Из степей в школы: рабочие документы храмовой школы времен правления Хубилай-Хана (1260-1294)

Historians of China commonly present the civil service examinations as the axis about which the late imperial polity moved, yet their absence in territories under Mongol control between 1238 and 1315 receives little attention. One notable exception is the Chinese historian Yao Dali 姚大力 , who in the 2011 essay “Yuan chao keju zhidu de xingfei ji qi shehui beijing 元朝科 举制度的行废及其社会背景 (The Enactment and Abandonment of the Yuan Dynasty’s Civil Service Examination System and Its Social Background)” presents a basic narrative of the interruption in the examinations and several hypotheses as to why it occurred. While Yao’s account presents an excellent survey of the situation, its synoptic character invites a more detailed and contextualized consideration of the problem. Regarding the absence of examinations alongside the persistence and even florescence of schools suggests a possible explanation absent from Yao’s analysis: that supporting schools but not examinations served all of the pragmatic Mongol leaders’ purposes, rendering the costly (in several senses) examinations pointless.

In short, imperial edicts and memorials preserved in such Yuan compilations as Yuan dianzhang 元典章 (Compendium of Statutes and Substatutes of the Yuan) and Miaoxue dianli 廟學典禮 (Compendium of Rituals from Temple Schools), and in the modern compilation Yuan dai zouyi jilu 元代奏議集錄 (Collected Yuan Dynasty Memorials), show that the early Yuan state – which for referential convenience will be taken here as roughly if not precisely equivalent to the 1260-1294 reign of the qaγan Qubilai, also called Emperor Shizu 世祖, even though the dynastic name “Yuan” dates to only 1271 – repeatedly received calls from officials for restoring examinations. Despite its interest in ensuring civil rule in its territory, and the ready availability of talented officials to staff the bureaucracy, the Yuan state under Qubilai variously rejected and vacillated upon these calls while simultaneously encouraging and supporting the government “temple school 廟學” system. Following current historiographical consensus on examinations’ purpose – essentially, that they represented a negotiated exchange wherein the state obtained talented administrators and general harmony while the literati obtained the ability to dictate specific ideological dimensions of the examination curriculum – it becomes clear that the Mongols valued talents and harmony but showed less interest in the relatively esoteric ideological points over which the literati clashed and which previous governments had viewed with greater interest. Schools alone would therefore suffice.

The only civil service examinations of the Yeke Mongol Ulus period were held in the wuxu 戊戌 year of Ögödei’s reign (i.e. 1238), at the urging of the famous Khitan statesman and noted advocate for traditional Chinese institutions Yelü Chucai (de Rachewiltz, 1993; Lam, 2008). Contrary to Ming and Qing scholars who touted them as the prequel to 14^th century examinations, Yuan-chu Lam 劉元珠 and Abe Takeo 安部健夫 among others have characterized them as historical isolates. Yao Dali follows Lam and Abe, asserting that they were primarily an intervention by Yelü aimed at reducing corruption, improving the quality of officials, freeing literati from corvée obligations, and filling the critical local office of Evaluator ( 議事官 or 詳議官 ) with civil officials rather than military attachés (Yao Dali, 2011). Regardless of Yelü’s intentions in initiating them or Ögödei’s in permitting them, the Wuxu Examinations would have no immediate sequel: there were no sittings during the reign of Ögödei’s successor Güyük (r. 1246-1248), the regency of Güyük’s widow Oghul Qaimish, or the reign of Möngke (r. 1251-1259). In fact, no further examinations would be held until 1315, when Ayurbarwada (also known as Emperor Renzong 仁宗 ) reinstated them.

Numerous officials proposed examinations in the interim, primarily during the reign of Qubilai. Yao Dali identifies five major proposals: by Shi Tianze 史天澤 (1202-1275) in the first year of the Zhiyuan 至元 reign (1264), by Wang E 王鶚 (1190-1273) in the 9th month of Zhiyuan 4 (1267), by unidentified officials in the Board of Rites 禮部 in Zhiyuan 7-8 (1270-1271), by various Hanlin 翰林 academicians in Zhiyuan 11 (1273), and by the Mongolian official Qorγosun (transliterated as both Helihuosun 和禮霍孫 and Huoluhuosun 火魯火孫 in contemporary documents) in Zhiyuan 21 (1284) (Yao Dali, 2011). To Yao’s count may be added several less formal proposals, some earlier – e.g. a 1250 or 1251 memorial from Liu Bingzhong 劉秉忠 (1216-1274) suggesting a revitalization of local schools and restoration of civil service examinations as a means of solidifying Mongol rule in the territories granted Qubilai by his older brother Möngke (Liu Bingzhong) – and some later – e.g. a memorial from Zhiyuan 29 (1292) by the high-ranking northern Chinese official Wang Yun 王惲 (1227-1304) (Wang Yun a).

Often, the interruption in the examinations is merely overlooked by historians – Conrad Schirokauer’s translation of Ichisada Miyazaki’s short introduction to the examination system, China’s Examination Hell , counts as a prominent example, unproblematically presenting the examination system as an essential feature of Chinese political culture since Song without comment on the Yuan complication (Miyazaki, 1976). Other works note the interruption but dismiss it too quickly, often by consigning Yuan to the category of “conquest dynasty” and thereby disqualifying it from consideration. Benjamin Elman’s voluminous A Cultural History of the Civil Examinations in Late Imperial China is partially guilty of such a culturalist move. Despite focusing on the Ming-Qing examinations, Elman dedicates a chapter to the history of examinations in earlier dynasties; despite Yuan having been the most proximate such dynasty, he spends only nine pages on it, with most of them dealing with the post-1315 examination curriculum and how other conquerors of China – namely the Jurchens – administered their examinations . As for their nearly 80 year cessation, he states simply and without citation that “the Mongols and their se-mu ‘outsiders’ initially never saw any need for ideological control or used education to channel Han ‘insiders’ into acceptable career paths. Civil examinations were at first feared by warriors as the haven of literate foes and quickly eliminated” (Elman, 2000:30). Elman’s first point is unsubstantiated but not – as will be seen – incorrect; his second, besides marking perhaps the first time in history that someone has suggested that a literatus could frighten a Mongol warrior, leaves open the question of why these same warriors – still actively campaigning throughout Qubilai’s reign, if not generally in China – would have repeatedly mulled the possibility of restoring examinations.

While other scholars have noted the interruption – S. Kuczera among them – Yao Dali has made arguably the most robust attempt to explain it. Rejecting the terse and unsatisfying explanations proffered by contemporaneous figures – he notes Wang Jie 王結 ‘s remark that officials were “too busy to hold them ( 未遑舉行 )” (Wang Jie), and Pu Daoyuan 蒲道源 ’s comment that “the proposers were not united so [it] was abandoned ( 議者不一而罷 )” (Pu Daoyuan) – Yao proposes four possible explanations: that Yuan had no pressing need for the civil officials it might recruit through the examinations, having already absorbed many of the Chinese who had served the Jin government; that the examination system had become so corrupt by the end of Song and of Jin that the Mongols did not view it as a credible means of recruiting officials and therefore declined to continue it; that Qubilai’s estrangement from his Confucian advisors over disagreements on fiscal policy – worsened by the Li Tan 李壇 insurrection – was so extreme that he rejected examinations out of spite; and that the gradual institutionalization of promoting clerks into the official ranks progressively hindered advocacy for the examinations (Yao Dali, 2011).

Yao’s explanations arguably give Qubilai and his government too little credit, presuming that personal pique would influence policy and that the unsustainability of the situation would have licensed inaction. The greater 93

problem however is that Yao says nothing of schools. The coupling of examinations and schools has been noted by historians of each in virtually all stages of late imperial Chinese history from Song onward. Among historians of the civil service examinations, Benjamin Elman notes how the “[c]ultural construction of neo-Confucian orthodoxy through the required educational curriculum for examination candidates guaranteed the long-term dominance of neo-Confucianism in intellectual life” (Elman, 1991:8). Thomas H.C. Lee – who has written more regularly in Chinese than in English, though only his English language works receive mention here – exemplifies the historians of education, reiterating in his several works on Chinese educational history the essential and enduring connection between the two. In Government Education and Examinations in Sung China , Lee has written: “Any one who attempts to study Sung education will immediately find that it was intertwinely related to the practice of the civil service examinations by the Sung government, in that an increasingly larger number of non-aristocratic elite children were able to enter the officialdom, thereby enjoying the largest share of the society’s rewards of prestige and privileges.” And, “therefore, the central concerns of a study of Sung education have to be to delineate how the examinations affected the organization of Sung’s state education, how the society at large viewed the purpose of that education and how it prepared its young members for the examinations under such circumstances” (Lee, 1985:ix). More recently, in a separate longitudinal study of Chinese educational history, Lee has asserted that the “rise of civil service examinations effectively made the formal government schools a part of the recruiting mechanism,” and that the centrality of the former facilitated the “complete submission of learning” to the requirements of the examination system (Lee, 2000: 38, 104). As such, the “history of Chinese education cannot be complete without referring to the history of the state’s establishment, funding and control of educational institutions”, and moreover – in a more editorial vein – “after the thirteenth century, the history of education [including here private academies as well as government schools] is basically a history of its subjugation to the destructive influences of the civil service examinations” (Lee, 2000:12-13).

With this historiographical landscape in mind, to say nothing of the primary sources themselves, Yao Dali’s decision to consider examinations in isolation from schools becomes still more troubling, especially insofar as the explanation for the former’s absence may lie with the latter. That is to say, there is abundant evidence that Qubilai – and many others in the Mongol government – saw schools without examinations as sufficient for attaining two of the traditional goals of the examinations as supported by government schools: the abstract one of attaining harmony and civil rather than military rule, and the pragmatic one of training of future officials.

Appreciating how schools might have had such objectives requires first understanding the situation of schools in the early decades of Mongol rule in China. Stereotypes of nomads, perpetuated by late imperial commentators and still to some degree extant in contemporary scholarship, prove singularly inaccurate in this instance: despite having no comparable history of institutional education themselves, the Mongols – or at least, those Mongols wielding the most power within the Mongol ulus – sought to protect and expand government-administered schools through government policy. While the number of complaints concerning these policies’ efficacy may indicate faulty, unsuccessful execution of said policies, the educational landscape in early Yuan was generally a thriving one.

Several types of local “schools” coexisted during the early years of the Yuan dynasty. Setting aside informal private venues and religious institutions, two varieties predominated: “temple schools 廟學 ” and “academies 書院 ”. Broadly speaking the former was “official”, i.e. controlled by and affiliated with the state, and the latter – at least notionally – “private“, i.e. controlled by individuals and independent of the state. Both the institution and the term “temple school” seem to date to the Tang 唐 dynasty, with the earliest known reference occurring in Han Yu 韓愈 ’s Chu Zhou Kongzi miao bei 處州孔子廟碑 (”Inscription for Chu Prefecture’s Confucian Temple”). Before the Tang, Confucian temples and schools were kept separate; beginning with Tang, “Palaces of Learning” 學宮 began to appear alongside buildings dedicated to ritual ceremonies, and during Song 宋 the schools became more commonplace (Hu Wu, 1993). Academies, meanwhile, supplemented government education during Northern Song and began supplanting it in Southern Song, serving – at least nominally – more as refuges for moral introspection than as incubators for bureaucratic ambition. By the end of Qubilai’s reign academies had begun to undergo a process of “officialization” of learning ( 官學化 ) whereby they came under state control and, gradually, became virtually indistinguishable from temple schools (Xu, 2000). Since academies tended to either be outside the scope of government control or virtually indistinguishable from temple schools – the Miaoxue dianli in fact includes regulations pertaining to them – they need not be treated separately.

Temple schools came in several varieties, and were referenced in several not-quite synonymous ways. Wang Liping offers a concise explanation: “Amongst government schools, there is the central government school, that is the School for the Sons of State; there is also the local route, superior prefecture, prefecture, and county schools, namely the local government schools, and because the schools set up Confucian temples, they were also called                             ‘temple                             schools.’

官学中，有中央官学，即国子学； 还有地方的路、府、州、县学校，即 地方官学，因学设孔子庙，故又被称之为 ’ 庙学 ‘” (Wang Liping, 1995). Wang’s implication that the schools preceded the temples may be inaccurate: the Japanese scholar Makino Shūji 牧野修二 proposes that the Confucian temples (variously termed wenmiao 文廟 , xiansheng miao 先聖廟 , Kongzi miao 孔子廟 , xuansheng miao 宣聖廟 , fuzi miao 夫子廟 , wenxuan wang miao 文宣王廟 , etc) served as the spiritual centers of the temple schools, and that the school portion was a mere appendage to it (Hu Wu, 1993; Makino, 1998). Some scholars, including Cheng Fangping 程方平 , have highlighted the temple schools’ ritual functions almost to the exclusion of their educational ones, but 95

others have found little evidence to support such claims (Cheng, 1993; Shen, 2002).

Temple schools founded in Yuan tended to be either replacements for preexisting schools which had been destroyed amidst the violence of the Song-Jin-Yuan transition – being actively destroyed, like the schools in Liquan County 禮泉縣 , Ganzhou Route 贛州路 , and Songxi County 松溪縣 , or destroyed in accidental fires or natural disasters but left ruined due to the pressures of war, like the schools in Hangzhou Route 杭州路 and Wenxi County 聞喜縣 – or new establishments borne of administrative reconfigurations – like the schools in the newly created Wujin County 武進縣 and Shanghai County 上海縣 . Some few temple schools were moved to new, more optimal locations within pre-existing administrative units, such as the school in Dong‘e County 東阿縣 . Funds for the restoration and upkeep of the schools originated variously from land endowments (”school fields 學田 ”), individual donations from local eminences, and – perhaps most commonly – from fundraising drives originated by the local magistrate and drawing the support of local elites. The size and scale of the schools tended to correlate with the hierarchical status of their relevant administrative unit, with the Route schools significantly outclassing the County ones (Hu Wu, 1993).

Temple schools did frequently suffer damage during the Mongol conquest, and particularly during fighting with Jin (Hu Ren, 1994). One inscription from the period states, for instance, that “In the season of the Jin’s turmoil the Central Plain was laid waste, and the temple schools there all turned to ashes. 金季板蕩中原邱墟，所在廟學例為灰燼 “ (Anonymous a, quoted in Wang Liping, 1995:51). The Mongol commanders did however generally seek to avoid damaging educational institutions, and – at least in contemporaries’ telling – to hasten to make repairs after the fighting ended. For example, in Yuan Haowen 元好問 ’s literary collection Yishan xiansheng wenji 遺山先生文集 there appears an inscription commemorating the restoration of the Guanshi temple school; included in it is a brief account of its experience during the conquest: “Since the death and disorder [began], the people’s homes have all been destroyed and the temple school alone survived. In the yiwei year [1235], the Assistant Marshal of the Right Zhao Hou pitied its dilapidation, and restored and mended it. 喪亂以來，民居皆被焚 毀而廟學獨存。 歲乙 未，右副元帥趙侯憫其 頹圮，復為完補之 ” (Yuan Haowen a). Such consideration endured through to the conquest of Southern Song. Yao Sui 姚燧 (1238-1313) wrote in a tomb biography preserved in his Mu’an ji 牧庵集 of how in Xiangyang 襄陽 , the new Mongol-appointed prefect went so far as to tear down a guard tower from the city wall in order to obtain the materials necessary to speedily rebuild the damaged temple school (Yao Sui). Generally, Lao Yanshuan has asserted that the “Mongol conquest of the south exerted little negative impact on the local public schools there” or on academies; he quotes Ren Shilin 任士林 (1253-1309), a headmaster of several early Yuan academies, to further demonstrate the government’s benign disposition: “After Emperor Shih-tsu (Khubilai) unified the entire domain,

[public] schools in prefectures and districts have become bigger and more important. And the authorities have not discouraged persons who wished to establish academies with their own resources” (Lao, 1981:116-17).

Determining precisely how many temple schools operated during the early decades of Mongol rule in China is difficult. The scholar Hu Wu 胡 务 has identified a total of 132, with a large majority of 120 having been founded or re-founded during Qubilai’s reign. As will be seen below, advocates for schools frequently complained that schools existed in name only, with Instructors and other relevant officials collecting salaries without actually engaging in teaching; Hu nonetheless has confidence that the Yuan school system’s breadth was unprecedented in Chinese history (Hu Wu, 1993).

The everyday treatment of schools by Mongol officials must also be noted. Numerous edicts and memorials include admonitions against disrupting Confucian temples and temple schools, beginning early in Qubilai’s initial Zhongtong 中統 reign period (1260-1271). Take for instance “Xiansheng miao suishi chasi saorao anxia 先聖廟 歲時察祀搔擾安下 (Prior Sages’ Temples’ Annual Sacrifices’ Disruption [and] Quartering)”, forbidding government troops and officials from desecrating Confucian temples or academies:

In the 6th month of the 2nd year of the Zhongtong reign [i.e. July 1261], there was respectfully received an imperial edict the gist of which was this:

[At] the Confucian Temple, the state every year offers sacrifices, and the various Confucians on the first of every month makes offerings to the ancestors, and it should permanently commanded that it be cleaned and repaired. Henceforth, we prohibit and constrict the various officials, envoys, and horsemen to not lodge inside the temple, or to assemble and hear legal cases, or to profane it with drinking and feasting, and the foremen and artisans may not build within it, and violators will be punished. Within [our] jurisdiction there are academies, and it is not permitted to order various people to disrupt them, or for envoys to lodge there. Respect this.

統二年六月，欽奉聖旨節該：

先聖廟，國家歲時致祭，諸儒月朔釋奠，宜恒令灑掃修潔。今後禁約 諸官員、使臣、軍馬毋得於廟宇內安下，或聚集理問詞訟，及褻瀆飲宴 ，管工匠官不得於其中營造，違者治罪。管內凡有書院，亦不得令諸人

搔擾，使臣安下。欽此。 (Anonymous b, in Wang Ting, ed., 1992:12)

Concerns for the integrity of temple schools appear in the documentary record again late in the Zhiyuan reign, in two documents included within the Miaoxue dianli from 1288. The first is a short imperial edict, “Jiangnan deng chu xiucai mian chaiyi, miaoxue jin saorao 江淮等處秀才免差役廟學禁搔擾 (Exempting Jianghuai and Other Areas' Talents from the Corvee [and] Forbidding the Disruption of Temple Schools)”, which deals first with the matter of corvée exemption and second with official misuse of school buildings:

On the […]th day of the 11th month of Zhiyuan 25, the emperor issued an edict:

According to the Department of State Affairs' memorial, [in] the matter of the scholars of various places in Jiang-Huai avoiding their various corvée obligations, the memorial is approved. Henceforth those who are in the registers as scholars, [if] they do business they will pay commercial taxes, and [if] they till land they will pay land taxes, and the others in all the corvée obligations will be exempted, and the local officials will steadfastly give them comfort and relief. Moreover it is forbidden for [imperial] envoys to retire for rest in the temple schools, and it is improper to disrupt them. Take this as standard.

至元二十五年十一月日，皇帝聖旨：

據尚書省奏江淮等處秀才免雜泛差役事，准奏。今後在籍秀才，做買 賣納商 稅 ，種田納地

稅 ，其餘一切雜泛差役並行蠲免，所在官司常切存恤。仍禁約使臣人 等毋得於廟學安下，非理搔擾。准此。 (Anonymous c, in Wang Ting, ed., 1992:36)

The second report, from an undetermined date in the same year, references an earlier edict but discusses at greater length ongoing concerns over abuses of schools and attached official positions. Titled “Wenmiao jinyue saorao 文廟禁約搔擾 (Forbidding the Disruption of Confucian Temples)”, it reads:

The Department of State Affairs – on […] day of the […] month of Zhiyuan 25 [1288], there was received [a report] submitted upward by the Bureau of Military Affairs co-signed by the Grand Master for Palace Attendance concerning the affairs of the Bureau of Military Affairs, and it stated:

In Zhiyuan 23 [1283], we respectfully received an imperial edict sending to Jiangnan and such places personnel to seeking highly talented [men], and when they arrived there were Educational Officials and shi who reported, and the various officials and clerks and the various officials and clerks commanding the troops, [of them] there were many in the lu , fu , zhou , and xian schools who had given their lives over to prostitutes’ singing, clamoring about and showing disrespect, [and] all of this had become typical, and there were none who dared to do anything, [though] even the fallen state [i.e. Song] had venerated learning and placed weight on the rituals of the dao . At present there are the newly installed Tanzhou lu Confucian School Instructor Lin Yinglong, Qingyuan lu Confucian School Instructor Wu Zongyan, Jiaxing lu Confucian School Instructor Tang Lin, and also all of them say that at the school buildings at which they are present there are many who as before do not know the law and rituals, and ask to increase the prohibitions [on such behaviors], [as] the various affairs of focused cultivation are the wellspring of solemnifying morals and manners. Because of this [we] check the edict of Zhongtong 2 [1261]:

[There follows a near-verbatim quotation of the original edict].

They made this official request that there be an investigation and implementation. Take this as standard.

This Bureau viewed the details:

It should be that the great and minor officials commanding the troops belonging to this Bureau be placed in charge, and outside of those already otherwise controlled, the rest of the officials should jointly carry out and all report to the Department of State Affairs concerning the details, and consult with the various lu ’s Branch Departments [of State Affairs], and everywhere under their jurisdictions should put up a notice on administering the implementation.

The capital’s Department [of State Affairs]:

Outside of this, jointly carry out and report, and everywhere under its jurisdiction, put up a notice on administering the implementation.

尚書省，至元二十五年月日，據樞密院呈准中奉大夫同簽樞密院事咨 ，照得：

至元二十三年，欽奉聖旨差往江南等處尋訪行藝高上人員，所至時有 教官士人告稱，諸官吏及諸管軍官吏等，多於路、府、州、縣學捨命妓 張樂，喧囂褻慢，習以為常，無敢誰何，甚失國家崇學重道之體。今有 新授潭州路儒學教授林應龍、慶元路儒學教授 吳宗彥、嘉興路儒學教授 唐林 ，亦皆稱所在學舍多有似前不知禮法之人，乞加禁戢，庶得專教養 之事，肅風化之源。以此檢會到中統二年聖旨節文：

[…]

咨請照驗施行。准此。

本院看詳：

應大小管軍官吏隸本院掌管，除已約束外，其餘官吏合行具呈尚書省 照詳，移咨各處行省，遍行所屬，出榜禁治施行。

都省：

除外，合行移咨，遍行所屬，出榜禁治施行。 (Anonymous d, in Wang Ting, ed., 1992: 41)

The survival of such directives – and the persistence of complaints concerning the contemporary condition of schools, made in memorials by Wang Yun among others – has ambiguous implications. In one sense, they may be read as casting doubt on whether the early Yuan truly saw an unprecedented florescence of government education. If many schools existed in name only, with corrupt Instructors 教授 receiving salaries and corvée exemptions without giving lessons and Supervisors of Confucian Schools 儒學提舉司 helping themselves to the lands with which the schools were endowed (i.e. the 學田), they may as well not have existed at all, and the state’s declared interest in supporting schools might well be deemed insincere. In another sense, however, they may be read as indicting the state’s efficacy rather than sincerity: high-level officials at the court, including the emperor, may have genuinely desired schools to operate effectively, but lacked the ability to compel lower-level officials – often Mongol nobles and soldiers without appreciation for or interest in Confucian education – to heed their instructions. Given that the state did unquestionably endow schools with lands and incentivize Confucians to teach in them with corvée exemptions and salaries – actions which came with considerable cost – the latter interpretation seems the more reasonable. In other words, these edicts should be read as proving the seriousness with which the Yuan state, at least at the highest levels, viewed the spread of education. Moreover, with respect to the complaints of officials over schools’ efficacy, the maxim that squeaky wheels get grease seems applicable: if Wang Yun and others wanted to advocate for examinations, or for even more support of schools, there would be rhetorical advantage in proclaiming a crisis rather than saying that things could yet be better. Certainly, as Yu Ji 虞集 (1272-1348) attested in the early 14th century, there were contemporaries who viewed the situation of schools as entirely fine: “In both the state capital and the prefectures and counties there have been established learning, and learning needs temples in order to sacrifice to the prior ages and prior teachers, and schools so that [people] may learn their learning.

自國都郡縣皆建學，學必有廟以祠先聖先師而學所以學其學也 ” (Yu Ji). There seems little reason to seriously question the objective truth of schools’ prosperity in early Yuan.

This prosperity admittedly seems puzzling at first glance. If government schools had, during the Song dynasty, been “intertwinely related” with the examination system as proposed by Thomas Lee, then why would they not only persist but flourish to an unprecedented extent in its absence? One possibility is that they not only served the state’s clearly-articulated goal of achieving Chinese-style civil rule, with all the good cultural practices and customs that went along with it, but moreover were believed – even absent examinations – to be guarantors of a skilled, competent bureaucracy.

Qubilai made clear his interest in achieving civil rule in his edict upon assuming the throne in 1260:

We think that [Our] ancestors established the territory, and put under [their] control the four directions, [and while] their military accomplishments rose in turn, civil rule was greatly lacking, and for more than fifty years it has been like this. In time there is [that which comes] first and [that which comes] after, and in affairs there is [that which is] deferred and [that which is] urgent, [and this is] the world’s great enterprise, and no one emperor or one administration is capable of both. […] Although [I] marched on campaign, I always cherished the idea of love for my fellow men, and provided relief to the masses, and [now] in actuality may become the world’s ruler. […] Ascending the throne and embodying the primordial, [I will] give the people a new beginning.

朕惟祖宗肇造區宇，奄有四方，武功迭興，文治多闕，五十餘年於此 矣。蓋時有先後，事有緩急，天下大業，非一聖一朝所能兼備也。 […] 雖 在征伐之間， 每存仁愛之念 ，博施濟眾，實可為天下主。 […] 建極體元， 與民更始。 ([Qubilai or a representative], 1260).

If Qubilai wanted to convince a literati audience of his interest in civil rule through actions as well as words, he might well have reinstituted examinations, insofar as they were viewed as contributing to it. Some proponents of examinations cited civil rule or its analogues, such as the shi feng 士風 , in their proposals: in his support of Tudan Gonglü’s proposal, for example, Yang Gongyi wrote of how examinations would cause men to “be engaged in practical learning, and then the feng of the shi will still be pure, and the people’s customs will tend to be sincere, and the country will obtain talents. 夫既從事實學，則士風還淳，民俗趨 厚，國家得才矣 ” (Anonymous e, in Song Lian et al: 3842). Chen You wrote somewhat more evocatively of how the hypothetical “harmony [resulting from civil service examinations] is a great change, with governance and transformation constantly progressing, and His Majesty rules without acting yet the world is in order 時雍丕變，政化日新，陛下端拱無為而天下治矣 ” , and of how “His Majesty sincerely wishes to arrange the world in peace like Mount Tai, basing the state on the stability of a great rock 陛下誠欲措天下於泰山之安，基宗社於磐石之固 ” – seemingly clear allusions to natural and civil rather than forceful and military rule (Chen You). Recent historians have articulated similar views: Ichisada Miyazaki, for example, has stressed how the exams “advanced civilians to important posts, while keeping subordinate to them the military officers with their concern for physical power” (Miyazaki 1976:127).

Schools sans examinations were however perceived as capable of achieving the same end, and Qubilai’s Chinese advisors had advocated schools to him in such a way even before he assumed the throne. As recounted by Yao Shu 姚樞 (1203-1280), Zhao Bi 趙璧 (1220-1276) for one exhorted the future emperor to “Repair the schools, respect the classics, display fidelity and filial piety in order to educate talents, enrich customs, and perfect the basis of culture, causing the shi to not look lightly on great works. 修學校，崇經術，旌節孝，以為 育人才、厚風俗、美教化之基，使士不 媮於文華 ” (Zhao Bi).

Others besides the emperor and his intimates saw a similar connection. Yuan Haowen, in the spirit-way inscription for the aforementioned repairer of schools Zhao Hou, begins by noting that before Zhao arrived in the Heshuo 河朔 region, “[In] Heshuo the state used military force, and since Jin had fled south, the affairs of wen [i.e. civil affairs] had been obliterated, and afterward that which students studied was merely riding and hunting. 河朔用武之國，自金朝南駕，文事埽地，後生所習見，唯馳逐射獵之事 。 ” Only after Zhao had restored the local temple schools did the students return to wen and literate civility (Yuan Haowen b). In short, schools civilized in the specific sense of compelling local youths to privilege pursuits better suited to bureaucrats than to soldiers. With respect to culture – that is, to civil rule and the propagation of good customs and morals – schools without examinations seem to have been perfectly adequate in the eyes of early Yuan officials.

The evidence of early Yuan discourse as captured in memorials and edicts also suggests that schools alone might have been seen as sufficient for ensuring a talented bureaucracy. Wang Yun – whose 1292 call for examinations was mentioned above – emphasized this practical dimension in memorials concerning schools. While often a critic of the existing school system, Wang does not seem to have thought that schools need be ineffective, or that they could only function successfully given the presence of an examination system. Take for instance his undated essay “She xuexiao 設學校 (Founding Schools)”, preserved within his collected works:

From olden days, founding schools is not only [about] respecting teachers and respecting teachings, [probably] it is [about] desiring to bring up men of talent, in preparation for official employment. At present, the great Ru and virtuous men, [they] are already elderly and moreover exhausted, and [humble] we of the younger generation, because there is a lack of education, and little hope of pursuing an official career, and moreover without exception no one learns, our Dao is hanging by a thread. If we construct a large building, we must use many materials [if] we are to be capable of succeeding, and what furthermore of the capacious residence that is the rule of the world? At present, although the fu , zhou , xian , and dao have established Educational Officials to discuss texts and lessons, this is only empty words, and none of it has any real effect. The Instructors everywhere, they are truly educational officials. Sponging off [others] and not giving, why do they slack off in researching righteousness and yet teach others? If, just like [instructors at] the medical schools, they were given salaries, and restored official allocations of school lands to provide for livelihood, [then] afterwards [we might] have selected officials' sons and younger brothers and outstanding commoners enter school, [making them] expert in explicating the canons and histories, in order to incline them towards useful practical learning, [and] not in [less than?] three to five years, [if] one locality will only have cultivated five to seven men, then the world might have obtained several hundred men to serve the state's uses, and how couldn't this be great? If after this [we] established civil service examinations, we would particularly need to educate [men] beforehand. If we don't do this, we will see that hundreds of years later, we will not only lack talents worth having, and then propriety, righteousness, honesty, and the sense of shame will be ruined. How might we treat this? Every lu 's medical schools, [schools] should be arranged and implemented just like [them], and it would not result in empty requests for salary, or being purely nominal.

夫自昔設立學校，非唯尊師重道，蓋欲養育人材，以備 內外任使。方 今名儒碩德 ，既老且盡， 晚生後輩，以上乏教育，下無進望，例皆不學 ，而吾道不絕如綫。設若構一大廈，必用眾材可成，况治天下之廣居乎 ？今府、州、縣、道雖設立教官，講書會課，止是虛名，皆無實效。其 隨處教授，名實學官。餬口不給，奚暇治禮義而及人？若與醫學一體給 降俸祿，復官撥學地資贍生理，然後選職官子弟及鄉民之秀異者使之入

學，專以講明經史，以趨有用實學，不三五年間，一處止有成材五七人 ，則天下可得數百人以須國家之用，豈不偉哉。如已後設立科舉，尤須

預先教養。不然，將 見數年之後，非惟無才可取，則禮義廉恥掃地矣。 將何以論治乎？隨路醫學，亦合一體整理施行，不致 虛請俸錢 ，有名無 實。 (Wang Yun b)

While Wang holds out hope in this essay for the restoration of the examinations, he speaks of them in only the conditional sense, and focuses on the secular utility of schools. It seems reasonable to infer that while Wang preferred the selective acuity of the examinations, he perceived that having officials make recommendations or promotions of well-educated clerks would work adequately: if they had been taught properly, matters would not go so far awry.

Wang Yun was far from the only Chinese official to think in these terms: many expressed confidence that even absent a formalized recruitment mechanism such as the examinations, talented men would be produced by schools and then be available for the state’s use. The first of many examples of such a position is glimpsed in a memorial from Zhiyuan 23 (1286) by Cheng Jufu 程鉅夫 (1249-1318), Auxiliary Academician in the [Academy] of Gathered Worthies 集賢直學士 :

I have heard that states in the world require talent for use, and that the flourishing of talents does not arise naturally, [but] all lies with the country's educational diligence, and its failure on the contrary can be verified with reference to past dynasties. [In] the country since the Zhongtong [reign]'s founding of Yuan, officials everywhere have occasionally heard of those who are exceptional and outstanding, and all became this way from the former times' learned old scholars influencing [them]. [These] historical times are already long [ago], and in turn have perished, and recently the morning stars are sparse, without even a few. I do not know, ten years hence, how contemptible people will be. But those who manage the state's great enterprises are tranquil and do not know evil, and see schools as being not an urgent matter, and say that the classics are without usefulness, and do not know that talents' flourishing and falling [or] make preemptive plans regarding it. Once there was an edict on implementing the civil service examinations, to seek excellent talents, and the emperor's intent was not insincere, but foolish men sneakily prevented it, following the old practices and gathering suggestions, which amounted to stopping it. That being so it is not surprising that untalented [men] have been chosen for posts, and that governance is without principle. Today [we] have already come to this; how will it be in the future? I humbly desire that His Majesty should clearly proclaim that officials [should] emphasize the matter of schools and should be careful in selecting Confucian teachers. The capital is especially [important] in building the National University, selecting the period's distinguished personages as their fellow countrymen's role models, giving salaries, granting courtesies, so that impressions everywhere have excitement. Outside [the capital] in the notable 103

cities and large towns, there is a lack of Educational Officials, and not only do they follow common practices [but] they get only mediocre men, [so] we must send court ministers to recommend and select those who might become men of greatness, listing and memorializing [them], and ordering that they have a salary that might nourish them and not cease, granting [them] posts that [they] might cherish the common people and increase [their] excellence, and look on education's abandonment and promotion, and test their achievements. Among the successful candidates there will be those good in both character and scholarship, and we will specially grant them exemption from taxes and corvée obligations, and carry it out in accordance with already-issued edicts. It seems that in looking on all aspects of the country's education, there are many shi who are inspired and tireless, and someday as we get more of them we will be more satisfied, and without looking on the sigh-worthy matters where talent is lacking, the world is fortunate indeed. I prostrate myself to obtain the emperor's judgment.

臣聞國於天地，必需才以為用，而人才之盛，非自盛也，全在國家教 育之勤，其衰也反

是，參之 歷代可考也。 國家自中統建元以來，中外臣僚亦時聞表表偉傑 者，皆自往時故老

宿儒薰陶浸灌而然。 歷時既久 ，以次淪謝，邇來晨星寥寥，無幾何矣。

臣不知更十餘年後，  人物當何如其瑣瑣也。而主國論者恬不知怪，視

學校              為不急，謂詩書為無用，不知人才盛

衰張本於此。蓋嘗有旨行貢舉，求好秀才，上意非不諄切，而妄人輒陰 沮之，應故事而集議，凡幾作輟矣。然則無怪乎選任之非才，政治之不 理也。今已至此，後當若何？臣愚欲      望陛下明詔有司，重

學校之事，慎師儒之選。京師首善之地，尤當興建國學，選一時名流為 國人矜式，優以餼廩，隆以禮貌，庶四方觀感有所興起。外而名都大邑 ，教官有缺，不但循

常例取庸人而已，必使廷臣推擇可以為人表儀者，條具聞奏，令有祿可 養而不匱，職比親民

而加優，視教化之廢興，為考第之殿最。其諸生有經明行修者，特與蠲 免賦役，依已降詔旨

施行。似望國家教育有方，多士鼓舞不倦，他日隨取隨足，無臨事乏材 之嘆，天下幸甚。伏 取聖裁。 (Cheng Jufu)

Cheng notes abortive attempts to restore examinations, and acknowledges that had things turned out otherwise the contemporary situation might be better; strikingly, however, he does not reiterate the call to restore them. Instead, he proceeds to sketch out how the existing school system might, particularly with increased support, rectify an increasing shortage of talented men. Critical for his program is an alternative recruitment strategy: rather than holding civil service examinations, the state might simply be active in identifying talented students and then recommending them for promotion. The parallel with Wang Yun’s memorial calling for the resumption of examinations is striking: while Cheng deploys many of the same talking points concerning the cultivation of talent and the selection of the worthy, he does so in the service of a different end.

Clearly the belief that schools could, even in the absence of examinations, rectify the state’s dearth of talents enjoyed great currency during Qubilai’s reign. While the details of Yuan official recruitment, which as Yao Dali points out relied mainly on promoting clerks, cannot be explored in depth here, it seems probable that the many officials who also elided the details had faith that it would facilitate the flow of talents educated at temple schools into the bureaucracy.

Schools without examinations then seem to have been perceived as fulfilling two of the major goals of the traditional examination system: ensuring civil rule as broadly construed and ensuring the state had a talented bureaucracy. They had most of the strengths of the examinations, save for one – the ability to make fine ideological distinctions through consideration of examination responses by a select few discerning officials. There is not, however, evidence that the Mongols would have cared to exploit such a strength. Peter Bol has written that he is “not sure, in fact, that the Mongols cared one way or the other how literati thought about such matters” as cultural independence; the point seems extendable to finer ideological points too (Bol, 1997).

This lack of concern is perhaps best evidenced by the lack of any significant engagement with ideological matters in state-authored texts. The Miaoxue dian li – a source for several of the edicts and memorials discussed above – is a telling example. Inarguably the most essential compendium pertaining to the operation of local government schools in the early Yuan state, it consists of 80 memorials and proclamations pertaining to education dating from 1237 to 1301, and 57 from Qubilai’s reign (Wang Ting, 1992). In no instance does it discuss in any depth the content of the curriculum to be taught at the schools. Instead, most of its items concern purely operational matters; that is, the proper assignment of school lands 學田 , or modifications to the salaries or posting procedures for Educational Officials. Often there is a transaction implied with the “Confucians” – I.e. the ru ren 儒人 belonging to the ru hu 儒 戶 or “Confucian households” – wherein the Confucians provide the state with educational services as Instructors and receive in return preferential treatment with respect to taxation and corvée obligations (Dardess, 1984).

The staggering silence of the memorials and edicts in the Miaoxue dianli concerning curriculum seems to offer considerable reason to doubt that the Yuan state had a nuanced ideological agenda. While little is known of the Miaoxue dianil’s compilers – the only extant version of the text, preserved in the Qing-dynasty imperial compilation Siku quanshu 四庫全書, derives from the now-lost encyclopedia Yongle da dian 永樂大典, and no information about its author or the circumstances of its original publication survives (Wang Ting, 1992) – it seems reasonable to guess that the texts preserved within it were deemed relevant and significant for the operation and management of temple schools. The inclusion of memorials such as Cheng Jufu’s clamoring for more support of education suggests that this interest in operational and managerial matters was not however exclusive, and that if the various Branch Secretariats and Censorates were in fact engaged in careful selection of texts and canonical interpretations for study, evidence of it might be found.

As such, it seems reasonable to say that the Yuan state cared little about the finer points of ideology. If Qubilai and his officials did not care about the finer points of ideology, it would moreover seem that the examinations’ ideological function – which, as noted before, entailed negotiation with literati and thus some concession of power – would not only do the state no good, but actually take away from its strength. The concession of corvée exemption to Confucians – roughly synonymous here with “literati” – may have been necessary for ensuring the availability of quality teachers at temple schools, but the Yuan state had no reason to give any additional ground to non-state actors.

In short, then, having a robust government education system of temple schools permitted the Yuan state to pursue civil rule and to be confident that talented individuals would be available to fill administrative positions, and identifiable through recommendations. Holding examinations – as proposed repeatedly by officials who often had ideological agendas of their own – might have given the state more ability to rigorously vet candidates’ values, but it felt no need to do so, and likely had little interest in the concessions to literati it would have entailed. From the perspective of the Mongol state with only vaguely defined ideological concerns, examinations would have served no rational purpose.

Works Cited

Abbreviations:

MXDL = Miaoxue dianli 廟學典禮

YDZYJL = Yuan dai zouyi jilu 元代奏議集 錄

Note:

Unless otherwise indicated all Chinese works quoted herein were translated into English by the author.

Anonymous a. ”Da Yuan Guo Jingyao fu Xuansheng Miao ji 大元國京兆府宣聖廟記 (Inscription for the Great State of Yuan’s Jingyao Prefecture’s Xuansheng Temple)”, in Jinshi cuibian weike gao mulu 金石萃編未刻稿目 錄 . Quoted and punctuated in WANG Liping 51.

Anonymous c. “Jiangnan deng chu xiucai mian chaiyi, miaoxue jin saorao 江淮等處秀才免差役廟學禁搔擾 (Exempting Jianghuai and Other Areas' Talents from the Corvee [and] Forbidding the Disruption of Temple Schools)”. In Miaoxue dianli 廟學典禮 (Compendium of Rituals from Temple Schools), Wang Ting 王 颋 ed. (Zhejiang guji chuban she 浙江古籍出版社 , 1992): j. 2 pg. 36.

Anonymous d. “Wenmiao jinyue saorao 文廟禁約搔擾 (Forbidding the Disruption of Confucian Temples)”. In MXDL j. 2 pg. 41.

Anonymous b. “Xiansheng miao suishi chasi saorao anxia 先聖廟 歲時察祀搔擾安下 (Prior Sages’ Temples’ Annual Sacrifices’ Disruption [and] Quartering)”. In MXDL j. 1 pg. 12.

Anonymous e. ”Yang Gongyi 楊恭懿 ”,in SONG Lian 宋濂 et al., Yuan shi 元史 (The Yuan History), j. 164 pg. 3842.

Peter K. Bol, “Examinations and Orthodoxies: 1070 and 1313 Compared”, 46; in Theodore Huters, R. Bin Wong, and Pauline Yu, eds. Culture & State in Chinese History: Conventions, Accommodations, and Critiques . (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997): 29-57.

CHEN You 陳祐 , “San ben shu 三本書 (Three Letters)” 154. In CHEN Dezhi 陳得芝 , QIU Shusen 邱樹森 , and HE Zhaoji 和兆吉 , eds. Yuan dai zouyi jilu 元代奏議集錄 (Collected Yuan Dynasty Memorials). Vol 1 of 2. (Hangzhou 杭州 : Zhejiang guji chubanshe 浙江古籍出版社 , 1998): 147-155.

CHENG Fangping 程方平 , Liao Jin Yuan jiaoyu shi 辽 金元教育史 . (Chongqing 重 庆 : Chongqing University Press 重 庆 出版社 , 1993).

CHENG Jufu 程鉅夫 , “Xuexiao 學校 (Schools)”. In YDZYJL 221-222. A nearly-identical version can be found in MXDL j.2 pg. 27-28.

John W. Dardess, Confucianism and Autocracy: Professional Elites in the Founding of the Ming Dynasty . (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).

Benjamin Elman a, A Cultural History of Civil Examinations in Late Imperial China . (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000).

Benjamin Elman b, “Political, Social, and Cultural Reproduction via Civil Service Examinations in Late Imperial China.” Journal of Asian Studies 50:1 (Feb. 1991): 7-28.

HU Ren 胡仁 , “Yuan dai miaoxue de fazhan guocheng 元代 庙 学的 发 展 过 程 (Yuan Dynasty Temple Schools’ Stages of Development)”, Wenshi zazhi 文史 杂 志 ( Journal of Literature and History ) 5 (1994): 12-13.

HU Wu 胡 务 , “Yuan dai miaoxue de xingjian he fanrong 元代 庙 学的 兴 建和繁荣 (Yuan Dynasty Temple Schools’ Rise and Flourishing)”, in Yuan shi luncong 元史 论丛 vol. 6 (Beijing 北京 : Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe 中国社会科学出版社 , 1993): 118-131.

LAM Yuan-chu, “The Civil Recruitment Chapter in the Yuan History” Monumenta Serica 56 (2008): 293-372; 312-3.

LAO Yan-Shuan, “Southern Chinese Scholars and Educational Institutions in Early Yüan: Some Preliminary Remarks” 111-112. In John D. Langlois, ed. China Under Mongol Rule . (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981): 107-133.

Thomas H. C. Lee a, Government Education and Examinations in Sung China (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1985).

Thomas H. C. Lee b, Education in Traditional China: A History . (Leiden: Brill, 2000).

LIU Bingzhong 劉秉忠 , “Chen shishi suo yi shu 陳時事所宜疏 (Memorial Explaining What Should Be Done in Current Affairs)” 25. In YDZYJL 23-28.

MAKINO Shūji 牧野修二 , “Yuan dai miaoxue he shuyuan de guimo 元代 庙 学和 书 院的 规 模 (The Scope of Yuan Dynasty Temple Schools and Academies)”, trans. Zhao Gang 赵刚 . Qiqihaer shiyuan xuebao 齐齐 哈 尔师 院学 报 4 (1998): 74-79.

Ichisada MIYAZAKI, China’s Examination Hell: The Civil Service Examinations in Imperial China , trans. Conrad Schirokauer (New York: Weatherhill, 1976).

PU Daoyuan 蒲道源 , “Ba qiusu pingzhang shiyuan zhong suo zuoshi 跋秋谷平章試院中所作詩 ”, in Xianju conggao 閑居叢稿 , j. 10.

[Qubilai or a representative], “Huangdi deng baowei zhao 皇帝登寶位詔 (Edict on the Emperor’s Ascending the Throne)”. In Yuan dianzhang 元典章 , eds. CHEN Gaohua 陳高華 , ZHANG Fan 張帆 , LIU Xiao 劉曉 , and DANG Baohai 黨寶海 . 4

vols. Tianjin 天津 : Zhonghua shuju, Tianjin guji chubanshe 中華書局 , 天津古籍出版社 , 2011. Vol. 1, pgs 3-4.

I. de Rachewiltz, “Yeh-lü Ch’u-ts’ai (1189-1243) Yeh-lü Chu (1221-1285)” 148150. In Igor de Rachewiltz, Hok-lam Chan, Hsiao Ch’i-ch’ing and Peter W. Geier, eds, In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yüan Period (1200-1300). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1993; 136-175.

SHEN Wanli 申万里 , “Yuan dai miaoxue kaobian 元代 庙 学考辨 (A Differentiation of Yuan Dynasty Temple Schools)”, Nei Menggu Daxue xuebao (Renwen shehui kexue ban) 内蒙古大学学 报 (人文社会科学版) 34:2 (March 2002): 22-26.

WANG Jie 王結 , “Shusong ting shi gaolue 書松廳事稿略 ”, in Wenzhong ji 文忠集 , j. 10.

WANG Liping 王立平 , “Yuan dai difang guanxue tixi de fazhan gaikuang 元代地方官学体系的 发 展概况 (An Outline of the Development of the Yuan Dynasty Local School System)”, Guyuan shizhuan xuebao 固原 师专 学 报 53:2 (1995): 51-59.

WANG Ting 王 颋 , “Dianxiao mingshuo 點校 說 明 (Explanation of Punctuation and Collation)”. In MXDL 1-4.

WANG Yun 王惲 a, “Shang Shizu Huangdi lun zhengshi shu 上世祖皇帝論政事書 (Letter to Emperor Shizu Discussing Political Affairs ) 204. In YDZYJL 199-210.

WANG Yun 王惲 b, “She xuexiao 設學校 (Founding Schools)”; in WANG Yun 王惲 , Qiujian xiansheng da quan ji 秋澗先生大全集 . Punctuated and reproduced in HONG Jinfu 洪金富 , trans. and ed., Yuan dai taixian wenshu huibian 元代臺憲文書匯編 (Taipei 台北 : Zhongyang yanjiu yuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo 中央研究院歷史語言研究所 , 2003): 368.

XU Zi 徐梓 , Yuandai shuyuan yanjiu 元代 书 院研究 (Beijng 北京 : Shehui kexue wenxian chubanshe 社会科学文献出版社 , 2000).

YAO Sui 姚燧 , “Nanjing lu zongguan Zhang Gong muzhiming 南京路總管張公墓誌銘 (Tomb Biography for Nanjing Route’s Route Commander Zhang Gong)”, in Yao Sui quanji 姚燧全集 (also known as Mu’an ji 牧庵集 ).

YU Ji 虞集 , “Nankang lu Duchang xian chongxiu Ruxue ji 南康路都昌縣重修儒學記 (Record of Nankang Route’s Duchang County Restoring the Confucian School)”, in Daoyuan xue gulu 道園學古錄 , j. 36. Quoted and punctuated in SHEN Wanli 23.

YUAN Haowen 元好問 a, “Dai Guanshi xuesheng xiu miaoxue biji 代冠氏學生修廟學壁記 (Wall Inscription for the Guanshi Students on Repairing the Temple School”, in Yuan Haowen quanji 元好問全集 (aka Yishan xiansheng wenji 遺山先生文集 ), j. 32, pg. 737.

YUAN Haowen 元好問 b, “Qian hu Zhao Hou shendao beiming 千 戶 趙侯神道碑銘 ”, in Yuan Haowen quan ji, j. 29, pg. 683.

ZHAO Bi 趙璧 quoted in YAO Shu 姚樞 , “Lun zhidao ba mu sanshi tiao 論治道八目三十條 (Discussing the Dao of Governance in Eight Sections and Thirty Items)”. In YDZJL 36-37.

Форд Стефен – исследователь истории и языков Восточной Азии, Гарвард.

Ford Stephen – researcher in History and East Asian Languages Harvard University.