Зборник радова Византолошког института LVI, 2019. Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta LVI, 2019. UDC: 75.071.1(=581)“05/11“:94(510:495.02) https://doi.org/10.2298/ZRVI1956069L ANGELIKI LIVERI Greek Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs [email protected] FU-LIN DANCES IN MEDIEVAL CHINESE ART – BYZANTINE OR IMAGINARY? Chinese artists, active from the Tang dynasty to Northern Song dynasty, created fa- mous paintings including Fu-lin musical and dancing scenes; as e. g. Yan Liben, Wu Daozi and Li Gon glin. The most of these works are unfortunately lost; thus, we have information only from written descriptions to reconstruct them. Some researchers identify Fu-lin with the Byzantines; others disagree with this interpretation. Therefore, it is worthwhile to study whether the musical and dance motifs that referred to Fu-lin and were used by the above mentioned Chinese artists and literati can be identified with Byzantine elements and their performers with Byzantines ones. Keywords: art, Byzantium, China, Fu-lin, dance, tributary paintings Introduction The historical background The term Fu-lin Most scholars accept that the word Fu-lin was a term for Byzantium, a transliter- ation of Frum or Hrum, i.e. Rum in the medieval Iranian languages.1 The name Fu-lin is derived from the word Romaioi, i. e. Romans. It refers to the Byzantine Empire and the kings of Fu-lin, who were the emperors of this state. Another explanation is 1 Hirth, Mystery of Fu-lin, 1–33; Idem, Mystery of Fu-lin, 193–208; Pelliot, Origins du nom Fou- -lin, 497–500; Shiratori, Solution of the Fu-lin problem, 189‒190; Kordossis, Name Fu-lin, 173, 176‒178; Idem, Embassies between Fu-lin (Byzantium?) and China, 141f; 167–180; 239‒242; Idem, T’ang China, the Chinese Nestorian Church and the „Heretical“ Byzantium, 161‒164. (I would like to thank Professor Michalis Kor- dossis for sending me his publication about Embassies). 70 ЗРВИ LVI (2019) 69–94 proposed by Lucas Christopoulos2: following the French missionary Claude de Vis- delou (1656‒1737) who arrived in China 1687, he believes that the word Fu-lin derives from the word Hualin, which is mentioned on the Nestorian stele of Xian (781) with the meaning “country of the immortals”. Nevertheless, Christopoulos associates the use of the word “Hualin with “the “forests of flowers”, situated at the western part of the Daqin Empire, but not with the Daqin-Fulin itself”. ‒ The same scholar argues that Fu-lin was used primarily for the city of Byzantium, because it was the starting point for travelers between Europe and China at the time of Zhang Gui and later for the Byzantine Empire.3 The name Fu-lin was mentioned in the Chinese historical sources from the middle of the 6th century to the 15th century, replacing the older name Ta-ch’in (Ta- -ts’in) or Daqin.4 However, it did not refer only to the Byzantine Empire, as its meaning changed over the centuries. During the Sui (581‒618) and Tang (618‒907) dynasties Byzantium is identified with Fu-lin. Fu-lin is referred to as a state, sometimes in con- junction with other neighboring states. According to Michalis Kordossis5 “geographi- cally, Fu-lin included all the territories from the river Euphrates to Constantinople. In political terms, however, this meant all the territories that were not under Arab rule, for instance Byzantium”. The Relations between China and Fu-lin-Byzantium We derive more information about the Chinese – Byzantine relations from the dynastic Chinese historical accounts than from the contemporary western sources (Roman and Byzantine). These accounts mention diplomatic contacts between Byz- antium and China taking place already from the 4th century.6 Occasionally the contact broke due to political situations, as for instance in the 6th century. In the 7th and 8th centuries, during the reigns of the first emperors of the great Tang dynasty, a consider- able exchange of embassies is mentioned to have occurred between the two countries and particularly from Fu-lin to China (from Constantinopel to Chang’an).7 A new era 2 Christopoulos, Hellenes and Romans in Ancient China, 67‒68; cf. information about relations/ contacts between the Greeks (Lixuan or Lijian), who lived in Baktria, Sogdiana and Ferghana after the death Alexander’s the Great, and the Chinese already in the Hellenistic period: ibid., 3‒46. 3 Ibid., 68‒69, especially n. 115. 4 Zhang, Study of Li-kan and Ta-chin, 107‒122; Chen, Γεωγραφικές πληροφορίες για Τa-ts’in, 123‒128; on Lijian-Lixuan- or Daqin, their meanings and connection with the Romans of Rome or the Roman Orient see Christopoulos, Hellenes and Romans in Ancient China, 35‒67; 70‒76. 5 Kordossis, Embassies between Fu-lin (Byzantium?) and China, 242. 6 Ibid., 129f. (In this paper I will mention only an exchange of embassies between Byzantium and China til the end of the 11th c. for understanding better the possible artistic information.) Cf. a list of Greco-Roman embassies and visitors to China: Christopoulos, Hellenes and Romans in Ancient China, 76‒78; for possible identification of Fu-lin in Chinese sources of the Tang period: Preiser-Kapeller, Jenseits von Rom und Karl dem Großen,70‒73. 7 Kordossis, Embassies between Fu-lin (Byzantium?) and China, 147–186; Lin, Byzantium in the Tang society; Boubouli, China under the Tang, 14–23 (A. Karamanou), 40‒45; Κοrdossis, T’ang China, the Chinese Nestorian Church and the „Heretical“ Byzantium, 171‒283; cf. the opposite opinion of Johannes Preiser-Kapeller: he disagrees with a direct embassies’ exchange between Constantinople and Chang’an, based on written sources: Preiser-Capeller, Jenseits von Rom und Karl dem Großen, 71‒73. ANGELIKI LIVERI: Fu-lin Dances in Medieval Chinese Art – Byzantine or imaginary? 71 of regular diplomatic contacts is initiated in 643 with the embassy sent by Ro-to-li (king of Fu-lin?) or Boduoli according other scholars and the answering letter of the Chinese emperor;8 that means during the reign of the emperor Constantine II/Kon- stans II, the Bearded/ “Pogonatos” (641‒648) in Byzantium and T’aizung/Taizong of Tang (627‒649) in China. However, the visit of Chinese ambassadors in Constantinople is not accepted by all scholars. Peter Schreiner argues for a visit of a Chinese diplomatic delegation in the Byzantine capital, in my opinion convincingly, based in Byzantine and West medieval sources.9 He supports that two Chinese annals of the 7th century describe Constanti- nople, according to information of Chinese ambassadors who visited the city. Howev- er, scholars, such as Friederich Hirth and Kurakishi Schiratori, do not agree with this interpretation: Hirth identifies Fu-lin with Antiocheia; Schiratori believes that some elements of the description could be for Constantinople, some real, other fictional.10 Although the Arabs had occupied the eastern territories of Fu-lin by the middle of the 8th century, it was China that controlled the most important part of Central Asia. The contacts between the two empires were maintained through the northern route, namely the northern branch of the Silk Road (fig. 1), from China to Constantinople, Fig. 1. The Silk Road (after Wikimedia, Seidenstrasse by Kelvin Case.) [From wikimedia commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SeidenstrasseGMT.JPG (accessed 06. 01. 2020)] 8 Κοrdossis, T’ang China, the Chinese Nestorian Church and the „Heretical“ Byzantium, 195‒199; Idem, Embassies between Fu-lin (Byzantium?) and China, 182f; cf. Christopoulos’ opinion who men- tions Boduoli as king’s name and identifies him with the emperor Constantine II/Konstans II the Beard- ed/“Pogonatos” (641‒648): Christopoulos, Hellenes and Romans in Ancient China, 73; 78. 9 Schreiner, Chinesische Beschreibung Konstantinopels, 494–505; Schreiner’s identification fol- low: Kordossis, Embassies between Fu-lin (Byzantium?) and China, 162–164; Christopoulos, Hellenes and Romans in Ancient China, 71‒74. 10 Hirth, China and Roman Orient, 49–83; Shiratori, as in n. 1. 72 ЗРВИ LVI (2019) 69–94 through the northern shores of the Caspian Sea and the territory of the Western Turks.11 The role of Western Turkic elites “as agents of cultural communication, trans- mission and appropriation” in Eurasia was also very important.12 During the Song or Sung Dynasty (960‒1279), as the Sung-shih (i.e. the history of the Sung dynasty) and other sources inform us, embassies of Fu-lin visited China at the end of the 11th century (1081 and 1091). Nevertheless, it is not certain whether in this case Fu-lin stands for Byzantium or for another country belonging to a more expanded Fu-lin, which included Byzantium. Some historians argue that “the Fu-lin of Sung is totally different as a state from the Fu-lin of Tang, i.e. different from Byz- a n t i u m”. 13 They believe that the embassies of Fu-lin in the 11th century were sent by the Seljuq Turks, the new main power in West and Central Asia, because they had es- tablished states in parts of the old territories of Fu-lin: the main Seljuq state of Persia, some smaller principalities in Syria and, later, the sultanate of Rum (Ikonion). From these regions “the sultanate of Persia was the most powerful and consequently capa- ble of sending embassies so far”. This possibility is very important for our research, because these embassies visited China in Li Gonglin’s lifetime. The exchange of ambassadors or embassies (fig. 2) was certainly a very import- ant medium of communication between Byzantium and China, accompanied by an exchange of gifts.14 Perhaps sometimes the embassies and their purpose were mixed: commercial and diplomatic.15 Undoubtedly, clerics or missionaries of the established Nestorian Church of China contributed also to the good relations between Byzan- tium and China participating in missions or embassies in the 7th and 8th century.16 11 The Northern route calls also Oxus route.