- 自己仔细读《秦本纪》和《秦始皇本纪》，前一个秦出子没有被叫做秦出公，后一个秦出公则也叫秦出子，这已经可以消歧义了，用不着一世二世。
- 《史记·秦本纪》：生出子。宁公卒，大庶长弗忌、威垒、三父废太子而立出子为君。出子六年，三父等复共令人贼杀出子。出子生五岁立，立六年卒。
- 《史记·秦本纪》：惠公十二年，子出子生。十三年，伐蜀，取南郑。惠公卒，出子立。 之出子二年，庶长改迎灵公之子献公于河西而立之。杀出子及其母，沈之渊旁。
- 《史记·秦始皇本纪》：出子享国六年，居西陵。庶长弗忌、威累、参父三人，率贼贼出子鄙衍，葬衙。武公立。
- 《史记·秦始皇本纪》：出公享国二年。出公自杀，葬雍。
——星光下的人 (talk) 01:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
(Discussion moved here from User talk:Zanhe)Reply
- Translation of the message above: read Annals of Qin and Annals of Qin Shi Huang, the first Chuzi is not called Duke Chu, but the second is called Duke Chu and also Chuzi. That's sufficient disambiguation, not need for I and II. (followed by quotes from the Shiji). (translated by Zanhe)
- Reply — here are the facts:
- In Annals of Qin of the Shiji, which deals with the history of the state of Qin, both rulers are called Chuzi.
- In Annals of Qin Shi Huang of the Shiji, which deals with the history of the Qin Dynasty but includes a list of rulers of the State of Qin, the first one is called Chuzi, the second called Duke Chu.
- In Han Zhaoqi's Annotated Shiji, Han says the first Chuzi should be called Duke Chu, and the second should be called Chuzi (see p. 358 and pp 478-479).
- Summary: Chuzi may refer to either of the two rulers, and there's no conclusion whether Duke Chu exclusively refers to the second Chuzi. Therefore it's better to call them Chuzi I and Chuzi II. --Zanhe (talk) 00:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
- OK，查了史记十二诸侯年表，确实前面的出子也可以叫出公，但我反对使用一世二世，中国没有这种体系，消歧义应该使用在位年代.——星光下的人 (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
- @Zanhe: I was wondering. Would Chuzi (4th century BC) and Chuzi (8th century BC) or Chuzi (Warring States period) and Chuzi (Spring and Autumn period) be better than using regnal numbers which does not exist in Chinese terminology. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
