A Discussion of the Historian's (史臣) Encomium Attached to the Life of Du Fu in the History of the Tang (唐書)唐書杜甫傳史臣贊議
予讀唐書杜子美傳。史臣作贊。美其詩之汪涵萬狀。固悉矣。其末繼之曰。韓愈於文章愼許可。至歌詩獨推曰。李杜文章在。光焰萬丈長。予以爲此則褒之不若不褒也。何則。士有潛德內朗。不大震耀於世者。史臣於直筆之際。力欲揚暉發華。以信於後世。而猶恐人之有以爲譽之過當。則引名賢之辭。憑以爲固可也。至如李杜則其詩如熊膰豹胎。無有不適於人口者。其名固已若雷霆星斗。世無不仰其光駭其響者。非必待昌黎詩之一句。然後益顯者也。宋公何苦憑證其句。自示史筆之弱耶。引其詩或可。其曰愼許可。甚矣。凡言某人愼許可人。而獨許可某人者。猶有慊之之意也。愈若不許可。而無此一句。則史臣其不贊之耶。嗚呼。史臣之言弱也。此贊亦引元稹所謂自詩人已來未有如子美者。此則微之所以直當杜甫切評。而論之者雖引之或可矣。若退之之一句。則將贈友人而偶發於章句者。而非特地論杜公者也。然韓愈。大儒也。雖一句非妄發者。引之或可也。如不言愼許可。則宋公之言。免於弱也。
Reading the life of Du Zimei (杜子美) in the History of the Tang, I found that the historian had made an encomium and thought it fine that his poems broadly held ten thousand forms within them; and it is indeed complete. At the end of it he went on to say, 「Han Yu was sparing in his acknowledgments where writing was concerned; but when it came to poetry he singled these two out and exalted them, saying, 'There is the writing of Li Bai and Du Fu, and its shining flame is ten thousand fathoms long.'」
I hold that this is the very case in which praising is not so good as not praising. Why so? When there is a scholar whose hidden virtue is bright within but who has not been able to shake the world and shine greatly in it, and the historian, in the course of using his upright brush, would strive to make his light fly abroad and his flower open and have later ages believe in him, but fears all the same that men may think he has praised him beyond measure, then it is right to draw in the words of a famous worthy and lean upon them to make it firm.
But when it comes to such men as Li Bai and Du Fu, their poems are like bear's paws and leopard's embryos, with nothing in them that does not suit men's palates, and their names are truly like thunder and like the stars already, so that there is no one in the world who does not look up to their light and start at their sound. It is not that they come out the more plainly only after waiting upon one line from Changli (昌黎). What trouble was it to Lord Song (宋公) that he should draw in that line for a proof and so show of himself the weakness of his historian's brush (史筆)?
To draw in his poem may perhaps pass. But to say that he was 「sparing in his acknowledgments」 is excessive. For when it is said that so-and-so was sparing in acknowledging others and acknowledged only so-and-so, there is still in it a sense of thinking ill of him. Had Han Yu not acknowledged them, and had this one line not existed, would the historian then not have made his encomium? Ah, the historian's words are weak.
This encomium also draws in what Yuan Zhen (元稹) called 「since there have been poets there has been none like Du Zimei」. This is Yuan Zhen appraising Du Fu directly and to the point, and for one who discusses him to draw it in may perhaps pass. But that one line of Han Tuizhi came out by chance in a phrase he was about to give to a friend, and was not an appraisal of Lord Du (杜公) in particular. Even so, Han Yu was a great scholar, and even one line of his was not put out at random, so that to draw it in may perhaps pass. If only he had not said 「sparing in his acknowledgments」, Lord Song's words would have escaped their weakness.