Hao Qiu Zhuan/en-davis/Front Matter
The Fortunate Union: Front Matter
From: The Fortunate Union, a Chinese Romance. Translated from the Chinese Original by John Francis Davis (London, 1829)
Note: This text was digitized via OCR from the original 1829 print.
Title Page
THE FORTUNATE UNION,
A ROMANCE,
TRANSLATED FROM THE CHINESE ORIGINAL,
WITH NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
TO WHICH IS ADDED,
A CHINESE TRAGEDY.
By JOHN FRANCIS DAVIS, F.R.S.
MEMBER OF THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY, AND OF THE ORIENTAL TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, &c.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR THE ORIENTAL TRANSLATION FUND, 1829.
Dedication
TO SIR GEORGE THOMAS STAUNTON, Bart. LL.D. F.R.S.
THIS VERSION OF A WORK, WHICH HE HAS ALREADY PERUSED IN THE ORIGINAL, IS WITH MUCH ESTEEM INSCRIBED, BY HIS VERY FAITHFUL FRIEND AND SERVANT, THE TRANSLATOR.
Preface
PREFACE.
—
Tue following translation was the amuse- ment of some leisure hours in the country which it describes. The perusal of the origi- nal work, entitled Haoukewchuen, or ‘ A tale of the fortunate, or appropriate union,’ had impressed the translator with a good opinion of its merits; and, after finishing the two first chapters on trial, he was encouraged to proceed towards a complete version of the Romance, with the addition of such notes and explanations as his long personal acquaintance with the people might qualify him to afford. The illustrative parts have derived advantage from the able assistance of the Rev. Dr. Morrison; while some botanical notes were the contributions of Joun Reeves, Esq. of the East-India Com- pany’s service, F.R.S. and L.S. a gentleman well versed in the natural history of China.
The Haoukewchuen seems to relate to the period when the Ming, or last native dynasty, occupied the throne, previously to the Manchow Tartar conquest: but, with the exception of
some
viii PREFACE.
some changes in their dress and coiffure, the Chinese are at this moment, in every respect, the identical people which our work describes.— The very great number of typographical errors in the original, almost inseparable from the mode in which their books are printed,* were, in the first instance, carefully revised and cor- rected by a competent native.
It is nearly seventy years since Dr. Hugh Percy, Bishop of Dromore, edited from a manuscript, partly English and partly Portu- guese, and dated more than a century ago, what was little better than a copious abstract of our romance, and without the poetical pas- sages, under the title of the ‘ Pleasing History.’ In this (commencing, it will be perceived, with the very title), much was mistranslated, much interpolated, and a great deal omitted altogether. One notable instance of omission is the heroine’s visit to the tombs and the pavi- lion, in the fourth chapter. Any Chinese scho- lar who thought it worth his while to compare the ‘ Pleasing History,’ with the Haoukew-
chuen,
© It is ecarcely necessary to mention that each page is stereotyped on a block of fine-grained wood ;—any slip of the carver’s instrument is there- fore frequently left uncorrected, as the correction involves, either the in- sertion of a new piece of wood, or the commencement ab initio of a new block.
PREFACE. Ix
chuen, could not fix upon a better portion of the work than the five memorials in the seven- teenth chapter of the original.* These, in the Chinese, are excellent specimens of composi- tion in that particular line, but in the misnamed version they have scarcely been attempted. The ‘ Pleasing History’ speaks of a penknife + among a people who have no pens—makes a delicate lady talk of ‘‘ her enemies being sacri- ficed, and their flesh offered to appease her resentment’’t—-represents the hero entering into debate with his attendant concerning his own marriage {—with many other the like instances. The most remarkable case, however, is where the Editor, misled by his manuscript, accuses the Chinese author of ‘ an affectation of modesty’"— whereas, the original is so outrageously the re- verse, that we could not do otherwise than sup- press the passage altogether, towards the end of the third chapter. In justice, at the same time, to the Haoukewchuen, it must be observed that this passage, and another short one, are the only untranslateable specimens throughout the work.
But
- The real divisions of the romance are, without any adequate reason,
confounded in the ‘ Pleasing History,’ + Pleas. Hist. vol. ii. p. 61. $ Vol. ii. p. SI. § Vol. ii. p. 198.
Xx PREFACE.
But it would be absurd to detract from the merit of Dr. Percy’s labours on account of the imperfection of his materials, or to deny that he most ably edited, and very correctly illus- trated (except where his version misled him) what certainly was, at the time when it ap- peared, by far the best picture of Chinese man- ners and society that we possessed. He was naturally puzzled by some parts of his manu- script, and expresses his surprise in notes at a number of incongruities, which, on a reference to the original, are not found to exist.
In the Haoukewchuen we see the most singu- lar people on earth, (self-insulated as they are from all the rest of the world), pourtrayed by a native hand in almost every variety and con- dition of human life.
Quicquid agunt homines—votum, timor, ira, voluptas, Gaudia, discursus—nostri est farrago libelli.
The interest and bustle of the scene, the spirit of the dialogue, the strong delineation and strict keeping of all the characters, joined to the generally excellent moral that is con- veyed throughout, may serve to impress us with no unfavourable sentiments in regard to Chinese taste. The story commences with an act of generous devotion on the part of the hero, and the gratitude of the person whom he
obliges
PREFACE. xi
obliges becomes the ultimate occasion of his own triumph over the combinations of his enemies. The profligate, the malicious, and the base, when they have exhausted all the resources of ingenuity, meet with their just reward ;—while rectitude, prudence, and courage carry their possessors not only unharmed, but glorious, through every trial. In the rival is exactly pourtrayed the reckless audacity of a young minion of wealth and power:—and the low devices of the uncle, ‘spite of the craftiness of the fox, and the slipperiness of the fish (to both of which he is compared) serve but to multiply his mortifications and defeats.
It may be proper to observe, that in the hero and heroine are accurately described the prin- ciples of the Confucian sect of philosophy, —a sect which in its professed admiration of virtue, and in its high tone of self-sufficiency and pride, assimilates somewhat to the ancient Stoics. Many of the precepts which the disci- ples of Confucius are in the habit of repeating, cannot be surpassed in wisdom and practical excellence. They talk of ‘ treating other men according to the treatment which you would de- sire at their hands’—of ‘guarding the thoughts,’ as the sources of action, &c.;—but in common with every other scheme of doctrines merely
human,
xii PREFACE,
human, theirs exhibits much that is exceptionable both in principle and practice. Revenge, or the lex talionis, was in some cases enjoined by Con- fucius himself,—and humility (though this virtue seems to have been inculcated by their sage) is not a distinguishing trait of his disciples. Com- bining within their own body all the talent and intellect of the state, and certainly almost all the virtue that is to be found in the country, they look with great contempt on the supersti- tious votaries of Buddha and Laoukeun. The translator received the following very just opi- nion of them from a gentleman whom thirty years residence at Peking had qualified to judge. ‘‘ The lettered class possessing a great ascendancy over the people, the policy of each successive dynasty has fully availed itself of their services :—and it is without doubt to this concentration of talent that China owes her wealth, her peace, and her prosperity.”
As we often find in our own favourite fic- tions, a number of the names in similar Chinese works have a reference to the characters of those who bear them. Thus the hero of the Fortunate Union is named from iron (quasi Ironside) ; the heroine is pingsin, ‘ icy-hearted ;’ —a term, however, which in her country means chaste, and not what we should call cold heart-
ed,
PREFACE. xiii
ed. Her father’s designation literally means ‘ dwelling in singleness of purpose,’ which sufficiently expresses his inflexible character— and so of many other appellatives. The indi- vidual personages are occasionally known un- der different names. In our translation, how- ever, it has been thought advisable to adhere to one only for each, as a means of preventing perplexity, and avoiding the unnecessary mul- tiplication of ill-looking and worse-sounding exotic words. The use, too, of those copulatives disjunctive, called hyphens, has been forborne, as they serve rather to separate than unite the syllables of names, which by-the Chinese are pronounced as much like single words, as any polysyllables in European speech. In regard to titles of honour, the translator was obliged to make use of equivalents from our own lan- guage. Laouyay, the ordinary address of a magistrate in China, is sufficiently expressed by our common term ‘ worship ;’—and the Chi- nese title Zajin (literally magnate) is pretty nearly rendered by ‘ lordship’ or ‘ excellency.’ The higher terms of respect, being less familiar and vulgar, may be occasionally used with a sparing hand ;—but to tack such household ap- pendages as ‘ mistress’ and ‘ miss’ to foreign names like the Chinese, can only be attended
with
Xiv PREFACE.
with a ridiculous effect, and certainly does not convey a just impression of the original.
The ‘ Fortunate Union’ may be considered as a more faithful picture of Chinese manners, inasmuch as the hero espouses but one wife. It is not strictly true that their laws sanction polygamy, though they permit concubinage. A Chinese can have but one 7%e or wife, properly so called, who is distinguished by a title, es- poused with ceremonies, and chosen from a rank of life, totally different from his 7séé, or handmaids, of whom he may have as many or as few as he pleases; and though the offspring of the latter possess many of the rights of legi- timacy, (ranking however after the children of the wife,) this circumstance makes little dif- ference as to the truth of the position. Even in the present romance, the profligate rival aims at effecting his union with the heroine, only by setting aside his previous marriage with her cousin as informal. Any Chinese fiction, there- fore, (and of these there are many,) which des- cribes a man espousing two wives, is in this re- spect no truer a picture of existing manners, than in respect to any other silly or amusing extrava- gance which it may happen to contain. These observations are not hastily made, being the
result of careful examination and enquiry, and derived
PREFACE. XV
derived in China from native authorities ; and the present work affords sufficient corroboration, were any required. The resolution of the scho- lar Hanyuen to suffer death, rather than allow his daughter to be degraded to the rank of a handmaid, even to a noble; and the attempts of the same noble, towards the conclusion of the story, to espouse the heroine Shueypingsin as his wife, because he had just lost his former spouse, afford abundant confirmation. In fact, the wife is of equal rank with her husband by birth, and espoused with regular marriage ce- remonies ; possessing, moreover, certain legal rights, such as they are:—the handmaid is bought for money, and received into the house nearly like any other domestic. The principle on which Chinese law and custom admit the offspring of concubinage to legitimate rights is obvious—the importance which attaches in that country to the securing of male descen- dants. It is plain that the 7se and the 7séé stand to each other in very much the same relation as the Sarah and the Hagar of the Old Testament, and therefore the common expres- sion first and second wife, which the translator himself has used on former occasions, in imita- tion of his predecessors, is hardly correct.
The reader will observe many remarkable
points
xvi PREFACE.
points of resemblance between the ‘ Fortunate ‘Union’ and our own novels and romances at the present day. Every chapter is headed by a few verses bearing some relation to its con- tents, and appropriate lines are occasionally introduced as embellishments to the story. Care has been taken to give a correct version of these poetical passages, as well as to explain the remote allusions which they frequently contain. A prose translation of poetry is con- fessedly objectionable, and rhyme sometimes imposes trammels which may interfere with the strictness of the sense. A middle course was therefore adopted, and recourse had to blank verse, which, while it admits all that is desirable on the score of fidelity, is less crab- bed and uninviting than mere literal prose. That the student of Chinese, however, might be able to avail himself of the translation in reading the original, a perfectly literal prose version of the poetical passages has been printed as an Appendix at the end of the last volume. In these may be observed some of the prin- cipal points noticed in the translator’s ‘Trea- tise on the Poetry of the Chinese,’—parti- cularly that of parallelism, which in numerous instances is as apparent as such a feature can
be rendered out of the original language. The
PREFACE. Xvil
The scattered poetry of the Haoukewchuen does not comprise above four hundred lines in the aggregate: but to represent adequately the meaning of these in a literal, aad their spirit in a metrical version, gave the translator nearly as much trouble as ai] the rest of the work. Except in some highly sustained dialogues, the prose parts convey the tone of ordinary conversation or narrative, and to any person daily accustomed to speak the language of the country, there is little more than the trouble of writing down the meaning. .
Sufficient aids exist, even in Europe, for the elucidation of prose compositions; but until a dictionary of Chinese poetry (at present a great want) shall have been compiled, the subject must be considered as almost out of the reach of European scholars. The frequent and remote allusions, which in some measure con- stitute the beauty of their poetry, are hardly to be seized by those who are unacquainted with the most popular tales, traditions, or fancies of the Chinese, and, at the same time, unsupplied with all the means of original in- formation. It is therefore, perhaps, unfortunate that Professor Remusat, of Paris, should have chosen for translation the novel of Yu-keaou- le, (or, as he writes it, Iu-kiao-li,) which is full
XVili PREFACE.
of verse. To notice a single instance at the commencement of the Fourteenth Chapter, he has mistaken the name of the fair and impru- dent damsel Wunkeun (in allusion to one of the commonest stories in China,* and bearing an evident reference to the subject of the chapter) for the title of some male personage. Instead of giving the proper name, he translates the two words that compose it, and renders the same by ‘‘the Prince of letters ;” a character and a sex the most unsuited to the runaway fair one, whom he, for the first time, dignifies with such a title. There is, however, nothing surprising in this,—and other instances might be. noted, were it a gracious task to find fault, and were Chinese criticism likely to in- terest English readers. But it is singular that M. Remusat should have misunderstood the meaning of lines so simple as the following :
REABART in 7 BD AS w
‘ Mais ce n’est pas le mérite et la renommée qui re- muent le monde,
- Est-il bon de recevoir ainsi l"hospitalité en tous lieux ?”
The very opposite is the sense of the original : ‘If
» See note to Appendix, vol. ii. p. 251, et passim.
PREFACE. xix
‘ If talent and reputation did not move (or affect) the whole empire,
‘ How could he every where have met with such a re- ception ”
There is much greater satisfaction, however, in bearing testimony to the more general correct- ness of the translation from the prose. In effec- tive knowledge of the ‘fanguage, M. Remusat seems to be without a rival in France; and his tone and language, in speaking of his own works, or those of others, entitle his ob- servations to respect. He does not, with an ’ absurd and blind fury (the motive of which is obvious) decry those advantages which are inseparable from a residence in China itself :—advantages which have enabled Dr. Morrison to achieve his dictionary, that co- lossal labour of utility, which is an honour at once to himself and to his country,—and which has met with its due praise from competent judges. It is of the author of this dictionary that M. Klaproth, after declaring that the book is “« very troublesome in use,” and “‘ full of faults,” adds the following extraordinary observation :— “* Tf, indeed, he is really the author of the work which he has published.” —But Dr. Morrison knows perfectly well how to estimate M. Kla- proth’s remarks.
Such
xx PREFACE.
‘Such attacks might well remain unnoticed ; and the translator himself has accordingly treat- ed with invariable disregard the liberal obser- vations and inuendos with which M. Klaproth (in his own peculiar style and language) has long thought it necessary to favour him—more especially as M. de Sorsum and M. Remusat deemed it worth their while to edit in French those very translations * (trifles as they were) which excited our critic’s irritability. But the resolution of the committee to reprint the Chi- nese tragedy in octavo at the end of the ro- mance, affords him a convenient opportunity (without which he should have been silent) to notice briefly some extracts which he has read from M. Klaproth’s observations upon that drama, and in so doing he craves the reader’s pardon for being dull. Our critic finds fault with the name Hanchenyu ; but had he a prac- tical acquaintance with the people, he would have known that Hanchenyu and Chenyu are the appellations which the Chinese, (who are not fond of more than three syllables in a proper name) constantly apply to that person in their frequent repetitions of the story, whether in
drawings,
© Concerning one of these M. Remusat observed, ‘ M. Davis, en le publiant, a donc rendu un véritable service aux amis de la littérature Asiatique.'
PREFACE. xxi
drawings, conversation, poetry, or prose. He seems tobe unaware that they usually make use of a single syllable of foreign names, with the addition of some adjunct; and that, could he speak enough of the language to talk to a Chinese about Hoo-han-ye-chen-yu, he would not be much more intelligible than the lady who affects to be dumb in a certain well-known French comedy. It may seem tedious to dwell on such a subject ;—but the translation itself disproves the insinuation, that the translator took the first syllable of the Tartar name ‘‘ dans le sens de s’appeler.” It says, ‘‘ 1 am Han- chenyu,” not “‘ Iam called,” &c. The heroine Chaoukeun is also called Mingfei and Wong- tseang ; but this would have been a miserable reason for lumbering our version with a string of harsh-sounding words, tending only to pro- duce confusion, and revolt the reader: and whatever anachronisms (of little consequence in a work of imagination) the original may contain, the translation is quite in accordance with the popular Chinese version of the story. The only real oversight, in the case of Wei- keang, has been corrected in the present edition. M. Klaproth has contrived to enliven so dull
a topic by a little entertainment. ‘‘ M. Davis traduit, Z met a maiden, daughter of one Wong- chang,
Xxii PREFACE.
chang, ‘ J’ai trouvé une demoiselle, fille d'un Wang tchhang.’ Mais Wang tchhang n’est pas un titre; c’est lenom propre, &c.”” Our critic may well be excused if he is not one perfect English scholar ; but he should at least be able to understand what he pretends to condemn.
A real master of Chinese literature has pro- nounced, that ‘‘ the dramatic works of the Chinese are certainly less calculated, on the whole, than their novels, to reward the labour of the translator.”* So much has been given of the Sorrows of Han, as appeared likely to be read or endured. It was thought that a plain and sufficient reason had been advanced for inserting only some of the operatic passages, of which pére Premare, in his version of the “* Orphan of Chaou,” had before given none. M. Klaproth, however, hints as usual that this was (peut-ctre) because the translator did not understand them. Be it so ;—but what curious reason will he next discover for so opposite a course, as the insertion of a double version, metrical and literal, of a// the poetry in the ROMANCE?
- Sir George Staunton.