The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞examinations, Literary

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108

brill.com/jco

The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies by Emperors and the Literary Circles during the Kangxi and Qianlong Periods

Bing Wang

Abstract

As a result of political demands and imperial cultural cultivation, the Qing Dynasty reigns of Kangxi (1661–1722) and Qianlong (1736–1796) both paid great attention to the traditional Han culture. During these periods, there were two landmark events that embodied the success of their cultural policy. These were the special examinations of boxue hongci (“breadth in learning and vastness in letters”, also called boxue hongru) in 1679 and 1736, and the publishing of numerous literary anthologies by the emperors. However, scholarly discussions have often focused mainly on aspects of political and cultural domination, and have rarely discussed the impact of these two events on literary circles in the early and middle Qing Dynasty. Thus, this paper examines the boxue hongci examination and the literary anthologies by Emperors as literary events and evaluate them from three perspectives. First, with regards to literary purposes, these two events fostered the link between official and elite discourses. Second, with regards to literary styles, these two events together facilitated the emergence at the height of the Qing Dynasty styles known as qingzhen yazheng (“purity, authenticity, elegance and correctness”) and wenrou dunhou (“gentleness and restraint”). Third, with regards to literary layout, the two events changed the proportion of writers’ identity and actively advanced the balance of the north and south literary circles.

Keywords

Boxue examinations – Kangxi – Qianlong – Qing literary circles

* National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore [email protected].

Introduction

In early 1678, Sanfan zhiluan 三藩之乱 (“the Revolt of the Three Feudatories”) was close to being suppressed and the land under Qing 清 (1644–1911) rule was stable. In this context, the emperor adopted the cultural policy of jigu youwen 稽古右文 (“verifying and advocating ancient culture”) to select talent, to edit various literary works, and to revitalize and strengthen domination. From the early Kangxi 康熙 period (1662–1722) to the early Qianlong 乾隆 reign (1736–1795), two public events launched by Qing officials impacted literary development. One was the boxue hongci 博學宏[鴻]詞 (“breadth in learning and vastness in letters”) examination (hereafter BHE), which was different from the traditional examinations. It revived special method of appointing scholars during the era of imperial examination, which originated in the Kaiyuan 開元 (713–741) period of the Tang 唐 Dynasty (618–907). The BHE was held twice in the early years of the Qing Dynasty, once in the 18th year of Kangxi’s reign (1679), and another in the first year of Qianlong’s reign to select the most knowledgeable and cultivated scholars who also had mas- tery of prose and poetry. In 1679, out of 154 people who participated in the examination, 50 people were selected. In 1735, out of 193 participants, 15 people were selected. In the following year’s supplementary examination, only 4 out of 26 candidates were chosen. The other event was the compilation of numerous Yuxuan zongji 御選總集 (Literary Anthologies by Emperors, hereafter LAE). In the section entitled Zongji 總集 (General collection) of the Siku Quanshu 四庫全書, eighteen anthologies specifically indicated yuding 御定, qinding 欽定, yuxuan 御選, yuzhi 御製 (all meaning “decreed/selected by Emperor”), such as Yuxuan guwen yuanjian 御選古文淵鑒 (Profound mirror of ancient- style prose selected by Emperor), Yuding quan Tangshi 御定全唐詩 (A complete edition of Tang poetry selected by Emperor), Yuxuan Tang Song shichun 御選唐宋詩醇 (Essence of Tang and Song poetry selected by Emperor) and Qinding sishu wen 欽定四書文 (Anthology of four books prose authorized by Emperor), etc. In compiling these collections, emperors directly or indirectly expressed their preferences and will. In ancient China, corresponding to the social strata, literary discourse was divided into three types: official discourse, elite discourse and folk discourse. Michel Foucault’s theory of power discourse held that royal power, as the high- est level of authority, controlled the production of knowledge and culture. Furthermore, people’s values were influenced by knowledge and culture, and different cognitive styles likewise created different discourses.1 Thus, it can

1 See Foucault 1980: 78–108.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 96 WaNG

Power Disseminate Folk Literary Professional Literary Events Literary World Life Ocial Discourse F Elit

Scholarly Literary olk Discourse BHE Reading Community e Discourse Model Literary Texts Consumption LAE Critique Literary Criteria Acceptance Figure 1 The pathways of official discourse.

be concluded that the BHE and LAE were producers of official discourse in the Qing Dynasty. In addition, these two literary events representing official discourse would influence elite discourse of the professional or elite literary world, which was comprised of the scholarly community, the model texts and the critique criteria. Then, via relationships of social power, elite discourse continued on to influence ordinary folks’ literary life, including the reading of literature and the consumption and acceptance of ideas. This graph captured the influence of official discourse on elite and folk discourse.

1 Change in the Mentality of Scholars: The Coexistence of Official and Elite Discourse

Since the Manchus conquered China and founded the Qing dynasty in 1644, emperors of different reigns emphasized on the appointment of Han 漢 intel- lectuals and their culture. The BHE not only attracted certain Han intellectual elites but also alleviated tension between the Manchu and the Han to a certain extent. Similarly, the compilation of numerous LAEs would include many scholars at that time and highlight the ruler’s cultural policies.

1.1 The Influence of BHE on Scholars’ Career Choice as an Official or an Anchoret In January 1678, Emperor Kangxi decreed:

自古一代之興，必有博學鴻儒，振起文運，闡發經史，潤色詞章，以備顧問著作之選。朕萬幾餘暇，遊心文翰，思得博學之士，用資典學...... 凡有學行兼優、文詞卓越之士，不論已仕未仕，令在京三品以上，及科道官員，在外督撫布按，各舉所知，朕將親試錄用。

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 97

From ancient times, whenever a dynasty arose, of necessity there were profound scholars of vast learning who fostered the literary development, expounded the Classics and Histories, and enriched the literary style, thus preparing themselves for selection as advisers and writers. I, in my spare time after enacting the ten thousand affairs, gladden my heart with literature; and it is my wish to obtain scholars of vast learning who could be used as aides in the classical studies . . . With respect to whoever is equally excellent in knowledge and conduct and surpassing in prose and song styles, whether already in service or not, I herewith order, within the Capital those officials whose ranks are above the third grade and those who are in the Censorate, and outside the Capital the viceroys and governors, the provincial financial commissioners and the provincial judicial commissioners, all to recommend those of whom they know, so that I might personally submit them to an examination for appointment.2

After publishing the imperial edict, Emperor Kangxi repeatedly ordered the Ministry of Personnel to charge officials in every province and district to find and recommend talent. The edict was so severe as to appear threaten- ing. Initially, many Ming 明 (1368–1644) loyalists refused recruitment attempts using excuses such as illness or needing to care for parents. For instance, Li Yong 李顒 (1627–1705) declined seven times. Gu Yanwu 顧炎武 (1613–1682) disobeyed the order despite the perceived threat of execution. Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲 (1610–1695) declined the appointment with the excuse that his old mother needed care. However, the Qing government did not punish scholars who refused appointments. On the contrary, the government rewarded scholars who accepted their appointment by allocating heating materials and money every month to them. Even those who took the exam perfunctorily, such as Yan Shengsun 嚴繩孫 (1623–1702), the government still held a tolerant attitude and finally admitted them. Some scholars such as Fu Shan 傅山 (1607–1684), who refused to take the exam and had been repatriated to his place of origin, were given official positions by the Qing government, albeit lower positions. Thus, the Qing government adopted moderate policies that did not include coercion. Meanwhile, these policies had a major impact on the life choices and literary perspectives of Ming loyalists. Even people such as Gu and Huang, who remained loyal to the Ming Dynasty by refusing to serve the Qing government,

2 Qing Shengzu ren huangdi shilu 清實錄:聖祖仁皇帝實錄: vol. 71, p. 910a. This translation is adapted from Hellmut 1951: 61.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 98 WaNG were supportive of their students and descendants who chose to engage in Qing politics. As Dai Mingshi 戴名世 (1653–1713) said:

自明之亡,東南舊臣,多義不仕宦,而其家子弟仍習舉業、取科第,多不以非。

Since the doom of the Ming Dynasty, most scholars and officials refused to serve Qing Dynasty because of their loyalty; however, most of them did not opposed their descendants to learn how to pass the imperial exam for official positions.3

Although some early Ming loyalists reluctantly accepted Qing patronage, later scholars still remained ambivalent. An interesting example was Pan Lei 潘耒 (1646–1708), a disciple of Gu Yanwu, who vacillated at first. Before recruitment, he wrote a poem,

只合從容求放免，林泉深處好偷生。

I beg forgiveness for not wishing to be recruited, as I would like to live in seclusion instead.4

However, after recruitment he wrote,

臣幸生雍熙之代,為侍從之臣。預在末班,遭逢曠典,豈可使鴻林盛美郁而不宣？

I am thankful to be able to live in a peaceful age, and serve the Emperor as an official. I am not good enough in such a great time; think we should encourage folks who have both capability and excellent conduct to serve the court.5

Therefore, it can be concluded that until 1679, Han intellectual elites in the Qing Dynasty changed their attitude from resistance and detachment to approval and cooperation toward the new dynasty.

3 Dai Mingshi: “Zhu Mingde zhuan” 朱銘德傳, in Nanshan ji 南山集 (in Gu 1997: vol. 1410, p. 162). 4 Pan Lei: Suichutang ji 遂初堂集 (in Siku quanshu cunmu congshu, 1995: vol. 249, p. 531). 5 Siku quanshu cunmu congshu, 1995: vol. 249, p. 543.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 99

1.2 The Influence of LAE on the Scholars’ Creation Another way in which the Qing Dynasty practiced its cultural policies of chongru zhongdao 崇儒重道 (“respecting Confucianism”) was to charge scholars with compiling ancient books. There were many ancient poems and anthologies that were included in this process. However, the LAE with personal involvement and intervention was that which could best embody the cultural policies of the Qing Dynasty, especially during the reigns of Emperors Kangxi and Qianlong. Specifically, there were two types of documents that were compiled. One was literary anthologies selected by the emperor and compiled by officials, and the other was literary anthologies compiled by the officials first, then annotated and prefaced by the emperor. Obviously, these two anthologies both belonged to the official discourse, which was created by the emperor himself and select members of the intellectual elite. This type of official discourse had a profound impact on scholars’ writing mentality. On the surface, such practices on the part of the emperor and the ruling class necessarily caused top-down effects on the intellectual elites and ordinary scholars. The emperor placed more emphasis on the literary classics, which stimulated scholars’ enthusiasm for writing. The emperor’s inter- est in literary anthologies encouraged the upsurge for editing anthologies in the literary arena. The same can be seen with literary criticism. For example, regarding the establishment and propaganda of several poetic thoughts in the Qing Dynasty, or for poetic criticism and inheritance toward the Ming Dynasty, compiling poetic anthology was an important method of poetic criticism, such as Wang Shizhen’s 王士禛 (1634–1711) shenyun shuo 神韻說 (“Theory of spiritual resonance”) and Shen Deqian’s 沈德潛 (1673–1769) gediao shuo 格調說 (“Doctrine of style”). As for the underlying connotation, official discourse fostered the link between elite discourse and common discourse with this type of “mild autocracy.” Generally speaking, the intellectual class cooperated with the ruling class in politics, but preserved an attitude of cultural independence. Sometimes they were critics and other times they were simply focused on their own spiritual world. The emperor wanted these members of the elite and ordinary scholars submissive to, instead of deviating from the norms of official discourse. Shen Deqian, for example, enjoyed a smooth official career after he was recommended to the BHE in 1736. In that period, Shen wrote many poems filled with praise and eulogy and advocated the tender and gentle style. However, all honors previously bestowed by Emperor Qianlong vanished into thin air after Shen’s literary inquisitions of Yizhulou shi 一柱樓詩 (Poetry of the Single-Pillared Building) and Guochao shi biecai ji 國朝詩別裁集 (Anthology of Poetry of the Qing Dynasty). Thus, Shen’s behavior in this instance broke off former positive relations with the Emperor.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 100 WaNG

2 Diversion of a Literary Trend: The Establishment of a Literary Concept in a Flourishing Age

The diversion of a literary trend not only depended on the regulation of literary self-development, but also could not ignore the influence of external factors. In fact, the establishment of a literary concept, such as qingzhen yazheng 清真雅正 (“purity, authenticity, elegance and correctness”) and wenrou dunhou 溫柔敦厚 (“gentleness and restraint”), as well as ideas promoting the Tang style during the Kang-Qian golden age (康乾盛世) were related to the BHE and LAE.

2.1 The Promotion of a Literary Concept in a Flourishing Age The direct effect of the official discourse of the Qing government on the trends of literary thought originated from the selection criteria of LAE. First, in the area of poetry, Emperor Kangxi wrote in the preface of Yuxuan Tangshi 御選唐詩 (Anthology of Imperially Selected Tang Poems):

是編所取，雖風格不一，而皆以溫柔敦厚為宗。

Though the styles of the poems in this anthology are different, the criteria for selection is still based on gentleness and restraint.6

Because this criterion agreed with the official perspective of political cultivation and traditional Confucian poets, the Qing government was pleased to see harmony among the three discourses. Shi Runzhang 施閏章 (1619–1683) of the Kangxi period noted:

君子懷易直子諒之心，則必多和平緩嘽之聲，誠積之於中不自知其然故曰溫柔敦厚，詩教也。

Gentlemen with righteous and considerate character can always hear gentle and peaceful sound; and even having already been in that environ- ment they might not realize that. That’s why we say that tenderness and sincerity is the foundation of Confucius poetics.7

The first sentence of the fanli 凡例 (general guidelines) in Guochao shi biecai ji reads,

6 Qing Shengzu Xuanye 清聖祖玄燁: “Yuxuan Tangshi xu” 御選唐詩序, in Chen Tingjing et al.: preface. 7 Shi Runzhang: “Jiashantang shi xu” 佳山堂詩序, in He, Yang 1992: 132.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 101

詩之為道，不外孔子教小子教伯魚數言，而其立言一歸於溫柔敦厚。

Poetry as Dao 道 (way) is just a few lines of what Confucius told his students and son to learn Book of Songs, while gentleness and restraint acts as a basic principle throughout his words.8

Indeed, apart from this style, orthodox Confucian aesthetics also included xing, guan, qun, yuan 興觀群怨 (“stimulation, self-contemplation, sociability and complain”), which are often deliberately excluded in official discourse. Second, with regard to essays, Emperor Kangxi noted,

朕留心典籍，因取古人之文，自春秋以迄於宋，擇其辭義精純可以鼓吹六經者，彚為正集，即間有瑰麗之篇，要皆歸於古雅。

I paid attention to classics, thus picked essential essays from the Spring and Autumn period 春秋時期 [770–476 BC] to the Song 宋 Dynasty [960–1279], which advocated the Six Classics fully, for collecting them into the anthology. Although interspersed with a few magnificent works, the overall style of anthology should be classic elegance.9

That was also mentioned in the comment on Qinding sishu wen:

我皇上復申明清真雅正之訓，是編所錄，一一仰稟聖裁，大抵皆詞達理醇，可以傳世行遠。

Our Emperor Qianlong would like to reiterate Emperor Kangxi’s decree that writings should contain purity, authenticity, elegance and correctness. All the selected works are in accordance with Emperor Qianlong’s requirements, which include intelligible expression and profound meaning, so that it can be passed down for a long time.10

Therefore, qingzhen yazheng became the general criteria for essays in official Qing discourse. One example was Fang Bao 方苞 (1668–1749), the compiler of the Qinding sishu wen. As the founder of essays from the Tongcheng School 桐城派, he focused on the doctrine of yi fa 義法 (“Principles and methods”),

8 Shen Deqian et al. 1998: 365. 9 Qing Shengzu Xuanye: “Yuzhi guwen yuanjian xu” 御製古文淵鑒序, in Xu Qianxue et al. preface. 10 See Yong Rong 1960: 1729.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 102 WaNG in which yi outlined the main ideas, conclusions and opinions of the essays, and in which fa discussed the structures, pattern and rhetoric. However, both yi and fa should demonstrate purity and elegance, and consciously cater to the official demands of the Qing dynasty, as disseminated to ordinary scholars and readers through influence of the literary elite. Moreover, successful candidates of the BHE made significant contribu- tions to the development of the writing style at the height of the Kang-Qian age. During Kangxi’s reign, fifty eminent scholars gathered in the capital for the compilation of a national history text, and they often socialized together for trips and parties, or composed poetry with Cabinet Ministers such as Feng Pu 馮溥 (1609–1692), Xu Qianxue 徐乾學 (1631–1694), and Ye Fang’ai 葉方藹 (1629–1682). They were often invited by the emperor to dinner and were asked to compose poems; therefore, more than half of their poems were either composed according to the original poems’ rhyming words or were col- lective creations. The contents of these poems focused on highlighting and praising the emperor’s benevolence, commemorating the good times in these meetings, or communicating between friends. As seen in Gao Yong’s 高詠 (1622–1685) poems,

通籍後所作，非頌聖即貢諛。

His poems written after being an official either praised or flattered the emperor.11

Such criticisms also occurred in the annotations of Qian Jinfu’s 錢金甫 (1638–1692) poems, which were “of glutinous sentimentality and inherited the style of gentleness and restraint.”12 (纏綿緋惻，不失溫柔敦厚之遺。) All these poems met government requirements, and their creators became the dominant force behind singing the praise of the flourishing Kang-Qian period.

2.2 The Poetic Trend Promoting the Tang Style Throughout the Qing Dynasty, promoting the Tang or Song style were the two strongest trends in the area of poetic criticism. Proponents of the Tang model praised its style and often denounced Song poetry, while supporters of Song poetry objected to blindly establishing Tang poetry as the standard and affirmed that Song poetry made great achievements, encouraged change and innovation, and attached great importance to knowledge. There was no

11 Deng Zhicheng 1984: 582. 12 Zhu Yizun 1935: 460.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 103 doubt that the official discourse of the Qing dynasty favored establishing Tang poetry as the standard, especially poetry written at the height of the Tang Dynasty. The poetic style of this golden Qing age was Tang poetry rather than Song poetry, which had been popular in Beijing in the early Kangxi period. This claim was shown clearly in the preface to one of LAEs:

詩至唐而眾體悉備，亦諸法畢該。故稱詩者，必視唐人為標準。

When poetry progresses until the Tang Dynasty, the different artistic fea- tures are now fully developed. Those who consider themselves to know poetry writing should make Tang Dynasty poets the standard for poetry creation.13

In addition, the abstract of Yuxuan Tang Song shichun issued this criticism:

宋人不解溫柔敦厚之義，故義言竝盡。

Writers in the Song dynasty did not understand the meaning of wenrou dunhou, so their poems lost meaning and words.14

Among the fifty scholars who were admitted to the BHE of 1679, the major- ity, such as Peng Sunyu 彭孫遹 (1631–1700), Li Yindu 李因篤 (1631–1692), Chen Weisong 陳維崧 (1625–1682), Mao Qiling 毛奇齡 (1623–1716), and Zhu Yizun 朱彝尊 (1629–1709), were proponents of Tang poetry. However, the upsurge in popularity of Song poetry did not quickly subside during the early Qing Dynasty, so some poets who preferred Song poems, such as Cao He 曹禾 (1637–1699), Wang Wan 汪琬 (1624–1691), Sun Zhiwei 孫枝蔚 (1631–1697), were also selected as part of the LAE. Until the early Qianlong reign, official discourse did not completely reject Song poetry and their supporters, and even believed that poetry reached its peak during the Tang Dynasty and changed greatly during the Song Dynasty. Wang Shizhen was most affected by the pro-Tang official discourse. He once said that he preferred the poetic style of Song Dynasty to Tang Dynasty when he was a middle-aged man. However, his prestige as a literary leader came from preaching a style that resonated with pro-Tang poetry rather than with Song poetry. Researchers generally believed that Wang’s Shenyun shuo created the

13 Qing Shengzu Xuanye: “Yuzhi quan Tangshi xu” 御製全唐詩序, in Peng Dingqiu et al. preface. 14 Yong Rong 1960: 1728.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 104 WaNG

Tangxian sanmei ji 唐賢三昧集 (Collection of Samādhi [Enlightened] Poetry by Bhadras [Virtuous Sages] of the Tang) printed in 1690. Meanwhile, many scholars believed that this theory went through a process of evolution from the time the idea was conceived to formation. Professor Jiang Yin 蔣寅 believed that the first step was taken by Wang Shizhen in his preface to the Huangmei shixuan 黃湄詩選 (Anthology of Wang Youdan [1636–1687]) where he discussed pro- Song poetry.15 Pan Wuzheng 潘務正 believed that the first step began after Wang enrolled in the Hanlin Academy 翰林院.16 Although the two findings were inconsistent, they observed that Wang’s life in the Hanlin Academy had an important influence on its poets. Strong evidence showed that Wang was promoted to Academician Reader-in-waiting 侍讀學士 in 1678, which coin- cided with the grand assembly of BHE candidates in the capital city. At that time, various poetic styles were likely to change anyone’s poetic thought and creation style; Wang was no exception. It is clear that candidates of the BHE who advocated Tang poetry played an important role in the establishment of the poetic style of the flourishing age.

3 Adjustment of the Literary Pattern: The Changes of the Scholars’ Identities and Regional Distribution

From the Ming-Qing dynastic transition period to the early period of Kangxi reign, loyalist literati were the main body of the literary arena. However, according to Liang Qichao 梁啟超 (1873–1929):

康熙二十年以後，形勢漸漸變了。遺老大師，凋謝略盡。後起之秀，多半在新朝生長，對於新朝的仇恨，自然減輕。

The political situation gradually changed after 1681 when the rising gen- eration replaced those old adherents. Most of them lived in the Qing Dynasty, and their hatred to new dynasty was lightened naturally.17

He was referring to official scholars, but this could also be applied to the literary arena.

15 Jiang Yin 2001: 35–36. 16 See Pan Wuzheng 2008. 17 Liang Qichao 2013: 18.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 105

3.1 The Change of Scholars’ Identity Of the 50 scholars admitted to the BHE in 1679, according to Yang Haiying’s 楊海英 statistics,18 15 were descendants of old ministers of the Ming Dynasty, such as Peng Sunyu, Chen Weisong, Xu Jiayan 徐嘉炎 (1631–1703), Zhu Yizun, Qiu Xiangsui 邱象隨 (1631–1701), and Fang Xiangying 方象瑛 (1632–?); 11 were venerable literary scholars, such as Wang Wan, Shi Runzhang, You Tong 尤侗 (1618–1704), Mao Qiling, and Li Yindu; 18 were incumbent officers, such as Cao He, Huang Yujian 黃與堅 (1620–1701) and Qian Jinfu; and six were poor scholars, such as Li Chengzhong 李澄中 (1629–1700), and Ni Can 倪燦 (1627–1688). Thus, the group was clearly composed of scholars with diverse backgrounds. Although there were some surviving scholars such as Gu Yanwu, Huang Zongxi, Wang Fuzhi 王夫之 (1619–1692) and Qu Dajun 屈大均 (1630–1696), their influence was not as it was before. In this process of transformation, the cultural policy of the Qing Dynasty accelerated the disintegration of the Ming loyalist group. While adherents of the Ming Dynasty were allowed to live in seclusion, most of their students and descendants acknowledged the new dynasty. From the time of the Shunzhi 順治 reign (1644–1661), some scholars who were born during the new dynasty and “turncoat” officials 貳臣, were becoming significant in literature. With restart of the BHE, they had already integrated into the dominant ideology as a group and adopted leadership roles in the Kangxi reign. Of course, the shift of writers’ identities was closely related to the cultural policy of the early Qing Dynasty. In the process of recommend- ing scholars to the BHE, Manchu rulers demonstrated the greatest sincerity for and the utmost acceptance of traditional Han culture and initially toler- ated Ming loyalists, to dispel any misgivings about cultural dislocation on the part of their adherents. In addition, the emperors’ prefaces to LAEs reiterated the value of traditional Han culture and scholarship. Nevertheless, the greatest contribution of the early Qing Dynasty in terms of cultural management was the gradual discontinuation of Ming loyalism among the literati in the Qing dynasty.

3.2 Adjustment of Writers’ Regional Distribution During the early Qing Dynasty, the significant characteristic of literary circles was the regional distribution of scholars. Qian Qianyi 錢謙益 (1582–1664) and Wu Weiye 吳偉業 (1609–1671) represented the Jiangnan 江南 literary circle; Wang Shizhen was the center of the Shanzuo 山左 (Shandong) literary circle; the circle of Huxiang 湖湘 literature included Wang Fuzhi; and Huang Zongxi and Zhu Yizun were representatives of the Zhejiang 浙江 literary

18 Yang Haiying 1996: 97–99.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 106 WaNG circle. Genres of literature were also classified by region, such as the Yushan School 虞山派, the Three Great Scholars in Lingnan 嶺南三大家, the Three Li in Guanzhong 關中三李, the Six Masters in Zhexi 浙西六家, the Ten Scholars in Loujiang 婁江十子, the Three Olds in Liaodong 遼東三老, the Seven Scholars in Wumen 吳門七子 and the Seven Scholars of Yuezhong 越中七子. The structure in the early Qing Dynasty appeared to be diffuse and diversified, but the Jiangnan literary circle possessed a leading influence that affected the whole country, even Guanzhong poets who were indepen- dent from mainstream poets. That is because poetics in Guanzhong was the product of the interaction between Gu Yanwu and other Guanzhong poets. However, after the formation of two BHE groups and certain conciliatory policies of the Qing Dynasty, this situation saw marked changes. The first change was the confrontation between the South and the North literary worlds. Due to the weakening of anti-Qing sentiment, Kangxi’s pacifist policy, and improved networks from south to north, the literary world during the middle period of the Kangxi reign separated into two parts: the Southern literary world and the Northern literary world, as seen in reference to the “South Shi [Runzhang] North Song [Wan]” 南施北宋 and “South Zhu [Yizun] North Wang [Shizhen]” 南朱北王. This situation showed balanced development in writers’ regional distribution. Furthermore, more than one hundred scholars waiting for the BHE and several great scholars of the Hanlin Academy who wrote The History of Ming Dynasty 明史 gathered in Beijing, which became an important part of the northern literature circle. The second was the establishment of a popularly acclaimed literary head. Since the early Qing Dynasty, the leaders of literary circles were Wang Shizhen in the Kangxi period and Shen Deqian in the Qianlong period. They were both associated with the BHE, although Wang had never participated in the special examination. As stated before, he changed poetic inclination from the Song style to the Tang style after making contact with candidates of the BHE. So the impact of the scholars of the BHE was a key factor in moving toward the leader’s position. Shen was an unsuccessful candidate in the BHE of 1736. However, after three years, he passed the imperial examination and was recognized by the emperor, so he eventually became a literary leader in the Qianlong Dynasty. It was quite coincidental that Wang and Shen were both affected by LAE and edited many poetry anthologies which conformed to the emperors’ aesthetic requirements. This meant that the two leaders had some similarities, such as remaining at the center of the literary world, maintaining close relationships with other elites, catering to the literary philosophy of official discourse, and enjoying recognition by the emperor.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access The Boxue Hongci 博學宏詞 Examinations, Literary Anthologies 107

Conclusion: Multi-interpretation of Literary Development

For the literary arena during Kang-Qian Period, the influences of BHE and LAE demonstrated the domination of elite discourse and folk discourse by the official discourse, as well as their response to the official discourse. This type of mutual gamble between these discourses was common. Moreover, when we analyze the direction of literary development, we should avoid determinism by literature itself. In any country, any important historical event and literary event could affect the development of literature, so the analysis of literature should be more multivariate.

Bibliography

Qing Shengzu ren huangdi shilu 清實錄:聖祖仁皇帝實錄 (Historical Materials on the Emperor Shengzu (Kangxi) in the Qing Veritable Records, Beijing, Zhonghua shuju), 1985–87. Siku quanshu cunmu congshu 四庫全書存目叢書 (Collections of Books Listed in the Section of Surviving Titles of Siku Quanshu), Ji’nan, Qilu shushe, 1995. Chen Tingjing 陳廷敬 et al. (eds.), Yuxuan Tangshi 御選唐詩 (Anthology of Imperially Selected Tang Poems), SKQS Edn. Deng Zhicheng 鄧之誠, Qingshi jishi chubian 清詩紀事初編 (The First Edition of Qing Poems Records), Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1984. Foucault, Michel, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977, edited by Colin Gordon, translated by Colin Gordon, Leo Marshal, John Mepham and Kate Soper, New York: Pantheon, 1980. Gu Tinglong 顧廷龍 (ed.), Xuxiu Siku quanshu 續修四庫全書 (Continuation of the Siku Quanshu), Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1997. He Qingshan 何慶善, Yang Yingqin 楊應芹 (eds.): Shi Yushan ji 施愚山集 (Works of Shi Yushan), Hefei: Huangshan shushe, 1992. Hellmut, Wilhelm, “The Po-Hsüeh Hung-ju Examination of 1679”, Journal of the Ameri- can Oriental Society, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Jan.–Mar., 1951), pp. 60–66. Jiang Yin 蔣寅, Wang Yuyang yu Kangxi shitan 王漁洋與康熙詩壇 (Wang Yuyang in the Poetic Circles of Kangxi Period), Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 2001. Liang Qichao 梁啟超, Zhongguo jin sanbainian xueshushi 中國近三百年學術史 (Chinese Intellectual History of Recent Three Hundred Years), Shanghai: Dongfang chuban zhongxin, 2013. Pan Wuzheng 潘務正, “Wang Shizhen jinru Hanlinyuan de shishi yiyi 王士禛進入翰林院的詩史意義”, Wenxue Yichan 文學遺產 2008: 2, 105–114.

Ming Qing Yanjiu 20 (2017) 94–108 Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 02:14:40PM via free access 108 WaNG

Peng Dingqiu 彭定求 et al. (eds.), Yuding quan Tangshi 御定全唐詩 (A Complete Edition of Tang Poetry Granted by Emperor), SKQS Edn. Shen Deqian 沈德潛 et al. (eds.), Lidai shi biecai ji 歷代詩別裁集 (Chronicles Anthology of Poetry), Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji, 1998. Xu Qianxue 徐乾學 et al. (eds.), Yuxuan guwen yuanjian 御選古文淵鑒 (Profound Mirror of Ancient-style Prose Selected by Emperor), SKQS Edn. Yang Haiying 楊海英, “Kangxi Boxue hongru kao 康熙博學鴻儒考”, Lishi Dang’an 歷史檔案 1996: 1, 97–99. Yong Rong 永瑢 et al., Siku quanshu zongmu 四庫全書總目 (The General Catalogue of Complete Library in the Four Branches of Literature), Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1960. Zhu Yizun 朱彝尊, Pushuting ji 曝書亭集 (Collected Works from the Pushu Pavilion), Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1935.

Ming QingDownloaded Yanjiu from 20 Brill.com09/25/2021 (2017) 94–108 02:14:40PM via free access