宋 Song · 文 Prose
伶官传序·版本
Preface to the Biographies of Court Entertainers (Version)
呜呼!
盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉!
原庄宗之所以得天下,与其所以失之者,可以知之矣。
Meaning
In the opening of his preface to the 'Biographies of Court Entertainers' in the New History of the Five Dynasties, Ouyang Xiu declares with a sigh that the rise and fall of states, though attributed to heaven's mandate, is in fact determined by human affairs. He proposes to prove this by examining how Emperor Zhuangzong of Later Tang both won the empire and lost it. The passage lays down the essay's rational, human-centered view of history.
唉!国家兴盛衰亡的道理,虽然有人说是天命的安排,难道不更是人为的因素造成的吗!推究后唐庄宗(李存勖)取得天下的原因,和他后来失去天下的原因,就可以明白这个道理了。
Appreciation
The excerpt is a model of Song historical argument: it opens with the exclamation 'Alas!', states its thesis through the rhetorical question 'is it not the work of men!', and sets out its method of proof in the paired examination of gaining and losing the empire. The concession 'though men call it heaven's mandate' yields ground only to seize it more forcefully, and the parallel structures give the brief passage both argumentative edge and literary cadence. Praised in the Guwen Guanzhi as possessing 'rising and falling intonation that captures the spirit of the Records of the Grand Historian,' it is a masterclass in establishing a thesis within a few dozen characters.
【白话串讲】 欧阳修写《伶官传序》:“呜呼!盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉”——他说国家兴亡在于人事。后唐庄宗“忧劳可以兴国,逸豫可以亡身”——得天下时意气风发,失天下时“泣下沾襟”——“夫祸患常积于忽微,而智勇多困于所溺”——他说祸患从小处积累。 【意象与手法】 开宗立论、以史证理:以感叹发端、反诘立论、骈偶示证,短短数十字而章法井然;语言骈散相间、抑扬顿挫,被誉为得《史记》神髓。 【情感与主旨】 以庄宗「忧劳兴国、逸豫亡身」为鉴,告诫君主与世人:盛衰兴亡取决于人事,不可沉溺逸乐而忘忧患。 【名句点睛】 常考「盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉」的史观意义,以及「忧劳可以兴国,逸豫可以亡身」的警句。
Background
The preface was written by Ouyang Xiu for the 'Biographies of Court Entertainers' in his New History of the Five Dynasties. Ouyang Xiu (1007–1072), courtesy name Yongshu, sobriquets Zuiweng and Liuyi Jushi, a native of Luling (present-day Ji'an, Jiangxi), was the leader of the Northern Song literary reform, one of the Eight Great Masters of Tang and Song prose, rose to vice grand councilor, and was canonized as Wenzhong. The New History was his privately compiled annals-biography history, modeled on the Spring and Autumn Annals in its praise and blame and laden with admonition; the 'Biographies of Court Entertainers' records how Emperor Zhuangzong of Later Tang, Li Cunxu, doted on court entertainers and ruined his state. Li Cunxu, having inherited his father's ambition, destroyed Liang and restored Tang with dazzling military feats—'binding the father and son of Yan with cord and boxing the heads of the lord and ministers of Liang'—yet after winning the empire he sank into music and beauty, entrusted himself to the entertainers, and finally 'was trapped by a few dozen of them, dying with his state destroyed, the laughingstock of the world.' Ouyang Xiu wrote in a Northern Song weakened by foreign threats (Liao and Xia) and administrative lassitude, and used Later Tang's rise and fall to urge upon his own age the lesson that 'toil and care can raise a state, ease and pleasure can ruin its ruler.' This version records the essay's opening argument: beginning with the sigh 'Alas!', it propounds the programmatic view that 'the principle of rise and decline, though called heaven's mandate, is it not the work of men!', revealing the author's rational spirit of explaining history through human affairs.
伶官传序是欧阳修为《新五代史·伶官传》所作之序。欧阳修(1007—1072),字永叔,号醉翁、六一居士,庐陵(今江西吉安)人,北宋诗文革新运动领袖,唐宋八大家之一,官至参知政事,谥文忠。《新五代史》是欧阳修私撰的纪传体史书,仿《春秋》笔法,褒贬人物、寄寓鉴戒,《伶官传》记后唐庄宗李存勖宠幸伶人而亡国之事,此序为其发端,是全书最有名的篇章。李存勖继承父志灭梁建唐,可谓「系燕父子以组,函梁君臣之首」,武功赫赫;然得天下后沉溺声色、宠信伶官,终致身死国灭,「数十伶人困之,而身死国灭,为天下笑」。欧阳修身处北宋积弱之世,外患(辽、夏)频仍、内政萎靡,故借后唐兴亡痛陈「忧劳可以兴国,逸豫可以亡身」之理,以史为鉴,劝诫当世。本组所录版本为全序的开篇立论:以呜呼发端,提出「盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉」的史观纲领,揭示作者以人事解释历史兴亡的理性精神。
Art
The Preface to the Biographies of Court Entertainers is the exemplar of Song historical-essay prose, its art lying in opening with a thesis, proving principle through history, and uniting feeling with argument. Though the excerpt has only three sentences, it fully displays Ouyang Xiu's architecture. The first, 'Alas!', opens with an exclamation—a single long sigh, brimming with feeling, that sets the elegiac tone of the whole. The second, 'The principle of rise and decline, though men call it heaven's mandate, is it not the work of men!', states the program: the concessive 'though men call it heaven's mandate' first yields a step, appearing fair while storing force for the turn, and then the rhetorical question 'is it not the work of men!' closes the net—in the double negation, human affairs is thrust into the sole determining position, the thesis cut clean yet resonant. The third, 'Trace why Zhuangzong won the empire, and how he came to lose it, and this may be known,' names both the object and the method of proof—the pairing of 'why he won' and 'how he lost' announcing the contrast between hard-won gain and easy loss that follows, the general statement in a classic whole-to-part structure. Rhetorically, the 'though... is it not...' interrogative and the parallelism of 'why he won the empire' and 'how he lost it' give the language both argumentative edge and literary flavor. Exclamation to open, rhetorical question to establish, calm statement to close—in a few dozen characters, thesis, evidence, and tonality are completed in one breath, precisely as the Guwen Guanzhi judged: 'rising and falling intonation that captures the spirit of the Records.'
伶官传序是宋代史论散文的典范,其艺术特色在开宗立论、以史证理、情文并茂。节选虽只三句,却已尽显欧阳修史论的章法:首句呜呼!以感叹发端,一声长叹,感慨淋漓,奠定了全文悲怆的基调;次句「盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉!」提出全篇的纲领——先用虽曰天命虚设一让,再以岂非人事哉反诘收网,双重否定之中,把人事推到决定兴亡的唯一位置,立论斩截而有余韵;末句「原庄宗之所以得天下,与其所以失之者,可以知之矣」点出论证对象与途径——所以得与所以失的对举,预示下文将以庄宗得之难与失之易的对照展开论证,是典型的总分结构中的总。修辞上,虽曰……岂非……的反诘句式、所以得天下,与其所以失之者的骈偶结构,使语言既有论辩的锋芒,又有文章的韵味。欧阳修以呜呼开篇、岂非反诘、可以知之矣作结,短短数十字,立论、示证、定调一气呵成,正如《古文观止》所评「抑扬顿挫,得《史记》神髓」。
Allusions
Though an argumentative essay, the piece is deeply rooted in the traditions of Chinese historiography. First, the debate between heaven's mandate and human affairs: since Yin and Zhou, Chinese historians explained rise and fall by mandate ('the mandate of heaven is not constant'; 'the mandate is not fixed'), Sima Qian had already opened the question of 'exploring the boundary between heaven and man,' and Ouyang Xiu's subordination of mandate to human affairs is the mature Song expression of the rational historiography descending from the pre-Qin, in the same line as the Book of Documents' 'Heaven sees as my people see' and Mencius' 'heaven's timing is not as good as earth's advantage.' Second, the admonition of the entertainers: 'entertainers' was the general term for court musicians and performers, and rulers ruined by doting on them run through history—Jie of Xia and Zhou of Shang were reproached for their female musicians, and Xuanzong of Tang neglected government for the Pear Garden; Ouyang Xiu's use of Zhuangzong as mirror continues this tradition of warning against ruin by song and beauty. Third, the story of Zhuangzong himself: the New History records that he 'bound the father and son of Yan with cord and boxed the heads of the lord and ministers of Liang,' and the allusion of the 'three arrows'—with which the dying King Jin, Li Keyong, charged his son to avenge three debts—is the best gloss on how hard the empire was won, while 'trapped by a few dozen entertainers' is iron proof of how easily it was lost. Fourth, the ancient maxim that toil raises states and ease ruins them: 'dwell in safety, think of danger' in the Zuo Commentary and 'in peace forget not peril' in the Book of Changes are of this purport, and Ouyang Xiu condensed it into an eternal warning for later ages. All this shows the deep learning behind the essay's use of history as mirror.
本篇虽为议论,却深植于中国史学的典故与传统。其一是天命与人世之争:自殷周以来,中国史家即以天命解释兴亡(「天命靡常」「惟命不于常」),司马迁已开究天人之际之问,欧阳修以人事压倒天命,是先秦以来理性史观在宋代的成熟表达,与《尚书》「天视自我民视」、孟子「天时不如地利」一脉相承。其二是伶官之诫:伶人是古代乐官、艺人的通称,君王宠伶乱政,史不绝书——夏桀、商纣皆有女乐之讥,唐玄宗更因梨园而荒政;欧阳修以庄宗为鉴,正承声色误国的史鉴传统。其三是后唐庄宗本事:《新五代史》载庄宗「系燕父子以组,函梁君臣之首」,其「三矢」报父仇的典故(晋王李克用临终授三矢),是得天下之难的最好注脚,而数十伶人困之又是失之之易的铁证。其四是忧劳兴国、逸豫亡身的古训:《左传》居安思危、《周易》安不忘危,皆为此意;欧阳修把它凝为千古警句,垂训后世。凡此种种,皆可见此文以史为鉴的深厚学养。
Commentary
The Preface to the Biographies of Court Entertainers is an eternal classic of Chinese historical essay whose influence reaches beyond historiography into literature and the history of thought. In historiographical value, it established the rational view that explains rise and fall through human affairs—Ouyang Xiu did not believe in fate but distilled from the contrast between hard gain and easy loss the law that toil and care raise a state while ease and pleasure ruin its ruler, giving historical writing's admonitory function its most powerful exercise and heralding Song historical argument (Su Xun's 'On the Six States' and Su Zhe's essays). In literary value, opening with 'Alas!', threaded through with sighs, in language alternately parallel and discursive with layer upon layer of argument, it is ranked among the crowning pieces of the Guwen Guanzhi—Wu Chucai praised its 'rising and falling intonation that captures the spirit of the Records'—and it appears in every anthology of classical prose. In intellectual influence, lines such as 'toil and care can raise a state, ease and pleasure can ruin its ruler' and 'disaster often accumulates in the negligible, while the wise and brave are often trapped by what they indulge' have become maxims of Chinese political culture and personal cultivation, still sharply cautionary today. Ouyang Xiu's lifelong advocacy of ancient prose to correct the floridity of the Five Dynasties found in this essay the practice of his literary creed—'writing that carries the Way, simple yet methodical'—and it is the crystallization in prose of the Song literati's spirit of taking the world as their own responsibility.
伶官传序是中国史论散文的千古名篇,其影响远超史学而进入文学与思想史。就史论价值而言,它确立了以人事释兴亡的理性史观——欧阳修不信天命,而从得之难与失之易的对比中提炼忧劳兴国、逸豫亡身的规律,使史学的鉴戒功能得到最有力的发挥,开宋代史论(苏洵《六国论》、苏辙诸论)之先声。就文学价值而言,此文以呜呼发端、以感叹贯穿、以骈散相间的语言与层层递进的论证,被誉为《古文观止》压卷之作之一,吴楚材评其「抑扬顿挫,得《史记》神髓」,是历代古文选本必录之篇。就思想影响而言,忧劳可以兴国,逸豫可以亡身、祸患常积于忽微,而智勇多困于所溺等句,已成为中国政治文化与个人修养的座右铭,至今仍具强烈的警示意义。欧阳修一生倡导古文、矫五代之浮靡,此文正是其文论主张(文以载道、简而有法)的实践,也是宋代士大夫以天下为己任精神在散文中的结晶。
Prosody
Line by line
呜呼!盛衰之理,虽曰天命,岂非人事哉!
Alas! The principle of rise and decline, though men call it heaven's mandate, is it not in truth the work of men!
唉!国家兴盛衰亡的道理,虽然有人说是天命的安排,难道不更是人为的因素造成的吗!
Alas! The law of rise and fall — though some call it the decree of heaven, is it not all the work of man!
这是全序的开篇立论,也是欧阳修史观的总纲。呜呼二字以感叹发端,一声长叹,先声夺人——叹的是历史的兴亡,也是下文的庄宗之悲,更隐含着作者面对北宋时局的忧思,感情的浓度在第一个字就已定下基调。盛衰之理四字,把论题提到历史规律的高度;虽曰天命是虚设让步,先承认旧说,看似公允,实为下文的转折蓄势;岂非人事哉以反诘作结,斩钉截铁地把人事置于天命之上——双重否定(岂非)的句式,比直说实为人事更有力量,也更见论辩的机锋。值得注意的是哉字:感叹与反诘合流,既有史家的冷峻,又有文人的深情。这三句不仅是节选的开头,更是全文的纲:此后所有的史实、对比、教训,皆是这一论断的注脚,立论之高屋建瓴,正是此文成为千古名篇的首要原因。
This is the preface's opening thesis, and the outline of Ouyang Xiu's view of history. The two words alas open with the exclamation, one long breath, the first stroke striking — the sigh for history's rise and fall, and the grief for Zhuangzong below, and the hidden anxiety for the Northern Song's own age, the emotional density set in the first word. The four words rise and fall raise the theme to the height of historical law; though it is heaven's will the virtual concession, first granting the old saying, seeming fair and yet storing force for the turn; is it not human effort! closes in the rhetorical question, decisively placing human effort above fate — the double negation of is-not more forceful than the plain saying it is human effort, the sharper edge of the debate. It is worth noting the word sigh: exclamation and rhetorical question flowing together, at once the historian's coldness and the writer's depth. These three lines are not only the excerpt's opening, but the whole's outline: all the facts, contrasts, and lessons below are the annotation of this thesis, and the lofty positioning of the argument is the first reason this text became a classic.
原庄宗之所以得天下,与其所以失之者,可以知之矣。
Trace why Zhuangzong won the empire and how he came to lose it, and this principle may be known.
推究后唐庄宗(李存勖)取得天下的原因,和他(后来)失去天下的原因,就可以明白这个道理了。
Trace the reason Emperor Zhuangzong won the empire, and the reason he later lost it; thereby the truth may be known.
这三句是总纲向史证的过渡,章法上承上启下。原字(推究、考究)领起,显示作者将以史实为据、循果溯因,这是史论家应有的严谨态度;所以得天下与所以失之者两两对举,构成全文论证的双翼——下文正是先写庄宗系燕父子以组,函梁君臣之首的得之难,再写数十伶人困之,而身死国灭的失之易,一难一易的强烈反差,正是人事决定兴亡的铁证。可以知之矣以矣字收束,语气肯定而有余味:不必多言,史实自明。值得注意的是与字的连缀:得与失本是相反的两极,欧阳修用一个与字把它们并置,暗示二者同出一源——都在人事;得之也因人事(忧劳),失之也因人事(逸豫),因果同贯,正是岂非人事哉的必然展开。三句如桥梁,把抽象的史观落到具体的史案,全文的论证骨架于此立定。
These three lines are the transition from the outline to the historical evidence, the craft inheriting above and opening below. The word trace (to examine and investigate) leads, showing the author proceeding on the facts, tracing effect back to cause, the rigorous attitude of the historical essayist; won the empire and lost it set in parallel, forming the twin wings of the argument — below, the text first writes the difficulty of winning, Zhuangzong binding the Yan father and son in cords and presenting the heads of the Liang lord and minister in a casket, then the ease of losing, a few dozen players hemming him in until death and the country's fall, the sharp contrast of difficulty and ease being the iron proof that human effort decides rise and fall. By this one may know the truth closes in the word may, the tone affirmative with aftertone: no more words needed, the facts speak. It is worth noting the linked compared: gain and loss are by nature opposite poles, and Ouyang Xiu places them side by side with the word, hinting the two share one source — both in human effort; the winning through human effort (worry and toil), the losing through human effort (ease and pleasure), cause and effect one thread, precisely the necessary unfolding of is it not human effort. The three lines like a bridge, grounding the abstract view of history in the concrete case, and the argument's skeleton stands.
Study
Word focus
Related Reading
'On Factions' and the Preface to the Biographies of Court Entertainers are both masterpieces of Ouyang Xiu's political prose, both embodying his creed that writing carries the Way. They differ in subject and method: the Preface uses history as mirror, arguing from the rise and fall of Zhuangzong of Later Tang and summing up the law of rise and fall from the angle of human affairs, in a tone of elegy and lament; 'On Factions' argues politics directly, answering the charge of factionalism leveled at Fan Zhongyan and his circle during the Qingli reforms with the thesis that 'the noble bind together by shared principles, the base by shared profit,' in a torrent of dialectic. The former wins by exclamation and historical proof, the latter by classification and logic; the one is historical essay, the other political. Read together, they show Ouyang Xiu's mastery of both genres and the Song literati's sense of the world as their own charge—whether arguing history or politics, the aim is always a mirror for the ruler.
朋党论与伶官传序都是欧阳修政论散文的代表作,都体现了其文以载道的写作主张。差异在论题与笔法:伶官传序以史为鉴,借后唐庄宗兴亡立论,从人事的角度总结兴亡规律,笔调悲怆感慨;朋党论以政为论,针对庆历新政中朋党之讥为范仲淹诸人辩护,提出君子以同道为朋,小人以同利为朋,笔调雄辩滔滔。前者以感叹与史证取胜,后者以分类与逻辑取胜;前者是史论,后者是政论。两篇并读,可见欧阳修驾驭史、政两类题材的功力,也可见宋代士大夫以天下为己任的经世精神——无论论史论政,其落脚点都是人君之鉴。
阿房宫赋·版本二 Rhapsody on Epang Palace (Version Two) 杜牧 · 同以亡国为鉴,同倡人事自取之论,一文一赋 Both take a fallen dynasty as mirror and argue that ruin was self-inflicted—one in rhapsody, one in proseDu Mu's 'Rhapsody on Epang Palace' used the swift fall of Qin to warn Tang, as Ouyang Xiu's Preface used the swift fall of Later Tang as a mirror for Song; both are classics of history as admonition, and both conclude that the cause of ruin lay within—the Rhapsody: 'It was the six states that destroyed the six states, not Qin; it was Qin that destroyed Qin, not the world'; the Preface: 'the principle of rise and decline... is it not the work of men!'—the same insight by different routes. They differ in genre and style: the Rhapsody is parallel-prose rhapsody, lush in diction and hyperbolic to the utmost ('it pressed down over three hundred li... waists of corridors winding'), painting tyranny's extravagance in sumptuous display; the Preface is ancient prose, simple yet methodical and heavy with feeling, writing the turn of human affairs in severe contrast. One ornate, one plain; one rhapsody, one essay—showing the contrast between late-Tang parallel splendor and early-Song ancient-prose vigor, and how the theme of admonition dresses differently in the two genres.
杜牧阿房宫赋借秦之速亡讽唐之当戒,欧阳修伶官传序借后唐之速亡为宋之当鉴,二者都是以史为鉴的经典,且都得出灭亡之因在自身的结论——阿房宫赋「灭六国者六国也,非秦也;族秦者秦也,非天下也」,伶官传序「盛衰之理……岂非人事哉」,异曲同工。差异在文体与风格:阿房宫赋是骈赋,铺采摘文、夸饰尽致(覆压三百余里、廊腰缦回),以铺陈的华美写暴政之奢;伶官传序是古文,简而有法、感慨沉痛,以对比的严整写人事之变。一华一朴、一赋一文,可见晚唐骈文之靡丽与宋初古文之简劲的对照,也可见鉴戒主题在两种文体中的不同呈现。
六国论·版本二 On the Six States (Version Two) 苏洵 · 同为宋代史论双璧,皆以兴亡立论、以史讽今 The twin jewels of Song historical essay, both arguing from rise and fall and both using history to admonish the presentSu Xun's 'On the Six States' argued that the six states bribed Qin and so weakened themselves into ruin; Ouyang Xiu's Preface argues that Zhuangzong rose by toil and care and fell by ease and pleasure. The two are the most famous Song historical essays, both borrowing the lessons of history to admonish their own age—'On the Six States' pricking Song for buying peace with silver and silk from Liao and Xia, the Preface warning Song rulers against indulgence and against what they dote on. They differ in angle of argument: Su Xun enters through diplomacy, fixing the argument on the single phrase 'the harm lay in bribing Qin' and pushing forward layer on layer in bold sweeps; Ouyang Xiu enters through human affairs, pairing toil-and-care against ease-and-pleasure, with opening and closing in echo, in a somber tone. In style, Su Xun writes like the man—sweeping and unabashed, vigor worn on the surface; Ouyang Xiu is unhurried and complete, feeling held within. Read together, the two essays show the twin peaks of the Su lineage and the Ouyang–Zeng–Wang lineage in historical argument, carrying Song prose's art of argument to its height.
苏洵六国论论六国赂秦而力亏以致灭亡,欧阳修伶官传序论庄宗忧劳兴国、逸豫亡身,二者是宋代史论散文最著名的两篇,都借历史教训讽喻当世——六国论刺宋之纳币求和于辽夏,伶官传序诫宋君之当防逸豫与所溺。差异在论证的角度:苏洵从外交切入,以弊在赂秦一言立骨,层层推导,笔势雄放;欧阳修从人事切入,以忧劳、逸豫对举立论,首尾呼应,笔调沉郁。风格上,苏洵文如其人,纵横捭阖、英发之气外露;欧阳修纡徐委备、感慨之情内敛。两文并读,恰见三苏与欧曾王两大古文谱系在史论领域的双峰并峙,共同把宋代散文的议论艺术推向高峰。