Số phận của nước Việt thời Xuân Thu – Chiến Quốc

Chú thích

This article had its inception as a presentation at the meeting of Warring States Project in conjunction with the Association for Asian Studies (AAS) in Boston on March 24, 2007. I am grateful to Dr. Bruce Brooks, the director of WSP, for providing both the venue for this presentation and the initial stimulus for engaging in this research.

  1. There is, for example, the tale of the grand tour of the courts of the northern and central states made in 544 BCE by Prince Jìzhá 季札 (the youngest son of King Shòu Mèng of Wú) in which he shows a grasp of music and ritual greatly surpassing that of his civilized hosts; see Zuŏzhuàn, Xiāng-gōng 29, Item 13. This appears to be one of the earlier examples of the topos of wisdom appearing in unlikely places.
  1. This placename is often pronounced “Kuàijī”; dictionaries, however, appear to prefer “Guìjī.”
  1. There are curious anomalies in the way Yuè is referred to in early texts. TheBamboo Annals uses the two-syllable form in almost every instance. The “Suǒyǐn” commentator in Shǐjì 41 uses the single-syllable form, but represents the word, not with the usual yuè 越, but with the yuè 粵 now generally associated with the culture and language of Guǎngzhōu.
  1. Chūnqiū, Xiāng-gōng 12, Entry 4.
  1. With regard to issues concerning the distinctive script of ancient Yuè, see Michele Thompson, “Scripts, Signs, and Swords: The Việt Peoples and the Origins of Nôm,”Sino-Platonic Papers, 101 (March, 2000).
  1. For all details in this paragraph and the ones that follow concerning China’s southeastern burialmound culture, I am indebted to a presentation on the subject given at the University of North Carolina on March 2, 2007 by professor Yáng Nán of the history department of the Central University for Nationalities in Beijing.
  1. Zhào Yè, Wú Yuè Chūnqiū, with translation and annotation by Zhāng Jué (Taibei: Táiwān Gǔjí Chūbăn shè, 1996), juàn 10 (“Gōu Jiàn Fā Wú Wàizhuàn”), p.486-87.
    1. The Shàokāng restoration story, with some variation in detail, actually occurs twice in Zuŏ-zhuàn, first in an admonition allegedy directed by Wèi Jiàng to Jìn Dào-gōng in 569 (Xiàng-gōng 4, second-to-last item) and then in an admonition allegedly delivered by Wǔ Zǐ Xū to Fūchāi in 494 (Ai-gōng 1, second item).
    1. Zhào Yè, Wú Yuè Chūnqiū, with translation and annotation by Zhāng Jué (Taibei: Táiwān Gǔjī Chūbǎn shè, 1996), juàn 6 (“Yuèwáng Wú Wàizhuàn”), pp. 283-85.
    1. Yáng Shànqún, Gōu Jiàn, Taipei: Zhīshūfáng Chūbănshè, 1993, pp. 3-4.
    1. Guóyǔ 16 (“Zhèng yǔ”) refers to Yuè and to another state (Kuǐ), as belonging to the surname (Mí ٪) of the rulers of Chǔ. In his notes to Guóyǔ 19 (“Wúyǔ) the Three Kingdoms commentator Wèi Zhāo says that Gōu Jiàn was “of the progeny ofZhūróng,” the fire god said to have been the ultimate ancestor of the kings of Chǔ. Mòzǐ, “Fēi Gōng Xià” says that the king of the state of Yuè (there characterized as one of the “four great powers of the era,” along with Qí, Jìn, and Chǔ) “sprang from Yǒu Jù” Sūn Yíràng has suggested, in his Mòzǐ Xiángū, that this is probably a reference to the Chǔ ruler Xióng Qú (c. 887 BCE). Shǐjì 40 (“Chǔ Shìjiā,” p.1692) says that Xióng Qú established his youngest son Zhí Cī as “Yuè Zhāng Wángˮ”. It is possible that this refers to the original enfieffment that lay behind the emergence of Yuè in later times. Shì Ben, a late Warring States text, also affirms the rulers of Yuè belonged to the Chǔ lineage. See Yáng Shànqún, Gōu Jiàn, Taipei: Zhīshūfáng Chūbănshè, 1993, pp. 5-6.
    1. The author of the “Suǒyǐn” notes appended to Shǐjì 41 at one point suggests that the triple recurrence in mid Warring States times of these initial “Wú”s may mean that it was a surname. This reflects a sinocentric misunderstanding of Yuè naming practices. A likelier possibility is that this wú meant “ruler” in Yuè, being cognate, perhaps, with “vua” in Mường and Vietnamese. Its placement at the beginning of each designation in which it occurs is quite in accord with Austroasiatic syntax.
    1. Zhào Yè, Wú Yuè Chūnqiū, with translation and annotation by Zhāng Jué (Taibei: Táiwān Gǔjí Chūbăn shè, 1996), juàn 4 (“Hélǘ Nèizhuàn”), p.135.
    1. The author of the “Zhèng Yì” commentary to Shǐjì 41, says that this ruler “expanded his territory, made his state great, and proclaimed himself wáng.”
    1. Shǐjì, (Beijing, Zhōnghuá Shūjú, 1959), juàn 41, “Yuèwáng Gōu Jiàn Shì Jiā,” p. 1751.
    1. Liú Jiànguó (editor and translator), Xīn Yì Yuèjuéshū (Taibei: Sānmín Shūjú, 1997), juàn 8 (Chapter 10), pp. 69-70. Scattered references to other Yuè rulers occur in Chapter 3 of this work in connection with various sites in the old capital area of Wú. These figures, however, are neither located in time nor arranged in chronological series, so it is not clear whether they were rulers of the principal Yuè state or of smaller Yuè groups. One such figure is “Yúfù Jūn”, said to have ruled a place called Fùchéng ; another is “Yuè Gān-wáng”ˮ who ruled Gānchéng, and another is “Wáng Shǐ” ˮ̦, associated with a large grave on Mount Yuān, and yet another is Yuè Jīng-wáng ˮ. Another site is said to be the grave of a Yuè king whose name was unknown to the 1st century CE writer. See Ibid, juàn 2, Chapter 4, pp. 42-66.
    1. This and all subsequent references to the Bamboo Annals are based on the text and translation contained in: James Legge, The Chinese Classics, Volume III: The Shoo King or The Book of Historical Documents (Hong Kong University Press Reprint Edition, 1960), Prolegomena, Chapter IV, pp.105 – 183. Due to a problem in Legge’s date conversion system, a one year error occurs in each dated entry; e.g. 471 BCE instead of 472; this problem has been corrected here.
    1. Yáng Shànqún, Gōu Jiàn, Taipei: Zhīshūfáng Chūbănshè, 1993, pp. 171-72.