University of Virginia Library

Translators' Note

The translation is based on the Zhonghua shuju [OMITTED] edition of
the San guo zhi [OMITTED]. This edition was first published in Beijing
in 1959 and went through six reprints up to 1975. Although the
publishing history always refers to these subsequent printings as reprints
rather than revised editions, it is not uncommon for new impressions
of the Zhonghua histories to incorporate minor changes.[1]
Eventually, changes are incorporated in a revised edition, and such a
revised edition of the San guo zhi was published in 1982.[2] We have
also used Lu Bi's [OMITTED] (1876-1967) indispensable San guo zhi jijie
[OMITTED] and other works.

This book consists of two main parts. Part One is introductory and
provides historical and historiographical information on women in
early imperial China. Part Two consists of three chapters of translation
and includes both Chen Shou's [OMITTED] (233-297) history and Pei
Songzhi's [OMITTED] (372-451) commentary. The juan [OMITTED] (fascicle, or
chapter) and page numbers of the 1982 Zhonghua shuju edition are
provided in the margins of the translation to facilitate finding the
original text; thus "5.160" in the margin marks the beginning of juan
5 on page 160 of that edition. The translation of the San guo zhi itself
is in regular type, while Pei's commentary, which is keyed to the text
by superscript letters (beginning with A), is set off from it in a smaller
type size. The placement of the commentary mirrors the Zhonghua
shuju text, which in turn follows the traditional placement of the
commentary.

There are two appendices. Appendix I contains tables that present
or supplement some of the information in the Prolegomenon and the
Translation in concise form. Appendix II contains a character count
for the San guo zhi that shows the lengths both of the history proper
and of Pei's commentary. This is useful because of the widespread but
unfounded assumption, sometimes purportedly supported by numbers,
that the commentary is much longer than Chen's own work.

Sources are cited in the Notes in two principal ways—either by
an abbreviation of the title (as listed in the Abbreviations) or by an

author-title reference. In both cases, of course, page numbers are provided.
Full bibliographic information on each work cited is provided
in the Bibliography. Citations to a small number of Classics are given
according to Sinological convention, and reference is made to specific
editions only where necessary. Since it is our desire to make our work
and related material accessible to the specialist and nonspecialist alike,
where possible we provide references to English translations of texts
we cite. If an English translation is not available, we try to refer the
reader to translations in other Western languages. Unless otherwise
noted, however, all translations included herein are our own.[3]

Chinese characters are given at the first occurrence of a name or term.
If no characters are given, the reader can assume that the name or term
appeared earlier in the text and can consult the Index to find the earlier
occurrence.

Names in the text are frequently anachronistic. For example, in the
Wei [OMITTED] section, Cao Cao [OMITTED] (155-220) is consistently referred to by
his posthumous title Grand Progenitor (tai zu [OMITTED]), and empresses
may be called empress (hou [OMITTED]) even in accounts of events that occurred
before their assumption of that title or after their assumption of some
other title.[4] These special usages figure not only in the descriptive and
narrative parts of the material, but in ostensible reports of direct
speech as well. Thus, in a statement supposedly made by Empress Bian
[OMITTED] to Cao Cao's supporters, she is made to refer to Cao Cao as Grand
Progenitor, even though his later success and his role as father of a
dynastic founder could scarcely have been guessed at the time. In the
translation, the name Cao Cao or an appropriate pronoun may
sometimes be substituted for the Grand Progenitor of the Chinese text.

Such posthumous names and titles (shi [OMITTED]) figure prominently in the
juan translated here.[5] A posthumous name represents a judgment about
an individual's life. Ideally, probity led to a good posthumous name,
lack of probity to a bad one.[6] Since the bestowal of such a name took
place soon after death, it constituted a contemporary evaluation of the
person. But inasmuch as it was intended to be permanent, the name
selected was meant to shape the image of the deceased in the minds
of both present and future generations. Thus the power to determine
posthumous names was not trivial. It generally rested with the sovereign
and his ritual advisers. Although this power might theoretically be
exercised in a more or less impartial way to commemorate genuine
virtue and condemn undesirable behavior, inevitably political judgments
and personal considerations colored the process.[7] Because posthumous
names were meant to carry meaning, we have attempted to
translate many of them.[8] Among the most notable posthumous titles
in the translation are those applied to the royal women. These follow

a pattern established earlier.[9] Cao Cao's Empress Bian, for instance, is
given the title Wu Xuan Bian huanghou [OMITTED]. The title can be
explained as follows: huanghou means empress; Wu (the Martial
[Emperor]) is her husband Cao Cao's posthumous designation;[10] Bian
is her own surname; and Xuan is her posthumous name. This can be
dealt with in translation by writing "Empress Bian, Consort of the
Martial Emperor and Canonized `Celebrious,' " which we shorten to
"Empress Bian the Celebrious of the Martial Emperor."[11]

To render the word zi [OMITTED], referring to the name given to or adopted
by an individual after reaching maturity, we have used the English word
"appellative." We considered "courtesy name" and "maturity name,"
which describe zi of certain types, but ultimately rejected them as too
narrow to encompass the full range of zi. The Roman terms agnomen
and cognomen were eliminated after consultation with Hsing I-tien of
Academia Sinica. Dr. Hsing, a specialist in the comparative history of
the Han and Roman empires, pointed out that, even though there are
some superficial similarities, the Chinese and Latin terms denote quite
different names, and to adopt Roman usage would risk leading the non-Sinological
specialist astray. We also decided against the old standby
of "style" for zi as misleading.

In China, people have traditionally been reckoned one year (sui [OMITTED])
old at birth and turn two at the first lunar New Year. Thus a person
who is forty sui might be thirty-nine or even thirty-eight years of age
according to Western reckoning. Because of the difficulty of knowing
a person's age according to the Western system of counting, the reader
should understand that when a person's age is given, it is in sui.

A good deal of direct speech is recorded in these chapters. Clearly,
these words cannot all be the actual utterances of the parties involved.
Not only would verbatim transcripts have been lacking in most cases,
but the literary language in which the texts are written was even then
at some remove from the spoken vernacular. The direct speech probably
comes from three sources: oral traditions concerning what was said at
a given moment; written materials available at the time; and conjectures
about what might have been said, based on the author's understanding
of the circumstances and personalities involved and his own agenda.

Since the Three States continued in large measure to use Han official
titles, we have generally opted for the translations in Hans Bielenstein's
The Bureaucracy of Han Times. We have chosen Bielenstein's renderings[12]
over Charles Hucker's functional translations because they
convey a better sense of the system of naming offices. We have employed
Bielenstein's translations and conventions even with regard to titles
from the Jin and other periods, because although the nature of offices
might change over time, the titles themselves frequently remained the

same. Occasionally we have had recourse to Hucker's A Dictionary
of Official Titles in Imperial China and other sources, particularly
"Official Titles of the Han Dynasty: A Tentative List," which was
compiled under the direction of Jack L. Dull for the Han Dynasty
History Project at the University of Washington. Where necessary, we
have coined our own.

Pinyin is the principal romanization system for this book. When
quoted material includes transliterated Chinese words in other
romanizations, we have converted them to Pinyin. We acknowledge
that this is an imperfect way of dealing with the problem of different
romanizations but hope that it may make the work somewhat more
accessible to a variety of readers. We ask the forbearance of those who
find this convention objectionable. We have not, of course, altered
transliterations appearing in the titles of books, articles, and other
works.

After the manuscript of this book had gone to the publisher, we
learned of two new works on palace women in early imperial China:
Liu Yongcong [OMITTED], De, cai, se, quan: lun Zhongguo gudai nüxing
[OMITTED] : [OMITTED] [Virtue, Talent, Beauty, and Power:
Women in Ancient China] (Taipei: Maitian chubanshe, 1998) and Lisa
Raphals, Sharing the Light: Representations of Women and Virtue in
Early China (Albany: SUNY Press, 1998). While we were unable to
make use of these two fine studies in our research, we were gratified
to find that their interpretations parallel many of our own and agree
with Professor Raphals regarding Liu Xiang's authorship of the Lie nü
zhuan.