Chapter 5 the Renewal of Empire: the Sui and Tang Dynasties (589-Ca. 800)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 5 The renewal of empire: The Sui and Tang dynasties (589-ca. 800) Key ideas: This chapter investigates the re-integration of empire in the Sui, the early and high Tang. This was the great period of aristocratic society, of internal control and external expansion. The investigation focuses on issues of continuity from the previous period and on transformation that set in during this period, heralding the fundamentally different Chinese society that became manifest in the Song period. The Tang 唐 dynasty is regarded as the greatest age of imperial China. The tremendous influence of the empire through Eastern and Southeastern Asia is reflected in the fact that “Tang” became the name for the country and its people in Korea, Japan and throughout Southeast Asia down to modern times. Denis Twitchett summarized the glory of the Tang: It was a time of unprecedented material prosperity, of institutional growth, of new departures in thought and religion, of creativity in all the arts. What accounts for its tremendous vitality? First was its eclecticism – the way the T’ang drew together the many cultural strands from the tumultuous history of the preceding four hundred years. Second was its cosmopolitanism – its openness to foreign influence of all kinds. These qualities of the T’ang civilization gave it a universal appeal. From T’ang China neighboring peoples drew the elements which transformed for all time their own cultures. And to T’ang China came people from all over Asia: students and Buddhist monks from Korea and Japan; tribal leaders and warriors from among the Turks, the Khitans, the Uigurs; emissaries, artists, and musicians from the oasis kingdoms of Central Asia; merchants from many lands – Samarkand, Bokhara, India, Persia, Syria, and Arabia among others. The T’ang capital at Ch’ang-an was more than the functioning capital of a great empire: it was a cosmopolis, the greatest city in the world; it was the radiating center of civilization for the whole of Eastern Asia; from it came the latest in Buddhist doctrine, the latest in poetical modes, authoritative models for institutions, and so on, down to the newest in haute couture and hair styles.133 When looking for history in the Sui 随 and Tang periods, however, we need to be aware that the age of overwhelming glory mainly refers to the first half of the 8th century – of a dynasty that lasted almost three centuries. Allowing ourselves also to investigate the century before and the one and a half centuries after the high Tang 133 Twitchett & Wright (1973), “Introduction,” p. 1. as periods in their own right, we may discern longer-term tradition and transformation. The Qin-Han and Sui-Tang analogy In exploring the history of the Sui and Tang, we have to deal with two major lines of interpretation, namely the parallel reading of Qin- Han 秦汉 and Sui-Tang 隋唐 histories and the image of the dynastic cycle and periodization. At first glance, parallels between Qin-Han and Sui-Tang may make us inclined to think that history repeated itself. The Sui (581-618) like the Qin (221-209) was a powerful yet short-lived dynasty that unified China through conquest. The Sui like the Qin came from the Northwest and was regarded as semi-barbarian by many, and it brought about its own downfall by overstretching resources in ambitious military and infrastructure projects. In addition, the rise of the middle empire, like that of the first, was accompanied by the formation of a new powerful steppe polity. As the Han faced the Xiongnu, the Sui and Tang were confronted with the confederation of the Turks (Tujue 突厥 in Chinese)134 who set up their steppe empire along the Northern and Western frontier in 522 AD. The Tang, like the Han, was a long-lived dynasty and is considered an age of great glory. During the early decades of the new dynasty, the government pursued a cautious course of consolidation that subsequently enabled it to embark on powerful expansion. Much like the Wang Mang interregnum in traditional historiography appears as the turning point after which the once glorious dynasty would never be more than a shadow of its former self, the An Lushan 安禄山 rebellion (755-763) brought the dynasty to the brink of collapse and left a weakened, de facto disintegrated empire behind. Closer investigation quickly reveals that many of the parallels are no more than superficial similarities or coincidences. Yet, while the attempt to mutually explain different ages through simply aligning them can hardly contribute to gaining a better understanding, the comparative reading of the early and middle empire remains important. Not so much because we want to prove or disprove historical repetition, but because Sui and Tang rulers, political thinkers and historians consciously used and defined themselves and their judgement through historical precedent. Continuities from the period of the Southern and Northern Dynasties The Sui as the reunifying dynasty, and the early to high Tang as a period of great imperial power with the reign of Xuanzong 玄宗 (reigned 717-755) as China’s golden age appears to delineate the Sui-Tang age clearly from the preceding “dark ages” of foreign rule and division. This periodization, however, can be quite misleading, when the demarcations of dynasties and the contrast of political 134 The Turks appear in the Chinese documents from the 6th century onwards as a tribal people based on the Altai region and renowned for their ironwork. disunity versus unified empire are overstated. After all, it were the same northwestern elites who were in power from the Wei through to the high Tang and they employed quite similar administrative structures. Furthermore, the great age of religion in China, with governments sponsoring Buddhism and Daoism while tolerating other creeds and a sizeable proportion of the population opting for monastic life as monks or nuns, lasted through to the early 9th century. Although transferred to a reunified empire, there doubtlessly existed strong continuities between the Northern dynasties and the Sui-Tang. Problems of dynastic periodization More importantly, the focus on dynastic and political history inhibits a perspective on socio-economic and cultural transformation that does not coincide with dynastic change. According to the traditional view, the Tang after the great rebellion were but a sad, lingering shadow of former glory, hardly worthy of dwelling upon. It was the longer- term, structural perspective of historical progress that enabled historians to recognize the later Tang as a great departure in socio- economic structures and with regard to the role of the state, akin to the Song rather than to pre 755 Tang.135 Taking into account this by now received interpretation of a fundamental revolution taking place in the later Tang and Song, this chapter concentrates on the period up to 755, leaving the exploration of the late Tang to Song transformation to the next. The following survey of political events and at some key structural issues will allow us to gain a more differentiated perspective on the period of the early middle empire. 5.1 Issues in the re-building of the Chinese empire For a map of the Sui empire, see http://www.artsmia.org/arts-of-asia/china/maps/sui-map.cfm 135 This reinterpretation of Chinese history was initiated by the journalist-historian Naitô Torajirô in a work of 1914. While many details of his proposition have been contested, the general periodization has become received historical understanding. The Northwestern aristocracy The Sui rose as successor to the Northern Zhou. As it were, Yang Jian 楊堅 (541 - 604, reigned as Wendi 文帝 581-604), the founder of the Sui, was a general at the Zhou court and the father-in-law of the last Zhou emperor. Li Yuan 李淵 (565-635, reigned as Tang Gaozu 唐高祖 618–626), the founder of the Tang, was a Sui general and a cousin of the second Sui emperor. The rulers of the newly unified empire and their core aristocracy came from the same background of the Northwestern aristocracy. The centuries of political and social dominance of non-Chinese people in the North left deep marks on society and institutions. Especially in the North-west a new, mixed aristocracy arose, created by the intermarriage of foreign and Chinese elites and cultural osmosis. Outlook and life-styles of these Northwestern aristocrats were very different from the traditional Chinese ruling class. Many spoke Turkish as well as Chinese, they were military leaders rather than a civilian elite, and their women were quite independent and active. Despite Xianbei and Turkish genealogies, however, we have to be careful not to lump the Zhou, Sui and Tang elites together with the invaders of two centuries before. Rather than ambitious steppe warriors, the northwestern aristocrats of the 6th and 7th centuries were statesmen with considerable experience in the ruling of quite extensive states. They considered themselves the ruling class of China. This comes out in the policy of the first Tang rulers. Although some members of the ruling house still preferred speaking Turkish, their new government immediately proceeded to fortify the borders against the non-assimilated Turks along the northern frontier. The identification of the new rulers and their northwestern aristocracy clearly was with the Chinese empire. The Sui unification The Sui conquest of the East and the South, undertaken after several years of internal consolidation, was accomplished swiftly and with minimal bloodshed. The Later Liang, a vassal state, was taken in 583 and provided the Sui with the naval force necessary to conquer the last southern dynasty, the Chen in 589. The reconquest of the South was accompanied by a show of force.