THE HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE CHINESE FRAGMENTS FROM DUNHUANG IN THE BRITISH LIBRARY

RONG XINJIANG

THE Dunhuang materials obtained by Sir Aurel Stein during his second and third expeditions were divided between the British Museum, the India Office and the Indian government (this final section now being in the National Museum, New Delhi). However, most of the written material remained in Britain. When the British Library separated from the British Museum in 1973 the paintings were retained by the Museum but written materials in Chinese and other languages were deposited in the Oriental Department of the British Library. In the first part of this century, Dr Lionel Giles, Keeper of Oriental Printed Books and Manuscripts at the British Museum, catalogued the Chinese and some bilingual manuscripts, and printed Chinese documents. His Descriptive Catalogue of the Chinese Manuscripts from Tun-huang in the British Museum was published in 1957.^ It covered Stein manuscript numbers Or. 8210/S.1-^980, and printed documents. Or. 8210/P.1-19, from the second and third expeditions. The Chinese Academy of Science obtained microfilm copies of these manuscripts and Liu Mingshu also completed a catalogue of S.1-6980, which was published in 1962.^ Until recently, only this group of manuscripts had been fully studied. However, the manuscripts numbered S. 1-6980 do not cover the whole of the Stein Dunhuang collection. There are many fragmentary manuscripts which Giles omitted from his catalogue. Dr Huang Yungwu of Taiwan compiled a brief catalogue of fragments numbered S.6981-7599 based on a microfilm obtained from Japan,^ and Japanese scholars also carried out detailed research on some of the fragments.^ When I visited the British Library in May 1985, I was told that the manuscript pressmarks had reached S.i 1604.' Funded by a British Academy K. C. Wong Fellowship, I was invited to London to compile a catalogue of the Chinese non-Buddhist texts from S.6981.^ Here I will give a brief survey of the sources and historical value of these manuscript fragments.

THE SOURCES OF THE FRAGMENTS At present, the manuscript pressmarks have reached S.13989 and many of these cover several separate fragments, numbered A, B, C, D, etc. There are two sources for these 78 additional fragments. First, many are fragments from Dunhuang and other sites which Giles chose not to catalogue either because of their incompleteness or because of their poor condition at the time. The latter have since been conserved. Secondly, there are many fragments which have been removed from other manuscripts, paintings on silk and paper, and sutra wrappers. Among those fragments ignored by Giles, the largest is about one metre wide and the smallest about the size of a palm. More than three thousand contain Buddhist text without beginning or end. Because there is no title or any other clear indication of the sutra or other text, they are difficult to identify. This may be one reason why Giles did not include them in his catalogue. Several hundred are, in fact, copies of the Lotus Sutra (Ch.: Miaofalianhuajing Wii;'>^WM., Skt: Saddharmapundarikasutra), which have since been catalogued by Kabutogi Shoko.' Another group of Buddhist fragments consists of the first panels of Buddhist sutra scrolls, on which the title of the sutra, scroll number, abbreviations of Dunhuang monasteries (such as 'en' M for Bao-en Monastery fl^M^ ; 'kai' W\ for Kaiyuan Monastery ^^71;^ , etc.), and the number of sutra wrappers in each monastery are all recorded. This group is mainly found between S.10858-11280 and S.11465-11504. They are of great importance for research on the construction of the Buddhist canon at Dunhuang monasteries in the Tang and early Song periods (seventh to eleventh centuries) and the sources of the Buddhist texts in the library cave (No. 17) of the Caves of the Thousand Buddhas. Professor Jean-Pierre Drege used some in his research on Dunhuang monastery libraries, but the list compiled by him does not include all these fragments.'^ Redundant texts, especially the more robust official documents, were often used by monks to mount Buddhist texts and paintings - the main offerings to temples and caves. Daozhen |t^ , a famous monk from Sanjie Monastery HW-^ •, 1^^ notes concerning this practice among the manuscripts.^ The Dunhuang cave contained Buddhist sutras from Sanjie Monastery mounted by Daozhen using waste official and private documents. Such small pieces of mounting paper can also be found at the beginning and end of Buddhist sutras kept in St Petersburg and Beijing, but the majority of such pieces have been removed from the sutras and paintings in London and Paris. In the Bibliotheque nationale de France, these mounting papers are sequenced after the manuscript and marked with the 'Pelliot chinois' serial number followed by 'piece i, 2, 3, 4...'. The British Library, however, has placed them at the end of the sequence of Stein numbers and assigned each a new number. The sequence, therefore, is constantly increasing. When I visited the British Library in 1985 the serial numbers ended at 11604 but over two thousand numbers have since been added. Some of the additional numbered fragments have been removed from silk paintings in the British Museum. The provenance of the fragments is shown on their versos. For example, S.8443F has the annotation' from Ch.0074', which indicates that the thirteen fragments with this number have been removed from the verso of the silk painting No. Ch.0074 iri the British Museum, 'Amitabha with the Eight Great Bodhisattvas'.^** The fragment S.8516 has been removed from the British Museum's silk painting Ch.xxxviii.005, 'Two 79 O IS m rn

o

OO

bo c p 5

I Cll c:

N (^ o

••^ ^^T^ «h K"- =-----a^^i A^ "W- ^^ -*. ->f ,-^

4-J bD C

8o Avalokites'varas'.'' On the verso of fragment S.8691 there is a pencil note, 'patch on S.5367\ which indicates it came from the Devatasiitra (Ch.: Tianqing wenjing "^rMf^'H ) fragment S.5367. Fragment S.11352 has a note ^from 6163'. S.11564, which contains only nine characters, fits into the hole on S.3329. Fujieda Akira has identified this latter manuscript as an inscription praising the benevolent administration of Zhang Huaishen ^^W and belonging with the other manuscripts S.6161, S.6973 and P.2762 (fig. i).^^ I will concentrate on those fragments removed from sutra wrappers. Sutra wrappers {jingzhi, m'k or .^!i|^), also known as 'book cloths' {shuyi, ^tl) were used to en- fold around ten Buddhist sutra rolls and were sometimes made of bamboo, brocade, satin or silk/^ However, in the Dunhuang region they were usually made of hnen, paper and papyrus. There are many records of the making of sutra wrappers among the Dunhuang documents. In S.3565, 'Record of an Offering by Cao Yuanzhong, Military Commissioner of the Returning to Allegiance Army District' , for example, there is a clear description: Donation of r bolt ^ of red brocade and 21 new sutra wrappers to cover the Buddhist sutras at Longxing Monastery UW- . Donation of i bolt of satin and 10 sutra wrappers to cover the Buddhist sutras at Lingtu Monastery M!^^ . Donation of i bolt of raw silk and 15 sutra wrappers to cover the Buddhist sutras at Sanjie Monastery. In the colophon of S.5663 there is another account by Daozhen: On the 15th day of the ist month of the yimei BT^ year (935), a copy of the Dabanruojing ^fl^^ilfi was repaired at Sanjie Monastery, together with a lesson to be read aloud in the inner temple. The monk Daozhen repaired eleven copies of various sutras and also made a copy of the Baoenjing^^'^^.M. and a copy of the Dafomingjingi\\^ ^il^ . With pious intent, Daozhen made sixty wrappers for the Dabanruojing of dark red embroidered silk cloth, all complete.** Stein was the first explorer to enter the Dunhuang library cave. From one of his photographs showing the Chinese manuscript rolls just after they were removed from the library cave, it appears that all the Buddhist sutra scrolls were originally covered by sutra wrappers in an orderly way.^^ The Buddhist sutras and their wrappers were separated in the course of transferring the manuscripts and for other reasons. Stein and Paul Pelliot, who reached the cave next, chose the best of the sutra wrappers. Some have already been published.^* Among the Pelliot collection there is a sutra wrapper made of bamboo, E0.1208, which is preserved at the Musee Guimet. An official document concerning the assignment of Linghu Huaiji v 5)JI1M^ of the Tang Dynasty was mounted on the verso and has not been removed.^^ There are similar pieces in the British Library. In general, however, several layers consisting of official documents have been removed one by one from the sutra wrappers at the British Library, except for a few wrappers which it was decided to leave as artefacts. The removed layers sometimes contain important historical texts. The standard size of the paper panels of Tang official documents is 30 cm. by 45 cm.^^ If the size of sutra wrapper is larger than that of the official documents, the mounting papers are almost complete; if the size is smaller, then

81 Fig. 2. Order of the Tang emperor, Ruizong, to Netig Changren, Governor of Shazhou Province, 7ti. Or. 8210/S.11287

the edges of the mounting documents were cut off, but most of them are fairly complete compared to other fragments. The most interesting document is that removed from the sutra wrapper S.11287. It is an order by the Tang emperor, Ruizong '#^ , to Neng Changren ^tHt , Governor of Shazhou Province, dated the 9th day of the 7th month of the ist year oi Jingyun ^-^T (711)- It is the oldest extant order of this type (Lunshi chishu ife^fi(-^'^ ) from the Tang Dynasty, and is useful for correcting some previous reconstructions of the form these orders took (fig. 2).'** Also among the fragments are miscellaneous manuscripts from other sites. S. 11585, for example, is a report by a Khotanese monastery on a contract lost by monk DabianTr^^^ft^^;;1;f^^[5(^^-X^^^4.?^*. On the verso is an original site number 'D.VIII.I' written by Stein to show that the item was discovered at Dandan-uiliq in the north-eastern region of Khotan in 1900.^** S.9464 has no site number but I believe that it was also found at Khotan. The text on the verso is a contract with the contractee 'Meina' \kM^ for borrowing copper coin with interest dated the 28th day of the 4th month of 15th year of Dali KWi (780) of the Tang Dynasty. The second character, 'na', of this personal name is a transliteration from Khotanese."* Moreover, the sand- 82 encrusted paper of the document is not typical of paper from the cave but is hke other paper from Khotan. The fragment of a letter, S.9222, has a covering sheet inscribed ^Hoernle 150/32', meaning that it belongs to the Hoernle collection in the British Library. On the recto of the two manuscripts S.9224 and S.9225 is the Chinese text of the Mahdprajnaparamitasutra (Ch.: Dabanruo poluomiduo jing -K]^WM§M^MX and on the verso is a Khotanese Buddhist text with the pencil serial numbers ' 142' and * 143'. These also belong to the Hoernle Collection and have been published by A. F. R. Hoernle himself and others.^^ S.9223 has Tibetan and Khotanese documents on its recto and verso respectively, and also belongs to the Hoernle Collection. The text on the fragment S.11605 mentions 'Xizhou bu' (aJ'li^ : cloth from Turfan). This document was probably found by Stein at the Astana tombs near Gaochang, but there is no original number to confirm this. The fragments S.11606-11609 are marked with the original site numbers 'Kao.III.oi62\ 'Kao.o65\ 'Ka0.VII.03' and 'Ka0.VII.05'. All of them are documents of the late Qing Dynasty (late nineteenth to early twentieth century) and were collected by Stein from the site of Gaochang f^fi (previously romanized as Kao-chang). The two documents S.9437 and S. 12597 ^^so date from the Qing Dynasty and were found by Stein at sites other than Dunhuang.

THE HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FRAGMENTS Although most of the manuscripts are fragmentary, they are of great historical value for Chinese studies. For example, the two fragments S.9213A and B contain the Confucian text, Xiaojing Zhengshi jie ^r,ff^ip^fp (The Classic of Filial Piety with commentaries by Zheng Xuan). These texts follow that on S.3993 and are supplementary to tbe selection considered by Professor Chen Tiefan in his study of Dunhuang editions of this text.^^ The two manuscripts S.7003B and S.11910 are copies of Lwiyu mM (The Analects), also with commentaries by Zheng Xuan. The former is not identified in the catalogue compiled by Dr Huang Yongwu, and the latter is a fragment attached to S.6i2i.^"^ There are few historical books in the new discovery, S.10591 being one exception. It contains only the title 'Biographies of Wang Shang, Shi Dan, and Fu Xi' ^M^m^Mn from juan 82 of Hanshu rS# (History of the Han Dynasty). S.12042 contains part of Liuzi Xinlun M^^fim written by Liu Zhou fJS of the Northern Qi Dynasty, namely the end of Part 10, 'Shendu' '\MM , and Part 11, 'Guinong' "KM . It contains one sentence not found in other copies of this text from Dunhuang, such as P.3562, etc.^^ What I found most interesting when cataloguing the fragments was that nineteen small fragments have been identified as the Daoist text, Liezi ^ij-f^tl^l^^^l M-ti. (Liezi Yang Zhu pian with commentaries by Zhang Zhan).^^ This is probably the best represented non-Buddhist text among the Dunhuang manuscripts (see fig. 3). S.7292 has been identified as the Daoist Sutra Taishang Yicheng Haikongzhizang Jing, juan I iz±-~WM':^¥\'MtM. . There are nine other copies of this text from Dunhuang^^ but this new fragment is the most important as it contains a previously unknown part of the Daoist sutra. Kongzi Matou Bufa ^l-tWM\ V\i^ , a divination text, is found on 83 Fig- 3- Diagram of fifteen Stein fragments which once formed part of a single scroll of the Daoist text Liezi the four fragments S.9501, S.9502, S.11419 and S.13002, totalling twenty-four lines. The beginning of the text is complete and its type and contents are almost the same as that on S.1339. There are two important manuscripts containing medical texts, S.9987C (2) and S.9987B, entitled Beiji Danyan Yaofang Juan i^MW-WM'Tj^ with preface. According to the research of Wang Jiqing, the two scrolls S.3347 and S.3395 contain different sections of the same text.^^ New discoveries have also been made concerning model or form letters (shuyi #1S). The four lines on S. 10595, when compared with the texts on S.329 and S.361, can be identified as part of Shuyi Jing, Sihai Ptngfanpoguo Qinghe Shu Wi^M-WmW-W^MMM^ (Congratulatory letter on the conquest of the Barbarians and Kingdoms in the World, Model Letter), and its beginning can be linked with the end of S.6111. Shuyi Jing is a special form letter written during the Tang Dynasty in the Anxi region (Central Asia), concerning the Chinese attacks on the Tibetans in Cherchen K^ in the Tarim Basin and in Bru Zha ^f$ in Gilgit. It describes the success won by the Four Chinese Garrisons in Central Asia in the 6th year of Tianbao ^ft (747)- This historical material was not previously known to scholars in the field of Central Asian studies.^*^ Several envelopes were also found among the fragments. These were originally sealed and are referred to zs fengqi 'MW. in model letters. S.11297, S.11348, S.11349, and S.I 1350 are all examples. Some are outgoing letters which were not sent out (for reasons now unknown), while others are letters between Guazhou (modern Anxi) and Shazhou (Dunhuang). All these letters have now been unfolded. While this separates the characters written across the fold and sacrifices the original shape, it helps us to read the contents of the sealed part and learn about the sealing system of this period.^^ Chinese literature is also represented. S.9504 is a copy of the unannotated Wenxuan XM . It contains a passage from Jiang Yan's K'tM 'Hen Fu' UU (Rhapsody of Hate). S.9432 is a fragment of juan 8 of Gw Chen Ziang Ji MM^^M (Collected Papers of Chen Ziang). The text follows that found on S.5971 and is, in turn, continued by the text on P.3590.^^ All three belong to the same scroll. Dunhuang transformation texts (bianwen ^#^) have been a subject of wide discussion^^ and the fragments provide some useful new information. Perhaps the most interesting is Zhuoji Bu Zhuanwen ty^^^if^ (The Story of the Capture of Ji Bu), found on S.8459. This text can be placed between that on P.2648A and P.2648B, thus making one long scroll from the now separate manuscripts of P.2747, P.2648A, S.8459, P.2648B, P.3386 and P.3582.^^ S.13002, S.9501, S.9502 and S.11419 are fragments from a single copy of 'Xia Nufu Ci' T'^^B^J (Words of a Waiting Maid) written in a good hand, with red ink used for the subject headings and for annotations. Compared with other copies of the same text, there are some variant readings.^^ The fragments also include official Tang dynasty documents such as the legal text, S.I 1456, concerning Su Xianchao's marriage in the 13th year of Kaiyuan f^^7C+H^^7fe>HS#^#(756), which was removed from a sutra wrapper and is very helpful to the study of the Tang legal system. S.11454A-G were also removed from a sutra wrapper and concern the taxes of the Tibetan regime. These documents, written in good hands with comments and corrections in red, have great historical value for the study of Tibetan rule over Dunhuang. Original archives of the Guiyi Jun MMW- ('Returning to Allegiance Army') regime which ruled Dunhuang from the Tang to the early Song period have also been found. These have settled some disputes concerning the regime.^^ In addition, there are many monastic and private documents. The examination of the fragments after S.6981 is helpful in understanding the nature of the library cave in the Dunhuang Mogao Caves. Based on the judgement that the Dunhuang documents do not comprise a complete library collection, Dr Fang Guangchang has recently reiterated the theory that the cave contents were 'a deposit of sacred waste'. This was originally proposed by Professor Fujieda Akira of Kyoto University many years ago.^^ However, the materials in the library cave mainly comprise Buddhist texts and paintings from Sanjie Monastery, a small monastery near the Mogao Caves. The Longxing ijiW# and Lingtu Monasteries, also in the Dunhuang area, would have had much more extensive collections of the Buddhist canon than the small Sanjie Monastery. There are many fragments from other large monasteries such as these among the cave's contents but many of them were repaired by monk Daozhen at Sanjie Monastery. A considerable number of fragmentary sutras or other texts in the library cave remain untouched. After the discovery of the library cave in 1900, the fragments of manuscripts were examined by the self-appointed custodian of the cave, the Daoist monk Wang Yuanlu, and the cream of the manuscripts were collected by Stein and Pelliot. 85 Material retrieved by later Chinese and Russian scholars is even more fragmentary. Those scholars advancing the 'sacred waste' theory have not adequately considered the nature of the British Library fragments. These did not enter the cave in their present form but have been removed from painting rolls, Buddhist sutras, and sutra wrappers and are therefore only an annexe to the holdings of the library cave. Accordingly it is misleading to argue that the library cave was used mainly to store fragmentary waste. The existence of a large number of sutra wrappers has fully proved that Buddhist sutras in the library cave were preserved in some sequence. As Stein and others were ignorant of the system used for the storage of scrolls by Buddhist monasteries, sutra rolls were separated from their wrappers when they were removed from the library cave. Today we find it difficult to recover their original order and this makes it easy to mistake them for a deposit of waste papers. The history of the manuscripts following the discovery of the library cave is complex. According to Stein, monk Wang rearranged the cave's contents and between 1900 and 1907 some Uighur Buddhist texts of the Mongol Yuan period from elsewhere found their way into the archive.•^'^ Sir Edward Denison Ross, who was in charge of the Stein collection in the British Museum, drew attention to this as early as 1913.^^ Unfortunately, very few scholars have heeded Ross's warning on the mixed provenance of the documents. As various museums and libraries have collected Dunhuang manuscripts, a further admixture of documents from different sites and periods has occurred. Any study of the archival heritage of Dunhuang needs, therefore, to distinguish those manuscripts which actually derive from the cave itself from those which do not. Apart from a few exceptions, the fragments from S.6981 onwards come from the Dunhuang library cave and are therefore closely related to those manuscripts now in Paris, Beijing, St Petersburg, Tokyo and Kyoto. Some documents preserved in these different institutions can be identified as belonging to the same scroll, text or genre. Among the items in the British Library which have been removed from sutra wrappers, S.8877, S.I 1450, S.I 1451 and S.11458 are documents of the Tang dynasty Horse Office at Beiting itfig (Jimshar). To date, I have also identified fragments of the same form and date in the following collections: five in St Petersburg (DX354); two or three in the National Library, Beijing; about forty in the Yurinkan Museum at Kyoto; a few in the Nakamura Museum of Calligraphy in Tokyo; and some belonging to the former collection of Luo Zhenyu M'M^-. . As these documents can be identified with each other from their contents, and because the Stein manuscripts among them definitely came from Dunhuang, this helps to reconstruct the provenance of the holdings of the Yurinkan Museum, the Nakamura Museum of Calligraphy and Luo Zhenyu's collection. Because most of the fragments originally comprised sutra wrappers, the thickness and quality of these fragments was sometimes altered by the water treatment used to remove them, and doubts have therefore been expressed about whether they are genuine. But such doubts are unnecessary when they are compared in form and content with the manuscripts newly removed by the British Library.

86 I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr Yonghui period), Shimada Masao Hakase Shoju Frances Wood, Dr Sarah Allan, Mrs Beth McKillop, Kinen Ronshu Kanko I-inkai .^fflIEI^(i|#dri^ Dr Wang Tao, and Mrs Xiaowei Bond who assisted #ffi,^!^^fiJ'ft ^M^ (ed.), Toyo hoshi no me in many ways during my work in London. The tankyu Mi^'l^^iD^^ (An investigation into support of the Chinese Section of the Oriental and East Asian legal history) (Tokyo, 1987), pp. India Office Collections of the British Library, 179-210; Yamamoto Tatsuro and Ikeda On financed by the British Academy K. C. Wong ^ffl?^> Tun-huang and Turfan Documeiits Fellowships, is also gratefully acknowledged. Last Concerning Social and Economic History, III, but not least, I wish to thank Dr Susan Whitfield for Contracts, (A) (Tokyo, 1987), pp. 105, 134. kindly correcting and improving the English of this 5 See Rong Xinjiang '•^WL , 'Ouzhou Suocang article. Xiyu Chutu Wenxian Wenjianlu' 1 (London, 1957). m}mM^i$,\^±Xm^^^m (Notes on 2 In Wang Chongmin .^ffi^- (ed.), Dunhuang Materials from Chinese Central Asia held in YtshuZongmuSuoyin n^^'^BB^^l (Index European Collections), Dunhuangxue jikan and General Catalogue of Preserved Manuscripts ^'Jg^^l|i|flJ (Journal of Dunhuang Studies), ix from Dunhuang) (Beijing, 1962). (1986), pp. 119-33, see pp. 120-1. 3 Huang Yongwu 1^4^ 3^ ,'Liubaihao Dunhuang 6 At the same time. Prof. Fang Guangchang wuming duanpian de xinbiaomu' T^Hf^S^'^oi y^Wi^ was invited to prepare a catalogue of the m$^Wl^^^%rM^ (Titles for nameless Dun- Buddhist texts. huang pieces in Giles's Catalogue Nos. 6g8i- 7 Kabutogi Shoko ^:?t^IE^ , Tonko Hokekyo 7599), Hanxue yanjiu M^W'SH: (Chinese Mokuroku I^C^^i^^g® (Descriptive Cata- Studies), i (1983.i), pp. 111-32. logue of the Miaofalianhuajing from Dunhuang 4 For examples, see Yamamoto Tatsuro |ii:$:^g[i , collected by Aurel Stein and Paul Pelliot) 'Tonko hakken no shohi taishaku ni kansuru ichi (Tokyo, 1978). shiryo: British Library shozo A. Stein S.8443' 8 J.-P. Drege, Les Bibliotheques en Chine au temps ^ikm^(Dm^'A\^\^^-th- ^fA • British des manuscrits {jusqu'au Xe siecle) (Paris, 1991), Library RJf^ A. Stein #5K^^:ic:S;# S.8443 (A pp. 238-45, Annexe i. contract of hiring from Tun-huang: Chinese 9 Shi Pingting WW-^ , 'Sanjiesi, Daozhen, document S.8443 brought back by A. Stein in Dunhuang Zangjin' ^fl-^SAM:^'l'\^M^. the British Library), Kokiisai kirisutokyo Daigaku (Sanjie Monastery, the monk Daozhen and Ajta bunka kenkyu [B[^g#|fe;^^TvT:S: the Dunhuang Buddhist Canon), iggo nian ftW^ , xi (1979), pp. 97-114; Dohi Yoshikazu Dunhuangxue guoji yantao hui wenji ihlE^^ ,' To Tenpo nendai Tonkoken judenho ^m^^Wit^m^Xm (Proceedings of the dankanko: dendo no kanju mondai ni kan- 1990 Conference on Dunhuang Studies) (Shenyang, 1995), pp. 178-209. (A study of frag- 10 M. Aurel Stein, Serindia, vol. ii (Oxford, 1921), ments of the Dunhuang land register compiled p. 954; R. Whitfield, The Art of Central Asia: the in the Tianbao era of the Tang dynasty: in Stein collection at the British Museum, vol. i relation to the problem of receiving an allocation (Tokyo, 1982), pi. 17, figs. 47-g, p. 312. 'Ch.' of land and returning it), Sakamoto Taro was Stein's site abbreviation for the Thousand hakushishoji kinen: Nihon shigaku ronshu Buddha Caves at Dunhuang, then romanized as 'Chien-fo-tung' (now as 'Qianfodong'). (Tokyo, 1983), pp. 303-41; idem, 'A Study of a 11 The Art of Central Asia, vol. i, pi. 24, fig. 15, Fragmentary Dunhuang District Land Allot- P- 321. ment record from the Tianhao Period of the 12 Fujieda Akira M^^ , 'Tonko senbutsudo no Tang Dynasty with regard to the Problem of chuko Cho-shi shokutsu 0 chusin toshita kyuseiki Land Reallotment', Memoirs of the Research nobukkutsugoei' ^mf-m^.'^^n • ^ftltft^ Department of the Toyo Bunko, lxii (1984), pp. ^'L-tLf.iKm'^'^mM'-^n , mw Gakuho 145-76; Okano Makoto H^^-iiS, 'To Eiki M'Jj^^ (Journal of Oriental Studies), xxxv shokuinryo no fukugen' ^7^'^^^-^(D'^7t (1964), pp. 9-139, esp. pp. 63-7. (A reconstruction of the personnel statutes of the 13 J. Needham, Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 5: Chemistry and Chemical Technology, Part Chavannes, Les Documents chinois decouverts par I: Paper and Printing, by Tsien Tsuen-hsuin Aurel Stein dans les sables du Turkestan Oriental (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 229-30. (Oxford, 1913), pp. 206, 208 (mistaken, 'Kuom- 14 Translated by Lionel Giles, op. cit., pp. 124-5, enna' |^|p^f^ ), pis. xxxiii-xxxiv; 'Jielingna' no. 4298. Wi^-^. on 'Mazar Tagh 0627' (Or.8212/723): 15 M. Aurel Stein, Ruins of Desert Cathay, vol. ii H. Maspero, Les Documents chinois de la troisieme (London, 1912), fig. 194. expedition de Sir Aurel Stein en Asie centrale 16 British Museum, Ch.xlviii.ooi (MAS 858) and (London, 1953), p. 191. Ch.xx.oo6 (MAS 859): see R. Whitfield, The Art 22 A. F. R. Hoernle, 'A Bilingual Fragment in of Central Asia, vol. iii (Tokyo,i985), pis. 6-7, Chinese-Khotanese, Hoernle MSS., Nos. 142 pp. 286-288; Musee Guimet, EO.1200, and 143: Introductory Remarks', Edouard EO.r2o8, EO.12O9/1, EO.3664, EO.1199, Chavannes et S. Levi, ' Un fragment en EO.1207, EO.3663, MG.23082, MG.23083: see chinois de la Satasahasrika-Prajfiaparamita', and K. Riboud et G. Vial, Tissus de Touen-houang Hoernle, ' A Fragment in Khotanese of a conserves au Musee Guimet et a la Bibliotheque Buddhist Sacred Text', all in A. F. R. Hoernle Nationale (Mission Paul Pelliot XIII) (Paris, (ed.). Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature 1970), pis. I, 3, 4, 12, 30, 39, 43, 45, 87, pp. 3-26, found in Eastern Turkestan (Oxford, 1916), pp. 69-71, 145-55^ 201-7, 221-8, 231-5, 369-70. 387-^9, Pl. XXII. 17 The sutra wrapper was listed as early as 1909 by 23 This manuscript was published by A. F. R. Luo Zhenyu M^B.^ in his 'Dunhuang shishi Hoernle and L. D. Barnett, *A Bilingual Frag- milu' ?'i'l:^~fi&^M (Secret catalogue of the ment in Tibetan-Khotanese', in Hoernle (ed.). Dunhuang caves) and published in Kaoguxue Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature, pp. Lingjian #"^^^^ (Papers on Archaeology) 400-4. (Shanghai, 1925), p. 40. Wang Renjun iCf^ 24 See Chen Tiefan WMPu (ed.), Dunhuang ben copied the text of the Tang official document in Xiaojing Leizuan l^'^I^^^f ^i-K (Classified his Dunhuang shishi zhenji lu l>['ti"5^ftE^i|^ Collection of the Classic of Filial Piety) (Taipei, (1909). For a colour photograph of the obverse of 1977)- the wrapper, see L. Feugere, 'The Pelliot 25 See my review of Wang Su's zEift Tang Collection from Dunhuang', Orientations, xx/3 xieben Lunyu Zhengshizhu jiqi yanjiu (Mar. 1989), p. 52, figs, io-ii. mM'^tmmm^&.yLnmt (Collection and 18 Fujieda Akira, 'The Tunhuang Manuscripts: A Studies of the Tang Manuscripts of Analects General Description: I', Zinhun, ix (1966), p. 17. with Commentaries by Zheng Xuan), Wenwu 19 On the text and related problems sec Rong X^. ii (i993)> PP- 58-^- Xinjiang, 'Guanyu Tang Song shiqi Zhongyuan 26 For a study of this text (but not including Wenhua dui Yutian Yingxiang de Jigewenti' S.I2042), see Lin Qitan WPJ^k and Chen Fengjin PtlL.# , Dunhuang Yishu Liuzi Canjuan (Chinese Cultural Influence on the Khotan Jilu m%.S^m'm^miim% (Collected Texts Kingdom during the 7th-ioth Centuries), of the Liuzi in Dunhuang Manuscripts) (Shang- Guoxue yanjiu I^^W^ (Studies in Sinology), hai, 1988). i (1993), pp. 408-9. The large character of the 27 S.10799, 12087, 13496, 13624, 12728, 12288B, emperor's command on this manuscript has been 12951, 9928, 12288A, 12991, 12124, 13441, used as the International Dunhuang Project 12971, 12710, 11422, 12285, 12295, 13219, 777- logo. Fifteen of these belong to one scroll (see fig. 3). 20 See Ed. Chavannes, 'Chinese Documents from Another fragment belonging to the same scroll the sites of Dandan-Uiliq, Niya and Endere' in has been identified in the National Library of M. Aurel Stein, Ancient Khotan, vol. i (Oxford, Beijing collection (L.2464 unpublished). 1907), pp. 532-3, No. 17; vol. ii, pi. cxvi. 28 Ofuchi Ninji -^t^M , Tonko Dokyo Moku- 21 The Chinese word 'na' ;f^ is always used as a rokuhen ^'^if^ - g mM' (Catalogue of the transcription of Khotanese personal names, such Daoist Sutras from Dunhuang) (Tokyo, 1978), as 'Ashina' HSSJ^ on D.v.6: Chavannes, op. pp. 3io-i5> 383- cit., pp. 525-6; 'Yanmenna' f^Pii'-T^ on 'Mazar 29 Wang Jiqing ^ % H" ,' Yingguo Tushuguan cang Tagh b.009' (Or.8212/969-972): Edouard Beiji Danyan Yaofang Juan (S.9987) de Zhengli 88 36 Rong Xinjiang, 'Chuqi Shazhou Guiyi Jun (Reconstruction of Beiji Danyan yu Tang zhongyang Chaoting zhi Guanxi' Yaofang Juan preserved in the British Library), Dunhuang Yanjiu ^!tlW^ , xxix (1991), pp. tions between the early Guiyi Jun Govern- 103-6. ment at Shazhou and the Tang Court) in 30 The complete text has been edited by Zhao Joseph Wong and Lau Kin-ming (eds.), Sut Heping ^IP^ in his Dunhuang Xieben Shuyi Tangshi Lunji mB'-^m^^ (Studies on the Sui Yanjiu ffe^;f^'^Sf^5J[-^ (Studies on Model and Tang Dynasties) (Hong Kong, 1993), Letters among the Dunhuang Manuscripts) p. 113; idem, 'Shazhou Zhang Huaishen (Taipei, 1993), pp. 265-74. yu Tangzhongyang Chaoting zhi Guanxi' 31 The original unopened envelope (S.11297) can rk'H-mmmmm^'k^-B'^^m^^ (Relations be seen in Akira Fujieda, 'The Tunhuang between Zhang Huaishen and the Tang Court), Manuscripts: A General Description', p. 29. Dunhuangxue Jikan, xviii (1990.2), pp. 1-13, see 32 For details of these two manuscripts, see Wu pp. io-ii; idem, 'Guanyu Caoshi Guiyijun Chiyu ^"K-:§i , 'Dunhuangben Gu Chen Ziang Shouren Jidushi de Jigewenti'|l^K'Wi?clf^ Ji Canjuan Yanjiu' ^ki^^mW^-f-^M^^^ m^amm^^^mmr'^m. (Some problems ii?f ^ (A Study of the Collected Papers of Chen on the First Governor of the Guiyi Jun Ziang) in Xianggang Daxue wushizhounian jinian Government under the Cao Family), Dunhuang lunwenji ^m^^S+til^.^S-^lift^m (Sym- Yanjiu, xxxv (1993.2), pp. 46-53; idem, posium on Chinese Studies: commemorating the ' Guanyu Shazhou Guiyijun Dusengtong Nian- Golden Jubilee of the University of Hong Kong dai Jigewenti' mnt^yH'mMW-^'mf:k^iX(]^ 1911-1966), (Hong Kong, 1966), pp. 241-303. MUf'^m (Some Problems on the Date of the 33 See, for example, Victor H. Mair's several books Monk-supervisors of the Guiyijun Govcrruncnt on this topic including Tang Transformation at Shazhou), Dunhuang Yanjiu, xxi (1989.4), pp. Texts: A study of the Buddhist contribution to the 70-8, see pp. 74-5. rise of vernacular fiction and drama in China 37 Fujieda, op. cit., pp. 15-16; Fang Guangchang, (Cambridge, Mass., 1989) and Painting and 'Dunhuang Cangjingdong Fengbi Yuanyin Performance: Chinese picture recitation and its zhi wojian' mkummmmj^M^ft^ (My Indian genesis (Honololu, 1988). opinion on the walling-up of the Library Cave 34 This identification was confirmed by Helene of Dunhuang), Zhonggno Shehui Kexue Vetch of the Bibliotheque nationale de France in i1=i[lltt^f4^ (Social Sciences in China), lxxi a letter to the author, 19 Aug. 1991. (1991.5), pp. 213-23. 35 On the two texts, see Rong Xinjiang 'Yinglun 38 M. A. Stein, Ruins of Desert Cathay, vol. ii, p. Suojian Sanzhong Dunhuang Suwenxue Zuo- 190. pinba' :^f|TmBH^i.^^tm iL^Mf^^lW. (Post- 39 E. D. Ross, 'The Caves of the Thousand scripts on Three Popular Literature Works in Buddhas',7i?.'/5 (1913), pp. 434-6. the British Library), Jiuzhou xuekan flM^^^l (Chinese Culture Quarterly), v (1993.4), PP-