All poems

宋 Song · 诗 Poem

秦州北山云是隗嚣宫登城楼下瞰偶题

On the Northern Hill of Qinzhou, Said to Be Weixiao's Palace — Descending the Tower and Glancing Down, a Casual Inscription

张方平

Zhang Fangping

咏史historical chant 割据regional separatism

宛下君臣实儿戏，昆阳胜败非人力。
刘秀其来异独夫，隗嚣何事为西伯。
送质已是不能强，保险明知本无策。
惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜。

The rulers and ministers at Wan were truly like children at play; the victory at Kunyang was no work of man.
Liu Xiu after all differed from the lone tyrant; why did Weixiao style himself the Western Earl?
Sending a hostage already showed he could not strengthen himself; holding the fort by danger he clearly knew was no policy.
Only that he won followers like Tian Heng is why later heroes jointly sigh in regret.

Listen

Meaning

A historical poem written atop the ruins of Weixiao's palace. It first scorns the frivolity of the Gengshi court and the overshoot of Weixiao, then faults his two failed strategies, yet finally grants him a measure of praise for winning loyal followers like Tian Heng. The poem implies that he who wins men wins and discreetly advises border commanders to value talent.

宛城之下的君臣其实如儿戏，昆阳的胜败原非人力所能定。刘秀本不同于独夫（王莽），隗嚣又何苦自比为西伯（周文王）。送质子已是不能自强，凭险固守明知本无良策。唯其能得士如田横，故后世英雄同声嗟惜。

Appreciation

A seven-character quatrain whose structure reads like a historical essay. The opening couplet launches two Han anecdotes — one dismissal, one sigh — with sharp, lofty argument. The second contrasts Liu Xiu, the lone tyrant, and Weixiao's presumptuous self-comparison to the Western Earl. The middle line directly censures Weixiao's two blunders; the closing suddenly turns to grant him the winning of men and a sigh of regret, with restraint and elevation well-balanced. The whole uses history as material and argument as poetry.

【白话串讲】张方平在秦州登城楼，看隗嚣的宫殿遗迹：“宛下君臣实儿戏”。“刘秀其来异独夫，隗嚣何事为西伯”——“惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜”——他评隗嚣。【意象与手法】此诗七言绝句（四句），章法如史论。起联「宛下君臣实儿戏，昆阳胜败非人力」以两桩汉末史事开篇，一贬一叹，立论峭拔；颔联「刘秀其来异独夫，隗嚣何事为西伯」以对比辨人物：刘秀异于王莽独夫，隗嚣却妄拟文王，翻案见讥；腹联「送质已是不能强，保险明知本无策」直斥隗嚣两大失策，议论斩截；尾联「惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜」忽作转语，许其得士，寄以嗟惜，抑扬得体。通篇以史为材、以议为诗。【情感与主旨】此诗登秦州北山，凭吊隗嚣故宫，前六句层层贬隗嚣之失，末联许其得士而嗟惜，寓意「得士者昌」之戒，亦含方平对边臣「务得士」的劝意，折射北宋咏史重「论古证今」的学风。【名句点睛】「惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜」以转笔收束，不没其「得士」一善，使全诗免于苛薄，于论史中见情韵，最见宋人咏史「先破后立、以一善收」的章法。

Background

Zhang Fangping's poem climbs the northern hill of Qinzhou (today Tianshui) and lingers over the ruins of Weixiao's palace. Weixiao (d. 33 CE), a late-Eastern-Han separatist of Longyou, held Tianshui, built a palace on the northern hill, later surrendered to Han then rebelled, and died of worry after defeat. The place was a border prefecture in the Song (Qinzhou). Zhang, descending the tower and looking down, touches the ruins and judges Weixiao: the opening couplet mocks the Gengshi rulers with 'truly like children at play' and sighs at Liu Xiu's heavenly aid at Kunyang; the middle contrasts Liu Xiu's difference from the lone tyrant and Weixiao's presumptuous comparison to the Western Earl; the later lines expose his sending a hostage and fortifying by danger, yet grant him winning men like Tian Heng. The poem was likely written when Zhang was on mission to Long or touring Qinzhou, using the past to mirror the present and implying concern that border commanders win men. It also shows the Northern Song historical-poem custom of proving the present through the past.

张方平《秦州北山云是隗嚣宫登城楼下瞰偶题》登秦州（今天水）北山，凭吊隗嚣故宫而作。隗嚣（？—三三），东汉初陇右割据者，据天水，曾建宫北山，后降汉复叛，兵败忧死。其地当河西孔道，宋时为秦州边郡。方平登城下瞰，抚遗迹而评隗嚣：起联以「宛下君臣实儿戏」讥更始君臣，「昆阳胜败非人力」叹刘秀得天助；中联辨刘秀非独夫、隗嚣妄比西伯；后联揭其送质、保险之失，而许其得士如田横。此诗当在方平使陇或游秦州时，借古喻今，寓对边臣「得士」之思，亦见北宋咏史重「论古证今」的学风，与《临淄同刘仲方作》同属登临论古之作。隗嚣据陇右而建宫北山，其地在宋为秦州边郡，方平登临凭吊，抚遗迹而评其兴亡。此诗当在方平使陇或游秦州时所作，借古喻今，寓对边臣「得士」之思。北宋与西夏、辽对峙，边臣得失为朝廷所重，方平以隗嚣之失为鉴，正见老臣论古证今之用心，亦合北宋咏史重「地理—人事」对照的学风，与《临淄同刘仲方作》同属登临论古之作。隗嚣据陇右建宫北山，其地在宋为秦州边郡，方平登临凭吊寓对边臣得士之思，亦合北宋咏史重地理人事对照之学风，与临淄篇同属登临论古。

Art

A seven-character quatrain (four lines) whose structure reads like a historical essay. The opening 'the rulers at Wan were truly like children at play; the victory at Kunyang was no work of man' launches two Han anecdotes — one dismissal, one sigh — with lofty, sharp argument. The second line 'Liu Xiu after all differed from the lone tyrant; why did Weixiao style himself the Western Earl' contrasts figures: Liu Xiu differs from Wang Mang the lone tyrant, while Weixiao presumptuously likens himself to King Wen — a reversal that mocks. The middle 'sending a hostage already showed he could not strengthen; holding the fort by danger he knew was no policy' directly censures Weixiao's two blunders, its argument cutting. The closing 'only that he won followers like Tian Heng is why later heroes jointly sigh' suddenly turns to grant him the winning of men and a sigh — restraint and elevation well-balanced. The whole uses history as material and argument as poetry, typical of Song historical poems leading history by argument, more rational than Tang poems' emphasis on sighing.

此诗七言绝句（四句），章法如史论。起联「宛下君臣实儿戏，昆阳胜败非人力」以两桩汉末史事开篇，一贬一叹，立论峭拔；颔联「刘秀其来异独夫，隗嚣何事为西伯」以对比辨人物：刘秀异于王莽独夫，隗嚣却妄拟文王，翻案见讥；腹联「送质已是不能强，保险明知本无策」直斥隗嚣两大失策，议论斩截；尾联「惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜」忽作转语，许其得士，寄以嗟惜，抑扬得体。通篇以史为材、以议为诗，是宋人咏史「以论带史」的典型，比唐人咏史重慨叹更见理性。四句如史论，起联以两桩汉末史事立论，一贬更始、一叹光武；颔联以对比辨刘秀、隗嚣、王莽三人品格；腹联直斥隗嚣送质、保险两大失策；尾联忽许其得士而嗟惜。通篇以史为材、以议为诗，斩截而抑扬得体，是宋人咏史「以论带史」的典型，比唐人重慨叹更见理性，于短章中具史断之锋。四句如史论，起联立论、颔联辨人、腹联斥失、尾联许士，斩截而抑扬得体，是宋人咏史以论带史之典型，于短章中具史断之锋。

Allusions

Allusions are from Han history. 'Rulers at Wan': Wan was the capital of the Gengshi Emperor Liu Xuan, whose ministers quarreled — 'children at play' mocks their lack of far sight. 'Kunyang victory': at the battle of Kunyang Liu Xiu defeated Wang Mang's huge army with few; ancients said Heaven aided, so Zhang says 'no work of man.' 'Lone tyrant' (du fu): from the Documents 'the lone tyrant Zhou' — a ruler abandoned by all; here it figuratively means Wang Mang; 'Liu Xiu differed from the lone tyrant' means Guangwu won hearts, unlike Mang. 'Western Earl' (xi bo): King Wen of Zhou, who received the mandate and was called the Western Earl; Weixiao, holding Longyou, once compared himself to the Western Earl to gather followers; Zhang mocks the incongruity. 'Sending a hostage': Weixiao once sent his son as hostage to Han to show submission, later rebelled; 'holding by danger' means relying on Longshan's natural defenses. 'Tian Heng': Qi's Tian Heng, defeated, fled to the sea with five hundred followers who died for him, a metaphor for winning men's devoted service; Zhang grants Weixiao 'won men like Tian Heng,' the reason for later regret. All allusions are Han history and the Confucian debate of king versus hegemon, fitting the Northern Song historiographical ethos of honoring the king and rejecting the hegemon.

用典皆汉史。其一，「宛下君臣」：宛城为更始帝刘玄所都，其臣如朱鲔、李轶多倾轧，「儿戏」讥其无远略。其二，「昆阳胜败」：昆阳之战刘秀以少破王莽大军，古谓「天助」，方平言「非人力」。其三，「独夫」：《书》「独夫纣」，指众叛之君，此喻王莽；「刘秀异独夫」谓光武得人心，不同于莽。其四，「西伯」：周文王受命称西伯，隗嚣据陇右尝自比西伯以收众望；方平讥其不伦。其五，「送质」：隗嚣曾遣子为质于汉以示附，后叛；「保险」谓凭陇山险固。其六，「田横」：齐田横兵败入海，五百士从死，喻得士死力；方平许隗嚣「得士似田横」，为其身后嗟惜之由。「宛下君臣」讥更始倾轧，「昆阳胜败」叹光武得天助，「独夫」喻王莽，「西伯」讥隗嚣僭比文王，「送质」「保险」揭其失策，「田横」许其得士。诸典皆汉史与儒家王霸之辨，方平以「儿戏」「无策」断之，以「田横」收之，正合北宋史学尊王黜霸、以正统衡人之风气，亦见其史识之活。宛下君臣讥更始、昆阳叹光武、独夫喻莽、西伯讥隗嚣、送质保险揭失、田横许士，诸典皆汉史与王霸之辨，正合北宋尊王黜霸之风气。

Commentary

This poem's craft lies in restraint and elevation well-balanced. The first six lines layer censure on Weixiao — mocking Gengshi, sighing at Kunyang, distinguishing the lone tyrant, laughing at the Western Earl, censuring the hostage, breaking the fortification — almost no lenient word; then the closing 'only that he won men like Tian Heng is why later heroes jointly sigh' suddenly turns to grant him the winning of men and a sigh, keeping the poem from harsh one-sidedness. This first-break-then-establish, ending by granting one virtue structure fits the Song historical poem's insight of rather than harshly blame, discuss why he failed. Su Shi's various historical poems often use this rise-and-fall; Zhang conducts it in a quatrain, even more cutting. The Qing 'Song Shi Chao' says Zhang has a profound, elegant manner; though this poem's argument is sharp its language is not petty-sharp, showing a minister's measure in judging the past.

此诗是张方平咏史之作，手眼在「抑扬得体」。前六句层层贬隗嚣：讥更始、叹昆阳、辨独夫、嘲西伯、斥送质、破保险，几无恕词；至尾联「惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜」忽作转笔，许其得士、寄以嗟惜，使全诗不板于苛论。这种「先破后立、末以一善收之」的章法，正合宋人咏史「与其苛责，不如论其所以败」的史识。苏轼《代葛蕴作》及《读后汉书》诸咏史，多此抑扬；方平此篇以七绝行之，更见斩截。清人《宋诗钞》谓方平「气体渊雅」，此诗虽论锋锐而语不尖薄，正见其大臣论古之度。读此诗，当知北宋咏史已由唐之「怀古伤今」转向「以史证理」，此篇可为一例。此诗手眼在「抑扬得体」，前六句层层贬隗嚣，尾联忽许其得士，使全诗不板于苛论。这种先破后立、末以一善收之章法，合宋人咏史「论其所以败」之识。苏轼咏史多此抑扬，方平以七绝行之更见斩截。清人谓方平气体渊雅，此诗论锋虽锐而语不尖薄，正见大臣论古之度，于研究北宋咏史由唐之伤慨转向宋之理断，此篇可为一例。先破后立、末以一善收，合宋人咏史论其所以败之识；苏轼咏史多此抑扬，方平以七绝行之更见斩截，论锋虽锐而语不尖薄，正见大臣论古之度。

Prosody

Form Seven-character quatrain七言绝句

Rhyme Entering-tone zhi, mo, xi rhymes mixed (li, bo, ce, xi), one rhyme throughout.入声职、陌、昔诸韵通押（力、伯、策、惜），一韵到底。

Tone pattern The seven-quatrain follows level-oblique rules; this poem uses entering-tone rhyme; its clipped ending gives a stark, vigorous affective tone.七绝依平仄，此诗押入声韵，句式为『宛下君臣实儿戏（仄仄平平仄平仄），昆阳胜败非人力（平平仄仄平平仄）』『刘秀其来异独夫（平仄平平仄仄平），隗嚣何事为西伯（仄平平仄平平仄）』『送质已是不能强（仄仄仄仄仄平平），保险明知本无策（仄仄平平仄平仄）』『惟其得士似田横（平平仄仄仄平平），后世英雄共嗟惜（仄仄平平仄平平）』，以入声收束，声情峭劲。

Reading note This seven-character quatrain rhymes in the entering-tone zhi/mo/xi groups (li, bo, ce, xi); the entering tone's brief, cut-off ending best suits historical judgment's cutting, settled, vigorous tone, matching the cold tone of 'children at play,' 'no work of man,' 'why the Western Earl,' 'jointly sigh.' Zhang envelops the four couplets in entering tone, its sound stark and vigorous, read like a knife carving history, without the soft grace of level-tone quatrains. Structurally, the first six lines layer censure, the last two turn to regret; the entering tone's clipped measure supports this rise-and-fall, so 'sigh' though feeling-laden is not soft. Song historical poems like entering-tone rhyme to write the sternness of judging the past; Zhang conducts it in a quatrain, more cutting than long regulated verse.此诗七言绝句，押入声职、陌、昔诸韵（力、伯、策、惜），入声短促收束，最宜史论斩截、慨叹沉劲之调，与「儿戏」「非人力」「何事为西伯」「共嗟惜」的峻冷语气相称。方平以入声笼四联，声情峭劲，读来如刀斫史迹，无平韵七绝常有的柔婉。章法上，前六句层层贬抑、末二句转惜，以入声的促节托住这番抑扬，使「嗟惜」二字虽含情而不软。宋人咏史好以入声韵写论古之峻，方平此篇以七绝行之，比长篇排律更见斩截。欲识宋调咏史「以韵写骨」的面目，此篇足堪参看——入声的清峭，正是其史识的外显。入声清峭托住史论之峻，前贬后惜以促节收束，正宋调咏史以韵写骨之显，读来如刀斫史迹而无平韵之柔。

Line by line

宛下君臣实儿戏，昆阳胜败非人力。

The rulers and ministers at Wan were truly like children at play; the victory at Kunyang was no work of man.

宛城之下的君臣其实如儿戏，昆阳的胜败原非人力所能定。

The lord and his ministers at Wan were truly playing at dolls; the victory and defeat at Kunyang were not human power.

此起联以两桩汉末史事立论，是全诗史评的底座。「宛下君臣实儿戏」直讥更始帝刘玄及其臣僚在宛城（更始所都）的倾轧无谋，以「儿戏」二字断其儿戏误国；「昆阳胜败非人力」则叹刘秀昆阳以少破莽，古来归之天助，故曰「非人力」。一贬一叹，笔法峭拔：上句贬更始之昏，下句叹光武之兴，正反相形，已暗伏后文「刘秀异独夫」的对照。七绝起手即以史论破题，不见景物，纯是宋调咏史的理性面目，为全篇「论古」定下斩截基调。

The opening establishes the poem's historical judgment on two late-Han events, the base of the whole critique. The lord and his ministers at Wan were truly playing at dolls directly mocks Emperor Gengshi (Liu Xuan) and his officials for their senseless factional strife at Wan (Gengshi's capital), judging their trifling with the country in the two words playing at dolls. The victory and defeat at Kunyang were not human power sighs that Liu Xiu, at Kunyang, broke Wang Mang's horde with few against many, which the ancients ascribed to heaven's aid, hence not human power. One blame one sigh, the brush steep: the first blames Gengshi's folly, the second sighs Guangwu's rise, the reverse and forward set against each other, secretly planting the later contrast of Liu Xiu, after all, was no lone tyrant. The quatrain opens with historical argument, no scenery, purely the rational face of the Song historical poem, fixing the decisive key of judging the past for the whole piece.

刘秀其来异独夫，隗嚣何事为西伯。

Liu Xiu after all differed from the lone tyrant; why did Weixiao style himself the Western Earl?

刘秀本不同于独夫（王莽），隗嚣又何苦自比为西伯（周文王）。

Liu Xiu, after all, was no lone tyrant; why did Wei Xiao make himself a Lord of the West?

此颔联以对比辨三人品格，是全诗翻案之眼。「刘秀其来异独夫」谓光武本不同于王莽那般独夫（众叛之君），得人心而兴；「隗嚣何事为西伯」则反诘隗嚣：你不过陇右一割据者，何苦妄自比况周文王（西伯）以收众望？一褒一讥，对比鲜明。方平于此最见史识：不因人废功（许刘秀），亦不因势恕失（讥隗嚣僭比）。「其来」「何事」虚词呼应，使斩截的史断带上跌宕的语气，是七绝中「以虚词行气」的好例，既立论又见波澜。

The jaw couplet distinguishes the characters of the three through contrast, the poem's reversal eye. Liu Xiu, after all, was no lone tyrant means Guangwu was originally unlike Wang Mang, the tyrant abandoned by all, who rose by winning the people. Why did Wei Xiao make himself a Lord of the West? rhetorically questions Wei Xiao: you were but a separatist in Longyou, why presumptuously compare yourself to King Wen of Zhou (the Lord of the West) to gather the people's hopes? One praise one mockery, the contrast clear. Fangping here most shows historical discernment: he does not discard achievement because of the man (allowing Liu Xiu), nor excuse failure because of the tide (mocking Wei Xiao's presumptuous comparison). The empty words after all and why echo each other, giving the decisive historical verdict a winding tone, a fine example in the quatrain of moving the breath through empty words, at once establishing the thesis and showing waves.

惟其得士似田横，后世英雄共嗟惜。

Only that he won followers like Tian Heng is why later heroes jointly sigh in regret.

唯其能得士如田横，故后世英雄同声嗟惜。

Only that he won his men as Tian横 did, do later ages' heroes all sigh for him.

此尾联忽作转笔，是全诗抑扬的关键。「惟其」二字一转，由前六句的苛论翻出许词：隗嚣虽失策，却能得士如田横（田横五百士从死），故此后世英雄同声嗟惜。方平不没其「得士」一善，使全诗免于苛薄，章法由破转立。尤可味者「后世英雄共嗟惜」——嗟惜非惜其割据，而惜其有士而终败，寓「得士者昌」之戒。七绝末句最重余味，此以嗟惜收，于论史中见情韵，正合宋人咏史「理中有情」之妙，亦暗含方平对边臣「务得士」的劝意。

The closing suddenly turns, the key to the poem's depression and raising. The two words only that turn, reversing the harsh judgment of the first six lines into allowance: Wei Xiao, though he erred, could win his men as Tian横 did (Tian横's five hundred followers died with him), so later ages' heroes all sigh for him. Fangping does not bury the one good of his winning men, saving the poem from harshness, the structure turning from breaking to establishing. What is most to taste is later ages' heroes all sigh for him: the sigh is not for his separatism, but for his having men yet ending in defeat, lodging the warning that he who wins men prospers. The last line of a quatrain weighs most on aftertone; this closes in sighing, showing feeling within historical judgment, exactly the Song delight of reason within feeling, and secretly holds Fangping's urging to frontier officials to win men.

Study

Word focus

儿戏 'Children at play' (er xi) comes from the Shiji tradition of contemptuous political judgement, meaning to handle state affairs like a child's game. Zhang uses these two characters to judge the Gengshi rulers, extreme in disparagement yet without vulgarity — the condensed brush of historical judgement. Its weight lies in the word 'truly' — 'truly like children at play' settles their foolishness beyond excuse. Song historical poems like a single character as verdict; Zhang's use of 'children at play' both inherits Sima Qian's tradition and anticipates later 'children-emperor' type verdicts. 「宛下君臣实儿戏」之「儿戏」，本《史记》论政「此亡秦之续耳」一脉的轻蔑语，谓处置国事如孩童嬉戏。方平以此二字断更始君臣，极尽贬抑而语不带脏，是史论笔法的凝练。此词之重在一「实」字——「实儿戏」坐实其昏庸，无可辩解。宋人咏史好以一字定评，方平此用「儿戏」既承太史公论政传统，又开后世「儿戏天子」类史评先声。二字置于篇首，先声夺人，为后文讥隗嚣「何事为西伯」张本：更始既儿戏，隗嚣之拟西伯自见不伦。

西伯 'Western Earl' (xi bo) was King Wen of Zhou's received title, an ancient sage-king symbol. Weixiao, holding Longyou, once compared himself to the Western Earl to gather followers; Zhang's rhetorical 'why did he' mocks the incongruity — a mere separatist daring to liken himself to a sage-king. Its subtlety lies in using the honored to set off the low: the more honored the Western Earl, the more ridiculous Weixiao's presumption. Together with the opposite 'lone tyrant' (Wang Mang) it forms a three-level contrast of sage-tyrant-presumptuous, with rigorous historical insight. Song historical poems value correct naming; Zhang's use of 'Western Earl' shows his weighing men by the Confucian king-versus-hegemon debate. 「隗嚣何事为西伯」之「西伯」，周文王受命之号，古之圣王象。隗嚣据陇右，尝自比西伯以收众望，方平以反诘「何事为」讥其不伦——一割据者安敢拟圣王？此词之妙在「以尊衬卑」：西伯愈尊，隗嚣之妄愈显。与对句「独夫」（王莽）形成「圣—暴—妄」的三级对照，史识精严。宋人咏史重「正名」，方平此用「西伯」正可见其以儒家王霸之辨衡人，是北宋史学「尊王黜霸」风气入诗的显例，二字之中寓一代正统观。