一句話裡有兩樣東西：七十餘萬人，和一條水銀做的河。《史記·秦始皇本紀》寫葬始皇：「始皇初即位，穿治驪山；及并天下，天下徒送詣七十餘萬人，穿三泉，下銅而致槨，宮觀百官奇器珍怪徙臧滿之。令匠作機弩矢，有所穿近者輒射之。以水銀為百川江河大海，機相灌輸，上具天文，下具地理。以人魚膏為燭，度不滅者久之。」
本紀裡的驪山
這段之後還有兩句：二世說「先帝後宮非有子者，出焉不宜」，於是「皆令從死，死者甚眾」；葬事完畢，怕工匠洩漏機關，「盡閉工匠臧者，無復出者」；最後「樹草木以象山」——把土丘種成山的樣子。這些都寫在本紀的敘事裡，與年表、巡遊、刻石並列。沒有高度、沒有周回、沒有「三泉」的深度。
「七十餘萬」在本紀裡出現兩處，要連著看。三十五年：「隱宮徒刑者七十餘萬人，乃分作阿房宮，或作麗山。」這批人分成兩處，一處在阿房宮，一處在驪山。到葬時又說「天下徒送詣七十餘萬人」。所以這個數字，一是累計（「始皇初即位，穿治驪山」，從即位就開始），二是共用（至少三十五年時，還分作兩處）。不能讀成「七十萬人同時在這座墓裡施工」。
劉向的引用
《漢書·楚元王傳》裡，劉向為諫漢成帝營建昌陵而上疏，先舉秦為戒：「秦始皇帝葬於驪山之阿，下錮三泉，上崇山墳，其高五十餘丈，周回五里有餘；石槨為遊館，人膏為燈燭，水銀為江海，黃金為鳧雁。珍寶之臧，機械之變，棺槨之麗，宮館之盛，不可勝原。又多殺宮人，生薶工匠，計以萬數。天下苦其役而反之，驪山之作未成，而周章百萬之師至其下矣。」後面還接項籍焚其宮室、牧兒亡羊失火燒其臧槨。
這段要讀出它的用途。劉向不是在報告考古發現，他是在勸諫：結論是「德彌厚者葬彌薄，知愈深者葬愈微。無德寡知，其葬愈厚，丘隴彌高，宮廟甚麗，發掘必速」；緊接著就轉到「陛下即位，躬親節儉……及徙昌陵，增埤為高，積土為山」。他把秦陵說得越盛，越能證明厚葬必遭發掘，藉此勸成帝停工。秦的滅亡，他也歸到厚葬上頭——那是他的論點，不是史實判定。所以引這幾句，必須帶上「劉向是在對成帝說話」這一層。
數字與描述
兩個數字不在同一個層級上。「七十餘萬」是本紀說的服役者，累計、且分作兩處；「計以萬數」是劉向說的被殺宮人與生埋工匠，性質是死亡人數，而且是估量。兩者不能相加，也不能拿「萬數」去反推「七十萬」，更不能推出「同時有多少人在場」——兩頁都沒有工期與出勤紀錄。
水銀那句也一樣。「以水銀為百川江河大海，機相灌輸」是本紀的敘述，劉向則寫作「水銀為江海」，兩者都是文字描述，不是實物紀錄。至於地宮裡究竟有沒有這樣一條水銀的河，兩頁都不給證據；本文不寫「已證實」。「高五十餘丈，周回五里有餘」同樣是劉向的估計，不是測量得來的數據。
兩頁的性質
一篇是本紀，紀年敘事；一篇是奏疏，修辭勸諫。本紀裡有傳說性的細節（人魚膏做的蠟燭、「機弩矢」射穿靠近的人），奏疏裡有對比與結論（厚葬必被發掘）。引文必須帶上說話人與目的：一句是史官在記，一句是劉向在對皇帝說。混在一起讀，就會把「勸諫裡的誇張」當成「記載裡的尺寸」。
能寫的是：這兩部書怎樣描述驪山。不能寫的是：考古已經證實了水銀江河；七十萬人同時施工；地宮就像本紀寫的那樣。前一項是把文字當物證，後兩項是把數字當出勤表。
材料裡沒有的
缺口：陵園布局、地宮尺寸、工匠名冊、死亡統計、修陵工期，兩頁都沒有；水銀、人魚膏、機弩矢都沒有實物紀錄；「從死」的宮人也沒有確切數目；也沒有說始皇死後這工程是否停工。所以這篇文章寫的是「兩部書怎麼講一座陵」，不是一座陵的考古報告。
驪山在這兩頁裡是兩樣東西：在本紀裡，它是一座「上具天文，下具地理」的地下世界，用來安置一個剛統一天下的人；在諫書裡，它是一座「厚葬必發」的現成教訓，拿來勸另一個皇帝別學。同一座土丘，兩種寫法；讀它先問：這是誰在說，說給誰聽。
延伸閱讀：六尺六寸：一輛戰車的尺寸，與「乘」的兩種算法 · 三十六郡：一個數字，沒有名單 · 宮城以北的市：遼南京的城坊與戶口
參考來源與延伸閱讀
- 司马迁《史记》卷六·秦始皇本纪（西汉；维基文库本，未与点校本复核） — The chronicle's account of the tomb. In the thirty-fifth year it says that 'more than seven hundred thousand convicts were set to work on the Afang Palace or at Lishan' (隱宮徒刑者七十餘萬人，乃分作阿房宮，或作麗山); at the burial it says that 'from the beginning of his reign the First Emperor had cut and governed Lishan, and when he had united the world, convicts were sent there from all under heaven, more than seven hundred thousand of them' (天下徒送詣七十餘萬人), who 'cut through three springs, poured bronze and set the coffin', filled the palace halls and offices with wonders, set crossbow triggers to shoot at anyone who approached, 'made rivers, the Yangtze, the Yellow River and the great seas out of quicksilver, mechanically circulated', 'above they set the heavens, below the earth', and used 'fish-oil for candles'. It adds that the Second Emperor had the childless women of the palace follow the dead, 'and many died', and that the artisans who knew the machinery were shut inside the tomb 'and none came out again', the mound then planted to look like a hill. It gives no plan, no dimensions and no duration of the work.
- 班固《汉书》卷三十六·楚元王传（刘向传，东汉；维基文库本，未与点校本复核） — A memorial, not a survey. Under Emperor Cheng the court was building the Changling tomb, and Liu Xiang submitted a remonstrance against the extravagance; to argue it he holds up Qin: 'the First Emperor of Qin was buried in the fold of Lishan: below he sealed the three springs, above he raised a mountain mound more than fifty zhang high and more than five li around; stone coffins made a travelling palace, human fat the lamps, quicksilver the rivers and seas, gold the wild ducks and geese. Of the treasures hidden, the machinery's ingenuity, the beauty of coffin and outer coffin, the splendour of palaces and halls, one cannot finish the account. He also killed many palace women and buried artisans alive, reckoned by the ten thousand. All under heaven suffered his corvée and turned against him; the work at Lishan was not finished when Zhou Zhang's army of a million reached its foot' (驪山之作未成，而周章百萬之師至其下矣). Liu Xiang then traces the desecrations — Xiang Yu burning the buildings, a shepherd's fire in the tomb — and draws the moral that 'the thicker the virtue, the thinner the burial', using Qin to argue that Emperor Cheng should stop building Changling. The figures are his, given in the course of an argument.
