Hok-Lam Chan - The Origin and Interpretations of The Jurchen State Name 1991

"Ta Chin" (Great Golden): The Origin and Changing Interpretations of the Jurchen State
Name
Author(s): Hok-Lam Chan 陳學霖
Source: T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 77, Livr. 4/5 (1991), pp. 253-299
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4528536 .
Accessed: 07/03/2011 04:51
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=bap. .
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.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to T'oung Pao.
http://www.jstor.org
T'oungPao Vol. LXXVII, 4-5 (1991)
"TA CHIN" (GREAT GOLDEN): THE ORIGIN AND

CHANGING INTERPRETATIONS OF THE JURCHEN
STATE NAME
BY
HOK-LAM CHAN FWW
Introduction
The proclamation of the name or title of a ruling regime, a state

or an empire has been regarded as a serious and sacrosanct event in
the political history of human civilization. Such an action estab-
lished a powerful symbol of identity and thereby the legitimacy of
the organized state, and the choice was often rooted in the sociopo-
litical and religious-cultural heritage of the ruling class, if not also
of the predominant social group of that polity. In China's millen-
nial history, which saw the maintenance of a continuous political
tradition marked by the rise and fall of kingdoms and empires until
the revolution in the twentieth century, the designation of a state or
dynastic name was the most important and sacred task of the
founder of the new reign. This tradition, which began with the
semilegendary sage-kings of high antiquity, was followed not only
by the rulers of the indigenous Han people, but also by the non-
Han seminomadic conquerors who came to rule over part, or all of
the Chinese empire. It had important political and ideological
repercussions.'
l I have presented the substance of this article in Chinese in an earlier paper:

Ch'en Hsueh-lin, "Chin kuo-hao chih ch'i-yiian chi ch'i shih-i", d-A
MARatX, reprinted in Liao-Chinshih lun-ts'ung - ed. Ch'en Shu
WAt,vol. 3 (Peking: Shu-mu wen-hsien ch'u-pan she 1l:5C tkiitL, 1987), pp.
279-309. The primary source for this study is Ta Chin te-yunt'u shuo (hereafter,
TCTYTS), a collection of official documents on the discussions to designate a
cosmic patron for the Chin state under Emperors Chang-tsung and Hsiian-tsung.
It has been reproduced in Ssu-k'uch'uan-shu chen-pen F Fourth ser., no.
121 (Taipei: T'ai-wan shang-wu yin-shu kuan Fi-M. n 1975). For details,
see Hok-lam Chan, Legitimationin ImperialChina:DiscussionsundertheJurchen-Chin
Dynasty (1115-1234) (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984) (hereafter,
Legitimation).
254 HOK LAM CHAN
As an independentpolityon its own right,whateverits historical

affinity,spatial and temporalimport, each of the scores of ruling
regimes in Chinese history should be properlycalled "state" or
"kingdom."The Chinese term is kuo(g). However, since the
inceptionof a linkageschemeof successionof rulershipsor regimes
as early as the first centuryA.D., and individual state was also
called a "dynasty" (wang-ch'ao EgE) throughout the imperial
period. This linkagescheme is traditionallyascribedto Liu Hsin
W2Jt(d. A.D. 23), adviserto the usurperWang MangEX (r. 923
A.D.). Invokingthe authorityof the cyclical pulsationformulaof
the cosmic forcesin the ancientFive Agents theory, Liu offereda
mysticalexplanationof the successionof rulershipsin the premod-
ern era. This theory was not only consciouslyacceptedby many
foundersof new regimesas a majorsourceof politicallegitimation,
but was also tenaciouslyupheldby didacticConfucianhistoriansin
deferenceto the continuityand longevityof Chinesehistory.In this
context, a state was also a dynasty in the dynastic chain that
reachedback to high antiquity,and the name or title of the state
was thereforesynonymouswith that of the dynastyin the Chinese
tradition.2
Discussing the origin of the officialname of the Mongol-Yuan
state in his Nien-erh-shih
cha-chie t2nMi-d(MiscellaneousNotes on
the Twenty-twoHistories), the eminent Ch'ing historianChao I
XX (1727-1814) noted several criteriaupon which the title of a
state or dynastywas chosenin Chinesehistory.His essay, entitled:
"The Use of LiteraryIdeas to Establishthe State Name Begun by
the Yuan" (XR1g1atAn S S:X ), reads:3
Ever since the Three Epochs (san-tai-tt ), [the rulers]who designatedthe

state name mostlyused the old name of its capital.Wang Mang establishedthe
name Hsin Bfi(>23 A.D.) because he was initially enfeofEedthe Marquis of
Hsin-tuSEgg. Kung-sunShu /9gXt [r. 2936 A.D.] adoptedthe title Ch'eng-
chia ,!At becausehe startedhis causefromCh'eng-tu,9g%[Szechwan]. Li Hung
2 For a useful survey of the designationof state name or dynastic title in

Chinese history, see Tu K'uei-yingF:tS, Chung-kuo li-tai cheng-chih
fu-hao
@S3StikiXGFt (Taipei:NationalCheng-chihUniversitylSlviRi9AlY, 1973),
pp. 42-51, and in particular,Hou Shao-wen@St, "Chung-kuoli-tai kuo-hao
chih yuan-ch'i" @1g11MA1g1tAgE,Chung-huawen-huafu-hsing yueh-k'an
@@tt2^S+IJ, 10, no. 6 (May 1977):S13.
3 Chao I, Nien-erh-shih
cha-chi(Ssu-pupei-yaoE]S'M; [SPPY]ed.) 29: 22a-23a.
For a new study on the origin and changesof the Chinese officialname of the
Mongolstate, see Hsiao Ch'i-ch'ingffitS, "Shuo'Ta-ch'ao':Yuan-ch'aochien-
hao ch'ien Meng-ku ti Han-wen kuo-hao",R't#': 7E#RtnlJWAti%tlSlM
Han-hsuehyen-chiu
Sirt, 2, no. 1 (June 1985):2340.
"TA CHIN" (GREATGOLDEN) 255
tt[r. 304=333],a native of Tsung X, chose the name Ta-Ch'eng7tS also

because he followed the old title.a Chin T'ai-tsu+t[A-ku-ta tt, r.
11191234] was the firstwho, adoptingthe idea thatchin[gold/metal]is hardand
strong,did not use the nameof the statecapitalbut chosechininstead.(According
to the Chinchihi,+>, T'ai-tsu called [his state] Ta Chinti [Great Golden]
becauseit producedgold, and moreover,it had a riverwhichyieldedthe gold.b)
Still, he did not use literary ideas. The late Chin PacificationCommissioner
(hsuan-fu shihR /R) P'u-hsienWan-nu,ffi;ti [d. 1233], who seized Liao-
tung -Q, usurpedthe title of "HeavenlyKing" (T'ien-wangii ) and called
his state Ta-chent [GreatJurchen, 1215].CThis was the beginningof using
literaryideas for the state name.
[The empireof] Yuan TXai-tsu7GtlgiR [ChinggisKhan, 1167-1227]originally
did not possessa state name. It wasjust calledMeng-kuXt[Mongol], like the
LiaoX [(907-)947-112]callingitselfCh'i-tanw7E}[Khitan]. In the eighthyearof
Chih-yuaniE [1271], Shih-tsutESL [KhubilaiKhaghan,r. 126>1294], acting
on the memorialof Liu Ping-chungg0t,*> [1216-1274],adoptedTa Yuan7tX
[GreatGreatness]as the statename.It was basedon the idea of "Howgreatis the
a On WangMang'sadoptionof the statenameHsin, see Pan Ku iEIXI, Han-shu

i% (Po-naWitPg [PN] edn.; hereafter,HS) 99A: 44b. For Kung-sunShu's state
title Ch'eng-chia,see Fan Yeh ielY, Hou Han-shuX1X (PN edn.; hereafter
HHS)13:23b. On Li Hung's designationof the state name Ta-ch'eng,see Fang
Hsuan-ling)X9;F, et al., Chinshu R R (PN edn.) 121: lb.
b On Chin T'ai-tsu'sproclamation of the Jurchenstate name Ta Chin, see
note 8 below.
c P'u-hsienWan-nunamedhis stateas Ta-chenXX in fall 1215,but changed
it to Tung-hsia9:w:in late 1216or early1217,and the latternameremainedin use
until the state ended in 1233. See Wang ShenjungTligit, "P'u-hsienWan-nu
kuo-haok'ao pien" 1g1t*$@, Li-shihyen-chiuEtRt, 1985, no. 5 (October):
64-75, and P'o Chen-shih t1Xt, "Lun 'Tung-hsia kuo' ch'eng-hao"
-=E"a:1g3"gM, Yen-pien ta-hsuehhsueh-paoXXXFXR,1983,no. 4 (December):
11>124.
d The originalname of the Mongol state was Yeke Mongghol ulus,which was
renderedinto Chineseas "Ta Meng-kukuo"XwSlSl,i.e., "TheGreatMongolian
State."It has been generallyassumedthat the Mongolsdid not have an official
Chinese state name until 1271, when Khubilai Khaghanadopted "Ta Yuan"
uponthe recommendation of his chiefadviserLiu Ping-chung.However,as Hsiao
Ch'i-ch'ingpointedout recently(see the citationin note 3 above),ChinggisKhan
did adopt a Chinesetitle called "Ta-ch'ao"7tM (GreatDynasty) around 1217,
afterthe Mongolsembarkedon the conquestof China.This state namewas in use
alongwithTa Meng-kukuountilit was replacedby the newnameTa Yuanunder
KhubilaiKhaghan.As a key conceptin the I-ching-% (Bookof Changes), "Yuan"
(az) has been customarilyinterpretedas "origin"and "firstbeginning"in West-
ernliterature.See RichardWilhelm,TheI-ching,orBookof Changes) tr. C.F. Baynes
(New York:Harper& Row, 1950), p. 51. But accordingto Hsiao, its primary
meaningin the old traditionof the Bookof Changes shouldbe "ta"(t) or "great-
ness."This readingis moreappropriateto explainingthe meaningof "Ta Yuan,"
because,like "Ta-ch'ao,"it was an abbreviatedChineserenditionof the Mongol
state name YekeMongghol ulus.For this reason, I have opted to translate"Ta
Yuan"as 'Great Greatness"ratherthan followingthe conventionof sinological
scholarship.
256 HOK LAM CHAN
'ch'ien'origin" ( z ) [in the Bookof Changes].d This is the genesis of using

literary ideas for the state name. The imperial edict reads:e
"As we have nobly accepted the splendid mandate, there must be an elegant
title [for our new beginning]. [In ancient times, the word] t'ang i [was taken by
the sage-king Emperor Yao * for the name of his kingdom because it] conveys the
idea of vastness (tang M ). [The word] yui * [was adopted by Shun # for his
kingdom because it] conveys the idea of happiness [lo * ]. Coming down to the
ages when Yu r and T'ang M arose, the respective titles [of their kingdom] Hsia
[2205-1766? B.C.] and Yin eR [1766-1122? B.C.] convey the idea of "greatness"
and "centrality."f As the generations followed, the practice [of establishing state
names] came to differ greatly from that of antiquity. The [rulers of] Ch'in a
[221-207 B.C.] and the Han i [206 B.C.-A.D. 9; 25-220 A.D.] took names
based on the places at Which they originally arose. [Those of] the Sui 1i
[581-618] and the T'ang Jf [618-907] took names from the appanages with
which [their ancestors] were enfeolfed.g In all these cases, they condescended to
the ingrained customs of the common people, and adopted momentary measures
of expediency for the sake of governance. Presently, we proclaim Ta Yuan to be
the state name. As such, it is derived from the idea of ch'ienyuianCJ-G['the great
origin'] in the Bookof Changes."
All rulers who presided over a new world order and who founded new institu-
tions that outshone the mediocre, necessarily had to start something unique, and
refuse to follow the previous epoch. This is one example. However, the fact that
T'ang [so called itself] because [the word] conveys the idea of tang[vastness], and
Yu [so called itself] because [the word] suggests the idea of lo [happiness], shows
that ever since the Five Emperors (Wu TiE-1), [all the rulers] had used literary
ideas to establish their state name. This can be seen from the Shang-shuchuanchu
fh1'fG, and the Shih-chicheng-i .h
This imperial edict was composed by T'u-tan Kung-lii E'g' , a Han-lin

Academician ofJurchen descent in Khubilai's reign. It incorporated the opinion
of Liu Ping-chung who recommended the adoption of "Ta Yuan" according to the
Bookof Changes(see note d). The full text is included in Ta Yuansheng-cheng kuo-ch'ao
tien-chang ; (Taipei: Palace Museum, 1976) 1: 2b-3a; Chou Nan-
jui )#X ed., T'ien-hsiat'ung-wenchi XT rJ, in Ssu-k'uch'uian-shu chen-pen
Fifth ser. (1974) 1: la-2a, and also Su T'ien-chiieh 7R;Kuo-ch'ao
, (YYuan)wen-lei
Af ( 5r.) SCE (Ssu-puts'ung-k'anlYg lRJ-[SPTK] ed.) 9: 4a-5a. For a partial
translation, see China UnderMongolRule, ed. John D. Langlois, Jr. (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1981), pp. 3-4.
According to Ssu-ma Ch'ien . Shih-chiSP-r (PN ed.; hereafter, SC) 1:
10a, 20a, 29b, 2: 21a, 3: ab, 8b, these ancient kingdoms derived their name from
the land or title of their enfeoffment. There is no indication that anyone of them
originated from literary or philosophical ideas. See also note h below.
g On the origin of the respective names of the Ch'in, Han, Sui, and T'ang, see
SC 5: 4b, 36a; SC 8: 28b; HS 1B: 3a; Wei Cheng RM, et al., Sui-shu R (PN ed.)
1: 1l1b;Liu Hsult MI! ,, et al., Chiu T'ang-shuWS1-3 (PN ed.) 1: 4a.
h Here Chao I erred in stating that there are references to the
literary meaning
of these ancient kingdoms in Shih-chiucheng-iand Shang-shuchuan-chui. The latter
refers to the Shang-shuta-chuanchi f&kXit by Cheng Hsilan 93 (SPTK edn.),
but neither work contains any such reference. The state names T'ang )g and Yu t
were respectively glossed with t'ang (vastness) and lo , (equated withyfi =
happiness) on the grounds of phonetic proximity in the post-Han etymological and
"TA CHIN" (GREAT GOLDEN) 257
In this context, therefore, the first source for state or dynastic

names was auspicious literary ideas prominent in the high culture
such as that of the ancient T'ang and Yii kingdoms. The second
was the enfeoffedtitle of the ancestors of the new rulers such as that
of Chou JTI(1122- 256 B.C.), Wang Mang, Sui or T'ang, and other
minor states during the Six Dynasties or the Five Dynasties. The
third, equally popular, was the geographical origin of the forebears
of the founders of the dynasty, such as that of Ch'in, Han, and some
of the minor kingdoms during the Six Dynasties or the Five Dynas-
ties. The fourth drew upon the names of the products of the land
where the new rulers or their affiliated tribes rose to power; for
example, the non-Han Khitan of the Liao, or the Jurchen of the
Chin state. The fifth, allegedly harking back to classical traditions,
derived the name from auspicious philosophical or religious ideas,
such as Yuan (Greatness), Ming m (Brightness) (1368-1644), and
Ch'ing h9(Clarity or Purity) (1644-l1912).4
These examples suffice to show that the designation of the name
of a state or dynasty was based on either historical precedent, the
heritage of the new rulers, or their social origin or religious, cultural
tradition geared to contemporary political requirements and objec-
tives.
phonetic encyclopedias. See the references cited in Morohashi Tetsuji 9 ,

comp., Dai Kan-Wajiten *zifThAk (Tokyo: Taishiukan shoten 1 1957-
60) 2: 1022/2; 9: 1073/4.
4 The exact meaning of the Ming dynastic title is not documented in contem-
porary sources and has given rise to various speculations. Wada Sei QE first
theorized that it came from a passage in the "T'ien-wen hsiin" 9itJII of Liu An
WiJW 's Huai-nantzu -M-: "The South [was the domicile of] Fire. The ruler was
the Red Emperor, his assistant was Chu-ming. Seizing the reins, they ruled over
China." ( M3I5ktl,' f
AbWiAfisa , nig ) (SPPY ed., 3: 3a) See his
"Min no kokug6ni tsuite" l L27 wX, Shigakuzasshi 42, no. 5
(1931): 70-75. However, most scholars accepted the view of Wu Han ni that the
name was derived from the slogan "Ming-wang ch'u-shih" MIEE8t ("The Prince
of Brilliance has emerged!") of the anti-Mongol peasant rebel leaders. It was
proclaimed by Han San-t'ung WA-W1 (d. 1355) and his son Han Lin-erh *it (d.
1367), each of whom called himself "Ming-wang." According to Wu, the Hans
were members of the White Lotus-Maitreya sect, but they were also strongly
influenced by the Persian Manichaeism which had infiltrated the Buddhist estab-
lishment in China. Struck by the prominence of the Manichaean influence in the
late Yuan, Wu was led to conclude that the slogan came from its scripture "Ta
Hsiao Ming-wang ch'u-shih ching" ;kJM UEftf. Chu Yiuan-chang *C3f
(T'ai-tsu, r. 1368-1398), founder of the new dynasty, who arose under the aegis of
the Sung X state of Han Lin-erh, therefore followed the tradition by designating
"Ming" as the title of the new regime. See his "Ming-chiao yiu Ta Ming ti-kuo"
XWttS, reprinted in Tu shih cha chi n (Peking: San-lien shu-tien
LAM CHAN
HOK
258
and changinginter-
Thisessay is an investigationinto the originby the seminomadic
of the name "Ta Chin" adopted
pretations state they estab-
Jurchenrulersof Tungusicstockbr the politicalthirteenthcenturies.
in North China duringthe twelfthand another "conquest
lished
Followingthe Liao, the Jurchen state became by the Yuan of
dynasty"in China'simperialhistory,to be followed
The significanceof
Mongols and the Ch'ing of the Manchus.
the claims by the Jurchen
subject lies not just in the conflicting of the state title, but
this
and their servantsregardingthe origin as a consequenceof
rulers
in the changinginterpretationsof that titleChineseinfluencein
also
acceleratedsinicizationof theJurchensunder
of the interactionsof
reigns. It providesa vivid illustration
later of the Chin
Jurchen and Chinese elements in the development in the confused
resulted
empire,and the extent to which they implications for
identityof the Jurchen people, with far-reaching
theirrule as well as later dynasticsuccessors.5
TheOriginof "Ta Chin"
a confederationof the
The Chin state was foundedin 1115 by
Jurchen tribesmen who
semipastoral,semisedentary Tungusic Far EasternProvincesouth
originallythrivedin the presentSoviet Chinese history since 903
ofthe Amur River. They appearedin as Chu-li-chen3W,
A.D. under various transcriptions,such and others,all derived
Chu-shenS;EI3, Nu-chentt, Nu-chihtA,
Nu-chen was changed to
fromthe ethnic nameJusen.(The name to avoid the tabooed
Nu-chihin the middle of the Liao dynasty
was recentlydisputedby Yang

WE, 1957),pp. 235-70. This view, however, XttttA, Yuanshih lun-ts'ung
Na XpS in his "Yuan-taiti Pai-lien chiao"
that since the Han fatherand son were
7Ctp-it, 2 (1983):212-14. Yang argued the source of "Ming-wang" should
faithfulfollowersof the White Lotus Society, he traced it to "Ta-a-mi-t'o ching"
have come from a Buddhist sutra, and
(The Great Amitabha Sutra), where the "Princeof Brilliance"was
tSJt "Ta Ming" originatedfrom a Buddhist
anothername for Buddha.In this case, This revisionistthesisis
source,and was not relatedto the Manichaeantradition.
. .
very convlnclng. state name, see, among
5 For earlier studies on the origin of the Jurchen(Tokyo:Fuzambot1llg,
to mtA
others,IchimuraSanjirottttR1S, Toyoshi iE3g4, "Ch'i-tan ming-hao k'ao-shih"
1940), 2: 603-606; Feng Chia-sheng Yu-fu
eGg,tS, Yen-ching hsueh-pao2t,>>>R 13 (June 1933): 2(}25; Chin University
(Chi-lin: National Northeastern
iXLt, Tung-peit'ung-shihAkAt Chin-ch'aoshih
g-,kt, 1941), 6: 22a-23b; see also Yao Ts'ung-wutL%,
vol. 3 (Taipei:Cheng-chung
ch'uan-chi
hsien-sheng tt+t,
*Xt, in YaoEs'ung-wu
shu-chuE + M, 1973),p. 34.
personalnameofthe KhitanemperorYeh-luTsung-chen413XvE,
r. 1031-1055, temple-nameHsing-tsung m.) The founders of
this new state, led by the dominant Wan-yen ziW clan who
supplanted the Khitans as rulers of North China until 1234,
belonged to the so-called "raw" or "savage" (sheng 'S) Jurchen
tribes.They flourishedin the middleand lower SungariRiverand
were the least influencedby Khitan culture. In the early twelfth
century, the Wan-yen clan consolidatedpower over the Jurchen
tribes, and, under the able leadershipof their chieftainA-ku-ta
(T'ai-tsu), they exploitedthe Khitan weaknessand rose in rebel-
lion. In due course, with superior cavalry, good fortune, and
cooperationof the Northern Sung, they annihilatedthe Khitan
Liao state and established another "conquest dynasty" in the
northeasternterritories.The Jurchensthen subduedthe Northern
Sung in 1127 and ruledNorth Chinafor over a century,until they
succumbedto the Mongolsin the early thirteenthcentury.6
Fromthe inceptionofJurchenrule, however,therewas constant
conflictand competitionbetweentheJurchenand Chineseforcesin
the consolidationof the new state. On the one hand,the Chin rulers
endeavoredto perpetuatethe nativeJurchen elements-political
institutions,social norms,cultural,religioustraditionsand the like
to buttressthe ethnic identityof their rule in North China. On
the other hand, as a minority ruling over a large indigenous
population,they were disposedto adopt the superiorpoliticaland
cultural traditionsof their Chinese subjects, in order to secure
controland impute legitimacyto their authority.
In the beginning,during the reigns of the first three emperors
until about 1150, the Jurchen rulersestablisheda dual system of
government,employing native organizationsto administertheir
own people and adoptingsinitic institutionsto governthe Chinese
inhabitants.The earlieststate capital,named Shang-ching 1n,9> or
Supreme Capital in 1138 by EmperorHsi-tsung I«Bg(r. 1135-
1149), was situated outside of the Chinese heartland,in modern
A-ch'engFJi,A,southeastof Harbin,Heilungchiang.The dual sys-
tem of governmentwas abandoned,however,by Prince Hai-ling
6 Fora surveyof the historyofJurchenrulefromthe foundingof the Chinstate

to its demiseby the Mongolconquest,see, amongothers,ToyamaGunjiL4WiX
Kinchoshi kenkyuQRrt (Kyoto:Toyoshikenkyukai:i¢tRt*, 1964),Intro.
Yao, Chin-ch'aoshih;Jing-shenTao, TheJurchen in Twelfth-century
China:A Studyof
Sinicization
(Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress,1976),and ChangPo-ch'uan
W:t$7@, Chin-shih
chien-pien
XtGb (Shen-yang:Liao-ningjenjin @Xt ch'u-
pan she, 1984),passim.
LAM CHAN
HOK
260
sinophileJurchenemperors,
(r. 115>1 161),one ofthe most
1W1WE Chin state into a full-fledged
he attemptedto transformthe
when and to unifyChina
dynastyby encouragingsinicization, In
"Chinese" against the Southern Sung.
launchinga massive invasion
by to Yen-ching t, (modern
Hai-ling transferredthe capital or CentralCapital.By that
1153,
then knownas Chung-tu @014
Peking), to conquer the rest of China,
despite the abortiveattempt elite had reachedsuch alarm-
time,
influenceamongtheJurchen EmperorShih-tsungt!tgc
Chinese
proportionsthat Hai-ling'ssuccessor,
ing theJurchen heritageby prom-
1161-1189),soughtto revitalize
(r. movement,however, failed
a "nativisticmovement."This
oting sinicizationcontinued
dismally,and the trend toward increasing sinicizedsucces-
Duringthe next decades,Shih-tsung's
unabated. and Hsuan-tsung v (r.
Chang-tsungor (r. 119s1209)
sors native traditions,and
paid only lip service to their
1213-1224) institutionsand Con-
increasinglyembracedthe Chinesepolitical and legitimize their
fucianideology to bolster their leadershipand Chineseelements
authority.The strugglebetweentheJurchen
state.7
coloredthe entirehistoryof the Chin the proclamationof
traditions,
In the contextof these competing
state foundedafter the successful
anoicial name for the Jurchen regardedas a top priority
rebellionagainstthe Liaowas necessarily in
"Chin"was initiatedby A-ku-ta
anda sacredevent. The name himselfthe emperor-founder of a
1115,when he declared
January as "huang-tichai" t WS, later
newstate in his capitalthen known Capital. The rationalefor
as Shang-chingor Supreme
upgraded name of his state was laid
choosing the Chinesewordchinto be the (sheng-hsun S11), promul-
outby A-ku-tain his "HolyInjunctions"
This decreewas recordedin Chinese
gateduponhis enthronement. Recordsof the Chin Grand
inthe ChinT'ai-tsushih-lu(Veritable
by the sinicized court historians
Progenitor),compiled in 1148 incorporatedinto the Chinshih
Xt
underHsi-tsung.It was laterChin history completed under the
(Chin History), the ofiicial Toghon-temur(ShunTi 1110W,
auspicesof the last Mongolemperor
reads:8
r. 1333-1370)in late 1344. It
briefly,Toyama, Kinchoshi, pp. 18-55; Yao,

7 For these developments,see TheJurchen, chaps. 3X, S7; and Chang, Chin
shih,chaps. 4, S8; Tao,
Chin-ch'ao
shih,chaps. F7. hereafter,CS) 2: 8a-b.
8 See T'o-t'o RE
et al., Chinshih it (PN ed.; of the state name,
Injunctionson the declaration
Fragmentsof A-ku-ta'sHoly T'ai-tsushih-lu,are preservedin Li T'ao f , Hsu
originallyrecordedin the Chin gRiAtA.Sd, ed. Yang Chia-lo
igrV
(Taipei:
ch'ang-pien
Tzu-chiht'ung-chien
In the first year of Shou-kuo &M [1115], the jen-shen3EF4Idate of the first
month [January 28] . . ., [A-ku-ta] ascended the throne. His Majesty said: "Liao
chose black iron for its name because it is hard in quality. Although black iron is
hard, it eventually deteriorates; only chin[gold/metal] does not change or deterio-
rate. The color of gold is white, and the Wan-yen clan esteems white." Thereupon,
he declared the state title "Ta Chin" [Great Golden] and changed the era name to
Shou-kuo ["Capturing the Country"]....
This edict asserts that the Jurchen founding emperor came to
adopt "Ta Chin" as the state name by following the Liao precedent
and adding the belief that gold is stronger than iron, as evidenced
by the Jurchens' triumph over their former ruler. The claim that
the Wan-yen clan esteemed white was based on the native belief in
the appearance of pure, white, auspicious portents and symbols at
the time of the dynastic founding. This notion was also buttressed
by the fact that the sacred mountain in the Jurchen settlement,
situated in the southeast of Manchuria on the Korean border, was
called Ch'ang-pai shan X:bLL1(Ever White Mountain).9 By this
account, it was the charisma of A-ku-ta and the distinctive Jurchen
heritage, with its strong and unique regional overtones that im-
puted legitimacy to the new dynasty.
Such a traditional explanation of the origin of the Jurchen state
name, however, is rather unclear and is belied by other
documentary evidence. Sources show that Liao derived its title
from the Liao River in the Liao-tung peninsula, where the Khitans
founded their early settlement; moreover, according to the late
Feng Chia-sheng 1 the reference to "black iron" in this
passage is a garbled statement which probably should have re-
ferred to the original meaning of the tribal name Ch'i-tan (Khitan),
not the state title Liao, although the origin of the latter word
remains unsettled. This confusion was primarily caused by
erroneous reading by later historians who inadvertently changed
the Jurchen reference to "Khitan" to the Chinese dynastic title
Shih-chieh shu-chii , 1965; hereafter, HCP) 38: 16b, and also Hsiu Meng-
hsin B San-ch'aopei-menghui-pien - *A~LgW (Taipei: Wen-hai 3 ch'u-pan
she, 1964; hereafter, SCPM) 3: lb. The latter has been translated in Herbert
Franke, "Chinese Texts on the jurchen: A Translation oftheJurchen Monograph
in the San-ch'aopei-menghui-pien,"Zentralasiatische
Studien9 (1975), p. 159.
9 The purported appearance of white auspices at the time of the founding of
the Chin state was invoked frequently by the participants in the discussions on the
designation of the cosmic patron under Chang-tsung and Hsiian-tsung. See
TCTYTS 3a, 10b, 15b, 17a, 18b. On the Jurchen people's reverence for their
sacred Mount Ch'ang-pai and its sacrificial offerings, see Murata Jir0 t4EUMM,
"Ch'ang-pai shan ch'ung-pai k'ao" A EfU:m , trans. Pi Jen-yung gII), Jen-
wenyueh-k'anARi ~fi, 6, no. 7 (September 1935): 1-8.
A:7z (r. 1055-1101)(i.e., "Tao-tsungai-ts'e" ), shouldbe pronounced
k'ei
262 HOK LAM CHAN
"Liao"in the belief that they were one and the same.l°Neverthe-
less, few Chin scholar-officials,
Jurchenor Chinese,seriouslyques-
tioned the traditionalexplanationthat the state name was derived
fromthe main productof theirstate-"gold" afterthe Khitan
example,or the rationalefor consideringChin the legitimatesuc-
cessorto the defunctLiao state, until later years.
In effect,the adoptionof the state name"Ta Chin,"accordingto
contemporaryrecords, originated with the recommendationof
YangP'o (or P'u)%th ( F ), a sinicizedPo-haiif iXchin-shih scholar
fromLiao-ningg, who had earlierenteredA-ku-ta'sserviceand
gained his confidence.Yang was credited, among others, with
advising A-ku-ta on governmentalorganization,and persuading
him to proclaimhimselfemperorand adopt a Chinese-stylestate
name.The reasonfor choosing"Chin"was that the riverwherethe
Wan-yenclan originallysettled a right tributaryof the Sungari
in eastern Manchuria produced gold/metal and had been
named An-ch'u-huX1MS, a name derived from an-ch'unXt,
ancun,or alcun,meaning"gold"in theirnativelanguage.This river
is now knownas A-shih SJ+tRiver. It is quite possiblethat Yang
P'o so advisedA-ku-ta by followingthe Liao precedent,but it is
clearthat the state title was chosenfromthe name of the river,not
1OScholarshaveall agreedthat the Liaostatetitle was derivedfromthe name

of the riverwherethe Khitanshad theirearlysettlementin southernManchuria,
and it bore no relation to the tribal name. The original meaning of Khitan
(Ch'i-tan),accordingto Feng Chia-sheng'spreliminarysurvey ("Ch'i-tanming-
hao k'ao-shih,"pp. 3142), was "iron" or "steel." This view, however, was
recentlychallengedby Chi-shihND, a scholarfromLiaoning,on the basis of his
researchon the Khitanscript.He contendsthat the two charactersets " X 'Ra "
in the Khitaninscriptionof the stele of the tombof the Liao EmperorTao-tsung
duanin with the meaningof "greatcenter"(tachung-yangAiP). (Forthis text, see

Ch'i-tan hsiao-tzuyen-chiu
ezJ>wR?t, eds. Ch'ing-ko-erh-t'ai%j%, Liu Feng-
chu WIJ*, et al. [Peking:Chung-kuoshe-huik'o-hsueh@ISIE*4 ch'u-pan
she, 1985],pp. 51916.) Ch'i-tan(Khitan),therefore,was a Chinesetranscription
of k'eiduan.Chi thussuggeststhat the Khitansso calledthemselvesbecausethese
seminomadicpeopleconsidered,in their parochialweltanschauung, that they had
occupiedthe "center"of China. See his "Ch'i-tankuo-haochieh" fflGlN,
She-huik'o-hsueh chi-k'an
t*444fIJ, 1983,no. 1 (February):104-10. This very
interestingbut provocativehypothesis,however,has not been acceptedby most
Chinesescholars,who foundfaultwith his methodologyin deciperingthe Khitan
script. See briefly,Ch'en Nai-hsiung1W75X,"Ch'i-tantzu yen-chiu shu-lueh"
etRtA@ in Languages
andHistoryin EastAsia:Festschrift
for TatsuoNishidaon
theOccasion of his60thBirthday(Kyoto:Shokado,1988),pp. 244=46.
on the ground that gold is harder and less changeable in quality

than iron.'`
It is equally untrue that the name was adopted in consideration
of the sinitic Five Agents theory as later alleged. In the course of
time, this belief in the Jurchen origin of the state title infused a
powerful mythological lore into the native tradition, and provided
an enduring inspiration to the Chin scholar-officialsin establishing
the legitimacy of their dynasty. This symbolic meaning of the
Jurchen state name, we should also note, was well known to Chin's
contemporaries. In the SecretHistoryof theMongols,for example, all
the Chin emperors are referred to as the "Altan ('golden') khan of
the Kitat (i.e., Jurchen) people," from A-ku-ta to the last ruler
Ai-tsung (r. 1224-1234). This terminology was later adopted
by Marco Polo in his Descriptionsof the World,where he mentions a
"Golden King" (Roi d'Or) in North China in reference to the last
Chin emperor. The title of the Jurchen state thus became the first
name of a "Chinese" dynasty to gain considerable publicity in
medieval Europe.'2
` On Yang P'o's biographies, see briefly, SCPM 3: lb, and Yeh

Lung-li
Xfflt,Ch'i-tankuo-chihPR-fIR (Shanghai: Shang-hai ku-chi htfmi ch'u-pan
she, 1985), p. 112; cf. Toyama, Kinchoshi,pp. 136-38. For details of Yang's career
and contributions, see Wang Han-chiang liil and Ho Chiin-che f t, "Liueh-
lun Yang P'o yii Chin-ch'u ti huo-tung chi ch'i p'ing-chia" 4
C 9 MRA -11, Liao-ChinCh'i-tanNii-chenshihyen-chiuLAQ J5C5, 1988, no.
2 (December): 24-27. The river where the Jurchen tribesmen established their
early settlement was variably written in Chinese as An-ch'u-hu
9 ( i ) Hfirt ' E, A-chu-hu WMAS, and An-chu-hu AL in Chin records.
See, for example, CS 1: 3a,. 3b, 24: lb-2a, 67: 3b. These variant transcriptions are
all derived from ancunor alcun,thejurchen word for "gold" (chin).On the origin of
this word, see among others, Han Ju-lin "'St, "Nui-chen i-ming k'ao"
ttW%t, reprinted in his Ch'iung-luchi RA3 (Shanghai: Shang-hai jen-min
ch'u-pan she, 1982), pp. 469-72; Gerhard Doerfer, Turkischeund mongolische
Elementeim Neupersischen ... ., vol. 2 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1965), pp. 112-14;
Chin Kuang-p'ing F and Chin Ch'i-tsung , Nu-chenyi-yen wen-tzu
yen-chiu f (Peking: Wen-wu h1tJ ch'un-pan she, 1980), p. 122;
Tao-erh-chi jag and Ho-hsi-ko n Nii-chen i-yuyen-chiu t (Nei-
meng-kuta-hsuehhsueh-paotseng-k'anCgwA VX fIi (Huhehot, Inner Mongolia,
1983), p. 156. See also Chin Ch'i-tsung, Nu-chenwentz'u-tien t (Peking: Wen-wu
ch'u-pan she, 1984), p. 224.
12 On the reference to the "Altan Khan of the Kitat People" in the Mongol
chronicles, see The SecretHistoryof the Mongols,trans. Francis W. Cleaves (Cam-

bridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1982), pp. 11 (#53), 62(#133), 184
(#248). See also Igor de Rachewiltz in PapersonFar EasternHistory,4 (September
1971), pp. 126, 156, n. 53; 10 (September, 1974), pp. 58, 73, n. 132; 30 (September
264 HOK LAM CHAN
An old Jurchen belief that surfaced in later reigns amid inten-

sified sinicization claimed that the name "Chin" was suggested to
the Jurchens by the Sung people in reference to the Five Agents
theory, which had been a popular source of legitimation since the
Ch'in and Han periods. This claim was put forward by the partici-
pants in the second round of the "Discussions on the Cyclical
Domination of Cosmic Powers" (Te-yuni f A) under Emperor
Hsuian-tsung. The main purpose of these discussions, as detailed
later, was to designate an appropriate cosmic patron to legitimize
the Chin state as successor to the Chinese political order in the
interdynastic linkage pattern. It is said that when A-ku-ta was
seeking assistance from the Sung during his campaign against the
Khitans, he asked the Chinese officials to suggest a name for the
Jurchen state. Since Sung had proclaimed Fire Power, they advised
the Jurchen ruler to adopt "Chin," alluding to Metal Power, and,
as fire overcomes metal according to the "cyclical conquest" for-
mula of the Five Agents scheme, it implied that Sung would even-
tually triumph over its rival. The jurchen chieftain, unaware of this
implication, thus chose "Ta Chin" to be the state title as recom-
mended. 13
This story, however, is debatable, since all the evidence points to
other interpretations; but there can be two explanations. It is
plausible that such a legend was contrived by the participants of
the legitimate succession discussions in support of the designation
of Metal Power for the Chin state. It is also quite likely that the
sinicized Jurchen rulers may have discovered later the symbolic
implication of the state name in the Five Agents scheme, and that
this discovery lent credence to the old Jurchen legend about the
title. The latter explanation seems likely, since there are references
in the Chinshih to the later Chin Emperor Shih-tsung adopting the
ch'ouXL day for the la * (terminal) sacrifice during the twelfth
month, which corresponds to the observance of the ebbing of the
Metal Power in the Five Agents formulation.'4 There is no evi-
1984), pp. 82, 108, n. 248; 31 (March 1985), pp. 41, 85, n. 281. For Marco Polo's
description of the "Golden King" in his Descriptionof the World,see TheBookof Ser
MarcoPolo, ... ., trans. and ed. Henry Yule, vol. 2 (New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1929), Bk. II, chap. 28-29, pp. 17-22. He gave a rather fantastic account of
an encounter between the "Golden King" and the legendary PresterJohn without
any reference to historical contents.
13 This was cited by T'ien T'ing-fang, one of the
participants in the discussions
on the designation of the cosmic patron under Hsilan-tsung in early 1214. See
TCTYTS 18b; cf. Legitimation,p. 167.
14 CS 6: 12b, 16b, 8: 20a.
dence, however, that they turned to the cosmic pulsation theory to

reinforce their native mythology as a source of legitimation until
the later reigns of the dynasty.
In this connection, it is significant that the Chin state name
before long became an imperial taboo as a result of accelerated
sinicization of the Jurchen rulers. This occurred in the reign of
Shih-tsung, during which Chinese influence reached its peak de-
spite the emperor's conscious effort to revitalize the Jurchen heri-
tage by launching the nativistic movement. It was a period which
saw increasing introduction of imperial taboos in conformity with
the Chinese tradition. In April 1169, for instance, Shih-tsung
tabooed the term hsiao chin W0 when he promulgated the dress
regulations for officials and commoners. The term hsiaochinrefers to
a type of expensive silk with gold embroidery. It was tabooed
probably because it literally means "melted gold," and could be
interpreted as "melting down the Chin state," an unlucky phrase
for the jurchen rulers. Shih-tsung decreed that henceforth, whenev-
er the term occurred in the old statutes, it had to be changed to ming
chinM-, i.e., "bright gold," auspiciously connoting "brighten up
the Chin state."
In May 1180, after having forbidden slaves to don gauze and
variegated silk, the emperor issued a further order that only impe-
rial clansmen, imperial relatives by marriage, and wives of officials
of the first rank were allowed to wear the "bright gold" dress. This
ruling, though ostensibly intended to discourage the kind of ex-
travagance practiced by the Northern Sung, was tacitly designed to
bolster the distinct identity of the Jurchen rulers and the senior
court officials.'5The tabooing of hsiaochinis thus a vivid illustration
of how the adoption of Chinese imperial customs sanctified the
Jurchen state name. This case also shows that Shih-tsung tena-
ciously honored the traditional interpretation of the state title in his
conscious effort to preserve the native heritage. Notwithstanding
his observance of the sinitic la sacrifice during the twelfth month,
the Five Agents theory had not yet made a significant impact on
Chin politics.
15
On Emperor Shih-tsung's orders to taboo the term hsiao chin in the pro-
mulgation of dress regulations, see CS 6: 18a, 23a, 7: 5b. For a parallel statute
under the Sung Emperor Chen-tsung Q7r,(r. 998-1022) to discourage extravance,
see HCP 69: 5a; T'o-t'o et al., Sungshih *P (PN ed.) 7: 17a. On the proliferation
of imperial taboos on Chin nomenclature introduced since Shih-tsung, see Ch'en
Yuan a;-, Shih-huichu-litP*iff (Peking: K'o-hsiieh f4W ch'u-pan she, 1958),
pp. 120-25.
LAM CHAN
HOK
266
Interpretations
Changing of "Ta Chin"(I)
of the Chin state name was sub-
Thetraditionalinterpretation under EmperorsChang-tsung
to considerablecontroversy
jected Chin rulersinvokedthe
Hsuan-tsungwhen these two sinicized
and authorityandJurchenrulein
Agentstheoryto legitimizetheir of courtdiscussions,known
Five
Both emperorsinitiateda series accordingto the "cyclical
China.
Te-yun
as i, to designatea cosmicpatron theory. I have already
production" formula of the Five Agents my recentbookon the
in
examined theseimportanteventsin detailcourt discussions vividly
of the Chin dynasty. The
legitimation mechanism
to the Jurchen rulers'familiaritywith the sinitic in
attest and theirextraordinaryskills
postulatingdynasticlegitimacy,
for their political objectives.l6
the prevalenttheoriesto suit
tailoring successioninitiated
on legitimate
In a nutshell, the discussions the culminationof a sacrosanct
bythe Chin emperorsmarked The Chinese term approx-
traditionin imperialChina.
political in the sense of the
the Western concept of legitimacy,
imating
mandate and the recognition of his rightby the governed,is
ruler's words,cheng
known as cheng-t'ung SE. It originatedin two separate of
found in two key phrases in the Kung-yang 'S;+*
chuan
andt'ung,
t@R (Spring andAutumn Annals,722481 B.C.) com-
theCh'un-ch'iu They are "ho yen hu wang
posed around the third centuryB.C. ("Whydoes
ta i-t'ung yeh" (9J> $E:ES s 7t at)
cheng-yueh, month? Because he majestically
itso mention the king's firstand "ku chun-tzu ta chu-cheng"
inauguratesa new reign"), superiorman augustly commands
ttf7t)sE ("Therefore,the of the
upright position"). These twin phrases laid the basis of
an for postulating the legitimacy
moral-ethical, political criteria
rulershipin the classicalera. later in
The term cheng-t'ung as a compound,however,appeared
meant"correctfiliation"or "prop-
LaterHan literature.It initially for establishingthe legitima-
erbloodline"as one of the conditions
but it acquiredthe genericmeaning
of
of the Eastern Han rulers, the en-
cy much broadenedcriteriain
"legitimatesuccession"with
three parts. Part I is a

See Legitimation(cf. note 1). This book contains perspectiveas well as
and legitimationin historical
16
generalsurveyof legitimacy imperialChina.PartII is devotedto an analysisof
the patternof legitimation in Chin emperors
of the cosmicpatronunderthe
the discussionson the designationPart III is an annotated translationof Ta-Chin
Chang-tsungand EIsuan-tsung. primarycollectionof ofEcial
documents for these
te-yunt'u-shuo(TCTYTS), the
.
.
c .lscusslons.
suing centuries. There were two principal sources for postulating

the legitimacy of rulership in ancient political thought and prac-
tices. The first included the theory of theocratic kingship in the
Shang state, the doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven under the
Chou, the principles of benevolent rulership and rectification of
names expounded by Confucius (551-479 B.C.) and his disciples,
and the moral-ethical principles of the Springand AutumnAnnals.
The other was the cyclical theory of historical change according to
the Five Agents theory formulated by the cosmological school of
Tsou Yen bW (305-240? B.C.) of the later Chan-kuo C1, or
Warring States period (480-221 B.C.).`7
According to Tsou Yen's treatise Chu-yuntAE (Domination of
Cosmic Powers), the primal mechanism of all changes in the uni-
verse came from the cyclical rotation of the five major agents
(wu-hsing Ii) or powers (wu-teEti ) of the basic cosmic forces:
Earth, Wood, Metal, Fire, and Water. These Five Agents are not
physical substances but cosmic forces that control periods of time
in a fixed cycle. Four of these elements, Wood, Fire, Metal, and
Water, are assigned to the four seasons with their corresponding
colors and directions, whereas Earth commands the central posi-
tion and coordinates the changes of the other elements and their
associations. The pulsations of these Five Agents follow a sequence
in which one is overcome by the next in the order of Earth, Wood,
Metal, Fire, and Water, and each evolves in a cycle of rise and
decline without fixed duration. This came to be known as the
"cyclical conquest" formula of the Five Agents theory.
Under this scheme, the pulsations of the Five Agents are related
to changes in cosmic configurations, and, by extension, to changes
in all human activities, including political affairs. Just as each
season is governed by an agent, each state or regime likewise rules
by virtue of a particular element that it honors by adopting the
color associated with that element in banners and by performing
suitable rituals. The assignments of the particular cosmic power
was supported by the appearance of auspices presaging the
appropriate elemental virtue by which a ruler could legitimate his
` For a general survey of the Chinese concept of cheng-t'ung,its primary

sources, and its application to historical writing, see Jao Tsung-i EKR,Chung-kuo
shih-hsueh shangchihcheng-t'unglun F (Hong Kong: Lung-men tUX
shu-tien, 1977), passim. I have provided an analysis of this important Chinese
political concept in a comparative framework in Legitimation,chaps. 1, 2. The
citations from the Kung-yangCommentary of the Ch'un-ch'iuare quoted from Ho Hsiu
5J{*,Ch'un-ch'iuKung-yang Ho-shihchieh-ku ' (SPPY ed.) 1: lb, 2: 7b.
268 HOK LAM CHAN
political authority. Tsou Yen had provided such an example in his

treatise; he assigned Earth to the legendary Huang Ti IMR(Yellow
Emperor), Wood to Yu (Hsia), Metal to T'ang (founder of the
Shang-Yin RC state), and Fire to Chou, with their corresponding
color symbols of yellow, blue or green, white, and red. This theory
of cyclical evolution of history thus revolutionized the classical
criteria of legitimate rulership and was subjected to various inter-
pretations and manipulation by later rulers according to individual
circumstances.18
Shih huang-ti Co@W (r. 221-210 B.C.), who inaugurated the
Ch'in *, the first centralized bureaucratic empire in Chinese his-
tory, by unifying six feudal kingdoms in 221 B.C., was the first
imperial ruler to invoke the Five Agents theory for legitimation.
According to the cosmologists, the Chou house possessed the Fire
Power, and its demise gave rise to Water; therefore, the. Ch'in
emperor proclaimed the acquisition of Water Power in succession
to Chou. As a corollary, he adopted the color black for the imperial
vestments and banners, and the sixth numeral as the basic unit of
weights and measures; and he set the tenth month to be the first
month of the year. The founder of Han, Kao-tsu Aiii0 (r. 202-195
B.C.), who overthrew the Ch'in in 206 B.C., followed a similar
device of legitimation. He retained Water as the cosmic patron, not
in emulation of Ch'in, but in consideration of Han succeeding the
Fire of Chou, circumventing the Ch'in in the Five Powers pulsation
cycle.
Kao-tsu's designation was criticized by Confucian scholars,
however, because Water was a symbol of the tyrannical Ch'in state,
and heated debates lingered on during the next decades. Finally,
Emperor Wu W (140-87 B.C.) issued a decree in 104 B.C.
changing the cosmic patron to Earth in consideration of Han
18 Fragments of Tsou Yen's treatise Chu-yinare preserved in Lu Pu-wei

7,,
Li-shih ch'un-ch'iuMRf (SPPY ed.), chian 13, and other Han and post-Han
works. There are several important studies on Tsou Yen and the cosmological
school. See briefly in English, Fung Yu-lan, A Histo7yof ChinesePhilosophy,trans.
Derk Bodde (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952), 1: 159-69; Hsiao
Kung-ch'iian, A Histo?yof ChinesePolitical Thought,trans. F.W. Mote (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1979), 1: 61-65, and Benjamin I. Schwartz, The World
of Thoughtin AncientChina(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985),
chap. 9. On the correlation between the pulsations of the cosmic elements and
changes in color symbols based on Tsou Yen's theory, see Tu, Cheng-chih fu-hao,
pp. 24-42, and Wang Yii-ch'ing I:f, "Li-yuin yii fu-se" in Pao
Tsun-p'enghsien-shengchi-nienlun-wenchi tAlI (Taipei: Nati6nal
Central Library, 1970), pp. 13-46.
overcoming the Water of Ch'in, with corresponding alterations in

rituals and institutional arrangements. In the meantime, the eru-
dite scholar Tung Chung-shu *$ff; (ca. 179-104 B.C.), distin-
guished- for his cosmological interpretation of the Ch'un-ch'iu,
offered a different elucidation of the cyclical pulsation formula of
the Five Agents theory. Tung contended that the Five Agents do
not conquer one another as Tsou Yen assumed, but successively
produce or nourish each other in the sequence of Wood, Fire,
Earth, Metal and Water without specific duration. This came to be
known as the "cyclical production" formula of the Five Agents and
had a revolutionary impact on the designation of cosmic patrons by
later rulers.'9
During the last reigns of the Former Han, as dynastic fortunes
underwent a steady decline, critics of the ineffectual rulers clam-
ored for the adoption of a new cosmic patron to initiate an auspi-
cious era. They maintained that the Earth Power had outrun its
course, and in the belief that the dynastic founder was the son of the
mysterious Red Ruler, proposed changing the designation to Fire
to legitimize desirable political and institutional changes; but no
formal action was taken. It was under Wang Mang, who usurped
the Han house and founded the Hsin dynasty, that the tradition
was revolutionized. Adopting the scheme of his ideologue Liu
Hsin, he proclaimed the acquisition of Earth Power by invoking the
new formula of the Five Agents theory. He claimed that he was the
descendant of Huang Ti as well as Shun, and legitimized his
succession to Han by invoking the myth of the abdication of
Emperor Yao, who possessed Fire Power in legendary antiquity.
Wang Mang's claim, however, did not fit with the "cyclical
production" formula of the Five Agents. Liu Hsin therefore doc-
tored the classics and history to concoct an expanded linkage
'9 See SC 6: lib, 8: 8a, 12: 24b, 26: 4a, 28: 8b; HS 1A: 6b, 6: 25a, 21A: 15b,
25B: 4a, 23b. For details, see Ku Chieh-kang f "Wu-te chung-shih shuo hsia
ti cheng-chih ho li-shih" Et --&1-1 , in Ku-shih pien , vol. 5
(Peiping: P'u-she MEi, 1935), pp. 423-30; Li Han-san 4j-, Hsien-Ch'inLiang-
Han chihyin-yangwu-hsinghsiieh-shuo .t;9i-A-T;eT& (Taipei: Chung-ting
wen-hua ch'u-pan kung-ssu 2 LWSE'PI, 1967), pp. 103-108. See also briefly,
Legitimation,pp. 27-30. Tung Chung-shu elucidated his "cyclical production"
formula of the Five Agents theory in his Ch'un-ch'iu
fan-lu W (SPPY ed.) 10:
9b. See briefly, Fung, ChinesePhilosophy,vol. 1, chap. 2, and Hsiao, Political
Thought,1: 484-502. For details of his political thought, see Michael Loewe,
"Imperial Sovereignty: Dong Zhongshu's Contribution and His Predecessors," in
Foundationsand Limitsof StatePowerin China,ed. Stuart R. Schram (Hong Kong:
Chinese University Press, 1987), pp. 33-57.
270 HOK LAM CHAN
system of succession of ancient rulers, each assigned a cosmic

patron according to the pulsation sequence. This new succession
begins with the legendary ruler Fu-hsi *ka, who possessed Wood
Power, and, after two cycles and ten different reigns, including
Shen-nung ii1 (Fire),... Ti K'u *4f (Wood), Yao-T'ang
(Fire) .. ., and King Wu WFE of Chou (Wood), the Han progenitor
Kao-tsu commanded Fire in succession to Chou. To accommodate
the Ch'in regime, he introduced into these cycles of regular or
legitimate rulers a subcategory of irregular or illegitirnate rulers of
the Water element (later known as jun) to be assigned between
Wood and Fire. They were the legendary Kung-kung fI, who
reigned between Fu-hsi and Shen-nung; Ti Chih , hitherto
anonymous, between Ti K'u and Emperor Yao; and Ch'in, be-
tween Chou and Han; all were relegated to usurper status.20
As a result, this interdynastic linkage scheme geared to the
cyclical production formula of the Five Agents became a standard
mechanism for postulating legitimate succession during the impe-
rial era. Therefore, Emperor Kuang-wu St (r. 25-57), who re-
stored Han rule by toppling Wang Mang, claimed the inheritance
of Fire Power, harking back to the beliefs of the Former Han. Later,
the historian Pan Ku SJ!1-1(A.D. 32-92) introduced the appella-
tions chengiE (regular) and jun PM(intercalary) to designate legiti-
mate and illegitimate rulers in the encomium of the monograph on
Wang Mang in the Hanshu1v (History of the [Former] Han). He
relegated the Hsin house to the jun category in condemnation of
Wang Mang and reestablished the legitimacy of the Han. In this
context, chengalludes to the regular elements in the cosmic pulsa-
tion sequence, whereas jun connotes irregular elements, approx-
imating the residual fraction in calendrical calculations, and these
two terms were subsequently employed for designating rightful
rulers and usurpers respectively in political theories and historical
writings.21
In this connection, we should note a new addition to the basic
20
On Wang Mang's usurpation and radical reforms, see HS, chian 99A-99C,
translated in Homer H. Dubs, Histoiyof theFormerHan Dynasty,vol. 3 (Baltimore:
Waverly Press, 1955), chap. 99. For details of his legitimation scheme and Liu
Hsin's role, see Ku, Ku-shihpien,pp. 509-24, 597-613, and briefly, Legitimation,pp.
30-32.
21 On Pan Ku's delegitimation of Wang Mang, see HS 99C: 36b; trans. in
Dubs, FormerHan, 3: 473-74. On Emperor Kuang-wu's redesignation of Fire

Power, see HHS IA: 20a-21a, 24b-25a. Cf. Hans Bielenstein, "The Restoration of
the Han Dynasty" IV, Bulletinof the Museumof Far EasternAntiquities51 (Stock-
holm, 1979), p. 164.
"TA CHIN" (GREATGOLDEN)
271
rituals associatedwith the designationof the cosmic patronsince
the LaterHan. This was the introductionof two importantannual
sacrificesknownas tsul (genesis)and la #l (terminal)to affirnzthe
symbolicpresenceof the appropriatecosmicagent.The observance
of theseritualsprobablybeganin the last yearsof the FormerHan,
but they became institutionalized after Emperor Kuang-wu
adopted Fire. They stemmed from the belief that all the cosmic
powersfolloweda regularcycle of rise and decline, and that sac-
rificesshould be offieredon specificdates to ensure their blessing.
Tsuwas usually held duringthe first month of the year, when the
cosmic power ascended, and la in the twelfth month, when the
cosmic power ebbed. Accordingto the cosmologists,tsuand la
sacrificeswere held on fixeddates duringthe first and last months
in correspondencewith the designationof the cosmic patrons as
follows:Water:tzu=D(tsu),ch'enK (la);Fire:wu 4 (tsu),hsuR (la);
Nood:mao VP (tsu),ch'ou i: (la);Metal:yufi (tsu),ch'ou(la); Earth:
hsu(tsu),ch'en(la). These sacrificeswere observedby all the dynas-
tic rulerswho adopteda cosmic power as a symbol of legitimacy,
includingthe Jurchen-Chinemperorsunder examination.22
The reasonsfor EmperorsChang-tsungand later Hsuan-tsung
to initiate discussionsto designate-a cosmic patron for the Chin
state as a majorsourceof legitimationhave been fully exploredin
my aforementionedstudy. To recapitulate the motivations of
Chang-tsung,the grandson and successor to Shih-tsung,he in-
vokedthe Chinesepoliticaltraditionto reinforcehis legitimacyout
of fearof losing the heavenlymandateduringinternaland external
crisespresentat the time of his enthronement.He facedon the one
hand the attempted rebellion of his ambitious uncles and the
challengeof conservativemilitaryleadersagainsthis accession;and
on the other hand, the grim spectreof economicstagnationdue to
unrestrainedgovernmentexpenditure,floodingof the Yellow Riv-
er, social unrest as a result of the state's discriminatorypolicies,
and militarythreatson the borderby the Tanguts (Hsi Hsia GiR:),
Mongols, and the SouthernSung.
Hsuan-tsung,Chang-tsung'shalf brotherwho was enthronedby
the rebelliousJurchengeneralHo-shih-liehChi-chung,gzEalJ+
(i.e. Hu-sha-huMiZJS, d. November 1213) in a palace coup
d'etat after the slaying of the emperor, Prince Wei-shao SiE
22 On these ritual arrangements,

see Ch'eng Po-yu 1A;f12W, Li-chiwai-chuan
Xg,d,S , in Ma Kuo-han.%1S1S, ed., Yu-hanshan-fang chi-ishu TAi 14g;R
( 1883ed.) 9b, and WangYing-lin4:S1M,Hsiao-hsuehkan-chuoJ8FW80S (Ts'ung-shu
chi-ch'engt:ttFS ed.) 37b. Cf. Legitimation,
p. 178, n. 36.
272 HOK LAM CHAN
(r. 1209-1213), initiated a similar mode of legitimation out of

desperation. He needed to strengthen his legitimacy as imperial
successor to rally the support of the sinicized Jurchen elite and
Chinese scholar-officials against the domination of the powerful
generals, and thereby bolster his authority and the stature of the
Chin state against the threats of the Mongols and the Southern
Sung. These discussions, though centered on academic and ideo-
logical issues, had deep-seated political motivations and exigent
contemporary relevance.23
Under Chang-tsung three main sessions in the discussions on the
"Cyclical Domination of Powers" took place over an eight-year
period between 1194 and 1202. The documents on these discus-
sions, which were presided over by the Presidential Council (shang-
shu shengfMPit) at the Central Capital, are no longer extant, but
fragments were preserved in the collection of documents on the
next round of similar discussions initiated by Hsilan-tsung in early
1214. This collection, known as Ta Chinte-yunt'u shuo .
(Explanations of theGreatChin'sPower-cycle with Charts;hereafter cited
as TCTYTS), includes excerpts of imperial decrees, memoranda
from the Presidential Council, individual discourses submitted by
the participants, as well as a chart illustrating the cosmic powers of
all past dynasties from Huang Ti down to the Sung for general
reference (see Appendix).24
Four major propositions emerged from this first series of discus-
sions. The participants including Chinese and Jurchen scholar-
officials, each proposed a specific cosmic patron for the Chin state
on ideological and political grounds. Their proposals ranged from
the Metal Power, either in compliance with A-ku-ta's Holy Injunc-
tions or in succession to the Earth Power of T'ang, to Wood Power
after the Water Power of Liao, or Earth Power in replacement of
Sung. Those who proposed the Metal Power subjected the Chin
23
On the political vicissitudes under which these discussions were initiated at
the Chin court, see Yao, Chin-ch'aoshih, chap. 8; Tao, TheJurchen, chap. 7;
Legitimation,Part II, chaps. 4, 5, and Chang, Chin-shih,chaps. 6, 7.
24
This collection of documents has been translated with annotations in Legit-
imation,Part III. The Ssu-k'uch'ian-shuedition provides a superb text, but the
rendition ofJurchen names varied greatly from the Yuan edition of the CS. In the
Ssu-k'u edition, the orthography followed the modified system introduced by
the Ch'ien-lung court in 1747 in conformity with the transcription in the Manchu
language. To avoid confusion, whenever Jurchen names were mentioned, I used
the orthography given in the CS, but included the variants as they appeared in the
Ssu-k'uedition in parenthesis. On the transmission of this collection, see Legitima-
tion, pp. 141-43. For details of the discussions on the designation of the cosmic
patron under Chang-tsung, see ibid., Part II, chap. 4.
state name to various new interpretations in an attempt to fit

Jurchen rule into the cosmic pulsation scheme of the Five Agents
theory in order to legitimize its succession to past Chinese dynas-
ties.
The first group, represented by Minister ofJustice Li Yu i
(1135-1206) and Han-lin Executive Academician Tang Huai-ying
i~t.'- (1134-1411), argued that Chin should adopt Metal Power
with its corresponding white symbols, and without reference to the
cosmic pulsation formula of the Five Agents theory. Li Yu con-
tended that since the founding emperor chose "Chin" for the state
title, and the ch'ouday had been set for the la sacrifice in the twelfth
month for over eighty years, the proclamation of Metal Power
would comply with the will of Heaven, the way of the people, and
the Holy Injunctions. Tang Huai-ying presented a similar view,
but strengthened his argument by invoking the precedent of the
Yin people of antiquity in the Neo-Confucian interpretation of the
Chinese classical tradition. He cited the revisionist thesis of Su Shih
Wt (1036-1101) in his Shu-chuan f (i.e., Tung-p'oShu chuan
ittX1W); namely, that Yin inherited the Metal Power by waging
war against the Yu kingdom, which possessed the Water Power.
T'ang Huai-ying maintained that Chin's conquest of Liao and
Sung paralleled Yin's subduing of Yii, and that Chin should thus
adopt Metal Power. He pointed out that the designation would
concur with ancestral injunctions and harmonize with auspicious
natural omens, and asserted that there was no need to reconcile the
designation with the succession sequence set forth in the Five
Agents theory.'5
The second group, with Minister of Revenue Sun To , (d.
1215), Han-lin Reader-in-waiting Academician Chang Hsing-
chien eTM (1146-1215), and Minister of Imperial Sacrifices
Yang T'ing-yiin C1EP as the main spokesmen, concurred with the
adoption of Metal Power with its corresponding white symbols, but
viewed it as the successor to the Earth Power of T'ang. They
maintained that all the interim states of the Five Dynasties after
T'ang, namely Chu-Liang ;X (907-923), (Shih)-Tsien (fE) W
(936-947), Later T'ang XXJw(923-934), Liu-Han WIJM (947-
951), and Kuo-Chou V)M (951-960), were usurpers and too
short-lived to merit participation in dynastic succession. The same
could be said of Sung, since by ignoring T'ang to link with the
25 TCTYTS 2a-b. For the biographies of Li Yii

and Tang Huai-ying, see CS
96: ab; 125: lb.
274 HOK LAM CHAN
Wood Power of Later (Northern) Chou as Fire Power, it had

droppedout of the propersequenceof succession,occupyingonly
an "intercalary"(^un)(i.e., illegitimate)positionbetweenthe legiti-
mate dynasties.They then pointed out that the Holy Injunctions
had declaredthat the Wan-yen clan esteemedwhite as the color
symbol,and therewereauspiciousappearancesof purewhite birds
and animalsat the timeof the state'sfounding.All theseattestedto
the presenceof Metal Power;hence,Chin shouldsucceedto T'ang,
bypassingthe wickedcontemporaneousSung houses.26
The thirdgroup,representedby DirectorLu Chen-kan MAW
and CollatorChao Mi dtEX of the Imperial Library,proposed
that since Chin ascendedby subduingLiao, and since Liao pro-
claimedthe WaterPower,which nourishesWood accordingto the
cyclicalproductionformula,it would be properfor Chin to adopt
Wood Power in succession to Liao. They contended that Chin
could not seek linkage with Sung, since it was replaced by the
Jurchenpuppetstates of Ch'u X and Ch'i X, whose rulersChang
Pang-ch'ang3;lEFl3E3(r. April 1127) and of Liu Yu WIJR (r. 113S
1137),wereappointedby the Chin emperorto ruleover the former
Sung territoriesof Honan and Shantung. Under these circum-
stances, they averred,if Chin chose to succeed Sung, it would
violate the cosmicpulsationcycle of the Five Agents scheme.27
The fourthgroup,with ExecutiveAssistantof ImperialSacrifices
Sun Jen-chieh )k presiding,argued that with the demise of
NorthernSung,Fire Powerwas extinguished,henceChin acquired
Earth Powerin the successionsequenceof the cosmicpowers.He
criticizedthosewho advocatedChin'slinkagewith T'ang, charging
that they were eitherreluctantto consideror refusedto admit the
terminationof the Sung mandate.This extremistposition,howev-
er, was repudiatedas unorthodoxand opportunisticby his Chinese
colleagues,especiallythose presentin the second round of discus-
sions under Hsuan-tsung.Nevertheless,several of the seniorJur-
chen participantssupportedhim and cosigned the written state-
ment. The signitoriesincluded Minister of the Grand Court of
Revision Wan-yen Sa-la zmAIJ ( Z!J ), Han-lin Auxiliary
AcademicianWen-t'e-hanT'ien-hsing MXFit (Wen-t'e-ho
Ta-hsingM}+Mi7tt ), Han-lin Curator of Documents Wan-yen
O-ch'u 7 M-nft1M (Wan-yenWu-ch'u t;X ), Collatorof the Liter-
26 TCTYTS2b-3a. For Sun To's biography, see CS 99: 9a. YangT'ing-yunis

mentionedin CS 11: 2b, 62: 11b.
27 TCTYTS 3a. For Lu Chen-kan'sbiography,see Yuan Hao-wenycUM,
Chung-chou
chi MJIIt (SPTK Ed.; hereafter,CCC) 8: 14a.
ature Advancement Office Chu-chia Chu-tun t19 *. F3 (Chu-chia

Chu-tun ; and others. (The orthographic variants in
parentheses are given in the TYTYTS).
The four different opinions described above did not necessarily
encompass all the suggestions presented, but we have little in-
formation on the views of other individuals who took part in the
discussions. The only exception is Chang Wei TT , father of
Chang Hsing-chien, then a Minister of Rites, who also submitted a
statement at this time. It is said that he made the point that
"discussions on the designation of the cosmic patron of a dynasty
are not confined to antiquity, and the claim to legitimacy does not
follow an established formula." This oblique message suggests that
he seemed to have taken a somewhat flexible position on the issue,
but we have no record of what specific proposals he made.29
The foregoing illustrates a lack of consensus among the discus-
sants in their search for a viable cosmic symbol for the Chin state
and an appropriate interpretation of its official name, even though
most of them made reference to the Five Agents theory. The
majority of the discussants advocated the Metal Power, but for a
variety of reasons. They may be classified, to adapt Michael Ro-
ger's felicitous epithets, into two distinctive groups: the "nativistic
autonomists" and the "sinitic autonomists," in consideration of
their ideological and political dispositions.30
The nativistic autonomists were those who chose to ignore the
cosmic pulsation cycle and to dispense with the interdynastic link-
age scheme of the Chinese tradition. Li Yii, for instance, invoked
A-ku-ta's Holy Injunctions and Jurchen ethnic lore, maintaining
that the current observance of the la sacrifice on the ch'ou day
accommodated Chin under the Metal Power, and making no refer-
ence to the succession sequence of the cosmic powers in the Five
Agents theory. Tang Huai-ying also ignored the cosmic pulsation
formula, claiming justification for Metal Power by comparison with
a parallel situation in Chinese history as defined in the revisionist
thesis of the famed Northern Sung scholar Su Shih.
28 TCTYTS 3a-b. These

individuals are mentioned briefly in CS 11: 6b; 11:
6a, 35: 4a; 13: 7b, 106: 14b.
29 Chang Wei, then
Minister of Rites, was credited as the compiler of the Ta
Chin i-li ff , a compendium of Chin state rituals presented to court in
January 1196 amid these discussions (CS 10: la). For his remarks on the designa-
tion of the cosmic patron, see Chao Ping-wen kd3, Fu-shuiwen-chi 47iK;C$
(SPTK ed.) 12: 4b.
30 See Michael Rogers, "The Late Chin Debates on
Dynastic Legitimacy,"
SungStudiesNewsletter13 (1977): 57-66.
276 HOK LAM CHAN
The sinitic autonomists were those who favored linking Chin

with a Chinese dynasty of the past according to the operations of
the Five Agents theory. This group was represented by Sun To,
Chang Hsing-chien, Yang T'ing-yiin, and others, who proposed the
Metal Power in succession to T'ang, ignoring the interim states.
They sought to rationalize Chin's linkage with T'ang by relegating
these transient states to the status of illegitimate dynasties, and to
bolster the argument that Chin acquired Metal through the
appearances of pure white omens at the time of the dynastic found-
ing. Two other groups of discussants also invoked the Five Agents
theory; one proposed Wood Power in linkage with Liao; and the
other suggested Earth Power in succession to Northern Sung. The
former differed from the nativistic autonomists in seeking to estab-
lish Chin's legitimacy according to the interdynastic linkage
scheme, although they espoused succession to Sung by virtue of the
Chin conquest of North China.
Notwithstanding these differences in ideological orientation,
however, most of the discussants based their arguments on the Five
Agents theory. They did not seem to have been inspired by the
moral-ethical criteria of legitimate succession expounded by the
eminent Northern Sung Neo-Confucian scholar-statesman Ou-
yang Hsiu RAOW9 (1007-1092), who harked back to the Kung-yang
Commentary of the SpringandAutumnAnnals.In developing his theory
of legitimate succession (i.e., cheng-t'ung), he offered a novel reading
of the above-mentioned key phrases in the Kung-yangCommentary.
He contended that what made up the appellation cheng-t'ung,ta
chu-cheng(k)XOIE)and ta i-t'ung (X), should be interpreted as
"[the superior man] augustly rectifies the unrectified," and "[the
ruler] majestically unifies the disunified elements in the country."
He asserted that cheng-t'ungshould contain two basic elements,
cheng,"the moral right to succession," and t'ung,"the fact of unified
political control," and they bore no relationship to the cyclical
pulsations of the cosmic forces.
Moreover, Ou-yang argued that these two conditions did not
always coincide, that the rulers could base their legitimacy on
either of these criteria, and that, in their absence, there should be a
period of "severence" (chuehi,) in the legitimate line of succession
under which no rulers or dynasties could be judged legitimate. In
this way, Ou-yang Hsiu disputed the notion of an uninterrupted
linkage of political succession, which had been the central issue of
legitimacy since the Later Han period. Although his elucidation
did not immediately discredit the Five Agents theory, it laid the
ground for the moral-ethical interpretations of legitimate succes-
sion in later times, includingthe contemporaryChin dynasty. As

detailed later, this novel thesis exertedconsiderableinfluenceon
the participantsin the seriesof discussionsto designatethe cosmic
patronunderHsuan-tsung.3l
It is significantto note that in these initial discussionsunder
Chang-tsung,as well as those underhis successor,all the partici-
pants dispensed with the original explanationof the Chin state
name laid down in A-ku-ta'sHoly Injunctions.Whatevercosmic
powerthey advocatedthe Chin rulerto adopt, and irrespectiveof
their politicalpretensions,they all soughta reinterpretationof the
official title in order to fit Jurchen rule into the interdynastic
linkage system of the Chinese political tradition. The reason is
quite clear. With the intense adoptionof Chineseinstitutionsand
value systems,and the need to competewith SouthernSung in the
sinitic world order, the Jurchen native heritagehad become dys-
functionalas a sourceof legitimationand had to be compromised
by politicalrealitiesto bolsterthe Chin claim of legitimacyagainst
its rival.
In this context, the differencesof opinion over the theoretical
formulationsfor adoption of a cosmic patron unveiled a broad
spectrumof political pretensionsamong the Chin court officials,
Jurchen and Chinese alike, regardingthe priorities and future
policiesofJurchenrule.We may visualizethe proponentsof Metal
Poweras generallysupportingtheJurchenstatus quo inasmuchas
it impliedcontinuationof establishedtradition.Nevertheless,they
agreedonly on the principleof the cosmicdesignation,not the logic
of the choice, and each explanationhad differentpoliticalimplica-
tions. It appearsthat those nativisticautonomistswho sought to
reconcile the Metal Power with the ancestral injunctions the
charismaof the foundingemperor-espoused the Jurchen indige-
nous cause, whereasthe sinitic autonomistswho linkedChin with
T'ang supportedsinicization.They wereall politicalidealists,since
they did not relate their argurnentto the desirabilityof Chin
cornpetingwith Southern Sung for legitimacy, even though by
31 Ou-yangHsiu elucidatedhis new interpretation of the theoryon legitimate

successionin threemajoressaysentitled"Cheng-t'unglun" iEniE. See Ou-yang
Wen-chung kungchi WkR;$l;,$<'Rffi
(SPTK ed.) 16: la-llb, cf. RolfTrauzettel's
Germantranslationin Sinologica 9, nos. 3-4 (1967):226 49. For a detailedanaly-
sis, see, among others, ShigezawaToshio th1t:1S, "Oyo Shu no seitoron"
ltRig°D JFEnE, in Tohogakkai soritsu nijiago shunenkinen Tohogakuronshu
At*W§Jv=t:X!+gd,29:X"t (Tokyo:Tohogakkai,1972), pp. 395 406.
See also briefly,James T.C. Liu, Ou-yang Hsiu:AnEleventh-century
Neo-Confucianist
(Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress, 1967),pp. l 11-12.
278 HOK LAM CHAN
postulating a T'ang linkage they ignored the Sung dynasty. The

opinion in favor of adopting Wood Power in succession to Liao also
reflected a Jurchen ethnocentric predeliction, but this position was
dismissed as anachronistic since it presumed the legitimacy of the
Khitan state.
By contrast, those who argued for the designation of Earth Power
to link Chin with Northern Sung, which the Jurchen had recently
conquered, did so with political purpose. They may be labeled as
pro-Chinese and pro-sinicization as well as astutely pragmatic,
since they tailored their arguments to immediate objectives. They
believed that the Chin emperor, by claiming to succeed Sung as the
legitimate ruler of China, would enhance his own prestige and
would also bolster the symbolic political superiority of the Jurchen
state over the remnants of the Chinese dynasty in the south. The
proponents of this view were condemned by most of their Chinese
colleagues for extremism; yet they were the only ones who accurate-
ly gauged the emperor's intention, and their recommendation later
received endorsement.
Whatever may have been the rationale of the participants in
these discussions for adoption of a specific cosmic patron for the
Chin state in succession to a previous Chinese dynasty, it appears
that Chang-tsung had already made up his mind on the basis of
political expediency. It is evident that he used the occasion not to
sound out the various options, but to manipulate the situation to
advance his objectives of legitimation. The emperor's decision is
indicated in the imperial edict transmitted through the directive
issued by the Presidential Council on the twenty-fifth day of the
tenth month of the second year of T'ai-ho *tf (11 November
1202), proclaiming the adoption of Earth Power for the Chin state
in succession to the Metal Power of Sung. The decree reads in
part:32
Liao occupied a partial territory, whereas Sung controlled the "Central Plain,"
hence legitimacy rested with Sung, and there is no basis [for Chin] to succeed
Liao. Chang Pang-ch'ang and Liu Yu were appointed by our ancestors,'after we
had subdued [Northern] Sung, to be in charge of the lands of Honan, Shantung,
and Shensi, so that they were our defacto servants. How could Liu Chen-kan say
that Ch'u and Ch'i proclaimed hegemony in sequence, and that we could not
arbitrarily succeed to the sinful Sung dynasty? Li Yii's discussion of the Holy
Injunctions of T'ai-tsu actually alluded to the distinction of the "white clans" [of
the Jurchens] from the "black clans" [of the alien tribes], and had nothing to do
with the succession sequence of the Five Agents.
32 For this decree, see TCTYTS 3b-4a. It has been translated and discussed in
Legitimation,pp. 88-90.
Our dynastyhad annihilated[Northern]Sung,capturingtwo of theirmasters,

so that the FirePowerwas alreadyextinguished,andwe ruledover [NorthChina]
intheirstead.ChaoKou SM [i.e.,EmperorKao-tsung ,v ofSouthernSung,
1127-1162] gained his temporaryrespite south of the [Yangtze] River; how
differentwas he fromSsu-maJui t %@ [i.e., EmperorYuan 7cX, r. 317-322]
of [Eastern] Tsin R ? If we follow the deliberationsof Wan-yen Sa-la, Sun
Jen-chiehand others,our dynastyshouldinheritthe extinguishedFire Powerof
[Northern]Sungat Pienliang ¢ (i.e., Kaifeng,Honan)and proclaimthe Earth
Powerin accordancewith [the FiveAgentstheory].We have receivedan imperial
decreefor its implementation.
This communiqueposits Chang-tsung'sreasonsfor rejectingthe
suggestionto designatethe Chin state as WoodPowerin succession
to the Liao, and for adopting Earth in replacementof the Fire
Powerof NorthernSung. The verdict dismisses the legitimacyof
not only the puppet states of Ch'u and Ch'i, but also Southern
Sung, elevating the Jurchen to universal rulership. This pro-
nouncementalso demonstratesChang-tsung'sastuteness;he de-
liberatelyignored the argumentsin favor of Chin's successionto
T'ang, and rejectedthe tortuousinterdynasticlinkagescheme. He
disarmedthe alternateproposals those of Li Yu and Lu Chen-
kuanin favorof Metal and Wood Power by attackingthe logic of
theirargumenteitheron ideologicalor politicalgrounds.He chose
instead to confirmthe political wisdom of Sun Jen-chieh and his
colleagues,who had recommendedthe designationof EarthPower.
The emperorthen issued two successiveedicts on the chia-ch'en
1K and wu-shenA El3days of the eleventhmonthof the secondyear
of T'ai-ho (19 and 23 November 1202). The first edict decreed
changingthe la sacrificeto the ch'en1Rday of the twelfthmonthin
observanceof the ebbingof the EarthPoweraccordingto the Five
Agents theory,and the second announcedhis adoptionof the new
cosmic patron throughout the country and to foreign states.
According to established practice, the designation of a cosmic
patroncalledfor correspondingalterationsin ritualsand in certain
institutionalarrangements.It is believed, therefore,that Chang-
tsung decreedchangingthe colorsymbolto yellow for the imperial
vestments,costumes,and bannersin conformitywith the require-
ments of Earth Power to enhance the visibility of the new order.
But the records also clearly show that such alterationsdid not
entail any unnecessarycomplicationsin the basic structure of
governmentinstitutionsand practices.33
Chang-tsung'sdecrees thus put an officialstamp on the inter-
33 CS 1l: 12b;cf. Legitimation,

pp. 9(S91.
280 HOK LAM CHAN
pretation of the Chin state name which asserted that it symbolized

the Jurchen ruler's acquisition of Earth Power in succession to the
Metal Power of the Sung in the cosmic pulsation formula of the
Chinese interdynastic linkage system. This official position did not
openly reject the jurchen belief that their state title originated from
the charisma of A-ku-ta and the gold of the An-ch'u-hu River in
Manchuria, but the native tradition was henceforth relegated to
obscurity. The name "Chin" had been given a new interpretation
to fit the Chinese cosmological theory in the interest of political
legitimation under tenacious sinitic influence.
of "Ta Chin" (II)

ChangingInterpretations
This new interpretation of the Chin state name was subjected to

further scrutiny under Hsilan-tsung, who ordered a similar round
of discussions on the cosmic patron of the Chin state in an attempt
to legitimize his accession and strengthen the linkage of Jurchen
rule to past Chinese dynasties. The occasion came in March 1214,
shortly after Hsiuan-tsung ascended the throne in the aftermath of
the slaying of Prince Wei-shao, when the court was dominated in
succession by the powerful generals Hu-sha-hu and Chu-hu Kao-
ch'i *L3 (d. January 1220), and when the Chin state was
threatened by the invasions of the Mongols and the Southern Sung.
The resumption of discussions on the cosmic patron of the Chin
state was ordered by an imperial edict dated 5 March, and the
participants included ten Chinese and twelve Jurchen officials. The
main purpose of these discussions was to legitimate Hsiuan-tsungas
successor to Chang-tsung, thereby rallying the support of the lite-
rati to continue the sinicization programs, and justifying the move
of the capital from Yen-ching to Pien (i.e., Kaifeng, known as
Nan-ching MT or Southern Capital under the Chin), the former
Sung capital, to allay the pressure of the Mongol invasion.34
According to the imperial directive, the participants were to
review the various proposals submitted during the previous discus-
sions under Chang-tsung. As we have seen, these concerned
whether Chin should proclaim the Metal Power with or without
reference to the Holy Injunctions of the founding emperor, or adopt
the Earth Power in succession to Sung in consideration of its
34 On the political vicissitudes under which these discussions were resumed
under Hsilan-tsung, see Tao, The Jurchen,chap. 7; Legitimation,chap. 5, and

Chang, Chin-shih,chap. 7 passim.
281
politicalimplications.These reneweddiscussionswere apparently
aimed at clarifyingthese controversialissues with a view to im-
plementing appropriatealterations in rituals and institutional
arrangements.But a close examinationof the individualarguments
and the ensuing imperialdecisionsindicatesthat the effectswent
beyond these objectives.Two major opinions were put forward.
The majorityof the participants,fourteenin all, favored Metal
Power,whereasonly fourof the twenty-twoparticipantssupported
Earth. The advocatesof Metal Power can be differentiatedinto
three groups on the basis of their ideological and political
orientations.35
The firstgroup,representedby Han-linRedactor-compiler Shih-
mo Shih-chi;ENttg (given as Shu-mu-luShih-chiMW"$tRt in
TCTYTS), and Auxiliary Court Gentlemanin the Ministry of
Justice Lu Tzu-yu M +XS and others, favored Metal Power in
conformitywith the Holy Injunctionsof the dynasticfounder.They
concurredwith the view of Li Yu underChang-tsungthat since the
ancestralinjunctionshad declaredthat the Wan-yenclan esteemed
white as the color symbol, Metal Powershould be designatedfor
the state.They harkedbackto the charismaof A-ku-taenshrinedin
theJurchentraditionand ignoredthe interdynasticlinkagescheme
in the Five Agents theory. In addition, they cited Chang-tsung's
decree,assertingthat though the formeremperorfinallyendorsed
the adoptionof Earth Power,he had not completelydismissedLi
Yu's proposalin favorof Metal Power,so that therewas alreadya
precedentin support of their argumentin the Jurchen ancestral
tradition.36
The second group, with RemonstrantGrandee and Assistant
Ministerof PersonnelChangHsing-hsineS ( 1163-1231), Right
Policy MonitorT'ien T'ing-fang i1gX, and Han-lin Curatorof
DocumentsHuang Shang At as the main spokesmen,reiterated
the earlieropinions of Chang Hsing-chien,Sun To, Yang T'ing-
yun and others,that Chin shouldsucceedthe EarthPowerof T'ang
and proclaimthe Metal Powerwith its correspondingwhite sym-
bol. They set the Holy Injunctionsof the dynasticfounderin the
cyclical pulsation formula of the Five Agents theory, seeking to
connectChin directlywith the gloriousChinesedynasty,and bla-
tantlydismissedthe legitimacyof both the interimstatesof the Five
Dynastiesand the Sung house.
TCTYTS7b;cf.Legitimation,
35 pp.10>102.
TCTYTS13a-14a.Shih-muShih-chiis mentioned
36 in CS 114:15b.ForLu
Tzu-yu'sbiography,
seeCCC8: 14a.
282 HOK LAM CHAN
Chang Hsing-hsin proposed Metal Power for Chin in succession

to T'ang in light of the historical precedents provided by the
interim seminomadic kingdoms between Han and T'ang and dur-
ing the Five Dynasties. He drew attention to the parallel situation
of the Yuan Wei 7fS state (i.e., Later or Northern Wei, 386-534)
founded by the sinicized Toba tribes. The Toba rulers, he pointed
out, initially adopted Earth Power linking with the Former Ch'in
'91 (352-410) of the Hsien-pei *, but Emperor Hsiao-wen 4iPC
(r. 472-499) decreed the change to Water Power in A.D. 492 on the
ground that the Toba tribes esteemed the color black, harmonizing
with Water Power. This designation, making Yuan Wei succeed
Tsin (i.e., Western Tsin), the Chinese dynasty that ruled Central
China until A.D. 316, set a precedent for Chin to link with a distant
Chinese dynasty, bypassing the interim illegitimate states.
Chang further asserted that all the rulers of the Five Dynasties
were usurpers of T'ang and occupied only a partial territority; they
did not inherit the Earth Power and did not qualify for participa-
tion in the dynastic succession. Similarly, he dismissed Northern
Sung, which had treacherously seized the throne of the Later or
Northern Chou, as no better than the usurpers during the Five
Dynasties. He argued that Sung, having proclaimed Fire after the
Wood Power of Chou, distantly associating with T'ang to boost its
achievement, had in fact violated the cyclical production formula of
the Five Agents theory, as had the Ch'in state by adopting Water
Power. Therefore, T'ang's demise should give rise to Metal Power,
and there was no basis for Chin to proclaim Earth Power in
succession to Sung. Chang tried to strengthen his case by referring
to A-ku-ta's Holy Injunctions, which designated "Chin" as the
state title, and the white omens at the founding of the dynasty.
These events, he asserted, justified Chin's succession to T'ang,
since the designation harmonized both with the operational formu-
la of the Five Agents and with the ancestral injunctions.37
T'ien T'ing-fang presented an equally elaborate statement sup-
porting the adoption of Metal Power in linkage with T'ang and
stipulating three criteria for postulating dynastic legitimacy. "This
is to be determined," he maintained, "either in response to the
extraordinary color of the product of the native land, or by tallying
with the distinctive [appearances of the portents] and auspices in
contemporary times, or, in consideration of the dynasty's succes-
sion to the kingly deeds of the preceding dynasty manifested at its
37 TCTYTS 14a-16a. For Chang Hsing-hsin's biography, see CS 107: 13b.

rise to power." "If one of the above conditions is met," he stated,

"we can then decide on the designation [of the dynasty] in the
cycle, and there is no absolute need to abide by the sequence in the
cyclical production formula of the Five Agents."
In reference to the first two criteria, T'ien T'ing-fang conjured
up an item of "new evidence" from Jurchen tradition, the produc-
tion of gold in the Ch'ang-pai mountain range in eastern Manchur-
ia, asserting that this, together with the white auspices at the time
of the state founding, fully validated Metal Power. Regarding the
third criterion, he devised an elaborate argument to the effect that
Chin legitimately succeeded to the kingly deeds of the preceding
dynasty, the T'ang, and that this was manifested at its rise to
power. He contended that T'ang was a virtuous dynasty, while
regimes of the Five Dynasties were too short-lived to warrant
participation in dynastic transmission. The same could be said of
Sung, he asserted, since by choosing to succeed to the house of
Ch'ai Yung W* (r. 921-959) of Later Chou as Fire Power, it had
strayed from the legitimate line of succession. If Chin chose to
succeed T'ang as Metal Power, this would be analogous to Han
associating with Chou and circumventing the Ch'in state, and
would fulfill another important criterion for legitimate succession.38
Huang Shang also advocated Metal Power for the Chin state in
succession to T'ang, but sought to support his thesis through
Neo-Confucian political theory. He propounded the principles of
moral right and unified political control with provisions for periods
of severance in dynastic transmission-outlined in Ou-yang Hsiu's
interpretation of the Kung-yangCommentary of the SpringandAutumn
Annals-, as the basic criteria for legitimate succession. He con-
tended that according to these principles, T'ang was the only
legitimate dynasty, and all the subsequent transient states were
ineligible for participation in dynastic transmission. He dismissed
Northern Sung, arguing that it had "cheated the Ch'ai house [of
Later or Northern Chou]" and "paid subservience to Liao," and
had failed to "rectify the unrectified" and "unify the disunified
elements in the country." Sung therefore could not claim Metal
Power; and it would be equally fallacious to make Chin succeed
Sung. Only Great Chin, having subdued both Liao and Sung and
completed the conquest of North China, had acquired legitimacy.
It should thus proclaim Metal, linking with the Earth Power of
T'ang. This designation, he pointed out, both complied with the
38 TCTYTS 18a-20b. T'ien T'ing-fang is mentioned in CS 13: 7b, 132: 21b.

284 HOK LAM CHAN
Holy Injunctions of A-ku-ta and harmonized with the appearances

of the white auspices at the time of the dynastic founding.39
The third group, headed by Han-lin Curator of Documents
Mo-nien Wu-tien t1J1 (given as Mu-yen Wu-teng i in
TCTYTS) and his Jurchen colleagues, concurred with Sun Jen-
chieh and others under Chang-tsung that Chin should succeed
Sung, but favored Metal Power in the belief that Sung possessed
Earth, not Fire. They contended that since Late T'ang, which
succeeded T'ang, was founded not by the scions of the Li family but
by an alien Chu clan, it received Metal, and not the Earth Power of
T'ang.` Consequently, each successive kingdom after Later T'ang
should be assigned a differentcosmic power according to the cyclical
formula; hence, Later Tsin becomes Water; Han, Wood; and Later
Chou, Fire. The Sung house, having replaced Chou after the
extinction of Fire, should therefore have commanded Earth Power,
and since earth produces metal, Chin naturally acquired Metal.
This designation, they pointed out, also fully harmonized with the
portents and auspices of Heaven-the appearances of the white
birds and animals during the Chin founding, the production of
white gold in the Ch'ang-pai mountain range in the Jurchen
homeland-and corresponded to A-ku-ta's Holy Injunctions. This
laborious argument was dismissed as anachronistic since it deliber-
ately rearranged the succession sequence of the cosmic powers and
accepted the legitimacy of the transient Five Dynasties, a preten-
tious claim rejected by an overwhelming majority of the discussion
participants.
The advocates of Earth Power, though a minority, also fell into
two groups on the basis of their interpretations of the theoretical
issues. The first group, headed by Hanlin Academician-in-waiting
Wan-yen O-ch'u (also known as Wan-yen Wu-ch'u), and Han-lin
Auxiliary Academician Chao Ping-wen MUCC(1 159-1232), reiter-
ated the view of Sun Jen-chieh and others in the previous reign that
Chin should proclaim Earth Power in succession to Northern Sung
according to the Five Agents cyclical formula. They argued that by
subduing the Liao and Sung, Chin ruled over North China, and
since Sung possessed Fire, Chin should receive Earth, and not
Metal in linkage with T'ang. This group ignored the Holy Injunc-
tions of A-ku-ta, Jurchen ethnocentric lore, and the interdynastic
linkage scheme, while invoking Chang-tsung's verdict as sufficient
39 TCTYTS 9b-1 la.

40 TCTYTS llb, 16a-17b.
285
grounds for retaining Earth Power in succession to Northern
Sung.
The second group, headed by Compiler of the Institute of
National History Wang Chung-yuanEE4gPx,invoked Ou-yang
Hsiu's interpretationof the Kung-yang Commentary of the Springand
AutumnAnnals,as had Huang Shang, that legitimate succession
should be decided accordingto moral right and unified political
control. However, unlike Huang Shang, who championedMetal
Power,Wang tailoreda new interpretationsupportingEarth. He
contended that the principles of Neo-Confuciantradition were
sufficientfor establishinglegitimacy,and disputedthe relevanceof
the Five Agents schemeto the discussions.The Jurchens,he aver-
red, had amply fulfilledthe criteriaof a legitimateregimeby their
conquest of North China. Citing A-ku-ta'sHoly Injunctions,he
asserted that when the founding emperorchose "Chin" for the
state title, he did so becauseit meant "permanence"and "indes-
tructibility";he was not consideringits implicationswith regardto
the Five Agents theory.Wang maintainedthat if it were desirable
to fit Chin into the cyclical productionformula,it would still be
properto abide by Chang-tsung'sdecreethat Chin be assignedthe
EarthPower.In this sense, therefore,Wang did more than simply
reiterateChang-tsung'sverdict to establish legitimacy;he drew
upon the Neo-Confucianinterpretationof legitimate succession,
declaringthat Chin was alreadylegitimateby virtue of its moral
and politicalattainments.42
In addition, there was a lonely voice advocatingFire Power.
Wang Kuai E£@,an administrativecouncillorin the Pacification
Office of Liao-tung, suggested Fire on the ground that the
Jurchens chose the color red for the bannersand pennons when
they foundedthe state. He also proposedto erecta templein honor
of Huang Ti (Yellow Emperor),claimingthat the Jurchenswere
the posterityof Kao-hsin rwE (i.e., Ti K'u), a descendantof the
legendaryemperor.His proposals,however,were spurnedas reck-
less and fallaciousnot only on theoreticalgrounds,but also because
they ran counterto the verdictof the dynasticfounderas well as
Chang-tsung.43
41 TCTYTS 11b, 13b. Wan-yenO-ch'uis mentionedin CS 13: 7b, 106: 14b.
For Chao Ping-wen'sbiography,see CS 110:6a.

42 TCTYTS 12a-b. Wang Chung-yuan's quotation of Ou-yang Hsiu's
"Cheng-t'unglun" is derivedfrom Ou-yang . . . chi 16: 2a-3a. For his biography,
see CCC 8: l9b.
43 For this proposal,see CS 107:lb. WangK'uai becamea Han-linAcademi-
286 HOK LAM CHAN
In essence, therefore, the participants had narrowed their differ-

ences down to two basic options, Metal or Earth Power, with
varying theoretical justifications. There was no support for Wood
in succession to Liao since it had been ruled out as anachronistic,
and the only proposal for Fire Power had also been summarily
rejected as irrelevant. In considering the ideological and political
contentions, we may again use the epithets of "sinitic autonomists"
and "nativistic autonomists" to classify those participants who
respectively proposed the adoption of Metal and Earth Power.
Their positions appear to have been similar to those of participants
during Chang-tsung's reign, but their theoretical and political dis-
positions were different.
At the theoretical level, the proponents of Metal Power include
both "sinitic autonomists" and "nativistic autonomists." We may
apply the term "nativistic autonomists" to those Jurchen officials
and their Chinese supporters, Shih-mo Shih-chi, Lii Tzu-yii, and
others, who harked back to theJurchen ancestral tradition, appeal-
ing to A-ku-ta's Holy Injunctions and Jurchen ethnocentric lore in
support of Metal, without reference to the Five Agents theory or the
succession sequence in the Chinese dynastic transmission. We may
identify as "sinitic autonomists" those Chinese scholar-officials
(Chang Hsing-hsin, T'ien T'ing-fang, Huang Shang), and to some
extent, their Jurchen counterparts, such as Mo-nien Wu-tien and
others, who invoked the traditional cyclical production formula,
but offered varying interpretations to justify Chin's linkage with
T'ang or succession to Sung. Similarly, those who advocated suc-
cession to Sung, headed by Mo-nien Wu-tien and several other
Jurchen officials, also reverted to their native tradition to rational-
ize their rearrangement of the Chinese dynastic succession se-
quence. Each of these individuals used whatever was appropriate
from Jurchen and Chinese traditions, and although each came to
the same conclusion, the proposal of Metal Power, their ideological
orientations and political motivations varied significantly.
The proponents of Earth Power in succession to the Fire Power
cian in 1216 but subsequently defected to serve as chief minister of the Jurchen
rebel general P'u-hsien Wan-nu, founder of the Tung-hsia state. He is mentioned
in CS 14: 13a, 19a, and has a biography in Yuan Hao-wen, Chung-chouyueh-fu WC,
in CCC, Appendix, 16a. For a detailed account of his career in the Tung-hsia
state, see Chin, Tung-peit'ung-shih6: 15a-53b, and in particular, Wang Shen-jung,
"Kuan-yiu P'u-hsien Wan-nu ho Wang Kuai ti chi-ko wen-t'i" 0M. AWP
mm
t?Q,f,F W, Pei-fangwen-wu AL)tiClt , 1988, no. 2 (May): 46-53.
of Sung, by contrast, were all staunch sinitic autonomists since they

followed the cosmic pulsation scheme without reference to the
Jurchen tradition, but they also differedin theoreticaljustifications.
Wan-yen O-ch'u and Chao Ping-wen invoked Chang-tsung's ver-
dict, arguing that since Chin had conquered Northern Sung, it
should proclaim Earth Power in compliance with the cyclical pro-
duction formula. Wang Chung-yiian, however, drew on Ou-yang
Hsiu's moral-ethical criteria of legitimate succession, contending
that Chin had already acquired legitimacy through moral right and
unified political control, and sought no support from the cosmic
pulsation theory. Since in both instances the arguments were
directed at reaffirmingChang-tsung's declaration that Chin should
succeed Sung, they were spared the polemical debates over the
interdynastic linkage scheme that had seriously troubled those
advocating Metal Power. It is significant that Wang Chung-yiian,
though he followed Huang Shang by invoking the Neo-Confucian
interpretation of legitimate succession, had superseded Huang by
abandoning an accommodation of the Jurchen ancestral injunc-
tions, and instead manipulated the Neo-Confucian theory in sup-
port of Earth Power.'
In terms of political motivations, it is evident that all those who
favored Metal Power believed that a viable symbol of legitimacy for
Chin might be acquired by refurbishing the Jurchen heritage and
dismissing Sung legitimacy. This group, however, offered different
justifications for their verdict, with varying political implications.
The nativistic autonomists, who advocated reviving the symbols of
indigenous traditions as a principal source of legitimacy, favored
restoration of their own heritage over the accelerated sinicization
policies, reflecting the concerns of the Jurchen elite after the abor-
tion of Emperor Shih-tsung's nativistic movement. The sinitic
autonomists, on the other hand, espoused clearer identification
with the Chinese tradition as a principal source of Chin legitimacy,
although they did not explicitly reject the Jurchen heritage. This
position is most conspicuous among those advocating linkage with
T'ang; they sought to elevate Chin as heir to a Chinese dynasty
that far outshone Sung in political and cultural achievement.
The proponents of Metal Power, be they nativistic or sinitic
autonomists, were political thus idealists, preoccupied with having
a symbol of legitimacy that evoked an idealistic version of Jurchen
rule in China, and they were less concerned with contemporary
44
See Legitimation,pp. 109-10.
288 HOK LAM CHAN
political realities. While espousing sinicization, for instance, they

overlooked the political desirability of buttressing Hsiuan-tsung's
claim to Chang-tsung's heritage. Similarly, though they dismissed
Sung's legitimacy, they did not pronounce a termination of the
Chinese mandate that would have bolstered Chin's symbolic supe-
riority over Southern Sung. It seems that those Jurchen officials
who proposed Chin's succession to Northern Sung, forcing a difficult
rearrangementof the interdynasticlinkage scheme, were more realis-
tic, but because they also pledged Metal Power, aspiring to the
restoration of native heritage, they were no less idealistic than the
other proponents of Metal Power in their political aspirations.
In comparison to the Metal Power advocates, the proponents of
Earth Power, favoring Chin's succession to Sung as ruled by
Chang-tsung, were far more concerned with the political situation
confronting Hsiian-chang and with the delicate relations between
Chin and Southern Sung. It is true that these advocates were no
more unanimous than their opponents in the theoretical justifica-
tions of their verdict: some held to the Five Agents formulation and
others invoked Neo-Confucian theory. Nevertheless, these ardent
sinitic autonomists all recognized the relevance of Chang-tsung's
theory of legitimacy for the new reign, since it encompassed both
sinicization and the termination of the Sung mandate by the Chin
conquest. This implied, most important of all, that Hsiian-tsung
could strengthen his position by claiming affinity with the tradition
of Chang-tsung, his half-brother, which would gain support from
the sinicized Jurchen and Chinese scholar-officials of the previous
reign.
In a similar vein, it would also support the view that Chin alone
possessed legitimacy as ruler of China after the demise of Sung in
the north, which would be manipulated advantageously at a time of
deteriorating relations with Southern Sung. Under these circum-
stances, the symbol of Earth Power became an important source of
legitimacy in countering the opponents of Chang-tsung's siniciza-
tion policies and the rival Chinese dynasty in the south. In this
context, the sinitic autonomists who proposed Earth Power were
more politically astute than their counterparts who favored Metal.
They would therefore be considered political pragmatists since they
did not subordinate their arguments to the established theories, but
manipulated them to enhance the symbols of political superiority of
the Chin state under internal and external threats.4`
45Ibid., pp. 110-12.

There are no explicit records of Hsiian-tsung's reaction to these

divergent views, or his final ruling on the designation of the specific
cosmic patron symbolizing dynastic legitimacy. Indirect references,
however, suggest that the emperor did retain Chang-tsung's deci-
sion that Chin received Earth in succession to Sung. There is an
entry in the Chinshih,under the twelfth month of the fourth year of
Hsing-ting lt, which mentions that the la sacrifice was presented
at the imperial ancestral temple on the keng-ch'enf day (19
January 1221). Inasmuch as the ch'enday had been set for such
sacrifice by Chang-tsung in observance of the ebbing of the Earth
Power, Hsiian-tsung clearly abided by that tradition, though it is
not certain when he issued his verdict.46
Corroborative evidence is provided by the memorial submitted
to Khubilai Khaghan, the Mongol founder of the Yuan dynasty, by
Han-lin Redactor-compiler Wang Yiin ITM (1227-1304) shortly
after Khubilai's enthronement in 1260. Wang, then in charge of
historical composition in the Institute of National Historiography,
proposed similar discussions to designate the cosmic patron of the
new regime in the Chinese dynastic transmission. His memorial
gives no indication of discussion on legitimate succession disputing
Chang-tsung's ruling by the later Chin emperors. Moreover, Wang
Yun recommended in a subsequent memorial that the new regime
adopt "white" for the color of the official costumes. This implied
that the Mongol ruler should proclaim Metal Power in succession
to Chin, and that Hsiian-tsung and his successor retained Earth in
accordance with the earlier pronouncement.47Inasmuch as there
was no change in the cosmic patron, there should not have been, as
surmised, any alteration in rituals and institutional arrangements
associated with the pulsation formula of the Five Agents theory.
It was rare in Chinese history that discussions on the designation
of a cosmic patron resulted in reaffirmationof an existing symbol of
legitimacy in the traditional mode of legitimation. However,
Hsiian-tsung's confirmation of the Earth Power as a cosmic symbol
legitimizing his rulership of the Chin state in succession to Sung in
46 CS 16: 5b.
` For Wang Yiin's proposals to designate a new cosmic patron for the Mongol
state and "white" for the color of the official costumes, see his essays "Ch'ing
lun-ting te-yiin shih chuang" Af5fiM * and "Lun fu-se shang pai shih
chuang" , collected in Ch'iu-chienhsien-shengta-ch'uan wen-chi
tkStti:S: (SPTK ed.) 85: 4a, 86: 20a. For his biographies, see Ch'iu-
chien. . . wen-chi,Appendix, and Sung Lien **, et al., Yuanshih 7- (PN ed.;
hereafter, YS) 167: 19a.
290 HOK LAM CHAN
the Chinese political order is not difficult to understand. It en-

hanced, on the one hand, the emperor's claim to succession to his
half-brother's leadership, thereby rallying the literati's support for
the sinicization policies. It also bolstered, on the other hand, the
belief in the Chin state as the successor to Sung in the Chinese
dynastic tradition which served well to elevate the morale of the
tottering Jurchen regime under the threat of the Mongol and Sung
invasions.
All considered, the discussion under Hsilan-tsung was an act of
re-legitimation aimed at strengthening his leadership and author-
ity. Indeed, the subsequent move of the Chin court to Pien, the
former Northern Sung capital in April 1214, and the initiation of
military offensives (1217-1219) against the Southern Sung had an
important bearing on the Chin ruler's quest for legitimacy. While
the discussions on the designation of cosmic patron may be seen as
the search forjustification of policy changes, Hsiian-tsung's verdict
on the legitimizing symbol also served to rationalize the designa-
tion of the new capital. The choice of Pien symbolized Chin's
control of the Sung empire, and the subsequent military adventure
against Southern Sung was a step toward completing the conquest
of all China. In this way, the Jurchen native heritage, symbolized
by the original meaning of the Chin state title, was brushed aside
by a resurgent sinitic tradition in the service of political
expediency.48
In all the proposals made under Hsiian-tsung's round of discus-
sion, the original meaning of the Chin state name and the Jurchen
belief in the legacy of their ancestral rulers were again subjected to
new interpretation under the sweep of Chinese influence. Although
the Jurchen native traditions-the derivation of the state title from
the production of gold in An-ch'u-hu River, the auspicious white
symbols manifested at the dynastic founding, and the charisma of
A-ku-ta-were not dismissed outright, they were manipulated to
strengthen the claim that Chin received the patronage of the cosmic
power according to the pulsation scheme of the Five Agents theory.
Whether the agent was Metal or Earth Power in succession to
T'ang or Sung, the Jurchen native tradition enshrined in the Chin
state name had to be compromised in support of the formula. To
the proponents of adoption of Metal Power, the original meaning of
the state name-the "Great Golden"-symbolized the inheritance
of Metal, but to those who championed Earth Power, the native
48 See Legitimation,pp. 112-14.

291
Jurchen traditionwas outmoded.In any case, the Jurchen native
heritagehad been sacrificedto give a new symbolto the Chin state
to legitimateits status in the Chinesedynastictradition.
Conclusion
This sinitic interpretationof the Chin state name under perva-
sive Chineseinfluenceand exigentpoliticalconcernshad a linger-
ing impact in later times. It is startlingthat the origin of the Chin
state title, notwithstandingits declinein politicalsignificanceafter
the terminationofJurchenrule, was alreadypoorlyunderstoodby
the early Yuan scholarswho hailed from that state. Wang P'an
fEX ( 1202-1293), an erudite ex-Chin scholar and Han-lin
Academicianunder Qubilai Qaghan, for instance, gave a rather
moot explanationof the origin of "Ta Chin." He said that the
Jurchens adopted "Chin" (golden) as the state title because they
wanted to overcome the "iron" of the Khitans, who chose that
name, i.e., iron, because it was the product of their land. He
considered as erroneous the claim that the Jurchens adopted
"Chin"becausethe riverof theirhomelandproducedgold and not
because of the Five Agents theory. In this regard, Wang P'an
harkedback to A-ku-ta'sHoly Injunctionsin offeringan explana-
tion of the origin of "Ta Chin;"however,he certainlyerredwhen
he dismissedthe connectionbetweenthe productionof gold in the
river of the Jurchen home territoryand the adoption of the state
title.49
More significantly,however,the identificationof the Chin state
name with the Metal Powerin the Five Agents formulationfound
an ardent advocatein early Yuan when an attempt was made to
designatea cosmicpatronfor the newlyestablishedMongolregime
to link it with the past Chinesedynasties.The Han-lin Redactor-
compilerWang Yun, also an ex-Chinscholar,as noted earlier,had
proposedto Khubilai Khaghanto adopt white for the color of the
officialcostumes.This would suggest that the Mongol-Yuanruler
should proclaimMetal Power in successionto Chin, and confirm
that theJurchen state had acquiredthe EarthPoweraccordingto
the pulsation formulaof the Five Agents theory. This proposal,
therefore,implicitlyrejectedthe relevanceof the traditionalbelief
49 WangP'an'sremarkon the originof the Chin state title is quotedin Wang,

. . wen-chi95: 8a. In this account,he is referredto as Mister Lu-an
Ch'iu-chien.
X,Ft . For his biography,see YS 160: la.
292 HOK LAM CHAN
in the Jurchen native heritage to contemporary political problems.

There was no follow-up to Wang Yiin's proposal, however, pre-
sumably because Khubilai, who regarded himself as a universal
ruler in the footsteps of Chinggis Khan, considered the Chinese
dynastic linkage system in the Five Agents formulation too restric-
tive. Even though discussions on legitimate succession resurfaced
during both the reigns of Qubilai and Toghon Temiir, the last
Yuan emperor, they were held among historiographers seeking to
determine the status of the defunct Liao, Chin, and Sung states for
the composition of their histories under the Mongol initiative.50The
object was not to try to legitimize the Mongol-Yiian regime in the
Chinese dynastic succession system, although the decision reached
at the Yuan court in 1343, which ruled that all three were legiti-
mate states, belatedly served to strengthen the Mongol claim as
unifier of the Chinese empire. Under these circumstances, the
controversy over the interpretation of the Chin state name in the
context of the discussions on the cosmic patron was largely ignored
in the official Chinshihcompleted in late 1344. The only reference to
the proclamation of the "Ta Chin" title was the excerpt from
A-ku-ta's Holy Injunctions, but this garbled statement fails to shed
light on the original meaning of the name, its ethnic identity, and
its political implications.
For purposes of comparison we should note that a similar trans-
formation of the state name took place under the Manchu rulers,
who annihilated the Ming and founded the Ch'ing dynasty in 1644.
This subject deserves close attention because the Manchus were
descendants of the Jurchen tribes who thrived in the Chien-chou
W1J1 guard in the ancient settlement under Ming rule. The names
which these semi-pastoral, semi-agricultural people used for their
tribal designation and their organized state have intrigued Chinese
and Japanese historians since the turn of this century. Leading
scholars such as Ichimura Sanjiro 0t4t3()1, Inaba Iwakichi
fId-P:, Chin Liang dR, Meng Sen 10, Hsiao I-shan f-TU,
50 These discussions have been summarized in Hsiu Tuan IW', "Pien Liao
Chin Sung cheng-t'ung" PkEC, included in Su, Kuo-ch'aowen-lei45: 3a-8a,
and in Yang Wei-chen CWtO, "Cheng-t'ung lun," in T'ao Tsung-i 1W7, Cho-
kenglu @ (SPTK ed.) 3: la-9b. The latter has been translated in Richard L.
Davis, "Historiography as Politics in Yang Wei-chen's 'Polemic on Legitimate
Succession'," T'oungPao 69, nos. 1-3 (1983): 33-72. On the impact of these
discussions on the compilation of the Sung, Liao, and Chin histories under the
sponsorship of the last Yuan emperor, see the brief account in Hok-lam Chan,
"Chinese Official Historiography at the Yuan court; The Composition of the Liao,
Chin, and Sung Histories," in Langlois, ChinaunderMongolRule, pp. 71-74.
Kanda Nobuo I Huang Chang-chien RMR, and others

have explored the subject, but little consensus has been reached
because of the corrupt and discrepant nature of the Manchu and
Chinese records.5'
In so far as their tribal name is concerned, the Manchus used
variable designations such as Chu-shen (Jusen), Nii-chih Man-chou
t: 9iI (Jurchen Manchu), Man-chou, or Chien-chou in different
periods. The sinicized Manchu state had also adopted different
names and had been given variant forms of address by its neigh-
bors, Ming China and Korea, at different stages during its pre-
dynastic phase. These names ranged from Nii-chih, Niu-chen, and
Chien-chou, to Hou Chin (Later Chin), Chin, and also the Man-
chou state. The name "Chin" came from the Chinese translation of
the Manchu ethnic tribal name aisin , derived from ancun or
alcun, meaning gold or metal in the Jurchen and Mongolian lan-
guages. It has been suggested that the first four names were used
successively as official nomenclature in diplomatic correspondence
and public proclamations, and the last mentioned was an unofficial
name used only inside the Manchu state.52
Nurhaci (1559-1626), the founding emperor of the Manchu-
Ch'ing dynasty who was posthumously known by his temple-name
T'ai-tsu, had proclaimed different titles on his road to supreme
power. According to the research of Huang Chang-chien, Nurhaci
called himself "Master in charge of the I people (TA) in the
Chien-chou Guard of the Niu-chih State" in 1596. A year later, he
relished the new title "Dragon-tiger General of the Nii-chen State"
after the investiture bestowed by the Ming court in 1595. (In the
investiture document, the tabooed name "Nii-chen" was rein-
stated.) Then in 1605, he claimed the title of "King (wang) of the
`' See Ichimura Sanjiro, "Shincho kokugo ko" in Toyo kyokai

chosabugakujutsukokokum* tb A n , vol. 1 (Tokyo, 1920), pp. 139-46;
Inaba Iwakichi, Shinch5zenshi X (Tokyo: Waseda University, 1914), pp.
300-310; Chin Liang, Kuang-Hsuanhsiao-chi3'aXJit (Peiping, privately printed,
1933), pp. 7-9; Meng Sen, Ch'ing-taishih 'M (Taipei: Cheng-chung shu-chil,
1960), pp. 11-12; Hsiao 1-shan, Ch'ing-tait'ung-shihMim5 (Taipei: T'ai-wan
shang-wu, 1962 rev. ed.), vol. 1, pp. 48-53; Kanda Nobuo, "Man-chou kuo-hao
k'ao" i?IIii, Ku-kungwen-hsien&t3C, 3, no. 1 (December 1971): 43-49, and
Huang Chang-chien, "Niu-erh-ha-ch'ih so chien kuo-hao k'ao F
and "Man-chou kuo-hao k'ao j reprinted in Ming-Ch'ingshihyen-chiu
ts'ung-kao 7 (Taipei: T'ai-wan shang-wu, 1977), pp. 481-517, 532-49.
52 See Huang, "Niu-erh-ha-ch'ih," pp. 481, 482; "Man-chou kuo-hao," pp.
540, 545.
294 HOK LAM CHAN
State of Chien-chou and Other Places," and in the following years,

he was honored by his followers with the title of Khan(hanft), after
Jurchen and Mongol practice to boost his stature in the tribal
tradition.
In 1619, when Nurhaci adopted the emperor (huang-ti)title in the
Chinese fashion in direct challenge to the Ming, he declared him-
self "Emperor (or 'Khan') of the Later Chin State," indicating his
affinity with the Jurchen dynasty, and took the sinitic era-name
T'ien-ming Xi (Mandate of Heaven). However, he must have
soon realized that no state in Chinese history ever initiated a name
with the prefix hou ("Later"), which was always retroactively
added to the main title by historians to differentiate two states that
shared a similar name. In 1621, therefore, Nurhaci dropped the
prefix, and simply called the Manchu state "Ta Chin" (Great
Golden) or "Chin," after its distinguished forebear. This modified
name was used in diplomatic correspondence as well as official
proclamations throughout the next fifteen years.53
Nurhaci's new designation of the Manchu state, however, was
deemed anachronistic and politically insensitive after the accession
of his son Abahai or Huang T'ai-chi t C (1592-1643, temple-
name T'ai-tsung t7) in 1627. By this time the Manchus, having
unified all the tribes in Manchuria, were in constant warfare
against the Ming for independence. In order to give a common
identity to these tribes and to forestall the enmity of the Chinese,
who were still smarting with humiliation over the Jurchen subjuga-
tion of China, Abahai wanted to change the image of the Manchu
state by introducting a new name with broader appeal. In 1635, he
took the first step to sever the historical ties by forbidding his
people to call themselves "Chu-shen" (in reference to the Jur-
53 See Huang, "Niu-erh-ha-ch'ih,"passim, and also Yen Ch'ung-nien 14,z

Ni-erh-ha-ch'ihchuana (Peking: Pei-ching 1L-Tch'u-pan she, 1983), pp. 153, 159.
Recently Tsai Mei-piao F disputed Huang Chang-chien's conclusion based
on a differentreading of the Manchu and Chinese records. He argued that in 1619
Nurhaci proclaimed the state title Chin, derived from the Manchu surname aisin
(gold), and the title was not Hou Chin. The latter was an informal name couched
by the Koreans and it later became known to the Ming and used in Chinese
documents. According to Tsai, Nurhaci never adopted the title Hou Chin as other
scholars have suggested. See his "Ta Ch'ing kuo chien hao ch'ien ti kuo-hao,
tsu-ming yii chi-nien" X l '1tlg Mi ., Li-shihyen-chiu,1987, no. 3
(May): 133-46. For Huang's rejoinder, see "Tsai lun Ch'ing T'ai-tsu Ch'ing
T'ai-tsung ti kuo-hao, nien-hao chi wei-hao" =*AEutEg a g
Ta-lu tsa-chih t 76, no. 5 (May 1988): 1-5. I am in favor of Huang
Chang-chien's argument.
chens), and ordering them to use "Manchou" as their official

ethnic name, instead. Then in May 1636, he proclaimed "Ta
Ch'ing" 7tk (Great Clarity or Purity; pronounced as Daicing in
Manchu) as the new dynastic title, and changed the era-name to
Ch'ung-te ' (Revering Virtue). Following this, a vigorous cam-
paign was launched to eradicate all references to the abolished
names in historical records, imperial insignia, and public inscrip-
tions to strengthen the Manchu state's new image and historical
mission. As a result, the political objectives were achieved, but the
destruction of such vital evidence seriously impeded historians'
efforts to trace the evolution of the Manchu nomenclature.54
The symbolic meaning of the new name "Ch'ing" is extraordi-
narily controversial, as it was nowhere documented in either Man-
chu or Chinese official records, and there had been extensive
tampering with the written documents of the early reigns. An old
tradition about its origin harked back to a remark of the Ch'ien-
lung tA Emperor (r. 1736-1795) in an edict dated September
1777 to the effect that the Manchus hailed from the land of the East
like the Great Golden. This tradition suggested that the name "Ta
Ch'ing" was intended as an allusion to "Ta Tung" tkI1 (Great
East), because, according to the cosmic configuration in the Five
Agents theory, the east is matched with the color ch'ing'P (blue or
green), and the character for "east," tung,approximates the sound
of the latter character (both W9 and it) in mandarin Chinese.
Most modern scholars dismissed these cosmological associations,
but they were attracted to the thesis of phonetic proximity. Ichi-
mura Sanjiro and Chin Liang, for example, suggested that Abahai
adopted the name "Ch'ing" because it is a variant pronunciation of
the original name "Chin" in Chinese speech. In addition, the name
"Ch'ing," meaning clear and pure, parodied both in sound and
` See the works of Chin Liang, Ichimura Sanjir6, Inaba Iwakichi, and Hsiao
I-shan cited in note 51 above. See also Robert B. Oxam, Rulingfrom Horseback:
ManchuPolitics in the Oboi Regency(1662-1669) (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1975), pp. 35-37; Sun Wen-liang : and Li Chih-t'ing i Ch'ing
T'ai-tsungch'uan-chuan A (Chi-lin: Chi-lin W# jen-min ch'u-pan she,
1983), pp. 265-68. On the imperial campaign to eradicate references to the
archaic nomenclature "Chin" and "Ta Chin" from historical documents and
public inscriptions, see also Chuang Chi-fa , "Ch'ing T'ai-tsung Han-wen
shih-lu ch'u-tsuan-pen yii ch'ung-hsiu-pen ti pi-chiao 97iT.:3W-
itt1W$t?fEK, reprinted in his Ch'ing-taishih-liao lun shuA vol. 1
(Taipei: Palace Museum, 1977), pp. 217-37, and T'ieh Yii-ch'in 3 "Hsin-
p'ai, yin-pai k'ao-shih" 8W2-86ta-hs.eh Liao-ning hseh-pao LM; Wi,
1979, no. 1 (February): 82-86.
296 HOK LAM CHAN
implication the Ming (Brilliant) dynasty. This would give Abahai

the propaganda value of posing not as a new version of earlier
Jurchen conquerors, but as one who would cleanse and purify
China of its Ming corruption. Meng Sen supported this idea of
phonetic approximation, but speculated that Abahai changed the
name Chin because he disdained its political implication, since the
Jurchen state ruled only a part of China.55
Dissatisfied with these theories, Inaba Iwakichi proposed a more
sophisticated explanation related to the linkage between the Jur-
chens and their descendants in an ancient mythology. He cited the
mythology about Shao-hao, a legendary ruler who reigned between
the Yellow Emperor and Chuan-hsiu f in high antiquity: his
surname was Chin-t'ien shih + his father was named Ch'ing
?9, and it was said that he "reigned in the land of purity" ("tso-t'u
yii ch'ing" ). In the opinion of the Sung historian Lo Mi
,gg, author of Lu shih W&-T[TheLu History],Shao-hao valued gold
(chin)as treasure, and esteemed the color white, and that accounted
for his surname Chin-t'ien (Golden Heaven). It was probable that
the Manchus, following the example of the Korean kingdom of
Silla, identified the Chin state with Shao-hao, and because Chin-
t'ien had "reigned in the land of purity," Abahai therefore adopted
Ch'ing as the new state name.56
This new explanation, though interesting, was received with
skepticism by Chinese scholars such as Hsiao I-shan and others,
because it presumed too much the intellectual maturity on the part
of the Manchu rulers, and it is not supported by a shred of
documentary evidence. Hsiao also questioned the validity of the
phonetic approximation thesis, but he offered no contribution to
the subject other than summarizing the contemporary scholarship.
Some later Chinese scholars suspected that the Manchus might
have come under the influence of the cosmological theory in chang-
ing the dynastic designation. They appointed out that both the
characters Man-chou and Ch'ing have water radicals, attesting to
the presence of Water Power, which could overcome the Fire of the
Ming, according to the Five Agents theory. This explanation is
` See Inaba, Shincho

zenshi,pp. 306-308; Chin, Kuang-Hsianhsiao-chi,pp. 7-9,
and Hsiao, Ch'ing-tait'ung-shih,pp. 48, 52.
56 See Inaba, Shincho
zenshi,pp. 307-308. The mythology of Chin-t'ien shih was
first recorded in the Later Han apocryphal literature and later elaborated in
historical works on legendary antiquity such as Lo Mi's Lu shih, chian 16. This
work is available in Ssu-k'uch'ian-shuchen-pen,ninth ser., 1978. For a succinct
account, see Ku, "Wu-te chung-shih," pp. 571-80.
even more bizarre and cannot be verified in historical sources.57

In spite of the foregoing speculations; a definitive explanation of
the meaning of "Ta Ch'ing" is still at large. Nevertheless, this new
dynastic appellation evoked both ethnic transcendence and politi-
cal sophistication, and imputed a distinctive image to the Manchu
rulers as the legitimate successors in Chinese history.
To conclude, these two cases of the reinterpretation and altera-
tion of the name of the state founded by the Jurchen and Manchu
tribespeople unveil a very interesting dimension of Chinese ideolo-
gy and political history. They show how the name of a state or
dynasty was adopted as a rallying point of communal and political
identity, and how its original meaning could be reinterpreted or
changed, and how even the name itself could be discarded when it
no longer served the ruler's political purposes. What is more signifi-
cant is that such controversies occurred only in non-Han dynas-
ties, when seminomadic northern tribes became the conquerors of
the Chinese population.58The main reason for this phenomenon is
that as a minority ruling over a vast and populous Chinese empire,
the alien rulers' regional native symbols of legitimacy no longer
satisfied the requirements of the new situation and had to undergo
change and transformation. The two cases investigated here also
provide important evidence for a study of the ideological and
political transformations of the non-Han tribespeople after they
became the rulers of China and inevitably submitted to Chinese
influence.
Universityof Washington,Seattle
5 We should note that all the four "conquest dynasties" founded by the
non-Han northern tribespeople in the later imperial era-Liao, Chin, Yuan, and
Ch'ing-had similar problems with their state title. They had at one stage or
another either given a new meaning to their original Chinese state name, or
adopted a diffierentone geared to the requirements of the sinitic political situation.
In the case of the Khitan-Liao and Mongol-Yiian state, see the studies by Feng
Chia-sheng and Hsiao Ch'i-ch'ing respectively, cited in notes 3 and 5 above.
58 See Hsiao, Ch'ing-t'ait'ung-shih,pp. 188-89, and Hou "Chung-kuo li-tai
kuo-hao," pp. 12-13.

Tsin R Later Wei QS E, Waf
298 HOK LAM CHAN
APPENDIX:
The Succession of Dynastic Cosmic Powers*
W, Wood;Wa, Water;F, Fire;E, Earth;M, Metal

Fu-hsi iX W
Kung-shihIR [Kung-kungtI] Wa
Shen-nung" ffi [Yen Ti a w ] F
HuangTi WW [HsuanTi fW] E
Shao-hao'+' M
Chuan-hsu3R Wa
Kao-hsinr% [Ti K'u W ] W
[Ti Chih WX Wa]
T'ang)W[Yao]F
Yu t [Shun*] E
Hsia R:M
Yin e Wa
Chou )W1 F, Wa
Ch'in X Wa
Han i E, Fb
. *Shu b c
(Han): . .Wei S E
* .Wu Md
*Liu-ChaogIge Wa-Shih-ChaoWS FormerYenn|JAW Fu-Ch'in"XF

[FormerChaonlJilS][Later
ChaoX] [FormerCh'innaJ]
: SouthernYen Xt e
LaterYen^ NorthernYenikA g
* Yao-Ch'inttX Hei-lienHsia gXXg
[LaterCh'inX]i
*Western WeiSX-Later Chou&1t1
W
: . [Northern
ChouiLl]
*. [NorthernWei t2]
* s
* *.EasternWeitS NorthernCh'iikWh
*EasternTsin t R Liu SungWxJXWah'i w W Liangw Fh'en lliE
LaterLiang'
Sui F
T'ang )FE
Chu-LiangX
[LaterLiang ]
LaterT'ang )FE
Shih-TsinE E3M
[LaterTsin X:g]
* Basedon TCTYTS8S9a; reproduced
fromLegitimation,pp. 82-83.
Liu-HangIJ« Wa
[LaterHan Qi%]
Kuo (or Ch'ai) ChouwD [ffi] M3W
[Later(or) NorthernChouiffil s ikM]
SungX F
a Chouwas firstassignedFire and later Wood Power.
b Han successivelyadoptedWater,Earth,and Fire Power.
c Annexedby Wei in 263.
d Annexedby Tsin in 280.
e Annexedby Tsin in 410.
f The Wei founder adopted Earth Power in 396, but Emperor Hsiao-wen
changedto WaterPowerin successionto Tsin in 492.
g Annexedby LaterWei founderin 428 and 436.
h Annexedby LaterChou in 577.
i Annexedby Sui in 587.

i Annexedby Sui in 589.
NOTE:This chart is not dated, but it must have been producedduring the initial
discussionsunder EmperorChing as a basic reference,and was used again in the
second round of discussions.The first half of the cosmic sequence of dynastic suc-
cessionfollowsthe formuladevelopedby Wang Mang's adviserLiu Hsin to justify the
proclamationof Earth Power for the Hsin dynasty. Both Kung-shih(i.e., Kung-kung)
and Ch'in, which possessed Water Power, were relegated to the intercalary (un)
position as illegitimateregimes. The rest of the chart contains several omissions and
errors concerning the specific cosmic powers adopted by the respective kingdoms
during the Northernand Southerndynasties. For instance, accordingto our records,
Tsin proclaimedMetal Power, and Fu-Ch'indeclaredWood, not Fire Power. There is
no mention of Later Liang proclaimingMetal Power, or of Liao adopting Water
Power.

Hok-Lam Chan - The Origin and Interpretations of The Jurchen State Name 1991

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Hok-Lam Chan - The Origin and Interpretations of The Jurchen State Name 1991

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

"Ta Chin" (Great Golden): The Origin and Changing Interpretations of the Jurchen State

"TA CHIN" (GREAT GOLDEN): THE ORIGIN AND

HOK-LAM CHAN FWW

The proclamation of the name or title of a ruling regime, a state

l I have presented the substance of this article in Chinese in an earlier paper:

As an independentpolityon its own right,whateverits historical

Ever since the Three Epochs (san-tai-tt ), [the rulers]who designatedthe

2 For a useful survey of the designationof state name or dynastic title in

tt[r. 304=333],a native of Tsung X, chose the name Ta-Ch'eng7tS also

a On WangMang'sadoptionof the statenameHsin, see Pan Ku iEIXI, Han-shu

'ch'ien'origin" ( z ) [in the Bookof Changes].d This is the genesis of using

This imperial edict was composed by T'u-tan Kung-lii E'g' , a Han-lin

In this context, therefore, the first source for state or dynastic

phonetic encyclopedias. See the references cited in Morohashi Tetsuji 9 ,

was recentlydisputedby Yang

6 Fora surveyof the historyofJurchenrulefromthe foundingof the Chinstate

briefly,Toyama, Kinchoshi, pp. 18-55; Yao,

262 HOK LAM CHAN

1OScholarshaveall agreedthat the Liaostatetitle was derivedfromthe name

duanin with the meaningof "greatcenter"(tachung-yangAiP). (Forthis text, see

on the ground that gold is harder and less changeable in quality

` On Yang P'o's biographies, see briefly, SCPM 3: lb, and Yeh

chronicles, see The SecretHistoryof the Mongols,trans. Francis W. Cleaves (Cam-

An old Jurchen belief that surfaced in later reigns amid inten-

dence, however, that they turned to the cosmic pulsation theory to

three parts. Part I is a

suing centuries. There were two principal sources for postulating

` For a general survey of the Chinese concept of cheng-t'ung,its primary

political authority. Tsou Yen had provided such an example in his

18 Fragments of Tsou Yen's treatise Chu-yinare preserved in Lu Pu-wei

overcoming the Water of Ch'in, with corresponding alterations in

system of succession of ancient rulers, each assigned a cosmic

Dubs, FormerHan, 3: 473-74. On Emperor Kuang-wu's redesignation of Fire

22 On these ritual arrangements,

(r. 1209-1213), initiated a similar mode of legitimation out of

state name to various new interpretations in an attempt to fit

25 TCTYTS 2a-b. For the biographies of Li Yii

Wood Power of Later (Northern) Chou as Fire Power, it had

26 TCTYTS2b-3a. For Sun To's biography, see CS 99: 9a. YangT'ing-yunis

ature Advancement Office Chu-chia Chu-tun t19 *. F3 (Chu-chia

28 TCTYTS 3a-b. These

The sinitic autonomists were those who favored linking Chin

sion in later times, includingthe contemporaryChin dynasty. As

31 Ou-yangHsiu elucidatedhis new interpretation of the theoryon legitimate

postulating a T'ang linkage they ignored the Sung dynasty. The

Our dynastyhad annihilated[Northern]Sung,capturingtwo of theirmasters,

33 CS 1l: 12b;cf. Legitimation,

pretation of the Chin state name which asserted that it symbolized

of "Ta Chin" (II)

This new interpretation of the Chin state name was subjected to

34 On the political vicissitudes under which these discussions were resumed

under Hsilan-tsung, see Tao, The Jurchen,chap. 7; Legitimation,chap. 5, and

Chang Hsing-hsin proposed Metal Power for Chin in succession

37 TCTYTS 14a-16a. For Chang Hsing-hsin's biography, see CS 107: 13b.

rise to power." "If one of the above conditions is met," he stated,

38 TCTYTS 18a-20b. T'ien T'ing-fang is mentioned in CS 13: 7b, 132: 21b.

Holy Injunctions of A-ku-ta and harmonized with the appearances

39 TCTYTS 9b-1 la.

41 TCTYTS 11b, 13b. Wan-yenO-ch'uis mentionedin CS 13: 7b, 106: 14b.

For Chao Ping-wen'sbiography,see CS 110:6a.

In essence, therefore, the participants had narrowed their differ-

of Sung, by contrast, were all staunch sinitic autonomists since they

political realities. While espousing sinicization, for instance, they