1. Kern, Martin, “Methodological Reflections on the Analysis of Textual Variants and the Modes of Manuscript Production in Early China,” Journal of the East Asian Archaeology 4.1–4 (2002), 143–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Putting aside for the time being the question of the authenticity and reliability of the received texts, we should immediately notice that accounts about Qin are all but absent from the Zuo zhuan 左傳 and the Guo yu 國語, that Qin is rarely mentioned in the writings of most of the rival thinkers of the Zhanguo age, and that even the five Qin-related juan of the Zhanguo ce 戰國策 focus almost exclusively on court intrigues at the expense of information about other aspects of life of this state.

3. For a partial summary of Qin-related epigraphic sources, see Hui, Wang 王輝 and Xuehua, Cheng 程學華, Qin wenzi jizheng 秦文字集證 (Taibei: Yinwen, 1999)Google Scholar, and Wang Hui's additions in his “Qin chutu wenxian biannian xubu (yi)” 《秦出土文獻編年》續補 (一), Qin wenhua luncong 秦文化論叢, ed. Qin Shihuang bingmayong bowuguan Luncong bianwei hui 秦始皇兵馬俑博物館《論叢》編委會, 9 (2002), 512–49; see also Kern, Martin, The Stele Inscriptions of Ch'in Shih-huang: Text and Ritual in Early Chinese Imperial Representation (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 2000)Google Scholar. Among later discoveries the most important are doubtless the local archives from imperial Qin unearthed in June 2002 in Liye 里耶, Hunan. For preliminary reports of these materials, see Hunan sheng wenwu kaogu yanjiu suo 湖南省文物考古研究所 et al., “Hunan sheng Longshan Liye Zhanguo—Qin dai gucheng yihao jing fajue jianbao” 湖南龍山里耶戰國——秦代古城一號井發掘簡報, Wenwu 文物 2003.1, 4–35 Google Scholar and Xueqin, Li 李學勤, “Chudu Liye Qin jian” 初讀里耶秦簡, Wenwu 2003.1, 73–81 Google Scholar.

4. Hereafter all dates are Before Common Era unless indicated otherwise.

5. The term “Chinese” is certainly anachronistic with regard to pre-imperial “China” and is used here only as a scholarly convention to designate the Zhou 周 cultural realm, the educated elite of which usually referred to themselves as the Xia 夏.

6. Cited from Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 63 Google Scholar. For early statements about Qin's alleged alien features, see Wentong, Meng 蒙文通, “Qin wei Rong zu kao” 秦為戎族考, Yu gong 禹貢 6.7 (1936), 17–20 Google Scholar; cf. Bodde, Derk, China's First Unifier: A Study of the Ch'in Dynasty as Seen in the Life of Li Ssu 李斯 280–208 B.C. (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1967), 2ffGoogle Scholar; for the most radical recent representation of this view, see Yutao, Liu 劉雨濤, “Qin yu Huaxia wenhua” 秦與華夏文化, Kongzi yanjiu 孔子研究 1988.2, 61–67 Google Scholar; For an alternative interpretation of textual data, particularly of the Qin annals in the Shi ji, see Michimasa, Yoshimoto 吉本道雅, “Shin shi kenkyū josetsu” 秦史研究序說, Shirin 史林 78.3 (1995), 34–67 Google Scholar; for an attempt to trace changes in Qin's cultural identity on the basis of textual sources, see, e.g., He, Wang 王和, Zhongguo zhengzhi tongshi: Cong bangguo dao diguo de Xian Qin zhengzhi 中國政治通史: 從邦國到帝國的先秦政治 (Jinan: Taishan chubanshe, 2003), 230–61Google Scholar. For an archeological study that emphasizes Qin's otherness, see, e.g., Xiaofen, Huang 黃曉芬, “Shin no bosei to sono kigen” 秦の墓制とその起源, Shirin 史林 74.6 (1991), 103–44Google Scholar. For an alternative view based on the exploration of archeological data, see, e.g., Wei, Han 韓偉, “Guanyu Qin ren zushu ji wenhua yuanyuan guanjian” 關於秦人族屬及文化淵源管見, Wenwu 1986.4, 23–28 Google Scholar; Zhongyi, Yuan 袁仲一, “Cong kaogu ziliao kan Qin wenhua de fazhan he zhuyao chengjiu” 從考古資料看秦文化的發展和主要成就, Qin wenhua luncong, ed. Qin Shi huang bingmayong bowuguan yanjiu shi 秦始皇兵馬俑博物館研究室, 1 (1993), 28–49 Google Scholar. Qin cultural identity is comprehensively discussed by Lothar von Falkenhausen in “Diversity and Integration along the Western Peripheries of Late Bronze Age China: Archaeological Perspectives on the State of Qin (771–209 BC)” (unpublished ms), and idem, “Mortuary Behavior in Pre-imperial Qin: A Religious Interpretation,” in Religion and Chinese Society, vol. 1, ed. John Lagerwey (Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 2004), 109–72.

7. See e.g. Ling, Li 李零, “Qin Yin dao bing yuban de yanjiu” 秦駰禱病玉版的研究 in Ling, Li, Zhongguo fangshu xukao 中國方術續考 (Beijing: Dongfang, 2001), 451–74Google Scholar; Jiahao, Li 李家浩, “Qin Yin yuban mingwen yanjiu” 秦駰玉版銘文研究, Beijing daxue Zhongguo guwenxian yanjiu zhongxin jikan 北京大學中國古文獻研究中心集刊 (2001), 99–128 Google Scholar; Xueqin, Li 李學勤, “Qin yudu suoyin” 秦玉牘索隱, Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宮博物院院刊 2000.2, 41–45 Google Scholar; Hui, Wang 王輝, “Qin Zengsun Yin gao Hua Da shan mingshen wen kaoshi” 秦曾孫駰告華大山明神文考釋, Kaogu xuebao 考古學報 2001.2, 143–57Google Scholar. I follow these scholars in treating the prayers inscribed on each of the tablets as identical; for minor, albeit interesting orthographical differences between them, see Xiantong, Zeng 曾憲通, Zesheng, Yang 楊澤生 and Yi, Xiao 肖毅, “Qin Yin yuban wenzi chutan” 秦駰玉版文字初探, Kaogu yu wenwu 考古與文物 2001.1, 49–54 Google Scholar; cf. Wolfgang Behr, “Orison in jade—Reading the Zengsun Yin inscriptions,” paper presented at the Second Hamburg Tomb Text Workshop, Hamburg, February 2004. According to Lian Shaoming 連劭名, the tablets were purchased by the Shanghai Museum: see Lian, , “Qin Huiwen Wang daoci Huashan yujian wen yanjiu” 秦惠文王禱祠華山玉簡文研究, Zhongguo lishi bowuguan guankan 中國歷史博物館館刊, 2001.1, 49 Google Scholar.

8. Both epithets of Yin should be interpreted ritually: “the great-grandson” was an appropriate designation of the ruler who sacrificed to terrestrial deities; “a small child” here and “a toddler” below are modest expressions which do not indicate Yin's actual age but rather his ritual position versus his ancestors, and perhaps also versus the deity to whom the prayer is addressed. See a detailed discussion in Fengwu, Zhou 周鳳五, “‘Qin Huiwen Wang daoci Huashan yuban’ xintan” 《秦惠文王禱祠華山玉版》新探, Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊 72.1 (2001), 217–31Google Scholar; cf. Jiahao, Li, “Qin Yin yuban,” 109–12Google Scholar.

9. Wang Hui interprets these four characters differently; in his version they should read: “The epidemic (or the illness) aggravates, and spreads again.”

10. In translating this sentence I follow suggestions of Li Jiahao.

11. “Four apices” (si ji 四极) are identified by Li Jiahao as “[deities] of the four directions” (si fang 四方); three luminaries are Sun, Moon and the stars; for contesting identifications of the “five objects of sacrifice,” see Fengwu, Zhou, “Qin Huiwen Wang,” 223–24Google Scholar.

12. For the importance of the purity of sacrificial objects, see Robin D.S. Yates, “Purity and Pollution in Early China,” Zhongguo kaoguxue yu lishixue zhenghe yanjiu 中國考古學與歷史學整合研究. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, 4 (1997), 479–536. Note that below purity is identified as one of the important features of the deity to whom the pledge is addressed.

13. Although the characters are generally legible, this sentence is one of the most debated in the entire inscription. First, both Li Ling and Li Xueqin read shi 士 (Gentleman) as tu 土 (earth, local). Second, Li Xueqin reads shi 氏 (“Mister, lineage name”) as min 民 (“people”), while Wang Hui considers it as a substitute for shi 是 (“thus; therefore”). Li Xueqin, Wang Hui and Li Jiahao are evidently misled by the reference to the punitive law in a Qin inscription, which immediately suggests in their eyes a reference to one of the so-called Legalists (fa jia 法家). Therefore, Li Xueqin suggests: 東方又（有）土姓，為刑法民，其名曰經 (“There is a person from a local family in the east, who models the people by the punitive law; his name is Canon”). Wang Hui suggests: 東方又（有）士，姓（生）為刑法，氏（是）其名曰經 (“There is a Gentleman in the East, who gave birth to the punitive law; thus his name is Canon”). I follow Li Ling's assertion that the topic of the sentence is a deity (to whom a declaration follows in the next sentence); but I accept Wang Hui's reading of the disputed third character as shi and not tu, and also slightly modify Li Ling's punctuation. It should be noted that by the late Zhanguo period the initial difference between xing 姓 (“family, i.e., clan name”) and shi 氏 (“lineage name”) had largely disappeared, and the phrase A's xing is B shi became relatively widespread. See Yanxia, 雁俠, Zhongguo zaoqi xingshi zhidu yanjiu 中國早期姓氏制度研究 (Tianjin: Guji, 1996), 193–99Google Scholar. Lian Shaoming in the revision of his earlier reading suggested that the sentence refers to the deity, whom he identifies not as the deity of the Mountain Hua, but as a spirit of Gao Yao 皐陶. See his “Qin Huiwen Wang daoci Huashan yujian wen yanjiu buzheng” 秦惠文王禱祠華山玉簡文研究補正, Zhongguo lishi bowuguan guankan, 2001.2, 52–54 Google Scholar.

14. It is possible to read here 正 as 政, in which case “correctness” should be emended to “proper rule.”

15. This is an approximate translation, the characters are partly illegible.

16. I follow Wang Hui's identification of the character after ji 吉 as zao 璅, which is identified in the Shuowen jiezi 說文解字as a “jade-like” stone 石之似玉者 ( Shen, Xu 許慎, Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注, annotated by Yucai, Duan 段玉裁 [Shanghai: Guji chubanshe, 1991], 1.17)Google Scholar.

17. The sentence is problematic due to the highly contested group of characters that follow the character ci 賜 (“confer, grant, bestow”). Li Jiahao, Lian Shaoming and Wang Hui suggest that the first two characters of the group are bayue八月 (“eighth month”), which is then followed by a date (Lian Shaoming reads it as jisi 己巳, while Wang Hui suggests jiyou 己酉). But this reading makes the text partly meaningless: it is unclear why the date should interrupt a sentence in which the donor hopes that the Mountain will cure his illness. Li Xueqin, whose transliteration I follow here, leaves a lacuna after ci, reading the next character not as ji 己, but as yi 已 (“to stop”).

18. The sentence is unclear. Li Jiahao suggests that “a family” (jia 家) refers here and below in the text to a sacrificial unit submitted by the commoners, but this explanation is problematic. Two sentences which end with identical “preceding them with one jade disk” clearly enumerate different sacrificial items submitted by the author of the prayer, and it is unlikely that some mysterious “three persons” would suddenly become a subject of the sentence. Wang Hui asserts that the sacrificial item of one jia consisted of three human figurines. Li Ling, followed by Zeng Xiantong et al., read 家 as 駕, which in this case will refer to the chariot mentioned earlier. It is not impossible that humans were sacrificed to the mountain, since evidence of human sacrifices in non-mortuary contexts exists in the Chunqiu-Zhanguo state of Qin, as exemplified by the presence of a pit of human victims near the Qin ancestral temple at Yong 雍, the Qin capital between 677 and 383 (see von Falkenhausen, Lothar, “The Waning of the Bronze Age: Material Culture and Social Developments, 770–481 b.c.,” in The Cambridge History of Ancient China, ed. Loewe, Michael and Shaughnessy, Edward L. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999], 459 Google Scholar; Zhanyue, Huang 黄展岳, Zhongguo gudai de rensheng renxun 中國古代的人牲人殉 [Beijing: Wenwu, 1990], 210)Google Scholar. I am unaware, however, of sacrificial rites in which the entire family would be sacrificed.

19. The character before the name of Mt Hua is unclear, I accept Li Jiahao's reading of this character as fu 覆 (“to bury”).

20. Zeng Xiantong et al. interpret the term jiu 咎 here not as a “punishment” but as 咎徵, an “evil portent”; Wolfgang Behr suggests “inauspicious.”

21. The last sentence is again extremely problematic, since many characters are only partly legible; I tentatively follow Li Xueqin's suggestions, adopting Wang Hui's reading for the two partly illegible characters after 人壹 as jiashi 家室. An alternative reading divides the last sentences differently: 故告大令、大將軍：人壹家室，王室相如 (“Thus, I declare to the great leader, the great commander: each family and the royal family will do the same”). In that case the terms da ling 大令 (or, as Li Ling suggests, Taiyi 大一) and da jiangjun 大將軍 are the names of the deity. Yet another, albeit not very convincing, option was proposed by Liu Jinhua 劉金華, who suggested that the da X (he did not identify the problematic character) and da jiangjun are the names of yet another two deities, to whom the sick king turns after his illness was not cured by the spirit of Mountain Hua. See his “Lun Qin Yin yudu yanjiu sizhong ji qi xiangguan wenti” 論秦駰玉牘研究四种及其相關問題, Hanzhong shifan xueyuan xuebao 漢中師範學院學報 20.1 (2002), 42–48 Google Scholar. For more about worship of the Mount Hua deities, see Dudbridge, Glen, Religious Experience and Lay Society in T'ang China: A Reading of Tai Fu's Kuang-i chi (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 86–116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22. The nature of the character tabooing during the Qin period is still a controversial matter. Hui, Wang (“Qin Zengsun Yin,” 154)Google Scholar asserts that the character zheng 正 was strictly avoided in the official publications, and hence its presence in the prayer suggests its pre-imperial origin. Alternatively, Kageyama Terukuni 影山煇國 opines that the strict avoidance of the character 正 began only after the death of the First Emperor in 210 (see his “Shindai hiki shotan” 秦代避諱初探, Sochi shutsudo shiryō to Chūgoku kodai bunka 楚地出土資料と中國古代文化, ed. kenkyūkai, Kakuten Sokan 郭店楚簡研 究會 [Tōkyō: Kyūko shoin, 2002], 571–94)Google Scholar.

23. See Wang Hui, “Qin Zengsun Yin,” 153–54. Zeng Xiantong et al. and Xu Jiuting 徐筱婷 (“Qin Yin yuban yanjiu” 秦駰玉版研究, Di shisanjie quanguo ji haixia liang'an Zhongguo wenzixue xueshu yantaohui 第十三屆全國暨海峽兩岸中國文字學學術研討會 [Taibei: Wanjuan lou, 2002[, 77–88 Google Scholar) agree with Wang's dating, while Zhou Fengwu suggests that the characters are roughly identical with those of the “Clay Document”; hence, he concludes that the jade tablets should be dated to King Huiwen's reign.

24. See Xidan, Sun 孫希旦, Li ji jijie 禮記集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1996), 6.141 Google Scholar (“Qu li xia” 曲禮下).

25. See the detailed discussion in Fengwu, Zhou, “Qin Huiwen Wang,” 219–24Google Scholar; Jiahao, Li, “Qin Yin yuban,” 109–14Google Scholar. Moreover, Hui, Wang (“Qin Zengsun Yin,” 154–55)Google Scholar identifies the sacrifice to Mountain Hua as a wang 望 sacrifice, i.e., a sacrifice to the spirits of mountains and rivers under the jurisdiction of the local overlord. Such prayers, which were performed particularly in cases of state emergency, were also the exclusive prerogative of the ruler. See Zhou li zhushu 周禮注疏, annotated by Xuan, Zheng 鄭玄 and Gongyan, Jia 賈公彥, Shisanjing zhushu 十三經注疏, ed. Yuan, Ruan 阮元 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1991), 18.763–64Google Scholar. Alternatively, it is possible to interpret the prayer as a personal appeal by the king (or one of his siblings) to the deity, and not a public wang sacrifice (I am grateful to Lothar von Falkenhausen for making this suggestion); but even in that case the ritual language of the prayer strongly supports the identification of the donor as a reigning king.

26. The first mention of Si as King Huiwen's name is by Gao You 高誘 (fl. 205 c.e.) in his glosses on the Lüshi chunqiu 呂氏春秋. See Qiyou, Chen 陳奇猷, Lüshi chunqiu jiaoshi 呂氏春秋校釋 (Shanghai: Xuelin, 1990), 59n20Google Scholar (“Qu si” 去私 1.5); see also Ye, Fan 范 曄, Hou Han shu 後漢書, annotated by Xian, Li 李賢 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1997), 87.2876 Google Scholar and Sima Zhen's 司馬貞 gloss in Sima Qian 司馬遷 et al., Shi ji, annotated by Zhang Shoujie 張守節, Sima Zhen 司馬貞 and Pei Yin 裴駰 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1997) 5. 205. Jiuting, Xu (“Qin Yin yuban yanjiu,” 79–80 Google Scholar) argues that the difference between Yin 駰 and Si 駟 is too obvious to allow for a substitution of one character for another.

27. Xueqin, Li (“Qin yudu,” 42–44)Google Scholar, who dates the inscription to King Huiwen's age, suggests that the sentence “the Zhou house has now vanished” refers to the ritual “destruction” of the Zhou as a result of massive usurpation of the royal title by contending overlords in the years 334–18; Jiahao, Li (“Qin Yin yuban,” 116–19)Google Scholar, in turn, suggests that the demise of Zhou refers to the division of the royal domain into two competing parts in the mid-fourth century. Both assertions are problematic, however, since they are not supported by any textual evidence. Both scholars furthermore do not explain why then the script of the jade tablets is visibly later than that of the “Clay Document” from King Huiwen's age.

28. Hui, Wang (“Qin Zengsun Yin,” 153–54)Google Scholar suggests that the donor may be either an unidentified member of the royal house or one of the kings, in which case Yin would be the donor's cognomen (zi 字). The first supposition is at odds with the donor's ritual position. The second is not supported by any corroborative evidence. Alternatively, Zeng Xiantong et al. (“Qin Yin yuban wenzi chutan”) identified the donor as King Zhuang 秦莊王 (r. 249–247), whose known name is Zi Chu 子楚. The authors argue that Zi Chu should be a cognomen, while the king's given name is Yin 駰. The major flaw in this otherwise convincing argument, is that we know that under King Zhuang's son, the future First Emperor, Qin tabooed the character “chu” 楚—and this taboo would not have existed if the character “chu” had not been a part of the late king's name. If, however, Kageyama is right in his assertion that we cannot prove the existence of the taboo on the character “chu” (“Shindai hiki shotan”), then Zeng's suggestion may be adopted.

29. See Kern, Stele Inscriptions.

30. For the reconstruction of the inscription's original phonetics and the discussion of its rhymes, see Behr, “Orison in jade.”

31. See Mao shi zhengyi 毛詩正義, in Shisanjing zhushu 十三經注疏, ed. Ruan Yuan 阮元, 12.447c (“Yu wu zheng” 雨無正) (Mao 194).

32. For the earlier usage of the pronoun jue, see Takashima, Ken'ichi, “The So-called ‘Third’-Person Pronoun jue 氒 (= 厥) in Classical Chinese,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 119.3 (1999), 404–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33. For the tripartite division of bronze inscriptions, see von Falkenhausen, Lothar, “Issues in Western Zhou Studies: A Review Article,” Early China 18 (1993), 154 Google Scholar; for the Qin steles, see Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 146–47Google Scholar.

34. It is interesting to compare this negotiation with the deity with an anecdote told in the Han Feizi, according to which King Zhao of Qin 秦昭王 (r. 306–251) punished the heads of local communities for independently deciding to sacrifice oxen in a pledge to relieve the ruler of his illness (Wang Xianshen 王先慎, Han Feizi jijie 韓非子集解 [Beijing: Zhonghua, 1998], 35.335–37 [“Wai chushuo youxia” 外儲說右下]). Han Feizi interprets this odd behavior of the king as a manifestation of the “Legalist” principle of eradicating the need in the people's affection toward the ruler; but in light of the Mountain Hua's prayer, a new interpretation may be offered. By offering oxen to the deities for the sake of the ill king on their own initiative, the community leaders effectively decreased the bargaining power of the king, who could have hoped to trade his power to order universal performance of the sacrifices for the deity's help.

35. Lüshi chunqiu, 705 (“Jin ting” 謹聼 13.5).

36. See, e.g., Lüshi chunqiu, 979–80 (“Hui guo” 悔過 16.4); 1013 (“Qu you” 去宥 16.7); 1212 (“Ying yan” 應言 18.7); 1491–92 (“Wu yi” 無義 22.2).

37. I am grateful to one of the anonymous reviewers of this article for this suggestion.

38. Mountain Hua and the adjacent territory of Yin Jin 陰晉 (renamed later into Ning Qin 寧秦) was acquired by Qin in 332 or 331 from the state of Wei 魏; originally the territory belonged to the Zhou royal domain; later it was contested by Jin and Qin (see Dudbridge, Glen, Religious Experience and Lay Society, 86–87 text and note 2Google Scholar). The spirit of the mountain was perhaps supposed to be particularly supportive of the Zhou house. The need in “sincerity” and “trustworthiness” when dealing with the deities was considered, at least from the Chunqiu period onwards, as the most crucial precondition for obtaining a positive response to the sacrificial pledge; see, for instance Bojun, Yang 楊伯峻, Chun qiu Zuo zhuan zhu 春秋左傳注 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1981)Google Scholar, Huan 6.111–12, Zhao 20.1415–16 (hereafter Zuo). For the emphasis on “sincerity” in the Chunqiu bronze inscriptions, see Haruki, Emura 江村治樹, “Shunjū jidai seidōki meibun no shoshiki to yōgo no jidaiteki hensen” 春秋時代青銅器銘文の書式と用語の時代變遷, Nagoya daigaku bungakubu kenkyū ronshū, 37 (1991), 55–56 Google Scholar.

39. Shi ji 4.159; cf. 5.201.

40. For these, see the discussion by Zhongxi, Zhu 祝中熹, “Chunqiu Qin shi sankao” 春秋秦史三考, Sichou zhi lu 絲綢之路 (1999), 55–59 Google Scholar.

41. Shi ji 5.202; 15.685; for Sima Qian's views of Qin history, see Pines, Yuri, “Biases and their Sources: Qin History in the Shiji ,” Oriens Extremus 45 (2005, forthcoming)Google Scholar.

42. For the text of the inscription on the eight Qin bells, see Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 85–86 Google Scholar; for other inscriptions that proclaim Qin's possession of the Mandate, see Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 73–92 Google Scholar. I follow Kern's dating of these inscriptions.

43. For more about Qin rulers' views of Heaven's mandate, see Zhifei, Zang 臧知非, “Qin ren de shouming yishi yu Qin guo de fazhan—Qin Gong-zhong mingwen tanwei” 秦人的受命意識與秦國的發展——秦公鐘銘文探微, Qin wenhua luncong 8 (2001), 243–60Google Scholar. An apparent contradiction between claims of the Qin rulers to the mandate and their continuous alliance with the Zhou may be resolved should we take into consideration that during the Chunqiu-Zhanguo periods the compound Tianming 天命 was employed in a variety of contexts, beginning with personal destiny and ending with an overlord's right to reign in his state. Assertive as they are, the declarations of the lords of Qin do not necessarily hint at replacing the Zhou kings. For these reasons I disagree with Yoshimoto Michimasa who argues (“Shin shi kenkyū josetsu,” 55–58) that Qin rulers viewed themselves as “Sons of Heavens” (tianzi 天子), whose Mandate extended to “All under Heaven” (tianxia 天下). Yoshimoto neither explains why throughout Qin's history its rulers refrained from explicitly naming themselves “Sons of Heaven,” nor does he notice a basic contradiction between the Qin rulers’ self-reference in the Mandate-claiming inscriptions as mere “lords” (gong 公), and the supposed usurpation of the tianzi title.

44. For the discussion of this epigraphic evidence, see Wang, and Cheng, , Qin wenzi jizheng, 89–90 and 133–35Google Scholar; for the dating of the chime-stones and the drums' inscriptions, see Wang and Cheng, 81–143; for a detailed discussion of Qin stone drums, see Mattos, Gilbert L., The Stone Drums of Ch'in (Nettetal: Steyler Verlag, 1988)Google Scholar; Mattos tentatively dates the drums' inscription to the sixth to fifth century (see the discussion on pp. 325–63); for the translation of the inscription on the chime-stones, see Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 89–92 Google Scholar.

45. The Zuo zhuan 左傳 records a single routine foreign visit of the Zhou king, to the state of Guo 虢 in 673 (Zuo, Zhuang 21.217–18).

46. It is clear that these visits did not result from Qin rulers' bullying the Zhou kings in the manner reminiscent of Lord Wen of Jin 晉文公 (r. 636–628), who had summoned King Xiang of Zhou to the inter-state meeting in 632 (Zuo, Xi 28.473). During the sixth and especially the fifth centuries Qin's power was at its nadir, and it was certainly not in a position to impose its will on the Zhou kings. Suffice it to mention that Mozi 墨子 (c. 460–390) omits Qin from his discussions of the contemporary superpowers, indicating thereby its relative weakness. See Yujiang, Wu 吳毓江, Mozi jiaozhu 墨子校注 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1994), 18.203–4Google Scholar (“Fei gong zhong” 非攻中).

47. Another piece of evidence for continuation of Qin-Zhou amicable ties throughout the Chunqiu period is the Huaihou 懷后 chime-stones inscription. This inscription, fragments of which survived only in Song 宋 (960–1279 ce) collections of rubbings, was recently discussed by Li Xueqin, who approved its authenticity and identified the author as the spouse of one of the Chunqiu period Qin lords. The inscription mentions a grant of a token of approval to the lord of Qin (or to his spouse) by the Zhou queen, adding thereby another dimension to our perspective of Qin-Zhou relations. See Xueqin, Li, “Qin Huaihou qing yanjiu” 秦怀后磬研究, Wenwu 2001.1, 53–55 Google Scholar.

48. Qian, Sima (Shi ji 5.202, echoed in Shi ji 15.685)Google Scholar opined: 秦僻在雍州，不與中國諸侯之會盟 “Qin was remote in Yongzhou and did not participate in meetings and alliances with overlords from the Central States.” This well-known remark is puzzling, since by recognizing Qin's location as “remote” Sima Qian did not only ignore Yongzhou being an old Zhou heartland but seemingly passed a negative judgment on the location of his own Han capital, Chang'an 長安, located as it was in the old Qin lands. For possible reasons for Sima Qian's adoption of the “eastern” outlook, see Pines, “Biases and their Sources.”

49. For the discussion of this document, see Zhongyi, Yuan 袁仲一, “Du Qin Huiwen wang sinian washu” 讀秦惠文王四年瓦書, Qin wenhua luncong 1 (1993), 275–85Google Scholar.

50. Shi ji 5.205 Google Scholar; 15.727.

51. See the transcription in Kuan, Yang 楊寬, Zhanguo shi 戰國史 (Shanghai: Renmin, 1998), 208 Google Scholar.

52. See Hubei sheng Jingsha tielu kaogu dui 湖北省荊沙鐵路考古隊, Baoshan Chu jian 包山楚簡 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1991), 17ffGoogle Scholar.

53. For the impact of Lord Huiwen's usurpation of the royal title on contemporary political dynamics, see Kōmei, Ishii 石井宏明, Dong-Zhou wangchao yanjiu 東周王朝研究 (Beijing: Zhongyang minzu daxue, 1999), 98–103 Google Scholar.

54. See detailed discussion in Rongzeng, Wu 吳榮曾, “Dong Zhou Xi Zhou liangguo shi yanjiu” 東周西周兩國史研究, in Rongzeng, Wu, Xian Qin liang Han shi yanjiu 先秦兩漢史研究 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1995), 133–47Google Scholar.

55. See, for example, Shi ji 4.167; 40.1733–34. For the political importance of the Zhou kings during the last century of the royal house, see also Jianzhang, He 何建章, Zhanguo ce zhushi 戰國策注釋 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991), 3.7, 102–3Google Scholar (“Qin ce” 秦策 1); 12.1, 422–23 (“Qi ce” 齊策 5).

56. See Ishii, , Dong-Zhou, 127–79Google Scholar. The only exception was the attempt by the notorious King Min of Qi 齊閔王 (r. 300–283) to usurp the title of Son of Heaven, but his claims were rejected even by the weakest of his neighbors, Lu 魯 and Zou 鄒; see Zhanguo ce, 20.13, 737 Google Scholar (“Zhao ce” 趙策 3).

57. The ongoing ritual prestige of the Zhou kings explains the lasting political importance of the Sons of Heaven well into the reign of King Nan. Thus, when the state of Zhongshan 中山 planned an invasion of its neighbor, Yan 燕, in the wake of the usurpation of Yan's throne by Zi Zhi 子之 in 316–314, King Cuo of Zhongshan 中山王A evidently sought approval of King Nan of Zhou; hence the inscription on Cuo's fang hu 方壺 tells that after the successful invasion led by Zhongshan's minister, Zhou 賙, “the Son of Heaven did not forget [Zhou's] achievements, and dispatched his Elder to grant reward to my Uncle [Zhou 賙], while all the overlords congratulated [us]” (天子不忘其有勛，使其老策賞仲父，諸侯皆賀. Cuo mu—Zhanguo Zhongshan guo guowang zhi mu 魯墓——戰國中山國國王之墓, ed. suo, Hebei Sheng wenwu yanjiu 河北省文物研究所 [Beijing: Wenwu, 1995], 1.379 Google Scholar; see also glosses on p. 382). Elsewhere, the inscription on the Zhongshan hou-tong yue 中山侯銅鉞 states, “the Son of Heaven established the state, Lord Yin of Zhongshan created this military yue to make his multitudes respectful” (天子建邦，中山侯作茲軍鉞，以敬厥眾, Cuo mu, 396; for Yin being Cuo's cognomen, see the editors’ gloss on p. 398). This inscription is doubly remarkable, as it shows that despite the usurpation of the royal title by Zhongshan's kings, in their interaction with the Zhou Son of Heaven they degraded themselves to the position of mere “lords” (hou 侯), in accord with ritual norms. See the further discussion in Cuo mu, 530.

58. The current text says, “The ruler of Zhou and King Nan [both] died” 周君、王赧卒, but the character jun 君 (ruler) was apparently misplaced in the text. See the discussion by Viatkin, R. M. in his translation of Istoricheskie Zapiski (Shi ji) (Moscow: Nauka, 1972), 1. 341n250Google Scholar.

59. The nine cauldrons were the major sacred vessels of the Zhou house.

60. Shi ji 4.169 Google Scholar. Shi ji 15.748 Google Scholar suggests that the Western Zhou was annexed in 255 and not in 256.

61. The enfeoffment of the ruler of Eastern Zhou principality is mentioned in the Shi ji 5.219 Google Scholar; fiefs of both former rulers were located in the vicinity of their former domains. See Daoyuan, Li 酈道元, Shui jing zhushu 水經注疏, annotated by Shoujing, Yang 楊守敬 and Huizhen, Xiong 熊會貞 (Nanjing: Jiangsu guji, 1999) 21.1747–49Google Scholar. No text, so far as I know, mentions the fate of the possible heir(s) of King Nan.

62. See Shi ji 4.218–19; 40.1736. It is unlikely that the overlords’ silence was a result of their fear of Qin power: in 256 Qin's power was relatively contained due to its unsuccessful campaign against the state of Zhao. See Kuan, Yang, Zhanguo shi, 420 Google Scholar.

63. Sima Zhen 司馬貞 (fl. 745 c.e.) complained: 蓋周室衰微，略無紀錄，故太史公雖考眾書以卒其事，然二國代系甚不分明 “It seems that as the Zhou house deteriorated, it had almost no records; hence, although the Grand Astrologist (Sima Qian) surveyed numerous books to finish (the depiction of the Zhou) affairs, the sequence of the rulers of both principalities is extremely unclear [in his book]” (Shi ji 4.170n2).

64. See, e.g., the depiction of the end of the Zhou by Sima Guang 司馬光 (1019–1086), Zizhi tongjian 資治通鋻 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992), 5.185 Google Scholar. Like many others, Sima Guang confuses the Zhou king and the lord of the Western Zhou principality, presenting, therefore, a highly skewed picture of the end of the Zhou domain. This confusion can be traced already to Wang Chong 王充 (c. 27–97 c.e.). See Lun heng jiaoshi 論衡校釋, ed. Hui, Huang 黃暉 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1995), 8.377 Google Scholar (“Ru zeng” 儒增); see also a gloss by Yu Yue 俞樾 (1821–1907) who explains Wang Chong's mistake on p. 378.

65. Is it possible that Qin rulers contemplated inheriting the Zhou mandate just in the way they had inherited the Zhou heartland five centuries earlier?

66. Noteworthy, despite the wide-spread hatred of Qin (on which see in the next section), its annexations of eastern states was remarkably smooth: aside from two illprepared attempts to restore the extinguished states of Zhao 趙 and Chu in 228 and 224 respectively, and a rebellion in the former Han 韓 lands in 226, no major uprisings against the Qin rule are recorded until the beginning of the self-destructive rule of Hu Hai 胡亥, the notorious Second Emperor 二始皇帝 (r. 210–207).

67. The present discussion therefore calls into question the assertion by Lewis, Mark E. in Writing and Authority in Early China (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 355 Google Scholar, that the elevation of the Zhou house above other Warring States was a post-factum creation by Sima Qian.

68. See Shi ji 6.283 Google Scholar; see also my detailed discussion of the Da yitong ideal in Pines, , “‘The One that Pervades All’ in Ancient Chinese Political Thought: Origins of ‘the Great Unity’ Paradigm,” T’oung Pao 86. 4–5 (2000), 280–324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

69. For these activities, see Kern, Stele Inscriptions; Ling, Li, “Qin Han liyi zhong de zongjiao” 秦漢禮儀中的宗教, in Zhongguo fangshu xukao, 131–86Google Scholar.

70. Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian 睡虎地秦墓竹簡, ed. xiaozu, Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian zhengli 睡虎地秦墓竹簡整理小組 (Beijing: Wenwu, 2001, 2nd ed.), 135, slip 176Google Scholar. I slightly modify the translation by Hulsewé, A.F.P., Remnants of Ch'in Law: An Annotated Translation of the Ch'in Legal and Administrative Rules of the 3rd Century B.C. Discovered in Yün-meng Prefecture, Hu-pei Province, in 1975 (Leiden: Brill, 1985), 170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71. Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian, 135, slips 177–78; Hulsewé, Remnants, 171.

72. The editors of the Shuihudi slips volume plainly stated that Xia is Qin's self-appellation (Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian, 135). Later scholars relied in their interpretation on the following Han shu passage: “Dependencies are a Qin institution to deal with the submitted manyi ‘barbarians’” 典屬國，秦管，掌蠻夷降者. See Gu, Ban, Han shu, annotation by Shigu, Yan 顏師古 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1997), 19.735 Google Scholar. Certain disagreements notwithstanding, scholars almost unanimously use this phrase to interpret the content of slip 176 in a way that suggests identity between Qin and Xia. See, for example, Haoliang, Yu 于豪亮, “Qin wangchao guanyu shaoshu minzu de falü ji qi lishi zuoyong” 秦王朝關於少數民族的法律及其歷史作用, in Yunmeng Qin jian yanjiu 雲夢秦簡研究, ed. Zhonghua shuju bianji bu 中華書局編輯部 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1981), 316–23Google Scholar; Yongzhang, Wu 吳永章, “Cong Yunmeng Qin jian kan Qin de minzu zhengce” 從雲夢秦簡看秦的民族政策, Jiang Han kaogu 江漢考古 1983.2, 68–73 Google Scholar; Motoo, Kudō 工藤元男, Suikochi Shinbo yori mita Shin dai no kokka to shakai 睡虎地秦簡よりみた秦代の國家と社會 (Tōkyō: Sōbunsha, 1998), 85–118 Google Scholar; Rui, Liu 劉瑞, “Qin shubang, chenbang, yu shudian guo” 秦屬邦、臣邦與屬典國, Minzu yanjiu 民族研究 1999.4, 89–97 Google Scholar; Takatsu Junya 高津純也, “Natsu ji no Chūka teki yōhō ōhō ni tsuite”《 夏》字の《中華》的用法について, Ronshū: Chūgoku kodai no moji to bunka 論集：中國古代の文字と文化 (Tōkyō: Kyūko shoin, 1999), 269–86Google Scholar. Even for Gao Min 高敏, who correctly interpreted the relevant slips, the notion that Qin are not Xia seems inconceivable; see his Shuihudi Qin jian chutan 睡虎地秦簡初探 (Taibei: Wanjuan lou, 2000), 274–77Google Scholar. My reading of the Shuihudi slips is supported only by Atsuhiro, Ōkushi 大櫛敦弘, “Shin hō—Unmei Suikochi Shin kan yori mita toitsu zenya” 秦邦—雲夢睡虎地秦簡よち見た「統一前夜」, Ronshū: Chūgoku kodai no moji to bunka, 319–32Google Scholar, and by Zhang Zhenglang 張政烺, “Shi you er gong ji qi xiangguan wenti” 十又二公及其相關問題 (http://www.guoxue.com/xstj/gxjl/gx_syeg.htm).

73. See Xueqin, Li, “Chudu Liye Qin jian,” 76–77 Google Scholar.

74. See the detailed discussion in Atsuhiro, Ōkushi, “Toitsu zenya—Sengoku kōki no kokusai chitsujo” 統一前夜—戰國後期の國際秩序, Nagoya daigaku tōyōshi kenkyū hōkōku 名古屋大學東方史研究報告 19 (1995), 1–25 Google Scholar.

75. See, for example, the misidentification of Central Asian merchants as a tributebearing mission from the Timur empire ( Rossabi, Morris, “The Ming and Inner Asia,” in The Cambridge History of China. Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2. ed. Twitchett, Denis and Mote, Frederick W. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998], 247–48Google Scholar).

76. For a summary of different views about Qin's culture and its relations with the Zhou cultural realm see n.6 above. For the clearest exposition of Qin's “acculturation” theory, see Bodde, , China's First Unifier, 2 ffGoogle Scholar.

77. This summary is largely based on the studies of Han Wei, Yuan Zhongyi, Martin Kern and Falkenhausen, mentioned in n.6 above; many insightful observations appear in several articles by Huang Liuzhu 黃留珠 collected in his Qin Han lishi wenhua lungao 秦漢歷史文化論稿 (Xian: San Qin chubanshe, 2002)Google Scholar; see, e.g. his “Qin wenhua suoyi” 秦文化瑣議 (pp. 103–15). See also a detailed discussion in Shelach, Gideon and Pines, Yuri, “Power, Identity and Ideology: Reflections on the Formation of the State of Qin (770–221 BC),” in An Archaeology of Asia, ed. Stark, Miriam T. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), 202–30Google Scholar.

78. Cited from Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 79 Google Scholar. I slightly modify Kern's translation.

79. See Kern, , Stele Inscriptions, 90 Google Scholar; see page 73 for the Qin-bo citation. Interestingly, in the earlier (early seventh century) inscription on Qin's bells, the lord of Qin promises to “rectify the hundred Man tribes” 盜百蠻 but makes no mention of the Xia. It is evident that the four Qin inscriptions analyzed by Kern reflect the increasing assertiveness of the Qin rulers from the early seventh to mid-sixth century; see Pines, “Biases and their Sources.”

80. It should be mentioned, however, that self-identification as heirs of Yu may refer to the general notion of the receipt of the mandate by Qin, and should not necessarily indicate Qin's identity with the Xia.

81. Eastern provenance of the above texts explains their relative lack of interest in Qin. Thus none of these texts, nor even the later and more informed Shi ji, display any awareness of the self-confident tone of the early Qin lords, and of their claims of being recipients of the Mandate and the leaders of the Xia. Perhaps this language of self-aggrandizement was designed for a limited circle of Qin top leaders, and was not employed in Qin's contacts with the rest of the Zhou world.

82. 國無陋也！“There are no remote states!” exclaimed the Lu host (Zuo, Wen 12.589). The Zuo contains another puzzling reference to Qin, in which it is identified as the Xia. In 544, Prince Ji Zha 季札 of Wu 吳 exclaimed, after listening to “The Airs of Qin” 秦風 section from the Shi jing 詩經: “This is called the melodies of Xia! One who is able to be Xia will become great – [will attain] the utmost greatness! It is [from] the old Zhou [lands]!” 此之謂夏聲。夫能夏則大，大之至也。其周之舊乎！ (Zuo, Xiang 29.1163). This saying could have testified to Qin's identification with the Xia, but there are manifold problems that prevent me from relying on this passage. First, the meaning of “Xia” here is not unequivocal. While many readers would automatically consider it identical to the “Huaxia” 華夏 (“Chinese”), Yang Bojun convincingly argues in his gloss that the term refers to the geographic location of Qin in the Western lands. Alternatively, the term “Xia” may stand in this context as a loan character for its cognate, ya 雅 (meaning “standard, elegant”; see Kern, Stele Inscriptions, 105n104). Finally, and most importantly for the present discussion, the entire story of Ji Zha's visit to the Central States and his semi-prophetic discussion of the future of different states based on their music is doubtless of much later origin than the bulk of the Zuo zhuan; indeed Ji Zha's prophecy of Qin's “utmost greatness” strongly suggests the post-unification (i.e., post-221) origin of his speech. See the detailed discussion by Zhiyang, Zhao 趙制陽, “ Zuo zhuan Ji Zha guan yue youguan wenti de taolun” 《左傳》季札觀樂有關問題的討論, Zhonghua wenhua fuxing yuekan 中華文化复興月刊 18.3 (1985), 9–20 Google Scholar. Thus, the cited passage is irrelevant to the present discussion.

83. See Chun qiu Gongyang zhuan zhushu 春秋公羊傳注疏, annotated by He Xiu 何休 and Xu Yan 徐彥, Shisanjing zhushu, 22.2319.

84. See Chun qiu Gongyang zhuan 14.2272 Google Scholar; 22.2316. For the dating of the Gongyang, see Gentz, Joachim, Das Gongyang zhuan: Auslegung und Kanoniesierung der Frühlings und Herbstannalen (Chunqiu) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2001), 345–403 Google Scholar. Gentz assumes that the bulk (Kerntext) of the Gongyang zhuan was composed between 320 and 233, i.e., when Shang Yang-inspired changes in Qin social structure had long become a fait accompli.

85. Both texts point at Lord Mu's arrogant and ill-prepared campaign against the state of Zheng 鄭 in 627 and his subsequent struggle against Qin's erstwhile ally, the state of Jin, as the major reason for Qin's degradation to the status of “barbarian”; the Guliang zhuan states explicitly that “Qin became identical with the Di (‘barbarians’) since the (anti-Jin) Yao battle” 秦之為狄， 自殽之戰始也 (Chun qiu Guliang zhuan zhushu 春秋穀梁傳注疏, annotated by Ning, Fan 范寧 and Shixun, Yang 楊士勳, in Shisanjing zhushu 9.2403 Google Scholar). Is it possible that the Guliang zhuan authors (ca. fourth century) were aware of Qin's erstwhile status as a normal Zhou state?

86. See Xianqian, Wang 王先謙, Xunzi jijie 荀子集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992), 23.442 Google Scholar (“Xing e” 性惡); for Xunzi's positive remarks about Qin, see, e.g., Xunzi, 16.303–4Google Scholar (“Qiang guo” 彊國); for a summary of Xunzi's views of Qin, see Liwen, Zhang 張立文, “Xunzi lun Qin lun” 荀子論秦論, Qin wenhua luncong 9 (2002), 17–35 Google Scholar. For identification of unrestrainedly following one's feelings as a characteristic of “barbarians,” see Guo yu 國語 (Shanghai: Guji, 1990), 2.6, 62 Google Scholar (“Zhou yu” 周語 2); Xidan, Sun 孫希旦, Li ji jijie 禮記集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1996), 10.271 Google Scholar (“Tan Gong xia” 檀弓下).

87. Jianzhang, He 何建章, Zhanguo ce zhushi 戰國策注釋 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991), 24.8, 907 Google Scholar (“Wei ce” 魏策 3); a similar passage appears in the Zhanguo zonghengjia shu 戰國縱橫家書 unearthed at Mawangdui 馬王堆 tomb no. 3 in 1973. See Mawangdui Han mu boshu (san) 馬王堆漢墓帛書 (三), ed. Mawangdui Han mu boshu zhengli xiaozu 馬王堆漢墓帛書整理小組 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1983), 16.52 Google Scholar.

88. Zhanguo ce 14.17, 508 Google Scholar (“Chu ce” 楚策 1).

89. See a detailed discussion on Qin's exclusion from tianxia in Pines, Yuri, “Changing Views of tianxia in Pre-Imperial Discourse,” Oriens Extremus 43.1–2 (2002), 109–13Google Scholar. For other instances of pejorative remarks about Qin in the Zhanguo ce, see 2.3, 49 (“Xi Zhou ce” 西周策); 20.10, 726 (“Zhao ce” 趙策 3).

90. Han Feizi, 1.2–3 Google Scholar (“Chu xian Qin” 初見秦).

91. The same memorandum appears also in the Zhanguo ce, where it is erroneously attributed to an earlier Qin statesman, Zhang Yi 張儀 (d. ca. 310). See a summary of distinct views regarding the authenticity of “Han Feizi's” memorandum in Zhongyao, Jiang 蔣重躍, Han Feizi de zhengzhi sixiang 韓非子的政治思想 (Beijing: Shifan daxue, 2000), 14–25 Google Scholar.

92. For the Guliang zhuan, see n.84 above; for Jia Yi's assertion, see Han shu 48.2204; for Sima Qian's views (more precisely, his citation of the alleged Shang Yang's words), see Shi ji 68.2234. A more extreme attitude toward Qin is reflected in the mid-second century Huainanzi 淮南子, the authors of which assert that Qin's innate greediness and aggressiveness “could not be transformed by positive means” 不可化以善; hence the harsh laws of Shang Yang were implemented there. See Wendian, Liu 劉文典, Huainan Honglie jijie 淮南鴻烈集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997), 21.711 Google Scholar (“Yao lue” 要略).

93. See his “Zhou Qin fengsu de rentong yu chongtu—Qin Shi huang ‘Kuang chi yi su’ tanlun” 周秦風俗的認同與衝突—秦始皇 “匡飭異俗” 探論, Qin ling Qin yong yanjiu dongtai 秦陵秦俑研究動態 4 (2002), 8–18 Google Scholar.

94. Lüshi chunqiu, 24.1, 1584 Google Scholar (“Bu gou” 不苟).

95. Shi ji 87.2544 Google Scholar; I slightly modify Burton Watson's translation in Records of the Grand Historian: Qin Dynasty (Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 1993), 183 Google Scholar.

96. Qin musical culture can be partly reconstructed from the excavated bells and chime-stones and their inscriptions; see a brief discussion by Gengxin, You 由更新 and Dangshe, Shi 史黨社, “Cong kaogu cailiao kan Zhou Qin lizhi de guanxi” 從考古材料看周秦禮制的關系, Qin wenhua luncong 5 (1995), 299–300 Google Scholar. The “music of Zheng and Wei” was usually employed in a pejorative meaning as licentious, unorthodox music. See, for example, Bojun, Yang, trans. and annot., Lun yu yizhu 論語譯注 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1991), 15.11, 164 Google Scholar (“Wei Ling gong” 衛靈公); Lüshi chunqiu, 1.2, 21 Google Scholar (“Ben sheng” 本生); Shi ji 24.1176 Google Scholar. It is puzzling that in Li Si's memorandum it is treated as a hallmark of positive, Eastern, culture. Is it possible that Li Si believed that it is better for Qin to be attached to the licentious music of the East than to its own “barbaric” sounds?

97. For another anecdote that shows that “tapping the pot” was considered in the late Zhanguo period as standard Qin music, see Shi ji 81.2442 Google Scholar; for an assertion of the Western origins of Qin's old music see Lüshi chunqiu, 335 (“Yin chu” 音初 6.3). For an alternative tradition that emphasizes “Chineseness” of Qin's old music, see Han Feizi, 10.70–72 Google Scholar (“Shi guo” 十過) and Shi ji 5.193 Google Scholar.

98. The term “Xia” as a reference to the “Chinese” entity (i.e., dwellers of the Central States) is never mentioned in the Shangjun shu 商君書, Han Feizi, and the Lüshi chunqiu, although in the latter text Xia is mentioned twice as a designation of the Central States as opposed to the state of Chu. In comparison, the term “Xia” as a designation of the cultural entity appears ten times in the Zuo zhuan, once in the Lun yu and the Mozi, twice in the Mengzi, Gongyang zhuan and the Guanzi, and five times in the Xunzi. The paucity of the appearance of this term in the Zhanguo texts deserves a special discussion; in all likelihood it is related to the relative lack of the pronounced notion of “Sino-barbarian” dichotomy in the late pre-imperial China. See details in Pines, Yuri, “Beasts or Humans: Pre-Imperial Origins of the ‘Sino-Barbarian’ Dichotomy,” in Mongols, Turks and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, ed. Amitai, Reuven and Biran, Michal, (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 59–102 Google Scholar. For more about the early usage of the term Xia, see Takatsu, “Natsu ji.” Takatsu's article has many useful observations, although problematic dating of the pivotal texts and several inaccurate interpretations somewhat undermine his conclusions.

99. Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭 noticed that, while during the second half of the Zhanguo period Qin script underwent similar process of changes as that of the eastern states, this new “popular script … never played havoc with the standard-script system,” which itself “was the most faithful in carrying on the written tradition of the Zhou dynasty.” This situation differed markedly from the development in the eastern states, where the advent of “popular” script resulted in significant divergences from the traditional forms. See Qiu, , Chinese Writing, translated by Mattos, Gilbert L. and Norman, Jerry (Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 2000), 78–89 Google Scholar.

100. von Falkenhausen, Lothar (Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius (1050–250 BC): The Archeological Evidence [Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, forthcoming])Google Scholar systematically analyzes similarities in material and ritual culture, particularly mortuary practices, between the nobles from different Chunqiu and early Zhanguo states. This archeologically obtained picture is largely supported by the Zuo zhuan which depicts sophisticated rules of inter-state intercourse that were evidently shared by members of the ruling elites from all major Chunqiu states. For the military culture of the Chunqiu nobles, see Cho-yun, Hsu, Ancient China in Transition (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1965), 53–62 Google Scholar; Takagi Satomi 高木智見, “Shunjū jidai no gunrei ni tsuite” 春秋時代の軍禮について, Nagoya daigaku tōyōshi kenkyū hōkōku 名古屋大學東方史研究報告 11 (1986), 1–33. For the decline of the aristocratic ritual culture during the Zhanguo period, see a brief but brilliant discussion by Gu Yanwu 顧炎武 (1613–1682), “Zhou mo fengsu” 周末風俗, Rizhi lu jishi 日知錄集釋, ed. Rucheng, Huang 黃如成 (Changsha: Yuelu, 1994), 13.467 Google Scholar. For a general overview of the Chunqiu aristocratic society, see Fenghan, Zhu 朱鳳瀚, Shang Zhou jiazu xingtai yanjiu 商周家族形態研究 (Tianjin: Guji, 1990), 450–593 Google Scholar; cf. Michimasa, Yoshimoto, “Shunjū seizoku-kō” 春秋氏族考, Tōyōshi kenkyū 東洋史研究, 53.4 (1995), 1–29 Google Scholar.

101. For social mobility as reflected in Qin almanacs, see Ri Shu yanjiu ban 日書研究班, “Ri shu: Qin guo shehui de yimian jingzi” 日書：秦國社會的一面鏡子, in Qin jian Ri shu jishi 秦簡日書集釋, ed. Xiaoqiang, Wu 吳小強 (Changsha: Yuelu, 2000), 291–311 Google Scholar; for a slightly different perspective, see Muzhou, Pu (Mu-chou, Poo) 蒲慕州, “Shuihudi Qin jian Ri shu de shijie” 睡虎地秦簡《日書》的世界, Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊 62.4 (1993), 623–75Google Scholar. Simultaneously, a strong downward mobility existed as well; despite occasional grants of hereditary appointments and fiefs, and despite certain perpetuation of the ruling family's power, Qin aristocrats generally could not secure their position for more than one generation, as suggested from the regulations regarding unranked descendants of the ruling house in the Shuihudi slips: see Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian, 137; Hulsewé, , Remnants, 174 Google Scholar.

102. Perhaps the most amazing example of potential social mobility in the state of Qin is a statute which stipulates that a bondservant could receive an aristocratic rank in exchange for his military achievements (“Junjue lü” 軍爵律, Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian, 55; Hulsewé, , Remnants of Ch'in Law, 83)Google Scholar; see a detailed discussion in Robin Yates, D.S., “Slavery in Early China: A Socio-Cultural Approach,” Journal of East Asian Archaeology 3.1–2 (2001), 313 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

103. For the new developments in Qin burial customs, see Han Wei, “Guanyu Qin ren zushu,” and Pines and Shelach, “Power, Identity and Ideology;” for locating these cultural traits among the indigenous population of north-west China, see Huang Xiaofen, “Shin no bosei”; for more about cultural ties of Qin with its non-Xia neighbors, see Yaqi, Tian 田亞岐, “Dong-Zhou shiqi Guanzhong Qin mu suo jian ‘Rong Di’ wenhua yinsu tantao” 東周時期關中秦墓所見 “戎狄” 文化因素探討, Wenbo 文博 2003.3, 17–20 Google Scholar; cf. Huacheng, Zhao 趙化成, “Shi lun Qin wenhua yu yuwai wenhua de jiaoliu” 試論秦文化與域外文化的交流, Qin wenhua luncong 12 (2005), 30–38 Google Scholar.

104. This phenomenon of the adaptation of the lower elite to popular beliefs may have a twofold explanation: some of the officials who came from the lower strata might have inherited their original beliefs; others perhaps had to learn the beliefs of the local population in order to be able to control and if necessary modify them (a famous non-Qin anecdote of the partial accommodation to the local beliefs as a tool of future suppression is a story of Ximen Bao 西門豹, [fl. c. 400] from the state of Wei 魏, who ostensibly accepted the local cult to the God of the Yellow River [He Bo 河伯] in the Ye 鄴 district only to be able to eradicate it [Shi ji 126.3211–12]; for Qin officials’ need to learn and to control the local customs, see the Yu shu 語書discussed below in n. 118).

105. The need for a precise census is articulated already in the Shangjun shu ( Lihong, Jiang 蔣禮鴻, Shangjun shu zhuizhi 商君書錐指 [Beijing: Zhonghua, 1996], 4.34 Google Scholar [“Qu qiang” 去彊]), and it is highly likely that such a census had been conducted in the state of Qin already in the first half of the fourth century (see Yates, Robin D.S., “Cosmos, Central Authority, and Communities in the Early Chinese Empire,” in Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History, ed. Alcock, Susan E., et al. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001], 363–66)Google Scholar. The precision of the fourth century census may be learnt from the Baoshan documents, which tell of the efforts of the state of Chu to verify the population registers and of punishment of the officials guilty of incomplete registration of “two youths of junzi 君子 rank” in one case, and of several other persons in the other. See Weld, Susan R., “Chu Law in Action: Legal Documents from Tomb 2 at Baoshan,” in Defining Chu: Image and Reality in Ancient China, eds. Cook, Constance A. and Major, John S. (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1999), 85–86 Google Scholar; Baoshan Chu jian, 17.

106. These developments are discussed in great detail in several major studies, such as Masubuchi Tatsuo 增淵龍夫, Chūgoku kodai no shakai to kokka 中國古代の社會と國家 (Tōkyō: Kōbun, 1963); Hsu, Ancient China in Transition; Boxiong, Zhao 趙伯雄, Zhoudai guojia xingtai yanjiu 周代國家形態研究 (Changsha: Hunan jiaoyu, 1990)Google Scholar; Yang Kuan, Zhanguo shi; Lewis, Mark E., “Warring States: Political History,” in The Cambridge History of Ancient China, ed. Loewe, Michael and Shaughnessy, Edward L. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 587–650 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Qin legal documents from Shuihudi and Liye and Chu documents from Baoshan present a picture of an extraordinarily active and intrusive state apparatus that tried to control every aspect of the life of the local people, beginning with their movements and ending with their everyday economic life and even their domestic affairs. See, for example, Yates, Robin D.S., “Social Status in the Ch'in: Evidence from the Yün-meng Legal Documents. Part One: Commoners,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 47, 1 (1987), 197–237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For many insights about the nature of Qin's state dominance of local communities, written before the age of major archeological discoveries, see Perelomov, Leonard S., Imperiia Tsin’—Pervoe Tsentralizovannoe Gosudarstvo v Kitae (Moscow: Nauka, 1961), 66–84 Google Scholar.

107. For the composition of Zhanguo armies and its impact on extra-military matters, see Lewis, Mark E., Sanctioned Violence in Ancient China (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990), 53–96 Google Scholar.

108. For the strong commitment of the educated elite in the Zhanguo states to the ideal of political unification as the only means to bring order to All under Heaven, see Pines, “‘The One that Pervades All’.”

109. See Yunmeng Shuihudi Qin mu bianxie zu 雲夢睡虎地秦墓編寫組, Yunmeng Shuihudi Qin mu 雲夢睡虎地秦墓 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1981), 25–26 Google Scholar; see also the translation of the letters by Shaughnessy, Edward L., “Military Histories of Early China: A Review Article,” Early China 21 (1996), 181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

110. Zhanguo ce 5.15, 194–95Google Scholar (“Qin ce” 3). A clear manifestation of the widespread anti-Qin feeling was a decision by the people of Shangdang 上黨, whose territory was yielded by the state of Han 韓 to the state of Qin, to surrender to the state of Zhao instead: the aggressive Qin was strongly hated. For Chu's hatred of Qin and the saying “even if only three households remain in Chu, it will be Chu that destroys Qin” 楚雖三戶，亡秦必楚也, see Shi ji 7.300 Google Scholar.

111. Shi ji 5.206 ff.

112. It is worth remembering that universal military service, particularly that which involves occupation of the hostile native population, serves as a strong consolidating force in many states throughout the globe well into the present. For a general discussion of the impact of military engagements on identity-building, see Smith, Anthony D., “War and Ethnicity: The Role of Warfare in the Formation, Self Images and Cohesion of Ethnic Communities,” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 4.4 (1981), 375–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

113. See, e.g. “Ri shu” 日書 in Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian 睡虎地秦墓竹簡, slips 145 and 144, 203.

114. See Wenhui, Hu 胡文煇, “Mawangdui ‘Taiyi chu xing tu’ yu Qin jian ‘Ri shu—chu bang men’” 馬王堆《太一出行圖》與秦簡《日書——出邦門》, Jiang Han kaogu 1997.3, 83–88 Google Scholar, and Wenhui, Hu, “Qin jian ‘Ri shu—chu bang men’ xinzheng” 秦簡《日書——出邦門》新證, Wenbo 文博 1998.1, 91–94 Google Scholar.

115. For the importance of the border-line fixation for creating conceptual demarcations between different groups and its consequent impact on individual allegiances later in Chinese history, see Naomi Standen, Borders and Loyalties: Frontier Crossings from North China to Liao, c. 900–1005 (forthcoming ms).

116. See the detailed discussion of Chunqiu-Zhanguo patterns of loyalty, including the political implications of the notion of “loyalty to Dao” in Pines, Yuri, “Friends or Foes: Changing Concepts of Ruler-Minister Relations and the Notion of Loyalty in Pre-Imperial China,” Monumenta Serica 50 (2002), 35–74 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

117. For the gradual increase in the power of the guest ministers at the expense of the ruler's relatives in the state of Qin, see Kazuki, Moriya 森谷一樹, “Senkoku Shin no sōhō ni tsuite” 戰國秦の相邦について, Tōyōshi kenkyū 60.1 (2001), 1–29 Google Scholar; cf. Liuzhu, Huang 黃留珠, “Qin keqing zhidu jianlun” 秦客卿制度簡論, in Liuzhu, Huang, Qin Han lishi wenhua, 41–50 Google Scholar. The question of the guest ministers’ interaction with two other segments of Qin elite, namely the ruler's kin and the local upstarts who attained high status thanks to military merits, deserves separate discussion. Noteworthy, aside from ordinary “guest ministers,” the state of Qin benefited from another segment of alien advisors, namely the kin of the queens, the most famous of whom was Wei Ran 魏冄, the Marquis of Rang 穰侯 (see his biography in the Shi ji 72. 2323–30Google Scholar).

118. Qin's efforts to impose its culture on the occupied population, and the difficulties it faced in this process, are demonstrated by the “Speech document” (Yu shu 語書) discovered in Tomb no. 11 at Shuihudi. The document records a speech made in 227 by the Qin governor of the Jiangling 江陵 area, acquired by Qin from the state of Chu half a century earlier. In the speech Governor Teng 騰 complains bitterly of the difficulties faced by Qin bureaucrats in their attempt to unify popular customs, and urges fellow officials to do their best to implement uniform laws and eradicate deviant customs: see Yu shu 語書 in Shuihudi Qin mu zhujian, 13–16. For archeological reflections on the complexity of cultural interaction in the newly conquered Chu territories, see Xianfu, Wang 王先福, “Xiangyang Qin mu chutan” 襄陽秦墓初探, Kaogu yu wenwu zengkan: Xian Qin kaogu 考古與文物增刊: 先秦考古 (2004), 219–25Google Scholar. Qin's cultural unification policies appear to be particularly successful with regard to the imposition of Qin's script on the areas under their control: see Zhaorong, Chen 陳昭容, “Qin ‘Shu tong wenzi’ xintan” 秦「書同文字」新探, Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 68.3 (1997) 589–641 Google Scholar; for the discussion of pre-imperial Qin script unification measures, see particularly pp. 605–12.

119. Shangjun shu zhuizhi, 15.92 Google Scholar (“Lai min” 徠民). For the dating of this chapter based on the events mentioned therein, see Liangshu, Zheng 鄭良樹, Shang Yang ji qi xuepai 商鞅及其學派 (Shanghai: Guji, 1989), 51–59 Google Scholar; cf. Takashi, Yoshinami 好并隆司, Shōkun sho kenkyū 商君書研究 (Hiroshima: Keisuisha, 1992), 103 ff.Google Scholar It is difficult to estimate whether or not such a recommendation was actually heeded. At the very least, the Shuihudi “Statutes on Military Ranks” mentioned above tell of the service of convicts (including probably former captives) in the ranks of the Qin military, and even of the possibility of these former captives to gain low aristocratic ranks due to their military merits. See Yates, “Slavery in Early China,” 312–14.

120. Shi ji 87.2541–46Google Scholar. Similar mistrust of the aliens was evoked several years later by Li Si, who reportedly opposed employing Han Feizi on the ground that “it would be only natural” for a royal scion from Han to serve his native state and not the state of Qin, and hence he should not be trusted ( Shi ji 63.2155 Google Scholar). Interestingly, there is no evidence for similar mistrust of foreigners prior to the reign of King Zheng, the future First Emperor.