The Awakening of the Hinterland: The Formation of Regional Vinaya Traditions in Tang China, by Anna Sokolova

Research on the Baekje Refugees in Tang China has been conducted using their epitaph tablet text (墓誌) as important data. This is because the epitaph tablet text contains information on the deceased's funeral and burial site, official posts held, genealogy, family details, and the year of birth and death. However, the information recorded in the epitaph tablets had been chosen by the descendants of the deceased according to their needs. The descendants tried to emphasize the contents that could contribute to their successful careers, the solidarity of family members, and the status of a family, and reduce the contents that were not. Tang China used how much they contributed to its interests as an important criterion when giving office posts to the ruling class of other states surrendered. On the epitaph tablet text of a person who had wreaked damage on Tang China, like a Heukchi Sangji (黑齒常之), the background and process of his migration to Tang China was vaguely and briefly described, the achievements he had made by acting as a Tang’s official were emphasized. On the other hand, on the epitaph tablet text of a person who made a clear contribution to the conquest of Goguryeo by Tang China, like a Namsaeng (男生), the background and process of the deceased's migration to Tang China was described in detail. In this way, the Baekje Refugees tried to strengthen the political and social status of the family. So the figurative expressions referring to the confusion of domestic politics or Baekje's attitude against Tang China’s foreign policy were used to justify their surrender and show their loyalty to Tang China on the epitaph tablet text of Ye gun (禰軍), Ye Sikjin (禰寔進), Jin Beopja (陳法子), and Buyeo Yung (扶餘隆).

Using a synthetic narrative approach, this ambitious work uses the lens of multipolarity to analyse Tang China's (618-907) relations with Turkestan; the Korean states of Kogury, Silla, and Paekche; the state of Parhae in Manchuria; and the Nanzhao and Tibetan kingdoms. Without any one entity able to dominate Asia's geopolitical landscape, the author argues that relations among these countries were quite fluid and dynamic--an interpretation that departs markedly from the prevalent view of China fixed at the center of a widespread tribute system. To cope with external affairs in a tumultuous world, Tang China employed a dual management system that allowed both central and local officials to conduct foreign affairs. The court authorised Tang local administrators to receive foreign visitors, forward their diplomatic letters to the capital, and manage contact with outsiders whose territories bordered on China. Not limited to handling routine matters, local officials used their knowledge of border situations to influence the court's foreign policy. Some even took the liberty of acting without the court's authorisation when an emergency occurred, thus adding another layer to multipolarity in the region's geopolitics. The book also sheds new light on the ideological foundation of Tang China's foreign policy. Appropriateness, efficacy, expedience, and mutual self-interest guided the court's actions abroad. Although officials often used virtue and righteousness in policy discussions and announcements, these terms were not abstract universal principles but justifications for the pursuit of self-interest by those involved. Detailed philological studies reveal that in the realm of international politics, virtue and righteousness were in fact viewed as pragmatic and utilitarian in nature. Comprehensive and authoritative, Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia is a major work on Tang foreign relations that will reconceptualise our understanding of the complexities of diplomacy and war in imperial China.

Material Culture and Fashion in Tang China and Beyond Rebecca Doran Empire of Style: Silk and Fashion in Tang China by BuYun Chen. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2019. Pp. xiv + 257. $70.00 cloth, $70.00 e-book. Silk, Slaves, and Stupas: Material Culture of the Silk Road by by Susan Whitfield. Oakland: University of California Press, 2018. Pp. xi + 339. $29.95 cloth, $29.95 e-book. Discussions of the Tang period almost inevitably address, or at least refer to, the dynasty's cosmopolitanism. A complex set of interconnections between the Tang and other kingdoms made it culturally rich and open to a variety of influences. The interstate relationships that contributed to the development of Tang culture and society can be approached from numerous perspectives. These relationships include but are by no means limited to tributary and trade systems, military expansion and foreign policy, and religiously motivated movement into and out of the Tang borders by clergy and laypeople alike. One way to understand and trace the connections between the Tang empire and kingdoms across Eurasia is through the lens of materiality. This material culture encompasses a wide range of articles of clothing, jewelry, decorative objects, items of daily use, and other artistic products, as well as the attendant attitudes toward them and practices surrounding their use. The networks comprising the famed Silk Road, referring to a system of routes across Central Asia and the Middle East, linking Chang'an in the east with Antioch in the west, were crucial to forging [End Page 165] and maintaining ties between the Tang and other kingdoms. They fueled the wealth and lush material culture of the Tang, especially during its first century and a half. This rich materiality is attested in textual, visual, and archaeological sources and remains fundamental to the historical memory of the dynasty. Recent monographs by BuYun Chen and Susan Whitfield adopt groundbreaking, multidisciplinary approaches to material culture in China and beyond. They emphasize the importance of materiality—clothes, textiles, jewelry, bowls, and stupas, among other artifacts—to understanding economic, political, and ideological realities. Chen's Empire of Style: Silk and Fashion in Tang China analyzes the multifaceted Tang fashion system, powered by weavers, artisans, traders, and consumers. Focusing in particular on the significance of silk textiles, Chen utilizes archaeological and textual sources, first, to reconstruct the changing modes of production that drove the creation of these fabrics and, second, to demonstrate the existence of a dynamic fashion culture and consciousness during the Tang. Whitfield's Silk, Slaves, and Stupas: Material Culture of the Silk Road adopts an object-centered approach to the cultural interactions enabled by the Silk Road. It explores the relationships between material items and broader systems of politics, trade, and religion. The monograph traces the creation and movement of ten different objects along the Silk Road and, through this analysis, maps networks of interconnection among artisans, traders, worshippers, and consumers across vast geographic and cultural boundaries. The issues raised and methodologies utilized by both books contribute to ongoing scholarly dialogues and open new directions in the study of material culture, fashion, art, and economic and social history in the Tang and beyond. Empire of Style is divided into two main sections, which unfold progressively to address the ideological and political forces, consumer demand, and logistics of production shaping the development of the Tang fashion system. The monograph begins with an insightful introduction that challenges traditional theories of the genesis of fashion, which have tended to view the emergence of modern fashion culture as inextricably tied to the advent of a capitalist system and commodity culture in nineteenth-century western Europe. Chen debunks the "myth of a static Chinese costume" by introducing what she terms the "tactile and playful world of Tang fashion," a world marked by the [End Page 166] desire for change and "aesthetic play," wherein consumers and wearers used fashion to experiment with social role, image, and perception (pp. 5, 7, 9). Turning to the main body of the book, part 1 comprises two chapters, which explore, respectively, the political and economic developments that enabled the emergence of a cosmopolitan fashion culture during the Tang ("History") and the discursive frameworks through...

This book analyzes Tang China's (618–907) relations with Turkestan; the Korean states of Koguryŏ, Silla, and Paekche; the state of Parhae in Manchuria; and the Nanzhao and Tibetan kingdoms. Without any one entity able to dominate Asia's geopolitical landscape, the book argues that relations among these countries were quite fluid and dynamic—an interpretation that departs markedly from the prevalent view of China fixed at the center of a widespread “tribute system.” To cope with external affairs in a tumultuous world, Tang China employed a dual management system that allowed both central and local officials to conduct foreign affairs. The court authorized Tang local administrators to receive foreign visitors, forward their diplomatic letters to the capital, and manage contact with outsiders whose territories bordered on China. Not limited to handling routine matters, local officials used their knowledge of border situations to influence the court's foreign policy. Some even took the liberty of acting without the court's authorization when an emergency occurred, thus adding another layer to multi-polarity in the region's geopolitics. The book also sheds new light on the ideological foundation of Tang China's foreign policy. Appropriateness, efficacy, expedience, and mutual self-interest guided the court's actions abroad. Although officials often used “virtue” and “righteousness” in policy discussions and announcements, these terms were not abstract universal principles but justifications for the pursuit of self-interest by those involved. Detailed philological studies reveal that in the realm of international politics, “virtue” and “righteousness” were in fact viewed as pragmatic and utilitarian in nature.

Reviewed by: Sui-Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power, and Connections, 580–800 by Jonathan Karam Skaff, and: Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia: A History of Diplomacy and War by Zhenping Wang, and: China and Beyond in the Medieval Period: Cultural Crossings and Inter-Regional Connections ed. by Dorothy C. Wong and Gustav Heldt Michael Hoeckelmann Sui-Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power, and Connections, 580–800. By jonathan karam skaff. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 402 pp. $90.00 (cloth). Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia: A History of Diplomacy and War. By zhenping wang. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2013. 464 pp. $65.00 (cloth). China and Beyond in the Medieval Period: Cultural Crossings and Inter-Regional Connections. Edited by dorothy c. wong and gustav heldt. New Delhi: Manohar, 2014. 444 pp. $99.00 (paper). Research on Eurasia as a complex whole rather than a sum of unrelated parts has become increasingly popular in recent years. Christopher Beckwith promotes the idea of a “Central Eurasian Culture Complex” with Europe and East Asia at the periphery rather than at the center, while recent studies focus on the interplay of multiple centers or, more holistically, Eurasia as a kind of fluid, transcultural zone. This newly arisen interest in Inner or Central Asia is also due, on the one hand, to the idea of “Global Middle Ages” gaining momentum, at least in the Anglophone world, and, on the other, to a predilection for interdisciplinary approaches, as several disciplines can come together in this kind of research. From the point of view of Chinese history, studies have focused [End Page 121] largely on reports about diplomatic embassies between China and its neighbors in the socalled standard or dynastic histories of premodern China. In contrast, scholars of Central Asia, lacking traditional sources for most of the empires they study, focus on epigraphic sources or archeology and art history. The three books under review represent poles on a spectrum: Skaff’s book is a cohesive and theory-driven account of the shared values and practices of Eurasian empires; Wang’s is a compartmentalized narrative of Tang 唐 China’s (618–907) relations with its neighbors; and the edited volume by Wong and Heldt, in contrast to the two monographs, offers views of cultural flows from many different angles. Moreover, Skaff’s and Wang’s books also stand in perfect opposition to each other, with one representing a traditionalist, exceptionalist approach and the other an integrationalist, holistic approach. Sui-Tang China and its Turko-Mongol Neighbors The first book is also the most theoretical. Skaff strives to transcend the “exclusivist” stereotypes of China here, Inner Asia there. However, he runs the risk of overgeneralizing the approaches of earlier scholars, pressing them into schools of “integrationalists” and “institutionalists,” and thus setting up shooting targets, which, on the whole, is not very convincing. A very good example appears on page 10: The conflict visions of integrationalist and institutionalist schools have emerged because of a shared tendency to essentialize Sui-Tang culture. If we stop assuming that Sui-Tang society was homogenous, the contradictions can be resolved. The Sui-Tang empires were pluralistic realms containing tens of millions of people who had different ethnicities, regional traditions, status rankings, and religions. Apart from the fact that Skaff fails to specify who it is that shares a tendency of essentializing Sui-Tang culture, no one has ever assumed that Sui-Tang society was homogenous. The claim that the Sui 隋 (581/9–618) and Tang were pluralistic is not new; this is a matter of scholarly consensus. Skaff himself takes up the “integrationist” stance, which might be the reason he has to overemphasize past scholars’ lopsidedness. Quoting the founder of the French Annales School, Marc Bloch, in his epitaph, he sets out to overcome the traditional and anachronistic mode of studying premodern China in the vein of modern-nation [End Page 122] states. Instead, he wants to study China and its neighbors in terms of “entangled histories.” The view that Eurasia formed a continuum has gained some adherence recently, although one could argue that it overemphasizes complexity and...

This book analyzes Tang China's (618–907) relations with Turkestan; the Korean states of Koguryŏ, Silla, and Paekche; the state of Parhae in Manchuria; and the Nanzhao and Tibetan kingdoms. Without any one entity able to dominate Asia's geopolitical landscape, the book argues that relations among these countries were quite fluid and dynamic—an interpretation that departs markedly from the prevalent view of China fixed at the center of a widespread “tribute system.” To cope with external affairs in a tumultuous world, Tang China employed a dual management system that allowed both central and local officials to conduct foreign affairs. The court authorized Tang local administrators to receive foreign visitors, forward their diplomatic letters to the capital, and manage contact with outsiders whose territories bordered on China. Not limited to handling routine matters, local officials used their knowledge of border situations to influence the court's foreign policy. Some even took the liberty of acting without the court's authorization when an emergency occurred, thus adding another layer to multi-polarity in the region's geopolitics. The book also sheds new light on the ideological foundation of Tang China's foreign policy. Appropriateness, efficacy, expedience, and mutual self-interest guided the court's actions abroad. Although officials often used “virtue” and “righteousness” in policy discussions and announcements, these terms were not abstract universal principles but justifications for the pursuit of self-interest by those involved. Detailed philological studies reveal that in the realm of international politics, “virtue” and “righteousness” were in fact viewed as pragmatic and utilitarian in nature.

This project investigates how Buddhist scholars in Tang China adopted and adapted Indian Buddhist logic at the basis of a study on the Yinming ru zhengli lun shu 因明入正理論疏 by Kuiji 窺基 (632–682). Dignāga’s (ca. 480–540) doctrine of the science of reasons is a watershed in the history of Indian logic because of its contributions to the mode of reasoning. It was first introduced in the Nyāyamūkha by Dignāga himself and then in the Nyāyapraveśa by Śaṅkarasvāmin (ca. 500–560). In the seventh century, the Nyāyapraveśa and the Nyāyamūkha were translated into Chinese by Xuanzang 玄奘 (600/602–664), and then a number of commentaries were made by Xuanzang’s disciples. The most important one was the Yinming ru zhengli lun shu by Kuiji, which was venerated as the Yinming dashu 因明大疏 (Great Commentary on the Science of Reasons) by later generations. In order to examine Kuiji’s understanding of Buddhist logic, my study analyzes and translates the sādhana section of his commentary. This study mainly deals with the following two aspects. By exploring how Kuiji integrates clusters of concepts to make definitions, how different Sanskrit terms are reconfigured, and how new concepts are invented and employed, I investigate how related concepts are interpreted in Kuiji’s commentary. Secondly, by exploring how Kuiji interprets the rules of debate to make it fair for both sides, and how he expounds the standards for judging the result, I investigate how he explains the standards of the practice of argumentation. In this manner, this study explores how Indian Buddhist logic was adopted and adapted in Tang China with a focus on Kuiji’s interpretation. In the reception of concepts and practice of Buddhist logic, the study of the science of reasons in Tang China, as a fruit of the Chinese encounter with Indian Buddhism, cannot be understood correctly in isolation, but needs to be made intelligible in relationship to both an intended Chinese readership and a conceptual context provided by Indian texts.

Traditional Chinese sources designated certain self-contained societies as kingdoms of women either on the grounds that no men were present in the population or that women served as heads of state. This paper seeks to identify and discuss the kingdoms of women as known in Tang China under two categories: (1) mythical kingdoms constructed by legend and imagination, and (2) historical kingdoms, located in western Tibet, Japan, and Korea, which did, in fact, interact with Tang China. In the light of current views on matriarchy, only the Chinese characterization of the Tibetan kingdom before the eighth century might be understood as pointing to a true matriarchy, in terms of female rule, matrilineal succession, and matrilocal residence. Despite the nearly contemporary reigns of China's only female emperor, Wu Zetian, Silla Korea's three ruling queens, and Yamato/Nara Japan's half-dozen empresses, none of these kingdoms of women can be understood as matriarchies, because women, in general, did not play a dominant role in the state or society.

Stone guardian figures at Unified Silla royal tombs continued to be erected approximately from the second-half of the 8SUPth/SUP till the end of the 9SUPth/SUP centuries. This is identified at four tombs of Seong-deok, Won-seong (also known as Suspended Tomb), Heon-deok, and Heung-deok Kings. Stone guardian figures are classified into two different kinds: one pair of guardian wears a sleeveless armor and holds a long sword, while another pair of guardian wears a round-necked coat and holds a club. Judging from the material they hold, it is clear that they are military officials to protect the tombs. For the analytical purpose, this paper designated stone guardian figures 1 and 2 respectively. By comparing the costumes and other visible materials they wear with those of guardian figures of Tang China, this paper attempts to identify the unique costume of Unified Silla. Stone guardian 1 wears an official hat, sleeveless armor on skirt and jacket, and shoes. There are similarities between the costume and associated items that a Sillarian wears and those of military guards’ in Tang China. Yet, in terms of overall appearance, detailed decoration such as combination of pentagon-shaped gold ornament and wing-shaped ornament and the diadem structure of stone guardian’s hat at the tomb of King Heung-deok shows a Silla style variation in official hat. In addition, the costume style of Silla differs from Tang China in sleeveless armor piece, the way in which breast part connects with back part, and belt tied in the back with hanging. Also there is a possibility that the costume of stone guardian 1 in Silla royal tombs corresponds to the court dress of Silla.

The study of early Christian and late ancient Jewish art has been skewed by failure to consider sufficiently the development of either faith’s material culture to the east of the Mediterranean. This chapter addresses some visual and monumental evidence for non-hegemonic Christianity in the Sasanian world and Tang China. It focuses on the ‘Nestorian Monument’, a limestone stele of 781 from Xi’an, with its rich inscriptional and visual evidence for the presentation of Persian Christianity as a minority religion reflecting a subaltern and perhaps resistant identity in the early medieval Chinese world. Very close in form to stelae set up by other new religions in Tang China (notably, forms of Buddhism—likewise imports from the west), it shows how Christianity both adapted to Chinese cultural norms in the period and affirmed its own identity—for example, through the image of the cross and the selective use of Syriac script.

Though various divinatory practices were central to all burial arrangements in Tang China, scholars have paid scant attention to these practices and their social context and effects. This article reconstructs burial divination practices, discusses their ritual and social functions, and examines the social attitudes that influenced and were in turn influenced by them. Focus is on the following questions: why and how did families perform burial divinations? How were the divinatory oracles interpreted, and by whom? Why and to what extent did families subject themselves to these oracles? And what does the practice of burial divinations tell us about the culture of remembrance in Tang China? The article proposes answers to these questions through reading muzhiming (entombed epitaphs) against other transmitted and excavated sources and examining one common, but rarely studied, effect of divination practices on burials: their being rushed or much-delayed. Finally, the article examines a case involving bo...

Kate A. Lingley. Review of "Empire of Style: Silk and Fashion in Tang China" by BuYun Chen, "Transcending Patterns: Silk Road Cultural and Artistic Interactions through Central Asian Textile Images" by Mariachiara Gasparini, and "Mongol Court Dress, Identity Formation, and Global Exchange" by Eiren L. Shea.

入唐 百濟 遺民과 그 후손들의 혼인과 가족 관계 - 高句麗 遺民과의 비교 -

(2005). Childbirth and Maternal Mortality in Tang China (618–907) The Chinese Historical Review: Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 263-286.

ABSTRACTThe Buddhist canon at Chang’an’s Ximing Monastery played a pivotal role in Tang China. Many of the scriptures comprising the canon were translated at Ximing Monastery. This paper reconstructs the outline of the Ximing Canon by examining Daoxuan’s Catalogue of Buddhist Texts of the Great Tang (Da Tang neidian lu), Daoshi’s Pearl Forest of the Dharma Grove (Fayuan zhulin), and other sources. The large number of scriptures in the canon, most in the format of scrolls, presented difficulties for preservation. In this context, the paper examines the history of scripture platforms and scripture cabinets. Finally, this paper considers the route by which copies of texts from Ximing Monastery made their way to Dunhuang and the activities of monks from Ximing Monastery in Dunhuang and elsewhere.Abbreviations: T Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經; see below (Takakusu and Watanabe, 1924–1932) for bibliographical details.