Volume 108d Treatise 4: Rituals 4

世宗永平四年冬十二月，員外將軍、兼尚書都令史陳終德有祖母之喪，欲服齊衰三年，以無世爵之重，不可陵諸父，若下同眾孫，恐違後祖之義，請求詳正。國子博士孫景邕、劉懷義、封軌、高綽，太學博士袁昇，四門博士陽寧居等議：「嫡孫後祖，持重三年，不為品庶生二，終德宜先諸父。」太常卿劉芳議：「案喪服乃士之正禮，含有天子、諸侯、卿大夫之事，其中時復下同庶人者，皆別標顯。至如傳重，自士以上，古者卿士，下通庶人。以為差謬。何以明之？禮稽命徵曰：『天子之元士二廟，，下通庶人。以為差謬。何以明之？禮稽命徵曰：『天子之元士二廟，諸侯之上士亦二廟，中、下士一廟。』一廟者，祖禰共廟。祭法又云『庶人無廟』。既如此分明，豈得通於庶人也？傳重者主宗廟，非謂庶人祭於寢也。兼累世承嫡，方得為嫡子嫡孫耳。不爾者，不得繼祖也。又鄭玄別變除，云為五世長子服斬也。魏晉以來，不復行此禮矣。案喪服經無嫡孫為祖持重三年正文，唯有為長子三年，嫡孫期。傳及注因說嫡孫傳重之義。今世既不復為嫡子服斬，卑位之嫡孫不陵諸叔而持重，則可知也。且準終德資階，方之於古，未登下士，庶人在官，復無斯禮。考之舊典，驗之今世，則茲範罕行。且諸叔見存，喪主有寄，宜依諸孫，服期為允。」

In the twelfth month of winter in the fourth year of Yongping under Emperor Shizong, Chen Zhongde—Staff General and concurrent Director of Secretariat Clerks—was in mourning for his grandmother and wished to observe three years in qi-cui garb. Lacking a hereditary title heavy enough to rank above his uncles, yet fearing that if he were classed with ordinary grandsons he would violate the duty of succeeding the ancestral line, he asked for a formal determination. The National University erudites Sun Jingyou, Liu Huaiyi, Feng Gui, and Gao Chuo, the Grand Academy erudite Yuan Sheng, and the Four Gates erudite Yang Ningju and others argued: "An eldest grandson who succeeds the ancestral line bears the full three-year mourning and does not admit a second rule for commoners by rank. Zhongde ought to take precedence over his uncles." Minister of Ceremonies Liu Fang argued: "The Mourning Garments treat the shi as the norm, yet they also cover the Son of Heaven, feudal lords, and ministers; wherever the text extends the same rule to commoners, it marks that fact separately. As for carrying on the ancestral line, from the shi class upward—in antiquity this applied even to ministers and shi, and was said to extend down to commoners as well. That view is mistaken in its gradation. How is this shown? The Rites of the Apocryphal Canon of Destiny states: "The Son of Heaven's yuan-shi have two temples," and is read as extending down to commoners. That reading is mistaken in its gradation. How is this shown? The Rites of the Apocryphal Canon of Destiny says: "The Son of Heaven's yuan-shi have two temples; feudal lords' upper shi also have two; middle and lower shi have one." One temple" means the founding ancestor and the immediate forebear are worshipped in the same shrine. The Methods of Sacrifice likewise says, "Commoners have no temple." When the text is this explicit, how can the rule be extended to commoners? Carrying on the line means presiding over the ancestral temple—not the commoner's practice of sacrificing in the bedchamber. Only when the main line has been carried through successive generations does one become true eldest son or eldest grandson. Otherwise one cannot succeed to the ancestral line. Zheng Xuan's separate treatise on mourning stages also says that the eldest son of the fifth generation wears hemmed-edge mourning. Since the Wei and Jin periods this rite has no longer been observed. The Mourning Garments classic contains no main passage requiring an eldest grandson to bear three years of heavy mourning for a grandfather; it prescribes three years for an eldest son and one year for an eldest grandson. The commentary and glosses explain the meaning of the eldest grandson's carrying on the line. Today, since eldest sons no longer wear hemmed-edge mourning, it follows that a low-ranking eldest grandson should not outrank his uncles while bearing heavy mourning. Moreover, measured by Zhongde's rank against antiquity, he has not even reached lower shi; and for commoners who hold office, this rite does not apply either. Checked against the old canons and against present practice, this norm is seldom followed. Moreover, with his uncles still alive and the chief mourner's role assignable elsewhere, he should follow the rule for grandsons and observe one year of mourning, which is appropriate."

景邕等又議云：「喪服雖以士為主，而必下包庶人。何以論之？自大夫以上，每條標列，[1]逮於庶人，含而不述，比同士制，不復疑也。 [2]唯有庶人為國君，此則明義服之輕重，不涉於孫祖。且受國於曾祖，廢疾之祖父，亦無重可傳，而猶三年，不必由世重也。夫霜感露濡，異識咸感，承重主嗣，寧甄寢廟，嫡孫之制，固不同殊。 [3]又古自卿以下，皆不殊承襲，末代僭踰，未可以語通典。 [4]是以春秋譏於世卿，王制稱大夫不世，此明訓也。喪服，經雖無嫡孫為祖三年正文，而有祖為嫡孫期，[5]豈祖以嫡服己，己與庶孫同為祖服期，於義可乎？服祖三年，此則近世未嘗變也。準古士官不過二百石已上，終德即古之廟士也。假令終德未班朝次，苟曰志仁，必也斯遂。況乃官歷士流，當訓章之運，而以庶叔之嫌，替其嫡重之位，未是成人之善也。」芳又議：「國子所云，喪服雖以士為主，而必下包庶人。本亦不謂一篇之內全不下同庶人，正言嫡孫傳重，專士以上。此經、傳之正文，不及庶人明矣。戴德喪服變除云：『父為長子斬，自天子達於士。』此皆士以上乃有嫡子之明據也。且承重者，以其將代己為宗廟主，廟主了不云寢，又其證也。所引大夫不世者，此公羊、穀梁近儒小道之書，至如左氏、詩、易、尚書、論語皆有典證，或是未寤。許叔重五經異義云，今春秋公羊、穀梁說卿大夫世位，則權并一姓，謂周尹氏、齊崔氏也。而古春秋左氏說卿大夫皆得世祿。傳曰『官族』，易曰『食舊德』，舊德，謂食父故祿也。尚書曰：『世選爾勞，予不絕爾善。』詩云：『惟周之士，不顯弈世。』論語曰：『興滅國，繼絕世。』國謂諸侯，世謂卿大夫也。斯皆正經及論語士以上世位之明證也，士皆世祿也。八品者一命，斯乃信然。但觀此據，可謂覩其綱，未照其目也。案晉官品令所制九品，皆正無從，故以第八品準古下士。今皇朝官令皆有正從，若以其員外之資，為第十六品也，豈得為正八品之士哉？推考古今，謹如前議。」

Jingyou and the others argued further: "Although the Mourning Garments are framed around the shi, they must also extend downward to commoners. How is this argued? From ministers upward each article is spelled out; for commoners the text states the rule without elaboration, treating them as equivalent to the shi standard—on that there is no doubt. Only where commoners mourn a lord of the state does the text specify the weight of mourning; that case does not concern the grandson–grandfather relationship. Moreover, one who receives the state from a great-grandfather, or whose disabled grandfather has no line to pass on, still observes three years—heavy mourning need not depend on hereditary succession. Frost and dew touch every living thing alike; bearing the ancestral burden and presiding over succession cannot be weighed against bedchamber sacrifice versus temple worship—the rule for the eldest grandson is fundamentally different. Moreover, in antiquity from ministers downward succession was not treated as exceptional; the encroachments of later ages cannot be invoked against the universal canon. Hence the Spring and Autumn Annals rebukes hereditary ministers, and the Royal Regulations say that ministers do not hold office by inheritance—this is explicit teaching. The Mourning Garments, though lacking a main passage on an eldest grandson mourning a grandfather for three years, does require a grandfather to mourn an eldest grandson for one year—can the grandfather wear mourning for the eldest as for himself, while he and ordinary grandsons alike wear one year for the grandfather? Is that consistent with principle? Three years of mourning for a grandfather—in recent times this practice has never been abandoned. By ancient standards, shi officials received at least two hundred shi of grain; Zhongde is equivalent to the temple-holding shi of old. Even if Zhongde has not yet been ranked in court order, where the intent is humane, it will surely be fulfilled. Moreover, his office places him among the shi in an age when ritual canons should be upheld—to displace his position as bearer of the heavy line because of scruples about ranking below uncles of common birth is not the conduct of a mature man." Fang argued further: "What the National University scholars say—that the Mourning Garments take the shi as their basis yet must extend to commoners— does not mean that nothing in the entire text extends to commoners; it speaks precisely of the eldest grandson carrying on the line, and applies exclusively to shi and above. This is the main text of the classic and commentary; that it does not reach commoners is clear. Dai De's Mourning Garments: Stages of Removal says: "A father wears hemmed-edge mourning for his eldest son—from the Son of Heaven down to the shi." These are all clear evidence that only from the shi class upward is there an eldest son. Moreover, the bearer of the heavy line does so because he will replace one as lord of the ancestral temple; the temple lord is never identified with the bedchamber—this too is proof. The citation that ministers do not hold office by inheritance comes from the Gongyang and Guliang—texts of recent Ruists on minor paths—whereas the Zuo Tradition, Odes, Changes, Documents, and Analects all offer canonical proof; perhaps they have not yet grasped this. Xu Shen's Divergent Meanings of the Five Classics says that the present Gongyang and Guliang commentaries on the Spring and Autumn hold that ministers and grandees hold office by inheritance only when power is consolidated in one clan—as with the Yin clan of Zhou and the Cui clan of Qi. But the ancient Zuo Tradition commentary on the Spring and Autumn says that ministers and grandees all received hereditary emoluments. The Commentary says "official clans"; the Changes say "partaking of old merit"—old merit meaning receiving one's father's former emolument. The Documents say: "Generation after generation I select your labors; I do not cut off your excellence." The Odes say: "Only the shi of Zhou do not cease their succession through generations." The Analects say: "Raise up extinguished states; continue severed lines." State" means feudal lords; "line" means ministers and grandees. These are all clear proofs from the canonical classics and the Analects that from the shi class upward office is hereditary—all shi receive hereditary emoluments. The eighth rank is the first appointment—this is indeed so. But judged by this evidence, they have seen the outline without examining the particulars. According to the Jin Statute on Official Ranks, the nine ranks established all had principal ranks without secondary; therefore the eighth rank was taken as equivalent to the lower shi of antiquity. The present dynasty's official statutes all have principal and secondary ranks; if by his staff-general status he ranks sixteenth, how can he be a principal eighth-rank shi? Weighing antiquity against the present, I respectfully adhere to my former deliberation."

景邕等又議：「喪服正文，大夫以上，每事顯列，唯有庶人，含而不言。此通下之義，了然無惑。且官族者，謂世為其功；食舊德者，謂德侯者世位； [6]興滅國，繼絕世，主謂諸侯卿大夫無罪誅絕者耳。且金貂七毦，楊氏四公，雖以位相承，豈得言世祿乎？晉太康中，令史殷遂以父祥不及所繼，求還為祖母三年。時政以禮無代父追服之文，亦無不許三年之制，此即晉世之成規也。」尚書邢巒奏依芳議。詔曰：「嫡孫為祖母，禮令有據，[7]士人通行，何勞方致疑請也。可如國子所議。」

Jingyou and the others argued further: "In the main text of the Mourning Garments, from ministers upward each matter is explicitly listed; only for commoners is it stated without elaboration. The meaning of extending the rule downward is clear and beyond doubt. Moreover, "official clans" means clans that generation after generation perform their service; "Partaking of old merit" means that those of virtue and enfeoffment hold office by inheritance; "Raising extinguished states and continuing severed lines" refers chiefly to feudal lords, ministers, and grandees who were executed without guilt and whose lines were cut off. Moreover, the Yang clan's four dukes with golden sable and seven-tassel caps—though office passed by succession, can one call this hereditary emolument? In the Taikang era of Jin, Clerk Yin Sui, because his father's auspicious ceremony did not reach the one he was to succeed, requested to return and observe three years for his grandmother. The government of the time held that the rites had no text on substituting for one's father in retroactive mourning, yet also had no rule forbidding three years—this was the established precedent of the Jin age." Minister Xing Luan memorialized in favor of Fang's deliberation. An edict said: "An eldest grandson mourning for his grandmother has basis in ritual statutes; gentlemen commonly practice it—why trouble to raise doubts and request a ruling? It may follow the National University's deliberation."

延昌二年春，偏將軍乙龍虎喪父，給假二十七月，而虎并數閏月，詣府求上。領軍元珍上言：「案違制律，居三年之喪而冒哀求仕，五歲刑。龍虎未盡二十七月而請宿衞，依律結刑五歲。」三公郎中崔鴻駁曰：「三年之喪，二十五月大祥。諸儒或言祥月下旬而禫，或言二十七月，各有其義，未知何者會聖人之旨。龍虎居喪已二十六月，若依王、杜之義，便是過禫即吉之月。如其依鄭玄二十七月，禫中復可以從御職事。禮云：『祥之日鼓素琴。』然則大祥之後，喪事終矣。既可以從御職事，求上何為不可？若如府判，禫中鼓琴，復有罪乎？求之經律，理實未允。」下更詳辨。

In spring of the second year of Yan chang, Partial General Yi Longhu was mourning his father and had been granted twenty-seven months' leave; Longhu counted the intercalary months as well and went to the office requesting reinstatement. Director of the Guards Yuan Zhen submitted: "According to the Statute on Violations, one who while observing three years of mourning falsely petitions to take office is punished with five years' penal servitude. Longhu had not completed twenty-seven months yet requested palace guard duty; according to the statute the penalty is fixed at five years." Director of the Three Excellencies Cui Hong rebutted: "Three years of mourning—the twenty-fifth month is the major auspicious ceremony. The Ruists variously say that the cap-removal ceremony comes in the latter part of the month after the auspicious ceremony, or say twenty-seven months—each has its rationale; it is not known which accords with the sage's intent. Longhu has been in mourning for twenty-six months; if one follows the interpretation of Wang Su and Du Yu, this is already the month past cap-removal when auspicious garments may be worn. If one follows Zheng Xuan's twenty-seven months, during the cap-removal period one may again attend to imperial duties. The rites say: "On the day of the auspicious ceremony, strike the plain zither." Thus after the major auspicious ceremony, the mourning obligations are ended. Since one may already attend to imperial duties, why may he not request reinstatement? If the office's judgment stands, is striking the zither during cap-removal also an offense? Sought in the classics and statutes, the reasoning is in fact not acceptable." The matter was referred downward for further detailed deliberation.

珍又上言：「案士虞禮，三年之喪，期而小祥，又期而大祥，中月而禫。鄭玄云『中猶間也』，『自喪至此，凡二十七月』。又禮言：『祥之日鼓素琴。』鄭云：『鼓琴者，存樂也。』孔子祥後五日，彈琴而不成，十日而成笙歌。鄭注與鄭志及踰月可以歌，皆身自逾月可為。此謂存樂也，非所謂樂。樂者，使工為之。晉博士許猛解三驗曰：案黍離、麥秀之歌，小雅曰「君子作歌，惟以告哀」，魏詩曰「心之憂矣，我歌且謠」。若斯之類，豈可謂之金石之樂哉？是以徒歌謂之謠，徒吹謂之和。記曰：『比音而樂之，及干戚羽毛謂之樂。』若夫禮樂之施於金石，越於聲音者，此乃所謂樂也。至於素琴，以示終笙歌以省哀者，則非樂矣。間傳云：大祥除衰，杖而素縞麻衣，大祥之服也。雜記注云：『玄衣黃裳，則是禫祭，黃者，未大吉也。』 [8]檀弓云：『祥而縞，是月禫，徙月樂。』鄭志：趙商問，鄭玄答云：祥謂大祥，二十五月。是月禫，謂二十七月，非謂上祥之月也。徙月而樂。許猛釋六徵曰：樂者，自謂八音克諧之樂也。謂在二十八月，工奏金石之樂耳。而駁云：『大祥之後，喪事終矣。』脫如此駁，禫復焉施？又駁云：『禫中鼓琴，復有罪乎？』然禫則黃裳，未大吉也，鼓琴存樂，在禮所許。若使工奏八音，融然成韻，既未徙月，不罪伊何！又駁云：『禫中既得從御職事，求上何為不可？』檢龍虎居喪二十六月，始是素縞麻衣，大祥之中，何謂禫乎？三年沒閏，理無可疑。麻衣在體，冒仕求榮，實為大尤，罪其焉捨！又省依王、杜，禫祥同月，全乖鄭義。喪凶尚遠，而欲速除，何怱怱者哉？下府愚量，鄭為得之。何者？禮記云：『吉事尚近日，凶事尚遠日。』又論語云：『喪與其易寧戚。』而服限三年，痛盡終身。中月之解，雖容二義，尚遠寧戚。又檢王、杜之義，起於魏末晉初。及越騎校尉程猗贊成王肅，駁鄭禫二十七月之失，為六徵三驗，上言於晉武帝曰：『夫禮國之大典，兆民所日用，豈可二哉。今服禫者各各不同，非聖世一統之謂。鄭玄說二十七月禫，甚乖大義。臣每難鄭失，六有徵，三有驗，初未能破臣難而通玄說者。』如猗之意，謂鄭義廢矣。太康中，許猛上言扶鄭，釋六徵，[9]解三驗，以鄭禫二十七月為得，猗及王肅為失。而博士宋昌等議猛扶鄭為衷，晉武從之。王、杜之義，於是敗矣。王、杜之義見敗者，晉武知其不可行故也。而上省同猗而贊王，欲虧鄭之成軌，竊所未寧。更無異義，還從前處。」

Zhen further submitted: "According to the Shi Yu Rites, for three years of mourning: after one cycle the minor auspicious ceremony; after another cycle the major auspicious ceremony; in the middle month the cap-removal ceremony. Zheng Xuan says, "'Middle' means 'between'"; "from the mourning to this point, altogether twenty-seven months." The rites also say: "On the day of the auspicious ceremony, strike the plain zither." Zheng says: "Striking the zither means preserving music." Five days after Confucius's auspicious ceremony, he played the zither but could not complete a piece; after ten days he could complete reed-pipe songs. Zheng's commentary, Zheng's Record, and the passage that after passing a month one may sing—all mean that he personally, after passing a month, may do so. This means preserving music, not what is properly called music. Music is performed by having artisans do it. Jin Erudite Xu Meng explained the three proofs, saying: According to the songs Li Sao and Wheat in Ear, the Minor Odes say, "The gentleman makes songs only to declare his grief"; the Wei Odes say, "My heart is full of sorrow—I sing and chant." Matters such as these—how can they be called metal-and-stone music? Therefore unaccompanied singing is called ballad; unaccompanied blowing is called harmony. The Record says: "Matching tones and making music of them, adding shields, axes, feathers, and plumes—this is called music." As for ritual music applied to metal and stone, transcending mere sound—this is what is properly called music. As for the plain zither, to show the end of mourning, or reed-pipe songs to reduce grief—these are not music. The interlinear commentary says: At the major auspicious ceremony one removes the coarse hemp; staff in hand, plain white hemp with hem—this is the garment of the major auspicious ceremony. The Miscellaneous Records commentary says: "Black upper garment and yellow lower garment—this is the cap-removal sacrifice; yellow means not yet fully auspicious." The Tan Gong says: "At the auspicious ceremony, white hemp; in that month cap-removal; in the following month, music." Zheng's Record: Zhao Shang asked; Zheng Xuan answered: "Auspicious ceremony" means the major auspicious ceremony, the twenty-fifth month. "In that month cap-removal" means the twenty-seventh month, not the month of the preceding auspicious ceremony. In the following month, music. Xu Meng explained the six proofs, saying: Music means the music in which the eight tones are harmoniously blended. This means in the twenty-eighth month, when artisans perform metal-and-stone music. But the rebuttal says: "After the major auspicious ceremony, the mourning obligations are ended." If the rebuttal stands thus, of what use is cap-removal? The rebuttal also says: "Is striking the zither during cap-removal also an offense?" Yet during cap-removal one wears yellow lower garments—not yet fully auspicious; striking the zither to preserve music is permitted by the rites. If artisans perform the eight tones and blend them into harmony, since the following month has not yet arrived, why should there be no offense! The rebuttal also says: "During cap-removal one may already attend to imperial duties—why may he not request reinstatement?" Examining Longhu's case: he has been in mourning twenty-six months and has only now reached plain white hemp with hem—the major auspicious period; what is called cap-removal? Three years including intercalary months—there is no room for doubt in principle. Hemp garments still on his body, yet he falsely seeks office and glory—this is a grave fault; how can his offense be set aside! Moreover, reviewing Wang Su and Du Yu's interpretation, cap-removal and the auspicious ceremony in the same month entirely contradict Zheng Xuan's meaning. Mourning for the dead should observe distant dates, yet he wishes to remove it quickly—how hasty! This humble office's shallow judgment holds that Zheng is correct. Why? The Record of Rites says: "Auspicious affairs should observe near dates; inauspicious affairs should observe distant dates." The Analects also say: "In mourning, better express grief than ease." The mourning period is three years; grief exhausts a lifetime. The interpretation of the middle month, though it admits two meanings, still favors distant dates and expressing grief. Moreover, examining Wang Su and Du Yu's interpretation, it arose at the end of Wei and the beginning of Jin. Commandant of the Rapid Cavalry Cheng Yi endorsed Wang Su, rebutting Zheng Xuan's error regarding cap-removal in the twenty-seventh month, composing six proofs and three verifications, and submitted to Emperor Wu of Jin: "Rites are the great canon of the state, used daily by the myriad people—how can there be two standards?" Today those observing cap-removal differ one from another—this is not what is meant by unity in a sage age. Zheng Xuan's doctrine of cap-removal in the twenty-seventh month greatly violates the great principle. Your subject has repeatedly challenged Zheng's errors—six have proofs, three have verifications—and at first none could break my challenges and reconcile Zheng's doctrine. According to Yi's intent, Zheng's doctrine was abolished. In the Taikang era, Xu Meng submitted in support of Zheng, explaining the six proofs and resolving the three verifications, holding that Zheng's cap-removal in the twenty-seventh month was correct and that Yi and Wang Su were in error. Erudites Song Chang and others held that Meng's support of Zheng was correct, and Emperor Wu of Jin followed them. Wang Su and Du Yu's interpretation was thereby defeated. The reason Wang Su and Du Yu's interpretation was defeated was that Emperor Wu of Jin knew it could not be implemented. Yet the superior office agrees with Yi and endorses Wang, wishing to impair Zheng's established standard—I am privately uneasy about this. There is no further differing interpretation; return to the former ruling."

鴻又駁曰：「案三年之喪，沒閏之義，儒生學士，猶或病諸。龍虎生自戎馬之鄉，不蒙稽古之訓，數月成年，便懼違緩。原其本非貪榮求位，而欲責以義方，未可便爾也。且三年之喪，再期而大祥，中月而禫。鄭玄以中為間，王、杜以為是月之中。鄭亦未為必會經旨，王、杜豈於必乖聖意。既諸儒探賾先聖，後賢見有不同，晉武後雖從宋昌、許猛之駁，同鄭禫議，然初亦從程猗，贊成王、杜之言。二論得否，未可知也。聖人大祥之後，鼓素琴，成笙歌者，以喪事既終，餘哀之中，可以存樂故也。而樂府必以干戚羽毛，施之金石，然後為樂，樂必使工為之。庶民凡品，於祥前鼓琴，可無罪乎？律之所防，豈必為貴士，亦及凡庶。府之此義，彌不通矣。魯人朝祥而暮歌，孔子以為踰月則可矣。爾則大祥之後，喪事已終，鼓琴笙歌，經禮所許。龍虎欲宿衞皇宮，豈欲合刑五歲。就如鄭義，二十七月而禫，二十六月十五升、布深衣、素冠、縞紕及黃裳、綵纓以居者，此則三年之餘哀，不在服數之內也。衰絰則埋之於地，杖則棄之隱處，此非喪事終乎？府以大祥之後，不為喪事之終，何得復言素琴以示終也。喪事尚遠日，誠如鄭義。龍虎未盡二十七月而請宿衞，實為怱怱，於戚之理，合在情責。便以深衣素縞之時，而罪同杖絰苫塊之日，於禮憲未允。詳之律意，冒喪求仕，謂在斬焉草土之中，不謂除衰杖之後也。又龍虎具列居喪日月，無所隱冒，府應告之以禮，遣還終月。便幸彼昧識，欲加之罪，豈是遵禮敦風，愛民之致乎？正如鄭義，龍虎罪亦不合刑，怱怱之失，宜科鞭五十。」

Hong rebutted further: "According to the three years of mourning, the principle of including intercalary months—even Ruist scholars sometimes find it difficult. Longhu was born in a land of war-horses and did not receive training in examining antiquity; counting months as years, he feared violating the delay. Considering his origin, he was not greedy for glory or seeking office; to hold him to the standard of righteousness immediately is not yet possible. Moreover, for three years of mourning: after two cycles the major auspicious ceremony; in the middle month the cap-removal ceremony. Zheng Xuan takes "middle" to mean "between"; Wang Su and Du Yu take it to mean the middle of that month. Zheng is not necessarily in accord with the classic's intent; Wang Su and Du Yu are not necessarily contrary to the sage's intent. Since the Ruists probed the profundities of the ancient sages and later worthies differed, although Emperor Wu of Jin later followed Song Chang and Xu Meng's rebuttal and agreed with Zheng's cap-removal doctrine, at first he also followed Cheng Yi and endorsed Wang Su and Du Yu's words. Whether the two doctrines are correct or not cannot yet be known. After the sage's major auspicious ceremony, striking the plain zither and completing reed-pipe songs—because the mourning obligations are ended, within remaining grief one may preserve music. But the Music Office must add shields, axes, feathers, and plumes, apply them to metal and stone, and only then is it music; music must be performed by artisans. For commoners of ordinary rank, to strike the zither before the auspicious ceremony—can there be no offense? What the statutes guard against is not necessarily limited to nobles—it also reaches common people. The office's interpretation on this point is even less coherent. The man of Lu sang in the morning of the auspicious ceremony and in the evening; Confucius held that after passing a month it would be acceptable. Thus after the major auspicious ceremony, when mourning obligations are ended, striking the zither and reed-pipe songs are permitted by the classics and rites. Longhu wished to stand night guard at the imperial palace—did he wish to incur five years' penal servitude? Even following Zheng's doctrine, cap-removal in the twenty-seventh month—in the twenty-sixth month one ascends fifteen steps, wears cloth deep garment, plain cap, white hemp with hem, yellow lower garment, and colored tassels to dwell—this is the remaining grief of the three years, outside the count of mourning garments. The coarse hemp is buried in the ground; the staff is cast away in a hidden place—is this not the end of mourning obligations? The office holds that after the major auspicious ceremony mourning is not ended—how can one again speak of the plain zither to show the end? Mourning obligations should observe distant dates—this is indeed as in Zheng's doctrine. Longhu had not completed twenty-seven months yet requested night guard—this was truly hasty; in the principle of expressing grief, censure by sentiment is fitting. To punish him while wearing deep garment and plain white hemp the same as on the days of staff, coarse hemp, and mat on the ground—is not acceptable in ritual law. Examining the statute's intent, falsely seeking office while in mourning refers to being amid hemmed-edge mourning and earth on the head—not to after removing coarse hemp and staff. Moreover, Longhu fully listed the months and days of his mourning without concealment; the office should instruct him in the rites and send him back to complete the month. To take advantage of his ignorance and wish to impose punishment on him—is this observing the rites, promoting customs, and reaching the utmost of loving the people? Even following Zheng's doctrine, Longhu's offense also does not warrant penal servitude; for the hasty fault, he should be sentenced to fifty strokes of the whip."

三年七月，司空、清河王懌第七叔母北海王妃劉氏薨，司徒、平原郡開國公高肇兄子太子洗馬員外亡，[10]並上言，未知出入猶作鼓吹不，請下禮官議決。太學博士封祖冑議：「喪大記云：期九月之喪，既葬飲酒食肉，不與人樂之；五月三月之喪，比葬，飲酒食肉，不與人樂之；世叔母、故主、宗子，直云飲酒食肉，不言不與人樂之。鄭玄云：『義服恩輕。』以此推之，明義服葬容有樂理。又禮：『大功言而不議，小功議而不及樂。』言論之間，尚自不及，其於聲作，明不得也。雖復功緦，[11]樂在宜止。」四門博士蔣雅哲議：「凡三司之尊，開國之重，其於王服，皆有厭絕。若尊同體敵，雖疏尚宜徹樂。如或不同，子姓之喪非嫡者，既殯之後，義不闕樂。」國子助教韓神固議：「夫羽旄可以展耳目之適，[12]絲竹可以肆遊宴之娛，故於樂貴縣，有哀則廢。至若德儉如禮，升降有數，文物昭旂旗之明，錫鸞為行動之響，〔鳴鐃以警眾，聲笳以清路者，所以辨等〕列，明貴賤，[13]非措哀樂於其間矣。謂威儀鼓吹依舊為允。」

In the seventh month of the third year, Minister of Works Prince Yi of Qinghe lost his seventh uncle's wife, Princess Liu of Beihai; Minister of Education Gao Zhao, Marquis of Pingyuan, lost his elder brother's son, an outer attendant Groom of the Heir Apparent—they both submitted, uncertain whether when going out they should still perform chui-bo music, and asked ritual officials to deliberate and decide. Grand Academy Erudite Feng Zuzhou argued: "The Record of Mourning says: For one-year and nine-month mourning, after burial one may drink wine and eat meat but not make music with others; for five-month and three-month mourning, by the time of burial one may drink wine and eat meat but not make music with others; for father's younger brother's wife, former master, and lineage heir, it simply says drink wine and eat meat, without saying not to make music with others. Zheng Xuan says: "Mourning by obligation has lighter obligation." Inferring from this, it is clear that mourning by obligation after burial may permit music in principle. The rites also say: "Greater merit—speak but do not deliberate; lesser merit—deliberate but do not reach music." In the sphere of speech and discussion one still does not reach it; as for producing sound, it is clearly not permitted. Even for greater and lesser merit mourning, music should cease." Four Gates Erudite Jiang Yazhe argued: "For all who hold the dignity of the Three Excellencies and the weight of founding a state, in mourning for royal kin there is complete cessation. If the honored rank is equal in body and status, even if distant in kinship, music should still be withdrawn. If otherwise, for mourning of non-eldest sons of the clan, after the encoffining, in principle music need not cease." National University Assistant Instructor Han Sheng argued: "Feather banners can extend the pleasure of eyes and ears; silk and bamboo can expand the amusement of feasts and banquets—therefore in music what is valued is suspension; when there is grief it is abolished. As for virtue and frugality according to ritual, ascent and descent with proper measure, cultural emblems displaying the brightness of banners and flags, bestowing the phoenix-bell as sound for movement—striking the nao to alert the multitude and sounding the reed-pipe to clear the road serve to distinguish ranks and clarify noble and base; grief and joy are not placed among them. I hold that ceremonial music and chui-bo should continue as before, which is fitting."

兼儀曹郎中房景先駁曰：「案祖冑議以功緦有喪，鼓吹不作；雅哲議齊衰卒哭，簫管必陳，準之輕重，理用未安。聖人推情以制服，據服以副心，何容拜虞生之奠於神宮，襲衰麻而奏樂。大燧一移，哀情頓盡，反心以求，豈制禮之意也。就如所言，義服恩輕，既虞而樂，正服一期，何以為斷？或義服尊，正服卑，如此之比，復何品節？雅哲所議，公子之喪非嫡者，既殯之後，義不闕樂。案古雖有尊降，不見作樂之文，未詳此據，竟在何典？然君之於臣，本無服體，但恩誠相感，致存隱惻。是以仲遂卒垂，笙籥不入；智悼在殯，杜蕢明言。豈大倫之痛，既殯而樂乎？又神固等所議，以為笳鼓不在樂限，鳴鐃以警眾，聲笳而清路者，所以辨等列，明貴賤耳，雖居哀恤，施而不廢。粗而言之，似如可通，考諸正典，未為符合。案詩云『鍾鼓既設』，『鼓鍾伐鼛』，又云『於論鼓鍾，於樂辟雍』。言則相連，豈非樂乎？八音之數，本無笳名，推而類之，簫管之比，豈可以名稱小殊，而不為樂。若以王公位重，威飾宜崇，鼓吹公給，不可私辭者，魏絳和戎，受金石之賞，鍾公勳茂，蒙五熟之賜；若審功膺賞，君命必行，豈可陳嘉牢於齊殯之時，擊鍾磬於〈疑〉祔之後？ [14]尋究二三，未有依據。國子職兼文學，令問所歸，宜明據典謨，曲盡斟酌，率由必衷，以辨深惑。何容總議並申，無所析剖，更詳得失，據典正議。」

Concurrent Director of the Ritual Bureau Fang Jingxian rebutted: "According to Zuzhou's argument, when there is greater or lesser merit mourning, chui-bo is not performed; Yazhe holds that after qi-cui mourning and the end of wailing, pipes must be displayed—weighing lightness and heaviness, the reasoning is not settled. The sage extends feeling to establish garments and relies on garments to match the heart—how can one offer the Yu sacrifice in the spirit palace while wearing mourning hemp and perform music? The great torch shifts once and grief is instantly exhausted—seeking by reversing the heart, is this the intent of making rites? Even as stated, mourning by obligation has lighter obligation—after the Yu sacrifice there is music; proper mourning is one year—what is the criterion for stopping? Or obligation mourning is honored while proper mourning is base—in such comparisons, what gradation applies? What Yazhe argued—that for mourning of a lord's son who is not the eldest, after encoffining music need not cease. Examining antiquity, though there is honoring and lowering of rank, no text on performing music is seen—this evidence is unclear; in which canon does it ultimately lie? Yet between lord and minister there is originally no garment relationship; only sincerity of favor moves them to preserve hidden compassion. Therefore when Zhongsui was near death, reed-pipes did not enter; when Zhi Dao was in the coffin, Du Kui spoke plainly. Can the pain of great human relations permit music after encoffining? Moreover, what Sheng and others argued—that reed-pipes and drums are not within the limits of music; striking the nao to alert the multitude and sounding the reed-pipe to clear the road serve to distinguish ranks and clarify noble and base; though in mourning compassion, they are applied without abolition. Stated roughly, it seems acceptable; examined against the canonical classics, it does not conform. The Odes say "Bells and drums are set up," "Strike the bells, beat the great drum," and also "Harmoniously beat the bells, joyfully at the Yong academy." The words are connected—are these not music? Among the eight tones there is originally no name for the reed-pipe; extending by analogy, compared with pipes and flutes—can a slight difference in name mean it is not music? If because princes and dukes hold heavy rank and ceremonial adornment should be exalted, chui-bo is publicly supplied and cannot be privately declined—Wei Jiang made peace with the Rong and received metal-and-stone reward; Duke Zhong's merit was abundant and he received the gift of five cooked dishes; if merit is verified and reward received, the lord's command must be carried out—can one set out the fine ox at the time of qi mourning encoffining, strike bells and chimes at 〈Doubtful passage.〉 The time after enshrining? Investigating two or three points, there is no basis. The National University's duty includes literature; to whom the command question belongs, they should clearly cite canonical documents, thoroughly deliberate, follow what is surely right, and resolve deep confusion. How can they submit all deliberations together without analysis? Deliberate further on gain and loss and decide correctly according to the canon."

祕書監、國子祭酒孫惠蔚，太學博士封祖冑等重議：「司空體服衰麻，心懷慘切，其於聲樂，本無作理，但以鼓吹公儀，致有疑論耳。案鼓吹之制，蓋古之軍聲，獻捷之樂，不常用也。有重位茂勳，乃得備作。方之金石，準之管絃，其為音奏，雖曰小殊，然其大體，與樂無異。是以禮云：『鼓無當於五聲，五聲不得不和。』竊惟今者，加台司之儀，蓋欲兼廣威華，若有哀用之，無變於吉，便是一人之年，悲樂並用，求之禮情，於理未盡。二公雖受之於公，用之非私，出入聲作，亦以娛己。今既有喪，心不在樂，笳鼓之事，明非欲聞，其從寧戚之義，廢而勿作。但禮崇公卿出入之儀，至有趨以采齊，行以肆夏，和鑾之聲，佩玉之飾者，所以顯槐鼎之至貴，彰宰輔之為重。今二公地處尊親，儀殊百辟，鼓吹之用，無容全去。禮有懸而不樂，今陳之以備威儀，不作以示哀痛。述理節情，愚謂為允。」詔曰：「可從國子後議。」

Director of the Secretariat and Libationer of the National University Sun Huiwei, Grand Academy Erudite Feng Zuzhou and others redeliberated: "The Minister of Works personally wears mourning hemp and harbors deep grief; as for music, there is originally no reason to perform it—only because chui-bo is a public ceremony has doubt arisen. According to the chui-bo institution, it was anciently military sound, music for presenting victory—not commonly used. Only those of heavy rank and abundant merit could fully perform it. Compared with metal and stone instruments and measured against pipes and strings, their sounding may differ in small ways, yet in essence they are no different from music. Therefore the Rites say: "The drum does not match any single one of the five tones, yet the five tones must harmonize with it." Privately I consider that adding the Three Excellencies' ceremony is meant to extend prestige and splendor; if it were used in mourning without any change from auspicious occasions, one man would employ grief and joy in the same year—measured against ritual feeling, that is not fully right. The two Excellencies may receive it as a public grant, yet their use is not purely private; when music sounds on their comings and goings, it also serves to entertain themselves. Now that there is mourning, the mind is not on music; horn and drum clearly are not meant to be heard. Following the principle of finding peace in grief, they should be set aside and not performed. But the rites honor the ceremony of ministers' comings and goings—to the point of quickening pace to Caiqi, walking to Sixia, harmonized bells, and jade pendants—all to display the supreme honor of the minister's seat and show the weight of chief ministers. Now the two Excellencies stand in honored kinship, their ceremonies differing from all other officials; chui-bo use cannot be entirely removed. The rites provide for instruments to be hung without being played; now let them be displayed to complete the imposing ceremony, not performed, to show grief and pain. Setting forth principle and restraining emotion—I deem this acceptable." The edict said: "The National University's latter proposal may be followed."

清河王懌所生母羅太妃薨，表求申齊衰三年。詔禮官博議。侍中、中書監、太子少傅崔光議：「喪服大功章云：公之庶昆弟為母。傳曰：『先君餘尊之所厭，不得過大功。』記：『公子為其母練冠麻衣縓緣，既葬除之。』傳曰：『何以不在五服中也？君之〔所不服，[15]子亦不敢服也。』此皆謂公侯枝子，藉父兄以為稱，其母本妾，猶繫之於君，不得以子貴為夫人者也。至如應、韓啟宇，厥母固自申內主之尊；凡、蔣別封，[16]其親亦容盡君妣之重，若然，便所謂周公制禮而子姪共尊。漢世諸王之國，稱太后，宮室百官，周制京邑，自當一傍天子之式，而不用公庶之軌。魏氏已來，雖羣臣稱微，然嘗得出臨民土，恐亦未必捨近行遠，服功衰與練麻也。羅太妃居王母之尊二十許載，兩裔藩后，並建大邦，子孫盈第，臣吏滿國，堂堂列辟，禮樂備陳，吉慶凶哀宜稱情典。則不應傍之公第，仍拘先厭。愚謂可遠準春秋子貴之文，上祔周漢侯王之體，成母后之尊，蠲帝妾之賤，申疏喪之極慕，擬功練之輕悲。誠如此：則三年之喪，無乖於自達；巨創之痛，有遂乎在中，寧成過哀，情禮俱允。」時議者不同，詔服大功。〕

Lady Luo, birth mother of Prince Qinghe Yuan Yi, passed away; he petitioned to observe qi-cui mourning for three years. An edict ordered the ritual officials to deliberate broadly. Attendant-in-Ordinary, Director of the Secretariat for Imperial Histories, and Junior Tutor of the Heir Apparent Cui Guang argued: "The da-gong chapter of Mourning Garments says that a duke's junior brother by a concubine wears da-gong for his mother. The commentary says: "What the former lord's surviving honor imposes cannot exceed da-gong." The Record says: "A nobleman's son for his mother wears a dyed cap and hemp garments with purple edging; after burial he removes them." The commentary says: "Why is this not among the five grades of mourning?" What the lord in a doubtful passage does not wear, the son also dares not wear. All these refer to branch sons of dukes and marquises who rely on father and elder brother for their title; their mothers were originally concubines, still bound to the lord, and could not be made principal wives through the son's nobility. As for Ying Han Qiyu, his mother indeed asserted the honor of mistress of the inner quarters; Fan Jiang received separate enfeoffment in a doubtful passage; his kin could also fully bear the weight of the lord's mother. If so, this would be what is called the Duke of Zhou establishing rites so that sons and nephews share honor. In Han times the kings' domains called their mothers empress dowager, with palace chambers and the hundred officials; following the Zhou system of the capital domain, they naturally modeled themselves on the Son of Heaven and did not follow the track of a duke's junior sons. Since the Wei dynasty, though court ministers are called petty, they could still go out to govern the people's land; likely they too did not abandon what was near to follow what was distant, wearing xiao-gong hemp and dyed mourning. Lady Luo held the honor of royal mother for some twenty years; two generations of frontier queens both founded great states; descendants filled the halls and officials filled the realm; dignified among feudal lords, with ritual and music fully arrayed—joyous and mournful occasions ought to match canonical sentiment. Then she should not be compared to a duke's junior residence, still bound by prior imposed reduction. I deem one may take afar the text of "when the son is honored" from the Spring and Autumn, and attach above it the form of Zhou and Han feudal kings—completing the honor of queen mother, releasing the low status of imperial concubine, extending the utmost yearning of coarse mourning, and likening the lighter grief of da-gong and dyed mourning. If truly so, then the three-year mourning would not conflict with self-expression; The pain of a great wound would find fulfillment within; better to risk excess of grief—both sentiment and rite would be acceptable." Those deliberating at the time differed; an edict ordered da-gong mourning.

〔時又疑清河國官從服之制，太學博士李景林等二十一人議：「按禮文，君為母三年，臣從服期。今司空自為先帝所〕厭，不得申其罔極。依禮大功，據喪服厭降之例，並無從厭之文。今太妃既捨六宮之稱，加太妃之號，為封君之母，尊崇一國。臣下固宜服期，不得以王服厭屈，而更有降。禮有從輕而重，義包於此。」太學博士封偉伯等十人議：「案臣從君服，降君一等。君為母三年，臣則期。今司空以仰厭先帝，俯就大功，臣之從服，不容有過。但禮文殘缺，制無正條，竊附情理，謂宜小功。庶君臣之服，不失其序，升降之差，頗會禮意。」清河國郎中令韓子熙議：

At the time there was again doubt about the Qinghe princely domain officials' protocol for following mourning; Grand Academy Erudite Li Jinglin and twenty-one others argued: "According to ritual texts, when the lord wears mourning for his mother for three years, officials follow with one year. Now the Minister of Works is himself reduced by the Former Emperor in a doubtful passage and cannot extend his boundless mourning. According to ritual da-gong, based on the examples of imposed reduction in Mourning Garments, there are altogether no texts on following with imposed reduction. Now the Grand Consort has already relinquished the title of the six palaces and received the title of Grand Consort, as mother of the enfeoffed lord, honored throughout the realm. Officials should properly wear one-year mourning; they cannot, because the prince's mourning is reduced, add further reduction. The rites provide for "following from lighter to heavier"; the principle encompasses this." Grand Academy Erudite Feng Weibo and ten others argued: "According to the rule that officials follow the lord's mourning, reduced one grade from the lord. When the lord mourns his mother for three years, officials wear one year. Now the Minister of Works, constrained above by the Former Emperor's imposed reduction, accepts da-gong below; officials' following mourning cannot exceed that. But the ritual text is incomplete and there is no definitive regulation; privately applying reason and sentiment, I say xiao-gong is appropriate. Thus lord and official mourning would not lose their order, and the gradation of ascent and descent would fairly accord with ritual intent." Director of the Palace Secretariat of the Qinghe Domain Han Zixi argued:

謹案喪服大功章云：公之庶昆弟為其母妻。傳曰：「何以大功？先君餘尊之所厭，不敢過大功也。」夫以一國之貴，子猶見厭，況四海之尊，固無申理。頃國王遭太妃憂，議者援引斯條，降王之服。尋究義例，頗有一途。但公之庶昆弟，或為士，或為大夫。士之卑賤，不得仰匹親王，正以餘厭共同，可以奪情相擬。然士非列土，無臣從服，今王有臣，復不得一準諸士矣。議者仍令國臣從服以期，嚚昧所見，未曉高趣。案不杖章云：為君之父母、妻、長子、祖父母。傳曰：「父母、長子，君服斬，妻則小君，父卒，然後為祖後者服斬。」傳所以深釋父卒為祖服斬者，蓋恐君為祖期，臣亦同期也。明臣之後期，[17]由君服斬。若由君服斬，然後期，則君服大功，安得亦期也？若依公之庶昆弟，不云有臣從期。若依為君之父母，則出應申三年。此之二章，殊不相干，引彼則須去此，引此則須去彼。終不得兩服功期，渾雜一圖也。議者見餘尊之厭不得過大功，則令王依庶昆弟；見不杖章有為君之父母，便令臣從服以期。此乃據殘文，守一隅，恐非先聖之情，達禮之喪矣。

Carefully according to the Mourning Garments da-gong chapter: a duke's junior brother by a concubine wears da-gong for his mother and wife. The commentary says: "Why da-gong? What the former lord's surviving honor imposes—one dares not exceed da-gong." If for the honor of one state the son is still subject to imposed reduction, how much more for the honor of all under Heaven—there is certainly no ground for extension. Recently when the prince suffered the Grand Consort's bereavement, those deliberating cited this passage and reduced the prince's mourning. Examining the meaning and precedent, there is indeed one path. But a duke's junior brothers by concubines may be shi or may be grand officers. The low and base status of shi cannot be matched upward to a prince; precisely because the imposed reduction from surviving honor is shared, one may analogize by overriding sentiment. Yet shi do not hold allotted lands and have no officials following their mourning; now the prince has officials, and again cannot be measured solely against shi. Those deliberating still ordered domain officials to follow with one-year mourning; in my benighted view I do not understand the higher intent. According to the chapter on mourning without staff: for the lord's parents, wife, eldest son, and grandparents. The commentary says: "For parents and the eldest son the lord wears zhan; for the wife, as lesser lord; after the father's death, then for one succeeding as heir to the grandfather he wears zhan." The reason the commentary deeply explains wearing zhan for the grandfather after the father's death is that it fears if the lord wears one year for the grandfather, officials would also wear one year. It makes clear that officials' following one-year mourning in a doubtful passage derives from the lord wearing zhan. If officials' one year derives from the lord wearing zhan, then when the lord wears da-gong, how can they also wear one year? If one follows a duke's junior brother by a concubine, it does not say that officials follow with one year. If one follows mourning for the lord's parents, the result should be three years. These two chapters are wholly unrelated; citing that one requires abandoning this one, citing this one requires abandoning that one. In the end one cannot combine da-gong and one-year mourning in a single confused scheme. Those deliberating, seeing that imposed reduction from surviving honor cannot exceed da-gong, then ordered the prince to follow junior brothers by concubines; seeing in the chapter on mourning without staff mourning for the lord's parents, then ordered officials to follow with one year. This is relying on fragmentary text and holding to one corner—I fear it is not the sentiment of the former sages, nor mourning that truly comprehends the rites.

且從服之體，自有倫貫，雖秩微閽寺，位卑室老，未有君服細絰，裁踰三時，臣著疏衰，獨涉兩歲。案禮，天子諸侯之大臣，唯服君之父母、妻、長子、祖父母，其餘不服也。唯近臣閽寺，隨君而服耳。若大夫之室老，君之所服，無所不從，而降一等。此三條是從服之通旨，較然之明例。雖近臣之賤，不過隨君之服，未有君輕而臣服重者也。議者云，禮有從輕而重，臣之從君，義包於此。愚謂服問所云「有從輕而重，公子之妻為其皇姑」，直是禮記之異，獨此一條耳。何以知其然？案服問，經云：「有從輕而重，公子之妻為其皇姑。」而大傳云：從服有六，其六曰「有從輕而重」。注曰：「公子之妻，為其皇姑。」若從輕而重，不獨公子之妻者，則鄭君宜更見流輩廣論所及，不應還用服問之文，以釋大傳之義。明從輕而重，唯公子之妻。臣之從君，不得包於此矣。若復有君為母大功，臣從服期，當云有從輕而重，公子之妻為其皇姑；為母大功，[18]臣從服期。何為不備書兩條，以杜將來之惑，而偏著一事，彌結今日之疑。且臣為君母，乃是徒從，徒從之體，君亡則已。妻為皇姑，既非徒從，雖公子早沒，可得不制服乎？為君之父母妻子，君已除喪而後聞喪，則不稅，蓋以恩輕不能追服。假令妻在遠方，姑沒遙域，過期而後聞喪，復可不稅服乎？若姑亡必不關公子有否，[19]聞喪則稅，不計日月遠近者，[20]則與臣之從君，聊自不同矣。

Moreover the substance of following mourning has its own order: though gatekeepers rank low and household elders rank humble, never has the lord worn fine hemp for barely more than three seasons while officials wore coarse hemp alone for two full years. According to the rites, great ministers of the Son of Heaven and feudal lords wear mourning only for the lord's parents, wife, eldest son, and grandparents; for the rest they do not. Only close attendants and gatekeepers follow the lord's mourning. As for a grand officer's household elder, whatever the lord wears he follows without exception, reduced one grade. These three rules are the general principle of following mourning—clear and evident examples. Even for lowly close attendants, they merely follow the lord's mourning; never has the lord worn light mourning while officials wore heavy. Those deliberating say the rites have "following from lighter to heavier," and officials following the lord—the principle encompasses this. I deem what Mourning Questions says—"there is following from lighter to heavier: a nobleman's wife for her husband's mother"—is simply an exception in the Record of Rites, this one passage alone. How does one know this is so? According to Mourning Questions, the classic says: "There is following from lighter to heavier: a nobleman's wife for her husband's mother." The Great Commentary says: following mourning has six kinds; the sixth is "there is following from lighter to heavier." The commentary says: "A nobleman's wife for her husband's mother." If "following from lighter to heavier" were not limited to a nobleman's wife, then Master Zheng ought to have cited other widespread examples; he should not have returned to the text of Mourning Questions to explain the meaning of the Great Commentary. This makes clear that "following from lighter to heavier" applies only to a nobleman's wife. Officials following the lord cannot be included in this. If there were also the case of the lord wearing da-gong for his mother and officials following with one year, it ought to say: "There is following from lighter to heavier: a nobleman's wife for her husband's mother;" for the mother da-gong in a doubtful passage, officials follow with one year. Why not fully record both passages to forestall future confusion, instead of singling out one matter and only tightening today's doubt? Moreover an official mourning for the lord's mother is merely following in name; the substance of mere following ends when the lord dies. A wife mourning for her husband's mother is not mere following; even if the nobleman died early, can she fail to wear mourning? For the lord's parents, wife, and children, if the lord has already ended mourning and then hears of the bereavement, he does not don mourning garments—because the bond is light and he cannot retroactively mourn. Suppose the wife is far away and the mother-in-law dies in a distant region; after the period has passed she then hears of the bereavement—can she again fail to don mourning garments? If upon the mother-in-law's death it surely does not depend on whether the nobleman still lives in a doubtful passage, and upon hearing of bereavement one dons mourning without regard to distance in time or place in doubtful passages, then this is already somewhat different from officials following the lord.

又案，臣服君黨，不過五人，悉是三年，其餘不服。妻服夫黨，可直五人乎？期功以降，可得無服乎？臣妻事殊，邈然胡越，苟欲引之，恐非通例也。愚謂臣有合離，三諫待決；妻無去就，一醮終身。親義既有參差，喪服固宜不等。故見厭之婦，可得申其本服；君屈大功，不可過從以期。所以從麻而齊，專屬公子之妻；隨輕而重，何關從服之臣。尋理求途，儻或在此。必以臣妻相準，未覩其津也。

Further according to the texts, officials mourning for the lord's kin extend to no more than five persons, all for three years; for the rest they do not mourn. Can a wife's mourning for her husband's kin be limited to exactly five persons? For one-year mourning and below, can there be no mourning at all? Official and wife are wholly different matters, as far apart as Hu and Yue; if one wishes to cite them together, I fear it is not a general rule. I deem that officials may part and reunite, with three remonstrances awaiting decision; wives have no leaving or staying—a single libation binds for life. Since the meaning of kinship differs, mourning garments should naturally differ as well. Therefore a wife subject to imposed reduction may still extend her proper mourning; when the lord is reduced to da-gong, officials cannot exceed that by following with one year. Therefore following from hemp to qi-cui belongs exclusively to a nobleman's wife; following from lighter to heavier—what has that to do with officials in following mourning? Seeking principle and finding a path, perhaps it lies here. If one must measure official against wife, I have not yet seen the ford.

子熙誠不能遠探墳籍，曲論長智，請以情理校其得失。君遭母憂，巨創之痛；臣之為服，從君之義。如何君至九月，便蕭然而即吉；臣猶期年，仍衰哭於君第。創巨而反輕，從義而反重。緣之人情，豈曰是哉？侍中崔光學洞今古，達禮之宗，頃探幽立義，申三年之服。雖經典無文，前儒未辨，然推例求旨，理亦難奪。若臣服從期，宜依侍中之論；脫君仍九月，不得如議者之談耳。嬴氏焚坑，禮經殘缺，故今追訪靡據，臨事多惑。愚謂律無正條，須準傍以定罪；禮闕舊文，宜準類以作憲。禮有期同緦功，而服如齊疏者，蓋以在心實輕，於義乃重故也。今欲一依喪服，不可從君九月而服周年；如欲降一等，兄弟之服，不可以服君母。詳諸二途，以取折衷，謂宜麻布，可如齊衰，除限則同小功。所以然者，重其衰麻，尊君母；蹙其日月，隨君降。如此，衰麻猶重，不奪君母之嚴；日月隨降，可塞從輕之責矣。

Zixi truly cannot probe distant tomes and texts or argue at length to display cleverness; I ask to weigh gain and loss by reason and sentiment. The lord has suffered his mother's death—the anguish of a grievous loss; When officials put on mourning, they do so in accordance with the lord's example. Yet how is it that by the ninth month the lord has already cast off mourning and returned to ordinary dress; while his officials still observe a full year of mourning, weeping in sackcloth at the lord's residence? The greater grief is treated as the lighter, and the duty of following one's lord as the heavier. Measured against human feeling, can this be right? Attendant-in-Ordinary Cui Guang's scholarship spans antiquity and the present day, and he has mastered the foundations of ritual. Not long ago, probing obscure points and establishing principle, he argued for three years of mourning. Though the classics offer no explicit passage and earlier scholars left the matter unsettled, when one extends precedent to seek the underlying intent, the reasoning is difficult to refute. If officials' mourning is to follow the one-year period, they should adopt the Attendant-in-Ordinary's view; but if the lord still observes only nine months, the debaters' proposal cannot stand. The Qin burned books and buried scholars, leaving the ritual classics mutilated and incomplete. That is why, when we search the past today, we often find no firm ground, and when we confront actual cases, we are much perplexed. I hold that when the law lacks a direct statute, one must determine guilt by analogy; when ritual lacks an ancient text, one should establish standards by analogous categories. Ritual sometimes prescribes a period equal to si or gong mourning while the garment resembles qi-sang. This is because what feels lighter in the heart may still be heavier in principle. If we now wish to follow Mourning Garments strictly, we cannot follow the lord's nine months and yet wear mourning for a full year; and if we wish to reduce one grade, the mourning worn for a brother cannot be applied to the lord's mother. Weighing both courses to reach a compromise, I propose hemp cloth like qi-cui in weight, but with the period of removal the same as xiao-gong. The reason is to keep the mourning hemp heavy, thereby honoring the lord's mother; while shortening the period to follow the lord's reduction. In this way the mourning hemp would remain heavy and would not strip the lord's mother of her due dignity; and the period would follow the reduction, thereby answering the charge of following too lightly.

尚書李平奏，以謂：「禮，臣為君黨，妻為夫黨，俱為從服，各降君、夫一等。故君服三年，臣服一期。今司空臣懌自以尊厭之禮，奪其罔極之心，國臣厭所不及，當無隨降之理。禮記大傳云『從輕而重』，鄭玄注云『公子之妻為其皇姑』。既舅不厭婦，明不厭者，還應服其本服。此則是其例。」詔曰：「禮有從無服而有服，何但從輕而重乎？懌今自以厭，故不得申其過隙，眾臣古無疑厭之論，而有從輕之據，曷為不得申其本制也。可從尚書及景林等議。」尋詔曰：「比決清河國臣為君母服期，以禮事至重，故追而審之。今更無正據，不可背章生條。但君服既促，而臣服仍遠。禮緣人情，遇厭須變服。可還從前判，既葬除之。」

Secretary Li Ping memorialized, saying: "In ritual, officials mourn for the lord's kin and wives mourn for the husband's kin; both are cases of following mourning, each reduced one grade below lord or husband. Therefore the lord wears three years of mourning, and officials wear one year. Now Minister of Works Yuan Yi, invoking on his own the ritual of honored imposition, has curtailed his boundless grief. State officials lie beyond what imposition can reach, so there should be no reason to follow a reduction. The Great Treatise in the Book of Rites says, "following from lighter to heavier," and Zheng Xuan glosses this as "a nobleman's wife mourning for her mother-in-law the empress dowager." Since the father-in-law does not impose reduction on the daughter-in-law, it is clear that one not subject to imposition should wear the original grade of mourning. This is precisely the precedent." An edict said: "Ritual also provides for following from no mourning to mourning—why limit the matter to following from lighter to heavier? Yi now imposes reduction on his own authority, yet cannot extend his mourning beyond the allotted interval. Officials of old never doubted imposition, but they did have grounds for following lighter mourning—why, then, may he not claim his original standard? The views of the Secretary and of Jinglin and the others may be followed." Shortly afterward an edict said: "We recently ruled that officials of Qinghe state should wear one year of mourning for the lord's mother. Because ritual matters are of the utmost weight, we now revisit and review the decision. We still lack proper textual authority, and one cannot invent new statutes in defiance of established rule. Yet the lord's mourning has already been shortened, while officials' mourning remains long. Ritual follows human feeling; when imposition applies, the garment must be changed. Let the previous ruling stand: mourning is to be removed after burial."

四年春正月丁巳夜，世宗崩于式乾殿。侍中、中書監、太子少傅崔光，侍中、領軍將軍于忠與詹事王顯，中庶子侯剛奉迎肅宗於東宮，入自萬歲門，至顯陽殿，哭踊久之，乃復。王顯欲須明乃行即位之禮。崔光謂顯曰：「天位不可暫曠，何待至明？」顯曰：「須奏中宮。」光曰：「帝崩而太子立，國之常典，何須中宮令也。」光與于忠使小黃門曲集奏置兼官行事。於是光兼太尉，黃門郎元昭兼侍中，顯兼吏部尚書，中庶子裴儁兼吏部郎，中書舍人穆弼兼謁者僕射。光等請肅宗止哭，立於東序。于忠、元昭扶肅宗西面哭十數聲，止，服太子之服。太尉光奉策進璽綬，肅宗跽受，服皇帝衮冕服，[21]御太極前殿。太尉光等降自西階，夜直羣官於庭中北面稽首稱萬歲。

In spring of the fourth year, on the night of dingsi day in the first month, Emperor Shizong died in Shiqian Hall. Attendant-in-Ordinary Cui Guang, who was also Director of the Secretariat for Imperial Histories and Junior Tutor of the Heir Apparent; Attendant-in-Ordinary and Commanding General Yu Zhong; Chamberlain Wang Xian; and Junior Mentor Hou Gang went to the Eastern Palace to receive Emperor Suzong. They entered through Wansui Gate and came to Xianyang Hall, where they wept and stamped in grief for a long time before regaining composure. Wang Xian wished to wait until dawn before performing the enthronement rites. Cui Guang said to Wang Xian, "The throne cannot stand empty even for a moment—why wait until dawn?" Wang Xian said, "We must report to the Inner Palace." Cui Guang said, "When an emperor dies and the heir apparent succeeds, that is the state's standing practice—why should we need an order from the Inner Palace?" Cui Guang and Yu Zhong had the junior palace attendant Qu Ji memorialize to appoint officials with concurrent duties to conduct the rites. Thereupon Cui Guang was given the concurrent post of Grand Commandant; Yellow Gate Gentleman Yuan Zhao concurrently served as Attendant-in-Ordinary; Wang Xian as concurrent Minister of Personnel; Junior Mentor Pei Jun as concurrent Director of Personnel; and Secretariat Drafting Officer Mu Bi as concurrent Superintendent of Protocol. Cui Guang and the others asked Emperor Suzong to stop weeping and stand on the eastern side of the hall. Yu Zhong and Yuan Zhao supported Emperor Suzong as he faced west and wept a dozen times; then he stopped and put on the heir apparent's garments. Grand Commandant Cui Guang presented the edict and advanced the imperial seal and cord. Emperor Suzong received them kneeling, donned the emperor's robe and cap, and took the throne in the front hall of Taiji. Grand Commandant Cui Guang and the others descended the western steps, while officials on night duty in the courtyard faced north, kowtowed, and shouted, "Long live the emperor!"

熙平二年十一月乙丑，太尉、清河王懌表曰：「臣聞百王所尚，莫尚於禮，於禮之重，喪紀斯極。世代沿革，損益不同，遺風餘烈，景行終在。至如前賢往哲，商搉有異。或並證經文，而論情別緒；或各言所見，而討事共端。雖憲章祖述，人自名家，而論議紛綸，理歸羣正。莫不隨時所宗，各為一代之典，自上達下，罔不遵用。是使叔孫之儀，專擅於漢朝；王肅之禮，獨行於晉世。所謂共同軌文，四海畫一者也。至乃折旋俯仰之儀，哭泣升降之節，去來閫巷之容，出入閨門之度，尚須疇諮禮官，博訪儒士，載之翰紙，著在通法。辯答乖殊，證據不明，即詆訶疵謬，糾劾成罪。此乃簡牒成文，可具閱而知者也。未聞有皇王垂範，國無一定之章；英賢贊治，家制異同之式。而欲流風作則，永貽來世。比學官雖建，庠序未修，稽考古今，莫專其任。暨乎宗室喪禮，百僚凶事，冠服制裁，日月輕重，率令博士一人輕爾議之。廣陵王恭、北海王顥同為庶母服，恭則治重居廬，顥則齊期堊室。論親則恭、顥俱是帝孫，語貴則二人並為蕃國，不知兩服之證，據何經典。俄為舛駁，莫有裁正。懿王昵戚，尚或如斯。自茲已降，何可紀極。歷觀漢魏，喪禮諸儀，卷盈數百。或當時名士，往復成規；或一代詞宗，較然為則。況堂堂四海，藹藹如林，而令喪禮參差，始於帝族，非所以儀刑萬國，綴旒四海。臣忝官台傅，備位喉脣，不能秉國之鈞，致斯爽缺。具瞻所誚，無所逃罪。謹略舉恭、顥二國不同之狀，以明喪紀乖異之失。乞集公卿樞納，內外儒學，博議定制，班行天下。使禮無異準，得失有歸，并因事而廣，永為條例。庶塵岳沾河，微酬萬一。」靈太后令曰：「禮者為政之本，何得不同如此！可依表定議。」事在張普惠傳。

In the eleventh month of the second year of Xiping, on yichou day, Grand Commandant Prince Qinghe Yuan Yi memorialized: "I have heard that among all the things the hundred kings held in esteem, none was held higher than ritual; and among the weight of ritual, mourning regulations stand supreme. Generations changed and evolved, with additions and subtractions differing from age to age, yet surviving custom and lingering brilliance—the bright model—endure to the end. Even former worthies and past sages differed in their deliberations. Some cited canonical text together yet argued feeling along separate lines; others each spoke from their own view yet examined the matter from a common starting point. Although each man followed statutes and ancestral models in his own school, amid the profusion of debate principle still returned to collective correctness. Each honored what his age revered and became a standard for a generation; from highest to lowest, all followed and applied it. Thus Shusun Tong's ceremonies held exclusive sway in the Han; and Wang Su's rites alone prevailed in the Jin. This is what is meant by shared standards and a single rule for all under heaven. Even the ceremonies of turning, bowing, and rising; the stages of weeping, ascending, and descending; the bearing shown in coming and going through lanes; the measure of entering and leaving inner gates—all still required consulting ritual officials, seeking counsel broadly from Confucian scholars, recording the results on paper, and fixing them in general law. If debate and reply diverged or evidence was unclear, one was immediately denounced for error and impeached into guilt. This is all recorded in documents and can be fully read and understood. One never hears of an imperial king setting an example while the state lacks fixed statutes; or outstanding worthies assisting in governance while each household followed conflicting forms. Yet wishing to set flowing custom and establish norms to bequeath to later ages forever. Recently, although schools were established, the academies were not properly maintained; when past and present were examined, no one had sole charge of the task. When it came to imperial-clan mourning rites and the funerary affairs of the hundred officials—regulation of caps and garments, and the lightness or weight of mourning periods—a single erudite was routinely and lightly ordered to decide. Prince Guangling Gong and Prince Beihai Hao both mourned for a concubine mother: Gong observed the heavier mourning and dwelt in a mourning hut, while Hao wore qi-cui for one year in a plastered chamber. In kinship, Gong and Hao were both imperial grandsons; in rank, both were feudatory princes—yet on what classic did the evidence for their two different mourning grades rest? Contradictions soon arose, and no one corrected them. Even among honored princes and close kin, matters could still be like this. From this downward, how could one even record it all? Surveying Han and Wei, the various mourning rites fill hundreds of scrolls. Sometimes eminent men of the age exchanged letters and established rules; sometimes a generation's literary master clearly became the standard. How much more, then, under the vast four seas, luxuriant as a forest, can mourning rites be allowed to diverge beginning with the imperial clan? That is no way to model the myriad states and gather all under heaven under one rule. I disgracefully hold the post of Grand Tutor, occupying a spokesman's place, yet have failed to grasp the state's balance and have brought about this lapse. As one upon whom all eyes rest, I am reproached, and there is no escaping guilt. I respectfully offer in brief the differing conditions in Gong's and Hao's two domains to show the fault of divergent mourning regulations. I beg that ministers and key officials, together with Confucian scholars within and without the court, be assembled to deliberate broadly and fix standards, then promulgate them throughout the realm. Let ritual have no divergent standards, let right and wrong have a settled place, and by extending from actual cases establish everlasting statutes. Perhaps even dust from a mountain peak may reach the river, and I may repay my debt in the smallest measure." Empress Dowager Ling ordered, "Ritual is the root of governance—how can it differ like this! Deliberate and fix standards according to the memorial." The matter is recorded in the biography of Zhang Puhui.

十一月，侍中、國子祭酒、儀同三司崔光上言：「被臺祠部曹符，文昭皇太后改葬，議至尊、皇太后、羣臣服制輕重。四門博士劉季明議云：『案喪服，記雖云「改葬緦」，[22]文無指據，至於注解，乖異不同。馬融、王肅云本有三年之服者，鄭及三重。然而後來諸儒，符融者多，與玄者少。今請依馬、王諸儒之議，至尊宜服緦。案記：「外宗為君夫人，猶內宗。」鄭注云：「為君服斬，夫人齊衰，不敢以親服至尊也。」 [23]今皇太后雖上奉宗廟，下臨朝臣，至於為姑，不得過期，計應無服。其清河、汝南二王母服三年，亦宜有緦。自餘王公百官，為君之母妻，唯期而已，並應不服。』又太常博士鄭六議云：『謹檢喪服并中代雜論，記云：「改葬緦。」鄭注：「臣為君，子為父，妻為夫。親見屍柩，不可以無服，故服緦。」 [24]三年者緦，則期已下無服。竊謂鄭氏得服緦之旨，謬三月之言。如臣所見，請依康成之服緦，既葬而除。』愚以為允。」詔可。

In the eleventh month, Attendant-in-Ordinary Cui Guang, who was also Director of the National University and Equal in Rank to the Three Excellencies, submitted: "Having received the dispatch from the Secretariat's Sacrificial Affairs Section concerning the reburial of Empress Dowager Wenzhao, we deliberated on the lightness and weight of mourning for the emperor, the empress dowager, and the multitude of officials. Four Gates Erudite Liu Jiming argued: "According to Mourning Garments, the Record does say 'reburial—si,' but the text offers no pointed basis; as for the commentaries, they diverge and differ." Ma Rong and Wang Su hold that those who originally wore three years of mourning should wear si for three layers; Zheng Xuan also argues for three layers. Yet among later scholars, more accord with Ma Rong, fewer with Zheng Xuan. I now ask that we follow the view of Ma Rong, Wang Su, and the other scholars: the emperor should wear si mourning. According to the Record: "The outer clan mourning for the lord's wife is like the inner clan." Zheng's note says: "For the lord one wears zhan; for the lady one wears qi-cui—one dares not apply kin mourning to the emperor." Now although the empress dowager above serves the ancestral temple and below presides over the court, in mourning for a mother-in-law she cannot exceed one year; by calculation she should wear none. The kings of Qinghe and Runan, who wear three years for their mothers, should also wear si. All remaining princes, nobles, and officials, who for the lord's mother and wife already observe only one year, should likewise wear none. Director of Ceremonies Erudite Zheng Liu also argued: "Having carefully examined Mourning Garments and miscellaneous discussions of the middle ages, the Record says, 'Reburial—si.'" Zheng's note says: "An official for his lord, a son for his father, a wife for her husband. Having personally seen the corpse and coffin, one cannot go without mourning; therefore one wears si." Those who originally wore three years wear si; those at one year and below wear none. I hold that Master Zheng grasped the intent of wearing si and refuted the notion of three months. As I see it, we should follow Kangcheng's rule of si mourning, to be removed after burial. I deem this acceptable." The edict approved it.

二年正月二日元會，高陽王雍以靈太后臨朝，太上秦公喪制未畢，欲罷百戲絲竹之樂。清河王懌以為萬國慶集，天子臨享，宜應備設。太后訪之於侍中崔光，光從雍所執。懌謂光曰：「宜以經典為證。」光據禮記「縞冠玄武，子姓之冠」，父母有重喪，子不純吉。安定公親為外祖，又有師恩，太后不許公除，衰麻在體。正月朔日，還家哭臨，至尊輿駕奉慰。記云：「朋友之墓，有宿草焉而不哭。」是則朋友有期年之哀。子貢云：夫子喪顏淵，若喪子而無服，喪子路亦然。顏淵之喪，饋練肉，夫子受之，彈琴而後食之。若子之哀，則容一期，不舉樂也。孔子既大練，五日彈琴，父母之喪也。由是喪夫子若喪父而無服。心喪三年，由此而制。雖古義難追，比來發詔，每言師、祖之尊。是則一期之內，猶有餘哀。且禮，母有喪服，聲之所聞，子不舉樂。今太后更無別宮，所居嘉福，去太極不為大遠。鼓鍾于宮，聲聞于外，況在內密邇也。君之卿佐，是謂股肱，股肱或虧，何痛如之！智悼子喪未葬，杜蕢所以諫晉平公也。今相國雖已安厝，裁三月爾，陵墳未乾。懌以理證為然，乃從雍議。

In the second year, on the second day of the first month, at the New Year court assembly, Prince of Gaoyang Yuan Yong argued that because Empress Dowager Ling was regent and the Grand Preceptor Duke of Qin's mourning period was not yet finished, the variety shows and string-and-wind music should be canceled. Prince of Qinghe Yuan Yi maintained that with all the states assembled in celebration and the emperor presiding at the feast, the full array of entertainments should be provided. The empress dowager consulted Attendant-in-Ordinary Cui Guang, and Guang agreed with Yong's view. Yi said to Guang, "You should cite the classics as evidence." Guang cited the Record of Rites: "A white hemp cap with black trim is the cap of lineage sons"—when parents are in deep mourning, sons may not observe purely auspicious rites. The Duke of Anding was her maternal grandfather in person, and she also owed him the debt of a teacher; the empress dowager had not been allowed to end mourning, and the hemp mourning garments were still upon her. On the first day of the first month she returned home to mourn and wail, and the emperor's carriage came in person to offer condolences. The Record says, "At a friend's grave, when last year's grass has grown upon it, one does not weep." This shows that friends observe one year of mourning. Zigong said that when the Master mourned Yan Yuan, it was like mourning a son but without wearing mourning garments, and his mourning for Zilu was the same. During the mourning for Yan Yuan, dried sacrificial meat was sent as a gift; the Master accepted it, played the zither, and only then ate. If the grief is like that for a son, then for one full year one does not perform music. When Confucius had reached the second stage of mourning garments for his parents, on the fifth day he played the zither—such was the rule for mourning parents. From this it follows that mourning for one's teacher is like mourning for a father, but without wearing mourning garments. The institution of heart-mourning for three years derives from this principle. Although the ancient meaning is hard to recover fully, recent edicts have repeatedly emphasized the honor owed to teachers and grandparents. This shows that even within one year, grief still lingered. Moreover, by ritual, when one's mother is in mourning, whatever sounds reach the son's ears, the son does not perform music. Now the empress dowager has no separate palace; she dwells at Jiafu Palace, which is not far from the Hall of Supreme Ultimate. When bells and drums sound within the palace, the sound carries outside; how much more so when one is inside, close at hand! The ruler's chief ministers are called his arms and legs; if an arm or leg is lost, what pain could be greater! When Zhi Daozi had died but not yet been buried, that was why Du Kui admonished Duke Ping of Jin. Now although the chancellor has been properly interred, it has been only three months, and the tomb mound is not yet dry. Yi found the reasoning convincing and thereupon sided with Yong's proposal.

太祖天賜三年十月，占授著作郎王宜弟造兵法。

In the tenth month of the third year of the Tianci era of Emperor Taizu, Wang Yidi was appointed Writing-office Lang to compose military methods.

高宗和平三年十二月，因歲除大儺之禮，遂燿兵示武。更為制，令步兵陳於南，騎士陳於北，各擊鍾鼓，以為節度。其步兵所衣，青赤黃黑別為部隊。盾矟矛戟相次周回轉易，以相赴就。有飛龍騰蛇之變，為函箱魚鱗四門之陳，凡十餘法。跽起前却，莫不應節。陳畢，南北二軍皆鳴鼓角，眾盡大譟。各令騎將六人去來挑戰，步兵更進退以相拒擊，南敗北捷，以為盛觀。自後踵以為常。

In the twelfth month of the third year of the Heping era of Emperor Gaozong, taking advantage of the year-end great nuo expulsion rite, troops were displayed to demonstrate martial prowess. A new regulation was issued, ordering the infantry to be arrayed to the south and the cavalry to the north, each side striking bells and drums to mark the rhythm and commands. The infantry wore blue, red, yellow, and black, each color forming a separate unit. Shields, long spears, lances, and halberds followed one another in turn, wheeling and shifting positions to converge and engage. There were flying-dragon and soaring-serpent maneuvers, forming box, fish-scale, and four-gate arrays—in all more than ten formations. Kneeling, rising, advancing, and retreating—none failed to keep time with the beat. When the formations were complete, both the southern and northern armies sounded drums and horns, and the troops all raised a great shout. Each side ordered six cavalry commanders to ride back and forth in challenge; the infantry advanced and retreated in turn to resist and strike; the south was defeated and the north victorious, making a grand spectacle. Thereafter this became the established practice.

高祖太和十九年五月甲午，冠皇太子恂於廟。丙申，高祖臨光極堂，太子入見，帝親詔之。事在恂傳。六月，高祖臨光極堂，引見羣官。詔曰：「比冠子恂，禮有所闕，當思往失，更順將來。禮古今殊制，三代異章。近冠恂之禮有三失，一，朕與諸儒同誤，二，諸儒違朕，故令有三誤。今中原兆建，百禮惟新，而有此三失，殊以愧歎。春秋，襄公將至衞，以同姓之國，問其年幾，而行冠禮。古者皆灌地降神，或有作樂以迎神。昨失作樂。至廟庭，朕以意而行拜禮，雖不得降神，於理猶差完。司馬彪云，漢帝有四冠：一緇布，二進賢，三武弁，四通天冠。朕見家語冠頌篇，四加冠，公也。家語雖非正經，孔子之言與經何異。諸儒忽司馬彪志，致使天子之子，而行士冠禮，此朝廷之失。冠禮朕以為有賓，諸儒皆以為無賓，朕既從之，復令有失。孔所云『斐然成章』，其斯之謂。」太子太傅穆亮等拜謝。高祖曰：「昔裴頠作冠儀，不知有四，裴頠尚不知，卿等復何愧。」

On the jiawu day of the fifth month of the nineteenth year of the Taihe era, Emperor Xiaowen capped Crown Prince Xun in the ancestral temple. On the bingshen day, Emperor Xiaowen presided at the Hall of Radiant Splendor; the crown prince entered for audience, and the emperor personally addressed him with an edict. The full account is given in Xun's biography. In the sixth month, Emperor Xiaowen presided at the Hall of Radiant Splendor and summoned the officials for audience. The edict said, "In recently crowning my son Xun, the rites had omissions; we should reflect on past errors and set the future right. The rites of antiquity and the present have different institutions, and the three dynasties had different regulations. In the recent capping of Xun there were three failures: first, I and the classicists erred together; second, the classicists defied me, and so there were three errors in all. Now that the Central Plains are being established and a hundred rites are being renewed, to have committed these three failures fills me with shame and regret. The Spring and Autumn Annals records that when Duke Xiang was about to enter Wei, a state of the same surname, he inquired how old its ruler was and then performed the capping rite. In antiquity libations were poured on the ground to invite the spirits down, and in some cases music was performed to welcome them. Yesterday the music to welcome the spirits was omitted. When we reached the temple courtyard, I performed the bowing rites as I saw fit; although the descent of the spirits was not achieved, in principle the rite was still largely complete. Sima Biao says the Han emperor had four caps: first black cloth, second the jinxian cap, third the martial cap, and fourth the tongtian cap. I saw in the Capping Ode chapter of the Family Conversations that there are four cappings—that is the method for a duke. Although the Family Conversations is not a canonical classic, Confucius's words differ in nothing from the classics. The classicists disregarded Sima Biao's Monograph and caused the Son of Heaven's son to perform a commoner's capping rite—this was the court's failure. For the capping rite I held there should be a guest, but all the classicists held there should be none; I followed them, and again there was a failure. What Confucius called "accomplishes an elegant pattern"—that is precisely what is meant here." Crown Prince Grand Tutor Mu Liang and the others bowed in thanks. Emperor Xiaowen said, "Formerly Pei Kai composed capping protocols and did not know there were four; if even Pei Kai did not know, what shame need you feel?"

正光元年秋，肅宗加元服，時年十一。既冠，拜太廟，大赦改元。官有其注。

In autumn of the first year of the Zhengguang era, Emperor Suzong received his capping ceremony at the age of eleven. After the capping, he paid homage at the Great Temple, proclaimed a general amnesty, and changed the era name. The official records contain the relevant annotations.

輿服之制，秦漢已降，損益可知矣。魏氏居百王之末，接分崩之後，典禮之用，故有闕焉。太祖世所制車輦，雖參采古式，多違舊章。今案而書之，以存一代之迹。

As for regulations governing carriages and garments, from Qin and Han downward, the additions and subtractions can be known. The Wei dynasty stood at the end of a long line of dynasties, succeeding after a period of fragmentation; in the use of canonical rites there were therefore gaps. The carriages and palanquins made in the Taizu era, though partly modeled on ancient forms, often departed from old regulations. I have now examined them and recorded them to preserve the traces of the dynasty.

乘輿輦輅：龍輈十六，四衡，轂朱班，繡輪，[25]有雕虬、文虎、盤螭之飾。龍首銜扼，鸞爵立衡，圓蓋華蟲，金雞樹羽，蛟龍游蘇。建太常十有二斿，畫日月升龍。郊天祭廟則乘之。

Imperial palanquin carriage: sixteen dragon shafts, four crossbars, red-patterned hubs, embroidered wheels, [25] with ornaments of carved hornless dragons, striped tigers, and coiling hornless dragons. A dragon head held the yoke; luan-birds and sparrows stood on the crossbar; the round canopy bore floral insect motifs; a golden rooster with feather tassels and hornless dragons with trailing tassels adorned it. It bore a Grand Regulator banner with twelve pennons, painted with the sun, moon, and ascending dragons. It was used when offering to Heaven or sacrificing at the ancestral temple.

乾象輦：羽葆，圓蓋華蟲，金雞樹羽，二十八宿，天階雲罕，山林雲氣、仙聖賢明、忠孝節義、遊龍、飛鳳、朱雀、玄武、白虎、青龍、奇禽異獸可以為飾者皆亦圖焉。太皇太后、皇太后、皇后助祭郊廟則乘之。

Qianxiang palanquin: feather canopy, round canopy with floral insect motifs, golden rooster with feather tassels, the twenty-eight lodges, heavenly stairs and cloud banners, mountain forests and cloud vapors, immortals, sages and worthies, loyalty, filial piety, integrity and righteousness, soaring dragons, flying phoenixes, the vermilion bird, the dark warrior, the white tiger, the azure dragon—all rare birds and exotic beasts suitable for ornamentation were also depicted. The grand empress dowager, empress dowager, and empress rode in it when assisting at suburban and temple sacrifices.

大樓輦：輈十二，加以玉飾，衡輪雕綵，與輦輅同，駕牛十二。 [26]

Great tower palanquin: twelve shafts with jade ornamentation added, carved crossbars and wheels with colored decoration, the same as the palanquin carriage, drawn by twelve oxen. Note 26.

小樓輦：輈八，衡輪色數與大樓輦同，駕牛十二。天子、太皇太后、皇太后郊廟，亦乘之。

Small tower palanquin: eight shafts, with crossbars and wheels in the same colors as the great tower palanquin, drawn by twelve oxen. The emperor, grand empress dowager, and empress dowager also rode in it for suburban and temple rites.

象輦：左右鳳凰，白馬，仙人前却飛行，駕二象。羽葆旒蘇，龍旂旍麾，其飾與乾象同。太皇太后、皇太后助祭郊廟之副乘也。

Elephant palanquin: phoenixes on left and right, white horses, immortals advancing and retreating in flight, drawn by two elephants. Feather canopy with streaming tassels, dragon banners, pennants, and standards—its ornaments were the same as those of the Qianxiang palanquin. It served as the secondary carriage for the grand empress dowager and empress dowager when assisting at suburban and temple sacrifices.

馬輦：重級，其飾皆如之。繢漆直輈六，左右騑駕。天子籍田、小祀時，則乘之。

Horse palanquin: multiple tiers, with ornamentation as described above. Six straight lacquered shafts, with paired outrider horses on left and right. The emperor rode in it when performing the sacred plowing ceremony or minor sacrifices.

臥輦：其飾皆如之。丹漆，駕六馬。

Reclining palanquin: its ornamentation was the same as above. It was lacquered cinnabar red and drawn by six horses.

遊觀輦：其飾亦如之。駕馬十五匹，皆白馬朱髦尾。天子法駕行幸、巡狩、小祀時，則乘之。

Touring and sightseeing palanquin: its ornamentation was likewise as above. It was drawn by fifteen horses, all white horses with vermilion manes and tails. The emperor rode in it on his ceremonial progress, when touring, hunting, or performing minor sacrifices.

七寶旃檀刻鏤輦：金薄隱起。

Seven-jewel sandalwood carved palanquin: gold leaf in relief.

馬輦：天子三駕所乘，或為副乘。

Horse palanquin: used on the emperor's three-court progresses, or as a secondary carriage.

緇漆蜀馬車：金薄華蟲隱起。

Black lacquer Shu horse carriage: gold leaf with floral insect motifs in relief.

軺軒：駕駟，金銀隱起。出挽解合。 [27]

Light chariot: drawn by a team of four, with gold and silver in relief. It was pulled out and hitched for departure, and unhitched and folded away when stored. Note 27.

步挽：天子小駕遊宴所乘，亦為副乘。

Hand-drawn carriage: used for the emperor's small progress on tours and banquets, and also as a secondary carriage.

金根車：羽葆，旒，畫輈輪，華首，綵軒交落，左右騑。太皇太后、皇太后、皇后助祭郊廟，籍田先蠶，則乘之。長公主、大貴、[28]公主、封君、諸王妃皆得乘，但右騑而已。

Golden-root carriage: feather canopy, tassels, painted shaft-wheels, floral cap, overlapping colored awnings, and outrider horses on left and right. The grand empress dowager, empress dowager, and empress rode in it when assisting at suburban and temple sacrifices or at the plowing ceremony before the silkworm rite. Princesses of long standing, the Grand Lady of Honor, [28] princesses, enfeoffed lords, and consorts of princes were all permitted to ride in it, but only with the right outrider.

太祖初，皇太子、皇子皆鸞輅立乘，畫輈龍首，朱輪繡轂，綵蓋朱裏，龍旂九斿，畫雲楱。皇子封則賜之，皆駕駟。

At the beginning of the Taizu era, the crown prince and princes all stood in luan carriages with painted shafts and dragon heads, vermilion wheels and embroidered hubs, colored canopies with vermilion lining, nine dragon banners, and painted cloud purlins. When a prince was enfeoffed, one was granted to him; all were drawn by teams of four.

又有軺車：緇漆，紫幰朱裏，駕一馬，為副乘。

There was also the light chariot: black lacquer, purple curtains with vermilion lining, drawn by one horse, used as a secondary carriage.

公安車：緇漆，紫蓋朱裏，畫輈，朱雀、青龍、白虎，龍旂八斿，駕三馬。軺車與王同。

Ducal public carriage: black lacquer, purple canopy with vermilion lining, painted shafts bearing the vermilion bird, azure dragon, and white tiger; eight dragon banners; drawn by three horses. Light chariots were the same as those for kings.

侯車：與公同。七斿，紫蓋青裏，駕二馬。副車亦如之。

Marquis carriage: the same as for dukes. It bore seven pennons, had a purple canopy with blue lining, and was drawn by two horses. Secondary carriages were the same.

子車：緇漆，草蠡文，六斿，皂蓋青裏，駕一馬。副車亦如之。

Viscount carriage: black lacquer, grass-insect pattern, six pennons, a black canopy with green lining, drawn by one horse. Secondary carriages were the same.

〈闕〉及公、侯、子陪列郊天，則乘之。宗廟小祀，乘軺軒而已。至高祖太和中，詔儀曹令李韶監造車輅，一遵古式焉。

〈The source text is missing at this point.〉 When dukes, marquises, and viscounts took their places in the procession at the suburban sacrifice to Heaven, they rode in these carriages. For minor sacrifices at the ancestral temple, they rode only light chariots. By the Taihe era of Emperor Gaozu, an edict ordered Ritual Director Li Shao to supervise the manufacture of carriages and regalia, all in accordance with ancient forms.

太祖天興二年，命禮官捃採古事，制三駕鹵簿。一曰大駕，設五輅，建太常，屬車八十一乘。平城令、代尹、司隸校尉、丞相奉引，太尉陪乘，太僕御從。輕車介士，千乘萬騎，魚麗雁行。前驅，皮軒、闒戟、芝蓋、雲罕、指南；後殿，豹尾。鳴葭唱，上下作鼓吹。軍戎、大祠則設之。二曰法駕，屬車三十六乘。平城令、代尹、太尉奉引，侍中陪乘，奉車都尉御。巡狩、小祠則設之。三曰小駕，屬車十二乘。平城令、太僕奉引，常侍陪乘，奉車郎御。遊宴離宮則設之。二至郊天地，四節祠五帝，或公卿行事，唯四月郊天，帝常親行，樂加鍾懸，以為迎送之節焉。

In the second year of Tianxing under Taizu, ritual officers were ordered to gather ancient precedents and establish the three progress guard-of-honor formations. The first was the grand progress: five regalia carriages were deployed, the Grand Standard was raised, and there were eighty-one attendant carriages. The Director of Pingcheng, Governor of Dai, Director of Retainers, and Chancellor led the way; the Grand Commandant rode as companion; and the Minister of Imperial Equipage drove and followed. Light chariots and armored warriors—thousands of chariots and myriads of horsemen—were arrayed in fish-scale and wild-goose formations. In the van were leather-canopied chariots, halberd screens, mushroom parasols, cloud banners, and south-pointing chariots; In the rear guard were leopard-tail banners. Reed pipes sounded the calls, and ceremonial music was performed throughout the procession. This formation was used for military campaigns and major sacrifices. The second was the statutory progress, with thirty-six attendant carriages. The Director of Pingcheng and Governor of Dai led the way; the Palace Attendant rode as companion; and the Director of Imperial Carriages drove. This formation was used for imperial tours and minor sacrifices. The third was the small progress, with twelve attendant carriages. The Director of Pingcheng and Minister of Imperial Equipage led the way; the Regular Attendant rode as companion; and a Gentleman of the Imperial Carriage drove. This formation was used for pleasure outings at detached palaces. At the two solstices when sacrificing to Heaven and Earth, at the four seasonal sacrifices to the Five Emperors, or when dukes and ministers performed the rites—only for the fourth month's suburban sacrifice to Heaven did the emperor usually go in person; bells and suspended chimes were added to the music as the ceremonies for receiving and escorting the spirits.

天賜二年初，改大駕魚麗雁行，更為方陳鹵簿。列步騎，內外為四重，列標建旌，通門四達，五色車旗各處其方。諸王導從在鉀騎內，公在幢內，侯在步矟內，子在刀盾內，五品朝臣使列乘輿前兩廂，官卑者先引。王公侯子車旒麾蓋、信幡及散官構服，一皆純黑。

At the beginning of the second year of Tianci, the grand progress's fish-scale and wild-goose formation was replaced with a square-array guard-of-honor formation. Infantry and cavalry were arrayed in four ranks, inner and outer; standards and banners were erected in formation; the formation opened on all four sides; and chariots and flags of the five colors each occupied their proper directions. Princes' escorts were placed within the armored cavalry; dukes within the banner guards; marquises within the infantry halberd ranks; viscounts within the sword-and-shield ranks; fifth-rank court officials were arrayed in the two flanks before the imperial carriage, with those of lower rank leading first. For princes, dukes, marquises, and viscounts, the tassels, banners, canopies, credential flags, and ad hoc officials' ceremonial dress were all pure black.

肅宗熙平元年六月，中侍中劉騰等奏：「中宮僕刺列車輿朽敗。自昔舊都，禮物頗異，遷京已來，未復更造。請集禮官，以裁其制。」靈太后令曰：「付尚書量議。」太常卿穆紹，少卿元端，博士鄭六、劉臺龍等議：「案周禮王后之五輅：重翟錫面朱緫，厭翟勒面繢緫，安車彫面鷖緫，皆有容蓋；翟車貝面組緫，有握；輦車，組輓，有翣，羽蓋。重翟，后從王祭祀所乘；厭翟，后從王賓饗諸侯所乘；安車，后朝見於王所乘；翟車，后出桑則乘；輦車，后宮中所乘。謹以周禮聖制，不刊之典，其禮文尤備。孔子云『其或繼周者，雖百世可知也』，以其法不可踰。以此言之，後王輿服典章，多放周式。雖文質時變，輅名宜存，彫飾雖異，理無全捨。當今聖后臨朝，親覽庶政，輿駕之式，宜備典禮。臣等學缺通經，叨參議末，輒率短見，宜準周禮備造五輅，彫飾之制，隨時增減。」

In the sixth month of the first year of Xiping under Emperor Suzong, Palace Attendant Liu Teng and others memorialized: "The Central Palace Servant's inventory lists the carriages and regalia as decayed and ruined. Since the former capital, the ritual objects differed considerably, and since the move of the capital they had not been remade. We request that ritual officers be assembled to determine the proper regulations. The Empress Dowager Ling ordered: "Turn it over to the Masters of Writing for measured deliberation. Minister of Ceremonies Mu Shao, Vice Minister Yuan Duan, Erudites Zheng Liu and Liu Tailong, and others deliberated: "According to the Zhou Rites, the queen's five regalia carriages were the heavy pheasant carriage with tin surface and vermilion tassels, the pressed pheasant carriage with lacquered leather surface and embroidered tassels, and the peaceful carriage with carved surface and quail tassels—all with canopy covers; the pheasant carriage with shell surface and silk tassels, with handgrips; and the palanquin carriage, with silk traces, feather fans, and a feathered canopy. The heavy pheasant carriage was what the queen rode when accompanying the king to sacrifices; The pressed pheasant carriage was what the queen rode when accompanying the king to entertain guests and feudal lords; The peaceful carriage was what the queen rode when attending court before the king; The pheasant carriage was what the queen rode when going out for the mulberry rite; The palanquin carriage was what the queen rode within the palace. Respectfully considered, the Zhou Rites are the sage's institution, an immutable canon, and their ritual texts are especially complete. Confucius said, "Should someone succeed the Zhou, even after a hundred generations one could know him," because its laws cannot be transgressed. From this perspective, later kings' carriage and dress regulations largely followed the Zhou model. Though ornament and substance changed with the times, the names of the regalia carriages ought to remain; though decorative patterns differ, the principle does not permit complete abandonment. The present sage empress presides at court and personally oversees all affairs; the forms of carriage and progress ought to be fully equipped according to canonical ritual. We, your subjects, whose learning falls short of mastering the classics, presumptuously took part at the end of these deliberations and venture our brief views: it is fitting to follow the Zhou Rites and fully prepare the five regalia carriages, with decorative patterns to be increased or reduced according to the times."

太學博士王延業議：「案周禮，王后有五輅，重翟以從王祠，厭翟以從王饗賓客，安車以朝見于王，翟車以親桑，輦車宮中所乘。又漢輿服志云：秦并天下，閱三代之禮，或曰殷瑞山車，金根之色，殷人以為大輅，於是始皇作金根之車。漢承秦制，御為乘輿。太皇太后、皇太后皆御金根車，加交絡、帷裳，非法駕則乘紫罽軿車，雲𣝛文畫輈，黃金塗五末，蓋爪，[29]左右騑，[30]駕三馬。阮諶禮圖并載秦漢已來輿服，亦云：金根輅，皇后法駕乘之，以禮婚見廟；桑輅，[31]后法駕乘之以親桑；安車，后小駕乘之以助祭；山軿車，后行則乘之；紺罽軿車，后小行則乘之，以哭公主、邑君、王妃、公侯夫人；入閤輿，后出入閤、宮中小遊則乘之。晉先蠶儀注：皇后乘雲母安車，駕六騩。案周、秦、漢、晉車輿儀式，互見圖書，雖名號小異，其大較略相依擬。金根車雖起自秦造，即殷之遺制，今之乘輿五輅，是其象也，華飾典麗，容觀莊美。司馬彪以為孔子所謂乘殷之輅，即此之謂也。案阮氏圖，桑車亦飾以雲母，晉之雲母車即是，一與周之翟車其用正同。安車既名同周制，又用同重翟。山軿車，案圖飾之以紫。紺罽軿車，雖制用異於厭翟，而實同用。於今入閤輿與輦，其用又同。案圖，今之黑漆畫扇輦，與周之輦車其形相似。竊以為秦滅周制，[32]百事創革，官名軌式，莫不殊異。漢魏因循，繼踵仍舊，雖時有損益，而莫能反古。良由去聖久遠，典儀殊缺，時移俗易，物隨事變。雖經賢哲，祖襲無改。伏惟皇太后叡聖淵凝，照臨萬物，動循典故，貽則後王。今輒竭管見，稽之周禮，考之漢晉，採諸圖史，驗之時事，以為宜依漢晉：法駕，則御金根車，駕四馬，加交絡帷裳；御雲母車，駕四馬，以親桑；其非法駕則御紫罽軿車，駕三馬；小駕則御安車，駕三馬，以助祭；小行則御紺罽軿車，駕三馬，以哭公主、王妃、公侯夫人；宮中出入，則御畫扇輦車。案舊事，比之周禮，唯闕從王饗賓客及朝見於王之乘。竊以為古者諸侯有朝會之禮，故有從饗之儀。今無其事，宜從省略。又今之皇居，宮掖相逼，就有朝見，理無結駟，即事考實，亦宜闕廢。又哭公主及王妃，周禮所無，施之於今，實合事要。損益不同，用捨隨時，三代異制，其道然也。又金根及雲母，駕馬或三或六，訪之經禮，無駕六之文。今之乘輿，又皆駕四，義符古典，宜仍駕四。其餘小駕，宜從駕三。其制用形飾，備見圖志。」

Grand Academy Erudite Wang Yanye deliberated: "According to the Zhou Rites, the queen had five regalia carriages: the heavy pheasant to accompany the king to sacrifices, the pressed pheasant to accompany the king when entertaining guests, the peaceful carriage for attending court before the king, the pheasant carriage for the mulberry rite, and the palanquin carriage for use within the palace. The Han Treatise on Carriages and Garments also says: When Qin united the realm, it reviewed the rites of the Three Dynasties; some say the Shang had an auspicious mountain carriage of golden-root color, which the people of Yin took as the great regalia carriage; thereupon the First Emperor made the golden-root carriage. Han inherited Qin institutions; what the ruler rode was called the imperial carriage. Both the grand empress dowager and empress dowager rode the golden-root carriage, with crossed netting and drapery curtains added; when it was not the statutory progress they rode purple felt-covered light carriages, with mica-pattern painted shafts, the five ends gilt in gold, canopy claws, [29] outrider horses left and right, [30] drawn by three horses. Ruan Chen's Rites Diagrams also records carriages and garments from Qin and Han onward, likewise stating: the golden-root regalia carriage—the queen rode it on the statutory progress to perform the marriage rite of appearing at the ancestral temple; The mulberry regalia carriage—[31] the queen rode it on the statutory progress for the mulberry rite; The peaceful carriage—the queen rode it on the small progress to assist at sacrifices; The mountain light carriage—the queen rode it when traveling; The dark purple felt light carriage—the queen rode it on short journeys to mourn princesses, enfeoffed ladies, consorts of princes, and wives of dukes and marquises; The inner-gate palanquin—the queen rode it when entering and leaving the inner gate or strolling within the palace. The Jin rites for the first silkworm ceremony state: the empress rode a mica peaceful carriage, drawn by six bay horses. Examining the carriage and regalia rituals of Zhou, Qin, Han, and Jin as they appear in books and diagrams, though the names differ slightly, their general outlines largely correspond. Though the golden-root carriage originated with Qin's creation, it is in fact a legacy institution of Yin; the present imperial five regalia carriages are its embodiment—splendidly ornamented, canonically elegant, and majestic in appearance. Sima Biao held that what Confucius called "riding in Yin's regalia carriage" refers precisely to this. According to the Ruan clan diagrams, the mulberry carriage was also ornamented with mica; Jin's mica carriage is precisely this—it serves exactly the same purpose as Zhou's pheasant carriage. The peaceful carriage shares its name with the Zhou institution and is used in the same way as the heavy pheasant carriage. The mountain light carriage, according to the diagrams, was ornamented with purple. The dark purple felt light carriage, though its form and use differ from the pressed pheasant carriage, in practice serves the same function. At present the inner-gate palanquin and the palanquin carriage likewise serve the same function. According to the diagrams, the present black-lacquered painted fan palanquin is similar in form to Zhou's palanquin carriage. I venture to think that when Qin destroyed Zhou institutions, [32] the hundred affairs were newly reformed, and official titles and norms were all different. Han and Wei followed in succession and kept the old ways; though there were occasional additions and reductions, they could not return to antiquity. Truly this was because the sages had long been distant, canonical ceremonies were widely lacking, times shifted and customs changed, and things changed with circumstances. Though worthy and sage men appeared, inherited practice went unaltered. Humbly considered, the Empress Dowager is wise and sage, profound and steadfast, illuminating all things, acting according to ancient precedents and leaving a model for later kings. Now I venture to exhaust my narrow views, examine the Zhou Rites, study Han and Jin, draw on books and histories, and verify against present affairs, and hold that one should follow Han and Jin: on the statutory progress, ride the golden-root carriage, drawn by four horses, with crossed netting and drapery curtains added; ride the mica carriage, drawn by four horses, for the mulberry rite; when it is not the statutory progress, ride the purple felt light carriage, drawn by three horses; on the small progress ride the peaceful carriage, drawn by three horses, to assist at sacrifices; on short journeys ride the dark purple felt light carriage, drawn by three horses, to mourn princesses, consorts of princes, and wives of dukes and marquises; For moving in and out within the palace, ride the painted fan palanquin carriage. Examining former precedents against the Zhou Rites, only the carriages for accompanying the king when entertaining guests and for attending court before the king are lacking. I venture that in antiquity feudal lords had the rite of court assembly, and hence there were ceremonies of accompanying the king at banquets. Today there is no such matter; it is fitting to omit it. Moreover, the present imperial residence and women's quarters are close together; even if there were court attendance, there is in principle no tying of four-horse teams; judging the fact in reality, this too should be omitted. Also, mourning princesses and consorts of princes is absent from the Zhou Rites; applying it today truly fits practical need. Additions and reductions differ; use and abandonment follow the times—the Three Dynasties had different institutions; such is the Way. Also, for the golden-root and mica carriages, the number of horses is sometimes three, sometimes six; inquiring into canonical ritual, there is no text prescribing six horses. At present the imperial carriages are all drawn by four, which accords with ancient meaning; they should continue to be drawn by four. The remaining small progress carriages should be drawn by three. Their forms, uses, and ornamentation are fully set forth in the diagrams and records."

司空領尚書令任城王澄、尚書左僕射元暉、尚書右僕射李平、尚書齊王蕭寶夤、尚書元欽、尚書元昭、尚書左丞盧同、右丞元洪超、考功郎中劉懋、北主客郎中源子恭、南主客郎中游思進、三公郎中崔鴻、長兼駕部郎中薛悅、起部郎中杜遇、左主客郎中元韡、騎兵郎中房景先、外兵郎中石士基、長兼右外兵郎中鄭幼儒、都官郎中李秀之、兼尚書左士郎中朱元旭、度支郎中谷穎、左民郎中張均、金部郎中李仲東、庫部郎中賈思同、國子博士薛禎、邢晏、高諒、奚延、太學博士邢湛、崔瓚、韋朏、鄭季明、[33]國子助教韓神固、四門博士楊那羅、唐荊寶、王令儁、吳珍之、宋婆羅、劉燮、高顯邕、杜靈儁、張文和、陳智顯、楊渴侯、趙安慶、賈天度、艾僧㯹、呂太保、王當百、槐貴等五十人，議以為：「皇太后稱制臨朝，躬親庶政，郊天祭地，宗廟之禮，所乘之車，宜同至尊，不應更有製造。周禮、魏晉雖有文辭，不辨形制，假令欲作，恐未合古制，而不可以為一代典。臣以太常、國子二議為疑，重集羣官，並從今議，唯恩裁決。」靈太后令曰：「羣官以後議折中者，便可如奏。」

Minister of Works and concurrently Director of the Masters of Writings, Prince of Rencheng Yuan Cheng; Left Vice Director of the Masters of Writings Yuan Hui; Right Vice Director of the Masters of Writings Li Ping; Master of Writings, Prince of Qi Xiao Baoyin; Masters of Writings Yuan Qin and Yuan Zhao; Left Assistant Director of the Masters of Writings Lu Tong and Right Assistant Director Yuan Hongchao; Director of Merit Evaluation Liu Mao; Director of Northern Receiving Guests Yuan Zigong; Director of Southern Receiving Guests You Sijin; Director of the Three Dukes Cui Hong; Concurrent Long-term Director of the Carriage Department Xue Yue; Director of Construction Du Yu; Director of Left Receiving Guests Yuan Wei; Director of Cavalry Fang Xianxian; Director of External Troops Shi Shiji; Concurrent Long-term Director of Right External Troops Zheng Youru; Director of Punishments Li Xiuzhi; Concurrent Director of Left Masters of Writings Attendants Zhu Yuanxu; Director of Revenue Gu Ying; Director of Left Population Zhang Jun; Director of the Gold Bureau Li Zhongdong; Director of the Storehouse Bureau Jia Sitong; National University Erudites Xue Zhen, Xing Yan, Gao Liang, and Xi Yan; Grand Academy Erudites Xing Zhan, Cui Zuan, Wei Fei, and Zheng Jiming; [33] National University Assistant Erudite Han Sheng; Four Gates Erudites Yang Naluo, Tang Jingbao, Wang Lingjun, Wu Zhenzhi, Song Poluo, Liu Xie, Gao Xianyong, Du Lingjun, Zhang Wenhe, Chen Zhixian, Yang Kehou, Zhao Anqing, Jia Tiandu, Ai Seng, Lu Taibao, Wang Dangbai, and Huai Gui—fifty men in all—deliberated and held: "The Empress Dowager holds the regency and presides at court, personally conducting all affairs; for the suburban sacrifices to Heaven and Earth and ancestral temple rites, the carriage she rides ought to be the same as the Son of Heaven's—there should not be separate manufacture. Though the Zhou Rites and Wei and Jin have textual accounts, they do not distinguish forms and patterns; even if one wished to make them, they would likely not accord with ancient institutions and could not serve as a canon for an age. Your subject finds the two deliberations of the Ministry of Ceremonies and the National University doubtful; the assembled officials were gathered again and all follow the present deliberation—we await your gracious decision. The Empress Dowager Ling ordered: "Where the assembled officials have moderated by the later deliberation, it may proceed as memorialized."

熙平元年九月，侍中儀同三司崔光表：「奉詔定五時朝服，案北京及遷都以來，未有斯制，輒勒禮官詳據。」太學博士崔瓚議云：「周禮及禮記，三冠六冕，承用區分，璅玉五綵，配飾亦別，都無隨氣春夏之異。唯月令有青旂、赤玉、黑衣、白輅，隨四時而變，復不列弁冕改用之玄黃。以此而推，五時之冠，禮既無文，若求諸正典，難以經證。案司馬彪續漢書輿服及祭祀志云：迎氣五郊，自永平中以禮讖并月令迎氣服色，因采元始故事，兆五郊於洛陽。又云五郊衣幘，各如方色。又續漢禮儀志：立春，京都百官，皆著青衣，〈闕〉服青幘。 [34]秋夏悉如其色。自漢逮于魏晉，迎氣五郊，用幘從服，改色隨氣。斯制因循，相承不革，冠冕仍舊，未聞有變。今皇魏憲章前代，損益從宜。五時之冠，愚謂如漢晉用幘為允。」靈太后令曰：「太傅博學洽通，多識前載，既綜朝儀，彌悉其事。便可諮訪，以決所疑。」二年九月，太傅、清河王懌、給事黃門侍郎韋延詳奏：[35]「謹案前敕，制五時朝服，嘗訪國子議其舊式。太學博士崔瓚等議：『自漢逮于魏晉，迎氣五郊，用幘從服，改色隨氣。斯制因循，相承不革，冠冕仍舊，未聞有變。今皇魏憲章前代，損益從宜。五時之冠，謂如漢晉用幘為允。』尚書以禮式不經，請訪議事，奉敕付臣，令加考決。臣以為帝王服章，方為萬世則，不可輕裁。請更集禮官下省定議，蒙敕聽許。謹集門下及學官以上四十三人，尋考史傳，量古校今，一同國子前議。幘隨服變，冠冕弗改。又四門博士臣王僧奇、蔣雅哲二人，以為五時冠冕，宜從衣變。臣等謂從國子前議為允。」靈太后令曰：「依議。」

In the ninth month of the first year of Xiping, Palace Attendant with Protocol Equal to the Three Ministers Cui Guang memorialized: "By imperial edict to fix the court dress for the five seasons—since the Northern Capital period and since the move of the capital there has been no such regulation; ritual officers have been directed to investigate thoroughly. Grand Academy Erudite Cui Zuan deliberated: "The Zhou Rites and the Book of Rites prescribe three caps and six coronets, with distinctions carried down in use; fine jade and the five colors, and their paired adornments, are also separate—nowhere is there variation according to the qi of spring and summer. Only the Monthly Ordinances have azure banners, vermilion jade, black garments, and white regalia carriages changing with the four seasons—yet they also do not list altered use of caps and coronets in dark and yellow. Inferring from this, court caps for the five seasons have no textual basis in ritual; if one seeks proof in the orthodox canon, it is difficult to validate by scripture. The Treatises on Carriages and Garments and on Sacrifices in Sima Biao's Continuation of the Book of Han state: welcoming the qi at the five suburban altars—from the Yongping era onward they combined ritual apocrypha with the Monthly Ordinances' seasonal colors for welcoming the qi, adopted precedents from the Yuanshi era, and established the five suburban altars at Luoyang. It also states that clothing and caps at the five suburban sacrifices each matched the color of the direction. The Continuation of the Han Rites and Ceremonies also states: at the Establishment of Spring, all officials of the capital wore azure garments, 〈The source text is missing at this point.〉 And wore azure caps. [34] In autumn and summer all were likewise dressed in their respective colors. From Han down to Wei and Jin, when welcoming the qi at the five suburban altars, caps and accompanying dress were used, with colors changed according to the qi. That practice continued by precedent, passed down unreformed; caps and regalia stayed as they had been, and no alteration was ever reported. Now that Great Wei follows the institutions of earlier dynasties, additions and reductions should be made as circumstances require. As for caps for the five seasons, I would hold that adopting the zé cap as in Han and Jin would be appropriate." Empress Dowager Ling ordered: "The Grand Tutor is broadly learned and thoroughly versed, with wide knowledge of earlier records; having already mastered court ritual, he understands these matters all the more fully. You may consult him and settle whatever remains in doubt." In the ninth month of the second year, Grand Tutor Prince Qinghe Yi and Attendant Gentleman of the Yellow Gate Wei Yanxiang submitted a memorial: Note 35. "We respectfully review the earlier edict establishing court dress for the five seasons and note that the National University was once consulted on the old forms. Grand Academy Erudite Cui Zan and others argued: 'From Han down to Wei and Jin, when welcoming the qi at the five suburban altars, zé caps and matching dress were worn, with colors changed according to the season's qi. That practice continued by precedent, passed down unreformed; caps and regalia stayed as they had been, and no alteration was ever reported. Now that Great Wei follows the institutions of earlier dynasties, additions and reductions should be made as circumstances require. For caps of the five seasons, they held that adopting the zé cap as in Han and Jin would be appropriate.' The Masters of Writing held that the ritual forms lacked canonical authority and asked that the matter be referred for deliberation; by imperial order it was entrusted to us with instructions to examine the question and decide. We hold that the dress and insignia of emperors and kings set the standard for all ages and must not be decided lightly. We asked that ritual officials be assembled again for deliberation in the lower offices, and by edict this was approved. We respectfully assembled forty-three persons from the Secretariat and the academy officers, searched the historical records, weighed antiquity against the present, and all agreed with the National University's earlier deliberation. The zé cap should change with the dress, but caps and regalia should not. Two Four Gates erudites, Wang Sengqi and Jiang Yazhe, held that caps and regalia for the five seasons ought to change with the clothing. We hold that the National University's earlier deliberation should be followed." Empress Dowager Ling ordered: "Let the deliberation stand."

校勘記

Textual notes

自大夫以上每條標列百衲本「以上」二字墨釘，南本以下諸本作「以下」，通典卷八九為高曾祖母及祖母持重服議條載孫景邕等議作「以上」。按大夫以下唯士及庶人，喪服本是士禮，無所謂「每條標列」，下又說「逮於庶人，含而不述」，作「以下」不可通。「以上」指「天子」「諸侯」，才在喪服中「每條標列」，今據通典補。

"Each article separately listed from great officers upward": the patchwork edition ink-marks the two characters for "above," while the Southern edition and all later texts read "below"; Tongdian juan 89, in the entry on heavy mourning for great-great-grandmothers and grandmothers, records Sun Jingyou and others' deliberation as "above." Note: below the rank of great officer there are only shi and commoners; mourning garments are fundamentally shi rites, so "each article separately listed" does not apply. The text below also says "reaching commoners, stated without elaboration," so reading "below" will not parse. "Above" refers to the Son of Heaven and feudal lords, who alone are "each article separately listed" in the mourning garments; emended now according to Tongdian.

不復疑也百衲本「不」字墨釘，「復」作「後」，南本以下諸本作「起後疑也」，冊府卷五八一〈六九六四頁〉、通典卷八九載孫景邕等又議並如摘句。按上云「喪服雖以士為主，而必下包庶人」，這裏說「比同士制，不復疑也」，上下相貫。當是先脫「不」字，又「復」字訛「後」，南本以意補「起」字。今據冊府、通典補改。

"There is no further doubt": the patchwork edition ink-marks "not," and "again" appears as "after"; the Southern edition and all later texts read "then afterward there was doubt." Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6964〉 , and Tongdian juan 89 both record Sun Jingyou and others' further deliberation as quoted above. Note: above the text says "although mourning garments take the shi as their basis, they must also extend downward to include commoners"; here it says "comparing them to the shi system, there is no further doubt." The two passages cohere. Presumably "not" dropped out first, and "again" was miscopied as "after"; the Southern edition supplied "then" by conjecture. Emended now according to Cefu and Tongdian.

固不同殊冊府〈同上卷頁〉「同」作「宜」，當是。

"Certainly not different": Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 tong (same) appears as yi (fitting); yi is correct.

末代僭踰未可以語通典百衲本「踰未」二字墨釘，南本以下諸本作「妄不」，當是以意補，今據冊府〈同上卷頁〉補。

"The last age's presumptuous excess cannot be spoken of in Tongdian": the patchwork edition ink-marks the two characters for "exceeded not," while the Southern edition and all later texts read "presumptuous not," presumably supplied by conjecture; emended now according to Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 Supplemented.

而有祖為嫡孫期諸本「期」作「者」，冊府〈同上卷頁〉作「期」，通典卷八九載孫景邕等議作「周」。按祖為嫡孫期在儀禮喪服期服章。這裏當是寫作「朞」，殘壞訛作「者」。通典避唐諱改「期」為「周」。今據冊府改。

"Yet there is mourning for a paternal grandfather by an eldest grandson for one year": various editions read qi (one-year mourning) as zhe (one who); Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 reads qi (one-year mourning); Tongdian juan 89 records Sun Jingyou and others' deliberation as zhou (cycle). Note: mourning for a paternal grandfather by an eldest grandson for one year appears in the Yili Mourning Garments chapter on one-year mourning. Here the character was presumably written as qi for one-year mourning, then damaged and miscopied as zhe meaning one who. Tongdian avoids Tang taboo by changing qi (one-year mourning) to zhou (cycle). Emended now according to Cefu.

且官族者謂世為其功食舊德者謂德侯者世位冊府卷五八一〈六九六五頁〉、通典卷八九孫景邕等議「謂世為其功」並作「謂世有功」，當是。下句通典作「食舊德者謂德繼於位」，冊府與諸本同。按原文不可解，疑「侯」乃「厚」音近而訛，通典避唐諱「世」字，並改其句，非必原文。

"Moreover, official clans are those who for generations had merit for them; those who eat old virtue are called those whose virtue continues in office": Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6965〉 , and Tongdian juan 89, in Sun Jingyou and others' deliberation, both read "those who for generations served with merit" as "those who for generations had merit"; this is correct. The following sentence in Tongdian reads "those who eat old virtue are called those whose virtue continues in office"; Cefu agrees with the other editions. Note: the original text is unintelligible; hou (marquis) is suspected to be a phonetic error for hou (thick/substantial). Tongdian avoids Tang taboo on shi (generation) and also alters the sentence, so it need not preserve the original wording.

禮令有據諸本「有據」訛「者處」，今據冊府〈同上卷頁〉、通典卷八九載詔書改。

"The ritual edict has basis": various editions corrupt you ju (has basis) as zhe chu (one at); emended now according to Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 , and Tongdian juan 89's record of the edict.

雜記注云玄衣黃裳則是禫祭黃者未大吉也諸本「衣」上無「玄」字，冊府〈同上卷頁〉有。按禮記雜記下「祥，因其故服」下注有「玄」字，知此志脫文，今據補。又雜記注「禫祭」下有「玄冠矣」三字，「黃者」作「黃裳者」，或是引書省文，今不補。

"Miscellaneous Records commentary states: black upper garment and yellow lower skirt, then this is the sacrificial dress of unburdening; yellow means not yet greatly auspicious": various editions lack xuan (black) before yi (garment); Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 has it. Note: in Liji Miscellaneous Records Part II, under "At the second month of mourning, one wears the previous garment," the commentary has xuan (black), showing that this chronicle dropped text; supplemented now. Also in the Miscellaneous Records commentary, after "unburdening sacrifice" there are three characters "black cap indeed," and huang zhe (yellow ones) appears as huang chang zhe (those with yellow skirts); this may be an abbreviated citation, so it is not supplemented now.

釋六徵諸本「徵」作「禫」，冊府卷五八一〈六九六六頁〉作「徵」，按上文已引許猛「釋六徵」，「禫」字訛，今據改。

"Explaining the six tokens": various editions read zheng (token) as tan (unburdening sacrifice); Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6966〉 reads zheng (token); as noted above, Xu Meng's "Explaining the six tokens" was already cited, so tan (unburdening sacrifice) is corrupt; emended now.

司徒平原郡開國公高肇兄子太子洗馬員外亡冊府卷五八一〈六九六七頁〉無「亡」字，按洗馬官不聞有員外置，且何以有官而無名？檢八瓊室金石補正卷一五有贈營州刺史高貞碑，乃高肇兄高偃子，官至太子洗馬，死於延昌三年，與此志合，自即其人。疑本作「太子洗馬貞卒」，「貞卒」二字訛作「員外」，後人又補「亡」字。冊府已訛作「員外」，但下尚無「亡」字可證。

Minister of Works, Duke of Pingyuan Commandery, Gao Zhao's elder brother's son, Palace Horse Groom Attendant Outside Office, deceased: Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6967〉 It lacks the character "deceased"; the Attending Horse Groom office is not known to have an Outside Office appointment, and how could there be an office but no personal name? Checking Bazhong Studio Collected Epigraphy Corrected juan 15, there is the stele of Posthumous Governor of Ying Province Gao Zhen — son of Gao Zhao's elder brother Gao Yan, who reached the office of Palace Horse Groom and died in the third year of Yan-chang — which matches this chronicle; he must be the man intended. The original reading is suspected to have been "Palace Horse Groom Zhen died"; the two characters "Zhen died" were corrupted as "Outside Office Attendant," and later copyists added "deceased." Cefu already reads "Outside Office Attendant," but below there was not yet the character "deceased" to confirm it.

雖復功緦諸本「緦」作「德」，冊府〈同上卷頁〉作「得」。按上引禮喪大記：「五月、三月之喪，比葬，飲酒食肉，不與人樂之」，五月、三月即功、緦。「功德」或「功得」乃「功緦」之訛。下房景先駁封祖冑議中引此語，諸本也作「德」，冊府却作「緦」，可證。今改正，下文同改。

"Although reduced mourning and coarse hemp": various editions read si (coarse hemp) as de (virtue); Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 reads de (obtain). Note: as quoted above from Liji Great Record of Mourning: "For five-month and three-month mourning, when compared with burial, one may drink wine and eat meat and not share enjoyment with others" — five-month and three-month mourning mean reduced mourning and coarse hemp. "Merit virtue" or "merit obtain" are corruptions of "reduced mourning and coarse hemp." Below, in Fang Jingxian's refutation of Feng Zugao's deliberation, this phrase is quoted; various editions also read de (virtue), but Cefu reads si (coarse hemp), which confirms the reading. Corrected now; the same correction is applied below.

夫羽旄可以展耳目之適百衲本「夫羽旄」三字空一格，南本注「闕一字」，北、汲、殿、局四本注「闕」。今據冊府〈同上卷頁〉補。

"Feather banners can extend the pleasure of eyes and ears": the patchwork edition leaves a one-character gap before "feather banners"; the Southern edition notes "one character missing"; the Northern, Ji, Palace, and Bureau editions mark "missing." Supplemented now according to Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 Supplemented.

〔鳴鐃以警眾聲笳以清路者所以辨等〕列明貴賤諸本「列」字上無括號內十五字，顯有脫文，冊府〈同上卷頁〉有。按下房景先駁議引韓神固語也有此十五字。今據冊府補。

[Beating gongs and drums to warn the multitude, sounding panpipes to clear the road — these distinguish ranks] and clarify noble and base: various editions lack the fifteen bracketed characters before "distinguish ranks," clearly showing lost text; Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 has them. Note: as quoted below in Fang Jingxian's refutation, Han Shengu's words also contain these fifteen characters. Supplemented now according to Cefu.

擊鍾磬於〈疑〉祔之後冊府卷五八一〈六九六八頁〉空格作「升」字。按此指大祥前之祔祭，似不得逕謂之「升祔」，今不補。

Striking bells and stone chimes at 〈suspected〉 after enshrinement: Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6968〉 The gap is read as sheng (ascend). Note: this refers to the enshrinement sacrifice before Great Auspices; it cannot directly be called "ascending enshrinement," so it is not supplemented now.

君之〔所不服〕諸本「君之」下脫括號內「所不服」至「自為先帝所」三百二十五字，在百衲本恰好脫一頁，但今頁碼相連，不知是宋本原來就這樣，還是後人挖改，南本以下諸本因此也都連接。且因文義似乎可通，無人疑有脫文。今據冊府卷五八一〈六九六八－六九頁〉補。

"The lord's [what is not worn in mourning]": in various editions, after "the lord's," 325 bracketed characters from "what is not worn" through "by the Former Emperor himself" are missing; in the patchwork edition exactly one page is lost, yet the page numbers now run consecutively — unclear whether the Song original was already so or later hands altered it — so the Southern edition and all later texts connect as well. Moreover, because the sense seemed passable, no one suspected missing text. Supplemented now according to Cefu juan 581 〈folios 6968–6969〉 Supplemented.

凡蔣別封冊府卷五八一〈六九六八頁〉「蔣」作「將」。按左傳僖二十四年：「凡、蔣、邢、茅、胙、祭，周公之胤也。」「將」乃「蔣」之訛，今改正。

"All Fan and Jiang separately enfeoffed": Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6968〉 The surname Jiang appears miscopied as jiang meaning general. Note: Zuozhuan, Year 24 of Duke Xi: "Fan, Jiang, Xing, Mao, Zuo, and Zai were descendants of the Duke of Zhou. Jiang meaning general is a corruption of the surname Jiang; corrected now.

明臣之後期按「後」字於文義不協，疑當作「服」，涉下「然後期」而訛。

"Clarifying the heir's subsequent one-year mourning": the character hou (after/subsequent) does not fit the sense; it is suspected to be fu (wear mourning), corrupted through contact with "then one-year mourning" below.

為母大功按「為」上當脫「君」字。無「君」字連上文便是「公子之妻」為母大功，大誤，和下「臣從服期」也連不起來。

"Heavy mourning for mother": the character jun (lord) is likely missing above wei (for). Without jun (lord), continuing with the text above would make "the wife of the lord's son" bear heavy mourning for her mother — a serious error — and it would not connect with "the subject follows in one-year mourning" below.

若姑亡必不關公子有否冊府卷五八一〈六九七０頁〉「有」作「在」，疑是，但作「有」亦通，今不改。

"If the mother-in-law dies, it certainly does not depend on whether the lord's son exists": Cefu juan 581 〈folio 6970〉 Have was written as at; that is probably right, but reading have also makes sense, so the text is left unchanged.

不計日月遠近者諸本「計」訛「許」，不可通，今據冊府〈同上卷頁〉改。

"Those not reckoning the distance of months and days": various editions miscopy calculate as permit, which will not parse; emended now according to Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 Emended.

服皇帝袞冕服百衲本「服」下空一格，汲、局本不空，南、北、殿本也不空，但「帝」下有「用」字。按文義不像有脫字，增「用」字也似贅，今從汲、局本。

"Wearing the emperor's dragon robe and court cap-garments": the patchwork edition leaves a blank after wear, while the Ji and Bureau editions do not; the Southern, Northern, and Palace editions also have no blank, but place use under emperor. Note: the sense of the passage does not suggest a lacuna, and adding use seems redundant; the Ji and Bureau editions are followed.

改葬緦百衲本「緦」作「緫」，諸本作「總」，獨局本作「緦」。按「緦」古文作「總」，訛作「總」「緫」，今從局本。

"Reburial in hemmed-edge mourning": the patchwork edition writes hemmed-edge as a variant form, most editions read total, and only the Bureau edition reads hemmed-edge. Note: hemmed-edge mourning was written total in antiquity and was miscopied as total and its variant form; the Bureau edition is followed.

不敢以親服至尊也按禮記雜記下重「服」字，不宜省，疑此脫一「服」字。

"Dare not wear mourning for a relative before the most exalted": Note: Record of Rites, Miscellaneous Records, Part 2, repeats wear, which should not be dropped; one wear is probably missing here.

鄭注臣為君子為父妻為夫親見屍柩不可以無服故服緦按儀禮喪服傳鄭注此條「親見屍柩」上有「服緦者」三字，或引文省，末句「故服緦」下有「三月而除之」句。觀下文云：「竊謂鄭氏得服緦之旨，謬三月之言。」若上不引「三月而除之」，忽駁「三月」之謬，令人不解，當是脫文。

Zheng's commentary: ministers for a lord, sons for fathers, wives for husbands — if one personally sees the corpse and bier, one may not go without mourning, and so wears hemmed-edge mourning. Note: in Yili Mourning Garments Commentary, Zheng's note on this passage has the three words those who wear hemmed-edge mourning above personally seeing the corpse and bier, perhaps omitted in quotation; after therefore wear hemmed-edge mourning comes the sentence removed after three months. The passage below says: "I venture that Zheng grasped the point of hemmed-edge mourning but was mistaken about the three-month rule." If removed after three months is not quoted above, suddenly attacking the error in three months is baffling; text must be missing.

轂朱班繡輪按「朱班輪」「朱班漆輪」見續漢書、晉書輿服志。疑這裏當作「朱班輪繡轂」，下皇太子、皇子條稱「朱輪繡轂」可證。

"Hub: vermilion-striped, embroidered wheel": Note: vermilion-striped wheel and vermilion-striped lacquered wheel appear in Continuation of the Book of Han and Jinshu, Carriages and Insignia. This probably should read vermilion-striped wheel, embroidered hub; the crown prince and imperial son entries below call it vermilion wheel, embroidered hub, which confirms it.

駕牛十二百衲本「十二」作「二十」，北、汲、殿三本作「一十」，南本、局本作「十二」。按御覽卷七七四〈三四三四頁〉引作「十二」，下小樓輦條亦稱「駕牛十二」，今從南、局本。

"Drawn by twelve oxen": the patchwork edition reads twelve as twenty, the Northern, Ji, and Palace editions read ten, and the Southern and Bureau editions read twelve. Note: Imperial Readings juan 774 〈folio 3434〉 It quotes twelve, and the small tower palanquin entry below also says drawn by twelve oxen; the Southern and Bureau editions are followed.

出挽解合四字不可解，疑有訛脫。

Issue draw release join: the four characters make no sense; there is probably corruption or missing text.

大貴按「大貴」下當脫「人」字。續漢書輿服志上稱「大貴人、貴人、公主、王妃、封君油畫軿車」。北魏宮中有「貴人」，不見「大貴人」之號，〈卷一三皇后傳〉，可能是襲用前史舊文。

Grand Noble: Note: the word person is probably missing after Grand Noble. Continuation of the Book of Han, Carriages and Insignia, Part 1, lists Grand Noble Lady, Noble Lady, princess, prince's consort, and enfeoffed lord for the oil-painted enclosed carriage. The Northern Wei palace had Noble Lady but no title of Grand Noble Lady, 〈Volume 13, Biographies of Empresses〉 so this may be language taken over from earlier histories.

蓋爪諸本「爪」作「瓜」，獨局本作「爪」。按續漢書輿服志上作「蚤」，晉書卷二五輿服志作「爪」，今從局本。

Covering claw: various editions read claw as melon, and only the Bureau edition reads claw. Note: Continuation of the Book of Han, Carriages and Insignia, Part 1, has early, Jinshu juan 25, Carriages and Insignia, has claw; the Bureau edition is followed.

左右騑諸本「左」作「在」，冊府卷五八二〈六九七二頁〉作「左」。按續漢書、晉書輿服志並作「左右騑」。今據改。

Left and right outrider horses: various editions read left as at, Cefu juan 582 〈folio 6972〉 reads left. Note: Continuation of the Book of Han and Jinshu, Carriages and Insignia, both read left and right outrider horses. Emended now accordingly.

桑輅諸本「桑」作「乘」，冊府〈同上卷頁〉作「桑」。按下云：「阮氏圖，桑車亦飾以雲母」，知作「桑」是。今據改。

Mulberry carriage: various editions read mulberry as ride, Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 reads mulberry. Note: below it says Ruan's illustration shows the mulberry carriage also adorned with mica, confirming mulberry is correct. Emended now accordingly.

竊以為秦滅周制諸本「滅」作「減」，冊府卷五八二〈六九七三頁〉作「滅」。按下云「百事創革」，豈得謂「減」。「減」乃「滅」形近而訛，今據改。

"I venture that Qin extinguished Zhou institutions": various editions read extinguish as reduce, Cefu juan 582 〈folio 6973〉 reads extinguish. Note: below it says a hundred affairs were newly reformed; reduce cannot be right. Reduce was miscopied for extinguish because the forms resemble each other; emended now accordingly.

鄭季明諸本「明」作「期」，冊府〈同上卷頁〉作「明」。按鄭季明附見卷五六鄭羲傳，「期」乃「明」形近而訛，今據改。

Zheng Jiming: various editions read bright as period, Cefu 〈same scroll, same page〉 reads bright. Note: Zheng Jiming appears appended in juan 56, Biography of Zheng Yi; period was miscopied for bright because the forms resemble each other; emended now accordingly.

京都百官皆著青衣〈闕〉服青幘百衲本「服」上空一格，諸本不空。按續漢書禮儀志上立春條：「京師百官皆衣青衣，郡國縣道官下至斗食令史皆服青幘。」則「服青衣」和「服青幘」者有區別。這裏「服青幘」上當有闕文，故百衲本空格，今注「闕」字。

All officials of the capital wore green robes 〈The source text is missing at this point.〉 Wearing green headcloths: the patchwork edition leaves a blank above wear, while other editions do not. Note: Continuation of the Book of Han, Rites and Ceremonies, Part 1, Beginning of Spring entry: Capital officials all wear green robes, while officials of commanderies, kingdoms, counties, and districts down to clerks receiving a dou of grain all wear green headcloths. Thus those wearing green robes and those wearing green headcloths are distinguished. Here there should be missing text above wearing green headcloths, which is why the patchwork edition leaves a blank; lacuna is marked now.

給事黃門侍郎韋延詳奏諸本「詳」作「祥」，獨百衲本作「詳」。按冊府卷五八二〈六九七四頁〉也作「詳」。「詳」是審議之意，今從百衲本。

Palace Attendant and Yellow Gate Attendant-in-Ordinary Wei Yanxiang memorialized: various editions read detailed review as auspicious, and only the patchwork edition reads detailed review. Note: Cefu juan 582 〈folio 6974〉 also reads detailed review. Detailed review means to deliberate and examine; the patchwork edition is followed.

Cite this Chapter