_full_journalsubtitle: International Journal of Chinese Studies/Revue Internationale de Sinologie _full_abbrevjournaltitle: TPAO _full_ppubnumber: ISSN 0082-5433 (print version) _full_epubnumber: ISSN 1568-5322 (online version) _full_issue: 5-6 _full_issuetitle: 0 _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien J2 voor dit article en vul alleen 0 in hierna): Anatoly Polnarov _full_alt_articletitle_running_head (rechter kopregel - mag alles zijn): Looking Beyond Dichotomies _full_is_advance_article: 0 _full_article_language: en indien anders: engelse articletitle: 0 T’OUNG PAO Looking Beyond Dichotomies T’oung Pao 104 (2018) 465-495 www.brill.com/tpao 465 Contents Looking Beyond Dichotomies: Hidden Diversity of Voices in the Yantielun 鹽鐵論 465 Anatoly Polnarov 465 Two Notes on Xie He’s 謝赫 “Six Criteria” (liufa 六法), Aided by Digital Databases 496 Paul R. Goldin 496 Yuan Hong’s 袁宏 Evaluation of the Han-Wei Transition 511 Sebastian Eicher 511 The Tang Poet in Song Poetics, Song Poetics in the Tang Poet: The Construction of Du Fu’s Image as Verbal Master 537 Jue Chen 537 Explaining Perfection: Quanzhen and Thirteenth-century Chinese Literati 572 Mark Halperin 572 Looking Beyond Dichotomies: Hidden Diversity of Writing Landscapes into Civilization: Ming Loyalist Ambitions on the Mekong Delta 626 Claudine Ang 626 Ideology of Power and Power of Ideology in Early China. Edited by Yuri Pines, Paul Goldin, and Martin Kern. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2015. viii + 348 pp. 673 Voices in the Yantielun 鹽鐵論 Mark Edward Lewis, Stanford University 679 Emperor Wu Zhao and Her Pantheon of Devis, Divinities, and Dynastic Mothers. By N. Harry Rothschild. New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 2015. xxii + 357 pp. 680 Antonello Palumbo, SOAS, University of London 687 Ming Loyalists in Southeast Asia. As Perceived Through Various Asian and European Records. By Claudine Salmon. Maritime Asia, 27. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2014. viii + 134 pp., illus. 688 Angela Schottenhammer, University of Salzburg 689 Brush, Seal and Abacus: Troubled Vitality in Late Ming China’s Economic Heartland, 1500-1644. By Jie Zhao. Hong Kong: The Chinese Univ. Press, 2018. xvi + 267 pp., illus. 690 Michael Marmé, Fordham University 695 Livres Reçus / Books Received 696 Anatoly Polnarov (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem) Introduction In 81 BCE, Emperor Zhao of Han (漢昭帝, 87-74 BCE) issued an edict ordering ministers of the state to consult with the “worthy and good per- sons” (xianliang 賢良, hereafter the Worthies) and “literary scholars” (wenxue 文學, hereafter the Literati) on matters of the people’s well-be- ing.1 The summoned experts proposed the abolition of state monopolies 1) Hanshu 漢書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1962), 7.223, 24B.1176. The designations “literary scholars” and “worthy and good persons” frequently appear in Han sources in the context of the appointment and promotion of officials (e.g., Shiji 史記 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959] 10.422, 12.452, 28.1384, 31.1424, and 121.3125; Hanshu, 4.116, 25A.1215, 49.2276-77, 56.2495, and 74.3133). These titles therefore suggest that the summoned debaters were holders of an office (typically, a minor one) or nominees to it, who had advanced through what was called the “recommendation system.” According to this system, nominees for appointment or promo- tion were recommended by local or central government officials on the basis of their moral character and abilities. For the Han recommendation system, see Yan Buke 閻步克, Chaju zhidu bianqian shigao 察举制度变迁史稿 (Shenyang: Liaoning daxue chubanshe, 1991), esp. 8-22; Yu Yingchun 于迎春, Qin Han shili 秦漢士吏 (Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 2000); Michael Loewe, The Men Who Governed Han China: Companion to a Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han and Xin Periods (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 109-54; Hans Bielenstein, The Bureaucracy of Han Times (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980), 132-42. According to recent archaeological data, the recommendation system was a relatively narrow avenue of entry and advancement through the Han bureaucracy; see Liu Pak-yuen (Liao Po-yüan) 廖伯源, “Handai shijin zhidu xinkao” 漢代仕進制度新考, in Jiandu yu zhidu: Yinwan Han mu jiandu guanwenshu kaozheng 簡牘與制度尹灣漢墓簡牘管文書考證 (Guilin: Guangxi shifan daxue chubanshe, 2005), 3-55; Ōba Osamu 大庭修, “Lun Handai de lungong shengjin 論漢代的論功升進,” in Jiandu yanjiu yicong 簡牘研究譯叢, vol. 2 (Beijing: Zhongguo she- hui kexue chubanshe, 1987), 323-38. Still, it seems more accurate to view the debaters as service-oriented men with ties to the bureaucratic system rather than representatives of the “common people” (contra Guo Moruo 郭沫若 “Yantielun duben” 鹽鐵論讀本 in Guo Moruo quanji 郭沫若全集, vol. 8 [Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 1985], 472-73). ©T’oung Koninklijke Pao 104 Brill (2018) NV, Leiden, 465-495 2018 DOI: 10.1163/15685322-10456P01 Downloaded from Brill.com09/26/2021 04:32:59AM via free access 466 Anatoly Polnarov on salt and iron, whereupon a debate ensued between the ministers and their critics. A generation later, during Emperor Xuan’s reign (漢宣帝, 74-49 BCE), the scholar and official Huan Kuan 桓寬 composed an ac- count of this event, the Yantielun 鹽鐵論 or Debates on Salt and Iron.2 The sixty chapters of the Yantielun represent the debates in the form of a dialogue between the two sides: the officials, led primarily by the counselor (dafu 大夫),3 versus the critics of the government, composed of the Literati and Worthies. These two groups take turns in debating the officials: in the first twenty-seven chapters, the Literati lead the ar- gument, and in the middle of chapter 28, “Guo ji” 國疾 (Ills of the state), the Worthies take over. They continue up until the end of chapter 42, “Ji zhi” 擊之 (Attack Them), after which the Literati return to the fray and stay at it until chapter 59, “Da lun” 大論 (Grand Discourse). The last chapter consists of Huan Kuan’s concluding words which reveal that the counselor is Sang Hongyang 桑弘羊 (d. 80 BCE), who served as imperial counselor (yushi dafu 御史大夫) from 87 to 80 BCE.4 The Yantielun encompasses manifold topics related to foreign affairs, administration, economics, and so forth. This, as well as the multiplicity of opinions expressed on these topics, makes the treatise an indispens- able source for political thought in the first century BCE. Scholars 2) Juri L. Kroll surmises a possible compilation date in the early years of Emperor Yuan’s 元帝 reign (48-33 bce); see Kroll, Spor o Soli i Zheleze, vol. 1 (St. Petersburg: Peterburzhskoe vostokovedenie, 1997), 22-23. Loewe articulates this view even more confidently in “‘Confu- cian’ Values and Practices in Han China,” T’oung Pao 98 (2012): 26, and idem, “Han Yuandi, Reigned 48 to 33 bce, and His Advisors,” Early China 35/36 (2012-13): 363. However, the Han- shu unambiguously ascribes the work to Emperor Xuan’s reign (Hanshu, 66.2903). For a sur- vey of various opinions on the dating of the Yantielun, see Wang Yong 王永, Yantielun yanjiu 鹽鐵論研究 (Yinchuan: Ningxia renmin chubanshe, 2009), 20-23. 3) Other participants debating for the official side are the chancellor (chengxiang 丞相), the chancellor’s clerk (chengxiang shi 丞相史), and the imperial clerk (yushi 御史). The chancellor must have been Tian Qianqiu 田千秋 (d. 77 bce) (Hanshu, 19.790). Here and hereafter, the translation of official titles follows Loewe, A Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Western Han and Xin periods, 221 bc-ad 24 (Leiden: Brill, 2000). 4) Wang Liqi 王利器, Yantielun jiaozhu (dingben) 鹽鐵論校注 (定本) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1996), “Za lun” 雜論 (Miscellaneous Discourses), 60.614; hereafter, all references to the Yantielun are to this edition. For my translations I have consulted Esson M. Gale, Discourses on Salt and Iron: A Debate on State Control of Commerce and Industry in Ancient China, Chap- ters I-XXVIII, Translated from the Chinese of Huan K’uan with Introduction and Notes (Taipei: Ch’eng Wen Publishing Co., 1967); Kroll, Spor o Soli i Zheleze, vol. 1, and Spor o Soli i Zheleze, vol. 2 (Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura, 2001); and Jean Levi, La Dispute sur le Sel et le Fer (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2010). T’oung Pao 104 (2018) 465-495 Downloaded from Brill.com09/26/2021 04:32:59AM via free access Looking Beyond Dichotomies 467 routinely read the text as an account of a straightforward clash between two bitterly opposed camps.5 This reading, in turn, is often used to cor- roborate dichotomous approaches to the political history of the Former Han as a whole which, seen through this prism, appears as being driven by an ongoing confrontation between two opposing forces. These an- tagonistic forces have been variously identified as schools of thought (Legalism versus Confucianism),6 political ideologies (Modernists ver- sus Reformists),7 or scholastic camps (New Text versus the Old Text Learning).8 Attempts have also been made to integrate some of these approaches. Thus, Yan Buke 閻步克 identifies Loewe’s categories of 5) See, for example, Gale, Discourses on Salt and Iron, xli; Loewe, Crisis and Conflict in Han China (London: G. Allen and Unwin, 1974), 91-112; Wu Hui 吳慧, Sang Hongyang yanjiu 桑弘 羊研究 (Jinan: Qi-Lu shushe, 1981), 292-343, esp. 325-43; Wang Liqi 王利器, “Qian yan 前言,” Yantielun jiaozhu, 1-31; Nishijima Sadao 西嶋定生, Shin Kan teikoku: Chūgoku kodai teikoku no kōbō 秦漢帝國: 中國古代帝國の興亡 (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1997), 304; Kroll, Spor o Soli i Zheleze, vol. 1, 35-38; Wang Yong, Yantielun yanjiu, 7-12. Jean Levi, La Dispute, xxxv, even describes the debate in such terms as “… des entités primordiales tels Ahriman et Ormuzd qui se livrent un combat cosmique” and “…caractère quasi manichéen de l’affrontement.” 6) Wu Hui,