽. Zhou. Also heir apparent Shou 大子壽. Zhao 15.3, 26.9. See Heir apparent Xian. Royal palace deputy Jun 王尹麇. Chu. Zhao 27.2. Royal younger sister Mi Biwo 季羋畀我. Chu. Also Ji Mi 季羋. Ding 4.3, 5.7. Ru Jia 女賈. Lu. Zhao 26.4. Ru Kuan 女寬. Jin. a. Rushu Kuan 女叔寬. Zhao 26.7, 28.4; Ding 1.1. Ru of Ju 莒挐. Ju. Also Ru 挐. Xi 1.9(C), 1.6. Ru Qi 女齊. Jin. a. Rushu Qi 女叔齊, b. supervisor of the military Hou 司馬侯,

2112

Personal Name Index

c. Qi 齊, d. Rushu Hou 女叔侯, e. Shu Hou 叔侯. Also Ru Shu. Xiang 26.7, 29.9, 29.11, 30.3; Zhao 1.8, 4.1, 5.3, 5.4. Ru Shu 女叔. Chen. Zhuang 25.1(C), 25.1. Ru’ai 女艾. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ai 1.2. Rui Jiang 芮姜. Rui (W). Mother of Wan, the Liege of Rui 芮伯萬. Huan 3.8. Rui Liangfu 芮良夫. Zhou. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 1.9. Ruo 弱 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Ruo’ao 若敖. Chu. Ancestor of the Dou lineage and the Cheng lineage in Chu. Xuan 12.2; Zhao 23.9. Sang Yanxu 桑掩胥. Qi. Ai 11.3. Scribe Gou 史狗. Wei. Also scribe Gou 史苟, Gou 苟. Xiang 29.13; Zhao 7.15. Scribe Gui 史龜. Jin. Ai 9.6. Scribe Hua Longhua 史華龍滑. Wei. Min 2.5. Scribe Huang 史皇. Chu. Ding 4.3. Scribe Jiao 史狡 (d. 563). Zhou. Xiang 10.12. Scribe Ke 史顆. Qin. Cheng 11.9. Scribe Mo of Cai 蔡史墨. Jin. a. Mo of Cai 蔡墨, b. scribe Mo 史墨, c. scribe An 史黯, d. An 黯. Zhao 29.4, 29.5, 31.6, 32.2, 32.4; Ai 9.6, 20.3. Scribe of the left Lao 左史老. Chu. Ai 17.4. Scribe of the left Yixiang 左史倚相. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Scribe of the south 南史氏. Qi. Xiang 25.2. Scribe Pi 史猈. Chu. Zhao 13.2. Scribe Qiu 史鰌. Wei. Xiang 29.13; Ding 13.3. Scribe Su 史蘇. Jin. Xi 15.4. Scribe Yi 史佚. Zhou. Scribe of antiquity quoted in speeches. Xi 15.4; Wen 15.4; Xuan 12.3; Xiang 14.9; Zhao 1.13. Scribe Yin 史嚚. Guo. Zhuang 32.3. Scribe Yin 史嚚. Qi. Zhao 20.6. Scribe Zhao 史朝. Wei. Zhao 7.15. Scribe Zhao 史趙. Jin. Xiang 30.3; Zhao 8.3, 8.6, 11.7; Ai 9.6. Shaman Gao 巫臯. Jin. Xiang 18.3. Shan Duke Cheng 單成公 (d. 531). Zhou. Shan lineage. a. Shan zi 單子. Also Duke Cheng 成公. Zhao 7.13, 11.6, 11.9. Shan Duke Jing 單靖公. Zhou. Shan lineage. Son of Shan Duke Qing. Xiang 10.12, 15.2. Shan Duke Mu 單穆公. Zhou. Shan lineage. a. Shan Qi 單旗, b. Shan zi 單子. Also Shan 單. Zhao 22.7(C), 22.8(C), 22.3, 22.5, 23.3, 26.5, 26.9. Shan Duke Ping 單平公. Zhou. Shan lineage. Son of Shan Duke Wu. Ai 13.2, 16.2. Shan Duke Qing 單頃公. Zhou. Shan lineage. Son of Shan Duke Xiang. Shan Master 單子. Xiang 3.5(C), 3.5. Shan Duke Wu 單武公. Zhou. Shan lineage. Son of Shan Duke Mu. Shan Master 單子. Ding 7.3, 7.6, 8.2.

Personal Name Index 2113

Shan Duke Xian 單獻公 (d. 535). Zhou. Shan lineage. Son of Shan Duke Jing. Xian Duke 獻公. Zhao 7.13. Shan Duke Xiang 單襄公. Zhou. Shan lineage. Shan Master 單子. Cheng 1.1, 2.9, 11.7, 16.12, 17.2(C), 17.8(C), 17.2. Shan Fuyu 單浮餘. Chu. Ai 4.2. Shan Liege 單伯. Zhou. Shan lineage. Wen 14.11(C), 14.12(C), 14.14, 15.6(C), 15.1, 15.6. (Not to be confused with the Shan Liege below; more than eighty years separate these two men.) Shan Liege 單伯. Zhou. First person of the Shan lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Zhuang 1.3(C), 14.2(C), 14.4(C), 14.1. Shan Mie 單蔑. Zhou. Shan lineage. Xiang 30.6. Shan Qi 山祁. Jin. Xi 10.3. Shan Yue 苫越. Lu. a. Shan Yi 苫夷. Ding 7.5, 8.5. Shang Chenggong 商成公. Zheng. Zhao 18.3. Shang Zhideng 上之登. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Shang Ziche 商子車. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Shang Ziyou 商子游. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Shangchen. See King Mu of Chu. Shao Duke Dai 召戴公 (d. 594). Zhou. Shao lineage. Son of Shao Duke Zhao. Younger brother of Shao Duke Huan. Also Shao Liege 召伯, head of the Shao lineage 召氏. Xuan 15.5(C),15.4, 16.4. Shao Duke Huan 召桓公. Zhou. Shao lineage. Son of Shao Duke Zhao. Also Shao Liege 召伯. Xuan 6.5; Cheng 8.7(C), 8.7. Shao Duke Kang 召康公. Zhou. Shao lineage. Also Shao Duke 召公, Shao Liege 召伯. Xi 4.1; Xiang 14.3; Zhao 2.1; Ding 9.2. Shao Duke Mu 召穆公. Zhou. Shao lineage. Xi 24.2. Shao Duke Wu 召武公. Zhou. Shao lineage. Xi 11.2. Shao Duke Xiang 召襄. Zhou. Shao lineage. Xuan 15.4. Shao Duke Zhao 召昭公. Zhou. Shao lineage. Son of Shao Duke Wu. a. Shao Liege 召伯. Wen 5.3(C), 5.1. Shao Duke Zhuang 召莊公. Zhou. Shao lineage. a. Shao Liege Huan 召伯奐. Zhao 22.5, 23.3. Shao Hu 召忽 (d. 685). Qi. Also Shao 召. Zhuang 8.3, 9.5. Shao Huo 召獲. Wei. Ai 15.5. Shao Jiang 少姜 (d. 540). Qi/Jin (W). Wife of Lord Ping of Jin. Also Shao Qi 少齊. Zhao 2.2, 2.5, 3.1, 3.6. Shao Liege Liao 召伯廖. Zhou. First mention of the Shao lineage of Zhou in Zuozhuan. Zhuang 27.6. Shao Liege Ying 召伯盈 (d. 513). Zhou. Shao lineage. Son of Shao Duke Zhuang. a. Shao Duke Jian 召簡公, b. Shao Liege 召伯. Zhao 24.1, 26.7(C), 26.9, 29.2. Shao Yang 召揚. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Shaohao Zhi 少皞摯. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 17.3. Shaokang 少康. Legendary figure of the Xia dynasty. Xiang 4.7. Ai 1.2. Shaoxi lineage 少西氏. Chen. Xia lineage. Du Yu also gives Zixia 子夏 as the name of the ancestor of Shaoxi. Xuan 11.5.

2114

Personal Name Index

She 舍 (d. 613). Qi (R, r. 613). Son of Lord Zhao of Qi. Wen 14.9(C), 14.3, 14.6. She Bin 涉賓. Jin. Ding 13.2. She Lord Zhuliang 葉公諸梁. Chu. a. Shen Zhuliang 沈諸梁, b. 葉公, c. Zigao 子高. Ding 5.5; Ai 4.2, 16.5, 17.4, 19.2. She Shu 攝叔. Chu. Xuan 12.2. She Tuo 涉佗 (d. 500). Jin. Zhao 22.4; Ding 8.7, 10.4. She Yong 舌庸. Yue. Ai 26.1, 27.1. Shen Baoxu 申包胥. Chu. Shen lineage. Ding 4.3, 5.5, 5.7. Shen Feng 申豐. Lu. Xiang 23.5; Zhao 4.2, 23.2, 26.4. Shen Quxu 申句須. Lu. Ding 12.2. Shen Hai 申亥. Chu. Shen lineage. Son of Shen Wuyu. Zhao 13.2. Shen Hou 申侯. Chu/Zheng. Xi 4.2, 5.5, 7.3(C), 7.2. Shen Kuai 申蒯 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Shen Li 申驪. Chu. Shen lineage. a. Shen Li 申麗. Cheng 8.2; Xiang 26.10. Shen Shu 申書 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 21.5. Shen Shugui 申叔跪. Chu. Shen lineage. Son of Shen Shushi. Cheng 2.6. Shen Shushi 申叔時. Chu. Shen lineage. Xuan 11.5, 15.2; Cheng 15.3, 16.5. Shen Shuyu 申叔豫. Chu. Shen lineage. Grandson of Shen Shushi. a. Shu Yu 叔豫, b. Shen Shu 申叔. Xiang 21.4, 22.6. Shen Shuzhan 申叔展. Chu. Shen lineage. Also Shu Zhan 叔展, Shen Shu 申叔. Xuan 12.6. Shen, Master of Chu. See King Gong of Chu. Shen, Prince of Cai. See Lord Wen of Cai. Shen Wuyu 申無宇. Chu. Shen lineage. Also deputy for the hunt Wuyu 芋尹 無宇, Wuyu 無宇. Xiang 30.11; Zhao 4.4, 7.2, 11.8, 11.10, 13.2. Shen Xi 申犀. Chu. Shen lineage. Son of Shen Zhou. a. Xi 犀. Xuan 14.3, 15.2. Shen Xianyu 申鮮虞. Qi. a. Xianyu 鮮虞. Xiang 23.4, 25.2, 27.9. Shen Xu 申繻. Lu. Huan 6.6, 18.1; Zhuang 14.2. Shen Xu 申須. Lu. Zhao 17.5. Shen Yegu 申夜姑 (d. 519). Lu. a. Yegu 夜姑. Zhao 25.6. Shen Zhou 申舟 (d. 595). Chu. First person of the Shen lineage of Chu ­mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Zizhou 子舟, b. Wen Zhiwuwei 文之無畏, c. Wuwei 無畏, d. Wuwei 毋畏. Wen 10.5; Xuan 14.3, 15.3. Sheng Ji 聲己. Ju/Lu (W). Concubine of Meng Mubo. Mother of Huishu. Wen 7.7, 15.4. Sheng Jiang 聲姜 (d. 611). Qi/Lu (W). Probably sister of Lord Huan of Qi. Wife of Lord Xi of Lu. Mother of Lord Wen of Lu. Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Xi 11.2(C), 17.3(C), 17.4; Wen 16.4(C), 16.3, 17.2(C). Sheng Meng Zi 聲孟子. Song/Qi (W). Wife of Lord Qing of Qi. Mother of Lord Ling of Qi. Lover of Shusun Qiaoru. Also Meng Zi 孟子. Cheng 16.11, 17.6. Sheng Zi 聲子 (d. 720). Lu (W). Consort of Lord Hui of Lu. Wife of Lord Qing of Qi. Mother of Lord Ling of Qi. Also the ruler’s lady 君氏. Yin 1.1 preface, 3.3(C). Shensheng 申生 (d. 656). Jin. Son of Lord Xian of Jin and Qi Jiang. a. Gong, the heir apparent 共大子, b. Gongzi 共子. Also heir apparent Shensheng

Personal Name Index 2115

大子申生, heir apparent Shensheng 世子申生. Zhuang 28.2; Min 1.6; Xi 5.1(C), 5.2, 10.3; Zhao 28.2. Shenshu Yi 申叔儀. Wu. Ai 13.4. Shi 視 (d. 609). Lu. Son of Lord Wen of Lu and Ai Jiang. Wen 18.5. Shi Chengzi 石成子. Wei. Shi lineage head. a. Shi Ji 石稷, b. Shizi 石子. Cheng 2.2. Shi Chu 石楚. Zheng. Wen 17.1, 17.6. Shi E 石惡. Wei. Shi lineage head. Son of Shi Mai. a. Daozi 悼子. Xiang 27.2(C), 27.3, 27.4, 28.2(C), 28.3. Shi Fang 士魴. Jin (d. 560). Shi lineage, branch of the Fan lineage. Son of Fan Hui. a. Zhi Ji 彘季. Cheng 18.13(C), 18.1, 18.3, 18.13; Xiang 3.7, 5.2, 9.4, 9.5, 10.1, 11.6, 12.3(C), 12.2, 12.6, 13.3. Shi Fu 士鮒. Jin. Shi lineage, branch of the Fan lineage. a. Xicheng Fu 析成鮒. Ding 14.6. Shi Fu 士富. Jin. Shi lineage. Xiang 3.7. Shi Gai 士匄. Jin. Shi lineage head. Son of Shi Ruo. a. Shi Wenbo 士文伯, b. Boxia 伯瑕, c. Wenbo 文伯. Xiang 30.3, 31.6; Zhao 2.5, 6.3, 7.4, 7.14, 12.4. Shi Hou 石厚 (d. 719). Wei. Shi lineage. Son of Shi Que. a. Hou 厚. Yin 3.7, 4.5. Shi Hu 士縠 (d. 618). Jin. Shi lineage, branch of the Fan lineage. Son of Shi Wei. Also supervisor of works Shi Hu 司空. Wen 2.4(C), 2.4, 8.7, 9.4, 9.6. Shi Jiafu 石甲父. Zheng. a. Shi Gui 石癸. Xi 24.6, 30.3; Xuan 3.6. Shi Kou 石彄. Song. Shi lineage. Ding 10.12(C), 10.6, 11.1(C), 11.1. Shi Mai 石買 (d. 554). Wei. Shi lineage head. Son of Shi Chengzi. a. Shi Gongzi 石共子. Xiang 17.3(C), 17.2, 18.2(C), 18.2, 19.13. Shi Mangu 石曼姑. Wei. Shi lineage. Possibly son of Shi E. Ai 3.1(C). Shi Mie 士蔑. Jin. Shi lineage, branch of the Fan lineage. Ai 4.2. Shi Miming 提彌明 (d. 607). Jin. Xuan 2.3. Shi Mimou 士彌牟. Jin. Shi lineage head. Son of Shi Gai. a. Shi Bo 士伯, b. Shi Jingbo 士景伯, c. supervisor of the military Mimou 司馬彌牟. Also Mimou 彌牟. Zhao 13.7, 14.7, 23.2, 24.2, 24.3, 25.3, 28.3, 30.2, 32.3; Ding 1.1. Shi Ping 士平. Song. Zhao 22.2. Shi Pu 石圃. Wei. Shi lineage head. Nephew of Shi E. a. Pu 圃. Xiang 28.3; Ai 17.5, 18.3. Shi Qi 石乞. Wei. Shi lineage. Ai 15.5. Shi Qi 石乞. Chu. a. Qi 乞. Ai 16.5. Shi Qian 士雃. Qin. Xiang 9.4. Shi Qizi 石祁子. Wei, Shi lineage. Zhuang 12.1; Min 2.5. Shi Que 石碏, Wei. First person of the Shi lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Shizi 石子. Yin 3.7, 4.5. Shi Rong 士榮 (d. 632). Wei. Xi 28.8. Shi Ruo 士弱. Jin. Shi lineage (branch of the Fan lineage) head. Son of Shi Wozhuo. a. Shi Zhuangzi 士莊子, b. Shi Zhuangbo 士莊伯. Xiang 9.1, 9.5, 10.1, 18.3, 25.10, 26.7. Shi Shang 石尚. Zhou. Ding 14.9(C).

2116

Personal Name Index

Shi Shou 石首. Zheng. Cheng 16.5. Shi Su 石速. Zhou. Zhuang 19.2. Shi Tui 石魋. Wei. Shi lineage. Son of Shi Mangu. Ai 17.6, 18.3. Shi Wei 士蒍. Jin. Ancestor of the Fan/Shi lineage. Zhuang 23.2, 24.3, 25.4, 26.1, 26.2, 27.5; Min 1.6; Xi 5.2; Cheng 18.3. Shi Wozhuo 士渥濁. Jin. Shi lineage head. a. Shi Zhenzi 士貞子, b. Shi Bo 士伯, c. Shi Zhenbo 士貞伯, d. Zhenbo 貞伯. Xuan 12.5, 15.6; Cheng 5.1, 6.1, 18.3. Shi Xiaoshu 施孝叔. Lu. Shi lineage. a. Shi shi 施氏. Cheng 11.3, 17.6; Zhao 5.1. Shi Yu 石盂. Zheng. Xiang 22.2. Shi Zhang 石張. Zhou. Zhao 32.3. Shi Zhi 石制 (d. 597). Zheng. a. Zifu 子服. Xuan 12.3. Shi Zhifenru 石之紛如 (d. 686). Qi. Zhuang 8.3. Shi Zhuangbo 士莊伯. Jin. Shi lineage, branch of the Fan lineage. a. Gongshuo 鞏朔, b. 鞏伯. Wen 17.4; Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.9, 3.8. Shi Zikong 士子孔 (d. 565). Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Zheng. Xiang 19.9. Shifu 施父. Lu. First person of the Shi lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Huan 9.4. Shiqi Li 師祁犁. Chu. Xiang 24.9. Shishen 實沈. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 1.12. Shishu Qi 世叔齊. Wei. Shishu (Taishu) lineage. Son of Shishu Shen. a. Taishu Ji 大叔疾, b. Ji 疾, c. Daozi 悼子, d. Taishu 大叔. Ai 11.6(C), Ai 11.6, 25.1. Shishu Shen 世叔申. Wei. Shishu (Taishu) lineage. Grandson of Taishu Yi. a. Taishu Yizi 大叔懿子. Zhao 32.5(C); Ai 11.6. (Gu Donggao identifies Shishu Shen and Taishu Yizi as two different persons.) Shou 壽 (d. 696). Wei. Son of Lord Xuan of Wei and Xuan Jiang. a. Shouzi 壽子. Huan 16.5. Shou, Governor of Shěn 沈尹壽. Chu. Xiang 24.9. Shou, Liege of Cao. See Lord Wen of Cao. Shou Yue 壽越. Wu. Xiang 5.5. Shou Yuyao 壽於姚. Wu. Ai 13.3. Shoumeng 壽夢. Yue. Zhao 24.9. Shoumeng, Master of Wu 吳子壽夢. Wu (R, r. 585–561). Also Cheng, Master of Wu 吳子乘, Master of Wu 吳子, Wu Shoumeng 吳壽夢. Xiang 3.5, 5.5, 7.5, 10.1, 12.4(C), 12.3, 19.1. Shouyu, Lord of Shen 申公壽餘. Chu. Ai 4.2. Shu Gong 叔弓 (d. 527). Lu. Shu lineage head. Son of Shu Lao. a. Zishuzi 子叔子, b. Jingzi 敬子, c. Gong 弓. Xiang 30.6(C), 30.9; Zhao 1.8(C), 1.11, 2.2(C), 2.3, 3.2(C), 3.5, 5.6(C), 5.7, 6.8(C), 6.10, 8.3(C), 8.3, 9.1(C), 9.1, 10.3(C), 11.1(C), 11.1, 13.1(C), 13.1, 15.2(C), 15.1. Shu Ji 叔姬. Lu/Qi (W). Daughter of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Wife of Ju Qing. Zhuang 27.5(C). Shu Ji of Ji 紀叔姬. Lu/Ji (W). Also Shu Ji 叔姬. Yin 7.1(C) , 12.1(C); Zhuang 29.4(C), 30.4(C).

Personal Name Index 2117

Shu Ji of Qǐ 杞叔姬 (d. 583). Lu/Qǐ (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Wife of Lord Huan of Qǐ. Cheng 4.2, 5.1(C), 8.8(C), 8.9, 9.1(C), 9.1. Shu Jian 叔堅. Jin. Xi 10.3. Shu Jiang 叔姜. Lu (W). Consort of Lord Zhuang of Lu. Mother of Lord Min of Lu. Min 2.3. Shu Jun 叔麇. Chu. Wen 14.10. Shu Lao 叔老 (d. 551). Lu. Shu lineage head. Son of Zishu Shengbo. a. Qizi 齊子, b. 子叔齊子. Xiang 14.1(C), 14.1, 16.7(C), 16.2, 20.7(C), 20.5, 22.3(C). Shu Pi 叔羆 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 21.5. Shu Qing 叔青. Lu. Shu lineage. Son of Shu Huan. Ai 19.3, 23.3. Shu Wei 叔隗. Jin (W). Wife of Zhao Cui. Mother of Zhao Dun. Xi 23.6, 24.1. Shu Xi 叔肸 (d. 592). Lu. First person of the Shu 叔 or Zishu 子叔 lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Son of Lord Wen of Lu. Younger brother of Lord Xuan of Lu. Xuan 17.8(C), 17.3. Shu Xuan 叔還 (d. 481). Lu. Shu lineage head. Great-grandson of Shu Gong. Ding 11.4(C); Ai 5.5(C), 6.5(C), 14.4(C). Shu Yang 叔鞅 (d. 519). Lu. Shu lineage. Son of Shu Gong. Zhao 22.5(C), 22.5, 23.2(C). Shu Yi 叔詣 (d. 513). Lu. Shu lineage. Son of Shu Yang. Zhao 25.2(C), 29.3(C). Shu Zhe 叔輒 (d. 521). Lu. Shu lineage. Son of Shu Gong. a. Zishu 子叔. Zhao 21.5(C), 21.5. Shu’an of Youliu 有飂叔安. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 29.4. Shuangjiu shi 爽鳩氏. Also called Snipes. Legendary lineage of antiquity. Zhao 17.3, 20.8. Shubao 叔豹. Legendary figure. Wen 18.7. Shuda 叔達. Legendary figure. Wen 18.7. Shuhou, Lord of Shen 申公叔侯. Chu. Xi 26.5, 28.3. Shujiao 叔椒. Jin. Han lineage. Han Qi’s son. Zhao 5.4. Shuliang He 叔梁紇. Lu. The father of Confucius. a. Zou shu He 郰叔紇, He, the man of Zou 郰人紇. Xiang 10.2, 17.3. Shuliu 叔劉. Jin. Xi 23.6. Shun 舜. Legendary sage ruler. Also Emperor Shun 帝舜. Xi 33.6; Wen 18.7; Zhao 8.6, 29.4. Shuo, Prince of Chen. See Lord Gong of Chen. Shuo, Prince of Wei. See Lord Hui. Shuqi 庶其. Ju (R). Also Lord Ji of Ju 莒紀公, Lord Ji 紀公. Wen 18.9(C), 18.7. Shuqi of Zhu 邾庶其. Zhu. Also Shuqi 庶其. Xiang 21.2(C), 21.2; Zhao 31.5. Shuqin 叔禽 (d. 581). Zheng. Cheng 10.5. Shuqin 叔禽. Jin. Han lineage, Han Qi’s son. Zhao 5.4. (Gu Donggao gives his name as Han Ji 韓籍.) Shushan Ran 叔山冉. Chu. Cheng 16.5. Shusun Bao 叔孫豹 (d. 538). Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Shusun Dechen. Younger brother of Shusun Qiaoru. a. Mushu 穆叔, b. Shusun Muzi 叔孫 穆子, c. Muzi 穆子, d. Shusun 叔孫, e. Zishusun 子叔孫. Also Bao 豹. Cheng 16.8, 16.11; Xiang 2.8(C), 2.6, 3.7(C), 3.6, 4.2(C), 4.3, 5.3(C), 5.4, 5.8,

2118

Personal Name Index

6.6(C), 6.5, 7.7, 11.1, 14.3(C), 14.3, 15.4(C), 16.10(C), 16.1, 16.2, 16.5, 19.14(C), 19.12, 22.1, 23.9(C), 23.4, 24.1(C), 24.12(C), 24.1, 24.11, 25.7, 27.2(C), 27.5(C), 27.2, 27.4, 28.9, 28.11, 28.12, 29.1, 29.13, 30.1, 30.12, 31.1, 31.3, 31.4; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 3.8, 4.6(C), 4.8, 5.1. Shusun Bugan 叔孫不敢 (d. 505). Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Shusun Chuo. a. Shusun Chengzi 叔孫成子, b. Shusun 叔孫, c. Bugan 不敢, d. Chengzi 成子. Ding 1.2, 5.5(C), 10.5. Shusun Chuo 叔孫婼 (d. 517). Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Shusun Bao. a. Shusun 叔孫, b. Shusun Zhaozi 叔孫昭子, c. Zhaozi 昭子. Also Chuo 婼. Zhao 4.8, 5.1, 7.3(C), 9.7, 10.4, 10.5(C), 12.3, 12.10, 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 19.1, 20.1, 21.2, 21.3, 21.5, 23.1(C), 23.3(C), 23.2, 23.8, 24.2(C), 24.2, 24.4, 25.1(C), 25.6(C), 25.1, 25.2, 25.10, 26.4. Shusun Daibo 叔孫戴伯 (d. 644). Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Gongzi Ya. a. Gongsun Zi 公孫茲. Xi 4.8(C), 4.5, 5.3(C), 5.3, 16.4(C). Shusun Dechen 叔孫得臣 (d. 604). Lu. Shusun lineage head. Grandson of Gongzi Ya. a. Zhuangshu 莊叔, b. Shusun Zhuangshu 叔孫莊叔. Wen 1.7(C), 1.4, 3.1(C), 3.1, 3.7, 9.3(C), 9.3, 11.6(C), 11.5, 18.5(C), 18.4; Xuan 5.4(C); Xiang 30.3; Zhao 5.1. Shusun Qiaoru 叔孫僑如. Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Shusun Dechen. Older brother of Shusun Bao. a. Xuanbo 宣伯, b. Shusun Xuanbo 叔孫 宣伯, c. Qiaoru 僑如. Wen 11.5; Cheng 2.3(C), 3.9(C), 3.5, 5.3(C), 5.3, 6.8(C), 6.8, 8.10(C), 8.10, 11.4(C), 11.6, 13.2, 14.3(C), 14.2, 15.12(C), 16.13(C), 16.5, 16.6, 16.11; Xiang 23.5, 25.2, 30.3; Zhao 4.8. Shusun Shu 叔孫舒. Lu. Shusun lineage head. a. Wenzi 文子. Ai 26.1, 27.1. Shusun Xuan 叔孫還. Qi. Xiang 21.3, 25.2, 28.11. Shusun Zhe 叔孫輒. Lu. Shusun lineage. Son of Shusun Zhouchou. a. Zizhang 子張. Ding 8.10, 12.2; Ai 8.2. Shusun Zhouchou 叔孫州仇. Lu. Shusun lineage head. Son of Shusun Bugan. a. Wushu 武叔, b. Shusun 叔孫, c. Zishusun 子叔孫, d. Chengzi 成子. Zhao 5.1; Ding 8.10, 10.6(C), 10.7(C), 10.11(C), 10.5, 10.7 12.3(C), 12.2; Ai 2.1(C), 3.4(C), 3.9(C), 11.1, 11.3. Shuwu 叔武 (d. 632). Wei. Younger brother of Lord Cheng of Wei. a. Shusun 叔孫, b. Yishu 夷叔, c. Wei Wu 衛武, d. Weizi 衛子. Xi 28.3, 28.5; Ding 4.1. Shuxian 叔獻. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Shuxiang 叔向. Jin. Yangshe lineage. a. Yangshe Xi 羊舌肸, b. Shuxi 叔肸, c. Xi 肸, d. Yang Xi 楊肸. Xiang 11.5, 14.3, 16.1, 18.3, 18.4, 19.12, 21.5, 21.7, 25.3, 26.1, 26.7, 26.10, 27.4, 27.5, 27.8, 29.7, 29.13, 30.2, 30.3, 31.6; Zhao 1.3, 1.12, 1.13, 2.3, 2.5, 3.3, 3.7, 4.1, 5.4, 6.3, 6.7, 8.1, 9.3, 10.4, 11.2, 11.6, 11.7, 13.2, 13.3, 13.9, 14.7, 15.5, 15.7, 28.2, 28.3; Ai 17.5. Shuzang. See Yang Zhen. Shuzhan 叔詹. Zheng. a. Zheng Zhan 鄭詹. Zhuang 17.1(C), 17.1; Xi 7.3, 22.9, 23.6. Shuzhong Dai 叔仲帶. Lu. Shuzhong lineage. Grandson of Shuzhong Huibo. a. Shuzhong Zhaobo 叔仲昭伯, b. Shuzhongzi 叔仲子, c. Shuzhong Zhaozi 叔仲昭子. Xiang 7.3, 28.12, 31.3; Zhao 4.8, 12.10.

Personal Name Index 2119

Shuzhong Huibo 叔仲惠伯 (d. 609). Lu. First person of the Shuzhong lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Shuzhong is a branch of the Shusun lineage. a. Huibo 惠伯, b. Shuzhong 叔仲, c. Shu Pengsheng 叔彭生. Wen 7.7, 9.9, 11.2(C), 11.2, 14.2(C), 14.2, 15.4, 18.1, 18.2, 18.4, 18.5; Xiang 30.3. Shuzhong Xiao 叔仲小. Lu. Shuzhong lineage. Son of Shuzhong Dai. a. Shuzhongzi 叔仲子, b. Shuzhong Muzi 叔仲穆子. 12.10. Shuzhong Zhi 叔仲志. Lu. Shuzhong lineage. Grandson of Shuzhong Dai. Ding 8.10. Si 絲. Zheng. Si lineage. Son of Si Yan. Zhao 19.8. Si Chen 司臣. Zheng. Xiang 10.9, 15.4. Si Chi 駟赤. Lu. Also Si Chi, Hou preceptor of artisans 郈工師駟赤. Ding 10.5. Si Chuan 駟歂. Zheng. Si lineage head. Son of Si Qi. a. Ziran 子然. Ding 8.11, 9.2. Si Dai 駟帶 (d. 535). Zheng. Si lineage head. Son of Zixi. a. Zishang 子上, b. Dai 帶. Xiang 30.10; Zhao 1.9, 7.9. Si Hong 駟弘. Zheng. Si lineage head. Son of Si Chuan. a. Ziban 子般, b. Si 駟, c. Ban 般. Ai 2.3, 7.6(C), 27.3, 27.5. Si of Yu 虞思. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ai 1.2. Si Qi 司齊. Zheng. Xiang 10.9, 15.4. Si Qi 駟乞. Zheng. Si lineage head. Son of Zixi (Gongsun Xia). Uncle of Si Yan. a. Zixia 子瑕. Zhao 19.8. Si Qin 駟秦 (d. 418). Zheng. Si lineage. Ai 5.4. Si, the Head of Xuˇ 許男斯. Xǔ (R, r. 522–504). Also Head of Xǔ 許男. Son of Lord Dao of Xǔ. Ding 4.2(C), 6.1(C). Si Yan 駟偃 (d. 523). Zheng. Si lineage. Son of Si Dai. a. Ziyou子游, b. Yan 偃. Zhao 16.3, 19.8. Song Mu 宋木. Chu. Ding 5.7. Song Yong 宋勇. Jin. Ai 2.3. Song Zi 宋子. Zheng (W). Consort of Lord Mu of Zheng. Xiang 19.9. Steward Kong 宰孔. Zhou. Zhou lineage. Also Zhou Duke 周公, Zhou Duke the king’s steward 宰周公, Kong 孔. Xi 5.6, 9.2(C), 9.2, 9.3, 30.6. Steward of the right Chou 右宰醜. Wei. Yin 4.5. Steward Xuan 宰咺. Zhou. Yin 1.4(C), 1.5. Su Fensheng 蘇忿生. Zhou. Ancestor of the rulers of Su/Wen. Yin 11.5; Cheng 11.7. Su, Prince of Wei. See Lord Mu of Wei. Sui, Liege of Gu 穀伯綏. Gu. Also Liege of Gu 穀伯. Huan 7.2(C), 7.1. Sun Boyan 孫伯黶. Jin. Zhao 15.7. Sun Jia 孫嘉. Wei. Sun lineage, son of Sun Linfu. Xiang 26.2. Sun Kuai 孫蒯. Wei. Sun lineage head. Son of Sun Linfu. Xiang 10.5, 14.4, 17.2, 18.2, 26.3. Sun Liangfu 孫良夫. Wei. Sun lineage head. a. Sun Huanzi 孫桓子, b. Sunzi 孫子. Huanzi 桓子. Xuan 7.1(C), 7.1; Cheng 2.2(2), 2.3(C), 2.2, 2.3, 2.8, 3.11(C), 3.13(C), 3.15(C), 3.6, 3.7, 6.4(C), 6.4; Xiang 7.7. Sun Linfu 孫林父. Wei. Sun lineage head. Son of Sun Liangfu. a. Sun Wenzi

2120

Personal Name Index

孫文子. a. Sunzi 孫子, b. Wenzi 文子, d. Sun shi 孫氏. Cheng 7.10(C), 7.6, 14.2(C), 14.1, 14.5, 15.12(C); Xiang 2.6(C), 2.9(C), 5.4(C), 5.5, 7.7(C), 7.7, 10.5, 11.3, 14.7(C), 14.4, 19.6(C), 19.2, 20.7, 26.2(C), 26.2, 26.3, 26.5, 26.7, 29.13. Sun Mian 孫免. Wei. Sun lineage. Xuan 6.1(C). Sun Xiang 孫襄 (d. 547). Wei. Sun lineage, son of Sun Linfu. a. Boguo 伯國. Xiang 26.2. Sun Zhaozi 孫昭子. Wei. First person of the Sun lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. Wen 1.5. Sun Zhuangzi 孫莊子. Wei. Sun lineage head. Son of Sun Zhaozi. Ai 26.3. Sun’e 孫惡. Zheng. Xiang 8.2. Sunji 孫繫. Zheng. Xiang 8.2. Sunshu 孫叔 (d. 578). Zheng. Cheng 13.4. Sunshu Ao 孫叔敖. Chu. Wei lineage head. a. Wei Ailie 蔿艾獵 (problematic identification—see Xuan, n. 166), b. Wei Ao 蒍敖 c. Sunshu 孫叔. Xuan 11.3, 12.2. Sunzhi 孫知 (d. 578). Zheng. Cheng 13.4. Suo, Master of Zhu 邾子瑣. Zhu (R). Zhuang 28.2(C). Supervisor of bells She 司鐸射. Lu. Zhao 13.3. Supervisor of conscripts Ang 司徒卬. Chen. Xiang 17.1. Supervisor of conscripts Laoqi 司徒老祁. Lu. Zhao 14.2. Supervisor of conscripts Qi 司徒期. Wei. Ai 25.1, 26.1. Supervisor of conscripts Rui 芮司徒. Song. Xiang 26.8. Supervisor of corrections Hai 司寇亥. Wei. Ai 25.1. Supervisor of corrections Niufu 司寇牛父. Song. Wen 11.5. Supervisor of fortification Xu 司城須. Song. Wen 18.8. Supervisor of the left army Pan 左司馬眅. Chu. Ai 4.2. Supervisor of the military Du 司馬督. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Supervisor of the military Du 司馬督. Jin. a. supervisor of the military Wu 司馬烏. Zhao 22.5, 28.3. Supervisor of the military Huanzi 司馬桓子. Chen. Xiang 25.5. (Yuan Bojun suggests that this may be the same person as Yuan Qiao in Xiang 3; see below.) Supervisor of the military Mao 司馬卯. Chu. Xuan 12.6. Supervisor of the military Niu 司馬牛 (d. 481). Song. Some commentators identify him as Confucius’s disciple Sima Niu. Xiang lineage. Younger brother of Xiang Tui. Ai 14.4. Supervisor of the military Qiang 司馬彊. Song. Zhao 20.5 Supervisor of the military Shu You 司馬叔游. Jin. Also Shu You 叔游. Zhao 28.2. (Du Yu identifies this person as the son of Ru Shuhou, also supervisor of the military.) Supervisor of the military Yin 司馬寅. Jin. Ai 13.4. Supervisor of the military Zao 司馬竈. Qi. Zhao 3.13, 22.1. Supervisor of the right army Ji 右司馬稽. Chu. Zhao 31.4. Supervisor of works Jing 司空靖 (d. 552). Jin. Xiang 21.5.

Personal Name Index 2121

Supervisor of works Wuhai 司空無駭. Lu. Also Wuhai 無駭. Yin 2.3(C), 2.3, 8.9(C). Susha Wei 夙沙衛. Qi. Xiang 2.2, 17.3, 18.3, 19.5. Taihao shi 大暭氏. Legendary ruler of antiquity. Xiang 21.4; Zhao 17.3, 17.5. Taijia 大甲. An ancient Shang king. Xiang 21.5. Taishu Xizi 大叔僖子. Wei. Shishu (Taishu) lineage. Son of Shishu Shen. Younger brother of Shishu Qi. a. Taishu Yi 大叔遺, b. Yi 遺. Ai 16.6, 18.3. Taishu Yi 大叔儀. Wei. First person of the Shishu (Taishu) lineage of Wei mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Taishu Wenzi 大叔文子, b. Wenzi 文子. Also Shishu Yi 世叔儀. Xiang 14.4, 25.15, 26.2, 27.3, 29.5(C), 29.8. Taitai 臺駘. Mythological figure. Zhao 1.12. Tan liege 檀伯 (d. 697). Zheng. Huan 15.6. Tan Liege Da 檀伯達. Tan (R). Ancestral ruler of Tan. Cheng 11.7. Tang 湯. Legendary first ruler of Shang dynasty. Also Shang Tang 商湯. Zhuang 11.2; Wen 2.5; Xiang 26.10; Zhao 4.3, 6.3; Ding 1.1. Tang Gou 唐茍 (d. 575). Zheng. Cheng 16.5. Tang Jiao 唐狡. Chu. Xuan 12.2. Tang Shu. Jin. Ancestral ruler of Jin. Also Tai Shu 太叔, Yu 虞. Xi 15.8, 23.6, 28.12; Zhao 3.3, 15.7, 29.5; Ding 4.1. Tang Shuyu. Ruler of the domain of Tang during the Shang. Zhao 1.12. Tang Wujiu 棠無咎 (d. 546). Qi. a. Wujiu 無咎. Xiang 27.7. Tao Shu 陶叔. Legendary figure of antiquity. Yang (4:1538) identifies him as Zhenduo, ancestral ruler of Cao. Ding 4.1. Taotie 饕餮. Mythological figure. Wen 18.7. Taotang. See Yao. Taowu 檮杌. Mythological figure. Wen 18.7; Zhao 9.3. Taoyan 檮戭. Mythological figure. Wen 18.7. Taozi 桃子. Zhou. Xi 24.2. Te Gong 特宮. Jin. Xi 10.3. Teng, Liege of Cao. See Lord Wu of Cao. Tian Bing 田丙. Song. Ai 17.7. Tian Su 田蘇. Jin. Xiang 7.6. Tingjian 庭堅. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 5.4, 18.7. Touxu 頭須. Jin. Xi 24.1. Tu 荼 (d. 489). Qi (R, r. 489). Son of Lord Jing of Qi and Yu Si. a. child ruler An 安孺子. Ai 5.3, 6.8(C), 6.6, 8.4. Tu Bo 屠伯. Wei. Zhao 13.3. Tu Ji 屠際. Jin. Xi 28.13. Tu Ji 屠擊. Zheng. Zhao 16.6. Tu, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Li of Zheng. Tui Shu 頹叔. Zhou. Xi 24.2. Tui’ai 隤敳. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Tuo 佗 (d. 515). Chu. Yang lineage. Zhao 27.3.

2122

Personal Name Index

Wan 完 (d. 515). Chu. Yang lineage. Zhao 27.3. Wan, Liege of Rui 芮伯萬. Rui (R). Also Liege of Rui 芮伯. Huan 3.8, 4.4, 9.3, 10.3. Wang Bao 王豹. Qi. Ai 6.6. Wang Fan 王犯. Wu/Lu. Ai 8.2. Wang He 王何. Qi. Xiang 25.2, 28.9. Wang Hei 王黑. Qi. Zhao 10.2. Wang Ji 王姬. See Gong Ji. Wang Ji 王姬. Zhuang 1.3(C), 1.4(C), 1.7(C), 1.3, 2.3(C). Wang Ji 王季. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ancestor of Zhou. Xi 5.8. Wang Jia 王甲 (d. 489). Qi. Ai 6.6. Wang Jiao 王湫 (d. 567). Qi. Cheng 18.2; Xiang 6.7. Wang Meng 王猛. Qi. a. Limi 犁彌, b. Mi 彌, c. Meng 猛. Ding 9.4, 10.2 Wang Sheng 王生. Jin. Ai 5.1. Wang Yi 汪錡. Lu. Ai 11.1. Wang Zhazi 王札子. Zhou. Also Wangzi Jie 王子捷. Xuan 15.5(C), 15.4. Wangchen, Duke of Song. See Lord Cheng of Song. Wangguan Wudi 王官無地. Jin. Wen 2.1. Wangshu Chensheng 王叔陳生. Zhou. Wangshu lineage. Son of Wangshu Duke Huan. a. Wang shu 王叔. Xiang 5.2, 10.12. Wangshu Duke Huan 王叔桓公. Zhou. Wangshu lineage. Son of Wangzi Hu. Wen 3.6; Xuan 7.4. Wangshu Duke Wen. See Wangzi Hu. Wangsun Hui 王孫揮. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Wangsun Jia 王孫賈. Chu. Ding 5.7. Wangsun Jia 王孫賈. Wei. a. Jia 賈. Ding 8.7. Wangsun lineage head 王孫氏. Wu/Qi. Wu Zixu’s son; established a new ­lineage in Qi. Ai 11.4. Wangsun Man 王孫滿. Zhou. Xi 33.1; Xuan 3.3 Wangsun Miyong 王孫彌庸. Wu. a. Miyong 彌庸. Ai 13.3. Wangsun Mo 王孫沒. Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Wangsun Mou 王孫牟. Wei. Zhao 12.11. Wangsun Qi 王孫齊. Wei. Ai 26.1. Wangsun Su 王孫蘇. Zhou. Wen 14.1, 14.9; Xuan 15.4, 16.4. Wangsun Xi 王孫喜. Chu. Zhuang 28.3. Wangsun Yan 王孫燕. Chu. Ai 16.5. Wangsun You 王孫游. Chu. Zhuang 28.3. Wangsun Youyu 王孫由于. Chu. a. Youyu 由于, b. the chamberlain 寢尹, c. Wu Youyu 吳由于. Ding 4.3, 5.7; Ai 18.2. Wangsun Yu 王孫圉. Chu. Ding 5.7. Wangzi Boliao 王子伯廖. Zheng. Also Boliao 伯廖. Xuan 6.6. Wangzi Bopian 王子伯駢. Zheng. Xiang 8.7, 11.5. Wangzi Chengfu 王子成父. Qi. Wen 11.5. Wangzi Chu 王子處. Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Wangzi Dai 王子帶 (d. 635). Zhou. Son of King Hui of Zhou and Queen Hui.

Personal Name Index 2123

Younger brother of King Xiang of Zhou. First person of the Gan lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. the senior younger brother 大叔, b. the senior younger brother Dai 大叔帶, c. Shu Dai 叔帶, d. Gan Duke Zhao 甘昭公, Duke Zhao 昭公. Also Zi Dai 子帶. Xi 7.5, 11.3, 12.3, 13.1, 22.6, 24.2, 24.5, 25.2. Wangzi Dang 王子黨. Zhou. Xi 10.2. Wangzi Di 王子地. Wu. a. Di 地. Ai 13.3. Wangzi Gucao 王子姑曹. Wu. a. Gongzi Gucao 公子姑曹. Ai 8.2, 11.3, 17.6. Wangzi Hu 王子狐. Zhou. Yin 3.3. Wangzi Hu 王子虎 (d. 625). Zhou. Son of King Xi of Zhou. Younger brother of King Hui of Zhou. a. Wangshu Duke Wen 王叔文公. Xi 28.3, 29.2; Wen 3.2(C), 3.3. Wangzi Huan 王子還 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. a. Huan 還. Zhao 22.5. Wangzi Jie. See Wang Zhazi. Wangzi Ke 王子克. Zhou. a. Ziyi 子儀. Huan 18.3. Wangzi Mou 王子牟. Chu. a. Zimou 子牟, also Zimou, Lord of Shen 申公子牟. Xiang 26.10. Wangzi Ningfu 王子佞夫 (d. 543). Zhou. Also Ningfu 佞夫. Xiang 30.4(C), 30.6. Wangzi Pi 王子罷. Chu. Cheng 7.5. Possibly the same person as Gongzi Pi. Wangzi Sheng 王子勝. Chu. Also deputy of the left Wangzi Sheng 左尹王 子勝. Zhao 18.7. Wangzi Tui 王子頹 (d. 673). Zhou. Son of King Zhao of Zhou. a. Zitui 子頹, b. Tui 頹. Zhuang 19.2, 20.1, 21.1, 27.6; Zhao 26.9. Wangzi Xia 王子瑕. Zhou. Also Xia 瑕. Xiang 30.5(C), 30.6. Wangzi Zhao 王子朝 (d. 505). Zhou. Son of King Jing of Zhou. a. Zizhao 子朝. Also the Western King 西王. Zhao 22.3, 22.5, 23.8(C), 23.3, 23.6, 24.1, 24.3, 24.5, 24.8, 26.7(C), 26.9; Ding 5.1, 6.5. Wangzi Zhaoche 王子趙車. Zhou. Zhao 29.2. Wangzi Zhi 王子職. Chu. Also Zhi 職. Wen 1.7. Wei Chou 魏犨. Jin. Wei lineage head. a. Wei Wuzi 魏武子, b. Wuzi 武子. Xi 23.6, 27.4, 28.3; Xuan 15.5; Zhao 13.2. Wei, deputy of Lan 藍尹 亹. Chu. Ding 5.7. Wei Gu 薳固. Chu. Wei lineage. a. deputy for remonstrance Gu 鍼尹固, b. deputy for remonstrance Gu 箴尹固. Ding 4.3; Ai 16.5, 18.2. Wei Guo 蒍國. Zhou. a. Ziguo 子國. Zhuang 16.6, 19.2. Wei Hu 微虎. Lu. Ai 8.2. Wei Ji 衛姬. Wei/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Xi of Qi. Mother of Lord Huan of Qi. Zhao 13.2. Wei Ji the Elder 長衛姬. Wei/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. a. Gong Ji of Wei 衛共姬. Qi. Xi 17.5; Min 2.5. Also called Qizi 齊子. Wei Ji the Younger 少衛姬. Wei/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. Xi 17.5. Wei Jia 蒍賈. Chu. Wei lineage head. Father of Sunshu Ao (Du Yu). a. Boying 伯贏. Xi 27.4; Wen 16.4; Xuan 1.8, 4.3. Wei Jiang 魏絳. Jin. Wei lineage head. Son of Wei Chou. a. Wei Zhuangzi

2124

Personal Name Index

魏莊子, b. Zhuangzi 莊子. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 3.7, 4.7, 9.4, 9.5, 9.9, 10.10, 11.5, 13.3, 14.3, 18.3, 23.3. Wei Jie 魏頡. Jin. Wei lineage. Cheng 18.3. Wei Ju 薳居. Chu. Wei lineage. Zhao 13.2. Wei Ke 魏顆. Jin. Wei lineage. Son of Wei Chou. Also Ke 顆. Xuan 15.5. Wei Lüchen 蒍呂臣. Chu. Wei lineage head. a. Shubo 叔伯. Xi 23.3, 28.4. Wei Manduo 魏曼多. Jin. Wei lineage head. a. Wei Xiangzi 魏襄子. Ding 13.2; Ai 7.2(C), 13.7(C), 13.2. Wei of Cai 蔡洧. Cai/Chu. Zhao 13.2. Wei of Xuˇ 許圍. Xǔ/Chu. Zhao 13.2. Wei Pi 薳罷. Chu. Wei lineage. a. Zidang 子蕩. Xiang 27.8, 30.1(C), 30.1; Zhao 1.14, 5.2, 6.7(C), 6.9. Wei Pian 尉翩. Zheng. Xiang 10.9, 15.4. Wei Qiqiang 薳啟彊. Chu. Wei lineage. Xiang 24.5, 24.6, 24.8; Zhao 1.14, 4.7, 5.4, 5.8, 7.3, 7.6. Wei She 薳射. Chu. Wei lineage. Zhao 5.8, 25.11; Ding 5.5. Wei Shouyu 魏壽餘. Jin. Wei lineage. Wen 13.2. Wei Shu 魏舒 (d. 509). Jin. Wei lineage head. Son of Wei Jiang. a. Wei Xianzi 魏獻子, b. Xianzi 獻子, c. Weizi 魏子. Xiang 23.3, 25.4, 29.13; Zhao 1.10, 5.4, 23.3, 28.3, 28.4, 29.4, 30.2, 32.3; Ding 1.1. Wei Wu 魏戊. Jin. Wei lineage. Son of Wei Shu. a. Wu 戊. Zhao 28.3, 28.4. Wei Xie 薳洩 (d. 536). Chu. Wei lineage. Zhao 6.9. Wei Yan 薳掩 (d. 543). Chu. Wei lineage head. Son of Wei Ziping. Also grand supervisor of the military Wei Yan 大司馬蒍掩. Xiang 25.11, 25.13, 30.11; Zhao 13.2. Wei Yi 魏錡 (d. 575). Jin. Wei lineage. Son of Wei Chou. a. Chu Wuzi 厨武子, b. Chuzi 厨子, c. Lü Yi 呂錡. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 16.5. Wei Yue 薳越 (d. 519). Chu. Wei lineage. Also supervisor of the military Wei Yue 司馬薳越. Zhao 21.6, 22.2, 23.5, 23.7. Wei Zhang 薳章. Chu. First person of the Wei lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Huan 6.2, 8.2, 9.2. Wei Zhi 尉止 (d. 563). Zheng. Xiang 10.9. Wei Ziping 薳子馮/蒍子馮 (d. 548). Chu. Wei lineage head. Nephew of Sunshu Ao (Du Yu). a. Weizi 薳子/ 蒍子. Xiang 18.4, 21.4, 22.6, 24.9, 25.8, 25.13. Weizi Qi 微子啟. Brother of the last Shang king. Ancestor of Song. Xi 6.4; Ai 9.6. Wen Jiang 文姜. Qi/Lu (W). Daughter of Lord Xi of Qi. Younger sister and lover of Lord Xiang of Qi. Wife of Lord Huan of Lu. Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Huan 3.5(C), 3.6(C), 3.8(C), 3.6, 6.4, 6.6, 18.1(C), 18.1; Zhuang 1.1, 1.2, 2.4(C), 2.1, 4.1(C), 5.2(C), 6.2, 7.1(C), 7.5(C), 7.1, 15.2(C), 19.4(C), 20.1(C), 21.3(C), 22.2(C); Zhao 32.4. Wen Mi 文羋. Chu/Zheng (W). Wife of Lord Wen of Zheng. Also Lady Mi 羋氏. Xi 22.9. Wen Ying 文嬴. Qin/Jin (W). Daughter of Lord Mu of Qin. Wife of Lord Wen of Jin. Mother of Lord Xiang of Jin. Also Lady Ying 嬴氏. Xi 33.3.

Personal Name Index 2125

Wen Zhikai 文之鍇. Cai. a. Kai 鍇. Ai 4.1. Wenbo 文伯. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Also Meng Wenbo. Son of Meng Mubo. a. Gu 穀. Wen 1.1, 7.7, 14.11. Western King. See Prince Zhao. Wife (widow) of Lord Dao 晉悼夫人. Qǐ /Jin. Wife of Lord Dao of Jin. Xiang 23.1, 29.11, 30.3. Wife of King Wen. See Xi Gui. Wife of Lord Huan of Song 宋桓夫人. Wei/Song. Min 2.5. Wife of Lord Xiang of Song 宋襄夫人. Zhou/Song. Elder sister of King Xiang of Zhou. Also the wife of the former Lord Xiang 襄夫人, Lady Wang Ji 夫人王姬. Wen 8.6, 16.5. Wife of King Zhuang of Chu 楚莊夫人 (d. 564). Chu. Xiang 9.8. Wu Can 伍參. Chu. First person of the Wu lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xuan 12.2; Xiang 26.10. Wu Jiang 武姜. Shen/Zheng (W). Wife of Lord Wu of Zheng. Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Yin 1.4. Wu Ju 伍舉. Chu. Wu lineage. a. Jiao Ju 椒舉, b. Ju 舉. Xiang 26.10, 26.11; Zhao 1.1, 1.13, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 9.2. Wu, Liege of Cao. See Lord Dao of Cao. Wu lineage head 武氏. Zhou. Yin 3.5(C), 3.4, 5.2. Wu of Handan 邯鄲午 (d. 497). Jin. Zhao lineage. Ding 13.2. Wu of Jin. See Lord Ding of Jin. Wu, Prince of Chen. See Lord Hui of Chen. Wu, Prince of Cheng. See Lord Cheng of Chen. Wu Shang 伍尚 (d. 522). Chu. Wu lineage. Son of Wu She. a. Shang, the Tang Lord 棠君尚. Zhao 20.2. Wu She 伍奢 (d. 522). Chu. Wu lineage. Son of Wu Ju. Father of Wu Shang and Wu Yun. a. She 奢, b. She, marshal of Lian 連尹奢. Zhao 19.2, 20.2, 27.6. Wu Taibo 吳大伯. Zhou/Wu. Legendary figure of antiquity. Eldest son of Grand King (Gugong Danfu). Also Taibo 大伯. Min 1.6; Xi 5.8; Ai 7.3. Wu Yu 烏餘. Qi. Xiang 26.14, 27.1. Wu Zang 鄔臧 (d. 514). Jin. a. Zang 臧. Zhao 28.2. Wu Zhiming 烏枝鳴. Qi. Zhao 21.6. Wu Zixu 伍子胥 (d. 484). Chu/Wu. Wu lineage. Son of Wu She. a. Wu Yun 伍員, b. Yun 員, c. Zixu 子胥. Zhao 20.2, 30.4, 31.4; Ding 4.3; Ai 1.2, 11.4. Wucheng Hei 武城黑. Chu. Ding 4.3. Wucun 烏存. Ju. Zhao 23.4. Wufu 五父. Chen. a. Chen Tuo 陳佗. Yin 6.4, 7.6; Huan 6.4(C); Zhuang 22.1; Xiang 25.10. Wuhai 無駭. Lu (d. 715). Zhan lineage. Grandson of Gongzi Zhan. Yin 2.3(C), 2.3, 8.9(C), 8.9. Wuli 吾離. Jiang Rong. Ancestor of the Rong. Xiang 14.1. Wuli, Prince of Deng 鄧侯吾離. Deng (R). Also Prince of Deng 鄧侯. Huan 7.2(C), 7.1. Wuluo 武羅. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 4.7.

2126

Personal Name Index

Wuqi 無慼. Song. Hua lineage. Son of Hua Hai. Zhao 20.3. Wusheng, Liege of Zheng. See Lord Zhuang of Zheng. Wuxu. See Zhao Xiangzi. Wuye, Prince of Qi. See Lord Qing of Qi. Xi. 熙. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 29.4. Xi Cheng 郤稱. Jin. Xi lineage. Also Xi 郤. Xi 10.3; Zhao 3.4. Xi Chou 郤犨 (d. 574). Jin. Xi lineage. Son of Bu Yang. a. Kucheng Shu 苦成叔. Also Kucheng 苦成. Cheng 11.2(C), 11.2, 11.3, 11.9, 14.1, 16.14(C), 16.5, 16.6, 16.11, 17.13(C), 17.10. Xi Chu 隰鉏. Qi. Xi lineage. Xiang 25.3. Xi Dang 隰黨. Qi. Xi lineage. Zhao 14.6. Xi Fuji 僖負羈. Cao. Xi 23.6, 28.3. Xi Gui 息媯. Chen/Xi/Chu (W). Wife of the Prince of Xi. Later, wife of King Wen of Chu. Also wife of King Wen 文夫人. Zhuang 10.3, 14.3, 28.3. Xi Guifu 析歸父. Qi. a. Zijia 子家, b. Xi Wenzi 析文子. Xiang 18.3, 23.3, 28.9. Xi Hu 郤縠. Jin. Xi lineage. Xi 27.4, 28.1. Xi Huan 息桓. Chu. Xiang 25.8. Xi Ke 郤克 (d. 587). Jin. Xi lineage head. Son of Xi Que. a. Xi Xianzi 郤獻子, b. Xizi 郤子, c. Xianzi 獻子, d. Xi bo 郤伯, e. Ke 克. Xuan 12.2, 17.1, 17.2; Cheng 2.3(C), 2.3, 2.7, 3.11(C), 3.6, 3.9. Xi Kuilei 酅魁壘 (d. 468). Jin. Ai 27.5. Xi Peng 隰朋. Qi. First person of the Xi lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xi 9.6, 10.2, 12.4; Zhao 13.2. Xi Qi 郤乞. Jin. Xi 郤 lineage. Xi 15.4; Xiang 26.10. Xi Que 郤缺 (d. 597). Jin. Xi lineage head. Son of Xi Rui. a. Xi Chengzi 郤成子, b. Ji Que 冀缺. Xi 33.6; Wen 7.8, 11.2(C), 11.2, 12.6, 13.2, 15.7(C), 15.7; Xuan 8.4, 9.13(C), 9.8, 11.4; Xiang 30.3. Xi Rui 郤芮 (d. 636). Jin. First person of the Xi lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Ji Rui 冀芮. Also Xi 郤. Xi 6.1, 9.6, 10.3, 24.1; Wen 7.4. Xi, the Prince of Cai 蔡侯肸. Cai (R, r. 674–646). Son of Prince Ai of Cai. Also Prince Mu of Cai 蔡穆侯. Xi 6.4, 14.5(C). Xi Wan 郤宛 (d. 515). Chu. a. Zie 子惡. Also deputy of the left Xi Wan 左尹, Xi Wan 郤宛. Zhao 27.4(C), 27.2, 27.3, 27.6; Ding 4.3. Xi Yi 郤錡. Jin. Xi lineage head. Son of Xi Ke. a. Jubo 駒伯, b. Xizi 郤子. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 13.1(C), 13.1, 16.5, 17.13(C), 17.10. Xi Yì 卻毅. Jin. Xi lineage. a. Bu Yi 步毅. Younger brother of Xi Zhi. Cheng 13.3, 16.5. Xi Zhen 郤溱. Jin. Xi lineage. Xi 27.4, 28.3. Xi Zhi 郤至 (d. 574). Jin. Xi lineage. a. Wen Ji 溫季, b. Jizi 季子. Also Zhi 至. Cheng 2.6, 11.3, 11.7, 12.4, 13.3, 15.5, 16.5, 16.12, 17.13(C), 17.10, 17.12; Xiang 26.10. Xi Zhuchu 析朱鉏. Wei. Also Chengzi 成子. Zhao 20.4. Xi Zhuchu 析朱鉏. Lu. Ai 8.2. Xia Ji 夏姬. Zheng/Chen/Chu (W). Daughter of Lord Mu of Zheng. Wife

Personal Name Index 2127

of Ziman. Later, wife of Xia Yushu, Xiang Elder, and Qu Wuchen. Lover of Lord Ling of Chen, Gongsun Ning, Yi Hangfu, Heiyao. Mother of Xia Zhengshu. Also Ji 姬. Xuan 9.6; Cheng 2.6, 7.5; Xiang 26.10; Zhao 28.2. Xia Nie 夏齧. Chen. Xia lineage. a. Nie 齧. Zhao 23.7(C), 23.5. Xia Qin 瑕禽. Zhou. Xiang 10.12. Xia Qufu 夏區夫. Chen. Xia lineage. Ai 13.11(C). Xia Shuying 瑕叔盈. Zheng. Yin 11.3. Xia Wu 夏戊. Wei. a. Xia Ding shi 夏丁氏. Ai 11.6, 25.1. Xia Xin 瑕辛 (d. 530). Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Xia Zhengshu 夏徵舒 (d. 598). Chen. Xia lineage. Son of Yushu and Xia Ji. a. Xia Nan 夏南. Also Zhengshu 徵舒. Xuan 10.9(C), 10.4, 11.5(C), 11.5; Cheng 2.6; Xiang 25.10. Xiafu Fuji 夏父弗忌. Lu. Wen 2.5. Xian 獻. Lu. Huan 6.6. Xian Danmu 先丹木. Jin. Xian lineage. Min 2.7. Xian Du 先都 (d. 618). Jin. Xian lineage. Wen 7.4, 8.7, 9.4(C), 9.1. Xian Gao 弦高. Zheng. Xi 33.1. Xian Hu 先縠 (d. 596). Jin. Xian lineage head. Son of Xian Ke. a. Zhizi 彘子, b. Yuan Hu 原縠. Xuan 12.2, 12.7, 13.4(C), 13.3, 13.4. Xian Juju 先且居 (d. 622). Jin. Xian lineage head. Son of Xian Zhen. a. Huo bo 霍伯. Xi 33.6; Wen 1.5, 2.1, 2.6, 5.5. Xian Ke 先克 (d. 618). Jin. Xian lineage head. Son of Xian Juju. Wen 7.4, 8.7, 9.1. Xian Mao 先茅. Jin. Xian lineage. Xi 33.6. Xian Mie 先蔑. Jin. Xian lineage. a. Shibo 士伯. Xi 28.13; Wen 6.5, 7.6(C), 7.4. Xian Pu 先僕. Jin. Xian lineage. Wen 3.6. Xian Shi 弦施. Qi. a. Xian Duo 弦多. Ai 4.3, 6.3, 11.3. Xian Xin 先辛. Jin. Xian lineage. Xuan 1.4. Xian You 先友. Jin. Xian lineage. Min 2.7. Xian Zhen 先軫 (d. 627). Jin. First person of the Xian lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Yuan Zhen 原軫. Xi 27.4, 28.1, 28.3, 33.3, 33.6; Wen 2.1; Cheng 16.5. Xiang Chao 向巢. Song. Xiang lineage. Great-grandson of Xiang Xu. Elder brother of Xiang Tui. a. minister of the left Chao 左師巢, b. Chao 巢. Ding 9.1; Ai 6.10(C), 12.5(C), 12.6, 14.4. Xiang Dai 向帶. Song. Xiang lineage. Cheng 15.4, 18.5. Xiang, deputy for artisans. See Deputy for artisans Xiang. Xiang Jiang 向姜. Ju (W). Also Lady Jiang 姜氏. Yin 2.2. Xiang, Liege of Cao. See Lord Gong of Cao. Xiang, Lord of Xia 夏后相. Legendary figure of antiquity. Early Xia ruler. Also Xiang 相. Ai 1.2. Xiang Luo 向羅. Song. Xiang lineage. Son of Xiang Ning. Called “Luo” 羅 in the text. Zhao 20.3. Xiang Ning 向寧. Song. Xiang lineage. Son of Xiang Xu. Zhao 19.3, 20.4(C), 20.3, 20.5, 21.3(C), 22.2(C), 22.2. Xiang Pishi 襄罷師. Qi. Xiang 23.4.

2128

Personal Name Index

Xiang Qinjiang 向禽將. Wei. Cheng 2.2. Xiang Sheng 向勝. Song. Xiang lineage. Zhao 20.3. Xiang the Elder 襄老 (d. 597). Chu. Also the court deputy Xiang the Elder 連尹襄老. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.6, 3.4, 7.5. Xiang Tui 向魋. Song. Xiang lineage. Great-grandson of Xiang Xu. a. Tui 魋, b. Huan Tui 桓魋, c. Huan, supervisor of the military 桓司馬, d. supervisor of the military 司馬, e. Huan shi 桓氏. Ding 10.6, 11.1; Ai 11.6, 13.1, 14.7(C), 14.9(C), 14.10(C), 14.4. Xiang Weiren 向為人. Song. Xiang lineage. Cheng 5.7, 15.4, 18.5. Xiang Xing 向行. Song. Xiang lineage. Zhao 20.3. Xiang Xu 向戌. Song. First person of the Xiang lineage of Song mentioned in Zuozhuan. Descendant of Lord Huan of Song. a. Minister of the left (whose settlement is He) 合左師, b. minister of the left 左師, c. Xu 戌. Cheng 15.4; Xiang 8.4, 9.1, 10.2, 11.2, 11.3, 15.1(C), 15.1, 16.1, 17.5, 26.8, 20.6, 26.7, 26.10, 27.4, 27.6, 28.12, 30.12; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 4.3, 19.3. Xiang Yi 向宜. Song. Xiang lineage. Son of Xiang Xu. a. Zilu 子祿. Zhao 20.5, 21.6. Xiang Zheng 向鄭. Song. Xiang lineage. Son of Xiang Xu. Zhao 20.5. Xiangyi 襄伊 (d. 548). Qi. Xiang 25.2. Xiangzhong 襄仲 (d. 601). Lu. Ancestor of the Dongmen lineage. Son of Lord Zhuang of Lu. a. Gongzi Sui 公子遂, b. Dongmen Xiangzhong 東門襄仲, c. Zhongsui 仲遂 d. Dongmen Sui 東門遂. Xi 26.5(C), 26.4, 27.4(C), 28.14(C), 30.7(C), 30.5, 31.2(C), 31.2, 33.7(C), 33.5; Wen 2.8(C), 2.7, 6.5(C), 6.7, 8.5(C), 7.7, 8.4, 9.8(C), 9.6, 11.4(C), 11.4, 12.5, 14.11, 14.14, 15.4, 16.3(C), 16.2, 17.6(C), 17.3, 17.7, 18.5(C), 18.4, 18.6; Xuan 1.2(C), 1.7(C), 1.6, 8.2(C), 8.3(C), 8.2, 18.5; Xiang 23.5. Xianwu, Prince of Cai 蔡侯獻舞. Cai (R, r. 694–684). Also Cai Ji 蔡季, Prince Ai of Cai 蔡哀 侯, Prince of Cai 蔡侯. Huan 17.5(C), 17.4, 17.5; Zhuang 10.5(C), 10.3, 14.3. Xiaobai, Prince of Qi. See Lord Huan of Qi. Xiaobo 孝伯. Wei. Son of Lord Zhuang and Wei and Li Gui. Yin 3.7. Xiao Tongshu Zi 蕭同叔子. Qi. Mother of Lord Qing of Qi. Cheng 2.3. Xiaowang Taojia 小王桃甲. Jin. Ding 14.6. Xiaoweizi 小惟子. Chu. Ding 6.4. Xiayang Yue 夏陽說. Jin. Yue 說. Cheng 6.4. Xichu Wu 西鉏吾. Song. Cheng 18.5. Xiang 9.1. Xie 契. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ancestor of Shang. Wen 2.5. Xie Hu 解狐 (d. 570). Jin. Xiang 3.4. Xie Jia 洩駕. Zheng. a. Xie Bo 洩伯. Yin 5.4, 7.3. Xie Jia 洩駕. Zheng. Xi 31.6; Xuan 3.6. Xie King 攜王. Zhou (R, r. 771–750). The Xie King of Zhou 周攜王. Son of King Xuan of Zhou. Rival of King Ping of Zhou. Zhao 26.9. Xie, noble son of the left 左公子洩 (d. 688). Wei. Also noble son of the left. 左公子. Huan 16.5; Zhuang 6.1. Xie Xi 謝息. Lu. Zhao 7.5.

Personal Name Index 2129

Xie Yang 解揚. Jin. Wen 8.1; Xuan 1.8, 15.2. Xie Ye 洩冶 (d. 600). Chen. Xuan 9.14(C), 9.6. Xie Zhang 解張. Jin. a. Zhanghou 張侯. Cheng 2.3. Xiedu Yumi 洩堵俞彌. Zheng. a. Xiedu Kou 洩堵寇, b. Ziyumi 子俞彌. See Du Shu. Xi 20.2, 24.2. Xiefu 燮父. Jin. Zhao 12.11. Xieyong 洩庸. Wu. Ai 2.4. Xifu 析父. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Xin 辛. Jin. Cheng 18.3. (Some identify this person with Jia Xin above.) Xin Bo 辛伯. Zhou. Huan 18.3; Min 2.7. Xin Jia 辛甲. Zhou. Xiang 4.7. Xin Liao 辛廖. Zhou. Min 1.6. Xin You 辛有. Zhou. Xi 22.4; Zhao 15.7. Xinchen, Head of Xuˇ. See Lord Mu of Xǔ. Xing Bo 邢伯. Jin. Qu Wuchen’s son. a. Xing hou 邢候. See Qu Huyong 屈狐庸. Xiang 18.3; Zhao 14.7. Xing Dai 邢帶. Jin. Han lineage. Zhao 5.4. Xing Kuai 邢蒯. Jin. Xiang 21.8. Xing Zang 省臧. Song. Zhao 22.2. Xing Zao 渻竈. Qi. Xiang 31.2. Xiong Fuji 熊負羈. Chu. Xuang 12.2. Xiong Kun 熊髡. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 4.7. Xiong Yiliao 熊宜僚. Chu. Ai 16.5. Xionglü Jubi 熊率且比. Chu. Huan 6.2. Xiongxiang Mei 熊相禖. Chu. Zhao 25.11. Xiongxiang Yiliao 熊相宜僚 (d. 597). Chu. Xuan 12.6. Xiongyi 熊繹. Chu. Zhao 12.11. Xiongzhi 熊摯. Chu/Kui. Xi 26.5. Xiqi 奚齊 (d. 651). Jin. Son of Lord Xian of Jin and Li Ji. Zhuang 28.2; Xi 4.6, 9.6(C), 9.4. Xiqi Shu 西乞術. Qin. a. Xiqi 西乞. Also Shu 術. Xi 32.3; Wen 12.6(C), 12.5. Xiwo, Head of Xuˇ. See Lord Zhao of Xǔ. Xiyang Su 戲陽速. Wei. a. Su 速. Ding 14.8. Xizhong 奚仲. Legendary figure of antiquity. Ancestor of Xue. Ding 1.1. Xu 須 (d. 609). Song. Younger brother of Lord Wen of Song. Wen 18.8. Xu Bo 許伯. Chu. Xuan 12.2. Xu Chen 胥臣 (d. 622). Jin. First person of the Xu lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Jiu Ji 臼季, b. supervisor of Works Jizi 司空季子. Xi 23.6, 28.1, 28.3, 33.6; Wen 1.5, 5.5. Xu Cheng 徐承. Wu. Ai 10.3. Xu Chu 徐鉏. Zhu. a. Chu 鉏. Zhao 23.2. Xu Gongwei 許公為. Wei. a. Xu Wei 許為. Ai 16.4. Xu Jia 胥甲. Jin. Xu lineage head. Son of Xu Chen. a. Xu Jiafu 胥甲父. Wen 12.6; Xuan 1.5(C), 1.4. Xu Ke 胥克. Jin. Xu lineage head. Son of Xu Jia. Xuan 1.4, 8.4; Cheng 17.10.

2130

Personal Name Index

Xu Liangdai 胥梁帶. Jin. Xu lineage. Xiang 26.14, 27.1. Xu Shu 許叔. Xu. See Lord Mu of Xǔ. Xu, the Liege of Cao. See Lord Ping of Cao. Xu Tong 胥童 (d. 573). Jin. Xu lineage head. Son of Xu Ke. Cheng 17.1, 17.12, 18.1(C). Xu Wu 胥午. Jin. Xu lineage. Xiang 23.3. Xu Wumou 須務牟. Chu. Zhao 13.2. Xu Xia 許瑕. Zheng. Ai 9.2. Xu Yan 許偃. Chu. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 12.2. Xu Ying 徐嬴. Qi (W). Xi 17.5. Xu’an 胥犴. Yue. Zhao 24.9. Xuan Jiang 宣姜. Qi/Wei (W). Wife of Lord Xuan of Wei. Huan 16.5; Min 2.5. Xuan Jiang 宣姜 (d. 522). Wei (W). Wife of Lord Xiang of Wei. Official mother of Lord Ling of Wei. Lover of Gongzi Zhao. Zhao 20.4. Xuan Wushe 還無社. Xiao. Xuan 12.6. Xumen Chao 胥門巢. Wu. Ai 11.3. Xumi She 胥彌赦. Wei. Ai 17.5. Xun Bin 荀賓. Jin. Xun lineage. Cheng 18.3. Xun Hui 荀會. Jin. Xun lineage. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 3.5. Xun Jia 荀家. Jin. Xun lineage. Cheng 18.3. Xun Linfu 荀林父. Jin. Ancestor of the Zhonghang lineage. a. Zhonghang Huanzi 中行桓子, b. Huanzi 桓子. c. Xunbo 荀伯, d. Linfu 林父, e. Boshi 伯氏; e. Zhonghang bo 中行伯. Xi 27.4, 28.13; Wen 7.4, 12.6, 13.2, 17.1; Xuan 1.8, 5.5(C), 6.3, 9.8(C), 9.4, 12.3(C), 12.2, 12.5, 14.2, 15.3, 15.6; Cheng 2.6. Xun Luo 鄩羅. Zhou. Zhao 23.3. Xun Shou 荀首. Jin. Ancestor of Zhi lineage. Younger brother of Xun Linfu. a. Zhi Zhuangzi 知莊子, b. Zhi Ji 知季, c. Zhi 知, d. Shou 首. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 3.4, 4.5, 5.3(C), 5.3, 6.11, 8.2. Xun Xi 荀息 (d. 651). Jin. First person of the Xun lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Xun Shu 荀叔. Xi 2.2, 9.4, 10.3(C). (The Xun lineage later splits into the Zhonghang 中行 and Zhi 知 lineages.) Xun Xi 鄩肸. Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Xun Zhui 荀騅. Jin. Xun lineage. Cheng 3.8. Xuwu Fan 徐吾犯. Zheng. Zhao 1.7. Yan 延 (d. 520). Zhou. Son of King Ling or King Jing of Zhou. Zhao 22.5. Yan Ao 閻敖. Chu. Zhuang 18.5. Yan Furong 晏父戎. Qi. Yan lineage. Xiang 23.4. Yan Gao 顏高. Lu. Ding 8.1. Yan Jí 燕姞. Yan/Zheng (W). The consort of Lord Wen of Zheng. Xuan 3.6. Yan Ji 燕姬. Yan/Qi (W). Wife of Lord Jing of Qi. Zhao 7.1; Ai 5.3. Yan Jiangshi 鄢將師 (d. 515). Chu. a. Jiangshi 將師. Zhao 27.3, 27.6. Yan Li 晏氂. Qi. Yan lineage. Xiang 23.4. Yan Ming 顏鳴. Lu. Zhao 26.4. Yan Mo 閻沒. Jin. Zhao 28.4; Ding 6.5.

Personal Name Index 2131

Yan Ruo 晏弱 (d. 556). Qi. First person of the Yan lineage of Qi mentioned in Zuozhuan. Father of Yan Ying. a. Yan Huanzi 晏桓子, b. Yanzi 晏子. c. Huanzi 桓子. Xuan 14.4, 17.1; Xiang 2.4, 6.7, 12.5, 17.7. Yan Wuzi 鄢武子. Wei. a. Xi 肸. Ai 16.2. Yan Xi 顏息. Lu. Ding 8.1. Yan Yi Ji 顏懿姬. Qi (W). Wife of Lord Ling of Qi. Xiang 19.5. Yan Ying 晏嬰. Qi. Yan lineage. a. Yan Pingzhong 晏平仲, b. Yanzi 晏子, c. Ying 嬰, d. Pingzhong 平仲. Xiang 17.7, 18.3, 22.3, 22.5, 23.4, 25.2, 26.7, 28.9, 28.11, 29.13; Zhao 2.1, 3.3, 3.13, 5.5, 6.11, 10.2, 20.6, 20.8, 26.10, 26.11. Yan Yu 晏圉. Qi. Yan lineage. Son of Yan Ying. Ai 6.3. Yan Yu 顏羽. Lu. a. Ziyu 子羽. Ai 11.1. Yan Zhi 閻職. Qi. Wen 18.2. Yan Zhongfu 燕仲父. Nanyan (R). Zhuang 20.1. Yan Zhouyun 偃州員. Wu. Zhao 21.6. Yan Zhuoju 顏涿聚. Qi. a. Yan Geng 顏庚. Ai 23.2, 27.3. Yang Chufu 陽處父 (d. 621). Jin. a. Yangzi 陽子. Also Chufu 處父. Xi 32.1, 33.3, 33.10; Wen 2.3(C), 2.3, 3.7(C), 3.6, 5.5, 6.7(C), 6.1, 6.6. Yang Gai 陽匄 (d. 519). Chu. First person of the Yang lineage of Chu mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. chief minister Zixia 令尹子瑕, b. Zixia 子瑕. Zhao 17.6, 19.1, 19.6, 19.11, 23.5. Yang Hu 陽虎. Lu. Retainer of the Jisun (Ji) lineage. a. Hu 虎, b. Yang 陽. Zhao 27.5; Ding 5.4, 5.6, 6.2, 6.3, 6.7, 7.2, 7.5, 8.4, 8.10, 9.3; Ai 2.2, 2.3, 9.6. Yang, Liege of Cao 曹伯陽 (d. 487). Cao (R, r. 501–487). Also Liege of Cao 曹伯. Ai 7.5, 8.1(C), 8.1. Yang Lingzhong 陽令終 (d. 515). Chu. Yang lineage. Also deputy for the central stables 中廄尹. Zhao 27.3, 27.6. Yang Luo 羊羅. Zhu. Zhao 18.4. Yang Shi 楊石 (d. 514). Jin. Yangshe lineage. Son of Shuxiang and Xia Ji’s daughter. a. Yang Siwo 楊食我, b. Siwo 食我, c. Boshi 博石. Zhao 5.4, 28.2. Yang Yi, deputy for diplomacy 楊豚尹宜. Chu. Xiang 18.4. Yang Youji 養由基 (d. 559). Chu. a. Yang Shu 養叔. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 16.5; Xiang 13.5, 15.3. Yang Yue 陽越 (d. 502). Lu. Cousin of Yang Hu. Ding 8.10. Yang Zhen 羊斟. Song. Also Shuzang 叔牂 (problematic identification, see Xuan, n. 21). Xuan 2.1. Yanggan 揚干. Jin. Younger brother of Lord Dao of Jin. Xiang 3.7. Yangshe Chi 羊舌赤. Jin. Yangshe lineage head. Son of Yangshe Zhi. a. Bohua 伯華, b. Chi 赤. Xiang 3.4, 3.7, 21.5; Zhao 5.4. Yangshe Fu 羊舌鮒 (d. 528). Jin. Yangshe lineage. Younger brother of Shu­ xiang. a. Shuyu 叔魚, b. Shufu 叔鮒, c. Fu 鮒. Zhao 13.3, 13.9, 14.7. Yangshe Hu 羊舌虎 (d. 552). Jin. Yangshe lineage. a. Shuhu 叔虎, b. Hu 虎. Xiang 21.5. Yangshe Zhi 羊舌職 (d. 570). Jin. Yangshe lineage head. Father of Shuxiang. Xuan 15.6, 16.1; Cheng 18.3; Xiang 3.4.

2132

Personal Name Index

Yangsheng, Prince of Qi. See Lord Dao of Qi. Yangsun 楊孫. Qin. Xi 30.3, 33.1. Yangzhou 陽州. Lu. Ding 8.5. Yanxi 奄息 (d. 621). Qin. Wen 6.3. Yao 堯. Legendary sage-king of antiquity. Also Taotang 陶唐. Wen 18.7; Xiang 9.1, 24.1, 29.13; Zhao 7.7. Yao Gou’er 姚句耳. Zheng. Cheng 16.5. Yao Zi 姚子. Zheng (W). Consort of Lord Mu of Zheng, mother of Xia Ji. Zhao 28.2. Yayu 亞圉. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 7.11. Ye, Head of Xuˇ. See Lord Xi of Xǔ. Ye Jin 冶廑. Wei. Xi 30.2. Ye Oufu 冶區夫. Lu. Zhao 13.1. Ye Xie 野洩. Lu. a. Xie Shengzi 洩聲子, b. Shengzi 聲子, c. Xie 洩. Zhao 26.4. Yellow Emperor 黃帝. Mythological ruler of antiquity. Xi 25.2; Zhao 17.3. Yi 豷. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 4.7; Ai 1.2. Yi Guizhu 夷詭諸. Zhou. Zhuang 16.6. Yi Hangfu 儀行父. Chen. Also Hangfu 行父, Yi儀. Xuan 9.6, 10.4, 11.7(C), 11.5. Yi Jiang 夷姜. Yi/Wei (W). Consort of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Later, wife of Lord Xuan of Wei. Huan 16.5. Yi Jiang 邑姜. Qi/Zhou (W). Wife of King Wu of Zhou. Zhao 1.12, 10.1. Yi Kuan 裔款. Qi. Kuan 款. Zhao 20.6. Yi lineage head 懿氏. Chen. Zhuang 22.1. Yi, Liege of Xue. See Lord Hui of Xue. Yi, Master of Zhu. See Lord Yin of Zhu. Yi of Lesser Zhu 小邾射. Xiaozhu. Ai 14.2, 14.2. Yi, Prince of Jin. See Lord Zhao of Jin. Yi Yigu 夷射姑. Zhu. a. Yigu 射姑. Ding 2.3, 3.1. Yi Yin 伊尹. Legendary figure of antiquity. Minister of the founder of Shang. Xiang 21.5. Yi Zhihu 佚之狐. Zheng. Xi 30.3. Yi Zhongnian 夷仲年. Qi. Brother of Lord Xi of Qi. a. Nian 年, b. Zhongnian 仲年. Yin 7.3, 7.4; Zhuang 8.3. Yibo 夷伯. Lu. First ancestor of the Zhan 展 lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Xi 15.9(C), 15.5. Yibo 懿伯. Lu. Zhongsun/Meng lineage. Zhao 3.5. Yichu of Xu 徐儀楚. Xu (R). Zhao 6.9. Yigao. See Lord Ling of Jin. Yigu, Liege of Cao. See Lord Zhuang of Cao. Yigu, Liege of Qǐ. See Lord Wen of Qǐ. Yiliao 宜僚. Song. Zhao 21.4. Yimo, Master of Wu 吳子夷末. Wu (R, r. 543–527). a. Gouyu of Wu 吳句餘. Cf. Master of Wu 吳子. Xiang 29.6. 29.8, 31.9; Zhao 5.8, 13.3, 15.1(C). Yin 印. Zheng. Si lineage. Son of Gongsun Hei. Zhao 2.4. Yin 憖. Jin. Son of Lord Dao of Jin. Ai 11.6.

Personal Name Index 2133

Yin Buning 陰不佞. Zhou. Zhao 24.8, 29.2. Yin Duan 印段. Zheng. Yin lineage head. Son of Gongsun Heigong. a. Yin shi 印氏, b. Zishi 子石, c. Duan 段. Xiang 27.5, 29.5, 30.10, 31.7, 31.10; Zhao 1.9, 2.5, 30.2. Yin Duke Wen 尹文公. Zhou. Yin lineage. a. Yin Yu 尹圉. Zhao 23.3, 25.7. Yin Duke Wu 尹武公. Zhou. First person of the Yin lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also Yin Master 尹子. Cheng 16.10(C), 16.8, 17.2(C), 17.2. Yin Gu 尹固 (d. 513). Zhou. a. Yinshi Gu 尹氏固. Zhao 26.9, 29.2. Yin Gui 印癸. Zheng. Yin lineage head. Son of Yin Duan. a. Ziliu 子柳. Zhao 16.3. Yin He 尹何. Zheng. Xiang 31.12. Yin Ji 陰忌 (d. 530). Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Yin Ji 陰忌. Zhou. Zhao 26.9. (This Yin Ji is different from the one above.) Yin Jinfu 印菫父. Zheng. Yin lineage. Xiang 26.6. Yin Li 陰里. Zhou. Xiang 12.5. Yin lineage head 尹氏. Zheng. Yin 11.8. Yin lineage head 尹氏. Zhou. (According to Yang, 1:189, this title is used for a series of people who occupied this position.) Yin 5.2; Xi 28.3; Wen 14.9; Zhao 23.8(C), 26.7(C); Ding 7.3. Yin, Liege of Qin. See Lord Kang of Qin. Yin Lord Tuo 尹公佗. Wei. Xiang 14.4. Yin Xin 尹辛. Zhou. Yin lineage. Zhao 23.3. Yin Yanduo 尹言多. Zhou. Yin lineage. Xiang 30.6. Yin, young son of the ruler of Qin 小子憖. Qin. Xi 28.3, 29.2. Yin Yupi 闉輿罷. Chu. Ding 5.5. Ying Kaoshu 潁考叔. Zheng. Yin 1.4, 11.4. Ying’er, Master of Lù 潞子嬰兒. Lù (R). Also Master of Lù 潞子. Xuan 15.3(C), 15.3. Yiwu, Prince of Jin. See Lord Hui of Jin. Yiya 易牙. Qi. a. Yong Wu 雍巫. Xi 17.5, 26.6. Yiyang Wu 夷陽五. Jin. a. Yiyang Wu 夷羊五, Wu 五. Cheng 17.10. Yong Chu 雍鉏. Wei. Xiang 26.3. Yong Jí 雍姞. Song/Zheng (W). Consort of Lord Zhuang of Zheng. Mother of Lord Li of Zheng, Huan 11.3. Yong Ji 雍姬. Zheng (W). Daughter of Zhai Zhong. Wife of Yong Jiu. Huan 15.2. Yong Jiu 雍糾 (d. 697). Zheng. Huan 15.2; Zhuang 16.3. Yong Lin 雍廩. Qi. Zhuang 8.4, 9.1. Yongzi 雍子 (d. 528). Chu/Jin. Xiang 26.10; Zhao 14.7. You Chu 游楚. Zheng. You lineage. Grandson of Lord Mu of Zheng. a. Gongsun Chu 公孫楚, b. Zinan 子南, c. Chu 楚. Zhao 1.7, 1.9. You Fan 游眅 (d. 551). Zheng. You lineage head. Son of Zijiao. a. Ziming 子明. Xiang 22.7. You Ji 游吉 (d. 506). Zheng. You lineage head. Younger brother of You Fan. a. Taishu 大叔, b. Zitaishu 子大叔, c. Ji 吉. Xiang 22.7, 24.8, 25.14, 26.6, 27.5,

2134

Personal Name Index

28.8, 29.8, 30.10, 30.13, 31.10; Zhao 1.7, 1.9, 1.14, 3.1, 3.7, 5.4, 6.7, 7.9, 8.3, 9.1, 10.4, 12.2, 13.3, 16.3, 18.3, 18.6, 20.9, 24.6, 25.2(C), 25.3, 25.11, 30.2; Ding 4.2, 8.11. You Ruo 有若. Lu. Ai 8.2. You Su 游速. Zheng. You lineage. Son of You Ji. a. Zikuan 子寬, b. Hun Han 渾罕. Zhao 4.6, 18.3; Ding 6.1(C), 10.10(C). You Wuxu 郵無恤. Jin. a. Ziliang 子良, b. You Liang 郵良. (Du Fu says he is the famous chariot driver Wang Liang 王良.) Ai 2.3. Youfeng Bo Ling 有逢伯陵. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 20.8. Youhang Gui 右行詭. Jin. Zhao 22.5. Young prince of Jin 晉小子侯. Jin (R, r. 709–705). Huan 7.4. Young servant Fu 豎柎. Zheng. Zhao 16.6. Young servant Guyang 穀陽豎. Chu. Cheng 16.5. Young servant Niu 豎牛 (d. 537). Lu. Illegitimate son of Shusun Bao. Also Niu 牛. Zhao 4.8, 5.1. Yousun Bo 游孫伯. Zhou. Xi 24.2. Youzai Gu 右宰穀 (d. 546). Wei. a. Gu 穀. Xiang 14.4, 26.2, 27.3. Yu 禹. Legendary sage-king of antiquity. Zhuang 11.2; Xi 33.6; Wen 2.5; Xuan 16.1; Xiang 4.7, 21.5, 29.13; Zhao 1.5; Ai 1.2, 6.3, 7.4. Yu 圉. See Lord Huai of Jin. Yu Efu 虞閼父. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xiang 25.10. Yu Fu 魚府. Song, Yu lineage. Cheng 15.4, 18.5. Yu Gongyang 圉公陽. Chu. Ai 16.5. Yu Jie 羽頡. Zheng. a. Jie, the trainer of horses 馬師頡. Xiang 30.10. Yu Lord Cha 庾公差. Wei. a. Ziyu 子魚. Xiang 14.4. Yu Pi 庾皮. Zhou. Zhao 12.9. Yu Pian 臾駢. Jin. Wen 6.8, 12.6. Yu Quan 鬻拳. Chu (d. 675). Also the Great Uncle 大伯. Zhuang 19.1. Yu Shi 魚石. Song. Yu lineage. Great-grandson of Ziyu (Gongzi Muyi). Cheng 15.11(C), 15.4, 18.5(C), 18.5; Xiang 1.1, 26.10. Yu Shu 御叔. Lu. Xiang 22.1. Yu Shu 虞叔. Yu. Huan 10.4. Yu Si 鬻姒. Qi (W). Consort of Lord Jing of Qi. Mother of Tu. Ai 5.3, 6.6. Yu Si 矞似. Chu shaman.Wen 10.3. Yuan 元. Cai. Ding 3.4. Yuan 宛. Zheng. Yin 8.2(C), 8.2. Yuan Chun 宛春. Chu. Xi 28.3. Yuan Duke Xiang 原襄公. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Xuan 16.4. Yuan Duke Zhuang 原莊公. Zhou. First person of the Yuan lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Also the Yuan Liege 原伯. Zhuang 18.2, 21.1. Yuan Fan 原繁 (d. 680). Zheng. Yin 5.4; Huan 5.3; Zhuang 14.2. Yuan Heji 苑何忌. Qi. a. Yuanzi 苑子. Zhao 20.4, 21.6, 26.4. Yuan Ke 袁克. Chen. Yuan lineage. Zhao 8.6. Yuan Liege Guan 原伯貫. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Xi 25.4. Yuan Liege Jiao 原伯絞. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Also Jiao 絞. Zhao 12.8. Yuan Liege Lu 原伯魯. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Zhao 18.5, 29.2.

Personal Name Index 2135

Yuan Mai 轅買. Chen. Yuan lineage. Ai 14.15(C). Yuan Mo 宛沒. Jin. Xiang 25.4. Yuan Pei 宛茷. Qi. Cheng 2.3. Yuan Po 轅頗. Chen. Yuan lineage. Ai 11.2(C), 11.2. Yuan, Prince of Qi. See Lord Hui of Qi. Yuan Qiao 袁僑. Chen. Yuan lineage. Xiang 3.6(C), 3.7(C), 3.6. (Possibly the same person as supervisor of the military Huanzi 司馬桓子 above.) Yuan Shequan 宛射犬. Zheng. a. Shequan 射犬 Xiang 24.8. Yuan Shouguo 原壽過. Zhou. Yuan lineage. Ding 1.1. Yuan Taotu 轅濤塗 (d. 625). Chen. First person of the Yuan lineage of Chen mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Yuan Xuanzhong 轅宣仲. Xi 4.4(C), 4.2, 4.5, 5.5, 7.2, 29.2. Yuan, Master of Teng. See Lord Cheng of Teng. Yuan, Prince of Wei. See Lord Ling of Wei. Yuan Xuan 元咺 (d. 630). Wei. Xi 28.11(C), 28.18(C), 28.3, 28.5, 28.8, 30.3(C), 30.2. Yuan Xuan 轅喧. Chen. Yuan lineage. Ai 11.2. Yuan Xuan 轅選. Chen. Yuan lineage. Wen 2.6. Yuan Yang Muzhi 苑羊牧之. Ju. Zhao 22.1, 23.4. Yuan Zhong 原仲. Chen. Zhuang 27.3(C), 27.3. Yuandi, Master of Gu 鼓子䳒鞮. Gu (Xianyu) (R). Also Master of Gu 鼓子. Zhao 15.5, 22.4. Yuansi of the Chang Di 長狄緣斯. Souman. Wen 11.5. Yue Bo 樂伯. Chu. Xuan 12.2. Yue Cheng 樂成. Zheng. Xiang 30.10. Yue Chuan 樂遄. Song. Yue lineage. Xiang 9.1. Yue Daxin 樂大心. Song. Yue lineage. a. the Tongmen general of the right 桐門 右師. Zhao 7.8, 21.4, 22.2, 25.2(C), 25.1, 25.3; Ding 9.1, 10.8(C), 11.3(C), 11.1. Yue De 樂得. Song. Yue lineage. a. the gates deputy De 門尹得. Ai 26.2. Yue Ding 樂丁. Jin. Ai 2.3. Yue Er 樂耳. Zheng. Wen 9.5. Yue Hun. See Hun. Yue Ju 樂懼. Song. Yue lineage. Cheng 16.3. Yue Ju 樂舉. Song, Yue lineage. Cheng 2.4. Yue Kun 樂髡. Song. Yue lineage. Ai 3.5(C). Yue Lü 樂呂. Song. First person of the Yue lineage of Song mentioned in Zuozhuan. Great-grandson of Lord Dai of Song. Wen 18.8; Xuan 2.1. Yue Pei 樂轡. Song. Yue lineage. a. Zidang 子蕩. Xiang 6.2. Yue Pei 樂茷. Song. Yue lineage. Son of Yue Hun. a. supervisor of fortifications Pei 司城茷, b. Zilu 子潞. Ai 26.1, 26.2. Yue Qi 樂頎. Lu. Ding 12.2. Yue Qili 樂祁犁 (d. 502). Song. Yue lineage. Grandson of Yue Xi. a. Yue Qi 樂祁 b. Ziliang 子梁. Zhao 22.2, 25.1, 25.2, 27.5(C), 27.4; Ding 6.5(C), 6.6, 8.3, 9.1. Yue She 樂舍. Song. Yue lineage. Grandson of Yue Xi. Zhao 20.5. Yue, Prince of Chen. See Lord Li of Chen. Yue Wan 樂輓. Song. Yue lineage. Grandson of Yue Xi. Zhao 22.2.

2136

Personal Name Index

Yue Wangfu 樂王鲋. Jin. a. Huanzi 桓子, b. Wangfu 王鲋, Yue Huanzi 樂桓子. Xiang 21.5, 21.8, 23.3; Zhao 1.1, 1.2. Yue Xi 樂喜. Song. Yue lineage head. a. Zihan 子罕, b. Zihan, supervisor of fortifications 司城子罕. Xiang 6.2, 9.1, 15.4, 15.8, 17.6, 27.6, 29.7. Yue Xiao 樂霄. Jin. Zhao 28.3. Yue Yi 樂裔. Song. Yue lineage. Cheng 15.4. Yue Yingqi 樂嬰齊. Song. Yue lineage. Xuan 15.2. Yue Yu 樂豫. Song. First person of the Yue lineage of Song mentioned in ­Zuozhuan. Wen 7.3. Yue Zheng 樂徵. Jin. Zhao 22.5. Yue Zhuchu 樂朱鉏. Song. Yue lineage. Son of Yue Wan. Ai 26.2. Yue of Zhuyong 燭庸之越. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Yukou of Xia 夏之御寇. Qi. Xiang 23.4. Yunge 允格. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 1.12. Yuqiu Shu 虞丘書. Jin. Xiang 16.1. Yushu 御叔. Chen. Xia lineage. Husband of Xia Ji. Father of Xia Zhengshu. Cheng 2.6. Yusui 虞遂. Sui 遂. Zhao 3.3. Yusun 御孫. Lu. Zhuang 24.1, 24.2. Yuwu, Master of Teng. See Lord Yin of Teng. Yuxiong 鬻熊. Legendary founder of the Chu domain lineage. Xi 26.5. Yuyi. See Lord Shang of Song. Yuyue, Duke of Song. See Lord Huan of Song. Yuzhai, Master of Wu 吳子餘祭. Wu (R, r. 547–544). Son of Shoumeng. Younger brother of Zhufan. Wu. a. Daiwu 戴吳. Xiang 29.4(C), 29.6, 31.9. Yuzhong 虞仲. Yu. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xi 5.8. Zang Aibo 臧哀伯. Lu. Zangsun lineage head. Son of Zang Xibo. a. Zangsun Da 藏孫達. Huan 2.2; Zhuang 11.2. Zang Binru 臧賓如. Lu. Zangsun lineage. Son of Zang Hui. Ai 8.6. Zang Chou 臧疇. Lu. Zangsun lineage. Son of Zang Xuanshu. Xiang 17.3. Zang Hui 臧會. Lu. Zangsun lineage. a. Hui 會. Zhao 25.6, 25.10. Zang Jia 臧賈. Lu. Zangsun lineage. Son of Zang Xuanshu. Jia a. 賈. Xiang 17.3, 23.5. Zang Jian 臧堅 (d. 556). Lu. Zangsun lineage. Jian 堅. Xiang 17.3. Zang, Master of Dun 頓子牂. Dun. Also Master of Dun 頓子. Ding 4.2(C), 14.2(C), 14.3. Zang, Prince of Wei. See Lord Ding of Wei. Zang Shi 臧石. Lu. Zangsun lineage. Son of Zang Binru. Ai 24.1. Zang Wei 臧為. Lu. Zangsun lineage head. Son of Zang Xuanshu. Wei a. 為. Xiang 23.5. Zang Wenzhong 臧文仲 (d. 617). Lu. Zangsun lineage head. Grandson of Zang Aibo. a. Zangsun Chen 臧孫辰, b. Zangsun 臧孫. Zhuang 11.2 28.5(C), 28.4; Xi 20.5, 21.2, 22.7, 24.5, 26.4, 31.1, 33.2; Wen 2.5, 5.4, 6.2, 10.1(C), 17.7, 18.7; Xiang 23.5, 24.1; Ai 24.1.

Personal Name Index 2137

Zang Wuzhong 臧武仲. Lu. Zangsun lineage head. Son of Zang Xuanshu. a. Zang He 臧紇, b. Zangsun He 臧孫紇, c. Zangsun 臧孫, d. Zang shi 臧氏, e. He 紇. Also Wuzhong 武仲. Cheng 18.13; Xiang 4.2, 4.8, 11.5, 13.6, 14.4, 17.3, 19.4, 21.2, 22.1, 23.5, 23.8; Zhao 7.12, 10.3. Zang Xibo 臧僖伯 (d. 718). Lu. First person of the Zang or Zangsun lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. a. Xibo 僖伯. Also Gongzi Kou 公子彄. Yin 5.7(C), 5.1, 5.9. Zang Xuanshu 臧宣叔 (d. 587). Lu. Zangsun lineage head. Son of Zang Wenzhong. a. Zangsun 臧孫, b. Zangsun Xu 臧孫許. Xuan 18.5; Cheng 1.5(C), 1.5, 2.3(C), 2.3, 2.8, 3.7, 4.4(C); Xiang 23.5; Ai 24.1. Zang Zhaobo 臧昭伯. Lu. Zangsun lineage. Son of Zang Wei. a. Zangsun 臧孫, b. Zhaobo 昭伯. Zhao 25.6. Zeng Fu 曾阜. Lu. Also Fu 阜. Zhao 1.6. Zeng Gufu 鄫鼓父. Lu. Xiang 29.10. Zeng Yao 曾夭. Lu. Zhao 1.6. Zhai Duke 祭公. Zhou. Zhai lineage. Huan 8.6(C), 8.4. Zhai Duke Moufu 祭公謀父. Zhou. Possibly an ancestor of the Zhai lineage in Zhou. Zhao 12.11. Zhai Liege 祭伯. Zhou. First person of the Zhai lineage of Zhou mentioned in Zuozhuan. Yin 1.6(C), 1.13. Zhai Shu 祭叔. Zhou. Zhai lineage. Zhuang 23.2. Zhai Zhong 祭仲. Zheng. a. Zhai Zu 祭足, b. Zhai Zhongzu 祭仲足, c. Zhongzu 仲足. Also Zhong 仲. Yin 1.4, 3.3, 5.4; Huan 5.3, 11.4(C), 11.3, 15.2, 18.2. Zhan Jia 詹嘉. Jin. a. Xia Jia 瑕嘉. Wen 13.1; Cheng 1.1. Zhan Liege Huan 詹桓伯. Zhou. Zhao 9.3. Zhan, minister of the left 左師展. Lu. Zhao 25.6.Zhan Qin 展禽. Lu. Zhan line­age. Also known as Liu Xiahui 柳下惠 in other early texts. Xi 26.3; Wen 2.5. Zhan Ru 展如. Wu. Ai 11.3. Zhan Xi 展喜. Lu. Zhan lineage. Xi 26.3. Zhan Xia 展瑕. Lu. Zhan lineage. Xiang 29.10. Zhan Yufu 展玉父. Lu. Zhan lineage. Xiang 29.10. Zhan Zhuangshu 展莊叔. Lu. Zhan lineage. Xiang 28.9, 29.10. Zhanfu 詹父. Zhou. Huan 10.2; Zhuang 19.2. Zhang Gai 張匄 (d. 521). Song. Zhao 21.4, 21.6. Zhang Ge 張骼. Jin. Xiang 24.8; Zhao 5.4. Zhang Junchen 張君臣. Jin. Xiang 16.1. Zhang Lao 張老. Jin. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 3.7. Zhang Shu 黨叔. Lu. Xiang 29.10. Zhang Ti 張趯. Jin. Also Meng 孟. Zhao 3.1, 3.7, 5.4, 9.3. Zhang Yu, Master of Xu 徐子章羽. Xǔ (R). Also Master of Xu 徐子. Zhao 4.2(C), 4.3(C), 4.3, 16.2, 30.4(C), 30.3. Zhangliu Shuo 張柳朔 (d. 490). Jin. Ai 5.1. Zhanyu 展輿. Ju (R, r. 542). Son of Lord Libi of Ju. a. Zhanyu of Ju 莒展輿, b. Ju Zhan 莒展. Xiang 31.8; Zhao 1.7(C), 1.11.

2138

Personal Name Index

Zhao Cheng 趙成. Jin. Zhao lineage head. Son of Zhao Wu. a. Zhao Jingzi 趙景子. Zhao 5.4, 7.9, 9.3. Zhao Chuan 趙穿. Jin. Zhao lineage. Also Chuan 穿. Wen 12.6, 17.4; Xuan 1.11(C), 1.9, 2.3. Zhao Cui 趙衰 (d. 622). First person of the Zhao lineage of Jin mentioned in Zuozhuan. Jin. a. Ziyu 子餘, b. Zhao Chengzi 趙成子, c. Chengji 成季, d. Mengziyu 孟子餘. Also Cui 衰. Xi 23.6, 24.1, 25.4, 25.6, 27.4, 31.4; Wen 2.1, 5.5, 6.1, 7.5, 8.7; Cheng 8.6; Zhao 1.15, 13.2. Zhao Dun 趙盾. Jin. Zhao lineage head. Son of Zhao Cui and Shu Wei. a. Zhao Xuanzi 趙宣子, b. Xuanzi 宣子, c. Zhao Meng 趙孟, d. Dun 盾, e. Xuanmeng 宣孟. Wen 6.1, 6.5, 6.8, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, 7.8, 8.4(C), 8.4, 9.6, 12.6, 13.2, 14.4(C), 14.8, 14.9, 17.4; Xuan 1.10(C), 1.8, 1.10, 2.4(C), 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 6.1(C); Cheng 8.6. Zhao Huo 趙獲. Jin. Zhao lineage. Zhao 3.4. Zhao Ji 趙姬. Jin (W). Daughter of Lord Wen of Jin. Wife of Zhao Cui. Also the ruler’s daughter Lady Ji 君姬氏. Xi 24.1; Xuan 2.4. Zhao Ji 趙稷. Jin. Zhao lineage. Ding 13.2; Ai 4.3. Zhao Kuo 趙括. Jin. Zhao lineage. Son of Zhao Cui and Zhao Ji. a. Ping Ji 屏季, b. Ping 屏, c. Ping Gua 屏括. Xi 24.1; Xuan 2.4, 12.2; Cheng 3.8, 5.1, 6.11, 8.6(C), 8.6; Xiang 23.3. Zhao Luo 趙羅. Jin. Zhao lineage. a. Luo 羅. Ai 2.3. Zhao, Master of Chu. See King Kang of Chu. Zhao, Prince of Qi. See Lord Xiao of Qi. Zhao Sheng 趙勝. Jin. Zhao lineage. Xiang 23.4. Zhao Shuo 趙朔 (d. 597). Jin. Zhao lineage head. Son of Zhao Dun. a. Zhao Zhuangzi 趙莊子. Xuan 8.4, 12.2. Zhao Su 趙夙. Jin. Zhao lineage. Older brother of Zhao Cui. Min 1.6. Zhao Tong 趙同. Jin. Zhao lineage. Son of Zhao Cui and Zhao Ji. a. Yuan 原, b. Yuan shu 原叔, c. Yuan Tong 原同. Xi 24.1; Xuan 12.2, 15.7; Cheng 5.1, 5.5, 6.11, 8.6(C), 8.6; Xiang 23.3. Zhao Wu 趙武. (d. 541). Jin. Zhao lineage head. Son of Zhao Shuo. a. Zhao Wenzi 趙文子, b. Wenzi 文子, c. Zhao Meng 趙孟, d. Wu 武. Cheng 18.3; Xiang 9.4, 9.5, 11.5, 13.3, 18.3, 25.7, 25.10, 26.7, 26.14, 27.2(C), 27.4, 27.5, 28.13, 29.13, 30.3, 30.10, 30.12, 31.1, 31.5, 31.9; Zhao 1.2(C), 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 3.4, 20.6. Zhao Wu 朝吳. Cai/Chu. a. Wu 吳. Zhao 13.2, 15.3(C), 15.2, 27.6. Zhao Wuxu 趙無恤. Jin. Zhao lineage head. a. Zhao Meng 趙孟. b. Zhao Xiangzi 趙襄子. Ai 20.3, 27.5. Zhao Yan 趙黶. Wei. Zhao 9.1. Zhao Yang 趙陽. Wei. Ding 14.1(C), 14.1. Zhao Yang 趙鞅 (d. 496). Jin. Zhao lineage head. Grandson of Zhao Wu. a. Zhao Jianzi 趙簡子, b. Jianzi 簡子, c. Yang 鞅, d. Zhifu 志父, e. Zhao Meng 趙孟. Zhao 25.2(C), 25.3, 26.7, 27.7, 29.5, 31.6, 32.4; Ding 4.2, 6.3, 6.6, 8.3, 8.6, 8.7, 10.4(C), 10.4, 13.5(C), 13.7(C), 13.2, 14.2; Ai 1.7, 2.4(C), 2.5(C), 2.2, 2.3, 3.3, 3.5, 4.2, 4.3, 5.3(C), 5.2, 6.2(C), 9.6, 10.5(C), 10.4, 13.4, 14.12(C), 14.4, 15.5(C), 17.3, 17.5, 20.3.

Personal Name Index 2139

Zhao Yingqi 趙嬰齊. Jin. Zhao lineage. Son of Zhao Cui and Zhao Ji. a. Ying 嬰, b. Zhao Ying 趙嬰, c. Lou Ying 樓嬰. Xi 24.1; Xuan 12.2; Cheng 4.6, 5.1, 8.6. Zhao Zhan 趙旃. Jin. Old man Zhao 趙傁. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 3.8, 13.3. Zhao Zhao 趙朝. Jin. Zhao lineage. Zhao 28.3. Zhao Zhuang Ji 趙莊姬. Jin (W). Wife of Zhao Shuo. a. Ji shi 姬氏, b. Meng Ji 孟姬. Cheng 4.6, 8.6, 17.10. Zhaobo 昭伯. Wei. Min 2.5. Zhe, Prince of Wei. See Ousted Lord of Wei. Zhenduo 振鐸. Cao (R). Ancestral ruler of Cao. Younger brother of King Wu of Zhou. See Tao Shu. Xi 28.12; Ai 7.5. Zheng Ji 鄭姬. Zheng/Qi (W). Consort of Lord Huan of Qi. Xi 17.5. Zheng Ji 鄭姬. Zheng/Chen (W). Wife of Lord Ai of Chen. Zhao 8.2. Zheng Kaofu 正考父. Song. Ancestor of Confucius. Zhao 7.12. Zheng Luo 鄭羅. Zheng. Ai 9.2. Zheng Pian 鄭翩. Song. Zhao 21.4, 21.6. Zheng, Prince of Wei. See Lord Cheng of Wei. Zheng Sheng 鄭勝. Zheng (R, r. 500–463). Lord Sheng of Zheng 鄭勝公. Also the Liege of Zheng 鄭伯. Ai 2.3, 15.3(C). Zheng Yuzi 正輿子 (d. 567). Lai. Xiang 2.2, 6.7. Zheng Zhoufu 鄭周父. Qi. Cheng 2.3. Zhengchang 正常. Lu. Ai 3.4. Zhengqiu Huan 鄭丘緩. Jin. a. Huan 緩. Cheng 2.3. Zhi Chuo 殖綽. Qi. Xiang 18.3, 19.10, 21.8, 26.3. Zhi Daozi 知悼子 (d. 533). Jin. Zhi lineage head. Son of Zhi Ying. a. Zhi Ying 知盈, b. Xun Ying 荀盈, c. Zhibo 知伯, d. Bosu 伯夙 (disputed identification), e. Ying 盈. Xiang 23.3, 27.4, 29.5(C), 29.8, 29.9; Zhao 5.4, 9.5. Zhi Huang 摯荒 (d. 520). Zhou. Zhao 22.5 Zhi, Master of Liu. See Liu Duke Xian. Zhi, noble son of the right 右公子職 (d. 688). Wei. Also Noble son of the right 右公子. Huan 16.5; Zhuang 6.1. Zhi Qi 知起. Jin. Zhi lineage. Xiang 21.8. Zhi Qiu 彘裘. Jin. Branch of the Fan lineage. Son of Shi Fang. Xiang 14.5. Zhi Shuo 知朔. Jin. Zhi lineage. Xiang 14.5. Zhi Wenzi 知文子 (d. 493). Jin. Zhi lineage head. a. Xun Li 荀躒, b. Wenbo 文伯, c. Bo shi 伯氏, d. Zhi Li 知躒, e. Zhibo 知伯, f. Li 躒, g. Wenzi 文子, h. Zhi shi 知氏 Zhao 9.5, 15.7, 22.5, 28.2, 31.2(C), 31.4(C), 31.2; Ding 13.2, 14.2. Zhi Xuwu 知徐吾. Jin. Zhi lineage. Grandson of Zhi Ying. Zhao 28.3. Zhi Yao 知瑤. Jin. Zhi lineage head. Grandson of Zhi Wenzi. a. Xun Yao 荀, b. Zhibo 知伯. Ai 23.2, 27.3, 27.5. Zhi Ying 知罃 (d. 560). Jin. Zhi lineage head. Son of Xun Shou. a. Zhi Wuzi 知武子, b. Xun Ying 荀罃, c. Zhibo 知伯, d. Wuzi 武子. Xuan 12.2; Cheng 2.6, 3.4, 3.10, 13.3, 16.5, 16.9, 17.7(C), 18.1, 18.13; Xiang 1.7(C), 1.5, 2.6(C), 2.9(C), 2.5, 2.7, 3.9(C), 3.2, 3.9, 4.3, 8.7, 9.4, 9.5, 10.2, 10.4, 10.11, 11.3, 13.3. Zhibing 直柄. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 3.3. Zhiru Zigong 枝如子躬. Chu. Zhao 13.2.

2140

Personal Name Index

Zhong 重. Qi. Daughter of Zizhong. Zhao 27.7. Zhong Gui 仲歸 (d. 617). Chu. a. Zijia 子家. Wen 5.3, 10.3. Zhong Ji 仲幾. Song. Zhong lineage. Zhao 22.2, 25.8, 32.5; Ding 1.2(C), 1.1. Zhong Jian 鍾建. Chu. Ding 4.3, 5.7. Zhong Shanfu 仲山甫. Zhou. Xuan 2.3. Zhong Tuo 仲佗. Song. Zhong lineage. Ding 10.12(C), 10.6, 11.1(C), 11.1. Zhong Yi 鐘儀. Chu. Also Zhongyi, Lord of Yun 鄖公鐘儀, Lord of Yun 鄖公. Cheng 7.4, 9.9, 9.14. Zhong Yingqi 仲嬰齊. Lu. Cheng 15.2(C). Zhong You 仲由. Lu/Wei. Disciple of Confucius. a. Jilu 季路, b. Zilu 子路, c. You 由, d. Jizi 季子. Ding 12.2; Ai 14.2, 15.3, 15.5. Zhong Zhong 眾仲. Lu. Yin 4.3, 5.7, 8.8, 8.9. Zhong Zi 仲子. Lu (W). Wife of Lord Hui of Lu. Also Lady Zi 子氏. Yin preface, 1.4(C), 1.5, 5.7. Zhong Zi 仲子. Qi (W). Wife of Lord Ling of Qi. Xiang 19.5. Zhonghang 仲行 (d. 621). Qin. Wen 6.3. Zhonghang Wu 中行吳 (d. 519). Jin. Zhonghang lineage head. Son of Zhonghang Yan. a. Zhonghang Muzi 中行穆子, b. Xun Wu 荀吳, c. Wu 吳, d. the Liege of Zhonghang 中行伯, e. Zhengsheng 鄭甥, f. Muzi 穆子. Xiang 19.1, 26.4(C), 26.5; Zhao 1.6(C), 1.10, 5.4, 11.5, 12.4, 12.7, 13.4, 13.7, 13.9, 15.5(C), 15.5, 17.4(C), 17.4, 21.6, 22.4. Zhonghang Xi 中行喜. Jin. Zhonghang lineage. Xiang 21.8. Zhonghang Xuanzi 中行宣子. Zhonghang lineage head. Son of Xun Linfu. Jin. a. Xun Geng 荀庚, b. the Liege of Zhonghang 中行伯, c. Geng 庚. Cheng 2.7, 3.12(C), 3.14(C), 3.7, 13.3. Zhonghang Yan 中行偃 (d. 554). Jin. Zhonghang lineage head. Son of Zhonghang Xuanzi. a. Xun Yan 荀偃, b. Zhonghang Xianzi 中行獻子, c. Xianzi 獻子, d. Boyou 伯游, e. the Liege of Zhonghang 中行伯, f. Zhonghang 中行. Cheng 16.5, 17.10, 17.12, 18.1; Xiang 1.2, 9.4, 9.5, 10.2, 13.3, 14.3(C), 14.3, 14.9, 16.7(C), 16.1, 16.2, 16.3, 16.5, 18.3, 19.1; Xiang 26.10. Zhonghang Yin 中行寅. Jin/Qi. Zhonghang lineage head. Son of Zhonghang Wu. a. Xun Yin 荀寅, b. Zhonghang Wenzi 中行文子, c. Yin 寅, d. Wenzi 文子. Also Zhonghang shi 中行氏. Zhao 29.5; Ding 4.1, 8.6, 13.6(C), 13.2, 13.7; Ai 3.5, 4.3, 5.1, 27.3. Zhonghui 仲虺. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xuang 12.2; Xiang 14.9, 30.10; Ding 1.1. Zhongjiang 仲江. Song. Zhong lineage. Xiang 14.3. Zhongkan 仲堪. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Zhongliang Huai 仲梁懷. Lu. Ding 5.4, 5.6. Zhongren 仲壬 (d. 537). Lu. Shusun lineage. Son of Shusun Bao and Guo Jiang. a. Zhong 仲. Zhao 4.8, 5.1. Zhongrong 仲容. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Zhongsheng, Liege of Cao. See Lord Huan of Cao. Zhongshu Yuxi 仲叔于奚. Wei. Cheng 2.2. Zhongsun Jiao 仲孫湫. Qi. a. Zhongsun 仲孫. Min 1.5(C), 1.5; Xi 13.1, 13.3.

Personal Name Index 2141

Zhongxiong 仲熊. Legendary figure of antiquity. Wen 18.7. Zhongyan Zhuangshu 仲顏莊叔. Lu. Xiang 29.10. Zhongyong 仲雍. Wu. Ai 7.3. Zhongzhang 仲章. Lù. Xuan 15.3. Zhòu 紂. Last ruler of Shang dynasty. Also Shang Zhòu 商紂. Zhuang 11.2; Xuan 12.2, 15.3; Xiang 4.1, 31.13; Zhao 4.1, 4.3, 7.2, 11.2, 24.1. Zhou Bin 州賓. Jin. Xiang 21.5. Zhou Chuan 周歂 (d. 630). Wei. Also Zhou 周. Xi 30.2. Zhou Chuo 州綽 (d. 548). Jin/Qi. Xiang 18.3, 21.8, 25.2. Zhou Duke 周公. Zhou. Son of King Wen of Zhou. Younger brother of King Wu of Zhou. Yin 8.2; Huan 1.1; Xi 24.2, 26.3, 31.5; Wen 12.5, 18.7; Cheng 16.11; Xiang 12.3, 21.5, 29.11, 29.13; Zhao 1.7, 2.1, 7.3, 10.3, 13.3, 25.6; Ding 4.1, 6.2; Ai 11.7, 15.4, 24.1, 24.3. Zhou Duke Chu 周公楚. Zhou. a. the Zhou Duke 周公. Cheng 11.5, 12.1(C), 12.1. Zhou Duke Huan 周桓公 (d. 693). Zhou. Son of King Huan of Zhou. Younger brother of King Zhuang of Zhou. First mention of the Zhou lineage of Zhou in Zuozhuan. a. Heijian, the Zhou Duke 周公黑肩, the Zhou Duke 周公. Yin 6.7; Huan 5.3, 18.3; Min 2.7. Zhou Duke Jifu 周公忌父. Zhou. Zhuang 16.6; Xi 10.2, 24.2. Zhou Duke Yue 周公閱. Zhou. Also the king’s steward, the Zhou Duke 宰周公, the Zhou Duke周公. Xi 9.2(C), 9.2, 9.3, 30.6(C), 30.4; Wen 14.1, 14.9. Zhou, Prince of Jin. See Lord Dao of Jin. Zhou Ren 周任. Zhou. Legendary figure of antiquity. Yin 6.4; Zhao 5.1. Zhou Zhiqiao 舟之僑 (d. 632). Guo/Jin. Min 2.1; Xi 28.3, 28.6. Zhoujiu of Liu 劉州鳩 (d. 530). Zhou. Liu lineage. Zhao 12.9. Zhoupu. See Lord Li of Jin. Zhouxu 州吁 (d. 719). Wei (R, r. 719). Son of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. a. Gongzi Zhouxu 公子州吁. Yin 3.7, 4.2(C), 4.6(C), 4.1, 4.3, 4.5. Zhouyu 州于. Wu. a. Liao 僚. Zhao 20.2. Zhouzi 周子. See Lord Dao of Jin. Zhu 柱. Legendary figure of antiquity. Zhao 29.4. Zhu Dan 祝聃. Zheng. Yin 9.6; Huan 5.3. Zhu Mao 朱毛. Qi. a. Mao 毛. Ai 6.6. Zhu, Master of Ju 莒子朱. Ju (R). a. Lord of Quqiu 渠丘公. Also Master of Ju 莒子. Cheng 7.6(C), 8.8, 9.2(C), 14.1(C), Zhu, Prince of Cai 蔡侯朱. Cai (R). Also heir apparent Zhu 大子朱, Prince of Cai 蔡侯, Zhu 朱. Zhao 21.6(C), 21.2, 21.7, 27.6. Zhu Yifu. See Ke, Master of Zhu. Zhu Zhiwu 燭之武. Zheng. Xi 30.3; Wen 17.4. Zhuan 鱄. Wei. Son of Lord Ding of Wei. Younger brother of Lord Xian of Wei. a. Zixian 子鮮. Cheng 14.5; Xiang 14.4, 26.2, 27.4(C), 27.3; Ai 26.3. Zhuan Shezhu 鱄設諸 (d. 515). Wu. Zhao 20.2, 27.2. Zhuang Jiang 莊姜. Wei (W). Wife of (the first) Lord Zhuang of Wei. Yin 3.7. Zhuang Jin 莊堇. Song. Zhao 21.6.

2142

Personal Name Index

Zhuang Zhao 莊朝. Song. Xiang 17.1. Zhuansun 顓孫. Chen. Zhuang 22.1. Zhuanxu 顓頊. Legendary figure of antiquity. Also Gaoyang shi 高陽氏. Wen 18.7; Zhao 8.6, 10.1, 17.3, 17.5, 29.4. Zhu’er. See Lord Xiang of Qi. Zhufan, Master of Wu 吳子諸樊. Wu (R, r. 560–548). Son of Shoumeng. Also E, Master of Wei 吳子遏, the King of Wu 吳王, the Master of Wu 吳子, Zhufan 諸樊. Xiang 14.2, 25.10(C), 25.12, 31.9. Zhui Chuan 騅歂. Jin. Xi 10.3. Zhui, the nephew 騅甥. Zhuang 6.3. Zhui Xi 追喜. Jin. Xiang 18.3. Zhuozi 卓子 (d. 651). Jin. Son of Lord Xian of Jin. a. Gongzi Zhuo 公子卓. Xi 4.6, 9.4, 10.3(C), Zhurong 祝融. Legendary figure of antiquity. Xi 26.5; Zhao 17.5, 29.4. Zhuyang 諸鞅. Yue. Ai 23.3. Zi of the Lesser Rong 小戎子. Jin (W). Consort of Lord Xian of Jin. Mother of Lord Hui of Jin. Zhuang 28.2. Zi Shen 梓慎. Lu. Xiang 28.1; Zhao 7.3, 15.1, 17.5, 18.3, 20.1, 21.5, 24.4. Zi Shu Ji 子叔姬 (d. 615). Lu/Qǐ (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Wife of Lord Huan of Qǐ. a. Shu Ji. Wen 12.3(C), 12.2. Zi Shu Ji 子叔姬. Lu/Qi (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Wife of Lord Zhao of Qi. a. Shu Ji 叔姬. b. Zhao Ji 昭姬. Wen 14.13(C), 14.3, 14.14, 15.11(C), 15.1, 15.10. Zi Shu Ji 子叔姬. Lu/Qi (W). Daughter of a Lu ruler. Wife of Gao Gu of Qi. Xuan 5.3(C), 5.5(C), 5.1, 5.3. Zi Wuxuan 茲無還. Lu. Ding 10.2. Zi’ai 子哀. Song. a. Gao Ai 高哀. Wen 14.10(C), 14.12. Ziban 子般. Lu. Zhuang 32.5(C), 32.4, 32.5. Zibei 子貝. Chu. Wen 16.4. Zibo 子伯. Wei. Min 2.5. Zibo 子伯 (d. 559). Wei. Xiang 14.4. Zibo Jizi 子伯季子 (d. 479). Wei. Ai 16.4. Zichan 子產 (d. 522). Zheng. Guo lineage. Son of Ziguo. a. Gongsun Qiao 公孫僑, b. Zimei 子美. Also Qiao 僑. Xiang 8.3, 10.9, 15.4, 19.9, 24.2, 25.5, 25.10, 25.14, 26.4, 26.6, 26.11, 27.5, 28.6, 28.8, 29.13, 29.17, 30.2, 30.8, 30.10, 30.13, 31.6, 31.10, 31.11, 31.12; Zhao 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, 1.9, 1.12, 1.13, 1.14, 2.4, 3.12, 4.1, 4.3, 4.6, 5.2, 6.3, 6.7, 7.7, 7.8, 7.9, 7.10, 9.4, 10.1, 10.4, 11.5, 12.2, 12.4, 13.3, 16.3, 16.6, 17.5, 18.3, 18.6, 19.8, 19.10, 20.9, 25.3; Ai 12.6. Ziche 子車. Song. Xiang lineage. Younger brother of Xiang Tui. Ai 14.4. Zicheng 子成. Qi. a. Zicheng 子城. Zhao 8.5, 10.2. Zichong 子重 (d. 570). Chu. Son of King Mu of Chu. Also called Gongzi Yingqi 公子嬰齊, chief minister Zichong 令尹子重, deputy of the left Zichong 左尹子重. a. Yingqi 嬰齊. Xuan 11.2, 12.2; Cheng 2.9(C), 2.8, 6.9(C), 7.5(C), 6.9, 7.4, 7.5, 9.8, 9.10, 11.8, 16.5, 17.5, 18.12; Xiang 2.8, 3.1(C), 3.1, 26.10; Zhao 7.3. Zichu Shang 子鉏商. Lu. Ai 14.1.

Personal Name Index 2143

Zichuo 子齹. Zheng. Han lineage. Son of Han Hu. a. Ruzi 孺子. Zhao 16.3. Zidang 子蕩 (d. 584). Chu. Qu lineage. Cheng 7.5. Ziding 子丁 (d. 565). Zheng. Xiang 8.2. Zidu 子都. Zheng. a. Gongsun E 公孫閼. Yin 11.2, 11.3. Zi’er 子耳 (d. 563). Zheng. Liang lineage. a. Gongsun Zhe 公孫輒. Xiang 8.3, 8.7, 9.5, 10.4(C), 10.8(C), 10.3, 10.6, 10.9; Zhao 7.9. Zifan 子反 (d. 575). Chu. Son of King Mu of Chu. a. Gongzi Ce 公子側. Also Ce 側. Xuan 12.2, 15.2; Cheng 2.6, 4.5, 7.5, 12.4, 15.3, 16.7(C), 16.5; Xiang 26.10. Zifeng 子豐. Zheng. Ancestor of the Feng lineage. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Xiang 7.9; Zhao 3.4. Zifu 子服. Zhou. Xuan 6.2. Zifu, Duke of Song. See Lord Xiang of Song. Zifu Huibo 子服惠伯. Lu. Grandson of Meng Xianzi. First person of the Zifu lineage of Lu mentioned in Zuozhuan. Zifu is a branch of the Zhongsun/ Meng lineage. a. Zifuzi 子服子, b. Zifu Jiao 子服椒, c. Gongzi Fujiao 公子 服椒, d. Meng Jiao 孟椒, e. Huibo 惠伯, f. Jiao 椒. Xiang 23.5, 25.3, 28.9, 28.12, 31.5; Zhao 3.5, 7.3, 12.10, 13.3, 13.9. Zifu Jingbo 子服景伯. Lu. Zifu lineage. a. Jingbo 景伯, b. Zifu He 子服何, c. He 何. Ai 3.2, 7.3, 7.4, 8.2, 12.4, 13.4, 15.4. Zifu Zhaobo 子服昭伯. Lu. Zifu lineage. a. Zifu Hui 子服回. Zhao 16.4, 16.7, 23.2. Zigao Fang 子高魴. Wei. Zhao 20.4. Zigeng 子庚. Chu. Son of King Zhuang of Chu. a. Gongzi Wu 公子午. Also Wu 午. Xiang 12.7, 13.5, 14.11, 15.3, 18.4(C), 18.4, 21.4. Zigong 子工. Qi. a. Zigong 子公. Zhao 8.5, 10.2. Zigong 子貢. Wei. Disciple of Confucius. a. Zigong 子贛, b. Wei Ci 衛賜; Ci 賜.Ding 15.1, 15.3; Ai 7.3, 11.3, 12.3, 12.4, 15.4, 16.3, 26.3, 27.1. Ziguo. See Gongzi Fa of Zheng. Ziguo 子國 (d. 563). Zheng. Ancestor of the Guo lineage in Zheng. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. Father of Zichan. a. Gongzi Fa 公子發. Cheng 5.5; Xiang 2.5, 5.2(C), 5.3, 6.7, 8.3, 8.7, 9.5, 10.8(C), 10.9. Zihan 子罕. Zheng. Ancestor of the Han lineage. Son of Lord Mu of Zheng. a. Gongzi Xi 公子喜. Cheng 10.3, 14.4(C), 14.3, 15.3, 16.3(C), 16.3, 16.9; Xiang 2.5, 7.9. Zihan Xi 子韓皙. Qi. Zhao 14.2. Zihang 子行 (d. 559). Wei. Xiang 14.4. Zihang Jingzi 子行敬子. Wei. Ding 4.1. Zihou 子侯 (d. 565). Zheng. Xiang 8.2, 22.2. Zihu 子狐 (d. 565). Zheng. Xiang 8.2. Zihu 子虎. Qin. Ding 5.5. Zihua 子華 (d. 644). Zheng. Son of Lord Wen of Zheng and Chen Gui. a. heir apparent Hua 大子華, b. heir apparent Hua 世子華. Xi 7.3, 16.5, 24.3; Xuan 3.6. Zijia Yibo 子家懿伯. Lu. Zijia lineage. Branch of the Dongmen lineage. a. ­Zijiazi 子家子, b. Zijia shi 子家氏, c. Zijia Ji 子家羈, d. Yibo 懿伯. Zhao 5.3, 25.6, 27.5, 27.7, 28.1, 29.1, 29.3, 31.2, 32.4; Ding 1.2.

2144

Personal Name Index