Mirroring the Past: The Writing and Use of History in Imperial China

319 Pages·2005·1.903 MB·English

by  On-Cho Ng, Q Edward Wang

9
1
3
f
o
1
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
G
N
I
R MIRRORING THE PAST
O
R
IR MIRRORING THE PAST
M
/
g
n
a
W
d
n
a
g
N

4
4
3
7

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
2
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
G
N
I
R
O
R
R
I
M
/
g
n
a
W
d
n
a
g
N

4
4
3
7

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
3
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
G
N
I MIRRORING THE PAST
R
O
R
IR MIRRORING THE PAST
M
/
g
n
a
W The Writing and Use of History
d
n
a in Imperial China
g
N

4
4
3
7
On-cho NgandQ. Edward Wang
UniversityofHawai‘iPress
Honolulu

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
4
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
G
N
I
R
O
R
R
I
M ©2005UniversityofHawai‘iPress
/ Allrightsreserved
g
n PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
a
W
100908070605 654321
d
n
a
g
N

4 UniversityofHawai‘iPressbooksareprintedonacid-free
4
73 paperandmeettheguidelinesforpermanenceanddurability
oftheCouncilonLibraryResources.
DesignedbyUniversityofHawai‘iPressProductionStaff
PrintedbyIntegratedBookTechnology

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
5
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
Contents
G
N
I
R
O
R
R
I
M
/
g
n
a
W
d
n
a
g
N

4
4
3
7
Prologue vii
C1 TheAgeofConfucius:TheGenesisofHistory 1
C2 FromtheWarringStatesPeriodtotheHan:
TheFormationandMaturationofHistoriography 31
C3 TheAgeofDisunity:ProliferationsandVariationsof
Historiography 80
C4 TheTang:TheHistoryBureauandItsCritics 108
C5 TheSong:CulturalFlourishingandtheBlooming
ofHistoriography 135
C6 TheJinandtheYuan:HistoryandLegitimationin
theDynastiesofConquest 167
C7 TheMing:TheFloweringofPrivateHistoriography
andItsInnovations 193
C8 TheQing:HistoriesandtheClassics 223
Epilogue 259
Glossary 265
Bibliography 275
Index 295

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
. v
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
6
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
G
N
I
R
O
R
R
I
M
/
g
n
a
W
d
n
a
g
N

4
4
3
7

5
2
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
7
t
e
e
h
s

/

T
S
A
P
E
H
T
Prologue
G
N
I
R
O
R
R
I
M
/
g
n
a
W
d
n
a
g
N

4
4
3
7
Thisbookwasnotwrittentoresolvescholarlyproblemsconcerninghis-
toriographyinimperialChina;norisitintendedtoadvancetechnical
discussionsonthesubject.Whatweofferisanup-to-date,reliablesur-
veyofimperialChinesehistoriography,anaccountthatwebelievetobea
reasonablycomprehensiveandtruthfulreconstructionoftheparameters
andpatternsofhistoricalproductioninaculturedistinguishedforitsven-
erationofthepast.Wewrotethisbookbecausethereisagreatneedfor
suchapanoramicwork.
Chinesecivilizationiswellknownforitslong,continuoustraditionof
historicalwriting.Sinceantiquity,writinghistoryhasbeenthequintessen-
tialChinesewayofdefiningandshapingculture.AsChinaforgedauni-
fiedempire,dynasticrulersgraduallybutsurelyturnedtheproductionof
historyintoaroutine,bureaucraticbusiness,asevidencedbytheappoint-
mentofcourthistoriansandtheinstitutionalizationoftheHistoryBureau
intheseventhcentury.Indeed,fromthethirdcenturyB.C.E.onward,the
writing of dynastic histories was undertaken as a matter of course. One
centralandinescapabletaskofanewdynastywastocompilethehistory
ofthepreviousdynasty.Historywasthetextualmanifestationofanewim-
perium, and control of the past, by imperial fiat, was part of the power
and authority of the new regime. According to one estimate, in order to
render the official dynastic histories, or ‘‘standard histories’’ (zhengshi),
thathavebeencompiledovermorethanamillenniumintoEnglish,atotal
of some forty-five million words would be required (Dubs 1946, 23–43).
Andthistotaldoesnotincludeanalmostequallylargenumberofprivate
and unofficial histories that further testified to the Chinese predilection
fororderingthepastthroughhistoricalnarratives.
ThestudyofChinesehistoriographyintheEnglish-speakingworldhas
never really flourished. Scholarly endeavor has been sporadic and inter-
mittent, if not downright sparse. In 1938 Charles Gardner published, to
ourknowledge,thefirstsystematic,book-lengthstudyentitledChineseTra-
5
2 ditional Historiography, a small volume of some hundred pages. It was fol-
:
0
1

3
2
. vii
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
8
t
e viii Prologue
e
h
s

/ lowedin1955byYu-shanHan’sElementsofChineseHistoriographyandW.G.

T
S BeasleyandE.G.Pulleyblank’seditedvolume,HistoriansofChinaandJapan,
A
P in1961.Pulleyblanklatercontributedalongarticle,‘‘TheHistoriographi-
E
H calTradition,’’toRaymondDawson’santhology,TheLegacyofChina,which
T
G appearedin1964.Thethreedecadesfromthe1960stothe1990swereap-
N
RI parentlyafallowperiodexceptthat1975witnessedpublicationofEssayson
O
R theSourcesforChineseHistory,editedbyDonaldD.Leslie,ColinMackerras,
R
I
M andWangGungwu,aworkthatofferssomecoverageoftheChinesehis-
/ toriographicaltradition.Otherwise,nomajorworksonhistoriographyin
g
n traditionalChinahaveappearedinEnglish.Despitetheimmensevalueof
a
W
thestudieswehavelisted,thesepioneeringworksarenowoutofprintand
d
an outdated. DennisTwitchett’s TheWriting of Official History under theT’ang,
g publishedin1992,wasthefirstmajorstudyontraditionalChinesehisto-
N

4 riography to appear in a long time. It was followed by two monographs
4
73 onSimaQian,thegreathistorianintheHan,writtenbyStephenDurrant
andGrantHardy.Butallthesestudiesarespecificinscopeandcoverage.
Twitchett’sstudyfocusesontheTang,whilethosebyDurrantandHardy
dealwithonlyonehistorian,importantthoughSimawas.Howevervalu-
ableindividualstudiesonaspectsandperiodsofChinesehistoriography
may be, they cannot adequately substitute for a continuous account. In
short,thereisnosingle,up-to-dateEnglish-languagevolumethatoffersa
criticalsurveyoftheChinesehistoriographicaltradition.
This relative lack of attention to traditional Chinese historiography
notonlyrevealsalacunainthefieldofChinesestudiesbutalsodetracts
from a general understanding of Chinese civilization, of which the cha-
risma of history was integrally a part. Insofar as history, the storehouse
ofmorallessonsandbureaucraticprecedents,wasthemagistervitae—the
teacheroflife—totheChineseliterati,neglectofthehistoriographicaltra-
ditionofChinameantdiminutionofabroadviewofChineseculture.Ac-
cordingly,acurrentandcomprehensivesurveyoftraditionalChinesehis-
toriography,onethatintegratesandreflectsthescholarshipandacademic
interestsofthepasttwodecades,isnecessary.
It may also be argued that this need is not a parochial one de-
fined solely in terms of Chinese studies. The onslaught of poststruc-
turalism, deconstructionism, postmodernity, postcolonialism, and other
post-Enlightenmenttheoriesinthehumanscienceshasunderscoredthe
multivalentandpolyvocallocioftruths.Settingasidethequestionofthe
interpretivecogencyandexplanatorypowerofthesetheories,theyhave,at
theveryleast,usefullydemytholizedtheparadigmaticstatusofEuropean
Enlightenmentvaluesandworldviews.Avarietyofhistoricalconceptions
havebeenshowntobeideologicalconstructionsratherthanculturaltru-
isms.Thus,forinstance,ithasbecomederigueurthesedaysinacademia
todeuniversalizeahostofnotionsthathavehithertobeenEurocentrically
construedanddefined,suchasmodernity,oreventheconceptofculture
itself. As the putative universality of the Western tradition of historiog-
5
2 raphywanes,itseemsincreasinglynecessaryforpracticinghistoriansand
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
9
t
e Prologue ix
e
h
s

/ historiographerstocometotermswithalternativeperspectives.Totheex-

T
S tentthateverypeoplehasalegitimatehistoryofhistory,thedevelopment
A
P ofadeeperunderstandingofthehistoricalprofessionanddisciplineasa
E
H wholemaywellrequireseekinginsightsandinspirationsfromthehistorio-
T
G graphical traditions of other cultures. In the recently published A Global
N
RI Encyclopediaof HistoricalWritings, editedbyagroupof Westernhistorians
O
R (Woolf 1998), for example, many of the entries pertain to non-Western
R
I
M traditionsofhistoriography.Hence,eventhoughthisbookontraditional
/ ChinesehistoriographyspeakstoscholarsandstudentsofChina,itshould
g
n alsoappealtohistoriansofotherpartsoftheworld,iffornootherthan
a
W
pedagogicalreasons.Whileappropriatetextsareabundantlyavailablefor
d
an the study of the historiographical traditions of Europe and America, in-
g structorsoftenfindthemselvesatalosstoidentifyproperbooksforChina.
N

4 Manyareforcedtofallbackonworkspublisheddecadesago.Ourwork,
4
73 atthesametimethatittracesthegeneralcontouroftraditionalChinese
historiography,isanadvancedtechnicalsynthesisofthelatestscholarship
onthesubject.
AsbefitsanoverviewoftraditionalChinesehistoriography,thisbook
isorganizedchronologically,followingthedynasticsuccessions,beginning
inantiquity,duringwhichtimetheearlyformsofhistoricalconsciousness
emerged,andendinginthemid-nineteenthcentury,whenencounterwith
theWestbegantoengenderafundamentallydifferenthistoricaloutlook.
ThisperiodizationcorrespondswiththeconventionaldivisionofChinese
history that we find in much of the scholarly literature produced in the
West.Themainmeritofthisschemaisthatitstrikesachordof harmony
withmanyexistingbooksonotheraspectsofChinesehistory.Readerscan
readilyintegratethematerialsfoundherewithinformationontheother
historicaldevelopmentsfromotherworks.Theindividualchaptersdetail
thecomplexitiesandnuancesoftheunfoldinghistoriographicaltradition,
revealingtherolesthathistoryandhistoriansplayedinphasesofChinese
history.ForeveryperiodweexploreandexamineChinesehistoriography
on two levels: first, historiography as the gathering of raw materials and
thewritingandproducingofnarrativesinordertodescribewhatactually
happenedinthepast—thecompilationofhistory;andsecond,historiog-
raphy as thought and reflection about the meanings and patterns of the
past—thephilosophyofhistory.
Acontinuousnarrativeintheformofageneralsurveyoftenrunsthe
risk of highlighting the trees while losing sight of the forest. In detail-
ingthemultitudeofcausalandcrucialelementsinthehistoriographyof
the various dynastic periods, a survey may blur the overarching themes.
Itmayglossoverthemetanarrative,asitwere,neglectingtheunyielding
bedrockoflogicandtheassumptionsthatliebeneathandextendbeyond
and above the surface historical minutiae. A recounting of the historio-
graphicalendeavorsandaccomplishmentsoftheindividualdynastiesthat
on their own become luminous with significance may in the end fail to
5
2 illuminate the very substance and nature of historiography in imperial
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
9
1
3
f
o
0
1
t x Prologue
e
e
h
s
China.Told in the form of a survey, the historiographical story may ap-
/

T peartobejustonedamnedfactafteranother,muchashappensinhand-
S
PA books or encyclopedias.What integrated picture, then, do all the dynas-
E tic snapshots yield? What overall profile can be constructed out of the
H
T
separatedevelopments?Whatcontinuityflowedthroughtheapparentdis-
G
IN junctionsofepochalsegmentation?Whatwholemaybeintuitedfromthe
R
O accumulationsoftheparts?Ourworkaimstoanswerthesequestionsand
R
R
I therebydemonstratethemainlinesandthemesofhistoriographicaldevel-
M
/ opments.Toseektodemonstratethewholeisnottoflattenoutthediverse
g movementsinChinesehistoriographythroughouttheagesinthenameof
n
a
W staticcoherence.Itisnot,ascriticsarewonttosaythesedays,toessential-
nd izewhatmakinghistorywasallaboutinimperialChina.Whatwedoseek
a
here, however, is an integrated view of Chinese historiography, one that
g
N
revealsthecontinuitythatpersistedwithinparticularperiods.
4
34 Historical consciousness in early China germinated within a unique
7
worldviewanimatedbyananthropocosmiccomminglingof Heavenand
humanity, wherein human affairs and agency were at once the reflection
andtheembodimentofHeaven’swillandaction.Confucius,generallyac-
knowledgedastheauthor-editoroftheSpringandAutumnAnnals(Chun-
qiu),purposefullyemployedandmanipulatedhistoricalretellingaseduca-
tivedisquisition.Otherwiseapedestrianchronologicalrecord,theSpring
and Autumn Annals became in the hands of Confucius a powerful tool
thatinfusedmoralpurportintothewritingofhistory.Thisdidacticactof
using the past to convey the moral messages and judgments vouchsafed
by Heaven exerted an enduring impact on Chinese historiography.The
makingandwritingofhistorycametobeenmeshedinmoraledification.
Anditwaspreciselybecauseofthishistoriographicalprincipleandprac-
tice of bestowing praise and levying blame (baobian) on personages and
events of the past that history acquired its unmistakable charisma and
authority.
ThetwoacclaimedhistoriansintheHan,SimaQian(c.145–85B.C.E.)
and Ban Gu (d. 92 C.E.), played remarkable roles in orienting historical
writinginnewdirections.Asaconsequence,thegrandenterpriseofdoing
historybegantodepartfromtheantiquemodelestablishedbyConfucius
intermsofbothscopeandstyle.Yetnotwithstandingtheirinnovationsthat
boldly forged new conventions and expanded the horizons of historical
writing, Sima’s intention to explore and reveal the relationship between
Heavenandhumanaffairsthroughhistory,andBanGu’sconcernwithdy-
nastichistoryandthewaysinwhichknowledgeofthepastwaspreserved
andpresented,verymuchreflectedearlierhistoriographicalassumptions.
Bothassertedthatthehistoryofhumanknowledgeandawarenessofthe
pastwas,initsessentials,pragmaticknowledge,thepracticalpurposeof
whichwasdemonstratedthroughdistinguishingthegoodandexcoriating
thewicked.Thepragmaticlessonsofthepastweremostrevealinglycon-
veyed in the exemplary lives of individuals, and indeed, beginning with
5
2 Sima Qian, the biographic form became the major narrative vehicle for
:
0
1

3
2
.
3
.
5
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T