大事記

Dà shì jì 大事記

Record of Great Events by 呂祖謙 (Lǚ Zǔqiān, 1137–1181, zhuàn 撰)

About the work

A 12-juan annalistic chronicle of post-Chūnqiū history, beginning at Zhōu Jìngwáng 39 (481 BCE — the year after the Chūnqiū’s closing entry) and intended to extend through the Five Dynasties, but cut short by Lǚ Zǔqiān’s death in 1181. Composed in Chúnxī 7 / 1180. Accompanied by a 3-juan Tōng shì 通釋 (“comprehensive explanations”) and 12-juan Jiě tí 解題 (“topic notes”). The principal Wùzhōu / Lǐ-zhái-school historical project, paralleling Sīmǎ Guāng’s Tōng jiàn but explicitly founded on Sīmǎ Qiān’s annual-table method.

Tiyao

Dà shì jì, 12 juǎn; Tōng shì, 3 juǎn; Jiě tí, 12 juǎn. (Held in the home of Wú Yùchí, Zhèjiāng.) By Lǚ Zǔqiān of the Sòng. Zǔqiān’s Gǔ Zhōuyì is already on record. The book takes Sīmǎ Qiān’s nián biǎo listing and arranges by year and by month, to record events after the Chūnqiū; further gathering from various books to broaden it. Begins at Zhōu Jìngwáng 39 (481 BCE), ends at Hàn Wǔdì Zhēnghé 3 (90 BCE). The method-of-writing follows the Tàishǐgōng. What is recorded does not exhaust the cèshū protocols. Zhūzǐ’s yǔ lù — “Bógōng / Zǐyuē honors the Tàishǐgōng’s learning, calling him not to be approached by Hàn Confucians” — is one piece of evidence here.

The book was made in Chúnxī 7 (1180); each day arranging one year’s events, originally intending to begin after the Chūnqiū and end at the Five Dynasties. He fell ill and stopped, so what was completed is only this. Yet what was already done shows the broad scheme. Of contemporary doctrinal-school scholars, only Zǔqiān was widely versed in history; not exclusively talking xìngmìng. The Sòng shǐ on this account demoted him, lowering him into the Rúlín zhuàn. Yet his learning has roots and foundation; this book has form and method. Even, e.g., under each entry, “from such-a-book amended such-and-such” — every one giving its source — is something far beyond those who privately exercise the editorial pen.

The Tōng shì in 3 juǎn is like the Gānglǐng head-notes of a classics-commentary, all recording the canonical-classics’ essential points. The Jiě tí in 12 juǎn is like a classic’s zhuàn, briefly outlining beginning-and-end and appending his own views. Wherever the Shǐjì and Hàn shū differ, or the Tōng jiàn shows gain or loss, all are picked apart and disputed in detail. Further, on names of objects, mathematical-astronomical phenomena seen in side-references, all are pushed to comprehensive interpretation, dual-noted under the line.

Zhūzǐ’s yǔ lù often mocked Zǔqiān’s learning as miscellaneous, but particularly took this book to be precise and detailed. Further said the Jiě tí shows real labor; “every single sentence wraps up the meaning of a paragraph.” Looking at Zhōu Shènjìngwáng 2 (319 BCE), the entry on King Xiāng of Wèi questioning Mèngzǐ — taking Sū Zhé’s Gǔ shǐ argument; the Mèngzǐ jí zhù later quoted his explanation. Apparently he too inwardly accepted his comprehension; knowing it was not what Zhào Shīyuān’s like could approach the level of. The appended Tōng shì: the Wénxiàn tōng kǎo gives 1 juǎn; this version is the Sòng Jiādìng rénshēn (1212) Wújùn school printing — actually 3 juǎn. The Tōng kǎo must be a transmission error.

Abstract

The Dà shì jì is the only major historiographical project of the Wùzhōu Lǚ family — Lǚ Zǔqiān’s Lǐzhái Academy historical-research circle — and the principal Southern-Sòng alternative to the Tōng jiàn tradition. Its formal model is not Sīmǎ Guāng’s biānnián but Sīmǎ Qiān’s Shǐjì tables, year-and-month framework — a pointedly anti-Sīmǎ-Guāng / pro-Sīmǎ-Qiān gesture in keeping with the Lǚ family’s broader historiographical orientation, which was more sympathetic to the jìzhuàn tǐ tradition than the strict biānnián school. The work was deliberately conceived to cover the post-Chūnqiū gap (after 481 BCE) through to the Five Dynasties — that is, to provide a comprehensive non-canonical extension of the Chūnqiū as far as the Tōng jiàn’s closing date — but Lǚ Zǔqiān died in Chúnxī 8 / 1181, less than a year into the project, having reached only Hàn Wǔdì Zhēnghé 3 / 90 BCE.

The work is in three parts: (a) the Dà shì jì proper in 12 juǎn — terse year-and-month entries with each event captioned for source provenance (“from such-a-book amended”); (b) the Tōng shì in 3 juǎn — orientation essays on canonical themes; (c) the Jiě tí in 12 juǎn — fuller running commentary on each event with adjudication of Shǐjì-versus-Hàn shū divergences and Tōng jiàn judgments. Zhū Xī, despite being Lǚ Zǔqiān’s frequent doctrinal interlocutor (their differences had been the central matter of the Éhú / Goose-Lake Convocation of 1175), was unusually warm in his praise of this work — particularly the Jiě tí.

The work was unfinished and never extended; the project of a comprehensive post-Chūnqiū / pre-Tōngjiàn annalistic chronicle was eventually carried forward in the Míng by Wáng Wěi 王禕 in his Dà shì jì xù biān (KR2b0035), which extends the chronology in continuation of Lǚ. Lǐ-zhái-school sub-commentary on Lǚ’s work is the Dà shì jì jiǎng yì 大事記講義 of Lǚ Zhōng 呂中 (a separate Sìkù biānnián entry, not in this batch — see Zinbun ID 0183502).

The composition is securely dated Chúnxī 7 / 1180 by Lǚ’s own preface; the dating bracket here is therefore the 1180–1181 window of the brief composition.

Translations and research

No Western-language translation. Discussion in:

• Hilde de Weerdt, Competition over Content: Negotiating Standards for the Civil Service Examinations in Imperial China (1127–1279) (Harvard EAC, 2007), §3 — discusses Lǚ Zǔ-qiān’s historiographical method.
• Charles Hartman, The Making of Song Dynasty History (CUP, 2021), index s.v. Lǚ Zǔ-qiān.
• Ye Pengfei 葉鵬飛, Lǚ Zǔ-qiān shǐxué yánjiū 呂祖謙史學研究 (Hangzhou: Zhèjiāng dàxué, 2009).
• Conrad M. Schirokauer, “Chu Hsi’s Sense of History,” in Robert P. Hymes & Conrad Schirokauer, eds., Ordering the World (UC Press, 1993), discusses Lǚ versus Zhū on historical method.

Other points of interest

The Dà shì jì is a primary documentary source for the late-Southern-Sòng split in Lǐxué historiography: where Zhū Xī’s eventual Tōngjiàn gāngmù would commit Lǐxué to a moral-evaluative form of universal history with strict legitimacy-judgment apparatus, Lǚ Zǔqiān’s Dà shì jì preserved the older, more Shǐjì-grounded model in which detail of source-provenance and adjudication of variant accounts took priority over moral judgment.

Links

• Wikidata Q11084108
• Kyoto Zinbun Sìkù tíyào 0104101.
• Wilkinson, Chinese History: A New Manual §49.5.