No. Classical Chinese was not punctuated. The reader could add marks, called 讀 (pronounced tòu/do) and 句; 讀 was like a comma, 句 like a period. That’s the extent of it.
So this sometimes brings different readings. A good example is from the Analects, 泰伯：子曰民可使由之不可使知之
If you punctuate it this way, it is the reason the people in the May Fourth movement said Confucius was undemocratic: 民可使由之，不可使知之。”You can have the people follow orders, but you don’t need to let them understand what’s going on.” One problem with this reading is that it doesn’t fall in line with the body of Confucius’s thought.
Let’s try again: 民可使，由之，不可，使知之。”If the people can be ordered, let them follow orders; if they cannot be ordered, make them understand why they are being ordered.” Better. (Obviously, I am filling in the translation to make it easier to understand.
Now let’s try again: 民可使，由之，不可使，知之。“If the people are willing obey laws, let do as they will. If the people are not willing to obey the laws, understand what is wrong,” meaning the officials are responsible for knowing what is acceptable for the people. This fits in much better with the body of Confucius’s thought.
Generally considered the greatest work of Chinese calligraphy, the Orchid Pavilion Preface is actually a draft. It was written in 353ce. You can see there is no punctuation.