1.  For significant works on Rome, see Veyne 1976; Millar 1977, chs. 4, 8; Saller 1982; DeSilva 2000, chs. 3–4; Bowditch 2001; Flaig 2003. Cf. now also Zuiderhoek 2006 and 2007.

2.  Hsu and Linduff 1988: 153–58, 177–79, 185–88, 206, 245–46, 249–57; Chunqiu Zuozhuanzhu, annotated by Yang Bojun (Beijing 1981): 71–72, 194, 200, 264–73, 814–15, 860–61, 1318–20; 1475–77; 1535–42; Lewis 1990: 67–68, 73–94; Lewis 2006: 82–84, 215–27; Major 1987.

3.  Lewis 1990: 60–63; Nishijima 1961.

4.  Lewis 2000.

5.  Bodde 1975: 341–48, 361–80.

6.  Hanshu 24a (Beijing 1962, p. 1133).

7.  Hanshu 49 (pp. 2284, 2286). “In all cases people will fight to the death and not surrender due to calculations. It is because attacking or defending lead to obtaining ranks, and the storming of towns produces booty to enrich their households. . . . First set up houses and agricultural implements [at the borders] and then recruit convicts and those who have been pardoned from capital punishment to dwell there. If this is insufficient, recruit adult slaves, men and women, who will be allowed to redeem their punishments, and those who desire to receive ranks. If this is not enough, recruit free people who desire to go, bestow high ranks on them, and excuse their families from corvee labor. . . . Commoners on the registers of the districts and commanderies can purchase high titles [at the frontier] that will make them the equals of high officials.”

8.  McKnight 1981: ch. 2. Hulsewé 1955: 209–14, 225–50. On the “gift” of allowing suicide as a privilege for officials, see, for example, Hanshu 48 (p. 2254).

9.  Lewis 2000: 53–57.

10.  The fundamental importance to the Han state of the exploitation of servile labor provided by convicts is discussed in Lewis 2007: 248–52.

11.  Swann 1950: 195–56; Hsu 1980: 79–80.

12.  Hanshu 4 (pp. 113, 117, 124, 125, 131), 5 (p. 143), 6 (pp. 156, 174, 178, 180, 193, 195, 196, 198, 207 [2]), 7 (pp. 221, 225, 232), 8 (pp. 239, 242, 245, 248, 254, 255, 257, 259 [2], 263, 267, 269), and so on throughout the “Chronicles.”

13.  Hsu 1980: 22–24, 27–34, 164–66, 172–83, 186, 204, 210–13.

14.  Lewis 2006: 173–74.

15.  For cases of gifts to officials, nobles, and imperial kin in the “Chronicles,” see Hanshu 4 (pp. 110, 126, 132), 6 (p. 179), 7 (pp. 218, 220, 221, 223, 224, 228, 229), 8 (pp. 239, 245, 249, 254, 257, 259, 264, 272), and so on throughout the subsequent chronicles. On gifts of precious metals in the Warring States, see Lewis 1999a: 606–7. For an example from a biography of a Han official who receives a retirement of precious metal, see Hanshu 71 (p. 3040). See also below, ch. 7.

16.  Yü 1967 and 1986; Lewis 2000: 58–61.

17.  On the protracted development of cults to differing high gods in the Han, culminating in the establishment of the cult to Heaven, see Lewis 1999a; Bujard 2000; Puett 2002, ch. 7 (“The Sacrifices that Order the World”).

18.  Bowditch 2001: ch. 2 (“Tragic History and the Gift of Sacrifice”). On dona to the gods, see ibid. 65–68. See also DeSilva 2000: 100–2.

19.  Lewis 2006: 309–10; Hanshu 49 (p. 2283).

20.  Veyne 1976: 658–60.

21.  Lewis 2006: 218, 220, 223–27.

22.  Hanshu 71 (p. 3040). See also Dongguan Hanji jiaozhu 15 (pp. 598–99): “Much accumulation increases losses and is a burden to one’s descendants”; and Hou Hanshu (Beijing 1965) 82a (pp. 2720–21).

23.  Scott 1976: ch. 6 (“Reciprocity and Subsistence as Justice”).

24.  A detailed account of a cult that had initially been sponsored by the state in one town but that spread across all of what is now Shandong and that entailed large–scale public feasts sponsored in rotation by local merchants is described in the late Eastern Han Fengsu tongyi jiaoshi (Tianjin 1980), 333–34. Less detailed references to the cult also appear in Hou Han shu 11 (pp. 479–80); Dongguan Hanji jiaozhu 21 (p. 863).

25.  Hou Hanshu 27 (pp. 945–46), 41 (pp. 1398–99), 43 (p. 1458), 91 (p. 3690).

26.  See above, n. 1. The following observations focus on the monarchical period of Roman history.

27.  Veyne 1976: 103–4, 110–15; Saller 1982: ch. 5.

28.  Lewis 1990: ch. 2 and passim.

29.  Lewis 2006: 212–13.

30.  Veyne 1976: chs. 2, 5, 11.

31.  Lewis forthcoming: ch. 4.

32.  Lewis 2006: 188.

33.  Veyne 1976: 701–6.

34.  Lewis 2006: 114–18, 155–57.

35.  Millar 1977: ch. 8.

36.  Flaig 2003: esp. 53–61.

37.  Lewis 1990: ch. 2.

38.  Bowditch 2001: ch. 3 (“The Gifts of the Golden Age: Land, Debt, and Aesthetic Surplus”).

39.  Attempts to support small holders were confined to the Republican period of Roman history and ceased with the creation of a monarchical regime.