Introduction: An Empire at a Crossroads

In the complex tapestry of Spring and Autumn period China, the state of Jin stood as a fading colossus. By the 6th century BCE, what was once the undisputed hegemon of the Central Plains found itself navigating increasingly turbulent waters. The reign of Duke Dao of Jin witnessed both the lingering prestige of a superpower and the sobering reality of diminished influence. It was against this backdrop of diplomatic tension and shifting alliances that a remarkable confrontation unfolded—one that would test the very foundations of Jin’s authority and reveal the power of reasoned discourse in an age of realpolitik.

The Waning of Jin’s Dominance

Jin’s hegemony had been built through military might and strategic marriages, but maintaining this position required constant diplomatic maneuvering. By Duke Dao’s time, internal divisions and external pressures had eroded Jin’s ability to command absolute obedience from its allies. The state found itself caught between the need to project strength and the practical limitations of its power. This tension manifested in increasingly arbitrary displays of authority—arresting diplomats, making unreasonable demands on allies, and finding excuses to avoid military commitments. The case of Wu’s appeal for help against Chu exemplified this dilemma: Jin’s leadership, represented by the influential Fan Xuanzi, preferred to cite breaches of ritual propriety rather than acknowledge their reluctance to engage in another costly conflict.

The Accusation Against the Chieftain

The confrontation began when Fan Xuanzi, Jin’s chief minister, summoned the Rong chieftain Ju Zhi to what amounted to a diplomatic tribunal. In front of assembled delegates, Fan Xuanzi leveled serious accusations against the Jiang Rong people. He claimed they had been leaking sensitive information to other states, thereby undermining Jin’s diplomatic efforts. His language was deliberately harsh and condescending, referring to the Rong as backward tribes who owed their very survival to Jin’s generosity. He threatened to exclude them from the upcoming alliance meeting—a significant diplomatic sanction—and even implied physical detention if they dared to attend without permission.

A Masterclass in Diplomatic Rhetoric

Ju Zhi’s response stands as one of the most sophisticated diplomatic speeches recorded from ancient China. Rather than reacting with anger or submission, he constructed a meticulously reasoned defense that combined historical narrative, logical argumentation, and subtle psychological pressure. He began by recounting the shared history between the Rong and Jin, reminding Fan Xuanzi how his ancestors had been driven from their lands in Guazhou by Qin expansionism and how Duke Hui of Jin had granted them territory—land that was then wilderness, “where foxes made their homes and wolves howled.” This framing immediately established the Rong not as passive recipients of charity but as partners in development who had transformed barren land into productive territory.

The Military Contribution Argument

Ju Zhi then delivered his most powerful argument: the Rong’s unwavering military support for Jin. He vividly described the Battle of Yao, where Rong forces had fought alongside Jin against Qin, using the metaphor of hunters taking down a stag—Jin grabbing the antlers from the front, the Rong pulling the legs from behind. This collaborative effort had resulted in a decisive victory that prevented Qin’s eastward expansion. More importantly, Ju Zhi emphasized that this was not an isolated incident: “In every campaign of Jin since that time, we Rong have been continuously involved, following the commands of your government just as at Yao.” This testimony of consistent loyalty undermined the accusation of betrayal.

The Cultural Difference Defense

Perhaps most remarkably, Ju Zhi addressed the cultural prejudice underlying the accusations. He acknowledged that the Rong differed from the Central States in dress, food, customs, and language—precisely the differences that made them suspect in Jin’s eyes. But he turned this into a strength of his argument: how could people who didn’t share a common language or diplomatic protocols effectively leak secrets to enemies? This clever inversion challenged the very premise of the accusation while simultaneously highlighting the absurdity of judging a culturally distinct people by standards that didn’t apply to them.

The Poetic Conclusion

Ju Zhi concluded his defense not with a direct plea but with a subtle literary gesture—he recited the poem “Green Flies” from the Classic of Poetry. This poem warns against listening to slanderers who “cluster like green flies” and lead rulers astray. The choice was brilliantly indirect: rather than accusing Fan Xuanzi directly of poor judgment, he invoked a classical text that both men would recognize as authority. This allowed the Jin minister to save face while receiving the message that he was being misled by malicious gossip.

The Aftermath and Reconciliation

The speech had its intended effect. Fan Xuanzi, recognizing both the justice of Ju Zhi’s arguments and the diplomatic damage that would follow from alienating a loyal ally, immediately reversed his position. Not only was Ju Zhi invited to participate fully in the alliance meeting, but Fan Xuanzi made special efforts to treat him with respect, embodying the “kind and brotherly” spirit mentioned in the poetic reference. This resolution demonstrated that even in an era of power politics, reasoned argument and historical evidence could prevail over arbitrary authority.

Broader Historical Context

This incident must be understood within the larger framework of Zhou dynasty diplomacy. The Spring and Autumn period was characterized by a complex system of alliances, rituals, and negotiated relationships between states of varying size and power. While larger states like Jin sought to dominate through military and economic pressure, smaller states and non-Zhou peoples developed sophisticated diplomatic techniques to maintain their autonomy. The Rong, though often dismissed as “barbarians” in traditional histories, clearly possessed considerable diplomatic skill and understanding of Zhou cultural norms—as evidenced by Ju Zhi’s mastery of historical narrative and classical poetry.

Cultural Implications of the Encounter

The confrontation between Fan Xuanzi and Ju Zhi reveals much about cultural relations in ancient China. The Central States’ attitude toward peripheral peoples was ambivalent: simultaneously dismissive of their cultural differences yet dependent on their military cooperation. Ju Zhi’s successful defense challenged the stereotype of non-Zhou peoples as uncivilized and incapable of sophisticated discourse. His ability to deploy historical arguments and literary references demonstrated that cultural boundaries were more permeable than official rhetoric suggested. This episode suggests that practical diplomacy often transcended ideological categorizations of “civilized” versus “barbarian.”

Legacy and Historical Significance

The recording of this incident in the Zuo Zhuan, one of China’s earliest historical works, indicates that contemporaries recognized its significance. It served as a case study in effective diplomacy and reasonable governance—themes that would become central to Chinese political thought. The encounter demonstrated that maintaining hegemony required more than military strength; it demanded fairness in dealing with allies and willingness to acknowledge past services. For later generations of statesmen, the story offered a lesson in the power of well-reasoned argument over brute force and the importance of cultural sensitivity in governance.

Modern Relevance

This historical episode remains remarkably relevant today. The dynamics between powerful states and smaller allies, the tension between cultural prejudice and practical cooperation, the use of historical narrative in diplomatic claims—all find parallels in contemporary international relations. Ju Zhi’s defense illustrates how smaller powers can effectively challenge larger ones through mastery of shared historical frameworks and cultural codes. His success reminds us that even in asymmetrical power relationships, persuasive argumentation and moral authority can sometimes redress the balance.

Conclusion: The Power of Reason in an Age of Power

The confrontation between Jin’s minister and the Rong chieftain represents a pivotal moment when rhetoric triumphed over raw power. In Ju Zhi’s eloquent defense, we see the emerging importance of reasoned discourse in Chinese statecraft—a value that would become central to Confucian political philosophy. The incident demonstrates that even during the turbulent Spring and Autumn period, when military strength often decided matters, there was space for persuasive argument based on historical truth and moral principle. Fan Xuanzi’s eventual acknowledgment of his error suggests that the most effective governance sometimes requires listening to those with less power but greater wisdom. This ancient story thus endures not merely as historical curiosity but as timeless lesson in the art of diplomacy and the enduring power of well-chosen words.