Walking over the acres, and levying | 300 paces formed a le, and a square of part of the produce. Why is an entry made of this first levying part of the produce of the acres [generally]? To condemn it. What was there to condemn in it? The introduction of the system of walking over the acres, and levying part of the produce. What was there to condemn in the introduction of this system? Anciently a tithe was taken [for the State] by the mutual labour of the people on the public fields. Why did they anciently appoint this system? The tax of a tenth [thus procured] is the justest and most correct for all under the sky. If more than this tenth be taken, we have great Keehs and little Keehs. If less, we have great Mih and little Mih. A tithe is the justest and most correct for all under the sky. When a tithe is the system, the sounds of praise [everywhere] arise.' that size was called the nine-squares fields, consisting of 900 acres, of which the public fields formed one portion. If the yield from the private fields was not good, the officer of agriculture was blamed. If the yield from the public fields was not good, the people were blamed. [The record of this first levying part of the produce from all the acres blames the duke for putting away the system of the public fields, and walking over all the fields to take a tithe of them, because he thereby required from the people all their strength. Anciently, [the people] had their dwellings in the public fields; there were their wells and cooking places; there they grew their onions and scallions.' 成公三年四章。甲子新宮災, 三日哭。 The third year of duke Ch'ing, par. four. On Keah-tsze the new temple took fire, when we wailed for it 'Why is duke Seuen's temple called of [great] grief, but that grief was ac the new temple? cording to the rules of propriety. [The duke] could not bear to say [directly that it was his father's temple]. Why is it said that they wailed for it three days? It was a rule that, when a temple was burned, there should be a wailing for three days. Why was this entry of the burning of the new temple made? To record the calamity.’ In consequence of the near relationship, [the duke] did not dare to call it by his father's honorary title; thereby showing his respect. The language being respectful, and the grief great, there is no condemnation of duke Ch'ing to be sought here.' 襄公七年十章。鄭伯髠頑如 會,未見諸侯,丙戍卒于颡。 The seventh year of duke Sëang, par. ten. K'wăn-hwan, earl of Ch'ing, went to the meeting; but before he had seen the [other] princes, on Ping-seuh he died at Ts'aou. 公羊傳日,操者何。鄭之邑」穀梁傳日,未見諸侯,其日 如會, 何也,致其志也。 也。 諸侯卒其封內,不地,此 何以地,隱之也。 禮諸侯不生名,此其生名, 何也。卒之名也。 卒之名,則何為加之如會 之上,見以如會卒也。 其大夫弒之.曷為不言其」其見以如會卒, 何也。鄭 大夫弒之,為中國諱也。 伯將會中國,其臣欲從楚, 曷為為中國諱。鄭伯將會不勝其臣,弒而死。 諸侯于郤,其大夫諫曰,中 其不言弑,何也。不使夷狄 國不足歸也, 則不若與楚。之民加乎中國之君也, 鄭伯曰,不可。其大夫日,以其地,於外也,其日,未踰 中國爲義, 則伐我要以中 竟也, 日卒時葬,正也。 國為彊,則不若楚。於是弑 之。 鄭伯髠原何以名。傷而反 未至乎舍而卒。 The Chuen of Kuh-leang says:-'As he had not seen the [other] princes, how is it said that he went to the meeting? To express fully his purpose. According to the rules, princes were 未見諸侯,其言如會何。not named when they were alive;-why 致其意也。 The Chuen of Kung-yang says:- 'What was Ts'aou? A city of Ch'ing. is he so named here? Because of his death. If he is named because of his death, why is the name placed before the statement When a prince died anywhere within that he went to the meeting? his own territories, the place was not mentioned; -why is it mentioned here? To conceal the fact. To conceal what fact? His murder. Who murdered him? His great officers. Why does not the text say so? To show that he died through going to the meeting. How does it show that he died through going to the meeting? The earl of Ch'ing was going to meet [the princes of] the Middle States, and his ministers wished him to follow Ts'oo. Not succeeding, they murdered him, and The thing is concealed on account of he died. the Middle States? Why so? When the earl of Ch'ing was about to go to the meeting of the States in Wei, his great officers remonstrated with him, saying, "The Middle States are not worth adhering to; you had better join with Ts'oo.' When the earl objected to this counsel, they said, " If you think | that the Middle States are righteous, they [notwithstanding] invaded us when we were mourning [for the last earl]; if you say that they are strong, yet they are not so strong as Ts'oo." With this they murdered him. Why is he named-" the earl of Ch'ing, K'wǎn-yuen?" [To express sorrow] that having been wounded, and being on his return [to his capital], he died before he reached his halting place. As he did not see the [other] princes, why is it said that he went to the meet ing? To express fully his purpose.' Why is it not mentioned that he was murdered? Not to allow it to appear that barbarous people (i. e., the ministers who wished to follow the barbarous Ts'oo) had dealt so with a prince of the Middle States. The place was outside [the capital]; on the day he had not crossed the borders [of the State]; the day of his death and the time of his burial [are given, as if all] had been correct.’ 二十有五年十章。十有二月, 吳子遏伐楚門于巢卒。 The twenty-fifth year, tenth par. In the 12th month, Goh, viscount of Woo, invaded Ts'oo, and died in an attack on one of the gates of Ch'aou. 公羊傳曰,門于巢卒者,何, 入門乎巢而卒也。 入門乎巢而卒者,何,入巢 之門而卒也。 吳子謁何以名,傷而未反 至乎舍而卒也。 穀梁傳日,以伐楚之事,門 于巢卒也。 于巢者,外乎楚也,門于巢 乃伐楚也。 諸侯不生名,取卒之名 加之伐楚之上者,見以伐 其見以伐楚卒,何也。 者,大國過小邑,小邑必 城而請罪,禮也,吳子謁伐 楚至巢入其門,門人射 子,有矢創,反舍而卒,古者 雖有文事,必有武備,非 之不飾城而請罪,非吳子 之自輕也。 The Chuen of Kuh-leaug says:-'In consequence of being engaged in an invasion of Ts'oo, he attacked one of the gates of Ch'aou and died. The words "of (or, at) Ch'aou" show that that place was outside Ts'oo. By attacking the gates of Ch'aon, he [would be able to] invade Ts'oo. A prince was not named when alive. Here the name, properly given to him when dead, is taken and placed before his invasion of Ts'oo, to show that it was in consequence of that invasion that he died. How does it show that it was through his invasion of Ts'oo that he died? Anciently, when [the army of] a great State was passing by a small city, the rule was that that small city should man its walls and ask what was its offence. Yeh, the viscount of Woo, in [proceeding to] invade Ts'oo, came to Ch'aou, and entered one of its gates, when the gatekeeper shot him, so that he returned to the station [of his troops], wounded by an arrow, and died. Although an undertaking be of a civil nature, there should be at the same time military preparation. [The entry] condemns Ch'aou for not manning its walls and asking what was its offence, [and also] condemns the viscount of Woo for his careless exposure of himself.' 昭公四年,三章。四章秋,七月,楚 子、蔡侯、陳侯、許男,頓子,胡子,沈 子,淮夷、伐吳執齊慶封殺之。 The fourth year of duke Ch'aou, parr. 3 and 4. In autumn, in the seventh month, the viscount of Ts'oo, the marquises of Ts'ae and Ch'in, the baron of Heu, the viscounts of Tun, Hoo, and Shin, and the Hwae tribes, invaded Woo. They seized K'ing Fung of Ts'e, and put him to death. 公羊傳曰,此伐吳也,其言穀梁傳日,此入而殺, 其 執齊慶封何,為齊誅也。 不言入,何也。慶封封平吳 其不言伐鍾離何也。不與 其為齊誅奈何慶封走至鍾離。 吳,吳封之於防。 然則曷為不言伐防。不與吳封也。 諸侯專封也。 慶封之罪何,脅齊君而亂 齊國也。 慶封其以齊氏何也為 齊討也 靈王使人以慶封 合於軍中日,有若齊慶封 The Chuen of Kung-yang says: This 弒其君者乎。慶封日子 was an invasion of Woo; how is it that 息我且一言日,有若楚公 the paragraph tells us of the seizure of King Fung of Ts'e? 子圍弒其兄之子而代之 He was taken off in behalf of Ts'e. 為君者乎。軍人粲然皆笑。 How was it that he was taken off in 慶封弒其君,而不以弒君 behalf of Ts'e? King Fung had run away to Woo, 之罪罪之者,慶封不為 and Woo had invested him with Fang. In that case why is it not said that they invaded Fang? Not to allow to the feudal princes the right of granting investiture. What was the crime of King Fung? He had exercised a pressure on the ruler of Ts'e, and thrown that State into confusion.' 王服也,不與楚討也,春秋 之義,用貴賤,用賢治不 肯,不以亂治亂也,孔子曰. 懷惡而討,雖死不服,其斯 之謂與。 The Chuen of Kuh-lëang says:-'Here they must have entered [the place where King Fung was] and slain [him];—why does the text not mention that entering? King Fung had been invested with Chung-le of Woo. Why does it not say that they invaded Chung-le? Not to allow to Woo the right of granting investiture. Why is "Ts'e" put before "King Fung" like a clan-name? [To show that] he was punished in behalf of Ts'e. King Ling sent a man to go round the army with him, and proclaim, "Is there anyone like King Fung of Ts'e who murdered his ruler?" K'ing Fung said to the man, “ Stop a moment; I also have a word to say." With this he cried out,“Is there anyone, who, like the Kung-tsze Wei of Ts'oo, murdered the son of his elder brother, and made |