The Natural
Noteworthy Human Behaviour
In over 160 entries of the collection the behaviour of humans is described, mainly from a moral point-of-view. Olga Fisman writes, that Ji Yun did not care for a psychological or individual description, nor for the development of a protagonist, but for his morally good or bad deeds in a given situation (Fisman 1974, 97–98 ). How the good or bad deeds are evaluated depends not only on the given situation, but also on the social class of the protagonist and if the behaviour is public or private.
The majority of stories of the YWCT are set during Ji Yun's lifetime. The social classes are therefore defined by the criteria of the 18th century, next to the specifications about the characters given in the narratives themselves.
1 The Elite
The difficulty in defining the increasingly mobile and complex elite of the Qing dynasty, can be solved by taking the significance of a traditional classical education into consideration. As Benjamin Elman writes ‘Within a broader society of illiterates and those only literate in vernacular Chinese, control over the written word in classical texts had political and social advantages.’[1]
Relevant for the YWCT are four main groups, not counting the nobility, as they make up only a very small part of the protagonists:
1 The first is that of middle- and high-ranking civil and military officials.
2 The second exists of the heterogeneous strata of classically educated scholars.
3 The third comprises the economically rich, such as great estate owners or wealthy merchants.
4 Finally, autobiographical stories as well as accounts of Ji Yun's family members are a fourth group of the elite.
Officials and scholars make up nearly one third of all protagonists in the over 160 narratives about noteworthy human behaviour.
1.1 Officials
Only four of the officials are shown in a domestic context, of which three are personally known to Ji Yun. One of these being Chen Guisen 陳桂森 (1729–1790) who fears to be the victim of a manifestation:
At the time, when the Vice-Minister for Law Enforcement, Chen Gengyan 陳耕巖 [Guisen], was employed at the Hanlin Academy, he was pestered by a demon. He tried to get rid of the demon by moving house, but this failed. Often, Chen Gengyan would find little notes containing intimate details about his whereabouts, which an outsider could not possibly know. Gengyan became increasingly fearful and horrified, so that he constantly prayed and made sacrifices. One day, he found a notice, in which he was reproached with not treating his nephew well enough. Furthermore, his financial allowances toward his nephew were less generous than they used to be, and accordingly a misfortune would come soon. Thereafter, some people, became suspicious of Gengyan's nephew, and secretly met to wait and catch him in the act. When one night, the noises of things breaking and a slapping could be heard coming out of one room, they quickly went in and took hold of something. This indeed turned out to be the suspected nephew.
As Gengyan was by nature generous and especially devoted to his family members, he said to his nephew: "When you are in need of money, you could have told me so. Why do you have to do something like this?" Laughing, he returned to bed and thereafter everything stayed quiet and peaceful. (RS III.28)
Here, Chen Guisen's benign reaction towards a dishonest family member solves the problem and restores the domestic harmony. Another example of a good-natured character is the unworldliness of Ji Yun's examination tongnian 進士同年, the Censor Hu Shaoding 胡紹鼎 (1713–1776), towards his cheating servants. Ji Yun and other colleagues warn him, but he continues behaving passively and credulously concerning his servants. Finally, Hu Shaoding dies in melancholy poverty (LX VI.9).
Even though there are stories about the mistreatment of servants, Ji Yun's friends and colleagues do seem to have more of a problem with credulousness, which is shown as a perilous disposition. For example, in the account of Ji Yun's examiner, Qian Weicheng 錢維城 (1720–1772):
There is an old man by the name of Li and one does not know where he comes from. He claims to be a few 100 years old, which cannot be confirmed. His way of speaking is so incoherent, that one is inclined to think he is the kind which is called ‘ming xing shenzhi liu 明醒神之流'. I [Ji Yun] once met him, when I was a guest with my teacher Qian Wenming 錢文敏 [Weicheng]. Li used charms (fu 符) to treat illnesses and sometimes this was somehow effective. One night, Wenming's second son, who stayed in the Shuiyue monastery, came home drunk, when ten hostile ghosts (li gui 厲鬼) blocked his path. Thereupon he went crazy and stabbed his sword into his stomach. When I [Ji Yun], Chen Yuzhai 陳裕齋 [Chen Shiliang 陳士良, fl. until 1787], and Ni Yujiang 倪餘疆 [Ni Chengkuan 倪承寬, 1712–1783] came to visit him, his wounds were still bleeding. He looked like someone about to take his last breath, to whom no one could be of help any more. Suddenly, old Li came along and took the injured man to his home to nurse him. After two weeks, to everybody's great surprise, the wounds healed.
The honourable Mr. Wenming believed mistakenly in the charm, but [instead of healing] the annoying wound from a wart on his hand inflamed again. Wenming became ill and died. In this case, Li's treatment was not successful and can be compared to the Daoist immortality pill, which sometimes is efficacious and sometimes not.
My teacher, Liu Wenzheng 劉文正 [Liu Tongxun 劉統勳, 1699–1773], remarked: "Naturally there are gods and immortals, but these are not necessarily the ones who sell medicine today. Of course there are Buddhist and Bodhisattvas, but these are not necessarily the ones who explain Buddhist texts today." A timeless truth, indeed! (RS II.55)[2]
While the disadvantage the protagonists have to suffer due to their weakness is seen as their own responsibility, for reasons of respect, this is not always explicitly stated.
Public Behaviour
Unsurprisingly, most stories are concerned with the public behaviour of officials, as for example, being able to forgive disrespectful treatment by others. Next to the thoughtful and clever Magistrate Yongning 永寧 (d. c 1770), who dares to stand in conflict with the common opinion of his subjects, the Prefect Ming Sheng 明晟 (b. 1688), solves a complicated murder case by smart investigations. On the other hand, the case of the Magistrate Ming Shuzhai 明恕齋[3] is mentioned, who behaves rather ill advisedly when he has to judge a complicated law case: Ming Shuzhai disguises himself as a humble person, in order to investigate incognito. On his way, he takes a break in a monastery, and is very astonished to find out, that he had already been expected by an old monk. When asked how he knew about his doings, the monk answers that everybody in the district knows the magistrate, whereas, of course, the magistrate cannot know every person of his district. It is common knowledge that Mr. Ming is presently wandering around in disguise to do his own research. The monk continues, that the people respect him as a good official, but that his present investigations would generally be criticised, since it would be easy for bad characters to take advantage of him (HX IV.17).
Corruption is a common topic, as in the case of a magistrate, who tries to embezzle money. He then starts an unintentional chain reaction of cheating, in which the last thief is murdered by robbers. Ji Yun's uncle An Shizhai 安實齋 (18th c) concludes that this has been the doings of ghosts and gods, even though the narrator does not think so. In general, the corrupt officials are not punished by society, but by ‘accident’. However, the comments to the stories explain to the reader that the outcome is a logical consequence of the protagonist's actions. One humorous story indicates that it is also inappropriate for officials to act emotionally. Instead of helping a monk who reports a theft, the magistrate clearly shows his hatred of Buddhism. Unintentionally he thereby gives the monk an idea how to make a successful, but treacherous advertisement for Buddhism. The punishment here is that the opposite of what the official had in mind happens, which only became possible due to his wrong behaviour.
Furthermore, there are accounts of complicated lawsuits, concerning the difficulties of jurisdiction for responsible officials. Wu Zhishen 吳至慎 (18th c), for example, who was an official in Fujian and is the father of Ji Yun’s mensheng Wu Zhongqiao 吳鍾僑 (1760 舉人), has to investigate a case in which a girl pretends to be dead, in order to cheat her fiancé and flee with her lover. The given legislation makes a suitable sentence impossible. Ji Yun's protégé, Wu Guanxian 吳冠賢 (fl. 1770) has to judge a lawsuit, in which a boy claims to be engaged to a girl, whereas the girl claims to be his sister. Since both are orphans, whom no one knows, the truth cannot be found and less harm seems to be done by separating the two. Another protégé, Zhe Yulan 折遇蘭 (1760 jinshi), is a conscientious Magistrate in Anding, where for generations, two stubborn families argue about a burial-place, without showing any intention of ever giving up. Further on, a mysterious murder case is mentioned, that was never solved, and another entry tells how the Governor-General Tang Zhiyu 唐執玉 (1669–1733) successfully captured a murderer. Shortly thereafter, however, he is visited by the ghost of the murdered victim, who convinces him that he has arrested the wrong man. Even though the following new investigation is very profound, the case stagnates. Finally, Tang Zhiyu's private secretary concludes, that a paid-for man must have played the ghost, because when leaving the house, he climbed over the wall, instead of walking through it, as a genuine ghost would have done. Due to the private secretary who dares to tell the Governor General that he had been tricked by an impostor, the expensive and useless re-examination of a murder case can be brought to a successful end. It is said, however, that after Mr. Tang reinstated his old sentence, he did not wish to ever make this case a topic again.
The stories show officials mainly in their capacity as civil servants, and as such they are portrayed as self-critical, rational, and exemplary, but also as arrogant, quarrelsome and dishonest. The narratives do not reveal that good behaviour of the protagonists is rewarded, but point out that this should be a matter of course, due to their model social role. Through good deeds, officials gain respect, which in turn legitimises their social position. The described bad qualities of the characters include corruption, which is mentioned a few times, but not seen as something special. In only one case, which also involves blackmail and intention of sexual abuse, a direct punishment by society is mentioned. This notwithstanding, it is explicitly stated that faith and the natural laws 天道 appropriately punish bad deeds.
1.2 Scholars
The stories about scholars are mainly related to their social behaviour. Additionally, three individual characteristics are told about. For example, one scholar is responsible for his servants' deaths since he forbids them to get married. At first, it seems that he had been too pedantic, but in the comment it is stated that the real cause was that he had an egoistic motive towards his female servant. This is said to be even worse from a moral point of view, but no punishment is mentioned and instead the hope is expressed that he will be judged accordingly by the underworld later on. Additionally, there are two narratives about scholars who believe their concubines to be vixens and therefore let them leave at will. The credulousness of the two men is commented upon as understandable, since the cunning behaviour of their concubines actually comes very close to that of real vixens.
Public Behaviour
The stories about the public behaviour of scholars point out irreverent and quarrelsome characters, as in the example of two students who stay in a monastery for one night, and have an argument. When a monk tries to mediate, the interference ends by them uniting in beating him up. Tian Zhongyi 田中義 (d. 1761) remarks upon this account, that small-minded people always look for a chance to fight and that a true scholar can only ignore this. Similar illustrations are those of a man, who enjoys to constantly engage in lawsuits, or two scholars, who hate each other so much that they hope to be able to settle this by making a posthumous appointment in the underworld.
Frequently mentioned qualities are pedantry, deception, opportunism, meanness, and credulity. In one entry, Ji Yun tells of Ji Kun's 紀坤 (1570–1642) friend, Liu Yi 劉佚 from Cangzhou. Mr. Liu does not question the wisdom of old books and tries to unconditionally put their advice into practice. He fails catastrophically as his efforts to organise a local military troop to combat bandits, nearly ends with his own untimely death. Following this, Mr. Liu can persuade the Governor to let him divert a canal, which results in a fatal flood. Thereafter, he gives up in resignation and feels deceived by the men of ancient times. Next to the harm done by Mr. Liu's unconsidered actions, he himself is deeply disappointed, but until his death cannot see his own failings. At the end of the story, Ji Yun quotes his former examiner, Akedun 阿克敦 (1685–1756), who says that to only have books in ones head can be as dangerous as having nothing in it at all.
Whereas officials and the biographical characters are shown as morally balanced, scholars are portrayed with over 60 per cent bad behaviour. Their characteristics include quarrelsomeness, pedantry, meanness, and deceitfulness. Further on, a fear of the supernatural and credulity is criticised, as well as gullibility due to lack of thought and practical knowledge. The latter does not only lead to unconscious escapism and personal disappointment, but also damages the community. There is no direct response by society and instead destiny, as a logical conclusion of a person's behaviour, punishes the protagonists. For example, cheaters are exposed, and a man who has a passion for legal arguments, is made to look a fool after his death by his widow. Here the bad public behaviour causes a family reaction, which in turn leads to public exposure. The stories reveal, that the most common punishment of scholars is that their transgressions become public, that they are ridiculed, and their reputations, as well as that of their families are damaged. It is even mentioned that scholars are deprived of their social status and are excluded from society.
1.3 Economically Wealthy
The characters of the economic elite make up the smallest group of protagonists. One narrative tells of an intriguer, who plans a sexual offence, and another of the exaggerated hate of a man towards robbers, who had damaged him. In a further narrative told for amusement, the son of an official is cheated and mortified by a prostitute, whereupon he blames ghosts for his misfortune. As a good deed, the action of a rich man is affirmed, who ignores social differences in favour of character. Accordingly, he marries his servant to his son, after she had cleverly saved the family from robbers.
The number and content of the accounts show that the economically wealthy, who are not scholars or officials, do not seem worthy of mention as protagonists to Ji Yun and the other raconteurs.
1.4 Biographical Stories and Ji Yun's Household Members
The majority of these stories related to Ji Yun's family have a domestic relevance. The narratives have a variety of topics and are often intimate in nature, as for example, the one about the mental illness of Ji Yun's favourite nephew, Ji Rulai 紀汝來 (1740−1791). Ji Yun also reveals the death of household members, as well as his family's belief in geomancy for the right choice of burial ground. The loyal and unselfish behaviour of servants is mentioned, but also their bad qualities, when Ji Yun tells about his anger concerning an unreliable cook, or how a servant of his father embezzled money.
A satirical example of the frequently mentioned unrealistic and pedantic qualities of scholars, is told Ji Yun by his father as follows:
[…] In the 50th year of the Chongzhen reign [1642], Houzhai gong 厚齋公 [Ji Kun 紀坤, 1570–1642] was planning to move the whole family to Hejian, in order to be secure against the robbers from Mengcun. After Houzhai gong's death it became known, that the Grand Army [of the later Qing dynasty] was planning to march to Hejian. Therefore, it was thought that it might be better to hide in the countryside instead. Shortly before the escape, an old neighbour found out about this plan and, turning to the door gods, said sighing: "If only we had men like Yuchi Jingde 尉遲敬德 and Qin Qiong 秦瓊 today, we surely would not be in such an unfortunate situation."
Your [Ji Yuns] two great-granduncles, one called Jingxing 景星 and the other Jingchen 景辰, have both been well known scholars. At this moment, they were outside packing their belongings. Hearing what their neighbour said, they answered in disagreement: "These two [door gods] are not Yuchi Jingde and Qin Qiong, but Shen Tu 神荼 and Yu Lei 鬱壘." The old man was not persuaded at all and as proof, he took out the Xiyou ji 西遊記 by Qiu Chuji 丘處機 [1148–1227]. Your two great-granduncles nevertheless said that this is nothing but fiction (小說) and will not do as proof, whereupon the old man took out the Shenyijing 神異經 by Dongfang Shuo 東方朔 [154–93 BCE]. Even though dusk started falling, more time was spent arguing and research of old books, until finally the city gates closed.
The next day, when at last the departure was to take place, the city was besieged by the Grand Army. After it had been captured, the whole family was killed, with the only exception of your [Ji Yun's] great-grandfather, Guanglu gong 光祿公 [Ji Yu 紀鈺, 1632–1716], great-uncle Zhenfan gong 鎮番公 [Ji Hao 紀灝, 1629–1699], and great-uncle Yuntai gong 雲臺公 [Ji Zhongxing 紀中興, 1634–1704].[4]
Who, but scholars are capable of discussing textual criticism and the authenticity of old books in a threatening moment of life and death? Are not only scholars able to completely forget the reality? […] (LX III.14).
Ji Yun remarks, that only after sufficient pondering, did he dare to include this biographical story into the YWCT. After all, such behaviour can be found more often among scholars, and does not only occur in his family.
Public Behaviour
A good deed of a family member is the action of Ji Yun's grand-uncle, Ji Hao 紀灝 (1629–1699). While working for the army, he supports the pardon of a robber, whose appearance deeply impresses him. Afterwards, Ji Hao employees him, is very satisfied with his service, and later on arranges a marriage for the man. Nevertheless, Ji Yun's family members are also reputed as not being free of credulousness and as being deceived by swindlers. When remote relatives are told by a fortune-teller that the ghost of a family member will return on a given date, they all run away from their house on that day. Unknown to each other, this is taken advantage of by two burglars, disguised as ghosts. They break into the house, but when each sees the other, are so scared that they faint and are caught.
Next to intimate memories, the biographical stories reveal exemplary behaviour such as gratefulness or benevolence, and give moral advice. For example, when Ji Yun's father admonishes him to not gloat over a thief's misfortune, but rather see this as a cause for concern. He also warns against being too naïve in one's good faith, and instead advises to take responsibility towards deceivers. Especially, since it is additionally told, how tricksters successfully fool relatives of Ji Yun.
Even though bad deeds are more often attributed to servants than to family members, the scholars of Ji Yun's family are obviously not unaffected by pedantry. In the quoted story, this quality has exceptionally damaging consequences, as it nearly leads to the extinction of the whole family.
2 Summary
Olga Fisman's thesis about the description of humans in the YWCT mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, can only be confirmed to a certain degree. Some protagonists, especially officials, Ji Yun's acquaintances, and friends are illustrated less as stereotype, than others. Further on, individual qualities of humans are referred to, and there are stories in which no moral is mentioned, not relevant, or even ridiculed. The narratives emphasise that motive, individual circumstances, as well as social class, are of importance for a moral evaluation of the protagonist's deeds. This becomes especially clear, when it is considered as legitimate or even good, when persons of the lowest social stratum, on the grounds of Confucian family values, take the law into their own hands. Accordingly, even though the percentage of stories about public violation of social norms is much higher, more stress is put on the behaviour towards individuals of the same class and family members; a finding, that is quite in harmony with Ji Yun's own biography.[5]
Concerning the bad actions of the protagonists, the stories often point out different forms of deceit motivated by greed, which can be found in all social classes. Adding burglars and thieves, over thirty cheaters are the protagonists, whereas sexual transgressions are mentioned nearly 20 times. The higher the social position of the protagonist, the more cleverly a crime is committed, the more severely it is morally reviewed in the comments. Society does not actively punish transgressors in the texts, but fate as the 'law of nature' (天道) takes care of the appropriate punishment or reward. Instead of human law or judicature, tiandao is the logical consequence of an individual's behaviour or actions and is the means for socialization.
The stories reveal that an individual's actions affect his domestic and social environment in a direct way. Accordingly, the reward of a protagonist is acceptance by his environment, strengthening of his social position, or even upward mobility, which in turn leads to domestic and social harmony. Due to the more subtle differentiation of transgressions compared to good deeds, the punishment is also more versatile. Either, by the protagonist's violation of social norms, that which he had tried to avoid happens, or he and his family suffer the same, as that he did to others. Finally, as a means of social control, there is public exposure, and the higher the social position of the protagonist, the more serious the consequences.
Contrary to officials, who are mainly described in their capacity as civil servants, scholars more often are shown with inferior qualities. They openly display bad manners, are frequently exaggeratedly pedantic, and unable to transform their knowledge into practical use. Their inflexible behaviour and consciousness of prestige is expressed in a satirical but also tragic way. Individuals of the middle class are also characterized with bad personalities, and often portrayed as unscrupulous and materialistic upstarts. This account can be interpreted as the elite's rejection of merchants, who are traditionally thought of as uncultivated swindlers (Ropp 1981, 29).
People of the lower stratum are described with a tendency towards a more direct and brutal behaviour, which is not as severely evaluated as a thoughtful considered violation of social norms. This also becomes clear since these individuals are often described in a humorous way. Buddhist monks and Daoists are represented as quite good-natured. Nuns are even portrayed as having only good qualities and positively support the social order.
An idealised, conservative, and at times tedious description of women, as well as the mistreatment of servants, is striking. Here, the social position of the victim is more important than gender. Accordingly, it is legitimate, if women of low background behave unconventionally and act against etiquette. It is further approved of if they take the law into their own hands, in case there is no evidence for a committed crime, the law does not suffice, or the state is passive.[6] This is only acceptable, if it is the last opportunity for persons of low social stratum to take revenge out of 'altruistic' family reasons; as is the case with the mistreatment or murder of servants. Nevertheless, Ji Yun carefully points out that an official who rapes the wife of a servant will only have to pay one salary as a punishment. The reason is that landlords and servants are living together, are therefore very intimate and their relationship is difficult to estimate. The legislators thus hope to prevent wrong accusations. Should a female servant really been raped, the laws of the hereafter will be more serious. Here, the law is placed back above the moral and it is added that the violator will have to stand trial in the underworld later on. The latter is also pointed out in the reports in which violation of social norms obviously has no consequences for the protagonists. Thus, the underworld is pointed out as higher moral authority, to balance the insufficient worldly law.
NOTES
_____________________________________
[1] Elman 1990, 100–101, 131–135, 364, 421; Ropp 1981, 46; Ho 1954, 156–158; Guy 1987, 31, 80, 202. A well-known other example for a scholar who decided against an official career is that of Yuan Mei 袁枚 (1716−1798), who, after only a few years of holding office, reported sick and retired. Even though, for financial reasons, he later on was forced to work as an official again for a short period of time. Waley 1956, 46–47, 63.
[2] “[…]明醒神之流”. My guess is that Mr. Liu was ‘speaking in tongues’. Chen Shiliang 陳士良 (d. before 1788) could not be further identified. Ni Chengkuan 倪承寬 (1712–1783), is a tongnian of Ji Yun.
[3] Considering the information given about Ming Shuzhai in the YWCT, he might very well be the same person as Ming Sheng.
[4] Yuchi Jingde 尉遲敬德 and Qin Qiong 秦瓊 are Ji Jingxing 紀景星 (d. 1642) and Ji Jingchen 紀景辰 (d. 1742). Unsurprisingly, there is not much information about Jingxing 景星 and Jingchen 景辰 in the Jingcheng Jishi jiapu 京城紀氏家譜.
[5] For this traditional point of view, see also Malek 1996, 48–49. The reason for Ji Yun's banishment to Xinjiang has been a breach of confidence in order to warn a relative. See Biography of Ji Yun, 4. Banishment, 1769−1771.
[6] Concerning the historical problem of mistreatment of servants, especially female servants, Susan Mann writes: 'Sexual abuse of female slaves and their daughters by male slaveholders was also recognized as a problem, even though an unmarried slave woman was considered the sexual property of a male master, who could not be punished for having sexual intercourse with her.' Mann 1997, 41.
Examples
灤陽消夏錄 (LY)
LY II.4 Ji Rongshu 紀容舒 (1686–1764) educates Ji Yun and his brothers.
LY III.5 Buddhist monk claims to be immortal, Ji Rongshu 紀容舒 is suspicious.
LY III.9 Shi Mao 史茂 (b. 1697) criticises a corrupt official for beating his servants to death.
LY III.12 Man masquerades as ghost in order to influence the prefect Tang Zhiyu 唐執玉 (fl. 1668–1733).
LY III.21 Cheng Jinfang 程晉芳 (1718–1784) witnesses Song Xiaoyan’s 宋小巖 hatred of another man.
LY III.24 Liu Yi’s 劉佚 (fl. late 15th–early 16th c) unconditional belief in books and his catastrophic failures.
LY IV.9 The prefect Ming Sheng 明晟 (b. 1688) solves a complicated murder case.
LY VI.7 Liu Guoxuan 劉國軒 (1629–1693) cunningly defeats monk who has exceptional fighting skills.
如是我聞 (RS)
RS I.24 Wang Zhixin 王執信 (1759 舉人) asks Ji Yun to write an epitaph for his step-mother.
RS I.35 Death of Lady Zhang 先太夫人 in 1750.
RS I.52 Chen Zhuyin 陳竹吟 (18th c) and Zhu Wenzhen 朱文震 (1717–1777) meet an educated beggar.
RS II.33 Wang Shoukun 王守坤 has self-doubts as an official and is afraid of judicial errors.
RS II.55 Man claims to be immortal, but Qian Weicheng 錢維城 (1720–1772) dies despite magical charm (fu 符).
RS II.60 Yongning 永寧 (d. c 1770) is a cautious and courageous official, prevents a trial.
RS III.28 Chen Guisen’s 陳桂森 (1729–1790) behaves good humoured when his nephew pretends to be demon in order to blackmail him .
RS IV.41 Wu Guanxian 吳冠賢 (fl. 1770) has to judge a lawsuit in which a boy wants to marry a girl, who claims to be his sister.
槐西雜志 (HX)
HX I.56 Exceptional calligraphy of Shi Sibiao 史嗣彪 and Li Dune 勵杜訥 (1628–1703).
HX IV.17 Old monk admonishes the magistrate Ming Shen 明晟 (b. 1688)
姑妄聽之 (GW)
GW III.24 Wu Zhishen 吳至慎 (18th c) has to investigate a difficult lawsuit, a suitable sentence is impossible.
GW III.27 Ji Yun’s thoughts on loyalty between friends (officials, scholars), as well as problems with servants and relatives
GW III.31 The magistrate Zhe Yulan 折遇蘭 (fl. 1760) tries to intermediate between two stubborn arguing families.
GW III.37 Daoist gives a long and educational scientific lecture mocking Fa Nanye 法南墅 and his friend.
GW IV.26 Pan Ban 潘班 (b. c 1645) and a well known hermit have public argument
灤陽續錄 (LX)
LX I.29 Poem by Liu Jingnan 劉景南 helps to pacify Ji Yun’s anger about unfaithful servant.
LX II.6 Liu De 劉德 gives good military advice to Wenfu 温福 (1710–1773) during the Changji-rebellion 昌吉亂
LX II.8 Wenfu 温福 (1710–1773) and magistrate He Erxi 赫爾喜 are courageous during the Changji-rebellion 昌吉亂.
LX III.16 Opportunistic behaviour of relatives and friends of Ji Yun’s former student.
LX IV.4 Ji Yun describes the character of two of his father’s servants.
LX IV.5 Ji Yun describes the mental illness of his favourite nephew Rulai 汝來 (1740–1791).
LX IV.6 Sun Weiqi 孫維棋 (1691 進士) forgives a petty man who had treated him badly.
LX V.12 Ji Hao 紀灝 (b. 1629) successfully socialises a former convict.
LX VI.3 Ji Yun fondly remembers social gatherings of friends and colleagues, involving heavy drinking.
LX VI.9 Hu Shaoding 胡紹鼎 (1713–1776) behaves so credulously concerning his cheating servants, that he dies in miserable poverty.