Talk:Cai Yan

message: There's more on Kongming's archives. Sarazyn • TALK • DE 08:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I understand that it is European tradition to cite family name when shortening references.  But with Chinese characters, this would rarely work.  It is the Chinese tradition to use Courtesy name as short reference.  This works because courtesy names are often quite unique. (There must be some conscious effort for literate people to avoid famous courtesy names.)  This discussion probably doesn't belong to this single page, but it is really very confusing to shorten reference to family name. Sillyvalley (talk) 22:45, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Simplified reference to ancient Chinese characters

message: Specifically, the previous editor indicated that Zhang Yu's painting was in Summer Palace collection in Beijing without citation.  This article http://www.cnwhtv.cn/show-46789-1.html specifically refers to the said piece as in Jilin Provincial Museum collection.  I also removed link to missing article about painter Zhang Yu because the painter has left no other historic records, nor did his other pieces survive.  There is little chance that a Wikipedia article will ever be created.  Baidu's Wiki includes this article about Zhang Yu, http://baike.baidu.com/view/101227.htm; it is solely about this one painting.Sillyvalley (talk) 21:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: References in Legacy

message: Citing Chang et al (1999), current Wiki text states "She asked him if he could provide her with yet another husband," causing Cao Cao to pardon her husband.  However, in Book of the Later Han, the story is, quoting completely: '祀为屯田都尉，犯法当死。文姬诣曹操请之。时公卿名士及远方使驿，坐者满堂。操谓宾客曰：“蔡伯喈女在外，今为诸君见之。”及文姬进，蓬首徒行，叩头请罪，音辞清辩，旨甚酸哀。众皆为改容。操曰：“诚实相矜，然文状已去，奈何！”文姬曰：“明公厩马万匹，虎士成林，何惜疾足一骑而不济垂死之命乎？”操感其言，乃追原祀罪。时且寒，赐以头巾履袜。'  There is no mentioning of "another husband".  Cao admitted that he had the intention to help (诚实相矜); he regretted that the (execution) paperwork had been dispatched (然文状已去，奈何).  Cai's counter argument was: "You have ten thousand horses in staples and a forest of soldiers as stout as tigers.  How could you not save a life by unwilling to dispatch a quick footed horse (to revoke the execution order)?"  After that, Cao was moved (操感其言), and pardoned (Dong) Si's crime.
From what I know, the couple hundred characters in the Book of the Late Han are all the historic text about her life that survived today.  But I do not have access to Chang et al, so I cannot tell whether some references may have come from later commentators who may have access to lost sources such as Collected Works of Cai Wenji.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sillyvalley (talk • contribs) 17:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: What changed Cao Cao's mind about Dong Si's capital punishment?

message: The current text cites Chang et al (1999) to state "The reason Cao Cao wanted her back was that she was the only one remaining of her clan and he needed her to placate the spirits of her ancestors." As a "reason," this is not fully reconcilable with other historic records, such as the fact that Wenji's father had at least two other daughters, possibly a son. (See Cai Yong.) One of the sisters was known to mother a few notable figures including Empress Dowager Yang Huiyu in subsequent Jin dynasty (whereas Wenji had no child fathered by a Han Chinese, not even a Xiongnu born child who would be accompanying her home). If such sisters were not able to placate the spirits of their ancestors, Wenji would not be, either, because females were not considered direct posterity. At best, this could only be a pretext Cao gave to convince fellow ministers to justify the ransom.  The word "reason" in this context implies, or at least suggests, true motivation.  It is impossible that her other sisters marriages were unknown at the time of the ransom, because they couldn't have been married into notable families without their father's blessing.  If pretext is too strong, justification Cao gave would be more neutral.  I will hold on a change, though, till I see some existing research.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sillyvalley (talk • contribs) 18:05, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Reason" or pretext?