Early references to collective punishment in an excavated Chinese text: analysis and discussion of an imprecation from the Wenxian covenant texts

This is the publisher's official version, also available electronically from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X1100036X.Susan Roosevelt Weld has observed that the Houma and Wenxian covenant texts, excavated texts dating to the fifth century BC, can be considered “examples of collective responsibility”. New materials from the Wenxian covenant texts provide further evidence relevant to this issue. In this article I present my analysis of a previously unseen imprecation, “Cause [you] to have no descendants” 俾毋有胄後. I suggest the excavated covenants provide the earliest references found in a legal context to collective punishment, a practice that, while archaic in origin, is generally better known from Qin and later penal codes. I also discuss the scope of the term shì 氏, as it is used in the imprecation, in the context of Mark Lewis’s work defining basic social units in the Zhou period. Keywords: Houma 侯馬and Wenxian 溫縣covenant texts 盟書, 俾毋有 胄後, Imprecation, Collective punishment, shì 氏, Lineage, Palaeograph

Ten thousand names : rank and lineage affiliation in the Wenxian covenant texts

This is the publisher's official version, also available electronically from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5169/seals-147840.The following paper looks at evidence of rank distinction and lineage affiliation among partici¬ pants in a covenant recorded on tablets excavated at Wenxian $ 3÷ Henan province, and dated to the fifth century BC. The covenant is in the form of a loyalty oath to a leader, taken to be the head of the Han M§ lineage, one of the ministerial families of Jin The text of the covenant is written in ink on stone tablets, each individualized with the name of a covenantor. Tablets with this partic¬ ular covenant text were found in five separate pits. The number of tablets in each pit ranged from several dozen to more than 5000. The stone- type and shape of the tablets varied within and among pits. I argue that these variations are evidence of distinctions in rank among the covenantors. I dis¬ cuss a set of four related names from the tablets that appear to support this conjecture. I then look at names, of both covenantors and enemies, in which a lineage name is found. I argue that these names show that it was loyalty to the Han leader, not shared lineage affiliation, which was the main requirement for participation in the covenanting group. I conclude with a brief discussion on the size of the covenanting group, lineages within political groups, and the wider significance of these materials

A methodological procedure for the analysis of the Wenxian covenant texts

This is the publisher's official version, also available electronically from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5169/seals-147669This article introduces a systematic methodological procedure for the analysis of Chinese palaeographic materials, constructed in this instance for the analysis ofthe Wenxian covenant texts {Wënxiàn mêngshû ÌSHS§). The covenant texts have been dated to the early fifth century BC and were produced in the state of Jin §; both the script and language of the covenants present problems of interpretation. The article first briefly introduces the tablets, on which the texts were written, and gives an example of the most commonly found type of covenant. A number of key palaeographic terms used in the description of the methodological procedure are then defined and discussed. These include terms related to characters, their non-standard forms and the components of which they are constmcted, as well as terminology associated with transcription. Following this, the methodological procedure adopted for the analysis of the Wenxian texts is set out. The article concludes with the observation that the procedure has proven generally successful in the analysis of the texts under consideration. It also suggests that such a procedure is transferable to the analysis of other palaeographic materials and that an understanding of this methodology can aid the appraisal of transcriptions and annotations of previously published excavated texts

Dating the Houma Covenant Texts: The Significance of Recent Findings From the Wenxian Covenant Texts

This is the publisher's version, which is being made available on KU ScholarWorks with permission. Copyright 2013, Society for the Study of Early China.This paper reconsiders the dating of the Houma covenant texts in light of new findings from the Wenxian covenant texts. Dating of the Houma covenants has focused on matching certain names found in the Houma covenants to names and events in historical texts. These include the name of the sanctioning spirit invoked in the covenants, and that of the covenant lord overseeing the covenants. I argue that the sanctioning spirit is not, as is often proposed, a former lord of Jin, but a mountain spirit called Lord Yue, and, as such, has no bearing on the dating of the texts. I further argue that the use of the personal name of a Han lineage leader in the Wenxian covenants strongly supports the identification of the figure referred to as jia 嘉 in the Houma texts as the historical Zhao Jia (Zhao Huan Zi). I suggest that the mention of Zhao Jia in the recently published Chu-slips Xinian implies that Zhao Jia came to the leadership of the Zhao lineage around 442 B.C.E., well before 424 B.C.E., the date of his single-year reign reported in the Shi ji. I conclude that the Houma covenants include materials that may be linked to the Zhao Wu incident of the early fifth-century B.C.E., but that those materials in which Zhao Jia is named as the covenant lord probably date to sometime between 442 and 424 B.C.E.本文根據溫縣盟書中的新發現重新考察侯馬盟書的年代問題。判斷侯 馬盟書年代的主要根據是侯馬盟書中能夠與歷史記載相關聯的一些人 名和地名。這些名字包括盟書中被召監督參盟人的神的名稱以及盟主 的名字。本文推測該神非晉國的某位先君，而是一位叫做 “岳公” 的山 神，因而對推測侯馬盟書的年代不構成限制。此外，根據溫縣盟書中 可確認為盟主人名的例子，可以推測侯馬盟書中的 “嘉” 字應該就是指 趙嘉 (趙桓子)。根據清華簡《繫年》中關於趙嘉的記載，本文進一步 推測趙嘉在公元前 442 年左右已經是趙氏的族長 ，比《史記》中記載 趙嘉 424 年即位早十幾年。根據這些分析，侯馬盟書中有的盟書應該 與公元前五世紀初的趙午事件有關，但是那些提到趙嘉的盟書的年代 大概在公元前 442 到 424 年之間

The reaction of cytochrome c with [Fe(EDTA)(H2O)]−

AbstractThe interaction of horse ferricytochrome c with the reagents [Fe(EDTA)(H2O)]− and [Cr(CN)6]3− were studied at pH 7 and 25°C by 1H-NMR spectroscopy. Two binding regions near to the heme crevice of cytochrome c were identified. Both regions bound both reagents but they exhibited different selectivities.The relevance of this finding to the electron-transfer function of cytochrome c is discussed

Structural role of the tyrosine residues of cytochrome c

The tertiary structures of horse, tuna, Neurospora crassa, horse [Hse65,Leu67]- and horse [Hse65,Leu74]-cytochromes c were studied with high-resolution 1H n.m.r. spectroscopy. The amino acid sequences of these proteins differ at position 46, which is occupied by phenylalanine in the horse proteins but by tyrosine in the remaining two, and at positions 67, 74 and 97, which are all occupied by tyrosine residues in horse and tuna cytochrome c but in the other proteins are substituted by phenylalanine or leucine, though there is only one such substitution per protein. The various aromatic-amino-acid substitutions do not seriously affect the protein structure

Pluralism about Knowledge

In this paper I consider the prospects for pluralism about knowledge, that is, the view that there is a plurality of knowledge relations. After a brief overview of some views that entail a sort of pluralism about knowledge, I focus on a particular kind of knowledge pluralism I call standards pluralism. Put roughly, standards pluralism is the view that one never knows anything simpliciter. Rather, one knows by this-or-that epistemic standard. Because there is a plurality of epistemic standards, there is a plurality of knowledge relations. In §1 I argue that one can construct an impressive case for standards pluralism. In §2 I clarify the relationship between standards pluralism, epistemic contextualism and epistemic relativism. In §3 I argue that standards pluralism faces a serious objection. The gist of the objection is that standards pluralism is incompatible with plausible claims about the normative role of knowledge. In §4 I finish by sketching the form that a standards pluralist response to this objection might take