Week 6

 

Tuesday, 10/3 

In the first month of his rule, Emperor Wen announces that “agriculture is the basis of the empire” (H296t). Later, in the fifth month, he reiterates this statement, and changes taxes in order to encourage more farming and distinguish it from other activities such as trade (H301m). Why is agriculture so important to Emperor Wen? 

In Sima Qian’s closing remarks for Empress Lu, he notes that during her reign the people enjoyed peace and “applied themselves to the tasks of farming, and food and clothing became abundant” (H284m). This is not due to overt actions from Empress Lu to encourage farming; rather she offered a “surcease of action” (H284m). This rest allowed the people themselves to choose and take up this activity. Emperor Wen, it seems, is following the lead of the people with this proclamation, allowing the people to continue the trajectory that they themselves set. When he makes this proclamation, is he not also saying that the people themselves, and their will, are the basis of empire? 

 What makes agriculture better suited to maintaining an empire than other activities? Emperor Wen’s proclamation is interesting in light of the king of Wu, who focuses on the non-agricultural activities of boiling seawater for salt and mining copper (H413m). Yuan Ang observes that these activities, particularly copper mining, have attracted unworthy men to Wu (H413m). These activities also allowed the king of Wu to amass great wealth which he puts to use to provide monetary incentives for joining a rebellion (H413m; H412t). In this case, turning away from agriculture ends up as a direct threat to empire. Does agriculture have a pacifying effect that will keep people at peace? In Sima Qian’s remark at the end of Liu Pi’s biography, he recalls that the ancients said that the people “should not be allowed to make use of the resources of the hills and seas (H422t). What led the ancients to this wisdom?   

Thursday, 10/5 

I’m very puzzled by Shi Ji 121, The Confucian Scholars. It gives a new layer to the history we have been reading, but why did Sima Qian choose to handle this information separately from the other accounts? For example, we learn that the overthrowing of the Qin empire is widely supported by Confucian scholars, who eagerly joined Chen She’s rebellion “because they were incensed at the Qin dynasty for having burned their books and interrupted their labours” (HII-357t). This surprising detail was not apparent in the earlier account of Chen She in Shi Ji 48. Why would it be omitted there? Is it better to keep political history separated from the explicit opinions of Confucians and Taoists? 

 Also in Shi Ji 121, Sima Qian gives an account of a debate between (Confucionist) Master Yuan Gu and (Taoist) Master Huang over whether it is principled to seize power from tyrants (HII-363.) Master Yuan Gu argues that rebelling against cruel tyrants is right, a “mandate of heaven” (HII-363m). The debate is never brought to conclusion however – when Master Yuan Gu applies the question to the political event most contemporaneous to the discussion, the overthrowing of the Qin empire, the discussion is ended by Emperor Jing (HII363b). Why is this debate prevented from continuing? Is it dangerous speech? Is it wise for subjects to avoid resolving or even in engaging in these kinds of debates? 

 Or is this just Sima Qian’s method of teaching us about the relation of politics to scholarship? When the reader is left on their own to ponder Chen She’s virtue, they are free to apply any teachings they like. Does it also perhaps keep Sima Qian’s history free of debates that might imperil it from being handed down? Is this what he means when he says at the end of the postface that he has not “’made’ a work such as Confucius did” (Postface 54, p.7b)?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Final 1

    1. What caused the feudal lords to believe that the Lord of the West received the mandate? (58mb) After the Lord of the West was released by Chow, he continued secretly carrying out good deeds (58mt). Since he was imprisoned by Chow, in the first place, because the latter believed his accumulating virtue to be a threat (57b-58t), his discretion made sense. But regardless, the feudal lords took notice and came to him for unbiased insights (58mt). When the Yu and Jui journeyed to Chou for help, they gained insight regarding their legal dispute without even needing to see the Lord of the West (58m). As they witnessed the farmers yielding on the boundary path, the people yielding to their elders, they felt something: ashamed (58m). The issue they were coming forth with was itself considered shameful by the Chou people, and as they had no interest in humiliating themselves, they turned back (58mb). This shame they felt led them to their solution: they followed the example of t...
Read more

Week 7

Tuesday, 10/10  In re-reading The Five Emperors this week, I was struck by the closing remarks, where Sima Qian describes the uncertainty surrounding the history of The Huang-Ti, stating that other scholars’ “words are not appropriate” and that “even civil officials or old masters would have trouble explaining” the history of The Huang-Ti (N17 2nd p.). His resulting account includes the “words which are the most appropriate” (N17 2nd p,b). What might Sima Qian mean by “appropriate”?  Perhaps an “appropriate” account is one that emphasizes virtue. Sima Qian’s account of The Five Emperors provides clear examples of the actions and characteristics of virtuous rulers. Sima Qian also remarks that his intent is that The Five Emperors be the first chapter of his “basic annals” (N17b). By making virtue the starting point, Sima Qian is showing us that virtuous government is in our nature, we only need to retrieve the virtuous nature shown in The Five Emperors. Sima Qian’s virtuous begi...
Read more

Conclusion

Nienhauser: Why can’t King Wu sleep? King Wu can’t sleep (63m) because he hasn’t “secured Heaven’s protection.” (63mb) At least according to Sima, it seems that he has done nothing but good works to the benefit of many. There is a hint on 62m that the area had been “pacified and the situation was not yet settled,” and so he sets to settling. He “cleared the roads and repaired…altars”, (62t) had his RectifierScribe read Chow’s crimes to Heaven (62mt), and claims he has been charged to, among other things, “receive the great mandate of heaven”. (62m) There are many more things he does on 62b-63t: He feeds the poor, honors the dead, makes records on behalf of the government, and rewarded the meritorious. These deeds are not enough, as nearing his own death, Sima relates that “the world was not yet settled.” (64m) Yin had failed as “heaven didn’t enjoy the Yin offerings” (63m): this left them vulnerable and led to King Wu’s “success.” (ibid.) Is Heaven hard to please, or is Wu missing so...
Read more