Runse hongye

Foundational to the study of early China, the Shijing 詩經 (Book of Odes), Zuozhuan 左傳 (Zuo Tradition), Shiji 史記 ([Grand] Scribe's Records), and Hanshu 漢書 (History of the [Former] Han) lay the bedrock for research in the field. Of these classic works, the Hanshu has received relatively little attention in the last century. Though its ten treatises—such as the “Lüli zhi” 律曆志 (Treatise on Harmonics and Astronomy), “Xingfa zhi” 刑法志 (Treatise on Penal Law), “Shihuo zhi” 食貨志 (Treatise on Financial Administration), “Dili zhi” 地理志 (Treatise on Administrative Geography), and “Yiwen zhi” 藝文志 (Bibliographic Treatise)—have remained important discussion topics, Hanshu has largely been approached as historical reference material, rather than as an object of direct study.1 Chen Jun's Runse hongye 潤色鴻業 (Embellishing the Imperial Order) is the first academic work to comprehensively investigate the Hanshu and its early history.The book is divided into two parts. Part 1 comprises the primary content in seven chapters: Prehistory of the Hanshu's CompilationFrom Conflict to Collaboration: The Politically Influenced HanshuEncapsulating an Era: The Hanshu's Textual MilieuThe Hanshu's Political Agenda and Political InfluenceManifesting Han Power: The Hanshu's Historical MissionEstablishing Consensus: The Hanshu's Circulation in the Medieval PeriodTraditions of Hanshu Exegesis in the Medieval PeriodPart 2, “Biographical Chronology of Ban Biao 班彪 (3–54 CE) and Ban Gu 班固 (32–92 CE), Father and Son,” begins with Ban Biao's birth in the third year of the Yuanshi reign of Emperor Ping of the Western Han (3 CE) and concludes with Ban Gu's death in the fourth year of the Yongyuan reign of Emperor He of the Eastern Han (92 CE). Following the outlines of Han (202 BCE–220 CE) political history, this chronology focuses on the literary and scholarly activities of Ban Biao and Ban Gu and includes the deeds of other notable scholars, providing historical background for part 1.This book contains a concise introduction in which Chen faithfully and cogently summarizes his major arguments. Those who find reading the book too time-consuming may want to start there, so as not to forgo the work's most compelling findings. Chen also indicates his primary approach therein: “Throughout the evolution of premodern Chinese political culture, the close integration of knowledge and political power was a ubiquitous phenomenon” (1). Indeed, this volume is a history of political culture. Through the lens of the Hanshu's formation, it aims to analyze the relation between knowledge and political power in the Eastern Han.2 Chen's principal research questions are as follows: How did political power play a role in the Hanshu's formation?How are historical writings shaped by the interaction of knowledge and political power?. . . . .In what follows, I introduce each chapter of part 1 in turn and discuss a few pertinent points. Since “xu” 續 (continuations) of the Taishigong shu 太史公書 (Grand Scribe's Records) and Ban Biao's Shiji houzhuan 史記後傳 (Later Tradition of the [Grand] Scribe's Records) are largely nonextant, chapter 1 (“Prehistory of the Hanshu's Compilation”) primarily gathers biographical information about Ban Biao and seventeen scholars who wrote such “xu.” Scholars well versed in the Shiji and Hanshu are generally familiar with the fact that Chu Shaosun 褚少孫 (1st c. BCE), Liu Xiang 劉向 (77–76 BCE), Liu Xin 劉歆 (50? BCE–23 CE), and Yang Xiong 揚雄 (53 BCE–18 CE) all wrote “xu” of the Taishigong shu; less are familiar with the other ten-odd “xu” authors mentioned in Li Xian's 李賢 (655–684 CE) Hou Hanshu zhu 後漢書注 (Commentary to the History of the Later Han) and the “Gujin zhengshi” 古今正史 (Standard History of Past and Present), a chapter of Liu Zhiji's 劉知幾 (661–721 CE) Shitong 史通 (General History). Chapter 1 thus lays out some highly useful research. The thrust of the chapter is the thorough and detailed study of Ban Biao's family, life, and authorship of the Shiji houzhuan. To this end, Chen adopts the notion of clan- or region-based political groups, writing: “The origin of the Ban clan from Anling [county], Fufeng [commandery], can be traced back to the Spring and Autumn period” (30); “In the final years of the Western Han, the Fufeng Bans, as kin to the imperial line, differed from the offspring of ordinary nobles” (31); “Wei Ao's faction, with which Ban Biao was initially affiliated, was a political group based around a Long You clan” (32). Chen makes similar claims in chapter 2, such as: “In light of the general situation at that time, it was not exceptional that Ban Gu was treated coldly, as many scholar-official clans—such as the Duling (Jingzhao) Fengs, the Duling Dus, and the Anling Bans—were falling out of favor” (41). Here we can easily see the influence of scholars since Chen Yinke 陳寅恪 (1890–1969 CE) on the study of medieval history. But this approach does not suit the study of the Han period. The Han inherited Qin (221–207 BCE) institutions. In the management of regional communities, both adopted the system of household and property division (fenyi fa 分異法) established during Shang Yang's 商鞅 (390–338 BCE) legal reforms: in households with two or more sons, the son(s) not responsible for supporting the elder kin and inheriting the family property received land from the government and established their own household(s) upon reaching adulthood. A household that did not divide in this way owed twice as much tax. With this system, small households formed the backbone of society. For the Qin, with its abundant natural resources, it was essentially a land cultivation scheme in disguise, which aimed to steadily expand and utilize arable land area with newly created households. The system gradually fell into disuse during the Han, but it was not until Emperor Ming of Wei (r. 226–239 CE) during the Three Kingdoms (220–280 CE) that it was abolished completely. Judging from Hanshu's “Dili zhi,” which records the countrywide household registration information for the late Western Han, the population during that period primarily comprised small households, with five people per household on average. We therefore cannot approach the late Western Han and early Eastern Han using the notion of clans or clan-based political groups.Chapter 2, “From Conflict to Collaboration: The Politically Influenced Hanshu,” is of special note. Section 3, “Speculating about the Status of the Hanshu as Presented by Ban Gu in Jianchu 7 (82 CE),” speaks to the pivotal stage of the Hanshu's formation and is thus immensely important. Chen likens the Hanshu to the Hanhou shu 漢後書 (Hua's History of the Later Han), Dongguan Hanji 東觀漢記 (Eastern Library's Record of the Han), Hou Hanshu 後漢書 (History of the Later Han), and even the Tang-era (618–907 CE) Wudai shizhi 五代史志 (Historical Treatises of the Five Dynasties), to infer that the Hanshu comprised at first only annals (ji 紀) and biographies (zhuan 傳), to which treatises (zhi 志) and tables (biao 表) were steadily supplemented afterward. Chen points out that Hanshu's “Wei Xian zhuan” 韋賢傳 (Biography of Wei Xian) contains a large portion of text that seems better suited for inclusion in the “Jiaosi zhi” 郊祀志 (Treatise on the Suburban Sacrifice), and that, historically, scholars have criticized this apparent misplacement. But if the annals and biographies predate the treatises and tables, it becomes easy to resolve the matter [i.e., when the “Wei Xian zhuan” was completed, the “Jiaosi zhi” had not yet been written—Trans.]. Chen also astutely observes that the “Liyue zhi” 禮樂志 (Treatise on Rites and Music) and “Xingfa zhi” appear to have been written during Emperor Zhang's reign (76–88 CE). Citing the Hou Hanshu's “Zhang Cao Zheng liezhuan” 張曹鄭列傳 (Biographies of Zhang Chun, Cao Bao, and Zheng Xuan) [which records Cao Bao's 曹褒 (?–102? CE) 87 CE drafting of ritual protocol that is germane to the “Liyue zhi” —Trans.], Chen persuasively argues that the “Liyue zhi” was written sometime after Zhanghe 1 (87 CE). This treatise was therefore not completed by Jianchu 7 (82 CE), Chen contends, and the Hanshu that Ban Gu submitted to Emperor Zhang in that year probably contained only annals and biographies.The ten treatises comprise one of the most important topics in Hanshu studies. Research on the “Dili zhi” and “Yiwen zhi” is especially comprehensive. Yet the relation between the ten treatises and Eastern Han history has been overlooked. It is of course slightly regrettable, then, that Chen discusses the political issues of Emperor Zhang's reign primarily to determine the composition date of the “Liyue zhi,” devoting only a few hundred words to the topic on page 58. Though Chen posits a link between the Hou Hanshu's “Cao Bao zhuan” and the Hanshu's “Liyue zhi,” he does not discuss the connection between the Hou Hanshu's “Guo Chen liezhuan” 郭陳列傳 (Biographies of Guo Gong and Chen Chong) and the Hanshu's “Xingfa zhi.” As Chen suggests, the “Xingfa zhi” comments on the legal matters of Emperors Guangwu (r. 25–57 CE) and Ming (r. 58–75 CE) and should thus be dated to Emperor Zhang's reign. But while the “Xingfa zhi” contains specialized legal knowledge and shows clear concern for political realities, Ban Gu was not in fact an officer of the law. This being the case, we can establish a connection between Hou Hanshu's “Guo Chen liezhuan,” as well as its “Zhangdi ji” 章帝紀 (Annals of Emperor Zhang), with Hanshu's “Xingfa zhi.” The latter is obviously related to Emperor Zhang's edicts (recorded in the “Zhangdi ji”) from the dingwei day of the seventh month and the guiyou day of the eighth month of Yuanhe 1 (84 CE). Guo Gong and Cheng Chong, further, were high-ranking officials who advocated for penal reform during Emperor Zhang's reign. In Yuanhe 3 (86 CE), Guo Gong sought to reduce punishments by “proposing forty-one matters that could be handled with leniency” (ke congqing zhe sishiyi shi zou zhi 可從輕者四十一事奏之).3 The content of Guo's proposals is highly consistent with the final section of the “Xingfa zhi.” The main source material of the “Xingfa zhi,” then, is probably related to the penal reforms proposed by Guo Gong and Chen Chong in the Yuanhe period (84–87 CE). Like the “Liyue zhi,” the “Xingfa zhi” was completed after Jianchu 7 (82 CE), but the documents on which it was based appear to predate those [of 87 CE] on which the “Liyue zhi” was based.At the end of the “Lüli zhi,” Ban Gu supplements the annals of Wang Mang 王莽 (r. 9–23 CE) and Emperor Guangwu after the line of succession excerpted from Liu Xin's “Shijing” 世經 (Generational Guides). This seems to indicate that Ban Gu first drafted the treatise during Emperor Ming's reign. If so, the composition of the ten treatises began at least as early as Emperor Ming's reign and lasted until Ban Gu's death, spanning the entire reign of Emperor Zhang. The connections discussed above between the “Liyue zhi,” “Xingfa zhi,” and administrative practice prompt further inquiry into the important relations between the ten treatises and contemporary political reforms: Was the composition of a geographic treatise (“Dili zhi”) related to the tax reforms of Emperors Ming and Zhang? Did Emperor Zhang's fondness for ancient learning and the Baihu guan 白虎觀 (White Tiger Hall) discussions underlie the composition of a bibliographic treatise (“Yiwen zhi”)? These questions extend the reach of Hanshu studies to more concrete processes of political practice and may lead to a more complete picture of the relation between knowledge and political power.Chapter 3, “Encapsulating an Era: The Hanshu's Textual Milieu,” discusses Hanshu's textual origins and Ban Gu's strategies for composition and compilation. Section 1 exhaustively enumerates the work's source materials across nine categories: Shiji; “xu” of the Taishigong shu; writings by Liu Xiang and Liu Xin; genealogies (pudie 譜牒); author's prefaces (zixu 自序) and supplemental biographies (biezhuan 別傳); masters literature (zishu 子書); court documents (chaoting dang'an 朝廷檔案); lyrics and rhapsodies (cifu wenzhang 辭賦文章); anecdotes (jianwen 見聞) and apocrypha (yishi 軼事); and “other.” In all, only the claims made in the masters literature category give me some pause. Discussing Han masters literature, Chen adopts Liu Shipei's 劉師培 (1884–1919 CE) position that Ban Gu excerpted Jia Yi's 賈誼 (200–168 BCE) “Zhi'an ce” 治安策 (Plan to Restore Order and Peace)—also known as “Chen zhengshi shu” 陳政事疏 (Enumeration of Governmental Matters)—from the Xinshu 新書 (New and that he excerpted BCE) to the of from the of the Spring and Autumn But the of in the Western Han differed from that of the edicts and and were of a especially those of special or written by edicts have been in China, for and BCE) have also been in a Han in Liu Shipei's of direct between is therefore The “Zhi'an ce” in both the Xinshu and but with text It is more that the Xinshu and Hanshu of the “Zhi'an The that Ban Gu the of the Xinshu in his of that as Liu suggests, is too “The Hanshu's Political Agenda and Political is especially Chen historical a as the can and history to their own Chen “In to the influence of political the Hanshu Ban Gu's of Han history. source and political his This chapter focuses on the between BCE) and Han history, as well as the link between the Western and Eastern most compelling is in section 3, and the one of the most important Chen that, in the Ban Gu special attention to both the two and the of Eastern Han We generally that the Western Han began in the first year of Emperor reign BCE) and in the fourth year of Wang reign CE), when the latter was In his chronology of Ban Gu includes the year after Wang year of the the Western Han to the as of [i.e., as Emperor and Emperor at the of CE). Emperor deeds of the Western Han Ban Gu the two Han Gu's of the annals and Chen also this of of history. the final zhuan” (Biography of the zhuan” (Biography of and Mang zhuan” (Biography of Wang the Western Han gradually and Emperor Guangwu of the Eastern Han the In Chen's Ban Gu wrote Wang as if it were an and this the two Han Through the study of textual Chen makes exceptional about the of Ban Gu's Han Power: The Hanshu's Historical studies the relation between the Hanshu and Eastern Han the of the this chapter does not with the Hanshu until section The first two too much the in early Eastern Han and the connections between and during the of Emperors Ming and Zhang. more on the of historical Chen does not the Hanshu's historical was to Han zhu Han he a compelling in section from Yi's CE) reading Chen the Hanshu the light on Emperor Zhang's political the Hanshu's formation, Chen's research is of to the third from to an important the Shiji and Hanshu were to the Five and a imperial were especially in the early Eastern Ban Gu wrote the Hanshu to the Five from to In both and chapter he to Five The of Chen's study seems to indicate that chapter should the of the Hanshu created this these are not is this the time, we can Chen's line of inquiry to the did the to imperial after the Eastern the to the Taishigong BCE) did not in fact to the Five he he was a classic in the of and Autumn Ban on the other The Hanshu is after the Five as it and with the after the we find further to a imperial in historical this is a and 7 a history of the Hanshu's and from the Han to the that the course of its Of to scholars of the Chen a clear and Runse hongye is one of the most of the Hanshu to Chen's this study to the field. of some important issues that Chen does not in the Hanshu a yet more I turn to some issues related to Chen's we approach Hanshu and its source materials with and to the the Hanshu can be by an attention to material from the Ban Gu primarily did so at the of But he also and the historical Chapter 3 this in But are more what Chen that Ban Gu his Ban sought in the In the of BCE), for Ban Gu the main from the Shiji but their For I both liezhuan” (Biographies of the of and The proposals been the Emperor as the and to an in and was court the time, were being to establish a in the The people of and from this [i.e., the or and to the to he the which he was of establish did not this . . . and he the for out his during court the Emperor to his own out or the The Emperor thus to be and in his during in legal and and with was with two years was to for the . . . . zhuan” (Biographies of and The proposals been the Emperor as the and to an in and he was court to edicts at . . . the time, had been established with the people and from so to the . . . the he was to for the . . . In for his he was and he the for as for the for a few he was to . . . . . . . . . . . . are the to imperial questions to the this of to Emperor of who in the The Shiji the to BCE), and the Hanshu But a that the of imperial is in the Hanshu In the first of to for years his position as for the in the by his period does not until after this the Hanshu the Hanshu's of the records that the court as for the in after his imperial that from to the could he have in that year This with the period after this Ban Gu such a the Hanshu's ji” (Annals of Emperor records that submitted this in 1 This an even more with the and yet Ban Gu made the and tables, he the of the biographies and that Ban Gu his source materials and had the Shiji we the If the Hanshu that Ban Gu submitted during Emperor Zhang's Jianchu reign contained only annals and he resolve the and and of (zhuan But in the did Ban Gu the of the tables and biographies more his of this an or Ban Gu most of the tables had not yet been completed, so was it Ban Gu or his Ban who made the and many other similar does the Hanshu If such are exhaustively we to the history of Hanshu's mentioned the Hanshu in important to the of Emperors Ming and Zhang. This relation can only be textual general with Chen's work is is the Runse hongye its on and Ban Gu as a the not as much on the Hanshu as on Ban Gu during the of Emperors Ming and Zhang. With a on of the Ban Gu is the of Chen's Chen Ban Gu a but this from about the between authors and their in the Han was in some to we about that relation [i.e., a who authors were two to Ban Gu's the one was the of such as the [of on the and to the The of these can probably be a in the the other was the of the it that Ban Gu such a As I to the ten treatises Ban Gu's as he did not the zhi” (Treatise on since the who have with the Shiji and Hanshu in a have been in large part literary in primarily on shi which to the author's close reading and to light on such as and the of the author's life, and is on a and so that the begins to their in line with their own a further the or text a or This of only the research and can easily a of such as the origin and of their materials and and the history of their and not only the of but also the of their the the have on the between and to the the But in premodern was the primary for Did the the text or are to these In the the chapter of his of and Zhang CE) The words of the were of the The of their writings sought to own as their The to the (zhi words the and supplements the words The of the did the as all that to be and not of what their words this Zhang from a or premodern were written the This premodern does not easily with the of who own their It is to that the Han who in the of with an such as the Spring and Autumn and it is only at the that the in a does not the and of the are not such as the and of materials influence the and of one section or In this Hanshu's is most the annals and biographies we cannot establish that only Ban Gu was in their approach should we to analyze ancient we the of the If we so, what to Han and These questions to be

Ancient history · Art · Divination · Emperor · Exegesis · Humanities · Literature · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Reign · Chinese history and philosophy · Classics · History · Law · Philosophy

• Inventing the Spring and Autumn Period

  Peter Tsung Kei Wong•The Journal of Asian Studies•2024

  Add to list

• A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China

  Yves Hervouet, Charles O Hucker•Journal of the Economic and…•1987

  Add to list