Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

To rebuild the empire: Lu Chih (754-805) and his response to the mid-Tang predicament Chiu-Drake, Josephine 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1993_spring_phd_chiu-duke_josephine.pdf [ 18.74MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0086392.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086392-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086392-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086392-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086392-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086392-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086392-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

TO REBUILD THE EMPIRE: LU CHIH (754-805) AND HIS RESPONSE TO THE MID-TANG PREDICAMENT by JOSEPHINE CHIU-DUKE B.Ed., National Taiwan Normal University, 1973 M.Ed., University of Vermont, 1977 M.A., The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1983 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Asian Studies We accept this thesis a conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 1992 © Josephine Chiu-Duke, 1992  In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  (Signature)  Department of  As t\a,h Sta4e!,  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6 (2/88)  OCi l 3,  i  ipz  Lu Chih^  ii  ABSTRACT  TO REBUILD THE EMPIRE: LU CHIH (754-805) AND HIS RESPONSE TO THE MID-T'ANG PREDICAMENT by Josephine Chiu-Duke University of British Columbia October 1992 Supervisors: Dr. Jo-shui Chen & Dr. Daniel Overmyer This study examines Lu Chih's efforts to rebuild the Tang empire toward the end of the eighth century, revises the previous views of Lu Chih as either a pure pragmatist or a conservative moralist, and establishes the significance of his political endeavors in the context of the mid-Tang Confucian revival movement. After a thorough exploration of Lu's life and his family background, this work shows that two complementary principles underlay Lu Chih's approach to government: the principle of righteousness (1) and the principle of expediency (Ch'iian). Lu's application of these principles, especially his interpretation of ch'ilan, is demonstrated by reference to his memorials to emperor Te-tsung and by his political practice. My analysis of Lu's application of these principles leads me to conclude that Lu's approach to government, both moralistic and pragmatic, may be characterized as a Confucian pragmatist approach. Relying upon this approach during the earlier stage of his official life as a Han-lin scholar, Lu Chih is seen to have been instrumental in the restoration of dynastic stability. Lu Chih continued to employ his Confucian pragmatist approach in formulating a number of policies during his tenure as Chief Minister. His earlier advice to the throne as Han-lin scholar is consistently reflected in these policies designed to realize his vision of an ideal Confucian benevolent government. Although all of his proposed policies were intended to meet current needs, their ultimate goal is shown to be the improvement of the public well-being. Lu's commitment to the public good was such  Lu Chih^  iii  that he consciously risked his political life for the sake of his Confucian political convictions. A comparative analysis of Lu Chih's political and social concerns and those of the leading figures of the mid-T'ang Confucian revival reveals many close affinities, and thus establishes Lu Chih's genuine place among them. While he failed to break new conceptual ground for the Confucian revival, his political life alone is seen as a behavior paradigm of the ideal Confucian minister for the mid-Tang Confucian revivalists, and this is precisely Lu's unique contribution to that most significant midT'ang movement.  Lu Chih^  iv  Table of Contents  Abstract^  ii  Table of Contents^  iv  Acknowledgement^  v  Introduction^  1  Chapter One: Lu Chih's Life and Family Background^9 Chapter Two: A Confucian Pragmatist Approach ^ 102 Chapter Three: Lone Pursuit of an Ideal^  167  Chapter Four: Significance in mid-Tang^  262  Epilogue:^  353  Bibliography^  369  Appendix: Glossary^  392  Lu Chih^  v  Acknowledgement  One-half page allows only minimal space for expressing my sincere gratitude to those whom I owe great intellectual debts. I would like to first thank my thesis supervisors: Professor Chen Jo-shui for his penetrating advice and insightful guidance and Professor Daniel Overmyer for his thoughtful comments and helpful suggestions. I also wish to thank Professor Alexander Woodside for his positive support. My further gratitude goes to Professor Lin Yii-sheng for stimulating my interest in Chinese intellectual history in 1980 and for his continuing encouragement; to Professor Yil Ying-shih who without knowing me nonetheless kindly answered my letter and suggested various thesis topics including Lu Chih to me; and to Professor Mao Hankuang for graciously supplying me much needed information about Lu Chih's family background. My friends J. J. Lo, Li Hsiao-ti, Osabe Yoshihiro, Stephen Eskildsen, my dear sisters Li-li and Wei-wei and brother-in-law Tse-hua all helped me to locate valuable materials. My heart-felt thanks to every one of them. I must thank my late father Chiu Shao-ying for his unique way of upbringing. I only wish he could have lived to see the completion of this study. Finally, my inexpressible gratitude goes to Michael for his loving care and joyful companionship.  Lu Chih^  1 Introduction  Lu Chih (754-805), better known by his canonical name of Lu Hsilan-kung, was a significant figure in mid-Tang history. His service as a Han-lin scholar in the early stage of his political life represents another example of the encroachment of imperial personal attendants or advisors upon the power of Tang Chief Ministers. 1 As a Han-lin scholar, Lu Chih played an unusually crucial role at a time when the Tang state was in crisis. His responses toward the social and political problems brought to him by emperor Te-tsung (reigned 779-805) made a contribution to the restoration of Tang stability. Lu's close relationship with the throne and his service in this earlier period of his career led to his rapid rise to the position of Chief Minister at a relatively young age. During his tenure as Chief Minister, he attempted to carry out a series of policies, but his efforts in this stage of his career had limited impact. The breakdown of his close relationship with the throne led to a precipitous fall from power and subsequently to his complete withdrawal from the midTang political stage. Lu Chih's life and his entire political service took shape in the post-An Lu-shan rebellion era. The An Lu-shan rebellion (755-763) was a turning point in the history of the Tang dynasty. It led a unified empire into a state of permanent division, with but a short period of restoration, and also left the Tang territory rampant with chronic militarism throughout the second half of the dynasty. 2 Faced with the catastrophic social and political As is well known, before the Han-lin scholars, some eunuchs had already seriously interfered with the regular operation of the bureaucracy. Emperor Su-tsung's (reigned 756-62) eunuch Li Fu-kuo is the best example. See Ssu-ma Kuang, Tzu-chih t'ungchien (TCTC hereafter), Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 1956, 221: 7073-74 and 222: 7115. For the development of eunuch power in the Tang, see Wang Shou-nan, T'ang-tai huan-kuan chiian-shih chih yen-chiu, Taipei: Cheng-chung shu-chii, 1971. 2 For the An Lu-shan rebellion, see Pulleyblank, The background of the rebellion of An Lu-shan, London: Greenwood Press reprint, 1982. For post-rebellion regional militarism, see C. A. Peterson, "Court and province in mid-and late T'ang," The Cambridge history of China, vol. 3 Sui and T'ang China, 589-906, Part 1 (The Cambridge history hereafter), Cambridge University Press, 1979: 485-560; also see 1  Introduction^  2  changes brought about by the An Lu-shan rebellion, many concerned Tang scholar officials felt compelled to fmd a way to restore their state to its previous order. Their undertakings created a fertile soil from which a most important intellectual movement, the mid-Tang Confucian revival movement, gradually grew into being. The Ho-pei region, where the An Lu-shan rebellion first started, became semiindependent after the Tang court settled the rebellion through a policy of compromise. When emperor Te-tsung attempted to exert central control over the Ho-pei region soon after ascending the throne in 779, the so-called second Ho-pei rebellion resulted and the Tang court was driven into another period of grave crisis. It is in the environment created by the general historical conditions of the post-An Lu-shan rebellion era, and against the specific historical background of the second Ho-pei rebellion that we witness Lu Chih's emergence on the mid-Tang political stage. Lu Chih is not a total stranger to Western students of T'ang dynasty history. As is pointed out elsewhere, some parts of Lu's extant works were translated into French in 1735 and later into German early in the third decade of the twentieth century. 3 By 1960, a small portion of Lu's criticism of the famous two-tax system was also translated for English readers. Despite the fact that E. G. Pulleyblank dealt briefly with Lu's approach to government in an article on mid-Tang intellectual activities published that year, it was only in 1962 when Denis Twitchett published a long essay exclusively concerned with Lu Chih that the first systematic study of Lu in English finally became available. 4 No further Pulleyblank, "The An Lu-shan rebellion and the origins of chronic militarism in late T'ang China," John Curtis Perry and Bardwell L. Smith, eds., Essays on Tang society, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1976: 33-60. 3 Professor Denis Twitchett cites J. B. Du Ha1de, Description de la Chine 1735, pp. 616 ff; S. Balazs, "Beitrage zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte der T'ang-Zeit, Part 3," Mitteilungen des Seminars fur Orientalische Sprachen zu Berlin, XXXVI (1933): 1 41 in his "Lu Chih (754-805) Imperial adviser and court official," (Lu Chih hereafter) in Arthur Wright and Denis Twitchett, ed., Confucian personalities, Stanford University Press, 1962: 84 and 336, notes 1 and 2. 4 For the English translation of Lu Chih's criticism of the two-tax system, see William Theodore de Bary et al., Sources of Chinese tradition, Columbia University Press, 1960: 416-423. For Pulleyblank's essay, see his "Neo-Confucianism and Neo-  Lu Chih^  3  research exclusively concerned with Lu Chih has been published in English during the intervening thirty years. Lu Chih's name is not entirely unfamiliar to the general population of educated modern Chinese either. For example, after the Nationalist government took over from the Japanese invaders in 1945, trials were held in Shanghai of those who had served under the Japanese puppet government in the occupied territories. At one such trial, Lu Chih's 783 suggestion to emperor Te-tsung -- that the throne should adopt a lenient policy toward the rebellious governors and especially toward their subordinate soldiers -- was specifically cited by a military lawyer urging a judge to issue a less severe sentence to a chief collaborator who had served as leader of the Japanese southeastern regional puppet government in 1938. 5 Interest in Lu Chih has continued among Chinese scholars. A number of short articles regarding his political views and his financial policies have been published since the late 1950s in Taiwan and in China after 1980. Two book-length studies of Lu's life and works were also published in 1975 and 1978 in Taipei. 6 Legalism in Tang intellectual life, 755-805," in Arthur F. Wright, ed., The Confucian persuasion, Stanford University Press, 1960: 93-95. Also see Twitchett, "Lu Chih,"  1962: 84-122. Although this study will revise to some extent Twitchett's previous findings on Lu Chih's life, it has benefited greatly from his pioneer essay on Lu Chih, and his contributions will be in evidence throughout. 5 Thus reports a classified document (trial case number 013.11 — 2110) on file in the Bureau of Historiography of the National Defense Ministry in Taipei. The name of the defendant is Liang Hung-chih, and the lawyer's name is Chu Hung-ju. On March 28, 1938, Japanese invaders made Liang Hung-chih their formal leader of the third puppet government at Nanking with jurisdiction over Kiangsu, Chekiang, and Anhwei. See Immanuel C. Y. Hsii, The rise of modern China, reprinted edition, Taipei: Hung-ch'iao shu-tien, 1978: 686. I am deeply grateful to my friend, Ms. J. J. Lo, for sending me this information. Ms. Lo came across this modern reference to Lu Chih while doing research for her Ph.D. thesis from Oxford University on the problem of the loyalty of Chinese intellectual during the Sino-Japanese War period. Due to the nature of this information, no photo-copy machine was available for duplication. Ms. Lo copied this lawyer's defense brief verbatim and sent it to me in a personal communication. 6 In addition to these short Chinese articles, I have also found one article in Japanese which deals with some limited aspects of Lu Chih's life. All these sources will be consulted in the course of this study. The only lengthy studies of Lu Chih's life and works are: Hsieh Wu hsiung, Lu Hsiian kung Chih yen lun chi ch'i wen hsiian, Taipei: Chia-hsin shui-ni kung-ssu, 1975, and Liu Chao-jen, "Lu Hsiian-kung yen-chiu," Shih chien hsiieh pao, vol. 9, 1978: 97-125 and vol. 10, 1979: 1-42. -  -  -  -  -  -  Introduction^  4  While those short Chinese articles undoubtedly enhance our knowledge in relation to some aspects of Lu Chih's approach to government, the limited scope of these essays prohibits an overall investigation of their research subject. The two lengthy studies of Lu Chih are not completely satisfactory either. Although presenting much interesting information, they tend merely to juxtapose and categorize their research materials and do not undertake a critical analysis of Lu's responses to mid-Tang historical conditions. Moreover, they also fail to reconstruct an accurate account of Lu's earlier career and his family background. By comparison, Twitchett's long 1962 essay on Lu Chih stands out as a major critical study. It improves our understanding of Lu Chih's official life by providing an analysis of his responses to mid-Tang historical situations during his two important periods of service at the court. It further leads us to see why a close relationship between Lu Chih and emperor Te-tsung deteriorated the way it did. More importantly, it calls our attention to the fact that Lu Chih was not a conservative Confucian, a view expressed in Pulleyblank's 1960 article, but a professional court official whose primary concern was to solve practical problems confronting the Tang state during the late eighth century. The important contribution of Twitchett's critical study of Lu Chih has been widely recognized, and his essay was translated into Chinese and published in Taipei in 1973. 7 There are still many unresolved problems, however. First of all, since Twitchett's study of Lu Chih is also limited in scope, some aspects of Lu's life and his immediate family remain unclear to us. Secondly, because Twitchett's essay deals with less than half of Lu Chih's responses to mid-T'ang historical conditions, the contributions Lu made to the court during his service as a Han-lin scholar, and his efforts as Chief Minister to carry  7  See Chung-yang yen-chiu-yiian Chung-mei jen-wen lee-hsiieh he-tso wei-yiian-hui, tr. and ed., Chung-kuo li-shih jen-wu lun-chi, Taipei: Chung-shan hsiieh-shu wen-hua tung-shih-hui, 1973: 104-161.  Lu Chih^  5  out a series of policies aimed at rebuilding the Tang empire have still not been given a thorough examination. Thirdly, the breakdown of a relationship as complex as the one between Lu Chih and emperor Te-tsung would seem to have involved more factors than the three given prominence by Twitchett: Lu Chih's outspoken personality, his change of role, and Tetsung's autocratic rule. Lastly, the position Twitchett maintained thirty years ago that Lu Chih was primarily a pragmatist whose orthodox Confucian beliefs were of merely secondary importance seems to have run into a new challenge. This is because David McMullen's recently published book, in which Lu is only a marginal figure, treats him as a conservative Confucian statesman devoid of any appreciation of the need to employ expediency in government.  8  McMullen's view obviously contradicts Twitchett's position, so much so that the exact nature of Lu Chih's approach to government seems persistently to elude our understanding. Furthermore, since the exact nature of Lu Chih's approach to government seems elusive, and since a detailed and thorough examination of Lu's responses to mid-Tang historical conditions is still not available, Lu's political convictions and his political commitment remain unknown to us. As a result, Lu Chih's significance in the mid-Tang is totally undefined. Without satisfactory solutions to the above problems, Lu Chih's political endeavors will remain a tantalizing puzzle to us, and our understanding of a segment of mid-Tang history will continue to be less than adequately clear. From this perspective, it appears imperative to conduct a detailed and thorough study of Lu Chih's life and his responses to mid-Tang historical conditions. Such a study is important because it will not only provide answers to previously unresolved problems, but also engage in a new undertaking to  8  See David McMullen, State and scholars inT'ang China, Cambridge University Press, 1988: 239.  Introduction^  6  retrieve Lu Chih's political convictions and his political ideals, and above all, establish Lu's significance in the mid-Tang. Thus, the following related questions are the main focus of this present study. First, what exactly were Lu Chih's responses to mid-Tang historical conditions, and how did he analyze the needs of his time? In other words, what was Lu's approach to government, and what were the fundamental characteristics of such an approach? Was Lu's approach pragmatic, or was it moralistic, or was it perhaps both moralistic and pragmatic? Second, what basic political convictions and ideals are disclosed in Lu's approach to government; were they related to his political downfall? What are the distinct features of his political convictions and ideals? Do these features qualify him to be considered a conservative Confucian, or a practical statesman, or both, or neither? Third and last, on what basis can Lu Chih's significance in the mid-Tang be established? To provide appropriate answers to these questions, we shall analyze every one of Lu Chih's extant memorials, both those presented to the throne during his service as a Han-lin scholar in the earlier stage of his official life and those presented as Chief Minister in the later stage. His extant memorials will serve throughout as our fundamental sources. The first chapter clarifies some confusions regarding Lu Chih's earlier career, some aspects of his personality and his immediate family. A clear understanding of Lu's life and family background will enable us to examine in a better light his responses to the social and political problems confronting emperor Te-tsung's court. The second chapter attempts both to grasp the exact nature of Lu Chih's approach to government, and to delineate how Lu relied upon his approach to assist emperor Te-tsung to resolve the social and political crisis that occurred during his tenure as a Han-lin scholar. The suggestions which Lu proposed to the throne in this period will be the center of our examination. Twitchett's position that Lu Chih was primarily a pragmatist and McMullen's view that Lu was a conservative Confucian who refused to apply expediency in government leave us  Lu Chih^  7  with two paradigms of polarization. In order to provide a more appropriate picture of Lu Chih and his approach to government, however, it has seemed more fruitful in our reexamination of Lu's approach to transcend any polarization paradigm, and rely upon Lu Chih's own expressed views to lead us to their most logical conclusions. The third chapter highlights Lu Chih's political convictions and his political ideals. By investigating the policies Lu formulated during his tenure as Chief Minister, we attempt to find out whether or not a consistency existed between Lu's approach to government in the earlier stage of his official life and that of the later stage. If Lu continued to apply the same approach to government throughout his tenure as Chief Minister from 792 to 794, this will make it possible for us to demonstrate his political convictions and ideals. Once we demonstrate how Lu Chih's core convictions and political ideals are embodied in his political behavior, this will allow us to see whether he was merely a court official whose concerns revolved simply around doing his professional job and preserving his political power, or whether he represented something different in the sense that he aspired to go beyond his prescribed duty and fulfill some higher goal. In this manner we will be able to produce a more accurate portrait of Lu Chih. In the meantime, since the political convictions and ideals upon which he based his activities during his service as Chief Minister consistently reflect his earlier position, this fact will offer some clues to explain why in the higher position of Chief Minister Lu failed to achieve the success he accomplished during his earlier service as a Han-lin scholar. It will also shed more light on the final breakdown of his close relationship with the throne. Having presented a more complete portrait of Lu Chih, our last major chapter explores Lu's significance in the mid-T'ang. To fulfill this task, Lu Chih's approach to government will be compared with that of several notable court officials before and during his time. This will help to demonstrate by exact examples whether or not Lu Chih displayed some unique qualities as a court official.  Introduction^  8  Moreover, since the most important intellectual movement during Lu's time was the mid-Tang Confucian revival movement, we shall also conduct a comparison between Lu's approach to government and that of the leading figures of the mid-Tang Confucian revival. Finding the similarities and differences between Lu's political convictions and ideals and those of the leading Confucian revivalists will not only help to identify the intellectual camp Lu belongs in, but more importantly, to discover whether or not we can claim a place for him in the most important intellectual movement of his time. The results of this inquiry will ultimately reveal Lu Chih's significance in the mid-Tang. In order to arrive step by step at the final point where Lu Chih's significance gradually unfolds, we have to start from the beginning, that is, with a thorough examination of his life and family background.  Lu Chih^  9  nChapter One: Lu Chih's Life and Family Background  Lu Chih was born in the thirteenth year of the Tien-pao era, the second reign period of emperor Hsiian-tsung (754 A.D.). This was a time when the glory of the T'ang empire had begun to decline despite the existence of a seemingly stable and prosperous facade. One year after his birth the calamitous An Lu-shan rebellion broke out; it destroyed the unity of the empire and consigned this golden age of the Tang to the status of a bygone memory. Although the Tang court managed to suppress the An Lu-shan rebellion in 763, it won its "victory" only by a compromise settlement. Forced to adopt a compromise policy, the Tang court not only pardoned the ex-rebel generals, but also allowed them to be the military governors of Ho-pei where the rebellion initially started. In so doing, the court sowed the seeds of a second Ho-pei rebellion in the early 780s when Lu Chih began his service in the central government. 1 Lu Chih's private life is largely an enigma. This is due to an insufficiency of existing traditional sources. Nevertheless, a close examination of his collected work -- despite their incompleteness and possible bias due to the personal preferences of their chief compiler -will help us reach a new understanding of some aspects of his personality while at the same time elucidating his political life. 2 1 2  On the compromise settlement see C. A. Peterson, "Court and province in mid-and late T'ang," in The Cambridge history, 1979, p. 484. A note on sources:  On the matter of the insufficiency of source materials, see Denis Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 84-87. Although Twitchett does not consider Lu Chih's biography in the New Tang History useful, as I shall demonstrate later, it is the New Tang History, not the other extant sources, which actually provides a very important clue for us to reconstruct Lu Chih's political life. As mentioned already, there were studies which had discussed and translated some parts of Lu Chih's extant works into English, French and German before Twitchett's 1962 study. Meanwhile, since 1962, quite a few short Chinese articles about Lu Chih's economic and political thought and two lengthy studies of Lu's life and works also became available. Moreover, a chronicle study of Lu Chih's life (nien-p'u), was also  Life and Family Background^10 published in Taipei by Yen I-p'ing in 1975. See Yen I-p'ing, Lu Hsiian-kung nien-p'u, Taipei: I-wen, 1975. In addition, as Twitchett mentions, two useful chronicle studies of Lu Chih's life already existed before Yen I-p'ing's book. One is the "Lu Hsilan-kung nien-p'u" composed by the nineteenth-century scholar Ting Yen, it is included in the 1768 Han-yilan chi chu (Collected works of Lu Chih); the other is the "Nien-p'u chi-liieh" appended to the Nien Keng-yao edition of Lu Chih's works reprinted in the Ssu-pu pei-yao (SPPY hereafter) edition. See Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962, p. 337 note 9. Another useful chronicle study was also composed by a nineteenth-century scholar Yang Hsi-min and is entitled Lu Hsiian-kung nien-p'u. It is in the Shih-wu chia nien-p'u ts'ung-shu collection. Compared with the other two Ch'ing dynasty nien-p'u, Yang Hsi-min's study provides more detailed information on Lu Chih's life. However, all these studies, including Yen Ip'ing's most recent nien-p'u, contain misleading information about Lu Chih's immediate family and his career development and should be used with caution. Twitchett gives a detailed description of the various extant editions of the collected works of Lu Chih. However, as he says, there is a discrepancy concerning the total number of chapters contained in Lu Chih's extant works. Ch'Uan Te-yii, Lu Chih's contemporary and probably also a friend, in his Preface (see Ch'ilan T'ang-wen, CTW hereafter, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii reprint, 1982: 493: 11-15) to the Han-yiian chi (Collected works of Lu Chih), describes Lu Chih's collected works as having twenty-four chapters altogether. He writes that they contained ten chapters of edicts, seven of private memorials (tsou-ts'ao), and seven of official memorials (chung-shu tsou-i). The New Tang History, I-wen chih section (Ou-yang Hsiu, et al., ed. Hsin T'ang-shu, HTS hereafter, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 1975, 60: 1616) tells us that there were ten chapters in the Han-yiian chi, and also twelve chapters in the Lu Chih lun-i piao-shu chi. Obviously, these two volumes together would make twenty-two chapters. The Sung dynasty Ch'ung-wen tsung-mu (compiled between 1034 and 1038) (Kuo-hsiieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, ch. 5, pp. 377-78) says there were two chapters in the Lu Chih chih-chi and ten chapters in the Han-yilan chi. The much later Chih-chai shu-lu chieh-t'i (probably compiled in the mid-thirteenth century; Kuo-hsiieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, ch. 22, p. 601) says that there were twenty chapters in the Lu Hsiian-kung tsou-i, which is also entitled Pang-tzu chi; but on another page (ch. 16, p. 448) it says that there were ten chapters in the Han-yiian chi and twelve chapters in the Pang-tzu chi; it combines these two together under the title of Lu Hsiian-kung chi. At the same time, the Chiln-chai tu-shu chih (1151; Kuo-hsiieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, ch. 4A: 363-64) says that there were twelve chapters in the Lu Chih tsou-i. It then mentions that previously there were five chapters in Lu Chih's Pang-tzu chi, three chapters in the 1-lun chi, and ten chapters in the Han-yiian chi. The author of the Tu-shu chih suspects that all these previous works were put together around 1090; the title of the works then became Lu Chih tsou-i. Following the above information, we must agree with Twitchett that the records of Lu Chih's works have become a "bibliographical muddle." However, the Ssu-k'u ch'iian-shu tsung-mu t'i-yao (chi-pu, pieh-chi lei, 3) tells us that the information in the Chiin-chai tushu chih does not match most of the historical bibliographical descriptions. The T'i-yao says that according to other Sung bibliographical records ever since the Southern Sung all of Lu Chih's works had been put together and placed under the general title of Han-yaan chi, a book containing twenty-two chapters. The T'i-yao further informs us that the author of Chiin-chai tu-shu chih must have seen an incomplete edition of Lu Chih's works and thus only listed twelve chapters in Lu Chih tsou-i. Because the Sung scholars also refer to Lu Chih's works as the Lu Hsilan-kung tsou-i, the T'i-yao says, many Ch'ing editions of Lu Chih's works follow this title. Based upon the explanation given by the Ti-yao, it seems clear to us that at least by Southern Sung times there were basically only twenty-two chapters in Lu Chih's collected works -- the Han-yiian chi. It is obvious that this Hanyiian chi contained ten chapters of the pre-Southern Sung Han-yi,ian chi and twelve chapters of Lu Chih's other memorials or edicts with a title unclear to us. This explains  Lu Chih^  11  why almost all the modern editions of Lu Chih's works have twenty-two chapters (ten of edicts, six of private memorials and six of official memorials). The Ssu-pu ts'ung-kan (SPTK hereafter) and SPPY editions apparently also follow the Southern Sung arrangement into twenty-two chapters. Although there are two twenty-four-chapter editions in existence now -- one a late Ming edition by Tang P'in-yin and Ma Yuan, the other a 1768 edition with extensive commentary by Chang P'ei-fang -- as Twitchett points out, the contents of these two editions are identical with the twenty-two chapter Sung edition. When we compare these Ming and Ch'ing editions with the twenty two chapter editions, we discover that their editors completely regrouped Lu Chih's writings into chronological order; there are no new discoveries. Twitchett's comment made almost thirty years ago that the best available edition of Lu Chih's works at that time was the 1768 edition by Chang P'ei-fang still applies to the current situation. This is because, like the SPTK and the SPPY editions, this 1768 edition was also compiled on the basis of a Southern Sung edition. However, unlike the SPTK and the SPPY editions which do not give us the exact date of the Southern Sung edition used by them, the 1768 edition used an edition compiled by a Southern Sung official named Lang Yeh (not Lang Hua as the editor of the 1768 edition wrote and Twitchett followed in his article). Lang Yeh presented his edition of Lu Chih's works to the throne in 1132 (1132 edition hereafter). This 1132 edition, entitled Chu Lu Hsiiankung tsou-i, includes fifteen chapters of Lu Chih's memorials and Lang Yeh's own commentary. It was reprinted in the Shih-wan-chiian lou ts'ung-shu in 1878 and is reprinted again in the Pai-pu ts'ung-shu chi-ch'eng collection. Because the 1768 edition provides the date of the Southern Sung edition (the 1132 edition) which it followed, and moreover, because the 1768 edition preserves not only Sung scholars' comments (though not Lang Yeh's commentary) about Lu Chih's works, but also contains its editor's own commentaries, this edition seems to be preferable. This is why, in this study, I have principally relied upon this 1768 edition. However, I have also compared the 1768 edition with the SPTK and the SPPY editions in case differences appear in the text. In addition, for the sake of comparison, I have also consulted the 1132 edition. The 1768 edition, hard to acquire formerly, is readily available now. In 1982 Taipei's Shih-chie shu-chU published a reprint of this 1768 edition under the title of Han-yaan chi chu (HYCC hereafter) edited by Yang Chia-lo as the sixth volume of the Chung-kuo wen-hsiieh mingchu collection. Lu Chih's work on medicine, Lu-shih chi-yen-fang, his encyclopedic work Pei-chii wen-ye , and his fifteen chapters of Pieh-chi on literary works were all lost after the Sung dynasty. See Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 86 and 337 note 14. As Twitchett mentions, HTS 1-wen chih classes Pei-chii wen-yen with Tu Yu's T'ung-tien and other Hui-yao. It also says that it contained twenty chapters; see HTS, 59: 1563. The Sung dynasty Ch'ungwen tsung-mu (Kuo-hsfieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, ch. 3: 178) and the Chiin-chai tushu chill (Kuo-hstieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, Hou-chih section, ch. 2: 852) agree with this information. The Chiin-chai tu-shu chih further mentions that it had more than 450 sections and was similar to the Po-shih liu-t'ie (compiled by Po Chii-i), but with more literary polish. The Wen-hsien t'ung-k'ao (228: 1828) quotes this passage from Chiin-chai tu-shu chih. However, both Sung shih 1-wen chih and Yii-hai say that it contained thirty chapters instead of twenty chapters. See Sung shih, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chU edition, 207: 5293; Wang Ying-lin, ed., Yii-hai, Taipei: Hua-wen shu-chU, 1967 reprint, ch. 201: 22. Yii-hai informs us that Pei-chii wen-yen put passages of a similar nature from the classics and historical works into different categories; altogether it contained 452 sections. Except for the difference in numbers of chapters, all the above sources agree that Pei-chii wen-yen is a sort of encyclopedic work. It was probably an administrative encyclopedia, as Twitchett points out. For Lu-shih chi-yen-fang, see HTS, 59: 1572; Ch'Uan Te-yU's Preface, in CTW, 493: 15; Shun-tsung shih-lu (SL hereafter), Ts'ung-shu chi-ch'eng edition, Commercial Press, 1936, 4: 16; Wang Ch'in-jo,Ts'e-fu yiian-kuei (hereafter  Life and Family Background^12 Lu Chih's memorials to emperor Te-tsung (reign 779-805) during the two most important stages of his career clearly reveal his "conscious responses to the situations in TFYK), Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii reprint, 1960: 859 19. HTS says this work on medicine contained fifteen chapters, but all the sources agree that there were fifty chapters in Lu-shih chi-yen-fang. It is very likely that fifty chapters is the correct number. For Lu Chih's Pieh-chi on literary work, see Ch'ilan Te-yii's Preface, CTW, 493: 15. According to the HTS 1-wen chih, the chief compiler of Lu Chih's works, the Hanyiian chi, was Wei Ch'u-hou (773-828). Twitchett suggests that since Wei Ch'u-hou was very likely a maternal relative of Lu Chih, his compilation of Lu Chih's collected works might have been biased though he does not specify biased in what manner. Twitchett's suggestion no doubt deserves our attention, but we should also realize that it was quite common for a relative or a friend to do such a compilation in Tang China. It does not follow that their compilation should thus be considered biased. We do not know exactly when Wei compiled the Han-yiian chi, but it may very well have been after 806 and before 818. Wei Ch'u-hou was appointed to compile the Te-tsung shih-lu around 808 when P'ei Chi was Chief Minister. Since he had access to all sorts of historical documents, he could have compiled the Han-yilan chi without much difficulty. During this time he also worked on the Shun-tsung shih-lu until he was demoted to another position in 812. Han Yii (768824), one of the most famous prose writers of the Tang dynasty, took over the compilation in 813. Han Yu completed his version of the Shun-tsung shih-lu in 815. E. G. Pulleyblank has suggested that Han Yii's version of the Shun-tsung shih-lu very likely became the text used by Chliian Te-yii to write his preface to Lu Chih's collected works, sometime before Ch'ilan died in 818. Pulleyblank has further suggested that the present text of the Shun-tsung shih-lu is Wei Ch'u-hou's and not Han Yii's version of the work. Whenever material in the present text of the Shun-tsung shih-lu about Lu Chili differs from Te-yii's preface, we often find Ch'ilan Te-yii's preface agrees with the material contained in the Old T'ang History. According to Pulleyblank this is because the Old T'ang History probably also used Han Yii's version of the Shun-tsung shih-lu as the basic text for Lu Chih's biography. In the early 1980s, Chinese scholars began to debate the authorship of the present Shun-tsung shih-lu. Some scholars' arguments support Pulleyblank's point of view, that is, Wei Ch'u-hou should be the compiler of the extant Shun-tsung shih-lu. Scholars holding a different point of view, however, argue that it was not possible for Wei Ch'u-hou's version of the Shun-tsung shih-lu to be circulated once it was replaced by Han Yil's text of the Shun-tsung shih-lu. Although I find the latter group's argument less convincing than that of their opponents, the controversy obviously remains unsettled. Nevertheless, precisely because it is unsettled, the material about Lu Chih contained in the extant Shun-tsung shih-lu, Chitin Te-yii's Preface, and the Old T'ang History thus becomes a more useful cross-reference for any re-evaluation of Lu Chih's life than we previously thought . On Wei Ch'u-hou's possible connection with Lu Chih, see Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 85 and 337 note 10 and 11; on the authors of different versions of the Shun-tsung shih-lu and the relationship between the Old T'ang History and Ch'iian Te-yii's preface, see E. G. Pulleyblank, "The Shun-tsung shih-lu," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (hereafter BSOAS), 19:2 (1957): 336-44, esp. 340; also see Chang Kuo-kuang, "Chin-pen <Shun-tsung shih-lu> fei Han Yu so tso pien," Wen-hsaeh p'ing-lun ts'ung-k'an, vol. 7 (10/1980): 328-340. For scholars holding opposite opinions, see Chiang Fan, "Chin-pen <Shun-tsung shih-lu> tsoche k'ao-pien," Wen-hsiieh ping-lun ts'ung-k'an, vol. 16 (10/1982): 321-336; Ch'ii Lintung, "Kuan-yii <Shun-tsung shih-lu> to chi-ke wen-t'i," Pei-ching shih-fan ta-hsiieh hsiieh-pao, 1 (1982): 45-53.  Lu Chih^  13  which he finds himself." 3 From them we can detect not only his ideas about how to solve the problems currently confronting the court of emperor Te-tsung, but also his "attitudes" and "propensities of feelings" toward particular events and circumstances. 4 Understanding these personality traits, Lu Chih will no longer appear merely as a "depersonalized political figure," 5 but rather more fully as a political figure with some vivid inner landscapes. Since many early aspects of Lu Chih's official career have not been dealt with accurately, 6 nor has the information about Lu Chih's immediate family ancestors been touched upon at all, it is also imperative to establish a more valid account of Lu Chih's political life and his family background. The examination of family background is essential not only because it generally shapes a person's character, but also because it played a particularly crucial role in determining one's social standing and upward social mobility during the T'ang. In order to determine the position of Lu Chih's family in the T'ang social hierarchy, we begin with a discussion of the Lu lineage. Lu lineage in the Tang social hierarchy  It is well understood that early and middle Tang society, like its predecessors, the Six dynasties and the Sui, was marked by clearly observed social segregation and stratification. An enormous gap certainly existed between commoners (shu-min) and the elite class (shih ta-fu), 7 but within the elite class there were different categorizations to define the place of a  Benjamin Schwartz, "The Intellectual history of China: preliminary reflections," John K. Fairbank ed., Chinese thought and institutions, University of Chicago Press, 1957: 16. 4 Ibid: 17. 5 Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 86. 6 As we shall demonstrate, none of the extant studies of Lu Chih, probably due to the nature and scope of their researches, provide correct information about Lu Chih's early career. 7 Denis Twitchett, "The composition of the Tang ruling class: New evidence from Tunhuang (The Tang ruling class hereafter)," Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett eds., Perspectives on the Tang (Perspectives hereafter), Yale University Press, 1973: 49. 3  Life and Family Background^14 lineage or a clang in that social hierarchy. 9 Generally speaking, most members of the Tang elite class belonged to the category of illustrious provincial lineages, but at the top of the elite class, a very small number of lineages constituted what some modern historians call the " aristocratic families." What made these families aristocratic was their "hereditary high social status, independent of full court control." 10 They were a super elite with national recognition. 11 Most of these aristocratic lineages began to emerge from the early fourth century on when north China was taken over by non-Chinese rulers. Education and culture, economic wealth, local power based upon accumulated landed property and clan solidarity, the practice of marriage exclusivity, and ingrained social respect for birth all amounted to valuable assets for the rise of these aristocratic lineages. Nevertheless, ownership of local property seems to have constituted the chief power base for their survival during dynastic changes. 12 They enjoyed high esteem and great influence I am fully aware of the difference between a "clan" and a "lineage" defined by anthropologists such as Maurice Freedman and Hugh Baker. However, scholars of the Tang dynasty have pointed out that most prominent medieval lineages were so loosely knit that "clan" and "lineage" are thus used interchangeably for the sake of convenience. In this study, I shall refer to Lu Chih's kinship group and subgroups as "Lu lineage" or "Lu clan" despite the fact that we can trace the common ancestor of the major Lu subgroups. Hugh D. R. Baker, Chinese family and kinship, Columbia University Press, 1979: 49 and 68. Maurice Freedman, ed., Family and kinship in Chinese Society, Stanford University Press, 1970: 13-14; Patricia Buckley Ebrey, The aristocratic families of early China: A case study of the Po ling Ts'ui family, Cambridge University Press, 1978: 22; David Johnson, "The last years of a great clan: The Li family of Chao Chiin in late T'ang and early Sung," Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (HJAS hereafter), 37 / 1 (June 1977) : 98; Chen Jo-shui, "The dawn of NeoConfucianism: Liu Tsung-yiian and the intellectual changes in Tang China," PhD dissertation Yale University, 1987: 35, and note 5. I am grateful to Professor Chen Joshui for giving me a copy of his thesis which is now forthcoming from Cambridge University Press. 9 Twitchett, "The T'ang ruling class," Perspectives, 1973: 50. 10 In her perceptive study of the aristocratic families of early imperial China, Patricia Ebrey has shown the distinctive characteristics of these aristocratic families in early imperial China and carefully provided the above quoted definition. See Ebrey, The aristocratic families, 1978: 2 and 10. 11 Twitchett, "The Tang ruling class," 1973: 47-8. 12 Ebrey has demonstrated that there were complex factors at work in the determination of status; throughout time, different factors weighed differently as various dynasties changed. However, she has particularly emphasized that the maintenance of a local geographical base was crucial to the survival of these aristocratic families. See Ebrey, The aristocratic families, 1978: 117 and 28-32. On the other hand, some scholars 8  -  15  Lu Chih^  in society. Their enormous social prestige, moreover, almost always guaranteed them a high rank in the nine-tiered system of recruitment and thus allowed members of these great families to dominate for generations the top positions in government during the Six dynasties. 13 Their participation in government in turn perpetuated their overall socioeconomic power. Consequently, these prominent lineages survived into the Tang despite the rise and fall of dynasties. These aristocratic families were referred to by various terms during the Tang: chiu tsu -  (old clans), shih tsu (scholar official clans), chu hsing (famous names), kuei tsu (noble -  -  -  clans), or ming tsu (illustrious clans). 14 Liu Fang, a mid-eighth century historian and -  genealogist once wrote a list in which he singled out four regionally based groups of aristocratic lineages as the most eminent families in Tang China. 15 Each aristocratic believe that education and culture were the most important factors in the earliest stage of the formation of powerful families at the close of the Western Han dynasty (202 B. C.A. D. 9) and in the early period of the Eastern Han (25-220 A. D.). Once having monopolized education and culture, members of these powerful families naturally controlled access to officialdom and economic wealth. In the process, it becomes difficult to distinguish which factor is the cause and which the effect. As a result, these factors mutually influenced each other and constituted a social cycle. See Yii Yingshih, "Tung-Han cheng-ch'iian chih chien-li yii shih-tsu ta-hsing chih kuan-hsi," in his Chung kuo chih shih chieh ts'eng shih lun (ku tai 'nen), Taipei: Lien ching, 1980: 113-5; Etienne Balazs, "Significant aspects of Chinese society," Arthur F. Wright, ed., Chinese civilization and bureaucracy, Yale University Press, 1964: 6-7. For social economic and political factors, see Yang Lien-sheng, "Tung Han to hao-tsu," Ch'inghua hsaeh pao, 11: 4 (1936): 1007-63, Wang I-t'ung, Wu ch'ao men ti, 2 vols., Taipei reprint, 1973, vol. 1, chs. 3 and 5; Mao Han-kuang, Liang Chin Nan Pei Ch'ao shih tsu cheng chih chih yen chiu, 2 vols., Taipei, 1966, vol. 1, ch. 3, esp.: 63-4., and ch. 7: 230-248; Twitchett, "The T'ang ruling class," 1973: 49. 13 Mao Han-kuang, Ibid., vol. 1, ch. 4; Wang I-t'ung, Ibid., vol., 1, ch. 3; Ebrey, The aristocratic families., 6; Miyazaki Ichisada, Kyahin kanjinhO no kenkya, Kyoto, 1956, ch. 3, esp.: 247. 14 Chen Jo-shui, "The dawn of Neo-Confucianism," 1987: 3; Ch'en Yin-k'o, T'ang tai cheng chih shih shu lun kao (Shu lun kao hereafter), Chung-yang yen-chiu-yiian lishih yii-yen yen-chiu-so chuan-kan, Taipei reprint, n. d., pp. 56-59, also reprinted in Ch'en Yin k'o hsien sheng ch'aan chi, Taipei: Chiu-ssu ch'u-pan, vol. 1, 1977: 225228; Ebrey, The aristocratic families 1978: 3. 15 See HTS, 199: 5676-80; CTW: 372: 7a-1 lb. Liu Fang's classification of aristocratic lineages is an important evidence of what was believed in his own days and has been widely cited by scholars of Tang history. See Twitchett, "The Tang ruling class," 1973: 50-1; Ebrey, The aristocratic families., 1978: 10-11; Chen Jo-shui, "The dawn of Neo-Confucianism," 1987: 4-8. -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  Life and Family Background^16 lineage in these four groups could trace its family roots back to the days of the Six dynasties, but the degree of their power and privilege varied considerably. Geographically speaking, two of these four regional groups were in the north, the Shan-tung (east of the mountains, modern Hopei, Honan and central Shansi) aristocratic families, the most prestigious group of lineages among all the four elite groups, and the so called "Kuan-lung block" to which the T'ang ruling house belonged. The "Kuan-lung group" was formed by an alliance of the Kuan-chung (modern southern Shansi and modern Shensi) and the Tai-pei (modern northern Shansi) aristocratic families. The other two groups held local power in southeast China and were defined as the southern aristocracy. While one of these two southern aristocratic groups consisted of emigre clans, the other constituted the native aristocracy. Lu Chih's family belonged to the Wu chiin (Wu commandery) Lu lineage, one of the the four most prestigious native aristocratic representatives in southeast China. 16 These four aristocratic groups were the cream of T'ang society, according to Liu Fang's thesis. They not only commanded the highest respect from society, but also felt themselves deserving of such respect. However, in the T'ang era, comparatively speaking, due to the suffering and losses inflicted on them by repeated military uprisings in the sixth century, the power and prestige of the southern aristocracy could not rival that of the northern aristocratic groups. In addition, the fact that Ch'ang-an was now the center of cultural and political activities naturally put the southern aristocratic families in an inferior position to compete with the northern aristocracy. Nevertheless, according to Liu Fang, this did not alter their superior social position in the Tang elite class as a whole. In short, Lu Chih's lineage in the southeastern region, though occupying a less prominent position than the northern aristocratic families, actually ranked in the highest level of Tang social structure.  16  For details of these four groups, see references given in the above note.  Lu Chih^  17  Although the presence of powerful aristocratic clans was one of the main characteristics of T'ang social structure, ironically, it was precisely during this era that the bureaucratization of the aristocracy began to take place through the famous examination system (K'o-chii chih-tu). Since it did not bring about genuine "inter-class" social mobility in T'ang China, the impact of the examination system should not be exaggerated. The process of bureaucratization was not completely carried out until near the very end of the dynasty. In the process of being bureaucratized, however, members of the aristocratic clans always had a better chance to enter and to advance in the Tang bureaucracy. 17 In other words, no matter how the Tang aristocracy was transformed, before the T'ang dynasty ended a person's standing in social and political life was always closely related to his family background. Bearing this in mind, we shall first highlight the general history of the Lu lineage and then focus on Lu Chih's family background.  A profile of the Lu lineage  As mentioned above, the Lu lineage of Wu chiin was regarded as a member of the super elite class by the mid-T'ang genealogist Liu Fang. Wu than included the southeast and the northeast areas of modern Kiangsu and Chekiang provinces. Situated at the lower region of the Yangtze River, it constituted one of the most important economic areas of the Tang state, especially after the An Lu-shan rebellion. During the Tang, Wu chiin was also known as Su-chou . Though the T'ang court decided to use Su-chou to replace the old  17  To understand how the examination system worked in the T'ang and why its impact on Tang society should not be overrated, see Denis Twitchett, The birth of the Chinese meritocracy: bureaucrats and examinations in T'ang China, A lecture delivered to the China Society in London on December 17, 1974 and printed by Bendles (Torquay) Ltd.. For the transformation of the T'ang aristocracy, see Denis Twitchett, ed., The Cambridge history, 1979: 21-22 , and Ebrey', The aristocratic families, 1978, esp. her concluding remarks: 118-9.  Life and Family Background^18 Han dynasty name of Wu chiin in 758, 18 both names were used interchangeably throughout the later half of the Tang. Altogether there were seven counties included in Suchou or Wu chiin under Tang rule. 19 Both the New T'ang History genealogy (HTS tsai-hsiang shih-hsi piao) and a preface written in 812 to the re-compiled genealogy of the forty-nine branches by a descendant of the twenty-third generation of a major subgroup, one Lu Shu, 20 agree that the person who initiated the history of the Lu lineage in Wu county (Wu hsien) of Wu chiin was a certain Lu Lie. 21 Although we do not know when this actually took place, one thing seems to be certain: before the Eastern Han (25-220) dynasty emerged, the Lu lineage was already firmly established in Wu hsien of Wu chiin. The History of the Eastern Han (Hou Han shu) unmistakably refers the Lus of Wu chiin as "a prominent surname for generations" (shih wei tsu-hsing). 22  Early in 634, the Lu family already appeared in an imperially approved list of "notable clans" (wang-shih). 23 Even in the late tenth century it was still recognized as one of the  Fan Ch'eng-ta, Wu Chan-chih, 6 vols.,Ts'ung-shu chi-ch'eng ch'u-pien edition, Shanghai: Commercial Press reprint, 1939, vol. 1, ch. 1: 2. 19 Li Chi-fu, Yiian-ho chiin-hsien t'u-chih (YHCHTC hereafter), ten vols., Kuo-hsiieh chi-pen ts'ung-shu edition, Taipei: Commercial Press reprint, 1968, vol. 6, ch. 25: 660 20 This preface to the recompilation of the genealogy of forty-nine Lu branches (812 Preface hereafter) is preserved in a Ch'ing dynasty Lu clan genealogy. See Lu-shih shih-p'u, 24 vols., compiled by Lu I and Lu Sheng-wu in 1745 (Ch'ien-lung shan-tet'ang edition), Columbia University Rare Books Collection, microfilm # 0876. The author of this preface, Lu Shu, was the Surveillance Commissioner (Kuan-ch'a shih) of the Fukien region in 812. This agrees with the information about him contained in HTS. See HTS, 73: 2972. This 812 preface is also preserved in another Ch'ing dynasty Lu clan genealogy, see Lu-shih tsung-p'u, compiled by Lu Chen-chih, 4 vols., Columbia University Rare Books Collection, microfilm # 548; also see Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 87 and 338 note 22. I rely upon Hucker's translations (where available) of all official titles in this study. See Charles 0. Hucker, A dictionary of official titles in imperial China, Stanford University Press, 1985. 21 HTS, 73: 2965 and 812 Preface. 22 Hou-Han shu, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 81: 2682. 23 This list was discovered at Tunhuang and later reprinted by Hsii Kuo-lin in his Tunhuang shih-shih hsieh-ching t7-chi yii Tunhuang tsa-lu, 2 vols., 1937, vol. 2: 154b; also see Twitchett, "Lu Chih," 1962: 87 & Ikeda On, "TOdai no gumbo hy6", TOO gakuhe), 42: 3 (1959): 61. 18  Lu Chih^  19  most illustrious "four surnames" in the southeast region. 24 Apparently, the Lu family must have developed into a very large kinship organization throughout the centuries before the T'ang. According to the New T'ang History genealogy, up to the Eastern Chin dynasty (317420) there existed at least eight branch groups within the Lu clan. 25 By the mid-T'ang, the clan became so large that it actually expanded to forty-nine branches which were acknowledged by the imperial ruling house. Lu Shu's 812 Preface stated plainly that each subgroup of the Lu clan should establish its separate genealogy, otherwise the lineage history might be lost due to demographic expansion. 26 Despite this proliferation of Lu subgroups, only three branches were actually mentioned in the New T'ang History, and that was because they had produced six chief ministers during the T'ang. 27 These three subgroups included the Tan-t'u branch, the T'ai-wei (the Defender in Chief) branch and the Shih-lang (Vice Director) branch which Lu Chih's immediate family belonged to. 28 While Tan-t'u was the name of a county (modern Chenhang in Kiangsu), the other two clan names referred to the official titles assumed by their branch ancestors. In the Pre-Tang era, among these three subgroups only the activities of the T'ai-wei branch have been continuously documented in dynastic histories, 29 and only the Tai-wei Twitchett, Ibid. & Ikeda On, Ibid: 79. See HTS, 73: 2965-2968. 26 See the 812 Preface. 27 See HTS, 73: 2965-2979. 28 Ibid. 29 Records about less recognizable branches also exist in dynastic histories both before and during the Tang. Examples can be found in Lu Kao's biography in Liang shu, and in Lu Chih's biography in Chiu T'ang-shu and HTS. This Lu Chih was a famous scholar of the Spring and autumn annals. His original name was Lu Ch'un, but he later changed his name to Chih to avoid a taboo in the name of emperor Hsien-tsung. I shall hereafter refer to him by his original name of Ch'un to avoid confusion with Lu Chih, our protagonist. Liang shu, Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 1973, 26: 398-99; Liu Hsii, et al. Chiu T'ang-shu (CTS hereafter), Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 1975: 189: 4977-8; HTS, 168: 5127-8. For Lu Ch'un's classical scholarship , see Chang Chitin, "T'an Chao Lu san-chia Ch'un-chiu chih shuo," in Ch'ien Mu hsien-sheng pa-shih sui chi-nien lun-wen-chi, Hongkong: Hsin ya yen-chiu-suo, 1974: 149-59; E. G. 24 25  Life and Family Background^20 branch, with its regional base in Wu hsien of Wu chiin, was considered one of the four most prominent aristocratic lineages in the southeast area. This is largely due to its enormous social prestige and its members' powerful positions in govemment. 3 ° Compared with the Tai-wei branch, information about members of the Tan-fu and Shihlang branches is quite limited prior to the T'ang. 31 Nonetheless, it was precisely in the Tang that members of the Tan-t'u and Shih-lang families began to make names for their lineages. To be sure, the social esteem and powerful influence accumulated for centuries along with its geographically concentrated local base sustained the Lu lineage during the military rebellions and political chaos arising toward the end of Six Dynasties. But a large question still remains: how did it maintain power and continue its reputation for being a member of the national elite in the T'ang, an era when the social and political stage was mainly dominated by the northern aristocracy, and when the imperial rulers attempted to build a strong and effective bureaucracy? To answer these questions, we shall examine how members of the three major Lu branches emerged in T'ang history. Only then can we find out where Lu Chih's immediate family stood in the lineage.  Pulleyblank, "Neo-Confucianism and Neo-Legalism," Arthur F. Wright, ed., The Confucian persuasion, Stanford University Press, 1960: 89-91; David McMullen, State and scholars in Tang China, 1988: 101-103; Inaba Ichirii, "ChiItili ni okeru shinjugaku undo no ichi kosatsu," Chagoku chaseishi kenkya, 1970: 390-396. 30 For the development of the T'ai-wei branch in the pre-Tang era, see Chin shu, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 54: 1467-68; Sung shu, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii edition, 53: 1510; Ho Ch'i-min, "Chung-ku nan-fang men-ti," in his Chung-ku men-ti lun-chi, Taipei: Hsiieh-sheng shu-chii, 1978, ch. 4; Mao Han-kuang, Liang Chin Nanpei-ch'ao shih-tsu, 1966, vol. 1: 140-46; vol. 2: 408, 440, 460, 463, 470, 472, 48283, 494, 502-05, 507, 509-10. 31 Perhaps, the size of these two branches made a difference. According to the available sources, both before and during the Tang, the size of these two subgroups bore no comparison with that of the Tai-wei branch. See HTS, 73: 2966-80; Lin Pao, Yuanho hsing-tsuan (hereafter YliFIT), Ssu-k'u ch'iian-shu chen-pen pieh-chi edition, ch. 10, la-4a.  Lu Chih  ^  21  The Tan-t'u branch  The person who carried the line of the Tan-t'u subgroup into the Tang was Lu Teming (his real name was Yiian-lang, ca. 560-630). Prior to the T'ang, Te-ming's erudition had already won him respect and office in both the Ch'en and Sui dynasties. When emperor T'ang T'ai-tsung, then still Prince of Ch'in, recruited Te-ming to be an Academician of the Institute of Education (or Academy of Literary Study, Chin fu wenhsiieh-kuan hsiieh-shih) in his palace, Lu Te-ming not only had achieved a reputation as a  renowned classical scholar, but was also known for his loyalty in not serving the rebel general Wang Shih-ch'ung. 32 In 624, Lu Te-ming greatly enhanced his reputation as a Confucian scholar in a debate on Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism. 33 He was subsequently promoted to the rank of Erudite of the National University (Kuo-tzu po-shih), and was ennobled as Baron of Wu-hsien (Wu-hsien nan). 34 As far as we know, Lu Te-ming was one of only two members of the entire Lu lineage who served in the governments of the first two Tang emperors. 35 The obvious point is that Lu Te-ming's rise in Tang officialdom relied not so much upon his family background as on his wide prestige as a learned scholar. This, of course, is not to deny the importance For Te-ming's life and his refusal to serve Wang Shih-ch'ung, see CTS, 189: 4944-5; HTS, 198: 5639-40. As for the Wen-hsiieh-kuan, see Fukusawa Sokichi, "Bungakukan gakushi ni tsuite," Kumamoto daigaku kyoiku gakubu kiy6, 1 (1953): 35-41. 33 For Lu Te-ming's scholarship, see David McMullen, State and Scholars in T'ang China, 1988: 33 & 72. For the practice of three teachings debate in the Tang, see Lo Hsiang-lin, "Tang-tai san-chiao chiang-lun k'ao," in his T'ang-tai wen-hua-shih, Taipei: Commercial Press, 1955: 159-76. 34 See CTS, 189: 4945 & HTS, 198: 5639-40. For the conferment of noble status, see CTS, 43: 1821; Tu Yu, T'ung-tien, Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii reprint (1984), ch. 19: 110; Wang Shou-nan, Sui T'ang shih, Taipei: San-min shu-chii, 1986: 412-4; Charles 0. Hucker, 1985: 35. 35 Mao Han-kuang thought Lu Te-ming was the only member who served in the early bureaucracy. See his "Wu chfin Lu-shih," in Tao Hsi-sheng hsien-sheng chiu-chih jung-ch'ing chi-nien lun-wen-chi, Taipei: Shih-huo, 1989: 61. However, there was another Lu Shih-chi who also served during Tai-tsung's reign. See CTS, 188: 4932; HTS, 195: 5584. 32  Life and Family Background^22 of family background. After all, very few common people of undistinguished origin could afford the time and money to be a scholar. 36 Although Lu Te-ming himself never seems to have acquired substantial political power, one of his two sons, Lu Tun-hsin, rose to be Chief Minister from 665 to 666 under emperor Kao-tsung (reign 649-83). 37 Like his father, Lu Tun-hsin was also ennobled as Baron of Chia-hsing county. 38 Though information regarding his administration or his ability as an official hardly exists, the fact that he was promoted to be Chief Minister in 665 nevertheless calls for attention. It is known that by the late months of 660, the court of emperor Kao-tsung was firmly controlled by his favorite consort, empress Wu. 39 In spite of her recent victory in liquidating all her enemies in the top echelons of government, empress Wu still tried to amass all the support she could within the bureaucracy in order to pave the way for a future takeover of the imperial throne 4 0 To promote someone from a southern aristocratic lineage whose immediate family had become more recognizable under Tang rule would, on the one hand, maintain the previous policy of balancing the power of regional aristocratic groups and, on the other hand, cultivate her own power base. 41 From this point of view, it is likely that the elevation of Lu Tun-hsin to the chief ministership was engineered by empress Wu in order to further consolidate her power. The descendants of the Tan-t'u branch continued to serve in the Tang bureaucracy till the end of the dynasty. Most of them occupied either high or middle rank positions. 42 In See Twitchett, Chinese meritocracy, 1974: 24. See Lao Ke & Chao Yiieh, T'ang Shang-shu-sheng lang-kuan shih-chu t'i-ming k'ao (Lang-kuan shih-chu hereafter ), Yiieh-he ching-she ts'ung-shu, Kyoto: Chung-wen ch'u-pan-she reprint, 1978: 64-5; HTS, 61: 1643. 38 HTS, ibid. 39 Denis Twitchett and Howard Wechsler, ""Kao-tsung (reign 649-83) and the empress Wu: the inheritor and the usurper," in The Cambridge history, 1979: 251-55; also see R. W. L. Guisso, Wu Tse-t'ien and the politics of legitimation in T'ang China, Western Washington University, 1978, ch. 3. 40 Ibid. 41 Denis Twitchett, "T'ang ruling class," Perspectives, 1973: 51. 42 HTS, 73: 2967; also see Mao Han-kuang, "Wu chiin Lu-shih," 1989: 61. 36 37  Lu Chih^  23  all, according to the New T'ang History genealogy, there were twenty-one male members in the Tan-t'u branch during the Tang era. Fifteen of that number served in the government; most of their appointments seem to be far away from Wu chiin and concentrated in the metropolitan area. 43 As their active participation in the bureaucracy apparently provided them with more assets to sustain the elite status of their branch in the society, it simultaneously increased their dependence upon the Tang state.  The Tai-wei branch As stated previously, the Tai-wei branch was the largest subgroup within the Lu lineage. During the Tang period alone, it produced one hundred and fourteen male offspring of whom eighty-one served in the government. Moreover, three descendants also rose to be chief ministers." A funeral inscription says that the earliest member of this branch in the Tang was Lu Shan-jen who served as a local official in the early Tang. 45 We do not know how Lu Shan-jen joined the bureaucracy, but his eldest son, Lu Chienchih, was famous for calligraphy, and this talent definitely earned him access to the officialdom. 46 However, the Tai-wei branch does not seem to have restored their powerful pre-T'ang position in the government until Chien Chih's nephew, Lu Yuan-fang (639-701), rose to be Chief Minister during empress Wu's rule (690-705). 47 Lu Yuan-fang entered the bureaucracy through the doctoral examination system. He passed the ming-ching (enlightening the classics) examination and special decree 43 HTS, Ibid. 44 HTS, 73: 2968-78. 45 This tomb inscription  was written during empress Wu's reign (690-705) by the famous scholar official Chang Yiieh to commemorate the Chief Minister Lu Yuan-fang, who died in 701. See CTW, ch. 231, 17. Mao Han-kuang does not include Lu Shan-jen in the first generation of the T'ai-wei branch members who served in Tang officialdom. See his "Wu chiin Lu-shih," 1989: 57. 46 CTS, 88: 2875; HTS, 73: 2968 & 116: 4235. 47 CTS, 88: 2875; HTS,116: 4235; CTW, ch. 231: 17.  Life and Family Background^24 examinations probably around 659. 48 Another early member who also entered the civil service by means of the doctoral examination was Lu Yii-ch'ing. He was Yuan-tang's uncle, and obtained the chin-shih (advanced scholar) degree during emperor Kao-tsung's time.49 The careers of Lu Yilan-fang and Lu Yii-ch'ing shared a similar pattern. To our best knowledge, they were the first two T'ai-wei Lus to pass the doctoral examinations in order to acquire a nominal official status. This not only proves that their scholarship and literary ability reached a certain r