Appropriations Of The Master’s Legacy 167

Chapter 5 Appropriations of the Master’s Legacy

Just enough evidence survives in the textual record of the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries to enable us not only to document the transformation of Wang Tong’s legacy over this span of time, but to glimpse its progress in stages. As the previous chapter revealed, the crafting of Master Wenzhong’s image in the sev- enth century was essentially a family project of the Wangs, who hallowed their ancestor for his Confucius-like comportment and convictions and his tireless crusade to restore the classical ideals and teachings of the ancient sage kings. We saw also that by the time of Lu Guimeng’s “Preface to a Letter Sent with Mr. Doulu,” written in the late ninth century and quoted at the chapter’s close, Wang Tong’s name had to some extent entered into general currency and the terms of his praises had expanded. Several late Tang and early Song texts will hereaf- ter complete the available picture, by showing how in certain men’s minds Wang Tong merited veneration, if not official canonization, as a divinely sent Confucian Worthy. Through his putative tutelage of the ablest ministers at Taizong’s court, they also reasoned, Wang Tong was nothing less than the intel- lectual father of the Tang Dynasty. The present chapter traces the process of this transformation and interprets its implications for our understanding of the tex- tual history of the Zhongshuo. The pivotal historical event in this story, as it is of Tang history generally, is the An Lushan rebellion of the mid-eighth century (755–763), after which the empire never recovered its former stability let alone the former reach of its administrative control. The many political and social upheavals of the dynasty’s final century-and-a-half are well attested and familiar. Once the An Lushan rebellion had been quelled (not militarily but by conceding to its leaders mili- tary governorships of the northeastern frontier provinces, in effect acknowledg- ing them as autonomous warlords), other crises immediately emerged, starting with the capital city of Chang’an being looted and razed by a Tibetan army late in 763. The beleaguered and cash-strapped court was subsequently challenged by a steady procession of internal revolts and rebellions, from those of Li Huai- guang 李懷光 and Zhu Ci 朱泚 in the 780s to Liu Pi’s 劉闢 and Li Qi’s 李錡 in the first decade of the 800s, from the uprisings of Qiu Fu 裘甫 and Pang Xun 龐勛 in the early 860s to Wang Xianzhi’s 王仙芝 and Huang Chao’s 黃巢 rebel- lions in the late 870s. Huang’s occupation of Chang’an and Luoyang in 880 marked the end of Tang power in all but name, though that name was not for- mally replaced until 907.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi 10.1163/9789004276338_007

9789004273214_Warner-1_text_proof-01.indd 167 5/1/2014 2:39:46 PM 168 Chapter 5

In light of this persistent unrest, it comes as no surprise that we encounter, in the prose and poetry of the later Tang, a pervasive nostalgia for, and idealiza- tion of, the founding reigns of the dynasty, particularly that of Tang Taizong. One facet of this idealization, moreover, was the exalting of Tang Taizong’s most prominent ministers, who won high lauds for their counsel and drafting of policies that achieved long-lasting peace and prosperity for the empire. In ter- rible contrast to that peace and prosperity were the recurring revolts that had brought about the collapse of the preceding dynasty, the Sui, and the very like catastrophes that threatened to bring down the Tang in the writers’ own times. In the case of a few such writers it was but a small and logical next step to take to idealize also the Confucian master who purportedly had trained up those men who later proved themselves the brightest luminaries of Taizong’s court. These writers’ motives for idealizing Wang Tong and Taizong’s ministers were not merely intellectual, nor simply an expression of literati’s yearning for by- gone days of dynastic glory, peace and plenty. Lu Guimeng’s extolling of Wang Tong in his letter written on behalf of Mr. Doulu was anticipated by him to have persuasive force with its recipient, thereby assisting in Doulu’s advancement. Likewise the compositions to be discussed in this chapter that came from the brushes of two other ninth-century admirers of Wang Tong, Sikong Tu (jinshi 849) and Pi Rixiu (jinshi 867),1 were plainly intended to say as much that was flattering about their authors as they were about Master Wenzhong and his il- lustrious disciples. The most extreme example of this endeavor appears in the early Song figure named (or rather, renamed) Liu Kai. And yet, it should be emphasized that throughout this period of the late Tang and early Song, despite the Zhongshuo having entered into general circulation and become an acknowl- edged vehicle of Confucius-inspired wisdom, the enthusiastic championing of Wang Tong’s teaching and the adulation of his person almost certainly, among scholar-official circles, remained something of a fringe activity. Indeed, that this was the case seems evident from the enthusiasts’ own rhetoric: they knew they

1 Pi Rixiu’s chronology remains unsettled, with two sets of dates for his lifespan proposed: ca. 834–ca. 884 and ca. 840–ca. 880. More scholars favor the former dates than the latter, but for a representive range of opinions on the question see William H. Nienhauser, Jr., Pi Jih-hsiu (Boston: Twayne, 1979), 13; Liang Chaoran 梁超然, “Pi Rixiu xingnian jianbiao” 皮日休行年 簡表, in Fu Xuancong 傅璇琮, ed., Tang caizi zhuan jiaojian 唐才子傳校箋 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987), 8.505–6; Miao Yue 繆鉞, “Pi Rixiu de shiji sixiang ji zuopin” 皮日休 的事蹟思想及其作品, Sichuan daxue xuebao 四川大學學報 (1958.1): 123–36; and Li Jutian 李菊田, “Pi Rixiu shengping shiji kao (bing yu Miao Yanwei xiansheng ji Xiao Difei xiansheng shangque)” 皮日休生平事蹟考 (幷與繆彥威先生及蕭滌非先生商榷), Hebei Tainjin shi- fan xueyuan xuebao 河北天津師範學院學報 (1958.1): 48–64. I omit more recent publicati- ons that have reopened the debate but present no new or conclusive arguments.

9789004273214_Warner-1_text_proof-01.indd 168 5/1/2014 2:39:46 PM