Clerimont’s song in Ben Jonson’s The Silent Woman (ca. 1739)
五百十六[1]
蘇籀《雙溪集》十五卷、《遺言》一卷。仲滋為子由之孫，《集》中亦稱說二父，而所作似欲拔戟自成一隊，務為奧衍瑰琦，炫博行怪，蠻做硬填，知堆砌而不善琢磨，以致語笨重而意悶僿。尤以詩為甚，每似明末清季人手筆。卷一〈次韻答晁以道見贈〉、〈東坡三絕句〉、〈南溪太息〉、卷二〈汲東坡所浚井〉、〈次韻王丈豐父待制荔枝二十韻〉、卷六〈雪堂硯賦〉、卷十一〈跋摹連昌宮詞〉、〈跋拔豕帖〉，莫不推重東坡，《遺言》亦無尊子由以壓東坡之意，《四庫提要》真為瞽說。卷二有〈送朱喬年被舉薦〉七律，則仲滋固文公之先友也。
卷二〈將軍〉：「將軍義勇名，蜂蟻嘗旅拒。拊邇建赤油，招遙揮白羽。（中略）匈奴恨未滅，致官逾噲伍。（中略）列屋鏁名倡，連車載清酤。用錢取水衡，卜宅凌武庫。山岳勢能移，震電赫憑怒。（中略）可憐金玉帛，殊勝煙埃土。嗟彼紳佩儔，索漠何太窶。試移名將傳，予汝頻晤語。」按參觀第二百四十六則。仲滋固上書秦檜干進附和者（見卷八），讀此詩想見當時武官惜死愛錢，以戰為利，或亦有激而主和戎耳。張巨山《紫微集》卷三十五〈陳公資政墓誌銘〉載簡齋斥大將語[2]，亦正相發明。《陔餘叢考》卷二十謂：「南渡將帥之豪侈，度越前代，惟岳忠武狥國忘家。」此詩可以佐證。
〈題張公文潛詩卷〉五排：「淵停真可挹，川駛不留行」，「百末芳蜂採，千岐理刃迎。」
卷三〈題徐師川詩卷〉：「學究村村自謂賢，西京涇渭派淪漣。古人聖處工研貫，新義阿時力洗湔。炳闊多聞包宇宙，閴寥餘韻出蹄筌。飄然徑造騷人室，老憤應加視後鞭。」按用字吃力而不貫，錄此以見蘇氏之孫、黃氏之甥尚有文字因緣。
〈春設〉：「折簡王春涓勝日，執輿鄰曲集僑官。奕娃紅手凌寒怯，歌頸塗薌訴白寬。膏沐柳梅牽屐齒，冶妍桃杏壓欄干。珍烹鬥賽携英黠，娛老粧樓疊肉槃。」
〈惜花〉：「豁眼桃紅思聖解，襲人蘭郁比修能。面脂靡曼負塗澤，繪綵化工夸斲氷。蒨粲芳穠觸吟境，艷陽風色嗾狂朋。傾壺簫管黳蓬鬢，沈頓金觥雹凸稜。」按二首雖不文從字順，尚較警鍊。
卷八〈上門下侍郎書〉：「歷數前後亂吾邦家者，皆鴃舌之相也。譬如蛇蠆蝗𧌒，遺類餘種，必為巨害。仲尼作《春秋》，吳越未嘗稱人，荊舒咸在斥罰，今奈何不循覆車之戒，用閩蜑為相乎！」知閩腹之有蟲，而渾忘己乃蜀人，腹亦有蟲也。
《遺言》：「公按即子由為籀講《老子》數篇，曰：『髙於孟子二三等矣！』」
「公解《孟子》至『浩然之氣』一段，顧籀曰：『五百年無此作矣！』」
「公言：『歐陽文忠公讀書，五行俱下。吾嘗見之，但近覷耳，若遠視何可當。』」
「公言：『東坡律詩，最忌屬對偏枯，不容一句不善者。古詩用韻，必須偶數。』」
「公曰：『吾暮年於義理無所不通，悟孔子一以貫之者。』」
「公曰：『子瞻之文奇，予文但穩耳。』」
「張十二病後詩一卷，頗得陶元亮體，然余觀古人為文，各自用其才耳。若用心專摹倣一人，捨己徇人，未必貴也。」
「元祐間，公及蘇子容、劉貢父同在省中，二人皆曰：『某等自少記憶書籍，不免抄節，而後稍不忘。觀君家昆仲，未嘗抄節，而下筆引據精切，乃真記得者也。』」
「子瞻諸文，皆有奇氣。至〈赤壁賦〉彷彿屈、宋之作，漢、唐諸公皆莫及也。」
「貢父嘗謂公所為訓詞曰：『君所作强於令兄。』」
「公曰：『申包胥哭秦庭一章，子瞻誦之，得為文之法。』」
「公曰：『莊周〈養生〉一篇，誦之如龍行空，爪趾鱗翼所及，皆自合規矩，可謂奇文。』」
「唐儲光羲詩髙處似陶淵明，平處似王摩詰。」
「公言：『吕吉甫、王子韶皆解三經并字説，介甫專行其説，兩人所作皆廢弗用，王、吕由此矛盾。』」
「黄魯直盛稱梅聖俞詩不容口，公曰：『梅詩不逮君』，魯直甚喜。」
「公每語予云：『聞吾言當記之勿忘，吾死無人為汝言此矣。』」
五百十七[6]
Jottings:
Pascal’s remark, “cela vous fera
croire, et vous abêtira” (Pensées et
opuscules, ed. L. Brunschvicg, p. 441), shocked Victor Cousin into
exclaiming: “quel langage!... comme si lors qu’on la hébété l’homme, il en était
plus près de Dieu.” In a learned essay on Pascal’s use of the word abêtir, Étienne Gilson explains: “Pascal
qui s’oppose si résolument à Descartes sur tant de points fondamentaux, nest
pas moins cartésien en se qui concerne l’automatisme des bêtes... Pour
convaincre l’homme tout entier, il faut s’adresser, non seulement à l’âme, mais
aussi à la bête, à la machine... Fixer l’instabilité de la raison sous l’automatisme
de la coutume, c’est s’abétir” (Les Idées
et les Lettres, pp. 270, 274). He also says that Miguel Asin Palacios has
found in the writings of the Arab theologian Algazel a similar account of the
conditions of faith: “une stupeur mentale, un abstention systématique de toute
refléxion et de tout raisonnement” (p. 268). Stupor or stupefaction is
the word for this complete surrender of will & total abeyance of
intelligence. Cf. 第七五九則論《列子‧力命篇》. One should recall Bruno’s injunction in his Asino cillenico: “Forzatevi, forzatevi
dunque ad esser asini, o voi, che siete uomini!”, which means, in the words of
De Sanctis, “l’asinità è la condizione della fede: chi crede non ha bisogno di
sapere” (Storia della letteratura italiana, B. Croce e A. Parente, II, p. 235). Of course this holds good
of any faith, besides the opium (if we say with Marx, or rather with George
Eliot — cf. J.W. Cross, G.E.’s Life,
II, p. 283: “The ‘highest calling & election’ is to do without opium” i.e. Christianity)【Long
anticipated by Novalis, Fragmente, hrs.
E Kamnitzer, Nr. 1388: “Philister leben nur ein Alltagsleben... Ihre sogenannte
Religion wirkt bloss wie ein Opiat: reizend, betäubend, Schmerzen aus Schwäche
stillend” (S. 451-2).】or the malt (if we say with A.E. Housman[7],
cf. 第二三九則) of the people (cf. Rupert Crawshay-Williams, The Comforts of Unreason, p. 5: “For
those of us who can afford them, drugs or alcohol may provide excellent
defences against unpleasant reality”); cf. Symes in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four[8]:
“Orthodoxy means not thinking — not needing to think. Orthodoxy is
unconsciousness” (Secker & Warburg, p. 55). Thanks to the advancement of
psychology, this abétissement, this automatisme can be brought about through
conditioned reflexes — see, e.g., Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, ch. ii, on “Neo-Pavlovian Conditioning” especially
on “the principle of sleep-teaching
or hypnopaedia (Chatto &
Windus, p. 27). For Marx’s phrase “das Opium des Volkes”, cf. Soame Jenyns, Free Inquiry into the Nature & Origin of
Evil, on ignorance as the “‘opiate’ of the poor, ‘a cordial, administered
by the gracious hand of providence’” (quoted in Basil Willey, The 18th Century Background,
p. 50); cf. 岡千仞《觀光紀遊》明治十七八月一日：“余謂：非一洗烟毒與六經毒，中土之事不可下手”(cf. 八月二十二日).
In Rhetoric, De Quincey says: “He [Burke] has been understood by the
long-eared race of his critics, not as incarnating
but simply as dressing his thoughts
in imagery” (Collected Writings, ed.
D. Masson, X, p. 115). Again in Style,
he quotes Wordsworth’s “weightiest” remark on the subject that “it is in the
highest degree unphilosophic to call language or diction ‘the dress of thoughts’... He would call it ‘the
incarnation of thoughts’” (op. cit., pp. 229-230). In Language, he once more returns to the
metaphor: “Style cannot be regarded as a dress
or alien covering, but becomes the incarnation
of the thoughts” (op. cit., p. 262).
Cf. Carlyle, Sartor Resartus, Bk. I,
ch. 11: “Language is called the garment of thought: however, it should rather
be, language is the flesh-garment, the body, of thought”; H.G. Wells, The Principles of Success in Literature,
ed. T.S. Knowlson, p. 118: “A genuine style is the body of thought, not a
costume that can be put on & off.” Flaubert, Correspondance, Éd. Louis Conard, III, p. 141: “Ces gaillards-l à s’en tiennent à la vieille comparaison: la forme
est la chair même de la pensée, comme la pensée est l’âme de la vie.”【Samuel
Wesley: “Style is the dress of thought” (An
Epistle Concerning Poetry).】Has it ever occur to someone that this is simply an
exegesis on what Edmund Spenser said in “A Hymne in Honour of Beautie”: “For of
the soule the bodie forme doth take: / For soule is forme, & doth the bodie
make”[9]?
Or in Schiller’s words: “Es ist der Geist, der sich den Körper baut” (quoted in
Hans Licht, Beiträge zur Antiken Erotik,
S. 10); cf. Theodor Storm: “Es ist die Form kein Goldgefäss, / In das man
goldnen Inhalt giesst — / Die Form ist nichts, als der Kontur, / Der einen
schönen Leib beschliesst” (Sämtliche
Werke, Aufbau, I, S. 140).
Boileau observes of the ode: “Chez
elle un beau désordre est un effet de l’art” (L’Art poétique, Chant II, vers 72). This has something to do with
Cicero’s remark, “sed quaedam neglegentia est diligent” (Orator, XXIII, 78), though by neglegentia
Cicero means only plainness or lack of adornment and not what we should now
call “negligence”. “Tum removebitur omnis insignis ornatus quasi margaritarum,
ne calamistri quidem adhibebuntur; fucati vero medicamenta candoris et ruboris
omnia repellentur; elegantia modo et munditia remanebit” (78-9, “The Loeb
Classical Library”, p. 364). Thus Tasso’s “le negligenze sue sono artifici” (Gerusalemme Liberata, II, 18, Poesia, F. Flora, p. 37; cf. 第七百三則 on Congreve) or Mathurin Régnier’s “Ses nonchalances sont ses plus
grands artifices” (Sat. IX) is only
verbally derived from Cicero & contains a wealth of meaning undreamed of in
the Roman’s philosophy (cf. 第六十四則); cf. Lessing’s preference of “eine angenehme
Unordnung, welche ebenso weit von der Methode als von der Verwirrung entfernt
ist” (quoted E. Engel, Deutsche Stilkunst,
Buch VII, Kap. I, S. 317; on S. 319 Herder’s remark on Aristotle: “Er ist ein
fester Knochenmann, wie der Tod, ganz Disposition, ganz Ordnung”). The same
applies to Clerimont’s song in Ben Jonson’s The
Silent Woman, I, i (“Still to be neat, still to be drest, / As you were
going to a feast; / Still to be pou’dred, still perfum’d: / Lady, it is to be
presum’d, / Though Arts hid causes are not found,/ All is not sweete, all is
not sound. // Give me a look, give me a face, / That makes simplicitie a grace;
/ Robes loosely flowing, haire as free: / Such sweet neglect more taketh me, /
Than all the adulteries of art; / They strike mine eyes, but not my heart”)
& to Herrick’s poem: “Delight in Disorder” in Hesperides (“A Sweet disorder in the dresse / Kindles in cloathes a
wantonnesse: / A lawne about the shoulders thrown / Into a fine distraction. / An
erring lace, which here & there / Enthralls the crimson stomacher; / A cuffe
neglectfull, & thereby / Ribbands to flow confusedly. / A winning wave
(deserving note), / In the tempestuous petticote; / A carelesse shoe-string, in
whose tye / I see a wilde civility; / Doe more bewitch me, then when art / Is
too precise in every part.”【Herrick’s poem “What kind of Mistresse he would have”
(p. 232) on “civil wilderness” & “order in sweet neglect”.】L.C.
Martin in his edition of the Poetical
Works of Robert Herrick, pp. 502-3 also calls attention to Ovid, Am. I. xiv. 21: “neglecta decens” &
A.M. Arborius’s Ad nympham nimis cultam).【Cf. Leopardi,
Zibaldone, ed. F. Flora, I, 30
criticising Ovid’s lack of “naturalezza” which is “una bella negligenza”.】It is
worth noting that although he too, dismisses scornfully the cosmetic aids to
beauty, Jonson deplores neatness, the very munditia
which Cicero emphasizes. Moreover the two English poets seem to have been more
romantic in their appreciation of beauty; their “sweet disorder” or “sweet
neglect” seems to be less calculated, less an effet de l’art or an artifice.
At any rate, they see it as a grace beyond the art. They might have said with Apuleius’s
Lucius: “Sed in mea Fotide non operosus sed inordinatus ornatus addebat
gratiam” (Metamorphoseon, I, 9, “The
Loeb Classical Library”, p. 62). The following passage from Roberti’s Discorso didascalico on Aesop’s Fables states clearly the classicist
problem of combining the Ciceronian neglegentia
with the Tassonian negligenze: “La
Favoletta debbe essere ornata; ma per ornamenti assai modesti e niente
ambiziosi. Dicesi che essa vuol esser adorna di se medesima; e questo detto
significa, chela mondizia e la castità del suo stile vien riputato il suo primo
o più acconcio adornamento . Per altro non ha a mostrarsi certo negletta e sparuta,
senza i suoi fiori. La difficoltà è che tali fiori hanno a essere tanto
spontanei, come se fossero i vulgari nati in un prato, e insieme tanto scelti,
come se fossero i nobili accarezzati in un giardino” (G. Leopardi, La Crestomazia Italiana, “Biblioteca
classica Hoepliana”, p. 62) The simile of flower is like Grillparzer’s on
folksongs: “Volkslieder sind wie die Wiesenblumen, die, wenn man sie im Felde
ohne Pflege und Kultur aufgewachsen antrifft, erfreuen, ja entzücken; in den
Gärten, zwischen Rosen, Nelken und Lilien versetzt, sind sie nicht viel besser
als Unkraut” (Gesam. Werk., hrsg. E.
Rollett & A. Sauer, VII, S. 165). Cf.《列朝詩集》乾集上明武宗幸宣府製小詞：“野花偏有色，村酒醉人多”；孔、劉合刻《長留集》在園〈友人納妾戲占〉：“閒花只合閒中看，一折歸來便不鮮”；《湘綺樓日記》同治九年三月十九日：“夢緹言家花有規矩，野者不堪玩。余因戲：‘君夫人宜為此論耳，彭雪琴必不為此言。’孫月坡詠野花云：‘折歸持鏡照，不及道傍看。’余論野花正以橫斜疏放為貴，家花正以羞澀嬌貴為美，必不可以植家於野也。家、野皆宜，惟梅、桂，皆非麗種。若牡丹臨澗，桃樹當窗，非不芳鮮，殊乖物性。”Cf. 五一六則足[10]。【［補五一七則］［Boileau］Sidney, Arcadia,
[Pyrocles disguising himself as a girl] “His heyre... lay uppon the uppermoste
parte of his foreheade in Lockes, some curled, & some, as yt were
forgotten: with suche a Careless care and wth suche an arte so
hyding arte, that hee seemed hee woulde lay them for a Patern whether nature
simply or nature helped by cunning bee the more excellent” (Complete Works, ed. A. Feuillerat, IV,
p. 23).[11]】【Cf.
Longinus’s praise of Demosthenes: “...disorder contains a certain element of
order” (On the Sublime, XX. 3). 】【Cf. Paul
Léautaud, Journal Littéraire, I, pp.
182, 203, 228 etc. on “le talent de la négligence”.】【Apuleius,
Metamorphoseon, I, 9: “Sed in mea
Fotide non operosus sed inordinatus ornatus addebat gratiam.”[12]】【Marino,
L’Adone, VIII. 44: “consigliati
disprezzi, incolti studi” (G.G. Ferrero, Marino
e i Marinisti, p. 167).】【《疑雨集》卷二〈個人之一〉：“喜殺未曾梳洗在，翠鬟鬆壓睡容鮮”；〈殘粧〉：“殘粧最是難看見（自注：原作‘殘粧更較嚴粧好’），緩住梳頭一細憐”；卷四〈即夕口占‧之九〉：“梳洗不妨停一刻，亂頭時節最傾城。”】【I promessi
sposi, cap. 9 (Opere, Riccardo Ricciardi, p. 521: “Nel
vestire stesso c'era qua e là qualcosa di studiato o di negletto” esc.】【王貞儀《德風亭初稿》卷十〈題小蓮女士行樂〉：“亂頭粗服偏相稱，不是殘粧是嬾粧。”】【Paul Léautaud, Journal
Littéraire, I, p. 38: “La négligence, une certaine négligence est un grand
principe, motif, d’art.”】【Leopardi, Pensieri:
“È bellissima nelle scritture un'apparenza di trascuratezza, di sprezzatura, un
abbandono, una quasi noncuranza” (Croce, La
Poesia, 5a ed., p. 235).】
五百十八[13]
趙湘叔靈《南陽集》六卷。清獻之祖父也，詩沿晚唐武功體，淺薄無隽語，未足羽翼九僧、逍遙、和靖也。方虛谷及館臣皆以清獻之故，而推尊之，殊過情實。翰墨場中月旦，亦有誥封、追贈之事，司空表聖〈力疾山下吳村看杏花〉第六首云：「儂家自有麒麟閣，第一功名只賞詩」，尚為未盡。叔靈古文却剛健，無唐末徘佻之習。勞季言《讀書雜識》卷十二云宜從宋本《嚴陵集》卷四補入〈新定旅館中作〉一首，《耆舊續聞》卷八補入〈桐江晚望〉、〈暮冬新定郡樓閒望〉、〈秋晚舟泊桐江〉等三首，宜刪去〈和子華對雨有感〉、〈蒙惠拄杖及詩依韻奉答〉、〈蒙以詩惠水晶鱠次韻答謝〉、〈聞太素絕食飲水以詩見招〉，又卷三七言絕句五首，諸詩均見韓維《南陽集》卷十四。
卷一〈姑蘇臺賦〉：「眾喧吞之於管，萬籟沉之於索。」按謀篇鑄詞皆步趨小杜〈阿房宮賦〉。
卷二〈題張處士山庭落葉〉：「硯浮窗外影，人拾樹中詩。」
〈暮春郊園雨霽〉：「地靜苔過竹，沙清樹入池。」
卷三〈春夕偶作〉：「酒醒風傍池邊起，坐久月從花上來。」
卷四〈揚子三辨〉（〈吃辨〉、〈投閣辨〉、〈無子辨〉）。
卷六〈迎富文〉：「淳化四年送窮之明日，眾人復迎富。」按《茶香室三鈔》卷一云：「《廣川畫跋‧送窮圖》云：『唐僖宗咸平二年七月，陳惟岳畫作窮女形，開門送之。又作富女象，主人反導却行，引堦升堂。』此送窮必兼迎富，於事方輩。錢大昕《養新錄》（《養新錄》卷十六）引魏華父〈二月二日遂甯北郭迎富〉詩曰：『才過結柳送貧日，又見簪花迎富時。』（曲園語止此）」叔靈此文亦資佐證[14]。《小謨觴館詩集》卷一〈樓煩風土詞〉第二首：「剪紈劈紙仿嬋娟，略比奴星送路邊。富媳娶歸窮媳去，大家如願過新年正月五日剪紙為婦人棄路衢，曰：『送窮』，行者拾歸供奉，曰：『娶富媳婦歸』。」元遺山〈送窮〉七絕（《詩集》卷十二）：「不如留取窮新婦，貴女何曾喚得來？」施注亦引《廣川畫跋》。《元詩選二集》謝應芳《龜巢集‧二月二日漫興》：「時俗喜逢迎富日，老夫羞作送窮文。」
五百十九[15]
張維《曾樂軒稿》一卷。子野之父也，詩僅九首。子野取乃翁得意之篇為圖，曰〈十詠圖〉，《齊東野語》遍載之。其五〈宿清江小舍〉破損，衹存一句，故得九篇而已，亦晚唐淺靡之格。
〈宿後陳莊〉：「灘頭斜日鳧鷖隊，枕上西風鼓角聲。」
〈貧女〉：「物為貴寶天應與，花有秋香春不知。」
五百二十[16]
張先《安陸集》一卷。子野存什無多，細貼澄隽，骨力雖弱，已勝乃翁。詞綿麗而能清約，格在屯田之上。【岳珂《寶真齋法書贊》卷十一載子野七律二首（「晚花露重香偏細，春女衣輕體尚寒」；「弦聲應手破竹響，旗影翻風戲鳥飛」）。】【子野詞本事見楊偍《古今詞話》（皆見《綠窗新話》引）。】【《永樂大典》卷二千二百六十四「湖」字載子野七律三首，〈九月望日同君謨侍郎泛西湖夜飲〉云：「山影與天都在水，風光爲月不留雲。」卷二萬三百五十四「夕」字載〈吳興元夕〉五排十二句[17]：「風月勝千夜，笙歌如一家」，自注夢中得「笙歌」句。】
〈巢烏〉：「烏啼東南林，危巢雛五六。心在安巢枝，一日千往復。脫網得羣食，入口不入腹。窮生俾反哺，豈能報成育。」按「入口」句摯老。
〈吳江〉：「落日未昏聞市散，青天都淨見山孤。」
〈題西溪無相院〉：「浮萍破處見山影，小艇歸時聞草聲。」按此用《東坡題跋》、《道山清話》，《附錄》中葛朝陽案語云：「《石林詩話》、《瀛奎律髓》俱作『聞棹聲』，但上句『萍』與『山』分寫，而景入畫，若作『棹』聲則與『艇』字語複，意亦平平」云云，竊謂「草聲」意不醒，「棹聲」則不稱上句，易作「水聲」最妙，惜與首句「積水涵虛上下清」重一字。姜白石〈昔游詩‧之五〉「忽聞入草聲」即子野語意，作「草聲」為是，皆本之姚崇〈夜渡江〉之「聽草遙尋岸」。【東坡〈夜泛西湖‧之四〉：「漁人收筒未及曉，船過惟有菰蒲聲。」】又按周美成〈隔浦蓮近拍〉詞云：「浮萍破處，簷花簾影顛倒」，較子野詩句更進一層。即唐子西之「水生看欲倒垂楊」也[18]。少陵〈渼陂行〉：「半陂以南純浸山，動影裊窕冲融間。船舷暝戛雲際寺，水面月出藍田關」，已開此寫法。（《墨子‧經下》：「臨鑑而立，景倒。」）張臯文〈玉樓春〉詞云：「東風飛過悄無踪，卻被楊花微送影。」蓋本子野點化。
〈贈妓兜娘〉：「當時自倚青春力，不信東風解誤人。」
〈木蘭花乙卯吳興寒食〉：「中庭月色正清明，無數楊花過無影。」
〈剪牡丹〉：「柔柳搖搖，墜輕絮無影。」按《苕溪漁隱叢話後集》卷三十六云：「胡宿詩：『風花飛有態，烟絮墜無痕。』張先詞：『柳徑無人，墜飛絮無影。』頗相類。」
〈減字木蘭花〉：「只恐驚飛，擬倩游絲惹住伊。」
〈青門引〉：「樓頭畫角風吹醒，入夜重門靜。那堪更被明月，隔牆送過秋千影。」
〈歸朝歡〉：「日曈朧，嬌柔懶起，簾幕捲花影。」
〈一叢花〉：「黃昏後，又還是斜月簾櫳。沉恨細思，不如桃杏，還解嫁東風。」
〈行香子〉：「斷鐘殘角，又送黃昏。奈心中事，眼中淚，意中人。」
[2]「初，上流大將項領已成，宰相不善，欲去之而不果。會其來朝見公，頗自矜大，公正色謂曰：『藉使無若輩，朝廷豈乏使耶？』將色沮，不復敢出一語。」
[5]《遺言》諸則引文次序，據原書調整。
[14]「叔靈」原作「叔湘」。
[17]「五排」原作「五律」。
[18]「看」原作「如」。
[19]「暗」原作「惜」。
沒有留言:
張貼留言