"Junzi Yue" versus "Zhongni Yue" in Zuozhuan

Harvard-Yenching Institute

"Junzi Yue" versus "Zhongni Yue" in ZuozhuanAuthor(s): Eric HenrySource: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 59, No. 1 (Jun., 1999), pp. 125-161Published by: Harvard-Yenching InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2652685 .

Accessed: 28/09/2014 10:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Harvard-Yenching Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to HarvardJournal of Asiatic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 72.105.157.124 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 10:01:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hyi

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2652685?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


"Junzi Yue" Versus "Zhongni Yue" in Zuozhuan

ERIC HENRY University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

A FTER narration and persuasive oratory, the most frequently employed literary mode in Zuozhuan is commentary, or evalua-

tion. The passages concerned fall into three broad categories: remarks attributed to ajunzi-a "superior man" or "man of quality"; remarks attributed to Kongzi, usually but not always identified as "Zhongni" +JP,;1 and remarks attributed to personages in the narratives themselves. The most elaborate interpretive remarks- the ones that go on for several paragraphs or more-all belong to the third category and are largely confined to the relatively copious entries pertaining to the years between c. 590 and c. 530 B.C. In these often deeply analytical passages, the narrator borrows the voices of his personages to give conceptual shape to the complex web of events that makes up his account of the Chunqiu era.

An earlier version of this study was presented at the Eighth Conference of the Warring States Working Group, held at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA., April 26- 27, 1997. I am grateful to many scholars, both within and without the Warring States Confer- ence, who studied earlier versions of this paper and made valuable criticisms and suggestions. I would particularly like to acknowedge here the debts that I owe to: Bruce and Taeko Brooks, Michael Nylan, Jens Oestergaard Petersen, Yuri Pines, and Paul Rakita Goldman.

1 The name "Kongzi" as employed in this paper is intended to refer to the personage bear- ing that designation, or equivalent designations, in Zuozhuan and other early texts; it is not intended to refer, except where an explicit exception is made, to a presumed historical personage. This rule applies generally to all names of personages in early historical narrative that appear in this article.

125



126 ERIC HENRY

By contrast, the comments in the first two categories-those con- tributed by the junzi and Kongzi-are brief and readily separable from the main text, being introduced by one of a few standard for- mulae, such as junziyue Tf H, junzi wei RTX, junzi shiyi zhi RT; E JU-, Zhongniyue {+J'H, and so on. My purpose here is to examine and compare the comments in these two categories with a view to defining their distinguishing traits. This investigation will reveal substantial differences in style and content between these two bodies of commentary-differences so marked, and so consistent, as to compel the conclusion that they did not proceed from the same source.

THE "JUNZI YUE" AUTHENTICITY CONTROVERSY

Beginning in the nineteenth century, a tradition of doubt concerning the authenticity of the "junzi yue" comments in Zuozhuan began to develop in the writings of certain independently minded Qing- dynasty scholars. A hint of this doubt may be seen even six centuries earlier in a random comment attributed to Zhu Xi in Zhuziyulei *f

C by one of his students:

"Lin Huangzhong #*P says that the comments of the 'superior man' in Zuozhuan are [nothing but] the words of Liu Xin WIJ), and Mr. Hu -M says that the Zhou 1i is [nothing but] the work of Liu Xin. I don't know what to think about this-the comments of the 'superior man' in Zuozhuan are quite pointless." Then in relation to this [he] brought up the passage [in Zuozhuan, Yingong 6, Item 4] about "weeding out and heaping up," [saying,] "What does it have to do with the text that precedes it?"2

This passage contains in embryonic form all the elements that were to fuel the controversy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: distaste for the comments themselves, knowledge that Zuozhuan passed through the hands of Liu Xin at a crucial stage in its transmission, and distrust of the editorial probity of Liu Xin, a known fol-

2 Li Jingde ?5il.t, ed., Zhuziyulei (Taipei: Zhengzhong shuju, 1970), facs. edition of a Ming rpt. of the original 1270 edition, 83.3408. The passage referred to by Zhu Xi occurs in Zuozhuan, Yingong 6, item 4. All references to Zuozhuan in this article are to Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu 4#AsMG-, ed. Yang Bojun Offll (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1981) [hereafter Zuo zhuan zhu].



"JUNZI" AND "ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 127

lower of Wang Mang, who usurped the throne in 9 A.D. (how, after all, could a politically disloyal person be editorially scrupulous?). A striking feature of the "junzi yue" controversy is that no textual evidence was ever injected into it-the discussions consisted exclusively of conjectures based on intuitions-but as voice after voice joined the chorus of doubters, and as later doubters referred to the authority of earlier doubters, the spuriousness of the "superior man's" comments became increasingly credible.

The modern phase of this skepticism begins in the Qing with Zuozhuan Chunqiu kao zheng EtW, tM by Liu Fenglu VIA41 (1776- 1829), an advocate of the Gongyang Commentary and one of the found- ers of the New Text movement. Liu's aim in this study is to uncover any and all evidence of textual tampering with Zuozhuan; he there- fore devotes attention to many different components of the work. He considers all the explanations of the Chunqiu classic's wording (shuyu Vi2) and all the explanations of its general procedures (fan 1i 0LWII) to be spurious; and all his remarks concerning "junzi yue"

passages express some mixture of disdain for their content and suspi- cion of their provenance. With regard to the first of these passages, containing thejunzi' s well-known words of praise concerning the fili- ality of Ying Kao Shu, he says:

The relationship of Kao Shu to Zhuanggong was that of an officer to a lord-the expression "caused it to extend to" is inadmissible, and the expression "your kind" is likewise inadmissible-the lack of deference here is extreme. Most of the various passages introduced [here] as sayings of the junzi are additions made by later people. Zhuzi [Zhu Xi] saw this as well.3

Elsewhere Liu quotes three comments in one entry and observes simply that "the superior man's comments appear again and again, and are uniformly inept."4 The passages he singles out for particular disapproval are usually ones that express admiration for modes

3 Liu Fenglu, Zuoshi chunqiu kaozheng, c. 1815, in Ruan Yuan, ed., Huang Qingjingjie '

&, Guangzhou Cuiwen tang bukan ben edition (1860; rpt., Taibei: Yiwen yinshu guan, n.d.), pp. 14183-84. "Caused it to extend to" refers to the words shiji SR in the sentence "Ying Kao Shu was wholly filial; he loved his mother and caused this love to extend to Lord Zhuang. " "Your kind" refers to the words er lei -MO in thejunzi's Shijing quotation, "When filial sons are not in short supply, / Blessings will be conferred on your kind forever" (Shyiing 247, "Ji zui" a).

4 Zuoshi chunqiu kaozheng, p. 14185.



128 ERIC HENRY

of behavior that, judged by imperial-era norms, seem violent, bi- zarre, or morally questionable.5

Liu Fenglu's work on Zuozhuan was much read and admired by subsequent scholars; and his feelings concerning the "junzi yue" passages are replicated in such works as Chunqiu tong lun *#AM (late nineteenth century) by Pi Xirui tAA , Shiji tan yuan -Sgp0 by Cui Shi W-A, and by members of Gu Jiegang's OWN Gu shi bian

j! group.6 The clearest expression of distrust for Liu Xin's work on the text is to be found in Pi Xirui's study, Chunqiu tonglun, and is based on an analogy between Liu Xin's political career and that of Du Yu, the great Jin-dynasty commentator on Zuozhuan:

[Du] Yu's father Hu never got on with Sima Yi and died unhappy. Yu forgot his father's wrongs and married Yi's daughter. Then he helped the Simas usurp the Wei throne. This is just like the case of Liu Xin and and his father Xiang: Xiang said that the Lius and the Wangs could not coexist, but Xin helped Wang Mang usurp the Han throne. The two were disloyal and unfilial; they were just the sort of rebellious bandits that the Chunqiu exposes to censure. And the work of Master Zuo passed through the hands of Liu Xin and was then promoted and publicized by Du Yu. It follows that the text was in places tampered with by those two men. That is why Lin Huangzhong felt that the "junzi yue" passages are the words of Liu Xin and why Liu Fenglu felt that the explanations of procedures (fan li) were slipped into the text by Liu Xin.7

In the early 1980s, the nature of the "junzi yue" passages was put into much sharper focus by Zheng Liangshu X a. In a pair of brief articles (the second of which makes some use of earlier work done by Yang Xiangkui T JA), Zheng demonstrates by means of textual evidence that these passages could not have been added by Liu Xin and are in all probability the work of the Zuozhuan author

5 In connection with a passage, for example, where thejunzi observes of the Chu officer Yu Quan (who brandished a weapon in his ruler's face to dissuade him from a foolish policy) that he "may be said to have loved his ruler," Lu observes that no true junzi would advocate expressing love for a ruler by threatening him with a weapon. Ibid., p. 14186.

6 See Pi Xirui, Jingxue tonglun, preface 1907 (Taibei: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1965); Cui Shi, Shiji tan yuan (1910; Taibei: Guangwen shuju, 1967); Qian Xuantong 9;r], "Zuoshi Chunqiu kaozheng shu hou" II, in Gujiegang, ed., Gu Shi bian, 5th collection, 4:1-21; Zhang Xitang WAS, "Zuo shi Chunqiu kaozheng xu (AEJk4#4W) Jjf, in Gu Jiegang, ed., Gu Shi bian, 5th collection 4:263-92. In the work of the more extreme new text scholars (i.e. Kang Youwei and his adherents), distrust of the "junzi yue" comments is merged with distrust of the entire Zuozhuan text.

7 Pi Xirui, Jingxue tonglun, Section 4: " Chunqiu, " p. 45.




himself. His most powerful argument is that texts that predate Liu Xin often quote or echo "junzi yue" commentary in the course of referring to the Zuozhuan passages in which they are embedded. This is a strong indication that these passages were a part of the text before it passed through Liu Xin's hands. Zheng cites seven examples of such early quotation, including one from Han Fei Zi (Nan si pian), one from Yan Zi Chunqiu (Nei pian za xia), three from Shiji (two examples from Qin ben ji and one from Lu shi jia), one (noted earlier by Yang Xianggui) from Guo yu (Lu yu 1, item 11), and one (also previously noted by Yang Xianggui) from Lu shi chunqiu (Qu si pian).8 In addition to these examples, the present writer has come across another example in Sh/ij (Song Weizi shijia),9 raising the number of demonstrable early quotations to eight.

Zheng Liangshu notes also that the "junzi yue" comments from time to time quote lost Shying poems (two examples: Cheng gong 9, item 10 and Xianggong 5, item 7), lost variants of Shyjing poems (two examples: Xianggong 27, item 6 and Xianggong 30, item 12),1o and lost Shangshu passages (three examples: Xigong 24, item 3; Xianggong 5, item 7 and Aigong 18, item 2).11 If the "junzi yue" comments were added in the late Han, Zheng asks, where did the interpolator get these lost passages? The hypothesis that the comments were written along with the main text is less strained; the personages in the stories, after all, refer to lost Shi and Shu passages

8 See Zheng Liangshu, "Lun Zuozhuan 'junzi yue' fei houren suo fuyi" = KK%) FET I

AFTif tt: and "Zai lun Zuozhuan 'junzi yue' fei houren suo fuyi" W= KK)f#, Fr f tJhbiAftW, " in Zheng Liangshu, Zhujian boshu lunwenji = (Beijing:

Zhonghua shuju, 1982), pp. 342-57, 358-63. 9 In this passage Sima Qian quotes the passage in Zuozhuan, Yingong 3, item 5 in which the

superior man praises Song Xuangong's prescience in bestowing the throne on his younger brother in 720 B.C. (and in doing so changes the formula "junzi yue" to "junzi wen zhi yue"

Ril? EIH). In his comments at the end of the chapter he quotes a passage from the Gong- yang commentary (misattributing it to the Zuozhuan author) that expresses an opposite view of Xuangong's action, saying that it led to ten generations of turmoil in Song. Shii (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959) 38.1623, 1633.

10 Zheng Liangshu, "Lun Zuozhuan 'junzi yue' fei hou ren suo fuyi," p. 347. Zheng mis- identifies the Xianggong 5 passage as a Xianggong 9 passage; also, he does not distinguish between lost Shzijng poems and lost variants of Shzijng poems, calling both "lost Shi poems. " The distinction I make between them is based on the comments of Yang Bojun in his annotated edition of Zuozhuan. The item numbers that I supply do not appear in Zheng's article; they are based on the Yang Bojun edition.

" Ibid., p. 348.



130 ERIC HENRY

about as frequently the junzi does (see, for example, passages in Yin- gong 1, item 4, shi-style poem; Zhuanggong 8, item 2, lost Shu passage; Xianggong 26, item 10, lost Shu passage; and Zhaogong 4, item 6, lost Shi poem).12

Zheng notes as well that use of the "junzi yue" formula to in- troduce commentary and opinion is a trait shared by a number of early texts and may even be found within speeches attributed to personages in Zuozhuan (Xianggong 14, item 2: speech attributed to Ji Zha of Wu; Zhaogong 3, item 4: speech attributed to Zhao Wenzi) and in Guo yu (Chu yu 1, item 9, speech attributed to Recorder- of-the-Left Yi Xiang).13 The "junzi yue" passages in Zuozhuan, moreover, often echo each other in phraseology, meaning, or use of quoted passages, a circumstance which, Zheng feels, reinforces one's impression that they reflect a single author's point of view and habits of expression."4

While there has been much previous discussion of the nature of the "junzi yue" passages, little has heretofore been said about the comments attributed to Kongzi. In the sections that follow, I shall examine both groups of commentary in detail. My investigation will show that the "junzi yue" comments are, as Zheng Liangshu has on other grounds suggested, closely associated with the Zuozhuan narrator himself; and that the comments attributed to Kongzi differ markedly in style and function from the "junzi yue" comments.

GENERAL COMPARATIVE OBSERVATIONS

The comments of the junzi are more numerous and more evenly distributed through Zuozhuan than those of Kongzi.15 The superior man voices his opinions eighty-nine times, but is not otherwise in- volved in the events portrayed.16 Kongzi, on the other hand, makes

12 Ibid., p. 348. Zheng refers only to the Zhuanggong 8, Xianggong 26, and Zhaogong 4

passages. 13 Ibid., pp. 353, 357 n. 3. 14 Ibid., pp. 348-51. Zheng provides eleven examples of repetitiveness. 15 See Appendices 1 and 2 for a complete listing of the appearances of Kongzi and thejunzi

in Zuozhuan. 16 There are altogether ninety comments introduced as opinions of a superior man; a few

of these, however, are bunched around a single incident in the text and one of them (Appen-




only forty-six appearances; in seventeen of these, he appears as an actor, and in twenty-nine as a commentator (but five of his twenty- nine appearances as a commentator are directly conjoined with his appearance as an actor). The appearances of the junzi are fairly evenly distributed through the first three quarters of the period covered, but show a marked falling off in the last quarter. The appearances of Kongzi in contrast, are non-existent in the first quarter, infrequent in the second, common in the third, and numerous in the fourth. Ta- ble 1, in which the Chunqiu era is divided into four periods, each roughly sixty years in length, portrays the situation.

Table 1 Comparative Frequency of Appearances

Period junzi Kongzi

1. 722-660 B.C. 21 appearances 0 appearances 2. 659-590 B.C. 25 appearances 4 appearances as commentator 3. 589-530 B.C. 37 appearances 9 appearances as commentator; 2

appearances as actor (including 1 case in which a comment is conjoined with an action)

4. 529-464 B.C. 6 appearances; none 16 appearances as commentator; 15 after 477 B.C. appearances as actor (4 cases of

conjoinment). None after 479 B.C.

Table 1 makes it look as if the comments of the junzi are more dense- ly distributed in period 3 than in periods 1 and 2, but this is not the case; Zuozhuan entries for period 3 are more numerous, and on the average longer, than those of other periods; thus the appearances of the junzi in period 3 have about as much space between them overall as they do in periods 1 and 2; it is in period 4 that a change in distribution occurs. The increase from period 2 to period 3 in comments attributed to Kongzi no doubt arises in part from this same variation in the number and length of entries.

dix 2, no. 86) may actually be a part of a comment attributed to "Zhongni, " so it is not counted in the tabulation of junzi comments in this article. There are also a few embedded "junzi yue" passages, in which a personage in a narrative, or even the junzi himself will say, "A superior man would observe, etc." It was a locution frequently used in pre-Qin writing as a means of introducing opinions. I shall not be concerned here with these embedded passages.



132 ERIC HENRY

Do the two voices differ in style or content? The junzi seems a little more attached to the habit of quotation than does Kongzi, but both figures often illustrate their points through the recitation of passages, and favor the same or similar texts. Forty-two out of the 89 comments attributed to the junzi contain quotations, in many cases multiple quotations, of Shijing (or Shijing-style) poems, prose passages, court records, or sayings. These include 46 quotations from (or references to) poems that occur in the extant Shijing, 2 quotations of lost variants of Shijing poems, 2 quotations from lost Shijing- style poems, 4 quotations of passages that occur in the "genuine" Shangshu, 4 quotations of passages in lost texts that now occur in spurious Shangshu documents, 1 quotation of a saying of Annalist Yi t._ of the Western Zhou 17 and 2 quotations from lost sets of "court records" (zhi). Of the 36 comments attributed to Kongzi, 10, a somewhat lesser proportion, have quotations (some multiple) from old material. These include 7 quotations from poems in the extant Shijing, 3 quotations from a lost Xia shu E ("Book of Xia; used likewise, in 3 instances, by the junzi) that now occur in spurious por- tions of Shangshu, 2 quotations from lost court records (zhi), and one quotation of a saying by one Zhou Ren )Jffi, perhaps a figure similar to the "Annalist Yi" mentioned above.

The comments themselves are almost exclusively concerned with attaching positive and negative values to specific historical actions, particular traits or abilities, and general types of action. The junzi, it appears, is primarily interested in phenomena belonging to the first of these categories: 80 of his 89 comments evaluate the worthi- ness of specific historical actions. The most striking feature of these evaluations is their forthright simplicity; the actions considered are

17 Annalist Yi is also quoted by personages within Zuozhuan narratives; see Xigong 15 (645 B.C.), item 4, pp. 359-60; Wengong 15 (612 B.C.), item 4, p. 611; Chenggong 4 (567 B.C.),

item 4, p. 818; Xianggong 14 (559 B.C.), item 9, p. 1019; and Zhaogong 1 (541 B.C.), item 13, p. 1224. Thejunzi's quotation occurs in Xuangong 12 (597 B.C.), item 3, p. 747. The passage in Chenggong 4, above, refers to a text called "Records of Annalist Yi" (Shi Yi zhizi tzhi

L,), suggesting that there may have been a written source for all these quotations. Various passages in old texts indicate that Annalist Yi was a Zhou court officer who flourished during the reigns of Kings Wen, Wu, and Cheng. See Zuozhuan zhu, pp. 359-60, notes. The junzi, Kongzi, and others occasionally quote from written material identified only as "records" (zhi

). The material quoted-terse moral and practical advice-is similar in nature to the sayings (yan =) of Annalist Yi.



"JUNZI'' AND ''ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 133

all either admirable (36 instances), or reprehensible (44 instances). These judgments are seldom modified by secondary considerations. Of the 9 comments not concerned with specific actions, 6 affirm the importance to states and individuals of some general type of action, e. g., preparing for warfare,18 maintaining friendships,'9 claiming the prerogatives due to rank," gaining the services of large numbers of people,2' maintaining a reputation for good faith,22 and observing ritual prescriptions.23 Only 3 comments do not assign a value to an action, general or specific; of these, 2 praise the discrimination with which names and titles are used in the Chunqiu classic,24 and 1 is prognosticative, concerning a covenant sworn by a count of Zheng with his court officers in 543 B.C. A discriminating person, says the junzi, can tell from the details of the covenant that Zheng's troubles are not yet over.25

THE SUPERIOR MAN

A few examples will suffice to convey the flavor of the junzi's positive and negative judgments. The narrator tells us that in 675 B.C.

Yu Quan % of Chu, while vehemently admonishing King Wen of Chu, brandished a weapon in his ruler's face; then, somewhat later, barred the gate of the capital city against the king to express disapproval for his failure to gain a victory on a campaign. To atone for these gross departures from ritual propriety, Yu Quan chopped off his own feet, an act that elicits the junzi's praise:

"Yu Quan may be said to have loved his ruler. He admonished him to such a degree that he delivered himself to mutilation; and he did not forget, even after mutilation, to urge him on to virtue." 26

18 Zuozhuan zhu, Yingong 5, item 4, p. 45. 19 Ibid., Yingong 6, item 4, p. 50. 20 Ibid., Chenggong 2, item 8, p. 808. 21 Ibid., Chenggong 2, item 8, pp. 808-9. 22 Ibid., Xianggong 30, item 12, p. 1179. 23 Ibid., Zhaogong 3, item 4, p. 1239. 24 Ibid., Chenggong 14, item 4, p. 870 and Zhaogong 31, item 5, pp. 1512-13. 25 Ibid., Xianggong 30, item 4, p. 1173. 26 Zuozhuan zhu, Zhuanggong 19, item 1, p. 211. The narrator in Dong Zhou lieguo zhi 3K)q

9IJS3> has a different slant on Yu Quan's behavior: "The scholar of ancient times, Mr. Zuo, said that Yu Quan was one who loved his ruler, but the historian has a verse in which he be-



134 ERIC HENRY

In a 672 B.C. entry, the junzi is again moved to admiration when Prince Wan X of Chen, who had come as an exile to the court of Qi Huangong, declines Huangong's invitation to continue drinking with him after sundown. Observes the superior man:

"Wine is used to complete the prescriptions of ritual; to refrain from using it to excess is righteousness. To carry out the ritual prescriptions with his ruler without

delivering him to excess was an instance of humankindness." 27

In a 648 B.C. entry, the junzi praises Guan Zhong for modestly declining to accept from the Zhou king ceremonies proper to a minister of the first rank (shang qing ?f; in fact the chiefs of the clans of Gao Is and Guo 1 held positions in Qi that were nominally higher than his):

"That the sacrifices to Guan should be continued from generation to generation is most fitting. He did not forget to yield place to those of higher rank. The Shi say,

'Joyous and aimiable is our lord; / He is rewarded by the spirits.'" 28

In these and other cases, the junzi's praise, when bestowed, is un- qualified and is based only on a consideration of the correctness of the specific action under discussion. In each case he attaches a brief explanation of the nature of this correctness.

Thejunzi's condemnations are as unequivocal as his encomiums. In one entry, we are told that after King Cheng of Chu won his great victory over Song Xianggong by the river Hong in 638 B.C.,

the Chu king allowed the two wives of Zheng Wengong (one of whom was his sister) to entertain him at a banquet and observe his war trophies (severed ears and prisoners). The junzi berates Chu Chengwang for his unseemly disregard of the separation of the sexes:

"This was not in accord with the rites. A woman, when sending off and greeting

rates him: "How can an officer correct his ruler with a sword? / To bar the gate against him was cause, too, for amazement. / If such things are upheld as instances of loyalty, / Then crowds of rebel bandits will lay claim to rectitude. " See Dong Zhou lieguo zhi (Taibei: Sanmin shuju, 1976), 19.114. This work was written around the 1620s by Feng Menglong ,,V under the title Xin lieguo zhi TifIJM=; it was later slightly revised and published under the present title by Cai Yuanfang 3 t in the Qianlong reign period.

27 Zuozhuan zhu, Zhuanggong 22, item 1, p. 221. 28 Ibid., Xigong 12, item 4, p. 342. The quotation is from Shijing 239, "Gan lu" IT. See

Mao shi Zheng jian -1 ;, SPPY edition (Taibei: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), 16.8b-9b.




guests, does not go beyond the gate and when seeing her brothers does not go beyond the threshold. The business of war has nothing to do with the employment of women. " 29

In an entry under 636 B.C., the junzi blames an exiled Zheng prince, assassinated at the behest of Zheng Wengong, for bringing about his own violent end through his fondness for wearing hats adorned with snipe feathers:

"Clothes that are not appropriate expose one's person to disaster. The Shi say, 'That gentleman there / Is not worthy of his garments.' Were not the garments of Prince Zang unseemly? The Shi say, 'I have drawn upon myself this grief.' This ac- cords with the case of Prince Zang. The Book of Xia says, 'The earth is reduced to order, and Heaven is effective.' This arises from their correspondence." 30

In an entry concerning the death and burial of Qin Mugong in 621 B.C., the junzi roundly condemns Mugong for causing three young men of the Ziju ?I clan to follow him in death (xun *; cf. Shiying 131 I, " Huang niao" *,ft):

"It was fitting, surely, that Qin Mugong never gained the position of alliance chief, for in his death he despised and rejected his people's feelings. When the kings of former times left the world, they still left behind examples to be followed; how could they have snatched away good men? The Shi say, 'When men are lost, the state must wither and perish.' This sums up what it is to lack good men. What could he have intended by seizing them?

"The kings of olden times, knowing that their lives would not be long, every- where established people of worth and wisdom, set up customs and instructions for their subjects, instituted distinctions of rank and merit for them, promulgated exemplary sayings among them, created rules and measures for them, displayed to public view productions of the finest craftsmanship, drew them into compliance with the rules of deportment, gave them laws and regulations, announced to them the statutes and the canons, taught them to avoid harm and prosper, instituted de- fined offices of government for their sake, and led them by means of the rules of propriety. In this way they insured that the earth would not fail to yield its proper increase, and they enabled all their subjects to rely on them. Only after having done these things did they go to their destined ends; and enlightened kings have all since done the same.

29 Zuozhuan zhu, Xigong 22, item 9, p. 399. 30 Ibid., Xigong 24, item 3, p. 427. The shi quotations are from Shyjing 151, "Hou ren" Af

A and 207 "Xiao ming" J,,M. See Mao shi, 7.8b-9a and 13.7b-8b. The Xia shu (Book of Xia) quotation now forms part of Shujing, "Da Yu mo," par. 8; see James Legge, The Chinese Classics (1893; Hong Kong rpt. ed., Cathay Press, 1960), vol. 3: The Shoo King or The Book of Historical Documents, p. 57.



136 ERIC HENRY

"But now, though Mugong left no good example to his posterity, he nevertheless took the good away with him in death. It would be hard for such a ruler to oc- cupy the highest place. The superior man may know from this that Qin shall not again march east!"31

The examples given above are typical of the junzi's style of commentary. They express conventional attitudes; they are concerned more with the observance of ethical and ritual norms than with pragmatic issues; they are unequivocal, leaving no doubt as to whether a particular action is admirable or reprehensible; and they are largely devoid of hidden content-what they mean is what they say.

The focus of the junzi's attention never broadens to include the overall character of the performer of an action; he is concerned only to assess the particular action under discussion. He is evidently not troubled by any sense of contradiction when a character who behaves well on some occasions behaves poorly on others. Thus in a 712 B.C. entry he blames Zheng Zhuanggong for his reprehensibly incorrect use of a spirit medium 32 even though, on two slightly earlier occasions, he praises Zhuanggong, once for his commendable correctness in bestowing some conquered Song cities upon his ally the marquis of Lu,33 and once for his admirable correctness in declining to annex the subjugated state of Xu 4. 3' These instances of praise are quite unclouded by any expressed awareness of the more sinister aspects of Zheng Zhuanggong's career, such as his want of family feeling and his open lack of submission to the Zhou throne. When in 623 B.C. he praises Qin Mugong for his seemly display of grief upon receipt of the news of the destruction by Chu of the state of Jiang,35 he is quite untroubled by another fact-the sacrifice of the three young men of the Ziju clan-which, in a slightly subsequent entry (quoted above), he severely condemns. Similarly, when the junzi praises Guan Zhong's modest behavior during a particular interview with the Zhou king, he does not concern himself in the least with the well-known questionable aspects of Guan Zhong's career,

31 Zuozhuan zhu, Wengong 6, item 3, pp. 547-49. The shi quotation is from Shiying 264, "Zhan yang" Plfl1. See Mao shi, 18.23b-25b.

32 Zuozhuan zhu, Yingong 11, item 4, p. 76. 33 Ibid., Yingong 10, item 3, p. 68. 3 Ibid., Yingong 11, item 3, p. 76. 35 Ibid., Wengong 4, item 6, pp. 534-35.



"JUNZI" AND "ZHONGNI" IN ZUOZHUAN 137

such as his opportunistic change of allegiance from Prince Jiu t?4 to the upstart Prince Xiaobai 'Jt4 (Qi Huangong), or the various manifestations of greed or hubris complained of by Kongzi in the Analects.36 This fixed practice of examining only one action (or, occasionally, one class of actions) at a time is one of the sources of the simplicity of the junzi' s judgments.37

KONGZI

The comments attributed to Kongzi, though fewer, are more various than those of the junzi and sometimes occur in quasi-dramatic settings, or are expressed through some kind of action rather than through speech, with the result that they are less amenable to quan- tification by type. Unlike the junzi, this commentator often (about eight instances) stands back and discusses the general attributes of a person's character rather than the correctness of a single action; and in cases where he does discuss single actions (about seventeen instances), his judgments are at times so equivocal that they cannot with confidence be placed in either the praise or the blame category. He is also more apt then the junzi to use pragmatic criteria in judg- ing actions and is more apt, as well, to use indirect means of expression, such as hints, hyperbole, silences, and suggestions.

An example of a character-focused comment occurs in a 625 B.C.

item regarding the rearranging of of ancestral tablets on the occasion of a great sacrifice. In the eighth month of that year, Lu Wen- gong, with the support of his director of ancestral sacrifices Xiafu Fuji g changed the order of ancestral tablets in the state temple, placing the tablet of his father Lu Xigong above that of Lu Min- gong, Xigong's half-brother, who, though born later than Xigong, preceded him on the throne. This case elicits comments from both

36 See Lun yu, 3.22, 14.10, 17, 18. 37 Yasumoto Hiroshi %4*tW suggests that the passages beginning with "junzi yue" are

apt to deal with questions of personal morality, while those beginning with "junzi wei" are more apt to deal with matters of practical statecraft. Quite a few passages appear to bear this out, but it seems to the present writer that the pattern is not consistent enough to enable one to regard this tendency as a generally reliable principle. See "Saden no kunshi etsu to kunshi i" KKt,) E F)8#IH T 9, EhimeDaigaku bungaku ronso 9tJ1j W 69 (1982): 27- 49; 71 (1982): 1-20.



138 ERIC HENRY

the junzi and Kongzi. The junzi, as is his wont, discusses only the act in question: he condemns the transposition of tablets as being contrary to ii, and cites legendary examples and Shi quotations to support his position.38 Kongzi on the other hand points out a pattern of incorrect behavior on the part of Zang Wenzhong WZ{O, who was in charge of state affairs when the event occurred:

Zhongni said, "There were three occasions when Zang Wenzhong displayed a lack of virtue [ren] and three when he displayed a lack of wisdom [zhi W]. He kept Zhan Qin %,r [Liuxia Hui IPRT] in a lowly position; he removed the Six Gates; and he had his concubines weave rush mats [for sale]-these are the three instances of his lack of virtue. He used items above his rank; he allowed a reversed-order sacrifice to go forward; and he sacrificed to the yuanju XJf [a strange sea-bird]-these are the three instances of his lack of wisdom."39

The above comment is notable not only for its awareness of character as a precursor to action, but for the manner in which it stands apart from received opinion. If we are to believe accounts in Zuozhuan and elsewhere, the Zang Wenzhong referred to was a culture-defining hero to the people of Lu, a man whose name was a byword for wisdom and exactitude of expression. Many examples of court oratory are attributed to him in Zuozhuan; Guo yu has several items that showcase him as a fountain of discriminating discourse; and a Shusun clan chief of the mid-sixth century B.C. is made to praise him as one whose words "still stand," though "his person is no more."40 Thus Kongzi's observation that Zang's virtue and wisdom were at times defective may fairly be characterized as a minority view. The two references to Zang Wenzhong in the Analects both accord with Kongzi's negative observations in Zuozhuan. He blames him in Analects 5.17 for having had inappropriately ornate pillars and rafter supports in the hall where his great tortoise from the state of Cai was displayed (an instance, it seems, of "using items above his rank") and in 5.13 for knowing the worth of Liuxia Hui but not

38 Zuozhuan zhu, Wengong 2, item 5, pp. 524-25. 3 Ibid., Wengong 2, item 5, p. 525. The phrase "reversed-order sacrifice" refers to the

switching of the tablets of Lu Xiging and Lu Mingong recounted in the Zuozhuan item under discussion. The narrative concerning this sacrifice appears also in Guoyu 4 (Lu yu 1), item I1, pp. 173-76. Guoyu also has a lengthy piece on Zang's unwise sacrifice to the yuanju bird, an item that does not appear in Zuozhuan. See Guoyu, 4 (Lu yu 1), item 9, pp. 165-71.

40 Zuozhuan zhu, Xianggong 24, item 1, pp. 1087-88.



''JUNZI" AND "ZHONGNI" IN ZUOZHUAN 139

yielding his position to him (or "not standing as an equal with him"). In all of these remarks, the speaker seems to be responding to a habit current among his associates of unquestioning admiration of this figure. He does not deny the overall stature of the man; his remarks assume such a background; their aim is to correct an adulation that is excessive. There is, in short, an implicit acknowledgment of Wenzhong's reputation for ren and zhi as well as an explicit discussion of his shortcomings in these areas.

Another example from Zuozhuan of Kongzi's global character as- sessments concerns Zang Wenzhong's grandson Zang Wuzhong M AO. The context is provided by an anecdote concerning an interview between Zang Wuzhong and Qi Zhuanggong (r. 553-548 B.C.)

that occurred in 550 B.C.:

The marquis of Qi intended to make a grant of farm land to Zang He AC [Zang Wuzhong, who had just come to Qi after being driven from Lu by rival clan chiefs]. Zang He heard of this and obtained an audience with the marquis. The marquis spoke with him about his campaign against Jin. Zang He said, "That you accom- plished much is true enough, but your lordship was like a rat. A rat lies hid in the daytime and moves about at night. It does not have its holes in ancestral temples, for it is afraid of men. It was only after your lordship heard that there were troubles in Jin that you moved against it; 41 if Jin had been at peace, you would have served it. If you were not a rat in this, what were you?" After hearing this, the marquis did not give any land to Zang He.

Zhongni said, "It is difficult to be wise. Though Zang Wuzhong was wise, he was not allowed to remain in Lu, and there was reason for it. His deeds put him at odds with people and he was not considerate of others. The Book of Xia says, 'When you think of a thing, place yourself within that thing.' This means that one should be compliant and considerate."41

Though the anecdote casts Zang Wuzhong in an interesting and quasi-heroic role, Kongzi withholds the admiration that it seems to invite. In this regard his response is typical of his general approach as a commentator to officer-ruler relations. In no passage in Zuo- zhuan does he approve of blunt directness in remonstrance if it

41 The clan of Fan in Jin was just then in the process of destroying the clan of Luan. 42 Zuozhuan zhu, Xianggong 23, item 8, p. 1085. This complaint about the character of

Zang Wuzhong was apparently not without basis; Zuozhuan has many items in which he behaves with a striking lack of tact. See for example Xianggong 19, item 4, p. 1047, where he needlessly antagonizes the head of the powerful Jisun clan through harsh public criticism of that minister's use of war spoils to cast a bell commemorating Lu's accomplishments in a recent conflict with Qi.



140 ERIC HENRY

leads to misfortune or disaster for the remonstrator. He is moreover reluctant, even in extreme circumstances, to criticize the actions or characters of rulers.

The junzi, as we have seen above, admires bold remonstrance and is not reticent in expressing disapproval of rulers. He applauds the dramatic disrespect shown to Chu Wenwang by his officer Yu Quan; and, when considering the famous rift between Zheng Zhuanggong and Zhou Huanwang, he sides with the vassal against the king, whom he blames for treating the Zheng ruler in a way that was bound to result in the latter's alienation.43 Elsewhere he berates Qi Linggong for meddling with the succession in his state and for ap- pointing unworthy men to office;44 he denigrates Jin Pinggong for weakly consenting to release a detained Wei marquis in return for the gift of a Wei princess:" he blames Zhan Yu M, a ruler of Ju, for bringing about his own exile and loss of position though neglect of his officers:46 and he quotes with approval a speech by an officer of Jin that blames Lu Zhaogong for failing to maintain the basic relationships that sustain the strength of a state.47 Other comments of the junzi show the same predilection: he blames two officers of Song for failing (presumably through bold remonstrance) to curb the extravagances of Song Wengong;48 he praises Yanzi for making a remark that caused Qi Jinggong to reduce the frequency of his punishments;49 and he praises Zichan of Zheng for refusing to comp- ly with a proposal that some old structures be torn down to facilitate the performance of burial ceremonies for Zheng Jian'gong.50

Kongzi, in his distaste for blunt remonstrance and reluctance to speak ill of rulers, differs altogether from the junzi. In one instance only does he speak critically of a ruler. Commenting on the failure of Chu Lingwang (r. 540-529) to be influenced by a timely admoni- tion, he observes,

"In ancient times there was a recorded saying: 'To subdue oneself and return to

Ibid., Yingong 11, item 5, p. 77. 44 Ibid., Xianggong 2, item 2, p. 920. 45 Ibid., Xianggong 26, item 12, p. 1124. 46 Ibid., Zhaogong 1, item 11, p. 1217. 47 Ibid., Zhaogong 5, item 3, p. 1266. 48 Ibid., Chenggong 2, item 4, p. 802. 49 Ibid., Zhaogong 3, item 3, p. 1238. 50 Ibid., Zhaogong 12, item 2, p. 1332.



"JUNZI" AND ''ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 141

propriety is perfect virtue.' It is indeed an excellent saying. If King Ling of Chu could have done this, how could he have met disgrace at Ganxi N?""5

This comment, more an expression of regret than a rebuke, is remarkably mild considering the spectacular crimes and follies of the ruler concerned. Elsewhere Kongzi provides a wholly favorable assessment of the character of Chu Zhaowang (r. 515-489 B.C.). The context is provided by a passage that makes two points. It first tells how Zhaowang sought and obtained death on the battlefield in a campaign against Wu so as to avoid the shame of the defeat predict- ed by his tortoise shells; it then recalls how, earlier in his career, he rejected proposals of his officers to conduct prayers and sacrifices of an irregular nature to safeguard his person from malign influences:

Kongzi said, "King Zhao of Chu knew the Great Way. That he did not lose his state was fitting indeed. The Xia shu says, 'That prince of Tao 1 and Tang )f alone, / Upheld the constant rules of Heaven / And so possessed the land of Ji g / But now his way has perished, / His rules thrown into confusion, / So that all is de- stroyed and lost.' It also says, 'When I think of him, my mind rests in him.' When a person observes of his own volition the constant rules of Heaven, he may be pronounced adequate.52

Kongzi again upholds the prerogatives of rulers when he implicit- ly accuses Jin Wengong of lese majeste in summoning King Xiang of Zhou to a meeting of the vassal lords and then to a hunt at Heyang PiM: "The summoning of a ruler by a subject cannot be used as an instruction. " This, adds the Zuozhuan narrator, accounts for the wording of the Chunqiu entry concerning this event ("The Heaven-ordained king held a hunt at Heyang"), a wording that con- ceals the fact that the king summoned no one on this occasion, but rather was summoned by a vassal.53

Kongzi's behavior in passages where he appears as an actor in a narrative is consistent with the views attributed to him as a commentator in that these actions tend always to uphold the status and prerogatives of rulers. When the Jisun clan chief insults the memo- ry of his former archenemy Lu Zhaogong by burying him on the

5' Ibid., Zhaogong 12, item 11, p. 1341. 52 Ibid., Aigong 6, item 2, p. 1636. The Xia shu passages now form part of Shujing, "Wu zi

zhi ge" and "Da Yu mo." See Legge, The Shoo King, pp. 159, 58 respectively.

53 Zuozhuan zhu, Xigong 28, item 9, p. 473.



142 ERIC HENRY

far side of the road next to the tombs of the Lu ruling house, Kongzi has a ditch made to connect Zhaogong's grave with those of his fore- bears.54 When Lu Dinggong is exposed to military intimidation at theJia'ao conference, Kongzi in his capacity as ritual assistant firm- ly insists that the threat be removed.55 When Bi city rebels besiege Lu Dinggong and the Jisun clan chief in a tower, he orders two officers to attack the rebels.56 When he hears of the assassination of Qi Jiangong by Chen Heng NW, he begs Lu Aigong to'attack Qi.57 He seems also, through his disciples, to be a supporter or instigator of a movement to tear down the fortification walls of theJisun, Meng- sun, and Shusun clans in Lu,58 a measure aimed, among other things, at reducing the power and independence of those clans and restoring some authority to the Lu marquis.

The commenting Kongzi is consistent in expressing disapproval for officers who admonish rulers with reckless vehemence. His main objection to such people is that they lack wisdom, zhi, a term that often means "the ability to preserve one's person"; but he also dis- likes their confrontational aggressiveness, considering it contrary to li. As we have seen above, he reacts negatively to Zang Wuzhong's habitual forthrightness. His response to the martyrdom of Xie Ye '&

?, who recklessly admonishes Lord Ling of Chen for his licentious behavior in court, is characteristic: he quotes a couplet from a Shi- jing poem about the folly of opposing the perversities of others with one's own perversities-wise people work through the mildly persuasive power of example.59 Kongzi is similarly contemptuous of Bao Zhuangzi iPff (Bao Qian M) of Qi for attempting to stop a sexual intrigue involving the consort dowager Sheng Meng Zi Wi&-T and in

Ibid., Dinggong 1, item 4, p. 1527. 55 Ibid., Dinggong 10, item 2, pp. 1577-79. 56 Ibid., Dinggong 12, item 2, p. 1587. 57 Ibid., Aigong 14, item 5, p. 1689.

58 Ibid., Dinggong 12, item 2, p. 1586. 59 Ibid., Xuangong 9, item 6, p. 702. Kongzi quotes from Shyjing 154 ("Ban" tv), Stanza

6 to make the point: "When the people have many perversities, / Do not set up your own per- versity before them. " Liu Fenglu, whose commentary elsewhere ignores the passages attributed to Kongzi, is provoked to wrathful incredulity by this critique of the heroic Xie Ye: "This passage provides a charter for those [timid officers] who stand by their horses, silent as frozen cicadas! This is not like the Lunyu, where Bi Gan is said to be ren [possessed of exemplary humanity]! " (Lun yu 18. 1); Liu Fenglu, Zuoshi chunqiu kaozheng, p. 14189.



"JUNZI" AND ''ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 143

consequence falling victim to the wrath of that powerful figure. The comment appears at the end of a passage that tells how, after his at- tempt at intervention, Bao suffered both the amputation of his feet and loss of his position as chief of the clan of Bao in Qi: "Zhongni said, 'The wisdom of Bao Zhuangzi wasn't equal to that of a sunflower. A sunflower can at least protect its feet.' '60

Only in one instance does Kongzi appear to condone blunt opposi- tion to the wishes of a ruler, and the situation, as one might expect, differs significantly from those cited above. A marquis of Qi (QiJing- gong; r. 547-490 B.C.) went hunting at Pei A. He used his bow to beckon to a game-forest official, but the man did not come forward, whereupon the marquis had him seized. The forester explained himself as follows: "In former times, when his lordship's predecessors went hunting, a flag was used to call a court officer, a bow to call a man-at-arms, and a fur cap to call a forester. I did not see a fur cap, so I dared not come forward. " The marquis let the man go. Kong- zi's comment follows directly: "Zhongni said, 'To hold to the Way is not as good as to hold to one's office. Superior men will say that the man was right.' a 61

Here, Kongzi upholds the propriety of the forester's insistence that he be properly summoned; in this instance, however, the resistance offered to the ruler is purely passive and appears to have arisen not from a deliberate intent to flout Jinggong's will, but from a fear of advancing by mistake or of seeming to claim a prerogative (i.e., being summoned by a bow) not due his rank. Even so, Kong- zi's support of the forester is couched in relative terms; there was an obligation to respond to the marquis's summons; to respond to the summons is "to hold to the way"; but here it is superseded by the forester's obligation to adhere to the rules of his office.

The touch of ambivalence that appears in the above comment-the simultaneous affirmation of "holding to the way" and "holding to one's office" -is but one of many examples of another quality that distinguishes Kongzi's comments from thejunzi's: a tendency to ac- knowledge the existence of two sides to every issue. A well-known example is the comment by Kongzi on Dong Hu WE, the upright

60 Ibid., Chenggong 17, item 6, p. 899. 61 Ibid., Zhaogong 20, item 7, pp. 1418-19.



144 ERIC HENRY

annalist of Jin. We are told that, when Jin Linggong was assassinated by Zhao Chuan WF in 607 B.C., Dong Hu noted the event in the Jin court annals as follows: "Zhao Dun MA murdered his ruler." Having made this entry, he displayed it at court. When Zhao Dun protested that the notation was untrue, Dong Hu said, "You are the prime minister. You left the capital but did not cross the state's borders, and upon your return you did not punish the perpetrator- if it was not you, who was it?" Zhao Dun thereupon reluctantly accepted the judgment, intoning some lines sung by a bereft wife in Shijing 33 ("Xiong zhi" SW) to express his sense of regret at losing his good name. This is immediately followed by:

Kongzi said, "Dong Hu was an upright annalist of olden times; his rule was not to

conceal. Zhao Xuanzi LA wi- [Zhao Dun] was an upright officer of olden times-to uphold the law he accepted a bad name. That was a pity-if he had crossed the border he would have escaped that fate. ,62

Here the commentator is plainly caught between sympathy for Dong Hu and sympathy for Zhao Dun, both of whom he admires, and, though he accepts the correctness of Dong Hu's reasoning in naming Zhao Dun as the assassin, he is sorry that Zhao Dun was not absent from Jin territory when the assassination was com- mitted, since such absence world have provided technical grounds for saving his good name.

Kongzi's habit of seeing merit in both sides of an issue sometimes results in judgments that are masterpieces of equivocation. An example is his response to the knotty moral problem posed by Shusun Zhaozi's public denunciation of Houseboy Niu (his half-brother) in 538 B.C., a denunciation that leads to the latter's death at the hands of an armed mob. Niu had indeed thrown the Shusun clan into turmoil with his murderous intrigues, but it was precisely through those intrigues that Zhaozi came into the chieftainship of the Shu- sun clan. Niu must have expected a reward, not a denunciation, from the new clan chief. Kongzi says:

"Shusun Zhaozi's refusal to bestow a reward for services received was an impossi- ble thing. There is a saying of Zhou Ren )W1f that goes, 'An administrator does not

62 Ibid., Xuangong 2, item 3, p. 663.



"JUNZI'' AND "ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 145

confer rewards for personal favors; nor does he impose punishments to satisfy personal resentment.' The Shi say, 'Aware of the uprightness of his conduct, / The states of the four quarters do his bidding.' ,,63

The wording here gives full weight to the usual obligation to return favors, but it is also intended as praise.

Kongzi shows the same kind of ambivalence in a comment ap- pended to an item of 528 B.C. that tells how Prime Minister Shu Xiang +i PZ of Jin denounced the corruptness of his younger brother Shu Yu S Shu Yu had just been slain in court by an angry nobleman for accepting a bribe from the nobleman's opponent in a civil dispute and Shu Xiang caused the corpse to be exhibited in the mar- ketplace. Shu Xiang is also shown in earlier Zuozhuan items warning various parties in Wei and Lu about Shu Yu's greed and dishones- ty. These denunciations are the topic of Kongzi's comment. Con- sidering each denunciation in succession, Kongzi finds much merit in them, but he wonders repeatedly whether Shu Xiang's actions were consistent with righteousness (yi A), a term that in this case refers to a person's obligation to deal generously with close relations:

Zhongni said, "Shu Xiang was one of the few who still exemplified the straightforward honesty of the ancients. In governing the state and administering punishments he did not conceal the misdeeds of his relation but thrice denounced the wickedness of Shu Yu without making the slightest abatement. Though the righteousness of this is open to question, he can be said to have been straightforward. At the Pingqiu conference [529 B.C.] he accused Shu Yu of craving bribes, so as to bring relief to Wei and save Jin from the practice of cruelty; upon returning Jisun [Yiru] to Lu [from Jin, where he had been detained], he informed others of Shu Yu's deceitfulness, so as to bring relief to Lu and save Jin from the practice of op- pression; and in the litigation of the marquis of Xing MRl3, he spoke of Shu Yu's greed, so as to uphold the correctness of the tables of punishments and to save Jin from partiality. With these three declarations he removed three evils and secured three benefits. Killing his brother, he magnified his glory. But did this resemble righteousness?64

The somewhat worried praise for Shu Xiang above may be con- trasted with the junzi's wholehearted admiration for Shi Que ;F fitof

63 Ibid., Zhaogong 5, item 1, p. 1263. The shi quotation is from Shijing 256, "Yi" 11. See Mao shi, 18.3a-6b.

64 Ibid., Zhaogong 14, item 7, p. 1367.



146 ERIC HENRY

Wei for bringing about the execution of his misbehaving son Shi Hou ;FWC:

Shi Que was a minister without blemish. He hated Zhou Xu )]pVI and included Hou in that detestation. Here, truly, was an instance of "a larger righteousness overcoming the bonds of relation." 65

OVERLAP

Although the two commentators on the whole speak with distinct voices, they occasionally sound alike: not all of the junzi's praise and blame is nuance-free, nor is every pronouncement of Kongzi weight- ed with ambiguity or shrouded in suggestion. An entry for 651 B.C.

relates how Xun Xi ViA of Jin fulfilled an earlier promise to Jin Xiangong by committing suicide following the assassinations of two young princes (Xiqi 'A and Zhuozi A+1) whom he was charged to protect. This is the sort of action that we might expect to elicit a round of applause from the junzi; and in fact the corresponding passage in Guo yu quotes him as saying that Xun Xi "did not eat his words."66 In Zuozhuan, however, the junzi quotes lines from a Shyjing poein in a way that questions the wisdom of Xun Xi's promise to Xiangong and expresses pity for the fate to which that promise con- signed him:

The superior man observes: "The situation of Xun Xi is summed up by these words from the Shi: 'A flaw in a white jade scepter / Can be polished away; / But for a flaw in speech, / Nothing can be done.' ,,67

In its use of suggestion (as opposed to direct statement) and in its concern for the pragmatic rather than the ideal dimension of court service, this comment is close in style to Kongzi. In fact it is similar in spirit to the latter's comment on Zhao Dun quoted earlier ("If he had crossed the border he would have escaped that fate").

An opposite example-one in which Kongzi's voice might be mis- taken for that of the junzi-is provided by an item that describes a mission to Jin undertaken by Zichan of Zheng in 548 B.C., in which he successfully justifies to Jin a recent attack by his state upon the

65 Ibid., Yingong 4, item 5, p. 38. 66 Guo yu, 8 (Jin yu 2), item 8, p. 305. 67 Zuozhuan zhu, Xigong 9, item 4, p. 330.




smaller and weaker state of Chen. Kongzi's comment takes note of the verbal skill displayed by Zichan on this occasion and reflects on the importance of such skills in statecraft generally:

Zhongni said, "There is a recorded saying that goes, 'Speech is used to give sufficiency to one's aims; and elegance is used to give sufficiency to one's speech. Without speech, who would know one's aims? And speech that is without elegance cannot go far. Jin was chief of all the states-had it not been for Zichan's well- ordered speeches, Jin would not have regarded Zheng's attack upon Chen as an act of merit. One must take great care with speech."68

In its concern for the pragmatic dimension of statesmanship, the above remark conforms to what one comes to expect of the commenting Kongzi. At the same time, in its singleminded attention to the importance of one attribute alone, it is reminiscent of those passages (the six adduced earlier) in which thejunzi affirms the importance to rulers and ministers of other qualities, such as preparation for warfare, the maintenance of friendships, and so on.

SUMMARY

The differing attributes of the two types of commentary afford much food for speculation. Nevertheless, I believe that the only reasonably secure conclusion to be drawn from these differences is that the junzi and Kongzi are not the same person. Their remarks, though filtered through the editorial care, perhaps, of one redactor or one group of redactors, had their origin in a minimum of two different individuals. The remarks of these individuals reflect sharply differing relationships to the events discussed and, as incorporated in Zuozhuan, they serve different literary functions.

The junzi's relationship to the events is similar to that of the reader: he looks at them from a distance, as a spectator, and is keen on deriving entertainment and instruction from them. He responds with uncomplicated enthusiasm when rulers are just, when ministers are bold and loyal, when evildoers get their just deserts, and so

68 Ibid., Xianggong 25, item 10, p. 1106. This praise for Zichan's gifts as an orator is borne out by the many speeches attributed to him in Zuozhuan in which striking, apposite, highly visual analogies follow one another in copious succession. See, for example, the speech in which Zichan cautions Zipi -Tf, a fellow officer of Zheng, against giving a position to an inexperienced man; Xianggong 31, item 12, pp. 1192-93.



148 ERIC HENRY

on. The views he expresses are majority views; in fact they corre- spond exactly to the views that will already exist subliminally in the reader after exposure to the narratives he discusses. His comments thus have an affirming or clarifying function in Zuozhuan. They orient and support the reader by putting his automatic responses into explicit form and bringing them into the narrative. The same function was later to be served by interspersed poems and authorial asides in Chinese vernacular historical fiction of the Ming dynasty. In our own era, one can see an example of this function (an extraordinarily debased example to be sure) in the canned laughter of radio and TV comedies.

The standpoint of Kongzi, on the other hand, is that of a poten- tial participant in the narratives. He cannot abandon himself to aes- thetic enjoyment, for he might at any time find himself under an obligation to admonish a ruler, keep a promise, or denounce a crime as do the personages in the narratives; thus he must always ask, not just whether an action is righteous, but whether it is wise or practica- ble. The views he expresses are generally minority views; they alert the reader to the possibility of a response different from the one he has already formed; thus they serve a corrective or enlarging function in the text.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding the identities of the junzi and Kongzi, I will set down here what seem to me the likeliest possibilities. Feng Menglong, author of the late-Ming Dong Zhou lie guo zhi, assumes that the junzi is simply the Zuozhuan narrator, whom he calls Zuoshi in accordance with what appears to have been the oldest title of the text: Zuoshi chunqiu or "The Annals of Master Zuo. " In view of the junzi's in- variable agreement with the subliminal messages of the narrative, and his usefulness to the narrator as an affirmer of those messages, this seems (whether one chooses to call him Zuoshi or not) a reasona- ble hypothesis.

As for Kongzi, I would guess that the views attributed to him reflect the opinions and concerns of the person or persons who com- piled the work not long before 300 B.C. I would guess that this person or team was closely associated with the group responsible for the



''JUNZI" AND "ZHONGNI'' INZUOZHUAN 149

accretion and transmission of the Analects, as the views and style of utterance in the Zuozhuan "Zhongni yue" ("Kongzi yue") passages conform very well to patterns that occur in the middle chapters of that text.69

The tentative identifications above point to a further hypothesis: that the Zuozhuan compilers of c. 300 B.C. were functioning more as editors than as creators-they were putting large chunks of preexist- ing material into a single text. They did their best to put a Confu- cian spin on the whole, and to invest it with contemporary relevance, but time was limited, and the material recalcitrant, so much remained in the text that was not particularly Confucian in spirit.

Appendix 1

APPEARANCES OF KONGZI IN ZUOZHUAN

"A" means "as actor"; "C" means "as commentator." Item and page numbers refer to the Yang Bojun edition of ChunqiulZuozhuan. Where names for Kongzi other than "Zhongni" are used, these appear in brackets. Cited passages are noted in parentheses.

Location of Passage 1. Xigong 28 (632 B.C.),

item 9, p. 473 2. Wengong 2 (625 B.C.),

item 5, p. 525 3. Xuangong 2 (607 B.C.),

item 3, p. 663

4. Xuangong 9 (600 B.C.),

item 6, p. 702 5. Chenggong 2 (589 B.C.),

item 2, p. 788

6. Chenggong 17 (574 B.C.),

item 6, p. 899

Nature of Passage (C) comments on Jin Wengong's treatment

of Zhou Xiangwang (C) comments on Zang Wenzhong's charac-

ter (C) comments on the character of Dong Hu

the scribe and Zhao Dun the officer ["Kong- zi"]

(C) comments on Xie Ye's unwise intransi- gence ["Kongzi"] (Shyjing 254)

(C) comments on the improper prerogatives granted to Zhongshu Yuxi by the men of Wei

(C) comments on Bao Zhuangzi's defective wisdom

69 See E. Bruce and A. Taeko Brooks, The Original Analects (New York: Columbia Univer- sity Press, 1998) for an enterprising, learned, detailed, and tenaciously argued presentation of an accretive model for the development of the Analects. Many scholars in the past two centuries have suggested that the text is chronologically layered, but none have developed the case as energetically, or made so many specific points available for future debate, as this pair of researchers.



150 ERIC HENRY

7. Xianggong 10 (563 B.C.),

item 2, p. 978


item 8, p. 1085


item 10, p. 1106

10. Xianggong 27 (546 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1130 11. Xianggong 31 (542 B.C.),

item 11, pp. 1191-92

12. Zhaogong 5 (537 B.C.),

item 1, p. 1263

13. Zhaogong 7 (535 B.C.),

item 12, pp. 1295-96

14. Zhaogong 7 (535 B.C.),

item 12, continued 15. Zhaogong 12 (530 B.C.),

item 11, p. 1341

16. Zhaogong 13 (529 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1360 17. Zhaogong 14 (528 B.C.),



item 3, continued 20. Zhaogong 20 (522 B.C.),

item 4, pp. 1413-13

21. Zhaogong 20 (522 B.C.),

item 7, pp. 1418-19

(A) the narrator mentions that the son of Meng Xianzi's spearman later became Kongzi's disciple

(C) comments on the character of Zang Wuzhong (passage from a lost Xia shu, now incorporated in Shangshu, "Da Yu mo")

(C) comments on Zichan of Zheng's use of language as a political tool ("recorded saying," not elsewhere extant)-

(C) causes an episode to be recorded to exem- plify "wordiness"

(C) comments on Zichan's defense of political discussion in village schools; he cannot believe that Zichan was not endowed with exemplary humanity

(C) comments on Shusun Zhaozi's failure to requite a favor (saying attributed to "Zhou Ren," not elsewhere extant; Shying 256)

(A) narrator mentions that Meng Xizi of Lu later made his sons study ritual with Kong- zi

(C) comments on Meng Xizi's character (Shi- jing 161)

(C) comments on the character of Chu Ling- wang ("recorded saying," not elsewhere extant)

(C) comments on the capacities of Zichan of Zheng (Shijing 172)

(C) comments on Shu Xiang's refusal to conceal the crimes of his brother Shu Yu

(A) has interview with viscount of Tan

(C) comments on value of interview with viscount of Tan

(A) enjoins Qin Zhang of Wei against participating in mourning ceremonies for Zong Lu, as the latter failed to prevent Qi Bao from assassinating Gongmeng Ji, the elder brother of Wei Linggong

(C) comments approvingly on the refusal of a game-forest official to come in response to an incorrect summons from the marquis of Qi



"JUNZI'' AND "ZHONGNI'' INZUOZHUAN 151

22. Zhaogong 20 (522 B.C.),

item 9, pp. 1421-22 23. (continuation of above) 24. Zhaogong 28 (514 B.C.),


item 5, pp. 1504-5 26. Dinggong 1 (509 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1527

27. Dinggong 9 (501 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1573 28. Dinggong 10 (500 B.C.),

item 2, pp. 1577-79

29. Dinggong 12 (498 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1587

30. Dinggong 15 (495 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1601 31. Aigong 3 (492 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1622 32. (continuation of above)

33. Aigong 6 (489 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1636

34. Aigong 11 (484 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1660-61

35. Aigong 1 1 (484 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1661 36. Aigong 1 1(484 B.C.),

item 6, p. 1665, 1667

(C) comments on policies of Zi Taishu of Zheng (Shijing 253, 304)

(C) comments on Zichan's death (C) comments on Wei Xianzi's redistribu-

tion of seized lands (Shijing 235) (C) comments on the casting of penal tripods

by jin (A) as Overseer of Crime, has a ditch made

to unite Zhaogong's tomb with those of his predecessors ["Kongzi"]

(C) predicts troubles for the clan of Zhao in Jin

(A) serves as master of ceremonies for Lu Dinggong at the conference in Jiagu ["Kong Qiu"]

(A) orders two officers to lead an attack on rebels in Bi city who are besieging Lu Dinggong and a Ji clan chief in a tower belonging to the Ji clan

(C) comments on Zigong's propensity to make predictions

(A) hears of fire in Lu while in Chen

(C) predicts that fire will consume the temples of Lords Huan and Xi ["Kongzi"]

(C) comments on the character of Chu Zhaowang ["Kongzi"] (two passages from a lost Xia shu, now incorporated in Shangshu, "Wu zi zhi ge," and "Da Yu mo")

(C) comments on the propriety of burying the boy Wang Yisheng (who has just died in a battle with Qi) with rites proper for grown men ["Kongzi"]

(C) comments on Ran You's use of mao- spears to oppose a Qi force ["Kongzi"]

(A) dissuades Kong Wenzi of Wei from using military force against his son-in-law Tai- shu Ji of Wei-Kong Wenzi was angry with Ji for bigamously maintaining a relationship with a lesser wife whom he had been ordered to send away-then leaves Wei and returns to Lu because Kong Wenzi persists in questioning him about military affairs



152 ERIC HENRY

37. Aigong 11 (484 B.C.),

item 7, p. 1668

38. Aigong 12 (483 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1670

39. Aigong 12 (483 B.C.),

item 5, p. 1673 40. Aigong 14 (483 B.C.),

item 1, p. 1682

41. Aigong 14 (481 B.C.),

item 5, p. 1689

42. Aigong 14 (481 B.C.),

item 5, continued 43. Aigong 15, (480 B.C.),

item 5, p. 1696 44. Aigong 15, (480 B.C.),

item 5, continued 45. Aigong 16 (479 B.C.),

p. 1697 46. Aigong 16 (479 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1698

(A) When Ji Kangzi has Ran You question him with regard to the imposition of a new tax, he declines to answer

(A) participates in the mourning observances for Meng Zi, consort dowager of Zhao- gong, but is not punctilious about details ["Kongzi"]

(A) responds to Ji Kangzi's query about a winter locust plague in Lu

(A) identifies a beast caught by huntsmen in the western suburbs as the auspicious, single-horned animal known as lin

(A) hearing of Qijiangong's assassination by Chen Heng, he begs Aigong to attack Qi

["Kong Qiu" ] (C) comments on his duties as court officer

(A) hears of disorder in Wei

(C) predicts that You (Zilu) will die

(A) death recorded in Chunqiu, item 3

(A) Lu Aigong eulogizes the deceased, "Nifu," and is sharply criticized by Zigong

Appendix 2

APPEARANCES OF THE COMMENTINGJUNZI IN ZUOZHUAN

The item and page numbers below refer to the Yang Bojun edition. Texts or sayings referred to by the junzi are indicated in parentheses.

Location of Comment 1. Yingong 1 (722 B.C.),

item 1, p. 15

2. Yingong 3 (720 B.C.),

item 3, p. 27

Nature of Comment On Ying Kao Shu's admirable filial devo-

tion, which was instrumental in repairing a rift between Zheng Zhuanggong and his mother (ShIying 247)

On the uselessness and unseemliness of an exchange of hostages between Zhou and Zheng (Shijing 13, 15, 246, and 251, all referred to but not quoted)



''JUNZI'' AND "ZHONGNI" INZUOZHUAN 153

3. Yingong 3 (720 B.C.),

item 5, p. 30

4. Yingong 4 (719 B.C.),

item 5, p. 38

5. Yingong 5 (718 B.C.),

item 4, p. 45

6. Yingong 6 (717 B.C.),

item 4, p. 50

7. Yingong 10 (713 B.C.),

item 3, p. 68

8. Yingong 11 (712 B.C.),

item 3, p. 76

9. Yingong 11 (712 B.C.),

item 4, p. 76

10. Yingong 11 (712 B.C.),

item 5, p. 77

11. Yingong 11 (712 B.C.),

item 6, p. 78

12. Huangong 2 (710 B.C.),

item 1, p. 85

13. Huangong 6 (706 B.C.),

item 4, p. 113

14. Huangong 12 (700 B.C.),

item 2, p. 134

On the admirable prescience shown by Song Xuangong in passing the throne to his younger brother (Shijing 303)

On the admirable public-spiritedness of Shi Que of Wei, who had his own son executed for disloyalty (ancient saying)

(With reference to a successful campaign of Zheng against Yan) on the importance of preparation in warfare

(With reference to Chen Huangong's failure to accept an offer of alliance with Zheng, though advised to do so by his officer Wufu) on the importance of maintaining friendships and avoiding enmity (Shangshu, "Pan Geng")

On Zheng Zhuanggong's admirable correctness in bestowing upon the marquis of Lu, a lord senior to himself, some Song cities subjugated on behalf of the Zhou king

On Zheng Zhuanggong's admirable correctness in declining to annex the subjugated state of Xu

On Zheng Zhuanggong's reprehensible incorrectness in using a spirit-medium to discover the identity of Ying Kao Shu's assassin

On Zhou Huanwang's foolish treatment of Zheng, which was bound to lead to the disaffection of that state

On the rash behavior of the state of Xi in attacking Zheng, a greater state, without first taking stock of its own political and material resources

(With reference to the assassination of Song Shanggong) on the reprehensible character of Huafu Du of Song, as reflected in a Chunqiu notation

On the admirable wisdom of Prince Hu of Zheng in declining a marriage alliance with Qi that would have resulted in a connection with Wen Jiang of Qi

(With reference to the failure of Song to observe the conditions of a treaty) on the uselessness of treaties where there is no good faith (Shijing 198)



154 ERIC HENRY

15. Huangong 17 (695 B.C.),

item 8, p. 150 16. Zhuanggong 6 (688 B.C.),

item 1, p. 168

17. Zhuanggong 8 (686 B.C.),




item 1, p. 211

21. Zhuanggong 22 (672 B.C.),

item 1, p. 221

22. Xigong 1 (659 B.C.),

item 7, p. 279

23. Xigong 9 (651 B.C.),

item 4, p. 330

24. Xigong 12 (648 B.C.),

item 4, p. 342 25. Xigong 20 (640 B.C.),

item 4, p. 387

26. Xigong 22 (638 B.C.),

item 9, p. 399

27. Xigong 24 (636 B.C.),

item 3, p. 427

28. Xigong 28 (632 B.C.),

item 3, p. 467

29. Xigong 28 (632 B.C.),

item 6, p. 472

On the prescience shown by Zheng Zhao- gong in hating Gao Qumi

On the lack of wisdom of two Wei princes in elevating prince Qianmou to the throne (Shijng 235)

On Lu Zhuanggong's admirable restraint in not attacking Qi

On the misfortunes of Cai Aihou (Shangshu quotation; same as in no. 6)

On the inability of Qiang Chu of Zheng to "protect his feet"

On the admirable loyalty to his ruler of Yu Quan of Chu, who cut off his own feet to punish humself for having brandished a weapon in the king's face while admonishing him

On the high character of the exiled Prince Wan of Chen, who declines to revel at night

On the extremism of the men of Qi in killing Ai Jiang, a daughter of the ruling house of Qi-since she had married into the house of Lu, it should have been the prerogative of the men of Lu, not Qi, to punish her

On the high character shown by Xun Xi of Jin in following Xiqi and Zhuozi in death

(Shying 256) On the modest correctness of Guan Zhong's

relations with the Zhou king (Shyjing 239)- On the failure of the state of Sui to take stock

of its own strength before rebelling against Chu (Shijing 17)

On Chu Chengwang's unseemly indulgence in mixed-sex diversions after his victory over Song Xianggong by the river Hong

On Zicang of Zheng's disastrous fondness for hats adorned with snipe feathers (Shijing 151, 207; passage from a lost Xia shu, now incorporated in Shangshu, "Da Yu mo")

On the exellence of the treaty promulgated after the battle of Chengpu and the meri- torious role played by Jin

On Jin Wengong's skill in assigning punishments and rewards (Shijing 253)



"JUNZI" AND ''ZHONGNI" IN ZUOZHUAN 155

30. Wengong 1 (626 B.C.),

item 5, p. 513 31. Wengong 2 (625 B.C.),

item 1, p. 522

32-34. Wengong 2 (625 B.C.),

item 5, pp. 524-25

35. Wengong 3 (624 B.C.),

item 4, p. 530

36. Wengong 4 (623 B.C.),

item 4, pp. 533-34

37. Wengong 4 (623 B.C.),

item 6, pp. 534-35

38. Wengong 6 (621 B.C.),

item 3, pp. 547-49

39. Wengong 6 (621 B.C.),

item 3, p. 549

40. Wengong 13 (614 B.C.),

item 3, p. 598 41. Xuangong 2 (607 B.C.),

item 1, pp. 651-52 42. Xuangong 2 (607 B.C.),

item 1, p. 652

43. Xuangong 4 (605 B.C.),

item 2, p. 678

On the reprehensible rashness of Wei in making a renewed attack on Jin (read -& as ?!)

On the enlightened manner in which Lang Shen, an aggrieved officer of Jin, commits suicide (Shyjing 198, 241)

Three comments on the violation of ritually prescribed order in sacrifices to former Lu rulers (Shyjing 300 quoted from in first comment, Shijing 39 in second)

On Qin Mugong's steadfast employment of Mengming in spite of the latter's military setbacks; Mengming's tireless determina- tion to learn from his mistakes; and Gong- sun Zhi's expertise in evaluating and recommending officers (each evaluation respectively reinforced by quotations from Shijing 13, 260, and 244)

On Lu's reprehensible disregard of propriety in sending an officer of low rank to act as a marital escort for Chu Jiang of Qi (Shyjing 272)

On Qin Mugong's admirable and proper display of grief upon hearing the news of the destruction by Chu of the state of Jiang (Shyjing 241)

On Qin Mugong's reprehensible disregard for the feelings of the people in having three men of the Ziju clan follow him in death (Shying 264)

A continuation of the above; consists of the prediction that Qin Mugong "will not again march east"

On Zhu Wengong's admirable acceptance of his fated early demise

On the deservedness of the capture of Kuang Jiao of Song by Zheng troops

On the unworthiness of Yang Zhen, the chariot driver of Hua Yuan of Song, for allowing a personal grievance to affect his behavior in battle, resulting in defeat and death for those with him (Shijing 223)

On the failure of Prince Guisheng (Zijia) of Zheng to prevent Prince Song (Zigong) from assassinating Zheng Linggong:



156 ERIC HENRY

44. Xuangong 12 (597 B.C.),

item 3, p. 747

45. Xuangong 13 (596 B.C.),

item 2, pp. 751-52 46. Xuangong 13 (596 B.C.),

item 4, p. 752


item 4, p. 802


item 8, p. 808


item 8, pp. 808-9


item 1, p. 833


item 2, p. 838


item 10, pp. 845-46

53. Chenggong 10 (581 B.C.),

item 5, p. 850

54. Chenggong 14 (577 B.C.),

item 4, p. 870

"Virtue (ren) cannot be made effective without martial skill."

On the appropriateness of the executions of the Zheng turncoats Shi Zhi and Prince Yu Chen (Annalist Yi quotation; Shijing 204)

On the failure of Jin to rescue Song from an attack by Chu

On the deservedness of the execution of Xian Gu ofJin and the extermination of his clan in punishment for his role in the Jin defeat at Bi

On the failure of Hua Yuan and Yue Ju of Song to fulfill their roles as court officers- they encouraged rather than curbed the extravagances of Song Wengong and upon his death condoned an extravagant funeral with living sacrifices (xun)

On the importance to states of feudal rank- Cai and Xu were no longer counted among the central states after their rulers lost rank (Shijing 249)

(With reference to Jin's avoidance of Chu after the battle of An) on the importance to states of gaining the services of large numbers of people (passage from a lost "Tai shi," now incorporated in Shangshu, "Tai shi")

On Ji Wenzi of Lu's admirable readiness to feel anxiety for his state, a strong indication that he will not suffer destruction

On the admirable readiness of Luan Shu of Jin to follow the good strategic advice of Xun Shou and others (Shijing 239)

On the culpable lack of preparedness of a Ju viscount, who let his city walls deteriorate and in consequence suffered an invasion by forces of Chu (lost shi-style poem)

On the lack of judgment of Shu Shen and Shu Qin of Zheng, who, though loyal, chose the wrong ruler to serve, and in consequence suffered death at the hands of his successor

(With reference to a Chunqiu notation concerning the arrival in Lu of a Qi consort



"JUNZI'' AND ''ZHONGNI'' INZUOZHUAN 157

55. Chenggong 18 (573 B.C.),

item 6, p. 912


item 2, p. 920


item 3, p. 921



item 4, p. 927


item 4, p. 935


item 7, pp. 943-44


item 10, pp. 944-45


item 8, p. 960

for Lord Cheng) on the unique expressive- ness and discrimination of the titles and appellations employed in the Chunqiu

On the admirable correctness of the newly installed Jin Daogong, who, in return for a court visit paid to him by Lu Chenggong, sent an emissary (Fan Xuanzi, also known as Shi Gai) to Lu

On the deservedness of the uncomplimentary epithet "Ling" in the temple name of Qi Linggong (r. 581-554 B.C.)-he meddled arbitrarily with the succession and raised unworthy men to office, throwing Qi's affairs into confusion

On the impropriety of using items reserved for the burial of Mu Jiang (consort of Lu Xuangong) for the burial of her daughter- in-law, a consort of Chenggong

On the costliness of a victory over Wu obtained by Zizhong of Chu

On the admirable impartiality with which Qi Xi of Jin recommended men for office (Shangshu, "Hong fan"; Shijing 214)

On the reprehensible carelessness with which Ji Wenzi of Lu attended to the mourning and burial ceremonies for Ding Si, a deceased consort of (the still immature) Xianggong of Lu ("recorded saying," not extant elsewhere)

On the incorrectness of Chu Gongwang's execution of his prime minister Zixin-he did it to satisfy the state of Chen and to shift blame from himself (lost shi-style poem; passage from a lost Xia shu, now incorporated in Shangshu, "Da Yu mo")

On Ji Wenzi's admirable loyalty to the ruling house of Lu-it was found upon his death that he had no grain-fed horses, no brocade-wearing concubines, no hoarded gold or jade, and no precious vessels, even though he had served three successive rulers

On the admirable propriety with which Fan Xuanzi (Shi Gai) of Jin sang odes and responded to odes sung by his hosts in the



158 ERIC HENRY

64. Xianggong 13 (560 B.C.),

item 3, pp. 999-1000

65. Xianggong 13 (560 B.C.),


item 11, pp. 1019-20

67. Xianggong 15 (558 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1022

68. Xianggong 22 (551 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1068

69. Xianggong 23 (550 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1073

70. Xianggong 26 (547 B.C.),

item 9, p. 1 19

71. Xianggong 26 (547 B.C.),

item 12, p. 1124

72. Xianggong 27 (546 B.C.),

item 6, p. 1136

course of a mission to Lu (With reference to a set of new military

appointments under Jin Daogong) on the admirable ability of the great officers of Jin to yield rank to each other-yielding is the essence of Ii (Shyjing 235, 205)

On the culpable carelessness shown by Wu in an attack upon Chu (Shyjing 191)

On the admirable loyalty of the Chu prime minister Zinang, who, after the death of Chu Gongwang, persuaded the Chu court to give the deceased king the temple name of "Gong" rather than "Ling" or "Li," as had been modestly requested by the king himself in his last moments (Shying 225)

On the admirable propriety of the official appointments in Chu made under Gong- wang's successor Kangwang (r. 559-545 B.C.) (Shijing 3)

On the exemplary deathbed advice given by Gongsun Heigong of Zheng to his son and successor: the son is to be frugal and modest, so as to prolong the life of his clan (Shijing 256)

On the unrighteousness, leading to personal destruction, of two rebel officers of the Qing clan in Chen (Shangshu, "Kang gao")

On the admirable propriety of an eloquently modest speech made to the marquis of Jin by Zixi of Zheng on behalf of his own ruler

On Jin Pinggong's failure to rule effectively, evidenced here by his willingness to release the marquis of Wei (who had been detained in Jin for an offense) in return for the gift of one of the daughters of the Wei ruling house

On the wisdom and rectitude of the caution- ary advice given by Zihan of Song to Xiang Xu of the same state; and on the admirable readiness of the latter to accept the advice and decline a gift of sixty towns conferred upon him by the duke of Song as a reward for acting as a peace negotiator



"JUNZI'' AND ''ZHONGNI" IN ZUOZHUAN 159

73. Xianggong 30 (543 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1173

74. Xianggong 30 (543 B.C.),

item 7, p. 1174

75. Xianggong 30 (543 B.C.),

item 12, p. 1179

76. Xianggong 31 (542 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1186

77. Zhaogong 1 (541 B.C.),

item 11, p. 1217

78. Zhaogong 3 (539 B.C.).

item 3, p. 1238

79. Zhaogong 3 (539 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1239

80. Zhaogong 3 (539 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1240

between the great states (Shyjing 80, 267) On the significance of a covenant sworn by

the count of Zheng with his court officers: the covenant shows to someone capable of interpreting the event that Zheng's troubles are not yet over

On the inappropriately extreme regard for propriety of Bo Ji of Song, who, to avoid leavning her quarters unchaperoned, perished in a palace fire; such behavior would be suitable in an unmarried girl, but a matron ought to act as circumstances require

(With reference to the omission in a Chunqiu notation of the names of officers who participated in an interstate conference) on the importance of good faith; since the officers in question lacked good faith, the conference bore no results, with the result that they suffered the implicit condemna- tion of having their names omitted in the Chunqiu notice (Shijing 235, 256)

On the immature behavior of the future Lu Zhaogong, from which one can see that he will be unable to hold on to his position in the future

On Zhan Yu of Ju's foolish disregard for his officers, which led to his exile and replace- ment on the throne ofJu by another prince (Shying 269)

On the admirable humankindness of Yanzi of Qi, who, by means of a single pointed remark, caused Lord Jing of Qi to reduce the frequency of his punishments (Shijing 198)

On the importance of 1i as exemplified by an event in the career of Gongsun Duan of Zheng: his punctiliousness in performing his duties as ritual assistant to his ruler moved Jin Pinggong to award him a fief (Shijing 52)

On the wisdom shown by Zhao Wenzi of Jin in declining to appropriate a disputed tract of land that had formerly belonged to the Luan clan



160 ERIC HENRY

81. Zhaogong 4 (538 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1251

82. Zhaogong 5 (537 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1266

83. Zhaogong 12 (530 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1332

84. Zhaogong 18 (524 B.C.),

item 3, p. 1397

85. Zhaogong 19 (523 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1402

86. Zhaogong 20 (522 B.C.),

item 7, p. 1419

87. Zhaogong 31 (511 B.C.),

item 5, pp. 1512-13

On the admirable expertise shown by Xiang Xu of Song and Zichan of Zheng when they are consulted by Chu Lingwang concerning the rites proper to conveners and attendees of multistate conferences

On the admirable grasp of the essence of ritual shown by Ru Shuqi of Jin in a speech critical of Lu Zhaogong, delivered to Jin Pinggong: Zhaogong is perfect in details of ceremony, but he nevertheless cannot be said to know the rites, for he fails in maintaining the basic relationships that sustain the strength of a state

On the admirable grasp of the principles of ritual shown by Zichan of Zheng when he orders that various structures (a clan temple and some houses) not be torn down to facilitate the performance of burial ceremonies for Zheng Jiangong

On the failure of Chen and Xu 04 to take appropriate steps with regard to a general out- break of fire in the capitals of the central states, from which one can know that they will perish earlier than the other states

(With regard to Xu Daogong's death from a dose of fever medicine given him by his heir-son) on the reprehensible failure of the heir-son to remain within behavioral limits proper to his station as an officer: "If a man use all his mind and strength in serving his ruler, he may let his medical prescriptions alone"

Evidently expresses support for a comment attributed to Zhongni ("a superior man would say that this is correct"), but this passage is perhaps itself part of the Zhong- ni comment

(With regard to Heigong of Zhu's use of a stolen city to seek refuge in Lu) on the excellent and just discrimination with which the Chunqiu author chastises evildoers by recording their names in his text, thus exposing their shame as a warning to all posterity (This is the longest of the comments)



"JUNZI" AND "ZHONGNI" IN ZUOZHUAN 161

88. Dinggong 9 (501 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1572

89. Dinggong 10 (500 B.C.),

item 4, p. 1580

90. Aigong 18 (477 B.C.),

item 2, p. 1713

On the reprehensible lack of tolerance and generosity of Si Zhuan, a prime minister of Zheng, in killing Deng Xi while at the same time using Deng )Y's legal code, "Bamboo Punishments" (Zhu xing tfflJ), in administering the state (Shijing 42 and 53 referred to without quotation; quotation from Shijing 16)

(With reference to rudeness shown by two Jin officers to the marquis of Wei at a conference in 502 B.C.) on the reckless and reprehensible indifference to propriety of She Tuo and Cheng He of Jin, which led to the execution of the former and the flight of the latter two years later (Shying 52)

On the excellent ability to judge men shown by King Hui of Chu in selecting three commanders to break a siege (by troops of Ba) of You city (passage from a lost Xia shu, now incorporated in Shangshu, "Da Yu mo"; "recorded saying," not elsewhere extant)

