左传 ( 王力 古代汉语 Wang Li Classical Chinese )

[rob07]

why is it bad if trees grow thick around your grave ?

I think the implication may be that if your grave is swallowed by forest, this would be because you have no filial descendants to tend it so you will be completely forgotten by the world and your life will be meaningless. Pretty harsh.

As people probably would already know, the origins of Qingming festival seem to be traceable to Duke Wen of Jin.

[chrix]

Thanks for the explanation, rob. It makes a lot of sense.

As far as Qingming goes, yes, it is so said, or rather the Cold Food Festival (寒食節), which according to Wikipedia was later moved to coincide with 清明節. But in reality the origins seem to lie in old customs and not the story in the Shiji (also, since the Shiji is much newer, it could be that this story between Chong'er and JIe Zitui 介子推 was used as a folk legend to explain the origin of the custom).

It'd be fun to read it though, and it even involves cannibalism I've been meaning to read more of the Shiji...

[chrix]

OK, so let's go on to the next text

晉靈公不君 宣公二年, p.25-30

23. Just a quick note, since I’m such a 成語迷, the first half of 宣公二年, not included in the lesson text, is (though 詩經 is often cited as well) the origin for各自為政. This overall seems to have a negative connotation, and the story in 左傳 explains why: on the eve of a battle between Song and Zheng, the Song general 華元 distributes mutton among his troops to raise morale, but forgets to give his chariot driver 羊斟 a share as well. The driver, insulted, explains to the general just as the battle is to start: 疇昔之羊，子為政，今日之事，我為政. This freely translates as „Yesterday you were free in distributing the mutton as you saw fit, as for today’s battle, I’m free in going wherever I see it fit!” and drove the chariot away from the Song army and right into the Zheng army’s ranks. 華元 was immediately captured by the Zheng army, and the Song army, deprived of their leader, suffered a crushing defeat.

24. Some characters used in the text are now 異體字, even in modern traditional script usage: 寘 for 置, and 鬬 for 鬥.

EDIT: one of the study guides mentions that 寘 is not totally interchangeable with 置, only for a subset of the latter's meanings. Fascinating stuff.

25. 趙盾 must be of higher rank than 士會. So if趙盾 goes first in 勸諫ing the Duke and fails, nobody will dare follow him (maybe in both senses, i.e. nobody will dare follow him go next, and it will also damage his authority as prime minister). I find this text extremely dense and nigh impossible to understand without annotations. For instance, something I found very hard to put into the right context without annotations was this sentence: “三進及溜,而後視之“ Three times he went ahead until he was under the eaves, and only then did the Duke see him.“ When Wang Li speaks of “就伏到地下行禮”, and I got thrown off by the polysemy of 伏 here, which apparently not only means "lie in hiding", but also "prostrate". "Prostrate himself on the ground before the Duke" makes much more sense than "hide underground" here.

26. “過而能改, 善莫大焉.” of course is the source for another chengyu that has several similar variants: 過而能改,知過能改, 知錯能改, 知過必改, 知錯則改 etc. Another variant reflects the reaction of the Duke: 知過不改.

27. The cited parts of the Shijing are translated by Legge thus: 靡不有初、鮮克有終。All are (good) at first, But few prove themselves to be so at last. See the Chinese Text Project for the entire poem:http://chinese.dsturgeon.net/text.pl?node=16507&if=en ; the second part is quite easy to understand, so no need to cite Legge here, but here’s the link to the entire chapter of the Shijing extolling the virtues of 仲山甫! http://chinese.dsturgeon.net/text.pl?node=16621&if=en

28. 晨往: this means "in the morning, he (鉏霓) came"

29. I find the story of 鉏霓 quite amazing. So he means that a ruler mustn’t forget his respect towards the common people, and a ruler that kills subjects is not loyal. And someone who fails to follow his ruler’s orders, is breaking his word. So naturally, in such a situation, dying is the best solution! But how do you die from colliding with a locust tree? Doesn’t sound like the most pleasant form of committing suicide…

30. The next plot by the Duke to have 趙盾 killed is to have soldiers ambush him... (why didn’t the Duke, being such a tyrant, just have him executed plain and simple, or kill him himself like he did the cook?). But this plan is frustrated by a loyal fighter in the service 趙盾 by the name of 提彌明, who leads his master out under a pretext, whereupon the Duke sets a vicious dog upon them, who is promptly killed by the fighter (the 明 in 明搏殺之 refers to 提彌明), who in the end dies fighting with the soldiers who had been lying in ambush (again, very condensated). Now I don’t completely understand why趙盾calls out: „棄人用犬, 雖猛何為?“ Is he ridiculing the Duke? „Even though using dogs instead of people is vicious, what use is it, since the dog is easily killed anyhow?“ And right after he says this, 提彌明 is killed BY PEOPLE anyways?

31. The paragraph starting with 初 first gives us a flashback, then gets back to the situation where趙盾 is trying to escape from the Duke’s soldiers. One thing I don’t get is this: 問其名居, 不告而退. I presume it refers to趙盾, who’s just been saved by 靈輒, asking him his name and address, but靈輒 doesn’t answer and instead flees the country. Why wouldn’t he answer the question? Suggestions: because being such a person of integrity, he didn't want take undue credit, and/or because he was afraid the Duke would have him hunted down and killed

32. 趙盾 most likely quotes the Shijing here, as Wang Li remarks in the version that has been transmitted through the ages, it reads 阻 instead of 慼. Legge translates thus:我之懷矣、自詒伊阻. “The man of my heart! He has brought on us this separation.” While the Shijing text is referring to a 雄雉 (male pheasant), 趙盾 is referring to his love for 晉 that has brought him sorrow (慼).

33. I couldn’t find the Confucius quote in any Confucian text. But nevertheless, this is the source for the chengyu 董狐之筆/董狐直筆.

Edited December 17, 2009 at 12:12 PM by chrix

[Daan]

25. 趙盾 must be of higher rank than 士會. So if趙盾 goes first in 勸諫ing the Duke and fails, nobody will dare follow him (maybe in both senses, i.e. nobody will dare follow him go next, and it will also damage his authority as prime minister).

Yes, 趙盾 is the 正卿 (the highest-ranking official in 晉), whereas 士季 is only a 大夫.

I find this text extremely dense and nigh impossible to understand without annotations.

Yes, me too.

28. 晨往: this means "in the morning, he (鉏霓) came"

Yes, or rather "he went around", since the place he came to is 趙盾's residence.

29. I find the story of 鉏霓 quite amazing. So he means that a ruler mustn’t forget his respect towards the common people, and a ruler that kills subjects is not loyal. And someone who fails to follow his ruler’s orders, is breaking his word. So naturally, in such a situation, dying is the best solution! But how do you die from colliding with a locust tree? Doesn’t sound like the most pleasant form of committing suicide.

The entire line of thinking is not unusual and attested to in other stories as well, but the death by collision with a locust tree continues to bemuse me. Then again, this is not entirely odd, since there's also the well-known story of a rabbit running head-on into a tree and dying, giving birth to 守株待兔.

30. The next plot by the Duke to have 趙盾 killed is to have soldiers ambush him... (why didn’t the Duke, being such a tyrant, just have him executed plain and simple, or kill him himself like he did the cook?).

I think executing prime ministers might have been a bit too much even by the standards of the Zhou dynasty, but then again, having soldiers ambush them on state banquets also sounds quite farfetched...

I don’t completely understand why趙盾calls out: „棄人用犬, 雖猛何為?“ Is he ridiculing the Duke? „Even though using dogs instead of people is vicious, what use is it, since the dog is easily killed anyhow?“ And right after he says this, 提彌明 is killed BY PEOPLE anyways?

趙盾 is being led away by his loyal guard 提彌明, and the Duke sets his dogs upon them. I think the point here is "Ohh, yeah, how much lower can you go", the point being that sending dogs after people is cruel, but also useless. Then the Duke sends his soldiers after them, and 提彌明 is killed in action.

31. The paragraph starting with 初 first gives us a flashback, then gets back to the situation where趙盾 is trying to escape from the Duke’s soldiers. One thing I don’t get is this: 問其名居, 不告而退. I presume it refers to趙盾, who’s just been saved by 靈輒, asking him his name and address, but靈輒 doesn’t answer and instead flees the country. Why wouldn’t he answer the question? Suggestions: because being such a person of integrity, he didn't want take undue credit, and/or because he was afraid the Duke would have him hunted down and killed

I understand this thus: 靈輒 was once treated kindly by 趙盾, when the former was starving after working for the emperor for three years. 趙盾 gave him enough food for himself and his mother, who he hasn't seen in a long time. Naturally, this means 靈輒 owes him a debt, morally if not financially. So when, now serving in the Duke's personal guard, he gets an opportunity to repay 趙盾, he does so by switching sides. Later on, 趙盾 asks him why he would have done such a thing, and because he does not want to be rewarded for his actions, he refuses to answer the questions, but flees instead (he couldn't remain in the country, either).

32. 趙盾 most likely quotes the Shijing here, as Wang Li remarks in the version that has been transmitted through the ages, it reads 阻 instead of 慼. Legge translates thus:我之懷矣、自詒伊阻. “The man of my heart! He has brought on us this separation.” While the Shijing text is referring to a 雄雉 (male pheasant), 趙盾 is referring to his love for 晉 that has brought him sorrow (慼).

According to the commentary in Sanmin, there's also another passage from the Shijing that has the line 自詒伊慼, supposedly from the 小明 chapter from 小鴨. But I can't find this passage (or even this chapter) in the CTP, and I can't find my Sanmin edition of the Shijing either.

33. I couldn’t find the Confucius quote in any Confucian text. But nevertheless, this is the source for the chengyu 董狐之筆/董狐直筆.

My teacher at Leiden puts it thus: "So many things have been ascribed to Confucius that no man could possibly have said them all in his lifetime"

That was a nice text! Enjoyed reading it, although it took quite a while. I hope to post comments on the next one soon!

[chrix]

So on to the next text

齊晉鞍之戰（成公二年）

Some more annotations here.

34. The events before June 17th (the lesson text only begins with this date): Between the last text and this, there's been the Battle of Bì (邲之戰) between 楚 and 晉, which has put a damper on 晉's ambitions (which also marks the rise of 楚莊王 as next hegemon; this amazing rise of this originally rather lazy ruler to supremacy is behind the chengyu 一嗚驚人). After some back and forth, at the beginning of 591 B.C.E., Qi decides to make use of the opportunity and attack 魯, which is allied with 晉 and 衛. 衛 sends troops to assist 魯, but they fail, and so now 衛 also requests 晉 for troops, which happens. The very portion before the lesson text begins talks of the valour of a general from 齊, by the name of 高固, from which the chengyu 餘勇可賈 comes, who engages the 晉 army in battle.

35. If you do read the part before the lesson text, I have a question for you: I don't fully understand 君無所辱命, translated in the Modern Mandarin version as 您的命令是不会不照办的. I have some trouble with the structure of the Classical Chinese here, especially what function 所 has. Also, if you had a look at the entire exchange of words between the Duke of 齊 and general 郤克 of 晉, what exactly is the Duke requesting them to do?

36. 陣: deploy the ranks in battle array: 摆开阵势

37. 病: here more around the lines of "hurt". I've noticed this connotation in Classical texts before

38. 擐甲執兵 here 兵 means "weapon", this is a chengyu meaning "in full armor and weapons in hand" (穿上鎧甲，手執武器。形容全副武裝的樣子。) According to Wang Li, this was an expression in Classical Chinese representing the determination to fight to the death.

39. 轡 pèi: 韁繩 jiāngshéng: reins

枹 fú (!): 鼓槌 gǔchuí: drumsticks

40. According to the study guide, the story about 韓厥 taking place while 晉 is chasing 齊 three times around the mountain, took place a day before.

41. "謂之君子而射之, 非禮也". Wang Li's criticism of the Duke's speech seems a bit ideologically tinged...

42. 硬行牽合 I think means "contrived" in the sense that Wang Li says that the author of the Zuozhuan made this prophecy up.

43. 越 "fall down", here unlike 斃 "prostrate, fall down (仆倒), doesn't seem to necessarily imply dying, but the Modern Mandarin translation clearly translates both verbs as "die" in this context.

44. 推車: so 逢丑父 was pushing the cart himself? Or why would his arm injury slow down the speed of the chariot?

45. I don't really get what 韓厥 is saying: 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. Modern Mandarin translation says: “寡君派臣下们替鲁、卫两国请求，说：‘不要让军队进入齐国的土地。’下臣不幸，正好在军队服役，不能逃避服役。而且也害怕奔走逃避成为两国国君的耻辱。下臣身为一名战士，谨向君王报告我的无能，但由于人手缺乏，只好承当这个官职。”. I don't get the following points:

45A. 寡君使群臣為魯衛請: the Duke of 晉 let his ministers beg/request on behalf of 魯 and 衛? To whom, and what? For 齊 to let off of them? OK, on second thought, rereading Wang Li's commentary about this as "tactful diplomatic language" I think this "begging" might just be a polite way of saying to 齊 "get the f*ck out of our allies' lands"

45B: 無令輿師，陷入君地: this is what the Duke of 晉 told his ministers to do. Don't get too far into 齊's territory. Why wouldn't want he too do that? Because it goes against divine principles? And the next part with 下臣不幸 etc.. accordingly means that 韓厥 is none too pleased about this because he was in the mood for some plundering and pillaging? And why is he is so displeased that he would have wanted to run away?

45C: 而忝兩君: the way I understand this is if he fled, he would shame two rulers, the one he deserted and the one whose realm he fled to.

臣辱戎士: "I'm a disgrace for soldierdom". More of this "tactful diplomatic language" I wager...

45D: 敢告不敏，攝官承乏: self-depreciation continues, 承乏 is similar to 共其乏困 from 13., i.e. "take up a post to make up numbers"

46. After the Battle of San Jacinto, the Mexican President Santa Anna tried something similar, pretending to be an ordinary soldier. Unfortunately all the other Mexican soldiers saluted him and so he was quickly captured by the Texians. Well, it can't always work, can it...

47. The lesson ends with 郤克 releasing 逢丑父 to reward him for his readiness to die for his ruler. The story, on the other hand continues... let's have a brief look at what happens afterwards:

48. the escape of the Duke. Incredibly enough, the Duke and 逢丑父 meet up and flee together. 三入三出 entering and exiting amongst the 晉 lines, protected (?) by the 齊 troops, and then continuing on to the 狄 forces, where the 狄 soldiers protect them, and then to the 衛 lines, where the 衛 soldiers also don't harm them. Why not? They're enemies after all?

49. Now 晉 takes the opportunity and invades 齊 (this might also influence our understanding of the passage from above where the Duke told his ministers not to go into 齊 too deeply), the Duke of 齊 finally offers terms, but his original offers are rebuffed, the Duke of 晉 demanding the Duke of 齊's mother to be a hostage in 晉 and have all the fields in his realm to be aligned on west-east grid (盡東其畝, presumably to make a subsequent invasion easier).

50. This is opposed to by some ministers, and the Duke or 郤克 respectively relents and terms more in line with the natural order of things are drawn up: 晉 takes some treasures, 魯 and 衛 get their lost territories back, and 晉 and 齊 enter into an alliance. For some 20 years or so, things will be peaceful on this end.

51. The rest of the Zuozhuan chapter is devoted to some rulers dying (amongst them 楚莊王) and some other skirmishes and diplomatic incidents, but no bigger story.

Edited December 17, 2009 at 10:41 AM by chrix

[Daan]

Got to the first paragraph of the lesson text, but also read all of the text from 成公二年 prior to that, so some pretty good mileage I would say. Some thoughts:

35. If you do read the part before the lesson text, I have a question for you: I don't fully understand 君無所辱命, translated in the Modern Mandarin version as 您的命令是不会不照办的. I have some trouble with the structure of the Classical Chinese here, especially what function 所 has. Also, if you had a look at the entire exchange of words between the Duke of 齊 and general 郤克 of 晉, what exactly is the Duke requesting them to do?

The Duke of 齊 meets with general 郤克 of 晉 to agree on a date for their armies' battle. The Duke proposes the afternoon of June 17th, while 郤克 is under strict instructions not to spend any more time than necessary out of the country. He therefore refuses, saying his ruler instructed him not to waste any time, and insists they begin fighting at daybreak. 君無所辱命 is indeed slightly obscure, but I would say it looks like a topic-comment structure, approximately meaning "as to our ruler, there cannot be orders that we ignore", or simply, "we must obey our ruler". However, 所 is a notoriously difficult word. As I said, I read this as "we cannot disobey our lord's instructions", and while that might be inconsistent with the Mandarin translation you quote, my Sanmin edition translates as 我們照辦奉陪，決不有辱君名, seemingly agreeing.

[chrix]

Thank you Daan, this interpretation make much more sense...

In the dialogue, I got confused by the overly diplomatic language I suppose

[Daan]

Finally finished this text!

41. "謂之君子而射之, 非禮也". Wang Li's criticism of the Duke's speech seems a bit ideologically tinged...

Hmm, I don't know, it would seem to me it might just be aimed at a contemporary public, that might conceivably have problems understanding how someone could discuss 禮 during a war.

42. 硬行牽合 I think means "contrived" in the sense that Wang Li says that the author of the Zuozhuan made this prophecy up.

Hmm, could be, or how about far-fetched? Unrealistic? I'm not sure if he meant to imply they were necessarily made up by the author of the Zuo Zhuan. But my Mandarin isn't quite as good as yours

43. 越 "fall down", here unlike 斃 "prostrate, fall down (仆倒), doesn't seem to necessarily imply dying, but the Modern Mandarin translation clearly translates both verbs as "die" in this context.

Yes, my Sanmin annotations and translation all say his 左 and his 右 die in combat, as well. But there's no explanation as to why these arrows killed them, as opposed to just wounding them.

44. 推車: so 逢丑父 was pushing the cart himself? Or why would his arm injury slow down the speed of the chariot?

The key to this phrase is, I think, a bit earlier: 驂挂于木而止, i.e. he got stuck? Or am I missing something here?

45. I don't really get what 韓厥 is saying: 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. Modern Mandarin translation says: “寡君派臣下们替鲁、卫两国请求，说：‘不要让军队进入齐国的土地。’下臣不幸，正好在军队服役，不能逃避服役。而且也害怕奔走逃避成为两国国君的耻辱。下臣身为一名战士，谨向君王报告我的无能，但由于人手缺乏，只好承当这个官职。”. I don't get the following points:

45A. 寡君使群臣為魯衛請: the Duke of 晉 let his ministers beg/request on behalf of 魯 and 衛? To whom, and what? For 齊 to let off of them? OK, on second thought, rereading Wang Li's commentary about this as "tactful diplomatic language" I think this "begging" might just be a polite way of saying to 齊 "get the f*ck out of our allies' lands"

Haha, hadn't looked at it from that perspective yet. Colourful translation I initially thought this meant:

寡君使群臣為魯衛請

My Lord sent many soldiers because of a request for help from [our allies] Lu and Wei.

(lit. That my Lord send many soldiers was requested by Lu and Wei)

曰，無令輿師，陷入君地

He said not to occupy your country with a huge army.

(presumably he did not want to get too involved)

下臣不幸，屬當戎行，無所逃隱，且懼奔辟，

But what a misfortune befell your lowly servant, in the middle of hostilities I ran across your Highness, and there's no escaping now.

(letting him escape would be consistent with his instructions not to get involved too deep, but he is now forced to take the Duke home as his P.O.W. since it would seem kind of stupid to let him "walk outta here")

而忝兩君

I'm afraid there's no avoiding offending two rulers now.

(one of them his own Lord, whose orders he is disobeying, and the other the Duke he's captured)

臣辱戎士，敢告不敏，攝官承乏.

I am merely a lowly soldier, I dare say stupid, merely an acting official for lack of someone better."

(don't know why he would say this, perhaps to express his respect for the Duke and also to cover Jin's ass in case this situation leads to serious problems, i.e., let it be clear that I am not acting on my Lord's instructions here?)

46. After the Battle of San Jacinto, the Mexican President Santa Anna tried something similar, pretending to be an ordinary soldier. Unfortunately all the other Mexican soldiers saluted him and so he was quickly captured by the Texians. Well, it can't always work, can it...

Haha, that's interesting!

47. The lesson ends with 郤克 releasing 逢丑父 to reward him for his readiness to die for his ruler. The story, on the other hand continues... let's have a brief look at what happens afterwards

Oh, you're going to kill me That's a pretty long piece of text, actually. I think I had better finish the other texts from Wang Li first. More importantly, how do you feel about my interpretation of the diplomatic language? Any suggestions or remarks? I wasn't too sure myself.

[Kobo-Daishi]

Dear all,

If you're interested in the Chunqiu with the Zuo Zhuan commentaries as translated by Legge you might check out this link:

Univ. of Virginia site of Chunqiu w/Zuo's commentary in Chinese with Legge translation of Tso Chuan

It has the Chunqiu and Zuozhuan in Chinese and the Legge translation of the Tso Chuan side by side and might be of help.

A Ph.D student from UCLA provided the characters to the Legge translation.

The Ch'un Ts'ew with the Tso Chuen was translated by James Legge, 1872. The new transliteration was done by Andrew Miller, a Ph.D. student at UCLA, in 2007 for this electronic edition and is not included in any other editions of James Legge's 1872 translation.

Plenty of additional comments. Don't know if they're by Legge (don't have a copy of Legge but since it was first published in 1872 it should be out of copyright in the US at any rate) or the University of Virginia people. Such as mention of notes from the Kangxi.

Kobo-Daishi, PLLA.

[chrix]

Hi Kobo-Daishi,

this is a very interesting link, thanks. I've looked up several of the stories we've had so far, and they all seem to be in there (though I've noticed that in the text about 趙盾, in the quote attributed to Confucius his name is written differently), but for the story we're currently discussing, the text seems to be completely absent. I'm talking about this bit: http://chinese.dsturgeon.net/dictionary.pl?if=en&id=18904#char30328 starting with 癸酉，師陳于鞍. I can't find it here: http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/saxon/servlet/SaxonServlet?source=xwomen/texts/chunqiu.xml&style=xwomen/xsl/dynaxml.xsl&chunk.id=d2.14&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d2.8&doc.lang=bilingual

There must be some variation between versions involved, can anyone shed light on this?

EDIT: Daan and I discussed this while the server was down, and it looks like the Legge translation part does include the text I'm mentioning, it's just the Classical Chinese version that doesn't, so the two versions aren't necessarily covering the same range of text.

Edited December 22, 2009 at 11:14 AM by chrix

[chrix]

A quote from the Legge text discussing the Zuozhuan:

What is really perplexing is that in the same account the same individual is now called by his name, now by his honorary epithet, and now by his designation, or by one or other of his designations if he had more than one, so that the narrative becomes very confused, and it requires considerable research on the part of the reader to make out who is denominated in all this variety of ways. [...] Zhao Yi says that such a method of varying names and appellations was characteristic of the style of that time. If, indeed, it was characteristic of the time, I must think that Zuo possessed it in an exaggerated degree. The confusion produced by it in his Work seems to have led to its cure. Sima Qian and the writers of the Books of Han are careful, at the commencement of their biographies, to give the surname, name, and designation or designations of their subjects, so that the student has none of the perplexity in reading them, which he finds with Zuo's zhuan.

And this is so true!

[chrix]

Merry Christmas everyone!

寡君使群臣為魯衛請

My Lord sent many soldiers because of a request for help from [our allies] Lu and Wei.

(lit. That my Lord send many soldiers was requested by Lu and Wei)

This is quite an interesting grammatical issue here. It all hinges on whether 為 is read wéi or wèi (Pulleyblank remarks that 所 becomes prevalent from the Han era, so its absence doesn't tell us much here of course). Also can 群臣 be understood as soldiers? Or probably "his ministers" which would or would not imply "many soldiers led by said ministers"?

So it boils down to the two different structures:

- that my Lord send his ministers was requested by Lu and Wei

- my Lord sent his ministers to request (the aggressor retreat) on behalf of Lu and Wei

If it's the former, do you have other examples where an entire clause can be passivised?

曰，無令輿師，陷入君地

He said not to occupy your country with a huge army.

(presumably he did not want to get too involved)

Where does it say "occupy"?

下臣不幸，屬當戎行，無所逃隱，且懼奔辟，

But what a misfortune befell your lowly servant, in the middle of hostilities I ran across your Highness, and there's no escaping now.

(letting him escape would be consistent with his instructions not to get involved too deep, but he is now forced to take the Duke home as his P.O.W. since it would seem kind of stupid to let him "walk outta here")

Where's the part about 屬當戎行? Also, doesn't 戎行 imply an army, and not just the Duke of Qi and his servant? Or this entire part about wanting to escape also "diplomatic language"?

而忝兩君

I'm afraid there's no avoiding offending two rulers now.

(one of them his own Lord, whose orders he is disobeying, and the other the Duke he's captured)

FULL ACK.

臣辱戎士，敢告不敏，攝官承乏.

I am merely a lowly soldier, I dare say stupid, merely an acting official for lack of someone better."

(don't know why he would say this, perhaps to express his respect for the Duke and also to cover Jin's ass in case this situation leads to serious problems, i.e., let it be clear that I am not acting on my Lord's instructions here?)

I don't think he is saying this to make explicit he's not acting on his Lord's instructions. Surely if a soldier came across the leader of the enemy troops, his ruler would expect him to arrest him? Maybe respectfully so, but still so...

[Daan]

Interesting and good points, thanks for posting them, chrix. I'll get back to this when I have some spare time, but as I said in the other threads, these are hectic days, so that might have to wait for a bit

[Daan]

So here are my comments finally, after finishing the first chapter of Wang Li. First some confused, but hopefully less so than previously, remarks on the diplomatic language in 齊晉鞍之戰（成公二年）.

So it boils down to the two different structures:

- that my Lord send his ministers was requested by Lu and Wei

- my Lord sent his ministers to request (the aggressor retreat) on behalf of Lu and Wei

If it's the former, do you have other examples where an entire clause can be passivised?

I do not have any examples of an entire clause being passivised, and also considering your reading makes more sense given the context, I'll take back what I said on this meaning "this was requested by Lu and Wei". I'll instead agree that it means his ruler sent him to convey the kind request to leave Lu and Wei alone. Here is a new attempt at translating the entirety of his words, this time with some help from my Sanmin edition.

寡君使群臣為魯衛請，曰，無令輿師，陷入君地.

"My ruler sent his ministers to plead on behalf of Lu and Wei, and instructed us not to go too deep into your territory with a large army."

My guess is he wants to say the Duke of Jin did not want to occupy Qi, only help out Lu and Wei. Invading a country the size of Qi would cause serious headaches for the Duke of Jin, and he must have thought diplomatically discussing the matter with the Duke of Qi, telling him Lu and Wei are firmly in Jin's sphere of influence, would be a better approach. You can wonder whether the Duke of Jin really gave such instructions, or whether 韓厥 is making this up to placate the Duke of Qi.

下臣不幸，屬當戎行，無所逃隱.

"But what a misfortune befell your lowly servant, while serving in the army he ran across your Highness, and there's no way to escape."

Sanmin says: 意謂只能逮捕你以盡職責. I think it's ambiguous whether the 逃隱 would be done by 韓厥 or by the Duke of Qi, though given the Sanmin annotation I assume it would be 韓厥.

且懼奔辟，而忝兩君.

Now this is where it gets interesting. Sanmin says that the 兩君 are in fact the rulers of Lu and Wei, who would no doubt be humiliated if their ally let the Duke of Qi walk free. So what you would get is "And I am afraid that trying to get out of this situation would make two rulers [namely those of Lu and Wei] lose face". The Duke of Jin might be able to get away with not attempting to vanquish Qi, but his allies wouldn't appreciate letting the Duke of Qi "walk outta here", in the words of the legendary Dirty Harry.

臣辱戎士，敢告不敏，攝官承乏.

"I am merely filling up the ranks, acting in absence of someone better, and humbly say to you I am not talented."

I don't think he is saying this to make explicit he's not acting on his Lord's instructions. Surely if a soldier came across the leader of the enemy troops, his ruler would expect him to arrest him? Maybe respectfully so, but still so...

Well, they were not supposed to kill other rulers (as previously explained in the text), so perhaps even arresting them would be considered disrespectful? And since the aim is probably still to come up with a diplomatic solution, 韓厥 can't just ignore the status of the Duke of Qi and arrest him as an enemy combatant. He is, after all, not interested in conquering Qi nor would he want to give future rulers of Qi a good reason to attack the state of Jin.

Does this all make more sense than my previous ideas? Once again, all thoughts and comments would be most welcomed, and where others have better ideas I would be happy to stand corrected.

Some comments on the final two texts in the next post.

[chrix]

Hey Daan, thanks for your comments. By and large I do agree with most of what you say. As for what 韓厥 meant I'm not sure as I lack the specialist knowledge of the Chunqiu era to be able to say what was convention and what was not. I think unless others can shed some more light on these issues, we might just have to leave it at that... and go on to the next text

[Daan]

Yes, I was just thinking I might have to ask one of my Leiden lecturers in classical Chinese who did a lot of research into warfare in the Warring States period. But he's generally quite busy, so I'm reluctant to bother him. Let's go on with the final three (not two) texts from the first chapter! I've read them and will post some comments and questions tomorrow.

[chrix]

OK, let's tackle the last three texts then

楚歸晉知罃 成公三年

Text

52. This again makes reference to the Battle of Bì (邲之戰), which occurred in 595 B.C.E., between 晉 and 楚. The text is set in the year 588 B.C.E., 7 years later. 楚 had won the battle and put a damper on 晉's plans for supremacy, but 晉 was not totally defeated, and 楚 not strong enough to fully subjugate it. According to Wang Li, this is the reason the King of 楚 agreed on releasing 知罃.

53. this time, we have two "simplified" characters in use here: 尸 and 于. The latter, 于, according to Pulleyblank, is of different origin than the particle 於 which is homophonous in Modern Mandarin. Both particles co-occur in the text, and what kind of difference there was between the two, if any, is still poorly understood.

54. 俘馘, could this be a bimorphemic word? At least it's some kind of compound, 俘 "P.O.W." and 馘 "P.O.W. with the left ear cut off" (my dictionary's defintion deviates from Wang Li's explanation "割取敵方戰死者左耳"

55. yet again we have an instance of 執事, again explained by Wang Li as referring to the King. What does Sanmin say?

56. 使歸即戮: I ran across the same sentiment in an earlier text (in a part skipped by Wang Li, see point 21): a captive says thanks for sending him to his death back home (戮). This is also translated by Wang Li and the Modern Mandarin translation as "接受殺戮". What is this supposed to mean? Surely he wasn't expecting to be executed upon his return, even though it might some kind of warrior code thing to take responsibility for a botched campaign (Varus of "redde mihi legiones" fame springs to mind).

EDIT: Well, after reading the entire text it's clear. Generals and minister who had failed in losing a battling or being had to expect to face death, and 知罃 epitomises this.

57. 德 is used as a verb here in the sense of "to thank, to be grateful". Maybe this also plays into no. 7.

58. 竭力致死 and 無有二心 sound like chengyu, but I couldn't find them in any chengyu dictionary. Maybe they survive in altered form.

祁奚薦賢 襄公三年

Text

59. 祁奚 Qí Xī

60. The quote from 尚書: 無偏無黨，王道蕩蕩 Avoid deflection, avoid partiality; Broad and long is the royal way.

61. The quote from 詩經: 維其有之、是以似之。They are possessed of the ability, And right is it their movements should indicate it.

子產不毀鄉校 襄公三十一年

Text

English translation

62. 子產 from 鄭 was one of the most famous politicians of the Chunqiu era.

[Daan]

楚歸晉知罃 成公三年

53. this time, we have two "simplified" characters in use here: 尸 and 于. The latter, 于, according to Pulleyblank, is of different origin than the particle 於 which is homophonous in Modern Mandarin. Both particles co-occur in the text, and what kind of difference there was between the two, if any, is still poorly understood.

Yes, 于 and 於 used to refer to different words. Some say this is a dialect issue. 尸 and 屍 have both been in use for a long time: 尸 was already used back in the Warring States period, as in the name of the little-known 尸子 written by the equally unknown 尸佼. Wikipedia uses 屍 and 尸 interchangeably.

54. 俘馘, could this be a bimorphemic word? At least it's some kind of compound, 俘 "P.O.W." and 馘 "P.O.W. with the left ear cut off" (my dictionary's defintion deviates from Wang Li's explanation "割取敵方戰死者左耳"

Sanmin agrees 知罃被俘，未被馘，此是連類而言及.

55. yet again we have an instance of 執事, again explained by Wang Li as referring to the King. What does Sanmin say?

Sanmin agrees with Wang Li that while 執事 means 'servants', 知罃 is still referring to the king. That's not surprising, since those servants would obviously only hurt 知罃 if so instructed by the king.

Now, the only question I have about this text is: does anyone have any clue how the king of Chu could possibly see 知罃's reply as a reward? Perhaps because this will set an example for the inhabitants of Chu that they should always remain loyal to their king?

祁奚薦賢 襄公三年]

Variants of this story are also found in the 呂氏春秋, the 史記, and the 新序. I'm particularly fond of the passage 君曰：“非子之讎耶？”對曰：“君問可，非問讎也。”

子產不毀鄉校 襄公三十一年

The idea that suppressing popular discontent, like bad water management, will cause disasters is also found in the 國語，周語上 3.1 and was later used by Han Yu of the Tang Dynasty. I have one question about this text: what does 蔑也 mean here? I can't figure it out for the life of me. It's probably something really simple I'm overlooking, but any help would be appreciated.

[chrix]

what does 蔑也 mean here?

蔑 is 然明's 名, cp. note 3 in the Wang Li text

[Daan]

Sigh. Thanks for pointing that out!