BULLETLV OF THE JJUSEU:li OF FA.R EASTEKY A.

NTIQUITIES

'w.J(s;'lf1,,1coc,1M1 ',f- 1&s.Jj'i.no,111 m: t1.1 '\t11J1'3'&!&7/'.)M s10t'ir76!7ii, tJt, 10,s; 111;:,11tt.*1 11;1;. i!~ 7h/.& t,1;!ti LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT
11s)i 7%tJ,J:..na)t 8JJJ!JJ1/d?!'J.lf.t1ti1,~ ,rar)JJJ11r1i(s1xJ/i!r.11sks1vtp11J,#;.,,,., P~1/S1fl!N.,;1.1:.,Jl(?rf,111~
1 CHINA
/dit: 11d,~ 1t1»/im"fl..vc, 1,1, !lfJ/!:i s,.r'.)GJdrl'itt.sYJ5~raJif]§ J't.t.1J:.s11fJ1t:14'. ft~ldl8fe'/ 1!!:5fR?stf?.vCfcs~:/~t'7 BY

f<t, 7,:,1,'])Jl;:,119(1/lt Jr':) J/;1$ Ill! .ifl. 101.21:i~79t/f",i<2Jo~, 7-tr. tfJff~ $S1,!lr2.1'J.t.;1N j~-77/, //5/; J°2,1wJ"Jix872,//18 BERNHARD KARLGREN
;t:_ 11,;. ~/tJ.vt_/&.u}; I1,1ffi_;lf1 J7J ,W7 ~d?/J, !lr.t¥p n,J;fz SMf~llt•:fii.!!31:jcft,,Jrs{k_770J,"F-7-1~;1iJ,:ffi 1:l.f#tm
tin fi!b ?#:if 1ti,-//JI.Ji\y g;,::J;zt.r12, Nst%:.11JJ'1"i.fftf!/it.Jfferti/Jj:..s,('/i!(t.zt;11H fJ(m,11r:z~1&J1. ji'41s, rrs _ctar
.J/,if KJF 7J 71'2Jfe, t?il/!8J ;fffe. i!Jf 7#/, tt18;!//Yj/f,/!ft.~ w.1i) ltJ/f!. ~ /,J(J Jh
7'J, /o.:t,:80' 1142 _-i 8'.WEl'f 71/, /tl.l/Ot!.~ II j{@
Dming the past fifty years a great many works, extensive books and short
111, sm,;o;r ~ 10J.-"\fm, m. ~ tor Jl~ 111k]5Z/b'l'$-.12d'~17;j{J so7, m, fJYV<i- 6fft1,tf1 111s>lt1wm M ,m.J"~vccJ,J!r,;:__ articles have been written by vVestern sinologues on the history, sociology ,,nd
religion of ancient Chi1m prior to the Han dynasty ---· so many, in faet, that
11-lfMtJ(O,'f!iik'lt:; 1t,,;Jit'S)./s:t111a:,~ /JaTJ J'Jl'//11,#u,x)::, 1as,1a;;£s?J-(J,.1:zmf"§ //YI Ti;"tis;mYX s:zd_t._7?c: W
they could form a library. But ,1, feature common to most of these treatises is
s11)f-S£,111/tJ(itvs:i:71'1ozt. ~ri tM 3~ 7oTi/f.Ma 9L 971 ;.ft;t1JJ/iitB}'f:.1tJJ"{!f Sf! ;/f.;J,1 i;f-11n J:.:1sc,rss0~5' .,:ft a curious lack of critim,l method in the lrnnclling of the material,. \Vhen a certain
theme has to be investigated, the data lrnve firnt been culled from the pre-Han
M 1'1.m Hill 11c5,~j Jt5J)/j 1t11n':J/ii 7.cy ;{l!f__791 i'i-.stJ~ 15t)iiz10JsifltJp915:'{{-1111.1f s'S1 ~/1£J]?t 12-1 .fl. f 1s.fS=:
texts, such as Shu king, Tso chnan, Mencius, ::\lo-tsL These having :,,ielded
11J1-+.iss 1"! 1ss:kriD its AA J.2.fi!;, !!9, ~ 111,~ 10J1 1'.'.J.y;f:,!ililffl "lfo/if..1v/t)~v!Ji'ifi 111.t., 119.J, f!JiJKr $'- /oSi.L only a meagre harvest, further details have been hunted for in early Han literature,
such as SI-ma Ts'ien, Huai-nan-tsL mid then in later Han documents such as
1uJI.C;;11,:;cf;;9J..:,rI}Jsr;g/i.,Jf:i.1tf \'f3 /m Iii 81!/#t.. fi/~U.t? $.._;av(';/ /d/1;" i!!¥'- ,J2 b11 II!i'l,-11,i ,y,.t1m 5'111;,, 'ft
Lun heng and Han shu, This being still insufficient for forming a full ancl syste-
1ogyjf,hq.ffi._s15:fft Jfl;ift 758 }:Jct? fJ:.JM,1tt'f ll!i'if_15&,1o?p1r1 $1.1,f 2-iff"/ f[{f. %J i!ll:. M 'it1otJ-~//t~i'?J,10?J matic treatise, the investigators have passed on and drawn upon the commenta-
tors of the 2nd c, A. D. and the following centmies all the way down to T'ang
G(t_701J#rmf'f-nctfi, 1b1{1Uosi:j);:,t;m J))it,1:1,t-m..f~ 111,-Jf:®wktMki.Jos,;t to1 f:t m ~ Jlf/Jt1 :;j S/Jl,1101
and Sung times, the identifications of 1Jersons and places, descriptions of rites etc.
iii 123 \.~ r1t.tH 1/Jo#it 1m~i?1c;sJ]Z111s:/,:ii;10;,11r1·i!c11J.#1i!1t!'.i!f.rJ'.s.~1t11tf-7(1.i!ff1t16~ ,d"!!i !N2.%lt.t11i'ilf made by these later Chinese scholars being reverently regarded as quite as
trustworthy materials as the early pre-H.an texts. In this way very full and
nuoo1 !~ 1m'.fi1111. ~ s.2t:~ 3.t, l!ZtiiTJ r1t;Jl-t trJ]j;;,r.Jf~o.wff-,,?-Z.4'- Xtf#=vr;v,~1;4:t.{lNl/lf JJ r G/j 11ff g-
detailed accounts have been arrived at - but accounts that are indeed caricatures
,10Aitm.Jll}Jil'10(JM tfJ5 tlr~ 1:t f'i m"ttlvatt1ot1,111.F)f;n,, w,-Jl.,t,i'"/i1s.JJ/L1mff..1M~l!1,Sz1f 110,. of scientifically established ones. This method, current l1itherto, would. be
-'if -"1: -<+ ,,_,. --!ci -c:E ~-ii -"' -'* ±!: ·• &' ,, , ,'ii " analogous to one by which the lore of Hellenistic times and the speoula,tions of
rfm,111:, &YfJ. J.&-1110.-f,JJZm Jf-11111>JJt1 J-10 YV.mitJ7f!>.ffi_ m~v;,-1, 1iJ/.t;,;:_1a2,)!!!,;Jso/j,.J?UtJ01,11Jfllt1JtiJ11t?!if
medieval scholars were used to fill in the gaps in the documentation c1,bont ear.ly
111sJ1l1itAAct8'8'.r-·t"tm,i'rr1s'ftil,t11£bj,f-11s:1111ff,'111:·gt,,s@/f111aibj//;5:d'i_m/}1111~n~JJ~m~itt. Rome under the kings, a.nd if this heterogeneous »material» were usecl as a
homogeneous ·whole to reconstruct the history, customs, beliefs ancl rites of ti11c
~'&m"Jit i$-&/tm:~cos ll/ ?fr J.1 m %§ &1 'ifi1m~1c,:, t{ rJo.1[ tot, 1J7 ~ rKi&t r:1,%t1115:,;J;i1, 111/f!!L
ancientmost phase of Roman culture.
1Nttfi.J11;'f!izF01,t~ m 1,:1,fff,Y:!.f:1Nc'j'~Sf;if1S5"~ v1,10Jt,;toJ)Uo1JiQi'ynJ1&7,;zJi,ro1fk:g5:,:,§b..9J?!J/!!:.s11,toJ,1/Jff In the present article some problems of early Chinese traditions ancl cult.H will
be treated in a totally different ,rny. vVe shall try to make a distinction between
ill r1JLi! ·M ci_s,;;;11t1ill':1olf~10,_.&i,;;i;&L,~d!11Jtjf)Jzt'i~;1;4p;111 ip11.,fi:!iC.,SZ!c~11s,~ tr'tffi-fc sn several kinds of sources and attribute to them their proper valne. thus arriYing
Jf;ort,1,.w*JS"fJ~/OJ?tfltw·ik.11.rc, fii9 off M11il'[*] 10J1JW{ f!v.f,'f1109,;;7z./1J\7 /,irrfim Ffi} ;ztt,loJsPim, r.% ,9f'.f:R at a picture of how the vari01rn beliefs h,we gradually been transforrnecL filled
"'- 11~r A !IS1.1zn.7,1;
'lrJ rFiJ!fS iv<; ~li'- -~r, "i:iic
1<..... Y!/3'"'919 , · '"''
~/0i,K<.S•1, .d;;
/tiJ,11111,11tf;fil..ldll/, -M" """"' Jlt'i'/~
.'f-iftC:i"oJ ,,-, 9,,i"',1
!,'l;;5,r/11y\ ,,,;; i/4' 1-:J,.,m,Sfr
,M out by later embellishments and foreign, imported elements ancl often rnthle:ssly
trimmed by aid of a systematizing interpretation,
%ii!Jl!Jl,,;x~ 111 iJ 111,.% vc:ijc.J'd1;tt'r1A(t-1110w.:'ltti'f#,fy;s.~m l sc~;@t 1111~11;:1,,/!, There are two principal distinctions tlmt must be made.
L In the first place, there is the c h r o no lo g i o a 1 consideration. There
are, first, the pre-Han texts, written at a time ,vhen China lived thrnugh its
feudal age, when the institutions ancl. beliefs were still those of a sociological stage

198 199
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUl'd OF FA.R EA.STERN A.NTIQUITIES
·-··-------~-----o'-
tlmt wets begun in Yin time and ended with the unification work of Ts'in SM
huang ti. This social system deteriorated rapidly in the 3rd c. B. C., but the
tn,ditions were still actively a1iYe in the various feudal courts, centred in the
noble class ,Yith their ancestral temples, their genealogical lists, their ancestral
sacrifices kept up, in many mises, in unbroken line from hoary antiquity, and
their cults of various other kinds faithfully preserving the fundamental features
of the early Chou rites. Towards the close of this feudal era, particularly in the
:frd c. B. C., certain foreign influences begi,n to make themselves felt, but as yet
not to an extent sufficient to overthrow the ancient system of tn,ditions and cults.
Once we have passed the crucia,] elate of 200 B. C., howev:er, conditions are
radically changed. The system of feudal kingdoms that had flourished for a
millennium had entirely broken clown. The barriers, both politicaJ and economical,
between the various cultura,] centres were a,bolishecl, new great highways con-
nected the various parts of China with ea.eh other, the plebeian classes, farmers
and merchants, obtt1ined conditions of life quite different from those which
prevailed during the feudal era, in short, the confedemtion of more or less
independent small states was supplanted by a. strong, centralized empire, in which
the nivellation set in at a i·11picl pace, obviating the provincial contrasts and
destroyi11g the ancient loca.J customs m1d beliefs. The ancestml temples of the
feudal lords were no longer the ritual and cultural centres, the litterati formed a
social class independent of the patronage of feudal lords, the literature of the
Chou era was seriously struck at by the famous burning of the books of 213 B. C.,
a.nd the traditions and cults of the feudal kingdoms were no longer a. living reality
but ,1 memory, beloved by a snrn.ll ela,ss of schoh1rs but forgotten and despised
by the men in power, plebeim1 representatiYes sent out from the central Imperial
Court in the (\1pitc1,l. In 2/50 B. C. the authors could still describe the cults they
witnessed a.s living rea,lities, in 100 .B. C. they had to tell the story of how things
were before the cat,iciysm of 221--211. (The cults of their own time were a
conglomeration full of innovations, many of them newly instituted by imperial
order). At the same time the foreign influences were multiplied. The knowledge
of \Vestern Asiatic things gained ground rapidly, but, above all, the Chinese of
Han time came into dose contact and carried on an exchange of ideas ancl
customs with the Nomad peoples of the North and North-west, and of the cultures
of the regions that now form Southern China, the Chinese penetration a.nd
colonization in this region for south of the Yang-tsi: making great strides in the
course of rt couple of centuries. The lore of the Han era is thus a mixtum
compositum far less homogeneous and less genuinely Chinese thRn the lore of
~c~~ - ,
Yet m1other great gulf gc1pes between the conditions of the early Han and
those of the 2nd c. A. D. Not only ht1d the first three centuries of Han rule
revolutionizecl Chinese life and thought. There was also another important
difference. In the first Ha.n cent.m·y the students were still not very far remote
200
B. l{ARLGREN: LEGENDS A.ND CULTS l.Y ANCIENT CHINA
--··-----~·-----·-
in time from the feudal en1: their. masters' masters liYecl in the htst phase of that
epoch, and though the customs and· cults were already badly shttken a.ml certt1inly
to a large extent c1,bolishecl, the knowledge about them eoulcl still be kr.pt aliYe
to a certain extent, in the circles of the early Hm1 scholars. But a couple of
centuries later, in the age of the grec1,t schofasts, Cheng Chung, Fu K'ien, Hi.\ Shen,
Kia, K'uei, Ma. Jung, Cheng Hi.tan, Kao Yu and ma,ny others, that knowledge
was such as had p,1,ssed through the cha.in of many genen1tions, it wc1,s no longer
based on recent memories but tlw lore of ancient times.
2. In the second place, there is the important and hitherto ,1,lmost entirely
disregarded diffel'ence between v a. r i o u s k i n cl s of sources: sources of
fundamentally different purport. On the one hand, there are sources like Shu
king and Shi king, Tso chuan and Kuo yli and Chan kuo ts'e, Lun yii c1,ncl
:VIencius, Mo-tsY and Chua.ng-tsi:, Li sa.o and T'ien wen -- they >Lre wlmt I shall
call free texts of t,he pre-Han era. Their accounts of a.ncient men, lrnppenings
and cults are given en pas.mnt, either a.s occasional records of eYent.s or i1rnel'terl
in speeches of politicia,ns and philosophers, who refer to current traditions in
elucidating some moral or political theme. Of an entirely different clmracter an•
those writings which I shall call systeinatiz-inr; te:rt8. 'l'hey c1,re the products of
scholars who deliberately tried to I ,1 y cl o w n 1 a, w s or ma k e a c o n sis t-
ent w h o 1 e of the ancient traditions and ritual ideas. Their goa.l wa.s to
work up and compile a diffuse and heterogeneous nrnte1fal, to create ,1, system.
To this class belong, in the first place, works such as the major JJ,i.rt of the Li
ki, and the whole of Yi Ii and Chou Ji. Their scope is something other than
simply to record ancient trn.ditions and customs. They represent the endeavours
'j of the Confucian school to determine what the beliefs a,nd rites s h o u 1 d p r o-
i
p er l y b e, according to the philosophy and principles of the fii scholars. It. is
obvious that cerfoin speeches by prominent men in Tso clnrnn a.ncl Kuo yii lrnvc
something of this cloctrina.ry fla,vour; bnt there is the fundamcnta,] difference that,
their disquisitions are ma.de ad occa.sionem, referring to a certain tradition or cult
in order to guide the conduct of a prince in a. special case; they do not form a
comprehensive doctrine for the entire field of ritual life. A doctrine bid down
i'n the Li ki or the Yi Ii cannot give us such a.n insight into the reaJ Ii ving
traditions and rites as a speech in the Kuo yi.t, because the rites it describes have
been la.id on the Procrustea,n bed of the systerna.tizing Confucian schoh1,rs; it may
have been -- and can often be proved to have been --- tampered with and
trimmed so as to fit into the ritua.l system which the Confucim1 school thought
was the proper one. This considera,tion is, in a. wa,y, just, as important as
the chronological one. Certain chapters in the Li ki and the Ta Tai li nmy
have been written in early Han time (this is traditi01rnl1y said of Li: \Vang
chi:, though the earliest statement to this effect was made as la.te as by Lu Chi,
d. 192 A. D.), whereas other parts are clearly pre-Han texts (e. g. the T'a.n kung);
but it is of less consequence whether the systematizer wrote in 250 or in HiO B. C.
201

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
---------· ----·-------·
than if the wrote with a deliberate p u r p o s e to make the rites he describes
accord with the doctrine of a certain school.1)
The chapters in SI-ma Ts'ien's Shl ki which tr~at of the pre-Han times are of
quite the same systematizing character. He has based himself, as an historian,
on vririous earlier documents and c o n s c i o u s I y t r i e d t o r e c o n c i I e
t h em, to select such facts as do not contradict one another and leave out
the rest or modify them so as to make them consistent with the rest. Some of
the documents on which he bases himself were already such systematizing texts,
particularly the chapter Ti hi of the Ta Tai Ii, which deliberately tries to
reconstruct a consistent list of the early sovereigns and to determine their family
relationships. Of the same kind were the Shu sii (Preface to the Shu king)
and the Sh'i pen (now lost, but some parts of which are known from early
quotations). 2 )
If these systematizing texts of the ju-school doctrinaries and of the early
historians already represent a deliberate compilation of the raw material of the
ancient traditions and customs, this is still more the case with the commentators
of Eastern Han, Liu ch'ao and T'ang times. They lived at a time when not only
all first-hand knowledge of the raw materials was entirely lost, but when the
secondary and tertiary etc. knowledge, passed on through a long series of teachers
and pupils,· was also to a hirge extent lost or bacliy distorted. The many
discrepancies between: commentators on the rituals, e. g. between Cheng Chung
and Cheng Hiia,n, clearly reveal that their pronouncements were very largely
reconstructive speculations, not founded on any living traditions but simply on
their conjectures and their attempts at a philological interpretation of the ancient
texts. In my works Glosses on the Kuo feng Odes (BMFEA 14), Glosses on the
Siao ya Odes (BM:FEA 16) and Glosses on the Ta ya and Sung Odes (BMFEA
18) I have shmvn how far the famous Cheng Hiian is wide of the mark in his
interpretations of the Odes. His doctrines about the ancient traditions and rites
laid clown in his commentaries on the Rituals are of no greater value: in many
1 ) Na body C'oulcl seriously believe that the Chou li accurately describes the system of offcials of
the Royal Chou. Its character of a reconstruction t,o show h o w i t o u g h t t o b e is quite obvious.
On the other hand, there cannot be the slig~1test doubt that it is a pre-Han text. This follows fron1
a co111pariso11 of the systern of officials which it la.ys do'\"'i'Il and that revealed by the free texts, notably
Shu, Shl, Tso and l{yi.i, 'J.1he discrepancies are so great that no Han-time forger would have dared to
devia.te so "i\;idely fr01n the sacred classics. Above all, those scholars who have maintained that both
the 'J.1so chuan and the Chouli were forged by Lin .Hin should have obseryed the glaring discrepancy
between the two texts - it would h~t-ve been strange indeed if one man had forged t,vo documents
thHt on many funda1nental points are irreconcilable.
') Qll.ite different is the Chu shu ki nien (not the spurious work translated by Legge, in Oh. Cl. III.
but the authentic Chu Shu collected fron1 early quotations by ,,,.ang Kuo-wei in his !{.u pen Chu shu ki
nien tsi kiao in Hai ning \iVang Chung-k'o kung yi shu; ,vhenever I quote the Chu shu ki nien, I always
refer to that edition~ in which the sources containing the quotations are car.efully recorded). This is
a chronicle of the Ch\m ts'iu type, based on yeA,rly reeords of the feudal courts, and. regarding the
enrly periods, evidently bus.eel on the genealogies kept in connection with the anceRtral temple cults.
202
-J
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IX ANCIENT CHIXA.
cases he may be right, in just as many he may be entirely mistaken; through
erroneous guesses and speculations. And that is true not only of Cheng Hiian
but of the entire galaxy of great commentators. Their pronouncements must
always be taken for what they are: scholarl.1· reconstruction~, not clocnmentation
of early happenings, beliefs and cults.
•
!
:t
,.
In the present article I shall take up for investigation the legends about primen1l
personages of various kinds and the cults connected with them. I shall keep
strictly separate first the accounts of free pre-Han texts, then the systematizing
and early Han texts, and finally the Eastern Han and later documents. I shall
not aim at completeness, and particularly not in regard to the last category.
If I were to incorporate all the speculations of Eastem Han scholars, it would
double the size of my article, and quite unnecessarily; I make only a selection
of these materials, sufficient to show how violently the ancient traditions have
been tampered with and embroidered. Very rarely clo I adduce texts later than
the 3rd c. A. D. If I should embody in my treatise all the fanciful cliatribe8
of the Six dynasties, T'ang and Sung times, such as the ShI yi ki, Sou shen ki,
Shu yi ki, Shen yi Iring, Lie sien chuan, San huang pen ki, the T'ang commen-
taries on the classics and histories, the Lu shI etc., this would make np a Yolnme
of several hundred pages, and that falls outside the scope of the present paper.
Under point 1. above we emphasized the funda.menfal importance of distin-
guishing between pre-Han texts and Han (and later) texts. Some remarh shoul,l
be added here about a few important texts, the age of which needs elucidation.
Lie-ts£. There is a strong tendency among modern Chinese scholars to regard Lie-tsr
as a spurious text, concocted jn post-Han-time. The re,,sons adduced ,uo, ho,1·ever, of
a very general and vague nature and far from conclusive. Now, thNe is one fact which
definitely vetoes this theory. As in many other earl.1' texts, there are variou,; pas,;agt:s
in Lie-tsi that are rhythmical and rimed, and the rimes are of the archaic type. ViTc find,
for instance, in chapter T'ien juei fl *p'iog: ~ *ts,ig; ibid. 1t *xwa: 'a *ngia; ibid.
Mi #ag: 'A *kii1g; eh. Huang Ti U'F *xi'wo: J1if *lcio; eh. Shuo fu ::¥U *g'w,1: l5f!i *dzwia;
eh. Liming rf;i: *njo: 616 *mfwo; ibid. §;o *tfeg: z *tfag, etc. These rimes could not have
been imagined in post-Han time, and we have therefore cver:v reason to accept our text
as being identical with the Lie-tsY recorded in Liu Hiang's catalogue (Han shu: Yi wen
chi). On the other hand, this does not imply that it is a pre-Han work. The rimes in
question were still quite possible in early Han time. Moreover, there i>< another ver~·
significant fact which forces us to conclude that the text was written in eiuly Han time.
In the pre-Han texts, the pronoun w u :g:. never occurs except in the nomirmtive i,nd
genitive case (>>I, my»). 1 ) This is an almost unbroken rule, not only in the Lu school
works (Lun, Meng, parts of Li), but in all the literature of the last centuries before the
l Han (Tso, Kyii, Ts'e, :M:o, Chuang, Si.\n, Hanfei, Lii etc.), "·hich shows that this ,vas a
regular grammatical feature of all the various pre-Han· dhileets, Now in Lic'-tsr there
are quite a number of examples in which w u :g:. stands as a regular object after it,,
verb, e. g.: Chtipter Huang Ti: s h 1 w u {l); ibid.: yin w u (2); eh. Chnng-ni: ~- i
1 ) But for the special eonstrnction of the type p u w u C' h Y -;r..; =g. ~n where, owing to the
r negation, the pronoun.objef't is plaeed before tbe Yerb, normnll,Y the plnf"e of the tmbjeC'ti (numinutin,}.
l
\
203
t
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
w u (3); ibid.: s h 1 w u (4); ibid.: s h 1 w u (l); eh. T'ang wen: ju w u {5); oh.
Shuo fu: y ii w u (6); ibid.: c hue i w u (7); ibid.: k i a o w u (8). In the texts
of the early and middle Han era, the role of w u as a pronoun of the nominative and
genitive oases is by no means forgotten, but in various of these texts there appear the
first signs that the feeling was gradually lost that w u could not serve as an object (da-
tive and accusative: »me>>). A few examples will suffice to illustrate this: Shi ki: k. 70,
p. 2: wei wu (9); k. 97 (the end): pu ju wu (10); k. 128, p. 7: sha wu (11);
Sin shu: Lien yit: we i w u {9); ibid.: Ch'un ts'iu: t s 'u n g w u (12); Shuo yiian:
Ch'en shu: s h r w u (4); ibid.: Li tsie: y ii w u {6); ibid.: Cheng Ii: ju w u {5);
ibid.: Shan shuo: s ha n w n (1.3); ibid.: we i w u (9); ibid.: K\ian mou: y i w u
(14); Lun heng: Kan hii: ha i w u (15). Such constructions, with w u as the object
of an immediately preceding verb (sometimes in the function of a preposition) hardly
ever occur in pre-Han texts. But Lie-ts1, as examplified above, shows just the same
system: as a rule w u me>ins »I, my>>, but occasionally the rule is broken: w u = >>me,>.
This cle>trly points to ettrly Han time as the date of the Lie-ts1.
In fact, certain Lie-ts1 elmpters so closely resemble in content and style some chapters
in Hu>ti-nan-ts1 that we are justified in attributing them to the same inilie~. and time
(2nd c. B. C., of. below).
Huai-nan-tai. About the Huai-nan-ts1, H. Maspero says (J. As. 1924, p. 12): >>C'est
surtout une compilation de petits traites >tnoiens . . . La plupart de ces opuscules
remontent a la fin des Toheou et a l'epoque de Ts'in, fin du IV:e ou III:e sieole>>. Nothing
could be more arbitrary and unfounded than this statement. We know perfectly well
through the Han shu (k. 44) that Prince Liu An (>>Huai-nan-tsi>>, d. 122 B. C.) assembled at
his court many scholars and f an g - s h 1 taoist adepts who wrote' the various treatises that
made up the collection generally known as the Huai-nan-tsL Pan Ku was sufficiently
near :in time to Liu An to know very well what he was speaking about. 'I:he preface of
Kao Yu (2nd c. A. D.) to the Huai-n>tn-ts1 gives full details of the principal coadjutors
of Liu An who c h u ~ wrote the book. There are no points d'appui as evidence that
these texts were pre-Han products - that is merely a personal opinion of :M:aspero's,
for which, so far as I am aware, he has offered no proofs. It is a common feature of
llfaspero's wm;ks th>it he ma:kes no distinction in his mode of expression between
established facts and his personal opinions, a.nd the unsuspioious reader is often led to
believe that a categorical statement of his sums up a scientifically proved fact, whereas
in reality it merely represents his own conviction. His p>tssage quoted above should'
preferably have run: >>C'est surtout, a m on a vis, une compilation ... >>. Briefly,
the Huai-nan-ts1 is a collection of essays written by a number of scholars at the Court
of Liu An in the middle of the 2nd c. B. C.
8han hai king. The Shan hai king is a curious document which has often been stated
to be a Chou-time text. Even a slight acquaintance with its contents convinces the
reader that it is a product of the Han era, in parts not even of the early Han. The first
five books give an enumeration of a long series of mountains and hills all over the »China»
known to the Han people, and almost every such hill has some supernatural animal or
tree or plant (occasionally also a spirit), and in most oases these animals and plants possess
! 11=1 Yi- a ;::t' :Ji.
'!.~ '"' "'- · , a J . ?JJ
o .1i-
a J,
7,
a;; .:£ ,- .i. :Ji. -(,,1;1 1i. ,,i. 7i...
?' r:1 J, .xo c, C. ..;,«; c, 7. "<---,.,, 5'. ·:::ix._-r.:, ,. ~ a
~~
/tJ -r.:-J<o-§ I I ~ 1.z.lj 13 !It~% IS: i %_
204:
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
·--· --------------· -------
magic power: when eaten they cause various sicknesses, or the appearance of the animal
presages drought or flood or war etc .. On Ki shan, for instance, »there is a bird, its sh>tpe
is that of a hen, but it has three heads, six eyes, six feet, three wings, its name is
c h ' an g - f u ; if you eat it, you do not sleep>>. In the said five books there ,ire no less
than 186 such weird animals and 48 m~gic trees or plants. 99 percent of them never
occur in a single pre-Han text. To a certain extent these chapters undoubtecUy cont>iin
Han-time folk-lore, but the critical reader cannot seriously >iccept it all as >t bona ftde
representation of beliefs that were really current among the people. The very exuberance
of these supernatural phenomena, with which the text is overlo>tcled, gives one the
impression that the author has had at his disposal a certain limited fund of such popular
beliefs connected with a few localities, and that his fertile brain has then invented the
rest in the interest of completeness and pamllelism: every hill in the vast domain sliould
be purveyed with its magic animal or plant in order to make the system complete. vVe
have no means of ascertaining how much - one fifth? - one third! - of all these
curious statements really 001Tespond to a.living Hm1-ti111e folk-lore. The l>tter clrnpter,;
(6-18) contain much more lore about pre-Han persmrnges, but they are none the les,;
patently written in Han time, and not even in the beginning of the Han era, sinee their
geography reveals a detailed knowledge of regions entirely unknown to the Chinese of
the 3rd c. B. C. There is not only the Min m,i region (book 1:3), i. e. in the present prov.
of Fu-kien and (ibid.) F,in-:i,ii ~ ·flli (close to the modern Canton), but also Y ii e oh i
oh 1 k u o H x ::z: ll!!ll »the state of the Yiie-ch1» (book 13) and even (book 18) 'l"ien-tu
x :#, i. e. Indi>t. The later books of the Shan hai Icing have been thoroughly and
competently studied by 0. Manchen in Asia Major 1924.
Kiwi taang fiiW jjl. The existence of this book in Chou time is attested by Chonli:
Ta pu, where we are told that there were three nmnuals of divination: Lien slmn, Kuei
tsang and Chou yi. Thus the Kuei tsang ,~hould be analogous to the C'hou yi, i. e. the
famous Yi king. In Kuo P'o's comment,iry on the Shan lrni king there is often quoted
a work K'i shi lg: ~, and sin.ce in k. 2 of the Shan hai king Kuo quotes the Kuei ts,mg
k'i shr fiiW jjl lg: -~, some scholars have thought that these quotations of Kuo\; are
drawn from the pre-Han work Kuei ts>ing, and that. K'i shr is R chapter in tlrnt Jost work.
H. Maspero, therefore, in his article >>Legendes mythologiques d>tns le Chou king>> (J.
As. 1924) h>ts made much use of this »pre-Ham> source. But all this is due to a miAunder-
standing. The title Kuei tsang k'i shi re>illy me>ins >>Explamitions of the divinatory figme,
in the Kuei tsang>>; it is not the Kuei tsang itself but >t later treatise, in which the author
enlarges upon various topics in connection with the divinatory mmnml Kuei tsang. That
this is so becomes clear from an examination of the extracts: they ,ire not at ,1,ll mmlogous
or even similar to the text of the Yi king, but they are very much akin to a typic,i,l Han-
time treatise Yi wei ~ ~ (see. Ku king kie huei han), a similar diatribe in connection
J
with the Yi king. Even when sometimes (e: g. comm. on 1Vensiim1 13) there is a
·, reference briefly formulated >>the Kuei ts>ing says,>, it is not a question of the Kuei ts>ing
itself, but of some similar >>Folgeschrift,> of H>tn or later date, as shown by the content,
} which is not of the type of a divinatory manuaJ.1) There must have existed quite a series
of such dii!oourses on divination in Han time; >inother one is also quoted by Kuo P'o
'
(comm. Sh>tn hai king 7) called Kuei tsang Cheng mu king fm jjl ~ ·BI: t~ The names
!1 of various classics have been exploited in this fashion in Han time, e. g. the Ch'un ts'iu
_;;s;,. =Ji. .,. V. §..
g yiian ming pao ;ff; jp}< 5f; 1fil" .g. The Kuei ts,ing itself was lost before middle Han
'i 1 ) Thus, for instance, the Ch u hiie ki 22 quotes a passage fro1n the »Kuei tsang)>, but the sa.me
1
passage recurs in comm. on Shan hai king 18, there correctly stated by I(uo P'o to be fro1n ~he :Knei
l
)
tsang k'i shi. ·
{ 205
t
,.
 B. KA.RLGREN: LEGENDS A.I\'D CULTS f;V lLVCJE;'v'T CHIN~l
BULLET!'\' OF THE JJUSJ;UJI OF F,iR EASTERN A.NTIQUJTIES

time.: if it had existed then. such an important work would surely lmvc been included T ' ,, n g2, S h u n = Y i\ 2 ) a.re correct. is attested hy the context in Lun: T'ai pn.
in Liu Hia,ng's bibliogmphy (H,111 shn : Yi wen chi); the Kuei tsang k'i shi, which does Chuang: Shan sing, Chuang: Lie Yi\-k'ou. The trnditions concerning the rulers
not occur there eithe1-, ,vn,R proha.bly a. 1,vork of Eastern Han tin1e. It has practically no a.nterior to Yao seem at first sight to be more comJ)licated, but. r,s we shall see,
value as a souree concerning Cl1ou~thne China... they a.re in fact remarkably consistent, if we a,bicle by the free pre-Han texts. Them
a.re various texts which give an enumeration of them, sometimes complete, some-
I A.
times giving only the most prominent members of the series:
I. The tn,clitions about the primeval times anterior to ]<' u Hi, S he n
Nun g and Hu 11 n g Ti (see below) are wry few and va,gue. vVe find some Yi: Hi ts'i: P' a, o Hi (= F 11 Hi) - Shen N 11 n g Huang Ti ---
notions of the kind in Ha.nfei: \Vu to, where t,he a,uthor ~pecuhttes a.bout the ear- Yao - Shun.
liest conditions of human life: in the highest antiquity people lived in »bird's nests>> Ts'e: Chao 2: Fu Hi - Shen Nun g -- Hutt n g Ti --· V a, o -- S h u n.
made in the trees, in order to a void the dangers threatening them on the ground; Kuan: Feng shan: F u Hi - S b en N u n g --- Y e n Ti --- Huang
this was the age of Yu C h' a o s hi (>>the Lords of the bird's nests»). The T i - C h u a n H ii - K ' u - Y a, o -- S h u n -- Y ii.
people harmed their ston11whs by eating ra.w food_. and so some ;,sages>> invented Lii: Tsun shi: S hen Xu n g - H u a n g Ti - Chu ,1 n H u K 'u
the fire-drill and tmight them to cook thei1· food; this was the age of S u e i Yao - Shun - Yi\.
,Jen s h Y (>>the Lords the Fire-drillers»). This, however, is not the invention Kyii: Lu, shang, Kyi.\: Chou, hia, a,nc1 Kyi.i: Ch'u, hia: Hu fl n g Ti -- Shao
of an individuaJ author (Han-fei) but represents some more generally recognized Hao - Chuan Hii. - K'u - Yao - Shun-·- YiL
tradition, for Yu C h 'a. o s h Y as a,ncient rulers are also mentioned in Yi Chou Auth. Chu slm ki nien: Hu an g Ti - X - Chu an H ii (>>When Hu an g
shu: Shi' ki; and Chuang: Chl lo spe>1ks of >>the pronouncements of S u e i Jen Ti died, after 7 yearn, his minic:ter T s o C h ' e put C h u an .Hit on the
and S h e n Nun g,>, thus coordinating S u e i Jen and S he n Nun g throne>>, thus indicating an interval between H u a n g Ti and C h u an
c1s sage rnlers of antiquity and placing S u e i ,Jen prior to S hen Nun g. Hi\, i. e. the reign of S h 11 o Hao acc. to Kyii. a.boYe).
Again, in Kuan: K'uei tu, S u e i J e n is given as the point of departure in an Chuang: Ta tsung sh1, Chuang: K'ie k'ie, Chuang: T·ien Tsi-fang: Fu Hi -·-·
evolutional series, followed by K u n g K u n g - H u a n g T i - Y a o - S hen Nu n g - Hu an g Ti.
Shun. .Furthermore, Shi tsi') tells how Suei Jen produced the fire and how he If we dress a table of this, we obtain:
ta,ught people the art of fishing. There is no indication that these >>rulers>> Yu
C h ' a o s h i and S u e i ,T e n s h 1 were ever offered a.ny cult; they play Kuan Li.i Kyii Clrnslrn
a very modest part in the pre-Han literature.
For remnants of other trnditions about primeval >>rulers>> anterior to Fu Hi 1. F n Hi .................... .
2. S hen Nun g ......... .
see 5 below (p. 220).
:3.Yen Ti .............. ..
:'l. From Y it, the founder of the Ria dynasty, the Chinese tmclitions are suf- 4. Huang Ti ........... ..
fioiently unanimous ancl consistent to give them a.t least a, semi-historical appea- 5. Sh110 Hao ............ . X
rance; from T'ang, the founder of the Shang-Yin dym,sty, we are on historical 6. Chua,n Hii ............. .
ground in regard to some funclmnental facts, tlmnks to the oracle bones from 7. K ·u .......................... .
8. Yao ......................... .
Horrnn. \Ve shall revert to these two dynasties later on.
9. Shun ....................... .
The direct sequence of three greaJ, rulers of the golden 11ge: Y a o, S h u n, 10. Y ii ............................ .
------·..·---- -----------------·-
·y ii, is universally accepted in pre-Han liternture. Primarily this is based on the
Shu, where full details are given of their succession in the earliest chapters, but
The important thing in these tmditions is that the sequence is quite consistent:
the s11me sequence recurs pa.8si1n, in Lun: T'ai po; Yieng: T'eng '\Ven kung, sha,ng;
nowhere a text where a 7 comes before a 5 or a, 6 etc., in spite of the fact tlrnt the
Kyii: Lu, shang; Kuan: Hua.n kung wen; Lii: Kin t'ing; Li: Li k'i, etc. Yao is
texts are very heterogeneous, belonging to va,rious centres and schools.
also called T ' 11 o T ' 11 n g 2 s h I (T ' a o T ' an g') or T ' an g°, and S h u n
These same sovereigns, besides figuring in these texts, in which they are placed
is called Yu Y ii" s hi (Yu Y ii") or Y ii'. That these identifications (Yao=
in a sequence, figure frequently and passim in the free texts of pre-Hmr litera--
1 ) The ren1n,in~ of 8h1-tRi"s writings haye been colleetcd. frm11 ancient quotations by Sun Sing-yen
ture, and will be studied in detail further below. 'I'here r,re, however, several
in P'ing tRin kuan ts'ung shu, and by \'Yang Ki-p'ei in Hu hai Ion ts\mg shu. points which clemmicl further commentR here.

207
206
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
a). That S ha o Hao has to be inserted between Hu an g Ti and·
Chu an H ii. is directly attested by Kyii and indirectly by Chu, shu (see above).
It is further attested that Sha o Hao ' s personal name was C h 1 • (Tso:
Chao 17), that he was also called Kin T' i en s hi: (Shi:-ts1) and resided in
K 'i u n g - sang (ibid.). Hence he was also known as K' i u n g - sang
(Tso: Chao 29). His successor Chu an H ii was born in Jo s hue i and
resided in K' u n g - sang, a variant of the same place name (Lii: Ku yiie).
We may add that the Chu shu ki n.ien tradition according to which the time
between H u a n g T i and C h u a n H ii - the reign of S h a o H a o -
was short (7 years) is confirmed by Lii: Sii yi, which speaks of >>what Hu an g
Ti taught Chu an Hu>>, thus suggesting a personal contact between these
two sovereigns. Finally it should be mentioned that acc. to the authentic Chu shu
ki nien, C h ' a n g Yi descended and resided in J o s h u e i and was the father
of the emperor K ' i e n H u a n g, which suggests that C h u a n H ii, son
of C h ' a n g Yi, was also called K ' i e n H u a n g.
Some remarks should be made here about the place name K ' i u n g s a n g or
I{' u n g s a 11 g. Tu Y11 (3rd c.) in comm. on Tso: Chao 29 says K 'i u 11 g s a 11 g
was in the north of Lu (the feudal state in Shantung), and. Kao Yu (2nd c.) in comm.
on Huai: Pen king like>1ri.se says K 'u n g sang was a place in Lu. Kan Pao (4th c.)
says it was >>a cave in the-mountain Nan shan in Lu». This agrees with the placing of
the K ' u n g s a n g mountain in Shan hai king k. 4. But on the other hand Shan hai
king k. 3 places »the K ' u n g s a n g mountain>> in the far north (somewhere in northern
Shansi). All such determinations of early localities are really void of value. In·reading
the westei·n ~ranslations of the earliest literature, in which there are thousands of place
names, one is agreably surprised to find that almost every one is well defined and carefully
located (see, for instance, Legge, Chinese Classics, Chavannes, Mem. hist., Forke, Me Ti).
The secret of this astonishing precision is simple. These translators have as a rule
followed the orthodox »standard>> commentaries on each of the works in question. But
what are their place identifications really worth 1 · that the traditions could be kept alive uncorrupted throughout the. many centuries from
The pre-Han literatme contains no single work on geography, except the Yii kung
chapter in the Shu, which deals principally with mountains and rivers and indicates their
position only very vaguely (by follo"ri.ng the route of Y ii through the »nine provinces>>),
The same is true of Western Han literature, where the fantastic Shan hai king, with its
account of mountains and rivers, is just as vague as the Yil lnmg. Si-ma Ts'ien's Shi
ki has no chapter on geography. It is only in Eastern Han time that a really descriptive
geography appears, the fundamental document being Pan Ku's Han shu: Ti li chi; and
that same work also marks the beginning of historical geography, for a great number
of Hail time places are identified by Pan with places (mostly with quite different names)
in the pre-Han literatme. At about the same time came the first great efflorescence of
Qhinese philology, and the commentators on the Chou-time literature also made frequent
notes on historical geography, trying to locate the place names occmring in the early
texts. A rich fund of such notes is due to the labours of Eastern Han and San kuo
scholars like Hii Shen, l\fa Jung, Cheng Hiian, Kao Yu, Wei Chao, Tu Yii and many
others of the same epoch. They sometimes agree quite well with each other, often they
diverge considerably, sometimes fatally. When, later on, comprehensive geographies
appeared, like Li. Tao-yiian's Shuei king chu (6th c.) and the Kuo ti chi (early, T'ang,
now known only from extracts preserved in quotations), and when the great commen-
208
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS lN ANCIEY7' CHISA.
tators on the Shi ki and the Han shu (P'ei Yin, 5th c:, Si-ma Cheng, Chang Shou-t~ie,
Yen Shi-kn, all T'ang time) passim discuss the localization of the pre-Han place names,
their points d'appui are, as a rule, not entries in the pre-Ha.n texts (which seldom allo"·
of any exact determinations) but precisely the various pronouncements in. Han shu:
Ti li chi and in the Eastern Han t,nd Liu ch'ao commentaries just mentioned. Whe11,
finally, in the Ts'ing dynasty a row of prominent scholars devoted themselves to the
historical geography of the pre-Han era - see, for insta.nce, various extensfre
geographical treatises in the Huang Ts'ing king kie and Huang Ts'ing king lde sii pien,
the copious notes in the new Ts'ing commentaries on the classics, and the Han slm pu
chu by Wang Sien-ts'ien - they again had nothing to do but weigh the opinions of the
Eastern Han, Liu ch'ao and T'ang writers and try to choose between the divergent
theories of these many authors. If we read these comprehensive treatises and
commentaries, we shall find it amply evident that the localization of pre-Han place names
in the >>standard,, commentaries is to a deplorably large extent contestable and that in
many cases no safe results can ever be attained. Even in the more conscientious of the
western translations this fact sometimes emerges (see, for instance, the alternative placings
in Chavannes, Mem. Hist. I, pp. 26, 31, 52, 72, 128, 1:H and pass-iin). The plain fact of
which we should never lose sight is that even the position of the places in the period,
of the Ch'un ts'iu and the Warring States, eras that a.re very fully treated in works like
Tso, Kyii, Mo, Lii, Ts'e, are to a large extent quite impossible. to determine ex,ictl:,·.
There is a framework of fundamental names in these texts, the exact positions of which
are certain beyond any doubt: such, for instance, as the state of Lu · (though it,; exact
confines are doubtful). With such fundamental places as. points of departure the
approximate position of a great many others may be gleaned through the context in the
Chou literature, but certainly no more; and if we take the trouble to go through the Tso
chuan with an open and critical mind, we shall be discouraged by finding how remarkably
small the number of quite certain localizations is after all.
It ought to be obvious that the determinations of the Eastern Han and later scholars
can be confidently accepted only when it is a question of the fundamental framework:
in regard to the position of the principal feudal states and their capitals and a number
of famous localities that are, so to spe,ik, hot1sehold words in the classics: we may expn,t
the Ch'lm ts'iu and Waning States eras clown to Eastern Han. But as soon as it is a
question of more modest localities, which play only a secondary part in Chou literature,
it is evident that no firm tradition could have smvived down to the 1st or 2nd c. A. D.
The identifications of Pan Ku et consortes are g1iesses, reconstructive computations and
nothing more.1)
There are various reasons why i, gre,it many place names of early historical times
(Yin, Chou) cannot be localized with any certainly, but two of them are fatal. On the
1 ) Ch'un ts'iu: Ruan 7 says (705 B. C.): Sue i, prince of Ku Jitlt f13
came to court (sc. in Lu).
Tso adds: He is called by his personal name, showing contempt. K u. which occurs nowhere else in
Ch'1m ts'in and Tso chuan, was an insignificant »statei>. But Pa.n I{.u (Han shu: rri li ch'i, followed
by Tu Yi\) says about the city Chu-yang $£ llJi.l- (the present Ku ch'eng hien in the prefecture of Siang
yang, Hupei): »It is the old country of the prince of Km. Can we seriously belieYe Pan's identifica-
tion? Is it probable that a, tradition from 700 B. C. down to the 1st c. A. D. lh·ecl on in the region
of the present Ku ch'eng hien that this was the »state» of the »prince of K.tH in the Ch'un ts'iu?
Obviously not, it is a mere speculation of Pan's. But on his great authority, the T'ang dyn,:1sty
renamed the place Ku ch~eng »the city of I{m), and the offic•ial geography (Yi t'nng chi) of the Ts"ing
says that to the north-west of l{u ch'eng there is »the grave of the prince of I{u»(!). This example
tln•ows a glaring light on the value of Chine,.se historical geography.
209
14
 BULLETIN OF THE lvlUSEUM. OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
one hand, a, certain phice name has often been transferred from one locality to another;
- I,
such are for instance, the famous Po if: of the Yin dynasty, and scores of others.1 ) On
the other hand there were frequently several places which had the same name; a good
example is K' u n g t,' u n g which, according to the account of Hu an g Ti' s
conquests in Shi ki: Wu ti pen ki, is clearly a pla,ce in the extreme west, and in Tso: Ai
12 is equally unambiguously a place in Sung (Honan); other examples are the two
different Po c h u 11 g (in Kansu and in Shensi, see Chavannes, M. H. I, p. 127) and
the two different K' u e i k 'i u (in Honan and in Shantung, see ibid. II, p. 29 and IV,
p. 44). There are scores of sin1ilar cases.
If then even the geography of the Sth-3rd centuries B. C., in spite of the ample
materials about that epoch in contemporaneous sources, must be admitted to be
exceedingly poorly known, the identifications of place names made by the scholars of
the Christian era being to a large extent contradictory and unreliable (a1+d even, when
not contriidictory, often mere surmises), it is obvious that nothing could be more futile
than to try to define the position of places in the legends about primeval times and the
pre-Chou dynasties. The na.mes are mere names and nothing more; we can but rarely
connect them with a precise locality. It might be objected that the localizations made
by Eastern Him and later scholars may be considered to be plausible when they are
supported by local traditions of their time: if the legend has it that an >>emperor>> X was
buried in Y, and the Y is identified by the commentators with a place Z where the people
in Han time were proud to possess >>the grave of emperor X>>, we might venture to accept
the identification. Unfortunately this is not admissible, for sometimes two places vie
with e,ich other for the honour of possessing >>the grave of So and s0>>. The Han and
post-Han scholars sometimes give us an amusing illustration of the value of such >>local
tracljtions». Sf-ma, Ts'ien, for instance, tells us (Sh1 ki: Feng shan shu) that »the graYe
of C h '1 Y m> is situated in K'an in the eastern P'ing lu district (Shantung) -
C h ' 1 Yu was the legendary re be] who fought Hu a n g Ti (seep. 283 below); and he
says (Shr ki: Po Yi lie clrnan) that he himself has been on the Ki shan and seen the grave
of R ii Yu, the sage to whom Yao wanted to cede the throne (seep. 292 below). It is
more than probable that even the "1'I'iters of the Chou-time texts, who record the legends
about primeval times, had but vague notions about where ancient places like K ' i u :n g
s a n g or H i e :n y ii a n or P a n t s ' ii an were to be located; we shall never be
able to ascertain what these names meant to t.he people ·ju pre-Chou· times.
The truth is that many of these place names are mere cliches, the stock-in-trade of the
early legend-tellers, which crop up again and again in various myths, simply because
they have a nirnb1,s, which lends glory to the myth in question. A good example is
M in g t ' i a o. Scores of generations of Chinese scholars have assiduously tried to
localize Mi n g t ' i a o, and in so doh1g driven to desperation by the impossibility of
reconciling the >>data.>>, they have sometimes concluded that there were several Ming
t ' i a o, where some of the foremost happenings of pre-Chou China took place; their
western disciples have equally ,issiduously recapitulated the learned conclusions of their
1) The exact position of the a successive Po, as deter1ni11ed by certain authorities, is indicated in
Chavannes, )1. H. I, p. 176. But Tsiao Si.ln, in conun. on l\{eng: T'eng "\¥en kung, hia, devotes several
pages to a review of the 111nny st.rongly divergent opinions about the localization of the three Po
expressed by a serif's of .Eastern IIan, Liu ch'ao and T'ang scholars: Pan Ku, Liu Hiang, Cheng Ri.i.an,
Sie Tsan, Liu Chao, rl'u YO., Huang-fu l\fi, S'i-1na Piao, Li Tao-yflan, Yen Shi-kn, Chang Shon-tsie,
and in the discussions of pr01ninent Ts'ing scholars like Yen Jo-kii, Wang Ming-sheng on this intricate
question, adding son1e extensive critic.al remw:ks of his own. \Vang Sien-ts'ien (Han shu pu chu: Ti
li chi, s. Y. Yen shi '{I ~jfj} continues the discuss.ion. In fact, in the absence of sufficiently guiding
pre-HH.n rimu·ces the prohle1n of the exact position of the three (or two?) Po can never be solved.
210
ii
' :f ~
!
i
f
s
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
--------"-
Chinese masters. Nothing could be more futile. We might as well try to define in
1. which province and which district in Germany the Schlaraffenland waR situated. What
,! has happened in the case of l\i in g t ' i a o is clear: a venerable legend in the princely
}! house of C h' en (Shun 's descendants) had it that the great sage died in Ming
a
t 'i a o (see p. 298 below). Ming - t 'i o thereby bec,ime a sacred and glorious place;
'I
what was more natural than that the princely house of Su n g (descendants of T ' an g)
seized upon the holy place for a leading legend of their own line! When T ' a n g the
Achiever founded the famous Shang-Yin dynasty, he did so by a victory in ::11 in g
t 'i a o!
b ). In the ancient texts there sometimes occur two soYereigns called Kao
Yang and Kao Sin. Kao Yang (e. g. inCh'u: Li sao, Tso: Wen 18) has
traditionally been identified with Chuan Hii and Kao Sin (e. g. Tso: Wen
IS) with K' u. The latter can be confirmed by free pre-Han texts, the former
can be given a measure of probability.
In Shi: Ode 303 a h ii an· n i a o >>black birch, i. e. a swallow, iH sent clown
from Heaven to give birth to the house of S h an g. Ode 304 tells us that the
lady who bore the founder (i. e. Si e) was a daughter of Y u S u n g 2 s h 'i, the
Lord of S u n g 2 • Lii: Yin ch'u tells us the legend in detail. There were two
young ladies of the house of Yu Sun g 2 s h 'i for whom there had been made
a (pleasm;e) tower in nine stocks, -where they were regaled with food, wine and
music; Goel sent a swallow to go and look at them, it sang, and the two girls con-
tested in catching it, putting a basket over it; when after a while they lifted the
baske't, the swallow left two eggs and flew away (they swallowed the eggs, and
Kie n Ti became pregnant). The same legend is referred to in Ch'u: T'ien
wen, where we find: >>K i en Ti was on a tower, how K ' u (sc. the emperor)
liked her! The h ii an n i a o black bird (swallow) gan its gift, how the girl
rejoiced!». Thus the lady Kie n Ti of the Sun g 2 house was the consort of
emperor K ' u. In Ch\1: Li sao the poet in his imagination seeks the daughter
of Yu Sun g 2, but he finds that he has been forestalled by Ka o Sin. Conse-
quently K a o S i n is = K ' u. That K a o S i n was close in time to Y a o,
i. e. that he was K' u is corroborated by Tso: Chao 1: Kao Sin had two
sons, Ng o p o and S h 'i C h ' e n, the former being placed in S h a, n g k ' i u;
Tso: Siang 9: the h u o c hen g >>goYernor of fire>> of T ' a, o T ' an g2 s h 'i
f (i. e. Yao) Ngo po resided in Shan g k 'i u. Therefore Kuan: Chi mi
J also speaks of the time of K' u 2 and Y a o (this K' u 2 being a, variant of the
ordinary K' u). On the other hand, that K 'u followed immediately after
t
C h u an H ii is attested in Kyi.i.: Chou, hia.
;
The identification of Kao Yang = Chu an H ii. is less strongly docu-
mented, but is nevertheless fairly plausible. Mo: Fei kung, hia says: Kao
Yang ordered Y ii to attack Yu Mi a o (cf. p. 252 below). This would imply
that Kao Yang was identical with Shun. But Tso: Wen 18 says that
>>K a o Y a n g s h i had eight talented sons ... for generations they achieved
~
211
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM. OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
------------ -· - - - - -
their goodness ... when it came to (the time of) Ya o ... ». Here Ka o Yang
is prior to Yao. This can only mean that in the Mo passage above S h u n was
called by the sovereign appellation of K a o Y an g because he was a descendant
of Kao Yan g. Now the only ancestor of Shun who was a >>sovereign» was
C h u a 11 H ii. (line of descent: C h u a n H ii. - M o - X - Ku S o u -
Shun, see Tso Chao 8), so that Chu an H ii. must be Kao Yan g. To
this identification Chavannes (l\1. H. I, p. 76) has objected that in Tso: Wen 18
the two seem to be distinguished in an enumeration: »K a o Y a _n g s h i had
eight talented sons. . . K a o S i n s h i had eight talented sons. . . T i H u n g
s h i had a son devoid of talent. . . S ha o Ha o s h i had a son devoid of ta-
lent. . . C h u a n H ii s h i had a son devoid of talent. . . T s i n Y ii n
s hi had a son devoid of talent ... >> (all prio:r to Yao). But the fact that one and
the same sovereign is called alternatingly K a o Y a n g and C h u a n H ii
is really no obstacle. In quite the same way Tso calls one and the same ruler alter-
natingly Shao Hao (Tso: Wen 18) and Kin T 'i en s hi (Tso: Chao 1)
- we have seen above (ap. Shl-tsi) that Kin t 'i en s h i was S ha o H a o ' s
appellation. The identification C h u a n H ii = K a o Y a n g thus seems
to be fairly safe.
c). The only one of the aborn texts which clearly distinguishes between Shen
Nun g and Yen Ti i~ Kuan-tsi. Many scholars have insisted that Kuan-
tsi is a spurious work of post-Han date; I have refuted this ,iew in BMFEA vol.
1 (1929). In any ca,se we have strong testimony that this chapter at least is truly
ancient, for the passage in which this enumeration of early sovereigns occurs is
clearly alluded to in Ch'un ts'iu fan lu 25, a work from the beginning of the Han
era. And there are, in fact. free pre-Han texts which confirm Kuan on this funda-
mental point. In Kyii.: Tsin ± we find this tradition: >>S h a o T i e n married
a lady of the house of Y u K i a o s h i and bore H u a n g T i and Y e n
Ti, the former acquiring the clan name K i from the K i river, the latter the
clan name Kiang from the Kiang river. These two t i emperors fought
with each other>>. Thus H u a n g T i became sovereign through a victory
over hos brother Y e n T i. (This explains the fact that both Kyi.i.: Chou hia
and Lii: Tang ping speak of H u a n g Y e n, i. e. H u a n g T i and Yen Ti;
this does not mean that H u a n g T i was prior to Ye n T i but only that
Hu an g Ti as victor is mentioned before Yen Ti as the vanquished sovereign).
Now, if S h e n N u n g and Yen Ti were identical, it would mean that S hen
Nung was son of Shao Tien and brother of Huang Ti. But Lii: Shen shl
tells us that Shen Nun g was not an individual ruler but a dynasty: >>the Divine
Husbandmem: »S h e n N u n g ruled for 17 generations over the world». The
passage cannot mean that S h e n N u n g was so long-lived that he personally
outlived 17 generations of the people, for Shi-tsi has the same, line, adding: >>How
could it be that each generation (sc. of rulers) was sage1 It was because it was
easy to guide the people>> (hence the dynasty could rule uninterruptedly for so
212
B. K.ARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN A.XCIENT CH ISA
long). These texts show that the early t~adition could not luwe considered S hen
N u n g as = Y e n T i = the brother of H u a n g T i, both sons of S h a o
Tien.
In quite the same way the pre-Han tradition indicates that Hu an g Ti was
not an individual but a dynasty: »the Yellow Emperors>>. The authentic Chu shu
ki nien says: >>From H u a n g T i to Y ii there were 30 generations», which
reveals the tradition that the Hu an g Ti >>Yellow Emperor>> who after 7 years
(those of S h a o H a o) was succeeded by C h u a 11 H ii was only the last
>>Yellow Emperor», the final member of a long dy1msty. The Chu shu tradition in
question reverts in a curiously distorted way in the \Vu ti t.e, which is connected
with the systematizing text Ti hi (chapters 62 and 133 in the Ta Tai li). The syste-
matizer, who wished- the ancient sovereigns to be imlividm,l rulers, makes Tsai
Wo ask Confucius about the ancient tradition that >>Hu an g Ti had :300 years>>,
and lets the Master answer that Hu an g Ti applied his good virtues for a hunch·ed
years, the people revered his spirit for another hundred years and they followed
his teachings for yet another hundred years!
The free texts of pre-Han times, as we have seen, reveal a perfectly c.onsistent
system of traditions about the line of early >>Sovereigns>>: F u H i - S h e n
Nun g (a. dynasty) - Yen Ti - Hu an g Ti (a dynasty) - S ha o
Hao - Chu an H ii - K ' u - Yao - S h u n - Y ii. This does not
mean, of course, that we lmve any reason t.o believe that these >>sovereigns>> were
really historical; we shall see below that they had many mythological features
which clearly reveal them as legendary figures. But the consistency in the tradi-
tions reveals another highly important fact: it was clue to a strong and well-estab-
lished system of c u 1 t s, maintained all the way down to middle and late Chou
time. It was because various noble families traced their origin back to legendary
heroes1 ) and kept up their cults that the most varying authors, who were aware
of these cults, could all refer to one and the same system of legendary rulers. The
doctrines about these rulers were commitne bonum of all the educated nobles of the
Chou era.
We may, however, proceed one step further and state that the Chou traditions
reveal that there was considered to have existed some kinship between all
these rulers from Y e n T i and H u a n g T i down to Y ii.
We have already seen how at the beginning of the line Yen Ti and Hu an g
T i were brothers. At the encl of the line, both S h u n and Y ii are definitely
stated to have been descendants of Chu an H ii:
As to Y ii, see the authentic Chu shu ki nien: >>0 h u a n H ii. bore P o K u n,
he was Jo Yang». Mo: Shang hien, chung, also states that P o Kun was
1 ) In the same wa.y the emperors of Japan trace their lineage ha.ck to the Sun Goddess Amat.erasu,
which testifies to a very ancient cult but certainly not to any historical origin.
213
 BULLETLV OF THE MUSEUM OF FA.R EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
----
»the eldest son of an emperor>>. Kun is well known as the father of the great
Y ii (Shu: Hung fan, Tso: Hi 33, Lii: Hing lun). For S h u n, on the other hand,
Tso:Chao 8 gives the clue, where an annalist tells of the origin of the house of
C h ' e n: »C h ' e n are the descendants of C h u a n H ii.; ... from M o to K u
Sou there were none who disobeyed the laws; S h u n enhanced it by this bright
virtue, and esti1blished the virtue (of the family) in Sue i; the Sue i kept it
for generations down to prince Hu; therefore the Chou gave them a clan name and
made them sacrifice to the Y li.2 ~ emperor (i. e. Shun)». Ku Sou is the
well-known father of S h u n (Meng: Li Lou, shang) and Mo was evidently
the son of Chu an H ii, and some generation at least must lie between Mo
and Ku So u1 ). Cf. Kyii: Lu, shang: »Mo was the one who was able to follow
(in the steps of) C h u a n H ii, and Y u Y i.i2 s h 1 the Lords of Y ii2 made
p a o sacrifices to him». Mo-ts1 likewise considers S h u n to be a descendant of
C h u a n H i.i (K a o Y a n g, since he calls S h u n by the name of K a o
Yang, seep. 211 above).
For the kinship of the emperors H u an g Ti,- Y ii as a whole we have to
turn to a fundamental passage in Kyii: Lu, shang, which recurs, with two diver-
gences, in Li: Tsi fa (these latter are here added in parenthesis). It is a question
of four kinds of sacrifices: t i mm' t s u Jiill, k i a O 5/11 and t s ll 11 g ~. the
k i a o being performed on the suburban altar, the others in the ancestral temple.
Y u Y li.2 s h 1 : t i to H u a 11 g T i ; t s u to C h u a 11 H ii. ; k i a o to Y a o
(Li: K' u); t s u 11 g to Shu 11 (Li: Yao).
H i a H o u s h 1 : t i to H u a n g T i ; t s u to C h u a 11 H ii ; k i a o to
Kun; tsung to Yii.
S ha 11 g : t i to S h u 11 (Li: K ' u) ; t s u to S i e ; k i a o to Mi 11 g ;
t sung to T ' an g.
C h o u : t i to K ' u ; t s u to We n w a n g ; k i a o to T s i ; t s u n g to
Wu wang.
In each horizontal line, the heroes were necessarily ancestors, belonging to the
1) There is a striking disc·repuncy in the num.ber of generations of the Shun line and the Yi\
line: on the one hand C h u a n H ft - M o - X - (X) - I( u S o u - S h u n. on the other
hand C h u a n H ii - I( u n - Y i.i. In itself this 1nay not seam absolutely ii11possible, for it is
comn1on in Chinn that a 1.uan beeo1nes a father at 15 years of age and then gets sons sou1e 50 years
later; thus in China a centtu·y n1ay sp1:tn over 6 generations a.s well ns m.rer 3 or ~.1:. None the less, it
seems s01uewlrnt hard to believe that S h. u n was a descendant of Chu an H fL in at least the 4th,
possibly in the 5th or 0th generation, whereas his successor on the throne, Y ii, was a grandson of
Chuan I:HL ,,. .e shull see below how Pan Ku in Han shu has concluded that these traditions are wrong
and that K. u n was not a son but a descendant in the 5th generation of C h u a n H i.i. But all this
labouring of the point is fntile, being an attempt at making history out of legend. '11he long genealogy
of Shun '"tas the tradition in the house of Yu Y i.i2 (C h ' e n}i the short one of Y i.i was the
tradition in the H i a house (K. ' i and T s e 11 g); the traditions belong to different ancient cult.
circles, and since they are legends and not history, need not tally; indeed it is precisely discrepancies
of this kind that. plainly re,teal that the stories of the early rulers prior to Yao are 1nyths.
214
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS I.V ANCIENT CHI:VA
---- ----------------
!:
families of Yu Y i.i2, Hia Hou, Shang and Chou respectively, since the gods >>did
not accept sacrificial gifts from such as were not of their kim> (Tso: Hi 10, Hi 32). 1 )
The t s u 11 g sacrifice was evidently offered to the greatest >>king>> of the line:
Wu w a n g of Chou; T ' a n g of S h a n g ; Y ii of H i a ; and S h u 11 of
Yu Y ii2 • In the first line, therefore, evidently the Kyii Yersion is right and the
J Li version is corrupt - in the Yu Y ii2 house S h u n could evidently not be
left out, in the fashion of the Li text. In the house of Yu Y ii.2, Shun played
,\i
the same part of predominating figure as Y ii, T'ang and ·w u wan g in the
later dynasties.
The k i a o sacrifice was more heterogeneous. The Chou house made it to
H o u T s i (this is confirmed in Tso: Siang 7), their ancestor in the time of Ya o ;
the S h a n g house to Mi n g, one of the early S h a n g kings, prior to
T ' a 11 g ; the Hi a house to Kun, the father of Y ii (this is confirmed in
. Tso: Chao 7); and the Yu Y ii2 house to Ya o. 2 ) It would thus seem that
Yao was likewise a kinsman of the Yu Y i.i 2 house. His title T ' a o T ' an g2
s hi simply refers to his apanage before becoming >>emperor•> and does not prevent
this. It might seem possible that he received sacrifices from the Y u Y ii2 house
simply because he was the father-in-law of Shun (Shu: Yao tien) and tlnrn a
forefather of the later members of the clan. But there are other reasons for
including Yao in the line of sovereigns who were all relatiws (see pp. 217. 211-
below).
The t s u sacrifice was offered to W e n w a n g by the C h o u house, as the
father of the first Chou king; in the S h an g house it was S i e. the ancestor in
the time of Yao ; in the Hi a house it was Chu an H ii., since, as we have
seen, he was father of K u n and grandfather of Y i.i ; in the Y u Y ti2 houRe
it was likewise C h u a n H i.i, since via M o - X - K u S o u - S h u n he
was the principal ancestor of that line.
The t i sacrifice concerned a more remote ancestor than the t s u. The Chou
honoured K ' u by this sacrifice, ·which is very interesting. In Shi:" Ode 245 it
is stated that Kia n g Y ii a 11, the mother of Hou T R i, became pregnant
by treading in the foot-prints of t i 'ri'l', which certainly only means God (Heaven)
- so it was still interpreted in early Han time (Ch'un ts'iu fan In eh. 23). But
later commentators have imagined that the t i (»sovereigm) in whose foot-print~
1 ) This principle is further illustratecl in Tso: Hi 31. The prince of Wei (Cl,m K i. of the Chou
house) sacrificed to Si an g, a king of the Hi a dynasty (instigated to this by u. portentous dremn);
a dignitary remonstrated: it is only the princes of K. 'i nnd Tseng, clesrendanh; of the Hi a,
who can sacrifice to a Hi a king - VV e i ' s sacl'ific·e is useless.
2 ) According to the Li version it was to K ' u, which is Yery unlikely, since he wn::; not a direet
ancestor of this fa1nily; in either version, however, Yao is included in the 11mnbe1' of those sacrificC'd
to by the Yu Y il' family. - In Chou time the clescendants of the Hi a, sc. the K 'i house, for
its k i a o sacrifice substituted Y i.l for Ku 11, as being a mo1•e worthy potentate: uncl the clescendnnts
of the Shan g. Yin, the Sung house, substituted Si e for :l\1 in g - o.11 this acc. to Li: Ll
yun.
215
 ,BULLETIS OF THE ivIUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
she walked wa,s really the >>emperor>> K' n, her husband. 1 ) This is plainly a
distortion of the original myth. The tme interpretation is. quite different. That
the emperor K ' u wa.~ considered to be the father of H o u T s i, by his wife
l~ang Ylbn, is clearly proved by the sacrificial scheme of the Kyii-Li passage
,1,bove: otherwise the Chon would not have made their t i sacrifice to K 'u as
their ,mcestor. But at the same time it was reaJly Goel (Heaven) who by the
magic foot-prints made Kiang Y ii an prng1mnt: the mimculous conception
dicl not prevent her husband K 'u from being considered the formal and lawful
father of Hou T s i.
In just the same way the S hang house made t i sacrifice to K ' u (here
evidently the Li version is su1Jerior to that of the Kyit, since S h u n was no
direct forefather of the Shang). vVe have already studied above (p. 211) the legend
about the birth of Si e, the ancestor of the Shan g: K 'u (= Kao Sin),
had, besides K i an g Y ii an, aJso another wife K i e n Ti, he was with her
on a tower and wa,s very >>pleasecl» with her, when a swallow was sent down from
Heaven a.nd gave her the >>gift,, of a.n egg which ma.de her pregnant. Here again
there is a, miraculous conception. but none the less her legal husband, the emperor
K ' u wa.s considered the father of S i e and hence received t i sacrifice from
the Slrn.ng. Then too both the Hi a house and the Yu Y ii 2 house made t i
sa,crifice to. Hu ,, n g Ti a8 a remote ancestor. As they were both descendants
of Chu a. n H ii, this c,m only mean that Chu a. n H it wa.s a. descendant
of H n a, n g Ti.
:Finally the Chou were kinsmen of Hu an g Ti. \Ve saw above that
H u a, n g T i lmd the clan name K i, a.nd this was the clan name of the Royal
Chou. Consequently K' u, the »remote ancestor>> (with t i sacrifice) of the
C h o u wa.s a, descendant of H u a n g T i. The C h o u did not go further
back in the line tlrn,n to K ' u in ma.king their t i sacrifices. But this does not
prevent the possibility of the line's being followed ha.ck even further, to the first
founder of the K i clan, H u an g Ti.
There is a very suggestive fact in this connection. Li: Yite ki tells us (a.
narrative which recnrn slightly aJtered in Lii: Shen ta.) that when vV u w a. n g
of C h o u lrnd vanquished the S h a, n g - Yi n, before he descended from the
w,1,r cha.riot he enfooffed the descendants of Hu an g Ti in K i 2 (Lii says: in
Chu), the descendants of Ya. o in C h u 2 (Lii says: in Li), the descendants
of Shun in C h' en, the descendants of Hi a Hon (i. e. Y it) in K 'i,
m1cl placed the descendants of (S h an g -) Yin in S u n g,,. Here Wu w a. n g
attended to those houses which constituted the most 11rominent branches of one
great family: the S h a n g - Yi n and C h o u were both descendants of K ' u,
and they were connected with H u a. n g T i ('who had the clan name K i like
the Chou) a.s primary ancestor; and the S h u n honse as well as the Hi a house
1 ) \Vang Ch'ung in Lun heng: l{j yen says 1;]rn.t she bemune pregnant by ·wearing K' u's clothes
and sitting at rest in his p1ae0.
216
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS .4ND CULTS IX A.\'CJENT CHINA
(Y it) were both descendants of Chu an H ii. \Ve find it confirmed here that
kinship existed between H u a, n g Ti - Chu an H ii - K ' u. ::\foreo\•er,
the Ya o house is then added to those who were enfeoffecl, which confirms that
Y a. o was regarded as a kinsman of the rest. It is particularly important to find
that even in C h o u time there were feudal houses which kept up. the sacrifices
'
to Hu an g Ti, Y a. o and S h u n as their direct ancestors; it wa.s surely to
a. large extent by the aid of their genealogiec,l trees that the traditions rngarding
the early rulers were kept a.liye a.nd currently known.
There remains only the somewhat mysterious S h a, o H a o ,vho is entirely
left out of the sacrificial scheme. \Vas he a kinsma,n of the rest? There are two
testimonies to the fact that he was. One is Kyii: Cheng yit: ,,The princes of
C h ' u a.re the descendants of C h ' u n g and Li>>. (The text cannot be
translated: •>are the clescenda,nts of C h 'u n g - Li [one pernon]>>, for immediately
afterwards mention is ma.de of Li separately, a.nd in Kylt: C'h'u yit thern is a
clear distinction dmwn between C h' u n g and Li). From 'l'so: Chao ~H we
know that C h ' u n g wa.s a. younger brother of S h a. o H a, o m1cl L i a son of
f
Chu a. n H ii. If the C h 'u princes were >>clescencla.nts» of them both, it must
f
mean that there wa.s some kinship between S h a o H a. o and C h u a n H ii.
(For further discussion of this Kyii passage see p. 2:35 below). The other passage
is a line in the chapter K'a.o te (now lost) of the Yi Chou shu (ap. Han shu: Lii
Ii chr), which says: >>Shao Ha. o, that mer1ns 'pure': the pme one, that wa.s
H u an g Ti ' s son T s ' in g Y an g '/If ~>> (That T s ' in g Ya 11 g was r,
son of Hu a. n g Ti is confirmed by K.yii: Tsin 4). Thus Shao H ,1, o is
identified as a son of H u a. n g T i. The sctme identifirntion of S h ,1 o H a o
a.nd T s 'in g Yang recurs, in an a.bfo·eviated form, in Yi Chou slm: Ch'lmg
mai, where he is called Sha. o Hao T s 'in g ?i!f.
We have thus established that the early traditions indim,te kinship between:
Yen Ti - Huang Ti - Shao Hao-~ Chu an Hli --- K 'u -- Ya.o
- Shun - Y it (with the Hi a, Shan g - Yin and Chou houses), though
of course the texts give no information of their detailed pedigree.
It is common in later times to speak of S an t a, i >>the three cly1msties>> (Hia,
Shang-Yin a.ncl Chou), the ages anterior to Hi a having no >>dynasty>>. But that
is contrary to the earliest traditions which frequently reckon with four dynasties:
Y ii2, Hi a, Sha. n g, Chou. This is directly stated in Li: Ming t'ang wei:
»the musical instruments of the s 1 t a i four dynasties>>, and the ,>Y i'i2, Hi a,
Sha. n g, Chon>> series appears passim in the pre-Hm1 texts: Tso: Chmmg 32,
Ch'eng 13; Li: T'a.n kung (bis), Wen wa.ng sh1 ts1, Ki,10 t'e sheng, Nei tse (bis),
Tsi yi; 'Kyii: Cheng yii; Mo: Ming knei, hia; Lit: Shen ying. In most of these
texts it is quite clear from the context that »Y it2,, does not mean simply the reign
of Shun but a real ~dynasty,>, an era, clmra.cterized by its own rites and customs.
Now the house of Yu Y ii 2 continued, even after the rise of the Hi a. dynasty,
as a. feudal house (the widow of Si an g, m1 early Hi a king, fled to Yu Y ii2,
217
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
see Tso: Ai 1) , but the above passages refer to the times before the Hi a dynasty
and indicate a Yu Y ii2 dynasty anterior to that. What is meant by this
dynasty·?
From Kyii: Cheng yii it would appear that the Kyii author meant by >>Y ii2>>
in >>Y ii2, Hi a, S ha n g, Cho u» merely the direct line (Chu an H ii) : lVI o
- X - K u S o u - S h u n. But that does not satisfy all the texts adduced
above, which speak of rites and customs of the >>Yii2 >> dynasty prior to the Hi a:
it must, in fact, have in view a connected line of sovereigns who were all kinsmen
of each other, thus forming a dynasty of imperial sovereigns. How far back the
tradition counts this ,,Y ii 2 >> dynasty it is, of course, impossible to tell, but it
certainly must include the direct ancestor of S h u n, i. e. Chu an H ii, and
the »Y ii2 >> dynasty must reasonably mean Chu an H ii - K ' u - Yao -
Shun: we have seen from the cult scheme above that Chuan Hu, K' u and
Shun were shown to be kinsmen, and that Yao probably belonged to the
same kin. Here we find this confirmed, for if Y a o were excluded, as an outsider
not a kinsman of the rest. there would be no consecutive >>Y ii2 >> dynasty ending
with S h u n, which could be characterized, as in the above texts, as an era with
rites and customs of its own.
3) There is, further, a potentate T ' a i H a o who in at least one pre-Han text
is styled t i emperor, sovereign: in the systematizing text Li: Yue ling (same
chapter in Lu); he is the t i emperor who represents spring (corresponding to
Yen Ti, summer, Hu an g Ti, end of summer, S ha o H a o, autumn,
Chu an H ii, winter). In Tso: Hi 27 it is said that the states of Jen, S u,
S ii - k ii and C h u a n - y ii had the clan name F e n g and sacrificed to (i. e.
were descendants of) T' a i H a o. In Tso: Chao 17 it is stated that T ' a i Hao
had dragons as insignia for his officers, a passage to which we refer under 4 below.
Further, certain constellations, and regions in China corresponding to them, are
mtllecl by the nmnes of ancient heroes (Tso: Chao 17, Ting 4): T' a i Hao c h 1
k ' ii J;ffl:, Chu Jung c h 1 k ' ii, S ha o H a o c h i: k ' ii, Chu an H ii
c h 1 k ' ii. But there is no pre-Han text which could either identify T ' a i H a o
with anybody in the general list of >>emperors>> (from the text just adduced it is
clear that he is not identical with Y e n T i, H u a n g T i, S h a o H a o or
Chu an H ii), or place him chronologically in that sequence. From Siin: Cheng
lun: >>All from T ' a i H a o and S u e i Jen all have had it>> it ·would seem
that he was considered anterior not only t.o F u H i but also to S u e i J e n,
the >>Fire-clrillers>> cf. p. 206.
4. vVe must insert here a note about another potentate, Kung Kung, who is
often mentioned as a powerful >>hegemoll>), sometimes on a par with the t i
>>sovereigns». In the pre-Han texts he crops up in two connections.
a. On the one hand, he is the protagonist in a deluge theme, akin to that which
later recurs in the myths of Kun and Y ii (see pp. 250, 301 below). He is then
placed in the times before Hu an g Ti. Kuan: K'uei to narrates: >>After the time of
218
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IS AXCIENT CHINA
,) ------
Suei Jen (seep.206above)when Kung Kung was wang king,thewaters
occupied 7 tenths and the dry land 3 tenths (so. of the e,trth); he aYailed himself
of the natural conditions and in the constrained space ruled the empire: when it
came to Hu an g Ti ' s being king ... ; when it came to Y a o ' s and 8 h u n ' s
·I•t being kings ... >> Similarly, in Kyu: Lu, shang we find: When Kung Kung
s h i: was hegemon over the 9 possessions ... ; Hu a n g Ti was able to ... :
l
Chu an H ii was able to .... ; Ti K ' u was able to ... ; Yao was able
l to ... ; Shun was able to ... ;>> etc.1 ) Here a chronological sequence is
·~: .
A
j;
evidently intended, and Kung Kung is again placed prior t.o Hu an g Ti.
i In Kyu: Chou, hia the theme is further elaborated: ,,K u n g K n n g wished to
) clam up the hundred rivers and streams, he overthre,v the heights and obstructed
the lowlands and so damaged the whole realm; but high Heaven did not gi,·e him
luck, the people did not help him, disaster and disorder both arose and J..;:_ u n g
j Kung was thus annihilated». Again, in Tso: Chao 17 it is told how n1rious
potentates had <lifferent insignia for their officers: H u a 11 g T i had clouds ao
insignia, Y e n T i had fire, K u n g K u n g had water and T ' a i H a o had
dragons, whereas in more recent times Shao Hao had birds. As pointed out
by Pan Ku (Han shu: Lu li chi:), the text purports a regressive chronology for the
first four: H u a n g T i >>took over>> from Y e n T i, he took over from K u n g
Kung, and he took over from T ' a i H a o, which again (as in Kuan and Kyti
above) shows that Kung Kung was considered prior to Yen Ti and
Huang Ti.
b. On the other hand, Kung Kung appears in the Shu. In Yao tien
he is first praised as a meritorious dignitary under Yao, but later in the same
chapter (now separate: Shun tien) he is one of the miscreants punished by 8 h u n
and banished to Yu c ho u. The commentators have concluded that Kung
Kung was not a name but the title of an office: »the furnisher of work>>. minister
of works, and probably the Yao tien author held that opinion, for he makes
S h u n say to C h 'u e i: j u k u n g k u n g rk ~ I »you shall attend to
the works>>. Further the commentators conclude that the Ku n g K u n g of
Y a o ' s time was a different man from the primeval one. It is easy to realize
how fictitious this interpretation is. What has happened is this. The Shu author,
who must have written in a fairly early part of the C h o u era, seized upon the
age of Yao, Shun and Y i.i as the golden age and panegyrized these three
rulers; he ·started with the chapter on Yao and excluded ever?thing in the
traditions that was anterior to them (there is one single item in the whole of
the Shu pointing to something prior to Yao: in Lii hing it is said that C h' 1
Yu was the first rebel, alluding to a myth connected with Hu an g Ti). Kow,
as evidenced above, the legend of K u n g Ku n g as an usurper and a hegemon
was a widespread and favourite tradition. Consequently the figure of Kung
1 ) Li: Tsi fa likewise speaks of the time when I{ u n g Kn n g was »hege1non over the 9
provinces».
219
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
K u n g was seized upon and used ad majorem Yao gloria1n: he was made into a
dignitary who first played an important part under the first golden-age emperor
Y a o but then mismanaged his duties and was banished. Thus the appearance
of K u n g K u n g under Y a o is a result of the deliberate trick of the Shu
author to let everything begin with Yao. We shall find a parallel to this on
p. 236 below.
5). Besides the above-mentioned more prominent and central >>rulers>>, the
pre-Han texts abound in names of legendary early >>rulers>>, of whom little or
nothing is lmown beyond the bare names.
Kuan: Feng shan places at the beginning of his list of rulers who sacrificed
to T'ai shan a Wu Hu a i s h i (followed by Fu Hi, Shen Nun g, Y en
Ti etc. as on p. 207 above). Chuang: K'ie k'ie speaks of the age of the >>highest
virtue>>, that of the rulers: Jung C h ' en g s hi, Ta T 'in g s hi (also
mentioned in Tso: Chao 18), Po Hu an g s hi, Chung Yang s hi, Li
L u s h i', L i H ii s h i, H i e n Y ii a n s h i, H o S ii s h i, T s u n L u s h i,
Chu Jung s h i, Fu Hi s hi', S hen Nun g s hi'. Observe that the
list ends with the first two sovereigns of the orthodox list (Yi king), Fu Hi
and S h e n Nu n g. Immecliately before them comes a C h u J u n g s hi -
the same name as the god C h u Ju n g; this is an interesting point to which
we shall revert on p. 240 below. Observe further that H i e n Y ii a n s h i comes
several steps before Fu Hi and Shen Nun g. This Hien Y ti. an occurs
also in Hanfei: Kie Lao as a miraculous person who, like Heaven and Earth, the
four seasons etc. and another genius C h' i S u n g, had got t a o, the highest
norm. The J u n g C h ' e n g s h i', who heads Chuang's list, recurs in Chuang:
Tse ya,ng as a sage who pronounced himself on time-reckoning, and in Li.i.: Wu
kung as the creator of the calendar. Ho S ii. s hi recurs in Chuang: Ma t'i,
where he is a, primeval ruler under whom the people lived in a happy, primitive
stage. Another early potentate anterior to F u H i and H u a n g Ti is H i
Wei s h 'i., who in Chuang: Ta tsung shY is said to have attained to ta o and
thereby >>lifted Heaven and Earth>>, and who in Chuang: Chi pei yu is said to
have had a paradisiac garden, like Hu an g Ti. In Tso: Chao 29 a certain
potentate Lie S ha n s h 'i had a son C h u 3, who became T s i god of the
grain; in Li: Tsi fa he is called L i S h a n s h i (sound variation: l i e ?./l
<*liat, 1 i fii; <*ljad) and is stated to have y u t ' i en hi a possessed the empire,
and who had a son Nun g (>>the Husbanclmam), who became T s i, god of the
grain. No pre-Han text permits us to place him in the series. Again, in Tso:
Wen 18, an emperor Ti Hung s hi' had a degenerate son, and T sin Y ii n
s h 'i another bad son, to both of whom we shall revert p. 247 below. Neither of
those rulers are mentioned in aily other pre-Han text. The same is true of Y i
K 'i s h 'i, who in Li: K.iao t'e sheng is said to be the creator of the cha ml
sacrifices, and in Li: Ming t'ang wei is the inventor of simple musical instruments.
Finally, in Lii: Ku yti.e there are C h u S i a n g s h i'., who c h i t ' i e n hi a
220
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS ft,; ANCIENT CHINA
--------·-----------
>>governed the empire>>, K o T ' i e n s h i' and Yi 11 K ' a n g s h 'i, likewise
some early >>rulers>>, and in Chuang: Tse yang a J a 11 S i a 11 g s h i and in
Sha11g-tsi: Hua ts'e a H a o Yi 11 g s h 'i - all entirely unlmown in other
pre-Han texts. - All these names tell us little in themselves, but they underline
a very important fact: in Chou-time China there must have existed any number
of myths concerning primeval heroes, of which only a few have been preserncl
through more detailed accounts in pre-Han texts.
I B.
From the traditions of the free pre-Han texts about the early sovereigns
registered above, let us now pass on to the systematizing texts and the texts of
the Han scholars in order to study how they have handled the traditions about
the sovereigns anterior to Yao and fabricated a detailed pedigree. Throughout
their speculations there is a tendency to reduce the number of early »sovereigns»
by the trick of identifying two or several names as referring to one and the
same person. To a certain extent they have been encouraged in this traffic by
authentic phenomena of this kind, e. g. the identity cif K a o Y a 11 g = C h u a n
H ii, of Ka o Sin = K ' u, and of S ha o Ha o = K i 11 T ' i e n, see p.
211 above.
1. There is first the identification of T ' a i H a o ·with F u H i and of
S hen Nun g with Yen Ti: the series of the Yi: Hi ts'i: P ' a o Hi (Fu
Hi) - Shen Nun g - Hu an g Ti is identified with another series: T ' a i
Hao - Yen Ti - Huang Ti.
As to Shen Nun g =Yen Ti, we have seen above (p. 212) that it is decidedly
wrong: it conflicts with the pre-Ha11 sources, which clearly indicate She 11
Nun g as the founder of a dynasty and Yen Ti as a subsequent emperor
ousted by his brother Hu an g Ti. Nonetheless, the idea that Yen Ti ic;
identical with Shen Nun g already crops up in early Han time. We find
it in Lie: Simo fu: »Shen Nun g had the virtue of yen ~ flames», i. e.
ruled by the virtue of fire, which should be compared 1'ith Tso: Ai 9: >>Ye n
T i was h u o s h 'i Master of fire>>. Similarly Y e n T i, who is alternatiYely
called C h' 'i Ti »the Reel, Fiery Emperor,>>1 ) is identified with Shen Nun g
in Ch'un ts'iu fan lu eh. 22.
Si'-ma Ts'ien (Shi ki: Wu ti pen ki) tries to reconcile the opposite Yiews. He
knows'that ·Shen Nu ng founded a dynasty (as proved by the texts p. 212 abo;-e),
and yet he identifies Y e 11 Ti ·with S h e n Nu n g by taking him as the last
of the S hen Nun g dynasty: >>At the time of Hien Y ii an (i. e. acc. to
him H u a n g T i) the S h e n N u n g s h i had from generation to generation
deteriorated . . . Yen Ti wanted to encroach upon (the rights of) the feudal
lords; the feudal lords all turned to Hi en Y ii. an . . . Hien Y ii an with
1 ) TaTai:Wutitesaystha.t Ch'i Ti warredwith Huang Ti inthefieldof Pa.n2 -ts'i:ta.n.
which is the sanl.e theme as I{yli: Tsin 4: Yen Ti battling with his brother H Lt a. n g Ti.
221

BULLETIN OF' THE MUSEUM OF' F'.4R E~lSTERN ANTIQUITIES
-----
Yen Ti f~ught in the field of P a n-t s ' ii an . . . the feudal lords revered
H i e n Y ii an as Son of Heaven; he took the place of S h e n N u n g s h i,
he was Hu an g Ti>>. This is ingenious, but there is no indication whatever in.
the. pre-Han texts that Yen Ti was of the Shen Nun g house. There is
in fact a suggestion tci the contrary in the texts in Li: Yiie ki and Lii: Shen ta.
quoted p. 216 above: Wu wan g, after his victory over the Sha 11 g - Yin,
enfeoffecl the descendants of H u a n g T i, Y a o, S h u n and Y ii, because
they were all members of one great family, to which the Chou house also-
belongecl: if S h e n N u 11 g had been regarded as the ancestor of Ye 11 T i
and his brother Hu an g Ti, \Vu Wang would have also enfeoffed some
special branch for keeping up the sacrifices to S hen Nun g. Si-ma Ts'ien
has realized this and extricated himself from the difficulty by an amusing trick:
in Shi ki: Chou pen ki he adds that W u w a n g enfeoffed the descendants of
Shen Nun g in T s i a o - but there is no pre-Han support for this, and
it goes against the narrative in Li and Lii above.
The identification of T ' a i Hao with Fu Hi appears much later - to
my knowledge earliest in Han shu: Lii li chL From Tso: Chao 17 and Ting 4
we know that T ' a i H a o was different from Yen Ti, Hu an g Ti, S h a o
Hao and Chu an H i.i, but there is no pre-Han or early Han text in support
of his being identical with F u H i. How then has this theory originated?
:Yiost probably it is based on the systematizing text Li: Yiie ling (same text
also in Lii). There we find the ancient emperors correlated with the seasons of
the year and with certain gods; these gods in their turn are correlated with the
5 elements in Tso: Chao 29, and, in a systematizing text (analogous to the Yiie
ling) in Huai: T'ien wen, with the cardinal points:
Spring: sovereign T' a i Ha, o, god Kou :Mang (wood, east);
Summer: sovereign Yen Ti, god Chu Jung (fire, south);
Encl of summer: sovereign Hu an g Ti, god Hou T' u (earth, centre);
Autumn: sovereign S h a o H a o, god Ju S ho u (metal, west); .
\Vinter: sovereign Chu an H ii, god H ii an Ming (water, north).
This being entirely a cosmogonic speculation, it has very little value for our
problem unless we can show that the series Fu Hi - S hen Nun g -
H u a n g Ti was likewise a cosmogonic series, based on the 5 elements and their
fixed sequence. But that is not the case. The theory of the 5 elements is very
a.ncient, since it plays an important part in Shu: Hung fan. But the sequence of
the elements is not fixed in the pre-Han texts:
Shu: Hung fan: water, fire, wood, meta,], earth;
Tso: Chao 29: wood, fire, metal, water, earth;
Tso: W'en 7: water, fire, metal, wood, earth;
Kyii: Cheng yi.i: (earth), meta,], wood, water, fire;
222
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
Li: Yiie ling: wood, fire, earth, metal, water;
Lii: K'ii yu: earth, wood, metal, fire, water.1)
:Yioreover Huang Ti is not invariably connected with a certain element. In
Li: Yiie ling and Lii, Ying t'ung he represents e art h, in Lii: Tang ping he
represents w a t e r.
The theory that a certain sovereign represents a certain element is quite early,
but nothing like a fixed system is yet to be observed in the free pre-Han texts;
on the contrary, the ideas on this point are very confused antl contradictory.
Yen Ti, it is true, represents fire (as in Li: Yiie ling), see Tso: Chao 17, Ai 9;
but the representative of water is sometimes Hu a, n g Ti, as stated above
(Lii: Tang ping), sometimes Kung Kung (Tso: Chao 17), sometimes Chu an
H ii (ibid.). The idea that an element vanquishes another is likewise quite old
(Tso: Chao 9 etc.), but the theory that the great rulers supplanted each other by
virtue of the successive elements was fully elaborated only in Han time. The
nearest approach to it is a chapter (Ying t'ung) in Lii, but the great sovereigns
there representing the elements are not at all those of the Li: Yiie ling chapter,
and only 4 sovereign.s are indicated, the 5th (representing water) being expected
to come in future (after the Chou dynasty) .2)
Moreover, when an orator in Tso; Chao 29 tries to apply the theory of the 6
elements to a certain series of hero-gods, he fails in an amusing way (see p. 240
below).
If, then, the theory that the sucessive great sovereigns arose hy virtue of the
6 elements which succeeded each other is entirely absent in the free pre-Han texts,
appearing for the first time in the systematizing text Yiie ling above, not even
in Han time was it a universally accepted system. To SY-ma Ts'ien the sequence
was this: Earth = Hu an g Ti; Wood = Chu an H ii; Meti1l = K 'u;
Fire = Yao; Water = S h u n (which devia.teR from the Yiie ling system on
all points but one (Of. Chavannes, 1\1. H. I, p. CXCI, CXCII). To Pan Ku (Han
shu: Lii Ii chi:, probably based on speculations advanced by Liu Hiang and Liu
Hin) the sequence was: Wood = Fu Hi; Fire = Shen Nun g; Earth =
1 ) In Han ti111e, the theory of the elements »vanquishing)) ear-h other brings in yet another sequence
(Huai: Chuei hing): wood vanquishes earth, which vanquishes ,Yater, which vanquishes fire, which
f vanquishes metal, which again vanquishes wood.
2 } Hu an g Ti saw certain big insects, concluded that the force of Ea~rth was vietorio~1s and chose
l
$,
yellow as his colow·; Y ft saw plants and trees that were green in winter, coneJuded that "\Vood wa.s
·victorious and chose green as his colour (this contradicts Li: T'nn kung, "\vhich says that the Hia had
j black as their colour); T ' an g saw sharp weapons of metal produced by water, concluc.led that l\ietal
,vas victorious and chose white as his colour; \Ven w a. n g saw fieaven produl'e ffre- etc., concluded
";\ that Fire was victorious and chose red as his colour; invhen there \Yill be s01nething that supplants the
Fire element, it \\':ill eertainly be VVater . .. its colour is black)> (i. e. a future dynu,sty after the Chon
will reign by virtue of VVat,er and have hla.C'k as their colour).
223
 B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FA.R EASTERN ANTIQUITIES ·--------------·--·-··-·-----

Huang Ti; lVIetal = Shao Hao; Water= Chu an Hu; Wood=K'u; Shao Tien
Fire = Yao; Earth = Shun - here we find the Yue ling system adopted,
Yen Ti being identified with Shen Nun g and (for the first time) T 'a i I
son emp ..Huang Ti (Hien Yi.i.an)
H a o with F u H i, and augmented by an additional cycle. In short, nothing
could be more e1Toneous than to interpret the pre-Han legends about the early
sovereigns as being determined by cosmogonic theories about them representing
I
.son Hiian Hiao
I
son Ch'ang Yi
I
son Ts'ing Yang
successive )>elements)>.
Let us stun up: though the identification of Fu Hi = T ' a i H a o and I
son Kiao Ki
I
son emp. Chuan Hii
S hen Nun g = Y en Ti is probably based (in Pan Ku's fashion) on the
cosmogonic chapter Yue ling, this speculation of the systematizers is quite wrong, I
son emp. K'u - - -
I
son K'iung Ch'an
I
son Kun
sinqe there is no cosmogonic foundation for the sequence F u H i - S h en
N u n g - H u a n g T i of the same kind as that which is the basis of the series
T ' a i H a o - Y e n T i - H u a n g T i. The identification S h e n N u n g =
1
son emp. Yao son emp. Chi
I
son King K'ang son emp. Yii
Yen Ti can be shown to be wrong (see p. 212 above); and for the identification
of T ' a i H a o = Fu Hi, which elates only from Eastern Han time, there is not
I
son Kou lVIang
the slightest support.1 )
Moreover, though the sequence F u H i - S h e n ~ u n g - H u a n g T i I
son Kiao Niu
is well established in pre-Han texts, there is, of course, nothing to prove that it is
exhaustive (it nrn,y represent only the most prominent figures, just as the Yi list
Fu Hi - Shen Nung - Huang Ti - Yao - Shun): a )>Sovereigm>
I
son Ku Sou
t i (Yiie ling) T' a i Hao may have had his place somewhere in between those
principal figures: or he may have been considered prior to Fu Hi, just like Yu
I
son emp. Shun
C h' a o_ s hi and Sue i Jen s hi - indeed we have seen above (p. 218)
that Siin: Cheng hm places him prior to S u e i J e n. There are several points to be observed here, besides the fact that the Ti hi
2. We have seen that from Hu an g Ti onwards the free pre-Han texts gives exact degrees of kinship, whereas the free texts in most cases only suggest
gave us this generally accepted list of emperors: undefined relationships.
Hu an g Ti.- Shao Hao (Chi ~) - Chu an H ii·- K' u - Yao a) The name Shao Hao does not figure in the Ti hi list. We have seen
- Shun - Y ii, and they were all kindred, the degree of kinship, however, that the free texts give us the personal name of Shao Hao as C h I, and that
being quite undefined as regards the first five. Let us now se~ what the systema- T s ' in g Y an g was his appellation. But the Ti hi does not indicate T s ' i n g
tizers have made of this sequence. Y a n g as an )>emperor>> (for those who became t i >>emperors)>, so. H u a n g T i,
Ta Tai li. We start with the chapter Ti hi in Ta Tai Ii, and the closely allied C h u an H ii, K ' u, Y a o, S h u n, Y ft, this is directly indicated in the Ti hi
chapter Wu ti M (chapters 62 and 63 of that work). Whether these chapters text). On the other hand it inserts an )>emperon Chi ~ as a son of K' u. Thus
were written in early Han time or in the 3rd c. B. C. is of less consequence than it deviates from the free pre-Han texts on two points, not recognizing T s ' i n g
the fact that they represent a typical case of systematization, a conscious effort Y a n g as ))emperor)>, and transfeITing the personal name of S h a o H a o : C h I
to construct a genealogy out of the heterogeneous data of the earlier traditions. to a later place in the scheme, and making C h i a son of K ' u.
The pedigree established in the Ti hi is the following: b) Hu an g Ti is identified with the Hien Y ii an who, as we have seen
above (p. 220), is entirely undefined in the free texts (placed long before Fu Hi
1 ) In Han shu: Lft Ii chi, Pan Ku says that the enumeration in Tso: Chao 17: Hu an g Ti - Yen and Shen Nun g in Chuang: K'ie k'ie). This, after Ti hi, has been almost
Ti - Ku 11 g Ku 11 g - T ' a i Hao (see p. 219 above) shows a regressive chronology, so that universally accepted in subsequent times; yet not quite without exception, for
T I a i Hao should be the very earliest, i. e. Fu Hi. But if so, since T 'a i Ha. o has only to be
prior to Yen Ti and Huang Ti (of the »emperors>>), and since Yen Ti is not= Shen
Nun g, ri, ' a. i Ha. o m.ight just as well be identical with S he 11 Nun g as with F n Hi.
1 Yue tsiie shu (a work ascribed to Yi.i.an K'ang of Eastern Han time, but probably
somewhat later): Pao kien says that ))in the time of Hie n Yuan, S hen

15
225
224:
rf::
fi,,.,

BULLETIN OF THE :lIUSEU.lI OF F.1R EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-··--·.. ·- __ ______ _
,._
Xu n g and Ho S ii one made weapons of stone,> - here Hien Y ii a. n,
just as in Chuang, is some primev>1l ruler far earlier than H u a n g Ti.
c) In the long line from Chu an H ii to S h u n, the first descendant
of Chu a 11 H ii, sc. :'YI o, attested in the pre·Han texts above (p. 214) .is
missing.,
cl) K o u :\1 a n g, the mune tts a god of C h ' u n g, younger brother of S ha o
Hao aceording to Tso: Clmo 2[) (see further p. 23\l below), occurs here as the
persorml name of a great-grandson of C h u a n H ii ; Shi: ki: Sm1 tai shi: piao
here lu,s the variant K o u W a. n g .
e) Of the members not t i >>emperors>> in the Ti hi genealogy: H ii a 11 Hi a o,
K i >1 o K i, C h ' an g Yi, K ' i u n g C h ' an, King K ' a 11 g, K i a o Niu,
only one: C h' an g Yi is known from m1y free pre-Han text (Chu shu ki nien,
see p. 208 ,,bove. where he is said to have been the father of K 'i en Hu a, n g,
which must be Rn ,,ppellation of C h u a n H ii).
In short, the systmm,t.izer has creafocl a genealogy that militates quite strongly
on several important points against the testimonies of the free pre-Han texts, and
gives various names thctt never occur in them.
S i: - m a, T s ' i e n (Sh! ki: \Vu ti pen ki), in the main follows the Ti hi, but
a,dds several new details: Hu an g Ti had the clan name Kung sun (a
ridiculous idea) and (in San tai shi" piao) the appellation Yu Hi u n g. After
I( ' u, his son C h i: ascended the throne, but he vrns a bad ruler, a.nd when he
died he wa.s succeeded by his brother Ya o ; thus the position of C h i: in the list of
rulers is exactly determined, which it was not in the Ti hi (like the Ti hi author,
Si:-ma overlooks that Chi: should really be Sha. o Hao). In middle Han time,
vVei Hung (ap. Sh'i ki so yin) asserts that C h 'i was n years on the throne (in this
followed by the Ti wa,ng shi: ki etc.). On one point, however, Si:-ma deviates from
the Ti hi. He identifies H u a n g T i ' s son H ii a n H i a o with T s ' i n g
Yang -- they m.·e clearly distinguished (in different lines) in the Ti hi. But just
as Ti hi cloes not 1m,ke T s 'in g Y ,, n g an •>emperor», so Si"-ma positively states
that he never occupied the throne. Moreover Si:-ma is inconsistent, for whereas
in 'Nu ti pen ki he states that Kao Sin =~ K' u, in his San tai shi" piao he
says that I'i:: 'u (there wr. K ·' u 2 ) was a son of Kao Sin. Again, in the legend
of Kie n Ti, wife of K' u and mother of Si e, he diverges from the pre-Han
inyth: a,octmling to this it was when K i e n T i was on a pleasure tower that
the swa.Ilow nmcle her pregnant; SI-ma says it was when she and her comrade were
ha.thing.
S h I p en iJ.t :,fs:, a systematizing text of the 2nd, or possibly the 3rd c. B. C.,
is lost and known only in part through ancient quotations (these quotations often
diverge considerably and am sometimes directly contradictory, so that it is
tempting to conclude that there were several manuals called SM pen current in
early Han time). Shi: pen differs in its system considerably from the Ti hi
226
,i
I
·~
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN kVCIENT CHINA
~ -------------·----- ---~----- --------------~---.--- --~---------
~ and S1-ma Ts'ien. On one importfmt point it respects the pre-Hm1 sources
better than they: it correctly identifies S h a o H a o (Kin T ' i en s h I) =~
I,,
J!
T s ' in g Y an g, thus duly making this 'r s ' in g Ya, n g a t i emperor
(as against Ti hi and SI-ma); moreover in one quotation it sa,ys his personal
.~
name was C h I (after Tso: Chao 17) (in another quotation it gives it as 11 ).
In consequence ShI pen has no >>emperor C h l>>, son of K ' u (as Ti hi and
Si:-ma).
Shan hai king (k. 14) tells us that Shao Ha. o reared 1/Wi i. e. was the father
of Chu an Y ii., which confirms the kinship assmnecl on p. 217 a,bove. HoweTer,
on two other important points it deviates from the earlier somces and from Ti hi
and Si:-ma Ts'ien. On the one hand it gives a different lineage for Kun, the
father of Y ii. \Ve have seen that these somces mmnimously tell us that H nan g
Ti begat Ch'ang Yi, Ch'a,ng Yi begat Chuan Hti, Chuan Hi.i
begat Kun, and Kun begat Y ii.. Shan hai king k. 18 says tlmt >>H u et n g
Ti begat L o Min g, L o l\f in g begat P o lVI a, this P o :M a, being id.
with Ku m>. On the other hand it introduces a mysterious t i emperor T s tin,
unknown in other sources. In two passages he is evidently identical with K ' u :
k. 15: the emperor T s ii. n begat K i Li (which should be compared with Tso:
Wen 18: )>Kao sin s h i: had 8 talented sons . . . K i L i 2>> ); k. 16: )>the emperor
T s ii. n begat Hou T s i)), However k. 14 says >>the emperor T s ii n begat Ti
Hung>>. Now Ti Hung (shI) (see p. 220 above) is known from Tso: \Ven 18
as a potentate prior to S h a o H a o 1111d C h u tt n H ii and long before K ' u,
so that here T s ii. n cannot be equal to K ' u. Again, in k. Hi Shan hai king
says that the emperor T s ii n ' s wife was Ng o H u an g ; but we know from
Shi"-tsi: (cf. p. 2ll6 below) that Ngo Hu an g was a daughter of Yao and
wife of S h u n ; thus here T s ti n would be egual to S h u 11. Altogether
the »emperor T s ii n>> of the Shan hai king and the myths therein conneetecl
with him cannot be reconciled with the pre-Han legends.
3. Kung Kun g. 1¥e have seen (p. 218 above) that Ku 11 g Ku 11 g was
primarily a >>hegemorn> or >>king>> ·who wt,s 1)Ifor to Hu an g Ti (and his brother
Yen Ti), the hero in a deluge theme, mid tlmt, on the other lmncl, the author
of some Shu cha,pters has transferred him to the time of Y t, o. In the early Han
texts the K u n g K u n g myth is, in contrast to all this, connected with the reign
of Chu an H ii. Lie: T'ang vVen: Kung Kung contested with Chu et n
H i.i. as to who was to be t i emperor; he became a.ngry and butted the mounta.in
Pu - c ho u, broke the pillars of heaven and cut off the attachments of the ectrth;
consequently heaven slanted tow,ircls the north-west, and sun, moon and st,us
moved in that direction; the earth did not fill out the south-east, so tlrnt rill the
rivers and rivulets flowed in that directiom.
The original deluge theme of Kung K u n g is here combined with a
cosmogonic theme exph,ining how so many mighty rivers cttme to flow eastward
in China, and hence Huai-rnm-tsi, who in Huai: T'ien wen lms the same story
227
 BL'LLETIN OF THE MUSEUM. OF FAR EASTERX ANTIQUITIES
almost word for word, says in Huai: Ping hie: >>Kung Kung caused a water
disast,er, therefore Chu an H ft killed him>>. 1 )
But the confusion is not yet at an end. In the same Huai-nan-tsi: in which
(Zoe. cit.) it is said that Kung Kung contested with Chu an H ft and was
killed by him, we find (Huai: Ytian tao): One so strong as Kung Kung, who
butted the P u - c h o u mountf,in and caused the earth to slant towards the
south-east, when he contested with Kao Sin (i. e. K 'u !) about being
emperor, he had to throw himself into the abyss, his clan was annihilated, his
descendants cut off his scicrifices>>. (This discrepancy is clue to Huai-nan-tsI being
a work written collectively by many authors; see p. 201 abo,-e). SI-ma Ts'ien,
however, more siw, tries to reconcile the two versions: C h u a n H ii first had
a war with Kun g K u n g and subjected him (Shi: ki: Lii shu); but then Kung
Kung rebelled under K 'u (ShI ki: Ch'u shi: kia), who sent C h 'u n g - 1 i
(cf. p. 238 below) to punish him, though he did not succeed entirely>>. This last
formuht is very amusing. SI-ma here seized upon the last version, which transfers
K u n g K u n g from the primeval times, before Huang Ti, to the time of
C h u a n H ii ancl K · u, and thus he can bridge over the gulf between the
origim,l deluge theme and tlmt of the Shu (the time of Ya o) : if Kung Ku 11 g
were active during Chu an H ii and rebelled against K' u, without being
utterly vanquished i,t the time, he could still play a role under Yao and S h u n
and be punished by them!
vVe haYc seen that Hm,i-nau-tsi contains two datings of Kung Kung, one
in Chu an H ii ' s tirne (when he was killed by Chu an H ii) and one in
K' u · s. He luts cilso the third, tlmt of Shu, which places Ku u g Kung in the
time of Ya o and S h u n. But whereas in the Shu nothing is said about the
cleecls of Kung K n n g -- beyond his being first a meritorious >>officer» and
then a wicked one' who wa.s punished - Huai: Pen king places the original deluge
story in vd1ich :Kung Kung »set in motion the inundating waters» in the
time of S h u n.
Shan hai king has yet m1other story, a genealogy entirely unknown in pre-Han
sources: Y c n Ti begat Yen K ii, this one begat T s i e Ping, this one
begat Hi K' i. this one begat Chu Jung (cf. III below), this one begat
Kung Kun g. But since the text immediately goes on to narrate how Kun
(sc. in the time of Y,w) was attacked by this same Chu Jung and killed on
the Y ii - s ha n, this pedigree of Kung Kung seems to be another attempt
to reconcile the Kung Kung myth with the story of the Shu (S h u n on
Ya o ' s order banishing Kung Kung).
1) The snmt"' co::;mogonic theme hnrl already O('cured in the pre~Han text Ch'u: T'ien wen, but in.
.a. forn1 thnt is very obscure nnd tells us nothing of the t.i1ne: >>l(' an g Hue i was very angry; ,vhen
it fell clo\vn. why did it slope towa.rds the Routh.east'fo The comn1entators, basing theinselves on Lie
and Huni above, conclnck that 1( i an g Hue i wus a nmne of K. u n g Kung (a proposed emen.
dation Y n n g Hue i i. e. i>the pen·ersP one,> is certainly no improven1ent)i but this is quite arbitrary.
228
B. KA.RLGREN: LEGENDS A.?\'D CULTS l:V ANCIENT CHJ,V1l
The uncertainty in the dating of the Kung Kung myth may be due to tbe
>)cutting-off of his sacrifices>> related in the Hua.i: Yiian tao passage abO\-e: if he
was no longer the hero-ancestor of some lJOwerful feudal house in Chou time, his
myth was not fixed in time by genealogical traditiorn. 1 ) This did not prevent
Kung Kun g from becoming a god sacrificed to in a more general way (not
ancestral worship): in Ch'un ts'in fan lu (earl)· Han time): K'iu yit it is tohl how
Kung Kung was a god sacrificed to in order to pmy for min.
4. N ft Ku a is a name that never occurs as tl1e name of ciny »ruler>> in the
earliest literature. In pre-Han texts we find it only twice. Ch'u: T'ien wen says:
,>The body of Nii Ku a, who fashioned it?,>, which tells us no more than that
Nii Ku a lrnd some peculiar shape. Li: Ming t\cmg wei speaks of >>the bells of
C h 'u e i (artisan under Yao), the musical stones of f'.;Jrn ~ aml the reed-organ
of Nii Ku rn>. It. is only when we come clown to Han time that this figure
occupies a more prominent place. \Ve lmve it in the myth 11bout the construction
of the world in Lie and Huai, closely connected ·with those about Ku n g K u n g
(under 3 above). Huai: Lan ming: >>Anciently he,wen dicl not completely cowr
(the earth), the earth did not all round cany (heaYen), fire fh,mecl without being
extinguished, water inundated without being stopped ... then Nit Ku a s h I
fused stones of five colours and mended the blue heaven, cut off the foet of a, great
turtle and raised the fom cardinal points, killed the black dragon and siwecl the
1( i - c h o u region, ama:osecl cinders of reeds and stoppc'cl tlie. overflowing w,1tern1>.
The same tale much cibbreviatcd recurs in Lie: T'cmg wen, ,,nd there follows
immediately: >>Afterwards K u n g K u n g s h °i contested with C h u a n H i.i
... >> (etc., see p. 227 abO\-e), thus placing N ft Ku a prior in time to the I(. n n g
Kun g legend. In these same texts Xii K u a. is for the first time placed on
t1 par with the >),govereigns>>. Huai: Lan ming spea.k.s of >>L' n Hi and :;-;; ii Kn ,M,
m1d Lie: Huang Ti states that >>P ' a o H i s h 1 (c= L' u H i), N ii Ku a s h 1,
Shen Nung shi: and Hia Hou shi° (= Yii)haclftscrpent'sboclrm1cla
human face, an ox's head and a tiger's nose>>. It should be observed that in none
of all these texts is there ai~y indication of Nii K 11 a ' s being a wonmn. The
fact that the name contains n ii 'woman' does not necessarily indicate a h,dy,
for if Nii Ku a. ·were c1n early clan name, it could lrnn, n i.i 'woman' forming
part' of the name just as many other clan na.mes are bi,secl on the feminine element:
K i, K i an g etc. (IVhen Shi: pen ap. Shi: ki: Hia 11en ki says that Y ii married
the lady T 'u s ha n s hi', by name Nii Ku a, this is merel:v 11 slip for Nii
Kia o, cf. Ta Tai Ii: Ti hi). The eiuliest authors who make Nii Ku a a wonmn
are Hii Shen a.nd \Vang Ch\rng. I-hi in Shuo wen (1st c. A. D.) clefines the
1 ) In 1-Cyii: Chou, hin, the Si Y il e ,vho helped the great Y -n in regu!ati11g tJw floucls und tlms
got the clan~nmne I( i an g of his aneestor Y t> n Ti r011ev.-ed, ii, c·nlled ))grnncl.son {nr: dc:,:;cendunt-)
of c"t brother of I{ung ;l:l..;1>, ancl \Vei Chao propo~P.R thnt this I( 11 n g in eqnal to K 11 n g I{ u n g.
This would entail that IC u n g Kung ,vns a member of the I{ inn g l'lan. B,1t \\\~i·s identification
is, of course, fa.r from conelusive.
229
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR E.1lSTERN ANTIQUITIES
------·
char. Ku a as = k u chi she n she n g n i.i, h u a wan w u c he >>an ancient
divine and sage woman who transformed all the things>>. But this last qualification
again refers to certain early Han traditions in which N i.i K u a is a primeval
cosmogonic deity. Huai: Slrno lin says: >>Hu an g Ti (begat =) created Yin
and Yang, S h a n g P ' i e n created ears and eyes, S a n g L i n created arms
and hands, that was whereby Nii Ku a made 70 transformations>>. (Here
Hu an g Ti is obviously not the ordinary emperor Hu an g Ti, and the comm.
Kao Yu therefore says that he was >>the ancient God of Heaven>> who at the time
of the first birth of mankind created the Yin and Yang forces; he adds that
Shan g P 'i en and Sang Lin were also she n gods). Hii Shen has
thought that these »70 transformations>>. referred to the creative power of Nii
K u a over the w a n w u >>things>>, but clearly the meaning is quite different:
it is connected ·with those beliefs enigmatically expressed in the Ch'u: T'ien wen
above (>>The body of Nii Ku a, who fashioned it?>>) and refers to son1.e trans-
formations in the body of N i.i Ku a. This is confirmed by Shan hai king 16:
>>There are s hen spirits (gods), 10 men, their name 1s »the bowels of N i.i Ku a ,
Nii Ku a chi c h' an g, they were transformed into she n spirits (gods)
who dwell in the fields of L i - k u a n g>>. Simultaneously with Hi.i Shen in Shuo
wen, Wang Ch'ung in Lun heng: Shu ku says that Nii Ku a was sacrificed to
in order to avert prolonged rain, and that Nii Ku a was represented in populat
pictures as a woman; he adds that the idea of N. as a lady and »ruler>> in ancient
times was first introduced by Tung Chung-shu (early Han time) - Tung's big
work Ch'un ts'iu fan lu, however, contains nothing of the kind.
5. In Han shu: Ku kin jen piao, Pan Ku makes a bold attempt to systematize
all the data in pre-Han texts about grandees. He places in the head column (that
of the >>emperors>>): 1. T' a i Hao = Fu Hi (unprovable by pre-Han sources,
as stated above) 2. Yen Ti= Shen Nun g (contrary to the early te:id;s, see
above) 3. Huang Ti = Hien Yiian (unprovable by pre-Han texts, see above,
and contrary to Chuang: K'ie k'ie) 4. Shao Hao = Kin T' i en s hi
(correct) 5. Chu an H ii = Kao Yang (correct) 6. K 'u = Kao Sin
0
(correct) 7. T 'a o T' an g 2 (Yao) 8. Shun = Yu Y ii2 , 9. Y ii= Hi a
H o u. In a sub-column he disposes of various dignita.ries under these successive
>>reigns>>, and there we find, under the first (that of T ' a i H a o = Fu Hi) :
a. NU Ku a s h i b. Kung Kung s h i c. Jung C h ' en g s h i d.
T a T ' in g s h I e. P o Hu an g s h i f. Chung Yang s h i g. Li
L u s h i h. L i L i e n s h i i. H o S i.i s h i j. T s u n L u s h i k. (T ' u n
Hun s hi which is a corruption of:) Hun T' u n s hi I. Hao Ying s hi
m. Yu C h ' a o s h i n. Chu Si an g s h i o. Ko T ' i en s hi p. Yin
K ' an g s h i q. Wu H u a i s hi r. Tung Hu s hi s. Ti Hung s h i.
In the sub-column under the second >>reigm (that of Y e n T i = S h e n
Nun g) we find: t. Si Chu u. Shao Tien v. Lie Shan s hi x.
Kuei Tsang shL
230
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
To the remarkable men under the following »reigns>> we shall revert later.
This construction of Pan Ku's is interesting on several points:
. a. N ft Ku a is here for the first time placed in the chronological system,
in the time of F u H i. b. K u n g K u n g is placed in accordance with the
oldest traditions (see p. 218 above): prior to Yen Ti, as against the early Han
ideas (times of Chu an HU and K ' u, see p. 227-228) as well as against the
Shu account. The personages c, cl, e, f, g, h (with a corruption: L i L i e n for L i
H ii), i, j are culled directly from Chuang-tsi (see p. 220) and here placed in the
time scheme; k. crops up in several connections (Tso: Wen 18, Chuang: T'ien
ti); 1. is from Shang-tsi, m. from Hanfei (but there a primeval figure, prior to
Fu Hi), n, o, p. from Lii. - all entirely undated in pre-Han texts: q. is in
Kuan placed before Fu Hi; r. refers to a personage in the Tsi s1 tR1; s. occm·s
in Tso, t. (the teacher of S hen Nun g) in Li.i: Tsun sh'i; u. in Kyii. v. in Tso;
x. alone is not known from any pre-Han text. In the following sections (sub-
columns under Hu an g Ti, S ha o Hao, C h u an H i.i, K ' u. Ya, o, S h u n,
Y ii) he records more than 100 prominent persons, and all of them occur in earlier
texts which we possess today: either pre-Han texts or SM ki, Lie, Huai, Ti hi.
All this is exceedingly important, for it shows that Pan Ku h a cl 11 o a c c e s s
a t a 11 t o a n y p r e - H a n s o u r c e s containing names of primeval
magn&tes be yon cl t ho s e w hi c h we p o s s e s s t o cl a, y. It is a serious
reminder that we should not sanguinely believe that various data about the earliest
eras which crop up in the literature of Eastern Han and later periods are based
on pre-Han works now lost: the Han scholars possessed no more pre-Han literature
than we possess today, with a few exceptions (e. g. the Shi-tsI). These >>traditions»
recorded in those late eras are so many speculations of scholasts or elements of
late Han and Liu ch'ao lore, uncritically given as true primeval traditions handed
down from pre-Han times.
In regard to the later sovereigns, there is one glaring discrepancy between Pan
Ku and the earlier sources. Both the pre-Han texts and the systematizers and
early Han scholars agree that Y ii was the grandson of Chu a 11 H U (Chu an
H i.i - Kun - Y i.i). For the reason discussed on p. 214 above (note), viz.
'i that the lineage seems too short compared with the long lineage from C h u a n
H i.i. to S h u n, Y ii ' s predecessor (free texts: C h u a n H i.i - JI/I o - X. -
Ku S o u - S h u.n ; systematizers: Chu an H ft - K ' i u n g C h ' a 11 -
King K ' an g - Ko u JI/Ian g - Kia o Niu - Ku S o u - Shun).
Pan Ku (Han shu: LU Ii chi) says: Chu a 11 H i.i. after five generations begat
Y ii.1 ) This arbitrary >>improvement>> is indeed quite unnecessary; see our note
just quoted.
1 ) Pan says that in this he follows the rri hi, but the now existing Ti hi (in Tt1 Tai Ii) dearly says
that }{. u n was the son of Chunn H i.'l (in accordance with nll pre-Han sources), nncl this it.
1nore fully exposed in Ta Tai: '\Vn ti te. which is closely connected with the ~ri hi; hence Pun's assertion
is erroneous.
231
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTER1\T ANTIQUITIES
-·-·-·-·-------·--------- ----··-~----·--·--· ~--~-----
6. If we pass on from Pan Ku to other scholars of the early Christian centuries,
,ve find various identifica,tions and speculations that deviate both from the pre-
Han texts and early Han sources and from Pan's system. To discuss them all
would be futile; it is sufficient to adduce a few examples.
a) ·whereas all authors accept Pan Ku's identification of Fu Hi = T 'a i
Ha o, they are not satisfied with the bare sequence Fu Hi - S hen Nun g ;
in one way or another they want to insert Nii Ku a. \Ve have seen above that
in the pre-Han texts Nii Ku a is barely mentioned, and then never as a >>ruler»,
that in early Ha,n time N. is a cosmogonic perso1mge and for the first time is
called (Lie, Huai) Nii Ku a s h I l:E;, indicating that N. was some kind of
potentate or >>ruler>>, and that in the 1st c. A. D. (Hit Shen, ViTang Ch'ung) N.
appears a,s a woman. Pan Ku (likewise 1st c.), as we have seen, places Nii Ku a
a,s a second-column »ruler» (not emperor) in the time of Fu Hi. In the 2nd c.
A. D., N. is promoted to ,, sovereign of the first class: t i (>>emperorn), but in
several different ways. On the one hand, K,10 Yu (comm. on Huai: Lan ming)
says ,,Nii Ku a was a yin I~ (womanly) t i (emperor, sovereign) who
assisted Fu Hi in governing>> (very inconsistently the same Kao Yu, in comm.
on Lit: Yung chung, s,1,ys tha.t the s an h u an g =: M three primev,11 sovereigns
were l? u Hi, S hen Nun g and Nii Kn a, here placing Nii Kua after
Shen Nun g). On the other hand, Cheng Hi.ian (comm. on Li: Ming t'ang
wei) sa,ys: ,,Nii Ku a was s a, n h n an g one of the three primeval sovereigns
and succeeded F u H fa. And Ying Shao likewise (Feng su t'ung yi: San huang)
says the s an h u an g were Fu Hi, Nii Kn a, S hen Nun g. In the
:3rcl c. A. D. Huang-fu JYii (Ti wa,ng shi ki) adds that Nii Ku a had the clan
name Feng, which he ascribes to ]' u Hi.
b) The I'o Im t'ung: Hao has two other theories for 1m1,king up s an h nan g
three primen1J soYereigns: either Fu Hi, S hen ~ u n g, S u e i Jen, thus
placing Suei Jen l1fter Shen Nung, against the pre-Han texts; or F n Hi, Shen
Nun g, Chu Ju 11 g, thus raising Chu Jung to the position of an emperor,
which again is a violent innovation. And Ying Shao (loc. cit.) quotes two earlier
works giving the series F u Hi, Chu Jung, S hen Nun g, and F n Hi,
S u e i Jen, S h en Nun g respectively.1)
c) ·welmveseenthat Yen Ti wasforthefirsttimeidentifiedwith Shen Nung
in early Hm1 time (Lie, Ch\m ts'iu fan lu); this conflicts with the pre-Han sources,
,vhich caused Si-ma Ts'ien to try a compromise, making Ye 11 Ti a descendant
of Shen Nun g (see p. 221). But Pan Ku, as we sa,w, boldly reverts to the
1 ) VarionR other »:-;ystems > oecm.· in the so-ct1.lled \:Vel shu ~ ~ 0£ middle and late I-Ian tiines.
1
These works, now lost, nre frequently quoted by ~r'ang-time C'01n1nentutors on the classies. But since
we knmv that theRe \Vei shu passed through 1.nauy vicissitudes a,11.d were particularly persecuted by
Yang ti of t,l1e Sm~i dynasty, we cannot at all aceept the T 1ang-ti1ne quotations as being drawn from
the ,iuthentie \Vei shu of the Han dynasty - they u.re probabl:,,7, to a large extent at least, spurious.
I t1wrefore refrain fron1 citing sueh quotations.
232
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
identification Yen Ti = Shen Nun g. In the 2nd c. A. D. tJ1is caused several
schola,rs some misgivings, and they tried other identifications, i. e. with some of
those little-known and absolutely undatable >>rulers>> registered p. 220 above and placed
by Pan Ku in the era of Fu Hi. Thus Kao Yu (comm. on Lit: Ku yiie) takes
Yen Ti as = Chu Si an g s h j ; Cheng. Hiian (comm. on Li: Yiie ling)
makes Y e n T i = T a T ' i n g s h L
d) The tradition that H u an g Ti was a son of S h a o Ti e n is well attested
both in 1Jre-Han and early Han sources. But ·wei Chao (comm. on Kyii: Lu,
shang) makes him a >>descendant,> ~ CJ· of S h a o T i e n. The reason for this
speculation is obvious. S h a o Ti en, acc. to the a,ncient sources, was father of
both Yen Ti and H nan g Ti. If Wei, with Pan Ku, believed Yen Ti
to be identical with S h e n N u n g, S h a o T i e n could not he father both of
S he n Nun g and Hu an g Ti : ergo Hu an g Ti was only a descendant
}' of S h a o T i e n.
e) We have found (p. 220) a potentate Lie Shan s h 1 (Tso: Chao 29) or
Li Shan s h j (Li: Tsi fa) who is quite undated in the early traditions. Pa.n
Ku made him a second-column »rulern in the time of S h·e n Nun g - Yen
Ti, and Tu Yii (comm. on Tso) accepted this; but Kia K.'uei (comm. on Tso) a.ncl
Cheng Hiian (comm. on Li) and ·wei Cluw (comm. on Kyi.i) rightly insist tha,t
since Li: Tsi fa says: >>\Vhen Li S ha n s h 1 y u t ' i en b i a possessed the
(whole world =) realm,,, he must have been a, t i emperor, and therefore they
identify him with Yen Ti ; but this identification is, of course, entirely
arbitrary.
f) \Ve have seen that Kung Kn n g s h j is placed by Pan Ku as a second-
column potentate in the era of F u H i, in accordance with the primary myth,
though the Kung Kung legend had gone through all kinds of vicissitudes in
early Han time (see p. 227). In the early phases Kung Kung ,rns always
a hero, sometimes a usurper and hegemon, sometimes a, cosmogonic hero. Now
in the 2nd c. A. D. Kung Kung was further promoted: Kao Yu (comm. on
Huai: Chuei hing) says he wa.s a >>heavenly Spirit t ' i en s hen, with human
face and snake's body>>. (Hnang-fu Mi places him »at the end of N ii Ku a ' s
reigrn> ).
g) We· observed in Tso: \Ven 18 (p. 220 above) an uncbtable potentate T sin
Y ii n s h L This personage has been entirely skipped by Pan Ku, but the
commentators must needs place him, and Kia K'uei m1d Fu K'ien, followed by
Tu Yii, make him one of the officers of H u an g Ti (Kil1 even asserts that he
had the clan name K i a, n g, being a descendant of Yen Ti, by which he
means S he n Nun g). The reason for this speculation is easily detected. Tso:
Chao 17 says that H n an g Ti had >>clouds>> as insignia for his officers, m1d the
word y ii n 'cloud' forms part of the name T s in Y ii n s h L Ji'u K'ien is even
capable of describing 8 catagories of such >>cloud>> officers of H u an g Ti ' ,,;,
one of which is our T s i n Y ii n s h i !
233

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
h) In Tso: Wen 18 (seep. 220) we had an undatable early potentate Ti Hung
s h. i. The name reverted in an awkward fashion in Shan hai king (see p. 227
above). Pan Ku placed him as a second-column potentate in the era of Fu Hi.
But Kia I~'uei (comm. on Tso) boldly identifies him with Hu a n,g Ti.
i) We have seen that the pre-Han sources indicate some kind of kinship between
all the emperors from Huang Ti and onwards, and that the Ta Tai: Ti hi elabo-
rated a detailed family tree. But there is a scholar of the 2nd c. A. D., Wang
Fu (Ts'ien fu lm1: Wu M) who bolcliy deviates from this: he says that K' u was
a descendant of F u H i, that Y a o was a descendant of S h e n Nun g (more
precisely: his mother K ' i n g T u, who was a descendant of S h e n N u n g,
gave herself to a dragon and bore Yao), and that Shun was a descendant
of Huang Ti.
7. Let us finally examine how Huang-fu :Mi (Ti wang shi ki, 3rd c. A. D.) has
tried to establish a great scheme of the early rulers, which diverges strongly from
that fabricated by Pan Ku. He gives as first-rank rulers (t i emperors, sovereigns):
Fu Hi shi - Nit I{.ua shi - Ta T'ing shi - Po Huang shi
- Chung Yang shi - Li Lu shi - Li lien shi - Ho Sit shi
- Tsun Lu shi - Hun T 'un sh·i - Hao Ying shi - Yu
Ch'ao shi-Chu Siang shi-Ko T'ien shi-Yin K'ang
shi - Wu Hu;i,i shi - Yen Ti= Shen Nung-:- Huang Ti -
S h a o H a o (C h 'i) - C h u a n H ti - K ' u - C h i - Y a o - S h u n
- Y iL Thus he has moved up the second-colmnn rulers of the Fu Hi era in
Pan's scheme into first-rank emperors,· though skipping some of them: Kung
Kung s h i (whom he makes a rebel under N ti Ku a), Jung C h' e n.g
s h i, T u n g H u s h i and T i H u n g s h i. Moreover in opposition both to
the pre-Han sources and Pan Ku, who have a Chi = Shao Hao petween
Huang Ti and Chu an Hti but no »emperor Chi>> between K'u and
Yao, and to the early systtimatizers (Ti hi and Si-ma Ts'ien), who have no Chi
= S h a o H a o between H u a n g T i and C h u a n H ti, but an additional
»emperor C h i>> between K ' u and Y a o, our good Huang-fu 1VIi is generous
and has an emperor Chi in both places, the first = S h a o H a o, the second a
son of K 'u!
IIA.
From the line of principal >>emperors>> and other primeval »rulers>> we now· (in
II and III) pass on to certain other personages who are best studied apart, and
we start with C h' u n g and L i.1)
The earliest text ori this subject is Shu:. Lti hing: >>The charge was given to
Ch'ung (andi) Li tstie ti t'ien t'ung wang yu kiang ko
to break the communications between earth and heaven, so that there was no
1) We have to read C h' u n g and not (with Chavannes and Granet} Chung, see King tien shi
wen on Shu: Lti hing.
234
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
----·-----·--..-
descending or (arrivi,ng =) ascending>> (at first sight an obscure passage to which
we shall revert presently). Here it may be discussed whether C h ' u n g Li is
one person: C h 'u n g - Li, or two: C h ' u n g and Li.
In Kyit, Cheng yti it is said: >>(The princes of C h ' u) are the descendants of
C h 'u n g Li». It might seem that C h ··11 n g Li is here one person, but that
is not correct, for immediately afterwards Li is spoken of separately, and other
passages (cf. below) clearly reveal that to the Kyit author C h 'u n g and Li
were two different persons.
The earliest detailed traditions about C h ' u n g and L i are in fact gfren in
Tso and KyiL Tso: Chao 29 says: >>S h a o H a o had four younger brothers ...
one of whi9h, C h ' u n g, was made Kou 1VI an g (Kou 1VI an g was a
divinity, set? Li: Yite ling p. 222 above, cf. p. 240 below); they achieved the work
of K'iung Sang (i.e. Shao Hao);ChuanHithadasonLi2 (variant
of Li), who was Chu Jung (likewise a divinity, see ibicl.1) Kyti confirms
this. Kyit: Ch'u, hia: When Chu an H ii took over from Sha, o Hao, under
whom the K i u L i, the Nine L i had caused confusion between men and
gods (mi n she n t s a j o u) . . . . . there being no proper order in the sacri-
fices (c hen g hi an g w u tu) and men and gods haying the same positions
(mi n she n t ' u n g we i) ... ·. he (sc. Chu an 'H ii) charged the n an -
c hen g T¥i lE Govemor of the S01ith C h ' u n g, to preside over Heaven in
order to (attach=) give their proper places to the gods; and he charged the
h u o - c h e 11 g !k lE Governor of Fire L i to preside over the Earth, in order
to give their proper places to the people (the men) . . . . That was called >>to break
the communications between Eart and Heaven» (s h i w e i t s ii e t i t ' i e n
t ' u n g). And then the text continues: >>Afterwards, when the S a il 1VI i a o, the
Three 1VI i a o, renewed the (bad) virtue of the K i u L i, Yao again elevated
the descendants of C h 'u n g and Li, such (of them) as had not forgotten the
old (rites), and let them again preside over them, this continuing down to the
H i a and S h an g; therefore the C h ' u n g and L i from generation to gener-
ation kept the orq.er of Heaven and Earth and distinguished their sacrificial
1 ) The eX!)ression in Kyli.: Cheng yii, that the princes o.f C h ' n were the 1)clescenda.nts» o~ C h ' u n g
(brother of Shao Hao} and Li (son of Chu an H ii) would seem to indicate that C h ' n n,g
was really identical with C h ' a n g Yi (brother of S h a o H a o = T s' in g Y a 11 g and father of
C h nan H i.l); 1?ut £or these details of kinship we have as sources only the systematizing texts (Ti
hi etc), and they have little value as evidence. It is not necessary, howevm•, to press the expression
so strongly; there may be a simpler .explanation. If the text does not say that the }Jrinces of C h "u
were the ))descendan.ts of C h u an ~ lll> but »descendants of C h ' u n g and L fo, it may sitnply
mean that among the early members of the family, from which the C h ' u princes descended, one
picked out and mentioned as early heroes those two who hu.d become gods: C h ' u n g = K o u
M an g, L i = C h u J u n g. The C h ' u princes need not have bee11 direct descendants of them
both, only scions of the house that comprised both C h ' u n g (brother of S h a o H tt o) and L i
(son of Chu an Hi.\), The other mode of expression, in fact, occurs in Ch'u Li sao: the poet K'ii
Yi.ian, a. kinsmen of the princes of C h' u, calls hhr.self »a descendant of the emperor K. a o Yang*
(i. e. Chu a 11 H ii).
235
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-·-------·------
representatives; in the Chou era, Po Hi u - f u of C h' en g (cf. Shi: Ode 263)
wa.s their descendant,; in Siian wang 's time he lost his office (sc. that just described)
and became s 'i - m a; he J10noured as gods his ancestors in order to have prestige
with the people, and said: C h ' u n g lifted Heaven high, L i kept down the
Earth (i. e. he kept them well apart)>>.
In fact this Kyii passage is the earliest comment upon the Shu: Lii hing
account ctbo-ve (p. 234). The context in Shu requires that it was Shu 11 who
(sc. on Y a o ' s order) gave the charge to C h ' u n g and L i to keep distinct
the rites of (Heaven and Earth =) gods and men. But the KyiI author maintains
that the original charge was given to the C h ' u 11 g and L i of C h u a 11 H ii ' s
time, their descendants in S h u n ' s · time then having the same charges. It is
easily seen, however, that this construction forms a11 exact parallel to the theme
of Kung Kung above (p. 219). The popular theme of C h 'u n g and Li
who became gods was too widespread and important to he left out entirely by
the Shu authors; but since these deliberately begin their accounts with the reigns
of the golden-age emperors Yao and S h u n, excluding all legends that were
prior to that age, they nimbly transferred C h 'u n g and Li to that golden
age and made Shun give them their charge to >>break the communications
between Earth and Heavem, i. e to keep the cults· of gods and men well
distinguished. 1 )
In the free texts of Tso and Kyii we get at ·the original myth: C h ' u n g, a
younger brother of Shao Hao, was n a 11 - c hen g and became the god
K o u M a 11 g under his successor C h u an H ii.. L i, who was son of C h u an
H ii, became the h u o - c h e 11 g and C h u J u 11 g under that sovereign, and
he continued in his charge under his successor K 'u (Kyii.: Cheng yii: >>Li was
the h u o - c hen g Governor of Fire of Kao Sin s h 'i [i. e.. K' u], therefore
he had the charge of Chu Jung, his merits were great>>).
It should be pointed out that there is an obscure point in the Li legend.
First the K i u Li. the Nine Li, were rebels under S h a o H a o ; then,
secondly, a son of C h u a n H ii was called L i and re-established the ritual
order disturbed by the rebellious Nine L i. There seems to be some vague notion
that though the good L i waR a son of C h u an H ii, he was still connected
in some way with the rebels under S h a o Hao. Were the >>Nine Li>> some
branch of the Royal house and the name L i therefore given to the son by
Chu a, n H ii - the legend thus obtaining a moralizing twist: a good Li
redeeming the wicked deeds of his earlier kinsmen? Impossible to tell, the texts
being so few and exiguous.
It may seem curious that the terms Kou Man g and C h u Jung figure
on the one hand as some kind of official titles under C h u an H ii and K ' u,
1 ) In the ,,·ake of the Shu, Lii: Ch'a eh'uan narrates how C h' u n g and Li were functionaries
.under S h u n; they were ordered by hi1n to promote K. 'u e i from a humble position to that of
Mu.':lic Master.
236
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
and on the other hand as names of gods. \Ve shall revert to this under III A
below.
That the C h ' u n g and L i legends played such a prominent part in the
Chou-time lore was evidently due to their figuring in the ancestral cult of some
important houses. vVe have already witnessed the Kyii account of the grandee
house of C h 'en g and the feudal house of C h 'u (clan Mi). But a fuller
account is furnished by Kyii: Cheng yii. in regard particularly to the descendants
of Li. From him descended 8 clans (sing): K i3 , Tung, P ' en g, T ' u,
Y ii n, T s ' a o, C h e n and M i. To the K i" clan belonged the houses of
K ' u n - w u (who were feudal lords in the Hi a dynasty, no longer existing
in the Chou era, see further p. 319 below), S u 2 , Ku, Wen and Tung
(the same char. as, but not to be confounded with, the clan Tung); to the
P ' e n g clan belonged the houses of P ' e n g T s u or T a P ' e n g (feudal
.~ house in the Shan g era, destroyed by the Shan g), S h 'i Wei feudal lord;;
in the Shan g era, destroyed by the Shan g) and Chu K i (,mll the Ki»?)
(destroyed by the Shan g); to the Tung clan belonged the houses of Tsu n g
4 Yi and Hu an Lung (destroyed by the Hi a); to the T 'u clan belonged
the house of Cho u 2 (destroyed by the Chou); to the Y ii n clan belonged the
houses of W u 2 , Kue i, L u 2 and Pi - yang (that Pi - yang belonged to
the Y ii. n clan is confirmed Tso: Siang 10); to the T s ' a o clan belonged the
houses of T s o u and K ii. ; of the .clan C h e n there were no known descendants;
i) to the M i clan belonged, (besides the house of C h ' u already described earlier
in the text) the houses of K' u e i and Y ii e. We thus see how a great many
prominent houses in Chou time reckoned Li, son of Chu an H ii, as their
ancestor and kept alive the legend about him. Several of the names above recur
in ancient texts in connection with important legends: for K 'u n - w u see p.
319; for P 'en g Tsu see 274; for Shi Wei see 293; for Tsu n g Yi ,;;ee
298; for H u a n L u n g ibid.
II B.
Some systematizing and early Han texts coalesce C h ' u n g and L i into
one person, whereas others still distinguish between them just as strictly as the
free pre-Han texts. But they all diverge widely on some fundamental points
from the free pre-Han sources, which, as we have seen, made C h 'u n g ,, brother
of S h a o H a o and L i a son of C h u a n H ii.
Ta Tai: 1'i hi'. gives the genealogy: Chu an H ii by lady Nii Lu s h I of
the house of T ' e n g s h 'i begat L a o T ' u n g, who by lady K a o K u a
s h i of the house of K i e S h u e i s h 'i bega,t. C h ' u n g L i and W u
Hue i.1)
1 ) This W n Hue i, still aec. to the Ti h.i, begot L u C h n n g, who through one of his sons, I{ i
Lien, became the ancestor of the feudal house of C h 'u (clan )'1 i).
237

BULLETLV OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN A.NTIQUITIES
------·-·-·------ ----- -- -------------------·----- - - - - - - - - -----· --·-·---·- --·--·--
The rhythm here indic,,tes that C: h ' u n g L i is meant to he one person, just
as the following vV u Hu e i.
Shnn hai king 16, on the contrary, has this genealogy: »Chu an H ii begat
Lao T ' u n g, L a o T ' u n g begat C h ' u n g and (&) Li; the emperor
charged C h · u n g to sm:rifice to high Heaven and L i to sacrifice to the Earth
below».
Shi" pen is quoted in several contrnclictory versions, which makes it probable
that there were· seven1l genealogica,l manuals of that name in early Han time.
ri. Shi pen ap. comm. on Shan hai king 16: Chu an H ii nrnrriecl lady Nii
L u s h 1 of the house of T ' e n g F e n s h I and she bore L ,1 o T ' u n g;
L a o T · u n g nrnrriecl lf1dy K i a o l<' u of the house of K e n S h u e i s h 'i
and she bore C h ' n n g and ( k i) L i,>. This vernion di.stinguishes C h ' u n g
mid Li: the ladies' names in a. minor part a.gree with t.he Ti hi, in the major
pa.rt diverge from it. i1. ShI pen ap. comm. on Tso: Chao :29: »Kao Yang
(i. e. C: h u ,1 n .H ii) begat C h ' en g 2 , (variant C h ' en g 3 in Shi pen ap. Lu
shI hou ki), C h ' en g 2 begcet K ii an eh an g, the latter begat L i1>. This
version aga.in takes Li to be a separate person, but for the rest the genealogy is
quite different from the preceding sources. )' Shi pen ap. Tsi kie on Shi: ki: Ch'u
shi: kia: >>L a o T ' u n g begat C h ' u n g Li and Wu H u e i1>. This version
follcnrn the Ti hi a.bove, which coalesces C h ' u n g and Li inte one.
S'i-nw T8'£cn finally (ShI ki: Ch'u shI kia) as usual tries to reconcile the
contradictory sources. He accepts the linea,ge of ShI pen ;3, but tampers with tbe
single person Li of t.lrnt version and alters him into C h ' u n g Li, taking
C h ' u n g Li to be one person. after the Ti hi: >>K a o Y an g begat. C h ' e 11 g 2,
C h ' en g 2 begat K ii 11 n C h an g, K li an C h an g begat C h ' u 11 g L i1>.
And then he goes 011 to narrn,te how C h ' u n g L i was h u o - c 11 e n g Governor
of Fire under emperor K ' u, with the title of Chu Ju n g, was ordered by
him to quell the insurrection of Kung Kung (see p. 228 above) and upon
his failure in this was killed by the emperor K ' u, who made his brother Wu
H u e i the successor of the C h ' n n g Li family, Governor of .Fire and Chu
.Jun g. All this. evidently. in order to reconcile the Kyli: Cheng yli. passage
,,(The princes of C:h'u) were the descendants of C h 'u n g L i,> with the Ti hi
genealogy which makes the C h 'u house descend from \Vu Hue i.
A.ncl then further (in ShI ki: Li shu) SI-ma seizes upon the Kyli statement above
(p. :2::!6) that the descenchmts of C h 'u n g and L i1) were reinstated by Yao
in the offices of cult-nrnsters to Hmwen and Earth, and he identifies these offices
with the famous Hi ,encl H o of the Y,w tien, which would then he not proper
names but official titles! (For Hi and H o cf. in detail p. 262 below). This has
given the commentator pseuclo-K'ung An-kuo (3rd c. A. D.) a welcome opportunity
of explaining the m1expeeted reappearnnce of the names C h ' u n g and Li in
1 ) Here in the Li shn, 8l-n1n 1 in the wnke of I{yil, treats C h. · u n g and Li as two separate persons,
and forgets that i11 thfl Ch ·u shl ki.u, he hnR followed the Ti hi nnd eon.lesced them_ into one!
238
l
I B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS A7VD CULTS IS A:-:CIE:-:T CHINA
Shu: Lli hing (see p. 2:34 above): evidently the C h · u n g and Li of Lii hing
are identical with the Hi and Ho of the Yao tien.
To sum up, the free pre-Han traditions about C h ' u n g and Li ,i.re in no
way contradictory as regards the distinction between C h ' u n g ,encl Li as two
persons. Tso and Kyii agree well as to their lineage (brother of S h a o H a o
and son of Chu an H i.i respectively); but the Shu ant horn lrnve tra.nsferrcd
them to the time of Shun.
The systematizers and early Han texts deviate widely from those pre- Hnn
traditions, all making Chu an H ii the gmndfatber (though by two different
lineages) of C h 'u n g nncl Li, two persons, or C h 'n 11 g Li, one person -·-
there being great confusion on this last point.
As to the descendants of Li, the Chu Jung, the T,i Ta,i: Ti hi on the une
hand gives further details, on the other hand diverges fron1 the pre-H,111 Kyli:
Cheng yii on a fundamental JJOint: Wu Hue i. brother of Li, the Chu ,Jung,
begat Lu Chung, Lu C h u n g begot six sons (by a. mirac:ulous birth. the
children after three years breaking out from the side of the mother, lci.dy N' ii
T 'u e i s h I); the first was Fan, lord of K 'u n - \Vu; the second was H n e i
L i e n, lord of T s ' a n H u; the third was T s i e n, lord of P ' e n g T s u :
the fourth was Lai Yen, ancestor of the house of Kn e i (clan Y ii n 2 = Y li n):
the fifth was An, ancestor of the houses of the T s ' a o clan; the sixth 1yas K i
I
Lien, ancestor of the houses of the :'11 i clan. Thus the Ti hi nui.ke,s all these
grandee houses descend not from Li (as .Kyi.i expressly Sflys) but from his brotlwr
Wu Huei.
III A.
i
! vVe have seen above that the systematizers (Li a.nd Lii: Yi.ie ling; Hmei) have
tried to establish a series of >>emperors>> corresponding to the r; elements:
T ' a i H a o - Y e n T i - H u a n g T i ·-- S h a, o H a o --- C h u a n
l H ii, and that the Han scholars arbitmrily (and wrnngly) identified the first three
.!
of these with the series of the Yi: Fu Hi - S h e n Nun g · ··- Hu an g Ti.
*' The theory of the 5 elements crops up agc1.in in regard to certain gods and certain
heroes who, for the lJllrpose of the cult of the grandee families, were madP to
impersonate these gods. Tso: Clmo 29 says: >>There were the officers of the 5
elements, they were called the 5 officers, they received their several family names
and clan names and were appointed s hang k u n g 11rinees of the highest rank:
they were sacrificed to as exalted gods, at tlie altars of the soil and the grain and
in the 5 sacrifices: they were honoured and served. The :'\faster of v\Toocl ,rns
Kou Mang, the Master of Fire w,1s C: h u ,Jung, the Master of Met,1.l ,rns
Ju S ho u, the J\faster of Water wa,s H li an Ming, the J\faster of Earth ,ms
Hou T 'w>. And then the author goes on to tell how these gods were imperson-
ated by >>historical» heroes: 1>S ha o Hao had four younger brothers, C h 'u n g,
Kai, Siu and H i2 , they were capable of (managing) meta.I, wood and fire.
239

BCLLETIN OF THE NJUSEUiVl OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
- ·-- -···------~- --·-------- -----------------~-·---·------------
He charged C h ' u n g to be K o u :NI ,1 n g, Kai to be Ju S ho u, and S i u
and Hi to be (successively?) H i.i. an J\'1 in g ; for generations they never lost
their offices and so achieYed (the work of) K' i u n g S an g ( = Shao Hao, see
p. 208 above). These are three of the sacrifice$. Chu an H ii had a son L i2 ,
who was Chu Jun g ; Ku 11 g Kung s h 1 had a son, Ko u Lung, who
was H o u T ' u ; these are two of the sacrific.es; H o u T ' u was S h e god of
the Soil; T s i w,1s Master of the Fields; Lie Sha 11 s h Y had a son C h u 3 ,
who was T s i, during the Hi a (dy1rnsty) arn;l previously they sacrificed to him;
K 'i2 of the Chou was also T s i, from the Shan g (dynasty) and onwards
they sacrificed to him».1)
vVe witness here ,1 fact that may seem curious: t,he terms Kou Mang, Chu
Ju n g, Ju S h o u, H ii. an M. in g, Ho u T ' u and T s i are at the same
time some kind of official titles and names of gods. This is particularly clear in the
case of H o u T ' u who is directly stated to be equal to S h e, the god of the
Soil. In the other cases the same name has a double meaning. The phenomenon
is very typical of a,ncient China. The gods certainly existed in the popular belief
from primeval times: an echo of this is, for instance, Chua11g: K'ie k'ie (see p.
220 above) where a long series of potentates of the age of >>the highest virtue>> is
given ,1,nd ·where, before Fu Hi, we find Chu Jun g s h L But some
members of the prominent families. who were remarkable as cult-masters (see
Kyii on p. 2:35 a1mve a,bout the cult functions of C h ' u n g and Li) ·-- four
(C h' u n g, K ,1 i, Siu 01· H i2, Li) out of the six belonging to the Shao
H a o - C h u a 11 H ii chm, the remaining two (Kou Lu n g, C h u 3) belonging
to the chms who traced their lineage back to the legendary K u n g K u n g and
L i e S h a n s h Y respectively - were recognized a,s the impersonators of these
divinities and o1Jtained as cult-titles the names of Kou lYI ,1 n g etc., thus for
ritual vurposes being identified with the gods in question. In other words, the
Royal house in the four c,1ses, and the Kung Kun g and Lie S h an s h i
clans in the other two, seized u11011, for their clan sacrifices, these six popular
divinities, identifying ·with them some prominent cult-masters of their clans, and
thus incoqJorating the cult of these gods in the ancestral cults of their families.
It is important to observe here, as in the case of the >>emperors>>, where the
theory of the 5 elements was applied to the sovereign list by the Yi.le ling
systematizer (see p. 222), that ,1 fairly early systematizer (the speaker in Tso:
Chao 29) has tried to force some early, unsystematic cult phenomena to agree
with the theory of the i3 elements. He was tempted to do so by the fact that
C h u J u n g was undoubtedly from 1irimeval times a fire-god, and H ii a 11
Ming certainly ,1 water-god (cf. p. 244 below). But in trying to force the material
,1nd to maJrn out a list· of 5 elements ,,nd obtain a logical system he has failed in
an amusing w,1y: he had necessarily to incorporate S he, the god of the Soil
-1)-rrhe
- -lust
-iten1, that of C b u3, son of Lie Shan s h I ·= T s i god of the Grain, succeeded by
K.' f? = Hou T s i of C 11 o u, recurs in E::Yi.l: Lu, shang.
24:0
l
B. ](,,lRLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIE,VT CHINA
-·----- -------~-----··-.. -·~----·· --· -·---···-·- ·--····-
(element: emth) in his list, identifying him with Hou T 'u - but then he
could not very well skip T s i, the god of the Grnin, who is always a Pollux to
She as Castor. He must therefore attach, quite loosely, to the 5 gods corresponding
to the i3 elements, a 6th god, T s i, who falb entirely outside that system uf
elements'.
This inadequacy lms not troubled the systematizer who wrote the Yiie ling: he
silently leaves out (see p. 222) the troublesome T s i, ,vho cloes not fit into the system
of i3, and he correlates the first i3 gods with the seasons: K o u l\I a 11 g preside,
over the spring; C h u J u n g over the summer; H o u T ' u over the end of
summer; Ju S ho u over the autumn and H ii an Min g ·over the winter
- we observe how he has had difficulty in reconciling 5 gods with 4 seasons: he
solves his problem by placing two gods in the summer!
The same Yiie ling author combines the firnt G gods with the 3 ,,domestic,,
sacrifices: Kou l\fa n g corresponds to the sacrifice to the h u Door, Chu
J u n g to that of the t s a o Hearth, H o u T ' u to tlrn,t of the c h u n g. - l i u
Central Roof-opening (dripping-place). Ju S ho u to that of the men Gate
and H ii an Ming to that of the h in g Road; the last is really a mistake;
another text version has t sing 'vVell. and Kia K'nei (1st c. A. D.) rightly main-
tains that this is the best re,1cling, fitting in better with the series of house
s,wrifices (the ancient graphs for h in g and t s in g were similar and easily
confused). These s,wrifices, the Ylie ling author st1ys, were the w n s I 11: )fil:.
evidently meaning that the >>five sacrifices>> in the Tso passage above refers to them.
Whether this is a mere systematizer's speculation or represents a true tradition it
is impossible to tell, since we have no free texts that describe the st1crifices in the
\ cults of those gods.
/;
In any case., the fact that these gods were annexed to the cnlt of certain
I prominent clans through the trick studied above (the identifirntion of wme
members of these clans with the several gods) causes us to expect tlmt they were
also incorporated in the regular an c est r ,1 l cult of cert,1in families. Moreover.
at least in the case of Chu Jung we have this confirmed in Tso: Hi 27, where
a prince of K ' u e i is reproached by a prince of C h ' u for not keeping up the
sacrifices to Chu Jung, the ancestor of the feudal houses of C h ' u mtcl
K' u e i (cf. p. 237 above).
We should add some further remarks on those gods-officers. In Kyii: Lu, shang
it is told that >>when Kung Kung s h i w,,s hegemon over the nine possessions,
l': his son was called H o u T ' u, he could tranquillize the nine lands, therefore he
f was sacrificed to as S h e, the god of the Soil. The st1me account recurs in Li:
l'r~
Tsi fa. The Li text says further: »When Li S h an s h 1 posseRsed the realm.
his son was called Nun g, the Husbandman, he could sow the hundred kinds
of grain; when the Hi a (dynasty) declined, K 'i" of Chou succeeded him,
therefore he was sacrificed to aR T s i, the god of the Grnin•>. This again agreeR.
subject to small variations, with the Tso account above: L i e R h au and L i
16 241

BULLETIN OF THE Jlll.USEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
·------- ---·-----
Shan are sound variations (seep. 220 above), and Nun g, the Husbandman,
was evidently an appellation of C h u 3 . Who the Lie Shan s hi was is
uncertain, see p. 220.
The last passages in these accounts, to the effect that first the L i e S h an
(Li S h a, n) house had laid hands on the god of the Grain for one of their
prominent clans-men, and then later another rising house, that of the C h o u,
did the same, is highly interesting. The powerful families vied with each other in
appropriating the popular gods and attaching them to their ancestral cults. A
phenomenon of the same kind occurs in Kuan: vVu hh'lg. This text is again a
systematizing effort to correlate some primeval gods-heroes with the 6 cardh1al
points: Heaven (zenith), Earth (nadir), east, south, west and north, and 4 of them
with the 4 seasons. And here these personages are connected with H u a n g T i.
Hu a 11 g '.I.' i obtained 6 wise »mh1isters>>: C h ' I Yu (for the legend of C h ' I
Yu in detail see p. 283 below) understood the norms of Heaven and was therefore
made t a n g s h i 'It 11# >>director of time>>; T a C h ' a n g understood the
advantages of Earth and was made 1 in Im >>granary mam; S h & Lung
understood the east and wa,s made (t 'u s h I ± ~iii, probably wrong for:) k u n g
s h i I ?,iii >>director of works>> ( = s I k ' u n g); C h u Jung understood ~he
south and was made s 1 t ' u •>master of the multitude>>; T a F e n g understood
t.he north and was made 1 i *
the west and was made s 1 111 a master of .the horse>>; H o u T ' u understood
(judge); therefore spring is k u n g s h 1 (s i:
k ' u n g), summer is s I t 'u, autumn is s i: m a, winter is 1i». The figures
T a C h ' an g, S h & Lu n g and Ta Feng in this myth are not known from
other sources. But two of our gods above, C h u J u n g and H o u T ' u, crop
up here aga,in, and in a quite dlfferent context from that of Tso. If we peel off
the systematizing speculations (cardinal points and seasons) of the Kuan author,
we can discern that some other branch of nobles, those who traced their lh1eage
back directly to H u a n g '.I.' i, were competitors with the S h a o H a o - C h u a n
H i.i clan for the honour of identifying the god of Fire, Chu Jung, and the
god of Earth, H o u T ' u, with their earliest clan heroes and attachh1g them
to their family cult.1)
The curious phenomenon that the positions of Ko u Mang, C h u Jung
etc. were of a t\\:ofold nature: those of officers (cult-masters) and of gods, has more
sinico led to a further elaboration of the water-god myth. The >>office>> of such
a cult-master-god was considered hereditary in the line. This gave the pious
genealogists an opportunity to connect their local cults with the more imposing
>>imperial» ct1lt of the leading families. We saw above that the emperor Shao
Hao gave the charge of H ii. an Ming (Master of water, god of water) to two
of his sons, Siu and H i 2 - this is somewhat obscure and has generally been
1 ) Though S ha a Ha. o and C h 11 an H ft w·ere considered to be kinsmen of Hu an g Ti,
see p. 217 above, there were, of course, fa.n1ily lines parn.Uel with theirs ,~lhich traced their origin back
t.o Huang Ti without being direct deseen<lants of S h ti. o Hao and Chu an H ii.,
24:2
J,1
l
I
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS I:V ANCIENT CHINA.
interpreted to mean that first the one and then the other held this position. Now
!
in Tso: Chao I we find: >>Kin T 'i en s h 1 ( = Shao Hao, seep. 208 above)
' had a descendant (y i t s 1) called M e i, he was H i.1 a n :111 i n g S h I, Master
H i.i an :i\1 in g. He begat Y i.i 11 Ko and T ' a i T ' a i. T ' a i T ' a i could
J
•
do meritorious work in that official position, he cleared the (rivers) Fen and T'ao
and embanked the great marsh and disposed the great plain; the emperor commen-
j ded him and enfeoffed him by the Fen river; (the feudal stateH) 8 h e n, S 1, J u
and H u a n g keep up sacrifices to him ... thus T ' a i T ' a i is the god of
J the Fem>. What has happened here is evident. In Shansi, in the region of the
Fen river, there was a local cult to the water-god T ' a i T ' a i. By proclaiming
him to be a son of :Mei, a Hi.la n lVI in g S h 1, )faster-God of water, who
1 was a descendant of S h a o H a o, the father of the H ii an Ming 8 i u and
H i2, the local Shansi cult of the god of the river Fen was linked up with the
general water-god cult that had been incorporated in the clan-cult system of the
family of S h a o H a o.
That the theme of the 5 elements is not a fundamental feature of these various
nature cults, which were annexed to the ancestral cult of the grandees, was already
proved by the T s i (god of the Grain) cult, which neither the Tso author nor
''
the Li author could press into the system of the 5 elements. This fact is underlined
by another, analogous cult, which has nothing to do Tuith the elements but which,
m the same manner, was attached to the >>imperial» family by being provided with
a pedigree. Tso: Chao 1 tells us about this: >>Anciently, K a o S in s h i:
'
( = K' u, see p. 211) had two sons, the elder called N g o P o, the younger S h i
C h ' en ; they lived in K ' u an g - 1 in, but could not treat each other well;
daily they sought their shields and dagger-axes and attacketl each other; the
august emperor disapproved of this, he transferred N g o P o to S h an g - k ' i u
(in Honan), to pres_ide over (the sacrifices t.o) C h 'en ./& (ft constellation), the
people of the Shan g dynasty followed this (i. e. kept up the cult), therefore
C h ' e n was star of the S h a n g ; he transferred S h 1 C h ' e n to T a - h i a
(in Shansi), to preside over (the sacrifices to) Shen ~ (another corn,tellation);
the T 'an g2 people (i. e. descendants of Yao) followed this (kept up the cult)
and served the Hi a and S h an g dynasties ... '.l.'hus S h 'i C h ' en i8 the
god of the (constella,tion) She 11.»1) On this analogy we nmy aclcl: Ngo Po
is the god of the constellation C h ' e n.2)
1 ) Kyii: Tsin 4 confirms this: i{fhe region of S h i C h · e 11 is where the people of 'J'sin tlwelfo (i. e.
modern Shansi).
2 ) The story of Ngo P o is also treated in Tso: Siang 9: i>The h u a - c h en g, }la Ater of Fire
of T' a o T' an g 2 s hi (i. e. Yao) Ngo Po resided in Shan g - k' i u and saC'rifieed to (the
constellation) Ta h u o * j( .... Si an g T' u (of the Shang dynnsty) succeeded him, therefore
the S hang presided over Ta h u oi,. Kyi't.: Tsin 4 likewise sa.ys: i>T n, h u o is the star of :N" go
Pa, that is Ta C h 'en fc. ~- Here we have two stellar cults, one (that of C h' en) centred in
Honan and one (that of Shen) centred in Shansi. They were Jinked up with the ant'eRtrn.1 1·nlt of
24:3
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FA.R EA.STERX A.NTIQUITIES
-· ·----·---------·--------- -------------------------
That these beliefs in vetrious 1mture gods, the cults of which were in this fashion
incorporated into the cults of the grnndee families, were really living beliefs in
the minds of the Chon-time Chinese is evidenced by various text passages.
Kou Man g. Mo: Ming kuei: Prince :M:u of (Cheng, read:) Ts'in (658-619
· B. C.) in clear daylight, in the middle of the day, was in the temple, when a
she n god (Spirit) entered the door and stood to the left. He had a human face
and a bird's body, he was dressed in a white robe ... his face and bearing ·were
very dignified». The spirit promised the prince prosperity for his state and 19
years of life for himself, m1cl told the prince that he was K o n 1VI an g.
Chu ,Jn n g. Mo: }"ei kung. hia: \Vhen Kie, the last king of the Hi a
dynasty, was attacked by T' an g, a she n god (Spirit) desceiided and said
to T ' an g that he would give him great force to vanquish his foe, because he
(the Spirit) had obtained the charge of Heaven to that effect. And indeed, >>Heaven
charged Jung ( = Chu ,Tung, the fire-god) to send clown fire to the north-
west corner of the wall of the city of Hi a,>. Similarly, Chu Ju 11 g by his
appearance inm1gurated the Hi a dynasty: Kyii, Chou, shang: >>At the rise of
the Hi a (dynasty), Chu Jung descended on the C h 'u n g 2 - s ha 11>>.
Ju S ho u. I(yii: Tsin 2: >>The prince of Kuo (early Chou time) dreamt he was
in t,lie temple; then there was a she n god (Spirit) with human face, ,vhite hair,
and claws of a tiger, who holding a y ii e battle-axe stood by the western slant
(of the roof)>>. The god warned the prince about an attack from the state of Tsin.
When awa,king. the prince let a diviner interpret the drea,m, and he decided that
it was Ju S ho u, »Heaven's god of punishment>> t 'i en chi: hi n g she n.
H ii an Min g. Tso: Clmo 18 describes a great conflagration in Cheng in
ii:M B. C. and the v,1rimrn measures taken by the authorities to sa,ve the city.
Inte.r aha, >>deprecatory sacrifices against the fire were offered to H ii an Ming
and Hu e i Lu. H ii a n ::\:[in, the water-god, was thus implored to combat
the fire (for Hue i Lu. cf. p. 246 below).
As to the gods Ho u - T ' u and T s i, I am not aware of any analogous
accounts.
III B.
In early Han time these legends were further embroidered.
H·uai-nan-tsf (Huai: T'ien wen) has a systematizing chapter very similar to the
Yiie ling discussed above (see p. 222), but he further correlates the »emperors>> and
the gods with certain stars which are in themselves also s hen, gods (Spirits)
and with magica,l animals, e. g.: >>The Ea.st (corresponds to) wood, its emperor is
T' a i Hao, his 00>1djutor is Kou Mang, he wields a compass and governs
spring, the she n (Spirit) is the S u e i star, the animal is the t s ' an g 1 u n g,
----~--·-
t,he >,ilnpet·lal11 house of Y n Y i.i.2 by a tradition which 1nacle a son of :K' u, nan1ed Ngo Po! the
cult-1nt1ster a.nd pergonifil'atlon of thl~ god of the C h ' e n, and ,vhich 1-nade another son of I{ ' u,
na.n1ell S h Y C h ' en, the cnlt-mnster and per.-mnifleati011 of the god of the constellation She n.
24:4
B. l{iJ.RLGREN: LEGENDS A:\'D CULTS IX ANCIE.\'T CHIXA
--~-------·--- -------------------·-··--·-··
Blue dragon», etc. The only interesting point is that the god conesJJonding to the
South is called Chu :Ming (but ,mother ea.rly text version, tlmt of Hii, has
Chu ,Jung, like the Yiie ling).
Shan ha·i king, as usual, has all kinds of weird specula,tions tha.t diverge from
the pre-Han lore. As to Kon JYI an g and ,Ju S ho 11, it a.dds but little that
i is new: Kou lVI an g has a. bird's body a,nd a human face a.nd rides on two
dragons (k. 9): . J. u S ho u at his left ear has ,1, snake, be rides on two dragons
(k. 7). But of Chu .Jung it has some very confused a.ccounts. Ji'irst. in k. G,
it describes Chu Jung as having >>an animal's body and a human face and
riding on two dragons>>. Then it has two contradictory Jledigrees for C' l1 n J u n g
- which again confirms that the Shan hai king is a conglomerate of va1-ious sources.
On the one hand, it follows lJ>1rtly the ancient somces (Tso, J(yii) in making
C h ' u n g and Li two different persons, partly the Ti hi, which makes C' h ' u n g
Li (one person) a son of Lao T 'u 11 g and grandson of Chu a 11 Hii. It says
(k. 16}: >>Chu an H ii begat Lao T' u n g, Lao T 'u n g bega.t Chu
.Jung>> and (ib-icl.): »Lao T 'u n g bega,t C h 'u ll g mid (k i) Li,> (adding
that C h 'u n g was ordered to sacrifice to Heaven, a.nd Li to Earth, in accord-
imce with Ky1i). On the other hand, it gives (k. 18) a total1y different pedigree:
Y e n T i by lady T ' i n g Y a o of the house of C h ' i" S h u e i s h 1 beg,1t
Yen K ii, this one begat T s i e P in g. this one begat Hi K ' i. this one begat
Chu Jung (and this one begat Kung Kung). As to Hou T 'u, it is just as
confused. It first bases itself on the ancient Tso a.ncl Kyii tradition that H o u
'l' ' u was a son of Kung Ku n g ; but then it rn.uddles the whole story by not
recognizing that, the Kung Kung of Tso and Kyii was m1 early potentate
anterior to Hu an g Ti. In k. 18 it gives the genealogy just quoted (Yen Ti
-Yen Kii-Tsie Ping---Hi K'i-Chu ,Tnng--·Kung
Kung), adding: >>Ku n g Kun g begat H o u T 'm>. But inunedicttely c1,fter
it says that K u n (in the time of Ya o) was athLckecl by C h u ,J u 11 g - the
father of Kung Kung! - · and killed on the Y li s h an. Thus it identifies
Ku 11 g Ku 11 g with the K u·n g Kung of the Shu tnl,clition (contemporary
with Yao and Shun, seep. 219 above) and makes Hou T 'u a son of this
grandee. This contradicts the pre-Han tradition (Kyii: Lu, shang) tlrnt Hou
T 'u was the son of the Kung Kun g who was >>hegemon over the nine
provinces>>, i. e. the early usurper in the time prior to Ye 11 Ti i,nd Hu a 11 g Ti.
S'i-mci Ts'·ien, in regard to Chu Ju 11 g, has yet another va.riation of the theme.
In Shi: ki: Ch'u shi: kia he bases himself on the Ti hi (see J>. 2:38 ctbove), taking
C h ' u n g Li to be one person, and saying that he was Master of }'ire under the
emperor K ' u, with the title of Chu Jun g. But then he introduces a quite
new idea of his own. The Ti hi had said that L a o T ' u n g, son of C h u ,1 n
H ii, had two sons, C h ' u n g Li and vV u Hu e i, a.ncl that it was Wu
Hue i who was the ancestor of the C h 'u house: VV n Hue i should, S1-ma
felt, be elevated to a fine position, a.nd he 11armtes: >>The emperor killed C h ' u n g
245
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EA.STERN ll:-'TIQUITIES
---····----·---·---- .. --------
Li ,,nd made his younger brother 'iV u Hue i instead C h u Jung>>. This
illnstra,tion of the specuh,tive mind of an early Chinese scholar is quite instructive;
we can m1sily discern how SI-nm cmne to concoct this fable of Wu Hue i succecling
his brother t,s Chu ,Ju 11 g. As alre1,cly attested above, Chu Jung was the
fire-god. whereas H ii an l\f in g was the water-god. In Tso: Chao 18, during
a conflagration in Cheng. propitiatory sacrifices were offered to Hi.tan Ming,
the ,n,ter-god, and to Hue i Lu. The context shows that Hue i Lu must
have been a fire-god. But the fire-god should be C h u ,Ju 11 g ; ergo Hu e i
Lu is eqrn,l to Chu Jun g. Ho»· is that possible, when. according to the Ti
hi (,wcepterl by S1-ma) it was C h · n n g L L gmndson of Chu an H i:i, who
was C !tu Jung? Very simple: C h 'u n g Li lrnd (aec. to the Ti hi) a brother
\,Vu Hue i -- evidently Hue i L lt' is the same as 'VV u If u e i! Yes. but it
,nis not \Vu Hue i but the elder brother C h 'u n g Li who was Chu Jun gl
Very well. evidently C h · u 11 g I, i was eliminated and succeeded as Chu
Jung by his brother \Vu Huei (= Huei Lu)!
Clever as this nrny seem, it is none the less a tyi1ical schoh,stic speculation
irreconcihtble with the ea.rly sources. That both names Hue i Lu and Wu
Hue i contain the clrnmcter h u e i fEiJ of course proves nothing. That Hue i
L u was a fire-god is shown by the context in the Tso passage, and it is confirmed
by the KyLi: Chou, slrnng; but in tlrnt text Hue i Lu is not identical with Chu
Jung but coorclirn,tecl with him as a sepamte divinity of fire: >>Anciently, when:
the H i a dy1rnsty arose, 0 h u Jung descended on C h · u n g' - s ha n (the
region of the H i a house, K u n, father of the founder Y i.i, being C h · u n g 2
ho u., prince of C h ' u n g 2 ); when it collapsed, Hue i Lu sojourned two
nights at K ' in - s u e i». The Kyi.i author would certainly not have called the
s,,me god first C h u ,J u 11 g and then II u e i L u in one and the same passage:
C h u ,T u n g mid H u e i L u were two kindred gods, both fire-gods.
The scholars of the firnt eenturies A. D. as usual introdnce various new datings
aberrant from those of the early texts. A few examples will suffice:
Kou Mang: ·whereas the pre-Han texts (see p. 239) make him =
C h ' u n g. a younger brother of S h a o H a o, Pan Ku (Han shu: Ku kin
jen ]Jiao) places him (in the v,uiant Kou \Vang of Sh1 ki) in the time of K 'u,
which is based on the Ti hi (see p. 22.5). Kao Yu (2nd c. A. D.) in com.m. on
Lii: Meng ch'un ki mllkes him =~ C h 'u n g a descendant (y i t s 1) of Shao
Hao.
J u S h o u : vVhereas the pre-Han sources make him = K a i, younger
brother of S h ll o Hao (Pan Ku places him under Chu an II i.i), Kao Yu
(comm. on Lli: Meng ts'iu ki) s11,ys he ,vas =Kai, a descendant (y i t s 1) of
S h a o H a o (in comm. on Huai: Shi: tse he sa,ys = Si u, descendant of S h a o
Hao -·- tt confusion with H li an }Ii n g below).
H li 11, n NI i n g : 1Vhereas the pre-Han texts make him = the brothers S i u
and II i', younger brothers of Shao Hao, and then make a descendant of
24:6
B. KARLGREN: LEGE:-VDS ilND CULTS IS .4.:•iCIEST CHI.\'A
--·-------
Shao II a o, called ~I e i, hold the same position. K11,0 Yu (comn1. on .Lii:
Meng tung ki) makes him = S ii 11, a son of S h a o H a o ; in comm. on Hnai:
Sh1 tse, he makes him = Mei, a first-mnk s o n (t i t s 1) of S Ji ,L o H a o.
Hou T 'u: Whereas the pre-Hm1 sources make him = Kou L 1111 g. a ;,011
of the »hegemom Kung Ku 11 g (prior to Ye 11 Ti and Hu ,1 n g Ti). Ptln
Ku places him under Chu an Hi\ (certainly under the influence of the early
Han texts which transfer Ku 11 g Ku 11 g to the time of Chu a 11 H ii. see JJ.
227), and the commentators have various specuh,tions. Kao Yu (comm. 011 Huai:
Shl tse) says that Hou T 'u ,ms not identical with Kon Lung. but that
Kou Lu 11 g had a so 11 called II o u T · n. \\'ei Chao (3rd c·.) in comm. on
Kyi.t: Lu, slrnng m,ys that Ho u T ' u = Ko u Lu 11 g was a d e s c e n d a n t
(yi tsl) of, Kung Kung, who assisted H 11 an g Ti as t · n kn a 11 »officer
of Earth,>. Pmticula,rly amusing is the famous scholar Cheng HOan (2nd c.). 1;-.ho
(comm. on Li: Yiie ling) says: Chu an H ii· s son Li was (in accorclam·e
with Tso) Chu Ju 11 g; but this Li wa.s at the 8m1u time Hou T · n. eombintn£:
the two offices of C h u J u 11 g and H o u T ' u in one person. Here agai11 ,n•
can discern how the shrewd mind of the seholast !ms ,rnrkecl. In forcing ;,
emperors m1d 5 gods to correspond to 4 se>csons. the Yi\e .ling author (eornmented
upon by Cheng) has had to put 2 of eaeh into the sumn1er season: Yen T i anrl
Chu Jung represent summer, Hu an g Ti and Hou T · n represent tlw
encl of summer (see p. 222). Hence. the good Cheng Hfam remmncd. one and tl1e
same man (L i ) was simultaneously C h u ,T n n g and H o u T ' u:
IVA.
S 'i h i u n g >>the four ominous ones,,.
1.
Tso: ·wen 18 narrates an important legend: the emperor Ti Hung s h 1 (ef.
p·. 220 above) lrnd an untalented son (who was thoroughly bad in various ,rn:rn folly
described) ... the people of all the worlds called him H n n Tun (Clmos); S h a o
H a o s h 1 had an untalented son . _ . the people ... called him K ' i u n g K ' i
(Monster): Chu a n H ii s h i had an untalented son ... the people ... caHer1
him T ' a o Wu (Block): these three familie,s from generfltion to gcnerntion
achieved their wickedness m1d augmented their bMl name: in Yao 's time.
Yao could not eliminate them; T sin Y ii n s h i: (see p. 220) had an
untalented son ... the people called him T ' a o T ' i e (Glutton): \\·hen . S h u n
was minister to Yao ... he banished the families of the four ominous ones ( s 1
hi u n g c h 1 t s u) and threw them out to the four border lands to withst,md
~ the c h' 1 and me i demons,>. 1 ) The smne theme reverts in Tso: Chao !I.
where certain Jung barbarians Yin Jung (of the clan name Y ii n 3 ) were
-----
1
Shl ki: \Yu ti pen ki hns the reading f&J], nnrl Chunu1ncs therefore translates: nafin ck :-:;onsmcth.·t·
)
it la rt!gle les
cl8n1011S>). But, this y i.'t is ht're only n short.forn1_, as ull'endy rec·ognized h,Y thP '1'\rn!.:·
corrunentatol' Chang Shou-tsie. Coun·ertr 1s translation: 1>il le:3 livru nux esprits ll1LlUYnis,1 is grn.:-: ..;:y
erroneous.
247
 BULLETIX OF' THE i'dUSEUilI OF' FAR EASTERN A.NTIQUITIES
drawn into a feud between Chinese nobles. A wise man lectured: >>The ancient
kings JJlaced T' a o Vv u on (one of) the four borders, in order to withstand the
c h ' 1 and me i demons; therefore the bandits of the Y ti n 3 clan live in K 11 a -
c ho m. The same legend is alluded to in Lti.: ShY kiln, where various northern
barbarian regions are enumerated, inter cilia >>the lands of T ' ,1 o T ' i e and
K ' i u n g K ' i».
There can be no doubt that these foU1' ominous ones, Hun T·u n, K' i 11 n g
K ' L T ' a o \Vu and T ' a o T ' i e were conceived as Spirits, in this case bad
Spirits, i. e. demons. And it is highly significant that the hated Jung ba,rbarians
(here the Yu n 3 clan) were considered to be descendants of the >>families>> of these
demons, which were banished by the great S h u n to the confines of the Chinese
realm: the banished ones were placed there to protect the Chine.~e world from the
onshmght of other demons. The Spirit character of the >>ominous ones>> is attested
in several ways: In Kyu: Chou, shang it is said: ,>Anciently, when ·the Hi a
dynasty arose, (the fire-god) C h u Jung descended on C h ' u n g 2 - s h an ;
when it collapsed, (the fire-god) Hue i Lu sojourned two nights at K' i 11 -
s u e i ; when t,he S h an g dynasty arose, T ' a o Wu sojourned several nights
at P ' e i - s h an : when it collapsed, Yi - y an g (ri divine sheep, a portentous
animal) was in the NI u (ye)>>. Thus, just as the appearance of the fire-gods
signalled the fall of a dynasty and the rise of a new one, so the a11pearance of
T ' a o W u signalled the rise of the S h a, n g - Y i n. Lii.: Sien shi:: >>On the Ting
tripods of C h o u there is represented the T ' ,1 o T ' i e, he has head but no
body. (ea,ting =) devouring 1ieople but not yet having swr1llowed, harm came to
his bod)'>>. Chuang: Ying ti wang makes use of the figure of Hun Tun as a
powerful >>emperor of the Centre» (a.~ against Hu »emperor of the Northern Sea>>
a.ncl Shu, >>emperor of the Southern Sea>>) in an allegorical tale.
The fact tlmt the legend nmkes these figures,. Hun Tun, K 'i u n g K ' i,
T · a, o 1V u and T ' a o T ' i e at the smne t,irne monsters and depraved
clescendants of the gr[1nclee c:lmrn nmy seem curious. That the she n (Spirits,
gods) of fire (Chu Jung) and water (H ii. an NI in g) etc. above were
impersmmted by prominent cult-masters of these clans and thus dr[1wn into the
clan cults is easily conceivable. But why incorpora.te the monsters of popular
belief into the clan' schemes? The reason is revealed by the Tso passage above
the Yin ,Jun g barbarians being descendants of T ' a o Wu. It ,n1s always
the tendency of the early Chinese traditions to consider the chieftain families of
border barbarians as descendants of Chinese families: a,ll civilization came from
China, and when those barbarians began to obtain a regular political and social
life it was due to Chinese immigrants who became their chiefs. In Chou time,
the ruling house of \Vu -- a state that was originally quite un-Chinese -
obtained its Chinese pedigree: the first two Wu princes were uncles of Wen
Vi,' r111 g of Chou (Tso: Min 1, Hi 5, Chao 30, Ai 7, Ai 13). The powerful sta,te
of C h ,-u was likewise originally un-Chinese, though it was drawn into the
24:8
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS I,Y ANCJE;\'T CHINA
Chinese cultural sphere much earlier than Vv u ; we lrnve seen 11bove (p. 2:3i'i)
that the C h ' u princes were endowed with a fine Chinese pedigree, 1m1king them
descendants of C h u an H u. These states were provided with a. fine a.nd
honourable lineage, since they were willingly a,nd rapidly sinieized ,md entered into
the Chinese confederation of feudal states. But other barbarians troublesome
' neighbours and often foes - in the very neighbourhood of the original >>central
kingdoms,> persistently refused to let themselves- he converted into Chinese, [111d
were in consequence inistrusted and despised and given pejon1tive names, such
as K' 11 an ,Jung >>Dog ,Jung>> etc. They must also, as sta,ted above, have
their ruling houses derived from Chinese families ---- otherwise 110 soeial order at
all could be imagined - but in consequence of their failing to become true
civilized Chinese their leaders were considered descendm1ts of cl e c a cl e n t
members of the Chinese grandee families: therefore, tlie Yi 11 ,Jung (da.n
Yu n 3 ) princes were descendants of C h u an H u, but only through his worthless
son T ' a o \Vu, who was identified with the popular demon T ' a o w· u ; a
typical example of the workings of the arehaic Chinese mind.
2. >>The four punished ones>>. In Shu: Yao tie11 (now: Shun tien) it is told how
Shun punished four miscreants. 'I'he following paragraph narrntes how Y a o
died and Shun ascended the throne; thus the punishment took place while
S h u n was the leading minister of Y a o : >>He (S h u n J b,1nisherl K u n g
K u 11 g to Y u - c h o u, he banished H u an T o n to C h ' u n g 2 - s h a JL he
4;t
letthe San Miao skulkin San-wei, hekilled 1 ) Kun on the Yti.-sban
(>>Wing Mountaim>)>>. This passage is repeated in Meng, vVan Clmng, shang; Kyti.:
Tsin 5 and Tso: Hi 33 likewise tell us that it was S h u n who k i killed Ku n.
The legend recurs in regard to three of the miscre>J,nts in Chuang: Tsa.i yu. but
here it is said that it ·was Ya, o himself who acte,d: >>Ya. o hanished Hu an
To u 2 to C h ' u n g 2 - s h an, he threw the S an ::\1 i fL o into 8 an - w e i, he
banished Ku 11 g Kung to Yu - tu. Ts'e: Ts'in 1 and Siin: Yi ping h:we
a different version: Yao attacked Hu an To u, 8 h u n ,-1tt,1eked S an
Mi a o, Yu attacked Kung Kun g.
The pre-Han entries tLbout the four miscreants a,re in some cases few and tell
us but little; only in regard to K u n and S a n M i a o are they fairly full.
Kung Kun g. We have seen above that the original Kun g I( u n g myth
was a, deluge theme, centred in a hero K u n g K u n g in the time prior to Y e n
Ti and Hu an g Ti (later on, in Han texts, tra.nsferrecl to the time of C b u 11 n
H ii. and K 'u), but that the Shu authors, who wished all important lrnppenings
1) K. i qi. Ma Jung ancl others have tried to argne that k i here does not 1ncan 'to kill' but only
'to punish\ i. e. here 'to banish' (referring inter alia. to Hnn shu: P110 Si.'u-m clrnan: )>Yao banished
the four 1niscrennts11); but that is to force a 1nenning into k i whiuh it doe."i not have. The RenAP, ·to
kiil' is clearly brought out in Shu: Hung fan: I{ n n t s e k i s 1 )>Kun was then killod)), and Ch'n:
Li sao says that E:. u n y a o "y]c met a violent death in the "\Yi1tls of Y i.P, i. e. Y t't ~ s ha n.
249
 BULLETIN OF THE IflUSEUJJ OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
to begin with the golden age of Y ,1, o, Shun and Y ii, have inserted Kung
E. u n g in the ento-urnyc of these rulers. In Shn: Yao tien he was recommended
>1s a meritorious 111>1n to Yao by Hu an To u, but ibid. (now Shun tien) he
w,i,s banished to Yu - c ho u. In Hanfei: vVai ch'u, yn slrnng it is said that Yao
desired to cede the throne to S h u n, but K u n g K u n g remonstrated: how
could the rea.lm be given to a p ' i f u comrnoned Yao then raised an army
ag>1inst K u n g K u n g ,,nd deported him to Y u - c h o u.
Ruan Tou. In Shu: Yaotien, Huan Ton recommends Kung Kung
to Y a o ; in Shu: Kao Ya,o mo, he is spoken of as a man apt to ca,rne the ruler
anxiety. Ha,nfei: Simo yi tells us tlrnt Hu an To u s h 1 had a bad a.dviser,
K u N a 11. Tlrnt is a.11.
Ku 11. \Ve lrn,ve seen above tlrnt Ku 11 was a, son of Chu an H ii and
father of the great Y ii. In Shu: Y,10 tien it is told how Y a o asked fm
some competent man to cope with the grei,t floods and was recommended
by »all» to employ I( n n. Yao hesitated, because Kun was becd, but he
was persuaded, ,ind Ku n tried to aecomplish the t.a.sk, but failed after 9
years. Shu: Hung fan narrates how Kn n clammed up the inlrndc1,ting w,,ters,
thereby disturbing the ;, elements, and hence was killed by the emperor.
Tso: Clrno 7 cigain sa.ys it w,is Yao who killed him (Tso: Hi 33 says it was Shun)
and gives a more detailed account: »Anciently, Y a o killed Ku 11 on the Y ii -
s ha n (>>vVing lVIounttLin»). his she 11 8pirit transformed itself into a yellow bear
and entered the Y ii - y ii" n (1>1Vi11g Abyss,>); he w1,s the one to whom the Hi a
offered the k i a o sacrifice (seep. 214 ;1l>ove), and the three dynasties (sc. Hi a,,
S h a n g, C h o u) sacrificed to him>>. The same story recurs in Kyii: Tsin 8 .1)
Mo: Shang hien. chung. briefly says: >>Anciently Po Kun was the eldest son
of tui emperor; he rejected the virtuous practice of the emperor, and so he was
hi n g punished in the outskirts of Y ii'. Li\: Hing lun tells us that Kun was
annoyed with the fa.et that Y a o did not give him the position of one of the s an
k u n g highest 1irinces; he was angrier than a wild beast, he wanted to rebel, he
ranged the horns of animals t,s a wall, raised their tails as banners, refused to come
when called mid ramble.cl in the wilclR. and so eaused S h u n anxiety; t-hereupon
they killed hi.m on the Y ii - s h t, n and cut him uri with a sword from Wu.
In the Ch'u ts'I the story of Kun occurs in some brief passages. Li sao says simply:
>>Kun w,1s refmctor~, and lost his body>>. Ch'u: T·ien ,rnn describes his punish-
ment: >>The c h ' 1 bird a,nd the turtle clmgged and took him in theil· mouths
1) The rrso text has h U all g h ill Jl g rrn 'a yellow bem·'; certain KyCL versions hnve the san1e
(hi u n g), anot,her version hatc. n en g f1~ ibear'. The T'ang seholnr Si:~111.n, Cheng. in gloss on Shl
ki: Ria pen ki, sn.ys that the word shoulrl be read not n en g but 11 a i and that it 1neans ·a turtle
with three legs'. This speeulation should clearly be rejeeted, for the T8o passu.ge ls told by an orator
as an explanation, when a si('k prince of 'rsin had drea1nt that a h u an g h i u n g yellow bear had
entered his bed~chnn1ber and the signifi<:anee of this portent ,vas discussed ~ what kind of Spirit he
represented: it was the dissntisEiect. Spirit of Ii.un.
250
B. EARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IX ANClBNT CHISA
{sc. his dead body), how could Kun be willing to this (sc. how could he act so
;i,s to incur this): according to his own will he lccbieved his work, bow dicl the
emperor punish him; for long he wtis kept shut off on the Y ii - s ha n. ,1·hy fur
three years wa,s he not thrown away (sc. killed and exposed); 1 ) Po Y ii (i. e.
Y i.i, his son) loved Kun. how did he change (sc. and become a sage nrnn. unlike
his father)». (This passage lrns been badly rnistranshted hy Maspero, J". As. l!JU,
p. Ml).
The legend of Kun ' s Spirit changing into a bear lrns given Tise to various
totem is tic speculations. but that is quite unwarranted. It is but one
example among many of the folklore belief that a person who feels wronged find
injured ,i,fter death appears as a ghost in the shape of some wild animal to take
revenge. Cf. the story in Tso: Chao H: A prince P'eng Sheng had been 1m11ished
by death on the order of the prince of Ts 'i; a year later the latter during a hunt
saw a big boar, whom the attendants declared to be the ghost of P'eng ::Sheng:
the prince shot an tuTow at him, and the boar-man rnse on his hind· legs and
wailed; the prince, scared, fell and hurt himself: l:''eng Sheng =' the l1on1· Jrnrl
taken his revenge. There is, of course. not the slightest rnascm to ~onclrnle that
the boar was the >>totem>> in the family of P'eng Sheng. Xo mme wt,s tlw bear
the >>totem>> of K u n.
Sa 11 Mi a o. The S t, n :VI i ,1 o story is throughout the pre-Ifon texts a stury
of rebels. \Ve have seen it briefl.y mentioned in Nlrn: Ym> ticn; there it ,rns stated
that it was Shu 11 who casued the San l\-1 i a o to ,kulk in S ,1 n - we i. Ts'e:
Wei ts·e tells us that the San }1 i a o lived iii the vicinit,v of tlrn Tung-t'ing
lake (Hunan); the Sa. n - we i, where they were removed by Shun, ·was in the
far north-west (Kansu). In Shu: Yii kung it is said: »The S tt n - we i (country)
became inhabitable. tmd the S an M: i a, o were gre,1tly put in order». which
suggests that it was Y ii who, on Shun's order. dee1lt with them. Shu: Kao Yau
mo speaks briefly of the deportation of the Yu l\-I i a o. lord of }Iiao. It is mon'
fully treated in Shu: Lii. hing: the people of Mi a o (YI i t, o mi n) used a system
of oppressive punishments, and the text embroiders the tt,le of resultant misrule
and disorder: the »august emperor>> then stopped mid cut off the people of }\'[ i a o.
Kyii: Ch'u, hia tells us how first the K i n L i cm1sed disorder under ~ h a , ,
H a o, and how C h u an H i.1 let C h ' u n g and L i re-establish order (see
1) There ha:.:-.; l1oen nrnch llisrut:.i~ion about thc:1 true motminµ: of thl.s phm~F): f u ho ~ o. n n i. f' li
p U Sh l nu£. Ho Yi-hang belie-Yes thut S h \ here 1neans 'to dissoln-··: ))\Yhy wa::; he (hl:,:.: body·) not
dissolved for :-3 yeart;,> (he is here inflnencecl by n 1.lifferent stor:,,· in the Kuei. tsrm!s k'i. ,..::hY, 8ee p, :25+).
but s h 1 has no such 111.ca.ning. Conrady translates: >}\Vannn Hess er dl'ei ,Jnh1•p nirht, nb (Yon seine!·
Missetat)>>. But the eol'l'eet interpretation is given by Chu Tsli.n-shcng (Shun wen t'nng hCm tinµ: sheng):
s h 'i means 'to throw a,Yay\ ns n culprit ·who has been killed and is th1·0,n1 into the rnm:krt-plarc-,
as proved by the good parallel in Tso: Chao 14: s h 'i. she n g l n B 'i. 1;to kill und thrmv a.way
(expose) the hying and to (punish =) 1nutilate the deach; and (£bl1l.) s h. l }ling ho u l)the-y kille1i
and threw away the prince of Hing)), cf. Kyi.'l: Tsin 8: 1)Those ·who .followed LLH-Hl shl were t n 1 u
s h 'i. greatly punished and killedi).
251
 BULLETIN OF THE ,lIUSEUM OF FAR EASTER1V ANTIQUITIES
"·- ·- -------··- ·--·--- - ---- -·----- . ··-· ···- ---- ·-----
p. 235 above); it continues: ,uHterwards, when the Sa, n lv1 i a o renewed the
(bad) virtue of the K i u Li, Y a o i,gain elevated the descendants of C h ' u n g
and Li ... ,>, thus describing the Mi a o as having already been rebels under
Y a o. And iii Kyii: Chou, hia a prince is admonished: ,>Should you not mirror
yolU'self in (the faJe of) the kings of the Li and the Mi a 0>>. Tso: Chao 1 says
that Shun had the S a 11 Mi a o as rebels. Ilfo-ts1 repeatedly discusses the
San Mi a o, most fully in Fei kung, hia. According to him, again, it was not
Shun himself but Y ii who attacked the Mi a o: ,>Anciently, the San Mi a o
greatly rebelled. Heaven ordered to annihilate them; a sun portent appeared in
the night, there rained blood three mornings, a dragon was born in the temple,
t,he dogs howled in the nu,rket, there was ice in summer and the earth cracked
down to the springs. the five kinds of grain were changed, the people were greatly
shaken; K a, o Yang (i. e. Shun, the descendant of Kao Yang, see p. 212)
then charged Y ii in the h ii a, n k u n g Dark Ha,ll; Y ii himself held the sceptre
of Heaven and ,vent to attack Yu Mi a o, the lord of Mi a o ; ... there was
a, she n Spirit with human face 1md bird's body ... (the text here corrupted);
the Mi a o m:my becmne greatly disordered and a.fterwards vrns nearly destroyed,>.
The legend about the portents signalling the catastrophe of the Mi a o recurs in
the authentic Chu shu ki nien: >>vVhen the San Mi a o were about to be destroyed,
Heaven r1tined down blood, in summer there was ice, the earth cracked to the
springs, a blue dragon was born in the temple, the sun came out in the night, and
in the day no sun came outi>. Hanfei: Shuo yi tells us tha,t the S an Mi a o
lmd a bad councillor, C h 'en g K ii, and in Ha,nfei: Wu ku we find a clU'ious,
moralizing ;,ccount: In t1rn time of Shun, the lord of Mi a, o rebelled and
Y ii wanted to nth,ck him, but S h u n disagreed; he >>instructed,> the Mi a o
for :3 yea,rn. and tben, when he »seized shield and a,xe and danced, the lord of Mi a o
submitterh. This legend .is a,Jso alluded to in Ts'e: Chao 2: ,>Shun da,nced the
Yu Mi a o (rhmce),>. Siin: Ch'eng siang likewise says that ,>without use of shield
m1d cln,gger-1ne, the S an Mi a o submitted,>. There is really no reason for
reading anything supernatural into this legendary theme, in the sense of a,
m ;1, g i c a 1 f o r c e of S h u n ' s dance; it means simply that the warlike
expedition was initiated by 1t solemn war dance, and the lord of Mi a o was so
overawed by this threatening first step that he g;we in. For the war dance as
a prepa,ration for w;1rfare, see Tso: Chuang 28.
IV B.
The two sets of legends under IV: 1 and 2 above, those of the four ,>ominous
ones>> who, though descendants of Chinese grandees, were really monsters, demons,
and those of the four ba,d ,>officers,> who were punished by Yao, Shun and
Y ii, a,re kept clearly apart in the early Han texts.
S'i-nw T8'ien (Shr ki: vVu ti pen ki) rela,tes first the one set and then, after
252
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHFS.1
. -··------··--··-------·----·-·----···~------ -----·-- --------·-·-
inserting various other things, the other set, recounting the da.ta of the ancient
texts without any essential additions.
Shan hai king, more suo, describes personages of both sets as su1>ernatural
beings,1) but in no way identifies the two series.
Hun Tu n : K. 2: ,>There is a s h en Spirit, his slrnpe is like a yellow sack,
with red as vermilion fire, he has six feet and four wings. Hun Tun, he lrns
no face or eyes, that one can sing and dance, he is Ti K i ;1, n g, ,,emperor 1(iang»
(the last evidently a variant for Ti Hung s h 1, who according to Tso ,ms
the father of Hun Tun, see p. 247).
K 'i u n g K' i: K. 2: ,>On the Kue i - s ha n there is an aninrnl. its slmpe
is lilrn an ox, with a porcupine's (hair =) bristles, its name is K ' i u n g K ' i, its
sound is like a howling dog, it eats people,>. K. 12: ,,The K · i u 11 g K ' i lms 11
shape like a tiger and it has wings; when eating people. it starts with the het1d,).
Neither T ' a o vV u nor T ' a o T 'i e occurs in the Shan hai king. But the
Shen yi king jjilji ~ *~,
a \Vestern Han work quoted by Fu K'ien (comm. on Tso:
vVen 18) says: i>T' a o \Vu has a shape like a tiger, its hair is brn feet long. it has
a human face, a tiger's feet, a hog's teeth, its t;,il lrns ;1, length of one c h t, n g
and eight c h ' 1, it can fight without retreating,>. And the same Shen yi kiug.
as quoted by Chang Shou-tsie (comm. on Shi: ki: .Wu ti pen ki) says: i>In the
southwest there are people who have on the body much lrnir, on the heads they
carry hogs, their nature is very wicked and la,zy, they amass wealth and do not
spend it, they are prone to robbing people's grain and goods, the strong men rob
the old, the weak ones fear a crowd but attack the single, their name is T · a o
T 'i e (Gluttons),>.
K u n g K u n g : Shan hai king does not describe K u n g K u n g as :J,11)'
strange figure; it is the Kuei tsang k'i shl (.Eastern Hm1 time) which first gives
this description: (ap. oonnn. on Shan hai king Hi): Kung Kung lrns ;, hum,rn
face and a snake's body mid vermilion-coloured hair". Ka,o Yu (corn.rn. on Huai:
Chuei hing) likewise says that Kung Ku n g had a hunmn face and a snake';;
body.
H u an T o u : Shan hai king: i>In the Ta-lrna.ng Great ·wild there is ;1, man
called H u a n T ' o u ; K u n ' s wife was S h 'i K i n g ; S h I K i n g ' s son wa.,
Yen Jung, Yen Jung begat Hu an T' o u; H n ;111 T' o u lrns a
human face and a bird's beak, and he has wings; he eats the fish of the sea: relying
on his wings he moves,> (this linea,ge brings clown Hu an To u in ;1,11 impossible
way, and in k. 17 Shan hai king gives another genealogy: Chu an H Li bore
Hu an T' o u). Shen yi king (ap. Chang Shou-tsie, Zoe. c,it.) has ;1, similar account.
adding: i>He is a very wicked nrnn; without fearing wind or rain or wild beasts,
he does not stop without defying death, his name is Hu an To u,>. Kuo P'o
1) Of. the ,va.y in ,vhich Lie describes not only Fu Hi, S Ct Kn a nml S hen N n n g hut nl.":lo
Hi a Hou i. e. Y Lt as having i>hnman face and snake's body, ox:·:,:; head nnd tige1·\; nm1P 1 seep. 2:rn
above.
253

BULLETIN OF THE llIUSEU!lf OF FliR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
(31'd c. A. D .. in co1n111. on t::han hai king 6) adds a story: >)Hu an To u was a
minister of Y a o ' s who ccnnmitted a crime and threw himself into the southern
Dea and died; tlie s0Ye1·eign pitied him and let his wns dwell by the southern sea
and sa.crifiee to him.,)
Kun : Shen '?i king (/oc. cif.) says: »In the east there is a man, he has a human
face but the body lrns 1nuch lueir; he understands well water tind land and knows
where there tue passteges and blockings, he is self-reliant>). Thus Kun is not
considered 1,s t1 monstel'. Shan !mi king does not describe him, but embroiders
the tiele of his deeds and punishment: Kun stole the swelling mould (ea.rth)1 )
of the emperor's a.ncl with it dammed up the flooding waters, without ,va.iting for
the emperor's orders; the emperor clmrgecl C h u Jung to kill Kun in the
outskirts of Y li3 (the t1ppettra11ce of C h u Jung in this connection resembles
the introduction of Chu ,T 1111 g as the punisher of Kun g Kung by S1-ma
Ts'ien, see p. 2:38 above). The Kuei tsang k'i shI varies the story further: ))When
Ku n died, for :3 yearn his body dicl not rot; they cut it open with a, sword from
\Vu (d. Lii on p. 250 above). m1d he changed into a, yellow d r a, go 111). 2 ) :Finally,·
still h1ter, the Shi yi ki decbres tlrnt, he clrnngecl into te fish (11 speculation based
on the name Kun. which means a kind of fish).
8 an M. i c1, o: Slrnn ha.i king 17: ))Outside the north-western sea, on the He i
s hue i Black "-"a,ter, there ,u·e people who have wings, their mune is the Mi a 6
a
min. :Ii i 11 o people: H u a. n T ' o u bore the ::Vl i o people>). Rhen yi king
(Zoe. ci:t.) says: ,1In the western wilds there are people with face and eyes ,mcl hands
a.nd feet tell in hunrnn slrnpe, but under the armpits they have wings, yet they
c>111not fly. they are t ' a o - t ·' i e gluttonous people . licentious and without
nmms, their rnune is Mi ;1 o mi n, the Mi a o people.>) - Huai: Miu ch'eng
repeats Hm1fei 's story (p. 2:52) tlrnt the rebellious S ,, n Mi a o gave in ·without
battle, after the .solemn wm: dance. hut here it is not Shun (as in Hanfei and
Ts'e) who performs but Y ii (,1Y ii seized shield and battle-axe and danced
between the two stairrnses, tend the San ::VI i a o submitted>)); and the same
work distinguishes between Sa, n Mi,~ o and >1Wing People>): Huai: Yi.i.an tao:
{l'o be able to eorreet the 8 an ;Jf i a o a.nrl bring to court (i. e. to submit) the
Y i.i ll1 in vVing People, to trnnsfonn the Lo k u o country of the Naked
:People and to bring into submission S u - s h e 11 , _ .>) (Lo k u o in the extreme
south and S u - s h en in the extreme north were legendary states subdued by
y ii).
Thus ,ve see tlrnt the pre-Han sources eloarly distinguish the two sets: the >)four
ominous ones>) m·e fnenk]y monsters, derived from the popular demon beliefs; ))the
four punished ones>) iere lmd >>offieers>) and >)rebels)) but no supernatural beings. In
ectrly 11nd middle }fan time the seuond set is fLlso made more or less supernatural
1) l\'fagical earth whieh renewed itself vd1en taken.
~) This version of I{ u n' f:i bocly not deC'ornposing ha.~ been e-1To110ously adduced for the interpreta-
tion of a C'h'n: T'i(~n wen paMf;U,Qe, sec' l_). :!51 ab(n-e.
254
LEGENDS AND CUL1'S IN A:SiCJENT CHINA
B. KA.RLGREN:
(just as even the grea,t Yii was 1mide such in Lie). 1mt still there is no iclentification
of the two sets; there is, however, a. first suggestion in this direction in the last
m1,se, the Shen yi king account of the S an :Mi a. o, who were t ' a o t · i e
»gluttonous>). R fruitful idea: the >)ominous
And this has given the Eastern Han scholasts
four -- w e r e t h e :-' n o t
ones>) were four, the ))punished ones>) were likewise
identical?
The Eastern H.an commentators on Tso clnmn, }'n K'ien and Kia K'uei, were
the first to elaborate this brilliant iclet,:
>)T i Hung s h i had an untalented son . . . Hun 'Tu 111> .-- Kia K't1ei: mi
untalented son, that mm,ns his cl e s c e n cl an t H u a n T o u.
»Shao Hao had an untalented son . . . K' i u n g K' i)) - ]<'u K'ien: tlrnt
was Kung K 11 n g.
>)0 h 11 an Hit had an untalented son . . . T ' 1, o \Vu>) - Kia. ICuei: tlrnt
was Kun.
>)T sin Y ii n s h i had an nntc1lentecl son _ , . T ' a o T .• i e>> -- here Ki;, mid
:Fu a.re silent, but Cheng H.i.tan (2nd e. A. D., in e01mn. on Nlrn: Ya.o tien av.
Kiang Sheng's eel.) steps in (11ossibly influenced by the Sheu yi king ltbow): T' a o
T' i e, that was the :-, an ::VI i a o!
This ,1musing specubtion, it is but fair to sRy, clicl not ;,t,tisfy all the early
eommentletors. Kao Yu (comm. on 1-hrni: Siu wu) lrns quite te rliffercmt idea:
Run Tun was a cl e s c e 11 cl a, n t of Ti Hung s hi, K' i u n g K 'i WtLS 11
cl e s c en clan t of Shao H '"o, T · tl o T 'i e a cl e s c en clan t of T sin
Yi.tn shI, ,mdthesethree: Hun Tnn, K'iung K'i ;md T'rto T'i.c,
were = S 1, n JY[ i a o >)the three Miao>), the rebels under Yt,o! (That leases out
the fomth: T' tl u vV u). \Vei Chao (:3rcl c.) in comm. on Kyii.: Ch\1 hia abandons
the idea of the famous scholarn of the 1st Rncl 2nd centuries mid i:n·os>Lieally ,,ssumes
that the S a 11 JVI i a o, who rebelled under Y 11, o. were the clescenclm1ts of the
K i u Li, who rebelled under Shao Hao. Nevertheless, the scholastic
identification of the ))four ominous ones>) mi.cl the >)four 1nmishecl ones)) has been
victorious in the commentaries of later ages (and reverently ,wceptecl by western
repea.ters), until it vrns brusquely - m1d rightly -- swept Rsi<k by critical scholars
of the Ts'ing cly1rnsty (in the T\mg kien tsi h111; also by Limig Yii-oheng a.nd
othern).
VA.
l. Tso: \Ven J 8 rnwrates: >>Anciently. Ka. o Ya. n g s h I ( "-~ Clma.11 Hii) har1
eight talented sons. T s ' a 11 g Shu, T 'n e i Ai, C h ' o u Yen. T a Lin,
;',fang Hiang, T'ing Kien, Chung Jung tLncl Shu Tt,. tl1e people
of 1111 the world called them P f, k ' a i /1. 'i:i:/: 11the Eight J<'elieituu:; ones»:. K a o
Sin .~ h I (= K' u) lmd eight talented sons, l' o }'en, Chung K · '"n,
8hu Hien, Ki Chung, Po B11. Chung Hiung. Shu I'ao and
255

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM: OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
K i L i .... the people called them P a y ii a n A JC >>the Eight Great ones>>;
these sixteen families from generation to generation achieved their excellence and
did not let their (name =) fame fall down; in the time of Yao, Yao could
not promote them; when S h u n was minister to -Y a o, he promoted the Eight
Felicitous ones and made them preside over the August Earth, to regulate all the
affairs, and there was nothing that was not in season and well-ordered, the Earth
was regulated and Heaven gave achievement. He promoted the Eight Great ones
and made them spread the five instructions in the four quarters ... >> .
2. In Shu there is pleiad of prominent men around the emperors Y a o and
Shun.
We have already discussed C h 'u n g and Li (see p. 234 above), and some
other famous personnages: Hi and H'o will be discussed later (see p. 262).
In Yao tien there is first a certain dignitary F a 11 g T s ' i consulted by Y a o
and recommending Yao·' s son C 11 u 4 • Ibid. (now Shun tien) there is a series
of nominations made by Shu 11: Po Y i.i. (= Yii, son of Ku 11) is made s i-
k' u n g master of works; K' i 2 {son of K 'u, see p. 215 above) is made Hou
1' s i and hence master of agriculture; Si e (son of K 'u, see p. 216) is made
s i - t 'u master of the multitudes (of instruction); Kao Yao is made s hi
master of justice; C h 'u e i1 ) is made k u 11 g - k u n g - this would seem to
mean much the same as s i - k 'u n g master of (public) works, but all the legends
describe C h ' u e i as a great artisan, and it is better to say: ·master of the artisans;
Yi 'fiil: (*·iek) is made y ii master of forests; Po Y i 2 ~ (*diar) is made c h i-
t s u n g master of rites; K ' u e i is made t i e n y ii e master of music; L u n g
is made n a yen <:J~uncillor. Moreover the master of forests humbly (but in vain)
recommends in his stead C h u 4 (Yao ' s son), ·H u 2 , Hi u n g and P ' i ; and
C h ' u e i, the master of artisans, in the same way recommends S h u 2 , T s ' i an g
(or, with Pan Ku and Cheng Hi.i.an, one person: Shu T s 'i a 11 g) and Po Y ii2.
Even inside the Shu this >>syste111» is somewhat shaken, in that P o Y i 2 ~
(*dfar) reverts in Shu: Li.i hing not as master of rites but as master of justice
creating penal laws; on the other hand, as against this, the Yao tien system is
confirmed in Kyii: Cheng yii: >>Po Y i 2 (*diar) was one who could perform the
rites to the Spirits and _thus assist Y a O>>. And that Kao Yao was the proper
master of justice is confirmed passim (Shi: ode 299: >>the good examiners [of the
prisoners] are like Kao Ya O>>; Shu as quoted in Tso: .Chao 14: >> ... those are
the punishments of K a o Y a o»; the authentic Chu shu Id nien: >>The charge was
given to Kao Yao· to institute the punishments,>).
Of these prominent men, the first three: Y ii, founder of the Hi. a dynasty,
K ' i2, ancestor of the C h o u, and S i. e, ancestor of the S h an g - Yin, are
famous. To K 'i2 (= Hou T s i) is devoted a whole ode (ode 245, Sheng min)
1 ) Lu TE!-ming reads the .name· in even tone, hence C h' u e i; Sii Miao in falling tone, hence
S h u·e i; the na1ne is also written C h 'u e i 2 , which in Ts'ie ylin is read C h 'u e i {even tone), in
T'ang yiin a\ternati.vely Shue i (falling tone).
256
~:~
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA.
'"-·- ------·-
telling the story of his miraculous birth and hfa vicissitudes ii1 youth before
becoming the great agricultural benefactor and institutor of a fundameiltal
sacrifice.1 ).
Kyii: Chou, shang tells us that as early as when the Hi a were declining, Pu
Chu, iI o u T s i. ' s descendant (his son acc. to the Han scholars, and in any
case very early in the line, as revealed by 1'so: Wen 2) lost his charge as master
of agriculture; but, nonetheless, Tso: Chao 9 asserts that the house (clan K i.),
because of the merits of the founder H o u T s i., right down from his time to the
Chou era possessed the districts of We i.2 , T' a i, Jue i., K·, i.3 and Pi. as
their »western lands>>.
About S i e, the equally famous founder of the S h an g house, nothing is
known except the story of his miraculous birth, see p. 216 above. 2 )
Kao Yao is likewise very famous, a whole Shu chapter (Ktt0 Yao 1110, including
the present chapter Yi Tsi) dealing with him; and, as we have just seen, his work
as master of justice was universally acknowledged. He was the hero-ancestor of a
grandee family which kept up his sacrifices far down into the Chou dynasty (Tso:
Wen 6): the small states of Liu and Li a o were extinguished in 622 B. C.,
and a Lu grandee, Tsang Wen-chung, exclaimed: »The sacrifices to Kao Yao
(with the appellation) T ' i. n g · K i e n are extinguished, how brusquely!» -
evidently the princes of Liu and Li a o regarded themselves as the descendants
of Kao Yao.
Of the remaining coadjutors of Shun very little is known from pre-Han texts.
C h 'u e i is mentioned as a »clever artisan» in Lii: Kuei kung; in Lii: Kn yi.ie
it is said that the emperor K ' u (Y a o ' s predecessor) ordered Yu C h ' u e i'
the lord of C h ' u e i 2 to make drums, bells and musical stones, and Li: Ming
t'ang wei speaks of the ho c hung set of bells of C h 'u e f; in Siin: Kie pi,
C h ' u e i is said to have made bows, and in Mo: Fei .iu, hi.a to have made boats.
Yi (*·iek) is known principally from Meng: Wan Chang, shang, which gives the
I
tradition that the great Yii wanted to cede the throne to this Yi instead of to his
son K 'i4 (just as Yao had ceded the throne to Shun and Shun to Y i.i,
instead of to their sons}, but that Yi, after the >>three years' mourning>> after
Y ii ' s death retir!)d in favour of K ' i4 to the south of the K i - s h an mountain
and the people all turned to K 'i4 (this story is also alluded to in Hanfei: Wai
1 ) See BMFEA 17, p. 71. His mother Kiang Y t1 an !rod on the big toe of Gocl's footprint,
became pregnallt and »without bursting or rencling>> bore .Hou T s i; »they laid him in a narrow lnne.
the oxen and sheep betwe~n their legs nurtured hhn; they laid hin1 in a forest of the plain, he was
J found by those who cut the forest; they laid him on cold ice, birds covered and protected ~itn», etc-.
') The proper graph for S i e was ,t , which occUl's e. g. in Han shn: Ku kin jen piao. It
i\ comes very near to the primeval form of the name occurring in the oracle bone inscriptions. This S i e
I
I
(*sfat / sfi;it / • i e) is phonetic in the chru: iWlf, (*tB'iat. J ts'iet / t s 'i e), which confirms the reading.
Why the scholars of the Han era, when transcribing the ancient texts into their current script,
.•ubstitutecl a ~ (*k'iad, *k'iat) as loan char. for Si e (*siat), a phonetically very unsatisfactory
loan, is quite obscure.
17 257
 t
!
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
ch'u, yu hia). Possibly our Yi is also identical with the Po Yi who in Lii:
Wu kung is said to have been the inventor of wells. For Po Y i 2 (*diar) see above.·
K ' u e i is more interesting. The word k ' u e i ~ properly designates a fancy
animal with only one foot (Chuang: Ts'iu shuei; cf. Kyii: Lu, hia, where Confucius
·says that K 'u e i is a •>monster of the woods,>), and since the >>master of music»
of Yao was already stated in the Yao tien to have a wonderful and magical
~ommand of the music (K'uei there says: >>Oh, I strike the musical stones, when
I knock on the musical stones, the hundred animals all dance•>), the popular
imagination of Chou time made him into a magical figure with >>one foot>>:
(K 'u e i y i t s u - ..!E). An amusing illustration of this is a story told by Lii:
Ch'a chuan: prince Ai of Lu asked Confucius if it were true that K ' u e i y i
t s u >>K ' u e i had only one foot>>, but the master explained that S h u n
considered that K ' u e i y i t s u >>K'uei, one man, was enough>> (t s u meaning
both 'foot' and 'enough') for the task of music-master, without need of any
assistant! (Hanfei: Wai ch'u, tso hia tells the story with slight variations, making
Yao the speal~er. - The idea that K 'u e i should have .a colleague reverts
in Ta Tai: Wu ti M, which says that L u n g and K ' u e i together taught the
[ritual] dancing). The folk-lore theme of the >>one-legged music-master K' u e i»
of course ·is ·due to the fact that the ancient hero had as personal name the word
.for the magical, one-legged animal;· it was exceedingly cmIDnon in ancient China
that people had names of animals as personal names - which certainly does not,
in itself, reveal any »totemism>>, as has often been proposed. 1 ) K 'u e i is further
discussed in Li: Chung-ni hien kii, where Confucius says that K ' u e i was a· great
expert on music but less well versed in the rites. Tso: Chao 28 narrates that the
music-master K ' u e i married a lady of the house of Yu J e n g s h 'i, with
unusually glossy black hair and hence called H ii a 11 T s' i >>the Black Consort»,
a,nd by her had a son P o F e n g, a worthless fellow nicknamed F e n g S h 'i
>>the Great Hog>> (a pun: the word fen g, his personal name, at the same time
meaning 'great'); he was killed by ·Hou Yi3 of Yu K 'i u n g (for whose
legend seep. 311 below), which caused the extinction of the sacrifices to K' u e i.
About the remaining prominent men: H u, H i u 11 g, P ' i, S h u, T s ' i a n g,
P o · Y i.i.2 nothing at all is recorded.
In Shu: Yao tien (now Shun tien) there is, further, a much discussed phrase in
which Y a o requests the advice of S 'i Y ii e >>Four Mountains>>. That this is
the title of one person is clear from several pre-Han texts (though the Han schol-
ars have other opinions, see B below). Tradition has a grandee T' a i Y ii e
>>Great :M:ountaim, who is = the S 'i Y ii e. This personage is identical with the
Po Y i2 ~ (*dja,·) above (p. 256), for Tso: Chuang 22 says: >>(the clan) K i a 11 g
1 ) Particularly by Conrttdy. The son of Confucius had the personal name Li »Carp»; the carp was
certainly not a· ,totem, of the K\mg family. - Observ~ that the small feudal state of K 'u e i had
nothing to do with Shun ' s music-1naster; its feudal house was kindred to the C h' u house,
desc:endants of Chu an H ll, see p. 237 above.
258
l
·~
.I
· B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
are the descendants of T ' a i Y ii e>>, whereas Kyii: Cheng yii says: •>The clan
K i a 11 g are the descendants of P o Y i2>>. This implies that this P o Y i2 was
a descendant of Y e n T i, for Tso: Ai O says: >>Y e n T i was the Master of
Fire, the clan K i an g are his descendants». The identity of T ' a i Y ii e and
S 'i Y i.i e is well established, on the one hand by Kyi.i.: Chou, hia, which describes
in detail how, after the troubles of Kung Kung and P o Kun (who caused
and mismanaged the floods), Y ii regulated the floods aided by S 'i Y ii e, and
how Heaven rewarded the S 'i Y ii e an.cl gave him the clan name K i a n g
(i. e. restored to him the clan name of his ancestors) and made him prince of L i.i.;
on the other hand by Tso: Siang 14, which says that the Jung (clan Kiang)
were descendants of S i Y ii e. Evidently the sacrifices to P o Y i 2 ( = S 'i
Y ii e = T' a i Y ii e) were kept up by the feudal houses of the clan Kiang,
sc. Ts'i (clan Kiang acc.toTso: Yin3,Kyi.i: Chou,hia),Shen2 (Tso:Yin 1),
Hi an g (Tso: Yin 2), H ii (Tso: Yin 11) and K i4 (Tso: Huan 9). Kyi.i.:
Cheng yii expressly says: >>His descendants never ceased his sacrifices, though he
did not rise» (sc. to great prominence himself).
It should be pointed out, however, that in the Shu itself Si Y ii. e is not iden-
tical with Po Y i2, for the emperor Shun says in Yao tien (Shun tien): >>Oh,
you S 'i Y ii. e, is there anybody who can regulate my three kinds of rites1 All
·(those present) said: there is P o Y i 2,>. Chavannes concludes that the phrase »all
said>> shows that ali·eady to the Shu author S i Y i.i. e meant 4 persons, not one.
But that is quite excluded:, for the emperor sums up his deliberation with his
coadjutors thus: >>Oh, you 22 men», resuming the preceding paragraphs in which
he suc~essively adresses the .S 'i Y ii e ·(1 person), the 12 Pastors, and the ministers
Y ii, K 'i2, Si e, Kao Yao, C h ' u e i, Y i, P o Y i 2 , K 'u e i, Lung (9
persons) - together· 22 men (when :M:a J1111g believes that S i Y ii e were four, he
calculates thus: K ' i2, S i e and K a o Y a o had already been nominated earlier
and are not included in the figure 22 - a funny idea). Thus the Shu and the
Tso-Kyii traditions diverge as to the identity of the Si Y ii e, though both clearly
concei:ve him as one person.
To those grandees of the Shu in the entourage of S h u n should ba added
another: P o Y i3 ~ (*·iai·) - different from the Po Yi c@: (*iek) and Po
Y i 2 ~ (*diar) above; he is described in Kyii: Cheng Yii: >>P o Y i3 (*·iar) was
one who could properly arrange all things and assist S h u n ... the Y i n g house
(feudal house of Ts'in) were his descendants ... they never ceased his sacrifices,
though he did not rise>> (sc. he did not personally attain to great prominence).
VB.
The systematizing· and early Han texts add some further items about the
prominent men who •>assisted>> Shun.
S 'i - m a T s ' i en (Sh'i ki: Ts'in pen ki) further elaborates the Kyii. theme of
P o Y i3 ~ (*·iar) as the ancestor of the T s ' i n house: Emperor C h u an H ii
259
 BCLLETLV OF THE MUSEUM OF FA.R EA.STERN ASTJQUJTIES
had a gn,nd-daughter Nii Siu; when she was weaving. a s,nillow dropped an
egg and she swallowed it and became pregnant and bore T a Ye. This T a Ye
nmrried a daughter of Shao Tien, called Nii Hu a and begat Ta :Fe i,
who assisted Y ii in regulating the floods i,nd helped S h u n in domesticating
birds and beasts: this T a 1<' e i was identical with P o Yi" ; Shun gave him
the chm name Ying and he became the mwestor of the T s ' in house. -
SI-ma lrns here even more than usmil confused the ancient legendary themes.
The theme of the s,rnllow ·s egg is a clumsy plagiarism on the story of Kie n
Ti, mother of Si e (see p. 211). Shao Tien was the father of Yen Ti
m1d Hu an g Ti. but SI-nrn nmkes a, great-grandson of C h 11 an H ii marry
a daughter of Shao Tien. Furthermore, a pre-Hi,n text (:Kuan: K'ing chung)
has a certain K ii Hu a who was one of the fatal ladies of Kie. the last Hi a
king (see p. 327 belmv); it would seem that H i - 111 a lms confused two different
sets of legends.
Hu a i - n an - t s I adds another remarkable man to the set of great men
a.round Shu 11. and he diverges from the list of >>officers» of the Shu text (Huai:
Ts'i sn): in Yao' s time, 81nm was s 1 - t 'u (acc. to the Shu. 8 i e was
s i - t 'u). 8 i e was s I - m a. master of the horse (a charge which does not figure
in the Shu list). Y ii ,n,s s 1 - k 'u n g, Hou T s i was ta - t 'i en (master
of the fields). H i2 Chu 11 g was k u n g (master of artisans) - the remaining
officers not being mentioned. Thus H i2 C h u n g takes the place of C h ' u e i
of the :"ilrn. The oldest entry about this H i 2 Chu 11 g is Tso: Ting 1. where
he is stt1ted to lrnYe been a11 ancestor of the JJrinces of S i e 2 (since the S i e2
house ha,d the clan name J en and were descendants of Hu an g T i, see p.
278. H i2 C' hung would then be t1 descench,nt of H 11 an g Ti). and he was
k ii c It en g ,mrnster of the ,nn chariots>> of the Hi a 1 ); if we suppose Hi a
here to refer to the founder of the H i a, the great Y ii. H i 2 C h u n g could
barely have been an official under Y a. o. Tso tells us that H i 2 Chung first
resided in Si e 2 and then moved to 1> · e i, and tlmt a descendant of his was the
famous C h u 11 g Hue i (a coadjutor of T ' an g, the first Shan g king),
who moved back to S i e2 • Evidently the legend of H i 2 Chung was preserved
and his sacrifices kept up in C h o u time b)l the princes of S i e2 • But there is
nothing in the pre-Han sources to connect H i2 Chung with Y a o.
The Et1stern I-Ian scholars have speculated further on the two lists of grandees
discussed under V A 1 and 2 above.
,1) On the one lrnnd, it has troubled the commentators that Kyii has a dignitary
P o Y i" ~ (*·iJr) who does not figure in the Shu. the ancestor of the clan Ying,
feudnl house of T s' in. Hi-nm Ts'ien, as we have seen, followed Kyii on this
point, rnlling Po Yi" (*"iJr) also Ta Fe i and making him son of Ta Ye,
great-grnndson of Chu an H ii. Now Pan Ku (Han shu: Ti li chI) snys: >)The
1 ) Mo: Fei ju, hitl, and Li1: EJm i:;hou eycn say he was the inventor of carriages, and Kuan: Hing
shl de13cribes hi.'3 skill.
260
B. KAKLGREN: LEGENDS A.ND CULTS IN 1lNCJENT CHINA
ancestor of the T s 'in was Po Yi 1iii: (*·:iek)>> - thus identifying the Po
Y i3 ~ (*·iar) of Kyii with the Po Yi (''·fek:) of the Rim (Wei Chao in comm.
on Kyii follows this). And Pan's famous sister, Pnn Chao, in comm. on Lie nti
chuan, where Liu Hinng lrnd it that >>(Kao) Yao' s son a.ssisted Y fo>. asserts
that Kao Yao 's son was = Po Yi (*'ji'k). Thus, if nil these identifications
made by the Pan family scholars were correct. the .system of versons ,.-,mld be
greatly simplified: Chu an H ii' s grent-granclson Ta Ye =c K a o Yao,
the latter's son Ta :Fe i = Po Yi ~ (*·iek) =c Po Yi" ~ (*·jcJr). But
there is, as we have seen, not the slightest support for all this in the pre-Han
sources.
b) Various picture.~que dett1il.g have been t,ddecl to the tales of some of these
worthies. 011e example nu-1,y suffice. About Ka. o Yao, the sage judge. \Vang
C h 'u n g (Lun heng: Hhi ying) rn11Tates: >>At present, in the public offices, Kao
Yao and the (animal) k i e - cha i are pafoted; the scholars explain that the
k i e - cha i is a, ram with one horn, it has the nature tlrnt it know., the guilty;
when K a o Yao, deciding litiga.tions, was in doubt, he ordered the rnm to butt:
the guilty one he butted, the innocent he did not hutt>l. This is merely an n.pplien-
tion to Kao Yao, the famous judge, of a, well-known m1ecclote from the time
of prince C: h u an g of T s ' i, narrated by Mo: Ming kuei, hia.
c) We sa.-w that Si Y ii e >>Four Mountains>> (= T' a i Y ii c >>Grea.t }Imm-
taim) was the title of P o Y i2 "W: (*·cliar). That in spite of the >)four>> in the
phra.se he was one person, not four, was still realized in the :lrd c. A. D. by vVei
Chao (comm. on Kyii: Chou, hia): >>S i Y ii e wa.s m1 official title, he presided over
the sacrifices to tbe Four (sacred) Mountains and was the .leader {po) of the
feudaJ lords». But some Hiin-time scholarn had alread:v set off in a new speculative
direction. Fu Sheng in Rhang shu ta chuan (:!ml c. B. C.) say.s: »ln the firnt year
he (the emperor) made an iirnpection tour to the eight lei,dern of the four (sacred)
mountains>> (s i y i.i e pa po), and he enumerates them: Ya ll g Po, Yi Po,
Hifi Po, Hi Po, Ts'iu Po, Ho Po, Tung Po (,cc 7;thet-lthisskipped
in the preserved text). Cheng Hiian comments: Ya. n g Po is =· C h · u n Po
(8pring leader), that wits Po Y i2 (*cli,1r); Yi Po. that was a de.~cenclant of
Hi Chung (seep.2u2below); Hit1 Po (SurnmerleRderJ,tlrntwi,sK'i 2 iHou
T s i) ; H. i Po, that was a descendant of Hi S h u (see p. 2(i2): 'J' s ' i u Po
(Autumn leader), that was Kao Ya. o ; H o P o, that 1rns tt descendant of
Ho Chung (see p. 262); Tung Po (Winter leader). that was C h 'u e i,).
But in his comm. on Shu: Yao tien the same Cheng Hiian htm a different specula-
tion: >>First, in the time of H i and Ho (see p. 2Ci2) those who presided over the
four mountains (s i y ii e) were called s i p o >)the four lea.ders>> (i. e. H i
Chung, Ho Chung, Hi Shu, Ho Shu) ; when they died, one divided
the tasks of the Mountains and instituted eight leaders pa po ; Hu an '1' o u,
Kun g Kung, F an g T s ' i and Ku n were four of them; as to the
remaining four, there are no documents from which the? can be known>).
261
 BULLETIN OF THE MTSEUM OF FAR EASTER?\' ANTIQUITIES
This is a very iustmctive exa,mple of the va,lue of Cheng Hiian's reconstructive
specuh,tions.
d) Just a'8 in the cases studied in IV above: the ))four ominous ones>> which the
commentators (arbitn1,ril)' ancl ,\Tongly) identified with the >>four punished ones>>,
so here the scholars lmve been quick to connect our list under 1: >>the eight felicitous
ones>> and »the eight great ones» r1,cc. to Tso, with our list 2: the prominent men
in the entourage of Y tl, o . S h u n ttnd Y ii acc. to the Shu. Tlnrn, in comm. m1
Tso: \Ven UL Fu K'ien says: {Che eight felicitous ones, that means such as Y ii
and C h 'u e i». and Tu Yii (:3rd c.) says morn fully: »The eight felicitous ones,
those rwe the category of C h 'u e i, Yi 1iif (*·jfk), Y ft. Kao Yao ... the
eight grea.t ones. tlrnse ttre tlw category of T s i (Hou T s i), t, i e, Uh u. 4 H u2,
Hi u n g and P 'ii>. In this c,i,se the commentators luwe better rer1,sons than in
regard t,o those studied under IV cibove, for here the lists have in fact som'? names
in common. In group l. r1,mcmg the >>felicitous ones». sons of C h u an H ii acc.
to Tso. there figmes T 'in g Kie n. which we lmve seen (p. 267) was the t,ppella-
tion of Kao Yao, one of the foremost cm1,djutors of Shun a,cc. to the Shu list.
And among the »great ones>>, sons of K ' u acc. to Tso, there are P o Hu and
Chung H i u n g, who may correspond to the H u 2 ,mcl H i u n g of the i::,hu
list. Tu Yti lms felt that the distance from Chu an H ii to Shun wa,S too
long, and so he interprets the t s Y >>sons>> of the Tso text ,1,s = »descendants)),
but that is quite arbitrary. Just as in the m1,se of Y ii ' s father Kun,
contemporary of Y a o and S h u n, who was. according to all the ancient
sources >>son of Chu an H ib. there is nothing to prevent Kao Yao (T 'in g
K i en) from being a >>son of K a o Y an g (Chu an H ii)>> -· chronological
improlmbilities do not (as pointed out p. 214 above) worry the ancient legend-tellers:
that K a o Y r1, o was a son of Chu an H ii may have been the tradition among
the descenda,nts of K a o Y tl, o (i:nter cilia the houses of L i u and Li a o, see
J). 257) who ht,cl him as the hero-founder of their line. and they troubled little
about the question how this could be rnc:oncilahle with the long line from C h u a 11
H ii to S h u n. which the descendants of S h u n upheld as the tradition of
their house.
VIA.
The venerable Shu: Yao tien starts with the famous passt1,ge about the
clignittl,l'ies Hi and Ho. First we have the simple Hi - H o. whom Yao
charged to oalcuhite ;1,ncl delineate (the movements of) the sun, the moon, the
stars and the constellations. The orthodox interpretation (all from Shang shu
ta chuan. 2nd c. B. C.) has ttlways been that Hi - Ho were two: the eldest
brothers in two families. Then, in the following lines, their younger brothers:
Hi Chun g. Hi Shu. Ho Chung, Ho Shu were charged to go to places
in the east. south. west t1,ncl north mid there pin >>receive as guest>>, i. e. receive
m1d welcome. the rising etc. sun. In this long later passage there are vtuious
262
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIEi'!T CHI.YA.
t1,stronornic,1,l data ,vhich have given rise to a whole body of literntnre,1) but ,\·c
have no reason for going into it here. The im1mrh1,nt thing is that the author of
the Shu chapter makes Hi and Ho a whole family of grandees. cult-mastern
who caITied out the rites in the cult of the sun, moon and stars. 2 )
Undoubtedly this is the very reason why the whole book conunen~e,; with the
Hi and H o : their sacral functions were or prime importance in the eyes of the
author, and they should therefore have precedence of all the dignihl,l'ies of a more
secular order, who come afterwards. Curiously enough, the voluminous pre-H,m
literature is otherwise almost entirely silent ti,lJOnt the Hi -- H o. There are
but a few and comparatively late references. Sh1-tH\ ap. Yi wen lei hii ii. say,::
»The calendar ,vas created by Hi Ho t s Y 4\Z %11 -=.f or. as ql1otecl in T';1,i p'ing
yil lan Hi. Hi Ho c h Y t s I Z .:cf-, which may he trnnslated in seyeral Wc1)',:
))the masters Hi a,nd HO>>; or: ,>the 1m1,ster Hi - Ho,>; or: ))the son(s) of Hi
and HO>>; or: »the son(s) of Hi - HO>>. Thus it is here urn•.ertr,in ,d1C'the1· l)hi:-tsi
took Hi - Ho as one or several persons. Lii: \Vu lmng sa)'s: Hi Ho eh an
j .\ and if this phmse stood isoh1,ted, there would be nothing to prevent our tmn,·
lating: >>Hi and Ho prognosticated (by memrn of) the sun». But tl1e context
is this: Ta Nao made the k i a - t s I (time cycle) ... Ju 11 g Uh 'en g mncle
the calendar; Hi Ho prognosticti,ted (by means of) the sun; N h an g Y i
prognosticated (by means of) the moon; H o u Yi prognosticated (hy means of)
the S u e i stan> etc:. Here it is quite clear that each .functionary i,, a binominal
name and Hi Ho is to be understood as one person. vVe might recall the fact
that the cult-masters Uh' u n g m1d Li, originally clm1,rly distinguished as two
persons, were later on (in Han time) coaleseecl into one: C h 'u n g Li (see p.
237 aboye), and one .is tempted to conclude that we meet with the same phenomenon
here: some 11ersons distinct in the ectrly tradition (Shu): Hi mid Ho. luwe been
coalesced into one: Hi Ho, in the Lii text. But that is not in fact the true
· solution. It is obvious that the Shu pt1,sst1,ge, such as it is generally unclerstoorl.
is very ti,rtificial: Hi - Ho lms been multiplied into (l (:3--3 brothers) in order
to supply first two primary dignitaries: Hi and Ho (the elclest). who created
the time-reckoning principles (and, ace. to fater expounders, corresponded to
Heaven and Earth) and t h e. n their younger doubles. who were made to
represent the four cardinal points. It seems that this is a scholastic embellishment
on the part of the Shu m1thor. And in fact the very formulation of the Shu text
shows that the first part about H i - H o who made the calculations clicl not
1) Cf. L. de Saussnre, Le texte aRtron01niqne du Yao tion. TP 1H07, and hi::,; grn11t :-::i:::.,ries LC'.s originc;-;
de l'aRtronmnie chinoise Tf 190!) ff.
2 } The existence of such a cult is w01l established by many early sources; sec for in:-;tnnce TRo: Cha,u
1: >i\.,lhen sno,v, frost, wind and rain are not tiinc>t~~. one rnn.kes the y n n g !-iLlrrifit'P to sun, nWCHJ.
stars and conste1lutions1>; other o,~idences in Kun.n: ICing clumg, ki; Chon li: Tn. tsung po. etc. (pui38ln•,
in the early literature}. The sun as u llivinity often appears in solemn outh:-;: 1d: ~wem· it by the Snw)
y u ju j l (Tso, i'fomg ls).
263

BULLE,'TIN OF THE iliUSEUM
_" __________________________ _
OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
originally belong together with the following about H i C h u n g etc. The former
runs: N a i m i n g H i H o k ' i n j o h a o t ' i e n 1 i s i an g j i y ii e
s i n g c h ' e n k i n g s h o u j e n s h i »And then he charged H i H o
reverently to follow the august Heaven and calculate and delineate sun, moon,
stars, constellations and respectfully hand the people the seasons». The latter
runs: F e n 111 i n g H i C h u n g ... s h e n 111 i n g H i S h u ... f e n 111 in g
H o C h u n g ... s h e n m i n g H o S h u ... >>Separately he charged H i
C h u n g (the next-eldest Hi) ... >> etc. If the two passages had originally
belonged together, the first would necessarily have had: Na i ni in g Hi Po
fa H o P o »He charged the eldest H i and the eldest H o>>. In other words,
if the two parts had originally belonged together, the eldest brothers would have
been defined as such by a, po fa 'eldest brother', as distinct from the following
Hi Chung, H i S h u >>the second Hi, the third Hi>>. That the text has
nothing of the kind shows conclusively that the two parts did not originally form
a consecutive whole. Let us examine the second part more closely; it commences:
>>Separately ha charged Hi Chu 11 g, the second brother Hi, to dwell in Y ii -
y i, (at the place called) Ya. n g - k u and respectfully receive as guest the rising
sun and arrange the eastern actions; the day of medium length and the constel-
lation N i a o determine the middle spring, the people disperse, birds and beasts
breed and copulate,> (then follow similar observations regarding south-summer,
west-autumn and north-winter). It is quite evident that the Yao tien is made
up, by a writer in early Chou time, of several different earlier existing pieces.
Immediately before our H i - H o section comes a verse (metrically translated
by Chavannes MH I, p. 43); after that verse the compiler has placed the primary
text about the cult-master of the sun, moon and stars: >>And then he charged
Hi H o ... >> etc.; in the third place he has inserted a peasant calendar: >>The day
of medium length ... >> etc. But in order to hook this on to the preceding, this
early scholast has hit upon the brilliant idea that there should he dignitaries cones-
ponding to each of the four quarters: he seizes upon the H i - H o in the
preceding pa:'lsage and splits this up into two persons: H i and H o, and he
supplies them each with two younger brothers: - H i C h u n g and H i S h u
representing east !tnd south, Ho Chung and Ho S h u representing west
~tnd north. Once we have seen through this scholastic trick and peeled off the
H i C h u n g, H i S h u, H o C h u n g and H o S h u, since they have no
H i P o a,nd H o P o corresponding to them in the primary text, which says
simply: n a i 111 in g Hi Ho >>and then he charged Hi - HO>>, we have
no longer any reason for translating this in the orthodox fashion inaugurated by
the Shang shu ta chuan: >>And then he charged Hi and Ho>> (since they need
not be two in order to coITespond to the four H i C h u n g, H i S h u, H o
Chung, Ho Shu prefixed by the scholast to the calendar passage), but we
should translate the original (pre-Yao-tien) text thus: >>And then he charged Hi
Ho (one person) reverently to follow the august Heaven and calculate and
264
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
--·---- - - - - - - - - - - · -
delineate sun, moon, stars and constellations a,nd respectfully hand the people
the seasons>>. That this is -the only correct translation is then confirmed by tbe
Lii passage above: >>Hi Ho prognosticated (by means of) the sum. In the Sh1-tsi
passage we should likewise translate: >>The one who created the calendar was
Hi Ho t s i master Hi H o>> (in accordance with the Yi wen lei tsii quotation).
vVe have thus arrived at a pre-Han (and very early attested) legend about a
cult-master Hi Ho who observed the heavenly bodies and, as cult-master,
prognosticated by means of the sun. At his side we find (though only attested
in the 3rd c., Lii) another personage, Shan g Yi, who was evidently a cult-
master in the 1110011 cult, since he prognosticated by means of the moon.
The master Hi Ho occurs in two more pre-Han texts. In Ch'u: Li sao. the
poet in his imagination makes his long journey to the west; the sun is about to
set: »I order Hi Ho to slow down the tempo (of the sun)>>. 1 ) In other words:
the cult-master of the sun, Hi Ho, is prayed to that he might exert his magiciil
power and make the sun move more slowly. Similarly, in Ch'u: T'ien wen we
find: >>Where does the sun not reach to? What does the torch-dragon illumi1mtel
') (Hi Ho c h i we i yang *
When Hi Ho has not yet raised (the sun), how can the Jo flower shine?,>
ffi - y an g is a transitive verb (as usual)
and the line does not mean, as has often been stated: >>when the h i - h o sun ha8
not yet risen»; hi ho is never the name of the sun itselfl).
It should be observed that in these two passages the cult-master Hi H o is
conceived as having the (magical) power of influencing and directing the move-
,, ments of the sun. This is entirely in accordance with the ancient Chinese ideas.
The whole chapter Yiie ling (in Li and Lii), for instance, centres around the idea
that the king, by his rites, s e t s t h e s e a s o n s f u n c t i o n i n g.
VIB.
In the systematizing and early Han texts the H i H o legend !ms been
elaborated in various fashions.
On the one hand, >>H i and H o,> are made into official titles held by successive
generations. S h i p en says that Hu ii n g Ti ah·eady charged H i (and)
H o to prognosticate by aid of the sun, and U h ' a n g Y i2 (identical with
Shan g Yi of L ii above) to prognosticate by aid of the moon. Si - m 11
T s ' i en (Shi ki: Li shu) first quotes the Kyii: Ch'u, hia as to the functions in
the time of Chu an H ii of C h ' u n g and Li (see p. 235) of attending to the
rites of Heaven and Earth respectively,•) and the action of Yao when he »again
1-) All from the comm. Wang Yi (2nd c. A. D.) this line has been understood thus: Hi Ho is the
coach-driver of the sun, cf. p. 267 below; thus: 1>1 or<ler Hi H o (the driver) to slow down the speed
(of the sun-chariot)». But Chu Hi reverts to the correct idea that thiR pre-Han text should be
interpreted in accordance with the pre-Han ideas: H i H a was the cnlt-mu.ste1· of the snn.
2) It is amusing to observe how Sl-1na, who in C h' u s h 1 k i a. has made C h' u n g and Li
into one: C h ' u n g - L i (in the wake of the Ta Tai: Ti hi), here fo11ows l{yii and 1nakes them t,•to
distinct persons.
265
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
- - - - - - - ~-- -------------------------
elevated the descendants of C h' u n g and Li, such (of them) as had not
forgotten the old (rites) and let them preside over them>>. Sr-ma then continues:
>>And then he instituated the offices of H i and H _o (e r 1 i H i H o c h I
k u an)>>, thus making Hi and Ho the official titles of the descendants
of C h 'u n g and Li in Yao's time (cf. p. 235 above). Again (in ShI ki:
Hia pen ld) Sr-ma tells us that well into the Hi a dynasty, >>in the reign of
C h u n g K ' an g, Hi and Ho plunged into dissipation, neglected the
seasons and b_rought -disorder into the days; the prince of Yin Jffl. went and
punished them, and one made the (Shu chapter) Yin cheng>>. 1 )
On the other hand, the S h a n h a i k i n g, here as in many cases discussed
earlier, has seized upon the Hi Ho and S h an g Yi (C h ' an g Y i 2) legends
and attached to them various nature myths current in Han time but entirely
unknown to the pre-Htin sources. Hi Ho, as we have seen, was the Yao -time
cult-master of the sun. and Shan g Yi (C h' an g Y i2 ) - at an undetermined
epoch - the cult-111,1,ster of the moon, and this has given the key-note. K. 15
stiys: >>Outside the south-eastern sea, in the Sweet Water, is the country of Hi
H o ; there is a woman called H i H o who bathes the suns in the Sweet Abyss
(var.: Sweet Spring); Hi Ho, she is the wife of emperor T s ii n, she bore the
ten sm1s>>2 ) (we have seen above that the >>emperor T s i.i rn> is quite undeterminable:
if the data of the Shan hai king are correlated with those of pre-Han texts, he
would sometimes be K ' u, sometimes S h u n, sometimes a ruler prior to S h a o
Hao, see p. 227 above). In the same book (k. 15) it is further said: >>There is
the twelve moons>>.") This C h ' an g Hi '/jl; *
a woman who bathes the moons; C h ' a n g H i, wife of emperor T s ii n, bore
is obviously identical with the
S h a n g Yi fM ~ of Lii and C h ' a n g Y i2 ~f; ~ of Shr pen ( s h an g and
c h ' an g, graphically cognate, were both *c'liang, though in different tones; hi
was *xia and y i was *ngia).4)
1 ) In part Si-1na has here drawn upon the Shn Sll, Prf'face to the Shu; bnt that ,York contains
nothing about any 1>king C h n 11 g I( ~ u n g». cf. p. 322.
2 ) The legend of the »ten suns» is well-kno,vn Irmn pre-Han sources, but belongs to a totally different
cycle of 1nyths, see VII below. Ten suns correspond to the ten days of n s ft n primary Chinese week,
a,nd to the ten >>stemsi> of the denary cycle.
3 } The twelve 1110011s, of course, correspond to the I~ 1nonths of the year, and the 12 »branches» of
the duodennry cycle.
') Stmngely enough, Maspero (J. As. 1924, p. 15) would identify this Shan g Yi - C h' an g Y i 2
with a person H e n g Ng o fii! ffi who in Hnai: Lan 1ning is said to have stolen the drug of
hnn1ortalit,y and fled to the moon; indeed, there are later variants of the naine that seem suggestive:
C h ' u n g Ng a '/jl; ij~ (Sii Han shu) ~ii\' -ij~ (pseudo-Kuei tsang ap. Yil Ian 984). But the reason
adduced by l\iaspero is curious: in Ha.n ti1ne, grt1.phs with the phonetic hen g were »taboo» in order
to ltYoid the imperifLl nmne Heng 117i and were replnced by characters c h ' an g ~"ft and clerivates.
Hence a eorreC't Heng Ngo (as aba,~e) ,vas replacecl py the forn1 C h' o. n g Ngo (as above)~
which again, through the influenC'e of the N11111e Hi Ho (4i lU) would htn~c, been corrupted into
C h' an g Hi and then C h 'n n g Yi (as above). But it is eafiily seen that the for1n Heng Ngo
appears precisely in a Han text (Huai), wherens t,he forn1s ·with C h ' an g appear in post-Han time,
266
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
In Eastern Han time, Wang Yi has added the idea that Hi H o was >>the
coach-driver of the sun» and interpreted a Ch'u: Li sao passage accordingly (see
p. 265 above). Probably he has hit upon this bright idea thanks to a beautiful
I
I
·1
metaphor in Chuang: Sii Wu-kuei: »You should motmt the sun chariot and roam
in the wilds of Siang-ch'eng>>. But his interpretiition immediately betrays its forced
character: H i H o would first be the mother of the ten suns and bathe them
in the Sweet Water; and then she would change into their servant: the coach-
. driver who drives them over heaven; no corresponding double nature is attributed
l to Shan g Yi (C h' an g Y i2, C h 'an g Hi), the mother of the twelve
moons; the coach-driver of the moon, according to Han time lore, was not tl1eir
mother C h' an g _Y i2 but a personage called Wang Shu (see Wang Yi's
comm. on Ch'u: Li sao).
p VII A.
There are two myths which are never mixed up in the pre-Han texts, but later
on have coalesced: that of the >>ten suns•> and that of Y i3 the Archer.
1. In Ch'u: Chao 1nm it is said of the Tung fang Eastern region (of which
the soul of the dead is warned): s h 'i j r ta i c h 'u »Ten suns alternately
come out, they melt the metal and fuse the stones>>. Here it is stated that the
ten suns (corresponding to the clays of a s ii n ten days w·eek) come out one for
l each day. This conception is alluded to in Lii: K'iu jen, where it is described
how Yao wanted to cede the throne to H i.i Yu (seep. 292); Yao said: >>'IVhen
~
the ten suns come out, if then the torches are not extinguished, is that not
(unnecessary) labour>> (in other words: when you, a sun, are here, why should I,
a mere torch, remain on the throne?). But then there was further the legendary
theme of a disturbance in the natural order which presages disaster; there are many
such catastrophes in ancient literature, and one of them is that all the suns come
out to g e the r, causing great damage. The authentic Chu shu ki nien says:
>>Heaven had a bad portent: ten suns came out together; that year Y i n K i a
died» (he was one of the last Hia kings, see p. 315 below). In Chuang: Ts'i wu
lun, this theme is used for a metaphor: Yao discusses with Shun his wish
-i to attack certain small states, and Shun says: >>Anciently, ten suns came out
together and the myriad things all without exception were exposed to the light
(there was an excess of brightness); the t e (virtue, mental power) is even stronger
than the SUll>) (why can you not let those states alone; why must you bring them
under your influence?).
2. There is a myth about a certain Yi" who was a great archer, mentioned
en passant in many places (Lun: Hien wen, lVIeng: Kao tsr, Si.in: Wang pa, Kuan:
when there was no reason for the taboo. l\1oreover, the oldest forru of the name of the diviner of
the 1noon is S h an g Y i (Li.1~ preRHan), and here certainly the S h a n g fM cannot be dne to any
Han taboo. Altogether, this identification is but an arbitrary nnd wild speculation, but quite old, as
shown by the contamination form C h ' a. n g Ngo of the Sri Han shu.
267

BULLETIN OF THE NIUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
--·------------------- - ·--·-~-~------------
Hing sh!, etc). When lVIo: Fei ju, hia and Lii: Wu kung say that >>Y i3 made
bows,,, it would seem that he was 11 primeval inventor; but that is not necessarily
so, for Lii (ib·id.) says that ,,y i Ti made spirits,,, and she was a comparatively
late persom,ge (a lady of Yii's, see p. 306 below). The >>making of bows» has been
ascribed to various persons (by Siin to C h ' u e i2, Y a o ' s ma,ster of artisans,
by Sh1 pen to NI o u K 'u a etc.), and the entr-ies simply mean that he was a
famous maker of bows. Indeed, the legend of Y i3 , the archer, is well known
and full of detail as told in Tso: Ch'eng 4. He was a grandee in the early part
of the Hi a cly1rnsty, and will be studied p. 311 below. He was ,t great hunter and
a marvellous shot, but he was arrogant and presumptuous and came to a bad encl.
One feature of his hybris is told in Ch'u: '.l"ien wen: ,,Why did Y i3 shoot at the
sun, why did the raven shed its fe,1thers>> (here the theme that there is a raven
in the sun crops up for the first time). For the sacrilegious act of shooting at the
sun as an expression of one's hyhris. cf. the story of K'ang wang of Sung (328-
2S(i B. C.) who, according to Ts'e: Sung Wei was so full of hybris that he >>shot
at Heaven and flogged the Earth, cut dow11 the altars of the Soil and Grain>> etc.
(for fmther details see Lii: Kuo li). 1 )
VII B.
\Ve lrnve seen above tlmt the Shan hai king eonverts Hi Ho, the cult-master
of the sun in Yao' s time, acc. to the pre-Han traditions, into a woman, wife
of the emperor T s i.i n, a lady who bore the ten suns and bathed them. Since
Hi H o was., ,ts all Han-time scholars well knew, connected with the emperor
Y a o. and since the emperor T s u n in several other contexts in the Shan hai
king means emperor K 'u (see p. 227), it is evident that here too T s ii n is
identical with K ' u. This ,,elating,, at onc,e reveals how loosely the Shan hai king
author has hooked on a H,111-time nature myth to the pre-Han hero myths: that
he a,tta.ches such ,1 primevaJ legend as the creation of the ten suns to such a late
potentate as T s ii n = K ' u immediately gives him aw,ty; the Hi Ho myth
and the myth of the ten suns originally had nothing to do with ea,ch other, they
a,re quite a,rtificially merged together in this Han-time speculation. Now, however,
the Han-time writers were familiar with their T'ien wen of pre-Han time, where
it was sr1icl that Y i3 , the archer (of the early Hia dynasty) shot at the sun, and
they immediately went on to transpose the Y i3 myth from the ·Hi a dynasty
to the time of Hi Ho, i. e. to the time of Yao. And since there were ten
suns, m1cl normally there is hut. one, evidently Y i3 shot down nine suns and left
only one! 'l'bus Huai: Pen king: >>When it came to Yao ' s time, ten suns
together cmne out, burned the crops, killed grass and trees, and the people had
1 ) SY-inn, Ts'len has transferred this theine of the shooting a.t Heaven, with many en1bellishrnents,
to one of l( 1nng wa,ng's ance~tors, \Vu Yi, one of the last Yin kings, see Chttvannes, J\iH. Ip. 198.
\Vang Ch'ung (Lun heng: Kan hli) Jrn,s applied it to I-C i e, the la.st Hi a king and to Cho u 3 , the
1ust Yin king.
268
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
nothing to eat; (the monsters) Ya Y ii, T s 'o C h ·' L K i u Ying, Ta.
F e n g2, F e n g H i, S i u S h e. all did harm to the people; Y a o then made
Y i" kill T s ' o C h ' 'i in the wilds of C h ' o u - h u a, kill K i u Y i n g on
II the Hi u n g - s hue i river, fetter T ,t Fe n g 2 in the nrnrsh of T s ' in g-
k ' i u ; above he shot at the ten suns, and below he killed Y a. Yu, cut S i u
[ S h e in T u n g - t ' i n g and captured F e n g H i in S a n g - l i n ; all the
I people rejoiced and made Y a o emperor». And in Huai: :Fan lu11 it is added:
,,y i3 eliminated the harm of the world; when he died, they made t s 11 n g - p u
i, . sacrifices (to him),> .1 )
' But we have seen above that the Han-time legend of Hi Ho. wife of
T s u n ( = K ' u) and mother of the ten suns, has a counterpart in C h ' a 11 g
H i, wife of T s ii 11 ( = K ' u) a.nd mother of the t-welve moons; henc:e, the
Huai authors conclude, Y i3 the archer must also be connected with the moon
ti legends, and so ·we find in Huai: Lan rning: »Y i3 begged for the drug of
immortality from Si \Vang 1VI u, but Heng Ngo (see p. 2CiG above)
! stole it and fled to the moon»!
l
.f The Shan hai king ha.s various other entries beU:ring upon these Han-time nature
I myths. The battle of Y i 3 with T s ' o C h ' 'i is described in k. 6. The monsters
lt. who acc. to Huai were killed by Y i" are depicted; but the Y a Y i.i is described
first (k. 3) as a monster of the north (ox's shape with reel body, hunrnn face and
horse's feet), secondly (k. 10) as a monster of the south (having a dragon's head)
1-,'
thirdly (k. 11) as a monster of the west (this illustrates what a frightful mi:dwm
1' compositum the Shan hai king really is). Further, k. 18 says that the emperor
j
i: T sun gave Y i3 a red bow with white silk cOl'd in order to help the states below;
,·
; k. 19 s,1ys that ,,at T'ang-kn (= Yang-kn of the Shu, in the extreme
east) there is the tree Fu - sang, that is where the ten suns bttthe: to the north
of the He i C h' 1 (>>Black Teeth,, people), out in the ·water, there is a big tree.
nine sU11s sit on its lower branches, one sun sits on its top branch,,: k. 14 adds:
,,When one sun arrives, another goes out: all of them carry ravens,> (Huai: Tsing
shen expounds this theme further: »in the sun there is a three-legged raven, in the
moon there is a toad>>).
Of all these Han-time myths there are no traces to be found in the pre-Han
literature.
Needless to say. the Eastern Han scholars have further embroidered these
various themes; a few· examples will be sufficient. Kao Yu (comm. on Huai):
H en g Ng o was the wife of Y i3 ; the Y a Y ti is ,111 animal with a dragon's
head, who eats people and lives in the west; T s ' o C h ' 1 is ,mother 1,ninrnl with
teeth 3 feet long, reaching below the chin, who holds dagger-axe and shield; the
Siu She (>>Long Snake>>) swallows elephants and their bones come out after 3
,!~· years, etc.
1) This directly contradicts the original Y i3 myth, in \vhich he met ,Yith an ignominious death,
see p. 312.
269

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
----- -- -------------------- --------
------------ --------------
Already in Middle H,tn time, however, new variants of the myth crop up. Wang
Ch'ung (Lun heng: Shuo ji:) discards Y i 3 the fl,rcher and says: >>In the time of
Y a o, ten suns came out together and scorched everything, whereupon Y a o
shot at them; hence they were never seen together any more on the same dayi>.
He varies the details in Luu heng: Tuei tso: >>Yao shot arrows at nine of them,>.
VIII A.
There is a somewhat enigmatic name S i W an g Mu which has given rise
to a whole body of literature among sinologues. The earliest sovereign with which
S i 'ii\T a n g Mu is connected by the ancient tradition is the emperor S h u n :
Ta Ta,i: Shao hien tells us how S h u n had an enormous realm; S h u o - f a n g
and Yu - t u in the north came and submitted to him, in the south he conquered
Kia o - c h 1; Si Wang Mu came and presented white (i. e. jade) flutes>>. In
this connection, where Si W a 11 g Mu balances S h u o - fa 11 g, Yu - tu and
Kia o - c h 1 (names of countries), it is quite clear that the name applies to a
state, a people; hence Erya: SM ti says: K u - c h u, P e i - h u, S i W an g Mu
and J 'i - hi a, those are the four h u a 11 g Y/E farthest wilds. 1) Still more clearly
this is expressed in Siin, Ta liie, where it is said that Y a o studied under the
wise K ii n C h ' o u, S h u n under W u C h ' e n g C h a o and Y ii under
S i W a n g K u o (the prince of) the S i W an g state. Thfo land of S i
Wang Mu crnps up again in the traditions about much later eras. The
Mu t'ien tsi'. chuan, k. 3, says that >>on the auspicious day k i a t s i'. the
Son of Heaven (i. e. Mu wang of Chou) was received as a guest by Si
W a 11 g Mu ; he held a white k u e i sceptre and a dark pi jade and saw Si
Wang 1\1[ u. . . Si 'iV an g Mu twice bowed and received them; .... on the
day y i c h 'o u the Son of Heaven drank to the health of Si Wang Mu on
the Yao - c h' i' Jade pond; Si Wang Mu made a verse to the Son of Heaven,
running ... >>. In this passage the tradition is clearly that the Son of Heaven
exchanged courtesies with the ruler of the state S i W a n g M u or S i W a n g
Kuo above. Its position is further determined as being far to the west of
T s u n g C h o u, the Chou capital, the distance reckoned in several very extensive
stages (the last of these being: >>from the K ' ii n y ii c h i' s h an >>mountain of
numerous jades>> westwards to the S i W a n g Mu c h i' p a n g state of S i
Wang Mu there are 3000 Ii»: for further details, see Chavannes, MH I,
p. 480 ff.). One might object that in these accounts Si Wang Mu is not the
name of the state but the title of its ruler (a person), but it is quite clear by
reference to the T~ Tai and Erya texts above that S i W a n g M u is the land
and its ruler is called by the name of the state, just as :in the same Ta Tai passage
1
} H u " n g f u is the zone or domain farthest away from the royal domain proper, according to
Shu: Yi.i km1g.
270
I~
i
I
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
-------- --"--··- --- --- -- ··-··-
above it is said that S h u o - f a n g and Y u - t u 1 a i f u came and submitted>>
- here the state names serve as denominations for their princes. 1 )
Another text likewise places S i W a n g M u in the far west. The authentic
1
Chu shu ki nien says, on the one lmnd, that >>He (presumably Mu wang) in the
west marched to the K ' u n - 1 u n mounta.ins and visited S i 'vV an g J\I rn>, on
the other hand it says that »(the ruler of) S i W a n g M u came and visited and
was received as guest in the temple of Chao (wang)».
Thus, all the pre-Han sources give the tradition of Si Wang ivI u as a
far-away western state, and at the same time this state name serves as a designation
for its ruler.
There is in fact no reason to conclude from the 111 u -IT}: >nnother>> which forms
part of the name that ancient tradition made this ruler a lady, a queen; on the
contrary the legend about Y ii just quoted: that he studied under S i W a n g
K u o (the ruler of) the S i W a n g state, just as Y a o and S h u n had studied
under two other sage gentlemen, suggests a male ruler (Y ii would not have had
a female teacher). I am therefore inclined to believe that the chan1,cter -/l]: *mag /
ni~u / 111 u is a short-form for lllf# *mJg / inaii / mu 'acre, farmed field' - if this far-
western state was situated (according to the legend) on the border of the >>Floating
Sands>> (the desert, see B below), it would be quite m1,tural to call it •>the Acre8,
farmed lands (the oasis) of the Western King>>. 2 )
VIII B.
In early Han time, S i W an g Mu is still treated as both a country and its
ruler in several texts: Lie: Chou :Mu wang repeats the story of Mu wang as ah'eady
related in Mu t'ien tsr chuan above. Huai: Chuei hing enumerates a series of
localities (and countries), e. g. Hien Y ii an, Yu Sung, San - we i, Lung -
111 e n etc. and in this series we find: S i 'i.V an g M u is situated on the border
of the Floating Sands (t s a i Liu s h a c h i'. pin). But then in another Huai
J text (Huai, as we know, is a collective work of many authors) and in Shan hai
king S i W a 11 g M u is for the first time presented under quite a new aspect:
a lady and demon - the female nature being, of course, suggested by the character
111 u -IT}: in the name. Shan hai king k. 2: Y ii s ha n (the Jade ;_\fountain), that
is where Si Wang Mu resides; Si W tt n g Mu ' s shape is human, with a
1 ) This is exceedingly c01nmon in ancient texts, e. g. Shl: ode 203: i>S ft - fang eu.me to cotu·t)).
\Ve have seen above that Chuang: Ta tstmg shl enu1nerates early potentates who acquired the t o, o :
Huang Ti acquired it and thereby ascended the cloudy heaven; Chu an H ft acquii:ed it. and thereby
dwelt in the Dark Hal1; {the ruler of) Y ft K ' i a. n g acquired it and thereby took his place n.t the
northern pole; (the ruler of) Si \IV an g ]i.i! u acquired it and thereby dwelt in S ha o - k u an g.
Here Si Wang Mu is the designation of the ruler hi1nself.
2 ) There is an important corroborating parallel. lllfj
'acre' is the i;n,n1e w01·d as~ *rncJg / 1ngu / n1 u
'acre' (variant graphs); observe that in Shu Sii (Preface to Shn} the phrase y i mu ~ nA »different
acres>> is reproduced as ~ -ff}: in Shi ki: Chou 'kung sh'i kia, with p r e e i s e I y t h i s s h o r t-
f or m : -HJ: forlllfj= P.i?l, as in our na.me S i wan g J\,f n, n.ccorlling to the theory proposed above.
271
 BULLETIN OF' THE MUSEUM OF' F'AR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
leopard's tail, a tiger's teeth; S. is skilled in howling, has dishevelled hair and
ca1Ties on the head a s h e n g Im hair-ornament; that person directs the t ' i e n
c h i 1 i 7' ::Z: //Ji and the w u t s ' a n 3i ~] >>(to the meaning of which we
shall revert presently). K. 16 has a similar aceount, adding that Si Wang Mu
lives in a cave. It is here the feature of the she n g »hair-ornament» which
reveals S. as a woman (cf. Chavannes -MH V, p. 483). Similarly Huai: Lan ming
says that s i I a o ~ c h 8 s h e n g »the old one of the west breaks the hair-
ornament>>; but, as pointed out by Sun Yi-jang, 1 a o 'old' here (in view of the
lady's ornament) is very probably a short-form for tt!, as often, and the phrase
means: »the old woman of the west ... ». 1 )
What, then, is the meaning of the t ' i e n c h i 1 i and the w u t s ' a n above!
Maspero (J. A. 1924, p. 35) says Si Wang Mu is >>the goddess of epidemics».
In fact, Ii /iii sometimes (for JI) serves in this sense (e. g. in 'Li: T'an kung),
but the character has many other meanings, and its sense here is very uncertain;
it can mean 'ugly, cruel, noxious, demon', and it is here combined with t s ' an
which means 'cn1el, noxious, to hurt'. It ,vould be more reasonable to think that
Si W a 11 g Mu directed the >>cruel· ones (demons) of Heavem and the »five
noxious ones>>, i. e. on the whole the malignant Spirits. On the other hand, Ho
Yi-hang (comm. on Shan hai king) argues that Li and Wu t s' a 11 were names
of stars, goven1ed by Si W a 11 g· Mu; W-u t s' an, sure enough, is a star
mentioned in Shi ki: T'ien kuan shu. But when Ho would identify L i with
Mao !f/i (basing himself on a gloss by Cheng Hiian) he is less convincing. In any
case Ho is right in stating that S i W a n g M u has some connection with the
heavenly bodies. We have seen above that the sun has a three-legged raven;
now in the Ta jen fu (Shi ki k. 117) of Si-ma Siang-ju (2nd c. B. C.) it is said:
»I now see Si Wang Mu ; she brilliantly has a white head, on the head she
has a hair-ornament an!l dwells in a cave, she is lucky to have the three-legged
raven as her messenger».•) We further saw above the Han-time connection and
parallism between the s1m myth and the moon myth (Hi Ho and the 10 suns,
C h 'an g Hi and the 12 moons, both wives of emperor T s ii n), and the two
myths come in contact with each other and with the S i W a n g M u legend
in Huai: Lan ming: »When Y i3 the archer begged for the dmg of immortality
from S i Wang Mu (who had a three-legged bird - the sun bird), Heng
Ng o stole it and fled to the m o o m.
J of the Lo and by aid of it made the Hung f tt n »Great rule» (a chapter in
1) The Mu t'ien tsi chuun, as quoted by Kuo P 10 in comm. on Shan hai king 2, gives son;ie verses
exchanged by M u wan g and S i \\1 a. n g M u, and in the latter S. says: »I am t i n U ~ 1J:: the
daughter of a. sovereign (God)i>j if this were reliable, the idea of S. being a woman would go back to
pre~Han timei but the text of the Mu t'ien tsi'. chuan such as we have it iu au early (Sung) edition
I
(
of the Han ,v-ei ts 1ung shu (photogr. repr. by the Comme1·cial Press), has merely: w o we i t i »I
am a God», so that nothing can be based on this passage. On the whole, the text history of the Mu
t'ien tai chuan is very obscure and has never been reliably investigated.
3 ) Shan hai king k, 12: »Si Wang Mu leans on a stool and carries a. hair-ornament ~d staff;
to the south there ai·e three blue birds, they bring food to Si •Wang Mu.~
272
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
-------- ___.. ________ _
IXA.
The p~e-Ran texts often speak of some t' u ,,drawing>> or »map>> and s h u
»document» which came out of some sacred rivers and were good auspices. Shu:
Ku ming already tells us that the H o t ' u friT Iii »drawing-tablet of the R o»
(Yellow River) belonged to the regalia of the earliest Chou. Yi: B.i ts':i, hia says:
»The H o brought forth the t ' u drawing, the L o (river) 1* brought forth the
s h u tF document». This statement recurs in Kuan: Siao k'uang. Confucius
complains (Lun: Tsi han) that »the H o does not bring forth any drawing» (gives
no ·more happy portent). Mo: Fei kung, hia says: »The Ho brought forth a green
drawing-tablet». Li: Li yi.in says: >>The Ho brought forth the horse's clra,l"ing
(m a t ' u)>>. The pre-Han texts that connect the myth with any specific
sovereign are few. Shi-tsi says: ,,When Y t\ had regulated the floods. ttnd looked
into the Ho, he saw a tall white-faced man with fish body who said: I >1111 the
t sing essence of the H o ; he gave Y ii the Ho t ' u drawing of the Ho,
and then he returned into the deep>>. On the other haml Mo: Fei kung, hia refers
the event to vVe n wan g of Chou: ,\Vhen Heaven ordered Vl en wan g
to .attack the state of Yin ... the Ho brought out a green drawing>> (later on,
Ruai: Shu chen supplies the detail that the Lo document was red). Lii: Ying
t'ung has another version of the tale: »In vV e n w an g ' s time, Heaven first
showed fire, >1,nd then a reel raven car~·ying a reel document ( t an s h u) in its
mouth descended on the She altar of Cham.
IXB.
The Han time lore deviates from all this.
Ruai-nan-tsi seems to place the events JJrior to the time of Y a o, for he says
(Huai: Shu chen): »The Lo brought out a red document, the Ho brought out
a green drawing, therefore H ii Y u, F a n g H u e i, S h a n K ii a n and P e i
Yi could perfectly understand the norms>> - as we shall see below (p. 292) R ii
Yu was Y a o ' s teacher and P e i Yi was R ii Yu ' s teacher's teacher's
teacher.
In middle Han time, Liu Hin (ttp. Ran shu: Wu hing ch"i) declares that it was
Fu Hi who received the drawing-tablet of the Ho anrl by aid of it made the
8 trigrams; and that Y ii, having regulated the floods, was given the docun1ent
Shu)! Hii Shen: Shuo wen says that (Y a o ' s mothe1•) K ' in g Tu went out
and looked at the Ro (river) and then a red dragon carried on its back a drawing
and presented it; it was called »the drawing conferring the empire>>. Kao Yu
(comm. on Ruai: Siu wu) likewise says it was K'ing Tu who received the Ho
drawing. Cheng Hiian (2nd c.) adds in comm. on Shu that it was a dragon who
brought the Ro drawing and a turtle who brought the Lo .document; whereas
in comm. on Li: Li yiin, which speaks of a »horse's drawing», Cheng has to say
that it was a >>dragon-horse» who carried the drawing on its back.
273
18
 lli
~
~
I
t
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM______
____ _ OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
"
{
Huang-fu Mi (Ti wang shi ki, 3rd c. A. D.) associates the legend in the first
place with Hu an g Ti: In Hu an g Ti' s 50th year, 7th month, on the day
ken g she n(!), Heaven made a great mist for three clays and nights; after it
was gone, the emperor promenaded on the bank of the L o river; he saw a great
fish which carried on its back a drawing and a document; he killed three victims
and sacrificed to it; Hetwen then rained for nine days and nights, and the fish
swam to the sea, and thus he got the drawing and the document». On the other
hand, the same Huang-fu Mi (Ti wang shi ki) connects the legend with Y a o :
>>Yao led the feudal princes and ministers and threw a pi jade into the Ho ;
he received the drawing and the document; those were the present treatises Shang
shu chung hou and Wo ho ki».
XA.
On p. 237 above we saw that Chu an H ii ' s son Li, the Chu
J u n g, had various descendants, among them the lord of P ' e n g T s u,
belonging to the P ' e n g clan (the systematizing text Ta Tai: Ti hi, giving him
the personal name of T s i e n, made him a son, not of L i • but of L i ' s brother
Wu Hue i). Certain grandees of the P ' en g clan have played an important
part in the legends.
On the one hand, (the lord of) P ' e n g T s u has become a Chinese Methusaleh.
Chuang: Ta tsung shi tells us that >>P' en g Tsu obtained it (the ta o) and
thereby upwards reached to the time of Yu Y ii2 (the Yu Y ii2 dynasty, last
emperor Shu 11), downwards reached to (the time of) the Five Hegemons (7th
c. B. C.)>>, i. e. Jived for a great number of centuries. It should be observed that
Y u Y i.i2 here does not, as is usually supposed, mean S h u n but only the dynasty
prior to the Hi a (seep. 218 above). In Ch'u: T'ien wen there is a passage about
a person P 'en g K 'en g obscure in its first part but in its latter part clearly
· referring to an extreme old age: >>P ' e n g K ' e n g served pheasant (soup), how
did the sovereign enjoy it1 He received a longevity that was very great, how was
it extended?,> Evidently the P ' e n g T s u of Chuang and the P ' e n g K ' e n g
of Ch'u are identical.
On the other hand, a certain L a o P ' e n g occurs in three texts. Ta Tai:.
Yi.i tai te states that »anciently, L a o P ' en g and Chung Hue i2 taught
the dignitaries the art of government» etc. Since C h u n g H u e i 2 was the
famous minister of T ' an g, the first s· h an g king (see p. 329 below), the
passage might suggest that L a o P ' e n g was his contemporary and colleague.
There is, iii fact, an early text which seems to support this. Mo: Kuei yi narrates:
•>When T ' an g went to see Yi Yin, he ordered the gentleman of the house
of P ' en g (P ' en g s h i c h i t s i) to drive his chariot>> (a great distinction),
and a conversation between thent is recorded. Again, Confucius (Lun: Shu er)
says that in his love for antiquity he is an equal of L a o P ' en g ' s. - There
is really nothing definite to connect the P ' e n g T s u or P ' e n g K ' e n g
274
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
of Kyii, Chuang and Ch'u above with the Lao P ' en g of Ta Tai, Mo and Lun
- except for the bare fact that the latter name contains the word 1 a o
'old' and refers to a man >>loving antiquity>>, which might seem appropriate to a
Methusaleh.
XB.
The systematizers and Han-time scholars have been greatly troubled about
P ' e n g T s u and L a o P ' e n g.
The Shi pen is the first to add some concrete details. Under clan Pang
(evidently a variant for P ' en g) it says that a man with the family name of
T s i e 11 (cf. Ta Tai in A above) and the personal name of K' en g (cf. Ch'u
above) in the Shan g dynasty was keeper of the archives (s ho u t sang 1 i)
and in the Chou dynasty was palace scribe (c h u hi a s hi) and lived 800
years, which suggests that its author already identified P ' en g K ' en _g
(P ' e 11 g Tsu) the Methusaleh with Lao P ' en g (who was then presumably
the archivist of T'ang's time). Ta Tai: Wu ti te (which is closely connected with
the following systematizing chapter Ti hi) tries to define the exact time of P' en g
Tsu' s appearance: >>(Yao) promoted Shun and P 'en g T s m. Si-ma
Ts'ien seized upon this (Shi ki: Wu ti pen ki): »When Shun became emperor,
Y ii, Kao Yao etc .... and P ' en g Tsu, who had already been in service
under Yao, got their functions more precisely determined>>(!). This dating of
P 'en g Tsu by the Ta Tai author and Si-ma is highly typical of the methods
of the systematizers. We saw that Chuang: Ta tsung shi said in a general way
that P ' en g Tsu, the Methusaleh, lived from the time of Yu Y ii2 (the Yu
Y ii2 dynasty, i. e. pre-Hia times) and down to the age of the 5 Hegemons. Ent
the Ta Tai author and Si-ma prefer to take Yu Y ii2 in the sense of S h u n
(who is often called Yu Y ii2 the lord of Y i.i2 ) in order to nail P' en g T s u
down more exactly, and moreover make him a functionary under Yao 1Jromoted
to minister under S h u n !
The Eastern Han scholars have divergent opinions. Cheng Hiian in comm,
on Lun: Shu er refuses to regard L a o P ' e 11 g as the name of one man: he
says Lao is = Lao - t s i and P ' en g is = P ' en g Tsu ; this, of course,
is clearly vetoed by the Ta Tai text above. Kao Yu (comm. on Lii: Ts'ing yii)
on the other hand accepts Shi pen's idea that P ' e n g Tsu and L a o P ' en g
are one and the same man, for he says: >>P' en g Tsu was a wise minister of
Yin (Shang)>>.1)
XI.
In the preceding paragraphs we have studied certain legends that span over
several »reigns» or for other reasons were best studied in special paragraphs. We
shall now take up in a more chronological fashion the legends of various >>rulers>>
1 } As a curiosity we 1night mention tha.t the T' a, n g ('Olnmentator on Lun: Shu er, Hing Ping,
says -that P ' en g T s u in Yao ' s time got the fief P ' en g C h ' en g and that he is identical
with L a o ~ t s i (!), who therefore could also be called L a o P I en g .
275
 BULLETIX OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR E;.1STERN ANTIQUITIES
a,ncl heroes, and, in the c,ise of such cis have alre,,dy been treated cursorily above,
fill in the features perta,ining by legend to their J)ers011s,
1 A, Fu Hi (see pp. 207, 220 above) pbys a rather modest pa,rt in the ancient
beliefs. He occurs often, en JJll8Sctnt, as a primeval ruler and sa,ge (e. g. Chuang:
Jen kien shI. Ta tsung po, T'ien tsI fang. K'ie k'ie; Stin: Ch'eng siang; Ts'e:
C:ha,o 2), but mostly without any concrete details. He has obtained his revered
position through the sa,cred Yi king (Hi ts'I), -where he is stated to have invented
the p a, k u a eight trigrnms, fundament of the prognostication by achillea stems,
and also fishing and hunting nets. Sh1-ts1. on the other h&nd, says it was S u e i
J e n -who taught the people to fish, whereas I<' u Hi taught them to hunt.
Kmm: !<'eng shan records F u H i as one of the ei,rly sovereigns who performed
the sacrifice to the T ' a i s h n n mountnin.
1 B. 'file earl~- Hm1 texts likewise know little about Fu Hi. Lie: Huang
Ti says that :Fu Hi (like Nii Kn a. Shen Nun g and Y ii) had a human
face ,md a, snake ·s body m1 ox's hettd and a tiger's nose. In middle Han time Liu
Hin attributed the myth of the Ho t · u drawing of the Ho. to Fu Hi, see
p. 27::l above. In the 2nd c. vVang Fn ('J's'ien fu lun: \Vu te lun) sttys that in the
Lei - t s e marsh there were foot-prints of a giant and that a lady of the Hu a
S ii s h 1 (the country H u a S ii occurs as a far-off imaginary kingdom of
fairies in Lie: Huang Ti) trod on tbem, became pregmmt nnd bore Fu Hi (a
plagiarizm of the legend of Kiang Y[ia,n. see p. 215 above), who had his capital
in C: h 'en. In the 3rd c. Huang-fu Mi ndds that F n Hi 's clan name was
Fen g. 1 ) and tlrn,t he t,lso was called Hi u n g Hu an g s h 1 and that he
reigned 120 (var. llO) ym1l's ,md was buried in Nan-kiin, or, as some say, to the
west of Ka,o-p'ing in Shan-yang.
A note should here be added about a personage Fu Fe i, who occurs in C:h'u:
Li sao and in Hlmi: Shu chen, together with various Spirits or gods. Pan Kn (1st
c. A. D.) does not enter F. in his gallery of remarkable early persons, and
the 2nd-century c·ommenta,tor \Vang Yi simply says: Fu Fe i was ,>a divine
woman» (she n n i.i). But the 3rd-century scholar Ju Ch\m (comm. on 'iVsi.ian:
Slmng lin fu) sa,ys: ,>Fu F c i vrns a da,ughter of Fu Hi who was drowned in
the L o river and then became the goddess of the L o,>.
2 A. Shen Nun g (see pp. 207, 212, 220 above), like Fu Hi. is frequently
referred to en pa,ssant in pre-Han texts as a primeval ruler and sage (Meng: T'eng
Wen kung. shang: Lii: Ts'ing yii, Ch'eng lien: Hanfei: Liu fa,n), and in a few passages
some mea,gre concrete data a.re given. Kuan: Feng shan stiys he was one of the
early rulers who sacrificed to the T'ai shan mountain: Kuan: K'uei to sa,ys Shen
Nung cultivated the 5 kinds of grain on the /'\outh of the K ' i - s h an ; Li.i: Tsun
sh1 says he lrnd a wise teticber Si C: h u, and Chuang: C:hI pei yu that he studied
1 ) Tho T'ang ro1mnentator S'i-1nn Ch€'ng (cf. ClutYtu1nes l\1H I, p. 3) asserts that this statement
originates frmn the KyCt, which is entirely unfounded: neither ]' u Hi nor T · a i Hao nre erer
nrnntioned in the Kyi.i..
276
B. KARLGRE.V: LEGENDS ilND CULTS I:V A,\'CIENT CHJN,4-
under Lao Lung K i; Lii: Yung min narrates tlmt the peo)lle of Sn - s h a,
revolted iigainst their ruler and gave themselves to Shen Nung. Here. ,1,s in the
case of Fu Hi. it is the sacrecl Yi king (Hi ts'i) which has brought Shen
Nun g into prominence: he invented the plough and instituteu markets.
2 B. The ea,rly Hti,n texts add little a.bout Shen Nun g. :For liis peeuliar slmpe
acc. to Lie see under Pu Hi (1 B above). S1-mt1, T,s"ien (Sh1 ki: Chon pen ki)
says that 1V u w an g enfeoffed S h en Nun g ' s descenda.nts in T s i a o
(cf. p. 222 above). but that ha,s no foundation in pre-Hm1 texts. In Shan Jrni king
the name Shen N 1111 g does not occur, but we lmve seen that. S h en Nun g
nnd Yen Ti were identifierl from early Ha,n time, and Yen Ti often crops
up in the Shan ]mi king. In le 3 it is said that >>Y en Ti ' s youngest cltiughter
N i.i Kie roamed by the eastern sea mid did not return,> (and became ti, Nl]irit).
La,ter tmthors Jrnve generally identified this Nii K i e with the N ii K n a of
p. 229 t,bove. but that is phonetically unlikely: Nii I\_ u tc was *kll'a I ku·a : kn ,i,,
and Nii Kie was *keg/ l~a,: / k i e1 ). K. lG .~t1ys tlmt ,i, gmnclson of Yen Ti
eallecl Lin g K ' i hegat H u ,J en >>who could ascend to ,1,nd clescenr1 from
heaven». K. 18 sa:rn tlrnt Y e n Ti lmd ,1 gramlf;on P o Lin g \Yho Imel ,m
affair with the wife of vV u K · i.i ,, n. milled Ngo N i'i Y i.i_ '"n Pu ; she
was pregnant for 3 years and bore Kn Yen and F, h u 2 ; this 8 h n 2 was the
first to make targets, and Kn Y en the. first to make hells arnl melodies. --
S h 112 might be compared with the S h u' of Shu king, see p. 25G above. A P o
Lin g of !<'en g 2 is mentioned in Tso: Clrno 20 as posse,ssing the territory of the
later T s 'i in :Sht1ntung. hut that was first in the hands of the Shu a, n g K i u
s h 1 house of Shao H ,i, o 's time. then of the K i S h l house a.ml wa.s then
held by the Po Ling house, so that he must he pbced if not in Slmng-Yin. at
lest in Hia time; it is impossible to tell whether the Rlrnn hai king arnl the T.so
stories represent two independent legends, or whether the Slmn lrni king ,iuthor lrns
simply confused the pre-Han traditions.
From Eiistern Han onwnrcls the dehiils multipl:v. \~',wg ],'u (Ts'ien fo lun:
Wu te lun) says thnt. a, divine dmgon ,vith his head ,nnovecl» lady ,Ten S 1 into
pregnnncy and she bore C h · 1 Ti ( ~ Yen Ti), -\\'ho \\'as aJso en.Herl K · u e i
vV e i s h 1. Huang-fu Mi has a, biography LLR if of an emperor of the l !ltli centmy.
Yen Ti ' s mother Jen S 12 (va.r .J en R P) waR a cfaughter of Y u K i ti o
s hi (cf. p. 212 above), and had the persmml na.rne N i.i Teng: she \1·a,R the
first-rank wife of 8 ha o Tien. vVhen she wr,s roaming on the south of the Hw,-
shan mountain. there \\'as 1, dragon who with his head tonche<l Xii Tc 11 g in
C h ' an g - yang (var. Shan g - y all g). and she bore Yen Ti ; he
originally came from Lie - s h an t1ncl was therefore also called Li e Rh an
s h L He invented medicine ti,gainst v11,rious sicknesses, ,md wrote a pc n t s · a o
WJ in X Ct Kn ;1, rn:1 */,:(g / kwi j
1 ) On the strength of this fnlt1e identificatlon, the Ts'ie yCm rends ~1
k i e, which b vetoed by the phonetic> of the chan-1.<'ter. Lu Tt•-rning (Hhlwen on Li) nnd Knang yCm
give the reading *kwa l.·tca I kn a, ·whil'b tnllieH with thP phonetiP 8Cries.
277
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
lVIateria lVIedica in 4 books(!). The people of Su - s ha rebelled against their
prince, who h.ad killed h.is remonstrating adviser K i We 11; Yen Ti then
retired and cultivated the virtues, and the people of Su - s ha attacked their
lord and gave themselves to Yen Ti. He moved his capital from C h 'en to
K ' i.i. - f u in L u. He augmented the 8 trigrams into 64 hexagrams. He was
on the throne 120 years and was buried in Ch'ang-sha. He married a daughter
of Pen Shuei shi called T'ing Yao (cf.Shanhaikingp.245above,which
has a totally different story), who bore emperor C h 'en g4 , who begat emperor
Min g2 , who begat emperor C h I2 , who begat emperor L i3 (var. Lai) who
begat emperor Ai, who begat emperor Y ii VV an g - the eight generations
ruling for 530 years.I)
The San huang pen ki by the T'ang author SY-ma Cheng has several more
details and deviates from the Ti wang shI ki on some points, see Chavannes MH I,
p. 12 ff.
3 A. H u an g Ti is a far more central and prominent figure in the ancient
legends than the preceding two; he occurs passim in the pre-Han texts as an early
ruler and sage, and the taoist writers in particular love to set him up as_ the
founder of the doctrines later expounded by Lao-tsI and his followers.
We have already seen (p. 212) the legend told in Kyi.i: Tsin 4 about the potentate
S h a o Tien who begat by a lady of the house Yu Kia o s h I the brothers
Y e n T i (grown up near the river K i a n g and hence taking the clan name
K i an g) and Hu an g Ti (grown up near the river K i, clan name K i) a1id
how they fought and H u an g T i vanquished his brother Y e n T i and took
the realm. Tso: Hi 25 tells us that H u a n g T i consulted the miHoil oracle
before the battle of P an - t s ' ii an, but it is only the systematizing and early
Han texts (Ta Tai and Lie, cf. B below) that have identified this battle with that
between Yen Ti and Hu an g Ti. Kyii (Zoe. cit.) further tells us that
Huang Ti had25sons,ofwhomitmentions3: Ts'ing Yang(= Shao
Hao, see p. 217) who was son-in-law of Fang Lei s h 1, Yi Ku who was
son-in-law of T 'u n g Y i.i s h I, and T s ' an g Lin, and it enumerates no
less than 12 clans descending from sons. of Hu an g Ti, several of which,
besides the clan K i, were prominent among the feudal houses of the Chou era.
This is important, for it shows that the sacrifices to Hu an g Ti must have been
wide-spread in the feudal courts and were not confined to the Royal Chou house;
and this, again, explains why the lore about H u a n g T i and his kin assumes
a much more important place than that of Fu Hi and Shen Nun g.
There are two such clans descending from sons of H u a n g Ti which deserve
special mention. The clan Jen was represented by the house of Si e•, the most
famous ancestors of which were H i2 Chung and Chung Hue i, see p. 260:
1 ) 'l,his is a very good and typical example of the work Ti wang shl k.i; many data of this work,
which are not known from earlier sources, have been solemnly adduced by Maspero and Granat as
materials for reconstructing the primevttl legends of China.
278
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CU[;TS IN ANCIENT CHINA
in the latest part of the S h a n g - Y in dynasty the clan J e n possessed the
state of C h I, and the lady T ' a i J. e n of C h i was the famous mother of
Wen wan g of Chou (ShI: ode 236). The clan K i 5 was represented by the
house of Y e n, and Tso: Siian 3 tells us that the first-rank wife of H o u T s i
; (K ' i2 ), son of emperor K ' u and first ancestor of the Chou house, was a
,4c, lady of the K i" clan. Thus the Royal Chou house counted its descent from
H u an g T i in triple fashion: Itself having the clan name K i, descending from
Hu an g Ti, the consort of its first ancestor was of the clan K i5, and the
grandmother of its first king, Wu wan g, was of the clan Jen - both these
clans descending from H u a n g T i.
Besides that of the battle of H u an g Ti and Y e n T i, there is a.nother
legend which holds the most important place in the H u a n g T i myth
cycle: the legend of C h 'i'. Yu, which is treated in a sepamte paragraph (-!)
I
I below.
Various stray features of the lore about H u a n g T i are preserved in the
1 pre-Han texts. Yi: Hi ts'i'. tells us in general terms how Hu an g Ti, Yao
~J and Shun had a transforming influence over the people and how they invented
boats and oars(!). We have seen above (p. 242) how Kuan: Wu hing gives a list
t: of remarkable men: C h ' I Yu (see 4 below), T a C h ' an g, S h e Lung,
Chu Jung, Ta Feng and Ho u T 'u, who assisted hhn in his government.
Kuan: Feng shan says he was one of the early rulers who sacrificed to the T'a.i-shan
mountain. Kuan: K'uei to says that he burned the forests on the hills, cleared
f the bush, burned the marshes and c.rove out the wild beasts, thus making cattle-
breeding possible; further that he invented the fire-drill (otherwise tiscribed to
Sue i Jen s h I, see p. 206). Chuang: Tsai yu lets Hu an g Ti »in his 19th
year as emperor>> have a discussion with the sage K u an g C h ' e n g t s I, and
Chuang: T'ien yiin gives a similar discussion with P e i Men C h ' en g. In
Chuang: Si.i Wu kei he goes, accompanied by various wise men (F an g Ming,
C h' an g Y ii, Chang Jo, Si P' en g, K' u n Hun, Ku K i), to see
the sage T a W e i on the mountain K ii - t s ' L Kuan: Huan kung wen says
he deliberated on the Ming-t'ai »Bright Terrace>>, consulting with sages. Li.i: Tsun
shI says he had a wise teacher Ta Nao (who, acc. to Lii: Jen shu was the
inventor of the k i a - t s 'i cycle). Lii: Ku yiie says that the ordered Ling
Lu n to make the musical pitch-pipes (their creation is described in detail) and
that he ordered the same L i n g L u n and J u n g T s i a n g to make a set
of 12 bells >>to harmonize the 5 sounds>> and to make the music called Hi e n - c h ' L
Kuan: Ti shu gives a dialogue between Hu a 11 g Ti and a sage P o Kao.
There is, further, the tale of the ugly woman Mo Mu (also alluded to in Si.in:
Fu p'ien) whom Hu an g T i liked and lectured: if she was careful of her womanly
virtues, her ugliness was no disadvantage to her. ShI-tsI says that of the barbarians
on the four frontiers there were those who had holes through the breast, those who
had deep-lying eyes, and those who had long arms, and Hu an g Ti by his
279
 BULLETL\' OF THE MUSEUM. OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
~ --------"·---·-·-~~----
virtue brought them to allegia,nce. Hanfei: Sh1 kuo shows us H u a n g T i as
a mighty 11otentate commanding both men and Spirits; he lets the music-master
Shi Kuang (6th c.) narrate: ,,Anciently when Hu an g Ti assembled the Spirits
on the T'ai-shan, he rode in a,n ivory chariot dra,vn by six dragons, (the Spirit)
Pi F a, n g was r1,breast with the wheel-naves, C h ' i Yu (see 4 below) was in
j
front, F e n g P o, the god of ·wind, went forward and swept, Y ii S .h i, the
god of Rain sprinkled the road, tigers m1d wolves were in front, Spirits were behind,
reptiles crouched on the earth and phoenixes soared overhead>>.
3 13. 'rhe systmnatizing and em-ly Han texts, while adding a great many more
details unheard of in the free pre-Han texts, on the other hand try to make a
more consistent entity of H u t"L n g T i ' s vita.
Lie: T'ang wen and Ta Tai: \,Vu t.i te embroider with details the famous battle
of P an - t s ' f1 an. Lie: ,,\¥hen Hu an g Ti battled with Yen Ti in the
field of P an - t s ' ii an, he led hears, wolves, leopa.rds and small and great tigers
to go in front, el"Lgles, fighting-phel"Lsants, falcons t"Lnd kites were his Wl"Lr-banners>>.
Tl"L Tl"Li: >>H u a, n g Ti trained bears, leopards m1d tigers and fought ... c"Lfter
three encounters he was. victorious,>. - In various ancient texts a certl"Lin Li
Lou (lYieng: Li Lou, slrnng: Li.t: Yung chung) or Li Chu (Chua.ng: P'ien mu,
Ha,nfei: Kua.n hing) is praised l"LS l"L man of supenmtumlly slmrp eye-sight, l"Lnd
now Huai: Jen Iden says that when Hu l"L n g Ti lost his hfack pel"Lrl, he ml"Lde
Li Chu sec"L1'ch for it, thus dc"Lting this renmrkahle ml"Ln. Lie: Hul"Lng Ti tells
ns tlrnt Hur, n g Ti had several wise coadjutors: T 'i en Lao, Li ]\I[ u and
T ' a i S h a, n K i ; the fast two are likewise mentioned in Hul"Li: Lan ming.
And in Lie: T'ang wen yet l"Lnother remarkable nrnn, ,Jung Oh' en g t s 1.
is pll"Lced in Hu a. n g Ti' s tim.e. we· have seen a.bove (p. 220) that Chuang:
K 'ie k'ie nrnkes ,J u n g C h ' e n g s h 1 a primeval ruler long before F u H i
and h Ii en X n n g (but that Pa,n Ku in the 1st c. A. D. placed him in the time.
of Fu H i) : Li.i.: Wu kung informs us that Jun g C h ' en g invented the
cr,lencbr. Now Lie rnwn,tes: >>Hu an g Ti l"Lnd Jung C h ' en g dwelt on the
K 'u n g - t' u n g mountl"Lin (in the extreme west) and together fasted for three
months.,,
The principal data given by Tl"L Tai: Ti hi t"Lbout the parents of H u tt n g Ti
and of his sons and descendants have l"Llready been c"Lddnced above (p. 225); we
nrny add here that it says that »Vilhen Hu l"L n g Ti lived on the hill of Hien
Y i.i an, he nmrried ll"Ldy Lei Tsu s h 1, daughter of the lord of Si Ling
s h 1, and she bore T s 'in g Y l"L n g and C h' l"L n g Yi>>, which disagrees
with Kyi.t: which gives Hu an g Ti ' s father-in-law l"LS F an g L e i s h 'i (see
p. 278), whose daughter bore T s 'in g Yan g.
SI-ma Ts'ien gives a connected biography of Hu a, n g Ti (Sh'i ki: \,Vu ti pen
ki), with vl"Lrious details unknown in pre-Hm1 texts (Chavl"Lnnes MH I, p. 25 ff.).
Inter a.lia., H 11 an g Ti subdued l"Lll enormous ret"Llm: in the ec"Lst he went to the
sea, in the west to the K ' 11 n g - t ' u n g mountain, in the south to the K i a n g
280
.8. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS l:-i ANCIENT CHINA.
(Ya.ng-tsi'.), in the north he expelled the H ii n - y ii.1) Further, Hu a. n g 'Ti
promoted four dignitaries to help him in ,>governing the people»: F en g H o u,
Li Mu, C h ' an g Sien l"Lnd Ta Hung (the last one in Shi'. ki: l?eng shan slm
ct"Llled Kue i Y ii K 'ii) - entirely unknown in pre-Han texts. Other promi-
nent assistm1ts were (see Fe 11 g slrnn shu, Chavannes III, iilll) Feng ]{ ii and
K 'i P o. In the Shi kl pa..ssim there l"Lre entries which show how the t.aoistie
chl"Lr!atm1s of the Han erl"L invested Hu l"L n g Ti ' s pernon with vm-ious fea.tures
belonging to their stock in trade: Hu a 11 g Ti never died (Li.\ slm, Chav. III.
330). Li Shao-kiin, lecturing the emperor ·wu, asserts tlrnt Hu l"L n g Ti, having
seen the immortl"Lls on the P'eng-ll"Li isla.nds m1d offered the f e 11 g a.ml s h t1, n
sacrifices, became l"Lll immortal (Feng slmn slrn, Chl"Lv. III, 4Gii). Hu l"L n g Ti
took the copper of the Shou-shm1 mountl"Lin and ml,st l"L Ting cauldron below mount
King-sh<"Ln; then a dragon with hanging heard l"Lnd mushwhes descended to meet
him; he mounted on him, l"Lnd ministers a,nd lrnrem ladies mounted with him, more
thl"Ln 70; the dragon ascended etc. (ib·id., Clrnv. III, 488). When Hu l"L n g Ti
hl"Ld ma.de the Ts'ing-ling terrace, on the 12th dl"Ly it burned; H. then nrnde the
Ming-t'ing, which Wl"LS the same l"LS the Kan-ts'i.im1 {cibicl., Clrnv. iil 3). J,'or various
such themes, which obviously have no pre-Hm1 origin, see Cha,vt1nnes 1xissiin.
In Shan hai lcing Hu an g Ti crops up in nmny places. We lmve witnessed
above the ancient Chinese predilection for tra.cing the origin of border barb,wians
back to Chinese potentates. Shan hai king here furnishes severnl exl"Lmples. K. l(J
says thl"Lt Hu an g Ti 's grandson Wl"LS called Shi Kit n, who bore the Pei
Ti Northern Ti hl"Lrbarians. K. 17 tells us how by a. long series of descenclt,ntR
(M i a o L u n g - J u n g W u -- N e n g JVI i n g - P o K ' i.i t1. n -- a son
and l"L cfaughter) Hu ,1 n g Ti Wl"LS m1 ancestor of the ]{ 'ii a, n ,Jung, »Dog-
Jung>> bt"Lrbl"Lrians. K. 14 sl"Lys tha.t Hu an g Ti bega.t Y i.i Hu, who hega.t
Y ii King ; the former, god of the El"Lstern se>c, had l"L lnmmn faue, '" bird's body
l"Lncl yellow snakes hanging at his ec"Lrs, and he stnod on two yellow mmkes (k. 17
says blue s1mkes); the ll"Ltter wl"Ls the god of the Northern sea.; in k. S he is c,l,Jled
Y ii K 'i an g and described: human face, bird's body r1nd blue s1rnkes lrnnging
at, the el"Lrs, standing on two blue snakes (k. 17 says: red mrnkes). Lie: T\1ng wen
sl"Lys that Goel (t i) ordered Y ii K ' i an g to 1m1ke 1.5 enormous turtles cany
on their hel"Lds 5 big mountl"Lins that were floating in the ocean.
We should com1)are these folk-lore entries with the pre-Hm1 text Li.i: K'iu jen,
which describes the journeys of the gre,,t Yii: he Cl"Lme in the north to the country
of K' ii l"L n Jung, the wilds of K 'u a 1'' u and the ctnmssecl watern of Y it
K ' i l"L n g. Here it is quite clel"Lr that K ' ii l"L n J u n g, K ' u a, F u a,ncl Y it
K ' i l"L n g l"Lre simply the names of regions inlrnbited by uertfcin tribes. But Slrnn
1 ) A tribe earlier only n1entioned by l\lencius as neighb01us of the C h o u in the tin10 of T ' a, i
,van g, great-grandfather of v\'T u ,van g; later cnn1111. hn,ve nrbitra,rily identified then.1 ,vith the
Hi u n g - nu, Huns, ef. BMFEA 17, p. 14-1.
281
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
hai king has made Y ii K i n g or Y ii K ' i an g into some demon or >>god,>,
and likewise K' u a Fu, see 4 below.1)
Shan hai king k. 18 gives, as we have seen (p. 227), a totally different genealogy
from Ru an g Ti to Kun, father of Y i.i., from that of the pre-Ran texts.
Finally, k. 14 describes the fabulous ani,1I1al K 'u e i (see p. 258): shaped like an
ox, with blue body, no horns, one foot, causing a great wind when going in and
out of the water, shining like sun and moon, with a voice like thunder; and it sa3;s
that R u an g T i got hold of it and made a drum of its skin.
In Eastern Ran time the folk-lore linked up with the figure of Huang Ti is
constantly growing and cannot all be retold here. As an example we may adduce
Wany Ch'img (1st c. A. D.): Ru an g Ti' s mother carried him 20 months
before he was born, and he could speak immediately after birth (Lun heng: Ki
yen). Ru an g Ti sacrificed to expel ghosts: he erected a human figure of
peach-wood and painted certain Spirits on the doors and suspended cords from
them (Lun heng: Ting kuei, for details see Forke I, p. 243); R u an g T i had a
dragon's face (Lun heng: Ku siang), etc. Pan Kii (Ran shu: Ku l~in jen piao)
adds various stray items. T s ' a n g R i e was Ru a n g T i ' s s h i scribe (so
also Ri.i. Shen: Shuo wen preface); in Lii: Kiin shou, Ranfei: Wu tu and Si.i.n:
Kie pi it is said that T s ' an g R i e was the inventor of the script, and now
he is here placed in the time of R u a n g T i. Mu Mu was R u a n_g T i ' s
wife, who bore T s ' a n g Li 11 (Mu Mu is the same as the Mo Mu _p. 279,
here determined by Pan as one of R ·u an g T i ' s wives; Pan, who found a
discrepancy between Kyii, which says that a lady of the F an g L e i s h i house
bore T s ' in g Y an g, and Ti hi, which says that L e i T s u s h i bore both
T s ' i n g Y a 11 g and C h ' a 11 g Yi, "tries a middle way: F an g L e i s h i
bore T s 'in g Yang but Lei Tsu s hi bore C h' a 11 g Yi(!). Ta
T 'i e 11 (a teacher of Ru an g Ti' s), Fe 11 g Ru and K' u 11 g Kia are
added as prominent men under R u a n g T i.
Wang Fii (Ts'ien fu lun: Wu M lun) tells us that a big lightning encircled the
star (in Ursa Major), illuminating the night and moved the lady Fu P a o to
pregnancy, arid she bore Ru an g Ti. Hiiang-fu Mi knows quite a lot more:.
Fu P a o bore Ru an g Ti in Shou-k'iu; he domesticated cattle and horses,
invented pestles and mortars, bows and arrows, houses, coffins. After 52 battles
he subjugated all the »feudal lords>>. Re instituted various offices, and his foremost
dignitaries are enumerated. To those given by Si-ma, Lie and Pan Ku he adds: Wu
She 11 g and S hen Ru a 11 g Chi, and (unlike Si-ma) he makes T a Ru 11 g
1 ) The state name, as often, figures also as the name 0£ its ruler; thus in Ta 'rai: Shao hien it is said
that S h u o . f an g and Yu - t u "came and submitted» to S h u n ; and in the same way Chuang:
Ta tsung shi emunerates ·ancient potentates who had got the t a o : »Hu a n g T i got it ...
Chuan Hil gotit ... Yil K'iang (= thelordofYiiK'iang)gotit ... Si Wang Mu (=the
lord of Si Wang Mu) got it ..• ,,. - In the 3rd c. A. D. Kuo P'o (comm. on Shan hai king 8)
identifies Yi\ K 'i an g with the Spirit H ii an Ming (see p. 222 above), because the latter
in Li: Yiie ling represents the north.
282
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
and Kue i Y ii K' i.i. .two different persons. As to Hu a 11 g Ti' s sons,
Ruang-fu deviates :from Kyi.i., Ti hi and Pan Ku in making the sons Y i K u
and T s ' a 11 g L in one and the same person. Through a portentous dream (told
in great detail) he found F e n g R u and L _i M u, and after that he ,\Tote the
treatise C h a 11 men g k i 11 g >>Interpretation of dreams•> in 11 books. K ' i
P o invented medicines and a p e 11 t s ' a o Materia medica comes from hin1;
Ru an g Ti made him investigate the blood circulation and study 81 sicknesses,
and then Ru a n g T i wrote the N a 11 k i n g •>Book of sufferances»; he
instituted the cure by acupuncture and wrote the Ne i · w a i s h u .k i n g in
18 books. Huang Ti was 100 years on the throne and died at the age of 110· (var.
lll). Re was also called Kue i T s a 11 g s hi (this after Cheng Riian: comm.
on Chouli: Ta pu; Pan Ku had placed K u e i T s a 11 g as a dignitary in the age
of Yen Ti). - These are but a few extracts from the voluminous tales about
Ru an g Ti given by Ruang-fu Mi.
4 A. The legend of C h ' i Yu already crops up in Shu: Lii. hing: >>C h ' i
Yu was the first to make rebelliom, which is remarkable, since in no other instance
does the Shu refer to events prior to Yao. Curiously enough, neither Tso, Kyii.
nor Mo contains any references to the C h ' i Yu myth. Yi Chou shu: Ch'ang
mai narrates: >>Heaven .... charged C h ' i Ti (.=Yen Ti, brother of Ru a 11 g
Ti, see p. 221 above) to institute two separate k' in g ministers, and charged
C h ' i Yu to reside in S h a o R a o (i. e. in Shantung, the region corresponding
to the celestial region called Shao Rao chi k' ii, see p. 218) . . . . C h' i
Yu then drove away the emperor and battled with him on the C h o - 1 u
River . . . C h ' i T i was greatly scared and appealed to R u a n g T i ; he seized
C h' i Yu and killed him in Chung K i». Shi-tsi likewise says that Ru an g
T i killed C h ' i Yu in C h u 11 g K i. According to Chuang: Tao Chi it was
Hu an g T i who fought the famous b_attle: »R u a 11 g T i battled with C h ' i
Yu in the field of Cho - 1 u, the b_lood flowed a hundred 1 i». Ts'e: Ts'in 1
likewi5e says: )>R u a 11 g T i attacked O h o - 1 u and caught C h ' i Y u», and
Ts'e: Wei 2 gives the amusing information that >>when Ru a 11 g Ti battled in
the field of Cho -1 u, the soldiers of the Western Jung (barbarians) did not
come (as auxiliaries)•>. Another early tradition was that C h' i Yu was the
first inventor of weapons, alluded to in Lii: Tang ping and amply embroidered
with details in Kuan: Ti shu: Ru a 11 g Ti, after deliberating with P o ·Kao,
cultivated the teaching (of virtue) for ten years, and then the mountain of Ko -1 u
opened up and water came forth and metal (copper) followed it; C h' i Yu took
it and worked it and made swords, armour, ma o and k i lances; that year he
laid under himself 9 feudal lords; the mountain of Y u n g - h u opened up and
water came forth, metal (copper) followed it; C h' i Yu took it and worked it
and made the k i lances of Y u 11 g - h u and the dagger-axes of Ju e i ; that
year he laid under himself 12 feudal lords; therefore the ruler of all the world (i. e.
Ru a 11 g ·Ti) shook his k.i lance and had ope outburst of wrath, and the fallen
283
 BULLETIN OF THE 1l!IUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
corpses filled the field>>. The same theme is briefly alluded to by Shi:-tsi, who says
that C h. ' 1 Y u invented the art of casting metal.
4 B. In early Han time, Si-ma Ts'ien still entirely follows the lead of the pre-
Han texts in regarding C h ' i Yu as a rebellious >>feudal lord>> (though Ta Tai:
Yung ping sa,ys that >>C h ' i Yu wr1s a common man of the people who was
greedy>>). This seems to have been the officially accepted theory, for the first Han
emperor sacrificed to Hu an g Ti and C h ' i Yu together (Chavannes MH II,
335), the latter because he was considered a w~r god (Chavannes III, 434). On
the other hand, Tung Chung-shu (Ch'un ts'iu fan lu: K'iu yi.i.) tells us that C h ' i
Yu was one of the gods (another was Kung Kung, see p. 229 above)
sacrificed to for obtaining rain.
This points in the direction of the popular beliefs, and it brings us over to the
Shan hai king, which narrates (k. 17): >>There is a person dressed in a blue garment,
milled Huang Ti's daughter Po (Huan.g Ti nii Po); when Ch'i
Y u made weapons and a,ttacked H u a n g T i, H u ii n g T i ordered Y i n g
Lung (Winged clmgon, a water god) to attaek him in the fields of K i - c ho u;
Ying Lung amassed water; then C h ' i Yu prayed Feng P o (the god
of Wind) and Y i.i. Shi (the god of Rain, cf. p. 280 above) to let loose great wind
and rain; H u an g T i then sent down the heavenly girl called P o, and the
rain ceased, and then he killed C h ' i Yu ; P o could not again ascend, and
where she resided there was no rain; Shu K ii n told this to the emperor, and
afterwards she was placed to the north of the C h ' i - s h u e i >>Red River» (in
the extreme north); Shu K i.i. n then became t 'i en t s u »Ancestor of the
fields». and Po kept aloof». 1 )
The demon of drought P o is a very old folk-lore figure, already occurring in
the Shi, ode 258, and here in Shan hai king we find how this demon, more sinico,
was attached to the hero myths (Hu an g Ti), made into a woman and endowed
with the paraphernalia of Han-time follr-lore. Shan hai king k. 14 has a different
version of the myth, 2 ) excluding the drought demon Po: >>Ying Lung dwelt in
the extreme south; he killed C h ' i Y u and K ' u a F u ; he could not rise again,
therefore below there was repeatedly drought (i. e. when the rain-creating dragon
could not mount in heaven and amass clouds); when there was drought, they (sc. the
people) made an image of Ying Lung, and then they obtained great raim. 3 )
1 ) The Shen yi king ap. Yi ,ven lei tsii 100 has a totally different notion about P o : it makes
P o a personage of the n tt n f a n g south) 2-3 feet tall, vdth naked body and eyes on the top of
the head, soaring upwards as a wind; the countries which P o looks on have great cl,rought, the soil
becoming reel for a 1000 Ii.
2 ) Mnspero quite arbitrarily an<l unnecessarily concludes (,J. As. 1924, p. 56) that the text is here
corrupt and inc01nplete.
3 ) This refers t,o the popular custom. of putting out earthen dragons in order to obtain rain,
mentioned in Huai: Chuei hing and Shuo shan, and fully described in Ch'un ts'iu fan lu: K'iu yi.i.
Ying Lung, who directed the flow of rivers and seas, occurs already in the pre-Han text Ch'u:
T'ien wen.
284
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHIN.J,
The Ch'i Yu myth is here, in Shan hai king, combined with tlrnt of K' u a Fu,
which is again narrated in k. 8 and 17: K ' u a F u is described as a personage
having two yellow snakes pendant from the ears and having two yellow snakes
in the hands; Hou T ' u ( = Kou Lung, son of Kung Kung, see p. 240
above) begat Sin, and Sin begat · K 'u a Fu; K 'u a Fu wanted to pursue
and catch the shadow of the sun, and attained it in Y ii - k u (the. ex_treme west,
where the sun goes down); he became thirsty a,nd drank and exhausted the Ho
(Yellow River) and the We i3 River, and he wanted to go north and drink the
T a t s e >>Great Marsh>>, but died of thirst on the road; he dropped his staff. which
became the T en g - 1 in forest (simila,rly, acc. to k. lfi, when C h ' i Yu threw
away his manacles, before he was killed, they changed into the Feng - mu tree);
when Y i n g L u n g had killed C h ' I Y u and K ' u a F ii, he went to the·
south, and therefore there is much rain in the south.
I
!
Evidently K ' u a Fu is another drought demon. analogous to P o ; and just
as P o was hooked on to the H u an g T i myth, so K ' u a F u is here attached
l! to the Ho 11 T 'u myth, and both drought-demon legends are mixed up with
t the C h ' i Yu legend, because C h ' i Y u in early Han time was sacrificed to
both as a god of war and as a god procuring rain: H u a n g T i lrnd first sent
!
1
the water god Y _in g Lung to combat C h ' I Yu, but when C h · i Yu
called in the gods of Wind and Rain to withstand him, then either (the k. 17 version)
£ H u a n g T i instead had to send the drought-demon P o to get the better of
I! C h ' i Yu ; or (the k. 14 version) Ying Lung. the water god, was in the
end victorious and killed both C h ' i Y u, the ally of the gods of Wind and Rain,
1! and the drought demon K ' u a F u.
In accordance with all this, C h ' i Yu had to be made out to be not a, human
»rebel» but a monster, and the Eastern Han work Kuei tsang k'i sh1 says: >>C h' 1
Yu ... had eight arms and eight feet and dishevelled hair>> (a tendency to make
C h ' I Yu a supernatural being is earliest observable in Hanfei: Shi kuo, where
he is combined with various other nature Spirits, see p. 280 above). With the
exception of Ying Lung, who already occurs in the 'r'ien wen, all these
nature myths are purely Han-time lore, and there is no trace of them in pre-Han
sources. They are loosely linked up v.ith the ancient hero myths of Hu an g Ti
and Hou T 'u, and the names of pre-Han legends have been appropriated and
applied to the leading figures in these nature myths. We saw above (p. 281) that
»the wilds of K ' u a F U>> were merely the lands of some northern barbarians in
Lii: K'iu jen, the name K ' u a Fu now appropriated and applied to a drought
demon.
The commentators of Eastern Han time rejected all these nature myths and
reverted to the idea of C h ' i: Yu as a >>rebel». It is amusing to observe how
they try to connect him with some of the earliest »rebels>> in the ancient traditions:
the K i u Li Nine Li, who, as we have seen p. 235 above, rebelled under
Shao Hao (Kyii: Ch'u, hia). Kao Yu (comm. on Li.i.: Tang ping) and Ma Jung
285
 l
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-·--·~---
(comm. on Shu: Lii hing) both say: ,,C h' 'i Yu is the name of the prince of the
Nine Li a.t the encl of Shao H ,1 o ' s reign>>. Ma's J)Upil Cheng Hilian (comm.
on the same Shu shapter) realizes that this is chronologically unsatisfactory (Shao
Ha. o being Hu an g Ti 's successor) and modifies it: C h' 'i Yu was a
hegemon, and the prince of the Nine Li learned from C h ' 'i Yu how to rebel!
In the 3rd century, Huang-fu Mi v,1ries the tale of Hu ,1 n g Ti ' s victory over
C h ' 'i Yu : he did not go himself but sent Li Mu and S he n Hu an g
C h 'i, who caught C h ' 'i Yu in the field of Cho 1 u, and then he let Ying
L u n g kill him on the mountain of H i u n g L i ,,the ominous L i,,. In later
times, the imagination of the writers has been given still freer rein. The T'ang
commentator on Shi ki CWu ti pen ki), Chang Shon-tsie quotes an earlier work,
Lung yii ho t'u. which tells us tlmt ,,while H u an g Ti had the regency (for his
brother Yen Ti), there ,rnre 81 brothers c,1lled C h' 'i Yu, who had ,111imal's
bodies ,md human voices, copper heads and iron foreheads, mid ·who ate sand,,;
they nm.de weapons and terrorized the people; ,,Heaven then sent down a dark
woman, who g,,ve Hu an g Ti a wa,r badge,,, and he vanquished C h ' 'i Yu
etc. (see further Clrnva,1mes. MR I, p. 27).
5 A. Shao Hao pla.ys a very modest part in the pre-Han traditions, and
all essenti,1,l features luwe a.lready been registered JJa8sim a,bove. That he was
not, however, a. mere theoretical speculation of the genealogists but a reality in
the life of tlie ancestral cults, follows from Tso: Cimo 17 (525 B. C.), where the
prince of T ' an declares that S h a o H a, o was the great a.neestor of his house,
which shows that the s,wrifices to Sha. o Hao were kept up by· this feudal
fo.mily. 1 ) He further sa,ys that Shao Hao had bird insigni,1 and titles for his
officern, and mentions inter alia the S h u an g K i u s h \, who were s "i - k ' o u
ministers of justice; in Tso: Chao 20 a dignitary in T s ' i says that aneiently the
S h u a, n g :r-::_ i u s h 1 ,rnre the first feudal lords possessing the land of T s 'i
(in Shantung). As we lrnve seen above (p. 24:3), there were four sma,11 feudal
states: S h en, S 'i, ,Ju and H u a. n g. the ruling houses of which reckoned
themselves tcs descenchmts of S h a o H a o via :Mei and T ' a i T ' a i a,nd
thus certainly kept his legend aJive.
5 B. In the Han texts there is very little additional matter a,bout S h a o
Hao. Shan lrni king mentions him in a few entries. K. 15: ,,Shao Hao begat
Pei Fa., who descended and dwelt in the Min Y ii an, :M: in abyss. K. 17:
»There tcre people with only one eye in the middle of the face; some say that is
the vV e i4 clan, [descendants of] a son of Shao Ha, o 's,,. K. 18: ,,S h "o
Hao begat Pan, he w,1s the first to make bows and arrows,,. vVang Ch'ung
(Lun Heng: Tsi yi) identifies S h a. o Hao \Yith K 'i2 (Hou T s i), ancestor
of the C' ho u, which is so curious that one suspects a text corruption. In the
2nd c. Wtcng }'u (Ts'ien fu lun: vVu te Inn) has " legend about his birth which
1 ) Si'-ma ]\;'irn1. (ChaYnnnes, 1U-I III. 41 D) sa,ys thnt prince Siang of Ts'in (died 7G6_ B. C.) sacrificed
to the Spirit of Kha o H no: hut there is no _pre-Hnn text in snpport of this.
286
f
E. K.ARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS l;Y ANCIENT CHINA
deviates both from the Kyi.i account (son of a lady of the Fa, n g Lei s h 1
house) and the Ti Hi (with Sh'i ki: son of a lady Lei Tsu s hi of the Si
Ling s hi house): a great star like a rainbow descended mid came flowing over
Hu a - tu ; the lady N ii T s i e received it and bore emperor C h i = S h "o
H a o : he resided in K ' i.i - f u. Huang-fu :Mi adds that he wa.s 1.00 years on
the throne, and after his death his Spirit descended on the mountain C h ' "n g-
1 i u.
o A. C h u a n H u. The pre-Ha,n lore about C h u a n H ii has 1,1,l'gely been
adduced pa8sim above, and there is little to tcdd. Chuang: Ta, tsung sh\ says
that he was one of the e,crly rulers who attained to the t a o and d,velt in the
Dark Palace (Hu an k u n g). Lu: Tsun sh1 sa,ys he had a wise teacher Po
Yi f u (is this a contamination with the legend of Po Y i2 above?), and Li.\:
Ku yue says he ordered Fe i Lung and Shan Sien to compose music.
6 B. The systema.tizing and e,wly Ha.n texts e1dd new information about the
family reh,tions of C h u 11 n H u. Ta Tai: Ti hi says that his father C h ' a n g
Yi (attested in the pre-Ha,n Chu shu ki nien, seep. 208 above) ma.rried a le1dy of
'the S h u S h a, n s h 'i house, by name C h ' a. n g P u and bore C h u a n H i.L
The Sh'i pen correspondingly gives: tbe Cho S h a, n s h 1 tcnd C h ' 11 n g P u 2•
Ta Tai: Wu ti te (closely connected with the Ti hiJ° lets Chu an H ii nrnke ntst,
journeys ,,riding on a dragorn> to Y u - 1 i n g in the north, to K i " o - c h 1 in
the south, to the L i u - s h a Floating Sands in the west and to P ' a n - m u in
the east (SY-ma Ts'ien reproduces this, but cuts out the ,,riding on a dragom!);
this pltcgiarizes the pre-Han theme about Y a o in Mo: Tsie ynng, chung. see
_p. 292 below.
Shan lrni ki,ng varies the story of C' h u an Hu 's mother (k. IH): C h 'an g
Yi married a daughter of the house of Nao (so read in the Ts'ie yiin) by 1mme
Ngo N 11, who bore C: h nan Hu; he also lrnd a,nother son (half-brother of
C: h u an H ii) H ,111 Liu, who had a drawn-out neck, a. hunmn face, ,1 pig's
snout, a unicorn's body. K. 16 says that the people with three faees (cf. Li:i: K'iu
jen which says that Yu in the west came to the land of the people with one mm
and three faces) descend from a son of G h nan H i.i who Im.cl three faces mid
one arm; k. 15 relates other legendary people descending form C: h u an H lL
Han Sh'i wai chuan 5 says Chu an H ii had as te,wher L n T 'u (Han shu:
Ku kin jen piao writes Lu T 'u). In Eastern Han time, v\ftmg Ch'ung (Lun
heng: Ku siang) (quoting some now unknown Li ,,Ritm1l») says tlrnt Chu an
H ii was born with the character w u ~ on his brow and that he had three sons
who were relegated and became demons: one dwelt on the Kia. n g (Yang-ts\)
and w;is a fever demon, another in J o - s h u e i and wt,s ,1 w a 11 g - 1 i a n g ;1 )
the third dwelt in obscure corners of houses and palaces m1d sm1red people ,md
children. Wang Fu (Ts'ien fu lun: vVu te lun) lms a totally a,berra.nt account of
1) A nature demon common in pre-}la.n textR, e. g. K,\'ii: Ln yCt; Tso: tSOan 3.
287
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
--·------
C h u an H ii ' s birth: a flaming light moved the lady N ii C h ' u in the
Yu - fan g palace and she bore Chu an H ft. Huang-fu Mi, as usual, tries to
reconeile the contradictory earlier stories: C .h u an H ii. 's mother, daughter of
Shu Shan s h 'i (as above) b:v name King Pu (deviating from the Ti hi
in this name detail) was also called N ii. C h ' u. At the end of S h a o H a o ' s
reign, the star Y a o - k u a n g shot through the moon and moved N ii C h ' u
in the paJace of Yu - f a n g. and she bore C h u an H ii on the Jo - s h u e i ;
he had shield and lance on his head. At ten years of age he assisted S h a o
H a o, at 20 he became emperor; he was 78 years on the throne, and was buried
in the Kuang-yang village in '.l'nn-k'iu of the Tnng-kiin.
7 A. The pre-Han traditions about K 'u have likewise nearly all been
registered above, and very few additional traits can be gathered. Lii:
Tsnn sh'i says he had as teacher Po Chao, and Lii: Ku yiie that he ordered
Hien He i to make songs (we have seen above p. 257 that he ordered C h 'u e i
to make drums, bells and musical stones). Li: Tsi fa says he determined the course.
of the stars and constellations.
7 B. The systematizing and ea,rly Han texts have various items unknown in
the pre-Han texts. Ta Tai: Ti hi tells us of his four wives: the first was of the
house of Yu T ' a i s h I., by name K i an g Y ii an, mother of K'i2 (see p. 215);
the second was of the house of Y u S u n g 2 s h 'i, by name K i e n Ti (Huai:
Clmei hing var. Kie n T i2 ), mother of Si e : the third was named (the lady
of) the C h ' en L u n g s h I house, mother of emperor Yao ; the fourth was
named (the lady of) the T s ii T s 'i s h I house, mother of emperor C h 'i (we
have seen p. 225 above that this >>emperor>> is an innovation, contrary to the
ancient sources). Here the personal names of the last two are not given, but Sh'i
pen supplies them. The third wife, of the house of C h' en Feng s h 'i (which·
diverges from the Ti hi; S'i-ma Ts'ien follo,vs Sh'i pen, Pan Ku in Han shu: Ku
kin jen piao writes C h ' e n F e n g2 ) w,is called K ' in g T u ; the fourth wife,
of the T s ii T s 'i house, was called C h 'an g Y i 2 •
By this last we touch upon the nature folk-lore of the Shan hai king, see p. 266
above.
Another YVestern Han work, the Han Sh'i wai chuan 5, tells us that the emperor
K ' u had as teacher C h ' i S u n g t s L This personage,· who plays a great
part in Han-time lore as an immortal (for instance in inscriptions on mirrors) and
who is mentioned as an ancient ta o adept (undated) in Hanfei: Kie Lao, in Ch'u:
Yiian yu (where it is said that he >>purified the dust>>), and, in the variant C h' i
Sung• t s 'i, in Huai: Ts'i su, is here placed in the chronological scheme (and
ar.cordingly inserted under K 'u in Han shu: Ku kin jen piao). Post-Han lore
attrijmtes to him quite a different origin: the Lie sien chuan (ascribed to Liu Hiang
in middle Han time but obviously a. much later work) says C h ' i Sung t s i"
was the >>rain-master» of S hen Nun g ' s, who taught S hen Nun g to walk
through fire etc. (a long yarn).
288
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
Like all the great primeval rulers, K 'u should have some remarkable bodily
feature, and Wang Ch'ung (Lun heng: Ku siang) says he had double rows of teeth.
Even the Ti wang sh'i ki has comparatively little to add to the biography o:I: the
emperor K 'u : at the age of 15 he assisted Chu an H ft, at 30 he ea.me to the
throne and resided in P o•; he was 75 years on the throne and was buried in the
same village of Kuang-yang as Chuan Hii (see 6 B abo\'e).
XII A.
The legends about Yao take a prominent place in lill the pre-Han literature,
above all through the Confucian school, which regarded him as the first of the
three greatest sages of the Golden Age, basing themselves especially on the Shu
as their Bible. The story of Yao, with the tippellation F an g H ii. n and
(after his appanage before becoming >>emperor>>) T' a o T' an g2 s h 'i or simply
T ' an g2 (Tso: Ai 6 quotes '" now lost Shu chapter in verse: >>That T · a o
T' an g2, he followed the norms of Heaven and possessed the land of K i>> etc.)
is most fully recorded in Shu: Yao tien (of which the present Shun tien originally
formed a part), which as an introduction praises his virtues and then proceeds to
record various themes. First comes the legend of his cult-master Hi Ho.
enlarged by scholastic additions with a view to the representation of the >>four
quarters>> (seep. 262 above). Secondly come the deluge theme and the appointment,
of Kun (see p. 250 above), who after 9 years failed in the task of coping with
the inundations (observe that the Shu author does not make Kung Kun g.
see p. 249 above, a figure connected with the deluge). Thirdly, after 70 years of
reign (>>I have t s a i we i been on the throne 70 years»), Y a o wishes to
cede the throne to S 'i Y ii e (see p. 258 above), who declines;, >>all» then
recommend Shun (for whose legend see XIII below), who now becomes leading
officer; inter alia •>he received the guests>> i. e. the feudal lords »at the four gates».
Yao tried him in various ways: he was sent into the great forest at the foot of
. the hills, and even violent wind and rain could not make him go astray. Then
follows a passage in which Yao says that he has studied Shun ' s deportment
for 3 years, found it good and asks him to ascend the throne. S h u n, after
having duly >>declined», s ho u c hung >>receives the end>> in the temple, i. e.
becomes regent, and from that time (as in the following paragraphs) performs all
the ritual and other functions of the emperor (see Shun in XIII below). After
this again comes the passage: in the 28th year, the emperor (Yao) died (when
Meng: Wan Chang says that »Shun assisted (s i an g) Yao for 28 years>> he
evidently refers to his years of regency), the people mourned for ;3 years, and on
the 1st clay of the 1st month S h u n »went to the temple>> i. e. formally took over
the throne as emperor. - These figures have given rise to no encl of computations,
and Si-ma Ts'ien believes that >>the 28th yea!'>> has to be counted after the year
when Y a o says he has »been 70 years on the throne•>, so that Yao really reigned
for 98 years. But, as pointed out by Ts'ai Ch'en (Sung school) this is quite
19 289
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-~-----"-
inadmissible. When Yao had reigned for 70 years, he desired to cede to Si
Y ii e, but this led to nothing, and he continued for 3 years, with S h u n
merely as minister (>>receiving the guests at the four gates>>), before he made him
regent: Y a o thus, according to the Shu account, reigned for 70-3 years, and
moreover for 28 years as a nominal emperor under Shun' s regency, i. e.
together 101 years. This is quite conclusive, but the salient point in the legend
is not the figure 101 but 100: Yao reigned himself for 73 years, and in the 28th
\ emperor for a full period of a 100 years; S h u n was 30 years when ettlled into
year after that, i. e. in his 101st year on the throne he died; thus he was
e rn p e r o r f o r 1 0 0 c o m p 1 e t e y e a r s.
iIf
Some analogpus miraculously round figures are found in the career of S h u n.
Yao tien (Shun tien) says: Shun she n g s an s hi c hen g y u n g s an
s h 'i t s a i w e i w u s h 'i t s a i c h i f a n g n a i s 'i. The pseudo-K'ung
commentary punctuated and interpreted thus: S h u n s h e n g s a n s h 'i
C h e 11 g y U 11 g, S a 11 S h 1 t S a i W e i, W U S h 'i t S a i C h I f a 11 g ll a i
s 'i >>Shun at 30 years of age was called into employment, he was 30 years 011 the
throne, s c. as regent (3 years on trial and 27 full years under Yao), after
50 years (i. e. iiO years after Yao 's death) he ascended on high and died>>. 1 )
This, however, is obviously impossible: it is inconceivable that the phrase t s a i
we i >>to be on the throne,> should apply to Shun 's regency, but not to the
following time when he really t s a i w e i was on the throne. Long before
pseudo-K'ung, Cheng Hiian had realized this and punctuated: Shun she n g
Ran s h 'i, c hen g y u n g s an s h 'i, 2 ) t s a i we i w u s h 'i t s a i, c h 'i
f a n g n a i s 'i. Thus he interprets t s a i w e i w u s h 'i t s a i >>he was 011 the
throne 50 years,>, which is obviously correct (cf. Yao's utterance earlier: c hen
t s a i we i t s ' i s h 'i t s a i »I have been on the throne 70 years,>, which is
exactly the s,1,me construction), and the whole passage must mean: ,>When Shun
,,rns 30 years of age, he was called and employed for 30 years (sc. the 3 years of
trial and 27 full years of regency under Yao, the latter dying in the 28th), he was
on the throne (sc. after Yao's death) for 50 years, and then ascended on high and
died,>. But even this series of figures: 30 + 30 + 50 will not do full justice to the
>>balance,> intented. We should take into account the compleinent in Meng: Wan
Chang, shang, where it is said: >>Shun recommended Y ii to Heaven (i. e. gave
him the regency), after 17 years Shun died,> (further: after 3 years of mourning,
Y ii wished to cede the the throne to Shun' s son, but in·fact himself ascended
the throne). Thus, cif Shun' s ,>50 years,> t s a i we i ,>on the throne>>, he was
3 years in mourning before he formally took full possession, and for 17 years at
the end he had Y ii as regent = together 20 years. This leaves 30 years of full
1 ) The sa.n1e punetuation, though with various interpretations and computations has been 1nain-
tained by most T'ang, Sung and later co1n1nento.tors, all do"rn to otu· tiine; 1Joth Legge and Couvreur
follow pseudo-1(\-m.g above.
2 ) Cheng reully reads: c hen g y u 11 g er s h 1 (•>20»), but this is a reading that should be
rejected 1 since it is irreeoncilable with the earlier accotu1t of the Yao tien.
290
~
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN AXCIENT CHIX.f!
"---
and real imperial sway, balancing the 30 years of youth and the 30 years of office
under Yao: 30 30+ + 50 (= 3 +
30 + 17) - the sequence contains thrice
the figure 30.
It need hardly be pointed out that all these figures have not the slightest
historical value; they are just what legendary figures should be: Yao was
office, he assisted Yao for 30 years, and of his 50 years >>on the throne>> he had
full formal and real imperial power for 30 years. 1 )
The theme of the sovereign who wishes to cede his throne to the most worthy
is highly popular in the ancient legends (it recurs, as we shall see., in the cases of
Shun, Y ii, and T ' an g). In regard to Y a o it crops up in tl, whole series
of variations. The most famous is his cession to Shun, which really led to some
result. It is embroidered with further details in lVIeng: Wan Chang. shang (where
:Meng even represents matters as if Yao had really abdicated and as a subject
,>with his face towards· the north,> served S h u n who stood as soverein »with his
face towards the south,>). Some further details can be gleaned from other sources.
Lii: K'ii s'i says that ,>Yao had 10 sons, but he did not give (the throne) to a
son but gave it to Shum. :Meng, Wan Chang, hia says that Yao made his
9 sons serve Shun. Here one of the 10 is eliminated. Very likely this is his son
0 h u 4 (who occurs among the grandees who in Yao tien are recommended by
Fang Ts'i see p. 256); he recurs in Shu: Yi Tsi, where Y ii says: >>Do not be arrogant
like T an Chu• (0 h u• of T an). That this C h u 4 was really a son of Yao ' s
is confirmed in Kyii: Oh'u, hia: ,>Yao had (the son) Tan C h u4, Shun had
(the son) Shan g K ii n>>. That be took a IJrominent place among tbe sons and
was evidently the heir-apparent follows from two items which indeed seem to
suggest that he rebelled, took the title of t i >>emperor,> and had to be crushed
by Y a o. On the one hand, the authentic Chu shu ki nien says: >>H o u T s i
(who became one of Shun' s ministers, see p. 256 above) banished t i C h u4,
the emperor Chu•, to T a·n - s hue i (the Tan river)>>; on the other hand, Lii:
Chao lei: >>Yao battled at T an - s hue i and so subdued the southern :Man
barbarians,> (whom Chu• evidently took as his supporters). Chuang: Tao Chi
l) Later systematizers ancl con1mentators have advanced all kinds of cmnputations in order to arrive
at correct historical figures for the »reignsi> of Ya. o, Shun and Y ll. SI-ma, Ts'ien nlready nrlvanr.ed
the following schen1e: Yao had ruled for 70 years when he found Shun; he contint1ed to rnle
for another 20 yea1·s, and then gave Shun the regency for 8 years, thus fOrmnlly pm,ses::;ing the throne
for 98 years; Shun was 20 years of age when he becmne reno'\vned for filial piety, he wus 30 when
called to office, at 50 he became regent, when he was 58 Yao died, when he wa.'3 Ul he nsnendecl
the throne, and after another 39 years he <lied (at, the age of 100). Various other Ryst,eins have
subsequently been propounded, but it serves no useful purpose to 1·ef'n.pitulo.te them. here. Seo for
instance A. Wedemeyer in Asia Major, Introd. vol. 1922, where mueh of this seholastie discussion
is related; vv·edemeyer himself treats the »historieafa prob]e111 of the J)yeu.rs of reig11t> of Y a o, S h u n
and Y ii with the utmost gravity, taking not on]y the spurious Shu king C'hapters and the spurious
Chu shu ki nien but all kinds of Liu ch'ao, T'ang and Sung authors a~ 1>sourees» for his reconstructions.
291
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
says that Y a o killed his eldest son. This son being thus eliminated, Y a o
could, with JY[eng above, make his 9 sons serve Shun. :Meng, however, has a
different story; he tells us. that T a n C h u 4 was not killed, only for the time put
aside. In the same chapter he continues: >>When the mourning for Yao was
at an end a:fter three years, S h u n withdrew to the south o:f the N an - h o
»Southern River>> in favour o:f Y a o ' s son. But all the princes and those who
had errands o:f complaint to the emperor etc. turned, not to Y a o ' s son but to
Shun ; he found that it was Heaven's will and ascended the throne.
But the sage and modest Yao had, before the cession to S h u n, · other
candidates to whom he desired to cede the throne. One o:f them was H ii Y u,
who according to Chuang: T'ien ti was Y a o ' s >>teacher,> (H ii Y u was pupil
of Nie K' ii e, pupil of W an g Yi, pupil of P e i Yi). That Yao would
cede the throne to H i.i. YU· is a legend occurring in Chuang: Siao yao yu, in
Hanfei: Slmo lin, hia, and in Lii.: K'iu jen. Both Chuang and Lii. give long
dialogues between Yao and H ii. Yu, in which the latter shows a noble
contempt for the dignity, and Lii narrates that after the interview in tlie P ' e i -
t s e marsh, he went to the foot of the K i - s ha n mountain (c:f. p. 257
above), to the north of the Ying - s hue i river and lived as a simple farmer.
Han:fei says he ran away from Yao and hid in the house of a commoner. -
Another candidate was T s 'i - c h o u C h 'i - f u, who is stated in Lii: Tsun
sh'i to have been Yao' s >>teacher» (acc. to Siin: Ta Hie he had also a teacher
K ii n C h ' o u, in Han shu: Ku pin jen piao called Y i n S h o u), and according
to both Chuang: Jang wang and Lii: Kuei sheng, Yao desired to cede the
throne to him, but he likewise declined. Other sages in the entourage of Y a o
were, acc. to Lii.: Pen wei, P o Y a n g and S ii. E r - ·Hanfei: Shuo yi, which
says that they >>declined the throne>> writes P o Y a n g and S ii Y a (so also
Sh'i-ts'i, whereas Han shu: Ku kin jen piao has S i.i. She 11). According to Chuang:
T'ien ti and Li.i.: Ch'ang li, a certain Po C h ' en g T s 'i Kao was made a
>>feudal lord>> by Yao, but under Y i.i. abdicated and became a common farmer.
Fragments of other Yao legends crop up passim. Li.i.: Ku Yi.i.e says· Yao
charged Chi-a to make music, and he stretched deer-skin over an earthen jar,
using it as a drum, and also used musical stones, whereas Ku Sou, Shun' s
father, played on a lute with five strings. Li.i.: Tsi chi says Y a o put up a drum
to be struck by those who had any remonstrations to make to him, and Kuan:
Ruan kung wen that 4e had a special hall, K ' i.i. - s h 'i, where he listened to
advice :from his subjects. Sh'i-tsi says that he had a >>banner for the promotion of
good mell>).
Yao, however, was also a warrior. In Chuang: Ts'i wu lun, Yao deliberates
with S h u 11, for he wanted to attack the states T s u n g, Kue i2 and S i.i. - a o,
and in Chuang: Jen Iden sh'i we find him annihilating the states o:f T s 'u n g -
c h 'i and S ii. - a o. Mo: Tsie yung, chung, makes Yao conquer a vast rea\m:
>>In the soutli he paicified K i a o - c h 'i, in the north he attained Y u - t u, in
29Z
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS lN ANCIENT CHINA
the east and west he reached to where the sun goes up and dowm (and in spite
o:f all this power he was very simple in his living, eating from earthen vessels, etc.).
The same story is told in Hanfei: Shi kuo and in Shi-tsi (the simple mode of Yao's
living is further embroidered by Shi-tsl). And Mo: Tsie tsang, hia says:
»Anciently, Y a o in the north instructed the eight T i - barbarian tribes, he
died on the journey and was buried on the north-side of the K ' i u n g -s h a n
mountain>> (and was buried with very simple materials and with no tumulus); on
the other hand Lti.: An si says Y a o was buried in Ku - 1 in. - In contrast
to all the praise of Yao 's prominence and power, there is sometimes a deroga-
tory note. Hanfei: Kung ming says: >>When Yao was a commoner (p 'i f u),
he could not govern three families; it was not that he was bad, it was that his
position was mean>>. And Hanfei: Shuo yi says: »Shun forced Yao, Y ii.
forced S h u m, sc. to cede the throne, thus giving a construction to the clmnge
of line totally different from the common and orthodox one.
Considering the highly revered position o:f Y a o in the middle and late Chou
literature, it is surprising that his descendants are of such little prominence in the
feudal system of the Chou (wheras Shun 's (\escendants had the important
fief of C h' e-11 and those of Y ii. the states of K 'i and Tseng). We have
seen above that according to the Li: Yti.e ki, Wu wang o:f · Chou enfeo:ffed the
descendants of Y a o in C h u2, but that does not occur at all as the name of a
state in the vast thesaurus Tso chuan; Lti.: Shen ta, on the contrary, says they
were enfeoffed in L i, and this small state occurs in Tso: Sti.an 15, where it is said
that the prince o:f Tsin reinstated the prince of Li (Li ho u), the term ho u
showing that his rank was at least quite high. Presumably this was the house that
maintained the sacrifices to Y a o. But more important, perhaps, was the fact
that a powerful grandee family in Tsin, the Fa 112 house, counted him as their
remote ancestor and that their clan traditions localized the fief of T ' an g2 of
Yao in the present province of Shansi.1) The story is told in Tso: Siang 24 and
Chao 29 and in Kyii: Tsin 8: when the house of T ' a o T ' an g• s h 'i (Yao)
was on the decline, one descendant o:f Y a o called L i u L e i tended the dragons
given by Heaven to K 'u n g Kia of the Hi a dynasty, and he was given
the family name of Y ii. L u n g s h i, 2 ) who in early C h o u time were the
1) This tradition was also current in other parts of China: in rrso: Siang 29, a, dignitary of Wu, on
a visit in Lu, the ritual centre, says that the odes of T ' a 11. g 2 (in Shansi) reveal that there are vestiges
of the people of T ' a o T ' a 11 g 2 s h i, i. e. Y a a.
2) There is a discrepancy in the texts on one point. In Tso: Siang 24 the grandee of F c:t 112 sa,ys
his ancestors were first T 'a o T ' an g 2 s h l, then under the Hi a they were Y l."L Lung s hi,
then 1mder the Shang they were S h i W e i s h i, then ,mcler the C h o u they were T ' an g2 T u
a h i. But in Tso: Chao 29 and Kyi.'t. Tsin 8 it is said, on the contrary, tht the descenclnnte of Y a. o
(T ' a o T ' a 11 g' s h i) in the H i a dynasty, then called the Y u L u n g s h i, took the place of
the house of S h i Vi e i, and the me1nbers of the (C h o u time) F a n 2 house were the descendants
is
of y u Lung s h i (sc. via T • an g' Tu s h i). The latter version evidently COITect, the s hi.
Wei never having been descendants of Yao : we found (p. 237) that the Shi ,v e i were descen-
dants of L i, the C h u J u n g, son of emperor C h u an H ii.
293
 B['LLETLV OF THE W!.USEUM OF FAR E.4STERN ANTIQUITIES
T' an rs" Tu s h .1 (lords of T ' a, n g2 and Tu), and from them the Fa n 2 house
descended. In faet we know from Tso: Chao 1 that it w,,s C h' en g wan g.
the seeond Chou king. who deposed the house of T' an g 2 (descendants of
T ' a o T ' an g' =, Y a o. during one period called Y ii Lu n g) ; its princes
were trmisferred as small princes to Tu, from which the F an' house descended.
Very likely the Ya, o cult ,rns kept up not only by the princes of Li (see above)
but by the grandee house of F a n 2 as well.
XIIB.
The systematizing and early Han texts lrnve surprisingly little to add to the
biogra,phy of Y a o.
Ta, Tai: Ti hi s,c,vs that Yao married a la.cly of the hOllRe of San Yi s h 1,
by name N i.i Hu an g. a,ncl Shi pen adds that she bore Ta, n. C h n 4 • SY-ma
Ts'ien with slight embellishments in the main reproduces the Shu account
(Ch11v,11mes ::YIH I, p. 42 ff.). Other small tedditional features are given e. g. by
Shang shu ta chm,n, which sa.ys that Yao at sixteen years of age, being prince
of T ' an g 2 , bec,ime emperor: further that Yao recommended Shun to the
feudal princes. delivered the realn1 to him in the wilds of T a - 1 n and presented
him with the cha o - h u a Hfr Jiij jade (ef. the Chu shn story below J). :127 tebout
Kie of Hi a and the ¥I "1(~ t 'i a. o -h u te jade). In the lore of the Slum lmi king
Y a o does not appear at tell. Hm,i, as we have seen p. 268 above. removed the
legend of Yi", the archer, from the early Hite dy1msty to the time of Yao.
Further, Hm,i: Pen king makes the Kung Kung of Yao· s time (when
Shun was regent) te deluge figure (in accordtence with the earliest tmditions -
in other chapters Huai pbees him in the times of Chu an H i.i and K ' u, see
p. 228), tes ag,1inst the Shu. which, when appropriating the legendary figure of the
deluge hero Kung Kun g ttnd transferring him to the time of Ya o, had
made him first te meritorious officer and then ,, punished miscreant. Hutei further
sttetes that Yao (like other early »rulers») Imel supernatural features (Huai: Siu
wu): Y t1 o hacl eyebrows in eight colours tend O orifices on the body. Middle
Hm1 authors embroider this theme. '.Vang Ch'ung (Lun heng: Ki yen) steys that
>>Yao 's body. when you came close to it. wtes like the sun. when looked at ,1,t
te distance it wces like t1 clouch etc. The same ,wthor (Luu heng: K'i lmai) tells
us t.lrnt Y a o ha.cl a miraculous birth: »Y te o ' s mother K ' in g T u went
out during the night, and te red dragon movecl her and she bore Y ,, O>>. In the
2nd c. A. D. Kteo Yu (comm .. on H1rni: Siu wu) knows further details: K' in g
Tu was te daughter of the Heavenly Sovereign (;R '/ff) (no longer, tes 'in Ti hi,
ShY pen and SY-ma Ts'ien p. 288 ,,hove, te bdy of the C h' en .Feng or C h' en
Lung house}; she dwelt in the house of Yi C: h' ten g - j u: at 20 she still had
no lrnsbm1d; she ,n,s sauntering and looking tet the Ho (Yellow River) when
a reel dmgon came out murying a drawing on its bt1ck ctelled >>the drawing of the
red dragon conferring the realm>> (cf. p. 2,:3 above); on it wt1s (depicted) a nmn
29±
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CFLTS IN ANCIENT CHJS),.
in red gterments and shining face. with eyebrows in eight eolours ancl .long beard ...
then it becteme cloudy tend the dragon joined himself with K ' in g Tu and shP
bore Y a o>>. - In the 3rd c. Hum1g-fu .Mi has Ytuious 1,dditiom,l dett1ils: Y a o
had the clm1 name K 'i 5 ifill but the he also. t1fter his mother. hacl the clan name
Y i4 s h 1 ffr (she was t1 foster-child in the Y i.S house. see Kao Yu abuw).1)
· After lmving mated with the reel dragon. K ' in g Tu ,rns pregirnnt for 1,i,
months and bore Y t1 o in 'l' an - ling. At lii years of tige he assistecl emperor
C h 1 (the emperor falsely introduced hy Ti hi. seep. 225 above). tend w>ts enfeoffecl
in T' an g 2 ; he wtes 10 c h 'I tall: he often dreamt that he olim!Jecl up to heaYetl
t1nd sat above it; therefore at 20 he tescendecl the throne; he resided lit P'ing-yang:
he chterged the four Hi Chu n g, Hi S h u, H o C h n n g and H o S h u
to manage the fom, setesons tend the four (sac.red) mountains, therefore they werP
ctelled S 1 Y 11 e >>Four Mountains•> (here Huang-fn mixes up the legends of Hi
Ho and of SI Y ii e, alias Po Y i2 , see p. 2,5:, above): residing mnong the
southern bterlrnrians there wt1s a, feudal lord Mi ,to s h 1, who did not submit;
Ya. o went and vtenquished him on the river T 1, n - s hue i (here Huang-fu
mixes up the stories of the San l\1 i a o, expelled from the south to the west
by Shun tend Y11, and Yao's battle ttt the T,,n-shnei, seep. 2\ll
above). Hmmg-fn goes on to tell a whole series of wonderful Irnppy ttuspices (tun
long to he repeated here), how he sacrificed to the tl o and received the Ho
drawing (see p. 274) ,,nd how he then led the princes tind ministern to engnwe a
p i jade with ,uiting, stating how Heaven bad ordered him to cede the throne to
S h u n, whereupon he threw the jade into the L o river -- this document being
>>the present treatise Chung hou yiin heng>>.
Let us tedd, fomlly, as a curiosity throwing a gfaring light on the historictel vahw
of the li:astern Hm1 comment,tries, tlmt the sage 11 o Y an g. who a,ccording
to Lu: Pen wei was found by Yao tend (Li.i: Tang ja.n) influenced S 11 u n, i,
identified by Kao Yu (comm. on Li.i: Tang jan) with Lao - t s 1 -·-· becau~e
SI-nm Ts'ien in his biogrnphy of Lao - t s I sap his 1mme was Li Po- y ,1 n g!
XIII A.
Like Yao. Shun, who had the a11peUation C h 'u n g Hu a (Cli'u: Li s111,;
and, tefter his appmmge before becoming emperor was mlled Yu Y i.i 2 s h 1, i,
praised JJa8sim in the pre-Hten literature as one of the three greatest sovereigns
of China's Golden Age.
We have alretedy seen (p. 214) tlmt Shun was c-onsiclerecl a clescend,mt of
Chu an H ii by a line: C: h u ten H i'L -- ~1 o - X - (X) -- Kn Sou ···-
S h u n, thus belonging to the great kin which inelucled all the »emperors•> from
Y e n T i tend his brother H u a n g T i clown to the H i a, S h a n g - Y i n
1 ) The idea of all this js eYidently to identify Yao with the ancient rulE'r Yi .l( · i B hi fj"t ffiJS J:.l?,:.
a figure which in pre.Han texts is quite nndatnble, set' p. ~::w. rrhe T'ang C'omn1t•ntut-or on Rh'i k.1,
Chang Shou.tsie has realized this nnd fra.nkl:r sny:,; that Yao\:i C'lnn nnrne \YH:-'< Yi E:' i :-:, hr.
295
 BULLETIN OF THE 111.USEUili OF FA.R EA.STERN A.NTIQUITJES
- - --· -
-----------·-·· --·· --- --------·-··-·-- ···- ____ __ ___________ ------ ·------- ----· ___________ _
, ,, ,,
and C h o u dynasties. Meng: Li Lou, hia tells us that he was born in Chu -
fen g, later moving to Fu - hi a., which tells us nothing, since these place names
can in no way be localized. He adds however: >>He was a man of the eastern Yi
~ barbarians>> (tun g Yi c h 'i j en), which, in view of his »imperial» genealogy,
can only mean that Chu - f en g was somewhere in the east, certainly not that
he was a »foreigner>>. 1 ) The legends tire voluble about his difficulties as a young
man owing to the wickedness of his JJtirents ttncl younger brother. Fullest is Meng:
\Van Chang, sha,ng: >>The father and mother sent Shun to repair a granary;
they removed the la.elder; Ku Sou (the father) set fire to the gram1ry; they
1m,de him dig tt well; he got out; but they (believing him to he there) proceeded
to fill up the well; (his brother) Si lt n g 2 said: it was I who made the plan for
covering up the fine gentleman,2) his oxen and sheep and granaries (shall be) for
father and mother. his shield and hwce, lute and bow for me, his two wives I shall
Jet a,ttend to my bed; Si an g 2 went and entered Shun' s lrnll; Shun sat on
his bed and played the lute; Si an g 2 si,id: I was only anxious about you; he was
ashamed; S h u n said: all my servants - you may govern them in my stead>>.
This kindness of Shun' s, however, was no e11sy matter; Meng (ibid.): >>When
Rhun went out in the fields, he cried out and wept towards Heaven». His kindness
is also referred to in Ch'u: T'ien wen: >>S h u n served his younger brothel'>>.
Afterwards, however, when he ea.me into power, tradition is not unanimous as to
his kindness to his family. Meng (·ibicl.), it is true, says he enfeoffed Si an g 2 as
lord of Yu Pi, but Clnrnng: T,w Ch1 says he ba.nished his younger brother,
and Hanfei: Chung hiao says he banished his father and killed his brother
Siang 2 . · performs all the great sacrifices, distributes the tokens of investiture to the feudal
Shun' s filittl piety, according to Shu: Yao tien, made his career: >>All»
reeommended him to Y a o· : »There is a biwhelor in low 1Josition, called Y H2
Shun, his father is stupid, his mother g,wrulous, (his brother) Si an g2 is
iwrogant, but he has been able to he concordant and to be g.nmdly filial.>>
Y a, o decided to try him and sent his two daughters to the bend of the Ku e i3
river to be wives t,o Shun. Sh1-ts1 gives fmther details about these ladies. As
he is quoted in Yi wen lei tsii 11, the first-rank wife was Hu an g2 the secondary
wife ·was Ngo : but T'tti p'ing yii Ian 135 and 811 quotes Sh1-ts1 as saying that
the first-rank wife was Ngo Hutt n g, the second-rank wife w,,s Nii Ying,
a.ncl the latter seems to he the more generally accepted version (so Liu Hiang:
Ku lie nii chuan; Shan lrni king says that the emperor T s i.i n, in this case
evidently = S h u n, lmd a wife Ng o Hu an g).
-----·-~--
,\) In the sanrn way :Wieng ('ibid.) says tlmt \Ven wnng, fa,ther of the first Chon king, was na 111an of
the western Yi bn,rbarinns1) (s i Yi c h 1 .i P n), ,vhich si111ply means tha.t he ca1ne fr01n a ·westerly
region (Shensi). - E. Erke.-; has advuneed in various papers the extravagant theory that Men.g's
plira~m about Shun aR ))tL 1nun of the eastern Yi barbarians)> reve1:1ils hin.1. to be a representative of
son1e ))eastern cnlture,> whieh cnme nnd influenced the earlier Chinese civilization.
2 ) Cha:vannes l\iH 1, 74 thinks the plir. t u k ll n refer.-; to Shun C'reating a tu fYI~ t•ity, ef. p.
:2D7 belmv, but thnt is far-fet,ched; t u son1eti.mes, e. g. in
the Shi', simply n1eans 1>fine, elegn.nt1>.
296
B. KA.RLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHIN~l
The tale of Y a. o ' s finding S h u n is varied in several ways. All 1,gree that
he was originally a man of humble 11osition,1 ) who by his ea.pa.city made himself
prominent. Sh1-ts1 says: >>Shun, when removing the firnt time, nul,(le a y i
city, when removing the second time, made a tu greater city, when removillg
the third time, made a k u o feudal-state capitt,h (id. in Lli: Kuei yin. Kuan:
f Ch1 lmo, Chuang: Sil Wu-kuei), to which he attracted the nobles of the four
quarters; Yao called him from the wilds, discussed rites m1d music mid
government with him and as a consequence gave him his chwghters. jifo: Shang
hien, chung says Shun farmed on the Li - s h tt n 2 mounta.in, made pottery
on the hank of the Ho, fished in the Lei - t s e marnh (icl. in Li.i: Shen jen,
Kuan: Pan fa), and Yao got hold of him to the south of the Fu - t s e marsh>>.
Hanfei: Nan 1 is even more explicit: >>The farmers of the Li - s h a n 2 encroached
upon each other's boundaries, S h u n went there and farmed, and ttfter a year
the boundaries were correct; the fishermen on the Ho bank qmwrellecl about
the sha.llows in the river, S h .u n went there and fished, ttfter rt year they gave
way to their elders; the potters of the eastern Yi bttrbarians (Tung Yi) made
vessels thttt were coarse and ba.d, S h u n ,vent there and made pottery; after a
yettr their vessels were solid>> (observe tlrnt here again there is the theme of Shun
having some connection with the east).
So far Slllm's antecedentia before he came into prominence. Shn: Y,to tien
(Shun tien) gives his career. We have seen ttbove (p. 289) tlrn.t Y tt o, after 70
years on the throne, makes S h u n his minister and ttfter another :3 years gives
him the regency, and he takes over all the great functions of an emperor, he
lords; he makes every five years great toms of inspection to the four qua.rters and
in this connection offers sacrifices to the sacred mountains, corrects the stand11rcls
of measurement etc., and receives various tributes: every four yei,1·s he receives
the feudal lords of the four quarters in his mpital and examines their works. He
divides the rea,lm into 12 provinces, makes 12 sacred mountains their proteetorn,
and he »deepens the rivers>>. He institutes various penal hews. Then follows his
action agt1inst the »four punished ones>>, discussed in detail on JJ. 240 ftbove. In
the 28th year of S h u n ' s regeney Y a o dies, and after :{ yearn of mourning
Shun formally ascends the throne (cf. p. 290 above, where all these data have
been discussed). Then comes the section about the promotion of the prominent
men: Y ii, K 'i2 etc., see ri. 256 above (for all this extensive text, see Legge
p. 31 ff., Chavmmes MH I, p. ,32 ff.). Meng: Wan Clmng, shang supplies the last
item: just as Yao had ceded the throne to Shun as regent, so S h u n ueded
to Y i.i a.nd lived on for another 17 yettrs under Y ti' s regency (see p. 200).
We have seen above how richly varied the theme of the >>ceding>> emperor wa.s
in regard to Y a o . Here under S h u n we find it recurring ttlmost ad nanseain.
1 )_ ViTe have seen above p. 2,50 that when Yao wanted to C'erle the 1il1rone to Shun, Kung
Kung ren1onstra.tetl tlrnt he was n. comTJwrn:w p 1 i f u.
297

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
Meng, as related above, makes S h u n cede in favom· of Y a o ' s bad son T a n
C h u • at the end of the 3 years mourning, though the princes did not accept this.
In Lii: Hia hien, Y a o very respectfully asks instructions from a wise man
S h an K ii an 2, who is also mentioned as such in Siin: Ch'eng siang (there 1'T.
Sha 11 K ii an). and Chuang: Jang wang says that S h n 11 wished to cede the
throne to him, but he refused. Again, in Lii: Li su and Chuang: Jang wang he
similarly desires to CE\de first to his >>friend>> S h i: H u C h 'i N u n g and then
to his >>friend>> P e i Jen Wu T s e, with the same result. Finally, just as Yao
had found his 10 sons unworthy and preferred Shun, so Shun, who had 9
sons, deemed them inferior and rejected them (the eldest being Shan g K ii n,
Kyii: Ch'u hia) in favour of Y ii (Lii: K'ii s'i). - The theme that Yao had
ways of distinguishing prominent men has its due counterpart in S h u n ' s having
a >>ba,nner for proclaiming good mem (Kuan: Huan kung wen) and a >>criticising
wooden tablet>> hung up to proclaim the faults of culprits (Lii: Ts'i ch'i).
A legend connected with Shun is told in Tso: Chao 29: A certain Shu An
of Li a o2 (a dignitary whom Pan Ku in Han shu: Ku kin jen piao, by computing
the date from this legend, places in emperor K 'u' s time) had a descendant
Tung Fu. who was an expert in attracting dragons by giving them food that
they liked. As a keeper of dragons he served S h u n, who gave him the clan
name T u n g and the family name H u a n L u n g s h i and enfeoffed him in
T s u n g - c h ' u an, and the T s u n g Y i s h i' house were his descendants.
We saw on p. 2:37 above that the Tung clan and the Hu an Lung and
Tsu n g Yi houses were descendants of :C i, the Chu Jung, son of Chu an
H ii, and evidently Shu An was one of the early members of that line.
The pre-Han texts abound in descriptions of Shun' s be1ievolent rule. He
attracted wise men: he had as »teacher>> the sage Wu C h ' e n g C h a o (Siin
Ta li.ie); Shi'-tsi enumerates 6 sages in his suit: besides the Po Yang and S ii
Y a and F an g Hue i who already figured under Y a o above (see p. 292),
there were L o T ' a o, Tung Pu S h i' and T s ' in Pu K ' u n g. That he
himself was a sage of great discernment was revealed by his having double pupils
in the eyes (Shi-ts'i). The pre-Han texts disagree as to Shun' s grave. Li:
T'an kung says he was buried in T s ' an g - w u, confirmed by Ch'u: Li sao;
Meng, Li Lou, hia, says he was buried in Ming - t ' i a o, and Lii: An si says
in K i - s h 12 - the exact position of these places have, of course, been determined
by the commentators, but, as stated on p. 210 above, such identifications have
very little value indeed. All agTee that T s 'an g - w u was in the south, in the
present Hunan, which is supported by Ch'u: Li sao, where the poet visits
Shun ' s grave in T s ' an g - w u. Ming - t ' i a o, on the other hand, is
generally placed in southern Shansi, which is so unreconcilable with the T s' an g-
w u tradition that Cheng Hiian concludes that our M in g - t ' i a o here must
be quite another place among the >>southern barbarians>>! Again, Kao Yu (comm.
on Lii) says that K i - s h i 2 was in the vicinity of T s ' an g - w u. All this is
298
c~
,i
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS D.' ANCIENT CHI.VA
very well, but matters are further complicated by a tradition in Mo: Tsie timng.
hia: just as Y a o had gone north and instructed the eight T i - barbarian8 and
I >>died on the journey», so S h u n went west to instruct the seven J u n g - bar-
barians and >>died on the journey and was buried in the N a n - k i c h i: s h 1.
market-place of Nan - k i» (evidently the same as Lii's K i - s h 12 ). The idea
here is evidently that his grave was not in the south but in the far west.
1t The line of Shun' s descendants is very fragmentarily known. In early Hia
time we find them as feudal princes. Tso: Ai 1 tells us how king Shao K' an g
(the 5th H i a king) fled to the lord of Yu Y ii2 and became his (nmster of
1
J
kitchen =) major domo; Y ii2 S i, evidently the prince of Yu Y i12 at the time,
gave him two girls Y a o2 to be his wives. This legend is referred to in Ch'u:
Li sao (>>I wished to avail myself of S h a o K ' an g ' s not yet having married.
and keep for myself the t,vo Ya o2 girls of the house of Yu Y ii2»). Vi'e
,J remember that emperor Y a o had given S h u n his two daughters to be his
wives, and here this theme is repeated. Obviously the S h u n house at this time
had Y a o2 as its clan name. Tso: Chao 8 tells us that the fief at some long period
anterior to Chou was called Sue i (this S u e i wa,s situated in Shantung; it
was still a feudal state in C h o u time, and was extinguished by T s ' i in 681
B. 0.): »Throughout the time from Mo (son of Chu an H ii) clown to Ku
Sou (Shun' s father) there were none who transgressed the orders (of Heaven):
Shun enhanced this (merit) by his brilliant virtue, and his virtue was located in
Sue i; the Sue i (house) preserved it from generations to generation, all down
,4, to Hu Kung (the first prince of C h' e 11 in early Chou time) they were never
licentious, therefore the C h o u gave them a clan name and made them sacrifice
'! to the Y ii2 emperor (sc. Shun)>>. About this event further data are given in
)
l
Tso: Siang 25: Ngo Fu of the Y ii2 house was t ' a o c hen g >>Master of
pottery» of the C h o u ; on account of his merits and because he was the
descendant of a sage (i. e. Shun), the king (Wu wan g) gave his eldest
I1
daughter T ' a i K i to prince H u k u n g and enfeoffed him in C .h ' e n. Thus
the S h u n house was transferred from S u e i in Shantung to C h ' e n in Honan
(probably the rulers in Sue i, which was a feudal state until 681, see 11bove, were
still a branch of the S h u n house?). The clan name of the house of C h ' e n,
as we know from Tso: Yin :3, was K i.l e i3. This means that Wu w an g altered
the ancient clan name of the house, Ya o2 , into Kue i3 (after the river Kue i"
,I where Shun obtained Yao' s daughters in marriage). From the Tso: Siang
I 25 text it seems evident that it vms Ng o F u himself who became H u k u n g
of C h 'en.
l XIII B.
The systematizing and early Han texts, 011 the one hand deviate from the
pre-Han texts, and on the other provide much additional matter.
Ta Tai: Ti hi speaks of S h u n as having only one wife. by name K ii Y e n
299

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EA.STERN ANTIQUITIES
s h 1 (which contmdicts the Shu and Shl-tsi: accounts above); the Shi pen, on the
other hand, like Shu speaks of two girls, calling the first-n,nk one Men g. also
muned Ngo Hu an g (with ShI-tsI) and with the appellation Ngo King,
the second-rank one Yin g2 , aJso called Nii Ying (with Sh1-ts1). Ta Tai:
\,Vu ti te (connected ,,-ith the Ti hi above) embroiders the theme of Shun' s
enormous realm: Kia o - c h I ,1nd Ta, - k i a o in the south, Si - c h 1, K 'i.i -
s o u rmd T i - k ' i a n g (T i r111d K ' i a n g) in the west, S h a n J u 11 g and
Si-shen (= Su-shen 1) in the north, Uh'ang Yi", Niao Yi and
Y ii - mi n in the east - which forms a parallel to the similar themes about
H u a n g T i mid Y ,1, o above.
SY-ma, Ts'ien on the whole reproduces the Shu and other pre-Han sources
adduced under A above, but he !ms certltin features of his own. He tells us that
when S h u n ·' s mother died, Ku S o u renmrried, so tlrnt it \Vlts only his step-
mother who mtcltreltted him t1,nd Si an g 2 w,1,s only his lrnlf-brother (this contra-
dicts the pre-Ha,n tradition; Chuang: Tao Chi s,i,:ys Si ,1, n g 2 w,1,s Shun' s mu
t i i>hrother by the smne mother,>). And (in contradiction to 1fo-tsi above) Si:-ma
etsserts tlrnt Shun died ,1,nd was bnried in T s ' "n g - w u while i>on an
inspection tour in the south" (Cheng Hi.tan in comm. on Li: T'mi kung sa.ys it
wn,s when he went to ,1,tt,wk the Yu Mi a o, which is contn1,ry to all pre-Han
trnditions).
In regn,rd to the descenda.nts of Shun, the systematizing and em'ly Han texts
devi,1,te widely from the older sources. Ta T,1.i: Slrno !den sa,ys that Y ii trans-
ferred the Ya o2 clan (the house of Shun) - we lrnve seen that in fact they
were in S u e i, ,1,nd the transfer to C h ' en only took p)t1,ce under \Vu v1 an g
of Chou. Si-nrn Ts'ien (Ch'en K'i shY kia) says that the early descendants of
:-: h u n had t1,lre,l,(l)' ta.ken the clm1 name Kue i" (after the river Kue i3 ).
S h u n ' s son S h an g K tin w,1,s enfeoffed. and in the H i a dynasty the fief
w,1,s sometimes lost, sometimes restored. vVhen it came to 1V u wan g of
C h o u, he ,>sought for,> '" descendant of S h u n ,mcl i>fonncli> a certain K u e i 3
JU ,1, n, who was now enfeoffed in C h ' en, as Hu k u n g. This Kn e i3 M an
is entirely unknown in pre-Han sources, t1,nd the commentator Cheng Hi.ian (in
his Shi pu) tries to bridge over the discrepancy by rissmning that Kue i3 Man
wr1s a son of Ngo Fu (by Cheng wr. Ngo F u 2 ).
Slrnn Irni king, as usual, hooks some na.ture mytlrn on to the name of Shun. In
Hlrni: Chuei hing, where ,1, series of localities of legendary states, peoples and
pernonages are determined, it is said: i>(The phwe of) Si a o :M: in g (i>Night-
hrightness>>) and Chu Ku an g (i>Torch-brilliance,,) is situated in Ho - c ho u,
the island in the H o ; the sp,1.ce they illuminate are l OOO li square,> - evidently
S i a o 11 in g and Chu Kn '"n g were some JJOwerfnl Spirits of Light. Shan
!mi king seizes upon this folk-lore theme and says (k. 12): i>S h u n took as wife
the lady Teng Pi s h 1 (bter on the Ti wang shi ki alters this into T en g
Pei s h Y), she bore Si a o :\fin g and Chu Ku an g, they dwelt in the
300
I
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IS ASCIEST CHI.YA
great marsh of the Ho (Ho c h Y ta t s e), the magic force of the t1rn ladies could
illuminate this ph1ce for 100 li square,>. We have seen above that the vre-H,m
lore made Yao 's daughters (Ngo Hu an g and X i.i Ying) S Ji n n 's
wives, ,md this Teng Pi s h 'i is quite unknown 1 ) earlier, Shan hai king knows
of other i>descenclantsi> of Shun (k. 14): Shun bore Hi", and Hi" bore
tha Yao-mi n peovle. for the legend of which see p. a25 below. In miclcll-e Han
time, Liu Hiang (in Ku lie ni.i chuan) tells us another feature of Ku S o u ' s
wickedness. He tried to make Shu n drunk in order then to kill him, hut
S h u n ' s younger sister H i 4 s,wed him. According to H,m shu: Ku kin jen
piao her name w,1,s K 'u o S ho u (in Shuo wen wr. K' u o S ho u 2 ), mid Lin's
H i'1 ~ is probably a corruption of Ki W, whieh again is K ' u o S h o u
wrongly coalesced into one character. -~ 1V"ang Fu (Ts'ien fu lun: \,Vu te lun)
says that the lady 1V u Te n g saw r1, gre'"t ntinbow, wtts moved into pregnanc.v
J and bore Shun. He also says (Tsm1 hi.ie) that Shun had as his teacher K i
H o u. - In the 3rd century, Hmlllg-fu Mi (Ti wang shI ki) adds a good deal
more. Ku S o u ' s wife \Vu Ten g bore S h u n in Y a 0 2 - k ' i.i, therefore
he got the clan name Ya o 2. He had a dragon's face and big mouth, w1is bh1,ck in
colour and 6 c h ' Y and one inch tall. He was a pedlar in Tun - k ' i u (this
after the Shang shu ta chuan). Yao gave him his clrnrge to the south of the
.,I, Shun - t s e nmrsh , .. and gave him a foltst in the Er - k u 11 g paJaoe, let
him sit with his face to the south and asked him ,,bout government; he gave him
fine silk garments and lutes and built ,1, 1mlace for him and enfeoffed him in
Y ii2 , , • when Si W a, n g NI u, admiring S h u n ' s virtue, c,1,me and presented
white y i.i an rings and k i.i e tokens, she presented ,1, geographical nrnp to
Yi, Slum's master of forests . , .; when Shun w11,s emperor he constantly went
and pt1,id his respects to his old father Ku Sou, therefore he ,rns called i>the great
Shu rn>; he resided in Hien-yang . , . : when he was 83 years old he recom-
mended Y i.i to Heaven, at 95 made him regent, after 5 years regency,
S h u n died, etc.
XIVA.
The legend of Y ii is one of the most important m1d most widely spread in
the pre-Han literature. \Ve have seen that the trndition in the families descending
from Y i.i reckoned him as grandson of Chu a 11 H i.i and son of Kun, for
whose legends see p. 250 above. Meng, vVan Chang, slrnng tells us how after his
17 years' regency Y i.i (see p. 290 above) w,mted to make S h u n ' s son
Shan g K i.i n emperor and himself withdrew to Yang - c h' e 11 g, but the
I people preferred him and 1m1,de him sovereign.
1 ) This has troubled later c01n111entators; bnt Li: T'an knng says: 1>S h n n was buried in the ·wilds
of T s' an g - ,vu, his three wives did not follmv him (sc. into the grt1Ye}1) -- very good, says Ho
Yi-hung (c01n1n. on Shan hni king), evidently Shun had besides the t\-vo daughters of Yao i:t third
f wife: the T en g P i s h ·i of Shan hai king! ·
'
'i'
301
I

BULLETIN OF THE J1USEUJ1 OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
The principaJ theme of the Y ii. legend is that of his great work in saving the
world from the inundations. The fullest account is that of the first Shu chapters.
The Yao tien (Shun tien) alrea,dy tells us how Shun promoted prominent officers
(see p. 25(l) and in the first place made Y ii. s 1 - k 'u n g >>Master of works>>, in
order to p 'in g s hue i t 'u regulate the waters and earth; according to the
8h11 aecount, it wa,s thus not until after the death of Y a o that Y ii became
the successor of his worthless father K u n ,,s regulator of the floods (in Y a o ' s
time, a,s we h,1ve seen on p. 297, it was S h u n himself who had started the
regulating work by instituting the 12 provinces and he >>dee1Jened the rivers>>). In
the following chapter (K,w Yao 1110, to which origina.lly belonged also the present
Yi Tsi) there ,we mostly solemn moralizing discussions between Shun, Kao
Yao ,wd Y ii. but also (in the present Yi Tsi) a report of Y ii.' s to Shun about
his works: >>The flooding waters assn.iled Heaven, vastly they embraced the rnoun-
t,1ins and overtopped the hills . . . I mounted my four kinds of conveyances and
follml'i.ng the mountains I cut the trees; together with Yi (*·i2k) I procured food
for the multitudes; I opened pncSsages for the nine rivers and conducted them to
the four seas; I deepened· the clmnnels ,1nd canals and conducted them to the
rivern, and together with T s i (= Hou T s i) I sowed ... >>. The following
long chapter Yh kung then gives a great expose of the 9 provinces which Y ii.
regnla.tecl (observe that Shun, according to Yao tien, had made 12 provinces;
Tso: Siang 4, quotes an old doeument in Shu style, where it is likewise said that
Y i_i »delimited the 9 provinces>>) and the enormous enginering works he carried
out in them. There a.re score.~ of names of rivers, mountains ,1nd localities, and
the chapter gives in fact. a rough geography of the world ,vith which the Chinese
ha.cl some cont>cct -- by sight or hearsay - in the early half of the Chou dynasty. 1 )
The rea,der m,1y refer to J. Legge. The Chinese Ch1ssics III, p. 92-117, and (best)
to E. Chavannes, ::YIH L p. Hl3-14D. Mo: Kien ai, chung likewise gives an expose
of the works of Y ii., full of geogmphical names.2) On the other hand, Mencius
seems to phcee the great deeds of Y ii.. in the time ,vhen Y a o was still living
(::\"Ieng: T'eng \Ven kung, slrnng): »In the time of Yao, the world was not yet
brought into order, flooding wa.ters flowed crosswise and inundated the whole
world; the vegetation w,1s luxuriant, the beasts swarmed, the five kinds of grain
could not be grown, the beasts pressed upon men ... Yao a.lone grieved over
this, he rnised 8 h u n and he widely regulated it; he let Yi (*·flk) manage the'
fire, Y i set fire to mounta,ins and nrnrshes. and burned them, a,nd the beasts fled
and hid: Y li led off the tl rivers. he regulated the T s i and the T ' a rivers
1 ) ~eedlesR to say, the seholm·s of :En.stern Hem anrl later tin1es have identified every single point
in t.his 1>geogrnphy1>, as mny be gnthered from_ the VVest0rn eornmenta.ries of Richthofon, Legge, Couv-
rcnr, Chnvnnnes; it is obvimlS hmvevcr, that these identifiea.tions are to a very la.rge extent quite
futile, for the reasons stated on p. 208 above.
2 ) Pi Yfmn n.ucl Sun Yi-jang lu-1.ye tn,ken great 1x1ins to identify all these loealities and bring the
acrount into n1·cord ,v.ith the Yrt kunµ,: in the Rhn.
302
l
\
B. I<.ARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS DJ AXCJE:YT CHINA
and led them into the sea; he opened up for the Jn and the H a. n rivers, ordered
the Hu a i and S i.i rivers and led them into the Kiang river ... during
that time Y ii. was eight years away from home, :3 times he passed his door but
did not enter>>. Then in .:vieng: T'eng Wen kung, hia, it is sh1ted: >>In the time of
Ya, o, the waters broke out and inundated the central kingdom; snakes and dragons
occupied it, the people had nowhere to settle, in the low grounds they made nests
in the trees, in the high grounds they nmde caves ... he let Y i_i. regulate it, Y i_i
dug the soil and led (the water) to the sea, he drove out the s1mkes and dragons
and relegated them to the marshes: the waters had their course through the middle
of the land, that was the rivers Kiang. Hu a, i, Ho and H an; when the
obstructions had been removed. the birds and be,tsb that ha.cl hurt people were
done away with, and then people obt,1ined ordered lm1cl a.ncl dwelt there>>. Other
etcrly texts are still less explicit about the time of Yi.i's work. Kyli: Chou,
hia tells us how Y a o killed Y ii' s father K n n on the Y 11 - s h a n and
continues: >>Afterwards, P o Y ii thought of his precleoessor's lawlessness» a.nd
carried through his great labour (described in detail), assisted by 8 I Y ii e (alias
Po Y i 2 [*djJrJ, thus not the Po Yi [*ickJ stated in Shu a.nd :'l:Ieng to lmve been
his coadjutor), and »August Heaven,>, i. e. the emperor, was so plea,sed with it
that he remunerated him with the realm, gave him the clan rnune :SI and the
family name Yu Hi a>>. :M:o: Kien ai, chung likewise simply says: »When Y li
regulated the world>>, and Sh1-ts'i narrates: >>Anciently Lung - men w,,s not yet
opened, L i.1 -1 i an g was not yet bored through. the Ho (Yellow River) passed
above Meng - men, it greatly swelled and flowed irregularly, even hills and
high mounds, it destroyed them all. tlmt was called the flowing waters (the deluge):
Y ii. led off the Ho and gave vent to the Kiang, for ten years he did not ,;oe
his home, on his hands there grew no nails, on his shanlrn there grew no hair, 1 )
he contracted a sickness which made him shrivel in half the body, so that in
walking he could not carry the one leg past the other, people c,1llecl this 'the walk
of Y li'>>. Similar accounts occur in L11: Ai lei (where it is ,idded that >>the lands the
lives of which he saved were 1800), Lii.: Hing lun, Chuang: T'ien hia, Lie: Yang C'lrn.
Hanfei: Wu tu. Yi.i's great deeds are ,clluded to in Sh1: odes 210, 244, 301, :304.
they are further praised in Tso: Siang 4, a.ml his a.c-hievements ,we drastically
summed up in Tso: Chao 1 by a. prince of Liu: >>If it were not for Y ii, would we
not be fishes!>>. The grea.t deluge lasted for i5 ye>1rs ac·cording to .Kuan: Shan
k\ian, 7 yea,rn according to Mo: Ts'i hmm (quoting a >>Book of the Hi a>>).
It was recognized long ago, indeed already by Eel. Biot (,J. As. 1842), that the
account of the venerable Shu about the engineering works of Y ii is ,,lrea.cly a
I scholastic endeavour to make history out of a deluge legend; but the im11ortm1t
point is that here, as in the case of the earlier deluge legends, those a,bout Kun g
Kung and Kun (see pp. 218, 250 above), it is ,1bove all a hero legend: the preponder-
1) Chuang: Tsai yu similarly sayt> of Y n, o and Shun that th!:'y wel'e ~o ndive t-hnt l)tlwir tl:.ighs
l had no ,vhite, fh:-,,sh, their shanks had no hail'I).
t 303
f
l
!
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
ating theme is not so mucb the catastrophe of the inundation as its connection
with a, hero who copes with it. Tbis is because most of the early Chinese legends
that are known to us have been preserved precisely because they belong to the
traditions of grandee houses who reckoned such heroes as their primeval ancestors.
The story of Y ii ' s strenous work is, of course, often embroidered. Lu: Kin
t'ing says that »when Y ii took a bath, he thrice had to grip his hair>> (hold it
together while he attended to some urgent business), etc. But it is important
that in his work he had Heaven's support. Shu: Hung fan says tlmt Heaven
gave to Y ii the Gre>it Plan in 9 divisions, embodying the fundamental principles
of a sage government (for transl. see Legge, Oh. CL III). And in his extensive
travels he came to many strange lands and had various adventures, but he was
always equal to the situations. iVhen he entered the Lo - k u o >>Land of the
naked», he stripped himself naked in order to accord with the native customs
(Ts'e: Cimo 2, Lii.: Kuei yin); when he pttssed the Kiang, a dragon lifted the boat
on its back, to the terror of rill its inmates, but Y ii loudly declared that he had
Hea,ven's charge and was afrnid of no dragon, whereupon the dragon lowered its
tail and fled (Lii: Ch1 fen). Lii: K'iu fen gives a vivid account of the strange
regions he visited: >>In the east he came to the F u - m u, the F u tree ( = F u -
sang, see p. 269 t,bove), where the sun goes up at the nine fords, and to the
wilds of T s ' i n g K ' i a n g, the Blue K ' i a n g people, the place of the dense
trees, the mountains that reach heaven, the lands of the Birds' Valleys and the
Blue Hills, to the country of the He i C h' L the Black Teeth (cf. p. 269 above);
in the south he came to the countries of K i ti o - c h 'i, S u n - p ' u and S ii -
men, with red grain and lacquer trees m1d bubbling hot wells, to K i u- yang
the mountain of the nine Brilliances, to the place of the Y ii - mi n, the
·winged people, and the Lo - mi n, the Naked people. and the land of the
immortals; in the west he came to the country of S an - we i (cf. p. 249
rihove), below the vV u - s ha n, the ·wizard's mountain, the people who
drink dew m1d inhaJe air. the mountain of the accumulated gold, the land of
those with one aim and three faces; in the north he came to the J e n C h e n g
country, the extTemes of the Hi a - ha i, on the Heng - s ha n mountain,
to the countries of the K ' i_i an Jun g, the wilds of the K ' u a Fu (see p.
281), the amassed waters of the region of the Y it K' i an g (see ibid.)
and the mountain of the Heaped stones ... he obtained Yao l>ffu (=Kao
Yao), Hua Yi(= Po Yi), Chen K'uei (Si.in: Ch'engsiangfor Chen
K 'u e i has C h 'i C h 'en g), and Heng and Ko, those frrn men assisted
Yii>>.
Y i_i ,nis also a warrior. Lii: Chao lei says that Y i_i attacked T s' a o - ,v e i,
K 'ii - a o and Yu H u 3 • About the first two nothing is known, but Yu H u 3
forms quite an interesting theme. There tire several entries about Y ii' s warfare
with Yu H u 3 , the lord of H u 3 • Chuang: Jen kien shI likewise says that Y i.i
attacked and devastated Yu H u 3 • In the Shu: Kan shI it is told how there
304:
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIEXT CHI,\'A
was a great battle in Kan and. how >>the king>> before the battle made a great
declaration about the misdeeds of Yu H u 3 • This chapter is quoted by Mo: Ming
kuei, hia, and there, as Mo lrns it: »The deelaration of Y i_i says•>, which show,
that he considered the battle of Kan as fought by Y ii. Yi Chou slm: Sh'i ki
says that >>when the Hi a, (honse) had just risen>> (Hi ri chi f ting hi n g),
the lord of H u'1 ,vas weak but not respectful, he himself died and his sta,te was
destroyed>>. This likewise indicates the time of Y it. On the other hand, the
same Lii, ,ev-ho said above that Y ii attacked Yu H u 3 , in Lii: Sien ki narrates:
>>Po K 'i4 of Hi a (Yi\' s son, the 2nd Hi a king) battled with Yu Hu".
the lord of H u 3 , in the marsh of Kan, but was not victorious; he blamed
himself for his unworthiness, lived frugally for a year, and the Yu Hu" sub-
mitted>>. The Shu sit (Preface to the Shu) lms followed this and ascribes the battle
of Ka 11 to K' i4, not to Y ii. Moreover Tso: Chao 1 seems to support this.
for it says: »Shu 11 had the Sa 11 NI i a o (rebels). Hi a hrid (the rebeb) Kut, 11
and H u 3 , Shan g had (the rebels) She 113 and P 'e i». Now Kuti n, as we
shall see belmY, refers to the time of K 'i.J, and H u 3 here, folhn,·ing after Ku rt n,
is evidently carried on to the reign of K ' i 4 by the Tso 1,nthor. Thus the pre-
.Han sources cannot be reconciled as to Y ii or K 'i4 being the fighter at Kan.
Hanfei: Shuo yi adds the detail that the lol'Cl of H u:1 had a wicked councillor
S h i Tu. There must have existed some more detailed legend about the rebellions
lord of H u 3 , for it is alluded to in some lines in Ch'u: T'ien wen, wl1ich are
1mtranslatable since the story to which they refer is not known.
Y ii forced a vast realm to submit. Tso: Ai 7 says: »Y ii assembled the feudal
lords on the T 'u - s ha n mountain, those who held jade (insigniti of investiture)
and silk (as tribute) were 10000 states>>. He was also a stern overlord. "Hanfei:
SbI sie says: Y i_i. brought the feudal lords to andience on the Kn e i - k i mount-
ain; Fang Feng _s h 1, the lord of Fa, n g Feng, came too fate rind Y (i
killed him>>. The story, however, is more interesting in the version of Kyii: Lu hia:
>>Anciently, Y ii brought together all the Spirits (she n) on the Kue i - k i
mountain; the lord of F an g Fen g eame too late m1d Y ti 1nmished him by
death; his bones filled a whole carriage>>. Evidently this ·was a gathering for
bringing sacrifices to nature Spirits, and the feudal lords lmd to be present and
officiate. The author makes Confucius expound the event: 1 ) Fang Feng
s h I was· the sacrificer to the Y i_i 3 - s ha n, of the clan T s 'i2 ; under the Y i.i 2,
H i a and S h a n g dynasties they were lords of vV a. n g M a n g (W a n g
Mang s h 1), during the Chou they were the C h ' an g Ti '>Gim1t Ti -har-
barians>> (hence the enormous skeleton above).
T 'u - s ha n and Kue i - k i are the mountains tha.t 11lay a leading part in
Y ii' s legend. In his report in Shu: Kao Yao mo (Yi Tsi) Y ti stiys: >>vVhen I
1 } He is n1ade to explain she n >>Spirit>> 1:u,;; =-= l>the divine ones)> in the sense of the lords ,vho
1>guardech the Spirits of the 11101.intains and rh-ers. The text would then mean: i>Y i"1 assem.bled all
the she n .guardians of the Spirits (i. e. the lonls)1>, which of c01use is pure schohrntiC'::;;.
20 305
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
maniecl the hidy of T 'u - s ha n, it wa,s the days sin, j en, k u e i, k i a, (sc.
that I stliyed with her); (my son) K ' i4 cried and wept, but I did not cherish him
a,s a, sorn> (I was so lJusy). Li\: Yin ch'u narrates how Y it during his work saw
the la.dy of the T ' n S h ,, n s h "i house, but before he had time to >>meet her>>
11·ith clue ceremonies (for nmrriage), lrnd to go south on m1 inspection tour; the
hdy brought aJong her nrnid a.nd >>waited upon>> Y i\ to the south of the T ' u -
s ha, n. mid nrnde a song ,,bout it. Ch'u: 1"ien wen refers to the same story:
,,¥ i\ · s forces achieved merit. he descended to inspect the (four) regions of the
earth: hm,· did he get tlrn,t girl of T ' u - s h ,1 n, ,mcl joined himself with her in
T ' a i - s an g 2 .» To the K u e i - k i mountc1in we shall revert presently. But
the L i - s h a n 2 of the S h u n legend also crops up in connection with Yi\ :
Kuan: Shan k\ia.n .~ays tlrnt Y ii cast money with meta,l from Li - s ha n 2 to
redeem such children as had been sold by their starving parents.
The theme of the grea,t men learning from other wise persons that is such a,
favourite in the legends of th0 preceding sovereigns of course crops up here as
well. \Ve lmve seen tlrn,t Si.in: Ta hie s>tys Y ii studied under Si \Vang Kuo
»(the lord of) the S i \Vang state>> (S i vV an g lYI u). Li\: Tsun shr says his
•>tm1,chel'» was Ta C h 'en g C h 1. Sh1-ts1 says that >>Y i.i had a long neck,
(a. mouth like) a raven's beak, bis face wa,s also ugly; that the whole world followed
him tend considered him ,1, sage w,1s hem1use he was fond of learning>>. Ts'e: Wei
2 tells ns a, rnora.lizing story: a. lady servnnt of the emperor, called Yi Ti, nmde
wme good wine and presented it to Yi\; he found it good, sent away Yi Ti
and refniinocl from all wine-drinking, saying: »in future there will s1uely be such
m, lose their states because of wine>>.
Y ii resided in Yang - c h 'en g and reigned for 45 years, according to the
authentic Chu shu ki nien. Again we meet with the usual theme of the ceding
of the throne. Meng: \Van Chang, slmng says >>Y ii recommended Yi (Po Yi,
*·i(k) to Heaven (and he became regent),1) after 7 ye,1rs Yi\ died; at the end
of the a ymi.rs' mourning (the smne theme as in the legends of Yao and S h u n
above), Yi withdrew in favour of Yi\' s son to the north of the K i - s ha n
mountain (d. p. 292) and the people turned to K 'i4 • Similarly, Mo: Shang hien,
slrnng says tlrnt ,>Y ti raised Yi in the Yin - fang (>>Dark regiorn>) ,md handed
nver the government to him, ,,nd the 9 provinces became perfected>>. On the other
ha.nd there is a pre-H,m tradition tlrnt things did not go so sinoothly as Meng
presumes. Ha,nfei: Wai eh'u slmo, yu narrates: >>Y ii loved Yi and charged him
with the (government of) the realm, but after all he 1nacle K ' i ' s men officers;
when he (Yi\) became old and considered tbat K 'i4 was not worthy of being
given the realm, he lmnded it over to Yi (i. e. nmde him his successor on the
throne): but the power and pre.~tige were all with K 'i4 , mid K'i4 and his party
att,wkecl Yi mid took the re,ilm from him,>. The smne account recurn in Ts'e:
1) T'he same term as hp 0mploys eonccniing Shun'::-; 11reeommenrling1) Y ii to Heaven1l 17 years
bPfore hi;-; death: it denntes ~1 re.gen(•y.
306
I B. KARLGREl'i: LEGENDS k'iD CULTS IN 1-lNCIEXT CHINA.
{ Yen 1, and this same tradition is referred to in Ch'u: T'ien wen: ,>When K' i4
supplanted Yi as ruler, why did he in the end get into difficulties. wl1y did K ·' i4
have worry but was able to hold on ,mcl be suc:c:essfnl?)); and: »\Vhy did Hou
Yi make a (change:) revolt and (the house of) Yi\ fall clown?» The anthentic
Chu shu ki nien says briefly: >>Yi tried to obtain K' i's throne, but I(' i4
• killed him».
The theme which we have met with under Yao and S h n n (pp. 2D3, 2!HI) that
the emperor should die when on a journey recurs under Y ii. :\Jo: Tsie tsang,
1 hit, says: >>Yi\ in the e,1st instructed the fl Yi -ba.rlm1fans (k i u Yi), he died
i on the journey and was buried in Kue i - k i (Li.\: An si likewise gives Kue i -
1 k i as Y ii' s grave).
} Yi\ became the founder of the long and glorious Hi t1 dynasty; the fate of the
family dming the Shan g - Yin dynasty is quite unknown, but the first Chou
king enfeoffed the descenda,nts (clan name S \) of the Hi a in K · i (see p. :2Hi
\ above); that the princes of K 'i were the desce11dm1ts of the Hi a, is confirmed
in Lun: Pa yi and Tso: Hi 31. Another feuch1,l state with princes of the clan S 1
who were also descendants of the Hi a was Tse n g .see Tso: Hi :31. I\)'i:i:
Chou, hia. Among the grandee families who were not feucl,1J lords in Chou
time there were cilso descendants of the Hi a. e. g. ,1, clignitr,ry in T s i n named
Tung - p o2, who nnrnt have been of this dan, since a.t fl Hi a. sa.crifice he func-
tioned as representative of the dead (Kyii: Tsin 8).1)
XIVB.
The systematizing and early Ha.n texts lrno1Y ,, good deal rn01·e of Y ii than
the free pre-Han sources. Ta Tai: Ti hi tells us tlrnt Kun, Y ii 's father. nmrried
a lady of the Yu Shen s h 1 house, by name Xii C h 1 s h 'i. and she hore
vV en Ming (i. e. Yi\) ; ShI pen, on the other lrnnd, says that she was of the
Yu Sin s h 1 house, named Ni\ C h 1 and she bore K ti o M i (another
appellation of Y ii). Ti hi says bis wife the hidy of the T ' u S h an s h 1 house
Imel the name Nii Kia o (Sh\ pen's version N i:i Ku a is simply a wrong
charn.cter due to a, varia.nt Nii K i a 0 2 ) who bore K 'i:'
SI-ma Ts'ien in the main simply reproduces tl1e Shu a.ncl :Heng drnpters a:bout
Y ii and other stray items of the J>re-Han texts cited above, \Yith snmll vm-iations:
thus, for instance, the >>8 yea.rs>> which Meng says Y i:i ,n1s awa,y from borne he
improves into »13 years>>; he s,1ys tlmt Y ii first wanted to cede tbe government
to Kao Yao, but when the latter unfortmrntely died, he ga.ve it to Yi; he
says that Y ii weut to the south of the Kiang and assembled the feudal lords
in order to make them give a.cconnts of their merits, m1cl then he died ,wcl Wtts
l) m:-mn Ts'ien. (Shl ki: Hia pen ki, at the end) ernm1ernteR no ]e:-;s than 1:~ fmnilic;:., ,d1il'li ..,n~r<;1
·deseenclants of Yi.'!; Et.8 pointed out by Ts\1ei Shn, se,·eral of these are obvionsly wrnug, nnd for mo:-5t
of the other::i Si'-1na ha.s no s11pport in pre-Han ~ources.
307
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUZvl OF FA.R EA.STERN ANTIQUITIES
··----- -·--~----
buried there: the mountain hence ,rns called I( u e i - k i (•>the Rendering of
accmmts,,); he says (in Shi: ki; Liu kuo nien piao) that Y ii grew up among the
Si K' i an g. the K' i an g tribes of the west. 1 ) A more important innovation
is his theory that the 11rinces of the grm1t state Y ii e were descendants of Y i.i.
(Sh1 ki: Yiie wang Kou Tsien sh1 kia); their t1ncestor, according to SY-ma, was a
younger son of king Shao K' an g of the Hi a dynasty, who was enfeoffed
in K u e i - k i in order to keep up the sacrifices to Y i.i. This is contn,ry to the
pre-Han tnedition. i\Io: Fei kung, hia says that king Yi K 'u e i (of Y tl e)
came from Yu K i.i. and settled in Y ii e. And when the Chou tradition would
connect the ba,rbarian chiefs with the ancient Chinese ruling families, it is not to
the house of Y i.i. (Hi a,) tlmt the Y ii e house is annexed but to that of Shao
H n o and C h u te n H ii vi:1 C h ' u n g and L i, for Kyft: Cheng yi.i st1ys that
the house of Y i.i. e, just like that of K' u e i, had the clan name Mi (and -was
of the same kin as the house of C h 'u).2) Finally S1-1na (Sh1 ki: Feng shan shn,
Chavannes III, 483) ascribes the casting 0£ the famous >>9 tripods>>, the regalia of
subsequent dynasties, to Yi\, whereas the pre-Han tradition connects them with
his son K' i.4 see p. 31() below.
Lie-ts1 (T'ang wen) seizes upon Y li' s great travels in order to make him see
various wonderful things: the gia,nt fish Kun in the Northern ocean, the giant
bird P 'en g and the p.imdise country Chung - p e i, ,,the Utmost North>>;
and (Lie: Huang Ti) he makes Yi.\, like ]<' u Hi, Nii K u a, and S hen
Nun g, a supernatunel being with a snake's body, human face, ox's head and
tiger's nose. Hmei: Siu wu says Y ii ' s ears had three orifices. Hnai: Chuei
hing st1ys tlrn,t Y i_i in his great works lrncl two assistants: T ' a i C h t1 n g, who
went te stupen<lons distance from the extreme east to the extreme west, tend S h u
Hai who went from the extreme north to the extreme south; and the theme of
the magical ,,swelling mould>> ,vhich Slrnn hai king connects with the K u n legend
(see p. 2fi4 above) is Jiere cipplied by Huai to Y ii.: he used the >>swelling moulch
to dam up the ,vciters. In Hnai: f-Jiu wu, Y Li. in order to cope with the
inundations, devotes his body to the (god of the) Yang - y i.i river (plagiarizing
the theme of T ' r, n g 's devotion, see p. 328 below). Another very curious item
is found in Huai: :Fan lun: Yi\ laboured for the world, and after his death he
became She god of the Soil: we have seen that the pre-Han texts invariably
make H o u T ' u become S h e, Another Ht,n-time addition to the legend of
Y i.i (or K 'i 14 ) concerns the rebellion of the lord of H u:i (Yu Hu'). In
pre-Hien texts he is regarded a,s a wicked rebel with a bad councillor (Hanfei, see
1 ) Hunng-fu l\1i (np. Chnng Shou-tsie e01nn1. 1:bid.) quotes }i.fencius to the effeet that Y ft was born
in S h .l - n i u and was 1,a mn,n of the western Yi )lbnrbarinnS)) (s i Yi c• h 1 j en). l\'Iencins sa,ys
nothing of the kind, which illustrates the grea.t unrelia,bi.lity of Huang-fu.
~) The idea of Sl-1nlt.'s secn1s to be due t,o 11 rnisunclerstanding of a text in Tso: Ai 1, where it is
said thnt )\(the prince of) Y i'L e is greater than Shao K.' an g wns,> - a good exn1nple of tht~
historicnl ntlne of the Sh°i kL
308
B. KilRLGREN: LEGENDS -4-:,,·n CULTS IN ANCIESiT CHINA
p. 305 above). But Hmti: Ts'i su tells u~ that the lord of H n" fought for a
righteous cause but perished (Hii Shen in Shuo wen says he wies of the same
clan, S 1, as the royal Hi a), and Ka,o Yu (comm. on Huai) explains: the lord
of H u 3 was an elder brother of king K 'i4 by a second-rank mother; since
Yao and S h u n had not made their sons their successors, K 'i4 ought not to
have become Yi\ 's successor, therefore his brother the lord of H u 3 tried to
depose him.
Shan lrni king follows up one of the versions of the Kun g Kun g legend:
that which places Kn n g Ku n g in the time of Y a o. Since the Kung
Kung legend (notwithstanding its different treatment in the Shu. which 11u1,kes
Kung Kung an officer, first meritorious and then wicked ,mcl punished) is
fuhdamentally a deluge myth, Shan hai king hooks on to it another legend of
noxious -waters and brings the btter into the same chronological scheme by con-
necting it with the great deluge hero Y ii : Ku 11 g Kn n g lmcl a c: h ' en vi1ssal
Si an g Liu (k. 8) or Si a 11 g Ya, o (k. 17) who .Imel H hertds, make's body
and was blue, who ate on the K i u s h an ,,Nine mountains>> (k. 8) or ate of the
K i u t 'u ,,Nine soils>> (k. 17); what he spat out a,nd deposited became springs
and marshes, but if they were not rmngent they were hitter, the animaJs could
not endure them (k. 17); what he struck t1gainst and dug UJJ became marnhes and
ravine torrents (k. 8); when Y ii. (the deluge hero) dammed u1J the flooding waters,
he killed Si t1 n g Li u, his blood was rancid, one could not grow the grn,ins there,
there was too much water and one could not dwell there; Y i.i dammed it up,
he thrice nrncle (a wall of) a j en (a nmn's height), but thrice it tumbled down,
and then he made it into a pond; all the emperor,~ nmde their look-out towers
on it>>.
In middle Han time the inevitable theme of the superna,tural birth crops up.
Lun heng: K'i lrnai sieys tha,t, Y ii ' s mother swallowed )ohm-fruits and hecmne
pregnant. Wang Fu (Ts'ien fu lun: W'u te Jun) on the contmry hm, it tlrnt the
lady Siu K i saw a, comet, she was moved to pregnancy and bore Y ii.. Huang-
fu Mi clumsily reproduces both themes: his mother, S i u K i2, walking in the
mountains, saw a comet pa,ss through the ]If a, o eonstellation; she dreamt that
she received it and her mind was scared; again she swallowed the divine pearl-
lotus fruit, her bosom burst and she bore Y ii, etc.
In Ht1,n time a legend wt,s current which in some way connected Y ii ' s wife,
mother of K 'i4, with a 8/one. The earlies texts t1re Hua.i: Siu wu: Y ii she n g
y ii s h 1 ~ .tl:: Jfi' 15 >>Yii wa.s born of a stone,>, m1cl a, proclamation (Han shu:
Wu ti ki) of emperor Wu Ti of the yetir 110 B C. in whir,h he rnys tlmt on the
Hua-shan mountain he has seen >>the stone of the mother of Hi R Ho u K ' i'1».
Kao Yu (2nd c. A. D.) comments thus on the Hm1,i: Siu wn passage a.bove: ,,His
mother was moved (to pregnancy) by a stone t,nd bore Y ii ; breaking her bosom
he came out». But his contemporary Ying Slmo (00mm. on Han slrn: vVu ti ki)
has another explanation: >>\Vhen K 'i 4 was born, his mother was transformed
309
 BULLETIZ...' OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-------·
into a stone>>.1) A fuller story, however, is only given by the T'ang commentator
Yen Sh'i-ku (d. 645 A. D.): »His mother was the lady of the T 'u Shan s hi;
when Y ii regulated the flooding waters and perforated the Hu a n - y ii a n
mountain, he changed himself into a bear; he said to T ' u S h a n s h i : when
you want to bring me food, when you hear the sound of the ru:um, then come;
Y i.i. jumped on a stone and by mistake hit the drum, T 'u Shan s hi went and
looked, and Y ii had just then become a bear; she felt ashamed and went away
and came below the S u n g - k a o mountain and changed into a stone; just then
she (bore =) was pregnant with K ' i4 ; Y ii said: give me my son; the stone
burst on the north side and K 'i 4 was born. For the happening see Hua·i-nan-tsl>>
($ Ji!, Hu a i - n an - t s i). The formulation of the last clause is significant.
Yen Shi:-ku, when citing verbatim, always introduces the quotation by a: X y i.i. e
>>X says>>. Here he says simply, at the end, that the happening is to be found in
Huai-nan-tsi, which means that Yen's passage is not a, real quotation. But it is
highly interesting to witness how 500 years later the Sung scholar Hung Hing-tsu
(comm. on Ch'u: T'ien wen), who knew his Han slm and his Yen Shi:-ku, reproduces
the text but now boldly heads it wit,h: Hu a i - n an - t s i y ft e »Huai-nan-tsi
says». Habent siv:i fata Zibelli. In fact, Huai contains nothing of the kind. It. is
futile to object that Huai originally consisted of 21 chapters >>Nei p'iem and 33
chapters »Wai p'iem> (Han shu: Yi wen chi), of which only the former now remain,
and that the quotation might be from the lost chapters, for they were lost long
before Yen Shi-ku (Suei shu: King tsi chi knows only the 21 Nei p'ien chapters),
and could not have been known to him, still less to Hung Hing-tsu in the 12th
century. (Yen Shi-ku's phrase: >>For the happening, see Huai-nan-tsi>> evidently
simply refers to the brief Huai passage in the Siu-wu passage quoted above: >>Y ii
was born of a stone>>, which Yen believes refers to this tale; for the carelessness
of Hung Hing-tsu in his references see p. 324 below).
Moreover it is very unlikely that this long tale existed in early Han time, for
neither Wang Ch'ung nor Huang~fu Mi, who avidly seize upon every supernatural
legendary theme (the former to criticize it, the latter to incorporate it in his
>>history>>) adduce it. Even more significant, perhaps, is that Liu Hiang, who in
his Ku lie ni.i. chuan diligently brings together all the legends of the early emperors
(cf. for instance his full story about Shun) not only has nothing about the
mother changing into a stone but on the contrary describes in detail how she lived
and brought up and cared for K ' i4 • Thus, as far as early Han-time lore is
concerned, Kao Yu is in all probability right in his interpretation of the Huai and
Wu Ti texts (>>the stone of the mother of K ' i•,1 was the magical stone which
caused the miraculous conception), and the long yarn falsely imputed to Huai-
nan-tsi by Hung Hing-tsu is an innovation of late Eastern Han and following
1) There is an obscure ljue in Ch'u: T'ien wen which Chu Hi believes refers to this change into a
-stone; but, as pointed out by V{ang Fu-chi 3: :Jc Z., the line as it stands trans1nitted is quite
unintelligible and can only be invested wit,h such a meaning by a violent forcing of the text.
310
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA.
~---------·~----
r
epochs; its various details indeed tally very well ·with the style of the writers of
the· Six Dynasties (Shu yi ki, Sou shen ki, etc.) and it is easy to see where the
materials for its concoction have been culled: Y ii. ' s father K u n, on being
killed, was transformed into a yellow bear (pre-Han theme, see 11. 250 aboYe) -
so his son in his work in the wilds to9k the shape of a bear; when Y ii ' s mother
l: bore him, he burst her bosom and came out (Huang-fu :Mi, 3rd c. A. D. theme,
'
see p. 309 above) - so his son K' i must have been born by a similar »bursting,,.
Another striking example of how the post-Han authors improve upon the
ancient myths is the story of the lord of F a n g ]' e n g, who came too late and
was killed (p. 305 above). A work Kuo ti t'u (attributed to Tsi.J.1 time by the
author of the Tsin shu: Yi wen chi) narrates: When Y i.i. had killed Fang
F e n g s h i, the virtue of the H i a house was at its peak, and two dmgons
descended to him; Y i.i. made Fan s h 1 drive them (before his cha,riot) and
c:.i made a tour in the south; when the Spirit of F an g Fe n g saw Y ti, he became
angry and shot at him; th_ere was a sudden clap of thunder,-the two dnigons flew
up and went away; the Spirit became afraid and with a pointed weapon pierced
his own heart and died; Y ii pitied him and cured him with the drug of
immortality; this (gave rise to what) was called C h 'u an hi u n g k u o ,,the
(country =) people of the pierced breasts>> (here this Y i.i. legend is hooked on
to the Hu an g Ti legend of the >>pierced breasts>>. see p. 27H above). For
another version of the same story in the Po wu chi, see Chavannes, :Mission
archeologique I, p. 79.
XYA.
1. The Hi a dynasty, though considered to have been long and exte1rniYe
in years: »From Y i.i to Kie (inclusive) 17 kings and 471 years>>, according to
the authentic Chu shu ki nien (Meng: Tsin sin, hia says: >>From Y a o and S h n n
down to T'ang there were more than 500 years»; Tso: Siian 3 rounds if off
more generously: >>600 years>>), has left but a meagre fund of legends. Of the 17
kings, the names of 16 occur in pre-Han texts. A sequence can be ascertained
from a few texts.
Six of the early kings can be placed in a sequence by aid of Tso, combined with
an entry in the authentic Chu shu. This is an extensive rycle of myths, which
is best told in one context. Tso: Siang 4: >>vVhen the Hi a began to decline,
H o u Y i3 (prince Y i3 ) from C h ' u 2 moved to K ' i u n g - s h 1 (Tso here
quotes a lost Shu ch!J,pter mentioning Yu K ' i u n g Hou Y i3 , prince Y i3
of Y u K ' i u n g) ; availing himself of the people of the H i a, he supplanted
the Hi a .in the government; he relied on his (skill in) archery, he neglected the
business of the people and went to excess in hunting; he rejected (his good men)
W u L o, P o Y i n, H i u n g K ' u n and NI a n g Y ii. and employed C h o
of H a n ; H an C h o was a slanderous young man of the house of P o :M i n g
311
 l
j:
:!
':!
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
s h 'i ; H an, prince of P o Mi n g, rejected him; but Yi Y i3 1 ) received him;
Cho flattered inside (in the palace) and bribed outside, he cajoled the people
aqd encouraged (the prince) Y i3 in his fondness for hunting; he laid sly plans for
robbing him of his State, and inside and outside all submitted ·to him (Cho);
. but Y i3 still did not change; when he returned home from the hunt, his staff
of house-men killed and_ cooked him, in order to give him as food to his sons; his
sons could not bear to eat him, they were killed at K ' i 1i n g - m e n, the Gate of
K 'i u n g ; (a certain) M i2 fled to Yu Ko s hi, the lord of Yu Ko ; Cho
now took Yi' 3s wife and begot Ya 0 8 (*ngiog) 2 ) and H i 5 ••• ; he (Cho) sent
Yao 3 with an army to annihilate the lords of C h en K u an and C h e n S ii n,
and he placed Ya o3 (as prince) in Kuo and placed H i 5 in Ku o2 • M i2 went
from Y u K o s h i and collected the remnants of the two States, annihilated
. C h o and set S h a o K ' a n g on the throne>>. This account is filled out by a
narrative in Tso: Ai 1: •>Anciently, Ya o3 of Kuo killed Chen Ku an and
attacked Chen S ii n, annihilating Hi a Hou S i an g. The queen Min
was pregnant; she escaped through a hole and returned to Yu J e n g s h i (the
lord of Yu Jen g, 3 ) her ·parental home) and bore Shao K' an g; he
became director of the shepherds of Jeng ... ; Ya o3 (who had killed his father
Si an g) sent (a certain) T s i a o2 to seek him (Shao K ' an g), and Shao
K ' an g fled to Yu Y it2 (the lord of Y ii2, descendant of S h u n) and became
his (master of kitchen =) major domo; Y ii 2 S i (the prince of Y ii2, cf. p. 299
above) gave him for wives two girls of the (Shun clan:) Ya o2 clan and gave
him the city of Lu n (a very small city) ... ; he sent Ju Ai to spy upon Ya o3 ,
and sent K i C h u 5 to beguile H i 5 ; then he4 ) annihilated the states of Ku o
and Ku o2 (belonging to Ya o3 and H i5 ), reinstated the (vestige =) line of
Y ii and sacrificed to the sovereigns of Hi a (his ancestors). 5 )
~This Yi Y 1a is evidently the sa,1ne as the afore-1nentioned Hou Y i 3, as will be seen fro1n the
following account: his passion for the htu1t and his death a.t K ' i u 11 g - n1 e n. This is confirmed
later in the sa.1ne rrso chapter: ))The emperor Y i Y i3 was passionate in l1tu1tiug»; Y i Y i 3 is here
called t i »e1nperor,>, clearly referring to H o u . Y i ' s »supplanting the Ria in the government))
above.
') This man seems to be identical with a person called Ao (*ngog) in Lun: Hien wen, there stated
to have been 1:1.ble to t an g c h o u >>turn over a boato; a line in Ch ~u: T'ien wen refers to the same
theme: f u c h o u C h e n - s ii n, but it is untranlatable since the anecdot,e it refers to is lost.
Needless to say, the Han-time and later glossists have supplied several different yarns to explain it,
but none of them are kno~rn from ·pre-Han texts.
') The lords of Yu Jeng were prominent in early Hi a time. Tso: Chao 28 (cf. p. 258 above)
te11s us tho.t S h u n ' s music master I{ ' u e i had married a lady of this house, called H ft an T s i
I
»the Dark Consort,, whose wicked son P o F e n g, alias F e n g S h i »Great Hog», was killed by
the usurper H o u Y i 3; evidently Icing S i an g of H i a married a lady Mi n of the same house.
4) By aid of M i2, as we have seen above.
S) These legends are refei·red to h;1 se'\reral places in Ch'u ts i. Li sac: »Y i 3 rambled excessively
1
and wasted his time in htmting, he loved to shoot the big foxes; but certainly the disorderly and
licentious rarely comes to a (good) end; C h o again was greedy for his (Y i3 ' s) house; Y a o 3 ' s
body was invested with great strength, but he gave free reins to his desires and was callous, daily he
312
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
---------·---·--------·--
In these accounts only 3 H i a kings are directly mentioned by name: S i an g,
his son Shao K ' an g and the latter's son K i C h u 5 , the last called simply
C h u 5 in Kyii: Lu, shang, and sometimes C h u6, sometimes C h uG in the
authentic Chu shu ki nien.
The said Chu shu ki nien mentions a 4th Icing: T ' a, i K ' an g. It says that
T ' a i K ' a n g resided in C h e n S ii n and that S i a n g resided first in
S h an g - k ' i u and later in C h e n K u_ an. It is quite clear that the two
lords of Chen Ku an and C h e,n S ii n killed by Y a o3 (son of the usurper
C h o who had ousted the usurper Y i3) were S i a n g and T ' a i K ' an g
respectively. It should be pointed out that the account in Tso: Ai 1: >>He killed
C h e n K u an and .attacked C h e n S ii n, annihilating H i a H o u S i an g•>
might seem to conflict with this, indicating 3 warlike expeditions, Siang not being
identical with either Chen Kuan or Chen Siin. But that is not so, for in Tso: Siang
4 it is clearly stated that the expeditions of Y a o3 were only two: against C h e n
K u an and C h e n S ii n, and we therefore have to interpret the texts thus:
T' a i K' an g, who as a king had resided in Chen S ii n (Chu shu above),
when deposed by H o u Y i3 remained as feudal lord in his erstwhile residence
C h en S ii n ; his son S i an g, who, according to the Chu shu, t s i w e i
,>ascended the throne and resided in S h an g - k ' i m, had evidently made claim
enjoyed himself and caused his own ruin, his head therefore fe]h. Ch 1u: T'ien wen: i)God sent down
Yi Y i3 to change (the line) and maltreat the Hi a people, why ilid he shoot at the H o P o' (gocl
of the Ho river) and take as wife that lady of the Lo (river) (for these legends seep. 319 below);
bending to the ful\ his bow Yao and forcefully tising his thimble, he shot at Feng Hi (Great
Hog = Feng S h i p. 258), why, when he presented the fattest of the meat, did the august
sovereign not accept it? When Cho (the favot11'ite of Y i 3) married (the lady of the house) C h 'u n
Hu, why did the H ft an T s 'i2 ( = H ft an T s ' i p. 2,58, sc. the n10ther of Great Hog, who111
Y i 3 had !tilled) la,y sly plans? .· .. (here follows an obscure line); when (he of) Tsu ( = C h 'u' above)
and K' i u n g (i. e. Y i 3) ma.rched to the west, what precipi.ees dill he cross? There was the ehange
into a yellow bear, how could sorcery save his (Y i 3 ' s) life? (Kun, the father of Y il, whose fo.n1ily
Y i 3 wanted to extinguish, on his death had changed into a yellow bear, seep. 250 above: he would be
sure to punish the usurper) , , .; when Ya o3 was in the door, what did he seek fro1n his sister-in-la,v?
How did Shao K' an g, when driving his dogs, throw down his (Ya o3 's) head? N (\ K' i (the
sister-in-law) had sewn his (Ya o 3 ' s) skirt, qnd they had stayed together in the smne house (had
an intrigue), how did they lose· their heads and themselves comt disaster?» (This last theme of
Y a o 3 ' s intrigue with his sister-in-law N ii I{ ' i is not incorporated in the Tso account above; the
author of the pseudo-Chu shu ku nien has concocted a long story by aid of this T'ien won passage,
see Legge, Oh. CJ. III, p. 121). - Shao K' an g and the girls ef the S h u n house are referred
to in Ch'u: Li sao: i)Availing myself of Shao I{ ' an g ' s not yet having 1narried, I woukl detai11
(for myself) the two Y a o' girls of the Y u Y (\ 2 house». - The theme of Y i3 as an excellent
archer crops up together with that of another archery expert F e n g M e n g (M:eng: Li Lou, hia,
Hanfei: Wen pien, Huai: Yuan tao), also written Feng Meng' (Lil: Kii pei), P 'en g Meng
(Chuang: T'ien hia), P'eug Meng' (Ch~ang: Shan mu), Feng Men (Siin: Wang pa, Lii:
T'ing yen). Meng: Li Lou says that F e n g M e n g studied archery under Y i8 and when he hacl
mastered all his art he killed Y i8; the comm. Chao K'i therefore concludes that F e n g M e n g was
one of the »house-men» who killed Y i3 in the Tso account above. (On the other hand Lii: T'ing
yen says that Feng Men studied w1der the famous archer Kan Ying).
313
 BULLETIN OF THE ilIUSEU.lI OF FAR EASTER:,," ANTIQUITIES B. KARLGREN: LEGE:',DS AND CULTS IX ASCIEXT CHJ:,,'A.

to the empire and t,,ken up his residence in S h an g - k ' i u and then (unsuccess- (apart from the more important myths to be discussed under 2 be.km'). which
ful a,gr,inst the usurper) had to give up his plans and move to a more subordinate tell us little:
position in C h en Ku an. Then Y a o3 >>killed (the lord of) Chen Ku an K' i 4 hetcl also the name Hue i (Chu shn): in his 2:'ith year he attticked Si-ho
(=Siang) and (the lord of) Chen Si.i.n (=Siang's deposed father T',,i (the »\Vestern River») (Chu shu); he had a great banquet (for the lords) in K ii 1: -
K' an g), annihilating Hi a Hou Si an g>> (Tso). i. e. definitely destroying t' a i (Tso: Chao 4): he reigned 39 years (Chu shu).
the last Hi a 1Jretendent to the empire. Tlmt T ' a i K ' an g was prior to Si an g. In his lst year he attacked the Hu a i Yi and the K 'i.i an Yi
Si a, 11 g is confirmed by Ch'u: Li s,10, which phwes him immediately after K 'i4 : (Chu shu); in his 2nd yeiu he attacked the 1'' c n g Yi and tlie Hu a, n g Yi
»I(' i" had (the songs) K i u pie n and K i u k o, K' a 11 g of Hi.a enjoyed (Chu shu): in his 7th year the Y i.i. Yi came to court (Chu shu): in G2fl 13. C. the
himself and gave himself a free rein». prince of ·wei clre,unt that an ancestor of his complained that Si an g rnbbed
\Ve thus obtain a list of the first 6 Hi a kings: Y i.i -- K 'i·1 - T · a i K' an g him of his sacrifcifll gifts; the prince ordered .~e1mrate sacrifices to Si an g (Tso:
-·-- Si a 11 g ~ S h et> o I..::.' an g - C h u 5 . Hi 31 ), but a dignitary remonstrated: l)It is long since S i a n g was sacrificed
There are some more points in the list of the H i rt kings where a sequence is to hem>>, which indicates a trndition that Si an g resided in the region of the
Chou-time state \Ve i.
a.ttested.
After king '[) u K i a 11 g »his brother>> K i u n g ascended the throne (the S h a o K ' an g : The F an g Yi came to court (Chu slm).
authentic Chu shu); C h u 5 : He resided in K i.i y i.i. an m1d remoYed to Lao - k' in (Chu shu);
he marched to the T u n g - h a i Ec1stern Sea and to S an - s h o u ,md caught a
K ' u n g K i a wa.8 the 4th king from the end of the dynasty (Kyi.i.: Chou, hia);
fox with nine tails (Chu shu); he ,rns able to follow the principles o:E Y ii. anrl the
After king F ,,, alias K i 11 g, his son Kie (the last Hia king) came on the -
Hi a dynasty made pa o sacrifices to him (K,1-i.i: Lu. slrnng) --- evidently
throne (Chu slrn). This gives the sequence:;: K' u n g K i 11 - - X -- Fa (K i 11 g)
because he had reesbtblished the dynasty.
-- Kie.
Fen : In his 3rd year the Nine Yi (K i u Yi) came to court (Chu slrn); he
There are. as sh,ted above, Hi Hi a kings mentioned in the free pre-Han texts.
was 44 years on the throne (Chu slrn).
IL faute de -m·ien:c, we arrange them according to the systematizing early Han text
H u a 11 g (l\l[ a n g) : In his 1st year he sacrificed n black k u e i j >1de to the
(Si-ma Ts'ien), we obtain this list: Ho (Yellow River), he reigned for 58 years (Chu slm).
Yu S i e'3 : In his 21st year he gave charges to n kinds of Yi barharimrn: K ' ii an
K' i 4 Yi, Po Y i4, C h ' 1 Yi, H i.i. an Yi, Feng Yi, Ya. n g Yi (Chu shn).
T'ai K'ang Pu Kiang : In this 6th year he attacked K i u · y ii an (Chu shu).
This sequence attested, see above. K i u n g : Younger brother of P u K i a n g, succeeded him in his 6tlth year
Si an g
Shao I('a,ng of reign (Chu shu).
C h u5 Kin (Yin Kia) : He resided on the Si - ho '\Yestern River; tt bad omen.
Fen (Chu shu) 10 suns coming out together, signalled his death (Chu shu).
H u an g3 or NI an g (Chu shu) K' u n g Kia - for his legend see p. 3:ll below.
S i e3 (Chu shu) Kao (Hao) : His grave was in Ya o'1 (Tsu: Hi 3:l).
Pu Kiana
" _
1 .
"' J Tlns sequence attested, see above.
F a (King) : In his 1st year all the Yi barbarians (see Sie" al><_rn,) came
I \..1 un g to court and were offered a banquet in S h a n g - c h ' i ; they performed dmwes
Kin or Yin K i a (Chu shu) (Chu slrn).
K 'ung Kir, (attested as 4th from the encl, Kyi.i above) Kie (son of 1'' a), extensively disClrnsed in pre-Hm1 texts, see p. :3:lll below.
Kao (Tso: Hi 32) or B. tl o (Chu shu) Thus, the most characteristic feature of the Hi a kings seems to be tlieir close
F a, or I( i n g (Chu slrn) 1 .
J Tins sequence attested, see above.
connection with the Y i tribes.
Kie (Chu shu) 2. King K 'i", w·hose birth and coming to the tbrone we lrnve studied nuder
Yi.i., has several legends connected ,dth his name. As stated p. ;30,3 above, some
As to the missing 17th king (Chu shn above), cf. XV B belmv. pre-Han sources place the rebellion of Yu Hu" shY and the battle of Kan in
About these kings there are mostly but a few entries in the pre-Han documents his reign. though other and equally good wurces make his father Y ii the fighter

314: 315
 ,I
.
,_'
.•.•.
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FA.R EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
at K an. Another rebellion crops up here, that of Ku an, but the sources
disagree as to whether it occurred under K ' i4 or his son T ' a i K ' an g. That
':lI
it is a question of a rebellion is clearly stated by Tso: Chao I: »Shun had the
S an Mi a o, Hi a had Ku an and Hu•, S h an g had She n 3 and P ' e i».
S an Mi a o and H u 3 being rebels, Ku a n is clearly likewise meant to be a
rebel. Tso places Ku an prior to H u 3 , and since the latter can certainly not
be later than the reign of K 'i4, the rebellion of Ku a 11 was evidently placed
in the reign of K ' i4 by the Tso author (no text has ever placed it as early as
in the reign of Y i.i). K' i.i Yi.tan, on the other hand, places the event in the time
of T ' a i K' an g, as we shall see presently. This Ku an is somewhat
enigmatical. 'Kyi.i: Ch'u, shang and Hanfei: Shuo yi tell us: )>Yao had Tan
C h u4, Shun had Sha 11 g. K i.i 11, K 'i4 had Wu Ku a 11 1i. ¥ill., T' a 11 g
had T' a i Kia, these five kings had a great virtue but they had wicked sonB)).
Here it is expressly stated that K 'i4 was the father of Wu Ku a 11. Now, on
the analogy of .Tan C h u4, Sb an g K i.i n, T 'a i Kia, various comment-
ators have concluded that Wu Ku an was one person: >>the fifth (son, prince
of) Ku a 11)), son of K ' i4 and younger brother of T ' a i K ' an g, and they
,have imagined that support for this is found in Mo: Fei yi.ie, where a lost Shu
chapter called Wu Kuan 2 :li-t ¥ill. is quoted, describing how king K ' i4 went to
excess in the pleasures of wine and music. Wu k u a ni :lit (*mfwo) ))the Martial
Ku am would be equal to Wu K u an (*ngo) )>the Fifth, Kuan>>. But this is
forbidden by two texts. On the one hand, Yi Chou shu: Ch'ang mai narrates:
>>In th~ time of the five sons (w u t s i:) of K 'i4 (one text version has Yin ~ for
K 'i4, ~ which makes no sense and is obviously an enor due to the similarity
of the two characters), they forgot the· charge of Y i.i ; relying on their being·
princes they did nothing correct, together they arose and rebelled (s i.i h i n g
t so 1 u an}, and this brought disaster on their states; High Heaven pitied Y i.i
(the founder of the house) and sent as a gift P 'en g S ho u (evidently a prince
of the P ' en g house cf. p. 237) and he brought order into the rules of the Hi a>>.
In this passage there is no mention of K ' i ' s successor T ' a i K ' an g, and
evidently the author, like Tso above, refers the event to the time of K 'i4 • On
the other hand, Ch'u: Li sao says: >>K 'i4 had (the songs) K i u pie 11 and
K i u k o, K ' an g of Hi a enjoyed himself and gave himself a free rein, he
did not care for the difficulties or plan for the future, the five sons (w u t s i:)
,vere therefore lost in their (private) houses and lanes>> (lost their -kingdoms and
official positions). Here again it is a question of the >>five sons)> of K 'i4, brothers
of T ' a i K ' a 11 g, though K ' i.i . Y i.i an places the catastrophe of the >>five
sons>> in the time of T ' a i K' a 11 g who, like his father, was bent on pleasures
and gave them no good example. ,
3. The other important legend connected with K ' i4 is the casting of the
famous nine T in g cauldrons, which for ages figured as talismans of grand royal
power. In Tso: S1fan 3 (for the year 606 B. C.) a dignitary narrates: >>Anciently,
316
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
when the Hi a just possessed virtue (Hi a chi fang y u t e ye}, the distant
regions depicted their {remarkable) objects, metal was sent as tribute from the
lands of the k i u 111 u Nine Pastors, and orie cast Ting cauldrons on which
were depicted the objects; all kinds of objects were there complete, so that the
people could know Spirits and monsters; thus the people, when going among rivers,
marshes, hills, forests (did not meet =) could keep away from the evil things:
C h ' i and me i demons, wan g - 1 i an g demons ... ; when Kie (the last
Hi a king) had an obscured virtue, the cauldrons were transferred to Shan g ... ;
when Cho u 3 of Shan g (the last Shan g - Yin king) was oppressive, they
were transfened to Chou ;1 ) when the virtue was good and brilliant, even though
the cauldrons were small, they were heavy (i. e. could not he displaced); when it
was perverted and obscured, even though they were big, they were light (i. e.
could easily be transferred to a new ruling house); C h 'en g wan g (the 2nd
Chou king) placed them in Kia - ju and divined (that the dynasty should last)
30 reigns,>. It is the custom of the commentators to connect this with Y ii, the
founder, but the vague phrase of the Tso: »When the Hi a just possessed virtue»
justifies no such conclusion. Mo: Keng elm dates the event more precisely:
)>Anciently, Hi a Hou K 'a i 11iq (i e. K 'i4, a Han-time taboo in the graph)
charged Fe i Lien (var. Fe i Lie 112) to break metal in the mountains and
to cast the T in g cauldrons in K ' u n - w u ; he let We n g N an - y i divine
on a whitish tortoise and it said: when the T i n g are completed, they should
be square and have four legs; without being heated, they boil by themselves,
without being taken, they store themselvee (i. e. with the good ruler who deserves
them}, without being removed they go away by themselves (i. e. from the bad
ruler); if you sacrifice with them in the land of K ' u n - w u, those aboye (so.
the Spirits) will enjoy and accept it,>.
The personage Fe i Lien above recurs in some Ch'u ts'i: passages. In Li
sao 2 ) the poet makes his long journey in his imagination, and says: >>In front I
make Wang Shu be my fore-rider, behind, Fe i Lie n 2 is made to mn and
be attached (to me); the 1 u an and h u an g birds are my fore-warners, Lei
Shi, Master of Thunder tells me of t,he unforeseem>. W a.n g Shu is quite
unknown in other pre-Han texts; 3 ) Fe i Lien is stated by the 2nd c. commen-
tator· Wang Yi and by his contemporary Ying Shao to be equal to Feng Po,
the god of the Wind, which, as we shall see below, is contestable. This identifica-
tion is probably due to a parallel in the similar accom1t ·of Hu an g Ti ' s great
journey (Hanfei: Shi lrno, seep. 280 above): >>(The Spirit) Pi Fang was abreast
with the whel-naves, C h ' i Yu was in front, F e n g P o, the god of Wind,
1 ) Tso: Huan 2 says that when W u w a n g had vanquished the S h a n g. he transferred the 0
cauldrons to L o · y i (in Honan).
2 ) A short allusion also in Kiu pien.
3 ) Wang Yi says he wa,i the coachman of the Moon; and in middle Han time Yang Hiung (Han
shu k. 87 a, the end) speaks of Wang S h u »slackening the reins.»
317
 f1-'
'i.J;
BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
- - --·-----------·
went forward and swept, Y u S h i the god of Rain sprinkled the road>>.
Evidently \Vang Yi and Ying Shao believe that Li sao's Fe i Lie n 2 corresponds
to the Feng P o in that account. But the lVIo-tsi legend above reveals that
F e i L i e 112 in the Li sao is parallel not to F e n g P o but to C h ' i Y u of
Hanfei. We have seen above (p. 283) that C h ' i Yu was in pre-Han tradition
the hero of a myth which made him not only a rebel against Hu an g Ti but
also the first inventor of weapons, the discoverer of metal and the founder of swords
and lances, briefly the supernaturally endowed Master Founder. Just as C h' i
Yu, the Master Founder, accompa,nied Hu an g Ti, so K'u Yuan dreams that
F e i L i e n 2 waits upon him - and F e i Li e n2, according to Mo-tsi above,
was a Master Founder who cast the cauldrons of K ' it. In both travelling stories
C h ' i Y u and F e i L i e 112 are combined with gods of the forces of nature:
Lei S h 1, Master of Thunder (Li sao), Feng Po, God of Wind and Yu S.h i
::\'faster of Rain (Hanfei), and they obviously stand for some analogous power;
but both being Yfaster Founders, they are more reasonably considered to be Spirits
of Fire than of Wind.1)
There is another passage in Ch'u: Yuan yu describing a similar imaginary
jonmey, which runs: >>I pa,ss through (the region of) T' a i Hao (the east, cf.
Li: Yiie ling) and turn to the right, in front Fe i Lie n 2 opens up the road;
the light is clearing but is not yet brilliant, I force my way through heaven and
earth and pass straight ahead; F en g Po is my fore-rider, the dust is eliminated
and !tll becomes clear; the phoenixes' wings I receive as banners, I meet Ju S h o u
(cf. p. 239 above) in the place of the Western Sovereigrn> (i. e. Shao Hao).
The commentators believe that this proves that F e i L i e 112 and F e n g P o
are identical (F e i L i e 112 opening up the road - F e n g P o being the fore-
rider), but on the contrary their juxtaposition proves that to K'u Yi.i.an they were
not the same: if they were, the two lines would be absolutely tautological, which
is not at all in K'i.i.'s style, and in fact we have here an enumeration of the
accompanying supernatural beings: Fe i Lie 112 - Feng Po - Feng -
h u an g (phoenix) - ,Ju S h o u.
For the name Fe i Lien there are the variants fei ~ and ~- Now the
name Fe i Lie 112 crops up in quite a different context, as a wicked favourite
of the last S h a n g - Y i n king. Sun: Kie pi says that C h o u 3 (the last Y i n
king) wa,s led aHtray. by T tt K i imd Fe i Lie n 2 ; Meng: T'eng Wen kung,
hia tells us that C h o u k u n g, assisting Wu w a n g >>expelled F e i L i e n 2
to a corner by the sea and slew him>> (the story of this F e i L i e 11 2 recurs with
various details in early Han literature: Shi: ki, Chavannes lYIH II, -4,5, 9, 99 etc.),
and it might seem tempting to see a connection here: the theme of a Spirit of Fire
or Master of the Blast, reverting as a destructive demon and supporting the wicked
Cl:__~ u 3 , _<:nly to be vanquished and killed by the virtuous Chou k u n g. But
1)If we would 1neet the Eastern Han scholars half way in their theories of Fe i Li en a.s as Spirit
of ¥Vind, we might be ten1pte<l to sa.y that he, the great Founder, was the lfaster of the Blast.
318
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN A.NCIENT CHINA
-·-------- ---·- -- ---·· ------ -- -- - -- ----
that is to force the materials too arbitrarily. In fact, 11rimarily f e i - 1 i e n was
simply (as it is today) the name of a kind of winged insect, in Kuang ya written
f e i - 1 i e 113 , and nothing could be more natural than that several heroes of the
early legends should be named after this animal (animal names as personal name~
were extremely common, cf. p. 258). That two different heroes happen to bear
the same personal name is, of course, not uncommon. Of. Po Y i2 (*cliJr), who
was the famous minister of Shun' s (p. 256 above), and Po Y i2 (same
characters), the equally famous prince at.the end of the Shan g - Yin dynasty.
Sometimes a grandee of a later age is purposely named after some early hero: in
late Chou time, a prince of Tsou has the name Hi a Hou K' i4 Ji Fo ~.
see Li.i.: Chi fen. -
4. The Mo-ts'i account of the casting of the cauldrons says that it took place
in K' u n - w u. This K' u n - w u appears in a few pre-Han texts. Kyii:
Cheng yi.i tells us that the descendants of L i, the C h u J u n g (son of C h u t, n
H u, see p. 237) were divided into 8 great clans; the most prominent of them was
Mi (the house of the princes of C h 'u), another was K i3, one branch of whic·h
was K' u n - w u, who were >>princes under the Hi a dynasty». In TRo: Clrn,o
12, a prince of C h 'u says: >>K 'u n - w u, elder brother of my august ancestor,
resided in the old H ii>> - which copfirms that there was kinship between the
C h 'u house, clan Mi, and the clan K i3. On the other hand, Tso: Ai 17 has
another geogra.phical placing of K 'u n - w u: >>In \Ve i there .is a look-out
tower on the ruins of (the house of) K ' u n - w u (K ' u n - w u c h 'i k ' i.i.)>>.
The only text that attests the state of K ' u n - w u at a precise date is Shi: ode
304, where it is said of T ' a n g, t,he founder of the S h a n g - Y i n dynasty:
>>VV e i 5 and K u1) were smitten, and K' u n - w u and Kie of Hi a>>. (This
event is also alluded to in Tso: Chao 18).
In the Mo-tsi myth above, K 'u n - w u is associated with the art of casting
metal. In Lu: Kiin shou, where early inventors m1d nmster artisans are enumer-
ated, it is said that K ' u n - w u made t ' a o llfuJ. This t ' a o normally mem1s
»pottery>>, but in view of the fact that K ' u n - w u is the pla.ce of the casting of
the famous cauldrons, evidently a centre of metallurgy, probably t ' a o here
means »kilm>, a furnace for fusing the metal. Even in C h o u time the region of
K ' u n - w u seems to have been a centre for fine metallurgy; Yi Chou shu: Ta
tsu tells us that VV e n w an g called a founder from K ' u n - w u and let him
cast a metal plaque with an inRcription.
5. We saw above in the legend of Yi Y i3 or Hou Y i3 , the archer in ea,rly
H i a time, that, according to Oh'u: T'ien wen, he shot at the H o P o2 >>prince
of the Ho>> (god of the Ho) and took a.s wife the lady of the Lo river (Lo
pin). The Ho (Yellow River) was considered to be a powerful divinity and
constantly sacrificed to in ancient China. In Chou time we find this attested
3 clan 1nentionecl in Kyti: Cheng yii, so that K u
1 ) Ku was likewise one of the branches of t,he K i
and K I u n - w u, both crushed by T ' an g, were kindl'erl houses.
319

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
- ----.----·----------·---------·----
passim. Tso: Vien 12: >>The prince of T s 'in with a pi jade prayed to the
Ho for (success in) the battle>>: Tso: Si.tan 12: >>The prince sacrificed to the Ho>>;
Tso: Siang 30: >>(They made a covenant and) \l'ith t,vo k u e i j,,des made
assurances of fidelity to the Ho>> (threw the jades as sacrifice into the Ho);
Tso: Ting 13 (a solemn declaration against rebels lrnd been made:) »The document
on which it w>1s written has been laid in the H o>>. The Ho is often taken as
witness in solemn oaths: Tso: \Ven 13: »I swear it by the Ho». We have it
already attested ,1s a divinity in the customs of the Hi a dynasty according to
the authentic Chu slrn ki nien: ,>The sovereign Hu an g3 s<1crificed " black k u e i
jt1de to the Ho>>. The divinity of the Ho was not conceived i'.n abstracto but
anthropomorphica,lly. In Tso: Hi 28 a dignitary Ts1-yi.1 dreams that the Spirit
(god) of the Ho (Ho she n) demands a beautiful cap of his and promises to
reward him with fertile lands. And the authentic: Chu shu ki nien narrates:
>>Yung, the Prince of the L o (Lo P o ) (god of the L o river) ba.ttled with
P ' i n g Y i, the Prince of the H o (H o P o2, god of the H o )>> - Y u n g
and P ' in g Yi being the names of these gods; the entry eyidently has in view
some natural disaster when L o, confluent of the H o, overflowed its banks.
It is interesting to observe the same combination here of the gods of the Lo and
the H o as in the Ch'u: T'ien wen above, i,nd also in the myths of the tablets
and documents mira,culously given by the Lo and the Ho (see 278 above).
Chuang: Ta, tsung shi. in enumerating ancient worthies who had attained to t a o,
says that P ' in g Yi obtaines it and could thus mam on the great rivers. In
Chuang: Ts'iu shuei, Ho P o2 rejoices at the great inundations. On the other
hand, :Mu t'ien ts'i chuan in its romantic description of the great travels of JVI u
says tlmt he ctune to the mountain Y an g - y i.12 »where Ho P o2 Wu Y i2,
the Prince (god) of the Ho, \Vu Y i 2 , lrnd his residence,>1 ) - here his name is
not P ' in g Yi but \Vu Y i 2. In Ch'u: Yi.tan yu the poet says: >>I order H a i
J" o (the god of the Northern ocean, Pei Hai J" o, see Chuang: Ts'iu shuei)
to make P ' i n g Y i dance». In ,i,ll the preceding accounts H o P o2 is clearly
a. Spirit of the waters. But there is one narrative where he appears as a human
being, a feudal lord. The authentic Chu shu ki nien says: >>Wang T s 'i H a i
of Yin was guest with the lord of Yu Yi but was licentious; the lord of Yu
Yi, Mi en C h ' en, killed and threw him away; therefore Chu Kia Wei
of Yin (d. p. 336 below) borrowed an army from Ho P o2 the prince of the
H o and with it attacked Yu Y i, annihilated it and killed its prince JVI i e n
C h ' en >>. It is difficult to see what is the explanation of this; was there some
special district the feu<fal lord of which was the c h u president of the sacrifices
to the (god of the) Ho and hence is here referred to as the Ho P o 2, prince of
the Ho 1
1 ) The text continues: >{rhat is the elan temple place of the Ho; the prinDe-clan~chief of the
Ho (B: o t s n n g po} (by nmne) Ya 0 6 came and n1et the Son of Heaven . .. 1> - Yao 6 being
apparently the appellat,on of vY n Yi' ( = P'ing Yi).
320
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS 1-iND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
6. We have to go as far into the Hi a line as to K' u n g I( it, before we
,i,gai:n meet with any considerable legend. Tso: Chao 2!) rnwmtes how K ' u n g
K i a was able to conform to the will of t i 'i'ff God, who gave him one rmir of
dragons (ma.le and female) from the Ho and one ]Jail' from the Han river.
K ' u n g K i a found a descendant of the emperor Y a, o by 1rnrne L i n T, e i
(see p. 2!)'1 above) who had studied the keeping of dragons under the H n ;1 n
Lung s h 1, and he now fed the dragons for the king, who was so plec,sed tlrnt he
gave him the family name Y 11 Lung s h 'i. When one fenrnle drngon died, he
pickled its meat and served the king, who found it, good: but when the king made
investigations, he became scared and removed to Lu - hi en. The family :F an"
are his descendants. (This last item explains why this myth has been J>reserYecl:
it belonged to the ancestral legends of a 1iowerful grandee family, which ph1yed a
prominent part in the Ch'un-ts'iu period, see T80 pass·im). The theme of the
dragons of K' u n g Kia, however, reverts in another legend. K · u 11 g E. i a
evidently turned bad, for Kyi.1: Chou, hia says: >>K ' u n g K i a brnught disorder
into the Hi a house, after four generations it collapsecl», ,1ncl this nrnkes it deal'
that the same work (Kyil: Cheng yii.) refers to the dragon-owner K 'n 11 g Kia
when it tells us a long story (reproduced in the main by Ri-ma Ts'ien and trnrisla.ted
in extenso Clmvannes MH I, 281): when the Hi a ·were on the deoline. some
Spirits of the P a o people changed into two drngons, who appeared together in
the king's (K' u n g Kia' s) court; vrognostioations were nrnde as to what to
do about them, and finally they disappeared leaving their spittle, whicl1 wt,s kept
in a never-opened box and st,crificed to, Tight down to the time of Li w an g of
Chou, who opened the box and looked in; the spittle overflowed the court. and
.harem ladies were made skirtless (i. e. with imked lower bodies) to shout a.t it;
it clrnnged into a lizard 11nd went into the roya,l apartments, where tl girl in the
teething age met it; when grown-up she beca.me JJregnant without man. and the
child w,i,s thrown away but miraculously saved and restored: it. became the fomou~
and baleful P a o S i:, favourite of Yu w an g. The moral of the legend fr, this:
By his wickedness Yu wan g brought about the fall of the vVestern Chou
(771 B. C.); this ,rns due to the bad influence of Pao SI, a descenclm1t by a
rnir;culous birth of the drt,gons of K ' u n g K i a, the king who by his
wickedness caused the >>decline of the H i a» (resulting in its fall after J genera-
tions) - dragons that were in reality hero-Spirits of the sti1te of l' a o (,vhich
presumably had been maltreated by K 'u n g Kia,). ··- Another story about
·K' u n g Kia is told in Li.1: Yin ch'u. He hunted on the :F n - s ha n mountain
in Tung-yang and, overtaken by a great storm, he took refuge in a house -where a
child was just born. The presence of the king was thought to he auspicious lJy
some, whereas others doubted this. The king brought the child home to the conrt
to make its fortune, but when grown-up the boy had his feet cut off in an accident
and had to become a gate-keeper.
21 321
 BULLErIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
----------· -----
XVB.
1. We have seen that according to the pre-Han tradition (as preserved in the
authentic Chu shu ki nien) there were 17 Hi a kings, whereas the free pre-Han
texts mention the names of only 16. Si-ma Ts'ien (Shi ki: Ria pen ki) has filled
in this gap by inserting a king C h u n g K ' a n g between T ' a i K ' an g and
Si an g. The reason for this trick is easy to see: there was a T ' a i K ' an g
and a S h a o K ' an g - what was more natm·al than to supply a middle one:
Chung K' a 11 g!1 ) But this was in fact an unusually unhappy trick; the pre-
Han tradition about the first 6 Hi a kings is so fully nanated in Tso (see above)
that it is amply evident that there is no room for any C h u n g K ' a n g in
between T ' a i K ' an g and Si an g. Si-ma has tried to find at least some
hat-peg on which to hang his Chung K ' an g. There ,vas a Shu chapter
(now lost; the one in the orthodox Shu version is spurious) Yin cheng JM, {if.
(in many Ts'ing time editions written Yiin Cheng ft. {if., the char. Yin
being tabooed). The Shu preface (Shu sii) says that when Hi and Ho (cf. p.
262) were drunk and disorderly, neglected the seasons and brought the days into
disorder, Yin went and punished them, 2 ) and then the chapter Yin cheng was
composed. This event Si-ma attributes to Chung K ' an g ' s reign, but for
this there is no foundation whatever. 3 ) It is only comparatively late that the
faked C h u n g K ' a n g had any success: the spurious Shu chapter Y in
c hen g (fabricated in the 3rd c. A. D.) places in Chung K' an g's reign
an eclipse that has given rise to a voluminous discussion among early Western
:sinologiles as well as among Chinese scholars, 4 ) but all these disquisitions are really
quite futile, since the connection of the eclipse with a certain reign (that of
•>C h u n g K ' a. n g>>) is thus quite spurious. A line of the lost chapter Y i n
c hen g (simply referred to as a Hi a s h u, >>document of the Ria)>> is preserved
in Tso: Chao 17, and it likewise refers to an eclipse, but it has nothing that connects
it with the reign of any king >>0 h u n g K ' a n g>>. This eclipse, thus merely
placeable somewhere in the long Hi a dynasty, is consequently quite useless for
the chronology of early Chinese history. But later scholars in the wake of Si-ma
Ts'ien and the pseudo-Shu author have made much of the faked Chung
K ' a n g : the much later spurious Chu shu ki nien has various entries about
>>0 hung K' an g>>.
In his 'list of Hi a kings 81-ma also has some other aberrations from the pre-
Han sources. For Chu 5 ;ft he has the short-form T; instead of Fen he has
1) 'rhis may seem tempting, but it is of course no serious reason: the legends ha\.~e a T ' a i H a o
a.nd n S ha o Hao but no C h u n g Hao.
2 ) Cheng Hihm thought that Yin was the name of a person, la,ter the pseudo-K 1ung corrun.
took it to mean the prince of a sta.te Y i n.
3 ) Maspero, J·. As. i024, p. 46, says that the attribution to Chu 11 g I{' an g's reign was n1ade
in the Shu Preface, which S'i-rnn would then have followed, but that is not correct; the Shu Preface
sa.ys nothing of any C h u n g K ' a n g.
4 ) See-, for instanC'e, F. Hirth, The Ancient History of China, p. 40, ,vith bibliogra.phy.
322
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN A.NCIENT CHI.VA
- ------------·----
Hue i2 • As to the legends of Y i 3 , the archer, properly connected with the early Hi a
kings, we have seen above how the folk-lore writers of early Han time transferred
them to the time ·of Yao and mixed them up with the myth of the 10 suns.
Si-ma Ts'ien still knew practically nothing about the successive kings of the
Hi a dynasty, beyond their bare names. But Huang-fu ~1i (Brd c. A. D.) is able
to tell us that K ' i4 also had the name K i e n or Y i.i T e, tha.t he ruled for
9 years and died more than 80 years old; that T ' a i K ' a n g was 20 years on
the throne; that Chu• (= C h u 5 ) was also called Kung - sun vV an and
reigned 17 years; that I<' en was also called Tsu vV u, ad ruled for 26 years;
that Man g was also called H o ; that Si e3 was also called S h 1 · Ol' S h 1
Tsu n g and ruled for 16 years; that Pu K i an g was also called Kia n g2
or P e i C h ' e n g ; that K i u n g was also called Y ii4 or K a o Y a n g and
ruled for 21 years; that Kin was also called H ii2 or Tun g K i an g and
n1led for 20 years; that Kao was also called Kao Kou. )foreover, after
P u K i an g he inserts two more kings: P u K i an g ' s brother K ' i lt o and
K 'i a o 's son Ku an g, quite unheard·of in the earlier sources.
2. The K ' i4 or T ' a i - K ' an g legend about the rebellion of the >>Five
(princes of) K u am or the >>Martial (princes of) Ku am has been corrupted in the
systematizing and early Han texts. The Shu Preface (Shu Sii) says: >>When T' a i
K ' a n g lost his realm, his brothers, five men, tarried at the conjunction of the
Lo river (Lo j u e i) and made >>the song of the five sons>> (w u t s 1 c h i k o
llfk). Si-ma Ts'ien, who follows this, knows the title of this Shu chapter, but the
text itself was lost and he can not quote a single line from it. In any ca,se it is
clear that here >>the five sons>> are regarded as virtuous and meritorious men, who
composed a >>song>> worthy of being incorporated in the sticred collection;
consequently ~he faker in the 3rd c. A. D. makes this ,>Song of the five sons>> a.
moralizing sermon. 1 ) On the other hand, the older tradition that they were rebels
has survived in other schools. Han shu: Ti li chi indica,tes a locttlity as having
the name P ' an Ku an »the Rebelling Kuam. 2 )
3. In the legend of K ' i ' s ma.gical cauldrons we saw that they were cast by
the Master Founder F e i Lien or I<, e i Lie 112 (who in Li sao wai, made to
accompany the poet on his imaginary journey as a Spirit of fire. or, posHibly, Spirit
of the Blast). In early Han-time lore, Fe i Lie 112 is transformed into some
1 } As a curiosity we m.a.y mention the theory of Tuan Yi.1-ts'ai thnt w u t:,, i chi k o never 1nea.nt
»the song of the five sons» but: >)the five sons went to I{.o ::fki), the latter (*!.:U) being a Yarinnt of Kunn
iJl (*k w ii n) as a place name!
2 ) The author who has concocted the spurious Chu shu ki nien has ,·vorked up the...lhws o.f l\{o: 1:i""'ei
Yiie and Yi Chou shu: Ch'ang n1ai above into a long yarn: )1In K.' i: s 11th year, the youngest son
Wu I{ u a n 2 was banished to the S i Ho VVestern River, rebelled in the .liJth yea.r a.ncl wns crushed
by P, en g S ho u (S ho u, prince of P 'en g). - Shan ba.i king (k. 10) hns one n1ore Jegend
about K 'i (Hi a Hon K 'i 4 ): he had a c h I en hetlC'hman 11 en g T · u (vurinnts :\fen g Y i.'1,
H ii e T ' u) who presided at the sacrifices of the people of P a, who eame to hhn for having their
cases of litigation sett.led. There is no trace of this legend in the pre~B:an som·<·-es.
323
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUJI OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
magical aninml: in a poem by S1-ma, Siang-ju (2nd c. B. C.), ap. Sh1 ki k. 117,
he is con1bined with a,nother fabulous animal, the k i e - cha i (cf. p. 261), and
Huai: Shu chen says that the faoist adept (c hen j en) can >>ride t,lie Fe i
Li em. but tbe context in these texts tells us nothing of their nature or symbolism.
It is only in Ea,stern Han time tlmt F e i Lien is expressly connected with the
wind. Ying Shao (comm. on Hm1 shu: vVu ti ki, yli.an-feng 2) says: :ff e i Lie 11
is a divine bird (she n k' in) who mm bring about wind; and Kuo P'o (about
300 A. D.) says: "Fe i Lien is a dragon bird (1 u 11 g t s 'ii e), it has a bird's
bocl:v rmd a deer's head. And, a,s mentioned above, Ying Shao (comm. on Han
slrn. k. S7 a,, beginning) and \Vang Yi (in comm. on Li srw), both of them of the
2nd c., identif;-· F e i L i e n with ]1~ e n g P o »the Prince of the \Vind» (god
of the \Vind) ··-· he would then lmve the shape of a bird. 1 ) But in Eastern H,,n
time there v,as a,lso quite a,nother conception of Feng Po. He is obviously the
same a,s the Feng S h I :\!faster of \Vind who occurs in Chouli: T,"I tsung po,
where it is said tluLt the T,1 tsung po sacrifices to I<' e n g S h 'i the .:\faster of
\Vind mid to Y i.i S h 'i the l\faster of Ra,in. Here (comm. on Chouli) Cheng Hli.an
(2nd c. A. D.) st"lys that Feng S h "i is equal to the constellation I~i ;'f{, and
Ts'ai Yung in Tu tuan (same period) says: :Feng Po is a Spirit (Shen), that
is the constellation K i; -when it sti,nds out clearly in the heavens, it can raise
wind. And l:Ceng su t'ung yi (a,scribed to the same Ying Shao above) says Fe i
L i e n = F e n g P o =' F e n g S h 'i is the constellation K i -which can bring
about wind (etc., various details). 2 )
4. We sa,v further that the casting of the cauldrons, in K' i4 ' s reign, by
"F e i Lie 11 ,n,s done in K ' u n - -w u, and that :K ' u n - w u occurs as a st,1te
at the end of the H i a dy1msty (Sh'i): m1cl the systematizing text Ta Tai: Ti hi
gives the genealogy of the house of K' u n - w u (follmrecl by S1-ma Ts'ien):
we saw that it diverges on a fundamental point from that of the free pre-Han texts.
Ti hi aclds: »I( · u 11 - w n, tlrnt is vV e i>>. This does not mean tlrnt the house of
vV e i descended from K · n n - w n (the house of VV e i was kindred to the
Chou house, clm1 K i). but only that the K' u n - w u domain was situated
in the Chou-time vV e i dominion (this h1llies with Tso: Ai 17 above, p. 319, but
not with Tso: Cimo 12, ibid.). Lie: T'ang wen, on the contrary. has quite l"\nother
plt"lcing of K · u n - w u in earl~- Chou time: >>iVhen Mu wan g went to attack
the western Jung b,1rbarians (s i ,Jung), these presented him with a, sword
from K' u n - w u 2 , which was beautifully tempered, it could cut jade as if it
were mud,>. In spite of the additimml radicals in the characters and the position
1) Hung Hing·tRn in c•.on11n. on Ch'u: Li sac1 makes Li'L shi ch"nn ts'in say that
l\'Iaster of "\Yind is enlletl Fe .i. Lien. LC1.i hov,:ever, contains nothing of the sort
inst,a.nceR of cci,relN;s I"efercnees in 111edien1l Chinese cornm.entaries).
2) "\~"e could, of course.. try to reeonei]e these opposite views by assuming that
raven in the sun 80 there \Yns n, magicttl bll:cl in the constellation I( ii who was thus
but thut would be n. mere speculation unsnpport,ed b:-,, texts.
324
B. K11RLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
in the far west, it is evidently a question of the same legenclm'Y theme of K ' u 11 -
w u as a country of marvellous founclern (the eaulclrons of K ' i 4 - - the sword
of :NI u wan g).
Slrnn lrni king (k. 15) tells us of a mountain of the \Vhite \Vater (Po - s hue i)
which engendered the White Abyss (P o - y ii ,1, n) where the shi" F,jji (.:\fa,ster'/
multitude? army?) of K 'u n - w u bathed, a vei·)' obscure p>cssage. Again (k.
16) it says that in the extreme west where sun and moon go down, there are the
8 a 11 - n a o Three Marshes which were (eaten by =) the appanage of K 'u n -
w u. 1) Here again K' u n - w u is placed in the far ,,·est, ,1,s in Lie. On the other
lrnnd, Huai: Chuei hing plt"lces it in the extreme wuth: there is >>the hill K ' n n -
w rn) (corresponding to the Fu - sang tree in the extreme east, etc.) (the T'ang-
time geogrnphy Kuo ti chi places K 'u 11 - w u in the north: in the prescmt Ta-
ming-fu of Hopei!).
The Eastern Han scbolar Ying Slmo (Feng su t'ung yi: \Vu po) is not s,1,tisfied
with the vague cbtes of K 'u n - w u in the Hi R d)'lrnsty (onl:,- fixed date: the
lord of K 'u n - w u under the last Hia, king vanquished b:,, T ·anµ:), and he
seizes upon the Kyii: Cheng yli. phrnse: K ' u n - w n w e i H i a, p o ""' K ' u 11 -
w u were feudal lords po 113 under the Hia: he giYes (in the ,rnke of Po bu hmg:
Hao) the word po the meaning of p 11 1/Jl >>to be hegemon» (as in the phrase
w u p o = w u p a the five »hegemons,> of the C h o u em,), thus: >>K ' u n - w u
was hegemon under the Hi t"I dyrrnsty,>. He says: »Aecmding to the Ch \m ts'iu
and the Tso chuan, the lord T 'a i K' an g of Hi a enjoyed himself m1cl wa,s
steeped in pleasures and did not (follow =) attend to the ttffair,s of the people,
the feudal lords encroached upon each other; then the lord of K ' u n - w u nmde
himself president of the let"lgue and killed those who did not obey his orclern 11nd so
exalted the king's hmrne,>. Needless to say, there is nothing of the kind in Ch'nn
ts'iu or Tso chuan (one example a,mong mm1y of the careless rnforenees of the early
commentators), and there is no foundation wlmtove1' for this elating of tlie first
power of the K ' u n - w n house.
:5. The Prince of the H o (god of the H o river), P · in g Yi. occurs
frequently in v\Testern Han liternture. Huai: Chuci hing says tlrnt P 'i 11 g Yi
attained to t :r o a,ncl dived clown into the great River; in Huai: Yiian tao he is
one of the two Spirits who direct the Yin and Y ,1 n g forces. Slmn lrni king
(k. 12) says: The ab;yss of T s 'u n g - k i is :3UO j en deep. that is where P ·in g
Yi constcintly resides; P · in g Yi lrns R human face mid rides on two dragons>>. 2)
-"---~~--
1) I(' u n ~ ·w u c h l so s h I: l)tn eut>> in this sPnse is Ye1·y c•ommon in the enrl:v texts; therC' is
nothing supernatu:ral or mythologi(•td in thi8 tale, eontrnry to ·wJwt Unmet foneicR (Dnns0s et
Feng S h 1 the k,gendes p. 4,50).
(one of the rna.ny 2 ) Shan hai king also has a passage (k. 14) rclating to the ,'jtory of the Ho r o:.!, foe of the Jol'd of
Y 11 Yi of Chu shu ki nicn ubove (p, a:w). stating thnt ]iis name was 1) · n ;\ i u (ol': resided i.n P 'u
jw:;t as there is a Ni u ?). But here, of eom·se, the author t.ake:,.; H o P o:.! w~ the god oJ' tlie H o mlding thn.t he
the god of \Vind.; pitied the lord of Y 11 Yi and let him est~ape and ('reate n ,'3tatc for l1im:wlf in ,'3 ho n. fan g (Region
of the beasts), where clwelt the peoplP Y n. o .. in i·.ri. w·lto w1-:n• des1.·Pncl1rnb; l)f ~lnrn (sL~e p. :10 I nbuV-(:>).
325

BULLETIN OF THE :lJUSEUM OF FA.R E,,1S1'ERN ANTIQUITIES
S1-ma Sim1g-ju (ftp. Han shu: S1-nrn Siang-ju chuan) says: >>I order Ling
Ku a, ( cc·c N ti Ku a, seep. 22H) to play the lute and make P ; in g Yi da.nce»,
etc. From Ea,stern H,m and onw,ircls the fables about Ho 1° o2 multiply. Kao
Yu (2nd c.) in comm. on J:foai: Chuei hing says: >>P 'in g Yi is the Ho P o2,
he was a man of the village Ti-sh<m of T\mg-hiang in Hua-yin; he carried 8 stones
~ k u n g (,>K 'i u n g gem palaee>>, nir. K' in g - kn n g) and the Yao - t 'a i
(i. e. in drowning himself) and became the Spirit of ·water>>. The Po wu eh! (Tsin
time'?) says that P ·'in g Yi rode on dragons and tigers and rushed through a
myriad l i; Kuo ti t'u (likewise aseribed to Tsin time) says he rode on a cloud
chariot drawn by two dragons; Ko Hung (Pao P'u tsL 4th c.) says tlrn,t in the 8th
month, the 1st k e n g ch,y he passed over the H o and drowned, ,1nd God in
Heaven gave him the charge of heing Ho P o2, god of the Ho (etc.; there are
many variations of the theme). Again K,10 Yu in comm. on Huai: Yiian tao takes
up the theme of Ch'u: T'ien wen, how the archer Yi" shot at the Ho P 0 2 and
expounds: »Ho P o2 by drcrwning killed people, Y i3 shot him in the left eye».1)
And his contemporary Wang Yi embroiders further: »The tale is (c h u an y ii. e)
that H o P o2 trf1nsformecl himself into a ·white dragon ,1,nd wandered at the side
of the ,crnter; Y i3 saw him and hit his left eye; H o P o2 compla,ined to God in
Heaven above and t,sked him to kill Y i 3 ; hut when Goel in Heaven heard about
his transformation trick he decided that it was H o P o ' s own fault. - As to
the Lady of the Lo river (Lo p in) whom Ch'u: T'ien wen says this Y i'3
married (see p. 313). \Vang Yi asserts that she was t1 divinity of Water (s hue i
she n), identim,l ·with l" u Fe i p. 27(3 above(!).
6. The legends of K ' u n g Kia have not been essentially added to in Han
time, as far t,s I am aware. SI-ma Ts'ien (Hia pen ki) asserts that he was not, a
son of his predecessor K in but of king P u K i an g.
XVIA.
There is an extensive cyele of myths about the last Hi a king, Kie, the
clown-fall of the clym,sty and the creation of the Shan g - Yin dynasty by
T ' an g and his c,m,djutors.
Kie is upheld passim in the classics as the typical miscreant on the throne
m1d henoe destined to cause the foll of the H i a ; his opponent 'I' ' a n g is the
great pattern of virtue, equally universally praised in the classics.
The misdeeds of K i e t,re sometimes described in detail. Ta Tai: Shao kien
says that, he was >>steeped in wine and music, built palaces and ten,wes (towers)
and subterranem1 grottoes for his pleasures ,incl tyrannized the people». Kuan:
K'ing chung makes Km1,n-ts1 narrate how in winter Kie made no bridges (sc. but
let the 11eople walk on the ice), in summer he made no ndts (for crossing the
streams). in order to ,rnteh how people froze and drowned; he let loose female
tigers (i. e. who had cubs and were particularly ferocious) all through the market,
1) Hung Hing~t:a::n (Sung UmE') ln c.0111111. on Ch'u: rr'ien wen alleges: >>Huai.nan.t:=:;l says ... >> (as
above), thns confouncUng the llnai tPxt \dth the I~uo Yn eomn1enta.ry!
326
B. EARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS LV A1VCIEST CHTSA
in order to watch how people were terrified: he had 30000 female muswuc1rn wlw
shouted m1cl nrnde music all from morning, so it wets heard all through the streets,
all of them dressed in embroidered silk; Yi Yin (see below) for one idle female
artist and a roll of embroidered silk obtt-,ined a hundred c h u n g of grain in
Kie ' s country. The authentic Chu slrn ki nien says he built the K 'i u n g -
(>>Yao gem terrace>>). Many texts (Li:i: Kung ming. C'hmmg: ,Jen kien shi, Ifan-
fei: Sh1 kuo and Jen chu, Ts'e: Ts'in 5) tell us how Kie lrncl a worthy num
(Ts'e says he was a good general) Ku an Lu 11 g }'en g who remonstrated and
was killed by the king. Lii: Sien sh'i says the t ' a i s h 'i l in g Great Archivist
Chung Ku held his records m1d statutes in the hands and wept (in remonstr-
ating), but Kie was still more disorderly ancl then Chung Ku fled tu
8 h an g (the state of the future opponent T ' an g). Kie relied upon various
had conncillors: Kan Sin. T 'u e i C h ' 1 (vm·. T 'u e i Yi). Ta Hi, .K' i
Chung Jung, Yin Hie, S 'i Ku an (Mo: Ts'in shI, Millg kuei; Lii: Tang
j,111, CM tu, Kien sitan, Shen ta: Hanfei: Slmo yi: Siiu: .K.ie pi, Yn tso). Knan:
K'ing chung stiys he had a wicked favomite councillor K ' ii Y i mid a favourite
lady Nii Hu a. both of whom T'ang bribed (see below). The women in
particuhu were his undoing. First, ,wcording to Kyii.: Tsin 1, Kie attacked
the land of Y u S h 1 (this house was evidently poweTful throughout the entire
S h an g - Yin em, since it figures in the time of \Vu w an g of C h o u, see
Tso: Ting 4). ctncl the people of Yu Sb 'i phwated him by giving J,irn the lad_\
Mo Hi (Chu shn var. Mo H i2). who won his great favour but lt,ter betrayer!
him (see helow). Then Tso: Clmo 4 tells us that after he liad m,u1e a gret,t assembl~·
of his feudal lords in the state of Yu Jeng (a powerful house already familiar
to us pp. 312 above; Hanfei: Sh1 kuo, however, s;,ys: in the state of the Yu
J. u n g) the lord of Yu Min rebelled (acc. to Tso: Chao lL Kie c•nrnhed
the lord of Yu Min), and the ,n1thentic Chu shu ki nien says that when he
attacked the lVI in - s ha n (Mountain of lVI in), he was presented ,Yith t,rn
ladies: Yi.ta 11 and Ye n 2, whose names he engraved on a famous jade (the
t 'i a o - h u a, jade 73 '/w) and rejected his first wife M o Hi, banishing her to
the L o river, whereupon she conspired with Y i Y i n (see below). Li\: ~hl'n
ta confirms that K. i e was deluded by Mo Hi ,md loved Y i.i an and Ye 11 2 . 1 )
His great opponent T'ang wtcs c1 pattern of virtue who (Kuan: K'ing clmng)
amassed grain to save those who hungered m1d who gave clothes to those wl1u
were cold. He (Kuan: Shan k'tian) took the metal of Chu ,, n g - shall mour1-
tai11 t,nd made coins to redeem such children who had been sold by destitute
1) Ch'u: T'ien wen says: J1K i e nttrwk:Nl the .11 en g - l:l h t1 n 1nountnin. what did he ol.>taio':
l\I o H i indulged her v,·ishe~, how did T ' u. n g kill him (1'. i P. ) ?1l The C'Omrn. be'lie\·e that K i ,,.
obtained l\i o Hi in l\.'I en g. s h n n (-whioh 1vould then be equal tn the Yu S h I of Tso nbtwe),
but I think it rnueh more probable that Meng. s h n. n i~ a yarlant. fnl' the ::U l n - s ha n nboYt.,
and the line refers to t.he rivals whou1 1\:1 o II i obtnirn~ll there.
32;
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUZvl OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
~·--------·--
parents. He (Lli: Yi yung) disapproved of those who ~et up the lnmting nets on
a11 four sides (of an area), catching all that was inside, and he left three sides open
so a,s only to· catch such ,111imaJs a,s >>had forfeited their lives>>. He (Lii: Tsi chi)
nominated public censors. After a long drought (Lii: Shun min) he prayed to
Goel on High in the Sa, n g Lin (>>Mulberry J!'orest>>, a sacred forest) 1 ) and
tendered his own body as a sacrificial gift.") The legend about the drought in
T ' an g ' s time crops up passim., with variations. Mo: Ts'i huan quotes a Yin
s Ji u, book of the Yin to the effect that T'ang had a drought lasting 5 years;
Kuan: K'iian shan a.nd Siin: \Vang pa say 7 years; Chuang: Ts'iu slrnei says that
in 8 years T'ang ha.cl 7 droughts (the story recurs slightly varied in Han Shi
wai chuan 3).
Lii: Chi lo has another moralizing story: a, straw of grain grew up in T ' an g ' s
court and between night and morning became so big that it could only be held
round with both lrnncls; this wa,s unnatural and was hence declared by a diviner
to be a bad omen; T ' a, n g still further improved his virtuous conduct towards
the people, and in 3 days the strnw died.
Above all T ·' a, n g was' skilful in making use of good councillors. The most
prominent of. them wr,s Y i Y i n >>the governor Y i,>, the most common
appellation of Yi C h i. 'l'hat Yi Yin was the councillor of T ' an g is
alrea.dy stated in Shu: Kan shi', and though chapters in the orthodox Shu (Yi
hiin, Hien yu yi te, T'ai Kia) c1scribed to him are spurious, there are fragments
of t,he authe.ntic ones left. e. g. of the T'ai Kia in Li: Tsi yi, of the Yi hiin in
Meng: Wa,n Chang, shang. The earliest details about Yi Yin are in Mo: Shang
hien, chung: ,,y i C h 1 was a servant (s Y c h 'en) of the daughter of Yu
S h en s h Y (the lord of She n), 3 ) and he was a cook (p ' a o j en) ; T' an g
got hold of him and nrncle him his ]Jrime minister>>. Chuang: Keng Sang-ch'u
briefly alludes to the sa.rne legend (,,T ' a n g [caged =] got hold of Y i Yi n
by [the office of] a cook>>). Ts'e: Chao 4 likewise sa,ys that Yi Yin, carrying
on his hack cirnldron a.nd sacrificia.1 table, sought T ' an g, and from being a
man whose very 1mme was unknown became a, first-rank minister. Ch'u: Kin
elmng sa,ys ,,y i Yi 11 cooked in the kitchen», and the same story is alluded to in
the T'ien ·wen. In Meng: ,van Chang, shang, on the other hand, \V. asked Mencius
1) Thr• princes of S n n g, rk~8CC'ndants of tlw. S h an g . Y i rt, were enfeoffocl in S u n g jn order
to keep up the eult, of Sang .Lin (Lti: Shen tu,); thoy had a, piece of sncred n1usic called Sang
Lin (Tso: Sit1.ug ] U); the Spirit of S a. n g Li n showed hi1nself in connect,io11 "\Yith a prognostication,
nnrl it wns concluded tlrnt this omen c~oneerned only the house of Sung (iUfrl.).
2 ) The solemn ·w·ords by which he dediented himself (n, now lost Shu chapter) arc quoted in extenso
in j\fo: Kicn a.i, hin., and rn.ore or less ttbbreviated in Lun: Yao yi.le and KyCi: Chou yi.'1; Shi:-~sl
describes in detail the rites of tho detliontion.
3 ) 1iVe luwe seen on p. :307 above how the systematizing texts seized upon this house: Kun
married a lady of the Y u S h e n. house who bore the great Y n. S h e n ,vas still a feudal state
in C h. o 11 tim.e, e. g. in Rhl: ode 236. .All from Legge, various western authors 1·ead this ¥ S in,
bnt the eorrect reading (Rhl w1-'.n, K 1.rnng yl)n) is H h en.
328
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
whether it was true that Yi Yin sought favour with T ' an g through his skill
as a cook, but JYiencius, in a long se1111011, describes how Yi Yi n farmed in the
lands of the lord of Yu Shen, >>delighting in the principles of Yao and
S h u m ; how T ' an g sent him presents of silk to entreat him to enter his ser-
vice; how he had to send thrice before Yi Yin felt mornlly bound to give in
a.i-1d took over the heavy charge of becoming prime minister. Lii: Pen wei gives
a, beautifully detailed legend: »A daughter of the lord of Yu S h e n 2 (va.rim1t
of Yu S hen) picked mulberry leaves, and then she found a, bttby in a k ' u n g
s an g hollow mulberry tree; she presented him to her lord, the lord let his cook
bring him up; when they investigated how things had come about, it was stated
that when hjs mother dwelt on the Y i4 river, she became pregnant: she dreamt
that a she n Spirit (god) told her: when water comes out of the mortar (trough),
then go east and do not look back! Next da.y she saw that water ea.me out of
the mortar, she told her neighbours and went ec1st for 10 1 i, and then she looked
back at her town - it was all (under) water; her body in consequence (sc. of her
disobedience) was transformed into a hollow mulberry tree; therefore he (sc. her
son) was called Yi Yin >>the governor Yi·1,> (sc. after the river 1mme); this is t.he
story of how Yi Yin was born by a. hollow mulberry tree; when he grew up
he was wise; T ' an g heard about Yi Yin and sent people to ask for him
from the lord of Yu Shen, but he wa,s not willing (sc. to part with Yi Yin) ;
Yi Yin also wished to go to T' an g; T' an g then c1sked for r1 wife. and
the lord of Yu Shen ghtdly sent Yi Yin as mi escort for the girl ... : when
T 'an g obtained Yi Yin, he purified him in the temple, threw light upon
him with the sacred fire, smeared him with the blood of the sacrificial pig and
next day received him in audience ... >> 1 )
Referring to these legends, Ch'u: T'ien wen says: ,,\Vhen T · an g t.lie Achievr,r
ma.de a tour of inspection in the e,1st, the JJrince of S h e n 4 came: why did he
(sc. T'ang) ask for that s i a o c h 'en low servant (i. e. Yi Yin) and
receive an auspicious wife'? In the tree on the river shore one found that little
child. why was it hated and sent ,1s esoort for the lady of the Yu Shen house 1"
To Yi Yin' s role in the fall of the Hi a ,rn shall revert presently.
Another fan10us a.ncl worthy assistant of T ' a n g ' s wtts C h n n g H u e i
(Ta Tai: Yi.i tai te var. Chung Hue i2 , Siin: Yao wen va.r. Chung Hue i3 ).
We lmve seen above (p. 260) that Tso: Ting 1 tells us that the ancestor of the
1 } This story is interesting on several points. On the mm hand 1 the place nnrnc\ l{. 1 n n g - R an g
or K ' i u n g - s an g appeared a.lrea,dy in the n1yths of the ea.l'ly 1>emperorn S h n. o H a o (Ree p.
208), the place evidently hu.ving got its name frorn :,;:om.f:-\ fo,mons old 1nulberry tree, probnbl;v the
· centre of a cult, a. com1non phenonienon even in modern China. (observe that when T 'n, n g offered
hhnself to God on High to avert n <fraught, he did so in S an g Li n i)the l\Inlbtirry forest)), a. i:;acrecl
grove); here the k I n n g sang i)hollm;v rnulberry tr0e1> turn:,; up ane,v1 now in connection with tlrn
birth' of one of the greatest heroes of the Shan g era. On the other hand, it i8 tempting to ..:;;uspeet
an early hellenistic inflnence in the theme of the ,voman changed 'into a tree (Philemon a.nd Buucis,
Daphne).
329
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN A.NTIQUITIES
Chou-time princes of Si e2 was H i2 Chung (clan Jen, descendant of
Hu an g Ti, see p. 260) who was ,mi.aster of war chariots,> k ii c hen g of the
H i a (in Han time Huai asserts that H i2 C h u n g was k u n g master of
artisans of Shun), that this H i2 Chung first took up his residence in P 'e i
and that (his descendant) Chung Hue i resided in Si e2 and was T'ang' s
minister of state of the left, t so s i an g. 1 )
He was the author of the Shu chapter >>the Announcement of C h u n g H u e i>>;
the present chapter bearing that title in the orthodox Shu is spurious, but fragments
of the authentic document are preserved in lVIo: Fei ming, shang, chung and hia,
and in Tso: Siang 30. When lVIeng: Tsin sin, hia speaks of Yi Yin and L a i
C h u as two worthy ministers of T ' an g ' s, most comm. believe that L a i
Chu is but another name for Chung Hue i, but they have no better reason
for this than the absence of all further knowledge about Lai Chu.
Conforming to the pattern of the earlier rulers, T ' an g should >>cede the
throne>> to some worthy man, and this favourite theme we find in an account told
both in Chuang: Jang ,vang and in Lii: Li su: T ' a n g consulted the sages
P i e n S u e i and W u K u an g (so in Lii. and Chuang: Ta tsung shi; M o u
Ku an g in Chuang: Jang wang; lVI o u Ku an g2 in Siin: Ch'eng siang) about
his attack on K i e, but they refused their advice; after his victory he wished
t,o cede the throne to P i e n S u e i, who refused and threw himself into the
C h ' o u river (Lii.: into the Y i n g s h n e i) ; then he wanted to cede it to
Wu Ku an g, who likewise declined and taking a stone on his back drowned
himself in the L u 3 riYer (Lii: the lVI u river). Hanfei: Shuo lin gives the story
a less complimentary twist: when T ' an g had attacked Kie, he feared that
people would consider him greedy and therefore he ceded to W u K u a n g ;
but he was afraid that Wu Ku an g would accept, and so he sent a man to him who
said: T ' a n g has killed his sovereign and now he wants to transfer the bad fame
to you, therefoi·e he cedes the empire to you; hence Wu K u an g threw himself
into the H o.
Chuang: Tse yang tells us that T ' an g ha.cl as teacher lVI e n Y i n T e n g
Heng (or: the gatekeeper Teng Heng), and in Chuang: Siao yao yu he
consults the sage K i7. Finally, in Ta Tai: Yii tai te there occurs the wi5e Lao
P' en g, see p. 274 above.
T ' a n g (in the oracle inscriptions written T ' a n g2) was evidently an
honorific appellation. His personal name was L i4, as is proved by a fragment
of a lost Shu chapter quoted in Lun: Yao yiie and Mo: Kien ai, hia, where he calls
1) Tso: Chao 1 records as fan1ous rebels under the Shan g dynasty (the princes of) She n 3 and
P ' e i ; it is undecided, however, under which reign they rebelled. Lu Te-1ning (King tien shi wen)
and Ts'ie yi.'tn both read the character Sien, but the sound gloss on Shuo wen reads She n 3 , and
it is evidently but another variant of Yu S h en or Yu She n 2 in the Yi Yin legend above.
Thus both states S he 113 and P , e i occur connected with the legends of T 1 an g (with Yi Yin
and Chung Hue i respectively). 'l1he spurious Chu shn ki nien pla-ces the rebellion of She n.3
nnd P I e i far on in the dynnsty, the reign of VY a i Jen, but for this there is no ancient support.
330
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS l:V ANCIENT CHINA
himself >>I, the little child L i 4 >> ; it is further confirmed by Ta Tai: Shao kien:
>>L i4 of Shan g instead (of the Hi a) came on the throne>>. His dynastic name
is given in Si.in: Ch'eng siang as T ' i en Yi (,>T ' i en Yi, that was C h ' en g
T'ang>>), which was accepted by S1-ma Ts'ien and later historians. But in
archaic script the graphs for t 'i en 'heaven' and ta (t 'a i) 'great' are pract-
ically identical, and Sii.n's T 'i en Yi is a wrong reacting of T 'a i (T a) Yi,
as shown by the oracle inscriptions, where the name frequently occurs with the
same graph as in names like T 'a i Ting, T 'a i Mo u. 1 )
There are various texts asserting that T'ang's original feudal land waR P o2
(*b'ak), sometimes (e. g. in Kuan: Ti shu, Yi Chou shu: Yin elm, Siin: Yi ping)
written P o3 (*b'ak): Meng: T'eng Wen kung, shang: >>T' an g resided in P o2>>
(sc. at the beginning of his career). lVIeng: Wan Chang, slrnng quotes the now
lost Shu chapter Yi hi.i.n: >>When heaven destroyed (Kie), it commenced
attacking him in the Mu - k u n g palace; I (sc. T ' an g) commencerl. in P o2>>.
Tso: Chao 4 says that T'ang gave his orders from King P o2 • Meng: Liang
Huei wang, hia enlarges upon the theme by adding that the original fief was very
small: 70 1 i square (so also Kuan: Ti shu; Mo: Fei ming and Stin: Wang pa
say 100 1 i). On the other hand, Li.i.: Shen shi says: »lf T ' an g had not had
(his original fief) Wei" tJl (1, cf. below) ... >>, and Lii: Kil pei says: »T ' a 11 g
was pressed in We i 6 P o3>> (We i 6 and P o3 '?). Lii: Shen ta says that the people.
»loved We i 6 as (they had loved) Hi a>>. The comm. Kao Yu has the idea that
We i 6 i5 a variant graph for Yin Al!:; he points out that in his time (2nd c. A.
D.) people in Yen-chou pronounced Yin like y i :iU (Cheng Hiian in comm. on
Li: Chung yung says the same of the people in Ts'i) and he concludes that \V c i';
is a variant for y i :iU in the sense of Y i n. In consequence of this gloss of
Kao's, the T'ang yiin reads tJl ·jar / }~i / y i just like ;;U. But the whole of thi8
speculation is not very convincing. It is true that 1i.. *·far could serve as variant
for M: *·jan (common in the bronze inscriptions). But tJl has the phonetic :ij!:
*gjwar / -jiv-ai /we i, which agTees badly with Kao's supposed *·iJr. It seems
more probable that We i 6 is simply an enlarged form of 'vV e i• :i\l:, a stftte which
T ' a n g crushed early in his career (see below) and evidently incorporated in his
·fief of P o2 (P o3 ) ; hence Li.i. could speak of We i 6 or We i 6 P o3 as the early
possession of T ' an g. It should be observed that the geographical position of
the original P o2 is contested (see p. 210 above). One early source has it that
it was· somewhere to the east of the Hi a capital, for Li: Tsi yi has a quotation
from a now lost Shu chapter, where Yi Yin, T ' an g ' s coadjutor, spealrn of
s i y i Hi a >>the city of Hi a in the west>>. This is confirmed in the Lii.: Shen
ta account below. The Hi a capital was, according to Tso: Ting 4 in the region
which became the fief of T s i n, i. e. central and southern Shansi.
T ' an g started his career by subduing variouR feudal states (the authentic
· 1 ) See for instance Tung Tso-pin, I{ia. ku '\Yen tuan tai yen kiu li, in Studies ... Ts·ai Yuan-p'ei
1933.
331

BULLETIN OF THE JIIJ.USEUJIIJ. OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
----- ·---- -·----·-··------ ~-------- -··-- - - - ~ - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chu shu says T'ang had 7 names and made 9 warlike expeditions; Meng: Teng
Wen kung, shang says he had 11 wars), before he attacked his supreme lord, the
Hi a king. Meng: Liang Huei wang, hia quotes a lost Shu chapter: >>When
T ' a n g started his punitive expeditions, he commenced with (the state of) K 02,> ;
and ::\1e.ng: T'eng W'en kung, hia gives a long story of how the lord of Ko•,
neighbour of T ' a n g in P o2, neglected his sacrifices, in spite of help delivered
from P o2, and it again quotes a lost Shu passage: >>The lord of K o2 treated as
enemies those who brought food to the field workers>> (robbing the men of Po•
who helped K o2 with field work). K 02 was a feudal kingdom in middle Chou
time, its ruling house belonging to the clan Ying, cf. Tso: Hi 17, where it is
mentioned that a lady Ying of K o2 was one of the second-rank wives of the
famous prince Hu a, n of T s 'i. W'hether this K o2 had anything to do with
the K o2 of the T ' an g legend it is of course impossible to decide.
From the odes we lea.rn of several other warlike expeditions of T ' a n g : ode
:304 says he crushed We i 5 , Ku, K' u n - w u and then (king) Kie of Hi a,.
and ode :305 sums up by saying tha,t under Ch'eng T'ang of all, even those Ti
fLlld K.' i an g (tribes in the far west), there were none who dfLred not come and
bring offerings. The We i 5 in question has been identified by Cheng Hiian with
the S h 1 W e i discussed in p. 29:3 above, which is quite arbitmry and unallowable;
our \Ve i 5 here is known from_ no other source, unless, as has been suggested
fLbove, it is identical with the We i 6 in Lii. Ku and K 'u n - w u were both
states with ruling houses of the K i" clan (cf. p. 2:37 above).
A line of the now lost Shu chapter Yi hi.in is quoted by Cheng Hiian (ap. K'ung
Ying-ta's comm. on Shu: Yao tien): >>Again he (sc. T'ang) attacked San
T s u n g2 >>. Yi Chou shu: Sh1 ki tells us thttt the lord of Yu L o did all kinds
of extnwagances (building palaces, ponds, parks etc.) and that C h' en g Shan g
i. e. C h ' e n g T ' a n g attacked and destroyed him.
In Ts'e: Wei 4 it is said that when T'ang was about to attack Kie, he
first tried his forces on the wefLk state of M i S ii as an exercise in warfare, and
having ,>obtained>> Mi S ii went on and tackled Kie. On the other hand, Lii:
Yung min places the Mi S ii legend in the time of \Ven wan g of Chou :
»The people of Mi S ii themselves fettered their lord and gave themselves to
Wen wan g>>. The comm. (Kao Yu and others) identify this Mi S ii with
the M i3 that occurs as one of the states attacked by Wen wang according to
Ode 241, which is just as arbitrary as the identification of We i 5 with S h 1 Wei
above. However in Tso: Cimo .15 it is stated that W e n w an g used >>the drum-
and great chariot of M i S ii>> in the big hunt, and it is more reasonable to assume
that these were trophies obtained by Wen wang in his own wars than that they
were heirlooms from the beginning of the Shan g dynasty. Hence Lii has
preserved a better version of the Mi S ii legend, and the Ts'e author seems to
have erroneously attributed it to T ' an g.
The fundamental fact of T ' an g, however, was his attack on Kie and
332
,-,
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS lN ANGIE.VT CHINA
---·------
-overthrowing of the H i a dynasty. There was a legend analogous to that of the
last S h an g - Y in king imprisoning \V e n w a n g : here K i e made T ' a n g
a prisoner but had to release him. The authentic Chu shu ki nien refers to it
(Kie 's last year): >>That was the year when T 'an g was released>>. And Ch'u:
T'ien wen says: »T ' an g came out from C h ' u n g - t s ' i.i an, what had been
his crime? (After that) he could not overcome his wish to attack the emperor,
who had caused him (sc. Kie) to provoke him (sc. T 'an g) ?»
The great attack, celebrated in one of the fLuthentic Shu chapters, T'ang shY,
in which T'ang harangues his troups before the battle, and which is referred
to in several other Shu chapters (To shi: l>C h ' e n g T ' a n g deposed the H i a>>;
Ki.in SM: >>When C h ' en g T ' an g had received the heavenly charge, he had
a man like Yi Yim), was preceded by prodigies: »the rivers Y i4 (cf. the Yi
Yi n legend above) and L o became (>>exhausted» =) dry ttnd then H i a
perished,> (Kyi.i: Chou, shang); »when Hi a perished, (the god) Hue i Lu (cf.
p. 246) stayed for two nights in K 'in - sue i» (ibid.); >>in Kie 's last year the
altar of the Soil burst>> (auth. Chu shu ki nien). Mo: Fei kung. hia embroiders this
theme: >>When it came to Kie of Hi a, Heaven declared its will: sun fLUd moon
missed their proper times, cold and heat came promiscuously, the five kinds of
grain were scorched and died, demons howled in the htnd, cranes cried for more
than ten nights; Heaven then charged T'ang in the Pi a o - k u n g palace ... ;
soon there was a s h e n Spirit (god) who came and said: the virtue of. the H i u
is greatly disorderly, go and attack it, I will certainly let you have the strength
for it, I have received the charge of Heaven; Heiwen ordered Chu J u n g (the
fire-god, see p. 240) to send clown fire to the north-western corner of the city of
Hi a ; T ' an g obtained the multitude of the Hi a and vanquished the lord
of Hi a>>.
The antecedentia and details of the great fight are described in Lli: Shen ta.
T'ang grieves over the misdeeds of Kie and sends Yi Yin to Hi a to spy on
him; fearing that Yi Yin may not be trusted by Kie, he shoots an Rl'I'OW after
him by his own hand, feigning enmity, and Yi Yin >>escapes,> to Hi a. After
:3 years he returns to P o2 and reports about K i e ' s infatuation for ::\I o H i.
Y i.i an and Ye 11 2 (seep. :32i above) and the misery of the people. T '1111 g then
makes a solemn covenant with Y i Yi n in order to show him that he was
determined to annihilate Hi a. Yi Yin now goes again to spy in Hi a. (i\'.Ieng:
Kao ts1, hia, makes these preparatory diatribes much more complicated: Yi
Yin 5 times went to T 'an g and 5 times to Kie) and consults Mo Hi.
She tells him that »the Son of Heaven,> the night before had dreamt that there
was one sun in the west and one in the east and that the two suns battled and
the western one was victorious. Yi Yin reports this to T ' an g, and in spite
of a bad drought in P o2 he mobilizes his army, in order to stand by the covenant
with Yi Yin, and lets it march ont of his state from the east· and advance
towards the west (sc. towards Hi a). Even before the armies have joined battle,
333
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
------------- ---- -- -- ---- -----
K i e flees and is pursued to the T a - s h a >>Great Sand>> and is killed and
dismembered. In another Lii chapter (Kien siian) the account is varied: >>T ' an g
had 70 fine war chariots and 6000 warriors devoted unto death; on the day m o u -
t s 'i he fought in C h ' en g 5 and caught (the strong men) T ' u e i Yi
( = T ' u e i C h ' 'i) and T a H i ; he ascended from Mi n g - t ' i a o and
entered the C h ' a o - 111 e n gate (Huai: Fan lun has the variant T s i a o - m e 11)
and thus got possession of Hi a; Kie fled>>. - This should be compared with
Mo: ):Iing kuei, hia: >>T' an g had 9 (probably wrong for 90) war chariots in wild-
geese array ... ; though Kie had strong men like T ' u e i C h' i and T a Hi,
who could tear a,stmder a living rhinoceros or tiger and kill a man by touching
hin1 with the finger, he could not escape the punishment of the gods.>> Ts'~: Yen
2 and Siin: Yi ping say that the great battle was fought in Mi n g - t ' i a o. Kuan:
K'ing chung varies the theme of T ' an g ' s inside help in Hi a : it was on the
one hand the lady Nii Hu a, on the other hand the favourite K' ii Y i.1)
We have seen that Lii says Kie was driven to Ta - s ha »the Great Sand»;
Mo: San pien, on the other hand, says that T ' an g banished Kie to T a -
s hue i >>the Great Water>>, whereever that may be. But a more wide-spread
tra.dition is connected with another name, N an - c h ' a o. Lii: Lun wei says
K i e died in Nan - c h ' a o, Kyii: Lu shang says Kie fled to N an - c h ' a o,
and the authentic Chu shu ki nien says he fled to the lord of N an - c h ' a o.
vVhen Siin: Kie pi asserts that he died on the T ' i n g - s h a n mountain, the
comm. are ready to determine this as >>a mountain in N a 11 - c h ' a o>> ; another
text version of S:li.n, however, had Li - s ha 113, and Wang Nien-sun believes that
T ' i 11 g is a scribe's fault for the similar character Li, since Sh'i-ts'i says Kie
was banished to Li - s h a 112• The com1nentators place N an - c h ' a o in
modern Anhuei. Several sources make this N an - c h ' a o instead of M in g -
t ' i a o the place for the decisive battle. Sh'i-tsi says that T ' an g with 300
leather-armed chariots attacked K i e in N a n - c h ' a o and imprisoned him in
the H i a - k u n g palace (Huai: Pen king calls it H i a - t ' a i >>the H i a
Tower>>), and Yi Chou shu: Yin elm has a long story (with various dialogues
between Kie and T ' a 11 g) : T ' an g intended to banish Kie to Chung -
y e, but all the people went over to T ' a n g there, and K i e with 500 adherents
moved a thousand 1 i to P u - t s ' i and from there to L u, and again from
there t.o N an - c h ' a o ; when T ' an g had placed K i e in banishment in
Nan - c h' a o, he returned to P o2 and the 3000 feudal lords assembled there.
T ' an g offered the royal seal and the throne to anyone who would be worthy,
but nobody dared accept, and so T' an g himself ascended the throne (the story
recurs abbreviated in Shang shu ta chuan).
Let us for a moment follow up the fate of T' a 11 g's great coadjutor, Yi
Yin. Meng: Wan Chang, shang narrates: >>Yi Yin was minister to T'ang
----
1 } N i'1. H u a n1ay mean »the womanly ±1oweri> an.cl I{ 1 i.i Y i ))the crooked and refractory one»
and they might si111p1y be sobriquets for M o Hi and son1e one of the wicked councillors of Kie ' s.
334
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS A.ND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
and made him king over the whole world; when T ' an g died, T ' a i Ting
never came to the throne, Wai Ping had two years (sc. as king), Chun g
J en had four years; T ' a i K i a overthrew the rules and laws of T ' a n g,
and Yi Y i n banished him to T ' u n g ; after 3 years T ' a i K i a repented ...
and he returned (as king) to P o2>>. From this account the degrees of kinship
between the four men is not clear, but it is revealed by Kyii: Ch'u shang: >>Yao
had T an C h u4, Shun had S h an K ii an, K ' i4 had VV u Ku an,
T ' an g had T ' a i K i a, W u w a n g had (the princes of) K u a n 2 and
T s' a i, those five kings possessed great virtue but they had wicked sons,> (a,
similar passage in Hanfei: Shuo yi). Thus it is clearly stated that T 'a i Kia
was a son of T ' an g, and presumably T ' a i T in g, V,.T a i P i n g and
C h u n g J e n his elder brothers. Kyii: Tsin 4 likewise says that Y i . Y i n
banished T 'a i Kia, and Tso: Siang 21 says Yi Yin bimished T' a i Kia
but was his minister (after the restitution). The authentic Chu slrn ki nien, how-
ever, has a less lenient account of the affair; it says: >>Wai Ping ascended the
throne and resided in P o2 ; C h u n g J e n ascended the throne, resided in P o2
and made Y i Y i n minister; when C h u n g J e n died, Y i Y i n banished
T ' a i K i a to T ' u n g and himself ascended the throne; when Y i Y i n had
ascended the throne and had kept T' a i Kia banished for 7 yen,rs, T' fL i Kitt
secretly left T ' u n g, killed Y i Y i n and set up his sons Y i C h 1" and Y i
Fen, restituted to them their father's fields and mansions and let them divide
them>>. That is the dry chronicle version of the end of the great sage Y i Y i n.
Some words, finally, of T'ang' s ancestors. \Ve have seen above that he
traced his lineage from Si e, son of emperor K 'u (p. 211). Kyii: Chou hia says:
>>The Dark King ( h ii an wan g), i. e. Si e (so called because of his miraculous
birth through the Black Bird, the swallow, in ode 303) did meritorious work for
the (future) Shan g house, after 14 generations it rose>> (to the royal throne).
This formulation is ambiguous, for it is not clear whether >>14 generations>> is
exclusive or inclusive of Si e and of T ' an g : it might mean S i e + 12 princes
+ T'ang; or: Si e + 13 princes + T 'an g; or: Si e + 14 princes +
T ' an g. Siin: Ch'eng siang, on the other hand, says: >>Hie, the Dark King
(Si e h ii an wan g) begat Chao ::YI i 11 g, he resided in C h I - s hi and
moved to Shan g, after 14 generations there was T 'i e 11 Yi (wrong for T' a i
Yi, see above), he was C h 'en g T'ang,>. If we were to interpret the Kyii
passage as exclusive of Si e (14 generations after Si e), we should have to
translate here, on the analogy of that: 14 generations after C h a o Ming, !111d
the two sources would be unreconcilable. But the figure >>14 generations,> is
evidently a fundamental genealogical fact, common to both texts, and we must
conclude that in both cases it refers, not to the number of princes after S i e and
Chao Ming respectively, but to the complete number of princes after the Royal
ancestor K 'u, Si e counted as the first, and T ' an g, who rose to Royal power,
as the 14th. Thus: Si e + +
12 princes T' an g.
335
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA

Some of these 12 princes can be determined from the free pre-Han texts. We If we turn from the texts to the orncle inscriptions, we find a series of prince~
saw from Sii.n that Si e was followed by C h a o l\'[ in g ; on the other hand ending with Kue i4, predecessor of T ' an g. related in a fixed order (repeated
Kyfi: Lu shang says: »All from the Dark King (Si e) down to Chu Kue i4 in several inscriptions) :1 )
none were equal to T ' a n g>>. From this we learn that T ' a n g ' s predecessor X Kia (tJ Ef3) - Pao Yi ('1 Z:..) - Pao Ping - Pao Ting -
(father?) was Kue i. 4 In between C h a o l\'[ in g and Chu k u e i 4 the texts S h i J en - S h I Kue i4 •
mention 6 princes: Since X K i a is the only name of Et prince anterior to T · a n g in the orncle
Si an g T ' u: Ode 304 mentions him in between S i e and T ' an g. Tso: inscriptions which contains the word Kia, Wang Kuo-wei is certainly right in
Siang 9 says: >>Yao ' s >>Master of Fire>> Ngo Po resided in S hang - k ' i u identifying X K i a with the S h a n g K i a W e i of C: h u K i a W e i of the
and sacrificed to the (star) Ta h u o (seep. 243 above), Si a 11 g T 'u continued texts. We have thus arrived at the following list of early Shan g prince,;:
it>>; consequently Si an g T ' u must stand very early in the line, directly after
C h a o l\'I i 11 g. S i an g T ' u is further mentioned in Tso: Ting 4, where it is (K'u:)
Si e (texts, inscr.) .
1
said that his >>eastern capital>> was in the region that in Chou time became the C h a o l\i,r 1· n g (text s) . Tlus sequence atteRterl
state of We i. In the oracle inscriptions he is called simply T 'u2 • 1
Si an g T 'u (texts), T 'u (inscr.)
Ming: Kyii: Lu shang says that the S h an g people offered k i a o sacrifice
to l\'I in g and t sung sacrifice to T' an g. Kyii (ibid.) further says that
l\'Ii n g (texts)
Tr • 8 (t
1f 'cl . 1
i>.. 1 ext s, 1nscr.
. ) these two 1 entwal.
»l\'I in g was energetic in his officfal task and died in the waters». This is highly
interesting. We have studied above (p. 244) the popular water-god H ii an
Heng (text), Wang Ken g (inscr.) 1
attestecl aR sons
Kai, Wang T s i Hai (texts), Wang Hai (inscr.) J of K is.
l\'I i n g, who was annexed to the ancestral hero cult as son of the »emperor>>
Shang Kia Wei, Chu Kia ·wei (texts), X Kia (inscr.)
S h a o H a o. Here a legendary forefather of T ' an g ' s, called l\'I in g (same
Pao Yi (inscr.)
name) is said to have died in the waters, evidently a coalescence of two sets of
Pao Ping (inscr.)
legends. ThiK Kequenee
Pao Ting (inscr.)
K i 8, He 11 g2 and Kai: Ch'u: T'ien wen says: >>Hen g2 (grasped =) attested.
Shi Jen (inscr.)
maintained the virtue of K i 8 ••• ; Kai maintained the virtue of K i 8 , his father
Chu Kue i4 (text), Shi Ku ei4 (inscr.)
found him good>>. In the oracle inscriptions there occur among the early princes
T' a 11· g, T 'i en Yi (texts), T' an g2, T' a i Yi (inscr.)
(anterior to T' an g - all the kings from T'ang to the encl of the dynasty
are well esti,blished by the oracle inscriptions) both K i 8 , 'iV an g Hai and We thus know the names of 14 princes (l 2 of which are attested in the inscrip-
W a 11 g Ke 11 g, and Wang Kuo-wei is clearly right in identifying Hai with tions), after the Royal ancestor K 'u : Si e 12 princes+ +
T 'an g, which
the K a i, K e 11 g with the H e 11 g of the T'ien wen. This is further confirmed would seem to agree with the pronouncements in Kyii. and Siin as interpreted on
by the authentic Chu shu ki nien, which says that Wang T s i H a i of Yin p. 335 above. But that is not quite correct, for even if we take the »14 generationR,,
was killed by the lord of Y u Y i, but was revenged by C h u K i a W e i of in those texts to mean the line with Si e and T ' an g inclusive, our list cannot
Yi 11 (see p. 320 above). From the wording of the T'ien wen text it is evident be called >>14 generatiom: from the formulation in Ch'u: T'ien wen above it is
that He 11 g (Ke 11 g) and Kai (H a i) were sons of K i 8 • Wang Kuo-wei evident that H e n g and K a i were brothers (both »maintaining the virtue
goes one step further: the Shi pen says that l\'I in g had a son Ho• ;f;ti, and if of K i 8») and probably there is one prince missing from the list-, representing »one
we take this H o2 as a variant of H a i 1!i. and K a i ~, that would mean that generation>> (or two, if we accept the identification of iVI in g and K i 8 ).
Mi 11 g and K i 8 are one and the same person. That is all very well, but the ·That the lore about the early S h an g princes lrns been so extensively pre-
Shi pen is a systematizing text little anterior to the Shi ki (which frequently draws served in the pre-Han texts is due to the fact that, vV n wan g. the first C: ho u
upon the Shi pen), and like the Shi: ki it is full of data that are in conflict with the king, enfeoffecl (Li: Yiie ling, Lii.: Shen ta) the descendants of the S h an g
free pre-Han texts. It is far from safe to rely on its statement above. house in the state of Sung (clan t s I, referring to the myth about the birth
Shan g Kia Wei or Chu Kia Wei: We have just seen that Chu shu of the ancestor Si e from a swallow's egg, t s i -=7~). which pla,ved a prominent
ki nien says this prince revenged the death of his predecessor. Kyii: Lu shang part in Chinese politics for 1mmy ce1-ituries. In its ancestral cult the early legends
says: >>S h an g Kia Wei could follow (the principles of) Si e, the S h an g were certainly well preserved. Kyi.i.: Lu shang and Li: Tsi fa. tell us that the
people offered p a o sacrifices to him>>. 1) See Tung Tso-pin, Kin kn wen tuan t.ni yen kin Ii, in Studief-l ... Ts'ui Yuun-p'ei 1H38.

336 22 337

BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
--------- ---~------- - ----- ----·--·-··--· -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shan g dynasty offered t s u sacrifices to Si e; but Tso: Wen 2 records that
the llrinces of S u n g offered the t s u sacrifice to a later sovereign of the line,
Ti Yi, who was the last but one of the Shan g - Yin kings (cf. Tso: Ai 9).
XVIB.
The systematizing and early Han texts offer various discrepancies from the free
pre-Han texts.
Si-ma Ts'ien, in his treatment of Kie and T ' an g, makes on the whole only
,1, very brief extract from the early sources, with small aberrations not all of which
need be. recorded here; a few examples will suffice. He says that K i e ' s name
was properly L i4 K u e i 4 Jilt ~. This flatly contradicts the ancient sources,
tmd, as pointed out by Chavannes, it i:s probably a gross lapsus: L i4 was
T'ang' s name, Kue i4 was that of his predecessor (father·?) in the princely
:-:\hang house,· and the names L i4 - Kue i4 have been combined and applied
to T ' tt n g ' s antagonist K i e ; the fault is clue to the Shi pen, from which
:-:\ i-ma took it over. Further on his authority Pan Ku (Han shu: Ku kin jen piao),
~implifying nmtters, says Kie' s names was Kue i4 (!). - Si-ma: Kie impris-
oned 'r ' an g in Hi a - t ' a i. Huai: Fan lun has the same story (Kie after
his defeat did not repent his sins but only regretted that he had not killed T ' an g
in the Hi a - t' a i), but the introduction of the name Hi a - t' a i (instead of
the C h ' u n g - t s ' i.i. an of Ch'u: T'ien wen) seems to be due to confusion with
the Hi a - k u n g (Shi-tsi) or Hi a, - t ' a i (Huai: Pen king), in which T ' an g
after his victory imprisoned Kie (see p. 334). - Si-ma: Kie was vanquished
on the site of the Y u S u n g2 house and he fled to Mi n g - t ' i a o (we saw ·
that Li.i. and Ts'e placed the battle in Ming - t' i a o, Shi-tsi in Nan - c h' a o);
hut again (Shi ki: Ts'in pen ki) he says that Fe i C h ' an g (unknown in pre-
Han texts) was T' an g 's charioteer when he vanquished Kie in Ming-
t, ' i a o : thus his data are contradictory. - Si-ma: T ' a i Kia was the son
of T ' a i Ting and the grandson of T' an g (whereas Kyi.i. expressly tells us
that he was T'ang' s son): here again he bases himself on the Shi pen. -The
Htory of the straw of grain which grew as a warning omen in T ' an g ' s court
has been transferred by the Shu shi.i. and Si:-ma (Shi ki: Feng shan shu) to a later
Shang king, 'l' ' a i Mou, and the straws have been changed into one mulberry
plant and one straw of grain which grew together (Shang shu ta chuan places the
event in the reign of Wu Ting).
A great many a,dditiona.1 items not existing in the free pre-Han texts have been
taken over by Si'.-ma from the Shu Preface (Shu si.i.}, a work evidently slightly
anterior to his time. This is a typical systematizing text. There existed a list
of the various Shu chapters, of which a great many were already lost in early Han
time, and the author of the Preface has systematically gone through the list and
supplied tales to explain the names of the chapters, tales that are quite unknown
in the free pre-Han textR. The Rhn sii SH'.','R for instance:
338
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA.
---" ··-·-------------------
--·--------
From S i e to C h ' e n g T ' a 11 g they moved (the capital) 8 times; T ' a 11 g
was the first to reside in P o2 ••• then he made the (chapters) Ti k a o and
Li wu. - Y i Y in left P 0 2 and went to H i a ; when he became disgusted
with the lord of H i a, he returned to P o2 ; he entered through the northern
gat.e and met (the worthy men) J u K i u and J u F a 11 g ; and so he made
the (chapters) Ju Kin and Ju Fang. - (After the battle at ;VI in g - t 'i a o)
T ' an g .... attacked S a 11 Tsu n g2 and captured it precious jades; Y i P 02
(Si:-ma var. Yi P o3 } and Chung Po made the (chapter) Tien pao. - When
T'ang returned from Hi a and came to Ta: k i u n g (Si-ma var. T' a i -
k i.i an}, Chun g. Hue i made his Announcement (the chapter Chung Huei
chi Imo). - Kao Shan made (the chapter) Ming ki.i.. - When T'ang had
died, in T' a i Kia' s 1st year, Yi Yin, composed the Yi hi.i.n. Later
scholars (followed e. g. by the T'ung kien kang mu) Jmve taken this entry to mean
that neither vV a i Ping nor Chung J. en ever came to the throne (against
Meng: Wan Chang and the authentic Chu shu, both of which reeognize these
kings); but the wording of the Shu si.i entry does not neces8arily convey this.
. Besides these earlier unknown remarkable men in T ' a n g ' s entourage: ,Ju
K i u, Ju Fang, Yi P o2, C h u n g P o, K a o S h an, some ea,rly Ha,n
texts know of several more. Lie-tsi in several passages lets T ' r1 n g diRcnss with
the wise Hi a Ko (e. g. Lie: T'ang wen). The comm. identify him with the
K i 7, mentioned by Chuang: Siao yao yu (see p. 330 above) mid say that ff<, ordi-
narily read *kc:k / ksk / k o should here be read *ki,1k / kiak / k i like llit This is a
very arbitrary guess. In the famous Shu: To shi a line runs: >>(Heaven ordered)
C h' e 11 g T'ang to k o Hi a depose the Hi a (ti'i Jl), and it seems likely
that Lie (in the playful manner of the taoist authors) has turned this into a name:
Hi a Ko >>the Deposer of the H i a>>, i. e. some councillor who helped 'r ' an g
to overthrow the H i a. Han Sh1 wai chuan 5 says T ' a 11 g had for teiwher ,1,
certain T a i Hu S i an g. The same work (k. 4) ,lrno,vs all the details of the death
of the famous K u a 11 L u n g F e n g: K i e made a wine pond so big that a boat
could move about in it, the dregs formed a mound that could be seen at a clist,111ce
of ten 1 i; those who drank tJ10re like oxen were 3000 persons; K u a 11 L u n g
Feng remonstrated and was killed by Kie. Han Shi nei ehuan (a,p. Yii lan
83) says T' a 11 g was 13 years on the throne and died at the age of 1.00 years.
Shan hai king (k. 16) attaches a ghost story to the Kie legend: >>There
is a man without head who stands holding dagger-axe and shield, he i8 called >>the
corpse of Hi a Ke 11 g>>; when C h ' en g T ' an g attacked K i e on the
Chang - s ha n (deviating from the pre-H11n texts) and vanquished him, he cut
off the head of H i a K e n g in front of him; K e 11 g stood up without his head
and fleeing from his punishment went down to the 'iV u - s ha n mountain.>>
The Eastern Han scholars add various supernatural features to the legend of
T'ang. Wa11g Ch'ung (Lun heng: Ku siang) says he had four elbowH. Wang J<'u
(Tsien fu lun: Wu te lun) has the customary story of a. miraeulous birth: T'ang 's
339
 BULLE7'1iV OF THE MUSEUil!I OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
---·- ---- ---- - -- --· . . ·-·----------·-·--
mother lady F u Tu saw a white va11our bore through the moon. she was moved
(to JJregnancy) and she bore the >>Black Ern11erorn T'ang. And in the 3rd c. Huang-
fu Mi (Ti wang shi: ki) as usual has a long and full biography in ,vhich, along with
the various themes of the earlier authors, there crop up a great many features of
·which only a few can he quoted here as examples:
Kie in his palace lrnd 3000 bronze pillars, he was the first to put tiles on the
houses; night a,ncl d,1y he feasted and drank wine with Mo Hi ,md the harem
ladies and he used to put Mo Hi on his hip; JVI o Hi enjoyed to hear the sound of
silk that w,1s torn to pieces and laughed, and hence Kie took silk from the stores
and tore it to please her; he put men to pull his carriage; he made mountains of
meat and forests of dried meat (this plagiarizes the story of Cho u 3 • the last Yin
kilig, who, ,iccording to 1{anfei: Yii Lao, made >>a garden of meat»). When Yi
Yin lifted his goblet and remonstrated against his wickedness, Kie said: Heaven
has its sun, just as I have the people; when the sun perishes, I shall perish. 1 ) After
the defeat K i e took JVI o Hi m1cl all the harem ladies and went by sea to Nan -
c h' a o, where he died. T'ang nrnde 27 punitive expeditions against wicked
feudal lords. ·when he lrn,cl made his famous order about the hunting nets (see
p. 328) the lords to the south of the Han river admired his benevolence and 36 states
at once gave themselves up to him; when Kie killed those who remonstmted,
'I ' a 11 g sent envoys solemnly to weep at their graves and hence was imprisoned
b y K i e; when he subsequently was released, in one clay 500 states submitted
to him. Yi Yin was a descendant of Li JVI u of Huang Ti's time (see p. 281)
and his mother was h,dy S h. I To; he became 100 yea,rs old, and when he died,
Heaven made a fog for 3 days. vVhen T ' an g had obtained all the important
parts of the reaJm. a she n Spirit (god) entered the court of Yin and led a white
wolf who carried a, (fishing) hook in its mouth; then he (T ' an g) nmde a tour to
the east, threw as sacrifice a pi jade into the Lo river and obtained the happy
omen of the Yellow Fish and the Black ,Jade; thereupon he accepted the mandate
,md called himself king. The peo1Jle of the Marvellous Arms K ' i Kung mi n
could nmke flying chariots, which follmving the wind went far away; in T ' an g ' s
time a westerly wind blew the flying chariots as far as to Yi.i.-chou, T'ang de-
stroyed the chariots and did not let the people see them, etc. Let us ttdcl that
Huang-fu JVIi (ap. Shi: wen to Chuang: Ta tsung sh'i) makes vV u Ku an g a
contemporary of H u a n g T i, not of T ' an g.
The legends about 'r ' an g 's prominent henchmen are also sometimes tampered
with. Thus, the story of Yi Yin 's mother (who, as we saw, was to flee when the
mortar produced water): Wang Yi (comm. on Ch'u: T'ien wen) says: >>When the
mortar and the hearth produce frogs ... >>.
There is finally the question of the genealogical line of the S h a n g princes,
descendttnts of emperor K 'u, prior to T' an g. Shi pen rncords the first genera-
------------------
1) This story is 1ncide ~o explain the famous phrase in Shu: '1' 1 ang sh'f, where the suffering people
say: VYhen ,vill thnt sun perinh, iVl' ,vill periHh. along· 'With it.
34:0
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN iLVCIENT CHINA
. ---· ----·---· .. ·····---------
tions thus: (K' u : son) Si e -- son Chao Ming -- son Rian g T 'u --- son
C h' an g Jo - son T s ',1, o Yu (var. Li a, n g Yi.\) - son Ken Kuo -
son J\1 in g. \:Ve saw under A above that neither the free pre-Han texts nor the
oracle inscriptions ever mention C h ' an g J o, T s ' a o Y i.\ or Ken .Ku o.
Si:-ma Ts'ien (Yin pen ki) follo-ws Shi: pen but skips K en Ku o and makes
JVI in g a son of T s ' a o Y ii. 1 ) He gives a complete list thus:
a
R i e - son C h a o lVI i n g - son R i n g T ' u --- son C h ' ,1 n g ,J o - son
T s ' a o Yu - son Min g - son C he n 2 - son 'IV e i' - son Pao Ti ng 2 ¥/z
T - son P a o Y i 2 - son P a o P i n g2 - - son CJ h u Jen - son Chu Kue i'-
- son T 'i en Yi (wrong for T' a i Yi= T'ang, seep. :3:31).
There is one very remarkable fettture in this list. S1-{1rn lrnmrn of tlie names
P a o Tin g, P tt o Yi, P ,1 o P in g, mid C h u J- en, though they never
occur in pre-Han texts; and none the less his data are confirmed by the reeently
exvated oracle inscriptions, the P a o 'J Pin g etc. of which are evidently iden-
tical with his P a o fR. P i n g2 etc. ,wd the S h 1 JTJ' ,J e n of ,vhieh clearly is
the same as his Chu :=t ,Jen. Thus it is clear that S i:-nm has Imel access to
some earlier source, some genealogical list, pro1mbly that of the house of 8 u n g
in Chou time. But it should he observed that there are several discrepancies
from the true line as revealed by the oracle inscriptions. On the one lrnnd, Che 112
is quite unknown in the inscriptions; on the other hand, S1-ma lms confused the
order of the kings, P <1 o T i n g being wrongly placed before insteail of after
Pao Yi and Pao Ping; and, finally, S'i-111,1 knows nothing of K i8 and his
sons Kai (Hai) and Heng (Ken g), attested hoth in Ch'u: T'ien wen and in
the oracle inscriptions.
* * *
With the legends ,,bout the fall of the H i a and the rise of the 8 Ji a n g this
survey shall come to a close; not because there rue no legends concerning the next
following periods, but because with the S h a, n g dynasty we are on semi-historic-
al ground; I hope to revert to the lore of the 8 h tt n g tmd the early C h o u on
another occasion.
It has often been stated that Confueius, :Ylencius, 2\fo-tsL the Tso and Kuo-yii
authors and all those other ,uiters of the la,st few pre-Han centuries regarded the
principa.1 figures ·in the legends pieced together above (our A sections) rts phiinly
his tor i c al personages: early emperors, kings, ministers, feucla.l lords, rebels
etc. Tlmt is true to a certain extent, but it is only lrnlf the truth: they certafoly
--------~
l) Pan K.n (Han shu: Kn kin jen piao) and V\'"ei Chuo (eunun. on Kyi't: Lu shnng) gi,·e a Ken Y Cl
as IvI in g ' s father. This see1ns to be a conta1nination fron1 the T s ' a. o Y ·O. and l{. e 11 I{. u o
of Shi: pen. Observe, however, t,lrnt the Shl pen variant for T s 1 no Y Ll : Li an g Yi:l_, since the
character Liang fj has a variant fN.
which is sirnilar to I{cn fJ?c 1 nrny lia.ve given rise to n, I{. en
Y i.i, under influence of the follmving I( c n I( u o in Shi' pen's list. ...-\ll(l Cheng Hih1n (comm. on Li:
Tsi fa) still with Shl pen maintains that l\f in g ·was the 6th detic.endunt of S r e, not the'. fith, ,vith
Sl~ma.
34:1
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
---- -----------·-··-·---------·--·-· - --·---- --·-------- ------
never doubted their real existence and the leading parts they played in the happen-
ings of early tim.es. But at the same tim.e it is quite obvious that they never
considered them to be merely sovereigns and grandees of the same character as the
protagonists in later times (We 11 w a 11 g and Wu w an g, Cho u 4 k u 11 g,
L ii Wang, Shao po Hu etc.) who, though prominent sages, were none the
less only human beings. >>Mem> like Fu Hi, Shen Nung, Huang Ti, Yao,
S h u n, Y it, T ' a 11 g were something much more: they were super-men, great
cultural heroes ,vith supernatll.I'al powers far exceeding those of ordinary mortals,
and this is why the tales of their lives and great achievements have been faithfully
preserved down to the end of the feudal era: their deeds have been recorded in the
grandee houses which were proud to trace their lineage back to those early super-
men and which faithfully kept up the cults to their ancestor-heroes. The divine
nature and powers of those early heroes were ever present in the minds of all the
writers of the last few Chou centuries, and in this sense the tales about them are
frankly mythological.1)
That this was so is amply evident in practically every chapter above. The tales
teem with supernatural features, and in numerous cases the miraculous events
ta,lly perfectly with the folk-lore beliefs current in late Chou time, such as frequently
peep thrnugh in the very same sources that have preserved the hero legends. It
is not necessary to recapitulate them all here, since they are recorded in the vr1rious
paragraphs above; it is sufficient to recall a few typical themes as examples: the
miraculous birth of Si e, ancestor of the Sha 11 g, by a swallow's egg, and of
K ' i2 , ancestor of the C h o u, by God's foot-print; the inundation myth connected
with Kung Kung; the primeval rulers with divine powers, e. g. Hie 11 Y ii a 11
s h 1; the nature-divinities Chu Ju 11 g (fire-god), H ii. an NL i 11 g (water-god)
etc. (a long series) that were identified ·with and impersonated by early heroes of
the leading grandee houses; the demons K 'i u n g K 'i etc., likewise hooked on
to the hero myths; the wicked K u n, whose Spirit, when he was killed by the
sovereign, changed into a yellow hear and entered the Y ii - y ii. an abyss; the
portents connected with the punishment of the S a n M i a o; the miraculous
happenings that saved H o u T s i ' s life; the cult-master of the sun, H i H o,
who by his magic could cause the sun to rise and determine its speed; the theme
of the 10 suns; the enormously distant western land of S i W a n g M u; the
i>drawing>> and the >>document•> which were miraculously brought out of the H o
and L o rivers; the Methusaleh P ' e n g T s u; H u a 11 g T i assembling the
1 ) These con('.eptions in Chau tin1e ubout the genealogicn,l conneC'tion of the then flourishing
grandee houses with early divine or se1ni~divine he1·oes u.re by no means unique; we find parallels in
various cnlt~1ral areas. Thus, fol' instance, the fmnolls tTttlian family in R01ne traced its lineage JJack
to Julius, the founder of Alba Longa, son o.f Aeneas, whose parents were Anchises and the goddess
Venus; Caesar himself was proud of his divine ancestry and built a temple in his forum to Venus
Genetrix. Similarly both the Royal houses o! Sparta (the Agiades and the Eurypontides) traced their
genealogy baC'k to Herakles, nnd so did, ticcording to Herodotos, the Royal 1t'lacedonian honse. To
this day the In1perial house of Japan clni1ns u. direct descent from the Snn goddess Ama.terasu.
342
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHI.YA.
----··-·----- -·-··-··-----·----
Spirits on T ' a i - s h a n, waited upon by a pleiad of marvellous divinities;
Hu a 11 g Ti miraculously causing metal to come forth. C h ' I Yu, the Master
Founder, and the gigantic battle between the two; Chu an H ii, the early t a o-
·master, dwelling in the >>Dark Palace,>; Yao who was on the throne 100 complete
years and had a fantastically large realm; the ghost of Yao 's son Chu• who
begat king Mu wan g of C h o u; Shun being miraculously saved from
dangers, expelling the demons K 'i u n g K 'i etc.; Y ii. saving the world from
the flood by his gigantic labours, scaring the ferocious dragon, visiting all kinds of
fantastic lands and possessii1g a reahn with typically mythological confines; Y i.i
assembling the Spirits on the K u e i - k i mountain and killing the giant F a n g
F e n g; the magical cauldrons of K' i 4 c ,1, s t by F e i L i e n; Y i3 the archer
shooting at the god of the Ho; K 'u n g Kia, ·who obtained divine clmgon~
from Ti (God); the dragons' spittle which gaYe birth to the ·wicked P a o S 1;
the portent in T 'an g's court; Yi Yin'" miraculous birth (the Hollow ::VIul-
berry tree); the prodigies signalling the fall of the Hi a.
It is nonetheless evident that in the legends about the pre-Shang era such a~
were current in late Chou time these supernatural fei,tures, though import,mt as
revealing the mythological character of most of the leading figures, are still quite
few in proportion to the great wealth of details of a frankly >>hunmn» kind: if mof;t
of these heroes had super-human powers - good or bad - they were still
principally great sages or great miscreants who created or ruined >>dynastieH>> or
grandee houses. It would, however, be erroneous to attribute this t.o any wish on
the part of the Chou - time aiithors to euhemerise the legends. to cut out the
mythological features of popular mythology and transform the early heroes into
normal, human emperors and statesmen. Writers like the Tso and .Kuo-yii authors,
Mo-ts1 and Lii Pu-wei had no such wish - they would then have refrained from
narrating all those supernatural features recorded above. The reason is quite a
different one: it is precisely the fact that the legends about the early heroes were
propagated by the grandee houses in connec:tion with their ancestral wlts (and
have been preserved and come down to us thanks to this). It was in their interest
to keep alive every scrap of tradition that showed their forefathers as powerful
sages and good lords, worthy ancestors of a still prominent and politically important
clan, and t,heir opponents and foes as .rebels ,ind miscreants, doomed to failure ancl
to loss of sacrificing descendants. It should further be observed that even the8c
II\Ore >>humam features of the tales reveal themselves as b~ing just as legendary
as the supernatural traits - they are, of course, no more >>historical» than the
latter - by the simple fact that they can be reduced, to a large extent, to certain
leading themes that crop up in the legends of various grandee houses: there is.
for instance, the constantly recurring theme of the sovereign who studies under
good teachers and finds good councillors (and respectively: the bad ruler who
listens to bad councillors), preferably sages who are found living in low and
unassuming circumstances; the modest sovereign who would cede the throne or in
3±3
 BULLE7'IN OF THE Jl!IUSEUkl OF FA.R EASTERN ,1NTIQUITIES
-·-----·--,·-----·---- ··-- -- ·-·--··----- ·------------------
fact cedes t.he throne to the most worthy; the sovereign who makes extensive
,,inspectiom tours and thus spreads his good influence, and sometimes who dies
far from his mtpital ·while on such a journey; the sovereign ·who sternly crushes
>>rebels,, and wicked feudal lords who are baleful to the people; the sovereign who
starts his ca,reer in a, very smaU capacity (sometimes even as a ,,commonern) and
then atta.ins to the highest power over an enormous rea.lm; the sovereign who
sacrifices to the sa,c.red T ' a i - s h an ,1,nd thereby signifies his superior power -
most of these ever-recurring themes we find aga.in in the tales about the fall of
the S h a n g - Y i n and the rise of the C h o u, which ,we not treated in the
present 11a,per.
It 1night be tempting to interpret such repetitions of the sa,me themes as the
liteniry play of the scholars of late (! h o u time, who in regard to various early
heroes plagiarized a tntdition which originally concerned only one of them; but
that ea.n hardly bl:l the correct explanation, for the traditions in question are as a
rule firmly connected, in ea,ch case, with a definite set of persons and events that
,1re registered quite identieaJly in works of different schools (by Confucian authors,
by Nlo-ists, in the (!h'u ts'i poetry, etc.), which reveals that those parallel themes
ctlready existed, cts accepted traditions, prior to the late-Chou literatme in the
lore of the ancestra,1 cults of early mid middle Chou time: the cult-masters in
the va,rious grandee houses lmd already then a series of patterns for their
hagiography that were a cmmnnne bonwm to all, and it is now impossible to tell
in which cult e.entre a certain idea, for instance that of the sovereign who cedes
the throne, first originated; probably we have here quite ancient ideals that found
expression simnlhmeously a,mong the descendants of several (sometimes many)
elans.
* * * to their own time - therefore they lrnd to resort to all kinds of amputations,
The materials ctdcluced in the 1mra.gmphs above suffice to show some
fundamentally important facts which confirm the correctness of the views
expressed in our introduction above.
A. The free prn-Han texts present a system of legends and beliefs which, on
the whole, is remarkably consistent and identical in all the texts of the most
varying schools; there are a number of divergences, certainly, but in most cases
they concern mere details; in the fundamental framework there are no considerable
differences.
B. The systenrntizing and early Han texts mark a violent rupture with the
old tmditfon. The a,uthors lmve deviated from the data of the old texts, not
merely modified their system in details a,nd tampered with subordinate matters
but often entirely corrupted the fundamental structure; they have transferred
certain legends from one myth cyele to another; they have introduced symbolistic
and cosmogonic speculations that were not inherent in the genuine pre-Han myths;
they lrnve adrled various embellishments, frequently quite extensive yarns and
344:
B. KARLGREN: LEGEI1/DS A.SD CULTS /;V A."NCIENT CHJSA
---------~--
often tales that by their mere content at once reveal themselves as obvious
innovations; a great number of nature myths and folklore beliefs that were current
in Han time, but for the earlier existence of which there are no proofs whatever,
have been hooked on to the pre-Han hero myths.
C. The Eastern Han and post-Han scholars have gone much further tlrnn their
--western Han predecessors. They have vied with each other in creating vmfous
structures for the systematization and interpretation of the materie1ls embodied
in the pre-Han texts, and they have been far m.ore bold in attauhing to them all
kinds of fanciful innovations, many of which are patently ridiculous.
The true explanation of these discrepancies between the free pre-J--Ia,n texts on
the one hand, the systematizing texts, the Han and post-Han texts on the other, lrns
already been indicated on pp. 199----203 above: the tmditions could be essentfally
eonsistent and identical in the most varying sources all through the Chou em
becaU,se the legends were sacred traditions faithfully preserved in connection with
the cults of the grandee families, be it feudal lords or their dignita,ries ,md vassa.Js.
These various grandee houses traced their lineage back to the ea,rly legenda,Ty
heroes, and the lore about these heroes was thus a commune bonum to all the
noblemen-writers of the pre-Han era. The majority of the myths preserved a,re
hero legends; a considerable part, however, are fundamentally nature m.yths, but
if they have been preserved in texts it is thanks to the fact tlrnt they lrnve been
seized upon and hooked on to the hero cults in the grnndee families. --- The
systematizers and Han scholars, on the contrary. on the one· hand had a quite
different purpose: what they wanted to do was not simply ctnd faithfully to recount
the traditions living in the minds of the eult-ma,sters m1d the noblemen-writers of
the Chou era, but to work ·11,JJ the materials, picked out_ from va,rions texts anterior
alterations and additions; on the other l:rnnd. they no longer lived in an epocb
when the a,ncient traditions were still living in the cireles of cult-masters ,1,ncl
noblemen connected with the ancestral cults of the various feudal courts, hut in
an imperial em which lrnd broken with the 1mst, annihilated the feudal cult eenb-es
and killed the living tradition; they bad to do the work of quasi-scientific
reconstruction. This character of >>archaeological reconstruction» is more strongly
pronounced the further remote from the Chou era the writers were: the grm1t
pleiad of Eastern Han and San-kuo commentatorn had cei:tltinly no longer any
first-hand knowledge of pre-Han traditions that lrnd survived up to their time,
several centuries of Han regime had irretrievably cut off the line of living tradition;
if, any traces remained in the popular mind and usages, it could be little more than
distorted remnants which had little similarity to the pri1rnu-y legends of the feuda1
era,; the scholars had to operate with ancient texts as philologists and ,1,rchaeologists.
iVhen the great Chinese scholars of the Ts 'ing dynasty for the first time ereated
a scientific study of the ancient history lmd culture of China, they never rm1,lized
the fundamental difference in the nature and the value of the free pre-Han texts
345
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-------·-
on the one hand, the systematizing and Han (and post-Han) texts on the other.
They treated all the existing materials concerning the early history as a
homogeneous whole, considered the Shi: ki, Shang shu ta chuan, Han Shi wai
chuan, Huai-nan-tsi:, the Han shu, the Eastern Han writers, all the early
commentators on the classics, the Ti wang shi: ki, the geographies of Eastern Han,
Liu-ch'ao and T'ang times, and even the T'ang commentaries on the classics and
the dynastic histories as primary materials for the reconstruction of early Chinese
history, first-rank sources equally or almost equally authoritative and trustworthy
as the pre-Han texts. 1 ) And this attitude has persisted among most Chinese
writers up to this day; it characterizes the writings of great scholars like Wang
K.uo-wei, Lo Chen-yii. and others; it is only recently that tendencies to a more
critical conception of the relative value of these heterogeneous sources have been
observable. A most astonishing phenomenon, however, is that the same uncritical
attitude has characterized the great majority of western workers on these subjects,
likewise up to the present day - in spite of the fact that the methods of critical
historiography have long since been 'elaborated in European science. Without
going into details, I shall only adduce a few of the most striking - and harmful
- examples.
The western scholar who has gone farthest, carrying a. outrance the principle
that Han, Liu-ch'ao, T'ang and Sung >>sources>> are equally valuable for the
reconstruction of the. sociology of pre-Han China as the pre-Han texts themselves,
is Marcel Granet, principally in his great work Danses et legendes de la Chine
ancienne, 1926. He discusses the principles of method extensively and his
conclusion, programmatically and forcibly expressed, is this: wherever a theme
concerning the legendary personages and events of archaic China crops up in
Chinese literature, it is of primary value; it is a mere matter of chance ·whether it
happens to be codified in a Chou-time text which we still possess or whether it is
recorded in a Han-tin1e or T'ang-time commentary or in one of the many foll<lore
treatises of the Six Dynasties or later times. The very fact that a certain tradition
about the primeval emperor H u a n g T i, for instance, can be found in a text
- whatever its epoch - is decisive: since it concerns H u an g T i, it must
belong to the pre-Han tradition about Hu an g Ti, and it is a matter of
indifference whether we know it from a text dating from 400 B. C. or a text from
1000 A. D.; in the latter case it must have existed and been handed down (in one
way or another) through a millennium and a half. Granet therefore cites. as his
sou.roes for primeval Chinese folldore, just as credulously the Shu yi ki, Sou shen
ki, Shen yi king, the spurious Shu chapters (Ta Yii 1110, Granet p. 243), the spurious
Chu slm ki nien, the T'ang and Sung commentaries, the wildly speculative Lu shi:
(Sung time) as pre-Han texts like Tso, Kyii. and Mo. It is not that he has not
envisaged, but. he deliberately shuts his eyes to the possibility - in our chapters
1 ) They- even considered the Shi ki as 1nore authoritative than the t s 1 »philosophers» of Chou time,
holding it second in importance only to the i)thirteen classics».
34:6
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS l.\' ANCIENT CHINA
above shown to be a fact - that the authors of Han and. later times tampered
with, altered, corrupted and added to the basic fund of pre-Han lore concerning
the legendary figures of ancient China. And then. on the basis of a vast and
exceedingly heterogeneous body of material from all epochs of Chinese literature.
he constructs a great system of ip.terpretation of the beliefs and sociology of pre-
Han China, a system that is worse than a caricature: it is a weird and fanciful
faITago of abstruse symbolisms and serni-philosophicttl magic that is entirely
foreign to the pre-Han China, such as we know it from the only sources that have
any decisive value: the free pre-Han texts.1)
Granet's work has been seriously harmful because it -has induced other scholarn
to proceed on tli.e same false track and speculate further about Chinese mythology
on the basis of late and valueless materials. As an example may be cited C.:.
Hentze. In his big work Myths et symboles lunaires (Hl32) he takes a,s the point
of departure for his entire elaborate edifice of an ancient Chinese lmmr mythology
the >>legend of Yii.», which he (p. 6) ascribes to the Ts'ien Han shu. It is the stor,1·
told above (p. 310): >>When Y i.i regulated the'flooding waters and perforated the
Hu an - y ii an mountain he changed himself into a bear; he said to (his ·wife)
T ' u S h a n s h 1 : when you ·want to bring me food. when )·ou hear the 8ouml
of the drum, then come; Y i.i jui'nped on a stone and by mistrike hit the clrum:
T ' u S h an s h I went and looked, and Y i.i had juHt then become a bear; ~he
felt ashamed and went away and came below the Sun g - k t1 o monnfain and
changed into a stone; she just then (bore =) was pregnant with K ' i'; Y ti said:
give me my son; the stone burst on the north side and K ' i4 was bor.l1». Hentze
expounds, with all kinds of more or less far-fetched parallels from the mythology
of Northern and Western Asia, Japan, the East Indies, Australia, America, how
this tale has an extremely deep significance: >>Y ii. jumped on a Atone>> -
evidently he performed a magical dance (p. 7); he danced holding a drum - the
drum is an attribute of the god of Thunder; when he >>acted tlw bearn he was
disguised by a bear skin for a ritual dance (p. 8); Yi.i's wife was ashamed
because she had witnessed a ritual dance, reserved for the men, which the women
were not allowed to watch; the bear belongs to the initiation rites and is combined
with sexual ideas, the women must not see it (p. 13); in some Californian tales the
1 ) If Granet's big work must thus be said, 011 the w110le. to be a failure, due to a deplorable lack
of critical method, it might be expected to have at least a considerable ,·alue c.1,s a vust thesanrns of
Qhinese folklore themes, culled With an admirable assiduity. 1.'nforl;unntely hls rnodf.' of riting hi:-.
sources makes his book a risky tool. A typical exmnple: Gt'tlnet (p. 3,1:!): >.1A ln bntaillr de Trhouo~lou
furent inaugw·6es des tactiques savantes; Tch'e You employait des C'avnliers et Hou.nir Ti des cluir~•>;
Granat refers to »Li ki, trad. Couvreur p. 54>>, and the unsuspicious reader nnt1unlly thinki:. that t,he
Li text gives this information. But i11. Convreur we find that in contrnst to all earlier sobrces it j:-,
only a 81mg author (Lu T'ien, d. 1102 A. D.) who asserts that »t.l1e ancient ones sny thnt in battle.;-;
Hu an g Ti used chariots and C h ' i Yu cavalry),. Another example: Grnnet (p. 359): >)!(ung
Kung est repr6sente cmume un serpent a tete humaine . .. , cf. Hoai-nnn-tseu chap. 411. But thi~
description is not that of the Huai-nan-tsi text but of Kao Yu's conunentary (3 centuries later).
347
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEU!Ji OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-··--------
bear is connected with the lunar myths; the sound of. the drum causes the food
to be brought by lady T ' u S h a n : the indication is very clear of a divinity
of vegetation and growth (p. 31); Y it drains off the inundating waters and forces
the Hu an - y u an pass: that means the act of se1,.'Ual defloration; when he
touches the drum of the Thunder god, nourishment is brought him by lady T ' u
S h an s h L >>la Fille de la Montagne>> who is no other than the Moon, just as
Y it is the Thunder (p. 36); when the wife turns back, this means the waning of
the moon (p. 37); she turns and becomes a stone, and the stone bursts - that
mea,ns that the thunder struck it (ibid.). Hentze adds some features of the legend
in Lii above (p. 306 above) (Yu went on an inspection tour to the south, and
the lady of T ' u S h an brought along her maid and waited upon Y u to the
sonth of T ' u S h an) : Y ii = the Sun goes to the south where the lady of
T ' u Bhan (the Moon) ca,nnot follow him; she >>waits for hilll>) (instead of the
>>waits upon him>> of the legend!) until he comes back; she waits below the
mountain - a mount,1in occms in many lunar myths which speak of an
inundation; the maid ,vho accompanies her is Venus, morning and evening star
- this is the myth which achieves the great trinity: Sun, Moon, Venus (p. 37).
These quotations give but a small fraction of all the symbolistic speculations of
Hentze's. As stated a.bove, Hentze believes that >>the legend of Yti.>> which he has
thus >>interpreted>> is from the Ts'ien Han shu (1st, c. A. D.) In fact - as described
p. 310 above - we know it in all its details (Yu' s changing into a bear, the
jumpi11g on the stone etc.) only from T'ang time (Yen Shi-ku, d. 645 A. D.) and
it is only in Sung time (Chu Hing-tsu) that it is erroneously attributed to Huai-
nan-tsi. The primary feature of the myth: the lady's turning into a stone, is no
older than the 2nd c. A. D. (Ying Shao), and the earlier Han tradition (Liu Hiang)
has it that K ' i ' s mother lived and brought him up carefully. The theme of
Y ii ' s wife being shocked ,vhen seeing her husband in the shape of a bear is an
inversion of the Greek theme of Psyche, as already correctly pointed out by
:\Iaspero, and the tale is very likely due to the Hellenistic influence that was so
strong in Han-time China. The exceedingly late elate of the full and detailed
legend has not deterred Hentze from concluding that it was archaic (p. 39): >>The
legend of Y ti goes back to a stage when the social organisation in China can
have been little different from that of a primitive tribe which has attained to the
stage of a resident and agricultural people, but still preserves the ancestral myths
and cult scenarios that accompany rites of initiation and passage; hence also the
fusion of the astral and sexual theme with that of fecundity (the nomishment
brought) ... ; the cult dance of the bear and all the ideas connected with it
indicate that the myth of the origin of the H i a was born in a region which i11
·winter bad a severe climate (p. 89) ... one must also reckon with the possibility
that the Chinese myth, older than the advent of the Hi a, was applied to a
possibly historical persom1,ge: Y it the Great>> (p. 40). Ha,ppy in his .belief that
>>the legend of Y ii>> as told by Yen Sht-ku (T'ang time) is primeval and has the
348
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS l.\' A.NCIEJYT CHIXA.
deep symbolical purport of >>lunar myth>> which he has deduced. Hentze goes on
to expound various decor elements on pre-historic Chinese pottery and in the
earliest Chinese bronze art as lunar symbols.
If Granet's work (and that of epigoni who follow in his wake) thus cannot be
taken very seriously, because it is quite uncritical, another attempt at an
interpretation of the early legends is much more important, since it is written
by a practised historian: Henri Maspero: Legendes mythologiques clans le Chou
king, J. As. 1924. Maspero starts from the tales in the Shu king about Ya o.
S h u n and Y it and their coadjutors, and those about Ku n g K u n g and
C h ' i Yu, and he points out that here they all appear as historical personages:
sage emperors and statesmen or rebelling feudatories. This, he rightly asserts,
is a result of euhemeristic efforts on the part of the scholars who wrote the Shu
to transform myths into history: all or most of the legendary and supematural
features have been scraped off and a small residue remains as >>historical facts>>
which constitute what the scholars considered to be the earliest history of China.
The critical student. Maspero insists, should on the contrary try to get at the prim-
ary, folk-loristic myths, of which these euhemeristic chronicles are a corrupted
skeleton, and thus arrive at a real knowledge of the primitive beliefs of the
Chinese people such as they were before the scholars took them up and trimmed
them into »history>>.
So far Maspero is indubitably right. But how has he then proceeded? He has
not gone preferably to the oldest sources available, the free pre-Han texts (Tso.
Kyii, Mo etc.) but to the. Han-time folkloristic treatises: his principal sources
are the Shan hai lung (which he cannot have failed to realize is no older than the Han
era), Huai-nan-tsi (which he ,nongly asserts to be a pre-Han work, see p. ~04
above) the Kuei tsang k'i shi (which at the earliest is an Eastern Han work, though
he mistakes it for the pre-Han Kuei tsang, now lost), and certain passages in the
Ch'u ts'1, the brief and obscure statements of which he interprets in accordance
with the Eastern Han and later commentaries. 'rhe materials culled in these
texts he fills out with notices in various Han and post-Han writers: Shl ki, S1-nm
Siang-ju's poetry, passages from Wang Ch'ung, Yang Hiung, the Feng su t'ung
yi, Kuo P'o's commentaries, the Shen yi king etc. Briefly, he has drawn principally
on the materials which are placed here in the B sections of each chapter above.
By this procedure he has managed to obtain a collection of highly >>mythologica.h
tales, embellished with all kinds of supernatural features. And then he clrnws
his conclusion: these fanciful tales in good folklore style constitute the true myths
and legends of ancient China, and they must be very ancient since the dry accounts
in· Shu kil1g are merely an euhemeristic corruption of them: tlrns, for instance.
the tale of the Shan hai king about lady Hi Ho, mother of the 10 suns, is the
primary myth; the >>historical» account of the Sun cult (Hi Ho) of Yao 's
in the Shu is a learned distortion. C h' i Yu, a monster who had >>huit doigts.
huit orteils, la tete herissee>> (Kuei tsang k'i shl). monster of the Earth who opposed
34:9
 BULLETIN OF THE .'WUSEU11i OF' FAR EASTERN A.NTIQUITIES
the heavenly hero (Hu an g Ti) is one variant of the primary deluge themes;
the Ch'Y Yu, >>the first rebel», of the Shu, is a learned re-interpretation. This is all
very well, and at fo:st sight it is not only tempting, it looks quite convincing. But
there is a fatal gap in the arguillentation. If we had only possessed the Shu king
on the one hand, the Han-time and later folklore tales on the other, it might be
defensible to attribute the priority to the latter, in spite of the chronological
discrepancy of half a millennium or more. But our pre-Han literature about the
early ages is not confined to the Shu king; on the contrary, the Shu tales form
only a very modest part; the great majority of what we know of the pre-Han
legends is embedded in other early texts: Tso and Kyi.i, Mo, Li.i, Meng etc. as
extensively studied in our A sections above. Now these accounts, which are often
very full and detailed, have by no means the euhemeristic character of the first
Shu chapters. All these works abound in mythological and folklori;itic tales, often
exceedingly fanciful and >>supernatural», and they can in no way be said to be the
work of >>scholars>> who tried to euhemerise the ancient myths into history. The
legendary character of their tales is quite striking, but for the major part they
are not simply nature myths, they are fundamentally hero myths, though nature
myths, as we have seen, have often been hooked on to the hero legends. These
works can so much the less be said to represent a conscious endeavour of some
learned school to make history out of mythology as the sources are exceedingly
heterogeneous, some of them belonging to the Confucian school, some to that of
Mo-ts1, some to the taoistic school (Chuang) etc., and as these sam.e works abound
in supernatural tales (ghosts, dreams coming true, portents of many kinds,
malevolent Spirits of nature, etc.). They furnish a fund of legends that are on the
whole quite consistent, since they are based on the ancestral cults of the grandee
houses of the Chou era. The legends in these works are the true representatives
of the Chou-time mythology, as far as it can be known today, whereas the folklore
tales of Han and h,ter times adduced by Maspero, and which deviate strongly
from the former, represent a later phase in the development of Chinese folklore.
This latter phase cannot in any way be admitted to the place of honour as the
primary and primeval myths, because that would mean a complete disregard of
the mnple legend materials we possess in the free pre-Han texts, which, as we_
have seen, ttre of quite a different character from the Han-time folklore.
~Iaspero, as a trained historian, has clearly felt that he was walking on thin ice
when he proclaimed the tales of Shan hai king, Huai-nan-ts1 and similar later
sources to be the primeval myths of China, but he has taken the risk because he
believed that he had a very powerful argument. 1 ) In the folklore of the T'ai
peoples of Indo-China he had found mythological tales which, according to him,
1) Certain minor supporting arguments of his are quite void of value. In the character for tun g
JI{.: >>sum> + 1Jtree1>, he sees (I, confirmation of the early existence of the 1nyth of the 10 suns
>leasti>
sitting in the Fu-sang t,ree. But this character is really a corruption: the oldest graph was not 1nade
up of i>smu + i>tree» but son1ething quite different, see Grammata Serica p. 435.
350
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
were strikingly reminiscent of the Chinese mythology and cosmogony such as he
had reconstructed them by aid of the' Shan hai king. Huai-nan-tsr etc. Though
it must be emphasized that the parallelism ha.s been greatly exaggerated by
:Maspero, it is true that in some fundamental cosmogonic features at least there
is a certain affinity between the Han-time Chinese conceptions and those of the
T'ai legends. This, Maspero argues, must prove that these myths are really
primeval, the common property of the Sino-T'ai peoples. It is, however, easy to
realize the fallacy of this argument. If the Chinese and the T'ai had been
g e o g r a p h i c a 11 y s e p a r at e cl in pre-historic times, the argument would
have been, if not conclusive (tales can wander, sometimes long distances), at least
fairly strong. But it is a well-known fact that the T'ai tribes lived as immediate
neighbours of the Chinese in the very heart of southern China far on into historical
times and emigrated to Indo-China in comparatively recent times. In Han time
- the era of Shan hai king and Huai-nan-ts1 - there were constant cont,acts
and interrelations between Chinese and T'ai on what is today Chinese soil, and
the a.ffinity between Han-time Chinese cosmogonic ideas and those of the T'ai
is better explained by this prolonged cohabitation. It is even possible that these
themes, unattested in Chou texts, which crop up in the Han literature. are of T'ai
origin, borrowed by the Chinese from their immediate neighbours in the south
(Huai-nan-tsY is a compilation made in the region of the ancient Ch'u kingdom,
in .Anhuei). However this latter may be - it is no more than a possible theory
- the T'ai legends adduced by Maspero can in no way prove (through any
»Urverwandtschaft>>) the pre-Shu-king existence of the Han-time myths. More-
over it is certainly methodically quite unallowable · to do whf1t Maspero has done
in his book La Chine antique (1027). Before studying the earliest documented
dynasties, Shang-Yin and Chou he gives an account of »le monde chinois primitif»,
and there we find all the pamphernalia of the Han-time folklore, as extracted from
Shan hai king, Huai-nan-ts1 and later sources, served up as the beliefs of the
primitive pre-dynastic Chinese.
Our criticism of the two examples chosen: the works of Granet (with Hentze)
and Maspero, may suffice to emphasize how the study of the early legends and
beliefs cannot be successfully carried out without drawing a strict cli8ti11ction
between the different classes of sources: pre-Han texts and Han (and post-Ha,n)
texts; free, narrative texts and systematizing (reconstructive) texts. But the
bearing of our conclusions is in fact much wider: they concern not only the subject
of the legends and cults but the whole field of early Chinese history prior to the
Han era. Our investigation has thrown a vivid light on the >>historical» methods
of SY-ma Ts'ien and the Eastern Han scholars and still more on those of Huang-fu
Mi (Ti wang shi: ki) and such-like post-Han authors. The corruptions, additions
and interpretative modifications which the Han and post-Han scholars take the
liberty of perpetrating are sufficiently serious to reduce their data to a, second-
hand material infinitel;ir inferior to the first-rank materials of the free pre-Han
351
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
texts. It is therefore simply no longer allowable to continue with the historiograph-
ical methods practised up to now, not only by the Chinese savants of the old school
but also by the western sinologues: if there are gaps in the pre-Han documentation,
they cannot simply be filled in by the aid of S'i-ma Ts'ien, Pan Ku, the Han and
post-Han geographies and the Eastern Han and later commentaries on the early
literature. Least of all can a work like the Ti wang shi: ki be relied on, that master-
piece of the good Huang-fu Mi, so beloved by the Chinese historians of all later
times and by the western sinologues alike, but, as we have witnessed all through
our B sections above, in fact a. compilation of the worst possible type. 1 )
It is in fact a matter of great importance to take a definite stand on the question:
how are we to envisage the exceedingly mrmerous cases in which the Han and post-
Han ·scholars deviate from the free pre-Han texts in regard to the history of the
pre-Han era! A few simple principles readily occur to one:
a) When post-Han authors (Six Dynasties, T'ang, Sung, Ming, for instance Ti
wang shr ki, Shuei Iring elm, Kuo ti chi:, the commentaries of Kuo P'o, Yen Shi:-ku,
Si:-ma Cheng, Chang Shou-t.sie, K'ung Ying-ta and many others, the Tsi: chi: t'ung
lden, the Lu shr) are at variance with both the pre-Han and the Han authors -
either by altering their data or by introducing information quite unknown in Chou
and Han texts. they should be entirely disavowed: there is indeed practically no
possibility whatsoever that these late authors possessed pre-Han sources that
were entirely unlmmvn to the entire learned world of the Han era. 2 )
/J) When the Eastern Han scholars, whether independent writers (Wang Ch'ung,
Ying Shao etc.) or collll11entators on the early literature (Fu K'ien, Kia .K'uei,
Ma Jung, Cheng I-Iiian, Hii Shen etc.) or regular historians (Pan Ku) deviate from
the data of both the pre-Han texts and the early Han texts· (such as Shi ki, I-Iuai-
nan-tsi:, Shang s.hu ta clman, the Mao commentary on the Shi:, Han Shi: wai c.huan,
1 ) It may seem astonishing tlmt the Chinese scholars throughout the Ts'ing dynasty and the
Republic.an era co11sta11tly dra.w upon and have an nnlhnited faith in that ridiculous »history», but it
is perhaps understandable. The genuine· ancient sources give us often enough only vagne and sketchy
notions about a faJ:11:oUS early personage. Bnt Huang-fu Mi is ready to furnish all the precise facts
desir'ed: where an ancient potentate was born, the naine of his mother, his age when he came on the
throne, the length of his reign, his whole v-ita, where he died and was buried, in fact an account that
would suit a modern 'Who's who; on the other hand, the Ti wang shi ki is a comparatively »ancient*
text, of the 3rd c. A. D. and hence co ipso much more venerable than the T'ang and Sung commen-
taries on the classics and the dynastic histories. '\i\'hen Huang-fu serves up his amazingly detailed
accounts, son1ethnes. a conscientious Chinese scholar feels a slight pang of apprehension: how cai1 it
be that Huang-fu knows so much that is entirely unknown in all earlier literature? But he quickly
consoles hii11self with a comforting thought: Hu an g - f u pi y u so k ii »Huang-fu certainly
had something on wh.ich he based .himself,,, and hence he confidently accepts bis yarns as Gospel truth.
- It is in fact even more astonishing that western authors frequently and confidently draw upon
Hua:ng-fu :i\'Ii. In Chav111mes' copious notes on the Shi ki (Mem. Hist.) the Ti wang shi ki is. a
constantly used household tool.
r:.) \'Vith exceedingly few exceptions~ for instimce the Chu shu k.i nien, found in the 3rd c. A. D. but
soOn lost again, and the Mn t'ien tsi chuan found on the same occasion.
352
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
------- -·----------
Ch'un ts'iu fan lu etc.) they should likewise be viewed with the greatest caution. The
chances that they possessed independent pre-Han sources unknown to Si:-ma Ts'ien
and his contemporaries, sources of such extent and importance that they could
justify alterations in and additions to the pre-Han history extractable from the
Chou and early Han sources we now possess, are indeed small (cf. p. 231 above).
In isolated cases they may have been in a position to pick up a few extra grains of
information, but on the whole their facilities in this direction may be regarded as
negligible. Their innovations are, as a rule, the fruit of reconstructive speculations,
not of additional pre-Han documentation:
y) When systematizing and early Han texts such as Ta Tai: Ti hi (with Wu ti te)
Shi: pen, Shu sii, Shi: ki deviate from or add to the data of the free pre-Han sources,
matters are more discussible. Their authors lived sufficiently near in time to the
end of the feudal era to make it possible that they had some additional information,
either from teaching tradition (through their teachers' teachers) or from pre-Hau
works now lost. It is reasonable, thei1, to lay down the following principles:
When the author diverges from the clear data of a good pre-Han text, either
it is because he deliberately tampers with them for a definite purpose, and he
should in consequence be disregarded - such is the case when Ti hi and Si:-ma
skip S h .a o Hao as emperor, because he does not suit their theories of the suc-
cession of the 5 elements; or it may be for some other reason. In this latter case we
do not know whet.her it is due to misunderstanding, carelessness, temptation to fabu-
late on one's own, or the possession of some early source not available to us. In
any case the testimony of the free pre-Han text which we possess must be given
preference, because the po s s i bi l.i t y of the systematizer's having had a
deviating pre-Han source unknown to us - a mere theoretical possibility - is
more than outweighed by the c e r t a i n t y of the information furnished by real
pre-Han documentation. As an example ma}: be adduced 8h'i pen's and S'i-ma's
assertion that T ' a i K i a was the son of W a i Ping (unsupported by free
pre-Han texts), whereas Kyii clearly states that he was a son of T' tt n g; here
Kyii's testimony must be given preference. When, fina,lly, the author furnishes
data which, though not directly conflicting with free pre-Han sources, are entirely
unknown to the whole of that extensive literature, we shall again have to be.exceed-
ingly cautious. There is still the great risk that he fabulates from his own imagina-
tion, and the chance that he draws upon a pre-Han work now lost is still but a
theoretical possibility. In no circumstances have we any right to use such data to
fill in, without further discussion, the gcips in the earlier documentation. If we
quote them, it should always be with the clear understanding that they derive
from a source less authoritative than a work written right in the feudal er<!,, when
the cults and traditions were still a living reality, directly observable to the writer;
in each such case it should be expressly and clearly stated that the information is
culled from a second-class source that deserves but limited credence.
These principles have a particularly important bearing on our attitude towards
23 353
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM. OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
the Shi: ki of S'i-ma Ts'ien, as far as its chapters on pre-Han China are concerned.
All the way from 722 B. C. we possess ample pre-Han documents about the history
of China (Tso, Kyii, Ts'e etc.) and from that date our means of controlling Si-ma
are fairly good. But it is in regard to the preceding epochs: the highest antiquity,
and the H i a, S h a n g - Yi n a:nd e a r 1 y C h o u dynasties, that the informa-
tion in the pre-Han sources is meagre and sketchy, and it is here that it has always
proved so tempting both to Chinese and to Western scholars to draw upon the
Sh'i ki in order to fill in the gaps. But it is precisely in his treatment of these
early periods that Si-ma has shown himself so unsatisfa,ctory a guide. as shown
in detail in our various chapters above. In regard to the lore about the early
periods he has (often influenced by earlier systematizers, Ti hi, Shi pen, Shu sii)
in a deplorable way altered and corrupted, misinterpreted and uncritically embel-
lished the materials derived from the free pre-Han sources. As an historian of
early China, Si'-ma Ts'ien is a very untrustworthy guide, and his value has been
enormously overrated.
The simple, even elementary principles laid down in our points a-y above, and
obvious to every practised historian, have. never been accepted as guiding prin-
ciples in the study of Chinese antiquity, by Chinese historians or by Western sinolo-
gues. On the contrary, the exceedingly heterogeneous materials of Chou, early
Han, Eastern Han, Six Dynasties, T'ang, and Sung times have generally been used
indiscriminately to build up the structure of the »history,> of ancient China. I
shall pass over the long series of Chinese general >>histories,> such as the Tsi chi
t'ung lden (and T'ung kien kang mu) and the T'ung kien tsi lan (so dear to Cha-
vannes. for instance, in his glosses on the Shi ki). I shall limit myself to adducing
a few Western examples.
The Ancient History of China (1908) by Friedrich Hirth1 ) is a typical product
of this uncritical historiography. In its sections on the early history (anterior to
722 B. C.) it is almost entirely buUt up on Si-ma Ts'ien's work and later Han and
post-Han sources - even down to various Sung-time compilations. This may
have been excusable in 1908, but it was certainly not allowable in Otto Franke's
big work: Geschiehte des Chinesischen Reichs (3 vols. 1930-37), in which the data
of pre-Han sources are inextricably interwoven with the corruptions, innovations,
misinterpretations and reconstructive speculations of Si-ma Ts'ien and later Han
and post-Han scholars. 2 )
1) Reprinted unaltered in 1923.
2) It would deinand a, stout volmne to sift all the chaff fr01n the wheat in Franke 1s enormous book~
A single example: Franke solemnly discusses (I, 99) Iring C h n n g K' an g of the Hi a, (who,
as we have seen, is unknow11 in pre-Hru1 texts and was first introduced by Si'.-1na Ts'ien) and the
solar eclipse in his reign; and though he admits that the two texts in ,vhich C h u n g I( ' an g and
his eclipse are 1nentioned (the spw·ious Shu: Yjn cheng and the spurious Chu shu ki nien) - we saw
that the only pre-Han text which mentions the eclipse (Tso) says nothing of ,1 ;C h u n g K ' an g»
or attributes it to any specia.l reign - are not abo·ve suspicion, he yet concludes that the 1>bridge
354
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
A laudable attempt to let the pre-Han sources, as far a,s pos~ible, speak for them-
selves, was made by H. Maspero in his La Chine antique (1927), in which he resolu 0
tely brushes aside practically every tradition about the ti)llCS prior to the Chou as
legendary. 1 ) But when he comes to the era of the early Chou, he has succumbed to
the temptation of frequently drawing upon Si-ma Ts'ien and the spurious Chu shu
ki nien. For describing the administrative system he has based himself largely
upon such a typical systematizing and highly speculative work aR the Chou li,
which in fact rather expounds how the scholars of late Chou time imagined that
the administration of the early Chou must have been than hmv they really knew
it to have been. Moreover, in his extensive and detailed aceount of the geographical
settlement of the Chinese clans in Y i n and early C h o u time he has ela-
borated a system which for its localizations depends almost entirely on the ideritifi-
cations in Eastern. Han and later sources (geographies and commentaries) of ancient
place names with the names of later epochs, identifications which, as we lmve seen
above (p. 208-209) can be accepted only within very narrow limits.
These examples of >>general histories>> of early China may suffice; a few words
should be added about treatises on more special subjects.
A. Wedemeyer: Schaupliitze und Vorgiinge der chinesischen. Geschichte gegen
Ausgang des dritten ~md im zweiten Jahrtausend vor Christus (Asia Major, lntrod.
vol. 1922) has made a lengthy and elaborate effort to make history out of the legends
about Yao, Shun and Y ii. It is quite astounding what a detailed knowledge
of all the lives and deeds of these potentates we thus get, all their a,ctions its rulers,
the complete geography of their time. and a minute chronology - no Louis XIV
or Queen Elizabeth could hope for a more amply detailed and satisfactory bio-
graphy. This is all because the author has not only confidently drawn upon Shi
ki and the Eastern Han scholars but has also avidly picked up every scrap of >>in-
formation,> in the Ti wang shi ki (his favourite source), the Shuei king elm, the
fanciful Sung-time work Lu shi and dozens of other »sources>> of Liu ch'ao, T'ang
Sung, Ming and Ts'ing times. It should be observed that it is just in regard to
these early epochs that Huang-fu Mi et consortes are most wildly and ridiculously
fanciful and free in departing from the pre-Han sources.
G. Haloun: Beitriige zur Siedlungsgeschichte chinesischer Clans (Asia Major,
Introd. vol. 1922) has made an extensive investigation into the political geography
of early China. He starts by accepting without discussion the (Eastem Han) iden-
tification. of F u Hi = T ' a i H a o, and takes up the question of the habitat
of each branch of the descendants of this potentate. In so doing he works elabora-
tely with geographical and historical >>sources>> like Ti wang shi ki, Shuei king elm,
that leads over,) fr0111 the reco~structive chronology of later Chinese scholars for the H i Ll. era to tho
1·e1iable chronology of the Chou epoeh is immTow but sa.feJ>, one of its two fundamental pillars
(»Hauptpfeile») being this very eclipse in the (spurious) documents!
1 ) Though, as expounded above, he has misrepresented the myths of the early ages by snbstituting
the Han-time folklore for the authentic pre-Han lore, such nS we hnve pieced it together above.
355
 BULLETIN OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR EASTER,\' ANTIQUITIES
San huang pen ki (T'ang time}, Wen hien t'ung k'ao and Lu shi (Sung time) and
many authors of various epochs quoted in the T'u shu tsi ch'eng. Needless to say,
he aITives at an amazingly extensive and detailed store of knowledge.
Works such as the two cited here are futile since they are based on materials that
have no proof-value whatever. The only thing they can demonstrate is what the
speculative scholars of medieva,l China have imagined, various more or less clever
attempts at reconstructing and embellishing the early h~story of their country
principally by the aid of Han and post-Han materials which in reality have no
value. What a Hm,ng-fu Mi or a Lo Pi (author of the Lu shl} asserts about the
history and domicile of pre- H i a, H i a, S h a. n g - Y i n and early C h o u
grandees is either based on pre-Han sources and should then be quoted from these
direct, or is contrary to or unknown in pre-Han sources and has then no other
interest than as a curiosity - it has nothing to do with the history of early China
but only with the history of scholarship in medieval China.
INDEX
1. Ai p. 277. - 2, An p. 23[). - 8. Ao p. 312. - 4. Chang ,To p. 279. - 5. Chang-shan p. 339.
- 6. Ch'ang :Hi p.-260. 27::!. - 7. Ch'a.np: Jo p. 341. - 8. Ch'nng-liu p. 287. - 9. Ch'ang Ngo
p. 205. - 10. Ch'ang Pu p. 2~7. - 11. Ch'ang Pu2 p. 287. - 12. Ch',mg Sien p. 281. - 13.
Ch'ang Ti p. 306. - 14. Ch'ang-ya.ng p. 277. - 15. Ch'ang Yip. 208, 225, 227, 280, 282. 287. -
16. Ch'ang Yi' p. 205, 26Ci, 288. -- 17. Ch'ang Yi" p. 300. - 18. Ch'ang Yu p. 279. - 19. Chao
Ming p. 335. 20. Ch'ao-men p. 3:14. - 21. Chen p. 237. - 22. Chen' p. :Hl. - 23. Chen Kuan
ship. 312. 313. - 24. Chen K'uei p. 304. - 25. Chen Siin ship. 312, 313 . - 26. Ch'en p. 211,
:21.J:. :216, 27U, :rn3, 29B. 300. - 27. Ch'en Feng sht p. 288. - 28. Ch'en Feng 2 p. 288. - 29. Ch'en
Lung shi p. 288. - 30. Ch'eng p. 23!i, 237. - 31. Ch'eng' p. 238. - 32. Ch'eng 3 p. 238. - 33.
Ch'eng4 p. :?78. -- 34. Ch'eng 5 p, 334. - 35. Ch'eng K.l'L p. 252. - 86. Ch'eng Shang p. 33:1. -
37. Ch'eng T'>1ug p. 3:l I. 332. - 38. Chip. 208, 22:i, 226, 227, 234, 279. 288, 295. - 39. Chi' p. 278.
- 40. Chi" p. 292. - 41. Ch'c Ch'eng p. 304. - 42. Chi-shi p. 33,,. - 43. Ch'i Shuei ship. 245. -
44. Ch'i Sm1g (tsi) p. 220. 288. - 45. Ch'i Sm1g' tsi p. 288. - 46. Ch'i Ti p. 221. 277, 283. - 47.
Ch'i Yip. am. - 48. Ch'i: Yu p. 210, 219, 242, 279. 280, 2S3, 318. - 49. Cho p. 311. - 50. Cho-
lu p. 283. - 51. Cho Shan ship. 287. - 52. Chou p. 214, 217, 240, 2;j6, 317. - 53. Chou' p. 237.
- 54. Chon' p. 317, 318, 3-!0. - 55. Ch'ou p. 330. - 56. Ch'ou-hua p. 269. - 57. Ch'on Yen
p. 255.' - 58. Clm p. 215. - 59. Chu' p. 216, 293. - 60. Chu' p. 220. 240. - 61. Chu' p. 256,
1, ri"'
I. ....... .e.-,,:; 3.
~ - 4-
;y,--.r,,i;k"" ~
S: 3fl.t.l! G.
,Ji, '!/:,
I(,~
,a -';I; I?: ,.J;; ,¥, AA; ;I,' ;dJ,
7. ,ab 9. -i;;:_w1L.9, .'j'oJ11x,i,t,x1X '"· ,ay1;,J/.,esnr-..~.
:f, 1e, 1s. k~ 111. ~ :/- /o /'l, .!,,1; ;if 11., ,;,:
U 11. ~ ;t l'l. a/,h1Jl.wJli9 2/. J!;f .f-2 tffi.. 21. JY\~R.
!.'t,~.l.d91·~ J;\,-!G.f,lll.z.:,:~/;\,2? 0.er.f;t~~ so;f<l.. J/~J.t:aa.ss ,1-vrMs.r.h'>:..o/.:lx.
A( %i Jz.J1>../i J!' '$ 11 Ji. wt 11 J h>- l"-to~-G 1/J;Ji,, ,K..r(. M./J~(.f}!/5' ,-il',l~!.f) :lt'.,jf,$' 1:;.;Jf,.
it n lll:'., 99~,'t.m.%<.~ Sl~ LLl t( _,:z.~ D-,1\}- J-lf./!-c's ,-.,_,J-~z~:lfS?~~S?itt..,.0Jj.,",:
356
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
--------~---------- - - - - - -- - -- - - - -
262, 291. - 62. Chu' p. 313. - 63. Chu' p. 313, 323. - 64. Chu-feng p. 29U. - 65. Chu Jen
p. 341. - 66. Chu Jung p. 218, 220, 222, 228, 232, 23fi, :!36, 238, 239, 242, 244-246, 2,14. 279.
- 67. Chu Ki p. 237. - 68. Chu Kia Wei p. 320, 336. - 69. Chu Kuang p. 300. - 70. Chu
Kuei 4 p. 336. - 71. Chu ~ling p. 245. - 72. Chu Sia.ng sh1 p. 220, 230, 233, 234. - 73. C:h'n p. 217,
235, 237, 248, 308. - 74. Ch\12 p. 311, 313. - 75. Chum1 Hii p. 207, 211. 214, 217, 218, 222, 22,,.
227, 230, 231, 23,5-237, 240, 245, 247, 253, 2.55, 259, 262, 271, 274, 287, 2flb. - 76. Chuan yfl
p. 218. - 77. Chuang-sh!tn p. 327. - 78. Ch'uei 229, 256, 257, 260-202. - 79. Ch't1ei' p. 2Jil,
2ii7, 268. - 80. Ch'un Ru p. 313. - 81. Chung Hiung p. 2/l;i, 262. - 82. Chung Huei p. 2611, 278,
329. - 83. Chung Huei' p. 274, 329. - 84 Chw1g Huei' p. 329. - 85. Chung ,Jen p. 33,i. --- 86.
Chung J1mg p. 255, - 87. Chung K'an p. 25/J, - 88. Chung K'i:mg p. :!li(i, 322. - 89. Chung Ki
p. 283. - 90. Chung Ku p. 327. - 91. Clnmg-pei p. 308. - 92, Chung Pop. 339. - 93. Chung
Yang shl p. 220, 230, 234. - 94. Chung-ye p. 334. - 95. Ch'ung p. 217, 228, 234, 237, 230, 24,,,
25.l, 256. - 96. Ch 1ung 2 p. 246. - 97. Ch'ung Hua. p. 29i'5. - 98. Ch'ung-shan p. 24·1, ::!4li, 249.
99. Ch'ung-ts'{ian p. 333. - 100. Er-kung p. 301. - 101 :B'a p, 3U. - 102. Fan p. 2:JH. -·- 103.
Fan' p. 203, 321. - 104. Fan ship. 31 J. - 105. Fang p. 275. -- 106. Fang Feng sht p. 30,,, :Jl l.
- 107. Fang Huei p. 273, 298. - 108. F,mg I-Hin p. 280. - 109. Fnng. Lei ship. 278, 282. - 110.
Fang Ming p. 279. - 111. Fang Ts'i p. 25(l, 261. - 112. Fang Yi p. 3lfi. - 118. ~'Pi Ch',mg p.
338. - 114. Fei Lien p. 317, 323. - 115. Fei Lien' p. 317. :J2:J. - 116. Fei Lien" p. 3\H. - 117.
Fei Lung p. 287. - 118. Fei1 p. 314, 323. - 119. :B'eng p. 218, 270. -- 120. Feng' p. 277. - 121.
Feng Hi p. 259, 313 .. - 122, Feng Hou p. 281. - 123. Feng H11 p. 282, 283. - 124. Feng Ki'l p.
281. - 125. Feng Men p. 313. - 126. Feng Meng p. :JJ:l. - 127. I•'eng Meng' p. :lJ:l. -- 128.
Feng Mu p. 285. - 129. Feng Po p. 280, 284, 317, 324. - 130. Feng Ship._ 2,i8. - 131. Feng Yi
p. 315. - 182. Fu Fei p. 276. - 183. Fu Hip. :2UG, 207, :!20. 221, :220, :2:lU, 232, 284, 27:3, :!7B. -
134. Fu-hia p. 296. - 135. Fu-mu p. 304. - 136. F11 Pao p. 282. - 137, Fu-sung p. 21l\J, · - 138.
Fu-shan p. 321. - 139. l<u-tse p. 297. - 140. F11 Tn p. :J40. - 141. Hai p. 331i. -- 142. Hai
,Jo p. 320. - 143. Han p. 311. - 144. Han' p. 303. - 145. I-Tan Liu p. 287. - 146. Huo p.
314. - 147. Hao YiI1g Ship. 221, 230, 234. - 148. Rei ,•h'i p. 2(l9, 304. -- 149. Heng,p. 304. -
150. Heng' p. 330. - 151. Heng Ngo p. 269, 272. - 152, Heng,shan p. 304. - 153. Hi p. 238,
262, 272, 289, 322. - 154. Hi' p. 239, 245. - 155. Hi3 p. 301. - 156. Hi' p. 3111. - 157. Hi''
p. 312. - 158. Hi Chung p. 2(ll, 262, 295. - 159 Hi' Chung p. 21l0, :!78. -- 160. 1-l i E.'i p. 228, 24,i. -
161. Hi Pop. 261. - 162. Bi Shu p. 202, 295. - 163. Hi \\'ei shi' p. 2211. - 164. Hin l'· 214, 217.
1-, a;j<J' .J 'r ...., 1-fef ,I.; ,s-:£.f: ((. r,ic,,~ff.:W~..-s: ;t tjl r!&.,t.l'i;t, ?o.:i.it:-11~ tlfj 7-!>J, '$.!;(,
,nb.1B.,1~/Vi1i ;f;' f.ft~ v.il±:-J.i n .:!ft 79.'& 8oa..-11A,.rdi" ~!!; S:t'1'f 71£.<Ll.ft1.t.?.: 'f "ffi$ ss:{'f
{f S(. 1,r fJ, S7.'l'f~ 8811' ff<..89. "F J rtd~ "2i 91. f.!,,_~~ ?.t{'f {13 ?J. 'f .A:_ t\, 1~ 'f 'Jt fS: i'. to* n.
0 ;.&J, ,a Alt
j, ~ ?3 *U-1 99. i~1a1't. 'if /d/.fZ11£~1ai.1e,;.:,pjlix., ltlf.f1 ICC~Jil.i( /(JJ 7J@l /(}8.$..f/);p7/5
~ ~ I/O. 7J 0~ 111/1dff, 11.2. 75 ii IIJ. fJl'. tI, //1. i ffif, 11.r.1t1?J!\.1A'. A} . I l l ~ ft !IS }r 119 J.i..,120fr.m.~
~ 1.21,Jilfe 12J.M tfl itl"# £, *t4£ 1~1' i 1.tc~-~._1,27.M_1.wf§t?\',,1.2rlfil..{e m#~131~ 1:1!1....
·~~e..m-fk.,ji,vl:.~.'\:'l~~,lm ~. {;1s,;J:iJ;\,,k_11d-t im;/k&JJY. ~ t.l! 1Jf/lil~'!r1w;y;t~1lf11s
11t2Slj1?# NJ.#/f¥-~M~ti1.1~ ~1,1. )t~(\;.-f.%.!',~M-*~1£1.·)Ji.1J7f~;J:d(iiti.u 1s-1..,im~1.,s:
k~:;or.JV.J7:·a~Vn!{<I' l.f', t{,t 1t(J£~1c1. ! {a 1ct.l_,-s,z,r1if\t,$ l;\,1?1 j_~fi1J1,z.j__j; i;X,/o·.
357
 BULLETIS OF THE MUSEUM OF FAR E'Ai:,TER.V iLVTIQUITIES B. EARU!RE.Y: LE(,E.\'DS AXD CTTTS IS A.\'CJE,\'T CHJ:VA.

:!fiO. 2;"1(\. 2!i0, :-HJ;), 31.1. --· 165. Hi,1.-hni p. :30±. - 166. J{ia. Hon shI p. :21-L 2:.!H. :280. ---- 167. Ilia
I(eng p. 3:30. 168 ..Hia. I(o p. :rnf:l. -· 169. 1:Iia-knng p. 334. - 170. Hin. ·po p. ~Gl. - 171.
llin-t"ni p. 384. aatt ----· 172. H:iang p. 25D. -- 173. Hien-ch'I p. :270. --- 17-±. Hien. :Hei p. 288. -
175. Hien.;vang p. :ml. - 176. l[ien YCtnn p. 2JU, 220, 2.21, 22,1. ~80. :271. 2S0. - 177. Hiung
p. 2,JG, 2(i:2. - · 1 1/8. Hiung J:.Iuang shl p. 27H. -- 179. Hiung l{'un p. 3·11. -- 180. Hiung-shnei
p. 21:iil. 181. Ho p. 2:38, 2G2. 322, 3:rn. -- 182. Ho' p. 336. ·- 183. Ho-chon p. 300. -- 184.
Ho Chung p. 21\2, 2%. -- 185. Ho Po p. 2ul. - 186. Ho Po2 p. :Jl3. :Jl9. :J20. 320. - 187. Ho
Shu p. 20:2, ;2!.);), 188. Ho SCL shl p. :220, 2:30, 234. -- 189. Hou Tsi p. 21G, :227, 257i :"WO, 279.
:rn1. ·- 190. J-{ou T'n p. 2:2:2, :2311--:2-12, 245. :247, :279, :28fl. -- 191. Hou Yi p. 263. - 192. Hou
Yi" P· 2;,s, :n I. :nu. 193. Hu p. 248. - 194. Hu2 P· 2GG, 2G2, - 195. Hu" p. 304. 308. -- 196.
207, 278. -- 264. Ki 2 p. 2HL ~ 265. KP p. 237, 31H. :332. ·- 266. IG·1 p. ~-11.l. -·- 267. K.i··, p. :2i\1.
-- 268. Ki 6 p. 28D. - 269. Ki' p. 33l\ 33fl. -- 270. Ki 8 p. 33!.1. -- 2 171. I(i-c·110t1 p. :2~n. :2S-L
272. K.i .Chu·1 p. 31:2, 313. -·- 273. Ki Chung p. :2.1{). -- 274. IG Houp. 30.l. 275. E:i Lip. :2:?.7.
255. -- 276. Ki Li 2 p. :?.:?.7. --· 2 1i'7. Ki Lien p. :?.37. :2iHJ. - 278. IG-t1hnn p. :?.,1i. :?.!-!:?.. -- 279. Ki
Ship. 277. -- 280. Ki Shi: 2 p. :?.\:lt:L -- 281. IG \Ven p. :27i'.'\. -- 282 ..K'i p. :?.J4----21H, :?.H;t 307.
283. I('i2 p. :?.40, 250, :261. :?.7!J, 288. - 284. K'P p. :2,17. 285. K'i 4 p. :?..)i. :rnti · 3U7. 30D. :31.1.
!323. - 286. K.'i'' p. :rn.J. - 287. K'i Chung ,Jung p. 3:?.7. 288. l('j IZnng 1nin p. 340. --- 289.
I('i Pop. :28.L 283. -·- 290. K'i-shan p. :?.70. -- 291. IGn-jn p. :i17. -~ 292. Kian~ p. :?.1:2. :?.,1\!.
278. - 293. I.\.iang:! p. :323. - 294. J.Gang YC.an p. :n.), :?.,"5'i. :?.88. ~ 295. E.:ino-t'bi" p. 270, :?..S7.
:?.D2. 300. :30±. - 296. Kiao Fu p. :238. -- 297. IGno IG p. :?.:?.{i. - 298. T\..ino Xitt p. :?.:?..->. -·- 299. K'icll 1

Hu J·en p. 277. -- 197. }fu knng p. :2!l!J. 300. - · 198. Hua Si.i. shl p. 2.7G. - 199. Hua Tll p. 2S7. - p. 323. - 300. lGe p. 24-!, :?.UO, :?.HS. 3.14, 317, 32fi. -- 301. Kie-ellLli JJ· :?.Ul_. :3:?.+. 302 ..KLP SlnH'i
200. Hun Yi p. :304. 201. Huai Yi p. 315. - 202. Hunn Lung p. 2:37., 298. 3:H. ·- 203. Hunn shl p. 237. -- 303. Kien p. 323. - 304. Kien Tip. :?.11, :?.1fi. :2:?.H, :200. 28.S. ----·- 305. l\.i(?n Ti. 2 p. :?.8:--.
Ton p. 2.J.\1. :230, :258. 2i5£'5. 261. - 204. Huan Tou 2 p. 249. - 205. Hunn T'on p. :263, 2i54. - 206. ~ 306. K'icn Huang p. 20t:. - 307. J(in p. 314, 3.:2:t - 308. Kin T'icn 1;;h'i p. :WS. :?l:?, :?.:27, :?:30,
l-:l..mu1.-yihm. p. ~HO. -· 207. Huang p. :243, 28G. ~- 208. Huung 2 p. 296. · - 209. Hnang:1 p. 314, 243. - 309. K'in-snei p. :24G, 338, - 310. J{·lng p. 814. - 311. IZing K'nnu: p. :2:?..l, --- 312.
3:20. 210. 1-lunng Tip. :200, 207, :21:2-214. :;1s, :!:21, 222, :2:25, 227, 230. :23:3, 2±2, 2±7, 2GO. :2li5, King Po'.! p. :ml. -- 313. King ru p. 2:SS. ~ 314 ..K'ing-kung p. B:27. 315. l\'ing Ttt p. 2:~+.
271. :!7+, :27S. 283---28?1. --- 211. Hnang Yip. :ns. - 212. Hnei p. 315. --- 213. Huei2 p. 823. - :273, 288 1 :2H4. --~ 316. lGt1 Li p. 2:35, ~t>L 26/'i. -~ 317. lGu-ynng p. :)O-t. --·· 318. Kiu "Ying p. :!I.HI.
214. Hnei Lien. p. 239. --- 215. Hnc•i Ln p. 244. 24G, 333. - 216. Hun Tun sh\ p. 230, 2:JJ, 247, - 319. Kiu-yCtan p. :n:1. ~ 320. Kinng p. 31-L :~:2:3. 321. K'im1g Cl\ nn p. :?:2.1. ---- 322. J{.'inrn..:
0

:!±8. ::rn:3. :2J,J. 21 1{ 1, HO p. 2i)H, 31H. -- 218. }Ht P· :3:23. -- 219. HCt Yu p. 210, 267, 273, :rn:2. -
220. IHta.n Hino p. :2:2il, :2:26. --- 221. Hi'am :Ming p. :2:22, 239, :24:3, :244, 246. - 222. HCta.n Ts'i p.
2fi8. 223. Hi'lun Ts'i' p. :ll:l. --- 224. Ui\an Yip. :nr,. -- 225. Hi\e 'l"u p. 32:J. -·- 226. Hi'tn-yii
p. 281. -· 227. ,Jan Siang Hhl p. 2'21. - 228. ,Jen p. ~18. 260, 278. -- 229. ,Jen Cheng p. 304. -
230. ,J0n Sl p. '277. -·- 231. ,Ten Si: 2 p. 277. - 232. ,Jen St1 p. ':!.77. --- 233. lTeng p. 312. - 234.
So-slrnoi p. :wti., 287. -·" 235. ,Jo Yn.ng p. 213. - 236. ,Jn p. 243, :28G. - 237. ,Ju Ai p. :n:2. - 238.
Ju Fang p. 3:30. -- 239. ,Tu Kin p. 3:30. - 240. ,h1 Shon p. 222, 2:rn, 244--24li. :ns. - 241. ,Juei
p. 257, 2S:i. - 242. J·ung p. 248, :'Wf\ '283. -- 243. ,Jung Ch'eng shl p. '220, 230. :!G3, 280. - 244.
Jnng Tsiang p. 27!:l. --- 245. ,Tnng \Vu p. 281. -- 246. K.ni p. 230. 24:G, 33G. -· 247. Kan p. 305,
315. -- 248. Knn Sin p. :J27. - 249. Kan Ying p. :n3. -- 250, K'ang Hnei p. 228. - 251. Kao
p. 314, 823. --- 252. E.uo Kon p. 323. - 253. Kno Kna shi' p. 237. - 254. Kao Mi p. :307. -- 255.
Kno Shau. p. 33H. --- 256. Kno Sin p. 21 l, 2:20. 228, 230, 243, 2,ji:i, -- 257. Kao Yt1.ng p. 211. 214,
230. 2:it'l, 2,-)t1, :20::?, 3:rn. ~ 2.18. Kao Yao p. 2:rn, 267. 2Gl. 2G2, :302, 307. ·- 259. I(en Kuo p. 341. --
260. J((:>n Hhuf'i Hbi' p. :23~. - 261. J.(en Yt"L p. ;JJ 1. - 262. Keng p. 330. -- 263 l(i p. :D2. ::?16,
K.'.i p. :247 .. 248. 233. 2;),). -- 323. K.'iung-kung }J. :3:27. 324. ICiung-men p. :11:2. ··-· 325. I('iung-
sang p. :208. :?33. -· 326. I('inng-shnn p. ::rn:3. --· 32 1/ . 1,_.iung-Bh.i p. 311. - 328. Ko p. 30·L --- 329.
l(o~ p. 332. - 330. R.o-lu p. 283. --- 331. J(o T'ien slil p. :22 I. :230. 23+. -- 332. Kon Lung p. :!+u.
247, 285. - 333. Kou l\rlnng p. 22:?, 22,1. :?.2'1. :?.3;"':i. :2:rn. :2:rn, 244----2-Hi. - 334. Kott \Yang p. :?.:W.
246. - 335. Ku p. 237, 3.HJ, 3:32. - 336. :Ktt l\.i p. 27\l. ·- 33?', Ji.n-1in _p. :?.H;t -~-- 338. Ku. Xm1
p. 250. - 339. Ku Soup. 21:2. :214, 22;1. :W2. 205, :200, 300. -- 340. Ku Yen p. -J.77. - 341. J("u
p. 207, 211, 214, :216. :H8, 22.J, 227. 228, :?~·HJ. 234, 220. 2::lS., 243. 24fi, ~;),l-·---:2,)7, :2tiH, 27~). -:!.Sl'-:. -·-
342. I('u2 p. :211, 22G. --- 343. Kun-chem p. :?.48. 344. 1\.\in-fu p. :281, :;sci. :2.S;), :HJ4. --- 345.
Kuan p. 30;3, :31(5. - 346. I.(un.11?· p. :33:'i. --- 34?'. l{nnu Lung .Fenµ- p. 3:27, :rno. -.. -- 348. Kunnp: p.
:i2:3. - 349. l{rn:mg Ch\~ng ts'i p. :270. -·- 350. K'uan[!-lin p. 243. - 351. l(uei p. :?:Vi, 2:ifJ. -,. 352.
Kuei 2 p. 29:2. - 353. I(nel:i p. 2~)U, :rnn, :,oo. -- 354. Km;ii·1 p. 338. 355. lZuel-ki 1-1· :mi>. :30-;.
308. - 356. Kuei:; Man p. 300. - 357. K.uei Tsang shT _p. ::rno, :2:,..;3. -- 358. :Knei Yfl .TZ'LL p. :2,Sl.
283. - 359. K'uei p. 2:rn, 237. 2.u. :?.:JO, :2;)8. :28:2, 308. ·---~ 360. l('uei-k'iu p. 210. --· 361. IC'uP!
\Vei. shl p. :277. - 362. :Knn p. 214, :?.:211. 22.7. :?.:31. :24i1, :?4G, .2±9-2;ll, 2;)3--:2,l!i, :?!ii. :?.8H. :rn3. ---
363. l('un Hm1 p. 279. - 364. I('un-lun p. :?.71. - 365. K'urFiVU p. :237. 2:rn. :1 t·i. 31U, :3:?.J.. :i:l~.

lt f /,W !l i !iv i fr:j /71 ii 'i. !i'.t. i:OJ !rlMf<'s/7/'ftx'J!.:prAr;;l';;,,ci/ff'/if.111~/';; mi(!;. 1 l;t., l?J~Mi.J g,,:c.za'tfc.,=&2,r~ ur*lw.t2r·,Jt 1H mU'f £731/:(t 21,l,l)(; v.dt.~zxi"fJ?.
!7f '~~ f"i'.'.lt00! ,)<..!!!/~, /J'.try'*< /i,,'.;f ;/,f/ /,?f,¥7 {'f !iS:,1-u{a It"(;'{ -{i~ !tJ,'),1 ,lo(;,rs.,iJ,fi,1%-t'(, !Sr/, ;f$J,:, IYC /.-, mtil.xn i il1 mi ;/ij.tSoiil $ w 'it X..%2;fc.,m*-m~.t£i7,~~F£,1,t,lf1i.fl..2&r '/;)' !li:Ku:1
5,/7,'. /0 (i;__jftj;'i ?f ;f.J,,7!2.!HAM)[ ;,:.§.,A..li'1~ I~ !ff*~IA.. !ft~ ;r@':!tl:?'ll:- .@.2171.,Y~ ~.tat*- i!,jz_{e 2ro!,lt 0-, 27'!~',W iiitJ .t:lJ f!tzN t ffit353t:,jfil::.2%.~,M,»1.:t;%#»s,:;$'.ti'-"Lff it 1003it.»1 faiip .¥)'

/:f\t.WJ~ U. ';YC:.l'tl<' ;;/19l2~i[@:_iti;-i/if<J,-2:.,w11t.tt1t]%_149~a $.. f v1. ~ft 2a ~ .v.J.,/,.)1!.vf,\}1.;.t.v,r.@ 1tii.:rt$i7.i'- ~ 3aJ.Mc-3~~ ~;'< 305:F,~ f,l_ Ji\{~ !_ J~;,)i ]OS% f'- t\ JOfJf/,jb1a~tJ1l'~3/.2 i_ ~ J!J !i_
'/'..,RU;')l il.)ftz.217.1',t..vJ'J~m.# l'fllifJ t.1,w.:t ;:t.w :t $!.w.l'lt$a.;,£ t.w:_wiJ~~ {~yJ:~,1JjlJ,t: ;/(..~5;7.)Ll"i/Jyg 7l~ Jlf1l;t:Im;.'/i,.w.*,r.)ji'.322.~ ry°JZJJi:& 3ZlfJj% F'.J .3.2T~ %.:w.

m:+t} /~3 t\ m1i: m A. iE..z»?((£11!<£Y ,{f.1)',{.tJ;l.{£ e. w17J m~ J<-2JS-:/!.f rti%~..!'J73t~$)p; 7j

7 'i£' Ll.1327~'6 m:,ff.1291; ;101,,,j.111.i Y,~ 33.z {.7~tJJJ ~c 311<'"J~JJJ~J,1;J~~J,r:%.+J',,,1Js.
21;1:,f(}(fb2rriJ( 'bz.»1 ?Ii 2~A.m.lrl.1»,.iC:M< ~~% 2.;,1:kr. %Z%'.°&f.i24'1.i:/".us. f" 4-.tf9 tr.s:~.20At@z57. J;.i\..«.j 337.3/f§1i'._31"1~/</~3{,.z.1*:;q3;f.\;!fi JI/If 'if;,(3;1//l)Ulr:i.wlij ~/tfbM'./ll( Jflf/li.h'x.+ 1!7!~
$..2J;:1 ~l <;; .u-11.fif.Yh r'\....m;~ )f;".z,:s:f:i'-'\/i.tsi: ~ f m~f~.ror $ f®m;1ru2].t.o,-]t'<...7J<...w;}!:l\!l.w!i +t.s37:-l13NJlt1JJ'.@,J.J1~JJT'~~JJ.~~~337JM;~ES ;~)l K~J»~J,cXJLJt/~ ~ (J,;, ..@k

358 359
 BULLETIN OF THE lf!USEUM OF FAR EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
-· -- ------- - --
-- 366. K'un-wu' p. 324. - 367. Kung Kung p. 206, 21S, 223, 227, 230, 231, 233, 234, 238, 240, 241,
24,,, 247, 249, 253, 25,5, 284, 280, 309. - 368. Kung-sun p. 226. - 369. Kung-sun Wan p. 323. -
370. K'ung Kia, p. 282, 293, 314, 321. - 371. K'ung-sang p. 208, 329. - 372. K'ung-t'ung p. 210,
280. - 373. Kuo p. 312. - 374. Kuo' p. 312. - 375. K'uo Shon p. 301. - 376. K'uo Shon' p. 301.
-,- 377. !Gi p. 237. - 278. Ki'1-ts'Y p. 279. - Kii-yiil1Il p. 315. - 280. K'fl-ao p. 304. - 381.
K'ii-shi p. 292. - 382. K'ii-sou p. 300. - 383. K'(1 Yip. 327, 334. - 384. Kii,,n Chang p. 238. -
385. K'iian Jung p. 249, 281, 304. - 386. K'iian Yip. 315. - 387. Kun Ch'ou p. 270, 292. - 388.
Kiin-t',1i p. 315. - 389. La.i p. 278. - 390. Lai Chu p. 330. - 391. Lai Yen p. 239. - 392.
Lao-k'iu p. 315. - 393. Lao Lung Ki p. 277. - 394. Lao P'eng p. 274, 330. - 395. Lao 'L"ung
p. 237, 238, 245. - 396. Lei Ship. 317. - 397. Lei-tse p. 276, 297. - 398. Lei Tsu ship. 280,
282. - 399. Lip. 21H, 217,234,235,237,245,247,251,256,274,293,298. - 400. Li2 p. 235,240. -
401. Li 3 p. 278. - 402. Li4 p. 330, 388. - 403. Li Chu p. 280. - 404. Li HC, shi p. 220. - 405.
Li Lien shi p. 230, 234. - 406. Li Lou p. 280. - 407. Li Lu shi p. 220, 230, 234. - 408. Li Mu
p. 280, 281, 28:l, 286, 340 - 409. Li Shan shl p. 220. 241. - 410. Li-shan' p. 297, 306, 334. - 411.
Li-shan3 p. 334. -- 412. Li wnng p. 321. - 413. Li,mg Yi\ p. 341. - 414. Liao p, 257, 262. -
415. Liao' p. 29S. - 416. Lie Shan ship. 220, 230, 240, 277. - 417. Ling K'i p. 277. - 418.
Ling J(ua p. :3:W. - 419. Ling Lnn p. 270. - 420. Liu p. 257, 262. - 421. Lin Lei p. 293, 321..
- 422. Lo-Imo p. 304. - 423. Lo Ming p. 227. - 424. Lo Pop. 320. - 425. Lo T'ao p. 298. -
426. Lo-yi p. 317. - 427. Lu p. 208, 278, 334. - 428. Ln' p. 237. - 429. Ln3 p. 330. - 430. Lu
Chung p. 237, :13H. - 431. Lu-hien p. 321. - 432. Lu T'u p. 287. - 433. Lun p. 312. - 434.
Lung p. 2fi(i, 2.'i8. - 435. Lung Men p. 271, 303. - 436. Li\ p. 259. - 437. Ln.Jiang p. 303. -
438. Lli T'u p. 287. - 439. Mang p. 314-, 323. - 440. l\iang Hiang p. 255. - 441. Mang Yi\ p. 311.
- 442. Mei p. 243, 247, 286. - 443. Men Yin Teng Heng p. 330. - 444. Meng p. 300. - 445.
Meng Men p. 303. - 446. Meng-shan p. 327. - 447. Meng T'u p. 323. - 448, Meng Yi\ p. 323. -
449. Mi p. 237, 239, 308. - 450. Mi 2 p. 312. - 451. Mi' p. 332. - 452. Mi Sli p. 332. - 453.
Miao Lung p. 281. - 454. Mi.io min p. 251, 2fi4. - 455. Mien Ch'en p. 320. - 456. Min p. 312. -
457. Min-shan p. 327. - 458. Min-ylian p. 286. - 459. Ming p. 214, 336. - 460. Ming' p. 278. -
461. Ming-t'ia.o p. 210, 298, 334. - 462. Mo p. 212, 214, 29,5, 299. - 463. Mo Hi p. 327. - 464.
Mo Hi' p. 327. - 465. Mo Mu p. 279. -- 466. Mou K'ua p. 268. - 467. Mou Km,ng p. 330. -
468. Mou Kuang' p. 330. - 469. Mu p. :l30. - 470. Mu-kung p. 331. - 471. Mu Mu p. 282. - 472,
3'J,/!f.1~Xf. rt~ XJ:)l.g;.i::;_t~ Jt7 ;tJ; :c..Xt~JA:..Jff~'i-i.l_J;ti.-R. 'f 31/.'i:° ~37:i. >i':M'J, ~:JlJ
Ja;l;t,1 -'t Jls.-~.f J,o.,W;:,@ 371. "t 3l.!'.~ ~ 379.)iffi_:JJv.ffi ~ JJ'r.'fif j_Jf:2.M,ID. llh ii...:JS't~ ~ JS.-~
A:_38(\J!t t 1,;. J_:j;. Jts.11?} l., 31'7. PK.J,o;fsA<.. JW~ "& 1,2. ilt.t{; JrJ.-'/f~ i5' Jy;.Jftj, m:-~ i :!Z'.~
3?7. ~if J:>si<.{,t&I\. 39f~,w ,W4a!J.f..w2Ai.Mlii~,e,,~j ~ M'-~Jl~l\kr;.~i-f w,.~1'1:. ~Jos.
}J <:1:/(Mfli,LU Ii\, q/&.Af LJJ I/II.~ ill /;',2.J! £911-*{l!l~~ f;s/.itJM'.8. LU /,\, 911.~ ~ 9/8.~*'fl"
{~ 1t:1.d, ~~ .l1.u.®Jl...1~ -rtt~EIA-rz1i%1'i§ 1tr.ffF;1J1s~t 127_f·ftfJ!'M.i1),{4.:l:1~#..#J1. i·oJM;.+J.t.
t,;J,..\1]1.11.~f~iif.1.r./liU~ r1(.g r17. g :4( 1Y.~ r1i~ AAJ;t ft-#1. Ali! ~lfK.#.:r.1'9 .1' !"·l:i.1-#. i
#sf l'i ~ tll Miz:~Ni'-..#s.J;:~#f.:¥=-,;,wAtfJ?.·l£:·fn/~·iil 1s:rtf~l1.w-¥ ~ #J,.,tt!f. 41...ti,;,p.~
i.!I ~JJ. #i~ l{;y~ ft2J.13)j 94''-~;1fa.kt:J4',i1*:,,!N?.JK _$../15°~1/C, #, ~ 9.:7.'i')t.1<;',f )t *r.~ ?ii::>.
360
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS IN ANCIENT CHINA
Nan-ch'ao p. 334. - 473. Nnn-ki p. 299. - 474. Nao p. 287. - 475. Neng Ming p. 281. - 476.
Ngo p. 296. - 477. Ngo Fu p. 209, 300. - 478. Ngo Fu 2 p. 300. - 479. Ngo Huang p. 227,
206, 300, 301. - 480. Ngo King p. 300. - 481. Ngo Nii p. 287. - 482. Ngo Nii Yii,1.n Fu p.
277. - 483. Ngo Po p. 211, 243, 336. - 484. :Nia,o Yi p. 300. - 485. Nie K'i.ie p. 2H2. - 486.
Nung p. 220, 241. - 487. Nii Chi shi p. 307. - 488. Nii Ch'u p. 288. - 489. Nf, Hua p. 2UO,
327, 334. - 590. Nii Huang p. 294. - 491. Nii K'i p. 31:l. - 492. Nii Efao p. 229, 307. - 493.
Nii Kiao' p. 307. - 494. Nf1 Kie p. 277. - 495. - Nii Km, shi p. 22\J-232, 234, 307. - 496.
Nii Lu ship. 237, 238. - 497. Ni\ Siu p. 260. - 498. Ni:! Teng p. 277. - 499. Ni'l Tsie p. 287.
- 500. Ni\ T'uei shi p. 239. - 501. Nii Yen shi p. 299. -· 502. Nii Ying p. 296, 300, 301. -
503. Pa. - 504. Pm1 p. 286. - 505. Pan-ts'iian p. 210, 222, 278, 280. - 506. Pm12 -ts'iio.n p.
221. - 507. P'an Kuan p. 323. - 508. P'an-mu p. 287. - 509. Pao p. 321. - 510. Pao Ping
p. 337. - 511. Pao Ping' p. 341. - 512. Pao Si p. 321. - 513. Puo -Ting p. 3:l7. - 514. Pao
Ting• p. 341. - 515. Pao Yip. 337. - 516. Pao Yi' p. 341. - 517. P'n.o Hip. 207, 221. - 518.
Pei Ch'eng p. 323. - 519. Pei Fa p. 280. - 520. ]>ei Hai Jo p. 320. - 521. Pei .fen Wu Tsf• p. 2H8.
- 522. Pei Men Ch'eng p. 279. - 523. Pei Ti p. 281. - 524. J>ei Yi p. 27:l, 2(12. - 525. P'ei p.
260, 305, 3.16, 330. - 526. P'ei-shan p. 248. - 527. P'ei-tse p. :JH2. -- 528. Pen Shuei shi p. 27H.
- 529. P'eng p. 237, 274. - 530. P'eng Ch'eng p. 27,i. - 531. I''eng Keng p. 274. - 532.
P'eng Meng p. 313. - 533. P'eng Meng' p. 313. - 534. P'eng Shon p. :nc;, -- 535. P'enf! Tsu p.
237, 239, 274, 27.5. -· 536. Pip. 257. - 537 Pi Fang p. 280, :Jl7. -·- 538. Pi-yang p. 2:l7. - 539.
P'i p. 256., 2(i2. - 540. Piao-kung p. 3:J3. -· 541. Pien Huei p. :iao. - 542. P'ing Yi p. :J20, 82,i. -
543. Po p. 284. - 544. Po' p. 331. - 545. Po3 p. 331.. - 546. Po Chao JJ· 288. - 547. Po
Ch'eng Tsi Kao p. 292. - 548. Po-chung p. 210. - 549. Po Fen p. 255. - 550. Po Feng p. 2fi8. -
551. Po Hiu-fn p. 236. - 552. Po Hu p. 2,,5, 2Ci2. - 553. Po Huang sh[ p. 220, 2:JO, 2:J4. -
554. Po Kao p. 279, 283. - 555. Po K'i4 p. 305. - 556. Po Kun p. 213, 2.'iO. - 557. Po K'iian p.
281. - 558. Po Ling p. 277. - 539. Po ll'ltt p. 227. - 560. Po Ming shY p. 311. - 561. Po Yung
p. 292, 295, 298. - 562. Po Yi p. 258, 261, 304, 306. - 563. Po Yi' p. 25(;, 258, 201. 30:J, 3Hl. -
564. Po Yi' p. 259, 260. - 565. Po Yi-fu p. 287. - 566. Po Yi11 p. 311. - 567. Po Yii p. 2,il,
256, 303. - 568. Po Yii' p. 256. - 569. Pu-chou p. 227, ~28. - 570. Pu Chu p. 2,i7. - 571. J'n
Kiang p. 314, 323. - 572. Pn-ts'i p. 334. - 573. P'u Niu p. 325. - 574. San Miao p. 23fi, 241J.
2ijl, 252, 254. 2i'i,'1, 295. - 575. San-na,o p. 32:i. - 576. Sm1-shon p. 3L). - 577. San T8ungi!. p.
1:z.'%°'1i'f1jley-~?l:'I. ii$.i j_473 ~ c.l/M}tm-}f 8.IJ 97'~4'!'1.~:'>t97f.;Uzl/rf~'i4tl7~f.fJ'!.f".f '3t1.£<:
*
f,r -.r ~ rJ.1 M) {s 41~ .fh Jl3 1,j- lffil<...1Kt}11. J: .;2;, I;(, N.r.,1;-~ 1tw. ~+to -Jz t 1v -1,; wl '17.t-dt.: tt-
111 ~~~4?f.'9:ft~?.f":,Z'~f\, 1t1,;t;f;;fzi\1fJ.ii:1'iHn..t '.'it 1/ff-i ~ .m*~t f\,.5111,t l{ ~ S"" ;!:~
B1f ~se~fU%~.ill7.lll'.f-~s,!\t.7)-',sl7f~~'J ~j7J.~i'9,?2.f&.;l/'.<.PJ.'] T .J71'1ll.::rJ7S:
'] l_.P(~°L S/7 ~~. ~l,,.fli~.~l57&~t.,4;..m.,(%{\z.,;zoAl'..sJ!~ s:v.~L'. ,(~:jf.!Zt.~t l',~.JZJ.
>IL'.!,:Zm•tl('\X.s.:?.f.'fr~i.l( ,.t15$~~.f.f!.7t;.7]<-K~~:5:JO§jJch'><.f.11.~~.fJtijlf.n3;f_~.ni-'itf*
~~ffj~...Lx.f s:11 ~ 1, nt{i;i ~5.1)'~*$#. if 5¥1.;f,~;~ tS1'.1$'flif ~ ! f ,;c{(J t~ .f¥naA.
.:J. it;.5{,s.tll/l1~8 i .f.l'O'(§ t.tm{a #'9C..m.{13,tlm1a :t e(m{ti ~ m-{e/,!},;n{s f!i/r,..JJJ.Ei ..it
.lJl'{s ~ . § -~ .mi.{e ~ 1:U~{i§ ~m~~s.J{a ,t.,.!"1£1 tt,.s-{1§ i ~:{g rf\£1-ff3 /lr-i.,zy-{13
~£71' feJ 570:'f,$.17!'1' N'6?.t".J~F1J1{4- J7f3..?s .57.i:..::.. ~~3.. .:ffr-.i71.~R'fz.~07Eie: fr'l,a,_
361
 BULLE:TIN OP THE: MUSEUM OP FA.R EASTERN ANTIQUITIES
·---·--··· ---------
1
,--1
332. 33H. - 578. San-wei p. 249. 251. 271. 304. - 579. San Yi shi p. 294. - 580. Sang-Jin p.
230. 269, 328. - 581. Shan Jung p. 300. - 582. Shan Ki:,an p. 273, 298. - 583. Shan IG\an' p.
::ms. - 584, Shan Sien p. 287. - 585. Sha-ng p. 211, 214, 217, 2:43, 317, 335. - 586. Shangwch'I
p. 315. - 587. Shang· Kilt ,Yei p. 330. - 588. Shangwk'iu p. :?.11. 243, 318, 336. - 589. Shang
Ki\n p. 291. 29S, 300, 301. - 590. Shang P'ien p. 230. - 591. Slmng-yang p. 277. - 592.
Shang Yip·. 263. 265, 266. - 593. Slrnng Yin p. 256, 326. - 594. Shao Hao p. 207, 208. 217, 219,
:!2:t 22H, 227, 230, 235, 237, :."?3{:), 243, 247, 25fi, 277, 278, 283, 286. - 595. Shno J{.'nng p. 299, 308,
312, 313. - 596. Simo Kuang p. 271. - 597. Shao Tien p. 212, 225, 230, 233, 260. 277, 278. - 598.
She p. 2JO. -- 599. Shf, Lung p. 2J2, 279. - 600. Shen p. 243, 286. - 601. Shen' p. 259. - 602.
Shen3 p. 305, 306, 330. - 603. Shen• p. 329. - 604. Shen Huang Chi p. 282, 286. - 605. Shen
Nung p. 206. 207, 212, 220, 221, 230, 232, 233, 276. 288. - 606. Shi p. 323. - 607. Shi Ch'en p.
2ll, 243. - 608. Shi Hn Chi Nung p. 298. - 609. Shi Jen p. 337. - 610. Shi Kuei• p. 337. -
611. Shi King p. 253. - 612. Shi Kiin p. 281. - 613. Shi-niu p. 308. - 614. Shi To p. 340. -
615. Shi Tsung p. 32:l. - 619. Shi Tu p. 305. - 617. Shi Wei p. 237. 293, 332. - 618. Shon-
fang p. 325, - 619. Shu p. 248. - 620. Shu' p. 256, 277. - 621. Shu An p. 298. - 622. Shu
Hai p. 308. - 623. Shu Hien p. 255. - 624. Shu Klin p. 284. - 625. Shu Pno p. 255. - 626.
Shu Shan shi p. 287. - 627. Shu Ta p. 255. - 628. Shuang Kiu shi p. 277, 28!\. - 629. Slum
p. 206, 201 . :ui. 214, 219. 225, 230, :234. 236. 247, 240, 252, 206. :rno, 2u1. 210, 275, 2so. - 630.
Shtm-tse p. 301. - 631. Simo-fang p. 370. - 632. Si-chi p. 300. - 633. Si Chu p. 230, 276. -
634. Si Ling shi p. 280. - 635. Si P"eng p. 279. - 636. Si-shen p. 300. - 637. Si Wang Kuo
p. 270, 300. - 638. Si Wang Mu p. 269, 270, 801. - 639. Si»ng p. 214, 312, 313. - 640. Siang'
p. 2HG, 300. - 641. Siang Liu p. :J09. - 642. Si.mg T'n p. 243, -336. - 643. Siang Yao p. 309. -
644. Siao l\iing p. 300. - 645. Sie p. 21 l, 214, 216, 256, 257, 260, 262, 288, 335. - 646. Sie' p.
260, 278, 330. - 647, Sie" p. 314, 323. - 648. Sin p. 28i>. - 649. Siu p. 239, 246. - 650. Sin
Kip. 309. - 651. Siu Ki' p. 309. - 652. Siu She p. 269. - 653. SI p. 243, 286. 303, 307, 309. -
654. Si Kuan p. 327. - 655. Si Yl\e p. 229, 2158, 261, 289, 295. - 256. Su p. 218. - 657. Su' p.
237. - 658. Sn-slm p. 277. - 659. Su-shen p. 254. - 660. Suei p. 214, 299. - 661. Suei Jen
sht p. 20(;, 232. 270. - 662. Sun-p'n p. 304. - 663. Sung p. 215. 216. 337, 341. - 664. Sung'
p. 211. - 665. Sl\-ao p. 292. - 666. Si\ Er p. 292. - 667. Sli-kli p. 218. - 668. SU-men p.
304. - 669. Sii Shen p. 292. - 670. S(\ Ya p. 292, 298. - 671. Si:m p. 247. - 672. Ta Ch'ang
p. 24:l, 279. - 673. Ta, Ch'eng Ch'i p. 306. - 674. Ta Fei p. 260, 261. - 675. Ta Feng p. 2J2,
:J79. - 676. Ta Feng' p. 209. - 677. T.i Hip. 327. 334. - 678. Ta-hia. p. 243. - 679. Ta Hung
j'. l;':.->?'O.~f. WAm ~~67J~#.\~f!¥~9c,_ro:~,_g-cJ:: ~m.l:.'frit.m~ .Ii.~m.fo'i;t:~SYO
J:. .~S'il ~ f S'Jt. r'fl~m.~~fj,--il$.rn::,J,--,'Y<ft'tj,'*.51!1''#.UY/.,f;t.m~/¥,Ctl1~&17!.'f rat.He
COJ,*"'9:j(f j_ @. £aJ:j(\f_;lt0;""-!!t. . ~ ~ t ' & 'ti _I, .zjL{df.;f-,-5:::tltJ./?, ~ {//. ±~o.zj§ jlq(IJ..fi M..
4i't.#JR.'1.f."-lit,'f((.l,{#;;..jf_.;1.~1f:m.~Jjw9.i'Jt~x....w.~~o/-~ti.a.i~(-lf;~(if;M.f:7
eit.tl!J.1 ix.,v,l~~e(,.0.~{.W'/~~•.¥.W3}J(J2i"J#-t...i.t~.-;~.Jr.i16Ft-~,!!~m~cx,@.
\l (jl,;gj .£121 (J! i\'& 3:.-q--.J?Jf@ ({,a ~(fl;f'Ei-11/f£"{It~..±.(fJ-*3 tft4'..P#. '[tf El}1(1..r.~ (K.t'°i'-£17.~{#{-& '*·
c.
{1f,; ,-;.ro(,~ #c. c11.11f ,~1fr,a'lbl::JJ4.U~Jilr i[,rr-119 f.;l;:,.z--lf§ G"ff1t,m /;ilY,),-,Sr,l.t ·JiGi:o~c,;~A.. e(,.
t,;t,E'.;\<j(cd.*-.to?<.#(i:'3~',r~,z"f.ilJf c,d~ {;J tt>?t{,l#i,,t.il t "7&4-f ~ c;z,1}&" '1'-<A i i;:11 AA\
Q't. t.... i Ci'S'.K~ CIC. /(.__/~tn;k_'ft.,-k}J'J.p1 J;:.. i 99 J<:...0:t.,v~ c. c,1 k1lm;k,J=/a]Q"J};.:_/l'.:.,#.I-..
362
B. KARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CFLTS l.\' ASCll'.\'T CHINA
p. 281, 282. - 680. Ta Ki p. 318. - 681. Ta-kiao p. 300. - 682. 'l'n-kiung p. 33[1. -- 683. T,,
Lin p. 255. - 684. Ta-lu p. 294. - 685. Ta Nao p. 2G3. 27fJ. - 686. Ta P'eng p. 237. - 687.
Ta-sha p. 334. - 688. Ta T'ien p. 282. - 689. 'l'a T'ing ship. 220. 230, 233, 234. - 690. Ta, WPi
p. 279. - 691 Ta Ye p. 2(10, 261. - 692. Tai Hu Siang p. 339 .. - 693. T'at p. 257. - 694. '.l'"ai
Chang p. 308. - 695. T'ai Hao p. 218, 210, 221, 222, 230. - 696. T\,i K'nng p. 31 :J, 316, :323, 32,,.
- 697. T'ai Kip. 299. - 698. T'ai Kin p. 316, 33:3, 338. - 699. T'ai-k(hm p. 339. - 700. 'l"11i-
eang p. 306. - 701. T'ai Shan Ki p. 280. - 702. T'ai T'ni p. 2,1,3. 280. - 703. T'ai Ting p. :i:ll,
335, 338. - 704. T'ai Yi p. 3:Jl. - 705. T'ai Yi\e p. 25H, 2lil. - 706. Tan Clm1 p. 2fll. 204, 29$.
- 707. Tan-ling p. 295. - 708. Tan-shuei p. 291, 295. - 709. T'rm p. 28(l. - 710. T'ang p. 211.
214, 223, 244, 200, 274, 3HJ, 326. - 711. T'ang' p. 20(i. 243, 2S9, 29:J, :330. - 712. T'ang-kn p.
269. - 713. T'ao T',ing' shi p. 206, 230, 289, 2!l3. - 714. T'tio T'ie p. 247. 248, 2,33. 2;,,,. - 715.
T'ao vVu p. 247, 248, 253, 25i>. - 716. Teng Heng p. 330. - 717. Teng Lin p. 28:i. - 718. Teng
Pei ship. 300. - 719. Teng Pi ship. 300. - 720. T'eng Fen slit p, 238. - 721. T'eng shI p. 2:l,.
- 722. Ti Hmig shl p. 21:2, 2.'.!0, 227, 230 247, 2rifi. - 728. Ti Kiang p. :2:i3. - 724. Ti K.'iang
1
p. 300. - 725. T'ien Lno p. 280. - 726. T'ien Yip. 331. - '727. T'ing Kien p. 2:l;], 2,,7, 21i2. -
728. T'ing-shan p. 334. - 729. T'ing Yao p. 24,3, 278. - 730. Ts'ai p. 33,i. - 731. Ts'an Hu p.
239. - 732. Ts'ang Hie p. 282. - 733. Ts'ang Lin p. 278, 283. - 734. Ts'ang Shu p. 2,,,;. - 735.
Ts'ang-wu p. 298, 300. - 736 Ts'ao p. 237, 239. - 737. Ts'ao-wei p. :304. - 738. Tsao YU p. 341. -
739. Tseng p. 214 . 293, 307. - 340. Tsi p. 214, 220, 240, 2J l. 202. :30:l .. -- 741. Ts'i p. 2,ifl. 277.
286. - 742. ~rs'i 2 p. 305. - 743. Ts'iting p. 25H. ~ 744. Tt:1iao p. :2:2:2. "!.77. -- 745. Tsino:! p. :31:!.
- 746. Tsia.o-men p. 334. - 747. Tsie Ping p. 228, 245. - 748. Tsien p. 230, 274, 27,i. - 749.
Tsin p. 307. - 750. '1."sin Yl'm ship. 212, 220, 247, 255. - 751. 1't:1'in p. :WO. - 752. T:,'in P11 K'utu!
p. 298. - 753. Tsing K'iang p. 304. - 754. Ts'ing-k'iu p. 269. - 755. Ts'ing Yung p. 217, 22,i -
227, 278, 280. - 756. Ts'itt Po p. 261. - 757. Tsi p. 33,i. - 758. Ts'i Chou Chi Fu p. :l9:l. -
759. Ts, Hai see Wang Tsi Hai. - 760. Tso Ch'e p. 207. - 761. Ts'o Ch'i p. 269. - 762. Tsou
p. 237. - 763. Tsu p. 313. - 764. Tsu Wu p. 323. - 765. Tsun Lu sht p. :l2U. 230, 234. - 766.
·Ts\.mg. - 767. Tsttng2 p. 292. 768. Tsung-ch'uan p. 298. - 769. Tsnng Yi p. 2:J7, 208. -
770. Ts'ttng-chi p. :l92. - 7'il. Ts'ung-ki p. 325. - 772. TsUn p. 227, 200. 2GS, 272. 200. - 773.
Tu p. 293. - 774. T'u p. 237. - 775. T'u• p. 336. - 776. 'l''u-shan p. 30;,. - 777. T'u Sh,lll
shl p. 229, 306, 307, 310. - 778. T'uei Ai p. 2fi5. - 779. T'uei Ch'i p. :327. - 780. T'uei Yi p.
327, 334. - 781. Tnn-k'iu p. 301. - 782. Tnng p. 237. 298. - 783. Tung Fu p. 208. - 'iS4.
Tung Hu. - 785. Tung Hu sht p. 230. - 786. Tung Kinng p. 323. - 787. Tung Pop. :l(i I. -
?t_u.n•.:J./t.oK,k,,~,Wk,i,.J,-ti'.!.k;1:Jt,,11 J<:.M ~frd..*..~t1;,,,::}ft-:t.t1{ f-¥1 <rJ~~,% A "1,,.,..A
B$.1t.A;.tf9.:ZA,ilf,w.r.A'f mffi:.~;w §- *._:m; J.<;.,u.1;/<'$;;u.t_,;"1..,uA. T 7Ci'}i:... c... ;i,_,.;k_f~.A:..-tf.-
?<1c.1]- ffi.:.7"1."11"~,rff,)<..m jfy71&}~ 711 Jg 71.1. ~ ~}7-/J ~A~ 714'. :f ~"17f'%u '.t -1.i 7-17 !:-r5-1'WIJ'.
f ~t.A r~jt rt.I(, 7.td.}J,f...A: t\,7i.lM'4t w 'i,fi Jt% ~ ~ £:.Lr.t.1 ~ )t,;,s..k-1t ?&:" A 1...ra?)l~?.tP.
"$ tl-1 7:29.1£¥-,7.Jil,ff-...?Jlt-j,1.173t.~~.,'G)1ijJJ;:t..#-1»~1'f7J.f';if i 7X- f fJI.. ,~738~111->rt/5
~;fl;,;,&[~;f<l1'J~,f 7*.~7t'J~,.C)!)'~ J//1.*fi;;fl.~ ~7:ffli~~ ~7i7. ~lj.2.~-'f",?i'.:153 ~
fc_.i®.~ £=~~;;;,.i,,::(13 757.+7s.r.+..:Ni ~X:.m.:} ~*?.'i:~tiw~?.:l'@rXiP.llit'H"E.if'Vor
~At\. ;,.c.~,J7;7Jl~~~1•\ ; t " t ~ m,:;:._,1<tzr1.f,t_~1r.21ft:..;i,J,J-.±.m.fc:vet...?7C.!!.u.1 ml't· Llj
~ 7i'f.rlf1zm*•f,#!{j W$f~i't!4:1ifJ5J£tl 76'31;:~rti-*.f JJ'J:,tf~~ TJ(l'_y.LlJ'l,~ fo.fS.
363
 BULLBTIN OF THE :llUSRL'Ji OF FAR EA.STERN ;.iNTIQUJTIBS B. EARLGREN: LEGENDS AND CULTS I:\' 1-L\'CIB'VT CHINA

788. Tung Po.! p. 307 ....~-- 789. Tung Pu Shr p. 298. 790. Tung 'T'ing p. 2G9. 791. T'ung p· :?HO. - 897. Yu Shen shi" p. 807, 328. -- 898. Yu 8l1en!l p. 3:2H. --··- 899. Yn :-:lhi" p. :127. -·- 900.
:l30. -· 792. T\mg Yii sht p. :!78. -- 793. ,Vai ,Jen p. :l30. -- 794. Wai Ping p. :1:15. - 795. Wm,g Yn Sin sh'i p. 307. --- 901. Yll Snng:! sh'i p. 2.11. 288, 33~. - 902. 'fu T'ai :;;lil p. 288. -- 903. Yn~tu
Hni p. 330. --- 796. "\Yang Tieng p. :mu. - 797. \Vang ~Iang sh'i. p. 30:5. -- 798. \Vang Shu p. 2G7, p. 249, 270 1 2H:2. - 904, Yu \Yn.ng p. 32.l. --· 905. Yn Yip. :120, :J:3ti. -··- 906. Yu Yi't:! f-\b'i p. :!OU. 21+.
:ll 7. -· 799. Wm1g Ts\ Hni p. :J:!O, :i:rn. - 800. \Yang Yi p. 292. - 801. Wei p. 315, :ll9, 32±, 230, 274, 29i), :.wn, 31:2. --- 907. Yung p. 320. -- 908. Yune,!."-hn p. :2,'t3. 909. Yung· Hnci p. :2:2:-i.
:1:lli. -- 802. Wei' p. 2R7. ··- 803. Wei" p. 280. -· 804. Wei' p. 2~1l. - 805. Wei' p. 31\l, :331, - 910. Yc1 p. 20fi, 201_. ::21:i. ::214. 22a. 22.J. :rno. 23.1., :2+n. 2.J:2. :2.Jo. 2.--..1. 2tw. 202. :21:i. :>; l, :2~i(i. 20:·~.
:1:12. - 806. Wei'' p. :J:JJ. - 807. Wei' p. :HI. --· 808. Wei" Po 3 p. :J3l. ··- 809. Wen p. 237. - 298, 301.. - 911. YCt!l p. :!OH, 21.J., 217. :Wt). 20D. 912. Yn:i p. :2;10. 913. YC1'1 p. :~2:3. -- 914.
810. \Ven =viing JJ, :307. 811. \Ye-u \Vnng p. 214, 223 248, 273, _:27\.i, :3:3:2. ~- 812. VVeng Nan-yi
1 Yl't Hu p. 2Hl. -- 915. Yi.i K'iang p . .:271. 281. -·-- 916. Yi'I King p. :2t;l. 91 1/ . Yi."t-k:1.1 p. :28.).
p. :n7. ---- 813. \\ 11 p. :24~, :!.JO.
7
814. \Yn 2 p. :2:37. -- 815. \Vu Ch'eng Chao p. :!'iO, :!B8. - 816. 918. Yi} Lm1g sh"( p. :?~l:_1, ~1:21. -- 919. YCt min p. 300. :io-t. --- 920. Yt'i-shan p. :24.), :240, 3U3. -·--
\\'n }[uni Rhl p. :220, 230. :234-. 817. \Vu Huei p. 2~7, 2~m. 24,J, 214. - 818. \Vu Knan p. 316. - 921. Yl.13 -shnn p. 30,J. - 922. Yi.'t ShT p. 280, 2~4. :~lK. 923. Yi"t H"i p. :?fHJ, 31:2. 924. YCt TC•
819. \Vu J{_nn,n:!. p. :-HO. 820. \Yu Ktwng p. :-rno, :340. -~ 821. \\~n lGlnn p. "277. -·- 822. '\Vu Lo p. 323. -· 925. Yi"t \Yang p. :278. ·-· 926. Yi"t Yi p. ;31.;1, - 92'7. YC1-;yi'it1n p. :2;i(l. 928. Yi"tt1n
-p. :111. 823. \.\'n-s1rnn p. :rn+. :1:Hl. -- 824. \Yn RhL~ng p. :2B:2. -- 826. \Vu Teng p. 301. - 827. p. 327. 333. --- 929. YLIE' p. :2:n. 30S. -~ 930. YCm p. :2:r1. 931. Yi"!n:! [1. ~:rn. 932. Yi'1n:J p. :24/.
Wu Wang: p. :!1+, :!]lj, :277, 317. -- 828. \l'u Yi 1'· :!liK. -- 829. \\'n Yi' p. 320. - 830. Ya, Yu p. -· 933. Yrm Ko p. :!~3.
"!.!HJ. - · 831. Ya.ng-cli.C'ng p. :-w1. :rnn. --··- 832. Yang-ku p. "!.ti~l, :mg, --- 833. Yang Po p. 201. -
834. Yang Yi p. :ns. 835. Ynng-yCt p. :{UK. 836 Ynng-yl't:! p. a:Y.l. ·-- 837. Yao p. :20li, 207,
:21,i. :nn, 2"!..) •.:rno, :2:H., 2 ..1_:7, :2.tn. 2~,1, ~;;s. :21n, :2ns 1 ::nu, :27'4-, 2-75, 2ss. :2KH. 838. Yao:! p. 2~m.
:JOO, :JOI. :J12. 839. Yao' p. :11:2. 840. Yno-' p. :Jla. -- 841. Y,10'' p. 3:20. - 842. Yao'-k'i't
p. :ml. 843. Yao-rnin p. :-101. 844. ·ytw-t'a.i p. i32'i. -- 845. Yen p. :27D. 846. Yen.2 p. 3:27,
:1:=rn. 847. Yen ,Jung· p. :2.-):·L 848. 'Yen l(ii p. :2:28, :245. -- 849. Yen Tip. 201, "21:2. 213, 219,
221, 2:22, 2:28. 2ao. 232, :2:rn. 24fi. :.urn, :277. :278. 280, :rnr;. --·- 850 . .,fi p. 250, :2;17. 20:2, 30.1, ao2, 30G. -
851. Ye' see Po Yi'. -- 852. YL'1 p. :21i7, :272, 2fl4, :Jll, 823, :l'!l-i. -·- 853 Yi·1 p. 20.3, :J:29. :J33. - 854.
Yi Ch'ang:-,iu p. 2iJJ. ·-· 855. Y, Cb'i p. :J28. -- 856. Yi ChY' p. :l:J5. -- 857. Yi Fen p. :3313. - 858.
Yi K'i Rh'i p. :2:W, 20,J. --- 859. Yi Kn p. :278, 28:3. 860. Yi J{.\iei p. :108. - 861. Yi Po p. 2131.
-· 862. Yi l'o' p. :rnn. -- 863. Yi l'o 3 p. :i:rn. - 864. Yi Ti p. 208. :l015. - 865. Yi-yang p. 2'18. -
866. Yi Yi3 p. :n2. :nn. 867. Yi Yin p. 274. :J:27, :J:28. :J:J:J, 384, HO. -- 868. Yin p. 320. -- 869.
Yin-fong p. 30tL --· 870. Yiu H.ie p. H:27. 871. Yin ,Jung p. 247, 24!). --- 872. Yin ICang sh:i p.
:.:21, :ml\ 2;34_ -·- 873. Yin .Kia p. 2G7, :H4. -·- 874. Yin Shoup. :292. 875. Ying p. :2;i9, 260, 332.
8/6. Yi.ng 2 p. 300. 877 Ying L1mg p. 284. 28fL -- 8?'8, Ying-shuei p. 29:2, :330. ~- 879. Yu
Ch'tt0 ;.:;hY p. 20G, :1:30, .:234. ·- 880. Yu-l'l10u Jl· :21H, 24,9. 881. Yn Ch'11ei 2 p. ::!fl7. --- 882. Yu-
fang p. 288. --- 883. Yu Hia p. 30:3. ·-- 884. YL1 Hiung p. :22ti. -- 885. Yu Hu3 p. 304, 308, 315. -
886. Yu .Teng shl p. 2.58, 312, ~~27. 88'7. Yu ,Tung p. :327. -· 888. Yn Kino sh'L p. 212, 277. - 889.
Yn 1('inng p. 2fi8. 311. 890. )_r\l .Ko Hli'i P· 312. -- 891. Yu Ki."i p. :~Wt,;. -- 892. Yu~ling P· 287. -
893. Yu Lop. 3:32. --- 894. ,·u ~'lino p. :2:;i. 2,,2, 3011. ·- 895. Y11 ~iin p. :J:27. -- 896. Yu Pip.

iif.(s Nx'K'f. :;i"~1,V,'.l;i]Jl.i:M1~;;]1f,tf1J1 ~ f\ ljJf'ki l;i,f,,9), i~1Ys:.l.t1~.1._f ,t1Yl:~, t't., 11s!t;S;t

m :£ +- 'ts10 £ 1'fl s-a;f:/1f,,:;;;~X"-1iil/ iutffi.taJ:f 8t£1fso1t'k,rar"°$'F,t.1/twi~K1:?.::',C~p s;1 :Z .£ s1.2 %

~ 1.. t!J.'?:-.J-N.$f l!s;JJ.f _q(g(; j.f,'ffJ.·J~f\..lf/1 ~ l'i/ /!!tc/;-1ti@_)Wi~.-~,,c;j?j;/t,W~,ff~J(_~ii2J!E.

:&:"]f.JZ.:/&.K8.i!fi\.:E. ns A L.?»1J.ir.J'., r.v0J0.ti'\J,J1fi'b'J11\?.1te%<;:mpib{BJJ1f,l\; ;iG m:~ft

1.lu:2,;,

sxl'f5f.-r tJ1J/t,,.w-4')~JtYk.t1o~,11.,kJr-<"AltJ,4ln;.t§i EZ, tlrr~ _tsp.r.,.r~~f,;J;i;tff;c~~ Sf't/U!; m ~

~ J'J'ZifeiSJ?'._;t ;JJ:Z}fJ>J{jJ3Y(j' f.__;-]f!i,rss'?J ~?s,21)"ycrs;1} £ 8J'5'1/' i 1\,03;'~ Wzvf~tJ/f5&ri!:, 8/S: 'fiJ ti s1dfJff. J'Jl-A"* f( 8'.9J'fl1fts.,,-J'lf~7,10. ~-=$'.t(.9N tJ~t\, .9,u 11 ,ifi 1,t :>&Jt8/, 'il'f ro{tfih .r..li1.,,
{{3 8c:t 1ffi.{{3 gr,J ),,{s S{i'lf>.!JX.J",.t~ fg;](', ~ sqfj J. sa:JRcitYF! ;/Jvo :j i&'b'iYMmfii::~ ix, 1-i !i.l i.% RAL lX,Jo!f8 ;>osM.1/\\!'?i'/ifre.l W ,% :w,4 ~1.d~ 5'/J ~i/4 /f,;,t ;11i~%1~,%1l i% !1 ~ v1
o7J}ft!L 'f m}' ~ ,ni&m:~,r11,~~g;w~4Jn:~ i\t.~tsa~.:l/ltt1~1f.txt~A s8J-1l°-W..&fe1% $, Z} i4'iiW~ltt!\, tP; }l i*, t2o!)J t.!.11.v0,;t; tl.i 9zt. rnii(im;;l.~.;i.t,,,:1f<f@'2i.9/'~\'i'Jvc f- t:; ,u;J~ _;fa\\ tzJ
il~tbT A}ttt(f]-{!H<.. S87fi Aa,f?'J ,k,%f\ 869. )i ~ W'tl ~1 f\, o'V J'iJl.5,r_z~jRt1J~~-(?-J?ll1)tf .3:)€, 929~ 7ctJJ:iJJ! i;, 93:z,k, ,'33.)C,Jf'&

3M 365