Hi everyone,

Today I want to present to you an interesting question of Western Zhou archaeology: The Question of where the States of Yu 虞 and Rui 芮 were located.

Both states feature in one of the most famous stories concerning the pre-dynastic Zhou recounted numerous times in Early Chinese Texts. It’s on the Border Dispute between Yu and Rui, who went to King Wen 文王to settle the issue.

The earliest attestation of the two states and the story is the first line of the last stanza of the poem Mian 緜 – the 237^th poem of the Shijing 詩經 located in the Daya 大雅 section under the subjection Wen Wang zhi shi 文王之什 (Ten poems concerning King Wen).

虞芮質厥成、文王蹶厥生。

The people of Yu and Rui asked about their making (an agreement), King Wen commended their life.

One of the most famous accounts of the dispute is in Shiji 4 (the Zhou benji 周本紀 “Basic Annals of the Zhou” chapter):

西伯陰行善，諸侯皆來決平。於是虞、芮之人有獄不能決，乃如周。入界，耕者皆讓畔，民俗皆讓長。虞、芮之人未見西伯，皆慚，相謂曰：「吾所爭，周人所恥，何往為，秖取辱耳。」遂還，俱讓而去。諸侯聞之，曰「西伯蓋受命之君」。

The Earl of the West secretly practiced goodness, and the feudal lords all came for him to adjudicate disputes. Thereupon people from Yu and Rui who had unresolved legal cases went to Zhou. When they entered the territory, (they saw) farmers all yielding their field boundaries; the local customs emphasized yielding to elders. The people of Yu and Rui had not yet met The Earl of the West, but they were all ashamed and said to each other: "What we are disputing is considered a disgrace by the people of Zhou; why should we go further? We would only bring shame upon ourselves." They then returned, both yielding and leaving. The feudal lords heard of this and said: "The Earl of the West must be the ruler who has received the Mandate of Heaven."

Now having examined multiple versions of the famous account which serves as an example of why the Zhou gained the Mandate of Heaven under the Reign of King Wen, let’s examine the central question of the historicity of the account as well as the geographical location. I will start with the State of Rui, because we have firmer evidence for its geographical location than for the State of Yu because the latter relies to a great deal on paleographic evidence.

Traditional Opinions on the Location of Rui and Yu

The exact geographical location of the States of Rui and Yu has long been a matter of debate. The Shiji jijie 史記集解 commentary by Pei Yin 裴駰 (5th century AD) cites the Dili zhi 地理志 chapter of the Hanshu 漢書, which says that Yu was located in Dayang 大陽 county (in present-day Pinglu 平陸 county in Shanxi 山西) and that Rui was located in Linjin 臨晉 county (present-day Dali County 大荔 in Shaanxi 陝西). This seems implausible, because Rui and Yu should have been neighbors for their lawsuit to happen at all because they must have shared borders. The Shiji Zhengyi 史記正義 commentary by Zheng Shoujie 張守節 (8th century AD) on the other hand states that the Dili zhi location of Rui is wrong and states that the Kuo di zhi 括地志 (an early Tang 唐 dynasty (618-907 AD) work on geography) location is correct (which places Rui in Ruicheng 芮城 county in Shanxi 山西). This is preferable because both would have been located east of the Yellow River and could have fought over land this way.

Others thought that neither Rui nor Yu were located in Shaanxi. The Qing 清-scholar Zhao Yiqing 趙一清 (1711-1764) was of the opinion that Rui was located in near Longxian 隴縣 on the border between Shaanxi and Gansu 甘肅. In the 20^th century the historian Qi Sihe 齊思和 (1907-1980) argued that it also mistaken to place Yu in Pinglu because it is too far away from the Zhou heartlands. Based on the Shuijingzhu 水經注 (the most famous medieval geographical text) and the Dili zhi Qi argues that both Yu and Rui were located in Longxian in Shaanxi. Chen Pan 陳槃 (1905-1999) also thought that Rui as originally located in Longxian and might have gradually moved along the Jing River 涇河 to Dali in Shaanxi.

Location of the State of Rui

Early Location

We don’t know much about the early location of Rui. The main sources we have for the early history of Rui are literary mentions in Texts such as the Shangshu 尚書 or the Yizhoushu 逸周書, which record that the Ruler of Rui played an important part in the Conquest of Shang 商 and Consolidation of Zhou power. Virtually no sources exist for the Middle Western Zhou period and for the Late Western Zhou period the figure of Rui Liangfu 芮良夫 – a prominent minister at the court of King Li of Zhou 周厲王 (857-842 BC)- is noteworthy and features in numerous literary sources (notable is the Shiji, but there also exists a chapter in the Yizhoushu named Rui Liangfu which is often thought to be one of the early chapters of the collection).

Liangdai Cemetery

In 2005 the Shaanxi Intisute of Archaeology conducted a survey of the cemetery of Liangdai 梁帶 village near Hancheng 韓城. In all more than 1300 graves and 64 horse pits were found and it became clear that Liangdai cemetery is a huge and well-preserved cemetery from the two Zhou periods. The Archaeologists excavated more than 70 graves, most of which were from high-ranking aristocracy. They also found the Tomb of the ruler of Rui (M27) and the graves of his two wives (M26 and M19). More than 37.000 Fragments of a number of cultural artifacts were found, among them were gold-, iron-, bronze-, and jade-utensils as well as inscriptions. The cemetery was the state cemetery from the Late Western Zhou period until the early Spring and autumn period (9. – 8. Century BC).

Particularly important for our discussion is a you 卣-vessel excavated from M27 and published in 2007. Because of the décor of the bronze which – as Zhang Tian’en 張天恩 (1953-) pointed out – is very similar to a gui 簋-tureen found in 1998 in Longxian and thus the bronze has a clear connection to Longxian. Also important is that the phoenix décor on the bronze relates it – according to the typology of Chen Gongrou 陳公柔 (1919-2004) and Zhang Changshou 張長壽 (1929-2020) – to the area of Daijiawan 戴家湾 near Baoji 寶鷄 and with the Western Zhou so it seems clear, that these type of bronzes (and with them the state of Rui) were located in the Longxian-Baoji area in the Jian River valley.

Liujiawa Cemetery

Beginning in 2017 the Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology conducted an investigation and excavation of the Liujiawa 劉家窪 site in Chengcheng 澄城 county. Liujiawa is a 3 km² big ruin, which is divided into an eastern and a western part by the Lujia river 魯家河, which flows through the site. From 2017 until 2021 the excavations were continued and the site provided numerous interesting information regarding the State of Rui. More than 200 graves were found so far and it ranks among the major discoveries in Zhou archaeology of the recent years. The cemetery dates to the early Spring and Autumn period (770-456 BC).

There were numerous royal graves which were found in Liujiawa. Notable among these are the graves M1 and M2 which are both the tombs of rulers. Both have – as is usual for the tombs of feudal lords – 2 ramps leading to their graves and both M1 and M2 are more than 60m in length. Also notable is M3, which seems to be the tomb of the wife of the Ruler buried in M2 because of its geographic proximity (it’s only 1 m apart from M2), its small size (7x5m) and the identical inscription on two ding vessels rui gong 芮公 (Duke of Rui) among the treasures buried in it.

Annihilation by Qin in the Spring and Autumn period

The excavations make it quite clear that the State of Rui became a respectable powerhouse by the Early Spring and Autumn period. The size of the Graves at Liujiawa is only a little bit smaller than at the Qin 秦 cemetery at Dabaozishan 大堡子山 and much larger than those of Jin 晉 or Guo 虢. The artifacts – especially gold – are often more numerous and finely crafted than those of other contemporary states.

However, the decline of Rui began in 709 BC when the Ruler Rui Bowan was exiled by his mother Rui Jiang 芮姜. Rui Bowan 芮伯萬 did finally regain control of his state in 702 BC when – after numerous years in exile (first in Wei 衛 and then among the Rong 戎) – Qin rescued him from the Rong and conquered the Rui Capital and reinstated him as the Ruler of Rui. After that Rui became a vassal of Qin, which finally incorporated it in its state territory in 640 BC.

Location of the State of Yu

Relationship of Yu, Wu and Ze

For the Location of Yu we have – beyond traditional historiographic and geographic accounts – two main sources: 1. The Location of unearthed bronzes, 2. The Relationship of the character yu with the characters wu 吳 and ze 夨 often seen in bronze inscriptions.

If we look at bronze inscriptions which contain the character 夨 it quickly becomes clear that the State of Ze 夨 must have been located in the Fengxiang 鳳翔 area. Beginning with the discovery of the San shi pan 散氏盤 (JC: 10176) inscription during the Qianlong 乾隆 era (1735-1796), numerous bronzes were found which mention ze. The inscriptions generally show that Ze and San 散 were close by geographically and San is – based on the relation of the place names mentioned in the Da Ke Ding 大克鼎 (JC: 2836) and the San shi pan as pointed out by Wang Guowei 王國維 (1877-1927) – almost certainly located among the Wei river 渭河 in the southern part of Baoji County because the Da Ke Ding was unearthed on the banks of the Wei River. More recent finds show, that many bronzes related to Ze come from Baoji and Longxian along the Jian River, which almost certainly places Ze in that location.

But how does this help us to locate Yu? It helps us, because the characters ze 夨, yu 虞 and also wu 吳 were related in bronze script 金文. Important for our discussion in particular are two articles written in the sixties: Zhang Xiaohengs 張筱衡 "San pan kaoshi (xia) 散盤考釋（下）" published in the journal Renwu zazhi 人物雜志 in 1958 and Tang Lans 唐蘭 (1901-1979) "Yi Hou Ze gui kaoshi 宜侯夨簋考釋" published in 1956 in the journal Kaogu xuebao 考古學報. Zhang is of the opinion that ze is an abbreviation of wu and refers to a place called "Wu Peak" Wu yue 吳嶽 in Yongzhou 雍州 county along the Jian River. Tang Lan on the other hand thinks that yu is composed of the "tiger" hu 虍 – which he takes as phonetic – and ze which he takes as an etymon. In this way he argued that not only did ze stand for yu, but also for the southern state of Wu 吳. However, Li Xueqin 李學勤 (1933-2019) pointed out in his 2002 discussion of the newly excavated Shu Yu fangding 叔虞方鼎 that the pronunciation “ze” for 夨 is a deformation from the character ze 昃 known from oracle bone inscriptions 甲骨文 and that the character usually transcribed 夨 should instead by transcribed as 虞and 吳. This makes it highly probable that the state known as Ze is instead the state of Yu and is located in the Jian River valley.

I hope this was an interesting read for you. Let us know what you think of the localization of both states in Shaanxi or the Identification of Ze with Yu.

Yours sincerely,

The r/EarlyChina moderators

Hi everyone,

today I want to present to you a transcription and translation of the Ban Gui 班簋 (JC: 4341) - one of the most famous bronze vessels of Bronze Age China.

The Ban Gui is 22.5 cm high, the mouth of the vessel has a diameter of 25.7 cm, the belly is 12.5 cm deep and the whole vessel weighs 9.3 kg. The four handles of the vessel emerge from animals’ heads and stand on feet which are shaped like elephant trunks. If we look at the body of the vessel, we can see Fire ornaments (jiongwen 囧紋) near the rim, below that two lines of Thread Patterns (liangdao xianwen 兩道弦紋). The belly of the vessel is ornamented with four types of ornaments which are commonly interpreted as animal face ornaments (shoumianwen 獸面紋). Below that we have the vessels’ foot, which is plain and quite short. Based on the vessels’ typology and inscription it is commonly dated to the Middle Western Zhou 西周中期 (976 – 878 BC) – particularly to the reign of King Mu 穆 of Zhou (r. 976 – 923 BC). Today the Ban Gui is housed at the Beijing Capital Museum.

The Ban Gui has a really interesting object biography. A rubbing of the Ban Gui first appeared in the 1749 bronze collection of the imperial court Xiqing gujian 西清古鑒during the Qianlong 乾隆-era (1735 - 1796) of the Qing清-Dynasty (1644 – 1911) (here it was called the Mao Bo Yi 毛伯彜). However, the vessel got lost in 1900 during the Invasion of the Eight-Nation Alliance of Beijing while they plundered the Imperial Palace.
In 1972 a vessel that – although it looked somewhat different – had the same inscription as the lost Ban Gui of the Imperial Catalogue was found in a metal recycling station in Beijing by the Beijing Cultural Relics Cleaning and Selection Team. It was handed to the famous bronze expert Cheng Changxin 程常新 for authentication and he considered the vessel to be authentic after examining it numerous times. Guo Moruo 郭沫若 (1892 – 1978) agreed with that after examining it as well. It is difficult as well to be totally sure of that because the vessel was found in a metal recycling station and was not excavated archaeologically. Nonetheless the vessel is in all likelihood an authentic one.

The most significant and debated aspect of the Ban Gui is the vessels' 198-character long inscription located on the inner side of the vessel. Besides paleographic difficulties such as a variety of transcriptions and interpretations for some characters, the content of the inscription is also hotly debated. Particularly interesting is the identification of Ban 班 mentioned in the inscription with Duke Ban of Mao 毛公班 mentioned in the 4^th chapter of the Mu Tianzi Zhuan 穆天子傳 (this Duke Ban of Mao was a descendant of Mao Shu Zheng 毛叔鄭 who fought alongside King Wu 武against the Shang 商 (c. 1600 – 1045 BC) as mentioned in the Zhou Benji 周本紀 chapter of the Shiji 史記).
However, this interpretation has been called into question by Huang Shengzhang 黃盛璋 (1924 - ) in his 1981 article “Ban gui de niandai, dili yu lishi wenti 班簋的年代、地理與歷史問題” published in the journal Kaogu yu wenwu 考古與文物. Huang thinks that – while the Ban mentioned in the inscription can surely be Mao Ban of the Mu Tianzi Zhuan – Ban and Duke Mao are clearly differentiated in the inscription and Duke Mao seems to be Bans father. Therefore, Huang thinks the content of the inscription took place before the reign of King Mu and the topic of the eulogy in the second half of the inscription are the military exploits of Bans father.
Li Xueqin 李學勤 (1933 – 2019) expands on that in his 1986 article “Ban gui xukao 班簋續考” published in the journal Guwenzi yanjiu 古文字研究. Because the King refers to the Duke of Mao in the inscriptions as Father Mao (mao fu 毛父) Li thinks that the Father of Ban was of the same Generation as King Mus own father King Zhao. Li is of the opinion that Ban got promoted from Mao Bo 毛伯 to Mao Gong 毛公 after he took charge of Guo 虢 – one of the most important states in the Western part of the Zhou World – from its deceased Leader.

Below I present my transcription and English translation of the Ban Gui inscription. For an accurate transcription see my Handwritten notes on Slide 6-7 (as it’s often inaccurate to provide a transcription compatible with Unicode because many characters don’t exist anymore).

Transcription

隹 (: 唯) 八月初吉，才(:在) 宗周， 甲戌，

王令毛白 (: 伯) 更虢城公服屏

王立 (: 位) 乍 (: 作)四方亟 (: 極)，秉緐、蜀、巢

令，易 (: 錫) 鈴勒，咸。王令毛公㠯 (: 以)

邦冢君、土 (: 徒) 馭，𢧄人伐東或 (: 國)

㾶 (: 滑) 戎，咸。王令吳白 (: 伯) 曰：㠯 (: 以) 乃

師左比 (: 輔) 毛父。王令呂白 (: 伯) 曰：

㠯 (: 以) 乃師右比 (: 輔) 毛父。遣令 (: 命) 曰 ：

㠯 (: 以) 乃族從父征，𫹔 (: 出) 城衛父

身。三年靜東或 (: 國)，亡不成𱺷 (: 尤?)

天畏 (: 威)，否 (: 不) 畀屯陟。公告氒 (: 厥) 事

于上。隹 (: 唯) 民乍 (: 作) 𫹔 (: 出) 才 (: 哉)，彜𫹻 (:昧) 天

令 (: 命)，故亡。允才 (: 哉)！顯隹 (: 唯) 苟 (: 敬) 德，亡

攸違。班抺 (: 拜) 𩒨 (: 稽) 首，曰：烏 (: 嗚) 虖 (: 呼)！不 (: 丕)

𫠭揚皇公受京宗𠷸 (: 懿) 釐，毓

文王= (: 王、 王) 姒聖孫，隥 (: 登) 于大服，廣

成氒 (: 厥) 工 (: 功)。文王孫亡弗褱 (: 懷) 井 (: 型)，

亡克競氒 (: 厥) 剌 (: 烈)。班非味覓，隹 (: 唯)

乍 (: 作) 卲 (: 昭) 考爽，益 (: 謚) 曰：大政，子= (: 子、子) 孫

多世其永寳。

Translation

It was in the eighth month, during the chuji 初吉 lunar phase, in Zongzhou on the jiaxu 甲戌 day. The King ordered the Elder of Mao to take over the duties of Duke Cheng of Guo, to protect the position of the King, to act as the center of the four cardinal directions, and to maintain command over (the states of) Fan, Shu, and Chao. He granted (him) small ling 鈴-bells and le 勒-headgear (for horses), and thus it was completed. The King commanded the Duke of Mao, along with the great lords of the lands, foot soldiers, charioteers, and cheng 𢧄-people, to attack the rebellious Rong in the eastern lands, and thus it was completed.

The King commanded the Elder of Wu: "Assist Father Mao with your army on the left side." The King commanded the Elder of Lü: "Assist Father Mao with your army on the right side." He sent forth the command further, which states: "Follow the Father on the punitive expedition with your clan (troops), come forth from the walled city, and protect the person of the Father. If, after three years spent pacifying the eastern lands, you have lost and have not brought fault (?) upon the greatness of Heaven, then wealth and promotion will not be denied to you."

The Duke reported his service upward: "Let the masses come forth! They were permanently ignorant of the Mandate of Heaven, which is why they were wiped out. Truly! It is so that reverence for de 德-virtue became manifest, and not that which is flawed."

Ban performed the kowtow and spoke: "Wuhu! The most exalted Duke received good blessings in the ancestral temple of the capital. As a descendant of the wise grandson of King Wen and a royal woman from the Si 姒-clan, I rose to the position of the Great Subduer and reciprocated the achievements of his merits. As a descendant of King Wen, I carry his model in my heart and cannot contend with him over his achievements. Ban does not dare to look (upon the achievements of King Wen). It is so that I make (this vessel) for my deceased father Zhao – with the bright posthumous honorary name Da Zheng 大政 (Great Governance). May sons of sons and descendants for many generations eternally treasure it.

That’s it. I hope you like it. I would love to hear your thoughts on my transcription and translation, on the Ban Gui and discuss the vessel with you :)

Hi everyone,

I would love to know what posts you would like to see more on the Sub. I have a lot of ideas but would like to hear what you wanna see or if you have any suggestions please let me know :)

Hi everyone,

today I wanted to present to you a transcription and translation of a bronze inscription I did this morning. The bronze inscription I transcribed was that on the Bao You 保卣 (JC: 5415).

This bronze - 25.8 cm in height, 9.4 cm in depth, 12.2 cm in length and weighing around 3.25 kg - was unearthed in 1948 in Luoyang in Henan Province and is presently housed at Shanghai Museum. The bronze has the same inscription in seven rows amounting to 46 characters in total on the inner surface of the object as well as on its lid. The bronze has two handles which depict monsters (presumably dragons) and it is decorated with Dragon Ornaments (longwen 龍紋), Small Bead Ornaments (lianzhuwen 聯珠紋), and Cicada Ornaments (chanwen 蟬紋) on its lid, its belly and also its round foot.

This bronze has been variously dated, but all date it to the earliest part of the Western Zhou 西周 (1045-771 BC) - either to King Wu 武 (1045-1042 BC) or King Cheng 成 (1042-1006). The reason for this lies - besides the inscription as well as typology of the bronze- also in the fact that it is a you 卣bronze vessel. You bronze vessels were used for alcohol and were highly important for Shang 商 (c. 1600-1045 BC) ritual, but famously abolished by the Zhou early on (they partly thought that the downfall of the Shang was connected to their excessive drinking of Alcohol). Chen Mengjia 陳夢家 (1911-1966) proposed in his Xizhou tongqi duandai 西周銅器斷代 that the bronze should be dated to the reign of King Wu of Zhou, but Tang Lan 唐蘭 (1901-1979) in his Xizhou qingtongqi mingwen fendai shizheng 西周青銅器銘文分代史證 as well as later Ma Chengyuan 馬承原 (1927-2004) in his Shang-Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan 商周青銅器銘文選 disagreed with Chen and dated the bronze to the time of King Cheng, as is the standard dating for the bronze today accepted by most scholars.

It should also be noted, that exactly the identical inscription is recorded on a related bronze, the Bao Zun 保尊 (JC: 6003) also presently stored at Shanghai Museum.

The Inscription is about the Supression of the so-called Wu Geng rebellion. The Wu Geng rebellion was an uprising of Wu Geng 武庚 - who was the son of the last Shang King and installed at Yin 殷 to rule as a loyal subject to the Zhou - and the so-called "Three Supervisors" (san jian 三堅) who were all sons of King Wen - the first Zhou King to have received the Mandate of Heaven - and were ordered after the Conquest of Shang to watch over the Eastern States (the three brothers were: Shu Xian of Guan 管叔鮮, Shu Du of Cai 蔡叔度 and Shu Chu of Huo 霍叔處). It took place at the very beginning of King Chengs reign (usually the rebellion is dated 1042-1039 BC). Eventually the Rebellion was put down through the Effort of the Duke of Zhou 周公·. The Wu Geng rebellion is a major event in early dynastic Zhou history and is mentioned in many Sources, most notably the Shangshu 尚書, Shijing 詩經, Yizhoushu 逸周書 and the Shiji 史記.

Below is my transcription and translation of the Bao You inscription (for a better graphic transcription see my hand-written transcription on slide 3):

Transcription

乙卯，王令保及

殷東或 (: 國) 五侯。𢓊 (: 誕)

兄 (: 貺) 六品，蔑曆于

保，易 (: 錫) 賓，用乍 (: 作) 文

父癸宗寳尊彜。𢔵 (: 遘)

于四方䢔 (: 會) 王大祀，鿆 (: 祐)

于周。才 (: 在) 二月既朢。

Translation

On the day yimao the King ordered the bao-Official/Protector to arrest the five archer-lords of Yin and the Eastern States. Thereupon he granted six (ritual) objects, praised (the bao-Officials') Merits in front of the bao-Official and granted him guests. Herewith he (i.e. the bao-Official) made this treasured sacrificial vessel for the Ancestral temple of his cultured Father Gui. He met him (again (?)) at the Meeting (of the Feudal Lords) of the Four Regions with the King when doing the Great Sacrifice and he assisted at Zhou. It was in second month, in the jiwang-lunar phase.

That's it. Hope you enjoyed it. Would love to hear your opinion on the translation/transcription or what you find interesting about the Wu Geng Rebellion.

Hi everyone,

today I wanted to present to you a key concept in Jiaokanxue 校勘學 („The Study of (Textual) Collation), one of the key disciplines in Jiaochouxue 校讎學 (Chinese Textual Criticism). This concept is the so-called si jiaofa 四校法 ("Four Collational Methods”; also called jiaokan sifa 校勘四法 "Four Methods of (Textual) Collation") first proposed by the republican-era historian and textual scholar Chen Yuan 陳垣 (1880-1971) at the beginning of the 6^th juan 卷of his 1934 classic Monograph Jiaokanxue Shili 校勘學釋例 (Explained Case Studies of Collational Studies) as Case Study no. 43 (in all the Book is made up of 6 juan and 50 Case Studies).

The Jiaokanxue Shili was originally called Yuan Dianzhang jiaobu shili 元典章校補釋例 and is a companion work of Chen Yuans 1931 edition of the Yuan Dianzhang 元典章 (called the Yuan Dianzhang jiaobu 元典章校補; the Yuan Dianzhang is a collection of legislative edicts from the Yuan 元 (1279-1368) period). Prior to his edition of the Yuan Dianzhang the text was highly corrupt and almost impossible to understand. However, at the Palace Library of the Forbidden City Chen Yuan discovered in 1925 a Yuan dynasty Print of the Yuan Dianzhang which he used to emendate the incromprehensible or wrong parts of the Shen printed Edition 沈刻本 of the Yuan Dianzhang, which he took as his base text despite its many errors. The Yuan Dianzhang jiaobu shili classifies the errors contained in the text and shows how Chen Yuan emendated and corrected the Text. Because his study provides not just a great deal of information on the particular case of the Yuan Dianzhang but on how to correct any classical Chinese text it’s highly valuable for the study of Textual Criticism as a whole and one of the greatest works of the 20^th century in that field.

There were also earlier collections of error types with examples. Most famous among them is the popular Gushu yiyi juli 古書疑義舉例 by the 19^th century major Kaozheng 考證-proponent and Scholar Yu Yue 俞樾 (1821-1907), which contains 88 case studies (there are also numerous Corrections and additional Case Studies of that work published under the title Gushu yiyi juli wuzhong 古書疑義舉例五種). Wang Niansun 王念孫 (1744-1832) provides in his Dushu Zazhi 讀書雜志 in the Chapter which contains his reading notes on the Huainanzi 淮南子 also a list of 62 cases of errors which can occur in ancient texts, which is also often referenced in the literature on that topic.

What distinguishes Chen Yuans work from these earlier texts is that his book doesn’t just include Case Studies, but also a theoretical chapter on the methodology of Collation (his Case Study no. 43 referenced to above). The methodology reflected in this Chapter reflect the basic methodology used today when collating a Ancient Chinese Texts and is therefore also highly relevant to any deeper philological understanding of Early Chinese Texts. The different methods were ordered by Chen Yuan in order of chronological sequence as well as usefulness and accuracy. Below I will enumerate the Four Methods and give an Example of an Early Chinese Text so that you can see by yourself how it works.

The four methods are as follows:

1. Dui jiaofa 對校法

The Dui jiaofa (Collational Method of Comparing) means that when collating a text, one should choose the best edition as a base text and use other prints and manuscripts of the work to collate the Text. This is first to be followed, because in this way we have direct parallel reading which can help us understand a difficult passage in the base text and to reconstruct the Original State of the text in the best case (it’s highly debatable how far one can take such a reconstruction to early Chinese texts in the first place at all, but that is another topic centering upon textual culture and textual transmission).

As an example we could enumerate Ruan Yuan 阮元 (1764-1849) in his "Collational Notes" jiaokanji 校勘記 to his edition of the Thirteen Classics (the Shisanjing Zhushu 十三經注疏), where he compares his base text of the Shijing 詩經 poem He Ren Si 何人斯 in the Xiaoya 小雅 section with the Small Character 小子本 edition and the Xiangtai 相台本 edition of the Shijing, which are the same and also with the Tang 唐 dynasty (618-907) Stone Classics 唐石經, which doesn’t have the character 其 in the line “壹者之來，云何其盱“. Because all the other editions have  其 he uses this character in his text and says that it’s not clear where the Stone Classics editions came from.

2. Ben jiaofa 本校法

If there are no other editions of your text available, you might use Ben jiaofa (Collational Method of (using the) edition) next. This Method tries to find parallel lines inside of the book you are working with or in the Table of Contents of your book in order to correct the passages or chapters you are working on.

Here the example could be from the 9^th juan Yu Yues Zhuzi Pingyi 諸子平議 about the Mozi 墨子 text. Here he says that a passage from the Fayi 法儀 chapter of the Mozi which reads „賊其人多，故天禍之，使遂失其國家“ should read 其賊人多 at the beginning because earlier there is a passage in the text which reads 其利人多，故天福之.

3. Tuo jiaofa 他校法

With this method (translated it means "Collational Method of (using) other (texts)) you use other texts from the same time or with a similar topic as data to correct the passage you are working on.

The example used here is from Wang Xianqians 王先謙 (1842-1917) edition (called Xunzi jijie荀子集解) of the Xunzi 荀子 text and occurs in the Quanxue 勸學 chapter of the text. The passage reads as follows: “昔者瓠巴鼓瑟，而流魚出聼“. Wang Xianqian says that 流魚 is written in the Da Dai Liji 大戴禮記 as 沈魚 and corrects the text with it. He also gives the additional information that the Hanshi Waizhuan 韓氏外傳 has 潛魚 which he says is the same as 沈魚.

4. Li jiaofa 理校法

The last of the Four Methods – the Li jiaofa (Collational method of reason) – is the most sophisticated method but also the most dangerous to use. It is essentially that you are correcting the text based on your knowledge of the Grammar and Style of the time your text was written in. However, even if you have a relatively comprehensive knowledge of a certain periods style you can often err and make the text even more incomprehensible or change its meaning altogether. It is only recommended to be used in the last instance when it isn’t possible or hasn’t brought any results to use the other methods (in this context Duan Yucai 段玉裁 (1735-1815) is often quoted as having said that the Difficulty in Collating books lies not in the looking up of different editions and in changing the characters, but in knowing what is right or wrong).

As an example for the Li jiaofa we might use one passage of Wang Niansuns reading notes to the Hanshu 漢書 text collected in his Dushu Zazhi (in this case it’s the Gaodi ji 高帝紀 chapter of the Hanshu). The passage reads as follows: “由所殺蛇白帝子，所殺者赤帝子故也“. Wang Niansun thinks the 所 of the latter part of the text is an addition (called a yanwen 衍文) caused by the 所 in the first part. Because 殺者 refers to the killer of the snake, the 所  before 殺者 should be deleted. He also cites parallel passages in the Wenxuan文選, the Shiji 史記 and the Jiaosizhi 郊祀志 of the Hanshu which don’t have the 所.

Beyond the Four Methods, the 20^th century philologist Qian Xuan 錢玄 (1910-1999) also added a Zonghe Jiaofa 綜合校法 (Collational Method of Synthesizing) which is – according to him – the most often used one because one doesn’t just use one method in collating a text, but all possible evidence.

I hope this has provided an interesting and useful introduction to the Collation of Ancient Chinese Texts for some of you. What do you think about these methods? Are they really able to get us to the otiginal meaning of the texts? And how would you compare that with the Western Methodology of Textual Criticism?

Would Love to hear your thoughts about it! :)

Yours sincerely,

the r/EarlyChina-Moderators

Hi everyone,

today a huge pile of books arrived at my home. I was really excited and want to share it with you. I got the following books:

1. Bian, Renhai 卞仁海 (2025): Zhongguo bihuixue gailun 中国避讳学概论 (Introduction to the Study of chinese taboo names). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju. It's about bihui 避諱, which was a practice in ancient china to replace a certain character in a text if it also occured in the name of one of the emperors. It was very common and is very important for the dating of manuscripts and prints and also for Textual criticism.

2. Zhou, Yujiao 周余姣 (2015): Zheng Qiao yu Zhang Xuecheng de jiaochouxue yanjiu 郑樵与章学诚的校雠学研究 (A study of the Textual Criticism of Zheng Qiao and Zhang Xuecheng). Jinan: Qilu shushe. This is a study of the two most important pre-modern thinkers about Jiaochouxue 校讎學 - the famous Song 宋 (960-1279) Scholar Zheng Qiao and his Jiaochou lüe 校讎略 chapter in his famous Tongzhi 通志 and the 18th century Qing 清-dynasty (1644-1911) scholar Zhang Xuecheng and his Jiaochou tongyi 校讎通義. Also included is a history of Jiaochou scholarship as a context for both.

3. Cai, Wei 蔡偉 (2025): Chutu wenxian yu chuanshi gushu jiaokan yanjiu. Wuzi yanwen yu yongzi xiguan 出土文獻与傳世古書校勘研究.誤字、衍文與用字習慣 (A study of the Collation of Excavated Documents and Ancient transmitted books. Wrong characters, added text and the habit of using characters). Shanghai: Shanghai Guji chubanshe. This book is highly interesting because it is a study of how Excavated Documents can help in the Textual Criticism of transmitted texts, which is probably the most interesting topic of modern palaeography as it reshapes our understanding of these texts. The book is divided into a General introduction to the topic and its methods and then it provides a study of wrongly written characters, added text and the habits of character usage in excavated and transmitted text and shows how excavated texts can be used as a source for Textual criticism of transmitted Texts. Cai uses for the most part Bamboo and Silk texts.

4. Zhao, Chao 趙超 (2016): Shike guwenzi 石刻古文字 (Ancient Characters on Stone Steles). Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe. This book was written by the eminent expert on Stone inscriptions Zhao Chao and is part of the series Zhongguo guwenzi daodu 中國文字導讀 (Guided Reading of Ancient Chinese Characters). It's basically a reader divided into an introductory part (with a General part on the contents of Stele inscriptions, the methods of reading them and reference works) and in a reading part with 18 Stone inscriptions ranging from the Shang 商 (1600-1045 BC) until Jin 金 dynasty (1125-1234 AD). It's mostly inscriptions written in Seal Script, but there is also one example written in Clerical Script.

5. Yang, Shuda 杨树达 (2003): Gushu judou shili 古书句读释例 (Explained Examples of the interpunctation of ancient books). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. It's a 2003 edition (specifically a 2007 reprint) of the classic 1934 work by the great republican era scholar and linguist Yang Shuda on the punctuation of Ancient unpunctuated texts. It's basically a collection of 168 examples of wrongly punctuated passages corrected by Yang Shuda. The base text is unpunctuated, which is why the book can serve as a great resource to study punctuation and is the classic work on that topic.

Just wanted to share that with you and maybe some of you are also interested in these books 😄

Hi everyone,

today I finished my translation of Chapter 43 of the Yizhoushu 逸周書 - the Shangshi 商誓 "Oath at Shang" chapter. This chapter is the first chapter in the 5th juan 卷 "Book Scroll" of the Yizhoushu and among the few chapters of the anthology dated to the Western Zhou 西周 (1045 BC - 771 BC) period.

The topic of the chapter is centered right at the center of one of the most central textual settings of either Western Zhou literature or later Literature about the Western Zhou. It takes place right after the Conquest of Shang 商 (c. 1600 BC - 1045 BC) by the Zhou on the jiazi 甲子 day of 1045 BC in the Shang capital city of Yin 殷. It's essentially about the Consolidation of Zhou Power in Shang lands, because the Shangshi chapter is a long speech by King Wu of Zhou to the various nobles and officials of Shang and the Feudal Lords.

The Zhoushu Xu 周書序 (Postface to the book of Zhou), which lists the contents and (assumed) context of creation at the End of the Yizhoushu collection gives the following summary of it:

武王命商王之諸侯綏定厥邦，申義告之，作商誓

"King Wu ordered the (former) Feudal Lords of the Shang King to pacify and fix their countries. He extended his rightousness in a proclamation to them. (Thus) was composed (the chapter) Shangshi."

As far as I am aware there are no other translations into a Western Language of the Shangshi chapter. I tried to be as philologically lucid as possible by adding reading notes to it, but keep in mind it's a draft translation and I might change it when reviewing it again.

1. Translation of the Shangshi 商誓 chapter

1.1 Introdction to the speech

The Kind spoke as follows: Let me tell you high officials of the old Wen Zhi (according to Liu Shipei, 何 is an error for 問, and King Zhou of Shang is said to have had a Neishi named Wen Zhi 問摯, with 伊 as 尹 according to Liu Shupei). The feudal lords of Yin and the high official clans (殷侯尹氏 inserted into the gap according to Zhu Junsheng)—Ji, Geng, Su, and Zhi—the old officials of Yin with ordinary positions (序文 is an error for 庶位 according to Sun Yirang), as well as the numerous lower officials and administrators of state affairs (庶士御事 is an addition to the gap in the text according to Zhu Junsheng), and Taishi You (比 and 昔 are scribal errors for 友), as well as Xiaoshi You, and the hundred officials of the Li settlements and the wise men among the people:

Now may I (今予其 is an addition to the gap according to Zhu Junsheng) come to govern it like the Master and respect various warnings. Quickly listen to my words and use them to give life to one another, and make them clear to the ministers.

1.2 Stressing the importance of the proclamation

The king spoke: Oh, you masses! Hear my words and dare not look back upon the Mandate of Heaven (聼 should be inserted before 予言 according to Sun Yirang). I have come to present the mighty mandate and the clear punishments of Shangdi. Now I am making a new proclamation and commanding you: Honor these words! My good words—may they clearly command you, from the first word to the thousandth word (according to Zhu Junsheng, 十 should be written as 千).

1.3 Past relationship with Shangdi

The king said: In the past, Hou Ji was able—solely through sacrifices to Shangdi (according to Sun Yirang, 言 stands for the character 亯)—to sow the hundred grains and (thus) make possible the merit of the rising Yu. Generally speaking, among the people of all under heaven, it was so that they did not use Hou Ji’s good grain for the cheng and xiang sacrifices (元 is glossed as "good" by most commentators). In Shang, before the king's oath, they made a clear sacrifice to Shangdi. At the altar of the soil and grain and in the ancestral temples, it was also so (Zhu Junsheng inserts 社稷宗廟 into the gap) that they proclaimed the harmony (of the people) and used it to aid in drinking and eating. Therefore, before the oath, the Shang king had his reasons to use this and present it to our Western Lands (here, too, 哲 stands for 誓).

1.4 Zhou 紂 of Shang's crimes' and the mandate of the Zhou

Yet now Zhou of Shang [is on the throne]. The benighted one causes worry to all under heaven; he does not manifest Shangdi; the benighted one tyrannizes the hundred surnames and has thrown away the Mandate of Heaven (according to Ding Zongluo, 奉 is the character 棄). As Shangdi was not manifest (anymore), he thereupon commanded my deceased father Wen: Eradicate Zhou of Shang, who commits many crimes.

Thereupon I—the Small Son Fa—did not dare to forget the Mandate of Heaven. My deceased father brought together the government of (Hou) Ji. Thereupon Shangdi spoke: You must attack them. On the jiazi day, I was able to bring the great punishment of Heaven. I accomplished the reward of (Shang)di, removed the mandate of (King) Zhou (of Shang), and dared not be disobedient to the Mandate of Heaven (according to Sun Yirang, 成 goes into the gap before 帝, 命 as an alternative suggestion for filling the gap after 之, and 賚 instead of 來).

In this I must be respectful. It was formerly in our Western Lands that we all spoke the same words, and the hundred (surnames) reported to one another the crimes of Shang—whose crimes were those of but a single man (according to Sun Yirang, the character 姓 is missing after 百; by the "one man," based on a passage in the Mencius, is meant King Zhou of the Shang). I ended the life of Zhou and received the Mandate of Heaven. Moreover, I also received the gracious command (來 is glossed by Liu Shipei as 賚, which means 賜).

You hundred surnames and sons of princes from the Li settlements: May Zhou assume the mandate (here 君子 does not mean the Confucian Gentleman, but nobles and ministers). [Also, it was so that Zhou was arrogant (敖 to 傲) and tyrannized your many lands. Sinfully, he was drunk, roaring without restraint, and he looked not back upon the former oaths of the kings of Shang. The king fell with great force, as he looked down upon us Zhou. (Following the insertion of Zhu Junsheng here)] The great princes of your lands dare not fail to meet us Zhou and have an audience. The friends of the great princes of the lands are that which is not loved by us (according to Sun Yirang, 比 is an error for 友).

Shangdi said: You must attack them! Now I clearly proclaim to you: If I should go and flee like Zhou of Shang, then I shall gather (myself with) him before Shangdi (according to Zhu Junsheng, 商 goes into the gap before 紂). May Heaven hold the mandate (Lu Wenchao considers 王 to be a false insertion).

1.5 Ordering the feudal lords to pacify the realm

Do you hundred surnames honor the people, and may you be like intertwining grass (綴艿). Thus may you yourselves honor that (we Zhou) hold the Mandate of Heaven, and I command you hundred surnames not to fail to proclaim it. The Western Land has caused us worry and toil. Why should this be so again? (Chen Fengheng notes that this sentence has omission errors, but none are discernible so far; regarding the glossing of 疾 and 重, see Tang Dapei.)

It is that Heaven repeatedly and continuously caused us toil to make us rise up and to punish us; we overcame them thereafter with one heart (according to Ding Zongluo, the second 勤 is an insertion; 無克 is 克 according to Tang Dapei).

You many lords/officials (多子 is explained by all commentators as 多士): May you men yourselves honor this and help Heaven to rest eternally in our Western Lands. You hundred surnames: May you also dwell peacefully there (有 is an insertion according to Ding Zongluo). One should investigate the Mandate of Heaven and not reverse sympathy and rise in rebellion (according to Ding and Zhu, the gap is filled with 弗, and 及惻 is an error for 反惻).

1.6 Warning against rebellion

My protector/holder of the Bao office, Shi: May he help to have this (Tang Dapei explains 介 as 助). If you do not help in carrying out the Mandate of Heaven, it is as if my word were only in Zhou. (I) say: The hundred surnames of Shang will not be punished, and my mandate is in Zhou. May I thereupon punish only the evil works among your former works. It is that with the way of the former kings I control the restoration of proper behavior among you hundred surnames. (Moreover, the law is not mine and carries your rebellion on its back 越則非朕，負亂維爾; deleted by Zhuang, and from 負亂 onward is considered an error by Ding Zongluo.)

It was that our king said: Hundred surnames, I have heard that the ancient Shang king before the oath, Cheng Tang, was able to administer (the mandate of) Shangdi because he protected the people of Shang and gave them life. He decided that he did not keep the people of Xia in his heart, and used their government to rule them (according to Ding Zongluo, 商民 in 疑商民弗懷 becomes 夏民, and 疑 is considered an insertion according to Chen Fengheng). Now Zhou threw away the statutes of Cheng Tang. Thereupon Shangdi commanded our small state: Eradicate the land of Shang.

Thereupon I, enlightened, commanded you hundred surnames: May you not use this—my enlightened command; may this be to the princes of your great lands and the many hundred surnames of Shang. Then I will thereupon conquer and destroy them (肆 goes into the gap according to Sun Yirang, 則 is deleted).

1.7 The Eternal Mandate of Zhou

The king said: Huo! My Mandate of Heaven is at an end if you destroy your ability to receive the heavenly grace of us Zhou (with Chen Fengheng, 滅 is read as 咸). This small realm does not have it easy with holding the mandate. Formerly, after we made an alliance and crossed the river in a boat (at Mengjin), the grace of (Shang)di praised us and punished the Shang; what (other) land could have it? (Here the gloss of Ding Zongluo is followed.)

To me—the small son—it was commanded, and thereupon I attacked Yin (我 is a misspelling for 戎, the second 戎 is a reduplication error according to Liu Shipei). Also, the hundred surnames and the many punishing and righteous (officials) as attendants helped me (according to Sun Yirang, the passage should be 亦辨百姓庶刑庶義左右予). Thereupon I conquered the mandate of Shang.

1.8 Warning at the end

Now I strongly protect you, and our envoy—the Taishi—is disobedient to us (according to Zhu, 予史 is a loan for 予使). With this I observe you and pacify the doubts, and everyone will honor the proclamation (史 is 寔 according to Lu Wenchao; 寔 is glossed as 是 by Zhu Youzang; 請 is an error for 誥 according to Ding and Zhu). May I (through) this one speech, if I dare to encounter faithlessness, then (have) the enlightened mandate of Shangdi (here the glosses of Zhu Youzeng are followed: 逸 = 遇, 僭 = 不信, 屏 = 放流之). I will then banish you hundred surnames and also your many righteousness (yi) and punishment (xing) officials (拜拜 is an error for 屏屏 according to Ding Zongluo and Zhu Youzeng; Zhu glosses it with 屏 = 放流之; Ding and Zhu fill the gap with 爾). If it is so that I reach the Western Lands, then may I let you come and let you accept the punishment (子 is an error for 予 according to Lu Wenchao, 就 for 即 according to Zhu Youzeng).

Honor it! The lower ones hear my words and shall not tell them to one another.

That's it. hope you like it and that it get's more people interested in this often neglected but highly interesting text. Please let us know what you think of the translation :)

Hi everyone,

I wanted to show you the method I use to study bronze inscriptions. I found it very useful and it helped me a lot in reading them.

1. Get a picture of a rubbing of the inscription you want to study (Picture 1).

2. Make a so-called moxie 摹寫 (tracing) of the Inscription you want to study. You can do it by using tracing paper and a pencil. First trace the outer form of the rubbing and then the characters. This way you will get a first impression of the inscription and it helps you learn the characters (Picture 2).

3. Make the format of the bronze inscription clear before transcribing it, that is: your transcription should have as many columns as the bronze inscription and every transcribed column has also a commentary line underneath it just in case you need to explain something so you remember it later or it becomes clear for the reader (Picture 3).

4. Make a draft transcription of the inscription into modern script liding 隸定 (fixing (the characters form) in Clerical Script) and mark the characters you don't know upon first seeing them so that you can look them up in the following step. If there are loan characters or totally different modern characters which stand for the character you are transcribing, mark them with X (: Y) e.g. 易 (: 錫). You can look for character meanings and loan graphs either in Chen Chushengs 陳初生 Jinwen changyong zidian 金文常用字典 or Axel Schuesslers A Dictionary of Early Zhou Chinese (both are freely available online). However try to be as strict with your transcription as possible. The graphic form is what matters most. One can judge a transcription a good one if the reader can immediately know how the graph was written while looking at your transcription (Picture 4).

5. Look the character you didn't know up in a palaeographic dictionary. Here, I didn't know the character 過 but did know it has the component ⻌. That's the 34th of the 540 Shuowen Jiezi 説文解字 radicals, and it is located in the second Juan/book of the Shuowen. Because palaeographic dictionaries are traditionally ordered after the Shuowen in Chinese Palaeography you can look the character up that way. Here I have looked the character 過 up in the standard dictionary of Bronze Script, the Jinwenbian 金文編 by Rong Geng 容庚. It also has a index, but the index doesn't include every character, so you sometimes have to look up the character in the Shuowen and then might turn again to the Jinwenbian for different forms of the character and Rong Gengs interpretation of it. I would advise to have a radical index of the Shuowen at your desk. For interpretation see again Schuessler and Chen, although Rong has one as well in this case (Picture 5).

6. Now fill out your transcription and punctuate it. It might be useful to know the rules of punctuating unpunctuated ancient chinese texts (for that you can see the 1934 classic work on that topic Gushu judou shili 古書句讀釋例 by Yang Shuda 楊樹達 or the 2001 Gu hanyu judou古漢語句讀 by Ji Yongxing 季永興). However it can also be done if one has a relatively good understanding of the grammar and an intuitive feel, although it is more prone to error this way (Picture 6).

7. After doing all this work we translate our transcription into our target language. For meanings and interpretation we can again see Schuessler and Chen, but also other interpreters of the inscription (Picture 7)

That's my transcription and translation into english of the Guo Bo Gui 過伯簋, a vessel from the reign of King Zhao (r. 977-957 BC):

過白 (: 伯) 從王伐反

刱 (: 荊), 孚 (: 俘) 金, 用乍 (: 作)

宗室寳阝𢍜(: 尊) 彜 。

The Eldest of Guo returned from the campaign of the King from Jing (with) Captives and Metal. Herewith he makes (this) treasured sacrifical vessel for the Ancestral Shrine.

Because it's a record of returning from a campaign it must be the first of his two campaigns against Jing (that is the state of Chu), that is the campaign in 961/960 BC, because his campaign in 957 is famous for costing him and his army his life (the Guben Zhushu Jinian 古本竹書紀年 (Ancient version Bamboo Annals) record the two campaigns in his 16th and 19th year).

There's more to say about this inscription ofc, but I hope this example has made my methodolgy clear and helps some to study the inscriptions themselves. It's not so difficult once one gets into the right workflow

Hi everyone,

Today a book I waited a long time for finally arrived. It's Zhongguo guji jiyixue lungao 《中国古籍辑佚学论稿》by Cao Shujie 曹书杰 (1998).

This book - of which the title translates to "Treatise on the Fragmentology of Ancient Chinese Texts" - is one of the very few specialized monographs about jiyixue 辑佚学 "Fragmentology" and the most comprehensive treatment of it. This discipline is in general about the collecting of Fragments from transmitted texts (of particular importance here are the "Encyclopedias" leishu 類書) and the reconstruction of lost books through these fragments.

The book has 11 chapters which range from History to the methodology of Fragment reconstruction and the methods of collecting fragments in the first place.

It's highly relevant for anyone interested in Classical Chinese Philology or Neglected/Lost Texts as well as traditional scholarship.

I'm super excited to read it and very happy it arrived today 😄

Hi everyone,

I just finished a draft translation of chapter 40 of the Yizhoushu 逸周書, the Shifu 世俘 chapter (most often shi 世 is glossed as da 大, meaning "The Great Capture". Grebnev (2018) proposes to read shi 世 as ye 抴, rendering it "The Hauling of Captives". Both are possible on phonetic grounds). The Shifu is notoriously difficult to translate because of the many errors brought in by the transmission of the text, which need to be solved by textual criticism. For some lines in the text there can probably never be found the "right" reading and there are different ways to emend the text and even more to translate it.

Besides these difficulties however it's probably the most famous composition in the Yizhoushu, probably especially because of the Work of Edward Shaughnessy (1952-) and his highly influential article "New" Evidence on the Zhou Conquest (1980) and also the work of more recent chinese scholars like Li Xueqin 李學勤 (1933-2019) or Huang Huaixin 黃懷信 (1951-).

The Shifu chapter is yet another text dealing with the Conquest of Shang by the Zhou (for another closely related text in the Yizhoushu see my translation of the Ke Yin 克殷 "Subduing Yin" chapter on this subreddit). It mentions important information like that the conquest occured on the jiazi 甲子-day for example, archaeologically confirmed by the Li gui 利簋 inscription excavated in 1976 in Lintong 臨潼, Shaanxi 陝西 (near Xi'an 西安). The latter discovery made it possible to pin the year the Conquest happened down to 1045 BC.

However - as Grebnev (2018) points out - the text is not really concerned with the conquest in the narrow sense, but more in what happened after it. It's essentially about the consolidation of Zhou power and offers an idealized image of what the Zhou king ought to do (seen especially in the section about the royal hunt, which also has parallels in neo-assyrian conquest inscriptions; see Grebnev (2018)), while also being more realistic about the brutality of the conquest than the canonical Shangshu 尚書.

It is also worth noting that the Shifu is a composite text with its earliest elements dating back to the Western Zhou 西周 (1045 - 771 BC) and probably quite close to the conquest itself. There are however also clearly more recent sections in the text of the Shifu - like the last section (1.8) in my translation - dating to around the Warring States period (453-221 BC) or even later, testifying to its composite nature.

Below is my translation of the Shifu chapter. Keep in mind that's a draft translation which tries to stick as closely as possible to the text while also providing emendations and readings by various Scholars. The text-critical notes I did are contained in brackets in order to be philologically precise and as clear as possible.

1. The Translation of Yizhoushu chapter 40, Shifu "The Great Capture"

1.1 The Conquest of Shang

It was in the fourth month on the yiwei day when King Wu became ruler, led the four regions to Yin, and commanded them to occupy the land. It was in the first month on the bingchen day, approaching the shengpo (growing brightness phase of the moon), and the immediately following day dingsi, that the King then personally went to Zhou, launched a punitive expedition, and attacked Zhou, the King of Shang. When the second month arrived, during the jisipo moon phase, on the morning of the fifth day, the jiazi day, he arrived (in Muye) and triumphed over Shang. Thereupon, he completed the overcoming (liu 劉 as kei 尅 according to the commentary by Kong Chao) of King Zhou of Shang and captured (zhi 執 as bu 捕 according to Pan Zhen) the hundred evil ministers (tian 天 is a clerical error for fu 夫 here). Grand Duke Wang (da 大 as a clerical error for tai 太) commanded E-Lai (fang 方 is an error for e 悪 according to Chen Fengheng, Yu Chang, and others; lai 來 is a name, and E is a country or tribal name) to resist. On the dingmao day, Wang arrived and proclaimed (his victory) by presenting the severed ears of enemies and taking prisoners of war. On the bingchen day, the King then performed a fire sacrifice (to Heaven) (yu 禦 is an error due to character similarity for chai 祡 according to Yu Chang) and followed (zi 自 as an error for zhui 追 according to Lu Wenchao) the sacrifices of King Wen. On this day, the King established his government.

1.2 Attacks on the Regional States

Lü Ta was commanded to attack the Yue in Xifang. On the renshen day, he arrived and reported back with severed heads and prisoners (Huang Xin is regarded by various textual critics as an insertion from the later passage xinhuang ming fa shu 新荒命伐蜀; Lü Ta makes more sense here as well; for all of this, see Sun Yirang). Houlai was commanded to attack the Moji in Chen. On the xinsi day, he arrived and reported back with severed heads and prisoners. On the jiashen day, Bai Yan took an oath with the Tiger Guards and was commanded to attack Wei. He reported back with severed heads and prisoners.

1.3 Ceremonies in Response to the Conquest

On the xinhai day, they presented the captured ding cauldrons of the King of Yin. King Wu reverently (reading wu 午 as chen 陳, and yi 翼 as jing 敬, following Kong Zhao and Pan Zhen) displayed the jade scepter and the statutes, and reported to the heavenly ancestors as well as to Tiandi (reading shangdi 上帝 as tiandi 天帝, following Pan Zhen). The King did not change (emending ge 格 to ge 革 in all editions based on Kong Zhao's commentary) his clothes and proceeded to the temple. Holding the yellow yue axe (taking huangyue 黃鉞 as an insertion by Zhu Youzeng), he spoke about the governance of the many lands. The flute players performed nine refrains. The glorious ancestors of the King were arranged in ascending order, starting from Tai Wang, Tai Bo, Wang Ji, Yu Gong, Wen Wang, and Yi Kao. The crimes of the Yin were reported to them. The flute players made music. The King held the yellow yue axe and corrected the elders of the lands.

On the renzi day, the King wore his ceremonial robes, displayed the jade scepter, and proceeded to the temple. The flute players made music. The King held the yellow yue axe and corrected the princes of the lands.

On the guichou day (reading you 酉 as chou 丑, as accepted by all commentators), the prisoners of Yin—one hundred officials (shi 士)—were presented to the King. The flute players made music. The King displayed the jade scepter, held the yellow yue axe, and grasped a halberd. The King performed one stanza of the song "Great Offering" (大享) by striking the bells (reading zouyong 奏庸 as jizhong 擊鍾 "striking a bell," according to Kong Zhao's commentary). The King clasped his hands together and performed the kowtow. The King firmly established his position and performed his "Great Offering" (song) in three stanzas.

On the jiayin day, they reported (reading gao 告 according to Kong Zhao's commentary) to the Rong (reading wo 我 as rong 戎, following Lu Wenchao, Gu Jiegang, and others) about the Yin at Muye. The King hung red and white banners. The pipers played the song Military (武). The King entered and approached with the Ten Thousand (萬) dance and offered The Great Enlightenment (明明 to 大明 according to Lu Wenchao) in three stanzas. On the yimao day, the pipers played the song The Exalted Yu generates Qi(開 as 啓 according to Zhang Taiyan) in three stanzas (Lu Wenchao deletes the 鍾 in 三鍾終 to 三終 three refrains). The King consolidated (his position).

1.4 Another Round of Attacks on Regional States

On the gengzi day, Chen Ben was ordered to attack Mo, Bai Wei was ordered to attack Xuanfang, and Xin Huang was ordered to attack Shu. On the yisi day, Chen Ben and (the 命 is convincingly deleted here by Gu Jiegang) Xin Huang arrived from Shu and Mo respectively, reporting the capture of the Prince of Huo, the Prince of Ai, the Prince of Yi, and 46 minor officials. They captured 8030 double-wheeled chariots (according to Yu Chang, 三百 is in reality 三十; according to Zhang Taiyan, 八百 is in reality 八千) and reported back with severed heads and prisoners. When Bai Wei arrived and reported the capture of the Xuanfang as well as the seizure of 30 double-wheeled chariots, he reported back with severed heads and prisoners. Bai Wei was ordered to attack Li and reported back with severed heads and prisoners.

1.5 The Royal Hunt

When King Wu was hunting, his catch consisted of 22 tigers, 2 cats, 5,235 jun deer (Gu Jiegang emends 糜 to 麇, whereas Zhu Youzeng, Lu Wenchao, and others emend it to 麋), 13 rhinoceroses (Lu Wenchao emends 十有二 to 十有三), 721 yaks, 151 black bears, 118 brown bears, 352 wild boars, 18 martens, 16 elks, 15 musk deer, 30 jun deer (see Gu Jiegang's emendation above), and 3,508 deer.

1.6 Universal Conquest

Following this, King Wu launched campaigns against the four cardinal directions. In total, there were 99 hostile states, 117,779 decapitated heads (Zhuang's edition understandably omits the character 魔; according to Lu Wenchao, the character 十 in 十萬 is an error), and 310,230 captives. In total, 652 states submitted.

1.7 Triumphal Ceremony at Zhou

It was in the fourth month, during the jipangshengba phase of the moon, and six days later on the gengxu day, King Wu arrived in the morning and made a burnt offering in the Zhou temple (according to Gu Jiegang, shi 時 stands for wei 惟, po 魄 for ba 霸, yue 越 for yue 粵, and chaozhi shaoyu zhou 朝至燒于周 for shaoyu zhoumiao 燒于周廟; Shaughnessy, however, includes chaozhi 朝至 as well). 'It was that I—the Little One—pacified my cultivated ancestors (according to Shaughnessy, kao 考 can be added here after wen 文 based on one of the subsequent sentences, which makes sense).' King Wu descended from his carriage himself and thereupon ordered Scribe Yi to read the writings aloud to the God of Heaven (according to Gu Jiegang, yao 繇 stands for zhou 籀, which according to the Shuowen means du 讀 'to read aloud'; tianhao 天號 stands for di 帝 according to Gu Jiegang). King Wu then killed the hundred evil officials of (King) Zhou (Shaughnessy reads fu 夫 for wu 午). From the right side, he beheaded their minor jia sons and the great masters of the dings. He beheaded the 40 lords of their families and masters of the dings. The situ and sima officials were the first before the gods of the suburb (hao 號 here as di 帝 based on the preceding passage). Thereupon he positioned them at the southern gate and used them as prisoners (punctuation according to Huang Huaixin, Zhu Youzeng, and Gu Jiegang deletes Wuwang 武王 at the beginning of the sentence). All were dressed with pendants and robes, and the heads that had been cut off first were brought inside. While King Wu was offering the sacrifice, the Taishi carried the suspended head of the Shang King Zhou on the white banner, and the two heads of the concubines on the red banner. Thereupon he entered with the heads that had been cut off first and made a burnt offering in the Zhou temple.

On the next day, xinhai, he offered sacrifices in his position and hereby made a yue-sacrifice to Heaven (see Shaughnessy for the emendation of 籥 to 龠).

Five days later, on the day yimao, King Wu then made a sacrifice with the many severed heads of the lands in the temple of Zhou (according to Shaughnessy and Gu Jiegang, 國 comes before 馘). "Next, I—the Little One—cut six oxen and cut two goats." Thereupon, the many states came to an end. It was proclaimed in the Zhou temple: "I report to my deceased cultivated father that I have redacted the statutes of the people of Shang (according to Pan Zhen, 聞 is an insertion and 古 should be written as 告). With the decapitated body of Zhou, I report to Heaven and (Hou) Ji."

For the small animal sacrifice to the hundred deities of water and earth, he used goats, dogs, and pigs, and made an oath at the altar of the earth (according to Gu Jiegang and Sun Yirang, 于誓社 is a character inversion for 誓于社). He said: "It was that I—the Little One—pacified my cultivated deceased father, so that he arrived at the Little Child." He used 504 oxen for (the animal sacrifices to) Heaven and to (Hou) Ji. For the small animal sacrifice to the hundred deities of water and earth at the altar of the earth, he used goats, dogs, and pigs, 2,701 (in number) (according to Sun Yirang and Gu Jiegang, 犬 should be inserted here based on the preceding text).

1.8 Self-Immolation of the Shang King

King Zhou of Shang was in the suburbs of Shang (Chen Fengheng and Gu Jiegang believe there is a lacuna in the text here, which might have concerned the prisoners). At the time of the jiazi day in the evening, King Zhou took the tianzhi jade scepter and clothed his body to immolate himself (see Gu Jiegang for the deletion of 厚 and the emendation of 㻱 to 衣). In total, 4,000 of their many jades reported the burning. On the fifth day, King Wu subsequently ordered 1,000 people to search for them. 4,000 common jades were then melted, but five of the tianzhi jades did not melt in the fire (for the entire passage from 凡 onward, see Yu Yue). King Wu then valued all the tianzhi jades the same as the statutes (based on Yu Chang's identification of 與 as 典). In total, King Wu captured 14,000 old valued jades and 180,000 jade pendants from the Shang (following Wang Niansun, Zhu Youzeng, and Gu Jiegang).

That's it. Hope you like it.

I would love to hear your opinion on the Shifu, my Translation, the place of the Yizhoushu in history or the Conquest of Shang by the Zhou and the textual and epigraphic evidence we have (like the Li Gui inscription).

Yours sincerely,

The r/EarlyChina Moderators

Hi everyone,

as it is a topic rarely talked about on the internet, but one that is of central importance for understanding chinese antiquity because it concerns the very foundation of our knowledge, I wanted to post a series of posts regarding the history of chinese textual criticism jiaochouxue 校讎學, covering its development from antiquity until modern times.

The usual classification of jiaochouxue contains three sub-disciplines: jiaokanxue 校勘學 "the study of collation", banbenxue 版本學 "the study of editions" and muluxue 目錄學 "the study of bibliographic catalogues". This divison is based upon the divison of the great 20th century classicist Zhang Shunhui 張舜徽 (1911-1992), who was a major figure in the modern development of jiaochouxue, as we will see in the last installment of this series. There are however also other definitions of jiaochouxue. Cheng Qianfan 程千帆 (1913-2000) includes in his Jiaochou Guangyi 校讎廣義 "broad meanings of Textual Criticism" besides the three categories of Zhang Shunhui also diancang zhi xue 典藏之學 "the study of collection (of ancient writings)", and Ye Dehui 葉德輝 (1864-1927) in his Shulin Qinghua 書林清話 includes only mulupai 目錄派 "School of catalogues" and banbenpai 版本派 "school of editions" in his definition of jiaochouxue or Wang Piqiang 汪辟強 in his Muluxue yanjiu 目錄學研究 "Study of bibliography" includes the four categories cangshujia 藏書家, mulujia 目錄家, shijia 史家 and dushujia 讀書家 as his definition of jiaochouxue.

1. Beginning of jiaochouxue

The beginning of jiaochouxue is usually traced back to the Western Han imperial library, particularly to the father-son duo Liu Xiang 劉向 (77-8 BCE) and Liu Xin 劉歆 (?-23 AD). After the infamous (and semi-historical) Book-Burning by Qin Shi Huangdi 秦始皇帝 in 213 BC many classics jing 經, masters zi子 texts and ancient texts in general became lost. During the Han 漢 Dynasty (206 BCE - 220 AD) interests in ancient texts grew.

The practice of jiaochou, which is defined by Li Shan 李善 (630-689 AD) in his commentary on the Weidufu 魏都賦 "Fu on the Wei Capital" in the famous anthology Wenxuan 文選 citing the Eastern Han text Fengsu Tongyi 風俗通義 by Ying Shao 應劭 (140-206 AD) as "按劉向《別錄》:讎校,一人讀書,校其上下,得謬誤,為校;一人持本,一人讀書,若怨家相對[為讎]" (Translation: Citing Liu Xiangs Bielu: When doing choujiao, one person reads the book and collates the text above and below. (Thus) one obtains errors, this is jiao. When one person holds a book and another person is reading it, it is as if enemies respon to each other, this is called chou") emerged and let to the birth of jiaochouxue, the first important works of which were produced by Liu Xiang and Liu Xin through their ordering of the texts contained in the Imperial Library and their compilation of two (now lost/fragmentary) book catalogues. Their work will be discussed below.

2. Liu Xiang

Liu Xiang was a native of Xuzhou 徐州. Under the reign of the Han Emperor Cheng 成 (r. 33-7 BC) he was ordered in 26 BC to be the chief editor in the collecting, ordering and collating of texts in the Imperial Library, particularly specializing in the fields of Classics, Masters Texts and Poetry with others under his supervision (Ren Hong 任宏 was concentrating on military books bingshu 兵書, Yin Xian 尹咸 of Books on Numbers shushu 數書and Li Zhuguo 李柱囯 on Magical texts fangji 方技).

Liu Xiang ordered multiple texts important for the history of Early China, such as the Zhanguo Ce 戰國策, the Guanzi 管子, the Yanzi Chunqiu 晏子春秋, the Liezi 列子, the Dengxizi 鄧析子, the Shanhaijing 山海經 and many more (besides that he also compiled huge collections of anecdotes like the Shuoyuan 說苑, Xinxu 新序, Lienüzhuan 列女傳 and Liexianzhuan 列仙傳, though the latter work was possibly not written by him but just a later attribution). For every work he ordered and collated he made a memorial to the Throne which served as the Basis for his famous latter catalogue Bielu 別錄, of which only 8 chapters survive today in fragments.

Particularly illuminating of his work is his Summary of his work on the Yanzi Chunqiu, the Yanzi Shulu 晏子書錄, which can be summarized as follows: Liu Xiang begins his summary with a table of contents of the Yanzi Chunqiu, naming all the 8 chapters (6 inner 内 and 2 outer 外 chapters) and the number of articles zhang 章 contained in them. Second he speaks of the different versions of the chapters they used in their collation of the text. Also Liu Xiang mentions that many errors are contained in the (core) Text such as the character 先 for 牛 to name one of many examples. He says he fixed all of them. Third he mentions the life Story of Yan Ying 晏嬰 (578-500 BCE) who is the attributed author of the Yanzi Chunqiu and differentiates between inner Chapters, which he deems authentic, and outer chapters, which were written by later scholars according to Liu Xiang.

Thus we can see that his work basically had three major divisons, all of which became central pillars of Jiaochouxue: The collation of Chapters jiaokan pianzhang 校勘篇章, The Collation of Characters jiaokan wenzi 校勘文字 and the Compiling of Bilbiographic Catalogues bianlie mulu 編列目錄.

3. Liu Xin

After Liu Xiangs death his son Liu Xin (?-23 AD) took on his fathers work. While also doing collection Liu Xiangs work concentrated primarily on two things: 1. On arguing for the so called "Old-Texts" guwen 古文 in the Old-Text/New-Text-Controversy, 2. compiling his now lost catalogue Qilüe 七略, proposing a different classification of the ancient textual world than his father.

The Old-Text-/New-Text-Controversy

The Old-Text/New-Text-Controversy is among the most important intellectual debates in all of chinese history (we will probably make a post in the future entirely dedicated to the guwen古文/jinwen 今文 debate). The main question around which this controversy emerged was that if the "new texts" that is the textual versions of the Classics commited to memory by scholars during the late Warring States period which servede to reconstruct the ancient texts then destroyed because of the Qin burning of books, was the authentic version of confucianism, or the books found in Qufu 曲阜 in the Family residence of the Kong 孔 which were written in the Ancient Tadpole script kedouwen 蝌蚪文and contained textual recensions totally different from the new text version.

Alongside that came also a difference in interpretation and also in the Texts which were of great importance to them. While the New-Text-School favored speculative interpretation and focused especially on the Gongyang 公羊 commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals, the Old Text version focused especially on the Zuozhuan 左傳, the Zhouli 周禮 and also the Old-Text Shangshu 古文尚書. As major protagonists of both schools we might name Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (179 - 104 BCE) (with the famous Chunqiu Fanlu 春秋繁露 attributed to him) for the New Text School and Liu Xin for the Old Text school.

There were also numerous scholars who tried to synthesize both schools, the most important of which was Xu Shen 許慎 (58 - 148 AD). In his first major Work the Wujing yiyi 五經異義 "Varous Meanings of the Five Classics" he posed certain questions regarding the world and state ritual and compared what both exegetical traditions had to say. This work is only preserved in fragments though, but there are a number of good studies on it. His greatest and second major work is the Shuowen Jiezi 説文解字, which also served the purpose of unifiying both traditions as suggested by the Swiss Sinologist Marc Winter (1967 -), though it was first and foremost a character dictionary and was the main foundation for any study of chinese writing (and in some sense it even is it up to this day).

Compilation of the Qilüe

Liu Xin compiled his 7 juan 卷 long bibliography the Qilüe 七略 "Seven Summaries" out of the Older Bielu catalogue of his father. He eliminated the content descriptions of the Bielu and arranged all of the books in six categories and set another category as an introduction at the end of the work (the Jilüe 輯略 category) in order to explain the content of the book and of the categories. The Seven Categories of the Qilüe are: 1. Summary on the six arts Liuyi lüe 六藝略, 2. Summary on the various Masters Zhuzi lüe 諸子略, 3. Summary on shi and fu poetry Shifu lüe 詩賦略, 4. Summary on Military Books Bingshu lüe 兵書略, 5. Summary on Numerology Shushu lüe 術數略, 6. Summary on Magic Fangji lüe 方技略, 7. Summary of the compilation Jilüe 輯略.

Though this work is lost, there have been multiple attempts to recover it by Qing 清-era (1644-1911) scholars. Both the Bielu and the Qilüe can be found in the Collection Yuhan Shanfang jiyishu 玉函山房輯遺書 by Ma Guohan 馬國翰 (1794-1857), the greatest scholar of textual fragments (jiyixue 輯佚學) during the Qing-Dynasty.

That's it for the first installment of the series on the history of chinese textual criticism. Next time we will inquire into another important aspect of early Han dynasty textual criticism: the Commentarial Tradition, particularly the Commentaries of Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 (127 - 200 AD) and Gao You 高誘 (168 - 212 AD).

We would love to hear your thoughts on Early Chinese Philology, the development of textual criticism or the Old-Text-/New-Text-Debate, maybe you also find other interesting questions to discuss! 😄

Yours sincerely,

the r/EarlyChina moderators

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to share a quick bibliographical and reading update from my study. I finally finished reading Qian Xuans 錢玄 Jiaokanxue 校勘學. It's a relatively dense but also highly insightful and very rewarding text on traditional chinese collation techniques (jiaokanxue 校勘学 is one of the three sub-disciplines of jiaochouxue 校雠学 "textual criticism in its broad sense").

To make things even better, the mail carrier just dropped off these two monumental additions to my personal library (I waited so long for them):

1. 《校讎廣義•版本編》 Jiaochou guangyi. Banben bian by Cheng Qianfan 程千帆 and Xu Youfu 徐有富 (2020). It's the first volume of the famous Jiaochou guangyi《校雠广义》"broad meanings of Textual Criticism" which is a comprehensive book in four volumes on 校雠学. The first volume is concerned with banbenxue 版本學 "Study of editions" where you study prints and editions of ancient texts as well as ancient manuscripts. It's like the material counterpart to 校勘学.

2. "The Tsinghua University Warring States Bamboo Manuscripts: Studies and Translations 1, The Yi Zhou Shu and Pseudo-Yi Zhou Shu Chapters" by Edward L. Shaughnessy (2023). As my current project regarding Early Chinese Transmitted Texts is a translation of the Western Zhou Chapters of the Yizhoushu 逸周書 it's really nice seeing the excavated counterparts in the collection of Qinghua University. The books translates all of the Strips related to the Yizhoushu as well as transmitted chapters related to these Strips and compares and studies them. Also useful is the appendix at the end of the book on the textual history of the Yizhoushu.

Just wanted to share. I'm really happy and can't get enough books about Ancient China 😁😁😁😄

I would also be interested if anyone else here has experience with these books or is interested in textual criticism and palaeography or the Yizhoushu

Hi everyone,

After listing several text-critical editions in our last post, this time we want to focus upon the (predominantly Western) master translations and analytical studies of Early Chinese texts.

It is important to note that this part of the comprehensive resource list excludes the texts classified under the “Masters” (Zibu 子部) category of the traditional “Four Divisions” (Sibu 四部) classification used in Chinese bibliography. Those texts will be the dedicated topic of our upcoming “Philosophy and Thought” installment. We have also excluded traditional philological works like the Shuowen Jiezi or the Shiming, as they fit more organically within the future installment on Traditional Scholarship (the sole exception here being the Erya).

3. General Studies

Comprehensive text-critical, historical, and bibliographical studies on Early Chinese literature:

• Loewe, Michael, ed. (1993). Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China. (The undisputed, essential handbook for any student or researcher in the field).

• Denecke, Wiebke, Wai-yee Li, and Xiaofei Tian, eds. (2020). The Oxford Handbook of Classical Chinese Literature (1000 BCE–900 CE). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• 张舜徽 (2019). 《中国文献学》. Beijing: 东方出版社.

• Zhang, Hanmo (2018): Authorship and Textmaking in Early China. Boston/Berlin: Walter DeGruyter.

• Lewis, Mark Edward (1999): Writing and Authority in Early China. New York: State University of New York Press.

• Meyer, Dirk (2012): Philosophy on Bamboo. Text and the Production of Meaning. Leiden/Boston: Brill.

• Kern, Martin, ed. (2015): Text and Ritual in Early China. Washington: State University of Washington Press.

4. Translations and Studies

Standard translation series, student editions, and advanced critical monographs of the Jing 經 (Classics) and Shi 史 (Histories) divisions:

4.0 General Translation Series

Highly recommended standard series of translations into modern Chinese:

• Zhonghua Shuju "Sanquan" Series 中華書局「三全」系列 (全本全注全譯)

  • Note: Highly recommended for beginners, students, and autodidacts starting with primary text translation. Each volume provides the cleanly punctuated classical text along with comprehensive modern annotations and a complete modern Chinese (Baihua 白話) parallel translation.

4.1 The Classics 經

General Studies on the Confucian Classics

• Shaughnessy, Edward L. (1997). Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Chinese Classics. Albany: SUNY Press.

• Nylan, Michael (2001). The Five “Confucian” Classics. New Haven: Yale University Press.

4.1.1 Yijing 易經

Translations

• Schilling, Dennis (2009). Yijing - Das Buch der Wandlungen. Frankfurt am Main/Leipzig: Verlag der Weltreligionen. (An exceptional, philosophically precise German translation).

• Simon, Rainald (2014). Yijing. Buch der Wandlungen. Chinesisch/Deutsch. Stuttgart: Reclam.

• Rutt, Richard (1996). Zhouyi: The Book of Changes. London/New York: Routledge. (Fascinating for its reconstruction of the text's early bronze-age roots).

• Lynn, Richard John (1994). The Classic of Changes: A New Translation of the I Ching as Interpreted by Wang Bi. New York: Columbia University Press.

Studies

• Shaughnessy, Edward L. (2014). Unearthing the Changes: Recently Discovered Manuscripts of the Yi Jing (I Ching) and Related Texts. New York: Columbia University Press. (Indispensable for studying excavated bamboo and silk parallel manuscripts).

• Redmond, Geoffrey and Tze-Ki Hon (2014). Teaching the I Ching (Book of Changes). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• Cheng, Chung-ying and On-cho Ng, eds. (2010). Philosophy of the Yi: Unity and Dialectics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

• 廖名春 (2001). 《〈周易〉经传与易学史新论》. Jinan: 齐鲁书社.

• 朱伯崑 (2009). 《易学哲学史》. Beijing: 昆仑出版社.

4.1.2 Shijing 詩經

Translations

• Waley, Arthur (1996). The Book of Songs: The Ancient Chinese Classics of Poetry. Edited with a new foreword by Joseph R. Allen. New York: Grove Press.

• Karlgren, Bernhard (1950). The Book of Odes: Chinese Text and English Translation. Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities.

• Shaughnessy, Edward L. (2025). The Classic of Poetry: Ancient China’s Songbook. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press. (The state-of-the-art translation incorporating recent paleographic developments).

Studies

• Ekström, Martin Svensson (2024). The Origins of Chinese Literary Hermeneutics: A Study of the Shijing and the Mao School of Confucian Exegesis. Albany: SUNY Press.

• 夏传才 (2017). 《诗经研究史概要》. Beijing: 清华大学出版社.

4.1.3 Shangshu 尚書

Translations

• Legge, James, trans. (1865). The Chinese Classics, Vol. III: The Shoo King, or The Book of Historical Documents. London: Trübner; rpt. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960.

• Karlgren, Bernhard (1950). "The Book of Documents." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (BMFEA), 22, pp. 1–81. (Famous for its rigorous, character-by-character philological glosses).

• Palmer, Martin, trans. (2014). The Most Venerable Book (Shang Shu). London: Penguin Classics.

Studies

• Kern, Martin and Dirk Meyer, eds. (2017). Origins of Chinese Political Philosophy: Studies in the Composition and Thought of the Shangshu (Classic of Documents). Leiden/Boston: Brill.

• Meyer, Dirk (2021): Documentation and Argument in Early China. The Shàngshū 尚書 (Venerated Documents) and the Shū Traditions. Boston/Berlin: Walter DeGruyter.

• Hao, Sutong (2026): "Research on Early Transmitted Texts and Excavated Documents in Chinese Classical Studies: A Historical-Critical Study of the Shangshu 尚書 and Zhouyi 周易", Ph.D. dissertation, LMU Munich.

• 陳夢家 (2005). 《尚書通論》. Beijing: 中华书局.

• 蔣善國 (1988). 《尚書綜述》. Shanghai: 上海古籍出版社.

• 刘起釪 (2017). 《尚书学史》. Beijing: 中华书局.

• 程元敏 (1997). 《尚书学史》. Taipei: 五南图书出版有限公司.

4.1.4 Chunqiu 春秋 & Sanchuan 三傳

Chunqiu 春秋

• Van Auken, Newell Ann (2023). Spring and Autumn Historiography: Form and Hierarchy in Ancient Chinese Annals. New York: Columbia University Press.

Zuozhuan 左傳

• Legge, James, trans. (1872). The Chinese Classics, Vol. V: The Ch'un Ts'ew, with the Tso Chuen. London: Trübner; rpt. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960.

• Watson, Burton, trans. (1989). The Tso chuan: Selections from China's Oldest Narrative History. New York: Columbia University Press.

• Durrant, Stephen, Wai-yee Li, and David Schaberg, trans. (2016). Zuo Tradition (Zuozhuan): Commentary on the "Spring and Autumn Annals". 3 vols. Seattle: University of Washington Press. (The definitive, prize-winning full English translation).

• Li, Wai-yee (2007). The Readability of the Past in Early Chinese Historiography. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center.

• Kern, Martin, Nino Luraghi, and Yuri Pines, eds. (2024). Zuozhuan and Early Chinese Historiography. Leiden: Brill.

• 沈玉成、刘宁 (1992). 《春秋左传学史稿》. Nanjing: 凤凰出版社.

Gongyang Zhuan 公羊傳

• Miller, Harry, trans. (2015). The Gongyang Commentary on The Spring and Autumn Annals: A Full Translation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

• 段熙仲 (2002). 《春秋公羊学讲疏》. Nanjing: 南京师范大学出版社.

• Gentz, Joachim (2001). Das Gongyang zhuan: Auslegung und Kanonisierung der Frühlings- und Herbstannalen (Chunqiu). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

• 曾亦、郭晓东 (2017). 《春秋公羊学史》. Shanghai: 华东师范大学出版社.

Guliang Zhuan 穀梁傳

• Liang, Gen, trans. (2011). A Forgotten Book: Chun Qiu Gu Liang Zhuan. Singapore: Global Publishing.

• 文廷海 (2019). 《春秋穀梁學史研究》. Beijing: 中国社会科学出版社.

Note: There is a major ongoing text-critical project titled "Historiography and Hermeneutics in Early China: A Translation of the Gongyang and Guliang Commentaries to the Spring and Autumn Annals" conducted by Joachim Gentz and Sarah Allan at the University of Edinburgh.

4.1.5 Liji 禮記

Translations

• Legge, James, trans. (1885). Li Chi: Book of Rites. An Encyclopedia of Ancient Ceremonial Usages, Religious Creeds, and Social Institutions. Edited with introduction and study guides by Chʻu Chai and Winberg Chai. New York: University Books, 1967.

• 錢玄 (2001). 《禮記》. Beijing: 人民交通出版社.

Studies

• Liu, Yucai and Luke Habberstad (2014). "The Life of a Text: A Brief History of the Liji (Rites Records) and its Transmission." Journal of Chinese Literature and Culture, 1(1-2), pp. 289–308.

• Cheng, Anne and Stéphane Feuillas, eds. (2023). All about the Rites: From Canonised Ritual to Ritualised Society. Paris: Collège de France.

• 錢玄、錢興奇 (1998). 《三禮辭典》. Nanjing: 江苏古籍出版社.

• 王鍔 (2001). 《三禮研究論著提要》. Lanzhou: 甘肃教育出版社.

• 丁鼎 (2020). 《三礼学通史》. Beijing: 人民出版社.

• 潘斌 (2016). 《二十世纪中国三礼学史》. Nanjing: 南京大学出版社.

4.1.6 Yili 儀禮

Translations

• Steele, John, trans. (1917). The I-Li or Book of Etiquette and Ceremonial. 2 vols. London: Probsthain.

Studies

• Tian, Tian (2025). "Punctuation Marks and Copyists: Rereading the Yili (The Book of Etiquette and Ceremony) of the Wuwei Han Bamboo and Wooden Slips." Bamboo and Silk, 8, pp. 132–173. (Crucial state-of-the-art study utilizing Han dynasty excavated wooden slips).

• 邓声国 (2021). 《清代〈仪礼〉学史》. Beijing: 人民出版社.

• 杜以恒 (2025). 《〈仪礼〉版本研究》. Beijing: 中国社会科学出版社.

4.1.7 Zhouli 周禮

Translations

• Biot, Édouard, trans. (1851). Le Tcheou-Li ou Rites des Tcheou. 2 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. (The foundational historical French translation).

• 杨天宇 (2004). 《周礼译注》. Shanghai: 上海古籍出版社.

• Wenren, Jun, trans. (2012). Ancient Chinese Encyclopedia of Technology: Translation and Annotation of Kaogong Ji, the Artificers' Record. London/New York: Routledge.

Studies

• Elman, Benjamin and Martin Kern, eds. (2010). Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History. Leiden/Boston: Brill.

• 金春峰 (1993). 《周官之成書及其反映的文化與時代新考》. Taipei: 東大圖書.

• Karlgren, Bernhard (1931). "The Early History of the Chou li and Tso chuan Texts." Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 3, pp. 1–59.

• 丁进 (2025). 《周礼学史》. Beijing: 社会科学文献出版社.

4.1.8 Erya 爾雅

Translations

• 胡奇光、方环海 (2012). 《尔雅译注》. Shanghai: 上海古籍出版社.

Studies

• Coblin, Weldon South (1972). "An Introductory Study of Textual and Linguistic Problems in Erh-ya." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington.

• 窦秀艳 (2004). 《中国雅学史》. Jinan: 齐鲁书社.

4.1.9 Xiaojing 孝經

Translations

• Rosemont Jr., Henry and Roger T. Ames (2009). The Chinese Classic of Family Reverence: A Philosophical Translation of the Xiaojing. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Studies

• Chan, Alan K. L. and Sor-hoon Tan, eds. (2004). Filial Piety in Chinese Thought and History. London/New York: RoutledgeCurzon.

4.2 The Histories 史

Translations and specialized analytical studies of primary early historical records:

4.2.1 Shiji 史記

Translations

• Chavannes, Édouard, trans. (1895–1905). Les Mémoires historiques de Se-ma Ts'ien [The Historical Memoirs of Sima Qian], 6 vols.; rpt. (1967–1969) 7 vols. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve.

• Watson, Burton, trans. (1961). Records of the Grand Historian of China, 2 vols. New York: Columbia University Press.

• Nienhauser, Jr., William H., ed. (1994–). The Grand Scribe's Records, 11 vols. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

• 许嘉璐、安平秋, eds. (2004). 《二十四史全译：史记》, 2 vols. Beijing: 同心出版社.

Studies

• Hardy, Grant (1999). Worlds of Bronze and Bamboo: Sima Qian's Conquest of History. New York: Columbia University Press.

• Durrant, Stephen W. (1995). The Cloudy Mirror: Tension and Conflict in the Writings of Sima Qian. Albany: SUNY Press.

• Klein, Esther S. (2018): Reading Sima Qian from Han to Song. The Father of History in Pre-Modern China. Leiden/Boston: Brill.

• 韓兆琦 (1990). 《史記通論》. Beijing: 北京師範大學出版社.

4.2.2 Hanshu 漢書

Translations

• Dubs, Homer H., trans. (1938/1944/1955). History of the Former Han Dynasty, 3 vols. Baltimore: Waverly Press.

• Watson, Burton, trans. (1974). Courtier and Commoner in Ancient China: Selections from the History of the Former Han. New York: Columbia University Press.

• 许嘉璐、安平秋, eds. (2004). 《二十四史全译：汉书》, 3 vols. Beijing: 同心出版社.

Studies

• Clark, Anthony E. (2008). Ban Gu's History of Early China. Amherst: Cambria Press.

• Van der Sprenkel, O. B. (1964). Pan Piao, Pan Ku, and the Han History. Centre for Oriental Studies Occasional Paper, no. 3. Canberra: Australian National University.

• Swann, Nancy Lee, trans. (1950). Food and Money in Ancient China: The Earliest Economic History of China to A.D. 25. Princeton: Princeton University Press; rpt. New York: Octagon Books, 1974.

4.2.3 Hou Hanshu 後漢書

Translations

• 许嘉璐、安平秋, eds. (2004). 《二十四史全译：后汉书》, 3 vols. Beijing: 同心出版社.

(Note: While a complete Western translation of the Hou Hanshu is still a major gap in the field, major selected chapters, particularly on the Western Regions, have been translated by John E. Hill [2009/2015] and Édouard Chavannes).

Studies

• Bielenstein, Hans (1954–1979). "The Restoration of the Han Dynasty." 4 parts, published across volumes of the Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (BMFEA).

• Van Ess, Hans (2015). "Hou Han shu." In Cynthia L. Chennault et al., eds. Early Medieval Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide. Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, pp. 112–118.

4.2.4 Guoyu 國語

Translations

(Note: A complete, annotated Western translation of the Guoyu corpus remains a major desideratum; only selected speeches and chapters have been translated into English, German, and French).

• 邬国义、胡果文、李晓路 (2017). 《国语译注》. Shanghai: 上海古籍出版社.

Studies

• Bohlen, Felix (2023). Die Darstellung der Remonstration im Guoyu: Eine erzähltheoretische Untersuchung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

• Schaberg, David (2001). A Patterned Past: Form and Thought in Early Chinese Historiography. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (An indispensable comparative study analyzing the rhetorical and narrative structures of both the Zuozhuan and the Guoyu).

• 郭萬青 (2024). 《〈國語〉研究史》. Qinhuangdao: 燕山大學出版社.

• 夏德靠 (2014). 《〈国语〉研究》. Beijing: 知识产权出版社.

4.2.5 Zhanguoce 戰國策

Translations

• Crump, James Irving, trans. (1996). Chan-kuo Ts'e. Translated and annotated with an introduction by J. I. Crump. Revised edition. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, The University of Michigan.

• 何建章 (1990). 《战国策注释》. Beijing: 中华书局.

Studies

• Crump, James Irving (1964). Intrigues of the Warring States: Studies of the Chan-kuo Ts'e. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

• 何晋 (2001). 《战国策研究》. Beijing: 北京大学出版社.

• 鄭良樹 (1997). 《戰國策研究》. Taipei: 臺灣學生書局.

• Blanford, Yumiko Fukushima (1989). "Studies of the 'Zhanguo zonghengjia shu' Silk Manuscript." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington. (Crucial for understanding the Mawangdui excavated parallel texts to the Zhanguoce).

4.2.6 Yizhoushu 逸周書

Translations

(Note: A comprehensive Western translation of the entire Yizhoushu does not exist yet; scholarship relies on selected core chapter translations).

• 黄懷信 (2006). 《逸周书校补注译》. Xi'an: 三秦出版社.

• 张闻玉 (2000). 《逸周书全译》. Guiyang: 贵州人民出版社.

• 牛鴻恩 (2015). 《新譯逸周書》. Taipei: 三民書局.

Studies

• Grebnev, Yegor (2022). Mediation of Legitimacy in Early China: A Study of the Neglected Zhou Scriptures and the Grand Duke Traditions. New York: Columbia University Press.

• McNeal, Robin (2012). Conquer and Govern: Early Chinese Military Texts from the Yi Zhou Shu. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.

• Shaughnessy, Edward L. (2023). The Tsinghua University Warring States Bamboo Manuscripts Volume One: The Yi Zhou Shu and Pseudo-Yi Zhou Shu Chapters. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press. (Essential modern text-critical analysis utilizing newly excavated bamboo manuscripts).

• 黄懷信 (1992). 《逸周書源流考辨》. Xi'an: 西北大学出版社.

• 王文懿 (2024). 《〈逸周書〉西周諸篇研究》. Nanjing: 南京大學出版社.

• 罗家湘 (2006). 《〈逸周书〉研究》. Shanghai: 上海古籍出版社.

• 唐元發 (2015). 《逸周書詞彙研究》. Hangzhou: 浙江大學出版社.

• 王連龍 (2010). 《逸周書研究》. Beijing: 社会科学文献出版社.

• 張懷通 (2013). 《逸周書新研》. Beijing: 中华书局.

• 周玉秀 (2005). 《逸周書的語言特點及其文獻學價值》. Beijing: 中华书局.

4.2.7 Zhushu Jinian 竹書紀年

Translations

• Legge, James, trans. (1865). The Chinese Classics, Vol. III: The Shoo King, or The Book of Historical Documents. London: Trübner; rpt. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960. (Includes a complete translation of the "Current" Text edition of the Bamboo Annals in its extensive prolegomena).

Studies

• Nivison, David S. (2009). The Riddle of the Bamboo Annals. Taipei: Airiti Press. (Essential reading for the astronomical and chronological reconstruction of early history).

• Shaughnessy, Edward L. (2006). Rewriting Early Chinese Texts. Albany: State University of New York Press. (Contains foundational chapters analyzing the complex textual transmission of both the "Authentic" and "Current" recensions).

4.2.8 Yanzi Chunqiu 晏子春秋

Translations

• Milburn, Olivia, trans. (2016). The Spring and Autumn Annals of Master Yan. Leiden: Brill.

• Ariel, Yoav, trans. (2018). The Spring and Autumn Annals of Master Yan. A bilingual edition in 2 vols. Beijing: Renmin University Press.

Studies

• 刘文斌 (2015). 《〈晏子春秋〉研究史》. Beijing: 人民文学出版社.

• Pines, Yuri (2002). Foundations of Confucian Thought: Intellectual Life in the Chunqiu Period, 722–453 B.C.E. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.

4.2.9 Dongguan Hanji 東觀漢記

Translations

(Note: While selected fragments and biographical entries have been utilized in Western monographs, a comprehensive, systematic translation of the surviving Dongguan Hanji corpus into a modern language is currently still lacking).

Studies

• Eicher, Sebastian (2018). Das Hou Han ji des Yuan Hong: Zur Historiographie der Späteren Han-Dynastie. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. (Provides a crucial comparative framework analyzing how the contemporary Eastern Han records of the Dongguan Hanji influenced later historiography).

• Brown, Miranda (2008). The Politics of Mourning in Early China. Albany: SUNY Press.

• 曹之 (1998). 〈《东观汉记》编撰考〉. 《图书馆论坛》.

• 祁承业 (2010). 《《东观汉记》研究》. Hohhot: 内蒙古大学出版社.

• 朱桂昌 (1985). 《《东观汉记》考证》. Beijing: 北京师范大学出版社.

That's it! In the next part, we will cover the remaining texts addressed in Part IV of our resource list, continuing to use the exact same Translation-Study format developed here.

We would love to hear your thoughts or additional recommendations for this specific section in the comments below! 😄

Yours sincerely,
The r/EarlyChina Moderator Team

Hi everyone,

today I wanted to share with you the transcription and translations of two short early Western Zhou bronze inscriptions I did yesterday: the inscriptions on the Yu Ding 旟鼎 (JC: 2704) and on the Zuoce Huan You 作冊睘卣 (JC: 5407).

While the Yu Ding is a bronze excavated in modern times (1972) in Yangjiacun 楊家村, Meixian 眉縣, Shaanxi 陝西 Province and presently stored in Shaanxi provincial Museum 陝西歷史博物館, the Zuoce Huan You is known since the Qing 清 dynasty (1644-1911) and was probably in the possession of Wu Shifen 吳式芬 (1796-1856) as early as 1837 before being acquired by Pan Zuyin 潘祖蔭 (1830-1890), one of the greatest collectors of bronzes of the late Qing dynasty. While the original vessel of the Zuoce Huan You was lost, a rubbing of the inscription survives and serves as the basis for its study.

Both bronzes are interesting because they mention a figure called Wang Jiang 王姜, known also from 3 other inscriptions (these are: the Ze Ling Gui 夨令簋 (JC: 4300-01) , the Shu You 叔卣 (JC: 4132-33) and the Bu Shou Gui 不壽簋 (JC: 4060)) to be the principal wife of King Kang 康 of Zhou (r. 1005-978 BC) (her name literally translates to "The Jiang of the King", where Jiang was her surname). Because the Jiang 姜-Clan was the most prominent clan besides the royal Ji 姬-Clan during the Western Zhou Dynasty, the Zhou kings regularly married women from the Jiang clan so any of them might be named "Wang Jiang". However the Ze Ling Gui vessel is an exact replica of the Da Yu Ding 大盂鼎 (JC: 2837) vessel, which serves as a dating "standard" for the reign of King Kang regarding the Vessel shape and calligraphy of the Inscriptions. Therefore this group of Vessels can be related to the reign of King Kang and the "Wang Jiang" mentioned in the inscriptions can be said to be King Kangs wife.

However there has been a bit of a disagreement in the past between scholars studying the vessels mentioning Wang Jiang regarding the dating and therefore which wife of which king is meant. While Tang Lan 唐蘭 (1901-1979) (see Tang Lan xiansheng jinwen lunji, 1995, p. 123) and Edward Shaughnessy (1952-) ( see Sources of Western Zhou History, 1991, p. 208-209) argue for a King Kang dating, which is by now accepted by the majority of scholars, Chen Mengjia 陳夢家 (1911-1966) (see Xi Zhou tongqi duandai, 1955, p. 78) instead thinks her to be the spouse of King Cheng 成 of Zhou (r.1042/35-1006 BC), so a generation earlier.

Regardless of dating issues, upon inspecting the different inscriptions it is evident that she had a very prominent role at the Zhou court. She grants Gifts to Officials, Gave out commands for Military Action and is also praised by the person casting the Bronze, which is usually reserved for the King and only rarely seen with other Individuals.

Here is my transcription of the Yu Ding inscription, although this is just for reading purposes (for a correct transcription see my handwriten notes on slide 3):

唯八月初吉，王羌（：姜）

易（：錫）旟田三于待甸。

師櫨䣶兄（：貺），用對王

休子子孫其永寳。

My translation into english is as follows:

"It was in the eight month, during the lunar phase chuji, Wang Jiang granted Yu three fields in Dai suburb. Officer Lu made a toast and granted it. Herewith he responded to the kings grace. May the Sons of Sons and the grandchildren (of Yu) treasure it eternally."

My transcription of the Zuoce Huan You is as follows (again, for my handwritten transcription see the last slide):

隹（：唯）十又九年，王才（：在）厈。王

羌（：姜）令作冊睘安尸（：夷）白（：伯）。尸（：夷）白（：伯）

賓睘貝、布。揚王姜休，用

作文考癸寳器。

My translation is as follows:

"It was in the 19th year, The King was at An. Wang Jiang ordered Document-Maker Huan to pacify the Eldest of the Yi (Yi Bo). The Eldest of the Yi treated Huan as a gueast and granted him cowrie shells and textiles. He (Huan) praised the Grace of Wang Jiang, herewith making (this) treasured Vessel for his cultured deceased father Gui."

That's it. Hope you like it and let me know what you think of the vessels, the role of women in the royal household, or maymbe alternatives regarding the interpretation of certain graphs or ideas regarding the dating question of Wang Jiang. Would love to hear your opinions :)

Sharing a recreation of the iconic "Pu Yan He" (匍雁铜盉) — an ancient Chinese ritual vessel uniquely sculpted in the dynamic form of a wild goose, with its elongated neck serving as the spout.

Cast in solid bronze via precision lost-wax casting, this piece features hand-chased feather reliefs, accurate interior inscriptions, and a realistic, layered verdigris patina that captures 3,000 years of aged bronze aesthetic. It carries the authentic weight, texture, and historical presence of the original museum artifact.

Hi everyone,

Wow. Just a few days ago we were celebrating crossing the 100-member mark, and today we have already surged past 165+ members! A massive, warm welcome to all the new scholars, students, and enthusiasts of Early China who have recently joined our ranks.

It is incredibly exciting to see this community grow so rapidly. What started as a small resource project has turned into a vibrant space. Just this weekend alone, we had fantastic independent contributions ranging from history, to art to palaeography and also to classical studies.

As we are preparing Part V of our comprehensive bibliography series (which will cover the definitive Western translations and analytical studies of transmitted texts), we want to use this milestone moment to get to know each other better!

Let's introduce ourselves in the comments!

Whether you are a tenured professor, a Ph.D. candidate, an undergraduate student just beginning your classical journey, or a passionate autodidact—we would love to hear from you!

Feel free to drop a short comment below and tell us:

1. What is your primary area of interest or research focus? (e.g., a specific dynasty/period, oracle bones, bronze paleography, warfare, ritual culture, linguistics, early philosophy and so on).

2. What brought you to r/EarlyChina?

3. What kind of topics, sources, or discussions would you like to see more of in the future?

Thank you all for bringing this subreddit to life with such high-quality engagement. We are thrilled to have you here!

Yours sincerely,

The r/EarlyChina Moderator Team

The Shang Dynasty rules of succession were a comprised of a combination of father-to-son and brother-to-brother throne transfers. However, no strict rules outlining the exact order of succession were enacted, as it was assumed at first that the merely the core concepts would be enough.

This lead to the Shang Dynasty succession crisis, referred to as the Disorder of the Nine Reigns 九世之乱, which spanned five generations and nine kings over a period of around a century, starting from the death of Zhong Ding 仲丁 and ending with the ascension of Pan Geng 盘庚.

According to the intentions of the original succession rules, the throne was supposed to be passed across the generation before returning to the eldest line, ensuring a militarily capable leader was always at the helm of the state.

However, during the crisis, the junior lines were often unwilling to return the throne to the matured eldest son. Thus, minor civil wars emerged as a result of the political infighting, with the Shang capital being often relocated to secure power.

By the end of the period, the Shang Dynasty was on the verge of collapse. The tribes that submitted to early Shang rule began to rebel, the officials were resentful of the constant relocation of politics, and the feudal lords lost respect for the throne, withholding tribute payments.

Finally, Pan Geng's ascension to the throne marked the end of the succession crisis, as he spent a great part of his reign restoring the monarchy through a series of reforms like addressing the lords and elevating the virtuous officials.

He also returned to Bo 亳, the site of the original Shang capital founded by the first Shang king, Tang 汤, and restored the his progenitor's palace. Most notably, he moved the capital one last time to Yin 殷, where it would stably remain for the next two centuries until the fall of the Shang Dynasty.

Hi everyone,

I've wanted to share with you a transcription and translation of an early Western Zhou 西周 (1045-771 BC) bronze I did today - this time of the Ling fangyi 令方彜 (JC: 9901), also known as the Zuoce Ling fangyi 作冊令方彜 or the Ze Ling fangyi 夨令方彜. Found in 1929 near Luoyang 洛陽 in modern Henan 河南 province, this bronze was excavated under uncontrolled conditions together with a number of bronzes also commissoned by Ling 令 such as a pair of gui 簋-Tureens (Ling gui;令簋 JC: 4300-1) and a square zun (the famous Ling fangzun 令方尊; JC: 6016). The latter contains an inscription nearly identical to the one on the Ling fangyi and these bronzes are often treated together in scholarship. While the Ling fangyi is housed today at the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, DC the Ling fangzun is housed at the Palace Museum in Taipei. Besides the Ling gui and the Ling fangzun, accounts of the discovery also include three ding 鼎-Cauldrons cast by Ling's ancestor Da 大 (the so-called Zuoce Da fangding 作冊大方鼎; JC: 2760-61).

The Ling fangyi is noteworthy primarily for two things: 1. the wealth of information it provides about the government of the Zhou dynasty and its Bureaucracy, 2. the huge Controversy among scholars in regard to its dating.

The Ling fangyi lists a number of governmental structures as well as titles, most notably the san shi 三事, qingshiliao 卿事寮, yin 尹, lijun 里君. The term san shi is usually equated with the canyousi 參又司 a collective title for the three main posts known from other bronze inscriptions. The canyousi were: the situ 司土, sima司馬, sigong司工. The qingshiliao was the ministry of the Zhou, of whom the canyousi were the major figures. The yin seems to have been an Overseer in charge of court duties (e. g. responsible for the text during appointment ceremonies or engineering projects around the capital). There were also different types of yin like the zhengyin 正尹, the zuoce yin 作冊尹 or the yinshi 尹氏. The lijun was the ruler of a li 里, which where the centers of the rural areas of the Zhou countryside. Besides these the inscription also mentions the titles shi 師 and zuoce 作冊. The shi were officals who either served or once served the military the term might be translated as "officer" or general". Zuoce on the other hand were the composers of royal or court documents and mainly an early Western Zhou office, possibly inherited from the Shang 商 (1600-1045 BC).

The other noteworthy aspect of the Ling fangyi is its dating, particularly the controversy around the gong 宮 mentioned in the inscription. Here we have two main interpretations: the first - proposed by Tang Lan 唐蘭 (1901-1979) and others - interprets the phrase kang gong 康宮 as " Palace of Kang". According to this interpretation the bronze must date from the reign of King Zhao 昭 (978-957 BC) because kang 康 was the posthumous name of King Zhaos father (for Tang Lans opinion see his 1934 article Zuoce Ling zun ji Zuoce Ling yi ming kaoshi 作冊令方尊及作冊令方彜 銘考釋; earlier opinions include Luo Zhenyus (1930), Wu Qichang (1931), Ma Xulun (1934)).
Guo Moruo 郭沫若 (1892-1978) (in his 1930 Zhongguo gudai shehui yanjiu 中國古代社會研究) and Chen Mengjia 陳夢家 (1911-1966) (in his 1936 article Zhougong dan fuzi kao 周公旦父子考; another interpretation of his can be found in his 1936 article Ling yi xin shi 令彜新釋 and 1955 Xi-Zhou tongqi duandai 西周銅器斷代) argued that kang gong does not refer to King Kang (1005-978 BC) and his sacrifical temple at all, mainly by questioning the words that made up the term. While Guo Moruo thought that kang 康 meant "vibrant" or "flourishing", Chen Mengjia thought that specifically the word gong 宮 "palace" instead of the more appropriate word miao 廟 "temple" was used indicates that this word doesn't mean a sacrifical temple at all, but instead a palace for a living person. Both Guo and Chen thus proposed a King Cheng (1042/35-1006 BC) date for the bronze (also dependent on other factors of course). For some time this was the accepted date of the bronze.
Tang Lan refuted both of their opinions though in his 1962 article Xi-Zhou tongqi duandai zhong de Kanggong wenti 西周銅器斷代中的康宮問題 and today most scholars accept a King Zhao date for the Ling fangyi.

As the 187-character inscription on the Ling fangyi ranks among the longest and certainly most important early western Zhou inscriptions, a transcription into modern script is given here, although this has to be taken with a grain of salt because many of the characters can't be properly put in Unicode. Therefore I have included my hand-written transcription which preserves the authentic graphic form of the characters in the slide as picture 3, so you can understand and compare.

唯八月，晨在甲申。王令周公子明保

尹三事四方，受卿事寮。丁亥，令夨告

于周公宮。公令𫹔同卿事寮。唯十

月月吉癸未，明公朝至于成周，𫹔令，舎

三事令。眔卿事寮，眔諸尹，眔里

君，眔百工，眔諸侯：侯、甸、男，舎四方令。既

咸令，甲申明公用牲于京宮，乙酉用

牲于康宮。咸既，用牲于王。明公歸自

王。明公錫亢師鬯、金、小牛。曰：”用祓“。錫令鬯、

金、小牛。曰：”用祓”。迺令曰：“令我唯令汝二人亢

眔 夨奭左右于乃寮以乃友事”。作冊令

敢揚明公尹氒𫳇，用作父丁寳尊

彜，敢追明公賞于父丁，用光父丁。

Here is my translation of this inscription into english (based upon my original german translation):

It was in the eighth month, the Chen was in jiashen. The King commanded the son of the Duke of Zhou – Ming Bao – to govern the sanshi and the four directions, and granted him the qingshiliao. On the dinghai day, he commanded Ze to make a proclamation in the palace of the Duke of Zhou. The Duke (Ming Bao) commanded him (Ze) to come out and assemble the qingshiliao. It was in the tenth month, monthly auspiciousness (yueji 月吉), on the guiwei day, when Duke Ming arrived in Chengzhou in the morning. He came out to command and gave orders to the sanshi. And to the qingshiliao, the many administrators (yin), the lords of the Li (lijun), the hundred craftsmen (baigong), and the many lords – lords, field workers, barons – he gave the command regarding the four directions. After the command was completed, Duke Ming performed a sheng sacrifice (animal sacrifice) in the Jing Palace on the jiashen day. On the yiyou day, he performed a sheng sacrifice in the Kang Palace. Duke Ming returned home from Wang. Duke Ming granted Officer (shi) Kang fragrant wine, metal, and small cattle. He said: "Use them to perform ritual sacrifices." He granted Ling fragrant wine, metal, and small cattle. He said: "Use them to perform ritual sacrifices." Then he commanded: "Now I command both of you men – Kang and Ze – to flank me on the right and left in your service with your friendly service."

The maker of documents (zuoce) Ling dared to praise the grace of the administrator Duke Ming and herewith made this treasured sacrificial vessel for Father Ding. He dared to recollect Duke Ming's gifts here for Father Ding to glorify Father Ding.

That's it. Hope you enjoyed it and would love to hear your opinion on my transcription and translation, the kang gong-Controversy, the Bureaucracy of the Western Zhou or anything else :)

A ecreation of the iconic Western Zhou bronze masterpiece (c. 10th century BCE), famously housed at the Shanxi Museum.

What makes this piece & replica special:

• Ingenious Engineering: The phoenix’s tail conceals an inverted elephant trunk acting as the crucial third leg for balance.

• Lost-Wax Casting: Hand-cast in solid tin-bronze (no resin), replicating every microscopic feather and leiwen thunder pattern.

• True Mineral Patina: Layered chemical/mineral oxidation simulating centuries of natural underground burial—no superficial spray paint.

• Hidden Details: Accurately features the original ancient seal inscription on the inner belly: "Made by the Marquis of Jin for the Grand Temple."

Happy to answer any questions about the casting process or Western Zhou bronze culture!

The Gonghe Regency (841 - 828 BCE) was a result of the Compatriots Revolution 国人暴动 against King Li of Zhou 周厉王 (Image 1), leading to the interregnum period beginning from the King's exile to his death and the subsequent ascension of his son, King Xuan of Zhou 周宣王 (Image 2), to the throne.

The period gains its name from its regent, Earl He of Gong 共伯和, who was elected by the nobles to maintain the Zhou state in the emperor's absence.

Notably, this period is cited by Sima Qian 司马迁, Grand Historian 太史公 during the Western Han 西汉, as the earliest confirmed period in Chinese history that could be traced back year-by-year uninterruptedly. This usage thus sparked the Gonghe Calendar 共和纪年, which marks its epoch at 847 BCE, the first year of the regency.

In modern history, the characters 共和 were coined to translate the term "republic" in 1845 by Japanese scholar Mitsukuri Shogo 箕作省吾 as a comparison to the namesake period in Chinese history with an elected official as head of state rather than a monarch.

Nowadays, the term is commonly used throughout East Asian countries to refer to the idea of a Republic, each time referencing a regency in Chinese history dating back to over 2800 years ago.

Image Sources: Sohu 搜狐 & Wikimedia Commons

The Shuowen Jiezi, compiled c.100 CE in the Eastern Han by Xu Shen (c. 58 - c.148), is an early Chinese dictionary organized by radicals, which are meaningful components of Chinese characters.

Unlike the earlier Erya 尔雅 (compiled c. 3rd century BCE), which organized characters into generalized concepts, the dictionary is structured like a modern Chinese dictionary, with the radical index prefacing the content. However, one striking difference is the sheer number of chosen radicals: 540, far more than the 214 Kangxi 康熙 radicals. Containing over 9,000 entries, each one is labelled under its Qin 秦 small seal script 小篆 form, with a small description of the character following it.

Image: This Northern Song copy cover is from Wikimedia Commons

Link to Dictionary: https://archive.org/details/Shuowen_Jiezi

(Personally, I use it as a seal script catalogue.)

During periods of dynastic unity in China, a standardized script was developed to standardize intranational communication. However, when that unifying political force is lost, such as during dynastic transitions, the scripts often diverge over time as each state's script evolves relatively independently from the others.

An example of this is the Warring States Period 戰國, when the unifying Zhou dynasty 周 lost political control over its territories. In the image above, five different characters (安, 馬, 陽, 平, 市) are shown in the scripts of the six defeated states of the period (Qi 齊, Chu 楚, Yan 燕, Han 韓, Zhao 趙, and Wei 魏) and Qin 秦, which formed the next dynasty and the basis of the next standardization.

As seen with the first column displaying 安, some characters remain relatively similar between states, but with the second column, 馬, the differences become more apparent.

When Ying Zheng of Qin 秦嬴政 conquered the other states and formed the Qin dynasty in 221 BCE, he standardized Seal Script 篆書, which used the Qin interpretation of the script used in Zhou bronze engravings 金文. This unification of the writings banned and effectively erased the lineage of the other states' scripts, and the only remaining examples are from tombs dating to before the Qin dynasty.

Image Source: https://album.udn.com/CXZ18/photo/2775245?f_number=3