East Asian Pedagogies Education as

Formation and Transformation Across

Cultures and Borders David Lewin
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/east-asian-pedagogies-education-as-formation-and-tr
ansformation-across-cultures-and-borders-david-lewin/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

International Management Managing Across Borders and

Cultures Text and Cases Helen Deresky

https://textbookfull.com/product/international-management-
managing-across-borders-and-cultures-text-and-cases-helen-
deresky/

Colonial Transformation and Asian Religions in Modern

History David W Kim

https://textbookfull.com/product/colonial-transformation-and-
asian-religions-in-modern-history-david-w-kim/

Doing Business in ASEAN Markets: Leadership Challenges

and Governance Solutions across Asian Borders 1st
Edition Peter Verhezen

https://textbookfull.com/product/doing-business-in-asean-markets-
leadership-challenges-and-governance-solutions-across-asian-
borders-1st-edition-peter-verhezen/

Globalization and Education Integration and

Contestation across Cultures 2nd Edition Nelly P.
Stromquist

https://textbookfull.com/product/globalization-and-education-
integration-and-contestation-across-cultures-2nd-edition-nelly-p-
stromquist/
Applied Pedagogies for Higher Education: Real World
Learning and Innovation across the Curriculum Dawn A.
Morley

https://textbookfull.com/product/applied-pedagogies-for-higher-
education-real-world-learning-and-innovation-across-the-
curriculum-dawn-a-morley/

Education and State Formation Europe East Asia and the

USA 2nd Edition Andy Green (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/education-and-state-formation-
europe-east-asia-and-the-usa-2nd-edition-andy-green-auth/

Globalization, Transformation, and Cultures in Early

Childhood Education and Care: Reconceptualization and
Comparison Stefan Faas

https://textbookfull.com/product/globalization-transformation-
and-cultures-in-early-childhood-education-and-care-
reconceptualization-and-comparison-stefan-faas/

Diaspora as Cultures of Cooperation: Global and Local

Perspectives 1st Edition David Carment

https://textbookfull.com/product/diaspora-as-cultures-of-
cooperation-global-and-local-perspectives-1st-edition-david-
carment/

Equity in Excellence: Experiences of East Asian High-

Performing Education Systems Siao See Teng

https://textbookfull.com/product/equity-in-excellence-
experiences-of-east-asian-high-performing-education-systems-siao-
see-teng/
Contemporary Philosophies and Theories in Education 15

David Lewin
Karsten Kenklies Editors

East Asian
Pedagogies
Education as Formation and
Transformation Across Cultures and
Borders
Contemporary Philosophies and Theories
in Education

Volume 15

Series Editors
Jan Masschelein, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
Lynda Stone, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Editorial Board
Gert Biesta, Arts & Social Sci, Halsbury Bldg, Brunel University
London, Uxbridge, UK
David Hansen, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Jorge Larrosa, Barcelona University, Barcelona, Spain
Nel Noddings, Stanford University, Ocean Grove, NJ, USA
Roland Reichenbach, Erziehungswissenschaft, University of Zurich,
Zurich, Switzerland
Naoko Saito, Graduate School of Education, Kyoto University,
Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, Japan
Paul Smeyers, Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University and KU
Leuven, Ghent, Belgium
Paul Standish, UCL Institute of Education, London, UK
Sharon Todd, Professor of Education, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland
Scope of the Series
Contemporary Philosophies and Theories in Education signifies new directions and
possibilities out of a traditional field of philosophy and education. Around the globe,
exciting scholarship that breaks down and reformulates traditions in the humanities
and social sciences is being created in the field of education scholarship. This series
provides a venue for publication by education scholars whose work reflect the
dynamic and experimental qualities that characterize today’s academy.
The series associates philosophy and theory not exclusively with a cognitive
interest (to know, to define, to order) or an evaluative interest (to judge, to impose
criteria of validity) but also with an experimental and attentive attitude which is
characteristic for exercises in thought that try to find out how to move in the present
and how to deal with the actual spaces and times, the different languages and
practices of education and its transformations around the globe. It addresses the
need to draw on thought across all sorts of borders and counts amongst its elements
the following: the valuing of diverse processes of inquiry; an openness to various
forms of communication, knowledge, and understanding; a willingness to always
continue experimentation that incorporates debate and critique; and an application
of this spirit, as implied above, to the institutions and issues of education.
Authors for the series come not only from philosophy of education but also from
curriculum studies and critical theory, social sciences theory, and humanities theory
in education. The series incorporates volumes that are trans- and inner-disciplinary.
The audience for the series includes academics, professionals and students in the
fields of educational thought and theory, philosophy and social theory, and critical
scholarship.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8638

David Lewin • Karsten Kenklies
Editors

East Asian Pedagogies

Education as Formation and Transformation
Across Cultures and Borders
Editors
David Lewin Karsten Kenklies
University of Strathclyde University of Strathclyde
Glasgow, UK Glasgow, UK

ISSN 2214-9759     ISSN 2214-9767 (electronic)

Contemporary Philosophies and Theories in Education
ISBN 978-3-030-45672-6    ISBN 978-3-030-45673-3 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45673-3

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents

Part I Introduction
1 Introduction: Positioning, Encountering,
Translating, Reflecting����������������������������������������������������������������������������    3
Karsten Kenklies and David Lewin

Part II Positions
2 Filial Piety, Zhixing, and The Water Margin������������������������������������������   11
William Sin
3 Western Image of the Teacher and the Confucian Jūnzǐ����������������������   25
Qasir Shah
4 Being-in-the-World: to Love or to Tolerate.
Rethinking the Self-Other Relation in Light
of the Mahāyāna Buddhist Idea of Interbeing��������������������������������������   51
Chien-Ya Sun
5 Cultivation Through Asian Form-Based Martial Arts Pedagogy��������   63
George Jennings, Simon Dodd, and David Brown

Part III Encounters
6 Tu Weiming, Liberal Education, and the Dialogue
of the Humanities ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   81
Paul Standish
7 Quiet Minding and Investing in Loss: An Essay on Chu Hsi,
Kierkegaard, and Indirect Pedagogy in Chinese Martial Arts������������ 103
Viktor Johansson

v
vi Contents

8 Alienation and In-Habitation: The Educating Journey

in West and East�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 121
Karsten Kenklies
9 Western and Eastern Practices of Literacy Initiation:
Thinking About the Gesture of Writing
with and Beyond Flusser ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 135
Joris Vlieghe
10 Education in and Through Ikiru: From Mu to MacIntyre������������������ 149
James MacAllister
11 Freedom in Security or by Recognition?
Educational Considerations on Emotional
Dependence by Takeo Doi and Axel Honneth���������������������������������������� 163
Sandra Töpper

Part IV Translations
12 From Comparison to Translation: Mutual Learning
Between East and West���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 179
Naoko Saito
13 Sumie Kobayashi and Petersen’s Jena-­Plan:
A Typical Case of the Acceptance
of Western Pedagogy in Japan���������������������������������������������������������������� 191
Hiroyuki Sakuma

Part V Reflections
14 The Tradition of Invention: On Authenticity
in Traditional Asian Martial Arts ���������������������������������������������������������� 205
Paul Bowman
 Part I
Introduction
Chapter 1
Introduction: Positioning, Encountering,
Translating, Reflecting

Karsten Kenklies and David Lewin

Conceptions of culture are bound to conceptions of human being and human becom-
ing. Cultures endure through the processes of formation that they, consciously or
unconsciously, initiate. But the ideas that underpin educational formation are
diverse, complex, and often inexplicit. In general, a conception of human being is at
stake, i.e. an anthropology which includes ideas of what a good life or educated
person looks like. In particular, the relations between those educating, those under-
going education, and the subject matter of education, are thereby shaped by distinc-
tive normative considerations reflecting the diverse cultural circumstances of their
origin. This, of course, is also true for those who discuss educational concepts and
practices originating in contexts other than the author’s contexts: those presenta-
tions are usually done for formative, i.e. educational reasons, and those educational
aspirations also need to be reflected upon with regard to the normative anthropolo-
gies which underlie, enable and restrict the way those presentations are shaped. A
book such as this, which intends to raise questions of international and intercultural
comparative education must, therefore, reflect on the ways it attempts to achieve its
goal, which is to participate in the dialogue between different educational cultures,
or, more specifically: between our (i.e. the editors’) own cultures and those we
might in a preliminary (and maybe overly hasty) step call East-Asian cultures. This
collection of essays seeks to explore the Anglo-American traditions of educational
trans−/formation and Germanic constructions of Bildung, alongside East Asian tra-
ditions of trans−/formation and development. Whether such juxtapositions are
legitimate or worthwhile must itself be explored.
Juxtaposition, dialogue, comparison … how are we to begin? Immediately envi-
sioning certain difficulties with even beginning (language capacities or, more pre-
cisely, the lack thereof, and the lack of cultural insights that result from being

K. Kenklies · D. Lewin (*)

University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
e-mail: david.lewin@strath.ac.uk

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 3

D. Lewin, K. Kenklies (eds.), East Asian Pedagogies, Contemporary
Philosophies and Theories in Education 15,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45673-3_1
4 K. Kenklies and D. Lewin

immersed in a culture for a long time come to mind), the question arises why one
should embark on such a journey at all? Given the constructive exercise of writing
a text like this, we should ask about what our constructions are founded upon. Why
build an edifice on foundations that might not be fit for purpose or that are estab-
lished on prejudices, stereotypes, and banalities? Is it only the promise of entering
a quarry where we may discover a rich seam of new concepts to be explored freely
in developing theoretical and practical ideas, extracting them from their natural
environment to build our own houses, or cathedrals of education? Are we simply
looking for inspiration to expand the catalogue of our own educational theorems
and activities? Are we looking for material to be plundered or transplanted from
‘there’ to ‘here’ as so often seems to be the case with regard to the international
comparative studies (like PISA)? These studies are seemingly used as an answer to
the question: What can we do to become equally or more successful in subject XY
(of course, usually in complete oblivion of the different cultural contexts that not
only provide the conditions which make those concepts and practices possible in the
first place, but also offer the normative framework within which something like
‘success’ is defined in a very specific and not so easily translatable way)? It cannot
be denied that pragmatic thoughts like this are initially part of most decisions to
present and engage with concepts and practices that are not one’s own: one wants to
learn something new that might be enriching, maybe even useful for oneself.
However, whereas this might actually happen sometimes – within the boundaries
hinted at above – to see this as the main reason for subjecting oneself to the efforts
related to encountering the other might be misleading. It would, at least, be mislead-
ing to take it as the only reason for us here to be interested in East Asian pedagogy.
It might have been serendipity that brought both of us into contact with East Asian
culture in general, and East Asian pedagogy in particular, and yes, we did learn
something new, i.e. new ideas, new practices, new ways to see the world, but actu-
ally, more happened: we experienced what in continental traditions of educational
thinking is often called Bildung; through the encounter with the other, i.e. through a
crisis-inducing self-alienation that is inevitably part of this encounter, we became
(or so we believe) more ourselves in the sense that we became more aware of our-
selves. As Gadamer has described: it is in the encounter with the other that we
become more aware of our own prejudices, of our prejudgements, of our fundamen-
tal expectations and therefore of all that we think of as normal; and it is only through
this awareness that one becomes able to critically engage with those otherwise hid-
den foundations of thought and action. Indeed, it is this process of raising the aware-
ness of others, but equally of ourselves, which drives us to engage with a project like
the one in hand. Despite these difficulties, as editors we still affirm the basic idea
that it is only the encounter with something or someone very different which enables
us to understand both ourselves and others – as individuals and as cultures. But we
must continue to ask ourselves: how far do we really allow the genuine encounter
with difference?
Relatively little work in this area has been undertaken and many questions about
the commensurability of North American, European and East Asian pedagogy
remain. It is not obvious that educational formation as Bildung is generalizable at
1 Introduction: Positioning, Encountering, Translating, Reflecting 5

all. Nor is it obvious that the lifeworlds of these different traditions are mutually
illuminating or at all commensurable. What is striking, though, is the continued
interest in the varied ways of (self-)formation through various East Asian practices,
from varied martial arts to health and spiritual practices and religious paths (e.g.
Aikido, Tai Chi, Yoga, mindfulness, Buddhism, etc.), suggesting that ‘traditional
East-Asian’ practices, their underlying anthropologies, their ideas about pedagogi-
cal relationships, about teaching methods and curricula, have something important
to contribute to modern educational life despite the marginal place they seem to
occupy (for different reasons) within educational discourses.
Of course, dialogues as the one suggested pose certain difficulties, and an intro-
duction to such a book as presented here has to begin with qualifications and caveats
acknowledging these difficulties, in order to establish the proper scope and limits of
the project being undertaken. The key task of our introduction is just this: acknowl-
edging proper scope and limits. This entails: sketching borders in terms of what will
and will not be relevant, and why; acknowledging the dangers of a supposed univer-
salism from which the other can be imagined; in short: becoming self-aware. It will
therefore be a helpful first step to reflect on the structure of what is presented here.

1.1 Positions

The emergence of an inter-cultural dialogue might be characterised by different

aspects: firstly, positions need to be presented as stances in their own right; they
need to be allowed to speak for themselves without an immediate positioning in a
comparative framework – as if they would have significance only in relation to other
concepts. It is the individual chapters in the first part of the book which represent
such endeavours: here, authors introduce specifically East-Asian concepts of forma-
tion, of education and cultivation; here, different aspects of the East-Asian educa-
tional culture become visible. Readers are introduced to specific Confucian ways of
thinking education: with the chapters of Wai Lam William Sin and Qasir Shah, we
look into more traditional Confucian thinking; Chien-Ya Sun explores the rela-
tional anthropology of Mahāyāna Buddhism through the concept of ‘interbeing’;
and with the chapter of David Brown/Simon Dodd/ George Jennings, characteris-
tics of (especially East Asian) Martial Arts pedagogy are introduced.

1.2 Encounters

Paul Standish introduces the reader to one of the most eminent contemporary
Confucian scholars, Tu Weiming, and brings him in conversation with positions of
the classic Western tradition of Liberal Education. Thus, we move from presenting
concepts and practices to a second step: relating positions, and it is in the second
part of the book – Encounters – in which the individual chapters present the reader
6 K. Kenklies and D. Lewin

with comparisons, through discussions about educational concepts and practices

from both sides of the cultural divide. Viktor Johansson also addresses characteris-
tics of Martial Arts pedagogy though in relation to something rather different: the
pedagogical ideas of Søren Kierkegaard. Whereas Karsten Kenklies explores the
different theories and practices of educational journeys, the chapter of Joris Vlieghe
is dedicated to investigating the different practices with which people are initiated
in different literacies; with the chapter of James MacAllister, readers are confronted
with culturally different readings of an aesthetic experience through an interpreta-
tion of Kurosawa’s film Ikuru; Sandra Töpper presents us with different accounts
of what we can call the ‘pedagogical relationship’ with reference to Axel Honneth’s
concept of recognition and Takeo Doi’s notion of Amae.

1.3 Translations

The third part, then, goes one step further: in discussing attempts to translate peda-
gogies from one context into the other, the authors reflect on the specific opportuni-
ties, but also difficulties of such attempts. Acknowledging the paradoxical condition
of translating what is ‘untranslatable’, Naoko Saito debates the general approach
for translations from one culture into another, whereas Hiroyuki Sakuma discusses
a more concrete example of such a translation by showing what actually happens
when someone tries to transplant one concept into another culture.

1.4 Reflections

However, those different steps that hopefully lead us into a more general dialogue
about education, might lead to more complexity but they are not yet resulting in
self-awareness. To achieve this, the book must also reflect on itself, and it is the last
section, and the chapter of Paul Bowman, that aspires to put a question mark against
the very distinction that is at the foundation of the book – the distinction between
what we called our ‘own cultures’ and ‘East-Asian culture(s)’. What do we think we
are doing when we juxtapose, compare and put in dialogue? We cannot repeat all the
discussions around Orientalism and Reverse Orientalism, around Colonialism and
Post-Colonialism, about cultural essences, about trans- and inter-culturality.
However, in including this last chapter, we at least wanted to acknowledge the need
for such an awareness, and we would like to leave it to the reader to take the insights
of this last chapter and read again all the preceding chapters to see how they might
be affected, how they might change in the light of those kind of questions. The book
might end with that chapter – the reflections, however, do not.
So where do we stand with respect to the question of East Asian pedagogy? How
is it that the concerns raised in this book are concerns at all? In view of the possible
problems of Orientalism and Colonialism just mentioned, what in our circumstances
1 Introduction: Positioning, Encountering, Translating, Reflecting 7

leads us to imagine that an encounter with other cultures will help us to catch sight
of the self? Does this mean that the other culture serves only the project of self-­
understanding and self-formation? Are we restoring a universalist assumption of the
priority of the subject and its inalienable right to interpret the other for the self?
As editors we take the project of self-understanding and understanding the other
to be mutually related, even dialectical. The metaphorical educational journey, or
Bildungsreise of this book concerns the relations between knowing the other and
knowing the self. This capacity for mutual illumination between self and other pro-
vides justification for making the effort to learn about the other. Through alienation
from the familiar, the self may be understood. Paul Ricoeur has described this path
to self-understanding as involving a ‘long route’ by way of a mediated opening to
and interpretation of the other (Ricoeur 1992). Taking further this image of a long
detour, interpreted through the concepts of the ‘way’ from East-Asian thinking (e.g.
道; Chinese: dao, Japanese: dō) towards self-understanding and self-cultivation, the
path has often been understood as hard, rough, narrow, and often steep. There is an
admitted mutuality between understanding the self and the other, and we resist pri-
oritising the one over the other, despite the obvious risks of appropriating the other
into the self, which may, indeed, never actually entail leaving the self.
It would be remiss of us not to acknowledge some of the other conditions that
have made the pathway (the Bildungreise) and the product of this book possible. In
2012, Naoko Saito and Paul Standish published Education and the Kyoto School of
Philosophy: Pedagogy for Human Transformation (Springer), a text which set the
stage for intercultural encounter and dialogue. In November 2017 some of the
authors from this text were invited to a conference generously supported by the
Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain (PESGB) and the University of
Strathclyde in Glasgow at which some of the initial ideas for projects around inter-
national comparative education and intercultural dialogue were developed. Some of
those papers formed drafts for chapters for this book and we are grateful to partici-
pants for their enthusiasm for, and commitment to, this ongoing project. We are also
grateful to Jan Masschelein and Lynda Stone, editors of the ‘Contemporary
Philosophies and Theories in Education’ series of which this book is a part, and the
editorial team at Springer for their support.

Reference

Ricoeur, P. (1992) Oneself as another (K. Blamey trans) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 Part II
Positions
Chapter 2
Filial Piety, Zhixing, and The Water Margin

William Sin

What are the demands of Confucian filial piety (or xiao 孝)? How stringent are they
in comparison to the demands of impersonal morality1? Between the demands of
filial piety and those of impartial justice (which is a prominent instance of imper-
sonal morality), how should individuals find a place for their personal interests
within the confines of Confucian doctrines? In this paper, I attempt to answer these
questions with reference to the virtue of zhi直 or zhixing 直性. Zhixing refers to an
agent’s ability to act ‘straightly’ in accordance with his beliefs.2 An agent with such
a character will be inclined to act from self-honesty, courage, and determination in
situations where moral dilemmas arise.

1
‘Impersonal morality’ here refers to the demands of morality from a neutral perspective; that is, a
morality that gives everybody reason to obey it. Standard cases of impersonal morality involve the
demands of justice, the impartial operation of legal rules, as well as humanistic concerns to
improve the lives of those affected by extreme poverty, disease, or starvation in the world. Both
Kantian ethics and Utilitarianism tend to generate impersonal moral demands – such demands are
also called the demands of impartiality. The nature of such demands differs from those which stem
from special relations between people. For instance, the reasons that we must care about our par-
ents’ or friends’ interests are uniquely applicable to us, but not to anyone else (see Scheffler 1982,
p. 123; Sen 1983; Nagel 1986, pp. 152–3, 171–175; Parfit 1984, p. 104).
2
Strictly speaking, zhixing is not a concept found before the Han period, whereas the concept of
zhi is prevalent in the Analects. However, as the literal meaning of zhixing is ‘the nature of zhi,’ in
the context of this paper I will regard them as two expressions of the same kind. In the rest of this
paper, I will express zhi as a character trait and zhixing a virtue. Here, the concept of zhixing is
taken to be a thematic extension of zhi, as we see that in The Water Margin, the major heroes are
often described to have the virtue of zhixing, and their characteristic traits demonstrate to a large
extent Confucius’s idea of zhi (on the Confucian idea of zhi, see Feng (2001, pp. 311–319); on an
elaboration of zhixing as a moral virtue, see Sin (2018, pp. 238–241).

W. Sin (*)
Education University of Hong Kong, Tai Po, Hong Kong
e-mail: wwlsin@eduhk.hk

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 11

D. Lewin, K. Kenklies (eds.), East Asian Pedagogies, Contemporary
Philosophies and Theories in Education 15,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45673-3_2
12 W. Sin

The virtue of zhixing is worthy of our attention because when an ordinary person
is faced with a moral dilemma and cannot fulfill both the demands of filial piety and
those of impersonal morality, he may be confused and overwhelmed by emotion.
Even if this person eventually complies with the demands of impersonal morality,
he might only do this because it is viewed as acceptable in the public eye. In con-
trast, the person with zhixing has a different motivational source. For him, it is more
important to be committed to his principle than to live safely, or to live free from
reprimand or the moral disapproval of others.
In the early part of this paper, I will engage with the debates between Liu
Qingping and his critics on the priority of filial piety against the values of other
virtues and those of impersonal morality (Liu 2003, pp. 234–250, 2007, pp. 1–19,
2009, pp. 173–188). Liu argues that Confucianism attaches overriding importance
to the spirit of “consanguineous affection”, and that as such Confucianism has con-
tributed to the spread of corruption in Chinese society. Liu’s arguments germinate
in his discussion of the cases in Analects 論語13.18 and Mencius 孟子7A35, which
will be introduced in section one.3 In sections two and three, I offer an alternative
reading of the demands of filial piety with reference to the two cases in Analects
13.18 and Mencius 7A35. I argue that in these cases, Confucian teachers have delib-
erately created moral dilemmas to train their students’ reactions. I believe that the
criteria of an appropriate response to the dilemmas is not necessarily determined by
the position the agent takes, but by the way he handles the normative concerns in the
scenario. The character trait of zhi is pertinent here as it enables the agent to perform
well in difficult situations. I will explain this point by analyzing the case with
regards to Analects 13.18. Finally, in section four, I will use the narratives of The
Water Margin 水滸傳 to demonstrate the myriad ways filial piety can be expressed.4
I will focus on the case of Zhu Tong 朱仝and that of Song Jiang 宋江. Zhu is a
person with zhixing, who can respond to moral dilemmas with authenticity, even
though he protects his friend’s interests over the demands of impartial justice. In
contrast, in Song’s case, because of his lack of sincerity, he seldom performs well in
moral dilemmas, despite how often he proclaims the importance of the demands of
impartial justice or that of filial piety to him.

3
Liu also discusses the case in Mencius 5A3, which is about an agent’s obligation towards his elder
brother. I will put it aside, as my primary focus here is on the conflict between the demands of filial
obligation (or filial piety) and of justice.
4
In regard to the classical novel The Water Margin, there are various translations. Even the title of
the novel in the different translations are not the same. For example, Shapiro uses ‘Outlaw of the
Marsh’ whereas John and Alex Dent Young use ‘The Marshes of Mount Liang’ and a different
subtitle for different volumes. For the sake of consistency, I use The Water Margin as a reference
for the novel in this paper, regardless of its various editions.
2 Filial Piety, Zhixing, and The Water Margin 13

2.1 Xiao: The Supreme Principle?

In Analects 13.18, Confucius 孔子makes a brief reply to the Duke of She regarding
his opinion on the idea of uprightness. Confucius states that an ‘upright’ son should
not report his father’s theft (of a sheep) to the authorities; he should conceal his
father’s wrongdoing and an upright father would do likewise to conceal his son’s act
of theft too.
The Case of Concealment: The Duke of She said to Confucius, “In our village we have one
Straight Body [Zhigong直躬]. If a father steals a sheep, his son will give evidence
against him.”
Confucius answered, “In our village those who are straight are quite different. Fathers
cover-up for their sons, and sons cover-up for their fathers. In such behavior is straightness
to be found as a matter of course” (Analects 13.18, in Lau 1979, with my modification).

The second case is from Mencius 7A35. Mencius 孟子’s disciple Tao Ying桃應
asks him a hypothetical question. If Shun舜’s father (Gu Sou瞽瞍, who is a blind
man) commits a murder, should Shun, being the emperor, excuse him for the crime
or allow the authorities to apprehend him? After an initial exchange, Tao Ying
presses Mencius for a more precise response. Mencius affirms that Shun would
abdicate the throne and carry his father away, living outside the bounds of civil
society.
The Case of Evasion: Tao Ying asked: “If Shun was Emperor and Gao Yao 臯陶 the judge,
what should have been done if the Blind Man killed a man?”
“The only thing to do is to apprehend him.”
“In that case, would Shun not try to stop it?”
“How could Shun stop it? Gao Yao had authority for what he did.”
“Then what would Shun have done?”
“Shun thought of casting aside the Empire as no more than discarding a worn shoe. He
would have secretly carried the old man on his back and fled to the edge of the Sea and lived
there happily, never giving a thought to the Empire” (Mencius 7A35, in Lau 1970, with my
modification).

Liu Qingping believes that the above two cases support the view that Confucianism
places filial piety above the value of the principle of justice, and even the Confucian
ideal of humane government (Liu 2004, p. 859, 2007, pp. 4–5). Liu calls it the spirit
of “consanguineous affection,” representing an integral feature of the Confucian
theory. There are general statements in both the Analects and Mencius attributing a
prime position to the value of filial piety or xiao: You Zi 有子, a disciple of
Confucius, states that being filial and having brotherly respect is the root of a per-
son’s character (Analects 1.2). Mencius also says that the substance of benevolence
is serving one’s parents and that the substance of righteousness is obedience to one’s
elder brothers (Mencius 4A27). And the greatest achievement a filial son can make
is to serve his parents and honor them (Mencius 4A19; 5A4).
Critics of Liu have provided useful reminders on how we should understand the
circumstances of the Cases of Concealment and Evasion. They point out that even
if a value is outweighed by another in a circumstance, it does not follow that this
value is unimportant or will lose its normative force in other circumstances. In fact,
Chapter 3
Western Image of the Teacher
and the Confucian Jūnzǐ

Qasir Shah

3.1 Introduction

The jūnzǐ (君子), the moral exemplar presented by Confucius, is the ideal individual
human to be aspired to via self-cultivation through her own moral effort. She is a
person of irreproachable character embodying the Confucian Wǔ cháng (五常): The
Five Constant Virtues of Humanity. These are: rén 仁 (humanity); lǐ 禮 (propriety or
rites); yì 義 (appropriateness); zhì 智 (wisdom); and xìn 信 (faithfulness). The five
virtues have at their heart the propagation of humanity rather than individuality;
these virtues find their application in the jūnzǐ.1 However, of particular significance
in terms of the character of a jūnzǐ, is the overarching virtue rén, which can be stated
as: “Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.” (Lau 12:2)2, and is
embodied in the Confucian saying “The man of rén, wishing to establish his own
character, also seeks to establish the character of others. Wishing to succeed, he also
seeks to help others succeed” (Legge 6:30). What though does this have to do with
teaching and the teacher? Teaching is a profession unlike any other; it involves the
education of the young and those seeking to further their knowledge and skill in
particular fields. Teachers are in a privileged position of authority, and can influence
the views, beliefs, and behaviour of their students. For me the aforementioned vir-
tues ought to form an important element of a teacher’s character. As Carr noted

1
These virtues shall be described in more detail later in this chapter.
2
The principal translations of Confucius’ Analects used in this chapter are those by D.C. Lau
(1979) and James Legge (2005). When cited, the numbering refers to the book number within the
Analects, followed by the chapter.

Q. Shah (*)
University College London, London, UK
e-mail: qasir.shah.14@ucl.ac.uk

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 25

D. Lewin, K. Kenklies (eds.), East Asian Pedagogies, Contemporary
Philosophies and Theories in Education 15,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45673-3_3
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
saved. If, as we have a right to suppose, Aetius had no direct part in
this achievement, both he and Marcian were probably indirectly
responsible for it and in fact had far more to do with it than Leo.
Were the Roman armies nothing, then, or the Byzantine threat
against Attila’s communications only a dream?
Not so. Attila retreated because like another Barbarian he “could
do no other,” and even so he dared not retrace his way over the
Julian Alps, for Marcian was already in Moesia, and ready and
anxious to meet and to punish him. He retreated instead upon that
Verona which he had ruined, crossed the Alps there, and after
pillaging Augsburg, was lost, as it proved for ever, in the storm of the
north and the darkness of his Barbary.

FOOTNOTES:
[13] See my “Ravenna; a Study” (Dent), 1912.
[14] So Jornandes who asserts that Aquileia was so utterly
destroyed “ita ut vix ejus vestigia ut appareant reliquerint.”
 IX
ATTILA’S HOME-COMING

Such was the return, such was the failure of Attila. He had looked
to hold the world in fee; he returned for the last time across the
Danube his desire unaccomplished, his hopes dead. He had struck
first the East and perhaps ruined it, but he had failed to take
Constantinople. He had struck Gaul and left its cities shambles, but
he had not destroyed the armies of Aetius. He had desired Rome for
his plunder and his pride, but Leo had turned him back before he
crossed the Po. Every attack had ended in a long retreat; if he
brought ruin to a hundred Imperial cities, at last he but achieved his
own. He returned to his wooden stockade in the heart of Hungary
with all his hopes unfulfilled, all his achievements undone, a ruined
man.
That he did not realise his failure is but to emphasise the fact that
he was a Barbarian. To him, doubtless, destruction and booty, ruin
and loot seemed the end of war, he had not even in this his last hour
begun to understand what the Empire was. And so if we ask
ourselves what in reality the enormous energy of the Hunnish
onslaught achieved in the first half of the fifth century, we are
compelled to answer, nothing; nothing, that is, consciously and
directly. Unconsciously and indirectly, however, the restless brutality
of Roua and of Attila brought to pass these two great and even
fundamental things; it was the cause of the passing of Britain into
England, and it founded the republics of the lagoons which were to
produce Venice the Queen of the Adriatic.
Of all this, of his failure as of those strange achievements, Attila
was wholly unaware. He came home like a conqueror to his wooden
palace in the midst of a great feast prepared for him, to be greeted
as Priscus describes he had been greeted before, on his return from
the ruin of the East and his failure to reach Constantinople. He had
made the West his tributary; he was laden with the gold and the spoil
of northern Italy. It was enough for him, and so he made ready with
joy to marry yet another wife, to add yet one more to his concubines;
not that Honoria who would have been the sign of his victory, but one
rather a prey than a prize, pitiful in her youth and helpless beauty,
Ildico, or as the German legends call her Hildegrude, perhaps a
Frankish or a Burgundian princess.
It is said, we know not with how much truth, that upon that long
and last retreat as he crossed the river Lech by Augsburg an old
woman with streaming hair, a witch or a sorceress, cried out to him
thrice as he passed, “Retro Attila!” It is part of the legend which
makes so much of his history.
Upon the night of his last orgy or wedding he had feasted and
drunk beyond his wont and he was full of wine and of sleep when he
sought the bed of the beautiful and reluctant Ildico, the last of his
sacrifices and his loot. What passed in that brutal nuptial chamber
we shall never know. In the morning there was only silence, and
when his attendants at last broke into the room they found Attila
dead in a sea of blood, whether murdered by his victim or struck
down by apoplexy cannot be known. It is said that Ildico had much to
avenge—the murder of her parents and her brothers as well as her
own honour.
From that dreadful, characteristic chamber the Huns bore the body
of their King, singing their doleful uncouth songs, to bury him in a
secret place prepared by slaves who were duly murdered when their
work was accomplished. Jornandes has preserved or invented for us
the great funeral dirge which accompanied the last Barbarian rite. It
celebrated Attila’s triumphs over Scythia and Germany which bore
his yoke so meekly, and over the two Emperors who paid him tribute.
He left no memorial but his terror written in the fire and smoke of
burning cities, and that tradition of “frightfulness” to which Kaiser
Wilhelm II first appealed to his troops on their departure for China,
and which he is practising upon the body of Europe to-day. For upon
his death Attila’s vast and barbaric hegemony fell to pieces.
Enormous revolts broke it in sunder, and e’er many years had
passed the very memory of it was forgotten.

“Kingless was the army left:

Of its head the race bereft.
Every fury of the pit
Tortured and dismembered it.
Lo, upon a silent hour,
When the pitch of frost subsides,
Danube with a shout of power
Loosens his imprisoned tides:
Wide around the frighted plains
Shake to hear his riven chains,
Dreadfuller than heaven in wrath,
As he makes himself a path:
High leap the ice-cracks, towering pile
Floes to bergs, and giant peers
Wrestle on a drifted isle;
Island on ice-island rears;
Dissolution battles fast:
Big the senseless Titans loom,
Through a mist of common doom
Striving which shall die the last:
Till a gentle-breathing morn
Fires the stream from bank to bank,
So the Empire built of scorn
Agonized, dissolved and sank.”
 SOURCES

I
AMMIANI MARCELLINI RERUM GESTARUM LIBER XXXI

II. 1. Totius autem sementem exitii et cladum originem diversarum,

quas Martius furor incendio solito miscendo cuncta concivit, hanc
comperimus causam. Hunnorum gens, monumentis veteribus leviter
nota, ultra paludes Maeoticas glacialem oceanum accolens, omnem
modum feritatis excedit. 2. Ubi quoniam ab ipsis nascendi primitiis
infantum ferro sulcantur altius genae, ut pilorum vigor tempestivus
emergens corrugatis cicatricibus hebetetur senescunt imberbes
absque ulla venustate, spadonibus similes: compactis omnes
firmisque membris, et opimis cervicibus: prodigiosae formae et
pandi, ut bipedes existimes bestias, vel quales in commarginandis
pontibus effigiati stipites dolantur incompte. 3. In hominum autem
figura licet insuavi ita visi sunt asperi, ut neque igni, neque saporatis
indigeant cibis, sed radicibus herbarum agrestium et semicruda
cuiusvis pecoris carne vescantur, quam inter femora sua et equorum
terga subsertam, fotu calefaciunt brevi. 4. Aedificiis nullis umquam
tecti: sed haec velut ab usu communi discreta sepulchra declinant.
Nec enim apud eos vel arundine fastigatum reperiri tugurium potest.
Sed vagi montes peragrantes et silvas, pruinas, famem, sitimque
perferre ab incunabulis adsuescunt. Peregre tecta nisi adigente
maxima necessitate non subeunt; nec enim apud eos securos
existimant esse sub tectis. 5. Indumentis operiuntur linteis, vel ex
pellibus silvestrium murium consarcinatis: nec alia illis domestica
vestis est, alia forensis. Sed semel obsoleti coloris tunica collo
inserta non ante deponitur aut mutatur, quam diuturna carie in
pannulos defluxerit defrustata. 6. Galeris incurvis capita tegunt:
hirsuta crura coriis munientes haedinis: eorumque calcei formulis
nullis aptati, vetant incedere gressibus liberis. Qua causa ad
pedestres parum accommodati sunt pugnas: verum equis prope
adfixi, duris quidem, sed deformibus, et muliebriter iisdem
nonnumquam insidentes, funguntur muneribus consuetis. Ex ipsis
quivis in hac natione pernox et perdius emit et vendit, cibumque
sumit et potum, et inclinatus cervici angustae iumenti, in altum
soporem adusque varietatem effunditur somniorum. 7. Et
deliberatione super rebus proposita seriis, hoc habitu omnes in
commune consultant. Aguntur autem nulla severitate regali, sed
tumultuario optimatum ductu contenti, perrumpunt, quidquid inciderit.
8. Et pugnant nonnumquam lacessiti, sed ineuntes proelia cuneatim
variis vocibus sonantibus torvum. Utque ad pernicitatem sunt leves
et repentini; ita subito de industria dispersi vigescunt, et incomposita
acie cum caede vasta discurrunt: nec invadentes vallum, nec castra
inimica pilantes prae nimia rapiditate cernuntur. 9. Eoque omnium
acerrimos facile dixeris bellatores, quod procul missilibus telis, acutis
ossibus pro spiculorum acumine arte mira coagmentatis, sed
distinctis: cominus ferro sine sui respectu confligunt, hostesque, dum
mucronum noxias observant, contortis laciniis illigant, ut laqueatis
resistentium membris equitandi vel gradiendi adimant facultatem. 10.
Nemo apud eos arat, nec stivam aliquando contingit. Omnes enim
sine sedibus fixis, abseque lare vel lege, aut ritu stabili dispalantur,
semper fugientium similes: cum carpentis, in quibus habitant: ubi
coniuges taetra illis vestimenta contexunt, et coërunt cum maritis, et
pariunt, eo adusque pubertatem nutriunt pueros. Nullusque apud eos
interrogatus, respondere, unde oritur, potest, alibi conceptus,
natusque procul, et longius educatus. 11. Per indutias infidi,
inconstantes, ad omnem auram incidentis spei novae perquam
mobiles, totum furori incitatissimo tribuentes. Inconsultorum
animalium ritu, quid honestum inhonestumve sit, penitus ignorantes:
flexiloqui et obscuri, nullus religionis vel superstitionis reverentia
aliquando districti: auri cupidine immensa flagrantes: adeo
permutabiles, et irasci faciles, ut eodem aliquoties die a sociis nullo
irritante saepe desciscant, itidemque propitientur nemine leniente.
12. Hoc expeditum indomitumque hominum genus, externa
praedandi aviditate flagrans immani, per rapinas finitimorum
grassatum et caedes, adusque Alanos pervenit, veteres
Massagetas: qui unde sint, vel quas incolant terras (quoniam huc res
prolapsa est) consentaneum est demonstrare, geographica
perplexitate monstrata, quae diu multa luda..., et varia, tandem
reperit veritatis interna ...* ...* ad.... 13. Hister advenarum
magnitudine fluenti Sauromatas praetermeat adusque amnem
Tanaim pertinentes, qui Asiam terminat ab Europa. Hoc transito, in
immensum extentas Scythiae solitudines Alani inhabitant, ex
montium adpellatione cognominati, paullatimque nationes
conterminas crebritate victoriarum attritas ad gentilitatem sui
vocabuli traxerunt ut Persae. 14. Inter hos Neuri mediterranea
incolunt loca, vicini verticibus celsis, quos praeruptos geluque
torpentes aquilones adstringunt. Post quos Budini sunt, et Geloni
perquam feri, qui detractis peremptorum hostium cutibus indumenta
sibi, equisque termina conficiunt, bellatrix gens. Gelonis Agathyrsi
collimitant, interstincti colore caeruleo corpora simul et crines: et
humiles quidem minutis atque raris, nobiles vero latis, fucatis et
densioribus notis. 15. Post hos Melanchlaenas et Anthropophagos
palari accepimus per diversa, humanis corporibus victitantes: quibus
ob haec alimenta nefanda desertis, finitimi omnes longa petiere
terrarum. Ideoque plaga omnis Orienti aestivo obiecta, usque dum
venitur ad Seras, inhabitabilis mansit. 16. Parte alia prope
Amazonum sedes Alani sunt Orienti acclines, diffusi per populosas
gentes et amplas, Asiaticos vergentes in tractus, quas dilatari
adusque Gangen accepi fluvium, intersecantem terras Indorum,
mareque inundantem australe.
17. Ibi partiti per utramque mundi plagam Alani (quorum gentes
varias nunc recensere non refert) licet dirempti spatiis longis, per
pagos, ut Nomades, vagantur immensos: aevi tamen progressu ad
unum concessere vocabulum, et summatim omnes Alani
cognominantur mores et media et efferatam vivendi, sed iam
immaturam. 18. Nec enim ulla sunt illisce tuguria, aut versandi
vomeris cura, sed carne et copia victitant lactis, plaustris
supersidentes, quae operimentis curvatis corticum per solitudines
conferunt sine fine distentas. Cumque ad graminea venerint, in
orbiculatam figuram locatis sarracis ferino ritu vescuntur:
absumptisque pabulis, velut carpentis civitates impositas vehunt,
maresque supra cum feminis coëunt, et nascuntur in his et
educantur infantes: et habitacula sunt haec illis perpetua; et
quocumque ierint, illic genuinum existimant larem. 19. Armenta prae
se agentes cum gregibus pascunt: maximeque equini pecoris est eis
sollicitior cura. Ibi campi semper herbescunt, intersitis pomiferis
locis: atque ideo transeuntes quolibet, nec alimentis nec pabulis
indigent: quod efficit humectum solum et crebri fluminum
praetermeantium cursus. 20. Omnis igitur aetas et sexus imbellis
circa vehicula ipsa versatur, muniisque distringitur mollibus: iuventus
vero equitandi usu a prima pueritia coalescens, incedere pedibus
existimat vile: et omnes multiplici disciplina prudentes sunt
bellatores. Unde etiam Persae, qui sunt originitus Scythae, pugnandi
sunt peritissimi.
21. Proceri autem Alani paene sunt omnes et pulchri, crinibus
mediocriter flavis, oculorum temperata torvitate terribiles, et armorum
levitate veloces, Hunnisque per omnia suppares, verum victu
mitiores et cultu: latrocinando et venando adusque Maeotica stagna
et Cimmerium Bosporon, itidemque Armenios discurrentes et
Mediam. 22. Utque hominibus quietis et placidis otium est
voluptabile; ita illos pericula iuvant et bella. Iudicatur ibi beatus, qui in
proelio profuderit animam: senescentes enim et fortuitis mortibus
mundo digressos, ut degeneres et ignavos conviciis atrocibus
insectantur: nec quidquam est, quod elatius iactent, quam homine
quolibet occiso; proque exuviis gloriosis, interfectorum avulsis
capitibus detractas pelles pro phaleris iumentis accommodant
bellatoriis. 23. Nec templum apud eos visitur, aut delubrum, ne
tugurium quidem culmo tectum cerni usquam potest: sed gladius
barbarico ritu humi figitur nudus, eumque ut Martem, regionum, quas
circumcircant, praesulem verecundius colunt. 24. Futura miro
praesagiunt modo: nam rectiores virgas vimineas colligentes,
easque cum incantamentis quibusdam secretis praestituto tempore
discernentes, aperte, quid protendatur, norunt. 25. Servitus quid sic
ignorabant, omnes generoso semine procreati: iudicesque etiam
nunc eligunt, diuturno bellandi usu spectatos. Sed ad reliqua textus
propositi revertamur.
 II
EX HISTORIA BYZANTINA PRISCI RHETORIS ET SOPHISTAE

Excerpta de Legationibus Gentium ad Romanos.

(Niebuhr. Bonn. 1829.)
1. Scythae, quo tempore mercatus Scytharum et Romanorum
frequenti multitudine celebrabatur, Romanos cum exercitu sunt
adorti, et multos occiderunt. Romani ad Scythas miserunt, qui de
praesidii expugnatione et foederum contemptu cum eis
expostularent. Hi vero se non ultro bellum inferentes, sed factas
iniurias ulciscentes, haec fecisse responderunt. Margi enim
episcopum in suos fines transgressum, fiscum regium et reconditos
thesauros indagatum expilasse. Hunc nisi dederent una cum
transfugis, ut foederibus convenerit, (esse enim apud eos plures,)
bellum illaturos. Quae cum Romani vera esse negarent, barbari vero
in eorum, quae dicebant, fide perstarent, iudicium quidem de his,
quae in contentione posita erant, subire minime voluerunt, sed ad
bellum conversi sunt. Itaque transmisso Istro, oppidis et castellis ad
ripam sitis plurima damna intulerunt, et inter cetera Viminacium,
quae Moesorum urbs est in Illyrico, ceperunt. His gestis, cum multi in
sermonibus dictitarent, episcopum dedi oportere, ne unius hominis
causa universa Romanorum respublica belli periculum sustineret: ille
se deditum iri suspicatus, clam omnibus civitatem incolentibus ad
hostes effugit, et urbem traditurum, si sibi Scytharum reges
liberalitate sua consulerent, pollicitus est. Ad ea cum beneficium
omni ratione se repensuros promitterent, si rem ad exitum
perduceret, datis dextris et dictis iureiurando utrinque praestito
firmatis, ille cum magna barbarorum multitudine in fines Romanorum
est reversus. Eam multitudinem cum ex adverso ripae in insidiis
collocasset, nocte dato signo exsiliit, et urbem in manus hostium
traduxit. Et ab eo tempore barbarorum res in diem auctiores
melioresque fuerunt.
2. Sub Theodosio Iuniore Imperatore Attilas Hunnorum rex
delectum ex suis habuit, et litteras ad Imperatorem scripsit de
transfugis et de tributis, ut, quaecumque occasione huius belli
reddita non essent, quam citissime ad se mitterentur, de tributis
autem in posterum pendendis legati secum acturi ad se venirent:
nam si cunctarentur aut bellum pararent, ne se ipsum quidem
Scytharum multitudinem diutius contenturum. His litteris lectis,
Imperator nequaquam Scythas, qui ad se confugissent, traditurum
dixit, sed una cum illis in animo sibi esse, belli eventum exspectare.
Ceterum se legatos missurum qui controversias dirimerent. Ea sicuti
Romani decreverant, ubi Attilas rescivit, ira commotus Romanorum
fines vastavit, et castellis quibusdam dirutis, in Ratiariam urbem
magnam et populi multitudine abundantem irruptionem fecit.
3. Post pugnam in Chersoneso commissam Romani cum Hunnis
pacem per Anatolium legatum fecerunt, et in has conditiones
convenerunt: profugos Hunnis reddi, sex millia auri librarum pro
praeteritis stipendiis solvi; duo millia et centum in posterum singulis
annis tributi nomine pendi. Pro unoquoque captivo Romano, qui in
Romanorum fines, non soluto redemptionis pretio, evasisset,
duodecim aureorum mulctam inferri. Quae si non solveretur, qui
captivum recepisset, restituere teneri. Romanos neminem ex
barbaris ad se confugientem admittere. In has quidem foederum
leges Romani sponte consensisse videri volebant: sed necessitate
coacti, superante metu, qui Romanorum ducum mentes
occupaverat, quantumvis duras et iniquas conditiones sibi impositas
summo pacis consequendae studio ducti lubentibus animis
susceperunt, et gravissimum tributum pendere non recusabant,
quamquam opes imperii et regii thesauri non ad necessarios usus,
sed in absurda spectacula, in vanos honorum ambitus, in immodicas
voluptates et largitiones consumptae fuerant, quales nemo sanae
mentis vel in maxime affluentibus divitiarum copiis sustineret, nedum
Romani isti, qui rei militaris studium adeo neglexerant, ut non solum
Scythis, sed et reliquis barbaris, qui proximas imperii Romani
regiones incolebant, vectigales facti essent. Itaque tributa et
pecunias, quas ad Hunnos deferri oportebat, Imperator omnes
conferre coegit: nulla etiam eorum immunitatis habita ratione, qui
terrae onere, tanquam nimis gravi ad tempus, sive Imperatorum
benignitate, seu iudicum sententia, levati erant. Conferebant etiam
aurum indictum qui in Senatum ascripti erant, ultra quam facultates
ferre poterant, et multis splendida et illustris fortuna vitae
commutationem attulit. Conficiebantur enim pecunias, quae
unicuique imperatae erant, cum acerbitate et contumelia ab iis,
quibus huius rei cura ab Imperatore erat demandata. Ex quo, qui a
maioribus acceptas divitias possidebant, ornamenta uxorum et
pretiosam suam supellectilem in foro venum exponebant. Ab hoc
bello tam atrox et acerba calamitas Romanos excepit, ut multi aut
abstinentia cibi, aut aptato collo laqueo vitam finierint. Tunc igitur,
parvo temporis momento exhaustis thesauris, aurum et exules (nam
Scotta, qui susciperet, advenerat,) ad Scythas missi sunt. Romani
vero multos ex profugis, qui dedi reluctabantur, trucidarunt, inter
quos aliqui fuerunt e regiis Scythis, qui militare sub Attila renuerant
et Romanis se adiunxerant. Praeter has pacis conditiones Attilas
Asimuntiis quoque imperavit, ut captivos, quos penes se habebant,
sive Romanos, sive barbaros, redderent. Est autem Asimus oppidum
validum, non multum ab Illyrico distans, quod parti Thraciae adiacet,
cuius incolae gravibus damnis hostes affecerunt. Non illi quidem se
murorum ambitu tuebantur, sed extra propugnacula certamina
sustinebant contra infinitam Scytharum multitudinem et duces magni
apud eos nominis et existimationis. Itaque Hunni omissa spe ab
oppugnando oppido destiterunt. Illi autem vagantes et a suis longius
aberrantes, si quando hostes exisse et praedas ex Romanis egisse,
exploratores denuntiabant, inopinantes aggressi parta ab eis spolia
sibi vindicabant, numero quidem inferiores adversariis, sed robore et
virtute praestantes. Itaque Asimuntii plurimos ex Scythis in hoc bello
necaverunt, et multos Romanorum in libertatem asseruerunt, et
hostium transfugas receperunt. Quamobrem Attilas, se exercitum
non ante moturum, aut foederis conditiones ratas habiturum
professus est, quam Romani, qui ad Asimuntios pervenissent,
redderentur, aut pro his mulcta conventa solveretur, et liberarentur
abducti in servitutem barbari. Quum, quae contra ea dissereret, non
haberet Anatolius legatus, neque Theodulus, praesidiariorum
Thraciae militum dux, (nihil enim rationibus suis barbarum movebant,
qui recenti victoria elatus, promte ad arma ferebatur, ipsi contra
propter recens acceptam cladem animis ceciderant,) Asimuntiis per
litteras significarunt, ut Romanos captivos, qui ad se perfugissent,
restituerent, aut pro unoquoque captivo duodecim aureos penderent,
et Hunnos captivos liberarent. Quibus litteris lectis, Romanos, qui ad
se confugissent, liberos se abire sivisse, Scythas vero, quotquot in
suas manus venissent, trucidasse responderunt. Duos autem
captivos retinere, propterea quod hostes, obsidione omissa, in
insidiis collocati, nonnullos pueros, qui ante munitiones greges
pascebant, rapuissent, quos nisi reciperent, captivos iure belli sibi
acquisitos, minime restituros. Haec renuntiarunt qui ad Asimuntios
missi fuerant. Quibus auditis, Scytharum regi et Romanis principibus
placuit exquiri pueros, quos Asimuntii raptos esse querebantur. Sed
nemine reperto, barbari ab Asimuntiis capti sunt dimissi, prius tamen
fide a Scythis accepta, non esse apud ipsos pueros. Iuraverunt
etiam Asimuntii, se Romanos, qui ad se effugissent, libertate
donasse, quamvis adhuc multos in sua potestate haberent. Nec
enim sibi perierasse videbantur, modo suos a barbarorum servitute
salvos et incolumes praestarent.
4. Pace facta, Attilas rursus legatos ad Romanos Orientales mittit,
qui transfugas repeterent. At illi legatos plurimis donis ornatos, cum
nullos perfugas apud se esse asseverassent, dimiserunt. Misit et
iterum Attilas alios, quibus non minus amplis muneribus ditatis, tertia
ab eo, post illam itidem quarta legatio advenit. Ille enim Romanorum
liberalitatem, qua utebantur, veriti, ne a foederibus barbari
discederent, ludibrio habens, novas subinde causas fingebat, et
vanas occasiones legatorum mittendorum excogitabat, et ad suos
necessarios, quos liberalitate ornare volebat, eas legationes
deferebat. Romani vero in omnibus rebus Attilae dicto audientes
erant, et quae praecipiebat, domini iussa ducebant. Non solum enim
a bello contra eum suscipiendo eorum rationes abhorrebant, sed et
Parthos, qui bellum apparabant, et Vandalos, qui maritimas oras
vexabant, et Isauros, qui praedis et rapinis grassabantur, et
Saracenos, qui regiones ad Orientem excursionibus vastabant,
metuebant. Praeterea gentes Aethiopum in armis erant. Itaque
Romani animis fracti Attilam colebant, sed ceteris gentibus resistere
conabantur, dum exercitus comparabant, et duces sortiebantur.
5. Edecon, vir Scytha, qui maximas res in bello gesserat, venit
iterum legatus cum Oreste. Hic genere Romanus Paeoniam
regionem, ad Saum flumen sitam, incolebat, quae ex foedere inito
cum Aetio, Romanorum Occidentalium duce, barbaro parebat.
Itaque Edecon in palatium admissus, Imperatori litteras Attilae
tradidit, in quibus de transfugis non redditis querabatur, qui nisi
redderentur, et Romani a colenda terra abstinerent, quam bello
captam suae ditioni adiecerat, ad arma se iturum minabatur. Ea vero
secundum Istrum a Paeonibus ad Novas usque in Thracia sitas in
longitudinem extendebatur. Latitudo autem erat quinque dierum
itinere. Neque vero forum celebrari, ut olim, ad ripam Istri volebat,
sed in Naisso, quam urbem a se captam et dirutam quinque dierum
itinere expedito homini ab Istro distantem, Scytharum et Romanorum
ditionis limitem constituebat. Legatos quoque ad se venire iussit
controversa disceptaturos, non ex quolibet hominum genere et
ordine, sed ex consularibus illustriores, quos si mittere intermiserint,
se ipsum ad eos arcessendos in Sardicam descensurum. His litteris
lectis, digresso ab Imperatore Edecone, cum Bigila, qui ea, quae
Attilas verbis Imperatori denuntiari voluit, interpretatus erat, cum
reliquas quoque domos obiret, ut in conspectum Chrysaphii spatharii
Imperat. veniret, qui plurimum auctoritate et gratia apud Imperatorem
valebat, admirabatur barbarus regiarum domuum magnificentiam.
Bigilas autem, simulatque barbarus in colloquium venit cum
Chrysaphio, interpretans retulit, quantopere laudasset Imperatorias
aedes, et Romanos beatos duceret propter affluentes divitiarum
copias. Tum Edeconi Chrysaphius dixit, fore eum huiusmodi
domuum, quae aureis tectis praefulgerent, compotem et opibus
abundaturum, si, relicta Scythia, ad Romanos se conferret. “Sed
alterius domini servum, Edecon ait, nefas est eo invito tantum
facinus in se admittere.” Quaesivit ex eo eunuchus, an facilis illi ad
Attilam pateret aditus, et num qua potestate apud Scythas esset. Ille
sibi necessitudinem intercedere cum Attila, respondit, et decretam
sibi cum nonnullis aliis Scythiae primoribus eius custodiam. Nam per
vices unumquemque eorum praescriptis diebus cum armis circa
Attilam excubias agere. Tum eunuchus, si fide interposita se
obstringeret, inquit, se maximorum bonorum illi auctorem futurum.
Cui rei tractandae otio opus esse. Hoc vero sibi fore, si ad coenam
rediret sine Oreste et reliquis legationis comitibus. Facturum se
pollicitus barbarus coenae tempore ad eunuchum pergit. Tum per
Bigilam interpretem datis dextris et iureiurando utrimque praestito,
ab eunucho, se de rebus, quae Edeconi minime damno, sed fructui
et commodo essent, verba facturum, ab Edecone, se, quae sibi
crederentur, non enuntiaturum, etiamsi exsequi nollet. Tunc
eunuchus Edeconi dixit, si in Scythiam rediens Attilam sustulerit, et
Romanorum partibus accesserit, vitam in magnis opibus beate
traducturum. Eunucho Edecon assensus est. Ad hanc rem
peragendam opus esse pecuniis, non quidem multis, sed
quinquaginta auri libris, quas militibus, quibus praeesset, qui sibi ad
rem impigre exsequendam adiumento essent, divideret. Cum
eunuchus, nulla mora interposita, dare vellet, dixit barbarus, se prius
ad renuntiandam legationem dimitti oportere, et una secum Bigilam,
qui Attilae de transfugis responsum acciperet; per eum enim se illi,
qua ratione aurum sibi mitteret, indicaturum. Etenim Attilam se,
simulatque redierit, percunctaturum, ut reliquos omnes, quae
munera sibi et quantae pecuniae a Romanis dono datae sint. Neque
id celare per collegas et comites licitum fore. Visus est eunucho
barbarus recta sentire, et eius est amplexus sententiam. Itaque eo a
coena dimisso, ad Imperatorem consilium initum detulit, qui
Martialium, magistri officiorum munere fungentem, ad se venire
iussum docuit conventionem cum barbaro factam: id enim illi credi et
committi iure magistratus, quem gerebat, necesse fuit. Nam omnium
Imperatoris consiliorum magister est particeps, sub cuius cura sunt
tabellarii, interpretes et milites, qui palatii custodiae deputati sunt.
Imperatore autem et Martialio de tota re consultantibus placuit, non
solum Bigilam, sed et Maximinum legatum mittere ad Attilam.
6. Bigila insidiarum in Attilam manifeste convicto, Attilas, ablatis ab
eo centum auri libris, quas a Chrysaphio acceperat, extemplo
Orestem et Eslam Constantinopolim misit, iussitque Orestem,
crumena, in quam Bigilas aurum, quod Edeconi daretur, coniecerat,
collo imposita, in conspectum Imperatoris venire atque eunuchum
interrogare, num hanc crumenam nosset; deinde Eslam haec verba
proferre, Theodosium quidem clari patris et nobilis esse filium,
Attilam quoque nobilis parentis esse stirpem, et patrem eius
Mundiuchum acceptam a patre nobilitatem integram conservasse.
Sed Theodosium tradita a patre nobilitate excidisse, quod tributum
sibi pendendo suus servus esset factus. Non igitur iustam rem
facere eum, qui praestantiori et ei, quem fortuna dominum ipsi
dederit, tanquam servus improbus clandestinas paret. Neque se
prius criminari illum eo nomine destiturum, quam eunuchus ad
supplicium sit traditus. Atque hi quidem cum his mandatis
Constantinopolim pervenerunt. Eodem quoque tempore accidit, ut
Chrysaphius a Zenone ad poenam deposceretur. Maximinus enim
renuntiaverat, Attilam dicere, decere Imperatorem promissis stare, et
Constantio uxorem, quam promiserit, dare, hanc enim, invito
Imperatore, nemini fas fuisse desponderi: aut enim eum, qui contra
ausus fuisset, poenas daturum fuisse, aut eo Imperatoris res
deductas esse, ut ne servos quidem suos coercere posset, contra
quos, si vellet, se auxilium ferre paratum. Sed Theodosius,
iracundiam suam palam fecit, cum bona puellae in publicum redegit.
7. Cum primum Attilae nuntiatum est, Martianum post Theodosii
mortem ad imperium pervenisse, et quae Honoriae accidissent, ad
eum, qui in Occidente rerum potiebatur, misit, qui contenderent,
Honoriam nihil se indignum admisisse, quam matrimonio suo
destinasset; seque illi auxilium laturum, nisi summa quoque imperii
ei deferretur. Misit et ad Romanos Orientales tributorum
constitutorum gratia. Sed re infecta legati utrimque sunt reversi.
Etenim qui Occidentis imperio praeerat, respondit, Honoriam illi
nubere non posse, quod iam alii nupsisset. Neque imperium
Honoriae deberi. Virorum enim, non mulierum, Romanum imperium
esse. Qui in Oriente imperabat, se minime ratam habere tributi
illationem, quam Theodosius consensisset: quiescenti munera
largiturum; bellum minanti viros et arma obiecturum ipsius opibus
non inferiora. Itaque Attilas in varias distrahebatur sententias, et illi in
dubio haerebat animus, quos primum aggrederetur. Tandem melius
visum est ad periculosius bellum prius sese convertere, et in
Occidentem exercitum educere. Illic enim sibi rem fore non solum
cum Italis, sed etiam cum Gothis et Francis: cum Italis, ut Honoriam
cum ingentibus divitiis secum abduceret: cum Gothis, ut Genserichi
gratiam promereretur.
8. Et Francos quidem bello lacessendi illi causa fuit regum
ipsorum obitus et de regno inter liberos controversia, quum maior
natu Attilam auxilio vocasset, Aëtium minor, quem Romae vidimus
legationem obeuntem, nondum lanugine efflorescente, flava coma,
et capillis propter densitatem et magnitudinem super humeros
effusis. Hunc etiam Aëtius filii loco adoptaverat, et plurimis donis
ornatum ad Imperatorem, ut amicitiam et societatem cum eo faceret,
miserat. Quamobrem Attilas antequam in eam expeditionem
ingrederetur, rursus legatos in Italiam misit, qui Honoriam poscerent:
eam enim secum matrimonium pepigisse: cuius rei ut fidem faceret,
annulum ab ea ad se missum per legatos, quibus tradiderat, exhiberi
mandavit. Etiam dimidiam imperii partem sibi Valentinianum debere,
quum ad Honoriam iure paternum regnum pertineret, quo iniusta
fratris cupiditate privata esset. Sed quum Romani Occidentales in
prima sententia persisterent et Attilae mandata reiicerent, ipse toto
exercitu convocato maiore vi bellum paravit.
9. Attilas, vastata Italia, ad sua se retulit, et Romanorum
Imperatoribus in Oriente bellum et populationem denuntiavit,
propterea quod tributum sibi a Theodosio constitutum non solveretur.
 EX HISTORIA GOTHICA PRISCI RHETORIS ET
SOPHISTAE
Excerpta de Legationibus Romanorum ad Gentes.

(Niebuhr. Bonn. 1829.)

1. Cum Rua, Hunnorum rex, statuisset cum Amalsuris, Itimaris,
Tonosuribus, Boiscis ceterisque gentibus, quae Istrum accolunt,
quod ad armorum societatem cum Romanis iungendam
confugissent, bello decertare, Eslam componendis Romanorum et
Hunnorum controversiis adhiberi solitum misit, qui Romanis
denuntiaret, se a foedere, quod sibi cum illis esset, recessurum, nisi
omnes Scythas, qui ad eos se contulissent, redderent. Romanis vero
consilium de mittendis ad Hunnos legatis capientibus, Plinthas et
Dionysius, hic ex Thracia, ille ex Scythia oriundus, ambo exercituum
duces, et qui consulatus dignitatem apud Romanos gesserant, hanc
legationem obire voluerunt. Ut vero visum est non ante legatos
proficisci, quam Eslas ad Ruam rediisset, Plinthas una cum Esla
misit Singulachum, unum ex suis necessariis, qui Ruae persuaderet
cum nullo alio Romanorum, quam cum ipso, colloquium inire. Cum
autem, Rua mortuo, Hunnorum regnum ad Attilam pervenisset,
Senatus decrevit Plintham legationem ad Attilam exsequi. Quo S.C.
Imperatoris suffragio comprobato, Plintham cupido incessit,
Epigenem, qui sapientiae laude celebris erat et quaesturae
dignitatem obtinebat, socium legationis sibi adsciscere. Qua de re
lato quoque suffragio ambo in eam legationem profecti sunt, et
Margum pervenerunt. Est autem Margus urbs in Illyrico Mysorum ad
Istrum sita, ex adverso Constantiae arcis, ad alteram fluminis ripam
collocatae, quo et regii Scythae convenerant. Extra civitatem equis
insidentes utrique congressi sunt. Nec enim barbaris de plano verba
facere placuit, et legati Romani suae dignitatis memores eodem
quoque apparatu in Scytharum conspectum venire statuerunt, ne sibi
peditibus cum equitibus disserendum foret. Itaque placuit, profugos
omnes, etiam qui multo ante profugerant, una cum captivis Romanis,
qui non soluto redemtionis pretio ad sua redierant, dedi: aut pro
unoquoque captivo Romano his, qui eum bello ceperant, octo aureos
dari, Romanos belli societatem cum barbara gente, quae bellum cum
Hunnis gerat, non facere. Conventus ad mercatus paribus legibus
celebrari, et in tuto Romanos e Hunnos esse. Foedera rata manere
et observari, si quoque anno septingentae auri librae tributi nomine
Scythis regiis a Romanis penderentur, cum antea tributum annuum
non fuisset nisi trecentarum quinquaginta librarum. His conditionibus
pacem Romani et Hunni pepigerunt, qua iureiurando patrio ritu
utrimque praestito firmata, utrique ad sua redierunt. Itaque qui ex
barbaris ad Romanos transierant redditi sunt, de quorum numero
erant filii Mama et Attacam ex regio genere, quos Scythae receptos
in Carso, Thraciae castello, crucis supplicio affecerunt, et hanc ab
his fugae poenam exegerunt. Pace cum Romanis facta, Attilas et
Bleda ad subigendas gentes Scythicas profecti sunt, et contra
Sorosgos bellum moverunt.
2. Theodosius misit Senatorem, virum consularem, ad Attilam
legationem obiturum. Et ille quidem quamvis legati nomen adeptus
esset, minime tamen est ausus terrestri itinere Hunnos adire: sed iter
per Pontum Euxinum instituit, et in Odessenorum civitatem navigavit,
in qua Theodulus dux commorabatur.
3. Chrysaphius eunuchus suasit Edeconi Attilam de medio tollere.
Super ea re, habito ab Imperatore Theodosio cum Martialio magistro
consilio, decreverunt non solum Bigilam, sed et Maximinum legatum
ad Attilam ire, et Bigilam quidem specie interpretis, quo munere
fungebatur, quae Edeconi viderentur, exsecuturum, Maximinum vero,
qui minime eorum, quae in consilio Imperatoris agitata erant,
conscius esset, litteras ab eo Attilae redditurum. Scripserat enim
Imperator legatorum causa, Bigilam interpretis munus obiturum, et
Maximinum legatum mitti, qui quidem Bigilam dignitate superaret, et
genere illustris et sibi valde familiaris esset. Ad haec minime decere
Attilam foedera transgredientem Romanorum regionem invadere. Et
antea quidem ad eum plures, nunc vero decem et septem transfugas
mittere. Nec enim plures apud se esse. Et haec quidem litteris
continebantur. Coram autem Maximinum suis verbis iusserat Attilae
dicere, ne postula et maioris dignitatis viros ad se legatos transire.
Hoc enim neque ipsius maioribus datum esse, neque ceteris
Scythiae regibus, sed quemlibet militem aut alium nuntium legationis
munus obiisse. Ceterum ad ea, quae inter ipsos in dubietate
versabantur, diiudicanda sibi videri, Onegesium mitti debere. Qui
enim fieri posset, ut in Serdicam, quae diruta esset, Attilas cum viro
consulari conveniret? In hac legatione Maximinus precibus mihi
persuasit, ut illi comes essem. Atque ita cum barbaris iter facere
coepimus, et in Serdicam pervenimus trium et decem dierum itinere
expedito homini a Constantinopoli distantem. Ibi commorantes ad
cibum nobiscum sumendum Edecona et ceteros barbaros invitandos
duximus. Bobus igitur et ovibus, quas incolae nobis suppeditaverant,
iugulatis, instructo convivio epulati sumus. Inter epulas barbari
Attilam, nos Imperatorem admirari et extollere. Ad quae Bigilas dixit,
minime iustum esse, deum cum homine comparare, hominem
Attilam, deum Theodosium vocans. Id aegre tulerunt Hunni, et
sensim ira accensi exasperabantur. Nos vero alio sermonem
detorquere, et eorum iram blandis verbis lenire. A coena ut
surreximus, Maximinus Edeconem et Orestem donis conciliaturus,
sericis vestibus et gemmis Indicis donavit. Orestes deinde
praestolatus Edeconis discessum verba faciens cum Maximino, sibi
quidem, ait, illum probum et prudentem videri, qui non ut alii ministri
regii peccasset. Etenim nonnulli, spreto Oreste, Edeconem ad
coenam invitaverant et donis coluerant. Nos autem harum omnium
rerum ignari, quo pertinerent Orestis verba, non satis percipientes,
cum ex eo sciscitaremur, quomodo et qua in re despectui esset
habitus et Edecon honore affectus, nihil respondit, et discessit.
Postridie cum iter faceremus, Bigilae, quae Orestes dixerat,
retulimus. Ille vero ait, Orestem non debere iniquo animo ferre, si
eadem, quae Edecon, minime esset consecutus. Orestem enim
comitem et scribam Attilae, Edeconem vero bello clarissimum, ut in
gente Hunnorum, longe illum dignitate antecellere. Quae cum
loqueretur, patrio sermone Edeconem affatus, non multo post nobis
confirmavit, seu vera proferret, seu fingeret, se Edeconi ea, quae
prius illi dixeramus, exposuisse, et aegre iram eius ob dicta Orestis
lenivisse. Venimus Naissum, quae ab hostibus fuerat eversa et solo
aequata: itaque eam desertam hominibus offendimus, praeterquam
quod in ruderibus sacrarum aedium erant quidam aegroti. Paulo
longius a flumine ad vacua lota divertentes (omnia enim circa ripam
erant plena ossibus eorum, qui bello ceciderant), postridie ad
Agintheum, copiarum in Illyrico ducem, qui non longe a Naisso
habitabat, accessimus, ut, traditis Imperatoris mandatis, reciperemus
ab eo quinque transfugas, qui septemdecim numerum, de quibus ad
Attilam scripserat, explerent. Hominem igitur convenimus, et quinque
profugos Hunnos tradere praecepimus, quos verbis consolatus,
nobiscum dimisit. Nocte transacta, a montibus Naissi Istrum versus
pergentes, in angustam convallem per obliquos flexus et circuitus
multos deferimur. Hic cum in ea opinione essemus, ut in occasum
iter tendere existimaremus, simulataque illuxit, sol exoriens sese ex
adverso oculis nostris obiecit. Itaque qui loci situm ignorabant,
exclamare, tanquam sol contrarium solito cursum conficeret, et
abhorrentia a constituto rerum ordine designaret: sed propter loci
inaequalitatem via ea parte ad Orientem spectat. Ex illo difficili et
arduo loco ad plana et uliginosa devenimus. Hic nos barbari
portitores in scaphis unico ligno constantibus, quas arboribus sectis
et cavatis adornant, exceperunt, et flumen transmiserunt. Et lembi
quidem minime ad nos traducendos, sed ad multitudinem
barbarorum traiiciendam erant praeparati, quae nobis in via
occurreret, quia Attilas ad venationem in Romanorum fines
transgredi volebat. Revera autem bellum contra Romanos paravit,
cuius gerendi occasionem sumebat, quod transfugae non
redderentur. Transmisso Istro, septuaginta fere stadiorum iter cum
barbaris emensi in campo quodam subsistere coacti sumus,
tantisper dum Edecon Attilam nostri adventus certiorem faceret,
manentibus interea nobiscum ex barbaris, qui nos erant deducturi.
Circa vesperam nobis coenantibus, auditus est strepitus equorum ad
nos venientium. Et duo viri Scythae advenerunt, qui nos ad Attilam
venire iusserunt. Nobis vero prius eos ad coenam accedere
rogantibus, de equis descendentes una convivium inierunt, et
postridie viam praeeuntes demonstrarunt. Qua die hora fere nona ad
Attilae tentoria pervenimus: nam erant ei plurima. Et cum in colle
quodam tentoria figere vellemus, obvii barbari prohibuerunt, quoniam
Attilae tentorium esset in planitie positum. Quamobrem ad
barbarorum arbitrium locum tentorii collocandi cepimus. Huc
Edecon, Orestes, Scotta et alii ex Scythis primores mox advenerunt,
et ex nobis quaesierunt, quarum rerum consequendarum gratia hanc