Bosco, Joseph. (2016).

The sacred in urban political protests in

Hong Kong. International Sociology. 31. 10.1177/0268580916645767.

_citation Duara_superscribing-symbols KUANdi

Superscribing Symbols: The Myth of Guandi, Chinese God of

War
Author(s): Prasenjit Duara
Source: The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Nov., 1988),
pp. 778-795
Published by: Association for Asian Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057852
Accessed: 17/12/2010 08:12

Superscrierea simbolurilor: Mitul lui Guandi, Dumnezeul chinez

al războiului
Autor (i): Prasenjit Duara
Sursa: Jurnalul de studii asiatice, vol. 47, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), pp.
778-795
Publicat de: Asociația pentru Studii Asiatice
URL stabil: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057852
Accesat: 17/12/2010 08:12
Utilizarea de către dvs. a arhivei JSTOR indică faptul că sunteți
de acord cu Termenii și condițiile de utilizare ale JSTOR, disponibile
la
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. Termenii
și condițiile de utilizare ale JSTOR prevăd, în parte, că excepția
cazului
ați obținut permisiunea prealabilă, nu puteți descărca o întreagă
problemă a unui jurnal sau mai multe copii ale articolelor și dvs.
pot utiliza conținut în arhiva JSTOR numai pentru uz personal,
necomercial.
Contactați editorul cu privire la utilizarea ulterioară a acestei
lucrări. Informațiile de contact ale editorilor pot fi obținute la
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=afas.
Fiecare copie a oricărei părți a unei transmisii JSTOR trebuie să
conțină aceeași notă de copyright care apare pe ecran sau tipărită
 pagina unei astfel de transmisiuni.
JSTOR este un serviciu non-profit care îi ajută pe cercetători,
cercetători și studenți să descopere, să folosească și să se bazeze pe o
gamă largă de
conținut într-o arhivă digitală de încredere. Folosim tehnologia
informației și instrumentele pentru creșterea productivității și
facilitarea formelor noi
de bursă. Pentru mai multe informații despre JSTOR, vă rugăm să
contactați support@jstor.org.
Asociația pentru Studii Asiatice colaborează cu JSTOR pentru a
digitiza, păstra și extinde accesul la The
Oficial al studiilor asiatice.
http://www.jstor.org
Suprascrierea simbolurilor:
Mitul lui Guandi, C-hinese
zeul razboiului
PRASENJIT DUARA
STUDIILE ISTORICE PRIVIND MOD DE MODIFICARE A
MITURILOR SI a simbolurilor au inceput abia de curand
să apară. Acestea tind să accentueze natura stratificată și
stratificată a miturilor,
fiecare strat reflectând preocupările unei epoci sau a unui anumit
grup. Marina Warner
(1982) a arătat modul în care imaginea lui Joan of Arc a fost
interpretată în mod diferit
Naziștii, naționaliștii și feministele, printre multe altele, și Jacques
Le Goff (1980)
a demonstrat imaginile ecleziastice și populare ale Sfântului
Marcellus din Paris
au venit să se asemene cu celălalt, dar în cele din urmă au rămas
întotdeauna în afară. Lui James Watson
Studiul stimulativ (1985) al lui Tian Hou, sau împărăteasa cerului,
susține că
exterior caracterul simbolic unitar al zeiței Tian Hou ascunse
importante
diferențe în ceea ce credeau diferite grupuri sociale despre ea.
Pionierat așa cum sunt,
 aceste lucrări sunt doar începutul eforturilor de a cerceta relația
extrem de complexă
între schimbarea în domeniul simbolic și schimbarea istorică între
grupurile sociale și
instituții.
Sper să progresăm înțelegerea acestei relații cu un pas înainte
sugerând
că complexitatea sa nu se află atât de mult în natura radicală
discontinuă a
mituri, ci în faptul că miturile sunt simultan continue și
discontinue. eu
explorați această relație examinând mitul lui Guandi printr-un
concept pe care eu
numiți "suprascripția simbolurilor". Guandi (RD 162-220),
cunoscută inițial ca
Guan Yu, înainte de a primi titlul imperial di în 1615, a fost eroul
apoteos
din perioada celor Trei Regate. Această perioadă, care a urmat
declinului
statul imperial Han (209), a fost romanticat în istoria Chinei
ca o epocă a războinicilor eroici și a strategilor artistici care au
dominat bătăliile printre ei
cele trei state succesoare care se luptă pentru putere imperială. De
atunci, mitul lui Guandi
a devenit din ce în ce mai popular într-o varietate de media-
literatură, teatru, oficial și
cultele populare și tradițiile societăților secrete.
Luați în considerare două episoade din viața mitului Guandi, care
sunt separate de mai multe
decât o mie de ani. Una dintre primele povestiri minunate despre
Guan Yu este derivată
de la un templu stele de 820 A.D. ridicate atunci când templul
Yuquan în județul Dangyang
Prasenjit Duara este profesor asistent de istorie la Universitatea
George Mason.
Acest articol reprezintă o dezvoltare substanțială a unui studiu
scurt al mitului Guandi
 se găsește în Duara 1988. Se referă, de asemenea, la probleme
conceptuale privind natura imperială
hegemonie care rămân inchise în carte; ca atare, completează
cartea. Autorul
dorește să-i mulțumească lui Arjun Appadurai, Andrew Char,
Juliette Gregory, Deborah Kaplan, Renato
Rosaldo, Roy Rosenzweig și James Watson pentru comentariile
lor.
Jurnalul de studii asiatice 47, nr. 4 (noiembrie 1988): 778-795.
? 1988 de către Asociația pentru studii asiatice, Inc.
778
MITUL GUANDI, DUMNEZEUL CHINEZ DE RĂZBOI 779
în modern Hubei a fost reconstruită. Aici, în vecinătatea muntelui
Yuquan, Guan
Yu a fost decapitat în timpul luptei lungi pe care a luptat
împotriva dușmanilor stăpânului său,
Liu Bei.
Într-o noapte, când a fost adânc călugărul budist Zhi Yi (AD 538-
97)
meditația sub un copac mare de pe munte, tăcerea a fost brusc
umplută de a
vocea înfloritoare: "Întoarce-mi capul." Când călugărul privi în
sus, văzu fantoma
apariția unei figuri pe care a recunoscut-o drept Guan Yu, spiritul
munților ....................

n.A schimbat a urmat între cele două în care călugărul a reamintit

lui Guan Yu căpitanii victime ale victimelor lui Guan Yu. Adânc
impresionat de logica karmicului, spiritul lui Guan Yu a căutat
instruirea în credința budistă de la ei, a construit o mănăstire pentru el
și a început să păzească muntele. Mai târziu, muncitorii au construit
un templu la Guan Yu unde au oferit sacrificii la începutul noului
sezon (Inoue 1941, nr.148, Harada 1955: 30) .1 În 1914, președintele
Republicii Yuan Shikai a ordonat crearea un templu al eroilor militari
consacrați lui Guandi, Yuefei și a douăzeci și patru de eroi mai mici.
Interiorul templului principal din Beijing, cu stâlpii de lemn magnific
și bogat decorat, a fost impresionant în simplitatea impunătoare a
aranjamentelor sale ceremoniale. Nu exista imagini. Eroii canonizați
au fost reprezentați numai prin comprimatele lor de duhuri. În Ianuarie
1915, comandantul general Yin Chang și comandantul diviziei
ModelArmy au luat ofițerii și soldații lor în templu pentru a-și lua
militarii. Ulterior, ei și-au plecat capul în timp ce depunau un șir de
tablete de lemn care purtau numele de onoare ale celor care luptaseră
pentru națiunea lor (Johnston 1921: 88). Aceste două viziuni ale lui
Guandi, reflectând nevoile diferitelor grupuri sociale, natura
discontinuă a mitului. Primul, viziunea unui cleric nervos care se
învârte de atacurile unui confucian renascentist asupra credinței
budiste ca străină și coruptă încearcă să stabilească unul dintre marii
eroi ai culturii chineze ca un urmaș și protector devotat. Aceasta din
urmă, viziunea armatei republicane, încearcă să creeze noi concepte de
loialitate față de statul națiunii. IsGuandi protectorul credinței budiste
sau un zeu chinez al războiului? Indiferent dacă le vorbim ca concepții
despre lumea spiritului sau ca întrupări ale intereselor lumii, cele două
viziuni par să aibă foarte puțin în comun. Dar un mit poate fi într-
adevăr atât de discontinuu radical? În cazul în care un mit reprezintă
sensuri radicale discontinue, dacă simbolurile sale sunt urmărite de
anumite grupuri numai pentru propriile lor scopuri, cum poate
continua să dăruiască legitimitatea atât de răspândită în cultură? La o
examinare mai atentă, cele două viziuni ale aceleiași figuri au cel
puțin două caracteristici comune: apoteozizarea unui erou și rolul său
de gardian. Această comunitate nu este aproape accidentală sau
nesemnificativă. Aceasta dă mitul puterea sa legitimativă și dă
grupurilor istorice un sentiment de identitate pe măsură ce suferă
schimbări. Ceea ce avem este o vedere a mitului și a simbolurilor sale
culturale, ca fiind simultan continuu și discontinuu. Pentru a fi sigur,
miezul continuu al mitului nu este static și este însuși susceptibil de a
se schimba. Unele elemente ale mitului pot fi făcute. Dar, spre
deosebire de multe alte forme de schimbare socială, schimbarea mitică
și simbolică are tendința de a "suprascrie" povestea miracolului
original cu câteva detalii din versiunea din secolul al XIV-lea
conținută în Sanguozhi yanyi de Luo Guanzhong (1961, cap. 77: 709-
10). Deși există diferențe între contul de stele și unul de către Luo cu
privire la perioada și identitatea călugărului, împrumuturile mele de la
laterversiune nu afectează mesajul central al povestirii din stele.
Diferențele dintre cele două sunt discutate de Harada (1955: 30). 780
PRASENJIT DUARA nu este radical discontinuu; mai degrabă,
schimbarea în acest domeniu are loc într-un mod care susține și este
susținut de un context istoric dens. În acest fel, simbolurile culturale
sunt capabile să acorde continuitate la un anumit nivel la schimbarea
grupurilor sociale și a intereselor, chiar dacă simbolurile însele suferă
transformări. Această modalitate specifică de simbolicvoluție este cea
pe care o numesc superscripția simbolurilor. După Walter Burkert
(1979: 23), putem defini mitul ca fiind un tradițional, cu referință
secundară, parțială la ceva de importanță colectivă.2 Procesul în care
diferite grupuri istorice scriu sau descriu prin alte practici culturale,
versiunea proprie a unei povestiri sau mituri existente încorporează
interesele lor sau stabilește "charte sociale" în sensul folosit de
Malinowski. În acest proces, versiunile existente nu sunt complet
șterse. Mai degrabă, imaginile și secvențele comune celor mai multe
versiuni ale mitului sunt păstrate, dar prin adăugarea sau
"redescoperirea" unor noi elemente sau prin acordarea unor elemente
existente o anumită înclinație, noua interpretare este pusă în practică.
Chiar dacă noua interpretare ar trebui să devină dominantă, versiunile
anterioare nu dispar, ci vin în schimb într-o nouă relație cu ea,
deoarece propriile statuturi și roluri din interiorul care ar putea fi
numite "arena interpretativă" a mitului vin să fie negociate și
redefinite. prezența unei arene plină de viață, în care versiunile rivale
se derulează, se negociează și se concurează pentru poziție. În acest
proces, unele dintre semnificațiile derivate de la ..................
mitul se pierde în mod desigur, însă, prin însăși natura sa,
superscripția nu notează alte versiuni; cel mult se dorește
reconfigurarea arenei, încercând astfel să-și stabilească propria
dominare față de ceilalți. În acest sens, este diferit de cele mai multe
otherarenas de contestare, în cazul în care victoria este absolută sau
potențial absolută. Obliterarea interpretărilor rivale ale unui mit se
învârte în mod automat, deoarece o suprascripție depinde de
rezonanțele simbolice din arenă pentru eficacitatea sa. La fel ca un
cuvânt în poezie, puterea lui din multe asociații semi-ascunse, un mit
în orice moment reprezintă palimpsest de sensuri stratificate din care
versiunea suprascriptibilă atrage forța. Mitul Guandi în istorie Ceea ce
este cel mai frapant cu privire la varietatea uimitoare de interpretări
ale Guandimyth este că povestea originală este una foarte simplă.
Biografia lui Guan Yu apare în Sanguozhi (Istoria celor trei regate),
scrisă de Chen Shou despre șaizeci de ani după moartea lui Guan Yu
(Chen 1973, 36: 939-42). Chen Shou se referă la locul de naștere al lui
Guan Yu din Xiezhou, Shanxi, și numerele sale diferite. El scrie
despre prietenia și devotamentul lui Guan Yu cu Liu Bei din casa
regală a Hanului ulterior. Împreună cu măcelarulZhang Fei, cei doi
prieteni au luat celebrul "jurământ în piersicul de pomi" legat de
protecția celuilalt până la moarte. Tot mai târziu, Guan Yu a devenit
general și agungor al unei provincii. Chiar dacă a fost ispitit de
dușmanul stăpânului său, CaoCao, cu un marquisat, Guan Yu a rămas
credincios în jurământul lui. În 220 de ani, el a fost capturat de către
inamic și a fost ucis. Centerele referințe ale lui Shou la Guandi nu sunt
complet complementare. Există referințe la vanitatea lui, la excesul de
încredere și la ignoranța cu privire la aspectele strategiei (Yang1981:
68). Cu toate acestea, aceste fapte rareori par a fi afectat viitoarea
carieră a lui Guandimyth. De-a lungul secolelor, această poveste de
bază a fost elaborată și utilizarea lui Guan Yu, elemente constitutive
ale unui mit care conferă acestui sentiment de semnificație a
colectivităților, sunt simbolurile sale, care pot fi incluse în anumite
imagini, evenimente sau eventsequences. aceste elemente. MITUL
GUANDI, DUMNEZEUL CHINEZĂ AL RĂZBOIULUI, a crescut
dincolo de măsură în povestirea și drama. În afară de binecunoscutul
său ca zeu al loialității, el devine zeul bogăției, zeul literaturii, zeul
protector al templelor, zeul patron al actorilor, societățile secrete și
multe altele. Cel mai vechi templu dedicat lui Guan Yu este Templul
Yuquan din DangyangCounty din Hubei, unde se spune că a fost ucis.
Acest templu a fost înființat în anul 713 și a fost atașat la mănăstirea
budistă de pe muntele Yuquan. În următorii două sute de ani, anumite
povestiri minunate au devenit asociate cu templul GuanYu din Yuquan
și atunci când politicile anti-budiste ale Tangului târziu au dispărut,
rolul său de protector chinez al templelor budiste (în locul devasilor
indieni) sa răspândit rapid imperiul (Inoue 1941, nr.148). Astfel,
budismul a devenit sinic. În prezent, în Taiwan, în ciuda statutului său
înălțat, Guandi continuesto păzește templele budiste ca un zeu al ușii
(Weller 1987: 164). Apelând la varianta arătată înfrumusețată a celei
mai vechi povestiri minune, continuarea clerului budist susține că
Guandi rămâne un protector hotărât și devotat al credinței
(Johnston1921: 61). Se poate face o pauză pentru a lua în considerare
direcția adevărată a procesului de aculturație: dacă budiștii îl
convertesc pe Guan Yu, sau chiar îi transformă într-un mod mai
autentic în chineză? stabilită de secolul al IX-lea (Inoue 1941, nr.148).
Nu trebuie să luăm mult timp pentru templele taoiste, de asemenea, să-
l adoptăm drept zeul lor protector; și în timpul cântecului (960-1279),
revendicarea taoistă asupra lui Guan Yu a fost suprascrisă în calitatea
sa de protector. În Xiezhou din Shanxi, unde sa născut Guan Yu, există
o faimoasă numită Salt Lake. În templu Song a fost creat un templu
Daoist lui Guan Yu la SaltLake. Potrivit mitului fondator, un lac de
templu al legendarului Împărat Galben a fost construit inițial. Cu toate
acestea, curând după aceea, un demon care sa dovedit a fi Chi You,
lider al triburilor Miao învins de Împăratul Galben, a început să-și
întărească zona. Maestrul Daoist Zhang a fost instruit de curtea
imperială să găsească o cale de a pune capăt acestei profanări a
onoarei imperiale. Maestrul a invocat asistența lui Guan Yu, care a
trimis soldații din umbra (yin) să lupte și să-i învingă pe voi. Templul
a fost întemeiat pentru a mulțumi lui Guan Yu și a comemora
evenimentul (Inoue 1941, nr.2: 248; Johnston 1921: 56). Inee Ichii
(1941, nr.2: 250) consideră că îndumnezeirea lui Guan Yu ca zeoistă
comunicate prin elaborarea acestei povestiri în piesele din perioada
Yuan (1279-1368). Desigur, mitul fondator al lui Guan Yutemple de la
Salt Lake are toate ingredientele unui mit legiuitor taoist: atrage un
element potențial semnificativ în povestea lui Gu ..............

un Yu - locul său de naștere - și se combină cu geografia sacră și

istoria antică a Chinei; cu acest context, identifică curtea imperială ca
patron al taoștilor care au învins cu succes spiritul lui Guan Yu pentru
a restabili onoarea imperială. Inoue, de asemenea, asociază rolul lui
Guan Yu ca zeu al bogăției, cu patronajul său de către taoși, care sunt
faimoși pentru preocuparea lor cu alchimia. Este bine cunoscut faptul
că răspândirea închinării lui Guan Yu ca zeitate populară dincolo de
limitele religiei sectare a fost comunicată romanele vernaculare și
piese de teatru ale tranziției Song-Yuan, în special Sanguozhi pinghua
și povestea Sanguozhi yanyi ("Povestea celor trei regate") de Luo
Guanzhong. În aceste imagini, slăbiciunile muritoare ale lui Guan Yu
văzute în Indicele lui Chen Shou dispare fără prea multă urmă și, fără
îndoială, datorită faptului că imaginea divină a lui Guan Yu a fost
hrănită în conștiința populară (Yang 1981; Huang 1968: 12-14). Dar
aceste media populare reflectă, de asemenea, evoluțiile sociale largi,
de la Cântarea care a promovat răspândirea lui Guan Yu ca o divinitate
printre comercianți, grupuri profesionale, comunități rurale și societăți
secrete. Huang Huajie leagă popularitatea crescândă a lui Guan Yu în
Ming (1368- 1644) și Qing (1644-1911) față de marile schimbări
socio-economice ale epocii, care, desigur, au permis popularizării
mass-mediei populare. Întrucât economia rurală a devenit din ce în ce
mai comercială, comunitățile autohtone de origine rusă au tendința de
a se dezintegra. În locul lor, așezările au ajuns să fie compuse din
grupuri de rude neînrudite, comercianți pentru care tovarășul devenise
un mod de viață, și popoare marginale fără o comunitate, cum ar fi
vagabonzi și bandiți. Nici unul dintre aceste grupuri noi nu a reușit să
folosească obligațiuni ale comunității kinshipor sau să țină împreună
așezările. Ca un simbol al loialității și tutelei, imaginea lui Guan Yu a
inspirat o etică a încrederii și a camaraderiei de a ține împreună "o
societate a străinilor" (Huang 1968: 100, 122, 227-29). Astfel, anumite
elemente ale mitului, a dezvoltat până acum materiale comune pentru
diverse grupuri; dar fiecare grup, de asemenea, suprascrie imaginea lui
Guan Yuto care se potrivește cu circumstanțele sale specifice. Pentru
comunitățile rurale, imaginea unui protestat de încredere a templelor a
dat naștere în mod natural protecției comunităților și, eventual, celor
celor vindecători și furnizorilor. Li Jinghan, în studiul său masiv al lui
DingCounty, a scris că oamenii din comunitățile rurale l-au închinat
lui Guan Yu să "caute avere și să evite dezastrul" (1933: 432). Pentru
comercianți, care se ocupă acum de regiuni îndepărtate, necunoscute și
neprotejate, Guan Yu a inspirat mai întâi încrederea și loialitatea
(pentru a contracta) și, treptat, a adus însăși sursa bogăției. Întorcându-
se din nou la un exemplu din județul Ding, atunci când comercianții au
fost întrebați de ce i-au închinat lui Guan Yu, ei au răspuns că au
făcut-o, deoarece Guarr Yu nu era altul decât Caishen, zeul bogăției
(Huang 1968: 229). societățile secrete, jurământul de loialitate pe care
GuanYu la susținut a câștigat o importanță de neegalat. Toate riturile și
ceremoniile dintre Triaj, de exemplu, inclusiv cele petrecute la
inițierea recruților și pedepsirea trădătorilor, au avut loc înaintea
altarelor lui Guan Yu și a fondatorilor societății secrete (Yang 1967:
64). Ca și budiștii și Superscripțiile daoiste, interpretările nonsectare
ale lui Guan Yu nu erau construcții aleatorii. Ei au construit nu numai
elemente originale ale mitului, ci și unul pe altul. Astfel, miezul
comun a fost el însuși un fenomen care evoluează; elemente care nu
au fost găsite în nici o interpretare, cum ar fi slăbiciunile muritoare ale
lui Guan Yu în descrierea originală a lui Chen Shou, au căzut în mod
natural. Dar, în mod obișnuit, un accent special de interpretare nu a
eliminat alte versiuni. Într-adevăr, le-a atras atenția: prestigiul zeului
însuși a rezultat din ce în ce mai mult din dovezile urmăririi sale
spirituale de atâtea grupuri pentru o perioadă atât de lungă, deoarece o
superscripție depinde de rezonanțele simbolice ale imaginii în cultură.
vorbit doar de grupurile sociale fără mijloacele instrumentale de a-și
imită imaginea asupra altora. Ce s-ar întâmpla cu arena interpretativă
atunci când un grup aparte puternic, cum ar fi statul imperial, a căutat
să domine simbolul Guan Yu cu toată greutatea aparatului său politic?
Mitul Guandi și lucrarea Imperiului de StatValerie Hansen despre
canonizarea cântărilor de zeități a stabilit apropierea dintre dăruirea
oficială a unui titlu pe o divinitate și înflorirea acestuia ca cult
apopular. Recunoașterea nesistematică până acum a zeităților locale de
către statul care a fost standardizată în Cânt ca titluri a fost acordată,
iar zeii au fost aduse în registrul local al sacrificiilor. Funcționarii,
elitele și oamenii obișnuiți au crezut că aceste titluri au îmbunătățit de
fapt puterile divine ale zeităților, iar grupurile locale adesea l-au
eliberat și s-au sinucis cu oficialii pentru a obține recunoașterea pentru
zei gods ................ (Hansen1987: cap.3). Implicarea statului imperial
cu cultul Guandi a reflectat acest proces; recunoașterea oficială a fost
încurajată de popularitatea cultului, care la rândul său a răspândit în
continuare faima zeului. Dar mai important, eforturile statului au
rămas în modul de superscriere. Statul nu a putut și, în majoritatea
cazurilor, nu a căutat nici măcar să ștergă versiunile locale ale zeilor;
mai degrabă, a încercat să-și descopere puterea simbolică chiar și
atunci când și-a stabilit dominația asupra lor. Așa că vedem statul
imperial din Cântare, pe care îl purtăm pe Guan Yu cu titluri succesive
mai mari și mai glorioase. În timpul tranziției de la nord spre Songul
de Sud, el se ridică de la statutul unui zeu cu un titlu ducal (gong) la
unul cu un principiu domnesc (wang), reflectând probabil necesitatea
cântecului de asistență divină pentru a se descurca împotriva presiunii
crescânde a atacurilor la nord (Inoue 1941, nr.2: 245). Sub Mongolii
(1279-1368), el îl înlocuiește pe Jiang Taigong ca pe un ofițer de
război (Ruhlmann 1960: 174), iar până în 1615 i se atribuie titlul
imperial și este declarat Guandi, suporterul cerului și protector al
imperiului (Inoue1941 , este clar că toate dinastiile de la Cântare până
la Qing au căutat să suprascrizeze imaginile lui Guandi și, astfel, să-și
potrivească simbolismul pentru scopurile sale, dar în mod deliberat
sau nu, aceste dinastii anterioare au promovat, de fapt, închinarea lui
Guandi în diferitele sale aspecte și a încurajat diferitele interpretări.
Acest lucru a fost cazul chiar și în timpul Mingului, bine cunoscut
pentru tendințele absolutiste. Ming la venerat pe Guandi ca pe zeul
războiului în templul Baima de la Beijing, care a devenit templul
oficial cel mai înalt Guandi. Templele oficiale ale lui Guandiwere au
fost, de asemenea, stabilite la site-urile de luptă, în special în timpul
războaielor coreene din Ming târziu (Inoue 1941, nr.2: 259). Ming a
făcut, de asemenea, contribuții substanțiale la Guandishrina din
județul Dangyang la numai câțiva kilometri est de templul budist
original. Templul original de pe muntele Yuquan, responsabil cu cultul
lui Guandi ca zeu al templelor, a fost supus unei revigorări sub
mongoli , care a favorizat buddhismul. Prin patronajul acestui site,
statul Ming a atras puterea povestilor minune asociate cu templul și
zona - site-ul presupus de martyrdom al lui Guandi - chiar și atunci
când la onorat în stilul oficial. Mai mult, în timp ce era scrisă o
superscripție oficială, guvernul Ming continua să promoveze și alte
aspecte ale cultului. De exemplu, a patronat un alt templu din zona
Beijingului, numit Yuecheng, unde Guan Yu a fost venerat ca un zeu al
bogăției, un cult care sa răspândit rapid în această perioadă. Într-
adevăr, a devenit atât de important că atunci când a primit imperialul
în 1615, Guan Yu din acest templu a fost atribuit (Huang 1968: 138-
41, Inoue 1941, nr.2: 249, 253, 257) . Având în vedere preocuparea
statului chinezesc imperial cu stabilirea unui monopolist al canalelor
de comunicare cu lumea spiritului, nu este deloc surprinzător că ar
dori să controleze mitul înfloritor Guandi. Dar statul Ming a căutat să-
și asigure controlul, nu prin eliminarea mitului acelor simboluri care
nu au susținut direct versiunea proprie a lui Guandi ca un războinic
loial autorității statului; ea a căutat, mai degrabă, să-și asume diferitele
aspecte ale lui Guan Yu în cadrul patronajului imperial și astfel să fie
patronul patronilor. În acest fel, eforturile sale au contribuit la
numeroasele imagini ale lui Guandi găsite în imaginația populară până
în secolul al XX-lea: un herowho a fost un protector și, de asemenea,
un furnizor și un războinic care era loial pentru constituirea autorității,
dar și pentru jurământul său. Superscrierea Qing a mitului Guandi a
fost distinctiv parțial pentru că era mai sistematică și parțial pentru că
a fost orchestrată cu schimbări instituționale.3 Există controverse cu
privire la data la care a fost conferit titlul imperial. Cu toate acestea,
putem fi destul de siguri că a avut loc în ultima perioadă Ming (Inoue
1941, nr.149). După cum au făcut predecesorii lor, Qing a promovat
Guandi la statute tot mai înalte în cultul oficial. În 1853, în timpul
răzvrătirii Taiping, închinarea sa a fost ridicată la același nivel în
sacrificiile oficiale (sidian) ca și cea a lui Confucius (Qingshi 1961,
juan85: 1070). Punctul înalt al procesului de superscripție a fost
compilarea hishagiografiei, Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji (o colecție
completă a scrierilor și ilustrațiilor referitoare la faptele sfinte din
Guandi, abreviată ca GSTQ), ceea ce a reprezentat un efort masiv
pentru confucianizarea lui Guandi. Această compilație a fost publicată
prima dată în 1693 și reeditată de patru ori în Qing. Au existat
elemente în povestea vieții lui Guandi, care ar fi putut fi văzută în mod
dubios de ortodoxia confuciană. Nu numai că era foarte puțin cunoscut
despre trecutul lui și despre viața lui timpurie, dar romantismul
vernacular al celor Trei Regate și-a jucat, de asemenea, înregistrarea
sa ca pe un legiuitor - un om înșelător de drept, pentru a fi sigur, cine a
ucis o exploatativă magie .....................

ci un răufăcător (Roberts 1976: 7). Au existat și alte ambiguități

cu privire la loialitatea față de autoritatea constituită: există un episod
în care el îi permite lui Cao Cao, arcașul domnitorului pe care la
servit, să scape pentru ca Cao Cao să poată continua să amenințe
statul. Mai mult decât atât, răspândirea închinării sale ca zeu al
bogăției și ca zeu patron al diverselor interese secționale nu a fost,
probabil, deosebit de convingătoare față de modul confucian de a privi
eroii ei. Ocazia compilării din 1693 a fost dată de presupusa
descoperire a genealogiei lui Guandi printre unele cărămizi într-un puț
în locul lui de naștere din Xiezhou. Din cauza originilor sale obscure,
unul dintre proiecte a fost să-l înrădăcineze cu fermitate ca un
respectabil practician de pietate filială. A patra prefață a textului
începe cu o exegeză literară complementaritatea valorilor loialității și
evlaviei filială. Autorul scrie: "Iti relocalizez pietatea filială că devine
loialitate. De asemenea, se spune: dacă căutați loiali sonsseek la poarta
fiului filial" (GSTQ, 4 intro). După înregistrarea evenimentelor din
viața lui Guandi, care îi dezvăluie clar loialitatea, autorul se plânge că,
până la descoperirea genealogiei, nu exista o modalitate reală de a
verifica originea lui Guandi sau dacă el era într-adevăr filială.
Descoperirea genealogiei dezvăluie cum înțelege Guandideeply marile
principii ale Analelor de primăvară și de toamnă ... finețea sa, care stă
în rai, trebuie în mod necesar să poată uita bunăvoința și grația
strămoșilor săi. El își amintește aceste virtuți ca să le transmită
generațiilor mai târzii. Astfel, inima sa de filialitate pură este mai mare
decât loialitatea și neprihănirea, care sunt doar o singură viață (GSTQ
4th intro.) În 1725, trei generații ale strămoșilor săi au fost decernate
rangului ducal sacrificii i-au fost comandate de două ori pe an pe tot
parcursul templului Guandi oficial în imperiu (Daqing lichao shilu
[17251 1937, juan 31: 3a). Alte pasaje vorbesc despre stăpânirea
clasicilor confuciani: "Oamenii au curaj și nu au știut despre
cunoștințele sale despre principiul 1. Guandiliked să citească Analele
de primăvară și de toamnă Când la călare, un singur mâner liber va
ține întotdeauna un volum "(GSTQ 2d intro.). Într-adevăr, lucrarea
atribuie loialitatea sa înțelegerii înțelesului subtil al Annalelor. Spre
deosebire de Sima Qian, care reprezintă idealul științific, Guandi este
reprezentat idealul activistului, înțeleptul confucian care "protejează
principiile și perfecționează exercitarea puterii" (shoujing daquan;
GSTQ, intro 3d). În cele din urmă, divinitatea sa este legată de măreția
imperiului: "Divinitatea lui Guandi [ling] stă în rai. Sacrifică pentru el
în templere ținută pe un plan înalt pentru a-și manifesta demnitatea
minunată. a lungul perioadei lungi de pace în imperiu, în care merită
să protejeze statul și să adăpostească poporul. neobservate în societate
dacă nu ar fi însoțite și de schimbări instituționale. Aceste schimbări,
puse în aplicare în 1725, au fost o piesă cu o organizare administrativă
masivă realizată de împăratul Yongzheng pentru a spori puterea
statului imperial. temple pentru a Guandi inevery capitala județ, cel
mai bine dotat a fost selectat ca templul oficial Guandi (adesea
cunoscut sub numele de Wumiao, sau templul culturii militare) de
către autoritățile locale, un unde ar fi trebuit să se facă în mod regulat
sacrificii lui Guandi și strămoșilor săi. Aceste temple au fost apoi
aduse sub comanda celui mai înalt templu Guandi de salvare oficială,
templul Baima din capitală (Daqing lichao shilu [17251 1937, juan 31:
3a). Această structură a fost modelată pe ierarhia templelor confuciene
(Wenmiao sau Templeof Cultură civilă), prin care statul imperial
încorporează literaturii într-un sistem oficial de reverență sancționat
oficial. Așa cum a subliniat Stephan Feuchtwang (1977: 584),
templele oficiale ale orașelor erau pentru uzul oficial exclusiv; acestea
erau locuri în care populația oficială și neoficială s-ar putea amesteca.
În timp ce în timpul închinării oficiale a lui Confucius, templele
Guandi frecventau confuciantemples (care adesea includeau o imagine
a zeului literar, Wen Chang), frecventate de membrii grupului, de
negustori și de alții, (Feuchtwang1977: 585). Într-adevăr, Feuchtwang
observă că în Taiwan și în sud-estul Chinei "comercianții de a-și
transforma averea în statut și de a se muta în clasa literei ar contribui
la construirea templelor oficiale ... Un exemplu al acestei întreprinderi
de îmbunătățire a feței - chiar mai bună decât clădirea a templelor
către Kwan-ti [Guandil și Ma-tsu [Tian Houl, care erau populare în
toate clasele populației, au construit temple dedicate lui Confucius și
Kuan-ti, numiți adesea Wen-wu miao și adesea întemeiată în legătură
cu înființarea unei instituții de învățământ privat "(1977: 584).
Imaginea lui Guandi a dezvoltat o asociere distinctă cu cultura
confuciană și imperială, și prin ierarhie a temei oficiale că ortodoxia
și-a comunicat imaginea suprascriptibilă. Suprascripția imperială a lui
Guandi nu a rămas, bineînțeles, o creștere a popularității sale în alte
roluri, mai ales ca un zeu al bogăției sau ca protector al comunităților
locale. superiorii imperiali - elitele - atît de gentriță, cît și de
nongentrie - pentru a-și arăta loialitatea față de imaginea oficială și
astfel schimbările au reușit să schimbe considerabil aria interpretativă
a mitului Guandi. Mitul acum a fost dominat de imagini oficiale, în
timp ce alte imagini au fost obligate să se reorienteze și să redefine
statutul lor în raport cu ele. Pentru a ilustra punctul meu de vedere, mă
voi referi la dovezi din partea societății locale China în nordul Qing și
în republica. Mitul Guandi în cultura populară Multe din materialele
pentru argumentele din această secțiune sunt preluate din înregistrările
etnografice și epigrafice din câmpia din China de Nord a secolului al
XIX-lea și al XX-lea.4 Guandi a fost probabil cel mai popular zeu
venerate în satele lui4 Cele mai importante dintre acestea sunt
anchetele rurale japoneze în șase volume, cunoscute sub numele de
ChugokunJson kankJ chJsa, desfășurate între 1940 și 1942 și publicate
pentru prima dată în 1952. Aici vor fi denumite CN urmate de numărul
volumului. Alte surse includ sondajele savantului japonez Yamamoto
Bin, care a colectat folclate și legende din întreaga regiune
NorthChina în anii 1930 și 1940, găsite în Chigoku no minkan denshJ
(1976). Vezi, de asemenea, Li 1933 și Gamble 1968. 786 PRASENJIT
DUARANorth China. Numeroasele temple și stelaje create pentru el
în satele chestionate sunt mărturii elocvente despre acest fapt. Deși
popularitatea lui Guandi nu poate fi atribuită exclusiv patronajului
imperial, imaginea lui Guandi găsită în sate reflectă statutul ridicat pe
care la ocupat ca urmare a onoarelor imperiale. În afară de Guandi,
zeul pământesc, Tudi (divinitatea tutelară a satelor), a fost probabil cel
mai des întâlnit zeu din satele chineze nordice (Smith 1899: 140). Dar
Tudi era văzut în mod diferit de Guandi. Următorul schimb a fost
înregistrat în județul Shunyi, Hebei: Q: Care este diferența dintre
templul Tudi și templul Guandi? A: Tudi este preocupat de un singur
sat, dar Guandi este preocupat nu numai de sat, ci și de afacerile
întreaga națiune.Q: Nu outsideri [waicunrenj închinare la templul
Tudi? A: Ei nu. Chiar dacă ei nu fac nimic, vor veni din ea. Q: Ce zici
de Guandi? O: Oamenii pot veni de oriunde. Oricine poate vizita un
templu Guandi oriunde. (CN, 1: 213) În satul Wu's Shop din apropiere
de Beijing, un informator a fost întrebat: Q: Ce este mai bun, templul
Tudi sau templul Guandi A: Templul Guandi este superior. Tudi se
ocupă de afacerile acestui sat. Dar Guandi este o ființă minunată și nu
se ocupă doar de treburile acestui sat. Heis nu este doar un zeu al
acestui sat. (CN, 5: 431) Cei doi zei au reprezentat simboluri distinct
contrastante. Tudi a fost văzut ca un subordonat care se ocupa în mod
unic de afacerile unui anumit sat, în vreme ce Guandiwas era văzută
ca o mare ființă, simbolică a națiunii și demnă de a fi venerată de
oricine. Cultele religioase bazate pe comunitate din Qing târziu, cum
ar fi cele din Guandi și Tudi, au fost legate indirect de cultul de stat și
de religia oficială și au format o parte importantă a infrastructurii
întinse a otomodiei populare. Tutelarydeities precum Tudi și
Chenghuang (zeul orașului) au fost asimilate în religia oficială în
modul birocratic. După cum se știe bine, Tudi a simbolizat pământul
ca o entitate discretă, dar a fost văzut ca un subaltern al lui
Chenghuang, care a fost responsabil față de o zeitate mai înaltă. Cu
alte cuvinte, acești dumnezei erau birocrați celesti cu jurisdicții
distincte parohiale. Guandi, pe de altă parte, pare să fi purtat o relație
cu ordinea birocratică similară cu aceea a împăratului, cu care a venit
să împartă titlul di. El a depășit o anumită identitate teritorială și a
simbolizat relația satului cu exteriorul - cu o categorie mai largă ca
statul, imperiul și cultura națională. Guandi nu era singurul dumnezeu
care simboliza aceste identități mai largi; el a împărtășit acest statut cu
Tian Hou, sau împărăteasa cerului, în preajerile de coastă de sud-est.
Dar în restul Chinei, nu cunosc nici un zeu care a fost mai identificat
ca fiind reprezentant al culturii chineze decât Guandi. Iar această
identificare a lui Guandi cu ordinele mai extinse ale civilizației
chineze a atras o elită ascendentă mobilă la interpretarea oficială a lui
Guandi și ia permis să fie instalată cu succes în societatea rurală.
Stelajele dedicate lui Guandi în multe sate prin perioada Qing arată că
..................
toate interpretările posibile ale lui Guandi - ca un zeu al bogăției,
ca protector al templelor, ca erou loial față de jurământul lui - cel pe
care l-am găsit cel mai adesea era acela care la investit cu virtuți
confuciene și loialitate pentru a stabili autoritatea. MITUL GUANDI,
DUMNEZEUL CHINEZ DE RĂZBOI Au existat cinci stelae dedicate
lui Guandi în satul Ditch Water din LichengCounty, Shandong. Textele
stelajurilor au fost uneori redactate de către deținătorii de diplome din
scaunul județean și, uneori, de către deținătorii de grad inferior din sat.
Altestelae nu menționează niciun titlu de gentry și pur și simplu a
înregistrat un text scurt cu numele conducătorilor satului și al
contribuabililor. Cea mai timpurie, datată în perioada Kangxi, începe:
se spune că în timpuri străvechi s-au făcut sacrificii și s-au construit
temple pentru cei care au adus meritul (gongul) dinastiei, care au fost
virtuoși în mijlocul poporului, care au glorificat onoarea și integritate
[mingjie) ... Într-un timp când deasupra și dedesubt au fost confundate
și principiile corecte (gangji) s-au dezintegrat, a apărut o persoană
specială care a fost loială și a acționat în mod adecvat pentru a-și
păstra viața (erjie buju yiming bugou4. El a făcut pe slujitorii răi și pe
fiii tâlharilor să știe poziția lor. El a primit o mare responsabilitate de a
vedea că nu au confundat neprihănirea (dayi) și că au creat o
tulburare ... El [Guandi] nu a acceptat nici un fiu de la banditul Cao
Cao și a rămas loial în casa lui Han. Acest lucru nu merită dinastia! El
a eliminat pericolul turbionelor galbene și a executat soldații
dezordonați ... Nu este aceasta o virtute pentru oameni! A căutat o mie
de frate pentru fratele său. În cele din urmă, el a murit deathof un
martir [shashen cheng ren). Nu este aceasta să aducă slavă la onoare și
integritate? (CN, 4: 390) Deși valorile ortodoxiei confuciene sunt
scrise peste tot în acest text, nicăieri nu există nici o demonstrație
explicită a loialității față de dinastia Qing. Într-adevăr, în măsura în
care este vorba despre o stea veche Qing, referirile la loialismul lui
Han ar putea fi chiar concepute ca o declarație de opoziție față de
manchetul străin. Dar la începutul secolului al XIX-lea, efectele
superscripției Qing sunt peste tot evidente. Un text compus dintr-un
titular de grad inferior al satului din 1819 și purtând numele
conducătorilor satului citește astfel: Un capitol din Cartea istoriei
spune: Există momente când un om bun se teme că nu sunt suficiente
zile și când un om rău este de asemenea teamă că nu există suficiente
zile ". Astfel știm calea evlavioasă (shendao) stabilește învățături
religioase pentru a aduce fericirea omului bun și pentru a face rău
omului rău. Acum, domnul Guansheng din Shanxi disprețuiește cele
nouă rele cu severitate severă. La a cincisprezecea zi a celei de-a noua
luni din 1813, White Lotus a invadat incinta capitalei, iar curtea
imperiala a fost pusa in pericol. În foarte puțin timp, binecuvântarea
armatelor, cu strălucirea puterilor sale divine, ia împins pe
WhiteLotus. El le-a făcut să se supună legii și să-i execute pe fiecare
dintre ei ... Liderii satului nostru și alții și-au salvat posesiunile umile
și au adunat niște bani pentru a construi un nou templu și o nouă
imagine (CN, 4: 391 ) Apariția presupusă a lui Guandi din partea
forțelor imperiale în timpul răzvrătirii WhiteLotus din 1813 a fost
ceva pe care împăratul Jiaqing l-a publicat (Naquin 1976: 338-39), iar
dăruirea Qing a unui titlu pe Guandi după ce a avut loc în 1815 a fost
fără îndoială legată de rolul său în revoltă (Inoue 1941, nr.2: 266).
Poate că promovarea imaginii imperiale a lui Guandi în societatea
locală a fost legată de acest eveniment; în orice caz, stelajele din
această și alte sate din timpul domniei lui Jiaqing (1796-1820) sunt
pline de trimiteri la onorurile Qing din Guandi (CN, 4: 391; CN, 1:
192; CN, 6: 151-52). Guandi ar fi trebuit, de fapt, să însemne pentru
țăranii obișnuiți, Qingstate-ul a reușit să suprascrie imaginea lui
Guandi până la sate - o realizare remarcabilă pentru un stat premodern
într-o vastă societate agrară. Ea ar putea ajunge în inimile acestei
societăți deoarece a reușit să creeze un sistem simbolic care să
găzduiască aspirațiile elităi rurale. Cultul Guandi a exemplificat
această cazare perfect. Conducerea locală în societatea rurală a fost
dezvăluită de patronajul de elită al zeităților populare și de gestionarea
ceremoniilor templului. Prin patronajul imaginii multi-vocale a lui
Guandi - în clădirea, repararea și gestionarea templelor - de exemplu -
aceste elite au reușit să articuleze aspirațiile lor de conducere în
societate și, în același timp, să se identifice cu un set de simboluri care
au fost prestigioase și pan-chineze în domeniu (Duara 1988: capitolul
5). Imaginea confuciană a lui Guandi perpetuată de elitele statale și
rurale ca apărătorul imperiului și instituțiile sale nu au înlocuit
celelalte imagini ale lui. Este clar că nici elitele, nici statul nu au putut
să potrivească pe deplin simbolul popular al mitului Guandi. Nici
superscria lor nu ar fi fost

both
..............................

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of

JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's
Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an
entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal,
non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this
work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=afas.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the
same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers,
and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information
technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.
 Association for Asian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Asian Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
Superscribing Symbols:
The Myth of Guandi, C-hinese
God of War
PRASENJIT DUARA
H ISTORICAL STUDIES OF HOW MYTHS and symbols
change have only recently begun
to emerge. They tend to stress the layered and historically
stratified nature of myths,
each stratum reflecting the concerns of an epoch or a particular
group. Marina Warner
(1982) has shown how the image of Joan of Arc has been
differently interpreted by
Nazis, nationalists, and feminists, among many others, and
Jacques Le Goff (1980)
has demonstrated how ecclesiastical and popular images of Saint
Marcellus of Paris
came to resemble each other but ultimately always remained
apart. James Watson's
stimulating study (1985) of Tian Hou, or the empress of heaven,
argues that the
outwardly unitary symbolic character of the goddess Tian Hou
concealed important
differences in what various social groups believed about her.
Pioneering as they are,
these works are only the start of efforts to probe the enormously
complex relationship
between change in the symbolic realm and historical change
among social groups and
institutions.
I hope to advance our understanding of this relationship a step
further by suggesting
that its complexity lies not so much in the radically discontinuous
nature of
 myths but in the fact that myths are simultaneously continuous
and discontinuous. I
explore this relationship by examining the myth of Guandi
through a concept that I
call the "superscription of symbols." Guandi (A.D. 162-220),
known originally as
Guan Yu before he received the imperial title di in 1615, was the
apotheosized hero
of the period of the Three Kingdoms. This period, which followed
the decline of the
imperial Han state (209 B.C.-A.D. 220), has been romanticized in
Chinese history
as an era of heroic warriors and artful strategists who dominated
the battles among
the three successor states contending for imperial power. Since
then, the myth of Guandi
has become increasingly popular in a variety of media-literature,
drama, official and
popular cults, and the lore of secret societies.
Consider two episodes in the life of the Guandi myth that are
separated by more
than a thousand years. One of the earliest miracle stories about
Guan Yu is derived
from a temple stele of 820 A.D. erected when the Yuquan temple
in Dangyang County
Prasenjit Duara is Assistant Professor of History at George Mason
University.
This article represents a substantial development of a short study
of the Guandi myth to
be found in Duara 1988. It also addresses conceptual problems
regarding the nature of imperial
hegemony that remain inchoate in the book; as such, it
complements the book. The author
wishes to thank Arjun Appadurai, Andrew Char, Juliette Gregory,
Deborah Kaplan, Renato
Rosaldo, Roy Rosenzweig, and James Watson for their comments.
The Journal of Asian Studies 47, no. 4 (November 1988):778-795.
? 1988 by the Association for Asian Studies, Inc.
 778
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 779
in modern Hubei was reconstructed. Here, in the vicinity of
Yuquan mountain, Guan
Yu was decapitated during the long battle he fought against the
enemies of his lord,
Liu Bei.
One still night, when the Buddhist monk Zhi Yi (A.D. 538-97)
was deep in
meditation under a great tree on the mountain, the silence was
suddenly filled by a
booming voice: "Return me my head." When the monk looked up
he saw the ghostly
apparition of a figure whom he recognized as Guan Yu, the spirit
of the mountain.
An exchange followed between the two in which the monk
reminded Guan Yu of the
severed heads of Guan Yu's own victims. Deeply impressed by the
logic of karmic
retribution, the spirit of Guan Yu sought instruction in the
Buddhist faith from the
monk, built a monastery for him, and began to guard the
mountain. Later the mountain
people built a temple to Guan Yu where they offered sacrifices at
the beginning of
each new season (Inoue 1941, no. 1:48; Harada 1955:30).1
In 1914 the president of the Republic, Yuan Shikai, ordered the
creation of a temple
of military heroes devoted to Guandi, Yuefei, and twenty-four
lesser heroes. The interior
of the main temple in Beijing, with its magnificent timber pillars
and richly decorated
roof, was impressive in the stately simplicity of its ceremonial
arrangements. There
were no images. The canonized heroes were represented by their
spirit tablets only. In
January 1915 Commissioned General Yin Chang and the
commander of the Model
 Army Division took their officers and soldiers to the temple to
take their military
oaths. They subsequently bowed their heads as they filed past a
row of wooden tablets
bearing the honored names of those who had fought for their
nation (Johnston 1921:88).
These two visions of Guandi, reflecting the needs of different
social groups a
thousand years apart, reveal the discontinuous nature of myth.
The first, the vision
of a nervous clergy reeling from attacks by a renascent Confucian
establishment on the
Buddhist faith as foreign and corrupt, seeks to establish one of the
great heroes of
Chinese culture as a devout follower and protector. The latter, the
vision of the fledgling
Republican military, seeks to forge new concepts of loyalty to the
nation-state. Is
Guandi the protector of the Buddhist faith or a Chinese god of
war? Whether we speak
of them as conceptions of the spirit world or as the embodiment
of this-worldly interests,
the two visions seem to have very little in common.
But can a myth actually be so radically discontinuous? Do the
symbolic materials
in a myth exercise absolutely no constraints on what may be
inscribed upon them?
Indeed, if a myth represents radically discontinuous meanings, if
its symbols are pursued
by particular groups only for their own particular purposes, how
can it continue
to impart legitimacy so widely across the culture? On closer
examination the two visions
of the same figure have at least two common features: the
apotheosization of a hero
and his role as guardian. This commonality is hardly accidental or
insignificant. It is
 what gives the myth its legitimating power and gives historical
groups a sense of
identity as they undergo changes.
What we have is a view of myth and its cultural symbols as
simultaneously continuous
and discontinuous. To be sure, the continuous core of the myth is
not static
and is itself susceptible to change. Some elements of the myth
may and do become
lost. But unlike many other forms of social change, mythic and
symbolic change tend
'I have taken the liberty of "superscribing" the original miracle
story with a few details
from the fourteenth-century version of it contained in the
Sanguozhi yanyi by Luo Guanzhong
(1961, chap. 77:709-10). Although there are differences between
the stele account and the
one by Luo regarding the period and the identity of the monk, my
borrowings from the later
version do not affect the core message of the story in the stele.
The differences between the
two are discussed by Harada (1955:30).
780 PRASENJIT DUARA
not to be radically discontinuous; rather, change in this domain
takes place in a way
that sustains and is sustained by a dense historical context. In this
way cultural symbols
are able to lend continuity at one level to changing social groups
and interests even
as the symbols themselves undergo transformations. This
particular modality of symbolic
evolution is one I call the superscription of symbols.
Following Walter Burkert (1979:23), we may define myth as a
traditional tale
with secondary, partial reference to something of collective
importance.2 The process
whereby different historical groups write or depict through other
cultural practices
 their own version of an existing story or myth incorporates their
interests or establishes
their "social charters" in the sense used by Malinowski. In this
process, extant versions
are not totally wiped out. Rather, images and sequences common
to most versions of
the myth are preserved, but by adding or "rediscovering" new
elements or by giving
existing elements a particular slant, the new interpretation is
lodged in place. Even if
the new interpretation should become dominant, previous
versions do not disappear
but instead come into a new relationship with it, as their own
statuses and roles within
what might be called the "interpretive arena" of the myth come to
be negotiated and
redefined.
Superscription thus implies the presence of a lively arena where
rival versions jostle,
negotiate, and compete for position. In this process some of the
meanings derived
from the myth understandably get lost, but by its very nature
superscription does not
erase other versions; at most it seeks to reconfigure the arena,
attempting thus to
establish its own dominance over the others. In this respect it is
unlike most other
arenas of contestation, where victory is absolute or potentially
absolute. The obliteration
of rival interpretations of a myth is self-defeating because a
superscription depends on
the symbolic resonances in the arena for its effectiveness. Just as a
word in poetry
draws its power from its many half-hidden associations, a myth at
any one time represents
a palimpsest of layered meanings from which the superscribed
version draws
its strength.
 The Guandi Myth in History
What is most striking about the amazing variety of interpretations
of the Guandi
myth is that the original story is a very simple one. Guan Yu's
biography appears in
the Sanguozhi (History of the three kingdoms), written by Chen
Shou about sixty years
after Guan Yu's death (Chen 1973, 36:939-42). Chen Shou refers
to Guan Yu's place
of birth in Xiezhou, Shanxi, and his various names. He writes of
Guan Yu's friendship
and devotion to Liu Bei of the royal house of the later Han.
Together with the butcher
Zhang Fei, the two friends took the famous "Oath in the Peach
Orchard" binding
them to protect one another until death. Still later Guan Yu
became a general and a
governor of a province. Even though he was tempted by the
enemy of his lord, Cao
Cao, with a marquisate, Guan Yu remained faithful to his oath. In
220 A.D. he was
captured by the enemy and put to death.
Chen Shou's brief references to Guandi are not entirely
complimentary. There are
references to his vanity, overconfidence, and ignorance on matters
of strategy (Yang
1981:68). Yet these facts scarcely seem to have affected the future
career of the Guandi
myth. Over the centuries this basic story has been elaborated and
Guan Yu's achieve2In
my usage, the constitutive elements of a myth that impart this
sense of collective
significance are its symbols, which may be embodied in particular
images, events, or eventsequences.
I will be mostly concerned with these elements.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 781
ments magnified beyond measure in storytelling and drama. Apart
from his wellknown
 role as the god of loyalty, he becomes the god of wealth, the god
of literature,
the protector god of temples, and the patron god of actors, secret
societies, and many
others.
The earliest temple dedicated to Guan Yu is the Yuquan temple in
Dangyang
County in Hubei, where he is said to have been killed. This
temple was established
in 713 A.D. and was attached to the Buddhist monastery on
Yuquan mountain. Over
the next two hundred years certain miracle stories became
associated with the Guan
Yu of Yuquan temple, and when the anti-Buddhist policies of the
late Tang abated,
his role as the Chinese protector of Buddhist temples (in place of
the Indian devas)
spread rapidly throughout the empire (Inoue 1941, no. 1:48). Thus
did Buddhism
also become sinicized. To this day in Taiwan, despite his exalted
status, Guandi continues
to guard Buddhist temples as a door god (Weller 1987:164).
Appealing to a
rather embellished version of the earliest miracle story, the
Buddhist clergy continues
to claim that Guandi remains a steadfast and devout protector of
the faith (Johnston
1921:61). One may pause to consider the true direction of the
acculturation process:
did the Buddhists convert Guan Yu, or did he in fact make them a
little more authentically
Chinese?
Guan Yu's career as a protector god of monasteries and temples,
launched by the
Buddhists, became well established by the ninth century (Inoue
1941, no. 1:48). It
did not take long for Daoist temples also to adopt him as their
protector god; and
 during the Song (960-1279) the Daoist claim on Guan Yu was
superscribed on his
image as a protector. In Xiezhou in Shanxi, where Guan Yu was
born, there is a famous
lake called Salt Lake. In the Song a Daoist temple was established
to Guan Yu at Salt
Lake. According to the founding myth, a temple to the legendary
Yellow Emperor had
originally been built by the lake. However, soon afterward a
demon who turned out
to be Chi You, leader of the Miao tribes defeated by the Yellow
Emperor, began to
menace the area. The Daoist Master Zhang was instructed by the
imperial court to
find a way to put an end to this desecration of imperial honor. The
Master invoked
the assistance of Guan Yu, who dispatched shadow (yin) soldiers
to fight and vanquish
Chi You. The temple was founded in order to thank Guan Yu and
commemorate the
event (Inoue 1941, no. 2:248; Johnston 1921:56).
Inoue Ichii (1941, no. 2:250) believes that Guan Yu's deification
as a Daoist god
is specifically communicated through the elaboration of this story
in the plays of the
succeeding Yuan period (1279-1368). Certainly the founding
myth of the Guan Yu
temple at Salt Lake has all the ingredients of a Daoist legitimating
myth: it draws on
a potentially significant element in the story of Guan Yu-his
birthplace-and combines
it with the sacred geography and ancient history of China; with
this as background,
it identifies the imperial court as the patron of the Daoists who
have successfully
invoked the spirit of Guan Yu to restore the imperial honor. Inoue
also
 associates Guan Yu's role as the god of wealth with his patronage
by the Daoists, who
were famous for their preoccupation with alchemy.
It is well known that the spread of the worship of Guan Yu as a
folk deity beyond
the confines of sectarian religion was communicated in the
vernacular novels and plays
of the Song-Yuan transition, particularly the Sanguozhi pinghua
(The story of the three
kingdoms) and the later Sanguozhi yanyi (The romance of the
three kingdoms) by Luo Guanzhong.
In these depictions the mortal weaknesses of Guan Yu seen in
Chen Shou's
account disappear without much trace, and it is undoubtedly
because of them that
the divine image of Guan Yu has been nourished in popular
consciousness (Yang 1981;
Huang 1968:12-14). But these popular media also reflect broad
social developments
782 PRASENJIT DUARA
underway since the Song that promoted the spread of Guan Yu as
a deity among
merchants, professional groups, rural communities, and secret
societies.
Huang Huajie links Guan Yu's growing popularity in the Ming
(1368-1644) and
the Qing (1644-1911) to the great socioeconomic changes of the
era, which of course
also enabled the popular media to spread. As the rural economy
became increasingly
commercialized, self-sufficient kin-based communities tended to
disintegrate. In their
place, settlements came to be composed of unrelated kin groups,
merchants for whom
sojourning had become a way of life, and marginal peoples
without a community, such
as vagrants and bandits. None of these new groups was able to use
bonds of kinship
 or community to hold the settlements together. As a symbol of
loyalty and guardianship,
the image of Guan Yu inspired an ethic of trust and camaraderie to
hold together
"a society of strangers" (Huang 1968:100, 122, 227-29).
Thus certain elements in the myth as it had developed so far
furnished common
material for various groups; but each group also superscribed the
image of Guan Yu
to suit its own peculiar circumstances. For rural communities, the
image of a trustworthy
protector of temples yielded naturally to that of protector of
communities, and
eventually to those of healer and provider. Li Jinghan, in his
massive survey of Ding
County, wrote that the common rural folk worshiped Guan Yu to
"seek fortune and
avoid disaster" (1933:432). For merchants, trading now in distant,
unknown, and
unprotected regions, Guan Yu first inspired trust and loyalty (to
contract) and gradually
became the very source of wealth. Turning again to an example
from Ding County,
when merchants were asked why they worshiped Guan Yu, they
replied that they did
because Guarr Yu was none other than Caishen, the god of wealth
(Huang 1968:229).
For the rootless bandits and rebels of secret societies, the oath of
loyalty that Guan
Yu upheld gained an unparalleled salience. All rites and
ceremonies among the Triads,
for instance, including those performed at the initiation of recruits
and the punishment
of traitors, took place before the altars of Guan Yu and the
founders of the secret society
(Yang 1967:64).
Like the Buddhist and Daoist superscriptions, the nonsectarian
interpretations of
 Guan Yu were not random constructions. They built not only on
original elements of
the myth, but also on one another. Thus the common core was
itself an evolving
phenomenon; elements not found in any interpretation, such as
the mortal weaknesses
of Guan Yu in the original description by Chen Shou, naturally
fell away. But typically,
a particular interpretive focus did not expunge other versions.
Indeed, it drew its
strength from them: the prestige of the god itself derived
increasingly from the evidence
of its spiritual pursuit by so many groups over such a long time,
because a superscription
depends on the symbolic resonances of the image in the culture.
So far we have spoken only of social groups without the
instrumental means to
impose their image on others. What would happen to the
interpretive arena when a
particularly powerful group, such as the imperial state, sought to
dominate the symbolism
of Guan Yu with all the weight of its political apparatus?
The Guandi Myth and the Imperial State
Valerie Hansen's work on the Song canonization of deities has
established the close
relationship between the official bestowal of a title on a deity and
its flowering as a
popular cult. The heretofore unsystematic recognition of local
deities by the state
became standardized in the Song as titles were granted and the
gods were brought
into the local register of sacrifices. Officials, elites, and
commoners all believed that
these titles actually enhanced the divine powers of the deities, and
local groups often
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 783
lobbied and colluded with officials to gain recognition for locally
important gods (Hansen
 1987:chap. 3). The imperial state's involvement with the Guandi
cult reflected
this process; official recognition was encouraged by the
popularity of the cult, which
in turn further spread the fame of the god. But more important,
the efforts of the
state remained within the mode of superscription. The state could
not, and in most
cases did not even seek to, erase local versions of the gods; rather,
it sought to draw
on their symbolic power even while it established its dominance
over them.
Thus we see the imperial state from the Song on lavishing Guan
Yu with successively
higher and more glorious titles. During the transition from the
northern to
the southern Song he rises from the status of a god with a ducal
title (gong) to one
with a princely one (wang), reflecting perhaps the Song need for
divine assistance to
defend itself against the increasing pressure of attacks from the
north (Inoue 1941,
no. 2:245). Under the Mongols (1279-1368) he replaces Jiang
Taigong as the official
god of war (Ruhlmann 1960:174), and by 1615 he is awarded the
imperial title di and
declared to be Guandi, the supporter of heaven and protector of
the empire (Inoue
1941, no. 1:49).3 It is clear that all dynasties from the Song until
the Qing sought
to superscribe the images of Guandi and thus to appropriate his
symbolism for their
own ends, yet deliberately or not these earlier dynasties actually
promoted the worship
of Guandi in his different aspects and encouraged the different
interpretations.
This was the case even during the Ming, well known for its
absolutist tendencies.
 The Ming worshiped Guandi as the god of war in the Baima
temple in Beijing, which
later became the highest-ranking official temple to Guandi.
Official temples to Guandi
were also established at battle sites, especially during the Korean
wars in the late Ming
(Inoue 1941, no. 2:259). The Ming also made substantial
contributions to the Guandi
shrine in Dangyang County only a few miles east of the original
Buddhist temple.
The original temple on Yuquan mountain, responsible for the cult
of Guandi as a
protector god of temples, had itself undergone a revival under the
Mongols, who favored
Buddhism. Through its patronage of this site, the Ming state drew
on the power of
the miracle stories associated with the temple and area-the alleged
site of Guandi's
martyrdom-even as it honored him in the official style. Moreover,
while it was writing
its official superscription, the Ming government was continuing to
promote other aspects
of the cult. For instance, it patronized another temple in the
Beijing area, called
Yuecheng, where Guan Yu was worshiped as a god of wealth, a
cult that spread rapidly
during this period. Indeed, it became so important that when he
received the imperial
rank in 1615, it was to the Guan Yu of this particular temple that it
was bestowed
(Huang 1968:138-41; Inoue 1941, no. 2:249, 253, 257).
Given the preoccupation of the imperial Chinese state with
establishing a monopoly
over the channels of communication with the spirit world, it is
hardly surprising that
it would wish to control the flourishing Guandi myth. But the
Ming state sought to
 secure its control not by ridding the myth of those symbols that
did not directly support
its own version of Guandi as a warrior loyal to state authority; it
sought, rather, to
bring Guan Yu's various aspects within the ambit of imperial
patronage and thus
became the patron of patrons. In this way, its efforts contributed
to the many images
of Guandi found in the popular imagination down to the twentieth
century: a hero
who was a protector and also a provider, and a warrior who was
loyal to constituted
authority but also to his oath.
The Qing superscription of the Guandi myth was distinctive partly
because it
was more systematic and partly because it was orchestrated with
institutional changes.
3There is some controversy about the date when the imperial title
was actually conferred.
However, we can be fairly certain that it took place in the late
Ming (Inoue 1941, no. 1:49).
784 PRASENJIT DUARA
As their predecessors had done, the Qing promoted Guandi to
ever-higher statuses in
the official cult. By 1853, during the Taiping rebellion, his
worship was raised to the
same level in the official sacrifices (sidian) as that of Confucius
(Qingshi 1961, juan
85:1070). The high point of the superscription process was the
compilation of his
hagiography, the Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji (A complete
collection of the writings and
illustrations concerning the holy deeds of Guandi [abbreviated as
GSTQ}), which represented
a massive effort to Confucianize Guandi. This compilation was
published first
in 1693 and reedited four times in the Qing.
 There were elements in the story of Guandi's life that might have
been viewed
dubiously by the Confucian orthodoxy. Not only was very little
known of his background
and early life, but the vernacular Romance of the Three Kingdoms
had also played
up his record as an outlaw-a righteous outlaw, to be sure, who
killed an exploitative
magistrate, but an outlaw nonetheless (Roberts 1976:7). There
were other ambiguities
with respect to his loyalty to constituted authority: there is an
episode where he permits
Cao Cao, the archenemy of the prince he served, to escape so that
Cao Cao was able
to continue to menace the state. Moreover, the spread of his
worship as the god of
wealth and as a patron god of various sectional interests was
probably not particularly
congenial to the Confucian mode of regarding its heroes.
The occasion of the 1693 compilation was provided by the
alleged discovery of
Guandi's genealogy among some bricks in a well in his birthplace
in Xiezhou. Because
of his obscure origins, one of the projects was to root him firmly
as a respectable
practitioner of filial piety. The fourth preface to the text begins
with a literary exegesis
on the complementarity of the values of loyalty and filial piety.
The author writes, "It
is by relocating filial piety that one gets loyalty. It is also said: if
you seek loyal sons
seek them at the gate of the filial son" (GSTQ, 4th intro.). After
recording the events
of Guandi's life that clearly reveal his loyalty, the author laments
that until the discovery
of the genealogy, there was no real way of verifying Guandi's
parentage or whether he
 had really been filial. The discovery of the genealogy reveals how
Guandi
deeply understands the great principles of the Spring and Autumn
Annals ... his fine
spirit, which resides in heaven, must necessarily be able to forget
the benevolence and
grace of his ancestors. He recalls these virtues to transmit them to
later generations.
Thus his heart of pure filiality is greater than loyalty and
righteousness, which are
of but one lifetime.
(GSTQ 4th intro.)
In 1725 three generations of his ancestors were awarded the ducal
rank, and sacrifices
were ordered to be performed to them twice a year throughout all
the official temples
to Guandi in the empire (Daqing lichao shilu [17251 1937, juan
31:3a).
Other passages speak of his mastery of the Confucian classics:
"People have always
spoken of his courage and have not known of his knowledge of 1i
[principle]. Guandi
liked to read the Spring and Autumn Annals. When on horseback,
his one free hand
would always hold a volume" (GSTQ 2d intro.). Indeed, the work
attributes his loyalty
to his having understood the subtle meaning of the Annals. In
contrast to Sima Qian,
who represents the scholarly ideal, Guandi is depicted as
representing the activist ideal,
the Confucian sage who "protects the principles and perfects the
exercise of power"
(shoujing daquan; GSTQ, 3d intro.). Finally, his divinity is linked
to the greatness of
the empire: "Guandi's divinity [ling] resides in heaven. Sacrifices
to him in the temple
are held on an elevated plane in order to manifest his awesome
dignity. He has silently
 assisted in the well-being and long peace in the empire. Herein
lies his merit of
protecting the state and harboring the people. Is this not great?
(GSTQ 4th intro).
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 785
No matter how thoroughgoing it was, such a literate
superscription might have
gone unnoticed in society if it were not also accompanied by
institutional changes.
These changes, implemented in 1725, were of a piece with the
massive administrative
reorganization undertaken by the Yongzheng emperor to enhance
the power of the
imperial state. Of all the Daoist, Buddhist, and nonsectarian
temples to Guandi in
every county capital, the most well endowed was selected as the
official Guandi temple
(often known as Wumiao, or Temple of Military Culture) by the
local authorities, and
here sacrifices were to be conducted regularly to Guandi and his
ancestors. These
temples were then brought under the command of the highest
Guandi temple of official
worship, the Baima temple in the capital (Daqing lichao shilu
[17251 1937, juan 31:3a).
This structure was modeled on the hierarchy of Confucian
temples (Wenmiao, or Temple
of Civil Culture) through which the imperial state had
incorporated the literati into
an officially sanctioned empirewide system of reverence.
As Stephan Feuchtwang has pointed out (1977:584), official
temples in cities were
rarely for exclusive official use; they were places where the
official and nonofficial populace
could mix. Whereas it was principally the gentry that frequented
the Confucian
temples (which often included an image of the literary god, Wen
Chang) during the
 official worship of Confucius, the Guandi temples were
frequented by members of the
gentry, merchants, and others, with commoners outnumbering the
gentry (Feuchtwang
1977:585). Indeed, Feuchtwang notes that in Taiwan and
southeastern China "merchants
desirous of converting their wealth into status and moving into the
literati class
would contribute to the building of official temples.... An example
of this face-improving
enterprise-an even better one than the building of temples to
Kwan-ti
[Guandil and Ma-tsu [Tian Houl, who were popular in all classes
of the populationwas
the building of temples dedicated to both Confucius and Kuan-ti,
often called
Wen-wu miao and often founded in conjunction with the
establishment of a private
school" (1977:584). The image of Guandi had developed a
distinct association with
Confucian and imperial culture, and it was through the hierarchy
of official temples
that the orthodoxy communicated its superscribed image.
The imperial superscription of Guandi did not, of course, stay the
growth of his
popularity in his other roles, particularly as a god of wealth or as a
protector of local
communities. Nonetheless the institutional changes
accompanying the imperial superscription
enabled elites-both gentry and nongentry-to demonstrate their
allegiance
to the official image, and thus the changes succeeded in
considerably reshaping
the interpretive arena of the Guandi myth. The myth now came to
be dominated by
official images while other images were compelled to reorient and
redefine their status
 in relation to them. To illustrate my point I will turn to evidence
from local society
in North China in the Qing and the Republic.
The Guandi Myth in Popular Culture
Many of the materials for the arguments in this section are taken
from ethnographic
and epigraphic records from the North China plain of the
nineteenth and twentieth
centuries.4 Guandi was probably the most popular god worshiped
in the villages of
4The most important of these are the six-volume Japanese rural
surveys known as Chugoku
nJson kankJ chJsa, conducted between 1940 and 1942 and first
published in 1952. Here they
will be referred to as CN followed by the volume number. Other
sources include the surveys
of the Japanese scholar Yamamoto Bin, who collected folktales
and legends from all over North
China during the 1930s and 1940s, found in his Chigoku no
minkan denshJ (1976). See also
Li 1933 and Gamble 1968.
786 PRASENJIT DUARA
North China. The numerous temples and stelae set up for him in
the villages surveyed
are eloquent testimony to that fact. Although the popularity of
Guandi can hardly be
attributed solely to imperial patronage, the image of Guandi found
in the villages does
indeed reflect the elevated status he occupied as a result of
imperial honorings. Apart
from Guandi, the earth god, Tudi (tutelary deity of villages), was
perhaps the most
commonly found god in North Chinese villages (Smith
1899:140). But Tudi was viewed
very differently from Guandi. The following exchange was
recorded in Shunyi County,
Hebei:
 Q: What is the difference between the Tudi temple and the Guandi
temple?
A: Tudi is concerned with only one village, but Guandi is
concerned not merely with
one village but also with the affairs of the entire nation.
Q: Do outsiders [waicunrenj worship at the Tudi temple?
A: They do not. Even if they do nothing will come of it.
Q: What about Guandi?
A: People can come from anywhere. Anyone may visit a Guandi
temple anywhere.
(CN, 1:213)
In Wu's Shop village near Beijing an informant was asked:
Q: Which is superior, the Tudi temple or the Guandi temple?
A: The Guandi temple is superior. Tudi looks after the affairs of
only this village.
But Guandi is a great being and does not handle the affairs of this
village only. He
is not merely a god of this village.
(CN, 5:431)
The two gods represented distinctly contrasting symbols. Tudi
was seen as a subordinate
god uniquely in charge of the affairs of a particular village,
whereas Guandi
was seen as a great being, symbolic of the nation and worthy of
being worshiped by
everybody. Community-based religious cults in late Qing China,
such as those to
Guandi and Tudi, were indirectly linked to the state cult and
official religion and
formed an important part of the sprawling infrastructure of
popular othodoxy. Tutelary
deities such as Tudi and Chenghuang (the city god) had been
assimilated into the
official religion in the bureaucratic mode. As is well known, Tudi
symbolized the
village as a discrete entity, but he was seen as an underling of
Chenghuang, who in
 turn was responsible to a higher deity. In other words, these gods
were celestial bureaucrats
with distinctly parochial jurisdictions. Guandi, on the other hand,
appears
to have borne a relationship to the bureaucratic order similar to
that of the emperor,
with whom he came to share the title di. He transcended a
particular territorial identity
and symbolized the relationship of the village with the outside-
with wider categories
such as the state, empire, and national culture.
Guandi was not the only god who symbolized these wider
identities; he shared
this status with Tian Hou, or the empress of heaven, in the
southeastern coastal
provinces. But in the rest of China, I know of no god who was
more identified as a
representative of Chinese culture than Guandi. And it is this
identification of Guandi
with the more extensive orders of Chinese civilization that
attracted an upwardly mobile
rural elite to the official interpretation of Guandi and enabled it to
be successfully
installed in rural society. The stelae dedicated to Guandi in many
villages through
the Qing period show that of all the possible interpretations of
Guandi-as a god of
wealth, as a protector of temples, as a hero loyal to his vow-the
one found most
frequently was the one that invested him with Confucian virtues
and loyalty to established
authority.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 787
There were five stelae dedicated to Guandi in Cold Water Ditch
village in Licheng
County, Shandong. The texts of the stelae were sometimes drafted
by degree holders
 from the county seat and sometimes by lower-degree holders from
the village. Other
stelae mentioned no gentry titles at all and simply recorded a brief
text with the names
of the village leaders and contributors. The earliest, dated in the
Kangxi period, begins:
It is said that in ancient times sacrifices were made and temples
were built to
honor those who have brought merit [gong) to the dynasty, who
have been virtuous
among the people, who have glorified honor and integrity
[mingjie).... At a time
when above and below were confused and the proper principles
[gangji) had disintegrated,
there arose a special person who was loyal and acted
appropriately to his
status [erjie buju yiming bugou4. He caused evil ministers and
sons of robbers to know
their position. He was granted the heavy responsibility of seeing
that they did not
confound righteousness [dayi) and create disorder....
He [Guandi) did not accept a fief from the bandit Cao Cao and
remained loyal
to the house of Han. Is this not merit to the dynasty! He
eliminated the danger of
the Yellow Turbans and executed the disorderly soldiers.... Is this
not virtue for the
people! He searched a thousand 1i for his [sworn] brother. Finally,
he died the death
of a martyr [shashen cheng ren). Is this not to bring glory to honor
and integrity?
(CN, 4:390)
Although the values of Confucian orthodoxy are written
everywhere in this text,
nowhere is there any explicit demonstration of allegiance to the
Qing dynasty. Indeed,
inasmuch as this is an early Qing stele, the references to Han
loyalism might even be
 construed as a statement of opposition to the alien Manchus. But
by the beginning
of the nineteenth century, the effects of Qing superscription are
everywhere evident.
A text composed by a lower-degree holder of the village in 1819
and bearing the names
of village leaders reads thus:
A chapter in the Book of History says: "There are times when a
good man is afraid
that there are not enough days; and when an evil man is also
afraid that there are
not enough days." Thus we know the godly way [shendao)
establishes religious teachings
in order to bring happiness to the good man and harm to the evil
man.
Now, the lord Guansheng of Shanxi despises the nine evils with
extreme severity.
On the fifteenth day of the ninth month of 1813, the White Lotus
invaded the precincts
of the capital and the imperial court was put in danger. In very
little time, the blessed
god of the armies, with the brilliance of his divine powers, pushed
back the White
Lotus. He caused them to submit to the law and executed every
single one of
them....
The leaders of our village and others have saved their humble
possessions and
put together some money to build a new temple and a new image.
(CN, 4:391)
The alleged appearance of Guandi on the side of the imperial
forces during the White
Lotus rebellion of 1813 was something the Jiaqing emperor had
himself publicized
(Naquin 1976:338-39), and the Qing bestowal of a title on Guandi
following the
rebellion in 1815 was doubtless related to his role in the rebellion
(Inoue 1941, no.
 2:266). It may well be that the promotion of the imperial image of
Guandi in local
society was connected with this event; at any rate, the stelae in
this and other villages
from the Jiaqing reign (1796-1820) are replete with references to
Qing honorings of
Guandi (CN, 4:391; CN, 1:192; CN, 6:151-52).
Whatever Guandi may have actually meant to the ordinary
peasants, the Qing
state had managed to superscribe the image of Guandi all the way
down to the villages-a
remarkable achievement for a premodern state in a vast agrarian
society. It
788 PRASENJIT DUARA
could reach into the bowels of this society because it was able to
forge a symbolic
system that accommodated the aspirations of the rural elite. The
Guandi cult exemplified
this accommodation perfectly. Local leadership in rural society
was often
expressed by elite patronage of popular deities and the
management of temple ceremonies.
By their patronage of the multi-vocal image of Guandi-in the
building,
repair, and management of temples, for example-these elites were
able to articulate
their leadership aspirations in society and at the same time
identify themselves with
a set of symbols that was prestigious and Pan-Chinese in scope
(Duara 1988:esp. chap.
5).
The Confucian image of Guandi perpetuated by the state and rural
elites as a
protector of the empire and its institutions did not replace the
other images of him.
It is clear that neither the elites nor the state could fully
appropriate the popular
 symbolism of the Guandi myth. Nor would their superscription
have been effective
if they had. Yamamoto Bin's collection of folktales from North
China in the 1930s
and 1940s contains stories about Guan Yu that are simply local
tales and nothing more
(1976:73, 75, 118, 151). Then too, ordinary villagers prayed to
him for all kinds of
benefits including rain and those from his healing powers (CN,
5:433). This seems
to have been the case for peasants all over North China, where he
continued to be
worshiped in his generalized aspect as a provider and protector of
communities (Li
1933:432; CN, 3:55; CN, 6:84-85). Although this characterization
of Guandi is
not in the least incompatible with the imperial and Confucian
characterization, it does
not invoke the state and Confucian culture symbolically in the
same manner as the
depictions in the stelae do.
Yet the imperial superscription was not without impact on folk
culture. Occasionally
it was assimilated into a kind of layered or imbricated imagery of
Guandi in
the popular consciousness. Guandi often appears in extremely
popular morality books
(shanshu), urging people to perform meritorious deeds to attain
salvation. These books
reflect a folk morality that is an amalgam of orthodox Confucian
and heterodox beliefs.
In these books we frequently see Guandi in his Confucian mode:
there are allusions
to his fondness for the Spring and Autumn Annals and to his
alleged qualities of filial
piety and righteousness. At the same time, however, he expresses
his faith in Buddhist
 notions of retribution and other beliefs. In one passage Guandi
even espouses the
syncretism of popular religion by pronouncing that Buddhism,
Daoism, and Confucianism
all emanate from the same source (Harada 1955:37).
In the following stele from Hou Lineage Camp village in Changli
County, Hebei,
we observe an instance where the official image of Guandi was
assimilated with older
associations of him as the source of prosperity. This stele was
emplaced in 1864 when
the temple to the god of wealth was repaired:
A Stele Commemorating the Reconstruction of the Caishen
Temple and the Creation of an Image
of the Saintly Sovereign Guan
His image is molded and painted to create awe of his divine
authority. It will
thereby attach importance to his teachings and his favors, which
have always been
the same.
Our village of the Hou banners has of old had a temple to the god
of wealth.
Alas, it had become covered with brambles and smoke. In the past
we had repeatedly
improved the temple, but for three years the yield of the land had
been very poor.
Now Taisui [the star god presiding over the yearly cycle) is
aligned to the sun. As a
tribute of thanks we gathered to discuss the expansion of the
temple. In this way we
enhance our admiration of Guandi's protection of righteousness
Nyi) and his preservation
of the institutions of the empire [gang). We wish to burn incense
and make
offerings to him.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 789
We scattered the gold of Dannapati. We contributed money
generously and
 brought a carpenter as capable as the famous Gongshu. We
gathered artisans who
were brilliantly skillful. There are now dragons dancing on the
beams in abundant
numbers. May wealth and honor be eternally renewed (fugui
changchun).
(CN, 5:377)
This stele, which bore the names of the village leaders and two
degree holders,
was erected in the presence of the county magistrate himself. It
demonstrates the actual
process of imperial superscription in the village as the official
image of Guandi is
written over an older cult of the god of wealth. This kind of
superscription was probably
not uncommon in the 1860s when the imperial order was briefly
reinvigorated after
the devastation of the midcentury rebellions. But neither the state
representative nor
the villagers seemed to be particularly put out by the close
relationship in the text
between Guandi and the god of wealth, by the collocation of
"honor" and "wealth."
Commenting on this relationship more generally, Basil Alexeiev
writes, "Another instance
of this curious and apparently illogical association is the cult of
Kuan Ti
[Guandi}, commonly called by writers on China the God of War,
but who is, in fact,
a Wealth God and appears in many household icons with all the
paraphernalia of such
a god" (1928:1). The official superscription of Guandi in the stele,
with its references
to his righteous preservation of imperial institutions, did not result
in any diminution
of Guandi's association with the god of wealth and the promise of
prosperity.
 On the other hand, a powerful superscription effort such as that of
the Qing state
could reorder the interpretive arena of the myth and bring
alternative interpretations
into a new relationship to it. There were situations when the
image of Guandi as the
god of wealth among some groups had to negotiate its status in
relation to the official
image. We have mentioned that when merchants in Ding County
were asked why they
worshiped Guandi they replied that they did because he was
Caishen, the god of wealth.
Their interlocutor wondered how this could be when Zengfu was
already considered
the god of wealth. The traders hastened to answer that there were
actually two gods
of wealth, Guandi and Zengfu. Whereas Zengfu was the civilian
god of wealth, Guandi
was the military god of wealth (Huang 1968:229; see also Harada
1955:35). This
point of view was apparently common. Alexeiev observes
(1928:9) that booksellers
honor Caishen as the civilian god of wealth "while blacksmiths,
cutters of every kind,
and all manual trades" worship Guandi as the military god of
wealth. The division
between civil and military temples was a basic feature of the
imperial and early Republican
state cult (Johnston 1921:48, 85). The popular image had not gone
away,
but it had learned to accommodate itself to the prestigious official
image.
Sometimes the prestige and lofty claims of the imperial image
gave it a power by
which the imperial establishment was able to subordinate and
even mobilize oppositionalist
images of Guandi to its cause. This was the case during the
Taiping rebellion
 in the middle of the nineteenth century, when Guandi was
elevated to the same status
as Confucius in the official rites, thus attaining full stature as the
protector of the
Chinese ecumene. The Taipings, a Christian-inspired rebel group,
had appeared to
threaten not merely the imperial state but also the very
foundations of the Confucian
system.
Rural elites led by the gentry, which mobilized the resistance and
ultimately defeated
the Taipings, were able to draw antistate secret society members
into their local
armies. Although monetary inducements were doubtless important
in attracting the
secret societies, Huang Huajie (1968:230) believes that the appeal
to the image of
Guandi was more significant. These societies were formed by the
uprooted underclass
elements of "the rivers and lakes" (in the language of the Wagter
Magrgin) for whom
790 PRASENJIT DUARA
Guandi's oath and heroic death forcefully symbolized the sworn
brotherhood that they
used to fashion a community of their own. For them, the oath
symbolized loyalty to
brotherhood, not to the state that had been their enemy. Yet under
circumstances when
it could be demonstrated that Chinese civilization itself was under
attack by the foreigninspired
Taipings, the identification of Guandi with the nation and Chinese
civilization,
shaped to a great extent by the imperial state and the elites, could
be mobilized
in defense of the imperial order. After all, had Guandi not
defended the house of Han
from the rebellious Yellow Turbans?
 The renegotiation of statuses could be complex. Although a
nonofficial version
might clearly defer to the official imagery of Guandi, as in the
following Buddhist
depiction, it is not at all clear whether nonofficial
characterizations necessarily suffered
a net loss in the process. In 1894 the bubonic plague spread
widely over southern
China. By means of a planchette, Guandi revealed himself to a
Buddhist or Buddhistic
society in Canton, the "Society for the Performance of Good
Deeds," and expressed
his views on the causes of the plague as well as the way to
eliminate it (Portengen
1898:461-8).5 Guandi referred to the many titles granted him by
the Qing dynasty
as well as his varied celestial offices. He revealed that he was in
charge of the Department
of Epidemics, where he supervised a thousand ghosts and
functionaries to inspect
human activities and morale. Guandi disclosed that the ultimate
cause of the plague
was the moral decadence of the people, who were dishonorable,
wasteful, and deceitful.
People were to avoid the plague demons by practicing filial piety,
loyalty, and honesty
and by chanting a liturgy. In addition, the rich were to
demonstrate their virtue by
making charitable contributions. As a sign that they were truly
complying with the
demands of the god of war, households were instructed to draw
his halberd and beneath
it write the ten characters of his name and title. The sign was then
to be attached to
the doorway of the house, which would keep away the plague
demon. Guandi then
advised the people on practical measures such as burning water-
purifying amulets in
 family wells and mixing insecticidal drugs in the drinking water.
It was widely acknowledged
that the plague was being spread by water from wells and canals
that had
been poisoned by dead rats.
The document apparently represented a familiar mode of
harnessing the authority
of the gods to mobilize the population during an epidemic to
undertake both ritual
and practical countermeasures. Francis Hsu (1983:11-24, 35-50)
reports similar developments
in Yunnan during the cholera epidemic of 1943. Hsu also shows
how the
causes of the epidemic were thought to be rooted in socioethical
factors. In this way,
the goals of social welfare came to be inseparable from the spread
of religious ideas.
In the text cited above, social mobilization is mixed up with the
consolidation of
Buddhist faith and practice. These are revealed in the concern
with retribution, the
chanting of liturgies, and the call to the rich to make charitable
contributions. But
more important, the authority of these messages is attributed to
Guandi-and it is
a Guandi who very much partakes of the imperial characterization
of him. The passage
is replete with Guandi's various high-sounding titles and with his
own references to
Qing honorings of him, his official position in the celestial
bureaucracy, and the Confucian
virtues of filial piety and loyalty. What we have here is the
deployment of the
official image of Guandi not only to mobilize the populace but
also to shore up the
claims of an otherwise politically powerless entity-the Buddhist
society that received
the planchette.
 5I have only been able to find a French translation of the original
text. Many thanks to Carol
Benedict for bringing this text to my attention.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 791
Conclusion
Although the image of Guandi meant different things to different
people, what
he meant to one person also communicated itself in some degree
to others. We have
seen how the different versions were linked in a semantic chain: a
warrior loyal to his
oath has his loyalty transferred to constituted authority; a hero
protecting temples,
communities, and state is turned metonymically into a provider of
health and wealth.
The semantic chain constituting the Guandi myth developed
historically, reflecting
the changing needs of state and social groups as they wrote on
earlier symbolic inscriptions.
Some elements, notably those in the original story that served the
image
of no particular group, fell away, but the conative strength-the
strength to impel,
inspire, and motivate-of any single interpretation derived from its
participation in
this evolving semantic chain.
The evolution of symbols along a semantic chain, their
simultaneously continuous
and discontinuous character, enables us to see the relationship of
symbolic change to
social change. Even when an agency such as the centralizing Qing
state seeks to dominate
a symbol thoroughly, the very mechanism of superscription
necessarily requires
the preservation of at least some of the other voices that surround
the symbol. A symbol
draws its power from its resonances (and sometimes its
dissonances) in the culture,
 from the multiplicity of its often half-hidden meanings. It is
precisely because of the
superscription over, not the erasure of, previous inscriptions that
historical groups are
able to expand old frontiers of meaning to accommodate their
changing needs. The
continuity provided by superscription enables new codes of
authority to be written
even while the legitimacy of the old is drawn upon. Thus
symbolic media focus the
cultural identities of changing social interests pursuing sectional
ends, even as the
symbols themselves undergo transformations.
At any one point in time, the interpretive arena of a myth sustains
a cultural
universe that enables the communication and negotiation of
worldviews. The struggle
to survive within this arena may be desperate, and so also the
effort to dominate, as
with the Qing. But although the Qing state was able to reorder the
interpretive arena
of the myth, its hegemony was never absolute. Indeed hegemony
within a superscribed
domain is rarely absolute. No matter how intolerant the Qing
government may have
appeared to be, over the long run its capacity to police symbols
was restricted. In the
end it had to be satisfied with a nominal acceptance of the official
version by particularly
defiant subaltern groups. This was precisely what made the arena
of superscription so
lively: it was an arena in which subordinate groups such as the
Buddhists of the plague
text were able to mobilize the hegemonic image to their own
considerable benefit but
also one where both dominant and subaltern groups could draw
on each other's images
 for their own purposes. By participating in the interpretive arena
of the myth, the
Confucian imagery could even occasionally have its authority
enhanced by its deployment
for nonhegemonic ends.
Much of the strength of the Qing state at its height derived from
its ability to
represent its authority in popular culture, particularly with the
techniques of superscription.
Superscription enabled the imperial state to create an authoritative
image
of Guandi with which rural elites could identify and which
peasants and other social
groups could acknowledge without renouncing the dimensions of
Guandi that were
more immediately relevant to them. However, consider what
happened to the Chinese
state when it sought to transform society while undermining the
interpretive arena in
which it had once participated-in other words, when it attempted
to change society
and culture simultaneously.
792 PRASENJIT DUARA
The twentieth century in China was a time when the Guandi cult
and, indeed,
most other religious cults had begun to wane (Duara 1988:chap.
5). The origins of
this decline can be traced to the turn of the century, when the
Qing state and its
republican successors launched on a course of modern state
building. Modernizing
state builders in North China sought to confiscate temple
properties and destroy the
institutions of village religion in order to use the resources to
build modern schools
and police forces. As ideological modernizers the republican
regimes also carried out
 several campaigns against popular religion and "superstition,"
inadvertently clearing
the ground for the communists in the process. To be sure, these
regimes probably had
little knowledge of the momentous consequences their actions
would have. Overtly,
superscription of the Guandi myth was not abandoned. The
republican state continued
to honor him, and it is even said that the bonds of loyalty among
the Guomindang
secret police were written on earlier superscriptions of the Guandi
myth by members
of the secret societies.
But in assaulting such community institutions as temples and
religious associations,
which had been the foundations of the Guandi cult, the
modernizing regimes
were destroying the institutional underpinnings of mythic
superscription and attacking
one of the most important means by which both state and elite had
been able to reaffirm
continuously their alliance and conception of the social order.
They eliminated the
means of maintaining the authority of the state in local life at a
time when this very
state was engineering important changes in rural society.
The only way a modernizing regime could launch a simultaneous
attack on social
arrangements and the domain of culture was by building strong
organizational foundations
in local society. None of the republican regimes was ever able to
build such
strong organizations. Lacking these foundations, the government
needed to sustain at
least, if not to strengthen, its authority in the cultural realm in
order to engage social
issues. Yet by assaulting religious institutions these regimes
undermined the very
 means of communicating their authority in Chinese society. The
bleak record of republican
regimes in rural areas has a good deal to do with their inability to
create a
viable alternative to the Guandi myth to serve as a symbolic
framework of identification
and communication between state and peasant.
Glossary
Baima
Caishen
Cao Cao
Chen Shou
Chi You
Dangyang
dayi
di
Ding
erjie buju yiming bugou -X 8 -
fugui changchun
gang
gangji Al
gong
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 793
Guan Yu rW 1J J
Guandi Q I
Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji q g v
Jiang Taigong 5k
ling
Liu Bei
mingjie
qiufu mianhuo
Sanguozhi
Sanguozhi pinghua it, t
Sanguozhi yanyi
shashen chengren
shendao
shoujing daquan At N4
sidian
 Tudi It
waicunren
wang I
Wenmiao
Wumiao
Xiezhou
yi
Yuecheng A
Yuquan
Zengfu
Zhang Fei
Zhi Yi
List of References
Abbreviations
CN Chigoku noson kanko chosa [Investigation of customs of
Chinese villages)
GSTQ Guandi shengli tuzhi quanji [A complete collection of the
writings and illustrations
concerning the holy deeds of Guandi}
Works Cited
ALEXEIEV, BASIL M. 1928. The Chinese Gods of Wealth.
London: School of Oriental
Studies and the China Society.
BURKERT, WALTER. 1979. Structure and History in Greek
Mythology and Ritual. Berkeley
and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
CHEN SHOU. 1973. Sanguozhi [History of the three kingdoms).
With a commentary
by Pei Songzhi. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
794 PRASENJIT DUARA
Chu7goku noson kankJ chosa [Investigation of customs of
Chinese villages]. [19521 1982.
Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Daqing lichao shilu [Veritable records of the successive reigns of
the Qing dynasty].
[17251 1937. Mukden: Manzhou Guowuyuan.
DUARA, PRASENJIT. 1988. Culture, Power, and the State: Rural
North China, 1900-
 1942. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
FEUCHTWANG, STEPHAN. 1977. "School Temple and City
God." In The City in Late
Imperial China, ed. G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
GAMBLE, SIDNEY. 1968. Ting Hsien: A North China Rural
Community. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
HANSEN, VALERIE L. 1987. "Popular Deities and Social
Change in the Southern Song
Period (1127-1275)." Ph.D diss., University of Pennsylvania.
HARADA MASAMI. 1955. "Kan'u shinko no nisan no y6so ni
tsuite" [Concerning
a few elements in the Guan Yu faith]. Toho shuikyJ 8, no. 9.
Hsu, FRANCIS L. K. 1983. Exorcising the Trouble Makers:
Magic, Science, and Culture.
Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
HUANG HuAJIE. 1968. Guangongde renge yu shenge [The
human and divine characteristics
of Lord Guan]. Taibei: Taiwan Shangwu Yinshuguan.
INOUE ICHII. 1941. "Kan'u shibyo no yurai narabi ni hensen"
[Origins and development
of Guan Yu temples]. Shirin 26, nos. 1, 2.
JOHNSTON, R. F. 1921. "The Cult of Military Heroes in China."
New China Review
3, no. 2.
LE GOFF, JACQUES. 1980. "Ecclesiastical Culture and Folklore
in the Middle Ages:
Saint Marcellus of Paris and the Dragon." In Time, Work, and
Culture in the Middle
Ages, ed. Jacques Le Goff. Trans. by Arthur Goldhammer.
Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
LI JINGHAN. 1933. Dingxian shehui gaikuang diaocha
[Investigation of social conditions
in Ding County]. Beijing: Zhonghua Pingmin Jiaoyu Zujinhui.
Lu JUNSHEN, ed. 1876. Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji [A complete
collection of the
 writings and illustrations concerning the holy deeds of Guandi].
Taoyuan: Tanguo
Xiansheng Diancang.
Luo GUANZHONG. 1961. Sanguo yanyi. [Romance of the three
kingdoms]. Hong
Kong: Jingjiban.
NAQUIN, SUSAN. 1976. Millenarian Rebellion in China: The
Eight Trigrams Uprising
of 1813. New Haven: Yale University Press.
PORTENGEN, P. A. 1898. "Une theorie chinoise sur l'etiologie et
la therapie de la
peste" [A Chinese theory on the causes and therapies of the
plague]. Janus: Archives
internationales pour l'histoire du la medecin et la g6ographie
m6dicale 1, no. 5.
Qingshi [History of the Qing dynasty]. 1961. Taipei: Guofang.
ROBERTS, Moss, trans. and ed. 1976. Three Kingdoms: China's
Epic Drama. By Luo
Guanzhong. New York: Pantheon Books.
RUHLMANN, ROBERT. 1960. "Traditional Heroes in Chinese
Fiction." In The Confucian
Persuasion, ed. Arthur F. Wright. Stanford: Stanford University
Press.
SMITH, ARTHUR. 1899. Village Life in China. New York: Little,
Brown and Co.
WARNER, MARINA. 1982. Joan ofArc: The Image of Female
Heroism. New York: Vintage
Books.
WATSON, JAMES L. 1985. "Standardizing the Gods: The
Promotion of T'ien Hou
('Empress of Heaven') Along the South China Coast, 960-1960. In
Popular Culture
in Late Imperial China, ed. David Johnson, Andrew J. Nathan,
and Evelyn S.
Rawski. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 795
 WELLER, ROBERT P. 1987. Unities and Diversities in Chinese
Religion. Seattle: University
of Washington Press.
YAMAMOTO BIN. 1976. Chugoku no minkan densho [Folk
legends of China]. Tokyo:
Taihei Shuppansha.
YANG, C. K. 1967. Religion in Chinese Society. Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University
of California Press.
YANG, WINSTON. 1981. "From History to Fiction-the Popular
Image of Kuan
Yu." Renditions 15.

Superscribing Symbols: The Myth of Guandi, Chinese God of

War Author(s): Prasenjit Duara Source: The Journal of Asian Studies,
Vol. 47, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), pp. 778-795 Published by: Association for
Asian Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057852
Accessed: 17/12/2010 08:12 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates
your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's
Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have
obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a
journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the
JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please
contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher
contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=afas. Each
copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same
copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such
transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology
and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of
scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
support@jstor.org. Association for Asian Studies is collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Asian
Studies. http://www.jstor.org Superscribing Symbols: The Myth of
Guandi, C-hinese God of War PRASENJIT DUARA H ISTORICAL
STUDIES OF HOW MYTHS and symbols change have only recently
begun to emerge. They tend to stress the layered and historically
stratified nature of myths, each stratum reflecting the concerns of an
epoch or a particular group. Marina Warner (1982) has shown how the
image of Joan of Arc has been differently interpreted by Nazis,
nationalists, and feminists, among many others, and Jacques Le Goff
(1980) has demonstrated how ecclesiastical and popular images of
Saint Marcellus of Paris came to resemble each other but ultimately
always remained apart. James Watson's stimulating study (1985) of
Tian Hou, or the empress of heaven, argues that the outwardly unitary
symbolic character of the goddess Tian Hou concealed important
differences in what various social groups believed about her.
Pioneering as they are, these works are only the start of efforts to
probe the enormously complex relationship between change in the
symbolic realm and historical change among social groups and
institutions. I hope to advance our understanding of this relationship a
step further by suggesting that its complexity lies not so much in the
radically discontinuous nature of myths but in the fact that myths are
simultaneously continuous and discontinuous. I explore this
relationship by examining the myth of Guandi through a concept that I
call the "superscription of symbols." Guandi (A.D. 162-220), known
originally as Guan Yu before he received the imperial title di in 1615,
was the apotheosized hero of the period of the Three Kingdoms. This
period, which followed the decline of the imperial Han state (209
B.C.-A.D. 220), has been romanticized in Chinese history as an era of
heroic warriors and artful strategists who dominated the battles among
the three successor states contending for imperial power. Since then,
the myth of Guandi has become increasingly popular in a variety of
media-literature, drama, official and popular cults, and the lore of
secret societies. Consider two episodes in the life of the Guandi myth
that are separated by more than a thousand years. One of the earliest
miracle stories about Guan Yu is derived from a temple stele of 820
A.D. erected when the Yuquan temple in Dangyang County Prasenjit
Duara is Assistant Professor of History at George Mason University.
This article represents a substantial development of a short study of
the Guandi myth to be found in Duara 1988. It also addresses
conceptual problems regarding the nature of imperial hegemony that
remain inchoate in the book; as such, it complements the book. The
author wishes to thank Arjun Appadurai, Andrew Char, Juliette
Gregory, Deborah Kaplan, Renato Rosaldo, Roy Rosenzweig, and
James Watson for their comments. The Journal of Asian Studies 47,
no. 4 (November 1988):778-795. ? 1988 by the Association for Asian
Studies, Inc. 778 MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR
779 in modern Hubei was reconstructed. Here, in the vicinity of
Yuquan mountain, Guan Yu was decapitated during the long battle he
fought against the enemies of his lord, Liu Bei. One still night, when
the Buddhist monk Zhi Yi (A.D. 538-97) was deep in meditation
under a great tree on the mountain, the silence was suddenly filled by
a booming voice: "Return me my head." When the monk looked up he
saw the ghostly apparition of a figure whom he recognized as Guan
Yu, the spirit of the mountain. An exchange followed between the two
in which the monk reminded Guan Yu of the severed heads of Guan
Yu's own victims. Deeply impressed by the logic of karmic retribution,
the spirit of Guan Yu sought instruction in the Buddhist faith from the
monk, built a monastery for him, and began to guard the mountain.
Later the mountain people built a temple to Guan Yu where they
offered sacrifices at the beginning of each new season (Inoue 1941,
no. 1:48; Harada 1955:30).1 In 1914 the president of the Republic,
Yuan Shikai, ordered the creation of a temple of military heroes
devoted to Guandi, Yuefei, and twenty-four lesser heroes. The interior
of the main temple in Beijing, with its magnificent timber pillars and
richly decorated roof, was impressive in the stately simplicity of its
ceremonial arrangements. There were no images. The canonized
heroes were represented by their spirit tablets only. In January 1915
Commissioned General Yin Chang and the commander of the Model
Army Division took their officers and soldiers to the temple to take
their military oaths. They subsequently bowed their heads as they filed
past a row of wooden tablets bearing the honored names of those who
had fought for their nation (Johnston 1921:88). These two visions of
Guandi, reflecting the needs of different social groups a thousand
years apart, reveal the discontinuous nature of myth. The first, the
vision of a nervous clergy reeling from attacks by a renascent
Confucian establishment on the Buddhist faith as foreign and corrupt,
seeks to establish one of the great heroes of Chinese culture as a
devout follower and protector. The latter, the vision of the fledgling
Republican military, seeks to forge new concepts of loyalty to the
nation-state. Is Guandi the protector of the Buddhist faith or a Chinese
god of war? Whether we speak of them as conceptions of the spirit
world or as the embodiment of this-worldly interests, the two visions
seem to have very little in common. But can a myth actually be so
radically discontinuous? Do the symbolic materials in a myth exercise
absolutely no constraints on what may be inscribed upon them?
Indeed, if a myth represents radically discontinuous meanings, if its
symbols are pursued by particular groups only for their own particular
purposes, how can it continue to impart legitimacy so widely across
the culture? On closer examination the two visions of the same figure
have at least two common features: the apotheosization of a hero and
his role as guardian. This commonality is hardly accidental or
insignificant. It is what gives the myth its legitimating power and
gives historical groups a sense of identity as they undergo changes.
What we have is a view of myth and its cultural symbols as
simultaneously continuous and discontinuous. To be sure, the
continuous core of the myth is not static and is itself susceptible to
change. Some elements of the myth may and do become lost. But
unlike many other forms of social change, mythic and symbolic
change tend 'I have taken the liberty of "superscribing" the original
miracle story with a few details from the fourteenth-century version of
it contained in the Sanguozhi yanyi by Luo Guanzhong (1961, chap.
77:709-10). Although there are differences between the stele account
and the one by Luo regarding the period and the identity of the monk,
my borrowings from the later version do not affect the core message
of the story in the stele. The differences between the two are discussed
by Harada (1955:30). 780 PRASENJIT DUARA not to be radically
discontinuous; rather, change in this domain takes place in a way that
sustains and is sustained by a dense historical context. In this way
cultural symbols are able to lend continuity at one level to changing
social groups and interests even as the symbols themselves undergo
transformations. This particular modality of symbolic evolution is one
I call the superscription of symbols. Following Walter Burkert
(1979:23), we may define myth as a traditional tale with secondary,
partial reference to something of collective importance.2 The process
whereby different historical groups write or depict through other
cultural practices their own version of an existing story or myth
incorporates their interests or establishes their "social charters" in the
sense used by Malinowski. In this process, extant versions are not
totally wiped out. Rather, images and sequences common to most
versions of the myth are preserved, but by adding or "rediscovering"
new elements or by giving existing elements a particular slant, the
new interpretation is lodged in place. Even if the new interpretation
should become dominant, previous versions do not disappear but
instead come into a new relationship with it, as their own statuses and
roles within what might be called the "interpretive arena" of the myth
come to be negotiated and redefined. Superscription thus implies the
presence of a lively arena where rival versions jostle, negotiate, and
compete for position. In this process some of the meanings derived
from the myth understandably get lost, but by its very nature
superscription does not erase other versions; at most it seeks to
reconfigure the arena, attempting thus to establish its own dominance
over the others. In this respect it is unlike most other arenas of
contestation, where victory is absolute or potentially absolute. The
obliteration of rival interpretations of a myth is self-defeating because
a superscription depends on the symbolic resonances in the arena for
its effectiveness. Just as a word in poetry draws its power from its
many half-hidden associations, a myth at any one time represents a
palimpsest of layered meanings from which the superscribed version
draws its strength. The Guandi Myth in History What is most striking
about the amazing variety of interpretations of the Guandi myth is that
the original story is a very simple one. Guan Yu's biography appears in
the Sanguozhi (History of the three kingdoms), written by Chen Shou
about sixty years after Guan Yu's death (Chen 1973, 36:939-42). Chen
Shou refers to Guan Yu's place of birth in Xiezhou, Shanxi, and his
various names. He writes of Guan Yu's friendship and devotion to Liu
Bei of the royal house of the later Han. Together with the butcher
Zhang Fei, the two friends took the famous "Oath in the Peach
Orchard" binding them to protect one another until death. Still later
Guan Yu became a general and a governor of a province. Even though
he was tempted by the enemy of his lord, Cao Cao, with a marquisate,
Guan Yu remained faithful to his oath. In 220 A.D. he was captured by
the enemy and put to death. Chen Shou's brief references to Guandi
are not entirely complimentary. There are references to his vanity,
overconfidence, and ignorance on matters of strategy (Yang 1981:68).
Yet these facts scarcely seem to have affected the future career of the
Guandi myth. Over the centuries this basic story has been elaborated
and Guan Yu's achieve2In my usage, the constitutive elements of a
myth that impart this sense of collective significance are its symbols,
which may be embodied in particular images, events, or
eventsequences. I will be mostly concerned with these elements.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 781 ments
magnified beyond measure in storytelling and drama. Apart from his
wellknown role as the god of loyalty, he becomes the god of wealth,
the god of literature, the protector god of temples, and the patron god
of actors, secret societies, and many others. The earliest temple
dedicated to Guan Yu is the Yuquan temple in Dangyang County in
Hubei, where he is said to have been killed. This temple was
established in 713 A.D. and was attached to the Buddhist monastery
on Yuquan mountain. Over the next two hundred years certain miracle
stories became associated with the Guan Yu of Yuquan temple, and
when the anti-Buddhist policies of the late Tang abated, his role as the
Chinese protector of Buddhist temples (in place of the Indian devas)
spread rapidly throughout the empire (Inoue 1941, no. 1:48). Thus did
Buddhism also become sinicized. To this day in Taiwan, despite his
exalted status, Guandi continues to guard Buddhist temples as a door
god (Weller 1987:164). Appealing to a rather embellished version of
the earliest miracle story, the Buddhist clergy continues to claim that
Guandi remains a steadfast and devout protector of the faith (Johnston
1921:61). One may pause to consider the true direction of the
acculturation process: did the Buddhists convert Guan Yu, or did he in
fact make them a little more authentically Chinese? Guan Yu's career
as a protector god of monasteries and temples, launched by the
Buddhists, became well established by the ninth century (Inoue 1941,
no. 1:48). It did not take long for Daoist temples also to adopt him as
their protector god; and during the Song (960-1279) the Daoist claim
on Guan Yu was superscribed on his image as a protector. In Xiezhou
in Shanxi, where Guan Yu was born, there is a famous lake called Salt
Lake. In the Song a Daoist temple was established to Guan Yu at Salt
Lake. According to the founding myth, a temple to the legendary
Yellow Emperor had originally been built by the lake. However, soon
afterward a demon who turned out to be Chi You, leader of the Miao
tribes defeated by the Yellow Emperor, began to menace the area. The
Daoist Master Zhang was instructed by the imperial court to find a
way to put an end to this desecration of imperial honor. The Master
invoked the assistance of Guan Yu, who dispatched shadow (yin)
soldiers to fight and vanquish Chi You. The temple was founded in
order to thank Guan Yu and commemorate the event (Inoue 1941, no.
2:248; Johnston 1921:56). Inoue Ichii (1941, no. 2:250) believes that
Guan Yu's deification as a Daoist god is specifically communicated
through the elaboration of this story in the plays of the succeeding
Yuan period (1279-1368). Certainly the founding myth of the Guan Yu
temple at Salt Lake has all the ingredients of a Daoist legitimating
myth: it draws on a potentially significant element in the story of
Guan Yu-his birthplace-and combines it with the sacred geography
and ancient history of China; with this as background, it identifies the
imperial court as the patron of the Daoists who have successfully
invoked the spirit of Guan Yu to restore the imperial honor. Inoue also
associates Guan Yu's role as the god of wealth with his patronage by
the Daoists, who were famous for their preoccupation with alchemy. It
is well known that the spread of the worship of Guan Yu as a folk
deity beyond the confines of sectarian religion was communicated in
the vernacular novels and plays of the Song-Yuan transition,
particularly the Sanguozhi pinghua (The story of the three kingdoms)
and the later Sanguozhi yanyi (The romance of the three kingdoms) by
Luo Guanzhong. In these depictions the mortal weaknesses of Guan
Yu seen in Chen Shou's account disappear without much trace, and it
is undoubtedly because of them that the divine image of Guan Yu has
been nourished in popular consciousness (Yang 1981; Huang 1968:12-
14). But these popular media also reflect broad social developments
782 PRASENJIT DUARA underway since the Song that promoted the
spread of Guan Yu as a deity among merchants, professional groups,
rural communities, and secret societies. Huang Huajie links Guan Yu's
growing popularity in the Ming (1368-1644) and the Qing (1644-
1911) to the great socioeconomic changes of the era, which of course
also enabled the popular media to spread. As the rural economy
became increasingly commercialized, self-sufficient kin-based
communities tended to disintegrate. In their place, settlements came to
be composed of unrelated kin groups, merchants for whom sojourning
had become a way of life, and marginal peoples without a community,
such as vagrants and bandits. None of these new groups was able to
use bonds of kinship or community to hold the settlements together.
As a symbol of loyalty and guardianship, the image of Guan Yu
inspired an ethic of trust and camaraderie to hold together "a society
of strangers" (Huang 1968:100, 122, 227-29). Thus certain elements in
the myth as it had developed so far furnished common material for
various groups; but each group also superscribed the image of Guan
Yu to suit its own peculiar circumstances. For rural communities, the
image of a trustworthy protector of temples yielded naturally to that of
protector of communities, and eventually to those of healer and
provider. Li Jinghan, in his massive survey of Ding County, wrote that
the common rural folk worshiped Guan Yu to "seek fortune and avoid
disaster" (1933:432). For merchants, trading now in distant, unknown,
and unprotected regions, Guan Yu first inspired trust and loyalty (to
contract) and gradually became the very source of wealth. Turning
again to an example from Ding County, when merchants were asked
why they worshiped Guan Yu, they replied that they did because Guarr
Yu was none other than Caishen, the god of wealth (Huang 1968:229).
For the rootless bandits and rebels of secret societies, the oath of
loyalty that Guan Yu upheld gained an unparalleled salience. All rites
and ceremonies among the Triads, for instance, including those
performed at the initiation of recruits and the punishment of traitors,
took place before the altars of Guan Yu and the founders of the secret
society (Yang 1967:64). Like the Buddhist and Daoist superscriptions,
the nonsectarian interpretations of Guan Yu were not random
constructions. They built not only on original elements of the myth,
but also on one another. Thus the common core was itself an evolving
phenomenon; elements not found in any interpretation, such as the
mortal weaknesses of Guan Yu in the original description by Chen
Shou, naturally fell away. But typically, a particular interpretive focus
did not expunge other versions. Indeed, it drew its strength from them:
the prestige of the god itself derived increasingly from the evidence of
its spiritual pursuit by so many groups over such a long time, because
a superscription depends on the symbolic resonances of the image in
the culture. So far we have spoken only of social groups without the
instrumental means to impose their image on others. What would
happen to the interpretive arena when a particularly powerful group,
such as the imperial state, sought to dominate the symbolism of Guan
Yu with all the weight of its political apparatus? The Guandi Myth and
the Imperial State Valerie Hansen's work on the Song canonization of
deities has established the close relationship between the official
bestowal of a title on a deity and its flowering as a popular cult. The
heretofore unsystematic recognition of local deities by the state
became standardized in the Song as titles were granted and the gods
were brought into the local register of sacrifices. Officials, elites, and
commoners all believed that these titles actually enhanced the divine
powers of the deities, and local groups often MYTH OF GUANDI,
CHINESE GOD OF WAR 783 lobbied and colluded with officials to
gain recognition for locally important gods (Hansen 1987:chap. 3).
The imperial state's involvement with the Guandi cult reflected this
process; official recognition was encouraged by the popularity of the
cult, which in turn further spread the fame of the god. But more
important, the efforts of the state remained within the mode of
superscription. The state could not, and in most cases did not even
seek to, erase local versions of the gods; rather, it sought to draw on
their symbolic power even while it established its dominance over
them. Thus we see the imperial state from the Song on lavishing Guan
Yu with successively higher and more glorious titles. During the
transition from the northern to the southern Song he rises from the
status of a god with a ducal title (gong) to one with a princely one
(wang), reflecting perhaps the Song need for divine assistance to
defend itself against the increasing pressure of attacks from the north
(Inoue 1941, no. 2:245). Under the Mongols (1279-1368) he replaces
Jiang Taigong as the official god of war (Ruhlmann 1960:174), and by
1615 he is awarded the imperial title di and declared to be Guandi, the
supporter of heaven and protector of the empire (Inoue 1941, no.
1:49).3 It is clear that all dynasties from the Song until the Qing
sought to superscribe the images of Guandi and thus to appropriate his
symbolism for their own ends, yet deliberately or not these earlier
dynasties actually promoted the worship of Guandi in his different
aspects and encouraged the different interpretations. This was the case
even during the Ming, well known for its absolutist tendencies. The
Ming worshiped Guandi as the god of war in the Baima temple in
Beijing, which later became the highest-ranking official temple to
Guandi. Official temples to Guandi were also established at battle
sites, especially during the Korean wars in the late Ming (Inoue 1941,
no. 2:259). The Ming also made substantial contributions to the
Guandi shrine in Dangyang County only a few miles east of the
original Buddhist temple. The original temple on Yuquan mountain,
responsible for the cult of Guandi as a protector god of temples, had
itself undergone a revival under the Mongols, who favored Buddhism.
Through its patronage of this site, the Ming state drew on the power of
the miracle stories associated with the temple and area-the alleged site
of Guandi's martyrdom-even as it honored him in the official style.
Moreover, while it was writing its official superscription, the Ming
government was continuing to promote other aspects of the cult. For
instance, it patronized another temple in the Beijing area, called
Yuecheng, where Guan Yu was worshiped as a god of wealth, a cult
that spread rapidly during this period. Indeed, it became so important
that when he received the imperial rank in 1615, it was to the Guan Yu
of this particular temple that it was bestowed (Huang 1968:138-41;
Inoue 1941, no. 2:249, 253, 257). Given the preoccupation of the
imperial Chinese state with establishing a monopoly over the channels
of communication with the spirit world, it is hardly surprising that it
would wish to control the flourishing Guandi myth. But the Ming state
sought to secure its control not by ridding the myth of those symbols
that did not directly support its own version of Guandi as a warrior
loyal to state authority; it sought, rather, to bring Guan Yu's various
aspects within the ambit of imperial patronage and thus became the
patron of patrons. In this way, its efforts contributed to the many
images of Guandi found in the popular imagination down to the
twentieth century: a hero who was a protector and also a provider, and
a warrior who was loyal to constituted authority but also to his oath.
The Qing superscription of the Guandi myth was distinctive partly
because it was more systematic and partly because it was orchestrated
with institutional changes. 3There is some controversy about the date
when the imperial title was actually conferred. However, we can be
fairly certain that it took place in the late Ming (Inoue 1941, no. 1:49).
784 PRASENJIT DUARA As their predecessors had done, the Qing
promoted Guandi to ever-higher statuses in the official cult. By 1853,
during the Taiping rebellion, his worship was raised to the same level
in the official sacrifices (sidian) as that of Confucius (Qingshi 1961,
juan 85:1070). The high point of the superscription process was the
compilation of his hagiography, the Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji (A
complete collection of the writings and illustrations concerning the
holy deeds of Guandi [abbreviated as GSTQ}), which represented a
massive effort to Confucianize Guandi. This compilation was
published first in 1693 and reedited four times in the Qing. There were
elements in the story of Guandi's life that might have been viewed
dubiously by the Confucian orthodoxy. Not only was very little known
of his background and early life, but the vernacular Romance of the
Three Kingdoms had also played up his record as an outlaw-a
righteous outlaw, to be sure, who killed an exploitative magistrate, but
an outlaw nonetheless (Roberts 1976:7). There were other ambiguities
with respect to his loyalty to constituted authority: there is an episode
where he permits Cao Cao, the archenemy of the prince he served, to
escape so that Cao Cao was able to continue to menace the state.
Moreover, the spread of his worship as the god of wealth and as a
patron god of various sectional interests was probably not particularly
congenial to the Confucian mode of regarding its heroes. The occasion
of the 1693 compilation was provided by the alleged discovery of
Guandi's genealogy among some bricks in a well in his birthplace in
Xiezhou. Because of his obscure origins, one of the projects was to
root him firmly as a respectable practitioner of filial piety. The fourth
preface to the text begins with a literary exegesis on the
complementarity of the values of loyalty and filial piety. The author
writes, "It is by relocating filial piety that one gets loyalty. It is also
said: if you seek loyal sons seek them at the gate of the filial son"
(GSTQ, 4th intro.). After recording the events of Guandi's life that
clearly reveal his loyalty, the author laments that until the discovery of
the genealogy, there was no real way of verifying Guandi's parentage
or whether he had really been filial. The discovery of the genealogy
reveals how Guandi deeply understands the great principles of the
Spring and Autumn Annals ... his fine spirit, which resides in heaven,
must necessarily be able to forget the benevolence and grace of his
ancestors. He recalls these virtues to transmit them to later
generations. Thus his heart of pure filiality is greater than loyalty and
righteousness, which are of but one lifetime. (GSTQ 4th intro.) In
1725 three generations of his ancestors were awarded the ducal rank,
and sacrifices were ordered to be performed to them twice a year
throughout all the official temples to Guandi in the empire (Daqing
lichao shilu [17251 1937, juan 31:3a). Other passages speak of his
mastery of the Confucian classics: "People have always spoken of his
courage and have not known of his knowledge of 1i [principle].
Guandi liked to read the Spring and Autumn Annals. When on
horseback, his one free hand would always hold a volume" (GSTQ 2d
intro.). Indeed, the work attributes his loyalty to his having understood
the subtle meaning of the Annals. In contrast to Sima Qian, who
represents the scholarly ideal, Guandi is depicted as representing the
activist ideal, the Confucian sage who "protects the principles and
perfects the exercise of power" (shoujing daquan; GSTQ, 3d intro.).
Finally, his divinity is linked to the greatness of the empire: "Guandi's
divinity [ling] resides in heaven. Sacrifices to him in the temple are
held on an elevated plane in order to manifest his awesome dignity. He
has silently assisted in the well-being and long peace in the empire.
Herein lies his merit of protecting the state and harboring the people.
Is this not great? (GSTQ 4th intro). MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE
GOD OF WAR 785 No matter how thoroughgoing it was, such a
literate superscription might have gone unnoticed in society if it were
not also accompanied by institutional changes. These changes,
implemented in 1725, were of a piece with the massive administrative
reorganization undertaken by the Yongzheng emperor to enhance the
power of the imperial state. Of all the Daoist, Buddhist, and
nonsectarian temples to Guandi in every county capital, the most well
endowed was selected as the official Guandi temple (often known as
Wumiao, or Temple of Military Culture) by the local authorities, and
here sacrifices were to be conducted regularly to Guandi and his
ancestors. These temples were then brought under the command of the
highest Guandi temple of official worship, the Baima temple in the
capital (Daqing lichao shilu [17251 1937, juan 31:3a). This structure
was modeled on the hierarchy of Confucian temples (Wenmiao, or
Temple of Civil Culture) through which the imperial state had
incorporated the literati into an officially sanctioned empirewide
system of reverence. As Stephan Feuchtwang has pointed out
(1977:584), official temples in cities were rarely for exclusive official
use; they were places where the official and nonofficial populace
could mix. Whereas it was principally the gentry that frequented the
Confucian temples (which often included an image of the literary god,
Wen Chang) during the official worship of Confucius, the Guandi
temples were frequented by members of the gentry, merchants, and
others, with commoners outnumbering the gentry (Feuchtwang
1977:585). Indeed, Feuchtwang notes that in Taiwan and southeastern
China "merchants desirous of converting their wealth into status and
moving into the literati class would contribute to the building of
official temples.... An example of this face-improving enterprise-an
even better one than the building of temples to Kwan-ti [Guandil and
Ma-tsu [Tian Houl, who were popular in all classes of the
populationwas the building of temples dedicated to both Confucius
and Kuan-ti, often called Wen-wu miao and often founded in
conjunction with the establishment of a private school" (1977:584).
The image of Guandi had developed a distinct association with
Confucian and imperial culture, and it was through the hierarchy of
official temples that the orthodoxy communicated its superscribed
image. The imperial superscription of Guandi did not, of course, stay
the growth of his popularity in his other roles, particularly as a god of
wealth or as a protector of local communities. Nonetheless the
institutional changes accompanying the imperial superscription
enabled elites-both gentry and nongentry-to demonstrate their
allegiance to the official image, and thus the changes succeeded in
considerably reshaping the interpretive arena of the Guandi myth. The
myth now came to be dominated by official images while other
images were compelled to reorient and redefine their status in relation
to them. To illustrate my point I will turn to evidence from local
society in North China in the Qing and the Republic. The Guandi
Myth in Popular Culture Many of the materials for the arguments in
this section are taken from ethnographic and epigraphic records from
the North China plain of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.4
Guandi was probably the most popular god worshiped in the villages
of 4The most important of these are the six-volume Japanese rural
surveys known as Chugoku nJson kankJ chJsa, conducted between
1940 and 1942 and first published in 1952. Here they will be referred
to as CN followed by the volume number. Other sources include the
surveys of the Japanese scholar Yamamoto Bin, who collected
folktales and legends from all over North China during the 1930s and
1940s, found in his Chigoku no minkan denshJ (1976). See also Li
1933 and Gamble 1968. 786 PRASENJIT DUARA North China. The
numerous temples and stelae set up for him in the villages surveyed
are eloquent testimony to that fact. Although the popularity of Guandi
can hardly be attributed solely to imperial patronage, the image of
Guandi found in the villages does indeed reflect the elevated status he
occupied as a result of imperial honorings. Apart from Guandi, the
earth god, Tudi (tutelary deity of villages), was perhaps the most
commonly found god in North Chinese villages (Smith 1899:140). But
Tudi was viewed very differently from Guandi. The following
exchange was recorded in Shunyi County, Hebei: Q: What is the
difference between the Tudi temple and the Guandi temple? A: Tudi is
concerned with only one village, but Guandi is concerned not merely
with one village but also with the affairs of the entire nation. Q: Do
outsiders [waicunrenj worship at the Tudi temple? A: They do not.
Even if they do nothing will come of it. Q: What about Guandi? A:
People can come from anywhere. Anyone may visit a Guandi temple
anywhere. (CN, 1:213) In Wu's Shop village near Beijing an informant
was asked: Q: Which is superior, the Tudi temple or the Guandi
temple? A: The Guandi temple is superior. Tudi looks after the affairs
of only this village. But Guandi is a great being and does not handle
the affairs of this village only. He is not merely a god of this village.
(CN, 5:431) The two gods represented distinctly contrasting symbols.
Tudi was seen as a subordinate god uniquely in charge of the affairs of
a particular village, whereas Guandi was seen as a great being,
symbolic of the nation and worthy of being worshiped by everybody.
Community-based religious cults in late Qing China, such as those to
Guandi and Tudi, were indirectly linked to the state cult and official
religion and formed an important part of the sprawling infrastructure
of popular othodoxy. Tutelary deities such as Tudi and Chenghuang
(the city god) had been assimilated into the official religion in the
bureaucratic mode. As is well known, Tudi symbolized the village as a
discrete entity, but he was seen as an underling of Chenghuang, who
in turn was responsible to a higher deity. In other words, these gods
were celestial bureaucrats with distinctly parochial jurisdictions.
Guandi, on the other hand, appears to have borne a relationship to the
bureaucratic order similar to that of the emperor, with whom he came
to share the title di. He transcended a particular territorial identity and
symbolized the relationship of the village with the outside-with wider
categories such as the state, empire, and national culture. Guandi was
not the only god who symbolized these wider identities; he shared this
status with Tian Hou, or the empress of heaven, in the southeastern
coastal provinces. But in the rest of China, I know of no god who was
more identified as a representative of Chinese culture than Guandi.
And it is this identification of Guandi with the more extensive orders
of Chinese civilization that attracted an upwardly mobile rural elite to
the official interpretation of Guandi and enabled it to be successfully
installed in rural society. The stelae dedicated to Guandi in many
villages through the Qing period show that of all the possible
interpretations of Guandi-as a god of wealth, as a protector of temples,
as a hero loyal to his vow-the one found most frequently was the one
that invested him with Confucian virtues and loyalty to established
authority. MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 787 There
were five stelae dedicated to Guandi in Cold Water Ditch village in
Licheng County, Shandong. The texts of the stelae were sometimes
drafted by degree holders from the county seat and sometimes by
lower-degree holders from the village. Other stelae mentioned no
gentry titles at all and simply recorded a brief text with the names of
the village leaders and contributors. The earliest, dated in the Kangxi
period, begins: It is said that in ancient times sacrifices were made and
temples were built to honor those who have brought merit [gong) to
the dynasty, who have been virtuous among the people, who have
glorified honor and integrity [mingjie).... At a time when above and
below were confused and the proper principles [gangji) had
disintegrated, there arose a special person who was loyal and acted
appropriately to his status [erjie buju yiming bugou4. He caused evil
ministers and sons of robbers to know their position. He was granted
the heavy responsibility of seeing that they did not confound
righteousness [dayi) and create disorder.... He [Guandi) did not accept
a fief from the bandit Cao Cao and remained loyal to the house of
Han. Is this not merit to the dynasty! He eliminated the danger of the
Yellow Turbans and executed the disorderly soldiers.... Is this not
virtue for the people! He searched a thousand 1i for his [sworn]
brother. Finally, he died the death of a martyr [shashen cheng ren). Is
this not to bring glory to honor and integrity? (CN, 4:390) Although
the values of Confucian orthodoxy are written everywhere in this text,
nowhere is there any explicit demonstration of allegiance to the Qing
dynasty. Indeed, inasmuch as this is an early Qing stele, the references
to Han loyalism might even be construed as a statement of opposition
to the alien Manchus. But by the beginning of the nineteenth century,
the effects of Qing superscription are everywhere evident. A text
composed by a lower-degree holder of the village in 1819 and bearing
the names of village leaders reads thus: A chapter in the Book of
History says: "There are times when a good man is afraid that there
are not enough days; and when an evil man is also afraid that there are
not enough days." Thus we know the godly way [shendao) establishes
religious teachings in order to bring happiness to the good man and
harm to the evil man. Now, the lord Guansheng of Shanxi despises the
nine evils with extreme severity. On the fifteenth day of the ninth
month of 1813, the White Lotus invaded the precincts of the capital
and the imperial court was put in danger. In very little time, the
blessed god of the armies, with the brilliance of his divine powers,
pushed back the White Lotus. He caused them to submit to the law
and executed every single one of them.... The leaders of our village
and others have saved their humble possessions and put together some
money to build a new temple and a new image. (CN, 4:391) The
alleged appearance of Guandi on the side of the imperial forces during
the White Lotus rebellion of 1813 was something the Jiaqing emperor
had himself publicized (Naquin 1976:338-39), and the Qing bestowal
of a title on Guandi following the rebellion in 1815 was doubtless
related to his role in the rebellion (Inoue 1941, no. 2:266). It may well
be that the promotion of the imperial image of Guandi in local society
was connected with this event; at any rate, the stelae in this and other
villages from the Jiaqing reign (1796-1820) are replete with references
to Qing honorings of Guandi (CN, 4:391; CN, 1:192; CN, 6:151-52).
Whatever Guandi may have actually meant to the ordinary peasants,
the Qing state had managed to superscribe the image of Guandi all the
way down to the villages-a remarkable achievement for a premodern
state in a vast agrarian society. It 788 PRASENJIT DUARA could
reach into the bowels of this society because it was able to forge a
symbolic system that accommodated the aspirations of the rural elite.
The Guandi cult exemplified this accommodation perfectly. Local
leadership in rural society was often expressed by elite patronage of
popular deities and the management of temple ceremonies. By their
patronage of the multi-vocal image of Guandi-in the building, repair,
and management of temples, for example-these elites were able to
articulate their leadership aspirations in society and at the same time
identify themselves with a set of symbols that was prestigious and
Pan-Chinese in scope (Duara 1988:esp. chap. 5). The Confucian
image of Guandi perpetuated by the state and rural elites as a protector
of the empire and its institutions did not replace the other images of
him. It is clear that neither the elites nor the state could fully
appropriate the popular symbolism of the Guandi myth. Nor would
their superscription have been effective if they had. Yamamoto Bin's
collection of folktales from North China in the 1930s and 1940s
contains stories about Guan Yu that are simply local tales and nothing
more (1976:73, 75, 118, 151). Then too, ordinary villagers prayed to
him for all kinds of benefits including rain and those from his healing
powers (CN, 5:433). This seems to have been the case for peasants all
over North China, where he continued to be worshiped in his
generalized aspect as a provider and protector of communities (Li
1933:432; CN, 3:55; CN, 6:84-85). Although this characterization of
Guandi is not in the least incompatible with the imperial and
Confucian characterization, it does not invoke the state and Confucian
culture symbolically in the same manner as the depictions in the stelae
do. Yet the imperial superscription was not without impact on folk
culture. Occasionally it was assimilated into a kind of layered or
imbricated imagery of Guandi in the popular consciousness. Guandi
often appears in extremely popular morality books (shanshu), urging
people to perform meritorious deeds to attain salvation. These books
reflect a folk morality that is an amalgam of orthodox Confucian and
heterodox beliefs. In these books we frequently see Guandi in his
Confucian mode: there are allusions to his fondness for the Spring and
Autumn Annals and to his alleged qualities of filial piety and
righteousness. At the same time, however, he expresses his faith in
Buddhist notions of retribution and other beliefs. In one passage
Guandi even espouses the syncretism of popular religion by
pronouncing that Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism all emanate
from the same source (Harada 1955:37). In the following stele from
Hou Lineage Camp village in Changli County, Hebei, we observe an
instance where the official image of Guandi was assimilated with
older associations of him as the source of prosperity. This stele was
emplaced in 1864 when the temple to the god of wealth was repaired:
A Stele Commemorating the Reconstruction of the Caishen Temple
and the Creation of an Image of the Saintly Sovereign Guan His image
is molded and painted to create awe of his divine authority. It will
thereby attach importance to his teachings and his favors, which have
always been the same. Our village of the Hou banners has of old had a
temple to the god of wealth. Alas, it had become covered with
brambles and smoke. In the past we had repeatedly improved the
temple, but for three years the yield of the land had been very poor.
Now Taisui [the star god presiding over the yearly cycle) is aligned to
the sun. As a tribute of thanks we gathered to discuss the expansion of
the temple. In this way we enhance our admiration of Guandi's
protection of righteousness Nyi) and his preservation of the
institutions of the empire [gang). We wish to burn incense and make
offerings to him. MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR
789 We scattered the gold of Dannapati. We contributed money
generously and brought a carpenter as capable as the famous Gongshu.
We gathered artisans who were brilliantly skillful. There are now
dragons dancing on the beams in abundant numbers. May wealth and
honor be eternally renewed (fugui changchun). (CN, 5:377) This stele,
which bore the names of the village leaders and two degree holders,
was erected in the presence of the county magistrate himself. It
demonstrates the actual process of imperial superscription in the
village as the official image of Guandi is written over an older cult of
the god of wealth. This kind of superscription was probably not
uncommon in the 1860s when the imperial order was briefly
reinvigorated after the devastation of the midcentury rebellions. But
neither the state representative nor the villagers seemed to be
particularly put out by the close relationship in the text between
Guandi and the god of wealth, by the collocation of "honor" and
"wealth." Commenting on this relationship more generally, Basil
Alexeiev writes, "Another instance of this curious and apparently
illogical association is the cult of Kuan Ti [Guandi}, commonly called
by writers on China the God of War, but who is, in fact, a Wealth God
and appears in many household icons with all the paraphernalia of
such a god" (1928:1). The official superscription of Guandi in the
stele, with its references to his righteous preservation of imperial
institutions, did not result in any diminution of Guandi's association
with the god of wealth and the promise of prosperity. On the other
hand, a powerful superscription effort such as that of the Qing state
could reorder the interpretive arena of the myth and bring alternative
interpretations into a new relationship to it. There were situations
when the image of Guandi as the god of wealth among some groups
had to negotiate its status in relation to the official image. We have
mentioned that when merchants in Ding County were asked why they
worshiped Guandi they replied that they did because he was Caishen,
the god of wealth. Their interlocutor wondered how this could be
when Zengfu was already considered the god of wealth. The traders
hastened to answer that there were actually two gods of wealth,
Guandi and Zengfu. Whereas Zengfu was the civilian god of wealth,
Guandi was the military god of wealth (Huang 1968:229; see also
Harada 1955:35). This point of view was apparently common.
Alexeiev observes (1928:9) that booksellers honor Caishen as the
civilian god of wealth "while blacksmiths, cutters of every kind, and
all manual trades" worship Guandi as the military god of wealth. The
division between civil and military temples was a basic feature of the
imperial and early Republican state cult (Johnston 1921:48, 85). The
popular image had not gone away, but it had learned to accommodate
itself to the prestigious official image. Sometimes the prestige and
lofty claims of the imperial image gave it a power by which the
imperial establishment was able to subordinate and even mobilize
oppositionalist images of Guandi to its cause. This was the case during
the Taiping rebellion in the middle of the nineteenth century, when
Guandi was elevated to the same status as Confucius in the official
rites, thus attaining full stature as the protector of the Chinese
ecumene. The Taipings, a Christian-inspired rebel group, had appeared
to threaten not merely the imperial state but also the very foundations
of the Confucian system. Rural elites led by the gentry, which
mobilized the resistance and ultimately defeated the Taipings, were
able to draw antistate secret society members into their local armies.
Although monetary inducements were doubtless important in
attracting the secret societies, Huang Huajie (1968:230) believes that
the appeal to the image of Guandi was more significant. These
societies were formed by the uprooted underclass elements of "the
rivers and lakes" (in the language of the Wagter Magrgin) for whom
790 PRASENJIT DUARA Guandi's oath and heroic death forcefully
symbolized the sworn brotherhood that they used to fashion a
community of their own. For them, the oath symbolized loyalty to
brotherhood, not to the state that had been their enemy. Yet under
circumstances when it could be demonstrated that Chinese civilization
itself was under attack by the foreigninspired Taipings, the
identification of Guandi with the nation and Chinese civilization,
shaped to a great extent by the imperial state and the elites, could be
mobilized in defense of the imperial order. After all, had Guandi not
defended the house of Han from the rebellious Yellow Turbans? The
renegotiation of statuses could be complex. Although a nonofficial
version might clearly defer to the official imagery of Guandi, as in the
following Buddhist depiction, it is not at all clear whether nonofficial
characterizations necessarily suffered a net loss in the process. In 1894
the bubonic plague spread widely over southern China. By means of a
planchette, Guandi revealed himself to a Buddhist or Buddhistic
society in Canton, the "Society for the Performance of Good Deeds,"
and expressed his views on the causes of the plague as well as the way
to eliminate it (Portengen 1898:461-8).5 Guandi referred to the many
titles granted him by the Qing dynasty as well as his varied celestial
offices. He revealed that he was in charge of the Department of
Epidemics, where he supervised a thousand ghosts and functionaries
to inspect human activities and morale. Guandi disclosed that the
ultimate cause of the plague was the moral decadence of the people,
who were dishonorable, wasteful, and deceitful. People were to avoid
the plague demons by practicing filial piety, loyalty, and honesty and
by chanting a liturgy. In addition, the rich were to demonstrate their
virtue by making charitable contributions. As a sign that they were
truly complying with the demands of the god of war, households were
instructed to draw his halberd and beneath it write the ten characters
of his name and title. The sign was then to be attached to the doorway
of the house, which would keep away the plague demon. Guandi then
advised the people on practical measures such as burning water-
purifying amulets in family wells and mixing insecticidal drugs in the
drinking water. It was widely acknowledged that the plague was being
spread by water from wells and canals that had been poisoned by dead
rats. The document apparently represented a familiar mode of
harnessing the authority of the gods to mobilize the population during
an epidemic to undertake both ritual and practical countermeasures.
Francis Hsu (1983:11-24, 35-50) reports similar developments in
Yunnan during the cholera epidemic of 1943. Hsu also shows how the
causes of the epidemic were thought to be rooted in socioethical
factors. In this way, the goals of social welfare came to be inseparable
from the spread of religious ideas. In the text cited above, social
mobilization is mixed up with the consolidation of Buddhist faith and
practice. These are revealed in the concern with retribution, the
chanting of liturgies, and the call to the rich to make charitable
contributions. But more important, the authority of these messages is
attributed to Guandi-and it is a Guandi who very much partakes of the
imperial characterization of him. The passage is replete with Guandi's
various high-sounding titles and with his own references to Qing
honorings of him, his official position in the celestial bureaucracy, and
the Confucian virtues of filial piety and loyalty. What we have here is
the deployment of the official image of Guandi not only to mobilize
the populace but also to shore up the claims of an otherwise politically
powerless entity-the Buddhist society that received the planchette. 5I
have only been able to find a French translation of the original text.
Many thanks to Carol Benedict for bringing this text to my attention.
MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE GOD OF WAR 791 Conclusion
Although the image of Guandi meant different things to different
people, what he meant to one person also communicated itself in some
degree to others. We have seen how the different versions were linked
in a semantic chain: a warrior loyal to his oath has his loyalty
transferred to constituted authority; a hero protecting temples,
communities, and state is turned metonymically into a provider of
health and wealth. The semantic chain constituting the Guandi myth
developed historically, reflecting the changing needs of state and
social groups as they wrote on earlier symbolic inscriptions. Some
elements, notably those in the original story that served the image of
no particular group, fell away, but the conative strength-the strength to
impel, inspire, and motivate-of any single interpretation derived from
its participation in this evolving semantic chain. The evolution of
symbols along a semantic chain, their simultaneously continuous and
discontinuous character, enables us to see the relationship of symbolic
change to social change. Even when an agency such as the
centralizing Qing state seeks to dominate a symbol thoroughly, the
very mechanism of superscription necessarily requires the
preservation of at least some of the other voices that surround the
symbol. A symbol draws its power from its resonances (and
sometimes its dissonances) in the culture, from the multiplicity of its
often half-hidden meanings. It is precisely because of the
superscription over, not the erasure of, previous inscriptions that
historical groups are able to expand old frontiers of meaning to
accommodate their changing needs. The continuity provided by
superscription enables new codes of authority to be written even while
the legitimacy of the old is drawn upon. Thus symbolic media focus
the cultural identities of changing social interests pursuing sectional
ends, even as the symbols themselves undergo transformations. At any
one point in time, the interpretive arena of a myth sustains a cultural
universe that enables the communication and negotiation of
worldviews. The struggle to survive within this arena may be
desperate, and so also the effort to dominate, as with the Qing. But
although the Qing state was able to reorder the interpretive arena of
the myth, its hegemony was never absolute. Indeed hegemony within
a superscribed domain is rarely absolute. No matter how intolerant the
Qing government may have appeared to be, over the long run its
capacity to police symbols was restricted. In the end it had to be
satisfied with a nominal acceptance of the official version by
particularly defiant subaltern groups. This was precisely what made
the arena of superscription so lively: it was an arena in which
subordinate groups such as the Buddhists of the plague text were able
to mobilize the hegemonic image to their own considerable benefit but
also one where both dominant and subaltern groups could draw on
each other's images for their own purposes. By participating in the
interpretive arena of the myth, the Confucian imagery could even
occasionally have its authority enhanced by its deployment for
nonhegemonic ends. Much of the strength of the Qing state at its
height derived from its ability to represent its authority in popular
culture, particularly with the techniques of superscription.
Superscription enabled the imperial state to create an authoritative
image of Guandi with which rural elites could identify and which
peasants and other social groups could acknowledge without
renouncing the dimensions of Guandi that were more immediately
relevant to them. However, consider what happened to the Chinese
state when it sought to transform society while undermining the
interpretive arena in which it had once participated-in other words,
when it attempted to change society and culture simultaneously. 792
PRASENJIT DUARA The twentieth century in China was a time
when the Guandi cult and, indeed, most other religious cults had
begun to wane (Duara 1988:chap. 5). The origins of this decline can
be traced to the turn of the century, when the Qing state and its
republican successors launched on a course of modern state building.
Modernizing state builders in North China sought to confiscate temple
properties and destroy the institutions of village religion in order to
use the resources to build modern schools and police forces. As
ideological modernizers the republican regimes also carried out
several campaigns against popular religion and "superstition,"
inadvertently clearing the ground for the communists in the process.
To be sure, these regimes probably had little knowledge of the
momentous consequences their actions would have. Overtly,
superscription of the Guandi myth was not abandoned. The republican
state continued to honor him, and it is even said that the bonds of
loyalty among the Guomindang secret police were written on earlier
superscriptions of the Guandi myth by members of the secret societies.
But in assaulting such community institutions as temples and religious
associations, which had been the foundations of the Guandi cult, the
modernizing regimes were destroying the institutional underpinnings
of mythic superscription and attacking one of the most important
means by which both state and elite had been able to reaffirm
continuously their alliance and conception of the social order. They
eliminated the means of maintaining the authority of the state in local
life at a time when this very state was engineering important changes
in rural society. The only way a modernizing regime could launch a
simultaneous attack on social arrangements and the domain of culture
was by building strong organizational foundations in local society.
None of the republican regimes was ever able to build such strong
organizations. Lacking these foundations, the government needed to
sustain at least, if not to strengthen, its authority in the cultural realm
in order to engage social issues. Yet by assaulting religious institutions
these regimes undermined the very means of communicating their
authority in Chinese society. The bleak record of republican regimes
in rural areas has a good deal to do with their inability to create a
viable alternative to the Guandi myth to serve as a symbolic
framework of identification and communication between state and
peasant. Glossary Baima Caishen Cao Cao Chen Shou Chi You
Dangyang dayi di Ding erjie buju yiming bugou -X 8 - fugui
changchun gang gangji Al gong MYTH OF GUANDI, CHINESE
GOD OF WAR 793 Guan Yu rW 1J J Guandi Q I Guandi shengji tuzhi
quanji q g v Jiang Taigong 5k ling Liu Bei mingjie qiufu mianhuo
Sanguozhi Sanguozhi pinghua it, t Sanguozhi yanyi shashen chengren
shendao shoujing daquan At N4 sidian Tudi It waicunren wang I
Wenmiao Wumiao Xiezhou yi Yuecheng A Yuquan Zengfu Zhang Fei
Zhi Yi List of References Abbreviations CN Chigoku noson kanko
chosa [Investigation of customs of Chinese villages) GSTQ Guandi
shengli tuzhi quanji [A complete collection of the writings and
illustrations concerning the holy deeds of Guandi} Works Cited
ALEXEIEV, BASIL M. 1928. The Chinese Gods of Wealth. London:
School of Oriental Studies and the China Society. BURKERT,
WALTER. 1979. Structure and History in Greek Mythology and
Ritual. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
CHEN SHOU. 1973. Sanguozhi [History of the three kingdoms). With
a commentary by Pei Songzhi. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju. 794
PRASENJIT DUARA Chu7goku noson kankJ chosa [Investigation of
customs of Chinese villages]. [19521 1982. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Daqing lichao shilu [Veritable records of the successive reigns of the
Qing dynasty]. [17251 1937. Mukden: Manzhou Guowuyuan.
DUARA, PRASENJIT. 1988. Culture, Power, and the State: Rural
North China, 1900- 1942. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
FEUCHTWANG, STEPHAN. 1977. "School Temple and City God."
In The City in Late Imperial China, ed. G. William Skinner. Stanford:
Stanford University Press. GAMBLE, SIDNEY. 1968. Ting Hsien: A
North China Rural Community. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
HANSEN, VALERIE L. 1987. "Popular Deities and Social Change in
the Southern Song Period (1127-1275)." Ph.D diss., University of
Pennsylvania. HARADA MASAMI. 1955. "Kan'u shinko no nisan no
y6so ni tsuite" [Concerning a few elements in the Guan Yu faith].
Toho shuikyJ 8, no. 9. Hsu, FRANCIS L. K. 1983. Exorcising the
Trouble Makers: Magic, Science, and Culture. Westport, Conn.:
Greenwood Press. HUANG HuAJIE. 1968. Guangongde renge yu
shenge [The human and divine characteristics of Lord Guan]. Taibei:
Taiwan Shangwu Yinshuguan. INOUE ICHII. 1941. "Kan'u shibyo no
yurai narabi ni hensen" [Origins and development of Guan Yu
temples]. Shirin 26, nos. 1, 2. JOHNSTON, R. F. 1921. "The Cult of
Military Heroes in China." New China Review 3, no. 2. LE GOFF,
JACQUES. 1980. "Ecclesiastical Culture and Folklore in the Middle
Ages: Saint Marcellus of Paris and the Dragon." In Time, Work, and
Culture in the Middle Ages, ed. Jacques Le Goff. Trans. by Arthur
Goldhammer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. LI JINGHAN.
1933. Dingxian shehui gaikuang diaocha [Investigation of social
conditions in Ding County]. Beijing: Zhonghua Pingmin Jiaoyu
Zujinhui. Lu JUNSHEN, ed. 1876. Guandi shengji tuzhi quanji [A
complete collection of the writings and illustrations concerning the
holy deeds of Guandi]. Taoyuan: Tanguo Xiansheng Diancang. Luo
GUANZHONG. 1961. Sanguo yanyi. [Romance of the three
kingdoms]. Hong Kong: Jingjiban. NAQUIN, SUSAN. 1976.
Millenarian Rebellion in China: The Eight Trigrams Uprising of 1813.
New Haven: Yale University Press. PORTENGEN, P. A. 1898. "Une
theorie chinoise sur l'etiologie et la therapie de la peste" [A Chinese
theory on the causes and therapies of the plague]. Janus: Archives
internationales pour l'histoire du la medecin et la g6ographie m6dicale
1, no. 5. Qingshi [History of the Qing dynasty]. 1961. Taipei:
Guofang. ROBERTS, Moss, trans. and ed. 1976. Three Kingdoms:
China's Epic Drama. By Luo Guanzhong. New York: Pantheon Books.
RUHLMANN, ROBERT. 1960. "Traditional Heroes in Chinese
Fiction." In The Confucian Persuasion, ed. Arthur F. Wright. Stanford:
Stanford University Press. SMITH, ARTHUR. 1899. Village Life in
China. New York: Little, Brown and Co. WARNER, MARINA. 1982.
Joan ofArc: The Image of Female Heroism. New York: Vintage
Books. WATSON, JAMES L. 1985. "Standardizing the Gods: The
Promotion of T'ien Hou ('Empress of Heaven') Along the South China
Coast, 960-1960. In Popular Culture in Late Imperial China, ed. David
Johnson, Andrew J. Nathan, and Evelyn S. Rawski. Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press. MYTH OF GUANDI,
CHINESE GOD OF WAR 795 WELLER, ROBERT P. 1987. Unities
and Diversities in Chinese Religion. Seattle: University of Washington
Press. YAMAMOTO BIN. 1976. Chugoku no minkan densho [Folk
legends of China]. Tokyo: Taihei Shuppansha. YANG, C. K. 1967.
Religion in Chinese Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press. YANG, WINSTON. 1981. "From History to Fiction-
the Popular Image of Kuan Yu." Renditions 15.